matters of greatest moment and controversie we still choose to practise safely and so as we had reason to judge that all sorts or the most of all the Churches did acknowledge warrantable although they make additaments thereunto To this third great principle of yours I answer 1. To it generally as you lay it downe here generally and afterwards more particularly to the instances and particulars brought by you to make it good In this principle you labour to cast an odium upon all the reformed Churches who differ from you dealing by them in such a medium and way as the Protestants doe by the Papists wheras we alleadge against the Papists that the Protestant Religion is via tuta and what we practise they themselves cannot but allow only they hold and practise over and above as namely they adde to Christs Righteousnesse their own in the point of Justification to Christs intercession the intercession of the Virgin Mary and Saints to prayers unto God prayers to Angels and Saints to the Scriptures the traditions of the Church to our Sacraments confest by themselves five others c. So here you say that you chose to practise safely and so as you had reason to judge other Churches did acknowledge warrantable but they make additaments and this you weave in all along in the particular instances under this head and it lyes upon them to prove what they adde over and above Now besides the great dissimilitude and difference of additaments in the things themselves between the Protestants and Papists and you and the reformed Churches the Papists additaments being in matters of faith and substance of worship but the matters excepted against by you being about outward government and order and that not so much about the things themselves the officers parts of worship but about the different manner and way of them as you acknowledge in your eighth pages and so you had no such cause to insinuate such matters against the reformed Churches yet consider that what you doe hold forth and take as your medium you have no good ground for which will appeare in three particulars and so your Apologie held forth unto the world is neither true nor just 1. I will demonstrate that in many matters of greatest moment and controversie you did not still choose to practise safely and so as you had reason to judge that all sorts or most of the Churches did acknowledge warrantable 2. That the reformed Churches practised more safely then you and did not make additaments as you charge them 3. That you in many Church practises have made additaments and superadditions and that in more materiall things then in such circumstances wherein you tax the reformed Churches For the first of these three Take these three Instances for the present 1. It is a matter of great moment and controversie to forsake the publike Assemblies which you confesse are true Churches and the body of Christ and to set up separated assemblies without and against the leave of the Magistrate Ministers and Churches This is by the judgment of all the godly and learned Divines of note both in other Churches and in our own condemned as unlawfull by Calvin Beza Peter Martyr Zanchius Bullinger Iunius Pareus Morneus Arnesius Voetius c. with Whitakers Brightman Perkins Cartwright Parker Banes Hildersham Ball. c. I could fill a booke with the testimonies of these and many others and I doe challenge the Separatists of all sorts whether them of the head-forme the Anabaptists or of the middle-forme the old Brownists or the lowest-forme the Semi-Separatists to give me any precept or allowed example of such a practise out of the Primitive patterne shew it me and I will yeild the cause As for that place Rev. 18. 4. you professe against that in your 6 t page of having any thoughts of our Churches or Ministers to be Antichristian and Babilonish I could alledge many Scriptures against this practise Iude v. 19 c. The Apostles who were sent by Christ into the world to make Disciples and to bring men from Judaisme and Heathenisme to beleeve in Christ and to plant Churches of such yet they never taught nor practised to gather and separate some Christians from the rest one part of the Church from the other to goe constitute a purer Church neither in Corinth Philippi c. Although there were many corruptions and many loose persons But Paul taught and practised to censure and cast out evill persons but in case those who had power neglected their duty he never taught the godly to separate from the Lords Supper celebrated in the publike Assemblies much lesse for a few to withdraw from their Pastours and other brethren and to set up new Churches of themselves You are Schollers and well read in the Scriptures shew me but any such direction from the Apostles and I am yours 2. It is a matter of moment and controversie the right making and calling of the Ministers of the Gospell now all the reformed Churches according to the examples of Scripture hold Ministers are not to be made by the people alone and that the people have not power of Ordination and Imposition of hands but the Presbyters and yet you have practised the being cal'd and made Ministers by the people without the Imposition of hands of the preaching Presbyters 3. It is a matter of great moment and controversie whether private Christians who were never trained up in Arts and learning nor intended the Ministery may in the publike Congregation Prophesie which Prophesying as it is not practised by the Reformed Churches so by most of them it is not counted warrantable and yet you allowed it in your Churches to which I might adde more instances but that the book would swell into too great a volume To the second head it is evident the râ—…formed Churchs practised more safely as in declining your way in the last mentioned Instances in not permitting such as are Lay-men to preach or prophesie in not forsaking true Churches or true Ministery for the mixture of wicked men but rather casting out such who after admonition continue impenitent so in other practises practising as the Apostles receiving men into their fellowship without any such curious inquirie and long detention sending men from one to another and requiring such preparatives and conditions to Church-fellowship as your Churches have done The wayes and practises the reformed Churches walked in were the good old way knowne and beaten for some score of yeares in which so many great lights and godly people have walkt and so more safe then bie and new wayes that a few men but of yesterday have taken up and have not yet well aired much lesse digested And in the name of other reformed Churches France Holland Scotland I deny the things you charge them with to be additaments or to be properly so called for if the particulars instanced in by you will be found to have a footing in the Scriptures and practised
