longer I shall make bold at the urgent request of some whose judgement is not to be sleighted here to annex a short discourse concerning the privacy or publiquenesse of administring the other Sacrament viz. of Baptisme which will not be unsutably joyned with the main subject of the discourse following And this challengeth its place here because it so particularly concernes the Ministry and is therefore to be submissively presented to your serious consideration and candid censure Let this then be the Question to be discussed before you viz. Whether or if at all in what cases Baptisme may be now administred privately not publiquely To publique is sometimes opposed in Scripture that which we render from house to house especially in that text Act. 20.20 But I humbly conceive the phrase so rendred viz. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is not equivalent to private or per singulas demos as Erasmus in Act. 2.46 renders the phrase for which he is justly blamed by the Learned Beza The phrase and the importance thereof is worth a strict enquiry In Pauls farewel speech to the Elders or Bishops of the Church of Ephesus Act. 20. for to them only he there speaks and if from house to house be to be understood of private houses its manifest it must relate only to the private houses of the said Bishops not the private houses of the people he avoucheth his integrity in the discharge of his Apostolical Ministry as in other Instances thereof so especially in that he saith ver 20. I have kept back nothing from you that was profitable for you But have shewed and taught you publiquely and from house to house or at the houses 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 testifying both to Jewes and also to the Greeks repentance toward God and faith toward our Lord Jesus Christ This adverb 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as also 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 seemes to signifie not only publiquely but openly popularly and agrees to an action exposed to open view and cognizance of the people and multitude without distinction of Christians from Jewes or Heathens and that with or pretending to the State authority Act. 5.18 the word is translated openly Act. 16.37 They have saith Paul beaten us openly i. e. exposed us to open shame before the promiscuous multitude Act. 18.28 Apollos mightily convinced the Jewes and that publiquely in their Synagogue vers 26. that Jesus was the Christ And being here opposed to the Christian houses it denotes the Temple Synagogue Market places or such open conventions to which persecutors and enemies as well as Christians had a free accesse and then 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifies not meere private houses but the Church Assemblyes which used to convene in severall houses appointed for that purpose which are therefore opposed to 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 because they were not built nor appointed by any publique act of the State and 2. because here was not a reception of the people friends foes promiscuously at least not at all times but of the brethren joyned together in ecclesiastical Christian society For the cleering hereof I shall shew 1. that this phrase 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the N. T. though sundry times there used is ever appropriated to the signifying of the Church meetings in their houses 2. And always I take it some other phrase is used to denote such as are in a meere private house This latter may be seene in Act. 16.32 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 1 Cor. 11.34 14.35 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Gal 2.2 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. The former I shal more insist upon for the demonstration whereof I shal produce all the places of the N. T. where the phrase is used Rom. 16.5 Greet the Church in their house 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 1 Cor. 16.19 Aquila and Priscilla salute you with the Church 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Col. 4.15 Salute Nymphas and the Church which is at his house 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Philemon vers 2. to the Church 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 That this phrase in these Texts signifies the Church meetings and Christian Assemblyes is demonstrated already by the learned Mr. Mede above all contradiction I shall only quote one passage or two of his for this which he hath in his discourse called Churches i. e. appropriate places for Christian worship p. 22. Unlesse saith he this should be the meaning why should this appendant be so singularly mentioned in the salutation of some and not of others and that not once but againe if the same names be again remembred as of Aquila and Priscilla Had none in those catalogues of salutation christian families but some only who are thus remembred It is very improbable nay if peruse them well we shal find they had but otherwise expressed as in that prolix catalogue Rom. 16. we find Aristobulus and Narcissus