according to the severall Relations he stood in If it be said All that share in the subject to whom the keyes are Given in these words To Thee they all share alike in the same equall Power of the keyes because they have all the same Commission I Answer it would indeed so follow If there were no other severall Commissions granted in Scripture else where but only here But cleare it is from other Scriptures That Power of Authoritative Preaching and Administering the Sacraments is Given only to Apostles Elders and such like officers but Power of Priviledge and Judgment is given all the Fraternity CHAP. 6. Touching the 10th Contradiction with the 11th 12th 13th The 10th Contradiction is thus held forth 10. Pastour and Flocke are Relates and so he is a Pastour to none but his owne Congregation This is the Common Tenent 10. The members of any Church we Admâ—t tâ— the Lords Table if they bring letters testimoniall and their Children to Baptisme The Way p. 68. The Keyes p. 17. 10. Administration of Sacraments is a Ministeriall Act and what Authority hath a Pastour to do it or they to Receive it from him to whom he is no Pastour Mr. Hocker Surv. Part. 2. 64 65. Pastours and Teachers might Pray and Preach in other Churches besides their owne but not Administer seales and Censures Bartlets Modell pag. 63. Answer 1. That Appearance of Contradiction is easily Removed if our Doctrine and Practise be knowne as it is what a Pastour doeth in his owne Congregation and to his owne Flock he doeth it by Pastorall Power and Authority what he doth to the members of other Churches abroad or out of his own Congregation He doeth it not Authoritativè but Precariò and not in a constant but in a transient way which the communion of Churches doth not only Admit but readily as occasion serveth Desire What Mr Hooker doubted of in this Point he Answereth himselfe in the end of the same Pag. 65. If Paul Apollos and Cephas things present and things to come be all Given to the Particular Church of Corinth 1 Cor. 3. 22. who yet had no peculiar Interest in them more then other Churches By the same Right all the officers and all their Gifts are theirs also in the same way Theirs they are not {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} for each Church hath his peculiar offices as their owne propriety Then they are theirs {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} for their use not Authoritatively nor Ordinarily but occasionally as God giveth opportunity Ordinarily as the Officers must attend to their owne Flock so must the Flock Depend upon their owne Officers The officers have no Authority over any Flock but that which the Holy Ghost hath committed to them Neither can any other Flock command the employment of any of their Gifts or any act of their office amongst them But upon occasion in a transient way as they may have need of their Gifts so they may have need of some Act of their Office and accordingly may Desire it and Receive it The 11th Contradiction which is thus set forth 11. We Receive the Sacrament of the Lords Supper say the same of ' Baptisme as a seâ—le of Communion not only with the Lord Jesus in our owne Churches but in all the Churches of the Saints Keyes pag. 17. Del. of 9. Posit pag. 133 134. 11. Baptisme and so the other Sacrament sealeth up the Externall Communion with a Particular Church c. Mr H. Surv. Part. 3. pag. 27. And he disputes against it as to the Catholick Church Answer When we say that the Sacraments are Seales of Communion with the Lord Jesus not only in our owne Church but in all the Churches of the Saints we do not meane that they seale up the same measure of Externall Communion with other Churches as with our owne They do not seale up this Communion That their officers are our officers and we their Flock Or that we have the same Power over them which we have over our owne members This were to seale up not a Communion but a Confusion of Churches And this is that which Mr Hooker in the place alledged doeth deny as our selves also do The 12th Contradiction is thus declared 12. It is an Act of the Elders Power and Authority to Examine whether Officers or members before they be Received of the Church Keyes pag 21. 12. As for Admission Election Ordination of Officers Admission or shutting out of Members these things the Brethren may do without officers The Way p. 45. 101 Answer The Answer is Obvious what the Elders do in this kind Ex Officio The Church may do the like in the want of Elders The 13th Contradiction is set before us thus 13. Ordination is then Compleat when the People hath Chosen an Officer and the Presbytery hath laied their Hands on him Keyes p. 37. 13. But if the Church want a Presbytery for want of Elders they want a warrant to Repaire to the Presbytery of another Church to Impose hands upon their Elect Elders Way p. 50. Answer In that Place of the Keyes I only Assert and Prove That a man of Sufficient Gifts chosen by the People of the Church and Ordained by the Presbytery of his owne Church wanteth nothing to the compleat Integrity of his calling The Right hand of Fellowship given by the Elders of other Churches expresseth their Approbation of his calling but addeth nothing to the essence or Integrity of his calling But when I say that in want of a Presbytery of their owne they want a warrant to Repaire to the Presbytery of another Church for his Ordination I no where say That the Officer Elected wanteth the complete Integrity of his calling for want of the Imposition of hand of the Presbytery of another Church And yet that had been requisite to make up a pretence of a Contradiction The Replyer knoweth that a Church wanting a Presbytery of their owne to lay hands upon an Elect Officer in our Judgment they may appoint some of the Elders and graver Members of their owne Body to supply the Defect of their owne Presbytery which we Account sufficient to the completing of his calling in such a case But when I said in the Way That the Church wanting a Presbytery they wanted a warrant to Repaire to the Presbytery of another Church to Impose hands upon their Elect Elders I meant in way of Subordination to an Extrinsecall Power For it is against that which both the Reasons Plead which I there Alleadged for that Purpose But I no where dislike That a Church wanting a Presbytery of their owne may send for Elders of other Churches to Assist them and to Joyne with them in the Ordination of their Elect Officers CHAP. 7. Touching the 14th Contradiction with 15. and 16. The 14th Contradiction is thus laied out 14. Paul and Barnabas were Ordained to that Office of Apostleship by the Imposition of hands of some officers or Members of the Church Way
p. 45. 14. In Act. 13. 2 3. There is no Ordination to Office at all for the Apostles had their office before Mr. Hooker Surv. Part. 2. p. 83. This was not to put a new office upon them but to confirme their sending to the Gentiles ib. p. 60. 14. This was done in a Particular Church Keyes p. 29. The officers of one Church did what was done in an ordinary Way Surv. Parr 2. p. 83. Then it followeth by Mr. C. his Doctrine that the Apostles who were officers in all Churches were ordained in a Particular Church or that officers of a Church may be ordained in another Church which he said was unwarrantable Ans. 1. When I say in the Way That Paul and Barnabas were ordained to the Apostolick office by Imposition of hands of some officers of the Church at Antioch Act. 13. 1 2 3. It is not Disproved by Mr Hooker saying that they had had their office before For I noe where say That ordination Giveth the office but only Approveth it and Solemnely as it were Installeth the elect officer into it and sendeth him forth with a Blessing into the Administration of it Neither when he saith That there is there no Ordination unto office at all doth he contradict what I affirme For his meaning is to Deny it in Mr Rutherford's sence who speaketh there of Ordination as Giving the calling unto the office which Mr Hooker Disproveth and therein I concurre with him For it puts no New office upon them but Bare witnesse to that calling which the Holy Ghost had given them When Mr Hooker saith The Officers of one Church did what was done in an ordinary way He himselfe inferreth the consequence Therefore it is no Precedent for the Pastors of many Churches what either they may or should doe But the Inferences which Mr Cawdry gathereth as from my Doctrine out of that Text either will not hold or not hurt our cause For this Inference will not hold That then the Officers of one Chuch may be ordained in another For they were as much Officers of the Church of Antioch as of any other Churches It will only inferre That they who are officers in many Churches may be Ordained in any one of them The other inference will in part follow That some of the Apostles who were Officers in all Churches may be Ordained in a Particular Church when the Holy Ghost calleth for it For they Act now not in their own Name or Power but in the great Name and Soveraigne Power of the Lord Jesus who is the Head of all Churches But what Prejudice is that to our cause or wherein doth it contradict any of our Tenents The 15th Contradiction is thus Declared 15. What if the whole Presbytery offend The readiest course is to bring the matter to a Synod the keyes pag. 43. 15. There is a readier and nearer way The Brethren may censure them all Way pag. 45. If the Congregation be found faithfull and willing to Remove an offence by due censure why should the offence be called up to a more publicke Judicature Keyes pag. 42. Ans. This Contradiction is made partly out of the concealment of Part of my words in the first Columne and Partly out of the Addition of some words of his own in the second Columne In the former Columne I say If the whole Presbytery offend or such a Part as will draw a Party and a Faction in the Church with them the readiest course then is to bring the matter to a Synod where those words such a Part as will draw a Party or Faction in the Church with them are given for the just Reason why in such a case the case of the offending Presbytery or other such Leading members in the Church should be brought to a Synod before it be censured in the Church But in the words recited in the latter Columne I speak of the Congregation as Agreeing together and both faithfull and willing to Proceed against Hereticall Doctrine and Scandalous crimes in whomsoever And then they need not Trouble the Synod to cleare the case which is already cleare unto themselves so that this Contradiction speaketh not ad Idem The one Columne speaketh of a Church Divided into parts and Factions and their readiest course is to bring the matter to a Synod The second Columne speaketh of a Church both faithfull and willing to Proceede against offences with one accord And then they have sufficient Power within themselves to judge that which is right and to execute their Judgment That which is Added of the Replyers own words in the latter Columne doth help not a little to make up an Appearance of the Contradiction In the Keyes I had sayd In the case above mentioned It is the readiest course to bring the matter to the Synod In the Way he quoteth my words as if I had said There is a readier and nearer way The Brethren may censure them all If these words had been mine there had been an Appearance of Contradiction To say this is the readyest course and yet to say a Discrepant course is a readier and nearer way is at least verbo tenus an apparent Contradiction But the Truth is Those words are none of mine but the Replyers own And so it will be an easy matter to make up Contradictions tot quot if we may take leave in one sentence to conceale Part of the words necessary to make up the sense and in another sentence to Adde words of our owne The 16th Contradiction is delivered thus 16. It belongeth to the civill Magistrate to establish pure Religion in Doctrine worship and Government partly by civill Punishment upon the wilfull oppressours and Disturbers of the same Keyes p. 50. 