put it in every Citie which we affirme not nor need not to carry the cause against you for if we can prove it in some Cities or in any Cities that the number of Converts did arise to such a multitude as to make severall and sundry Congregations then we prove the Scripture holds out a Presbyteriall Classicall Church and overthrow your grand principle about a particular Church And Reader observe the fallacie of these Apologists how in the manner of their expression and as they propound it though the thing may be true yet they alter quite the state of the Question For though in every Citie where the Apostles came you could not imagine the number of Converts should be so great nor we neither yet in some Cities you might have well imagined it as in Ierusalem and Rome But Brethren why will you who are Schollers and without question weighed well all your words and manner of expressions having so many heads in the framing this Apologie deale thus with the Reader in a Narration speake truly though you did not imagine the number of Converts were so many in every City yet did not you imagine the number might be so great in some Cities as in Ierusalem and if still you will not imagine it for the helping of your imagination consider whether you have not more reason if not infallible and necessary yet probable and rationall to imagine the Church of Hiâ—…rusalem consisting of so many thousands of people and having so many Ministers to preach unto them as 12. Apostles besides the seventy Disciples and they meeting in so many distinct houses and not having the power and command of any publicke large place or liberty through those times to fit it for such multitudes to heare the word joyne in prayer and Sacraments should have severall and sundry Congregations rather then to imagine all those should make but one standing Congregation to meet in one place and roome 2. It is stated otherwise carried higher then need be granted and that in all your expressions of it for the Scriptures may hold forth a combination of the Elders of many Churches for government and yet not be the Institution of Christ or his Apostles It may be allowed and agreeable to the word have a jus divinum permissivum upon generall rules of the word and according to the rules of the law of nature and of Prudence yea and may have some examples of it and yet not amount to a divine Institution many who hold the thing will not in those phrases owne it 2. These Elders of many Congregations may have a power of Government in common over all and yet not be the first seat of Church-power for it is not denied but some particular Congregations having a competent number of Presbyters both have and may exercise Church-power before any such combination is or can be 3. These Elders combined may have Church-power to rule these Congregations so combined and yet not have a compleate and entire seat of church-Church-power but a power liable to appeales unto Synods and generall Assemblies The question betweene you and us is whether Classes or Presbyteries have power in Ecclesiasticall matters as Ordination Excommunication c. within the number of Congregations so combined or may by warrant from the word exercise any power in Church matters but in their owne particular Congregations the question is not whether it be the Institution of Christ or his Apostles that the combination of the Elders of many Churches should be the first compleate and entire seat of Church power As you state it you strangely mistate the question to lay it downe in these words That the combination of the Elders of many Churches should be the first seat of Church-power over each Congregation so combined whereas the opinion of the Reformed Churches is quite contrary not holding Classes and Synods to be the first subject of Church-power from whence it is consequently derived and conferred upon particular Churches but that particular congregations having power in themselves and amongst themselves equall power doe in Classes and Synods conferre and execute in common their owne power even as those who are colleagues and equall members of some politicall societie 4. The power which particular officers and Presbyters of combined congregations may have over particular members of those Churches they teach not ordinarily doth not amount to the challenging and assuming an authority over those Churches they feed and teach not your expression is a mistake it is not an assuming a power and authority by some over other Churches but it is a power of the whole and of themselvs too even those particular Churches in their officers over particular members as in the Parliament no member hath power over another more then another over him but the whol hath power over all the particulars for the clearing of which the Commissioners of the Church of Scotland speake fully in their Reformation of Church government in Scotland cleared page 24 25. And for the close of this second head wherein you stand upon what you are not satisfied in but disallow if you would impartially consider that the Scriptures in the Acts of the Apostles and Epistles doe as well hold out grounds yea and more indubitable as I shall make evident in a particular Tractate of the visible Church that the first particular Churches planted by the Apostles consisted of more Congregations and distinct meeting places then of one only Congregation you will acknowledge that where there are many Presbyters to feed and rule and many more Christians living in a vicinity then can meet in one place it is not the most safe and allowed way to retaine the government of each Congregation thus within themselves neither that it is an additament in the reformed Churches to practise so but rather an additament on their part who living in a City where the number of beleevers are so numerous as to make many meeting places there to make these places and persons such distinct Churches as to manage all things each one within themselves and not to grow into one for government And I am so farre versed in these controversies that I challenge you five to give me an example of any City where it is probable the multitude of beleevers were so numerous as to make many meeting places that ever they were governed and ruled but in common or ever called Churches but Church still called the Church of Corinth and the Church of Ierusalem I foresee only one instance that can be probably alledged that in Rom. 16. 1. of the Church which is at Cenchrea which Cenchrea was a part of Corinth and neare to Corinth yet named a Church as well as the Church of Corinth but the insufficiencie of that ground I shall at large shew in that Tractate of the visible Church which Primitive practise hath so farre wrought with some of the reformed Churches as those of Holland that in great Cities where the number of their people
HAving diligently perused this Antapologia I find it so full and just and necessary an examination and discovery of the Apologeticall Narration both in matters of fact and of opinion that because I dare not as too many have the faith of our Lord Iesus Christ the Lord of glory with respect of persons I approve it to be imprinted and commend it Reader to thy most serious consideration Ia. Cranford ANTAPOLOGIA Or A Full Answer to the Apologeticall Narration OF Mr Goodwin Mr Nye Mr Sympson Mr Burroughs Mr Bridge Members of the Assembly of Divines Wherein is handled many of the Controversies of these Times viz. 1. Of a particular visible Church 2. Of Classes and Synods 3. Of the Scriptures how farre a Rule for Church Government 4. Of Formes of Prayer 5. Of the Qualifications of Church members 6. Of SubmissioÌ„ Non-CoÌ„munioÌ„ 7. Of Excommunication 8. Of the Power of the Civill Magistrate in Ecclesiasticals 9. Of Separation and Schisme 10. Of Tolerations and particularly of the Toleration of Independencie 11. Of Suspension from the Lords Supper 12. Of Ordination of Ministers by the people 13. Of Church Covenant 14. Of Non-residencie of Church-members Humbly also submitted to the Honourable Houses of Parliament By THOMAS EDWARDS Minister of the Gospel Ephes. 4. 14. That we henceforth be no more children tossed to and fro and carried about with every wind of doctrine by the slâ—…ight of men and cunning craftinesse whereby they lie in wait to deceive Vers. 〈◊〉 But speaking the truth in love may grow up into him in all things which is the head even Christ. Matth. 24. 26. Wherefore if they shall say unto you Behold he is in the desart go not forth Behold he is in the secret chambers believe it not Augustinus Vincentio epist. 