possibly staÌ„d 1. All the ministers are made appoynted by the Bishops if therfore the Bishops be taken avvay hovv can the ministers remayne the same take avvay the correlative relation ceaseth Trew the relation ceaseth But is that externall relation unto an efficient cause any part of the substance or essence of the ministerie I had thought that the substance essence of a thing had consisted in matter forme not in such externall relations Mariages are also made as Mr. R. affirmeth by Bishops authoritie take away Bishops therfore by this reason the mariages shall not remayne the same for substance which they are now Licences for teaching school in many places for practizing of physick are given by the Bishops their officers take away the Bishops may not the same schoolmasters physitians yet stil remayn for substaÌ„ce that were before Fie upon sophistrie 2. Take avvay the prelacie sayth Mr. R. and hovv can such a ministerie continue vvherof one part viz ruling shall bee usurped by the prelat As if when once that power is taken from the minister it now apperteyned to the substance of his ministery by whome it were usurped whether he that possessed it were a Byshop or a high commissioner or of some other place that which is without a thing may be changed without any substantiall change of the thing it self else how can Mr. R. say that eyther the function of masspreists or of Popish Byshops doe remaine still in England as of olde for substance when ther is so great an alteration in that supreme power from whence of olde they were derived The office of a king also it remayneth the same for substance now that it was in time of poperie for the substantiall parts of it yet one part therof was in those times usurped possessed by the pope is now restored to the crowne viz power over ecclesiasticall persons in ecclesiasticall causes It cannot therfore be denied but by the same reasoÌ„ the parochial ministery should abide the same for substance that now it is thovgh that part which is now usurped by Byshops should be restored againe So that Bishops being removed whether that power of ruling should be translated unto some other officers or setled in the ministers as it ought Mr. R. argument hath by neyther way any waight or force at all 3. Take avvay sayth he the provinc diocesan churches prelats the parochiall churches ministers as partes of them must fall also As partes of them in deed they must of necessitie fall that is they must cease to be partes of them but it doeth not therfore follow that any thing of their internall substance should fall The nationall church of England so the provincial diocesan did once stand members or partes of the oecumenicall papall church of Rome now that is removed out of England so farr at least that this nationall church is not subiect unto Rome nor dependant on it or conteyned in it as a part in a wholl yet Mr. R. will say that the same diocesan provinciall nationall church remayneth for substance that was before Why doeth he not then see that parochiall churches may remayn the same for substance though diocesses and provinces did follow the other 4. He reckoneth up sundry corruptions idoll preists crosse surplice vvith such vanities mixture of profane vvith the godly and asketh if it be possible that the prelacie beeing abolished such things should remayne as novv I answer 1. It is possible Ther are more meanes of disorder corruption then one Neyther can any such necessarie coÌ„junction be shewed betwixt the prelacie these abuses but that it is possible to seperat one from the other Yet 2. If they should all be abolished with the prelacie no reasonable man wil therfor say that the substance of parochial churches should be therin chaÌ„ged If praejudice could be set apart the shallownesse of this the former reasons could not be hid from the eyes of him that framed them TO a mayn obiection by Mr. R. urged viz that all parochiall ministers are subiect unto the spirituall iurisdiction of prelats answer was given first that so are privat christians subiect unto the same jurisdictâ—â— not onely in their church actions which they performe with others in publick but also for personall private opinions behaviours this subiection therfore doeth no more hinder coÌ„munion with the one then with the other in things that are good To which answer Mr. R. replieth nothing but referreth unto his former book where as good as nothing is to be found If there had bene a fit answer to be given wee should certainly eyther haue had it repeated heere for of repetition Mr. R. is not so nice or at least the page quoted where wee might haue found it But in deed it is not possible but if meere subiection to Bishops bee in it self a sufficient barr against publick communion it must also be held sufficieÌ„t against such privat in for which a man is also subiect The second answer unto the forenamed obiection was that the greatest part of the prelats iurisdiction is from the king derived unto those that doe exercise the same and therfore must of necessitie be a civill power such as the