incompossibiles A whole thing cannot be wholly or all wayes or according to all its possible Modifications for many of them severally or apart are possible which conjunctly are incompossible if I may so expresse my self or rather impossible So a man may be white and he may be black but he cannot be white and black together for these two qualities being contrary are impossible or incompatible one with another If then feeding either by way of teaching or ruling or the power to feed be taken in actu primo viz. for the facultie to feed this Proposition The combined Eldership or a Classicall or Synodall Assembly and every particular Elder considered apart and separated from the combined Presbyteries have power to feed teach or rule all particular Churches is true And as for the particular Elders which may seem the most absurd it appeareth cleerly for if they had it not how could ye or they Preach in sundry and divers particular Churches as ye do out of your own particular Churches If it be answered that ye do it onely Occasionally and not Ordinarily I reply That before ye can do it either Occasionally or Ordinarily ye must have a power to do it absolutely for actus secundus supponit primum the second act supposeth the first or all actions suppose some active power from whence they proceed for a man that is no Minister can neither Preach Ordinarily nor Occasionally Item It is a certain Maxime in Logick that a Parte in modo ad Totum argument amur affirmativè ut est homo albus Ergo est homo We argue from a modified part or taken with some limitation or modification to the whole as if I say this is a white man Ergo this is a man So I say this man may Preach occasionally Ergo this man may Preach or have Authoritie to Preach For Power or Authoritie to Preach is Totum in modo and Power or Authoritie to Preach occasionally or ordinarily are partes in modo If it be objected That if every particular Minister hath Power or Authoritie to Preach in every Church or Congregation then every Minister is an universall Pastour as the Apostles But so it is not Ergo. Answ I deny the Consequence of the first Proposition for an Apostle not onely hath an universall Vocation to teach all particular Churches and Flocks but also to teach all particular and ordinary Pastours or Ministers of all particular Churches and Flocks 2. Item The Vocation of the Apostles was immediately from God 3. They were infallible in Doctrine 4. Endowed with extraordinarie Gifts 5. They had no particular Mission to restrain them to any particular Church And these four last Conditions were most conveniently annexed unto the Universalitie of their Charge which cannot be said of ordinary and particular Ministers If it be replied At least they differ not from them in the Universalitie of their Charge but onely in some Accidents as in Infallibilitie some extraordinarie Gifts c. that are meerly Extrinsecall unto the Charge and to the Universalitie thereof I answer First That these Accidents are not meerly Extrinsecall unto the Universalitie of the Apostolicall Charge but Intrinsecally annexed unto it by Gods Ordinance by Congruitie and Morally since it could not be Universally exercised without them Secondly For the better cleering of this I observe That to the Charge of a Minister three things are necessary 1. A generall Vocation to Preach and that not unlike to that which Masters of Arts and Doctors receive in Universities with this clause Hic ubique terrarum to Teach here and through all the World 2. A speciall Mission either 1. by God alone or 2. or also from the Representative Church 3. A particular Election and Admission whereby the Minister is elected by a Reall particular Church and so admitted therein to exercise his Charge The first of these three is common to the Apostles with all ordinary Ministers The second is universall in the Apostles for Christ sent them to teach all Nations and sitted them with gifts convenient thereunto But it is particular in Particular and Ordinary Ministers for orders sake and that jure divine as many learned and godly Divines hold The third jure divine should be universall in respect of the Apostles for every Particular Church was bound to admit the Apostles in case they would have preached amongst them and if any should have refused them yet in vertue of their generall Vocation and universall Mission from God they had power and Authoritie to Preach among them and in them all But in Particular and Ordinary Ministers it is onely Particular and not Universall for neither doth every Particular Church chuse elect or admit every Ordinary Minister to be its Minister neither is it bound so to do The first of these three is the remote foundation or the remote and principall cause of the Power and Authoritie that a Minister hath to Preach or to rule the Church of God The second and third are the next and immediate foundation or cause thereof or conditio sine qua non viz. The universall Mission and Admission of Ministers is the immediate cause of their universall Power