the meetings of Hereticks and Schismaticks who separate themselves c. Though your passion would not yet your charity might have given us better language You and your Party are very full of these tearms though you nor they ever define what Schisme or Heresie is We desire and challenge you to tell us what Heresies we have broached in these Conventicles In what Fundamentalls do we differ from you which is Heresie What Acts against the power of godlinesse can you manifest against us What Treasons have we plotted against the Parliament in our meetings Should I call you Heretick and Schismatick c. because your judgement is Presbyteriall would you take it well The Lord learn you meeknesse and a more sober Spirit not to tax so highly and slander so insufferably unlesse you make it out that we are such To the eighth he saith I answer negatively and well I may My first Answer was that the nationall Church of the Jews cannot be a pattern for us now because the Covenant of the Gospel is not made with any one particular nation but to all in every nation that beleeve you have no promise nor Prophesie of any nation to be holy to God but the Jews when they shall be called again To which he Replyes 1. That the Independents have not the least Precept or Example for a solemn Covenant but in the old Testament and Church of the Israelites and that no private Congregationall but publike nationall Covenant prescribed by the supream temporall Magistrate and Assembly yea the principall Precepts and Presidents for sanctifying the Sabbath publike or private Fasts you likewise derive from the old Testament and that Church Why should not therefore their nationall Church be a pattern for us c. To which I Answer First For the Covenant we hold not that such a formall Covenant constitutes a Church this is enough that there be an union whether by Covenant explicite or implicit or consent that is certain the Union is Morall as all other must be that constitute a Policie yet for that he saith there is no Precept or pattern but in the old Testament for a Covenant it s answered Secondly That its ground enough for such a practise the Covenant not being Ceremoniall but Morall and that which of necessity goes to such a Constitution it did not constitute the Church as nationall but as a Church Indeed the Covenant was nationall because the Church was so but that was accidentall It s no part of the essence of a Covenant that it should be nationall that doth accedere to it as it constitutes such a Policie and the same or which is equivalent must constitute a particular Church the same formall Constitution that was in that Church as a Church must be in every Church also and though the dispensation in Churches be different yet the same constitutive Principles remain in all For that he saith the principall Precepts for a Sabbath and Fasts we take out of the old Testament and therefore why should not their 〈…〉 Church be a pattern for us to imitate as well as their nationall Covenant Sabbaths c. I Answer We keep the Sabbath onely as it is a Morall Precept in the Decalogue not as peculiar to the Jews for where there was any ceremonialnesse in it as the seventh day it s changed among us and for Fasts there is as great equity that when we have displeased God we should solemnly humble our selves before him But that the Church was Nationall was meerly accidentall and he might as well argue and it will as rightly follow that there must be but one visible Church in all the world and that one nation as the Jews were for if he argue from one part which is accidentall he must argue from another that is so likewise Besides if this be a property of a Church that it be nationall then there is no Church but what is nationall if that did convenire to the Church of the Jews as a Church that it was nationall then it doth so unto every Church and the same may be said that there was but that one Church in the world then therefore there is but one now Many such absurdities will necessarily follow such an Argument To that that I say that the Covenant of the Gospel is made with no particular nation but with every one in every nation that beleeves and that there is no Prophesie or Promise of any one nation to be converted but the Jews He Answers That this Reason is both absurd and false the Covenant extending not only to particular persons but to all nations c. And for this he quotes many Scriptures in the Margent the summe of which is contained in Psal 2. 8. Ask of me and I will give thee the heathen for thine inheritance and the utmost parts of the earth for thy possession And that in Esay 2. 2 3. The mountain of the Lord shall be exalted on the top of the mountains and all nations shall flow to it Therefore God hath made a Covenant with particular nations to be Churches To which I answer 1. That if these Texts be to be understood so Jesus Christ never had a Church since the dissolution of the Jewish State for there hath been no nation in the world yet wholly given to Christ none that may be called a holy nation as yet that Prophesie is not fulfilled what may be hereafter I know not Secondly You may as well say that the Covenant of the Gospel is made with all nations and that all nations are or shall be Churches to Christ for so the words run in the generall I will give thee the heathen for thine inheritance and the utmost parts of the earth c. and all nations shall flow in unto the Church and become such Thirdly That in Psalm 2. is not meant of God covenanting with any people but it shews that all the world is in subjection to Christ and that the Father hath given him all rule and power from one end of the earth to the other and the following words imply so much for he saith He shall rule them with a rod of iron now it s not meant so much of the Church as of the Kings and Potentates and great men of the world that band themselves against Christ Christ rules not his Church with a rod of iron but with a golden Scepter and if all nations were given to Christ that is really converted and in Covenant there would not be so many Potentates Kings and great ones to band themselves against Christ and his Church and for that place Esay 2. That all nations shall flow into the Church when once it s exalted it s no more then what was fulfilled in Acts 2. where men of every nation under heaven beleeved and so is the word commonly used for some of all nations and the utmost that can be said of them and all the other places brought is but this that when Jews and Gentiles
