Church but as a Professor of Christianity which intitles others to this priviledge as much as him Therefore he cannot be the fountaine of Church power as such for whoever is the fountaine of power to any society is a member yea the noblest member of it Obj. But as a christian Magistrat he is a member of the Church Ans 1. What then will this prove him to be the fountaine of Church power so might Christian Husbands Parents c. argue as justly for this clame the truth is he being only a member of the Church as a Christian and not as a Magistrat Magistracy gives him no more priviledge then any other power civil or natural when the person tuines Christian for the benefite of membership goes on grounds and reasons common to all Christians and containes no speciality to one more then to another If any think Magistracy does they shall do well to prove it which none hath yet offered to do 2. If men understood well what it is to be a Christian a disciple and member of Christ's Church they would quickly see its inconsistency with the said profession does not persons turning Christians profese subjection to Christ his Lawes Ordinances and Servants which is repugnant to the fountaine of the Church power 2. He may not exercise Church power Therefore is not the fountaine of it all yeeld that these who are the fountaine of power to others may exercise it themselves it being in them and others acting as their delegates in its exercise that the Magistrat may not exercise Church power is clear for Church power being by positive institution from Christ they that exercise it must have a commission from him which none hath prodduced for the Magistrat Erastus asserteth it but without all proofe of which it is so destitute that the most of his followers have left him in this assertion Arg. 2. All Church power is lodged in and immediatly descended from Christ Jesus as the Supream Head and Ruler of the Church and Superiour to the Magistrat Therefore it is not subordinat to the Magistrat The reason of the consequence is clear for it is a repugnancy in a power to be immediatly subordinat to two Supream powers in one and the same respects especially where the one is superiour to the other The antecedent is manifest for Christ is only head of the Church all power in her is institute by him exerced in his name astricted to and regulated by his word and accomptable to him All notes of power immediatly descended from him Obj. But the Christian Magistrat as Christs substitute and vicegerent is under him the nearest and immediat fountaine of Church power for subordinata non pugnant Ans Long hath the Pope of Rome conrended for this and on grounds more plausible then these on which the Magistrat goes But Protestant Divines answer to the Papists on this head furnish us with irrefragable answers to the Magistrats clame which we desire our adversaries would consider answer at their own leasure we finde not the Magistrat inrolled among the officers of the Church far lesse substitute for Christs vicegerent if there be any Scripture for this bring it forth We know of none as yet alledged by our adversaries but what will plead as strongly for the heathenish Magistrat as for the Christian And if they do what traitours were the Apostles Ministers and Christians of the primitive times that did not acknowledge the heathenish Magistrates for their head in the Church but resisted and disobeyed their lawes and edicts against them for crying up of another Kâ—ng in the maters of their Christian Profession Arg. 3. All Church power was institute by Christ in an immediat subordination to himself without any acknowledgment of or dependance on the Magistrat Therefore it is not dependant upon nor subordinat to him The antecedent is clear from the History of the New Testament where we find that Christ moulded and constituted the Church by his Apostles and furnished her with a Government and officers to be exercised in his name and all this he did without consulring or advising with the Magistrat or suspending of her upon him the Magistrat all this time resisting letting himself for crushing of this Church Kingdome of Christ which he erected in the midst of their Kingdomes making use of their rage and violence to establish and propagat it for some Hundreds of years All this is so evident that our adversaries are not able to refuse it what is there then to hinder the consequence that we draw from this deed of Christ If our opposites in this mater could shew us that the Church had no government institute by Christ nor exercised any all the time that the Magistrat thus opposed himself to her or that Christ had declared his will that she should be subjected to the Magistrat in her Government when he should become Christian they would soon end this strife but nothing can we learne from them to this purpose Arg. 4. As this Government was institute by Christ and his Apostles so it was exerced in his name in the Church without dependance on the Magistrat till Constantine the great 's time and from thence downe ward till the Reformation of Religion brack up in Germanie till which time it was never questioned by any until Erastus the Physician arose who laboured not only to subject the Church to the Magistrat in all her concearnes as such but denied all Government to her by divine institution that is distinct from the Government of the Magistrat contrare to full and clear Scripture which he most insolently and wickedly endeavours to wrest pervert So then if the Government of the Church was in Scripture times and downwards till within these hundered years exercised without dependance on the Magistrat both heathenish and Christian then it must yet be independant on and not directly subordinat to him Here our Antagonists are put to strange shifts The first three hundred years they must grant and may we not take this for a yeelding of the cause Scripture and antiquity hath been held for a sufficient plea for maters of doctrine and practise debates in Polemical divinity hath run on these two heads and whoever made out their assertions from these have been esteemed to carry the cause all that our adversaries have to say to this are these two 1. That the Government exercised in the Church was not by divine institution and precepts but by confederation of Churches and officers To this we reply 1. If the Epistles to Timothy to the seven Churches in Asia Revel 2 and 3. Chapters with other places of Scripture used by our Divines in this mater prove not the contrary they have no sense We beg of our adversaries they will for saving us a labour answer Mr. Gillespies Arguments from Scripture in the second part of his Aarons Rod blossoming 2 Besids they are not able to make out what they assert to wit that the Church did