16. Yet the Brethren here call for or Tolerate Toleration of all Opinions and Deny the magistrate Power to Punish any Pretending conscience Bartlets Model pag. 128. 16. See Mr. Bartlets Modell p. 25. Contrà Ans. 1. This Contradiction laboureth of the same Disease as the rest generally Doe It speaketh not ad Idem Such as require the Magistrate to establish Pure Religion in Doctrine worship and Government and to Restraine the willfull opposers and Disturbers thereof by civill Punishments They speak of Fundamentals in Religion and such opinions as apparently tend to libertinisme and licentious ungodlynesse as Mr Bartlet expresseth it Modell pag. 126. But the Toleration which they Allow and call for is of such opinions as neither subvert the Foundation of Religion nor Practise of Piety Both these may be maintained without the least shew of the face of Contradiction Further I find this in Mr Bartlet That himselfe and some others are not free That Hereticks should be put to Death in case they keep their errors to themselves and doe not seek to seduce and corrupt others And though I grant that such an Heretick after once or twice Admonition may be Rejected out of the Church according to Titus 3. 10 11. yet I doe not finde that Moses
particular Church it is no Church at all for the Catholicke Church it is not he replyes that though it be not such a particular Congregation as I intend yet it may be a particular Patriarchall Church but 1 then it seemes it is a particular Church which grants my inference 2. It was a particular Church of Christ's institution that I inquired after doth our Authour think that Christ hath appointed any Patriarchall Church a Patriarchall Church as such is such from it's Relation to a Patriarch and he can scarce be thought to judge Patriarches to be of Divine institution who hath cast off and abjured Episcopacy The Donatists are mentioned againe p. 113. And I am againe Charged with an attempt to vindicate them from schisme my thoughts of them I have before declared to the full have no reason to retract any thing from what was then spoken or to adde any thing thereunto if it may satisfie our Authour I here grant they were Schismatickes with what aggravations he pleaseth wherein their schisme consisted I have also declared but he sayes I undertake to exempt some others from schisme I know whom that suffer with them in former and after ages under the same imputation I doe so indeed and I suppose our Authour may ghesse at whom I intend himselfe amongst others I hope he is not so taken up in his thoughts with charging schisme on others as to forget that many the greatest part and number of the true Churchs of Christ doe condemne him for a Schismatick a Donatisticall Schismatick I suppose he acknowledges the Church of Rome to be a true Church the Lutheran I am perswaded he will not deny nor perhaps the Grecian to be so The Episcopall Church of England he contends for and yet all these with one voice cry out upon him for a Schismaticke and as to the plea of the last how he can satisfie his conscience as to the rejection of his lawfull superiors upon his owne principles without pretending any such crime against them as the Donatists did against Caecilianus I professe I do not understand new mention is made of Episcopall ordination p. 120 And they are said to have had their successive ordination from Rome who ordained therein so indeed some say and some otherwise whether they had or no is nothing to me I lay no weight upon it they held I am sure that place in England that without their approbation no man could publickly preach the Gospell to say they were Presbyters and ordained as Presbyters I know not what satisfaction can arise unto Conscience thereby Party and argument may be countenanced by it they professe they ordained as Bishops that for their lives and soules they durst not ordaine but as such so they told those whom they ordained and affirme they have open injury done them by any ones deniall of it As it was the best is to be made of it this shift is not handsome nor is it ingenious for any one that hath looked into Antiquity to charge me with departing from their sense in the notion of schisme declared about the 3d 4th Ages at the same time to maintaine an equality between Bishops and Presbyters or to say that Bishops ordained as Presbyters not as Bishops nor doe I understand the excellency of that order which we see in some Churches where they have two sorts of Elders the one made so by ordination without Election and the other by Election without ordination those who are ordained casting off all power and Authority of them that ordained them and those who are elected immediately rejecting the greatest part of those that chose them Nor did I as is pretend plead for their Presbyterian way in the yeare 46 all the ministers almost in the county of Essex know the contrary one especially who being a man of great ability and moderation of spirit and for his knowledge in those things not behind any man I know in England of his way with whome in that yeare and the next following I had sundry conferences at publicke meetings of ministers as to the severall wayes of Reformation then under proposall But the frivolousnesse of these imputations hath been spoken of before as also the falsnesse of the Calumny which our Authour is pleased to repeat againe about my turning from wayes in Religion My description of a particular Church he once more blames as applicable to the Catholicke Church invisible and to the visible Catholick Church I suppose he meanes as such when a participation in the same ordinances numerically is assigned as its difference He askes whether it becomes my ingenuity to interpret the capability of a Churches reduction to it's primitive constitution by its owne fitnesse and capacity to be so reduced rather then by its externall hinderances or furtherances But with what ingenuity or modesty that question is asked I professe I understand not and pag. 134 he hath this passage only I take notice of his introduction to his answer with thankes for the civility of the inquiry in the manner of its expresion my words were these whether our Reverend Authour doe not in his conscience thinke there was no true Church in England 'till c which puts me into suspition that the Reverend Doctour was offended that I did not alwaies for oft I doe give him that title of the Reverend Authour or the Doctor which made him cry out he was never so dealt withall by any party as by me though upon review I doe not find that I gave him any uncivill language unbeseeming me to give or him to receive and I heare that somebody hath dealt more uncivilly with him in that respect which he took very ill Let this Reverend Authour make what use of it he please I cannot but againe tell him that these things become neither him nor any man professing the Religion of Jesus Christ or that hath any respect to truth or sobriety can any man thinke that in his conscience he gives any credit to the insinuation which here he makes that I should thanke him for calling me Reverend Authour or Reverend Doctor or be troubled for his not useing those expressions Can the mind of an honest man be thought to be conversant with such meane and low thoughts for the Title of Reverend I doe give him notice that I have very little valued it ever since I have considered the saying of Luther Nunquam periclitatur Religio nisi inter Reverendissimos So that he may as to me forbeare it for the future and call me as the Quakers doe and it shall suffice And for that of Doctor it was conferred on me by the University in my absence and against my consent as they have expressed it under their publicke seale nor doth any thing but gratitude and respect unto them make me once own it and freed from that obligation I should never use it more nor did I use it untill some were offended with me blamed me for my
remarked The first is this He supposed me to be an Independent and therefore made that charge the consequent of which supposition is much to weake to justify this Reverend Authour in his Accusation doth he suppose that he may without offence lay what he please to the charge of an Independent but he saith secondly that he tooke the word Independent generally as comprehending Brownists Anabaptists and other Sectaries But herein also he doth but delude his owne conscience seeing he personally speakes to me and to my designe in that booke of Schisme which he undertook to confute which also removes his third intimation that he formerly intended any kind of Independency c the rest that follow are of the same nature and however compounded will not make a salve to heale the wound made in his reputation by his own weapon for the learned Author called vox populi which he is pleased here to urge I first question whither he be willing to be produced to maintaine this Charge and if he shall appeare I must needs tell him what he here questions whether it be so or no that he is a very lyar For any principles in my Treatise whence a denyall of their Ministers and Churches may be regularly deduced let him produce them if he can and if not acknowledge that there had been a more Christian and ingenious way of coming off an ingagement into that charge then that by him chosen to be insisted on animos iram ex crimine sumunt And againe we have vox populi cited on the like occasion pag. 34 about my refusall to answer whither I were a Minister or not which as the thing it selfe of such a refusal of mine on any occasion in the world because it must be spoken is purum putum