Selected quad for the lemma: power_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
power_n	believer_n	church_n	key_n	3,113	5	10.5671	5	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A82508	A defence of sundry positions, and Scriptures alledged to justifie the Congregationall-way; charged at first to be weak therein, impertinent, and unsufficient; by R.H. M. A. of Magd. Col. Cambr. in his examination of them; but upon further examination, cleerly manifested to be sufficient, pertinent, and full of power. / By [brace] Samuel Eaton, teacher, and Timothy Taylor, pastor [brace] of [brace] the church in Duckenfield, in Cheshire. Published according to order.	Eaton, Samuel, 1596?-1665.; Taylor, Timothy, 1611 or 12-1681.	1645 (1645)	Wing E118; Thomason E308_27; ESTC R200391	116,862	145

judicatories and appeals such ought to have the judging Church in the dayes of the Gospel This main hypothesis upon which the strength of all depends is unsound For 1. It is necessary that the judging Church in the times of the Gospel should be conformed to spirituall precepts and patterns left us by Christ and his Apostles but Christ hath not appointed the Jewish church in matter of government to be a pattern to Gospel Churches For if so then are not the Churches that are of Presbyterian complexion to be understood in this place for there is a vast difference betwixt your Churches and the Jewish Church For First there is disparity in the manner of the calling of persons for Synods are made up of men chosen and sent forth by particular Churches but the Sanhedrin did not consist of chosen men sent out by the Synagogues but of Priests and Levites which the Synagogues did neither choose nor send forth Secondly there is disparity in matter of power In the Jewish Sanhedrin the chief Priest was chief by vertue of Office 2 Chron. 19.11 but in the Classicall Way all are equall in point of Office Thirdly in respect of the causes judged the Sanhedrin dealt with matters of civill nature Deut. 21.5 but Synods only with Ecclesiasticall Fourthly in respect of the time of judicature The Sanhedrin was a standing constant court but Classicall Provinciall Nationall and Oecumenicall Synods meet but once in a moneth once in half a yeer once in twelve moneths or it may be not once in many ages is an Oecumenicall Synod gathered and so those appeals that are made from a Nationall are in little hope to finde relief from an Oecumenicall Synod 2. If it were necessary that Church-government in the times of the Gospel should beare conformity with the Jewish Government then they must not only have graduall judicatories and appeals but they must have First a stated Oecumenicall judicature constantly to judge all hard controversies between blood and blood plea and plea stroke and stroke into all Churches in the world Secondly that this stated Oecumenicall judicature must have some stated place which God should choose Deut. 17.8 that so appellants might know whither to repaire for redresse of their grievances Thirdly that there must be one chief by vertue of office over all met in this universall court 2 Chron. 19.4 That he that shall do presumptuously and will not hearken to that Catholike councell that man must die Deut. 17.12 3. There may be good reason rendered why the Synagogues should be under a Juperiour judicatory and the same cause there is why Congregationall-churches should be under a Superiour judicatory The Synagogues were parts of a church that had not power to dispence all Gods Ordinances amongst themselves and were branches of a politick Nationall-church endued with power of government as Nationall The Promise and Covenant of God extended to the whole Nation But there is no such power of government left to every or to any Nation in the world neither are particular Congregations parts of a Church as the Synagogues of the Jewes were but they are entire and compleat Churches and may transact all Gods Ordinances walking in truth and peace amongst themselves otherwise all Gods Ordinances could not be transacted unlesse a whole Nation were converted and brought into Church-society This Gospel was writ principally for the Jews some say in Hebrew Answer c. Admitting the Proposition were true Reply which yet we have much cause to doubt of may not Congregationall men that are Christians use this place aright in applying it to Congregationall churches because the whole Gospel was writ principally for the Jews Certainly the undiscernible strength of this reason at least by us will levie war against the Presbyterians except they will professe themselves Jews for applying this place to Presbyterian Churches The Epistles to the Hebrews and James were writ principally for the Jewes and yet Christians that are Gentiles may make a right use of them In it the spirit of God useth much the language and dialect of the old Testament Answer in which Kahal and Ecclesia with the Seventy do sometimes signifie the company of Elders as well as the body of the people a Nationall Church with graduall judicatories and appeals as well as a particular assembly We cannot but despaire of ever seeing the premises delivered of the conclusion Reply Let it be granted that Kahal c. signifies in the old Testament sometimes a company of Elders sometimes the People sometimes a Nationall sometimes a Congregationall Church yet it will not follow that the Congregationall men in applying Mat. 18.17 to the Congregationall Church have offered any violence to the Text. For it will not follow Kahal sometimes signifies a Nationall Church in the old Testament no though to make it more strong you adde that the Spirit useth much the language and dialect of the old Testament I say it will not follow therefore it signifies a Nationall Church in Matth. 18.17 for the Spirit may use by your own confession the language and dialoct of the old Testament and yet it may be understood of a particular Assembly Neither will it follow Kahal sometime in the old Testament Ergo Ecclesia signifies a company of Elders Ergo it signifies a company of Elders in Matth. 