of understanding in those that say so For if Christ had a Church before his ascension that wanted any thing essential to its being then it was a Church and no Church at the same time which is absurd to imagine Let what is abovesaid be duly and considerately weighed and there will be no reflection upon Christ nor ignorance in those that say they were onely Disciplâ—â— and not impowered as a Church before Christs Ascension It can reflect no want of care in Christ because they could not be in any other capacity than his Scholars before the Spirit was given them noâ— were they capable to receive more than what Christ did communicate to them and leave with them until the Spirit was manifested I have many things to say but ye cannot bear them now John 16.12 Then it s no reflection upon Christ for want of care considering the time and the Disciples incapacity to bear them then Nor do we say Christ had a Church before his Ascension if they were a Church that wanted any thing essential to its being in that dispensation therefore you may keep your absurdity till you have more occasion Quest 6. We demand whether those qualifications that give us a Right to Baptism do not give us a Right to the Lords Table Answer 1. Those qualifications that give you a right to Baptism do not give you a right to the Lords Table 2. For confession of sins and profession of Faith in Christ for the pardon of them are qualifications that gives â—â—â—ht to Baptism but they do not give the person so confessing and professing a right to the Lords Table except he be first baptised by your Principles and Practice if we be not deceived by you Quest 7. We demand whether it be not sinful to make more conditions of Communion than ever God made And whether the imposing of any thing though true as the conditions of Church-membership and Communion which God hath not made a Condition be not to keep those out of the Church that Christ would have in Answer 1. We grant it is sinful to make more Conditions of Communion than ever God made 2. And to impose any thing though true as â—he Condition of Church-Membership and Communion which God hath not made a Conâ—ition is to keep those out of the Church that Christ would have in Quest 8. If Christ hath required no other conditions of Church-Communion than Confession of Sin Faith Baptism and a holy Life whether you can by an Rule deny Communion to any that are so qualified If so shew that Rule Answer 1. Though it be true that Confession of sin Faith Baptism and an holy Life be conditionâ— of Communion yet are there more conditionâ— required by Christ of Church-Communion that those for the twelve Disciples Paul founâ— at Ephesus had confessed their sin professed their faith and were baptised yea and werâ— men of holy Lives and yet they wanted somâ— conditions of Church-Communion 2. For these Disciples were ignorant of the Doctrine of Baptisms Heb. 6.2 knew no more than the Baptism of John for they had not heard whether there were a holy Ghost or noâ— Act. 19. 3. They were not under laying on of handâ— which God had appointed as the means hâ—â— which the holy Ghost was given and received both which viz. the Doctrine of Baptisms anâ— laying on of hands are Principles of the Doctrine of Christ Heb. 6.2 And therefore â— truly conditions of Church-Communion â— Water-Baptism for it is by one Spirit we aâ— all baptised into one Body 1 Cor. 12.13 4. Then not to hear whether there were holy Ghost or no as these Disciples did not â—less defect in them than for you to hear and read there is a holy Ghost promised to as many as obey Christ and you not believe the Baptism thereof but oppose and reject the means by which the Baptism of the Spirit is obtained and by which we all are baptised into one Body is a far greater defect and want of the conditions Christ requires of Church-Communion in you than was in them 5. Then can we deny Communion with you because Christ requires more conditions of Church-Communion than you yet have for which we have these Rules 2 Thess 3.6 1 Tim. 3.4 5. Cum multis aliis Quest 9. Whether the Baptised Congregations that are not under laying on of hands do not make those qualifications above mentioned absolutely necessary to Church-communion and Church-membership And if so why should you refuse Communion with them Answer 1. You may well make a question of it whether you do make those qualifications you mention before absolutely necessary to Church-communion and Church-membership when in your sixth Question you demand Whether those qualifications that give you a Right to Baptism do not give you a Right to the Lords Table Which â—mporteth That those which have a Right to Baptism by virtue of some qualifications have a right to the Lords Table by virtue of the same qualifications at the same time and if they that have a right to Baptism have at the same time a right to the Lords Table they may by right have Church-communion though they be not baptized 2. Therefore we must Answer you That we cannot tell or we do not know whether you do make those qualifications you mention absolutely necessary to Church-communion and Church-membership because in your sixth Question you more than seem to leave out Baptism as a qualification which you put in elsewhere as one 3. But if you do make all those qualifications you mention absolute necessary to Church-communion and Church-membership you have been already told why we refused Communion with you it will be too much in this place to say it again Quest 10. Whether you have not at some turns both by practice and professed agreements owned those for Churches and Church Members that are baptized Believers as aforesaid and if so by what rule can you refuse to have Communion with them Answer 1. It is not without cause to believe that is too true that some have been daubing with untempered morter Ezek. 13.10 11 12 13 14. to heal the hurt slightly saying Peace peace when there was no peace Jer. 6.14 having both by practice and professed agreements owned you for Churches rightly constituted 2. It were well if those that have so practised and agreed would remember from whence they are fallen and repent and do their first works before it be too late and their Candlestick be removed out of its place Rev. 2.5 3. And they their giving so much advantage to you who oppose some part of the mind of Christ which they believe and practise which is now taken up by you and used as weapons against the truth they practise doth cry aloud upon them to repent and smite upon the thigh saying What have we done 4. For if such practice and professed agreement be according to the will of God wherein they have owned you Churches and Church Members rightly constituted Communion
