Answers we have studied not onely to answer to the Reply but have taken in what sundry others godly learned object against our principles but without mentioning scarce any time their Names of which we are sparing for no other reason but because we honour the men from our very hearts and could wish though differently minded from us in some things as Melanchthon did in another the like case to live and die in their bosomes The name of this servant of Christ now asleep is an oyntment poured out and precious to us we could therefore have wisht it our portion to have answered the Booke without the least reflecting upon him but the necessity herein is unavoydable This onely we adde that whatever weaknesses may passe from us let them not bee imputed to those servants of Christ that set us on work and have wanted leisure to review what is here done Every one may not bee in all things of the same mind with us for they may meet us in the same end though they use not the same arguments or become followers of us in the same path yet we know wee are not alone in any thing but may safely say this much that what is here defended is generally acknowledged and received in these Churches of Christ A DEFENCE OF THE NINE POSITIONS CHAP. I. Concerning the Title WHereas it is called a new Church-way wee little expected that Brethren studious of Reformation who have been so exercised with imputations of novelty would have so readily and in the frontispice cast the same upon us who with them desire to walk in the first wayes of our Lord Jesus Christ and his holy Apostles but as in most substantiall points of Church-order wee goe along with the best reformed Churches so wee doubt not to make it good that wherein wee pressing after further Reformation seeme to differ from them yet wee build upon Scripture grounds acknowledged by many godly and Learned Reformers in our English and other reformed Churches which if the Lord have in mercy given us further â—…ight or rather opportunity to practise then they had let it not bee imputed to us for novelty A new edition of the old Church-way of godly Reformers in some things perhaps corrected and amended is no new Church-way or if it be thought the mending of some crooks in the old way make a new way wee answer with Junius in a case not unlike Vt cunque nâ—…vam esse videâ—…tur 〈◊〉 quaecunque sunt vetera fuerunt nova ac non propterâ—…a novâ—…tatâ—â— nomine vitiosa nisi forte novam pro renovatâ restitutâ accipitis quo sensuâ—… novam esse hanc viam agnosciâ—â—â— One thing more in the Title page the Reader is to take notice of that whereas it is said This Treatise of Mr. Ball was penned a little before his death and sent over 1637. it seemes to bee a mistake of the Printer for the Nine Questions themselves were sent over 1636 the answer returned 38 but miscarrying another was sent 39. from which time wee longingly expected a return but partly for the reason rendred in the Epistle and what else wee know not wee never in so many yeares received any till this printed Reply by a Friends meanes came occasionally to our hands 1644. Concerning the Epistle to the Reader Whereas the publishers of this Treatise impute unto us or some related to our Cause That we are the Volunteers such as cry up this way and forward to blow such things abroad in the world which pressed them to make this Controversie publique 1 Wee may truly professe before the world that our Epistle sent with our former Answer proceeded from a spirit of love and peace with an humble willingnesse to receive further light by the holy and just Animadversions of our reverend and belâ—â—â—d Brethren which wee earnestly expected as men 〈…〉 after the truth 2 That wee were altogether ignorant of the 〈◊〉 of that our Answer and in that it was published then was not without our utter dislike wee have neither sounded trumpet nor struck up drum to any if any such volunteers wee heartily grieve that there are any differences between Brethren much more that they should bee published most of all if before they bee privately debated and brought to some head by mutual consent are thought fit to be sent out to publique considerations 3 For our Brethren in England we know no reason to question the truth of that Apology of our Brother Mr. Thomas Weld in his answer to W. R. pag. 2. Obj. 3. Answ 1. where he professeth in the name of himselfe and others of our way a lothnesse to appeare in the case and that although they had Bookes of this subject ready for the Presse yet by joint consent they suppressed them happily to the detriment of the Cause being unwilling to blow a fire and whether they appeared in Pulpit or Presse without instigation and how sparingly hee appeales to all the godly to judge 4 Lastly wee desire our Brethren to consider the date of Mr. Ball his Booke printed for stinted Liturgies one chiefe part of this controversie and the Printed answer to the Nine questions and let that resolve the question who of us came first Volunteers into the field and if any through weaknesse or zeale without knowledge have been too clamorous to cry up New-England way with reproach to others wee desire the world to take notice that they have neither patent nor patterne from us so to doe who came not hither proudly to censure others but to reforme our owne CHAP. II. Qu. 1. That a stinted Forme of Prayer and set Liturgie is unlawfull Reply THis Position cannot beare that meaning which you give it if you take it according to our minds and the plaine construction of the words We never questioned why you made not use of a Liturgie c. Answ Let our Answer bee viewed and it will appeare that wee had just cause to premise those distinctions of Formes of Prayer into private and publike and publike into such as are imposed by others or composed and used by Ministers themselves before their Sermons otherwise we must have involved such in the Position as wee doe not condemn Now if your generall thesis justly admit such limitation to publike imposed Formes where shall wee finde any set stinted imposed Liturgies but in Churches of the Papacy or Prelacy no Reformed Churches stinting or imposing their Formes of Prayer but leaving Ministers and people at much liberty Onely the English Liturgy therefore is such according to the plaine construction of the words 2 Concerning your minds in the Position wee deny not but you might intend to draw from us an approbation of stinted Liturgies in generall that so you might have to stay the separation of people from your Liturgy whereof you complaine but by that it appeares plainly what your chiefe scope and ayme was in the Position according unto which wee thought it most safe and pertinent for us to
worships and the following reformed Churches those of Scotland Geneva and divers others in France and Switserland c. whose Doctrines rites and administrations wee doubt not will bee confessed more pure then English Churches It would bee too tedious and in these knowing times needlesse to search all records and to compare the puritie of the prayers and rites of these with former times wee read of very few formes used for 300. yeeres some short ones they had which are retained yet in our Liturgie with many more and these formes they had not imposed nor stinted which is the great offence of this untill about the yeere 406. and there wee read in the Milevitan Councell that no prayers should bee used in Churches but what were either composed of able and sufficient men or approved by the Synods and this was determined onely in regard of the ignorant Ministery of those contentious and hereticall times as Chemnitius observes ne forte aliquid contra fidem vel per ignorantiam vel per minus studium sit compositum If the Roman Bishops did multiply as indeed they did excessively unlesse their owne admirers erre grossely rites and formes of prayer yet it is well knowne how long it was ere the Churches in other places submitted to their power so that this comparison might well have beene spared To conclude though wee say not that all Churches since 200. yeeres after Christ were so miserably decayed that the faithfull might not without sinne communicate with them yet wee may bee bold to say many of them were so corrupt that the faithfull did not nor could not communicate in many parts of Gods worship without sinnes of ignorance conforming to the corruptions themselves and that if they had seene and discovered the evill of them they ought and we beleeve would have abstained from divers ordinances in regard of the corrupt administrations of them yea after all meanes used to purge them out and not prevailing they ought and would have withdrawn themselves to more pure Churches or erected such amongst themselves Reply The prayers of the Ministers conceived or stinted in a set forme bee not his private prayers but the publike prayers of the assembly but you will not say the people ought not to joyn with their pastour therein if ought bee amisse for matter manner or both Answ There is a wide difference betweene the whole Liturgie so imposed and so clogged as is before shewed and such prayers of the Minister having something amisse But you may put the case so as it would bee unlawfull for people to joyne in such prayers also as if the Minister for matter usually pray to Saints for manner turne himselfe and fix his eye on a Crucifix Reply It is all one to the people in this case whether the fault bee personall as some distinguish or otherwise knowne beforehand or not knowne for if simple presence defile whether knowne before hand 〈◊〉 not all presence is faultie and if simple presence defile not our presence is not condemned by reason of the corruptions knowne whereof wee stand not guiltie Answ First we distinguish not here between personall and ministeriall faults but object against the personall act of him that joynes with that whole Liturgie and so in the corruptions of it as hee must needs doe that joyns with the whole not onely saying Amen to them but as is knowne he takes his share in those shreds of prayers Responds c. which in Mr. Cartwrights judgement is so absurd as makes a man seeme out of his wits And therefore his personall actuall conformitie must needs carry guilt and therefore there is more then simple presence in this case as is cleare to any understanding Secondly it is not all one whether the faults bee knowne or not knowne beforehand as appeares plainely 1 Cor. 10.27 28 29. where wee see if a man come to a feast and know not they eate with reference to the Idoll nor that any take offence he may eate without asking any question but if hee know such things he may not eate Besides publique sinfull actions of Ministers are either 1 Accidental occasional or 2ly known appointed in a stated service now the frailties of a Minister which accidentally fall in and are not known before nor are any part and essence of the service unto which men that come doe or should take themselves to bee called hinder not communion because they doe not prae se ferre by their presence to attend and observe them but the corruptions of the Liturgie are knowne and appointed and to which and with which the imposers call others to joyne as in a stated service to God the use of which if it bee an humane frailtie in Gods Ministers not yet convinced of the evill thereof yet for those to communicate herein who know such evills have surely passed the bounds of frailtie and infirmitie because in this action of prayer there is not onely communion by way of presence as it is in hearing the word but communion of action publique prayer being the common action of the whole Church towards God There can be no prayer by any man offered to God but there will be some humane frailties attending on it if therefore for this cause wee should reject communion in prayer wee should reject the ordinances of God and never joyne in any prayer in this world but the corruptions of the Liturgie are not such but that they may bee more easily cast off then kept This case stands not in tolerating faults in another as the reply makes it but in actuall joyning with the sinnes of another wherein hee that joyneth is involved and therefore whether they bee corruptions that may bee tolerated or not in another yet if sinnes they may not bee practised and so joyned in with another And therefore the case you put of communion with any person obstinate in errour till hee may bee convinced is nothing to this purpose For wee must not joyne with him in his error no not an houre though wee may tolerate him a moneth Reply Hath not Christian wisedome and experience of humane frailties lessoned you deare brethren to beare one with another in matters of greater consequence then any have or can bee objected truely against the forme of prayer in use among us Answ The Lord hath lessoned us to tolerate and beare with many humane frailties not onely in one another but also in our deare brethren abroad but to joyne with the best of men in conformitie to knowne and grosse corruptions in worshipping God or to stoop so low to the insolent tyranny of usurping Prelates as to beare on our backs their whole Liturgie and the corruptions thereof wee confesse wee have not yet learned and now wee hope never to goe to that schoole againe to learne the same Reply And why such corruptions should not bee ascribed to humane frailtie we see not For if a godly Minister make use of a booke in things which hee judges
