Believers and Reprobates so the same Apostle in another place do good to all man especially to them that are of the houshold of faith whether those of the houshold of Faith are not specified from that generality all men and whether they be not a different sort of persons from all men that are not of the houshold of Faith so here in the Teâ—t Whether they that are said to labour in the Woâ—d â—ith â—n E pecially are not persons different from thoâ—e that are afore â—â—â—d to Rule well in general without a word of labouring wherefore we must say that all those thâ—â— Rule do not labour in the Woâ—d 〈◊〉 the the particle specially is superfluous which Gâ—d so 〈◊〉 we should think as it bâ—ing distinctive it doth not distinâ—uish where it iâ— put Nay I say that this specification of labouring made 〈◊〉 some Elders doth imply that some Elders do not labâ—â—â— I hope the Aâ—reâ—â—â—teâ— have not forfeited their knowledâ—e thâ— Rule in Loâ—ick that a particular affirmative doth suppose a particular Negative thus Some man is good it doth suppo e and â—â—me man is not 〈◊〉 so some Elders labour in the word and 〈◊〉 me or do preach therefore some Elders do not preach yet 〈◊〉 Rule 〈…〉 as clear as t e day and it is the judgement not only of Modern but also of very ancient Authors such as Ambroâ—â—◠〈◊〉 upon this place doth asseâ—t that there were such Elders in the Pâ—imitive Church and he doth complain that it was neglected tâ— have them watch in part be attributes to the pride of Teache â— Some of the Aâ—versaries whom I have di coursed with upon this â—oâ—nt being â—â—â—ed by the aâ—o esaid reasons do confeâ—t that there are too danâ—er Preâ—byters yet both they would have to be preaching to whâ—â— I anâ—wer th s cannot be that they should be diâ—â—â—ct 〈…〉 preâ—ch and this inconsistence of those two asserâ—â—â—◠〈…〉 thy 〈◊〉 one aâ—â—â—ment that which is common to 〈…〉 make a dâ—fference and distinctiâ—n between both 〈…〉 cannot put a diffeâ—ence between Peter and Jâ—hn 〈…〉 they say it c mmon to both therefore preaching 〈◊〉 make a difference between both 〈◊〉 that to say that both do pâ—each 〈◊〉 to deny distinction and difference between both 〈…〉 assâ—rted otherwise then by acknowledging the truth 〈…〉 that there are Ruling Elâ—ers who â—o not preach but 〈…〉 this answer of theirs I say if there be no 〈…〉 and they grant nay affiâ—m that hâ—â—e are two kinds of Elders ready d stinâ—uished then besides Ministers no other kind can be affi â—â—â— but Bishops in their sense whom they also call Elders if to them theâ—e wil be Bishops of Bishops that is plainly Tyranny or elâ—e 〈◊〉 these two kinds of Elders bâ— only Ministers and not Bishops in their sense with this distinction that one shall Rule well and preach and the other rule well yet not preach though a Minister what else is it but a lay-Elder if he doth not preach for so hâ— cann t be called a preaching Elder Or further if they understand such Elders as that boâ—h shall preach yet one shall labour or take more paines as they interpret it then the other Then this will be to force the word Labâ—ur which being joyned to Word and Doctrine do not signifie to take great paines in it more then otheâ—s but only it properly si nifieth to preach the Word for Ministers are called by Christ Labourers and Workmen in the Harvest and Vineyard of Gâ—d Bâ—sides this I would put them in mind that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Especially is put between Ruling and Labouring and not between preaching the Word and labouring in the Word so that the difference is between Rulers and Labourers and not between Preachers and Labourers for every Preacher must labour as Aretius doth very well say in his Comment upon Acts 20.28 Think not saith he the word â—ishâ—p to be a title of honour and dignity no it is a name of labour Whereupon with Scripture he calleth speculative Ministers or Bishops dumb dâ—gs wherefore saith famous Calvin upon this place 1 Tim. 5 17 Honour 〈◊〉 due not to the title but to the labour so that there is no Minister but he is a labourer and he must spend and be spent in doing the work the work committed to him and not be drones as they were formerly under Preâ—acy for I may name some who preached but twice in seven yeares and otheâ—s hardly once in two yeares Whether it be the duty of those who are not labourers in the Word but labourers in Discipline as Censors and Senates to Rule well The order of which persons is so clear from Scriptures by what hath already been spoken that I dare to say none but wilfully bâ—inded can doubt of the truth of it And to go further about the point of illustration of it it will be to liâ—ht as they say a Candle at noon-day but if any one is curious to hear more of this Subject let him peruse the writings of that incomparable Minister Calvin in his Institution lib. 4. from â—hap 4. to the 12. inclusively and Martyr's Câ—mmon-place chap. 4. loc 1. sect 1 2 c. chiefly sect 10. and Hindersons Conferences with