much degenerate and be defiled in their doctrine and government desperately corrupted with error and sinfull practices as the Jews before Christ commonly and most of all in Christs dayes after Christ the churches of Corinth Galatia the churches of Asia Rev. 2. and 3. c. yet till Christ remove the candlestick and come himself and unchurch them they still abide churches of Christ and are so to be acknowledged of all Fifthly such as the state of the church is such is the state of the Ministry of that church and administration and so long as the true church remains a true church so long the ministry remains a true ministry and all the divine institutions authenticall administrations and truly the Lords ordinances notwithstanding the mixture of humane devices with them making the commandments of God of none effect through their traditions To cleer all these in each particular by the light of divine revelation would require a larger discourse then I intend and not so difficult as tedious I doubt not but any truly judicious considering the state of churches in the old and new Testament will yeeld without any other travell what is here set down and that the church ministry and administrations stand and fall together To come then to the question I affirm that if there be true churches in England then there is a lawfull ministry there and true authenticall administrations But there are true churches there Ergo there is a lawfull ministry there and authenticall administration The Consequent is cleer because it is the true being of a church that giveth being to the truth of ministry and ordinances and not the ordinances that give being to a church Lot any company set up preaching and administer the Sacraments I so call them for discourse sake that will not make that company to be a church but because they are not a church therefore they are not Gods ordinances The antecedent that there are true churches in England I prove thus If the true visible state of Christs Church be to abide from his time unto the end of the world as it must Dan. 7. Luke 1.33 Mat. 16.16 18.18.20 28.19 20. 1 Cor. 11. Heb. 12.29 c. then it is in England and places of like consideration that it hath continued in some other places of the world But it hath not continued in any other places of the world it will be gratefull to all that desire truth if any man can shew where also in England and places of like consideration hath Christs visible church continued Again if there be no other churches in the world nor have bin for many hundred yeers but those that are infected with Papisme that is the dominion of the Pope and traditional doctrine or reformed churches and England amongst others then either the churches infected with Papisme are the true visible churches of Christ or the reformed But there are no other churches in the world nor have been for many hundred yeers but those that are infected with Papisme or the reformed Ergo the one or the other must be the true visible churches of Christ But notwithstanding those that are infected with Papisme few grant it as now they stand Ergo the reformed and England amongst others Further if Antichrist must fit in the Temple of God 2 Thes 2.4 and the courts of the Temple be given unto the Antichristian Gentiles for a certain time Rev. 11.1 to 15. to tread under foot then there was a true church-estate where he sate and whilest he sate there and the true measured Temple whose courts he treads under foot nor can there be Antichrist unlesse there be the Temple and courts thereof where he is And if Antichrist ever sate in England then there was the Temple of God there before he sate in it and whilest he sate in it as also in other reformed churches The Temple or church is the subject wherein hee must sit The Antichristian seat is not the subject nor constitutes it but is an accident vitiating the subject the removing thereof Antichristianity doth not destroy the subject or make it cease to be but changeth it into a better state I shall adde this If ever there were true churches constituted in England then they remain so still or God hath by some manifest act unchurched them unlesse therefore they that deny true ministry in England and baptisme there can and do prove that churches were never constituted there or make good some manifest act of God unchurching them sutable to such acts of his in Scriptures in the like cases and whereby wee may cleerly discern the like effects all that can be said to disprove the lawfulnesse of ministry there or to prove the unlawfulnesse of administrations there so far as they are prescribed in the word will not be available And yet I shall be content to speak a little farther of the church-estate and ministry in England And concerning churches it is to be considered that a companny become or are a church either by conversion and initiall constitution or by continuance of the same constituted churches successively by propagation of members who all are born in the church-state and under the covenant of God and belong unto the church and are a church successively so long as God shall continue his begun dispensation even as well and as fully as the first and though in respect of the numericall members they are not the same yet truly they are the same in kinde Rom. 11.16 1 Cor. 7.14 Gal. 2.15 even as man continues the same in kind from the first man though not the same in number so the church-estate continued from Adams time till Abrahams in the world by succession of generations So the Jewes continued a church from Abrahams time till Christs Secondly the way to prove churches to have had true constitution is no way to be attained but either by Scriptures or humane testimony By Scriptures we may