48. Non enim propter malos boni deserendi sed propter bonos mali tolerandi â—…ti sicut toleraverunt prophetae contra quos 〈◊〉 dicebant 〈◊〉 communionem sacramentorum illius populi relinquebant Bezae epist. prima D'Andreae Duditio lactabimusne libertatem conscientiis permittendam esse Minime ut haec quidem liberta intelligitur id est ut quo quisque modo volet Deum colat Est enim hoc mere diabolicum dogma Sinendum esse unumquemque ut si volet pereat Et illa est diabolica libertas quae Poloniam Transylvaniam hodiè tot pestibus implevit quas nullae alioqui sub sole regiones toleratent London Printed by G. M. for Ralph Smith at the Bible in Cornhill neer the Royall Exchange 1644. To the tender Consciensed scrupulous doubting Christian. DEare and beloved Christians for your salâ—…es in speciall who are apt to be troubled with many doubts and feares about the Constitution and Government of the visible Church and the way of Worship and Communion in it have I drawn up this present Answer as to undeceive you in the Apologists the Apologie and their Church-way so to satisfie you in your scruples and doubts about Presbyterie It was my love care and respect to tender consciences that more especially moved me at first now some seven yeares agoe to fall upon the more thorough studying and searching into the controversies of the Church c. And the grounds which now of late have afresh revived my thoughts and studies that way are 1. The recovering and reducing conscientious Christians who are not too far engaged 2. The setling some who are wavering and doubtfull 3. The keeping of others from falling Now the first borne of my latter thoughts and studies in this kind is this Antapologiâ—… which I here recommend to you for a true glasse to behold the faces of Presbyterie and Independencie in with the beauty order strength of the one and the deformity disorder and weaknesse of the other And good Reader I have some reason to beleeve and hope that if you will indeed reade and consider looke impartially and throughly into this glasse you may be either changed into the image of it or at least so stumbled at Independencie as to be kept from falling into it and willing in the meane time to waite upon God in that way of his an Assembly of so many learned and godly Divines to see what he will be pleased to speake by them I at first intended and accordingly provided materials for a large Epistle to this Book the more to make way for it in the hearts and consciences of the people as well knowing there are laid in before hand by many of the Independent party many prejudices both against my person and the Book to hinder if possible the fruit and benefit of it yea to keep people from so much as reading any part of it that so receiving and beleeving the Independent Grounds without hearing or examining the other side they may be still kept in ignorance and error I had many thoughts and purposes in my Epistle to have given the Reader an accompt of my especiall call to the making this Answer as also to have laid downe the Principles and Rules I more especially went by in the studying of these controversies and then to have Apologized for my selfe and Book by answering some objections and clearing aspersions cast abroad in this mistaking age and by representing to the Reader my many sufferings constant labours c. and so to have compared my grounds moving me to make this Antapologia with the Apologists grounds occasioning their Apologeticall Narration and my Principles with their three Principles expressed in their Apologie and my sufferings troubles patience and labours with their exile and patience c. and then left them to the Reader to judge in those matters between us but conceiving the danger of this way in comparing with the Apologists least I might become a foole in glorying and runne into the same fault I charge upon the Apologists and least it might be thought I sought to commend my Answer by such wayes rather then by the strength of the discourse it selfe I resolved to forbeare all those comparisons and vindications of my selfe and to refer all to God and that I may not hold the Reader too long in the portch I will only insist somewhat upon justifying and clearing the lawfulnesse of the way and manner of this Answer and the grounds I goe upon for matters of fact reported in it and this I must doe of necessitie for besides other grounds calling for it within these few dayes just before the Antapologie was comming forth a Pamphlet entituled The Anatomist Anatomized was printed rather to prepossesse the Reader against the Antapologie then to answer the Anatomie of Independencie as all may see and to be a shelter rather against this shower as the Anatomizer calls it ready to fall then to dry up the drops already fallen But 〈◊〉 shall by the helpe of God not only satisfie the Reader that this covering is too narrow and the stuffe too slight to keep out the shower from wetting but make an advantage of it even
Churches allow particular Congregations such an entire and compleate power to be exercised by the Elders within themselves and wherein not such a particular Narration would have carried in the face of it some ground for the defference of their practise and allowance might have served to have pointed out the differences between your way and theirs But secondly As you relate the way and discipline of the reformed Churches it sounds somewhat harsh and strange that their practise should be one way and their judgements another their practise to governe each particular Congregation by a combined Presbyterie of the Elders of severall Congregations united in one for government and yet in their judgements to allow especially in some cases a particular Congregation and entire and compleate power of jurisdiction within it selfe Doe they practise one way and allow another way or doe they hold both wayes the wayes of God or what is it you meane in this Narration of those Churches or can it be meant in the same sense and acception to practise one thing and yet allow another or will you make the lesser matters practised in their particular Churches by their own Elders to be the same with some cases wherein they allow particular Congregations an entire and compleate power of jurisdiction within themselves Now the latter namely in some cases cannot be meant for then this last part is no more then the first neither can your words of an entire compleate power of jurisdiction in the particular Congregations be meant of smaller matters but of the greatest matters in some cases You shall doe well in your reply to english these lines about the difference of the reformed Churches practises in greater matters and their different judgements in some cases and shew us in what sense they meane it and whether it can be properly and truly alledged for your case of entire and compleate power in your Congregations Thirdly This which you here relate of the reformed Churches practise and allowance is fallaciously set downe and for your own advantage meerely to make out this third principle that you still chose to practise safely namely what the reformed Churches allowed and acknowledged warrantable onely they superadded Presbyteriall combinations whereas the reformed Churches doe not as you well know in the case and question controverted between them and you allow particular Congregations in a Kingdome and nation conceiving the reformed Religion to have an entire and compleate power of jurisdiction within themselves what may be in some of their books in extraordinary or speciall cases where there is but one