may not women as Church Members challenge power and right in them do they not challenge the same in some of the new Congregations Is not investing Non-Elders with Ministerial power placing the power of the Keys in the Body of the Congregation and complaining of the Elders that rule well for taking too much upon them the sin of Corah Is it not a sin of the New as well as of the Old Testament Doth Jude Historically or Prophetically speak of it If Prophetically When and in whom is it or shall be fulfilled Doth Election without Ordination make the Officer Were the seven chosen by the people Acts 6. Officers by vertue of their Election before the Apostles prayed and imposed hands If so then did not the people rather then the Apostles appoint them over the businesse If Ordination be lesse then Election then why is laying on of hands rather then lifting up of hands in suffrages reckoned amongst the Principles Heb 6. Why is the charge more expresse that Ordination rather then Election should not be suddenly and hastily made Why is the description of persons to be ordained much more large in the Epistles to Timothy and Titus which were to ordain then of persons to be elected in any or all the Epistles written to the Churches to whom such election is conceived to belong Is Ordination of Ministers an act of Presbyterian power or of Church-liberty Did the Apostles which you confesse (a) Reasons of the dissenting Brethren did wherever they came leave the Elders and people to the exercise of that right which be longed to them invest non-Elders with the power of Ordaining Did not Churches wait and not ordain their own Elders though they had as much Authority and knew it as well as Churches now do Did not the Apostles go themselves to ordain Elders in every Church or send some Elders or other to that purpose Doth the Scripture require that every particular Congregation may yea must though she hath neighbour-Congregations to assist which is our case alone ordain her own Elders What one Elder in Scripture was ordained by those that were onely of that particular Congregation where he was to officiate What may be the reason that the Apostle which did all things fitly writing to so many Churches in each of which was a particular Eldership did not so largely if at all set down Rules for Ordination as in the Epistles to Timothy and Titus Did the Presbytery that ordained Timothy consist onely of one particular Congregation and of what Congregation and how is it proved Was not every Apostle as also Timothy and Titus as it were an Eldership of the Churches extraordinarily combined in one man When the Apostles joyned with other â—lders in Ordination under what notion did they joyn as Elders of sundry Churches or onely as Co-elders of that particular Congregation If under the later notion what did they adde unto them the Elders of a Church being but Three or Four having as much power as if by addition of Two or Three they were made Five or Six May we not grant in some cases that Supreme Civil power suppose in executing one that had murderer his father and attempted to murder his mother as well as Ecclesiastical may be exercised in one Congregation yea in one family if it be in a wildernesse when it can have no assistance in Government without having the least thought that in ordinary eases every Congregation or Family ought to be Independent in Ecclesiastical or Civil matters Ordinary Elders imposing hands on Apostles or Apostolike men as you say the Teachers of Anttoch ordained Paul an Apostle Act. 13.1 2 did they set him apart to officiate onely in one their own Congregation and not in other Churches For example not in Rome to which Paul writing calls himself with reference to that Ordination 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 an Apostle separated c. Is there not as many precepts or presidents for admitting to the Sacrament known Christians of no set Congregation which you so much boggle at as of admitting the members of other Churches and their children which you commonly practice Do not Elders receive their power and commission for the whole Church of Christ and may they not having a Call preach in any Congregation administer the Sacrament to any Christian yea vote in any Synod as the Scotish Divines by consent do vote in our Assembly Doth not communion of Churches bring communion of Offices and Officers Else how can a Minister administer the Sacrament as an Officer for as a gifted man he cannot dispense it to men of another Church by vertue of the said communion of Churches And if so why may not an Elder of other Churches in Jurisdiction If recommendation be as it were a dismission by your own Principles differing not really but onely in time may not a Minister recommended that is dismissed for a time act Ministerially in another Congregation may not the Maior of one Corporation by consent of all parties interested act authoritatively out of the said Corporation as the Maior of London is Bayliff of Southwark And may not the Colonels of Lancashire your own similitudes by like consent govern and rule the Souldiery of Cheshire Is not the whole Church of God one Corporation one City ut supra And may not then the Aldermen and Officers notwithstanding their several Wards Limits Companies joyn together in a Court of Common counsel for the Government of the City May a Pastor as a Pastor pray for the Universal Church or no Is it a divine or but an humane Institution that Ministers should be maintained by Lords-day collections If humane can any man which holds all Humane Institutions