saluted with their houshold Asyncritus Phlegon c. with the brethren which are with them c. Others with the Saints which are with them 2 Tim. 4.19 the houshold of Onesiphorus this therefore so singular an appendix must meane some singular thing not common to them with the rest but peculiar to them alone And what should this be but what I have shewed thus that happy Interpreter There are only two more places where 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is used in the N. T. both which comply with the forementioned sense of Church meetings in houses Act. 2.46 Breaking bread 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 compared with ver 42. referring to the love-feasts which they had in common to which the celebration of the Lords Supper was sometimes annexed in several houses appointed among them for that purpose see Beza on the place Act. 5.42 the Apostles dayly in the Temple and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ceased not to teach preach Jesus Christ where preaching in the Temple promiscuously is opposed to the preaching in Church meetings of the Christian brethren as it was in the text last quoted and therefore is fairly interpreted to the same sense here as it was there I shal only adde one thing more which makes it probable that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in Act. 20.20 should denote the Church Assemblyes rather then the private houses of the Ephesian Elders as such One designe of Pauls speech appeares to be the confirming the Ephesian Elders by his example of constancy and boldness in the Christian faith and his function notwithanding all persecutions v. 19. Yet saith he v. 20. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 I have not through fear or cowardize withdrawn in any thing needful see the importance of the word as it s used elswhere Gal. 2.12 Heb. 10.23 25. comp with ver 38. his boldness is instanced in preaching both publiquely or openly before friends and foes and at their Church Assemblyes notwithstāding the danger of coming thither which made some to withdraw themselves Heb. 10.25 Now to instruct privately in Christian families was no such instance of boldness as
be censured for this my presumption in dissenting from the common interpretation of several Scriptures and asserting some things against the judgement of many or most Divines and godly Christians c. Assault Humphreys and Timson crys Mr. W. p. 48. The men like Ingenuous Worthyes appeare in print c. It s pitty that such a learned and ingenuous Divine as Mr. Humphreys appeares to be should be yoakt so unsutably with Mr. Timson Mr. Humphreys wants not assaulting Mr. Timson as to our controversie will not I thinke deserve an assault untill now in his publique capacity Mr. W. intimates he gaine the repute of lesse arrogance and more learning than his former writings so far as they reach our case have discovered If such a man as Mr Humphreys will pick out that which lookes as considerable in this controversie in Timson it would sooner be answered But I wonder not Mr. W. and Timson so well agree For they are both good at provoking words and it s a jolly Champion whose name Mr. W. hath mentioned 26 times I take it in his booke When I have little els to doe I may perhaps answer him as Mr. W. challengeth mee But I hope to be better imployed And the truth is I agree with him and Mr. Humphreys in so many things they treat of for substance that the service of answering them is not so proper for me as their peculiar Antagonists But see what an answer this is Timson is against Elders Ergo there 's no consequence from the suspension of word rejecters of Christ to the suspension of deed-rejecters of Christ Sampsons new withes will not tye these together This is to dispute at a low rate indeed §. 4. 3. To his third I say 1. Our question was not whether open scandalous and presumptuous offenders in the Church are to be punished by the discipline of the Church I wonder he hath the face to say it was and tell the Reader so who hath the Question stated before him otherwise But whether any of these might be debarred the Sacrament though not fully excommunicated Therefore Mr. W. his debate here is not only impertinent to the present argumentation he pretends to answer to but also to the whole controversie in hand 2. His odious Insinuations of every Parish Priest after his own humour using partiality with the rest of that riff raff have been answered before 3. But that which ad ravim usque he talkes on is suspending for non-submission to Examination and that of persons otherwise judicious and of good example Our Question was whether for any cause any might be suspended not for what causes Yet this Digression I intend to say somewhat to when it comes among the Digressions at the latter end to which I refer it 4. If it were not fit the correcting discipline should lye in the hands he excepts against because of their cohabitation with them who should be corrected which may cause partiality then the Corinthian Officers should not have had in their hands the correcting discipline wherewith