particular Congregation in a Countrey or the like that is nothing to the point in hand it being laid for a common ground by them all that every particular Church in a Nation or Kingdom is not to be left to it selfe but that there is a necessity of a common nationall government to preserve all the Churches in unity and peace And to cleare the reformed Churches of France Holland Scotland from what you say they allow I doe not find in their books of discipline and platformes of Church government by which we must judge of their judgements nor in their practises that they doe allow an entire and compleate power to be exercised by the Elders of every Congregation alone either in the making or ordaining of Ministers or in deposing their Ministers or in drawing up a forme of doctrine worship and discipline for themselves they allow power of admonition suspension from the Lords Supper and of taking up lesser differences by the particular Eldership and if I forget not the Churches of France only practise excommunication by the Elders in particular Congregations without carrying it at first higher but then if we consider that in those Churches of France their Elderships goe upon certaine fixed rules in there excommunications laid down in their books of discipline who if they proceed otherwise are liable to censure themselves and their being appeales to Synods and Assemblies and all being carried in reference and dependance to Assemblies the case is very different now if the Churches of your way and communion in old England and in New would yeeld to have a government fixt and setled by Synods and Assemblies establisht also by the Magistrates upon which Rules and Orders they should proceed in the way of making Ministers and that such errors in doctrine and such evill manners ought to be the subject of excommunication and then agree upon appeales to Synods and Assemblies then there would be lesse dangâ—…r in such an entire and compleate power in particular Congregations To the second particular under this first head namely what some of the old non-conformists grant placing the power of excommunication in the Eldership of each particular Church untill they doe miscarry and then indeed subjâ—…cting them to Presbytâ—…riall and Provinciall Assemblies and that it could not be infallibly prooved that any of the Churches recorded in the new Testament were so numerous as necessarily to exceed the limits of one particular Congregatïon And that both the Ministers of the reformed Churches and our non-conformists all granted that there should be severall Elders in every Congregation who had power over them in the Lord I answer as followes For Mr Cartwright you not quoting which of his books you have reference to and so not knowing which to turne to to find out what you assert of him I shall not deny it but as for Mr Baynes Diocesans Tryall which is the only booke I ever heard of wherein he handles these points he doth in the third question give the Ecclesiasticall power and the exercise of it to a united multitude of Presbyters in which booke howsoever as intending his booke against Diocesan Bishops and Diocesan Churches to whom all Presbyters and Churches stand in subjection and subordination he pleads against them for the power of the particular Elders in the severall Congregations yet as against the reformed Churches practise namely of a Presbyteriall Church consisting of many particular Congregations and ruled by the Elders of severall Congregations combined he pleadeth not but expressely in answer made to those two objections from the Churches and Elders where there is a co-ordination and a communiâ—…y in government as in the Low Countries and at Géneva he grants the thing contended for against your Congregationall way even before miscarrying and shewes thâ—… great difference between the Diocesan government and the Presbyteriall in severall particulars and answers your objections which you commonly make of a forraigne extrinsicall power And for your better satisfaction reade and compare together the passages in these pages of Mr Baynes Diocesans Tryall page 21 page 11. What is meant by a Diocesan Church and in the 12th page two first conclusions agreed in and in the 16th page And for the non-conformists in their writings against the Episcopall government and Diocesan Churches though they put the Bishops their adversaries all they could to it to make them proove
liberall maintenance annually for our Ministers yea and constantly also wine for our Communions And then we againe on our parts not only held all brotherly correspondencie with their Divines but received also some of the members of their Churches who desired to communicate with us unto communion in the Sacraments and other ordinances by vertue of their relation of membership retained in those Churches In the last Section I prooved both by Letters and many other presumptions you alwayes held not that respect to the Church of England you seeme to professe in that Section if now at last you be growne more sober and wise upon reviewing your principles I am glad of it non est pudor ad meliora transire For this Section your being received and entertained with the like respect from those Reformed Churches abroad and your mutually giving and receiving the right hand of fellowship If I may beleeve reports and Letters and those not light but from Ministers and good people I have been by word of mouth told and I have in writing from thence grounds to question the truth of this Narration A godly Minister out of Holland in answer to some questions sent about the truth of your Apologie writes thus to this present Section And here I cannot but adde this that whereas the Apologeticall Narration mentions these things as an argument of the incouragements they had in these parts and their good concurrence with the Churches here it hath been affirmed to me from very good testimony that however the Magistrates at Rotterdam for politick ends as to gather company to them which is for the profit of the place yet the Churches there I meane the Dutch never approoved of the course held there by these Brethren and their people It hath been affirmed to me that many of the Dutch Ministers were much offended at Mr Bridges being ordained Minister by the Lay-elders without any preaching Presbyters And what ever right-hand fellowship and brotherly correspondency you might hold with the Dutch Divines some of the English Ministers of the Reformed Churches there have complained of your great strangenesse and distance towards them and instance hath been given me particularly by a great friend of yours now in London that when some of you have come to Amsterdam you never would goe to Mr Herrings a good old non-conformist but have gone to Mr Canne's the Separatist and to his Church And besides this report told me some yeares agoe from a friend of your owne that I might not only beleeve reports I sent over into Holland some questions about the truth of some things related by you in this Apologie the contrary whereunto I had been informed of before and among other questions upon this Section I propounded what communion and converse passed between the godly English Ministers and their Congregations and you or whether when you came to Amsterdam you went not rather to the Brownists meetings and conversed with Mr Canne more then the Reformed Ministers Unto which question I had this answer in so many words sent To this I can say that since my comming hither we have had no such communion with them as that we have prevailed with any of them to preach in our Congregation though I am sure some of them have beene earnestly importuned