Tij hr returiud as early as possible.
THE
MHxopoUtun JLiftrars
AND
READING KOOMS,
81 GREAT QUEEN STREET,
LINCOLN'S INN FIELDS,
LONDON.
The leaves not to be turned down or written, on.
ii.. ii
li
at"*?.'.".;"
m:
u-^VKXJ::. ■ :.i-i'.irji;XS.f^: "gSBg?^.."
\. i.) Norcouldi.t
enter into my mind, that a peifon of fuch Learning as Mr. Toml?s would
b^ accounted to hi, in Head of a fait and fober Anfw^r, {hould have
turn'-d afidc by Gobflfeb-likc and unnccefl'ary diliin^^ions, like thz ds
and/y/xof the Schoolmen, of which it may hi faid,
•f Ihudent. Ap'^ihe. jj one f cf old fpake of others,
vl iome of rhe
/r.cienc Philofo- ^ , /r • ■ t^ •
pliers, StatHm lacejJHMt ommptentu Dcy^
Ca!^?»'iifjjis litihtu.
'Fidcm mlnutii dljfecayit amhagibmy
U: qHifque eft linguA neqtiior,
Solvant , lt^ai9tcj'4e q'AXjlioy.umvinCHUy
Per S}ilogi[mos jihclilcs.
tD the clouding and cbrcuiiD§,of what was plain and obvious to the un-
d^rftmding of the meaneft capacity, and the perverting the intend-
ment of his A/itag3r.t[i^ nakedly rcprefcnted to a meaning never in-
tended by him : as not once (that he mighc feem to fay fomewhat) he
baih done ,* fctting up a man of ftir.w of his own forming, to fpend
the heat of hl5 mifg tided ztal upon, •s.dly, I fuppofed alio, that a
iTiin of thi; repute; in days paft, for Sobriety (to which he is ftill no
mean pretender) and Holincfs as Mr. T, would never have d-filed him-
fclf wid) the vomit and (lum^ful fpcwing cf paflionate and mcftun-
chfirtian expiefTnns (worfe than which, had he beendifputing with the
Devil, if he would have taken a meafureof modefiy from the Arch-
angel, he could not have made ufe of ) he isfreqjently venting and
difgotging againft bis Adverfa-y. The review wliereof, I am affured^
will not beover-pleafing to him, if his heart beb.uin the kaft fixt up-
on that frame cf fpirit in which our feiviccs for God (of vvhicb lie
deems his prefent undertaking to be a part) fhould be managed. ' He
hath fure read (and I willi he would liy it to his very heart) Jam.i^
20. that the wrath of wan rvoikjth mt the Righteoufnefi cf God; and
^ Tim. 2. 2^. iAy of tongue-ttrifcj, and
contention?, and is by fome rendredro/co/^ ^^ as alfo Tlrf.i. 7. from
the guilt whereof I know not how he will acquit himfslf. He talks
indeed of B ', III yjgs- gate RhetoricJ^y ufed by othe'S p. i<5. and expscfls,
he faith in his hpllile to the then Lord Chanatlory no other event than
Obloquy from perfons of the mind of this Author. For my part I am
^ot confcious to. my fdf of giving the kift occal^on of fuch cxp.eflions
■flOTi
The V re face afMr. Tombs hu BooJ^ examined', j
from this An'.ntAdverter^ not remembring what one fentence through-
out the whole riiacife, doth juftly defetvc fuch a caHigation ,• and am
iefolved no[ to return him the fame mcafure hi is pleafed to mete oiir^
not liking th; Copy-fo Will as to write after it. So that what-ever he
meets with from others, I afTure him, how grateful focver it may bs
unto him, uponfome accounts ( which may make him cxpsd it as he
Ipeaks) he fhill mifs of the returnal of Obloquy • for Obloquy & thofe
wrathful Ic palfionate cxprclHonshe is frequently venting in the Papers
under confideration. Through Grac^ we have othervvife learned Chri(is
and can fay touching this Animidverter, as Calvin touching Lathery
Though Luther callme-Dog^ O'C jet I rvill jay of him^ he i^ (I h)pej the
Servant ofjefm Chrifl. Though I muft crave. leave to add, that thefe
Animadverfions of his will be no joy of heart to him in the day of the
Lord, when all outworks iLall be iryed by fiie of what fort they are,
b;caufe they will be found hay and ftubble in that day ,• 'Tis an Argu-
ment M^. T. is an utter Granger to the Author of S. T. elfehe would
never haviexpt6led fuch a returnal from him. lafe^.i. oi ihlsTreface
he inveighs againfi Prefaces and cxprclfions which tend to create pre-
judice, and partial propenlity taonepart more than to another, which
he vvould have prohibited and refirained feverely. In which that I am
notin theleart concerned,! muft p:ofefs my felf to be wholly a Ikanger
D0[ b:ing confcious to my felf of any fuch Preface, or cxprcilion uled
bym::, and do heartily Willi that all fuch might b: fotborn that have a
tendcocy to foreftallth.' judgment of any ; beingdefuous that what I
wiits, may be impartially and candidly weighed in the BalUn,ce of the
Sanctuary, where if it be not found weights"! defire it may be rrjetled,
no: having (as I know of ) efpoufed any private opinion, nor imbraced
whafjupon Scriptural evidence to the contrary, I cannot more chear.=
fully lay doKDjthan ever 1 aflumedit : And am fo.farfrom (uch a tem-
per of rpirit, as to return any that fhall labour to convince me of my
mirtakcs (for 1 am a man, and fubjed to th:m) obloquie for thtir
love and pains, that I fliall thankfully acknowledge both, in fuch i
Chri-fiian undertaking, and profefs my felf thvir debtor. With what
feverity, or under what penalty }jf[.T. would have fuch prccedureif
interdided and refirained, and who lliall be conftitutcd of the Com-
mittee of Tryers touching exprilTions and prefaces of fuch a tendency
becauf;: he haih not exprefi'ed himfelf, I cannot divine : I hope he Is
rot Canguinary in thisdiftite, anddefire ! There arc (I pr^fume he"
thinks; Lawj enough, by penalties fufficiently fevere,inteidi61in? the
tviKing aad preaching of the men of, his fecoiing indigpatio;i; anii hi
& . The Preface of Mr. Tombs his BookjX'amlncd,
hith more pltty to pcifons under heavy ftrokes and burdens, than to
hive them encreafed. If it be (as he intimates towards the clofe of this
his EpljioUry Preface) the Efi(ile to the %eader^ prcfixt to the S. T. he
thus inveighs againft, as guilty of the wretched delign mentioned, he
knows there is nothing therein new, nothing but what is ufually done
by peifons writing Icffer Tractates ; nothing to forcrtali the judgment
of any is thereby intended. And Come think that this Animadvertet is
in this matter ocuTnAxrocKfi^o.-^ doing more in a few lines to balUft the
Reader to his pcifwafion, than the Author of the S. T. hath done in
his whole Epililc.
Qni alteram Incufatfrohrl If [nmfeintHeri Of ortet.
Towards the end of [d^i, i . he intimates, and /r^.2. plainly expref-
fes, that fome perfonsl exceptions have been entertained againft him,
and fuch avcrlnefs to his later Writings found in the fpirits of a great
number of thofe that feem to be inquifitive after Truth, that they have
not found fuch reception as fuch Arguments were deemed to require,
v\'hich he attributes to his writing about a point that few can conco6V.
That this is the ground of their prejudice ( many of them; who are
perfons of the complexion intimated, is a miftakc of the Animadverter,
which a little enquiry might eafily deliver him from. My fmali ac-
quaintance amongftfuch, as do not only feem ( asM^Tow^joutof the
abundance of that charity, which he frequently condemns his Anta-
gonift for the want of, fpeaks) but are veally inquifuive into Truth,
oives me ground to fay, That not thofe (for the mcft part) who cannot,
but liich as have well c ;nco6led the point he mentions, which, if 1 mif-
take nor, is the Baptifm of Believers, upon a manifertation and decla-
ration of Faith received, are the perfons (chiefly) of the prejudices in-
timated. And 'twere well if the non-reception of his late Writings,
amongft perfons of fuch a denomination as he fpeaks of, did put him
upon a review of them, the frame of fpirit in whichhe wiir thtm, to-
gether with the temper cf his fpirit and a6lions in dayes paft, that he
may fee from whence he hath fallen, and repent. I amveiyaptto
think that the prefent undertaking of the Animadverter, is not, like to
meet with better entertainmenr, than.;ibc fore-mentioned, amongft
perfons inquihtive into Truih : Efpecialiy confidering, hew oppcfite
to former layings of his, this undertaking of his is. The Tables are
cafily tobeconfulted with ; where, in legible cbara^^ers, the mind cf
"^{r. Tombs (in his Book intituled, FertxentHw Pharif>zoruw, being a
Sermon preached nLewfler\i\ Herefordjhlre Novemb. 24. 16^1, on
Mat,!^, ip, ordered by the Committee ofthe Houfc of Commons,
The Preface of M/.Tombs his BooJ^ examined,: -7
'\Aprtlip. i<^43» to bs printed, vvhcn Reformation began to be ccun-
tenanced ) is 10 bs read, contrary to what now he Tccmj to plead for.
■** Hear him fpiak. Having in pag. 17^ i§. in his third ufe of his Do-
**<5^fine raifcd from the -words, vitj. That however they thiMk^ of their
** aWions^ they in vain worjhip God who teach for doUrines Mans precepts^
'' P. 2. 5. 2. He takes occafion to admonifli Minifters to avoid the way
<*of thofc Pharifccs who taught forDodl:rine mans Precepts, and pi-
^Vthily expoliulates the cafe with them, SeSi.i^^^ And P.'iS.Se^.i^.
"he faith, ^ly. From hence n>e mfty take occafon to admonifhthe peopU^^
*< to take heed offnch Pharlfaical Teachers ^ (U teach for DoUrine the Cont'
<^ mmdments of men. Our Saviour Chiift having manifefted the hypo-
•< crifie of the Scribes and Pharifees in this thing, bids his Difciplts
*«/« them alone, telling them that they were blind leaders of the blind;
*f and if the hlind lead the hlind^both faH into the ditch^ Mat.i y. 14, And
*< elicwhere, Beivare of the leaven of the PharifeeSy which is hypocrifc,
<< L>ik.e 12. I. And furely people have need to take heed of fuch Tea»
*'che'S, fith Superftition, as it is a pernicious evil, fo it eafily iniinu-
<*ate$intop:opks minds, and (iicks faft in theavunder Hicw of Anti-
^< q;
** vino potefi, coercere vera mtnime, Declinare^et dereHr,q»ere eos poffant^
't cog;re^AHt pnnire non poffunt, Vii Cr vindt[}a gladio.aliigata^extra priva-
** torHmjcr (m, ac catum coUocata funt , Unde PaulttSy Rom. 16. obfervaf^
'* eo: cfii d Jfidia, & fcandala centra doUrinam qaamjidom eflis, facinnty
*<: dr declin^re ab \is, Oves me(iy im^ait Domlnus nofler^^ocem meam audi-
** fi»t^ & feqHHtitptr ms, Alienttm antetn ne^H^qaam fe^ahtur, fedfugtCKt
*' ab eo. Idem Cyprianus & reliqn Epifcopi confetti reffripferptnt Eplji.
** /. I. <'j?. 4- Seperemint inqtit Dominus n tabert^ncnlis hominu^ ifiorti.&f
"** durljfimorumi & nolite tangere ea, qfi£ adeoS'pertinent, ne fxmulpereatk
'' in pcccatis eomm. Propter qtiod dlebs obfeqnsns prdceptis Domini^ Cr Ds^
-«' tim metnrHSy a peccato prf
* R , "the Preface ofMr. Tombs Im BooJ^ examimd,
the Treatifc under confidcraiion, which may be reduced to thefc head*.'
r. The expectation of his giving account of thcTalenrj.committcd
to him by his Loid and Maftcr, which being retrained from publick
preaching, he thinks he ought to make ufe of this way.
Anfw. That a ftri(5l account mLll: be given to the Lord for the im-
proveaient of Talents received, is undeniable. The Parable, /V/4f.2y,
14 to 3 1, evinccth as much. The conhderation whereof (lioufd quic-
ken us to our duty : the moft cxa3: and diligent performance of it ima-
ginable, thit we have not at the laft the mol^ direful judgment of the
wicked and llothful Servant, wr. 25,2^,30. paft upon us. But every
u'fe of our Talent is not a faithful improvement of it for God: Wif-
dom,puts, c^f. arc Talents given by him : many have ufed thsm a-
giinll him ; and fmitten him (if I may fo fay) with his own weapons ;
nor had they been in a capacity of doing fo much 2gain(t him, had chcy
not received fo much from him* Whether Mr. T. hath in his prefent
undertaking been improving his Talent according to the mind oiChrlfi,
I humbly big him in his more retired thoughis to confidcr. That none
can fo improve their Talents without the bkHsd fupplies of the Spiiit
ofChritt, this Animadvertei will not deny : 'Tis impolTib.'e any duty
01 fervice fhould be accepted of God, without thefc. 'lisone end
for which he h fent from the Father and the Son, to iri-dwcll in the
hearts of Believers to enable them hereunto, %om. 8. 26. How little
of (he Spirit of the Lord in thofe Magifterial and Di»^ator-llke expref-
iions3(manifefting too much of a fpiritof pride and felf-fulncfs, with
an horrible contempt of what is oppofit to rhe mind of this Animadv.)
together with thofe reproachful, biting^paiTionate words, that without
any juft caufe given, do ever and anon drop fiom him, he viiUup:>na
review be able to difcern, I am not able to forefee ? We are roo apt to
judge partially in our own csufes, and of our own avitions ; but the
day will declareit. Should 1 mufkr up the many expreffior scf this
nature, fcattcred almoft from the one end of this Book to rhe other,
andxeprcfent them at once , pofl'ibly it might fomewhatftarile this A-
nimadvetter of his being reft'iined from publick preaching ; I have
nothing to fay but only rbis, That if Mr. Tomh ruppoieth himfelf to
be called forth by the Lord to the woikof pieiching the Goip:!, I
fee not now ( at leaft whiUlnot under corporal rcflraint) hecanan-
fwer the obliganon is upon him, by fuch a call, by a total negle6l of
that duty, either publickly or privately, notwithftanding the interdidi-
on of any. Our retreat in fuch cafes to iheold Apcftjlical Maxime,
JB. J. 2^» frhether if h lavfftfl to obey God or man, judge je ? being fui-
table
The Preface of Mr. Tombs k's Book examined, ^
table iftd warrancablc. Noc is it I believe juftifiable, to improve Ta-
lents given in one worker duty with the ncglcd of another, to which
we arc as cq Jilly obliged by the reception of them. He add?, as a fe-
cond Realon of this undeitaking,his meeting with the Book under con-
fideration, and another, entituled, PreUilcal Preachers none ofChrlft's
Teachers y\yhich manifefting thit the feeds of moft rigid Separation
were fown, and fptcad themfclves amongfi many, out of the greatnefs
of his lovre, and dcfi^n to do them good> and for the publick peace of
theNi.ionhe conceiv'd himfclf bound to pluck up fuch roots t)f bit-
ternefs ; and the rather, b-caufe fomi that had known him to be for
Believers Bapti.m, have been ready to think himfoi Separation alfo.
j4n[nf. That he met "vvith the Book under confidera.ion 1 readily yeeld
him, being informed that in fomc heat of Cpirit, about two years before
the publidiing his Theodulla. he thrcatned the Refutation thereof* But
that the feeds of Separation are roots of bttternefs^M a"? rvarmlyfaU as rveak^'^
ly frovedy in his following Treatile. The word (though it founds ill in
the cars of the world) is of a middle fignification, denoting neither
that which is evil nor good in it lelf (as Mr.T*. well knows) A twofold
Separation wc read of in the Scripture, i. A wicked and unlawful
Separation, which is a canflcfs departure from the People and Appoint-
ments of Chriftfl as not abk to bear theT fpiritualityj rtridnefs, purity,
and glory, in contempt of Chiili's I nrtitution, and meerly for the fi-
tiifying their lifts, Jftdf ip. This is the Separation that is condemned
in the Scripture^ Doeithtr of theTrads mentioned, undertake the
defence or vindication of it ? Are there not Principles laid down, and
aflerted therein, wholly oppofirc hereunto ? 2dly. A warrantable
lawful Separation enjoyned by JelusChrift, which is a peaceable de-
parture from a Church (or People) not rightly conftitutcd according
tothe mind of Chrift, the pattern exhibited by him, or degenerated
therefrom, beyond a poiTibility of recovering their firft ftate, purely for
the enpymenc of the Ordinances of God in power and purity. Tnis is
the Separation (no other) pleaded for in the Papers mentioned. Which
fuch poor worms as we arc apt to think there is, ground enough in the
Scriptures for. i» 'Tis ofold profihefied of, Aww.23.9. 7/4.52. 11,
i2.&<^2.To. 2dly. Commanded by the Lord, PriJz;. 4. 14. ^9.6,
& 14.7. Ejih^^. II. 2.Cor,6.i6. Aft.2,35). ?/^.45.io. 2 T/w.j.j-.
J?tft/.i8.4. 5dly. Pra6lifed by the Saints (not to mention thecnof
old,(j^/;.4. 25.) Exad. 19. y, Beat. 7. 6. & ^^, 28. Ni^mc^, 33. 52.
£ftW.24.i2,i5'. John If. 19. T^^v.ip. 7, 8, p. which the Epililes of
the Apoftles to the Churches juftiHe, who writ to ihcm as Saints fepa.
B rated
I © The Preface c/M^.Tombs his BooJ^ examined.
rated from the World, and the Woifhip thereof. What the Anicnad-
verter hath done, in ordcrto the plucking up the feeds of this Sepira-
tlon. is afier'Wards confidered. He that is fuccefsfull in fuch an under-
tikin''(oi delirestobefo), had need do more than vent his pafTion in
foTie biting fatyrical expreflions, againft the men of his contett, or
di6latc to them as if Wifdom only reftcd with hicn, and all others "werc
to hang on his lips for Indoflrination : whofc «tyn>J >J?oc without con-
troul v?cre to be fubmitted : But Chrift's School knows tio fuch Rabhi
befides himfelf. If a man ferioufly intend to pluck up the roots of this
Separation he nciuft (I humbly conceive) do thefc five things, i. Ma-
nifcft that the termlntis a qm^ or that from which any feparate, is of the
Inliitutionof Chrirt : becaufe to feparate from that which is not fo,
is no-whcre ( that I know of ) in the Scripture condemned as finfull,
but enjoyned us as our duty. To putfue us with outci'yes, that wc arc
SepArati/is and Sehifmaticksy becaufe we have feparatcd ftom.thc Church
oiEnglaniy without any tender of proof that it wasevcr rightly con-
ftituted according to the mind oi Chiili, is but (in my poor judgtncnt)
to do as he,
. — Cafut ahum in fr&ha toUhy
Oflenditquc hfimerosldtoSiahernaifuejii^at,
Brachia^ froiendtns & verberat iUibus aur^,
but beat the Air. adly, That the Church (or People fcparated from,
if eter of the InRitution of ChriA, arc not fo degenerated and apofta-
tized from what it was at firft, that 'tis now quite another thing,rctain-
in" little, befides the name and fhadow, of a Church ; fo dreadfully
conapted and fallen, that the ends of Gofpel-communion cannot be
attained, nor enjoyed in it j nor is it in an utter impoiribility of reco-
vering to its prifiine ftate of Gofpcl-ordcr and purity. A depavturc
ficmfuch a coilapfed Church, being abundantly warranred in Scrip-
ture, enjoyned to Saints as their duty. The Church of Rome was once
a pure Churchy of the Inttitution of Chrili ; whilft it abode foj it was
(ordinarily) the duty of its Members to continue in the communion
thereof; but when once it apoliaiized, and fo irrecoverably fell, ti
that there remained no probability or poiVibility of its recovery and
healing, it became the duty of the Saints concerned in its Communi-
on, to feparate from her, according to Rev. 18.4.. 3dly, That thofe
againrt whom this Charge is Uid,be proved once regularly to belong to
that Ch.irch, (which, whatfoever is pretended by this Animadvertcr,
aone can do but by their voluntary conlent) fromiflrhich they are fup-
pokd to feparate. For fure it will not be pleaded, that a man is not a
Separatilt
The Preface of Mr. Tombs his BooJ^examined, 1 1
Separatift from thtt Church, true or falfe, to which he had no union or
relation, as a vifible Member thereof. For any one to have joyn'd to
the Church of Sardis, could not (as I conceive) be adjudged fepira-
tion from the Church of SpheffUy fuppofiug he never was by his own
free confent a member of the EphefHe-Chnich. Now this is the cafe
of moft of the Members of the Congregated Churches ; they were never
by their own voluntary confent, Members of the Church of £«^/W,
and therefore cannot juttly be charged with nnful feparation from it,
4thly. That the means or way of Separation, SecefTion, or departure be
unwarrantable. I conceive the Animadverter is of that opinion, that
it is lawful, under fome citcumftances, to depart from the vifible Com-
munion of a true Church of Chrift, without, being guilty of fuch rigid
Separation. If he judge the Church of ErgUnd to be a true Church ;
and the Pirifti-Churches thereof as fuch; it's pofTible to leave the ont-
vvard Communion of the one, and the other, without being guilty of
finful Separation : othevwife Mr. T. will make more Separatifts than
he is aware of ; every one removing out of one Pariili to dwell in ano-
ther, and joyning with the fame numedcal Ordinances there ; that goes
out of the Nation and joyns with the Church, fuppofe in France or Bo-
^ff»»^<« being fo. ythly, He had need alfo prove that their Separation
be not for this end, to enjoy the Ordinances of God in power and pu-
rity, but meerly for the fatisfying their lufts ; no other Separation be-
ing condemned in the Scripture. Till this be done, the difcharging of
many volliesof hard and lofty exprclTions, of gathering Churches out
of Churches, being Schifmaticks, SeparatiftS; ^c. will be very infig-
nificant to the Judicious : however they may affright the the weak frtsm
clofing with that way (though of God) which is with much obloquy de-
claimed againft by perfonsof Mr. T, his learning and fobriety. But he
hath not yet done, he thinks himfelf obliged to pluck up thefc rdotsof
bitternefs, out of his great refpefl to the publick peace. An unhAnd-
foMeinJinttatioK) to fay no more ; fecretly accuflng thofe, that are for
the principles in theaforcfaid Trads (which he cannot but know many
.truly fearing God in the Nation-jj[c) as the difturbers of the Peace of.
the Nation, thereby rendring them odious to the Rulers thereof j
and himfelf lovely,
Galllna Ftlltes alb£.
B-ut Sir, what are the Seeds fo.vn in thofe Treatifes that do endanger
thediflurbance of th^r^eacc of the Nations? It he conceive that an
Uniformity of WoiQiip is neceffary for the prefervation of the Na-
tions peace ; and fomcwhat oppofit to this Uniformity, being alVerrcd
B 2 . ia
^^ ' Jhe Preface of Mr, 1, his Boo\examined,
in them they ire deftruaivc thereof, he knows he hath more Antago-
nifts thin one in that Affertion : and who they are that have averted,
and proved, that the ground of the late Confufions, and Garments
rolled in Blood, was not difcrepamy in Worfliip, but the rigid pref-
fio'^ of Conformity. Nor is he aftranger to this, That the peace of
thcNitionj abroad is prefetved, where Uniformity is not preflcd,tnd ~
hath been at home in the dayes of the greateft Toleration, and there-
fore no reafon but it may be here again. If he mean that thefpivits
of his Antagonifts, and fuch like, are againft the Peace of the Nation,
he deals injurioufly, none being more for Peace upon the moft righ-
teous and larting foundations,, than they ; which will be ( and not till
then) whatever the contrivementsand attempts of men arc, when the
Intereft of Nations is laid in a fubfcxvicncy to the truelntcreft and
Kin'^domof Chrift,. which we are praying for, that the time may come
in vvhich thofc Prophecies (liall have their full accomplifhment, Ifa,
2 4. AfiV. 4. 3,4* In the mean while we are not a little comforted^
tiiuhw perfecttted they the Prophets ; Elijah was the tronhler of Ifraely.
fo was Jeremy : Chrift.hc was an enemy to C^/^r, likely enough to aflumc
the Government ; and he is no friend to C^far that goes about to prc-
ferve bis life : the Apoftles, who were men that tttrned the vPorU upjidc ■
dgrvn. This fmiting his fellow-fervants, wiU. one day be no joy of
heart to him to think: of. , j , 7 ,. r , •
He tells us thirdly) He was hereunto provoked by the direful imput a ^
tlon of fcrvi>!gthe Image of theBeafl) which the Title chargeth upon the-
hearing the prefent Mimfiers, , , ,,
AnCtv, But, r. whylliould this provoke him, when h^ tel's uj f/?^,
7 that the Book, fo far as he can learn, hath been difpened (chiefly
if not only,) amongft perfons, who were not able to examine what is
faid by Fathers, Councils, Schoolmen, who^. 'tis more than probable,
thought that the Eogli(h Title was all that was lignified by the Greek
one,°til^ ^^» "^^ explained it to them. 2dly, What 1 mean by the
Ima"e of the Beaft) I intimate, p.5:3. of 5.r. vyhcre are thefe words,
7hejmahanImagetotheBeaftyKcv.iS*i^,iS' i- e. ereH an Ecclefia-
fticdjiate of Government y in aproportionablenefs to^ and refemblance of the
Civil State. This EcclefialHcal ftate of Govevnmenr,! aflert to be the.
Ima^cof theBeaft; by wotfhipping it,, I mean no more, than fubjea-
iiio,l>owingdownto, or owning of this Ecclefiaftical-State, which is
no^fuch direful exptefllon, amounting only to thus much, A Chnfha^t-
r.eflimonj againft fach 04 own, ftibjell to, are partakers with, the Ecclefia^
flicalSme, and Govirnmm of the Church of England, That there, are
The Preface of Mr, T. his BooJ^ examined: i }
foQicthitdofojMr.T. will nor denyj nor can be, that the Govern-
ment of the Church is laid in a propoitionablcnefs to, and refembUncc
of the Civil-State : which I apprehending to be an evil, 'tis much to
me a man of Mr. T. his fobriety (hould be offended at my bearing a
Chriftian Teftimony againit itjor interpret fo fober a Title to be a dire-
full imput at i an, &c. I think not what he pleads for in the Trcatife un-
der confideration, to be TheodaliaiOt the Worfhip of God, but amnot
provoked he fo ftyles his Book,becaufc he thinks it is fo ; yet have Its
juft caufe to be offended thereat,, ai he hath by the Title of the S, T»
given him to be provoked.
Another ftone of Offence in Mr. T. his way if, That there are dlrefftl
TreiiElions in theEpiftle againft heart Mg the frefent Mimjlers of England^
4uiflikelj to meet with the fame Judgments m the day of Gods vorath with
the Anticbrifiian Bea(i^ and feemlng commiseration of fuch as joyn in Com"
mmioa with the fPtblick^ChHrch-uiffemi/lies,.
Anfw. And I am forry tbefe thing* are provoking to him: Can he
not hear fin condemned, and the warning of God againft finners given
forth in Scriptural exprelfions from the Prophecies thereof, but his fpi-
lit mult rife againft them ? He will one day know that another fiamc
of fpiiit had better become him> and would have conduced more to bis
true peace, comfort and intereft, than that which was upon him under
the reading thofe Scriptural Predidions ; for fuch are thofe mentioned
in the Epilile, though, as Mr. 7. fpeaks, one would rather thin^fiem
to be fome Enthufiaftical dreams, than the Warnings of th^ord in
the Scriptures, founded forth by an unworthy duft. Co rp-itii fetation
healfodifcernsin thofe lines, but underftanding the hearts- of the
Children of men, he can. roundly pronounce of it, AadaUer fatis^ that
I fay not blafpheme, that it is h\ii fesmingcommiferation ; at the belt.,
this is an evil fftrmifey i fruit oftheflefhy to he bemoaned and mourned ovex ■,-
I can affure Mr. T. that they are not feeming^ but real Cq^imfe^i'ions j.
and that my foul is forely a{rli(^ed within me becaufc of the Wrath oF
the Lord that is like to be poured forth, for the tranfgrefl[>on and fmfulj
complyance with the corrupt and, fuperftitio us^pi^ p of the Nation,..
(after God hath from Heaven wilneffed ^^OTp^Tand-fo man-y cf the.
precious Children of God have fealed a-TeliRony with thsirdeareft.
Blood againft it) of the profeflTmg People of (5od in Englandh\^on theai; ,
and I cannot but once more cry aloud to them, and to this Animadver—
ter, to haften their efcape from the Tents of thefe falfe Shepherds and •
Affcmblies, left being complicated and twifted together with them,.
shcy fhjkre of the judgeinent ii like to bs. poured forth upon them..
1 4 T^^^^ Preface of Mr. T. his Boo\ examined.
God ill jealous God, and will in his jealoufie plead with thofe', that
icich for Doftrines the Commtndments of men, and woifliip according
to their Precepts : And what I faid then, I fay again now, who knows
(not intimating, as Mr. T. ftlfly fuggefts, that it would be, biit my own
dirknefs as touching the extent of the bng-fufering of the Lord, to fuch
as continue difobcdient to his voice) but this may be the laft Warning
you may have from God. For his Throne is like the fiery flame,and his
Wheels as burning fire, a fiery ftream iflaes, and comes forth from be-
fore him, Dan,7.9yio. He feems to be rifen up againft an hypocriti-
cal people, and a fpeedy riddance will he make in the earth. However
thcfc things may feem to Mr. T. to be hrtitumfulmefi^ like a great thun-
derclap wuhout any thunder-bolt in it, (as he fpcaks) which makes my
very foul pity him, efpccially they being (as I faid) the Prophecies of
the Lord levell'd againft the very pcrfons againft whom I level them.
My prayers to God for him fhall be, that they may prove words of a-
wakening and humbling, and not of deftru6lion and further addition of
mifcry in the day of the Lord, which without faith and repentance
come betvveen, if for nothing bat for that flight contemptuous frame of
fpirit upon him in the reading of them they are too like to be. He adds,
that J judge fach Complyancc a damnable fin. If he mean a fin that in
its own nature deferves damnation, I do fo indeed, nor can I doother-
wifc, not having imbraced that novel diftindion of the Papi/is between
d/im>iAhle (or deadly) and venial fins : as if the merit (or wagcs^ of
all fin were not death, judging it (as I do) to be a fin. Butifbydam-
ivable he mean Irremlffible^ like that of Blafphemy againft the Holy
Ghoft, which he intimates as if I judged and fuggefted the fin of Com-
plyacce in fome to be, I muft crave leave to tell him, That I deleft
and abhor the leaft thought of any fuch thing. 'Tis true, in the event
it may be irremiffiblc, like the fin againft the Holy Ghcft:, and fo may
theleaft vain word; but that I judge it is fo in its own nature, is an
Alfertion of that nature that nothing is more falfe and untrue. And
I cannot but wonder with what forehead this Animadverter could im-
pute it to me. Nor can I guefs at his defign in fo doing, not the occi-
fion adminiftred by me. I have read the Epiftlc over, and find not the
leaft prints or marks of fuch an Affertion. If any words may be wjreft-
ed to fuch an intendment, I do here folemnly difclaim and difavow it,
profeffing from my very heart that I believe quite otherwife. Our
God is a God ready to pardon, to multiply pardons : though you have
turn'd afide from him, he vviU heal backflidings, and love freely ;
therefore poor hearts be not deicii'd from looking to him. But he goes
The Preface of Mr, T. his BoaJ^ examined] i f
on, which murt needs produce thefc wofullcfFcas. i. An irrccon-
cikablc eomity becvvixc the Separacirts, and fuch as hold communion
with the prefent Churches and their Paltors. A^f^, But what will
produc-c this efte6i? will judging their fin to be irremiirible ? This is
t Calumny. I know none that doth fo. Will the pleading for fcpari-
tioD from that which God calls aloud to feparate from f 1 hope better.
And vvifli this Animadverter takes not a meafure of others fpirits
by bis own. God forbid that any fhould be returning enmity for love.
The Lord knows out of greattjed bowels of compaffion I write what I
wrt-te; and after all if I meet with fuch a retuinal as that intimated, I
hope never to live (througn the rich grace of the Lord) to fee that day
i-n whvch I fhotiW beiep^yinginy that may be pofTeffed with enmity
againft me in rh-u c'vn kind, or ceafe to love, pity, and pray for them.
Can we not dtlf "• u opinion, and tell each other in plainnefs, of the
guilt and evil vv , ciuccrn on each other, but this direful effed: of irre-
concilable: enmity mult be produced ? I hope not enmity,much lefs ir-
reconcii.'ble enmity. And am penwaded that this Animadv. cannot
juftly charge any of the Srparatifts (as he in fcorn calls them) with any
fuch thing. And believe that God will help poor dufts to fuch a meafure
©f a Goipel-ipiik, that there (hall not be the leaft of the frame menti-
twied, budding or putting forth upon them. And becaufe I conceive
it m^y be neediui, I fhall mind Mr. Tomhsoi what he hath fometimes
fcad in the Preface to the Harmony of ConfcfTfons, publiQied in the
name of the French and Belglci^ Reformed Churches, PrAcUre efuodam
loco dicit AmbroJiHSy Inter fervos Chrljli contentio non debet cjfe:, fed celiaiio;
^nttm emm (it eu mentis hfimava hehetndo^ in rebtti praferdm divinis, fit res'
alioqui maxime c/arM,fiepeperff>icere nonfojfimm^ qttin ex mutHa-n^nriffH-y
Cr arnica frAiernaq^t dijceptatione plarimum lac 14 a^equnmnr negari nulh
modo potefi Contendere y vera, rixari (jrferociter ac protervs digUdi^
art tuntHm abeft^ nt deceat a Deo inftitmos homines^ ut ne modeJU^y attt hfs-
ntanu cjHidem conveniat Eqtttdem San^ia Sancia ac Religiofe [tint tra--
^anda in timore DiviftiNttminis: et Charitate proxlmi-, which I widi him
to make his Copy when he next writes Controverfie?. 2,dly. The
luine of many thoufands in thgr Liberties, Eftates, Live?, if the L^w
ihould not be mitigated, is the next doleful eflfi6l mentioned; Anjit,-
Tbattheprefcivation of ihefe, fo far ashonellly we may, is amoial'
duty I grant. Thefe cffed^s are not the iflae of imbracing the opini-
ons and principles pleaded-for in that Treatife, but of thofe grievous;
and unrighteous Decrees (by which the Child of this mans tuition,hath.
ever,, even fioa its iWAdling=-£lou'.s, I int*n the Conam&a-Piayer-
i'^ * The Preface of Mr, T. his dool^ examined.
Book Worfhip, been foftrcd and fuftained. The effects mentioned tic
no other than hath been the ufual attendtncnt of imbracing the Gofpcl :
which our Lord tells us we muft expeA, if we will be his Difciples.
Nordic they, as this Animadverter calls ihem,vvoful effcds, but blef-
fcd and glorious, being brought upon us for Chrift's, for the (Sofpcli-
fakc ; in which he would have us to rejoycc with leaping joy, Mat. y.
10,11,12. And many of the Children of the Lord have taken them
joyfully, Heh. lo. 34. Nor is this any better reafon for the Animad-
vetter's advance againft the Trcatife under confidcration, than was
that of LycurgiiSi who would have the Vines deftroyed becaufe the fruit
of them made men drunk, (nor yet indeed is it fo good) nor any other
than what he might frequently have had to engage him to write againft
the reception of theGoipel; and at this day in many places againft the
Dowf.
Hum ejfe in mundo non creierem^ he fliould not have believed the CJo-
fpelhad been preached in the world, if he had not feen thefc brawls and
tumults. Nor, 3dly, is Mr.T. a ftranger to what of late hath been
charged tipon Proteftams, with a defign to pcrfwadc to a rctuinal to
the Church of Romct upon the account of the fchifms, divifions, brawls
that have enfucd feparation from thence,* And with as good reafon as
this Aoimadverter chargeth thcfe upon the 5(r;^r
ef Nature teacheth with r'effeB to fVorJhtp, That God is to be worfhlpped.
Of Atheifm. The fayings of Cicero and Seneca touching the Opinions of
the Nations vptthreffe^ toaDeity. That God is to he vforfhi^ed in a
Commnnity : that he is to he worjhippfd according to his own will. Th&
fretences 0/ Ztkucus, Lycurgus, Minos, Nutni, the mofl famam
Lawgivers amsngH the Gentiles : and their impojition of Laws, The
famoM faying of Soctitts i» Plato tmchingthe i^OTroi^'or rnamer of
IVorjhip prefcrihed by the Godds. That the Voice of God is to be hearkrnj
id ttntOi wheny and in what manner he [halt he pleafc^ tofpeakj. The Gen-
tiles owned httt one chief Deity. Thecufivmof the Nations in their ocV'
•S'P^TroQy^ioc, Diabolical Oracles leading them thereunto ; which they
ff*pp9/ing to be the voice of the Godds ^ obeyed. Injiituted or Ceremonial
fVorfhif whtrein it confifls. Hearing the fVardyfnch a H^orfhip. Mr. T.
declines the matter in controvsrfiei Men do not worjhip Gud in Hearing
Vf hen they hear, i Thcfl.2.13. epened^ and explained,
■•-'.>[
' Aving ahetdy anfwered what Mr. T. wajplcafed to premife
in his Epiftolary Preface ro the Reader, lb far as we are
(or can befuppofed.tgbc) concerned, we arenow ready to
attend hiifurther motion toward the difcuffion (as be phia -
feih it) of the Book it felf ; which is (as he faith) dillinguifhcd into t
Preface and ten Chapters. How fuitable the method is, or comprehen-
five in hij judgment, lam little concerned : it feem'd toqictoan-
fwer my aim and intendment, which was folely the clearing TrutH,£ti(4
fatisfying the Scruples of tender Confcienccs -ift t-he matters we were
€nqaiiing after. .no : ..
