from the Jayler Acts 16. He came trembling and fell downe before Paul and Silas and said Sirs or Lords or masters what must I do to be saved therefore it is lawfull for the ministers of Christ now to be called sirs or masters and to receive such titles or respects which are due to their ministeriall place and honourable calling The Argument was not then so fully and largely given but to this effect Mr Bourn was pressing to prove this truth But James Nayler like the deafe Adder turned away his eare and would not answer and according to his practice when he was not able to answer an argument Mr Bourn and Mr Billingsley stood in the reading seat and James Nayler was in a seat neer Mr Major a good distance from the reading seate looked aside and spake at randome to the people in a bragging vapouring manner what he could doe and while we were pressing him to answer we did see Mr Major and some other nere him going forth of their seats and Nayler and others following and so the Disputation ended abruptly But if any understanding Christian who is not byassed by misinformation of his judgement consider these Arguments they are sufficient to prove that honourable respect that is due to the ministers of Christ not that Christs ministers should ambitiously seeke after honours or honourable titles for that Christ forbids and that Gods faithfull Embassadours affect not endeavour not But yet when false teachers seeke to disgrace and prophane persons with their wicked plots and designes to dishonour us and our honourable ministeriall calling we are bound in conscience with St Paul to magnifie our office and to vindicate our selves from such wicked practises of erring Quakers and of prophane ungodly malicious men who neglect and contemne the Ordinances of Jesus Christ Thus as neer as I can remember out of my notes taken and what I could learn of others I have given a just and true relation of that Dispute at Chesterfield if it were worthy of that name being a wrangling by that man who had not artificiallie scarce naturall order of reasoning but like a boisterous railing fellow who by loud out-cries little or nothing to the purpose sought to deceive the people A witty honest Gentleman who was present at the Dispute asked his name and one told him his name was James Nayler to whom as I was informed he replyed certainly his name should no more be called James Nayler but James Rayler for said he I never heard a more bawling railing reviling fellow talke or words to that purpose The Lord give him repentance if it be his will I have said sufficient to the Question to prove the lawfulnesse of giving honour to Christs Ministers That it is lawfull to give hanour Now I shall only add a few Arguments to prove the lawfulnesse yea duty of giving outward honour as well as inward honour to Magistrates and others according to their place and dignity whatsoever these Quakers gatrulate to the contrary It is lawfull to give the title of Lord and Lady and the like and to declare our due respect by outward testimonies of the honour and due regard we doe owe unto them as to superiours Iames Nuyler It is true James Nayler being examined upon an indictment of blasphemy against him at the Sessions at Appleby in January 1652. See the briefe reply to some part of a scurrilous and lying pamphlet called Sauls errand to Damascus printed 1653. kept on his hat before the Bench and when Justice Pearson one of the Justices commanded to put off their hats James Nayler answered I doe it not in contempt of authority And he being asked againe by Colonell Briggs If hee were in the Parliament House wouldest thou keep it on To whom James answered if God should keep me in the same mind I am now in I should Then Colonell Briggs replied I knew thou wouldest contemne authority The same hath been the practice of divers other of the seduced seducing Quakers before the honourable Justices of the Peace in severall Countries And Naylers pretence of giving honour inwardly when they refuse to give any outward civill respect what is it but pharisaicall dissimulation instead of sincere humility and obedience or duty to those whom the Lord hath set over us in power and authority for his glory and the good of his people For shall we not judge the tree by its fruits But let me evidence duty a little in this respect Argument 1 1. Those who by Gods Ordinance are set in place above others in Gods stead for the peoples good they are to have honour given to them above others to be declared outwardly as well as setled inwardly in the hearts of men But Magistrates supreme and inferiour Judges and Justices and such as are of higher or lower place and power they are by Gods Ordinance set in place above