shall all be called together the most part of the nations shall beleeve and come to Christ in 1 Pet. 2. 9. which he quotes The Apostle calls the scattered Saints a holy nation yet they were no nation but scattered thorow many nations and these Scriptures are meant of the multiplicity of beleevers that shall be brought under Jesus Christs Dominion and these Texts do no more prove a nationall Church or any one nation wholly converted then that Text Go preach the Gospel unto every nation Matth. 28. proves that every nation shall therefore be converted to Christ and they rather prove that all nations shall be reall Saints then that any one nation or more shall be so Besides if the Church be nationall every one of the nation is a member and there can be no censures of Excommunication rightly administred for there can be no Excommunication but either by cutting the person off from this life or else banishing which are for destruction not edification for whiles he lives in the Kingdom he is a member and the bounds and limits of the nation are the bounds and limits of the Church Againe of what Nation in the world can it be said which is said of the Church you are a peculiar and holy people nay are not all the Nations corrupted few or none in the most imbracing the Gospel England hath been accounted as Protestant and as refined a Nation as any hath been for Doctrine yet how many vipers hath it bred in its own bowels who ever have been more wicked then they where have the Saints been more persecuted then here Againe if Nations may be Churches there will be no distinction between the World and the Church all will be Saints and as far members of the visible Church as the best Saints To that I say that he cannot shew any Nation every Member whereof is qualified sufficiently to make up a Church unlesse wee will take in Drunkards Whoremongers c. and this cannot be avoided in a Nationall Church he answers that he daces not be wiser then his Lord and Master who informes him that there will and must be alwaies in the visible Church on earth goats among the sheep châ—ffe amongst the wheat c. I answer 1. That there will be goats is most certaine but that there must be is neither necessitate praecepti nor medâ—j Christ never commanded it neither is it of absolute necessity for the Saints can live be built up without any mixture of such society is it a delight and pleasure to Christ to see goats among his sheep in his own fold what need then this must be so confidently put in Secondly goats chaffe bad fish are taken for hypocrites as well as profane men and in these places they are only to be taken so as for example that place Mat. 13. 24. of the good seed and the tares which he quotes by tares are not meant profane persons but hypocrites 1. the * Scutietus in obse vat in Mat. Pasor Lexicon in â—…b Word expresseth no more tares as Historians observe are a weed like the wheat now profane men are no way like the Saints 2. if it be meant of profane men and Master Pryn take it of their being in the Church then all the censures of the Church are out off ipso facto for the Text saith expressely they must be let alone till the harvest that is the day of judgment so that no wicked man may be excommunicated or any censure passe upon him yea 3. it is plaine they are hypocrites they were discovered by none but the Angells yea 4. if you will needs take it of profane men the Text saith expressely that these were not in the Church but in the world the field is the world vers 38. whereas he saith he finds that in the Churches of Galathia Collosse Pergamus c. there were drunkards Epicures whoremongers c. I answer in general that I know no Churches openly taxt for any such grosse acts of sin in all the New Testament only the Church of Corinth abou the incestuous Corinthian which is spoken as a defilement and a blot upon them whereby they were corrupted and he therefore exhorts them to cast him out that they might be a new lumpe 1 Cor. 5. As for 1 Cor. 11. where the Apostle saith one is thirsty and another is drunke I think it not meant of that grosse act which we call drunkennesse but the same with that which is said of Joseph and his brethren Gen. 43. 5. they dranke and were merry they drank more freely then they ought at that time though it might be lawfull at another time but however though there were these in such Churches Yet First I speak of the first constitution of a Church and what Churches should be not what they are degenerated into Secondly they were most spirituall sins that were laid to the charge of the seven Churches and other Churches as that they lost their first love countenanced false teachers c. not such grosse acts of prophanesse as whoring c. Yet Thirdly what heavy and sad threatnings are there denounced by God against these if the continued in that estate and what judgment did follow for God is very tender of his worship and what is become of all these Churches now how greatly hath God been displeased with them the Jewes might not enter into marriage with the daughters of a strange Land much lesse might they admit them to ordinances among them unlesse really converted and made proselytes now such are all not visible Saints in the judgment of the Saints unto those that are really called and joine together in the ordinances and they ought to be as shye of those as they were of them whatever a Church rightly constituted may fall into by defection I speak not of but what they ought to be such as the word calls Saints which can hardly be given by any knowing Saint to the most part of men in England For that he asketh whether we have not drunkards cozeners usurers c. members of our Churches I answer we know none and we should thank Master Pryn if he could discover any such account him our reall friend in it For that he saith where was there ever a Church of all elected ones that is a state for heaven not for this world I answer there 's none saith a Church must be all of elect but of such as can be judged by the Saints to be elect If men be not saved it s not because the Church is deceived but themselves the Church goes only on these probable rules of judging by which the word prescribes the visible Church in Scripture is called Heaven often times as Mat. 25. 1. Heb. 12. 26. Mat 13. and in Esa 4. 5. its called glory to intimate that none should properly be of the Church but should go to Heaven and it s called the body of Christ none should be admitted as members of that body but