thereunto indeed Mr Bridge seemed once to be willing but did not And for their going to the Brownists and conversing with Mr Canne more then us that is undeniable What you may of this reade in Epistle to the Rejoinder indefence of Mr Bradshaw against Mr Canne is most true and certaine But suffer me a little to examine the particulars wherein you would proove the mutuall giving and receiving the right-hand of fellowship For the first That you were received and entertained with the like respect that you gave to our Churches in England I easily beleeve which was but little And if the Reformed Churches look't upon you and you on them as you did upon our Churches in this Kingdome you have no cause to boast here of mutuall giving and receiving the right hand of fellowship remembring what I answered to your last Section concerning your profession of our Churches As to that proofe you bring of their giving you the right hand of fellowship in their abundantly manifesting it by the very same characters and testimonies of difference which are proper to their own orthodox Churches and whereby they use to distinguish them from all those Sects c I answer this was not to all of your Churches for Mr Simpson which yet is your way and is here owned by you all in this Apologie had not a Church or publike place for worship granted to him nor the priviledge of ringing a Bell to call to meetings but was looked upon as a Sect as Mr Bridge told me And in a Letter out of Holland from a good hand to that question Whether Mr Simpsons Church had the allowance of ringing a publike Bell to call to their meeting and whether any maintenance allowed by the States 'T is answered To this I shall say I never yet heard by any that his Church had any such allowance of Bell or maintenance by the States Now if Mr Simpsons Church was lookt upon as a Sect tollerated but not owned wanting that great signall of difference between allowed Churches and all other assemblies namely the priviledge of ringing a publike Bell to call unto their meetings and the rest of your Churches being just of the same way and constitution with his as appeares by this Apologie then the ranking of you now you are here with Sects is no great injury to you Neither will the granting to your two other Churches publike places to worship with maintenance for some of your Ministers c. free you from being lookt upon as Sects by the Churches and Ministers there but I must tell you these priviledges came from other grounds as namely one of your Churches consisting of many persons of great quality and going at first to a priviledged place the other Church having formerly been a Church in the way of the Reformed Churches there and so had then the allowance of a publike place The first sensible declining of that Church to the new-way being by Mr Peters before he went to New-England Now Mr Bridge comming to that Church and bringing with him and after him wealthy Citizens and Clothiers by which the Magistrates at Rotterdam knowing well their advantage No wonder though they permitted that Church their publike place and gave to their Ministers a full and liberall maintenance yea and Wine for their Communions and yet should gaine well by it As for your holding all brotherly correspondency with their Divines which I suppose you meane the Dutch not knowing any of them I can say nothing against it but only 't is a great presumption that holding so little brotherly correspondencie with our own English Divines there you held not much with the Dutch But grant that
used every Lords day in the reformed Churches then the particulars mentionad by you without an c. and therefore what you meane by under c. unlesse Prophesying Hymnes and such like I cannot imagine For Officers and publike Rulers in the Church whether you actually had made any Church-Widdowes in any of your Churches they being matter of charge which also as for admitting of poore members some of you are very carefull of I cannot affirme but that you hold Widdowes to be Officers of the Church and part of the Church government that I can prove by these following instances 1. By a passage in a Letter from Mr Bridge to some at Norwitch by Mr Davenports profession of faith printed and by Mr Cottons Catechisme And how much you have of late reasoned for such a Church Officer in the Assembly you know And let the Reader observe that by the way that we must judge of your wayes rather by what you hold then alwayes by your practise for one of your Churches hath been some yeares without a Pastour the first and chiefe Officer and yet you set up such moch more may you be without Widdowes for some yeares and yet hold them and as you have Widdowes a Church Officer which the reformed Churches hold not so in one of your Churches you have had Teaching Elders besides a Pastor and Teacher And what ever the reformed Churches hold of their Officers as necessary and sufficient for the perpetuall government of the Church Yet your practise is not as if you held them necessary and perpetuall for one of your Churches hath been many yeares without a Pastour the prime Officer and Ruler in the Church and other of your Churches without other officers which if they were so necessary and as instituted by Christ and his Apostles for the perpetuall Governement of the Church how you can be without these officers and namely the most necessarie and principall for many yeares together I cannot see And I desire you in your Reply to satisfie us and to shew Reason how you can depart from that which is confest by all Churches and your selves to for the maintaining an opinion of the essentiall difference betweene Pastours and Teachers in each Congregation so much denied by many learned and godly Divines As for that Parenthesis about ruling Elders with us not Lay but Ecclesiastick persons separated to that service I desire to know wherein and how your ruling Elders are more Ecclesiasticke persons and separated to that service then the ruling Elders of the Reformed Churches The Reformed Churches account their ruling-Elders Ecclesiasticall persons and they are separated to that worke by election and ordination and whereas you make a distinction in the manner of your expressions between ruling Elders separated to that service and Deacons I aske you whether Deacons are not Ecclesiasticall persons and separated to that service by Election and ordination as well as Elders what are your more and in what further degree are they Ecclesiasticall then the ruling Elders of the Reformed Churches or your owne Deacons doe you meane them so Ecclesiasticall and separated to that service of ruling so as the Pastours and Teachers are to their office that is separated from all civill Imployments and callings to the worke of wholly attending the flocke and of being as Ministers and preachers of the word now if you understand it in this sense that all your ruling-Elders doe give over their civill callings and worldly imployments and are so separated as Pastours and Teachers are it being the duty of the ruling-Elder to teach publikely as well as governe then I have nothing to say against your ruling-Elders And this puts an end to all that controversie about Lay-Elders onely let me aske you two questions 1. What specificall difference you will give me betweene those officers the Ministers of the word and ruling-Elders Seeing both rule and preach and what becomes then of those texts 1 Cor. 12. Rom. 12. Which are held out to prove Church Government by and amongst other particulars are brought to prove that besides those who teach and preach the word the Scripture reckons up Governours and Rulers 2. Whether did your Gentlemen