answer And this wee did the rather for our reason mentioned in our letter because though all of us could not concurre to condemne all set Formes as unlawfull yet wee could in this viz. that though some set Forms may bee lawfull yet it will not follow that this of the English Liturgy is therefore to remove all obscurities and breake all snares and resolve the question in the true intent of it wee were forced to distinguish of Formes and so touch the true Helena of this controversie and therefore if any shall narrowly observe Mr. Ball his large defence of set Forms in generall they shall finde those wings spread forth in a very great breadth to give some shelter and warmth to that particular Liturgie then languishing and hastening through age and feeblenesse towards its last end Reply It is true people separate from our Liturgie because stinted not because this or that or ours in particular Answ If because it's stinted then because yours for we know none properly such but yours and it may well bee one offence to all godly consciences that yours are so imposed and stinted as they bee though it is hardly credible to us so farre as our observation reach that the main causes of the godly withdrawing from your Liturgy should be the stinting of it when so many corruptions in Matter and Forme have been objected against it by the best godly Reformers And seeing the same persons will joyne with Prayers of godly Preachers though they use the same forme of prayer usually and so in a large sense freely stinting themselves thereto though not properly in such sense as your Liturgy is stinted Reply But say you such set Formes used by Preachers are disliked also and your reasons especially the two last why you admit not a stinted Liturgie conclude against both in our understanding Answ Wee deny not but some may dislike the constant use of such Formes especially when studiously framed with elegancy of phrases and as the manner of some is but doe any we now speak of condemne all use thereof or withdraw from them that use them which is now the case in hand For our parts wee neither know such men or if we did we should condemn such minds As for our Reasons in generall or the two last you mention in particular it passeth our understanding to conceive how any such inference can bee made if the Reply had formed the inferences from our arguments it may bee wee should have seene more by the helpe of such spectacles But passing over what we say to the Position as we interpret it you think fit to advertise us of some things which are six Reply Advert 1. Your reasons why you accept not a stinted Liturgie are ambiguously propounded and so that such as looke at stinted Liturgies as images forbidden Command 2. may easily draw your words to their meaning Answ If our Reasons themselves being sound and unanswered by you contain any thing that may be drawn to such a Position that cannot arise from the ambiguousnesse of words which are plaine but from their abuse who mis-apply them Reply Advert 2. The Reasons you bring against a set forme of Prayer doe hold as strong against a set forme of Catechisme confession and profession of faith blessing baptizing and singing of Psalmes Answ 1 Concerning forms of Catechismes and confessions of Faith if religiously and perspicuously framed wee account them of singular use though abused by men nor without some sacred allowance yet from hence to infer the like use of set Formes of prayers neither our reasons nor any other will in force for Catechismes and Confessions as well as Psalmes in the nature of the thing require in some sense a set and limited Forme but publike prayers though they may admit of a set and comely order in the generall to prevent errour yet of their owne nature they require no set Forme for God gives us no new matter or doctrine daily to be beleeved but he gives new matter of new affection in prayer daily 2 If by set Forms of Catechismes and Confessions bee meant according to the termes of the Question stinted Formes like stinted Liturgies i. e. beyond or short of which Ministers may not teach or Christians beleeve and professe then wee should say the same of these as wee doe of stinted Formes of Prayer wee confesse there is danger in casting by all Formes of Confessions and Catechismes lest through the instability of ungrounded and heady men pretending new light or searching after further light the Churches adhere to nothing and their Faith as the learned Leyden Professors terme it become fides horaria or menstrua The faith of an houre or moneth and then cast it off the next And on the other side there is danger that by imposing such Confessions too far that which is indeed further light be supprest wee therefore thinke it usefull and needfull to pave out such high wayes of Catechismes and Confessions so as the subjects of Christ Jesus our King and Law-giver may walke therein without shackles reserving liberty for further future light in points lesse cleare yet standing in a readinesse alwayes to confesse and hold fast the present truth which appeares most cleare 3 Concerning Forms of blessing baptizing singing Scripture Psalmes there is a far differing reason from this case for the Lord himselfe hath left us Formes in these cases not onely for instruction but allowing the use of the same as Numb 6.23 c. Luke 10.5 Matth. 28.20 2 Chron. 29.30 and therefore such may bee used as hee hath left yet the Lord hath not imposed some of these at least to bee used alwayes and onely in his Churches much lesse doth hee allow any man to impose their own Forms upon his Churches or conforme to such as are tyrannously imposed Reply Third Advert We have not called you at this time to witnesse for or against the corruptions of the Common-prayer-book this you fall upon by straining the sense of our demands Answ Wee have spoken to this before and we thinke whatsoever your intent and desire was yet the nature of the thing and the case it selfe gave us a just call to testifie against it especially seeing the corruptions then increased in England and the impositions were more rigid and violent Reply The reasons you bring against the Communion-booke wee cannot approve them all the exceptions against it wee know but to esteem the whole for some corruptions found therein a Monument of Idolatry that we have not learned Answ The Answer calls it not a Monument of Idolatry for some corruptions onely found in it though the corruptions in matter and manner bee objected as the first reason why wee used it not but being never commanded of God greatly abused unto Idolatry and superstition and of no necessary use the same that was in Popery for substance which are the usuall arguments for abolishing Images Ceremonies and all Monuments of Idolatry and wee marvaile how any
proposition so they will much take off the edge of the Reply For it will appeare that all conformitie of Ministers and people to any parcells of that booke at such a season as this was is a farre differing case from those that are put in some of the replies 1 To the first reply then wherein you put it beyond imagination that such a practise should bee scandalous or offensive wee know not what you have observed in some particular congregations neere you but what ever have beene the opinions of men formerly concerning this practise yet you know that the booke in generall hath been condemned of all godly reformers and the use of any part of it hath been counted burdensome to many for the reasons named But of later times as the booke and conformitie thereto was urged more hotly so the spirits of very many grew more zealous against it and began to loath it and to withdraw wholly from it many very inquisitive about the lawfulnesse or unlawfulnesse of joyning with it at all and your selves complaine of the withdrawing of many from joyning in the ordinances where it was used so that wee see not but at least in some persons and at some places and times it might probably bee offensive and scandalous so to practise 2 Wee looked not onely to the offence of those in your owne congregations but to the imboldning and hardning of Papists in honouring any part of their portuises above the formes of other reformed Churches abroad and you cannot bee ignorant how many of the Lords witnesses now asleepe have testified of the offence and danger thereof Reply 2 You say if the booke were an Idolothyte yet latent offence doth not oblige Answ The offence in this season and as all things stand cannot bee latent complaint is made of the offence taken by many and therefore it is evident Reply 3 The booke so farre as it is sound and good by your confession is no Idolothyte nor taken out of the Masse booke in such sense as you object but rather the Masse and other prayers added to it Popery is a scab cleâ—…ving to the Church and many truths belonging to the Church as her proper Legacy were stolne and heaped together in that Denne And why the true man may not challenge his goods where ever hee finde them or the theefe plead title to the true mans goods by prescription wee know not Answ First wee judge the whole booke an Idolothyte and whence you gather that wee confesse the contrary of any part of it as it stands apart in relation to that whole wee know not Secondly that it was taken out of the Masse booke was proved by the confession of King Edward and other evidences are many but you say not in such sense as wee object But rather è contra Masse c. added to it c. But where to finde such a legacy bequeathed to the Church in the Testament of our Lord Jesus Christ wee could never yet see So that wee rather feare all those formes of prayer of marriage burialls visitations of the sick confirmation c. are rather the copper counterfeit coyne of a well growne Antichrist whereby he cousened the Churches when hee stole away the golden Legacy of Christ rather then any part of the true Churches Legacy and therefore it had been more happy for the Churches that they had never challenged the same but let the theefes prescription to have been a good plea to hold them still this further we adde when we say it was taken out of the Masse-booke wee understand Masse-booke in a large sense as it is commonly taken for to speake narrowly it was collected out of three Popish bookes the first part of publique Prayers exbreviario the second part viz. the order of administring Sacraments Matrimony visiting the sick and burialls è Rituali 3. the order of consecration in the Supper the Epistles and Gospels and Collects è Missali as the forme of consecration of Bishops and Priests was taken è Pontificali as the Author of Altare Damasc shews pag. 612. Thirdly because those words Popery is a scab c. may bee a seed of much evill an Egge out of which a Serpent may bee hatched if men zealous of mouldy formes may but have time againe to set upon it if the wheele of these evill times through Gods judgement on this wanton age turne the Prelates or other zelotes for this Liturgie uppermost wee shall therefore crave libertie to examine this speech more narrowly And because as it is said unumquodque ex suâ origine rectissime judicatur wee shall trace the steps of the first times and so downeward to see what sound parts of Liturgie there was on which this scab is supposed to grow 1. Our blessed Saviour taught his Disciples a blessed forme which though it may bee lawfully and comfortably used the rather not being of mans but the Lords composing yet it is evident hee never appointed his people to use it as their onely forme and therefore the Apostles in the primitive Church in that heavenly prayer Acts 4. did not attend to the words and forme of this prayer though they might have this in their eye as the comon rule and direction how to powre out their prayers to God for particular things which may be an everlasting witnesse against their usurpations that will limit the Churches to their formes which the Lord Christ would not doe to his owne 2. In the first 300. yeeres after Christ wee read of few formes that the Churches used and those rather short ejaculations then set formes but contrarily wee read frequently of the exercise of their gifts in prayer They prayed sine monitore quia de pectore saith Tertullian i. e. They prayed without a Promptour because from the heart which as Zephirus observes was in opposition to the prompted formes then in use amongst the Pagans Wee read also what they prayed for viz. pro inimicis pro imperatoribus pro statu seculi pro morà finis c. but of any set formes we read not Their persecutions and dayes of afflictions preserved them from formalitie in prayer and taught them how to finde their hearts and knees and tongues to poure out their soules to God while under the Altar they were pouring out their blood 3. But after the Churches had enjoyed peace for some space of time wherein securitie usually makes insensible and insensâ—…blenesse formall then indeed wee read of set and imposed formes which the rather prevailed in regard of the grosse and palpable ignorance of a blind ministry under a more learned Prelacy and therefore it is well observed by Chemnitius that the third Councell of Carthage decreed this ut nemo in precibus c. viz. that no Minister in his prayers either names the Father for the Sonne or the Sonne for the Father but when hee comes to the Altar to direct his prayers alwayes to God the Father and that no man use his owne formes
