Distinct. There is a confession which containeth fundamentalls only the knowledge whereof is simply necessary for salvation and the simple ignorance whereof condemneth There is a confession which containeth fundamentalls and non fundamentalls which are not simplie necessary to be knowen by all necessitate â—â—edii 3. Dist. A confession of faith is to be respected in regard of the matter which is Divine Scripture or according to the stile conception and inâ—erpretation which is in some respect humane 4. Distinct. There is a confession of a particular man what such a person or Church believeth de facto as the confession of â—â—e Belgick Arminians and a confession de jure what every one ought to believe as the Nicen Creed the Creed of â—thanasiâ—s 5. Dist. There is a confession of a faith firme and sure quoad â—ertitudinem fidei quoad substantiam articulorum credendoâ—um sure in the Articles believed and a confession sure quoad radicationem fidei in subjecto the first way all are obliged â—â— believe the Articles contained in the word But we see not how now after the Canon of Scripture is closed but the certainty of faith according to the measure of light more or lesse as our Lord more or lesse doth reveale himselfe in a more or lesse measure of ligh doth not grow woâ— or decrease according to the certainy of faith the second way hence we say 1. Conclusion Onely the Word of God is the principall and formall ground of our Faith Eph. 2. 20 21 22. 2 Tim. 3. 16. Luk. 14. 25. 2. Concl. A confession of Faith containing all fundamentall points is so farre forth the Word of God as it agreeth with the Word of God and obligeth as a rule secundary which wee believe with subjection to God speaking in his owne Word and to this plat-forme wee may lawfullly sweare 1. What ever wee are obliged to believe and professe as the saving truth of God that we may lawfully sweare to professe believe and practise that the bond of faith may be sure but wee are obliged to believe and professe the nationall confession of a sound Church Ergo. The proposition is cleare from Davids and the Saints practise who layed bands on their soules to tie themselves to that which is lawfull as Psal. 119. 106. I have sworn and will performe it that I will keep thy Righteous judgements The major is the doctrine of our Dvines and cleare when they explaine the matter of a lawfull Oath as Pareus Bucanus Tilenus Profess Leydens Calvin Iunius Beza Piscator Zanchiâ— c. That things lawfull may lawfully be sworne to GOD observing other due circumstances The assumption is â—â—deniable 2. Arg. That whereof we are assured in conscience to be the truth and true Religion bringing salvation to mens soules to that we may tie our selves by an Oath upon the former grounds But the sound confession of faith set downe in a platformâ— is such as we may and are to be assured of in conscience â— the truth of God Ergo The assumption is proved because what is Gods Word and truth of that we are to be assured of iâ— conscience as Col. 2. 7. Being knit together in love unto all riches of the full assurance of understanding and Heb. 6. 11. should keepe the full assurance of hope to the end Col. 2. 2 3. Eph. 4. 14. 3. If the people of the lewes did sweare a covenant with God to keep the words of the covenant to doe them Deut. 29. 9. 10 11. To seeke the Lord God of Israel with all their heart and with all their soule 2 Chron. 15. 12. and if they entered into a curse and an oath to walke in the Lords law which was given by Moses the servant of God to observe and doe all the Commandements of the Lord and subscribed and sealed the covenant with their hands Nehem. 10. 1. v. 29. Then is it lawfull for a Church to sweare and by oath subscribe an Orthodox confession But the former is true as the places alledged cleare Ergo so is the latter That which onely may be doubted of is the connexion of the major proposition because Israel did sweare to nothing but to Moses written Law which in matter and forme was Gods expresse written word but it will not follow that we may sweare a plat-forme of Divine truth framed and penned by men but the connexion notwithstanding of this remaineth sure because Israel did sweare the Lords covenant according to the true meaning and intent of the Holy Ghost as it is Gods Word and we also sweare a Nationall covenant not as it is mans word or because the Church or Doctors at the Churches direction have set it down in such and such words such an order or method but because it is Gods Word so that we sweare to the sense and meaning of the platforme of confession as to the Word of God now the Word of God and sense and meaning of the Word is all one Gods Law and the true meaning of the Law are not two different things When a Jew sweareth to the doctrine and covenant of God in the Old Testament in a Jewish meaning he sweareth not to the Word of God because the Word of God unsoundly expounded is not the Word of God and though the Sadducees and Pharisees sweare the five bookes of Moses and the very covenant which Asah and the Kingdome of Iudâ—h did sweare 2 Chron. 