by no rule can be refused but ought to be maintained and held with you 5. But we say whatever some have practised and professedly agreed that you are not Churches nor Church Members rightly constituted because you have not yet laid all the principles of the foundation but are wanting in some one if not more of the first rudiments of Christianity as you have confessed laying on of Hands to be We therefore refuse Communion with you by the above-mentioned rules in our Answer to your 8th Question Quest 11. But if you shall deny you have so owned them then we demand whether you that are under laying on of Hands do not daily receive such into your Communion that have been converted and baptized by those not under laying on of Hands without taking an account of their Faith or baptizing them again If it shall be answered you do so receive them because they had confessed their Faith and were baptized before then we demand whether such as you so receive were converted by or made their confession to and received their baptism from the Church or the World If you say they were the Church how dare you separate from them you own to be Gods Church though less perfect If you say they were the World they made their confession to and did receive their baptism from then shew us whenever God intrusted the world with or otherwise how the world came by a power to take a Confession of Faith and to administer a lawful Baptism If you shall say they that Baptized them you so receive were neither the Church nor the World then shew us a middle state of men that are intrusted with the lawful and due Administration of Gods Ordinances that are neither the Church nor the World if not doth not this practice of yours declare you own those for a Church of Christ that are not under laying on of Hands c. Answer 1. We confess that we which are under laying on of hands have received to laying on of hands and then to Communion some from you not under laying on of hands nor did we take account of their Faith nor baptize them again because we were satisfied in both not inquiring who converted them thinking that not material so they were converted 2. To your next demand we say They were neither Baptized by the Church nor the World but by Disciples and therefore we dare to separate from you though not from them that God owns for his Church though they should be less perfect 3. To your third demand we say Men and Women may be converted and baptized and yet they that convert and baptize them neither the Church nor the World 4. Philip Asts 8. converted and baptized the Samaritans and the Eunuch but Philip was neither the Church nor the World But you will say Philip was a Member and a Deacon of the true Church 't is true he was but then Apollos who taught diligently the things of the Lord at Ephesus and elsewhere and it s beyond a supposition to say the twelve Disciples Acts 19. were baptized by him but if not by him by some other whose attainments were no more than his and he if he did not baptize them might as lawfully as teach the things of the Lord and by as good authority might Baptize them as they that did if he did not and he was neither the Church nor a Member rightly Constituted for he at that time knew only the Baptism oâ— John Acts 18.25 5. So the Men and Women Philip Baptized at Samaria were not a Church complete in their constitution though they had confessed their sins believed and were baptized but were thereby made materials fit and framed ready to be put into the Building which the Apostles Peter and John were sent by the rest of the Apostles from Jerusalem to do who prayed and laid their hands on them and they received the Holy Ghost Acts 8.14 then were they all Baptized by one Spirit into one Body according to 1 Cor. 12.13 before which they were not a Church nor Church-members according to right and true Church-constitution nor were they the World because they were Believers baptized So in like manner the twelve Disciples Paul found it Ephesus Acts 19. were not a Church because they were not baptized by that one Spirit into one Body nor were they and Apollo's the World because they were Believers baptized they are said to be Disciples Acts 19.1 6. Then is there a middle-state of men that were neither the Church nor the World that were entrusted with the lawful due Administrations of some of God's Ordinances as Apollos who taught and baptized or if he did not baptize yet some other did no more authorized than he and if one might lawfully an hundred might by the same rule that were in no other capacity than he 7. Then doth not our practice in receiving some that you have converted and baptized as afore declare we own you for Churches that are not under laying on of hands 8. And whereas you again demand Whether it was not agreed on at a general Meeting of Elders That such as believe and are baptized were in the account of the Scripture to be estimated a Church We say we know of no general Meeting of Elders where any such thing was ever agreed though we are apt enough to believe that at a meeting of some Elders there have been such non-scriptural agreements made 9. But such agreements you speak of make work for Repentance let them be made by whom they will and well may it be said of those Elders that make such agreements as was once said of the Hebrew Church they have need that one teach them again which be the first Principles of the Oracles of God Heb. 5.12 10. And to your demand Whether it hath not been permitted by and practised among us that those which are under laying on of Hands may and do lawfully marry with those that are not under laying on of Hands We say it hath been so permitted and practised and since from thence you demand Whether this was not and is not esteemed by us a marrying in the Church and in the Lord We say that it is not a marrying in the Church though we say it may be a marrying in the Lord since Believers baptized may be out of the World and in the Lord though not a right and true Church-state constituted according to the pattern Christ appointed The Samaritans that believed and were baptized and Apollos and those twelve Disciples mentioned afore were in the Lord yet not a Church as hath been shewed Thus you see we do not own you a Church in the Lord therefore you may spare your last demand Whether it be not prodigiously absurd to own you a Church in the Lord till we do own you a Church in the Lord and yet deny you a Church in the Lord. And whereas you say you have Members fiâ— to make us husband wives Truly not
it doth not for we have plain words and practice for it in the Scripture there being from this Text Act. 8.17 plain and clear Example for laying on of hands both on Men and Woman and not conjectural and guess'd at we have good reason to divide from you about it Quest 30 Suppose we had a plain Example that they laid hands on Men and Women promiscuously this being but an Example and no Command preceding it how could it become binding so as to give you a ground to separate about it Answer We have plain example without supposition that the Apostles laid on hands both on Men Women yet you say This being but an Example and no Command preceding it how could it become binding so as to give us ground to separate about it How uncharitable to say no worse do you here secretly charge the Apostles with practising that for which they had received no Command from Christ to practise What unfaithfulness were it for them to set up their post by their Lord and Masters And if they were so unfaithful in one thing how can we give them so much credit as to believe and follow them in any thing But we firmly believe and make no doubt though you beg the question by concluding they had no Command to warrant what they did but they had a Command from Christ for what they did when they laid hands on the baptised Believers in Samaria or they had never put it in practise and left it upon Record for future Ages to read as we could abundantly prove against all such Quarrels you or any other shall pick with them You still give more ground to separate about