Con. Therefore baptized Churches baptize such as shall be saved Mr. Cr. and some of his Party began to deride and say this was in gyro idem per idem All that are saved confesse and believe All that confesse and believe are saved Said Dr. Chamb. it is the greater truth in being reciprocal according to all the rules of truth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 With this the Company seemed to acquiesce in continuation of this promiscuous discourse Mr. Cranf used the word Renegado againe and said that baptized Churches baptized such as denyed the Faith not such as professed the Faith therefore we were all Renegadoes Dr. Chamb. replied I shall prove you so Mr. Cranf bid him do Dr. Chamb. Ma. They that practise what they neither have command nor example for practise what they should not Mi. But you who sprinkle Infants practise what you neither have command nor example for Mr. Cranf cried out is this to prove us Renegadoes Make your Conclusion Said Dr. Chamb. I was loath to use words of provocation and that are not written but Mr Cranf continuing in derision Dr. Chamb. said then I le prove you Renegadoes They that speak Lyes in Hipocrisie are Renegadoes But you speak Lyes in Hypocrisie Here the meeting broke up abruptly The last meeting between Mr. Cranford and Dr. Chamberlen at Mr. Webbs house at Bartholomew Lane end was on the 13. of April 1652. THe Question was still Whether Ministers of London Presbyterian Ministers were the Ministers of Jesus Christ Mr. Cranf as before Respondent Dr. Chamb. Opponent After Prayer as formerly the Dispute began in writing being so agreed the time before Dr. Chamb. began his Argument thus Ma. They that are Ministers of Jesus Christ are Ordained by Jesus Christ Mi. But Presbyterian Ministers of London are not Ordained by Jesus Christ Con. Therefore they are not Ministers of Jesus Christ Mr. Cranf Negatur Minor The Ministers are Ordained by Jesus Christ Mediately Dr. Chamb. Ma. They that are Ordained by Antichrist are not Ordained by Jesus Christ Mi. But Presbyterian Ministers of London are Ordained by Antichrist Con. Therefore they are not Ordained by Jesus Christ Mr. Cranf Negatur Minor Dr. Chamb. Ma. They that are Ordained by the Pope within these thousand yeares are Ordained by Antichrist Mi. But Presbyterian Ministers of London are Ordained by the Pope within these thousand yeares Con. Therefore they are Ordained by Antichrist Mr. Cranf Negatur Minor Dr. Chamb. Ma. They that are ordained by those who were Ordained by the Pope within these thousand yeares are Ordained by the Pope within these thousand yeares Mi. But Presbyterian Ministers of London are Ordained by those who were Ordained by the Pope within these thousand yeares Con. Therefore they are Ordained by the Pope within these thousand yeares Mr. Cranf Negatur Minor Dr. Chamb. Ma. They who were Ordained by the Bishops of England and their Successours within these thousand yeares are Ordained by those who were Ordained by the Pope within these thousand yeares Mi. But Presbyterian Ministers of London are Ordained by Bishops of England and their Successors within these thousand yeares Con. Therefore they are Ordained by those who were Ordained by the Pope within these thousand yeares Mr. Cranf Negatur Major Dr. Chamb. Ma. If they were Ordained by the Power or Ministers of the Pope c. then they were Ordained by the Pope c. Mi. But they were Ordained by the Power or Ministers of the Pope within these thousand yeares Con. Therefore they were Ordained by the Pope within these thousand yeares Mr. Cranf Negat Min. Dr. Chamb. Ma. If the Bishops of England within these thousand years were not Ordained by the Power nor Ministers of the Pope within these thousand yeares Then there were some Bishops in King Henry 7. and K. Hen. 8. dayes neither Ordained by the Pope nor Ministers of the Pope within these thousand yeares Mi. But there were no such Bishops in K. Hen. 7. nor King Hen. 8. dayes Con. Therefore they were Ordained by the Power or Ministers of the Pope within these thousand yeares Mr. Cranf Negat Mi. Dr. Chamb. Name any Mr. Cranf do you prove there were none Dr. Chamb. Ma. If there were any such then either they were allowed or disalowed Min. But there were neither any allowed nor disallowed that were such Con. Therefore there were none such Mr. Cranf Negat Minor None of the allowed Ministers were Ordained by the Pope Dr. Chamb. Ma. If the Pope had power at that time to place and displace whom he pleased then they were Ordained by the Pope Mi. But the Pope had power to place and displace whom he pleased Con. Therefore they were Ordained by the Pope Mr. Cranf Negat consequentia Minor est falsa Dr. Chamb. Power of Ordination you grant is Approbation and Imposition of hands Ma. If their placing and displacing were a consequence of their Ordination then the consequence is true Mi. But their placing and displacing was a consequence of their Ordination Mr. Cranf Negat consequentia Dr. Chamb. Ma. If the Pope had power of placing and displacing of Bishops then he had power of their Ordination Mi. But the Pope had power of placing and displacing of Bishops If placing and