to censure the Incestuous person because forsooth he was among them and they might if Mr. W. had been their prompter have evaded the Apostles objurgation for neglect of disciplining him and have said It was not fit for us who live with him to censure him some body els more remote who might be presumed more impartial should have taken him in hand And belike the same Reason would as well perswade Justices of peace that it s not fit for them to take cognizance of offences among their neighbours they are fit to minister Justice to those who are remote from them not to them who cohabite with them in the same Hundred or Parish And yet though Mr. W. talkes thus consideratly as he saith himselfe p. 103. yet a while agoe he seemed to have a better mind to exercise discipline among his neighbours if the State would enough assist him therein For said he p. 90. we have ordinary cases enough in being for the full exercise of Ecclesiastical discipline had we power from the Christian Magistrate to convent offenders before us authoritatively and to inflict punishments upon them after their legal conviction according to the quality of their crimes and should not rather be a ludibrium to bold offenders then any way reform them To the former part whereof I answer Did he never see the Ordinance of Lords and Commons of March 29 1648. entituled The Form of Church Government to be used in the Church of England and Ireland agreed upon by the Lords and Commons assembled in Parliament after advice had with the Assembly of Divines Is that but a toleration or was it ever repealed But some Ministers and others pretend ignorance of such an Ordinance and wonder when it s shewed them and well they may that they should no more regard the affaires of the Church Others have pretended It was but an Ordinance and therefore not valid after the dissolution of the Parliament who made it and yet in the meane time have sued for their tithes upon an Ordinance built upon the same Authority To the latter part I returne Cyprians answer Epist. 55. ad Cornelium Quod si ita res est frater charissime ut nequissimorum timeatur audacia quod mali jure atque aequitate non possunt temeritate ac desperatione perficiant actum est de Episcopatus vigore de ecclesiae gubernandae sublimi ac divinâ potestate nec Christiani ultrâ aut durare aut esse jam possumus si ad hoc ventum est ut perditorum minas atque infidias pertimescamus And after Non id circo frater charissime relinquenda est ecclesiastica disciplina aut sacerdotalis solvenda censura quoniam convitijs infestamu◠aut terroribus quatimur c. §. 5. To his fourth I answer It s most of it answered in what was lately mentioned whereby it appeares if Ministers were not the greatest hinderers of Church Order they might see that presbyterated Churches have power from the State authoritatively to send for offenders yea to give Oath if need require But as long as the Magistrate doth not compel them to do their duty herein by depriving them of their maintenance for neglect hereof as well as for total neglect of preaching they cannot see sufficient authority for their acting herein That Question Mr. W. here propounds whether Parochial suspension with Classical power in being by toleration civil be an universal remedy against all the evils that belong to Ecclesiastical cognizance Lanswer negatively Who said it was But doth Mr. W. thence evince the consequence of my fore-recited argument to be invalid Good Reader Respice titulum Look to what Mr W. is answering to all along and then judge whether it was handsome he of many should have told the world how he feares my braines are almost marred as he doth p. 89. I am beholding to him for his care of me But I cannot desire he should be fo
also because in a neighbourhood and association of Congregationall Churches this excommunication passed in some one of them is not likely to be effectuall for humbling the offender unless the rest also comply therewith And it cannot be expected they should unless they have satisfaction concerning the justness thereof Therefore we judge it requisite that where a Classis may be had this excommunication be managed with their advice and consent that so other Ministers and Churches may not admit an excommunicate of any one to their Communion among them either sacramentall or that private encouraging fellowship which by excommunication he is justly debarrd from at home §. 12. 