subject to a Common-councell or Court of Presbyters The Doctor urgeth that Scripture the third Epistle of John the 9.10,11 verses as an invincible Argument You shall finde it thus expounded by the Doctor pag. 15. ' And therefore when Diotrephes assumed to himself and his particular congregation a power and authority to rule according to his will and pleasure without the consent of the Presbyterie and opposed Iohn the Presbyter He sharply reproves his proceedings and signifies to the Church That when he came he would remember his words and teach him how to prate against the Presbytery with malicious words Which is an evill thing in him saith St. Iohn It was evill in him to assume unto himself and his particular congregation that power that belonged unto the colledge or councell of Presbyters and was to be moderated and exercised onely by the conjoynt and common-consent of the Presbytery For God hath appointed that the Church should be governed by a Presbytery and Diotrephes would have his congregation Independent and have an absolute jurisdiction within it self which saith St. Iohn is an evill thing Now let the Reader judge whether the Dr. be not much mistaken in his Commentary-exposition and application of this place of Scripture And let me give you to understand that St. Iohn saith verse 9. I wrote unto the Church Or as Beza upon that verse 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Scripsi nonnihil Ecclesiae that is I have written something to the Church But seeing no mention is made of any perticular Congregation how can the Dr. so confidently affirm that it was his particular Congregation Now the Reader may see plainly That the Dr. can expound those Brethren and their Elders or Presbyters which the Scripture calles a Church to be a particular Congregation And what it was which St. Iohn had written to the Church is not in this Epistle nor any other Scripture declared except it was to receive those Brethren which he saith verse 8. ought to be received and verse 10. whom Diotrephes would not receive how then doth the Doctor say That Diotrephes assumed that power to himself which belonged unto the Colledge and councell of Presbyters without whose joynt and mutuall agreement and common-consent nothing ought to be done or transacted of publike concernment Is the receiving of Brethren or casting out of Brethren a power which belongs to a Colledge of Presbyters and neither the one nor the other may be transacted by the Elders and Brethren of a particular congregation unlesse the court or common-councell of Presbyters conjoyntly consent unto it Let it be also considered That Diotrephes opposed the Brethren and forbade them that would have received those who St. Iohn saith verse 8. we ought to receive yea and cast them ought vers 10. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 volentes admittere prohibet de Ecclesia dejicit That is and forbiddeth them that would or are willing to admit them and casteth them out of the church to wit excommunicates them Doth it hereby appear that Diotrephes would have his congregation Independent and have an absolute jurisdiction within it self No but Diotrephes would Lord it over the church and have the pre-eminence above his brethren whether fellow Elders or fellow Saints verse ◠〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 sed amans primatum gerere in eos Diorephes that is But Diotrephes loving the primacie amongst them He would be the Primate and Metropolitan of the church and have the Pre-eminence of all the Presbyters in it and Brethren of it The Doctor could have urged this Scripture against the domineering Prelates and why should he marvail that his Brethren should now urge it against the court of Presbyters It is confessed Diotrephes did that which was evill in usurping Authority over the church and those Brethren whom he cast out of the church But that he was the first that opposed the Presbyterian Government or that he did affront a Court and common-councell of Presbyters is more then I know or the Doctor can prove For had Diotrephes done so why was he not convented before them surely the Apostle and Elder St. Iohn would rather have written to the colledge of Presbyters if there were any such then to the Church or in writing to the Church would rather have sent him a summons to appear at some consistorie before the Court and common-councell of Presbyters then to warne them to take heed of his evill that they did not follow it And doubtlesse St. Iohn would have written thus Diotrephes loves to be a Primate among you wherefore when the Presbyterie that is to say the Magistracy or Signory of grave solid learned religious and wise Divines and Ministers come to keep order and met together in a Court and common-councell I will remember his deeds and inform or complain to the Court and common-councell of Presbyters that he prates against us the Presbyters with malicious words But the Apostle St. Iohn did not know any Court or common-councell of Presbyters neither Classicall nor Synod call to appeal unto Nor can the Doctor make good those Appeales he mentioneth pag. 10. to be according to the Scripture of Truth to wit That every particular man as well as any Assembly or Congregation may have their appeal to the Presbyterie of their Precinct hundred or devision under whose jurisdictions they were And if they finde themselves wronged there then they have appeales to some other higher Presbytery or Councell of Divines for relief and justice I onely ask the Doctor how he can prove these appeales by Scripture and if he could whether that higher Presbytery or Councell of Divines especially if they may say the Holy Ghost and we be not as Independent as these Brethren and their Churches against whom the Doctor hath written And if so then such a high Presbytery or Councell of Divines is not Gods Ordintnce by the Doctors own confession and Affirmation Therefore the Apostle writes to the Church or perticular Congregation whereof Diotrephes was a Member and an Elder whom he knew had power to judge him as well as the Church or perticular Congregation of Corinth had power to judge them that were Members therein 1 Cor. 5.12.13 And therefore might as warrantably admonish Diotrephes as the Church of Colosse might Arckippus Coloss 4.17 ' And if nothing of publike concernment ought to bee done or transacted without the joynt and mutuall accord or agreement and common consent of the Presbytery Iohn the Presbyter would not have transgressed so farre as to take upon himself this Authority over Diotrephes to tell the Church of his faults and to say he would remember him and sharply reprove him and teach him to prate against the Presbyterie with malicious words which belonged to the Court and Common Councell of Presbyters But I shall have a just occasion to say more touching this matter in the answer unto the third Question and therefore passing by the objection with its answer mentioned page 19. to the 29. unto its