18.17 Now there is not a word in the Text Answer to shew either that the Church is not here taken for the Presbyterie but for the People seeing when Christ saith whatsoever ye shall binde c. he speaks to the Disciples vers 1. or Apostles which are elsewhere said to have the power of binding and loosing Matth. 16.19 Joh. 20.23 and were not ordinary Believers but Elders 1 Pet. 5.1 or that it is meant of a parcular Congregation without graduall judicatories and appeals c. These are the Premises Reply but how shall we do to get the conclusion willingly to follow these Premises which must be this Ergo when the Congregationall men affirm that the particular Congregation is the Church to which God hath given the power of government and urge Matth. 18. to prove the exercise of such power by the Church aforesaid they abuse that Text. For the Congregationall men may very securely affirm that those words Tell the Church send the offended Brother to the Congregationall Church in the time of the Gospel even as they sent the Jewés to the Sanhedrin whilest that was in force and yet not send him to the people as they stand in opposition to the Presbyterie which are the most noble organicall parts of the integrally perfect Church For we do not seat the power of the Keys in the people as they are contradistinguished to their Elders but in the whole Church by a most wise and divine dispersion of power unto the dissimilar parts of the Church according to their severall capacities For as the Elders have an authoritative power so the people have a power of liberty in point of

censures So that reclamante Ecclesiâ there can be no excommunication So then though it be not understood of the people only no nor chiefly as they stand in opposition to their Guides yet this place may lawfully be understood of the Congregationall Church as it is contradistinct to Classicall Provinciall Nationall and Oecumenicall Churches The reason is we have presidents in the Word of God for the one as in the Churches of Jerusalem Corinth Cenchrea c. and rules prescribed to such a Church Acts 6.3 1 Cor. 5.4 chap. 11. chap. 12. chap. 1.4 chap. 16. but of any stated Classicall Provinciall Nationall Oecumenicall Churches there is a deep silence in the Scriptures of the new Testament no precept for the erecting of such and no lawes nor Officers provided for such Churches Now Christ Matth. 18. sends the people of God to such a Church as should be in strength by vertue of a Charter from heaven to redresse grievances and heal offences and therefore he sends us to the Congregationall Church as it opposeth those churches I spoke of before for these can shew no such charter I read that the promise of binding and loosing is not given to a particular Congregation when leavened with error and variance Answer But then a Synod of Churches or of their Messengers may judicially convince and condemn errors search out truth c. All that we have to say to that Reply is this If you will acknowledge the power of binding and loosing to be seated in the particular Congregation we shall not contend against it though we cannot say that the Scriptures and reasons brought are convincing to each of us to inforce our grant but that in ease of error or scandall that cannot be healed in the Congregation A Synod of neighbour churches or their Messengers may judicially condemn those errours and schismes c. and impose wayes of peace and truth but yet not assume authority of censuring the delinquents but leave that to particular Churches to be performed Cotton Keys pag. 28. POSITION XX. Matth. 16.19 Christ directeth his Speech not to Peter alone This seems to be taken out of Answer to 32 q p 44. but to all the Disciples also for to them all was the Question propounded by Christ vers 15. Nor to them as generall Officers of the Churches for that Commission was not yet given them but as Disciples and Believers In laying down this Position Reply and making your battery upon it as you do fall short of that ingenuity you professe in your Preface when you say If any of the Brethren amongst whom Mr. Cotton is deservedly the chief seem in my apprehension to come neerer the truth then other Cotton Keys pag. 4. I willingly take notice of it c. Now Mr. Cotton must needs in your judgement come neerer the truth then the Elders for he doth acknowledge that Peter was considered in the severall capacitles of an Apostle an Elder a Brother and so the power of the Keys was promised in him to Apostles Elders and Brethren according to their severall proportions of that dispersed spirituall power Now had you dealt with this doctrine with which we concurre and told us your thoughts of it in reference to the place we should have acknowledged your answerablenesse therein to your profession Now though you cite Mr. Cotton in the margent yet so as that the ordinary sort of readers can hardly guesse what his judgement is and the whole frame of your Discourse is such that may well leave the Reader in this apprehension That the Elders of New-England place all power of the Keys in Believers as such which is contrary to the very expressions of the Elders of New-England and to the judgement of the Congregationall men in generall For the Elders say The ministeriall power of government is given to the Church and consequently not to Believers unlesse they become a Church yea they say expresly That the Keys are committed to all Believers that shall joyn together in the same confession according to the order and ordinance of Christ and consequently except Believers joyn into Church-societies which is the Ordinance of Christ they have no share of the power of the Keys much-lesse do they assert any such power in women who though Believers yet are excluded from any share in Church-government by a positive law 1 Cor. 14.34 35. Peter was an Apostle in Office and Commission Answer though not yet sent out into all the world and an Elder Matth. 