smother one truth under another For albeit the women of Corinâth were become so mannish as that they would prophesiâ uncovered and withovt their veile the ensigne oâ their subiection yet doth not the Apostle meddle at all with that malady in this place but in the 11. cha. of the Epistle as himselfe noteth Here and in Tim. he simply forbids the thing there the manner of doing it Likewise for their being as forward to speake as their husbands and in their preâence it may be true in part and in some But what then Doth the Apostle in these places onely forbid their speaking uncouered and permit them to teach so it be veiled or forbids he onely their being as forward as their husbands but gives them leaue to speake in the Church so it be with good manners after their husboÌds which his answer insinuates Or is it not evideÌt to all that will not shut their eyes that he simply that severely inhibits them all speaking whatsoever in this exercise Are not the words plain enough Let the women keep silence in the Church for it is not permitted to them to speake but to be under obedience as the Law sayth And againe It is a shame for them to speak in the Church And in 1. Tim Let the women learne in silence with all subiection And I suffer not a woman to teach nor to usurpe authority ouer the man but to be in subjection For Adam was first formed c. Do not and every one of the Reasons binde women to all âeace and deepe silence in the Church yea to such âd so absolute as that they may not so much as aske question for learning any thing themselues ver. 35. âuch lesse teach others any thing I therefore conâude this as a most certain and undeniable truth ââat the Apostle speakes here of such a gift and exârcise as women are simply forbidden to use in the âhurch and therefore not of an extraordinary gift âr exercise which they might use lawfully and did âoth before and a long time after the writing of this âpistle His last answer now comes in consideration which âs that the consiquence is ill women are forbidden and âherefore men are permitted to prophesie in the Church by ân ordinary gift If the consiquence seem not good why doth he so strugle as before otherwise to make an escape froÌâhe Argument let us coÌsider of the force of it which appeareth to me irresistable in these 3. things First the Apostle in and for this worke opposeth the men to the women sex to sex and so in prohibiting women he permits men When the H. Ghost opposing faith and works in the cause of iustification denies that we are iustified by works is not then the consequence good that therefore we are iustified by faith where he opposeth beleevers and vnbeleevers in the ââse of Saluation and teacheth that beleevers shall be saued doth he not teach consequently that vnbeleevers shall perish if consequences be not goodââ must confesse my selfe farre to seeke both in Logiââ and Divinity Secondly the reasons of the prohibition of womââ proue the consiquence which are all such as prefeââ the men before the women and subiect the women to the men in the Church and in this very work of prophesie of which he treateth But now if in prohibiting women he gaue not liberty unto men where were the prerogatiue of men aboue women which is the onely ground upon which he buildeth his prohibition Thirdly where verse 34. 35. It is not permitted for women to speak but if they will learn any thing to ask then husbands at home if their husbands might not speake neither nor any more then they what reason can be rendred of the Apostle so speaking Lastly M. Yates in denying this consequence sheweth that so he might deny something he tooke no great heed what it were The Apostle in this whole Chap takes order for some to prophesie and debarring women therefrom either admits men to the use of that liberty or els we must haue some third kinde of persons thought of which are neither male nor female My fourth Argument is from verse 29 and 32. Lââ the prophets speake âwo or three and let the rest iudgâ ând the spirit of the prophets are subiect to the prophets âhence I affirm that the Apostle speaks not of exâraordinary prophets or prophesying since they in âheir Doctrine could not erre and so were not subâect to any such iudgment or censure of others He ânswereth roundly though briefly in this place that âhese prophets were not infallibly assisted and more largây in another place that such prophets as haue an inâallible assistance are noâ subiect to this Rule but others âhat had but as the Apostle sayd Rom. 12. 6. meaner âifts were to be examined according to the pâoportion of âaith so that extraordinary prophets might mix some of âheir own with the extraordinary gifts of Gods spirit âhich was to be censured by such as had a greater meaâure for none are to thinke that all that haâ thâse extraordinary gifts were free from errour in their veây doctrine We see the strange gift of tongues was abused and so âight the rest be That one extraordinary Prophet had a greater meaâure and proportion of gifts then another I acknowâedge but that any one of them could erre in doctrin or was not infallibly assisted therein by the spirit â deny as a most pernicious errour weaking the foundation of faith and truth of the word of God neither hath Master Yates so much as enterprised an answer unto the Scriptures brought by me to proue the contrary which were Ephesians 2. 