exercise her Government in these times by confederation and mutual consent and not by institution and command for as there is nothing in Scripture and pure antiquity for this So the Churches being gathered and constitute by the Apostles we presume they continued in the constitutions which the Apostles left according to the precepts and rules they gave them to which we find in the word and Church History their practice conforme When the persecutions of the Church ceased upon the Magistrats turning Christian we find her continuing in the exercise of the former Government but with the addition of some corruptions which grew to a sad hight afterwards throw the excessive munificence bounty of Constantine the great the first Christian Emperour and exercising the sameâ— as formerly as is clear from History that speaks of these times Here our adversaries speak of some instances of the power the Magistrat did exerce in the Church as convocating of Synods labouring in the peace of the Church lorely rent at sometimes through lad heresies and schisms And that saying of Constantines repeated by them ad nauseam vos estis Episcopi ad intra Ego ad extra But how is our Antagonists conclusion made out by all these will it follow that becaus the Magistrat did convocat Synods its Government is derived from subordinat to him No wayes for 1. Albeit the Magistrat have a power to convocat the officers of the Church anent maters relating to his owne conscience and duty whether about Church or State yet this is not privative of the Churches power to convocat her owne assemblies either for worship or government as we find she did in the primitive times not only without but against his consent yea when the Magistrat became Christian she retained and exercised this power in assembling into several Synods without the Magistrat It is true we do not read of general Synods assembled after this but by the Magistrat till the Pope of Rome claimed this power and usurped therein on the Church and Magistrat as he did in all other things but the vastness of the Empire and large extent of the Church which exceeded its bounds made this in point of prudence necessare for without the Magistrat it could not easily be done But 2. Convocating of others is not alwayes in its self and infallible signe of a superiour power and dominion over judicatories convocated as in limited Monarchies and not absolute where the Supream power is lodged in the King and States of the Kingdom although the King have the power of conveâ—ning the States yet they share wiâ—h him in the leg stative and executive power while in being therefore the illation is bad and not concludent 4 What imaginable advantage-can accrew to our adversaries assertion by that saying of Constantines formerly cited We grantâ— the Magistrat is the overseer of things without the Church but this will not prove that thâ— government of the Church is in and from his hands and subordinat to him they must first make it appear by good reason that ner Government is ad extra which they have not yet done nor never will for although it be visible in its institution and exercise yet it is as intrinsinck to and within her as her doctrine and worship which by this sence will be as much derived from and subjected to the Magistrat as her Government seing the one is as visible in its dispensation as the other Arg. 5. The Magistrat may not yea cannot jure impede and hinder the exercise of the Churches government therefore it is not derived from nor subjected to him the reason of this consequence is what ever power is derived from the Magistrat and subordinated directly to him he may suspend hinder its exercise yea he may totally remove and annihilat it this is yeelded by all and taken for a sure Maxime in Politicks but the Magistrat may not do this in the Government of the Church and that becaus it is of divine institution and the persons intrusted with and called to its â—xercise are under the obligations of divine precepts and commands for it which the Magistrat cannot hinder nor by any deed or command of his make void These that deny this divine institution of Church Government we refer to the forecited book where it is strongly pleaded made out from clear and express Scriptures in the New Testament Likwise as he cannot impede its exercise so he may not nullify its sentences by himself which he may do in the sentences passed by all powers derived from and subordinat to himself Arg. 6. The Christian Magistrat is by vertue of his Christian Profession bound to subject himself to the acts exercise of Church Government in the hand of Church Officers and is as much obleidged to yeeld thereto as any other Therefore Church power is not directly subordinat to him The antecedent is clear for all are commanded submission and obedience to Church Officers in the exercise of their power in watching overseeing and ruleing of the Church Heb. 13.7 17. to which exercise of their power we finde Magistrats in the word submitting as UZZIA who was by the priests confor me to the law separated and secluded from the holy things of God and communion with the Church in these yea it is given for the maine cause of all that heavy wrath and judgment that came on Zedekiah 2. Chron. 