10.1 2 c. and doubtlesse the Key of Authority and Rule when it was promised to Peter and given to him with the rest of the Apostles Joh. 20.23 is the same authority which is given to their successors whereby they are called to feed and rule the Church of God as the Apostles had done before c. Let it be granted that the twelve Disciples so called Mat. 10.1 are not called Apostles vers 2. by way of anticipation Reply Mar. 3.13 14. but in reference to their present state and condition yet it will be necessary still to distinguish the equivocall term of Apostle as noting 1. One authorized to dispence doctrine and discipline amongst all nations Matth. 28.19 and in this sense Peter was no Apostle in Office and Commission as your self confesse And what the Elders affirm is true That the Keys were not given to Peter in this capacity i.e. not as to one that was actually in that estate and condition or was hereby put into that estate and condition 2. As one sent forth by a temporary Commission to preach and work miracles amongst the Jews only (a) Mat. 10.23 Now the Promise of the Keys was not made to Peter under this capacity neither was he an Elder invested with authoritative power of government at this time he could neither vote in Synagogues nor in the Sanhedrin but only preach authoritatively and work miracles to confirm his Doctrine and in case that they did not receive him he could not excommunicate them by himself or with all the rest of the twelve with him but must shake (a) Mat. 10 14 15. off the dust of his feet against them and leave them to the great day of Gods immediate judgement for so runs the tenour of his Commission and there is deep silence of any other then meerly a doctrinall power of the Keyes So that the issue is this that though what you say be true in the sense expressed yet it is nothing to the purpose for which it is brought for still the assertion of the Elders may be true that Christ speake not to them as Apostles in Office and Commission whether limited to the Jewes as you would insinuate or extended to all Nations but as Disciples or Believers 2. Neither will it follow the Key of authority promised to Peter and given to him with the rest of the Apostles Joh. 20.23 is the same which is given to their successors therefore Christ directeth his Speech to

Peter not as a Believer but as an Apostle in Office and Commission for what ever the import of the thing promised may be yet that hinders not but the promise may be made to Peter under the respect and consideration of a Believer For the thing promised in this place may be considered two wayes First as a reward in generall of grace and mercy Secondly as such a reward which importeth a power of opening and shutting the Kingdome of heaven Now the Power of the Keys considered as a reward of grace and mercy is promised to Peter as making such a glorious confession 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and I say unto thee q. d. thou hast made such a holy confession of me that I say unto thee I will not suffer thee to go unrewarded but I do promise that I will give thee the Keys of the Kingdome of heaven c. Now Peter did not confesse Christ as a generall Officer but as a Believer and therefore the reward which is the promise is made to him not as a generall Officer but as a Believer 2. As importing a power of opening and shutting and so though it be promised to Peter as a Believer and in him to all those that shall make the same holy confession of Christ that he did yet is it not to be executed either by Peter himself or any other under the notion and consideration of a Believer only but imports also an Office or State under the capacity and consideration of which it is to be executed Thus when Christ saith to Peter I will give to thee Keys c. he doth thereby promise that Peter shall be as a Member as an Elder as an Apostle in the Gospel-churches and in all these capacities shou'd have some share in the dispensation of the power of the Keys The consequent whereof is this No Believer at this day meerly as a Believer nay nor yet as a Believer externally confessing Christ with the mouth may have any share in executing the power of the Keys unlesse he be a Brother joyned to some Church or an Elder set over some Church for children for their weaknesse and women for their sex are excluded by a positive law For as the power of the Keys is promised so the State under the consideration of which they shall exercise such power yea and a Commission from Christ by which they shall exercise that power is also promised And thus Mr. Cotton may say that Peter may he considered as an Apostle an Elder a Brother because together with the power of the Keys the state of an Apostle of an Elder of a Brother is promised and yet not clash with the Elders of New-England who affirm that the power of the Keys is promised to Peter i. e. as a reward of grace and mercy as a Believer Neither need the Elders of New-England dread your three-fold consequence viz. First That the Keys are not given to any visible Church And Secondly That they are given to all Believers in covenant or no whether males or females Thirdly That Apostles and Pastors have no more power of the Keys then ordinary Believers which as they are false and absurd so it may easily appear by that which hath been said that they cannot shelter themselves under any thing in the Position of the Elders of New-England Neither will that Axiom à quatenus ad omnevalet consequentia i. from as such to all such a consequence is of force how beare you out in so unjust a charge For though it be true in such Propositions where the specificall difference is predicated of the Species or proper Accident of the Subject the proper effect of the immediate cause yet it will not hold when you speak of a Soveraign Lord acting in a transcendent way of