15. yet doe they not sweare the covenant of God and that same which Gods people did sweare 2 Chron. 15. Or if any professing they worship idols should sweare that covenant alledging the covenant doth not forbid idols to be memorials and objects by which absolute adoration is given to God we would not thinke that they had sworne the covenant of God but onely words of God falsely expounded yea and made to be not Gods Word but a plaine lying invention Therefore it is all one whether a Church sweare a confession in expresse words of Scripture or a covenant in other words expounding the Scriptures true meaning and sense according to the language and proper idiom of the Nation and Church for we sweare not words or a platforme as it is such but the matter sense and meaning of the Scriptures of God set downe in that platforme and it is certaine in Nehemiahs time there was some platforme either the writings of Moses or some sound exposition thereof else I see not how they could seale it Nehem. 9. 38. And because of all this we make a sure covenant and write it and our Princes Levites and Priests seale unto it Now that which was written could not but be a platforme either in Scripture onely according to the meaning of the exacters of the oath or some interpretation else every man writ his owne covenant and sealed it which is not like for they all joyntly sware this covenant and the reason of this written sworne and sealed covenant being morall as is cleare
Divine saw visions and heavenly mysteries which none of the rest of the Apostles saw nor could write in their writings and Canonicall Epistles yet it doth not hence follow that James Peter Jude and Paul in their canonicall writings and Epistles were not immediatly inspired It is enough to make the Apostles in their writings infallible Apostles and immediatly inspired if that which they write bee the infallible truth and canonick Scripture though every Apostle write not all canonick truth now what the Apostles setteth down in this Synod is Scripture and the object of our faith and written for our instruction so something was revealed to James which was not revealed to Peter and Paul in this dispute but it followeth not Ergo what Peter and Paul spake they spake it not by immediate revelation and what they spake is not Scripture Answ. 1. The strength of my argument is close mistaken for I did not argue simply from the Apostles borrowing light one from another to prove they act not here as Apostles but as Elders neither did I argue simply from this James saith more then Peter doth Ergo Peter is not immediatly inspired in what hee saith for I grant the Apostles borrow â—ight from the Prophets and their writings one saith and writeth what another saith not and cannot write and yet all are immediatly inspired in what they write But I argued thus when ever the Apostles are consulted with to resolve a question as Apostles do conveenâ— Synodically intend to resorve the question if the Apostles in that case or any one of them come short of the resolution do not see the conclusion they intend to see but in so sarre as they are helped on by another in a way of disputation in that they doe not act as Apostles but the case is so here 1. all were consulted with Act. 15. 2. 2 all intended to resolve the question and did meet together for that end to resolve it fully v. 6. 3 yet divers of the Apostles as Peter Paul and Barnabas see not the resolution fully that they aimed at but determine the question imperfectly and so as if Iames had beene absent or if hee had seene no more in resolving the question then Paul and Barnabas and Peter said which was onely that the Law of Moses was not to bee kept by either Iew or Gentile upon the Necessitie of salvation but that both Jewes and Gentiles are saved by the grace of Jesus Christ if James I say had seene no more then this the consciences of both sides had not beene satisfied and the question not resolved but the Jewes should have gone on in a totall abstinence from all ceremonies which because of the indifference of the ceremonies was then dangerously scandalous and spirituall homicide and the Gentiles should freely have eaten blood meates offered to idols and things strangled which also was scandalous in a high measure to the weake Jewes and so the matter should have beene worse after this Synod and the controversie hotter the fire bolder and the scandall more dangerous then it was before the Synod which I cannot beleeve that the Apostles as Apostles could have