members of Churches should be thus judged Saints because all the Ordinances that Christ hath left it s for to build up the Church they are to be administred in the Church now none have right to the Ordinances but Saints and therefore none may be admitted but such as can be judged so by the Saints Againe for the former which we say is consent or agreement whether by covenant or any other way we stand not on it we conceive first it ariseth from the nature of the thing the Church being a politick body wherein is rule and authority nothing but free consent or agreement to walk in such wayes can constitute it as in all other policies What makes England as a Common-wealth or as a Church to be such a policie but the consent of the people who have given up themselves to be governed by such Laws and Constitutions Secondly if this be not granted there can be no distinction of Churches in the world but all must be under one power for what makes England as a Church distinct from Scotland or Scotland from all Churches that they have no authoritative power over each other but onely this that the members of England or Scotland have not consented to walk under any other power but their own Surely the bounds of Seas or Rivers can no more distinguish Churches then a wall or a doore can if there be no other distinction and no other thing but consent can forme a Policie Besides Scripture is no way silent for the proof of this Not to urge many that place is famous and may serve for all in Act. 9. 26. Paul after he was converted it is said Assayed to joyne himselfe to the Disciples at Jerusalem and the word is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which signifieth to be glewed to them Now observe Paul was converted and a Saint yet not joyned to the Church he was in that place where they were he was joyned to them as they were Saints yet he was not joyned to them as a Church and this joyning was not Physicall but Morall Now this must be done by free consent and willing subjection to the Ordinances or no way For the ordinary Officers of the Church they are Pastors Teachers 1 Cor. 12. 28. Ephes 4. 11. Teaching-Elders and Ruling-Elders 1 Tim. 5. 17. Deacons Acts 6. 1 Tim. 3. Widows 1 Tim. 5. 9. Rom. 16. 1. That the Church hath power of choosing its own Officers is cleare from Acts 1. 21. Acts 6. 3. and Chap. 14. 23. That a Church is but one Congregation having power within it selfe to exercise all the Ordinances is apparent in the new Testament neither do we read of any other there First the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 used for the Church signifieth no other neither hath it any other signification in the new Testament when referred to any visible Company neither is it used by any profane Author for to note out a larger Society then could meet together in one place For the Church at Jerusalem it was but one Church Acts 2. 46. and 5. 12. and 6. 1. and 15. 25. and 21. 22. and 25. 22. so the Church of Antiochia was but one Church Acts 14. 27. they are said to gather the Church together now that could not be the Elders for for Elders onely the word Church is never used and the same persons that are called the Church vers 27. are in vers 28. called the Disciples and Chap. 15. 1. the Brethren so Acts 11. 26. the same persons are called the Church Disciples and Christians Besides the Church of Corinth was but one Church was but one particular Congregation 1 Cor. 5. 4. 1 Cor. 14. 25. 1 Cor. 11. 17. vers 23. In uno codem loco neither can the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ever be shewed to signifie any thing else besides one particular Assembly as learned Baines wel observes I shal conclude this with quoting of what that judicious Divine D. Ames saith in this particular Med. p. 190. Hine variae Congregationes fixae ejusdem Regionis ac Provinciae plurali numero semper appellantur Ecclesiae non una Ecclesia etiam in Judaea quae tota fuit antea una Ecclesia Nationalis Act. 2. 46. 15. 12. 14. 27. 1 Cor. 5. 4 11. 17. 23. 1 Thes 2. 14. Acts 14. 23. and 15. 41. Rom. 16. 4. 5. 16. 1 Cor. 16. 1. 1. 19. 2 Cor. 8. 1. 18. 19. Gal. 1. 2. 22. 1. Rev. Ecclesiae enim illae particulares quae in N. T. commemorantur convenice solent 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 neque in toto N. T. legitue de institutione Ecclesiae amplioris a quo minores Congregationes penderent c. Thus you see a short description and discovery of what we hold about Church-government with some Scriptures in stead of others that move us to this way The Reasons and Grounds I doubt not but we shall see at large when that shall be made publike which our Brethren have urged in the Assembly and presented to the Parliament But to proceed For that part wherein he saith I should have proved that Christ hath set one immutable forme of government and have made it out by direct Scriptures besides what is laid down in the Observations which I doubt not to make good against his cavills I thought Master Prin had read learned Master Parker de Eccles Pol. Cartwright and the most of the Nonconformists who though Presbyteriall in their judgement yet have largely proved that to whom I shall refer him for larger satisfaction I know none that ever writ against the immutablenesse of a forme of Church-government in the new Testament but Episcopall and Pontificiall men as Hooker Bilson The judgement of the Church of Scotland is quite contrary For they assert their Presbytery to be Jure Divino and holds its Title onely from heaven it seems the Presbyterians differ as well as the Independants and they are also various in their judgements some think there is no forme of government others that there is But to the Arguments First Exod. 25. 40. I said if this were granted the Gospel would be straiter then the Law Heb. 8. 5. Christ more unfaithfull then Moses and the Argument lies thus according to his own drawing if God set a pattern to Moses of every thing to be done in the Church from which he was not to vary upon any termes these being but carnall Ordinances comparatively Heb. 9. 10. then he hath prescribed a forme of government in the new Testament to all Churches Nations c. from which they may not vary but the former Ergo the Medium or ground of arguing between these two is from the care that God hath of the Church at all times being one and the same rather more in the new Testament God had shewed lesse care over his Churches now than then if he had not prescribed a set Government for them also besides their Ordinances had been more spirituall far then ours
for that which God directly appoints is more spirituall then what man appoints in Gods worship though for the kinde more noble and the use in reason far more excellent To this he saith in generall thus That if I or any other can shew him such a patterne so clearly delineated in the new Testament as that in the old he will beleeve my sequell else he shall judge it a meere independent Argument to this before Master Prin knows its a good way of reasoning if the same ground hold the same consequence we are sure for your Presbyteriall-government you cannot have the least direct Texts and you are faine to go to miserable extorted consequences c. there is nothing that we hold but we will shew in cleare Scriptures as before where did you or any one ever read of either name or thing of a classicall Presbytery of a Provinciall or Nationall Synod either alone or by way of subordination He goes on in way of Answer and saith if this consequence will follow then this must needs also God prescribed to Moses the expresse patterne and fashion of Aarons and his sons garments c. under the Law Exod. Ergo He hath likewise shewed the expresse patterne fashion and colour of all Bishops Presbyters and Ministers garments under the Gospel How weake this absurdity is that he labours to fasten on this Argument let wise men judge First I say not That what ever was commanded in the old Testament must be commanded now for the matter of it if my meaning had been so this consequence had been good but when I argue from the exact description of every thing in the old Testament to the like in the new I argue from the equity and common reason that is in the thing there was something in the Ceremonies and in their forme of worship that was Juris Moralis Naturalis the equity of which remaines for ever and the Apostle argues from it in severall places as that God should be worshipped after his own way and according to his own prescript not through mens inventions c. As for the matter of the things commanded in the old Testament these things that were Ceremonies then and had a spirituall signification are but circumstances now and not to be regarded as Place Garments c. You shall finde the Apostle arguing thus from this very head and instance in that Heb. 8. 