36.12 that he humbled not himself before Jeremiah the Prophet speaking the word of the Lord to him Obj. But this subjection in Magistrats to Church Officers is properly to Christ and not to them Ans we confess the subjection is primarily and cheifly to Christ Jesus whom such in the exercise of their Office doe represent yet the subjection is to them too whom all without exception of any in the Church are commanded to receive hear and obey so that in the dispensation of holy things they are superiour to all in the Church Magistrats and others as their constitut Rulers Overseers Governours and Watch men whom they ought to obey when acting in their Office agreable to the law of Christ which obedience is not CATACHRESTICAL or ABUSIVE as VIDELIUS speaks in the Magistrat but proper and really a debt they owe to the Ministers of the Gospel dispensing holy things as much as any other member of the Church their obligation to it being of the same kinde and nature with the obligation of others If any think other-wayes let them produce their reasons and Scriptures 2. If the fiery and zealous promotters of the Magistrats power in and over the Church of God did consider the true and real prejudice they do to Magistrats by exeeming them from that subjection that they with all others owe to Church Officers they would if there be any sense of Religion and its advantages remaining with men hold their hand and should have little thanks from Magistrats for their preposterous zeal who by their opinions in this mater do
〈◊〉 fulness of prelacy to the well but not to the being of the political Ministerial Church which they grant â—ay be such without it as most of the former opinion â—â—â—ld 3. Others that lean not to Scripture for the 〈◊〉 of prelacy in the Church found it upon Ecclesiaâ—â—◠〈◊〉 â—â—â—stitutioâ—s canons customes which they take to be the Interpreters of Scripture in this debate as Dounhame and others with him that make most use of antiquity 4. Others more moderat pious and more learned then the rest do so clip its wings that they bring it to a meer constant presidency in the meetings of presbyters for government making it a pure non-entity as to what is established by law amongst us and for which they bring no Scripture of which judgment was that godly and learned Bishop Usher who for knowledge in all the controversies of the Church especially in Antiquity was Nemini secundus 5. Some others argue for it as a matâ—er of indifferency that may be received or rejected as Churches and states see it fits their interests asserting that all its authority and goodness depends upon and flowes from the power that brings it in thus Stillingfleet 6. Some of that party have fallen on a new method for justifying its divine right being straitened as it seems with our arguments and the weakness of their owne alleadging that Presbyters were not institute in Scripturâ—-times by the Apostles that all Ministers mentioned in the Scriptures were Bishops in the sense controverted as Doctor Hammond but his evidence from Scripture and antiquity is so dimme that for any thing we know he hath gained few or none to follow him in this 7 These of the court party place all its goodness in the authority lawes establishing it granting it signifies nothing antecedently to these 8. If we shall consider prelacy and view it in its several parts as it is by law constitute and setled amongst us and bring them to the test and rule of the word of God that we may give judgment of them according to it how liteâ—â— of prelacy will be found to be of divine right 〈…〉 the confession of our adversaries of all that have appeared on the feild for its defence there is none that ever pleaded scriptural institutions precepts and instances for the Lordly titles eminencies and wordly dignities of the Prelats that are now annexed to their office nor yet for their civil places and power in the State nor for their several orders and degrees as Primats Metropolitans Archbishops c Or for the like among their dependents in their numerous and various distinctions of degrees of superiorities and subordinations as Vicars Chancelors Deans Arch deacons Subdeans Deacons Parsons c. whoever hitatherto did put pen to paper and contended for the divine right of prelacy never opened a mouth to plead either Scripture or antiquity for thesâ— except Doctor Hammond who argues for Archbishops and what is prelacy in its constitution amongst us without them The only thing debated betwixt us and our Antagonists anent it is the superiority of one Pastor over other Pastors and their respective congregations to the probation of which from scripture and pure Antiquity there are two things that must of necessity be made out from these first the sole power of Ordination and Jurisdiction and secondly Diocesan Churches made up of several â—esseâ— Churches and their respective Pastores and Officers in these does the essential difference lye in their owne confession betwixt Bishops Presbyters or ordinare Pastores none of which two hath been proven from scripture and antiquity And if that which differences prelats from other Pastores of the Church be â—or made to appear from scripture how will their office 〈◊〉 of divine right and how can it be expected from 〈◊〉 â—ho are under such strait divine engadgments against it that we should comply therewith and submit to the lawes injoining conformity thereto We complaine of the subdolous and uning enuous way of our opposites in this debate who always keep in generals and never condescend on the particular differences betwixt Prelates and Ordinate Pastores nor undertake to prove these and the truth is they cannot for they are forced to confesse that it is clear from antiquity that Presbyters have ordained