the late King where through the edge of his reasons be concealed and the King 's put to the height by an Eâ—iscoâ—al Pen yet truth in it doth triumph over all the reasons and Replies of the Adversaries of that divine verity Wherefore as it is evident out of Scriptures that there is an office in the Church if lay Elders to rule it so it is no lesse conspicuous that the Episcopal party iâ— to bent upon that Diana as they would movâ— heaven and 〈◊〉 â—â—ther then to lose any thing by the 〈…〉 aâ— into 〈◊〉 â—o them so that 〈…〉 no â—or◠〈◊〉 they 〈…〉 Hâ—â—â—â—a Peâ—nacie derived in that 〈…〉 Popery through pride and ambâ—â—â—â—◠〈…〉 thereby tâ—â— Church hath bâ—en deprived 〈…〉 Christ and yielâ—ed by the Apostles 〈…〉 of tâ—ings of any importance 〈…〉 the people of that 〈…〉 a sacâ—iledge to cut off from the 〈…〉 inâ—tituted in and practised by the 〈…〉 the Apo tle◠〈◊〉 and since Now to be brief the subâ—tance of all that hath been spoken is this there ought not to be â—â—ch Rulingâ— aâ— are spiâ—iâ—â—al Lâ—â—ds and pretend any Primacy over any Mâ—niâ—ters and 〈◊〉 shall be in no danger of â—â—â—our and Heresie we shall be fâ—ee from so many innovations introduced into the Church from Popery we wâ—ll bear no more of the strange 〈…〉 Deanes Chapters Prebends Canons c. whose mean◠〈…〉 to the encouâ—aging of a goâ—ly able preachin◠〈…〉 of wâ—ich aâ—e often to want even of that which others 〈◊〉 to their â—ounds a B shop shall have 4000 or 5000 〈◊〉 a year when some Ministers that have great Families have not above 25 or â—0 pounds a year if it be so then we shall hear 〈…〉 expressions as Presbyters Overseers of their stock and not Lordâ— to or
such a Degree howsoever it is in the nature of it they ever aspiâ—ing from one place to a higher preferment let one of these Bishops come to Church in a Coach and six Horses with a gallant attendance and be called my Lord here my Lord there Will Christ own him for his servant Is this his Lesson Be humble and lowly as he was even in washing his Disciples feet Will not the Lord Christ say Hast thou left all to follow me Canst thou serve the world and me too This is indeed the posture of a man drunken with the pleasures of this world more then of those meek and humble Apostles of Christ What difference to see a Minister of Christ in a very low condition and a Bishop professing himself to be a minister in the plenty of all worldly enjoyments but they will say this is the liberalitie of Princes yet let them know that they cannot serve the world and Christ and therefore they should not ask it as some do but rather refuse these great earthlie things account them but loss and dung and say to them who profer these temporal favours I must not be so cumbred with the things of this world like Martha but with Mary I must take the good part for all these riches honours and pleasures are but snares to entrap them For as you will hear in the case of Popes so it may be in this Popes at first were no more then other Bishops but because Rome was the seat of the Empire therefore Christians ever placed in it persons eminent for Pietie and Learning who because of their great parts and abilities received a more then ordinary respect This being a great bait to ambitious persons such as their successors they began to look upon it as a thing due to their Office no consideration had to the person or parts and thereupon they began to usurp so the Pope having gotten to be the head those that adhered to him in forraign parts assumed much to themselves because of the adoration which in times of darknesse was granted to the Beast No Protestant can deny but that this in Poperie deserved Reformation as many Popish great and learned men did acknowledge Why then God sending puritie of Doctrine by the conversion of this Nation to the truth of the Gospel was not there a Reformation of this exceeding power derived as streames from that ambitious Antichrist but no eveâ— have seen Reformation wrought by degrees therefore a great 〈◊〉 and opportunitie is afforded to his Majestie in removing that whereby the servants of Christ are in these dayes so different from those in times paâ—tâ— as if there were a new Gospel brought from Heaven Thâ—t desire of Supremacy doth argue a spirit much different from that of Saint Paul 〈◊〉 saying to the Corinthians 2 Epist 1. To state you 〈◊〉 are not yet â—â—me to you as if this had been too high for a servant of Christ he presently addeth not for that we have dominion over your faith yet it is that which some undertake by laâ—â—â— as necessary upon 〈◊〉 those things that are indifferent so that I must account these Ceremonies to be good becoming and edifying not because I believe it but because they tell it to be so in pressing it upon me even when my conscience perswadeth me it is not so And further if we look on that place the scope will shew us that the Apostle doth not mean by having dominion over their saith to have power over things to be believed for it would have been in