unlawful with good conscience offer at those Collections If you say it is divine where is the warrant for it Dare you determine it as certain or do you but dispute it as probable Do not those Independent Ministers which enjoy Church lands and receive Tythes or compositions for them or yeerly half yeerly quarterly stipends hold these ways of maintenance as lawful as Lords-day-collection By what Scripture prove ye that it is the duty of any Christians that are not of your Church nor ever were but are by you excluded out of it possibly because they will not take your Covenant or subscribe your Confession or the like to contribute to your maintenance seeing you take no charge of them nor so much as preach to them as Pastors Have you from Christ any power to receive maintenance from such May a Church to save charges make it a rule or constant practice to chuse no Ruling-elders though never so fit and able but such as are able to maintain themselves Doth not that Text 1 Tim. 5.17 hold forth the maintenance notwithstanding the poverty of those times as well as the lawfulnesse of Ruling elders Whether Moderators and Presidents of Synods and Church-assemblies Assessors Scribes and Registers of Church-proceedings to say nothing of ringing Bells to
CERTAIN QUERES Modestly though plainly Propounded to such as affect the Congregational-way And specially To Master Samuel Eaton and Mr. Timothy Taylor WITH AN EPISTLE Also directed to them Concerning their late Book Intituled A Defence of sundry Positions c. BY Richard Hollinworth Mancuniensis You shall not turn aside to the right hand or to the left Deut. 5. If they speak not according to this Word it is because there is no light in them Isai 8.20 If the light that is in thee be darknesse how great is that darknesse Matth. 6. London Printed by Ruth Raworth for Luke Fawn and are to be sold at the signe of the Parrot in Pauls Church-yard 1646. THE EPISTLE Reverend and beloved Brethren I Have perused your defence lately Printed which how able or unable to justifie Independency or to vindicate the Positions and Scriptures time may discover At present I have these few things to advertise you of First you charge me with provoking you to be my Antagonists in Print a In the Epistle from which I was so far that when others rather then my self thought fit the Examination of sundry Scriptures c. which for the most part was an Answer to some Allegations as they were privately made to me for satisfaction should be Printed I gave special charge that neither my own name nor the name of Manchester much lesse the name of other persons and places should be inserted at length in or before the Book though some few Copies came out otherwise lest I should seem either to provoke persons or reveal secrets The deep and heavy charge as you call it b in the first part of my Preface against misinterpretation of Scripture as a belying of God counterfeiting the King of Kings hand c. Though I now see how I have sped I repent not of nor see I cause why you should repine at it or complain of it if you have clearly manifested as in your Title page you say you have the Positions and Scriptures alleaged for your Church-way and by me examined to be sufficient pertinent and full of power And yet I finde my self deeply and heavily charged by you To deprave places to blot and blur sweet humble spirited holy pertinent expressions to wrong the Elders of N. E. to wrest allegations c. Yea though I said I will not tell you who said All the Church is holy ye take too much upon you Yet you think it not unworthy my serious consideration Whether it might not be said to me as sometimes Christ said to one of the twelve when he asked Master Is it I and he answered Thou hast said c Psa 85.15 a bitter personal invective What is your beloved brother your good brother as a Judas or Corah Dathan c I hope in this to say no more we neither are nor shall be Brethren and desire an humble modest Christian Contestation with you which are in your own phrase my Antagonists in Print in this grave controversie and withall calmly to consider what I spake in relation to your cause not to any person whether investing non-Elders with Ministerial power placing Church power in the body of the Congregation and complaining of the Elders that rule over them in the Lord for taking too much upon them be not the gain-saying of Corah a sin of the new as well as of the old Testament Whereof if I be guilty I justly bear this reproach if not you have much wronged me but God hath sent you to do it from whom I deserve much worse though not from you any evil The usual occasion of your censures of depraving places c. is a wide I hope not a willing mistake in you and not any iniquity in my hands or heart You expect the Positions and Scriptures alleaged to agree fully and exactly with the places cited in the Margent which I neither professed nor intended nor could effect without some in mine opinion unfitting alterations of them as they were alleaged to me But on the contrary for evidence that I followed another rule then the Printed Books as at the first coming out of my Book I advertised one of your Brethren I sometimes alleaged no Book at all even where you know I might as Pos 4. Other times that by comparing Arguments that otherwise came to hand with the Printed Books I might probably intimate from whence they were taken and also evidence the truth of what I said in my Preface That Independency for the most part produceth the same Texts in Print which she did in Preaching Writing and Conference I alleaged Printed Books