and Authoritie but the particular Mission and Admission is the immediate cause of the Power and Authoritie of Particular Ministers And as we never finde the Philosophers Particularia without their Vniversalia in Particularibus inclusa never a Genus but in some Species nor a Species but in some Individuum by whose Differences their indifferent Nature is limited and determined No more finde we over this vast and generall Vocation in Ordinary Ministers without this Particular Mission of some Representative Church and Admission in and by some Reall and Particular Church or at least it should not be for without this consent Election and Admission a Minister is no more its Minister then a Man is a Womans Husband without her consent Neither can a Man be married to a Woman in generall or to an Individuam vagam but to this or that Particular Woman with whom he contracteth No more can a Preacher be sent to Preach to the Church in generall or to Particular Churches indefinitely viz. Unto quaedam Ecclesia but to this Church distinctly 1. And so I answer that a Particular and Ordinary Minister is differenced from an Universall Minister or an Apostle by the Particularitie of his charge in vertue of his Particular Mission which he hath of God by a Representative Church and of his Particular Election and Admission which depend upon that Particular Reall Church whose Minister he is and not in vertue of his generall Vocation which is common unto both Nam Principium convenientiae non est Principium differentiae That wherein things do agree cannot distinguish or make them differ 2. Every particular or Ordinary Minister may feed teach and rule all the Church but not alwayes Totam militantem Ecclesiam sed non totaliter All particular Churches but not particularly for as we have
that regard it is not compleat full or entire If of a Power compleat in its own kinde or nature ye say nothing but what we say since it is our opinion That every Particular Congregation hath a compleat Power in it self such as is due to such a Congregation dependent upon that of Classes and Synods in case of Appeal whereby it may be challenged to erre grosly If it be so Wherefore contest ye with us who give you no subject of quarrell as not dissenting from you in that particular Pag. 14. 2º they say That they claim not an independent power in every Congregation to give an account or to be subject to no others Answ Then your power is dependent upon some others then it must give an account and be subject to some other If subject to some others then that other is superiour And what say we more onely we say that there is a subordination betwixt superiour and inferiour Ecclesiastical Judicatories which ye hold here to be juris divini we partim divini partim naturalis aut mixti I pray you Brethren agree these two Propositions how a Church can have a full and compleat Government and yet not independent it should seem to me that either you contradict not us or contradict your selves within the compasse of two lines Pag. 14. 3º they deny That by the Institution of Christ or his Apostles the Combination of the Elders of many Churches should be the first compleat and entire seat of Church-power over each Church so combined Here ye attribute unto our Churches an opinion That they own not as their own viz. That the Combination of Elders of many Churches is the first Seat of Church-power for they hold the contrary viz. That the first Seat of Government is in Parochiall Churches since there the parties debates their cause in first Instances if ye say that by first ye understand the principall then ye cannot deny but that Senate or Assembly whereunto Particular Congregations are subject whose judgement according to Gods Word they must obey and of whose judgement their judgements depend must be the principall Seat of Church-power for that is principall whereof the other dependeth and to which the other is subject Neither say we That it is the compleat and entire Seat of all Ecclesiasticall Judgement since in things of lesse concernment and that onely belong to Particular Congregations we hold the Eldership of that Congregation may judge and sometimes judges in effect compleatly and entirely But ye propound a tacite Objection The Eldership so combined cannot challenge authority over the Churches they feed not Answ 1. We have answer'd That our Eldership challengeth no such authority to it self 2. That this argument striketh no lesse at your judgements of Neighbour Churches against Particular Congregations then at that of combined Elderships against a Particular Church since your Neighbour Churches feed no more that particular Congregation then our combined Elderships a particular Church 2. We deny that our Classes and Synods or as ye call them combined Presbyteries or Elderships feed not particular Congregations for they govern them which is a certain sort of feeding due to Elders and in this signification Kings Princes and Dukes are called Pastors or feeders of their People because they rule them Jor. 