it Quest 31. But if you shall say the Apostle Paul did lay hands upon the Disciples of Epâ—esus Act. 19. and therefore it was surely commanded we demand whether Paul did not also baptise the same persons after they had been baptized into John's Baptism as appears he did vers 5. and why should not his baptizing them again be a Fundamental Doctrine since the Doctrine of BAPTISMS is as much a Fundamental Doctrine as laying on of hands Heb. 6.2 And why may you not as well produce the Apostles Example Act. 19. for the Explication of the Doctrine of Baptisms Heb. 6. seeing he baptised those that had been baptised before and so baptise all our Members again that come to you as produce this Example for the explaining the Doctrine of laying on of hands We demand then what can be inferred from hence to prove it an unquestionable Duty And if not why should you divide about it Answer 1. We do say the Apostle Paul did lay on hands upon the Disciples at Ephesus Act. 19. and therefore it was surely commanded him and so us Phil. 3.17 4.8 9. that have believed on Christ through their word John 17.20 You then demand whether Paul did not also baptise the same persons after they had been baptised into John's Baptism And then you answer your selves and say It appears he did vers 5. And then you ask Why should not his baptizing them again be a Fundamental Doctrine since the Doctrine of Baptisms is as much a Fundamental Doctrine as laying on of hands Heb. 6.2 We do not say but his baptising them again was a Fundamental Doctrine 2. But then you enquire Why we may not as well produce the Apostles example Acts 19. for the explication of the Doctrine of Baptisms Heb. 6. seeing he baptised those that had been baptised before When we meet with the same case we shall have occasion to make use of that exâ—mple to explain the Doctrine of Baptisms Heb. 6. till then we need not Then you further say And so baptise all your Members again that come to us as produce this Example for the explaining the Doctrine of laying on of hands Had your Members known no more than the Baptism of John and had been baptised into Johns Baptism we should have baptised them all again but as they profest and we believed they were baptised in the Name of the Lord Jesus we had no reason to baptise them again and so no occasion to produce that Example to explicate the Doctrine of Baptisms Heb. 6. as we have of laying on of hands And from this Example of Paul's laying on of hands on the twelve Disciples he found at Ephesus Act. 19. we infer that he as well as Peter and John Act. 8. had Christs Doctrine for his practice and that therefore it is an unquestionable Duty We have then good reason to divide from you about it Quest 32. We demand where-ever you read of the practice of laying on of hands by Christians before the extraordinary Gifts of the Spirit were given to enable for the Work of the Ministry If you say it was practised before then we desire that you would shew us where it was practised And if it was not practised it was either because it was not commanded before or else it must needs be that â—hey were all negligent of their Duty which is uncharitable to conceive or else it must needs be that though Christ did command it yet they were to suspend their practise of it till they had received the extraordinary Gifts of the Spirit If you say it was commanded before Christ did ascend but the practice was suspended during the absence of the extraordinary Gifts of the Spirit because there was no reason why the Apostles should lay hands on others in order to the reception of the extraordinary Gifts of the Spirit when they had not received those Gifts themselves Then we further demand If that laying on of hands could be proved a Command in the sense you contend for whether we may not be excused from either doing or receiving of it NOW while the extraordinary Gifts are absent both from him that administers it and they that receive it But if you shall say This Objection lieth against Baptism as well as laying on of hands then we demand how that can be Since Baptism was practised before the extraordinary Gifts were given so was not this laying on of hands Baptism was administred by them that never did Miracles so was not laying on of hands Again Baptism was practised on them that had received the Gifts of the holy Ghost before they were baptised but where do you read of any that having first received the holy Ghost before laying on of hands that afterwards had laying on of hands administred unto them So that till this doubt be removed what ground have you to divide about it Answer 1. What if we grant that laying on of hands was not practised before the Spirit was given â—y which they were endowed with power from on high to put in practise laying on of hands and all other practical Duties And what if we say that laying on of hands and also other Duties that were commanded by Christ after his â—assion and before his Ascension were all suspended till the Apostles were endowed with power from
on high and during the absence of the Spirit yet not for the reason you give but for reasons we have and shall give when they shall meet with due place 2. That there is a Command for laying on of hands is sufficiently proved and therefore â—our not receiving it Now though the extraordinary Gifts of the Spirit be absent will not be excused Let us unfold this Mystery For you hereby secretly conclude that they that administred laying on of hands then had the extraordinary Gifts of the Spirit but no man hath the extraordinary Gifts of the Spirit now therefore we may be excused from receiving laying on of hands now We say if this be good reason it will lay aside as not practical the whole Doctrine of Christ thus They that â—reached Repentance and Faith the Doctrine of Baptisms and Laying on of Hands the Resurrection of the Dead and eternal Judgement then had received the extraordinary Gifts of the Spirit No man hath the extraordinary Gifts of the Spirit now Therefore all men may be excused from preaching and from heâ—â—ing the Doctrine of Repentance Faith 〈◊〉 the Doctrine of Baptisms of Laying on â— hands the Resurrection of the Dead etâ—â—nal Judgement now And what is the tendeâ—cy of such reasoning but Infidelity and Athâ—ism And whereas you think to be excused froâ— laying on of hands because the extraordinarâ— Gifts of the Spirit are not given now we 〈◊〉 that will not excuse you before Christ at his appearing because you crave excuse upon a faâ—â—â— bottom supposing that the extraordinary Gifâ— of the Spirit was the onely end of the practiâ—â— of the laying on of hands yet was it not 〈◊〉 the reception of the Spirit only was as a common end assigned Act. 8.15 of prayer and laâ—ing on of hands and not this or that Gift thereof ordinary or extraordinary Though it's true the extraordinary Gifts of the Spirit were giveâ— upon prayer laying on of hands God appearing so eminently in that Appointment did beâ—â— witness confirm it to be part of that word spoken by the Lord Heb. 2.4 yet was those Gifts never propounded as the end of laying on of hands no more than they were promised to them thaâ— obeyed Christ by repenting and being baptiseâ— in his name Act. 2.38 39. 