liberty no nor of a rationall creature moving according to choyce and election Suppose you should have a servant that should prove faithfull in his place though one of the meanest places and therefore you should promise to give into his hand all the Keys of the house that he should open and shut to all the rest and this you should do looking upon him as faithfull A quatenus ad omne non valet consequentia in such a case it will not follow that every faithfull servant in your house hath the power of the Keys neither will it follow that the faithfull servant to whom the promise of the Keys much lesse every other faithfull servant as such may execute the power of the Keys For though the promise be made to that servant under the capacity of a faithfull servant yet the promise it self carries an Office by implication viz. the office of Steward under which consideration and not under the consideration of a faithfull servant he is to manage the power of the Keys Phineas the son of Eleazar the son of Aaron was zealous for God Numb 25. and God gives him the covenant of an everlasting Priesthood because he was zealous will you say that A quatenus ad omnia valebat consequentia in this case i. e. because an everlasting Priesthood was promised to Phineas because he was zealous therefore every zealous person hath an everlasting Priesthood Lastly that it was far from the purpose of the Elders of New-England to assert any such Doctrine as you would draw from their words may appeare in this Answer and elsewhere in this booke wherein they place the power of the Keys not in the body as contradistinct to the guides but in the whole consisting of Rulers and ruled giving to the Rulers an authoritative power which they give not to the ruled POSITION XXI 1 Cor. 5. Paul himself though an extraordinary Officer yet would not take upon him to excommunicate the incestuous person without the Church but sends to them exhorting them to do it (a) See also answ to 23. q. pag. 49. and reproves the Brethren of the Church of Coriuth as well as the Elders that they did no sooner put him away (b) Cotton Keys pag. 13. To prove that this Doctrine is injurious to the Text you thus reason He blames all women as well as men Answer that notwithstanding the notorious fornication which was amongst them they were puffed up and gloried c. 1. We suppose this battery is raised against those words Reply and reproves the Brethren as well as the Elders c. Now if it might be any gratification of strength to your Argument we will grant that the Apostle blames all in generall and yet the Elders may without any shew of wrong to the Text affirm that he blames the Brethren as well as the Elders for it will not follow Paul reproves the whole Church Ergo he reproves not the Brethren which are a part of the Church 2. If it be said that the wrong lies in the scope of the words For hence we go above to prove that the Brethren have ashare in the power of Church-censures Now the same argument will prove from this

Paul alone did not do it Doth Paul command the Church to deliver the incestuous person to Satan Answer and yet reserve the whole power to himself as he must needs do if 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 have reference to himself These things being spoken by you in reference to one individuall act under one and the same consideration expressed in the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 must needs be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 altogether inconsistent one with another or with the truth 2. If the Elders abuse the Text by saying that Paul exhorts the Church of Corinth to excommunicate the incestuous person how will you wash your hands from all wrong offered to the Text whilst you affirm that Paul commanded them to excommunicate him Yes say you Paul writes to them to see if they would be obedient in all things Is this your meaning that Paul writes not to them requiring them to put forth a power given unto them and all other Churches by Jesus Christ but only to exercise an act of power which did not of right belong unto them but to his Apostolicall Function And why by the same reason might not the Apostle then and the Ministers now in their Churches call out one or more and command them to preach or administer Baptisme or the Supper meerly to try their obedience Now this must be your meaning or else your argument will never conclude the thing you professe to conclude For we willingly grant that Paul writ unto them to try their obedience but the very Text imports that there were other grounds of his writing as well as this for he saith not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 therefore for this I write much lesse 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for this therefore only writ but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for this therfore also I writ unto you to try your obedience intimating that there were other grounds And therefore that Paul writ unto them to try their obedience will never afford such a conclusion therfore he writ not to them to exercise an ordinary power purchased for them by the blood of Christ for obedience may be tried by that which is both a priviledge and a duty Paul bids the Colossians cause an Epistle to be read in Laodicea Answer they its like did it in obedience to Apostolicall authority yet it will not bence follow that a Church hath ordinarily the same power over another Church There is a twofold causing by way of authority Reply or by way of morall swasion or endeavour this latter the Apostle speaks of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 saith he work or use your endeavour and the same power hath every Church over other at this day for their good 2. Suppose you could obtain what you desire in all these that Paul did excommunicate not the Church or if the Church did yet it is a wrong to the text to plead for the like power at this day Do you not all