others in Gods stead for the peoples good Therefore they are to have honor given unto them above others to be declared outwardly as well as setled inwardly in the hearts of men The major or first proposition is most agreeable to reason and order even in nature it selfe The herbes and grasse of the field which are inferiour and have but a vegetive life they doe service and give a kind of obedience in Gods Ordinance for the nourishment and service of the beasts and cattell which are superiour in nature and have besides a vegetive or growing life a life of sence also which is more excellent Againe these brute creatures which have only the vegetive and sensitive life they are inferiour unto and doe service and yield obedience unto man which is a more noble creature superiour to the other as having not only a vegetive and sensitive but also a rationall life and more excelling inferiour creatures and man hath yet the great God and Creator of heaven and earth above him to whom he doth owe honour and service both in soule and body Rom. 12.1 Thus in order of nature and thus in order of government the Comm-wealths and governments of Nations there is and ought to be order of superiour and inferiour 1 Cor. 14.33 for as in the Churches of the Saints so in Common-wealths God is not the Author of Confusion but of peace and good order in all And so an orderly respect is to be had to every superiour according to their place and power The Apostle Paul giveth evidence to this at full Rom. 13.1 c. Let every soule be subject unto the higher powers for there is no power but of God and the powers that be ordained of God they are Gods Ordinance and hee is the Minister of God to thee for good For this cause pay you tribute also for they are Gods ministers attending continually upon this very thing And hence he concludes render therefore to all their dues tribute to whom tribute custome to whom custome feare to whom feare honour to whom honour Thus honour is a
due as well as tribute or custome or any other service I might call in the Apostle Peter to witness the same 1 Pet. 2.13 14 17. but I refer the Reader to the Scripture it self these testifie an honor due to our superiours And for the minor or second proposition That magistrates supreme or inferiour are Gods Ordinance set and approved by God for government above others the places alledged might suffice but if you read Exod. 18.21 23. when Jethro Moses Father in law gave him that good counsell to provide out of all the people able men such as feare God men of truth hating covetousnesse and to place them over them to be Rulers of thousands of hundreds of fifties and of tens And if thou doe this thing and God command thee so then shalt thou be able to endure and this people shall goe to their place in peace And Moses did so and God himselfe doth approve of this order of government of superiours and inferiours and giveth Moses order to gather to God seventy Elders and the Lord taketh of the Spirit of government that was upon Moses and gave it to the seventy Elders as you may read Numb 11.16 17 25. Thus are Governours over the people of Gods owne ordination as superiours and so a higher honour and respect is due unto them Argument 2 Againe that outward manifestation of honour and those titles of honour which have been given by holy men in Scripture to Princes Magistrates and Judges and others according to their places and dignities which are not reproved by Gods Spirit that may lawfully bee given now to Princes to Judges Magistrates Governours and others according to their places and dignities But outward manifestation of honour and honourable titles have been given by holy men in Scripture to Princes Judges and Magistrates and others according to their place and dignities therefore they may be given now to such without sinne yea it is our duties so to doe Psal 82.16 Doth not the Scripture call them Gods as in Gods stead And to evidence both propositions Example 1 I shall give you severall examples If we read that place Numb 11.28 when the Spirit of God rested upon Eldad and Medad in the campe Joshua in his zeale speaks to Moses to forbid them and cals him Lord and Joshua said my Lord Moses forbid them he giveth him an honourable title my Lord Moses And did not wise Abigal call David Lord when he was comming with his Souldiers to destroy churlish Nabal for his ingratitude 1 Sam. 25 24 25 c. Yea divers times in that Chapter she giveth David the honourable title of Lord. And did not good David cry after King Saul and giveth him this honourable title my Lord the King 1 Sam. 24.8 And doth he not then give outward reverence to Saul to witnesse his honorable respects to Saul as to his superiour in place and