mendacium so it is no truer that that was vox populi at Oxford which is pretended that which is vox populi must be publicke publicum was once populicum now setting aside the whispers of it may be two or three Ardelio's notorious triflers whose lavish impertinency will deliver any man from the danger of being slandered by their tongues and there will be little gound left for the report that is fathered on vox populi And I tell him here once againe which is a sufficient answer indeed to his whole first Chapter that I doe not deny Presbyterian Churches to be true Churches of Jesus Christ nor the ministers of them to be true ministers nor doe maintaine a nullity in their Ordination as to what is the proper use and end of Ordination takeing it in the sense wherin by them it is taken though I think it neither administred by them in due order nor to have in it selfe that force and efficacy singly considered which by many of them is ascribed unto it Thus much of my judgment I have publiquely declared long agoe and I thought I might have expected from persons Professing Christianity that they would not voluntarily engage themselves into an opposition against me and waveing my judgment which I had constantly published and preached have gathered up reports from private and table discourses most of them false and untrue all of them uncertaine the occasions and coherences of those discourses from whence they have been raised and taken being utterly lost or at present by him wholly omitted His following excursions about a successive ordination from Rome wherein he runnes crosse to the most eminent lights of all the Reformed Churches and their declared Judgments with practise in reordaining those who come unto them with that Romane stampe upon them I shall not further interest my selfe in nor think my selfe concerned so to doe untill I see a satisfactory answer given unto Beza and others in this very point and yet I must here againe professe that I cannot understand that distinction of deriveing ordination from the Church of Rome but not from the Roman Church Let him but seriously peruse these ensuing words of Beza and tell me whither he have any ground of a particular quarrell against me upon this account Sed praeterea quaenam ista est quaeso ordinaria vocatio quam eos habuisse dicis quos Deus paucis quibusdam except is excitavit Certe papistica Nam haec tua verba sunt Hodie si episcopi Gallicanarum ecclesiarum se suas ecclesias à tyrannide Episcopi Romani vindicare velint eas ab omni idololatria superstitione repurgare non habent opus alia vocatione ab ea quam habent Quid ergo Papisticas ordinationes in quibus neque morum examen praecessit neque leges ullae servatae sunt inviolabiliter ex divino jure in electionibus ordinationibus praescriptae in quibus puri etiam omnes canones impudentissime violati sunt quae nihil aliud sunt quam foedissima Romani prostibulin undinatio quavis meretricum mercede quam Deus templo suo inferri prohibuit inquinatior quibus denique alii non ad praedicandum sed pervertendum evangelium alii non ad docendum sed adrursus sacrificandum ad abominandum {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} sunt ordinati usque adeo firmas tecum esse censebimus ut quoties tali cuipiam pseudoepiscopo Deus concesserit ad verum Christianismum transire omnis illa istiusmodi ordinationis impuritas simul expurgata censeatur Imo quia sic animum per Dei gratiam mutavit quo ore quo pudore qua conscientia papismum quidem detestabitur suam autem inordinatissimam ordinationem non ejurabit aut si ejuret quomodo ex illius jure auctoritatem dicendi habebit Nec tamen nego quin tales si probe doctrinam veram tenere si honest is moribus praediti si ad gregem pascendum apti comperiantur ex pseudoepiscopis novi pastores legitime designentur Thus he who was thought then to speake the sense of the Churches of Geneva and France in his book against Saravia about the diverse orders of Ministers in the Church His plea for the Church-Authority of the Pope notwithstanding his being an Idolater a murderer theman of sinne an adversary of Christ because a Civill magistrate doth not by any morall Crime or those whereof the Pope is guilty loose his jurisdiction and Authority considering the different principles grounds ends laws Rules priviledges of the Authority of the one and the other and the severall tenures whereby the one doth hold and the other pretends to hold his power is brought in to serve the turne in hand and may be easily layd aside And when he shall manifest that there is appointed by Christ one single High-Preist or Prelate in the house of God the whole Church and that office to be confined to one nation one blood one family propagated by naturall generation without any provision of reliefe by any other way person or family in case of miscarriage and when he shall have proved that such an officer as the
Pope of Rome in any one particular that constituteth him such an officer was once instituted by Christ I shall farther attend unto his Reason for his Authority from that of the High-Priests among the Jewes which was not lost as to it's continuance in the family of Aaron notwithstanding the miscarriage of some individuall Person vested therewithall In the close of the Chapter he reassumes his charge of my renouncing my owne Ordination which with great confidence and without the least scruple he had asserted in his Answer of that assersion he now pretends to give the Reasons whereof the first is this 1. The world lookes on him as an Independent of the highest note therefore he hath renounced his ordination and therefore I dare to say so So much for that reason I understand neither the Logick nor morality of this first Reason 2. He knowes from good hands that some of the Brethren have renounced their Ordination therefore he durst say positively that I have renounced mine Prov. 12. 18. 3. He hath heard that I disswaded others from their ordination and therefore he durst say I renownced my owne and yet I suppose he may possibly disswade some from Episcopall Ordination but I know it not no more than he knowes what he affirmes of me which is false 4. He concludes from the principles in my book of Schisme because I said that to insist upon a succession of ordination from Anti-Christ and the Beast of Rome would if I mistake not keep up in this particular what God would have pulled down therefore I renounced my ordination when he knowes that I avowed the validity of ordination on another account 5. If all this will not doe he tels me of something that was said at a publique meeting at dinner it seemes with the Canons of christ-Chhist-Church viz that I vallued not my ordination by the Bishop of Oxford any more than a crum upon my trencher which words whether ever they were spoken or no or to what purpose or in reference to what Ordination I meane of the two orders or in what sense or with what limitation or as part of what discourse or in comparison of what else or whither solely in refference to the Roman succession in which sense I will have nothing to doe with it I know not at all nor will concerne my selfe to enquire being greatly ashamed to find men professing the Religion of Jesus Christ so farre forgetfull of all common Rules of civility and principles of humane society as to insist upon such vaine groundlesse reports as the Foundations of accusations against their Brethren nor doe I believe that any one of the Reverend Persons quoted will owne this information although I shall not concerne my selfe to make enquiry into their memories concerning any such passage or discourse Much reliefe for the future against these and the like mistakes may be afforded from an easy observation of the different senses wherein the terme of Ordination is often used it is one thing when it is taken largely for the whole appointment of a man to the ministry in which sense I desire our Authour to consider what is written by Beza among Reformed and Gerhard among the Lutheran Divines to omit innumerable others another thing when taken for the imposition of hand whither by Bishops or Presbyters concerning which single Act both as to its order efficacy I have sufficiently delivered my judgment if he be pleased to take notice of it I feare indeed that when men speak of an ordained ministry which in its true and proper sense I shall with them contend for they often relate only to that solemnity restraining the authoritative making of ministers singly thereunto contrary to the intention and meaning of that expression in Scripture antiquity and the best reformed Divines both Calvinists and Lutherans and yet it is not imaginable how some men prevaile by the noise and sound of that Word upon the prejudiced minds of partiall unstudied men A litle time may farther manifest if it be not sufficiently done already that another account is given of this matter by Clemens Tertullian Cyprian Origen Justin Martyr and generally all the first writers of Christians besides the Counsels of old late with innumerable Protestant Authors of the best note to the same purpose This I say is the ground of this mistake whereas sundry things concurre to the calling of Ministers as it belongs to the Church of God the ground and pillar of truth the spouse of Christ Psal. 45. and mother of the family or she that tarryeth at home Psal. 68. unto whom all ministers are stewards 1 Cor. 4. 1. even in that house of God 1 Tim. 3. 15. and sundry qualifications are indispensably previously required in the persons to be called overlooking the necessity of the qualifications required and omitting the duty and authority of the Church Acts 1. 15. Acts 6. 2. 13. 2. 14. 22. the Act of them who are not the whole Church Ephes. 4. 11 12. but only a part of it 1 Cor. 3. 21. 2 Cor. 1. 24. 1 Pet. 5. 3. as to ministry consisting in the approbation and solemne confirmation of what is supposed to go before hath in some mens language gotten the name of ordination and an interpretation of that name to such an extent as to enwrap in it all that is indispensably necessary to the constitution or making of ministers so that where that is obtained in what order soever or by whom soever administred who have first obtained it themselves there is a lawfull and sufficient calling to the ministry Indeed I know no errour about the institutions of Christ attended with more pernitious consequences to the Church of God then this should it be practised according to the force of the principle its selfe Suppose six eight or ten men who have themselves been formerly ordained but now perhaps not by any ecclesiasticall censure but by an act of the civill magistrate are put out of their places for notorious ignorance and scandall should concurre and ordaine an hundred ignorant and wicked persons like themselves to be ministers must they not on this Principle be all accounted ministers of Christ and to be invested with all ministeriall power and so be enabled to propagate their kind to the end of the world and indeed why should not this be granted seeing the whole bulke of the papall ordination is contended for as valid whereas it is notoriously knowne that sundry Bishops among them who perhaps received their own ordination as the reward of a whore being persons of vitious lives and utterly ignorant of the Gospell did sustaine their pompe and sloth by selling holy orders as they called them to the scum and refuse of men but of these things more in their proper place Take then Reader the substance of this chapter in this briefe recapitulation 1. He denies our Churches to be true Churches and our Ministers true Ministers 2. He hath renounced his owne ordination 3. When some
