be open Enemies and persecuters of the church and then they are justly to bee suspected saith the Dr. page 102. untill they have given publike Evidence by witnesse to the Ministers of their true Conversion and there produceth a plaine instance to prove this page 102. Acts. 9.26,27,28 And when Saul was come to Ierusalem 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 tentabat jungi he assayed to joyne himselfe to the Disciples but they were all afraid of him and beleeved not that hee was a Disciple c. Now this liberty have all the disciples in the like case because Ierusalem the Mother church is the pattern of all other the Daughter Churches as the Doctor confesseth yea affirmeth page 97. And saith all men acknowledge That the Mother Church must give an example of government to all the Daughter churches And this is also by the Doctor acknowledged page 102. to be a part of the power of the Keyes to open and shut the doores of the Church that is to admit such as are for their Faith Knowledge and Repentance sufficiently qualified and fitted to be made members and to refuse such as are not fit to be recived into the fellowship of the church either for their Ignorance or other sins and offences c. Now then when it doth evidently appear That the Disciples or Brethren not to say Sisters though they are Disciples also of the Church in Jerusalem in her most flourishing condition had this libertie to declare their feares and the ground thereof against Paul who was at that time a Beleever a Baptized person a Preacher or minister of the Gospell so that although hee came and assayed to be joyned to the Disciples and be admitted a member among them that he might have fellowship with them in the worship and ordinances of the Gospell Yet was thereby hindered from admittance untill Barnabas witnessed his condition and conversation to the Apostle and then he was with them coming in going out at Jerusalem How can the Doctor make good that ' The Presbyters alone without the consent of Brethren may admit members and cast out members and that the Brethren or the congregation hath nothing to doe to hinder any such thing page 102.106 For further proof hereof ' The Doctor urgeth Act. 8.35 to 40. The example of the Eunuch to whom Philip being sent preached Jesus and Baptisme in his Name and it is related That when they came to a certaine water the Eunuch said unto him See here is Water What doth hinder me to be Baptized And Philip said If thou beleevest with all thy heart thou mayest 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 licet And he answered and said I beleeve that Jesus Christ is the Son of God And he commanded the Charet to stand still And they went downe both into the water both Philip and the Eunuch and he Baptized him Here we set saith the Doctor that PHILIP admits him into the number of beleevers and makes him a member of the Church But the Doctor saith this was without consulting with the Congregation by his owne authority and upon the Eunuch his own testimonie pag. 106. I answer that PHILIP had a speciall command from God for what he did herein and so had Ananias Act. 9.15 touching Saul which is the next Instance which the Doctor brings in this same 106. pag. And albeit the Doctor affirme ' That ANANIAS did not say to SAUL I will consult with the Church to see whither they will admit thee to be a member for thou hast greatly wasted the Church and made havock of the Saints and therefore I will have their approbation and consent and thou shalt give in evidences of thy true Conversion c. And so be received and admitted ' But without all this ado saith the Dr. pag. 107. he baptized Paul and admitteth him into the number of Beleevers and makes him a Member of the Church Yet if the Reader look back into the 102. page of his Book The Dr. there makes an exception from the power which he a little before had affirmed the Presbyters have to admit Members by vertue of Christ his commission upon the profession of their faith and repentance and receiving baptisme without any further Testimony ' Unlesse saith the Dr. they had been formerly known to be open enemies and persecutors of the Church and then they were justly to be suspected till they had given publike evidence by witnesse of their true conversion And gives an instance in Paul who for a time the Disciples feared Acts 9.26.27 till they had better information and proof that he now preached the faith that he had once persecuted and had suffered for it pag. 102. To rehearse all the Scriptures alledged to prove this method of God and practise of the Apostles were needlesse But passing by such as are not so plain and clear for the proof thereof and also omitting what the Doctor hath said touching the Brethren in comparing their practise with the Apostles Because the Dr. is mistaken in stateing the Question and also in his Queries as before I mentioned in the 14 page of this my answer and the Reader may see pag. 98 99. and 100. of the Doctors Book I shall give the Reader the result of all that the Dr. hath written from pag. 100. to the end of his Book touching Gods method and the Apostles practice in gathering of Churches and admitting Members viz. ' First That Christ having given a Commission to his Apostles to teach all Nations and baptize them Matth. 