5.32 Theâ—â— though the extraordinary Gifts of the Spirit 〈◊〉 not now given that will not excuse your disobedience to Christ in not doing or receivinâ— â— now And truly the reason if we may so â—all it that you make your Plea doth lie against â—aptism and all other Gospel-Duties as we â—â—ewed before But then you demand How that can be since â—aptism was practised before the extraordinary â—ifts were given We say the Baptism of John was practised beâ—or the extraordinary Gifts were given But then you say Baptism was administred by â—â—em that never did miracles so was not Laying on â—f Hands We grant you John baptised and did no miraâ—â—e but how do you know laying on of hands â—as not administred by them that never did miâ—â—cles What miracle did Ananias do â—ct 9. Again you say Baptism was practised on them 〈◊〉 had received the Gifts of the holy Ghost before â—â—ey were baptised but where do we read of any â—â—at having first received the holy Ghost before layâ—ng on of hands that afterward had laying on of â—ands administred to them We say that neither we nor you read that any â—â—d received the Spirit before laying on of â—ands was first administred to them saving Corâ—elius and his houshold Act. 10. who indeed â—eceived the Gifts of the holy Ghost before â—aptism or laying on of hands either but â—hat then What if the like instance is not to be read the Scripture being silent in the Caâ—â— whether Cornelius and his Houshold had layinâ— on of hands administred to them VVill thâ— lessen the Authority of any part of the Doctrine of Christ and make void and null 〈◊〉 Apostolical and Primitive Practice Further Though what you demand is not to bâ— read yet let us tell you that what you say wiâ—â— lie as full in the reason of it against Baptism 〈◊〉 you conceit it doth against laying on of hands because the Gift of the Spirit in the promise â— it is annexed to Baptism as the Gift of thâ— Spirit was assigned in laying on of hands as thâ— end of it Now Cornelius and his Houshold haâ— no reason to be baptised in Water because theâ— had first received and possessed that which wherâ— baptised they could not lay claim to any thing more than the promise of no reason we say but the Authority of the Lord Jesus who haâ— commanded it And therefore though they had received the Spirit before they were baptised yet must they be baptised in Water in obedience to Christs Doctrine and Command So iâ— like manner if Cornelius and his Houshold muâ—â— be baptised though he had first received the Spirit which Gad had annexed the promise of tâ— Baptism then must they be bound in Duty 〈◊〉 well to submit to laying on of hands thougâ— the Spirit be assigned as the end thereof anâ— they had first received the Gift of the Spiriâ— before laying on of hands from the same reason of obedience to Christs Doctrine and Command though we do not read it was administred unto them 4. But what is this to your Case Do any of you pretend to have such a measure of the Spirit as Cornelius had or so much you need not that any should administer laying on of hands that you might have more and so think to be excused doing or receiving it Oâ— do you doubt whether it be your Duty to practise it because the extraordinary Gifts of the Spirit are now absent Your Doubts now being removed we have the same ground left we ever had to divide from you about it till you shall remove our ground by doing and receiving it Quest 33. Whether it be not uncharitable for you to say we â—â—ppose or deny laying on of hands because for the reasons implied in the former Questions we question your practise of it with respect to its being a Duty incumbent upon all Disciples May you not as well say That those people that believe not that Christ died for all do deny the Death of Christ because they do not believe he hath died for all as 〈◊〉 may say we deny laying on of hands a Duty because we do not believe it a Duty for every Man â—nd Woman that is baptised And may you not as â—â—ll say They denied the Priestly Office of Christ 〈◊〉 5. that were ignorant of many things that related thereunto as say that we oppose a Doctrine of Christ because we are ignorant of something relating to it which for the reasons implied in the former question we cannot yet understand And further may we not as truly say Many of you deny Christ and so have not God because they deny he took Flesh of the Virgin Mary as say we deny a
these Principles of his Doctrine that he cannot be laid the Foundation without these are laid nor can these be laid the foundation without Christ for had not Christ been a Prince and a Saviour able to save all that come unto God by him there had been no foundation for these And whoso shall refuse to submit to these as the Principles of his Doctrine Christ will be no Saviour to them And this is the very sence of the Text to which the whole body of Scripture agrees and consents for the Apostle doth not deny Christ to be the Foundation when he saith these Principles of his Doctrine are nor doth he deny these are when he saith Christ is 1 Cor. 3.11 12. as you absurdly argue And who knows not that knows any thing in Christianity that he that falls away from one of these foundation-Principles viz. the Resurrection of the Dead falls from Christ and denies him to be the foundation If Christ be not risen your faith is vain you are yet in your sins 1 Cor. 15.17 Then those cannot be denied to be the foundation but Christ must be denied also 5. But then when you leave arguing and query again Whether this be not the sence of the Text when the Author says Heb. 6. he would â—oâ— lay again the foundation of Repentance and the foundation of Faith and the foundation of the Doctrine of Baptisms and the foundation of Laying on of hands c. Here now you say the Author himself says these are the foundation as stoutly and as confidently as you denied them so to be before and these he saith he will not lay again Not laying again the foundation of Repentance c. Heb. 6.1 but will go on to perfection though we doubt not but he intended no less but that Christ was the chief Corner-stone the foundation of all these Principles and first Rudiments of Christianity He then concludes that they ought not to lay the foundation again but to leave them and to go on to perfection and if they did not go on unto perfection but fall from the foundation they had laid there would be no renewing them again unto Repentance no laying the foundation the second time And then you argue again If then the faith and obedience mentioned Heb. 6. be the Gold Silver and precious Stones that we build upon this foundation according to 1 Cor. 3.12 and not the foundation it self c. If it be as you say is not laying on of hands which is among them neither Gold Silver nor a precious Stone If not it must be Wood Hay Stubble and yet you say the Author of the Epistle to the Hebrews says it is a Foundation but it is the Foundation we say with Jesus Christ himself being the Chief Corner-stone on which the Christian Church is built Ephes 2.20 Then it follows except this foundation be laid all and every part of it the House can never be though where the foundation is laid there are other things without which the House may be though not so well and compleatly be And in like manner we say This Foundation Heb. 6. and every Principle of it the belief and practice of is absolutely necessary to the being of Gods House and yet there are other things the belief and practice of is necessary to the further edification of Gods House without which it cannot so well be And since here