this while fight against the Presbyterians whose Cause you pretend to advocate as well as against the Congregationall men whom you professedly oppose For if it will not follow The Church of Corinth whether particular or representative is commanded to deliver the incestuous person to Satan therefore every true Courch hath the same power then whilest the Presbyterian Brethren urge this place to prove the power of a Classicall Presbyterie they wrong the Text For though it may be a question whether this Text gratifie the fraternity of the Church with so much power as we would state upon them by vertue of this Text yet Presbyterians and Congregationall men all except your self that we know agree That whatsoever power the Fraternity and Presbyterie of the Church of Corinth had that the Fraternity and Presbyterie of all true Churches have to the end of the world He bids them purge out the leaven Answer and put away from them the wicked person c. which must not be understood as if Elders and People were equally authorized thereunto c. 1. Reply Is not this to insinuate that the Elders of New-England and Mr. Cotton affirm that the Elders and People are equally authorized to cast out the incestuous person and not only quilibet in suo gradu every one in their degree There is nothing in the place by you alledged that doth import thus much They say the Apostle reproves the one as well as the other The King for a miscarriage in a Cause may reprove the Jury as well as the Judge and yet there is no such implication that Elders and People Judge and Jury are equally authorized to the respective acts of Judicature The Elders of New-England infer from hence that all Church-power is not in the Officers alone do they therefore affirm that there is as much in the people as in the Elders Whereas in answer to Q. 15. p. 60. they shew certain acts of power in the Eldership which are not in the people and Mr. Cotton (a) Cotton Keys cap. 4. and 5. expresly gives all authority properly so called to the Eldership allotting only a popular power of interest and liberty to the people 2. And lastly for the rest of your expressions about this matter I take to be but of the train and retinue of this grand misprision and so passe them over lastly I say when you say that he bids them purge out the old leaven and put away the wicked person which must not be understood as if Elders and People were equally authorized thereunto but quilibet in suo gradu a man would think you did acknowledge that the People in suo gradu are authorized to purge out the old leaven and put away the wicked person which questionlesse are acts of some kinde of governing power and yet in the Catastrophe of all this Discourse you wipe the Fraternity of the Church cleerly of all acts of governing power when you say So when he speaks of acts of gouerning power it is to be understood of Elders and not of Believers Are not these 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Are purging out the old leaven and putting away the wicked person acts of governing power And are Believers authorized in suo gradu to perform these acts and yet doth no act of governing power belong to the Believers of the church Let him assoyle this Riddle that is an Oedipus able to do it for our parts we cannot Thus much of your 21. Section POSITION XXII The Lord Jesus reproving the Angel of Pergamus for suffering Balaamites sends his Epistle This is alledged by Answ to 32. q. 45. and 49. not only to the Angel but to the Church The Spirit saith not only to the Angel but to the Churches Rev. 2.11 And the Church members are seen by Iohn in a vision sitting on Thrones clothed with white raiment having on their heads Crownes of gold Rev. 4.14 Now Thrones and Crownes are ensignes of Authority and governing power To make good your charge against the Elderss of wrong offered to these Texts

concession that the Church Reply Acts 2. bad no ordinary Officers for none were then appointed and yet they were a church and Acts 14.23 shewes so much they were churches before the Apostles ordained Elders in them and this is all that the Position drives at And though there were generall Elders which had inspection over all Churches yet neither these nor any other Elders do * Come into the essence of Churches ingredi essentiam Ecclesiarum nor is it any formall reason why a Company of Believers are a Church because they have Elders whether extraordinary or ordinary for were it so then their priviledge to choose their Officers would be when they have Officers for then they are a Church and it would follow that they cannot choose Officers when they want them and have most need of them for then they are not a Church and so can have no such power and it is very uncomfortable for the death of an Officer might be the unchurching of a people But that which may give more satisfaction in this matter is the consideration of such Scriptures where the members mentioned apart from the Officers are called the Church of God Acts 20.28 the Elders are the persons spoken to feed the flock over which the holy Ghost hath made you over-seers the believing Ephesians are the flock who are also called the Church of God purchased with his blood * Acts 20. vers 28. So Phil. 1.1 So that a Christian people united together with an intent of constant congregating to enjoy Ordinances for their edification are a church without officers or if they have them yet without consideration of them POSITION IX She hath also full and free power to choose her own Officers without the help of Synod This though not so fully is asserted by R.M. W.T. to C. H. Classis or Presbyterie Act. 1.15 Acts. 6.3 14.23 In Church-affairs Answer of weighty and difficult common concernment as election and ordination of Elders excommunication of an Elder it is safe and wholesome and an boly Ordinance to proceed with consultation and consent of the churches Prov. 11.14 (p) Cottons Keys p. 55. Reply This Position