displacing of Bishops be greater then their Ordination then the Pope who did place and displace did also Ordaine Mr. Cranford Negatur consequentia The Civil Magistrate may remove or displace Ministers but may not Ordaine Ministers To place and displace is not greater then to Ordaine Dr. Chamb. Ma. If what the Pope did he did it as an Officer of the Church and it was so publickly acknowledged then the consequence is true Mi. But what the Pope did he did it as an Officer of the Church and it was so publickly acknowledged Mr. Cranf Negat consequentia Though the Pope had power to do it he did not do it Some discourses as betwwen all the rest of the latter Syllogisme interrupted the clear dispute and then Dr. Chamb. followed with this argument to the discourse that was Ma. If all the particular parts and faculties of the Church of England were under the power and Ministry of the Pope of Rome then Bishops were Ordained by the power of the Pope of Rome Mr. Cranf Negat consequentia Dr. Chamb. Ma. If so then Ordination is no part or faculty of the Church Mi. But Ordination is a part Ergo. Mr. Cranf Ne. consequentia Minor etiam est falsa The Church of Rome though it were Ulcerous yet was a true Church of Christ as a man is a man though full of Ulcers Truth came out of the Church of Rome The Scriptures that have been conveyed through the Church of Rome are true Scriptures Dr. Chamb. denyed that Truth came out of the Church of Rome or that the Scriptures were conveyed through the Ulcerous Church of Rome What is of their conveyance is not true Mr. Cranf often acknowledged that the Church of Rome was Ulcerous and Dr.
a universal power over all Churches became Antichrist 4 After his usurpation there wanted not many both Bishops and other Teachers that opposed this usurpation of the Pope till the Protestants departed from it 5 There remained oppressed by the Papacy a true Church of Christ in Rome till our separation from them 6 From this true Church I say not pure Church in Rome our first Reformers had their Ordination which was in the essentials true and from Christ 7 The Pope of Rome hath been Antichrist I believe about a thousand yeares that is so long as he hath usurped power over all Churches 8 There was a true Ministeriall Church in Rome when we separated from the Papacy Ja. Cranford Dr. Chamb. argued to the last Ma. If no Ministerial Church in Rome since the Pope was Antichrist but what was from the power of the Pope then there was no such Church in Rome when you separated Mi. But there was no Ministeriall Church in Rome since the Pope was Antichrist but what was from the Power of the Pope Con. Therefore there was no such Church in Rome when you separated Mr. Cranf said That all that the Pope doth is not Antichristian Dr. Chamb. Replied Ma. If the Pope were the root of Antichrist Then all Ministeriall Officers from him were Antichristian Mi. But the Pope was the Root of Antichrist Con. Therefore all Ministeriall Officers from him were Antichristian as Branches Mr. Cranf denied the Consequence Though the Pope were the Root of Antichrist yet all Ministerial Officers under him were not Antichristian Dr. Chamb. then mentioned Mat. 7.16 17 18. But there being a disorderly discourse he argued thus Ma. If all power derived from the Pope acknowledged his power as a power over all Churches then they were all Antichristian Mi. But all power derived from the Pope acknowledged the Popes power as a power over all Churches Con. Therefore they were all Antichristian Mr. Cranf then fell into discourse againe and said That the Romane Church at the time when Luther separated was a true Church Dr. Chamb. offered to prove it was then no true Church Ma. Where there were no true Sacraments there was no true Church Min. But in the Church of Rome when Luther separated there were no true Sacraments Con. Therefore then there was no true Church The Minor was denyed That in the Church of Rome when Luther separated there were true Sacraments Which was thus argued against Ma. Where there was no true Baptisme there were no true Sacraments Mi. But in the Church of Rome when Luther separated there was no true Baptisme Con. Therefore in the Church of Rome when Luther separated there were no true Sacraments Mr. Cranf There was a true Baptisme Dr. Chamb. Ma. Where it was not administred on the true subject there was no true Baptisme Mi. But in the Church of Rome when Luther separated Baptisme was not administred on the true subjects Con. Therefore in the Church of Rome when Luther separated there was no true Baptisme Mr. Cranf denyed the Minor which was to affirme That in the Church of Rome when Luther separated Baptisme was administred on the true Subjects Dr. Chamb. pâ—â—â—â—â—ed his argument thus Ma. They that a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 red 〈◊〉 noâ— on Believers and Repenters admiâ—â—â—â—red 〈…〉 the true subjects Mi. But the Châ—â—â—h of â—â—me when Luther separated did not administer it on Believers and Repenters Con. Therefore they did not administer it on the true subjects Minor was to be proved Ma. They that administer it on Children administer it not on Believers and