they neither Agree with me nor with them They say it is put into diverse hands And he saith it is Given only to Believers And is not this a Contradiction Ans No verily For when I say It is given to Believers as such and expresse virtually as well as Formally The meaning is cleare It is given to all Believers and only to Believers and by them Communicated to such as they doe orderly choose and call forth to the exercise of the same And the publishers of the keyes I doubt not will say as much When I said in the way That the brethren might not administer Sacraments in Defect of all Officers And therefore made it appeare that one sort of men the brethren had not Received all the Power of the keyes Formally The Replyer returneth Truly this is to Discover the Contradiction the more For if the Power of the keyes be Delivered to Believers as such then the Power of Administring the Sacraments is Given to them for that is a Part of the Power of the keyes Ans. It is wearysome to repeat so often the same Answer yet let me say it once more and leave it He that saith Believers Receive all the Power of the keyes as Profest Believers He saith all of them have Received the Power and they only and such as Receive their Power from them And this is the force of quateuus Tale That whosoever Receive any thing as such all such doe Receive it none but such as Derive it from them But saith the Replyer In the Way he giveth the greater part of Church power to the Body of the Church pag. 45. to wit to Ordaine and in some cases to excommunicate all their Church Officers which are the highest Acts of Rule as else where he speaketh Therefore he may not Deny them the lesser which is to Administer the Sacraments Ans. The answer is ready at hand and was ready at his hand in Part 2 of the Congregationall way cleared pag. 29. where I Distinguish Potestas into officiariam and honorariam Excommunication by the Brethren is the highest Act of Honoraria Potestas but not of Officiaria Potestas To Preach the word with Authority and to Administer the Seales of it are acts of the highest office-Power in the Church Popish Divines would take it very ill if any Act of Church Power were said to be higher than Conficere corpus Domini But excommunication largly taken is an Act of a Power proper to a Community Any community hath power ex Natura rei to Receive into their Communion to cast not of their Communion Every sound Body hath a power to cast out his own superfluous humours and to cut off his own Putrid members As for ordination though we looke at it with Dr Ames as Adjunctum consummans of the Peoples Election and vocation of their Officers and therefore not utterly Excentrical from the Peoples power yet our Churches doe not Practise it ordinarily where they have Elders of their own or can Procure other Elders to Joyne with them As for that last words in the Scheme of the first Contradiction I know not whether the Replyer put any weight or stresse in that in the first Columne the keyes are said to be given to wit partly to Believers and in the same Columne againe to the Fraternity with the Presbytery in the second Columne to Profest Believers In the third to Believers Publickly Professing their Faith And in Mr Hookers Judgment Not to Believers as Believers but as Believers Covenanting But if it be requisite to say any thing to this I would say 1. That the Fraternity and Profest Believers and Believers Publickly Professing their Faith are all one And the common Name of Believers is often put for all the rest They that were Added to the Church Acts 2. 47 and 41 are called by the common name of Believers Acts 2. 44. and 4. 32. when Mr Hooker saith the Power is not Given to Believers as Believers but as Believers Covenanting He meaneth the same that I do by Profest Believers As for women whom the Replyer cast in our way before though they be Believers and so partake in the same common Salvation as also in the word and seales yet because of the frailty of their sex they are expresly exempted by the Apostle from any Act of Power in the Church 1 Cor. 14. 34 35. and 1 Tim: 2. 11 12. Yet that Impeacheth not the Generality of the Proposition That all the Fraternity of Believers have Part in the Power of the Keyes That all men once Dye is the generall Proposition of the Apostle Heb 9. 27. which is not Impeached by the Translation of Enoch and Elias Having thus cleared the first Answer to this contradiction Let us weigh next what he saith to the second Answer which saith he is given to help out the former for I had said 2. If there had been some Difference between the Keyes and the Way in some expressions yet it lay rather in Logicall Termes then in the Doctrine of Divinity or Church Practise and such is this about the first subject of the Power of the Keyes What saith the Replyer to this He Returneth a double exception 1. Saith He Had it been only a lesser Difference about a Logicall Notion as he minceth it the Assertor had not Observed it But a difference of the highest magnitude to Contradiction in Delivering a New way is very Remarkable How shall we be brought to Agree with them that contradict not only one another but one man himselfe Answer 1. It was not any weaknesse of the first Answer that needed a second to Help it out but variety of fit matter for a just Defence produced it It needed no help but to cleare it selfe from groundlesse exceptions Answer 2. The seeming Difference between the way and the Keyes if any be in this point it lyeth rather in Logicall expressions then in the Doctrine of Divinity or Church Practise For what ever the Different Judgments of men of our way may be touching the first subject of the Power of the Keyes some Placing it in the Body of the Church others Dividing it between officers and Brethren yet in the Doctrine of Divinity we all Agree with one Accord that the Church even the Body of Church-members have power to choose their officers to Admit members and to censure offenders And that the officers only have Power to Preach the word with office and Authority and to Administer the Sacraments And according to this unity of judgment is the uniforme Practise of our Churches And therefore let mincing be left to curious Cookes to prepare their shread meat for queazy stomackes or let it be left to such as would make the best of a bad cause we neither Distrust our Cause to be of God nor do feare any thing more then that it should be hid and clouded with prejudices and calumnies from such as know it not and yet seek the Truth in sincerity And
therefore let the Replyer be pleased to consider whether the Difference be indeed any more then in a Logicall Notion and whether they be the words not only of an Assertour but of an Avenger to style it a Difference of the highest magnitude Surely if there were not some more then common zeale and Indignation in the cause A Contradiction in Logicall Termes would not be counted a Difference of the highest magnitude in Divinity nor vvould such Difference in vvords so easy to be reconciled be blovven up to so high an opposition as a Contradiction 2. His second exception is That Howsoever the first Subject is indeed a Logicall Terme yet the matter Discoursed is Doctrinall Divinity And whatsoever the Practise be It is a Contradiction in Divinity as well as in Logick Answer But I hope it hath appeared there hath been found no Contradiction at all neither in Logick nor in Divinity though there have wanted no Industry to search it nor animosity to charge it And therefore your Question is easily Answered How shall we be brought to Agree with them that Contradict not only one another but one man himselfe For here is yet no Contradiction found of one man to himselfe nor any Appearance of Contradiction neither in one man nor other unlesse it be only in Logicall Termes and scarce therein But If the Replyer deferre his Agreeing with Divines or Churches in any way of Religion till he meet with such as neither Contradict themselves nor one another He must neither be Protestant nor Puritan as they have been called nor of the Presbyterian nor Congregationall way What if it be said in the way pag 45. The brethren of the Church might Proceed to wit upon just and weighty grounds against all their officers as well as one yet in such cases our Churches are never wont to proceed but in the Presence and with the Consent and approbation of other Churches Why then saith he their Doctrine and Practise agree not which is the greater Blemish How hard is it for a heart leavened with Prejudice to take good things in good part A free man sui juris having his fathers consent might marry a wife if he would without his Brethrens consent And for Adultery he might put her away also without their Consent And yet he will not do either without their consent and Approbaion Is this mans Judgment contrary to his Practise and is it the greater Blemish what say we to Paul He Received his Gospell neither of man nor by man And he might have Preached it every where boldly and confidently and have called an Anathema upon all such as had gainesayed Him whether Angells or Apostles Gal. 1. 8 9. yet he chose rather to go up to Jerusalem to conferre with the Apostles about his whole Gospell Gal. 2. 