formally in collegio this they did not nor could they doe in appointing the office for they were immediatly inspired by the Spirit to appoint new offices but in ordaining the officers in concreto that is in ordaining the men Steven Philip c. they proceed after a presbyteriall way every way as an ordinary presbytery doth Object But they ordaine Elders here upon this Apostolick â—round because they were Apostles and Pastors to all the world c. if the ground was Apostolick the action was formally Apostolick Answ. Wee must distinguish betwixt ordination comparative and absolute ordination comparative is in relation to the place if the question bee upon what ground doe the Apostles ordaine in all the world I answer because they are Apostles and every where Ergo they may ordaine every where but as for absolute ordination here in Jerusalem if the question bewhy they did ordaine Stephen Philip c. tali modo by conveening the Church I answer because the Apostles were Elders But our brethren say Then the Apostles in this act laid downe their infallible Apostolick spirit I answer they laid downe the ininfallible spirit which they had as Apostles and tooke them to â— fallible spirit but they did not operate and governe in this Act from this infallible spirit but from an ordinary spirit else you must say 1. when the Apostles did eate and drinke they laid downe an infallible and Apostolick spirit and tooke an ordinary and fallible spirit for they did not eate and drinke by immediate inspiration and as Apostles but as men 2. because they were Apostles where ever they came it shall follow by this that they did all by this Apostolick spirit as if the question bee upon what ground Did the Apostles every where baptize pray pasiâ—aâ—â—y exhort as Pastors governe in Corinth deliver the incestuous man to Satan at Corinth If you answer because they were Apostles then I say because they were Apostles alwayes and in every place they never used the ordinary power of the keyes given to them as common to them and all Pastors to the end of the world Matth. 18. 18. Matth. 16. 19. John 20. 23. and so they could not doe any thing as ordinary Pastors or ordinary Elders 2. Christ gave to the Apostles an ordinary power which they could never put forth in Acts 3. we have no warrant from the Apostles preaching baptizing exhorting governing retaining and remitting sinnes excommunicating rebuking to preach baptize exhort governe retaine and remit sinnes excommunicate and rebuke because the Apostles in Acts Apostolick and extraordinary are no more to bee imitated by us then wee are to imitate them in speaking with divers tongues and raising the dead Hence upon these grounds wee are certainly induced to beleeve that the Apostles did here ordaine not as Apostles but as ordinary Elders 1. Because in these Acts the Apostles are imitable but in what they doe as Apostles they are not imitable 2. What ever rules of the Word doth regulate the ordinary classicall presbytery the Apostles goe along in all these acts here condescending to these rules such as the meeting of the presbytery the twelve do meet 2. They tacitely acknowledge a neglect of the daily ministration to the widowes which is an act of misgovernment of the Deaconrie which is an ordinary office of the presbytery and therefore they desire of the Church to bee freed of this office 3. They referre the nomination and election of the seven men to the people 4. They ordaine seven constant and perpetuall officers as the presbytery doth Ergo they doe not ordaine by their transcendent power as Apostles 3. From this place our brethren prove their Congregationall presbytery which they would not doe if the Apostles did here manage affâ—ires as extraordinary officers 4. This colleâ—ium of Apostles doe nothing in all this which by confession of both sides may not bee done and to the end of the world is not done in the transacting of the like businesse by the ordinary presbytery 4. What the Apostles doe as Apostles agreeth onely to Apostles and can be done by none but Apostles or by Evangelists having their power by speciall warrantable commission from them as what a man doth as a man what a Pastor doth as a Pastor a Deacon as a Deacon a Prophet as a Prophet can bee done by none but by a man onely a Pastor onely a Deacon onely except whereas one Act as to teach agreeth both to a Pastor and a Doctor which yet have their owne differences but all here done the Apostles might have done if wee suppose they had not beene Apostles 5. If as Apostles they ordaine any one of the twelve Apostles should compleatly and entirely ordaine all the seven and so the seven Deacons should have beene twelve times ordained at this time which needles multiplication of Apostolick actions were uselesse served not for edification and is not grounded in the Word for the whole twelve in collegio doe ordaine and what any one Apostle doth as an Apostle by the amplitude of a transcendent power every Apostle doth it compleatly and wholly his alone as without helpe of another Apostle Peter worketh a miracle especially any one Apostle as Paul his alone might ordaine Timothy an Evangelist 6. If they did here act as Apostles any one Apostle might have ordained the Deacons in an ordinary way as here but that wee cannot conceive for then one and the same action should have beene ordinary and not ordinary for one man cannot bee a Church or a societie to doe the ordinary Acts of an ordinary societie for it should bee extraordinary to one to act that which is the formall Act of many as many and should involve a contradiction except it were an Act which cannot bee performed by many as when one Paster speaketh for many for a whole Church but that is ordinary and necessary because a multitude as a multitude cannot speake without confusion in a continuated discourse for that all the people say one word Amen is not a multitude as a multitude using one continuated speech Object 1. If the Apostles did not all their Ministeriall acts as Apostles they did not fulfill their commission given to them as to Apostles Matth. 28. Goe and teach all Nations Answ. The consequence is nought if they had not done all things which by vertue of their Apostolicall Office they were commanded to doe they had not then fulfilled their commission given to them by Christ. That is true but now the assumption is false they were under no commandement of Christ to doe all their Ministeriall Acts as Apostles prove that they did neither Preach nor Baptize as Apostles but only as Apostles they did preach infallibly 2. In all places of the world as Catholick Pastors 3. With the gift of Tongues 4. Working of Miracles which by divine institution were annexed to their preaching but their preaching according to the substance of the act was ordinary Object 2. The Apostles went
the King Judgeth by them and in them 2. This error is founded upon a worse error to wit that the supreme Magistrate had no power of life and death in Israel without consent of the people but certainly there are as specious and plausible reasons if not more specious for the peoples government in all civill matters then there can be for their Church-power of judging in the Church-matters and government therof Yet there is no ground for it 1. Because the Rulers only could not be charged to execute judgement in the morning to deliver the oppressed to execute judgement for the Fatherlesse and the VViddow nor can there be a promise made to establish the Kings Throne for obeying that Commandement as a Gods Word teacheth if the people have as great yea greater power in Judging then the Rulers have by this our Brethrens argument They say all the Believers at Corinth 1 Cor. 5. could not be commanded to cast out the incestuous person nor could they all be taxed for omitting that duty if they had not power to excommunicate 2. Neither can the Spirit of God complaint that the Judges builded Zion with blood and the heads of the house of Jacob and Princes of the house of Israel did abhor judgement and pervert equity as the Prophets say nor could they be condemned as roaring Lyons and evening Wolves as the Prophet sayth for the Judgeâ— might well be faultlesse when the poore were crushed in the Gate and Judgement turned into Gall and Wormewood because they cannot helpe the matter the people are the greatest part in caring matters in judgement 2. We see Davids practise in condemning the Amalckite out of his own confession not asking the peoples consent and in condemning to death Baanah and Rehab for killing Ishbosheth Solomon gave sentence against Adoniiah Ioab Shimei without consent of the people David pardoned Shimei contrary to the counsell of Zerviahs sons 3. If from the peoples witnessing and hearing of judgement in the Gate we conclude the people were Judges with the Rulers there was never a time when there was no King in Israel and no Iudge to put evill doers to shame but every man did what seemed good in his own Eys contrary to Scripture because all are a generation of Kings and Princes no lesse then the Ruler himselfe as Anabaptists teach By the Doctrine of our brethren I deny not but he that gathered stickes on the Sabbath was brought Num. 15. 33. to Moses and to Aaron and to all the Congregation but the Congregation signifieth not the common multitude For 35. Moses received the sentence from God and pronounced it and the Congregation stoned him to death And Numb 27. 1. The Daughters of Zelophehad stood before Moses Eleazar and before the Princes as Iudges and before all the Congregation as witnesses not as Judges but v. 6. 7. Moses gave out the judiciall sentence from the Lords mouth And 1 King 21. 12. Naboth stood in presence of the people to be judged but the Nobles and Princes were his Judges because v. 8. Iezabel wrote to the Nobles and Princes that v. 10. they should carry out Naboth and stone him to wit judicially and v. 11. The Nobles and Princes did as Iezabel had sent unto them And Ieremiah cap. 26. pleaded his cause before the Princes and people for v. 10. The Princes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Set down judicially in the entry of the new gate of the Lords House nothing can be gathered from the place to prove that the people judged but because Ieremiah spake to the Princes and the people who vers 24 were in a fury and rage against Ieremiah if Ahikam had not saved him from their violence CHAP. 4. SECT 4. QUEST 5. WHether there be no nationall or provinciall Church under the New Testament but only a parishionall Congregation meeting every Lords day in one place for the worship of God The Author in this first proposition denieth that there is any Nationall or provinciall Church at all under the New Testament for clearing of the question observe these 1. Dist. VVe deny that there is any diocescan provinciall or Nationall Church under the care of one Diocesan or Nationall Prelate or Bishop but hence it followeth not there is no visible instituted Church now but only a particular Congregation 2. Dist. VVe deny any Nationall typicall Church where a whole Nation is tyed to one publick worship in one place as sacrificing in the Temple 3. Dist. VVe deny not but the most usuall acception of a Church or visible meeting is given as the refutator of Tylenus sayth to a convention of people meeting ordinarily to heare the word and adminstrate the Sacraments Stephanus deriveth it from 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And Cyrillus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 As Causabon observeth so these who meete at one Sermon are called Ecclesia a Church and it is called Ecclesia concio sayth the Refutator of Tilen but this hindreth not the Union of more particular Congregations in their principall members for Church-government to be the meeting or Church representative of these many united Congregations 4. Dist. A Parish-Church materiall is a Church within such locall bounds the members whereof dwell contiguously togegether one bordering on the other our Brethren meane not of such a Church for as Paâ—â— Baynes sayth well this God instituted not because a company of Papists and Protestants may thus dwell together as in a Parish and yet they axe of contrary Churches a Parish-Church formally is a multitude who meete in manner or forme of a Parish as if they dwelt neere together in a place ordinarily to worship God as the 〈◊〉 of those who came together to celebrate the Lords Supper is called the Church 1 Cor. 11. 18. For first of all when ye come together in the Church I heare that there are divisions amongst you 〈◊〉 what have ye not houses to eat and drink in or despise ye the Church of God 1. Concl. If we shall evince a Church-visible in the Now Testament which is not a Parishionall Church we evince this to be false which is maintained by our Brothren that there is no visible instituted Church in the New Testament save onely a Parishionall Church or a single independent Congregation But this Church we conceive to have been no Parishionall Church 1. Because these who met dayly and continued with one accord in the Temple and breaking bread from house to house that is administrating the Sacraments together as our Brethren say were a visible Church But these being first an hundred and twenty as Acts 1. and then three thousand added to them Acts 2. 41. could not make all one single independent Congregation whereof all the members had voyce in actuall government Ergo they were a visible instituted Church and yet not a Parishionall Church The proposition is cleare The Church of Ierusalem was one visible Church and did exercise
together a visible act of government in sending messengers to 〈◊〉 Acts 15. 22. Then pleased it the Apostles and Elders and the whole Church our Brethren say the whole collective Church Men Women and Children at Ierusalem to send men of their own company to Antioch 23. And wrote Letters and some Decrees and Commandements to be observed Now the many thousands of the Church of Ierusalem by no possibility could meete aâ— one Parish in one materiall house to administrate the Lords Supper farre lesse could they be as is said Acts 2. 42. all continuing stedfastly in the Apostles Doctrine and followship our Brethren say in Pâ—rishionall or Congregationall fellowship and in breaking of bread and prayer nor could they dayly continue in the Temple and breake bread from house to house being all one Church or a fixed parishionall meeting in one materiall house Now it is cleare they were 〈◊〉 even after they exceeded many thousands in number in one Parishionall and Congregationall government as our Brethren would prove from Acts 15 22 23 24 25. And Acts 2. 42 43. Else how could they have all their goods common if there be not one visible government amongst them but this government could not be of one single Congregation for all who sold their goods and had all things common could not meete to give voyces in Discipline a judicatory of so many thousand Judges were impossible and ridiculous 2. Paul writeth to the Galatians where there were many Parish Churches Gal. 1. 2. as our Brethren teach yet doth he write to them as he doth to the Corinthians where our Brethren will have one Parish Church and writeth to them of uniformity of visible government that they meete not together to keepe dayes Sabbaths and yeers Gal. 4. 10. as the Iewes did that they keep not Iewish and ceremoniall meetings and conventions Gal. 4. 9. these Churches are called one lumpe in danger to be leavened as Corinth is a Parishionall lumpe in hazard to be leavened as our Brethren teach Now how could Paul will them that the whole lump of all the Churches and Congregations in Galatia be not leavened except he lay down a ground that they were with united authority to joyne in one visible government against the false Teachers suppose there were twenty sundry Kings in Brittaine and twenty Kingdoms could our friends over Sea write to us as to one Nationall lump to beware of the Spanish faction except they laid down this ground that all the twenty little Kingdomes had some visible union in Government and might with joynt authority of all the twenty Kingdomes concurre to resist the common Enemie Here that godly and learned Divine Mr. Baynes sayth Communion in government is not enough to make them one Church this sayth he maketh them rather one in tertio quodam separabili in a third thing which may be separated then one Church Government being a thing that commeth to a Church now constituted and may be absent the Church remaning a Church I answer this is a good reason against the Prelates Dioceseâ—n Church which as Baynes sayth well is such a frame in which many Churches are united with one head Church under one Lord prelate common Pastor to all the Pastors and particular Congregations of the Diocese as part aking of holy things or at least in that power of government which is in the chiefe Church for all the others within such a circuit Now the prelâ—tes frame of a properly so called Church under one Pastor being a Creature with a hundred heads having Church and pastorall care of a hundred little Congregations and Churches is a dreame for we know no such Church fed by a Prelate nor no such prelaticall Argos to oversee so many flocks nor doe we contend that the many Congregations united in a presbyteriall government doe make a mysticall visible Church meeting for all the Ordinances of God But union of many Congregations in a visible government is enough to make all these united Churches one visible ministeriall and governing Church who may meete not in one collective body for the worship of God yet in one representative body for government though worship may be in such a convened Church also as we shall heare The name of the Church I thinke is given to such a meeting Mat. 18. 17. Acts 15. 22. though more usually in Scripture the Church is a fixed Congregation convened for Gods worship now government is an accident separable and may goe and come to a mysticall Church but I thinke it is not so to a Ministeriall governing Church So the Church of Ephesus is called a Church in the singular number Rev. 2. 1. and all the Churches of Asia Rev. 1. 20. but seven Churches and Christ directeth seven Epistles to these seven and writeth to Ephesus as to a Church having one government v. 2. Thou hast tryed them which say they are Apostles and are not and hast found them lyers This was Ecclesiasticall tryall by Church-Discipline yet Ephesus contained more particular Congregations then one 1. Because Christ speaking to Ephesus only sayth v. 7. He that hath an Earâ— to heare let him heare what the spirit sayth unto the Churches in the plurall number 2. Because there were a good number of preaching Elders in Ephesus Acts 20. 28. 36. 37. and it is incongruous to Gods dispensation to send a multiude of pastors to over see ordinarily one single and independent Congregation 3. This I have proved from the huge multitudes converted to the Faith in Ephesus so huge and populous a City where many Iewes and Greeks dwâ—lâ— and where the Word of God grew so mighâ—â—ly Acts 19. 17 18 19 20. and Christ writeth to every one of the seven Churches as to one and yet exhorteth seven times in every Epistle that Churches in the plurall number heare what the spirit sayth Now as our Brethren prove that the Churches of Galatia so called in the plurall number were many particular Churches so doe we borrow this argument to prove that every one of the seven Churches who are seven times called Churche in the plurall number contained many Congregations under them yet doth Christ write to every one of the seven as having one visible Government 2. Concl. A nationall typicall Churchâ— was the Church of the Iewes we deny But a Church nationall or provinciall of Cities Provinces and Kingdomes having one common government we thinke cannot be denyed so Paul Baynes citeth for this 1 Pet. 1. 1. 1 Pet. 5. 2. Though we take not the Word Church for a my sticall body but for a ministeriall company But Acts 1. Matthias was elected an Apostle by the Church as our Brethren confesse but not by a particular Congregation who met every Lords-Day and in ordinary to partake of all the holy things of God the Word and Sacraments 1. Here were the Apostles whose Parish Church was the whole World Mat. 28. 19. Goe teach all Nations 2. In this Church were the brethren of Christ
as you gather First they did not meet often together for prayer and spirituall conference while they were satisfied in Conscience of the good estate one of another and approved to one anothers Consciences in the sight of God as living stones fit to be laid in the Lords spirituall Temple as you require because frequent meeting and satisfaction in Conscience of the regeneration one of another could not be performed by three thousand all converted and added to the Church in one day for before they were non-Converts and at one Sermon were pricked in heart that they had slaine the Lord of glory Acts 2. 37. 42. and the same day there were added to them three thousand souls Our brethren say It was about the Pâ—ntecost when the day was now the longest and so they might make short confessions of the soundnesse of their conversation before the Apostles who had such discerning spirits Answ. Truly it is a most weake and reasonlesse conjecture for all the three thousand behoved to be miraculonsly quicke of discerning for they could not sweare mutually one to another those Church-duties except they had beene satisfied in Conscience of the regeneration of one another Surely such a miracle of three thousand extraordinarily gifted with the spirit of discerning would not have beene concealed though it be sure Ananias and Saphira who deceived the Apostles were in this number Secondly how could they all celebrate a day of fasting and prayer and from the third houre which is our ninth houre dupatch the confessions and evidences of the sound worke of conversion of thirty hundred all baptized and added to the Church Capiat qui volet because this place is used to prove a Church-covenant I will here once for all deliver it out of our brethrens hands The Author of the Church-covenant saith There was hazard of excommunication John 9. 22. and persecution Acts 5. 3. and therefore the very profession of Christ in such periâ—â—us times was a sufficient note of discerning to such discerning spirits as the Apostles Answ. If you meane miraculous power of discerning in the Apostles that was not put forth in this company where were such hypocrites as Ananias and Saphira Secondly this miraculous discerning behoved to bee in all the three thousand for the satisfaction of their Consciences of the good estate spirituall of all of them And if it be miraculous as it must be if done in the space of sixe houres as it was done the same day that they heard Peter vers 41. then our brethren cannot alleadge it for ordinary inchurching of members as they doe Secondly if it be an ordinary spirit of discerning then at one act of profession are members to be received and so often meeting for the satisfaction of all their Consciences is not requisite Thirdly if profession for feare of persecution be an infallible signe then those who are chased out of England by Prelates and come to New England to seeke the Gospell in purity should be received to the Church whereas you hold them out of your societies many yeeres Fourthly suffering for a while for the truth is not much Iudas Alexander Demas did that for a while The Apologie and discourse of the Church-covenant saith These converts professed their glad receiving of the VVord vers 37 38. in saving themselves from that untoward generation else they had not beene admitted to baptisme But all this made them not members of the Church for they might havereturned notwithstanding of this to Pontus Asia Cappadocia c. but they continued stedfastly 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the doctrine of the Apostles Secondly they continued in fellowship this is Church-fellowship for we cannot say That it was exercise of Doctrine and Sacraments and confound this fellowship with doctrine no more then we can confound doctrine and sacraments which are distinguished in the Text and therefore it is a fellowship of holy Church-state and so noteth 1. A combination in Church-state 2. In gifts inward to edification and outward in reliefe of the poore by worldly goods Answ. 1. They could not continue stedfast in the Apostles doctrine and fellowship before they were added to the Church for stedfastnesse in Doctrine and saving themselves from the froward generation could not be but habituall holinesse not perfected in sixe houres Now that same day vers 41. in the which they gladly heard the VVord they were both baptized and added to the Church and therefore their stedfast continuing in Church-state can no wayes make them members in Church-state Secondly though they should have returned to Pontus and Asia c. they returned added to the Church Church-state is no prison-state to tie men to such a congregation locally as you make it Thirdly there is no word of a Church-covenant except when they were baptized they made it and that is no Church-covenant and that should not be omitted seeing it conduceth so much first to the being of the visible Church in the which we must serve God acceptably Secondly and is of such consequence to the end that the holy things of God be not prophaned as you say Thirdly that the Seales of the Covenant be not made signes of falshood Fourthly wee would not be stricter then God who received upon sixe houres profession three thousand to Church state Fifthly the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 fellowship is no fellowship of Church-order which made them members of the visible Church because the first day that they heard Peter they were added to the Church and being added they continued in this fellowship and in use of the Word Sacraments and Prayer as a reasonable soule is that which makes a man discourse and discoursing is not the cause of a reasonable soule Beza calleth it fellowship in Christian charity to the poore And the Syrian interpreter 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The Arablan interpreter saith the same The ancient Latine interpreter 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Fourthly if Baptisme bee the Seale of our entry into the Church as 1 Cor. 12. 13. as Circumcision was the Seale of the members of the Jewes visible Church then such a Covenant is not a formall reason of our Church-membership but the former is true as I shall prove hereafter Ergo so is the latter The Proposition standeth because all the baptized are members of the visible Church before they can sweare this Covenant even when they are Infants 5. Argu. This Church-covenant is either all one with the Covenant of grace or it is a Covenant divers from the Covenant of grace but neither wayes can it be the essentiall forme of a visible Church Ergo First the Covenant of grace cannot be the forme of a visible Church because then all baptized and all beleevess should be in Covenant with God as Church members of a visible Church which our brethren deny If it be a Covenant divers from it it must be of another nature and lay another obligatory tie then either the Covenant of workes