take notice of many churches planted in Judea Syria Galatia Achaia Macedonia c. and by name Rome Corinth Cenchrea Philip Coloss Thessal Ephes Smyrna c. of any other by name I know not That the Apostle preached from Jerusalem to Illyricum and that hee mentions his coming into Italy by Spain is evident but whether any churches were planted there or no divine records manifest not And as cleer it is that those churches mentioned in Scriptures are destroyed nor can wee by Scriptures prove the continuance of Christs visible Kingdome in the world for many hundred yeeres upward but in Rome which few will plead for to have any truth of church-estate and I see no need of proving any such thing in this case So that by Scripture testimony I know not where we may cast our eys to look upon any Church now or for many yeers past existent By humane testimony we may take notice of the Gospel preached in many places and amongst other in Britain by Apostolicall authority where the Word hath ever continued since
A REPLY TO A CONFUTATION of some grounds for Infants Baptisme AS ALSO Concerning the form of a Church put forth against mee by one THOMAS LAMB Hereunto is added A Discourse of the Verity and Validity of Infants Baptisme wherein I endevour to clear it in it self As also in the Ministery administring it and the manner of administration by Sprinkling and not Dipping with sundry other particulars handled herein By George Philips of Watertown in New England MATTH 7.15 Beware of false Prophets which come unto you in Sheeps-cloathing A parvulo recens nato usque ad decrepitum senem nullus prohibendus est a Baptismo August Enchirid. cap. 42. Dic quaeso omni me libera quaestione quare infantuli baptizentur Orthodox ut iis peccata in baptismate dimittantur Hieron advers Pelagian Dialog ter LONDON Printed by Matthew Simmons for Henry Overton and are to be sold at his Shop in Popes-head-Alley 1645. To the Reader WHO is so ignorant but seeth what Satans Master-peece and greatest work in the kingdome of Christ is at this day viz. to divide and sow Tares of discord between man and man And truly whose heart bleeds not to behold the present divisions by sword by pen in affection in opinion under which the land of peace lies now a bleeding Among which divisions none more lamentable nor grievous to a tender spirit then those that are between persons professing the feare of God especially in those times when all their strength and spirits should be wholly taken up against the common Adversary watching their destruction at their very doores yet such is the malice of Satan to set them especially at a distance and at variance whom the pretious blood of Christ hath been shed to reconcile And this hee doth especially when he hath started a controversie according to the old observation In re Sacramentaria in matters of the Sacraments and therefore it is no wonder if hee troubles the world and divides the mindes of some piously affected about the baptisme of Infants although withall one would wonder in other respects how any godly men who have better things to minde should hold up the Buckler in defence of such a stigmatized doctrine by the pens of so many of Gods Worthies from the Scriptures If indeed there were any new light concerning it that was never yet discovered to the world this present age might have second thoughts and learn the more by others errours but when in this controversie men dig up onely the old Sepulchers and heap up little more then the dried bones and sculls of other mens examined condemned and corrupted devices this is very uncomfortable and very unbeseeming the spirit of a prudent and humble Christian who will never suffer himselfe to be removed much lesse attempt the moving of others from the ancient received opinion and practice of the most sincerely godly in all ages without mountains of arguments and light as cleare as the Sunne from the holy Scriptures to alter his mind or make him to remove the ancient Land-markes and therefore he that writ the life of Doctor Whitaker prudently observes of him that he was Academiae oraculum the Oracle of that University and Mundi miraculum the miracle of the world in his time because though hee was a man of such eminent parts yet he ever kept the ancient received Doctrine had nothing proper nor did he in veteri via novam semitam quaerere he did not seek a new path in the old way as almost all Divines of great parts doe use to doe as from Hierom he observes The Authour therefore of this Reply in which wee wish he had a stronger Adversary to honour well knowne in the gates of his people and among the Churches of Christ in this Westerne world for his learning godlinesse and peaceablenesse of disposition cannot bee justly blamed as any Fire-brand of contention in returning this Answer it doth but defend the Walls and Trenches of the ancient received Truth nor would he have made any resistance had he not been assaulted on that ground where himself with Gods truth have had just and quiet possession so long Nor hath he published it to increase disunion but for satisfaction of his conscience Firstly who hath given him this occasion to reply or if not of his yet of some others godly and tender who in simplicity have been or may be suddenly taken in the snares of the Fowlers of these evill times I remember it was Luthers prayer seconded often by learned holy and aged Paraeus A Doctore glorioso Pastore contentioso inutilibus quaestionibus liberet Ecclesiam suam Dominus To start this controversie about Infants baptisme I feare upon sad examination will fall under the head of those inutiles quaestiones especially in these unsetled and troublesome times and though pretended to be a work of Reformation yet will