1 2. and that lest he had Runne in vaine or should Runne in vaine What then shall we say Then Pauls Doctrine and Practise Agree not which is the greater Blemish God forbid Christian Prudence and Religious care to Prevent offence will condescend to cleare Righteous Proceedings to all judicious and equall mindes And yet neither crosse his owne judgment of his owne Right nor blemish but rather Honour himselfe by Approving it to others 3. I gave a third Answer to the former Charge of Contradictions which he saith I Added to succour both the former But the Truth is they need no succour to Defend themselves against such exceptions but it is an Honour to truth to have many witnesses to attend upon it I said it for a third Answer That it were no just matter of calumny If in some latter Tractate I should Retract or expresse more commodiously what I wrote in a former lesse safely as Augustine c. Whereto he Replyeth Truly Sr It had been no just Calumny so to do but matter of Honour and Reputation rather But to write Contradictions and to take no Notice of them till observed by others and then to be so farre from Retracting as to stand upon Justification of them is nothing like Augustines Practise and so falleth short of his Reputation Answer Though Augustine Retracted what he was convinced of to be erroneous or unsafe yet he did not Retract what every one objected against him not only what Faustus or Petilius or Julian objected but not so much as what Jerome himselfe objected but justly stood upon his owne Defence Had Vindex his objections been Convictions Reason and I hope conscience would not have suffered me to Justify knowne Errours He doth himselfe beare me witnesse That he hath sometimes heard I have often changed my opinions And I thank God I take it for no shame to change for the better But to confesse I am convinced when I am not and to Retract what a Stranger though a Brother conceiveth erroneous to wit in his Judgment but not in mine own It were as much as to live by another man's Faith and not mine own and with all to cast my selfe under that Reproach which the Title of his Booke implicitly casteth upon me A wavering minded man is unstable in all his wayes In the conclusiō of his Preface he saith there are in that Prefatory Epistle to the Way and in that other to the keyes other Differences observed betweene the Author and the Prefacers but the Author is not pleased to take Notice of them It is too hard perhaps to Reconcile others to himselfe It is well if he can Reconcile himselfe to himselfe Ans. This is the word not of an Assertour but of an avenger whose heart is hot Deut. 19. 6. But Though Mr Cawdry know not so much yet I have taken Notice of those Differences and have Advertised the Prefacers of the same whom it concerned My letters to them are not present at hand with me If they were I should not think it meet to publish them In the Preface to the keyes the Prefacers note a Difference between me and them about the Prophecying of Private Brethren concerning which I sent them word I Discerned no Dissent at all between them and me in that Point though they had Added a case or two of liberty more than there they did expresse Whether it be too hard for me or no to Reconcile others with my selfe it is enough that I keep the unity of the Spirit with them in the bond of Peace and that I have learned Placidè ferre contra Sentientes But howsoever I hope by the help of Christ I shall soone Reconcile my selfe to my selfe unlesse the Replyer can prevaile with me so farre as to make me not only to fall out with my selfe but to fall off from the Truth too or else convince me that I have so fallen and yet even so I hope the Lord will help me rather to Reconcile my selfe to the Truth than my selfe to my selfe CHAP. 2. Touching the second Pretended contradiction with the 3 4 5. The second Contradiction which the Replyer chargeth is delineated in the Scheme thus 2. The
keyes are Given to the Church of Believers The way pag. 1. that is a combination of Faithfull men as Mr. Hooker 2. The key of knowledg belongeth to all the faithfull whether Joyned to any particular Church or no The Keyes pag. 11. 2 The key of knowledge is given not only to the Church but to some before they enter into the Church Keyes pag. 2. Ans. This terme the key of knowledge is taken from our Saviour's words in Luk. 11. 52. Where he Reproveth the Lawyers who had taken away the key of knowledge and neither entred in themselves nor suffered others to enter The words argue that the entring in was not into the visible Church for into that the Lawyers had entred and were willing to admit others He speaketh therefore of entring into the state of Grace and so into the kingdome of Grace and Glory The solution then is plaine and easy The key of knowledge or Faith belongeth to all the faithfull whether Joyned to any particular Church or no For by it they enter into the Kingdome of Grace and Glory But if we speak of the keyes of a Particular visible Church they are all given to the Church or Congregation of Believers Touching the third Contradiction The third Contradiction is decyphered thus 3. The key of Order is Common to all the members of the Church keyes pag. 8. Then say we to Women and Children 3 It is not every place or Order in the Church that giveth Power to Receive Ordinances much lesse to Dispense them as Children and Women Way cleared part 2. pag. 19. Ans. 1. It hath been Answered above that such Generall Propositions hold true notwithstanding some knowne particular exceptions It is appointed to all men once to Dye which is an undoubted Truth though Enoch and Elias never Dyed Ans. 2. The Children of Church-members are in Order to Baptisme but excluded from the Lord's Table 1 Cor. 11. 28. Women have some parts of the key of Order whereby they have power to walke Orderly themselves and in a private way to help others to walk Orderly also Act. 18. 26. Tit. 2. 3 4 5. Only they have not Power to Admit members choose Officers censure Offenders But if they have any part of the power of the keyes the Proposition is true yea and it were true also though they had been kept from all Interest in the Exercise of the keyes Touching the fourth Contradiction The fourth Contradiction is thus laid out 4. Ordination is a work of Rule The way pag. 49. Ordination and Jurisdiction both Acts of Rule pertaine indifferently to all the Presbyters ibid. pag. 49. 4. As for Election Ordination of Officers these things the brethren may doe if need be without Officers The way pag. 45. 101. 4. Ordination is not an Act of Supreme Jurisdiction but of Order rather Hooker's Survey part 2. 75. Ans. Ordination They that make the least of it make it an Act of Prayer such Prayer by which the lesse is blessed of the greater as it is in all Prayer which is Joyned with Imposition of hands which Argueth it is an Act of majority of Power and majority of Power may without a Soloecisme be called Rule though not office-Rule yet Honourable preheminence I no where call it an Act of Supreme Jurisdiction which is that Mr Hooker Denies and seemeth to Deny it not Positively neither but comparatively rather Ordination saith he is not an Act of Supreme Jurisdiction but of Order rather then there is no contradiction here Nor will it be found in the other clause for though Ordination and Jurisdiction be said in the Way pag 49. to pertaine indifferently to all the Presbyters yet that is expresly spoken in opposition to the Lord Bishops who usurped both into their own hands as their peculiar prerogative and though I say else where in the Way that in Election Ordination of Officers the Brethren may act if need be without Officers yet the very word of limitation if need be Argueth that in ordinary cases ordination pertaineth to the Presbyters as other Acts there mentioned doe pertaine to the Presbyters and Brethren met together but as for Election I take it to pertaine principally to the Brethren Touching the 5th Contradiction The 5th Contradiction followeth in this sort 5. The keye of Authority or Rule is committed to the Elders of the Church and so the Act of Rule is the proper Act of their office Keyes pag. 20. The People discerning and approving the Justice of the censure give consent and Obedience to the will and Rule of Christ keyes pag. 15. 37. 41. The People stand in an Order even an orderly Subjection according to the Order of the Gospel pag. 11. 5. In case the Officers doe Erre and give offence they shall be governed by the whole Body of the Brethren The Way Pag. 100. The Church exerciseth severall Acts of Authority over the Elders The Way pag. 101. The People have some storke of Power and Authority in the Government of the Church pag. 36. They Rule the Church by Appointing their own officers ibid. pag. 16. Ans. 1. The former Columne in all the three Places speaketh of Elders walking in the right Administration of their office then in Propriety of speech the Key of Authority and Rule is committed to them 1 Tim. 5. 17. and is there made the proper Act of their office Then it is that the People Discerning the will and Judgment of Christ in their Judgment they do give Consent and Obedience to the will of Christ in Censures Advised by them Then it is also that they walke in orderly subjection to their Elders Heb. 13. 17. But the latter Columne speaketh of the Power of the Church over the Elders chiefly in case of the Elders mal-Administration of their office or misgovernment of themselves But then the Power which the Church putteth forth It is not office Power which is properly Authority but Potestas honoraria Answer 2. In Columne the second when it is said The People have some stock of Power and Authority in the Government of the Church Keyes pag. 36. They are the words of an objection not of mine owne Assertion And though some where I speak of Acts of Authority over the Elders I do clearely explaine my selfe in the Keyes pag. 36. That Authority is taken in a large sense and after a sort when it is Acknowledged in the People over the Elders As 1. When a man acteth according to his owne will freely he is then said to be {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} Dominus sui Actus so the People in all the Acts of liberty which they put forth they are Domini sui Actus Lords of their owne Actions 2. The people by sundry Acts of liberty as in Election of officers in sending forth their messengers in concurrence with their Elders in the Admission of members and censure of Offenders in the Determination and Promulgation of Synodall Acts They have a great stroke and Power in