Repenters Mi. But the Church of Rome when Luther separated administred it to Children Con. Therefore they did not administer it on Believers and Repenters Mr. Cranf denyed the Major Dr. Chamb. asked whether Children could believe and repent Mr. Cranf answered they had Faith and Repentance in their Parents But he denyed the Major because though the Church of Rome did administer Baptisme on Children supposing them a false subject yet they might administer it on others also And might administer it both on true and false and the administration on the false did not hinder but it might be administred on the true also Hereupon Dr. Chamb. undertook to prove that they did administer it to none but false by the Syllogisme following Ma. They that onely administer Baptisme to no believers or mis-believers to no repenters or mis-repenters administer it onely to the false subject Mi. But the Church of Rome administer it onely to no believers or mis-believers to no repenters or mis-repenters As Children and Romane Proselites Con. Therefore to none but false subjects Here Dr. Chamb. was desired to return to the first Question and so he proceeded to this Argument following out of 2 Cor. 11.20 Ma. They that bring the flock into bondage or devour them or take of them or exalt themselves or smite them on the face are not the Ministers of Jesus Christ Mi. But Ministers of London Presbyterian-Ministers doe some or all of these Conclus Therefore Ministers of London Presbyterian-Ministers are not the Ministers of Jesus Christ Mr. Cranf denyed both but desired Dr. Chamb. rather to prove the Major Wherein Mr. Cranf was to hold that they who brought the flock into bondage or devour them or take of them or exalt themselves or smite them on the face are the Ministers of Jesus Christ This was thought somewhat strange being the Major were the very words of the Text. But Dr. Chamb. proceeded Ma. They that are Fooles are not the Ministers of Jesus Christ Mi. But they that bring the flock into bondage or devoure them or take of them or smite them on the face are fooles Con. Therefore they that bring the flock into bondage or devoure them or take of them or smite them on the face are not the Ministers of Jesus Christ The Major was againe denyed Whereat Dr. Chamb. professeth he was not a little startled that Mr. Cranford should allow fooles to be the Ministers of Jesus Christ For though the Ministers of Jesus Christ may be sometimes accounted fooles yet he could not imagine that fooles should be accounted Ministers of Jesus Christ but this Syllogisme followed Ma. They that are not Qualified as 1 Tim. 3. and Tit. 1. are no Ministers of Jesus Christ Mi. But fooles are not quallified as 1 Tim. 3. and Tit. 1. Con. Therefore they are no Ministers of Jesus Christ Mr. Cranf here was pleased to confirm the Text by way of restraint onely to the wicked foole though the quallifications require a vindication from Idiotisme also As Vers 2. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and Vers 4. and 6. of 1 Tim. 3. and Vers 9. of Tit. 1. And therefore Mr. Cranf affirmed that men may be wicked yea false and yet the true Ministers of Jesus Christ Whereupon Dr. Chamb. said it was true that the Devils themselves in some sence may be said to be the Ministers of Christ in executing his judgments and all the wicked also in such
a lawfull assembly vers 39. or unlawfull vers 32 41. But by way of excellency because no Assembly so worthy as that which is called together to the worship of God Therefore it is ordinarily taken for such wherein we must also distinguish between the Church of Christ and a Church of Christ The Church comprehends all the faithfull Saints from the beginning of the World to the end As Ephes 1.22 and 3.21 and 5.23 c. Col. 1.18.24 and 1 Cor. 12.28 Heb. 12.23 A Church of Christ also is taken for any Church of Christ respectively as Mat. 18.17 and 1 Cor. 14. and 4.17 c. 1 Cor. 7.17 and 11.16.15.9 Philip. 3.6 And it hath also severall other Appellations as House City Body Spouse and Family or definitively either And that an uncertain providentiall Assembly or meeting as Mat. 18.20 Wheresoever two or three are gathered together in the name of Christ. In which sense Mr. Cranf distinguisheth it Ecclesia Fidelium Or more setled and constant which likewise are distinguisted by Times Nations or Places Distinguished by Times we read Act. 7.38 the Church in the Wildernesse And by Nations Rom. 16.4 all the Churches of the Gentiles By Places as Countries α Kingdomes β Provinces γ By Countrys α 1 Cor. 16.19 Church of Asia And by Kingdomes β 2 Cor. 8.1 of Macedonia And by Provinces γ as Galatia 1 Cor. 16.1 Gal. 1.2 and Judea Gal. 1.22 Citys of Corinth 1 Cor. 12. and 2 Cor. 1.1 Ephesus Smyrna Pergamus Thyatyra Sardis Philadelphia Laodicea Revel 1.11 And Houses as Aquila and Prisscilla 1 Cor. 16.19 Rom. 16.3 5. and Nymphas Col. 4.15 The Church of Christ is then and so long the Church of Christ as she saith and doth what Christ gave her to say and doe even as Christ himself John 7.17 and 8.26 28. and 12.5 and 14.10 24. and 5.19.30 And when she saith or doth otherwise she speaketh or playeth the Harlot in that