5. See that thou do all things according to the patterne in the mount he speaks this of Christs Priestly Office and proves that Christ was a true and reall Priest and he proves it by this because all the Priests of the Law served but to the example of heavenly things and they had their Commission onely from heaven God gave it Moses in the mount surely then Christ saith the Apostle must needs be a reall high Priest in whom all these things are fulfilled eminently and he instanceth in this of the Tabernacle which could not prove it but by reason of the equity of the thing and its one of Calvins Observations from the place Hic docemur perversos esse omnes cultus adulterinos quos sibi proprio ingenio citra mandatum Dei comminisci homines permittunt nam cum praescribat Deus ut fiant omnia secundum suam regulam nihil penitus alienum facere licet He applies this to all worship in generall and that from the equity of the thing it selfe To quell this Argument saith he further 1. The patterne in the mount was meant onely of the materialls forme utensils of the Tabernacle not of the Government and Discipline therefore very impertinent to prove a seeled form of Church-government Answ I never said that the Tabernacle was a patterne of Church-government and therefore that will not answer for grant it to be a prescribing of the materialls c. yet there is as great a reason that God should prescribe the forme of government as that and God did prescribe a forme of government to them from which they could not vary I onely instance in this because the Apostle makes use of it to prove as different the thing as this there was nothing to be done either in Church or Common-wealth but was discovered to Moses as a rule for him to walk by See Exo 2â— 21 22 23 24 25 26 27. Chapter which he could not vary from in a tittle there is a great reason it should be so now because the Ordinance and Government of the Church is more spirituall The Materials of the Tabernacle he grants were exactly prescribed and why not then the particulars of Government seeing it is as great an Ordinance as that Secondly he saith It was shewed to Moses the Temporall Magistrate not to Aaron or any independant Priest and therefore if there be any consequence from this Kings Parliaments c. ought to prescribe and set up such a Church-government as is according to the word c. I answer it s no matter at all neither doth it a jot prejudice my consequence to whom it was discovered whether Moses or Aaron they were not to vary from it and there is as good reason for Church-government as that but let me ask a question or two of you seeing you have urged that First Was this discovered to him Quae a Magistrate under that consideration onely or no Secondly If to him as a Magistrate then where will you finde a correlate to Moses now Thirdly Whether as a Magistrate he durst prescribe any thing more in a tittle or any thing besides the patterne in the mount let Magistrates shew us what they have received immediatly as the minde of God and we will as willingly take it from them as any durst Moses though chiefe Magistrate in a prudentiall way for the good of the people prescribe any thing besides the patternes much lesse may any now who never had the minde of God revealed to them as Moses had In fine saith he If there be any expresse unalterable form pray inform me why it was not as punctually described in the new Testament as the forme of the Tabernacle To which is answered againe that it is as punctually described as hath been formerly shewen Nay saith he why was the Tabernacle altered into a Temple different from it and why did the second Temple vary from the first in the same Church and Nation I answer I never said that God tied himselfe so as he could not alter the frame of Government but that no man could if God will change the Tabernacle into a Temple it s his pleasure and that is our rule but none else could do it had David or Solomon done it without a word from heaven what thanks would they have had It was a sinne in Jeroboam to set up places of worship in Dan and Bethel when God said they should go onely to Jerusalem though afterwards God changed it and made every place fit to lift up pure hands to God in Besides God changed
things among the Jewes according to the fitnesse and conveniencie of their condition the Tabernacle was made as suiting with their condition in the wildernesse being fit to carry up and down with them but when they vvere become a setled nation rich and vvealthy and in peace then God commands to build a Temple Under the Gospel it s otherwise Christ being come himselfe as King of his Church hath made a covenant with no nation under heaven but in every nation he that feares him is accepted with him his Laws being onely spirituall and that concerning the conscience it suits with the condition of all Saints and may be practised in every Kingdome neither can it be altered the Laws written in the new Testament being the last that ever shall be given to the Churches for ever so that Master Prins Reasons against this Argument will not hold when they are truly tried To that part of the Argument wherein it is said that Christ should be more unfaithfull then Moses if he should not prescribe a set unalterable Discipline in the word he answers nothing whereas the Apostle urgeth it in Heb. 3. 2. 5. 