sometimes in conjunction with Bishops and sometimes without them And for diocesan Churches with one fixed pastor over-feeing other Pastores and their flocks we cannot meet with the least probable evidence from scripture and pure antiquity we find no argument from our adversaries concluding this It is empty arguing to say there were Apostles there were Priests and Highpriests in the Old Testament there were seven Angels in the seven Churches of Asia therefore there must be Bishops now If they will from scripture make out the difference now assigned betwixt Prelats Presbveers in these instances of the Apostles Priests and Angels we shall yeeld the cause Let none therefore blame us in holding to this as a necessare consequence of our Antagonists succumbing in the probation of these things that a parity among the Ministers of the Gospel in point of power or office is of divine right for if in the institution of the Ministery there be alike power given to all called thereto there can be no superiority of one above another by divine right 9. It is a question much debated among the Popish school men and in which they are not agreed to this day whâ—â—ther their Prelacy be an order or office distinct from that of Presbyters or only a different degree of the same 〈◊〉 with Presbyters including no power formally distinct from theirs which last opinion asserts that all power acclaimed by the prelats is formally in Presbyters so that by office they are empowered to and may doe all that the prelats pretend to How hotly and stifly was this question tossed the Councel of Trent betwixt the Italian Gallican and Spanish divines which for this cause received no decision in this Councel but was left undetermined as before As is to be seen from the History of the said Councel 10. If any will consider our adversaries arguments for prelacy and compare them with the arguments of Papists especially Bellarmins for the Papacy they shall finde that they plead as strongly for the Pope or an Universal Bishop to the Catholick Church as for the Prelat or Bishop now controverted betwixt us as wil be made appear by a particular condescension if our intended brevity would suffer it We referre such as question this to the arguments of both and upon an impartial collation of the same we nothing doubt but it will be manifest Doth not the much courted and endeavoured reconciliation with Rome by the prelatical party in former and later times with their concessions to them for making way to this agreement speak this with full evidence As their denying the Pope to be the Antichrist their granting a primacy to him over the Catholick Church their purgeing
the Romane Church of Idolatry and superstition their asserting the difference betwixt Papists and us in doctrine worship and government not to be fundamental nor on their part damnable c. All which discover to the world the native tendency of prelacy and what it will if 〈◊〉 â—â—nue ultimatly resolve into 11. Do not the opinions of prelatists their practises the ways taken for bringing in and establishing of Prelacy among us reflect upon and condemne all the reformed Churches and their divines except Scultetus who in their confessions treatises reformations conforme thereto disclame prelacy as no office of divine appointment As will be evident to any that peruse them We know there was a Pamphlet emitted in the beginning of prelacyes last introduction that undertakes to prove the contrare but it is so destitute of all evidence of truth that we wonder exceedingly at the impudence affrontedness of the author in alleadging of Calvine Beza Bucer c. for prelacy who in their practise and writings have argued and debated against it Did not this Author know that their writings are extant and others as much versed therein as himself But the unjust know no shame 12. As prelacy or prelatical government in its constitution and exercise is a compound of additions to the Word of God which for want of its authority we reject so presbytery or presbyterian government in the confession of our Opposites is in all its parts of divine institution or right which we offer to make out from scripture and the concessions of our Antagonists who first yeeld all our Church Officâ—rs except Ruling elders to be of divine appointment Doctor Hammond only excepted granting that presbyters or ordinare Pastores and Deacons to be institute by the Apostles and alwayes used in the Church to this day they likewise grant the power of ordination and jurisdiction in Presbyters till of laâ—â— As also the meetings of Pastores lesser and greater for government and discipline and all the particularities of power anent these asserted by and formerly exerâ—â—â—â—â— among us We think strange of Stillingfleet in denying of Presbytery to be of Divine institution who yeelds all we seek for if all the former be of Scriptural institution and practise must it not be of divine right even as to its forme We cannot for bear to declare our resentments to the world of the high indignities done to our Royal and great Master Christ Jesus and his blessed word the holy Scripture in that 1. The forme of the government of his house is asserted to be mutable at the pleasure of men and made capable of any forme they please to assigne to the same Was it ever heard in the world that the forme of any government was taken from the Officers thereof and not from the Supream head in whom the Legislative power is lodged All that ever treated of governments and spoke to their different forms did always found their forms on the head and not on the Officers of it Is not Christ Jesus the Supream and only Head of the Church by divine appointment Are not ordinare Pastores or Presbyters found institute in the word with all the parts of their power that we afterwards grant to them c Will it not then necessarily follow that the forme is of divine right both in the head and officers which is