where it cannot be otherwise interpreted therefore we must depart from the proper notation of the word where the context of the place doth induce us and the practice of the Church and People of God in after-generations to abide by it is not tolerable arguing His next Exception is 3dly None are said to 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but Paul and Barnabas and they are said to do it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for them viz. tâ—â— Church or Disciples Answ 1. Nor is it necessary that we affirm any other so to do They herein presiding over them and regulating the whole affair according to the instructions received from Christ bear the name of the whole work though the Votes and Suffrages of the Disciples were in it also The Apostles ordained by Suffrages viz. the Suffrages of the Church Elders for them But this proves not that the Vote of the Disciples was excluded it rather evinceth the cantraâ—y Yet 2dly Why 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 must be rendred creating by Suffrages or ordaining for them I do not understand It may every whit as properly be rendred with them viz. with the Church or Disciples For so the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is frequently rendred so Mat. 13. 29. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ye root up also the Wheat not for but with them Act. 17. 2. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 reasoâ—ed with them Heb. 8. 18. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for finding fault with them and in many places besides That it should be so rendred here is evident 1. 'T is consonant to the practice of the Saints then and in after-generations as is known 2. How Paul and Barnabas may be said properly 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to ordain by Suffrages alone by themselves every understanding is not able to reach render the word with them i. e. with the Disciples and the câ—se is plain â—nd evident viz. the Apostles with the Church or Congregation of Believers by Suffrages and Votes ordained Elders which is the matter enquired after So that whatever this Animadverter is able to say to the contrary this Scripture proves the power of particular Churches to elect their own Officers and therefore if the present Ministers have not received a Commission from Christ thus mediately by the election of some one or other particular instituted Church of Christ if they pretend not to it have it in derision come barely with a presentation from a Patron Ordination Institution and Induction from a Lord-Bishop things forreign to the Scripture and impose themselves upon the People whether they will or no as it may most truly be affirmed of them they are not Ministers of the Gospel nor may be heard as such But Mr. T. hath somewhat more to adde he tells us 1. That it will be hard for us to prove that the Parish-Churches in England are not particular instituted Churches of Christ Answ 1. Of what is hard or easie for us to do or any man else our Animadverter seems a very incompetent Judge 2dly He is not ignorant that this is already done to our hands by several learned men and 't is sure no difficult task actum agere to do over again what we find done to our hands before He further affirms 2dly It will also be hard to prove that the Ministers of England are imposed on the People whether they will or no. Answ 1. The generality of the People of England will attest the verity hereof who for the most part know not their Minister till he comes to them with his Orders nor is their Consent touching his Reception desired or at all significant with respect to his exercising an Office-power over them 2dly What they do in London and some few particular places where the Inhabitants it may be are the Patrons is not considerable or worth the minding 1. For the most part they are imposed upon the people whether they will or no. 2. Were they chosen by their Parochial Inhabitants they were never the nearer Ministers of Christ Because 1. That their choice hath not the least influence upon their being constituted such 't is the Bishops Ordination that in this matter doth all 2. The Parish-Churches of England are not true Churches of Christ which we demonstrate 1. Where there is not the true matter of a Church there is not a true Church But in the Parish-Churches of England there is not the true matter of a Church Therefore The Minor which alone is capable of a denial is evident That only is fit matter of a Church which corresponds to the matter of the Primitive Churches planted by the Apostles These were Saints Ephes 1. 1. Col. 1. 2. Holy Brethren 1 Thess 5. 27. Such â—â— were not of but called out of the World Joh. 15. 18 19. whom God had received Rom. 14. 3. Such as please Christ and are dearly beloved by him Eph. 5. 29. are built upon the foundation of the Prophets anâ— Apostles Eph. 2. 20. have the Spirit of Christ Eph. 4. 4. are built up together an holy and spiritual House to God 1 Pet. 2. 5. God 's House 1 Tim. 3. 15. Heb. 3. 6. are living Stones a chosen Generation a Royal Priesthood an holy Nation a peculiar People v. 9. faithful in Christ Jesus Eph. 1. 1. The sons and daughters of the Lord God Almighty 2 Cor. 6. 17 18. Christ is said to be their Husband their Head They his Bride Eph. 5. 23. Col. 1. 18. his Temple 1 Cor. 3. 16. Now he must have a brow of brass that shall affirm that these Characters are applicable to the Parish-Assemblies of England when they themselves will confess they appertain not to them Are Drunkards Swearers Revilers Persecuters of God and Holiness loose prophane scandalous livers of which these Assemblies for the most part are constituted and made up Saints holy Brethren such as are called out of the World c. None will dare to aver it 2dly Where there is not the true form of a Church there is not the true Church But in the Parish-Assemblies of England there is not the true form of a Church Therefore The Minor which is alone liable to exception is evident The form of a Church consists in the free and voluntary embodying together of Saints giving up themselves to the Lord and one another according to his will as we have already proved Now this cannot be asserted of the Parish-Assemblies Those Civil divisions for they are no others were of the institution of man as we have demonstrated And to this day they are held together by penal Statutes and Ordinances such as never came into the heart of Christ to establish 3dly There where there is not the Church-power that of right belongs to a true Church of Christ there is not a true Church of Christ But in the parish-Parish-Churches of England there is not that church-Church-power nor as such are they capable of it Therefore The Minor which alone is to be proved is perspicuous 1. The power of electing their own Officers
it is Is not the Discipline of their Church from the Canon Law with what forehead can he deny it Whence is the Hierarchy Ecclesiastical decrees Episcopal jurisdiction Procurations Dispensations Pluralities Non-residencies Popish-retained-Ceremonies their Excommunications by a Commissary Ordinations Absolutions Degradations Visitations Offerings Courts Silencing of Godly Preachers disquieting the Lords people for Non-conformity if not from the Cannon-Law These things are notoriously known to be from them So that Mr. T. grants the present Ministers may lawfully be separated from But this might be a slip of his pen before he was aware That it is our duty to separate from persons acting from an Antichristian Power Office or Calling we prove 2ly 'T is unlawful to attend upon the Teachings of Antichrist therefore upon the teachings of such as act by vertue of a power derived from him To this Mr. T. replyes If by teachings of Antichrist be meant the teachings of the present Doctrine of the Church of Rome and the power derived from him be meant the English Bishops Ordination it is impudency to say they derived their power from Rome Answ 1. We are not yet speaking of the Ministers of England to separate from those that act from an Antichristian power be they Ministers of Germany Holland if they so act in their Ministry they are to be seperated from and that because we may not attend upon Antichrist in his Teachings or Ministration doth Mr. T. deny tâ—is He saith indeed if they preach truth we may attend upon their Ministry though they so act Answ But this hath been often said without the least proof and as frequently replyed to and its inconsutilousness in its applâ—cation to the present Ministers who preach Popish Errours and are interdicted the preaching all truth manifested 'T is an assertion most derogatory to the Dignity and Authority of our Lord and King and not to be born by his Loyal Subjects Hath not he Servants enough of his own to do his work to preach his Gospel but he must be beholding to the greatest enemies he hath in the world to send forth Servants into his Vineyard 2dly The present Ministers of England deny their power from the Papacy or they do not if they do not it had been my mistake not impudency to say they did If they do as most certain it is they do and they themselves acknowledge it and plead it the Impudency is rather in Mr. T. to deny it I add in S. T. 3dly Christ calls his to separate from every thing of Antichrist Rev. 18. 4. 14. 9 10 11. Therefore from his Ministry or such as act by vertue of an Antichristian power To which our Animadverter replies 1 Rev. 18. 4. may be understood of a local departure from Babylon when her judgment of destruction from the Kings of the Earth draws nigh Answ 1. And who can hinder Mr. T. from making conjectures his it may be is no proof that it is However the ground of the Lord 's calling them out of Rome should it be granted him that by Babylon were meant the City of Rome is plainly intimated to be lest they should partake of their sins Not their dwelling in Rome but their complying with the Antichristian Ministry Worship thereof their abominable Rites and Ceremonies is that which is loathsom to the Lord. 2dly 'T is true God calls not his People to depart from every doctrine the Pope teacheth there is some truth remaining amongst them which is to be cleaved to because truth much less a rejection of the Bible These are but vain words empty flourishes this Animadverter knows full well that these things are not affirmed by those with whom he hath to do 3dly To a departure from her by forsaking Communion with her in Worship and leaving subjection to her Government he grants this Scripture may be extended which is all we need contend for The Worship of Rome and England are much the same as we prove The Church-government in use amongst us by Arch-Bishops Bishops issues from the same sourse and spring as is known Therefore a separation from the Worship and Ministry of England lawful by the Animadverter's confession 4thly When God commands to come out of her he must be interpreted to come out of every thing of her viz. that which is truly hers whatever hath not the stamp and authority of God upon it for the reason why the Lord would have his forsake any thing of hers is because it is hers and hath not his own Image and Superscription 'T is ridiculous to imagine that God should command a separation from her Worship and Government and not from her Ministry when this is a main part of her 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Church-Government He adds 2dly By the Beast and his Image Rev. 14. 9 10 11. is meant some Empire or State which promotes Idolatry the Roman Papacy the worshipping of which is undoubtedly the acknowledging of its power and subjection to their Idolatrous Decrees and Edicts The receiving his mark is a profession of our being the servants of the Pope to subject to his authority and after the citation of Mr. Brightman and Mr. Mede speaking to this purpose he saith which doth evince that the worship of the Beast and his Image is not retaining every usage of the Papists though superstitious and corrupt but acknowledging the universal Monarchy of the Popes adoring Images the Host c. Answ 1. But what doth evince that this is all that is intended by worshipping the Image of the Beast Mr. T. would bear his Reader in hand as if he had produced somewhat for the confirmation of his Assertion when he hath not said the least word tending thereunto The very truth is 2ly The Beast mentioned Rev. 14. 9 10. is the same with the Beast mentioned Rev. 13. 11. or the false Prophet Rev. 19. 21. or Antichrist consider'd in his Ecclesiastical State composed of head the Popes and members the rest of the Antichristian Clergy whether at Rome or elsewhere for as the learned Mede saith the Pope alone maketh not up the Beast except the Clergy be joâ—n'd with him since the Beast doth signifie a company of men composed of a certain order of members like as the Beast hath not one man alone the Image of the Beast cannot be a dumb Image 't is expresly said to be a speaking one viz. the Ecclesiastical policy that in its Cannon-Laws upon which both that of Rome and England is founded breatheth forth nothing but Excommunication against such as shall disobey them upon which they are deliver'd over to the Secular Power here with us though not to be burned yet to perpetual Imprisonment The worshipping the Beast and receiving the mark is subjection to an Antichristian Ministry and Church-polity from which it is the duty of the people of God to separate and if we prove not the Ministers of England to be so we acknowledg this Argument to be null and that notwithstanding any thing in it
not to be an order above Presbytery Answ 1. Who they are that have thus acknowledged I know not 2. Mr. T. saith not that any of the present Bishops do so 3. If they did in words their practice contradicts it exercising jurisdictions over the Presbyters or Elders 3dly Nor to this saith he that though the Bishop imposing hands do act as of superior order yet being a Presbyter his act is valid as he that convey's a thing as conceiving himself as Heir and Executor if he be not Heir yet if he be only Executor by that hath power to convey iâ— the Grant is good Answ 1. But this is Mr. T. his mistake I say expresly though it should be granted that they act as Presbyters yet their act is not valid because they act not as Presbyters of the institution of Christâ— of which he afterwards takes notice Though 2dly Mr. T. will never be able to prove that the Bishop imposing hands as a Bishop and acting under that capacity yet being a Presbyter his act is valid For. 1. when a Bishop he is no longer a Presbyter but one of an higher order and degree as a Presbyter is no longer a Deacon when once made a Presbyter 2. As a Bishop he hath no authority from Christ at all to act in the business of imposition of hands therefore acting as such his act is invalid which his once being a Presbyter cannot make otherwise because he is not now so nor acts as such but avowedly the contrary 3. His instance of a persons conveying a thing as conceiving himself as Heir and Executor is not pertinent For. 1. He hath originally and legally the same right if he be one as if both and pretends to a right to both in his conveyance 2ly Should he refuse his Executorship and make a Conveyance as Heir and he prove not to be so his Conveyance is naught Nay 3. if he make a Conveyance of what neither as Heir or Executor he hath any right to the Grant is undoubtedly not good This is evidently the case of our Lord-Bishops To the objection as proposed by us we answer 1. That they act in the capacity of Presbyters in the matter of ordination is false 2. Contrary to their avowed principles Mr. T. replies This is uncertain Answ And he may as well say it is uncertain that the Sun shines at noon-day The least smatterer in the usages of the Church of England and principles of these Doctors thereof see and know it to be certainly true 2. Contrary to the known Law of the Land by which they receive power to act therein in which they are known and owned only in the capacity of Lord-Bishop Mr. T. replies This is not true for the ordination of Suffragan-Bishops who are not Lords is valid by Law Answ A weak proof of such a crimination A Suffragan-Bishop is a Titular-Bishop when he acts in the matter of ordination he represents the Lord-Bishop whose Suffragan he is And the Law accounts his act not his own but the act of the Lord-Bishop whose Representee hee is And this Mr. T. could not be ignorant of We say 3dly 'T is contrary to their late practice whereby they have sufficiently declared the nullity of a Ministerial Office received from the hands of a Presbytery in thrusting out of doors several hundreds of Ministers so ordained Strange that it should be pleaded they act as Presbyters in the matter of ordination and yet they themselves judge a Presbyterian ordination invalid What saith Mr. T. Why 1. They do not nullify ordination by a Presbytery in forrain Churches Answ But this is not at all to the purpose have they not done so at home To attempt to do so in forraign Churches where they have no power were but to expose themselves to greater contempt as busy Bishops indeed 2dly In England they do it because the Laws saith he require Episcopal Ordination Answ But Sir the question is not upon what accounts they have so done in England but whether their so doing be not a manifestation that they act not in the capacity of Presbyters in the business of Ordination for if they did they fore-condemn their own act in condemning Presbyterian ordination their ordination being upon this supposition onely such 2dly He grants The Law requires Episcopal ordination if so it doth sure tie them that act in it to think themselves Bishops to act with such an intention and under that notion which not many lines before he denyed We further answer in S. T. What if this should be granted it would avail nothing except it can be proved that they are and act as Presbyters of the institution of Christ which these being only in a particular instituted Church of Christ will never be to the worlds end To which our Animadverter replies If this be held then all the Presbyters of the French Dutch and other Churches under Presbyterial goverment are not of Christs institution and so a separation avowed from all Protestant Churches except their own Answ 1. But this is no proof that the Bishops of England act in the matter of ordination as Presbyters of the institution of Christ which is the one and onely thing he should have heeded in his reply but of that he is wholly silent 2dly No doubt he thinks he hath sufficiently bespatter'd uâ— but if he account it a discredit to speak palpable untruths it will be his own 1. 'T is false that we avow separation from all Churches but those of our own way that our Assertion tends to such an end I challenge our Dictator to make good 2. The Presbyterians own particular Churches of the institution of Christ have their Presbyters fixed officers in and amongst them and that both in England and beyond the Seas What satisfaction he will think meet to make us for so foul an aspersion whereby he labours to render us odious to the Godly at home abroad we shall know by the next In the mean while we are ready to attend his motions in the next Chapter CHAP. V. Sect. 1. The fourth Argument in S. T. against hearing the present Ministers vindicated A twofold denial of the Offices of Christ Whether the Papists are guilty of a verbal professional denial of Christs Offices 'T is not lawful to hear such as are guilty of a verbal or real denial of Christs Offices The present Ministers oppose the Kingly and Prophetical Offices of Christ They do so who hearken not to that revelation Christ hath made touching the Orders of his House Deut. 18. 18 19. Act. 3. 23. Mat. 3. 17. Isa 9. 6. explained The vanity of Mr. T. his dictates to the contrary evinced IN Chap. 4th of S. T. we advance a fourth Argument against hearing the present Ministers which is this Those that deny any of the Offices of Christ are not to be heard but separated from But the present Ministers deny some of the Offices of Christ Therefore Before we come to clear the several
Jonathan Every Minister must be 1. Seperated 2. Authorized 3. have allotted to him a certain portion of people which may be instructed by him which the diminutive 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 may seem to insinuate Now as God doth give every Pastor his several Flock so he will that we travel in leading of them we must not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 we must not be Bishops in other mens Diocesses lest God say Who hath required this at your hands When the Lord lighteth Candles he doth find Candlesticks on which to set them c. The sum is 1. The Body of Christ Eph. 4. 11 12. is a particular Church of Christ for the edification of which Pastors and Teachers are given 2ly Ordinary Officers are limited to particular Churches From whence the vanity of this Animadverter's Argument is conspicuous to every eye If by Body of Christ he understand in his first Proposition the Universal Catholick Church 1. His Argument is naught consisting of four terms for we have manifested that the Body of Christ in the Minor which is the Apostles is a particular Church of Christ 2. Hiâ— Major is invalid It doth not follow that if men may be Ministers of Christ though they be Ministers for the Body of Christ and all the members thereof that they may be Ministers of Christ though National If he think Ministers for the Body of Christ and all the members thereof and national Ministers are aequipollent upon second thoughts he will be so ingenious as to acknowledge he was mistaken Nay 3dly The very truth is 't is so far from being true that upon supposition a man may be a Minister of the Body of Christ and yet the Minister of Christ i. e. by the appointment of Christ a Minister for his Body and all the Membeâ—â— Churches thereof That therefore he may be the Minister of Christ though National that ejus contrarium est verum A man cannot be a Minister of Christ if a National Minister or Minister of a National Church upon supposition that Christ hath instituted and appointed his Ministers to be Ministers for his Body i. e. his Church-Catholick-visible which is not sure confined within the narrow circumference of one Nation A mans residence wherein will be accounâ—ed but a pittiful discharge of his Ministry upon the supposition aforesaid But 4thly By the Body of Christ Ephes 4. we have proved a particular Church of Christ to be intended That there is any shew of reason in the Animadverters proposition They that may be Ministers of Christ though they may be Ministers of the Body of Christ i. e. a particular Church of Christ and all the Members thereof which by the appointment of Christ they are may be Ministers of Christ though National which none are but by the devisings of man and appointment of Antichrist he himself will not have the confidence to aver There are these things incumbent upon him to prove if he ever reinforce this Argument First That by Body of Christ Ephes 4. is not meant a particular Instituted Church of Christ Secondly That ordinary Church Officers for to run into a discourse of what was done by the Apostles extraordinary Officers who were not fixt any where nor could be whilest they made conscience of their Commission Mat. 28. 19. which was to Preach the Gospel to every Creature In which Office none are their Successors as we prove Chap. 4. is such a pittiful fig-leaf to cover ones nakedness with that every eye will see through are not limited to or fixed in a particular Congregation Thirdly Manifest the truth of this proposition shoulâ— it be granted him for disputes sake that by Body Ephes 4. is meant the Church-Catholick-visible They that may be Ministers of Christ though they may be Ministers of the Body of Christ i. e. the Church-Catholick-visible and all the members thereof may be Ministers of Christ though National The Bottom or Basis upon which it is built I must acknowledge my short-sightedness to be such that I cannot ken nor it may be a wiser man than either of us His Fourth Argument is like the rest 't is thus formed If any of the Saints as well as one particular Congregation have an Inâ—erest in all the Ministers of Christ so as that they are truly theirs then Ministers of Christ may be National But 1 Cor. 3. 22 23 Paul and Cephas and Apollos were all the Corinthians and all others who were Christ's Therefore Answ En cor Zenodoti en jecur cratetis What is most admirable in this Argument I know not A few things will manifest its nakedness to all 1st The Ministers of Christ are either such as were called extraordinary as were immediately sent by Christ or assumed to themselves by them who were so sent to be coadjutors or fellow-workers with them in that service and employment to preach the Gospel throughout the world and were fixed no where related as Pastors or Teachers to no one particular Congregation more than another or such as were mediately sent by Christ ordained in and set apart for particular Congregations Of the former sort were the Apostles c. Of the latter Pastors Teachers as we but now proved 2dly The having an interest in Ministers is either the having an interest in their gifts and abilities God hath given them or in their persons as Ministers appointed by the Lord to oversee instruct and watch over their souls as such that must give an account Heb. 13. 17. Now let him take Ministers in either sence for extraordinary or ordinary Ministers and an interest in them for an interest in their gifts or in them as Ministers appointed by the Lord to watch over and instruct them the consequence of his first proposition is most weak and invalid Though all the Saints in the world might claim an interest in Paul c. it doth not follow that they were National Ministers which 't was impossible they should be there being no such thing as a National Church from whence a National Minister hath his denomination And Mr. T. may as well surmise a King without Subjects a Father without Children or a Husband without a Wife as to surmise Paul c. to be National Ministers when there was no such thing in being as a National Church The like may be said of Pastors and Teachers in that day But 3dly If he take Ministers for ordinary Ministers as he must do if he speak to purpose extraordinary Ministers being ceased with the Apostles and their interest in them for their interest in them as Ministers to oversee and instruct them in the Lord by virtue of office-Office-power there is nothing more false than this that every Saint hath an interest in them as such none but that particular Congregation having in that sense an interest in them to which they are related as Ministers Nor doth the Apostle 1 Cor. 3. 22 23. say that every Saint hath 1. All is yours is no more
like such a call as the Scriptures mention in the Ministers of Christ 2dly That 't is above the ability of Christian hearers to judge of the Ministers call when 't is so plainly declared in the Scriptures is Mr. T. his mistake an Assertion that he will never be able to prove nor need they to fit themselves herein to spend their time to enquire into their many proceedings in getting Testimonials using means for the obtaining Ordination Institution c. as he talks they have through the great kindness of God to them the Bible in their hands and the holy Spirit dwelling in them to lead them into all Truth they have the qualification of Gospel-Ministers laid down 1 Tim. 32. to 8. Tit. 1. 5 to 10. c. the manner of their call and solemn inauguration into their office where they find persons let their pretences be never so high that are not able to acquit themselves according to those Rules they may judg and yet 't is not they so much as the Spirit of God speaking in the Scripture that they are not the Ministers of Christ But he hath a third Reason In all Governments and Societies the peaceable possessor is presumed to have right till the contrary be evinced Ergo 't is lawful to hear them as Ministers of the Gospel that are not such risum teneatis amici If this be good arguing 't is easie to prove it lawful to hear the Pope yea the greatest Hereticks that ever were in the world He is in the peaceable possession of St. Peter's Chair as they call it The Arrian Bishops once had it generally yet not to be heard I hope as Ministers of Christ The learned Field de Eccl. cites Nazianzen speaking far otherwise Neque qui per vim irrupit successor habendus est c. Nor is he to be accounted the Successor who gets possession by violence but he who suffers violence not he who defends a false opinion but he who is endued with the same Faith unless any one perchance may be called a successor as we say a disease succeeds health darkness light a tempest tranquillity wisdom madness And so we confess the present Ministers are the Successors of the Ministers of Christ and possessors of their room 2dly If by right he mâ—an right to their Parsonage and Vicarage-house and Globe-lands c. a right they have for ought I know by the Law of the Nation as things now stand thereunto If a right of Ruledom over the People of God in the Nation 1. They are not peaceably possest of this right they protest against them as Intruders 2dly These being the People and Flock of Christ they can have no right over them except it be given them from him let us see his Commission whereby they are authorized and we are satisfied 3dly If he suppose that a Patron 's presentation of a sorry thing in black suppose a debauch'd Sir John a Knight Errant of the Popeâ— make with the Bishops institution and induction into a Benefice and he is in the peaceable possession hereof that therefore he is to be heard as a Minister of Christ and would impose it upon others as Truth he must know that he hath to do with such who pitty him because of his folly and expect proof of what he asserts before they will believe him The instances of Paul's speech to Ananias Act. 23. 5. of Caiapâ—as prophesying John 11. 51. Christ's not excepting against him when convented before him are such pittiful stories that I must crave pardon of the Reader whilst I mention them Paul owned Ananias as High-Priest Act. 23. 5. which yet 't is probable he did not but spake ironically Caiaphas prophesied John 11. 51. and so did Balaam Num. 23 24. and Christ doth not object against his Office though both supposed to be unlawful Officers Therefore it 's lawful from Christs and Paul's example to hear them who are not right Officers though neither of them heard these preach nor had they to do with them in any act of Instituted Worship when they peaceably possess the place and consequently it is lawful to hear them as Ministers of the Gospel who are not such rightly called Such non-sequiturs introduced with pomp and state I must profess I never before read in any Author which others it may be take notice of with contempt for my part I heartily pitty him and beg him to consider whether the hand of God be not gone forth against him in stripping him of the parts he once had as well as in other things as a just judgment upon him for his lifting up his hand against his Truths and the Kingdom of his Son in the World Till he prove these consequences of his we are not concerned to take further noâ—ice of them there being indeed not the least shew of Argument in what he doth with so much confidence and pomp of words affirm and declare Sect. 3. The Ministers of England not Ministers of the Gospel They come not in by the Door proved John 10. 1 9. opened Of Petrus Waldo and other Reformers Their contrariety to what Mr. T. attempts to erect Of Ordination by particular Churches The Exceptions of the Animadverter refâ—ted Act. 14. 23. explained The Ministers of England imposed upon the People without their consent Parish-Churches no true Churches of Christ. IN Sect. 3. this Animadverter begins to consider the proof of our Assertion viz. That the Ministers of England are not Ministers of the Gospel The sum whereof is They that enter not in by the Door viz. Christ i. e. by vertue of some authority derived to them from him immediately or mediately are not Ministers of the Gospel John 10. 9. But the Ministers of Engl. come not in by the Door receive no Commission or Authority from Christ either immediately or mediately The first we say will not be asserted The second cannot for they receive no Authority from any particular Church of Christ to whom power is solely delegated for the electing their own Officers Acts 6. 5. 14. 23. What saith Mr. T. hereunto Why after he hath eased his spleen by disgorging himself of that choller that did it seems oppress it in some Billingsgate Rhetorick as he speaketh he tells us 1. That thâ—â— may be urged against the Presbyterian Preachers Answ This is only mentioned ad phaleras populi to take the people But good Sir why may this be urged against the Presbyterian Preachers is it because they disown Particular Congregations or Churches of Believers or because they absolutely deny the designation of particular persons to Offices Ecclesiastical by them But each of these is owned by them at least by some of them He adds 2dly This makes against his gifted Brethren Answ 1. Why his gifted Brethren is Mr. T. become a Scorner of the Brethren or are there none thinks he that have received gifts from Christ for the edification of his Body 2. Why doth it make against these They pretend not to
act as Ministers of Christ when they prophesie for the edifying the Body of Christ by vertue of any Office-power so that they need not any such Election What follows is a Rhapsody of words that the ingenuous Reader knows proves nothing introduced to cast the â—dium of Irreligion-upon the men of his Contest The best is the Nation knows him to be at least in this matter a false Accuser He tells us 3dly That it may be doubted whether Christ be meant by the Door John 10. 1. Answ But why it should be doubted when Christ expresly tells us v. 9. that He is the Door I cannot tell That the Door v. 1 v. 9. is not the same Door is not probable and less probable that by the Door v. 9. should be meant the Scriptures of the Prophets who although they foretold of Christ yet can in no sense that I know of be said to be the Door through which he entred But this he is unwilling to abide by He adds 4ly That if the door be the same Joh. 10. 1 9. the entering in v. 9 cannot be entring into the Ministry by the lawful election of a particular Church for then it would follow that every one that so enters in shall be saved but that is manifestly false Answ 1. But if by saved he mean everlastingly saved this doth not at all follow he knows right well that the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is not alwayes to be restrained to such a signification 2ly The whole expression he shall be saved and shall go in and out and find pasture seems to intimate no more than this that he may expect the blessing of God with him the defence of God upon him in his Ministry that thus enters into it according to his mind according to Deut. 28. 6. So the Assembly Beza c. interpret the words which I think is so far from being manifestly false that nothing is more true Of immediate Calls to the Ministry and the wayes whereby men may prove themselves to be so called I shall not now turn aside to speak nor in what sense I asserted that persons receiving Commission immediatly from Christ to preach the Gospel will never be made good without the working of miracles it not being pleaded as I know of that the present Ministers have any such Commission nor do they pretend to it Of Petrus Waldo and other Reformers I think as honourably as this Animadverter They were worthy and eminent witnesses for Christ in their day no small part of their Testimony was against the Abominations pleaded for by Mr. T. in his Theodulia They admited nothing into their Church but what is written in the Bible no Decrees no Epistles Decretals nor the Legends of the Saints nor the traditions of the Church They held that the Preaching of the word of God is free to every man that hath received abilities from the Lord for that work That the Priests Vestments are little worth That no day a man may cease from his labour except the Lords day and not the feasts of of Saints Zanchy introduceth a certain Orthodox man speaking thus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and afterwards adds the Churches are to be reformed according to the best form a better from of the Church cannot be invented than that which Christ and his Apostles in the beginning of the Church did constitute and appoint And afterwards all Doctrines of Worship and Discipline are to be examined not by the Lesbian rule of humane judgment but by the Touchstone of the Divine Word Zanch. de ver Eccl. reformand ration Johannes Gerson affirms That the authority of the Primitive Church was greater than now it is for it is not in the power of the Pope or Council or Church to change the Traditions taught by the Evangelists and Paul as some dream de vit Spirit animae Budaeus saith Canonum canities vel caries potius nulli jam usui est sed velut anus delira è foro explosa est de ponte enim jam diu comitiorum paracleti dejecta est disciplina Canonica ut annis sexaginta major atque etiam sexcentis de Translat Heclerismi lib. 2. And afterwards Navis nobis disciplinae à servatorâ— relicta est Ecclesiae conditore quae Cantico Ministerio instrumento miraculisque instructa fuit ab ipso aut ejus auspiciis These were some of the Witnesses of Christ in their day whom we honour as such that bear their Testimony against what Mr. T. thinks good for the present to espouse to himself 5ly This Animadv speaks of the proof of our Assertion that those that receive authority to preach the Gospel mediately from Christ have it from some particular instituted Church of Christ to whom power is solely delegated for the electing their own Officers according to Acts 6. 5. 14. 23. as weak and impertinent He tells us 1. That though this should be granted yet power may be given to others to choose send and ordain Preachers for the unconverted who are and may be heard as Ministers of the Gospel Ans 1. This we deny the Keys being given to the Church by Christ Mat. 16. 19. with 18. 17 18. we cannot conceive how any can legally choose or send forth persons to act by vertue of an office-Office-power in the preaching of the Gospel but the Church 2dly We never yet understood that Interrogations were sufficient Answers his may not for all this is no evidence that it may He adds Yea may not some others ordain Elders for particular Instituted Churches Answ 1. Without the Churches consent Election c. they may not 'T is true Titus was left by Paul in Crete to ordain Elders in every City Tit. 1. 5. but that he might do this without the choice election and concurrent act of the Church as a Diocesan Bishop as some fondly imagine is a fancy that as it hath over and over been confuted by many Godly Learned so Mr. T. will never be able to make it good 2ly Should it be granted which yet is most false contrary to the practice of those times and many years after that Titus ordained by himself without the knowledg counsel and approbation of the people Elders it doth not in the least follow that any persons may do so now For. 1. He had express warrant and direction from the Apostle to do what he did 2. He was an extraordinary Officer an Evangelist not limited to a certain Church the continuance of which office we have no direction for in the Scripture 3. The officers that were to be continued in the Churches are said to be Elders or Bishops which were not names of distinct officers but of the same Tit. 1. 5 7. to be confined or limited to oâ—e particular Congregation not having or exercising jurisdiction over many Phil. 1. 1. Acts. 14. 23. 20. 17 28. Tit. 1. 5 6 7. so that this instance makes little to his purpose When he proves his suggestion that there are any
that they might not be heard as gifted Brethren Of which he gives us three learned reasons 1. Because the withdrawing themselves from every Brother that walks disorderly cannot be meant of their excluding themselves from Hearing Praying or receiving the Lords Supper if such an one be present Answ Right but though this withdrawment from such a Brother cannot be meant of exclusion from hearing whilst he is present yet I hope it may from hearing him who walks thus disorderly The same may be said of receiving the Lords Supper If he be there as a looker-on meerly this ought not to hinder any from waiting upon Christ in that institution though the Church of England in imitation of the old Pagan custom of the Druides c. of old interdicts the Priests saying service whilst an excommunicate person is there but if he shall be forced upon the Congregation as a member to joyn with them in that ordinance and much more as their Minister to celebrate it as is our case it is the duty of the Saints to surcease the performance of that duty for that season It was the keeping themselves from being polluted that caused them to sever from him that reason remaining which it doth till he hath testified his repentance their withdrawment is to continue He adds 2ly That the withdrawment mentioned 2 Thes 3. 6 14. is only from arbitrary communion in entertainments c. Answ This is an old shift of Mr. T. we have already refuted He further tells us 3ly If we omit it we omit the Worship of God and so break his Commandments Answ 1. This is a meer petitio principii we deny the ministration of the Sacraments according to the rights of the Church of England to be the Worship of God strictly so called 2ly There 's no need through grace of omitting the Worship of God if we worship not with them there are meetings of his people whither we may have recourse to worship him in his own way To what follows in this chapter we have already answered We attend his advance towards the discussion of our third argument of which in the next chapter CHAP. IIII. Sect. 1. Such as act from an Antichristian calling not to be heard proved 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 what it signifies Who is Antichrist what is Antichristian explained The Ministers of England derive their Office-power from the Papacie The Bishops of England Petty-Popes 'T is unlawful to attend upon the teachings of Antichrist therefore upon the teachings of such as act by a power derived from him Christ calls his People to separate from every thing of Antichrist Rev. 18. 4. and 14. 9. explained Of trying the Spirits 1 Joh. 4. 1. of Christs instituting Officers of his owâ— No promise of a blessing in attending upon an Antichristian Ministry IN Chap. 3. of S. T. a third Argument is produced against hearing the present Mâ—nisters viz. Those that act in the holy things of God by vertue of an Antichristian Power Office or Calling are not to be heard but to be seperated from But the present Ministers of England act in the holy things of God by vertue of an Antichristian Power Office or Calling Therefore The Major is evident for 1. The Power Office and Calling of Antichrist is opposite and contrary to the Power Office and calling of Christ not to separate from such as act by vertue of such an Office-power is to stand by and plead for Antichrist against Christ The sum of what Mr. T. answers hereunto is If by Antichristian Power Office and Calling be meant the Papal Power and the acting in the holy things be by preaching the doctrine of the Trent Council in the points determined therein against Protestants by administring Sacraments according to the Roman Missal and Discipline according to the Canon-Law of the Popes the Major is granted and the Minor denied But if by Antichristian power c. be meant by vertue of ministry according to the Liturgy Articles of Religion and Homilies of the Câ—urch of England from the Ordination and Licence of the Bishops his Major is denied that which he calls Antichristian is not truly such and it is denied that what he calls Antichristian is opposite and contrary to the Power Office and Calling of Christ Answ 1. The word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as this Animadverter tells us found only in the Epistle of John and principally 1 John 2. 18. where the Apostle distinguisheth between 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 between the mean Antichrists and the main Antichrist The best interpretation of the word seems to be a false Christ or â— Counter-Christ one that under the pretence of being for Christ doth really oppose Christ the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 both in opposition and composition signifies For in the Scripture as Mat. 2. 22. Acts. 13. 7. and in Classical Writers as Homer Hesycheius c. in his Offices Ministry Discipline Worship He is Antichrist that under the pretence of acting for Christ doth indeed though covertly act against him in his name and under the vizard of his authority That is Antichristian that though it be pretendedly for and from Christ it really is not And in this sense the Major is to be understood Those that act in the holy things of God viz. Praying Preaching Administration of Sacraments c. by vertue of a Power Office and Calling that is not though pretendedly really from Christ are to be separated from as we plainly declare in the first proof of the Major proposition in S. T. which Mr. T. would have disproved if he could But in the stead thereof he labours to raise a dust with a multitude of words before the eyes of the Reader that he might not be able to perceive wherein the weight of the Argument lay 2ly He acknowledges the Major to be true if understood of the Papal Power Office and Calling so that he which acts in the Holy things of God i. e. in Preaching for whether it be the doctrine of the Trent Councel or otherwise is not in this case considerable for if he act from an Antichristian Office-Power 't is not his preaching Truth which would make that Antichristian Office-Power Christian administration of Sacraments according to the Roman Missal and discipline according to the Canon-Law by vertue of an Antichristian Papal Power is not to be heard but in this sense he denies the Minor And I cannot but wonder at the confidence of the man doth he not know that they derive their Office-Power from the Papacy he is not so ignorant as noâ— to know it Do not the Bishops of England exercise the same power over the Clergy and Laity as they are called thereof as the Pope doth over his so that they are upon the matter Papilli Petty-Popes Is this power Antichristan in the Papacy and not so in the Prelacy Is not the manner of administation of Sacraments in use amongst us taken out of the Popish Missal Mr. T. knows