6. Moses was faithfull in his own house as a servant but Christ as a son wherein lay the faithfulnesse of Moses but in declaring faithfully what God had prescribed to him in the governing of the Church and ordering all things which concerned the worship of God according to the patterne given in the mount Now how much more unfaithfull then Moses should Christ be if he should not as eminently do the like to his own house For it was not onely matters of Doctrine and the foundations of Religion that Moses was faithfull in prescribing to the people but all the Ceremonies and parts of instituted worship to which Discipline is to be referred he did not onely give them the Decalogue but every thing that was to be practised by them even to a pin of the Tabernacle and therein lay his faithfulnesse And is not Christ as faithfull as Moses To the second Argument That Christ should neither be faithfull as a husband head nor King of his Church if he should give others power to order it as they pleased to their own civil government not setting down his own Laws for them to walk by he saith it s both a fallacie and absurdity yet he shews neither That he sayes to make it good is this That one may be as faithfull a Husband Head King though he lay not down particular Laws to regulare his Wife Subjects c. To which I answer That its against the law of nature to require obedience of a Subject Wife c. in things immediatly appertaining to a Husband King and not to prescribe rules of obedience and its greatest unfaithfulnesse that can be to leave these that are committed to ones care and trust to others to rule and order who cannot do for them as the party intrusted can Should the Parliament be faithfull to the Kingdome if they should not make particular Laws for the governing of it but leave it either to others or else set down generall dark confused things like so many blanks and Et cetera's that every one may adde what they will Either the Government of the Church is a part of Christs Kingly Office or not if it be he cannot be faithfull if he prescribes not particular Lawes for them to walke by Besides either the Discipline of the Church is spirituall and to edification or not and if it be spirituall then none can prescribe it but Christ for that is onely spirituall in instituted worship which hath Christs Precept for it Neither will the giving of generall rules take away this blemish as that Rom. 14. 40. Let all things be done decently and in order which you call a generall rule for Church-government for every particular Office and Ordinance in the Church is for to effect some supernaturall end to build up the soule in grace now no Office or Ordinance can do that but onely what is instituted by Christ to that end For that place in the Corinthians I spake somewhat of it in the Observations and I wonder he past it over without mentioning for these words Let all things be done decently and in order is onely meant of ordering things in a Church already constituted not of giving rules for the constitution of it and the words import nothing lesse for what is order but a fit disposing of things already made and constituted in their proper place it being a word taken from martiall Discipline where every man is set in his Rank and File according as occasion is Now you shall finde the Apostle applying of it so in the place quoted for he speaks it to regulate the exercise of Prophesie in that Church and whereas they were wont to use that Ordinance confusedly one speaking when another spake he tells them they might all speak one by one if they would but stay before each other had done and then layes down this as a rule to direct in the exercise of this and all other Ordinances Let all things be done decently and in order I wonder how men that are not lost in prejudice that haue any intellectualls about them can so mistake this place as to say its a generall rule of prescribing a forme of Church-government left arbitrary to any people seeing neither the signification of the words nor the coherence of the place hath the least shadow of such an interpretation where the fallacie of this Argument lies I cannot as yet discerne much lesse where the absurdity is which Master Prin hath charged it with His third Argument saith he is that Revel 11. 1 2. we read of a measuring of the Temple and Revel 21. 1 2. of the new Jerusalem comming out of heaven c. Ergo There is a setled divine Church-government universally prescribed to all Christians in the new Testament To this he saith nothing in answer either to the interpretation of the place or the application of it to this particular onely he seems to retort First That this is no better proofe of this Assertion then the Angel of the Church of Ephesus is of our Prelates Lordly Hierarchie Jure Divino but how or wherein the parallel holds he shews not yet this he thinks is a full Answer Secondly he saith I might as well yea more properly conclude thence That the Altar was measured as well as the Temple Rev. 11. 1. referring to the Jewish not Christian Church which hath no Temple nor Altar Ergo We ought to have an Altar yea one set forme of Altars in all Christian Churches under the Gospel Thus far he What the sense of these words is I cannot as yet understand much lesse where the Argument lies I never thought to have found such a piece of absurdity fall from Master Prins mouth His Argument will run thus if put into forme If the Temple was measured then as an absurdity the Altar was measured and
will never punish any man for the not obeying that he searcheth after prayeth God to reveale and yet cannot find it to be the mind of God much lesse should men force men who not only have no light in the thing but their light is against it to obey what they conceive is the mind of God 2. That Doctrine that puts upon any man an inevitablenesse of sinning may not be admitted but such doth this that men must obey what superiours command in the Worship of God though their judgements be against it and the minor is proved thus by instance to go against my light and conscience is sin and to disobey the Magistrates commands is sin and one I must doe yea it s the greatest hypocrisie that can be to follow that authority commands which yet mans conscience thinks is not to be done besides what do I know but the light I have is from the Spirit of God and if I go against it I am guilty of resisting and grieving the Spirit which is the greatest sin that can be 3. It is the greatest tyranny over mens souls that can be what can be greater then to make other mens judgments the rule of my conscience to sweare obedience to that my understanding is against surely its the greatest soul-inquisition that can be however Master Pryn saith I infer a blind obedience from his Position I know not how to infer otherwise for that must needs be blind obedience when a man must obey take it in what you will of this kind that which he seeth not either exprest or any way warranted by the Word it s to put men above God at least in this place for if I must obey because higher Powers judge it so their power must be the rule of my conscience which alone is subject to the Word and it s the greatest basenesse of spirit it dis-ennobles mens spirits hinders and utterly crusheth the growth of any ones gifts for if other mens judgments must be my rule and I sin in not submitting to it what need any man study to find out truth or with the noble Bereans to search the Scripture to see whether these things be so give men eyes and they will soon follow you else never call for such unlimited