king might as well performe by other civill officers as it is in the high commission The lawes of the land doe so esteeme it c. In this Mr. R. insisteth much as thinking no small advantage to be given him therfore requireth of the reader wel to observe what heere is sayd on both sides In which request I ioigne with him so that it be marked withall that I doe not undertake to justifie the Byshops wholl state much lesse their proceedings but onely so far that some subiection unto some of their authoritie is not simply unlawfull Mr. R. plea after his praeamble ariseth unto these 3 defenses 1. The lavves doe no vvhere derive from the kings civill authoritie the povver of the Bishops spiritual administratioÌ„s but doe onely make the king an establisher up holder civilly of this povver 2. Though the lavves of the laÌ„d did esteeme this iurisdiction civill yet it doeth not follovv that therfore it is such in deed because they misesteeme diverse things 3. That the prelats iurisdiction is not civile as appeareth playnly by 5 reasons of him alledged For the first of these I appeal 1. To the oth of the clergie to the king established by a statut law in the reign of king Henry 8. exstaÌ„t in Mr. Fox p. 961. Where the Byshop sweareth that he knovvledgeth himself to hold his Bishoprick of the king onely 2. To the act that was then made for the supremacie wherin all iurisdictions belonging to the title of head of the church in EnglaÌ„d are giveÌ„ to the king as it is in the same book p. 963.3 I appeal to the 5. Book of Sr Edward Cooks reportes where he sheweth out of
not unto those exercises of religion where none are present but of their voluntary mind He should haue given a mad answer that being desired to hear Mr. Perkins should haue denied upon this ground because that parish church where he onely taught for a member of it a long time he was not was gathered by constreynt when none came to hear him by any constreynt of that parrish few or none to speak of were present By all which we see that this argument though framed thus as Mr. R. would haue it concludeth nothing against al publick communion in England 3. For that which I by the way onely remembred that he himself was once at a sermon in that assembly since he professed separation as he had bene at many of Mr. Perkinses before he answereth it vvas neyther pertinently nor truly obiected because at that time he disputed onely for seperation but had not professed it Practised it in deed he had not in that setled manner which since he hath but by report of some that had speach with him he declared then to one of his acquaintāce that he had been amōgest some company of the seperation before his comming to Camb exercising amongest them had renounced his former ministery That is enough for the truth of what was affirmed The pertinencie of it consisteth in this that he having so often so lately been at that exercise of Mr. Perkins his successors cannot but know that there was no cōstreynt nor service-book that had any place or part in it It is pertinent also by the way to know whether Mr. R. doeth repent him for hearing Mr. Perkins or whether he doeth reckon it among his offences against God The historicall narration which upon this occasion he interposeth I passe over as remote from the argument in hand 4. He acknowledgeth that for the very use of a set forme of prayer he will not seperate from a true church in things lawfull But many differences he findeth betwixt the set formes of other churches that which is used in England even so many as make the service-book a hatefull Idol advanced above all that is called God The temper of which speach I leaue to be considered of himself others My argument is granted viz that a set forme of prayer in it self is not a sufficient cause of denijng all publick communion Let the manner of imposing be as hatefull as Mr. R. would make it yet in those actions where it is not used nor yet imposed as in that exercise of Mr. Perkins with other like that infection is conveyed by it I cannot possibly conceyve I desire a freind to hear with me a sermon preached by a godly man where he shall neyther see nor hear any thing else beside the sermon such prayers as belong unto it wil any sense allow him to answer no I dare not ther is an idol imposed under the name of service Surely I should think he wanted sleep that would speak so idly 5. For the state of Geneva whose lawes doe require church communion of all the inhabitants of that citie he seeketh as before to find some differences betwixt that England but granteth in the mean time that if a state for politick respects expell out of their territories such as will not ioign in church communion that kind of compulsion doeth not make their communion unlawfull Meer injunction of law therfore though it be generall for all doeth not make all publick communiō unlawfull Especially in such actions where it is manifest that none doe communicate but voluntarily This is all that I mainteyned Which beeing granted by Mr. R. with some other of my demands and the rest opposed with