the most part 2. If the sinnes be against the worship of God as idolatry or sinnes of a wicked conversation the worship of God remaining pure and sound at least in professed fundamentals 3. If the idolatry be essentiall idolatry as the adoring of the worke of mens hands or onely idolatry by participation as Popish ceremonies the Surplice and Crosse being as meanes of worship but not adored and so being Idols by participation as Amesius and M. Ball doe well distinguish and before them so doth the learned Reynold and Bilson make use of the distinction 4. All lenity must be used against a Church if not more lenity then we use in proceeding against single persons 5. Divers degrees of separation are to be considered hence these considerations 1. There is a separation Negative or a non-union and a separation Positive Though a Church of Schismaticks retaining the sound faith yet separating from other be deserted by any it is a Negative separation from â— true Church and laudable as the faithfull in Augustins time did well in separating from the Donatists for with them they were never one in that faction though they separated not from the true faith holden by Donatists but kept a Positive union with them so doe all the faithfull well to separate from the Churches of the Separatists 2. If the whole and most part of the Church turne idolatrous and worship Idols which is essentiall idolatry we are to separate from that Church the Levites and the two Tribes did well as Mr. Ball saith to make a separation from Jeroâ—oams Calves and the godly laudably 2 King 16. 11. did not separate from the Israel and Church of God because the Altar of Damascus was set up and because of the high places Things dedicated unto Idols as Lutheran Images may be called and are called 1 Cor. 10. 34. idolatry yet are they idolatry by participation and so the Cup of Devils 1 Cor. 10. Paul doth not command separation from the Church of Corinth and the Table of the Lord there 3. Consideration There is a separation from the Church in the most part or from the Church in the least and best part In Achabs time Israel and the Church thereof for the most part worshipped Baal Elias Micajaâ— Obadiah and other godly separated from the Church of Israel in the most part Jeremiah wished to have a Cottage in the Wildernesse no doubt a godly wish that he might separate from the Church all then for the most part corrupted yet remained they a part of the visible Church and a part in the visible Church and therefore did he not separate from the Church according to the least and best part thereof The godly in England who refused the Popish ceremonies and Antichristian Bishops did well not to separate from the visible Church in England and yet they separated from the mainest and worst part which cannot be denied to be a ministeriall Church 4. Considerat If a Church be incorrigible in a wicked conversation and yet retaine the true faith of Christ it is presumed God hath there some to be saved and that where Christs ordinances be there also where Christs ordinances be there also Christs Church presence is And therefore I doubt much if the Church should be separated from for the case is not here as with one simple person for it is cleare all are not involved in that incorrigible obstinacy that is yet a true visible communion in which we are to remaine for there is some union with the head Christ where the faith is kept sound and that visibly though a private brother remaining sound in the faith yet being scandalous and obstinately flagitious be to be cast off as an Heathen yet are we not to deale so with an orthodox Church where most part are scandalous 5. Considerat I see not but we may separate from the Lords Supper where bread is adored and from baptisme where the signe of the Crosse is added to Christs ordinances and yet are we not separated from the Church for we professedly heare the word and visibly allow truth of the doctrine maintained by that Church which doe pollute the Sacraments and we are ready to seale it with our bloud and it is an act of visible profession of a Church to suffer for the doctrine mentioned by that Church 6. We may well hold that Ambrose saith well that a Church wanting the foundation of the Apostles is to be forsaken 7. There is a forced separation through Tyranny from personall communion and a voluntary separation David was forced to leave Israel and was cast out of the Inheritance of the Lord the former is not our sinne and our separation from Rome hath something of the former the latter would be wisely considered 8. There may be causes of non-union with a Church which are not sufficient causes of separation Paul would not separate from the Church of the Jewes though they rejected Christ till they openly blasphemed Act. 13. 44 45 46. Act. 18. 16. And when they opposed themselves and blasphemed Paul shooke his â—ayment and said unto them Your blood be upon your owne heads I am cleane from henceforth I will goe to the Gentiles There is a lawfull separation and yet before the Jewes came to this there was no just cause why any should have joyned to the Church of the Jewes who denyed the Messiah and persecuted his Servants Act. 4. Act. 5. seeing there was a cleaner Church to which Converts might joyne themselves Act. 2. 