hitherto asserted it may be lawful to attend them We say in S. T. 4ly That there is not a command in the Scripture enjoyning Saints to take heed of being deceived to try the spirits but is an abundant demonstration of the truth of the first Proposition To which Mr. T. subjoyns 1. If by acting in the holy things of God by vertue of an Antichristian power be meant their acknowledging the power teaching the doctrine owning the calling of him that is truly Antichrist 't is granted Answ To this we have already replyed 'T is enough to prove any person ought to be separated from if he act in the holy things of God by vertue of an Antichristian power though the doctrine he preach be true He adds 2ly The Scriptures mentioned forbid command he means only to reject Antichristian Doctrine and Worship not every thing said by any without proof to be a thing of Antichrist Answ 1. Very well If we prove then the Worship of the Church of England to be Antichristian it is to be reiected Now it being the Worship of the Papacy which is acknowledged by him to be so I cannot see how it can be otherwise 2ly The Scriptures mentioned fairly import not only a command for the rejection of the Doctrine and Worship which is Antichristian but them also that pretend to be but really are not of God The persons are to be proved and tryed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 try them as Goldsmiths try Gold whether it be pure and right and if you find them not to be so reject them 1 John 4. 1. We proceed and in S. T. say further 5ly The institution of Officers of his own by Christ to be continued to the end of the World Eph. 4. 11. evinceth the truth of the Major proposition To this our Animadverter answers 1. 'T is true some of the Officers mentioned Ephes 4. are to be continued to the end of the World in the way appointed by him but that there is any particular way of Election of ordinary â—astors and Teachers in those words appears not Answ Who saith there is 'T is sufficient they prove the continuation of the Officers in the Church to be an Institution of Christ Of the particular way of their election we have mentioned elsewhere as we have shewed 2ly 'T is well this Animadverter will acknowledg that there is a way appointed by Christ in which Church-Officers are to be continued which as I conceive is a part of Church-Government which therefore cannot be left to such an indifferency as he sometimes intimates He tels us 2ly How the Major is proved by it he discerns not unless this be the Argument Christ hath appointed these therefore no other are to be heard which overthrowes the hearing of Gifted-Brethren Answ We are contented with the form our words are by him cast into only with this alteration therefore no other are to be heard as Ministers acting by vertue of an Office-Power which makes nothing against the hearing of gifted Brethren We further add in S. T. 6ly That there is no promise of a blessing in the whole Scripture upon persons attending upon such a Ministry Mr. T. replies 1. Though there be no promise of a blessing upon persons attending on such a Ministry yet if they Preach the Gospel truly there is Luk. 11. 28. Answ 1. 'T is not probable they should Preach the Gospel truly as touching the present Ministers of England they do not so 1. They preach it from a false mission 2ly They preach it by halves as is known 3. They mixt many humane traditions therewith and thereby obscure the Gospel as Mr. T. himself in his Fermentum Pharisaeorum asserts 4ly There is no blessing promised to persons attending upon such a Ministry Luk. 11. 28. Christ speaks not there of any such Ministry the whole of his intendment is that no external pâ—iviledge though it were to bear him in the Womb c. who was a true Messiah renders a man glorious blessed and excellent as a conformity to the divine will which how much it is to his purpose others will judge He saith 2ly If there were no promise of a blessing the Major is not proved unless this were true They are not to be heard but separated from to whose Ministry as such a blessing is not promised which makes unlawful the hearing of gifted Bretheren unless they can produce such a promise Answ Let me seriously ask this Animadverter whether he doth not when he goes to hear go to meet with God in that duty and to receive a blessing from him This he will not sure deny now I would know further whence it is he expects to meet with God and be blessed by him in his so doing can he or any one in the world give any other reason but this Because God hath promised to meet and bless his people while they are waiting on him in his own wayes Whether the work be managed by a Minister of Christ as acting by Office-power or a private Brother acting by vertue of Talents received for the profiting and edification of the Body we are not destitute of a promise of a blessing Exod. 20. 24. Isa 64. 5. Mat. 18. 20. Eph. 4. 11 to 15. But if we run to a false Ministry to such as act from an Antichristian office and calling I know not any promise of a blessing but rather the contrary So that the Major Proposition remains unshaken notwithstanding Mr. T. his Battery against it His next attempt is against the Minor of which in the next Section Sect. 2. The present Ministers of England act in the holy things of God by vertue of an Antichristian power office or calling proved They are not from Christ There is a twofold Church Ministry Worship Of Luthers Ministry The names office of the present Ministers their admission thereinto forreign to the Scripture Of Suffragan Bishops THat the present Ministers of England act in the holy things of God by vertue of an Antichristian power office or calling which is the Minor Proposition of the last mentioned Argument we say in S. T. wants not sufficient demonstration 1. The present Ministers of England are either from Christ or from Antichrist there is no medium That they are not from Christ besides what is already proved may be further evinced To which our Animadverter answers 1. Mr. Bradshaw asserts that there is a medium and that a Ministry may be from Christ in reâ—pect of the thing ministred though from Antichrist in respect of the way of entry into it yea he saith it is not necessary that the ministry of Priests and Deacons though ordained by Antichrist himself should be the ministry of his apostasie but notwithstanding his Ordination their ministry may be the Ministry of Jesus Christ as was the Ministry of Luther Hus c. Answ 1. All that Mr. Bradshaw saith is not Gospel nor to be believed because he saith it 2dly That the thing ministred should render that Ministry that
already answered We add 9thly The Popish Priests wait not the Churches call to the Ministry but make suit to some Prelate to be ordained Priest and giving money for their Letters of Ordination so the Priests of England Mr. T. replies To offer a person's self for ordination is in some case a duty 1 Tim. 3. 1. Isa 6. 8. Answ 1. The Scriptures produced prove not his assertion Isa 6. 8. is sufficiently remote from any such thing there 's not the least mention of Ordination therein it s only a testimony of Isaiah's readiness to obey the voice of the Lord in going forth to bear a testimony for him against an untoward rebellious people 1 Tim. 3. 1. only tels us that he that desires the office of a Bishop desires a good work i. e. as say our Annotators is inwardly moved by the Spirit of the Lord thereunto which he may do and yet I hope wait the Churches call thereunto Besides 2ly Should this be granted it signifies little till he prove that it 's the duty of any with the neglect of the Churches call to this Office to seek ordination thereunto from an unscriptural Prelate which is that we charge upon them which Mr. T. knows they do He tells us 2dly Giving money for their Letters of Ordination is only Wages to the Register for writing Answ 1. Be it so that they give money for their Letters of Ordination is all that is asserted by us which Mr. T. grants they do 2. 'T is well if there be no Simony as it 's call'd found amongst them 3. If provision be made against the Registers exacting over-much by the Canons of the Church of England he informs us that the same provision is made by the Popish Trent-Council The Parallel in this particular holds good We say 10thly The Popish Priests are ordained to their Office though they have no Flock to attend upon So the Priests of England Mr. T. replies The Priests of England are not to be ordained without some title according to Can. 33. even the Trent-Council hath made some provision thereabout Answ 1. Mr. T. doth well to consociate the Canons of the Church of England and the Church of Rome in the Trent-Council together they are in not a few things near of kin 2. However I cannot but stand astonished at his confidence in telling us that the Priests of England are not to be ordained without some title according to Can. 33. when that Canon saith expresly That they may if a Fellow or in right as a Fellow or to be a Chaplain in some Colledge in Oxford or Cambridg if a Master of Arts of five years standing that liveth of his own charge in either of the Universities if to be shortly admitted either to some Benefice or Curatship then void or if the Bishop do after his admission into the said office keep and maintain him with all things necessary till he prefer him to some Ecclesiastical Living 3. But it may be the Animadverter by title means some one of those things mentioned To which I shall only say that if so he doth openly prevaricate pretends to answer to what he speaks not one word such Titles are supposed to be without a Flock to attend upon What he adds of Ministers being necessary for Armies c. is nothing to the purpose This proves not that they may be ordained Ministers without a Flock to attend upon which they may have and by them be sent forth for the works mentioned for a season We know it hath been the practice of the Churches so to do 2. Privâ—te Brethren may act for the supply of the services mentioned and frequently have done so nor indeed do I conceive how any can act therein in any other capacity Which is not incongruous to Acts 23. 2. as this Animadverter suggests which speaks not a tittle of their ordination to the Office of Ministry which they had before but only a solemn commending of them by Fasting and Prayer to the Blessing of the Lord by the Church in the Service they were now setting upon in which they testified their consent by the laying on their hands as say our Annotators To the 11th Parallel viz. That the Priests of England must swear Canonical Obedience to their Ordinary as the Priests of Rome Mr. T. only saith That 't is true at their institution into Benefices they do so but it is so bounded that it is not intolerable 't is nothing like that which is required of the Papists Answ 1. The Parallel herein betwixt the English and the Popish Priests is acknowledged which is all we affirm 2. That the Oath is tolerable that 't is nothing like the Oath of Canonical Obedience tendred to the Popish Priests is only affirmed by Mr. T. without proof that was the copy and pattern of this as he cannot be ignorant The 12th Parallel touching their leaving their Benefices for advantage-sake without consent of the People The 13th touching their special Licence to preach without which they must not from â—he Prelates though thereunto before ordained The 14th touching their subjection to be silenced by the Prelates betwixt the Ministers of England and Rome he grants to be true nor saith he any thing by way of reply that deserves the taking notice of To the 15th viz. the Popish Priests are not of like and equal power degree and authority amongst themselves but are some of them inferiour to others herein as Pastors to Archdeacons Archdeacons to Lord-Bishops Lord-Bishops to Arch-Bishops so the Priests of England Our Animadverter replies 1. Inequality is judged to be in the Elders of the Primitive Churches by the inscription of the seven Epistles to the Angels of the seven Churches of Asia Answ But this rather proves there equality to each is a several Epistle directed whereas had there been one Arch-Bishp or Superintendent over them one Epistle had been sufficient and had been no doubt directed to him He adds 2dly It hath been in some sort in all well-ordered Churches and is necessary to setled order Answ These are his dictates which he is not at leasure to prove The Church of Rome in the Apostles dayes of Corinth Ephesus were as I remember well-ordered Churches yet cannot be manifest any inequality amongst their Elders No Superintendent Lord-Bishop or Arch-Bishop as I read of 2dly What thinks he of the Church of the Waldenses were they well-ordered Churches They were from the beginning without this Superiority of Elders one above the other The like may be said of most or all the Reformed-Churches The Churches of Helvetia reckoning up the degrees of Arch-Bishops Suffragans Metropolitans Deans Subdeans tell us plainly they are not sollicitous about them That the Apostles Doctrine touching Ministers is sufficient for them cap. Confes. Helvet poster c. 18. And afterward there is one and the same equal Power and Function in all the Ministers of the Church and though in process of time one was chosen from amongst the rest to preside in
afterwards and here and in his Roman discussed asserts that 't is not tyrannical Dominion but the Dominion of one Apostle over another that is interdicted So that the same thing is doubtful and not doubtful with Mr. T. in the writing a few lines And this he proves by no fewer than ten reasons in his Rom. discussed 2dly Here he tels us that 't is an affectation of the Rule which a person may have and lawfully exercise that is forbidden there that the Dominion or Rule it self is interdicted which he would do well to reconcile and answer his Arguments he there produceth for its confirmation The sum whereof is Christ would have none amongst them superiour but all equal he forbids not only tyrannical Dominion but also any Dominion at all over one another which is saith he apparent 1. From the occasion of the words Christ forbids what they sought for but they sought for chief Dignity Seniority and priority of Order as do the Bishops of England 2dly From the Subjects whose Dominion is forbidden viz. Kings that had lawfull Authority and therefore such Rule is forbidden as the best Rulers used amongst the Nations 3dly The word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 although sometimes meant of meer lordly forcible Rule against the will and good of the person ruled yet here it cannot be so meant sith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to use Dominion at all and to have power at all over one another is forbidden Luke 22. 25. 4thly 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and the simple 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which is used still of Rule without abuse is forbidden 5thly It is forbidden to be called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i. e. to affect that title which implies one to be under another and to be beholden one to another as persons that could gratifie one another which doth imply superiority in some sort 6thly The additional speech of Christ commanding in the stead of Dominion Mat. 20. 26 27. rather Ministry and Service shews he would have none among them superiour but all equal 7ly Christ's propounding himself as their example only in service 8â—y He requires such a mutual debasement as takes away the taking to themselves priority of order or place or rule over one anotheâ— Mat. 20. 26 27. Mark 10. 43 44. Luke 22. 26. 9ly This is confirmed by other places upon a like occasion Mat. 18. 1 2 3 4. Mark 9. 33. Luke 9. 46. In which Christ resolves them that they should be as a little child that assumes not Empire but is humble and accounts others as equal to him 10ly From Luke 22. 28. that Christ having forbidden superiority in any of them among themselves promises them a Kingdom afterward in recompence of their abiding with him in his temptations All which manifest 1. a Superiority interdicted 2. That the Superiority interdicted is not interdicted to all Christians as he would in his Theodulia bear us in hand for then Christians should be forbidden to exercise Civil Dominion and Power as Mr. T. his ten Arguments manifest But 3. a Superiority of order over one another as the Bishops of England exercise over their fellow-Ministers That the Apostles exercised any such Superiority over the Church of God or Ministers of a lower order as the Bishops of England exeâ—cise over them this Animadverter will never prove And if he were able so to do this would not justifie the Bishops in their exercise of such Superiority who are invested with no Apostolical Power that I know of 'T is true a rule over the Faith of Saints is disclaimed by the Apostle 2 Cor. 1. 24. but that this is not the whole of what is interdicted in the places before-cited he hath himself proved by ten Arguments but now repeated by us As for 1 Pet. 5. 3. he tells us what the Assembly in their Annotations say on the place viz. that is not imperiously commanding your own inventions in the stead of the Doctrine of the Gospel not carrying hemselves insolently and magisteriously towards Gods People 3 Joh. 9. Answ 1. All this is known to be practised by the present Bishops They command imperiously their own inventions to which the preaching of the Gospel must give place when there is not time for both as in the case of Liturgy-worship is known to be true How insolently and magisterially they carry it towards the people of the Lord the whole Nation is witness 2. The Elders being interdicted 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to exercise Lordly Rule over the Heritage of God is certainly an interdiction of the introduction of any such Officer into the Churcâ— of God as against the will of the Lord's People should by vertue of an office-Office-power exercise a Lordly jurisdiction over them and their Ministers as a superiour order of Priesthood and certainly more forbidden than the office of an Elder Jurisdiction is not an abuse of our Prelates Office as is known though they too often abuse it by exercising it exorbitantly even contrary to their own Canons but a great a chief part of it wherein they do 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 exercise dominion over the People of God and that against their will by fore and violence to their utter undoing and that in execution of that office they have received and exercise according to their Canon Laws in their Courts Ecclesiastical We further prove in S. T. That the office of Lord-Bishops is Antichristian because derived from and only to be found in the Papacy none of the Reformed Churches have retained it the Woman in her flight into the Wilderness carried it not along with her it 's rejected by the true Spouse and Witnesses of Christ in all ages We instance in several as Hierom the Churches of Helvetia c. To this Mr. T. replies 1. Though the latter Popes viz. from the time of Boniface the third about the year 606. be the head of Antichrist yet it doth not follow that the office that is derived from and is only to be found in the Papacy is surely Antichristian there having been bad Officers perhaps derived from good Popes and continued only in the Church of Rome Answ 1. That the Popes of Rome were not the head of Antichrist till the time of Boniface the third this Animadverter will never prove 2dly Should it be granted him what good Popes he will find from the time of Sylvester about the year 320 I know not nor what Officers were derived from them Lord-Bishops there were none till afterwards When Constantine coming to the Throne the Man of Sin began by little and little according to the prophesie of Paul touching him 2 Thess 2. 7. to shew himself in the following Popes The 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or the Letter viz. the Roman Pagan Emperours being removed out of the way about which time many report a Voice was heard Hodie Venenum c. This day Poyson is poured forth into the Church of Christ And from this time the noble and renowned
parts of the Argument we premise 1. That there is a twofold denial of the Offices of Christ 1. Verbal and professional of this the Jews not the Papists noâ— the Ministers of England are guilty 2. Real and actual when persons do that which enwraps in the bowels of it a denial of the Offices of Christ Thus the Papists the present Ministers are guilty To this Mr. T. replies I allow the distinction but it is false that the Papists are not guilty of the verbal professional denying of the Offices of Christ for though they acknowledge Christ to be King yet their doctrine overthrows all the Offices of Christ as he that ascribes Kingly power to a Subject doth make another King and so doth unking him Thus the Papists do while they will have unwritten traditions to be received Answ 1st To dispute about words with any man living I shall not by a verbal professional denying of Christs Offices I mean express and down-right asserting that he is not King of his Church this I say the Papists do not they own preach up all the Offices of Christ i. e. they acknowledge him in their discourses of his Offices to be King to his Church which Mr. T. knows they do Their ascription of Kingly power to any but Christ in assertions mentioned I make a real and actual denyal and oppugning the Offices of Christ It being a doing what enwraps in the bowels of it such a denial of them 2dly This Animadverter hath already asserted what will in part at least make good our charge in this matter against the Ministers of England The ascription of Kingly power to any but Christ is a denying his Kingly authority the Papists Prelats and Ministers of England do so in asserting that traditions unwritten are to be received That the Pope a Convocation or Assembly of Prelates and Priests can make Laws to bind the Conscience by vertue of his their authority can dispense with Gods Laws incestuous Marriages by granting a License for a good Spill prohibited by God therefore the Papists the Ministers of England do deny the Kingly authority of Christ We premise in S. T. 2dly That a verbal professional acknowledgement of Christ is nothing when contradicted in practice To which we subjoyn that such as really oppose or deny any of the Offices of Christ are not to be heard but separated from which we prove 1. Because such aâ— do so are the Antichrists 1 Joh. 2. 22. and 4. 2 3. 2 Joh. 7. 2dly To hear such is to strengthen and encourage them in that their denial of and opposition to the Offices of Christ and thereby to become partakers with them in their sin Of which we treat more at large in S. T. chap. 4. p. 29 30. Whereunto Mr. T. replies 1. That a verbal professional acknowledgement of the Offices of Christ when contradicted by practice is nothing to the salvation of the person so professing his plea shall not be admitted before God or mans Ecclesiastcal censure i. e. he may be suspended excommunicated for his so acting notwithstanding his profession yet all this doth not prove that his doctrine may not be heard Answ 1. It seems then its lawful to hear persons not waâ—king exorbitantly but under Church censure for so doing which pours forth most fearful contempt upon that institution of Christ Excommunication To what purpose is it that any one is cast out of the Church if it may be lawful to hear them notwithstanding i. e. own them as the mouth of God to me and my mouth to God whom the Church thought not meet to be continued as a member in the body 2dly In vain then are all the exhortations of the Apostle to the Saints with relation to their withdrawment from such as these 1 Cor. 5. 9 10 11. Ephes 5. 11. 3dly To no purpose did Paul write to the Corinthians to receive the incestuous person had they but known their liberty they might have done so before for if his doctrine did not oppugn the Offices of Christ it might have been heard to their profit according to our Dictators dictates they might not only have received him but as a Preacheâ— amongst them Nay 4thly In vain is the charge of the Apostle 2 Cor. 3. 5. for if they profess to own the Offices of Christ i. e. Have a Form of Godliness though they contradict it in their walk i. e. deny the Power thereof they may be joyned with Poor Paul understood not so much of our Christian Liberty as rich confident Mr T. who is driven to such pittiful shifts and gross absurdities in the management of this Controversie that I really pitty him He adds 'T is not true that Christ saith the false Prophets are to be descried by their vitious Life only Nor do I say in this place he doth I say he saith they are to be known by their fruits Preaching and practising what invelops in it a denial of the Offices of Christ though attended with a visible holy Conversation I am contented that he make the fruits mentioned to be His discourse of Judas and false Prophets being so called not in respect of their outward Calling or vitious Lives but of their Doctrine that upon the least occasion he runs frequently forth into we have already answered Nor say we that teaching something through ignorance and inadvertency as is appointed by Christ which is not or denying something to be instituted which was so appointed is what doth denominate a man a false Prophet The Animadverter forgets what it is he attempts to answer we are not talking of false Prophets but of such as deny the Offices of Christ nor do we say that this as thus proposed by him doth render a man guilty of real denying the Offices of Christ or is a sufficient ground of separation from him much less then an opposing in heart any of the Offices of Christ is so as he suggests afterwards we do but that those that do really oppose any of the Offices of Christ viz. by setting themselves against the most if not the whole of Gospel-Institutions by owning a power in others to constitute Laws for the Family and Houshold of Christ even contrary to his Institutions and acknowledging another Head beside him of his Church is such a real denial of the Offices of Christ that upon whomsoever it is found 't is the duty of Saints to separate from them and that for the reasons before mentioned which Mr. T. may disprove when he can The rest of this Section being spent in railing and sorry impertinencies I come to his second Section were he sets himself to consider our Minor Proposition viz. That the present Ministers of England do oppose and deny the Prophetical and Kingly Offices of Christ Which we prove thus Those that hearken not to the Revelation Christ hath made and as Supream Lord and Lawgiver hath enjoyned to be observed touching the Orders and Ordinances of his House deny the Prophetical and Kingly Office of
said to be the Bodies of their Governours Whether the Apostles were the Heads of the Church Ojections answered Mr. T. his Exceptions thereunto considered 1 Tim. 2. 2. 1 Pet. 2. 13. expounded Whether the Kings of Israel were Heads of the Church Isa 44. 28. explained The Government of the Church and State proved distinct WE further manifest in S. T. That the present Ministers deny the Prophetical and Kingly Office of Christ thus 3dly Those that acknowledge another Head over the Church beside Christ deny his Prophetical and Kingly Office But the present Ministers of Engl. do own and acknowledge another Head over the Church beside Christ Therefore To which Mr. T. Sect. 11. The Author of S. T. speaks darkly and thence falls to conjecturing what I mean by the Head of the Church Answ To satisfie this Animadverter once for all By the Head of the Church I mean the King and Bishops that as Heads and Law-givers thereunto assume unto themselves a power to institute Laws and Ordinances of their own and create Officers in the Church which were never of the appointment of Christ which Danaeus and others make to be some of the essential parts of Church-Government and they are indeed so And if the owning such an Head-ship be not a denial of his Kingly Authority I must profess I know not what is This Mr. T. denies But 1. without giving us the least reason of his so doing 2. In contradiction to what is affirmed by himself p. 119. chap. 4. of his Theodulia 3. 'T is avowedly condemned by many sober judicious Protestant Writers and Churches as Rivet Calvin c. He tells us 2dly That no such Headship is owned by the present Ministers as the Pope claims Answ 1. The question is not whether such an Headship be owned by them as the Pope assumes but whether such an one as is not a denial of the Soveraignty of Christ 2. With respect to the extent thereof it is acknowledged there is no such Headship owned by them The King is not Universal Monarch of the Church Yet 3. For the kind of it it is the same i. e. Henry the 8th having cast off the Popes supremacy rests himself with it in his own Dominions Hence the learned Fuller in his History of the Church of England tells us That the King became the Popes heir at Law And it was indeed evidently so 1. Did the Pope claim a right to that Title Summum Caput Ecclesiae sub Christo The Supream Head of the Church under Christ 2. Did he account himself the Fountain of all Ecclesiastical Power 3. Did he undertake to make and dispense Laws pro libitu according as he saw meet So did H. 8. and his Successors the Kings of England with respect to the Church of England The Title of Supream Head or Governour under Christ is given to them They are the Fountain of all Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction it being by Statute Law annexed to the Crown The Bishops Courts ought to be held all Processes to go out in their Name With a Synod of Priests or without sometimes they can make and dispense with Laws for the binding or loosing of the Members of the Church thereof Hear what the learned Rivet saith Explic. Decal Edit 2. p. 203. touching this matter taxing Bishop Gardener for extolling the Kings Primacy For he that did as yet nourish the Doctrine of the Papacy as after it appeared did erect a new Papacy in the person of the King And reverend Mr. Calvin And at this day saith he how many are there in the Papacy that heap upon Kings whatsoever right and power they can possible so that there may not be any Dispute of Religion but this power should be in one King to Decree according to his own pleasure whatsoever he list and that should remain fixed without controversie They that at first so much extolled H. King of England certainly they were inconsiderate men gave unto him Supream power of all things and this grievously wounded me alwayes for they were Blasphemers and yet the present Ministers avow the same when they called him The Supream Head of the Church under Christ Thus he in Amos 7. 13. What this Animadverter saith Hart the Jesuite acknowledgeth of the Pope with respect to the whole Church is for the most part acknowledged by the present Ministers of the King with respect to the Church of England The Power which we mean to the Pope the King and Arch-Bishop by this Title of the Supream Head is that the Government of the whole Church of Christ throughout the World of the Church of England doth depend of him In him doth lie the power of judging and determining causes of Faith of ruling Councils or National Synods as President and ratifying their Decrees of Ordering and Confirming Bishops and Pastors of deciding Causes brought him by Appeals from all the Coasts of the Earth all the parts of the Nation Of reconciling any that are Excommunicate of Excommunicaâ—ing Suspending or inflicting other Censures and Penalties on any that offend Finally all things of the like sort for governing of the Church even whatsoever toucheth either preaching of Doctrine or practising of Discipline in the Church of Christ of England which whilst the Animadverter goes about to insinuate as not appertaining to the King he advanceth himself against the Royal Prerogatives of his Crown and Dignity Nor doth the Explanation mentioned Artic. 34. and 37. contradict what we have asserted Jurisdiction and Power of exteriour Government is acknowledged to belong to him which comprehends the substance of what we are contending for In what follows we are not in the least concerned we abhor the Primacy of the Papal Antichrist we deny not the Kings Headship and Supremacy over the Church of England by the fundamental Laws of the Nation it appertains to him We only infer from hence 1st That the Church of England is no true Church because Headed by some one else besides Christ 2dly That whilst the present Ministers account it Christ's Church and own another Head over it besides himself they deny his Soveraignty and Kingship they make another King over it and thereâ—y really unking him We add in S. T. as a proof of the Major Proposition If the assertion of another King in Engl. that as the Head thereof hath power of making and giving forth Laws to the free born Subjects therein be a denial of his Kingly authority as no doubt it is the Major cannot be denied If Christ be the alone King of his Church as such he is its alone Head and Lawgiver If he hath not by any Statute-Law established any other Headship in and over his Church to act in the holy things of God from and under him besides himself the assertion of such a Headship carries with it a contempt and denial of his Authority If there be any such Headship of the Institution of Christ let us know when and were it was Instituted Whether such a Dominion and
c. that never entred into the heart of Christ the judicious Reader will easily from what we have already offered discern the impertinency of Ezra 6. 7. and 7. 13. Dan. 3. 29. and 6. 26. to the present design 'T is true as he saith Christianity alters not civil Relations or Estates 1 Cor. 7. 24. And 't is as true that if in the time of my infidelity I have been the servant of men that are my Political Masters with respect to Worship though I am whilst I continue their servant to perform faithful service to them with respect to things Civil yet am I not to own them or subject to them as my Lords Governours with respect to the Service of God therein one only being my Lord and Master viz. Christ 2. I say not that all the Kings of Israel were Types of Christ but that the Kings of Israel were so i. e. some of them nor do I restrain the word Israel to the ten Tribes but to the twelve headed by David Solomon a pair of eminent Types of the Messiah That Christ and the Apostles yeelded subjection to Civil Powers with respect to things sacred of which this Animadverter must speak or he speaks impertinently is a gross mistake unworthy so learned a person We say in S. T. 3dly That the Kings of Israel were Heads of the Church is false God was its alone Head and King Hence their Historian saith Their Government was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And when they would needs choose a King God said They rejected him to whom even as to their Political Head a Shekel was paid yearly as a Tribute called the Shekel of the Sanctuary True indeed as they were a Political Body they had visible Political Governours but that these had any Headship over them to make any Laws introduce Constitutions of their own framing in matter relating to Worship will never be proved To which Mr. T. replies 1. That the Church of Israel was different from the Kingdom of Israel is one of the proper opinions of those who would establish from that example an Ecclesiastical Independent Government in the Church distinct from the Civil Government of the State Answ 1. 'T is no matter whose opinion 't is if Truth it ought to be imbraced 2. That there is a real and formal distinction betwixt the two Societies Church and Common-wealth is at large proved by several As Mr. Gillespy in his Aarons Rod Blossoming b. 1. c. 3. The Assembly in their Jus Divinum Hear their Reasons p. 88 89. 1st The Society of the Church is only Christ's and not the Civil Magistrates it s his House and he hath no Vicar under him as is abundantly proved by Mr. Rutherford in his Divine Right of Church-Government Chap. 27. Q. 23. Pag. 595 to 647. 2dly The Officers Ecclesiastical are Christ's Officers not the Magistrates 1 Cor. 4. 1. Ephes 4. 8 10 11. 1 Cor. 12. 28. 3dly These Officers are elected and ordained by the Church without Commission from the Civil Magistrate by virtue of Christs Ordinance and in his Name Acts 6. 3 4. with 14. 23. 1 Tim. 4. 14. with Acts 13. 1 2 3 4. 4thly The Church meets not as Civil Judicatories for Civil Acts of Government but as Spiritual Assembles for such as are spiritual viz. Preaching 5thly Should not these two Societies be acknowledged to be really and essentially distinct from one another several gross absâ—rdities would follow As 1. Then there can be no Common-wealth where there is not a Church but this is contrary to all experience Heathens have Common-wealths yet no Church 2. Then there may be Church-Officers elected where there is no Church seeing there are Magistrates where there is no Church 3. Then those Magistrates where there is no Church are no Magistrates And if so then the Church is the formal constituting Cause of Magistrates 4. Then the Common-wealth as the Common-wealth is the Church and the Church as the Church is the Common-wealth 5. Then all that are Members of the Common-wealth are because so Members of the Church 6. Then the Common-wealth being formally the same with the Church is as Common-wealth the Mystical Body of Christ 7. Then the Officers of the Church are the Officers of the Common-wealth the power of the Keys gives them right to the Civil Sword and consequently the Ministers of the Gospel as such are Justices of the peace All which how absurd let the world judge He adds 2dly That Solomon and other Kings did exercise power over Ecclesiastical persons is evident because he deposed Abiathar Answ 1. Who denies it How this proves the power of the Kings of Israel as Heads of the Church to innovate in Worship which is the thing to be proved I know not Hic labor hoc opus est And Mr. T. hath more wit than seriously to attempt it 2. Solomon deposed Abiathar not as High Pontifee or Head of the Church for male administration in Church-affairs but as King of Israel for treason against the Common-wealth in the business of Adonijah Ergo Solomon was the Head of the Church of Israel risum teneatis amici Of 2 Chr. 29. 30 and 30. 2. which he produceth to prove That the Kings of Israel had power in Ecclesiastical things we have already spoken What follows in this 14th Sect. is not worthy our spotting paper with the repetition of 1. He grants That God was the alone Head and King of the Church of Israel with respect to power Legislative to assign what Faith Worship Judicatories and what other things were necessary for that Congregation all which solely appertained to him which is all we need contend for The Kings of Israel had not any Legislative power with respect to these he grants from the power of these Kings then it cannot be argued that any have power now to innovate in matters of Faith and Worship they are not Heads of the Church invested with authority to introduce Constitutions of their own framing in matters relating to Worship as such nor had the Kings of Israel any such Authority Jam sumus ergo pares nec ab uno dissidet alter 2. What he talks of Kingly Government we are not at all concerned in All that we assert in S. T. is that Josephus saith Their Government was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a Theocracie that when they choose a King they rejected God 1 Kings 8. 17. which when he attempts the confutation of we may attend him 3. That a Shekel was yearly paid to the Lord Ex. 30. 13. which continued to the destruction of Jerusalem Josep l. 7. c. 28. of the Jewish Wars he grants that it was paid to him as their Political Head he denies Now though this be not of any moment as to our present concern therein yet the truth thereof is easily demonstrated 1. It was paid to the Lord in token of their thankfulness for his delivering them from the Egyptian yoke which he did as their Political Head 2. None were