5 Lastly from the Texts before mentioned it may also appeare that there is an excommunication ipso jure as well as facto that is 1. where the Law of God determines who are to be withdrawn from and it s left to the discretion of the Church-Officers and private members to determine who those persons are who by the Law are so excommunicate upon a notorious manifestation thereof And 2. where there is required the juridical sentence of some Ecclesiastical Judge to determine that such a person is to be excommunicated This latter none doubt of And the former is proved by 2 Thes 3.6 and 3 John ver 10 11. That learned Gentleman Mr. William Morice quotes Estius saying that If the crime be so notorious that by no gainsaying it can be denied it seemes not that the sentence of the Judge is to be expected in order to the avoyding of the offender This quotation he hath in the 147 page of his booke which he hath entituled Caena quas◠〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The new Inclosures broken down and the Lords Supper laid forth in common for all Church-members having a dogmatical faith and not being scandalous Which position if it be limited to Church members adult who have duely once made a personal recognition of their baptismal Engagements And if herein he exclude not the profession of a justifying faith as if it were not necessary to be joyned to and with the dogmatical faith he speakes I say if that position of his be so understood as I see not but it may according to the tenor of his discourse following I finde nothing therein to be gainsayd For all such Church members are to be reputed and dealt with as justified sincere beleevers §. 13. In my sixth particular concerning the state of the Question in the M S. numb 15 16. I made use of Ames his words to expresse my minde viz that the lesser degree of excommunication which consisted in suspension hath place in the Church not by any particular express Institution of Christ but from equity and the nature of the thing it selfe There first Mr. W. flouts me as quoting so low an Authority and adjudgeth me to be stiled a private man for it I had been more private but for him But it s evident I built nothing upon the authority of Ames here no more then Mr. W. doth on the Author of charity mistaken or Tornesius which he quotes in his Epistle Next he gives us his observations concerning the time and order of Ames his workes and that in part I thinke to shew my quotation of him to be amisse And though he after mention his Transcriber of my copy his diligence he commends that none of the faults may be taken off my selfe Let him excuse his Transcriber as he pleaseth my paper quoted Ames de Consc lib. 4. cap. 29. But who could thinke this lofty Eagle would deigne to catch at such poore flies as these But he had leasure enough it seemes and a mind to say any thing so it might be against me And then because Ames is not of my minde in all things about the subject of the power of excommunication he tells the world I wrong Ames in quoting that passage from him When as our dispute was purposely and expresly separated from the Question about the subject of this power Numb 5 6. §. 14. My seventh and last note was to this purpose One particular affirmative overthrows an universal negative and therefore if I prove some in the Question in any case may be suspended I attaine my end The which is so manifestly true to every fresh man that Mr. W. hath not the face to deny it yet he chides about it extreamly but most impotently as if he would challenge our Wych-wallers to a scuffle with him Your majesticall severity in a bead roll of words as if you would charm the senses of the vulgar with your rare skil in Logick to delude the simple by fraudulent and illogical arguments c. Thus his tongue runs at random and he hath confuted me fluently if his Reader will but do him this small very little favour as to beleeve him without proofe But in the midst of this ranting fit he interweaves two impertinent Questions Pag. 31. The first is this Why all unregenerate ignorant and scandalous members should not be debarred as well as some seeing they all as well as some do stand guilty of the same notorious cause of exclusion To which I answer 1. Some may be unregenerate who are neither ignorant nor scandalous 2. There are degrees of ignorance and scandall and therefore some may be more debarrable than others 3. I no where say that any notoriously ignorant or scandalous should be admitted but its sufficient for the overthrowing their universall negative None such may be debarred if I evince any may let him look to it whether all such may my present province not putting me on the proofe thereof His second Query is Whether your pretented flagitious Burgess may lawfully be whipt before be he carefully convented or convicted or after If before tell us by what Law if not till afterwards Then you no wayes contradict our Assertion As if I had brought this simile to prove suspension when as I used it only to shew that a particular affirmative overthrows an universall negative viz. that if some flagitious Citizen may be whipt then its false that none such may so it some scandalous Church-members may be suspended then its false that none such may The matter he queries as to some excommunication of scandalous persons notoriously such although no juridical sentence of an Ecclesiastical Judge hath passed on them to be such hath been answered in the last section And now having dispatcht his cavills against my explication of the Question and the management thereof I shall attend him in the argument it selfe But first let me take a little refreshing PSALM 119. part 3d. C. 17 Choyce bounty shew that whiles I live Thy Word I keepe with awe 18 Cleere up my dim eyes to perceive The wonders of thy Law 19 Conceale not from me thy Lawes high I am a stranger here 20 Care breakes my soul whiles all times I Long for thy Judgements deare 21 Curst are the proud whom thou dost blame Who from thy precepls stray 22 Cast not on