40 41 42. 9. There is no just cause to leave a lesse cleane Church if it be a true Church and to goe to a purer and cleaner though one who is a Member of no Church have liberty of election to joyne to that Church which he conceiveth to be purest and cleanest 10. When the greatest part of a Church maketh defection from the Truth the lesser part remaining sound the greatest part is the Church of Separatists though the maniest and greatest part in the actuall exercise of Discipline be the Church yet in the case of right Discipline the best though sewest is the Church for truth is like life that retireth from the maniest members unto the heart and there remaineth in its fountaine in case of danger CHAP. 4. SECT 6. The way of the Churches of Christ in New England IN this Section the Reverend Author disputeth against the Baptizing of Infants of unbeleeving or excommunicated neareit Parents of which I have spoken in my former Treatise Onely here I vindicate our Doctrine And first the Authour is pressed with this the excommunicated persons want indeed the free passage of life and vertue of the Spirit of Jesus till they be tuitched with repentance yet they are not wholly cut off from the society of the faithfull because the seed of faith remaineth in them and that knitteth them in a bond of conjunction with Christ. The Authour answereth It is true such excommunicates
is essentially an act of preaching the Word Object 14. This Synod declares only in a doctrinall way what is necessary what is scandalous the same way that Paul doth Rom. 14. 14 15. i Cor. 8. 1 Cor. 10. Answ. This Synod and Paul declare one and the same thing Ergo with one and the same authoritie it followeth not Paul writeth 1 Cor. 5. that the incestuous man should bee excommunicated and this hee wrote as canonicall Scripture by the immediat inspiration of the holy Spirit if then the Church of Corinth should have excommunicated him shall it follow that they gave out the sentence of excomunication by the immediate inspiration of the holy Spirit I thinke not their Churches sentence had been given out by a meere ecclesiasticall authoritie according to the wch Churches of Christ to the worlds end doth excommunicate following the Church of Corinth as a patterne Obj. 15. Though these obtruders of ceremonies did pervent soâ—ks v. 24. yet the Synod doth not summond them before them nor excommuncite them but remit them to the particular Churches to whom it properly belonged to censure and not to any Synod or superiour Judicature Answ. There was no need to summon them for these subverters of soules were personally present at the Synod and rebuked in the face of the Synod as perverters of soules v. 24. for if they were not present 1. to whom doth Peter speake v. 10. Now therefore why tempt yee God to put a yoake on the necke of the disciples c. the Apostles and Elders did not impose the yoake of Moses Law upon the beleeving disciples nor any other save onely the obtruders of circumcision 2. Who were they in the Synod who made much disputing v. 7. note the Apostles not any save these obtruders Ergo they were personally present at the Synod nor needed they to excommunicate them for I judge that they acquiesced to the determination of James which was the sentence of the Synod and the great dispute spoken of v. 7. ceased v. 13. and the conclusion is agreed upon 22. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 then it seemed good to the Apostles Elders and whole Church and there was reason why these obtruders should acquiesce so that there was no need of further censure for there was satisfactiou in part given to both siddes The question was whether or no are beleevers now to keepe the Law and the ceremonies of Moses his Law It was answered by the Synod by a distinction which favoured in part both sides 1. There is no necessitie that the beleeving Gentiles who are saved by grace as well as the Jewes bee troubled to keepe all the ceremonies and this satisfied the Apostles who taught that the Gentiles were now made one people with the Jewes and both are freed in conscience from Moses his yoake the other part of the distinction it was this yet there bee some ceremoniall commandements as not to eate things offered to Idols blood and things strangled for fornication is of another nature and abstinence therefrom is of perpetuall necessitie 1 Cor. 6. 13 14 15 16. 1 Thess. 4. 3. Col. 3. 