done So wee know Nathan to have spoken as a man and not as a Prophet when being consulted with by David anent the building of the Temple and purposing and intending fully to resolve the question yet resolved it amisse and quite contrary to the mind of God now what the penmen of holy Scripture intended to write as Scripture that they fully wrote and no more and what they wrote not that they intended not to write but leave it to others of the penmen of the holy Ghost because the immediatly inspiring holy Ghost consulted with and intending to resolve such a canonick truth cannot misse in his blessed intention And also the Elders at Jerusalem were consulted with to resolve the question as well as the Apostles as is cleare Act. 15. 2. Now if the Church of Antiech had beene minded to referre the resolution to the Apostles as infallibles Apostle they would never have referred it to the Elders whom they knew could erre as well as themselves nor would the Elders have joyned as fellow-disputers with the Apostles as Apostles as they expresly doe v. 6. for that is as you would say some countrey men of ordinary spirit destitute of all propheticall light concurred with Esaiah to see the visions of God And it is as if David as king counsell at God whether the men of Keilah would deliver him up to Saul had consulted with God and with Abiathar and some foure or five Elders of Keilah voyd of all propheticall spirit whether the men of Keilah should deliver him up to Saul or no for these Elders of Jerusalem and Antioch and other brethren were as voyd of an Apostolick spirit as the Elders of Keilah were of a Propheticall spirit It were a vaine action for the Elders to joyne themselves as joynt-disputers and fellow-resolvers of the controversie with the Apostles for the fellow-resolvers were to seeke resolution at the Apostles who could as Apostles infallibly resolve them 2. What the Apostles set downe is Scripture and is the object of our faith and written for our instruction Ergo the Apostles did give it forth in the Synod as Scripture it followeth not I may preach Scripture and that which is the object of faith and written for our instruction Ergo I preach it as an Apostle by an Apostolick spirit it followeth not for so if the Elders had spoken Scripture which is written for our instruction the Elders should have spoken it by an Apostolick spirit which is manifestly false and so if the Elders of Corinth 1 Cor. 5. should have proven in their Presbytery that the incestuous person should bee delivered to Satan from Matth. 18. they should have spoken that in the presbytery by an Apostolick Spirit all which are manifestly false The holy Ghost by Luke did make it Scripture formally but that the Apostles spake it as Scripture by an Apostolick spirit because it is the object of our faith that Luke did insert it in the Canonicall history is no more hence proven then one might inferre that Gamaliel by the immediate inspiration of the Spirit spake the oration that hee uttereth to the councell of Priests and Pharisees Act. 5. 34 35. c. for that is formally made Scripture by Luke his inserting of it in the Register of Scripture yea the words of Satan Matth. 4. by that reason behoved to bee spoken by divine and immediate inspiration but the truth is wee are not to take what Peter speaketh from the Prophet Amos Act. 15. v. 16. to bee Scripture because Amos spake it in the Old Testament but because Luke by immediate inspiration saith that Peter uttered these words from the Prophet Amos. Immediate inspiration maketh any saying Scripture and not the Apostles historicall relating of it out of the writings of the Prophets though the sayings of the Prophets as
Didoclavius answereth that then all that live holily should have stipend as workmen and certainly if Paul had spoken nothing of these who labour in the word and Doctrine yet the Text doth hold forth that these who rule well and doe not labour in the Word and Doctrine are worthy of honour for the comparative here or superlative degree doth well inferre the positive degree But 1. Ministers shall bee worthy of honor though they preach not 2. The arguments which I brought to prove and that undeniably that there be two sorts of Elders in the Text fight against this sense which inferreth that their is but one sort of preaching Elders here to whom double honor is due for two respects to wit holinesse of life and painfull preaching 3. Holinesse of life in all Gods Word is never expressed by well governing which is a worke of a publick Church-officer as is cleare Rom. 12. 8. 1 Thess. 5. 12. 