6.3 and 12 10. But to bring more light to this captious Proposition and all fallacious Arguments that may be grounded hereupon here I will more fully declare in what sense these Propositions may be true or false viz. 1. The combined Eldership hath power to feed rule and teach the Church or all Particular Churches 2. The combined Eldership feedeth or ruleth all Particular Churches 3. The Elders of the combined Eldership have power to feed or rule Particular Churches And for this effect note 1. That the feeding or teaching of the Church may be taken either in actu secundo for actuall feeding or the exercise of the power of feeding as when a Preacher teaches actually c. 2. In actu primo for the morall power which Ministers have to teach in vertue of their Vocation and Mission to their Charge and Admission into it So the Power to feed howsoever it signifie formally the Actum primum as ruling Actum secundum may be taken in Actu primo for the Power that a Minister hath to feed or in Actu secundo for the Act of feeding proceeding from the power or first act 3. Item in Actu signato when a power or an act is signified to belong to a thing that exerciseth not the act as when a King commands but putteth it not in execution or in actu exercito when it is exercised so particular Officers have the power in actu exercito which the King and superiour Judges and Magistrates have in actu signato 3. That the Ministers or Elders of the Eldership may be considered in quality of a collective body of Elders or severally every one apart which the School-men call ordinarily collectivè distributivè If severally then either Absolutely without any relation to the collective body of the Eldership and in quality of particular Ministers of their own Particular Churches or with some relation or respect to the collective body or combination of the Eldership viz. as parts thereof 4. The whole collective body of the Eldership may be taken either formally as it is a collection of sundry Elders according to the Order established in the Church representing many Churches combined and consociated from which they have their Commissions or materially in quality of Ministers or Elders of whom the Consociation or Combination or Synod or Classicall Assembly of Elders is compounded 5. Both the collective body or consociation of Elders which is a representative body of many Churches as also every particular reall Church and the whole Militant Church may be considered as other things aut ut Totum simpliciter aut ut Totum totaliter either as a Totall or Totally as a Whole or wholly so may we say of omne it may be taken simpliciter pro omne vel pro Omni omnino vel omni modo this word All may be taken absolutely for all or for all considered all manner of wayes or altogether Then a Totum is taken totaliter or totally or a whole thing wholly and this word All all wayes when it is taken according to all the Modifications that it can have As for example Peter is a Totum or a Whole-man when he is lying in his Bed at Rome he is Totus Romae all or whole at Rome but not Totaliter totally not wholly or all wayes for he may sit and stand at Rome and when he is lying he is not according to these other wayes and Modifications viz. standing c. Yea I may say that it is impossible That at one time a Totum be or exist in one place totum totaliter i. e. Secundum omnes suos modes possibiles multi enim divisim sunt possibiles sed conjunctim
further it and having no impediments that could hinder it Your helps were first Gods Word Secondly The Discipline of the Reformed Churches Thirdly That of the Non-Conformists Fourthly That of New-England Fifthly The example and president of the Shipwrack of the Brownists Sixthly The reason ye had to be true to your consciences The impediments or hinderances ye could have were first worldly temptations secondly aymes thirdly education fourthly engagement to other Churches from which all ye were free But this Enumeration is imperfect for the grace of God which is the principall help without which we can do nothing is here omitted But let us examine them all according to the order that ye have set them down We lookt upon the Word of Christ as impartially and unprejudicedly as men made of flesh and blood are like to do in any juncture of time that may fall out This is much As for us Brethren being but men made of flesh and blood we know that we know but in part that we do but in part the good we have power to do for we have power to do more good then we do that we may omit much evill that we do that of both we know very little in respect of that we know not For the heart of man is deceitfull and who can know it And as for others we know much lesse then of our selves not knowing their hearts temptations ayms intentions or their sins repentance backslidings their falls or uprising but least of all of men possible in junctures of time to come that God can create for what know ye or we Brethren what may be And therefore we dare not be so bold as to compare our selves with