truely Monarchicall and not alterable at the will of any 2. For making way to this the sufficiency and perfection of the holy Scripturs as to matters of obedience and practice in the Church is denied and thereby the fundation of the Protestant Religion is shaken How inconsistent is this with their granting the perfection of the Scripturs in maters of faith For if all maters of obeâ—â—â—â—â—â— be first and primarily Maters of faith must 〈◊〉 they be perfect in these also How our Oppoâ—its will defend our arguments for the perfection of the Scripturs in matters of faith and manners against the Papists who in this speak more consequentially then the Prelatists and maintaine the former affertion is unintelligible to us For our arguments plead as much and as strongly for their perfection in the one as in the other But must it not be a desperat cause that needs such a prop to support it 13. In the last place We humbly offer the following particulars to be considered by all nothing doubting that when they are duely and seriously weighted it will soone appear that our exceptions against Prelacy are not light and groundless As 1. There is no good to the Church and immortal souls attainable by Prelacy that may not be win at without it It is a sure truth that every ordinance of Divine institution hath it's proper good to the Church in order to which as it's end it was appointed by Christ which is not easily reachable by other ordinances As will appear to any on a particular condescension for as there is nothing defective in divine institutions so there is nothing redundant and superfluous Now we desire to know what is that good to the Church and immortal souls that cannot be obtained without Prelacy let our Antagonists give instances If they think that ordination and jurisdiction is the good that the Church hath by prelacy we offer to prove from Scripture and antiquity as hath been done before us without a reply yea and granted by many of them that Presbyters have the power of ordination and jurisdiction and the truth is it was never questioned by any but yeelded by all till of late for we have not only instances in Scripture and antiquity for Presbyters exercising ordination and jurisdiction but the reason that all gave for it was that the ministery conferred by ordination consisting of the power of order and jurisdiction as it 's integral constituent parts persons ordained receive the power of both If this be a truth why may not the Church have these by Presbyters as much to her advantage and benefite as by Prelats But son e say there can be no unity or peace in the Church without Prelacy The contrare is evident from the Churches experience in former later times for as the Church was never more rent and filled with contentions and schisms then under by Prelates of which there are innumerable instances in history so there hath been much flourishing unity and peace under Presbyters in Churches that wanted Prelats as is to be seen in the present case of the reformed Churches and will be evident to any that is acquainted with and seen in the records of the Church what unity peace hath the Churches of Britan and Ireland beyond other reformed Churches Yea is there not more of these among them then is with us at this day But what sayes unity and peace in the Church if they have not truth and righteousness for their cement and foundation which are seldome the attendents of Prelacy But some place the good of Prelacy in the oversight and inspection it takes of Ministers
sake although differing from us in some other things 5 It is thought sufficient ground for this charge that some yea many of the persons that come to and haunt our meetings are found not to be conscientious and Christian in their walk but flagitious or in many of their practises scandalous We cannot think our adversaries are serious in this do beleeve as they speak seing 1 This does fall as heavy and will to onlookers reflect as much and more on the objectors themselves as on us whose meetings for worship are found to be the sinck of all debauched and profaine persons thorow the Land can they refuse this It is like the foresight of this forced them to say in their lybel of greivances against us that the abominations mentioned in one Article were commited at our meetings and not by persons present at them otherwise their assemblies for worship should have been as chargeabâ—â— therewith as ours but in this our Antagonists 〈◊〉 like to the persecutours of the Christians in the prâ—â—mitive times who charged them for having these 〈◊〉 the like abominations commited at their assemblies as is to be seen in Church Histories The Lord deliver us from and rebuke the lying Spirit that is entered into and possesseth many 2. But if the presence of wicked and scandalous persons at the assemblies of Christians for hearing of the word and performing of other acts of worship be sufficient ground for chargeing the wickednesse and impieties of such on them as the cause inductive to scandals will not the assemblies that Christ his Apostles Ministers and Christians keeped in all ages be as lyable to this charge as we who excluded none but admited all to the hearing of the word and some other acts of worship as is manifest from Scripture and History whatever our adversaries will say for clearing of Christ Iesus his Apostles c. will acquit us 3. Do not men know that in preaching of the Gospel to sinners we should designe and labour their conversion as much as the edification of the converted Is not the Gospel with which Ministers are intrusted the mean and power of God to the one as well as to the other And seing this is our designe as it hath been our practice so it is our resolution not to exclude any from our assemblies how wicked soever they have been or are Truth is to charge us and our meetings with the sinnes and scandals of those that frequent the same is to reproach the Gospel