which the Presbyters acted as Presbyters But the Apostles in governing the Church of Ierusalem acted and Ordered things in a joynt body and Common-councell with the Presbytery or Presbyters either of that Church Ergo the Apostles acted as Presbyters This should have been the Doctors conclusion Now the truth is though the Apostles were called Presbyters in the Scripture yet it followeth not that they acted as Presbyters but as Apostles Acts 15. And they cannot therein be a pattern and president for Presbyters First because the Apostles had the care and charge of and over all Churches 2 Cor. 11.28 But the Presbyters had the care and oversight of some one Church onely as Ephesus Acts 20.28 or Philippi Phil. 1.1 and this the Dr. often inserts in his Book That all the Churches we read of in the new Testament though they were Presbyterially governed were dependent upon their severall Presbyters pag. 12. Pag. 12. And secondly because this would make the Presbyters Independents indeed for so the Apostles were in the Government of all the Churches The Presbyters of Jerusalem of Ephesus and of all the Churches were dependent upon the Apostles and the Apostles onely depended on Christ by whose holy spirit they were all alwayes guided in the government of their Churches and therefore they said Acts 15.28 It seemed good to the Holy Ghost and us And though the Doctor say the Presbyters might say so as well as the Apostles because the Elders or Presbyters are mentioned there The Dr. might have also considered that the Brethren even the whole church the multitude how many soever the D. can make of them were present as wel as the Presbyters Acts 15.4.12.22.23.25.27.28 And so have made the Brethren the multitude even the whole Church Independent also and the Dr. might as well have affirmed that the Brethren even the whole Church might say It seemed good to the Holy Ghost and to us To the fourth proposition ' That the Church of Jerusalem and the Government of the same is to be a pattern for all Congregations and Assemblies in any City or vicinity to unite into one Church and for the Officers and Presbyters of those congregations to govern that Church joyntly in a Colledge or Presbytery pag. 97. And for the proof of this fourth Proposition the Doctor saith ' That all men acknowledge that the mother Church must give an example of Government to all the Daughter Churches Neither do the Brethren deny saith the Dr. but the Government of the Church of Jerusalem must be the pattern of Government to all Churches But the Dr. knowes that the Brethren deny that the Church of Ierusalem consisted of divers Congregations and severall assemblies under a Common-councell Consistory Colledge or Court of Presbyters And this they have not granted neither hath the Doctor proved And this may be sufficient to be said in answer to the four Propositions touching the first question And now I come to the second Question which is concerning the manner of gathering of Churches and admitting of Members and Officers pag. 98. which Question the Dr. thus states viz. ' Whether Ministers of the Gospell may out of already gathered assemblies of Beleevers select and chuse the most principle of them into a Church-fellowship peculiar unto themselves and admit of none into their society but such as shall enter in by a private Covenant and are allowed by the consent and approbation of all the Congregation And this Question the Doctor brancheth into sixe Queries pag. 98.99 Wherein the judicious Reader may perceive the Doctor through mis-information I conceive hath mistaken the stateing of the Question which he partly acknowledgeth pag. 100. ' But now I shall set down saith the Dr. pag. 100 Gods method and the Apostles practice in gathering of Churches and the manner they used in making Members in every Church and compare it with the method our Brethren the Independents use c. And to this purpose the Doctor begins with Christs commission Matth. 28.19,20 and Mark 16.15,16 and Acts 26.15,16.17,18,19,20 Out of these severall Scriptures the Doctor observes these three things pag. 101. and 102. To wit First ' That they should teach no other things but what Christ commanded them and appeared to them in and for which thy had his Word and warrant Secondly the condition which they were to propound unto all nations and people upon which they were admitted into the Church was Faith Repentance and Baptisme And thirdly that this commission was delivered onely to the Apostles and Ministers of the Gospel that they should admit whosoever beleeved and were baptized And they that beleeved not would not be baptized were not to be admitted These are the Doctors owne words page 102. and page 103. The Doctor for proofe quotes the third Chapter of Matthew and Luke 3.7 And the sum of Iohns preaching saith the Dr. is mentioned verse 3. It was the baptisme of Repentance for the Remission of sinnes Also he there cites Luke 7.29 That all the people that heard him and the Publicans justified God being Baptized with the Baptisme of Iohn But the Pharisees and the Lawyers rejected the councell of God against themselves being no Baptized of him page 103.104 But now to go on saith the Dr. pag 104. after the Resurrection and Assension of Christ c. Where he quotes Acts 2.37,38 Then they that gladly received the Word were Baptized and the same day were added unto them about three thousand soules Hence the Doctor observes that the Apostles propounded no other condition or termes for the making all and every one of them members of the Church but Repentance and Baptisme The which when the people had accepted of saith the Doctor They were forthwith admitted c. page 104. For another proofe the Doctor produceth Acts 10.44,47,48 Where the Doctor affirmeth page 106. That those Brethren who came with Peter did not intermeddle in that businesse to wit of their admittance by Baptisme into the Church Now I conceive the reason why those Brethren did not intermeddle to hinder their admittance to that Ordinance of Jesus Christ to wit Baptisme in water and so to an entrance into the Church was not because they had not such Libertie but because the Brethren had no just objections or kindrance to declare to Peter That the Brethren had a liberty to have declared any thing which might justly have hindred the administration of that Ordinance of Baptisme unto them doth appeare by the Question which the Apostle expounded verse 47. Can any man forbid water that these should not be baptized ' And the Dr. himselfe acknowledged pag. 102. That the Brethren or Disciples of the Church of Jerusalem who must be a patterne saith the Dr. of all churches had this libertie to except against some sorts of persons and hinder their admittance into the church though baptized according to Christs Commission and Preachers chosen and sent by Christ himselfe And that in case such persons have been formerly known to