the Ordering of Church Affaires which may be called {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} or Potestas a Power which many times in Common speech goeth under the Name of Rule or Authority But in proper speech It is indeed a Priviledge or liberty an {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} or Power rather then Authority It is a common speech usuall amongst our best Divines That the Government of the Church is mixt of a Monarchy an Aristocracy and a Democracy In regard of Christ the Head the Government of the Church is Soveraigne and Monarchicall In regard of the Rule by the Presbytery it is Stewardly and Aristocraticall In Regard of the Peoples Power in Elections and censures It is Democraticall Chap. 3. Touching the sixth Contradiction The sixth Contradiction is thus Presented 6. Examination is one of the highest Acts of Rule and therefore cannot be performed but by some Rulers Keyes pag. 16. The Church cannot Excommunicate the whole Presbytery because they have not received frō Christ an office of Rule without their officers ibid. No Act of the Peoples power doth properly bind unlesse the Authority of the Presbytery Joyne with it Ibid. pag. 36. 6. If all their officers were found Culpable either in Hereticall Doctrine Or in scandalous Crimes the Church hath lawfull Authority to proceed against them all The Way pag. 45. In case of offence given by an Elder or the whole Eldership together the Church hath Authority to require satisfaction and if they give it not to Proceed to Censure Ibid. page 101. 6. Excommunication is not an Act of the Power of office but of judgment Nor an Act of highest Rule but of supreame Judgment seated in the Fraternity Surv. part 3. pag. 45. As a Church of Brethren can not proceed to any publick Censure without the Elders so nor the Elders without concurrence of the People Preface to the Keyes pag. 4. Answer 1. Here is indeede a Discrepance in Expressions between the Way and the Keyes But it was not my Act that any such Discrepance should have been extant The truth is That many yeares agoe and some yeares before the suppressing of the Bishops in England I was seriously moved by some of our Brethren and fellow Elders here to Draw up an Historicall Narration of our Church-way together with some familiar grounds of the same briefly In short time as God Helped I dispatched it which when our brethren had perused I saw they did not close with it Yet a Brother going for England got some where a Copy of it and Presented it to some of the Congregationall way there and I afterwards heard that neither did they close with it and in particular not with that Passage which is here recited as a part of the Contradiction Which since appeareth more openly by the Asterisk put upon that Passage and upon sundry other in the Book But before I saw that and had only heard That they did not fully Accord I hoped it had met with a timely suppression rather then an impression for I heard no more of it for two or three yeares after Meane while perceiving That one maine Point of Dissatisfaction was the Authority given to the Fraternity I considered more seriously and Distinctly of the whole Power of the Keyes and expressed my Apprehensions in that Treatise of the Keyes which our brethren here did well Accept and so did the brethren of like Judgment in England and some of them were pleased to Attest it with the Preface which is now extant before it yea I have heard as well as some other of our Brethren here by some letters from England that Reverend Mr Rutherford who was a great Part of the Assembly at Westminster offered to the Dissenting brethren That if they would come up to the Treatise of the Keyes themselves would meet them there But this was sundry yeares after the Treatise of the way had been finished and carried to England and as I hoped suppressed But it seemeth some Brother there having got a Copy of it being zealous of the Authority of the Fraternity and Perceiving that their Authority was not so fully Acknowledged in the Keyes as in the Way He caused his Copy of the Way which was indeed abrupt in the entrance and imperfect otherwise to be Published in Print which when I saw It troubled me not a little as knowing That the Discrepant Expressions in the one and in the other might trouble friends and give Advantage to Adversaries Afterwards Mr Hooker coming downe from Connectiquol to consult with the Elders here about his Book He pleaded seriously for the Placing of all Church power primitively in the Body of the Church and also for their Judiciary Power of Censure over the Presbytery suitable to what I had delivered in the Way Now though I cannot say that his Reasons did prevaile with me to lter the Placing of the First Subject of the Power of the Keyes from what I had delivered in the Treatise of the Keyes yet Perceiving that some mens Judgments did more Adhere as to his Judgment so to the former course of the Way others to that of the Keyes I suffered both to stand as they did especially seeing I could not help it the Book of the Way being published without my Consent and both the Way and the Keyes being disperst into many hands past my Revoking and Refuted by some So that if the Replyer find some Discrepancy in one of these bookes from the other Let him know that the Doctrine of the Way in such few Points wherein it differeth from the Keyes was not then mine when the Keyes were published much lesse when the Way was published which was many yeares after though it had been penned many yeares before And yet take all the Discrepancyes and weigh them I will not say with Candour but with Rigour and I do not yet remember nor can I yet find any of them but they lye rather in Difference of Logicall Notion then in Doctrine of Divinity or Church Practise as I said before Answer 2. This further let me Acquaint both the Replyer and the Reader withall that sometimes there hath growne a Question amongst us whether all Excommunication be an Act of Officiaria Potestas or not some Honoraria only If of Officiaria It cannot be Dispensed by the Brethren only as the first Columne hath it If of Honoraria It may and so the second Columne hath it and then the Contradiction is not ejusdem Neither is this Censure dispensed by the brethren as I conceive one of the highest Acts of Rule which is to deliver unto Satan 1 Cor. 5. 5. but Reacheth only to cast their Elders out of Administration of office to them and out of Church Communion with them The Truth is Ego libenter in eorum me numero esse Profiteor qui proficiendo Scribunt Scribendo proficiunt which gave me occasion to Adde the third Answer given above to the first Contradiction Some things in the
way which I delivered more laxly I expresse more distinctly in the Treatise of the Keyes which followed after and some things more fully and clearely in the way cleared then in either of the former Answer 3. When I say No Act of the Peoples part doeth properly binde unlesse the Authority of the Elder joyne with it Keyes pag. 36. I would be understood to speak it as I meant it of the Elders walking without offence in the Right Administration of their office and Conversation of their lives Answer 4. When Mr Hooker saith Excommunication is not an Act of Office Power nor of Rule but of supreame Judgment seated in the Fraternity I easily grant that the Excommunication dispensed by the Fraternity is not an Act of Office-Power But it may Justly be Inquired whether Excommunication being Dispensed by the Elders with the consent of the Church be not an Act as of the Churches honourable Judiciall Power so of the Elders Office-Power and Rule in the Church For as the Pastorall Preaching of the Elders is Officiall and so Authoritative though the Preaching of other Brethren as of the Sonnes of the Prophets be not so so why may there not be the like Difference observed here To deliver unto Satan seemeth to be an Act of Judiciall Office-Power as when in another case it is said The Judge delivereth a man to the Officer and the officer casteth him into Prison Matth. 5. 25. He that casteth into Prison is an Inferiour officer The Judge must therefore be a Superiour officer that delivereth an offendour to the officer to be cast into Prison In the Excommunication of the Incestuous Corinthian where both the Elders and Brethren concurred the sentence might well be delivered in Termes that expresse an Act of highest Authority To deliver unto Satan But where the Church is called to Act against their Elders who corrupt them with false Doctrine there the Apostle Requireth the Church to mark them and Avoyd them Rom. 16. 17 18. which may expresse an Act of liberty and Judiciall Power but not of Authority CHAP. 4. Touching the seaventh Contradiction and eighth The seaventh Contradiction is thus gathered 7. It was a Sacrilegious Breach of Order That Commissaries and Chancellours wanting the Key of Order no Ministers have been invested with Jurisdiction Yea and more then Ministeriall Authority above those Elders who labour in word and Doctrine The Keyes pag. 16. 7. There is a Key of Power given to the Church with the Elders as to open a doore of entrance to the Ministers calling so to shut the doore of entrance against them in some cases c. The Keyes p. 9. Yea to Censure all their Elders without Elders The Way p. 45. as before Ans. The power given to the Commissaries Chancellors I justly called a Sacrlegious Breach of Order in more Respects than one 1. In that being no Ministers they exercised more than Ministeriall Authority over the Elders For Ministers doe not exercise Authority over Elders no nor over any Brother but with consent of the Church But these doe it without and against the Consent of the Church 2. In that they exercise this Authority even in Churches wherein they have not Received the key of Order and so stand not so much as in the Order of Members amngst them 3. In that they proceed against them not for crimes committed against the word of God but for Neglect of Popish-Canons or Humane Traditions But now no Authority allowed to Brethren either in the Keyes or in the Way cometh neere to this Breach of Order For 1. In Joyning with the Elders to open a doore of entrance to Minister's calling They put forth no Act of Authority properly so called at all but only exercise a liberty and Power orderly which they have Received from the Lord Jesus to elect their own officers As the Peoples election of Deacons Act. 6. 2. to 5th And their lifting up of hands in the choice of Elders Act. 14. 23. doth declare And when they doe shut them forth it is not without their Elders where their Elders are not wanting or not wanting to their Duty And even then they put forth no Act of Office Rule or Authority properly so called as the Commissaries doe but only an Act of Judiciall Power common to the whole Church 1 Cor. 5. 12. 2. The People do exercise this Power only in their own Church where themselves are members and have Received a key of Order 3. They proceed not against any much lesse against their Elders but for notorious offences committed against the word of God in Doctrine or life so that this Contradiction speaketh as little ad idem as any of the former Touching the 8th Contradiction The 8th Contradiction is represented thus 8. We are so farre from Allowing that Sacrilegious usurpation of the Ministers office That private Christians ordinarily take upon them to Preach the Gospell Publickly The Keyes pag 6. 