others in time present much lesse with those that be possible in junctures of time to come in esteeming our selves as good or better then they may be And therefore I esteem that your comparison proceedeth rather of flesh and blood then of the spirit of God We wish indeed we were the best of all men but we esteem not our selves the best Oh that we might be but in the number of good men We wish we could say as much as ye but again we dare not being conscious of our own infirmitie that we are but flesh and blood But ye seem to prove it by removing of hinderances as first Of Temptations of the place ye went unto your condition and company which left you as freely to be guided by Gods Word as the Needle toucht with the Loadstone is in the compasse But this is an imperfect Enumeration of Temptations It containeth onely some externall and yet not all as those that proceed from the Divell and omit internall Temptations whereof ye purge not your selves sufficiently But left that company you in such a condition Medied it self no more in a businesse of so great consequence in establishing a new Government to which it was to submit it self Did it so let it self be led by the nose Had it no more interest in the businesse It is too much Onely I adde it is one of the greatest Temptations that a man can fall into to esteem himself without Temptations and that such a man in such a case should not need to say Lead us not into Temptation And was this no Temptation that ye went out of your Countrey with some miscontentment in it that ye found your selves so consociated that ye might frame your Government to your present estate and condition as was requisite in such a company that shuning too much one extremitie because of your sufferings ye should presently run into the other Neither was this extravagant power a small temptation Nunquam satis fida potentia ubi uimia est We had say ye of all men the greatest reason to be true to our own consciences in what we should embrace This Brethren cannot be said without a high esteem of your selves and great undervaluing of others Have not other men as good reason as ye to be true unto their consciences since they are all bound under the pain of eternall condemnation to that duty What greater reason then this can ye have Have not these whom ye call Presbyterians who were condemned to death for that Discipline ready to be executed who afterward were exiled into forraign Countreys wherein they ended their lives who were men of no lesse learning abilities and holinesse of life then any of your profession had they not I say as great reason to be true to their consciences as ye can have Afterward in this Paragraph ye remove all ayms and ends that might make you byas We had say ye no new Common-Wealths to rear c. As much may all Schismaticks say Neither can every man have new Common-wealths to rear neither can these of New-England say so And as for you five your number was too small and howsoever ye had not Kingdoms in your eye yet had every one of you one in his heart to subdue Tunc omnia jura renebis cum poteris Rex esse tui Hoc regnum sibi quisque dat This is a Kingdom which every man by Gods grace may take and give to himself without any materiall Arms or Armies And howbeit ye have no State ends neverthelesse as ye have very many good men so have ye very many good States-men among you yea more then those that maintain Presbyterian Discipline in regard of your number But what Republikes had the Protestants in France or Scotland to rear or worldly Kingdoms to subdue more then ye Your mould of Church Government will be coexistent say ye with the peace of any form of civill Government on earth that may be true of yours but not of ours for it cannot comply with that of the Turks and we confesse ingenuously that for any thing we know yours will comply a great deal more with State and State ayms then ever S. Peter S. Paul or we could do howsoever ours submitteth it self willingly to all sort of just Government that is of God Neither requireth the Parliament any thing more of the Church of GOD. Howbeit ye had No preferment or worldly respects to shape your opinions for yet praised be God your Ministers have no want but as great abundance of worldly means as any of your Brethren that stand for Presbyteriall Government But what preferment or worldly respects could Calvin or Beza have had who for the puritie of Doctrine and of Discipline introduced this Presbyteriall Government whereby both themselves and all they that should thereafter professe the Gospel were deprived of all hopes of future preferment and worldly respects What preferment or worldly respects could they have that refused them when they were offered unto them and prefer'd death and perpetuall exile before good fat Bishopricks We know King James his round answer when some asked him wherefore he preferred not good men to Bishopricks in Scotland The Divell an honest man sayes he will accept them And what greater preferment have they who at this present