c. yet should leave our accommodations and comforts should forsake our dearest relations Parents brethren Sisters Christian friends and acquaintances over looke all the dangers and difficulties of the vast Seas the thought whereof was a terrour to many and all this to go to a Wildernesse where wee could forecast nothing but care and temptations onely in hopes of enjoying Christ in his Ordinances in the fellowship of his people was this from a stupid senslesnesse or desperate carelesnesse what became of us or ours or want of naturall affections to our deare Countrey or nearest relations No surely with what bowells of compassion to our deare Countrey with what heart-breaking affections to our deare relations and Christian friends many of us at least came away the Lord is witnesse What shall we say of the singular Providence of God bringing so many Ship-loads of his people through so many dangers as upon Eagles wings with so much safety from yeare to yeare The fatherly care of our God in feeding and cloathing so many in a Wildernesse giving such healthfulnesse and great increase of posterity what shall wee say of the Worke it selfe of the kingdome of Christ and the form of a Common-wealth erected in a Wildernesse and in so few yeares brought to that state that scarce the like can bee seen in any of our English Colonies in the richest places of this America after many more years standing That the Lord hath carryed the spirits of so many of his people through all their toylsome labour wants difficulties losses c. with such a measure of chearfulnesse and contentation But above all wee must acknowledge the singular pity and mercies of our God that hath done all this and much more for a people so unworthy so sinfull that by murmurings of many unfaithfulnesse in promises oppressions and other evils which are found among us have so dishonoured his Majesty exposed his worke here to much scandall and obloquie for which wee have cause for ever to bee ashamed that the Lord should yet owne us and rather correct us in mercy then cast us off in displeasure and scatter us in this Wildernesse which gives us cause with Mich. 7. to say Who is a God like our God that pardoneth iniquities and passeth by the transgressions of the remnant of his heritage even because he delighteth in mercy Though we be a people of many weaknesses and wants yet wee acknowledge our God to have been to us a God of many mercies in respect of that sweet peace which he hath taken away from so many Nations yet continuing the same to us in respect also of that liberty wee have in Gods house the blessed Ministery of the Word the sweet unity and communion of Gods Churches and Ministers increase and multiplication of Churches Christian government in the Common-wealth and many other mercies wee enjoy but especially the gracious presence of Christ to many of our soules in all these But wee will not insist much upon this subject being perswaded it is in the consciences and hearts of many of our dear Countrey-men to thinke that we should be an object of love and tendernesse to that State and people by whose Laws and unkind usages we were driven out into a wildernesse rather then to bee judged as desertors of our Brethren and the Cause of Christ in hand with whom excuse us if we now speak plainly it had been far more easie unto many of us to have suffered then to have adventured hither upon the wildernesse sorrows wee expected to have met withall though we must confesse the Lord hath sweetned it beyond our thoughts and utmost expectations of prudent men But passing by this wee must desire the Reader to beare with us a little in removing that apprehension that wee are the great stumbling block in the way of Reformation which if it were true it had been better we had been driven so farre into this wildernesse as never to have been heard of more Concerning our affection to this blessed worke of a publique Reformation of the Nation in generall and the particular Churches or Congregations of the Land in particular as it is best knowne to God so wee thinke it is not unknowne to men not onely here by our daily prayers for it and sometime solemne seekings of God about it but also we have given some testimonies thereof both by private Letters and the publique motions of some of Gods eminent servants among us tending that way We conceive two things specially in our Doctrine and practise that may seem to bee stumbling blocks in the way of this publique Reformation which we shall here remove The first is our practise wherein wee seem so much to differ from the reformed Churches in receiving to our Churches onely visible Saints and beleevers This we doe freely confesse that our practise and judgement doe evidence this to all that we thinke reformation of the Church doth not onely consist in purging out corrupt Worship and setting up the true but also in purging the Churches from such profanenesse and sinfulnesse as is scandalous to the Gospel and makes the Lord weary of his owne Ordinances Esay 1. And wee doubt not but this was in the hearts of many if not most of Gods servants to desire a separation of the precious from the vile in the dispensing of Gods ordinances and if the charity of some be of larger extent herein then others this hinders not agreement in the maine This day hath discovered what kinde of people are to bee found every where in the Parishes of England Can light and darknesse Christ and Belial agree together Popish episcopall enemies and haters of all godlinesse and reformation cleave together in one Church of Christ with the Saints of God Yet neither our Doctrine nor practise do prescribe and limit the way of attaining this reformation whereby any should justly from our example stand off from concurring in such a publique worke It is true where there is no Church relation but a people are to begin a new constituting of Churches reformation is to be sought in the first Constitution This is our case But where corrupted Churches such as we conceive the Congregations of England generally to be are to be reformed there we conceive that such Congregations should bee called by able Ministers unto repentance for former evills and confessing and bewayling their sins renew a solemn Covenant with God to reform themselves and to submit unto the discipline of Christ By which meanes such as refuse so to doe exclude themselves and others by the severity of Discipline should bee purged out if falling into sinne they remaine impenitent in the same What some particular persons may have said or done contrary to this our profession wee cannot say nor doe we justifie but wee know nothing that hath come from us to the contrary to weaken the hands of godly reformers or to perswade the people to separate from the Congregations if by any meanes they might
the Church in neglecting them to goe immediately to the Classis and yet some of our Brethren at the requests of tender consciences might declare their judgement when no rule called them to write to their Pastors which perhaps were bitter persecutors or if better yet such as they had no knowledge of and if any by such writings did abstaine from the sacrament for such corruptions as their consciences would be defiled with no hinderance from us was in the way but that you might call them to account before the Church and convince and censure them if there were just cause which was the objection against Mr. P. in flying presently to the Classis CHAP. III. 2 Position That it is not lawfull to joyne in Prayer or receive the Sacraments where a stinted Liturgie is used Or as wee conceive your meaning to bee in this as in the former c. viz. where and when that stinted Liturgie is used Reply IF we mistake not your judgement and practise both you have born witnesse against both that you call the rigid separation and this more moderate also and wee humbly wish that the moderate doe not degenerate into the rigid ere long it is very strange if they take not great encouragement upon your grounds Answ If you will needs account not joyning in that stinted imposed Liturgy to bee a moderate separation wee must confesse we have witnessed against such separation yea not onely conformed to that corrupt Worship but also to divers of the Ceremonies thereof some of us with shame before the Lord may confesse it But we desire that may be no prejudice to the truth since discovered to us but wee have ever conceived that the separation witnessed against both by your selves and us have been such as to separate from the Churches of England as no true Churches the Ministery as no true Ministery their separations from corruptions in Doctrine and Worship their endeavour to enjoy all the ordinances of the Lord Jesus in purity if wee bee not mistaken your judgement and practise with ours have alwayes approved and the question now in hand is not about a new kinde of separation more moderate from the Churches and Ministery of England but whether the Liturgy of England be not indeed one of those corruptions in Worship which you and wee had need reject as well as the ceremonies and no longer conforme to the same And wee heartily wish that the growing endeavours of the godly after more purity of Worship and to bee purged from all the pollutions of the man of sinne bee not too rashly branded with the odium of separation and breach of peace and unity of the Church As for degenerating into the rigid separation wee think you need not feare it upon our principles no more then upon the common grounds of Non-conformists and you know what they inferre upon those principles now justly it concernes you to consider as well as 〈◊〉 but as it is truly observed in England it was the justification and pressing of ceremonies and other corruptions that drave many to separation not the endeavour of further Reformation so you may feare the too too much conformity of Ministers to humane impositions and justification of the Liturgie c. have and will more dangerously alienate godly minds from your Churches and Ministery and so drive to separation then all the principles and progresse of the godly in wayes of reformations and wee shall refer it to the judicious and common experience whether the discovery of the corrupt worship in the Liturgy or contrary conformity to it be the greater block of offence and strengthens the hands of the Separatists most which yet you after object unto us Wee suppose the Worthies of this renowned Parliament together with those of the reverend Assembly would not so soone have removed the whole frame and fabrick of this Book nor wholly stopped up this pit if building of battlements about it and keeping watchmen neare it to bid passengers take heed had been the readiest way to cure separation nor doe wee thinke that this reverend man of God would have been in more jealousie and feare of us if hee had considered how tenderly we returned our answer to the question then of those faithfull witnesses in Scotland who separated their lives into the hands of death rather then communicate in the use of this Booke and yet wee thinke they deserve a better place then to bee ranked so neare to the rigid separation notwithstanding for our selves we are heartily thankfull for what he humbly wisheth and for his jealousie over us so farre as it is godly but so farre as such wishes cast a cloud of evill suspition over us in the hearts of others as if we were going faster then we knew where to stay we wish humbly such words had been spared till some other time Concerning this distinction a letter of this subject is cited printed without the Authors knowledge that put a difference indeed between the reasons of the Separatists proper to them qua tales and other reasons used by himself common to others studious of Reformation To which we answer 1 That letter acknowledgeth no such distinction of separation rigid and moderate onely if you will a separation from Churches and separation from the sins and corruptions of Churches which latter is all we professe 2 Those Reasons which the letter ascribes to them qua tâ—…les will wee suppose bee found in their Books thus farre that the Prayers Preachings Sacraments c. are unlawfull because offered in a false Church by a false Ministery for the subjects of Antichrists kingdome That there should be no Separatists in the world because none it is said none plead against the Booke of commonâ—…Commonâ—…prayer as unlawfull because offered up in a false Church is strange to us that this learned Author should not read or observe the same exceeding frequently in the Separatists writings take but a taste in the first pages of Mr. Smith against Bernard in his parallels censures and observations his words pag. 9. are these Hee would prove that an erroneous constitution of a Church is a reall Idol and the prayers they offer with the prayers of the wicked comming from that false constitution are tainted with the Idolatry of that constitution And pag. 10. It is Idolatry to offer up service to God in a Church of a false constitution And pag. 13. Tell mee Mr. Bernard can there be a true Ministery true baptisme true faith true prayer true preaching and administring the supper true excommunication in a Church which is falsly constituted Did the Lord accept the sacrifice of the Church constituted by Jeroboam so page 14. A Church falsly constituted is not accepted of God neither are their actions ecclesiasticall as prayer preaching c. acceptable in the sight of God And againe a false Ministery Worship government may bee in a true Church through ignorance and the like but a true Ministery worship government cannot possibly bee in a