give as sad a blow to that which is firstly and principally to bee attended in it as almost any opinion I know and the end will speak as much And therefore a sober strong defence of the baptism of Infants may be very profitable useful against an unprofitable questioning of it now and the more because it is much to be feared that the doctrine of Anabaptisme especially in this controversie concerning Infants will gangrene farre and leaven much and that for these Reasons First because there is not that expresse word nor such manifest cleernesse in such full and expresse sentences of the Scripture as in many other practicall points For the practice of this there is sufficient Scripture to satisfy a sober humble mind that loves the truth in sincerity in this point yet they that are contentious and love scruples and questions a disease Paul would have cured 1 Tim. 1.5 6. will be alway touching upon that string viz. Where is your commandement I see not any expresse Scripture Yes that you may by just and ful deduction from the Scripture and that is a good proof from Scripture or else our Saviours proof of the resurrection was bad from I am the God of Abraham Isaac and Jacob which is not expresly contained in these words but deducted from them Secondly if conscience and experience may speak there are but few Christians that have tasted the sweet and comfort of their baptisme and therefore are very apt to question this ordinance if they meet with a fit tempter to deceive them For this is a certain and everlasting truth viz. that that truth which a man hath received without love to it by some sense of the sweetnesse of it in times of temptation he will quickly cast off A man will not care for that bread that doth not feed him nor will keep on those clothes in Winter time that do not warm him nor love that truth which doth not refresh him and consequently will be ready to cut down that barren baptisme under whose covert he hath so long lived but never tasted of the fruit
hee admitted them that he would have their Infants also and so in time of the Gospel to the Jewes and Gentiles at first setting it up Secondly Disciples are those that being entred with their parents into the school and profession continue successively so till God turn them off and no otherwise were the Jewes from Isaac till Christs time Disciples and so also it is now to say therefore there is no command to baptize Infants now because Disciples are to baptized is not upon any just consequence Besides let any shew me a command of baptizing females there being no command to circumcise them examples there are of baptizing them but I suppose that without a command will not suffice If any shall say it is commanded Mat. 28. where under the term of nations they are included I reply Are not children a part of all nations as they were a part of the Jewish nation But yee will say they must be made Disciples first Reply First Disciples as I said are made two wayes actually by profession or foederally by imitation as Infants were then so Infants may be now Secondly God taketh care of Infants now and requirâ—â— they should be instructed in the discipline and admonition of the Lord now God never took the care of any that were not his and in that he commanded them to be nursed up in his discipline it plainly argueth they are his Disciples His fourth and last answer is the same with the former from the difference of the subjects that were circumcised now to be baptized there being the same reason of changing the subject that there is of changing the Sacrament viz. Christs coming and if it were absurd to circumcise children now because they were circumcised then then it is absurd to baptize Infants now because they were circumcised them because Christs coming doth put an end to the subject also and hath put another subject to be baptized namely believers and only believers Reply First there is not the same reason of changing the subject that there is of the change of the Sacrament God changed the Sacraments he gave to Adam in Paradise but hee changed not the subject but continued the same offer of happinesse to Adam the same subject but he continued not the same Sacrament Secondly the Sacrament is not changed into another of another nature For the grace signified in both is the same the manner of signifying is the same in both sacramentally but the signes only are changed Thirdly the subjects are not changed by reason of Christs coming as being types of him which I have disproved before though here again implyed but because of their unbelief the kingdome being taken from them because they refused to submit Mat. 21.22 and now the subjects shall be cut off if they cease to be loyall and they should not if they had been loyall Fourthly the change of Gods administration of his grace hath been divers but the subjects to whom the grace was offered were never changed from Adams time to Abrahams where were the same subjects men women and Infants none will say Infants were excluded if they died before they came to yeers of discretion From Abrahams time to Moses the administration of grace was changed not the subjects Infants also from Moses time it was more changed till Christs time the subjects were not changed Infants not shut out no not Infants of Proselytes and why should Infants be shut out since seeing the offer of grace is the same though the administration of it differs but especially with more inlargement Upon all that hath been said it may appeare that the consequence of mine Argument is not weakened and so the point proved by it certain that as Infants were then circumcised so Infants are now to be baptized baptisme succeeding circumcision The second Part. AND thus for reply