power the text saith David stooped with his face to the earth and bowed himselfe This is far unlike Naylers and his quaking companions carriage even to Princes Magistrates and Judges and Justices of the peace to stand with their hats on their heads and to speak to them in an irreverent manner thou man or thee man who sittest in the place of judgement do this or that as some of them have said and done May I not say the same of Abner who as David testifieth was a Prince and a great man in Israel yet when he came to David he gave him titles of honour I will goe saith he and gather all Israel unto my Lord the King 2 Sam. 3.21 What need I tell you of that great Prophet of God Elijah doth he not call Ahab Obadiahs Lord goe tell thy Lord behold Elijah is here 1 Kin. 18.14 Though Ahab was a wicked man yet hee doth not take from him his title of honour And doth not the Spirit of God give the title of Lord to that noble man on whose hand the King leaned 2 Kin. 7.2 What need I tell you that in the New Testament the blessed Evangelist Luke in that his history of the Gospell which he did write to Theophilus he giveth him that honourable title most excellent Theophilus Luke 1.3 a title of great honour and high esteem given to Theophilus And blessed Paul calleth Festus the Governour of that Province noble Festus Acts 26.25 27. And in the same Chapter when he was before King Agrippa to answer for himselfe he doth not in a proud or blind ignorant sottish manner call Agrippa thou man or thee man as the Quakers doe but King Agrippa believest thou the Prophets I know that thou believest Thus do these Saints give titles of honour according to mens place and dignities I will name but one more and that is the blessed Evangelist St John that beloved Disciple of Christ John 19.26 in his second Epistle hee giveth that gratious woman to whom he writ her title of honour and respect verse 1. The Elder saith he to the elect Lady And againe verse 5. I beseech thee Lady Thus doth the blessed Apostle give titles of honour to whom honour belongs And these certainly are witnesses sufficient to justifie this truth against the Quakers that there may be some kinde of respect civill respect I mean though not to corrupt or flatter yet to know and owne difference of persons and to give to each that honor which is due to them in their severall places Againe as it is a duty to give honour and respect so it is lawfull for Princes Judges Justices and others to this honour when in a right and due manner it is given unto them I shall call in only one witnesse to evidence this truth besides those whom I named before to whom honor was given of men none of which godly men did reject that honor which was ascribed given unto them which had it been unlawfull to have received they would certainly have refused The witnesse is that holy man Job one that feared God and eschewed evill and what doth he testifie of himselfe you may read Job 29.7 8 c. when I went out of the gate saith he through the City when I prepare my seat in the street the young men saw me and hid themselves and the aged arose and stood up Righteous Job was an honourable and just Judge he was eies to the blind and feet to the lame he was a father to the poor and the cause which he knew not he searched it out he did break the jawes of the wicked and plucked the spoile out of his teeth therefore was Job honourable and both old and young did honor Job not in their hearts only as the Quakers would have magistrates honoured but outwardly also in giving all civill outward honour unto them according to their severall place and dignities and good reason it should be so For who more honourable profitable and necessary then good religious just and righteous Judges and Magistrates in a Common-wealth When justice is
resurrection After which it was demanded what Kingdome Christ did speake of Acts 1. Reply of another to Nayler But some one neer Nayler Replied Acts 9.5 17. 1 Cor. 9.1 1 Cor. 15.7 8. that Christ was seen after his Ascension For he was seen of Paul as Paul himselfe doth testifie Am not I an Apostle have I not seen the Lord And last of all he was seen of me as one born out of due time c. Iames Naylers Answer Nayler answered Christ was seene but he was seen invisibly Reply To which one Replyed that was a Bull or a sencelesse Answer for whatsoever is seen must be seen visibly in what manner soever it is seene whether by the eie of the body or by faith the eie of the soule If we see him that is invisible as Moses did yet he is visibly seen with those eies Heb. 11.27 by which we doe see him either in Grace or Glory Nayler Yet Nayler still persisted in his confidence that some thing might be seen invisibly and continued