the By-standers mentioned in the Preface with these or the like clauses See your own Defence p. 1 13 14 46 78 90. See almost the same Argument verbatim The like you have This though not so fully This seems to be taken out of These Scriptures are alleaged though not with such tartnesse c. And sometimes I alleaged for one Position the second for example two or three Printed Books differing possibly more then in phrase one from another which are so evident signes that I tyed not my self to the Printed Books that I cannot but wonder that you did not observe it which had you done you needed not to have fought so earnestly and frequently with your own fiction for if it be acknowledged that the Scriptures alleaged witnesse no such thing as they are produced for whether they be in Printed Books or no I as I told you in my Preface have my full end You have also either to bring an odium upon me or the cause I plead sprinkled here and there both unlovingly and unnecessarily some secret intimations of affecting Prelacy whereas I in the worst times was not so much or no more Prelatical then the greatest and godliest Independents in the Kingdom if not at least one of you have been though what ever I was or am that is no Answer to my Arguments nor do I plead the cause of Prelacy which we have Covenanted to endeavour to the utmost to extirpate But of the Government of the Reformed Churches which we have Covenanted to defend against the common enemy maintained by godly learned men our betters known opposers of Prelacy which have obtained a good report in Manchester and the parts about it viz. Master Burn of Manchester Master Gosnol of Boulton Master Fleetwood of Wigan both Master Midsley's of Rachdal Master Storer of Stockport Master Hildersham of Ashby Master Herring of Shrowesbury Master Ball of Whitmore Master John Paget to omit his Brother Master Thomas Paget and multitudes of others now alive Master Hunt of Oldham Master Rathband of Cockey Master Gee of Newton Master â—ilecoat of Stretford c. Nor is the Presbyterian-way a Prelatical-way but a Social-way as between Friends Colleagues Confederates Brethren where all judge and all are judged all things done communi consilio where no Congregation is above another Congregation no Minister above another Minister though the major part
of them as of the spirits of the Prophets to the prophets and of Congregational Members though equal one to another be about the minor part where every Elder is left to enjoy the Office of an Elder and each Congregation left to the freedom of the Congregation in what belongs to them and they able to perform where Presbyteries Classes Synods of the same Congregations or their Commissioners in matters of common concernment do strengthen and help particular Congregations walking according to the rule and reduce such as walk not in truth and peace but are leavened with errour and variance and Elders upon a call do teach and rule and perform all Ministrations with reference to and the best advantage of the whole Church of Christ though more specially of those parts of it to which they are most related Also I cannot but observe that there is a difference between your Title-page in which you say indefinitely That the Positions and Scriptures alleaged not some or many of them by me examined are sufficient pertinent and full of power and are manifested yea clearly manifested so to be and some other passages in your Book in which you disclaim the places applyed to Pos 23. as it is by me controverted and are confident they are not found in the Works of any Congregational man d P. 105. And Pos 15. after the Allegation of some Authorities in stead of answering a Text upon which the distinction of Pastors and Teachers is grounded you the one a Teacher and the other Pastor conclude If we do put a false glosse upon the Scripture by mis-interpreting of Ephes 4.11 yet more modest language let any man finde immodestly in that examination if he can had become you brother seeing such Reverend and Learned men whom your self so much honour have gone before us in this Exposition e Pag. 7. ult So Pos 19. do you clearly manifest or so much as assert that the Text Matth. 18. what ever other Texts do doth prove That the Church must be Congregational Pos 20. have you clearly manifested that Matth. 16. proves that the Keys were given to Peter to be used by him for you could not but know that to be the meaning as a Disciple or Beleever not as an Officer f Pa. 93. 1. Pos 12. have you clearly manifested that Col. 4.17 proves the Churches power to censure her Officers when the best Arguments you bring to prove Archippus his faultinesse without which it was no censure amounts but to a strong presumption g Pa. 59. l. 14. and that you know is a weak proof So Pos 2. have you clearly manifested from Adams family that seven eight or nine make a Church when for any thing you Answer Adams family was no more a Church when they were seven or eight then when they were but two or three and do acknowledge notwithstanding your clear manifestation that God hath not precisely determined what number doth make a Church h P. 10. lin 14 33 34. Also methinks you have not manifestly cleared that Revel 8.8 9. is sufficient and full of power against settled endowments in the Church of which Text you say Our brethren present their Exposition as probable they force the Interpretation upon no man And Pos 7. you do not manifestly clear that 2 Cor. 8.5 doth pertinently and powerfully prove that every Member at his admission doth promise to give himself i P. 68. l. 12. to