And at the end of the Confirmation it 's ordered And there shall none be admitted to the holy Communion untill such time as he can say the Catechisme and be confirmed Here is the substance of what is required among us Let any who come to communicate shew that ever since they came to years they thus personally owned the Christian Faith and I know no bar in the Presbyterial Government to their admission The Ordinance of Parliament no where requireth that all should be examined now in order to their admission But that the ignorant are to be excluded and that implies not as some have over-hastily concluded that all are to be now examined But onely that all not examined sometime before are to be examined now and they onely unless there be proofes or at least strong presumptions of any their apostasie from or losing the knowledge of the faith they have sometime personally professed §. 4. Secondly for scandall the order of the Church of England was manifest that the scandalous should be suspended though not then fully excommunicated or excommunicated majori excommunicatione as the Canons speak In the Rubrick before the Communion it is thus ordered If any of those who intend to communicate be an open notorious evill liver the Curate shall advertise him in any wise not to presume to the Lords Table untill he have openly declared himself to have truly repented and amended his former naughty life c. The same order shall the Curate use with those betwixt whom he perceiveth malice and hatred to reign not suffering them to partake of the Lords Table untill he knowes them to be reconciled And if one of the parties so at variance be content to forgive the other from the bottome of the heart to make amends for that he himself hath offended and the other party will not be perswaded to a godly unity the Minister in that case ought to admit the penitent person to the holy Communion and not him that is obstinate The first exhortation which is ordered to be read at certain times when the Curate shall see the people negligent to come to the holy Communion is mostwhat verbatim and altogether in sense what Mr W. hath prefixed before his Book under the name of Dr Peter Martyr and why he might not have quoted the Common-Prayer Book for it as well as Peter Martyr I cannot certainly tell but the Reader may easily guesse somewhat shrewdly at it And for answer thereunto as I see nothing therein against the suspension pleaded for so those who framed the Common-Prayer thought it no way thwarted their suspension and lesser excommunication if they had they would not have contradicted themselves so grossly as to insert it in the Communion where they so expressly give order for the debarring the ptophane as you have already heard And in their next exhortation to examine themselves repent and amend they add For otherwise the recieving the holy Communion doth nothing else but increase your damnation And especially in their third Exhortation It 's said thus Therefore if any of you be a blasphemer of God an hinderer or flanderer of his Word an adulterer or be in malice or envy or any other grievous crime bewayl your sins and come not to this holy Table lest after the taking of that holy Sacrament the Divel enter into you as he entred into Judas and fill you full of impiety and bring you to destruction of body and soul Whereby it is evident the first exhortation to come was made to them onely who were supposed obedient believers and here they who were disobedient are warned to keep off whiles so wilfully disobedient and those who were notoriously such were to be kept off by the Minister But yet certainly the Curate did not fully excommunicate all them whom he was not to suffer to partake of the Lords Table though in part he did ecclesiastically withdraw from them as is more evident in the Canons of the Synod held at London in the first year of King James §. 5. The title of the 26th Canon is Notorious offenders not to be admitted to the Communion And in the Canon No Minister shall in any wise admit to the receiving of the holy Communion any of his cure or flock which be openly knowne to live in sin notorious without repentance nor malicious persons not reconciled nor unfaithfull Church-wardens c. Can. 27. The title is Schismatiques not to be admitted to the Communion The title of Can. 57. is The Sacraments not to be refused at the hands of unpreaching Ministers In the Canon it selfe its ordered Those who leave their own Parish Churches in that respect c. they are from the Ordinary to receive punishment by Ecclesiastical Censures that is Let them persisting in their wilfulness be suspended and then after a moneths further obstinacy excommunicated In Can. 59. Enjoyning Ministers to catechize every Sunday It s decreed if the Minister do neglect he is to be admonished and if he wilfully offend againe suspended