5. these must bee avoided for scandals sake by all the Jewes but especially by the Gentiles lest the weake Jewes who take these to be divine commandements yet in force take offence and this was satisfactorie to the obtruders and wee heare no more of their disputing and there is an end of the controversie by the blessed labours of a lawfull Synod 3. I could easily yeeld that there is no necessitie of the elicit acts of many parts of government such as excommunication ordination admitting of heathens professing the faith to Church-membership in Synods provinciall nationall or oecumenicall but that Synods in the case of neglect of presbyteriall-Churches command these particular Churches whom it concerneth to doe their dutie and in this sense the Synod Act. 15. is to remit the censure of excommunication to the presbytery of Antioch and Jerusalem in the case of the obstinacie of these obtruders of circumcision but so some power of government is due to the Synod as prescribing of Lawes and Canons for presbyteries and Congregations Object 16. Therefore was the Synagogue of the Jewes no compleat Church because all the ordinances of God cannot bee performed in the Synagogue and therefore were the Jewes commanded onely at Jerus salem and in no other place to keepe the passeover and to offer offerings and sacrifices which were òrdinary worship Deut. 12. but there is not any worship or sacred ordinance saith that worthy Divine Dr. Ames of preaching praying Sacraments c. prescribed which is not to bee observed in every Congregation of the New Testament Nor is there any ordinary minister appointed who is not given to some one Assembly of this kind So also Mr. Mather and Mr. Thomson teachers in New England Others say because there was a representative worship of sacrificing of all the 12. Tribes at Jerusalem therefore all the Synagogues were dependent Churches and Jerusalem was the supreme and bighest Church but there is no representative worship in the New Testament and therefore no need of Synods as higher Churches Answ. Surely the aforesaid reverend Brethren of New England have these words But it seemeth to us that the power of a Synod is not proporly a power and exercise of government and jurisdiction but a power of doctrine and so a Synod is rather a â—aching then a governing Church from which I inferre 1. That out Brethren cannot deny a power of governing to a Synod but it is not so proper governing as excommunication and ordination performed in their Congregations but say I it is more properly governing as to make Lawes and rules of governing is a more noble eminent and higher act of governing as is evident in the King and his Parliament then the execution of these Lawes and rules 2. Our brethren incline to make a Synod a teaching Church but I inferre that Synodicall teaching by giving out decrees tying many Churches as our Brethren of New England and the forenamed authors teach is an ordinance of Christ that can bee performed in no single Congregation on earth for a doctrinall Canon of one Congregation can lay no ecclesiasticall tie upon many Churches Ergo by this reason our Congregations shall bee dependent as were the Jewish Synagogues 3. With favour of these learned men it is a begging of the question to make Jerusalem the supreme Church and the Synagogues dependent Churches because it was lawfull onely at Jerusalem to sacrifice for I hold that Jerusalem was a dependent Church no lesse then the smallest Synagogue in all the tribes for in a Catholick meeting of all Judah for renewing a Covenant with God Ierusalem was but a sister Church with all of Iudah Benjamin Ephraim Manasseh who 2 Chron. 15. 9. 10. 11 12. made up one great Church which did sweare that Covenant Ordinances doe not formally make Churches visible nor divers ordinances divers
Churches profession of the truth formally constituteth a visible Church and Church union in ordinances and government and this was alike in the Synagogues and in Ierusalem It was a thing meerely typicall that at Ierusalem onely and in the Temple onely should there bee offerings and sacrifices because in Christ God-man all our worship and service and prayers are accepted of the Father but I pray you did this instampe Ierusalem with any note of Church-supremacy above the meanest Synagogue in all Israel and Iudah I see it not all the Synagogues and all the land were members of the nationall Church and every one a member of his owne Synagogue the persons processing the truth and dwelling at Ierusalem had no supremacie over the Synagogues because they did inhabit that typicall place but the Priests and Levites were indeed servants to all the land in offering sacrifices and in governing in the Synedry either the greater or the lesse but these professors who did constitute the visible Church at Ierusalem had no Church supremacie at all for their relation to the Temple their cohabitation or bodily contiguitie was no Church-relation then or now and that these of the Synagogues behooved to worship in some solemne acts onely at Ierusalem did no more give supremacie to the inhabitants of Ierusalem to bee a Church over them then the Synagogues could claime supremacie over the inhabitants of Ierusalem for the inhabitants of Ierusalem were tied to worship there and in no other place and to stand to the determinntion of the great Synodrie without appeale because there was not a Catholick visible Church in the world but the Church of the Iewes and this argument with as great force of reason might conclude that all the cities and incorporations of England