C z Tfec
2 A Vindication of the Sober Teflimony^
Thft firft thing Mr. T. is pleafed to take notice of, is m Aflertion
of mine in the Preface ro the enfuing Difcourfe ; wherein I affirm that
the matter we were to trcal of^ is one part o£ thei^ftitntcd Worfliip
oi Cnria under the Gofpcl t from whence he takes occafibn in his fiift
Si6lion to tun forth into a difcourfe touching the derivation of the word-
iP'orpjif^ and very learnedly tells us, that it is a contradi of the word
fyorthy^fl>ip, aad notes fingulat refpe6t— l>y r-eafon of fome worth k the
thing vvorlliipped, conceived in the heart, and expreffed by feme fign,
which he gathers from the ufe of the word fVorfhipfHlf and jv/^r Worjhif^
«ivcn to Supcriours, — and gives- us feycral diftindlions about Wor-
ibip, which as they arc trite and obfoletc, fo what the intendment of
the Animadverter Qiould b^ in producing them, except to ihew his
reading, or amufe the Reader with t multiplicity of words and diftin-
6licns, and thereby render him the more unfit to examine what is of*
fercd in the Controvcrfie to confidera.tion^ I cannot divine. As the
quibling upon every particular word in a Difputc, is much like that
which the Apofllc condemns, iTijn^6.^, 2Tim.2.ii^, fo I know not
of what ufe it can be to the Reader, nor that it ferves to anything,
fave to render the Gontroverfie more arduous and difficult, when the
meanin'' of each other is obvious to anyconfideiate underftanding
without it. Tbereis (as I know of) no more than a twofold Worfhip
of God ; 1, That which is natural, oiiginal, or moral: which Icall
natoial, becaufe in the principle- of it it was concreatcd with man;
snd moral, becaufe it is invariable and alway the fame ; and is com-
prchenfive of our faith, affiance and truft inGod, our fubjc6iion to
him, as the God, fovercign Lord and King, and Lawgiver to all. That
Worfhip which the Law of Nature, oi the Law written and engraven
upon the hearts of the children of mcn,.tcacbeth, isthat I call the na-
tural Worfhip of God. Four things this Law tcachcth with refpcft to
Worfhip. Firft, that God is to be wotfhipped. Whether there were
ever any fo guilty of Atheifm as to deny * Deity, is not much to our
prefent pui-pofe to enquire. CiccroXiithi NuIUm mquam-fulfff GeMtem^
(^c. That there vvas never any Nation Co barbarous, which knew not
that there was aGod. And to the fame purpofc Seneca^ Epfi.'],Verita^
us Argumentum efiy omnibus AliquU ifUeri tanejuam Deosejft^ qmi omm^
km de Diu opinio injita Jit ^ neqttc nlla gsns ajquam eflaito extra LegeSy
morefqiiepofita^ ttt non aliqttos Deos credat, N6r is there any thing, Pjal,
14. 1, oppofit thereunto, which the Chaldee Par apbraft renders^ iV each one by
himfelf, but; by perfons in particular bodies and focieries to be wor-
shipped and fervcd, is another di(ftateof Nature. Thecreftion of
Temples for Woifhip, with the form? of publick Service, and Piieftr
for the managery thereof, to be found amongrt the oioft ignorant and
dark corners of the World, both before and fince the Gofpel-difpen--
fation, fufficiently evince the truth of the fuggeftion. Yea,
3d!y. That God is to bcworfhipped according to that Revelation
to Himfelf he is pleafed to exhibit to the children of men, not accord-
ing to their wills-one or other of them. Hence when any had a defign-
of impofing Laws upon others of their omi devifing, they prefcnted
them unto them, not as their own invention?; upon which foot of ac-
count they knew they would meet with little refpeift from perfons at-
tending the dictates of Nature, but as received from the Godds. Thus
did ZakHcus^ Lycurgns^ Mlms^ Numa, the moft famous Lawgivers a-
mongft the Gentilts. Famous is the faying of Socrates in Plato to thi«;
purpofc, That every God will he worfhippedy to fiXK^- ctt/jS (x.^ii».oAi"
'jqaTOf in tkat way which p/eafeth befl his own mind. Contrary to which,
as if thofe xoiVoi hmsf., cnftamped upon the hearts of mcn,as men,weie-
totally obliterated. Some tfTumc th-e confidence to plead, that th«
7§o^of, or manner of Worftiip, is not from divine dircdion and prc-
fcription ; but only the Aa7f«« or Wor(hip it felf..
4thly. That the Voice of God when he fiioirld be pleafed, or in
what manner foever, to fpeak to them, was to be hearkned and attended-
to, the fame Law of Nature did indoctrinate them in j I fay the
Voice of God : for however unto fome of them there were Godds-
many and Lords many, yet the wifeft and moft learned amongft them,
did acknowledge but one chief Deity or God, at wbofe beck and or-
dinance all the reft were, whom therefore they contcmn'd as things oft
naught. Hence Plamus in CaJiKa, Ad' 2*
Ukhs Tihi hie dum fit propitius Jupiter^
Th ijios miautos cave Dtosflocei feceris,
H-cnce Satan eafily abufed them t^ an attendance upon his-didateyas-^
txhe Oracles of God> though never fo cruel and fanguinary. Thatic
wasufual amongft ^he Gentile Nations to offer up Men and Women'
in Sacrifice to the Godds^ is known. Tacitus tells us of the Germans,
that they were wont to facrifice Men to CMercury ; Tacit, de tnorih,-
German, TertttUian aflures us that the people of Africa facrificed their
Children to ^(?^«r», and that openly, even to the time of. ths Procon^,
fuJilup,>
■2^L ' JiVindicalJon of the Sober Tejiimony^
fulHiip of Tiberlui ; ^pol. c.S. And when the Carihaginianj were o-
vzicomt by Agathocles the Sicilian Tyrant, judging the Godds to be
greatly angry with them, they at once facrificed two hundred Noble-
mcns Sons to SatnrKy as Pefcenninui Feflm witnefr. The fame Abomi-
nation Wis rife among the %om-itJS^ which fcems to have continued
amongll them to the time of theConfulfhip of Cornelius LempilttSy and
Pitblim Licimus Crajfuii as witncffeih Pliny ^ Nattir.Hlfi. L^.c. i. the
French (as Cicero^ Orat per Fomei.) the Biitans (a$ TachtUyAmd, 14.)
(of whom faith Horace^
Vifam Br'ttannoi hojpltlhus feros)
were led captive to the like ferofity to their own flelli.
That they received this Abomination from their diabolical Oiacles
( which they mittook for the voice of the Gods to them) is more than
probable. That the deftrudion of Mencum and Iphlgenia is to be fixed
here, is known. Not had the maner of the Lacedemomans, wounding
ihemfelves in the worlliip of their Gods,any other fpring, as witneffcth
ApolloaifU) aptid Phlloflrat. 1.6, c. 10. 75 3 t f^nym is*®' 7^ k^-n^i^ 7^ "^
trKvjuv ^x-mt ;' ^tr,jLZv eople think.it a very eafie matter to mrfhip God
(and fo it were, if Mr.T.his Affertion were true) // it were nothing elfc
to wor[hip God bnt to come and hear a Sermon, then it were the eafteftmat-
ter in the world to worjhip God, bnt there is more required in the duty of
Cod's iVorfhip than thou haft been acquainted withy there is a power ofCod-
iinepnit. And citing Jo/^. 24*1? . he adds, ^.^. Touthink it is nothing
tofervetheLord aloi, you cannot ferve the Lord, for he u a holy Cody
and a jealottsGed you muft have other manner of hearts than yet you
kavs— you muft under ft and hts fVorfhip in another manner than yet you do:
• nyitii
ifi Anfwer to Mr. T. his Exceptions, 2 s
until yoH mderjland God^ his Wayes a^d fVor(hip^)uH cannot [erve the Lord^
i, e, you do not, cannot woiQiip him. Nor doth the Scripture, i Thef.
2. 13. prove his Affcitionj but rather the contrary. The words ar«,
Fof- this catife thank, w God withont ceajing^ hecaufe rvhen ^e receized the
Word of God which ye heard of m^ ye received It not at the word ofwan^ but
Oi it is in truth the fVord of God, which eff equally workjih alfo in yon that
believe. Not to multiply words, the Apoftle (with Sihar.m and Timo^
/if«*, daap.i.i.) acquaints them in this verfe, i. of the returns they
were on their behalf making to God, for the Grace was beftowed on
them; We thank^God without cea/ing. 2. Particularly declares the ground
and reafon of this their thankfgiving ; which was their reception of,
obedience to, the Gofpel, which he calls Aoyay r^QiQ, the Word of Cod ;
which bccaufe they minifterially brought to them, he calls alfo >^oy«v «.
ii»^i'7m( viiA.ai, the word of hearing Ifieechy or report f-cm them. This he
faith they did ^gj^A^iu/j^ywy^ they tryed, proved, confidered^ weighed
in their fpirits what was offered to them by the Apoftles (as learned Be-
z,a tells us the word fignifies, whereby it is faith he diftinguifhed from
the word ^kiSm) An entertainment that the Gofpel did not every-
where meet with, being many times ciyed out againft, run upon, and
violently oppofcd, as were the Publifhers of it) without fo much as fo-
beily confidering whether things be fo or no : nor here but by a very
few, the Rabble in an hurly-burly, futioufly affaulting the houfe of Ja-
fon, JU.i7.$. (whithei 'twas like the Difciples were wont to repair)
And ^Ki(^«i having upon tiyal found it to be of worth and weiohr,
they received, imbraced it (as Bez,ai Zanchy^ &c. on the place, fay the
word fignifies) and that as the Word of God ; with reverence living
up ihcmfelves to hiscondud. How this came to pafs he alfo aflcrf-
ethjit was from the efFedlual energy of the Lord upon their hearts by his
mighty Power (iV mg7«Si) which they were not able to refift. As" lear-
ned Cameron in Myroth. Evang. ad Phil. 2. And Pr^leEi. and holy Bai}2S
on Efh. 1. 1 1, fay. And they being thus powerfully and cffedually
wrought upon to the imbracing the Dotlrine of the Gofpel as the Word
of God, they become followers of the Churches of God ,• which in Ju. .
•r Congregation, for the celebrating the Ordinances of God
together, ai^.d worfhippini- him according to his will. Therefore we
worfliipGod iu hearing when we hear ; of which the Apcftle fpcsks,
negryquidem^ as Mr. 7. well knows. Yet is this the only Scripture
produced for the confirmation of .his AHertion. They were fo fat
^ from
2S -^ Vmdicatiortofthe Sober Teflmonyy
from worfJiipping God in their bare hejuing, that had they done no.
more> they had not worfhipped him at all ; no more than thq rcrt of
them of Thejfalov/ica with the Jews, who although they heard the Apo-
file?, conforicdnot with them, but afterwards pcrfecuted and oppofed
them^ 6/^(^.17.4 J. who 'tis to hi thought Mr. T. will not fay, wor-
flipped him at all. He need never fear mifcairying in anycaufchc
thinks meet to undertake : if he can but beforehand affare himfelf he
flial! meet with fuch partially addidled Readers as will take fuch proofs
as. thefe to be cogent and convincing, but
Parvoi hahetjpes Troja fi tales hahet.
Strong and confident AifettionSj without more clear and evident proofj
are not likely to lead the underftanding of peifonSjfoberly inquifuive
after Truth, into obedience of them-
Sea* 2.^
Qflnjihmei Worfhlf. Mat. 1 7.5'. exflainei. What ever is to he fraUlfei
by N, T. Saints inrejfeB offVorJhip, ufolelj/ to be bottomed upon the au^
thority of Chrlfl, Luke i o. 1 5. conjidered, O, T. Precepts with refpeU:
[ to Hearings how obliging. 1^1^^16,29. explained. The intendment of
■ Chrifl in the Parabhy evinced. zPtu 1. ip. opened, VFhom ws are
\ prohibited from hearing in the N. T, Mat. 15'. 4. explained. 2 Tim.
3. J. conjidered and opened. Of the [catteredDifciples^ A^s S, I3 ^,
touching whom Mr. T. egi'egiofijly trifles^ and abufeth his Reader, No
hearing the prefent Minijlers m gifted Brethren. P^Fhether hearing of
Preachers be a moral and perpetual pyorjhip common to all times,
MR. T.his firftSeaion being fpent iti the confideration of the
word fVorjhip ; and fome diHindions about the Worftiip of God,
the Iccond is dcfigned to the confideration of the wovd Inftitnted. And
having learnedly told us that the Inftituted Worfhip of Ghrift isfuch
as is byChrilVs Inftitution ; i.e. the Inftitutcd WorQiipof Chrift is
the Inrtituted Woifhip of Chrift. He fuither acquaints us what a Civil
Lawyer faith of InftitutionSj vi^. Thatthey are preceptlons by whicb
men are inflru<5Ved and taught : which after fome exemplification by
particular inftances, he applies to the Worfhipof Chrift under the Go-
fpel, and tells us that 'tis fuch that is by Chvift's preceptions taught,
direded or appointed in the time thereof, which may be meant (he
faith) of the Natural Worfhip which belongs to God or Chrift, fuch as
prayer to God, giving Thanks to him. Hearing, which yet in refpea
of fome peculiatitiesjare to be divolved upori the Scriptures of the Nevr
, Teftamenr^
in Anfwer to Mr . T. his Exceptions, 27
Teftatnent, yet not excliiding the Old, or the Light of Nature, fo far as
the WorQiip is perpetual and general to all people and times, as being
either natural or moral. An[rv, Very good! Hearing it feeiTiS then,
as a Gofpel-duty to be performed by the Saints in the time thereof, is
part of Natural Worfhip ; for hereof muft he (peak, or hefpeaks im-
pertinently} thequcrtion being about the duty of thefe, Sober le^m,
pa". 13. which not attempting the leaft proof of^ vye are bound to take
no°f urther notice thereof than to avouch the contrary. If the Animad-
vcrtcr thinks, that becaufefome things areconfonant to ihedidatesof
right Reafon, the Light and Ljw of Nature ; therefore, as to be per-
formed by Saints under the Gofpel, they arenot meerly of theinttitu-
tion of Chril^, and to be performed folely upon the account of his Au-
thority and Command, he (hall not have mer for his Rival. Nor will
any fobcrChtiftian, tender of the honour and glory of his Lord and
Mattel Chrlft, fvvallow down fuch an Affertion without better proof.
About this matter a worthy and learned perfon hath fpolten excellently
fn a Catecbife lately publiYhed, called A brief InftrHUlon in the fVorjhip
cfGod, where inpag.84. ^. 18. are thefe words ; Whereoi [undry of
thefe things^ {vU. Prayer, Preaching, &c. of which he had fpoken be-
fore, as principal Inftitutions.of the Gofpel ) are founded in the Light
and Law of Nat Hre^ as reqHi/ic nnto all [olemn Worfhipf a>id are moreover
comma?ided in the Moral Larv^ and explications of it in the Old Tgji^ment^
hove do jot* look^ updn them as Evangelical Infiitfttions to be objerved princi-
pally on the Authority of Jefni Chrijl? Anfw. Neither their gcnerd fm-
tablenefsfinto the principles of right Reafon^ and the diBates of the Light
and Lavf oflSJjtHrey nor the praBice of them in the Worfhipof (jod nnder the
Old Teftament do at all hinder themfiom dependin^yn the meer Injlittitien of
Jeftii Chrifly 04 to thofe effecialends of the glory of God^ in and by himfelfy
and the edification ofhi^ Chuirch in the Faith which is in i>;w, whereuntv he
hath appointed them: nor as unto the fpscial manner of their performance^
■tvhicb he nqmreth ; in which rtffeBs they are to be obferved on the account
^ his Amhorit J and Command only ^y^n.^j.^. $; 28.20. John i<^. 23>
24. Heb.j.4,5,<5. Eph.1.22. & 2.20j2i,22. Heb. 12. 25-. In the
explication whereof he fpeaksth'ffter this wife : The principal thing we
are to aim at in the whole f^or(h'ip ofGod^ is the dif charge of that duty which
-we owe to Jefns Chrifl the King and Head of the Chr'.rch, Heb.j .(5. iTim.
3. ly. T^iis we cannot do unlefs we confider his Authority as the
formal reafon and caufe of our obfervance of a,ll that we do therein. If
we perform any thing in the VVoidilp of God on any other accounr,i£ js
DO part of our obedience unto him, and lo we can neither expeil his
D 3 Grace
2 8 A Vindication of the Sober Te^imojiyy
Grace to afTift us ; nor have wc his Promife to accept u$ therein ; tot
that he hath annexed unto our doing, and obferving. what ever he hath
commanded, and chat bscaute he hath commanded us, Matth,2.Z, 20.
This promiicd Pr efence refpe6^s only the obfervance of his Commands.
Some men are apt to look on this Authority of Chrift as that which
hath the leaft influence into what they do. If in any of his Inftitutions
they fiud any thing that is luited or agreeable to the Light of Nature,.
as Ecclefuftical Societies^ the Government of the Church, and the
like, they fay are ; they fuppofe and contend that that is the ground
on which they are to be attended unto, and fo are to be regulated ac-
cordingly. The interpofition of his Authority they will allow only ia
the Sacranients, which have no light in Reafon or Nature, fo defirous
are fome to have as little to do with Chrift as ihey can, even in the
things that concern the WorlHp of God. But it would be foraewhat
ftrange,that if what the Lord Chrift hath appointed in bis Church to
be offerved in particular in an efpccial manner, for fpecial ends of his
own, hath in the general nature of it an agreement with what in like
cafes the Light of Nature fcems to dire6t unto, that therefore his Au-.
thority is not to be confidered as the fole immediate reafon of our per-
formance of it. Butitisevideat,_
Firft, that our Lord Jefus Chrift, being theKing.and H«ad of his
Church, the Lord over the Houfc of God, nothingis to be done there-
in but with refpc6t unto his Authority, Af-=zf. 17. y- £^A, 4. XJt &2^
20,21. Secondly, and that therefore the fuitablencfs of any thing to
right Reafon, or the Light of Nature, is no ground for a Church-ob-
fcrvation of it, unlefs it be alfo appointed and commanded in efpcciat
by Jefus Chrift. Thirdly, That being fo appointed and commanded,
it becomes an efpecial Inftitution of his, and as fuch is to be obfervcd ;
fo that in all things that are done or tobe done,vvith refpeft unto the
WorftiipofGod in the Church, the Authoriy of Chrift is alway prin-
cipally to be confidered, and every thing to b« obkrvedas commanded
by him, wiihout which confideration it hath no place in the Worftnip
of God. Thus far he with convincing brightnefs and evidence.
*Tis true, Mr. T. tells us there a!e fome pattictilarities which God
hath tied us to in the New Teftamenr in hearing : But of what nature
they are he cxprefly tells us not : Whether fuch as do conftitute it
New-Teftament-Worftiip, without which it is not, or cannot be ac-
counted to be fo. The Scriptures cited by him are not wholly ftrangerj
to fuch a thing. Firft, Mat.i7.$. fairly intimates that what ever is to
be done in the Ncw-Teftanient-Woxftiip,, is to be done folely upon the
Authority
in Anfiver to Mr. T, his Excej)tiorrs, t^
Authority of Chrift. In v.2. we have an account of Chrift's transfigu-
ration before Petir^ JameSf and John. Vcrf. 3. Mofes and E/ia6 appear
talking with him. Mofes was the great Lawgiver to the Old-Teftament-
-Ch-arch, Dem.^^.^i-i. (». e. in the pDttian or inheritance which Mofes
the Lawgiver according to the Comniand God had given to the Gadites)
Elioi was the great Reformer of the Church in thedayes of Jex^^hels
Apoihcy from God : men of great renown in their day. Peter (and
the reft of them being amazed) cryes out, It is ^ood for m to be here ; let
Hi make three TdbemacleSy one for thee^ one for Mofes ^ And one for £//W;
Whereby he feems to equalize them with Chrift, each of them a taber-
ntcle,t/.4. What faith the voice of God ?t/.(J. while he yet j^ake^beholi
a bright cloud overjhadorved them ; and behold a voice om of the cloHditvhich
faidy This is my beloved Son^ in whom I am^rveli f leafed ^ hear ye him.
And Mark tells us, chap. p^p. That faddenly when they looked about ^they
faw none but Jefus : Mofes »nd Elioi were vanished and gone. The in-
tendment of the whole fcems to be this ; That though betwixt Chrisi-y
Mofes And E/ia^ there was a fweet coalefcency and agreement (they
talked together) yet in- the Worfhip of God under the Gofpel, not
Mofes nor Eliaty but only Chrifl is to be hcarkned and attended unto..
Therefore but a reafonable po/iulatum, that the whole of the Worlliip
ofChiift, in the times of thcGofpei, bedivolvedupon the Scriptures
of the New-Teftament, He being appointed and deputed by the Fa-
ther, folcly to be attended unto for Laws and Diredions touching it ,.
for which alfo he came from thebofome of the Father, John 1. 18> By
whomhc bath fpoken to us in thefclaft dayes, Heb. 1.2. To whom
fulnefs of Power and Authority is delegated by the Father, M^f.28.18.
From whence, the Commiffion to the Apoftles for preaching the Gofpel.
(-v. 20.) doch originally fpring; and confequcntly our hearing, or at-
tending upon Preachers in that work, is to take its meafurc from the
Law5 and Statutes, which, as Lord of the Family, he hath given forth,
thereabout, for his Houfhold to obferve and do. Nor,2dlyj doth Luk^*.
io.i(J. cited in the fecond place by this Animadverter, fcrve to- any
other purpofe but to cut the throatof the caufc he hath at prefent un-
dertaken the management of. Tli^yare the wordsof Chrift unto the
Seventy, whom he fcnt two and two before his face, v,i. and prove
thus much, That hearing thofe that are fcnt out by Chrift, is a pofitive
Inftitutionof his, and fuch an Inftitution, That therein wehcarhim^:
which proves not the lawfulnefs of attending upon the Miniftry of fuch
as a6l not by vertue of any Authority received from him, but the con-
.SMxy, If the Argument Chr-lft here ufeth be. valid, That hervbo hiareth-
thsmi
^0 A Vindication of the Sober Tefiimony^
them rvho>nhe [ends in hiiT/w that fent him,
(viz.. the Father) as moft cercain it is : I do not fee that this can be
accufed of weakncfs and invalidity ; though fuch an one as Mr.T.cares
not (it may bz) to hear of, viz.. that he who heareth the Parilh-Mi-
nifters, heareth the Bi(liops ; and he v^ho heareth the Bi(hop$, heareth
the Pope, from whom they originally received and derive their power
and authority. And yet it may be this may not be fo diftaftful to this
Animadverter as I had thought, whom I already find, pag.34.4. plead-
ing it lawful to hear the Jefuitcs ; a fair advance towards the perfonal
hearing of his HoltneJ^.
Thus infuccesful is Mr. T. in producing Tcftimonies, every one of
them fpeaking oiherwife than he would have them, aed much to the
difadvantage of the caufe he undertakes the management of. Nor do
we fay, that the many Precepts in the Old-Teftament about Heaving,
ate vacated, we rather eftablifti them, whilft we make it part of infti-
tuted WorQiip. God was of old to be attended,in his fpeaking in and
% his Servants and Prophets, whom he inftituted and infpired,to whom
the Word of God came 10 communicate it to his People. They that in-
deed came in his Name were to be heeded and hearkned unto, and
^hat by tal
for the pattern of his Gofpel-Worfhip. 3dly. -z/.k^. he exprefly tells
us that the Law and the Prophets were but until j^'^^j and fince that
time the Kingdom of God> or Gofpel-Church-lhte (frequently fo cal-
led in Scripture ) is preached. But fuppofc Mr. T. had evinced (ox
fhould ever be able to do fo) that the words of Chrift did refpeft New-
Tcftament- Believers (any othevwife than hath already been intimated
by us) he had need do one thing more b;fore they will ftand him in any
Read, viz,, manifeft that they arc fpoken by Chriil with relation to
Worfliip; that therein Ncw-Teftament- Believers are to be regulated
by Mofes and the Prophets, ( for if they refped onely the Doarine
taught by the peculiar Types of that day, and the Truths dropped by
them touching Chrift the Meffiah, they make nothing at all to his pur-
pofe) which when he hath done,
Erit mihl magnm Apollo.
Nor doth 2 TeK i. ip. the other place cited by him, contribute the
leaft mite of affirtance to his dying caufe^ The Apoftle underftanding:
by Divine Pvevelation (as 'tis thought) that hemuft fhortly dye,z'.i4,.
As he was refolved whilft he lived not to ceafe to call upon them, and
fill them up (as v. 12, 13.) fo he was willing to leave this Epiftle with
them, to put them in remembrance of the great things he had taught
ahd communicated to them, v. 15^ which he tells them, -y.i^. were
mt cmningly devifed fables, fo artificially inteiwoven as though they
feemedto be true, they were moft falfe: ftore of which had been in
thofe dayes invented by Jews and Pocts^ Oh no ! had they been fo^he
could have had no comfort in the review of them now he was ^oinc cfi-
the ftage of the world, which he had, not having followed thele wlien
he made knov^^n unto them, the power and coming (or the powerful
eoming.:
'3-2 * A Vindication of tie Sober Teftimony]
coming, or coming in the power of our Lord Jefus Chiift ( manifefted
to be Co in the efficacy of his Decline, working Miracles^ his Rcfur-
redion from the dead ) they were, he tells them, cye-vvitneffcs of his
Majefty. The honour and glory whereof he proves by a double Argu-
ment ; I. The teftimony and witnefs the Father bare of Chrift, the
honour and glory put upon him when that Voice came from Heaven,
when he was on the Mount transfigured before them (viz. Peter^ James
tndjohfj^) 2dly, From the word of Prophecy: left thsyfliould think
the former Apparition was a fiction of his own, he acquaints them that
the Prophets have teftified of his coming and glory. Of which Word
of Prophecy he alTcrts? i. That 'tu of m private interfret^tion {i.e»
the holy men to whom it came, gave it forth as they received it from
God, without putting anyof their own gloffcs, meanings, private in-
tevpietations to it.) idly, That to this they do well to take heed^ ( ^
asexS? TTsta-n 'rrtoa-ixovrif^ to whvch taking heed ye do excellently, worthi-
ly, and as becometh Saints) a^ unto a light that fhimth in a dark, flace.
Yet, 3dly, with this limitation, as to the time of their fo doing, t««
is y.y.iiy^ Sk<:ivyct(n)j )i^ f)aa-ti)0^s od/xthM tv lu'i! Tisf-^icMi vf4.m^ unttl the day davcfty
and the day-jiar arife i» their hearts* Wnich if WC fhould interpret of
the day of theGofpel, and the more clear revelation of the admini-
ftrations thereof, which fome learned and judicious men do, as the
AfTembly in their Annotations on the place (and indeed as by [hadows
we are fometimes to underftand the Jewish adminilhation of affairs
under the old pa;dagogy j fo by day^ the time of the difperfion of thofc
Shadows, and the introduflion of the Gofpel-Church-ftatc, Cant, 2.^1 7,
£c 4. 6.) The whole of what Mr. T. would infer from this place would
not only be enervated, but a Sword ready furbifhed put into the hands
cf his Antagonift to put an end to his expiring caufe. Nor wil it at all
avail him to fay,that the Gofpel-adminiftration was already introduced
and brought in : for although that was afoot fome while before, yet
many Jcwilli Ceremonies were yet winked at, and pra(5tifed by the
believing Jews, of whom the charge was committed unto Peter yCal,
2. 7,8, p. to whom be writes thefe Epiftles, who were much in pra-
ftife of their old Ordinances (fome of them) till the time cf the ruine
and devaftation of theii Temple by TitmVesfafiaKy when fome think
2. -P-?f. 3. 7,9,10* of the burning and confuming of the then Heavens
and Earth ( viz.^ the JewiQi Pasdagogy and old Adminiftration of
affairs) had its accomplidiment, and the new Heavens or Gofpel-
Church-ftate was fully introduced. Though we need not aflert any
thing of this nature. The Apoftlc, as wasfaid, is treating not of the
Woifhipj
in Anfwer to Mt.Il. his Exceptions, 3 3
Worrhip> but Doarine of the McfTiah, in particular of his Glory, Po-
wer and Coming, which the Prophets he tells them had abundantly
bore wituefs to,and to their Teftimony it was their duty (is ouis) to at-
tend* That hence fuch a conclufion as this, is or can be logically iofer-
red • ^at therefore the Precepts and Dire<^ion$ of the Old-Tcftament
are to be heeded and learned in refpe.i. 10. That teach
other Dodrine> i TV'zw+itg. 2 John 10. Another Gofpel, Gali, 8,9*
An[w. I. Chrift's inftitution of Officers of his own for the admini-
ftration of the affairs of hi$ Houfc, had there been no cxpvefs intcrdi-
dion, had been intctdi(^ion fufficicnt to hear a Minif^ry not of his ap-
pointment. The Lord having caufed Fire to come down from Heaven,
and giving a charge that it (hould be kept alive continually upon his
Altar, was fuch an intcrdidion of offering Sacrifice with ftrange Fire,
that Naiab and Abihti not obfcrving it ( though no exprcfs command
igainft offering ftrange fire) die by the immediate hand of the Lotd>
as a punifhment for their tranfgrcfrion. But, idly, we rcade of other
prohibitions in the Scripture, though Mr. T. is not pleafed [ now ] to
take notice of them ; zsMat^ if. 14. which about twenty five years
ago he feems to fuppofe to be an injun<5lioD of Chrift not to hear the
Scribes and Pharifces (and indeed the word there ufed plainly imports
asmuch, w^f-re tfWTiif, which fignifics
to remove from, forfaken [9 as never to * A except he make God
the Preacher, and then he altars the ftate of the queftion : and after-
wards 'tis more than probable he preached to his Family, not they to
him. 2. Except the time o£ ignorance God winked at, when he fent
no Preachers to the Gentile world, butfuflfercd them to walk in their
own wayes. 3. He had need to qualific his Affcrtion 1 little better,
clfe it will not be found weight. I am apt to think that heating all
preachers (and an indefinite Propofition (as Mr.r^his is) is equipollent
to an univerfal, is neither part of moral, not inftituted Worftiip. The
Romans htdt their Flamins and Arch-FIamins, ( from whence the pat-
tern of Birtiops and Arch-Bifliops;) Baal had his Chemarims ; our fore-
fathers in Englani, the Drudes (who in their folemn a»5ts of Worfhip
were clad in a white-garment, you may call it a Surplice, from whence
'tis probable that rag had its original) all Preachers; yet the hearing o£
them no part (I hope) of moral VTorlhip. Yea, the Devil was once a
Preacher, and of the Gofpel too, till Chtift filenced him, L^j^tf 4. 41.
yet I very much queftion whether (hould he do fo again, i$*iisno^
impoflTiblC) our Animadverter would affett ic lawful to hear him. There
were alfo Preachers of the Circumcifion ; whom Paul thought it no part
of the WoilHp of God to hear ; the duty of Saints lying in the dired
contrary part by vcrtue of the Apoftolical Injunftion, PhiL^, 2» So
that 'tis evidently a miftake of Mr. T. to fay that hearing of Preachers
is a moral and perpetual Woifhip, common to all times and perfons*
Whcreasj 4. the very truth is, Though heating the Word of God,
whenever and however it (hall pleafc him to dilpenfe it, be a moral
and perpetual Worship ; yet hearing thefe 01 thofe Preachers appoint-
ed by him to difpcnfe it, is purely of Sovereign Inftitution. It being
free to the Lord to- have fent his Word alway by the hands of bis An-
oels (as fometiraes he did to his Children) as well as otherwife ; which
had he done, it had been fo fat from being our duty to attend upon
Men-Preachers, that it had been our fin to have heeded any other than
thefe Angelical ones. I muft defire the Animadverter by the way to
coiiea one paffage of his, it being a gtofs miftake, wherein he feems to
iniimatc:
in Anfwer to Mr, 1^. his Exceptions, 37
intltnate, t^^^ I^aksthe hearing the prefent Miniflers^fHch an inftitutei
IVorfhlp ofChrifiy Oi ii meerlypoficive ; and adds, that herein I feem to be
very inconjf derate; Which Iconfefj I (hould hz if I did fo. Mr. T.
knows I am To far from miking it fuch an Inftituccd Worftip of Cnrift,
that I fay 'tis no Woifliip of Cnrift at all, either moral or mliitutcd, to
heat them ; zud^ex po/(?,^,ptove,as well as I can, the contrary : which
that it is not fatisfa6lory to Mr. T. I cannot help. Some men will be
fatisficd with little except what hath the countenance of Authority on
its fide* Howevev I never faid that hearing the prefent Mlniflers is any
part if the iidtitutei mr[hlp ofChrifl ; which had I believed to be fo, I
had done vlrfy wickedly to have oppofed it. He adds, that JhoaU it h
grant einte that the tv hole of (jcf^sl-Inflitmions yuere to he devolved upon
the Scriptures of the Nev^-Tefiamenty yet woultfit be to the difadvanta^e of
my f elf and the refi of the Separatijisy who ufe many places of the Old-T'eBa"
ment aboat the Sabbath, Baptifnty Lord's Supper^ &Ci and I do fo in this
dijpute, Anfw. E^regie di^am, excellently faid indeed ! as if becaufc
we affirm, that whatever is to bepradifed in Inftituted Worihipin the
time of the Gofpcl, is to be wholly bottom'd, as to the Law and Pre-
cept inftituting it upon fome Commandment of Chiift in theNew-Te-
ftament, therefore vve aflert that no ufe may be made of the Scriptures
of the Old-Teftamcnt, treating thereabout by way of prophecy or other-
wife; which if a Confcquence this learned Animadverter will never
be able to make good. 'Tis true, many learned men do make ufe of
fome places of the Old-Teftament to prove the morality of one day in
feven, or the feventb part of time, not as I remember, except Pfa. 118.
24) which fome conceive, by way of prophecy, fpeaks of the Lord's ho-
fioaring the firft day) for the confiimalionof theobfervation ofthefir^
day ; which they conceive Chrift's refurredion on that day, the pra-
aice of the Primitive-Church meeting together for the folemn V/or-
(hip of God, I Cor.i(5.2. A^szo./, the appellation [the Lord's Da)]
which they judge is given to Uy&c isafufficient warrant for their
obfcrvation thereof in Gofpel-time?. They plead not for Baptifm or
the Lord's Supper upon any other bottom than Gofpel-Inftitu'tion, or
iht'it preceptionby Chrift in the Mew-Tdbment : Though 'lis true,
« touching the fabjedsof the one and theother, they judg they may by
way of analogy argue fomewhat fromOld-Teftament-Scriptures ; from
which apprehcnfion they fee nothing fo weighty in what is tendred by
Mr. T.(notwithftanding his brag and immodcft Affertion, pag.i8.Sed-.
14. thatftieha voay of arguing is irrational ; as if wifdoiTi relied vvirti
bim, »nd he had ihemealurc of it, and a man could not differ from hina.
bus
3S A F'mdication of the Sober Teflmotiyy
but he muft be a block or bruit) to influence their depirture. Thit bc-
caufe the granring the AlTciiion would be difadvantagious to the Au-
thor and the Sepauariftj, therefore it fhould be in Mr. 7. his opinion
an unreafonable pftulatttmytQ devolve the qucftion upon the Scriptures
of the New-Te(iament, I undcrftand not. He takes not a meafurc
(I prefume) of the reafonablencfs or unrcafonablenefs of requefts from
their advantagioufnefs or difadvantagicufnefs to fuch contemptible
creatures as we, and fhould he do fo he were much to blamc> as to in-
fer from hence ; therefore I fee no reafonablencfs in his Poftulatumf
which is introduced not as the natural iffue of any thi^ premifcd
which he knows it is not, but meetly for pomp and fhew.
Sea. 3.
7'he jnigments of the Antlents no fufficient fubftratum to bmU my fraEitce
upon in the fVorfhtp of God. The opytion of the Antients themfelves in
thuf matter. None but the Sprit of Godjfeaking i» the Scriptures can fa-
tufie the confclences of any dijfati^jied in matters relating to fVorJhip. Our
Faith not to he refohcd into the TeHrlmor^y of men : which is a principle
decry ed by the Antients and Protejiant Churches* The confciences of none
can be fatiified in what is written bj theAncients^before they are ajfured^
I . that what they read 04 ^ or" are told is theirs^ be indeed foj and Hot coun^
terfeited nor adulterated. 2. That in their fVritings they wtre^as the A-
pofiles and Prophets^ guided by an unerring Spirit. The true ufe of the
TeHlmony ef the Ancients. Congregational-Principles owned by them.
Of Councils and Schoolmen,
THc fourth Scftion is fronted with this, The judgement of the And'
cms not ufelef inthis Coyitreverjie^ as if the Author of the 5o^^r-
Tefilmony had alTertcd it tobefo; which Mr. T. knows he nowhere
doth : This indeed the words of the Author, not perplexing our felvef
nor the confciences of any vvith the judgments of men in generations
paftj wherein they cannot acq ^iefce faiily, intimate , i. That the
judgment of none of the children of men, though never fo famous in
their generation, fmcethe Apoftles fell alleep,is a fufficient Subftratum
to build my faith and praftice upon in the Worfliip of my God. In
which we have the concurrence of the Ancients themfelves. Bafil tels
us, that It isnectjfary and confonant to Reafon^ that every man learn that
which ii needful out of the Scriptures, both for the fulnef of Codhnej^j and
left they be Inured to humane traditions', Regul. centraSl.p^. p.p02. And
AuHln ( Epijl. 111. ad Paulln.) faith, If a matter be grounded on the clear
author It J'
in Anfwer to Mr, T. hi^ Exceptions, 3 p
aatbority of the holy Scrlfturesy it « to be believed withont all doftk ; butof
far other voltnejfts and tejlimomeiy upn rvhofe credit any thing mxy be urged,
unions to believe it^ it is larvfnlfor thee either to credit or noc to credit them;
according ai thou fh^lt perceive thent of weight to deferve or not to deferve
credit. Origin faith (Homll. i. in Hlerem.) We mafl of necejficy call the
Scriptures to witne^; for onrfenfes and interpretations vvlthom them are of
no credit. Famous is the faying of Cyril Biihop of fernfalem (Catcch.4.
p. 1 5".) We mtifi not deliver any things though never fo fm^zll, without the
holy Script Hres ; neither may we be led away with probabilities andfhews of
words ; neither yet believe me barely faying thefe things unto yoUy unlefsyoa
4ilfo believe the demonfiration thereof fi-om the Scriptures ; for the [ecurity
»f our faith arifeth from the demonfiration of the holy Scripture.
2dly. That not the fayiogj or judgment of the Ancient?, but the
clear Tcftimony of the Spirit of God fpeaking in the Scriptures, is fuffi-
cicnt and efficacious for the fatisfying pcrfons that arc diffatisfied in
anything relating to Faith or Worihip. Conne to a poor foul under
real fcruplcs of fpirit with rcfpcA to thefc> and tell hicn, this Father is
of this opinion and that Father of that, you do but oleum & operam per-
dere; vvhen you have laid all, he remains as he was, diflatisfted, and
fo will do, without evidence from Scripture. More than thefe two
rhingg the Animadvertcr cannot righteoufly infer from the expreifion he
difcants on. What faith he to thefe ? not a word more or Icf^. And I
am apt to believe of Mr. T. that he is a man of greater modefty than to
oppofe them. He tells us indeed that it miy be of good ufe to fatisfie
mens confciences, that no fuch feparation as now is from the prefent
Minifters of the Church o( England was allowed of by the fitft Fathers
and Writers (what truth there is in this faggeftion fhall by and by bs
manifefted) He will not fay furely of what good ufe he fuppofcth it to
be, that the faith of any is to be refolved into their tertimony, which
it mufi be if what they fay fatisfie the fcrupling confcience, /. e. I mall
believe what they fay is tmc, b^caufe they fay it, elfc that they fay it,,
will never tend to my fatisfat^ion ; which yet is an homage and duty
that we owe to none but the Lord. A principle decryed and abhorred
by the Ancient!^ thcmfelves. The flying of Au/lin {Epifi.4.%.) i^known^
uifidi dicit Domintts nan dicit D}:iatpUy aut Ro^atus aat Vtncentius^ aat
HUariHi^ aut Ambro^i^^ am AzgHsiinus., fed diclt Dominttt. And, Epi/l..
