the Sabbath Baptism Lord's Supper c. and I do so in this dispute Answ Egregie dictum excellently said indeed as if because we affirm that whatever is to be practised in Instituted Worship in the time of the Gospel is to be wholly bottom'd as to the Law and Precept instituting it upon some Commandment of Christ in the New-Testament therefore we assert that no use may be made of the Scriptures of the Old-Testament treating thereabout by way of prophecy or otherwise which is a Consequence this learned Animadverter will never be able to make good 'T is true many learned men do make use of some places of the Old-Testament to prove the morality of one day in seven or the seventh part of time not as I remember except Psa 118. 24 which some conceive by way of prophecy speaks of the Lord 's honouring the first day for the confirmation of the observation of the first day which they conceive Christ's resurrection on that day the practice of the Primitive-Church meeting together for the solemn Worship of God 1 Cor. 16. 2. Acts 20. 7. the appellation the Lord's Day which they judge is given to it c. is a sufficient warrant for their observation thereof in Gospel-times They plead not for Baptism or the Lord's Supper upon any other bottom than Gospel-Institution or their preception by Christ in the New-Testament Though 't is true as touching the subjects of the one and the other they judg they may by way of analogy argue somewhat from Old-Testament-Scriptures from which apprehension they see nothing so weighty in what is tendred by Mr. T. notwithstanding his brag and immodest Assertion pag. 18. Sect. 14. that such a way of arguing is irrational as if wisdom rested with him and he had the measure of it and a man could not differ from him but he must be a block or bruit to influence their departure That because the granting the Assertion would be disadvantagious to the Author and the Separatists therefore it should be in Mr. T. his opinion an unreasonable postulatum to devolve the question upon the Scriptures of the New-Testament I understand not He takes not a measure I presume of the reasonableness or unreasonableness of requests from their advantagiousness or disadvantagiousness to such contemptible creatures as we and should he do so he were much to blame as to infer from hence therefore I see no reasonableness in his Postulatum which is introduced not as the natural issue of any thing premised which he knows it is not but meerly for pomp and shew Sect. 3. The judgments of the Antients no sufficient substratum to build my practice upon in the Worship of God The opinion of the Antients â—hemselves in this matter None but the Spirit of God speaking in the Scriptures can satisfie the consciences of any dissatisfied in matters relating to Worship Our Faith not to be resolved into the Testimony of men which is a principle decryed by the Antients and Protestant Churches The consciences of none can be satisfied in what is written by the Ancients before they are assured 1. that what they read as or are told is theirs be indeed so and not counterfeited nor adulterated 2. That in their Writings they were as the Apostles and Prophets guided by an unerring Spirit The true use of the Testimony of the Ancients Congregational-Principles owned by them Of Councils and Schoolmen THe fourth Section is fronted with this The judgement of the Ancients not useless in this Controversie as if the Author of the Sober-Testimony had asserted it to be so which Mr. T. knows he no where doth This indeed the words of the Author not perplexing our selves nor the consciences of any with the judgments of men in generations past wherein they cannot acquiesce fairly intimate 1. That the judgment of none of the children of men though never so famous in their generation since the Apostles fell asleep is a sufficient Substratum to build my faith and practice upon in the Worship of my God In which we have the concurrence of the Ancients themselves Basil tels us that it is necessary and consonant to Reason that every man learn that which is needful out of the Scriptures both for the fulness of Godliness and lest they be inured to humane traditions Regul contract 95. p. 902. And Austin Epist 112. ad Paulin. saith If a matter be grounded on the clear authority of the holy Scriptures it is to be believed without all doubt but as for other witnesses and testimonies upon whose credit any thing may be urged unto us to believe it it is lawful for thee either to credit or not to credit them according as thou shalt perceive them of weight to deserve or not to deserve credit Origin saith Homil. 1. in Hierem. We must of necessity call the Scriptures to witness for our senses and interpretations without them are of no credit Famous is the saying of Cyril Bishop of Jerusalem Catech. 4. p. 15. We must not deliver any thing though never so small without the holy Scriptures neither may we be led away with probabilities and shews of words neither yet believe me barely saying these things unto you unless you also believe the demonstration thereof from the Scriptures for the security of our faith ariseth from the demonstration of the holy Scripture 2dly That not the sayings or judgment of the Ancients but the clear Testimony of the Spirit of God speaking in the Scriptures is sufficient and efficacious for the satisfying persons that are dissatisfied in any thing relating to Faith or Worship Come to a poor soul under real scruples of spirit with respect to these and tell him this Father is of this opinion and that Father of that you do but oleum operam perdere when you have said all he remains as he was dissatisfied and so will do without evidence from Scripture More than these two things the Animadverter cannot righteously infer from the expression he discants on What saith he to these not a word more or less And I am apt to believe of Mr. T. that he is a man of greater modesty than to oppose them He tells us indeed that it may be of good use to satisfie mens consciences that no such separation as now is from the present Ministers of the Church of England was allowed of by the first Fathers and Writers what truth there is in this suggestion shall by and by be manifested He will not say surely of what good use he supposeth it to be that the faith of any is to be resolved into their testimony which it must be if what they say satisfie the scrupling conscience i. e. I must believe what they say is true because they say it else that they say it will never tend to my satisfaction which yet is an homage and duty that we owe to none but the Lord. A principle decryed and abhorred by the Ancients themselves The saying of Austin Epist 48. is known
not at all to his purpose At the best it is but a recrimination I know not how this Animadverter could imagine that the owning and asserting of these things as lawful had the least tendency to the establishment of a National Church But some men are so distempered that they suppose every thing makes for the advancement of that design they are driving on If he deems Synods owned by men of Congregational Principles and his Ecclesiastical Convocation of National Officers are of the same nature he is mistaken 1. Those are chosen by the particular Churches to which they are severally related and what they act and do is in their name and upon the account of that power and authority they receive from them The Convocation of the Clergy act in their own name and authority being never chosen by any one Congregation to sit and make Laws 2ly Those pretend not to be the Church nor to any self-power to make Laws and impose them upon the Churches as obligatory and binding to be received and subjected to by them without the least judgement of discretion allowed them or liberty of dissenting if not perswaded in their consciences of the truth of what is decreed by them and its consonancy with the Scriptures of the Lord. As is known to be the case of the Convocation of the Church of England to dissent from whose Canons at least to oppose them is censured with no less than an Excommunication or delivering up to Satan Which how directly it leads to the Popish implicit faith of believing as the Church believes every one is able to discern For my part with reference to these I am much of the mind of the learned Whitaker de Concil p. 12. General Councils may erre and imbrace false opinions Nam Concilium Antiochenum veritatem damnavit haeresin apertam propugnavit Similiter Ariminense Ephesinum secundum ex quo patet veritatem non esse metiendam ex numero Episcoporum Of them he saith 1. That their calling together is a certain politick and humane invention pag. 35 77. 2. That they cannot frame Articles of Faith to binde the Conscience pag. 19. 3. That their end in coming together is not to feed as Pastors but to consult what is best for the Churches pag. 85. 4. That they are not simply necessary pag. 23. 5. That they do not give authority to the Scripture pag. 242 243. 6. That their Decrees are not immediately inspired by the Holy Ghost pag. 262 263. 7. That the ultimate determination and judgment of a General Council may be false pag. 231. 8. That there is no judgement of a Council properly in matters of Faith ibid. 9. That the truth of things determined in Councils may afterwards be called into question and again disputed pag. 283. 10. That the Churches of Christ have been kept sound in Faith without them for the first 300 years pag. 23. To which I add 11. That I never yet read of any Council or Synod since that Act 15. but 't were easie to demonstrate that in one thing or other it hath erred The most of the Hay and Stubble that is built upon the Foundation at this day not to mention their attempts 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 owing its original to some of them So that I confess I am no admirer of them and am bold to affirm of any that have yet been it had been better for the Church of God that they had never been in the world But these things are little to Mr. T. his purpose That persons owning the lawfulness of Synods from Scripture-warrant as they conceive should therefore be necessitated to own a National Church as a true Church of Christ is a position that Mr. T. will never make good I suppose by the view I have taken of some of his Writings he is very confident of his own abilities but he is a rare man indeed that can compose a Rope of Sand. The lawfulness of a National Church or unlawfulness thereof having no dependance upon Congregational Synods but is to take its measure from somewhat else of which before Of Churches of a greater number â—han can meet at one place for the celebration of all the Ordinances of Christ I shall not need to say any thing till he acquaint us what Congregational men are of that perswasion it will be accounted a meer Calumny The assembling of the members of a particular Church in the same place for the celebration of the same Numerical Ordinances being one considerable part of the definition given by our Congregational Brethren of such a Church And yet if they did own Churches of a greater number 't is ridiculous to imagine that they could from thence be compelled to the owning of a National Church which wants both the matter and form of a true Church of Christ which yet the other may have So that we need not turn aside to consider the proofs used by those that held That many particular Congregations may be under one Presbyterial Government Printed 1645. Of which this Animadverter reminds us For though I am not of their mind nor do I conceive their Reasons to be cogent Yet were that true a National Church could not from thence be proved a true Church of Christ For 1st They suppose these Congregations to be particular Churches of Christ constituted and made up of visible Saints which cannot as yet be affirmed of any National Church in the world or any Parish Church as a part thereof 2dly They also affirm that these particular Churches have power within themselves to determine differences by their own Elders to excommunicate Offenders obstinately guilty of notorious scandals 3dly They are utterly against all Archiepiscopal National Officers the source and spring of a National Church 4thly They conceive not all in England nor all in a Parish to be lawful Church-members because born there nor will they compel them as such to receive the Sacrament with them which is the known case of the Church of England That at Jerusalem there were more Churches than one under a Presbyterial Government is a fond conceit which the numerous multitude of Believers thereunto belonging contribute not the least mite of assistance to Be they never so many they are called Acts 8. 1. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The Church which was at Jerusalem The like may be said of the Church of Corinth it was one single Congregation the Church of God which was at Corinth 1 Cor. 1 1. 2 Cor. 1. 1. So was the Church at Ephesus Rev. 2. 1. But as was said The grant of more Churches than one under one Presbyterial Government is remote enough from the establishment of a National Church which by other bonds and ligaments than the Assertors thereof will own must be united to one National Head or it hath not cannot have a being in the world So that these things are little to his purpose The next attempt of this Animadverter is to remove an obstruction which he
and I would be more phrenetical for the Interest of my dear Lord Sorne think these expressions might have been spared though for our parts Contenti sumus hoc Catonâ— 3dly What Interpreters he hath met with I know not The Assembly in their Annotations upon the place are of our mind Their setting of their thresholds by my thresholds i. e. adding their Traditions to my Precepts Isa 29. 13. So is Mr. Greenhill c. We further propose in S. T. an Objection to consideration viz. That though these Canons and Constitutions owned by the Ministers of England be not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to be found in the Scripture of the Institution of Christ in so many words yet by consequence they may rationally be deduced from thence As where it is commanded that all things be done decently and in order 1 Cor. 14. 40. which 'tis the duty of the Church to make Rules and Constitutions about which when it hath done it is the duty of every Son thereof to own or subject to them without questioning its Authority To this Mr. T. Sect. 3. subjoyns 1. He asserts not that the Canons and Constitutions of the Church of England may rationally be deduced from Scripture Answ Goodly Constitutions surely that cannot rationally be deduced from Scripture but have their Original singly from the bloody Canon-Law of the Papacy and worthy to be submitted to by such as profess themselves Ministers of the Gospel what greater contempt any one could pour forth upon them I know not But 2dly Whilst Mr. T. refuseth to assert this he plainly relinquisheth his concern in the Objection proposed by us and tells us He will not stand up in its defence However 2. This he asserts in the room thereof That Canons and Constitutions Ecclesiastical concerning Divine Worship and Church-Government may be made by Governours if not opposite to such Rules as are in Scripture about Gods Worship and the Rule of his Church and be indeed subservient and conducible to the well-ordering of such Worship and Rule which 't is the duty of the Members of such a Church to obey Answ 1. But I would be informed whether by Canons and Constitutions Ecclesiastical concerning Divine Worship he means only Canons touching the spreading the Table at the Communion with a linnen Cloth the Sermons beginning at the Reading of the Text at which rate he speaks in Sect. 4. Or whether he means Canons and Laws for the Institution of considerable parts of Worship together with such accidentals as he calls them that must be submitted to by such as are admitted to the publick managery of Worship without which they shall not be permitted so to do If the first he doth but trifle we have not been taking notice of things of such an inferiour allay If the latter I desire to be satisfied by what Law any Rulers or Governours do assume to themselves such an Authority which when Mr. T. shall be pleased to shew us we shall further consider it Heb. 13. 17. speaks not a tittle thereunto Of the vanity of its Application to the Governours of the Church of England we have already spoken The Reasons of his Assertion are these 1. Without such Regulations Church-Societies cannot be continued by reason of the difference of miâ—ds Answ 1. The contrary is manifest before ever such constitutions as those he speaks of were in the World Church-Societies were continued One of the first open breaches amongst them was because of them as he knows fell out betwixt Victor Bishop of Rome and the Eastern-Churches about the observation of Easter All the confusion differences breaches that have been in the Churches so called is for the most part to be charged upon their Impositions 2dly The Animadverter supposeth That without such Constitutions the Churches should be wholly destitute of Regulation but falsly 'T is derogatory to Christ the Scriptures perfection a pitiful begging the thing in question As Christ hath a Church in the world he hath Laws with respect to external politie by which he rules it needs not be beholding to Antichrist for his 'T is impious scandalous to conceive endite such dictates He further adds 2dly All sorts of Churches have had their Synods to this end Answ 1. To what end To make Laws and Constitutions for an Order of Ministry that Christ never established to impose a Lyâ—urgical Worship upon his Churches to set up an unpreaching Ministry in his House Mr. T. knows that these things are false and untrue If he mean not these I would advise him to speak pertinently in hâ—s next These are the Institutions we charge the present Ministers wâ—th submitting to 2. That all sorts of Churches have found it necessary to have Synods is more than Mr. T. can prove The Learned Whitaker tells us That they are not simply and absolutely necessary De Concil q. 1. p. 22. and I am sure they may be well enough without them Licinius interdicts them Euseb de Vit. Constant l. 1. c. 44. yet the Câ—urches continued aâ—d in a flourishing sttate 3dly That few or no Synods that ever were yet in the World have had a right Constitution were a facile undertaking to demonstrate The Synod so called of the Câ—urch of England by which the Laws we mention were out of the Popes Canon-Law collected was not so A right Synod is constituted of the Messengers of the Churches upon the account whereof they are said to be the Churches Representatives sent by them with Instructions from them touching matters to be debated in that Convention This cannot be affirmed of the aforesaid Synod nor of any Synod that ever was in the World since the Apostles fell asleep So that whilst our Animadverter is discoursing of them as necessary he is talking of the necessity of â— Non-ens a meer Chimaera 4thly The Churches of Christ had a perfect Discipline before ever the Synods he speaks of had a being in the World Nor 5thly had these ever from Jesus Christ any Authority and what they have not from him is not Obligatory to impose any thing upon the Churches to be observed by them by virtue of an Authoritative power seated in themselves 'T is a Yoke not to be endured by the free-born Subjects of Christ that any of the Children of men should impose upon them in the matters of their God The Synod of Jerusalem did not do so as we have proved His third Reason is down-right begging the thing in question Christ hath left nothing relating to the Worship and Government of his House as such undetermined against which I advise him not to talk so confidently in his next till he hath proved the contrary The Texts mentioned by him 1 Cor. 14. 40. Heb. 13. 17. prove no such thing as the lawfulness of additional Institutions in matters of Church-Polity as a part thereof to the Institutions of Christ 1 Cor. 14. 40. is afterward in S. T. Heb. 13. 17. hath already been considered That because Paul gives direction in some
common consent Which that it was observed by the Apopostles of Christ the sacred History testifies Acts 15. And this is the Opinion of the most famous Doctors of the Canon-Law saith Durandus De Sanct. Minist Lib. 1. c. 11. He saith more truly perhaps than he was aware That as the whole Kingdom is said to meet in the Parliament so the whole Church may be said to meet in their Synod and no otherwise Now we know that the meeting of a company of Knights Gentlemen at Westminster is not the Parliament the Representative of the Kingdom Their free Election by the Body of the People of the Nation renders them so In like manner the Convention of a company of Prelates and Priests make not a Synod by our Animadverters own Argument but their Election by the People to meet and sit in Council together as their Representees which the Synod so called at London One thousand six hundred and three nor any National Synod ever since had not the Choice of the People was never minded never was their consent required So that in the sence he takes the word Church which yet is forreign to the Scripture as we say in S. T. the Church of England was never yet concerned In what follows in this Section Mr. T. himself will acknowledge I am not further concerned Sect. 2. The present Ministers oppose the Kingly and Prophetical Office of Christ whilst they own Laws contrary to the Revelation of Christ That they do thus evinced by the induction of particular instances Acts 8. 27. â— Tim. 6. 15. Jer. 51. 26. Luke 11. 2. Mat. 6. 7 8 9. Whether Christ there instituted a form of Prayer Rom. 8. 26. 1 Cor. 14. 15. Mark 14. 18 22 23. opened That Christ sate with his Disciples in the celebration of the Ordinance of breaking Bread evinced Of Kneeling The reason of its first institution It s opposition to 1 Thes 5. 22. manifested Of forbidding to Marry and commanding to abstain from Meats IN Sect. 6. Mr. T. proceeds to the examination of what is further produced in S. T. for the manifestation of the guilt of the present Ministers in their opposing the Kingly and Prophetical Office of Christ which we further prove because they own submit and subscribe to Laws Constitutions and Ordinances that are contrary to the Revelation of Christ This we prove by particular instances They own and acknowledge 1. That there may be other Arch-Bishops and Lord-Bishops in the Church of Christ besides himself Which is contrary to 1 Pet. 5. 3. 1 Cor. 12. 5. Ephes 4. 5. Heb. 3. 1. Luke 22. 22 25. 26. To which our Animadverter replies 1. They do not acknowledge them in opposition to these Scriptures Answ But that is the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Mr. T. may be ashamed of such pitiful beggery He adds 2ly They do not acknowledge Arch-Bishops over the whole Church as the Pope but in their own Province Answ This is not at all material the authority of Arch-Bishops over a Province is as much against the Texts mentioned as over the whole Church 'T is not the extent of Authority Lordship that is therein condemned but the thing it self 3ly He further tells us They have no such dominion ascribed to them over the Church they oversee as is forbidden 1 Pet. 5. 