are in government dependent and subordinate to London and the suburbs because they are subordinate to the honorable Houses of Parliament if wee should suppone that Westminster by a standing Law of the Kingdome were the unalâ—erable seat where the Parliament can fit and in no other place which yet could prove nothing seeing London and the suburbs are in their government no lesse subordinate to the Parliament then the meanest village and towne in England and therefore I see no ground because some representative worship was tied to Jerusalem to give Jerusalem a Church-supremacie 2. because one Congregation doth pray for another that is under pestilence and diseases and praises God for the deliverance from these evills which also is a sort of representative worship every Church and person partaking of a Christian priesthood to offer up prayers and praises one for another it will not as I conceive prove that one Congregation hath Church-supremacie and power of jurisdiction over another Because 1. all Israel was alike circumcised 2. all alike the called people of God in covenant with God 3. all had claime to the Altar Sacrifices Temple Arke c. 4. All alike professed their subjection to God to Priests and Prophets in these same ordinances whether typicall or judiciall or morall therefore every Synagogue alike at Ierusalem at Dan or Bersheba were alike Congregationall Churches without dependance one upon another and all depended upon the whole nationall Church and on the Synodries supreme subordinate and the Synagogue-government according to their subordinations respectively and I see no nationall Church in Israel peculiar to them or typicall more then there is a nationall Church in Scotland or England though God put some distinguishing typicall notes upon their government yet it never made either the invisible or visible Church of the Iewes to differ in nature and essence from the Christian Churches Object 17. From the power of jurisdiction in a Synod you may inferre a power of jurisdiction in a nationall Church and a power of jurisdiction in the whole Christian world and wee know not any Politicall Church Catholick and visible in Scripture and if then were any such Church Catholick then might they conveene and sweart a Catholick-covenant for uniformitie of doctrine worship and government of the Church as wee have done in Britaine and this Catholick Church might impose it upon a nationall Church even by that same Law of proportion by which the nationall Church may impose it on particular Churches which are parts of the Nationall Church Answ. I see not how the consequence holdeth every way good that as wee inferre from a juridicall power in a presbytery the same power juridicall in a Synod and the same in a nationall Assembly that therefore wee may inferre the same juridicall power in an Oecumenick councell and the reasons of the disparitie I take to bee these 1. The farther remote in locall distance of place that Churches bee as it falleth out in the Catholick visible Church the danger of scandalizing one another by visible communion and so the opportunitie of edifying one another is the lesse and so the communion visible is the lesse and consequently the power of jurisdiction is the lesse 2. An universall and oecumenick councell of all the visible Churches on earth is an act of the visible Church which supposeth all the visible Churches on earth to bee in that morall perfection of soundnesse of faith of concord and unitie that some one Congregation or classicall presbytery of Elders according to Gods heart may bee in which morall perfection perhaps is not de facto attainable though it bee not physically impossible in this life except wee suppose the heavenly dayes of Christs visible reigne on earth a thousand yeares when yet there shall bee no Temple nor externall ministery of which state I cannot now dispute and therefore I conceive these sixteene hundred yeares there never was an integrall and perfect oecumenick councell of all the Churches on earth and therefore if wee should dispute of the juridicall power of such a Catholick assembly whether it may impose an oecumenick and Catholick oath on a nationall Church against their will and excommunicate a nationall Church is but a needlesse and a Châ—mericall dispute and it includeth two contradictory suppositions 1. That all the Churches on earth are of one sound faith worship doctrine and Church-government and yet one nationall Church is supposed to bee heterodox scandalous and obstinate so that that whole nationall Church must bee constrained to take a lawfull oath and must bee excommunicated such an hypothesis is not possible where the Gospell is preached for even the whole Romish Church in all its members deserveth not excommunication in respect wee are sure God hath thousands in the bosome of that Church who beleeve in Christ and doe not defend popery with obstinacie and such an hypothesis is contradicent to the supposition of the soundnesse of faith and unitie of all Christian Churches on earth and therefore I plainely deny that Christ hath given the like power of jurisdiction to the Catholick visible Church that hee hath given to a nationall Church over a provinciall Church or Synod and to a Synod over a classical