the Church to be guided by them when you say The practice of the Churches of Macedonia by way of allusion is made use of and the Argument is a comparatis k P 44. l. 18. For you know Allusions and Comparisons are not Argumentative And Pos 13. instead of clear manifestation of Ministers maintenance out of the Stock of the Church you say We think we see most warrant for it from the New Testament and as most probable once disputed it but neither then nor now are we peremptory in it l P. 61. l. 5 6 7. Finally to omit more instances when you say We think We conceive it is probable c. or do never so confidently assert any of the several Positions and do not prove the same by the several Texts respectively alleaged nor clear the said Texts from all the Objections made against your Exposition one material Objection unanswered being enough to invalidate the same you afford so many Arguments to any wise Reader that you have not clearly manifested the Positions and Scriptures where such speeches are found to be sufficient c. As for your pretending to prove some Positions and Practises by other Scriptures and Arguments which makes your Book swell so big Suppose you should really so prove them yet that as to mine intent expressed in the Preface is but a by-matter For Positions and Practises may be true and lawful and yet not truely nor lawfully grounded on the Texts alleaged and if I answer them and you produce other new ones we shall contend in infinitum and not come to any issue I could wish we might keep close to the Scriptures and Positions alleaged till they be one way or other cleared and then we may more safely and orderly proceed to other Scriptures and Arguments If the Positions and Scriptures be so clearly sufficient why do you not directly Answer the Examination but obliquely and evadingly in sundry places For instance in the very first words of your first Reply when I alleage one thing viz. That the Apostles never taught or practisied to gather or separate one part of this true Church and another part of that especially persons which themselves converted not to make a purer Church You answer of another thing which was never denyed viz. The Apostles both taught and practised the separating of some Jews from other Jews and gathered them into a Christian Church while yet the Jewish Church you say was not dissolved but was a Church of God But suppose you did solidly prove that the Church of the Jews was then a true Church Yet first it was not a Christian Church nor are the Reformed Churches and Ministers to be compared to the then Jewish Church and the Priests thereof and you should prove Separation from a Christian Church Secondly It was but one Church and you should shew gathering out of several Churches Thirdly It was onely of those Jews which they converted to Christianity from unconverted Jews and you should shew the gathering of Christians converted by others from other Christians converted as well as they and possibly from those persons by whom they were converted Fourthly That Church was then by Gods Commandment to be dissolved and many Churches to be built upon its ruines and therefore doth no more warrant the building of one Christian Church upon the ruine of other true Christian Churches then the Parliaments Commission if there were such a one to the Inhabitants of Derby Hundred to take down Latham house to build them houses
to be submitted to then if they were plainly professed and practised as Institutions of the Church Was not Episcopacy the worse when Jus Divinum was stamped on it Whether profession and practice of humane inventions as a part of Gods Worship or as essential to a Church a Minister or Church-Member was not formerly esteemed and asserted to be and is it not still Antichristian impiety and much liker to procure Gods judgements on the Kingdom then the discovery confutation and opposition of them Whether they which in opposition to Presbyterial Government the Government of the most and best Reformed Churches make Disturbance Divisions Separations pretending their way is the Scriptural-way the onely way must not have as clear yea more clear Scriptures for their way then the other or else be justly accounted enemies to Truth and Peace Doth the Scripture require the new Constitution of any true Churches such as the Reformed Churches are confessed to be and which already by your confession have the essence of Constitution and where doth it require it May not the said Churches be fully reformed according to Gods Word without a new Constitution Doth the Scripture use the phrase gathering the Church in the sense that you use it for the first Constitution or Coalition of a Church By what name or names is thè said Church Constitution so much urged upon tender consciences called in Scripture Did the Apostles or Ministers in those dayes teach or practise to gather or separate one part of this true Church of the Jewish Church I speak not which was then by Gods Commandment to be dissolved and another part of that yea persons which themselves converted not to make out of them all a purer Church Did they sever the godly into bodies distinct from others of the same place professing the same Religion Is it not the Scriptural-way of purging a corrupt Church to cast out the grossest offenders first as the Church of Corinth in which were many Schismatikes Heretikes Fornicators Drunken Communicants was advised to cast out the incestuous person that others may hear and fear c. And so in case of Heresie and Errour Gal. 5. and 6. First the Seducers were to be cut off and