so slender defences as we haue now shewed I doe not find fault with the title of his writing as he doeth with mine but acknowledge it to be a true manumission that is a setting free or a free grant of what was by me propounded for other usuall meaning of that title I doe not understand NOw though I haue not undertaken to give answer unto every thing that Mr. R. may obiect against the state of our assemblies and therfore might without praeiudice neglect that addition which he hath annexed unto his answer yet least any should think some unanswerable reasons to be conteyned in the same maintenance of his separation I will breifly plainly declare what I think in all the particulars of it He undertakes to set downe what thinges are of absolute necessitie for a true ordinary church-officer minister of Christ reducing the same unto 4 heads a true visible church a fit person a lawfull office and a right calling About the formost of these he moveth 4 quaestions 1. Hovv the ministers of England can be true ministers not being made ordeyned such in to any particular church I ans making ordeyning are two thinges he may be a minister that is not formally ordeyned in the church There is a making of ministers in to particular churches in England when they are called in to such churches 2. Hovv many vvhich of the parrish churches consist of a people separated out from the vvorld How many such ther are in England I cannot tell because I haue no sufficient intelligence wherby to informe my self therin But divers assemblies ther are well knowen to such as are not willfully ignorant which are so far at the least seperated from the world as is of absolute necessitie to the being of a true church Perfect seperation is not of that nature As for the mixture in dioces c. It is as formerly hath been shewed a civil combination 3. Hovv the true forme of a church can be found in any parrish church of the land vvhich is not any particular act disposition or relation but as he conceaveth a publick orderly covenant union of a particular assembly by vvhich it hath in it self entire right to Christ to all the meanes of enjoying him Wherin 1. It is to be observed that it is not a very easy thing to discerne of this forme of a church for this man that hath labored so long about the search of it that with more abilities helpes then ordinary christians can atteyne unto yet speaketh something doubtfully or fearfully concerning the matter as I conceave it can be no other then this Me thinke then that charitie should teach him others more sparingly to censure condemne those assemblies which doe not practise this forme so orderly as they should seeing difficultie of discerning a duty doeth alway lessen the fault of him that omitteth it 2. That which now he giveth for his opinion concerning this form hath a manifest contradiction in it therfore cannot be right He sayth that this forme is no particular act disposition or relation yet it is a publick orderly covenant union A covenant union must be taken eyther for the act of covenanting uniting then
orders of the diocessan not knowing any evill in it whether such a fault if it bee a fault doeth pollute that communion with him which otherwise is lawfull that it doeth not Mr. R. seemeth to witnesse in his former treatise p. 15. For this he referreth the reader unto that answer which he gave to the former demand and so doe I to the refutatiō of it Wheras he addeth that his testimonie is misaplied because his meaning was that a humaine infirmitie about an externall ordinance doeth not hinder from communion in actions performed meerely by personall grace I answer that it is possible for a man which hath such orders to performe the actions of prayer preaching even in a publick place meerly by vertue of the personal grace gifts which God hath endued him with all Especially this man of whom heere we speak who yet hath no speciall state or reference by office unto those that communicate with him in the word prayer The reason therfore is one and the same in this case that which Mr. R. speaketh of THe fift quaestion was of a man that being desired so chosen by some assembly wherin there are many fearing God apparently he taketh a pastoral charge of them hauing the Byshops patrons admission but cheifly grounding his calling upon the peoples choyse and that he doe nothing but the same he did before besides the administration of the sacraments to such as are in charitie discretion to bee esteemed worthy what hindereth from communion heer To this a four fould answer is given in shew though none in deed 1. Hee denieth an assembly gathered consisting of many fearing God many vvithout the fear of God to bee a lavvfull church assemblie hauing right in communion to call enjoy a Pastor But the question was made of an assembly wherin are many fearing God apparently without his supplie of many not fearing God though with them ther may be mingled some which give not such apparent evidence of Gods grace to be in them but rather praesumptions of the contrarie Will Mr. R denie the title of a true