weake p. 297 298 299 seq Mr. Coachmans arguments dissolved p. 305 306 307. seq The way of Church judging in independent congregations examined p. 308 309. That there be no peculiar authority in the Eldership for which they can be said to be over the people in the Lord according to the doctrin of independency of Churches and their six ways of the Elders authority confuted p. 311 312 313 314 315. seq That independency doth evert communion of sister-Churches and their seven wayes of Churches-communion refuted from their own grounds p. 324 325 326. seq The divine right of Synods Ten distructions thereanent p. 331 332. seq The desinition of a generall or Oecumenick Synod p. 332. 333 The place Acts 15 farther considered p. 334 335. Synods necessary by natures Law p. 336. Papists no friends to councells p. 336 337 338. seq 340 341. Three ways of communion of sister-Churches according to the doctrin of independent Churches confuted p. 346 347. seq How the magistrate hath power to compell persons to the profession of the truth p. 352 373. seq Six distinctions thereanent 2 part p. 352 353. The Magistrates power over a people Baptized and over Pagans who never heard of Christ in this poynt of Coaction to profession not alike p. 353 354 355. The magistrates compelling power terminated upon the externall act not upon the manner of doing sincerely or hypocritically p. 355 356. The magistrates power over hereticks with sundry distinctions thereanent p. 356 357 358. seq Socinians judgement and Arminians hereanent p. 359 360 A farther consideration of compelling or tolerating diverse Religions p. 361 362. Some indirect forcing lawfull p 362. Erroneous opinions concerning God and his worship though not in Fundamentalls censurable p 363 364. Diverse non Fundamentalls are to be believed with certainty of Faith and the non-believing of them are siâ—nes punishable p. 365. 366 367 seq Arguments on the contrary dissolved and the place Philip. 3. 15. cleared p 316. seq How an erring conscience obligeth p. 378 379 380 381 seq Arguments on the contrary answered p. 383 384. seq The Princes power in Church affairs Ten distinctions thereanent p. 391 392. 393. How the Magistrate is a member of the Church p. 392 393. The Prince by his Royall Office hath a speciall hand in Church-affaires p 393 394. The intrinsecall end of the Prince is a supernaturall good to be procured by the Sword and a coactive power and not only the externall peace of the State Spalato resuted p 396 397 398. seq How the Magistrate is subordinate to Christs mediatory Kingdome p 402 403 404 seq The ordinary power of the Prince is not Synodicall teaching or making Church-Lawes p. 403 404 405 406. seq The influence of the Princes civill power in Church-Canons p. 409. 410 411 seq The government of the visible Church spirituall and not a formall part of the Magistrates Office p. 417 418. seq The power of Ordination and Deprivation not a part of the Magistrates Office p. 427 428. seq Instances from David Salomon Ezechiah c. answered and our Doctrine and Iesuites differenced p. 438 439. seq Difference betwixt the Princes commanding Church-duties and the Churches commanding these same p. 417 418 seq The Kings ordinary power to make Church-Lawes examined p. 438 439 440. seq The intrinsecall end of the Magistrate a supernaturall good p. 442 443 446 447 448. The Popes pretended power over Kings protestants contrary to to Papists herein what ever the author or Popish libeller of the survey and the night-Author of Treason Lysimachus Nicanor say on the contrary p. 449 450 451 452. seq The way of Reformation of Congregations in England according to the independent way examined p. 457 458. The originall of Church-Patronages p. 459. And how unwarrantable by Gods Word p. 462 463. Other wayes of Reformation of England according to the way of independent Churches modestly considered as about maintenance of Ministers and replanting of visible Churches there p. 464 465 466. seq Errata THe Author could not attend the Presse therefore pardon errors of the Printing Observe that the Author was necessitated to make some occasionall addition to the mids of this Treatise which occasioned-variation of the Figures of the Pages and therefore stumble not that when the Booke commeth to page 484 the next page not observing due order is page 185. 186 and so forth to the end of the Treatise page 60. title of the page 60 c. page 61 62. 