saith not that a particular Congregation or Church of Brethren have full and free power to choose her own Officers without asking or seeking the help of advice and direction from Synod Classis or Presbyterie nor do we think that there is any such meaning in it but without authoritative help of a Synod Classis or Presbyterie for in all those places of the Acts the churches had the help of direction but they were not strengthened by the interposition of the authority of the Apostles or of any other You will not take upon you hastily to censure the many notable precedents of ancient and latter Synods Answer who have put forth the Acts of power in ordination and excommunication (q) Cottons Keys p. 28. Reply 1. The grave Author of this speech meddles not with election in that place quoted but this Position runs of election 2. He keeps himself from an hasty and peremptory censuring of ancient precedents who have put forth acts of power in ordination and excommunication but he declares his opinion against it and we approve as well of his modesty as we do agree with him in his judgement We hold it a priviledge of the people especially if they proceed wisely and piously to elect their Officers Answer and an injury to obtrude any on them without their consent 1. What people are these that have this priviledge Reply Cottons Keys pag. 12. the Author whom you make use of so oft calls them Church of Brethren is it a people-priviledge or a church-priviledge to choose Ecclesiasticall Officers 2. What if they do not proceed wisely and piously is their priviledge lost must it be taken from them and then it would be no injury to obtrude an Officer on them It is an Officers priviledge to rule the Church but what if he do it not wisely and piously is the privilege then lost it is a Master of a Families priviledge to rule his own house but what if he do it not wisely and piously must it now be taken from him or rather must he not be directed and exhorted to do it rightly and the priviledge remain stil with him so of the people we have Junius of our minde herein (a) Junius Eccles p. 1963 Answer But let us view your Scriptures Seeing that you agree with us in the substance of the Position Reply and yet immediatly bring all the Scriptures brought by us to strengthen the same into question and none of them will passe for currant with you it had been convenient that you should have produced the Scriptures which do sway you unto the asserting of the same thing that it might have appeared to the world that you have found out some better bottome to set such a tenet on then we have produced For we conceive that if the Scriptures you oppugn are not pertinent to prove the Position there will be none found in all the new Testament but they will be more liable to exception then these and it is to be noted that all our modern Writers that we know of that grant any liberty to the people of choosing their own Officers they do it upon the evidence of these Scriptures which are excepted against in so much that we know not what should be the reason why you grant the thing alledged and bring no proofes of your own to confirm it and yet allow not of ours which we bring except you be resolved to contradict all that comes from us But what are your exceptions let us prove what weight is in them you say The Assembly Answer Acts 1. it is likely was not a body politick but occasionall only no part of Church-government being as yet set on foot here were not all but some of the sounder members of the Jewish Church and they had no commission to separate from the Jewes before Acts 2.40 the Company was not without Elders all the Churches and Elder at that time in the world were present if there had been any more Elders they must have conveened upon that occasion the choice was limited by the Apostle Peter First to the persons present Secondly to those that accompanied the Apostles all the time c. and was determined by God whose it was to choose an Apostle by his directing of the lot The meaning is Reply they were not a Christian Church but some of the sounder members of the Jewish Church and not yet separated from the Jewish Church and then 1. There is a contradiction unto some other of the exceptions which follow If they were no Christian Church how were the Apostles Elders of it and how was it an Oecumenicall councell all the Churches and Elders in the world being at it 2. Is there not some mistake in point of truth For those persons who were commanded to separate Acts

are said to be come to one mount Sion If so then the Congregations of the Christian Gentiles may well be another mount Sion And if the Nationall church of the Jewes with the assemblies thereof were mount Sion why may not every Nationall-church of Christians with the assemblies thereof we speak now in your language be Sion also and then there being many Nationall churches as you say there are many Sions And what greater absurdity is it to say there are an hundred or a thousand Sions then to say there are an hundred or a thousand Churches Seeing Sion and Church are all one Now you know there were many visible churches in Judea Galatia Macedonia Asia and many other places and if then so many how many more now therefore many Sions and because those many churches then and these now we believe to have been and still to be Congregationall therefore every Congregationall Church we hold to be Sion But you ask an odde strange needlesse to say no worse of it question with a great deal of vehemency Answer viz. Have you not found God present in our Assemblies Have you not by faith closed with the promises in the use of the Ordinances among us Speak out I know you dare not belie your selves us and God himself c. Reply Your question is bottomed upon a mistake when we say that God hath promised to be present in Sion you give this glosse upon it that we deny all your Assemblies to be Sion and will not grant Gods presence at all to be with