28.19.20 Mark 16 15 16. the Apostles practised accordingly Acts 2.37.38 Acts 10.44.45.46.47.48 and so did Philip Acts 8.35.36.37.38 and Ananias Acts 9.10.18 Secondly That the condition or tearmes which they were to propound unto all Nations and people upon which they were to be admitted into the Church were Faith Repentance and Baptisme Mark 16.15,16 For the commission was delivered to the Apostles that they should admit whosoever beleeved and would be baptized and they that beleeved not and would not be baptized were not to be admitted pag. 102. and pag. 104. The Apostles saith the Dr. propounded no other condition or tearmes for making all and every one Members of the Church but Repentance and Baptisme Acts 2.37.38 Thirdly that the Apostles and all succeeding Ministers of the Gospell should admit whosoever beleeved and were baptized to be Members of the Church and teach them to observe no other things but what Christ commanded them and for which they had his Word and warrant pag. 101. and 102. Matth. 28.19.20 And this saith the Dr. the Apostles did practice without requiring them to take a private covenant or enter into the Church by way of a particular covenant pag. 105. Acts 2.37.38 This being the summe and result of that method and practice which the Dr. conceives should be done in gathering Churches and admitting Members which the Scriptures will warrant and Christ Jesus approve of as his fathers will I shall now take liberty to declare what I know by mine own experience to be the practice of some Churches of God in this City That so both the Dr. and the Reader may judge how near the Saints who walk together in the Fellowship of the Gospell do come in their practice to these Apostolicall rules and practice propounded by the Dr. as Gods method in gathering Churches and admitting Members I say that I know by mine own experience having walked with them That they were thus gathered viz. Some godly and learned men of approved guifts and abilities for the Ministerie being driven out of the Countries where they lived by the persecution of the Prelates came to sojourn in this great City and preached the Word of God both publikely and from house to house and daily in the Temples and in every house they ceased not to teach and preach Jesus Christ and some of them have dwelt in their own hired houses and received all that came in unto them preaching the Kingdome of God and teaching those things which concern the Lord Jesus Christ Matth. 28.18.19.20 Mark 16.15 Act. 8.4 â—ap 1â— 19 20.21.22 Act. 10.20.21 Act. 5.42 Act. 28.23.30.31 Acts 17.1.2,3,4,5 Acts 17.5.11,12 Acts 2.38.40,41,42 And when many sinners were converted by their preaching of the Gospell some of them that beleeved consorted with them and of professors a great many and of the chief women not a few And the condition which those Preachers both publikely and privately propounded to the people unto whom they Preached upon which they were to be admitted into the Church was Faith Repentance and Baptisme and none other And whosoever poor as well as rich bond as well as free servants as well as Masters did make a profession of their Faith in Christ Jesus and would be baptized with water into the Name of the Father Sonne and Holy Spirit were admitted Members of the Church but such as did nor beleeve and would not be baptized they would not admit into Church-communion Act. 16.30,31,32,33 Acts 8.35.37.38,39 Acts 8.12 Acts 18.8 This hath been the practice of some Churches of God in this City without urging or making any particular covenant with Members upon admittance which I desire may be examined by the Scriptures cited in the Margent and then compared with the Doctors three conclusions from the same Scriptures whereby it may appear to the judicious Reader how near the Churches some of them come to the practice of the Apostles rule and practice of the primitive Churches both in gathering and admitting Members And my humble request to the Doctor is That he will use all meanes that the method of God and practice of the Apostles in gathering of Churches and admitting Members may be conscionably practised by his Brethren of both sides according to the revealed Word and Will of the Father FJNJS