wisheth utinam tales hodie à ministerio aâ—…verentuâ—… Fourthly because the Lord would cast off their children from being his for this sinne as Calvin also notes upon the place the promise of shewing mercy to a 1000. generations being chiefly annexed to the observers of the second Command and the instituted meanes of worship which those Priests never were Reply On the contrary if you will extend this Text to all unworthy Ministers of what sort soever whom the Word of God condemns as not approved Ministers of God c. Answ Wee intended no other sorts then such as wee have in hand the unable and ungodly Idoll Priests of England and therefore this discourse concernes us not For wee freely confesse that it is lawfull in divers cases at least for a time to communicate with such unworthy Ministers as may bee contained in your description but that people must and ought to joyne with such in the worship of God and sinne if they separate from the ordinances as you say the Scriptures alledged teach not this so evidently that wee can see as 1 Sam. 2.12 13.17.24 that imputation Verse 24. They make the Lords people to transgresse doth not depend immediatly on Verse 13 14.17 but on Verse 22.23 where they are charged to have layne with the women the other passages being interrupted by the story of Samuel and his Mother Verse 18 19.20 21. So Jer. 8.8 9. Micah 3.11 12. containe onely threats against wicked Ministers but not a word to prove people ought to joyne with them c. Phil. 1.15 speaking of such as preach and preach Christ though not of sinceritie doth not reach such Ministers as the word condemnes for many such may be approved Ministers by the Word having a call according to the same but wee shall not contend in this case wherein wee doe not dissent so that Christians bee left to their lawfull libertie of withdrawing from Ministers grossely wicked and Teachers of false Doctrin or idle and unsufficient when they cannot reclaime them or remove them in the use of all lawfull meanes within their power Reply The reasons whereby the ancient Churches condemned the Donatists and Catharists for their voluntary and seditious separations and the moderne Churches condemne the Anabaptists for their renting from the body of Christ will hold against separation from the Prayers of the Congregation because they are read by an ungodly Minister Wee deny that wee teach or hold such separation because read by an ungodly Minister as is sufficiently shewed before but what we speak is against conformitie to and communion with the corruptions of the Liturgie especially used by an unable as well as ungodly Minister and therefore the arguments mentioned will hold against our proposition just as the accusations and imputations of Donatisme Puritanisme Anabaptisme which the Prelates cast upon all Non-conformists and men studious of reformation will hold and fasten upon them which is nothing at all Reply The second Proposition where the whole Liturgie is used though by an able and godly Minister it is not lawfull to joyne in prayer in that case Wee cannot bee of your judgement herein for in the times of the Prophets and our Saviour Christ as great abuses no question were found c. but they never taught people to separate from the holy things of God Answ First wee must still mind the Reader of the true and full state of the question which in our answer is of joyning in prayer with and when that whole Liturgy is used and hee that joynes with that whole Liturgie must needs bee supposed to have actuall communion with all the corruptions thereof what ever they bee and therefore though this Proposition reach to the practise of able and godly Ministers yet let none thinke wee plead herein separation from their ministery but onely that people may not conforme with them to any corruption in worship and by this proposition also the Author might easily have seene that wee denied the other which was woven in with this not because of the ungodlinesse of the Minister alone as hee carried his dispute but chiefly in respect of the corruptions of the worship together with the unlawfulnesse of such a ministery that is both unable and ungodly Secondly concerning the argument it runs as full for conformitie to all the corrupt ceremonies of the booke as the corrupt worship it selfe therein as was said before cleare the one viz. non-conformitie to ceremonies shew a reason why you will separate from the Sacrament because you will not kneele according to the booke and you answer your argument here alledged against us but the reply proceeds Reply And if presence at formes of prayer bee not lawfull by reason of the corruptions alledged there can bee no visible societie named since 200. yeeres after Christ or thereabout wherein a Christian might lawfully joyne in prayer reading the Scriptures hearing the word or participation of the Sacraments their Doctrines prayers rights being lesse pure then ours but no man wee hope will bee so bold as to affirme the state of the Churches within 200. yeers after Christ to bee so miserably decayed that the faithfull could not without sinne hold communion with them in the foresaid ordinances of God Answ First this argument holds as strongly for conformitie to the ceremonies as to the whole booke of Common Prayers as was said before Secondly this is a dangerous kind of reasoning from the practise of the faithfull in corrupt times of the Church especially when they are declining and growing clouds of darkenesse and superstition overspread the Churches It is no breach of charitie to thinke that through the iniquitie of the times the godly lived in many evils through ignorance and weakenesse which after light is come into the Churches wee ought to abandon wholly these are times of light and of the consumption of Antichrist and time for us to abolish his Liturgies and corrupt formes of worship as well as Images ceremonies c. Who doe not pitie the weaknesse of godly Bilny and others that seeing some grosse corruptions were yet so devoutly obedient to the Church as they called it in many grosse superstitions and the like may bee said of those former times and wee see not but this reason will goe farre in justification of communion with many false worships of Antichrists that are not grosly idolatrous Thirdly it is a great charge upon those times to say no visible societie throughout the world can bee named since 200. yeeres after Christ that was not lesse pure then England in Doctrine rites c. It may bee that as generally Churches were corrupt so they contemned and censured such as professed more puritie but that there were some visible assemblies more pure may bee conceived by that testimony given to Aerius and many orthodox Christians with him though condemned for a Hereticke in that which wee all now hold to bee an undoubted truth also after the Waldenses casting off the Pope and his will
will joyne in a knowne corrupt service will his godly desires excuse him shall not his broken absurd responds his standing at the Creed kneeling at the Sacrament c. all which hee must doe if hee joyne in the whole Liturgie shall none of these cleave to his sacrifice what though the Minister offer the service so did the Priest the sacrifice But both in the name of the people and they joyning with him in offering the same to God 3ly Concerning Malach. 1.13 14. the more advisedly wee consider it the more perswaded wee are the Lord allow us to make such application of the truth contained in it and wee thinke others will bee of our mind not onely in respect of the similitude that iâ—… in this case with that in Malachi but also if wee consider what an argument the Lord useth to convince them of their corruptions and carelesnesse in his service Verse 11. wherein the Lord upbraids the Jewes and provokes them to Jealousie as the Apostle Paul speakes by declaring the reverend esteeme of his name amongst the heathen and that every where Incense should bee offered and a pure offering to his name And what is that Incense and pure offering but the pure prayers and worship of God that should be in all Gentile Churches under the Gospell as Tertullian Eusebius Jerom and Austin with others expound it And hee applies it againe Verse 14. I am a great King and my name shall bee great amongst the heathen If then the Lord oppose the pure prayers and worship of Gentile Churches to the corrupt carelesse sacrifices of the Jewes the application is not onely sutable but the place containes a sad admonition to all Gentile Churches that by their corrupt worships and Incense so farre frustrate as it were Gods expectation and glorying of their pure oblations Reply Your third Proposition That as you are very tender of imputing sinne to those men that joyne in some select prayers read by an able and godly Minister so on the other side you are not without feare lest such joyning may bee found unlawfull unlesse it may appeare that the Ministers with whom they have communion neither give scandall by reading them nor give unlawfull honour to a thing abused to Idolatry and Superstition nor doe suffer themselves to bee sinfully limited in the reading of them 1 Wee cannot conceive how you should imagine the practise of a godly Minister in reading some few select prayers to bee scandalous or offensive in the Congregations when the people generally in their assemblies and in the whole land were perswaded of the lawfulnesse of that course till now of late times some have beene drawne away to separate who yet by warrant of Scripture produce nothing of weight to countenance that practise Answ Concerning this Proposition wee doe ingenuously confesse that it may seeme over rigid and tending to separation and therefore we will not wholly justifie the same yet diverse things there bee which may much mitigate the seeming rigidnesse of it 1 In the words of the answer where wee doe not determine any thing positively wee doe not impute sinne to any in such a case wee say onely that wee are not without feate lest it may bee found unlawfull where any scandall unlawfull honour or sinfull limiting bee found in the Ministers and if our feares bee needlesse wee hope such as know how jealous the Lord is in matters of his worship will easily forgive us 2 Because you marvell wee should bee so timerous in this case wee shall give you some reasons of it which perhaps may abate much the marvell or wonder First let it bee remembred that these select prayers are yet a part of that Liturgie which is acknowledged to bee corrupt in matter and manner and clogged with such evill consequences as are afore touched Taken out of the Masse-booke c. And Master Parker who was no separatist doubts not to affirme that the touching of Antichrists things maketh uncleane for which hee cites 2 Cor. 6.17 Haggai 2.14 John 4.23 Park of the Crosse part 1. pag. 137. Secondly let it be considered that this booke is imposed by an unlawfull Antichristian authoritie of the Prelates to whom to give place and subjection in any thing is justly to bee questioned And wee know that a man may acknowledge his fealtie and hold his Lands of the Lord of the Manner by a small rent as well as by a greater Thirdly consider this corrupt Service-booke hath beene over-long tolerated and borne withall in the English Churches it deserveth not so honorable a buriall as the Jewish worship but hath stunke above