particular By Organical was meant a definite setled Church of Christ compleated with Officers as a body with members 1 Cor. 12.12 Here Dr. Chamb. being called upon to prove that Presbyters did forbid Ministers of a true Church He proved it by this Syllogisme Ma. They that forbid Ministers Ordained by the Presbytery of Baptised Churches forbid Ministers of a true Church Mi. But Ministers of London Presbyterian Ministers forbid Ministers Ordained by the Presbytery of Baptised Churches Con. Therefore Ministers of London Prebyterian Ministers forbid Ministers of a true Church Mr. Cranf denyed the Major because no true Presbytery and because no true Church but desired that the last should be proved To which Dr. Chamb. argued Ma. They that have the true Marks of a true Church are a true Church Mi. But Baptised Churches have the true Marks of a true Church Con. Therefore they are a true Church Mr. Cranf denyed the Minor which was thus proved Ma. They that have true Preaching of the Word and true Administration of the Sacraments have the true Marks of a true Church Mi. But Baptised Churches have true Preaching of the Word and true Administration of Sacraments Con. Therefore they have the true Marks of a true Church Mr. Cranf denyed the Minor That they neither had true Preaching of the Word nor true Administration of the Sacramets Dr. Chamb. asked which he should prove Mr. Cranf bad him prove the true Administration of Sacraments Ma. They that have the true Administration of Baptisme and the Lords Supper have the true Administration of Sacraments Mi. But Baptized Churches have the true Administration of Baptisme and the Lords Supper Con. Therefore Baptized Churches have the true Administration of the Sacraments Mr. Cranf denyed the Mi. but bad him prove Baptisme Ma. They that have the Administration of Baptisme in the true manner and on the true Subject have the true Administration of Baptisme Mi. But Baptized Churches have the Administration of Baptisme in the true manner and on the true Subjects Con. Therefore Baptized Churches have the true Administration of Baptisme Mr. Cranf denyed the Mi. Dr. Chamb. asked whether he should prove first the manner or the subject Mr. Cranf said any which he would Then said Dr. Chamb. First I le prove the manner and then the Subject Ma. They that Administer Baptisme in the same Manner as it was Administred unto Christ Matth. 13.16 And as Philip Administred it to the Eunuch Act. 8.38 have the true manner of Administration of Baptisme Mr. Cranf cryed out and some with him prove the subject for that is desired by some here Then Dr. Chamb. proceeded Ma. They that Administer Baptisme on Beleevers and Repenters Administer Baptisme on the true Subjects Mi. But Baptized Churches Administer Baptisme on Repenters and Believers Con. Therefore Baptized Churches Administer it on the true Subject The Mi. was denyed and thus proved Ma. They that Administer Baptisme upon those that confesse their Sins and professe their Faith Administer Baptisme on the true Subject Mi. But Baptized Churches Administer it upon those that confesse their Sins and professe their Faith Con. Therefore Baptized Churches Administer Baptisme on the true Subject Mr. Cranf denyed the Minor and said they do not Baptize such as do confesse their Sins and professe their Faith Dr. Cham. said that might be attested by any that ever were present at their Baptisme Besides it were against their very Principles if they should not do so Saith Mr. Cranf I say they do not Baptize Believers and Repenters Saith Dr. Chamb. now you go back to the former Syllogisme Mr. Cranf said they do not Baptize Believers and Repenters but Renegadoes Dr. Chamb. said I gave no ill language but used the words of the Scripture and I hope you will not be angry with the language of the holy Ghost when I must use it in argument Renegado is language of Scripture saith Mr. Cranf Where said Dr. Chamberlen Mr. Cranf said because it signified Apostate Said Dr. Cha. Then why did you not rather use that Word The debate here made Dr. Chamb. forget to take notice how in denying the Baptisme of Believers and Repenters Mr. Cranf denyed the Conclusion But he proceeded to prove that they did Baptize Believers and Repenters Ma. They that baptize such as shall be saved baptize believers and repenters Minor But baptized Churches baptize such as shall be saved Con. Therefore they baptized believers and repenters Mr Cranf denyed the Major Dr. Chamb. urged Mark 16.16 Whosoever believeth and is baptized shall be saved Mr. Cranf denyed it Dr. Chamb. replied Contra Principia negantem non est disputandum Saith Mr. Cranf you are to prove it Dr Chamb. then argued thus Major They that baptize such as confesse with their mouth the Lord Jesus and believe in their heart that God hath raised him from the dead Rom. 10. baptize such as shall be saved Mi. But baptized Churches baptize such as confesse with their mouth the Lord Jesus and believe with their heart that God hath raised him from the dead