64. dele not and for not of the same essentiall frame c. read of the same essentiall frame c. page 484 line 22 Churches their persecution read Churches through their persecution for page 229 read 209. for page 259. read 269. for p. 484. r. p. 498. יהוה THE Way of the Church of Christ In NEW ENGLAND Measured by the Golden Reed of the SANCTUARY Or The way of Churches walking in brotherly equality and independence or coordination without subjection of one Church to another examined and measured by the Golden Reed of the Sanctuary Propositions concerning the supposed visibility and Constitution of independent Churches examined CHAP. 1. SECT 1. PROP. 1. THe Church which Christ in his Gospell hath instituted and to which he hath committed the keys of his Kingdome the power of binding and loosing the Tables and Scales of the Covenant the Officers and Consures of his Church the Administration of all his publick worship and Ordinances is coetus fidelium a company of Believers meeting in one place every Lords day for the administration of the holy ordinances of God to publick edification 1 Cor. 14. 23. 1 Because it was a company whereof Peter confessing and believing was one and built on a rock Mat. 16. 18. a Such as unto whom any offended brother might complaine Mat. 18. 17. 3 Such as is to cast out the incestuous Corinthian 1 Cor. 5. Which cannot agree to any diocesian provinciall or Nationall assemblie Ans. From these we question Quest. 1. If a company of believers and saints builded by faith upon the rock Christ and united in a Church-Covenant be the only instituted visible Church of the New Testament to the which Christ hath given the keys Let these considerations be weighed 1. Dist. The matter of an instituted visible Church is one thing and the instituted visible Church is another as there be ods betwixt stones and timber and an house made of stones and timber 2 Dist. It is one thing to govern the actions of the Church and another thing to governe the Church the Moderator of any Synod doth govern the actions of the Synod but he is not for that a Governour Ruler and Pastor of the Synod Or ordering actions and governing men are diverse things 3. Dist. A thing hath first its constituted and accomplished being in matter forme efficient and finall causes before it can performe these operations and actions that flow from that being so constituted a Church must be a Church before any
Jewish entry in the visible Church Gen. 17. 13. It being the Covenant of God in the flesh the uncircumcised being commanded to be cut off from Gods people v. 14. 4. This is according to the Scriptures and the doctrine of the fathers Augustine Cyrill Basilius Tertullian Hieronymus Theophylact Theodoret Ambrose Cyprian who constantly so teach so doe our Divines Calvin Beza Buâ—nus Pareus Piscator Anton. Wallaeus Tilenus Kickermanus So Zanchius Polanus Sihrandus Rivetus Fennerus Whittakerus Raynoldus Willetus and the professors of Leyden 〈◊〉 Our Brethren say it is the opinion of the Anabaptists that the Church is made by baptisme and Papists have the same conceit and therefore place their Font at the Church doore to signifie mens entry into the Church by baptisme but we beleeve not that baptisme doth make men members of the Church nor to be administrated to them who are without the Church as the way to bring them in but to them that are within the Church as a seale to confirme the Covenant of Grace to them Answ. 1. Anabaptists deny that any ought to be baptized while thy come to age and while they beleeve and be regenerated and they say not farre from your selves in this who teach it to bee absurd to put a blanke seale upon a falshood and so you presuppone all to be regenerated and truly within the Covenant before they can be sealed to be within the Covenant by baptisme and yet you do not think all Infants of beleeving parents to be regenerated and truly within the Covenant then is the seale blanck Also you say baptisme is not to be administrated to those who are without but onely to those who are within the Church you meane not within the Church by profession for Infants have no profession and you say the Sacrament cannot be put on a blanke or a falshood Ergo you thinke all that are baptized ought to be within the Church really and not in profession ouely Ergo they must all come to age and beleeve before they can be baptized 2. We say not that baptisme maketh a Church mysticall and the true and lively body and Spouse of Christ but that it is a seale confirming us of our entry in the visible Church 3. The placing of the Font at the Church doore as a mysticall signe of our entry in the Church is an Antichristian ceremony of mens devising which wee disclaime 4. If Infants baptized must bee within the Church before they can be baptized how deny you to receive them to the Lords Supper when they come to age while they bee againe by your Church-oath received within the Church then are they both within the Church because they are baptized and without the Church because they are not received in by your Church-oath againe 5. If baptisme be a seale of grace to confirme the Covenant of grace to those who are within the Church that is onely a single Congregation for you deny that there be any visible Churches in the New Testament save these onely then are persons baptized persons and confirmed in the Covenant of grace onely within a single Congregation I would know if baptisme should not then be repeated and reiterated in every ones person as they come to a new Congregation for they are confirmed in the Covenant of grace