A Moderate Answer VNTO Dr. BASTVVICKS BOOK CALLED Jndependency not Gods Ordinance WHEREIN Is declared the manner how some CHVRCHES in this City were gathered and upon what tearmes their Members were admitted That so both the Dr. and the Reader may judge how near some Beleevers who walk together in the Fellowship of the Gospell do come in their practice to these Apostolicall rules which are propounded by the Dr. as Gods method in gathering Churches and admitting MEMBERS By HANSERD KNOLLYS Printed and published according to Order Imprimatur JA CRANFORD LONDON Printed by IANE COE 1645. A Moderate ANSWER UNTO Dr. BASTWICKS Book CALLED Jndependencie not Gods Ordinance PAssing by many things lesse considerable because I intend brevity In the 7th page of the Doctors booke There is a twofold Question betweene them called PRESBYTERIANS and their Brethren who are termed INDEPENDENTS The first is concerning the Government of the Church viz. Whether it be Presbyterian-Dependen or Presbyterian-Independent The second Question is concerning the Gathering of CHURCHES Touching the former Question concerning the Government of the Church the Doctor acknowledgeth in the same 7th page that the Brethren on both sides agree that the Government of the church is a Presbyterian-Government both acknowledging a Presbyterie But whether it be Dependent or Independent is the maine thing in the question which the Doctor doth determine and saith in the Title page of his book he hath evidently Proved ' That the Presbyterian-Government-Dependent is Gods Ordinance and not the byterian-Government-Independent I intend not to strive with the Doctor about wordes and therefore touching the two Termes to wit Dependent and Independent I shall onely say this at present That if by Independent the the Doctor indeede mean as it doth appear so to my understanding by many passages in his booke he doth intend a Presbyterian-Government which hath not Dependencie upon any in matters meerly Ecclesiasticall but upon the Lord Jesus Christ Who is the Head of the Church And if by Dependent hee also indendeth as in many other passages in his booke seemeth to me to be his meaning Pag. 8.10 Pag. 14.15.17.18 a Presbyterian-Government which hath a Dependencie upon a supream Judicature of a Common-councell of Presbyters and who must in matters Ecclesiasticall be subiect unto the Decrees Sentences Constitutions and Commandments of a Common-councell Colledge or Consistorie of Classicall Provinciall or Synodicall Presbyters Then I do conceive the Doctor hath not proved nor will he ever be able to prove That the Presbyterian-Government-Dependent is Gods Ordinance And I hope to make the contrary plainly appear both from cleere Texts of Scripture and the Doctors owne bookes And seeing that the Doctor hath in the 6th p. of his Book desired all his Christan Brethren in the Deciding of this Question to take the Word of God into their Hands and with the Noble Bereans to sit downe and examine whatsoever shall be said on either side according to the Scriptures I willingly make the same request as most desirous that this short Answere may abide the like triall and be weighed in the other ballance of the Sanctuary against the Doctors Booke Now that all things may be handled in good order and in a Methodicall way the Doctor hath reduced the whole disputation concerning this first Question into four Propositions page 11. The first that there were many Congregations and severall assemblies of Beleevers in the church of Ierusalem in the which they enjoyed all acts of Worship and all the Ordinances amongst themselves and did partake of all acts of Church-fellowship especially of preaching and in the Administration of the Sacraments and prayer and that before the Persecution we reade of Act. 8.2 The second That all these congregations and severall assemblies made but one church The third That the Apostles and Elders governed ordered and ruled this church joyntly and by a Common-councell and Prebsytery The fourth that this church of Ierusalem and the government of the same is to be a patterne for all severall congregations and assemblies in any City or Vicinity to unite into one Church and for the Officers of those congregations to governe that Church joyntly in a Colledge or Presbyterie These are his four Propositions But before hee comes to the proof of these particulars hee saith it will not bee amisse in generall to take notice That all the Churches we read of in the New Testament were Aristocratically and Prestbyterially governed and were all Dependent upon their severall Presbyters and produceth divers places of Scripture to prove the same and two sheets are spent wholly in proving thereof from the 12. page to the 29. All which should it bee granted only proves First That in every City or Church there was a Presbiterie Acts. 14.23 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 cumque per suffragia statuissent illis per singulas Ecclesias seniores that is When they had ordained them Elders in every Church by the Suffrage or stretching forth of Hands also Titus 1.5 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 constituas oppidatim seniores that is And thou mayest Ordaine Elders towne by towne or city by city or village by village Secondly that as there were Apostles and Elders in the Church of Jerusalem Act. 15.2,4 So there were Elders in the Church of Ephesus Act. 20.17,28 And in the Church of Corinth and in the Church of Galatia and in Philippie c. Thirdly that these severall Churches were Dependent upon their severall Presbyters and were to obey them who had the rule over them Heb. 13.7,17,24 Or who were their Guides 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Obedite