we seem in some sort to agree you had done well if you had told us what in your opinion those things are without which the House of God can never be seeing you say that Repentance and Faith c. are no parts of the foundation of Christianity and how Christ can be laid the Foundation and those Principles and Foundations mentioned Heb. 6. neither believed nor practised But not to dwell any longer on this our answer to your last demand in this Question is That the House cannot be except the Foundation be laid in whole not in part and laying on of hands on all baptised Disciples being one Principle of the Foundation must be necessary to its being without which a Church rightly constituted can never be And this we have proved whether you will believe it or no. And therefore we are not guilty of Schism in making a Separation from you Quest 26. We demand Why that laying on of hands Heb. 6. which you say is called a foundation may not be figuratively understood for the holy Spirit which was given thereby and which they were said to partake of vers 4. the Gift whereof was a great support to the profession of the Christian Faith and for that reason the Doctrine of the Spirit might there be understood for one of the Doctrines of Christ which he taught his Disciples once and again before his departure from them We demand why may not this be so since the Scripture doth usually speak after this manner putting the Cup for the Wine contained in it and the Bread and Wine for the Body and Blood of Christ which are but the means by which the Body and Blood of Christ are commemorated in like manner men are said to be Enemies to the Cross of Christ when they slight those advantages that acrue to the world which he obtained by his suffering thereupon And whether that laying on of hands Heb. 6. may not by the same figure of speaking be put for the reception of the Spirit which was so necessary to the first establishing a Christian Church Heb. 2.3 4. How shall we escape if we neglect so great Salvation which at the first began to be spoken by the Lord and was confirmed unto us by them that heard him God also bearing them witness both with signs and wonders and with divers miracles and gifts of the holy Ghost acding to his own will Answer 1. Before you said Laying on of hands was no foundation and now here you demand Why that laying on of hands Heb. 6. which we say is called a Foundation may not figuratively be understood for the holy Spirit that was given thereby We perceive you would be content it should be nothing or any thing but what it is said by the Spirit of God to be And again you demand Why this may not be so seeing the Scripture doth usually speak after this manner putting the Cup for the Wine contained in it and the Bread and Wine for the Body and Blood of Christ which are but the means by which the Body and Blood of Christ are commemorated 2. Well for Argument-sake what if we should say it may be so understood We hope you will not say Though we are to take the Wine for the Cup that the Cup is not by institution to be used as a decent and necessary means to convey the Wine to our mouths that so we may drink the Wine And so though the Bread and Wine be taken for the Body and Blood of Christ and are but the means to commemorate his Body and Blood yet we hope you
so fit neither as we could and do desire our Members would make choice of however not so fit as to be Church-Members at the Lord's Table Quest 12. If a People congregated upon profession of Faith Baptism and a Holy life be a Church of God and God requireth no other conditions in order to the constituting of Churches and Church-members as appears by the light of the former questions and â—our own practice and confession at some turns Then we demand whether he that first separated and those with him did not make a separation from such a Church and whether such a separation from the Communion of or disowning Communion with such a Church be not to make Divisions and Schism in the Body of Christ Answer 1. We have already shewed you that such a People no otherwise qualified than you are cannot be a Church rightly constituted and that God doth require more conditions than you have in order to the right constituting of Churches and Church-members 2. Nor doth it appear by any light your questions give that you have a true Church state for had we no other light to walk by in finding out â— right constituted Church than your questions we should be in the dark stumble and fall as many of late have done the more it 's to be â—amented 3. Nor doth it appear that you are a Church rightly constituted never the more for what some back-sliders have practised and confessâ— at some turns 4. You may well call them turns for tuâ—â— they are indeed for had they not turned froâ— the truth as they were taught and as they hâ— believed and as the Truth is in Jesus thâ— had never so practised and confessed as yâ—â— say they have 5. Then he that first separated from you aâ— those with him did not separate from Church whose Constitution is according to tâ—â— will of Christ 6. And then separation from you and diâ—owning Communion with you whose Churcâ— state is not true is not to make Divisions 〈◊〉 Schisms in the body For 7. The Apostle Paul after he had laid hanâ— on the twelve he found at Ephesus went into 〈◊〉 Synagogue and spake boldly for the space of thâ— Months disputing and perswading the thiâ—â— concerning the Kingdom of God Acts 19.8 8. He that separated from you and thâ— with him after they were under Laying oâ— Hands continued disputing and perswadiâ—â— the things concerning the Kingdom of Goâ— for more than the space of three months The Apostle Paul when divers were hardâ— and believed not but spake evil of the way befâ— the multitude departed from them and separaâ—â— the Disciples vers 9. 10. So he that separated from you when â—â—vers of you were hardened and believed not 〈◊〉 spake evil of that way before the multitude â—aying Laying on of hands was an invention 〈◊〉 the Devil Such a one's hands were holy and â—ould keep their heads warm with such-like as â—at departed from you and separated the â—isciples Quest 13. Whether or no to deny Communion or not to reâ—ive such so qualified into Communion as aforesaid doth not savour of pride singularity and uncharitableness And whether this doth not sympathize with the spirit of Diotrephes who did not â—â—ly refuse to receive the Brethren but forbid those â—hat would 3 John 9. Answer 1. For those under laying on of hands to deâ—y Communion and not to receive such into Communion no otherwise qualified than you â—re doth not savour of pride singularity nor uncharitableness because your Church-constitution is not right 2. If so it hath no sympathy with the spirit of Diotrephes to refuse communion with you nor to forbid those that would But it may be â—ride hardness of heart and unbelief in you â— the cause you stoop not to Christ but do â—ill persist in making opposition against a Principle of his Doctrine as you have done and now do Quest 14. Whether all that maintain such a Separâ—â—â— from any Congregations that do believe in Gâ—â— and are baptised and walk holily as aforesaid â— not guilty of Schism and the sin of Diotrepâ— aforementioned Answer This is much the same with the last questâ—â—â— therefore we shall say onely this That neiâ— all or any which maintain a Separation from â— upon