3. Luke 22. 25 26. Answ 1. This is again to beg the thing in question 2ly We have proved the contrary He adds 4ly They are not Lords in the Church but in the Kingdom and Parliament Answ False and untrue I wish he speak not against knowledge in this matter 1. When invested into their Episcopal Sees they are stiled Arch-Bishops of such a place or Province Lord-Bishop of such a See 2. The Priests submit to them pray for them as their good Lords 3. They have Power Authority Precedency as such over the rest of the Clergy give forth Laws and Canons to rule and guide them to whom they promise obedience at their Ordination 4. They exercise jurisdiction authority over their respective Diocesses in their Ecclesiastical Courts and Consistories as such all evident Ensigns and Demonstrations of Lordly Dignities even in and over that which they call the Church That which he 5ly adds of the Eunuchs being called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Acts 8. 27. without contradiction to 1 Tim. 6. 15. where Christ is said to be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is frivolous 1. The Eunuch is not said to be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a Potentate with respect to the Church of God over it he was not such but with respect to the Kingdom of Aethiopia where he was a Noble Man a Governor under Candace the Queen Our Bishops are Potentates in and over that which they call the Church of Christ 2. That any other besides Christ should exercise Lordship and Authority in the World is not interdicted as is their so doing in the Churches of Christ in the Scriptures mentioned He saith 5ly He hath not shewed that what is acknowledged is a Law Constitution or Ordinance nor the Ministers own it by subscription Answ True indeed I did not do so for I thought it needless to demonstrate that the Sun shines at noon-dayes Are not the Offices of Arch-Bishops Lord-Bishops Constitutions and Ordinances Have they not their Foundation and Establishment by Law Doth not Mr. T. know it Is he onely a stranger in our Israel Of the Truth of this there are not many in the Nation that are or can be ignorant That the Ministers own these whether by subscription or otherwise is not considerable Mr. T. deals injuriously whilst he suggests I say they own these with the rest of the particulars mentioned by subscription when I assert onely That they own submit and subscribe to i. some of them they manifest they own by Subscription others other wayes but they own submission to them all is too notorious to admit of a denyal They do so in their Ordination when they promise Canonical Obedience to them in their prayers for them subjection to their precepts from time to time transmitted to them which they dare not transgress 2ly That men may and ought to be made Ministers onely by these Lord-Bishops is we say in S. T. owned by the present Ministers which is contrary to Heb. 5. 4. John 10. 1 7. 13. 20. Acts 14. 23. with 6. 3 5. What Mr. T. adjoyns hereunto touching Ordination by Suffâ—agan Bishops hath already been removed out of the way How much they own a Presbyterian Ordination of which he speaks many good men in the Nation feel and find Of these things we have already spoken That Ordination by Lord-Bishops is established by Law is known and that exclusively to any other without them Hereunto the Ministers subscribe Can. 36. The Scriptures instanc'd in prove this to be contrary to the Revelation of Christ Heb. 5. 4. John 10. 1 7. 13. 20. manifestly evince That who-ever undertakes to be a Minister of the Lord in his Church must
be viz. when Antichrist according to Paul whose Epistles Peter conversed with 2 Pet. 3. 15. should be revealed In respect of each of which the title is applicable to the present Ministers 1. They assume the title of Teachers falsly as is proved chap. 3. of S. T. 2dly They teach false things as we demonstrate ch 5. 10. of S. T. 3dly That they are teachers of a great part of the Lie of Antichrist their Discipline Worship and Doctrine thereabout being for the most part hammered at his forge cannot be denied Secondly Of them it is said 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that they shall bring in Heresies of destruction The word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifies to bring in besides i. e. besides mens expectations or besides the Truth taught by Godly Teachers by themselves in part also to countenance their Errors so the Assembly They shall do it fraudulently under the vizard of Truth so Aretius They shall do it privily and subtilly pretending a shew of Piety and name of the Church so Gerh. Heresies of cestruction are no other but the Heresies or false Doctrines of Antichriâ—â— such as destroy and lay waste the Church the Truths and Institutions of Christ being alien and contrary to what is of his prescription and are supported by force and violence against them that do oppose them For which at the last swift destruction is brought upon themselves Upon which account Antichrist as is thought is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Rev. 9. 11. i. e. a Destroyer and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 2 Thess 2. 3. the son of destruction or perdition That the Ministers and Church of England do thus is too evident to admit of a denial They assume to themselves the name of the Church cry out against all others that separate from them as Hereticks and Schismaticks preach some truth with which they slily mix their Errours that lay waste the Institutions of Christ and persecute all these imprison waste ruine destroy them or at the least attempt it to the utmost of their power that stand up against their Innovations and Church-destroying Doctrines The greatest difficulty may seem to be in those words that are spoken of them Thirdly That they shall deny the Lord that bought them the words are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 They denied not that he bought them if it be meant of Christ but denied him as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Lord cast off in part at least his Authority as sole King and Lord of his Church And this too not openly and in words which is against the express letter of the Text they shall privily or slily bring it in but in practice doing that which doth invelop or wrap up in it a denial of the Despotical or Kingly Office and Authority of Christ And this saith Grotius the word signifies De tali desertione quae non verbo sed reipsa fiat figurate usurpatur Hugo Grot. Whence Dux Gregis the Captain of this Herd is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that lawless-one that despiseth sets light by the Laws and Authority of Christ That hereof the present Ministers are guilty we prove chap. 4. 5. of S. T. So that not one of the Scriptures produced but may justly be applyed to them And the Conforming-Ministers are rightly charged as the false Prophets of the Jews are in the places produced in S. T. This Mr. T. denies but if he would have made good his denial in my conceit he should have produced the particular places mentioned and manifested that they could not properly be applyed to them But he knew an easier way Mentiris Bellarmine mentiris a few keen words against his Antagonist would cost him little 'T is true he tells us that the present Ministers teach the Fundamentals of Christian Religion but what he means by the Fundamentals of Religion he tells us not Doth he intend that they own one God c. so did the false-Prophets The great Fundamental of true Religion is That God is to be worshipped according to the Revelation he hath made of himself in the Scriptures of Truth that all we do in his Worship and Service that relates to it as such be bottom'd on divine prescript This fundamental they deny introducing the Ordinances and Inventions of man and making these a part of Worship A departure from which is the ground of all the Apostacy that ever was in the World 4thly This Animadverter's plea for the Church and Ministers of England is not much better than what was or might have been made use of by Jeroboam himself for his Ministry Church and Worship Touching which precious Ainsworth in his Arrow against Idolatry ch 3. introduceth Jeroboam speaking after this rate I see my course O men of Israel to be much suspected if not wholly misliked of many some thinking my Ceremonies to savour too rankly of Heathen Superstition some charging me plainly with flat Apostasie and forsaking of God But how far off I am from all such Impiety I hope to manifest to all indifferent persons chiefly sith that I have neither spoken nor done against any Article of the Ancient Faith not changed any Fundamental Ordinance of Religion The very plea of Mr. T. for the present Ministers given us by Moses but worship with reverence the God of my Fathers and love him as I am taught with all my heart and with all my soul cleaving unto him alone who is my life and the length of my dayes Other Godds of the Nations I utterly abhor with all their impure rites and services The alteration I have made is in matters of circumstance things whereof there is no express certain or permanent Law given us of God and which are variable as time place or person give occasion and such as good Kings have changed before me and have been blameless This the sum upon which he dilates excellently and Sect. 12. introduceth him asserting his Worship for substance to be the same that God commanded by Moses We worship saith he the same God we offer the Sacrifices of Beeves and Sheep burn Incense pay First-fruits and Tythes and observe all the Ordinances that our Fathers have kept since the World began We hold the main Article of our Messiah to come and of Redemption from our sins by him Thus plausibly with much more mentioned by that worthy person before-named in his Arrow against Idolatry a Tract to say no more worthy the perusal Might Jeroboam plead for himself and practice as Josephus tells us he did B. 8. Jews Antiq. â—ap 3. yet are his wayes and worship abominable and not to be joyned with And yet Mr. T. hath not hitherto said more for the justification of the Ministers and Worship of England Parvas habet spes Troja si tales habet If no more can be pleaded in defence of the present Ministers and Worship than Jeroboam could plead for his Innovations and horrible Apostacy from God their case is deplorable indeed Sect. 11. In the height of the