and Merchants who were made ruling-Elders among you upon their office give over their merchandizing and their way of living as Gentlemen wholly applying themselves to their studies and to all gravitie in apparell haire c. But now if your ruling-Elders doe follow their merchandizing and trade and are not as Pastours and Teachers how can you affirme of them to be more Ecclesiastick persons then your Deacons or then the Elders of other Reformed Churches And as for the matter of Governement and censures of the Church you did forget here what you were to write in the 16th page and in the 21th How one of your Churches unhappily deposed one of their Ministers which censure was neither admonition nor excommunication upon obstinacie and impenitence But the particulars under this head I have spoken to upon this Section alreadie But as I have clearly and unanswerably shewed your publique worship was made up of other parts then the worship of all other Reformed Churches and have instanced wherein you practised and held over and above so let me from this Narration of your wayes and practises here question whether you practised all parts of worship and censures which other Churches practise For I feare your Narration as it is all a long subtilly carried for though you say your worship was made of no other parts nor you executed no other censures but what all acknowledge so it may be here and you may conceale what you have omitted was your worship then and is it still made up of all these Doe all of you hold or did you practise in Holland the reading the Scriptures of the old and new Testament as an Ordinance without any exposition and doe you practise the singing of Psalmes according to the way of Reformed Churches I have been told that at Roterdam the Scriptures were never read barely without Exposition and there are many of your Church way and communion that will neither joyne in hearing the Scriptures read nor in singing of Psalmes in our Congregations Which makes me doubt some of you may be of the same opinion and practise And did all of you whilest you were in Holland and doe you now administer Baptisme to all the Infants of your Churches or are there not some Infants unbaptized amongst you and for the matter of censures though you say you had nor executed no other but what all acknowledge yet you doe not affirme you executed all censures which other Reformed Churches acknowledge and so you conceale your judgement of things Yet in this Narration of your way and practises you carry your discourse so in this Section as if your practise and way were all the same with the Reformed Churches but had you dealt ingeniously in the Narration of the way and practises of your Churches you
should have laid downe particularly as wherein and how farre you agreed with the Reformed Churches so also wherein you departed from them namely you should have shewed in what you practised more then they doe and wherein you practise short of them and in the things you practised with them yet how you differ'd in the manner of them but to returne to that of censures Reformed Churches practise besides admonition and before they come to excommunication that which is called by Divines Abstentio à sacracaena but you doe not so but conceale this but brethren why should you not practise this especially considering how according to your principles the Church is to receive the Lords Supper every Lords day Now suppose some members commit a great sinne on the Saturday which though comming it be known to the Ministers or Elders and some of the people either there may be no time to call the Church to admonish the parties or if there be for admonition yet not time sufficient for the parties to testifie Repentance and yet the persons may not be judged obstinate and impenitent as to be excommunicated but the persons offending will come now to the Lords table in the interim what will you doe in this case And further the Reformed Churches enjoyne the censure of open confession of sinnes and practise deposition of officers from their places which may justly arise upon some cases and yet not thinke it fit to proceed unto excommunication as your selves practised in M. Wards case never proceeding to give him up to Satan but how lame and defective is this your Narration about the governement of the Church onely relating two things you practised in common with the Reformed Churches and as concealing other things you practised not with them so wholly passing over in silence here all your different way of practising from all Churches in the way of ordination in the way of constituting Churches and admission into them and in the way of governing by the votes and suffrages of the whole bodie in the way of celebration the Lords Supper receiving it at night c. in the Sacrament of Baptisme with many other particulars which whether it be fairly done I appeale to the Reader who is by this much deceived thinking upon the reading of this Narration that you had agreed in all things of Worship Officers Censures with the Reformed Churches But to returne to that censure of Excommunication which you insist upon laying downe your judgement about the subject of that censure As for your blessing God you never exercised it There may be but little ground for such a blessing but cause rather to be humbled for not using it seasonably I judge had you practised it some revilings evill speakings between many members of your Churches with some other offences might have been prevented But there is no such great cause to set out your selves by the non-exercise of Excommunication if what you hold for the matter of it be considered wherein I suppose you differ from all Orthodox Reformed Churches and doe open a wide gappe to much licentiousnesse both in doctrine and practise What doe you judge Is it not to be put in Execution for no other kind of sinnes then may evidently be presumed to be perpetrated against the parties knowne light c. What if men practise Polygamie prophane the Lords day by using it as they doe any other daie what if they doe hold and accordingly will have practised communitie of goods amongst beleevers what if they maintaine that Christians ought not to be Magistrates all which are not condemned in all the Churches of Christ especially if some Churches may be taken for Churches of Christ and we have reason to beleeve by your manner of expressions you include such neither are perpetrated against the parties knowne light but rather are practised upon new light and as new truthes and let me intreate you in your Replie to explain your meaning what you meane by all the Churches of Christ and by the common received practises of Christianitie and what by the principles of Christianitie universally acknowledged in all the rest of the Churches whether by Churches you understand the Churches onely of your owne communion and waie or the Churches which are commonly called the Reformed Or else all Churches whatsoever that are so called as besides your owne and the Reformed the Churches of the Anabaptists Antinomians and such like And I have reason to propound this question your words being so doubtfull Now if your words and phrases be taken in the first sence of your Churches only that those sinnes and no other are to be the subject of Excommunication then great sins and errours according to the Scripture and judged so by Orthodox Churches may escape Excommunication and on the contrarie many matters which according to Scripture are neither sinnes nor errours but only your Churches hold them so may have that dreadfull sentenee passe upon them but if you meane it in the largest sence for all kind of