Here ye mistake for we can produce you sundry others of good note here Printed at London we are sorry ye have not seen them or disdained to read them If there were not many written before those it was in pittie of your afflictions whereunto good Divines would not adde new affliction Neither thought they your Partie so considerable Neither were your Opinions much known or published abroad being onely written in English and not in Latine except by one or two of your Divines for any thing I know Neither thought they that ye were so averse from their Discipline as ye appear in this Assembly but that ye suffered only for not conforming your selves unto Episcopall Government But whatever they have written I know not what this can serve to the purpose unlesse it be to declare That whatsoever helps ye had heretofore yet ye were destitute of those writings whereby ye might have received farther light concerning Presbyteriall Government and I pray God ye make good use of them In the 16. § at the end of the 16. Pag. Ye travell to remove an Objection viz. That in Congregationall Government such as is amongst you there is no allowed sufficient remedy for miscarriages though never so grosse no relief for wrongfull Sentences or Persons injured thereby no room for Complaints No Powerfull or Effectuall means to reduce a Church or Churches that fall into Heresie or Schisme c. To avoid this Objection ye relate us an History § 17. and what ye did upon such an emergent case But ye shew us no Law that ever ye had amongst you whereby ye might bring any remedie against such a miscarriage before that it fell out 2. Neither read we of any such Law or remedie in your Books before this 3. Your Divines and the Members of your Churches with whom we conversed shewed no remedie amongst you for such inconveniencies 4. They gave us no answer unto this Objection save onely this That God hath ordained no remedies in such Cases Yea that if Churches should fall away from Christ and with the Jews call him an Impostor and the Trinitie with Servet a three headed Cat and deny the Incarnation of the Son of God they should be tolerated Yea more That the Civill Magistrate should punish no man for his Religion be it never so bad or blasphemous and that it must be left to God And this giveth us reason to think That these Reasons within these two yeers have made you to refine your Opinion and to mould some new Solutions and to suite your Opinions more close to the current of the time then you were wont to do If therefore we speak after them it is their fault and not ours it may be that your Opinion be not common to you all but to you five alone The sum of the History is A Minister was suddenly deposed by his Flock whereupon some Churches did take offence and all their Churches consented in this Principle That Churches 1 Cor. 10.32 1 Tim. 5.22 as well as particular men are bound to give no offence neither to Jew nor Gentile nor the Churches of God they live among Item That in vertue of the same or like Law of not partaking in other mens sins the Churches offended may and ought upon the Impenitency of those Churches persisting in their errour and miscarriage to pronounce that heavy sentence against them of withdrawing and renouncing all Christian Communion with them untill they do repent And further to declare and protest this with the causes thereof to all Christian Churches of Christ that they may do the like In this Narration it appeareth 1. That this Church offending before this emergent Case knew not so much for if she had it is not credible that she would against all charitie and the common order of all Churches have committed so great a scandall 2. This remedie is not sufficient nor satisfactory 1. Because all Churches according to your Tenets be equall in Authoritie Independent one of another and par in parcm non habet Imperium none hath power or Authoritie over his equall how then could any Church binde another to any such account but out of its freewill as a partie may do to its partie 3. Because since other Churches were or pretended to be offended in such a proceeding they could not judge in it for then they should have been both judge and partie in one cause which cannot be granted to those that have no Authoritative Power one over another as when a private man offendeth the State and we our God 4. What if many Churches yea all the Churches should offend one should that one Church gather all the rest together judge them all and in case of not submitting themselves to her judgement separate her self from them all If so we should have Separations and Schismes enough which should be continued to all Posteritie to come 5. What if Churches were so remote one from another that they could not easily meet together upon every occasion Then there should be no remedy or at least no easie remedy 6. What if the Offence were small should so many Churches for every trifle gather together and put themselves to so great cost and trouble 7. What if the Churches in their Judgements should differ one from another