and if the third time then excommunicated and others concern'd to come themselves or send theirs to be catechized are in the same Canon in case of their neglect herein to be suspended by their Ordinaries if they be not children and if they so persist for the space of a moneth then let them be excommunicated Can. 68. the title whereof is Ministers not to refuse to christen or bury But in the body of the Canon there is this proviso Except the party deceased were denounced excommunicate majori excommunicatione for some grievous and notorious crime and no man able to testifie of his repentance These three last Canons I have quoted shew how cleerly they owned a degree of Censure called by the name of suspension though it was in those cases to be inflicted by the Ordinary But the former quotations shew how farre the Minister also was entrusted with a debarring from the Communion notoriously prophane persons who might tender themselves to receive Now we are to heare what Mr. W. alledgeth to cut us off from our present pleading this order of the Church of England The suspension saith he taken up in the Church of England in case of obstinacy in some notorious crime was the publique act of the Church and State not inherent in a Minister as a Minister but derived to him by deputation and cannot now be pretended to the Common prayer book which gave the power being now abolished So he p. 41. §. 6. First It s to be observed that Mr. W. here speaks of the suspension taken up in the Church of England as if it were only in case of obstinacy in some notorious crime whereas its manifest most of the passages before rehearsed out of the Canons and Common prayer booke cleerly evince that suspension was inflicted for several crimes without respect to obstinacy therein and then obstinacy and continuance in those crimes without visible repentance and reformation was punished with greater excommunication as
the Canon it selfe speakes 2. But as to the substance of his exception I answer briefly thus for the overthrowing of it Either the Common prayer booke was not abolished by a lawfull authority sufficient for the nulling and abrogating of that sanction whereby it was formerly established or els it was If it were not then Ministers by vertue of the Common prayer booke may as opportunity is offered suspend according to the Directions therein given them which remaine still in force if not nulled by a sufficient authority But if the Common prayer booke was abolished by a lawfull authority sufficient for the abrogating that sanction whereby it was formerly established then certainly they who had such power to abrogate that government and order had power also to establish our suspension It belonging to the same power or authority to null as to make a law And then the same suspension in substance is delegated to Church Officers still in the Ordinance of 48 for Presbyterial Government where this is appointed by the Lords and Commons by whom only the Service booke was abrogated I have the rather hinted this for the satisfaction of some godly persons who have not been well satisfied with the State proceedings in reference to Church Government who yet have an high esteem of the former constitutions of the Church of England And me thinkes where the same thing for substance is appointed and practiced they should not reject it And now let the Reader if he please judge whether M. W. or we behave our selves most like Ministers of the Church of England in reference to the degrees of excommunication and specially in reference to suspension the neglect whereof he out of Mr. P. chargeth us with Mr. W. proceeds to carp at may be in my syllogisme when as yet may be was in the position I opposed And the question was whether such cases may occurre not whether they did occurre wherein the persons spoken of might be suspended as appeares in my M S. at numb 6.17 But our Doctor resolutissimus absolutissimus descends not so low as to observe the state of the Question he had rather it seemes be shewing his Logick to his weaker consciences for whose satisfaction his title page designes his booke and telling them p. 43 44. which are the subjects and the predicats in the Propositions and the medius terminus in the syllogisme they will it may be applaud their Doctor with an Egregiam veró laudem But if any of his weaker consciences meet with these lines I am of opinion they will not so farre admire those logical termes as to refuse the plaine and wholesome provision I now offer them to share with me in the PSAIM 119. Part 4. D. 25 Down on the dust my sad soul stayes Let thy truth life afford 26 Declar'd to thee I have my wayes Thou heardst Teach me thy Word 27 Disclose thy Precopts-way to me Thy wondrous workes I 'le tell 28 Deep griefe my soul melts strengthen me After thy Word right well 29 Drive lying wayes from me thy Law Grant to me graciously 30 Duely I chose thy Truth and saw Thy Judgements with mine eye 31 Dearly thy witness'd Truth I hold From shame Lord me discharge 32 Daily in thy wayes run I would If thou my heart enlarge CHAP. V. §. 