his railing and reviling phrases liars liars or to that effect 4 Question Disputed The time was farre spent and Mr Bourn called to another Question and that was taken which was the last that was proposed and the last that was disputed This was whether it bee lawfull to call any man Master or Father upon earth The sense and meaning of the Question was whether it be lawfull to give any honour or titles of honour to men to Father or Master to Magistrate or Minister to Lords or Ladies or the like The occasion was in part the Qakers crying out against the Ministers of Christ because they are called of men Masters and in part the proud uncivill unchristian behaviour of some Quakers towards their naturall parents and ordinary masters some towards civill Magistrates honourable Judges and Justices of peace before whom being called they have some of them in my sight kept on their hats in a contemptuous manner and denied any outward honour or civill respect to be given unto them Iames Nayler in his answer to this Question in his false Relation yea Nayler himselfe in his written Answer calleth us the Ministers of Christ Antichrist because we are called of men Masters And Richard Farnworth another rayling Quaker R. Farnworths discovery of Faith and divers papers page 2.3 and their common practice of refusing to give any outward respect to Magistrates not only Fox and Nayler but their seduced proselytes witnesse daily But Mr Bourne brought an Argument to prove it lawful to call or be called Master or Father and to give civill honour and titles of honour and respect to men according to their place and dignity to this effect Mr Bournes Argument Whatsoever titles of honour or respect the holy Patriarchs or Prophets or Apostles or other faithfull men have given unto or received from each other which are no where forbidden in the Scripture or written word of God those are lawfull for Christians now to give unto or to receive from each other But these titles of honour or respect as Father and Master and Lord and Lady and the like they have been given and received by the Patriarchs and Prophets Apostles and other holy faithfull men and are no where forbidden in the Scripture or written word of God Therefore the same titles or names of Father and Master Lord and Lady and the like may lawfully be given and received by Christians in these daies or in this age of the world First proposition I conceive will not be denyed except by such as will not be tried by the holy Scriptures And for the minor or second proposition we shall make that evident by an induction from singular or particular examples of godly men recorded in holy writ First if you read Gen. 23.6 You may finde Example 1 that when Abraham came to the children of Heth to ge◠a burying place for Sarah his wife shee being then dead hee spake to the children of Heth and bowed downe himselfe to the people of the land to give unto them not any divine religious worship which is due to God but civill honour due to men and three times is Abraham there called Lord by that people and faithfull Abraham taketh that title to himselfe without any reproofe of them for giving that title to him or any refusing of that title given him which he would not have done if it had not been lawfull to have received any such honour nor would he have bowed downe himselfe to the people of the land if it had been sinne to have done so For Abraham was a knowing faithfull man believing in Christ the Messiah to come and rejoicing to see Christs day witnesse our Saviour John 8. Iohn 8.56 〈◊〉 Againe read Gen. 24. When Abraham sent his religious servant to provide a wife for his sonne Isaac Gen. 24.27 his servant putteth up his prayer to God O Lord God of my Master Abraham send me good speed this day and shew kindnesse to my Master Abraham And hee calleth Abraham Master sixteen or seventeen times in that Chapter which certainly he would not have done if it had not been lawfull to call Master Thirdly Gen. 32.18 read Gen. 32. And you may finde that Jacob calleth his brother Esau Lord in that direction of his to his servants whom he sent before with a gift to his brother When you meet my brother Esau saith he and he shall aske you whose are these Cattell you shall answer it is a present sent to my Lord Esau and he cals Esau Lord foure times in that Chapter Fourthly 1 Kin 18.7 8. read 1 Kin. 18. When religious Obadiah who did feare the Lord from his youth met Elijah the Prophet he calleth Elijah Lord. Art not thou my Lord Elijah And verse the 8. The Prophet calleth wicked Ahab Obadiahs Lord For thus speaketh hee to Obadiah Go tell thy Lord behold Elijah is here Thus doth that good Prophet not only suffer himselfe to bee called