in such a case should they all by Schismes separate themselves one from another 8. This sort of Government giveth no more Power or Authoritie to a thousand Churches over one then to a Tincker yea to the Hangman over a thousand for he may desire them all out of charitie to give an account of their Judgement in case he be offended by them Neither see I what more our Brethren grant to all the Churches of the World over one But the Presbyteriall Government is subject to none of these inconveniencies for the collective or combined Eldership having an authoritative Power all men and Churches thereof are bound by Law and Covenant to submit themselves thereunto Every man knoweth their set times of meeting wherein sundry matters are dispatched and all things carried by pluralitie of voices without any Schisme or Separation 9. This Government is a Power wherein the Partie is judged if he will and so the judgement of the Judges suspended upon the judgement of the Partie judged which is most ridiculous without any example in Ecclesiasticall or Civill Judicatories a judgement indeed not very unlike to that which is related of a merry man who said he had the best and most obedient wife of the whole World because saith he she willeth nothing but what I will and as all men wondred at it knowing her to be the most disobedient yea saith he but I must first will what she willeth else she willeth nothing that I will 10. This sort of Government is unjust and unreasonable for not onely the Partie judgeth its Partie but also it inflicteth the same punishment viz. Separation upon all offending Churches what ever be the offence great or small
in case of Non-satisfaction whereas all punishments should be commensurate unto the severall offences 11. And so ye seem to approve the opinion of the Stoicks who held all sins to be equall since ye inflict the same punishment upon them all 12. Not onely this Discipline cannot easily be put in execution in great Kingdoms as England wherein all the Churches offended cannot so easily meet together but also 13. Because the person offended after he hath represented his grievances unto one Church and that Church having received satisfaction it may go to another and that Church likewise having received satisfaction it may go to another and so continually in infinitum to the Worlds end evermore taking those Churches for the Partie that judge it which is most absurde and foolish 14. What if the Partie offended be poor and have not the means to post up and down from Neighbour-Church to Neighbour-Church to pray them to make the offending Church to give an account of her Judgement muchlesse to attend upon their uncertain conveniencie Here will be found true Pauper ubique jacet whereas in Presbyteriall Government the Partie offended may easily be redressed and get satisfaction as not having need so to post up and down to be at so great charges or to attend their conveniencie for by a simple Appeal he may binde the Church offending to appear at the day appointed 15. What if there should fall out an hundred such Offences in a small time Must so many Churches evermore gather together for every one of them apart 16. What if Churches be poor and cannot be at so great expence Then in that case it should seem there is no order to meet with Offences And as for those precepts 1 Cor. 10. and 1 Tim. 5. The first of them is not a Rule of Government or ruling of the Church but a generall command common to all Christians whereby the Apostle forewarnes the Corinthians in things indifferent not to give any occasion of Offence unto the Church of God or to any other but therein to comply with all men as he doeth himself From whence ye cannot draw a Rule or Law of ruling the Church or how the Church should take order with such Offenders so that it sheweth indeed every mans dutie towards the Church in things indifferent but not the Churches dutie towards every one of them in judging or ruling Ye might as well have proved it from this Principle Fly from all evil or from that We must love God above all things and our Neighbour as our selves neither see I any greater connexion that it hath with the one then with the other And truely I cannot sufficiently admire how out of that Principle Give no offence ne to any man ye can inferre this conclusion Ergo a Church offended may make a Church offending to give an account of her judgement before all the world and in case of impenitency pronounce a Sentence of withdrawing and renouncing all Christian Communion with her and further to declare it to all other Churches No more can it be inferred of the other viz. Be not partakers in other mens sins for the Apostle there giveth rules about the Vocation of Ministers forbiddeth Timothy to receive any man rashly into the Ministery least in so doing he be the cause of an unlawfull Vocation because saith he vers 24. their sin and incapacity will soon appear to all men But how is it possible out of this to spin out the former Couclusion § 18. Pag. 17 ye prove your former