112. / Will not have youfollorv mine authority, to think, it necefjary that yoff
believe any thing therefore becaufe I fay it> And Generally abhorfed by
the Reformed Churches. The Helvetian Confeffhon fpeaks ro'jndly and
Mly to this matter ; Q^apropter mn patimur mts, &c» therefore wefuf^
fcr
40 * ^ Vindication of the Sober Tejlimony^
ftr not our [elves in controverfies of Religion^ or matters of Faith, to he im-
pofed upon with the hare opinions of the Fathers^ or determinations of Com-
c'lls ?}}uch lefs hy received cHJloms, or the multitude of ferfons thinking the
fame things y or hy prefcrlptlon of long time* We admit no other Judge of
Faith than God hlwfelfy pronomctng by the holy Scriptures what u true,
rehat falfe ; what is to he imhraced^ what riot. fVe reft tn the judgments of
none bnt Jiich m are (plrltualy taken from the Word of God. Harmon.Conf,
cap. 2. Ceitainly Jeremiah and the reft of the Prophets grievoufly
condemtied the Councils of the Piiefts inlVituted againft the Law of
God ; and diligently admoniQied that we hearken not to Fathers, or
go in their wayes, who walking in their own inventions decline from
t'he Law of God- Before the confciences of any can be fatisfied in the
judgment and pra^ice of the Fathers bi primitive Writers, two things
they had need be afTured of ; i. That what is hinded-out to them be
indeed their fayings and pra6liccs whofe they are pretended to be* Foi
luppofe my confcience ought to be fatisfied in what they fay or do, yet
I had need be afluied, that what I reade or hear of their fayings or
practices, be indeed theirs, and not the interpolations or importures o£
others, fraudulently mixed in their Writings and imputed to them;
which this Animad verter knows to be no eafic matter to affure any bo-
dy of : The moft of them have unqueftionably been cxpofed to corrup-
tion and adulteration by them into whofe hands they have fallen ; from
whom we have received them. Particular inftances whereof lie near at
hani to be prodaced,were it needful. Of Ignatlm his Epiftles fome talk
much ; that they are (at leaft) wondroufly corrupted, if not wholly
foiged'and counterfeit. Were eafie to demonftrate. To mention only
what you have, Eplft. 2. Fear and reverence your Bljhop, defied in his confcience,
and more mtferable than an Infidel. For what is a Bl\l;op but one endued with
theporverofChrlftyWho isGody whofe prefcript Oi man he follows^ and ob-
tains Authority moreftibllme than all Empire and Principality ? And what
is the Presbytery but an holy Council^ the Counfellors and Affeffors of the Bi-
fhcp. And Epilh 7. fpeakingof the fame perfons, Amongft all men I
■will not fay none are more excellent^ but none can he found fo like to God: &c,
ExprelTions that the fimplicity of that Age was wholly ignorant of, and
could not entertain without a blufli, nor think of but with great abhor-
rency of fpirit* The like may be faid of other of the Ancients. Am-
bnfe is made to fpeak after this rate, The Eplfcopal honour and dlgf^lty
can
in Anfrver to Mr . T. his Exceptims. 4 j
can he by no compnrlfoKS adxquated ; ifjoa compare it to the ftilgor ofKitivt^
a»(i diadem of Princes : this would U m much beneath it^ Oi if thotijhouldflr
compare Lead to the brightnefs of Gold. For thou mayefi fee the xccks cf
Kings and Princes bowed down to thek»fes of Prie^s, &c. Dc Di'^nitar.
Saceid. cap. 2. And cap. 3. There « nothing in this Pi^'orld to be found
more excellent than Priefis^ nothing more fubltme than Bifhops. Which
thofc who hive in the leafi enquired into the ftate of affairs in that
Age, will b^ conftraincd to acknowledge to be counterfeit and fpuiiouj.
The like may bemanifefted of the reft, and of thcfe in other points-
but that dcfign would require a Treatife by it felf, larger than we in-
tend this to be. But, 2ly, fuppofc things with refpsdi: to them, were
other wife than we have manifefted them to be ; and we could be afcer-
tained that thus they faid and vvrit,thus they did and pradifed ; we had
nced,erc our confciences could be fatisfied, be afccrtained of one thin''
move, vix,. That in their Writings they were, as the Prophets and A-
poftlcs, guided by an unerring Spirit, that in their pradice they were
to be our examples : for if I am not aflured that what they write is in-
falliWy true, I am not to believe it ; for furc it will not be pleaded
that there is any obligation lies upon me to imbrace what any man faith;
right or wrong, becaufe he faith it ; and yet except I believe it, con-
fcicncc will not, cannot be fatisfied in their indoftrination. Now this
is infallibly falfc Mr. T. knows, who writ retradations of a great deal
he had writ before ,• and had he lived longer, we might have feen more
Books of retraaacions. And this they themfelves acknowledg. So Aa.
pine ; I cannot deny but there are many things in my Works, oi there are in
the Writings of my Anceftors, which jufily and with good difcretion may he
blamed, D. p . Negat. And ^nfelme writes, that in their Books which
the Church reads^ many times are found things corrupt and heretical. Com-
ment, in 2 Cor. Let the wife Reader perufe their Books, and he (in\\
find this true that I fay. The fame may be faid of the praaice of the
Fathers. Of what they did wc have uncertain rumours; vvherein they
a^cd exorbitantly and not according to rule.they are not to be heeded.
So that not what the Fathers faid and did is fufficient to fatisfie my con-
Tciencc in any point,but only yihiifjehovah fpeaks in the Scripture. All
which I fay, not to detrid from the true worth of the Worthies of old,
but to manifeft the wcaknefs of Mr. T. his Adercion, That it Will cot
conduce much, or be of good ufe to fatisfie mens confciences, &c,
wherein truly it is of no ufe at all, not being appointed by the Lord
for fuch an end ; though I deny not but to other ends and purpofes it
aiay be ufeful, as for flopping the mouths of Adveilaries, who ^^loiv in
F ' the
42 ' 'AVindlcatimofthe SohsrTe^imony^
the Fathers and primirivc Wiiters ai if they were all for them; Tc^
remove prejudices out of the minds of people againft Truth upon ac-;
count of its feeming novelty, &c>- as Ifaid in S, T^ Nor (hall I at any
time refufe for the manifeftation of the vain brag of pcrfons, that they
have all Antiquity on their (idc, though I cannot admit of what they
fay into my Creed btcaufe they fay it ( the only foundation of Faith
being the infallible fpcakings of God in the Scriptures ) to debate
from thence the matters in controveide mthMr. T. And doubt not
but it may be made manifeftly to appear, that things arc far otherwifc
with refpeft to the Teftimony of the Fathers, than is by him intima-
ted ; and that the footftcpsnot of the Epifcopal Hierarchy, Common-
Piayer-Book-fervicCi Chutch o^ E>jgla»d,<^c, but of thevvayof the
Congregationd-Cburches, are to be found in and amongft them. And
fuch principles laid down by them that vvill abundantly juftific perfons
feparating from fuch a Mmirtry ai that of the Ch.of SngL Cyprian (/. t.
ttlfi. 4.) tells plainly, Mr let the people flmer themjelves^ at ifthej were,
fiee'from the contagion of fin when they commnnieMe rvith a wicked Prle^^
jed that they ought to feparate from them : wherefore the people that obey the.
Lam of God and fear him, onght to feparate themfelves from, a wicked jhep^
berd\avd'notbe prefent at the' facr'tfices of a facrilegieus Prlejl :. direftly
contrary to what this AnimadVerter affirms, SeB. 9, Evil perfons may h».
heard as true Minijlers, And Epift. <5. He may by no means have or ksef
aChurchi who is not ordalned.inthe Church (viz.) to which he is related Oi-
Mnijier ; which the Minifters 0^ England are not. 'Twete cafie to fill
many pages witS citations to this purpofe. Mr. T. fpeaks of Councils
and Schoolmen, and of fome that are not able to examine what is faid.
by them. As for the latter of thefe, it had been well for the Church o£^
God if they had never been : And the former, for the moft of them, it.
might have been well without. N'az.lenz.en^ who 'tis thought knew as
tnu^chof them as many other mcn,^^faith,_/f / w«/^ write the.trmh, I
am mnch' encHned to flee from ali the Councils of Bifhops j becaufe I never-
farif.a joyful and hapfy end of any Coftncil) nor was there by them any fnp-^
prejfion of evils ^bUt rather an addition and encreafe of them.; Gtcg.Naz.ep,.
ad Procul. And Lather affirms of the very bcft of them, lunderflani not
that the holy Spirit is in this Council i All thefe Articles are hay^ fltdblcy
wood^&c. And learned Bez^attllsuSi that fuch was the folly ^ ignorance^,
afnbitionywickednefs of many Bifhops in the befi times ^ that yoti mttldfuppofs:
the Devil to be Prefdtnt in their jffembltes, {Fr^fad N.Tefi.) Which if
fo^that which Mr. T. intends asa difparagement, will be found to be-
dean contrary. No mattei how4ittlewc hivc.to do with them : had.
they;
_ . in Anfiver to Mr. T, his Exceptions', 4j
they been ftudied Icfs thxn they are, and the Scriptures of the Lord
more, we had ('tis more than probable) been at a nearer agreement in
more controverfies than one at this day. Had the Lebian Rule of Re-
formation been laid afidc, and this Ezratical Golden one been folely
made ufe of in meafuring the Temple and themthat dwell therein. Re-
formation had been carried on with more celerity, and another Gofpel-
Chorch-ftate introduced than many arc aware of.
Sea. 4.
Some beams of Light may be commtimcated by a retrcf^eBlon Into the estate
of affairs in the time of the old Lav9 into the prefent enquiry y though the
rohole thereof be devolved in our prefent difquijition upon the Scriptures of
the New-Tejiament , Gen. 4. 2.6, conjidered/ The Reformation of the
[ then Church by fegregation and aggregation. The ijfue hereof was the
I continuation of their Church'fl Ate for about a thouf and years after. The
lawfulnefs of feparation from the Church of England, proved by Ainf-
Worth, Cotton, Bartlet, &c. No more pollution to be found awong
thofc) Gen. 4. 26. from whom the Saints thenfeparated^ than is to be
found upon the Church of England. The Animadvert er begs the qtieflion
infuppofing the Church «f England, to be a true^ and rightly confiituted
Church, The end of Separation of calling upon the Name of^od. Thofe
from whom they feparated. Gen. 4. invohat fenfe they called upon the
Name of God, Of the IS^oachieal Separation, Gen.hen at the TVorjhif of (joibegau to be
corrupted and prophanedy in the rvicked foflerity of Catfty then Adanty Sethy
and other of the Riyjiteom Seed^ began publickjyto exercije Religion^ and to
have their holy A4eetings andAJJembltesfortkt Service of (jod. And after-
wards more fully (from Mercerm.) Wherefore the true meaning iS; as
before exprefled, that now the Church of God being increafcd to t full
number, did make a publick Separation in their Worlhip, from the ge-
neration of the Wicked, and began apart, in a folemn manner, to wor-
fliipGod. But 2dly. Thatthey fepatated to callon theNameof the
Lord, is true ; The end of their Separation was to worfhip God, as a
people alone, from the wicked of the world, amongft whom they lived,
according to his own Appointments : nor can a Separation from any,
for any other ends be juftified. But this evidenceth that thofc they fc-
parated from, did not call on the Name of the Lord. Anf, Not at all.
They did call upon his Name. That there was no Worship amongft
them,wiU no-t be afferted : No Nation under the thickcft darknefs that
ever overfpred the World, but had fome worfliip of the Godds amongft
them. The wotfliip of Idols (properly fo called) was not yet invented
(as was faid frcm Jofephw, &c.) nor introduced : fo that 'tis evident
they did call upon the Name of the Lord; ij. they had not rcjeded the
true Godjnor all Woiftiip of him. This indeed follows, that they had
much degenerated in their WorOiip of him : This we prove of the
Churchpf £«g/^»(/, which would jurtifie our Separation from it, as it
did theirs from them, could no more be faid therein. As for what he
faith oi Noahs Separation, that it was from men that had fill'd the earth
with violence ; 'Tis true, they had done fo, and that with other things
mentioned, c/7g the ears
ofCorfjy and David'j eatit^g the Shew-hread, conjidered, Hoi,6.6, eX'
■plained, (jod's dif^enfing with his ovon Law no argument that the JewS
tnight add to or diminijh therefrom. Of the feven other dajes kspt by the
AJfembly, 2 Ch10n.30.23. Of Dxv'id'^ Ordinance i Sam -3 0.20^25",
MR.T. inhis<^rhScaion repeats what I affirmed pag.8. of^.T.
touching the people of the y.t he Judicial LtWf
or Civil Sin6^ions, as by Statutes orDccreej the Ordinances relating'
toWorftiip iieufuallyundeiftood ) which he particularly doth in the
following verfes. ( To what purpofe he is charged to fet them before
them is etfie to be conjedured, viz., that they might conform to them;
and not folely to do fo, had been a contempt anddifvaluation of the
wifdom and love of God who gave them forth); and chargeth them,
chap. 25. 13. that mth reffe^ unto them they he cireumjpeB:^ (i, e, that
they heed them, and them only.) Lev.iS. 4. ( thefecond place in-
ftanced) fpeaks after this wife, Te (hall do mj Jadgmettts^ (i,e.) mine on-
ly; lit him tboH fhalt ferve^ Deut.<^. 13. is expounded by Ch:\^yMat./^,
10. him onljfhalt thoftferve. Nor is there any thing more frequent in
the Hebrew language ( which is fliort and concife) as is known, than
fuch a manner of fpsech. ) The fame line of interpretation is to be
ftretchedover, L^z/.ip.37» & 20.22. &2;,i8. But howegregioufly
doth Mr. T. miftake in affirming, that not one of the Scripttresinfiancei
in^faithy that they were indifpenftbly bound^ mthout adding or detraUingy to
conform to thefe Statutes and Judgments^, when Vem.^. 2^ the 7 th Scrip-
ture inftanc*d in, exprefly afferis it ? Now therefore hearken, O Ifrael^
unto the Statutes and Judgments which I teach you , for to do them ; Tejhatt
not add unto the Word which I command you^ neither fhall je diminijh ought
from ity that you may keep the Commandments of the Lord you God which I
command you. Bound they were by this Scripture to conform to the
Statutes and Judgments, without addition to them [ thoufhalt not adde}
or detraction from them [neither (halt thou diminijh.'] And if bound they
Vfere indifpenfibly fo : For no man hath power (though the Papifis blaf-
phemoufly alfett their Pope hath ) todifpcnfe with the breach of Jeho-
vah's Law ; what he himfelf may do is not of our prefent difqaificion :
which is enough to evince the falfity of Mr. T. his AlTercion. Thif
one Scripture (if there had been no more) as it is a fufficient proof of
what we aflertedj fo it gives us light into the intendment of the Spirit
of the Lord in the reft inftanced, according to the meafure whereof
they are to be interpreted. Nor An it be otherwife, the holy and wife
God having given forth Laws for his People to walk by, they muft
needs be perfeft and compleat : To accule them of Imperfe(iHon,as to
the end for which they were given forth (and they vveie given forth for
a Law and Rule to vvalk by ) is to accufe and charge the infiniiiy holy
.and bhlfed God with Impcrfeftion. That a People having a peifed>
Law revealed to them to coruorm to, fliculd not be indifpenfibly bound
G fo
jQ ^u4Vindicationofthe SoberTefimony^ _
fo to do,*i$ the fiift-born of improbabilities and abfiirditie j. But Mr.T.
will prove the contrary : vvc attend his divSlatej. Hetelisus, i. Onr
Lord hath determined, the contrary. A^fvo. But this is nothing to the
purpofe : We fay not that they were fo bound to the obfcrvation of
thefe Laws, that God could not difpenfe with them (that he fometimes
did, and at laft, at the Icaft as to one part of them that eminently rela-
ted to inftituted Wor(hip, he hath wholly removed and taken out of
the way) but fo bound, that it was not lawful for any of the fons of men
to add to or detraft from them. The cafe of the Difciples plucking the
ears of Corn, and r>4w' I mil have mercy and not [acrlfice^ ye voonld not have con-
demned the guiltltji. Which is a citation out of the Pfophet, Hof, 6. ^,
The meaning fcetns to be, that in cafes of real neccflity fome Ceremo-
nial Inftitutions ftiould give place to Moral Duties. Now how weakly
doth Mt.T. argue ! God did in the Law in fome cafes difpenfc with
the violation of fome particular branches of the Ceremonial Lavv,there-
fore the People of the Jews were not indifpenfibly bound to the obfer-
vationofit. The queftion not being, what God did or could difpenfc
with, who was the abfolute and fupream Lawgiver, but what the duty
of the fons of men was, with refpcd to the Law, where there was no fuch
difpenfation ; and whether they were not bound without additions and
diminutions of their own, folely to conform to it ? So that Mr. T, his
Argument is no better than
ft/^ Baculo ad Anattlum ;
and altogether inconclufivc of what he would prove thereby.
But it may be what follows is more to his purpofe ? Let that be con-
fidered. He tells us, that at for additions to Laws Eccle/ia/iicaly the J[,
femHles ksefmg other (even dayes befides thofe frefcribed in the Law of the
PafSover^ 2. Chron*30.23. and to Civils^ the Ordinance ofDavid^ i Sam,
30. 20j25. P?ew that in both feme additions might be by the PrincCi^^c.
Anf^ 'Tis true indeed, the Aflembly in Hez,ekiah's time did over and
above the Ccven dayes prefcribed by the Law of the Pafsover, keep alfo
other feven dayes : and 'tis as true that this Animadv. openly prevari-
cates in the caufe he is pleading. For, i. This was an extraordinary
cafe, not to be reduced to ordinary praaice, nor of force to enervate a
general Rule. 2dly, This was no Inftitution or pofitive Law, nor was
there any Injunftion laid upon the People for the obfervation of thofe
Laws, but the People might if they would (or otherwife) obferve
them : and therefore cannot properly be faidtobe an addition to the
Laws Ecclefiafiical ; (it being no mote than any agreement of men a-
mongft themfelves to keep a da^ or dayes of Thankfgivingor Humi-
liv:ion) which had there been, it bad been abominable wickednefs.
Mr. T. himfelf faith, in his third part of the full review of the Difpute
Corc?-iTi\no/„fa>it.Baptifm^ Sec. That Jeroboams Sacrifice and keepng a
Feafi at another time than God appointed — is condemned 06 f^'i/lrworfhipi
T'SA: The Ordinance of D^z/ir^, 1 Sam. :^o. 20. is to as little par-
pofc inftanc'd in by this Animadvcrrer. i. It was a Military Ordi-
nance; made by Davidwh^n in a wandring ftatc driven out of the bor-
<3 2 ders
j-i ' A Vindication of tie Sober Te^imony]
dcvs of I[r*tL 2dly, Some refer the wordy, v. 2y. to Davli, as If he
lllcdgcd an old Law and Cuftom, is if it were written, It is both now
and hath been ever. SoyatAblm who tenders the words, that root ob-
[ervedfrom that day and abovcy i. c, from the beginning of the World
to that day. Some fay it was a Statute from >4ir4/>'?Exod. 22.29. Nutrb.8.L6jX7ji8. explained. The reafcn of
the People-s laying an of hands. Aaron and his fans Levites, In what
fenfc the Levites are called Prlefls : their office and work,,
I He feventh Seitionisby this Animadverter fronted mihth\s,T&e
_^ BleUion and Ordination of the Levites it no Rule for EleSiion *nd Or^
dlnatlonof Mini/iers now i which if with anintendment to infinuate in-
to the mind of the Reader, as the AfTertionof the Authorof the S.T.
he egregioufly abufeth both the one and the other j There being not
rhe leaftword, fylUble or tittle throughout the whole Treatife, that
gives him the leili ground, to fuimife any luch thing, but rather the con,
irary.
T'
in Anfwer to Mr, T. his Exceptions', f 3
triry. The Election and Ordination of Minifters is a pofitive laftitu-
tion of Chrift, to be managed according to Rules given forth by him in
the New-Tcftament* ThisI prove aswell as I can,chap.4»pag»33. So
that what Mr. T. clofcth this Sc6):ion with, that if it were true, that in
this aU of intfojing thtir hatids there were Ele^ion and Ordination, this
was not a fuccelfivc Ele6lion and Ordination, as is when one dies and
another is chofcn and ordained in his room, as oft as there is fuch a va-
cancy, when one Minifter dies and another comes in his ftead. For this
Elcdion and Ordination ( if it may be fo called _) was but once, and of
the whole company together ; and fo is no pattern for Ele,
which he knows I do not. But I fay, that p^rfons were appointed by
the Lord to be chofen by the Congregation, for the p-ubUck adminiftri-
tion of Ordinances and WoriHp. Thus were the Levt^s, Ei^od. 13. 2,
12,1.3. &22. 29. Num.^. 12. ^nfiv^ r do fo indeed': what hath
this Animadverter to fay againft it ? Tis true, be grants they were
given to God from among the ChiWren of Ifrael to do the fervice of the
Congregation-; but it is not true that they were appointed by the Lovd
to be chofen by the Cangreguion. Anfiv. Thii? muftbe a little fiuches
confidered. Upon the account of hisfpaiingthe fiili-born of the chil-
dren of //r^f/j when he Q^wth^ fiiftborn of the £j^^;j^»4«/, dor h the Lord
challenge tbe-n to be his, Exjd.i^, H^^P Th(few:re theCongregMu^i
of Ifrael to fet afiirt unto the Lord, v,.i2. Thou (che People -or Conr
tiiegr.ion
54 -^ Vtnduation of the Sober Teflimony]
gregaticm o^ Ifrael^v.'^.) fhaltfet apart unto the Lord, all that ope^eth the
matrix^ (or, as the Seventy renders it, thoufhalt pat tkem apart untc the
Lord.) This is ctll'd, chap. 22.29. the giving of the firfl-korn of their
fans to God, viz* to his woik and fervice. In the ftead of thefe he af-
terrvards appointeth f he Levitts, T^^w^, 8.1 ij. This Animadverter faith indeed, that
the reafon of the Uylng on of the hands of the children of Ifrael upon the L?-
viteJf 7va^ to Jtgmfje their obedient yeelding them in their /lead to God^ &c\
If he mean, that it was one reafon whereof, it's granted^ no ad of worl
ftiip which we perform, but we thereby fignifie our fubjeaion and obe-
dience to God. If the formal and only reafon^ his Aflertion is void of
truth ; it being, as was (hewed, to fet them apart to the office of Mini-
ftry or Service of God, that they hid their hands on them: nor is
there the leaft print inv, 19 (the only proof of thisAffertion) of any
fuch thing. ' lis true the choice {i.e. the firft-choice or appointment of
them to this Miniftry) was God's; the prcfentment of them to the Con-
gregation CMofes his aa ; the yeelding of them, or rather the (olemn
deputation of them to the work of the Lord, not the aa of the fitft-
bora meerly, but of the Congregation who were called together for this
putpofe. The Aflembly in their Annotations fpeak clearly hereunto,
Numb.^.io, The Children] meaning fome of the chief among thetii
in the name of the whole. Their hands] the impcfition of hands was
ufcdin Bencdiaions and Ordinations, not only in the Old-Teftamenc
ts Gen. 4.S. 17,20. Nftmb.27.2^. but in the New, Szt^Bs6.6. U
13.3. I 7tw. 4. 14. & 2 Tim.1.6. The Peoples putting their hands
upon the Levites, was partly to teftifie that they gave up all carnal and
vvorldly refpeas, and interefts in tbem, and bequeathed them wholly
to God, and that they did approve of their office in the behalf of them°-
felves, in whofeftead they flood in the performance of many of their
miniftrations. But Mr. T* hath found out a grievous miftake, which
he again takes notice of Se^. 2, which if true, enervates all that we
have affeited ; and that is, that ^efervere not Priefls^ they rvere dijli-dl
fromthe LeviteSyv'iz^ Aaronand h^s fans, who were called of God, Heb.5'.4„
rvithom the Peoples laying on of hands. But i. Aaron and his Tons were
Xfft/;r. that all the People approved
the eleUion 0/ Aaron to the Priest hood.rvhich God had made. And /.4.C.2.
introduceth CMofes fpeaking to the People upon the occafion oiKorah's
RebdUon,thus, JIthough by the loJS of that honour (vtz^.oitht'P ntii'
hood) vfhichhe C Aaron; hath received from yottr own eWton, And'tu
most certain that a long time after Zado\ was anointed to the office of High-
PrieB by the People, i Chron. 29. 22. Bf*t the Levltes were not Priefts,
Anfw. I. That they were not fuch Pricfts is Aaron and his fons, is
granted;' Piicfts to offer Sacrifice or burn Incenfc they were not : nor
do I any where affert them fo to be. Piiefts and Levitef are fome-
timcs in Scripture diftinguil^ied 1 alfo grant: but then Pxiefts irc
taken for the Sacrificing-Priefts, viz.. Aaron and hisfons, tov\hofe af-
fiftince in their oiiniftry and fervicc they were appointed by the Lord.
Yet 2dly, That the word Priefis is of various acccptions in the Scrip-
ture Mr. r. cannot deny. i. The People of Ifrael (all of them) arc
called a Kingdom of Piielis, Exod.19.^. ^dly, Peifons of note,emi-
rcocy, power and authority, G^». 41- 4^- Exod.2.16. pafsundcrthe
fa[r.e denominition. 3dly. The firftborn of the male.childicn,£^tf,
& 12.24. 3dly. To blefs in his Name, Deut. 10. S, 4thfy. The
Judgment of things facrcd appertained to them, as touching Leprofic,
Pf«f.24.8, 2C^ro«.i9.8,io,ii. works in which the Worfhip of God
wis as eminently as Sacrifice, drc upon the account of their defigna^
H lion.
J. g A f indication of the Sober Te^imony,
tion wh-veunto they may be called Prltflsy ind are fo in the Scrip-
tare. Yet 3dly. I no where ufc the name Prtefisy to denote the Le^
vltes only (in diftinc^ion from Aaron and his Tons) but make ufe of that
term, to denote the Officers or MiniftctJ amongft the Jews^ dcfigned
and feparated for the Worfhip of God, and the management of holy
things for and to thcm> whether Pricftj or Levites ; who being fo cal-
led by the Spirit of the Lord, I thought I might warrantably life that
appellation without diftafting any one ; and as yet fee no juft ground
for the change of my thoughts in that aiattcr.
Sea. 7.
Ptrfonsin'ueHd into the office of Priefthoody not left to the liberty of their
cwn willsy or the vpills of my : the whole of their fV&rpjip^rvith ref^eB to
the mutter and mmntr thereof^ of divine In/iltatlon, Of the CAndlejllck,
made by Mofes, The matter of It. His obllgat'ion to the pattern In making
it. fVhat ittypedom. The ground of the accept mce of fVorfhlp. Several
places of Scripture revlfed and conjidered*
THat pcrfonj invefted into the office of Priefthood were not left to
the liberty of their own wills, or the wills of any of the fon$ 6f
menj that the whole of their Wordiip, with refpeft to the matter
and manner thereof? was purely of divine Inftitution, is a third
AlTcrtion of mine touching the ftate of things under the old Law, which
Mr. T. tikes notice of SeB. 8. which he grants to be thus far true j
that what was of the Inflltntion of the Lord, both as to matter and manner^
they were not in their office left to their own willsy or the wiHs of any others ;
and fo much he faith the Scriptures produced prove*.
Sed dabltur Ignid tamen et/i ab Inlmlcus pet am.
We will not thank him for his grant, and doubt not but to manifefi
fomewhat more, viz,. That nothing was to be intermixed with what the
Lord had inftituted, nothing of man to be fuper-addcd thereunto, whe-
ther you refped the matter or manner of the Worfliip. And this the
Scriptures inrtanced do prove. Exod. 25". 9, 40. According to all that 1-
jhew thee ^ after the pattern of the Tabernacle^ and the pattern of all the In^
jlruments thereof^ even fo [hall ye makj ft And look^that ye make them
After their pattern which wa^Jhewed thee In the Momt. And thi? Di.fVlHe^
upon the place plainly alTirts, It is hence gathered (faith he) the form of
the Tabernacle is not left to the will of man^ no not to the judgment of Mofes;
to teach y^ that (jod will not be ferved with wllLworjhip, according to the
devices and Inventions of menj but 06 h< hlmfelfhath prefcribed. Prelarg.
Pifcato.
in Anfvoer to Mr . T. his Exceptions, jo
Pifcar. So our blefled Saviour alledgeth in the Gofpcl out of the Pro-
phet. Mark^ 7. 7- A'^w. 8.4. hccording to the fatter k Yfhich the Lord had,
Jherved Moftj, [0 he made the Candleftick, The Candlcftick was a figure
of the Church., faid to be but one here, becaufe the Church at this°day
was National (as alfo^ec^. 4. i.) But^^f. i. 20. we reade of feven
Candlcfticks, which are cxprefly (aid to he the feven Churches of Mhy
i. e. they fignified the feven Churches of Afia ; they were rcprcfented
by the feven Candjcfticks faid here, and there to be made of Gold, bea-
ten Gold; to point foith the matter conftituting them to be vifiblc
Saints, and to be made according to the pattern ( of which Exod. 25-,
31.) to type forth that no other ground or form of Doarinc, or of the
Church, if to be brought in, than that which is fliewcd of God, 2 Tim.
1.13. I r/w.i. 3,^4. &3.i5r. Mat A^,2.o. To this Pattern ;i/o/«
was fo ftiiaiy bound, that it was utterly unlawful for him to have ad-
ded the leall of his own invention ; which to have done had been not
only great unfaithfuincfs in him, but an impeachment of thcWiidom
of God, and his Love to his People. Heb. 8. j-. ^ho ferve unto the ex^
amfle andfhadow of heavenly things ^ oi Mofes rva4 admomjhed of God when
he wot about to mak« tht Tabernacle : For fee (faith he) that thou make all
things according to the pattern /hewed to thee in the Mount ; /, e. To the
type and example fet before him to imitate, to which he was not to
add the lealtpin of hisown, i CAr.28.11. (The pattern of the Porch,
i,e. of the Temple (faith Vatahlm) which David received either by re-
velation, or by the hand of the Prophet, i Chr.^S. iz^ip^ Exod.^. 27.
^S9- 1,^,7,21,2(^,3 1;43. (other places inftanced in the 5. r. preach
forth the fame thing ) Thefe were types of the heavenly Ordinances in
the Church of Chrift, Heb. 8. y. And type out that nothing of min if
to be fupcraddcd thereto, but all things to be done according to. Di-
vine Commandment.) To the fame thing doth the Spirit of the Lord
bcarwitnefs, £A;tf
which ftands with a two-edged Sword in its hand to defend the Truth
oppofed by this Aniaiadverter. No lefs than ten times, viz.. v. 4, y, p,
13,17,21, 2p, 34, 35',3ided Mofes ; but here, becaufe they added unto the Command-
** mentjhe faith not fo, for they did not as the Lord had commanded ;
*' and added moreover unto them ftrange Fire which he had not com-
*' manded them, Lev.io.i. And Jo/fp^»rf b.^.c.p.faith thus, Na^
*^ dah md j4blht4 bringing Sacrifices unto the Altar, not fuch as were
«' appointed by Mofesy but of that fort they were accuftomed to offer^
f< aforetimcs, were burned by the violent flame that iffued from the
** Altar, that at length they died. The other place he takes notice of
is Ifa.2p. 1 3 . which be refers to be difcufl'ed to the firft chapter : All
the other places (as was faid) are pafled over in filence : which man-
net of dealing is a greit abufe both to the Truth and Reader. To the
Truth, by waving the confideration of what is offered as tht [ubFtrAtHm
upon which it is built : To the Reader,by pretending to anfwer to what
isaffetted by his Antagonift, tor the confirmation of Truth, without
advancing one ftep forward towards its confutation. But perhaps he
means not, that where God hath given direction about any part of
Wotfliip it's lawful to add any thing thereunto, but onely wherein
God ha\h not fpoken and determined as touching the management of
iiis Woifliip, there the will of fome of the children of men takes place,
and
in Anfwer to Mr. T. bis Exceptions, 6 1
tnd they may determine. But if fo. i. This is a moft pitiful Peritlo
principii or begging the thing in queftion, viz^ That God hath not de-
termined the whole of his Worihip and Service, but hath left fomc-
what to the wills of men relating to Worlliip, as fuch,to be determined
by them, which is the -n x^tio.uuii^ or the thing inqueftion, and will
never be granted him upon thofe teroiJ. adiy. Contrary to that fun-
damental principle placed in the nature of man, and implyed an i fairly
intimated ia each Scripture before inftanccd in, that nothinc^in his
Worlhip and Service is acceptable to him but what is of his own pte-
fcription. jdly. DiiEHetrically oppoiite to D^;
relating
%
in Anfwer to Mr, T. bis Exceptions, 63
fcliting to it as fuch, were then and now expieny forbidden j (whileft
he fuppofeth the contrary he doth but beg the Ql'v^ftion ) by the fecond
Commandmsnt, and clfevvherc, as hath been fhe.vcd. The learned Dr.
Willct\n his Coment.on the 2d. Com. tells us^Thac the true H^orjhip ofGodj
vohlch according to his natHre^mHJl hfpiritual^u commafided in this ^d.Prc
cept^aud that he rvill be worjhipped according to his mil revealed in his f-Ford;
towhichitis not lavcfttltoaddto^ or takf any thing therefrom, as the Lord
faid to Mofes, Exod* 2^,9, He further acquaints us, That all other
kinds of fuperJiitloHs fVorfhipy devifed by muK:, which the ApojlU calUth
iS-sXeS-jtiFKHx^mll-rvorfhipy Col. 2. 2 j. {forwemnfi ( fiith he ) be con-
tented jvith Rites and Ceremonies pre f crib ed of God himfelf ) and the appli-
cation of things of themfelves indifferent j fo Hnto the Service of God^ oito
make ibem a necejfary part thereof^ is condemned by tht6 Precept; 2dly. Mr.
T. affcrts, That the Ceremonies of the Chttrch t?f England, are confejfed out
of the Cafe of fVorfhip, in themfelves to be things indifferent. J4nfw. i.
And were there no Ceremonies amongft the fews^ confeflcd out of the
cafe of Worfhiptobe fo? This Animadverter knows the contrary.
2. By what authority doth any of the children of men make that necei-
faryincafeof Wor{hip,thatijconfe{redly not foout of it ; i.e. make
it a part of Worship ; for if neceffary in cafe of Worlliip, 'tis evident-
ly made a part thcreof,without which it cannot acccptablly be p^irform-
cd. I confcfs ( Dr. foen. in Comitiis Oxon. t/^n. i<5o j.) one of theii
cwn Poets fings.
In Domini cnltu, Jiqaid medium ejfe vldetftr
QuodpopuU dubioy/iat^ cadit arbitrio.
Hoc Sacro-fanUa parens Ecclefii* ji modo fanxit,
Inqnt facris cultum hnKC Ji velit ejfe ratunr,
Non erit hie cuhui medius, coge:ur ai illnm
Quifqne necejfarnuy hie qttocjHe cnlttis erit 4.
Wherein he telsus, Thn if any thing be indifferent in the Wor(hlprof
God, and Holy- Mother-Church fhall ejiablifh ayjd confirm it, it ceafeth to be
indifferent, and becomes neceffary iVor^ip, which every one is to be cofnpelled
to. In which he fpeaks, fhall I'tay, like a true Son of the Church of
England, or of Rome ? But he forgers to tell us upon what Scripture he
bottoms thefe two Affertions. Firfi, Tnat there is any thing relating
to the Worfhip of God, as fuch, of an indifferent nature. Secondly,
That 'tis in the power of the Church to make that which is left indif-
ferent by the Lord, a neceffary VYorAiip ; nor can he produce any, but
the unwritten Word or Law comnaunicated to the Pope or his Con-
clavcj,
^4 ^ vindication of the Sober Teflimony,
cUve, I know not when, and kept I know not where ; which will prove
no better ( at b^ft ) than the proof the '^ews bring for their Fopperies,
fincc their Apoftacy and fcattcring abroad, oat of their Talmndical
VViiters ; or the 7"«r)^j from their y^Ariir<«», i.e. frivolous and ridicu-
lous. This is generally decried and exploded by Proteftant Writers,
Peter MArt)r ( /» Epifi. ad Hoop. Epifcop. Chcefl. ) affirms of the Eng^
///^Ceremonies, That, Quoad aliterfacere non Uceat^ i.e. in their im-
pofition, as neceffary parts of Woi{liip,thcy were grievous and burdcn-
lom. Certain Princes of (^ermany^ to pleafe Charles the Emperor, Im-
pofed the Surplice, and other Rites, upon thcMinifters of their fcve-
ral Territories, and are all condemned ( SuppUcat. Teolog. German. A,
I yj^ I.) for thi$> That they caufed tofigh the Spirit of God, and the hearts
of good men, ' It is Blafphcmy to think that any outward thing may be
* made a Sign in the Church of any thing that is ipiritual (as the Ctofs
' in Baptifm is} unlefs it be exprefly ordained in the Word, and Com-
* manded by God himfelf to be ufed to that end, faith Lambert, Vandiu
( Cont. Bellar. de Cult. SanB. Lib. 3. Cap. 7.) * Contrary whereto is the
* Dofttineof none of the Reformed Churches, befides the Church of
' England^ but of the Church of Rome ; the Bafis upon which her pom-
* pous Wovfhip is built, which being removed would fall to the ground,
*.aad periHi with its own weighs YcZybwt Third! j, The Ceremonies
of. the Church of England are for Decency and Order. To which I fliall
onely fay what one faid of the like fpcech of the Monks of 5«r//^4/r. 9. 10. Jer,
16. iL, 12. andi9.4,$. and I doubt not but he will fay, that they
aie not grofly abufed (as Mr. T. fpsaks) when applied ( though we
did not do fo) to the impofuion 01 ufe of.the Ceremonies in the Church
o£
in Anfwer to Mr. T. his Exceptions. s for,
Oftr haring Tejlimony againji thefe hath no tendency to the infringment
of the Peace of the Nation, The way of ridged Conformity no Bafis fnf^
ficient to fupport the lotions Peace, The faying of Cyii\, Thennjufi
Accnf ations of Mr, T, againji Hi
WHat I remark in the fifth place touching the People of the Jews^
that notwithftanding their Apoftafie they remained confident
that they were the People of God> and petfecutcd, and put to death the
Prophets and Servants of the Lord, that bore their Teftimony againft
their Innovations, Mr. T. grants to be true, SeB, lo. But intimates
I, That the People and Teachers of England are not guilty of fuck Innova*
tioni,aithe Prophets, Chriji and his Apojlles charged upon the fervs : Whe-
ther they are or no, let the judicious Reader judge from what is offer-
ed in the foregoing Section. To which we fhall only add, that Mai. i.