to his full answer to the discourse touching Infants baptisme it remains that I proceed with him in the rest about the form a Church wherein first he saith I speak of agreement in this that matter and form doe constitute a Church Also that the matter is a company of visible Saints professing faith in the righteousnesse of Christ and living accordingly To which he answereth First this definition agreeth not to Infants which I would make to be subjects of baptisme who are born in sinne and are children of wrath Eph. 2.3 Psa 51.5 Secondly nor doth it agree with the Jewish Church which I would make to be a pattern for ours in bringing grounds from them for baptizing infants who never were required to make such profession at the time of their admission as all Churches and members added doe since Christs time Acts 2.41 8.12 c. Thus he Before I come to reply let me give notice of this That I cannot own these words thus expressed That he and I with whom I had this discourse agreed of this that matter and forme doe constitute a Church I am consident and before we accorded had many passages to and fro but proceeded not till wee consented there nor can I say that I writ it down And touching the definition of the matter of a Church as is there expressed I am confident so farre as I can remember it was none of mine nor doe I now owne them and therefore let all observe how vain and rash he is so ungroundedly to publish these things under my name unto all the world Yet because some things in the discourse I well remember to be mine I shall cleare my way in passing this in a word or two and setting down such a definition of a Church as I have by me and go along with him in the rest and to what he saith I make this reply First I would say that the matter of a Church is a company of visible Saints And this I conclude to be clear in every place where a Church is stiled Saints Beleevers and the like Secondly this definition agrees to children as well as grown men being Saints also and holy seed of holy parents though it is true they bee born in sinne and children of wrath by nature so were infants in the old Testament as well as now as the place Psal 51. by him alledged evinceth and the same is true of the holiest men of yeares and Paul confesseth himselfe with others to be the children of wrath by nature yea then when he said it there is no hinderance then why that description may not agree to infants Thirdly it agreeth right well to the Jewish Church who were not a company of prophane persons but a holy people unto God a company of Saints and no otherwise a Church but as such or beleevers and wee are upon these terms admitted continued members of that Church so long as it continued a church as hath been shewed afore So that the description of the matter of a church doth well agree to all churches and members of churches alwayes nor are Churches to consist of or admit
others unto them Now a Church I conceive to be an institution of it whereby a company of men and women called by the word of Gods grace and some work of Gods Spirit upon them doe joyn themselves unto the Lord and one to another by entring into covenant with the Lord to have him to be the God of them theirs and they and theirs to be the Lords and his Christs as also one with another to meet together to worship God for his glory their mutuall edification to life according to Gods revealed will Now as I tie no man to my expressions so I shall be willing to learn of any that shall help me to a better understanding in this point yet in this description all the causes concurre The efficient an institution of Christ with the instrumentall the Word in some effects upon their hearts the materiall a company of men and women so called and from thence Saints and beleevers the formall joyning themselves to the Lord and one with another by entring into covenant whereof there are two branches one called Zach. 11. The staffe of beauty taking the Lord to be the God of them and theirs and giving up themselves and theirs to be the Lords the other called The staffe of bonds or brotherhood and both the covenant the finall to meet together to glorifie God the supreme and edifie one another to life with the meanes worshipping God according to his own appointment revealed in his word onely I would be understood of a Church in the constituting of it which is continued in the same state by succession till the Lord the efficient dischurch them But to proceed this confuter next saith That I make this quaere Whether baptisme be not the form of a church and answering No giving reasons of my deniall I affirm a covenant acted is the form of it To all which he answereth first in generall And here he distinguisheth between the form and the thing formed and saith That a Church being an Assembly the form or fashion thereof is the relation that every member possesseth from Christ their head and each with other wherby every law and service is communicable and executed concluding that neither a covenant or baptisme is the form of a Church but baptisme of a beleever is an instrumentall meanes by which a Church is made partaker of that forme which it hath as by which it becomes a Church Further that the instrumentall meanes of the being of a Church both of matter and form is by consent of love issuing forth from the covenant of grace made in and from our Lord through one Spirit one Faith one Baptisme Ephes 4.4 5. And if any of these be wanting and be not supplied the Church can have no visible existence and being From whence it followeth though baptisme bee not the form of a Church yet being an essentiall meanes and the last too of the visible Church where true baptisme is wanting there can be no true visible Church