obedience Againe what if the Parliament and Synod should erre in setting up a Government must every one be bound to joine with them To which he answers First such an oversight is not to be presumed untill it be actually committed and it s neither Christian charitable nor any way of Christ thus to prejudge their resolutions And yet you to presume to determine what the Congregationall way is and censure what effects will follow though you professe you know not what they hold and never saw the way exercised we know as much of Presbyteriall and its effects as ever any can speak of the Congregationall therefore leave off your scandalous Titles of this way which yet you never saw did commit any thing worthy of them As for your sufferings you speak of I never mentioned them as your shame though you have made the honour of them lesse then the World thought it was in that you say you suffered not for opposing any Ceremony legally established or the Bishops calling but their Lordly power however you suffered and now we are glad we know for what you suffered yet holy Master Burton for his part confesseth the contrary that he suffered for preaching against the Bishops Government and the Ceremonies I doubt not but if ever God shall call us to suffer for this truth we shall have as much comfort and strength in standing for the Prerogative of King Jesus as ever you had for maintaining any Statute-Law whatsoever In the fifth saith he he grants that Independency will overthrow all Nationall Churches and Synods 1. Is it not even a turbulent dangerous Schismaticall unquiet that I say not insufferable Government which will admit no equall nor corrivall and thus he goes on with his uncivill calumnies for many lines But bona verba quaeso if you understand the words thus that in the judgments of these that are of this way there can be no Nationall Churches according to the Word so it overthrowes it but yet only in intellectu as I may say they cannot think it to be a Gospel Institution of a Church as the holding one opinion overthrowes another so is this that all Nationall Churches will be overthrowne by your Congregationall way and this sense which I meane deserves not such unworthy Language but if you take it as it seems you do that the Congregationall way cannot live by the other Government or in a Nation which is a Church but it will endeavour by force and armes to extirpate overthrow unchurch them that disturbe their peace slay their members c. It hath not as yet conceived such a thought and its contrary to its nature to bring it forth there is nothing so detestable to our judgements and I doubt not that should be more contrary to our practice then the disturbing the peace of a Nation what ever scandall men fasten on us To the sixth he sayes I returne no answer but plainly yeeld that there was never any Independent Church in any age or nation whatever totally converted to the Christian faith c. If Mr. Pryn understand the words thus That the congregationall way hath not beene set up as the government of any one Nation it s granted but that there was never a congregationall Church in any one nation is denied and it will put him to it to make it out Nay for the first foure or 500. yeeres I durst challenge him to produce any other then particular Churches that had the power of censures within themselves Justin and Irenaeus knew no kinde of Church in the world which did not assemble on the Sabbath and as learned Mr. Baines proves out of Euseb l. 3. 44. lib. See Bains diocesan triall 4. cap. 21. and lib. 2. cap. 6. that Churches at first were but Parishes and Parishes within Cities and he quotes Saint John lib. 3. cap. 23. saying to the Bishop Redde juvenem quem tibi ego Christus teste Ecclesia tua tradidimus Tertullian Apol. c. 39. knew no Churches which had not power of censures within themselves and we hold no more Saith Cyprian lib. 4. ep 1. Schismes were said to be from hence Quod Episcopo universa fraternitas non obtemperat And the same Author Epist 55. tota fraternitas i. e. unius congregationis tota multitudo ex qua componitur Ecclesia particularis Sabino de universae fraternitatis suffragio Episcopatus fuit delatus And againe lib. 1. epist 47. 58. 68. Ecclesiae igitur circuitus non fuit major quam ut Episcopatus totam plebem fuam in negotiis hujusmodi convocare potuerit He which is skil'd in Antiquity I doubt not but may bring forth multitudes of such testimonies as these all that we say is that a
Independent from the Apostles Laws And if he put it as an Argument it runs thus if the Primitive Churches were subject to the Apostles Laws Rules then are all Churches now subject to a Presbytery and Synods the consequence we desire you to prove To whom should the Church be subject but to these who gave them the minde of God immediatly And here let the Reader observe that in this Head Master Pryn brought in many Arguments by way of absurdity upon the holding of the Primitive Churches to be a pattern of all other which it seems he is ashamed to mention and seeth now because of what was retorted on him that even they themselves are absurd For that he saith of my retorted That the Scriptures were written in the infancie of the Church therefore better might be written now that is a blasphemous conclusion It s confessed Yet had it as good a consequence as yours that the Churches now had a more perfect constitution then the Churches in the Apostles times because they were the first and as you call them Infant churches Whereas you say that the Scripture was writ by the Ancient of dayes who hath neither infancie nor imperfection as the Church hath I Answer That the Scripture was writ to be a Rule to perfect the Churches and the reason of the imperfection of the Churches is because it comes not up to that Rule and these Churches how ever you deemed them Infant had more knowledge of that Rule then ever any yet have had they receiving it more immediatly from Gods mouth then any since and their Churches must needs be more exactly constituted then any since who lived under the Apostles direction and had all they had from them as from God To that I say that he would make a Nationall Church more perfect then a Congregationall he saith he doubts not to averre it since warranted by direct * Eph. 4. 11 12 13. 2 Cor. 13. 9. Heb 6. 1. 1 Pet. 9. 10. Phil. 3. 12. 2. Heb. 13. 21. James 1. 