they that were overtaken with a fault to be restored with the spirit of meeknesse Doth not the setting up of a Church in a Church and extracting the one out of the other or out of Churches imply the incorrigiblenesse incurablenesse dissolving and disanulling of that Church or Churches out of which it is extracted Doth meer Separation of Members from a confessed true Church and Ministery endeavouring to reform according to her Light without their admonition assistance in the Work of Reformation or so much as intimation to the Ministers or Members free their consciences from the guilt of those corruptions which they judge to be in that Church Is it not a neglect of Christs rule viz. Admonition Tell him his fault c. And the substitution of another in the place viz. Separation which is as it were an Excommunication of the Church and beyond the Rule Whether if seven eight nine ten twenty separating voluntatily yea sinfully as if they turn Brownists Anabaptists Familists Antinomians Arminians from a Congregation of an hundred two hundred or a thousand do by a particular Covenant combine themselves together are presently thereupon exempt from the Jurisdiction of that Church and have as much or more Church power then they had while they were as they ought still to have been Members of the said Church yea do become a distinct Independent sister Church Whether Women at least Widows and Maids that are sui juris be not engaged to-seek the participation of all Gods Ordinances as well as men and bound to joyn in Church-Covenant whether any considerable number of men or any men at all do joyn with them or no Had Paul converted those Women to whom he preached Acts 16.13 which could not be brought into an Organical Congregation can it be conceived that they though Baptized were still without were not their children 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 holy having right to Baptism If it be essential that the Church should be at first made up of visible Saints can a man in Faith joyn to any Church or being joyned bear Office submit to Censures or give any Church respect unto her at the Constitution whereof he was not present nor knoweth the first Members or possibly suspecteth them to be unsound seeing he may well doubt whether the said Church hath all the Essentials of a Church or no Is not that which was once Essential to a true Church ever Essential and is not the matter of a Church visible Saints as necessary in the continuation as in the first constitution of it Was every Member at his admission into the Church in the Apostles times called to give account of the Work of Grace in his heart and how is that proved Was the Congregation to judge and what Congregation in Scripture did so judge whether that work was wrought in his heart or no and consequently whether he were to be admitted or no Did John Baptist which Baptized Jerusalem and all Judel yea those which he calls Generations of Vipers Luke 3.7 with 21. and the Disciples of Christ which Baptized more Disciples then John so much mistake though they were born and lived amongst them as to think every of them a true Saint of God Was this grosse mistake the ground of their Baptizing so many of them Did they prophane or prostitute the Holy Virgin Ordinance of Baptism in baptizing so many thousands yea myriads for they could be no lesse amongst whom were so few very few comparatively either real or visible Saints Should they not have prepared the people better then thus and letten them have walked sometime in fellowship with them for approbation of their Conversation for so the very Cells of Satan say some Monasteries and Nunneries do before they admit any into their Society Was not the first if not the onely Church founded by Christ himself domestical in Christ's own Family as the first Jewish Church was in Abraham's Family in which Christ himself the Master of the house who chose the Apostles and not they him was the Priest Prophet and Pastour as also Adam Noah Abraham in their Families and in which the Sacrament was administred and received which we read not in other Families called Churches and to which Christ might have added many formerly converted by himself and others and yet did not and should or may a family of twelve or thirteen be and continue so long an entire Church without adding one Member of any other family though never so fit to be received as Christs Family till it was dissolved by his death did Whether the Church being first Domestical and after Congregational both the one and the other were not accidental to it the Jewish Church having the essence of a Church when it was National as well as while it
was Congregational and to the Office of an Apostle then the onely Church Officer seeing themselves say an Officer and a Church an Universal Officer and Universal Church are Relatives as it is accidental to a General to have but one Company or one Regiment Whether Subordination of Ecclesiastical Judicatories and the benefit of Appeals in the Old Testament was meerly Ceremonial though the High Priest Temple and some other things were or was it grounded on natural Reason and Equity and so far as it is so grounded is it abrogated in the New Testament and how doth the abrogation of it appear Doth not 1 Cor. 12.28 warrant an Vniversal visible Church name and thing seeing it is improper to say That the Apostles which by Office had the care of all Churches were set put or placed in any one If they were Members of any particular Church was it not rather of Jerusalem then of Corinth to which Paul did but come as to