of Christ and to Father all the wickednesse of its hearers on it contrare to its grand designe which is to save sinners from sin and all the miseries that follow upon it SECT V. Some Reasons why the Indulgence was not accepted IN the next place we come to the head of the Indulgence the not allowing of which hath been represented as a full evidence of our pivish wilful and stiff disposition to unpeacableness and distoyalty but we hope when our carriage in this mater is seriously thought upon and the reasons that determined us to this refusal are weighted in the ballances of the sanctuarie this charge will be found light and we are confident that upon trial it will appear we are not against but with all expressions of thankfulnes shall be ready to intertaine and receive any libertie for the Gospel its true interest and our selves that is consistent with our known principles that the Magistrat shall be pleased to grant us We look upon it as an unjust state of the question in this mater which hath been offered by some whether the Magistrat jure may or have it within the compass of his Magistratical power to give liberty to Ministers and people for serving and worshiping of God in his Son Christ Iesus according to his word this we do not deny but chearfully grant that although the exercise of Church power that is properly such be independent on the Magistrat yet the peacable exercise of it is truely from him it belongs to him no doubt to encourage countenance and protect the Church against all enemies and to relieve her of oppression when under it to this he is impowered and oblidged both as a Magistrat and as a Christian Neither is it with us a question whether the Magistrat may command Ministers to the duties of then function nor whether he may exeem them from the hazard of suffering to which they are obnoxious by law for their non-conformity nor yet whether he may confine Ministers simply and abstractedly considered from our present case which is only proper to the Magistrat and not all to the Church All these and much more we yeeld to the Magistrat about persones and maters Ecclesiastical according to the Word But the true state of the question to us is whether the Magistrat Jure Magistratico may of himself and immediatly without the Church the previous election of the people assigne and send Ministers to particular Churches to take the fixed and pastoral over sight of them prescribe rules and directions to them for the exercise of their Ministery and confine them to the said congregations The question thus stated being complex and consisting of several branches conform to the acts of Councel anent the indulgence we must of necessity for giving a just accompt of the grounds of our dissatisfaction therewith speak to them severally in some assertions with the reasons subjoyned Assertion First The Magistrat by vertue of his Magistratical power cannot of himself and immediatly assigne or send Ministers to particular congregations to take the pastoral charge and oversight of them For 1. We finde not in all the Word of God any such power given to or exercised by the Magistrat in the Church none hath yet given any instances of this If there be let them be produced and we shall acquiesce All acknowledge the Church not to be founded on the law of nature but on positive institution and supernatural revelation and therfore not to be governed in wayes and methods of Mens invention but in these that are revealed by the Holy Scriptures without which there cannot be a Church so that she owning her being constitution and all to them there must be some evident proof produced from these before we can yeeld to any such power in the Magistrat how long shall we exspect this 2. Also we finde the Church in the possession and exercise of this power from the times of the Apostles to the breaking up of the reformation by Luther and others in Germany as is manifest from Scripture and History We grant there was for some time a considerable debate betwixt the Pope and the Emperour of Germany about the investiture of Bishops which gave the rise to other Princes claming of the same seasing upon it but what says this to the mission of Ministers application of their Ministery to particular congregations For as Prelacy was the invention of men and the cause of horrid contentions in Churches and States so
before us 1. From Scripture practice and example Acts. x 15. to the end Chap. 6 vers 1. to 9. and 14 vers 13. where we have Arguments both from the more to the lesse and from the lesse to the more which are acknowledged by all to be concluding Topicks and much used in the Scripturs When our adversaries have the like from Scripture and antiquity how use they to insult but poor we must not be allowed this liberty 2. It is evident from the constant practice use and custome of the Church from the Apostles times till the Popes of Rome inhansed and swallowed up all power and priviledges either in taking them a way or bringing them into an absolute dependance upon them For this we appeal to the records and histories of the Church yea to the histories of the Pops PLATINA and others in many of which we shall not only finde the uncontrolled use of the peoples election mentioned but its right just fled and defended and many canons of Councels made for its regulation and against the encroachments that were by some made upon it in a mater so clear and graâ—ted by the adversary â—â—e need nor spend time If any ask us why we plead antiquity here and reject it anent Prelacy Our Answer is because we finde in this question as it is stated betwixt us and the adversaries antiquity full and clear which it is not in the other Let the State of the question about Prelacy as it is now agitated betwixt us be in every part of it brought to the pure times of antiquity and if it can be evidenced made out even as to the sole power of ordination jurisdiction and superiority