leisure In allusion to the Priests of old the Porters or New-Testament Officers are commanded to watch Mark 13. 34. viz. that as much as in them lies they hinder persons morally unclean from entring into Gospel-Churches 2. He tells us That none but Saints are to be admitted thereinto 3. Threatens those Ministers that shall be careless and negligent in this matter with a deposition from their Office Ezek. 44. A Prophesie though in Old Testament-clothing expresly relating to New Testament dayes as is acknowledged by most And to any that shall compare what is there spoken with what is recorded of the New Jerusalem Rev. 20 21 22. Chap. 't will manifestly appear so to do 4. Acts 20. 28. is most impertinently alledged and wretchedly abused by the Animadverter It only preacheth forth thus much That the Gentile Nations were not so unclean as the Jews fondly imagined but that persons might go unto them and preach the Gospel amongst them as vers 28 29 34 evince But that Adulterers Drunkards should not be accounted unclean and common so as not to admit them into Church-Communion or if admitted that they ought not legally to be ejected Mr. T. attempts not the proof of The Scriptures fully manifest that they ought so to be Whether every single Minister hath power to keep any professing the Faith from the Lords Supper is not of our present disquisition if Ministers of Christ they with the particular Church to which they relate have power so to do The constant practice of the present Ministers in admitting the visibly wicked and prophane to the participation of Church-Ordinances and Priviledges is a manifest discovery that they symbolize with the Priests of Old of whom the complaint of the Lord is That they put no difference betwixt the holy and prophane The 10th Character of false Prophets instanc't in is this that they do not exercise pity to the weak broken scattered sheep of Christ nor shew bowels in their recovery but with force and cruelty rule over them Ezek. 34. 4. This we say is evidently true of the present Ministers with force and cruelty they rule over us in stead of exercising pity towards us threaten us with Excommunications Imprisonment dispoiâ—ing us of our Goods yea condemning us to Death if we stoop not to their lure All that can be called an Answer hereunto Sect. 9. is this 1. The Shepherds mentioned in Ezek. 34. are Civil Rulers for the Prophets did not rule over the People with force and cruelty but with lies and deceit Answ 1. Junius the Marginal Notes of the Geneva Translation Diodati the Assembly in their Annotations on the place the most of Interpreters expound it of false Ecclesiastical Shepherds or Ministers That this is the intendment of the Spirit of the Lord is evident 1st He speaks of such Shepherds whose special duty it is to feed the flock the neglect whereof he condemns them for v. 2 3. But this is the duty of Ecclesiastical Shepherds Cant. 1. 8 John 21. 15 16 17 1 Cor. 9. 7. 1 Pet. 5. 2. 2dly They are condemned for ruling over them with force and cruelty vers 4. The like condemned in Ecclesiastical Rulers 1 Pet. 5. 3. 3dly It s a Prophesie that runs down to the times of the Gospel and speaks of such Shepherds in opposition to whom Christ is said to be the true Shepherd vers 23 24. John 10. 11 12 14. The Reason alledged by Mr. T. to prove Civil Rulers are here meant being weighed in the Ballance is found wanting They may righteously be said to rule over the flock of God with force and cruelty when they provoke the Magistrate to do so as the Woman or Antichristian Church is said to be drunk with the blood of the Saints Rev. 17. 6. And in her 't is said was found the blood of all that were slain upon the earth Rev. 18. 24. because she prompted and provoked the Civil Magistrate to pour it forth That the present Ministers of England are not righteously charged with ruling over us with force and cruelty he saith not thinks there are some to whom this evil may be imputed 'T is added in S. T. What should I mention 13thly that â—hey come u out of the Earth Rev. 13. 11. i. e. are raised up by men of earthly spirits and principles To this after an harangue of words Sect. 10. that I might leave him upon second thoughts to correct himself for As 1st Thaâ— the Book of the Revelation is obscure which in it self is not but a Lanthorn a Light 'T is a horrid disparagement to any part of the Scripture so to speak of it The Sun is not dark though blind men discern not the lighâ— and brightness of it The obscurity is in us not in the Scripture 2. That sober men have wished it were less read Which wish whatever the men are I am sure is not over sober being directly opposite to the advice of the Spirit for the reading of it with an encouragement thereunâ—o Rev. 1. 3. He answers 1. That the first and second Beast Rev. 19. are differently conceived Answ Who the first and second Beast are we have already explained which Mr. T. may confute when he is able That the second Beast and the false Prophet Rev. 19. are the same we have but now demonstrated The Hierarchy of England and Rome are the same Antichristian Hierarchy their Original the same the Canon Laws by which their Jurisdiction is supported their Courts Officers c. the same He further acquaints us 2dly With horrid consequences that attend this Principle that the second Beast is to be interpreted the Hierarchy and Ministry of England 1. The first we own with this limitation The first Beast is the Antichristian Civil Powers who if at the coming of Christ are found such and in actual rebellion against him shall be cast into the Lake burning with fire 2. The second about worshiping the first Beast if understood of the Pope as he saith may be truly affirmed of the present Hierarchy who cause the Earth and them that dwell therein so to do whilst they cause them to own bow down subject to his Canon-Laws in their Consistories Ecclesiastical Courts 3dly That all who subject to the Image of the Beast or Ecclesiastical Government shall drink of the Wine of the wrath of God Without general or particular repentance being no more than this That those that die in any one sin unrepented of shall do so as Mr. T. will grant we affirm and challenge Mr. T. to prove these things to be horrid consequences monstrously uncharitable an argument of dotage the speech of a furious Bedlam Sir you will one day know that your tongue is not so your own but you must give an account of these hard speeches with which you are beating your fellow-servants I pray may not be laid to your charge He asks 3dly How doth it appear that to come out of the Earth is to be raised by men of earthly
and Bethel was no necessary part of Gods Worship for the same reason but it was of Jeroboams when once established and commanded by him The case is the same here Liturgical Forms are no necessary parts of Gods Worship because no where commanded by him but are of the Lyturgists Worship because established by Law And this is all we affirm they are the necessary parts of that Worship which is managed and carrâ—ed on by them which they suppose is the Worship of God What he adds from the Preface of the Common-Prayer-Book That particular Forms of Divine Worship and the Rites and Ceremonies appointed to be used therein are things in their own nature indifferent and alteraâ—le makes not void what we have asserted it rather establisheth it For 1st The same may be said of many acknowledged essential parts of Divine Worship Circumcision Sacrificing yet alterable and abolished If it be said that none could abolish them but God the answer is easie nor can any abolish the Lyturgical Forms and Rites but only those who have such Authority as that by which they were imposed who are to the Lyturgists as Vice-Godds We add in S. T. 2dly That the present Ministers of England make the Liturgy or Common-Prayer-Book-Worship a principal part yea the whole Worship of God Whence we conclude That the present Ministers of England worshipping God in the way thereof which he hath not prescribed they are Idolaters To which Mr. T. 1. He doth not think its true that any Minister of England would affirm the Common-Prayer-Book to be an essential part of Worship Answ But what Mr. T. thinks in this matter is not considerable the truth of the assertion is notoriously known and he may as well tell us they disown the Cross in Baptism which they are daily in the practice of He adds 2dly If it were they do not think it an essential part of Worship by virtue of Gods Command but they conceive they ought to obey their Governours Laws not judging others who use it not Answ 1. This is not at all ad Rhombum Jeroboam's Priests and those Apostatick Worshippers that struck in with him did not account sacrificing at Dan and Bethel an essential part of Worship by virtue of Gods Command but the Kings 2. To obey their Governours in such things as these Mr. T. saith is bottomed upon Christ's Command and if so whilst they account it their duty from divine Precept to subject to their Governours imposing it upon them as an essential part of Worship they do little less than account it to be so by virtue of Divine Command 3. I wonder with what forehead Mr. T. could say They judge not others who use it not when their Pulpits ring with invectives against them and they will not suffer them to preach but Excommunicate and Imprison them for no other reason but because they will not conform to it Sect. 5. A second Argument proving the Ministers of England Idolaters They act in holy things by virtue of an Office-power received from Idolaters and offer up to him a Worship abused to Idolatry with the Modes and Rites of Idolaters All will-worship Idolatry The testimony of the Antients c. The Romish Church Idolaters their worship Idolatry The present Ministers act by virtue of an office-Office-power received from that Idolatrous Church Com. -Prayer-Book-Worship Idolatry The Rites used by the Ministers Idotrous Rites in themselves indifferent when once abused to Idolatry not to be used proved The Testimony of the Learned touching this matter A Second Argument proving the Ministers of England Idolaters is in S. T. thus formed Those who act in the holy things of God by virtue of an office-Office-power received from-Idolaters and offer up to him a Worship neerly of Humane composition once abused to Idolatry with the Modes and Rites of Idolaters are themselves such But the present Ministers of England do so Therefore In the Major two things are asserted 1st That such as act in the holy things of God by virtue of an Office-power received from Idolaters are themselves such at least in respect of that their Office-power Jeroboams Priests being Idolaters those that acted by virtue of an Office-power from them must needs be so as those who act by virtue of authority to them committed from Rebels in matters civil are equally guilty of Rebellion as those from whom they derive that their authority This Mr. T. denies But 1. for the ground of his denial noâ—hing is offered but Dictates built upon this mistake That none can be accounted Idolaters but such as exhibit Divine Worship to the Creature The vanity of which is before evinced 2dly I desire at his leisure to be informed whether there be any truth in that Maxime One cannot give that to another that he hath not himself If the Idolater communicate an Office-power to another and he have none himself but that which is Idolatrous he doth most assuredly communicate an Idolatrous Office-power to him That persons acting from authority received from Rebels if under hand they design the restitution of their Prince are not to be accounted Rebels as he saith is an assertion 1. That will scarce pass for truth amongst the learned of the Law 2. Impertinent For 1. The present Ministers act from such an authority for the support of Antichristian Courts oppressive diabollical Usurpations and Prerogatives for the keeping out their lawful Prince Christ Jesus 2. They justify their acting from the authority aforesaid refuse to act from any other contemn and despise it 2dly That worshipping God by a Form meerly of humane composition with the Rites and Modes of Idolaters is Idolatry those that so worship him are Idolaters Mr. T. replies That this makes not Idolaters unless there be Idolatry in the Form and the Rites be Idolatrous in the Use Answ 1. This he speaks without proof 2. Upon this mistake that there is no other Idolatry but the giving of Divine honour to the Creature 3. All will-worship is Idolatry so saith August de Consens Evang. Lib. 1. Cap. 18. Vazq de Adorat Lib. 2. Disput 1. Cap. 3. Dr. Bils ag Apol. p. 4. p. 344. and Mr. T. denies not such a worshipping God as that mentioned to be will-worship What he adds That it is not true that they are Idolaters who use that which is of divine appointment to the right use because Idolaters abused it to Idolatry Those may do well to take notice of that are concerned in it For our parts we say no such thing the allegation is impertinent to the matter in hand the Form used in the English Liturgy is not of Divine appointment nor the Rites thereof neither will Mr. T. have the confidence to assert they are That I any where revoke that assertion of mine That few or none worship the Creature terminativè is Mr. T. his mistake 'T is true pag. 65. I say That Bellarmine affirms that the Images themselves terminate the veneration given to them as they are in
themselves considered But this is but one Doctors opinion retracted by him de Sac. Euch. l. 4. c. 29. where he asserts that which is contrary thereunto should two or three more be remarked of the same mind with him they amount but to a few in comparison of the generality of mankind otherwise minded The Minor Proposition viz. That the present Ministers of England act in the holy things of God by virtue of an Office-power received from Idolaters and offer up to him a Worship meerly of humane composition once abused to Idolatry with the Modes and Rites of Idolaters we do in S. T. demonstrate Three things are in this matter argued and evinced 1st That the Romish Church are Idolaters their Worship in the complexion thereof Idolatry This we prove at large and our Animadverter grants it to be true 2dly That the present Ministers of England act by virtue of an office-Office-power from this combination and Assembly of Idolaters This they themselves will not deny Succession from hence being one of the best pleas they have for the justification of their Ministry This we argue at large in S. T. and Mr. T. after a great many words grants their succession from Rome But adds 2dly That this is not one of their best pleas they have for the justification of their Ministry Answ 1. When they or he for them produce a better it shall be considered this is what they especially plead an Argument 't is one of their best pleas in their account however our Animadvertâ—r thinks otherwise Nor indeed 2dly Do I see how their Episcopal Ordination can be justified without it He conceives 3dly That they will deny that they act by virtue of an Office-power received by succession from the combination of Idolaters in the Church of Rome Answ 1. The derivation of their succession from the Papacy they deny not This their succession pleaded for is a succession of Ministry That they should be so absurd as to acknowledge a succession in respect of their Ministry from them and deny the reception of their office-Office-power from them which is nothing more or less than their Office of Ministry I cannot imagine What follows in this Sect. hath already been replied to and therefore we shall not further trouble the Reader therewith We say in S. T. 3dly That the present Ministers offer up to God a Worship meerly of Humane composition as the Common-Prayer-Book-Worship hath been proved to be once abused to Idolatry being the Worship of that Church whose worship is so the whole of it being taken out of the Popes Portuis with the Rites and Modes of Idolaters viz. their Holy Vestments Bowings Candles Altars which are the Rites of the Idolatrous Church of Rome and were introduced from thence by Austin the Monk cannot be denied And hence conclude That the present Ministers acting in the holy things of God by virtue of an office-Office-power received from Idolaters and offering up to him a Worship meerly of Humane composition once abused to Idolatry with the Rites and Modes of Idolaters are deeply guilty of Idolatry What Mr. T. replies hereunto Sect. 14. hath for the most part already been removed out of the way 1. The Forms of Prayer in the Service-Book by their Imposition are made an essential part of Worship as we have proved as such they are not agreeable to Gods Word not of Divine but meerly humane composition 2. Had these Forms never been in the Mass-Book being made by their imposition a part of Worship they had been superstitious Idolatrous being an open violation of the second Commandment 3. I wonder at the forehead with which 't is affirmed that the Rites and Modes used in the Church of Rome that are Idolatrous are not observed and used What thinks he of bowing at the Altar the Name of Jesus which Dr. Willet acknowledgeth to be superstitious Idolatrous Synops Papism the 9th gener Contro p. 492 493. as do our Protestants generally kneeling at the receiving of the Sacrament the Cross in Baptism These are some of the Rites used in the Papacy and as so used Mr. T. will not I presume deny them to be Idolatrous 4. The learned Muccovius proves what he asserts That the sacred Rites of Idolaters though they be things in themselves indifferent are †So say our Divines generally to whom Zâ—nchie Junius Pelican Calvin Beza Farrel yea Lyra though a Papist Pezelius Mollerus Zegedinus Danaeus Zepperus Sadael not to be retained because all conformity with Idolaters is to be avoided from Lev. 19. 19 27 28. 21. 5. Deut. 14. 1. The things there interdicted were in themselves indifferent the ground of their interdiction was because they were the sacred Rites of Idolaters as say Salmasius Herodotus l. 3. Maimonides Treat of Idolatry chap. 12. Sect. 7 11. Vatablus Fagius c. I cannot upon this occasion but remind the judicious Reader of what the learned Zanchy writes touching this matter to Q. Eliz. l. 1. Epist p. 431. 'T is not honest saith he that those things which have a long time been used in idolatrous Worship if they are things in themselves indifferent should be retained in the Church with the hazard of the Salvation of the Godly The brazen Serpent which was appointed by the Lord and indeed for the Salvation of Israel because the Isruelites abâ—sed it contrary to the Word of God was by the good King Hezekiah taken away who is greatly praised for it how much more should things and Rites indifferent instituted by men when they decline to Superstition and other abuses be removed which Mr. T. may answer at his leisure Sect. 6. A third Argument proving the Ministers of England Idolatâ—rs That worshipping God in by or before the creature respectivè or with relation to the creature is Idolatry WE advance in S. T. a third Argument to prove the Ministers of England Idolaters which is thus formed Adoration in by or before a creature respectivè or with relation to the creature is idolatrouâ— such as so adore or worship God are Idolaters But the present Ministers of England do adore or worship God in by or before a creature respectivè or with relation to the creature Therefore The major proposition we say is generally owned by Protestants it being the very same Maxime they make use of and stop the mouths of the Papists with in the point of adoring God mediately by the Creature The truth of the minor proposition their bowing and cringing at the Altar their kneeling at the receiving the Sacrament do evince That their kneeling is an adoration or worshipping God before the creature respectivè or with relation to the creature is manifest Nothing being more certain than that the Elements are objectum a quo or the motive of their kneeling which if they were not there they would not do Didoclavius p. 755. tells us That Genuflexion is Idolatry which Maccovius assents to Loc. Com. p. 861. To which Mr. T. Sect. 15. 1. The Author of S. T.
trial for satisfaction He further argues Arg. 29. This Author Chap. 2. allows the hearing gifted Brethren He would not think it unlawful to hear Parents or Masters catechize or Readers in the University when they read Divinity Lectures Therefore by a like reason must allow hearing the present Ministers Answ This consequence we deny there is no parity or likeness of Reason in it why we cannot hear them as gifted Brethren we have manifested Chap. 2. There are more reasons against hearing them than against hearing Parents catechize as their acting from an Antichristian Call or Readers in the University to which I go not as to a part of instituted Worship but School-Exercise That they are ordain'd according to the Discipline of the Church in which they live is nothing at all for their commendation except that Church were a true Church or the Discipline thereof more different from the Discipline of Rome than it is His thirtieth Argument is not worth the mentioning That our Arguments may be retorted upon our selves is not improbable any mans Arguments may be so The difficulty lies in proving the justness of their retortion which when he shall be able to effect Erit mihi Magnus Apollo To dictâ—te that Ordination by other Ministers besides the Elders of their own Congregation is necessary for the constitution of a Gospel-Ministry that the Church of England is a true Church or that separation from a company of wicked and ungodly persons is not warrantable by Scripture when we have proved the contrary is to expose himself to the pitie or contempt of the judicious Arg. 31. The grounds upon which the Author of S. T. and other Separatists deny the unlawfulness of hearing the present Ministers are neither false nor doubtful That nothing is to be done in the Worship of God and Church-Discipline relating to it as the Worship of God without a particular Institution we have abundantly before proved Arg. 32. That the Ministers of England have proved the truth of their Ministry against Papists and Separatists That the Prelates have so opposed Popery that were not men resolved never to lay down a calumny they have once taken up they would not cry them down as Antichristian Popish is but what he at present thinks They have opposed the person of the Pope and retained his Laws and Canons They oppose the Pope of Rome and his Conclave and set up and maintain the Pope of Canterbury and his Hierarchy against whom the very Arguments they use against the Pope â—f Rome directly point Arg. 33. The absurdities will follow upon denying to hear the present Ministers because not rightly elected or because they use the Common-Prayer-Book or are faulty in their lives are either not such or really follow not thereupon Answ 1. Every Christian Reader is able to judge of at leâ—st some of the Reasons in the S. T. whether they can warrant his not-hearing 2. He must be able to judge every Minister he hears whether he be rightly elected but this his judgment may proceed from the information of the Church to which the Minister is related or if his Minister he tries and judgeth with the Church as a Member thereof which gives not Authority to individual Hearers but to the Church or rather Christ Jesus who hath entrusted the Keys of the Kingdom of Heaven with them over their Ministers Much less 3. must every individual hearer have power to silence or withdraw from his Minâ—ster This he hath power to do and this he ought to do with respect to the Pastor of that Church to which he is related if he knows any sin or evil upon him to admonish him and in case of perseverance therein to take two or three with him and again admonish him and if he remain obstinate to bring it before the Church who have power if he will not hear them to depose him If he be a Pastor of some other Church to which he is not as a particular Member related to bring iâ— to the Elders of that Church or some Brother of known integrity appertaining thereunto who is to observe the same Rules already minded which would not introduce oppression upon Ministers nor will they if truly Christian account the execution of the Righteous Laws of Christ to be so The Scepter of his Kingdom is a right Scepter To compare the corrupt bloody Popish Canons herewith is little less than blasphemy 4. That hereby there should be any danger of Gospel-Mâ—nisters being exposed to penury deserted of their Members is not likely 5. That there can be no setled Government in Church or State if the stated Ministers according to the present Laws should be deserted or disobeyed is a false and bloody assertion Arg. 34. That such a Plea as this is made by the Papists for their Recusancy we have already answered Arg. 35. To this we say 1. Christ hath debar'd us from hearing the present Ministers as we have at large proved 2. Whilst we press men to an obedience to the Voice of Christ we make not men Rabbies it hath not the least tendency thereunto but Christ Nor are we against hearing any whom Christ in his Royal Law forbids us not to hear Arg. 36. To this we say Not to hear the present Ministers is no Negative Superstition 't is built upon Divine Precept as we have proved it occasions not the neglect of Gods Command he beggs the Question whilst he supposeth it or any duty of love incumbent upon the Saints It begets not unnecessary perplexities in mens Spirits nor puffs them up with conceit of more holiness than others nor causeth them to be censorious of others Nor hath Mr. T. proved these things to be so or the consequent of the Opinion contended for The whole of his 37th Argument That the denying the hearing the present Ministers is a usurpation of Christs Regal Office in putting a Law on the Consciences of men arrogating that power which is proper to Christ James 4. 12. Mat. 23. 4. is a meer calumnie Nor is the Animadverter able to prove what he saith nor hath he so much as attempted so to do We have demonstrated that the non-hearing the present Ministers is no imposition of our own but a Yoke of Christ We forbid not any to hear Preachers of the Gospel but such as pretend to be so and are not To his 38th Argument we answer By this means the knowledge of the Word of God is not at all hindred nor the furthering his Kingdom neglected but the contrary 'T is not true that those who hold the Opinion of not hearing the present Ministers in publick think it enough if they can teach those of their own Society they are willing to instruct others also which they do as they have opportunity That 't is seldom by conference that we insâ—ill any truths into others without somewhat that alienates them from others and engageth them to our own Society with diminution of love to others is a most false
Epistl 1. ep 4. Soperemini inquit Dominus a taberuaculis hominum istorum durissimorum nolite tangere ea qua ad eos pertinent ne simul pereat is in peccatis eorum Propter quod plebs obsequens praeceptis Domini Deum meturus à peccato praepofitó seperare se debet nec se ad Sacrilegi Sacerdotis Sacrificia misare quando ipsa defectu sidelis Magistratus maxime habeat potestatem vel eligendi dignos Sacerdotes vel recusandi indignos Thus far he in open defiance of his present undertaking But to proceed in Sect. 2. and afterwards we have an account notwithstanding his late discouragement in writing why he still follows that employment and in particular of his engaging in the confutation of the Treatise under consideration which may be reduced to these heads 1. The expectation of hâ—â— giving account of the Talents committed to him by hâ—s â—ord and Master which being restrained from publick preaching he thinks he ought to make use of this way Answ That a strict account must be given to the Lord for the improvement of Talents received is undeniable The Parable Mat. 25. 14 to 31. evâ—nceth as much The consideration whereof should quicken us to our duty the most exact and diligent performance of it imaginable that we have not at the last the most direful judgment of the wicked and slothful Servant ver 26 28 30. past upon us But every use of our Talent is not a faithful improvement of it for God Wisdom parts c. are Talents given by him many have used them against him and smitten him if I may so say with his own weapons nor had they been in a capacity of doing so much against him had they not received so much from him Whether Mr. T. hath in his present undertaking been improving his Talent according to the mind of Christ I humbly beg him in his more retired thoughts to consider That none can so improve their Talents without the blessed supplies of the Spirit of Christ this Animadverter will not deny 'T is impossible any duty or service should be accepted of God without these 'T is one end for which he is sent from the Father and the Son to in-dwell in the hearts of Believers to enable them hereunto Rom. 8. 26. How little of the Spirit of the Lord in those Magisterial and Dictator-like expressions manifesting too much of a spirit of pride and self-fulâ—ess with an horrible contempt of what is opposit to the mind of this Animadv together with those reproachful biting passionate words that without any just cause given do ever and anon drop from him he will upon a review be able to discern I am not able to foresee We are â—oo apt to judge partially in our own causes and of our own actions but the day will declare it Should I muster up the many expressions of this nature scattered almost from the one end of this Book to â—he other and represent them at once possibly it might somewhat startle this Animadverter of his being restâ—ained from publick preaching I have nothing to say but only this That if Mr. Tombs supposeth himself to be called forth by the Lord to the work of preaching the Gospel I see not now at least whilst not under corporal restraint he can answer the obligation is upon him by such a call by a total neglect of that duty either publickly or privately notwithstanding the interdiction of any Our retreat in such cases to the old Apostolical Maxime Act. 5. 29. Whether it be lawful to obey God or man judge ye being suitable and warrantable Nor is it I believe justifiable to improve Talents given in one work or duty with the neglect of another to which we are as equally obliged by the reception of them He adds as a second Reason of this undertaking his meeting with the Book under consideration and another entituled Prelatical Preachers none of Christ's Teachers which manifesting that the seeds of most rigid Separation were sown and spread themselves amongst many out of the greatness of his love and design to do them good and for the publick peace of the Nation he conceiv'd himself bound to pluck up such roots of bitterness and the rather because some that had known him to be for Believers Baptism have been ready to think him for Separation also Answ That he met with the Book under consideration I readily yeeld him being informed that in some heat of spirit about two years before the publishing his Theodulia he threatned the Refutation thereof But that the seeds of Separation are roots of bitterness is as warmly said as weakly proved in his following Treatise The word though it sounds ill in the ears of the world is of a middle signification denoting neither that which is evil nor good in it self as Mr. T. well knows A twofold Separation we read of in the Scripture 1. A wicked and unlawful Separation which is a causless departure from the People and Appointments of Christ as not able to bear their spirituality strictness purity and glory in contempt of Christ's Institution and meerly for the satisfying their lusts Jude 19. This is the Separation that is condemned in the Scripture Do either of the Tracts mentioned undertake the defence or vindication of it Are there not Principles laid down and asserted therein wholly opposite hereunto 2dly A warrantable lawful Separation enjoyned by Jesus Christ which is a peaceable departure from a Church or People not rightly constituted according to the mind of Christ the pattern exhibited by him or degenerated therefrom beyond a possibility of recovering their first state purely for the enjoyment of the Ordinances of God in power and purity This is the Separation no other pleaded for in the Papers mentioned Which â—â—ch poor worms as we are apt to think there is ground enough in the Scriptures for 1. 'T is of old prophesied of Num. 23. 9. Isa 52. 11 12. 62. 10. 2dly Commanded by the Lord Prov. 4. 14. 9. 6. 14. 7. Eph. 5. 11. 2 Cor. 6. 16. Act. 2. 39. Psa 45. 10. 2 Tim. 3. 5. Rev. 18. 4. 3dly Practised by the Saints not to mention them of old Gen. 4. 26. Exod. 19. 5. Deut. 7. 6. 33. 28. Numb 33. 52. Exod. 24. 12 15. John 15. 19. Rev. 19. 7 8 9. which the Epistles of the Apostles to the Churches justifie who writ to them as Saints separated from the World and the Worship thereof What the Animadverter hath done in order to the plucking up the seeds of this Separation is afterwards considered He that is successfull in such an undertaking oâ— desires to be so had need do more than â—ent his passion in some biting satyrical expressions against the men of his contest or dictate to them as if Wisdom only rested with him and all others were to hang on his lips for Indoctrination whose 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 without controul were to be submitted But Christ's School knows
no such Rabbi besides himself If a man seriously intend to pluck up the roots of this Separation he must I humbly conceive do these five things 1. Manifest that the terminus a quo or that from which any separate iâ— of the Institution of Christ because to separate from that which is not so is no-where that I know of in the Scripture condemned as sinfull but enjoyned us as our duty To pursue us with outcryes that we are Separatists and Schismaticks because we have separated from the Church of England without any tender of proof that it was ever rightly constituted according to the mind of Christ is but in my poor judgment to do as he Caput altum in praelia tollit Ostendit que humeros latos alternaque jactat Brachia protendens verberat ict bus auras but beat the Air. 2dly That the Church on People separated from if ever of the Institution of Christ are not so degenerated and apostatized from what it was at first that 't is now quiâ—â— another thâ—ng retaining little besides the name and shadow oâ— a â—hurch so dreadfully corrupted and fallen that the ends of Gospel-communion cannot be attained nor enjoyed in it nor is it in â—n utter impossibilâ—ty of recovering to its pristine state of Gospel-order and purity A departure from such a collapsed Church being abundantly warranted in Scripture enjoyned to Saints as their duty The Church of Rome was once a pure Church of the Institution of Christ whilst it abode so it was ordinarily the duty of its Members to continue in the communion thereof but when once it apostatized and so irrecoverably fell as that there remained no probability or possibility of its recovery and healing it became the duty of the Saints concerned in its Communion to separate from her according to Rev. 18. 4. 3dly That those against whom this Charge is laid be proved once regularly to belong to that Church which whatsoever is pretended by this Animadverter none can do but by their voluntary consent from which they are supposed to separate For sure it will not be pleaded that a man is 〈◊〉 a Separatist from that Church true or false to which he had no union or relation as a visible Member thereof For any one to have joyn'd to the Church of Sardis could not as I conceive be adjudged separation from the Church of Ephesus supposing he never was by his own free consent a member of the Ephesins Church Now this is the case of most of the Members of the Congregated Churches they were never by their own voluntary consent Members of the Church of England and therefore cannot justly be charged with sinful separation from it 4thly That the means or way of Separation Secession or departure be unwarrantable I conceive the Animadverter is of that opinion that it is lawful under some circumstances to depart from the visible Communion of a true Church of Christ without being guilty of such rigid Separation If he judge the Church of England to be a true Church and the Parish-Churches thereof as such it 's possible to leave the outward Communion of the one and the other without being guilty of sinful Separation otherwise Mr. T. will make more Separatists than he is aware of every one removing out of one Parish to dwell in another and joyning with the same numerical Ordinances there that goes out of the Nation and joyns with the Church suppose in France or Bohemia being so 5thly He had need also prove that their Separation be not for this end to enjoy the Ordinances of God in power and purity but meerly for the satisfying their lusts no other Separation being condemned in the Scripture Till this be done the discharging of many vollies of hard and lofty expressions of gathering Churches out of Churches being Schismaticks Separatists c. will be very insignificant to the Judicious however they may affright the the weak from closing with that way though of God which is with much obloquy declaimed against by persons of Mr. T. his learning and sobriety But he hath not yet done he thinks himself obliged to pluck up these roots of bitterness out of his great respect to the publick peace An unhandsome insinuation to say no more secretly accusing those that are for the principles in the aforesaid Tracts which he cannot but know many truly fearing God in the Nation are as the disturbers of the Peace of the Nation thereby rendring them odious to the Rulers thereof and himself lovely Gallinae Filius albae But Sir what are the Seeds sown in those Treatises that do endanger the disturbance of the peace of the Nations If he conceive that an Uniformity of Worship is necessary for the preservation of the Nations peace and somewhat opposit to this Uniformity being asserted in them they are destructive thereof he knows he hath more Antagonists than one in that Assertion and who they are that have asserted and proved that the ground of the late Confusions and Garments rolled in Blood was not discrepamy in Worship but the rigid pressing of Conformity Nor is he a stranger to this That the peace of the Nations abroad is preserved where Uniformity is not pressed and hath been at home in the dayes of the greatest Toleration and therefore no reason but it may be here again If he mean that the spirits of his Antagonists and such like are against the Peace of the Nation he deals injuriously none being more for Peace upon the most righteous and lasting foundations than they which will be and not till then whatever the contrivements and attempts of men are when the Interest of Nations is laid in a subserviency to the true Interest and Kingdom of Christ which we are praying for that the time â—ay come in which those Prophecies shall have their full accomplishment Isa 2. 4. Mic. 4. 3 4. In the mean while we are not a little comforted that thus persecuted they the Prophets Elijah was the troubler of Israel so was Jeremy Christ he was an enemy to Caesar likely enough to assume the Government and he is no friend to Caesar that goes about to preserve his life the Apostles who were men that turned the world up side down This smiting his fellow-servants will one day be no joy of heart to him to think of He tells us thirdly He was hereunto provoked by the direful imputation of serving the Image of the Beast which the Title chargeth upon the hearing the present Ministers Answ But 1. why should this provoke him when he tells us pag. 7. that the Book so far as he can learn hath been dispersed chiefly if not only amongst persons who were not able to examine what is said by Fathers Councils Schoolmen who 't is more than probable thought that the English Title was all that was signified by the Greek one till Mr. T. explained it to them 2dly What I mean by the Image of the Beast I intimate p. 53. of S. T. where are
the Waters and through wonderful Grace hath given down much of a spirit of love and mutual forbearance amongst the Nonconforming Separatists though in some small matters of different apprehensions And I hope that such carriage as this Adimadverter useth towards them will engage us to press more than ever after it that this stone of offence may be rolled out of the way and the mouth of absurd and unreasonable men may be muzled that they may have nothing justly to object against us while they behold our Love as the Disciples of Christ to one another and to all the Saints and our godly conversation accompanied with fear As for the promiscuous prophesying mentioned though we dare not quench the Spirit in any Believer nor despise its operation and breathings yet I know not any that are in the Animadverter's sense for it Gifts and abilities for that work with the consent and approbation of the Church which is before satisfied in their personal holiness and soundness in the Faith is â—equired in those to whom a constant libeâ—ty of propâ—esying is granted As for the vain fancies and opinions destructive of true Religion I must crave leave to profess I know not any such vented amongst the Congregations of mine acquainâ—ance And if they were they could not rationally be charged upon the Congregational way more than that horrible Ignorance Atheism those wretched Oaths Blasphemies Adulteries horrid Abominations not to be named amongst the Saints daily hourly committed by the members of the Church of England are to be charged upon it or any principles owned by such as walk therein which are as they have manifested to the world directly and â—iametrically opposit thereunto That the practices of the Separatists have caused a disturbance of Ecclesiastical and Civil peace in those places where they have had any considerable duration is another crimination And it brings to my mind that passage Acts 17. 6. These that have turned the world upside down are come hither also I shaâ—l crave leave to add that there is a wicked false peace a very conjuration and conspiracy against Christ and Truth where the Gospel comes in power it breaks and dissolves this peace There is an Ecclesiastical peace that is the result of such a confederacy and Mr. T. knows who pleads this on the behalf of the most Idolatrous Church so call'd in the world And am sorry to find him writing after so sorry a copy on the behalf of one of her daughters There was an Ecclesiastical peace amongst the Heathens when the Gospel was first promulgared as it was received in power this peace was broken and dissipated without any just reflection oâ— disparagement to the Gospel or the way thereof being rather its glory manifestly discovering it self hereby to be the power of God When the Animadverter proves that any Ecclesiastical peace of the appointment of Christ is broken and disturbed by the persons he inveighs against we shall conceive our selves concerned till then these words are but scar-crows vain and tâ—ivial As touching the distuâ—bance of the Civil peace we have already spoken some what we shall only add That it was not Elijah but the whoredoms of Jezebel that was the troubler of Israel though he good man must â—ear the blame of all And Mr. T. knows that if any trouble or evil had befallen the Empire the voice was Christianos ad Leones they are presently charged and dealt with as the only occasions and causers of it Nor can he be ignorant that not the Separatists but some others have been the disturbers of the Nations peace I suppose a so that he is no stranger to a Treatise written by Mr. Pryn displaying the Treasons committed against the peace of Kings and Kingdoms by the Prelatical party and I should be sorry if he can produce one parallel instance among the Congregational Churches These are the reasons the Animadverter is pleased to give of his present undertaking which I thought it my duty to examine I shall detain thee Christian Reader no longer in this Epistolary Preface but desire from my very soul that thou wouldst impartially weiâ—h what is offered on each side in this Controversie and beg of God for his good Spirit to lead thee and guide thee that thou mayest judge righteous judgment and walk in the good old paths that thou mayest find â—est to thy soul And if we differ in opinion as to the whole or part of any thing herein controverted let us keep up Love and a Spirit of Christianity be labouring to reduce each other into the way of Truth Which is the earnest request of him who is in truth Thy souls friend and servant for Christ's sake C. A. JERUBBAAL OR A Review of the Sober Testimony The Vindication of the Preface thereof from the Exceptions of Mr. Tombs CHAP. 1. Sect. 1 A twofold Worship of God Natural Worship what it is What the Law of Nature teacheth with respect to Worship That God is to be worshipped Of Atheism The sayings of Cicero and Seneca touching the Opinions of the Nations with respect to a Deity That God is to be worshipped in a Community that he is to be worshipped according to his own will The pretences of Zaleucus Lycurgus Minos Numa the most famous Lawgivers amongst the Gentiles and their imposition of Laws The famous saying of Socrates in Plato touching the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or manner of Worship prescribed by the Godds That the Voice of God is to be hearkened unto when and in what manner he shall be pleased to speak The Gentiles owned but one chief Deity The custom of the Nations in their 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Diabolical Oracles leading them thereunto which they supposing to be the voice of the Godds obeyed Instituted or Ceremonial Worship wherein it consists Hearing the Word such a Worship Mr. T. declines the matter in controversie Men do not worship God in Hearing when they hear 1 Thess 2. 13. opened and explained HAving already answered what Mr. T. was pleased to premise in his Epistolary Preface to the Reader so far as we are or can be supposed to be concerned we are now ready to attend his further motion toward the discussion as he phraseth it of the Book it self which is as he saith distinguished into a Preface and ten Chapters How suitable the method is or comprehensive in his judgment I am little concerned it seem'd to me to answer my aim and intendment which was solely the clearing Truth and satisfying the Scruples of tender Consciences in the matters we were enquiring after The first thing Mr. T. is pleased to take notice of is an Assertion of mine in the Preface to the ensuing Discourse wherein I affirm that the matter we were to treat of is one part of the instituted Worship of Christ under the Gospel from whence he takes occasion in his first Section to run forth into a discourse touching the derivation of the word Worship and very learnedly tells us that it