<5, 7, may molt truly be fpokcn of them. They call God indeed Father^
and Mafier, but they fear and reverence others as fuch, whcfe Canons
and Conftitutions they arebounc^oyeeld Canonical obedience unto.
They defpifc hisName by offering polluted bread upon his Altar j t fer-
vice not commanded by him, that hath been polluted, defiled by Anti-
chrift. Not can they be cleared from that imputation of Chrift, {Jlfat,
ij.p. Teaching for Do5irines the Commandments of men. Which that
theydo, Mr T, himfelf in his Fermemum Pharifeeorum, yetfpsakerh,
and eveiy one knows. So tharby this Animadverters confeflion we do
f^ftll to bear our Teftimony againft them. 2diy, That our witnefTiflg
I 2 agaialt
^g A Vindication of the SoberTe^imonyl
asralnfl them tenis to infringe the fHblick^PeAce, Anfrv. This WiS in IC-
cufation managed in every day againft the witnelfiS of Chrift. The
Prophets infdnged the Peace, fodidChtift, the Apoftles, d'^:. It was
thou'^ht therefore not to be for the fafety of the Nations to fufFa them
to live. And Mr* T. doth what he can ( by fuch wicked tnd unchri-
ftian intitnationf as ihefc ) to irritate the prefent Rulers to proceed t-
gainft us in like manner : Which ( through the grace of the Lord ) is
a fmall matter to us, who would not account our lives dear to our
felves, Co we may Rnidi our work and teftimony for Chrift- with faith-
fulncfs and joy. What peace thefc cxprelTions will in the review of
them admlnifter to Mr. T. I know not ^ I am fure they will be bitter-
nefs in the latter end. For our parts,whcrc is the perfon that can teftifie
ou^^ht againft us, as the difturbers of the peace of the Nation ? Arc
there any in it, that do more covet and de(ire the introducing what may
tnd will moft affuredly be a Bafis to fuppott its continual peace and
welfare ? The way of rigid Conformity will never do it, as fomc hun-
dreds of years experience minifeft. To this Animadverter I (hall only
further fay, as Cyril of old ( Cfril Epiji. ad Cleric. Conflan. in Concil,
Mphef.p, 72.^ iivyoftiv 7KVHfK9t}V ; i^itft,2i xXt^Ti f(gt»iti MfTmlefitt^ tut of^Xtyn^
M jri«f opSn. Are vee Enemies to Peace ? In no mjty rve rather wittpuU it to
tu with violence^ fo that the true Faith withal may be confejfed. If our Te-
ftimony do not evemually re6tify any thing, we cannot help it, 'tis no
other than what thefcrvants of God ( yea Chrift himfelf, his »«t' tlcx,^
fervant ) met with. The people would go on in tbeir fupcrftitious pra-
aicesjfay what they could in the Name of the Lord unto them; yet were
they bound to teftify againft them. This is our comfort, that onr judge,
mentis with the: Lord y and our reward rvith our God, That this Animad-
verter accufeth us of being guilty of Calumny, and our praftice as pro-
ceeding not from holy zeal but evil paflionjWc are not much concerned.
'Tis a fmall matter to be judged of mans day ; we muft (hortly ftand
before an higher Tribunal, whither we can chcarfuljy appeal ; and
heartily wi(h that Mr. T. had manifcfted leCs pafTion, and more holy
2cal in this Treatife than I am able to difcern ; then would he have had
g.reatci caufe of tejoycing in the day of Chrift.
Szdc* 10.
Ofthefalfe Prophets that were among/i the Jews, To whom the Miniflers
0/ En gl and bear a great refemblancejmanifefted in 6 particulars, Ifa . 5) .
i^%^anl2.%,7^%. Jcr, 23.11. Z:ph. 5.4. Hof.9>8. 2 Pet* 2.1.
txplain^
inAnJjverto'Mr,'X,hisExuji9nsl ^6
exptalnei. TopropheJiellestnths'^MeofiheLordj what, Ecclejiajfi-^
cat Canons agahfi thepraSllce of the frefent Mimfiers. To do vioUnce
to the Law : to be a [nare of aforvler : What they import. -iev^o^^Amx^
Xatj or falfe Teachers yVfiho they are. Vamnable Herefies whaty andwhy
fo called. Denying the Lord that boHght them, what it imperts. The Plea
of the Animadverterfor the Church and Minifiers of England^ not much
better than what was, or might have been made ufe of by Jeroboam him-,
felf.
WHat I mention in the <^th place touching the falfe Prophets that
were amongft them of Old,ȴho ran before they were fenr, and
prophclicd fmooth things to them in the name of the Lord, according
to the defire of the heart of them and their Rulers, upon the account
whereof they were in great efteem amongft them , Mr. T* grants.
But intionaics. i. That the Minifiers of England are not fptch at the textr
produced defcribey and therefore thofe that accufe themj oi if they werefftchy
are falfe acctifers,
Anfrv. But '•— Nef&vi magne Sacerdos.
Have a little patience, and we doubt not but to manifcft, thttthey
bear a very great refemblancc and likcnefs ro them.
ift. *Didthey ran before they were fent, Jzt, 14. 14, 21. and 2^, 2r,
( >. e. pretend to come and tdi in the Name of the Lord, when he ne-
ver commanded them, nor fpakc to them ? ) Do not the Minifteis of
England the fame ? This we afterward manifeft.
2dly> 1)id they Prophefie lies in the Name of the Lord, Ifa. 9.1 5 .Lief,
what are they ? They are called, Falfe ViJlonSy and Divinations^ a thing
of nought J and the deceit of their hearts y which G&d never commanded^ nei~
ther ever entred it into his heart to do foj Jer* 14. 141^ Dreams, Jer. 23.
27, Ezek 13. 2. <««^22.28. (i.e. the Inventions and Traditions of
men, which they mingled with the Word of the Lord.) That of this
the Minifteri of England are guilty, we prove Chap. 4, and y, of
S. T.
3dly. Were the]^ {(omc of them ) (vcallowed np offVine, erring through'
firongdrink, (i.e^. a parcel ofBrunken Sots) Ifa, 2S. 7,^. and <) 6. 12,
And hath Mt.T. the forehead to deny this of theprefent Minifiers of
the Church of England ? I fpeak it without pafTton or prejudice againll'
their perfons ; 1 believe, (and the the whole Nation will (I judge)
attcft the truth thereof ) that there are not fuch t parcel of drunkards:
and debaucht pcrCons to be found amongft any one profcffion of men im ;
Bnglandy as amongft this Tribe.
4.'^hly.,.
70' A V'mh I cation of the Sober Teftimonyf
4lh1yj J^ere they given to Covttoufnef? Jer. 6. 13^ (/. e, the <»ene-
rality of them were to) & 8. 10. Ifi.^6. n. And is it not the ^enc-
lal complaint of the people of the Nation, who have eyes to fee and
u D del ftan dings to judge of perfons and thing?, as well as this Animad-
vei'ter, that the prefect MiniHers of Englmi arc fo. Fiom whom (were
they Brethren) it is therefore our duty to feparate by Apoftolical Pre-
cept, I C^r. 5-. 1 1. Theii greedy gaping after preferment and greater
places of emolument - — heaping one Steeple upon another ( could no
more be faid) abundantly evince the truth hereof. Which is not only
contrary to Chilli's Canons (to which many have too little regard) buf
10 Canons Ecclcfiaftical in former daycs, which intcrdi<^ fuch pia(ai-
ces, upori penalty of being deprived of their Office and Benefice Lib,
CoKcil.Efifl. Leo.Pa]}.^^. & Decret.caufa ; 7. Qu.i,
jchly. IVeretheyfrofhane? did the Lord find their vfickednefs in his
Uoufe ? Jer. 2.^. II. (arc prophancj i. e. have liitle 01 no icfpe(^ to my
Inilitutions ; their tvickfidne^ have I fopind in mjHMfey i. e» my very
Temple is full of their Supetftitions and Idolatries; fo our Annotators.
Did they do violence to the Larv ? Zeph. 3.4, i. c. corrupt it with their
glofles> forced interpretationSi conftru6tions,fuch as God never put in-
to it ; they fet by the Law, and fetup their own inventions, wills,
traditions, by which the Law wat made void.) And can the piefcnt
Minifters be acquitted from a copartncrfhip with them herein ? wc
prove the contrary, chap. 4^ & 5. of S.T,
dthly. fVere they as afnmre of a Fowler in all his rvayesy and hatred in.
or againfi the Houfe of the Lord f Hof.p.8. (»./. they watched the God-
ly in Ephraimt or amongft the ten Tribes, who duift not fti ike in with
Jfr(?^(?<«w's Abominations, but went up though byftealth andfecietly
(fome of them) to the Houfe of God which was at JerufaUm ; and pri-
vily) as the fnare of a Fowler that is laid fccret, not in the fight of the
filly Bird) accufed and molefted thetn,being full of hatred againft them,
or the Worship that was managed and carried-on at Jerufalenti whither
they went' The very fame thing is pra6tifed by the prefent Minifterj
againft fuch as dare not comply with them in their eftablifhed inventi-
ons : which is fo generally known, and by feme felt at this day, that it
cannot be denyed ; Who if they do not (fome of them) openly, yet fe-
cretly labour to enfnare, moleft and trouble, by caufing to be prcfcnted
into the Bifhops Courts, &c. peifons of fuch a complexion. What the
frame of their fpitits is with refpcd to the Worfliip which is of the ap-
pointment of Chrift, and will be fousd at the laft to be fo ; their rail-
ing (not being able to do more) and inaiUng againft it in their preach-
ing,
in Anfvoer to Mr, T. bit Exceptions, 7 1
t!jg,(^<^. together with their prayers ind endeavours for it J extirpation,'
fumcicntly evince.
7 thly. Did they prepare JVar againFi fuch m pm not into their mottths f
Mic.^,^1. Hid they no Vifion^ were they dar}^^ bLlnd^ vDithont An anfwer of
Cod ? ver»<$,7. And doth^Mr. T, think that he will ever pcrfwade the
cnlightned people of God in England that thcfc things are not true of
the prefent Minifters of England f Hath he alone been fuch a ftranger
in our Ifrael, a$ not to kno.v that they are legible, and vilible upon ths
Clergy thereof ? Andif he athoufandtimcsover call us Calumniators
and falfe Accufers, for onr aftiKing them to them : VAfdom mil be JH/iifid
of her Children whether he will or no. The good People of the Nation
(yea thofe that are but fobcramongft them(elvcs) will acquit us thu
we fpeak nothing but truth of and touching them in this matter j kno.v-
ing full well that thefc things are indeed fo*
But Mr* T. add$> adiy, They do not hring-in damnable HerefieSy denying
the Lord that bought them^ 2 Pet. 2.1.
A»[rv, 1. Nor did I in 5. T. charge them with fo doing : 'Tis true,
Icite 2P/?,*rhey are called ^ivh)'^is'uTKi>.n^\yK\c\\ im-
ports either that they, i. falfiy arrogated to thsmfelves the title of
T«?4c:W/, when really and indeed they are not fo ; or 2d!y, that they
taught fdfe things for true^ thus foT.e carry it. But 3dly, the corrupt
and abominable innovations of Aniichrift arc in 2 Thejf.z. 1 1. caikd
•^evj{<^^alie; with allufion hereunto thefe Do6lors or Teachers are
here called 4»='4»*M*<^*«^'0 or teachers of a Ue^ viz. the great Anri-
chiiflian
72 ^ Vindication of the Sober Teflimonyy
■ chriftiaa Lie. Hence though there were many falfe Teachers it that
day (as is known) the Apoftle faith not in the prefent tenfe, there are^
but in the future, there jhall hey viz. when AntichriB (according to
?aul, whofcEpirtles Tff^J'convcrfed with, 2 Prf.3. ij.) fhonUbe re-
veaUd. In refped of each of which the title is applicable to the prefent
Minitkrs. i. They affume the title of Teachers falfly, (as is proved,
chap. 3. of S. r.) 2dly. They teach falfe things, as we demonftratc,
ch. 5. & lo. of 5. T. 3dly. That they are teachers of a great part of
the Lieof Antichtift; their Difciplinc, Worfhip and Dodrinc there-
about, bein^ for the moft part hammered at hisforge,cannot be denied.
Secondly y Of them it is faid, -TmfsitmUirh a^fis-ta avi)^»Mi^ that they {hall
bring In Herefes of defirnBion, The Word 9m^M(r«|K(n» fignifies to bring in
beJideSj'uQ. befidcs mens expeftations, or befides the Truth taught by
Godly Teachers, by themfelves in part alfo to countenance their Er-
jors, fo the Aflembly ; They (ball do it frthe Truths and Inftitutionsof Cfarifl-,
b:ing alien and contrary to what is of his prefciiption> and are fup-
"ported by force and violence againfl them that do oppofe- them. For
which at the laft fwift de(truaion is brought upon tbemfelvss.^ Upon
which account Antichtifl (as is thought) is called ATD^Je^, Rev's>, 11.
i.e. aDeJiroyery and v^'f efsruxeieny 2 rhe{r.2. 3. the fon of defiru^iiofiyOt
perdition. That the Minifters and Church of England do thus, is too e-
vident to admit of a denial* They aflfume to themfelves the name of
the Church, ciy out again(t all others that feparate from them as Here-
ticks and Schifmaticks; preach fome truth, with which they fuly mix
their Errours ; that lay wa(te the In(titutions of Chri(t, and perfecute
all thefe, impr'ifon, wafte, ruine, dcftroy them ( or at the lea(t attempt
it to the utmoft of their power) that Ihnd up againft their Innovations,
and Church-deRroying Doaiincs. The greate(t difficulty may fcem to
be in thofc wordj that are fpoken of them. Thirdly, That they (haU de^
ny the Lord thM bought them ; the words are, •"> «y«f«cwyg! kvT^i LurTn-m*
Kfrs^>t, They denied not that he bought them (if it be mean t of Chrift)
but denied him, as /^r»ow, or Lordy cart off ( in part at leaft) his Au-
thority as fole King and Lord of his Church. And this too, not openly
and in words, which is again(t the exprefs letter of the Text, theyfhall
privily orjllly bring it in, but in pradicc doing that which doth invelop
or wrap up in it a denial of the Defpotical or Kingly Office and Autho-
lity
in Anfiver to Mr, T. his Exceptions, y ^
rity of Chrift. And this faith Grotlm the word fignifies ; Be tali defer-
tioKe qua Mon verhy fed reipfafiaty f^urate ufarpatur. Jingo Grot, Whence
Vhx Gregis, the Captain of this Herd is called, '<> 'Ay«^«f, that lawlefs-
oncthatdcfpifcth, fets light by the Laws and Authority of Chrift.That
hereof the ptefent Miniftcis aie guilty we prove, chap. 4. & ^M S,T,
So that not one of the Scriptures produced but may juftly be applycd to
them. And the Conforming- Miniliers are rightly charged, as the falfc
Prophets of the Jews are in the places produced in S, T, This Mr.T.
denies : but if he would have made good his denial (in my conceit) he
ftiould have produced the particular places mentioned, and manifcfted
that they could not properly be applyed to them. But he knew an ea-
ficr way, Mentlris^ Bellarminey mentiris ; a few keen words againft his
Antagonift would ccft him little. 'Tis true, he tells us that the pre-
fent Minifters teach the Fundamentals of Chriftian Religion, but what
he means by the FmdameMtals of Religion he tells us not : Doth he in-
tend that they own one God,c^£-. fo did the falfc-Prophets. The great
Fundamental of true Religion is, That God is to be worfhipped ac-
cording to the Revelation he hath made of himfelf in the Scriptures of
Truth : that all we do in his Worfliip and Service, that relates to it as
fuch, be bottom'd on divine prefcript. This fundamental they deny,
(introducing the Ordinances and Inventions of man, and making thefe
apart of Worftiip) A departure from which is the ground of all the
Apoftacy that ever was in the World.
4thly. This Animadvertet's plea for the Church and Miniflers of
England is not much better than what was or might have been made
ufe of by Jeroboam himfelf, for his Miniftry, Church and Worihip.
Touching which precious Ainfmrth in his Arrow againft Idolatry^ ch.5,
inttoduccth Jeroboam fpcaking after this rate, *' I feemy courfe ( O
*« men oUfraelJ to be much fufpedted, if not wholly miflikcd of maiiy*
**fome thinking my Ceremonies to favour too rankly of Heathen Su-
*' perdition ; fome charging me plainly with flat Apoftifie, and for-
" faking of God : But how far off I am from all fuch Impiety, I hope
** to manifeft to all indifferenyperfons, chiefly fith that I have neither
<'• fpoken nor done agiinrt any Article of the Ancient Faith, nor changed
<*any Fundamental Ordinance of Religion (The very plea of Mr, T,
" for 'he p-efcnt Minifters ) given us by (JHofes^ but worlliip with re-
^* verencc cne God of my Fathers, and love him (as I am taught) with
** ill my heart, and with all my foul, cleaving unto him alone who i$
«' my life and the length of my daycs. Other Godds of thp Nations I
(f ' utterly abhorj with all their impure iites and fervices — The alt?.
K lacioa
74 AVindicationofths Sober Te^imonyy
*« ration I have made is in matters of drcuiiiftance,thingj whereof there
''is no exprefs, certain or permanent Law given us of God, and nhich
in Anfwer to Mr. T. Us Exceptions, 7 5-
(the beginning hereof being hid in the departure from tbat Piinciple,
Thtt God is to be ferved according to the revelation he makes of him-
fclf> not according to mans inventions ) his citation of the places now
again mentioned by Mr. T* cvinceth the contrary ?
2. O but there u no [nch [elf- Invented Worjhif found in England.
Anfrv. That there is not in every particular, the fame is granted. I
know not that they fet up the image of Baal to wor/hip it ; what they
do in the chambers of their imagery,God only fees ; openJy they ferve
not the fame Idols, nor burn Inccnfe to Vanity, (^c. but that there is
nofuch fclf-invented Worfhip to be found in England \$ gratis diB urn ^
tnd without proof. All felf-invented Wor/hip being indeed fuch> like
it in its principle, a departure from the fore-mentioned fundamental-
principle of Religion, being the fource and fpring from whence it iflucs
forth ; A bowing the knee to BaalyOr yielding obedience to other Lords
{viz,, the Inftituter and Commander of that Worlliip which is invent-
ed) a ferving Idols (in the fetting up Man in the room of the Spirit of
God, and the image (or form) created and made by him in the place of
Divine Appointments.)
But 2dly. 'Tis to me a fond conceit to Imagine, that upon a fuppo-
fition that the Minifters and Church of England are not guilty of fuch
grofs Abominationf , as the places mentioned intimate the Jews to be
guilty of, againft whom the Prophets bear their Teftimony ; Therefore
none .muft bear tciVimony agiintt prefent Abominations, nor can they
be juftified in their fo doing,from thefc Texts. Whereas had they been
guilty of lefs wickcdnefs than they were, it had been the duty of the
Servants of the Lord to have teftified againft them* The doing of what
was not commanded by the Lord (as well as what was exprcfly forbid-
den) is part of their Teftimony, 2 i^iV^. 1 5. 11. &17.11513. yiTe
pretend not to be extraordinarily raifed up, and fpirited, to witnefs a-
gainft prefent Abominations, conceiving it not at all needful in the
prefent undertaking. Every Chriftian that hath tendcrnefs to the honour
and glory of God, (according to the capacity they are in) being obliged
to teftifie for him againft th^nnovations and Will-vvorfhip of the day.
Whether that fpcech of Chrm to fames and John be moft aptly applyed
to this Animadvcrter, and that generation he is become the Advocate
of, and who they arc that call for fire to comedown from Heaven up-
on thofe that will not imbrace their doctrines, others will judge. We
have through grace otherwife learned Chrift. Whether it be i;itter
or holy Zeal for God that moves us, by whom whether our langu-age will
be judged juft reproof, or unjuft reviling, will one day be declared. I
K2 am
- ^ A Vindication of the Sober Teftimony,
am fui-e Mr. T, hath idvcntured upon whit doth not at all appertirn to
him in judging before the time. And in this can we rejoyce, that un-
der all his Ccnfuies we have the Teftimony of the Spirit of the Higheft,
That in godly fimplicity, and from a principle of holy Zeal to God, wc
arc carried forth in this matter. Though we dare not acquit our fclves
of flellily mixtures (which we too much difcern to our abafcment and
grief in all our undertakings ) Kut what hath this Anlmadv. to accufe
us of ? 'Twerc as eafic to have raanifefted (if it had been fo, and we
conceive he would not have fpared us) could he have done it, wherein
the bitternefs of our Zeal did appear, as to have faid it was bitter j to
have ftiewcd wherein our reproof was un juft, as to intimate it to be fo*
Thefe arc but words, and I hope not fpoken from a fpirit of gall and
bitternefs towards us, though peihips.fomc other will be apt to think
they are fo.
Sea. 12.
The People of Goi of old not to hearken to the teachings of fuch as were mt
ftnt by the Lord, The CommAnd of God toMching their ctitting,ojf^ Saint i
forbidden to hear them. The fulfe Prophets f reached much truth y though
not the whole truth. So doth Antichriji, They mere not called falfe Pra^
fhets meerly for their preaching faljhood, but becaufe they ran before they
were fent. Thep^efent MiniFters preach falfhoods^ &c^ In what fenfe to
be cm off. Separation from the enjoyned falfe worjhip ofoldy commanded,
'Tis a. breach upon the Sovereign Amhoritj of God, called by the names of
Adultery y fVhoredom, Idolatry^ &c. Upon what account fo called. Jer.
. $). 2. Hof. 3. 3. & I. 2. Rev, 14. 8. explained, worfhipping God at
Jerufalem. Non-feparation f-om his fVorfhip^ there , no argument af the
unlawfuinej^ of Stparation from the Church of England.
IN his 13 th Seaion Mr. T. takes notice of what I offer in the eighth
place touching the duty of the Saints of old, viz.. That they were,
I. Not to hearken to the teachings of fuch as were not fent of the Lord,
though they pretended never fo much to be fent by him. This we prove,
I. from the Command of God touching thefe falfe Prophets,, W*. to
cut them off, Deut, 18.20. adiy. They aie cxprefly forbidden to hear
thtm, JDeut.i^'^, Jer. 27.6,16..
To which the Animadvertcr replies j 1. NoKe are faid in the Texts
mentioned^ nor in any other he meets with, not to be fent by the Lord, who
delivered the Truth of God, but fuch oa delivered falfhoods^ inciting to Ido*
htrj^ «y QontradiQory to the. mejfage to the true Prophets,
AMfv^o .
in Anfwer to Mr^T, his Exceptions^ yj
An[v9, 1. If by theTtuth(5fGod,hemcansthc whole Truth of God,
'tis granted, That never any falfe Prophet delivered the whole Truth
of God, nor do the Miniftersof Snglani^ as we prove 5. T. p. pi. If
he mean that alltheydelivered was falfe and erroneous, there is no-
thing more falfe can be invented or fpoken. They knew (and fo did Sa-
tan that fet them on work) that fo to have done, had been immediatly
to have mifcarried in the defigo they were advancing. Antichrift in his
Eccle(iafticalftate,is called the /«//(? ProphetyRev. ip.21. his Doarinc
and Worfhip, a Licy 2 Thc{r.2.ii. yet many Truths are imbraced and
preached by him.
2. If Mr. T. thinks they were called falfe Prophets meerly npon the
account of their preaching F
ch.'\y d* J. of 5.T* Therefore not to be heard by the conceffion of this
Animadverter, though comraandcd by Kings and Rulers.. Bywhich-
he may guefs how fit thefe things are to my prefent purpofe, and. bow
frivolouily hefpeaks when he faith, I (hould have left out thofc Alle--
gations, if I had well bethought my felf how unfit they were to my pre-
fent defign : but I will not he prefumes fay, that the.p;efeni Min\i\tr.'i.
{hould J.
7 8 ^ vindication of the Sober Teftimony,
fliouldbccut off. Anfvp. If by cutting eft- he msans putting to dc^tb^ I
will not indeed fay fo; though it may be Mr. T, when an AiTiftant for
the cjt;6lion of fcandaious Minifteis thought it lawful civilly to flay
them ; the faying of Divine Service being one bunch of fcandal for
which they were to be ejeftcd. And the truth is, the Author of 5. T.
thinks they (liould not open their mouthesj as if Mcflengevs and Embaf-
fadors for God, till he opens them by giving down the holy Unction to
them (the great qualification of Gofpel-Picachers, which moft of
them, 'tis to be feared want ) and an heart to tclinquifh their Anti-
chrirtian ftanding ; that they may go forth in the work of God from Au«
thority received not from his grand Enemy, but from himfelf. adly,
As not harkning to the falfe Prophets, was the duty of the Children of
the Lord of old, fo is Separation from the devifed Worfhipof that day,
in the fore-cited places afl'erted, and proved to be ( i. ) Fromth«3
greatnefs of the fm of felf-invented Worfiiip ; which is,.
il^, A breach upon the fovcraign Authority of God.
2diy, Called by the names of Whordomj Adultery, Idolatry, For-
nication, P[al. 73,. 27. Ifa, S7. S> 8. Jer, 9. 2. Ez,ei.2^.^^. Hof. 5.7.
aKci 7. 3. Lev. 20. f. Jer. 13. 27. Ez,ek.. 16, 17. aad 20. 30. Hof,i,2^
^rz/. 14. 8. ^«
have you dealt treacheroufly with me^Ohoufe of Jfrael, Th^'ii turning afidc
to their own Inventions is the bottom apon which thefe abominations
are fo called. Pfal. 106^^9, Thus were they defiled with their own works y
and -went a whoring with their own inventions ; Jer. p. z. They be all adul-
terers ( /. e. turned away from God, fay the Affembly ) Hof. 3.5. Hci
not playingthe Harlot, is exprefly faid to be^ hzimt being for another
man : which ihotild (he be (as by fubje^iiDg to the Ordinances of men,
in the Worfhipof God, weare) f^e plays the Harlot. And Hof , 1.2.
Departing from the Lord ( or his inltitutions, and Appointments) is
called, committing great whordom.
2d[y, 'Tistrue the Worfhip which is allzd^Fornlcation, Rev. 14,8*
and 18,9. is fuch as Babylon made all Nations ^even the Kings of the Earth
to commit. Which learned Bright man n'^on "T^z/. 14. 8. interprets to b;!,
theSuperftitions, En'ors, and Idolatries of the Church o\ Rome, which
the Wefi fucked from her as from her Mothers Breafts, which proved
Wine of wrath or jealoLifie, as well as Fornication ; becaufe hereby the
jcaloufic of God was ftirrcd up and provoked againll them, as to pur-
pofe it hath been ; minifcfting and difplaying it fclf in Charafters of
Blood and Flames, Ruinc and Devaftation more or lefSjthroughout the
£«r«?p^feffsih,
pag. 1020^ his Theodulia. So that if her Worlliip'be Fornication, , the
XA/'orlhip of England (being the very Worfhip of Rome) is fo too j From
which Mr. T. tells us, in this Se^. without: controverfe the People of God
were tofep^rate^ and have ho communion -with anyin,jSo that,
Habemus confitentem reum^^' ' - - '"'
He paffeth fentence upcn^imfeif in having com'munion ivith, and
pleading for the Church and Worfhip of £«^W, and aquits -thc-rnnc*
cent in their righteous Separation there-frccn,in thar very Tveatifche
defigned to juftifie the one, and condemn the other. That which is far-
ther,'S a moft forry begging of the Q^ieftion ( a piece of Sophiliry this
"Animadverter is frequently gnilryof ) the furri is, Burn-itherthc
IS
. . ^ , , , , . _ le
Texts alledged, nor ariy other do fecjiirt fcparatioc -from th^ WorihitJ^
tk
so * A Vindication of the Sober Teflimonyy
of Godj or the Miniftcrs of God, that arc in fomc things corrupt, even
in their miciftiation; which he exemplifies in Samuels miniftring be-
fore the Lord, and Hannah's prefenting him and her felf at the folemn
Feafts, whsn Ho^hni and Phlnehoi did corrupt the Worihip of God :
And thofe of Juiah were not to feparate from the fervice at Jerufalemy
which was to God, while there was burning inceife and facrificing on
the high-places ; and though there were lundry corruptions in the
Church and Services of the Jervsy yet did Chrilt joyn in the publick
Service of the Temple, and pcrfwaded the cleanfed Leaper to offer the
Gift Mofes had commanded. From whence he infers, That though there
fhonU be [ome degree ofcorrnption in fforjhipj yet this is not [nfficient tojttjii"
fie our Separation from the Church ani Mimflers pf England.
Anftv.i. That every corruption in Worfhip, that every difordcr in
Church-adminiftrations is a fufficient warrant for feparation from the
Woilliip, Church or Churches that are of Divine Inftitution, (as was
the Worihip^-and Church at Jerufalem) I no where affcrt; never
thought,
2dly. Whileft from hence the Animadvettcr infers, That though
there fhouU be fome degree of Corruption in J^orfhify yet this is not fujjicient
tejujiifie our feparation from the Minifiers and Church o/England; He doth
but like an unwifc Souldier, that not well heeding the ground he Ihnds
on, is difplaying his Colours till he finks into the Earth. There is one
thing wanting to his Inference,that makes it too light to pafs with pcr-
fons but of ordinary underftanding ; viz,. That the Church of £«^/^» that arefufficient to juftificany
mans peaceable {^rparation from ir. Though every corruption in Wor-
fiiip and Church- Adininiftiations, as was faid, vyill not do fo. Th?re is
nothing
in Anfvper to Mr . T. his Exceptions^ s i
nothing in this 4th. Se^. of that moment as to require our ftiy in the
confideration thereof. Whether thofc eight Pofitions averted in S, T.
touching the management of affairs of old, be evidently comprized in
the Scripture or ho, may be perceived by the examination of Mr. t; his
exceptions againft them , let the Chiiftian and judicious Reader judge.
I argue not from thence by way of Analogy, though I conceive the In-
ftitution being founded upon fome command of Chrift in the New Teft.
r the only warrant for the pra«^ice of Gofpel- Appointments ) To argue
from the carriage and deportment of Saints to Divine Ordinances of
old, to the carriage of Saints towards Ne^.v Teft. Inftitutions, from pa-
lity of Reafon, is neither irrational nor unwarrantable ; which when
Mr.T. proves it to be,or attempts to do fo,his Arguments (hall be con-
fidered : his fecond and third Se6i. in his fecond part of the review of
the difpute about Pado-Saptifm ( to which he diie6li us ) fpakc not 1
word hereunto as he knowf.
Sci^. 13.
Of the jvord UkmvU , what It imports. Its acceptiens in the Scrlptnre^
I Cor. 12. 284 ani I J. 9. AEi, 4. 32. opened. 7 he Churches of Afia,
Galati a, Judaea, not National , Diocefan, or Provincial^ bm particular
I Churches. The foundation of T)iocefan (^hurches. Mat. i6, 18. and,
18. 17. expounded. By the Church not meant the Pope and his Car.
dinalsy a Sjnody the Bi/hopj or Chancellors Court ^ the Magifirate^ the
^ Presbytery^ nor fele^ Arbitrators, but the while Church conjijling of EU
ders and Brethren , proved,
IN SeEi. i;'\ Mr. T. begins to confidcr the Queries in the Preface of
S. T. and in anfwcr to the firft Query, whether there be any Natio-
nal Church of the Inftitution of Chrift under the Oeconomy of the
Gofpel ; he falls upon the confideration of the word Church, and tclU
us, in the New Ttftament its taken for,
I. An affcmbly of Unbelieverj, ^^.19.32539,40.
2dly. For the Congregation of Ifrael in the Wildernefs, ABs 7.
3dly, The Univcrfal Church, whether vifiblc or invifiblc, i Cor, 12.
28. fieb. 12. 23. Ephef. 1.22.
4thly, The vifible Church indefinitely but not univerfaily, i Cor*
jthly, The Church Topical, as of a City, Town, or Houfc, A^. 8. i,
Pkihmf 2, or of a #)untry, or Nation ; and then its put in the Plural
L Number,
g 2 A vindication of the Sober Te^imony^
Numbev ; as the Churches of AJia^ GaUtia. Jadaa,
Anfvo. I. Theword, U»aht/os, C/^«rc•^, is ^'T«Ex««A«r, ^ff^ijif/wr^if^, or
call out ; Becaafef as faith Mnfcalns, in Rom. i. 7. the Chttrch is anttm-
her called out from the reji ; and in the general jtgnifies any company of men,
fifjgled oftt, or fefarated from the refty for any end or pHrfofe rvhatfoever.
That 'tis of various acceptations in the Scripture cannot be denied ;
fome of which are rightly alTigncd by the Animadverter.
Firfty Tis taken foi tn Affecnbly of Unbelisvers, e/f^J ip, 32.
39.
Secondly, For the Congregation of //r^r/inthc Wildeinefs, A^s
But Thirdly^ As touching the third acceptation of the word inftan-
ccd in by this Animadverter, we muft crave leave a little to detnui
about it*
ifti If by the Univerfal Church vifible, he mean that which fome
call the Church-Catholick vifible, confilHng of theuniverfality of men
piofeilingthe Do6ltine of thcGofpel, and ycelding obedience there-
unto throughout the World; I do very much queftion whether the name
of the Church be given to them throughout the Scripture* The places
inftanc'd in by this Animadverter are lemote from the proof of any
fuch thin*', i Cor. 12. 28+ fpeaks not a tittle to it : For,
1. The Chuvch, verf. 28. is the Body of Chrift, verf, 27. This Pattl
tells them (the Church of Corinth ) they were j and every Saint in the
Chuvch a Member in particular.
2. 'Tisfuch a Church amongft whom a Schifm might be, verf, 25-.
( as in the Church o( Corinth there adually was, which was the occtfion
of PmIs writing to th«m) That there fhouldh mfchifm in the Bvdy. « But
* Schifm is entirely in one Church amongft the members of one parti-
< cular Societyjfaith that learned man J. O. in his Treatife of Schifm,
Befides, 3. It will be hard to prove that in the Church-catholick-
vifible (asfuch) Officers ate fct and placed, as 'tis -z/fr/. 28, 25?..
Thefe were in the Church of Corinth^ which was founded by Paul^ AEls
18. 8, 9, 10. Probably Peter had been there ; for he intimates, That,
At leafl, fome of them had gloried overmnchin himy i Cor. 3.21, 22. (Ce^
thoi/i, c. Peter ) Proj^hets, Teachers^ Miracles^ Gifts of healings HelpSy
Governments diverjities of Tongues xoere found amongft them, as is known.
Some of thefe there is no quel^ion, but they relate to a particular
Church. That the J^^«t*«' , or Teachers here, are the fame who arc elfe-
where called, '^rte-tr^^-n^i^ iTnoxoisst^ Presbyters, Elders, and Overfeers^
Mr. T. will not, I picfame, deny. Arguments fie neai at hand fw
the
in Anfwer to Mr. T, his Exceptions, 85
the demonftration thereofjwcre it needful : Thefc are placed of God in
particular Churches, relate to them as fuch,y^c?j 14.23.(^1^.2,4,6,22,
23, (^ id. 4. c^20. 17. (^21.18. r/f. I. y.y^zw. 5". 14.^^.20.28, Not
atn 1 fingulat in the application of this Scripture to the particular Chu- ch
of Corinth. Fareus hath thefc words upon the place, * Et cjHla^ qtc. And
* becaufe he bad faid, that the Church of the Corinthians was the Body
* of Chrift, ^ib.5'.25j2(^. That
the word Church, i Cor. ly . 9. is taken for the vifibie Church indefi-
nitely, I cannot fubfcribc to. PofTible by the Church of Cod, he meanr,
. Firfl, The Churches of Gfcd (by an ufual Figure) there being in
thofc daycsjfcw or no Believers>but were added to one Church or other;
asmight eafily be demonftrated, -<4^j 2. 41, 42. ^W A0j4. 32. The
multitude of Believers is a P<«r to whom
each EpiftU was dircfted to be cotnnaunicated to the Congregation (for
to ihcm in it doth Chrift by his Spirit fpeak, Rcv.i.y^ ii^i7j2p. & j.
A. i. i. fo.
doth Chrift of the Church of Pergamos^ Rev. 2. 15. / know thy workjy
and where than dtvelleft (i.e. among what manner of people thine abode
is, ?/<»/. 5'7.4. &120. 5',d. Ez,e\,2.6, PhU.2.ij. viz,, a wicked,
graceiefs, ungodly people) even whereSatansfeat iy, where Satan dweU
leth : who were fure no part of the Church. The Jike may be faid of the^
reft of them. 'Tis ftrange to me that when God calls them Churches^
any perfon pretending tofobriety, ihould dare to aver them to be but
one. "
Touching the interpretation of <(^rff. id. 18. & 18. 17, there are
indeed great debates ( as our Aniraadverter faith ) betwixt Protefta»tS'
tvid Papifisi amongft Protejlants alfo and Protejiams. The expofirion the
Papi/isolYQoi Mat, 16. 18. who from hence would infer, that 'Pctery
and after him the Biiliop oi'Komej was made Univeifal BiQiop, is fo
favoious, that 'tis not vvorth the menuoningv.
I:, 'E»3-i
SS A FindicationoftheSoberTeftmony,
I, *£» ttt'j^ rri 9riT^x, fdper haflC pttramy is not tm-murS ',u Hir^ ftiper
hunc FetrTim'y upon this Rock, will 1 build my Church, we EngUlVmea
ihink to be very different ixom^n^QnSt.PetermW I build it. The Faith
Peter confeffed we take to be ons things his perfon another.