13. holinesse of life is common to all private Christians yea and to women who cannot rule nor rule well Ob. 6. The Rulers here ought to have wages as workmen but your Elders have no wages Ergo your Elders are not in this Text. Answ. That is not concluded which is in question for the assumption should be but your Elders ought to have no wages and are worthy of no honour and the assumption is onely de facto they have none 2. This argument might prove that a noble man called to be a Minister if he should take no stipend were not a lawfull Minister and Paul then was no lawfull pastor at Corinth because hee refused stipend but stipend is due to both Pastor and Elder and in the case of scandall it is due to neither of them hic hunc Ob. 7. If there be two sorts of Elders here there must be two sorts of Bishops for Presbyter and Bishop are synonyma and one and the same as is cleare Tit. 1. 6 7. Acts 20. 17. They are called Elders and v. 28. Bishops But we cannot admit of two sorts of Bishops some to rule and some to preach that were Antichristian Answ. Though there be two sort of Elders here it doth not follow that there be two sorts of Bishops and it is not proved because Elder and Bishop are not proved to be synonyma from the alledged places genus species as a living Creature and a man are not synonyma but have different definitions Gladius ensis have the same definitions as a man and a discoursing creature are synonyma An Elder is a generall and a Bishop a sort of Elder and an Apostle is an Elder and so Peter tearmeth himselfe 1 Pet. 5. 1. an Elder â—uâ— Divines say that a preaching Elder and a Bishop are synonyma one and the same and synonyma non faciunt mumâ—rum as Gladius Ensis but they never taught that an Elder in general and a Bishop are synonyma and the same nor doe the places Acts 20. Tit. 1. prove it for if they be all preaching Elders to whom Paul preached at Ephesus Acts 20. as the Text seemeth to make them Acts 20 28 29. then the Elders that Paul called for v. 17. are preaching Elders and the same with Bishops v. 28. and Tit. 1. Paul willeth Titus to ordaine Elders that is both preaching ruling Elders and there he giveth an instance in preaching Elders or Bishops and sheweth what sort of men Bishops should be 2. If there be two sorts of Elders 1 Tim. 5. 17. then should there be two sorts of Bishops I distinguish the proposition then are there two sorts of preaching Bishops I deny the proposition in this sense but if the meaning be there be two species of Bishops or Overseers one ruling Overseers and another preaching Bishops we shall not contend for the word if we agree upon the thing though I much doubt if the ruling Elder in the Scripture come under the name of Bishop or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 3. This objection falleth under the stroake of the arguments proving that there be two sorts of Elders in this Text and how they can bee answered I know not Ob. 8. That office is not in Scripture whose Characters qualities and notes are not specified in Scripture as the Characters of a Deacon are 1 Tim. 3. and of a Bishop ibid. But the Characters qualites and notes of a ruling Elder are not in the Scripture Ergo c. Answ. 1. I deny the major proposition for then because the Scripture saith not an Apostle should be blameles the husband of one wife vigilant sober and thus and thus and an Evangelist should be thus and thus and a prophet should be thus and thus qualified therefore Apostles Evangelists Prophets are not in Scripture It is true these were but temporall offices yet it is enough to take off and breake the argument for these temporary â—ffices must be no lesse warranted by the word except they be unlawfull then the offices that are of perpetuall indurance 2. I distinguish the major proposition That office is not in Scripture whose characters are not in Scripture neither in one particular place expresly and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 it is not true for baptism in no one place is so expresly set downe in Scripture from all its Characters in particular as is the Supper of the Lord which is described Mat. 26. Luk. 22. Mark 14. 1 Cor. 11. in the Elements sacred actions prayer consecration words of institution efficient forme end gesture c. Yet is baptisme for that not excluded from the classe and number of Gods ordinances and seales or that office is not in Scripture whose Characters are not in Scripture nether in divers places of Scripture nor by good consequence and lawfull analogy with other its fellow offices that I yeeld willingy but now the assumption is false for as baptisme by analogy is described in many of its Characters as prayer consecration of the Elements end c. when the Supper of the Lord is described making a just proportion betwixt baptisme and the other Sacrament and by other places of Scripture so is the ruling Elder in his characters described when the Bishop his fellow-officer is described 3. The assumption also is false for the ruling Elder is described out of this Text. 1. negatively that hence is gathered by strong consequence as is said that he is an Elder who laboureth not in the Word and Doctrine 2. Hee is described affirmatively for an office is sufficiently described when the specifick acts thereof are set downe as a man is described when wee say hee is a Creature who doth discourse and make use of Reason so is this Elder described when wee say it is his office to rule well 1 Tim. 5. 