informed that some have said that my heart is still at Rome whose mouthes must be stopped and those bâ—ats of spight and envy coming forth from thence like the frogs that came out of the mouth of tâ—e Dragon of the Beast and of the false Prophet Revel 16. vers 13. must be crushed least from câ—oaking at the first they proceed further to poison and envenome that good name and reputation which I hope I have purchased unto my self both by a known affection to the state affairs and Governours and by soundness of Doctrine these ten years that I have lived in Kent where my Teaching hath had the Approbation of all sorts of people of sound judgment who far and near have resorted to me and acknowledged from me the comfortable work of the Ministery uppon their Souls And as for any inclination or bending of my heart or affection to Rome I doubt not but that all England hath taken notice of my writings and actings against that Triple crowned man of sin and his Emissaries the Priests and Iesuites here in England against whom I have been often by Authority commanded up to London to the Sessions held at the old Bayly and without any competent satisfaction from the State have spent and wasted much of my poor estate which should have been my Wives and poor childrens portion and comfort hereafter In which Bell the Franciscan Friar Sanderson alias Holland and Wright both Iesuites and some others whose names are at present out of my memory have been discovered and according to the Laws of the Land brought to condigne punishment at Tyâ—urn For which service I have been often assaulted and threatned with murther by my bloud thirsâ—y enemies the Romish Papists to whom Mr. Nichols his party rashly judgeth my heart inclines as unto friends but especially by one Burke an Iâ—ish Gentleman in Alders-gate street and in Shoo-lane by one Captain Vincent Burton who came from Flanders purposely to kill me and had glutted his malice with bloud in my very châ—mber where I lodged had not the ever watching Providence of heaven prevented his murtherous intentions Which dangers threatning my life were well seen and credited by the Right Honourable my Lord chiâ—f Iustice Rowls when at the execution of Wright the Iesuite he charged one Mr. Thomas Mayo an Officer of the State to guard me during my abode in London and offered me more strength to secure me would I have accepted of it which I refused having constantly about me a Trooper also at my charge well known unto you of this Parish But can my heart be at Rome where if my body were it would be burnt to ashes for my good services to England as were the bones of the Byshop of Spalato after that upon fair promises he returned from England unto the Pope But these somes of malice are against me because I durst dispute with Mr. Nichols a private man and contend as the Saints have formerly done for the truth and because as a Schollar by way of Argument I have granted that the contrary whereof he could not prove nor so much as offered to reply against it to wit that Rome is a Church and true in some substantials though not in her corruptions of Rites foolish ceremonies superstitions and some false Doctrines contrary to the Scriptures Which opinion Beloved I shall never hold tenaciously noâ— heretically by inhering to it if by sounder judgements I may be convinced of the contrary to whom I shall willingly submit and not disturb as too many do the tender flocks of Iesus Christ. The ground therefore whereon at present I say this Opinion may be grounded and by me was truely intended when I answered Mr. Nichols saying that Rome was and was not a Church in several respects was this First Although it be true that the Councel of Trent convocated in the year 1547. did desperately wound the Church of Rome first in that it did heighten and multiply her damnable errours Secondly in that it did draw all the poison into one entire monster and body of errour and presented it all to the world as the Doctrine of the Church Yet as the dissenting parties from other councels setling the Popes Supremacy communicating in one kinde of worshipping of images disallowing the use of the Bible to the people forbidding Priests to marry and in England Mr. Iohn Wickliffs Tenents as I have shewed before were ground sufficient to discover a party a people a Church in Rome and in England which Mr. Nichols himself opposed not but rather seem to grant it then the like may be said since the councel of Trent for if any have opposed or dissented from or disallowed that councel they must be said to disallow those damnable errours that poison drawn into one entire monster and body of errour But many there are who have opposed dissented from and disallowed that councel Ergo They must be said 'to disallow those damnable errours that poison drawn into one entire monster and body of errour The Minor is known to such as have travailed beyond the Seas and no doubt to all learned Divines who have perused such Bookes as do lay down the State of Rome since the councel Wherein they shall finde that