ducibus vestris that is Obey your Guides Fourthly that this Presbyterian-Church-Government God hath hath appointed as his Ordinance to be continued to the end of the world the which whosoever resisteth resisteth the Ordinance of God but it doth not prove That this Presbyterian-Church-Government is Dependent upon a supreame Judicature of a Common-counsell of Presbyters or that they must submit and subject them themselves and their churches unto the Decrees Sentences Constitutions and Commandements of a Common-councell colledge and court of classicall or Synodall Presbyters which the Doctor should have proved for such a Presbyterian-Government he intends as may appeare by the Doctors owne words pag. 17.18 As for the Presbyterian Government in the sence that I understand it there is nothing more cleare to me in all the Scripture Yea the very word and name of Presbytery signifieth a Magistracy or Aristocracy or Signory or court And as the word is taken in the civill Polity and Government so in the Ecclesiasticall by a Presbytery wee understand saith the Doctor page 18. A Religious Grave Sollid Learned and Wise Councell of Divines Ministers c. Without whose joynt and mutuall accord or agreement and common-consent nothing ought to be done or transacted of publicke concernment And to make this good to wit That the Presbyters of particular congregations or assemblies of Beleevers and their Churches ought to be
subject to a Common-councell or Court of Presbyters The Doctor urgeth that Scripture the third Epistle of John the 9.10,11 verses as an invincible Argument You shall finde it thus expounded by the Doctor pag. 15. ' And therefore when Diotrephes assumed to himself and his particular congregation a power and authority to rule according to his will and pleasure without the consent of the Presbyterie and opposed Iohn the Presbyter He sharply reproves his proceedings and signifies to the Church That when he came he would remember his words and teach him how to prate against the Presbytery with malicious words Which is an evill thing in him saith St. Iohn It was evill in him to assume unto himself and his particular congregation that power that belonged unto the colledge or councell of Presbyters and was to be moderated and exercised onely by the conjoynt and common-consent of the Presbytery For God hath appointed that the Church should be governed by a Presbytery and Diotrephes would have his congregation Independent and have an absolute jurisdiction within it self which saith St. Iohn is an evill thing Now let the Reader judge whether the Dr. be not much mistaken in his Commentary-exposition and application of this place of Scripture And let me give you to understand that St. Iohn saith verse 9. I wrote unto the Church Or as Beza upon that verse 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Scripsi nonnihil Ecclesiae that is I have written something to the Church But seeing no mention is made of any perticular Congregation how can the Dr. so confidently affirm that it was his particular Congregation Now the Reader may see plainly That the Dr. can expound those Brethren and their Elders or Presbyters which the Scripture calles a Church to be a particular Congregation And what it was which St. Iohn had written to the Church is not in this Epistle nor any other Scripture declared except it was to receive those Brethren which he saith verse 8. ought to be received and verse 10. whom Diotrephes would not receive how then doth the Doctor say That Diotrephes assumed that power to himself which belonged unto the Colledge and councell of Presbyters without whose joynt and mutuall agreement and common-consent nothing ought to be done or transacted of publike concernment Is the receiving of Brethren or casting out of Brethren a power which belongs to a Colledge of Presbyters and neither the one nor the other may be transacted by the Elders and Brethren of a particular congregation unlesse the court or common-councell of Presbyters conjoyntly consent unto it Let it be also considered That Diotrephes opposed the Brethren and forbade them that would have received those who St. Iohn saith verse 8. we ought to receive yea and cast them ought vers 10. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 volentes admittere prohibet de Ecclesia dejicit That is and forbiddeth them that would or are willing to admit them and casteth them out of the church to wit excommunicates them Doth it hereby appear that Diotrephes would have his congregation Independent and have an absolute jurisdiction within it self No but Diotrephes would Lord it over the church and have the pre-eminence above his brethren whether fellow Elders or fellow Saints verse ◠〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 sed amans primatum gerere in eos Diorephes that is But Diotrephes loving the primacie amongst them He would be the Primate and Metropolitan of the church and have the Pre-eminence of all the Presbyters in it and Brethren of it The Doctor could have urged this Scripture against the domineering Prelates