in S. T. reflects sadly upon its authority and perfection which is the next thing we affirm to evidence the truth of the major Proposition This M. T. saith is true with respect to all Doctrinals of Faith and Manners and Worship in respect of Essentials but not of Accidentals thereof undetermined in the Scripture Answ 1. The unscripturalness and vanity of that distinction we have already discovered 2ly We had thought that the perfection of the Scripture had consisted in this that the whole of that obedience that God required of us had therein been stated and enjoyned for which end we conceive it was at first commanded to be written and hitherto by the wonderful gracious providence of the Lord continued to us The Accidentals of Worship are either part of that Obedience we owe to God or they are not If not how come they to be such parts of Worship as without them we are interdicted to perform it or indeed whence is it that we are tendring them up to God when all our Worship is nothing else but the solemn tender of that Obedience that we owe to him if they are then there is some part of our Obedience that is not prescribed in the Scripture then is the Scripture imperfect and that with respect to the main end for which it was given forth viz. to indoctrinate and direct us in the whole of that Obedience that God requires of us and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 saith Aristotle l. 2. de Coelo c. 4. But this is contrary to 1. The testimony and witness of the Spirit of God speaking in the Scriptures 2 Tim. 3. 15. Prov. 2. 1 9. Isa 8. 20. 2 Pet. 1. 19. Luke 1. 4. John 5. 39. 20. 31. 2 Cor. 4. 6. Lukâ— 10. 26. 16. 29. Deut. 12. 8 32. Prov. 30. 5. Mat. 22. 29. Gal. 1. 8. Eph. 2. 20. Heb. 4. 12. Rev. 22. 18. 2dly To the Witness of many of the Worthies of the Lord in their day The renowned Waldenses or the Church of Christ in the Wilderness some hundreds of years ago declare and attest that nothing is to be admitted in Religion but what only is commanded in the Word of God that all mens Traditions are to be rejected and therefore this singing and superfluous chanting in the Chancel to be left It is necessary and consonant to reason that every man learn that which is needful out of the Scriptures both for the fulness of Godliness and lest they be inured to humane traditions saith Basil Regul contract 95. pag. 502. God will ask no more of a Christian Believer in this life but only to obey the Precepts of that most blessed Law If any Prelate of the Church require more or else any other kind of obedience than this to be used he contemneth Christ exalting himself above God and so becâ—meth an open Antichrist saith the Lord Cobham in the Confession of his Faith offered to Hen. the 5th about the year 1413. Chrysostom calls them a most exquisite rule and exact square and ballance to try all things by Augustine expounding Gal. 1. 8. saith If we or an Angel from Heaven declare unto you either concerning Christ or his Church any other matter belonging to our Faith or Life any thing but that which you have received in the writings of the Law and the Gospel let him be accursed Cont. Lit. Petilian Don. l. 3. c. 6. de unitat Eccles cap. 11. Et honos praeter mandatum est dedecus God is dishonoured by that honour that is ascribed to him beyond his own prescription saith Hierome Yea 3dly our Protestant Divines disputing with the Papists about an universal Head of the Church Cardinals Purgatory Mass c. have ever thought this one good Argument against them that they find them not commanded in the Scripture and to assert them needful or lawful to be used in the Church of Christ they affirm to be derogatory to the perfection of the Scripture Suppose a Papist â—o say 'T is true the Scripture is perfect with respect to the essential parts of Worship not so with respect to Accidentals such as are Cross Spittle Salt in Baptism Holy Water Pope Cardinals Crosses c. What would Mr. T. answer hereunto 'T is a thousand to one but the same Answer would stop his own mouth in the reply to the Argument undertaken to be refuted by him We add in S. T. as a further confirmation of the truth of the Proposition under debate 7thly That God condemns not only that which is done against the warrant and direction of the Word but also that which is done beside it Deut. 4. 2. 12. 32. Mat. 15. 9. Lev. 10. 1. Prov. 30. 6. Jer. 7. 31. To which Mr. T. replies 1. That the Assertion understood of Accidentals of Instituted Worship is false Answ 1st Very good It seems then it is lawful to add what we please as accidental parts of instituted Worship for God no where condemns our doing so Altars Candles Crucifixes Baptism with Spittle Salt c. Dedication of Churches to He-Saints and She-Saints with the Inscription of Laus Deo S ta Helena of the Popes make Baptism of Bells the whole Farrago of Popish Inventions may by Mr. T. his arguing be introduced for these are but Accidentals of Worship and no where expresly interdicted Secondly The Protestant Divines have ever thought this a sufficient convincing Argument against these fooleries of the Papists That Christ hath no where commanded them therefore they may justly reject them as unlawful Christ being the alone Pastor Eccl. 12. 11. Master Mat. 23. 8 10. Prophet of his Church Acts 7. 37. Who shall dare to speak where he is silent or can do so without an open undervaluing and contempt of his Authority 'T were easie to fill many Pages with citations of Protestants to this purpose in whose Writings nothing is more frequent than this Nihil sine nihil extra nihil praeter nihil ultra Divinam Scripturam admittendum esse Peter Martyr on 2 Sam. cap. 6. pag. 212 213 saith From this History we may see that the true Worship of God he speaks of Uzzah's touching the Ark is not to be deduced from the Palestines or Ethnicks but the Word of God For God will be worshipped according to his own Praescript not our Inventions But as touching what pertains to the Worship of God nothing is to be sought without the Word of God It went ill with Uzza that he would imitate the Palestines with Nadab and Abihu that they would offer profane fire with Ozias the King that he would offer Incense in the Tabernacle when he was neither Priest nor of the Tribe of Levi. But Thirdly The Scriptures produced abundantly manifest the truth of the Assertion Let the judicious Reader seriously peruse them and they will lead him captive to the belief of it Deut. 4. 2. 12. 32. Pro. 30. 6. Strictly interdict mans adding to the Word of God which if it be not a condemnation of
what is practised in his Worship without any warrant from him I must confess I know not what is Is not You shall sign with the Cross in Baptism kneel at the Sacrament wear the Surplice c. an adding to the Word of God when he is altogetheâ— in the Scriptures silent in these matters Mat. 15. 9. speaks of the Inventions of men with respect to accidental parts of Worship as Mr. T. accounts them The essentials of Worship as praying hearing c. they had from the Lord these things were not what Christ condemns in them as the Doctrines of men What was it then Mr. T. in his Fermentum Pharisaeorum on Mat. 15. 9. shall answer for me But in this place saith he that which our Saviour objects to them is That they sought to establish the Traditions of men chiefly that they taught men to observe things praeter Legem besides the Law in stead of Gods Law as the washing of hands before meals the washing of Cups and Potts with many such like Traditions inveâ—ted by men And afterwards Sect. 5. tells us That Bowings Duckings and such like Gestures Usages and Rites invented by men to express Humility Devotion and Reverence to God he contemns as Childish Apish Theatrical and ridiculous And Sect. 7. he adds That this teaching for Doctrine the Commandments of men intrencheth on Gods Prerogative who is the only Law-giver to his Church Jam. 4. 12. for his Worship and that with respect to the fashion and way of Service 'T is an injuring God whilest we conceive him to be so childish as to be affected with pomps and shews gestures and carnal Rites which he never appointed It opposeth Gods Word his Law his Gospel because it brings in another Rule of Worship than God's Law viz. Tradition of Elders Custom Example contrary to Deut. 4. 2. Pro. 30. 6. It opposeth the manifestation of the clear light of the Gospel as shadows the light of the Sun Look into the places where there is so much preaching of Ceremonies and Church-orders and such a regular observation of them as in places where the Cathedral and Canonical Preachers and officiating Priests do bear sway there is little spiritual understanding and lively feeling of the Doctrine and Grace of Christ to be found Sect. 8. with much more to the same purpose Lev. 10. â— Jer. 7. 31. expresly assert that their sin lay in doing that which God commanded them not which had he done it had been lawful Let Mr. T. shew where the offering of strange fire was expresly forbidden and he may be supposed to say somewhat that is pertinent Mr. Ainsworth whom he cites on Lev. 10. 1. is against him Strange fire he tells us is other fire than God hath sanctified on his Altar fire not commanded And the Assembly upon the place say rightly In God's Worship his Command not man's wit or will must be our rule The citation of Josh 22. 34. 2 Chron. 20. 3. 30. 23. Esth 9. 27 31. by this Animadverter is impertinent Josh 22. 34. gives us an account of their building an Altar but they expresly affirm it was not for burnt-offerings nor for Sacrifices not for an Ecclesiastical but a Civil use v. 22 23 24 26 28. Had they built it for the Worship of God it had in the judgment of the whole Congregation of Israel been Rebellion against him ver 16. So that this Scripture instead of supporting cuts the throat of his dying cause nor can Mr. T. ever satisfactorily answer this Argument 'T is great wickedness to commit a trespass against to turn away from following to rebel against the Lord But the doing or practising any thing in his Worship besides what God hath enjoyned to be done is to commit a trespass against him to turn away from following to rebel against him Therefore The Major no sober Christian will deny The Minor is evident from v. 16 18 19. Nor will Mr. T. his old shift of Essential and Accidental parts of Worship serve him in this case For 1. The erection of an Altar he supposeth to be but an accidental part of Worship 2. He produceth this Scripture to prove the lawfulness of mens orders in and about the Accidentals of Instituted Worship As for his other Scriptures 2 Chron. 30. 23. hath been already considered and answered in our Answer to Prof. Sect. 5. 2 Chron. 20. 3. Esth 9. 27 31. speak only of the Proclamation and Decree or Purpose of the King and People to observe and keep certain dayes unto the Lord upon the account of such signal providences that the Lord had brought them under wherein they judged he was calling them thereunto To what is added in S. T. touching the judgment of the Ancients Mr. T. replies but so jejunely that it deserves not to be taken notice of As for Cyprian's testimony 't is full up to the matter in hand the foundation upon which he dealt against the Aquarii being no other than what we are pleading-for that Christ alone is to be heard in matters of Instituted Worship as Mr. T. will grant the Sacrament to be I stand amazed at the confidence of the Animadverter in asserting that Beza's words on Phil. 1. 1. are to be understood of things determined in the Scripture when he expresly speaks of giving the title of Bishop for Polities sake peculiarly to him that did preside in the Assembly whereof he tels us the Devil began to lay the first foundation of Tyranny in the Church of God and then he adds Behold of how great moment it is to decline from the Word of God though but an hairs breadth if it be but in giving titles peculiarly to persons which are not so given to them in the Scripture And much more do I wonder if he did without blushing write that Luther is to be understood of Doctrines and Decrees if he oppose these to Church-Ceremonies which if he do not he yeelds his Cause when he expresly saith he means that nothing with respect to external Rites which he calls Traditions and the mixing the Worship of God with foolish Gewgaws is to be taught without the express words of God for our warrant 'T is true Dr. Whitakers words are meant of the Popish use of Oyl in their Sacraments but the ground of his opposing it is plainly the same with that we are contesting about viz. That nothing is to be added to the Instituted Worship as a part thereof without warrant from the Scripture for saith he we acknowledge no Oyl because we read nothing of Oyl in the Scriptures To these I say many may be added Take a few instances instead of many Whatsoever things men find and fain without the Authority and Testimony of the Scripture as if they were from Apostolical Tradition are smitten by the Sword of God saith Hierom Comment in Hag. c. 2. And again Men are saith he set to eat their meat without Salt when they are commanded any thing that hath no relish from the