8. This is ordinarily Practised in England and Allowed by the Independant Brethren Yea they being but in the Notion of Gifted Brethren no Ministers to other Congregations doe it ordinarily themselves Ans. 1. This Contradiction is not of me to my selfe but of some others who whether they be Independants truly so called I doe not know sure I am that Presbyterians and Independants are not membra Dividentia though I see that all that are not for Popery or Episcopacy or Presbytery doe commonly lurke under the style of Independancy I hope the Replyer would be loth to Renounce the Protestant Religion because there are found some contradictions and greater than these in one of them to another Ans. 2. When I call it a Sacrilegious usurpation for Private Christians Ordinarily to take upon them to Preach the Gospell Publickly to Administer the Sacraments yet this latter of Administring the Sacraments the Replyer leaveth out and so the Contradictiction is not ad idem which is a Common failing in this and the rest For I would not say that it is a Sacrilegious usurpation for well gifted Brethren where ordained Ministers cannot be had there to Preach ordinarily and Publickly especially if they be Approved by those that have Power and requested thereto by the People wherein I goe further in giving way to the Prophecying of Private Brethren than my Reverend Brethren the Prefacers to the Keyes doe who only Allow them to Preach occasionally and not ordinarily which I speak only to this end That the Replyer and others may know there is more consent and Agreement in our Judgments then they take notice of or sometimes our selves either But if Private Brethren doe Administer the Sacraments at all whether ordinarily or Occasionally It seemeth to me like the Fact of Uzziah in offering Incense CHAP. 5. Touching the 9th Contradiction The 9th Contradiction is layd out thus 9. A Particular Church of Saints Professing the Faith that is members without offices is the first subject of all the Church Offices with all their Spirituall Gifts
Power Keyes pag. 31. 9. As the keyes of the kingdome of Heaven are divers so are the Subjects to whom they are committed diverse keyes pag. 11. The Apostles were the first subject of Apostolicall power ibid. pag. 32. A Synod is the first Subject of that Power whereby Errour is convinced and condemned ibid. pag. 47. 9. The Power of the keyes belongeth firstly to a Congregation of Covenanting Believers Surv. part â— p. 219. The Power of the keyes is in the Church of Believers as in the first subject ib. p. 195 That conceite is wide to make one first subject of this power yet others to share in this power not by meanes of that for this is to speak daggers and Contradictions ibid. Ans 1. This is one of those Differences of which I spake before that lyeth rather in Logicall Notion than either in Doctrine of Divinity or in Church Practise Against which the exception made above hath been Answered above in clearing the first Contradiction Ans. 2. There is no colour of Contradiction betweene the two former Columnes For when I say A Particular Church is the first Subject of all the Church Officers and their Gifts I speak not of this or that particular Church which is but an Individuall but of a Particular Church taken Indefinitely which by meere errour of the Printer is without sence said taken Independently which is the Disadvantage of us who live so far remote from the Presse that we can neither prevent their mistakes nor correct them afterwards But take a Particular Church Indefinitely it comprehendeth all Particular Churches And that God hath given to Particular Churches all spirituall officers together with their Gifts for the Discharge of their offices is Proved by evident Texts of Scripture in that very Page of the Keyes 31. I doe not say as some doe that the Church meaning the Fraternity is the first subject of all spirituall Gifts for then they had received them immediately without officers but I say the offices and Officers not devoid of Gifts but furnished with their gifts are given by Christ to the Church freely and not to any other Person or Society from whom the Church Receiveth them But this no whit crosseth what is said in the second Columne That Elders are the first Subjects of ordinary Ministeriall Power and Apostles of Apostolicall Power and Synods of Synodicall Power A wife may be the first subject of her own Dowry but yet her Husband is the first Subject Recipient of his wife with her Dowry Ans. 3. As for what is said differently by my Brother Hooker in the third Columne as his Person and Gifts and Friendship were pretious and deare to me whilest he lived so now that he resteth in Glory his Name and memory and labour saving some very few private Notions are honourable and blessed with me and I suppose with all that knew him But in this Logicall Notion I crave leave not so much to dissent from him for he herein Dissented from me who wrote first rather than I from him but leave I crave not to Retract what I formerly wrote in the Keyes touching this Point though I should as much suspect mine own judgment where he Dissenteth from me as where any man It is true he taketh the Church of Covenanted Believers to be the first Subject of the power of the keyes vvhich if he meane no more than that they have all Church-Power either formaliter or Radicaliter and Virtualiter then there is no Difference in our expressions but if he meane that that they are the first Subject of all Church-Povver properly two or three things Detaine me from consenting with him herein 1. That vvhich is the first Subject of any Povver Receiveth it immediately vvithout any other Intervening Subject As fire being the first Subject of Heate Receiveth not his Heate from any former Subject But it is evident That many a Church of Believers hath not Received Pastorall Gifts nor it may be any Gifts fit for office 'till they fetch them from other Churches and sometimes from some who are not members of any Particular Church at all 2. The first Subject of any Power as it hath immediately Received it so it may immediately exercise it as Fire the first subject of Heate can Heate without Intervention of any other subject But the Church hath not Power immediately to exercise Pastorall Preaching or Administration of the Sacraments 'till it have procured and chosen and called forth some or other Gifted Persons to exercise the same 3. I might Adde a third Reason to both the former Whatsoever is properly the first Subject of any Power It hath that same Power or some other equivalent and analogicall to it not only radicaliter and virtualiter but Formaliter also And because formaliter therefore radicaliter and virtualiter For whatsoever is in any Subject Firstly whether it be proper Adjunct or proper effect or any other proper Argument it either floweth from the forme or from the matter so formed As for instance capacity of Learning or Risibility is in Man as in the first subject The former floweth from the Reasonable soule the latter from the matter of a man so formed But neither of these are in man radicaliter or virtualiter but only because they are in a man formally and so either flow from the forme or from the matter so formed Take another Instance and of another sort The People that have power to elect a King though they have not formally kingly power yet have they a formall Power to submit themselves to Kingly Power And so haveing a formall Power to put one of the Relatives they have an aequivalent and Analogicall Power to put the other Correlative For Posito uno Relatorum Ponitur etiam alterum As for that which is quoted by the Replyer from Mr Hooker in the last clause of the third Columne of this contradiction I see not how it concerneth me or contradicteth any thing in the former Columnes For I doe not make any first Subject of Church-Power and yet others to share in that Power but not by meanes of that But as the keyes of the kingdome of heaven are diverse So I see no Inconvenience that the first Subjects to whom the severall keyes are committed may be diverse also Neither doth the letter of the Text seeme to me to gainesay that Mat. 16. 18. For though it speak not to Them but to Thee a Representing one state or Condition of men yet say that one condition to be believers and take Believers in a large sence It comprehendeth all sorts of Professing Believers whether Private members or Elders or Apostles indeed all But neither doe I see any convincing reason seeing Peter stood in a threefold Ecclesiasticall Relation being both an Apostle and an Elder a Profest Believer why Christ committing the keyes to him saying to Thee will I give them might not Intend to give all the keyes and the severall sorts of them
condemned them unto Death unlesse they became blasphemers or Idolators or Seducers to Idolatry What Christ and Moses doe both of them Tolerate the Servants of Christ need not to be ashamed of such Toleration Ans. 2. This Contradiction for ought I can Discerne laboureth also Crimine falsi For it seemeth a manifest untruth what he speaketh in Columne 2. That the Brethren call for or Tolerate Toleration of all opinions and Deny the magistrate Power to punish any Pretending conscience Mr Bartlet Alledged for the proofe hereof p. 128. saith no such thing And the contrary he proveth from the expresse Testimony of Mr Burroughs Mr Thomas Goodwin others of that way The 8th Chapt. Touching the 17th Contradiction with 18. 19. The 17th Contradiction is thus set forth 17. Visible Saints though they be Hypocrites inwardly are the matter of a visible church Mr. Hook part 1. p. 14. 15. 17. You say Saints in outward Profession are the matter of a Congregationall Church we judge that reall Saints uttering in Discourse the Breathings of the Holy Spirit and experiences of conversion interested in a stricter conversation to be the matter Dr. Holmes Epistle to Way cleared pag. 4. Mr. Bartlet speaketh something this language Can there be Ability for spirituall holy services where the spirit is not yet given Can there be communion between light and Darknesse Can they edify one another in the Faith that have not the work of Faith wrought in them Modell p. 57. See more pag. 103. Ans. What Mr Hooker's Judgment was is expressed in that first Columne what mine own is declared and I hope cleared in the Holynesse of Church-members What Dr Holmes and Mr Bartlet doe further require in it they Declare what Church-members ought to be de jure especially in their first constitution rather then what they are or are wont to be de facto especially in their Declension Againe I see Mr Bartlet speaketh in opposition to the members of the Parish Churches who are in many places Ignorant loose profane and scandalous livers who are not indeed visible Saints pag. 56. It is true there is some work of the Spirit where ever there is a visible Saint But the Spirit giveth many Gifts to the edification of others as to Judas and Demas which often doe not reach to the Regeneration of him that Receiveth them The 18th Contradiction is thus stated 18. The forme of the visible Church is the Covenant either explicite or implicite and the latter is sometimes fully sufficient Mr. H. Surv. part 1. pag. 47. 