and why should he marvail that his Brethren should now urge it against the court of Presbyters It is confessed Diotrephes did that which was evill in usurping Authority over the church and those Brethren whom he cast out of the church But that he was the first that opposed the Presbyterian Government or that he did affront a Court and common-councell of Presbyters is more then I know or the Doctor can prove For had Diotrephes done so why was he not convented before them surely the Apostle and Elder St. Iohn would rather have written to the colledge of Presbyters if there were any such then to the Church or in writing to the Church would rather have sent him a summons to appear at some consistorie before the Court and common-councell of Presbyters then to warne them to take heed of his evill that they did not follow it And doubtlesse St. Iohn would have written thus Diotrephes loves to be a Primate among you wherefore when the Presbyterie that is to say the Magistracy or Signory of grave solid learned religious and wise Divines and Ministers come to keep order and met together in a Court and common-councell I will remember his deeds and inform or complain to the Court and common-councell of Presbyters that he prates against us the Presbyters with malicious words But the Apostle St. Iohn did not know any Court or common-councell of Presbyters neither Classicall nor Synod call to appeal unto Nor can the Doctor make good those Appeales he mentioneth pag. 10. to be according to the Scripture of Truth to wit That every particular man as well as any Assembly or Congregation may have their appeal to the Presbyterie of their Precinct hundred or devision under whose jurisdictions they were And if they finde themselves wronged there then they have appeales to some other higher Presbytery or Councell of Divines for relief and justice I onely ask the Doctor how he can prove these appeales by Scripture and if he could whether that higher Presbytery or Councell of Divines especially if they may say the Holy Ghost and we be not as Independent as these Brethren and their Churches against whom the Doctor hath written And if so then such a high Presbytery or Councell of Divines is not Gods Ordintnce by the Doctors own confession and Affirmation Therefore the Apostle writes to the Church or perticular Congregation whereof Diotrephes was a Member and an Elder whom he knew had power to judge him as well as the Church or perticular Congregation of Corinth had power to judge them that were Members therein 1 Cor. 5.12.13 And therefore might as warrantably admonish Diotrephes as the Church of Colosse might Arckippus Coloss 4.17 ' And if nothing of publike concernment ought to bee done or transacted without the joynt and mutuall accord or agreement and common consent of the Presbytery Iohn the Presbyter would not have transgressed so farre as to take upon himself this Authority over Diotrephes to tell the Church of his faults and to say he would remember him and sharply reprove him and teach him to prate against the Presbyterie with malicious words which belonged to the Court and Common Councell of Presbyters But I shall have a just occasion to say more touching this matter in the answer unto the third Question and therefore passing by the objection with its answer mentioned page 19. to the 29. unto its
due place I shall desire seriously to consider the Doctors proof of his first proposition which he laboureth first by producing such Scriptures as he conceiveth make for the manifestation of the Truth and from thence frames and formeth his Arguments ' His Scriptures are these viz. Matth. 3. vers 1.2.5.6 Mark 6.20.21 Matth. 14.5 and Luk. 20.4.6 And divers other Scriptures which you have at large set down in the Doctors Book with his Arguments framed from thence pag. 29. to 82. where this first proposition endeth The summe of all which I shall give the Reader to understand as briefly as I can to wit ' Where there was an infinite multitude of Beleevers or a very City of Beleevers so that they kept a tyrannicall King in awe and all the Magistrates and Elders in whose hands was all the power and Authority even a world of Beleevers with many Rulers and men of great place and and Office with such an increase of multitudes of Beleevers 8000 new Converts besides women and children yea many 10000 of Beleevers and where there were almost an hundred Preachers and Ministers besides the 12. Apostles and all these continually taken up in Prayer and Preaching There must of necessitie be many Congregations and Assemblies But in the Church of Jerusalem there was an infinite multitude of Beleevers and a very City of Beleevers which kept Herod himself the tyrant in awe and all the Magistrates and Elders even a world of Beleevers with many Rulers and men of great place and Office with an increase of multitudes of Beleevers and 8000. new Converts besides women and children yea and many 10000. after all the persecutions and almost an hundred Preachers and Ministers besides the 12 Apostles and all these were continually taken up in