4. Scriptures to the which I shall refer the Reader but to look over and then let him learn hereafter to be taken with Master Pryns Marginall Quotations what shaddow there is of proof in these Scriptures but a cast of an eye will discern But yet I answer Imperfection in any thing ariseth more or lesse either from the defect of something essentiall or which is to the beauty and ornament and glory of a thing or both then is a thing more or lesse perfect when either its essentialls are more perfect or that which accidentally goes to the adorning of it What there is more of these two in a Nationall Church then in a Congregationall I know not unlesse the mixt multitude of beleevers and profane persons growing up together into a bitter bulk of sin should adde either to the essence or ornament of a Church if God had seen so much beauty in Nationall-churches above others he would not have destroyed the Jewish State or at least would have stablished the like in the Gospel and would have converted the heathen Empires and have took them in to be a Church to him It was the mixt multitude which came out of Egypt with the Israelites that brought them to so much wo indeed were a whole nation such as could be judged reall Saints it would be a lovely sight to behold so many Churches walking together in the unity of the faith but that never hath been yet we know not what may be we have little hopes of it untill the Jews be called if then And which is a more perfect State a company of visible Saints joyned together in love and walking in all the Ordinances of God according to their light or a whole nation wherein there is here and there a Saint walking with Whoremasters Drunkards and all sorts of ungodly ones without distinction and enjoying all these Ordinances that the most have no right unto The comparison between a grown experienced Christian and a babe in grace is no way proportionable to this thing Wherein lies the growth and perfection and experience in a Nationall-church that is not in a Congregationall Either it lies in the Presbytery and Nationall-assembly or in the distinct Parishes and the Members of them If in the Assembly that they are so experienced the people have little benefit by it unlesse to subject their necks to what they say and there is the same in many Congregationall-churches when met for advice if in the Parishes and the severall Congregations the same is in this way we speak of much more little is the edification the members have from the perfection of a Nationall-church seeing they cannot meet together or be present at the hearing of these experiences that others have the onely benefit the members have is from the enjoyment of the gifts of their own Pastour and it may be he one that they never chose as Pastour to them but was imposed on them and the truth is this is but to circumscribe the Church in the Ministers for else there may be more understanding men and experienced Christians in a congregationall-Congregationall-church then generally thorowout a nation the common people being most ignorant every where One thing he urgeth more in this That a Congregationall-church is forced to pray in the aid of other Churches for advice assistance c. which a Nationall-church need not Now here let all the world observe whether he or any of the Presbyterians have cause to call us Independent What more independent then a Nationall-church It s a Pope infallible needs no aid assistance of any Church in the world it hath a spirit of infallibility tied to its girdle We acknowledge we need help and assistance from other Churches they need none and here all you Presbyterians either renounce Master Pryns opinion and get some other Champion for you or else for ever cease to open your mouth to call any of the Congregationall way Independent In fine saith he He himself confesseth that the Apostles made new rules for Government and Discipline as occasion served and as God fitted occasions so he made known new rules successively by degrees not at once c. Therefore the Infant-Church in the Apostles dayes was not so compleat and perfect in all its parts as the multiplied and grown Churches afterwards A. How much he hath failed in the recitall of this let the Reader compare and judge I will not say wilfully as he saith of me for he hath left out that part which was the strength of all which if he had took in his Position had been overthrown which was that though the Apostles added by degrees according as occasion served new Rules and Offices for to what end should they adde untill there was occasion yet so as at length they discovered all the minde of God concerning his Churches Government and left it as a pattern to all the Churches As the Scriptures were not written all at once but
State free from the blood of Martyrs if this Principle be ingrafted to them and practised by them Ninthly this will be the greatest hindrance of knowledge and growth in Religion that can be for it puts out mens own eyes and judgment and ties them to see by others every man which hath not his conscience and judgment quite sold to the common opinions and lost in the common road will be affraid to read the Scriptures or search them throughly for if God should dart in any light from them or his own ingenuity thorough the strength of his reason should be forced to dissent from the multitude either he must stiffle in the birth his divine conception for so it may be for if he be known to be of such a judgment though in it self never so small he must loose all he hath and ipso facto be liable to the greatest censure or else he must dissemble his judgment and wound his conscience what a strait is this this will be only growth in religion to grow up more conformable to the opinion of the times he will be accounted the most knowing man who hath the language of the times most by heart no man durst set to himself a higher pitch in walking with God then the State hath set to him upon pain of the greatest hazard and wheras God reveals divers truths in divers ages times especially in matters of government and worship more and more as men come out of Antichristian darknesse yet none must be suffered and tolerated but that one it may it self be Antichristian at the least miserable cold and formall Tenthly if you will needs be punishing for smaller difference in judgment I desire you to shew your Commission and Warrant from the Lord Jesus and I am sure he never gave either patterne or precept for such a course he knowes his gifts he gives to men are different and that light he communicates is more and lesse and he beares with his Saints who are of different growth and stature and I thinke we ought to beare much more who are as infirme as any others he bore with his Disciple weaknesse when they believed not the resurrection and came with peace in his mouth to them how much more would he have borne if they had doubted only of matters of Discipline Rom. 15. 1. you which are strong ought to heare with the infirmities of the weak and not to please your selves as Christ pleased not himself I hope you will walk as Christ walked Christ told his Disciples Luk. 9. 