ground twice 40. yeeres in the nostrills of many godly who breathed in the pure ayre of the holy Scripture being witnessed against by the writings and sufferings of many godly Ministers and Christians in England and Scotland Fourthly many godly men it is well knowne have been of late times especially offended at many good Ministers silence in these things that they would no more plainely and boldly discover the corruptions in that booke and at their compliance with the same Fiftly these are times of more light whereby the Lord is consuming Antichrist with the breath of his mouth And therefore we have cause the more to feare how we meddle with any thing of his Sixtly consider the season when this answer was sent was it not at a time when superstitious opinions of the whole booke and the ceremonies thereof were growne to a great height in the mindes and hearts of very many when divers superstitious Popish worships as bowing at the name of Jesus reading at the Table set Altar-wise c. were added to the heape of former corruptions when the tyranny of the Prelates raged in the pressing of the booke and their other humane inventions when many Ministers and people well thought of by the best were carried away shamefully with these things when many weake Christians were staggering and wavering and looking at the judgement and practise of their guides ready to stand or fall with them Lastly consider that things lawfull in themselves may bee inexpedient because offensive in their use and so farre unlawfull which offence wee chiefly looked at in this act as appeares by our answer Let all these things bee laid together and weighed in an equall ballance which wee hope our brethren are now at some libertie and leasure to doe and let the consciences of all speake whether it was not high time for all the godly in England to take unto them that zeale and courage which was soone after in our Brethren of Scotland to cast off and wholly abandon the book it self and all the formes of it and use of the same in every part and peece thereof At least wee hope you will cease to marvell at our timerousnesse of such a season how ever wee confesse wee have sometime been more bold in the darke These considerations premised as they may in a great measure abate the seeming rigour of the
of God and where there is a Covenant there is the people of God c. Answ This assertion seems to us very strange to fall from that reverend and learned Author being a foundation of many inconveniences and absuâ—…dities and tending to overthrow the order of Christ in his visible Churches For First if this be so that every Society in Covenant with God be the Church of God then men may set up as many Forms of visible Churches as they please if the people be in Covenant with God visibly at least the Archdeacon with his Commissary Priests Churchwardens c. being in Covenant with God are a true Church So the Diocesan Bishop in his Cathedrall with his Clergy or any such Assembly are the Church of God or what other form-soever men will devise may goe for the Church of God and to them belong the seals and you may as wel say discipline and all Ordinances of God if they bee the true Church Secondly upon this ground every company of godly Christistians in Covenant with God meeting in fasting prayer c. are the true Church of God and to them as such the sealâ—… belong and sending for a true Minister of the Catholick church they may have Baptism and the Lords-supper administred and by the same reason discipline also yea if but two or three as you say being in Covenant with God meet together in their travail at an Inne c. are the Church of God especially every Christian family iâ—… the Church for they professe the entire faith joyn daily in prayer and thanksgiving receive the truth of God to dwell amongst them are in some measure obedient unto the commandâ—… of God and in Covenant with God And therefore being the Church of God why not call for a Minister and have seals ordinarily dispensed to them Thirdly upon this ground a company of Christian Women in Covenant with God are a Church to whom the seal â—… belong and who sees not how all orderly dispensation of Gods Ordinances and the whole order of visible Churches in the Gospel would be overturned by this assertion We verily beleeve this Author was far from admitting these things but the Position it self will unavoidably enforce the same Neither can we impute this assertion to any inconsideratenesse through heat of disputation For if any shall maintain the personall Covenant of people with God to be sufficient to constitute visible Churches and not admit a necessity of a more publick or generall Covenant explicite or implicite whereby a company of Christianâ—… are made one people joyning in one Congregation to worship God in his holy Ordinances and walk together in his wayâ—… they must of necessity acknowledge every Society in Covenant with God to be a Church as here is said and therefore admit all forms of Churches and all Families c. to be Churches and so bring in the confution objected which we desire may well bee considered All your Arguments stand upon that ground of personall covenant with God which is too weak to bear up that conclusion to make all such visible Churches to whom the seals belong as the absurd consequences thereof shew These Reasons and the Scriptures in the margent some of them will prove them fit matter for visible Churches and that they have a remote right unto the seals of that Covenant which we grant but they will not prove every Society of such to bee true Churches having immediate right to have the seals dispensed unto them Reply Fifthly If it be graâ—…ted that the seals are the prerogative of particular visible Churches known and approved Christians amongst us are members of such Churches and so to be esteemed amongst you c. and every visible beleever professing the pure entire faith admitted to the right and lawfull participation of the sacraments is a visible member of the true Church if he hath neither renounced the Society nor deserved justly to be cast out by excommunication or Church censure c. And if known and approved Christians members of our Churches comming to New-England shall desire to have their children baptized or themselves admitted to the Lords-supper before they be set members amongst you we desire to know upon what grounds from God you can deny them if you acknowledge our Churches Ministery and Sacraments to be true as you professe and the members of the Church be known and approved orderly recommended unto you Answ We grant all this here expressed for the substance however some reasons spoken unto before intermixed we passe over and to your question we frame a ready answer from your own words For first you grant that if such members have renounced that Society wherein they did partake of the seals they are not to be reputed members of it and this is generally the case of all approved Christians among us who though they doe not so renounce the Churches that bare them and gave them suck as no true Churches yet seeing they were grown so corrupt many ways as they could neither enjoy some needfull Ordinances nor partake in those they had without sin they have therefore renounced and forsaken all further communion with them and membership in them and so by your own grant neither themselves nor the Churches here can take them as members of your Churches to receive them under that respect Secondly if any yet have not so far renounced those Churches they belonged unto yet they are not orderly recommended unto us which also you grant ought to be and indeed otherwise we may oft receive persons justly excommunicate or such as are no members of Churches any where or otherwise under great offence as frequent examples amongst our selves doe sheâ—…e though the Church may think well of such as offer themselves What else follows in this Paragraph is the same in substance and much of it in words also that we have answered before and therefore we passe it over and that of the Jewish Church we shall speak to after As for that you desire leave to set down and us to examine what may be objected against that we affirmed That the distinct Churches named in the New Testament were Congregationall Societies we shall consider as followeth Reply The number of beleevers were so great in some Cities that they could not conveniently meet in one place as one Assembly to worship God according to his will and for their edifying as in Samaria Jerusalem Antioch Ephesus Answ Although we expected not Objections in this case against the currant Tenent of our godly Reformers Baine Parker c. with whom we joyn and we might refer you to them for answer to this beaten Objection of the Prelates yet we are not unwilling to examine what is said in this digression The Argument stands thus If the number of beleevers were so great in some City as could not meet in one Assembly to edification then there was some other form of a Church besides Congregationall But so it was in Samaria c. Answ
ordinances of Christ and priviledges of a Church which the other have not being out of that order of Christ prescribed in the Gospel in which order of a visible Church visible ordinances are to be dispensed as hath been proved before Reply If a Synod consisting of sundry members of particular Churches met together in the name of Christ about the common and publike affaires of the Churches shall joine together in prayer and Communion of the Supper we can see no ground to question it as unlawfull although that assembly bee no particular Congregation or Church hath no Pastour over them c. Answ That such an assembly may pray together is no question for every family may doe so and that they may receive the Supper also in a right order wee deny not for meeting where there is a particular instituted Church they may have Communion therewith in the Supper being many as well as few but whether they may as a Church being no politicall body but members of many Politicall Churches administer Church ordinances proper to a Church wee would see some reasons before wee can judge it lawfull so to doe for though some doe account such a Synod Ecclesia orta yet not properly such a Church as hath Ecclesiasticall power authority and priviledge belonging thereto they may consult and doctrinally determine of cases of that assembly Acts 15. but further to proceed we see no rule nor paterne Besides if such an assembly of many Churches may administer Seales why may not any other assembly of Church members or Ministers doe the same and so this power will be carried without limitation we know not how far if they once depart from a particular Church CHAP. VIII Consid 3. Reply TO the third consideration this whole reason as it is propounded makes onely against it selfe who ever thought that the Seales were not proper to confederates or the Church of God of old visible beleevers in the Covenant of grace were of the visible Church and in Church order according to the dispensation of those times though not joyned to the society of Abrahams family to exclude Job Melchisedeck c. because not of the visible Church is welnigh a contradiction and so to debarre known approved Christians c. Answ That this reason makes not against it self Mr. Ball himself hath cleared when he stated our consideration truely in the words following as will appeare however here he somewhat troubles the waters needlessely that the ground may not appeare for there is nothing in our answer which deny Melchisedech Job c. to bee of the visible Church according to the manner of those times indeed wee instance in them as persons under the covenant of grace not mentioning their membership in family Churches as being enough for our purpose if they had not right to Circumcision by vertue of their right in the covenant of grace except they joyned to the Church at first in Abrahams family and so after to the same Church in Israel and the more speciall Church relation in Abrahams family was required to Circumcision the stronger is the force of our reason not the weaker For so much the rather it followes that seales are not to bee dispensed to beleevers as such though visibly professing the faith except they joyne also to such a forme of the visible Church to or in which the seales are instituted and given Reply The true and proper meaning of this consideration is that as Circumcision and the Passeover were not to bee dispensed to all visible beleevers under the Covenant of grace but onely to such as were joyned to Abrahams family or the people of the God of Abraham no more may Baptisme and the Lords Supper be administred now to any beleevers unlesse they be joyned to some particular Congregation Answ These words rightly stating the consideration wee leave it to any indifferent reader to judge whether any way it make against it selfe or whether there was any cause first to darken it as was done in the former passage