make the Tabernacle For see saith he that thou make all things according to the pattern shewed to thee in the Mount i. e. To the type and example set before him to imitate to which he was not to add the least pin of his own 1 Chr. 28. 11. The pattern of the Porch i. e. of the Temple saith Vatablus which David received either by revelation or by the hand of the Prophet 1 Chr. 28. 12 19. Exod. 8. 27. 39. 1 5 7 21 26 31 43. other places instanced in the S. T. preach forth the same thing These were types of the heavenly Ordinances in the Church of Christ Heb. 8. 5. And type out that nothing of man is to be superadded thereto but all things to be done according to Divine Commandment To the same thing doth the Spirit of the Lord bear witness Exod. 40. 23 25 29. Num. 8. 3. Exod. 35. 10 29. 36. 1 5. Isa 29. 13. To which may be further added Deut. 4. 1 2 40. Now therefore hearken O Israel unto the Statutes and Judgments which I teach you for to do them Ye shall not add to the Word which I command you neither shall you diminish ought from it that you may keep the Commandments of the Lord your God Thou shalt keep therefore his Statutes and Commandments which I command thee this day All which prove not only the obligation that lay upon them to conform to what was of the Institution of the Lord but the utter unlawfulness to add thereto or introduce any thing of their own in his service The ground of the acceptance of any Worship or Service offered to him being his Command and Institution and that with such evidence and brightness that it seems Mr. T. durst not look them in the face lest they shouâ—d have so reproved him as to have hindred his further advance in that good work and cause he was resolved having undertaken its defence to prosecute He only takes notice of two of these many places instanced in viz. Lev. 8. throughout which he grants speak of the investure of the Priests into their Office according to the Rites set down but whether any other might to these have been added to the sons of men he tells us not which yet he should have proved if he would have demolished and thrown down what it was his good pleasure to set himself against And he doth wisely not to approach too near this Scripture which stands with a two-edged Sword in its hand to defend the Truth opposed by this Animadverter No less than ten times viz. v. 4 5 9 13 17 21 29 34 35 36. The Commandment of the Lord is laid as the foundation of the whole of that procedure clearly importing that matters of this nature viz. things relating to his Worship are solely to be bottom'd on Divine Precepts and condemning and interdicting whatever of the like nature is offered to him on any other bottom Which Aaron's sons afterwards attempting to do Lev. 10. 1. perish in the flames of God's jealousie and wrath R. Menachem on Lev. 8. 36. hath these words In every other place it is said as the Lord commanded Moses but here because they added unto the Commandment he saith not so for they did not as the Lord had commanded and added moreover unto them strange Fire which he had not commanded them Lev. 10. 1. And Josephus b. 3. c. 9. saith thâ—s Nadab and Abihu bringing Sacrifices unto the Altar not such as were appointed by Moses but of that sort they were accustomed to offer aforetimes were burned by the violent flame that issued from the Altar that at length they died The other place he takes notice of is Isa 29. 13. which he refers to be discussed to the first chapter All the other places as was said are passed over in silence which manner of dealing is a great abuse both to the Truth and Reader To the Truth by waving the consideration of what is offered as the substratum upon which it is built To the Reader by pretending to answer to what is asserted by his Antagonist for the confirmation of Truth without advancing one step forward towards its confutation But perhaps he means not that where God hath given direction about any part of Worship it 's lawful to add any thing thereunto but onely wherein God hath not spoken and determined as touching the management of his Worship there the will of some of the children of men takes place and they may determine But if so 1. This is a most pitiful Petitio principii or begging the thing in question viz. That God hath not determined the whole of his Worship and Service but hath left somewhat to the wills of men relating to Worship as such to be determined by them which is the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or the thing in question and will never be granted him upon those terms 2dly Contrary to that fundamental principle placed in the nature of man and implyed and fairly intimated in each Scripture before instanced in that nothing in his Worship and Service is acceptable to him but what is of his own prescription 3dly Diametrically opposite to Deut. 4. 1 2. these additions let them be of what nature or in what case they will are additions to the Word of Jehovah Isa 29. 13. with Mark 7. 7. being evidently doctrines and institutions of men which the Spirit there tells us must have no place in the Worship of God That the Jews had their Service more fully particularized in all things pertaining to it than we have if he mean things relating to Service or Worship as such is spoken after the rate that a great many other things in this Treatise are viz. with confidence enough but without proof There being nothing relating to Gospel-Worship as such but is determined by Christ and appointed in the Scripture When he sends forth his Apostles Mat. 28. they were to teach what he had commanded them nothing more or less And he being Lord and Master of his House whose House are we Heb. 3. 6. who dares be so bold as to intermeddle with the affairs thereof without his appointment or can do so without an incroachment upon his Soveraignty He was faithful as Moses who received and revealed the Ordinances of the then House of God that he left nothing relating to the Worship thereof as such to the wills of men But of this more hereafter Sect. 8. Of the apostasie of the Jews from Divine Institutions The aim of the Author in remarking it It s application to the Church of England Whose Investions are expresly forbidden Of things in themselves out of the casâ— of Worship indifferent 'T is not in the power of the Church to make that which is left indifferent by the Lord a necessary Worship The judgement of the Protestant Writers Of the decency and order is in the Ceremonies of the Church of England Of their being imposed by Publick Authority How they draw from God
Of their rise from the customs and manner of the Nations directly contrary to many precepts The introduction of mens Inventions into the Worship of God idolatrous Will-worship Idolatry The judgment of the Ancients and others thereabout A departure from the Institutions of God to the Customs of the Nations called in Scripture a forsaking of God Several Scriptures reviewed Of the Jews worshipping other Godds How these things are applicable to the Church of England IN Sect. 9. This Animadverter examines what was asserted in S. T. touching the Apostasie of the Church of the Jews from the pure Institutions of the Lord mingling therewith the Inventions of Men and Customs of the Nations of which God sorely complaines and for it severely punisheth them the Contests of God from first to last being bottomed upon this foot of account which as it relates to the People of the Jews he acknowledgeth the truth of But to apply these things with the threatnings and punishments in the places mentioned to the imposing or using of such Ceremonies as are retained in the Church of England is a gross abuse Answ 1. But who applied them hereunto The utmost of the Athors intention in this assertion was only to manifest That a Church might be wonderfully gathered and separated by the Lord out of the World taken near to himself for his People yet soon apostatize and depart from him which the Jews did From whence I thought it had been lawful to conclude That another Church or Churches except some special Priviledge or grant to the contrary given to them of the Lord could be produced might likewise apostatize from God which when applied to the Church of England as â—e calls it only amounts to thus much that supposing it once was a true Church 't is possible if it hath not already it may apostatize and depart from God which Mr. T. will not deny And that this was the utmost of my intendment in this matter is evident from Q. 7. P. 11. Where are these words Whether any Church in the world we speak of a visible instituted Church hath greater security against Apostasie from God and that sore Judgment of having its Candlestick removed and being unchurched than the People of the Jews had If not Then whether supposing a National Church of the Institution of Christ it may not so come to pass that it may be so overspread with corruptions that it may lose the essence of a Church and justly be disrobed of that appellation Yet upon second thoughts I see not that there is such a vast discrepancy betwixt the Inventions of men charged upon the Jews for which they were threatned and punished and the Inventions are to be found in the Church of England as this Animadverter would compel us to the belief of He tells us 1. That their Inventions were expresly forbidden And are not the Ceremonies of the Church of England Inventions of Men he grants at least some of them to be Now all the Inventions of man in the Worship of God relating to it as such were then and now expresly forbidden whilest he supposeth the contrary he doth but beg the Question by the second Commandment and elsewhere as hath been shewed The learned Dr. Willet in his Coment on the 2d Com. tells us That the true Worship of God which according to his nature must be spiritual is commanded in this 2d Precept and that he will be worshipped according to his Will revealed in his Word to which it is not lawful to add to or take any thing therefrom as the Lord said to Moses Exod. 25. 9. He further acquaints us That all other kinds of superstitious Worship devised by man which the Apostle calleth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Will-worship Col. 2. 23. for we must saith he be contented with Rites and Ceremonies prescribed of God himself and the application of things of themselves indifferent so unto the Service of God as to make them a necessary part thereof is condemned by this Precept 2dly Mr. T. asserts That the Ceremonies of the Church of England are confessed out of the Case of Worship in themselves to be things indifferent Answ 1. And were there no Ceremonies amongst the Jews confessed out of the case of Worship to be so This Animadverter knows the contrary 2. By what authority doth any of the children of men make that necessary in case of Worship that is confessedly not so out of it i. e. make it a part of Worship for if necessary in case of Worship 't is evidently made a part thereof without which it cannot acceptablly be performed I confess Dr. Foen in Comitiis Oxon. An. 1605. one of their own Poets sings In Domini cultu si quid medium esse videtur Quod populti dubio stat cadit arbitrio Hoc Sacro-sancta parens Ecclesia si modo sanxit Inque sacris cultum hunc si velit esse ratum Non erit hic cultus medius cogetur ad illum Quisque necessarius hic quoque cultus erit Wherein he tels us That if any thing be indifferent in the Worship of God and Holy-Mother-Church shall establish and confirm it it ceaseth to be indifferent and becomes necessary Worship which every one is to be compelled to In which he speaks shall I say like a true Son of the Church of England or of Rome But he forgets to tell us upon what Scripture he bottoms these two Assertions First That there is any thing relating to the Worship of God as such of an indifferent nature Secondly That 't is in the power of the Church to make that which is left indifferent by the Lord a necessary Worship nor can he produce any but the unwritten Word or Law communicated to the Pope or his Conclave I know not when and kept I know not where which will prove no better at best than the proof the Jews bring for their Fopperies since their Apostacy and scattering abroad out of their Talmudical Writers or the Turks from their Alcoran i. e. frivolous and ridiculous This is generally decried and exploded by Protestant Writers Peter Martyr In Epist ad Hoop Episcop Glocest affirms of the English Ceremonies That Quoad aliter facere non liceat i. e. in their imposition as necessary parts of Worship they were grievous and burdensom Certain Princes of Germany to please Charles the Emperor Imposed the Surplice and other Rites upon the Ministers of their several Territories and are all condemned Supplicat Teolog German A. 1561. for this That they caused to sigh the Spirit of God and the hearts of good men It is Blasphemy to think that any outward thing may be made a Sign in the Church of any thing that is spiritual as the Cross in Baptism is unless it be expresly ordained in the Word and Commanded by God himself to be used to that end saith Lambert Danaeus Cont. Bellar. de Cult Sanct. Lib. 3. Cap. 7. Contrary whereto is the Doctrine of none of the Reformed Churches
be viz. when Antichrist according to Paul whose Epistles Peter conversed with 2 Pet. 3. 15. should be revealed In respect of each of which the title is applicable to the present Ministers 1. They assume the title of Teachers falsly as is proved chap. 3. of S. T. 2dly They teach false things as we demonstrate ch 5. 10. of S. T. 3dly That they are teachers of a great part of the Lie of Antichrist their Discipline Worship and Doctrine thereabout being for the most part hammered at his forge cannot be denied Secondly Of them it is said 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that they shall bring in Heresies of destruction The word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifies to bring in besides i. e. besides mens expectations or besides the Truth taught by Godly Teachers by themselves in part also to countenance their Errors so the Assembly They shall do it fraudulently under the vizard of Truth so Aretius They shall do it privily and subtilly pretending a shew of Piety and name of the Church so Gerh. Heresies of cestruction are no other but the Heresies or false Doctrines of Antichriâ—â— such as destroy and lay waste the Church the Truths and Institutions of Christ being alien and contrary to what is of his prescription and are supported by force and violence against them that do oppose them For which at the last swift destruction is brought upon themselves Upon which account Antichrist as is thought is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Rev. 9. 11. i. e. a Destroyer and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 2 Thess 2. 3. the son of destruction or perdition That the Ministers and Church of England do thus is too evident to admit of a denial They assume to themselves the name of the Church cry out against all others that separate from them as Hereticks and Schismaticks preach some truth with which they slily mix their Errours that lay waste the Institutions of Christ and persecute all these imprison waste ruine destroy them or at the least attempt it to the utmost of their power that stand up against their Innovations and Church-destroying Doctrines The greatest difficulty may seem to be in those words that are spoken of them Thirdly That they shall deny the Lord that bought them the words are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 They denied not that he bought them if it be meant of Christ but denied him as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Lord cast off in part at least his Authority as sole King and Lord of his Church And this too not openly and in words which is against the express letter of the Text they shall privily or slily bring it in but in practice doing that which doth invelop or wrap up in it a denial of the Despotical or Kingly Office and Authority of Christ And this saith Grotius the word signifies De tali desertione quae non verbo sed reipsa fiat figurate usurpatur Hugo Grot. Whence Dux Gregis the Captain of this Herd is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that lawless-one that despiseth sets light by the Laws and Authority of Christ That hereof the present Ministers are guilty we prove chap. 4. 5. of S. T. So that not one of the Scriptures produced but may justly be applyed to them And the Conforming-Ministers are rightly charged as the false Prophets of the Jews are in the places produced in S. T. This Mr. T. denies but if he would have made good his denial in my conceit he should have produced the particular places mentioned and manifested that they could not properly be applyed to them But he knew an easier way Mentiris Bellarmine mentiris a few keen words against his Antagonist would cost him little 'T is true he tells us that the present Ministers teach the Fundamentals of Christian Religion but what he means by the Fundamentals of Religion he tells us not Doth he intend that they own one God c. so did the false-Prophets The great Fundamental of true Religion is That God is to be worshipped according to the Revelation he hath made of himself in the Scriptures of Truth that all we do in his Worship and Service that relates to it as such be bottom'd on divine prescript This fundamental they deny introducing the Ordinances and Inventions of man and making these a part of Worship A departure from which is the ground of all the Apostacy that ever was in the World 4thly This Animadverter's plea for the Church and Ministers of England is not much better than what was or might have been made use of by Jeroboam himself for his Ministry Church and Worship Touching which precious Ainsworth in his Arrow against Idolatry ch 3. introduceth Jeroboam speaking after this rate I see my course O men of Israel to be much suspected if not wholly misliked of many some thinking my Ceremonies to savour too rankly of Heathen Superstition some charging me plainly with flat Apostasie and forsaking of God But how far off I am from all such Impiety I hope to manifest to all indifferent persons chiefly sith that I have neither spoken nor done against any Article of the Ancient Faith not changed any Fundamental Ordinance of Religion The very plea of Mr. T. for the present Ministers given us by Moses but worship with reverence the God of my Fathers and love him as I am taught with all my heart and with all my soul cleaving unto him alone who is my life and the length of my dayes Other Godds of the Nations I utterly abhor with all their impure rites and services The alteration I have made is in matters of circumstance things whereof there is no express certain or permanent Law given us of God and which are variable as time place or person give occasion and such as good Kings have changed before me and have been blameless This the sum upon which he dilates excellently and Sect. 12. introduceth him asserting his Worship for substance to be the same that God commanded by Moses We worship saith he the same God we offer the Sacrifices of Beeves and Sheep burn Incense pay First-fruits and Tythes and observe all the Ordinances that our Fathers have kept since the World began We hold the main Article of our Messiah to come and of Redemption from our sins by him Thus plausibly with much more mentioned by that worthy person before-named in his Arrow against Idolatry a Tract to say no more worthy the perusal Might Jeroboam plead for himself and practice as Josephus tells us he did B. 8. Jews Antiq. â—ap 3. yet are his wayes and worship abominable and not to be joyned with And yet Mr. T. hath not hitherto said more for the justification of the Ministers and Worship of England Parvas habet spes Troja si tales habet If no more can be pleaded in defence of the present Ministers and Worship than Jeroboam could plead for his Innovations and horrible Apostacy from God their case is deplorable indeed Sect. 11. In the height of the
Not one Provincial or National Church but seven particular instituted Churches First To each Church is there a distinct Epistle written Secondly Each Church had its particular Officer or Angel to whom each Epistle was directed to be communicated to the Congregation for to them in it doth Christ by his Spirit speak Rev. 2. 7 11 17 29. 3. 6 13 22. 3dly Each Church received its particular commendation bore its particular burden The Evils found in one are not charged upon the rest nor the Good found in either imputed to them generally but severally 4thly The power of Excommunication or rejection of Scandalous Offenders seems to be seated in each Church severally and apart therefore no Provincial or National Churches but Congregational For the neglect of which power some of them are expresly rebuked by Christ Rev. 2. 14 15 20. which our English Annotators apply and that truly to a non-rejection of them by excommunication and cite 1 Cor. 5. 2 6. Alas a National Diocesan Provincial Church was not then thought of Diocesan Churches were first founded as 't is said but it were no difficult task to evince that their original is antidated some scores of years by Dyonisius Bishop of Rome about 280 years after Christ or as some will about 251 he was the first that appointed the limits and bounds of Parishes Here in England they received their rise and original from one Honorius Bishop of Canterbury Polyd. Virgil. de Invent. rer lib. 4. c. 9. Nay the truth is the Churches mentioned were so far from being a Church of a Region or Nation that they were not all that lived in the same Place City or Town appertaining to the Church there As for the Church of Ephesus one of the seven Paul speaks of it as distinct from the rest of the Inhabitants Eph. 1. 1. so doth Christ of the Church of Pergamos Rev. 2. 13. I know thy works and where thou dwellest i. e. among what manner of people thine abode is Psal 57. 4. 120. 5 6. Ezek. 2. 6. Phil. 2. 15. viz. a wicked graceless ungodly people even where Satan's seat is where Satan dwelleth who were sure no part of the Church The like may be said of the rest of them 'T is strange to me that when God calls them Churches any person pretending to sobriety should dare to aver them to be but one Touching the interpretation of Mat. 16. 18. 18. 17. there are indeed great debates as our Animadverter saith betwixt Protestants and Papists amongst Protestants also and Protestants The exposition the Papists give of Mat. 16. 18. who from hence would infer that Peter and after him the Bishop of Rome was made Universal Bishop is so frivolous that 't is not worth the mentioning 1. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 super hanc petram is not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 super hunc Petrum upon this Rock will I build my Church we English-men think to be very different from upon St. Peter will I build i◠The Faith Peter confessed we take to be one thing his person another 2. We find not notwithstanding this promise that Peter was the Prince of the Apostles at which lofty rate these Gentlemen love to speak or Universal Bishop If he had been so Paul much forgot himself when he said 2 Cor. 11. 5. For I suppose Gr. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 I conclude for certain I was not a whit behind the chiefest Apostles And much more Gal. 2. 11. But when Peter was come to Antioch I withstood him to the face because he was to be blamed Strange that he should carry it with no more respect to the Prince of the Apostles and Universal Bishop and head of the Church-Catholick-visible 3. But if these were granted them what is this to their Pope Why Peter was at Rome Answ That is uncertain Yet should it be granted he was there it would not in the least advantage them in their present cause 'T is most certain he was at Samaria Antioch Lydda Joppa Cesaria yet no Primacy or Supremacy affixed to either of them upon that bottom 4. Yea but he placed his Chair at Rome fixed his Seat there Answ This is false and untrue nor can they ever make it appear that he did so Yet if this should be granted they are never a whit the nearer the mark except they prove 1. That a succession in this universal Unlimited Archiepiscopal power was entailed to the Church of Rome and that so that 1. Though those who ascended that Chair came to be invested therein by bribery cozenage cruelty bloo◠whilst they possessed it were Hereticks and declared by Councils to be so and their Successors Conjurers Adulterers Idolaters Atheists Blasphemers bloody Persecutors destroyers of bodies and souls of men the veriest Villains and Wretches that ever the Earth bore 2. Though this Succession hath been interrupted by a Vacancy or Interregnum of some years polluted by a Woman a Whore delivered with her Cardinals about her in solemn Procession whence Papa parit Papam peperit Papissa Papillum By the setting up of Anti-Popes two or three at a time contesting to the pouring out of much Blood wasting destroying Villages Towns Cities Cursing excommunicating one another and all that adhere to each other for the Popedom or St. Peter's Chair yet when in it and those that succeed them be they as bad or worse than they that went before must infallibly be his successor which when they prove I will be a Papist and before they shall effect this it being the grand Principle of their Religion or Superstition rather it would become all that have or would be accounted to have the least spark of Wisdom remaining in them to have nothing to do with such a generation For my part I am abundantly satisfied that the Church there is neither the Church-Catholick visible nor any particular Church as such but the Invisible-Church or Elect of God Tell the Church Mat. 18. 17. hath divers interpretations put upon it according as the interests of some lead and encline them In the language of the Episcopalians it is Tell the Lord Bishop and his Consistory but this is such an heterogeneous piece so wild an interpretation that it would put a sober man if concern'd in them to a blush to hear it mentioned 1. There were no such creatures at that day nor for some hundreds of years after Alas there was somewhat else to do than to think of erecting Episcopal Seas and Consistories when they were every day fighting with beasts and made a spectacle to Angels and men for the Truth and Gospel-sake which was the state of the Church of God for the most part for the first three-hundred years and upwards as is known 2. One man as saith precious Cotton is not the Church nor can he represent the Church unless sent by them but so is neither the Bishop nor his Commissary 3. The Bishop ordinarily is no member of the Church where the offence is committed
and what is his satisfaction to the removal of the offence given to the Church 4. The Parisian Doctors say truly Ecclesiam nunquam c. The Church cannot be taken for one person nor be govern'd by one Of which the Learned Chamier gives his reason How can it be that the Bishop should be the Church according to whose Ecclesiastical Authority things should be determined Mat. 18. when a long time after the Bishop himself by humane authority had his original of which Ambrose complains And as soon as the Lord had said tell the Church he speaks in the plural number all along afterward Verily I say unto you Whatsoever Ye shall bind on Earth c. Whence it plainly appears that the Church is not taken for one person but for many congregated together Pol. Eccles Yea Sutcliffe when disputing against Bellarmine saith Christ did not constitute the chief Tribunal in the hands of Peter but of the Church for not those who refused to hear Peter but those who refused to hear the Church were to be accounted as Heathens and Publicans De Pontif. Rom. l. 1. c. 5 6. Besides in matters of controversie Peter himself was subject to the Tribunal of the Church But a superiour cannot be judged by an inferiour If any controversie happened amongst the Apostles that could not be defined by particular persons but a Council of the Church was to be congregated This we see done Acts 15. Now one would think our present Bishops should not be so arrogant as to assume that power to themselves which when disputing with the Papists they will not allow to Peter 2dly In the judgment of our Brethren of the Presbyterian way Tell the Church is tell the Presbytery But they are I humbly conceive somewhat wide of the mark too My Reasons are 1. The Church is sometimes put for the Congregation as distinct from the Presbytery or Elders and Officers Acts 14. 23. 15. 22. never for these as distinct from the Congregation throughout the New-Testament 2. The Presbytery may be the party offending and then you must tell the Church that the Church offendeth i. e. go tell themselves But the Scripture is express that after private dealing with the offenders themselves upon non-amendment the Church as distinct from them is to be acquainted with it 3. What if the Presbytery themselves be offended whom shall they tell must they tell themselves If they are the Church they can go no further 4. Besides we find 1 Cor. 5. not the Presbytery alone but the whole Church concerned in the matter of Excommunication of which our Brethren confess Christ here treateth This Animadverter manifests his good will to interpret it of an Assembly of the Jews in their Synedrium or if extended as a direction to Christian Brethren whether to refer it to their Assembly under an Ecclesiastical consideration or Political i. e. the Christian Magistrate he seems to demur with an apparent inclination to the latter To the first of these Mr. Cotton answers †Treat of the Keys p. 40 An. 3. It is not credible that Christ would send his Disciples to make complaint of their offences to the Jewish Synagogues for is it likely he would send his Lambs and Sheep for right and healing unto Wolves and Tygres Both their Sanhedrim and most of their Synagogues were no better And if here and there some Elders of their Synagogues were better affected yet how may it appear that so it was where any of themselves dwelt And if that might appear too yet had not the Jews already agreed that if any man did confess Christ he should be cast out of the Synagogues Joh. 9. 22. To which we add 2dly Christ knew that within a little while the Synedrim and whole Church-Policy of the Jews would be at an end And 3dly in the mean while charges his Disciples to have nothing to do with them Mat. 15. 14. Tell them that they would persecute kill them and think in doing so they did God good service As it fell out afterwards accordingly So that it cannot with the least shew of reason be imagined that Christ should direct them to appeal to them and stand to their final determination 2dly The second desires not a reply Go tell the Church i. e. go tell the Magistrate is so wild an interpretation that the bare naming it is the giving it too much honour 1. The Magistrate is no where called the Church 2dly The Magistrate quâ talis hath nothing to do in the stating and determining Church-Controversies 3dly Sometimes and for the most part they have ever since been for above three hundred years afterward they undoubtedly were no members of the Church but enemies to it destroyers of it Mr. T. adds that he can find no Institution by preception or command of a Church i. e. there is no such thing as an instituted Church of Christ under the Gospel but 't is left to the prudence of men c. to determine whether they shall be Domestick Congregational Parochial Classical Diocesan Provincial Patriarchal or Oecumenical which how derogatory to the Honour and Sovereign Authority of Jesus Christ to his love and tenderness to his Children to his Faithfulness with respect to the obligation that lay upon him as Mediator to reveal the whole will of the Father to them others will judge For my part I am fully of his mind who some while since said That there were particular Churches instituted by the Authority of Jesus Christ ordained and approved by him that Officers for them were of his appointment and furnished with gifts from him for the execution of their employment That Rules Cautions and Instructions for the due settlement of those Churches were given by him that these Churches were made the only seat of that Worship which in particular he expressed his will to have continued until he came is of so much light in Scripture that he must wink hard that will not see it Which is as much as we need to say to this Animadverter in this matter what he saith herein being meer dictates of his own without proof which when he shall be able to evince that Christ hath not the Government of his Churches upon his shoulders that he is not sole King and Lord over them or having so hath not given them Rules to walk by of his own but left them to the liberty of their own wills or which is worse the wills of such as by Providence are permited to ascend the Throne though such as whilst they profess to know God in works deny him being abominable and disobedient and to every good work reprobate he will be supposed to say something in way of confirmation But of this more in Sect. 15. 'T is true de facto Parochial Classical Diocesan Provincial Patriarchical and Oecumenical Churches by the prudence of men c. have had and yet have their being it the World and the Animadverter deals ingenuously in acknowledging that their original
as is made by marriage joyn our selves to the Lord c. so Isa 2. 3. Mich. 4. 2. Isa 44. 5. Zech. 8. 21 22 23. 2dly Accordingly we have the Churches of Christ in the New-Testament practising and commended for their so doing as acting therein according to the will of God Acts 2. 41 42. 2 Cor. 8. 5. 3dly The several names and titâ—es given unto particular Churches evince as much Every such Church is called 1. A Body 1 Cor. 12. 27. Col. 3. 15. Rom. 14. 4 5. Eph. 5. 30 32. Col. 1. 18 21. Now 't is not the multitude or number of members whether many or few that constitute or make a Body We say not if we come into a Field where a Battel hath been fought and find an Arm in one place a Leg in another an Hand in a third c. though we meet with as many members scattered up and down as are in the body yea though thrown together in heaps that here is a body no no 't is Rudis indigestaque moles Their union each with other and coalescency in one is that which gives them that denomination Particular Saints scattered here and there or casually coming together are not nor can they be called the Body of Christ their union each with other by their free and mutual consent is that which denominates them so to be 2. An House or Temple Heb. 3. 6. Ephes 2. 21 22. 1 Tim. 3. 15. 1 Pet. 2. 5. Mr. T. knows who have thought the world was made by the casual confluence of Atoms he doth not sure think that a casual concurrence of people professing the Name of the Lord without more ado are or can become an House or Temple for him 3. A City a Kingdom Eph. 2. 19. Mat. 21. 43. Heb. 12. 28. Joh. 18. 36. That a man should be any way a member of these but by his free consent cannot be asserted with the least shew of reason 4. A Fraternity or Brotherhood Zech. 11. 14. 1 Pet. 2. 17. compared with chap. 5. 2 13. 5. A Candlestick in allusion to Moses his Candlesticks Exod. 25. 31. wherein though there were many shafts yet they did all coalesce in one Rev. 1. 11 12 20. All which as they import Aggregation or a solemn union so they clearly evince that this cannot be but by free and mutual consent 4. Besides we find Christ promising his Presence to his Church and People thus aggregated or gathered an Argument of his well-pleasedness therein Mat. 18. 20. which accordingly he makes good to the Churches of Asia as to the rest Rev. 1. 13. which we have proved to be particular Congregational Churches That they were separated from the World and its Worship gathered together by their own free consent for the worshipping God Mr. T. cannot deny There were no Laws to compel them hereunto but the contrary So that 3dly we may righteously retort this Animadverters Argument upon himself There cannot be a true Church where those things essential to a true Church cannot be found But in National Churches in general in the Church of England in particular those things that are essential to a true Church cannot be found Therefore The Major is Mr. T 's The Minor we prove Right matter and form is of the essence of a true Church both wanting in the Church of England 1. The right matter Mr. T. denies not to be visible Saints visible Drunkards Swearers Whoremongers covetous persons are not such yet of such as these is the Church of England mostly composed 2dly The form of a true Church we have manifested to consist in separation from Worldly Formal Antichristian Worshippers gathering together by free consent into a Church-state or particular Societies for the Worship and Service of God neither of which can be asserted of the Church of England Much of the Worship of the Nations of Antichrist at least their rites and modes of Service is retained in it And into that Church-state such as it is in which they are fixed did they never enter by their free and voluntary consent but by the Laws of the Kingdom were they at first I speak of their National-Church-state that the Gospel was early whether by Joseph of Arimathea or some one of the Apostles is not material preached in England that then a true Church or Churches were here planted I grant but this is nothing to their present frame as a Church-National compell'd thereunto and by severe Laws retained therein to this day From which as from the Lordly Prelacy the most sober People of the Nation do every-where groaning being burdened long to be delivered What follows will receive a speedy dispatch 1. 'T is true the defect of outward order i. e. of every outward order though of the institution of Christ doth not nullifie the Church but want of that order which is of the essence of the Church as we have evinced to be the case of the Church of England doth so 2dly Mr. T 's instances of the disorders in the Church of Corinth yet a true Church are so evidently impertinent that the bare mentioning them is confutation sufficient The Church of Corinth was a rightly constituted Church made up of visible Saints 1 Cor. 1. 1. gathered together into a particular body 1 Cor. 12. 27. meeting together 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the same place for the Worship of God 1 Cor. 11. 20. 14. 23. Some disorders found amongst this Church did not nullifie it Ergo the defect of that Order that is instituted by Christ ad esse to the very existence and being of a Gospel-Church as is the case of National Churches doth not nullifie them will not in hast be made good When Mr. T. proves the sameness of constitution betwixt the particular Church of Corinth and the National Church of England his instance of disorders amongst the Corinthians will be acknowledged pertinent but till then he will not himself upon second thoughts say it is so The having of Natioâ—al Rulers Ecclesiastical either single persons or in a Synod or Convocation make not a false Church saith the Animadverter Answ 1. But should this be granted it would not follow that a National Church is not a false Church which it may be upon other accounts though upon the account hereof it should be acqâ—itted But 2ly National Officers or Rulers Ecclesiastical in whom all church-Church-power is stated as Arch-Bishop and from thence derived to Diocesan Bishops and by them communicated in part to the ordinary Parish-Priests as is the case of the National Ecclesiastical Officers of England are false and Antichristian Officers and Ministers we prove chap. 3. of the S. T. That a National Church so denominated from their subjection to these should be a true Church is beyond the reach of my understanding What he addeth touching Synods owned and submitted unto by those of the Congregational way and Churches of a greater number and at a greater distance than could meet in one place every Lord's day is
not at all to his purpose At the best it is but a recrimination I know not how this Animadverter could imagine that the owning and asserting of these things as lawful had the least tendency to the establishment of a National Church But some men are so distempered that they suppose every thing makes for the advancement of that design they are driving on If he deems Synods owned by men of Congregational Principles and his Ecclesiastical Convocation of National Officers are of the same nature he is mistaken 1. Those are chosen by the particular Churches to which they are severally related and what they act and do is in their name and upon the account of that power and authority they receive from them The Convocation of the Clergy act in their own name and authority being never chosen by any one Congregation to sit and make Laws 2ly Those pretend not to be the Church nor to any self-self-power to make Laws and impose them upon the Churches as obligatory and binding to be received and subjected to by them without the least judgement of discretion allowed them or liberty of dissenting if not perswaded in their consciences of the truth of what is decreed by them and its consonancy with the Scriptures of the Lord. As is known to be the case of the Convocation of the Church of England to dissent from whose Canons at least to oppose them is censured with no less than an Excommunication or delivering up to Satan Which how directly it leads to the Popish implicit faith of believing as the Church believes every one is able to discern For my part with reference to these I am much of the mind of the learned Whitaker de Concil p. 12. General Councils may erre and imbrace false opinions Nam Concilium Antiochenum veritatem damnavit haeresin apertam propugnavit Similiter Ariminense Ephesinum secundum ex quo patet veritatem non esse metiendam ex numero Episcoporum Of them he saith 1. That their calling together is a certain politick and humane invention pag. 35 77. 2. That they cannot frame Articles of Faith to binde the Conscience pag. 19. 3. That their end in coming together is not to feed as Pastors but to consult what is best for the Churches pag. 85. 4. That they are not simply necessary pag. 23. 5. That they do not give authority to the Scripture pag. 242 243. 6. That their Decrees are not immediately inspired by the Holy Ghost pag. 262 263. 7. That the ultimate determination and judgment of a General Council may be false pag. 231. 8. That there is no judgement of a Council properly in matters of Faith ibid. 9. That the truth of things determined in Councils may afterwards be called into question and again disputed pag. 283. 10. That the Churches of Christ have been kept sound in Faith without them for the first 300 years pag. 23. To which I add 11. That I never yet read of any Council or Synod since that Act 15. but 't were easie to demonstrate that in one thing or other it hath erred The most of the Hay and Stubble that is built upon the Foundation at this day not to mention their attempts 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 owing its original to some of them So that I confess I am no admirer of them and am bold to affirm of any that have yet been it had been better for the Church of God that they had never been in the world But these things are little to Mr. T. his purpose That persons owning the lawfulness of Synods from Scripture-warrant as they conceive should therefore be necessitated to own a National Church as a true Church of Christ is a position that Mr. T. will never make good I suppose by the view I have taken of some of his Writings he is very confident of his own abilities but he is a rare man indeed that can compose a Rope of Sand. The lawfulness of a National Church or unlawfulness thereof having no dependance upon Congregational Synods but is to take its measure from somewhat else of which before Of Churches of a greater number â—han can meet at one place for the celebration of all the Ordinances of Christ I shall not need to say any thing till he acquaint us what Congregational men are of that perswasion it will be accounted a meer Calumny The assembling of the members of a particular Church in the same place for the celebration of the same Numerical Ordinances being one considerable part of the definition given by our Congregational Brethren of such a Church And yet if they did own Churches of a greater number 't is ridiculous to imagine that they could from thence be compelled to the owning of a National Church which wants both the matter and form of a true Church of Christ which yet the other may have So that we need not turn aside to consider the proofs used by those that held That many particular Congregations may be under one Presbyterial Government Printed 1645. Of which this Animadverter reminds us For though I am not of their mind nor do I conceive their Reasons to be cogent Yet were that true a National Church could not from thence be proved a true Church of Christ For 1st They suppose these Congregations to be particular Churches of Christ constituted and made up of visible Saints which cannot as yet be affirmed of any National Church in the world or any Parish Church as a part thereof 2dly They also affirm that these particular Churches have power within themselves to determine differences by their own Elders to excommunicate Offenders obstinately guilty of notorious scandals 3dly They are utterly against all Archiepiscopal National Officers the source and spring of a National Church 4thly They conceive not all in England nor all in a Parish to be lawful Church-members because born there nor will they compel them as such to receive the Sacrament with them which is the known case of the Church of England That at Jerusalem there were more Churches than one under a Presbyterial Government is a fond conceit which the numerous multitude of Believers thereunto belonging contribute not the least mite of assistance to Be they never so many they are called Acts 8. 1. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The Church which was at Jerusalem The like may be said of the Church of Corinth it was one single Congregation the Church of God which was at Corinth 1 Cor. 1 1. 2 Cor. 1. 1. So was the Church at Ephesus Rev. 2. 1. But as was said The grant of more Churches than one under one Presbyterial Government is remote enough from the establishment of a National Church which by other bonds and ligaments than the Assertors thereof will own must be united to one National Head or it hath not cannot have a being in the world So that these things are little to his purpose The next attempt of this Animadverter is to remove an obstruction which he