2. We find not (notwiihftanding this promife) that Peter was the
Prince of the Apoftles ( at which lofty rate thefe Gentlemen love to
fpeak) or Univerfal Biflaop. If he had been fo, Paul much forgot him-
felf, when he faid 2 Cor. 1 1. y . Par I fuppofe (Gt. Asy/Ca^*, I conclude
for certain) / rvat not a whit behind the chief e^ Apojiles. And much more
Gal. 2. II. Bm when Peter was come to Antioch, / withftood him to thi
faccy becitufe he woi to be blamed. Strange ! that he ihould carry it with
no more refpeta to the Prince of the Apoftles, and Univerfal Bift\op
and head of the Church-Catholick-vifible*
3 . But if thefe were granted them, what it this to their Pope ? Why
Teter was at Rome, -
A^fw, That is uncertain : Yet fhould it be granted he was there, it
would not in the leaft advantage them in their prefent caufc. 'Tis
moft certain he was at Samaria^ a/^ntioch, Lydda, Joppa^ Cefaria ; yet
no Primacy or Supremacy affixed to either of them upon t|iat bottom,;
4. Yea but he placed his Chair at %ori^ey fixed his Seat there. '
A/}fw. This is falfc and untrue,; nor can they ever make it appear
that he did fo. Yet if this lliould be granted, they are never a whit the
nearer the mark, except they prove, i. That a fucceffion in this uni-
verfal, Unlimited, Archiepifcopal power was entailed to the Church of
S.ome, and that fo, that i. Though thofc who afcendcd thai Chair,came
to b^ invefted therein, by bribery, cozenage,cruelty, blood, whilft they
pofl'efTed it were Hereticks (and declared by Councils to be fo, and their,
Succeffors) Conjurers, Adulterers, Idolaters, Atheifts, Blafphemers,
bloody Perfecutors, deftroyets of bodies and fouls of men, the verieft
Villains and Wretches that ever the Earth bore.) 2. Though this Suc-
ceffion hath been incenupted by a Vacancy, or Interregnum, of fome
years ; polluted by a Woman, a Whore, deiiveted with her Cardinals
about faer in folemn Proceflion ; whence
'papa par it Papam, peperit Papijfa Papillnm.
By the fetting up oi Anti^Popes^ two or three at a time, contefting to
the pouring out of much Blood, wafting, deftroying Villages* Towns,
Cities ; Curfing, excommunicating one another, and all that adhere to
each other, fcr the Popedom, or St.P^f^r's Chair; yet when in it, and
thofe that fucceed them,be they as bad or worfc than they that went be-
fore, muft infallibly be his fucccftot : which whea they prove, I will
be
in Anfwer to Mr, T. hts Exceptions, 2j
be a Papift .• and before they rhall effedl this, it being the grand Prin-
ciple of their Religion (or Supeiftition lithcr) it would become all that
have (or would be accounted to have) the leait fpark of Wifdom re-
maining in them, to have nothing to do with fuch a generation. For
my part I am abundantly fatisficdj that the Church there, is neither the
Chutch-Catholick vifible, nor any particular Church, as fuch, but the
Invifible-Church,or Eleftof God.
TeU (he Churchy Md^.iS.iy. hath divers interpretations put upon
it, according as the interefts of fome lead and encline thefn. In the
language of the Eplfcopalians it iSj Tell the Lord. Blfhop^ani his Confjiorf :
but this is fuch an heterogeneous piece, fo wild an interpretation, that
it would put a fober man (if concern'd in them ) to a blulli to hear it
mentioned, i. There were no fuch creatures at that day, nor for fome
hundreds of years after. Alas ! there wasfomevvhat elie to do, than to
think of ere(^ing Epifcopal Seas and Confirtorics, when they were eve-
ry day fighting with hearts, and made a fpeilacle to Angels and men,
for the Truth and Gofpel-fake ; which was the ftate of the Church of
God, (for the moft part) for the fitft three-hundred years and upwards,
as is known. 2. One mm (as faith precious Co«(7«j is not the Church,
nor can he reprefent the Churchjunlcfs feat by them ; but fo is neither
the Bilhop nor his Commiffary* 3. The BilTiop ordinarily is no member
of the Church where the offence is conlmitted , and what is his fatif-
faiftion to the removal of the offence given to the Church ? 4. The
Parifian Doftors fay truly, *' Ecclejlant nrnqftam^ c^c. The Church can-
" not be taken for one perfon, nor be govern'd by one. Of which the
** Learned C/>j way, TetL
tht Churchy \s, tell the Prcsbjfterjf. But they arc, I humbly conccire,
fomcwhat wide of the mark too. My Reafons arc, i. The Church is
fometimes put for the Congregation, as diftin6t from the Presbytery or
Elders and Officers, ^Sj 1 4.. 23- 8c i5'.22. never for thefc, as diftind
from the Congregation, throughout the New-Tcftament. 2. The Pref-
hytery maybe the party offending, and then you muft tell the Church
that the Church offendeth; i.e. go tell themfelvcs : But the Scripture
is exprefs, that after private dealing with the offenders themfelvcf,
^ upon non-amendment, the Church, as diftint^ from them, is to be ac-
quainted with it. 3 . What if the Presbytery themfelves be offended ?
whom (hall they tell ? muft they tell themfelves ? If they arc the
Church, they can go no further. 4. Bcfides, wefind> i Ccr. y. not
the Prexsbytery alone, but the whole Church concerned in the matter of
Excommunication, of which our Breth-en confefs Chrilt here treateth.
This Animadverter manifcfts his good will to interpret it of an Affem-
bly of the Jews in their 5j»r<^W»w,or if extended as a dire(^ion to Chri-
flian Brethren, whether to refer it to their Affembly, under an Eccle-
fiaf^icalconfideration, or Political, i.e* the Chriftian Magiftrate : he
feems to demur with an apparent inclination to the latter. To the firft
t Treat ^f thcfe Mr. Cotton anfwers ; '* f ^^ i* "^^ credible that Chrift vvould
of the ' " fend his Difciples to make complaint of their offences to the Jewifh
Keys, p. ti Synagogues : for is it likely he would fend his Lambs and Sheep for
40 Ani- j< right^and healing, unto Wolves and Tygres f Both their Sanhedrim^
** and moft of their Synagogues were no better. And if here and there
** fome Elders of their Synagogues were better affcfted ; yet how may
*'it appear that fo it was,where any of themfelves dwelt ? And if that
«' might appear too , yet had not the Jews already agreed, that if Any
« m^n did confefs Chrift, he Jhduid be caji out of the Synagogues ? Job. 9.
22. To which we add, 2dly, Chrift knew that within a little while the
Synedrim and whole Church-Policy of the Jews would be at an end.
And, 3dly, in the mean while charges his Difciples to have nothing to
do with them. Mat.i'^. 14. Tell them that they would perfecute, kill
them, and think in doing fo they did God good feivicc : As it fell out
after-
in Anjrver to Mr. T. his Exceptions, go
ifttrwards accordingly. So that it cannot with the leaft (hew of rcafon
be imagined, that Chrift iliould dircd them to appeal to them, and
ftand to their final determination. 2dly. The fecond defircs not a re-
ply. Go tell the Churchy i. e. go tell the Magiflrate, is fo wild an inter-
pretation, that the bare naming it is the giving it too much honour.
I; The Magiftrate is no where called the Church: 2dly, The Magi-
ftrateC^'^** tali^) hath nothing to do in thelhting and determining
Church-Controverfies. 3dly, Sometimes, and for the moft partjthey
have ever fince been (for above three hundred years afterward they un-
doubtedly were ) no members of the Church, but enemies to it, dc-
firoyeis of it.
Mr. T. add*, that he can find nolnftitution bypreception or com-
mand of a Church, *. e, there is no fuch thing as an inftituted Churcir
of Chrift under theGofpel, but 'tis left to the prudence of mzn^&cxo
determine, whether they fliall be Domeftlckj) Congregational, Parochial^
Clajjicaly Dlocefm^ Provincialy Patriarchaly or Oecumemcal : which how
derogatory to the Honour and Sovereign Authority of Jefus Chrift • to
his love and tenderncfs to his Children, to his Faithfulnefs with refpeft
to the obligation that lay upon him as Mediator, to reveal the whole
will of the Father to them, others will jadge. For my part I am fully
of his mind, who fomc vvhile fince faid, " That there were particu-
*Mar Churches inftituted by the Authority of Jefus Chrift, ordained
<< and approved by him ; ihat Officers for them were of his appoint-
*« mcnt, and furniflied with gifts from him for the execution of their
'* employment ; That Rules, Cautions and Inftrudions for the due
" fettlcment of thofe Churches were given by him : that thefc Chur-
" cheswcre made the only feat of that Worftiip, which in particular
'* he expreflcd his will to have continued until he came, is of fo much
** light in Scripture,that he muft wink hard that will not fee it» Which
is as much as we need to fay to this Animadvertcr in this matter; what
he faith herein, being mecr dilates of his own, without proof : which
(when he (liall be able to evince that Chrift hathnot the Government
of his Churches upon his (houlders ,* that he is not fole King and Lord
over them, or having fo^ath not given them Rules to walk by of his
own, but left them to the liberty of their own wills, or which is worfe,
the wills of fuch as by Providence are permited to afcend the Throne,
though fuch,aswhilft they profefs to know God, in works deny him, be-
ing abominable and difobcdient, and to every good work reprobate )
be will be fuppofed to fay fomcthing in way of confirmation* But of
this moic in Sed. ly. *ri$ true, defa^o^ Paiochial; CUffical, Dioce-
M far.
JO- ' A Vindication of the SohtrTe^mony,
f»n, Provincial, Patiiaichical, and Oecumenical Churchcs,by the prui
dence of men, c^c have had and yet hive their being in the World :
and the Animadvertei deals ingenuoufly, in acknowledging that their
original is not fiom Heaven, but the iffue of humane prudence, &c.
So that to them, or their Rulers and Officetf> as fuch, we owe no tri-
bute or leCpeil by vertue of any Inftituiioa of Chrift,which they are (ai
he acknowledgeth, and that truly) deftitutc of. ' Twctc caiie to fill
many pages with citations of Authors fpeaking to this matter.
Whereas originally there was a fmall uncertain number of Presby-
ters at RomSt they were brought to a certain number and order by Cletm
and Evariftfti, Popes of Ro?w, Firil, Clettu reduced the Presbytery of
Rome to the number of twenty five: Afterwards Evarl/itu^ about the
year of Chrift loo, appointed and prefcribcd a feveral Parifti to every
one of thefe Presbyters, which Parifties were afterwards enlarged, and
had their bounds and limits more perfeftly and more exa^ly prefcribed
to them by Pope DpmfitfSy as was faid, about the year of Chrift 260 •
After which time MarcelipUy about the year of Chrift 30^, limited the
number of thofe titles, which anciently were firft given to the Presby-
ters by Evarlftfts, and did by Decree conftitutc. That there (hould be
in Rome 25-, as it were fo many Dioceffes ; for the more convenient
baptizing of fuch Gentiles as were daily converted to Chriftian Religi-
on : Onufhritu Panvlnitu,, de pracipnis urbis Rom£ Bafillcu • And Sclden
in his Hiftory of Tythes, chap. 6, Se<^. 3. writes thus. For Parlfh
Churches J it is pUi»y that at O^etropolitan See's, Patriarchats (Exar-
chates, in the Eaflern Chttrch) Bijhopricks > thefe greater dignities reert
moB ufually at fir H ordained and li/mted according to the difiixUion of Seats
iff Government and inferiour Cities, that had been tiffigned to the Subfiittttes^"
or yicarii of the Prafe^-Pratorio, or Vice- Roys of the Eaft and fVefiern-
Empire : So were Pari(hes appointed, and divided to feveral Minifters
within the Ecclefiaftical rule of thefe dignities, according to the con-
veniences of Country-Tow^s and Villages ; one, or more, orlefs (of
fuch as being but fmall Territories might not^y the Canons be Biftiop-
ricks) to a Parifh : The word Parifh at firft denoting a whole Bifbop-
rick (which isbat as a great Paiidi, and fignifies no othtr than Dioccfs,
but afterwards being confined to what our common language reftrains
iI^. ThcCuratsof thefe Pariflies were fuch as the Bifhops appointed
under him to have cure of fouls in them, and were called Presbyterii-
Parochianii i.t. PariQi- Presbyters. But thus far of this matter.
As touching what Mr.T. adds, that there is no precept about the defining
how many jhottldgo to a Churchycr be accounted to belong to oneChurcbjSi-^.
Wc
in Anjwer to Mr, T. hit Exceptions, 91
Vfcdnfrnvy I. That'tif very impertinently produced by blm^tend-
ing not at all to the matter in hand ; fuch a vifible Kon-ftqmtur as he
will never be able to mike good. How many (hould go to a Churcbj
we have no precept of Chrift dirc
Earth, &c.
2dly. The iffuc or coafequence of this Juridlcial Sentence is^ Th.^.t.
he is to the Church (for what one is liwfuliy to a part of the Body, he.
is to the whole) m a Heathen or Publican, i. e, /hut out of theif Com-
munion or FellowfliipjButMr. r, isfure .(he tells us; the Publicans
were not excluded ^jiif?'^,.:,^..
Anfw. I. If by pfr* he, means thofe Ordinances that peculiarly re-
hted to them as members of the jW^/f^/ Church, ^nd by Publicans urt-^-
profelyted; uncircumcifed Publjcari, '«s moft falfe, that fuch were not:
excluded- a facrii. They mi^ht notpart^'tke. ofiht P4jfovey mth them (to.'
- . "inlUncft-
94 - -^ vindication of the Sober Tepimony^
inftance in no more ptiticoliis ) £;»?(?, «'« r» It^v^ to the Holy ( the whoie
building of the Temple, confining of an inward and outward Court, is
fo called ) to pray ^ is Parabolically faidof himasof thePharifee; but
both the one and the other prayed by themfclves, fcvcrally and apart,
verf. 1 1 . The Pharifee flood and prayed thm with himfelfy s»B-fis ^vw cjo-
fnvj^To^ word for word, ftanding to himfelf> ( or apart from the Publican)
he prayed thefe things; O Gody I thanks thee, &c. verf. 13. And the
Publican, f^K^Jt* h^*^ fiandingafar off^, viz,, in the firft Court of the
Temple, where all forts of People, publicans and Sinners might come,
I Kings 8. 41,
Fourthly, 'Tis mofi certain, and the Animad verier cannot be igno-
lant hereof, That the Publicans were excluded, not on!y, afacris,7i\iic\i
they were, but alfo from Civil Communion, fo ftr as poflibly they
could ; infomuch as it was a great crime charged upon ChiiH by them,.
That he ate -and drank, vfiith Publicans and Sinners^ and that more than
once, Matth. 9. n. and 11. ip. Mark^, 2. \6. Luke f. 30.
a»d 7. 34. Accordingly upon this fentencc of the Church upon
the Offender, the Members of the Society arc to cany it towards
him, not only as towards a Heathen ( with whom they might have
civil Commerce ) but as towards a Publican ( with whom they at
that day had none ) i Cor. y . i x. 2 Thef. 3. 14- And he that ihould
have
in Anfwer to Mr, T, his Exceptions. 9 f
have fecn the PMcatty Luke 18. (if there was ever fuch t thing done)
praying in one Court, and the P^<«r;/^f in another j or if in the fame
Court) one at one Corner and the other at the other, apar-c by thetn-
felvcs, would fcarce have concluded, that they held Communion toge-
ther, or inferred therefore the Publicans were not excluded 4/<«cw.
Which Confequcnce Mr. T, will take tim: to make good, «/^; ad Grx^
COS CaUndas,
It remainf, That forafmuch as by Churchy Mat, 18. 17. is not
mttnxxht J ewi^ Synedriunty not x\\z Lord Bifhop tnd his CoK/i/itfry^ nor
the Civil AlaglfirAtgy nor the Presbyterie^ nor Mr. T. his ScltU Ar-
iitrAtars • ( the vanity of each of which hath been evinced) that there-
fore it if a pitticular inftituted Charch of Chrift in the New Tefta-
ment, as Mr. T. knows the learned of old, and of /ate have interpreted
it. So Ignntius (who applies it to the particular Church of Philadelphia)
Chryfojio»fe,&c, The jadldousCafaftbon {Exercit, Lib. ^S.f. 453. }
&c,
Thefc thing! prcmifed, vvc attend his Anfwcrs to the Queftions pio-
pofcd in S, T. of which in the next Se^iott we (hall treat.
Sed* 14.
fybtther there be any National Church under theOeconomie of the Gofpelo
Mr, T. his anfwers hereunto, confdered. Ifa. 49*23, & 66, 8. explain.
ed. That they are Prophefies that wait their accomplifhrneMt^demonjiratedi
Of the miraculous converfion of the Jervs, Zach. 12. \o^ explained. The
Sign of the Son of Man ^ Mat. 24, 30, What,
THe firft Queft. in 5.T.propofedby us is, whether ftnce the Apotomi^
or unchurching the Nation of the Jfrvs^ the Lord hath fo efpoufed a
Nation or People to himfelf-, m that upon the accoant thereof, thewhoU Bo-
dy of the People thereof may be accounted his Church? whether there be any
National Church under the Oeconomie of the Gofpel ? ThisMr. .T. is pica-
fed to make two C\ieftions, though in it felt but one ; the latter bein''
only^A:fj^«»W to the former.
ift. Hz grants, That (Mod hath not^ fmce the unchurchi>^g the lotion of
thejervsy efpoufed a Nation to himfelf ^ oi that the vohole Body of the Temple
thereof may be accounted bis. i.e. There is no National Church of divine
Jnftitution under the Gofpel; for if there be, the Lord hath mosH'aJfttredly
ffi/ibly efpoufed that Nation to himfelf and they are to bt accounted his.
What he adds, vi^ We omnno Church vi/ible novf>^ but of Believers bj^
tiuirf-
$S A V'lndlcaihn of the Sober Tejlimony^
their ovffn per fo»al prof ejjion, we tic not concerned to take notice of. Hii
mentioning the p''' Article of the Church of EttgUnd,^ by way of appro-
bation, and as if it were of thcfams mind with him touching the fub-
jcds of the vifible Church,is an abufe of it and the Reader. 'Tis known
that the addition in the Confeflion of Faith of the Aflembly, Chap.2^.
uirt.z. OfChiUrens Church- member jhip^ii the Detlrine ofthefftii^Chnrch,
Of this matter we arc not now treating.
^ Secondly^ In anfvvcr tathe Q^icftion, M^hether there Be any "Rational
Church (ifider theOecomnsy of the (jofpel ? * I fay ( faith Mr. T, ) that
* though there be no National Church, fo as that the whole Nation,
< and every member of the Nation be to be accounted of the vifible
« Church of Cbrift, by virtue of their generation and Profelytifm, and
' fuch Covenant as was made to Abraham^ concerning his natural Seed,
^ OHO Jfrael it Mount Sinaly oi clfewhete, yet the whole number of
' Believers; of a Nation^ may by ieafon of their common profeflion be
« called a National Church, as well as the whole body of men through-
*^ut the world upon the account of thsir profeiTing the Faith of the
* Gofpel, &c, are and may be called the vifible Ga tholick- Church o£
« Chrift.
Am/xv. I. But if Mr. T. think* this to be an anfwer to the Queftion,
he will fcarce find in this matter any Corrival : Quaftio eft de oUis^ Kc-
[ponfto defcpis. Wc are not enquiring, whether a company of Believers
living in a Nation, may be called, upon the account of their Faith and
Piofcfficn, a National Church, which by the figure Catachrefis it may
•be they may. I am fure moft abuftvcly and improperly it is that they
are fo called. "
Nor, 2^/)', Is thecnquiry or education-
Faith and ProfelTion ( contradiv5led by the moft) alTumcd and profefled
by perfons living in a Nation divided in feveral Parifhes & Diocefles,
under the condudt of their Parochial Miniflers, and Diocefan, Metro-
politan Billiops, united together under one (or more) Ecclehaftical
vifible Head ; This company of People thus molded, are or may truly
be accounted a Church of Chrift, inrtituted by himnndei* the Oecono-
inie of the Gofpel. Which, whoever will undertake to dcmonflrate,
mnft I conceive attempt the proof of thcfc few things.
Flrfty That a profcfrion of Faith forced and compelled, or at leaft in
which men have been trained up from their Infancy ( as the Tnrkes arc
in
in Anfwer to "Mr, T. lis Exceptions] 9 7
in the Do(3:rinc of their Alcoran ) and that for the moft part contradidl-
ed in their converfation, \% fufficicnt to give a man ci woman aright
and title to Church-n:iember/hip.
Secondljy That pcrfonsco- habiting, or living together in a Parifli,
tre^dejurCf upon the account of that their co. habitation (atleaftif
they make fo much profefiTion as to be able to fay the Creed, Lords-
Prayer, and ten Commandments, though, as was faid, contradidcd by
a courfeof debauchery &c.) are aChurch of Chrift ; or that Parifti'
Charchej, ejua tales, arc of the Inftitution of Chiift.
Thirdly, That the Subordination of thefe Churches and Minifters to
Diocefan Bi/hops, Archdeacons, Confiftorics and Commi{faiics, and
thefe again to an Arch-Bifliop, or Metropolitan is of the fame Oj;igi-
oal.
FoHrthly, That thefe Bifhopji Arch-deacons, Commiffaricf, Courts
Ecclefiaftical, Metropoliiical Head, are of the Inftitution of Chrift.
Which when Mr. T. (or any one for him) (hall do, I will be a Mem*
her of the Church oi England. But he knows an eaficr way ; 'Tis but
faying. That there is no Infiitution of a Church by Preceftion or Command;
and he avoids, he thinks, the necefllty of putting himfelf to all this
toyl. But ferioufly Sir, very few confidcratc and judicious Chriftians
will care to be Members of fuch a Church as is deftitutc of divine In-
ftitution, and whether his Clients of the Church of England will thank
him for this part of his Plea, I amnotcertain. In the grcatnefs of his
love he fcems to be killing his Mother with kind embraccs.Thc Church
ci England \% not, fae grants, of the Inftitution of Chrift (for there is
no Church that is) fothat there is no need to alleadge, l[a. 49, 25,
and 663, for the Inftitution of a National Church : Never thelcfs that
the Prophcfic,//4. 49. 25. waits the time of its accompliftiment, is fatd
by the author of the S. T, with more confidence than evidence.
Anfw. Well, Mr. T. will not be guilty of the fame crime : what
evidence brings he of this confident afl'ettion ? Why, many learned In-
terpreters ( among whom Mr. (jataker) think otheiwife. But Sir, we
have not learned, Jurarein verha Maglfirly to take any mans dictates
for evident proof of any thing of this nature, which we arc fure they are
not. As learned Interprciers are of the mind of the Author of S,T, The
truth of the Affertion is cvi ]e»*,
ift. The Prophefie hath rcfpc6l to fome time after the coming of
Chrift in the flefti, of which he fpeaketh, verf. i, 3 , 4, y, 7, 8. .which
one confideration manifefts the nothingnefsof the fiiftpartof Mr. Ga.
takers notion ; That it had itsfalfilUng in Cyriti^ Artaxcrxes^ Varim, A-
N haftterus^
c) 8 -^ Vindication of the Sober Teflimsny,
^hafhuerus , rclth the Qifeens of fame of them. *
2diy, Its to receive its accomplifhmcnt after the Pxeachiog of the
Goipel iQ\.\iZ Gentiles (which was not till after the Afccniion of Chtilt)
verf. I, 6. which xhz Aportlc cites, AUs 13. 47. for hiswarrant ia
fp'iaking she Word of God to them.
3diy, The Deliverance and Glory, God doth in this Chapter engage
to beftow upon the twelve Tribes ( as Is evident from the Names of
/fraelyVerf. SyS>^> 7. Ol Jacob ^ verf. j. Of the Tribes of J<«f(?^, verf,
6. Theprefervedof //r<«p/ i'tbU.) /. ^. the ten Tribes, in way of di-
iVmdion from whom the two Tribes are called Sloriy verf. 14. ) cvin-
cethjthat as yet it waits its accomplillimint. For though the two Tribes
weLc delivered from the Babjlomfh Cap:ivity, yet the ten Tribes ( as
its known) have remained in their graves ever fince they were carried
captive by SalmAnefer to this day. 'Tis true, God did once call his Peo-
ple of the two Tribes from the North, in the time of Cyrm^ drc. But
from the Weft, and from the Land of Slmm (/. e. from all parts of the
world into which they have been fcattered ) they have not yet been cal-
led, as 'd$ verf. 12. ,
4thly, When God doth this, his People fhall not hunger nor thi.ft,
neither [lull the beat or San fmite them, z/^rf. 10. (i.e. they (hall hart'
ger, or thirji no mire, the heat^ or San (hall never after more fmite them j
Kev. 7. 16. i.e. theyfhall never be burnt by the heat or Sun of Per-
fecution more ; all forrow and crying fhiU depart, a^jd God jhall rvipe
aivay all tears from their eyes^ ( Rev* 7. '^7. ) which we are fute Is not
yet accompliflied.)
. ytbly, rerf.17. Was never yet fulfilled, at their return from-S^j^
^j'/o^ their deliroyers and they that made them wafte went not out of-
them ; There were then the crew of SanbalUt^ Tobiahy &c. that oppo-
fed them, and that fo far, thit they put a ttop it the laft to the work of
the Lord at Jentfalem, into which, aiion after Alexander the Great en-
ters ; after him Antlochns Epiphanes waftetb, after thefc the %omanr
conqaer it ; and now the Tftrkj poffefs it.
Norhith, ^thly, the ly''"" verf, ever b^ea tccompliflied fincethc
carryingawiy the tea Tribes, the Kingdoms of Jfrad and Jadah were
never fuU of their own In-habitants. Thofe fent to p:>ffef$ it 2 Kinas
17. 24. we never r^zad were fenr for horn: again. Tney thit fwallow-
cd up the tw -Ive Tribes have been cbmged ( the Affynans^ Greekj.Ro-
?«>««;, T;^^-^r,have.interch:.ogib!y done it) but not removed* All which
abundantly evidince the truth of what I averted; That the Prophefte
Of lilts th; tlraj of Its Aicom-pll^msnt. If you apply the Scripture folcJy to.
the
in Anfiver to Mr. 1. his Exceptions, 99
the Gentile Saints, 'tis evident, hitherto it hath not been fulfilled. They
are ftill under Sorrow, OppreiTion, SufteringSj which at this day of its
iccotnplilliment they {hall not be ; (of whom this Prophefie fpeaks )
verL 10 . Their ^Vajiers, Deflroyers^ &c* are not gone cm from among theWy
as 'tis verf. 1 7. The prey is not yet taken from the mighty^ nor the lawful
Captive delivered^ Nor hath God contended with the Perfccutors of hif
People, according to the purport of verf, 24.3 2f , ad* So that evidently
the Prophefie had not its accompliHiment in the days of the Terjian Po-
tentates, oioiConjlantineydrc. or fince in any of the ten Horns ; but
waits the time thereof,as we think Mr.T.himfelf will fay we now affeic
with as much evidence as confidence. The former whereof (with a
<'reat abatement of the latter) is much defired in the writings of this
Animadverter by fober minded pcrfons, not a few, who have fpent fome
cftheir time in perufing them. That the text', Ifa.66.^. is a Prophe-
fie exprefly relating to the Jews, and their miraculous converfioD,(as is
aflerted in the 5. T. ) Mr. t; tells us ps not certain ; and cites Mr. Ga^
f^j^^r.acqiiainting us that the mofl: Interpreters underftand it of the fud-
dcin delivery of the People out of the Babylonian bondage h^jCyrmi
Divers of the Reftitution and Reftauration of the Church, under the
Miniftry of the Gofpel, whenfo many thoufands were converted, A^s
2,41. c^4. 4*
Anfvc. I. But that learned perfon is no Oracle, to whofe di<5tates vve
are indifpcnfably bound to attend, and give evidence.
2. Other Interpreters underftand it of the miraculous converfion
of the Jevfi ; and thofe not a few, nor contemptible.
3. That it hitherto hath not had its fulfilling we have the concurrent _
Teftimony of fome of the Anticnts. Jufi. Mart, in his Dialog, cum
Tryp. pag. 312. refers, this place of Ifa. 66. from the 5^''^er/. &c, to
Chrifts lecond coming. In which words (faith he) isro A«ff^'a*«»T«A/»iT?f
>«n«(s»?,)>»v, ( which Mi'.Mede underftands as meant of the Reluirt^ion
of the Godly ; the myftsry of our being again generated, or made new,>
at the Refuire6lion ) iu d'^MS 'TfKVTat ^ kq^'^v c* UfucxXntA %evi,7. Behold^ he cometh with Clouds i and every eye fhall
fee himy and they alfo which pierced him : and all kindreds of the Earth fhaU
wailbecaufeofhim. And Mat. 24.30. Then ^aU appear the Sign of the
Son of Mm ( either per Synechdochen, the great figns of Glory and Ma-
jefty, which then (hall compafs him round about ; or the Son of Man
himfelf, as the fign of Circumcifion is nothing clfe but Circumcifion
itfelf) in Heaven, Andthen Jhall aU the Tribes of the Earth monruy and
they (hall fee the Son of Man coming in the Clouds of Heaven, viz. in Ma^
jejiy And great glory. The fight Whereof fhall be the means of their mira-
culous Converfion. Accordingly you have here in Ifa. 66,verf. y. The
appearingof the Lord. The iffuc whereof is (i) The ruine of his ene-
mies, z^^r/. 6, 14, 15, i<5j ( where you have Chrifts appearance, large-
ly difcourfed of Eev. ip.) (2) The Converfion and Reftauratioa
oithtjewsy 'verf. 7, 8, p. ( 3 ) The concomitant Glory in the ntyt
Heaven, and new Earth ftite,or the time of the reftitution of all thing?^
verf. 10, 11, 12,13, 14, 22, 23. All which confidcredj I humbly con-
ceive I had ground enough to aftrt, That Ifa. 66. 8. h a Prophefie ex-
prefly relating to the Jews and their miraculous Converfion. That be-
caufe tis faid, Rom. 11. 2j, 26» fVhenthe fttJlnefs of the C entiles ii come
in
tfijin/wer to Mr.T,bts Exceptions, ' loi
f», 4S/frAel{hall hefaved : Therefore I may find fotnetbiog of i Nitio-
oai Church, confifting of fcveral Parilh Churches, bounded by old
Cuftotns, Lawi, Conftitutions, &e, in fubordination to Dlocefan^ Me^
tro^litttn Churches, with their fevcral Officers, of Priefts, Arch.
Deacons, Birtiops, Arch-BilTiops on the head of them, which is the Na-
tional Church we arc enquiring after in 7/4. 66. 8. is aConfequencc
I (hall never fee Mr. T. make good. That he fhould do fo, is ci tm i-
'^Mtu.ru^i amoDgft the number of thofc things that are impoffibie* And
once for all I defire him, when he writes next, not to think fo highly of
himfclf, as to conceit that his di(aate$ muft pafs without controle, but
to remember he is, ( as well as other men ) obliged to give us a rea-
fon of them ; elfe we (hall not think our fclves bound to take any fur-
ibex notice of them,then to rejed them as fayings of no weight or value*
Sea. i;»
Of National Mlmfltrs, Petcr,Pau!,Titu$j ns National Mlmflers, Ephef.
4^ II, 12, 15, explained. The Body of C^ri/l there, mt the Church^
Catholick^vi/ihle, hut a jfarticnlar Church ofChriji^ proved. Payors and
Teachers are only belonging to one f articular Congregation. If a man be a
Minijler bjf the appointment ofChrifi, of a ChHrch-Catholich^vifible, he
cannot be a Minifler ofChri/i of a National Church. The Minijiers of
Chriji are either Extraordinary or Ordinary, Of Saints Intereji in each,
I Cor. 3. 22, 23, expounded*
THE fccondQueriein the5'*T< is, Whether National Minijiers
are the Minijiers of Chriji ? Or, Whether there can he a true Mivi-
firy in a falje Churchy as a National Church muji be if not of Divine I n^-
fiitution ?
To this Mr* T, pretends to anfwer, SeB. 16. And after conje6lu'rej
of what I mean by National Minijiers^ he gives us fuch a defcription of
them, as he could not ( fure ) think any man befides hin^felf would
fubfcribeto; but it ferved his defign (bethought.) By National Mi-^
nijiersy I mean fuch as are members of a National Church, related to it
as the Minifters theteof,*s fuch ; Ordained and fet apart by National
Officers, bound up by its Canons and Laws in their Mmirtrations : who
when Mr. r.-fhall prove to be Minifters of Cbritt, he will befuppofed
to fay fomcthing in anfwer to the Queric,vvhich as yet he hath not. done.
His cnfuing Arguments fpeak not a word for fuch National MinifteH,
hinafdf being Judge,
102. A Vindication of the Sober Teftimony^
I ft, Vii^t, though he had the Jpofllejhi]), of CircumciJiof7j and Piul of
the Gentiles^ VYcrc not T<[ailoyiAl Mimfters,
2dly , Nor TitHiy though left. In Cieic, to fet In order things that were
wanting^ and to ordain Elders in every City^ Tit. i. y. For they were,
' Firjt) No members oit National Church.
Secondly, Not related to it as the Minijlers thereof.
Thirdly y Nor Ordained, or fet apart to iheii Office by NatinmlOf.
■fleers.
Ff?«rf/i/7, Not'bounded andcii'cumfcribed in their Miniftrjtions, by
my dcvifed hjliintions or Canons thereof : None of which were then in
being as is known. He goes on and tells us,
' 3Clly, They that may be Miniffers of Chrifi y though they be Mini,
fl^rs for the Body ofChriJ}^ and aJlthe Members thereof, may be Minijien of
Chrijfj though TSljtional ;
But Pafiorsand Teachers are g'lVCn for the edifying of the Body of Chriji i
Thcriforey &c.
' Anfrv, I. If by the Body of Chriji y Mr.T. means the Church- Catho-
lickvifible; The Apoflle, £/j^. 4. n, 12, ij.fpeaksnot a word of it ;
not the Body of Ptofeffors, or multitude of perfons profeffing Faith in
Chrift, is there intended; but fome particular Inltituted Church of
ehiili. Which we prove,
1. The Body ofChvift>£p^.4.ii»i2,i5. is the fame with the Body
and Church of Chrift, iC«?>:, 12.27,28. asby thcfcriousperufalofboth
places (comparing the one with the other) will to the fober and judi-
cious hz evident. That there it fignifies a particular Church of Chrift,
we have'demonftiatcd SeEi.ti: thcrefore'here it alfo fo fignifies.
2. Here Paftors and Teachers atelaid to be given for the edifying
cf the Body of Chrift,(/.^. particular inftituted Churches of Chiift) and
accordingly we find them ordained in every Church, ABs 14.23. Tit,
I. 5-. and the whole ol; their charge limited to particular Churches,
^^j 20. 17,28. 1 Pet.^.2,. iT;>».3.ij. Co/. 4. 17. who arc com-
manded to'obey them in the I-ord, i Thef.^. 12. Heb. 13. 17. from
whom they might not upon every occafion, nor without the confent of ■
the Congregauon, upon any pretext whatfoever, remove ; (See Calv.
Jnflltfit. /.4. c.l.f.7.) cf which Mr. Paul Bains [pQiks in his Expofition
on the ephejiansy chjp.2.3.p.3yo>3Jl. As the Lord doth give a Calling
and Grace, fo a People, towards whcm it is efpecially blejfed It is true,
the Apoftle had a more lavg.r Fipck, the caie of all Churches was upon
bim ; but wherefoevev God giv.cih 2/""']ling, there he giveth a People,
of whom theMinifter m.dyfav " ' joft Grace i^ given me of ^od^
AUs.
in Anfwer to Mr, T. his Exceptions, . 103
jiUsio.2.%^ I Pet. ^,2. God hath alfigncd every ordinary Minlfter a
portion of his People : for this is the difference between extraor-
dinaryj as the ApoHlcs, Evangelilis, thefevcnty Difcrplef, and our
ordinary Paflois : The Apoliles had an Univerfal Comtnillion ^ and
the Evangelirts were Delegates of the Apoliles — The Seventy (if not
EvangelittSj which Come of the Ancients encline to) yet they were il-
limited helpers, anci fellow-laboureisin the work of the Lord. Bat or-
dinary Miniftersthe Lord comminded to farten them to certain place?,
Tit.i.%. Ordain Elders City b^ City, And in the Council oiChalcedon^
chap.<^» Let none be ordained at large^ left he prove a tvandrln^ Jonathan.
Every Minifter muilbi, i. Seperated, 2. Authorized, 3. have allotted
to him a certain portion of people which may be inftriiiled by hirn,
which the diminutive ^of^c/up^not Tra/j/nj, may feem to infinuate. Now
as God doth give every PaftothisrcveraJFIock,fo he will that we travel
in leadingof them, we muft nolcxKKr)tlllo^mm'7^»v^ we rnuft not be Bi-*
fhops in other mens Dioceffcs, lert God fay, who hath required this at
pur hands? When the Lord lighteth Candles he doth find Candle-
liicks on which to fet them, &c.
Thefumif, i. TheBody of Chrift (Bph.4., 11, 12.) is 1 particular
Church of Chrift, for the edification of which Paftors and Teachers ara
given. 2ly. Ordinary Officers are limited to particular Churche.'?^
From whence the vanity of this Animadverter's Argument is confpl-
cuous to every eye.
If by Body of Chrift he underftand, in hU firft Propofition, the Uni-
vcrfal Catholick Church : i. His Argument is naught, conliffing of
four terms : for we have manifcfted that the Body of Chrili in the Mi-
nor (which is the Apoftles) is a p.irtieuhr Church of Chrilt. 2. His
Major is invaHd ; It doth not follow,, that if men ^may be Minifterrof
Chrift, though they be Minifters for the Body of Chrift, and all the mem-
bers thereof,that they may be Minifters of Chriftthough National., If
he th-ink Minifters for the Body of Chrii^, and all the members thereof,
and national Minifters are aequipollent,iipon fecond thoughts he will b^
fo ingenious as to acknowledge he wasmiftaken. Nay, ^dly. Tne very
truth is, 'tis fo far from being till*, that upon fuppoficion a man may ba
a Minifter of the Body o| Chrift, and yet the Viinifter of Chrift ;*.^. by
the appointment of Chrift a Minifter for his Body, and all the-Mimbers
( Churches ) thert^of. That therefore he may be the Minifter of Chrift
though T>{ational)- that ejm comrarlum^ est verum. A man cannot be 3
Miniftei of Chrift if x- National CMlmfter^a^ Minifiir ai a Naiional
Churchy upon fuppofition that ChrLlliiach. inftitutcd and appointed his
Min'.ftel5.
104 -^ Vindication of the Sober Te[lmo7iy,
Minifters to be Minifteis for his Body, i. e. his Church-Catholick-vi-
iible, which is not fure confined within the narrow circumference of
one Nation : A mans lefidcnce wherein will be accounted but a pitti-
ful difchargeof his Miniftryupon the fuppofition aforefaid. But, 4thly,
By {he Bodji of Chrifly Ephef,4. we have proved a particular Church of
Chiift to be intended. That there is any (hew of rcafon in the Ani-
madvertcrs propofition ; They that may be Mimflers ofChrljiy though they
may be Mimjiers of the Body ofChrlji^ i. e, a particular Church of Chrift,
and all the Members thereof ( which by the appointment of Chrift they
are ) way be Mimjiers ofChrifi, though "^iatienaly ( VA'hich none are but
by the devifings of man, and appointment of Antichrift) he himfelf will
not have the confidence to aver. There are thefe things incumbent up-
on him to prove if he ever reinforce this Argument.