church unto all assemblies that haue some such amongest them then must hee condemne most rashly not onely a multitude of praesent churches Dutch Frēch but those of Corinth Galatia Pergamus Thyatira Sardis Laodicea also of which the Apostles Christ him self gave other judgement 2. He telleth us that none can truely take a pastoral charge in the Parish assemblies because he cannot governe or rule the flock But first a man may truely take upon him that which he cannot fully in every part performe or fullfill desiring endeavoring so farr as his knowledge abilitie extendeth Otherwise no high Preist in Israel from the time of Salomon unto the time of Hezekia did truely take upon them the charge of a high preist because none did celebrat the passouer which was a principall sacrament in such sort as was writtē 2. Cron. 30.5.26 Nor keepe the feast of tabernacles in a far lōger time Nehem. 8.17 Nor did any king al that time truly take upon him the charge or office of a king because none did reforme things as he ought If any difference bee their sinne was greater that might haue doē their duty would not then theirs that would cannot Secondly the meere want of performing one part of the charge doeth not hinder but that a man may well communicat in the other parts which are well undertaken discharged also 3. He addeth that the church of Englād acknovvledgeth no such calling as is cheifly grounded on the peoples choyce Such private intendimēts underhand professions of particular persons in secret are cloaks of shame craftinesse like unto disguised familisme And if any ministerie bee so grovnded it is not the ministerie of the church of England But what that church of England alloweth which he understandeth by this title it maketh nothing to the quaestion It is enough if such a calling bee in some assemblies of England Yet for a minister to lay the cheif ground of his calling upon the peoples choice so that he haue withall those formallities required I know no law in England that doeth forbid or disallow it Ther is therfore no necessitie for him that doeth so to speak of it in secret onely hee may professe it in the pulpit as many haue been knowen to doe yet bee a minister of a church established by the law of England Neyther is that after consent by acceptance submission which Mr. R. speaketh of so slight a matter for this purpose as he would make it For as in wedlock the after consent of parents or parties doeth often make that a lawfull state of mariage which before without that was none in governement acceptance submission doeth make him a king which before was a tyrant though in their nature these actions bee rather consequences then causes of that calling so is it betwixt minister people All the wind that he spendeth therfore in this answer is but a venting of his praejudiciall passions The quaestion it self he secretly granteth in making a ministerie grounded on the peoples choyce to bee no ministerie of the church of England insinuating therby that with such a ministerie he cannot say but communion is lawfull Now that ther is such a ministerie to be found in England as it is manifest in diverse places so he him self doeth as much as witnesse it in the next page where he affirmeth that in sundry places the people are ready to suffer persecution with their ministers For if the lifting up of a hand in tokē of consent be a choosing a cōsent declared by such fruights must needes implie no lesse 4. He excepteth against baptizing of all infants borne in the Parish But to absteine from by controversies it shall suffice for that that other churches doe extend the use of that sacrament to as great largenes as England doeth with whome not withstanding Mr. R. wil not denie all communion publick The 6 quaestion was of a deprived silenced minister why a man should not hear him when he preacheth Mr. R. after a censorious note or two passed upon such ministers giveth for answer that such a man remayning still a minister of the church of England preaching by that calling cannot bee communicated vvith vvithout submission unto and upholding of the prelats antichristian authoritie vvhich in that vvork hee exerciseth Which is a conceyt past commune apprehension That hee which by the prelat the prelats cannons all that his authoritie can make is forbidden to preach often times excommunicated also by him and all this for witnessing against his usurped authoritie should in performing that duty which also he did law fully before he receyved any commission from any prelat not onely exercise the prelats authoritie but so exercise it that no christian man may bee present therat without actuall submission to antichristian