Lord but calleth wicked King Ahab Obadiahs Lord which he would not have done if it had not been lawfull and if it were lawfull to call prophane Esau Lord and wicked Ahab Lord wherefore is it not lawfull to call Master or Father or to give honourable titles to men now unto whom they doe belong both by naturall and civill respects witnessed by the practice of the Saints holy men in several ages of the world For fifthly if you read 2 Kin. 2. Did not the children of the Prophets at Bethel call Elijah Elishas Master Knowest thou not that the Lord will take away thy Master from thy head to day And againe another company of the Prophets at Jericho verse 5. Knowest thou not that the Lord will take away thy Master from thy head to day And in the same Chapter verse 12. When Elijah was taken up into heaven in a fiery Chariot Elisha cryeth out my Father my Father the Chariot of Israel and the
horsemen thereof Thus you see titles of honour Lord Master Father are both given and received by holy men and this without any reproofe or check of the Spirit of God recorded in the Scriptures concerning any of these examples therefore sure it was and is lawfull to give and receive titles of respect and honour to call or be called Lord or Master or Father according to every ones place and dignity All these places of Scripture were not then alledged Naylers Answer And James Nayler by his loud clamour hindred the pressing and application of those places that were alledged as much as he could and cried out that was in the Law but now in the Gospell Christ forbids to call any man Master or to be called of men Masters or Father and alledged that of our Saviour Mat. 23. But be not ye called Rabbi for one is your Master even Christ and all ye are brethren and call no man your Father upon earth for one is your Father which is in heaven And hence Nayler would infer That now in time of the Gospell it was not lawfull tocall any man Master or to be called of men Master or Father upon earth Mr Bournes Reply Then I replied and bad Nayler read the context in the verses before and if his eies were open he might see the mind of Christ that it was not absolutely to forbid his hearers to call any man Master or Father but to forbid the ambitious seeking of honor and the ambitious love of honour which was in the Scribes and Pharisees This you may finde is that that he reproveth in them in the 6 and 7 verfes They love saith Christ the uppermost rooms at Feasts and the chiefe seats in the Synagogues and greetings in the Markets and to be called of men Rabbi Rabbi And this ambitious pride and love of honour from men Christ reproveth in the Pharisees and this he forbiddeth his disciples but be not ye called Rabbi for one is your Master even Christ and all ye are brethren he would not have his Apostles to seeke superiority and power one over another in a proud ambitious manner Diotrephes-like to love to have the preheminence as 3 John 9. the Evangelist doth witnesle Diotrephes did Yet our Saviour Christ here doth not simply and absolutely forbid all giving or receiving of honour or of calling or being called of men Master or Father or Lord or Lady or the like Yet it is certaine our Saviour Christ doth forbid so to call Master or Father as to make any man the Master or Father of our Faith instead of Christ or that any man should be called Master or Father so as to take the honour of chiefe Master or Father or Teacher to himselfe which is due to Christ This is that which Christ forbiddeth and this is that which the Apostle Paul forbiddeth the Corinthians 1 Cor. 1. Now this I say saith the Apostle that every one of you saith I am of Paul and I of Apollo and I of Cephas and I of Christ One said he was Pauls Disciple another he was Apollos another he was Christs But what saith the Apostle is Christ divided was Paul crucified for you Thus they made Paul the Master or Father of their faith And this the Apostle Paul reproveth here And this Christ our Saviour reproveth and forbiddeth Mat. 23. And Christ doth forbid to give that divine honour which is due to God and Christ that God-man our Saviour to any man in the world but hee doth not forbid to give or receive civill honour and respect one to another according to each mans place and dignity or so to be called of men Master or Father or the like To this effect was the Answer given but more close and briefe then now I give it But Nayler instead of any better Answer cried out lyar lyar hold thy peace for shame doth not Christ plainly forbid to call Father or Master and made a great clamorous noise and bid siâ— downe for shame for shame Mr Bourns Reply Then Mr Bourn called to Nayler and bid him leave his loud shamelesse out cries and