17. hee is a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and a government which Christ hath 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 instituted in the body 1 Cor. 12. 28. and he is Rom. 12. 4. an Organ and member of Christs body whose office it is to rule
determinations on the contrary for it was certaine that the Word of God had refuted the necessitie of circumâ—ision and of observing Moses his Law as Peter James Paul Act. 15. doe strongly prove from the Word of God and the word of God condemned the eating of things strangâ—â—â— and of things sacrificed to Idolls in the case of scandall therefore none of sound judgement will inferre that the determination of a Synod such as is Act. 15. 22. is not necessary yea because the bookes of Moses condemned the Sadduces in their Epicurith opinion of denying the resurrection of the dead I hope it is not for that superfluous for Christ out of Moses his writings to determine and prove Matth. 22. that the dead must â—iâ—c againe you may by as good reason say nothing should bee determined in preaching nor in writings because all these are already determined in the Word by the Lord his Prophets and Apostles this shall close evert all ministery as Sâ—inians doe especially now after the cannon of the Scripture is closed for they use the same very arguments against the necessitie of a ministery because now the Gospell is fully revealed there is no necessitie of a sent ministery as was in the Apostles time so teach Andr. Raddeccius Smalcius and the Arminians And lastly it is a vild abusing of Scripture to say that the accept thâ—e yeare of the Lord of which Christ speaketh Luk. 4. 18 1â— is that Jubilee yeare of libertie of conscience to all sects of Papists Arminians Socinians Anabaptists c. 1. Because a libertie of hereticall and blasphemous opinions of God his nature worship and Word cannot bee the acceptable yeare of the Lord which Christ as Mediator came to proclaime Esa. 61 2. 5. for that is licence not libertie Christs acceptable yeare Fsiy 61. is the spirituall Jubilee of remission of sinnes and eternall redemption proffered in the Gospel and really bestowed upon the meeke the broken hearted the captives the prisoners the mourneâ—s in Ziâ—n and those whom Christ is sent to comfort and to clothe with the garments of praise but hee is not sent to comfort Macedonians Sabellians papists Socinians c. because they are Sectaries and doe adhere to their rotten and false grounds of divinitie for then libertie of conscience should have beene a mercy purchased by Christs death and Arius should obtaine by Christs death a power to bee an Arian and to deny the divinitie of Jesus Christ. 2. In the Hebrew 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ultio a revenging is an allusion to 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 naeham consolatus est for this yeare was to the beleevers Nechama or consolation and to unbeleevers Nekama a revenge or a vengeance which cannot sort with sectaries 3. The acceptable yeare is as Paul expoundeth it 2 Cor. 6. 2. the acceptable time of the Gospell and the day of salvation and as Hugo Cardinalis expoundeth it well the time of the fulnesse of grace under the Gospel and that which is called Esay 49. 8. the day of salvation 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ratson the day of good will and so Beda Toletus Cyrillus and the Jesuit Salmeron and Glossa Ordinaria expoundeth it faith and salvation Procopius the day of the Lords incarnation as Hieronymus expoundeth the day of vengeance opposit thereunto to bee the day of damnation and Lyra the yeare of Christs suffering in which Christ is pleased with mankind Quest. III. Whether the Jesuited Lysimachus Nicanor and the Author of the Survey of Discipline doth with good reason impute â—â— the Church-Government of the reformed Churches the eversion of the 〈◊〉 Magistrates power â—n matters ecclesiasticall There came to the light of day a night-peece of darkenesse Anno 1640. A Pamphlet by one Lysimachus Nicanor acting the person of a â—esuite but better resembling â— is nature against our blessed Reformation imputing to us Treason to Kings as the Popish author of the Survey had ledde the poore man both of these as Jesuites doe raile against Calvin Beza and the Geneva-discipline as Becanus Suarez Uasquez Bellarmine Greâ—serus