the grounds we do are guilty of Schâ— or the sin of Diotrephes for we maintain â— Separation from Churches nor Church-Members rightly constituted Quest 15. Whether we who you have separated from â— denied Communion to have not used all Chrisâ— and candid ways of Accommodation that can reasonably be thought on Have we not profess'd â— you That if we saw laying on of hands in the â— you practise it a Duty we would submit to â— Have we not also declared That we are willing â— the better finding out the Truth that you shaâ—â— come and preach it among us Have we not â— promised that we would never preach or diâ— against it to avoid offending of you Nay â— we not practised this by suffering your Counâ—â—â— Elders freely to preach among us who preacheâ— your practice without any opposition from us â— further have not many desired to come under â— â— on of hands if you would not make it the bounds â— conditions of Communion and tie them from â—ning us or having Communion with us afterâ—â—rds Whether then to refuse Communion with 〈◊〉 after such large and loving Condescensions as â—se be not Schism greatly aggravated Answer 1. We believe you have of late used ways of â—ccommodation as you call them but wheâ—â—er Christian and candid we have cause to â—pect When one of you shall desire hands â—â—ght be imposed on him by the Elders upon â—s confession given under his own hand viz. â—â—ese may therefore certifie that I do believe the Doctrine of laying on of hands mentioned Heb. 6. â— be one of the first Rudiments of Christianity â—d yet now he is one of the chief Opposers of â—t laying on of hands which he prophanely to â— no more submitted to Which how Chriâ—â—â—an and candid he therein was may easily be â—â—â—cerned by any 2. What if you have professed that if you 〈◊〉 laying on of hands to be a duty in the way â— practise it you would submit to it Will 〈◊〉 make your Church-state true It is more â—â—n probable that those in the Presbyterian and â—â—dependant way are as ready candidly to proâ—â—â— That did they see Baptism as you and we â—â—â—ctise it and laying on of hands also to be â— Duty they would submit to both doth it follow that your separation and ours from tâ— is Schism 3. And what if you have declaired that â— are willing for the better finding out of Trâ— as you pretend that some under laying oâ— hands should come and preach it among yâ—â— Will that heal your sore and give you a riâ— and due Church-constitution 4. And if you have promised never to preâ— nor dispute against it and if you have practâ—â—â— so by suffering some Countrey Elders freely â— preach it among
will allow us to use the Bread and Wine as the means to commemorate the Lords Body and Blood and not reject it and cast it off as useless So in like manner if laying on of hands be a figurative speech and understood for the Spirit that was given thereby we hope you must allow that laying on of hands ought to be used and practised as the means by which the Spirit was obtained and is given as well as you will the Cup and the Bread and Wine in your figurative instances and we desire no more 3. But we further say That laying on of hands is not figurative but is a plain practical Ordinance joyned with solemn and fervent Prayer to the most High in the Name of Christ for his holy Spirit that according to his faithful and never-failing promise them that believe and are baptised in the Name of the Lord Jesus Christ might receive the Spirit by which as the means the Spirit was given to some of the Baptised in the primitive times in more than an ordinary manner and was necessary to the establishing Christian Churches than which extraordinary Gifts of the Spirit given then is a confirmation to us now that not onely the other Principles of the Doctrine of Christ are to be believed and practised but this in debate also as one Principle of the Foundation of Christianity God having confirmed them all to be the Word spoken and Foundation-Doctrine taught by the Lord bearing witness to them both with Signs and Wonders and divers Miracles and Gifts of the holy Ghost according to his own will and then how shall we escape if we neglect so great Salvation Heb. 2.3 4. Quest 27. If you shall say That simply the Act and Ceremony it self as you practise it is put for a Foundation Doctrine of Christ then we demand Whether the Apostles ever taught any thing for a Doctrine of Christ whereof we do not read Christ did either preach or practise before his Ascension And if you say That Christ did teach and practise laying on of hands upon all Disciples both Men and Women before his Ascension or any thing from which such a practice may be inferred pray shew it and we will believe it Answer 1. We say That Prayer and Laying on of hands as we practise is a Principle of the Doctrine of Christ one of the first Rudiments of Christianity But you demand Whether the Apostles ever taught any thing for a Doctrine of Christ whereof we do not read Christ did either preach or practise before his Ascension 2. What is it to the purpose when Christ taught laying on of hands whether before his Passion or after or before his Ascention or after by his Spirit It sufficeth he did teach it for it is one of the Principles of his Doctrine And can it be a Principle of his Doctrine and he not teach it We are certain it cannot And taught it was likewise by his Apostles for a Doctrine-Principle and an Oracle of God Heb. 5.12 6.1 and they did not only teach but practise it also Act. 8.17 19.6 And do you think they would both teach and practise it and never receive it from Christ but must invent it themselvs We cannot believe you do so think Then was it taught by Christ and taught and practised by his Apostles as a foundation-Principle And that sufficeth us and might you if you were willing and obedient See this answered before in Christs Doctrine p. 58. Quest 28. If laying on of hands upon all baptised Believers be to be practised in your sence as an indispensable Duty then we demand Why all the other Principles in Heb. 6. should be expresly and particularly commanded believed or practised in Christs time and not this as it is practised by you if there be that weight in it as you lay upon it c. Answer 1. If laying on of hands say you upon all baptised Believers be to be practised in our sence as an indispensable Duty then you demand Why all the other Principles Heb. 6. should be expresly commanded believed and practised in Christs time and not this as it is practised by us if there be that weight in it as we lay upon it We told you above that it matters not when Christ taught laying on of hands whether in the time of his Life or not And whereas you say That Faith and Repentance the Baptism of Water the Resurrection of the Dead and eternal Judgement were in Christs time plainly taught Pray where did Christ in the time of his Life before his Ascension or after it either so plainly command baptising with water Though we do not deny but there was both Faith Repentance the Resurrection and eternal Judgement plainly enough taught according to that Dispensation and so they were before Christs Incarnation by the Prophets of old nor do we deny but grant that there was Authority enough from Heaven for the Baptism of Water then practised and that there was them that did fore-tell that the holy Spirit should be afterwards given and so it was by the Prophet Joel all