Church-covenant betwixt the Pastor and stranger for the Church covenant is prior to the comming of this stranger and hath already constituted the Church in its entyre essence and operations though no stranger come at all and though that stranger never covenant to obey the Pastor and the Pastor never covenant to take care of that stranger 4. Whereas it is said It is a part of the liberty wherewith Christ hath made us free that every one choose his own Pastor I see not the truth of this in Scripture The people hath power to choose but that is a part of Christian liberty in this sense I see not the Prophets and Apostles exercised pastorall acts over many who made not choise of their Ministery yea they preached to them against their will and Paul preached as a Pastor to many in Corinth against their will and a faithfull Pastor may preach to many who never made choise of him for their Pastor and to whom the word is the savour of death unto death and to whom he hath vengeance in readinesse 5. There is no liberty purchased to us by Christ but such as is regulated by Gods Word and found reason a liberty of sole will in embracing or refusing a Minister is licence not liberty now in Christ we are called to liberty not to licence and if some of a congregation wanting the spirit of discerning upon prejudice refuse a called pastor to be their pastor yet if the most part of the congregation elect him he is a pastor to all and to those who refused him as Christ doth reigne in the word and Ministery over hypocrites in a congregation who say in their hearts we will not have this man to reigne over us yet here is a Ministeriall charge which a pastor hath lawfully over such as are not willing to submit to that ministery the power of electing a pastor is not infallible what if they or most of them upon sole groundlesse prejudice refuse such a man to be their pastor is he not their pastor because all consent not are we to thinke that Christ purchased a liberty in his bloud of refusing a called pastor nor can we thinke these who taught the doctrine of the Nicolaitans in Pergamus and these who held the doctrine of Balaam or that the woman Jezebel which called her selfe a prophetesse in Thyatira and seduced the people of God to commit fornication and to eate things sacrificed to Idols were received in Pergamus and Thyatira by a Church covenant nor hath it colour of truth that the faithfull there were satisfied in conscience with the conversion of Iâ—zabel and such as held the doctrine of Balaam and that they consented and did choose the Angell of the congregation of Pergamus and Thyatira as our brethren speake for their pastor and yet the pastors and Church are rebuked for not executing the censures of the Church over the followers of Balaam Revel 2. 14 15. and upon Iezabel the false prophetesse Ergo they are not all such materialls of a visible Church as our brethren say even saints by calling and a Church doth well take the charge of those who never offered their professed subjection to Christs Ordinances we are not to thinke that these who called themselves Apostles and yet were Lyers were visible saints approved in the sight of God to the consciences of the Church of Ephesus and that such did offer their professed subjection to the Angell and Church of Ephesus as you teach yet that Church tooke care of them by the censures of the Church and are commended therefore Revel 2. 2. Thou canst not beare them that are evill and hast tryed them which say they are Apostles and hast found them liers If a false teacher shall come to a congregation and be a hearer for some yeares and at length fall to and teach pernitious Doctrine will not the Church censure him labour to stop his mouth yea and excommunicate him that the spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord I thinke they cannot but exercise some Church censures and that the pastors convincing of such a gaine-sayer and a stopping of his mouth is the very pastorall charge layd upon Titus by Paul Tit. 1. 10 11 12. as is most cleare v 13. Rebuke them sharply that they may be sound in the faith 6. That place Ro. 14. is not rightly expounded for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is not to receive into Church-state by way of covenant but it is as Pareus saith amâ—â—ter placide instituere patienter tolerare to instruct him patiently in the Christian liberty about meates and dayes and so Beza take him in and far lesse slee not his company Marlorat institute fovete donec proficiat and so Calvin e Castellio opitulemini helpe him and the word is Philem. 12. receive him as my bowells not unto Church-state for Philemon was no pastor Question 3. VVhether or not it be lawfull for one or many particular Churches to sweare a plate-forme and prescribed vocall covenant called the confession of Faith of such a Church It is a fit place having spoken so much of a Church covenant to speake of a covenant of the faith of a Church our Brethren being asked what meanes have you to preserve unity and verity Answ. 1. We have say they Scriptures 2. The pastors Epkâ— 4. 11. and Gods promise to leade them in all truth Ierem. 32. 39. Ier. 16. 13. But this is not a right Answer for when we inquire of the meanes to preserve verity and unity we aske for the externall meanes whereby the Scriptures are kept from false glosses it is true the Scriptures keepe themselves from false interpretation but the Question is by what externall meanes doe the Scriptures keepe themselves from false glosses The answer is not right the Scriptures keepe themselves from false glosseâ— by keeping themselves from false glosseâ— Also the Question is by what meanes doe pastors keep unity amongst themselves It is not right answered that pastors by pastors keepe â—nity amongst themselves But we think a plat-forme say â—ur Brethren ibid of doctrine and discipline or a confession of Faith or doctrine according to godlines may be made by any Church or person but say they â—â— plat-forme to be imposed on our selves or others as a binding Rule â—f faith and practise so that all men must believe and walke according to that plat-forme without adding altering or omitting we doubt whether such be lawfull or convenient Whence our brethren conâ—emne the swearing or subscribing by Oath of a confession â—mposed or stinted by the Church Let these considerations be weighed 1. Distinction There is a principall and originall and formall â—round of faith which is the Word of God in the Old or New Testament this is the onely persit and formall ground of Faith 2. There is a secondary and materiall ground of Faith which is so far â— ground of Faith and practise as it agreeth with the VVord â—f God 2.
presse this place Answ. In this Type many things are loose and doubtfull 1. We desire a warrant from the Word that the Temple was a Type of a visible Congregation and that all must be as really holy before they enter into a visible congregation as they behoved to be Typically holy who entered into the Temple of Jerusalem The Temple is a Type of Christs Body Iohn 2. and of the Church of the New Testament invisible which must consist of sanctified ones but how it is a Type of the visible Church we see not For the Lords spirituall building whereof the Corner-stone and the foundation is Christ is the Church invisible built by Faith as lively Stones upon Christ 1 Pet 2. 7. Unto you therefore which believe he is precious v. 5. yee also as living Stones are built up a spirituall House opposite to the disobedient v. 7. who stumble at the Word v. 8. 1 Cor. 3. 9. yee are Gods building Eph. 2. 20 21 22. Expressely the building are these who are built on the Doctrine of the Prophets and Apostles and grow up into an holy Temple in Christ and are the habitation of God through his Spirit This cannot agree to a visible Church the members whereof may be as our Brethren teach from Revel 2. Hypocrites who fall from their first love Yea also the laying on of stones on the bulding is not the act of inchurching or of union to a Church as it must be if the comparison prove the poynt but the joyning of the stones to the building is the union of these stones by Faith to Christ the chiefe corner stone as is expounded 1 Pet. 2. To whom comming as to a living stone v. 5. yee also as liveing stones are built c. Yea and Peter doth not build this comfortable Doctrine all upon the comforts of a Church-state in a single congregation for many of these to whom he writ were dispersed and persecuted through Pontus Asia and Cappadocia c. And might have and had an Union with Christ by Faith without a Church Union in a Parish 2. Though in this Type were signified a morall obligation that all before they be inchurched in a visible Congregation should be converted how is it proved that the Church should receive none to a visible Congregation till they bee converted for these are farre different All should be converted but there is no new Law commanding the Church to receive none into her fellowship but the converted 3. The hewers of stones or builders of the Temple must Typifie Pastors in Office dressing stones for the spirituall building our Brethren make them to Typifie private Christians out of Office and deny that any Pastors as Pastors doe fit and prepare stones to bee layd on the spirituall building Also none layd stones on that Temple save onely builders by Office but by our Brethrens Doctrine onely Pastors doe not convert Soules There were no Stones at all in the Temple of Jerusalem but choice and well squared stones are no members of the visible Church but the chosen of God 3. If the Porters typifie the Ministers of visible Churches first only Porters hold out the uncleane Ergo onely Pastors should hold out the scandalous but you admit the whole Church with equall authority to take in or refuse Church-members 2. If the Temple be a Type of the visible Church then no prophane person nor uncircumcised in heart should meet with the visible Church to heare the Word for hearing of the word prophanes the holy things of God This you cannot say for infidels may be as you say fellow-partners with the Church in hearing the word 3. Robinson holdeth that Abrahams seed and so all the Jewes were to separate themselves from the world that they might be a visible Church to God but we read not that the porters were to hold out any wicked person Yea Jer. 7. professedly they came to the Temple of the Lord who were theeves adulterers and wicked persons And so by that neither are the porters of the visible Churches of the New Testament to hold out unconverted persons because they are unconverted Lastly the place Revel 22. 15. For without are dogges c. is fouly abused when it is applied to the visible Church where there may be and ordinarily are dogges yea and liers Revel 2. 2. idolaters v. 14. Napper Pareus Marlorat expoundeth it of the Kingdome of glory for it is that Kingdome spoken of Rev. 21. 27. but within that Kingdome cannot enter any thing that defileth neither what soever worketh abomination or maketh a lie but they which are written in the Lambes booke of life But it is against all reason and the Lords Word that in the visible Church is nothing that defileth that is no sinne but onely those who are written in the Lambes book of life This is the very doctrine of Anabaptists though we know our deare brethren hate that Sect and their Doctrine Robinson The purest Church on Earth may consist of good and bad in Gods Eye but the question is about the true and naturall members whereof the Church is orderly gathered but as it were fond Philosophy in the discription of Wives and Children to make Rebellion a naturall property of a child and Whoredome of a Wife so it is as profane Divinity to make ungodly persons the true matter of the Church and prophanenesse a property of the same because many seeming Saints creepe in Answ. If the holiest Church visible on Earth consist of good and bad before God then to be partakers of the Divine nature Temples of the holy Ghost Saints by calling is not of the essence of a visible Church nor is it essentiall to make one a member of the visible Church that he be converted It is sufficient that he be a professor of the Faith And it is a poore comparison to say that prophannesse cannot be put in the description of a visible Church for in the essence of a visible Church as visible we neither include Holinesse nor Propanenesse but only a visible company professing the Faith of Christ and called by the Ministery of the Word whether they be Believers or Unbelievers it is all one neither of the two belongeth to the essence of a visible church a visible Church is saved in the number of fourty all being converted or in 40. being all unconverted so they be externally called by the Ministery of the Gospell and prosesse the same And it is as foolish to make holinesse the essence of a child as to make it of a visible Church and as vaine to make chastity the essence of a married Wife for this is not our philosophy but a conceit of Mr. Robinson falsely imputed to us Robinson All the Churches that ever the Lord planted consisted of good only as the Church of the Angells in Heaven and of mankind in Paradise God hath also these same ends in creating and restoring his Churches and if it were the Will of
neerely because as I sayd before the more universall the Church visible is the externall visible Communion is lâ—sse even as when the number of a Family is cut off by the Sword of the Magistrate the matter first and more intimately and more neerely concerneth the Family whereof hee is a Member yet it doth also concerne the Common-Wealth of which also hee is a Member A Finger of the right Hand is infected with a contagious Gangren it is to bee cut off yet the cutting-off concerneth more neerely the right Hand then it doth the left Hand and the whole Body For the contagion should first over-spread the right Hand and Arme and Shoulder before it infect the left Hand and the whole Body though it doe not a little concerne the whole Body also So though actuall Excommunication concerne all the Churches of the Presbyterie yet it doth more neerely concerne the Congregation whereof hee is a Member 2. The pronouncing of the sentence being edificative it is a fit meane to worke upon others but calling and trying of witnesses and Juridicall decerning of a Man to bee Excommunicated requiring secrecies yea and some scandals and circumstances of Adultery Incest Pestiality requiring a modest covering of them from Virgins young Men Children and the multitude wee have no warrant of GOD that they should bee tryed before the whole multitude nor are acts of Jurisdiction for their excellency to bee brought forth before the people but for their neerenesse of concernment and use of edification Object 12. The people are to consent yea they must have a power and some thing more than a consent in Excommunication Ergo they are all to bee present The antecedent is proved 1. Because they were not puffed up they did not keepe the Feast they did not dostaine from eating with the incestuous person onely by consent 2. Others not of that Church did excommunicate by consent 3. It is said v. 12 doe yee not judge them that are within Answ. If you will have them to excommunicate the same way that they doe other duties you may say they excommunicate the same way that Pastors and Elders doe and if they Judge vers 12. as the Elders doe either all the people are Judges and where are then all the governed if all bee governours or then hee speaketh in this Chapter to the Churches-Iudges onely 2. There bee degrees of consent these of other Churches have a tacite and remote consent the people of the Congregation are to heare and know the cause and deale in private with the offender and to mourne and pray for him Object 13. The highest and double honour is due to him who laboureth in the word 1 Tim. 5. 17. but if the Presbyteriall Church be the highest Church it shall not have the double honour for it is onely the governing Church Answ. Highest honour is due in suo genere to both And this is as if you should compare obedience and honour that I owe to my Father with that which I owe to my grand-Father 2. Paul 1 Tim. 5. 17. compareth Elders of diverse sorts together as the Ruling and Teaching Elder here you compare Pastors to bee honoured in respect of one act with themselves to bee honoured in respect of another act and this might prove I am to give more honour to my Pastor for preaching in the Pulpit then for ruling in the Church-Senate Object 14. The Congregation is the highest Church for it hath all the Ordinances Word Sacraments Jurisdiction Ergo there is not any Presbyteriall Church higher which hath only disciplinary power Answ. There is a double highnesse one of Christian Dignity 2. Another of Church-prehemenency or of Ecclesiasticall authority indeed the Congregation the former way is highest the company of Believers is the Spouse and ransomed Bride of Christ. But the Eldership hath the Ecclesiasticall eminency as the Kings heire and Sonne is above his Master and Teacher one way yet the Teacher as the Teacher by the fift Commandement is above the Kings Sonne as the Teacher is above him who is taught And so is the Case here Object 15. The Arguments for a Classicall or Presbyteriall Church do much side with Prelacy for you make many Lords ruling and not teaching Answ. Let all judge whether the independent power of three Elders accountable to none in a Church-way but to Iesus Christ onely as you make your little Kingdomes on Earth be neerer to the Popes Monarchy and especially when there is but one Pastor in the Congregation then the subordinate Government of fourescore or an hundred Eldersâ— sure I am three Neighbours are neerer to one Monarch then three hundred 2. One Monarchicall Society is as tyrannicall Antichristianism as one Monarchicall Pastor 3. If wee made many ruling and dominering Lords you should say something but wee make many servants endued onely with Ministeriall power onely to teach and rule and to bee accomptable to the Church your Eldership in this agreeth with the Pope that though they deliver many Soules to Satan yet no Man on Earth can in a Church-way say What doe you ACT. XV. A Patterne of a juridicall Synod THat the Apostles in that famous Synod Act. 15. did not goe on by the assistance of an immediately inspired spirit and by Apostolick authority but onely as Elders and the Doctors and Teachers assisted with an ordinary spirit to me is evident from the course of the context 1. Because Act. 15. when a controversie arise in the Church â—â— Antiochia Epiphanius saith as also Hieronymus by Câ—â—mbus and others touching the keeping of Moses his Law especially the Ceremonies except they would bee losers in the buâ—nesse of their salvation Paul could not goe as sent by Amiâ—h to submit that Doctrine which hee received not from flesh and blood but by the revelation of Jesus Christ Gal. 1. 12. to the determination of a Synod of Apostles and Elders for who would think that the immediatly inspiring spirit iâ— Pâ—ul would submit himselfe and his Doctrine to the immediately inspiring spirit in Paul Peter Apostles and Elders therefore Paul and Birnabas come as sent to Jerusalem not â—â— Apostles or as immediately inspired but as ordinary teachâ—â— Therefore saith Diodatus Not because these two A◠〈…〉 were every wayequall to the rest in the light and conduct 〈◊〉 Spirit and in Apostolicall authority Gal. 2. 6. 8. had any 〈◊〉 instruction or of confirmation but only to give the weake 〈◊〉 who had more confidence in Peter and James and in the Church at Jerusalem and to stop false doctors mouths and to estaâ—â—â—â— by common votes a generall order in the Church Hence when a controversie ariseth in the Apostolicke Church and the Controversie is betwixt an Apostle as Paul was and others and both sides alledge Scripture as here both did out of all controversie there is no reason that the Apostle Paul who was now a party should judge it and when a single Congregation in the like case is on two