Conclusion thus 1. For that ye saw no further authority in Scripture in proceedings purcly Ecclesiasticall of one or many sister Churches towards another whole Church or Churches offending 2. Because no other Authority can rationally be put in execution without the Magistrates power Answ 1. Ye saw no more in Scripture yea but saw ye your own Conclusion in Scripture 2. Truely we see no Word of God for it and if we take it not upon your word we shall never take it 3. If ye see no Scripture for it yet others may see 4. Ye may if ye will see it in the ordinary Practice of the Church of the Jews in the old Testament which is not abrogated in the New since it is not Ceremoniall but grounded in the Law of Nature Ye may see it in the History of the New Testament in the judgement given out at the Synod of Hierusalem concerning the businesse of Antiochia which I hope ye shall see cleerly demonstrated to you by a better hand before it be long 6. It may be proved by the Law of Nature which is a praecognitum to Scripture and supposed by Scripture for Grace is not destructory of Nature but a Superstructory above Nature So that when Scripture containeth nothing contradictory to the Dictats of Nature we are bound to believe them unlesse we will misbelieve God who is no lesse the Author of Nature and of the Dictats thereof then of Grace 2. Because no other Authority can rationally be put in execution without the Civill Magistrates power Answ 1. Our Brethren here as every where else stand very stiffly to Negations They never prove any positive Doctrine and it is known in the Schools how easie a thing it is to deny all things and to prove nothing If they had that to prove wherein they agree with us I suppose they should have more to do then we to prove that wherein they disagree from us But to take away all mistakes and captious Evasions we suppose that our Churches arrogate to themselves no Imperiall or Magisteriall but onely a Ministeriall Power or Authority 2. That it is meerly Spirituall consisting 1. in the Creation Suspension and Deposition of Church-Officers 2. in determining matters of Doctrine 3. in making of Ecclesiasticall Laws concerning things indifferent 4. in Ecclesiasticall Censures as in Suspension Excommunication c. They prove That no more can rationally be put in execution viz. then to call an offending Church to an account and in case of her impenitency to declare it to all other Churches Answ We deny the Assumption They prove it for that Christ gave no power to Churches to excommunicate their neighbour Churches Answ 1. This is again another mistake in our Brethren for they suppose that we excommunicate whole Churches which we never do 2. Neither believe I that they can bring us any examples of it The reason why we do not so is Because whole Churches ordinarily amongst us contemn not the superiour Ecclesiasticall Power viz. of Synods being bound by their Oath and Covenant to observe and maintain the Order of the Church 3. And therefore we have no Ecclesiasticall Laws concerning such cases for Lex est ordinatio rationis and Laws are not made of things that never fall out or of things that fall out extraordinarily but of things that are ordinary 4 Much lesse think I that ever any such case did fall out in any one of the Reformed Churches Item it is
what Opinions are to be tolerated and what not which will be a question inextricable which no mortall man appearingly is able distinctly to determine And some may say The lesse the difference be the lesse need is there for a Toleration to be granted to such a Sect For the lesse it be the greater is the Schisme 5. God in the Old Testament granted no Toleration of divers Religions or Disciplines and the New Testament requireth no lesse union amongst Christians then the old amongst the Jews 6. Either our Brethren do assent to our Doctrine and are resolved likewise to assent to the Discipline which God willing shall be established by common consent or do not If they grant the first what need they any other Toleration then the rest If the second it would be first discussed wherein they are resolved to dissent and afterwards considered whether it be of so great importance that in consideration thereof they dare not in good Conscience entertain communion with us 7. They are not pressed to be Actors in any thing against their Consciences Ergo They need not to be suiters for a Toleration or if they be it may justly be refused 8. It is against the nature of the Communion of Saints to live in Sects apart without communicating at the Lords Table which very hardly will be avoided if Toleration be granted 9. Because the Scripture exhorts us evermore unto unitie which cannot be easily procured by a Toleration of Sects which cannot but daily beget new Schismes and Divisions 10. Because there was greater difference amongst the Members of the Church of Corinth in the rim of Saint Paul and yet they communicated together yea the Apostle exhorted them unto mutuall communion and forbearance of Sects and Divisions 