not What he adds is most frivolous 't were wicked and abominable in our addresses to God to call him Molech Milcom Malcham Jove but that therefore if the names of Idols be to be abolished we may not call him King Lord Jehovah because some of the fore-mentioned Titles so signifie and others as 't is thought were derived from these names of God is most absurd Christ is called Priest he is truly really so and upon the account of his once offering up himself for the sins of the people before any Mass-Priest was thought of in the world that therefore the name of Priests may lawfully be applied to a company of persons accounted Ministers of the Gospel which was a title assumed by the most idolatrous generation of men professing themselves to be of the same order when such as these pretend to be are no where in the Scripture so called will not in haste be proved We manifest in S. T. 1. a further agreement betwixt the Priests of England and Rome 2. They are both Deacons before they are Priests 3. Ordained to their Office by a Lord-Bishop or his Suffragan 4. Both presented by an Archdeacon or his Deputy with these words Reverend Father I present these men unto thee to be admitted to the Order of Priesthood Our Animadverter replies These are granted and avouched as not Popish but justifiable and agreeable to Orthodox Antiquity Answ 1. That these things are not Popish are avouched without proof They are exactly extracted out of the Pope's Portuis not retained in any one of the Reformed Churches but ejected as the sowr leaven of Popery 2dly That they are justifiable is said not proved Mr. T. should not talk thus confidently of Orthodox Antiquity when he knows 't is of all things the most difficult to determine what things are agreeable to Orthodox Antiquity 3dly Nothing will justifie what we do in matters Divine but the Scriptures Orthodox Antiquity is not sufficient Hear what Basil saith If whatever is not of Faith is sin as saith the Apostle but Faith is by hearing and hearing by the Word of God without doubt whatever is without Divine Scripture since it is not of Faith is sin So Hilarie ad Constant Augustine Tertullian de praescript cap. 15. 8. Hierom in Mat. 23. and Lactantius Humane Precepts have no weight which want Divine Authority lib. 3. c. 27. Theophylact saith 'T is Diabolical to account any thing Divine without the authority of divine-Divine-Scriptures that is Divine which is Apostolical nor is it â—o be sought any where without the Scripture lib. 2. Paschal The saying of Ignatius is worthy to be written in letters of Gold 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Christ is our Antiquity Yet 4thly the Animadverter cannot justifie these things from Orthodox Antiquity any better than the Papists can justifie their Oyl Spittle Salt in Baptism their orders Eccâ—â—siastical of Exorcists Acolytes And indeed his arguing and Baronius's for these seems to be much a like although there is mention made in Scripture only of Bishops Presbyters and Deacons yet saith he Ignatius in those counterfeit Epistles you must understand that pass under his name mentions more so that it is necessary that either they were in the Apostles time or at least were approved of by them By such Orthodox Antiquity Mr. T. may soon justifie not only the forementioned practices of our Clergy but all the inventions of the Romish Bawd 'T is a trick of the Devil saith Augustine under the pretext of Antiquity to commend fallacies to us de quaest Vet. Nov. Testa q. 14. some things seem'd to be new that were indeed ancient as Christ's Doctrine to the Pharisees Christian Religion to Celsus and his Pagans some things seem to be ancient that are but the impostures cheats and fallacies of the later dayes We add in S. T. 5thly The Priests of Rome must be ordained to their Office according to their Pontifical the Priests of England according to their Book of ordering Priests and Deacons which is taken out of the Popes Pontifical To this Mr. T. returns the same answer that Arch-Bishop Whitgift gave the summe whereof is 1. That what is good in the Popes Pontifical if in our Pontifical our Pontifical is never the worse for having it Answ That nothing but Divine Institution in the Scripture of the Lord renders any thing good consider'd as it relates to the Worship of God as such we have already proved In such cases to talk of things as good for which no precept instituting them can be produced is to talk without book 'T is diabolical saith Theophylact. He proceeds 2dly 'T is most false that the book of ordering Ministers is word for word drawn out of the Popes Pontifical Ignorance and rashness drives you into many Errours Answ 1. Why the Book of ordering Ministers should be called a Pontifical if not from the chief Pontifice of Rome I understand not 2. We say not that the English Pontifical is taken word for word out of the Popes but that it is so i. e. for the substance thereâ—f 3. I have often observed that persons most guilty of ignorance and rashness have been most free in charging their Antagonists therewith Thus fares it with our Animadverter as is evident to the eye of an ordinary Reader from the view of the ensuing parallel Romish Pontifical 1. Tempora ordinationum sunt c. The times of ordination are the Sabbaths in omnibus quatuor temporibus Rom. Pontif. de ordinibus conferendis 2. Ordinationes Sacrorum Ordinum The ordination of holy Orders shall be in the times appointed and in the Cathedral Church the Canons of the said Church being present thereat shall be publickly celebrated in the time of Divine Service ibid. 3. They are taken to the order of Presbytery who have continued in the Office of a Deacon at least a whole year except for the profit and necessity of the Church it shall otherwise seem good unto the Bishop ibid. 4. Episcopus autem Sacerdotibus but the Bishop Priests being adjoyned to him and other prudent men skilful in the Divine Law and exercised in Ecclesiastical functions shall diligently examine the persons age of him that is to be ordained 5. Nullus ad ordinem None shall be admitted to the order of a Deacon before he be twenty three years old nor to the order of Presbytery before the twenty fifth year of his age 6. Archidiaconus offerens The Arch Deacon presenting those who are to be promoted to the order of Deacons each of them being decently habited unto the Bishop sitting in his seat before the Altar saith Reverend Father 7. Pontifex c. The Bishop shall ask Do you know them to be worthy the Arch-Deacon shall answer As much as humane frailty suffers me to know I know and testifie that they are worthy 8. Pontifex The Bishop shall speak to the Clergy and People If any one hath ought against thâ—se persons let him come forth and with confidence speak for
God and before God 9. Postremo Lastly the Bishop takes and delivers to them all the Book of the Gospel saying Receive power of reading the Gospel in the Church of God 10. Pontifex The Bishop shall say the Ministers and Chaplains answering Lord have mercy upon us O God the Father of Heaven have mercy on us O God the Son Redeemer of the world have mercy on us That it may please thee to blesse sanctifie and consecrate these elect ☞ We beseech thee hear us 11. They sing one and the same Hymn only the one is in Latine the other in English Veni Creator Spiritus Mentes tuorum visita c. 12. Pontifex The Bishop shall lay his hands upon the heads of each of them kneeling upon their knees before him saying to every one Receive the Holy Ghost whose Sins thou dost forgive they are forgiven and whose Sins thou dost retain they are retained 13. Pax The Peace of God be alwayes with you the blessing of God Almighty the Father Son and Holy Ghost descend upon you English Pontifical 1. We decree that no Deacons or Ministers be ordained but only upon the Sundays more heathenishly spoken then the Pope in his Pontifical immediatly following jejunia quatuor Temporum commonly cald Ember-weeks Constit Can. Eccl. can 31. 2. And this be done in the Cathedral or Parish Church where the Bishop resideth and in the time of Divine Service in the presence not only of the Archdeacon but of the Dean ibid. 3. And here it must be declared unto the Deacon that he must continue in that office the space of a whole year except for reasonable causes it shall otherwise seem good unto the Bishop The Book of ordering Priests and Deacons 4. The Bishop before he admit any person to holy Orders shall diligently examine him in the presence of those Ministers that shall assist him at the imposition of hands Can. 35. 5. None shall be admitted a Deacon except he be twenty three years of age and every man which is to be admitted a Priesâ— shal be full twenty four years old The Preface to the Form and Manner of making Priests and Deacons c. 6. The Archdeacon or his Deputy shall present unto the Bishop sitting in his Chair near to the holy Table such as desire to be ordained Deacons each of them being decently habited saying these words Reverend Father 7. The Bishop Take heed that the persons whom you present unto us be apt and meet for their learning The Arch Deacon shall answer I have enquired of them and also examined them and think them so to be 8. Then the Bishop shall say to the people Brethren if there be any of you who knoweth any impediment or notable crime in any of these persons let him come forth in the name of God and shew what it is 9. Then the Bishop shall deliver to every one of them the New Testament saying Take thee authority to read the Gospel in the Church of God 10. The Bishop with the Clergy and People shall sing or say the Litany O God the Father of Heaven have mercy upon us miserable sinners O God the Son Redeemer of the world have mercy on us That it may please thee to bless these they Servants ☞ We beseech thee to hear us good Lord. Come Holy Ghost our souls imspire And lighten with Celestial Fire c. 12. The Bishop shall lay their hands severally upon the heads of every one that receive the order of Priesthood the Receivers humbly kneeling upon their knees and the Bishop saying Receive the Holy Ghost whose Sins thou dost forgive they are forgiven and whose Sins thou doest retain they are retained 13. The Peace of God and the Blessing of God Almighty the Father Son and holy Ghost be amongst you and remain with you always Amen To which it were easie to adde other parallel particulars but these upon a slight view of the Roman Pontifical offering themselves being sufficient to confute that assertion of Whitgift and Mr. T. that the Book of ordering Ministers and Deacons is almost in no point correspondent to the Roman Pontifical we content our selves with them From whence the ingenuous Reader will soon determine to whom ignorance and rashness may justly be imputed We add 6thly The Popish Priests must kneel down upon their knees at the feet of the Lord Bishop that ordains them and he must say to them blasphemously enough Receive the Holy Ghost whose Sins ye forgive they are forgiven whose Sins ye retain they are retained which exactly accords with the fashion of ordaining the Priests of England To which Mr. T. replies in a long harangue not at all to the purpose giving us an account what Whitgift and Hooker say to this prâ—ctice confesses at last they offer some force to the Scripture to which they allude tells us those words may be used prayer-wise Answ 1. The Question is Whether in the particular instanc'd in there be an exact symmetry betwixt the Ordination of the present Ministers of England and the Priests of Rome This Mr. T. denies not but leads the Reader to the consideration of somewhat else 2. The use of the words John 20. 