strictest sense a foundation of their office but whether their office doeth so conteyne that as a part of it as that whosoever preacheth with in their diocesse must needes execute a part of their office or power A Second assertion wherof use was made in the manuduction was preaching is no naturall or necessarie part of the parochiall ministers office Concerning this sentence Mr. R. complayneth first that it was by me unjustly reproched secondly that my inference upon it is of no force Reproch it I did not but so reprove it as it was worthy wondering much at the shamelessnesse of it Now I doe much lesse merveyl at it then I did before seeing that which he heere affirmeth of the parochiall minister he doeth as boldly affirme of all ministers true pastors viz preaching is not the pastors office eyther main or mean I doe rather merveyl that he should cast that upon parochiall ministers for a crime which he maketh to be the case of all true pastors Yet for the reproof I used it was deserved I saye it was an intemperat speech proceeding from an impotent sicknesse of mind that is an unreasodable assertion arising out of passion or perturbation My reason annexed was because he can find marijng churching burijng among the naturall or necessarie parts of this ministrie things not mentioned in the ordination but cannot find preaching any part though it be expressely mētioned that as a mayn part Whoe doeth not see that such partiall dealing doeth proceed from passion the force of this argument thus couched in that comparison Mr. R. observing wil take no knowledge of but frameth another which he thought he could answer and simply proproundeth my reason to bee that preaching the word is expresly mentioned in the ordination therfore a naturall necessarie part of the parochiall ministers office Though this I neyther sayd nor meant yet if it bee rightly understood viz that preaching of the word is mentioned as the principall work to which he is ordeyned the argument is good sound the objections which Mr. R. hath brought against it are but as the raising of a litle dust unto the clearenes of a shining light It is mentioned also in the ordination of a maspreist But is not mentioned as the cheif work wherunto he is concecrated sacrifizing for quick dead is the maine Yet according to the intention of those which first framed that forme of ordination it is manifestly the office of him that is so ordeyned to preach the word of God So also is ministring the discipline of Christ as the Lord hath commanded expresly mentioned So is it also a part of his office though he be not now permitted to performe it according as he should The Bishop also expressely bids his ordeyned one receive the H. Ghost doeth he therfore so receyve it most trifling Is this the quaestion now whether the ordeyned one receyveth every thing that he is bidden receyve or doe those words any ways import an office of such receyving The greatest part of the ministers vvant abilitie of preaching therfore it cannot be a naturall or necessarie part of their office So did the greatest part of the preists levites in the days of Ieremie the other prophets was it therfor no naturall or necessarie part of their office But the publique lavves doe approve of their inabilitie to preach by appointing homilies to be read by them It is a publick slander to say so when as in the very preface to those homilies the appointers of them doe declare that their intent was not to approve such unsufficiencie but to make some kind of supplie for that which was wanting in such men toward the performance of their office and that for a time onely while better provision might be made Wherby also it is manifest that it is not law but pretense abuse of law that continnueth such blots in so many assemblies This of the speach reproved now for the inference deduced out of it Which was that if preaching be no naturall part of such a ministers office then he in preaching doeth not exercise any power receyved from the prelat neyther doeth he that cōmunicates with him in that action of preaching therby communicat with him in any corrupt office of prelacie or preisthood receyved from it Wherunto Mr. R. answereth that though it bee not a naturall necessarie part or vvork of his office yet is it a casuall arbitrary part or vvork vvhich vvhen it is doen proceedeth from the same povver vvith those that are naturall that is from the authoritie of the prelate But whoe doeth not see how casuall arbitrarie the answers of this man are Sometime preaching is no office of the ministers neither main nor mean as we heard before sometime it is a part but not naturall or necessarie And where did he learn I wonder to distinguish the parts of any thing into naturall preternaturall necessarie casuall that which is preter-naturall to a wholl is no part of it neyther is ther any part which is not in some degree necessarie The duety of preaching may bee a naturall necessarie part of the ministers office though the work of it be not so necessarily urged as the office doeth require That the work also is made no more necessarie it ariseth not from the nature of the office but from the corruption of the officers A Third assertion of Mr. R. applied unto the former purpose was that the root beeing plucked up the branch cannot survive for the prelacie being plucked up the parochiall ministerie might stand stil in al the substantiall parts of it as reason wil teach any man that considereth