11. Because the Opinion of our Brethren symbolizeth too much with that of the Donatists who separated themselves from other Churches under pretext that they were not so holy as their own Neither is it unlike to the Convents and Monasteries amongst the Papists for as they all professe one Doctrine with the Romish Church and yet every Order hath its own Discipline that of S. Francis one that of S. Dominick another and in every Order one Generall and in every Monastery one Abbot Prior or President So all your Churches beleeve one Doctrine together with us and every one of your Churches hath one Minister as their Convents a particular Abbot or Prior. Ye onely differ in this That ye have no Generall or any thing answerable thereunto to keep you in unitie and conformitie 12. It is the Civill Magistrates part to take away Heresies Superstitions and Corruptions in manners after the examples of the Kings of Juda Wherefore then is not his dutie likewise to take away all Schismes which are the high-way to Heresie and consequently to deny Toleration which is a way to both 13. We have but one God one Christ and one Lord one Spirit we are one Body we have one Faith and one Baptism whereby we enter into the Church Wherefore shall we not have one Communion whereby to be spiritually fed and one Discipline to be ruled by 14. If Churches have Disciplines or Governments different in their Species then the Churches must be different in their Species also for all Collective bodies or Consociations that are governed are differenced by their different Governments as we see in Civill Government in the Constitution and Distinction of States Kingdoms and Republikes Wherefore as many divers Governments as there be in Churches as many different Species of Churches must we admit of I speak here of the Church considered according to her visible forme but the consequent is false since there is but one Church Ergo. 15. Neither Christ nor his Apostles ever granted any Toleration to divers Sects and Governments in the Church wherefore then will ye be Suiters for that which they never granted 16. Yea your New-England men whose wayes and practises in Government ye say are improved to a better Edition and greater refinement whom ye compare with our Father Abraham Pag. 5. tolerated not their Brethren who did hazard their lives in that voyage but made them go again as our Father Abraham to seek out some new Habitations in strange Countreyes yea in strange Wildernesses for themselves and their seed after them yea they would not so much as some very godly and learned Divine relateth in his learned Book against Toleration as receive some men otherwise approved by themselves both for their life and Doctrine to live in any corner of New-England howsoever here they were in danger to be persecuted for Non-conformitie And that mee ly because they differed a little from them in point of Discipline How then can our Brethren of that profession be Suiters for a Toleration in Old England where they are no more persecuted when as those of their profession refused it to those of New-England in time of great persecution Is it not to be feared That if they had the upper hand over us here as there they should send us all to some Isle of Dogs as they have done others 17. Besides all this the Scripture forbiddeth all such Toleration Reve. 2 20 1 Cor 1.12 as that of Jezabel There must be no such speeches amongst us as I am of Paul I of Apollos I of Cephas nor that some are Calvinians as ye terme us some Independenters some Brownists some Anabaptists c. We must all be Christs we must all think and speak the same things Vers 10. Otherwise men are carnall 1 Cor. 3.3 1 Cor. 11.16 18 19 20. Heb 10.25 Gal. 5.12 Neither hath the Church of God a custome to be contentious Neither permitteth the Apostle Schismes We must not quit our mutuall meetings as others do and as must be done in a publike Toleration They that trouble the Church must be cut off 18. Such a Toleration cannot but expose our Churches unto the calumnies of Papists who evermore object unto Protestants the innumerable number of their Sects whereas they pretend to be nothing but one Church 19. Of such a Toleration follows all we formerly deduced out of Independency 20. If it be granted it cannot but be thought that it hath been granted or rather extorted by force of Reason and that all the Assembly were not able to answer our Brethrens whereas indeed their Opinion and Demands are against all Reason as sundry of themselves could not deny and had nothing to say save onely that it was Gods Ordinance which yet they never could shew out of Gods Word On the contrary if it be refused it will help to confirm the Churches and the people in the Truth 21. Neither can it but overthrow all sort of Ecclesiasticall Government for a man being censured in one Church may fly to another and being again suspended in that other from thence to another and so scorn all the Churches of God and their Censures And so this order by necessary consequence will breed all sort