Elders as well as the Apostles convened to consider about this matter and Act. 21. 18. 25. All the Elders of Jerusalem with James take on them these acts as well as the Apostles and they are the decrees of the Elders no lesse then of the Apostles Act. 16. â— 4. a derivation of the immediate impiâ—ing Spirit to â—â—â— Elders and by them as fellow-members of the Synod to the Apostles and a derivation of this immediat Apostolick spirit by the Apostles to the Elders to make them also infallible is unknowne to Scripture for one Prophet did not immediatly inspire another and one Apostle did not immediatly inspire another wee read not in the Word of any such thing and therefore it is said Act. 15. 7. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And when there had beene much disputing Peter sâ—â—d up All who interpret this place say even Papists not exâ—pted as Salmero com in 〈◊〉 Salmeron Lâ—â—mus â— Lorinus Cornelius a lapt Cornelius a lapide and others on the place that when there is not consultation and disputing on both sides to find out the truth but an absolute authoritie used by commanding the proceeding of the counceil is rash saith Salmeron now the Prophets were immediatly inspired without any consultation with men in delivering Gods will and they saw the visions of God as it is said And the Word of the Lord came to Jeremiah to Ezechiel to Hosea c. and bee said c. yea when a propheticall spirit came upon Baâ—â—m Num. 24. bee seeing the visions of God hee prophecied directly contrary to his owne carnall mind and to his consultation with Balâ—â—k now it is cleare that the Apostles what they spake by the breathings and inspirations of that immediatly inspiring Spirit is no lesse cannonick Scripture then the prophecies of the immediatly inspired Prophets who saw the visions of God and therefore 2 Pet. 1. 16 17 18 the voyce that the Apostles heard from heaven This is my beloved Sonnâ— in whom I am well pleased is made equall with the word of prophâ—cie and propheticall Scripture which the holy men of God spale â— they were moved by the holy Ghost v. 19 20 21. and 2 Pet. 3. 16. Pauls Epistles are put in the classe with other Scriptures v. 15 16. now all Scripture 2 Tim. 3. 16. is given by divine inspiration and 2 Peter 3. 2. puteth the words of the Prophets and Apostles in the same place of divine authority 2 Pet. 3. 2. That yee bee mindfull of the words which were spoken before by the holy Prophets and of the commandements of us the Apostles of the Lord and Saviour whence to mee this synodicall consultation is not Apostolicall but such as is obligatory of the Churches to the end of the world and a patterne of a generall Synod 6. This assembly is led by the holy Spirit as is cleare v. 25. 28. but this is not the holy Spirit immediatly inspiring the Apostles as Apostles but that ordinary Synodicall spirit to borrow that expression that is promised to all the faithfull pastors and rulers of the Church to the end of the world because the immediatly inspiring spirit comming on Prophets and Apostles in an immediate inspiration did necessitate the Prophets and Apostles to acquiesce and prophesie and to doe and speake whatsoever this spirit inspired them to doe and to speake but this spirit spoken of v. 28. doth not so but leaveth the assembly to a greater libertie because the assembly doth not acquiesce to that which Peter saith from Gods Word v. 7 8 9 10 11. nor doth the Assembly acquiesce to what Barnabas and Paul saith v. 12. but onely to that which James saith v. 13 14 15 16 17 18. but especially to his conclusion which hee draweth from the Law of nature not to give scandall and from the Scriptures cited by himselfe and by Peter v. 19 20. Wherefore my sentence is saith James c. and this clearely is the sentence of James as a member of the Synod v. 19. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which is an expression clearly insinuating that the judgement of James though it was not contrary to that which Peter Paul and Barnabas had spoken yet that is was somewhat diverse from them and more particular and the very mind of the holy Ghost which the whole Synod followed and therefore though Peter and Paul spake truth yet did they not speake that truth which did compose the controversie and this is to mee an argument that they all spake as members of the Synod and not as Apostles 7. The immediatly inspired Apostolick Spirit though it may discourse and inferre a conclusion from such and such premisses as Paul doth Rom. 3. 28. and hee proveth from the Scripture Rom. 4. 4. 5. 6. that wee are justified by saith without workes and 1 Tim. 5. 17. 18. and Act. 9. 22. Act. 24. 14. 17. and so doth Christ reason and argument from Scripture Matth. 22. 31. Luk. 24. 25 26 27. and so have both the Prophets and Apostles argued yet the immediatly inspired Spirit of God in arguing doth not take helpe by disputing one with another and yet doth not obtaine the conclusion in hand but here Peâ—â—â— and Paul argue from Scripture and they prove indeed a true conclusion that the Gentiles should not keepe Moses his Law as they would bee saved yet they did not remove the question nor satisfic the consciences of the Churches in their present practise for if James had not said more then the Churches had not beene sufficiently directed in their practise by the Synod and for all that Peter and Paul said the Churches might have eaâ—â—n meates offered to Idols and blood and things strangled which at that time had been a sin against the Law of nature and a great stumbling block and a scandalizing of the Jewes Except therefore wee say that the Apostles intending as Apostles to determine a controversie in the Church they did not determine it which is an injury to that immediatly inspiring spirit that led the Apostles in penning Scripture wee must say that Peter Paul and James here spake as members of an eccleâ—iasticall Synod for the Churches after-imitation 8. If the Apostles here as Apostles give out this decree then it would seeme that as Apostles by virtue of the immediatly inspiring spirit they sent messengers to the Churches for one spirit directeth all and by this Text wee should have no warrant from the Apostles practise to send messengers to satisfie the consciences of the Churches when they should bee troubled with such questions now all our Divines and reason doth evince that a Synod may by this Text send messengers to resolve doubting Churches in points dogmaticall for what the Apostles doe as Apostles by that power by which they writ canonick Scripture in that wee have no warrant to imitate them 9. I propounded another argument before which prevaileth much with mee The Elders of an ordinary Presbytery and Churches such as conveened at this Synod cannot be
collaterall actors with the immediatly inspired Apostles for the penning of Canonick Scripture but in this Synod not onely Elders but the whole Church as our reverend brethren teach were actors in penning this decre Act. 15. 28. Ergo this decree is Synodicall not Apostolick I have heard some of our reverend brethren say all were not actors in the decree pari gradu authoritatis with a like degree and equall authoritie every one according to their place did concurre in forming this decree I answer it cannot bee said that all in their owne degree saw the visions of God and all in their owne degree were immediatly inspired to bee penmen of Canonick Scripture for Paul in penning this The cloake that I left at Troas bring with thee and the Parchmenâ—s was no lesse immediatly inspired of God then were the Prophets who saw the visions of God and then when hee penned the 1 Tim. 1. 15. That Jesus Christ came into the world to sâ—â—â— sinners except wee flee to a Popish distinction which Duvallius and Jesuits hold that all and every part tota Scriptura and totum Scripturae is not given by divine inspiration because say they the Apostles spake and wrote some things in the New Testament as immediatly inspired by God as did the Prophets but they spake and wrote other things 〈◊〉 necessary with an inferiour and Apostolick or Synodicaâ—â— spirit which the Peâ—e and Church may decree in Synods to â—ee received with the like faith and subjection of conscience as if the Apostles had written them 2. You must say there was two holy 〈◊〉 the penning of the decree one immediatly inspiring the Apostles another inferior assisting the Elders or at 〈◊〉 diverse and most different acts of that same hoâ—y 〈…〉 way inspiring the Apostles and in a fallible way inspiring the Elders But with your leave Act. 21. 24. The ordinary Iâ—esâ—ytery at Ierusalem by that same Synodicall spirit by which they orâ—aine Paul to purifie himselfe doe ascribe to themselves this decree v. 25. 3. Wee deâ—ire a warrant from Gods Word of commixion of immediatly inspired Apostles as immediatly inspired with Elders assisted with an ordinary spirit for the pâ—â—ning of Scripture 10. Wee thinke the Presbytery of Jerusalem as an ordinary Presbytery Act. 21. 18. and contradivided from the Church of Jrusalem v. 22. The multitude must needs come together for they heare that thou art come did ordaine Paul to purifie himselfe and it is cleare Paul otherwise would not have purified himselfe and therefore hee did not by the immediatly inspired spirit purifie himselfe and obey their decree which was grounded upon the Law of nature not to scandalize weake beleevers v. â—0 21. and bt this same holy spirit did Paul with other of the Apostles write this decree as is cleare v. 25. 11. If the Apostles did all in this Synod as immediatly inspired by God then should the Synod have followed the determination of any one Apostle of Peter and Paul as well as of 〈◊〉 for the immediatly inspiring spirit is alike perfect in all â—â—s determinations but it is said expresly v. 22. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. Then it seemed good to the Apostles c. and so to 〈◊〉 and Peter and Paul to follow the sentence of James 〈◊〉 the rest of the Apostles now if James spake as an immediately inspired Apostle and not by vertue of that Synodicall Spirit given to all faithfull Pastors conveened in a lawfull Synod then should James have acquiesced to what Peter and Paul aid and not to what hee said himselfe and Peter should have acquiesced to what hee said and Paul to what hee said â—â— every inspired writer is to obey what the immediatly inspiring Spirit saith and then there was no reason why the Synod should rather acquiesce to what Peter and Paul said who spake of no abstinence from blood and things strangled then to what James said Ergo by the Apostles consequence v. 24. we gave â—â— such commandement that you must bee circumcised Ergo you should not bee circumcised so this consequence is good Peter and Paul speaking as Apostles gave no commandement in this Synod to abtaine from blood Ergo by the like consequence the Synod was not to command nâ— abstinence from blood which consequence is absurd Ergo they command not here as Apostles 2. The Synod should have been left in the midst to doubt whether shall wee follow Paul and Peter who speake and command nâ— abstinence from blood and things strangled oâ— shall wee follow James who commandeth to abstaine from blood and things 〈◊〉 for all here command as immediatly inspired Apostles and what the Apostles judge lawfull and command as Apostles that must the Churches follow and what they command not that by an immediatly inspiring Spirit they command not as is cleare v. 24. and that also must the Churches not follow therefore I thinke we must say they did not here speak as Apostles 12. These words v. 24. Some who pervert your soules say you must bee circumcised and keep the Law to whom wee gave no such commandement doe clearely hold forth what the Apostles as Apostles command in Gods worship that the Churches must doe what the Apostles as Apostles command not in Gods worship that the Churches must not doe whence they teach 1. That an Apostolicke commandement of any one Apostle without any Synod might have determined the question to what use then doth a Synod conduce Ergo certainly either the Synod was convened for no use which is contrary to Gods Word Act. 25. 2. 6. Act. 16. 4. 5. it served to resolve the controversie and edifie the Churches Act. 16. 4. They delivered them the decrees c. 5. And so the Churches were established in the saith and increased in number daily or then the Synodicall commandement and so the Synodicall spirit spoken of v. 28. must bee some other thing then the Apostolicall commandement and the immediatly inspiring spirit 2. The Apostles gave no positive commandement to keep Moses his Law as Apostles nay nor to keepe any part of it they did not as Apostles forbid before this Synod that the Gentiles should abstaine from blood and things strangled which were Mosaicall Lawes before this Synod yet now they give a commandement to keepe some Mosaicall Lawes in the case of scandall hence wee must either judge that now as Apostles they command in positive commandements the keeping of Moses his Law contrary to what they say for their not commanding to keepe Moses his Law is a commanding not to keepe it observe this or then their commandement here is but synodicall and so far binding as the case of scandall standeth in vigor which certainly a Synod may command and one Church may injoyne by way of counsell to another for otherwise as Apostles forbidding scandall which is spirituall homicide they forbid also eating of blood in that case when it stood indifferent 3. The Apostles saying To whom wee gave no such commandement they
Elders â— Presbyters and by the same reason the Elders concurre by way of obedience to the Apostles for as the Elders as Elders and above the fraternitie so the Apostles as Apostles are above the Elders but then I much wonder how the acts are called the decrees of the Apostles and Elders joyntly Act. 16. 4. and how the Elders of Ierusalem doe ascribe those decrees to themselves Act. 21. 25. and how all the assembly speake as assisted by the holy Ghost Act. 15. 28. Shall wee distinguish where the Scripture doth not onely not distinguish but doth clearly hold forth qualitie and an identitie But some object that the holy Ghost v. 28. is the immediatly instiring Apostolick Spiritâ— and so the Apostles must here concurre in giving out those decrees as Apostles not as ordinary Elders 1. Is Peter and Paul alledge Scripture and testimonies of Gods Spirit in this Syned as Elders not as Apostles then they reason in the Synod as falliâ—â— men and men who may erre but that is impossible for if they 〈◊〉 Scripture as men who may erre the Scripture which they alâ—â—dge 〈◊〉 be fallible Answ. Though the Apostles here reason as Elders not as Apâ—stâ—â—s I see no inconvenience to say they were men who might â—re though as led with the holy Ghost they could not erre in this Syned following the conduct of the holy Ghost as is said â— 28. though the holy Ghost there bee onely the ordinary holy Ghost given to all the Pastors of Christ assembled in Gods name and the authoritie of Iesus Christ yet in this Act and as led by this Spirit they were not fallible neither men who could erre for I see not how ordinary beleevers as led in such and such Acts by the holy Ghost and under that reduplication can erre for they erre as men in whom there is flesh and a body of corruption and therefore though both Apostles and Elders modaliter might erre as Logick saith Apostaâ—â—s err are est possible yet de facto in this they could not erre being led by the holy Ghost v. 28. and the necessitie of their not erring is not absolute but necessary by consequent because the Spirit of God led them as v. 28. But the reason is must weake if they might erre Ergo the Scripture they alledge might bee fallible for though hereticks alledge Scripture and abuse it and make it to bee no Scripture but their owne fancie while as they alledge it to establish blasphemous conclusions yet doth it no way follow that Scripture can bee fallible or obnoxious to error but onely that abused and aâ—â— applved Scripture is not Scripture Object 2. If ever the Apostles were led by an infallible spirit 〈◊〉 to bee in a matter like this which so much concerned the 〈◊〉 and consciences of all the Christian Churches amongst the Gen 〈◊〉 Eâ—go in this Synod they could not bee led by a fallible spirit but â—â— an infallible and so by an Apostolick Spirit Answ. I conceive the spirit which led both Apostles and Elders in this Synod was an infallible Spirit but Ergo an immediatly inspiring and Apostolick Spirit it followeth not yea the holy Ghost of which Luke doth speake v. 28. as the president and leader of this first mould of all Synods and so the most perfect Synod is never fallible no not in the meanest beleever and it were blasphemy to say the holy Ghost in any can bee obnoxious to errour and I thinke de facto neither Apostles nor Elders could erre in this Synod because de factâ— they followed the conduct of the holy Ghost without any byas in judgement but it followeth not 1. that the men could not erre because the holy Ghost leading the men could not erre as wee answer Papists who produce this same argument to prove that generall councells and so the Church must be infallible 2. It followeth not Ergo this holy Ghost was that immediatly inspiring and Apostolick Spirit leading both Apostles and Elders which is the question now in hand Object 3. This is a patterne of all lawfull Synods then may all lawfull Synods say It seemed good to the holy Ghost and to us if therefore the men might erre the leader to wit the holy Ghost might erre which is absurd Answ. It followeth onely that all lawfull Synods should so proceed as they may say It seemed good to the holy Ghost and to us and there is a wide difference betwixt Law and Fact all are lawfull Synods conveened in the name and authoritie of Christ and so by warrant of the holy Ghost speaking in his Word but it followeth not as Papists inferre and this argument proveth that therefore all which de facto those lawfully assembled Synods doe and conclude that they are the doings and conclusions of the holy Ghost and that in them all they may say It seemed good to the holy Ghost and to us 2. The consequence is false and blasphemous that if all lawfully conveened Synods may not say It seemed good to the holy Ghost and us that therefore the holy Ghost is fallible and may erre but onely that men in the Synod following their owne Ghost and spirit can say no more but it seemed good to our Ghost and spirit and cannot say it seemed good to the holy Ghost and to us for an ordinary Pastor lawfully called and preaching sound doctrine in the power and assistance of Gods spirit doth speake in that act from the holy Ghost and yet because in other acts wherein with Nathan and Samuel hee may speake with his owne spirit see with his owne eyes and light it followeth not that he is infallible or that the holy Ghost is infallible Object 4 Is the Apostles did not conclude in this Synod what they 〈…〉 an Ap sâ—a â—â—k spirit it shall follow that the holy Ghost 〈…〉 15. 28. is not that same holy Ghost of which Peter 〈◊〉 2 Pet. 1. 21. But holy men of God spake as they were moved 〈◊〉 Ghost and if so that holy Ghost which spake in the Pro 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 not also speake in the Apostles Answ. I see no necessitie of two holy Ghosts 1 Cor. 12. 4. Now 〈◊〉 â—â—â—â—ersities of gifts but the same Spirit there be divers acts of the same holy Ghost and I willingly contend that the Synodicall acts of Apostles and Elders in this Synod though comming from the holy Ghost assisting them as Elders in an ordinary Synod v. 28. are different from the acts of that same holy Ghost as immediatly inspiring the Prophets and Apostles in prophecying and penning canonick Scripture and yet there bee not two holy Ghosts for Paul did not beleeve in Christ by that same spirit which immediatly inspired him and the rest of the Apostles and Prophets to write canonick Scripture â— meane it is not the same operation of the Spirit because Paul by the holy Ghost given to all the faithfull as Christians and not given to them as canonicall writers or as Apostles or immediatly inspired
Prophets doth beleeve in Christ love Christ contend for the prise of the high calling of God as is cleare Rom. â— 37 38 39. 1 Cor. 2. 12. 16. Phil. 3. 13. 14. 1 Cor. 9. 25. Yea Paul beleeveth not in Christ as an Apostle but as a Christian and yet hee beleeveth by the grace of the holy Ghost but â—â— followeth not that the same spirit which immediatly inspired the Prophets doth not immediatly inspire Paul as an Apostle and all the rest of the Apostles Object 5. These decrees Act. 16. 4. are called the decrees of the Apostles and Elders but if the Apostles in giving out these decrees gave 〈◊〉 as ordinary Elders not as Apostles then the sense of the words Act. 16. 4. should bee that they were the decrees of the Elders and of the Elders which is absued Answ. It followeth onely that they are the decrees of the Apostles who in that give them out as Elders and as a part of the ordinary established Elders of Jerusalem Whence if Christ promise the holy Spirit to lead his Apostles in all truth hee promiseth also the holy Spirit to all their successors Pastors Teachers and Elders not onely conveened in a Congregationall-Church but also in a Synod as hee maketh good his promise here Act. 15. 28. and whereas the holy Ghost commandeth in a Synod of Apostles and Elders who are lawfully conveened by our brethrens confession and speaketh authoritatively Gods Word by the holy Ghost Act. 15. 28. they cannot speake it as a counsell and brotherly advise onely for that a brother may doe to another a woman to a woman Abigail to David a maide to Naaman wee desire a warrant from Gods Word where an instituted societie of Pastors and Elders conveened from sundry Churches and in that Court formally consociated and decreeing by the holy Ghost as Act. 15. 28. against such and such heresies shall bee no other then a counsell and advise and no Church-commandement nor binding decree backed with this power Hee that despiseth you speaking by the holy Ghost the Word of God despiseth mee and whether doctrines or canons concerning doctrine comming from a lawfull Court conveened in Christs name have no ecclesiasticall power of spirituall jurisdiction to get obedience to their lawfull decrees for if every one of the suffrages of Elders bee but a private counsell having onely authoritie objective from the intrinsecall lawfulnesse of the thing and no authoritie officiall from the Pastors because Pastors then the whole conclusion of the Synod shall amount to no higher rate and summe then to a meere advise and counsell If it bee said that when they are all united in a Synod and speaking as assembled Act. 15. 25. and speaking thus Assembled by the holy Ghost v. 28. the authoritie is more then a counsell yet not a power of Church-jurisdiction Then 1. give us a warrant in Gods Word for this distinction 2. Wee aske whether this authoritie being contemned the persons or Churches contemnibg it bee under any Church-censure or not if they bee under a Church-censure what is this but that the Synod hath power of censure and so power of jurisdiction if you say non-communion is a sufficient censure But I pray you spare mee to examine this 1. If the sentence of non-Communion bee a sentence of 〈◊〉 it must proceed from a judicature that hath a 〈◊〉 of jurisdiction but give mee leave to say as all Church 〈◊〉 have and must have warrant in Gods Word so must 〈◊〉 such as non-communion for the ordinary Church punishments such as publike rebuâ—ing have warrant in the Word as in 1 Tim. 5. 20. and excommunication 1 Cor. 5. 4. 〈◊〉 1â— and the great Anathema Maranatha 1 Cor. 16. 22. and forbearing to eate and drinke with scandalous persons 1 Cor. 5. 10 11. withdrawing from his company 2 Thâ—s 3. 14. and I pray you where hath the Word taught us of such a bastard 〈◊〉 ensure or if you will not allow it that name a censure indicted by the Church or Churches as is non-communion May our brethren without Christs warrant shape any punishment equivalent to excommunication without Gods Word 〈◊〉 they may as well without the Word mould us such a censure as excommunication if they say separation warrenth this censure of non-communion But 2. By what Law of God can an equall give out a sentence of non-communion a 〈◊〉 an equall an equall cannot as an equall punish when a Christian denieth followship to another because hee is excommunicated hee doth not punish as an equall for the punisher in this case denying fellowship to the excommunicated doth 〈◊〉 an equall but as having authoritie from the Church who hath given this commandement in the very sentence of communication 1 Cor. 5. 4. compared with v. 10 11. Separation under a great controversie and denyed in many cases â—â— the way of those who are more rigid therein even by our 〈◊〉 2. Christ Matth. 18. 15 16. will not have any brother who 〈◊〉 but private authoritie and no Church-authoritie over a broâ—â—â—◠〈…〉 non habet potestatem to presently renounce 〈◊〉 give up all communion with his brother though hee bee 〈◊〉 before two or three witnesses and inflict on him the sentence of non-communion while hee first tell the Church and non-communion is inflicted on no man as if hee were a heathen 〈◊〉 to speak no thing of delivering to Satan while hee â—â— conveened and judicially sentenced before the Church 〈◊〉 our brethrens sentence of non-communion is in inflicted by an equall Church upon a â—â—ster Church in a meere pâ—â—â—â— way and by no Church-proces 4. Non-communion if it bee warranted by the law of â—â—ture as communion of equalls is yet should wee not bee refused of the like favour when wee plead that the Law of nature pleadeth for combination and communion of joynt authorities of sâ—sâ—er-Churches in one presbytery for if non-communion of Churches bee of the law of nature so must communion of Churches and authoritative communion and authoritative and judiciall non-communion by natures law must be as warrantable upon the same grounds They 6. Object â— the Apostles were in this Synod as ordinary Elders thâ—n The Synod might have censured and in case of obsâ—inacie excommunicated the Apostles which were admirable Answ. For reâ—ukeing of Apostles wee have against Papists a memorable warrant in Paul Gal. 2. withstanding Peter to â—ce face and Peter his giving an account Act. 11 1 2 3. to the Church of Jerusalem of his going in to the Gentiles which Parker acknowledgeth against Papists and Prelats to bee a note of Peters subjection to the Church Papists say it was Peters humilitie other Papists say Peter gave but such a brotherly account to the Church such as one brother is oblieged to give to another also all our Divines and those Papists who contend that the Pope is inferiour to universall councels doc with good warrant alledge that by Matth. 18. Peter is subjected to the Church-censures if hee sinn against