Reply First to let passe his distinction onely this I say that he confoundeth forme and figure as one thing which are divers For water in a round glasse or square hath this or that figure or fashion but it is not the forme whereby water is water and not another thing and therefore form differs from figure and fashion Secondly whereas he denieth a covenant or baptisme either to be a Churches form he contradicteth what he said before in his answer to my first argument to prove the covenant before Christ and after to be the same It is true said he that the coventnt of God maketh the Church both in the time of the Law and Gospel too and a Church is nothing but a people in covenant with God That saying of his here and there cannot be both true Thirdly he saith that the form of the Church is that relation that each member possesseth from Christ the head and each with other which is by consent of love Reply First the relation that each member possesseth from Christ the head and each the other is either internall as Spirit Faith Love or externall the manifestation of these as they are internall they cannot be the form of an externall visible church as they are manifested outwardly they cannot make the churches form because they may manifest these graces and yet be no church nor members of a visible and this particular church And indeed they are neither matter nor form though hee makes them both but the manifestation of these maketh them to be fit matter for a church which yet cannot be a church without the form added to the matter and that is a covenant or as he calleth it a consent which indeed is a covenant by which alone every Law and Service is communicable and excecuted Last of all he saith that consent of love from one Spirit Faith and Baptisme are essentially necessary meanes of the being of a church for matter and forme Ephes 4.4 5. And if any of these bee wanting then there can be no visible church Reply First in making all these to concurre to the matter and form of the church as meanes thereof hee necessarily yeeldeth the form and matter to be something else differing from them all Secondly he confounds baptisme with faith and love which are internall graces unlesse he means the externall profession of them flowing from the covenant of grace which if he doe then I conceive he yeelds as much as I require that in a covenant or mutuall engagement of all parties and one main part by profession of faith and love through one spirit without which a covenant cannot be in the state we speak of it Thirdly that of Ephes 4. intends not to describe the forme of a church but perswades to unity by a sevenfold unity that they are already church-members were all partakers of Lastly if baptisme may be wanting for a time and yet a beleever essentially a church-member as Abraham and his many males and females were before circumcised for the space of at least 14. yeares between the covenant and circumcision and therefore doth not concurre to the constitution of a churches matter and form but for the confirmation of a church constituted in matter and forme before And when a man of yeares is baptized in a church is the baptized a visible Saint or no If yea for he may be no reall Saint then his baptisme doth not give him matter and forme but hee hath both before or else hee ought not to be baptized And thus much to his generall discourse In particular he goeth on and saith First as it is in natural birth so it is in spirituall but in naturall birth we have the beginning of our natural being among the world and in the affairs of this life by our birth from our parents therefore wee have the beginning of our spirituall and visible being among the church as in the affaires of life eternall by our spirituall birth and this spirituall
all these ends which he hath appointed it for and so for those ends it is to be administred and the omission of it is a grievous sin But none of these ends is to give them a visible being in a visible church but by way of signification and confirmation Ergo baptisme is not the form of the church A 5th Argument is from the nature of Baptisme as it is the seal of the Covenant if there be no visible Ordinance before Baptisme to note out their visible being in the covenant whereby they may be known then it is baptisme that doth it But there is no other visible ordinance before baptisme to note out their visible being in the covenant whereby they may be known Ergo it is baptisme that doth it and so it is the form of the Church Answ 1. If he really grant it is the seal of the covenant then it is not the covenant it self for which hee hath formerly argued Secondly it must be considered to whom baptisme must note out their visible being in the covenant if to themselves they may know it before for he that believeth hath the witnesse in himself if to others either Christians they must know it before or not baptize them or else the world and baptisme can no way notifie such a thing unto them they cannot take notice thereof nor will they they know them not because they have not known Christ nor the Father And if a man truly baptized fall off from his profession to whom doth it note that he is in the covenant though it be known he was baptized And our Saviour giveth a rule wherby all men shall know his Disciples not if baptized but if they love one another and keep his commandements and if any say he hath fellowship with God and doth evill hee lies and all the world may know it though they know he was visibly baptized Ergo baptisme cannot be the form of a church seeing it doth not note out their visible being in covenant which is notified before and by other means both before and after Last of all again he contradicteth himself in saying here that baptisme is the form of the church and yet before denying baptisme or the covenant either to be the form of it The 6th Argument is taken from the commission given to the first Matth. 