you and that we appropriate Sion and Gods presence to our selves which is a great injury to us You also put this sense upon our words that God is so present in Sion that he is present no where else and so not present with holy men and women which are out of Church-fellowship nor present with members of many churches meeting together which either is a foul mistake or a slander For we think God to be present with his people when they meet in his feare whether they be Church-members or not Church-members whether they be of one or many churches whether they be in our assemblies or yours provided that his Ordinances be carried according to his minde yea though there should be some error yet he might give his presence (a) Rev. 2.1 with Rev. 2.14.20 Much rather do we think God will be present with persons whom he sets on work to exalt him in the execution of some office as he did the Apostles and now doth ordinary Elders Neverthelesse we conceive God to be most present with his people gathered into a body and compacted together in an instituted Church which we hold to be Congregationall and the reason is because the more any people do fall into the order of the Gospel and come into the way of Christ which he hath appointed for Saints to walk in the more Christ is ingaged to be present with them Now to joyn to some instituted Church of Christ is that way and order which Christ hath directed to therefore with them in such a way as so united and joyned Christ will more especially be present for he vouchsafeth a speciall presence amongst such Churches Rev. 2.1 he styles himself one that walketh in the midst of the seven golden candlesticks he walks in other places and people but he would intimate thus much that his especiall delightsome walk is among them and the more golden the candlesticks are the more pure they be the more delight he takes to walke in the midst of them But Matth. 18. you say is mis-interpeted Your words are these Answer Christ in Matth. 18. promiseth his presence to those that are not a Church for two or three will not make a Church they vers 17 were to give the second admonition the Church the third There is a figure in the number Reply there is a certain number put for an uncertain two or three are put for a few the paucity that may be in a Church shall be no obstacle of Christs presence Pareus upon this Text hath these words It is an argument that the judgement of the Church shall be ratified because Christ himself will be present in the Church as supreme Judge to ratifie it it is also a generall promise of the presence of the grace of Christ in his Church be it great or small Now surely we shall lesse doubt our exposition having so learned a Commentator so well approved of to stand by us in the same POSITION XVII So long as a Believer doth not joyn himself to some particular Congregation he is without in the Apostles sense 1 Cor. 5.12 Those without Answer of whom the Apostle speaketh were unbelievers Pagans and Heathen without Christ as well as without the visible Church Let it be granted that those whom the Apostle speaks of were both without Christ Reply and without the visible Church yet it may be securely affirmed that the Apostle speaks of them under the notion of such as were without the visible church and not of those that were without Christ 1. Singuli de suâ familia judicant non immittunt consuram in alienam samiliam Ergo in Ecclesia similis servetur ratio ut singulae desuit membris judicent Aretius in 1 Cor. 5. Because those without whom the Apostle had not to do to judge stand in opposition to those within vers 12. the latter part whom the Church of Corinth had to do to judge and consequently if this exposition of yours be true the judgement of the Church of Corinth extended as far as the ultima Thule the lands end of Christianity and only ceased when it came to the consines of Paganisme and consequently any one Church hath power to judge any one Believer in all the world because say you he is not without in the Apostles sense that is to say he is not a Pagan Heathen or unbeliever 2. Suppose the Apostle had known a member of the Church of Corinth what ever he appeared outwardly in the frame of his conversation to be indeed without Christ and in a state of enmity with God if this man had committed a grosse sin might not the Apostle have judged such a one to be excommunicated We suppose you will say he might and if so we demand why should a Church-unbeliever be subject to the Apostles judgement and an Heathenish unbeliever be exempted from the Apostles judgement If Church-membership did not make the one obnoxious to that spirituall judgement more then the other For in the notion of unbelievers and without Christ they both agree and therefore if a Heathen were exempted from judgement because without Christ and not for this reason because without the visible Church why should not a Church-unbeliever be exempted as well as a Heathen 2. If we mistake not a Believer not joyned to any particular congregation is without in reference to Church-judgement and we suppose by vertue of this Text in your Presbyterian