without passion and experience also sheweth in many parts of Germanie Therfor the parochial ministerie can bee no proper branch of the prelacie For answer heerunto first he denieth merveyleth that I vvould affirme the same parochiall office povver of ministerie to remaine in any churches of Germanie that vvas in use vvhen prelats vvere there in time of poperie vvhich vvas mas-preisthood But 1. It was not affirmed that the ministerie there doeth remaine the same with that which was there before but the same for substance with that which is Englād though we haue prelats they haue none The truth of which is evident unto all that haue any knowledge of the state of those churches 2. If the removing of the masse the reference of preisthood unto it doeth necessarily inferr a change of the ministeriall function as this answer importeth why then doth Mr. R. so much forget himself in affirming that the office of a masse preist of a parochial minister is one the same And for the poynt the reasons by Mr. R. alledged to prove that the parochial ministerie cannot stand in all the substantiall parts of it if the prelacie be taken away are so frivolous voyd of substance that if passion praejudice be taken away they cannot
ordering of the church in her publike affaires in vvhich respect he affirmeth all in the parrish assemblies to be lavvlesse persons if they be not under the prelates jurisdiction spirituall Wherto I answer 1. That such good governmēt as he granteth these mē personally civilly generally to be ruled lawfully religiously by for all this he denieth not is more then sufficient to remove from them that imputation of lawlesse inordinate walkers which he without law or limit had cast upon them And for this purpose were those 1 2 answers opposed Neyther yet can it be with any truth affirmed that in that strict acception of government the former imputation doeth cleave unto all in all assemblies Are there none in any assemblies that are any way in any measure guided ordered by their ministers in publique affaires what not in those prayers wherin they goe before the people and direct them in their supplicatiōs by a special gift of prayer is there no guidance ordering by the preaching of the word surely this accusatiō may in no sense be excused frō overlashing Lastly it is alledged that this not beeing subiect to government is misapplied by me unto ministers vvhē he spake it of the people as is evidēt by his reply Wheras indeed the cōtrarie may better be gathered out of the replie For therin p. 30. he speaketh first in general termes excluding none after doeth take in the ministers in special expressely naming them no lesse thē 6 times in that one side of a leaf The truth is he findeth himself touched not with a touch of wit as he termeth it but with a glance of his owne toung and therfore hath now to help that changed the terme of spirituall government into another of the povver of Christ for the censures and because he doeth not acknowledge himself to be under any externall spiritual government yet under the power of censures he is therfore the want of this in ministers people he choseth now to impute for a lawlesse inordinate state p. 19 As if this power of censuring were such a thing as every want therof were a sufficient cause of so deepe a censure and this were not rather an audacious abusive strayning of the apostles phraze applijng that unto most godly men which he spake of the scandalous Or as if all power of censuring in any degree were wanting because the liberty of proceeding is in a great part restreyned But thus much for this obiection and so for the justification of some publike communion to be lawful in England THese thinges hitherto discussed were all that I could or can yet find in M. R. book directly concluding against al publick communion Yet because ther be 2 other obiections which by some might be thought to perteyne unto the same purpose viz that all are urged to communion by penall statutes and that a set forme of prayer is appointed I added therfore concerning them this answer following What fault soever may be found with them they lie not so in the way as that they should hinder from all communiō publick seeing there are many exercises of religion wherin none are present by constraint where the service book doeth not so much as appear As by name Mr. Perkins his exercise was where Mr. R. hath often been and at whose successors he hath once been since he professed seperation wherof I am perswaded also he doeth not yet repent Further to reason about them is beside the purpose of my writing and in deed needlesse seeing the accuser hath answered himself in the one p. 9. Whē he grāteth that the reformed churches generally use a stint forme of prayer with whō yet he wil not refuse al publick cōmunion make like answer to the other out of the lawes of Geneva where he shall find like strictnesse to be used toward all the inhabitants of that citie though he hath unadvisedly denied it in his so large assertion of our assemblies difference therin from all true churches in the