28.19 where the Participle baptizing concurres to making them Disciples and Mark 16.16 Faith puts a man into the state of salvation before God Baptisme before men the reason runs thus If from commission to the first planters baptisme was required to make a person a Disciple in a visible state of salvation and stated in all other ordinances of Christs kingdom then baptisme so administred is that which gives being to a true visible Church I answer First the Scripture requires first that they be made Disciples and then being Disciples to be baptized and therefore baptisme doth not make them Disciples Again faith makes them Disciples in the state of salvation before God and profession of that faith and not baptisme doth make visibly and outwardly Disciples in the state of salvation before men Rom. 10.9 10. They that baptize any must know them to be visibly such before they baptize them else not baptize them as himself hath saith from Acts 2.21.8.12 Secondly Baptisme is required to state them in the observation of all the ordinances of Christs kingdome not by making them a church or member to whom only such ordinances yea baptisme it self doth belong but to make them fit to observe them being members and there are other things though they be baptized that may hinder them from observaton of those ordinances as in the old Testament circumcision did not make them a church but being a church they were to be circumcised without which they might not observe the Passeover but there were other things also which did hinder them from observation of the Passeover though they were circumcised And thus of his Position and the grounds of it That baptisme is the thing that formeth the church only if I understand his close hee flatly contradicts himself in saying baptisme is the means and thing that formeth the church and yet it is not the outward form of our church formed For either it formeth the church withan outward or inward but not inward before God Faith doth that and therefore the outward form it must be and so hee said in his last Argument baptisme puts a man into the state of salvation before men Again hee grants the church to be formed with an outward form without baptisme in saying baptisme is not that outward form of the church formed If a formed church it hath a form that formed it but the form is not baptisme Ergo he overthrows all that he hath argued for or else the church hath two outward forms one he grants the church hath without baptisme the other by baptisme which these six arguments plead for It were well if he agreed with himself Next he answereth the Reasons I set down as he saith to prove that baptisme is not the form of a visible church The first whereof is this That which giveth being to a church must be removed to make a church cease to be a church but Baptisme cannot be removed from a church whilest it remains a church Ergo. Hee answers It is as easie to remove baptisme from a church as to remove a church from being a church Reply First this is a very easie answer and toucheth no part of the Argument Again a church is unchurched not by unbaptizing the baptized as it must be if it were the form of a church but by destroying the church it self The church must first in reasan be made no church before ordinances can cease to be ordinances in that church but destroy the church and baptisme will not be baptisme as the Edomites circumcision was not circumcision when they were not the church the Jewes circumcision and all that they do are nullities to this day since they ceased to be a church A second Reason is this That which being wanting to a church constituted doth not cause the church to be no church that cannot be the form of the church but baptisme may be wanting to a church constituted and yet it be a church As circumcision to Infants seven dayes alwayes to all females to them in the wildernesse forty yeers Josh 5. Ergo Answ He denies the second Proposition That baptisme may be wanting to a church constituted his Reason because a church is constituted by baptisme and so Josh 5. hee saith that case was extraordinary having speciall dispensation from God himself supplyed by miraculous Sacraments during the time of their necessary forbearances of circumcision and the Passeover while in travells unlesse wee can shew a like case and supply of miraculous Sacraments we cannot conclude that a church is a church or men members of a church without baptisme by which they are constituted Reply First the Reason he gives
more or lesse and therefore it is false for Rome to challenge the conversion of the English nation and no lesse absurd and injurious for us to draw and derive our succession from them As the Gospel was received there so it hath not been without fruit as also in other places but under the tyrannie of Ethnick Emperors and apostafie of Antichristian Bishops many there have witnessed unto the truth of Christ and suffered for the testimony of Jesus nor hath it been at any time nor is now ineffectuall there but the Lord hath been pleased to blesse those means of his notwithstanding persecution or corruptions with conversion of many thousand soules from Satan to himself yea hee hath not only reserved successively even in England unto himself thousands that have not bowed their knees unto Baal but amongst others some of the most famous lights that he vouchsafed to raise up in the time of that horrid darknesse overspreading the world have been of English Christians as Mr. Wickliffe Pastor of Lutterworth though