which were as preparatives to what afterward Christ should command and teach when he had suffered and was risen and all power in Heaven and Earth was given unto him Mat. 28.18 So John was sent to prepare the way and he taught the Baptism of Repentance saying They should believe on him that was to come so that between both the Faith and the Baptism then and that after Christ was come had suffered ascended and the holy Ghost was given there must needs be a vast difference therefore as you affirm Paul baptised the twelve Disciples he found at Ephesus again because they were onely baptised into John's Baptism who as was his Baptism so was his Doctrine of Faith and Repentance John verily baptised with the Baptism of Repentance saying to the People That they should believe on him which should come after him that is on Christ Jesus Act. 19.4 From whence or from which Dispensation we do not take the Authority of the Foundation-Doctrine of Christ no not of Repentance Faith Baptisms Laying on of hands Resurrection and eternal Judgement but from Christ dead risen and ascended to the Father from whom he sent his holy Spirit to confirm them all to be his Doctrine on which he hath built his Church Yet might these Principles be nay doubtless were left and commanded by Christ before his Ascension which they better understood and put in practice when they were endowed with power from on high Acts 2. by the Spirit of Truth which Christ sent to them to guide them into all Truth John 16.13 and of them whom Christ commanded by word of mouth to observe and teach these Principles have we received them as the Doctrine of the Lord Jesus of which Doctrine laying on of hands on baptised Believers â— such is one Principle taught also by the Apostles and by them practised Acts 8.17 19. â— And if we
do not find it was practised in thâ— â—ime of Christs life that doth not make invalid what was taught and practised after his Ascension He had many things to say in the time of his life his Disciples could not then bear John 16.12 which he promiseth to instruct them in by his Spirit vers 13 14 15. 2. It being then clear that laying on of hands is a Principle of the Doctrine of Christ it 's not to the thing in hand where when or how Christ taught it but that you will study doubts rather than obedience And whereas you speak of the Doctrine of the holy Spirit if the Truth were known you as little believe it as you practise laying on of hands for the reception of it as will appear hereafter Concluding from what hath been said That laying on of hands is as clear a Principle of Christs Doctrine as any of the other are having the same Authority we refuse and keep no communion with the Disobedient Quest 29. If you say The practice of the Apostles Act. 8.17 plainly shews that they had a Command for what they did We thereupon demand Though we read they baptised Men and Women promiscously yet where do you read they ever laid hands promiscuously upon Men and Women If you shall say It is implied in the word THEM which the Apostles laid their hands upon which were the same THEM that Philip baptised we demand Whether it may not be as truly said that Philip preacheâ— to every Man and Woman in Samaria because it iâ— said He went to the City of Samaria and preached Christ to them vers 5. And whether iâ— may not be as well said That every Man and Woman in Samaria believed and were baptised because it is said That Samaria had received the Word of God and was baptized as you may say That because the Church of Jerusalem sent unto Them Peter and John to lay hands on Them that therefore it must be understood they laid hands on every baptised Man and Woman c. Answer 1. We do say the practice of the Apostles Act. 8.17 and elsewhere doth plainly shew that they had received a Command from Christ for what they did and so must you say unless you will say it was their own humane invention And if you think it was practised by them without command from Christ and so their own invention why do you not say so But if you think they had received sufficient Authority from Christ for what they did why do you make opposition against their practice and refuse to follow them as they followed Christ and keep those traditions they delivered 2. But you demand Though we read that they baptised both Men and Women promiscuously yet where do we read they ever laid hands promiscuously upon Men and Women We say it is in so many words said Act. 8.12 they were baptised both Men and Women and no less plain it is that Peter and John prayed and laid their hands upon them both Men and Women For by as good reason may one conclude that Peter and John were sent by the rest of the Apostles but to some of them that believed and were baptised at Samaria as to conclude that Peter and John prayed for and laid hands on but some of them Nor can it be as well said that Philip preached to every Man and Woman in Samaria because it is said that Philip went down to the City of Samaria and preached Christ unto them nor every Man and Woman in Samaria believed and Were baptised though it be said Samaria had received the Word the former being true though he had preach'd but to twenty and the latter though but six believed and were baptised And to conclude all in Samaria were preached to believed and were baptised were not logical indeed but to conclude that Peter and John prayed for and laid hands on the Women that Philip baptised as well as they prayed for and laid their hands on the Men he baptised is Scriptural and Logical because the Women had equal right to the Gift of the Spirit which was the end of that service by vertue of Gods Promise to them as well as to men Joel 2.28 29. Act. 2.17 18. Then is it Scriptural and Logical to conclude that the baptised Women had equal right to the means by which the Spirit was given as well as the baptised Men. 3. So that the Truth is whereas you say That we are so far from having a Command for laying on of hands on all baptised Believers that we have not a plain Example for it you are so far from knowing and believing the Truth that you will not see any Command there is nor Example neither for laying on of hands on baptised Believers as such that you still remain contradicting and putting it from you thereby judging your selves unworthy of the blessing of Gods holy and guiding Spirit which to his praise is receiv'd thereby There being both Command and plain Example from the Apostles which Command they received from Christ and Christ from God his Father See this answered before in Gods Oracle page 47 48 49. 4. But you say Dr. Hamond questioneth which laying on of hands is here intended and saith it is probable it was upon Disciples for the Gift of the Spirit and doth confess there is a difficulty to resolve whether it be for the laying on of hands for Confirmation or Ordination Dr. Hamond and you might conclude that it was not for Ordination had you but consulted Paul to Timothy when he saith A Novice must not be chosen or ordained a Bishop lest being lifted up with pride he fall into the condemnation of the Devil 1 Tim. 3.6 Then could not Peter and John lay hands on the Baptised at Samaria for Ordination because they were but of yesterday newly come to the Faith Moreover the very end of their laying on of hands was That they might receive the holy Ghost Act. 8.15 Now had your learned and judicious Doctor considered these things he would not have said it was difficult to resolve whether the laying on of hands Act. 8.17 was for Confirmation or Ordination 5. But we perceive the Authority of this Doctor goes very far with you that you will believe when he believes and doubt of what he doubts That if he had said there is a Command for laying on of hands and a plain Example peradventure you would say so too For you say And therefore though laying on of hands as we practise it be true yet it is not so infallibly true because it depends upon our Exposition If you had drawn your conclusion right from what was before premised by you it must have been thus Therefore though laying on of hands as we practise it be true yet it is not infallibly true because Dr. Hamond is at a stand about it and saith it is difficult to resolve whether it be for Confirmation or Ordination and not say Because it depends upon our Exposition which