Officers if Presbyters and Elders be such as 't is evident they are from Act. 14. 23. 20. 17 28. whom we find in the Church at Jerusalem Act. 11. 29 30. 15. 2 4 6 22 23. 16. 4. 21. 18. 3ly What he further offers That the Church of Jerusalem was to be that Church from whence were to be taken such as might plant other Churches for which end they were after dispersed Acts 8. 1 4. therefore it cannot be said to be the pattern of all Churches is to speak modestly such a strange non-sequitur that he must take time to make good That because the Lord in his providence suffered the enemies of his Son to dissipate and scatter this Church and by it took advantage in the greatness of his Love and Wisdom for the preaching the Gospel to others also that therefore it should be a Church not formed up according to the mind of Christ or being so formed was not to be an example and pattern with respect to the matter and manner of its constitution to succeeding Churches is a consequence that will not be swallowed down because Mr. T. saith it and yet nothing but his ipse dixit is tendred towards its support and maintenance But what he saith in the 4th place wil he thinks do his work 't is this Be the Church of Jerusalem of what nature or kind soever whether Congregational Presbyterian or Parochial it was so not from any Institution of Christ but came to pass according to divine Promises and Providence which being so various as that no certain rule can be accommodated to all times places and estates of the Church We may judge that Christ hath left the shaping of Churches much to humane prudence That is in short there is no Form of Churches of divine institution An Assertion so derogatory to the honour and glory of our dear Lord Jesus that it cannot but be grievous to Christ-loving Saints to hear it abetted by any I confess if this were the state of Churches it were to no purpose to contend with him about his National Church nor is it at all to be wondred at if he hath always been for that Church-Government that was uppermost in the World But this being an Assertion wherein most of the Saints of God in the World do look upon themselves upon more accounts than one to be greatly concerned Mr. T. should have brought most irrefragable Arguments to make it good But behold in the stead hereof we meet with a deep silence he onely turns aside to consider what worthy Mr. Parker offers to prove that the form of Churches is of Divine Institution Of which in the next Section we shall speak Sect. 17. The Form of Churches of Divine Institution The learned Parker 's Arguments vindicated from Mr. T. his Exceptions Particular Churches called the Body of Christ his House and Temple The plain upon which the Antichristian Church was first erected No other foundation of the Church but Christ. 1 Cor. 3. 10. Eph. 2. 20. Zech. 6. 13. Rev. 11. 1. explained Twelve Arguments to prove the Form of Churches is of Divine appointment IN Sect. 17. Mr. T. pretends to answer the learned Parkers Arguments by which he proves Lib. 3. de Polit. Eccl. c. 17. that the Form of Churches is of Divine Institution How well he hath discharged this province is now to be considered The sum of Mr. Parker's first Argument is this The Church is the Body of Christ 1 Cor. 12. 27. But in the first forming of mans Body he shewed himself such an accurate worker in the determining the dimension and measure of it Gen. 2. that nothing might be added to or taken from it by any Therefore it cannot be imagined that he should be so regardless of his own Body as not accurately to circumscribe the dimension thereof This Mr. T. is pleased to call a Rhetorical flourish but by his good leave it will be found an Argument of such weight that he will not be able soon to remove it out of his way If the Church of Christ be his Body he hath certainly determined the dimensions of it Not to have done so had been an Argument of little care thereof of his leaving it to the arbitrary disposements of the children of men of which we reade not a tittle in the New-Testament Who or where is he that dares assume the confidence of ordering and disposing the Body of Christ without his leave or can do so without treading the Soveraignty of Christ over it under foot and proclaims himself to be the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that lawless one the Antichrist or Beast that ascends out of the bottomless-pit must go into perdition What saith Mr. T The Church of Christ he tells us is the Body of Christ but this is rather true of the Universal Church and Mystical Body of Christ as may be gathered from 1 Cor. 12. 12 13. Eph. 1. 22 23. 4. 4. than of a particular Congregation Answ 1. But he gives us no Argument to demonstrate that 1 Cor. 12. 27. is to be interpreted of the Universal Church we have demonstrated the contrary Sect. 13. which he should have done if he would have us think our selves concerned in his reply 2dly He himself grants That a particular Church of Christ is and may be called his Body as his words 't is rather true of the Universal Church than of a particular Congregation import That he should entrust any with a power to model figure and fashion his own Body as they please and yet never give us the least hint of any such betrustment is the first-born of improbabilities and absurdities The 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the very plain in the Land of Shinar upon which the cursed Fabrick of the Antichristian Church Babel was at the first erected as Mr. T. well knows The learned Parker further argues Each first Church of God is the house and building of God 1 Cor. 3. 9. Heb. 3. 3 4. 1 Tim. 3. 15. And what prudent housholder will permit the Figure and Quantity of his House to the arbitrement and will of others To this Mr. T. adjoyns 'T is true the Church of God is his House God built it Christ is the only Foundation of it yet others are subordinate Builders and Foundations too in respect of their Doctrine 1 Cor. 3. 10. Ephes 2. 20. to whom many things pertaining to the outward figure and quantity i. e. the distributing of Churches into Oecumenical National Classical Parochial c. are left c. This the Sum. Answ 1. 'T is true Paul calls himself 1 Cor. 3. 10. A Builder with respect to his instrumental planting and founding of that Church 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a wise Architect or chief Builder but that he or any others was to build according to the good pleasure of their own wills that they had no Idea Platform or Model given them by Christ the Lord and Master of the House according to which
be imagined upon that supposition a measure of them by it were impossible to be taken 5. The measured Court saith the learned Mede setteth forth the primitive state of the Christian Church conformable to the Rule of Gods Word The measuring is an allusion to Ezek. 43. 7 to 10. or to building viz. That what the drawing of the Platform is to Builders the same is Measuring to God in the language of the Prophets i. e. the state of the Church figured thereby is God's workmanship 6. The measuring is as was said a clear allusion to Ezek. 43. 10. but that measuring was in order to the shewing the form of the House Let them measure the pattern ver 11. Shew them the form of the House and the fashion thereof therefore the measuring here must be for the same end too Mr. Parker further argues If God when the Church of the Jews is call'd to the Faith designs the quantity longitude latitude thereof it cannot be imagined that he hath left the dimension of the Gentile Churches to humane pleasure But when the Church of the Jews is called to the Faith he designs the quantity c. thereof Therefore Mr. T. replies 1. That the Holy City is the visible Church of the Jews c. Or that the measuring it was to design the quantity of particular Churches is not probable Answ But this is more than probable that the Holy City be it what it will is exactly formed and figured by the Lord as the measuting the City the Gates the Walls thereof doth abundantly evince If you take it for the converted Jews as some learned men do or the Gentile Churches after the fall and ruine of Antichrist to which it may be Mr. T. rather enclines 't is not probable that God should then take such exact care about the forming and figuring of the Church-societies of these and in the mean while leave his present Churches to the good pleasure of the children of men and those none of the best neither 2dly He tells us Inasmuch as the Apostle Rom. 11. 25. asserts that all Israel shall be saved he might better argue for a National Church of Christ's Institution from the visible Church-state of the Jews at their future calling than for a Congregational Church Answ 1. But then he must argue that some Church-form is of divine institution which would overturn his present structure 2. He must first prove that the Jews Church-state upon their conversion will be National which the Apostle's words all Israel shall be saved do not evince for so they may be though formed up into particular societies as some learned men think they shall 3. God's designing more diligently the quantity c. of the Jewish Church at their calling hereafter and leaving the dimension of ours to humane choice may be done Mr. T. tells us out of more special love to them Answ 1. But pag. 39. he tells us That God's leaving things appertaining to the New-Testament-Churches to be set down by man more than he did to the Jewish-Church is an Argument of greater love and care to the New-Testament-Churches than to them This needs a Reconciler 2. However he neither manifests that God bears greater love to the Jews than Gentiles which to speak properly he cannot do nor that if he did so he should bear so little love to the New-Testament-Churches as to leave them wholly to the forming of the sons of men What he adds fourthly in answer to what is further argued by Mr. Parker that the Church is compared to a City but no City is so negligently administred by man that no regard is had to the bounds and lin its thereof is greatly impertinent for though it may consist with the prâ—dence and care of good Princes to leave many things to the choice of some in the City incorporated as the ordering their Meetings c. â—s shall be found most convenient for them yet to take no more care thereabout than to suffer the City to grow up into the compass of a Shire a Nation would scarce be accounted consistant with that prudence and wisdom which should be in them And thus far of Mr. T. his reply to the famous Parkers Arguments for the Divine Institution of Churches For a close of this Section we shall briefly propose twelve Arguments for the further clearing of the truth That the Form of Churches is of Divine Institution which our Animadverter may answer at his leizure Argum. 1. If the Form of the Church be not of Christ's appointment 't is not so either because it was not needful or because Christ was not careful faithful or sufficient to institute or ordain it But neither of these is true To assert the latter were blasphemous c. That 't is needful is evident 1. There are some duties which cannot well be performed but upon supposition hereof as Mat. 18. 15. 2dly The care of the Apostles to bring such as they converted into Church-order 3dly Their diligent instructing them in their duty as members of particular Bodies and Congregations 4thly Christ's owning them who walked together in such Societies affording them his Presence promising it to them and that in opposition unto Babylonish Assemblies of the formings of man abundantly evince the needfulness thereof Besides 5thly If it be not needful they are bloodily cruel who persecute men to the loss of Estates Liberties Lives and give them up to the Devil by the sentence of Excommunication For no other reason but for refusing communion with their National Church or denying its form and frame to be of the institution of Christ. Arg. 2. If the Form of the Church be not of Christ's appointment then there must be more Lords over the Church besides Christ for the forming or figuring of Churches pro libito is an act of Lordly Authority But there cannot be more Lords over the Church besides Christ Isa 33. 22. 1 Cor. 8. 5. Jam. 4. 12. Therefore Arg. 3. If the Form of Churches be not of Christ's appointment Then is it in the power of man without any precept or authority from Christ to add to or take away from the Body of Christ for so are particular Churches as we have proved But this is contrary to 1 Cor. 12. 18 27. with Rom. 12. 4 8. Therefore Arg. 4. That which the Apostles practised in pursuance of the Commission they received from Christ is undoubtedly an Order and Institution of his But the gathering of Disciples into particular Congregations the Apostles practised in pursuance of the Commission they received from Christ Mat. 28. 19 20. with Acts 2. 41 â—2 43. Therefore Arg. 5. If the Form of Churches be not of Divine Institution Then the Church of Christ is either not his Palace Kingdom or Christ hath not that care over his Palace and Kingdom as the Princes of the world have over theirs But both these are false and highly injurious to Christ Therefore Arg. 6. That Church to which Christ hath enjoyned his
lawful Ministry where there is no Church Of this we have spoken at large Chap 4. of S. T. To which multitudes of Testimonies might be added The Churches of Helvetia Harm Confes Sect. 11. de min. Eccl. affirm The Ministers of the Church must be called and chosen by Ecclesiastical and lawful election i. e. they must be religiously elected by the Church or by some from her deputed thereunto So also do they speak Artic. 16. ibid. So the Bohemian Churches Men who are firm and strong in the Faith fearing God having received necessary gifts for the work of the Ministry of an honest and unblamable conversation by People fearing God must be chosen and called to the administration of holy things Harmon Confes Sect 11. cap 9. de min. Eccl. And they expresly tell us That they permit none to discharge the Office of the Ministry without such an Election of the Church as appears ibid. by the antient Canons thereof To the same purpose the Belgick Churches declare ibid. Art 31. But Thirdly Ordinary Officers cannot be before the Church Therefore where there is no Church there can be no lawful ordinary Officers The Antecedent is evident 1. All along the Acts we read first of the Constitution of Churches before the Ordination of Officers 2. The Scripture saith expresly That all Officers are set in the Church 1 Cor. 12. 28. Which setting doth necessarily presuppose a Church in which they are set 2dly A true Ministry cannot be in a false Church false I mean either with respect to its first Constitution or by reason of such an Apostacy as hath destroyed the essence and being of it For first A false Church is no Church of Christ Therefore in it can be no true ordinary Ministry according to the mind of Christ for the reasons before mentioned Secondly Such a Church is intrusted with no Authority from Christ therefore cannot communicate any nor send forth any to act in his Name That Christ hath intrusted his Church with power to elect and choose Officers we manifest Chap. 4. Pag. 32 33 of S. T. That any Church not right in its Constitution as is the Case of National Churches is invested with any such power is the first-born of absurdities and improbabilities 'T is the Queen the Bride the Lambs Wife that hath the Keys at her girdle not the Concubines But Mr. T. hath more to say to evince the contrary Arg. 2. If there be a true Ministry though to or in a National visible Church or Catholick then the extent which is conceived to be inconsistent with a true Gospel-Church makes not the Ministry false But Peter and Pauls Ministry to the Jews or Gentile Churches was a true Ministry though the Church were National or Catholick Therefore Answ 1. 'T is a most sad thing upon more accounts than one to be engaged against Truth such sorry shifts are men put to and driven to the use of Sophisms so puâ—rile that at other times they would be asâ—amed of Thus fares it with this Animadverter who argues so jejunely that considering what I have heard of him for a Disputant I am ready to question whether the Arguments I read be his or no. Though Truth seeks no corners yet it makes its Adversaries frequently to do so The enquiry as Mr. T. saith rightly in p. 34. is of the ministry of ordinary Pastors c. His two first Arguments relate only to extraordinary Officers viz. the Ministry of the Apostles so that we are not concerned to take the least notice of them Many such impertinencies is thâ—s Animadverters Treatise stuft with 2. Besides the Argument is inconclusive of what Mr. T. pretends to prove viz. That in a National Church or a false Church there may be a true Ministry If there be a true Ministry though to or in a National visible Church saith he then the extent which is conceived to be inconsistent with a true Gospel-Church makes not the Ministry false But Sir whether there be a true Ministry in a National Church is the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 how it comes to be the medium of your Argument I am yet to learn Sure I am such kind of Arguings would deservedly be hissed out of the Schools being in themselves illogical I suppose he would have argued thus If that extent which is conceived to be inconsistâ—nt with a true Gospel-Church makes not the Ministry false Then there may be a true Ministry though to or in a National Church But the extent which is conceived to be inconsistant with a true Gospel-Church makes not the Ministry false for Peter's and Paul's Ministry to the Jews and Gentiles were true Ministries though the Churches were National 1 Cor. 12. 28. Ergo. To the Argument I answer 1. By denying the consequence of the first Proposition For though the extent inconsistant to a true Gospel-Church should not make the Ministry false yet somewhat else may What thinks he of an Antichristian Ordination or a Mission to officiat from the Antichristian Persecuting Beast and Whore though the Church were rightly constituted in and to which a man is a Preacher I conceive his Ministry is false But 2dly I deny his Minor Proposition if by Ministry he understands the Ministry of ordinary Pastors c. which if he doth not he speaks not a word to the question as he himself acknowledgeth pag. 34. the extent of a Church inconstent with a Gospel-Church renders the Church false and indeed no Church i. e. no Gospel-Church Therefore it renders the Ministry false as we before proved Mr. T. his proofs are weak and impertinent 1. Paul and Peter's Ministry was not the Ministry of ordinary Pastors as he grants p. 34. 2dly They were not Ministers in or to a National Church 'T is true they preached to the Jews and Gentiles but for the first their Church-state was virtually terminated at the death of Christ when the Vail of the Temple was rent as for the Gentile Nations they were no National Churches The forming of which ows its original as was said to a latter date So that hitherto Mr. T. hath onely hung out signs of Arguments to prove his Assertion being weighed in the ballances they are found wanting are plainly sophistical It may be in what follows he speaks more pertinently Thus he argues Arg. 3. If Ministry to Churches Hypocritical Schismatical and in some sort Heretical may be a true Ministry much more to a Church National c. those being greater degrees of falshood than this But the Antecedent is before proved from the Epistles to the Corinthians to the Churches of Pergamos Thyatira and Sardis Ergo. Answ No doubt but Mr. T. and his Associates in this work think they have excellently well acquitted themselves in this Argument but the emptiness and invalidity of it will soon appear 1. What if we deny the consequence of the Major Proposition upon supposition that there may be a true Ministry to Churches of such a complexion as that intimated it doth not
at all follow that there may be a true Ministry to and in a Church National Where is Mr. T. proof of his consequence Why these are greater degrees of falshood than are to be found in a National Church Well this is denied also What offers he to make it appear to be so Why you have his 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for it he saith so But seriouslly Mr. T. is so inconstant to his own words principles and practices that we are afraid if we should assent to what he asserts upon that foundation we should once in seven or eight years if the minds of men in authority over us should in that time be different believe and disbelieve the same positions What if the National Church be as Schismatical Heretical Hypocritical as the Churches instanc'd in this were a facile undertaking to demonstrate I hope then it being false in its constitution which the others instanc'd in were not we may with this Animadverter's leave assert that greater degrees of falshood are not to be found in and upon them than are to be found upon his National Church Besides supposing the Churches instanc'd in to be such as M. T. saith they were they were once true Churches of Christ to whom power was delegated from him foâ— the election and choosing of Officers to act in his Name and Authâ—rity amongst them which cannot be affirmed of any National Church in the World That because a true Ministry may be in a true Church under great degeneracy therefore there may be a true Ministry in a false Church is an Assertion that this Animadverter had need to consult with some body else to help him to make good than his present Adviserâ— But 2. We crave leave to deny his Minor A true Ministry câ—nnot be in Hypocritical Schismatical Heretical Churches If they are such they are no Churches of Christ if known to be so they are not to be owned as such by them that fear him But he hath proved this from the Epistles to the Corinthians to the Churches of Pergamos Thyatira and Sardis Answ What hath he proved that these Churches were Hypocritical Schismatical Heretical nothing less 'T is true 1 Cor. 1. 11 12. Paul tells the Corinthians that he heard there were Contentions amongst them c. that the Church was schismatical he saith not That there are Contentions amongst the members of the Church of England Mr. T. cannot deny that therefore it is to be accounted a Schismatical-Church he will scarce assert 'T is true also that there were some in the Church of Pergamos and Thyatira that held false and erroneous opinions and that the Churches were too much to blame to suffer them as they did for which Christ rebukes them In Sardis the generality of the members were wonderfully declined in their spirits a time of withering decayes deadness was upon them yet was not the one an Heretical nor the other an Hypocritical Church Nor can Mr. T. make good his charge against either of them As for the Church of Pergamos Christ witnesseth of them that although they dwelt where Satan's seat was i. e. where the Roman Governour lived who was Satan's chief instrument for persecuting the Saints yet they hâ—â—d fast his Name and did not deny his Faith which is not a description of an Heretical Church They owned Christ retained cleaved to the Doctâ—ine of the Gospel i. e. the Body of the Church did though some few amongst them held strange Heterodoxies therefore no Heretical-Church The like may be said of the Church of Thyatira doth Christ charge her with Heresie doth he say the whole Body or maâ—or part of the Church was infected with the doctâ—ine of Jezebel nothing less He saith indeed that the Church was too negligent in their duty to put a stop to her seducing his Servants and intimates as if some were led astray by her But withal testifies that there were a considerable number amongst them that had not received her doctrine nor known the depths of Satan they called them depths i. e. deep and wonderful things but they were the depths of Satan Of Sardis Christ also witnesseth that there were some things remaining that he would have her strengthen i. e. some graces that were not quite extinct and dead in them and of some of them expresly that they had not defiled their garments and that they should walk with him in white for they were worthy which cannot be affimed of Hypocrites Rev. 2. 13 19 20 24 25. 3. 2 4. Therefore no Heretical nor Hypocritical Churches And I cannot but wonder at the confidence of this Animadverter to affirm it of them after the testimony Christ gives touching them it being little less than giving him the lie to his face So that of this Argument we shall 't is probable hear no more Of his fourth Argument we need say no more but this that the Ministry therein mentioned is the Ministry of the Apostles which he grants not at all to relate to our present Question If he can make good this Consequence the Apostles who were extraordinary Officers immediately sent forth by Jesus Christ were true Ministers afore the regular constitution and discipline of Churches without their election or mission Therefore Pastors and Teachers who are to be chosen by a Church regularly constituted are true Ministers though not so chosen he will be able to reinforce this Argument else he must never bring it into the field more His fifth Argument in brief is The denomination of true Ministers is from the truth of their Doctrine and no other form denominating them But there may be a Ministration of true Doctrine in a false Church Ergo Answ 1. The Major is most false the denomination of true Ministers is from somewhat else beside the truth of their Doctrine viz. A regular Mission according to the mind of Christ or an entrance in by the Door else they are not true Ministers but Thieves and Robbers What places they are before-mentioned that he saith placeth the truth of Ministry in the Doctrine taught and no other thing I cannot tell and do assure him that when he brings one place to prove it I will be his convert Col. 1. 6 7. saith no such thing Epaphras preacheth the Truth of God to the Colossians and is said to be for them a faithful Minister of Christ therefore the denomination of true Ministers is from the truth of their Doctrine and nothing else is one of those consequences are frequently imposed upon us without the least shadow of proof 2dly That 't is the duty of true Ministers and in some sense their property to preach and promote Truth is most certain Paul tells us 2 Cor. 13. 8. that they could do nothing against the Truth but for the Truth But that the denomination of true Ministers is from the truth of their Doctrine and no other form denominating them is I suppose asserted by our Animadverter in haste and will upon second thoughts be retracted
men signally pointed out by the Lord for the administration of holy things in his house by the Body of the Church be not now as then their peculiar priviledge What saith Mr. T. hereunto 1. The solemn deputation of Apostles and other Ministers we find not in the New Testament to have been the peculiar priviledge of the Church Answ 1. But our Question is not touching extraordinary Officers such as Apostles but of ordinary ones such as Pastors c. Yet 2dly a man need not go far to find such a deputation even of an Apostle to the work of the Lord by the Body of the Church together with the rest of the Apostles Acts 1. 14 15 16 23 24 26. being an evident proof hereof beyond exception He adds 2. Their Ordination is no where mentioned as done by the Saints or Brethren which were not Officers Answ 1. The Animadverter mistakes Ordination for Imposition of hands which is only one part of Ordination and comprehends the whole act of deputing or setting men apart to the work of the Ministry 2. That Assertion That the Church or Assembly of Believers are nowhere said to have an hand therein must be imputed to Mr. T. his forgetfulness Acts 6. 3. 14. 23. manifestly declare the contrary He grants that in the first ages there are relations of the election of their own Ministers by the Church but the management hereof with Tumults Frays Disorders necessitated an alteration and considering the present temper of the Saints how unquiet injudicious deceitful factious divided they are he thinks it not safe it be again committed to them Answ 1. The first Ages in that matter held fast to the Doctrine of the Gospel and the Priviledge which according to the Institution of Christ his Church and People were invested in 2. Many things are reported of the Saints in the first Ages notoriously false and untrue and it may be the story of their tumults frays c. in electing their own Pastors may be so Contentions I know there were early amongst them about this matter that there were tumults and frays may perhaps be coined by some ambitious spirits that they might the better take an occasion to divest the Saints of that sacred Priviledge 3. The former disorders or present distempers amongst Saints are no warrant for the variation or nullifying an Institution of Christ 4. What strange Saints it may be he means only the Parochians of his Mother the Church of England Mr. T. hath his lot cast amongst I cannot tell Blessed be the Lord there are thousands of Saints and many Churches in England this little point of the World directly of another temper and spirit being peaceable judicious upright serving the Lord with one consent according to the discovery he hath made to them And if any in any thing are of different perswasions praying the Lord to reveal that also unto them And Mr. T. doth not well thus to asperse and blacken the Generation of the Righteous The absurdities that Mr. T. supposeth will ensue upon the asserting the election of Ministers to be the priviledge of the Saints are not worth the mentioning I know not any Law that forbids Women to intermeddle herein whose priviledge reached farther than so 1. There are many Scriptures that seem to assert it as their right and liberty 1. In the choice of Officers they were unquestionably present Act. 1. 15. 6. 2 34. 14. 23. 16. 23. 2. At the deciding of Controversies Act. 15. 22. 21. 22. 1 Cor. 6. 2. 3. At the choice of Men to carry the Benevolence of the Church to the needy Brethren 2 Cor. 8. 19. 1 Cor. 16. 3. 4. At the casting-out of Offenders Mat. 18. 17. 1 Cor. 5. 4 5. 5. In their re-admission upon Repentance 2 Cor. 2. 6 to 10. They being part of the Church must necessarily be understood as concern'd in these matters wherein the whole Church are said to be concerned 2. 'T were easie to introduce above a Jury twice told of learned Writers who have written as much as this comes to As Beza Calvin Bucer Bullinger Melancthon Bucan Paraeus Junius Cyprian Trelcutias Sibrandus Rivetus Jerome Augustine Nazianzen Ambrose Chrysostom Theodoret Theophylact So the Magdeburgenses in 2 Cent. c. 7. de Consociatione Ecclesiarum who all assert that Church-affairs should be executed by the consent of the whole Church The Council of Carthage indeed decreed 4. can 99. That a Woman though never so holy and learned should not preach in publick nor baptize can 100. And Tertullian tells us that in his time it was forbid to a Woman to teach in the African Church and baptize but they deny them not liberty to vote consent or dissent in Church-matters Nor do the Scriptures mentioned by this Animadverter in the least advance themselves against what is asserted by us Not 1 Cor. 14. 34 35. 1. 'T is as much more against the practice allowed by his Mother the Church of England In that Church Women have liberty not only to say Amen to say Prayers after the Priest with a loud voice but with the Men to act their parts in Worship the Priest saying one part and they another They have at least they had not long since liberty in case of necessity to baptize which is greater than the Sisters priviledge we plead for Sure this is speaking in the Church But this is clavem clave pellere 2. That Women might be chosen Church-officers is evident from 1 Tim. 5. 9. Phaebe was a Deaconess Rom. 16. 1. Touching the management of their office they ought especially if called upon by them so to do to give an account to the Congregation How they could do this without speaking in the Church I am not able to understand Therefore 3. The sense of the Apostle is that they be not admitted to publick preaching or prophesying ordinarily by vertue of office-Office-power That they do not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 command as the word sometimes signifies or speak so as to usurp authority over the man as the Apostle explains it 1 Tim. 2. 12. But I suffer not a Woman to teach or usurp authority over the Man The latter expression is exegetical of the former i. e. not so to teach as to usurp authority over the man Yea I had ever till now thought that speaking so as to testifie ones consent or dissent to inform the Church of what they knew not of concern to them and the Apostles 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 1 Tim. 2. 12. had been vastly different And indeed see no reason to change my thoughts from any thing this Animadverter offers that these Scriptures make nothing for his purpose As for the second absurdity that Mr. T. supposes would follow upon the asserting the Saints Priviledge in the election of their own Ministers viz. That whom the major part choose the lesser part are not to take for their Minister scarcely deserves to be taken notice of 1. The difference supposed seldom happens
amongst the Congregated Churches if but once 't is too often Though Mr. T. his expression intimates as if a frequent case which I cannot but tell him is a meer calumny 'T will not one day be for his credit however it may at present serve his design that he walks so much by that rule Calumniare fortiter aliquid adhaerebit 2. When it happens the exercise of those Rules of Condescention Love and mutual forbearance enjoyned by Christ upon his Disciples would soon put an end to the differences suggested But 3. If this will not do the calling-in the help of some Sister-Church may quench the flames Yet 4. If nothing will do but through the prevalency of corruption Schisms remain amongst them and separation at the last each from other ensue to prevent this we must not lay aside an Institution of Christ 5. Besides the imposing a Minister upon a People by a Patron with a Bishops Institution and Induction hath more frequently and I am sure more justly and warrantably been the occasion of the offence and difference intimated Sect. 21. Of a visible instituted Church and its security from Apostasie What Errors and Corruptions unchurch a Church Of the National Church of England Of the Governours and Officers of a collapsed Church The condition of England's Church-Officers Of Separation from a collapsed Church Of Communion with a Church not rightly constituted and compulsion thereunto IN Sect. 23. Mr. T. transcribes the 7th Query in S. T. Whether any visible instituted Church in the world hath greater security against Apostasie from God and that sore judgment of having its Candlestick removed and being unchurched than that people of the Jews had If not then whether supposing a National Church to be of the Institution of Christ it may not so come to pass that it may be so overspread with corruptions â—hat it may lose the essence of a Church and justly be disrobed of that appellation To which he answers in the Affirmative and tells us that they justly plead it against the Church of Rome and that the promise Mat. 16. 8. doth not belong to any particular instituted Church in the World but to the invisible Church of Gods Elect. And we are of the same mind with him in this matter But lest any reflection of disparagement should from this Concession happen to the Church of England as a very dutiful Son he adds That not every no nor many corruptions of some kind do unchurch but such Errors as overthrow the foundation of Christian Faith Corruptions of Worship by Idolatry in life by evil manners utterly inconsistant with Christianity Answ 1. Nor did we ever assert that every or many corruptions of some kind did unchurch So that in this matter Mr. T. might have saved his pains Nor 2dly had we the least occasion to do so with respect to the Church of England which we deny to be a true Church not because dreadfully degenerate from what at first it was but because in its first Constitution as National which it received under the Paâ—acy it was never a true Church of Christ Though 3dly such fundamental Errors such corruptions in Worship and evil manners are to be found upon it that are inconsistant with the power of Godliness or Christianity and therefore such as by Mr. T. his Concession were enough to unchurch it To the eighth Query in S. T. viz. Whether the Ecclesiastick and Spiritual Rulers Governours and Officers of such a collapsed Church may not righteously as of old be accounted and esteemed as false Prophets that go about to cause the people to forget the Name of the Lord or his pure Worship by their lies or unscriptural Traditions Innovations and ceremonious Pageantries Mr. T. pretends to answer Sect. 24. which he fronts with this Every Error makes not a false Prophet which no one saith it doth And further by way of reply having placed in the Van 2 Pet. 2. 1. Jude 4. 1 John 4. 1. 2 John 7. 1 John 2. 22. which speak of false Prophets and Antichrist but advantage him not in the least in his present undertaking as we have manifested He adds that so long as they teach the Worship of Christ in his Name are without Idolatry in their Worship and Heresie in their Doctrine they are not to be accounted false Prophets Answ But this as to the present Ministers of England will not be granted They practise not the Worship of Christ but of Antichrist as we prove ch 7. of S. T. They come not really in Christ's Name though they pretend to it but in the name by the authority of the most profest enemy he hath in the world as we evince ch 3. of S. T. Though the Doctrine of the Church of Engl. be the most sincere part the greatest care of our Reformers at first being thereabout yet they own and preach false Doctrine the most of them are greatly degenerated from the Doctrine of the Church of England in not a few points as touching Election Free-will the extent of the Death of Christ c. as might be evidenced from their Sermons and printed Papers Of this we have spoken chap. 10. of S. T. The addition of this Animadverter of In Te ipsum cudetur faba as if guilty of the same things or such like as we charge upon the Ministers of the Church of England I challenge him to make good else he doth but calumniate His 25th Section is an Answer to the 9th Query in S. T. about separation from a Church so dreadfully collapsed as to lose the essence of a Church The sum is 1. Separation by reason of some corruptions is unwarrantable Answ And we say so too but this is not ad Rhombum we are speaking not of corruptions of any kind but of such as destroy the essence of a Church as is evident from the 7th Query in S. T. upon which this hath a dependance He adds 2dly Separation from a Church somewhat erroneous in judgment and corrupt in worship and conversation that is not Idolatrous nor heretical nor requires that to their Communion which would be sinful especially if from all attending on Ministers and Ministry at all times is unjustifiable Answ 1. All this might be granted without the least disadvantage to the Cause we are pleading 2dly By his own Sword is the Cause he undertakes the defence of wounded under the fifth rib We prove the Church of England Idolatrous Heretical She requires that to her Communion that is sinfull viz. Conformity to the Mass-book I should have said the Liturgie from thence stolen bowing at the Name of Jesus communicating with a Drunken Parish-Priest and a company of Swearing Drunken Parishioners whereby persons become one Bread with them kneeling at the act of receiving having their Children signed with the sign of the Cross which we are apt to think are things sinful and till Mr. T. is pleased better to inform us are like to abide in our present apprehension thereabout from
invested with authority derived to them from Christ to elect ordain officers to and for the Churches of Christ without their knowledge and consent he will be supposed to speak pertinently which in this matter hitherto he hath not done Let us consider if there be ought more to the purpose in what follows To Acts. 6. 5. he replies 1. That was but one act Answ 1. Who saith it was many Consonant to this one act was the practice of the primitive Church for many years after some prints whereof in the election of the Overseers of the Poor do yet remain amongst us He adds 2. They were not such a particular Church as made up one Congregation that could meet together for all Offices Answ This vanity we have already refelled Sect. of our Reply to Mr. T. his Exceptions against the Preface of S. T. He proceeds and tells us 3dly They did not choose the Deacons upon any conceived power delegated from Christ by vertue of any rulâ— that was to be perpetual in all ages to all Churches Answ 1. This is a meer conjecture of his own without the least tender of proof 2dly 'T is the ready way to banish all the instituted Worship of Christ out of the world 'T is but saying 't is true this or that was done but without any Rule that was to be perpetually binding and the work is effected 3dly 'T is injuriouâ— to the Apostles and the primitive Believers to imagine and indeed ridiculous that they should devise an Office in the Church without authority derived to them from Christ and that so necessary an Office as the experience of above sixteen hundred years manifests the Church of God could not have been without which was not only continued in the Churches afterwards Phil. 1. 1. but Rules laid down for their future election and choice 1 Tim. 3. 8 to 13. with a solemn injunction to Timothy and in him to succeeding Believers to keep that Commandment amongst others without spot unrebukeable until the appearing of our Lord Jesus Christ chap. 6. 14. So that these are but shifts our reverend Dictator scarce knows what to answer it seems to the Evidence introduced I shall only add Malè res agitur cum tot opus est remediis it is a bad sore that must be wrapped in â—â— many clouts Yet he hath not done He adds 4thly This can be no rulâ— for chusing other Officers there was a peculiar reason why they should choose Deacons whose honesty was to be discern'd and not other Officers whose sufficiency to teach was to be considered of which thâ— multitude of Church-members then and now are rarely competent Judges Answ 1. But we had thought honesty had been as necessary a qualification of a Pastor or Teacher as of a Deacon 2dly The Apostles mention it as the Churches priviledge without the least intimation of any peculiar reason thereof Act. 6. 3. 3dly There is the same reason for the election of one Officer in the Church as another those with whom power is entrusted for the choice of one it is for the choice of all the rest 4thly That the Saints then and now are not competent Judges of the abilities and Orthodoxie of other Officers this Animadverter is desired to prove 1. 'T is derogatory to the Spirit of Christ that indwells in Believers 2. Contrary to the express Testimony of the Spirit of God touching them 3. A meer Petitio principii The question is whether they did elect and choose them the Answer is they were not fit to do so but their fitness is presupposed in that they had liberty or power to do it To the other Scripture Acts 14. 23. he replyes 1. By way of seeming concession The word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is rendred by Beza They created by Suffrages i. e. when the people by lifting up their hands had testified their consent in the election of them they set them apart to that work An allusion to the custom of the Greeks in the election of their Officers by Suffrages and Votes signified by the stretching out of the hand which was unquestionably the practice of the Church for the first three hundred years Cyprian who lived an 240 often intimates as much Take one instance in the stead of many Propter quod diligenter de traditione divinâ Apostolica observatione observandum est tenendum quod apud nos quoque fere per provincias universas tenetur ut ad ordinationes rite celebrandas ad eam plebem cui Praepositus ordinatur Episcopi ejusdem Provinciae proximi quique conveniant Episcopus delegatur PLEBE PRAESENTE quae singulorum vitam plenessime novit unuscujusque actum de ejus conversatione perspexit Quod apud vos factum videmus in Sabinae collegae nostri ordinatione ut de VNIVERSAE FRATERNITATIS SUFFRAGIO de Episcoporum qui in praesentia convenerant quique de eo ad vos literas fecerant judicio Episcopatus ei deferretur Epist. â—8 2dly By way of Exception he tells us 1. This is but one example not sufficient to infer a perpetual Rule Answ 1. 'T is intended but for one example 2dly We find the thing practised afterwards Elders are ordained Tit. 1. 5. 1 Tim. 5. 22. That they should so suddenly vary from the practice of the Apostles here no intimation thereof being given but rather the contrary 2 Tim. 1. 14. 3. 10. Tit. 1. 5. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that thou mayest set streight or according to the liâ—e or rule that thou hast learned of us the things that are wanting and ordain viz. according to that rule Elders in every City is not probable That they did not do so for some hundreds of years after Mr. T. grants and we have proved Which is a sufficient Answer to his Exception about constituting Elders without the mention of any such election of the People Tit. 1. 5. 3dly In the election of other Officers as an Apostle we find the people concerned 1. Out of an hundred and twenty persons they chose and presented two v. 23. out of which two one being câ—osen by lot 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 he was counted amongst the Apostles by the common Suffrages of them all v 26. And this very Scripture amongst others is used by Cyprian to confirm the power of the people in châ—sing or refusing their Ministers Epist 4. l. 1. Deacons as was said was so chosen Act. 6. 3 5 6. Put all together and you have as full an evidence of the truth of the Assertion as can be desired But our Animadverter 2dly acquaints us from Dr. Field c. that the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is applyed to other creating then by Suffrages as Acts 10. 41. Answ 'T is granted it sometimes is so applyed but the proper and most usual signification of the word is to elect by Suffrages as Mr. T. knows That because it 's once or twice it may be used in a metaphorical sense