principally seated in the Presbytery in regard of the latter Synods are the first subject of the occasionall Church-power in things which â—e in common belong to many Presbyteries or to a nationall Church But to returne if the Synodicall power bee different in essence and nature and not gradually onely from the counsell and advise of Christians then first it is not a determination that bindeth by way of counsell and brotherly advise onely but under some higher consideration which is as like a Church-relation of Church-power as any thing can bee seeing here bee Pastors acting as Pastors 2. formally gathered in a councell 3. speaking Gods Word 4. by the holy Ghost But this shall bee against the Church-government of New England 2. If it bee essentially different from an advise and councell and warranted by divine institution why doe not our brethen give us Scripture for it for if they give us Act. 15. then can they not say that the Apostles in this Synod did determine and voyce as Apostles by an Apostolick and immediatly inspiring Spirit for the spirit Synodicall is a spirit imitable and a rule of pertually induring moralitie in all Synods and must leade us for an Apostolick spirit is not now in the world 3. As they require a positive divine institution for the frame of a Presbyteriall Church in power above a Congregation and will not bee satisfied with the light of nature which upon the supposall of a spirituall government instituted by Christ in a Congregation which is a part may clearely by the hand lead us to the inlarging of that same spirituall government in the whole that is to a number of consociated Churches which are all interessed as one common societie in a common government so they must make out for their Synod endued with dogmaticall power a positive divine institution 4. We desire a warrant from the Word why a colledge of Pastors determining by the Word of God as Pastors having power of order and acting in a colledge according to that power should not bee a formall and ordinary great Presbytery 5. How can they by our brethrens determination exercise such pastorall acts out of their owne Congregations towards those Churches to which they have no pastorall relation virtute potestatis ordinis 6. How can the wisedome of Christ who provideth that his servants bee not despised but that despisers in a Church way should bee censured 1 Tim. 1. 19 20. cloth his messengers in a Synod with a power dogmaticall and deny all power of iâ—â—â—diction to them upon the supposall that their determinations be rejected I feare there bee something under this that none are to bee censured or delivered to Satan for heterodox opinions except they erre in points fundamentall But farther it may bee made good that a power dogmaticall is not different in nature from a power of jurisdiction for we read not of any societie that hath power to meet to make Lawes and decrees which have not power also to backe their decrees with punishments if the Jewish Synedry might meet to declare judicially what was Gods Law in point of conscience and what not and to tie men to it they had power to conveene and make Lawes farre more may they punish contraveners of the Law for a nomothetick power in a societie which is the greater power and is in the fountaine must presuppose in the societie the lesse power which is to punish and the power of punishing is in the inferior judicature so a nomothetick power ministeriall cannot want a power of censuring It is true a single Pastor may ministerially give out commandements in the authoritie of Christ but hee cannot his alone censure or excommunicate the contraveners of those commandements but it followeth well in an assembly hee hath power to censure and excommunicate now here Pastors and Elders are in an assembly It is objected Pastors in a Synod have no jurisdiction as Pasters for what they doe as Pastors that they may doe there alone and on of a Synod but they doe not nor cannot determine and give out Canons there alone and they cannot there alone determine juridically therefore they doe not wholly and poorely as Pastors in relation to those Churches give out these decrees yet doe they not give out the decrees as privite men wholly but in some pastor all relation for Pastors as Pastors have something peculiar to them in all Churches whither they come to preach so as a speciall blessing followeth on their labours though they be not Pastors in relation to all the Churches they come to even as a Sermon on the Lords day is instamped with a more speciall blessing bâ—â—â—use of Gods institution imprinted on the day then a Sermon preached in another day Answ. This argument is much for us it is proper to acts of jurisdiction ecclesiasticall that they cannot bee exercised by one onely but must bee exercised by a societie now a Pastor as a Pastor his alone without any collaterally joyned with him exerciseth his pastorall acts of preaching and of administrating the Sacraments but those who give out those decrees cannot give them out Synodically but in a Synod and Court-wayes as forensicall decrees and so in a juridicall way and because Pastors whither so ever they come doe remaine Pastors 1. The Apostles are not in this Synod as Apostles Secondly nor yet as gifted Christians to give their counsell and advise nor thirdly as this answerer granteth meerely as Pastors then it must follow that fourthly they are here as such pastors conveened Synodically by divine institution and that this is the patterne of a Synod Object 2. But there is no censuring of persons for scandalls in this meeting because there is nothing here but a doctrinall declaration of the falsehood of their opinion who taught a necessitie of circumcision and that all is done by way of doctrine and by power of the Keyes of knowledge not of jurisdiction is cleare from the end of this meeting Act. 5. 2. Paul and Barnabas were sent from the Church of Antiocâ— unto Jerusalem unto the Apostles and Elders 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 concerning this question and v. 6. the Apostles and Elders came together to consider 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of this matter consideration of questions being the end of the Synod is a thing belonging to doctrinal power meerely so Mr. Mather Answ. 1. It is false that there is no censuring of persons here for to say nothing that Peter accuseth those of the wrong side as personally present at the Synod either being summoned or comming thither by appeale v. 10. Now therefore why tempt ye God to put a yoake upon the necke of the Discip'es c. which reproofe comming from one man onely cannot be called a Synodicall reproofe It is more then evident that the publick Synodicall censure of rebuke is put upon those who held and urged the necessitie of circumcision and why not excommunication also in case of obstinacy for the Synodicall censure
principles for sometime they say the Apostles gave out this decree as Apostles and sometime there is nothing here done by a meere doctrinall power such as Paul had over Peter or one single Pastor hath over another now it is sure that Paul had no Apostolick power over Peter and that one Pastor have not Apostolick power over another 2. When our brethren say here that the Apostles as Apostles by an infallible spirit gave out this Decree they doe in this helpe the Papists as Bellarmine Becanus Grâ—â—rut and in particular the Jesuit Lorinus who saith decrâ—um authenticum cujus inspirator spiritus sanctâ— and so saith Cornelius a lapide visiâ—m est nob is inspiratis decretis a Spiritu sanctus therefore saith hee the councell cannot erre and so Salmeron and Cajetan say and expresly Stapleton saith this Apostosack definition flowed from the instinct of the holy Ghost observandum saith Stapleton quanta habenda sit ecclesiae definienth authoritâ—s hence our brether here must yeeld either that all Synods are infallible as Papists say this Synod the patterne of all Synods being concluded by an Apostolick spirit could not erre and so neither can councells erre or they must with Socinians and Arminians say there is no warrant for Synods here at all And certainly though wee judge our brethren as farre from Popery and Socinianisme as they thinke wee detest Anti-Christian Presbytery yet if this Synod bee concluded by an Apostolick spirit it is no warrant to bee imitated by the Churches and wee have no ground hence for lawfull Synods Whittakerus Calvin Beza Luther and all our Divines do all alledge this place as a pregnant ground not of Apostolick but of ordinary and constant Synods to the end of the world and Diodatus good to the holy Ghost because they did treat of ecclesiasticall reders concerning the quietnes and order of the Church wherein ecclesiasticall authoritie hath place the Assembly used this tearme it seemed good to us which is not used neither in articles of faith nor in the commandements which meerely concerned the conscience and to shew that authoritie was with holy reason and wisedome there is added and to the holy Ghost who guided the Apostles in these outward things also 1. Cer. 7. 25. 40. 2. If our brethren meane that the Elders and brethren were in this Apostolick and immediatly inspired Synodicall determination not as collaterall penners of Scriptures joyned with the Apostles but onely as consenters and as consenters by power of an ordinary holy Ghost working consent in them more suo according to their capacitie as ordinary Elders 1. They yet more helpe the Papists because they must say onely Apostles and so onely their successors the Prelates had definitive voices in this Synod the Presbyters and Brethren did no more then Papists and Prelates say Presbyters did in generall councells of old and therefore the Presbyter is to subscribe Ego A. N. Presbyter consentiens subseribo whereas the Prelate subscribed say they Ego A. B. Episcopus definiens subscribo wee crave a warrant in Gods Word to make an Apostle or a Prelate a Synodicall definer having a definitive voyce and the Elder Brother or Presbyter to have a consultative voyce for here all the multitude if there was a multitude present doe make Synodicall decrees by consulting and consenting yea all the nation may come to a nationall Synod and both reason dispute and consent because matters of doctrine and government of the Church concerneth all therefore all have an interest of presence and all have an interest of reasoning and 3. by consequent all have an interest of consenting yea of protesting on the contrary if the Synod determine any thing against the Word of God If they say there is a threeford consent in this Synod 1. an Apostolicall 2. a second Synodicall agreeing to Elders as Elders and a third that of the people or a popular What a mixt Synod shall this be but 1. then as the Epistle to the Tlxssalonians is called the Epistle of Paul not the Epistle of Silvanus and Timotheus though Silvanus and Timotheus did consent so these dogmata or decrees should not be called the decrees of the Apostles and Elders as they are called Act. 16. 4. Act. 15. 6. Act. 21. 25. but onely the decrees of the Apostles seeing the Elders did onely consent and had no definitive influence in making the decree by this doctrine as Silvanus and Timotheus were not joynt pen-men of Scripture with Paul 3. When as it is said the specification of actions must not bee taken from the efficient cause but from the formall object and all that a done in this Synod might have beene done by a single Pastor I answer wee doe not fetch the specification of this rebuke and of these decrees from the efficient causes but from the formall object for an Apostle might his alone have rebuked these obtruders of circumcision and made this decree materialiter for Paul did more his alone then this when hee wrote the Eâ—istle to the Romans but yet one Pastor could not have Synodically rebuked and given out a decree formally Synodicall laying an Ecclesiasticall tie on moe Churches then one there is great ods to doe one and the same action formally and to doe the same action materially and I beleeve though actions have not by good logick their totall specification from their efficient cause yet that ordinances of God as lawfull have their specification from the efficient causes in part our brethren cannot deny For what made the difference betwixt Aaron his fire offered to the Lord and Nadab and Abihu their strange and unlawfull fire that they offered to the Lord but that the on fire had God for its author the other had men and the like I say of Gods feasts and the feasts devised by Jeroboam else if a woman preach and administrate the Lords Supper in the Church that preaching and sacrament administrated by her should not have a different specification and essence if wee speake morally or Theologically from that same very preaching and celebration of the Supper performed in the Church by a lawfull Pastor it is as I conceive of the essence of an action Synodicall I say not its totall essence that it cannot bee performed by one in a Church-way and with an ecclesiasticall tie but it must be performed by many else it is not a Synodicall action and it is true that Paul Rom. 14. and 1 Cor. 8. 10. hath in substance the same Canon forbidding scandall which is forbidden in this Canon prohibiting eating of meats offered to Idolls and blood in the case of scandall but I pray you is there not difference betwixt the one prohibition and the other yea there is for Rom. 14. 1 Cor. 8. 10. it hath undenyably Apostolick authoritie here it hath onely Synodicall 2. There it is a commandement of God here it is a Canon of the Church 3. There it commeth from one man here from a
nor being a witnesse of the life death and resurrection of Christ then the authoritie of James and Peter who werâ— eye-witnesses of Christs life doctrine and sufferings and saw him visibly ascend to heaven and the believers doubted if hee was an Apostle and the Synod was convened to have theresolution of the Apostles and so it was meerely Apostolicall Ans. Though I grant there beesome truth in this that Pauls Apostolick calling was now more question 〈◊〉 then the rest of the Apostles and I easily yeeld that these who disputed with him could not rest upon his authority yet I deny that hence wee can inferre no Synod for if the Apostles had convened in Synod to satisfie those who doubted of Pauls authoritie as an Apostle then they would have reterred the matter to James and Peter who to these beleevers were undoubtedly the Apostles of the Lord but if the Apostles had had no intent but to end the controversie in a mere Apostolick way and not intended a Synodicall and an â—clesiasticall and perpetuall remedy in such cases of controversies in particular Churches I shall not beleeve that the Apostles when they were to determine by a superior an Apostolick and infallible light they would have joyned with them the Elders as Act. 15. 16. to consider of the question and that the Church of Auâ—ioch doubting if Paul was an Apostle would have decreed to seeke a resolution from Elders and that in an Apostolick way for they sent to the Elders at Jerusalem for a resolution as well as to the Apostles Act. 15. 2. and judge yee if the Apostles being to determine infallibly as Apostles would joyne the falliblo and inferiour light of Elders v. 6. and Brethren v. 22. if tlloy had not had a mind to determine the question in a Synodicall way Object 9. But it is not cleare that in this act they either censure persons or doe any thing in order to Church-censure but onely exercise a naked doctrinall power Answ. A doctrinall power was in a higher measure in the Apostles then in all the Elders of the world who were all but fallible men and James and Peter to these beleevers who moved the question were undenyably Apostles and what doctrinall power could they seeke in the Elders to whose determination by intention both of Antioch ch 15. 2. and by the Apostles intention v. 6. the question is referred as well as to the Apostles if the matter was not to bee ended by a formall Synod 2. Nor can they deny a power of jurisdiction though there were no persons rebuked and censured in this Synod for the object of a juridicall power is not onely persons but things of order decencie circumstances questions of doctrine as is cleare Reâ—el 1. 14. 15. officers to be ordained Act. 6. 3 4 5 6. 1 Tim. 5. 22. 2 Tim. 2. 2 3. 3. Our brethren cannot deny but the sentence of non-Communion is a censure and a great one yea and of kindred and blood most neare to excommunication and that if any Churches should have refâ—â—sed those Canons by this Canon the Churches might have pronounced the sentence of non-communion against them and to pronounce this sentence is an act of government as properly so called as to pronounce the sentence of excommunication for it is the formall halfe of the sentence of excommunication Object 10. It seemeth that Apostles here determine as Apostles for they condenme the obtruders of circumcision because they taught these things without any Apostolick Commandement v. 24. They teach that you must bee circumcised and keepe the Law to whom wee the Apostles gave no such commandement Answ. This is no more a good argument to prove that the obtruders of circumcision did teach false doctrine and were not condemned by the Apostles and Elders Synodically then if one should say this is not a Synodicall decree of the Church because it is proven and made good by the Word of God for Synodicall decrees exclude not Gods word though they bee not formally Scripture for in some part of the Epistle the Apostles may well speak of themselves as distinguished from Elders and as Apostles and yet the assembly is an ordinary Synod and not an Apostolick meeting for if wee should argue thus the whole Church men and women v. 22. sent messengers to Antioch as the Church and not as Apostles our brethren would thinke it a weake consequence to inferre Ergo this was nothing but a Congregational not an Apostolical meeting Yet our brethren contend that the whole Church and single Congregation of Ierusalem did concurre in this meeting as consenters and having power also though not of jurisdiction but I wonder why our brethren should so contend that there was no power of censuring put forth in this Assembly seeing one of their speciall answers whereby they would prove that this it not a patterne of an ordinary Synod and such a Synod as wee contend for having power of jurisdiction is that this was an ordinary meeting of the Elders and Church of Ierusalem giving counsell and advise with the Apostles to the Church of Antioch but I am sure the businesse of not scandalizing did as much concerne the Church of Ierusalem and therefore in the Synod they ought to put forth power of jurisdiction if any of their members hearing that the Apostles contended that the ceremoniall Law did not lay a tie on the conscience of either Jew or Gentile in foro dei before Gods court as the places cited by Iames prove v. 15 16 17. Peter saith expresly that God now putteth no difference betwixt Iewes and Gentiles v. 9. but 〈◊〉 are saved through the grace of our Lord Iesus v. 11. should ab â—aine from blood to the offence of the weaker should not this Congregation all Church condemne such in ordine ad censuram in order to excommunication yea the Eldership and Congregation of Jerusalem here convened as our brethren say should have failed in this first Synod and also the Apostles with them if they neglected to exercise juridicall power over their owne Congregation in the case of scandall and a scandall as possible to them to fall in as the Gentiles and therefore either this assembly consisting of Apostles and of the particular Church of Ierusalem erred which wee cannot say or then they did exercise power in order to excommunication towards their owne Church and so there is some juridicall power put forth in this meeting Object 11. Though the Apostles in this Synod proceed by way of disputing and borrow light one from another it followeth not thâ—â— they goe not on here as Apostles yea though Peter and Paul dâ—e not say all the truth nor fall upon that which is the conclusion of the Assembly as I ames doth it doth not hinder but they are led in all these Synodicull debaâ—eâ— by the infallible and Apostolick spirit because some things are revealed to one Evangelist and to one Prophet which is not revealed to another Iohn the
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
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