the whole Kingdom of France to this day hath opposed that councel besides many other learned Divines and among them the whole University of the Sorbonites at Paris who unanimously and strongly maintain the Oath of Allegiance to Kings Princes Governours of Nations against the Pope and so vigorously have opposed the Popes supremacy voted in the councel of Trent that had not Vrban the Eight complyed with the Court of Paris when Cardinal Richlieu was in his height of command and prosperity either he â—imself or one Friar Ioseph a Capuchin had been made Antipope for France and all Addresses to the Pope of Rome had been forbidden to the people of France in general at which they have been aiming these many years and I believe will ere long effect it if this Cardinal at present Mazarini continue in favour and keep close Prisoner that Popes great favourite Cardinal de Retz such is the regard that Kingdom hath to the councel of Trent to the Popes supremacy â—etled by it The same Oath of Allegiance hath been vigorously maintained and the Popes supremacy strongly denied these many years in England by some also of the Popish Religion as by Mr. Roger Widrington in his Apology but especially by the order of the Bendictines amongst whom Price the superiour of that family in England and before him Doctor Preston a Prisoner formerly in the Clinke who being excommunicated by the Pope for his opinion was by King Iames protected against the Pope the like Sir William Howard otherwise a Papist hath opposed in print all these slighting the councel of Trents determination as a point of faith and disregarding the Popes thundering out excommunications against them Besides these what dissenting parties must needs be there whereas many
that even in Countrey Parishes there was a seed and remnant left of Godly people who would not with Baals Priests bow their knees unto idols But as if this known truth were not satisfactory Mr. Nichols following his usual way of Arguments as I have observed in him either changing new terms or not minding what hath been granted denied or distinguished gives a sudden leap from England to Rome and from thence fetcheth a reply thus 3. Object In those dayes Parochial Churches were subject to Rome Ergo In those dayes Parochial Churches were Babylonish All this being answered before in substance carried not his Argument one step further than it was gone before though he went so many steps to fetch it Who doubts but then the major part were subject to Rome and so were Babylonish But here is no reply to what had been distinguished of the Martyrs of the holy remnant in those dayes who would not be subject to Rome But perceiving what a formal Disputant I had to deal with I granted all according to my former distinction and let him run on to this ensuing Enthymema 4. Object Rome then was no Church Ergo England then was no Church Here you see again how Parishes are laid aside and the word Church as if his terms were now altered from Parochial Churches to a National Church is revived But here though I might again have answered with my former distinction of the Godly remnant in England and shewed him that though Rome was not a Church then yet there was a Church and people of God in Eâ—â—land then Yet purposely for Arguments sake I resolved to turn his Byass from England to Rome himself iâ—clining by Arguments that way to try if yet he knew more of Rome than he had shewed to know in his answer to my first Argument concerning Parochial Babylonish Romish Churches and to try further whether he could as yet tell how like a Schollar to reply with a formal Argument to the several heads of a distinction and therefore I distinguished his Antecedent thus Rome then was no Church Qâ—oad substantiam or in some substantials as Ordination Baptisme the Scriptures a confession of Christs Birth Death Resurrection and Ascension and the like I denied his Antecedent But in corruptions of Rites and Ceremonies in Superstitions and in some Scripture opposing Doctrines I granted his Antecedent Here Mr. Nichols began to Triumph hoping now to regain what he had formerly lost by his slight answers to my Arguments and called out with a great exclamation and wonder to the people to take notice that I granted that Rome then was a Church But remember beloved how cunningly and craftily he concealed my distinction and never bad the people take notice that I had granted that it was a Church onely quoad substantiam or in some substantials yet remaining as Ordination Baptisme and the like Neither pursued he â—is advantage if any against me like unto Scâ—ollars who in Schooles are taught to reply against that part of the distinction which denieth and so whereas his Antecedent was this Rome then was not a Church and the negative or denying part of my distinction was this Rome thâ—n was not a Church quoad substantiam or in some substantials as Ordination Baptisme the Scriptures a confession of Christ his biâ—th dâ—aâ—h resurrection and ascension and the like I denie it he should have replyed against