22 23. he grants to be an offering force to the Scripture and if so it is wicked and abominable to wrest the Scripture to our private interpretation is undoubtedly so 3. That they should be used prayer-wise is a most ridiculous evasion the manner of expression evinceth the contrary 4. Mr. Richard Hooker Eccles Polit. lib. 5. sect 77. as câ—ted by our Animadverter interprets it of the collation of the gifts of the holy Ghost which if we should interpret of the Office of Ministry it belongs as we have said to the Church not to such a thing as a Lord-Bishop to collate We proceed in the Parallel 7thly The Popish Priests are not ordained in and before the Congregation to whom they are to be Priests but in some Metropolitan Cathedâ—al City So the Priests of England To which Mr. T. replies 1. This is not alwayes so Answ I challenge him to give one instance of the contrary for these six or seven years last past 2dly It may be before the Congregation to whom the person is to be Priest Answ What may be is one thing what is another We say not only that it may be but that it ought to be yet we know it is not 'T is added in S. T. 8thly The Popish Priests take the care of Souls though nâ—t elected by them from the presentation of a Patron by the Institution and Induction of a Lord Bishop so the Ministers of England To which our Animadverter This is not always so nor when so Popish Answ 1. The first is most notoriously false and we challenge Mr. T. to make it good if he can 2. the latter remains to be proved by him to assert it is not Popish is a piece of beggary this Animadverter is much used to What he hath before said is
Christ Deut. 18. 18. Acts 3. 22. Isa 9. 6. But the present Ministers of England hearken and conform not to the Revelation Christ hath made touching the Orders and Ordinances of his House Therefore To which Mr. T. replies by denying the Major or first Proposition But he wisely takes no notice of the Scriptures produced for the Proof hereof as Deut. 18. 18 19. where the Lord promiseth to raise up Christ from among his Brethren in whose mouth he would put his words by whom he would speak to them to whom whosoever will not hearken God saith he will require it of him i. e. take vengeance on him as the Greek renders it or as the Apostle Acts 3. 23. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 He shall be exterminated from amongst the People rejected by the Saints as a Despiser oppugner of the Offices of Christ into which he was so solemnly invested by the Father Mat. 3. 17. In Isa 9. 6. It is Prophesied of Christ That the Government should be laid upon his shoulders he should be King in Sion give forth as such Laws and Constitutions for the Government of his People which accordingly he doth and solemnly promulgates them by his Heralds and Messengers fixeth them as upon publick Pillars in the Scriptures of Truth to be seen and read of all men That after all this persons should refuse slight neglect to hearken to these Institutions of Christ violate oppose preach against them and yet not be guilty of denying his Prophetical and Kingly Offices is the first-born of absurdities Go and offer it to thy Prince deal so by the constitutions of thy Rulers and see what they will say to thee what interpretation will be by them put upon thy so dealing with them But he gives the reasons of his denial and tells us 1. Denial is more than not hearkening to Answ There is a denial its true that is more than a not hearkening to but there is a not hearkening to that is a real denial rejection of the Authority of him to whom we refuse to hearken The Scripture expresly affirms it Psal 81. 11. But my People would not hearken to my voice Israel would none of me Ezek. 20. 8. but they rebelled against me i. e. opposed rejected my Authority and would not hearken unto me Nor can I tell how those Luke 19. 14. are said to send a message after Christ saying We will not have this man 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to King it over us which is sure a denial of his Kingly Authority but by refusing to hearken and conform to his Royal Appointments He adds 2dly The not hearkning may be out of ignorance incapacity to understand fearfulness c. without any enmity of heart habitual stubbornness which are requisite to a plain denial of the Offices of Christ Answ 1. It may be so indeed but whether this be the reason of the Ministers of England not hearkening thereunto he acquaints us not Certainly they are not fit to be Ministers of the Gospel or to be accounted Overseers of the flock of Christ who are ignorant of his Institutions and incapable of understanding them 2. Though it be out of fearfulness prevalency of temptation that they hearken not yet may their not so doing be a denial of the Offices of Christ It was out of fearfulness the prevalency of temptation that Peter denied his Lord without any enmity of heart yet his denial was a plain denial So false is that which Mr. T. saith That enmity of heart habitual stubbornness or wilful gainsaying are requisite hereunto He tells us 3dly There may be sundry Orders of his House controverted if acknowledged such not thought to be of that moment as to break the Peace of the Church by contending for them or not judg'd perpetual or not binding the Ministers to observe till the Magistrates reform Answ 1. But upon such Principles as these I know not but Christ may be divested of the Scepter of his Kingdom all his bonds and cords broken asunder and cast away and yet no one would be nocent It is evident that this is the lot of many most of them already 2dly There are but few of the Orders of Christs House but are controverted amongst the Children of men will this excuse any from subjection to them May not the Papists plead thus for their rejection of the Institutions of Christ Must Christ lose his obedience till the parties Litigant are at an agreement Nugae tricae sicâ—lae what more frivolous could have been invented 3dly This Animadverter will one day find that there are no Institutions of Christ but what are of moment how derogatory to the glory of Christ the Oeconomie and Administration of the Gospel such assertions as these are others will judge 4thly That any of the Institutions of Christ remarked by us were temporary I challenge Mr. T. to make good i. e. such as were not to endure till his coming Such Principles as these would soon evert all Gospel-Institutions and make way for the Introduction of unwritten Vanities and humane Traditions which the soul of our Lord abhors 5thly I desire to be informed what Appointments of Christ those are that are not binding to the Ministers till the Magistrate reform I know not any such and conceive the assertion to be foreign to Truth 1. The Primitive Believers were obliged to conform to â—hem all though the Magistrate blasphemed and opposed 2. 'T is wonderous derogatory to Christs honour to ask the Magistrate leave whether his Institutions shall be binding or not i. e. â—f he will reform they shall otherwise not such trash as this will nevâ—r pass for sound reason absurd dictates without proof though never â—o importunely imposed Mr. T. must not imagine will meet with reception amongst judicious Christians 6thly That it should be scandalous to hearken to the Institutions of Christ as he suggests is such a monstrous assertion that I aâ— amazed to think it should drop from such a person The reciting it iâ— refutation sufficient So that the Major Proposition I still take for manifest truth notwithstanding his three dictates to the contrary which are now abundantly refuted Sect. 2. The present Ministers of England do not hearken and conform to the Revelation Christ hath made touching the Orders and Ordinances of his House proved by the induction of seven particulars All power for the Calling Institution Order and Government of his Church is invested solely in Christ Mat. 28. 19. 1 Tim. 6. 14 15. John 3. 35. Acts 3. 22. and 5. 31. Mat. 23. 8 9 10. 1 Cor. 11. 23. and 14. 37. Gal. 1. 8. 2 John 10. Rev. 22. 18. Acts 15. 25 28. considered The present Ministers own other Lords that have a Law-making-Power over his Churches besides Christ which Mr. T. grants is a denyal of his Kingly Authority Separation from the World and Saints walking together in particular Societies an Institution of Christ proved This is opposed by the present Ministers 1 Cor. 1. 2. Phil.
Luther ought not to be severed from the choosing Ecclesiastical Persons 'T is tyranny to do so saith Bullinger Let the judicious Reader peruse the words of the rest recited in S. T. and he will be convinced that they speak home to the matter in hand and that Mr. T. doth but trifle whilest he labours to avoid their Testimony That there is nothing like this Institution of Christ practised amongst the Ministers of the Church of England is known And Mr. T. acknowledgeth That by reason of the continuance in force of so much of the Popes Canon Law things are far otherwise than they should be Now this is that we say A non-hearkening to the Institutions and Laws of Christ with an imbracement and subjection to the Cannon-Law of Antichrist is a real denial of Christs Kingly Authority This the Ministers of England are guilty of The latter our Animadverter hath the ingenuity to confess the former we have proved What difficulties Congregational men have found in the rectifying these things besides what they have ground to expect in any work of God in which 't is no new thing to find Satan at our right hand to resist us I know not That Separation and Election by the Churches makes things worse than they are is a plain calumny against the known experience of them all We proceed and in S. T. instance a sixth Institution of Christ viz. 6thly That Saints may Prophesie one by one and ought to admonisy exhort and build up one another in their most holy Faith 1 Cor. 14. 40. Rom. 8. 26. and 12. 6. 1 Cor. 4. 17. and 5. 4. and 11. 23. Ephes 4. 7 11 12. 1 Tim. 2. 1. and 3. 15. Jude 20. 1 Cor. 12. 7 11. Mat. 25. 24. 1 Pet. 4. 10 11. 1 Cor. 12. 15. and 14. 12 24. Ephes 4. 3 7 15 16. Acts 2. 42. Rom. 15. 14. Ephes 5. 19. Col. 3. 16. 1 Thes 5. 14. 2 Thes 3. 15. Heb. 3. 13. to which might be added the frequent Examples of the Saints in the Old and New Testament 2 Chr. 17. 7 8 9. John 2. 11. Mal. 3. 16. Luke 4. 16. Acts 13. 15. 1 Cor. 14. 