Prayer and Preaching Ergo they must of necessitie be dispiersed into many Congregations and severall Assemblies I do deny the Minor proposition of this Argument Neither hath the Doctor proved That there was an infinite number of Beleevers nor a very City of Beleevers in the Church of Jerusalem The Scriptures quoted by the Doctor speakes no such thing those places in Matthew Mark and Luke tell us of very many who were baptized by Iohn and by Christs Disciples but do not declare how many of these baptized persons were of the Church in Jerusalem and the Scripture witnesseth Acts 9.31 that there were Churches throughout all Judaea as well as in Jerusalem and for ought I know or the Doctor either many of those baptized persons might be in these Churches yea the most of them and but a few it may be no more but those 120. mentioned Acts 1.13,14,15 To whom were added about 3000. souls who continued in the Apostles Doctrine and fellowship and in breaking of bread and in prayers Acts 2.41.42.44.46 And as for the world of Beleevers mentioned in another argument drawn from Joh. 12.19 behold the world is gone after him Pag. 37 and 40. That Scripture doth not say they beleeved in him much lesse that there was a world of Beleevers in the Church in Ierusalem Neither is there mention in any Scripture quoted by the Doctor of 8000. new Converts besides women and children Neither doth that Scripture produced Acts 4.4 prove any such thing For the Reader may consider that the number of them there mentioned are but 5000. And albeit the Doctor make them up 8000. by saying those 5000. men were added to the Church and joyned to the formers Beleevers pag. 57. Yet there is a twofold mistake in the Doctors Addition to wit First that some of the 3000. may be were women and how then can the Doctor say there were 8000. new converts besides women Secondly these 5000. are onely called men and not converts not beleevers For howbeit many of them hearing the Word beleeved yet it is not said the 5000. men beleeved And the truth is the Text well considered only holds forth that the number of men was made up five thousand 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 factus est numerus virorum quasi millia quinque and the number of men was made about five thousand not 8000. And as for the many 10000 s. mentioned Acts 21.20 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 comes of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 infinitus and though the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 do sometimes signifie numerum decem millium yet not alwayes but for some great number which cannot suddenly be told as Luke 12 1. And Beza both according to the old and new version of the Greek into Latine reads it millia 1000 s. not decem millia 10000 s. and so we have it in our English Bibles translated thousands And the following verse 22. will make it probable that there were not many 10000 s. for there we thus read The multitude must needs come together so that I say its probable that they were not so many 1000 s. but they could yea must assemble together Neither can the Dr. make good from those Scriptures he produceth ' pag. 62. to wit Acts 1. vers 21.22 cap. 6. vers 2.4 and cap. 8. vers 1. That there was almost a hundred Preachers and Ministers besides the 12. Apostles in the Church of Jerusalem The 12. are named indeed in Act. 6.2.4 but not 100. besides no nor any one Preacher but them 12. And as for the other two places Acts 1.21.22 and Acts 8.1 there is not any word concerning Preachers or Ministers onely some directions touching the choise of Matthias who was one of the 12. mentioned Act. 6.2 And although they who were scattered preached the Word Acts 8.4 yet the Scripture doth not declare that they were Preachers or Ministers of the Church in Jerusalem But the Doctor hath one Argument which is more to the purpose then all the other which I desire the Reader seriously to consider pag. 64. he thus further argueth That which the Holy Scripture in expresse wordes and in divers places hath declalred unto us that every Christian is bound to beleeve But the Scripture in expresse words and in diverse places hath declared unto us that there were divers assemblies and Congregations of Beleevers in the Church of Ierusalem and that the Apostles and all the Beleevers in Ierusalem did continue daily with one accord in the Temple and that they brake bread from house to house and that daily in the Temple and in every house they ceasad not to teach and preach Iesus Christ Ergo There was diverse congregations and severall assemblies of Beleevers in the CHURCH of Ierusalem where they did duly pertake in all the Ordinances and injoyed all the acts of Worship Now I doe desire the Reader to consider how the Doctor Proves his Minor which he saith is manifest from Acts 2.46 and chap. 5.12,42 and chap. 3.11.12 and many more places that might be produced pag. 64.65.66 In all which discourse the Dr. gives you nothing but his own suppositions and conclusions for the proof of his Minor proposition which is his manner of