Reply The strength of it stands in the parity betweene Circumcision and Baptisme but this parity is not found in every thing as your selves alledge To unfold it more fully wee will consider three things First wherein the Sacraments agree and wherein they differ Answ It matters not in how many things the Sacraments differ so they agree in the thing questioned and though wee might raise Disputes and Queries about some particulars in this large discourse upon this first head yet seeing here is a grant of the parity in the point now questioned viz. Concerning the persons to whom Circumcision and Baptisme doe belong wee shall take what is granted and leave the rest For thus it is said Circumcision and Baptisme are both Sacraments of Divine institution and so they agree in substance of the things signified the persons to whom they are to be administred and the order of administration if the right proportion be observed Now that we hold the right proportion in the persons may appearâ—… First in that as was granted Circumcision sealed the entrance into the Covenant but this Covenant was not simply and onely the Covenant of grace but that whole Covenant that was made with Abraham whereby on Gods part they were assured of many speciall blessings whereof Lot and others not in this Covenant with Abraham were not capable and whereby Abraham his seed and family were bound for their part to be a people to God and to observe this signe of the Covenant which others in the Covenant of grace were not bound to Answ Secondly as is granted it was Abraham and his houshold and the seed of beleeving Jewes that were the persons to bee Circumcised and therefore not visible beleevers as such for then Lot had been included so by right proportion not all visible beleevers as such but such as with Abraham and his family are in visible Covenant to bee the people of God according to the institution of Churches when and to which the seale of Baptisme is given and therefore as all family Churches but Abrahams being in a new forme of a Church were excluded so much more such as are in no visible constituted Church at all Reply Secondly As for the proposition it selfe certaine it is Circumcision and the Passeover were to bee administred onely to the visible members of the Church i. e. to men in Covenant professing the true faith but that in Abrahams time none were members of the visible Church which joyned not to Abrahams family wee have not learned Answ The proposition wee see is granted yet it is obscured divers wayes to which wee answer First whereas it is said these members of the Church were men in Covenant professing the true faith True but where not in any place but in the Church of Abrahams family and so after in the Church of Israel Secondly what faith not onely faith in the Messiah for life and salvation but withall faith in the promises made to
Reply If Lot Job c. were not circumcised there is not the like reason for Circumcision and baptisme in this particular Answ The force of the consideration doth not depend upon the likenesse of reason betweene the persons to be circumcised and baptized in every respect but in this that as Circumcision and the Passeover were given onely to visible members of that instituted visible Church and therefore so in this case of baptisme and the Lords Supper now therefore if you could alledge many more different reasons betweene Lot Job c. that were not circumcised and those not to bee baptized it would little availe in the case but wee shall consider your differences particularly Reply First If ever circumcision was appropriated to Abrahams family and might not be communicated to other visible beleevers it was in the first institution but in the first institution of baptisme it was not so observed that beleevers should bee gathered into a Christian Church and then baptized Mat. 3.7 John baptized such as came to him confessing their sinnes the Apostles baptized Disciples such as gladly received their doctrine c. Answ There is no such disparity in this as is objected for Abrahams family was in Covenant before Circumcision was given onely the Covenant was more fully explained and confirmed and so when John baptized hee baptized the members of the Jewes Church in Covenant before to whom hee was sent to turne the heart of the fathers to the children c. and to prepare a people for the Lord and baptisme was then given to the Church of the Jewes with reference to so many as would receive the doctrine of John concerning repentance and remission of sinnes by faith in the Messiah now come amongst them and therefore Christ himselfe and his Disciples remained yet members of that Church Secondly Though the visible Kingdome of Christ was not yet to bee erected in Christian Churches till after Christs death and Resurrection whereby hee did put an end to the Jewish worship and therefore no Christian Churches could bee gathered by John yet there was a middle state of a people prepared for the Lord gathered out of the Jewish Church which according to that state were made the Disciples of John by solemne profession of their repentance or conversion to God and acknowledgement of Christ the Lambe of God already come to whom the seale of baptisme was appropriated As for the instances Act. 2.37 c. and 8.37 and 10.47 48. they are spoken to before in the first consideration Reply Secondly Lot Job c. were not bound to joyne to Abrahams family and bee circumcised but now all visible beleevers are bound to seeke baptisme in an holy manner Answ First This difference makes little to the point in hand it is enough that all that would be circumcised were bound to joyne to that Church and so now Secondly in after times no doubt every true proselyte fearing God was bound to joyne to that church as well as now and if now all visible beleevers be bound to professe their faith and seek baptisme in an holy manner why should they not bee bound to joyne to some visible Church and seeke it there as well as of old yea where should they professe their faith but in the visible Churches as the Proselytes of old did Your third difference is oft pressed and answered before Reply Fourthly If Circumcision bee appropriated to the family of Abraham it is because that Covenant was peculiar to Abrahams posterity namely that Christ should come of Isaac but baptisme is the Seale of the Covenant of Grace without peculiarity or respect Answ This difference is of little moment neither will it hold for first though that and other promises had a speciall eye to Abrahams family yet Circumcision sealed the righteousnesse of faith Rom. 4. to them being in visible Covenant with the Church as baptisme now doth Secondly this peculiar respect you speake of no way hindereth the joyning of many servants to Abrahams family and Covenant nor any proselytes to the Church afterward of any nation no more then now in respect of baptisme Thirdly the true reason was because although the Covenant was made with others yet not established nor enlarged towards them and hence if they would partake of such a Covenant they must joyne in this which also is the glory of the rich grace of Christ shining forth in Church-Covenant with all that will become a people to him to this day The first difference is answered in the first and second CHAP. IX Consid 4. Reply TO the fourth consideration first Men are capable of Church censures either as having power to dispense them or as being subject unto them c. In the second sense many are capable of Church priviledges who are not subject to Church censures as the children of Christian Parents are capable of baptisme and approved members of any true Church are capable of Seales in other Congregations amongst you who are not subject to the censures of the other Congregation spiritual Communion in publike prayer whereof visible beleivers not in Church order are capable but not subject to common censures in your sense Answ This distinction is needlesse our meaning is plaine in the second sense and therefore wee say nothing to what is objected against the first To the instances objected against the proposition in the second sense wee answer first concerning the Infants of Church-members they are subject to censures whensoever they offend the Church as others are though so long as they live innocently they need them not Secondly Members of any true visible Church are subject and so capable of censure though not in another Church which is not in in the proposition 2. Also they are capable of censures mediately by and in that other Church if they there offend for that Church may admonish and prosecute the admonition in the Church to which they belong and refuse society with them if they repent not which cannot bee said of such as are not members of any visible Church who cannot be prosecuted to excommunication in any place Thirdly Publike prayers of the Church though they bee an ordinance of Christ and the Church have a speciall Communion in them in which respect others do not share yet they are not a priviledge or peculiar ordinance wherein none but the Church may share for an Heathen or Infidel may hear the word and joyne in the prayers being cultus naturalis saying Amen unto the same which cannot be said of seales and censures being cultus institutus Reply Secondly A Person baptized is not baptized into that particular Congregation onely but into all Churches and in every particular Church hath all the priviledges of the baptized person and so to be esteemed of them Now the privilâ—…dge of the baptized person walking in the truth and able to examine himselfe is to bee admitted to the Lords Supper as all circumcised persons had right thereby to eate the Passeover in any
society where God should choose to put his name there Exod. 4.47 Deut. 16.1 1. Answ This seemeth to touch the question it selfe rather then the proposition of this fourth consideration but wee shall answer to it as it stands 1. Here you grant that a person baptized is baptized unto a particular Congregation which wee accept as a yeelding of the question unawares 2. If you meane that such hath a liberty of Communion in a way of brotherly love in all Churches where he comes wee grant so farre as nothing in him justly hinder but if you meane that hee is baptized into all Churches so as to challenge a right of Membership in them all wee deny it as a position that would take away all distinction of Churches as wee have formerly shewed 3. We deny that the Lords Supper is the priviledge of a baptized person able to examine himself walking in the truth as a baptized person for then a Papist converted to the truth able to examine himselfe hath a right to the Lords Supper in every Church before he make any profession of his conversion and faith in any particular Church for hee may bee such a baptized person And we may say the like of an excommunicate penitent 4. We grant that a baptized person is not onely baptized in to that particular Church whereof hee was first a member For if it bee a seale of his initiation into that particular Church onely then he must bee rebaptized as oft as hee enters into another but hee is baptized in the sense formerly shewed into the whole mysticall Body of Christ and hence hath jus ad rem or a remote right unto the priviledges of the Church every where but that therefore he hath immediate right to the fruition of all when he is severed from that particular church wherein he was baptized that follows not for as he had this latter right in the first Church wherein hee was baptized so he must have it in any of the Churches of Christ afterward now if in the first Church the fruition of ordinances came by orderly joyning to it so it must be afterward for as wee said before such as the communion is such ought to be the union he that would have politicall communion with the politicall Churches of Christ must be some where in politicall union with them otherwise one may have communion in all Churches yet never unite himself to any one which loose walking we are perswaded Christ Jesus will not allow 5 The similitude from a circumcised person will not hold First because there is no parity between severall families in the same Church and severall Churches in the New Testament but rather severall seats of communicants in the same Church answers severall â—…amilies eating the passeover in the Church of the Jewes Secondly an Edomite circumcised though he were converted and acknowledged the true God in his owne country never so fully yet might not eate the passeover till he joyned to the church of Israel as all other Proselytes did so is it here Reply Thirdly there is not the same reason of every Church priviledge one may have right to some who may not meddle with others as members of one Church may joyne in hearing and prayer with another Church but not medale in election and ordination of their Teachers and therefore the prâ—…position is not so evidâ—…nt to bee taken without proofe