Presbyterie yea I much doubt if a Catholick councell can formally excommunicate a nationall Church though such a councell may use a power analogicall like to the power of excommunication Object 18. But you cannot demonstrate from Gods Word that there is such a thing in the New Testament as a Catholick visible Church Answ. I said something of this before but I conceive the subject of the 1 Cor. 12. is a Catholick visible Church But 1. wee doe not understand a politicall body with ordinary visible government from one man who maketh himselfe the vicar of Christ the Pope whose members are Cardinals Bishops c. and such like But the Catholick body mysticall of Jesus Christ and that as visible and 1. that the Apostle is to bee understood of an universall not of a Congregationall and particular politick Church that meeteth in one place is cleare 1. hee speaketh of that Church wherein are diversities of gifts for the good of the whole Catholick body as miracles the gift of prophecie the gift of interpretation the gift of healing c. of whom hee saith v. 5 6. there is the same spirit and the same God who worketh all in all the particular Congregation is not such an all in all 2. Hee speaketh of such a Church as taketh in all baptized into one spirit but this is the whole visible Church not one single Congregation onely 3. Hee speaketh of such a Church as taketh in all both Jewes and Gentiles making them one body v. 13. and that taketh in all the world 4. Hee speaketh of such a Church as hath an adequat and full relation to Christ from which this Church is denominated Christ mysticall all the beleevers meeting in one mysticall body of Christ as lines in one center v. 12. now a single Congregation hath not a foot to fill this measure 5. Hee speaketh of such a body as hath need of the helpe one of another as the head hath need of the feet v. 15 16 17. those of a single Congregation have need of those who are eyes and eares without the congregation 6. Hee speaketh of such a body as is not to separate in their members one from another to make a schisme in the body v. 25. but a single Congregation ought not to separate from the rest of the great body made up of many sister Churches 7. Hee speaketh of such a body the members whereof must care one for another and suffer one with another v. 26. now single Congregations are such members of this great bodie as must mourne with these that mourne and rejoyce with these that rejoyce therefore one single Congregation cannot bee this whole body but its part onely 8. Hee speaketh of such a body in which God hath set v. 28. Apostles Prophets Teachers miâ—â—cles c. now Christ hath not wedged in Apostles the Catholick Pastors of the whole world to one single Congregation nor hath hee confined such a multitude of officers ordinarie and extraordinary to one single Congregation And that hee speaketh here of a Catholicke visible Church is cleare 1. Hee speaketh of such a body to which is given the manifestation of the spirit to profit withall v. 7. this must bee a visible policie 2. Hee speaketh of a politicall and organicall body having eyes eares hands feet c. which must bee a visible ministery 3. Hee speaketh of a body capable of the seales such as Baptisme v. 13. We all are baptized by one spirit into one body this must bee a visible baptized body discerned by the visible character of baptisme from all societies of Jewes Pagans and others who professe not Christ Jesus 4. Hee speaketh of such a body as standeth in need of the helpe one of another as the eye cannot say to the hand I have no need of the v. 21. this evidently cryeth that hee supposeth a visible and externall policie in this body 5. Hee speaketh of a body so tempered of God as that there should bee no schisme in the body nor separation from it v. 25. now this cannot bee a separation from the invisible body of Christ for so hypocrites which are members of this visible body and are often officers as eyes and eares yea Pastors and Teachers remaining in the body without any schisme or separation are yet separatists from the invisible body of Christ and no more parts of that body then a woodden leg or arme is a member of a living man 6. He speaketh of that body which is to expresse its care in praying praising mourning and rejoycing with the rest of the members as they are in a good or adverse condition of prosperitie or adversitie v. 23 26. and this must bee a visible Church praying or praising God 7. Hee speaketh of such a Church as the fellow members may see and know by their senses to suffer and bee in a hard condition or to rejoyce as v. 25. 26. and this is more then apparently cleare to bee a visible Church 8. Hee speaketh of such a Church as God hath furnished with severall officers in severall orders visibly knowne to bee different officers as v. 28. Now God hath set some in the Church first Apostles secondarily Prophets thirdly teachers these bee parts and most eminent and considerable organs of a visible Church And the like I might prove by divers of these arguments of that body politicall of which the Apostle speaketh Rom. 12. 3 4 5 6. to the end of the Chapter These speciall exceptions there bee against this 1. That the Church 1 Cor. 12. is the invisible and mysticall body of Christ because it is a body baptized by one spirit 2. A body called Christ that is Christ mysticall Answ. It is true that this visible body hath also an inward and spirituall baptizing answerable to the externall and outward baptizing and so according to that internall and mysticall union it is an invisible body as these reasons prove but the question is if the Apostle speake of the body of Christ in that notion we deny that for hee speaketh plainly here of the Church as it is a politicall organicall and visible body Object 2. If one should say God hath placed in the common-wealth Emperours Kings Dukes Princes and Rulers as the eyes and eares of the Commonwealth it should no wayes follow that all the Common-wealths in the earth are one visible civill body having a government so though it hee said God hath placed in the spirituall Common-wealths of the Church Apostles Prophets Teachers c. it followeth not that the Church is all one spirituall politick visible body it followeth onely that the Lord hath placed in the Church Apostles Prophets Teachers indefinitly that is that these may bee in any one single Congregation as it is said James 2. 2. If there come into your Assembly or Synagogue a man with a gold Ring c. now this will not prove that all the dispersed Jewes to whom James wrote were all but one Congregation Answ. 1. It is
evident that the Apostles were persecuted cast in prison and beaten Act. 4. 3. c. 5. 18. 26. 33. 40. it is as evident that they had Assemblies and Churches meetings Act. 2. 37. 41. 46. c. 4. 1 2 3. c. 5. 10. v. 25. now the question then is not if they could not meet for extrinsecall impediments of persecution for both our brethren and wee agree in this that they had their Church-assemblies for Word and Sacraments then the question is upon the supposall of Church assembles which the persecution of the Jewes then fearing the people was not able to hinder c. 5. 26 whether or no was the Church at Jerusalem of such a competent number onely as that they could meet not occasionally onely to heare a Sermon but in an ordinary Church-meeting to heare the Word and communicate in the breaking of bread and seales of the Covenant and though the want of a capacious house bee also an extrinsecall impediment why they could not meet yet that they wanted such a capacious house as the Temple will prove nothing but it cannot bee said that they wanted a capacious house for the ordinary meeting of a Congregation the ordinary and genuine use whereof is to bee edified by the Word and Sacraments and that an ordinary house could containe such a number of thousands and multitudes as can bee edified in a Congregationall way is denyed 2. Our brethren say that they did not eate the Supper in private houses for the breaking of bread Act. 2. 46. was common bread and they had the use of the Temple and taught in the Temple for the Senate of the Jewes durst not extend their malice to the highest Act. 5. 26. for they feared the people and Act. 4. 21. So when they had sâ—â—â—her threatned them they let them goe finding nothing how they might punish them because of the people for all men glorified God for that which was done so the people favouring the Apostles they made use of their libertie to the full and bad their publick meetings for Word and Sacraments in the Temple and did meet in private houses Act. 20. 20. in a private way not in a Church way So Act. 2. 47. They had favour with all the people Answ. It is said these beleevers v 44. were 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in one place and those who v. 46. did eate bread 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 from house to house met then being in one place and eating of bread from house to house must bee exponed as wee doe distributively that is divided in small Assemblies for the argument that we bring militateth against the eating of their common meat in houses all being in one private house were three thousand in â—ne place 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 all at one banquet and that daily 2. It is true divers expone the breaking of bread v. 46. not of the Supper of the Lords yet of the banquets of love where there was an assembly of many but v. 42. It is cleare these three thousand did receive the Supper of the Lord together and it is so true that the Syriack hath it in his exposition thus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 unâ—isht anâ—hephin bavau but luthi uâ—aktsaâ—a deuâ—haâ—rskia it is memorable saith Lorinus that hee retaineth the name of Eucharistia it is rendred Et communicaâ—ant in oratione fractione Eucharistia yea and Lutherus and Calvin both expound it so and as Lorinus Cajetanus Cornelius a Lapide they bee all spirituall exercises named here But how can wee imagine that many thousands could in one meeting communicate at one Table in the Lords Supper and that ordinarily 1. What voyce could reach to so many thousands as they did grow unto 2. What Table could suffice to a Congregation of so many thousands added to the Church for the supper is a Table ordinance and requireth Table communion Table gestures which the Apostles could not so soone remove and change into an Altar that all might conveniently heare and bee edified 3. Can wee beleeve that seeing Congregationall meetings of fewer and that in private houses was lesse obnoxious to the indignation of authoritie then meeting in the Temple as is most evident Act. 4. 1 2. and seeing the Apostles had libertie to meet Act. 5. 26. that they would draw the first mould of the Christian visible Church after the patterne of a convention most unfit yea unpossible for attaining the intended end to wâ—t edification especially not being compelled thereunto by an extrinsecall necessitie Our brethren say three thousand five thousand might all communicate in one place though not at one time súccessively as it is in many numerous Congregations But I answer 1. after they were five thousand ch 4. I dare say taking in the hundreth and twentie the five hundreth brethren that all saw Christ at once 1 Cor. 15. 6. and the fruit of the preaching of the other ten Apostles all now present at Jerusalem when the 〈…〉 the Spirit on all flesh joe 2. 28 29. 〈◊〉 15 16 17. was now to take effect at this time there were 〈◊〉 thousand but after there all it is said Act. 6. 1. The 〈…〉 were multiplyed v. 7. And the Word of God 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The 〈…〉 Disciples grew exceedingly and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a great 〈◊〉 the Priests were obedient to the faith how many of the people were then obedient to the faith could all these make on Congregation to eate at one Table But 2. when they are put to this shift to say that they did communicate suc 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Table and which must bee not all in one day then 〈◊〉 brethren grant there was not here such a Congregation as is 1 Cor. 11. 20 When you come together therefore into one 〈…〉 eat the Lords Supper 23. Wherefore my brethren 〈…〉 together to eate 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 tarry one for another when 〈◊〉 come to eate at the love-feasts especially at the Lords Supper saith Diâ—datus if every one of the Congregation bee to waite on while another come then in the Apostolick Church all the Congregation came together to the Lords Supper to one place and at one time and this is not the Congregation where of hee speaketh 1 Cor. 14. 23. if therefore the whole Church câ—me together to the same place and all speake with tongues 〈…〉 in thâ—se that are unlearned and unbeleovers will they 〈…〉 mad Hence all the Congegration come together to one place at one time and the place was so that heathen and unbeleevers might come into their worship of the Congregation but our brethren make the meeting of this Congregation such as they were not to sâ—ay one for another 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 all at one time but successively and so as the whole Congregation could not come to one place at once but by 〈◊〉 and quarters and fractions and divided parts now one 〈◊〉 or two thousand then another two thousand the next day for the Apostles then celebrating
the supper at night and after Supper 1 Câ—r 11. 21. few thousands should bee able to communicate after Supper 2. There was no necessitie that these wise master-builders should divide the Church and the first visible Church in so many parts and this successive communion doth clearely prove our point that there were many Congregations for every successive fraction being a competent convention of beleevers having the Word and Sacraments and so power of jurisdiction not to admit all promiscuously to the Lords Table is to our brethren a compleat Church for to it indeed agreeth the essentiall Characters of a visible instituted Church for there is here a ministery the Word and Sacraments and some power of jurisdiction within it selfe and so what lacketh this successive fraction of an intire Congregation But what ground for so needlesse a conjecture that the Apostolick Church did celebrate the Lords Supper in the Temple never in private houses The contrary is Act. 20. 7. And upon the first day of the weeke the Disciples came together to breake bread Paul preached unto them v. 8. And there were many lights in an upper Chamber where they were conveened so the Text is cleare the first day of the weeke 1 Cor. 16. 1. was the day of the Christians publick worship and Augustine Calvin Luâ—her Melancthon Bullinger Diodatus and so Lorinus and Sanchius say this was the Lords Supper who can imagine that the Apostles did bring so many thousand Christians after Supper to the Temple to celebrate a new Evangelick feast and that immediatly after Peters first Sermon Act. 2. 42 1. Before the Apostles had informed the Jewes that all their typicall and ceremoniall feasts were now abolished yea while they stood in vigor and the Apostles themselves kept them in a great part was this like the Spirit of the Gospel which did beare with Moses his ceremonies for fortie yeares 2. The Apostles Act. 4. 1. are indited before the Synedry that they taught in the Temple Jesus Christ if they had with so many thousands gone to the Temple with a new extraordinary ceremoniall ordinance as a new Sacrament so contrary in humane reason to all the sacred Feasts Sacrifices and ceremonies should not this with the first have beene put in their inditement that they were shouldering Moses out of the Temple yet are they onely accused for teaching the people yea Christ the Law-giver who preached the Gospell daily in the Temple would not take the last Supper to the Temple but celebrated it in a private Chamber and Paul being accused alwayes as an enemy to Moses and the Temple his enemies the Jewes who watched him heedfully could never put on him that hee celebrated a Sacrament in the Temple as for Baptisme it being a sort of washing whereof the Pharisees used many Matth. 15. Mark 7. it was performed often sub diâ— in rivers never in the Temple wee desire any author father Ocecumenius doubteth onely Doctor Divine Protestant or Papist late or old who said the Apostles celebrated the Supper in the Temple 3. Our brethren say all These did conveâ—ne 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for Act. 4. 31. When they had prayed the place was shaken where they were assembled together 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Act. 2. 46. and they continued daily with one accord in the Temple and breaking bread from house to house did eate their meat with gladnesse Answ. The place Act. 4. 31. saith not that all the five thousand beleevers were in that one place which was shaken for v. 21. that when the Apostles were let goe by the Priests and Captaines of the Temple they returned to their owne company 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to their owne but no circumstance in the Text doth inferre that they came backe to the whole five thousand but onely to some few of the first beleevers that were converted before the first Sermon of Peter was made cap. 2 they returned Lyra and Hugo Cardinalis to their owne company ad domesticos suos and so saith Lorinus who citeth the Syriack 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 hachaiehin ad fratres suos Salmeron ad suos â—apostolos sive condiscipulos domesticos fidei and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 doth not signifie the whole Church but friends and domesticks as Mark 5. 19. Goe home to thy own house and shew thy friends Luke 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 compared with Luk. 8. 39. and Gal. 6. 10 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 1 Tim. 5. 8. therefore the place saith that the five thousand were gathered together in this one place which was shaken 2. Giving and not granting that they were all conveened to prayer it doth not follow that they did meet ordinarily in one place for partaking of Word and Sacraments as one Congregation for â—oe might conveene to prayer and hearing the Word then could meet ordinarily in a Congregationall-way Neither will any Text inforce us to expone 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 collectively but distributively as wee say all the Congregations in Scotland met 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in one every Lords day that is every one of the Congregations is in one place but the sense is not that all the Congregations collectively are in one place And wee may justly aske what this place was which was shaken it is not like that it was the Temple that which should have beene more prodigious like and presaged a ruine to the Temple would not have beene concealoâ— by the holy Ghost for it would have more terrified the Jewes and the Temple is never called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 sine adjecto without some other thing to make it bee knowne to bee the holy place if it was a private house give us leave to say it could not containe five thousand to heare prayer farre lesse a more numerous multitude Wee reâ—it it to the judgement of the wise if the Apostles were so lazie to propagate the Gospell that where twelve of them were present undoubtedly Act. 4. 23 31. Act. 6. 2. and as many of the learned thinke the seventie Disciples that eleven Apostles did heare the Word onely and one did speake to one Congregation onely which consisted of so many thousands for to the five thousand if there were no moe c. 5. 14. mere beleevers were added to the Lord multitudes both of men and women who could not conveniently heare This I thinke not imaginable for 1. now the harvest was large thousands were to bee converted 2. The Spirit was now powred upon all flesh 3. Christ when hee sent the twâ—lve but to Judeâ— hee sent them two and two and would have every man at worke and the Apostles went out in twoes Act. 13. Paul and Bâ—rnaâ—as and sometimes but one Peter was sent to the Jewes Paul to the Gentiles and the world divided amongst them 1. of other officers Timothy is sent to Ephesus Titus to Crete that so they might the more swiftly spread the Gospell to all the world What wisedome could wee
imagine would lead the twelve Apostles to speake to one single Congregation met in one place at one time the rest to wit the eleven and the seventic Disciples being silent for in the Church the God of order will have one to speake at once 1 Cor. 14. 31. But our reverend brethren seeing and considering well that the Church at Jerusalem could not all meet in one Congregationall way and that they were a Christian Church and so behooâ—ed to bee a Presbyteriall Church they doe therefore betake themselves to another Answer for they say that this Church at 〈…〉 an extraordinary constituted Church and 1. wanted an Eldership and presbytery as Christian Churches have now 2. the government was meerely Apostolicall 3. the constitution was somewhat Jewish rather then Christian for their service was mixed with legall ordinances and Jewish observances for many yeares and therefore cannot bee a patterne of the Christian visible Church which wee now seeke To which I answer 1. Because our brethren consider that the Church of Jerusalem will not bee their independent Congregation before wee obtaine it for us as a mould of a presbâ—tâ—riall Church they had rather quit their part of it and permit the Jewes to have it for us both but wee are content that their Congregations in some good sense bee given to them and not to Jewes 2. There is no reason but the Church of Jerusalem bee a Christian Church 1. The externall profession of a visible Church maketh it a visible Christian Church but this Church professeth faith in Christ already come in the flesh and the Sacraments of the New Testament baptisme and the Sacramentall breaking of bread Act. 22. 41 42. wee desire to know how saving faith in a multitude constituteh an invisible Church and the externall and blamelesse profession of that same saving faith doth not contitute a visible Church also and how this is not a Christian visible Church not differing in essence and nature from the 〈◊〉 Churches that now are to which the essentiall note of a visible Church agreeth to wit the preaching or profession of the sound faith if it bee called an Apostolick and so an extraordinary Christian Church because the Apostles doth governe â—it that is not enough if the Apostles governe it according to the rule of the word framing the visible Churches of the New Testament this way the Church of Corinth 1 Cor. 5. shall bee an Apostolick and so an extraordinary Church which our brethren cannot say But wee desire to know wherein the frame of this first patterne Christian Church at Jerusalem is so extraordinary that it cannot bee a rule to us to draw the mould of our Churches according to it for if the Apostles make it a patterne of an ordinary Christian Church in Word and Sacraments to say it was extraordinary in the government except you shew that that government was different from the rule that now is in government is petitio principii to begge what is in question for these same keyes both of knowledge and jurisdiction that by your grant were given to the Church Matth. 18. 15 16 17. were given to the Apostles Matth. 16 17 18. and Joh. 20. 21. If you say it is extraordinary because as yet they had not Deacons for the Apostles did as yet serve tables where as afterward Act. 6. that was given to the Deacons by office and so they had not Elders nor Doctors nor Pastors as we now haâ—e but the Apostles were both Pastors Ruling Elders Doctors and Deacons and they were the onely governing Eldership and this was extraordinary that they had no Eldership and so they were for that same cause no presbyteriall Church whence it followeth that you cannot make this Church which had no presbytery a patterne of a presbyteriall Church But I answer this will not take off the argument if wee shall prove that after they were more then could meet in one Congregation and so after they were so numerous that they were moe Congregations then one they had one common government and 1. wee say though the Apostles had power to governe all the Churches of the world and so many Congregations yet if they did rule many Congregations as Elders and not as Apostles wee prove our point Now we say where baptisme and the Lords Supper was there behoved to bee some government else the Apostles admitted promiscuously to baptisme and the Lords Supper any the most scandalous and prophane which wee cannot thinke of the Apostles it is true say you they admitted not all but according to the rule of right government but this right government was extraordinary in that it was not in a setled Eldership of a Congregation which was oblieged to reside and personally to watch over that determinate flock and no other flock but it was in the hands of the Apostles who might goe through all the world to preach the Gospell and were not tied to any particular flock and so from this neither can you draw your classicall Eldership nor wee our Congregationall Eldership But I answer yet the question is begged for though it bee unlawfull for a setled Eldership not to reside where their charge is yet the question is now of a government in the hands of those who are oblieged to reside and give personall attendance to the flock and the government in the hands of the Apostles who were not oblieged to personall attendance over this and this particular flock which they did governe were governments so different in nature as the one is a patterne to us not the other and the one followeth rules different in nature and spirit from the other for though it were granted that the Apostles did governe many Congregations as Apostles not as Elders yet there was no extraordinary reason why these many Congregations should bee called one Church and the beleevers added to them said to bee added to the Church as it is said Act. 2. 47. And the Lord added to the Church daily such as should bee saved except this Church bee one entire body governed and ruled according to Christs Lawes 2. There bee seven Descons chosen to this Church Act. 6. and Deacons are officers of the Church of Philippi which our brethren calleth Phil. 1. 1. a Congregationall Church and Pnebe was a Deaconisse say they of the Church of Cenchrea Rom. 16. 1. and if they had Deacons they could not want Elders who are as necessary 3. This Church could not bee so extraordinary as that it cannot bee a patterne to us of the constant government of Churches by Elders which wee call Aristocraticall seeing it is brought as a patterne of the Churches government by the voices of the people which is called by Divines in some respect democraticall and this place is alledged by our brethren and by all Protestant Divines against Bishops and Papists to prove that the people have some hand in government to wit in election of officers and so the words are cleare Act. 6. 5.