by baptisme onely in one single Congregation as you teach Their second and third reason is Baptisme and all ordinances are priviledges given to the Church so it maketh not the Church but the Church is before baptisme and all ordinances the use also of baptisme is to be a seale of the Covenant now a seale is not to make a thing which was not but to confirme a thing which was Answ. 1. The Church is indeed the Church mysticall and the invisible body of Christ before baptisme but this proveth not but baptisme is a seale of our entry in the visible Church for if this be a good argument your Church-covenant which to you is an ordinance of God falleth to the grrund for persons are the true Churches of Christ before all the ordinances of Christ Ergo by your Church-covenant men doe not become Christs visible Church 2. The argument hath no feet for the ordinance of preaching the Word is a priviledge of the Church and ordinance of God yet is not the Church before the preaching of the Word for birth is not before the seed but the seed before the birth the preaching of the Word is the seed of the Church 1 Pet. 1. 23. and a meane of gathering the Church Rom. 10. 14. and it is also a priviledge of the Church for hee dealeth not so with every nation to send his Gospell to them Psal. 147. 19 20. 3. When you say that a Seale doth not make a thing that was not but confirme a thing that was while you would seeme to refute Papists who vainely teach that Sacraments doe confeâ—re grace ex opere opâ—rato by the deed done yet doe you make the Sacrament but a naked signe and take part with Arminians and Socinians whose very arguments in expresse words you use for Socinius goeth before you in this argument and so doth Smalcius follow him 〈◊〉 and sealing there is required the trying of the thing and some â—â—â—hing or document but that ceremony a baptisime and that rite though it bee â—â—ly doth nothing to the remission of sins but it doth onely shadow out and as it 〈◊〉 delineâ—ue and point forth remission of sinnes by the washing of water â—xpâ—ned in the Word of God You say Sacraments 〈◊〉 make a thing that was not but confirme a thing that was before you can have no other meaning then to deny all cansalitie and all reall exhibition of grace in the Sacraments for if a Sacrament make not a thing that was not before or if God give nâ—t and really produce conferre and exhibite grace and a stronger measure of faith and assurance of remission of sinnes at the due and right use of the Sacrament the Sacrament is a naked signe and not an exhibitive Seale But if Christ give and in the present exhibit as surely remission of sinnes as the infant is washen with water as our Divines and the Palatinate Catechise teacheth yea and the confession thereof and the Synod of Dort teacheth then by the Sacrament of Baptisme a thing is made that which it was not It is true a civill seale as I said before addeth no new lands to the owner of the Charter but if Christ by his Seales rightly and in faith used doe not onely confirme grace and pardon but also really exhibite and give grace and pardon in a further degree and a new measure of assurance to the conscience which there was not before you goe not a streas breadth from Arminians and Socinians especially seeing Episcopius Henricus Welsingius saith that remission of finnes is not sealed by
by the dominion of free-will but this is Pelagianisme and Arminianisme and Papists and Pelagians will needs examine the inclinations powers and motions of the soule which goe before the wills consent or arise in us without the wills consent from all subjection to a Law that so originall sinne may bee no sinne because as Pâ—â—agius said it is not voluntary and concupiscence when the will joyneth no consent to it is no sinne yea so the unbeleefe and ignorance of fundamentall points as they remaine in the mind shall bee no sinne 3. If this bee no sinne we are not to pray for illumination to see either the truth on the one side nor on the other and what actions wee doe according to these opinions in things not fundamentall wee doe them not with any certaintie of faith or any plerophorie but blindly or doubtingly and so sinfully which is expresly condemned Rom. 14. 13. and is expressely against that full assurance of faith that wee are to have in those very actions which in their owne nature are indifferent as is evident Rom. 14. 14. I know and am perswaded by the Lord Jesus that there is nothing uncleane of it selfe â— 5. Let every one bee fully perswaded in his owne mind 4. If they be not sinnes then are none to bee rebuked for these opinions no more then they are to bee excommunicated for them and though any erre in points not fundamentall they are not to bee rebuked yea nor to bee convinced of them by the light of the word 2. If they bee sinnes then when they are publickly prosested they must scandalize our brother but there bee no sinnes which scandalize our brother but they are susceptible and in capacitie to bee committed with obstinacie Every sinne sub ratione scandali is the subject of Church-censure Yea Iâ—m 16. 