THE DISPUTES BETWEEN Mr. CRANFORD AND Dr. CHAMBERLEN At the house of Mr. WILLIAM WEBB at the end of Bartholomew Lane by the Old Exchange On March 1. 1652 and April 1. 6. 13. Published for the satisfaction of all that love the TRUTH MATTH 11.19 Wisdome is justified of her Children LONDON Printed by Gartrude Dawson and are to be sold by Gyles Calvert at the Black Spread-Eagle near the West end of Paules 1652. THat the Children of Truth may be sustained with Truth as the Children of Errour gorge themselves with the contrary It hath been thought requisite by divers to let those hours fly abroad into the World with faithfull Records which were for a while limited to a private house and small auditory Dr. Chamberlen being at first confined to two or three of his party and all the rest of Mr. Cranfords party unconfined The occasion was from one of Mr. William Webb's servants Mr. John More who being convinced of the Erronious Practises of the Ministers of England was Baptized the first of February one thousand six hundred fifty two whereupon his Master being displeased these Letters and Disputes following were occasioned The Copie of a Letter left at Dr. Chamberlen's about the second or third of February last A Letter left at my house intimating the first occasion of this Dispute BROTHER CHAMBERLEN OUr brother John More who was lately baptized and my self were here to acquaint you that through the earnest solicitation of his Master who is at present very much displeased with him about his present judgement he is ingaged to procure your assistance under God to dispute these two points with Mr. Cranford Our Brothers Master being very confident that Mr. Cranford will give you the foile therein The Questions are these 1 Whether or no a private person may Preach without Ordination 2 Whether or no the Presbyterian-Ministers be not the true Ministers of the Gospel Our Brothers Master desireth the meeting should be at his house he having a convenient Roome We desire you would consider of the Chalenge and likewise of a convenient time to meet Mr. Cranford which is all at present from Your ever loving Brothers John More John Spittlehouse At your house February 2. 1652. UPon which Letter Dr. Chamberlen consented to a meeting when Mr. Cranford should appoint The Questions being sent him under Mr. Webbs hand but being delayd and the noise of it being amongst Mr. Cranford's Party they began to report that Dr. Chamberlen durst not meet which put Mr. John More to a more eager prosecuting of the businesse with his Master and Mr. Cranford till at last he went with a Paper whereof the Copie followeth from his Master to Mr. Cranford The Copie of the Paper is thus The Questions stated by Mr. William Webb he ingaging for Mr. Cranford his appearance to dispute them with Dr. Chamberlen for whom I ingage Feb. 24. 1652. JOHN MORE Sir The expresse words are these which if you shall please to correct you may provided you under-write them 1 Whether the Ministers of London Presbyterian-Ministers be not Ministers of Jesus Christ 2 Whether private men I mean tradesmen may preach the Word of God without Ordination in the City of London This Paper was presented by the said Mr. More to Mr. Cranford which he owned but would not subscribe it To my much desired Friend Mr. Cranford SIR ALthough the Discourse that passed between us hath done that work which you say you intended yet hath it not taken that Effect I desired so long as you are disobedient to the Truth and so many misreports scattered into the eares of those that were not present I shall therefore humbly desire you to peruse these our Discourses in all faithfullness too your own soul They come forth with the Syllogisme compleated that they might not be fruitlesse to the Reader I have not accompanied them with many Observations till I see what acceptance they find on your behalfe for I would faine winne you by Truth and Love If all the Particulars of our Discourses be not in you may if you please supply what is wanting from some of your Party on whom I have waited somewhat the longer in expectation that you would have published them as was reported If yet you are not convinced but desire rather to mend any of your Answers or Discourses and to proceed in writings as formerly in speakings I shall be ready to endeavour your satisfaction by writing also provided that whatsoever is published on your behalf do bear your Name since no man can likely meddle with your businesse without your approbation In all which I shall endeavour not to depart from the civility and sincerity of being Yours in the Lord Peter Chamberlen A PRAYER O Father of Lights John 1.17 who gavest thy Son John 3.17 a Light unto the World Chap. 12.46 to be the Way the Truth and the Life Chap. 14.6 Who hath promised to give a mouth and wisdome to thy servants which all their adversaries shall not be able to gainsay nor resist Luke 21.15 Unvaile thy Truth O Lord to all that love it that they may find and come into the way which leadeth unto Eternal Life And give me a mouth and wisdome to convince gainsayers to the saving of Soules Tit. 1.9 Through Jesus Christ our Lord Amen On the 25. of MARCH 1652. was the first meeting The Result whereof followeth AFter prayer against Prejudicacies and for the the Truth and a solemn Protestation