20. where the Ephesians as the houshold or Church of God are said to be built upon the foundation of the Apostles and Prophets c. chap. 3. 5. where he speaks of âmistery of Christ which in other ages was not mâ known unto the sonnes of men as it is now revealed uâ his holy Apostles and Prophets by the spirit When it apeares that the Church is as well built upon tââ foundation of the prophets to wit extraordinarâ which then were for of them he speaketh as upââ the doctrine of the Apostles and they as infalliblâ euen for the very foundation inspired by the Holâ Ghost as the other So that if the Prophets coââ erre in doctrine then the Apostles if in doctrinâ taught why not written and if one alone why nâ more or all and if they might erre how know ââ that they did not erre If he say the meaner in gift might erre but not the greater first the same folloâeth also touching the Apostles how much more touching the Prophets before Christ not comparible tâ those after him why then may there not be errors in the writings especially of those meaner gifts as without doubt some were in comparison of the rest what whether this wind will bring who seeth not Moreover whereas wee propound such interpretations and doctrines as we
man as that he thereby be inabled extraordinaâly to prophesie make him an extraordinary proâhet why should not by due proportion such a âift of the Spirit given by the Lord to a man as by which he is inabled to prophesie ordinarily serue alââ to make him an ordinary Prophet and so by conââquence if there be amongst us any though out of âffice so enabled to prophesie or preach what hinâreth them from being Prophets euen of the Lords own making by his spirits gift and worke upoâ their study and ândeauours And if they be Prâphets then may they Prophesie which Moses also â that place insinuates for in wishing that they weâ all Prophets he wisheth as wel the use as the posseâsion of the gift M. Yates may see a very learned maâIo Wolphius in his comment upon 2. Kin. 23. shewing by this place the libertie of priuate Christianâ that are able to speak and teach not onely in ordinary congregations but even in most solemn Councelâ The next place is 2 Chron. 17. 7. where Kinâââhosaphat sent his Princes to teach in the Cities of Iâdâââ and with them the Levites c. M. Yates accounts it a monstrous conceite that the princes should be publique teachers which saith he werâ onely by theyr presence and authority to back the Leuitesâ adding that the traslation is mended by Iunius anâ Tremelius c. but if the Iewes heard him professing the knowledge of Moses and the Prophets to speak so they would marvaile at his ignoranceâ of a thing so frequent and evident in their writings with whom it is and euer hath been a receaued truth that any of their wise men as they after the Scriptures math. 23. 34. 1. Cor. 1. 20. Iââ 18-18 call them may and ought to teach in theyr synagogues without respect had to office neither doth the translation of Iunius and Tremelius by any necessity make for him neither can it be set against me without violence to the originall from the simplicity âhere of they do with due reverence unto them be spoken seeme vnto mee some thing to turne aââe in the 8 ver. Pagnine the 70 Interpreters Ieromâd all our English Bibles carry it directly to our âse And if the conceit be monstrous that these princes âeached publikely it is not bred onely in my braine âe uery same scripture having been alledged very ââely by the publick Professour in the Vniversitie âLeyden in a solemne assembly as expresly proving â lawfull for others then ministers to teach publickâ And because much weight lieth upon this ground âhich yet hee thinketh very sandyâ and light I will âake it cleare to all indifferent mens indgments that âese Princes and so others in Israell and Iudah ââough no Levites nor Church officers might lawââlly teach and preach publickly in the Temple âynagogues and Cities First then all Princes Magistrates Indges âd Governours were bound to open expound and âply the Laws by which they governed according â the severall occasions offred otherwise they ruled â tyranny appetite which laws for al administraâons even of the common wealth were onely the written word of God wherupon I conclude that if â open expound and apply the word of God be to âreach and teach they then had not onely power âut charge so to doo 2 It may appeare what these Princes of Iekosapâ partaking of his power were to do in this cause which he himselfe and other godly kings haue doâ the sum of his most pithy sermon we haue recordâ 2 Chron. 