Doctrine of Christ because we deny or rather doubt of laying on of hands on all Disciples Men and Women as you practise it Answer 1. To say the Truth is not to be uncharitable and when we say you oppose or deny laying on of hands as you have done more than twenty years is not to be we hope uncharitable For that laying on of hands we practise you do deny and oppose though you may colour your opposition under the pretence of doubts and questions and under the pretence of owning laying on of hands to heal the Sick or to set Men apart to Office in the Church though not on all baptised Men and Women that they might receive the Spirit Nor is your reason by which you would wipe off that blemish sufficient for we may not as well say that those people which believe not that Christ died for all do deny the Death of Christ because theâ— do believe he died and died for them and more too But you do not believe that layinâ— on of hands on baptised Believers as such tâ—â— â—â—ey might receive the Spirit is the duty of any 2. Neither can it be said that the Hebrew Church denied the Priestly Office of Christ because they were dull of hearing and could not receive those great Mysteries thereof that were hard to be uttered Heb. 5.11 And though you pretend you are ignorant yet we think you would not take it well should we set you down for such And as for what you may say say your pleasure and say if you will many of us if you say true deny Christ took flesh of the Virgin Mary We can say and say truth that many of you deny Christ and have not God because you deny him to be God of one Substance with the Father and say that he is a created being and took his beginning in the Womb of the Virgin besides your denying laying on of Hands on all Disciples Men and Women as we practise Quest 34. Did you ever come to us or send any to us to lay Hands upon us and we rejected you why then â—â—ould you reject us Answer When we first received laying on of Hands we were with you and continued reasoning â—â—d perswading you to receive the truth but 〈◊〉 then opposed us and it yea and at length â—e hardned and believed not but spake evil of the way and then we departed and separated from you and know no reason we have to come or send to you to lay Hands on you except you repent and receive the truth candidly in the love of it until then we have reason to reject you Quest 35. Do we not practise laying on of hands upon Officers and are not many willing to submit to it a Members for peace and accommodation sake and together with you wait upon God for further light in this matter why then should you impose believing of it on us as a Command upon all Disciples both Men and Women I and such a Command as is essential to Communion and Church-membership when you have no such Command nor Example in all the Scriptures either that it was practised upon Men and Women that were Baptized or that it was judged essential to Communion or that it was ever practised but on the account of the extraordinary gifts of the Spirit or that it was ever administred on any if they had received the gifts of the Spirit before Till these sober Scruples are removed and the Duty of Laying on of Hands proved essential to Communion what ground have you to refuse Communion with us Answer We know not whether you practise laying on of Hands upon Officers or no but if you do what Command have you for it Nor are those terms for peace and accommodation sake sufficient Christ hath no need to be beholding to you Where do you read that any were received to or practised any Gospel Ordinance upon those terms We must therefore if you receive it from us impose it upon you as a Command upon all Disciples both Men and Women because it is so as appears Acts 8. for the Apostles practised no more in Holy and Divine Adoration and Invocation than what they were taught and commanded by their Lord and Master Christ to do yea and such a Command or rather Duty it is that is essential to Communion and Church-membership we having both Command and Example in the Scripture as we have shewed and it would â—e but reiteration to shew it here again nor was it practised upon the account of the extraordinary gifts of the Spirit the Scripture no where assigning them as the end thereof 2. And if the Scripture be silent in the â—ase of Laying on of Hands on Cornelius and his House it doth not follow but that he did receive laying on of Hands after he had received the Spirit as well as his being Baptised â—n Water after he had received the Spirit â—here being the same weighty and pressing reaâ—ons for both viz. Christ's Doctrine and Command We do not know when you will say your sober Scruples are removed for Laying on of Hands is proved to be essential to Communion therefore we have ground to refuse Communion with you Quest 36. Are you not divided among your selves in this matter have not some of you said Laying on of Hands was for Confirmation Others that it was for the extraordinary gifts of the Spirit Others that it was for the Spirit in any measure Answer We know not any that saith That Laying on of Hands was for the extraordinary gifts of the Spirit but you and others of your mind and if some do say that Laying on of Hands is for the receiving the Spirit in any measure and others will say it was for Confirmation there is not much difference between them we say then we are not divided among our selves about laying on of Hands Quest 37. Have not others of you both Printed and Preached that Laying on of Hands is one of the sever Pillars that Wisdom builded her house upon Prov. 9.1 and may not the Church of Rome as welâ— prove her seven Sacraments from hence as you prove Laying on of Hands Besides do you 〈◊〉 by thus expounding the Word of God create sever Principles instead of six you talk of and may yâ—â— not as well say that because the New Jerusalem Wall had twelve Foundations that therefore the Church must have twelve Fundamentals without which she cannot be a Church communicable Is not this making the Word of God like the Lesbian Rule who having built crooked and irregular so as the Work was not conformable to the Rule went and made their Rule conformable to their Work Answer 1. What if some of us have from those Pillars Wisdom builded her house upon Prov. 9.1 alluded to the Foundation Doctrine of Christ Heb. 6.1 2. and of the Apostles Eph. 2.20 But if you shall say that Heb. 6.1 2. makes mention but of six Principles and Prov. 9.1 mentions seven Pillars we hope you