to endeavour Truth not Victory The Questions being read by Dr. Chamberlen and owned by Mr. Cranford to have been presented to him It was thought good to fall upon the last first according to the first Letter because it was a subject which had been formerly disputed of betwen Mr. Cranford and Mr. Rowley at one Mr. Williamsons Mr. Chamberlen comming in accidentally The Conclusion of the Dispute ended in this That Mr. Cranford freely granted That in Eclesia non constituta or male constituta It was not onely lawfull for any Man but any Woman or Mayd to preach the Gospell The Arguments then by Dr. Chamberlen having been from 1 Cor. 14.31 Where all might Prophesie one by one and from Rom. 16.1 where Phebe is termed a Deaconesse of the Church of Cenchrea and divers other places and instances of Deborah and Hâ—ldad and 1 Cor. 11.5 Act. 21.9 Act. 18.26 Pilip 4.3 c. The Question sent was Whether Private Men I mean Tradesmen may Preach the Word of God without Ordination in the City of London But Mr. Cranford not liking of the Question in those termes the Question altered by him was thus Whether Prvate Men or Tradesmen may Preach the Word of God without Ordination Having propounded the Question he explained it as followeth That by Private Men he meant in reference to Station or Calling And that sons of the Prophets might be Private Men though Publick by Designation By Preach he meant to Expound and Apply to Admonish Exhort Reprove Preaching is
either Authoritative or Charitative Ordinarie or Occasionaliter Publice or Private That is Authoritatively or in Charity Ordinarily or Occasionally Publickly or Privately Whence he layd down this Thesis That No Private Man that intends not the Ministery may Exhort Admonish Reprove Authoritatively Ordinarily and Publickly in a true Church without Ordination By Ordination he meant Approbation and Imposition of hands by the Preaching Presbyterie Candidati may Preach severall times and a considerable number of times for Approbation By Authoritatively he meant in relation to Christ and Men. Then Mr. Cranf layd down these Theses He that is a Tradesman and continues so ought not to Preach the Word of God not being Ordained Major And being once Ordained he ought not to Work By the change of the Question and those severall limitations restrictions and distinctions it was almost brought to what Dr. Chamb. might within a little have consented to But upon these last Theses Dr. Chamb. inferred this Minor following Min. But Paul was a Tent-maker and did continue so notwithstanding his Preaching Act. 18.1 2 3. and 20.34 and 1 Thes 2.9 Conclu Therefore Tradesmen Ordained Ministers or Ordained Ministers may Work Major Mr. Cranf answered that though Paul might it was not lawfull for other Ministers to Work Whereupon Dr. Chamb. replied Min. But the Elders of Ephesus Act. 20.17 ought to Work Vers 35. Conclus Therefore Ministers Ordained may Work There was no Answer by Negation or Distinction but a miscelaine of Discourses therefore Dr. Chamb. proceeded as followeth Ma. If Paul being Ordained to Preach and more priviledged from Working then others might Work then others lesse privileged might work also Min. But Paul being Ordained to Preach and more priviledged from working then others might Work Conclus Therefore others lesse priviledged from Work might Work also Mr. Cranf affirmed that Paul was not more priviledged from Work Dr. Chamb. proved it from 1 Cor. 9.6 Have not we power to forbear working c. The whole scope of the place is to set forth Paul and Barnabas's priviledge above Others Which being denied by Mr. Cranf Dr. Chamb. referred it to the Auditory Whereupon Mr. Cranf affirmed That the priviledge to Paul and Barnabas was not more but was common to others Dr. Chamb. then replied If Paul who was like priviledged as others might Work then others might Work also Here Mr. Cranf made a long discourse in the close whereof upon some words interposed by Dr. Chamb. Mr. Cranf by way of consent affirmed That whosoever hath an immediate Call by Christ may Preach any where without Ordination To this Dr. Chamb. argued Ma. They who are immediately called by Christ may preach any where without Ordination Min. But some Tradesmen are immediately called by Christ Con. Therefore some Tradesmen may preach without Ordination Mr. Cranf denyed the Minor which Dr. Chamberlen proved thus Ma. They who are immediately called by the Word of Christ are immediately called by Christ Mi. But some Tradesmen are immediately called by the Word of Christ Con. Therefore some Tradesmen are immediately called by Christ The Minor was denyed Ma. They who are gifted by the immediate reading of the Word of Christ are immediately called by the Word of Christ Mi. But some Tradesmen are gifted by the immediate reading of the Word of Christ Con. Therefore some Tradesmen are immediately called by the Word of Christ There Dr. Chamb. understood that Mr. Cranf did not allow gifts by the Word to be gifts of Christ Whereupon he offered this Syllogisme Ma. All that are gifted are gifted by Christ Ephesians 4.8 1 Peter 4.10 Mi. But they that are gifted by the Word are gifted Con. Therefore they that