17. Every one is to bee avoyded who causeth divisions and 〈◊〉 es contrary to the doctrine which the Church hath learned of the Apostles and every one who walketh disorderly 2 Thess. 3. 11. and 〈◊〉 not the commandement of the Apostles is to bee excommunicated 〈◊〉 hee bee ashamed v. 14. but opinions contrary to the Apostles doctrine in non-fundamentalls are not fundamentalls and if they bee professed cause divisions and offences contrary to the Apostolik doctrine for many non-fundamentalls are the Apostles doctrine 3. What ever tendeth to the subversion of fundamentalls tendeâ—â—â—◠〈…〉 to the subversion of faith and so doth much truly scandalizâ—anâ— bring on damnation that Christ hath ordained to be removed out of the Church by Church-censures but erroneous opinions in points not fundamentall and in superstructures being professed and instilled in the eares and simple mindes of others tend to the subversion of fundamentalls as having connexion by just consequent with fundamentalls and doe scandalize and bring on doubtings about the foundation and so bring damnation Ergo erroneous opinions in points not fundamentall must be removed out of the Church by Church-censures The proposition is cleare he that falleth in a publicke scandalous sinne is to be delivered to Satan both for his owne sake that he be not damned himselfe but that 1 Cor. 5. 5. to the destruction of the flesh the spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord and so also for others because a little Leaven leaveneth the whole lump v. 6. The assumption is proved by dayly experience for corruption in Discipline and Government in the Church of Rome brought on corruption in Doctrine and the same did we find in the Churches of Scotland and England 4. Fundamentalls are no other thing then that which the Apostle calleth Heb. 6. 12. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the first principles of the oracles of God and ch 6. 1. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Doctrine of the Principles of Christ which are laid as foundations as ib. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 not laying the foundation againe c. Then non-fundamentalls must be such superstructures as are not the first Principles of the Oracles of God and are not the Doctrine of the Principles of Christ. But the Apostle will not have us to fluctuate and doubt as Skeptickes in a Pyâ—rhonian Vacillation and Uncertainty in these which he calleth the superstructures 1. As is evident by his words 11 Of whom we have many things to say and hard to be uttered but you are dull of hearing 12. For when for the time yee ought to be teachers yee have need that one teach you againe which be the first Principles of the Oracles of God and are become such as have neede of milke and not of strong food 13. For every one that useth milke is unskilfull in the word of righteousnesse for he is a babe 14. But strong meate belongeth to them that are of full age even those who by reason of use have their senses exercised to discerne both good and evill Chap. 6. 1. Therefore leaving the doctrine of the beginning of Christ let us goe on unto perfection not laying againe the foundation of repentance from dead workes c. Whence it is more then evidently apparent to any intelligent mind 1. That when he saith they ought to be teachers of others he cannot be thought to meane that they should teach fundamentalls onely to others because he would have them to be capable of the food of such as are stronger and have their senses exercised to discerne good and ill and will have them carried on to perction now fundamentalls are expressely the foode of babes which bâ—â— neede of milke c. 6. v. 12. and not the foode of the stronger if then they ought to teach superstructures and non-fundamentalls to others they cannot teach and exhort privately for of such he speaketh these things whereof they have no certainty of faith and which they beleeve with a reserve as ready to reject them to morrow upon second thoughts for what we teach to others those as I conceive we are oblieged to speake because we beleeve Psal. 116. 10. 2 Cor. 4. 13. and those we are to perswade because we know not with a reserve but with certainty of faith the terror of the Lord 2 Cor. 5. 11. If it be said teachers now are not oblieged to know all that they teach now to be divine truths with such a certainty of faith as Prophets and Apostles who were ledde by an infallible Spirit for our private exhorting our publick Sermons come not from a Spirit as infallible as that Spirit which spake and wrote canonick Scripture for we may erre in exhorting in Preaching in writing but the pen-men of canonick Scripture were infallible I answer the pen-men of Scripture when they did speak and write Scripture were infallible de jure de facto they could neither erre actually and by Gods word they were oblieged not to erre and in that they were freer from error then we are who now succeed them to preach and write but what God hath revealed in his word whether they be fundamentalls or superstructures doth obliege