other Churches and no other Apostle that we read of was there and which at his Baptism was a meer non-ens much lesse were the Jews and Gentiles Baptized into the Corinthian Church Is not Paul's speech Ye are the Body of Christ corrective of it self 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as if he should say Ye are not the whole Body but members in part of that Body in which the Jewish and Gentilish Churches are said to be Heb. 13.3 Ephes 3.6 Whereof Paul was a Minister Colos 1.15 viz. The Catholike visible Church Is not this Body or Church Catholike totum integrale and the particular Churches similares parte Doth not the Scripture usually set it down as one Spouse one Woman travelling one Assembly of twenty four Elders and four Beasts one City of God one Houshold one Temple whereof the Church of Ephesus being not the whole City Houshold or Temple were fellow Citizens of the Houshold and built together viz. With other Churches and Children of God one new Jerusalem c. The Scripture not warranting the expression of an hundred or a thousand Cities of God New Jerusalem c Doth not the Scripture expressely and almost in the fame words teach That the Sacraments Officers and Censures belong primarily to the Catholike visible Church when it saith We are all Baptized into it and in it God hath set not onely extraordinary persons callings gifts as Apostles Prophets c. but ordinary as Teachers there is the same reason of Pastors Helps Governments in which the Censures are included If the Scripture allow the name and thing of an Universal visible Church If also the Jewish Christian Churches be called in Scripture one Bride one new Jerusalem and all the Gentiles Churches one Sister and all the Jews and Gentiles converted one sheep fold under one Shepherd may not all the Churches in a Nation living under one Civil Government agreeing in one Confession of Faith and Directory for Worship joyned in one Covenant and represented sometimes in one Assembly of themselves or their Messengers be by warrant of Scripture called one Church Whether though National Churches were as lawful as either Domestical or Congregational There was in the Apostolike times any possibility of having a National Church when there was no Christian Magistrate which we now esteem a special blessing nor were Christians so many as to bear the name of a Land or Nation as if but one Family had been Christian the Church could not have been more then Domestical nor had they liberty safely and freely to meet in National Synods or Assemblies which yet we now hold lawful and useful Ordinances of God Could the Protestant Church be National in the dayes of Henry the eighth and Queen Mary as it was in the days of King Edward and Queen Elizabeth Whether can a wise impartial man which reads and considers the wonderful operations of the Sermons of John Baptist Jesus Christ the twelve Apostles and the seventy Disciples conceive that the one hundred and twenty Acts 1. were the total number of the Christians in Jerusalem among whom were the eleven and the seventy or the major part of them Whether it be possible or probable that all those of Jerusalem which were converted and Baptized before the death of Christ Matth. 3.1 5 6. John 4.12 and 12.19 Luke 10.17 18. together with those several thousands converted to Christianity by Peter Acts 2 c. might notwithstanding their numbers joyn in Publike Prayer and Preaching so that all might hear and all might be edified Whether doth any Scripture shew that the many thousands confessed to be of the Church of Jerusalem did meet ordinarily together to receive the Lords Supper the chief Church Ordinance Can it be imagined that so many at once could be accommodated with room Beds to sit lye or lean upon as Christ did according to the custome of those times a Table to receive at and Cups to drink in especially seeing that though they continued with one accord in the Temple yet they brake Bread from house to house the Jews probably not permitting this new Ordinance in the Temple viz. In the several houses of those poor that then received the Gospel Can it be shewed that any Church in a City or Town how numerous soever it grew was for the numerosity of it divided into two or more Churches I speak of Ecclesiastical Judicatories not of Congregations or that there were for that reason more Churches then one in any one City or Town and by what Scripture Do not places in Scripture denominate Churches Were not all the beleeving Corinthians of the Church of Corinth the Brethren that were in Laodiced of the Church of Laodicea the Saints in Ephesus the Church of Ephesus c And each of them under the Jurisdiction respectively of Corinth Laodicea and Ephesus c. Is not this a patern uncontrolled by precepts and other paterns Is there any example or warrant in Scripture That a Christian living in a Town or City where there was a Church was not nor ought to be a member of that Church but of a remoter Church Did not Pastors in Scripture feed the flock of God that was amongst them or can they watch over their flocks or Church members one over another as by Covenant they are bound if they live five ten fifteen twenty miles a sunder Can it be shewed that God in the Old or New Testament did erect one Church without Officers Seeing Adam was a Priest to his Wife and Family and the first born afterwards were Priests at the founding of the Jewish Church and Christ was an Officer to the Church in his house and the Apostles were Officers in commission at the founding of the Christian Churches Hath a Church without an Elder or with one onely and consequently no Presbytery power to censure yea excommunicate Can an Instance be given of any such incompleat Church that did exercise any Church Government Or can it be proved by Scripture that they might and ought to have exercised it