1. THe confirmation of the Major Proposition in my second syllogisme at numb 25. in my M S. Mr. W. repeats in his p. 44. where he hath such jejune and lanquid exceptions against some explications being inserted in Parentheses and so separated from the syllogisme it selfe that I judge it needless to make any defence against them There being none I thinke who manage a dispute in writing who do not use the like Although its true in disputations face to face there is less need of them any mistake which might occurre about the meaning of the termes being soone rectified by explication thereof The like frivolous complaint he makes of some various equipollent phrases used viz. visibly unbeleevers and such as ought to be judged and taken to be unbeleevers when as I had expresly signified the equipollency of them numb 25. The proposition I was to prove was Those who by word openly renounce the Lord Jesus Christ are visibly such to whom the Lord would not according to the revelation of his will in his Word have the Lords Supper administred Now my conclusion in the syllogisme I brought to prove this was Those who by word openly renounce the Lord Jesus Christ are visibly such to whom according to the word of God the Lords Supper ought not to be administred An ordinary Reader I think would see no difference betwixt them to whom according to the word of God the Lords Supper ought not to be administred and them to whom the Lord would not according to the revelation of his will in his word have the Lords Supper administred But Mr. W. that he may seeme to see further into a milstone than another can doe hath spyed the disagreement He was belike at a great want for exceptions who takes up these and considering his necessity he may be better excused It s better to pick strawes than to doe just nothing But at last he hath unbutton'd his eyes and can perceive some strength in my proofe when it hath been he thinkes beholding to him for a better dresse p. 46. where he thus formes it Those who are visibly unbeleevers are visibly such to whom the Lords Supper ought not to be administred But those who by word openly renounce the Lord Jesus Christ are visibly unbeleevers Ergo Those who by word openly renounce the Lord Jesus Christ are visibly such to whom the Sacrament of the Lords Supper ought not to be administred § 2. Well now he hath the honour as he speakes to be opponent himselfe I hope he will be more civil in his answer and not be captious against his own creature Wherein now saith he p. 47. doth this argument advance your pretensions or disparage ours and then explaining that Question or shewing that he is not at a want of other artificiall words to say the same thing againe as pompously he addes What evidence doth it artificially and intrinsecally give for you or against us My conclusion was those who by word openly renounce the Lord Jesus Christ are visibly such to whom according to the word of God the Lords Supper ought not to be administred The conclusion he hath made for me is those who by word openly renounce the Lord Jesus Christ are visibly such to whom the Sacrament of the Lords Supper ought not to be administred Let the Reader judge what material difference there is betwixt them Yet he grants the latter when he quarreld the former But then as bethinking himselfe that the argument is mine though the dress be his he will now have another thrust at it and denies the Minor yet not absolutely but with distinction now he attempts to play the part of a
we assume that to our selves which by the said Form of Church Government we are required to doe not to mention here what hath been discussed before concerning the Ministers duty in point of conscience 3. How do we take more authority to our selves then the Prelates did Not to rake into other old sores that which the Prelates did in suspending all who would not kneel at the Communion and requiring Ministers should not deliver it to them as hath been recited in the Treatise above Ch. 4. § 4. doth cleerely manifest the falseness of this which Mr. W. or rather his passion I hope it s not himselfe would affix on us 4. But yet more his distemper swells above ordinary bounds when he flatly determines our usurping power of suspension to be such as that we assume more power to our selves over the people then the 1 most domineering Prelate 2 ever did among us Belike Bishop Bonner himselfe not excepted I l'e say nothing here in our own Apology but rather for Mr. W. who more needs it I consider That as of false Dials that 's best which is most false because it will deceive fewest so it was a favour to us that Mr. W. when he would traduce us hath done it so palpably and grossly 11 He is pursuing the designe of his book viz. against us when he saith p. 91. The scandal of such as depart from us casting such an odium upon the publique Ministers and proper meanes of grace deserves the severity of Ecclesiastical Discipline more by farre then the private miscarriages of our men in publique unitie with us in matters of Religion possibly can and yet you let these alone And here the Christian Magistrates