this and proved it was not a Church quoad substantiam or in any substantials neither in maintaining Ordination by Imposiâ—ion of hands by the Presbytery as from Christ neither in upholding Bâ—ptisme as also an ordinance of Christ neither in acknowledging the Gospel to be from Christ and not a fable of mans invenâ—ing and the like But as one that had quite forgotten his schoole and University lessons and Rules for arguing and hoping that the generality of the people understood not the words quoad substantiam he waves them and goes on thus 5. Object Rome then in those dayes was no true Church Ergo Rome then in those dayes was no Church If he had argued thus Rome then in those dayes was no true Church in any substantials Ergo your deniall is false I should have liked my Cambridge Schollar better But to change his term in the former Antecedent Church in this Antecedent into true Church having had deniall to Church onely is a way of arguing I have never yet found out Surely Mr. Nichols cannot be ignorant of a false Church and a true Church and that a false Church in some sense is usually called a Church or else why doth he call our Parochiall Churches being Babylonish and false in his opinion yet Churches I might therefore here have stopped his further proceeding by granting his Antecedent and denying his consequent but to try how far he would run upon new terms I told him that if he argued â—ill mid-night I would answer with the same denying part of my former distinction till he replied against it and so again I distinguished his Anâ—ecedent quoad substantiam or in some substantials it was no true Church â— denyed it In many corruptions ceremonies superstitions and some Scripture oppâ—sing doctrines I granted it And here Mr. Nicâ—ols like the Ieâ—uites spoken of before not being able to prove by arguments or Scripture that Mâ—ry was conceived without Original sin falling yet into eâ—clamations and wondring so he not being able to prove by any strong Argument or Scripture Authority that our Parochial Churches are Babâ—lonish â—ell into exclamations into both wondring and forgetting himself wondring that I should grant Rome to be a Church and forgetting my distinction and in what sense I granted it to wit in some substantials onely forgetting also that in the other branch of my distinction I denied Rome to be a Church to wit in her corruptions superstitions and many Scripture-opposing doctrines But here Mr. Nichols having pumped his brain dry and finding the stream of his Enthymema's to flow no more from him being not able to prove our Parochial Churches to be now Babylonish from any instance of Romes being or not being a Church without any further reply to my denial quoad substantiam or in some substantials which I long expected left off And so ended beloved our dispute and Arguments upon the first Proposition affirming Parochial Churches to be Babylonish As for his second Proposition concerning his own Church and Congregation and what was by Argument objected against it I shall speak of that after I have more fully cleared my judgment unto you yet concerning our Parochial Churches and to what hath been already said added such strong reasons and Arguments as want of time upon the day of dispute suffered not to come forth to light But before I satisfie your expectations and desires herein I must first clear my self from the harsh judgement and censure of Mr. Nichols his party against me for granting Rome to be a Church in some substantials which distinction they waving I am
Comparatively in respect of Iews and Turks they are good and true Or else surely the Title of Learned Mr. Fuller his book called The holy War and the holy State is false wherein he treats of the Christians Wars against the â—uâ—ks and against Ierusalem and of their State-Government in the Citie of Ierusalem and other places subdued by them But the Christians then were most such as lived under Popery and as Christians they joyned together against the enemies of Christ that the name of Christ might be propagated and confessed where it was most hated and blasphemed and this work by all Writers is called a holy work Then I infer that where such holy indeavours are for Christs name and the propagation of it there Christ in substantials is acknowledged and to confess and acknowledge Christ is some part and Character of a people and Church of God Ergo They are a Church in some part and in some substantials of a Church But fifthly I answer that this my opinion is no such strange Doctrine as Mr. Nichols and some others would judge it to be It hath been held by many sound and Orthodox Divines both at home and abroad Learned Morneuâ— Du Plessis who wrote against Rome and hath been held alwayes a â—ound Protestant in his book de Ecclesia pag. 343.350 holds Rome to be a Church and his chief Argument is indeed the same that hath alwayes moved me to this opinion before ever I read it in him which is this 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Antichrist must in full height sit in Templo Dei