24 to 34. and the practice of the Primitive Church as witness Origen in his Epistle to Celsum Tertullian in his Apol. Justin Martyr in his Apol. and many others This Institution of Christ the present Ministers trample under foot rail against oppose reproach do all they can to cause to perish from amongst the people of Christ To which Mr. T. Sect. 8. upon the matter speaks not one woâ—d in a way of contradiction tells us Prophesying was an extraordinary gift by an immediate Revelation of the Spirit whereby some hidden thing is discovered and this prophesying the Ministers of England neither do nor can hinder none that he knows of have this gift Answ 1. Were all this granted it would not at all advantage him There is a Prophesying that was as he saith an extraordinary gift But that is not the Prophesying as he knows we are treating of but a speaking to men to edification exhortation and comfort This we say is an Institution of Christ bottom'd upon the forecited Scriptures which notwithstanding the present Ministers of England oppose and deny Are not these things so Is Mr. T. able to disprove them Doth he attempt to do so nothing less A very fardle of Contradictions not worth the mentioning is the whole of what he is pleased to return in Answer hereunto one while the restraint of such exercises is no transgression of Christ's Command and yet immediately adds that the duties in the Texts ought to be cherished furthered and such meetings countenanced Quo teneam vultus mutantem Protea nodo An Institution of Christ he denies not this to be nor that it is not hearkened to but rejected opposed by the present Ministers His imputing practises to us tending to Sedition and Disturbance very ill becomes him The whole Nation is under the conviction of the contrary 'T is no more than what of old was charged upon the Saints A very false crimination for which I advise him that he pray to God to give him repentance unto Life A 7th Institution of Christ remarked in S. T. is this That nothing be offered up to God but what is of his own prescription divine and spiritual without affectation of Legal Shadows John 4. 24. Of worldly Pomp or carnal Excellency 2 Cor. 1. 12. and 2. 17. 1 Cor. 2. 12. and 6. 13. 1 Cor. 12. 28. Isa 33. 22. Jam. 4. 12. Mat. 15. 6 9. Heb. 8. 5. 1 King 13. 33. and 12. 13. Jer. 7. 31. Numb 15. 39. Deut. 12. 1. 4. 31. This the Ministers of England conform not to they act what is contrary thereunto whilst they offer up a Service not of his prescription affect Legal Shadows worldly Pomp and carnal Excellency Mâ— T. replies Sect. 9. Where God hath left us free not forbidding us to use a prescript form of words Musick in the praising of God there we may so do Answ 1. This is such a shameful petitio principii or begging the thing in question that he could not sure write without blushing 2dly Contrary to what he hath in other Treatises formerly asserted 3dly Directly opposite to some of the Scriptures instanced in which he takes no notice of 4thly An open door for the Introduction of all the Popish trinkets and fopperies 5thly A most Papistical assertion generally exploded by Protestant Writers when they dispute against the Papists who affirm that an Argument from the authority of the Scripture negatively is valid i. e. 't is not commanded in Scripture not to be proved thence therefore not to be believed nor practised as Sutcliffe argues against Bellarmine de Pontif. l. 2. c. 9. p. 134 135 and others So that notwithstanding what Mr. T. is able to say to the contrary the present Ministers of Engl. refuse to subject to despise oppose persecute the Orders and Institutions of Christ in his House and therefore deny his Prophetical and Kingly Office We proceed in S. T. to the removing an Objection which is thus proposed But perhaps to these things some may say These are but small matters good men differ among themselves herein To which we Answer 1. That they are part of the Instituted Worship of God hath already been proved To say that any part thereof is a small matter is no small derogation to the wisdom of him who instituted it To this Mr. T. Sect. 10. Replies 1st Though nothing commanded by God is small yet some things are comparatively small Mat. 23. 23. Answ 1. Christ speaks not of Gospel-Institutions of which we are treating But 2. Of Commandments and Ceremonies that were then drawing apace to their period and full point 3. He saiâ—h not that they were so small that they ought not to be observed but the contrary 4. The Appointments instanced in by us are of such import as that in them the visible Kingship of Christ in and
be called of sent by him So was Aaron Acts 14. 23. 6. 3 5. manifest that the Way of the Lord's mission is not by Lord-Bishops but by his Churches and People What he tells us he hath said in answer to any of these Scriptures we have replyed to Chap. 2. We add in S. T. 3ly That Prelates their Chancellors and Officers have power from Christ to cast out of the Church of God is owned by them contrary to Mat. 18. 16 17. 1 Cor. 5. 4. To which our Animadverter subjoyns He finds no such Law Answ It may be he is willingly ignorant hereof This he cannot but know that in the Name of Christ the Officers mentioneâ— do excommunicate out of the Church so call'd of Christ Do they do this without Law Is it not one of their Church-constitutions that they may do so Do not the present Ministers own them herein Whilst they cite present persecute their Neighbours for not coming to Divine Service as they call it it may be for refusing to pay them a four-penny-due in the Ecclesiastical Courts even to an Excommunication whose Act therein they afterwards publickly denounce and declare once and again in obedience to them What more evident The weakness of his answer to Mat. 18. 1 Cor. 5. we have already manifested We say further in S. T. That they own 4ly that the Office of the Suffragans Deans Canons are lawful and necessary to be had in the Church contrary to 1 Cor. 12. 18 28. Rom. 12. 7. Ephes 4. 11. The Officers instituted by Christ are sufficient for the edification and perfecting of the Saints till they all come unto a perfect man v. 12 13. In what sense the forementioned being not one of them of the Institution of Christ may be owned as lawful and necessary without an high contempt of the Wisdom and Sovereignty of Christ I am not able to conceive this is the sum Mr. T. replies 1. He knows not where this imagined Ordinance is Answ That there are such Officers and Offices in the Church of England established by the Laws thereof he cannot be ignorant To say They are Antichristian or repugnant to the Word of God is censured by the Canons thereof Can. 7. That the Ministers own submit to some of them is known The vanity and impertinency of Mr. T. his pleading for them not to mention his perjury therein is discovered in our present Vindication of Chap. 3. from his exceptions against what is by us therein argued We say they own 5thly That the Office of Deacons in the Church is to be imployed in publick Praying administration of Baptism and Preaching if licensed by the Bishop thereunto contrary to Act. 6. 2. Ephes 4. 11. Mr. T. replies 'T is not contrary to Christ's Revelation that they should be imployed in those works Ans 1. But when Christ hath instituted the office of Deacons for this end to attend Tables or look after the provision and necessities of the Saints That any persons may own an Office of Deacons in the Church to be imploy'd by virtue of Office-power in any other work than that for which they are intrusted by Christ and called unto Office without an advance against that Institution of Christ is absurd to imagine 2. That the present Ministers own such an Office he doth not deny 3. What he speaks of Stephen and Philip he had said before and to it we have replied already and need noâ— add more A sixth Law or Ordinance that we say they own is this That the Ordinance of Breaking Bread or the Sacrament of the Lords Supper may be administred to one alone as to a sick man ready to die Which is diametrically opposite to the Nature and Institution of that Ordinance 1 Cor. 10. 16. and 11. 33. Mat. 26. 26. Acts 2. 42. and 20. 7. To which Mr. T. This is not easily proved from the Scripâ—ures instanced in Answ Whether it be or not is left to the judgment of the judicious Reader to determine I am weary in pursuâ—â—g him in his impertinencies He grants a Communion is proved in that Sacrament 1 Cor. 10. 16. but vers 17. and 1 Cor. 12. 13. prove the Communion to be rather with all Christians Of which yet there is not one word in either of the places In vers 17. He speaks of the Church of Corinth that was one bread one body The other Scripture speaks nothing of Saints Communion one with another in this Ordinance 1 Cor. 11. 33. Acts 20. 7. he confesseth prove That it should be administred when all the Communicants Church or Brethren he should say are come together Whether its administration to one alone be not diametrically opposite hereunto as also to the very first Institution of this Ordinance Mat. 26. 26. let the Judicious judge Though it be said Act. 2. 46. that they brake bread from house to house it doth not follow there was none beside the Minister and the sick man the words import the contrary We manifest further in S. T. That they own 7thly a prescript form of Words in Prayer that a ceremonious pompous Worship devised â—y man and abused to Idolatry is according to the will of God and may lawfully be used under the New Testament Dispensation contrary to Mat. 15. 9. and 28. 20. John 4. 23. Deut. 12. 32. Jer. 51. 26. Rom. 8. 26. 1 Cor. 14. 15. By this prescript form of Words this ceremonious pompous Worship the Common-Prayer-Book Collegiat-Worship and Service is intended This I say is devised by man the owning whereof is contrary to Mat. 15. 9. and 28. 20. Deut. 12. 22. abused to Idolatry The owning hereof is opposite to Jer. 51. 26. It is Ceremonious and Pompous the abetting whereof is adverse to Joh. 4. 23. as is the owning of a prescript Form of Words to Rom. 8. 26. 1 Cor. 14. 15. To which our Animadverter replies 1. He should have told us what part of the Common-Prayer-Book was abused to Idolatry Answ The whole of it is so being Worship not appointed by the Lord and used in that Church that is the most Idolatrous Church in the world What he hath said in this Chap. Sect. 3. or in Chap. 3. Sect. 4. We have already answered His great out-cry of our abuse of Jer. 51. 26. produced to prove it unlawful to use any thing in the Worship of God abused to Idolatry will soon be evinced to be an empty sound Vox praeterea nihil 1. We have for our Companions in this Exposition persoâ—s not contemptible for wisdom and holiness who make conscience of applying Scriptures and abusing the Reader 2. Of all men Mr. T. iâ— the most incompetent for the management of this charge who most egregiously perverts Scriptures in this Treatise contrary to former Interpretations given by himself to them and to the plain intendment of the Spirit therein As we have in part manifested and may do further in our Appendix 3. He egregiously abuseth the Reader in this very passage whilst