and other their Doctors and teachers doe leade them That I may adde to what I have said before I desire the reader to eye and consider these distinctions 1. Paraeus teacheth that there is a double Church-power one internall and proper as to preach hinde and loose to administrate the Sacraments c. This is not in the Prince and there is another improper and externall which is exercised about Church-matters and Church-officers and this distinction is grounded upon that saying of Constantine the Emperour to the Bishops as Eusebius relateth it 2. An externall power about matters ecclesiasticke is three-fold 1. A power of order and jurisdiction about the externall or rather in the externall acts of the Church which are visible and incurreth in the 〈…〉 as to preach baptize and these as saith that learned and worthy preacher at Middleburgh Guliel Apollonii doe properly pertaine to the spirituall and proper Church-government and without controversie doe not belong to the Prince 2. A power externall about Church-matters which is objective in respect of the object sacred or ecclesiastick but improperly and by a 〈◊〉 enely ecclesiasticke and essentially and in it selfe politick such as we hold to be the Magistrates power in causing Church-men doe their duty in preaching sound doctrine and administrating the Sacraments â—cording to Christs institution and punishing hereticks and false teachers 3. Some have devised a mixed power ecclesiastick as Henric. Salcobrigiensis whereby the Prince is the head of the Church and hath a nomotheticke and legislative power in things ecclesiasticall and this is not onely objective in respect of the object ecclesiasticall but also subjective in respect of the subject ecclesiasticall in respect that the Prince by vertue of his civill office as a King may ordaine Prelats and make Lawes in Church-matters Distinction 3. There is a twofold power in a King one in a King as a King this is alike in all and ordinary regall coactive whether the King be a Heathen a Turke or a sound beleeving Christian There is another power in a King as such a King either a King and a Prophet also or as a Propheticall King and this extraordinary power was in Solomon and David to write Canonicke Scripture and to prophecie and is not properly a Kingly power or there is in a King as such a King even as a Christian beleeving King an other power ordinary indeede but it is not a new regall power but potestas executiva a power or a gracious hability to execute the Kingly power that he had before as a King so Christianity addeth no new Kingly power to a King but onely addeth a Christian power to use inlarge and dilate the Kingly power that he had before Distinction 4. The Magistrate as a Magistrate is a politicke head and ruler of the Common-wealth but as
they are registred in the bookes of Old Testament bee formally Scripture yet as cited by the Apostles they dâ—e not become Scripture except these saying bee cited tali modo that is by the influence of the immediatly inspiring holy Ghost which influence onely maketh formally any saying to bee Scripture Object 12. If the Apostles did not in a Synod with the Elders dispute and voyce as Apostles it should follow that as Apostles they did plant Churches but after the Churches were planted they ceased to bee Apostles and did all as ordinary Elders which is most incongrâ—oâ—s for then should they descend from an infallible to a fallible spirit Answ. The Apostles did onely use their Apostolick power when there was need of it as God worketh not miracles but in some necessitating exigence of second causes and what they could doe by an ordinary power when the Churches were once constituted they did not attempt to doe by their Apostolick power and though their Apostolick power was in them as a habit yet the exercise thereof was rather under the dominion of an extraordinary and immediate rapt and influence of God then under the mastery of their owne free-will I would aske why the Church of Antioch no doubt most lawfully Act. 15. 2. did send to seeke resolution at the fallible spirit of Elders and also as our brethren teach at the infallible spirit of the Apostles and why did they not from their infallible and Apostolick spirit seeke out and choose seven men to bee Deacons but remitted to the fallible spirit of the multitude who are not infallible or Apostolick in their choise both the nomination and election of these seven men but the Apostles did much honour the Churches of Christ in cooperating with them and in doing most things with their consent that by example they might interdict dominion and assert a ministeriall power and make Christ most Monarch-like in the government of his spirituall Kingdome nor did they put off or interdict themselves nor forfeit their Apostolick power after Churches were constituted but used their Apostolick power at the Commandement of that great King exalted Jesus Christ whose Catholick Ambassadours they were as God immediatly moved them Object 13. Paul exercised the power of the Keyes of knowledge upon Barbarians and might have preached to Indians and did presâ—h to the scefling Athenians Ergo hee might exercise power of jurisdiction over them and judge those who are without it is no consequence and against the word of God 1 Cor. 5. 