in the Temple of God What then is that or where is that but in the Church â—rom whence I form this Syllogisme If the Pope be Antichrist he must sit in the Temple and Church But the Pope is Antichrist Ergo He siâ—s in the Temple and Church Then further But the Pope as Antichrist sits in no Temple or Church except it be in the Church of Rome Ergo The Pope either is not Antichrist or Rome is a Church But the Pope is Antichrist and must sit in a Temple or Church Ergo Rome is a Church But Rome is not a Church in her corruptions Supersttions and Idolatries Ergo Rome the seat of Antichrist is a Church in some substantials So Mornâ—y also discourseth in his book de Ecclesia pag. 349.350 with these words which I have faithfully transcribed In that we affiâ—â— that Antichrist rulâ—th there we consequently hold that it is the Church in as much as he cannot sit any where but in the Church But it is one thing to separate our selves from the Church of Rome defiled by Antichrist and another thing to depart from the Communion of the universal Church Again we depart not from the Temple but from the Idolatry committed in the Temple nor from the Common-wealth but from the Tyrannie which oppresseth the Common-wealth nor from the Citie but from the pâ—stilâ—nce which inâ—ecteth the Citie nor from the Communion and fellowship of the people but from the conspiracie of Antichrist and of his maintainers We therefore renounce not their baptisme but we ratifie it And further for this point of baptisme that for substance it is true in Rome he â—aith thus pag. 147. It is not the Heretick that baptizeth as long as baptisme remaineth sound but Christ by the hand of the Heretick wherein we follow the practise of the Primitive Church and the determination of the fiâ—st Councel of Nice that they which were baptized by Hereticks renouncing their Hereâ—ie they shall not be rebaptized except those that have been baptized by the Samoâ—arens who keep not the essential words of baptismâ— And Doctour Reynolds speaking warily of the Church of Rome denies it not to be a Church but saith Ecclesia Romana nec est Ecclesia Catholicâ— nec sâ—num memâ—â—um Ecclesiae Caâ—holicae It is neither the Catholick Church not a sound Member of the Catholick Church In which words he seems to acknowledge it a diseased Member or a sick Member Which indeed puts me in minde of what I have read of a Commencing Doctour long since in Oxford whose question was Ecclesia Romaâ—a non 〈◊〉 Ecclesia vâ—â—a The Church of Rome is not a true Church And in his Pâ—â—ition or to speak properly in Oxford stile in his supposite he shewed the many coâ—â—â—ptions and spiritual diseases of the Church of Rome A Doctouâ— replying on him used this Argument Ecclesia vivâ— est Ecclesia vera Ecclesia Romana est Ecclesia viva ergo vera The Minor being denied the Opponent proceeded thus Ecclesia aegra est Ecclesia viva Ecclesia Romana est Ecclesia aegra Ergo viva Thus you see that by other sound Divines the Church of Rome hath been held a Church though sick diseased unsound in her corruptions which argues that under those diseases and corruptions there is some life yet in her and some truth of substantials as C rist Baptisme the Scriptures Ordination and the like 1. Object But it may he Objected that I speak things contradictory and do aver two contradictories in the same subject simul semel at once and the same time saying They are a true Church and yet again saying that in their corruptions superstitions and some Doctrines they are a false Church But true and false are contradictories not Predicable of the same subject at the same time Ergo I seem to speak things contradictorie Answ. To which I answer that contradictories are not predicable of the same subject at the same time if taken in one and the same respect but in several respects they may be predicable As I may say Peter is a man and Peter is not a man and in several respects both may be truely verified Peter truely is a man in respect of the substantials and essentials of a man in him and Peter is not a man but a beast in respect of his madness and beastly conversation Rome likewise is and may be said a Church and not a Church A Church in respect of some substantials in it belonging to a Church and not a Chuâ—ch in respect of the filthy corruptions Idolatry and Superstitions in it and Doctrines contrary to the â—â—uth of the word of God 2. Object Secondly it may be objected If in some substantials Rome be a true Church why then did I separate and doth all England separate from Româ— Where is our Warrant to separate from a true Church Ans. To which I answer that we have warrant sufficient to separate from Rome though not for the substantials which they yet maintain Their Idolatries their â—superstitions their false doctrines are waâ—rant sufficient to us out of the word of God to separate from them True it is every disease must not keep a man from his Neighbours society a man being Animal sociabile a sociable creature born into the world among other ends for comerce and society with his Neighbours Yet so infectious and contagious so filthy and loathsome may the disease be