corruptly called in part in Lincolnshire It cannot be denyed that as in all other places of the Western world wheresoever Christianity setled the whole world went after the Beast and all churches I know not one excepted with that apostafie were corrupted and the courts of the Temple were not measured and the holy city was given to be troden under foot of the Gentiles Antichristian 42. moneths yet all this time the holy city remains a holy city and after too unlesse God himself rejecteth her In the same condition amongst others were the churches in England corrupted as the rest with false doctrine Idolatry c. and usurped upon by Antichrist against which God even there also had his two witnesses some few prophesying in sackcloth At last it pleased God more fully to cleer up the light and caused his truth to prevail so as many thousands were redeemed from amongst men Antichristian and they were the first fruits unto God and the Lamb nor was the church-estate altered essentially all this time nor are these first fruites unto God new constituted churches but members of some churches cleering themselves from corruption and by reformation recovering themselves out of a desperate diseased condition into a more healthfull and sound estate In which course the Lord went on mightily in many places especially after Luthers time yea even in England something by Henry the 8th more by Edward the 6th and Queen Elizabeth who did not constitute new churches but reformed the churches as Geneva Scotland c. in a further degree deeply degenerated from the first constitution and the pure state thereof as they did the like in the state of Judah often sometimes better and more fully and sometimes not so fully in the dayes of Judges David Asa Jehosaphat Hezekiah Josiah Ezra and Nehemiah To conclude this as I believe firmly Christs visible Church hath continued in the world from his time to this day though not alwayes in one estate nor ever in like purity So I know not how it may be better cleared in the generall or any thing more be said for any other church or churches then I have here set down for the continuance of the visible church-estate in England in particular if any can I think they shall do well and that which is necessary especially in these times and therefore as I said afore unlesse they that deny true ministry in England can shew that there never was church-estate in England nor constituted churches or that God hath given them a bill of divorce I shall desire all that will not be satisfied herewith that they will be content not to disquiet themselves with disturbance to others I come now to propound some things about the ministry there in particular To this purpose wee know all that no man can have a lawfull Calling but of God and that in one of these two wayes Immediately by himself without concurrence of man or mediately by men using them as instruments other way of calling I know not any according to the Word accounting all callings or way of calling not set down in the Word to be humane and Idolatrous Concerning the way of calling by men for of the other I know not any but the Apostles that ever were or are to be called two things I desire to speak to First who hath the power of applying a calling to a man Secondly how it is applyed 1. Who hath the power of applying a ministeriall calling to a man some say the Pope some stand for in mediate revelation both which I conceive to be alike contrary to the Word some say the Christian Magistrate quà Magistrate at least approbation but I see no warrant for this neither some say the Church but by Chuch they understand a Presbyterie or Classis a company of Presbyters of severall churches or Councell but of these wee have no cleer evidence in Scriptures to evince such a church or such a practice For though there be mention of laying on of the hands of Presbyters yet that was not the actuall calling of a man but a ceremony of confirmation as I shall shew afterward By church therefore I judge is meant a company of Saints joyned together in profession and successively standing up in the same estate and this company hath power to apply the office to such a man as may be according to Gods Word Thus I judge partly from Scriptures partly from reason the Scriptures are these in the old Testament the Jewes chose their own officers Deut. 1.13 16.18 In the new Testament Act. 1.26 The word signifies hee was incorporated into the societie of the eleven by common suffrages In the context I note two things First the whole company did choose two from out of themselves and set them before the Lord because the applying of that kinde of calling depended only on God yet they bring it thus far as to single out two Secondly God having chosen one of the two they subscribe to it by joynt suffrages nor did any other thing concur in that mans calling no imposition of hands which if it had been necessary certainly should have been especially there being eleven Apostles present and inferiour persons in a case imposed hands on Paul and Barnabas Acts 13. Again Acts 6.3 5. The multitude that is the church and it seems without the assistance of the Apostles did look out by examination and triall and choose seven men amongst themselves and then set them before the Apostles who prayed and laid their hands on them Acts 14.23 They set no Elders in every church by lifting up of hands that is they assisted the churches in ordaining Elders who were chosen by peoples suffrages manifested by their lifting up their hands and 2 Cor. 8.19 he whose praise is in the Gospel was chosen by the churches testifying their suffrages by lifting up their hands from which Scriptures I judge that the power of choosing and setting apart a person for