F*>/?, That by Body of Chrift, Ephef. 4. is not meant a particular In-
ftitutcd Church of Chrift.
Secondly, That ordinary Church Officers (for to run into a difcourfe
of what was done by the Apoftles extraordinary Officers, who were not
fixt any where,nor could be,whilert they made confciencc of their Com-
niiiTion, Mat. 28. ip* which was to Preach the Cofpel to every Creamre ;
In which Office none are their SuccefTors, as we prove Chaif, 4. is fuch a
pittiful fig-leaf to cover ones nakcdnefs with, that every eye will fee
through ) are not limited to, or fixed in a particular Congregation.
Thirdly^ Manifeft the truth of this propofition ( fhould it be granted
him for difputcs fake, that by Body^ Efhe[. 4. is meant the Church-Ca-
tholick-vifible ) They that may be Mimjiers of Chriji, though they may be
Minijiersof the Body of Chrift ( ». e, the Church-Catholick-vifiblc )
und all the members thereof, may be Minijiers of Chrift though 7>(atioKal,
The Bottom or Bafis upon which it is built, I muft acknowledge my
fhort-fightednefs to be fuch, that I cannot ken, nor, it may be, a wifei
man than either of us.
His Fo«rf A Argument is like the reft, 'tis thus formed : If any of
the Saints, ai tvelloi one particular Congregation, have an Inter eji in all the
Mimjiers of Chrift, [0 Oi that they are truly theirs, then Mimjiers ofChriji
may be National ;
But I Cor. 3. 22, 23, Paul} and Cephas, and ApoIIos were alUhz Co-
lin thians, and all others who were Chriji's ;
Therefore*
Anfw. En cor ZenodoH, enjecur cratetis.
What is moft admirable in this Argument I know not. A few thingf
will manifel^ its nakednefsto all.
Eirji,
inAnfwer to Mr, T, his Exceptions , 105-
ift, The Miniftersof Chiift are either fuch as were called extraor-
dinary,a$ were immediately fcnt by Chrift, ( or affutned to themfelves
by them who were fo fent, to be coadjutors, or fcIiovT-wotkers with
them in that fcrvice and employment) to preach the Gofpel tbrcugh-
out the world, and were fixed no v\here ; related as Paftors or Teach-
ers to no one particular Congregation more than another; or fuch is
were mediately fent by Chrift, ordained in, and fet apart for particular
Congregations. Of the former fort were the Apoftles, &c. Of the lat-
ter, Paftors, Teachers, as we but now proved.
2dly, The having an inteteft in Minifters, is either the having an in-
teicft in their gifts and abilities God hath given them, or in their per-
fons, as Minifters appointed by the Lord, to ovcrfee, inftrua, and
watch over their fouls, as fuch that muft give an account, Heb. 15. 17.
Now let him take Minifters in either fence, for extraordinary or ordi-
nary Minifters, and an intercft in them for an intereft in their gifts, 01
in them as Minifters appointed by the Lord to watch over and inftrua
them ; the confequence of bis firft proportion is" moft weak and inva-
lid. Though all the Saints in the world might claim an intereft in P. e*
the gifts of the one and the other, were foi their ufe and emolument,
as the Lord was pleafed in his providence to caft them amongll them.
4. He fpeaks of extraordinary unlimited Officers, that were to con-
tinue but for a fcafonjand (vvhilft they were) fixed and fctlcd in no par-
ticular Churchj fo that the Corinthians might lay as much claim to them
npon that account as any other : Therefore National Mimflers maj be
;i//;7//?^rj of Cibr/y?, is this Animadvettet's Logick, which when I pui-
pofe Indicre fophifilcaref I may imitate him in.
What follows, viz,. That a man mity be a Commijjloner for approbation
9f PHblick,Treachers throughom a Nation^ (as Mr*T. Was when that wa$
in fafhion) and fo a National Minijiery or an Itinerant Preacher, anti yet
be a Mlnlhtr ofChrifly is not at all to the purpofc,
I. If Mr. T. look'd upon himfclf as fuch an one, wheii he fate at
fVhite-ff all imon^^ the Tryers, I know many of tbem that then fate
there, did not. And in the fenfc I fpeak of National Miniflers, as ex-
plained in the beginning of this Sedion, he could not be one.
2dly. Some(at leaft) of the then Tryers were fo far from being Nati-
onal ^finifters, that to my knowledge they were not Minifters at all^
but private Gentlemen, whom the then Powers thought fit to cnttuft
with the management of that aflfair.
Sea-* 16,
No National Church tinder the Oeconomj of the C off el. The National
Church of England deftitute of what Mr, T. makes ejfential of a true
Church, Somexvhat more ejfential to a true Church than the truth of
VoBrine of Faith, the truth offVorJhipy the truth of holy Converfatlon^
viz. Segregation and Aggregation, proved. The Animadvert ers Ar-
gument retorted upon himfelf- Though every defetl of Order doth not ml-
life a Churchy yet the defeU of that Order that is of the effence of a true
Church doth. Of the Dlforders of the Church of Corinth. Their imper^
tinent Allegation by the ^Animadverter of Synods : the learned Whita-
ktt'i judgment of them, and General Councils, Thefe ko proof for N^*
tlonal Churches. Of many particular Congregations under one Presby-^
terial Government. Thefe may be jet no National Church. The Church
of Jerufalem but one particular Congregation^meeting together in thefafw
place for celebration of Ordinances. How this Church rvat the pattern of
aH other Churches, Mr. T. his Cavils refuted,
THe next attempt of Mr. T. in this Se6tion, is to prove a National
Chaich, fo denominated from their fubjeaion to fome Canon-
B,uleis
in Anfwer to Mr. T. his Exceptions] 1 07
Rulers Ecclefiaftictl ( which is the National Church we are enquiring
after) or convcening by Deputies in fomc National Synod, though not
of Divine Inftitution, is a true Church.
This fccms at firft bluih to be a difficult task : to aflert a Church not
of Divine Inftitution,to be a Church of God(for fo 'tis if a true Church)
his Temple, Tabernacle, in vvhicb he walks and dwells, is to me fuch a
Paradox as requires a ftrong brain and hard forehead to make good.
But t/€^ffilft non capit mnfcof, nothing but what others defpair of ever
accomplilhing is thought by daring fpiriis worthy the attempting. We
attend his proofs. Thus he argues : They may be a true Church roho have
4iU things e^CHtial to 4 Church i and, nothing deflruCiive of its being fuch »
But a National Church may have all things effeatial to a Churchy &c.
Therefore,
Anfvp. Very good 1 Wc deny his minor Propofition, that a National
Church may have all things effentialto a Churchy &c. What faith he for
the proof of it f He tells us, that a National Church may have the truth
cfDo^rine of Faith y the truth of H^orjhify the truth of holy Converfationj bi'
fides which there is nothing ejfential to a true Church,
Anfrv. But this \i gratis di5lum)tnd without proof.
I. That Mr. T. can give us an account of any National Church un-
der the Oeconomy of the Gofpel, concerning which it may be affirmed
that the truth of the DoUrine of Faith ^the truth of fVorJklpythe truth of holy
Converfation did appertain to it^ (/.?.) if I do not much miftake him, it
hath been found in Doc^rinals, the true Worship of Chrift hath been
managed and carried on in it, and the particular members thereof (i.r.
the multitude of the Inhabitants of the Nation) holy and righteous:, will
not haftily be believed by fuch as have thought themfelves concerned
to look into thcfe matters. As for the Church oi England we fuppofe he
will not have the confidence to aflert that it may be truly affirmed of it>
that the members thereof are fo qualified. The frequent ftaggering and
fliameful fpcwings, through excefs, that we daily behold in no fmall
number, even of the Captains and chief of this Herd, evince the con-
trary. Of the foundnefs of their Do6lrine we give an account, Chap,
II. and of the truth of^ their Worfliip, Chap.S,
But 2dly, The Animadvertcr full well knew that his Antagonifts
look not not upon the particulars inltanced in, to be the ElTentiais of a
Church. We Country-folk are not wont to fay, that when the mate-
rials of an Houfe are fitted and brought together, the Houfe is built ,•
there muft be an orderly forming and placing of each piece in the build-
ing according to the Scheme or Platform thereof, before ibis can be af-
O 2 firmed
10^ A Vindication of the Sober Teflimony,
firmed of it. And therefore hie pes figendust he (hould hive minifefted
the truth of his didatc, that befidcs thefe there is nothing efTential to
a true Church.
We arc apt to think that two things,ovcr and above V¥hat is inftanc'd
in by him, are fo effcntial to a true Churcb,that V¥ithout them it is not
fuch. I. Segregation^ or fcparation from the wicked, carnal,foimaljhy-
pocritical world, and the vvorfiiip thereof, of which chuf./^. of the S.T,
-and in our Epiftle to the Reader prefixt to this Treatifc. 2. Aggrega-
tioKy or a folemn gathering together, by free and mutual confent, into
particular Congregations, in the fear of ih-e great God, giving up out
feJves to him and one another, according to his will, to walk together
in the fcHowfhip of th€ Gofpcl, in obedience to all the Inftitutions and
Appointments of out dear Lord,
I. That thus it fhould be in Gofpel-dayes the Prophets of old bear
their Tcftimonyjjeftjo.j'. Come Ictus-f joynour
tHeb. nS, which points f elves to th« Lord, &c. fo Jfa-. 2. 5. Mich. 4. 2.
foytbnoiacafualaggre- JU.X±,<. Zech.S.2l,22,27,
jS^i:f:f^/Z ^dly- Accordingly «. h.vc the Chutche, o£
'voluntary giving up Chrilt in the New-Teltament pra6tihng, and
themfelves to the Lord^ commended for their fo doing, as a6i:ing therein
and to one another r« according tO the. Will of God, A^jl^^l.^Z.
ujed ej Juc h a conjunitt- /^ o . t > 1
tin as it made by marri- ZLor.o. f.
age, 3dly. The feveral names and titles given un-
to particular Churches evince as much* Every fuch Church is called,
1. A Body, iCor. 12.27' Col.^.i^. ^ow. 14.4,5-. £/?A. j, 30, 32.
Ce/.i.i8,2i. Now 'tis not the multitude or number of members, whe-
ther many or few, that conftitute or make a Bbdy. We fay not, if we'
come into a Field where a Battel hath been fought, and find an Arm
in one place, a Leg in another, an Hand in a third, &c. though we
meet with as many members fcattered up and down as are in the body,
yea though thrown together in heap?;, that here is a body ,* no, no, 'tis
Effdis indigefiaque moles.
Their union each with other and coalefcency in one, is that which
gives them that denomination: Particular Saints fcattered here and
there, oreifually coming together are not (nor can they be) called
the Body of Chrirt ,* their union each with other by their free and mu-
tual confent, is that which denominates them fo to be.
2. An Houfe or Temple, Heh.^.6. Ephef.2. 21, 22. i lim. 3. if.
» Pet. 2.^, Mr. T. knows who have thought the world was made by the
carnal confluence of Atoms ; he dotbnot fure think j thai a cafaal con-
currence
in Anfwer to Mr, T. his Exceptions . 109
cutrencc of people profciTing the Name of the Lord, without more ado,
arc,or can become an Houfc or Temple for him.
3. A City, a Kingdom, Epb.z.ip. Mat. 21.^^. Heb.\2.i%. Joh.
18.36. That a man (hould be any way a member of chefe but by his hec
confcnt, cannot be afl'crted wich the lesft i>iew of reafon.
4. A Fraternity or Brotherhood, Zfir/j. 1 1. 14. i P^f.a. 17. compared
mthcbap.f.2ii^,
5'. ACandleHick, in allufion toM/p^hisCiodkllickj, Exod. 2^,
31. (wherein though there were many (}iafts,yet they did all coalefcc
in one) Rev.i.it,i2yZO. All which as they import ^j^^rf^^r/o», era
folemn union ; fo they clearly evince that this cannot be but by free
and mutual confent.
4. Beftdcs, we find Chtift promifing hij Ptefence to his Church and
People thus aggregated or gathered (an Argument of his well-pleafcd-
nefs therein) Mat. 1^.20, which accordingly he makes good to the
Churches of >4/;/i (as to the reft) "^v,i.i^. which we have proved to
be particular, Congregational Churches. That ihey were feparated
from the World and its Worfhip, gathered together by their own free
confent for the worlliippingGod, cjl^r. T, cannot deny ; There, wcis
no Laws to compel them hereunto, but thj contrary.
So that 3dly, we may righteoully retort this Animadverters Argu-
ment upon himfclf. There camot be a true Chnrch where thofe things ef-
fentlal to a true Church cannot be found : But in National Churches in ge^
neral (in the Church of England in particular) tho[e things that are ejfen-
tial to a true Church cannot be found : Therefore.
The Major is Mr. T's; The Minor we prove. Right matter and form
is of the ejfence of a true Churchy both wanting in the Church of England,,
I. The right matter Mr. T. denies not, to bj vifiblc Siints ; viable:
Drunkards, Swearers^ Whoremongers, covetous perfons are not fuch-:
yet of fuch as thefe is the Church of SyigUnd mofily compofed.
2dly. Thefotmof a trueChurch wehave manifcfted toconfut in fe-
piration from Worldly, Formal, Antichriftiaa Woiiliipptrs^ gathering
together by free confent into a Church-ftate, or panicular SocictieJ,
for the WoriVipand S^ryice of God : neither of which canbc aiVcrted
of the Church of England, A/uch of the WoiHiip of the Nitions, of
Antichrift (at leaft their rites and modes of Service) is retained iniu.
And into that Church-fhte. (fuch as it is) in which they are fixed,, did
they never enter by their free and voluntary confent, but by the Laws
of the Kingdom were they at fiiii ( I fpeak of their Naticnal-
Chuxch-ltatc i that ihe.Gofpel was early (whether by Jojefh of Arim-^-
th:a^
I r (5 A Vindication of the Sober Tejlimony^
thea^ or Coins one of the Apoftles, is not material ) preached in En^*
land ; that then a true Chuich,or Churches, were here planted I grant,
but this is nothing to their prefent frame as a Church-National ) com-
peirdthereanto,and by feverc Laws retained therein to thisday.From
which (as from the Lordly Prelacy ) the moft fobcr People of the Na-
tion do every. where (groaning, being burdened) long to be delivered.
What follows will receive a fpeedy difpatch. i. ' lis true the defcA
of outward order (*. was a rightly conftituted Church, madeupof vifible
Saints, i Cor. i.i. gathered together into a particular body, i Cor, 12,
27. meeting together) t*' -^ «^f^Oj in the fame place, for the Worfliipof
God, I Cor, 11.20. & 14.23. Some diforders found amongft this
Church did not nullifie it : £r^o the defc6l of that Order that if infti-
tuted by Chtift ad ejfe^ to the very exiftencc and being of a Gofpei-
Chuvch (as is the cafe of National Churches) doth not nullifie them,
will not in haft be made good. When Mr. T. proves tbe.famenefs of
conftitution bstwixtthe particular Church of ConWA, and the National
Church of England, his inftance of diforders amongft the Corinthians
Will be acknowledged pertinent ', but till then he will not himfelf, up-
on fecond thoughts, fay it is fo. The having of National Rulers Ec-
clefiaftical, either fingle perfon^ or in a Synod or Convocation, make
not a falfe Church, faith the Animadverter.
Anf^v. I. But (liould this be granted, it would not follow that a Na-
tional Church is not a falfe Church, which it may be upon other ac-
counts, though upon the account hereof it fhodd be acquitted.
But 2ly, National OfVicers (or Rulers) Ecclefiaftical, in whom all
Church-power is ft itcd (as Arch-Biftiop,) and from thence derived to-
Diocefan Biihops, and by them communicated (in part) to the ordina-
ry PertoMr,T.bisExcepimf\. rii
grettcr diftincc thm could meet in one place every Lord's day, is not
at all to hispurpofe. At the beft it is but a recrimination. * I know
not how thlsAnimadvcrter could imagine that the owning and averting
of thefe things as lavvfuljhad the leaft tendency to the eftablilhment of a
National Church. But fome men arc fo diikmpercd that they fuppofe
every thing makes for the advancement of that defign they are driving
on. If he deems Synods, ovvned by m^n of Congregational PrwcifleSy
and his Ecc/efafiical Convocation of National Officevs are of the fame
nature, he is miftaken.
I. Thofc are chofen by the particular Churches to which they are
feverally related, aad what they ad: and do is in their name, and upon
the account of that power and authority they receive from them : The
Convocation oi the Clergy td in their c^o name and authority, being.
never chofen by any one Congregation to fit and make Law?.
2ly. Thoi'e pretend not to be the Church, not to any felf-power to
make Laws, and impofe them upon the Churches as obligatory and
binding, to be received and fubje6led to by them, vvithom the ieaft
judgement of difcretion allowed them, or liberty of diflenung, if not
perfwaded in their confciences of the truth of what is decreed by
them, and its confonancy with the Scriptures of the Lord. As is
known to be the cafe of the Convocation of the Church of England^ to
difTent from whofc Canons (at leaft to oppofe them ) is ccnLured with
no Icfs than an Excommunication, or delivering up to Satan. Which
how direflly it leads to the Popifh implicit faith, of believing as the
Church believesy every one is able to difcern.
For my part, with reference to thefe, I am much of the mind of thc^
learned fVhitakery de Concll.p. 12. General Councils may erre, and im-
brice falfe opinions : Nam Concilium AHtlochenum verltatem dam»avit^
& hdirejin aprrtam propttgnavit : Similiter Arlmlnenfe (jr Ephefinnm [ecuK"
dum^ ex qno patet verltAtem non ejfe metiendam ex numero Eplfcoporttm^.
Of them he faith,
i . That their calling together is a certain politick and humame invention^.
P«g. 35,77.
2. Th(U they cannot frame Articles of Faith to blnde the Confcifnce^^
pag. ^^« . . 1 .
3. That their end in coming together^ UnottofeedoiPaftorSi brntocon---
[itlt what u beft for the Churches^ pag. 8 j.
4. That they art not Jimplynecejfary^ pag. 2^.
a being in the world. So that thefe things are little to his
purpofe. The next attempt of this Animadverter, is to remove an ob-
ftru6lion which he^ feeth to lye in his way, which in fum is this : T'he
firfl Church ofChriFir mdcr the Oeconomy of the Gofpely rvai ttndouhndly
formed according to the mind ofChr'ift. Buc this was a pauicular infiicu-
ted Churchy which though numerous^was not fo numerous, but that they
might meet together in the fame place. Therefore not a National
Church,^but_aparticular^hurch of Chriiiis of his inftitution, err.
The fiifl Propofition iseafilv dtmrnR'ated : Ic was formed by the
Apcftles> mcfi of integrity and faithfulneffj who would nor, du.ftnor,
innovate in the ihings of Chrirt, who had but lately received char«?e
from him to te^xch Believers to ohferve und do all things whatfoeverhc hr:d
commanded them; and had promifed thereupon hu-prefence with them.
lo whom alfoy after his Refurre^ion, he opened his hearty or fUinlyffokj of
■ \gs
^ ' "thm
1 1 4 A Vindication of the Sober Tejlimony^
things fertalnlngto the Kingdom of God, or ^ off el Church-fiate, A&a I,
3. Accordingly 'tis faid of chstn, Thai: they revealed the Coftnfel of God;
not their o«?«, but h^, A6l$ 20. 27. delivered to them what they had
leceived of the Lord Chrift, i Cor. 11. 23. To have done otherwifc,
had been an eftablidiment of Will-worfhio, which they condemn, Col,
2.13.
The Minor Propoficion is manifeft : Thefiift Church of Chrift under
the Oeconomy of the Gofpel) was the Church at Jemfalem : This vv»s
a particular Church of Chrift. 'Tis faid of them, Chap. 2. 45. That
they continued daily with one accord in the Temple. Verf. 47. Such as ppe •
converted, t:ziiid to l^e added rii IxxMo-fcc ^ to that Church , viz. which rvat
atjerufalenf. See Chap. 4. 23, 24, 29. and j* 12, and 8. 1,3. and 11,
22. and 12, ^ . and 15.4522, Tis ftrange to me, that when the Spirit
of the Lord, whenever he makes mention of this Church at yer«/4ptifm^ or the 3 d part, p. 34°.) that dll the Chnrch dU come togethery
Adl.J. II, 12. vpere gathered together, A61. 14. 27. and that the^ were
not ptrtsofthe Church who did not come together^ ^c. His iecond Reply
is fcarcc worth the mentioning. If it be granted that they then met for
that bufinefs, .yet there is no likelihood that they met for Ordinances.
And why fo I pray ? vvhy 'tis hldyAB.2.^6. that they did break^breai
fiom honfe to houfe.
Jnf. I. But thatbecaufe theyfometimcs celebrated that Ordinance
mote privately, it (hould ncccffarily foUovv that theynever did itall
of them together, that they were not in a capacity, were in an utter
impoflibility of fo doing (as is the cafe of a National Church) is be-
yond the verge of any mans undeiftanding but Mr. T*. And 'tis dcfired
he would at his next leizure make good that confequence.
lam informed (and doubt not the truth otit) that Mr.T. after
he had been in hearing of the Parifli-Prielt at Lempfiery not long fince
got as many of the Church, to whom he once owned himfelf related as
their Paftor, together as he could, and brake bread privately with them;
yet may it not thence rationally be concluded that he never celebrated
that Ordinance with them more publickly, or that he never intends to
do fo, much lefs that the Congregation, he ftill it feems holds commu-
nion with, is fo numerous that they cannot break bread together in the
fame place. Such pittiful Sophifms as thefe will never pafs for proof
amongft perfons that have the exercife of their underftanding or rea-
fon.
Yet 2dly, The Animadvcrter's Conceffion is a grant of the verity
of that he fcts himfelf to oppofc. If, A SI. 6.2. the Church did meet in
one Congregation for that bufinefs (as Mr. T. faith) 'tis evident they
were not fo numerous but they might meet together in one AlTembly,
which is the matter incontroverfie betwixt us.
He adds, 3dly, TheChttrchofJerafalem cannot be [aid to be the pattern
of all Chftrches.
Anfw. I. Nor is it neceffary that we affert it fo to be. The difco-
vcryof the Willof Chrift, the Laws and Rules he hath given forth
touching the aggregation of his Children into a Gofpel-Church-Rate,
arethepattcrn of all thcChurchesofChrirt in the World: and what-
ever Church is not conftituted according to this pattern,is none of his,
nor will ever by him be owned fo to be.
Yet 2dly, This Church at Jerufalem, being planted by the Apoftle.?,
according to the mind of Chriil, may with reference thereunto, be faid
to be the pattern of all rightly conltituted Churches. What hath our
P 2 . Animad-
1 1 (J' A Vindication of tie Sober Tefiimony^
Animads'erter to excep againrt this ? He tells us this cannot be, he-
Ciitdje I. "7 here was no (iij}rihiitlon of Believers under particnlar Officers.
Anfvu. I. But what doth Mr. T. mean by the dilhibution ot Belie-
vers under particuiaLOfHcers ? doch be mean that they were not diftii-
buted into feveral Congregations, under their particular Paftors ? no
one faith they were ; we aflertthccn to be one Church. They arc no
Icfs a pattern of particular ChurcheSj than if they had been fo diftri-
butcd, fo long as we find them in a poffibility of meeting in the fame
place.
2diy. Doth he mean that they had no Paftors amongft them ? This
is more than he will in haft make good. For, i. They had Apoftles..
adly. They had fixed Officeis, if P.csbytets and Elders be fuch (as 'tis
evident they are, from Atl. 14.23. & 20. 17,28.) whom we find in the
Church at Jfr«/<«/f»?, Act»n.2p, 30, & 1^.2,4,(^,22,23. &id.4.&
21.18.
3ly,What he further t^tn^That the Church ofjerufalem was to he that
Church fromrvhencevDert to be taken fnch oi might flam other ChurcheSy
forrvhich end. they vp ere after difper fed ^ Ad:s 8.1,4. therefore it cannot be
faid to be thefattern of allChurches, is, to fpeak modeftly,ruch a ftran^e
OT»-/f<5f«/f«r, that he muft take time to make good. That bccaufe the
Lord in his providence futifercd the enemies of his Son, to diiTtpare and
fcatter this Church, and by it took advantage, in the greatnefs of his
Love and Wifdom, for the preaching the Gofpel to others- »lfo, that
therefore it fhould be a Church, not formed up according to the mind
ofChriftjor being fo formed, was not to be an example and pattern^
with refpedb to the matter and manner of itsconftitution-to fuccceding.
Churches, is a confequcncc that will not be fwallowed down becaufc'
Mr. T. faith it ; and yet nothing but his Ipfe dixit is tendied towards
its fupport and maintenance.
But what he faith in the 4:hplacc,wil he thinks do his work,'tis this:
Be the Church of ferufalem of vnhat nat me or \(ind foever ^whether Con^
qreaationd^ Presbyterian or T^arochial ; it wot fo, not from any I^fiitmiott
of Christy bnt came to pafs according to divine Promifcf and Providence^
which being fo vanopis, 04 that no certain rule can be accommodated to all
timts, places cnd'ejiates of the Church ; ff'em^y jf*dgey that ( hrlfi hath^left
the jkaping of Churches m'Ach to humane prudence. That is in Hiort, there-
is no Foim of Churches of divine inilitution. An AfTertion fo deroga-
tory to the honour and gloi7 of our dear Lord Jeftts^ that it cannot but
be orievous ro Chriii-loving Saints to hear it abetted by any. I confcfs^
-^ this were the ftatc of Ciiurchesjit were tono purpofe to contend witii
hiia
in Anfrver to Mr. T. his Excejnions] . 117
him abo'U hisNitional Chiuch : nor is it at til to be wondrcd ar, if he
hath alwjys been for that Church-Government thit was. uppcrmoft in
the World. But this being an AfTertion ivhcreinmort of the Saints of
God in the World, do look upon chemfelvcs (upon more accounts than
one) to be greatly concerned, Mr. T. fhould have brought mod irre-
fragable Arguments to make it good. But behold in the ftcad hereof,
we meet with a deep filence; he onely turns afide to confider what:
worthy Mr. Parker offers, to prove that the form of Churches is of Di-
vine Inftitution. Of which in the next Sedion we (hall fpeak.
Se6l. 17.
The Porm of Churches of Divine InftitHtlon, The IfArnedVirktl's Argu^
merits vindicated from (JWr. f. hh' S'xceptioKS^ Particular Chftrches
called the Body of Chri/iy hii Houfgy aniTempte. The plain upon which
the Antichrljiian Church yvoi firft eretted. No other foHndaiion of the
Church bm Chrifi-. i Cor. 3. 10. Epb. 2. 20. Zech. 6. 13. Rev.
1 1 . 1 , explained. Twelve Arguments to prove the Form of Charches is
of Divine appointments
N Sftdi* i7« Mr. T. pretends to tnfwer the learned Parkers Argu-
. ments, by which he proves {Lib. 5. de Pollt. Ecct.c.17.) that ^the
Form of Churches is of Divine Injiltmlon : How Well he hath difchar^ed
this province is now to be conhdered. The fum of Mr^ Parker 5 firft
Argument is this : The Church is the Body of Chrl ft ^ i C0r.1l.27. But
in t he firfi forming of mans Body^he fhewed hlmfelf fpich an accurate rvorkeVy
in the deternttmvg the- dimenjton and Weafure of it^ Gen. 2. that nothing-
might he added to or taken from it by at7y : Therefore it cannot be imagined
that he fhould be fo regardlcfs of hii own Body^ as not accurately to clrcttm-
fcrlbe the dimenfim thereof. This Mr. T. is pleafed to call a Rhetorical
fiourljh ; but by his good leave, it will be found an Argument of fuch
weight, that he will not be able foon to remove it out of hi<; way. If"
the Church of Chriii be his Body, he hath certainly determined thedi-
mcnfions of it.. Not to have done fo, had been an Argument of little-
care thereof ; of his leaving it to the-arbitrary difpofements of the chil-
dren of men, of which^wc readenot a tittle in the Ncw-Tcftament.^
Who, or where ish;, that dares affume the confidence of ordering
and difpoi-iDg rhe Body of Chrift wichout his leave, or can do To with-
out^ treading the Soveraignty of Chrift overit, under foot; and pro-
claims hionfclf to be the i'Avtfti?^ that laivlefs ene^i the AntichriH- or
Bealijthat£fccndsoutofthc.bouomlefS"pif, &.muft go into perdition p
What:
ii^ A Vindication ■of the Sober Teflif^ony,
Whit faith Mr. T ? TheChftrch of Chriji, he tells us, is the Body of
Chriji ; but this is rather true of the Univerfal Church, and Myftical
Bodypf Chtirt, as may be gathcied from, iCor»i2. 12, 13. Efh, i,
22,23.^4.4. thanof a particular Congregation.
Anfvs). I. But he gives us no Argument todeiiionftrate,that i Cor.
\iL, 27. is to bi interpietcd of the Univerfal Church ( we have demon-
Hrated the contrary St^^ 13.) which he (hould have done if he would
have Lif think our felves concerned in his reply*
2dly,^ He himfelf grants, That a particular Chtirch ofChrlFt is ani
maj l;e called his Body ( as his words, 'tis rather true^ of the Univerfal
Church, than of a particular Congregation, impovt) That he fhould cn-
tiurt any with a power to model,figure andfafliion his own Body as they
plcafe, and yet never give us the ieaft hint of any fuch betruftment, is
the firft- born of improbabilities and abfurditics. The •jr^aTry i'ivl(^^ the
very plain in the Land oi SkiAm\ upon which the curfed Fibrickof the
An tichriftian Church., iB4^.^/j was at the fiift erected, as Mr. 7". well
knows. . , I ' ; • .
The learned P^ij-j^^r further argues : Eachfirft Church of God is the
houfe and bHildlngofGod^ i Cor. 3. 9 Heb. 3. 3, 4. i Tim. 3.15'. And
whit piudent'hQuiholder. will permit the Figure and Quantity of his
Houfe to thc;arbifrement and will of others ? To this Mr. T. adjoyns>
''^is true the Church of God is his Houfe 5 God built ity ChriB is the only
foundAtion of it, yet others are jubordmate Builders, and Foundations too in
refpetl- of their Doilriney i Cov. 3. 10. Ephef. 2,20. to vohom many
thif7ff( pertaining to the outward figure andquantity, i.e. the difiributing
vf Lharches into Oecumenical^ National^ Clajjicali Parochialy &c. are lefty
dec. This th^ Sum.'
Mfm I. 'Xts true PaulczWi himfelf,, iCor, ^. 10. A Builder (with
refpedt to his ( inlhumental ) plandng and founding of that Church ;
erspis 'A.fx.nexlmj a wife Archite^y or chief _ Builder ) but that he (or any
others ) was to build according to^thc good pleafure of their own wills,
that they had; no Idea, Placform., or Model given them by Chrift the
iord and-Maftcr of the Houfi?:, accoi(dihg,to y^rhichthey were obliegcd
to fa/liion th^eii building, is not fi^om hepcc proved.; 'Twas of old pro-
phefisd of Cbiift, That he fhould build his fpiritual Houfe ( or Temple )
^and bear the. glory ^Zic^6.i ^.(wh'ich accordingly 'tis faid he did^inrvhich
he was faithful y Kf^.3»3,5.) How either the one 01 other can be affirm-
ed of Chrill, if he> not at all concerned himfelf with the figure or quan-
tity of his Houfe, but left this to the prudence of men, 1 am not able to
conceive. Certainly. if theie be any glory in the Sttuduic, 'tis to be
afcribdd,
in Anfwer to Mr . T.his Exceptions, ' 1 1 p
jfcribed ( according to this Anitnadverters principles) to the dreg and
net of humane prudence and policy : Man mufi bear the glory there-
of, not Chtift ; which whether it be not plainly to juftlc Chrift out o£
the Throne of his Glory, and fet up a Man of clay there, a very Idol in
his room, let the judicious Reader determine.
2dly, Where any, bcfides Chri(^, is called, Ike Foundation of this
"Bmliingy ( as this Animadverter afleits) I know not : I remember full
well? that the Apoftle fpeaks of him as the alo^e Foundation^ i Cor. 3.
10, II. an expreifTon wholly deftruAivc of Mr. T. his Aflertion. Tis
true, Efh, 2. 20. the Apoille tells the Ephe/ia^Sy They were built upon
the foundation of the Trofhets and ApoJjUsi i.e. on Chiift, the Founda-
tion upon which they, and all Believers that ever were in the world,
were built. But he no where faith, That thefe w^re the Churches Foun-
dation : And yet were this yeelded him, it would be fhort of an evi-
dent dcmonftration, of what our Animadverter introduceth it to c-
vince, viz,. That many things appertaining to the outrvardjigure.yand quan-
tity of the Churchy were left to them to order and determine^ in and bj their
own private fpirit. What they did in this matter ^ they had inJiruQl ens from
Chrlji to doy were infallibly guided by the Spirit of the Lord In. Yet were
it further granted him, Tnat the diftribution of Churches vvas in a
great mcafure left to the Apoftles, doth it thence follow, That otherj
of the Children of Men, Antichrift, the Son of Perdition, maydiftri-
bute and figure them as they pleafe, and that in dired opposition to the
figure and quantity of them exhibited by the Aportles, in the firft Infti-
tution of Churches in the world ? What more frivolous ? The vvorthy
Parker ptocccdSyThe Material Temple had Its breadth^and Its meafure de-
fcrlbed mofi accurately by (jod ; jhall not the Spiritual have Its ? Wherefore
tbenwoi that Reed given to John? Wherefore a Command, to tneafurtthe
Temple, Rev. 1 1. i ?
To which Mr. T*. ift, By way of ConcdflTiDD. Each Congregatio'nd
Church is the Temple of God : The true Chrlfilan Church is [hadowed by the
Type sf the Old Temple ; the fever al parts of which were of old moji accu-
rately defcrlbediand meafured by the command of^od : that men might kyow
that this Houfe was madtJjy God, that It is not of humane Structure. God
hath by his providtnce dejcrlbed the Spiritual Temple as well Oi the Mate--
rlal.
2dly, By way of Negation. God hath not given u§' any fuchdefcripj.
tion of the outward fafhion and order, the breadch, a-ad mearure( /. e.
the number, cr^. ) of the Spiritual Temple, as he did to Mofes, &r,
of the material Temple. And afterwards^ Godhatknot deteimii^ei'th^
• diitrj>-
4(
I 2 A vindication of the S ober Teftlmonyt
diftribution and ordex of particular Churches Co., but that he hath left
many things therein to humane prudence.
\Am[vi>, And this Mr. T. calls, an Anfwer to the forcmentioned Argu-
.msnt, that any perfon (not bereft of his underftanding ) befides him-
fclf will deem it to hz fo, he muft not im.aginc. The Queftion is, n'he-
ther the Torm of Churches he of Divine hflittition ? Mr. T. denies it. The
learned Parlor proves it is, '* Becaufe the Form of the Temple (which
'' was a Typ:: of the GoLpel Churches ) was fo, ,and God cannot be
f fuppoCed to take lefs care of his Spiritual, than he did of his material
'* Temple.
What is our Animadverters reply ? ^'^7, the Form of Churches is not
ef Divine Infiitmion. He peifills in his opinion, without taking the Icaft
notice of the Argument advanced againrt it. But fcrioufly Sir, peifons
of judgment and fobriety will either fmile at your folly, or pitty you
for your fclf- conceit in fuch replies as thcfe. In my ("hallow judge-
ment, would he have removed this Argument out of his way, he Qiould
cither have proved that the material Temple of old> was not typical of
Gofpcl-Churches ,or that the figure and model of it was not of divine
IntUtucion, or that though both thefe are true ( which he grants ) the
confequence is not valid; that therefore God hath inlUtuied the form
•of his New-Teftamcnt-Churchcs ; which when he (ball be able to prove
that the Anritype muft not correfpond with the Type,OT that Gods care
was more about his material than his Spiritual Temple, hewillbefup-
pofed to fay fomcthin^> but till then,though he cry till his Lungs crack,
faHerii Parkere^fallerts; though he may amufe the fimple, with his
Doife of word?, the intelligent Reader will difccrn his weakncfs, and
nakednefs. -
2dly, Gods defcribing the Spiritual Temple as well as the Corpo-
ral by his providence, is a certain kind of oibberidi I underftand not;
he derciibc? both in his Word.
To thatQiuftion, f^berefore then wof the Reed ^Iven to John ? f^fhere-
f ore a Command tameafnre the Jemf^e} Rev. ii. i. Our Animadverter
ReoUes, It wm not that he (hould jet down the figsire^ cr quantity of each
tarticnlar Chtirchi or the number of Perfons that are to belong to it &C. b»t
his meafftring the T^fKp/e rvas his underjlanding the the. extent ofit^ i.e how
large and how narrow the Church fhould be in after-times^ in what efiate of
Peace or Perfecution^ &C.
Jnfw. But thefe ate his wonted diftatcs, without any tender of
proof.
. 1. The Temple of God was typical of the New Tcftament Churches,
who
ZH^ttfiper to Mr. T, his Exception/ . 121
who arc therefore here reprefcntcd under the notion and fitxiiliiude of
the Temple.
2. Thefe had hitherto during the fiift ten Peifecutions remained in
fome mcafure of Purity and confonancy to the fiift Inftitution.
3. But now they were to contctt with another ( an Antichriftian)
Beaft ; therefore mcafure them, faith the Angel to John, with a Reed:
Let them look to it that they mend what is already amifs in, and a-
mongft them by, and that they fvveive not from the meafuring Reed
or Rule, for therein will lie their fafety ( as we know it hath done)
from Antichriftian defilements.
4. The Golden Reed is the Word of God, which though in it fclf
precious and excellent as Gold to the men of the world, and the carnal
Antichriftian Church, it's accounted and ufedjis a Reed, a mean and
contemptible thing : though it is indeed like unto a Rod, the Rod of
Chrift's ftrength it is, by which he rulcth in the midft of his enemies.
That there ftiould be a Command given forth to meafure the Temple,
the Churches, by this Reed, if their Form were not inftituted and ap-
pointed thereinjisnot to be imagined ; upon that fuppofition a meafure
of them by it, were impolTibleto be taken.
f ♦ The meafured Court (faith the learned MedeJ fetteth forth the pri-
mitive fiate of the Chrifiian Church conformable to the Rule of Cods fVord,-
The meafuring is an allufton to E^cek,. 43. 7 to 10. or to building, viz.