them to do them good but I will put my fear in their hearts that they shall not depart from me Jerem. 32.40 Thirdly God hath brought us out of the Egyptian bondage of that Roman Antichrist which is another part I have heard the groaning of the Children of Israel whom the Egyptians kept in bondage and I have remembred my Covenant Exod. 6. vers 5. Fourthly because we have the book of the Covenant which is read to us as formerly by Moses to the people who took the book of the Covenant and read in the audience of all the people and they said All that the Lord hath said will we do and be obedient Exod. 24. vers 7. We have the holy Commandments and the Gospel the words of the Covenant Exod. 34. vers 28. And it is a special prerogative to Gods people to have the word of God as Paul observes in the Iews prerogative and advantage what advantage then hath the Jew Much every way chiefly because unto them were committed the Oracles of God Rom. 3. vers â— 2 Which David also sets down as a great priviledge and prerogative He shewâ—â—h his word unto Jacob his statutes and his judgements unto Israel he hath not dealt so with any Nation Ps. 14. v. 7 19 20. All which bound up in one bundle of an impartial judgement tâ—ue consideration will make it to appear unto the world that surely Mr. Nichols his Assertion is most erroneous and false affirming as much as this that a people offering their prayers to God in the name of Iesus Christ taking the same Iesus Christ onely for their Mediatour and Advocate condemning as Babylonish the Mediation and Advocation of all Saints and Angels partaking of the Covenant made by God to his people through Iesus Christ having true knowledge of Gods word and his Law written in their inward parts having the fear of God possessing their hearts having been brought out of Babylonish and Antichristian bondage having the book of the Covenant read unto them having the holy commandments the Gospel the words of the Covenant and acknowledging obedience due unto them and enjoying that peculiar priviledge and prerogative of Iacob and Israel in the word Yet notwithstanding all these particulars and sure truths out of Scripture that such a people is no true Church but Babylonish and Antichristian Mr. Nichols may say so but I am sure the Scriptures say the contrary which must be yours and my guide to the which I beseech you to lean as you tender your Souls For my part I am so convinced out of the word of the contrary to Mr. Nichols his Assertion that I hope I shall never be so seduced nor blinded as to incline to so gross and false an opinion And I hope my good God my true guide my Prophet and onely Teacher will not hereafter judge or condemne me for the lighâ— which in this particular point of controversie I am resolved till death to follow All these Arguments upon the day of dispute should have been objected against Mr. Nichols had he answered like a Schollar Categorically to every Proposition and not so much indeavoured with Speeches and Orations to stop the stream of them Many more I could propound unto you were it not that I have already found the work to increase like the Widows Oyl much in my hands and nothing yet spoken of the second Proposition which I know you expect to have it further cleared unto you than it was the other day by a few Objections against it But before I come unto it I must briefly answer the scruple of one or two of the Clergy my fellow-labourers whose impatient mutterings against Parochial Churches wherein they serve and can willingly enjoy the milk of such flocks were taken notice off by some who seem not to deny Parochial Churches in Mr. Nichols his sense counselling or Preaching a separation from them but in another sense Presbyterial they would fain call it but unjustly as disagreeing with the Classical way and with Provincial Churches which one of them told me were to be called onely Churches and Parishes not truely Churches but onely integral parts of such Classical or Provincial Churches So that the whole County being divided into Classes the Parishes also are to be divided so as that a competent number are to belong to such and such a Classes as formerly to such and such a Cathedral and all that number of Parishes to make up but one Church to be ruled by Officers and Elders according to the word but singly every Parish taken by it self not to be called a Church Which Opinion being but a Cavil as I suppose against my self by the party insisting on it I shâ—ll wave as unwilling to disturb and as willing to submit for peace and quietness sake especially in this which well understood doth not cross my Opinion and judgement of holding Parish Societies to be true Churches nor my Opinion cross the judgement of the Learned and Reverend Divines of the Presbyterial way who affirm the Presbyterial Government by Preaching and Ruling Presbyters in Congregational Classical and Synodal Assemblies to lay the truest claim to a Divine Right according