Churches and for the received principles and practises of Christianitie professed and acknowledged in all the Churches then more sinnes and errours so judged by the word by most Churches and by your owne Churches too will not be acknowledged for such in all the rest of the Churches and so shall escape that censure But if you should say you meane onely the Reformed-churches commonly so called and the common received practises professed by them it cannot be so understood as is evident by your own expressions in this passage about Excommunication So that here are strange unsafe rules to goe by in the censure of Excommunication and I judge it is a part of the new light and now truths of these times never yet given by any learned Classicall Authour How much better were it for Churches to make the subject of Excommunication such sins and errours which the Scripture hath made so and those sinnes to be agreed upon by common consent in Assemblies and Synods so drawne up for all to know them But if it be objected that this may hinder further light and an after discoverie I answer when any thing more shall come to be found out this need be no hinderance unto any light but by the publike Government and common consent upon good grounds may be added But this your judgement about the censure of Excommunication I feare is calculated for the Meridian of pretended liberty of conscience Now this position of holding the subject of Excommunication to be onely such sins and errours as are against the parties knowne light and the common received practises of Christianity professed in all Churches and no other to be the subject of it tends much to the tolerating of Sects and Heresies which in this impure age is by many men and by too many of the Church way so studiously promoted against the nature of Reformation and true zeale But if one of the great ends of Excommunication be to preserve others from
not deale fairely in abridging the Scriptures and making your supreme rule so narrow as the Acts and Epistles and I might justly stand upon it to make you inlarge your rule to the books both of Old and new Testament yet well knowing the Acts of Apostles and Epistles will cast you I am well contented and most ready at that weapon alone to try it with you and care not in the present controversie of the Church-way as to let all other Authours so for the old Testament and that part of the New too the Gospells to stand by And if you can make good out of the Acts of the Apostles and the Epistles by any Apostolike direction patterne or example of those Primitive Churches directed by the Apostles many things you practise and maintaine as Ordination of Ministers by the people alone as your Church-covenant as a few private Christians to gather and constitute a Church as persons to be members of such Congregations where they live constantly many miles distant from their Ministers and the meeting places with other such I will yeeld the cause and if I make not good from the Acts of the Apostles and Epistles things mainly opposed by you but affirmed by us As that of particular Churches to consist of more then can meet in one place to be edified in all parts of worship with other such then blame me So that I may say of your Church-way and the questions between us as Tertullian answered long since some hereticks That if they were to be determined by the Scriptures they would not subsist Now as to the ground of this principle within you yeur consciences were possest with that reverence and adoration of the fullnesse of the Scriptures that there is therein a compleate sufficiency as to make the man of God perfect so also to make the Churches of God perfect c. First I answer Your ground here alledged doth not prove your supreame rule without you namely the Primitive patterne and example of the Churches erected by the Apostles to be compleatly sufficient to make the Churches of God perfect because that speakes as of the whole Scriptures that there is in them a compleat sufficiencie and not as of a part now though the Scriptures may be and are so full and perfect yet every part may not you can in reason conceive that the whole may be compleatly sufficient to all ends and uses for which it was intended when a part or parts may not suffice And that Scripture which you allude unto for proofe 2 Tim. 3. v. 16 17. speakes of the whole Scripture and not of a part only the Papists would have 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in that text to signifie non totam sed omnem Scripturam and so would give that praise not to the whole body of the Scriptures but to particular parts of it Learned Chamier snewes the contrary how that the whole Scripture is here rather to be understood and he proves it by a threefold argument and in this great question between us and the Papists An Scriptura Christianum perfâ—…ctum reddat resolves the question to be understood of the whole canon in the Old and new Testament And so doth Dr Whitakers by which you may judge how unsufficient and short your first principle was being only a part of the Scriptures but not the whole and you may observe the fallaciousnesse of your reason propounded to argue from the whole to a part because the whole Scriptures have a compleat sufficiencie to make the Churches of God perfect therefore the Primitive patterne and example of the Churches erected by the Apostles have too Secondly I doe also adore the fullnesse of the Scriptures and God forbid that I should take from the Scriptures any thing God gives unto them or that which in the Scripture is attributed unto it but we must not give unto the Scriptures more then what God intended them for or what the Scripture affirmes of it selfe for that is to be wise above what is written and to adde unto the word and may be and hath been a ground of dangerous consequence in the Church of God and to cleare it from your own instances of exception Meere circumstances we except c. Now suppose some to speake as you doe and to be really acted also upon the same ground of the fullnesse and sufficiencie of the Scriptures should yet affirme of the Scriptures without all exception of me 〈◊〉 circumstances and of the rules which the law of nature doth in common dictate and should say nothing must be practised no not in meere circumstances but by some direction from the word and as for the rules the law of nature doth in common dictate in them also the Scripture gives light how to doe them and thereupon should speake as you doe all along in this Section would not this prove inconvenient and trouble you in your Churches Nay suppose some should so extoll the fullnesse and sufficiencie of the Scriptures that they should hold them so perfect and sufficient for all Christians as to be a perfect rule for all civill government and that Chrstian common-wealths ought to be governed by lawes only there recorded and by no other which opinion in substance Carolostadius held That in Courts of justice Judges should not proceed according to humane laws but according to the law of Moses and so for Military practises should hold all the way of Warre must be founded upon the Scriptures and thereupon should clamour against any other art and way of Warre then what was practised there What would you reply to these men or what strength were there in such principles would not you answer them in what sense the Scriptures were perfect and how they must understand it Men have often by giving more to the most excellent creatures and things then the Scriptures allow fallen into great errors and mistakes The Papists and Ubiquitaries speake highly of the body of Christ and 't is all in the way of magnifying it and Schuvenckfeldius did boast himselfe to be the Assertor of the glory of the flesh of Christ in Heaven which other Preachers neglected or else opposed and yet all these held great errors about the body and humane nature of Christ under the notion of advancing it So in the present controversie by giving to the Scriptures that which God hath not given to them both is and may be a ground of error And therefore I referre you for the true sense of that question concerning the fullnesse and sufficiencie of the Scriptures to make the Churches of God perfect unto the answers our Protestant Divines give the Papists in that controversie about the perfection of the Scriptures And by the way let me commend to you and all the Ministers of the Church-way to study our Protestant writers as Whitakers Chamier c. against the Papists upon the Church and of the notes of the visible Church upon the controversie concerning the