Christians Esal 54. 13. not denied to Women and believing Children who cannot lay on hands nor ordaine Ministers as the presbytery doth 1 Timothy 4. 14. Acts 6. 6. Acts 13. 1 2. 3. 1 Timothy 5. 22. 2 Timothy 2. 2. but for trying of Ministers if they bee the sonnes of the Prophets and must be apt to teach 1 Timothy 3. 1 2. able to convince subtile Hereticks and gain-sayers and to put them to silence Titus 1. 10. 11. there must be in a constituted Church a Colledge of pastors and prophets to try the prophets with a presbyteriall Cognizance But here some object If Election bee absolutely in the hâ—â—ds of the people then is the peoples will because will the absolute determiner who shall be the Pastor to such a flock but people certainly may erre therefore the Presbytery must bee the last determiner in election And people have onely a rationall consent and if their consent be irrationall the Presbyter must chuse for them I answer shortly in these propositions 1 Pro. Neither is the People infallible in chusing nor the Presbytery infallible in regulating the peoples choice yet is power of regulating the choice the presbyteries due nor power of election to be denied to Gods people 2. Pro. You must suppose the Church a settled and an established Church of sound professors for if the Congregation or presbytery either of them be for the most part popish Arminian or unsound in the Faith in so far hath Christ given neither power to the one or other 3. Prop. When it is acknowledged by both people and presbytery that of two or three men any one is qualified for the place then the man is absolutely to bee referred to the peoples choice and though the people give no reason why they chuse this man rather then any of the other two yet iâ— the Peoples choice reasonable for no doubt Acts. 6. there were more men then these seven of good report and full of the Holy Ghost and fit to be Deacons therefore the multitudes choice of these seven and their nomination of them to be Apostles rather then the nomination of any other men is rationall and approved by the twelve Apostles though they give no reason Yea though Nicolas be the Sâ—ctmaster of the Nicolaitans as the learned thinke yet the election is Ecclesiastically lawfull and needeth not that a reason be given to the Apostles 4. Prop. We never read that in the Apostles-Church a man was obtâ—uded upon the people against their will And therefore Election by the people in the Apostolique Church as Acts 1. 26. Acts 6. 2 3 4. Revel 2. 12. Acts 20. 28. must be our rule any election without the peoples consent must be no Election for if it please not the whole multitude as Acts 6. 5. it is not a choice 5. Prop. We must distinguish Election and Regulation of the Election 2. There is a Regulation of the Election positive and a Regulation negative Hence the presbyteries power consisteth only in a negative regulation of the peoples choice not in a positive For example Election is an elicit act of the people and their birthright and priviledge that Christ hath given to them and it cannot be taken from them if there be any Election it must be made by the people the presbytery even in case of the peoples aberration cannot usurpe the act of Election because the Apostles who yet had the gift of discerning spirits in a greater measure then the multitude remit the choice of the seven Deacons to the multitude Ergo the presbytery should doe the same yet may the presbytery negatively reggulate the Election and if the people out of the humour of itching eares chuse an unfit man in that case the presbytery may declare the Election irregular and null as suppose the multitude Acts 6 had chosen such a man or all the seven men like Simon Magus the twelve Apostles by their Ministeriall power might have impeded that Election or rather nomination as irregular and put them to chuse other seven men but the Apostles could not have chosen for them other seven for then Election should have bin taken out of the peoples hands Hence that distinction of elicit and imperate acts even as the understanding commandeth and directeth the will to such and such elicit actions and regulateth the will therein and yet the understanding can neither nill nor will and the King may punish pastors who preach Hereticall doct in vitiate the Sacrament but the King can neither preach the word himself nor administate the Sacraments so the presbytery may regulate negatively and hinderth Election of an unfit man but the presbytery cannot do as the Pâ—elate did who would name a man to the people and desire their consent but consent is not all the presbytery and neighbour Congregations have consent but no elective liberty given them by Christ but if the people refused their consent he Prelate without more a do chose and ordained the man and so he was obtruded on the people without any Election at all Ordination of an ordinary pastor is always to a certain flock Act. 20. 28. 1 Pet. 5. 1. Rev. 2. 1. yet here must we distinguish'd dedication to Christs service by the office 2. The exercise of the office in the former respect the pastor is a pastor every where and may be sent as a Pastor to plant Churches but ratione finis He is primariò principally to feed this flock and secundario and ratione medâ—i secondarily while he feedeth this flock he feedeth the Church universall Mr. Mather if people may not mâ—dle with ordination because it is proper to Timothy and Titus this may prove that they were Bishops who did ordaine Elders there alone which ministers may not do there for these Epistles are not written to them as Bishops alone nor as Elders alone but as to a mixt state including the people Answ. Some parcells of these Epistles are written to Timothy and Titus as Evangelists such as none may now do but they only â—â— 2 Tim. 4. 4. 1 Tit. 1. 3. Tim. 1. 5. and some other things which they gave in charge to Elders 2. Some things are written to them as Christians as 1 Tim. 1. 19. Tit. 3. 3. finaliter or objectively all is written for the Churches good but 3 the builk of the Epistle is written to them as Elders and is a rule of perpetuall government and especially 1 Tim. 1. 22. 2. Tim. 2. 2. for these and the like they were to doe with the presbytery as is cleare 1 Tim. 1. 14. Object The Congregations of Jerusalem were not fixed in their members and officers onely the Apostles preached to them if they were many congregations which is possible in a circular way now one Apostle to this assembly then another But in regard not one Paster could say this is my flock not this nor any flock could say Peter is our Pastor not Andrew Therefore there was no Church-state in any
absurd the Communion shall onely be of Pastorall acts as Christian acts but in no sort betwixt them as Pastorall acts 5. The Scriptures for this opinion are weak Ergo the opinion it selfe is weake I prove the antecedent Act. 20. 28. feede the flocke over which the holy Ghost hath made you overseers c. there is no ground to feede even by Preaching or by vertue of a gift these flockes over which the holy Ghost hath not set you Obey them that are over you in the Lord Heb. 13. 17. c. there is no warrant to submit to other Pastors that are not over you in the Lord though they command by vertue of a gift not by vertue of an office or calling these be loose consequences 6. All reciprocation of mutuall duties amongst sister Churches whereby they exhort rebuke comfort one another must be unlawfull for these be Church acts and this Author saith The office extendeth no further then the calling but there is no calling of Church-membership betwixt sister-Churches and therefore all these duties are not acts of the Communion of Churches as they are such Churches or incorporations in a Church-state but onely duties of Churches as they are Saints but communion of Churches as Churches in the act of Church-dispensing of the Word and Seales reciprocally one to another is not in the Word of God as this opinion will inferre which is a weighty absurd 7. The Authors of this opinion hold That if the Congregation for no fault reject the Pastor whom they once called and elected to â—e their Pastor though in so doing they sinne and reject God in rejecting him yet they take nomen esse the name and nature of a pastor from him yet say they hee still remaineth a Minister of Christ till he accept a call from another Congregation Hence 1. such a one is a Pastor and yet the people have taken name and nature of a Pastor from him as they gave him name and nature Ergo he is either a Pastor without a calling which is absurd or he remaineth a person in relation to another flocke who never choosed him nor gave him any calling 2. To adde by the way if he be capable of a calling to another Church Ergo for the time he is no Minister else they must say he may be a Minister capable of two callings to two sundry Ministeries which yet maketh him a Pastor not in relation to one single congregation onely It is true they object that the Apostles Matth. 18. were commanded to preach to all Nations but Pastors are not so now but are commanded to feed the flocke over which God hath appointed them Act. 20. 28. but it is as true the Apostles were commanded to preach to all Nations in opposition to the charge that the Prophets of old were to speake to the people of Israel onely and the Apostles Matth. 10. forbidden to preach to the Samaritans and Gentiles and it is as true that Gods Spirit limited the Apostles to Preach to Macedonia not to Bithynia now because this particular direction for places is wanting in the Church it is certaine that a man is yet a Pastor in office in relation to as many as Gods hand of providence shall send him unto though he be chosen by a people to feed ordinarily one determinate flocke and though he be not an extraordinary and immediatly inspired planter of Churches or the first planter as were the Apostles yet is he a Pastor in relation to all And if this be not said 1. It were simply unlawfull for Pastors now to plant Churches and spread the Gospell to those nations who have not heard it because all Pastors now are ordinary and none are immediatly inspired Apostles but it is certaine what the Apostles did by an extraordinary gift as such immediatly called pastors it is unlawfull for ordinary Pastors to attempt to doe as to attempt to speake with tongues and to plant Churches by speaking with tongues and confirming it with miracles is unlawfull Papists as Bellarmine Suarez Acosta ascribe this to the Pope and his Apostles Our Divines answer that the Apostles that way have no successors But what the Apostles did by an ordinary pastorall gift as to preach the word administrate the Sacraments to erect and plant Churches by ordinary gifts where the Pastors can speake to the Churches by an ordinary gift in their owne language they are oblieged both within and without the Congregation to preach as Pastors because where God giveth gifts pastorall to pastors he commandeth them to exercise these gifts else they digge their Lords talent in the earth but God giveth to Pastors pastorall gifts to preach to others then their owne Congregation and to administrate the seales to them also and to plant Churches Ergo it is presumed that the Church doth give authoritie and an externall ministeriall calling to the exercise of these gifts 2. It is an unwarrantable point of Divinitie that the Apostles and the Pastors succeeding to them doe differ essentially in this that Apostles might preach as Pastors to more Congregations then one and might plant Churches but pastors succeeding to them may not as Pastors preach to more Congregations then their owne and may not planâ— Churches for then planting of Churches now were utterly unlawfull because it is certaine there be no Apostles on earth and it is not lawfull for a Pastor yea nor it is lawfull for any other gifted person to doe that which is essentiall to an Apostle and agreeth to an Apostle as to an Apostle It is then unlawfull for our brethren seeing they be not Apostles to plant Churches in India Nor is that comparison to be regarded much A Magistrate or an Alderman of a Citie may not lawfully exercise his office of Magistracie in another Citie whereof he is not a Maior and therefore a Pastor cannot preach ex officio as a Pastor in another Congregation whereof he is not a Pastor nor can he exercise discipline in another Congregation then his owne seeing another Congregation hath not by voluntary agreement oath or paction submitted themselves to his ministry nor chosen him for their Pastor For I answer the comparison halteth and doth not prove the point for by one and the same act the citie hath chosen such a man both for to be a Magistrate and to be their Magistrate and have given him thereby authority over themselves onely so he cannot exercise the office of a Magistrate over another Citie who hath not chosen him to be their Maior or ruler But the flocke doth not both call such a man in one and the same act to be a pastor and to be their pastor but hee is made by the laying on of the hands of the Elders a Pastor and a Pastor in relation to all to whom God in his providence shall send him to speake the Congregation by election doth give him no authority pastorall but onely appropriate his pastorall authoritie to themselves in particular
of the truth but also in writing suffering for the truth and death-bed-confessions of the truth These worthy men in their owne bowells as Occam Petrarcha Gerson Mirandula these who in their death bed renued confidence in merits Saints Images were the true Church and the other side the false Church all the Churches of Asia excommunicated by Victor as Bellarmine saith and Binnius Pope Stephen then and his Councell denying communion to Cyprian and fourescore of Bishops must bee the Separatists and Cyprians and his adherents the true Church 2. In this division we are united to the true Apostolick to the ancient Church to the true ancient Church of Rome which opposed the Apostate Church of Rome but an immediate and personall adherence to and union with the ancient Church is not essentiall to a visible Church The separation from a true Church where the Word of God Orthodox is preached and the Sacraments duely administred wee thinke unlawfull and the place for separation mainely I would have vindicated 2 Cor. 6. 14. Be ye not unequally yoaked together with unbeleevers c. Robinson will have this strong for their separation and saith 1. It is true he findeth fault with the beleeving Corinthians communicating with the unbeleeters in the Idol feasts but with all it must be considered that the Apostle up in this particular occasion deliveâ—eth a generall doctrine as from â—â—â—â—â—tion 1 Cor. 5. to forbid commingling with fornicators with 〈◊〉 persons with Idolaters c. and as he forbiddeth partaking with the wicked in their evills yet then therein did he forbid all religious communion with them since their very prayers and other Sacrifices are their evills wherein whilst the godly doth communicate with them what doe they else but acknowledge their common right and interest in the holy things with them Answ. 1. It is good that Robinson with the interpreters doth acknowledge that Paul forbiddeth communicating with unbeleevers aâ— Idol feasts as the place will command us to separate from the Masse Service and therein let it be that hee inferreth a generall Ergo you are to separate from all the worship of the Gentiles Idols and are not to be mixed with them in their service which they give to their false gods but this is not the generall which includeth separation from a Church in the service of a true God the service being lawfull and onely evill to some worshippers and by accident because they eate to themselves damnation but not damnation to others 2. But he forbiddeth saith he all partaking with the wicked in their evills I distinguish their evills in their evills of their personall sins in not worshipping the true God in faith sincerity holy zeale that I deny and it is to be proved Christ himselfe and the Apostles eated the Passeover and worshipped God with one whom Christ had said had a devill and should betray the Sonne of man and was an uncleane man Job 13. 11 12. 18. He forbiddeth all partaking with the wicked in their evills that is in the unlawfull and Idol-worship or in their superstitions and will-worship that is true but nothing against us or for your separation If it be said Judas was neither convicted of his Traitory to Christ nor was he knowne to the Apostles by name to be the man for some of them suspected themselves and not Judas to bee Traytor but you communicate with such as be professed and avowed Traytors and persons knowne to be scandalous and so you acknowledge you have a common right in these holy things with these persons Answ. 1. Christ shewed to the Disciples that they were an uncleane societie and that one had a devill and therefore though they knew not the man by name who had the devill they knew the societie to have a devill and to be uncleane for that one man his cause and so neither Christ nor his Disciples should have taken part with the evills and the Prayers and sacrifices of the wicked for in so doing they acknowledge that they have commune right and interest in the holy things of God with some who have a devill and with an uncleane societie but you cannot condemne Christ and the Disciples communicating at that Supper 2. Though the scandalous person bee not convicted of the scandall that doth make the scandall more grievous and haynous to the scandalous person in that he dare remaine in a sin though he be convicted of his guiltinesse by the Church but it doth not make the persons scandall to be no scandall and no uncleannesse at all for magis minus non variant speciem more or lesse of sinne doth not vary the nature of sin now if Paul will the Corinthians to meet together to eate the Lords body as hee doth 1 Cor. 11. and know that there bee amongst them carnall men such as goe to Law with their brethren before Infidels such as deny the resurrection such as come drunke to the Lords Supper though they bee not convicted of these sinnes by the Church yet if they be knowne to others as Paul doth declare them in that Epistle they must pollute the Lords Table before the Church convict them no lesse then after the Church hath convicted them though the pollution may bee more and greater after Church-conviction then before yet Paul willeth all the Corimbians to acknowledge their communion with the sinnes of the non-convicted and with their abominable and wicked sacrifices and prayers which none can teach or beleeve of the Apostle led by an infallible spirit and therefore to communicate with them is not to take part of their evills 3. He saith at last They who communicate at the same Table with scandalous persons what doe they else but acknowledge their commune right and interest in the holy things of God with such scandalous persons And this is that which Master Coaâ—hman saith This banquet of the Lords Supper is the nearest fellowship that the Saints have in this world what lying signes and decâ—avable demoustâ—ations dâ—e these make who communicate they care not where nor with whom but thinke if they examine themselves it is well enough forgetting that it is an act of communion for if we sever the word Sacrament from communion we put out Gods tearme and put in our owne But I answer 1. These who are baptized by one spirit unto one body as all the visible Churches are 1 Cor. 12. 13. professedly heare one Word preached doe thereby acknowledge they have one communion right and interest in these holy things to wit in a communion with Christ in remission of sinnes and regeneration sealed in baptisme and in one common Saviour and common faith preached in the Gospell and is this communion unlawfull and this fellowship a lying signe because all baptized and all hearing one Gospell and that in an avowed profession are not knowne to be regenerated Then should no Infants be baptized except they know all in the visible Congregation baptized with them to
Arminians Pelagians and old Anabaptists expound it of the visible Church that they may make Judas whom they alledge was chosen out of the world no lesse then Peter an example of their universall election and of the small apostasie of the truly elected and regenerated And you have to side with you in this the Apostate Peter Bertius the Arminians at Hage Arminius himselfe the Socinians as Socinus Theoph. 〈◊〉 and you may see your selves refuted by Amesius refuting the Arminians in the conference at Hage and this you expressely say with Arminians and Socinians 1. Because as you say Judas was one of them whom the Father had given to Christ out of the world whom alone of all them so given to him he hath losed Ergo Christ speaketh of a visible donation Answ. The Antecedent is false Joh. 6. 37. All that the Father had given me commeth unto me and him that commeth unto me I will in no wayes cast out v. 39. And this is the Fathers will which â—â—th sent me that of all which he hath given me I should lose nothing but should raise it up at the last day But Judas was cast out and losed and is not raised up at the last day as one which commeth that is beleeveth in Christ. 2. This is the very exception of the Arminians and Amesius answereth quae Scriptura manifesto est judicio Iudam non it a Christo datum commendatum fuisse a Patre ut â—aeteros Christ saith Robinson speaketh of such persons as the world hated because they were not of the world Job 15. 14. But the wicked world 〈◊〉 not hate men as they are elected before God and invisibly or inwardly separated â—ut as they are outwardly separated whether they bee inwardly so or not Answ. 1. Invisible election and the contrary spirit that the children of God are led by which is most unlike to the spirit that leadeth the world is the true ground and cause why the world doth hate them and this choosing out of the world is seene and made visible by the fruits of the spirit to the wicked world but the consequence is nothing he speaketh of election that is visible or made visible yet not as visible for often Paul tâ—â—rmeth the visible Churches Saints Temples of the holy Spirit the sonnes and daughters of the living God and when he tearmeth them such he speaketh to and of a visible Church yet not as visible because to be the temple of the holy Spirit and a sonne and daughter of the living God is a thing formally and properly invisible for faith and the spirit of adoptien are not things visible or obvious to the senses but Separatisâ—s are often deceived with this hee speaketh to the visible Saints Ergo he speaketh to them as visible Saints this is the vaine collection of ignorant Anabaptists Paul writeth to the visible Church but every priviledge that hee doth ascribe to them doth not agree to them as they are visible He saith to the visible Church of Colossians ch 3. v. 3. your life is hid with Christ in God an unvisible life cannot agree to the Colossians as they are a visible Church so separation from the world made manifest and visible is the cause why the world hateth the children of God yet that separation is formally invisible and not seene to the eye of men for it is an action of God to choose men out of the world and no eye mortall can see his actions as they be such And therefore except Robinson prove that this choosing out of the world is common to elect and reprobate and to be seene in Peter and Iudas he bringeth nothing against us to prove his point but hee plainly contradicteth his owne tenents for in his first reason he will have the true Church separated from the world as Iudas the traytor was separated from the world which we grant that is separation in show and in profession and so maketh his visible Church to be made up of traytors and hypocrites who cannot bee the Spouse of Christ nor a part of Christ his mysticall body and his redeemed flocke Now hee still harpeth on this that the visible Church rightly constitute is the Spouse of Christ the redeemed of God the mysticall body of Christ and so hee contradicteth himselfe and saith with us that there bee no visible separation from the world essentiall to such a Church as they dreame of to wit of called Saints Temples of the holy Spirit c. and therefore never one of that side understood to this day the nature of a true visible Church though they talke and write much of it for the truth is the essence and definition of a Church agreeeth not equally to a true Church and a visible Church yea a visible Church as it is visible is not formally a true Church but the redeemed Church onely is the true Church Lastly He speaketh saith he of such a choosing out of the world as he doth of sending unto the world v. 18. Which sending as it was visible and externall so was the selection and separation spoken of Answ. The choosing out of the world is not opposed to sending unto the world for sending unto the world is an Apostolick sending common to Judas with the rest whereby they were sent to preach the Gospell to the world of chosen and unchosen of elect and reprobate but to bee chosen out of the world and given to Christ is proper to the elect onely who are chosen out of the loosed and reprobate world 2. It is also false that the sending of the Apostles is altogether visible for the gifting of them with the holy Spirit is a great part of sending the Apostles as our brethren say a gifted man is a sent Prophet but the Lord his gifting of the Apostle is not visible You cannot saith Robinson be partaker of the Lords Table and of devills Ergo we must separate from the ungodly Answ. The Table of Idols is that Table of devils and of false worship kindly in respect of the object that wee must separate from but a scandalous person at the Lords Supper partaketh of the Table of devils by accident in respect the person being out of Christ eateth damnation to himselfe but it is not per se and kindly the Table of devils to others and therefore I must not separate from it The Supper was to Judas the devils Table because Satan entered in him with a sup to cause him to betray the Lord and Christ told before one of them twelve had a devill and so to one of the twelve the Supper was the devils Table yet could not the Disciples separate therefrom Further he objecteth Paul condemned the Church of Corinth as knâ—â—ed lumpe and as contrary to the right constitution finding so many aberrations and defections from that state wherein they were gathered unto a Church who dare open so prophane a mouth as to affirme that this faithfull labourer