That what the drawing of the Platform is to Builders, the fame is
Meafuring to God in the language of the Prophets, i.e. the ftate of the
Church figured thereby is God's wotkmanftiip. — -
6. The meafuring is, as was faid, a clear allufion to Ez,ek.. 43- 10,
but that meafuring was in order to the fhewing the form of the Houfe.
Let them meafure the patterriy ver. 1 1. Shetv them the form of the Houfe^
*nd the fafhioK thereof — therefore the meafuring here muft be for the
fame end too.
Mr. P<«r)t.4.ii,i2. Therefore*
Arg. 12. Thofc Churches which Chrift owns for hisCandlefticks
(in allufion to the Candlcfticks of the Temple, which were purely of
divine inftitution) are of the inftitution of Chrift. But Chrift owns par-
ticular Churches, for his CandleHicks ( vU. the Seven Churches of
AJia) which we have before demonftrated were particular Churches,
Kev.i. 20. Therefore —
Thofethat defire further fatisfa^^ion in this matter, may confult a
Utile Treat'fe, lately publifhed, entiiuled, A hief Inftrnliim in the
ff^orjhip
in Anfwer to Mr, T, Im Exceftiens. ' iif
Worjhif of(Joi,Ani DlfcipUne of the Chftrches of the New Tefl^.menti^.^i,
where ihey will find ic clearly and amply debated.
Sea. 18.
Of National Mlnljlers. What meant hy Mimflrj. Of extraor dinar j uni
ordinary Officers. Upon rvhat account the Church of Engl . is ajferted to
be afalfeChnrch. Mr,T. his^ Arguments toprove^ that in a National
Church)Or a Church Irregular In Its con/iitutionyway ke a true Mlnlfirj of
Chrifijafjfrvered, The contrary u demonjiraied.
TH E Defign of Mr. T, his 18'" and ip'^ Scft. is to anfwer the fe-
cond Query io S, T. whether National Mtnlfiers are the Mimftert
of Chrlft f Or^ whether there can be a true Mlniftry In a falfe Church ? (as
a National Ch-irch muft hz if not of divine Inftitution, upon what pre-
tence foever it be fo denominated.) Before he attempts the Refolution
of thisQ^iery, heconfideis
f/Vy?, What the Miniflry is, of which it is enquired whcthet it be
true or falfe : And having at large acquainted us with the fignification
of the word ^^hs^^j and XHrnfyof, he tells us, he underftandsthe query
to be meant of that part of the Miniftiy which is by preaching. But I
muft crave leave to tell him, he fomewhat mifleth the white of'^the Au-
thors intendment, who by it intends an Office- Power of Miniftr/jfor
difcharge of that whole work, that peculiarly relates to the MiniftersoF
the Gofpel, to be performed and managed by them according to the
Will of Chrift; Whether it be the Miniftry of the Word, the Lords
Supper, &c. This, as Mr. T. faith rightly, u either the Mlmfrry of ex^
traordlnary Officers^ oa Apojiles, &cc. of which our Qiicftion is not ; or of
ordinary Officers, as Pajiors^ &c. of whom it isq.icried, whether ordl.
nary National Officers or Minifters are of the Inftitution of Chrlit ? Wh a t
fakh Mr. T ?
He tells us, I . That Paul wa^ a Mlnlfter not only to a particular Churchy
hut even to the Gentiles.
Anfn>.^ That this doth not in the leaft concern the Queflion in de*
biic, which is of ordiifiry Church-Officers, ( and Paul, as I remem-
ber, ( with the reft of the Apoftles ) was an extraordinary one, re^
cciving a Commiffion for the Preaching of the Gofpel to all Nations )
hz will be fo ingenuous, as upon the review, to acknowledge.
Secondly, ^ Church may be [aid to he falfe many wayes.
Anfiv, True, it may fo 5 bu[ in his difcouife thereabouts vve arc little
ii6* A Vindication of the Sober Tefiimony,
qoncernsd, who afiert the Church of England to be a falfc Church, be-
caufe it is dcrtituteof the true Matter ( vifible Saints ) and the true
Form C freely giving up themfel ves unto the Lord, and one another, to
woirtiiphiai together as a Community, according to the revelation of
his will.)
But he will prove , Thirdly, That itt a National Chftrch^ or a. Church
irregular in its conftltmionj ( i. e. that hath neither the matter nor
£onu of a true Ciiuich of Chrift ) or difcrplinCy may be a true Minijiry of
Chrljt.
His firft Argument is, Arg. i. // the truth of the Mlmjiry defend
npon the truth of the Churchyor Its regnlarity ; then where is no true regular
C hurchj there is no trtie Mlmjiry. But that ufalfe^ fnce then may be a true
Miniftry rvhere there is no Chnrch at ally and therefore no true Church,
Therefore.
Anfw, If by atrue regular Church, Mr. T. means a Church for mat-
ter and form rightly conliitutcd, according to the mind of Chtift ; and
by a trueMiniliry, the Miniftry of ordinary Officers, fuchas Paftors,
and Teachers (as he muft do if he fpcak pertinently ) we deny his ^Z-
mr Propofition. Where there is no true Church at all, in a falfe
Church;, or Church not regularly conftituted, according to the mind of
Chrift, ( as is the cafe of the National Church of England ) there can-
not be a true Miniftry ,• which Mr. T. forgot to attempt the proof of.
And indeed his abilities feem to lie much in Dogmatizing, and 'tis
great pitty but he were created t Rabbi in the P/ri[?<«g«'M» School, his
accutenefs therein being fo incomparably excellent.
ift, That there can be no true ordinary Miniftry where there is no
Church, is manifcft.
F;V/?, Where ever we read of ordinary Minifters, we read of them
as appertaining to fome one particular Church or other, ABs 14. 23.
dr i<).2y 4j 22. or 20. 17, 28. 1 Cor^ 11. 28. Fhil. 1. 1. Tit. i. 5*^
\ Pet. J. I, 2 As good a man may imagine an Husband to be without
a Wife; or a Major, without a Corporation ; or a Father, without Chil-
dren ,• as a Miniftet, without a Church j in which he is XHTv^yitj to mi*
nifter according to the will and appointment of Chrift,
Secondly, Every lawful Minifter is elected, and chofcn to his Office
by the Church or People of God. Therefore there can be no true ordi-
nary lawful Miniftry, where there is no Church. Of this we have fpo-
ken at large, Chap 4, of S. T. To which multitudes of Teftimonics
might be added. The Churches of Helvetia ( Harm. Confef SeB. 1 1.
demin.Eccl.) affirm, **Thc Minifters of the Ciiurch muft be called
" »nd
in Anfwer to Mr. T. his Exceptionsi 127
** and chofen, by Ecclefiaftical and lawful ele(5tion; (» ^. thsy muft be
** religioufly elected by theCourchjOr by fom: from her deputed therc-
*' unto. ) So alfo do they fpeak, Artie. 1.6. IhU. So the Bohemian
Charches ; ^' Men who arc firtn and ftrong in the Faith, fearing God,
*• having received necefTary gifts for the work of the Miniftry, of an
" honeft and unblamable converfation, by People fearing God, muft be
** chofen, and called to the adminiftration of holy things. (Harmo*'.
Confef, SeEi 11. c^p 9. de min.Eccl.) And they exprefly r were not, we may with this Animadvertcr's leave, affertjthat great-
er degrees of fallTiood, arc not to be found in and upon them, than arc
to be found upon his National Church. Befides, fuppofingthe Churches
inftanc'd in 10 be fuchasM. T. faith they were? they were once true
R Chuichej
5 3 <3 A Vindication of the Sober Tejiimonyy
Churches of Chrift, to whom power wis delegued from him, for the e-
le6lion, and choofing of Officers to adt in his Nitnc and Authority t-
mongrt theai : which cannot bz afficm^d of any National Church in the
World. ThatbecaufeatrucMiniftrymay beinatrueChurch, under
great degeneracy ; therefore there may ba a true Miniftry in a falfe
Church: is an Affcrtion that this Animadvcrtcr had need toconfalt
with fomc body clfe to help him to make good, than his prcfcnt Advi-
fers. But
- 2; We crave leave to deny his Minor; A true LMimfiry ctnnot be
in Hypocritical^ Schl[ntAt'ical\Hereticd Churches, U they arc fuch,thcy
ate no Churches of Chrift ; if known to be fojthey atenot to be owned-
as fuch by them that fear him.
But he hath proved this from the Epiftles to the Corinthians^ to the
Churches of ^ergamos^ Thyatira and Sariis,
■ Anfrv. What hath he proved ? that thefe Churches were Hypocriticaf,
Schifoiatical, Heretical? nothinglcfsl 'Tistrue, i C(?r. 1. 1 1,1 2. P4«/
tells the Corinthians , that he heard there were Contentions amongft them^
&c. that the Church was [chlfmAtlcaL he faith not* That there arc
Contentions amongft the members of the Church of England^ Mr. T.
cannot deny : that therefore it is to be accounted a Schifmatical-
Church, he will fcarce affert. 'Tis true alfo, that there were fome in
the Church of Pergamos^ and Thyatlra^ that held falfe and erroneous
opinions ; and that the Churches were too much to blame to fuffer
them, as they did, (for which Chrift rebukes them): In Sardiixht ge-
nerality of the members were wonderfully declined in their fpirits, a
lime of withering, decaycs, deadnefs was upon them; yet was not the
one an Heretical, nor the other an Hypocritical Church : Nor can Mr.
T. make good his charge againfl: either of them. As for the Church of
Fergamosfl^xi^ witneffeth of them,that although they dwelt where Sa-
tan's feat wasj (/. e- where the Roman Govcrnout lived, who vvas Sa-
tan's chief inftrument for perfecuting the Saints) yet they held faft his
Namcj and did not deny his Faith : which is not a defcription of an.
Heretical Church. They owned Chrift, retained, cleivcd to the Do-
6:dne of the Gofptl, i. e, the Body of the Church did ( though fome
fe-v amongft them held ftrange Heterodoxies) therefore no Heretical-
Charch. The like may be faid of the Church of Thyarira^ doth Chrilt
charge her with Herefie ? doth he fay the whole Body, or major part of
the Church was infeiled with the dodrinc.of Jez.ebel? nothing lefs i
He faith indeed that the Church was too negligent in their duty to put
a.ftop to her feducing his Servants,, and iniimites as if fome were led
al^iay
in Anjrver to Mr. T. his Exceptimsl 13*
tftray by her : But withil teftifiej, that there were a confiderable num-
ber amoDgft them, that had not received her dodrinc> nor known the
depths of Satan (they called them depths^i.e. deep and wonderful thingf,
but they vvere the depth$ of Satan.) Of Sardi^ Chrift alfo witncfTeth,
that there wert fome things remaimng that he would have her fire ngthen^i.e.
fome graces that were not quite extind and dead in them ; and ot fomc
of them exprefly, that they had not defiled their garments y and thtxthey
JhoHld walk, with him in white, for the; were worthy, ( which cannot be
aflfimed of Hypocrites) ^^t/.2.i3,ip,2o,24j2y. 8c 3. 2, 4, Therefore
no Heretical nor Hypocritical Churches. And I cannot but wonder
at the confidence of this Animadvertcr to affirm it of them, after the
tertimony Chrift gives touching them : it being little lefs than giving
him the lie to his face. So that of this Argument we fliall ('tis proba-
ble) hear no more.
Of his fourth Argument we need fay no more but thiJ, that the Mini-
ftry therein mentioned is the Miniftry of the Apoftles : which he grants
not at all to i elate to our prefent Queftion. If he can make good this
Confequence, the Apoftles who vvere extraordinary Officers, immedi-
ately fent forth by Jeftts Chri^, were true Minifters, afore the regular
conftitution and difcipline of Churches, without their election or mif-
fion, Therefore Paftors and Teachers (who arc to be chofen by a Church
regularly conftitutcd) are true Minifters though not fo chofen ; he will
be abJe to reinforce this Argument, clie he muft never bring it into
the field more.
His fifth Argument in brief is, The denomination of true Minifiersis
from the truth of their DoUrine^ and no other form denominating them.
But there may he a Miniffration of true DoUrine in a falfe Church ,-
Ergo •
jinfw, I . The Major is moft falfe ; the denomination of true Mi-
nifters is from fomcwhat elfe bcfide the truth of their Dod:rinc, viz>,
A regular Miflion according to the mind of Chrift y.ot an entrance in
by the Door ; elfe they are not true Minifters, but Thieves and Rob-
bers. What places they are before-mentioned that he faith placeth the
truthof Miniftry in the Dr)d:rine taught, and no other thing, I cannot
tell ; and do affurc him tnat when he brings one place to prove it, I will
be his convert. C
21, 22, 2d. ^Joh.T.
■ jinfw I. We deny the confcquence, it doth not follow upon fuppo-
filion that falfe Prophets are fo denominated from their falfe Do6trine ;
that whoever preach true Do6lrine are true Minirters j the proof where-
of we cxpei^ by the next*
2ly. the Antecedent is manifeftly falfe. Falfe Prophets arc fo cal-
led bccaufe they ran and propheded in the Name of the Lord, when he
never fent them, (peak in thetn, or to them, Jer. 14. 14, if. & 23.
21,22. & 27. I J. & 28. 1 J. &2p. 9,31. & 43. 2. f'x,*^. 13.(5. Of
falfe Apoftlcs there is the fame reafon. The true Apoftles are fo call'd
upon the account of their Mljfion from Chrift : nor is any one fo, except
lawfully called by Chrift, faith Paretu on i Cor. i. The falfe, upon the
account of their pretending thereto, when indeed they were never fent
by him. Nor doth 2 C«r ii» 13. make void this Affertion, it rather
ertablifhethit. Tis true, the '^ivhtTio^ui^ or falfe Apoftles, preached
falfe Doctrine, but they are not upon that foot of account fo denomi-
nated, but becaufe they were metafchematizing , or transforming
themfelves into the Apoftles of Ctirift, as Satan is alfo fometimcs
transforming himfelf into an Angel of light ; #, r , they come as the A-
poftles of Chrift, pretend to be his AmbalTadors, men fent by him (al
M. T. knows the word fignifies) when really and indeed they were not
fo. 1 yo/>.2. 18, 2i,22)2«J. tells us oi Anticbrifts that were already
Co\Tity^\ic'titS Simon CMagHii EhioNy Cerirtthm, and that tbey oppofed
the Peifon and Do6trine of the Son of God, who with their endlefs ge-
nealogies, and uninteiiigible conception* attempted the total ovcr-
ihrow
in Anfwer to Mr. T. his Exception f I 13?
throw of the Oofpel, wondroufly perplexing the Saints of that day;
but that therefore they were called fjfe ApofiUs, there i$ not the lealt
mention. Gal.2.. 4, 5-, fpcaks of falfe Brethren ; but that they arc fo
called fingly, upon the account of their fpreading falfe opinions, is t
conceit that Mr. T, will not in hafte make good. They were unfound,
hypocritical Piofcflfors, that pretending to be Brethren, fought an oc-
cafion to injure and mifchievc the Children of the Lord : (which Paul
had too great an experiment of, 2 Cor. 1 1.2(5.) 2 Pet. 2,1, hath already
been confidered. So that with more Scripture-evidence it may be ar-
gued ; If falfe Prophcts> falfe Apoftles be fo denominated, upon the
account of their running before they vvere fent, pretending to come in
his Name, when he never midionated them ; Then they are falfe Mi'
mjiersj who come in the Name of Chrift, arid have received no au-
thentick Commiflion from him. But the Antecedent is tiue,as we have
evinced. Theieforc — >
Se6t. ip.
Of God's determining the whole of oar pygrjhip. His fo doing of old In thf
Statutes and Judgments he gave to Ifraely an eminent aU of Love : It is
fa notv to h^ Nevp-Teflament-Churches. CMr, T. his ten Arguments to
the contrary^ anfvcered, hSts 15. 10. Hcb. 7. 18, ip. & p. p, 10,
Joh.i. 18. explained,
THe third Q^ery in the S. T, is, whether God doth not bear oi much
love t ay aniexercife asmuch falthfulnefs over his l^vD-Tefl amenta
Churches, as over the National Church of the Jews f To this Mr. T^ an^
fwers, No doubt of It. He grants he doth.
To the fourth Qjcry, whether he hath not, as of old he dldy with refc'
rence to the then Church) determined the whole of the Worjhlp appertaining te
*themy to whofe Infiltutlons (without any humane additions) It u the duty of
fouls foUly to conform ? He anfwers in the Negative ; Cod hath not de-
termined Clrcumflantlals In Worship (he muft mean Circumftanccs c^
Worfhip relating to it, as fuch, or he fpeaks nothing to the purpofe j
md thefe are fuch neceffary parts of Worlliip, that without them it is
not accepted ) and hiAtot doing fo^ is an argument of greater love to his
Nerv.Te/lament-ChureheSy than his determining the whole of his fVorJhip
to the Chpirch of the Jews woi to them.
Anfw. I . In pag. 32. he tells uS; that If God dodefyn more diligently^
the longitude and latitude of the J ervljh Church at their catH'^^ hereafter^
(which a-re thiog^s ^r. r, accounts Accidentals of Worlliip undetcr,
m.in2d)
, . ' ji Vindication of the Sober Teflimony,
mined") arA leave the dmtnfion of ot^r Church to humane choice^ this maf
be dor.e out ofmore(peciat love to them i So that the fame a<^ of God is (ic
fccm ) a minifcrtacion and no manifeftation of gteatci love fiom God j
i,e. when it will fervc (J^r. T, his defign to aflert it to be fo, it isfo,
when otheiwifcjhc will pcifwade to the belief of the contrary.
Quo tenetim vultm mutantem Protea nodo.
2dly. When the Lord l"peak$ of the Judgments and Statutes he hid
oiven to Ifrael ( whereby the whole of theii Wordiip was determined)
he fpeaks of them as the wondrous manifeftation of his love to them,
whereby they weie eminently exalted above all the people in the woild,
Pfal.1^7. ip,2o. E!cek.,20.ii, Nfh.p.i^. VeHt,6.zj^. That thedc-
teiminatiou of their Worftiip (hould be an iffuc of dearcft love, and the
Don-detetmination of ours, a manifeftation of greater love, isanAf-
fertion that had need be back't with ftrong proofs and evidence, clfc
it is not likely to find the Icaft entertainment amongft the Saints. Bui
this he manifefts by no Icfs than a decad of Reifons*
Reaf. I. Becaufe the determination of the vohole of the fVorjhlf of Cod t»
the Jews, wot the imfofwg of a yoke on them which neither thf elder j ftor-Ja*
ter Jews were able to beary A6l$ 15. 10.
Anfrv. But this is a miftake of the Animadveiters. The Apoftic P?-
frr faith not, the determination of the whole of the Worftiipof God to
them was fuch a yoke, but the prclfiog Circumciiion and Mofaical Ob-
fcrvancci by fome Se<5l-mafters amongft them, as the way to Juftifica-
lion and Salvation, was fo; As is evident from ver^iy^^ii. The Do-
ctrine of JuHihcation and Salvation by the v\orks of the Law, was a yoke
that thcv were not able to bear 5 Ergo^ the determination of the whole
of the Worftiip of God was fo, is a moft ridiculous and puerile Conclu-
- fion. 2.. Grant the yoke to be Mofaical ObfervanceSy their number and
multitude, (^^. made thcmfuch an infupportable yoke, not their de-
le mination by the Lord. Whatever he inftitutes and commands (as*
fcich) is the joy and delight of the Saints to confoiin to, not their yoke
and burden.
Reif. 2. Becaufe the determination of the whole of God's JVorJhip to the
JiVi'Sy did bring in many things which were Hnfrofit able y weakj and made
nothing ferfet'ty Heb. 7. i^. 19* And if Cod had fo determined to w, he
had commanded things Hnprojic able, weakly (^c. Therefore
Anfvp. I. The will of God was the ground and meafuieof thofc
things the Aopftle calls unfrofnabUy O'c, ivhich had they been more fo,
upon the ace Ji:nc thereof they ought to have been fubmitted unto: the
unprofitablcncfs and wcaknefs of any thing, being no ground for its re-
jtv^lion when commanded by the Lord. 2dly,
in Anfwer to "Mr . T. his Exceptions, T ^ y
«dly, Thij Animadvettcr is not fomuch of Godscotinfel, as to be
tblc to fay what had been, if the whole of Gofpcl- Wot/hip had been (as
it is ) deteroaincd by the Lord. That there is fome part of Gofpcl- Wor-
(hipinftitutcd, he will not deny : l5 this unprofitable, weak? If nor,
what neceirity is there, that what he fuppofcth not to be inftituted, had
\\ been fo, (hould be liable to fuch a crimination.
3dly, Whit is moft weak, contemptible, and unprofitable in the eye
of man, is uCually made the power of God to them that are faved,
iCor, 1. 18) 23,24,25'.
4thly, Thefc fuppofed accidentals of Wotfhip non-determined of
God, arc left by him (according to Mr. T. his didare ) to be deter-
mined by Governours. If the determination of the Lord would have
fcndred them Wiak and unprofitable, doth their determination make
them efficacious and profitable ? Are they wifer, Wronger than God ?
or being determined by them,inay we re jeft them as unprofitable, weak,
and good for nothing ? To vvhat purpofe difputes he then for them ?
5'thlyj If God hath left them to be fet down by Governours, to whom
obedience is due ( as faith the Animadverter ) 'cis out of love, and
faithfulnefs to us, that he hath done fo : that it fhould be greater love
andfaithfulncfs in him to us, to leave them to the determination o£
men (with a neceflity of our fubjcd'ion to them when determined)
than to do it himfelf, is abfurd to affert.
But<^thly, Theobfervaocesinflanced in by PWjZ/f^./.iSjip. were
not accidentals of Wor(hip, they were neccffary, and efleotial parts
thereof ; fuch things wherein the greateft part of the Inftituted VVor-
(hip of God amongft the Jews did confiil, which arc called wf^i^, /*«^
iinprofitiiibie, &c. not with rcfpcft to the determination of God, as if
his determining them made them fo, which were impious to imagine,
nor in rcfpe6i of the end for which they were inftitutcd by the Lord
(which it was impoflible they fhould be, he never failing of his endj
normiftakingin the choice of means proper and fuitable thereunto) but
with refpefVtothe great works of JulHfication, Sanfttfication, &c. ac-
compliih^d and wrought by thz Meichsz^edfchian Priefthood of the Lord
JeCjs, asthe Apc^lefpeaketh : and in this fenfe all the Worlli'pof
Chrirt that is determined by him is weak, unprofitable, makes nothing:
perfed, vU. in it felf, or with refpsdt to Jurtification ; and by this
AnimadvertcrsArgumcntjit had therefore been a greater demonftraticn
of love and faithfulnefs in the Lord to us, to have determined no pare
of Inftituted WorOiip.
Reaf. 3, The things God determined to the Jews airout the Circt^m-i
I 3 <5 ^ Vindication of the S ober Teftiwony]
ftantlals of his PVor(hlf^ vfiert hm fhadoivs of go 9 d things to come, which wtrt
not fit to be continued^ or to hcft^Jiplled mth any other, Chrlji i>ei»g come who
was the Body or Sttbjfance t Colof. 2. id, 17. Hcb. 10. i. ThciC-
forc. —
^yjfiv. I. What was fit or not fit for God to do, Mr. 7*. is too bold
to afTucne the confidence to determine : He never made him, 01 any
of the Sons of men his CounCellor.
2. Not the circumftantials of Woifhlp only, but the grciteft part of
the inftitutcd Worlliip of the Lord amongft them, was a fhadow of good
things to come* The Sacrifices^ Pajfover, Ordinances of the Prieft-
hood, crc. were eminent Types of Chdft, who was the Subftancc and
Body of them : yet no accidentals of Wor(hip, but that wherein the
Worfiiip it (elf did confift.
But, 3dly, Mr. T, will never prove, That if God determine the
whole of his Woiiliip under the Gofpd, he muft introduce fuch thingf
as arc fuch (hadows of good things to come, as the Jews Obfervances
were. The determination of the whole of the Worfliip of Chrift, avert-
ed by us, fecures us, we find by experience, from fuch things j which
the afl'crting a liberty in men to determine what they pleafe, under the
notion of accidentals of Worfhip, expofeth us toj (witncfs the Crofs in
Baptifm, Surplice, Hood, Tippet, and a hundred fuch ridiculous trin-
kets invented by them) and yet except he prove this, his teafonjs ir-
lationalj and ludicrous. Let us fee if there be any more weight in what
follows.
Reaf. 4. Such Ordinances were carnalj to eadttre only to the time of
Reformation^ which is this time of the (joffely Heb. p.p. Therefore iis fart
of Gods love, Si c. that neither tffe fame in f articular, nor other are precifely
determined to m bj ^od.
AnfvD. I. The Jewi(h Ordinances, arc called C<«r«^/, or ^w<*^«
«w/)>c°f, ihzjptjllficationsy 01 Eight eotifneffes oftheflefh, becaufc in their
** own nature they reached only to the outward man ( faith T//«"<«ror )
** b:caufc they did fan(5tifie only to the purifying of the fle(h, verf. 13,
** ( fay our Annotators ) Thefe were to continue but untill the time
of Reformation, as the Apoftle faith> even to the times of the Gofpcl ;
but that no other Ordinances that in their own nature ( I fpeak not of
what is done by the bleifing of the Lord upon his own appointments )
reach only to the outward man, and the purifying of the fl:l^, are of
the appointment of Chrift^ whatever others fay, Mr. T. uponfecond
thoughts will not affert it.
But, 2dly, Thefe Ordinances were carnal and vertually aboli/hed
at
in Anfwer to Mr. T. his Exceptions,, i , 7
It the death of Chiift, K^ually taken away and removed yyhen the
Temple was dcftroyed by Titw refpatian, the fame Ordinances in 6ar-
ticular are not determined by the Lord j but that no other Ordinances
are, is a flip of Mr. T. his Pen, or it may be a Typographical error,
which he will not juftifie.
3dly, When this Animadverter proves that it was not an tSt of rich
love and faithfulnefs in the Lord,upon the ccffation of the carnal Ordi-
nances of the y^wx, to inftitute de movo^ and precifely determine, a more
fimple or fpiritual Worfliip • or that bscaufc ihefe then ccafed, there-
fore it could not be an aft of love in the Lord fo to do : i. e. When he
fiiall make good his Inference, he may be fuppofed to fay fomethin <^, 7. Heb. 3. 5. Therefore wc arc no
longer to be fubjeft to Afo/^i/V^/ appointments, had been fome.vhat to-
lerable arguing ; but therefore 'tis greater love in the Lord, not ro dc»
termine the whole of his Worfliip to us now ( rvhich beirg the Pohtion
he attempts the proof of, fliould have been his laureace) isiuch a pir=
s tifui
J 5 ^ ji yinduatton of the Sober Teftimony,
tifull ilUiion, that one would never expe6l from fuch a Icirned perfon
2S Mr, T>
It rather follows, Therefore Chrift hath determined the whole of hlj
Woi/hip under the New Tettament, heUgfakhfal at a Son^ when Mon-
ies the Servant^ according to the appointment of the Lord, gave forth
Laws for the ordering the whole of the affairs of the then Houfe of God:
efpccially confidcring that he was i^Cit Prophet Like unto Mo^esy whoni
the Father promilcd to ral[e up; into whofe mouth he faid, he would
fHt his words^ and. that he [houU fpeak^ ftnto the Sons of Men^ n>hatever he
sommandedhlm, Dcut. i8. 18. Accordingly when he comes into the
world, 'tis faid of himjH^ revealed the Father,]o\\a.\%.{(jr:^y,ynd?SSi*^''*i or hand-writing of Mofaical Ceromonies been aholifhed, Col.
2.14. we had not reaped the frm ofChriFts deaths bj which they were
abolijhedy Ephef. 2. 14, 1 5". andfo confeq^ently tajied the lefs of the- love of
the Lord, But that therefore 'tis a greater argument of love in God,
cot to determine the whole of his Woilliip, or that if he had done fo,
we had not reaped the fruit of Chrifts death, is fuch a fort of nakednefs
in Mr. T, his arguing, that one would not willingly difcover, did not
the vindication of Truth necefTitate one hereunto.
Reaf. 8. His eighth Reafon is ( if polTible ) more weak and ab-
furd. The Apojilesjndged it a great benefit to the Chrifiian Churches^ that
they were exempt from the Rites and Ceremonies of the Mojaical Law^ A(5ls
15.28. therefore theyacconnted it an effcll of Godslove,that hv had not de-'
termined the whole of his iVorfhip to us. •
With what aff.'ilion others will perufe thefc paflagcs I cannot tell,
for my part I heartily pitty him, that he fhould ever undertake the de-
fence of a caufe fo deplorable, as to be driven to fuch pittiful ftiifts, -in
the managcrie thereof : which I cannot impute to his want of Abilities
(which he will one day find, he mi^ht better have imployed than in
his prefent undertaking) but the dcfperatenefs of the Caufe he en-
deavours to defend. It follows indeed, that therefore they accounted
it an cffedof Gods love, chat they were delivered from the burden of
thofe external Rites and Ceremonies, ( efpecially as they. appertained
to the Covenant of Works ) andfo do we. 'Tis ftrargeif this Ani-
madvevter reckon it to be fo, that he fhould plead for the fame, the
fciJie>. yea woife Ceremonies, impofcd not by the Lord, but by men,,
whofa
in Anfwer to Mr. T. his Excepiionf. \ 3 9
•whofc fervantJ we never were, nor in thefc matters ought to be. But
thit they accounted it an effed of love, that God had not determined
the whole of his New-Tc(hment-Wor(hip, is fuch a elimination as
their fouls abhorred.
But he proceeds : Rcaf. 9. *Tis an ejfeEi of greater love to the GentUe
ChttrcheSy that God hath mt iettrmlneA. the vahole of his fVorJhip ; hecanfe
they being of divers Nations and Language s^ under divers Goverrmentt,
It fed to dtvers Cufiomst they could not conveniently ( if at all ) fraEiife fuch
an Uniformity of Circumftances J as theymufi have dene, if God had fo de^
termined,
Anfw. I. That their being of divers Nations, &c. fliould difctpi-
cittte them with refpc(Si; to their conforming to the will of God,
even in Circumftantials of Worrtiip, as fuch, any more than they arc
difcapacitatcd in their conforming to that part of Inftituted Worfhip,
Mr. T. grants to be determined by the Lord, is beyond the ken of my
(hallow undeiftinding.
2dly, That the Saints muft have pradlfed any external Uniformity
( I fuppofe he means it with refpcd to Liturgies ( falfly called Divine
Service ) in ufe amongft the Papifts and Ghurch ofEnglandy Vcftoientf
called Holy^ &c. ) if God had determined the whole of his Worfhip,
we crave leave to deny he hath fo done ; yet fuch an Uniformity ought
not to be pradifed, 'tis wretched and abominable. And yet had the
Lord fcen it meet to have enjoyned any fuch thing, it ought to have
been piac^ifed, nor would it by the Saints have been accounted a lef$
argument of his love to them, becaufe thereby they fhould have been
expofed to outward inconveniencics. This reafon at the beft is but car«
nal and felfifli ; from our conveniencies external, or inconveniencie?,
t mcafutc of the Lords love, in Divine AppointmcDii, is not to be
taken.
But there is yet one Reafon behind.
Rcaf. 10. The Ajfertiony That God hath determined the whole of hit
Worfhif in Circunfjiantlals relating to it, at fuch y is to infringe our Chrijlian
Liberty^ and to bring us into fuch bondage at they were in under the Law ;
therefore not agrhable to that love, God bears to the NeW'Tefiament^
Churches^
AnfvD, I. That the Lords determining the whole of his Wor/Tiip,
ftiould in the leafl infringe our Chriftian Liberty, is a monftrous afler-
tion ; it rather eftablifheth it, in the freedom it gives, not only from
the 3^tfB»//^ Ceremonies, but the Inventions and Devices of men, wirh
force and violence, attempted to be impofed upon us. For if God had
S 2 de.
1 40 -^ Vindication of the Sober Teflimony^
determined the whole of his New-Tcftttnent-Wovdiip, it c»nnot be
fuppofcd that we owe the leaft homage or fubjeaion to thcfe : We may
not be the fervantsof men. , i. , ,
2dly, I never yet thought, that a conformity to any things that God
had reveikd and dctetmined,as our duty, had (upon that account) been
out bondage. 'Tis the liberty, joy, and delight of the Saints to do his
will, T[d. II9.4^ iJoh.'y.S' Pfal.np.^' & iip.m. Suchkind
of weak impertinent arguingj, averted with ftate and confidence ( as
is the manner of the man ) muft he be content to deal with, who un-
dertakes the confideration of what is propoled by this Animadvertei.
But to recite thefe Arguments had been Anfwer fnfficient to the judici-
ous and intelligent Reader. We attend his fuithet motion*
Sea, 20,
Cod h^diefgfied his own Officers for the management of the affairs of his
Houfe, kvho they are^ may be coUeEiedfrom Ephef. 4. 1 1. The Animad-
verier proves noty that Arch-Bijhops, &c. do the mrkofthe Mlnijiers of
the Gofpel^are commiffioriated bj Chrlfi, His apfrehenfion when hetookjht
folemn League ani Covenant^ not the fame as now. The extenfivenefs of
the Privlledges of the Saints under the Qofjiel-Oeconomie. what things
were wanting to the Jews under the fecond TempUy which they had under
thefirfi. The EleBlon of Mlnlfters the peculiar Prlviledge of the Church,
That tt was praBlfed by the Saints in thefirfi Ages, granted by the Ani^
madverter. Many things charged upon the Saints then livings that are
falfe. Neither former dlforders^ nor prefent dlfiempers amongft tht
Saints any fnfficient Warrant for the changing an Infill utlon ofChrlFt.,
The Prlviledge of Women afferted frem Scripture^ and learned Writers,
Of the Decree of the Council of Carthage, i Cor. 14. 34, 37. i Tim.
2. 12. explained. What « to be done In cafe of difference In the CongrC'
gatlon touching the eleUlon of Officers*
MR. T. inhi$2r.5r£?. propofesthe j-'^Query in S.T, toco-r
(ideration, viz,. Whether God hath not now^ oa then ( under the
time of the Law ) defgned the feveral Officers and Offices his wifdom thought
fufficlentfor the management of the affairs of his Houfe ; fo that the Imen-
tion of new ones by the Sons of Men, ts not only needlefs, but a daring advance
agalnji the foveralgnty^care and wifdom of God over his Churches. To which
after a large harangue touching MofeSy\.\[t 70 Elders J ofhifa^ihc Judges^
David and other Kings, the Piophcts,-/44r<7« and his Sons,with the Le-
vitts
in Anfjver to Mr, T. his Eoiteptions, 141
vltts^ whom the Lord appointed for the management of the affairs of
hisHoufe; (having alio learnedly told ms^ that God hath not in the
Chriftian Church dcfigned fuch Officers and Offices as thcfe) the twelve
Difciples, and amongft the rcftj Pettr^ ( to whom he fcems to affert a
Primacy, by way of promife to appertain.) He refolvcs the Queftion in
the affirmative. Tells us, that who the Officers of ChiilVsdefigning.
tre> may beft be gathered from Eph.4.. 11. (of which we have formerly
fpoke in Chap. 3. of 5. T. ) As foi what follows, when Mr. T. (halt
prove,
I ft, That the Arch-Bifhopsj Blfliops, &c. of the Church of England.
do the works enjoyned by Chrift and his Apoftlcs, to the Minifters of
tile Gofpel.
2dly,That every one that doth thofc wo;ks,though not Commiffiona-
ted by Chrift thereunto, nor performing them after the order appointed
by him, is a Minifler of Chrift.
3dly, That its lawful for the Sons of men, to make more degrees of
Miniftry,( one above the other)under ne'vNames,Titlcs,(with maintc-
aanceforrcign to the maintenance of Chrift) employed in works he no
where charges upon them todo,than Chrlji ever inftituted Scappointed,
fliall look upon our felves as concerned in what he offers in this SeUion,
But till then we (hall neither trouble our feives or Reader with his
Lordly diftatcs, which being tendred without proof, may vighteoufly be
rejected by us. Only thus much I would tell him inhis ear. That if he
had ( when he took the folemn League and Covenant) the fame appre-
henfion of this generation of men he now feems to have, he did very
wickedly to fwear to endeavour the extirpation of Prelacy (i, e. as in
the Covenant is explained, Church-Government by Arch-Bi/hops^ Bljhops^
their Chancellours^ and Commijfaries^ Deans, Deans and Chapters^ Arch-
deacons^ and all other Ecclefiaftical Oncers depending on that Hierarchic. )
What ? Durft he fware to cxtirpite the Minifters and Mihiftry o£
Chrift, as he now fuppofeth them to be ? But
Temporamatantftri nos &mHtamurinillfs,
In Se[l, 22. Mt^ T. takes notice of the ^'^ enquiry in S. T. touch-
ing the cxtenfivenefs of the Privilcdgcs of the Siints under the Gofpcii
whether not commenfurate with theirs under the Law :. which if unr
derftood of Saints in appearance, or the vifible Church, he tells us, Thf
vifible Church of the Jejvs had in fame things greater Privi ledges ; 04 thofc
ytentioned Rom. 9» 4, J. & 3. i, 2. ( and are they not as much com-
mitted IQ the Church and People of God now ? fo that, thefe Texts ane.
liule:
JA.^ A FindicaHon of the Sober Teflimonyi
little to his advantage ; ) together mth Gods revealing his mind to them
hj Urim and. Thuoaiai, extraordinary Prophets^ and many more ( which hc
not being pleafed to particularize to us we (hall not turn afide to
make enquiry after : ) But to thofe inftanccd in wc Anfwcr.
F;>/?, That the Church and People of God aredcftituteof fomeof
the Priviledges mentioned, i$ granted r and fo was the Church of the
Jews, afrer their return from the BahylonijhCnpimty' The Rabbics
tell us, That in the fecond Temple there were five things wanting which had
been in thefirfi.
^ I. The Arh^wtth the Mercy-Seat and Chernhimt,
2. The fire from Heaven.
3. The Urimand Thummim, Ezra 2.63. Neb. 7. ^S* vfhtrebj the
Lord never anfwered them more*
4. The Majefty ( or divine prefence ) whereby they feem to mean the
Oracle in the mo/i holy place ^ where God hath dwelt between the Cheruhims^
Pial. 80. 2. Numb. 7. 8p.
5. The Holy (jhsfi, or the Spirit of Prophefiey which was not in the Pro*
^hets after the fecond year of Darius, after Higgai, ^echariah, and Mala-
chic had f.nijhed their Trophefies.