that they have no power to admit a beleever into communion in any Church priviledge who have no power to excommunicate Answ What is here objected from the liberty or restriction of Church members in another Congregation is answered before in the first objection and therefore the proposition may stand good for all that is here said 2 That which is set down as the proposition is neither the same with that in our reason nor any way allowed by us for wee speake not here of power to admit but of the right to bee partakers neither doe wee deny a power in officers to admit members of other Churches to the seales though they have no power to excommunicate them 3 If our proposition seeme to need proofe the reason of it is at hand because those that are the peculiar priviledges or proper priviledges or proprieties of the Church as seales and censures being of the same nature viz. outward ordinances of Christ ordained by him for the edification of his Church and joyntly given to his Church and therefore looke to what Church hee hath given the one hee hath given the other also if the one viz. censures bee given to the Church of a visible Congregation then the other they are all both seales and censures contained in the keys which are given to the visible instituted Churches of the New Testament not to the Catholick as such for a godly man justly cast out of the particular Church yet cannot bee cast out of the Catholick Reply That visible beleevers baptized into a true Church professing the true faith and walking in holy obedience and their seed should be judged such as are without in the Apostles sense because they are not externally joyned as set members to some peculiar Congregation in Church Covenant is affirmed not proved Answ Comming to the assumption of our argument it is expressed according to the frequent manner in this Reply in such termes as it is not affirmed by us and theâ—â—â—ore if it want proof blame not us our assumption is Such as are not in Church Covenant are not capable of Church censures where by being in Church covenant wee meane either implicitly or explicitly membership in any true Church as in our answer wee expresse to prevent mistakes and this is proved from 1 Cor. 5.12 and in applying hereof wee doe not affirme that such are simply without in the Apostles sense but in some respect onely viz. in regard of visible church Communion Reply First It doth oft fall out that the true members of the Catholick Church and best members of the orthodox Church by a prevailing faction in the Church may bee no members of any distinct society and shall their posterity be counted aliens from the Covenant and debarred from the Sacraments because their parents are unjustly separated from the inheritance of the Lord Answ This objection is before answered in the first consideration where was given the instance of Athanasius and it is answered by the Reply it selfe in the next words Surely as parents unjustly excommunicated doe continue still visible members of the flock of Christ understand that particular Church out of which they are cast so the right of Baptism belongs to their Infants which being so they are not without that Church though debarred unjustly of the present communion with it unlesse he renounce that Church or other Reply Secondly If such Churches renounce it as are no members of a politick spirituall fellowship be without then the mâ—…mbers of one Church are without unto another c. Answ This objection wee have
are to bee admitted without such a promise includes a necessity the answer speakes onely of expediency and agreeablenesse to rule not to breake off abruptly Secondly the Position affirmes the necessitie of a promise the answer speakes onely of the case in practise as in many cases besides for the watch of the Church reacheth to such particular acts of which wee make no promise expresse in the entrance Thirdly the Position speakes of the Churches leave the answer acknowledgeth onely that brethren removing should approve themselves to doe that which is lawfull and take counsell in such weighty affaires By all which it appeares that wee doe not owne this position in judgement nor practise and therefore in effect our answer doth deny the same and is negative Secondly if the words of the answer bee not full enough because wee see our brethren here runne upon it as a question if such a promise be required and Mr. Rutherford and others take it up as a confessed practise wee doe therefore clearely and plainely deny the position and affirme that wee doe not thinke that none are to bee admitted without such a promise neither is there any such practise in our admissions of members to require such a promise wee onely count such removalls especially of families an action amongst many others whereunto the watch of the Church doth extend to prevent sinne where there is any just ground of suspition thereof and to further the best good of such as are under our charge by counsell prayers c. If any Minister and people of old acquaintance and deare affection or any other Christians cleaving together in love have privatly resolved or agreed together not to part from each others in any Church it is the most that wee have taken knowledge of and wee thinke that hath beene very rare but for any such publick promise Covenant or Church oath as some straining things to the height have called it it is not nor hath been required or practised amongst us this being so there needs no grounds of that which wee practise not Reply First you exclude all such as bee not set members from the seales and yet hinder them from entrance into the Church society because they cannot promise continuance in the place they are resident in for the present here we desire to bee satisfied by the word of God by what you require it c. Answ First We deny not but divers may and doe forbeare to joyne because of their unsettlednesse in the place of their present abode Secondly It may bee in some cases some may be advised by the counsell of their private friends in a Church to forbeare till they be some way setled But that any are debarred from Communion when they desire it because they cannot promise continuance unlesse other just causes hinder it neither suites with our judgement nor practise and if any should practise other wayes wee doe not allow of the same and therefore it 's needlesse to give you reasons of what we practise not Reply Secondly It pertaines not to the whole Congregation to take notice or bee acquainted with or judge of every particular members removall may not a servant remove from his Master to another Congregation or a father bestow his childe in marriage to one of another Congregation but the whole Church must be called to counsell in the matters c. when Churches grow populous they must bee negligent or weary of such a taske and for the present to challenge so much authority over one another is usurpation c. Answ If our answer were but attended such apprehensions of our practise of calling the whole Church to counsell in every such case and all that followes might be spared For thus we say Wee judge it expedient c. That none forsake fellowship and abruptly breake off c. This doth not imply a necessity of calling the whole Church to counsell in every plaine and easie case many times and for the most part such removals are so plaine and free from suspition of abrupt breaking off or forsaking fellowship that there is no need of counsell as in case of servants marriages c. and therefore no trouble to the Church and in some removall of families also the case is cleare and openly carried in the knowledge of many of the Church none scruple it and therefore at the first demand of dismission or letters of recommendations the same are granted but in removall of some members and in the manner of the same there are such difficulties and dangers as neede the prayers and counsell of the Officers and whole Church as is confessed after nor doe wee say it pertaines to the whole Church to bee called to counsell and judge of every particular members removall for they may approve themselves to the consciences of all mediately by advising with some who may satisfie the rest if need be Reply Let it be shewed that ever by divine right this power was committed to the Church and we will confesse it expedient but till then wee thinke the Church over rigid and the members busie bodies c. Answ The rule of love whereby wee are bound to exhort admonish seeke the edification and good one of another and that not onely in generall as of all Christians but as members of so neere relation in one Church body who are bound to serve the Lord with one shoulder Zeph. 3. â—… and to uphold the worship of Christ therein as this doth reach to all the actions and wayes of one another so in a speciall manner to such an action as this iâ—… and we thinke this ground is sufficient to satisfie our practice as wee have declared which may wipe off the aspersion of being rigid or busie-bodies Reply In the multitude of counsellors is peace but over-many counsellors oft causeth distractions and different apprehensions breed delayes Answ Wee grant it may doe so neither doe wee bring all cases to publike counsell but the case may bee such as needs the publike counsell of all and as wee have a gracious promise of the presence of Christ in his Churches who is the counsellour so we confesse to his praise that we finde the judgment of a Church of Saints in matters orderly carryed and gathered up from the various gifts of wisedome grace and experience of many Christians when need is to be a blessed priviledge of Gods people to enjoy and sanctified oft to the great good of his Saints and being neglected and slighted hath been oft followed with sad events Reply The nature of your Church-Covenant inferreth not a necessity of bringing every such businesse to the Church for you binde your selves mutually to watch one over another c. but this essentially tyeth not any man to a perpetuall residence in one place for then even occasionall absence should be a breach of Covenant without consent of the Church Answ We grant our Church-Covenant neither requires every businesse to come to publike counsell nor perpetuall
of faith in Christ and the duty of obedience to the Gospell and how did all this appeare but by their profession and what kinde of confession can any man think such soules would make but a broken hearted gracious confession which to any discerning charity must be taken to argue a worke of grace so that the very character given of them by the holy Ghost in so briefe an History doth cleerely evince what we contend for Consider also the story Acts 8. and first not to passe over what is said of Simon Magus of whom it is said Hee beleeved was baptized continued with Philip and wondered so that no doubt they took him for a true beleever but when Peter discovered his falsnesse see what hee saith Verse 21. Thou bâ—…st no part nor lot in this matter and the reason is For thy heart is not right in the sight of God Let any here consider that if hee had no part nor lot in Christ and baptisme c. because not right whether the Apostle Peter or the Church would have received him if such had been discovered before And for the Eunuch Philip requiring his profession of faith If thou beleevest with all thy heart looked for a sound worke of grace and though it was delivered in those words which are the Fundamentall truth That Jesus is the Sonne of God yet it includes true faith in him for salvation as we see our Saviour Christ takes that confession of Peter for true faith Flesh and blood have not revealed thâ—… to thee but my Father and promised to build the Church on this rocke Matth. 