calculation of Ecclesiasticall power For Classicall Provinciall and Nationall Synods have a power of judging or excommunicating those only that are within the combination Now these being representative Churches he that is of no particular Congregation is without the verge of Presbyteriall power or else it will follow that the Presbyteriall Church hath power to excommunicate a person that is not within their combination and if one by the same reason a thousand ten thousand in every quarter and corner of the world But say you The Apostle opposeth Fornicators of the World Answer and Fornicators that are Brethren Persecution in the Primitive times as it is at this day was chiefly if not only levied against those who did joyn themselves to the Churches to the enjoyment of Ordinances Reply or at least otherwise visibly as Paul at his first conversion by preaching declared themselves to be Christs Disciples Hence those to whom God had given so much faith and constancy as to be willing to expose themselves to persecution these did inlist themselves in the Churches frequented their meetings which were observable by the Persecutors and professed themselves of the fraternity of the Church the Church looked on them as her members and accordingly dispensed ordinances and censures to them as they had need Others there were who like Nicodemus came to Christ by night or like those chief Rulers spoken of Joh. 12.42 who though they believe in Christ yet they dare not confesse him by publike joyning of themselves to run all hazards with the Church Hence it is that no politick visible Church doth look upon these as of her fraternity or doth dispence all ordinances and censures to them Now the Brother that is opposed to the fornicators of the world is not he that by the internall and invisible grace of faith is a Brother and of the mysticall body of Christ though peradventure he dare not openly professe Christ But such a one is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the Church of Corinth who is a named and professed Brother so looked upon not only by the motherly eye of the Church but oft times by the malitious eye of the world though peradventure they be not truly brethren united with the rest of the faithfull people of God as members of the mysticall body of Christ 2. With such a one not to eat presupposeth in an orderly way a forbearing of voluntary civil and spirituall communion with the party upon this ground that he is under censure in the Church Now the power of Church-censures is not to be executed by the church-mysticall but by the church-visible as such neither is it to be executed upon the members of the Church-mysticall as such but upon the members of the visible church whether they be in truth or only in appearance members of the mysticall church So then Fornicators of the world are to be understood of the world as it stands in opposition to the visible church and so those that are of the mysticall church may be fornicators of the world in that sense And though by the lawes of Christ concerning Church-discipline every man be forbidden to eat with those that are known Fornicators under church-censure in their own church and by vertue of church-communion with those that are fornicators under censure in any other church yet if one that is a member of the mysticall but dares not professe his subjection to Christ in that particular of joyning himself to some visible church shall be a fornicator we know no law of Christ precisely concerning church-discipline that interdicts a man to eat in point of voluntary civill communion with such a man any more then if he were a Pagan or Heathen But Answer say you without are Dogs and Sorcerers such as the Apostle had not to do with What have I to do c. vers 12. and yet he had to do with all Christians by his illimited apostolike power whether they belong to that or any other Congregation or no such as God judgeth or are left to the immediate judgement of God But this is not the case of Believers not joyned especially in your sense of joyning to a particular Congregation nor do you I hope judge it to be the case of Believers in England and Scotland 1. Reply There might be Dogs in the Apostolike Churches as well as without Phil. 3.2 and with such dogs Paul had to do with Nay he had to do with the dogs of the Gentiles he received a key of knowledge by which he was to open the Kingdome of heaven to them in case they would repent and believe and to binde them under the guilt of impenitencie and infidelity in case they would not repent and believe Matth. 28.19 with Mark 16.16 But those that Paul had not to do to judge who are said to be without in this place are all such as are contradistinguished to those that are within with whom the Church had to do by way of Ecclesiasticall judgement Now the church of Corinth had power of Ecclesiasticall judgement over all and only those which were within the combination of that church and therefore Paul had nothing to do to judge them that is to say with the judgement mentioned in this place which were out of this combination Now what was this judgement Answ The judgement whereby the Apostle decrees that the church of Corinth shall excommunicate fornicators and consequently shall not eat with them Now the Apostle had received no such power to judge those persons to excommunication and that by the ministery of a church that were never in fellowship with the church But such persons though for their crimes they may be subject to the judgement of the civill Magistrate yet in respect of Ecclesiasticall judgement they are left to the immediate judgement of God And if this be not the case of Believers not joyned to a particular congregation by whom shall those Believers be judged Why shall this Congregationall Classicall Provinciall National-church judge them rather then that May they be judged by all or any one Certainly they stand no more related to one then to another which are members of none at all Where shall the fault be charged if judgement be not passed We said before if a church may judge one out the combination why not a thousand why not ten thousand c. yet we are far from judging those Believers in England and Scotland which are not joyned in our Way of joyning to a particular Congregation therefore to be altogether out of Church-combination not capable of the Ecclesiasticall judgement of their Churches and consequently subject to the immediate judgement of Christ POSITION XVIII The Elders are not Lords over Gods heritage 1 Pet. 5.3 nor do exercise authority as the Kings and Princes of the earth do remembring our Saviours lesson Matth. 20.25 26 Luke 22.25 26. They are not so many Bishops striving for preeminence Answer as Diotrephes did 3 Joh. vers 9 10. (a) These Scriptures