they have not This belongs to Patrons Lord-Bishops c. 2. The power of admission of Members and ejection of the Scandalous by excommunication they have not The first a man hath by buying or renting a piece of Land in the Parish and dwelling there the other is managed in the Bishops Courts by a sorry thing call'd a Chancellor it may be as deboist as the worst that is brought before him Now that with respect to these things Christ hath entrusted his Church with power we evince chap. 2 4. of S. T. 4ly That company of men that are not capable of performing those duties and cannot answer that end that Christ requires of his Churches for which he instituted them are not a true Church of Christ But the Parish-Assemblies of England are not capable of performing those duties Therefore 'T is the Minor needs proof The duties Christ requires to be performed by them the end he aimed at in instituting his Churches was 1. To set forth his honour and praise Eph. 3. 21. 1 Pet. 2. 9. 2. To promote the true Light and Knowledge of God Ephes 1. 8. 1 John 1. 6 7. 3. The mutual edification of one another in the things of God 1 Thess 5. 11. Eph. 4. 29. 1 Cor. 14. 26. Jude 20. I appeal to any unbyassed man in the world whether he thinks in his conscience that the Parish-Assemblies of England can perform these duties answer this end The contrary is most evident and too notoriously known to be true than to admit of a denial But I shall not enlarge on what is already so judiciously asserted and argued by others which Mr. T. is not able to evert The Ordination of Lord-Bishops of which he next speaks is forreign from Scripture if the Office it selâ— be This we prove chap. 3. of S. T. and Mr. T. once swore to extiâ—pate it as such and I am sorry to find him now pleading for it Whether I have abused John 10. 1 9. neither Mr. T. nor I must now be judge the judicious Reader will judge for us both and I doubt not according to truth Sect. 4. The Ministers of Engl. not to be heard as gifted-Brothren Judas not particularly declared by Christ Joh. 6. 70. to be a Devil The Animadverter abuseth the Author of the S. T. in affirming he â—ies up Saintship to particular Churches whom the Scripture makes Brethren Mr. T. reduceth the Brotherhood to a smaller scantling than we We cannot perform the duties of Brethren to the Ministers of Engl. and why If we own the best of them for Brethren we must own the worst Of Judas his receiving the Sacrament The mixt multitude making acclamation to Christ of joyning with other in Worship We separate no more from the Church of England than they do from us 1 Cor. 5. 1â— 'T is not lawful to break Bread with the visibly prophane proved Iâ— what sense the Bishops are styled Reverend Fathers They are not to be owned as such The Ministers of Engl. disorderly walkers proved They engage against Scripture-Reformation 2 Thes 3. 6. explained Of Obedience to Ministers Rom. 13. 1. Heb. 13. 7. opened We ought not to hear those from whom 't is our duty to withdraw Mr. T. his Aâ—guments to the contrary answered IN Sect. 4. our Animadverter replies to the proofs produced in S. T. for the confirmation of the second part of our Minor Proposition viz. That 't is not lawful to hear them as gifted-Brethren because 1. The most of them are not gifted nor 2. Brethren being Canonical Drunkards Swearers c. To this he saith 1. That any of them are such is to be bewayled in a Christian way the persons guilty are to be rebuked Lev. 19. 17. not to be thus charged in print in a Book vented in the dark tending to make them odious Answ 1. When he shall be pleased to manifest the Rule of Christ I have trangressed in thus charging them I shall as publickly acknowledge my error Those that sin rebuke before all 1 Tim. 5. 20. is some part of what I have to plead for my so doing 2. If the Book were vented in the dark I may thank them for it who would have such things stifled that their works may not be made manifest 3. I make them not odious they have made themselves so throughout the Nation 4. Mr. T. his hoping this is not true proves nothing the contrary is manifest to thousands He adds 2dly Were all this and more true yet they might be heard preach the Gospel as Brethren gifted Answ But knows he what he saith We affirm that they are not gifted nor Brethren that this should be true and more too and yet they might be heard as gifted Brethren is such a Paradox to me that comes but a little short if a little of down-right nonsense i. e. there are some may be heard as Brethren gifted that are neither gifted nor Brethren That Judas was declared by Christ to be a Devil John 6. 70. as he suggests is false He saith one of them was so but names him not 'T is true John tells us ver 71. that he spake of Judas but this neither he nor any of the rest knew till afterwards We add in S. T. 3dly The best of them cannot by Saints in respect of Gospel-communion be accounted Brethren For 1. There was never any giving up our selves each to other whence such a Brotherhood doth result To this Mr. T. answers 1. By Saints he means such as are members of a particular instituted Congregational Church distinct from the Presbyterian for such only are accounted Saints by him as give up themselves each to other c. Answ False and untrue I am amazed to see with what conscience this matter is managed by him no regard seems to be had to truth and honesty so he can cast dirt upon his Antagonist 2. 'T is contrary to my avowed principle and practice 3. I do verily believe that there are many Saints in England that are neither for the Presbyterian Parochial or Congregational way yea with Dr. Ames Trip. p. 523. afterwards cited by him I doubt not to say according to my conscience that amongst those which live under the tyranny of the Popâ—s and do not utterly separate from him through ignorance there be many Christians belonging to the true Catholick Church and so to be accounted our godly Brethren viz. upon the account of their Catholicism and so I believe there are in the Church of England somâ— amongst the Ministers thereof of whom I say still I deny not but they may be good men But yet we say 4. That upon the account of Gospel-Communion they cannot be accounted by us as Brethren because they are as Mr. T. saith rightly no members of a Christian Church i. e. any particular instituted Church of Christ That which is added by him makes much against him 1. 'T is false That the Scriptures make all who hold the same Faith and are Baptized into Christ
to be Brethren and Members of all the Churches in the world Gal. 3. 26 1 Cor. 10. 16. and 12. 12 Eph. 4. 4. They make them to be Brethren only of those particular Churches to whom those Epistles are directed as the serious reading them will evince 2. Were what he saith true He would reduce the brotherhood to a narroer compass than we either do or dare For if his notion be true only those that are baptized into Christ can be so accounted but Mr. T. thinks that only such as are baptized at years of discretion are thus baptized into Christ Therefore only such are Brethren and then I am sure the Ministers of England are not to be so accounted Thus frequently doth he wound to the heart the cause he undertakes the management of with his own sword We add in S. T. Secondly We cannot as things stand perform the duties of Brethren to them according to Mat. 18. nor will they or can they in the state in which they stand to us What Mr. T. hath answered to Maâ— 18. in his answer to the Preface Sect. 15. we have refuted in the Vindication thereof Sect. and have evinced a Congregational Church is there meant 'T is no Argument of hatred as Mr. T. according to his wonted candor suggests that we cannot perform the duties of Brethren to them 1. They are a Church of such a Latitude that 't is almost impossible we should do so 2. We are in no Church-state together 3. Should we reprove them we could do no more therefore we cannot perform the duties of Brethren required by that Scripture which indoctrinates us in case of non-repentance to bring it before the Church we know no Churth to whom we may complain The Parochial Assemblies have no power to deal with them The Bishops Court is no Church of Christ yet thither must we appeal if any where and we have little encouragement to do so it consisting of persons altogether â—â— vicious and deboyst as those we are to complain of We say further in S. T. Thirdly If we acknowledge the best of them for Brethren we must acknowledge the worst of them For 1. They are all members of the the same Church 2. They profess themselves to be one Brotherhood To which Mr. T. pretends a Reply in a Rhapsodie of words little or not at all to purpose He tells us 1st Of a twofold Communion Private or Publick and that the worst of the present Ministers are to be accounted as Brethren in respect of private Gospel-Communion i. e. we are to restore them as Brethren open our hearts to them according to Gal. 6. 1. Mal. 3. 16. Jam. 5. 16. I industriously omit his Scoffe of Pharisaically minded reputed Saints which he must shortly account for to him who will reckon with men for their hard and reproachful words to his Children And to what may be thought of any moment in this his Answer we Reply Answ 1. His distinction of Private and Publick Gospel-Communion is impertinent as is his discourse of the lawfulness of holding private Gospel-Communion with them 'T is of Communion with them in preaching c. that we are treating which he accounts Publick Communion 2. Not one of the Scriptures produced but condemn what he would have them justifie The Brethren Paul speaks of Gal. 6. 1. were Members of a particular instituted Church Gal. 1. 2. Such as had received the Spirit Chap. 3. 2. The Sons of God by Faith Vers 26. Baptized into Christ putting him on Vers 27. Sons into whose hearts God had sent forth the Spirit of his Son crying Abba Father Chap. 4. 6. Heirs of God through Christ Vers 7. Such as knew God were known of him Vers 9 c. Mal. 3. 16. Speakes expresly concern-such as feared the Lord in opposition to the proud and them that work wickedness such as those mentioned Jam. 5. 16. which Mr. T. knows in his conscience cannot be affirmed of the worst of the present Ministers Certainly the forementioned Characters fit not the drunkards swearers adulterers that are known to be of that Tribe Nor 3. Am I able to make any tollerable sence of what follows that concerning this it follows not if we acknowledge the best of them as Brethren we must also acknowledge the worst of them he having asserted and introduced the Scriptures but now requoted to prove it that concerning this The worst of the present Ministers are to be accounted as Brethren 2dly As touching publick Gospel-Communion he tells us It consists in hearing them praying with them receiving the Lords Supper c. Answ Very well How proves he that with respect hereunto we mâ—y own them as Brethren Why 1. Judas might be heard as an Apostle was perhaps a Communicant at the Lords Supper It 's therefore lawful to hear and joyâ— in the Lords Supper with the worst of the present Ministers Answ 1. Of the case of Judas that is repeated usque ad naâ—sâ—am we shall have occasion to speak hereafter At present we shall only say 2. He was an Apostle sent forth by Jesus Christ which the present Ministers of England are not 3. He was a visible Saint carried it so well that but immediately before his betraying his Lord the Disciples seemed rather to suspect themselves than him which cannot be affirmed of visible Drunkards 4. That he received the Communion is uncertain If he did they were in a Church-state he was a visible Saint no actual crime or evil could be laid to his charge so that this instance makes not aâ— all for Communion with the worst or best of the Ministers of England who are not in a Gospel Church state c. He further tells 3dly A mixt multitude made acclamation to Christ yet our Lord justified their joyning together in their praying and praising God Mat. 21. 16. Luke 19. 39. Answ 1. This was but one act 2. Out of a Church-state 3. From an extraordinary impulse of Spirit 4. They joyned with the Disciples were not the mouth of the Disciples to God and therefore reacheth not at all our present Casâ— 5. Mr. T. Can never prove this Consequence valid The Disciples sing Hosanna to Christ and others a mixt multitude by an extraordinary impulse of Spirit sing so to Ergo It 's our duty to joyn with the present Ministers as Brethren in praying preaching receiving the Sacrament c. which yet he must make good or confess he hath hitherto proved nothing He adds 4thly 'T is no sin to joyn in the true Worship of God wâ—th any if we have no command to withdraw from that Service because of their presence nor power to exclude them and yet bound to the duties then performed Believers might prophesie and hear it though unbelievers came in 1 Cor. 14. 24. Answ 1. This Animadverter takes for granted what we deny First That the true Worship of God is performed in the Parish Assemblies All praying and preaching is not the true Worship of God The offering
with respect to the way of entry into it is Antichristian a Ministry of Christ is to me such a riddle as needs an Oedipus to unravel I am sure the distinction is unscriptural We reade therein but of two Churches 1. The Woman cloathed with the Sun afterwards in the Wilderness the Bride the Lambs Wife with her Ministry Ordinances Worship though in a mean persecuted state called the Ministers of Christ Men of God Stewards of the Mystery of God Angels Pastors c. 2. The false Antichristian Church called Babylon the Whore the Mother of Harlots the Woman in pompous array outward splendour and glory drunk with the blood of the Saints Rev. 17. 2 3 4. her Worship called the Wine of her Fornication Abominations of the Earth her Ministry called False-Prophets Locusts as some think Rev. 9. 3. unclean spirits like Frogs Rev. 16. 13. And to one of these every called Christian Minister in the world must appertain if to the first they are of Christ if to the second of Antichrist 3dly That a Ministry of Priests ordained by Antichrist himself is not a Ministry of his Apostasie but a Ministry of Christ had need be attended with more evidence than a bare assertion it being so evidently false and untrue How there should be any Antichristian Ministry in the world if that were true I know not 4ly The Ministry of Luther was the Ministry of Christ but he received not his Ministry from Rome but his Friardom Mr. T. adds of his own If by being from Christ or Antichrist be understood of outward calling Ministers may be neither from Christ nor Antichrist and yet true Ministers he should have said of Christ as those that preached Christ even of envy Phil. 1. 15 18. Answ 1. That a man should be a Minister of Christ and not from Christ or externally called according to his appointment i. e. a Minister of Christ and not a Minister of Christ is somewhat a strange Assertion 2dly How doth he prove that those mentioned Phil. 1. preached Christ by vertue of an Office-power as Ministers and not as gifted Brethren 3dly If Ministers how proves he that they were not from Christ in respect of outward calling This he should have proved if he would have made good his Assertion his failure wherein exposes it to the contempt of the judicious Reader But our Animadverter delights in dictates without proof His next advance is to the consideration of the evidence we bring to prove the present Ministers not to be from Christ 1. Their names are foraign to the Scripture where read we of Priests as distinguished from Christians in the new Testament Deans Canons Petty-Canons these are only found in the Popes Pontifical whence they are derived To this he answers 1. That the term Priests is the same with Presbyters and that is sure found in Scripture Acts. 11. 30. Answ 1. Thus indeed Hooker Eccles Pol. l. 5. and before him Whitgift Answer to the Admonit say but in vain For 1. The words are never used to signifie the same thing but divers 2. The first Assumers of the title under the times of the Gospel never intended to signifie any such thing thereby They assumed it not meerly to distingush themselves from the people but as a note of distance amongst themselves 2dly The other names saith M. T. note not any Ministry different from the Ministry of Christ Answ 1. I stand astonished to hear Mr. T. say so if they do not those who bear those names are the Ministry of Christ 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Is this the draught of that hand which was solemnly lift up to Heaven when he swore to extirpate them as none of Christ's Ministry 2dly Where read we of any such Officers of Christ in the Scripture who are not so called as Lecturers with respect to the manner of their doing the work of the Ministry but with respect to some place in the Church higher or lower then the residue of the Clergy 3dly The Author of the S. T. argues not the names are forraign to Scripture therefore the things as this Animadverter falsly pretends he asserts as fast as he can that both name and thing is so 4thly 'T is a shrewd sign that those Ministers came out of the Mint of Antichrist who bear the names wherewith he stamps his Ministers We add 2dly As their names are forraign to the Scripture so are their Offices Deacons attending tables we read of But Deacons praying preaching administring Sacraments by vertue of an Office-power an order of the first step to the Priesthood we find not Priests in the old Testament we read of in the New Saints are so called but an Office of Priesthood in men for the Ministry of the Gospel that are to be bounded by men in that their Office must preach what they would have them and cease when they would have them as in the case of the present Ministry of England the Scripture is a stranger to To which Mr. T. adjoyns 1. If they be appointed to pray preach and administer Sacraments they have this to say that Pâ—â—â—ip did so Acts. 8. Answ 1. The Church at Jerusalem to which he was related as a Deacon was first scatter'd 2. It appears not that he preached by vertue of an office-Office-power as a Deacon or in any other capacity then as a gifted Brother 3. 'T is most certain it was no part of his work as Deacon Acts. 6. 2. the attending on the Ministry of the Word is peculiarly distinguished from the attending Tables 4. His baptizing seems to be by the extraordinary and immediate call and impulse of the Spirit none of which can be asserted of these Deacons He adds 2dly The Deacons Office may be well conceived the first step to the Priesthood in that Paul requires of the Deacons that they hold the Ministry of Faith in a pure Conscience and tells us that they who have used the Office of a Deacon well purchase to themselves a good degree 1 Tim. 3. 9 13. Answ 'T is true Paul saith so but that thence this Animadverter should be able to inferre therefore the Deacons Office may be well accounted the first step to the Priesthood must be imputed to that acuteness of his whereby he is enabled to deduce quidlibet ex quolibet what conclusion he hath a mind from any premisses There being not a tittle more or less spoken by Paul of any such thing nor thought of in those dayes As for the name Priest he saith if the Saints as Saints may be termed Priests then may the Elders Answ 'T is true the Elders as Saints may be so called but not as Elders or in respect of their Office of drawing nigh to God nor doth the expression used by Paul Rom. 15. 16. prove any such thing Mr. T. proceeds As for that which is added that the present Ministry of England is bounded by men in their Office so as that they must preach what they would have them and cease when they
ever he met with hath judged them Antichristian must be imputed to the shortness of his memory He haâ—h I suppose met with Zuinglius Keckerman who say little less The former Art 34. p. 254 255 tells us That for any to claim any Rule Power or Superiority over any Church of Christ which we know out Bishops do is Devilish Proud and Popish Arrogancy And Aretius in his Problems producing Christ's prohibition of Superiour power to his Apostles Mar. 10. 5. Luke 22. 25. saith None but Antichrist dare be so fancy as to usurp it Marlorat on Rev. 17. 3. saith That Arch-Bishops are in Office under Antichrist And on Chap. 19. The tailes of Antichrist Bale on Rev. 17 saith That Canterbury and York are the Beastly Antichrists Metropolitans And on Chap. 13. That Arch-Bishop Diocesan are very Names of Blasphemy Of these we spake pag. 28. S. T. who I dare say were sober Writers and considerate men Mr. T. his answer to their Testimony viz. That they writ thus against the Romish Hierarchy is ridiculous they writ against the Offices of Arch-Bishops as such which are not a whit the better because they constitute the English Hierarchy We mention Cartwright the seekers of Reformation in Queen Elizabeths dayes proclaiming them to come out of the bottomless Pit of Hell to be Antichristian Devilish These also must pass in the Roll of inconsiderate fellows yet others as wise as Mr. T. think otherwise of them For the proof of the Antichristianism of the Office of Lord-Bishops I propose a few things briefly in the S. T. as 1st That Office that is not to be found in the Scripture of the Institution of Christ but is contrary to express Precepts of his is Antichristian But the Office of Lord-Bishops is not to be found in the Scriptures is contrary to express Precepts Therefore The Major Mr. T. is nibling at but he doth but think he tells us if Universal it is not true The Office of the Religious Votaries he talks of is Antichristian If there be any Antichristian Office in the World that must needs be so that is introduced into the Church of Christ though not of his Institution directly contrary to express Precepts That this Assertion should necessitate any one to affirm every sin to be Antichristian though in a large sence as Antichristian signifies that which is against Christ every sin every errour is so is absurd to imagine The Minor I say consists of two parts 1. That the Office of Lord Bishops is not to be found in Scripture of the Institution of Christ This I manifest by considering the most remarkable places where the Officers and Offices that are of Christs appointment are enumerated in which we have a total silence of them Ephes 4. 11. Rom. 12. 7 8. 1 Tim. 3. 12. Acts 14. 23. Tit. 1. 5 7. Acts 20. 28. I add also that they were never dreamt of in the world for some hundreds of years after Christ We introduce the Testimony of Clemens Lombard Dr. Hamonds acknowledgment of their Rise To which Mr. T. answers The whole Discourse is impertinent the thing to be proved was that the Office of Lord-Bishops was not to be found in the Scriptures and the whole Discourse is about the Superiority of Order above Presbyters Primacy or Supremacy of Degrees among Bishops Answ 1. We have examined the particular places wherein mention is made of the Officers of Christs Institution and find no Lord-Bishops instituted in any of them which manifests that they are not If this be not taken for proof I know not what will If this be not to the purpose I am in dispair of producing any thing that he will account so 2dly The Office of Lord-Bishops as such consists in the Primacy Superiority and Supremacy mentioned as is known If Mr. T. grants this not to be found of the Institution of Christ in the Scripture he gives away the Cause 3dly They themselves do own and avow a great part of their Office to consist in the foresaid Primacy Jurisdiction And if this be not it I am sure some of them are seldom or never minding their Office these things are what is most attended by them Of whom we may complain as Bernard of old Vides omnem Ecclesiasticum Zelum forvere prâ— sola dignitate tuenda honori tantum datur sanctitati nihil aut parum Si causâ requirente paulo submissius agere aut socialius to habere tentaveris absit inquiunt non decet tempori non congruit majestati non convenit quam geras personam attendito De placito Dei ultima mentio est pro jactura salutis nulla cunctatio quod sublime est hoc salutare putamus quod gloriam redolet id justum De Considerat Lib. 4. His following Exceptions are not worth the heeding I mention Diotrephes in S. T. and say That some appearances of a Spirit striving to ascend into this Chair of wickedness was seen in him and others in the Apostles dayes To this Mr. T. But this was not the usurping the Superiority of Order of a Bishop above a Presbyter Answ Nor do I say it was I expresly affirm the contrary whâ—n I say that such a Superiority was not in the world for some hundred of years after Christ we only say that some appearances of that Spirit was seen in him which the Apostle affirms John Epist 3. Vers 9. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 He loveth the preheminence among them attempts the Primacy so Beza Which if it be not an appearance of the Spirit mentioned I know not what is he endeavoured to rule all himself carried it proudly pragmatically arrogantly over the Church the Brethren John himself who was an Elder saith Mr. T. He that cannot see somewhat of our Episcopal Spirit in this is I fear willfully blind I am fure he must wink hard He takes notice that in reciting Ephes 4. 11. I twice leave out Evangelists which he knows not the reason of Answ Nor do I my self possibly it was an oversight it may be an omission of the Amanuensis However it was it was not I assure him any fear I had that he or any one could justly plead that our Prelates were Evangelists 1. I know that Title is declined by Pleaders for Episcopal Jurisdiction 2. Our Bishops do not the works of Evangelists They had no setled residence but travelled up and down with or after the Apostles to help forward the work of Christ that was set on foot in the world by them We find Titus who was an Evangelist somtimes at Crete Gal. 2. 3. At Dalmatia 2 Tim. 4. 10. appointed to meet Paul at Nicopolis Tit. 3. 12. Sent to Corinth 2 Cor. 12. 18. At Macedonia 2 Cor. 7. 5 6. Such an itinerant laborious life that our Bishops are unacquainted with 3. Evangelists were such extraordinary Officers as ceased with that Age for we find no directions given touching their future Election in in the Churches Mr. T. tells us Our Prelates
1. 1 5. 2 Cor. 8. 5. John 15. 19 and 17. 6. 1 Cor. 5. 12. Acts 2. 40. 2 Cor. 6. 17. Acts 19. 9. Rev. 18. 4. considered Of the acception of the word World Characters of persons that are not of the World A third Institution of Christ remarked Of the power Christ hath intrusted his Church with Acts 1. 23. 1 Cor. 5. 5. explained Of the Officers of Christ's appointment Their Election by the Church Of the Liberty of Prophesying Nothing must be offered up to God in Worshiâ— but what is of his own prescription The present Ministers of England refuse to subject to these Ordinances of Christ An Objection answered Mr. T. his Exceptions considered and removed out of the way 2dly THat the present Ministers of England do not hearken and conform to the Revelation Christ hath made touching the Orders and Ordinances of his House we prove in S. T. by the induction of seven particulars To this Mr. T. replies in Sect. 3. Chap. 4. 1st In the stead of Argument he proves all with Interrogations Answ False and untrue I wonder at the conscience and confidence of the man in asserting it He knows I prove it by the induction of the most remarkable Orders of the House of Christ which they hearken not to 2dly He askes Which of the Ordinances of Christ have they made void Answ They were under his view whilest he wrote these words so that his question is frivolous I enumerate seven of the Orders and Institutions of Christ they have so dealt with He adds 3dly He should have reckoned up seven times seven Answ 1. And why so If guilty of a rejection of these which are the principal they oppose his Kingly and Prophetical Office though they embrace some others that are of his appointment The Romanists do so yet this Animadverter grants they are guilty of the crime instanced in 2. Mr. T. cannot reckon up seven times seven Institutions of Christ that are of the peculiar Institutions of his House to be performed by Saints embodied and united together in the fellowship of the Gospel nor many more than these seven mentioned by us He instanceth in hearing the Word praying to the Father in the Name of Christ which he tells us they have not made void by their Traditions Answ 1. The first of these is in a great measure if not totally made void by them 1. They oppose and deny the management of this duty in the way of Christ's appointment whilest they debar Christians from electing their own Officers or attending upon the Ministry of such as are according to the mind of Christ elected by them 2. The Preaching of the Word must give way to their Service-Book-Worship or Forms of humane devising which I am much mistaken if it be not in a great measure a making void of that Institution of Christ he speaks of by their Traditions 2. I wish the same may not be said with respect to the most of them at least of praying to the Father in the Name of Christ which none can do but by the Spirit whom they despise reproach set up their stinted Formâ— in opposition to him and his breathings The first of the Orders of Christ's House instanced in is That all Power for the Calling Institution Order and Government of his Church is invested solely in him as the alone Lord Soveraign Ruler and Head thereof Mat. 28. 19. 1 Tim. 6. 14 15. John 3. 35. Acts 3. 22. and 5. 31. Hence Christ chargeth his Disciples not to be called of men Rabbi nor to call any Father viz. not to impose their authority upon any or suffer themselves to be imposed upon by any in the matters of their God Mat. 23. 8 9 10 because one is their Master and Lord viz. Christ. Hence also the Apostles lay the weight of their exhortations upon the Commandment of Christ 1 Cor. 11. 23. and 14. 37. proclaim all to be accursed that preach any other Gospel Gal. 1. 8. Charge Chrâ—stians not to receive such as bring any other Doctrine 2 John 10. The Spirit terribly threatens such as shall add to the Revelation of God Rev. 22. 18. This Institution we say they conform hot really unto they own other Lords Heads and Governours that have a Law-making Power over his Churches beside him To this Mr. T. 1. That all power for the Calling Institution Order and Government of his Church is invested solely in Christ as the alone Lord Soveraign Ruler and Head thereof he grants as a Truth Though 2dly He assents not to our Paraphrase on Mat. 23. 8. As if Christ did forbid the Apostles to impose their Authority upon any in the matters of their God which they did Acts 15. 25 28. Answ 1. By imposing their Authority is meant giving forth Commands Doctrines in their own Names as from themselves without the Authority of Christ Where did they so Do they not every where disavow it 1 Cor. 1. 15. 2 Cor. 4. 5. 1 Cor. 11. 1. Divine Revelation not the Dictates of men one or other of them is the Foundation of a Christians Faith 2. Mr. T. mistakes when he saith they did this Acts 15. 25 28. For 1st They enjoyned nothing but what was before enjoyned by the Lord only acquainted the Gentile Believers therewith as is 1. Abstinence from Fornication Exod. 20. 14. Ezek. 16. 26 29. Mat. 5. 32. 2. From things Strangled Deut. 12. 24. 3. From Blood Gen. 9. 4. 5. i. e. the Life-Blood or any member of the creature pulled from it whilest it is yet alive as the Jewish Rabbins expound it and that truly 2dly He speaks against the express Letter of the Scripture vers 28. It seemed good to the holy Ghost and to us Expressions very remote from the countenancing such an authoritative imposition as he speaks of 2. He askes How comes this to be an Order of the House of Christ he took such Orders to be Precepts of Christ to us but this seems to be Gods gift to him Answ That Christs Ruledom and Soveraignty over his House is a gift of God to him we grant but such a gift as doth necessarily imply a duty on the part of his Houshold viz. That they own obey subject to none in the matters of Worship but only him admit no Laws or Institutions amongst them but his And this is expresly asserted in S. T. which we took then and still do for an Order of Christ's House 3. He tells us further That to assert the present Ministers of England own other Lords that have a Law-making Power over his Churches besides him is to unchristen them Answ 1. And however Mr. T. his Book came to be licensed with an intimation from the reverend Licenser That he finds nothing in it contrary to the Doctrine of the Church of England Some of them think though I assure him I do not he hath asserted that pag. 123 that doth indeed unchristen them 2. However if the assertion mentioned unchristens them they
into the Jewish Synagogues c. we shall speak in its proper place Though we have no command to separate from the true Worship of God and the professors of the true Faith walking suitable thereunto yet we have express precepts to have no communion in Worship that is of the devising of man the Pope Antichrist with persons as members of the same Body and that have the very Lineaments of Satan the portraiture of Hell upon them with whom Christ doth not will not walk The Scriptures but now instanced in evince as much Rev. 18. 4. commands separation from a false Church false either in constitution or by apostacy The Church of England Rome is so as we have proved and the false Worship thereof of this we have already spoken Let the Reader seriously consider the Scriptures he will find it to be so In a word the Babylon mentioned our Animadverter will grant is the Roman Church Chap. 17. 1 2 3. The scarlet coloured Beast is th Civil Power not once represented under the notion of Beasts Dan. 7. 3 17. by which she hath ever been supported from the beginning The seven Heads are the seven sorts of Governments viz. Kings Consuls Dictators Decemvirs Tribunes Caesars Christian Emperors and the seven Mountains upon which Rome was built Rev. 17. 9 10. The ten Horns are the ten Kingdoms which her abominations and filthiness of her fornications did overflow of which England was one as is known and generally granted vers 12 13. The coming out of her is a separation from the whole of her Abominations Ministry Rites Inventions which if we do not we come not out of her she hath in the ten Kingdoms by the power of the Civil Magistrate that supported her erected and by external force and violence compelled persons to bow down to with respect hereunto she is represented as drunk with the blood of the Saints and Martyrs of Jesus This is all we plead for from this Scripture We would not have the Institutions Inventions of this old Bawd and bloody Strumpet imposed upon us and subjected to as if from Christ Let the Animadverter or any one for him prove the Hierarchy of Arch-Bishops Bishops Deans Chapters c. their Parish-Churches as such Organs Singing-Service bowing before Altars Candles there placed Copes holy Vestments Service-Book to be of the Institution of Christ and we are ready to stoop to them and own those that practise them but if they have no other foundation but what â—he Mother of Harlots compelled the Civil Powers to give them when she rid them at her pleasure and made them serve her Lusts to the muâ—thering of millions of the Servants of Christ in the Nations as most certain it is they have not as it would be the honour of the chief Rulers of the Nations to eradicate them they remaining as a badge of their old slavery to the worst of Strumpets So it s eminently the duty of the Children of God by virtue of express precept from this Scripture in the mean while whatever they may suffer to separate from them The Church of England i. e. the best and most enlightned amongst the chief of the Nation thought it their duty in dayes past to separate from the Doctrine of the Papacy and some of her Trinkets to cast over-board we plead but for separation from her Discipline and Ministry and the rejection of the rest of her fopperies that as we profess our selves Christians we may have not the Canons of Rome but the Laws of our dear Lord for our Rule and sole guide in this matter which one would think above many Mr. T. might permit one peaceably to do 1 Cor. 5. 12 13. Phil. 1. 5. Act. 2. 41. and 17. 4. were brought to prove it the duty of Saints as such to walk together distinct and apart from the world not to distinguish of the duties of Pastors and People nor to prove any written Church-Covenant which we were not treating of So that in what follows in this Sect. we are not at all concerned We have thrown no dirt upon the face of the Church of England as he is pleased to talk we only tell her what diâ—t and filth is there that evety body sees but her Admirers Nor are we solicitous touching his throwing dirt in the face of the separated Churches from the Writings of any railing false accusers God will plead their Cause and bring forth their Righteousness in the fit season The third Institution of Christ mentioned in S. T. is this That he hath intrusted his particular Churches with power for the carrying on the Worship of his House to choose Officers admit Members excommunicate Offenders Acts 1. 23. and 6. 3 5. and 14. 23. 2 Cor. 8. 19. Mat. 18. 17. 1 Cor. 5. 4. The Ministers of the Church of England own not conform not to this Institution of Christ we manifest in the said Treatise Mr. T. his Reply hereunto is 1. The Election Acts 1. 23. was of an Apostle and that by Lot and contains no Institution of Christ we are bound to follow Answ 1. This last is Mr. T. his dictate which 't is fit should be rejected till he proves it especially considering that the Churches for some hundreds of years afterwards chose their own Officers 2. Though it was the Election of the Apostle yet he was I hope an Officer of Christ and that to the Churches 3. His being chosen by Lots doth not evince that he was not chosen by the Church they gave forth the Lots seems to be expressive of the way they took to manifest the person whom they chose What he hath said of Acts 6. 3 5. and 14. 23. is already answered The Election 2 Cor. 8. 19. being of a person imployed in service by them manifests that none are to do services for the Church but by their appointment Of Mat. 18. 17. we have at large spoken already and vindicated it from Mr. T. his Exceptions That 1 Cor. 5. 5. is more than Excommunication practised by the Churches of the Saints he cannot prove his turning Mat. 18. 17. also to another sence is an argument of his denial of any such Institution of Christ to be practised by the Churches in the World 1st That 'T is a Church-Act is evident from the words vers 4 5. The Church is to be gathered together for this end to deliver the Incestuous person over to Satan But no Church saith Mr. T. had power over unclean Spirits to command them to cruciat the Bodies of persons Therefore say we that cannot be here intended 2dly The Church comes together to do that which Paul condemns them that they had not done before stirrs them up to set about vers 2. Now it had been absurd to have condemned them for not doing that which they had no power or Authority to do 3dly That which he calls here a delivering to Satan he calls a purging out from among them the old leaven vers 7. 4thly To the working of