54. that they knew not of what spirit they were of when they would have fire to come down from heaven to consume those that would not receive him there are many such spirits now a day but they know not what spirit they are of Object But it will be said and its the maine objection they have if we tolerate you we must likewise tolerate Papists c. Answ That doth not follow for their very principles opposeth the secular power they differ in fundamentalls and are properly another Religion and yet the State faith when they execute Jesuites and Fryers c. it is not for their conscience or religion only That we differ is but in a point not of absolute necessity to salvation though neerer the beauty and ornament of Religion and being a truth of Christ as is conceived it must be prized and we dare not discharge our conscience of it I shall say no more of this but let men take heed how they persecute the Saints and oppresse their Brethren lest Jesus Christ draw forth his Iron Scepter against them to vindicate the innocency of his people To my twelfth quaere saith he he only answers That I fall a jeering of my Brethren and that I put a nick name on them to make them odious not answering one sillable to the substance of the Question To what I should answer more then I did I am not yet informed for this was his Question whether it be not a proud insolent name we arrogate to be independent I answered that wee disclaime it and that in print and therefore his Quaere could be nothing but a jeare To which he answers first That this title was at first assumed approved of by your selves and is still owned by many you should have named the persons that assumed it as for our parts as many as I know abhor the name as it s fathered on us Indeed we are independent in this regard that we will not subject our judgements and cause to the juridicall power either of Master Pryn or any others though we will lie down at the foot of Christ in whatever he shall command us out of his Word and the truth is the Presbytery is the onely independent in the world and may most properly be called so for you neither depend on the Scriptures for it for you affirme not jure divino neither hath it dependence on others for you say in your third Reply pag. 13. that it needs not the aid and assistance of other Churches for as the ever honoured Lord Brookes said in his booke against Bishops I know no reason why one Congregation should be accounted more independent in respect of a whole Nation then Geneva in respect of France and France in respect of all Europs cominent Therefore you are best to take up that title on your selves as most suiting with your principles As for our part we are accomptable for our actions to every neighbour Church that shall in the name of Christ require it and we stand not independent from but hold communion with all other Churches both in Ordinances and asking counsell mutually though we thinke no Church hath a power of jurisdiction to command or impose any thing on us To which you answer That if we are accountable for our actions to every particular neighbour Church then why not much more to a Parliament or Synod To which I answer We shall be as ready to give an account to the Parliament and Synod of any action we do with the reason of it as well nay rather then to any other as for the way of doing of it we are accountable by way of information and satisfaction and in some cases unto the Magistrate by way of just appeal as in case an obstinate offender shall be excommunicated and he be unruly he or we may appeal to the Magistrate for redresse we that if the Magistrate judge him justly excommunicated he may be restrained from disturbing of us he that if the Magistrate judge the sentence unjust may be publikely cleared and vindicated But for any authorative power of jurisdiction that Synods or any have to make Canons and impose on us which we are bound to follow we humbly conceive it not be the minde of Christ and we shall desire Master Pryn to shew us his Rule in Scripture To the second he answers That if you stand not independant from other Churches but hold communion with them
Then first why do you separate from them as no true Christians Answ I answer in generall We separate from none we know to be true Churches but if you mean by your true Church the whole bulk of the nation whom you call a Church we must needs separate from it for we acknowledge no such Church Yet Secondly Though we acknowledge not England as a nation to be a true Church yet we acknowledge many true Churches in England with whom yet we cannot communicate in Church Ordinances because of many personall defilements among them or yet purged out and if they would give us leave in our communion with them to professe against these corruptions which we think defile them we should not scruple communion with them You know that one may be a reall man yee so corrupted with diseases and sores that it may be dangerous to come nigh him or eat or drink with him Glad should we be to joyn with them if they were so reformed and that mixture taken away that as nigh as could be none but such as had a right to Christ might partake of the Ordinances untill then you must excuse us if though we think many to be true Churches we cannot actually communicate with them You tell us saith he that neither I nor any Synods nor this Synod is infallible c. Therefore men are not bound to obey their decrees on penalty of sin To which he answers onely by way of Querie May not you and your Independent Ministers erre as well others O yes surely therefore they arrogate not such a power to make Laws for others as for that of the Major Votes it s answered before How ever slight Master Pryn makes of this reason yet untill he hath answered he must give us leave to beleeve it For if Synods have power to binde the conscience it is either because they can enjoyn nothing but truth for truth onely binds the conscience and so are infallible or else because of their own power and authority I know no other ground for it Is this good Logick or Divinity saith he Good Ministers may and do erre in some points of Divinity therefore we will beleeve them in none In that you say true there is neither Logick nor Divinity but the Consequence as I draw it is this Ministers may erre therefore none are absolutely bound to beleeve every thing they say as Scripture and so to sin if they obey not for it s a certain truth not probable that binds the conscience Certain I say either as I apprehend it or in regard of it self if I am bound to beleeve what ever they say that are in authority who may erre then my conscience is subject to errour as well as truth for that which is commanded may be errour yea if I think it errour yet I must obey it and this holds in every thing as well as any thing for in all things that is commanded they who command are to go by their own â—…dgements of the truth of the thing that they enjoyn and their judgements may erre yet I am bound to obey and sin if I do not Nay suppose what they command to be a truth yet I think it an errour and so it is to me my conscience so judging yet I am bound to obey else I sin The Lord learn you and those in authority more tendernesse to Saints consciences that you may not put such a yoke upon our necks that neither we nor our fathers were able to bear FINIS