vain to have expressed such a thing since the same Apostle telâ— in another place there is one Faith and one Lord as I may say by joyning them together one Lord of that saith besides those whom he 〈◊〉 write to know this fundamental point that no man hath poâ—â— over our faith and that Saint Paul was too humble to have had any such meaning when he saith for to snare them he came not but this I take to have been spâ—ken upon the account of the incestuous of the toleration of whom be dâ—â—h complain 1 Cor. 5. Wherefore becau â— they had been neglectâ—â—â— in the administâ—ation of censure aâ—â—in such a man he would not â—â—me leâ—â—â— he had been forced to reâ—â—ove them for their neglect Not saith he that I hâ—â—â—â—dren 〈…〉 you but like a brother I â—â—ght to rebuke you even as he 〈…〉 Peter upon a different â—â—â—â—tion Gal. 2. So the senâ—e of this 〈◊〉 Faith will be this as to force y u tâ— a thing against youâ— eâ—â—ent oâ— which you believe ought not to be done that is to censure or exâ—â—mmunicate the incestâ—â—â—◠〈…〉 approve of hâ—â— by not calling of him to an account whence these two â—reat truths are afforded us First Saint Paul confesseth to have no power over their Faith that is their profession for to it is often taken in Scriptures in the discharge of Ecclesiastica Discipline the execution of which he cannot force upon them But the second truth is this That the Discipline of the Church is and ought to be administred by the Church and therefore the Bishop or Minister cannot do it but by the Church this case here is clear of of the incestuous for the Discipline was not committed to any single person but to the Corinthians to the Church as he calls them that is at Corinth 1 Cor. 1. it is not to the Minister alone but to the Church whence it is visible that the Church was to take course where they thought fit about such a man wherefore the Church hath power to chuse so ne Representatives for every one cannot be a judge in it in whose hands is the administration of Church-discipline as here we see it used in Parliaments every free-born English man hath right to complain of grievances and to indite any one that hath injured him yet it is not fit that every particular man should go up to be a Parliament man and a Judge of affairs but they have Representatives to do it In the Church these Representatives can be no others but Elders That this is in the power of the Church it is clear out of Acts 14.23 Paul and Barnabas ordaining Elders not whom they pleased but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by the votes and suffrages of the people whose maxime it was accoâ—ding to the custom of the Greeks to give their votes by lifting up of handâ— and in the câ—se of choosing Deacons the twelve left it to the power of the Church Acts 6. Titus being left in Câ—â—es to ordain Elders preaching or Ruling it is to be understood this ordination was to be made by the consent of the Church for it is not probable that Saint Paul would â—ive that liberty to Titus which he assumed not to himself to elect Elders without the consent of the Church and in all this there was no Primacy for there was not a Bishop of a Bishop or a Prâ—sbyter of a Presbyter to make use
so then they are no Ministers but they are laymen so there are laymen Elders and Rulers in the Church and though here the Church be taken for the universal Church of which particular Churches are members and parts yet these particular Churches of Congregations must have in themselves that which is essential to a Church as it is a Church and integral to this or that Church as it is such for else it will not have the being of a Church nor the well-being of the same but we know it cannot have the being of a Church without doctrine not the well-being without discipline and as doctrine is necessary and administred by Preachers so discipline is necessary and administred by Rulers and as the object of the Preacher to wit Preaching doth differ from the object of the Ruler which is Ruling so that Ruling is not Preaching neither is Preaching Ruling therefore the person that Preacheth and the person that Ruleth must be two distinct and different persons but if they say these functions may be administred by one and the same person I will Reply then the functions of all the members of one body may be in one member of the same so hearing seeing smelling feeling c. may be in the hand or in some other member the reason is clear from the comparison of the Apostle the life and strength whereof doth consist in the diversity and difference of members and of their functions and since this comparison is so much pressed by Saint Paul we think it ought not to be neglected by us but to conclude this although we confess that in the Church a Minister may be and is a Ruler yet thereby we do not both eye the Ruling office in the Châ—rch which may be and sometimes is in it though there were no Preachers as it happeneth in some places where though they have no