to the Scriptures with whose own Doctrine I shall confirm this truth that Parochial Congregations are to be called truely Churches The aforesaid Divines in their book of the Divine right of Church-Government take notice of the whole Church the whole Body of Christ and of larger particular Members of that Body of Christ and thirdly of smaller single Congregations Which threefold distinction of Churches is truely grounded upon the Scripture Thus Paul calls the whole Body of Christ Church Now ye are the Body of Christ and Members in particular And God hath set some in the Church first Apostles secondarily Prophets thirdly Teachers 1 Cor. 12. vers 27.28 So Matâ—h 16. v. 18. and often elsewhere So likewise larger particular Members of that body of Christ such as Provincial Churches are in Scripture called Churches as the Church of Ierusalem Act 8. vers 1. the Church of Antioch Act. 13. v. 1. the Church of Coâ—inth 2 Cor. 1. vers 1. and the Church of Ephesus unto the Angel of the Church of Ephesus write these things Revel 2. vers 1. In which places there were no doubt many single Churches and Congregations as appears plainly in Corinth where Paul taught Apollo taught and Cephas taught and in Ephesus where Eusebius Emissenus reckoneth up above three-score several Churches and Congregations all which in Scripture are called one Church And I cannot here but declare my judgement upon those words of Iohn Rev. 2. vers 1. Unto the Angel of the Church of Ephesus that certainly if there were in Ephesus many single Congregations and particular Churches and yet called but Church as if but one Church were there then it appears evidently that those many single Churches made up one Provincial Church as integral parts of the whole which I will not deny to my Caviller though
and have denied my Minor which immediately I proved thus from St. Paul to the Hebrews 4. Argument St. Paul in Hebr. 6. Chap. vers 1 2. sets down with Baptisme Imposition of hands to be a Principle of thâ— Doctrine of Christ. But Baptisme because it is a Principle of the Doctrine of Christ â—ught never by any Churches to be omitted to the end of the World Ergo Imposition of hands by the Presbytery in Ordination also ought never by any Churches to be omitted to the end of the World Here Mr. Nichols began to perceive his errour and want of knowledge in the Scriptures when he denied the Minor and that Imposition of hands by the Presbytery was a Doctrine of the Principles of Christ which being made clear unto him he could give no answer to it and so my Syllogisme was in the discretion and sound judgement unanswerable and unanswered But Mr. Nichols his Moderatour perceiving the unresistible force of the Arment and seeing his friends mouth almost shut up spoke a word to this purpose that it was doubted by some Authours whether that place of Paul Hâ—br 6. vers 1 2. did intend Imposition of hands by the Presbytery in Ordination or some other end in Imposition of hands in that place To whom I â—ad replied had not Mr. Nichols his mouth begun to open again for my beloved some of the Authours which understand that place of Paul not of Imposition of hands in Ordination but to some other end intend that end to be Imposition of hands by the Byshop in Confirmation whose judgement I cannot follow neither will Mr. Nichols or his Moderatour dare to follow that Opinion unless they will acknowledge Bishops again amongst us to Confirm and Bishop our Children that such a Principle of the Doctrine of Christ in that sense may not be omitted in our Churches Which I am sure Mr. Nichols his Moderatour whom I respect as a Divine of sound judgement doth not allow but onely to strengthen his friend in his weakness and that in the mean time he might recollect himâ—elf for some better answer was pleased to make such a motion and put in such a Caâ—â—at Some other Authours understand that place of Paul Hebr. 6. vers 1.2 to mean laying on of hands on the sick which the Church of Rome continues to this day superstitiously maintaining extream Unction and anointing the sick with Oyl hallowed by their Bishops Either of which Opinions had Mr. Niâ—hâ—â—â— insisted on I should soon have shewed him his errour and such a second trouble to have befallen him as the Poet speaketh off saying Incidit in Scyllam cupiens vitare Charybdin and as the Iews spake to Pilate So the last errour shall be worse than the first Matth. 