meere toleration restraines your consciences c. Mr. W. here seemes to insinuate that the Magistrate doth so tolerate these enemies of the meanes of grace as that Ecclesiasticall Censures might not be inflicted on them without offending him Whereas The toleration of some supposed to be erroneous yea schismatical and heretical is in reference to the forbearance of laying corporal or purse-penalties on them for the same not laying restraint on the Churches in exercising of spiritual Censures And if Mr. W. be so bold as to slander the State thus openly It s the less to be wondred at that against our professed judgements present practice he tells the world that we let these exorbitant persons being our Church members alone that is that we dare not censure them Ecclesiastically as opportunity is afforded unto us Mr. W. is so much at leasure as to tell me p. 151. About 19 times you have alarum'd us with the bagpipes of your fully and full I might count his Untruths here I will not say Full lyes to answer my fullies But I have somewhat else to doe 12 But he hath another confutation of our suspension like the rest p. 114. in these words You are a man mightily cry'd up and wonderfully admired by some and one a prime friend of yours in my hearing spake of you by way of admiration saying O that man And that for which he so deservedly extoll'd you was the great good service you did for the honour and credit of the Popes holines acquitting him from a grosse aspersion cast upon his holiness by some Protestant Divines charging him to be Antichrist Now you by your skil and authority discharged his holiness by open Proclamation or preaching from the crime objected And whether for the like good services others your Admirers cry you up time will manifest But me thinkes in this piece of yours I can finde little that savours of Divinity or of any other good science I shall not stand expostulating about the publication of this he pretends to have heard For I grudge every word I shall write for my vindication herein and indeed was apt to have contemned it in silence if some others had not urged mee to take notice of it publiquely But I flatly deny the words he chargeth on me and any other equivalent thereunto The Sermon from which this reproach hath as I understand taken its pretence was preached on 1 John 2.18 which text was not of my own choosing but fell to my lot in the exercise wee have in these parts which handleth that whole Epistle in order 1. I have the witnesse of my own conscience that I never harboured that opinion which is here put on me 2. I have the testimony of a godly Divine Mr. Thomas Edge to whom I communicated the notes of that Sermon before I preached it that I designed to profess against it the which he hath given me under his hand 3. I have my notes yet to shew which also I brought to our Classis that they might see how therein I affirmed that it was my opinion the Pope with his party are the great Antichrist of the latter times 4. There were six or seven Ministers my Auditors sundry of whom wrote my Sermon who all would unanimously testifie if I desired it against what Mr. W. taxeth me with Three of them viz. Mr. Newcome Mr. Martindale and Mr. Edge did long agoe send me in their Testimonies in this matter but they are too large to be here inserted fully and some passages therein may not wel become mine own pen to transcribe and publish Yet some one of them I shall here recite because Calumniators mouthes are not easily stopped Mr. Martindale his Testimony runs in these words Having lately read in the 14 page of a little book called Suspension discussed an invective passage against my deare Brother Mr. Samuel Langley Authour of the Manusript pretended to be answered in the said booke charging him to have acquitted the Pope by open Proclamation or preaching from the crime of Antichristianisme objected against him by some Protestant Divines I account my selfe a debtor both to the truth and also to the good name of a Minister of Jesus Christ to give this true and impartial testimony of him viz. That upon the 8th day of May last I heard an elaborate Sermon preached by the Gentleman accused upon 1 John 2.18 which is in all probability the very Sermon that the Accuser aimes at wherein he was so farre from denying the Pope to be Antichrist that he professedly asserted that the Pope called elswhere in Scripture the man of sin is and may properly be called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Antichrist great Antichrist of these latter dayes And that John in using the terme Antichrist may probably allude to such a thing Though he modestly proposed his judgement with submission that these words Antichrist and Antichrists in the Epistles of John did most properly and in their primary and immediate signification refer to the false teachers of those dayes Adding also his grounds and divers Cautions to have prevented misunderstanding and misrepresentations if it would have been What I have here said I am ready as occasion shall be given by oath if lawfully required to own and justifie which if I should