19. unto the Iudges vers. 6. 7. and unto â Levites vers. 9. 10. 11. as also his divine prayer â to God in the publike Congregation chap 20. 5. c. Likewise the excellent sermon of King Heâ kiah unto the Priestes and Levites in the very Teâple 2. Chron. 29. 4. 5. c. also of Nâhâmiaâ with âthers teaching the people the Law of the Lord Neh. 10 the Kings and Princes being as shepherds feed the people as by Goverment so by instructiâ in the Law of their God Defend wee downe lowâ to the time of Christ and we shall see this matâ put out of al question Do we not read every wheâ how that the Scribs Pharisees and Lawers did teaâ publickly amongst the Iewes of whom yet maâ were no Levites or Church officers but indifferenâ of any tribe Phil. 3. 5. And if it were not the receâved order in Israel of old for men out of office â speake and teach in publick how was Iesus the ââ of Mary admited to dispute in the Temple with â Doctors Luk. 2. 46. and to teach ând preach in the Synagogues so commonly as he did Mat. 9 35. Luk. 16. 17. and how were Paul and Barnabas sitting dowâ in the Sinagogues sent unto after the lecture of the Lâây the ruler that if they had any word of exhortation ãâ¦ã people they should say on Act. 13. 14. 15. But if any man shall answer that these were exâordinary persons and so taught by an extraordinaâ gift he speakes the truth but to no purpose For âat was that to the order receiued in the Temple âd Synagogues and to the Rulers thereof who did ât beleeve in Christ nor acknowledge either his his Apostles authority but onely admitted them to the use of their gift as they would haue done âd did ordinarily any other men able to teach as also â rulers of the Synagogues of the Iews do at this ây The third place is mistaken by the printer in oâitting onely one prick which was corrected in any Coppies and might easily haue been obserued ââ the Reader For Ier 50. 45. it should be Ier. 50 â 5. M. Yates therefore upon this Scripture refutes âs owe guesse and not my proofe The fourth place is Math. 10. 1. 5. 6. where âhrist calling unto him his 12 Disciples sends them to âeach the Kingdom of heauen to the lost sheep of Israel His answer is that the 12 Apostles were called into ofâce and had their calling from the first election of Christ âut had a further confirmation after greater measure â Gods Spirit to lead them into al truth as a Iustice of âace may be put into office and yet receiue a further âonârmation yea and greater meanes to performe his plâââ â affirme on the other side and shal evidently ãâ¦ã it God assisting mee that these 12 were not actâ possessed of their Apostleship till after Christs surrection but were onely Apostles elect as you him the Major elect who hath not the office of âjor committed to him of a good space after Neiâ am I herein of the mind with the Papists to put Yates out of feare that Peter was not in office â Christ gave him charge to feed his sheep Joh. 21 whâ yet I am peâswaded never Papist held of his Apoâship but of his primicy and universall headshâ or Bishoprick but of the same mind whereof hâ selfe is in his first argument to wit that his comâsion Apostolick was actually conferred upon â ioyntly
third Argument is from ver. 34. where the Apostle restrains women from prophesying or other âpeaking in the Church with authority as also 1. Timâ 11. 12. and in forbidding women giues liberty to âll men gifted accordingly opposing women to meÌâex to sex and not women to officers and againe in âestraining women shewes his meaning to be of ordinary not extraordinary prophesying for women âmmediately extraordinarily and miraculously inspiâed might speake without restraint Exod. 15. 20. âudg 4. 24. Luk. 2 36. Acts 2. 17 19. It is a pitteous thing to see how M. Yates intaggles himselfe about this Argument straining all the âeyns of his wit if not of a more tender part his consciene to draw some face of answer upon it That which hath any shew of answer either in that place or any other throughout his tedious and perplexed discourse I will relat and refute confirming the Argument clearly as I am perswaded to any indifferent âudgment His first answer or exception is that it is most absurd to imagine that the Corinth women did folloâ their study and tooke ordinary paines to make sermons Secondly that extraordinary prophesie dâcease and that not all at once but first in women that the Apostle therefore especially aimes at them â though to wit in their own iudgment the same measuâ were still upon them as well as in former timeâ when Christ that saues both man and women woulâ extraordinarily manifest himselfe in both yet first aâter a sufficent manifestation of his grace goodnesâ he withdrew those extraordinay gifts from that sâ then afterward from the other His third answâ upon which he doth most insist is that the Aposâ forbids two generall faults in the women the one that the would pray and prophesie uncouered 1. Cor. 11. â