hearken to an Argument to prove the Exposition to be truth and according to the mind of Christ which was to this effect Argument 2 Whatsoever Christ himselfe or the Spirit of Christ in the Apostles of Christ doth approve of elsewhere in thenew Testament as lawfull to be done that Christ himselfe doth not forbid in that place Mat. 23. But Christ himselfe and the Spirit of Christ in the Apostles doth elsewhere approve of the calling of men Masters and Fathers and of giving other titles of respect and honour to men Therefore Christ in that place Mat. 23. did not forbid to call any man Master or Father as James Nayler pretendeth The first proposition is witnessed to be clear because Christ is truth yea the way the truth and the life and he is no way contrary to himselfe For Jesus Christ is yesterday and to day and the same for ever Heb. 13. Therefore Christ doth not forbid that here Mat. 23. which he alloweth elsewhere And for the second proposition that Christ and his spirit in the Apostles doth approve and allow fit titles of honour to bee given to men as is agreeable to their conditions in their severall places This will bee evident if you read rightly consider that of the Evangelist Marke 7. Where Christ is witnessed to repeat the Commandement Honour thy Father and thy Mother and in the next verse Christ himselfe giveth the name of Father and Mother to the parents of the man of whom he spake to the Pharisees And saith Christ ye suffer him no more to do ought for his Father and Mother Now Christ certainly would not have named Father and Mother nor have approved of those titles and that relation if it had not been lawfull And the same also doth the Spirit of Christ in the Apostle Paul in divers places read Eph. 6. Col. 3. Col. 4. and you may finde he giveth the titles of Father and Master Honour thy father and mother and fathers provoke not your children and masters give unto your servants that which is just and equall knowing that ye also have a master in heaven And the Apostle Peter to the same effect 1 Pet 2. Honour all men love the brother-hood feare God honour the King the supreme magistrate by whatsoever title he be called And servants be subject to your masters with all feare not only to the good and gentle but also to the froward so that here are earthly fathers and masters as well as God and Christ is our father and master in heaven And therefore it is evident that our Saviour Christ in that place Mat. 23. did not simply and absolutely forbid to call or to bee called master or father for if he had he would not have approved it himselfe nor would the Apostles of Christ who had the Spirit of Christ have done it as we have proved they did to
this purpose was the Argument but shorter Naylers Answer Then Nayler was constrained to acknowledge that a naturall father might bee called father by his child and a civill master might bee called master by his servant but that it was not lawfull for any other to give or receive such honour or titles of honour as father or master or the like or to that effect Although this acknowledgement of Naylers was contrary to the Doctrine and practice even of Nayler himselfe and divers of his fellow Quakers and proselytes as the uncivill carriage of some of them towards their naturall parents and civill masters and of others towards Magistrates and Ministers doth witnesse at full Mr Gardiner Minister of Eckinton Mr Gurdiner a good Disputant as I remember seeing Nayler wrangle and endeavour to shift off from the Question began to presse Nayler with an Argument But before Mr Gardiner could speake out his Argument Naylers Reply Nayler would not heare him but he and some other of his sellow Quakers that stood by him cried out aloud lyar lyar stop thy mouth and made a clamouring noise against him to cause him to hold his peace Mr Gardiner To whom Mr Gardiner seeing Nayler's so uncivill unchristian and unreasonable behaviour Replied fie on thee thou unreasonable man thou art not fit to be reasoned with or to that purpose and so turned his backe upon him Mr Bournes Argument Then Mr Bourne called aloud to Nayler againe and bad him leave his uncivill rayling and reviling speeches and loud clamours and hearken to an Argument to prove it which was to this effect That title of honour which St Paul did give to Festus who was none of his naturall father nor civill master that it is lawfull for Christians to give now to those who are neither naturall fathers nor ordinary civill masters But read Acts 26. and you may finde that St Paul stiled Festus noble Festus which is a title of honour and high respect and therefore it is lawfull now to give honourable titles to such as are neither naturall parents nor civill