of some Ministers over other Ministers of the Gospel and we shall yeeld the cause and quietly submit but in the business of the peoples right of election it is beyond all contradiction clear even in the confession of our Antagonists 3 All relations amongst rational creatures that are not founded on nature are free there is alwayes requisite mutual consent from which as its proper cause and foundation it does result as is to be seen in all sorts of such relations It is not denyed but yeelded by all that there is a particular special relation betwixt a Minister and the Congregation he in ordinare serves we desire to know what is the cause or foundation of it if it be not this All other relations of this kinde are founded upon consent and why not this 4. The good effects that have come to the Church by the free and voluntar election of the people where it hath been admited and in use confirmes us not alittle in this perswasion we have obseved in universal experience that not only a more universal and chearful subjection hath been given to the Ministry of those that entered this way into congregations but a faithful and able Ministry hath been more generally propagated to the great advantage of immortal souls if we may gather the nature of the tree by the fruit we cannot say this is evil but truly good Assertion 3. It belongs not to the Magistrat to prescribe Rules and give Directions to the Ministers of the Gospel for regulating the exercise of their Ministry as is done in this indulgence Our reasons for this are 1. We see no precept institution and example in all the Scriptures impowering the Magistrat to this we hope none will expect we should receive and subject to a power that hath no warrant nor foundation in the word seing all church power owes its descent and derivation from it our Antagonists themselves grant that not only the power they ascribe to the Magistrat is in and from the Scriptures but the regulation of its exercise should be conforme thereto so that there will be no debat about the consequence The great Patrons of Erastianisme plead the instances of David and Solomons ordering the courses of the Levits and the priests and of other things relating to the worship of God in the time of the old Testament but to little purpose seing they acted therein as Prophets and at the directions and instructions given from God by the Prophets and not as Magistrats as is clear from the very letter of the Scriptures in many places 2 Chron. 29 vers 25. and 35 vers 15. with others If the Magistrats of our time did produce such warrant for what they assume to themselves and do in this mater how readily should they be obeyed But the Objection of greatest seeming strength is that of Hezekias practise keeping of the passeover in the second moneth 2. Chron. 30 2. which conforme to the institution Exod. 1â— should have been observed in the first moneth Our Ans to this is first if this practise be pleaded for a leading example to Magistrats it will warrant Magistrats to change things institute by God which we hope all will say is absurd Obj. It was but the circumstance of time that he changed Ans a command or institution makes circumstances determined by it as unalterable by men as the substantials of the ordinance it self does not this if it be concludent impower the Magistrat to change our Sabboth from the first to the second or any other day in the week as he pleaseth What may not come in at this dore Next Our satisfying Answer to this is that what Hezekiah the Princes Congregation did they did it at or by the word of the Lord concerning this alteration and not of themselves as is express vers 12. 2. As it is usual for commissions given to Ambassadors by those that send them to containe all necessary instructions for regulating their carriage in the discharge of their ambassage so we finde in the Word of God rules precepts and directions given to the Ministers of the Gospel about the ordering of the worship of God and the exercise of their Ministery in all its parts which not only impowers them for this work but brings them under as strait Obligations to observe the same as the work and maine substantials of the ambassage on which they are sent for this let 1 Cor 14. two Epistles to Timothy with other Scripturs be consulted and we doubt not but this will be beyond disput with the unprejudged If the Erastians could give us such commands and precepts in the word for the Magistrat power in this how would they triumph and so they justly might for they should have no such willing and cheirful assenters to them then we if any such thing could be shewed 3. This power in the Magistrat would subject Ministers to and bring them in the exercise of their ministerie in a dependance on him the contrare of which we have proved before and shall do more after wards The truth is we tremble to think on the consequences of this dependance for thereby the Magistrat may suspend the ministry in these parts and exercises of it that Christ Jesus cals them to in the stated cases