are gifted by the Word are gifted by Christ Rom. 1.12 and 1 Cor. 12. was also instanced Mr. Cranfords Answer was that those gifts were limited to mens approbation not to execution till after approbation But after approbation they not onely may but must Preach Which Dr. Chamb. referred to the Auditory because it seemed to contradict what he hath formerly consented to And seemes to set up the approbation of man above the gifts of God and to oppose the Command of the Apostle 1 Peter 4.10 On this Reference there was a Discourse between Mr. Cran. and Dr. Cham. Whereupon on some Questions propounded by Mr Cranf these following Particulars were agreed to and subscribed by Dr. Chamb. In a true Church Organicall of Christ it is not lawfull for any man to Preach or Prophesie Ordinarily in the ordinary sence without Approbation and Imposition of hands Nor at all unlesse it be in reference to the said Approbation and Imposition of hands Except they have immediate infallible revelation Upon further discourse Mr. Cranf affirmed It was not lawfull for any out of Office to Prophesie Dr. Chamb. affirmed it was lawfull for any to Prophesie 1 Cor. 14.31 else the whole Church might be Officers Mr. Cranf upon further proceedings said That By Prophets He meant such as had immediate inspiration By Teachers Such as instructed others By Ordinary What was in relation to endowments or frequency That Revelation of Scripture he counted Ordinary That Ordinary Revelation was to the Conscience Extraordinary to knowledge Immediate Revelation was such as was to Bâ—laaâ— Num. 23. Immediate teaching was such 〈◊〉 Judas from Christ And that was no Revelation that was either by preaching or reading Then Dr. Chamb. Instanced that of Peter Mat. 16. Where Christ saith Flesh and bloud hath not revealed this unto thee And yet it was a thing that was ordinarily preached and known So that the Devils could tell that he was the Son of God Mark 1.31 And it was declared at his birth Mat. 3.17 c. And 1 Cor. 2.14 The naturall man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God c. Mr. Cranf here would have distinguished upon the word Receiving as different from knowledge though the words following do in expresse termes say neither can he know them For they are Spiritually discerned Therefore Dr Ch. affirmed that knowledge to be extraordinary whensoever Scripture is revealed without mens teachings But Mr. Cranf affirmed that extraordinary was not by Scriptures nor Spirit but by Visions or Dreames Which upon revew he mended and said Not onely by Scriptures and Spirit But also by Visions and Dreames But this was the close of the first meeting ending in Prayer The Second meeting at Mr. WEBB'S was on the first of APRIL 1652. AFter Prayer and solemn Protestations as before Dr. Chamb. having desired there might be no offence taken at the phrases of the Scripture which he should make use of in his Arguments The Question was read Whether the Ministers of London Presbyterian-Ministers be the Ministers of Jesus Christ Mr. Cranf took the Affirmative Dr. Chamb. was to prove the Negative The first Argument was taken from 2 Cor. 11.15 Major They that are transformed as the Ministers of Righteousnesse are not the Ministers of Jesus Christ Minor But the Ministers of London Presbyterian-Ministers
are transformed as the Ministers of Righteousnesse Conclusion Therefore the Ministers of London Presbyterian-Ministers are not the Ministers of Jesus Christ Mr. Cranf denyed the Minor to wit That the Ministers of London Presbyterian-Ministers are transformed as the Ministers of Righteousnesse Dr. Chamb. proved it Ma. They that are not formed as the Ministers of Righteousnesse are transformed as the Ministers of Righteousnesse Mi. But the Ministers of London Presbyterian-Ministers are not formed as the Ministers of Righteousnesse Con. Therefore the Ministers of London Presbyterian-Ministers are transformed as the Ministers of Righteousnesse The Minor was denyed which was thus proved Ma. They that are formed as the Ministers of Antichrist are not formed as the Ministers of Jesus Christ Mi. But the Ministers of London Presbyterian-Ministers are formed as the Ministers of Antichrist Conclus Therefore the Ministers of London Presbyterian-Ministers are not formed as the Ministers of Jesus Christ The Minor was againe to be proved Ma. They that are Ordained as the Ministers of Antichrist are formed as the Ministers of Antichrist Mi. But the Ministers of London Presbyterian-Ministers are Ordained as the Ministers of Antichrist Con. Therefore the Ministers of London Presbyterian-Ministers are formed as the Ministers of Antichrist The Mi. was againe denyed and thus proved Ma. They that are Ordained in the manner succession and power of Antichrist are Ordained as the ministers of Antichrist Mi. But the Ministers of London Presbyterian-Ministers are Ordained in the manner succession and power of Antichrist Con. Therefore the Ministers of London Presbyterian-Ministers are Ordained as the Ministers of Antichrist Mr. Cranf denyed the Mi. Which containeth three Particulars and therefore three severall Series of Sylogismes First for the manner this