Doth not Election of and Submission to the same Officers and Ministery ordinarily frequenting the same Ordinances and Worship joynt maintenance of Officers and Ordinances not to speak how considerable â—ohabitation and private Christian Communion is include a sufficient though an implicite covenant or consent which may be justified by holy Writ Whether there be any Precept direct or indirect or President at the founding of the first Churches for a solemn expresse verbal Covenant or Agreement more explicite then this and if not are not they guilty to say no more of strange boldnesse which make it not onely lawful but useful and far better then the said implicite Covenant yea a binding Ordinance of God necessary if not to the being yet to the welbeing strength and purity of the Church Whether there be a Church Covenant in Scripture viz. which not onely in general promiseth Service and Obedience but hath also special relation to Church State and Church Members duties as such as marriage Covenant hath to conjugal duties as such May not the Scripture Covenants viz. God shall be our God c. be taken by two or three though too few to make a Church or by one Family or by persons of several Churches and yet leave them in the state they were in and not make them Members of a distinct Church as Independents Covenants are said to do Whether Subscription to your Confession of Faith be as essentially necessary to Church Constitution as entering into Covenant Is your Confession the very same with the Confessions of other Independent Churches or a Different Is the Confession of your later Churches the very same with the Confession of your former Churches Do your selves esteem all things therein unquestionable Fundamental Articles of Faith seeing you require Subscription to them all alike as a Confession of Faith and that upon pain of Non-Admission Whether there be any Precept or President in Scripture for requiring a Promise before we admit Members that they will not depart without the Churches leave Is this a standing Ordinance or but a Politique invention requisite for the good of Societies so moulded Are not Church Members Liberties much infringed when they can neither dispose of themselves or their children in Service Marriage and Factorship remote from that Church without discovering the causes them thereunto moving which is not alway fit and safe to be done and having Approbation and Dismission from her which sometimes is hard to be got especially for rich and useful Members Whether any Apostle or other in the Primitive times did refuse to admit any known beloever to the Sacrament because he was not to use the new phrase of these times in Church-state or that they enquired of him whether he was convenanted into some particular Congregation and that such a one as they might lawfully hold Communion with Was the Baptism of John and of the Disciples and Apostles of Christ a Seal of Congregation Communion Was Paul the Apostle and the Ennuch Baptized into a particular Congregation did not the ordinary Pastors of Corinth Administer that one Baptism ahd Baptize in the same Body that John Baptist did and that Paul Baptized Crispus and Gains and the houshould of Stephanas into Is Baptism one time a Seal principally of Congregational Communion and other times not and what Scripture is there to warrant such a distinction Whether every Congregation which joyns in Covenant doth or must consist of all or some Christians able to try the sufficiency of an Elder yea fit to discharge that Office Or whether visible Sanctiry without such ability be not sufficient And may this Congregation lawfully without assistance of others unlesse themselves please notwithstanding their apparent inability chuse their own Minister and that one of themselves also which must needs be an Insufficient one May this Congregation also suppose they had a godly learned Pastor proceed against him in case of Errour and Heresie even to Deposition and Excommunication if their weaknesse shall judge it fit And is the said Deposition valid whether just and unjust unlesse the said Church be pleased to recal it to deprive the said Pastor of his Ministerial Authority and Office and is there no remedy in such a case Is it not improper to call them that rule onely by the name of Elders and them that both rule and labour in the Word and Doctrine by a meaner name Ministers Doth the Scripture apply the name of Elders rather to Ruling then to Preaching Elders and if it doth not why should we Are the Ministers in the New Testament called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The Ministers or Deacons of the Church or of the people Are they not usually called Ministers of the Lord of God of Christ of the New Testament of the Gospel of the Word c and with reference to their people Elders Rulers Pastors Teachers Overseers Ministers for them c Doth that Expression in the second Epistle to the Corinthians Chap. 4. Vers 5. Our selves your servants wherewith Paul call-himself as well as others 〈◊〉 imply that he received his Authority and Office from the Church did Officiate in their names was censurable by them as a servant by his Master or that he made himself a servant to them as Christ did to his Disciples and as all good Ministers do to their Flocks for their good Are the