imitating the Pythonisses and Sibelles of the Gentiâ in laying aside their vaile and spreading their haire âgainst decency and comlinesse the second that in the husbands presence they would be as ready to speake â they and therefore the Apostle finding the women to abuse this gift prohibits the use of it whether simply or â he cannot iudge Fourthly he admires by what Logâ this will follow women are forbiden to prophesie therfore men haue liberty which sayes hee is an ill consâquence In his first Answer or rather exception he mâ takes both the state of the question and also the âture of the ordinance The question is not of the study or ability of these women which yet I thinke was greater then he maketh account of but of their forwardnes to teach which was certainly too great And what consequence is this The Corinthian women were not sufficiently furnished to teach by an ordinary gift therefore they needed not to be restrained from teaching Nay therfore they needed much more such a bridle of restraint to be cast upon them especially considering their mannish bouldnesse and immodesty insinuated against them here by the Apostle in part but much more chap. 11. Neither for the second poynt are they that speak in the exercise of prophesie to make a sermon by an houreglasse as M. Yates gathers that were to abuse the time and wrong the gifts of others but briefly to speak a word of exhortation as God enableth that after the ministeriall teaching be ended as Act. 13. questions also about things deliuered and with them euen disputations as there is occasion being part or apurtenances of that exercise 1. Cor. 14. 35. Act. 17. 2. and 18. 4 For the Prophets gifts and abilities then as under the law a bullock or lamb that had any thing superfluous or lacking in his parts might yet be offered for a free-will offering but for a vow it was not to be accepted Lev. 22. 23. so in this exercise of Prophesie as in a free will offering according to the gift of God that which is lesse perfit and exact may farr better be accepted then if the same were presented in the Pastors vowed seruice and ministration For his second Answer As it is true that extraordinary prophesie did ceâse by degrees so is it not certaine but a meere presumption that it ceâsed first in women but most untrue it is that the Apostle there aims at all ââ the ceasing of that gift in women Ecclesiasticall Histories worthy of credit in this kind doe certifie that the streame of the spirit was so far from being neare dry at this time as that it ranne a strong current wel nigh a hundred yeares after for all the extraordinary gifts thereof as for the casting out of Deuils foreseing and foretelling of things to cââe healing the sicke raising of the dead of whân dâuers so raised liued many yeares after witnesse amongst others Iraenaeus adv. Her lib. 2. c. 57. whom also for the same purpose Eus Hist. Eccl. l. 5. c. 7. alledgeth And euer or women Euident it is by the Scriptures that extraordinary Prophesie in a very plenteous manner by them that in the presents of men continued in the Church many years after Pauls writing of this Episte Philip the Evangelist had four daughters vergins which did prophesie Act. 2. 1. 9 and that in the presence of the Apostle Lo four extraordinary Prophetesses in one house and the daughters of one man so that âitherto the conduit of the spirit of prophesie kept âis course as well upon their daughters as sons Ioel 2. Act. 2. So Rev. 2. 20. we read how the woman Jesabel âalling her selfe a prophetesse taught and by teaching ââduced the Lords servants in the Church of Thyaâyra ân which place as the errors and evils of the person âs condemned so is the former order of the Church manifested to be that women prophetesses extraordinary might teach Lastly the prohibition of women by the Apostle is perpetuall and not with respect to this or that time as it appeares by the reasons there of both in this place and in the Epistle to Timothy and such as equally belong to former times and latter and no more to the latter end then to the beginning or meddle time of the manifestation of the grace and goodnesse of Christ What can be more absurd then to say that these reasons The women must be under obedience 1. Cor 14. 34. not usurpe authority ouer the man but be in silence because Adam was first formed then Eve Anâ Adam was not sedused but the women c. 1. Tim. 2. 12. 13 14. were not morrall and perpetuall Were not those reasons and grounds for womens silence in the Church without extraordinary dispensation by miraculous inspiration of as great force seuen yeares before as when Paul wrote this Epistle It is therefore most cleare that the Apostle aimes not at all at any ceasing of the gift of extraordinary prophesie now growing on but at the uniuersall and absolute restraint and prohibition of womens prophesying not extraordinary but ordinary In his third answer he dealeth worse then in any of the other in labouring to