27. vers 64. This beloved I do mention but to call you to minde to remember it that you may take notice how with the strength yea evidence of my Argument which truely to me is undeniable Mr. Nichols was put to his shifts And so indeed after a while he betook himself to another shift saying that Imposition of hands by the Presbytery in Ordination had been so abused and corrupted by the Bishops and by the Church of Rome that now by the Godly it was thought fit to be omitted and laid aside Ah beloved and can this answer perswade any sound Conscience to slight a Principle of the Doctrine of Christ Must Bishops or Romes corruptions make us more corrupt Must their corruptions make us deny our Principles Might not Mr. Nichols as well have answered that because the Church of Rome hath corrupted baptisme with Rites and Superstitious Ceremonies therefore we ought utterly to forsake to forget slight and omit baptism which also is a Principle of the Doctrine of Christ Surely for all this his answer you will be unwilling to deprive your Children of baptisme so purely and rightly administred in England because in Rome it is corrupted And so shall I for all this poor shift of Mr. Nichols be as unwilling to deny Imposition of hands by the Presbytery in Ordination as a Principle of the Doctrine of Christ because in Rome it is corrupted with anointing with Oyl the thumbs and fore-fingers of the Priests and with other foolish superstitious needless Rites and Ceremonies never practised by the Apostles But yet to shew Mr. Nichols his folly in this answer I demanded of him why then if he made such scruple of us Ministers who had been ordained by Bishops formerly with their Presbyters and of those Reverend Presbyters who in some places of this Land did still ordain without Bishops why then had he not the Imposition of hands by some Ministers nearer in judgement unto himself who had been beyond the Seas in Holland and doubtless there were ordained by some purer Presbyters who never succeeded Bishops These at least might better have ordained him than the people who have no power to ordain nor any power of the Keyes But this last Mr. Nichols denying and affirming the power of the Keyes to be in the people I replied against it thus 5. Argument The power of the Keyes wheresoever it is must be in that Subject which Christ hath ordained But Christ ordained not the people to be the Subject of the Keyes Ergo The people are not the Subject of the power of the Keyes The Major Proposition he granted and the Minor without any distinction at all he denied To which I replied If Christ ordained the people to be the subject of the power of the Keyes then the people must needs be the proper subject of the power of the Keyes But the people are not the proper subject of the power of the Keyes Ergo Christ ordained not the people to be the subject of the power of the Keyes The Major was granted and the Minor was yet denied to the which I replied with another Syllogisme If the people are the proper subject of the power of the Keyes than they are thâ— first subject of the power of the Keyes But the people â—re not the first subject of the power of the Keyes Ergo The people are not the proper subject of the power of the Keyes This Minor also he denied that the people were not the first subject of the power of tâ—â— Keyes till a friend whispering him in the ear made him to see and â—â—flect upon his oversight and better to consider what he had denied But I forthwith replied against him thus If the people were the first subject of the power of the Keyes then the power of the Keyes was in them first and before it was in the Apostles converting and baptizing them But the power of the Keyes was not in the people first and before it was in the Apostles converting and baptizing them Ergo The people are not the first subject of the power of the Keyes Here beloved Mr. Nichols finding himself by this Syllogisme quite cast upon his back followed his whispering friends as is supposed good counsel and though
of the people the Text would â—avâ— declared it thus unto us 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and when they had ordained to themselves Elders and not as it is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 when they had ordained them Elders as speaking of others Mr. Selden hath a large discourse in his book de Synedâ—iis veterum Hebraeorum shewing that the word signifies to Elect Decree Ordain and is to be understood of the Apostles Act in this place and not of the peoples What comfort then can Mr. Nichols have from this place especially if he understand Greek and the whole context and from those many more produced by me and unanswered by him to satisfie his conscience when thus by Scripture he is fully convinced to be no lawfully ordained Minister of Iesus Christ Which was the first thing I discovered by Argument against his Church or Congregation that it was not the house of God not being the pillar and ground of the Truth where the Truth of Ordination according to the word of Christ and the practise of the Apostles so much faileth and is by him opposed Thus far beloved my Arguments reached upon the day of our dispute against Mr. Nichols his second Proposition And seeing we are come to this main point of the controversie of these times concerning popular Election and Ordination and popular Government in the Church which popular men too much affecting popularity for their ends to draw away our people from our Churches have devised and of late stirred up I shall yet a little more inlarge my Judgement and Discourse for the better resolving a doubt so necessary in these times to be unfolded This Monstrous opinion