16. Yea it includes subjection unto him as the Sonne of God the Prophet and King of his Church and this is no rare but a common thing in the New Testament by one fundamentall truth beleeved and confessed to include true faith and profession of the whole truth that suites with that foundation as Rom. 10.9 so expounded Verse 10 11. as being more then historicall faith so 1 John â—… 1 2. and 5.1 The like characters of a penitent and gracious carriage and confession may be observed Act. 19.17 18 19. And seeing you have given us this occasion to lay downe some grounds of our practise from the first patternes we shall add a word or two to take away the conceit of novelty which is imputed to us in this point as much as in any thing else Tertullian saith in his booke of prescriptions Wee admit no man to any disputation about divine things unlesse hee first have shewed us of whom he received the faith and became a Christian and secondly whether hee admit and hold the generall principles wherein all Christians doe and ever did agree otherwise proscribing against him as an alien from the Common-wealth of Israel And if in those times they were so strict in admitting men to disputations no doubt much more in receiving men to Church Communion But if this seeme not full enough take another in the Churches of old there were Catechumeni instructed for enterance into the Church by baptisme with whom they tooke much paines in sanctifying them before by fasting and prayer and often preaching to them And for their admission there were foure things in use among them 1. Nominis professio 2. Scrutinium 3. Abrenuntiatio 4. Fidei professio Their Scrutinium which they call Examen competentium or the examination of such as were competent or fitting for admission This Examen was very strict as is observed out of Alcuinus by learned Chamier Fiant scrutinia ut explorentur saepius an post renuntiationum Satanae sacra verba datae fidei radicitus corde defixerint i. e. Let examinations be made that if oft may bee tryed whether they have deeply fixed in the heart the sacred words of their professed faith And what ever any may thinke of the strictnesse of that their discipline in this point Chamier gives a large testimony by way of approbation of the same whose words upon it are these Certe nemo it â—…are potest seriam in tam sanctis rebus diligentiam ne quantum fieri poterit lateant Simones c. i. Certainely no man can disallow such serious diligence to prevent proâ—…anation of sacred things lest so farre as it is possible such as Simon Magus may lye hid And saith hee the Apostles went before in their examples for Philip Acts 8. being demanded of the Eunuch What hinders mee that I may not bee baptized hee answereth not simply thou mayst but with this supposition added if thou beleevest with thy whole heart Now this profession of their faith was either by reciting the Creed in an eminent place before all the people and that praeclarâ fiduciâ with full affiance as hee observes out of Clement and Augustine or else respondendo interroganti Sacerdoti per singula in subsidium forte pudoris aut memoriae i. e. By answering to the Minister propounding questions concerning their faith for helpe of their bashfulnesse or want of memory Also Beza in his Epist 14. Commending much the severity and zeale of former Pastors and Churches in this kind and bemoaning the negligence of such as followed from whence hee saith it is that the Church without a miracle could not rise out of its filth he concludes thus Itaque frustra disputabitur tum voce tum scriptis nisi conversione cordium 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 initium instaurationis sumâ—…tuâ—… Reverend Mr. Hildersam in his treatise of the doctrine of the Lords Supper to that question whether the people that come to the Lords Table bee bound to make knowne their knowledge and spirituall estate to their Pastor Answers thus yes verily for seeing Matth. 3.6 Acts 8.37 God required of them that being of yeares of discretion were to bee baptized that they should make knowne to the Congregation or their Minister their faith and repentance hee doth every whit as much require this of them that are to come to the Lords Supper Whereby we see 1. that his judgement was that Act. 8. and Mat. 3. the people did make known their spirituall estate to the congregation or Minister when they professed faith and repentance and secondly that the same ought now so to bee Lastly We may appeale herein to the consciences of very many godly Ministers in our deare England whether they groane not under the mixture of the precious with the vile in the Ordinances of Christ and would not gladly have it otherwise which cannot bee without such a way of admissions into the Church as we plead for or else in constituted but corrupted Churches by casting out such as after admonitions appeare impenitent in sin by the severity of discipline And this was evident by the qualifications of persons to be received to the Lords Table voted at first by the present Reverend Assembly and presented in their Directory to the Parliament if wee bee not mis-informed whose words are these None are to bee admitted thereto meaning the Lord Suppers but such as
communion with him as a true Minister of Jesus Christ in the Church he doth belong to as they may do with a member unjustly cast out but til that appeare unto them they cannot so esteem and honor him being orderly deposed but must at least suspend their judgment til the case be cleared Fourthly we answer clearely and plainely to the chiefe scope of the question If a Minister bee unjustly deposed or forsaken by his particular Church and he also withall renounce and forsake them so farre as all Office and relation betweene them cease then is hee no longer an Officer or Pastour in any Church of God whatsoever you will call it And the Reason is because a Ministers office in the Church is no indelible Character but consists in his relation to the flocke and if a Minister once ordained his relation ceasing his Office of a Minister Steward of the mysteries of God shall still remaine why should not a ruling Elder or Deacon remaine an Elder or Deacon in the Church as well all are Officers Ordained of Christ alike given to his Church Officers chosen and Ordained by laying on of â—…ands alike but weâ—… suppose you will not say a Deacon In such a case should remaine a Deacon in the Catholique Church therefore not a Minister Secondly wee shall now consider what is here said and first this language of a Minister in the usuall Church as a particular Church hath union with and is a part of the universall it is an unusuall expression to us and to the Scripture phrase and therefore beare with us if wee fall short of your meaning the usuall Church in England hath beene either the Arch-Deacons Church in the Deanaâ—…ies or Diocesan in the Bishoprick or Provinciall or Nationall but wee hope that there is no such intended here yet to all this and the jurisdiction thereof particular Churches have been subject as parts there But if by usuall Church you meane a Classical Provinciall or Nationall Church wee must intreat better grounds for any of these and therefore wee must confesse our minde and meaning is not so that wee looke at a Minister of a particular Church in any such relation to the usuall and intermediate Church betweene it and the Catholique The second sense therefore we owne and acknowledge as before But whether this be contrary to the judgement and practise of the universall Church wee know not because it is hard for us know what the universall Church judgeth except we could heare it speake or see its practise if the onely head Prophet and Shepherd of the Church Jesus Christ be fit to declare her judgement we will be tryed thereby who we know hath set Elders in every particular Church Act. 14.23 to watch over their particular flock Act. 20.28 but not over any other Church that wee can finde Neither doth this destroy the unity or Communion of the Catholique Church nor of particular Churches one with another as is said for Churches may enjoy brotherly Communion one with another without such stated formes under the power and authority of one another as hath been shewed before Reply For if he be not a Minister to other Churches then are not the Churches of God one nor the Communion which they have together on nor the Ministers one non the flocke which they feed one Answ In what sense is intended to have the Ministers one and flocke one we doe not see If you meane one by one visible Government over the Catholique Church wherein there is a subordination of Churches and Ministers you must at last rise to Oecomenicall Pastor or Councell that must be the supreme which can scarce ever be had If you meane an unity by brotherly Communion in officeâ—… of love and mutuall helpefulnesse of Churches and Ministers without usurpation such an unity and Community is not destroyed and the argument doth not follow Cannot many distinct societies of Townes or Corporations make up one County except the Major or Constable in one Towne be a Major or Constable in others also By this Reason the Deacon of one Church is the Deacon of all or else the unity is destroyed Reply If the Pastor derive all his authority from the Church when the Church hath set him aside what right hath he to administer among that people Answ True but we say he derives all his authority from Christ by the Church indeed applying that office to him to which the authority is annexed by the institution of Christ hence being the Minister of Christ unto them if they without Christ depose him they hinder the exercise of his Office but his right remaines Reply As they give right to an unworthy man to minister amongst them if they cal him unjustly so they take right from the worthy if they unjustly depose him Answ We grant there is a parity in foro externo but as in the call his outward cal consists in the election of the calling and the acceptation of the called to compleat his power of administration Now this by Christ in his Church may be destroyed in a â—…ust censure without his consent but cannot unjustly be wrung from him without his consent therefore he may hold his right till either hee be justly deposed or willingly relinquish the same upon their injurious interruption of the use of his right Reply And whereas you say the Minister is for the Ministery and the Office for the execution and so the Pastor and the flocke are relatives and therefore if their election gave him authority among them to feed their câ—…sting him off hath stripped him of the same power they gave him Answ Wee grant it is so yet the execution may bee unjustly hindred though the right and Office remaine But we may well retort this argument upon the Minister of the usuall or Catholicke Church Thus if the Minister bee for the Ministery and the Office for the execution and so the Pastor and flock be relatives then hee that may justly for ever be hindred of all execution of the Ministery and hath no power to censure his flock or cannot so much as justly approve and admonish them for the same surely hee hath a poore Office and Ministery but such a Minister that hath no particular Congregation that is his flock under his charge may justly be excluded out of all Churches and cannot censure or reprove his Catholique or usuall Church for the same therefore he is indeed no Minister and and hath no Office in the Church of God â—…HAP XVII Position 8. THat one Minister cannot performe any Ministeriall act in another Congregation Reply The Preaching of the Word and publique Prayer in the Congregation meet together solemnely to worship God c. are properly Ministeriall c. Answ Concerning our true sense and meaning in our answer to this Position wee have spoken in the second consideration of the second and third Positions to which wee referre the Reader onely here wee must ingenuously confesse that our expression That a Minister exercising in another Church doth it not by vertue of any calling but onely by his gifts is not so cleare but may occasion stumbling yet the the next words following doe fully expresse our mindes viz. that he doth not put forth such a Ministeriall act of authority and power in dispensing of Gods Ordinances as a Minister doth performe to that Church whereunto hee is called to be a Minister for so hee doth not performe any Ministeriall act with that authority hee doth to his owne which further cleares up our expression in the second consideration viz. that he is a Pastor of none but his proper flocke although some acts of his Office may extend beyond his owne flocke as we have shewed before and therefore in this sense we may still conclude that if the question be put to any Minister so exercising in another church which was once put to our Saviour By what authority dost thou these things let him study how to give an answer for wee have not yet learned it from this Reply We confesse there are some godly learned servants of Christ who possibly may bee otherwise minded and thinke that a Minister preaching in another Congregation doth it onely as a gifted man as the Refuter of Doctor Downam with others in former times of Reformation beleeved also But we desire that if any difference appeare herein it may bee no prejudice to the same cause for substance wee maintaine if by sundry lines wee all meet at last in the same point FINIS Vid Pet. Mart. Loc. Com. de Excom Brins Watch part 3. capâ—… 10. Jun. lib. 1. paral 6. G. Apol. cap. 7. Q. 2. Ibid. p. 138. Peter Martyr in 1 Kings 12. verse 31. Pet. Mart. Com. Loc. de Idol in praeâ—… l. 1. Iohn 2.15 16. Conc. Miliv Can. 12. Tertull. Apol. cap. 30. Vid. Chemnit Ex. de Innoc. Sanctorum Vid. Birth of Heresies out of Elasopolitans Comment Pet. Mart. loc â—…om de Idol Whit. de Eccle. 1 Cor. 15.47 Vid. Brightm An. in Loc. Cypr. lib. 3. Epist 13. Cypr. lib. 4. Epist 7. * Right of Presbyt pag. 482. Page 22. Page 68. Tertul. lib. 4. Com. Mar. * Calvin Epist 332. Chamier de Euchar cap. 13. Reply To the second Consideration of the Answer Pet Mart. de Excom Loc. Com. * Officiall Lib. 1. cap. 6.7 Rev. 2.2 and 3.9 Acts 2 38.8 â—…7 19 17 18 â—… Cham de Bap. lib. 5. cap. 1â—…