of our ministry in the places to which we were to be confined was a piece of policy invented to cover the too visible encroachment on Church power in the first act of Indulgence which was known afterwards to stumble many that the mater might be more smoothed and goe the better down while the designe was the same which was as is said to bring our ministry in subjection to the Magistrat in the maters of God and without noise to obstruct the spreading of the Gospel and to ruine our cause for attaining of which we have not yet seen a more succesful like piece of policy then this of the indulgence Resolveing as bath been said to unfold our hearts and to keep nothing up anent what is truly greivous to and buâ—dens our consciences in the commands and impositions of these times we shall adde other reasons to these which with the former are the grounds of our dissatisfaction with and non-approbation of this indulgence as 1. In the Narrative of the 2. act of indulgence it is declared that this pretended favour is provided for a remedy against the evil of Conventicles by which we understand the assemblies of the Lords people for hearing of the word and partaking of other ordinances from faithful Ministers of the Gospel which the execution of laws made against the same hath not suppressed As this narrative speaks to all the designe of the indulgence so it shews what we are to expect as its consequence if approven by us to which we dar have no accession directly nor indirectly for by our allowance and submission we shall not only prove active in hindering the propagation of the word for the future but also shall consequentially condâ—mne the former practice of the Lords servants and people in preaching and hearing of the word that hath been blessed and made not a little succesful to the advantage of the truth and the benefite of many souls 2. Many by this indulgence were assigned and sent to other congregations then these they had formerly served their Master in before this revolution in the Church As we judge the former relations to particular flocks over which the Holy Ghost and not the State had made them overseers to be yet in force and not dissolved by all the violence used against us so we think our approbation of this indulgence would not only justify the unjust usurpation and violence in casting them out but likwise would have made void the former and yet standing relation to these respective congregations in which we darre have no hand but in the way Christ hath appointed and was formerly used in this Church seing it will no question both strengthen the Magistrat in his unjust encroachments on the Government of the Church and be a practical acknowledgement of him in all he hath done in this mater 3. By one clause in the 2. act of indulgence appeals are allowed and authorized from the indulged to the Prelats Courts which does subject and directly subordinat them to these in the exercise of government and discipline which is known to be contrare to our Covenanted and well grounded principles The truth is we look on this with other particulars in that indulgence as a device framed of purpose for gaining all these ends and intents upon us which by violence hath been formerly designed against us for establishing of Prelacy and Erastianisme 4. As some of the Rules are impracticable so others of them do not a little reflect upon the practises of Christ and his Apostles recorded by the Evangelists who preached in houses and fields If we understand our Christian profession aright we must take ourselves bound by many commands and precepts in the word of God to imitat Christ and his Apostles in their performances of the duties of Religion and righteousness which are of purpose related in the Scripturs for this effect Do we not find from these sacred records Christ and his Apostles preaching in houses and fields as occasions offered never declining to teach and instruct the people in these as the present exigence required although they had the opportunity of and accesse to the Synagogues which is denyed us as to the places allowed for publict worship Do not these practices of Christ and his Apostles say that as preaching in houses and fields is in it self noâ— sinne but lawful except we resolve to make Christ â— transgressour so in the like cases and under the like câ—lls we are bound to do in this as Christ did before us who can get this shuned Amongst the many designes aimed at in this indulgence and in part obtained by it we know the deviding and breaking of our party was a principal one which at first actuated and set on foot this device amongst us but we hope without the fruit our adversaries exspected to have reaped thereby to the advantage of their cause for whatever difference there hath been or yet is amongst us in our practice in relation to the indulgence we are all agreed in the preceeding exceptions against it and if there had been accesse for representing the same to our Rulers our unanimity and concord in these had been more discovered and made known to the world then it is There is no charge with us of our known and professed judgment about the Government of the Church in its true distinction from and independence on the Magistrat as is afterward expressed What ever was our perswasion in this represented to the world in our publick confess on of faith we yet throw the grace of God resolve to cleave to having never seen or heard of any thing in all the times that have gone over our heads to cause us alter our apprehensions of this mater in the least Some who take hold of all occasions to reproach us are pleased to represent some their acceptance of this indulgence as contradictory to and inconsistant with our former professed principles anent Church Government yet any that considers what was shortly hinted at to the Councel at the receiving of this indulgence and what was more largely declared by them to the congregations at their first entry will be sufficiently convinced of our constant adherence to our former principles which by this acceptance is not at all changed It is expected from the lovers of our righteous cause that nothing shall be done by them to ward the furtherance of the evil intents of this indulgence but rather an endeavour to counteract and ineffectuat them that our opposites may have no benefite therefrom to the prejudice of the interests of Christ for which we contend SECT VI. The nature of Church Government as distinct from and independent upon Magistracy explained HAving proceeded thus far and dispatched the first three things we proposed to speak to in the beginning we shall now enter on the last the Supremacy Ecclesiastical that is now by law annexed to the crown established in his majesties person and successours and sensed by law and practice Let