48 and others 18. You say an implicit uniting viz. A walking and communicating with you is a sufficient evidencing of the Forme we say Their folemne confession of their faith expresse open covenanting with the Lord to wake with such a body of Saints in all the wayes of Christ to be the manifest Forme D. Holmes ibid. 18. It is not generall Profession will serve the turne but there must be a peculiar engagement and appropriation to this or that particular body Mr. H. Surv. pag 63. Yet he said An Implicite Covenant was sufficient Ans. The expressions of Mr H. quoted in Columne 1 and Columne 3 will not amount to an opposition of himselfe much lesse to a Contradiction For though he make an Implicite Covenant sufficient yet a generall Profession will not serve the turne to make an Implicite Covenant For an Implicite Covenant must be with Reference to this or that particular Body or else it is neither Covenant at all nor Implicite A Generall Profession entreth not any man into any Relation with any Church unlesse he offer himselfe to Joyne with them as Mr Hooker in that Place more largely truly openeth himselfe Neither doth Dr Holms his expression contradict him For he that maketh the explicite Covenant the manifest forme of the Church He doth not gainesay the implicite covenant to be a real Forme of the Church though not so manifest but more obscure The 19th Contradiction is thus delineated 19. We crave leave of the Authour of the keyes To Declare that we Assent not to all expressions or all and every Assertion in it As in these Particulars About the Prothesying of Private Brethren 2. That the Assembly Act. 15. was a Formall Syned 3. That the Apostles Acted in it as Ordinary Elders Preface to Keyes pag. 6. 19. We doe in this Epistle certifie our Assent to the way of the Churches of New England saving that we doe not fully close with some expressions passim in the Bock before some of which 10 at least belike there are more we minded to Note a star in the Margin This we could not but say and doe pace Authoris or we could not Assent Epistle to the Way pag. 2. 19. Yet they are angry that we call for a fuller Declaration of themselves Epistle to the Way p. 1. and Epistle to the Way cleared pag. 2. Answer 1. Though my reverend Brethren crave leave to dissent from me in some expressions which they may safely and freely do without my leave for I professe my spirit subject to the Prophets yet about the Prophecying of private Brethren I must againe Professe as I did before That I do not know wherein I Dissent from them unlesse it be that I Allow somewhat more liberty to the Prophecying of private Brethren then they do The Allowance which they give is with foure limitations 1. That is be done occasionally and not in ordinary course 2. By men of such Abilities as are fit for office 3. Not assuming this to themselves but as they are allowed and designed to it by such as have Power 4. That their Doctrine be subjected to the Teaching Elders of the Church Graunt these limitations and I never scrupled to my remembrance the liberty of Prophecying by private Brethren yea this liberty I should further graunt that though the private Brethren be not furnished with abilities fit for publick office yet there may be occasion to call them forth to exercise their gifts as in the suddaine sicknesse or absence of the Minister and other officers why may not a private brother be called forth by the Church or stirred up by the Spirit of God in himselfe to stand up and with leave instruct and exhort the Church to make a Sanctifyed use of such a suddaine stroke of Providence Or what if a private Brother of good credit in the church shall observe the Doctrine of the Ministers not so much válued as were meet why may he not take occasion to speak some words of encouragement and confirmation both to the Minister and to the Congregation Jehosaphat's Nobles though Princes yet were but as Private Brethren in the Church as bearing no Publick Church-office yet they taught in the Cities of Juda what Respect was due to the Ministery of the Levites whom they brought with them when my beloved Brethren do not acknowledge the Assembly of Apostles Elders and Brethren Acts 15. To have been a formall Synod of
Messengers sent out of a set and combined Association from neighbour churches They do not herein Dissent from me For the two Churches of Antioch and Jerusalem were too farre remote to stand in a set or combined Association and therefore they may well deny it to be a Formall Synod according to the Forme of Synods now in use in Presbyteriall Churches But that that assembly had the true matter and forme of a just Synod As I do believe it so I do not see that my Brethren deny it For the efficient cause of the Synod the Church of Antioch sent messengers and the Church of Jerusalem whose officers were sent unto they freely gave them a meeting and the Church with them For the matter of the Synod they had the Messengers officers and Brethren of both Churches met together in the Name of Christ It is not necessary to the being of a Synod the convention of the Messengers and members of many Churches The convention of two Churches by themselves or messengers may make a Synod If the convention of one Church may make a Synagogue why may not the convention of two churches make a Synod The forme of a Synod they had in Arguing and disputing the case in hand and freely giving in their Judgments from scripture grounds and at length determining the whole cause with the Joynt consent of the Apostles Elders and Brethren and Publishing the same by letters and messengers to all the churches whom it concerned The establishment of Peace and Truth in the churches was the end of this Synod as it ought to be the end of all It is true here was a consultation in that the church of Antioch sent for counsell and the Apostles and Elders met to consult and consider of the matter But consultation was but one Act of the Assembly many other Formall Acts of a Synod they put forth besides which have been specified The Apostles though they did put forth some Acts of their Apostolicall Power in helping to cleare the Truth by explayning obscure Scriptures and in Ratifying the conclusion with some greater Plerophory of the mind of the Holy Ghost yet in Putting such things to Argumentation and Disputation and allowing Elders and Brethren liberty of Putting in their votes and determining and publishing the sentence in the Name and with the common consent of all herein they Acted as Ordinary Elders and messengers of churches might and ought to do The Notes of about Ten Passages in the Way wherein our Reverend Brethren in England or some of them say they could not fully close with them without Affixing an Asterisk to them If I knew where the Pinch of the Difficulty lay I would Addresse my selfe to give them fuller satisfaction either by condescending to them or giving them just Reason why I could not Meane while I have learned through Grace not to fall out with my Brethren for greater differences in judgment then those be That which is added in the third Columne that they are offended and as you call it Angry with you for that you call for a fuller Declaration of themselves for that themselves can best give you an Account for 1. It may be they think it needlesse to Publish further declaratioÌ„s because over above the former Declarations there have been since published three or foure Pithy Pregnant Declarations of the same Argument as Mr Hookers surv Mr Nortons Answer to Apollonius the Synod at Cambridge the Defence of the Answer to the nine Questions 2. It may be they feare If they should publish more declarations in this case It would Adde rather more Fewell to contention then Prevaile with the Spirits of men contrary minded to Receive satisfaction CHAP. 9. Touching the 20th Contradiction and 21. The 20th Contradiction is thus Expressed 20. It is generally asserted by them that one Church hath not Power to Censure another 20. A Synod hath Power to Determine to withdraw Communion from them if they cannot heale them Keyes pag. 24. 20. The sentence of non Communion denounced against whole Churches Apolog. Narrat p. 18 19. If a Sentence denounced it is a Censure Answer To withdraw Communion from a church is no more an Act of Power over a church then it was to Joyne in Communion with them Communion and non-Communion are Acts of the same power both of them Acts of priviledge or liberty And if withdrawing Communion be not an Act of censure then to determine so to withdraw is no Act of an higher Nature Though a Censure is a sentence denounced yet every sentence denounced is not a Censure unlesse it be Denounced by an higher power then that of equalls When the Ten Tribes denounced their Rejection of service to David's House 1 Kings 12. 16. It was not a censure more then theirs who solemnely Rejected the Rule of Christ we will not have this man to Rule over us Luk. 19. 14. The last Contradiction is declared thus 21. We Say Instituted worship and Ordinances do not flow immediatly from spirituall union and Relation to Christ and his members c. Def. of 9. Pos. pag. 76. He must come at them in a right Order to wâ—t in Fellowship of the Church Surv. pag. 2. 21. Then it followeth that Hearing the word Preached Singing of Psalmes and Baptisme belong not to any but such as are members of a Particular Congregation And yet they say Ordinarily hearing it no signe of a Church member Surv. part 1. pag. 18. 21. A Person hath his first Right to the Sacrament and so to other Ordinances because He hath an Interest in the Covenant of the Gospell Surv. part 1. pag. 65. Answer Here is no semblance of Contradiction Mr Hooker Surv. saith a Person hath his first Right to a Sacrament because he hath an interest in the covenant of the Gospell The defence saith he hath not immediate Right till he be a member of a Particular Congregation And so saith the Survey too in the Place Alledged If Immediate Right and first Right were all one there were some colour for the Exception but it is farre otherwise in having Christ we have a first Right to all things but not an Immediate Right but in Gods way But neither hence will it follow that Instituted Ordinances as hearing the word Singing of Psalmes belong to none but to members of a Particular Congregation For though they be given to such firstly and Immediately yet for their sakes to all that come in amongst them The Childrens Table and the Provisions thereof is first Allowed to the Children of the Family yet in a Bountifull House-keepers Family such part of the Proâ—â—sions may be Allowed to strangers as they may be fit to partake in FINIS Vid. Gerard loc. Com. de Minist. Ecclesiast Sect. 11. 12.