Soveraignty over the Subjects of his Kingdom with respect to Worship be granted by him to any of the sons of men absolutely or conditionally If the first tâ—en must the Church be governed by persons casting off the yoke of Christ trampling upon his Royal Commands and Edicts for so its possible it may fall out those that attain this Headship may do as its evident many Popes of Rome the great pretenders hereunto have done If the second let one iota be produced from the Scripture of the Institution of such an Headship with the conditions annexed thereunto and we shall be so far from denying it that we shall chearfully pay whatever respect homage or duty by the Laws of God or man may righteously be expected from us But this we conceive will not in hast be performed and that for these Reasons 1. The Scripture makes mention of no other Head in and over the Church but Christ Ephes 1. 22. 5. 23 29. 2 Cor. 11. 2. To this Mr. T. answers 1. We use not the title of Head but of Supream Governour yet that title being given to Saul 1 Sam. 15. 17. and others 1 Cor. 11. 3. Ephes 5. 23. Exod. 6. 14. and may be used Answ 1. What We Mr. T. means when he saith We use not the title of Head I know not 't is the usual form of the present Ministers to stile the King in their prayers Under Thee and Thy Christ Supream Head and Governor But 2dly Head of the Church is a title nor to be given to any in that sence in which it is given to Christ this Animadverter grants I ask Hath Christ onely an Headship of influence to his Church communicating vital Spirits unto the true Members thereof Hath he not also an Headship of Government over it If he assert the first he knows he is departed into the Tents of the Antichristian Papal Shepherds who allow indeed such an Headship to Christ alone The second they divide betwixt him and the Pope as Mr. T. seems to do betwixt him and the King If the second be owned by him than none of the Children of men have an Headship of Government over the Churches of Christ they are not so the Supream Governors thereof as to give forth Laws and Institutions of their own for the Saints to conform to For this title of Head is not to be appropriated to any in that sense in which it is given to Christ as saith our Animadverter Besides 2dly If the Kings of the Earth are the Supream Governors of the Churches of Christ they have this Supremacy over them by grant from Christ and that either absolutely or conditionally if the first then whoever ascends the Throne of worldly Ruledom hath a right of supremacy over them though they themselves be such as have cast off the Yoak of Christ are trampling upon his Royal Laws and Edicts If the second let us see the proof thereof from Scripture with the conditions annexed to this their supremacy and we are satisfied This we told Mr. T. before but he was not pleased to take notice of it That because the Scriptures mentioned by him attribute â—he title of Head of the Tribes to Saul and the Man is called the Head of the Woman Therefore the Governors of the World may be called the Head of the Churches of Christ when that title of Head of the Church is given to none but Christ in the Scripture is such a piâ—iful non-sequitur as Mr. T. will not surely without blushing review Sir Saul was constituted by the Lord King over Israel a Man to have superiority over the Woman with allusion hereunto they are called their Head by the Spirit of the Lord But where is the Scripture constitution of the Superiority Kingship of any over the Church beside Christ Amongst whom he saith He will have no such thing Where is it that any have this title of Head of the Church ascribed to them by the Holy Ghost This must be proved or you must acknowledge the impertinency and invalidity of their present arguing the best of it is whether you will be so ingenuous or no 't is but a Fig-leaf covering that every eye can discern your nakedness through it We say in S. T. 2dly If there be any other Head of the Church besides Christ he must be either within or without the Church The latter will not be affirmed Christ had not sure so little respect to his Flock as to appoint Wolves and Lyons to their Governors and Guides in matters Ecclesiastical nor can the former for all in the Church are Brethren have no Dominion or Authority over each others Faith or Conscience Luke 22. 25. Mr. T. replies Though all in the Church are Brethren yet all are not equal nor doth Luke 22. 25. prove it Answ 'T is enough for our present purpose that all in the Church are thus far equal that being all brethren none may exercise any Ruledom or Authority over the rest without their consent nor any such Ruledom as to command in case of Worship where Christ is silent which is at least asserted Luke 22. 25. and Mr. T. may confute it when he is able Of this Scripture we have spoken at large Chap. 4. and of Rom. 13. 1. Heb. 13. 17. frequently and have fully removed out of the way what is here repeated touching the Laws of Rulers and their obligation upon Conscience nor need we add more We say further in S. T. 3dly If any other be Head of the Church but Christ then is the Church the body of some others beside Christ but this is absurd and false not to say impious and blasphemous To which Mr. T. Particular Churches in respect of that ministration and government which their Governors afford them may be said to be the bodies of their Governors Answ Boldly ventured however 1. The Church is frequently said to be the Body of Christ 1 Cor. 12. 12 27. Ephes 5. 30 32. Col. 1. 18. 2dly Is no where said to be the body of any other not of Peter Paul much less of Nero Domitian the Supream Governours of the Empire at that day By what Authority Mr. T. takes the body of Christ and joyns it to another Head besides himself I am yet to learn 3dly The Church is call'd his Body upon the account of that glorious nearness and union is betwixt Christ and them the reception of Spirits life from him their absolute indisputable subjection to him Is the Church the body of any other with respect hereunto beside Christ Where is it so called Is it united or in subjection to any other besides Christ as the Woman is to the Man upon the account whereof she is call'd his body Ephes 5. 28. his I say not anothers That Mr. T. should assert That upon the same account the Church may be called the body of some other beside Christ We add 4thly There was no Head of the Church in the Apostles dayes but Christ That upon any
every one that teacheth somewhat of the Word of God but onely such as teach it according to Christs appointment nor will Mr. T. say it is the Devil did so Women may do so yet he saith they are not to be heard much less that it is the duty of one that is of God to hear the present Ministers of England who preach Christs Word from Authority humane Antichristian and that mixed with a multitude of humane Inventions We may better argue that is unlawful which is not a duty and characteristical property of one that is of God or Christs Sheep but to hear the present Ministers of England is not a duty and characteristical property of Christs Sheep as we have proved And have yet to add 1. They preach not the Word of God lawfully from Authority in his Name of which the Scriptures mentioned are to be understood 2. They preach the Commandments traditions of men in the stead of Gods Word 3. They hinder oppose persecute such as have authority to preach it 4. They are the stangers mentioned John 10. from whom 't is the property of Christs Sheep to flee 5. Many of them preach not the Word at all nor can they so do Therefore He adds Arg. 5. That may be unlawful which may be a sign of one thaâ— is not of God nor of Christs Sheep But not to hear the present Ministers when they teach the Word of God may be a sign of one that is not of God John 8. 47. 10. 26. A. This is answered in what was replied to the former Argument i. The minor is denied for the same reasons of our denial of the miâ—or in the precedent Argument 2. This Patron of charity at once rejects the many thousands of England precious in the sight of the Lord and beloved of him as persons not of God not of Christs Sheep because they hear not the present Ministers 3. We may more righteously argue To hear those that pretend to teach the Word of God as Ministers intermixed with the traditions of men but are not commissionated by him so to do is unlawful for 't is a rejection and contempt of Christs Authority who alone hath power to appoint his own Officers by whom he will communicate his mind and will But to hear the present Ministers is to hear such as pretend to â—each the Word of God intermixed with the traditions of men buâ— are not commissionated by him so to do as we have before demonstrated Therefore Arg. 6. His sixth Argument is thus formed To refuse to hear the Word of God though delivered by the present Ministers is such prâ—phaneness as is condemned in Esau Heb. 12. 16. for it is the rejecting or neglecting of an holy thing Matth. 7. 6. therefore it may be unlawful to shun hearing them and consequently lawful to hear them Answ 1. Very good It seems then that all that refuse to hear the present Ministers are prophane Esaus this he will have so much ingenuity as to retract in his next 2. He supposeth that the non-hearing of the Ministers is a refusing to hear the Word of God which is a most nefarious and diabolical accusation We refuse not to hear the Word of God in the way of his own appointment but to comply with and abet a false Antichristian-Ministry 3. The People of God conceive it to be one part of their birth-right as Men and Christians not to be compelled to hear those who come in their own names in the name of Antichrist which they refuse to sell for advantage in the World with prophane Esau and therefore judge it irrational a contradiction to be accused as if prophane like him for not dâ—ing that upon the account of his doing whereof he was branded by the Spirit of the Lord as such 4. They judge they may more rationally argue To hear the Word of God as delivered by the present Ministers is an Esau-like prophaneness because 1. 't is a rejection of their birth-right as Men and Christians 2. 'T is a compliance with encouragement of those who trample upon the Sovereignty Authority of Christ 3. 'T is a departing from the appointments of Christ to the Ordinances of Antichrist which is no small undervaluing of the Grace of Christ of the Gospel whereof Esau's prophaneness was a Type Therefore 't is unlawful to hear them Arg. 7. The seventh Argument advanced by him for this good service is The Word of God is a Pearl of great price Mat. 7. 6. 13. 44 46. Therefore to be heard and received by whomsoever held forth and consequently it's folly and sin to refuse hearing it because of personal exceptions against the bringer Answ 1. We deny the consequence nor will Mr. T. affirm it out of the heat of dispute to be true he hath asserted the contrary in his Theod. 2. 'T is wisdom not folly to refuse to meddle with the Pearl of the Prince when brought us by the hands of those from whom he hath charged us not to receive it who were never authorized by him to bring it to us especially when it is to be had from persons of his own authorisement 3. We have found the present Ministers such merchandizers for their own profit in the World that they put off dross for Gold and stones for Pearls at the best mix it with the dirt and gravel of the Antichristian City the traditions of the great Whore which they also impose upon us 4. We think we may more justly argue The Word of God is a precious Pearl Mat. 7. 6. 13. 44 46. therefore they ought not to hear the present Ministers who spoil corrupt it with their traditions and thereby offer violence to it who contemn despise tread underfoot much of the Contents thereof who huckster and make merchandize of it who prefer the Canon-Law of Antichrist before it so debaseing it to their lusts and wills of their Lords and Masters lest they should partake of the guilt of those injuries they offer thereunto whom they see many of them more zealous and nice in the punctual observance of an Edict or Institution given forth by their Masters the Bishops as bowing the knee uncovering the head or the like than the Institutions of their Lord Christ So that we may too truly say of them as Theodoricus Niemensis once said As the Priests of the Jews were at last possessed with that madness that they cried out We have no King but Caesar So I have a long time feared and do fear that our Priests may say We have no other King but the Prelate He adds Arg. 8. If the Word of God preached by the present Ministers may be effectual for that good which is the end wherefore it is preached then it ought to be heard from them according to James 1. 21. 1 Pet. 2. 1. But the Word of God preached by the present Ministers may be thus effectual Therefore Answ 1. If he understand the Major of a may be of possibility with