world This answer of mine I was forced to repeat that the reader may see how Mr. R. being putt as it seemeth to hard shifts hath miserablie mangled the same without giving any answer directly to the purpose 1. He bringeth in my first answer thus he neyther purposeth nor thinks it needfull to deal about these thinges seeing there are many exercises of religion vvhere none are present by constraynt c. Was this my answer why doeth he leave out that wherin the mayn quaestion consisteth wherupon all that followeth dependeth viz that those things doe not hinder from al communion publick For this that reason was brought which he mentioneth and not for that wherunto he pleaseth to applie it Great distance ther was in my writing betwixt those words which he patcheth together Neyther was it my saying that I had no purpose to deal about those thinges at all but not further then I had answered before this mangling patching confoundeth all 2. He chargeth me with changing the state of the question after my evill custome vvhich is not sayth he about mens being present by constreynt at the exercises of religion but of churches gathered by constreynt of al the profane parishioners vvith the other handfull But what goodnesse is in this custome to passe by the wholl quaestion in hand and then to move controversie about other matters the state of our quaestion thorougout this dispute is whether all publick communiō in the parish assemblies of England be unlawfull or no the obiection in this place was that all are urged to communion by penall statutes For answer of which I sayd that ther be many exercises of religion publick where none are present by vertue of such constreynt therfore such constreynt could not hinder from all communion though it might from some Could any thing be more direct presse to the matter in hād Take we in also that which he sayth our quaestion is about that churches are gathered by constreynt of all the profane parshioners vvith the other handfull what advantage hath he by it nothing at all but onely that his charirie moderation is therby made knowen For 1. There be many parrishes in England which are but a handfull in all diverse of them consisting onely of a familie two or three having none in them that are profane Diverse also there are more populous which haue more then a handfull of such in them as no holy man having bridle of his tongue can cal profane 2. Though lawes doe urge unto such communion yet it cannot be reasōably gathered that al which practise accordingly are cōstreyned unto it except Mr. R. will say that all men which live orderly with their wives children absteyne from murder treason such like offences doe it by constreynt because lawes doe require urge the same under great paynes 3 Though all were gathered into churches by constreynt yet that constreynt apperteyneth
it is an act or for the state arising from that act of obligation which is nothing else but the relation those persons obliged haue one to another so it is a relation or else for the thing to which they are obliged or the signe therof so it may be eyther an act or a disposition or some other good All these significations of the word covenant I find in scripture use of speach any other beside these I doe not understand If Mr. R. had another meaning he should haue doen well to haue expressed it better the poynt especially being of such momēt The things covenanted or the signe he cannot meane for these are not constantly resydeing in the vvhole all the parts therof which is a condition of this forme by him required some act or relation therfore he must needs understand gainsaying one part of the sentence by the other 3. The truth is this forme in strict accurate meaning must needs be some relation by Mr. R. his owne reason For nothing beside a relation can possiblie resyde actually one the same and at all times in a whole companie of men and in all the parts of that companie 4. Wheras he calleth this forme an orderly covenant his words are doubtfull at the least For there be many degrees of orderly proceeding in businesses publick as wel as private and every circumstance of order doeth not apperteyne as absolutely necessary to the constituting forme of a true church Now for the declaring of the trueth concerning this matter I propound to be considered this breif demonstration A visible church must not be considered as a simple effect arising of meer matter forme as Mr. R doeth speak of it But as a whole or compound consisting of partes or members so that the members must conteyne in themselves all the essentiall both matter forme also which make the wholle by compacting or uniting themselves in one Christian men being the called of God haue in them both matter forme essentiall for making of a visible church else could they not giue essence or being to the church for nothing can give that which it hath not Now these members combining themselves into one body as they are such doe make or rather are actually a true visible church one integrall body not continued but by aggregation which integral