Matth. 10. 5 6 7. they were members of the Jewish Church and called Apostles To the 3. I answer ignorance of fundamentall points not fully proposed and revealed if there bee a gratious disposition of saving faith to beleeve these when they shall be revealed such was as in the Lords Disciples Matth. 16. 16 17. Luk. 12. 32. Luk. 22. 28 29. may well stand with the dignitie of young and as yet limited Apostles Matth. 10. 5 6 7. who had not yet received the holy Ghost in that measure Act. 1. 8 9. that was requisite for Apostles in their full Apostolicke charge and made infallible pen-men of Canonick Scriptures sent to preach to all the world To the 4. I answer They were not non-residents because they returned to reside with Christ after they had casten out devils Ioh. 4. 1 2. which your lay-Prophets by your owne confession cannot lawfully doe not to bee idle but to learne more and to be eye and care witnesses of the doctrine life death resurrection and ascension to glory of Christ 2 Pet. 1. 16 17 18. 1 Joh. 1. 1 2 3. Matth. 26. 37 38 39. Luk. 24. 50 51 52. Joh. 20. 19 20. Act. 4. 20. which was necessary that they might preach these things to the world Nor is a Pastor in his studie attending reading as 1 Tim. 3. 15 16. though he be not then teaching a non-resident To the 5. I say when Christ ascended unto heaven Ephes. 4. 11. He gave some to bee Apostles c. but that gifting of Apostles is not to restrict the institution of Apostles to the precise time of his ascension for you grant that after the Lords resurrection and before his ascension they were ordained Apostles Matth. 28. 19. Joh. 20. 23. but the full sending of the holy Spirit to Apostles Evangelists Pastors and Teachers is ascribed to his ascension as a speciall fruite of his ascension Act. 1. 8 9. Joh. 16. v. 7 8 9. and therefore is their sending called an effect of the holy Spirit For the second point Giving and not granting that the Apostles were not Apostles till after the resurrection yet will it not follow that they were lay-Prophets or Prophets out of office for they might have beene Pastors in office though not Apostles in office for there were beside these others in the Jewish Church else where were Scribes Pharisees Lawyers Doctors all sitters in Moses his chaire They were not Apostles sure what were they then all teachers out of office No If then I prove that the Apostles were teachers in office though it were granted that they were not Apostles as in the fulnesse and plenitude thereof they were not till Christ arose from the dead I prove as much as taketh this argument for lay-prophets out of their hands But that they were not non-officed teachers but called Apostles or Pastors I prove 1. Argum. Judas was chosen one of the twelve and an Apostle Ergo farre more were the rest I prove the Antecedent 1. Act. 20. Let another take his 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 his charge 2. v. 17. He took part with us say they in this 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in this ministery 3. Matthias v. 25. was chosen in that place and Apostleship from which Judas fell Now Lay-Prophets have no officiall Episcopacie no Ministery nor can any chosen in their place said to bee chosen to an Apostleship Ioh. 6. 7. Have not I chosen you twelve this choosing was to an Embassage saith Cyrill Augustine Euthymius and all our Divines with them 2. Matth. 10. 2. These are the names of the twelve Apostles v. 5. he send them What power he giveth to them in respect of al the world to remit and retaine sinnes Iob. 20. that hee giveth to them toward the house of Israel v. 11 12 13. under the name of offered peace Magis minus non variant speciem Mark 13. 14. Mark 3. 14. hee ordained twelve 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 hee made twelve to be with him which he might send to preach Luk. 9. 1. and he called the twelve and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 be sent them hee tooke them from their fishing and made them fishers of men and Matth. 10. 10. hee calleth them workmen worthy of their hire private Prophets are not gifted nor sent nor taken from their callings nor are they workmen deserving stipend for that is due to Prophets by office 1 Cor. 9. 13. 14. Gal. 6. 6. 1 Tim. 5. 17. 3. Those who have power to dispense the seales of grace and to baptize are not private or unofficed Prophets but sent of God and in office as Matth. 28. 19. 1 Cor. 1. 17. and Robinson granteth this and so doe Separatists teach But the Disciples of Christ before his resurrection baptized Ioh. 4. 2. 4. Those who were witnesses of the life miracles doctrine of Christ and preached the same and confirmed it by miracles were pastors 5. Those who were twelve selected men chosen Luk. 6. 13. named Apostles Mark 9. 35. Mark 10. 32. Luk. 8. 1. to whom the keyes of the kingdome were given Matth. 18. 17 18 19. Matth. 16. 19. are not unofficed men 6. This is a Popish opinion and to be suspected for Papists to advance Peter to a Popedome will have him no Apostle while after the resurrection for Bellarmine saith Imposition of hands is essentiall to holy orders and that the Apostle ordained no Presbyters while Christ was risen and made the Apostles and gave them the holy Spirit The Councell of Trent hinteth at the same opinion Bellarmine saith the Apostles were made Priests at the last Supper to sacrifice Christs body but not Presbyters till after that when they received the holy Ghost and Cardinall Hosius Martinus Ledesma Petrus a Soto say the Disciples are made Apostles Ioh. 21. Toletus saith they had power before this time to preach but not to forgive sinnes in the Sacrament of pennance while now And Cardinall Cajetan saith here was first the Sacrament of pennance ordained and it is true Cyrillus and Chrysostome say that Iohn 21. Soli sacerdotes onely Pastors by this place have power to forgive sinnes but not by this place onely for they say that Matth. 16. power is given Joannes de Lugo the Popes Professor at Rome teach that Joh. 21. the Apostles first received this power And jayne with him Suarez Thomas Sanchez Aegidius Coniuk and Vasquez though as good as they say the contrary as Panormitanus a late Schooleman Avila and Sylvester and John Bishop of Rochester writing against Papists and their Popes power of dethroning Kings saith how could the Apostles who are examples of good order preach and baptize if they were meere Layicks and not Pastors while after Christ was arisen from the dead Robinson citeth Luk. 8. 39. Christ biddeth the dispossessed man gâ—shew what great things the Lord had done for him and hee went and preached it now
and their doctrine judged by the Prophets now if such could erre our faith were not immediately builded upon the doctrine of the Prophets and Apostles Answ. This is before examined by me the consequence is null for the holy Spirit saith Pareus did not dite all things which the Prophets spake they might have mixed in some thing of their owne Robinson saith that Paul could not have said if any thinke himselfe to be a Prophet c. let such an one acknowledge that the thing I wrote are the commandements of the Lord if these had beene extraordinary Prophets they should have knowne Pauls writings undoubtedly to have beene the Canonick word of God and could not have beene ignorant thereof Answ. This presupponeth that these extraordinary Prophets might have beene ignorant that the Apostles commandements was the commandements of the Lord which is not absurd for Nathan and Samuel were ignorant of Gods will in some points for Prophets see and know sometimes as men and sometimes as Prophets in the former they may erre in the latter they are infallible He subjoyneth The word of God came it to you or came it from you if the word of God came after a sort to the Corinthians and not from them then were they not immediatly and extraordinarily inspired whereas indeed the Word of God came from the Apostles Answ. This proveth not the point for hee condemneth the arrogancie of some immediately inspired Prophets Came the word of God from you that is are yee above the Apostle to whom the word of God was committed that it may bee preached to all the world that it might come from the Apostles to others Or came it to you onely as to the only Apostolick teachers that you neede no admonition but hence it followeth not but they were extraordinarily inspired Prophets for Peter might be rebuked though an Apostle a chief one Neither is it any imputation to Paul or to any who hath received the Spirit in measure to be censured It is true Canonick doctrine as it is such cannot be censured but the teachers thereof though infallible even Paul Act. 17. 10 11. and every spirit is to bee tried whether they be of God or no 1 Joh. 3. 1. yea to say that the Church cannot be builded upon the foundation of the Prophets and Apostles as Mr. Robinson saith pag. 68. if these Prophets extraordinary can erre or can bee subject to the censure and judgement of the Church is the very argument of Papists for they say that the Word of God borroweth authoritie quoad nos in respect of us from the Church and is to be beleeved because Peter Paul the Prophets and Apostles the then present Church say it is the Word of God So Stapleton as Whittakerne teacheth that Christ was the Sonne of God dependeth to our faith upon the testimony of John Baptist. See Bellarmine Gregorius de Valent. Gretser So three famous commentators say Jansenius Cardinalis Cajetan and Cardinalis Toletus But our Divines answer that the Word of God is true in it selfe and the authentick ground of our faith not because the Prophets and Apostles say it is the word of God not because Paul or an Angel from heaven saith it is so Gal. 1. 8. for even the Prophets and Apostles were but men and so their testimony not infallible but because God himselfe saith so See for this Rivetus Whittakerus Bucerus Calvinus yea and the Fathers most expressely say that the Prophets and Apostles are not the foundation of our faith nor their word because they were infallible but Gods word by their mouths and penne So Theaâ—â—â—lact Chrysostome Beda Ambrosius Occam and Gerson doe roundly acknowledge that their Popes word is not the foundation of faith quia Papa potest heretiâ—ari because the Pope may erre What because Samuel was deceived in calling Eliah the Lords annointed are not his bookes a part of canonick doctrine whereupon our faith is builded Lastly saith Robinson Pastors must preach and pray before they hee put in office otherwise they cannot bee trâ—ed if they bee apt to teach as they must be 1 Tim. 3. 2. Tit. 1. 9. It is decreed that all may preach Ministers Teachers Elders Deacons and if there beam ex ipsa plebe any of the common people who would imploy their gift for the good of the Church and it is practised in the Colledges where all must preach though they were never Priests Answ. 1. It is lawfull that these ayming at the office 2. Brought up in humane sciences 3. Called by the Church preach by way of tryall before they be admitted to the office but hence it cannot be concluded that tradesmen and artificersvoyd of learning and ignorant of the Scriptures should preach not for try all or as ayming at the office of the Ministery but as ordinary ministers of the conversion of soules to the faith and that without any calling of the Church either to the office or to the degree preparatorie to the office 2. All gifted should preach yea and in England ought to bee put in office where there is a reading ministery which Christ never ordained to bee in his house and this the harmony of confession and Synods teach and no more It is a fault that in Colledges all doe preach whether Christ hath called them or not such unsent runners Mr. Robinson cannot approve Ambrose saith at the beginning it was granted that all should preach and baptize that the Church might grow and Origen said the same But otherwise Hieronymus saith it is praesumptio temeritatis a rash presumption for any to preach who are not sent and Theophylact calleth them false Prophets Augustine will have them all to come before Christ and so to bee theeves and robbers who commeth not sent Sicut Moses Prophetâ— as Moses and the Prophets were sent Coachman saith if preaching be tyed to the ministery and that order there shall neither bee faith nor grace in a Church where there is no ministery Answ. It followeth not for faith may come by reading by conference and you expone Rom. 10. 14. As Arminians and Socinians doe 2. We as Embassadors pray you in Christs stead to be reconciled 2 Cor. 5. 20. Ephes. 4. 11. 1 Cor. 12. 29. Are all Prophets Ergo would you say no reconciliation in a land without apostolick Ambassadors It followeth not ex negatione unius medii for then there should be no grace nor salvation where there be none of your lay-Preachers Coachman Knowledge judgement utterance with gravitie authoritie power maketh a man a Minister whether he be in office or not Preaching is accidentall to the office and no part of the office but onely an ornament or appendix of it a Minister is in full office of the order of Priesthood though he never preach an office maketh not a Preacher it maketh him onely such
or Church assembly have any power to bind the Churches to obedience because these commandements and decrees of censure are but ministeriall and limited and in so farre onely of force as they have reason from the Word of God as you say 3. Conclusion There is an authoritative power in Synods whereby they may and doe command in the Lord the visible Churches in their bounds the whole Churches are subject to the ordinance and decree of the Church Act. 1. where with common consent of a Synodicall meeting Matthias is ordained an Apostle Ergo all the Churches are to take him for an Apostle This argument cannot bee repelled because the Apostles by their extraordinary power did choose Matthias Because 1. they themselves cite this place to prove the peoples power ordinary which is to indure to Christs second comming in calling and electing their owne officers and Elders 2. Almain a Papist alleadgeth the place with good reason to prove that a generall councell is above Peter or the Pope because Peter would not choose Matthias without consent of the Apostles and Church 3. If this was extraordinary that Matthias was chosen why then is the vow and consent of the Church sought for there is nothing extraordinary and Apostolick flowing from an Apostolick spirit which is concluded or done by the spirit ordinary of the Church of beleevers So also Act. 6. If the Apostles did not by the ordinary and Synodicall power of ordinary Pastors choose seven Deacons how doe they first require that the Churches of Grecians and Hebrewes should seek out seven men v. 3. and did ordaine them with the common consent of the whole multitude v. 5. Act. 15. A Synod of moe Churches give decrees which obliege the Churches v. 28. ch 16. v. 4. Ergo Synods have authoritie over the Churches Those who say this Synod is not a patterne for after Synods say farre aside for their reason is this was 1. An Apostolick Synod 2. the holy Ghost was here 3. the thing determined was canonick Scripture But this is a way to clude all the promises made to Pastors in the word when as they are first made to Apostles this promise Behold I am with you to the â—nd of the world and this I will send you the other Comforter who 〈◊〉 lead you in all truth cannot bee made to faithfull Pastors and the Christian Church that now is for it is certaine Christ is otherwise present with his Apostles then with his Pastors after them And that he gave them a tongue a spirit when they were before the councels and rulers as to Apostolick men as Act. 4. 8. 9 10. Act. 5. 29. as Christ promised Matth. 10. 19. 20. Luk. 21. 13 14 15. for they were full of the holy Ghost before rulers but by our brethrens doctrine it shall follow none of these promises belong to Pastors now adayes in the like because no pastors now are Apostles Surely this were to fetter and imprison many glorious promises within the pale of the onely Apostolick Church and because Christ ascending to heaven sent downe the Apostolick spirit to his Apostles to write and preach canonick Scripture it shall follow he fulfilleth that promise John 16. 13. to none now adayes because none have the Apostolike spirit in the manner and measure that the Apostles had Yea further it is canonick Scripture that the Apostles at the last supper did shew forth the Lords death till be come againe therefore it shall follow that we have no warrant to shew forth the Lords death till he come againe 2. But that the Apostles in an ecclesiastick way did determine in the Synod for our imitation and not in an Apostolike way is cleare by many evidences in the text as Act. 15. 2. Paul and Barnabas were sent commissioners to the Apostles and Elders about this question Paul as an Apostle needed not be sent to know more of the matter then he knew as an Apostle for as an Apostle he knew the whole mystery of the Gospel Gal. 1. 16. 17. Ephes. 3. 4 5. Ergo he was sent to the Synod as a Pastor and that as an ordinary Pastor 2. They came together v. 6. to consider of this businesse but as Apostles they needed not the help of a Synod Ergo they came together as ordinary Pastors for the Churches after imitation 3. There was much debating and disputing v. 7. about the matter 4. They set down their minds and sentences in order one after another as Peter first v. 7. 8. then Barnabas and Paul v. 12. then James v. 13. and to James his sentence the whole Councell agreeth v. 22. Now what the Apostles as Apostles and from an infallible Spirit do they doe it not by seeking light and help one from another 5. The Decree of the Councell is a thing that Apostles Elders and Brethren and the whole Church resolveth after much dispute v. 22. But all these especially brethren and the whole beleevers as our Brethren say doe not joyne themselves with the Apostles either to write canonick Scripture or to give their consent to the writing of it therefore they doe consent by a synodall authority for the after imitation of the Churches Also there bee reasons of moment for Synods and 1. if according to the Law of nature and nations no man can bee a Judge in his owne cause then are appeales from the Eldership of one congregation when they are a party to the accused person naturall and from a Session to the Presbyteries and Synods of many moe Elders But the former is reason nature Law of Nations Ergo so is the latter 1. It is best reason which hath most of Scripture Paul and Barnabas Act. 15. 1. 2. had no small disputation with those who said circumcision was necessary finding their parties could not be Judges They appeale to a generall councell at Jerusalem where were the Apostles and Elders The Church of the Grecians and the Church of the Hebrewes strive neither of them can judge other and both appeale to a higher judicatory to the twelve Apostles and their owne Churches meeting with them and there is the matter determined aâ—ent helping the poore by Deacons if the Judge doe wrong and one particular congregation shall oppresse one sincere and sound beleever what remedy hath the care of Christ provided for this that the oppressours may be edisied by Church censures and the oppressed freed and delivered by remedy of discipline of Christ whose it is to judge the poore of the people and to save the children of the needy Ps. 72. 4. Now it is knowne that Diotrephes doth sometime excommunicate and the evill seâ—vant ruleth all Hieronymus saith Arrians ruled all in the dayes of Constantius and Valens Basil saith we may say in our time that there is neither Prince nor Prophet nor Ruâ—â—â— nor oblation nor incense Athanasius and Vincentius Lirinent complain'd that it was in the Arrians times as with the Church and Prophets in the