spirits of the Prophets subject to the people or to the Prophets Is not this subjection of the Spirits of the Prophets to the Prophets viz. Of the fewer to the greater number as well in Synods and Assemblies of Churches or of their Messengers as in particular Congregations Whether these two Propositions Synods or Assemblies of Churches or of their Messengers to say nothing now of their Jurisdiction are Gods Ordinances and Every particular Congregation may yea must enjoy all Gods Ordinances within it self be not crosse and contrary one to another or how are they reconciled according to Scripture grounds Is it any priviledge for Congrogations to subsist every one by her self May they not stand and flourish surer and better in an holy and Brotherly combination and coordinate subjection then in a divided singularity Doth not Communion of particular Churches require and the light of nature and the equity of Scripture rules and examples teach that they may and ought to enter into mutual Consociation or Confederation amongst themselves in Classes and Synods that they may so far as conveniently can be make use of common consent and mutual assistance especially in those things that are of greater moment If the Keyes be given to Beleevers to be exercised by them as Beleevers then are they not given to all beleevers whether in Church Covenant or no Church Members or no If they be given to Church Members as such doth it not then follow that Pastors as Pasors or Elders as Elders have no more power of the Keyes then othher Church Members And
chiefly so that no Christians though never so syncere and holy have Christ for their King except they be Church-members and also within the Congregational Covenant or at least none so much as they And if it be not so applied in Scripture do not they wrong Christ his Kingdom and people that presume so to apply it Did not New England-men well and warrantably when their hopes began to languish of reducing the erroneous by private means or by preaching and conference to hold an Assembly of the Churches for discovery and confutation of them Had the General Court Civil in New-England a lawful power when Opinions grew on and experience discovered the danger to make a Law that Churches should not be set up in N. E. without the consent of the Magistrates and Churches there And hath not the Civil power in Old England from whence theirs is derived seeing the Word of God doth not alter with Climates the same power when there is the same or greater occasion And ought not obedience by yeelded here as well as there Would not they that now plead for Liberty of Conscience and Toleration in the Kingdom were they able to root out Presbyterians and their Way and could Civil Authority enclinable to put forth coercive power against it tell the Magistrate that he might if not he ought represse it with a strong hand at least under the notion of being prejudicial to the Civil peace if it could not otherwise be suppressed Did not the Magistrates of N. E. when they saw that neither preaching conference nor Assembly of the Churches did work the cure of their Distractions but the erroneous went on in their former course not onely to disturb the Churches but miserably also to interrupt the Civil Peace to convent them and to disfranchise some fine others and banish others Is it true or no that sundry speak and some write that our N.E. Brethren would not tolerate a few Presbyterians notwithstanding the now-pretended smalnesse of the difference which were persecuted for Nonconformity in any corner of their Countrey no not so much as in that which was next to the Barbarians Whether they which hold Episcopal Government to be Antichristian Babylonish to be destroyed by fire and sword and also Presbyterian Government to be Antichristian as bad or worse then Episcopal be not bound by their principles to root out Presbyterial Government and the resolute abbettors of it with fire and sword if they can get ability and opportunity for such a designe Whether they which have solemnly sworn to endeavour the Reformation of Religion in Doctrine Discipline Worship and Government according to the Word of God and the example of the best Reformed Churches and to endeavour the Vniformity of the Churches in the three Kingdoms and the extirpation of Popery Prelacy Superstition Heresie Schisin c. as all Parliament men the Assembly and the best affected in the Kingdom have done can with good conscience allow or tolerate Popery Prelacy Superstition Herefie Schism and why may they not for any obligation lying upon them by this Covenant tolerate Popery Prelacy and Superstition as well as Heresie and Schism Whether the Parliament can perform those promises they have made in the first Remonstrance and since wherein the Kingdom hath much confided If they loose the golden reins of Discipline and leave private men or particular Congregations to take up what form of Divine Service they please without requiring conformity to that Order which the Laws enjoyn according to Gods Word Have our Brethren expressed all their present opinions and desires or kept some for a reserve and what may be the reason of such a reserve Are they fully perswaded in their own mindes of the truth of all that which they expresse themselves to hold or onely take them up for the present waiting for further light May not the Presbyterian-Way for ought they certainly know howbeit they at present think not so be the Way of God and most agreeable to his Word And have not expressions to this purpose proceeded from their Tongues or Pens FINIS