Syllogisme was prepared Ma. They that are commonly required to have had their Education in Schooles to be furnished with Antichristian Titles to have Approbation from men of such Titles and sent from them to be over a flock oftentimes whether the flock will or no are Ordained in the manner of Antichrist For the Pope likewise dispenseth sometimes with Education and Titles and some flocks are not unwilling to receive Antichristians Mi. But the Ministers of London Presbyterian-Ministers are commonly required to have had their education in Schooles to be furnished with Antichristian Titles and approved by men of such Titles and by them sent out to be over a flock oftentimes whether the flock will or no. Con. Therefore the Ministers of London Presbyterian-Ministers are Ordained in the manner of Antichrist But the Succession was desired to be proved and therefore the Syllogismes for that followeth Ma. They that have their Ordination by Succession from Antichrist are Ordained in Succession of Antichrist Mi. But the Ministers of London Presbiterian-Ministers have their Ordination by Succession from Antichrist Con. Therefore the Ministers of London Presbyterian-Ministers are Ordained in the Succession of Antichrist The Mi. was denyed and thus proved Ma. If they have it by Succession and there were no other Succession but from Antichrist then they have it by Succession from Antichrist Mi. But they had it by Succession and there was no other Succession but from Antichrist Con. Therefore they had their Ordination by succession from Antichrist Here Dr. Chamb. desired to expresse that by Succession he meant publick Succession allowed of by the Powers of the Nation which Mr. Cranf assented to and denyed the Mi. Which was thus proved Ma. They that had their Ordination from the Bishops had their Ordination by Succession from Antichrist Mi. But the Ministers of London Prsbyterian-Ministers had their Ordination from the Bishops Con. Therefore they had it by Succession from Antichrist Here the Dispute grew into some disorder but the thing to be proved was they that had their Ordination from Bishops had it from Antichrist As thus Ma. If Bishops themselves had their Ordination from Antichrist then they that had their Ordination from Bishops had their Ordination by Succession from Antichrist Mi. But Bishops themselves had their Ordination from Antichrist Con. Therefore they that had their Ordination from Bishops had their Ordination by Succession from Antichrist Mr. Cranf Minor Dr. Chamb. If from Rome then from Antichrist But from Rome Therefore from Antichrist Mr. Cranf deny the Consequence Dr. Chamb. replyed If from Rome since Antichrist was Antichrist then if from Rome then from Antichrist But from Rome since Antichrist was Antichrist Therefore if from Rome then from Antichrist Here Mr. Cranf made a long digression concerning the Church of Rome and a Church in Româ— and said That 1 The Church of Rome was a true Church till our separation from it 2 The Pope of Rome was Antichrist these thousand yeares 3 A true Church in Rome till this day Which when Dr. Chamb. read over there were exceptions taken that he had not read as Mr Cranf spake For they affirmed he said there might be a true Church in Rome till this day Nempe Fidelium So Dr. Chamb. formed a Syllogisme against it Ma. That Church which hath not the true Signes and seales of a true Church is no true Church Mi. But the Church of Rome hath not the true signes and seales of a true Church Con. Therefore it is no true Church Mr Cranf said you would faine draw me to believe it but you shall not draw me to it with Horses The Church of Rome might be a true Church though full of Errours as a man may be a true man though full of sores and Ulcers And though the Church were Erroneous yet the Ordination might be true As many other things may be true which the Church of Rome did hold And that Ordination was not Antichristian till Protestants separated from them Dr. Chamb. then said they separated from a true Church and so the separation made it false Mr. Cranf said they separated from them when they began to be false Dr. Chamb. offered to prove they were not yet separated from them Ma. If you did separate then either you did separate from their Doctrine or their Power Mi. But you did separate from neither Con. Therefore you did not separate The complaint was that now the Question was lost and they were gone to new Questions So Dr. Chamb. returned to the Question thus Ma. If no other publick Ordination but from the Pope since separation then from Antichrist by your own confession Mi. But no Ordination but from the Pope Con. Therefore from Antichrist Mr. Cranf said The Church of Rome was a true Church still But because Mr. Cranf in his discourse did either let fall sometimes what he would not owne or Dr. Chamb. was supposed to mistake what Mr. Cranf spake it was desired that Mr. Cranf woud write down his own Words and Positions which he did as followeth 1 The Church of Rome was once a true Church of Christ 2 In the Church of Rome there happened many corruptions in Doctrine 3 The Bishop of Rome sometimes a true Minister of the Church usurping