Minâ—â—ters yet they love Elders to Rule and some either Deâ—â—on of other in such a case to read the Word before the Congregation of which places I have the charity to believe they aâ—e a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 though they have not the Word preached yet they have 〈◊〉 read till Goâ— be pleased to afford theâ— Ministers Bâ—t to draw niâ—â— to the end of this whole matter we will â—ome to that place which is so sâ—â—l and so clear for this truth as that whatsoever they anâ—eâ— to it is but three or four woâ—ds for the which they can gâ—ve no reason nor pâ—esident in Scripture so that I account it 〈◊〉 answeâ—able the place is well known 1 Tim. 5 1â— the words are there Lâ—â— the Elders that rule well be counted wâ—â—thy of â—â—nâ—le â—â—sâ—â—â—â— espâ—â—ially they who labour in the Wâ—rd and Doctrine Hence doth appear that there are twâ—â—inâ—s of Elders some who do preach and some who do not as lay-Elders for an intâ—â—duâ—tion unto the proof 〈◊〉 this we must take notice that Saint Paul doth write to Timothy instructions for the discharge of his office only of which this Teâ—â—â—s It is â—nown that Timothy was a Minister in the Church of Epheâ—â—â— and an Overseeâ— not 〈◊〉 other Ministers as having any 〈◊〉 over them but of â—is flock which for a time only was committed to his chaâ—gâ— and perhaps he was the superintendent of others his fellow Presbâ—terâ—â—â— Thus 〈◊〉 aâ— to be a Moderator in their Assemblies having been preâ—erred to it either by Saint Paul's credit oâ— elâ—e which I bâ—lieve the ratheâ— by vertue of the choyce made of 〈◊〉 by his fellow Presbyters because of his piety and prudence he 〈◊〉 â—uch there were some that stood between him and the pâ—â—â—le there were Elders as they are called here whom he was to 〈…〉 els and she accounted by others worthy of double 〈…〉 are Rulers whose quality was honourâ—â—â—e of 〈…〉 they Ruled well bâ—◠〈◊〉 more 〈◊〉 beâ—â—â—es the other 〈…〉 perfection well they laboâ—â—red in the word 〈…〉 that 〈◊〉 they were not only Ruling â—â—ders but alâ—o 〈…〉 Elâ—â—â—s â—â—â—m the place I aâ— he thus two sorts of Presbyters 〈…〉 There but of them one sort â—â—â—h not preach and tâ—e oâ—he◠〈◊〉 preach therefore there is a kind oâ— lay Presbyters beâ—â—â—â—â—â—â—ed the Minor as proved here are asserted some who role 〈…〉 in the word and doctrine and some who only rule but thoâ—e that only rule and labour not in c. they do not preach therefore 〈◊〉 are some Elders who do not preach but perhaps they will say that this is spoken but of one person in whom this preaching and Ruling are gradually distinct that is one and the same person is a ruling Elder and a labourer but I argue here is a double subject one general and another special but every subject here is a person therefore there is a double person the Minor is clear because universal and special are really distinct so here must be a real distinction of persons and therefore the same person which is the Elder labouring in the word and doctrine is not that person that is the ruling Elder only that general and special are really distinct it appears because Genus and Species are such as it is clear from Aristotle's definition of description of both as Species and Number are really distinct because this distinction is between res and res but to avoid falling off from the question we say hence the preaching Elder may be a Ruler when the Ruler shall not be a Preacher as now let us put Elder for the Genus as it is here and Ruling with Preaching the difference or several Species rather as anon we will prove it to be then we must draw these true propositions A preaching Elder is a Ruling Elder but a ruling Elder is not a preaching Elder this I say in Logick every man is an animal but every animal is not a man every living thing is a substance but every substance is not a living thing so every Minister is an Elder but every Elder is not a Minister because although every Species hath the Genus yet the Genus shall not be spoken equally of both Species in one and the same subject But the truth doth throughly appear from the particle 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 specially which is particular restrictive and specificative but that which is part rest and specif is distinctive therefore this particle is distinctive of things if joyned with things and of persons if joyned to persons as appeareth by the word et qui this is clear from other Scriptures where being ordinarily joyned to persons it doth really distinguish them as 1 Tim. 4.10 God is the Saviour of all men especially them that believe whether there be not a distinction between all men and believers Is not the particle 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 added to restrain and specifie believers from all men Are all men redeemed and saved Is not this proper to believers and here to say that Believers are not specified from all other men that are not believers it is to make a sad confusion between