masters and to be given by such as are neither naturall children nor meniall or hired servants or to this end was the Argument Naylers Answer Nayler answered those were noble Romans and deserved honour c. But now c. as if he thought now we had none so worthy to whom such honour should be given for to my best observation this was the sence of his broken speech for hee did not speake whole sentences but wrangled about giving honour and said howsoever honour might be given to naturall parents or civill masters yet how could we prove that any that professed themselves Ministers of Christ should be called master or father contrary to that of Christ Mat. 23. noted before where he said Christ did particularly forbid his Apostles and ministers to be so called Mr Bournes Reply To which Mr Bourne replied Nayler and bad him reade again that place Mat. 23.1 2. and thou shalt find that Christ did speake there to the multitude as well as to his Disciples and what in that text he did not forbid others he did not forbid them Consider the Text fully and thou maiest see it plaine if thou hast eies to see Naylers Answer Nayler according to his custome instead of other Answers cried out it is false it is false prove that any Minister of Christ should be called master or father or have any such honour given to them or to that effect Mr Maudesley Mr Maudesly Minister of Dronfield being neer to Nayler as I remember brought an Argument from that place Eccl. 12.11 The words of the wise are like goads fastened by the masters of the Assemblies And if by the Masters of the Assemblies be intended teachers of Gods people and Ministers of Christ then it is lawfull for them to be called masters because the Spirit of God in Solomon calleth them so But this is apparent that by masters he meaneth teachers therefore it is lawfull to call the ministers of Christ who are teachers of Gods people masters or to that purpose Naylers Answer But James Nayler sings still his old song liar liar no such thing is intended there and wrangled ignorantly about the sence of that place as nothing concerning ministers in the New Testament Mr Bournes Argument Then Mr Bourne bad Nayler to heare an Argument out of the New Testament from that place of the Apostle to Timothy 1 Tim. 5.17 Let the Elders that rule well be accounted worthy of double honour especially them that labour in the word and doctrine to this effect If preaching Elders that labour in the word and doctrine be worthy of double honour then the faithfull labouring ministers of Christ are worthy of honour but preaching Elders who labour in the word and doctrine are worthy of double honour witnesse the Apostle in that place 1 Tim. 5. therefore the ministers of Christ who labour in the word and doctrine are worthy of honour and so may lawfully have honour given them yea that honour which is due to them that is not only the honour of maintenance but the honour of reverence and esteem let a man esteem of us as ministers of Christ and stewards of the mysteries of God 1 Cor. 4.12 Nailers Answer This was not so fully pressed then But Nayler answered and said The ministers of Christ they must bee honoured in the Lord but not be called master or father and have any outward honour And still Nayler wrangled and turned to those people neer him not answering the Argument but railed at ministers for suffering our selves to be called masters vapouring in contemptuous termes but bringing no word of proofe at all Mr Bournes Argument Mr Bourne bad Nayler leave off his vapouring or to that effect and hearken to another Scripture 1 Cor. 4.15 where St Paul did take to himselfe the name of father of the Corinthians their spirituall father though you have ten thousand instructers saith he yet yee have not many fathers for in Christ Jesus I have begotten you through the Gospell Now if Paul as a minister of Christ converting soules did lawfully take to himself the name of father Then the faithfull ministers of Christ who convert men and women to Christ may lawfully take to themselves the name of father but this was lawfull for blessed Paul therefore it is lawfull also for all the faithfull ministers of Christ Jesus who turne men to God to take to themselves the name of father and so to be called masters or sirs which is a title of honour and respect For what title was lawfull to that blessed Apostle and Silas preachers of the Gospel to receive from men and they did accept that as lawfull now to Gods faithfull ministers But it was lawfull for the Apostle Paul and Silas to receive the title of sirs or masters 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Domini Sirs or Masters a title of honour and they did accept of that title of honour