12. Yea Paul by this power dogmaticall rebuked the Athenians Act. 17. 22. I perceive that in all things yee are too superstitious yet Paul had no power to excommunicate the Athenians Mr. Mather Answ. I deny not but there is great odds betwixt a concionall rebukinâ— by way of preaching which may bee and is alwayes performed by one and a juridicall rebuking by a power juridicall of the Keyes which is performed onely by a Church-sâ—ciâ—tie now it cannot bee denyed but the rebuking of men because they subverted soules v. 24. is not a meere concionall rebuking which may bee performed by one 1. it is a rebuking v. 24. 2 it is a rebuking performed by many by a whole Synod v. 6. v. 22. 3 It is performed by a politicall societie and body having a dogmaticall power to judge and determine in a doctâ—inall way as our brethren say and consequently as wee say having a juridicall power v. 25. It seemed good unto us being assembled with one accord to send chosen men unto you c. which is undenyably a politicall body an assembled company as v. 6. met about a question which concerneth the Churches of Christ as is cleare v. 2. v. 6. v. 23. c. 16. 4 5. c. 21. 25. compared with v. 22. hence a businesse of doctrine which troubleth the Churches of Antioch c 15. 2. and of Jerusalem v. 5 6 7 8. and Syria and Cilicia v. 23 24. must bee a Church-businesse in respect of the subject 2. The question is a Church-question in the matter of practise it conoâ—rneth the consciences of the Churches in the point of taking and giving offence in a Church-societie as this doth v. 19. That yee trouble not them which amongst the Gentiles are turned unto God and v. 28 29. compared with 1 Cor. 10. 24 25 26 27 c. Rom. 14. 14 15. this was a Church-â—candall or publick offence as touching the matter materia quâ—nt 2 The forme and manner of deciding the controversie was a publick Church-way by the Word of God Act. 15. so 〈◊〉 proveth v. 7 8. 9. and James v. 15 16 c. maketh good 4 The efficient causes and agents in the question are 1. Church 〈◊〉 v. 6. Apostles and Elders 2. Church-officers conveened Church-wayes in a Church-body or societie v. 6. c. 15. and The Apostles and Elders came together in a Synod 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a word which cur brethren acknowledgeth doth 1 Cor. 5. 4. note a formall Church-assembly to consider of this matter and â— 25. It seemed good to us being assembled with one accord 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and the very word Church is not wanting though with reverence of others it seemeth not to bee the multitude seeing the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 beeing so generall must have its signification from the action and end for which the meeting is intended as before I said as is cleare v. 22. It pleased the Apostles Elders and whole Church 5. The action they performe when they are met in a politicall body is to decide a Church-controversie that troubled many Churches Act. 15. 2. v. 23 24. 6 The end is the peace and edifying of the Churches as that the Churches of the Gentiles bee not troubled with needlesse ceremonies as James saith v. 19. and the good of the Churches v. 29. from which if you keepe your selves yee shall doe well c. 16. 4. And â—s they went through the cities they delivered them the Decrees to 〈◊〉 v. 5. so were the Churches established in the faith Consider 〈◊〉 is the happy end and fruit of this Synod The establishâ—â—â— of the Churches Therefore have our brethren without reason I speake with reverence of their learning and godlinese denied the word Church to bee given to a Synod or a meeting of Elders which to mee is cleare Act. 15. v. 6. The 〈◊〉 sending is the Eldership of Antioch the Church receiâ—â—â— v. 4. is the Eldership at Jerusalem and cannot conveniently bee exponed of the whole and numerous thousands that â—â—eâ—ed at Jerusalem the rebuking cannot then bee meerely â—â—â—â—inall by the power of the keyes of knowledge which is exercised by one nor are the Apostles and Elders here considered as meerely Preachers and Teachers in the Act of teacher for why then should they not bee formally a Church and a Church-assembly as our Brethren say if they bee an assembly meeting for preaching the Word for the exercise of the keyes of Knowledge in the hearing of a multitnde