Miracles by the Apostle there had been no need to have assembled the Church but it was necessary that to the doing of this act the Church be assembled vers 4 5. 5thly He is to be delivered to Satan for the destruction of the flesh that the spirit may be saved which is not likely to be effected by Satans Ministry 6thly 'T is more than probable the Church did what the Apostle commanded them to do Now this is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the publick rebuke inflicted by many which many cannot signifie the Apostle but the Church of Corinth all which evince that it was a Church-act and no more than what is practised by the Churches of Christ at this day Though 't is true it is more than the ordinary Excommunication of the Church of England by a Chancellour or Proctor several miles from the Parish-Church to which the person is related and it may be unknown to them an argument they own not this Institution of Christ We add in S. T. as another Institution of Christ 4. That the Officers of his appointment are only such as these Pastors Teachers Elders Deacons Widows or Helpers who as they are in one particular Congregation so they have not any Lordly authority over each other Ephes 4. 11. Rom. 12. 7. and 16. 1. 1 Cor. 12. 28. Phil. 1. 1. 1 Pet. 5. 1 2 3. Acts 6. 5. and 15. 2. and 20. 17. and 28. 21 28. 1 Tim. 3. chapt and 5. 9 10 17. This Law of Christ they subject not we say unto set up other Officers and Offices To which Mr. T. 1st There were other Officers given by Chrst besides these mentioned viz. Apostles therefore these are not the only Officers of his appointment Answ 1. Had he said therefore These were not the only Officers of his appointment he had spoken more properly Apostles were of his appointment are not now as we have proved 2. We are speaking of ordinary fixed Officers in the particular Churches of Christ which the Apostles were not so that his instancing these and inference thereupon is frivoâ—ous and impertinent If these had Superiority over others it will not advantage the Animadverter except he can prove the Bishops in respect of Office to be their Successors which he will never be able to do That because the Elders mentioned 1 Tim. 5. 17. must be accounted worthy of double honour therefore they were of a Superiour order of Ministry to lord it over the rest is one of Mr. T. his Consequences that a youth of half a years stâ—nding in the University would be ashamed of Besides Sir the double honour is due to the working Presbyter not the lording loytering Bishop as is the custom of England The person mentioned 2 Cor. 8. 19. was chosen by the Churches for the present expedition was no standing fixed Officer amongst them therefore appertains not to our present disquisition He adds Whether all the Officers and Offices be rightly ordered in the Church of England is not our present inquiry Answ But this is no small part of our present enquiry for if they are not rightly ordered they are not Officers of Christ if they are not such 't is evident they reject this Institution of his set up other Officers and Offices What he tells us is notoriously false viz. That the present Ministers of England have neither Name nor thing required by Christ in this Law is manifestly true Their Parish Ministers are called Priests not Pastors or Teachers 'T is true they have those are called Doctors which signifies Teachers but that is a School not a Church-Title they are call'd so with respect to an Academick degree not with relation to any particular Church or Churches in whom they are placed They have those thaâ— are called Deacons but they are not such Officers as Christ calls so those that come nearest to these are those they call Church-wardens oâ— Overseers of the Poor But they have the thing the Office of preachâ—ng the Gospel continues with them Answ 1. 'T were well if it could be said of many of them that they preached the Gospel Alas they understand it not 2dly However they have not the Office as we prove whilest he suggests the contrary he doth but beg the Question Whether the Assertion That they set up other Officers and Offices as if in open contempt and defiance of Christs Authority be very unrighteously said others will judge I am sure as was said in S. T. They are such of which it may righteously be said he did at no time command them neither did it ever enter into his heart so to do And I challenge Mr. T. to give an instance of the contrary We remark a 5th Institution of Christ in S. T. viz. That these Officers be chosen by the common Suffrage of the Church of Christ according to Acts 1. 15 23 26. and 6. 1 2 3 5. and 14. 23. and 9. 26. which we find the Church in the practise of for some Centuries of Years As the Epistle of Clemens to the Church of Corinth Martin Luther Cyprian Lambard Peter Martyr Bullinger Gualter Zanchy Calvin Beza the united Brethren of Bohemia manifest Of which at large we there treat This Institution of Christ we say the present Ministers conform not to Mr. T. replies 1. He finds not this to be an Appointment of Christ in the Scriptures mentioned Answ Whether it be or not let the Reader judge the impertinency of his Answer to the three first we have already shewed Acts 9. 26 27. proves thus much That 't is in the Churches power to reject any one or refuse to receive him as a Preacher amongst them till they have received satisfaction touching him which doth not a little demonstrate the power of Election of their own Officers to be seated in them For he assayed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to joyn himself to the Disciples as a Brother in the fellowship of the Gospel as the word signifies Acts 5. 13. 1 Cor. 6. 16 17. but they would not suffer him so to do till better informed of him and then he comes in and goes out at Jerusalem ver 28. i. e. is owned received by them What follows is a repetition of what he had before said Sect. 22. in answer to the Preface to which we have there spoken Clemens speaks fully to our purpose Ministers must be appointed by famous and discreet men with the good liking and consent of ALL the Church without which it seems they could not be constituted In that which follows in Clemens his Epistle touching a readiness in the Elder or Pastor to depart or return according as the multitude of Believers should determine We have sure a proof that the choice or rejection of a Pastor is seated in them That Luther Bullinger meant no more than the not obtruding unable Ministers on the Churches of Christ is Mr. T. his mistake They both assert the Churches priviledge in the choice of their own Pastors Their voice saith
and if scandalous in some cases the persons guilty of it to be separated from We say moreover in S. T. 4thly 'T is false that good men pressing after Reformation according to the primitive pattern do differ touching the substance of the things instanced in To which Mr. T. adjoyns The more to blamâ— is this Author to widen the Breach A. But this Author doth no such thing he widens not the Breach urges not Separation from good men who press after Reformation according to the primitive pattern But such as have renounced the pursuing such a Reformation though they were once sworn some of them to prosecute it to the uttermost of their power persecute oppose it in them that are pressing after it As is the known case of the preseâ—t Ministers of England What is added by us in the 5th place viz. That the particulars instanced in being commanded by Christ they are not discharged from the impeachment drawn up against them who conform not to them of Nonconformity to the Laws of Christ by this Plea That good men differ in these matters i. e. some good men transgress the Laws of Christ he grants to be true Nor doth he offer any thing further in this Chapter that deserves our attendment CHAP. VI. Sect. 1. The present Ministers own Laws not of Christs revealing contrary thereunto therefore deny his Offices The first proved by the induction of fourteen particulars Mr. T. yeelds the matter in controversie Ezek. 43. 8. explained An Objection answered Of the Authority of Rulers touching Laws and Constitutions Ecclesiastical Of Synods THE second Argument whereby in S. T. we prove the present Ministers deny the Kingly and Prophetical Office of Christ is this Those who own submit and subscribe to Orders and Ordinances which not only are not of Christs revealing but contrary thereunto do really deny and oppose the Prophetical and Kingly Office of Christ But the present Ministers of England do own submit and subscribe to Orders and Ordinances that are not only not of Christs revealing but contrary thereunto Therefore The Major or first Proposition is beyond exception Persons non-conformity to the Laws of Magistrates if in what they have power to command their giving forth Laws of their own without the consent of their Rulers directly contrary to their Laws is a visible notorious opposition denyal and rejection of their Authority in them that give forth such Laws and in them that conform and subject to them This we manifestly prove to be true of the present Ministers of England with respect to Christ the alone Independant Lord King and Soveraign of his Church and People That which Mr. T. opposeth hereunto Chap. 5. Sect. 1. will receive â— sâ—eedâ— dispatch 1. His distinctions about the Orders and Ordinances of Christ are needless they are but a clouding and darkning of Truth by words without knowledge The Orders we speak of are the Appointments of Christ to his Church with respect to Worship wherein their practice is more or less concerned to deny and reject these and in the place of them to substitute others of their own of Antichrist and subject thereunto is a denial of the Offices of Christ mentioned or it is not If Mr. T. his conscience tells him that it is he doth ill to equivocate This he grants to be true of the Pope of Rome Chap. 4. pag. 119 120. Why it should not be so of the Pope of Canterbury and his Prelates I yet understand not That the giving forth and subjection to the Cannon-Law in the Papacy should be Antichristian and a denial of the Offices of Christ and the same thing in the Church of England not so is a Riddle to me Henry the 8th rejected the Popes Supremacy an Act of Parliament is instituted 25. H. 8. c. 9. for the retention of the whole of his Canon-Law in its wonted vigour that is not contrary to the Laws and Statutes of the Kingdom nor prejudicial to the Royal Prerogative by virtue whereof how great a part of his Law whereby he ruled his Kingdom of darkness and still rules it received its establishment Mr. T. knows and in part confesseth Chap. 4. Of which the Institutions and Orders mentioned are a part by which the Pope yet speaks as a King amongst us though his Supremacy be justly by Law rejected for the Law of a King is his mouth That very Law that is the Canon-Law of the Papacy by which the Saints were burned in Smithfield and other places is that Law by which in the stead of the Institutâ—ons of Christ the Church of England is governed the Saints are excommunicated delivered over to the Secular Power imprisoned ruined at this day This Law the present Ministers of England subject to which is the Canonical obedience they promise to their Ordinary And though this Animadverter multiply millions of words he will never make persons of judgement and sobriety believe that this is not a real denial and rejection of the Authority of Christ They tell him in their practice that they will have none of his Institutions they prefer Antichrists Canon-Law before them which is stufft with such filthy Abominations that Luther was wont to call the Decretals Excretalâ— and had them publickly burned at Wittemburge And Whitaker one of their own saith The Canonical Decretal and Pontifical Law ought to have no place amongst us because it is Antichristian and altogether a stranger to all Piety and Religion Lib. de Concil 9. 2. If the Animadverter will speak to the purpose and evert what hath been offered in this matter he must I conceive either manifest that the Popes Canon-Law is not the Law of Government to the Church of England or that a retention thereof with a rejection of the Institutions of Christ is not a denial of his Offices To tell stories of things done of ignorance which we have over and over and in this matter cannot have place they themselves know that things are with them as we have reported them the setting up open Antichrists and Universal Monarchs is the ready way to expose himself to conteâ—pt for his impertinencies no probable one to carry the Cause he undertakes the defence of There being nothing further worth the considering in this first Sect. we hasten to the 2 d. In order to the confirmation of the Minor Proposition of the forementioned Argument two things we say in S. T. are incumbent upon us to prove 1. That the present Ministers of England do own submit and subscribe to Orders and Ordinances that are not of Christs revealing which we manifest by the Induction of 14 particular Instances As First They own the Orders and Offices of Arch-Bishops Bishops c. and promise subjection and obedience to them Eccles Can. can 7. To which Mr. T. 1. He will not undertake to justifie all that is in the Ecclesiastical Canons nor need he nor perhaps will the present Ministers or Bishops Answ 1. But he having undertaken to be their Advocate he
and I would be more phrenetical for the Interest of my dear Lord Sorne think these expressions might have been spared though for our parts Contenti sumus hoc Catonâ— 3dly What Interpreters he hath met with I know not The Assembly in their Annotations upon the place are of our mind Their setting of their thresholds by my thresholds i. e. adding their Traditions to my Precepts Isa 29. 13. So is Mr. Greenhill c. We further propose in S. T. an Objection to consideration viz. That though these Canons and Constitutions owned by the Ministers of England be not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to be found in the Scripture of the Institution of Christ in so many words yet by consequence they may rationally be deduced from thence As where it is commanded that all things be done decently and in order 1 Cor. 14. 40. which 'tis the duty of the Church to make Rules and Constitutions about which when it hath done it is the duty of every Son thereof to own or subject to them without questioning its Authority To this Mr. T. Sect. 3. subjoyns 1. He asserts not that the Canons and Constitutions of the Church of England may rationally be deduced from Scripture Answ Goodly Constitutions surely that cannot rationally be deduced from Scripture but have their Original singly from the bloody Canon-Law of the Papacy and worthy to be submitted to by such as profess themselves Ministers of the Gospel what greater contempt any one could pour forth upon them I know not But 2dly Whilst Mr. T. refuseth to assert this he plainly relinquisheth his concern in the Objection proposed by us and tells us He will not stand up in its defence However 2. This he asserts in the room thereof That Canons and Constitutions Ecclesiastical concerning Divine Worship and Church-Government may be made by Governours if not opposite to such Rules as are in Scripture about Gods Worship and the Rule of his Church and be indeed subservient and conducible to the well-ordering of such Worship and Rule which 't is the duty of the Members of such a Church to obey Answ 1. But I would be informed whether by Canons and Constitutions Ecclesiastical concerning Divine Worship he means only Canons touching the spreading the Table at the Communion with a linnen Cloth the Sermons beginning at the Reading of the Text at which rate he speaks in Sect. 4. Or whether he means Canons and Laws for the Institution of considerable parts of Worship together with such accidentals as he calls them that must be submitted to by such as are admitted to the publick managery of Worship without which they shall not be permitted so to do If the first he doth but trifle we have not been taking notice of things of such an inferiour allay If the latter I desire to be satisfied by what Law any Rulers or Governours do assume to themselves such an Authority which when Mr. T. shall be pleased to shew us we shall further consider it Heb. 13. 17. speaks not a tittle thereunto Of the vanity of its Application to the Governours of the Church of England we have already spoken The Reasons of his Assertion are these 1. Without such Regulations Church-Societies cannot be continued by reason of the difference of miâ—ds Answ 1. The contrary is manifest before ever such constitutions as those he speaks of were in the World Church-Societies were continued One of the first open breaches amongst them was because of them as he knows fell out betwixt Victor Bishop of Rome and the Eastern-Churches about the observation of Easter All the confusion differences breaches that have been in the Churches so called is for the most part to be charged upon their Impositions 2dly The Animadverter supposeth That without such Constitutions the Churches should be wholly destitute of Regulation but falsly 'T is derogatory to Christ the Scriptures perfection a pitiful begging the thing in question As Christ hath a Church in the world he hath Laws with respect to external politie by which he rules it needs not be beholding to Antichrist for his 'T is impious scandalous to conceive endite such dictates He further adds 2dly All sorts of Churches have had their Synods to this end Answ 1. To what end To make Laws and Constitutions for an Order of Ministry that Christ never established to impose a Lyâ—urgical Worship upon his Churches to set up an unpreaching Ministry in his House Mr. T. knows that these things are false and untrue If he mean not these I would advise him to speak pertinently in hâ—s next These are the Institutions we charge the present Ministers wâ—th submitting to 2. That all sorts of Churches have found it necessary to have Synods is more than Mr. T. can prove The Learned Whitaker tells us That they are not simply and absolutely necessary De Concil q. 1. p. 22. and I am sure they may be well enough without them Licinius interdicts them Euseb de Vit. Constant l. 1. c. 44. yet the Câ—urches continued aâ—d in a flourishing sttate 3dly That few or no Synods that ever were yet in the World have had a right Constitution were a facile undertaking to demonstrate The Synod so called of the Câ—urch of England by which the Laws we mention were out of the Popes Canon-Law collected was not so A right Synod is constituted of the Messengers of the Churches upon the account whereof they are said to be the Churches Representatives sent by them with Instructions from them touching matters to be debated in that Convention This cannot be affirmed of the aforesaid Synod nor of any Synod that ever was in the World since the Apostles fell asleep So that whilst our Animadverter is discoursing of them as necessary he is talking of the necessity of â— Non-ens a meer Chimaera 4thly The Churches of Christ had a perfect Discipline before ever the Synods he speaks of had a being in the World Nor 5thly had these ever from Jesus Christ any Authority and what they have not from him is not Obligatory to impose any thing upon the Churches to be observed by them by virtue of an Authoritative power seated in themselves 'T is a Yoke not to be endured by the free-born Subjects of Christ that any of the Children of men should impose upon them in the matters of their God The Synod of Jerusalem did not do so as we have proved His third Reason is down-right begging the thing in question Christ hath left nothing relating to the Worship and Government of his House as such undetermined against which I advise him not to talk so confidently in his next till he hath proved the contrary The Texts mentioned by him 1 Cor. 14. 40. Heb. 13. 17. prove no such thing as the lawfulness of additional Institutions in matters of Church-Polity as a part thereof to the Institutions of Christ 1 Cor. 14. 40. is afterward in S. T. Heb. 13. 17. hath already been considered That because Paul gives direction in some
Kneeling at the Sacrament is wisely done and had he wav'd the whole Controversie some think it had been no argument of his indiscretion but his so doing is no Answer He that will justifie the present Ministry and Worship of the Church of England persons of such dull capacities as our selves conceive must justifie these too They being made so necessary a part of their Worship that the Worship it self must rather be omitted than these devices of their Prelates or rather the Arch-Priest of Rome a Minister though never so able must not Preach if he will not wear the Surplice nor Baptize if he will not Cross nor may any either administer the Communion or receive it without Kneeling In which things if they transgress they are liable to be presented suspended excommunicated I have no power to compel Mr. T. to plead for any thing that he hath no mind to plead for In due time for ought I know he may as fast draw off from the tents of these men as he hath of late been advancing towards them He will not plead for their Canons nor for their Ceremonies at least some of them he tells us p. 54. It may be the next step may be nor for their Ministry To what purpose Mr. T. disputes for the power of Governors to Institute Rules for Church-Polity when he will not plead for those they Institute I know not We manifested in S. T. the invalidity of this Argument The Apostle by an infallible Spirit adviseth the Church of Corinth That all things de done decently and in order and discovers to them wherein that Decency and Order lay therefore persons that pretend not to such a Spirit may of their own head bind our Consciences by Laws and Rules of their own in the Service of God To this Mr. T. replies He conceives none would thus unadvisedly conclude Answ And I believe so too but if they will argue rightly from this Scripture thus must they argue as we have demonstrated But he will yet prove the power of Governours in this matter from 1 Cor. 14 40. thus That which belonging to Decency and Order is commanded in general but not in the particularities determined is in respect of Communities left to be determined by their Rulers But so is the Apostles command 1 Cor. 14. 40. Therefore Answ 1. Both Propositions are liable to exception 1. Upon supposition that what in the Worship of Christ belongs to Decency and Order is left undetermined it doth not follow that it belongs to the Rules of the Church to determine thereof which is to make the Rulers Lords over Gods Heritage to introduce insupportable Tyranny into the Churches of Christ They are the Churches Servants not Lords that are her Ministers 2dly The Minor Proposition is notoriously false and untrue the Apostle is debating the business of Prophesying touching this he lays down particular rules for Decency and Order which he requires them to conform to Let any sober Christian peruse the Chapter he will see this shining therein in brightness So Ambrose Aquinas c. inform us Decently and in Order that no unseemliness or tumult arise But this prescription of the Apostle is not to be applied to any Episcopal Traditions but the Apostles own viz. such as he had delivered to the Churches saith a learned man Thus the heat of this contest is allayed Pulveris exigui jactu We further reply in S. T. But let this be granted suppose that 't is the Priviledge and Duty of the Church to make Laws and Constitutions for the binding of the Consciences of men in matters of Decency and Order this Church herein is bounded by the Scripture or 't is not If it be then when it hath no prescription therein for its commands it 's not to be obeyed and so we are where we were before That Decency and Order is to be determined by the Scripture If it be not bounded thereby then whatever Ceremonies it introduceth not directly contrary thereunto they must be subjected to which how fair an inlet it is to the whole Farrago of Popish Inventions who sees not To this Mr. T. adjoyns That he doth not plead that it is the Priviledge and Duty of the Church to make Laws and Constitutions for the binding of the Consciences of men in matters of Decency and Order Answ Very good The Church of England Mr. T. thinks hath no such Power Priviledge or Authority granted unto them by the Lord Jesus Then have they whilst they have so done invaded his Throne and Kingly Authority The Parish Priests whilst they own abet and subscribe to what they have done in this matter are Co-partners with them in their iniquity are really guilty of opposing the King-ship of Christ which was the matter we have been all this while contesting about and is now in effect granted by our wary Antagonist We argue thus Those that assume power to make Laws and impose the reception of them upon the People of a Nation beside those and without any Priviledge or grant to them by such given in whom the Soveraign Power of Ruledom resides are guilty of Rebellion against such their Rulers and Governours Those that abet them herein are guilty of the same Rebellion But this the Church of England with respect to Jesus Christ the onely Soveraign Lord and Ruler of his Churches hath done her Ministers have abetted her herein Therefore The Major cannot be denied The Minor is evident 1. That the Church of England hath made Constitutions for the binding thâ— Consciences of men in the maters of Decency and Order their Book of Canons and Constitutions Ecclesiastical evince that they have no authority from Christ so to do Mr. T. grants So that in what follows we are little concerned partly because he hath already yeelded the cause and partly because the particularities he speaks of be they what they will are only he tells us of Decency and Order not determined in the Scripture Now we deny any such particularities undetermined we think it a most fearful undervaluing of the Wisdom of Christ to assert That mans ' Devices can add Beauty Order or Decency to Christ's Institutions i. e. They are not Orderly or Decent without Humane Impositions Nor see we how these can be prescribed by Canons Ecclesiastical to be obeyed because enjoyned by the Rulers of the Church to whom we are saith Mr. T. in Conscience bound to submit if it be not the Priviledge nor Duty of the Church to make Laws and Constitutions for the binding the Consciences of men in matters of this nature and think that the latter part of his Answer is in contention with the former Besides we are yet â—o seek for a proof of this matter That we are obliged to obey Rulers Ecclesiastical commanding us any thing in the Worship of God as such under the notion of Decency and Order and believe this very assertion is contrary to the Law of Nature and right Reason which teacheth us That God
is to be served after that way that pleaseth him best That â—he Will of God who is the alone Master of the House not man is solely to be heeded in the Ordering of his Family and Houshold Mr. T. would take it ill should I prescribe Rules to him for the well-ordering of his Family and that without his Licence and that after I know he hath Constituted and appointed Laws himself for that very end And yet I conceive he is not so far above me as the great and only wise God is above the mightiest and wisest of mortals So that whilest he would avoid the horns of the Dilemma that of the Poet is verified of him Incidit in Scyllam qui vult vitare Carybdim Nor do I see how he avoids the horns of the Dilemma by what he replies in this matter The Rulers Ecclesiâ—stical are either when they make Laws binding the Conscience indirectly bounded in their so doing by Scripture or they are not i. â— they must impose no Laws upon us without Scripture Precept or they may If the first we are bound to obey them no further than they are able to evince the justness and righteousness of their Commands upon the account of their being bottomed upon the Scripture Then no Obligation lies upon us to observe the Canons Ceremonies of the Church of England any further than they can manifest their Observation commanded therein then she and her Ministers do wickedly to Excommunicate Imprison Ruine us for not yeelding subjection when and where none is due If the second then whatever Ceremonies they introduce under the notion of Decency and Order that are not contrary to the Scripture must be subjected to which is an open in-let to the whole Farrago of Popish Inventions We fear the General Rules in Scripture the Laws of Nature right Reason other laudable Customs that Mr. T. tells us must be observed in this matter will be but a weak defence against them For who shall be judge of their consonancy to these Principles Shall every man be judge for himself This our Rulers think to be absurd and contrary to the Principles asserted by our Animadverter to be observed If our Governours they will tell us whatever they impose 't is consonant to all the forementioned Principles that we subject to them therein Ask our Bishops they will tell you so with respect to the whole of their Popish-English-Canon-Laws and Ceremonies Ask Mr. T. and he will tell you little less than That a blind obedience should be yeelded to them in undetermined particularities Chap. 1. Sect. 1. Ask the Pope and his Conclâ—ve they will tell you 'T is consonant to the fore-mentioned Principles that we subject to all his Ceremonies Nor indeed can we say of most of them that they are more dissonant to right reason than some that are retained amongst us So that the horns of the Dilemma are piercing the heart of the Cause whose defence Mr. T. hath undertaken We further argue in S. T. Yet were this also yeelded them they were never a jot nearer the mark aimed at except it can be proved that supposing a power of introducing Ceremonies to be invested in the Church thence a power for the Institution of new Orders and Ordinances the introducing of Heathenish Jewish and Superstitious practices in the Worship of God may be evinced And yet should all this be yeelded them how will they prove the Constitutions mentioned to be the Constitution of a right constituted Church a National Church the Church of England is not so Yet if all this were granted where are the Constitutions of this Church that we may pay the homage to them that is meet When was it assembled in the same place together in its several Members freely to debate and determine what Laws and Constitutions were fit to be observed by them If it be said That it is enough that it be assembled in its several Officers or such as shall be chosen by their Officers whose Laws every Member is bound to be obedient to We Answer But these Officers being not the Church nor are true Officers of a right constituted Church any where so called in the Scripture I owe no subjection to their Laws or Constitutions it being pleaded that 't is the Church that hath only power in this matter It remaineth therefore notwithstanding what is pleaded in this Objection That the present Ministers of England own Laws and Constitutions that are not in any sence of Christ's revealing and therefore oppose the Kingly and Prophetical Office of Christ To which Mr T. 1. I do not plead for the Constitutions of the Church of England Answ But the framers of the Objection proposed do Which if Mr. T. will justifie he must also plead for them but I shall not coâ—pel him to a warfare he is not willing to engage in he may take his liberty to stand by and look on but then he had done fairly not to have pretended to justifie what he scarce speaks a word to The impertinent Questions he speaks of are pertinent to the Objection and Objectors we have to deal with What he hath spoken of a National Church in answer to the Preface Sect. 15. we have removed out of the way by our Reply thereunto He tells us 2dly That the Church of England was Assembled at London in its several Members by Deputation freely to debate things at was the usage of the Synods in the antient times as the Kingdom is said to meet in the Parliament so the whole Church may be said to meet in their Synod Answ 1. No doubt Mr. T. and his Abettors thinks he hath now spoken to the purpose indeed but the emptiness of the whole is soon manifested No Synods whether antient or new can be supposed to represent the Church but upon the account of the free Election of the persons constituting them and deputation by the Members of that Church which they represent Whosoever is sent by the Church represents the person of the Church saith the Learned Whittaker De Concil q. 3. c. 3. p. 103. Yea Bilson himself tells us None are bound to the Council but those who send to the Council No Council doth bind the whole Church except the consent be general Con. Ap. p. 49 51. And Saravia tells us The Council represents no Churches except those who send their Messengers to the Churches Con. Gretz p. 379. Yea in every rightly constituted Synod the Laity as they are called are not to be excluded 'T is a Rule founded in Nature and Reason Quod omnes tangit ab omnibus tractari debet That which concerns all ought to be handled by all Although the Priests and Clerks do alone exercise Judgements Ecclesiastical yet where a matter is agitated that pertains to the Church Universal which consists not only of Clerks but also of Laicks it is not equal that the Laicks or Lay-People should be removed from these deliberations but all Decrees ought rather to be confirmed by
common consent Which that it was observed by the Apopostles of Christ the sacred History testifies Acts 15. And this is the Opinion of the most famous Doctors of the Canon-Law saith Durandus De Sanct. Minist Lib. 1. c. 11. He saith more truly perhaps than he was aware That as the whole Kingdom is said to meet in the Parliament so the whole Church may be said to meet in their Synod and no otherwise Now we know that the meeting of a company of Knights Gentlemen at Westminster is not the Parliament the Representative of the Kingdom Their free Election by the Body of the People of the Nation renders them so In like manner the Convention of a company of Prelates and Priests make not a Synod by our Animadverters own Argument but their Election by the People to meet and sit in Council together as their Representees which the Synod so called at London One thousand six hundred and three nor any National Synod ever since had not the Choice of the People was never minded never was their consent required So that in the sence he takes the word Church which yet is forreign to the Scripture as we say in S. T. the Church of England was never yet concerned In what follows in this Section Mr. T. himself will acknowledge I am not further concerned Sect. 2. The present Ministers oppose the Kingly and Prophetical Office of Christ whilst they own Laws contrary to the Revelation of Christ That they do thus evinced by the induction of particular instances Acts 8. 27. â— Tim. 6. 15. Jer. 51. 26. Luke 11. 2. Mat. 6. 7 8 9. Whether Christ there instituted a form of Prayer Rom. 8. 26. 1 Cor. 14. 15. Mark 14. 18 22 23. opened That Christ sate with his Disciples in the celebration of the Ordinance of breaking Bread evinced Of Kneeling The reason of its first institution It s opposition to 1 Thes 5. 22. manifested Of forbidding to Marry and commanding to abstain from Meats IN Sect. 6. Mr. T. proceeds to the examination of what is further produced in S. T. for the manifestation of the guilt of the present Ministers in their opposing the Kingly and Prophetical Office of Christ which we further prove because they own submit and subscribe to Laws Constitutions and Ordinances that are contrary to the Revelation of Christ This we prove by particular instances They own and acknowledge 1. That there may be other Arch-Bishops and Lord-Bishops in the Church of Christ besides himself Which is contrary to 1 Pet. 5. 3. 1 Cor. 12. 5. Ephes 4. 5. Heb. 3. 1. Luke 22. 22 25. 26. To which our Animadverter replies 1. They do not acknowledge them in opposition to these Scriptures Answ But that is the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Mr. T. may be ashamed of such pitiful beggery He adds 2ly They do not acknowledge Arch-Bishops over the whole Church as the Pope but in their own Province Answ This is not at all material the authority of Arch-Bishops over a Province is as much against the Texts mentioned as over the whole Church 'T is not the extent of Authority Lordship that is therein condemned but the thing it self 3ly He further tells us They have no such dominion ascribed to them over the Church they oversee as is forbidden 1 Pet. 5. 3. Luke 22. 25 26. Answ 1. This is again to beg the thing in question 2ly We have proved the contrary He adds 4ly They are not Lords in the Church but in the Kingdom and Parliament Answ False and untrue I wish he speak not against knowledge in this matter 1. When invested into their Episcopal Sees they are stiled Arch-Bishops of such a place or Province Lord-Bishop of such a See 2. The Priests submit to them pray for them as their good Lords 3. They have Power Authority Precedency as such over the rest of the Clergy give forth Laws and Canons to rule and guide them to whom they promise obedience at their Ordination 4. They exercise jurisdiction authority over their respective Diocesses in their Ecclesiastical Courts and Consistories as such all evident Ensigns and Demonstrations of Lordly Dignities even in and over that which they call the Church That which he 5ly adds of the Eunuchs being called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Acts 8. 27. without contradiction to 1 Tim. 6. 15. where Christ is said to be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is frivolous 1. The Eunuch is not said to be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a Potentate with respect to the Church of God over it he was not such but with respect to the Kingdom of Aethiopia where he was a Noble Man a Governor under Candace the Queen Our Bishops are Potentates in and over that which they call the Church of Christ 2. That any other besides Christ should exercise Lordship and Authority in the World is not interdicted as is their so doing in the Churches of Christ in the Scriptures mentioned He saith 5ly He hath not shewed that what is acknowledged is a Law Constitution or Ordinance nor the Ministers own it by subscription Answ True indeed I did not do so for I thought it needless to demonstrate that the Sun shines at noon-dayes Are not the Offices of Arch-Bishops Lord-Bishops Constitutions and Ordinances Have they not their Foundation and Establishment by Law Doth not Mr. T. know it Is he onely a stranger in our Israel Of the Truth of this there are not many in the Nation that are or can be ignorant That the Ministers own these whether by subscription or otherwise is not considerable Mr. T. deals injuriously whilst he suggests I say they own these with the rest of the particulars mentioned by subscription when I assert onely That they own submit and subscribe to i. some of them they manifest they own by Subscription others other wayes but they own submission to them all is too notorious to admit of a denyal They do so in their Ordination when they promise Canonical Obedience to them in their prayers for them subjection to their precepts from time to time transmitted to them which they dare not transgress 2ly That men may and ought to be made Ministers onely by these Lord-Bishops is we say in S. T. owned by the present Ministers which is contrary to Heb. 5. 4. John 10. 1 7. 13. 20. Acts 14. 23. with 6. 3 5. What Mr. T. adjoyns hereunto touching Ordination by Suffâ—agan Bishops hath already been removed out of the way How much they own a Presbyterian Ordination of which he speaks many good men in the Nation feel and find Of these things we have already spoken That Ordination by Lord-Bishops is established by Law is known and that exclusively to any other without them Hereunto the Ministers subscribe Can. 36. The Scriptures instanc'd in prove this to be contrary to the Revelation of Christ Heb. 5. 4. John 10. 1 7. 13. 20. manifestly evince That who-ever undertakes to be a Minister of the Lord in his Church must
be called of sent by him So was Aaron Acts 14. 23. 6. 3 5. manifest that the Way of the Lord's mission is not by Lord-Bishops but by his Churches and People What he tells us he hath said in answer to any of these Scriptures we have replyed to Chap. 2. We add in S. T. 3ly That Prelates their Chancellors and Officers have power from Christ to cast out of the Church of God is owned by them contrary to Mat. 18. 16 17. 1 Cor. 5. 4. To which our Animadverter subjoyns He finds no such Law Answ It may be he is willingly ignorant hereof This he cannot but know that in the Name of Christ the Officers mentioneâ— do excommunicate out of the Church so call'd of Christ Do they do this without Law Is it not one of their Church-constitutions that they may do so Do not the present Ministers own them herein Whilst they cite present persecute their Neighbours for not coming to Divine Service as they call it it may be for refusing to pay them a four-penny-due in the Ecclesiastical Courts even to an Excommunication whose Act therein they afterwards publickly denounce and declare once and again in obedience to them What more evident The weakness of his answer to Mat. 18. 1 Cor. 5. we have already manifested We say further in S. T. That they own 4ly that the Office of the Suffragans Deans Canons are lawful and necessary to be had in the Church contrary to 1 Cor. 12. 18 28. Rom. 12. 7. Ephes 4. 11. The Officers instituted by Christ are sufficient for the edification and perfecting of the Saints till they all come unto a perfect man v. 12 13. In what sense the forementioned being not one of them of the Institution of Christ may be owned as lawful and necessary without an high contempt of the Wisdom and Sovereignty of Christ I am not able to conceive this is the sum Mr. T. replies 1. He knows not where this imagined Ordinance is Answ That there are such Officers and Offices in the Church of England established by the Laws thereof he cannot be ignorant To say They are Antichristian or repugnant to the Word of God is censured by the Canons thereof Can. 7. That the Ministers own submit to some of them is known The vanity and impertinency of Mr. T. his pleading for them not to mention his perjury therein is discovered in our present Vindication of Chap. 3. from his exceptions against what is by us therein argued We say they own 5thly That the Office of Deacons in the Church is to be imployed in publick Praying administration of Baptism and Preaching if licensed by the Bishop thereunto contrary to Act. 6. 2. Ephes 4. 11. Mr. T. replies 'T is not contrary to Christ's Revelation that they should be imployed in those works Ans 1. But when Christ hath instituted the office of Deacons for this end to attend Tables or look after the provision and necessities of the Saints That any persons may own an Office of Deacons in the Church to be imploy'd by virtue of office-Office-power in any other work than that for which they are intrusted by Christ and called unto Office without an advance against that Institution of Christ is absurd to imagine 2. That the present Ministers own such an Office he doth not deny 3. What he speaks of Stephen and Philip he had said before and to it we have replied already and need noâ— add more A sixth Law or Ordinance that we say they own is this That the Ordinance of Breaking Bread or the Sacrament of the Lords Supper may be administred to one alone as to a sick man ready to die Which is diametrically opposite to the Nature and Institution of that Ordinance 1 Cor. 10. 16. and 11. 33. Mat. 26. 26. Acts 2. 42. and 20. 7. To which Mr. T. This is not easily proved from the Scripâ—ures instanced in Answ Whether it be or not is left to the judgment of the judicious Reader to determine I am weary in pursuâ—â—g him in his impertinencies He grants a Communion is proved in that Sacrament 1 Cor. 10. 16. but vers 17. and 1 Cor. 12. 13. prove the Communion to be rather with all Christians Of which yet there is not one word in either of the places In vers 17. He speaks of the Church of Corinth that was one bread one body The other Scripture speaks nothing of Saints Communion one with another in this Ordinance 1 Cor. 11. 33. Acts 20. 7. he confesseth prove That it should be administred when all the Communicants Church or Brethren he should say are come together Whether its administration to one alone be not diametrically opposite hereunto as also to the very first Institution of this Ordinance Mat. 26. 26. let the Judicious judge Though it be said Act. 2. 46. that they brake bread from house to house it doth not follow there was none beside the Minister and the sick man the words import the contrary We manifest further in S. T. That they own 7thly a prescript form of Words in Prayer that a ceremonious pompous Worship devised â—y man and abused to Idolatry is according to the will of God and may lawfully be used under the New Testament Dispensation contrary to Mat. 15. 9. and 28. 20. John 4. 23. Deut. 12. 32. Jer. 51. 26. Rom. 8. 26. 1 Cor. 14. 15. By this prescript form of Words this ceremonious pompous Worship the Common-Prayer-Book Collegiat-Worship and Service is intended This I say is devised by man the owning whereof is contrary to Mat. 15. 9. and 28. 20. Deut. 12. 22. abused to Idolatry The owning hereof is opposite to Jer. 51. 26. It is Ceremonious and Pompous the abetting whereof is adverse to Joh. 4. 23. as is the owning of a prescript Form of Words to Rom. 8. 26. 1 Cor. 14. 15. To which our Animadverter replies 1. He should have told us what part of the Common-Prayer-Book was abused to Idolatry Answ The whole of it is so being Worship not appointed by the Lord and used in that Church that is the most Idolatrous Church in the world What he hath said in this Chap. Sect. 3. or in Chap. 3. Sect. 4. We have already answered His great out-cry of our abuse of Jer. 51. 26. produced to prove it unlawful to use any thing in the Worship of God abused to Idolatry will soon be evinced to be an empty sound Vox praeterea nihil 1. We have for our Companions in this Exposition persoâ—s not contemptible for wisdom and holiness who make conscience of applying Scriptures and abusing the Reader 2. Of all men Mr. T. iâ— the most incompetent for the management of this charge who most egregiously perverts Scriptures in this Treatise contrary to former Interpretations given by himself to them and to the plain intendment of the Spirit therein As we have in part manifested and may do further in our Appendix 3. He egregiously abuseth the Reader in this very passage whilst