are so many as they cannot meet in one place but have more meeting places yet in imitation of the Scriptures giving that ground to some who have askt them a reason they make City Churches but one and the Ministers are Ministers in common of them all preaching in their courses in the severall meeting places and governed in common and this they doe to keep nearest to Apostolicall practise whereas now in the Countrey where villages are and the meetings are scattered they doe not all preach to all And to adde this further to shew your unsafe way of practising in the way of your particular Congregations over the reformed Churches and our Churches in England your Congregations as in London where the meeting place is and the Ministers reside is made up of members as of some living in London so of some in Surrey Middlesex Hartfordsheire Essex where they have fixum domicilium being twenty miles asunder and many members meeting but sometimes in a Moneth where neither Ministers can oversee them nor members watch over one another not knowing what the conversation of each other is which yet are brought as the maine grounds for your Church-fellowship which non-residencie of the members from one another and of the officers from so many of the members whether it overthrow not and be not point blank against many of your principles of the Church-way I leave to your selves to judge besides that it is without any Primitive patterne and example of the Churches erected by the Apostles the Churches being still stiled according to the places where they lived and met as in Rom. 1. 7. To all that be in Rome beloved of God called to be Saints And so in the Epistles to the Corinthians To the Church of God which is at Corinth And I desire you to give me any Primitive patterne of any who belonged to the Church of Rome Corinth Ierusalem that is were standing members of those Churches who lived and inhabited ten miles twenty five miles c. round about those Cities so that we find here in this third instance namely in the government and discipline of the Churches as well as in the first instance in the qualification of your members that the additament is on your sides and not on the reformed Churches To the third head namely the reasons couched and hinted for your own practise and against the practise and way of the reformed Churches to the first reason I answer as the relating of the state of the questions was not proper so this argument hinted here is not properly expressed for their might be such a Presbyteriall Church and government as is maintained against you namely but two or three distinct meeting places and yet not Churches rising to such a numerous multiplication nor Apostles staying to the setting up of Churches untill they rose to such a numerous multiplication But pray what doe you meane by those expressions We did not imagine but might you not or could you not have imagined it though you did not nor would not and what by this that the Apostles should stay the setting up of any Churches at all untill they rose to make such a numerous multiplication as might make such a Presbyteriall combination Doe you carry the words in reference only to that numerous multiplication or simply and positively that the Apostles did not stay so long in any City as to set up any Churches at all Now if you will have your words interpreted in the first sense then judge how improper the speech and narration of your mind is for then it should have gone thus that the Apostles should stay the setting up of so many Churches untill they rose to such a numerous multiplication for the denying the setting up of any Churches and at all agree not with the following words untill they rose to such a numerous multiplication the former being a diminitive nay a negative and cannot agree to such an augmentative as the latter besides your first words carried in reference to the following have no strength to proove what you bring them for namely what you allowed and practised or what you disallowed for though the Apostles should not stay so long as the setting up so many Churches as might arise to such a numerous multiplication of severall and sundry Congregations yet there might be such a Presbyteriall classicall Church a Church consisting of more then could meet in one place which is the controversie between us But if you understand your words simply and positively that the Apostles did not stay the setting up of any Churches at all I desire you to remember your own principles and expressions in many books and discourses of your way that the Apostles were the founders of the first Churches as at Corinth Rome and for Ierusalem especially which is the particular Church we most stand upon the Apostles staid long enough there to set up not onely any Churches at all but many to make such a Presbyteriall combination as is stood for as will appeare both by Acts 8. Acts 15. Acts 21. and it is the judgement of Mr Robinson that Ierusalem was never without some of the Apostles there which the two first chapters of the Galathians give a strong ground for besides the many Presbyters that belonged thereunto And so for the Church of Ephesus Paul stayed at one time in those parts three yeares together long enough to make so many Churches as might make a Presbyteriall combination which that of the Acts chap. 20. vers 17 18 25 28 29 31. doe give hints enough for if the nature of an answer to a Narration would permit to draw them out at length To the second reason hinted that those precepts Obey your Elders and them that are over you were to be sure meant of the Pastours and teachers set over them in each particular Congregation respectively and to be as certainely the intendment of the Holy Ghost as in those commands Wives obey your own husbands c. I answer that in Scripture a particular Church consisting of more Congregations then one and the Ministers and Elders feeding them and governing them in common as at Ierusalem and as it is in the Low Countries in Cities there as at Amsterdam c. all the Ministers and Elders are their own Ministers and Elders as the husbands are the owne of their wives and those Scriptures are to be understood of all their Pastors and Ministers and not of some only or in respect of some and not of the rest and it is as certainely the intendment of the Holy Ghost as in that command Wives obey your owne husbands that obey your Elders c. be meant not of some but of them all 2. In Churches by their combination consisting of many Congregations where ordinarily some Pastors and teachers feed some Congregations and not the rest Ministers being fixed some to that Congregation and others to other Congregations yet there being a government in common by all the Presbyters of