church as it is such hath for the constituting forme that relation which ariseth out of the combination of all the members and so differeth not essentially from all the members compacted but onely in reasō Further this integral body for the wel being of it in exercising those operations which belong unto it wherunto it serveth must become as we say organicall having members of diverse rankes some as head mouth eyes the pastor teachers elders some as hāds the deacons helpers wherupon ariseth another relation forme of accidental perfection in state of government which is cōplete or incomplete freely exercising the power granted by Christ to his church or else restreyned or defective therin Out of all this my answer is that the essentiall forme of a visible church is the covenant of God or true fayth made visible by profession the notes markes wherof are the word sacraments rightly administred receyved with fruights of obedience The integral constituting forme is that state relation or reference which a congregation of such professors haue one to another by vertue of their setled combination the note or mark wherof is their usuall assembling into one place watching one over another The organicall active forme is that state of order wherin officers people stand one to the other the note of which is direction submission Now to the poynt so many parrish assemblies of England as haue any competent number of good christians in them united together for to worship God ordinarily in one societie so many have essentiall integrall forme of a visible church and all they have entyre right to Christ to all the meanes of enioying him howsoever they are defective in the puritie of their combinatiō in the complete free exercising of their power The 4 and last quaestion propounded by Mr. R. concerning the church is hovv parrish assemblies being partes of diocesan false churches can any more be reputed true churches then could a particular Ievvish synagogue be so reputed vvhich should haue made it self an entyre independēt body in respect of the nationall church temple To which I answer that ther is not the like reason For parrish assemblies are not spirituall parts of a diocesan spirituall church but entyre spirituall bodies though civilly combined into a diocesan government Neyther is the principall worship performed at the cathedrall church as it was in the temple but in the parrish assemblies themselves In the second head ther is but one quaestiō moved that is vvhether a mā fitted invvardly called to the ministery being persvvaded in his heart that a lavvfvll outvvard calling vvithout sin in the enterance continuāce can not be had in the church of England vvhether such a man be not bound in conscience to seek out procure another church c. I ans 1. That inward calling is not ordinarily to be built upon without some outward approbation doeth confirme it 2. A lawfull outward calling is had enioyed in many churches of England 3. He that cannot enter in one place without sin yet hath his heart so fully set unto the ministery that he cannot haue peace without that function ought as I think to take any good occasion of removing into some other place of more freedome To the demands in the 3 4 head I haue answered before that preaching is necessarily required by the natur of a ministers office in England some ruling is exercised by those that make conscience of their duty and unto this function men are not called meerely by the prelat These 4 conditions therfore so farr as they are of absolute necessitie for a true ordinary minister of Christ are manifestly to be found in many assemblies of England Which also Mr. R. in a manner granteth in confessing that there are to be found in the parochiall ministery men apt to teach unreproveable in conversation having an invvard calling from God that is a holy disposition desire to administer the gospell of Christ to the glory of God furtherance of mās salvation For this is the 2. condition which he acknowledgeth to be found in the parochial ministery And can any charitable aequall minde receyve into it self this thought that so many mē of so good knowledg syncere conscience should be so far forsaken of God all the time of their life and that one generatiō after another as not onely to cōtinue in Babilon as members of Antichrist but to bow downe ordinarily give spiritual honour to so many hatefull idols exalted above all that is called God as these men doe telus of in the English assemblies or if Mr. R. did inwardly beleeve that they lived in such continuall practise of idolatrie as he doeth in words accuse them of would he account them unreproveable men in their conversation without any exception annexed I say no more but God grant me that comfort which many of them haue had in their unreproveablenes and more to Mr. R. then he can possiblie finde in such kind of reproving or rather slandering of them Amen Sec. 1. Manumis p. 3. Publicus quasi populicus S. 2. Sec. 3. Sec. 4. Pag. 7. Sec. 5. Sec. 6. Sec. 7. Sec. 8. Sec. 9. Dan. 2. Pag. 5. Sect. 10. Sect. 13. Sec. 12.