can plead no Scripture except those three places by me above rehearsed out of the Acts of the Apostles To that whereon Mr. Nichols leans I have answered as also to that of Act. 6. Chap. where although the people look out honest men for Deacons yet the Apostles appoint them over that business and to that ordain them by Imposition of hands which sheweth more than a meer looking out for them and approving or allowing of them The third place is out of Act. 1. vers 23. They appointed two Joseph called Barsabas who was surnamed Justus and Mathias From whence some of the separation will settle Ordination upon the people because in this peculiar work the people were joyned with the Apostles But observe first from this place that there the Electours were eleven Apostles to guide the other But Mr. Nichols will allow those to chuse him who have no Officer to guide them amongst whom no doubt but there are very many weak persons Secondly It was very easie to chose one of these two Ioseph or Mathias who had accompanied with the Apostles all the time that Jesus went in and out among them vers 21. This was easie to know But to chose a man fit for a Pastour requires more skill than so Thirdly In this Election God was peculiarly seen the Apostles not knowing who it should be Fourthly in vers 26. They gave forth their lots and their lots fell upon Mathias They that will make any thing of this place may as well make casting of Lots an Essential to Ordination as give this power to the people who were never constituted appointed or ordained by Christ to be either the proper first or immediate subject of the power of the Keyes which I shall indeavour to clear thus unto you That which is the first subject is the proper subject No doubt of this But the proper subject is reciprocated and convertible with his Accident As for example A living Creature is the proper subject of sense and feeling A man is the proper subject of laughing or laughter And from hence we say reciprocally Every man is Risible and Every thing that is Risible is a man Every living Creature hath sense and feeling and so likewise Every thing that hath sense and feeling is a living Creature This is called Axioma 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 But every Axiome that is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 doth include in it the Rule 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 where the Predicate is true of the subject in all place and at all time This is true of a living Creature and feeling of a Man and Risibility And so if the people or the Fraternity be the proper subject of the power of the Keyes It must be true that they are and have been the proper Subject of the power of the Keyes omni tempore omni loco in all places and at all times But if we finde the power of the Keyes exercised in time before there was a Christian Fraternity then certainly there was some other subject of the power of the Keyes in whom this power was as in a proper subject When Paul came to Corinth he preached Authoritative and with power and Commission Eâ—go Then the power oâ— the Keyes was in some â—ubject but the Fraternity at that time was non Enâ— had no being in Christianity How then could they be the subject And if then they were not the subject how can they now be the proper subject of the power of the Keyes who were not in all place and time the proper subject of it Yet Mr. Nichols could grant that the people were the subject the proper subject and the fiâ—st subject of the power of the Keyes But he â—ruely might as well have granted that in these times Man is the proper subject of Risibility but was not alwâ—yes and that at some time Man was not Risible nor at some time a living Creature the subject of sâ—nse and feelâ—ng though now he be Buâ— secondly This Absurdity will appear thus Those who are the effect of the power of the Keyes are not the fiâ—st subject of it But the Fraternity is the effect of the power of the Keyes It was so in all the Churches which the Apostles gathered and is indeed to this day So that which is primum Subjectum the fiâ—st subject is Immediatum Subjectum the immemediate subject But how can the Fraternity be the immediate subject of the power of the Keyes since then mediantibus Apostolis by means of the Apostles and now mediantibus Ministris by means of the Ministers the Fraternity is made up I but the Elector is before the Elected It is true of Christ who Elected the Apostles and gave to them the Keyes from whom by a continued succession of Ministers still the Fraternity was made But had not the power of the Keyes had some effect there had not been a Fraternity to chose an officer though they are now in time before him whom they now Elect Yet they were not before him or them qua Fratres who by the power of the Keyes in the Ministery made them capable to chose an Officer Therefore the power of the Keyes was in some subject before them Besides Election is no power of the Keyes Therefore to argue The people Elect ergo They are the first subject of the