account the Apostles or Elders were Heads of the Church that in respect of ministration and government they were so as our Dictator speaks is notoriously false 1. There is not the least intimation of any such thing in the N. T. Nor 2. any Language or Speech of any Headship over the Church but Christs till the rise of that man of sin who prophaned the Crown of our Lord by casting it to the ground 3. We find not the Apostles talking of themselves at this lofty rate they confess themselves to be the Brethren of the Saints their Servants for Christs sake 4. Why talks he of Heads of the Church Doth the Scripture mention any more than one Is this the Language of Christ or Antichrist Will he make the Church a two-headed Monster but Quô passim sequerer corvum I am sorry and ashamed that so learned a Person as Mr. T. should suffer such trifles to drop from his Pen. We proceed in S. T. and say 5thly If any be Head of the Church beside Christ they either have their Headship from an original right seated in themselves or by donation from Christ To assert the first were no less than blasphemy if the second let them shew when and where and how they came to be invested in such a right and this controversie will be at an end To which our Animadverter answers Their Headship is by donation from Christ in the places often alleadged He means Rom. 13. 1. Heb. 13. 17. That they refuse to afford shelter to this dying Cause we have already manifested We add 6thly He that is asserted in Scripture to be Head of the Church is said to govern feed and nourish it to eternal Life is he◠Husband 2 Cor. 11. 2. In which sense none of the Sons of men can be the Head thereof and yet of any other Head the Scripture is wholly silent But of this matter thus far It cannot by any sober person be denied but an owning a visible Head over the Church having power of making Laws with respect to Worship such an Headship not being of the institution of Christ must needs be a denyal of his Sovereign Authority and Power To which Mr. T. replies None can be said to be the Husband of the Church as Christ is or to govern feed and nourish as he by the influence of his Spirit yet the Apostles and such as convert and build up Souls may in a qualified sense be said so to do as 1 Thes 2. 7 11. the Apostle saith of himself Answ 1. This is a meer Dictate without proof and so fit to be rejected the Apostle saith not any such thing 1 Thes 2. 7 11. 2. He tells us not in what qualified sense they may be said so to do Nor 3. doth he shew us where any one is said to be the Husband of the Church beside Christ nor indeed can he so that the Argument abides firm He that is in the Scripture said to be the Head of the Church is also said to be her Husband to govern feed and nourish her to eternal Life but Christ alone is and doth so Therefore We add That the present Ministers do own such an Headship is undeniable witness their Subscription Oath Conformity in Worship to Laws and Edicts made and given forth by the sons of men as Heads-of the Church which are not onely forreign to but lift up themselves against the Royal Institutions of Christ This being matter of fact the individuals charged herewith must prove themselves not guilty or manifest that what they do is lawful The former being notoriously known to be true the latter must be insisted on Mr. T. answers Sect. 12. 1. He cannot justifie all the present Ministers do in their subscription and conformity Answ 'T is good to be ingenuous we know he cannot Longa dies citior brumali tempore noxque Tardior Hyberna solstitialis erit Nor is there any one will compel him to more than he hath a will to He adds 2. The Ministers may own Laws given forth by men as the Governors and Heads of the Church that lift up themselves in opposition against the Institutions of Christ and yet not deny his Kingly Office Because 1. this may be done out of weakness or error Answ This is already removed out of the way 2dly A man may subscribe yeeld subjection to the commands of a Usurper as some did to Richard the Third who acknowledged him not to be King of right and some do to the Decrees of the Trent Council or the Popes Edicts and yet not own his power Answ 1. This is such a legerdemain so like to those Jesuitical equivocations condemned by our Protestant Writers that I understand not nor desire to be acquainted with 2. By my subscription to the Laws mentioned and promising obedience to some of the formers of them as my Reverend Fathers in God I avowedly own their power except I have learned Fallere mille modis nec non intexere fraudes to use such hard dissimulation and treachery as an Heathen would abhor 3. Will Mr. T. stand by this plea will he undertake the Ministers of England shall do so If not Why doth he multiply words to deceive the Reader if he will he egregiously scandalizeth the King and Bishops supposing them to be Usurpers Though he hath taken the Oaths of Allegiance and Supremacy he hath not thereby manifested his loyalty in acknowledging him to be King of right but onely hath submitted for peace-sake to what though he owns not to be just or right he cannot remedy If the Laws of Trent Council or the Popes Edicts should be established amongst us which God forbid Mr. T. can it seems subscribe to them without owning them as just or the power imposing them he seems well acquainted with the cursed carnal Machiavellian principle of self-interest and preservation Cum fueris Romae Romano vivito more No need of taking up the Cross daily to follow Christ to subscribe to what is uppermost which we may do without owning it or the Authority by which it is established is better and safer We proceed in S. T. to the answering of some Objections that lay in our way as 1. That the Headship owned by them is an Headship under Christ To which we Answer 1. But this Headship is either of Christs appointment or 't is not if it be let it be shewen where it was instituted by him If it be not the assertion and owning of such an Headship is a denyal of Christ's Authority To this Mr. T. replies Sect. 13. The tearm Head of the Church is not used in the Oath of Supremacy this we have already answered in this Sect. and need not say more but Supream Governour And this is agreeable to Rom. 13. 1. 2 Tim. 2. 2. 1 Pet. 2. 13. Answ By Supream Governour over the Church of Christ is meant one that hath power seated in him for the prescribing Rules in things undetermined as Mr. T. grants the establishing
of Laws Institutions not of the appointment of Christ contrary thereunto who is the Fountain of all Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction and Church-Politie That Mr. T. sees such a Supream Governour to be agreeable to the Scriptures produced by him must be imputed to that acuteness of his whereby he may be supposed to tâ—anscend the rest of his Neighbours Ille solus sapiens reliqui velut umbra vagantur Of Rom. 13. 1. we have already spoken Though the Church be comprized under every soul yet it doth not follow that Magistrates are the Heads or such Supream Governours of the Church as are invested with power for the establishing and instituting of parts of Worship or commanding them in any thing relating to Worship as such of which the Apostle speaks not a tittle in that place Civil subjection as subjects of the Empire is the utmost can rationally from thence be argued for Those that were then Rulers and Governours were such as Nero Domitian who persecuted the Church design'd to root the Worship of Christ out of the world were Idolaters establisheâ— by force and violence an Heathenish Idolatrous Worship whom Christ never intended to intrust with any such power which is a sufficient answer to 1 Pet. 2. 13. which is exponed by our Annotat. Of Civil Government 1 Tim. 2. 2. is impertinently cited That because the Apostle there exhorts that Prayers be made for Kings therefore they have Ecclesiastical Power and Soveraignty committed to them over the Churches of Christ is a consequence that the very reciting of is confutation sufficient When I ascribe as he talks as much power to the Church as he doth to the King and Bishops I know not That I should make the Church the Head of the Church which is downright nonsense is not probable For the present I must crave leave to tell him he is utterly mistaken I ascribe no power of inventing Rites and Ceremonies devising Laws and Constitutions of their own relating to Worship as such to any one Church or Churches in the World I challenge him to make good his assertion I dispute against it as well as I can in S. T. Chap. 5. pag. 41 42. Whatever power I ascribe to the Church 't is only such as Christ hath entrusted her with that this should be as much a denial of Christ's Kingly Office as the ascription of a power over the Churches of Christ to any to whom he hath not committed such a power Mr. T. will not in hast be able to prove We further reply in S. T. 2dly The Headship pleaded for by the Church of Rome is no other viz. than a Head-ship under Christ To this Mr. T. 1. I grant the Church of Rome pleads for no other Headship But 2. They usurpe a power in some respects superiour to Christ in their dispensing with the keeping of lawful Oaths allowing of Incestuous Marriages Answ And the same may be said of the Heads of the Church of England I suppose this Animadverter may be yet of the mind that the Oath of the Solemn League and Covenant was a lawful Oath yet that can be dispensed with Marriages prohibited are not seldom allowed of by their Ecclesiastical jurisdiction We add 3dly 'T is not so as is pretended they own an Headship that is not in all things subordinate to Christ having a Law-making and a Law-giving Power touching Institutions of Worship that never came into his heart are flatly against his appointments as hath been proved We add in S. T. 4thly One Head in subordination to another doth as really make the Body a Monster as two Heads conjoyned To this Mr. T. The terms Head and Body being used only Metaphorically there 's no more Monstrosity in making a Head under a Head than in making a Governour under a Governour Answ 1. Should it be granted there were no Monstrosity in the thing it self yet there is in the expression in the Title an argument it was never from the Spirit of the Lord. 2. Bernard is of another mind Thou makest a Monster saith he if removing the hand thou makest the Finger to hang on the Head Thou makest the Body of Christ a Monster if thou placest the Members of his Body otherwise than he hath placed them in the Church Lib. 3. cap. 10. Con. ad Eugen. Much more to take a Beast a Lion or Bear as wicked and graceless men are whom yet Mr. T. seeâ—s to allow for Heads in the Churches of Christ and place them not only as Members in but as Heads over though under Christ the Church of God 3. The making of a Governour under a Governour in the Common-weale hath no Monstrosity in it because agreeable to the Will of God Principles of State-polity which a Head under a Head in the Church hath because dissonant contrary to the Law and Soveraignty of Christ its Supream Independant and alone Head A second Objection is in S. T. thus proposed by us That the Kings of Israel were the Heads succesively of the then Church and therefore a visible Headship over the Churches of Christ in the New Testament is lawful To which we Answer 1. That betwixt the Oeconomy of the Law and Gospel there is a vast disproportion many things were of old lawful which now to practice were no less than a denial of Christ come in the flesh 2. The Kings of Israel were Types of Christ which notwithstanding Mr. T. dictates that it is falsly and vainly asserted Sect. 14. till he prove the contrary we take for truths What he speaks with reference to the Kings of Israel and England we are unconcerned in That the Rulers of the Jews or any other Nations had de jure any such Dominion or Power over their Subjects as to make Laws introduce Constitutions of their own framing in matters relating to Worship and compel them by force and violence to subject thereunto Mr. T. hath not proved Isa 44. 28. Is a Prophesie of the Liberty the Jews should obtain under Cyrus to go up to Jerusalem to build the Temple of the fulfilling whereof you have an account Ezra 1. 1 2 3. But not a tittle of his Dominion about things sacred or introducing Constitutions relating to their Worship as such or compelling any to go up to Jerusalem is there mentioned He only removes the Babylonian yoke that was upon them and sets them at liberty to build the Temple of the Lord which the Kings before him would not grant them to do and Worship him according to his own appointments Isa 45. 1. is impertinently alledged relating only to the Victories and Conquests the Lord would afford unto Cyrus over the Cities and Nations of the World Jonah 3. 7 8. gives us an account of a Decree published by order of the King for a solemnization of a Fast and to turn from â—mpiety but this comes short of the proof of the Headship argued for which is an Headship having power of making and giving forth Laws touching Institutions of Worship Orders Rites
for it 'T is added in S. T. 2dly Let both parties be weighed in an upright ballance such as you judge to be offended with you for not hearing and such as are offended thereat I am bold to say the last mentioned for number holiness spirituality and tenderness do far surmount the former Mr. T. his Answer herento 1st is A composure of passionate expressions and reflections upon the Brethren of the Congregational way even the prime Leaders of them of stories of the piety of Hildersham Ball Bradshaw Gataker of the rottenness and stinkingness of puffing up my own party and disparaging dissenters Answ 1. But what needs all this wrath I own my self of no party love all that love Christ disparage not such as dissent from me have a reverend esteem of many of them only say That such as attend not on the present Ministers for number holiness spirituality and tenderness surmount those that do which I should not say but that this is generally known to be true The generality of their hearers being a debauch't formal covetous generation of men but few very few serious enlightned souls to be found in their Assemblies they worship else-where 2. That which he saith That by the Authors Rule if we would know our duty we must leave studying of the Scriptures and study men is false and scandalous I am fully of Tertullian's mind Non ex personis fides aestimanda sed ex fide persona and crave leave to tell him that had he studied men less and the Scriptures more we should have met with fewer Antiscriptural Notions than we do in his Theodulia I conceive the Rule mentioned by the Author of S. T. is bottom'd upon Scripture 1st Let it be remembred that the matter of our debate is touching what is at the least conceived to be the Christians Liberty not Duty 2dly That the case as proposed is of scandal by the use of my Liberty whether it be this way or that The eating the Idolothyte is my liberty I may do it or not do it without sin If I do it not my Heathen Neighbour will be offended and say I am proud and unsociable If I do it my Christian Brother will be scandalized What shall I do Offend not thy weak Brother saith Paul He bears the Image of Christ the other doth not But what if some Brethren be offended at my going others at my forbearing What shall I do now Why truly I know no better way to determine the doubt by a parity of Reason than by the Answer before given Consider who they are that will be offended that exceed in number For certainly if it be not my duty to offend one Saint because a Saint then when the case is brought to that pass that I must necessarily offend some Saints my duty lâ—es in doing that whereby I shall offend the smallest number of Saints which Mr. T. may confute at his leisure We add 3dly Let also the grounds of the offence on both sides bâ— weighed the one are offended at you that you build not up in practice in a day of trouble and cause thereby the enemies of the Lord to blaspheme and triumph what in a day of liberty you did in your preaching and practice pull down and destroy The other because of your disobedience to what they are satisfied and you your selves once were God is calling you to viz. to have nothing to do with separate from this generation of men To which Mr. T. 1st These words are Aenigmatical and require an Oedipus to unriddle them Answ 1. It may be Sir you your self stood so in your own light that you could not see to unriddle them 2. It may be you were not willing to have them unridled 3. If they need an Oedipus you your self shall be the man Sir you were he that in your Fermentum Pharisaeorum call'd the People from attending upon the Ministers of England as Preachers of Superstition though for the generality of them in some things much better then than now 't is an offence and just ground of offence to your Brethren to see you in this day of their distress to plead for what in the dawnings of Liberty you preached down You are the man that with hands lift up to Heaven swore to extirpate the Hierarchy with its Appurtenances Traditions who rejoyced and were glad at the prosperity of those who carried on that work resisting unto blood You are he who sate at White Hall as a Commissioner for the approbation of Ministers and rejection of such as were scandalous gloried in Print that the then Protector had so good an opinion of you as to constitute you one of that number and 't was one part of scandal to use the Service-Book Now after all this for you to write a Book for the defence of this very Hierarcy and Worship your Brethren think it a just ground of Scandal and at their refusing to hear you have and such as you at least no real ground at all since 't is no more than what they practised in dayes past and that without your offence by your leave or at least connivance as the People you particularly walk't with at Lempster did Hereby you have given occasion to Saints to mourn wicked prophane persons to rejoy So that the grounds of offence on your side are not in the least considerable in comparison of theirs What follows is a heap of impertinencies that I am not concerned in 1. I count not any the enemies of the Lord but such as are evidently such a generation of Swearers Drunkards Adulterers and Adulteresses these the turnings about of Professors cause to blaspheme thereat they rejoyce 2. He is mistaken whilst he thinks the Author of S. T. was for violent practices in dayes of Liberty who more or less was not concerned with those publick transactions nor ever was the prosecutor of one person in any kind who by the then Law might be obnoxious to ejection out of their places of spiritual or temporal promotion or otherwise 3. Of some of the things he mentions he himself was once guilty particularly of setting up private Brethren to preach which I account not his fault but wish he had had a little more respect to his own repute if regard to the wayes of truth and peace had not been prevalent upon him than to condemn others for practising the very things he himself hath been found in the practice of That we gather Churches out of Churches that particular Churches of Christ have not the power of government within themselves he should have proved before he had given liberty to his Pen to wander at this wild rate That eminent Independent as he calls him who would not have the Lords Prayer used in a prescript form of words is of age to answer for himself that he hath given any one just cause of offence by that assertion Mr. T. may evince by disproving what he hath written thereabout in his Vindiciae Evangelicae pag.
which one of their Reverend Prelates hath been moâ—e than once heard to say That the presence of Christ in the Sacramenâ— is not Symbolical but Realiter and upon that account we give adoration 't is like more are of his mind as horrible Idolatry as bowing before a Crucifix or Image 2. That Christ is not alone the Head of the Church 3. They seem to attribute greater efficacy to the Blood than the Body of Christ whilst they pray That their bodies may be made clean by his Body and their souls by his most precious Blood as they do in the prayer before that which is used at the Consecration 4. That Christ descended into Hell as if he descended into the place of the Damned as â—he Papists hold To which Mr. T. 1. 'T is in the Creed call'd the Apostles Answ 1. This is no part of Scripture Nor 2. ever composed by them whose name it bears Nor 3. is it certain when or by whom it was so done 4. To this very day it was never in any full and general Council confirmed and established So that its being in the Creed proves it not so authentick as that we are bound to believe it 5. What is said by Bishop Usher touching this matter I have not leisure to enquire since it 's put after his burial it can signifie no other descent but into the place of the damned which is as rotten a figment as ever was invented 3. Touching Man 1. They generally own I speak especially of them who are called the Church free-will And 2. an implicite Faith not in words but really and indeed whilst they say We must practise in Worship the determinations of the Church though we our selves see no reason for them because she hath determined them and that this is reason sufficient for our so doing i. e. We must in these things believe â—or Faith must preceed practice in the Worship of God as the Church believes 4. Touching Worship They hold 1. That Worship devâ—sed by man though abused to Idolatry is the Worship of God with which he is well-pleased 2. That God is more particularly to be worship'd in one place than in another and that these places being Consecrated are the Houses and Churches of God and upon that account holy and to be reverenced 3. That reading an Homilie or a few Prayers out of the Liturgie is a more excellent worship of God though no where commanded in the Scriptures than Preaching which must therefore give way to it 4. That none must be suffered publickly to worship God or privately except in their own Families but according to Forms of mans devising Which 5. they say Is the Worship of God 5. Touching the Sacraments 1. They seem to intimate that there are more than two when they say there are two only generally necessary to salvation 2. That Women may Baptize in casu necessitatis as the Papists hold and that such Baptism is valid 3. That Baptism is to be administred with a Cross in the fore-head 4. That all Children when baptized are regenerate and received by the Lord for his own Children by adoption Common-Prayer-Book of Publick Baptism 5. That Children being baptized have all things necessary for their salvation and shall undoubtedly be saved 6. That all that are baptized have received remission of sins Confirmation before the imposition of hands 7. They seem to make the imposition of hands a Sacrament when they say 'T is a sign to certifie Children of Gods grace and favour towards them Ibid. in the Prayer after the imposition of hands Yea they really do so if the definition they themselves give of a Sacrament be right viz. That it is an outward and visible Sign of an inward and spiritual Grace 8. So they to make Matrimony by that expression used by them consecrated the state of Matrimony to such an excellent mystery in one of the Collects in the form of the solemnization of Matrimony 9. They adore before the Elements of Bread and Wine 10. That the wicked and ungodly may receive it 11. That though the most notorious offenders be partakers of it yet the People that joyn with them are not defiled thereby 12. That the Body of Christ was broken the blood of Christ was shed particularly for them 6. Touching the Church 1. That under the time of the Gospel there is a National Church 2. That the most wicked and their seed may be compelled and received to be members of the Church which is notoriously known nor have they the face to deny it though Mr. T. talkes as if they would to be consonant to their principles and practice 3. That 't is not lawful to separate from this Church whoever do so are Sectaries Schismaticks to be excommunicated imprisoned a bloody error 4. That the Clergie is the Church as is the Pope and his Conclave to the Romanists 5. That these is another Head of the Church besides Christ 6. That 't is not in the power of the Church to choose their own Officers 7. That 't is in the power of Kings to appoint the highest Church-Officers 8. That Lord-Bishops are Officers of the Church of Christ though no where of his appointment 9. That Lord-Bishops can give the Holy Ghost and power to forgive and retain sins 10. That 't is in the power of a Priest to absolve from sins In the Visitat of the Sick 11. That 't is not in the power of the Church to excommunicate but the Bishop 12. That Pastors and Teachers are to be ordained by Lord-Bishops 13. That dumb Ministers are lawful Ministers of Christ 14. That the Ministry Worship and Government which Christ hath appointed to his Church is not to be received or joyned unto unless the Magistrates where they are reputed Christians do allow it And this their practice preacheth forth 7. Touching things supposed indifferent 1. That 't is in the power of the Church i. e. the Bishops in their Convocation to make that which is in it self indifferent a necessary part of Worship 2. To devise what Rites it pleaseth and add to the Worship of Christ 3. That Marriage may be forbidden at certain Popish seasons as in Lent Advent Rogation week 4. That the Cope Surplice Tippet Rochet are meet and decent Ornaments for the Worship of God and ministry of the Gospel 5. That Altars Candles Organs are necessary and useful in the Church of God Mr. T. his thoughts are vain when he thinks that they will not assert this Certainly they will not be so imprudent as to aver that they lavish the Gold out of the Bag for the erection of that in the Service of God which is neither necessary nor useful 6. That there may be Holy Dayes appointed to the Virgin Mary John Baptist the Apostles all Saints and Angels together also with Fasts on their Eves on Ember dayes Fridayes Saturdayes so called heathenishly enough Mr. T. answers They will deny this to be their Tenent and câ—tes Whitgift c. telling
is plain by the Temple of Solomon Like as the Clergie and Priests so also â—he People and Laity or else unless all such as be now addict unto avarice from the least to the most be first reclaimed as well the People as the Clergie and Priests Albeit as my mind now giveth me I believe rather the first that thâ—n shall arise a new People formed after the new man which is created after God of the which People new Clerks and Priests shall come and be taken thaâ— shall hate covetousness and the glory of this Life hastening to a heavenly conversation notwithstanding all these things shall come to pass and be brought by little and little in order of times dispensed of God for the same purpose And this God doth and will do for his own goodness and the riches of his great loâ—ganimity and patience giving time and space of repentance to them that have long lien in their sins to amend flee from the face of the Lords fury whilst that in like maâ—ner the carnal People and Priests successively and in time shall fall away â—e consumed with the Moth. But we have a more sure Word of Prophesie that the pompous carnal Church and Ministry the Whore and false Prophet with all their retinue shall be dethroned and for ever cease to be And then shall piety flourish and the knowledge of the Lord shall cover the Earth as the waters do the Seas Then what shame will cover you that have not hearkened to Christs voice though he loudly calls you to come with him from Lebanon to look from the top of Amana and Shenir from the Lyons Dens and Mountains of the Leopards that you have not forsaken the Tents of false Worshippers Sect. 2. Counsel and advice to Saints separated from the carnal worldly Church 2. TO you that have heard and obeyed the voice of your Beloved in separating from the present Worship and Worshippers would I also speak a few words 1. Pray hard for the making the vision pâ—ain that you may understand how long it is to the end of these wonders The wise shall understand 2. Wait watch and pray for the glorious effusion of the Spirit according to the promise of the Father Antichrist's day is now even run out not the first fruits only but the full harvest of New-Covenant glories shall shortly be upon you 3. Get on the whole Armour of God that you may be fitted and fixed to accost the Prince of darkness and his Hellish Armado in their next and last attempt against the Saints when the Dragon will be wroth and go about to make war with the remnant of the Womans Seed that keep the Commandments of God and have the Testimony of Jesus 4. Condemn the world and worldly Church by those shines of holyness and that heavenly conversation shall be found amongst you 5. Take heed of degenerating into the Form mind the power of Christianity and Godliness Be not contented to have a Name to Live when Dead Take heed of the Temptation of the Day a Temptation to slumbring especially considering the Cry at Midnight which is a Ministerial voice or out-cry The Bridegroom cometh go ye out to meet him 6. Press after a Gospel-Spirit of Love and Union one with another Study to be of one Spirit of one Mind Wherein you differ for want of the same measure of Light bear one with another as becometh Brethren of the same Father Members of the same Body pray one for another and if any one be otherwise minded God will reveal this also unto him in due time Know not one another as Men only but as Chrâ—stiâ—ns Let the bottom of your Communion each with other be not the foundâ—tion of agreement in extrafundamental Principles which the Spirit of Antichrist leads to but blessed satisfaction that you are received beloved begotten again of God and bear his Image Study to forget the names of distinction that have been too much used in dayes past Neither Presbyterian nor Independant nor Anabaptist is any thing but if real Saints we are all one in Christ Remember the Disciples were first called Christians at Antioch The departure from Scripture words and appellations hath had no small influence into that Antichristian Apostasie that hath overspread the Nations Take heed of animosities and divisions one amongst another 'T is the Devils grand Maxime Divide Impera Divide and Rule Bear with and forbear one another in love Prefer your peace and edification before private interest Methinks such Discourses with a Pen dipt in Gall as drop from this Aâ—imadv should engage us to make it our study to be of one heart and one soul if we cannot in all things be of one Judgement and Opinion But whither sail I 'T is a pleasant Sea a sweet Theam the Lord bow the hearts of his People every one of them to an imbracement of it I must not expatiate 7. Hold fast that you have that no one take your Crown Yet a little while and he that shall come will come and will not tarry Sect. 3. An Appendix or Felo de se being a brief but faithful Collection of several passages in his former Writings opposite to what is asserted by him in his Theodulia LAstly to Mr. T. our present Antagonist would I speak a few words by way of Counsel and advice I beseech you Sir in the bowels of Christ 1. With a sober spirit to review your Theodulia and consider whether you will be able to justifie your undertaking therein What have you been doing but sadning the hearts of the righteous and gladding the hearts of the wicked Had it not been better you had let Baal have pleaded for himself since one had thrown down his Altar It may be in your retired thoughts you now begin to think so The design it self was bad but Sir how can you review the frame of spirit the gall and bitterneâ—s the reviling and reproachful language with which your Book is stuft from the one end thereof to the other against the VVayes and People of Christ whom you in your Conscience think to be so and hold up your face with confidence before God and his People I had once thought to have gathered into one heap the several parcels of scurrilous unsavoury scandalous and false expressions you were pleased to make use of but I found the dunghill would swell so big and the smell of it might be so offensive that after I had made some progress therein I forbore 2. Read with seriousness the Reply we have made to the Treatise mentioned You see Sir we have not writ after your Copy nor rendred reviling for reviling into your bosom we have otherwise learned Christ and commit our Cause to him that judgeth righteously The Lord the Lord God his Spirit Scriptures and People be judge betwixt us 3. Read twice ere you Reply once You know Sir whose Motto it was Festina lente sat citò si sat bene Too much haste to oppose Truth
Disciples to appeal in matters of Scandal found upon their Brethren with which he hath promised his Presence to which he hath given the Keys of the Kingdom power of binding and loosing is a Church of his own forming But this is a particular Congregational-Church Mat. 18. 17 18 19. as we have demonstrated Therefore Arg. 7. If the Form of Churches be not of Christ's appointment then there is either no beauty splendour glory therein or Christ bears not cannot bear that glory But both of these are absurd 2 Cor. 3. 7 8 9. Zech. 6. 13. Therefore Arg. 8. If the Form of Churches be not of Christ's appointment Then the Church of Christ may have communion with yeeld obedience to the inventions constitutions ordinances and appointments of men of Antichrist the Man of Sin But that they are charged â—ot to do upon most dreadful penalties Rev. 18. 4 5. 14. 9 10 11. Therefore Arg. 9. If the Form of Churches be not of Christ's appointment Then either Christ hath not left sufficient Laws for the government of the Saints or man may super-add to his Laws But both these are false scandalous and injurious to Christ Gal. 3. 15. 2 Tim. 3. 16 17. Rev. 22. 18 19. Arg. 10. If the Form of Churches be not of Christ's appointment Then the Church is not to be governed as 't is taught for it must be taught only by the Word of God Isa 8. 2. But the Consequence is absurd Therefore Arg. 11. If the placing of Officers in particular Churches be of the appointment of Christ then the Churches themselves are so But the placing of Officers in particular Churches is of the appointment of Christ 1 Cor. 12. 28. Eph. 4. 11 12. Therefore Arg. 12. Those Churches which Christ owns for his Candlesticks in allusion to the Candlesticks of the Temple which were purely of divine institution are of the institution of Christ But Christ owns particular Churches for his Candlesticks viz. the Seven Churches of Asia which we have before demonstrated were particular Churches Rev. 1. 20. Therefore Those that desire further satisfaction in this matter may consult a little Treatise lately published entituled A brief Instruction in the Worship of God and Discipline of the Churches of the New Testament p. 93. where they will find it clearly and amply debated Sect. 18. Of National Ministers What meant by Ministry Of extraordinary and ordinary Officers Upon what account the Church of Engl. is asserted to be a false Church Mr. T. his Arguments to prove that in a National Church or a Church irregular in its constitution may be a true Ministry of Christ answered The contrary is demonstrated THE Design of Mr. T. his 18th and 19th Sect. is to answer the second Query in S. T. Whether National Ministers are the Ministers of Christ Or whether there can be a true Ministry in a false Church as a National Church must be if not of divine Institution upon what pretence soever it be so denominated Before he attempts the Resolution of this Query he considers First What the Ministry is of which it is enquired whether it be true or false And having at large acquainted us with the signification of the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 he tells us he understands the query to be meant of that part of the Ministry which is by preaching But I must crave leave to tell him he somewhat misseth the white of the Authors intendment who by it intends an Office-Power of Ministry for discharge of that whole work that peculiarly relates to the Ministers of the Gospel to be performed and managed by them according to the Will of Christ Whether it be the Ministry of the Word the Lords Supper c. This as Mr. T. saith rightly is either the Ministry of extraordinary Officers as Apostles c. of which our Question is not or of ordinary Officers as Pastors c. of whom it is queried Whether ordinary National Officers or Ministers are of the Institution of Christ What saith Mr. T He tells us 1. That Paul was a Minister not only to a particular Church but even to the Gentiles Answ That this doth not in the least concern the Question in debate which is of ordinary Church-Officers and Paul as I remember with the rest of the Apostles was an extraordinary one receiving a Commission for the Preaching of the Gospel to all Nations he will be so ingenuous as upon the review to acknowledge Secondly A Church may be said to be false many wayes Answ True it may so but in his discourse there abouts we are little concerned who assert the Church of England to be a false Church because it is destitute of the true Matter visible Saints and the true Form freely giving up themselves unto the Lord and one another to worship him together as a Community according to the revelation of his will But he will prove Thirdly That in a National Church or a Church irregular in its constitution i. e. that hath neither the matter nor form of a true Church of Christ or discipline may be a true Ministry of Christ His first Argument is Arg. 1. If the truth of the Ministry depend upon the truth of the Church or its regularity then where is no true regular Church there is no true Ministry But that is false since there may be a true Ministry where there is no Church at all and therefore no true Church Therefore Answ If by a true regular Church Mr. T. means a Church for matter and form rightly constituted according to the mind of Christ and by a true Ministry the Ministry of ordinary Officers such as Pastors and Teachers as he must do if he speak pertinently we deny his Minor Proposition Where there is no true Church at all in a false Church or Church not regularly constituted according to the mind of Christ as is the case of the National Church of England there cannot be a true Ministry which Mr. T. forgot to attempt the proof of And indeed his abilities seem to lie much in Dogmatizing and 't is great pitty but he were created a Rabbi in the Pithagorean School his accuteness therein being so incomparably excellent 1st That there can be no true ordinary Ministry where there is no Church is manifest First Where ever we read of ordinary Ministers we read of them as appertaining to some one particular Church or other Acts 14. 23. 15. 2 4 22. 20. 17 28. 1 Cor. 12. 28. Phil. 1. 1. Tit. 1. 5. 1 Pet. 5. 1 2. As good a man may imagine an Husband to be without a Wife or a Major without a Corporation or a Father without Children as a Minister without a Church in which he is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to minister according to the will and appointment of Christ Secondly Every lawful Minister is elected and chosen to his Office by the Church or People of God Therefore there can be no true ordinary
Synods yet was he not set over others nor endowed with greater power than the rest cap. conf Helvet prior Arti 15. the French Churches say We believe that all true Pastors wheresoever they are placed are endowed with equal authority under that only head high and sole universal Bishop Jesus Christ and therefore it is lawful for no one Church to claim authority and dominion over another cap conf gal Confes. Art 30. So say the Belgick Churches Bely conf Art 31. So that Mr. T. out of his great love and dutifulness to his Mother the Church of England is not sparing to cast dirt in the face of the Churches planted by the Apostles themselves and most or all the Reformed Churches at this day who own no such inequality as he pleads for and therefore were are all of them not well-ordered Churches in comparison at the least to her and the Church of Rome where the Hierarchie is established To the 16th parallel about holy Vestments he is able to object on-thing worth the considering The 17th is The Popish Priests are tyed to a book of stinted Prayers and a prescript Order devised by man for their Worship and Ministration so are the Ministers of England and that to such a one as is taken out of the Popes Portuis To this Mr. T. replies 1. The Assembly of Westminster prescribed a Directory for Worship Answ 1. Quid hoc ad Rhombum I am not in the least concern'd to justifie all that was done by that Assembly and am apt to think they might in that matter have spared their pains 2dly The same Assembly abhorred the Common-Prayer-Book Service as a most detestable and filthy Idol preached printed against it procured its Abolition 3dly Every one that knows any thing knows that upon various accounts there is no likeness betwixt these two None were compell'd to the use of this or that form of words by the Directory as in the Book of Common-Prayer He adds 2dly Those prayers and portions of Scripture which are holy and good are never the worse because they were in the Popes Portuis no more than the acknowledgement of Jesus to be the Son of the most High God is the worse because the Devil used it Mar. 5. 7. Answ 1. Of the Scriptures and that glorious Truth of Christ's Eternal Deity as the Son of the most High God and the Common-Prayer-Book-Service there is not the same reason They were from the inspiration of the Holy Spirit originally Divine this of man devised upon the prevailing of Apostacy upon the Churches of Christ imposed with threatnings cruelties and slaughters upon the Children of Christ by his professed Enemy abused by a confessed Idolatrous generation of men if there be any such in the world That because the abuse of the Scriptures and the Truths contained in them doth not render them the worse therefore a devised Service that it the best is wicked and abominable in its imposition intolerable used by Idolaters is not the worse I chalenge Mr. T. to make good 2. Though the Scriptures are not the worse because portions of them are read in the Romish Idolatrous Service yet the following the Romish Synagogue in curtailing the Scriptures reading one part of a Chapter at one time another at another and manifestly misapplying them causing them also to give place to the Apochryphal Writings is abominable He goes on 3dly That which is suggested as if the Common-Prayer-Book now in use were little different from the Popes Missal he tells us is untrue Answ 1. The Animadverter is a little mistaken We affirm in S. T. that the Common-Prayer-Book-Service used in King Edward the 6th's dayes and the Popes Missal were not much different And for the proof of that we produced the Testimony of the King and Council which we thought M. T. would never have questioned That the Common-Prayer-Book now in use and that then used is not much different every body knows 2dly 'T is true all that is in the Pope 's Missal is not in the Common-Prayer-Book nor did any one ever assert this but the most that is in the Common-Prayer-Book is stolen out of the Popes Missal The Epistles and Gospels the Prayers or Collects the rites and usages therein joyned are so and this Mr. T. denyes not I had thought to have represented the truth of this to the eye of the Reader by exhibiting our English and the Popes Latine Masse at one view to him which I have by me faithfully collected and compared together But the swelling of this Treatise unexpectedly and the difficulty of printing any thing of this nature that is voluminous through the tyranny of the Prelates makes me wholly to lay aside that intendment to a fitter season if need be The summe of what we have been offering in this matter we say in S. T. is this 1. Those Ministers that in their names office admission into their offices are not to be found in the Scripture are not Ministers of Christ act not by vertue of an Authority Office-power Calling received from him 2. Those Ministers that in their names office admission into their office are at a perfect agreement with the Ministers of Antichrist such are the Popish Priests acknowledged to be are not the Ministers of Christ But such as have been abundantly demonstrated are the present Ministers of England Therefore The Minor Mr. T. saith is manifestly false he hath said nothing to prove it in the main Answ This is soon said had he proved it manifestly false be had done somewhat Whether any thing considerable hath been offered by us for the proof of the Minor others besides Mr. T. and I will now judge Sect. 4. The present Ministers of Engl. proved Antichristian They act from a Power Office and Calling received from a Lord-Bishop whose Office is Antichristian The opinion of the Learned touching them Their Office is not to be found in the Scripture Eph. 4. 11. Rom. 12. 7 8. 1 Tim. 3. 12. Acts 14. 23. Tit. 1. 5 7. Acts 20. 28. know them not They were not known in the Church for some hundreds of years after The Office of Lord-Bishops wherein it consists Of Diotrephes his asserting Supremacy Our Bishops neither Evangelists nor Pastors nor Teachers nor Apostles proved Mat. 28. 19. explained Of the Rise of Episcopacy The Testimonies of Dr. Hammond Whitaker Reynolds Eusebius c. touching it WE further prove in S. T. The present Ministers of England act in the holy things of God by virtue of an Antichrâ—stan Power Office and Calling Because 2dly That they act from a Power Office and Calling received from a Lord-Bishop whose Office is Antichristian This the summe To which Mr. T. replies That neither himself nor any sober Writer judged them Antichristian Answ 1. Whether he once so judged of them his taking the Covenant to extirpate them wherein they are condemned as Antichristian will evince 2. What he or I judge them is not material that no sober Writer or considerate man that