Nazianzen which is not against their authoritie and true fulnesse and he speaketh of the councells of his time and it is not to bee denyed but Panormitan saith well dictum unius privati est praeferendum dicto papae si ille moveretur melioribus rationibus veteris novi Testamenti and Augustine saith latter councells may correct older councells and Petrus de Monte under Eugenius complained that there was no godly and learned Bishops in his time to determine truth in a Synod when Doctors Professors Bishops and all have sworne obedience to the Pope to their Occumenick councells and to the wicked decrees of the councell of Trent as the Bull of Pius the fourth requireth But before I say any thing of the second question anent the magistrates power I shall close the other wayes of communion of sister Churches CHAP. 6. SECT 5. Three other wayes of communion of sister Churches A Fift way of communion saith the author is by helping and contributing to sister Churches Prophets and Teachers when they are in scarstie as Act. 11. 29. Rom. 15. 25. 26. Ans. This way of communion we acknowledg but we see not how this communion can stand wiâ—hout the authoritie of Synods if Churches bee not united in one visible body they cannot authoritatively send helpe of teachers one to another and this is a direct acknowledgement of a visible union of more Churches in one visible body for the Church of Jerusalem authoritatively sent Pastors Paul and Barnabas as Pastors to the Gentiles you will have them sent as gifted men and that they are not Pastors while they bee ordained and chosen by these Churches to which they goe A sixt way of communion saith hee is by admonition if a sister Church or any member thereof bee scandalous wee are then to send Elders to warn them to call Archippus or any other Elder to take beed to do their dutie if the Elders or Church bee remisse in consuring wee are to take the helpe of two or three Churches moe if yet that Church â—eare not wee are to tell a Congregation of Churches together or if the offence bee weightie wee are to withdraw the right hand of fellowship from such a Church and to forbeare all such sort of exercise of mutuall brotherly communion with them which all the Churches of Christ are to walke in one towards another Answ. You acknowledge that same order which Christ commandeth Matth. 18. to gaine a brother is to bee kept in the gaining of scandalous Churches But 1. What warrant have you of the two first steps of Christs order against scandalous Churches and to omit the third judiciall and authoritative way when sister Churches turne obstinate Christs order for gaining the scandalous is as necessary in the third as in the former two 2. Why doe you allow the third in a sort for if the sister Church will not bee admonished you will have her rebuked before moe sister Churches that are conveened that is before a Synod is it because you thinke there is more authority in a Synod then in one sister Church then you thinke there is authoritie in a Synod for by good Logick wee may inferre the positive degree from the comparative and there is no other reason why the matter should come before a Synod for all in a Synod wanteth authority and power to censure as you thinke yet to complaine to a Synod is an acknowledgement of the authoritie of a Synod as Christs order saith Matth. 18. 17. If hee neglect to heare them tell it to the Church 3. What is the withdrawing of brotherly communion from obstinate sister Churches but as Amesius saith well excommunication by proportion and analogie Ergo say I in this a Synod hath a Synodicall authoritie over the Churches within the bounds of the Synod by proportion for who can inflict a punishment of a Church censure by proportion answerable to excommunication but a Church or a Synodicall meeting which hath the power of the Church by proportion Amesius would prove that a particular Church cannot bee excommunicated because a Church cannot bee cast out of communion with it selfe for then she should bee cast out of herselfe But this argument with reverence of so learned and godly a man proveth onely that a particular Church cannot excommunicate herselfe which I grant but it concludeth not but a particular obstinate Church may bee excommunicated out of the societie of all sister Churches who meeting in a Synod in the name of Jesus Christ have power to save the spirits of sister Churches in the day of the Lord and are to edifie them by counsell and rebuking as the Author granteth and why not by an authoritative declaring that they will have no communion with such an obstinate sister or rather daughter Church Wee have never saith the Author been put to the utmost extent of this dutie the Lord hitherto preventing by his grace yet it is our dutie The Church Cant. 8. tooke care not onely for her owne members but also for her little sister that had no brests and would have taken care if having breasts they had been distempered with corrupt milke if the Apostles had a care of all the Churches 1 Cor. 8. 11. is that spirit of grace and love dead with them ought not all the Churches to care for sister Churches if not virtute officii by vertue of an office yet intuitu charitatis for charities sake Answ. That you have never beene put to these duties to the utmost will never prove that the government is of God for Corinth Ephesus Pergamus Thyatira which were glorious Churches by your owne confession were put to a necessitie of the utmost extent of these duties yea it proveth your government to bee rather so much the worse because Christs government is opposed by secret enemies in the Church 2. You make the spirit of love in a pastorall care over other Churches to bee dead because none have any pastorall care over any other Churches but the particular Congregation over which they are Pastors and pastorall love to unconverted ones as pastorall you utterly deny The last way of communion saith the Author is by propagation or multiplication which is as the Apostles had immediat calling from God to travell through the world and to plant Churches so have particular Churches given to them immediatly from Christ the fulnesse of measure of grace which the inlargement and establishment of Christs kingdome doth require that is when the Bee-hive a parishionall congregation is surcharged they have power to send forth their members to enter by Covenant in Church-state amongst themselves and may commend to them such able gifted Ministers as they thinke may bee Ministers in that young Church Answ. 1. This way of inlarging Christs kingdome is defective 1. It sheweth the way of inlarging the number of invisible Churches and multitudes of converts into new incorporations but doth shew no way how to
Bucanus Zanchius Perkinsius Daneus Bullingerus the Professors of Leiden teach All that can be said commeth to this that Hereticks should not bee punished 1. Cyprian saith to Demetrius that hee was greater then his Gods because he revenged the wrongs done to his Gods and that it was a shame for him to hope for helpe from the Gods which hee behooved to defend Answ. This proveth that the false Gods of Demetrius were but false Gods because they were not able to revenge the wrongs done to themselves as the true God who made the heaven and the earth can doe but nothing against the punishing of the Hereticks for then it should follow that blasphemy against the holy Ghost and no sinnes should bee punished for all sinnes are injuries done to God and therefore neither Magistrates nor parents nor doctors yea nor the Church should use any rod either corporall or spirituall against subjects children or scandalous persons because God can revenge his owne quarrell yea excommunication is a revenging of a wrong done to God 2. They object the Apostles way was to watch against Hereticks Act. 20. 29. 31. and Rom. 16. 17. to esâ—hew them 2 Tim. 2. 25. the servant of the Lord must bee gentle Answ. This is objected by Gerardus as also because they may bee converted Ergo they are not to bee killed Christ would not have fire comming downe from heaven to destroy the Sa 〈◊〉 for afterward they were converted but wee thinke not any should be put to death for simple heresie as Musâ—uâ—us and Whittaker teach they are to bee instructed censured rebuked eschewed but though Ananias and Saphira might bee converted Peter strake them with death and Paul did right in â—iking Elymas the Sorcerer with blindnesse Act. 13. because he laboured to turne away Sergius Paulus from the faith these were extraordinary judgements but yet they doe well prove that where the Magistrate is armed with authority hee ought to inflict bodily punishment upon the seducing hereticks so it hee done as Augustine saith Animo corrigendi non vindicandi See Beza Professors of Leyden and what Elias did by an extraordinary power in killing Baals Priests that Achab the then supreme Magistrate should have done 3. They object that it is contrary to the meeke spirit of Christ in the New Testament that any should bee punished for heresie and that it is proper to enemies of the truth and Antichrist so to doe as their practise declare Nestorius being made Archbishop of Constantinople said to the Emperour I will give thee heaven O Emperour if thou with free the earth of hereticks Dioscorus compelled with armed souldiers the Bishops to subseribe to the heresie of Entyches Eudâ—xius the Arrian obliged Valens the Arrian Emperour to root out 〈◊〉 orthodox professors The Turke in his Alcoran commandeth to kill all who obey not his law Answ. The sword is expressely given by God Rom. 13. to Christian Magistrates and this is not against the meeknesse of Christ no more nor to deliver to Satan or to curse and excommunicate Apostats with that great curse called Anathâ—ina Maranatha 1 Cor. 16. 22. And though Hereticks and Mahomet teach that Hereticks as also they teach that manslayers adulterers paricides should die the death it followeth not that we are not to teach the same Fourthly The parable of letting the Tares grow while the day of judgement is alleaged It is true Chrysostome saith that many innocent persons are killed in the rooting out the tares by bloody warres Chrysologus saith Neither Matthew the publican nor Paul should have beene comerted if the Sword had beene used and Augustine seemeth to call the tares haereticorum falsitates and Theophylact Zizania sunt haereses But I answer Christ exponeth the tares 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Syriace 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Beza filii illius improbi Erasmus diaboli the children of the devill and Theophylact addeth Zizania sunt hâ—reses vel malae cogitationes and Gerardus perverteth Theophylact for he extendeth the tares not onely to Hereticks but also to wicked men to Matthew who was a publican but not a Heretick properly And first the field is the world of the visible Church where the seed of the Word is sowne and it must bee meaned of all scandalous persons in Christs visible kingdome so all shall bee spared and there shall neither bee use of the Magistrates sword nor of the Church discipline in the Church as Anabaptists expone the place 2. There should not so much as rebukes and threatnings beene used but wicked men should bee permitted to grow while the day of judgement that the Angels root them out Now it is knowne that the power of the word preached hath rooted out some tares because it hath converted them 3. Hereticks are not all things which offend the incestuous Corinthian offended also 2. Onely Hereticks are not such as worke iniquitie there bee others also in the visible Church as our brethren expone Revel 22. 15. nor are onely hereticks to be cast out in the furnace of fire where there shall bee weeping and gnashing of teeth 3. Nor are onely the good wheat those who are orthodox and opposite to hereticks who shall shine as the Sunne in the kingdome of their father p. 42. 43. except wee would say that all sound in the faith and holding no hereticall doctrine shall shine in the firmament as the Sun 4. The casting out of Hereticks out of the visible Church by excommunication is a rooting of them out of the field of the visible Church Let more of this be seen and considered in those who have written thereof as in Gâ—rardus loc cit Beza de puniend Haeret. Bellarm. de laicis c. 21. Costerus Enchirid. de moriâ—us haereticor Pelr. Gregorius lib. 12. de repub c. 4. Suarez de tripl virtut theolog disp 18. sect 2. Gregorius de Valent. 〈◊〉 3. disp l. q. 10. punc 6. Jus Canonicum C. Quid autem dist 49. Meiser lib. 4. de legibus sect 1. â— 10 11 12. Lipsius l. 4. 〈◊〉 c. 2. Coâ—â—d Bâ—unus l. 3. de haeretic c. 13. Paulus Windeck lib. de exsâ—irpandis haeretic APPENDIX A further consideration of compelling or tolerating those of contrary Religions and Sects in the Church WEe still hold as is already said that Christian Magistrates cannot compell Pagans to embrace the Christian faith Nor can the Church in a Church-way compell Pagans or Jewes comming to remaine amongst us Christians because Pagans are to bee gathered to a Church by the preaching of the Word and by that way that the Apostles planted Churches which was by the sword of the Spirit only as Matth. 28. 19 20. 1 Cor. 2. 1. 2. 2 Cor. 10. 4 5 6. But the argument which the Jesuit Tannerus other Papists bring for it I judge most weake for they will not have them compelled to the faith because 1. faith is a voluntary and
by the dominion of free-will but this is Pelagianisme and Arminianisme and Papists and Pelagians will needs examine the inclinations powers and motions of the soule which goe before the wills consent or arise in us without the wills consent from all subjection to a Law that so originall sinne may bee no sinne because as Pâ—â—agius said it is not voluntary and concupiscence when the will joyneth no consent to it is no sinne yea so the unbeleefe and ignorance of fundamentall points as they remaine in the mind shall bee no sinne 3. If this bee no sinne we are not to pray for illumination to see either the truth on the one side nor on the other and what actions wee doe according to these opinions in things not fundamentall wee doe them not with any certaintie of faith or any plerophorie but blindly or doubtingly and so sinfully which is expresly condemned Rom. 14. 13. and is expressely against that full assurance of faith that wee are to have in those very actions which in their owne nature are indifferent as is evident Rom. 14. 14. I know and am perswaded by the Lord Jesus that there is nothing uncleane of it selfe â— 5. Let every one bee fully perswaded in his owne mind 4. If they be not sinnes then are none to bee rebuked for these opinions no more then they are to bee excommunicated for them and though any erre in points not fundamentall they are not to bee rebuked yea nor to bee convinced of them by the light of the word 2. If they bee sinnes then when they are publickly prosested they must scandalize our brother but there bee no sinnes which scandalize our brother but they are susceptible and in capacitie to bee committed with obstinacie Every sinne sub ratione scandali is the subject of Church-censure Yea Iâ—m 16. 17. Every one is to bee avoyded who causeth divisions and 〈◊〉 es contrary to the doctrine which the Church hath learned of the Apostles and every one who walketh disorderly 2 Thess. 3. 11. and 〈◊〉 not the commandement of the Apostles is to bee excommunicated 〈◊〉 hee bee ashamed v. 14. but opinions contrary to the Apostles doctrine in non-fundamentalls are not fundamentalls and if they bee professed cause divisions and offences contrary to the Apostolik doctrine for many non-fundamentalls are the Apostles doctrine 3. What ever tendeth to the subversion of fundamentalls tendeâ—â—â—◠〈…〉 to the subversion of faith and so doth much truly scandalizâ—anâ— bring on damnation that Christ hath ordained to be removed out of the Church by Church-censures but erroneous opinions in points not fundamentall and in superstructures being professed and instilled in the eares and simple mindes of others tend to the subversion of fundamentalls as having connexion by just consequent with fundamentalls and doe scandalize and bring on doubtings about the foundation and so bring damnation Ergo erroneous opinions in points not fundamentall must be removed out of the Church by Church-censures The proposition is cleare he that falleth in a publicke scandalous sinne is to be delivered to Satan both for his owne sake that he be not damned himselfe but that 1 Cor. 5. 5. to the destruction of the flesh the spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord and so also for others because a little Leaven leaveneth the whole lump v. 6. The assumption is proved by dayly experience for corruption in Discipline and Government in the Church of Rome brought on corruption in Doctrine and the same did we find in the Churches of Scotland and England 4. Fundamentalls are no other thing then that which the Apostle calleth Heb. 6. 12. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the first principles of the oracles of God and ch 6. 1. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Doctrine of the Principles of Christ which are laid as foundations as ib. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 not laying the foundation againe c. Then non-fundamentalls must be such superstructures as are not the first Principles of the Oracles of God and are not the Doctrine of the Principles of Christ. But the Apostle will not have us to fluctuate and doubt as Skeptickes in a Pyâ—rhonian Vacillation and Uncertainty in these which he calleth the superstructures 1. As is evident by his words 11 Of whom we have many things to say and hard to be uttered but you are dull of hearing 12. For when for the time yee ought to be teachers yee have need that one teach you againe which be the first Principles of the Oracles of God and are become such as have neede of milke and not of strong food 13. For every one that useth milke is unskilfull in the word of righteousnesse for he is a babe 14. But strong meate belongeth to them that are of full age even those who by reason of use have their senses exercised to discerne both good and evill Chap. 6. 1. Therefore leaving the doctrine of the beginning of Christ let us goe on unto perfection not laying againe the foundation of repentance from dead workes c. Whence it is more then evidently apparent to any intelligent mind 1. That when he saith they ought to be teachers of others he cannot be thought to meane that they should teach fundamentalls onely to others because he would have them to be capable of the food of such as are stronger and have their senses exercised to discerne good and ill and will have them carried on to perction now fundamentalls are expressely the foode of babes which bâ—â— neede of milke c. 6. v. 12. and not the foode of the stronger if then they ought to teach superstructures and non-fundamentalls to others they cannot teach and exhort privately for of such he speaketh these things whereof they have no certainty of faith and which they beleeve with a reserve as ready to reject them to morrow upon second thoughts for what we teach to others those as I conceive we are oblieged to speake because we beleeve Psal. 116. 10. 2 Cor. 4. 13. and those we are to perswade because we know not with a reserve but with certainty of faith the terror of the Lord 2 Cor. 5. 11. If it be said teachers now are not oblieged to know all that they teach now to be divine truths with such a certainty of faith as Prophets and Apostles who were ledde by an infallible Spirit for our private exhorting our publick Sermons come not from a Spirit as infallible as that Spirit which spake and wrote canonick Scripture for we may erre in exhorting in Preaching in writing but the pen-men of canonick Scripture were infallible I answer the pen-men of Scripture when they did speak and write Scripture were infallible de jure de facto they could neither erre actually and by Gods word they were oblieged not to erre and in that they were freer from error then we are who now succeed them to preach and write but what God hath revealed in his word whether they be fundamentalls or superstructures doth obliege
bestoweth lawfull Kings and Magistrates upon many Nations who know nothing of a Saviour I answer When I consider the point more exactly I see not how Kings who reigne by the wisdome of God Jesus Christ Prov. 8. 14. 15. have not their kingly power from Christ who hath all power given to him in Heaven and in Earth Matth. 28. 18. for they are Nurse-fathers of the Church as Kings Esa. 49. 15. they are to kisse the Sonne and exalt his Throne as Kings Psal. 2. 11. they bring presents and kingly gifts to Christ as Kings Psal. 72. v. 10. 11. and they serve Christ not onely as men but also as Kings as Augustine saith therefore are they ordained as meanes by Christ the Mediator to promote his kingly Throne Some of our Divines will have the kingly power to come from God as Creator in respect God giveth Kings who are his Vicegerents to those who are not redeemed and to Nations who never heard of Christ and others hold that the kingly power floweth from Christ-Mediator in respect he accomplisheth his purposes of saving of his redeemed people by Kings authority and by the influence of their kingly government procureth a feeding ministery and by their princely tutory the edification of his body the Church which possibly both aime at truth See the groundlesse carping at Cartwright Calvin Beza and others by that sharp toothed envier of truth the Author of the Survey of holy discipline of this hereafter more 4. Conclusion The King as King hath not a nomothetick or legislative power to make Lawes in matters ecclesiastick in a constitute Church nor hath he a definitive sentence as a Judge 1. All power of teaching publikely the Church or the Churches of Christ is given to those who are sent and called of God for that effect but Magistrates as Magistrates are not sent nor called of God to the publike teaching of the Church Ergo. The proposition is cleare from the like Rom. 10. 14. How shall they preach except they be sent Ergo how shall they publikely and synodically teach except they be sent Heb. 5. 4. No man taketh this honour upon him but he that is called of God as was Aaron c. Ergo if none be a Priest to offer a Sacrifice without Gods calling neither can he exercise the other part of the Priesthood to teach synodically to give out 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 decrees Acts 16. 4. that obligeth the Churches ecclesiastically but he who is called 2. Who so hath nomothetick power to define and make Lawes in matters ecclesiastick have onely a ministeriall power to expone Christs will in his Testament under paine of Church-censures and hath no coactive power of the sword to command these Lawes enacted and to injoyne them on the Churches But onely Church-men who are formally members of the Church as Pastors Doctors Elders and others sent by the Church have this ministeriall power without the coactive power of the sword and what ever the Magistrate as the Magistrate commandeth he commandeth it in things ecclesiastick necessary and expedient under bodily punishment I adde this because threatning of bodily punishment is not essentiall to Lawes in generall because some Lawes are seconded onely with rewards as the Judge offereth by law a reward to any who shall bring unto him the head of a Boar or of some notorious robber Ergo c. The proposition is cleare the learned Junius giveth to the Magistrate with our Divines an interpretation of Scripture as a Judge which concerneth his owne practise they are interpreters pro communi vocationis modo in a Christian way as private men but they have no power of ecclesiastick interpretation 2. Gul. Apollonius saith the Prince as a Christian hath an office to exhort the Svnod by word or Epistle as Constantius did the Fathers of the Nicen Councell and his Legates exhorted the Councell of Chalcedon ut Deo rationem reddituri See Ruffinus and the acts of the Councell of Chalcedon 3. The Magistrate hath a power judiciall as a Magistrate in so farre as his owne practise is concerned to expone the things defined but this expotition he useth non instruendo synodice non docendo ecclesiastice sed docendo seu potius mandando cum certa relatione ad paenam à brachio seculari insligendam contemptoribus not in an ecclesiasticall way teaching and instructing synodically but teaching or rather commanding with a certaine relation to civill punishment to be inflicted upon the contemners as he teacheth what is just or unjust in his civill Lawes not directly to informe the mind but to correct bad manners and this maketh the object of kingly power about Churches matters and the object of ecclesiasticall power formall objects different 3. Those who have a nomothetick power to define in Synods are sent by the Church to Synods with authoritative commission and power for that effect representing the Church which sent them as all who are sent with any ambassage doe represent those who sent them But Magistrates as Magistrates are not sent to represent those who sent them with authoritation commission of the Church Ergo they have no such power â—â—dâ—ine in Synods I prove the proposition from the Apostles practise Paul and Barnabas were sent as chosen men by the Church 〈◊〉 Antioch Acts 15. 2. 3. Acts 15. 6. the Apostles and Elders came from the Church to consider of this matter Acts 21. 18. Acts 22. 17. 〈◊〉 2 Cor. 8 17 18. if the Apostle with the Church sent Titus 〈◊〉 Brother whose praise is in the Gospel as chosen of the Churches to travell with us v. 19 in gathering the charity of the Saints for the poore at Jerusalem then by the like those who are sent to declare the minds of the Churches are also clothed with the authority of the Churches who sent them but Magistrates aâ— such are not sent but are there with the sword of Common-wealth and not with the mind of the Church as Magistrates except they be also Christians 4. The Apostolike Synods is to us a perfect patterne of Synods but persons defining in them are Apostles and Elders Acts 16. 4. Acts 15. 6. the Church Matth. 18. 18. defineth and 1 Cor. 5. 4. those who are conveened in the name of the Lord â—esus and the Apostles pastorall spirit those who are over us in the Lord and watch for our soules 1 Thes. 5. 14. Heb. 13. 17. but in these Synods there are no Magistrates yea there was at Câ—rinth a Heathen Magistrate 1 Cor. 6. 1. and in the Apostolike Church a persecutor Acts 22. 1 2 3. c. And the Magistrate as the Magistrate is not a member of the Church and is neither Pastor Elder nor Doctor nor a professor of the Gospel except he be more then a Magistrate 5. No Ecclesiasticall power or acts formally Ecclesiasticall are competent to one who is not an Ecclesiasticall person or not a member of the Church but a civill person