Secondly y The Inference of the Animadvertcr is weak, Believers {at
vifible Saints) under the Gofpel have not fomt things with which the
Churchof the Jews waif riviledgedy therefore their Priviledges are not at
■extenfivei which notwithflanding they might he ^ yea abundantly more ex-
tenfive. The fiift Temple upon many accounts was more glorious than
the fecond, which wanted ( as was but now remarked ) many things
wherein its glory lay. Yet, Hag. 1.9. the Prophet tells them, that
the glory of the Utter hsufe fhould he greater than of the former i which it
was, though it had not the fame things for its ornament and glory, upon
other accounts, T'/«.. its being honoured with the bodily prefence of
Chrift there, &c. Of the Priviledges of the Gofpel-Churches, and
.their fuper-en:,incncy, with i'cfpc6l to the Old-Teftament- Church, we
ill ill not now treat. They are delivered from the Yoke of Ceremonial
Obfervances, have the Gofpel unvailed , preached amongft them,
^Cor.^, i8,c^(r. Nor need we the intendment of our prefent enquiry,
being only thisj fVheiher the folemn deputation of men fignally pointed out
hy the Lord for tht adminifiration of holy things in his houfe^ by the Body of
the Churchybe not now as then, their peculiar priviledge ?
What faith Mr. T. hereunto ?
T. The folemn deputation of Apojiles and other MiniflerSy we find not m
the New Tejiament^ to have been the peculiar priviledge of the Church.
Anfw^
in Anfwer to Mr. t, his Exceptions] 14$
A»/V. I. But our Q^cftion is not touching extraordinary Officers,
fuch asApoftles, but of ordinary onej, fuch 1$ Payors, &c.
Yet 2dly, a min ne«d not go far to find fuch a deputation, even of an
Aportle, to the work of the Lord by the Body of the Church, to<»cthcr.
with the reft of the Apoftles, A^/ i.i4,r y,x($j2j,24,2(5. \izm° tn evi-
dent proof hereof beyond exception.
He adds, 2* Their Ordination it no where mefjtioned as done by the
» SaintSjOr Brethren, which were not Officers.
hfffiv. I. Tne Animadvertermuiakes Ofdinition,for Impofition of
hands, which is only one part of Ordination, and comprehends the
whole aA of deputing orfcttingtncn apart to the work of the Miniftry,
2. That Aflcrtion, That the Churchy
&c. in ekvSHng their own Paftors,miy be fo. Contentions I know there
vvsre, early amongft thsm, abaut this matter ; that there w^re tumults
and frays,, .may perhaps be coined by fome ambitious fpirits, that th^y
m'ght the better take -airoccafion to divcft the Sancsof that faaed Pii-
viiedge.
3.. The former diforders, or piefeot diftsmpers amongft Saints, arr
no warrant for the variation, or nullifying an Inftitution of Chrift.
4- What ftrange Saints (it may be hcmcansonly ihcParochiansof
his Mother the Church of 5'«^/^W^ Mr. T. hath his lot caft amongfl I
cannotrelU BlcffedbethcLord there are thoufands of Saints, and
many Churches i*£»g/rf«Arrwaiion$, pvayiffg:
the Lord to reveal that alio unto •them. And .MrcT^othnot well thus-
to afperfe and blacken ths Geaeiationctf the.Ri'ghtcouSa.
Ths:
'j J ^ A Vindication of the Sober Tefliminy,
The abfurdities that Mr. T. fuppofcth will enfuc upon the afferting
the election of Minifters to be thepriviledge of the Saints^ aic not
worth the mentioning. I know not any Law that forbids Women to
intermeddle herein, whofc priviledge reached farther than fo.
1. There are many Scriptures that feem to afl'ert it as their right and
liberty, (i.) In the choice of Officers they were unqucftionably prc-
fcnt, /^^.i.if. & <$.2,34. & 14.23. & i<5. 23. (2.) At the deciding
of Controvcrhes, y4^. if. 22. &»i.22. 1 Cor. 6. 2, (3.) At the
choice of Men to carry the Benevolence of the Church to thc.necdy
Brethren, aCcr.S.ip. i Cor. 16,^. (4.) At the cafting-out of Offen-
ders, ^;«M 8. 17. I Cor. 5". 4, 5". (f.) In their re-admifllon upon Re-
pentance, iCor.2.6to 10. They being part of the Church, muftncccf-
firily be underftood as concern'd in thefc matters, wherein the whole
Church are faid to be concerned.
•i A. Twere eafie to introduce above a Jury twice told, of learned
Writers, wh6 have written as much as this comes to : As Bez^aX^ivm^
Btlter^Biiti'oiger^MelaiiUhoMi Bacan. Partttu, Juniuii Cyfriariy TrelcHtias^
SihrdnduSj Rive'u^^ Jerome ^ AugHJilne-, Naz.tMxz.eMyjimh'ofcy Chryfofiom^
Tbeodoret, TheopbyUB; So the Magdeburgenfes in 2 Cent. c.7. de Confom
clatioyie Ecclefiarum ; who all affert that Church-affairs Ihould be exe-
cuted by the content of the whole Church. The Council o( Carthage in-
deed decreed 4. r^w. pp. That a Woman, though never fo holy and
learned, fliould not preach in publick, nor baptize ; can. lOo. And
Tertttliian tell<; US that in his time it vvas forbid to a Woman to teach in
the Jfrtcan Church, and baptize ; but they deny them not liberty to
vote, confent, or diffent in Church-matters.
Nor do the Scriptures mentioned by this Animadvcrtcr in the leaft
advance themfelvcs againft what isaffertedby us. Not i Cor. 14.34,3 j.
I. 'Tis asmuch,moreagainttthepradice allowed by his Mother the
Church of England. In that Church Women have liberty not only to
fay Amen, to lay Prayers after the Pricft with a loud voice, but with^
the Men to 3(51 their parts in Wordiip, the Prieft faying one part, and
they another. They have (at leaft they bad not long fince) liberty in
cafe of nectffify to baptize : which is greater than the Sifters priviledge
we plead for. • Supcinis is fpeaking in the Church* But i^\%Ai clavem
sUve peUere. • ■
2. That Women might be chofenCWf^-oj^f^r/,is evident from iTim.
y.p. Phah was a Deaconcfs, Ram.i6,x, Touching the .management of
their office, they oiight (cfpecially if called upon by them fo to do) to
give an account to the Congregation : How they could do this without
fpcaking
in Anfiver to Mr, T. bis Exception f. 14^
fpeaking in the Church I am not able to underftarid. Therefore,
3* Thcfenfc of the Apoaicis, that they be not admitted to publick
preaching or prophefying (ordinarily) by vertae of Office-power ; That
ihey do not a*a«», command, (as the word fomctimes fignifies) or fpcak
fo as to ufurp authority over the man, as the Apoftlc explains it, 1 Tim.
2.12. Bm I fujfernot a^Vomantoteach, or ufurp authority over the Man,
The Utter cxpreiTion is exegetical of the former, /. e. not fo to teach
as to ufurp authority over the man! Ye* I had ever till now thou<'bt
that fpeaking fo as to teftifieones confent, or difl'ent, to inform the
Church of what they knew not, of concern to them, and the Apoftles,
^.li^KM^ I Tim. 2. 12. had been vaftly different : And indeed fee no
icafon to change my thoughts from any thing this Animadvertet offers;
that tfaefe Scriptures make nothing for his purpofe^
As for the fccond abfurdity that Mr. rjfuppofes would folJow upon
the afferting the Saints Privilcdge in the clcaion of their own Mini-
ftcrs, viz. That whom the major part choofe, the lejfer part art mt to take
for their Mimfler — fcarcely dcferves to be taken notice of.
I. The difference fuppofed feldom happens amongft the Con^regatei
Churches-^ if but once, 'tis too often : Though Mr. T. his exprefiion in-
timates as if a frequent cafe j which I cannot but tell him is a mecr ca-
lumny. Twill not one day be for his credit, however it may tt prcfcnc
ferve his defign, that he walks fo much by that rule,
Calfimniare fort iter aliquid adharebit,
2. When it happens the cxercifeof thofc Rules of Condefccntion,'
Love, and mutual forbearance, enjoyned by Chrift upon his Difcipief,
would foon put an end to the differences faggefted. But,
3 . If this will not do, the calling-in the help of fomc Sifter-Churchy
may quench the flames* Yet,
4. If nothing will do, bur, through the prevalency of corruption,
Scbifms remain amongft them, and feparation atthclaftcach fromo-
ther enfue,to prevent this we muft not lay afide an Inftitution oiChrifl,
y. Bcfides, the impofing a Miniftcr upon a People by a Patron with .
a Bifliops Inftitutlpn and Indudion, hath mote frequently (and I am
futc more juttly afid warvantably) been the occtfion of the offence and
difference intimated.
Sea.
,4^* jiFindicationof the SoberTelimonyy f.
Sea. 21.
Of a vlfilfle itftlmied Churchy and its fecurity from ApoJIaJle, PVhat Srron
and Corrnpttons unchurch a Church, Of the National Church of Ed*^-
land , Of the G over noun and Officers of a collapfed Church. The condl-
tion of EngUnd's Church-Officers.Of Separation from a collapfed Church,
Of Communion with a Church not rightly confiitmed^ and compulJio»
thereuuto,
IN Sea. 23. Mr.T. trmfcribes the 7th Qperyin S. T. Whether any
vifihle infiituted Church in the world hath greater fecurity againft Apo-
fiafie from body and that fore judgment of having its Candlefiick^removed
{and being unchurched J than that people of the Jevps had ? If not^ then ivhe-
ther^ fuppojing a National Church tohofthelnflitutionofChrifty it may
not fo com! topafs, that it may be fo oversfread with corruptions^ that it may
lofe the effence of a Churchy and jufily bedifrobed of that appellation. To
which he anfwcrs in the Affirmative, and tells us, that they jufily plead
h agaiufi the Church of Rome, and that the promife, Mat. 1 5. 8. doth not
belong to any particular infiituted Church in the fVorldy but to the invlfihle
Church of Gods EltH, And we are of the fame mind with him in this
matter. But left any reflexion of difparagement (hould from. this Con-
cellion» happen to the Church of £»g/4»^, as a very dutiful Son, he
addj,T/j4f not every ^ no nor many corruptions of jome kind do unchurch^ but
fuch Errors as overthrow the foundation ofChriftian Faith : Corruptions of
fVorfhip by Idolatry ^ in life by evil manner Sy utterly inconfifiant with Chri'
fianity.
. Anfw. I. Nor did we ever affert, that every or miny corruptions of
fome kind did unchurch. So that in this matter Mr. T, might have fa-
ved his pains.
Nor 2dly, had we the leaft occafion to do fo with refpeft to the
Church of England^ which We deny to be a true Church, not becaufe
dreadfully degenerate from what at firft it was, but becaufe in its firft
Conltitution as National (which it icczivzd aadcrihc Papacy) it was
never a true Church of Chrift. ^' ^r^^.
Though 3dly, fuch fundamental Errors, fuch corruptions in WorlTiip
and evil manners, arc to be found upon it, that are inconfiftint wicn
the power of Gcdlinefs (or Chriitianity) and therefore fuch as, by Me.
T", his ConcedionjWere enough to unchurch it.
■ To the eighth Qjery in 5.T. viz.. H^hether the Eccleftafilch^and Spi-
ritual Ruler Sy Govcrnours^ and Officers of fuch a collapfed Churchy m.ty not
ri^h-.
in Anfiper to Mr. T. his ExcepUem] 1 47
righteoujly, fu of oUy he accoutited and efieemtd as fal[e Prophets^ that go
about to canfe the people to forget the Name of the Lord (or hu pure fVorJhip)
^j their lies or unfcriptural TraditionSy ImovatioaSi and ceremouiom Page-
antries. Mr^T. pretends to inrvver,5rfl. 24. which hcfronts with thif;
Ever^ Error makjs not a falfe Prophet : which no one faith it doth. And
fuithctjby w*y of reply, having placed in the Vin 2 Pet, 2,1. Jude^^
I John 4. 1. 2 John 7. i John 2.22. which fpeak of falfe Prophets and
Antichriftj but advantage him not in the leaft in his prefeni under-
taking, as we have manifefted. He adds, that fo long at they teach the
fVorfhip of Chrtft in his Name ^ are mtheut Idolatry in their fVorfhip^ and
Here fie in their 7)oiirine, they are not to he accounted falfe Prophets.
Anfw. But this, as to the prcfentMiniftersof£»^/4«,
W*. Conformity to the Mifs-book ( I (hould have faid the Llturgle
from thence ftolen) bowing at theNameof J^/«^j communicating with
a Drunken Pari(h-Prieft, and a company of Swearing Drunken Pariflii-
oners, whereby perfons become one Bread with them ; kneeling at the
a^ of receiving ; having their Children figned with the fign of the
Crofs : which we are apt to think arc things finful, and till Mr. T. is
pleafcd better to inform us, are like to abide in our prefcnt apprehen-
fion thereabout : from whence Separation from her is warrantable by
the Animadverters concefTion and grant.
3dly, That Separation from one part of Worfliip in a Church fhould
be lomrwhat juftifiable, and not from the whole, at fomc time and not
alway (things ftill remaining as they weie) ija myflery that I.profeff
I underftand not. I prefumc he fuggcftj it with reference to the Pray-
ers and Sacraments of the Church, a fcparation from which he fuppc-
feth is more juftifiable than from their Preaching.
But ferioufly I would thank Mr. T* if he would take the pains to
prove, I. That 'tis lawful for me to joyn with that Church in any part
of Worfhip, with ivhom I am not obliged, cannot in confciencepray.
2dly, That where the Sacraments are not duly adminiftrcd, there is a
true Church : The due adminiftration of Sacraments, having been hi-
therto afifcrted as one certain note of a true Church* If they are duly
idminiftred in the Church o^Englaniy why doth Mr- T. refufe to joyn
in their Adminiftration > If they are not duly adminiftred, the Church
c£ EngiaKd is a falfe Church, and not to be joynedwith in any part
of WorQiip. What follows in this Scdlion, that the Separation pleaded-
for, is for the moft part, the fruit of pride, or bitter zeal, and tends to
flrife and confufion, ar»d every evil work, muft be imputed to the over-
flowing of Mr. T. his gall and paffion ; 'Tis at the leaft a fruit of the
flefh, which he will do well to wait upon God to humble him for, and
mortifie in him. I fhall only fay, The Lord forgive thee. The Scripture
inftanc'd,JT. pag.4ij ^2* w« denied, W«;.
That there are any circumjiances, orparticalarities of fforfhipj relating to
tty as [uch^ undetermined by the Lord. 2dly. Under the notion of parti-
culiiitics of Worfliip undetermined, he (lirouds the many Popiih
toyes, and Antichrittian inventions, ( as Crofs in Baptifm, Ring in
Marriage, Surplice — ) yet retained in the Church of England, Thefe
hevvouldnothaveperfons too careful about. But ferioudy Sir, tHofc
that know the Lord, know him to be a jealous God, and that he hath
manifefted his jcaloufie, in fuch terrible rebukes, againft fome of the
fons of men (as iV^i<«^and v^^7?«, Levit.io.1,2. Vz.7:^ayiSam.6.6^
7. whom he flew in his fury, for their Worfhipping him othetwife than
he had determined) that be they never fo weak, they tremble (and ab-
hor) to draw nigh to God, in a way they have no Scripture- vvarrant for.
3dly. They dcfire to be fatisfied in the authority of the Children o£
men, in their attempts to impofe upon their Confciences, and make
thofe things the neceflary parts of Worship, which they themfelves
acknowledge, Chrift hath left as particularities undetermined.
4ihly^ They would alfo be direfted by Mr.T. to thofe faithful ,.learned^
wife, and holy Teachers, hefpeaks of, for they can find few,, or none
fuch, in a whole County. And yet fthiy. One thing more they would
be fatisfied in, Whether an implicite Faith in matters of Worrtiip, be
any more tolerable and juftifiable than in matters of Doilrine : And •
whether this will ever be a fatisfa^lory anfwer to their mighty Sove-
reign, the Lord of^ofts, when he (hall demand of them, who hath rr-
quired fhii at yoar hAnds ? Why, truth Lord, we never read that thou
didft ever do fo ;. but our faithful — Teachers told us we might, yea
ought notwiihthnding to priaife thefe things, and believe it will
never be accepted as fuch. 6ihly, His fcvirrilous reflcaions they
can freely pardon,, though they know that the biood of %antersy &i.
J ^ X A Vindication of the Soher Tejli??2ony,
(hcfpsaksof) have not been produced by the inquifitivcncfs of any
after the mindof God, with rcfpcd^ to loftituted Worfliip- butpcrfons
taking up, wich fiich (light thoughts of the Woifblp t)f the Holy God,
a^fuc^licxpreirions, as thefc ufed by him, arc apt enough to-bsget in
the minds of tnen^togethcr with the inttability and inconihncy of per-
lons, whonathey have (it niay be) owned as their Teacheri and Ru-
lers ; being ready to icnbrace and (hake hands with whatever is upper-
moft in the world : labouring to fupport, uphold, and draw others, to
thcici^braccment of that now, which not long ago they Prayed, Prea-
ched agiinft, and with hands and eyes lift vp to Heaven, they fwore to
fcek ( to theuttermott of their power ) to root out, anddemoUifli.
Sir, thefe things arc fome of thofe occafions (through the fubtilty of
Satan, and the corrliption of mans nature) of that Rantifmi Atbelfm,
drc. that is in the world. And bleffed be the Lord, the Congregati*
ons of his People, have been but little emptied hereby; they are a brood
iifuing, for the tnoft part, out of the Womb of the Church of EKglani,
xndarefuch (as it's known) that little enquired into thefc matters,
taking all for Gofpel that their Preachers taught the.ii.
The next attempt of the Animadvsrter, is the examination of the
Arguments advanced in the 5, T. againft hearing theprefent Minitters
QtEyigUni. Thefivftis,
Thiit which there i^ no warrant for In the Scripture, (being fart of In-
filtmed fVorjhip) is not lawful for the Saints to fraUlfe : Bm there is no
V arrant In the Script tsre for hearing theprefent iJHlnl/lers (^ and Hearing
u part of InfiitHted ^orjhlp.) Therefore
To which he anrweis,i'(f^1.2. C/?^p.i. Thefumis. Thereis a Twofold
IVarranty bj Command^ or by Perwljfion. Of Inflltuted fVorjhip there are
tiro Parts, i. EJfentlal) wlthotit: which It ii not^ or is not rightly called
/»/} It wed fVorjhip. i. Accidental, which maj he prefent-> or abfent^ and
yet the ff'orjhip be. or rlghteoufly be fo called: If the Major be meant of fVar-
rant by Command, and part accidental of Injlituted fVorjhlpi It is denied ;
and fo is the Minor. Hearing the Word from this or that perfon^ Is a part
accident^ of hfiltated H^orjhipi undetermined, and hath a warrant by Per-
mJffioH at being not contrary to any precept or %^ule In Script are about fffch
Wo'jhlp,
Anjw. I. This Animadve,rter continues ftill his oldtradcof beg-
ging, and dilating without proof, which doth not become hfm '-, and
being in matters wherein our fouls are fo nearly concerned, we cannot
bear it in him.
I . He te' Is us, That with re(pe^ to Injiltuted mrjhlf^there Is a twofold
warranty
in Anfioer to Mr, T, his Exceptions I ly,
vfarrant^lfyCoMmaniyorhy PermlJfion\ but would he had thought it
incumbent upon him, to hive proved, what he affcrted. This we deny.
Whatever hath not a wairant of Command in the Scripture is plainly
interdifted, and forbidden therein, Deut.^.z. & 12.32. Rev.X2.,\%,
punifticd with no Icfs than death upon thofc that have adventured to zdt
exorbitantly, without fuch a warrant, as we but now maoifcfted.
2dly. He tells us. That there Are tvfo Parts oflnfiitttted fTorp^ip^ Ef-
fentUlyind AccUental ; but this alfo is falfc, and untrue, we expcd hij
proof of it. A part Accidental of Inftitutcd Wor(hip, is a fort o£
gibbcrilli (that as it is unfcriptural fo) it is little lefs than down-right-
nonfence. " Inftitutcd Wojfliip is fuch Worship as is appointed by
**command from Chrift, or that is by Chtifts inftitution, faith Mr. T,
( in anfwer to the Preface of S, T. SeU^ 2. ) How any part of infti-
tutcd Worfhip, can be an accidental part 1. e, fuch a part of Worfliip,
(as though cnjoyncd by Chrift, which if it be not, it is not inftitutcd) af
may be done, or not done, without fin, I muft profcfs I undcrftand nor.
And defire Mr. T. would inform me (not in a Die requlptey and vohat
parts were ejfential and necejfary to be ohferved, were determined in Scrip.
turc; at for accidental things y they were left to the prudence and authority
chiefly of Rulers, ( Who told hitn fo ? This canting he furely learned of
the Romifh CahaL) Chrif wot faithful, in that he revealed what wm his
Fathers will in Spirituals, but for Externals appointed hut a few things ^and
left the reji to be ordered under general Rules, as it fhould be found convent'
ent in after times*
Anfw, I. Thcfe arc Mr. T. his di^flates, of which you muft expefi
his proofs when he hath greater leifurc ; but in the mean while no man
can leafonably be blamed, if he icfufe to fubfciibe to them.
2dly, If Chiift hath determined what parts of wor(hip are effcntia/^
md neceffaty to be obferved,as he grants, this part of the Controvcrfic
is at an end, and muft be by him acknowledged to be fo, till he have
proved,
Firfl, That there arc accidental parts of Inftituted Worrtiip;
Secondly, That unneccfiary triftes taay be added to the effential and
ncccfl'ary parts of WorlKp, as parts thereof.
Thirdly, That what Chrift thought not neceffary to be obfcrvcd, is
neceffaty to be obfcrved, becaufe men think fo.
Bat 3dly, Would Mr. T. would direft us, to the place where Chrift
bath granted that power to the Rulers (oranyelfe) to add what they
fhall judge convenient to his Woifliip, h« being Head of his Body, the
Church, and King of Saints, we fuppofe he will not have the confidence
toaffert; they may do this without his leave ( the doing fo being a
plain ufurpation of bis Throne and Kingly Authority .^) I have read
oves
in Anfioer to Mr . T. his Exeeptiony, ir ^7
©vcf the New Tcfttment more thm once, and tnuft profcfs, I find not
the leift indmition of any fuch thing therein, but the contrary.
4thly. We do not underftand how Chrift could be faithful, if he rc-
vcaltd only what was his Fathers will in Spirituals, and negledcd to
do fo, with refpe«ft to Externals (as Mr. T. intimates ) when he was
to reveal the whole vvill of his Father to his Cfauich, and for that end
ctm« into the world, John 1. 18. Heb. 1^2,
Nor Jthly, Can we conceive, how it confifts with thewifdomof
Chrift to leave it to men ( the gteateft and wifeft of them ) to deter-
mine what if fit and convenient to be added to his Worfhip ; becaufc
nothing is more evidenf>than that they arc incompetent Judges hereof^
Their folly herein being frequently remarked in the Scripture. Jcrobo^
Am thinks it convenient that the People worfliip at Dan and Bethel, and
that they have golden Calves, as vilible rcprefentations of that God
whom they wor(hipped. Ahaz. thinks it decent and convenient, that a
ftitely Altar, ( the pattern whereof he had feen at Damafcm ) be fee
up by the Altar of the Lord that was at Jert^falem^ which things were
the provocation of the eyes of his glory. The truth is, the wretched ad-
ditamcnts of the Sons of men to the Worfhip of Chrift, owe their ori-
ginal to this one abominable figment of Mr. T, That what is by men
thoH^ht convenient y in thefyorfhip ofChriJiy is left to be ordered by them. In
the Papacy, Holy water is by Pope Alexander thought to be convenient
to be referved in Temples, to fanc^ific the People, and drive away De-
vils ; So is the Dedication of Temples by Pope Hlginm : That all of
ripe years, do every Sajier receive the Sacrament, by Pope Zefhirinns^
That Priefts Stand when the Gofpcl is read, by Pope Anafiatlus : The
Letany, by Pope C/rr^or; : Confirmation of the Baptized, by Clemens
(as 'tis faid : ) ( though many of thefc things arc antedated, and afcti-
bed, as to their Original, to perfons that would have abhorred them.
ScHltetHS Med, Fatr, p.i.l.ii.c. 10. faith. Of all the Eplfiles'ofthefirj)-
Popesy no man that reads them attentively y but acknowledgeth them to be for"
ged. The Epiflles Decretal which pafs under the Mames of Clement, &c,
are all forged^ and that for Jtx-ReafonSy faith Perkins, The like fairh Dr.
Prideaax inh\s 9^ Orat. de Pfetidoepigr aphis y SeU.^^) The Celebration
of the Mafs upon the Altar, by X/7?«j ( or Sixtus : ) The Diftinaion
of Piri(h:$ by DionyJittSy with t command to Plreachers to keep within
thnr Bounds. The fingipg theCtced,by Pope Marcus : The Glory to th&
Father yX.0 be faid after the Pfalms : And the Order of Verifiers or Si»g-
ing-Men, by Pope Damafus : The Dedication of Churches by Bi{hops>
by f a//Ar.Popc Stephen the?!*! think* it convcnicatto Degrade all that
had
"i J- 8 A rindi cation of the Sober Teflmony,
bid taken Orders from P. Formoftu^^ be himfclf gives them new onef.'
John Sicca the Succcflbr of Silvejlcr^ ar.. loo^ makes a Decree, that the
cle6lion of the Roman Popes,{liould belong only to the Roman Clergy,
without the confcnt cf the People ; becaulc- the People are to be led,
and not foUowed:he eftabliOieth theFcaft of All SohIs.^. Urban An.\o^6^
ordained, That no Clergy or Layman (hould eat Fle(h from Shrovetide
to Eajlcr, Innocent the third, ordained Tranfubfiantiation : yea the
Fathers of the Council of Conflance, publish a Decree in thcfc wordj>
** Although Chtift after Supper hath inftituted and adminiftred to bis
** Difciples this venerable Sacrament, under both kinds, of Bread
*' and Wine ; yet notwithftanding, the Authority of the facrcd C»-
*' nonsj the laudable and approved cuftom of the Church,hathobfcrved,
*' and doth obfervcj that this Sacrament ought not to be fini/hed after
*' Supper, nor adminiftred under both kinds — and feeing this cuftom
*' hith been according to icafon brought in, and a long time obferved
** by the Church and holy Fathers, it is to be held foi a Law. Concil,
^' Cox ft. Sefi.
And if the cafe be fo with us, as is fuggefted by this Animadvcrtcr,
'tis not to be thought that our condition is in the leaft better'd by the
f emoving the carnal ordinances of the JewSj 'tis by many degrees worfe
than theirs. They had a ftinted number of Ceremonies, of the inftitu-
tion of the Lord : We have an innumerable company of the deviling of
man, not any fecurity, but we may have a thoufand more : for if the
Rulers (hall judge them convenicntjthey may ordain them, and we are
bound to fubmit unto them, if Mr, T. his Do(ftrine be true* But
blcffcd be the Lord, things are far otherwife : Chrift hath not broken
the yoke of the Jewif}i obfervances oflf the necks of his Difciples, to
have them bscoine fuch fetvants of men as to ftoop to every Theatri-
cal and Ludicrous Ceremony (that under the notion of Convenicncy)
{hall be by them thought fit to be impofed on them. If he hath, let iMr,
T. produce one Scripture in which he hath fo done ,* if not, we expert:
he manifd^ fo much Chriftian modefty, as to*retra(ft his over-confident
Affcrtion, that Chrifl hath under general rttles left what ( relating to the
externals of Worlliip) wot td be added^ to be ordered oi it jhould be fsund
convenient in after-times.
We further add in S. T. That 'tis not lawful for the Saints, in mat-
ters of Inftituted Worftiip, topra^ifc what there is no warrant for in
the Scripture, bccaufe fo to do (fthly) pours out ccnteirpt upon the
care of God over the New-Teftament-Churches ( as if it were lefs to
fhcfe, than to that under the Law) and the Osconomy of the Gofpel,
as
in Anfwer to Mr, T. hli Exceptions. i^^
ti not fo complcat as that of old ; the whole of whofe WorHiip, Or-
ders and Ordinances (as was faid) was bottom'd upon pjrc revelation.
To this faith Mr. T. i. Tbii poitrs ont no contempt upon the care of God
over the Nevo-TeflAment-Chttrches^Oi. is before proved^ in anfwer to the Pre-
face, SeU, 20.
Anfvif. What Mr. T.. there dilates (for he proves little) we have
already confidered, and removed out of the way, in our reply there-
unto. 2dly. He begs of us toyeeldhira, that Circumflamials of mr-
(hip i as fuck y are liable to variation^ are not bottom d nponpttre revelation-
divine, bnt in many things left tohufftane prttdence.
Anfpf. I. But bi he never fo itnportunatciy precarious herein, we
cannot^ yceld it hitn, but demand his proofs hereof, elfe we judge he
fpeaksinjurioufly both toGhrirt, and Sainis.
2dly. We cannot but demur a little upon that expteflion, pnre re-
velation divtne^ upon which he faith thefc circumftantials of Worship
arc not bottopi'd. I hope he doth not think his Antagonifts own any
Revelation, but that which is Divine. Though as touching the Cere-
monies, he is (under the notion of Circamihntials ) pleading for, the/
arc nor, indeed, built upon Revelation Divine, but Diabolical, diame-
trically oppofit to that which is Divine. The language whereof is,that
nothing be offered up to God, but that which is of his own prefcription,.
3dly. In many things (hc faith) tbefe Cir^nrnfiantials ofmrfhip. are left
to hftmane prudence.
A^fw, I. Would he had told us in what things ; 2. Thought it in-
cumbent upon him to prove his didatc. 3 . Manifefted how we might
be able to difcertr ( if anexcft enumeration of particulars is not to be
obtained) betwixt thofe w^»; that are left to humane prudence, and
tht fame that arc not. 4. Difcover to uswhat fecurity we have, that
if a Proteftant-Biihop — impofc on us fomc of the Rites and Ceremo-
nies of the Church of ^^w^junder the notion of Circumrtantials. and Ac-
cidentals of Worihip (though they arc indeed fuch ftrange accidentals,
asvvere never heard-of in the world before, viz,. fuch>a$ without which
the Woifhip tnuft not be performed) that if the Papifts lliould evec
bear fway (which is not impofiible) his Holinefs the Pope Oiall not im-
pofe upon us allfhc reft^ ( that arc as yet behind the Curtain) upon
the fame pretentions.
4. He tells u«, T^ an effeU of God's love and care over the Nerv^e-
fiament-ChurcheSy that he hath not tied them in fo many things, to external
rites — oi he did the Jews.
Anfiv, Aiad wc fay fo too i but hcxcin Mr» T.fpctks not pertinent-
J 5^ A Vindication of the Sober Te^mony^
ly : The QucftioD is not. Whether the Lord's not tying U5 in fo many
thinoj, as be did the Jews, to external rites, be an effect of his caic md
love, ornOjWhichvvefayitis : but whether it be conliftant with ihttbis
care and love, in delivering us from thefe, not to determine the whole
of our Worftiip, as he did determine the whole of theirs> but leave us
to the wills, lufts and inventions of men, to be ordered and ruled by
them according as they fliould think meet and convenient : Which
when Mr. T. lliall think himfelf able to perfwade any, but the blind,
when the Sun (bines in its ftrength, that it is not day, he may attempt
the proof of.
y . Hz adds, The Oeconomy of the Goffel is not Uf compUat than that of
oliy for this caiife : This reafoninj^ if he ttnderfiands the dpojiUy C0I.2. 8,
p , J o. is iither the fame, or very like that of the Philofophica/ Jniaiz.ing'-^
Teacher.
Arifi9. I. But Mr. T. his Affertion is no proof. If the whole of the
Woriliip of the Jews was compleat without humane addi|amcnts (be-
ing built upon pare Revelation) and ours be not compleat without many
things, that arc left to humane prudence to determine, relating to
Worlhip as fuch, ours is moft afluredly lefs compleat than theirs.
2dly, Mr. T. his abilities of underftanding, I have little to fay to,
BernArdtis non vldet omnia. And he hath a ftrange faculty of diCcetning,
that can fee our reafoning to be the fame, or much like to the reafoning
of the Judaizing Teachers, Col, 2^ 8, 9, 10. ift. Theydifputcd for
]tm(h obfervances ; we argue as well as we can againft them. adiy.
They afl'crted that they were not, nor could be compleat without them ;
this weoppofe, and affirm the contrary, That neither our Perfons, or
Woifhip arc, or can be any whit the more compleated by them, or any
other Obfervances in the vvorld, not inrtituted by Chritt in the New-
Teftament. Mr. T. indeed aflerts, that there arefome Ceremonies left t9
he ordered by men^ according as they fhall fee convenient .- Which is fome-
vvhat like to the Dod^rine of thefe JudaizingTcacherSj which the Apo-
ftlc cautions the Church of Cohff'e againft, v. 8. That by the Rudiments
of the world is meant Jewifh Rites, we may grant ; the mcfxhins r «»tfg«-
-K^y or the Traditions of men, feems to be fomewhat elfe> viz.. humane
Additions to Divine Inftitutions, fuch as were thofe amongft the Jews,
that Chrilt calls •nu^khm Cj^at^ Mat. 1^.^)6. which he interprets, v.p,
to be cvrxXfi^Tu acte^aurm^ the Commandments of men. Whether our ica-
fomng,or the Animadvertet's be more like that here of the Philofophi-
cal Teachers, is left to the judgment of the Judicious to determine.
jdly. How little to Mr. T. his purpofe this Scripture- citation if, he
already
in Anfwer to Mr, T. bis Exceptiontl kj r
tircidy may difccrn, how much it makes againft the grand Defign he is
labouring to advance, the propofing of one or two Arguments from it
willfully evince.
1. Thofc Traditions and Rudiments that are not »ttw« ;j^/f m^ after
Chrlit, (» c. according to the Dodiine and Inftitution of Chrirt,yvhich
only ought to take place in the Church (as fay our Annotators upon the
place) are not to be complied with,but to be watched & warred againft,
as fuch that do crvxuyayiii, lead us captive from Chrift. But the Ru-
diments Mr. T, pleads for, are fuch as are not x«S ;t$«W», after the In-
ftitution of Chrift (if they are, let Mr. T. produce the place where they
arcfo) Therefore
2. If the Church at Coloffe was fo compleat in Chrift that they need-
ed not to fubjed (ought not to do fo) to tiie JewiHi Rites, and Tradi-
tions of the Elders j then much Icfs need we to fubjcdl to the Rudi-
ments of men, or any of the accurfcd Rites and Ceremonies of the
Papacy. Thefe Rites are much more weak and abfurd than the former,
as never being of the Inftitution of the Lord, but the devifing and im-
pofing of his profeft enemy. Therefore
. I. The unfcripturalnefs, and vanity of that diftin and fo bccomcth
"anopen Antichrift, faith the Lord Cobham in the Confcfllon of his
*-* Faith, offered to Hen, the yf/', about the year 1413. Chryfojiom ci\\%
** them a moft exquifite rule, and c\i&. fquare and ballance to try all
*' things by. Auguftine expounding C?^/. 1.8. faith, If we, or an Angel
*-^ frof>f Heaven^ declare unto you, either concerning Chrifiy or ^;j Church,
<* any other matter belonging to our Faithy or Life^ any thing i^zt that
*^ which you have received in the writings of the Law And the Gofpely let hint
*^be accurfed. Cont. Lit. Petilian. Don. 1. 3. c. 6. & de unltat, Ecclef,
" cap. 1 1 . £t honos prater mandatHm eft dedecus^ God is dishonoured by
** that honour that is afcribed to him beyond his own prcfciiption, faith
*' Hierome. Yea, 3dly, our Proteftant Divines difputing with the
Papiftj, about an univerfal Head of the Church, Cardinals, Purgatory,
Mafs, &c. have ever thought this one good Argument againft^hem,
that they find them not commanded in the Scripture 'j and to affcrt them
needful, or lawful to be ufed in the Church of Chrift, they affirm to be
derogatory to the perfc6l:ion of the Scripture. Suppofe a Papift to fay,
Tis tvue the Scripture it perfe^b with refpea to thecftential paitsof
Worftiip, not lo with refped to Accidentals, fuch as arc Crcfs^ Spittle,
Salt in Baptifm, Holy Water-, Pope, Cardinals, CroffeSy&c^ What would
Mr.T.anlwer hereunto } *Tis a thoufand to one, but the fame Aofwes
would
in Anfrver to Mr. T. hif Exceptionf', i e 3
would flop his own mouth, in the reply to the Argument undertaken to
be refuted by him. We add in S. T, as a further confirmation of the
tiuth of the Propofition under debate,
7thly, That God condemns not only that which is done againft the
warrant and direction of the Word, but alfo that which is done befidc
it, Vem. 4t 2. & 12. 52. Mat, if. p. Lev. 10. i. Prov, 30. 6. J heiiing,d' as to be affeaed with pomps and fhewj,
• gcftures and carnal Rites, which he never appointed. It oppofeth
• Gods Word, his Law, his Gofpel : becaufe it brings in another Rule
« as in places where the Cathedral and Canonical Preachers, and offici-
< ating Priefts do bear tway ; there is little fpiritual underftanding,
• and lively feeling of the Dodtine and Grace of Chrift, to be found.
• Seti. 8, With much more to the fame purpofc. Lev.io.i. Jer.7,
51. expredy affert, that their fin lay in doing that which God com-
manded them not, which had he done, ithad been lawfuL Let Mr. T.
{hew where the offering of Grange fire was exprefly forbidden, and he
CRay beiuppofed to Cay Comewhat that is pertinent. }Ai,^lnfvi>Drth^
whom.
in Anfioer to Mr . T. his Exceptions, i ^j
ivHomhe cites on Lev. lo. i. is igtinft him ,* Strange fiye^ he tells uj>
u other fire than God hath [an^lfiei on his Altar ^ fire not commanded — And
the Affembly upon the place fay lightly, In (joi^s fVorfhip his Command.,
ml mans volt or rvlll, mnfir be our rule. The citation ot J0/Z7. 22.34,
2 Cibrow. 20, 3. & 30.23. £/?/>. p. 27,3:1. by this Animadvertcr is im-
pertinent. Joj'^.22.34. givcsusan account of theii buildiag an Altar,
but they cxprcfly affirm it was not for burnt-offerings nor for Sacrifices;
not for an Ecclefiaftical, but a Civil ufe, z/.22,23, 24,26,28. Had they
built it for the Worfhipof God, it had in the judgment of the whole
Congregation of Ifrael^ bsen Rebellion againft him, ver. 16^ So that
this Scripture? inftead of fupporting,cut$ the throat of his dying caufe :
nor can Mr. T. ever fatisfaftorily anfwer this Argument. Tis great
mckedncfs to commit a trefpafs againrt, to turn away from following,
to rebel againft the Lord : But the doing, or ptatSliiing any thing in
his Worfhip, befides what God hath enjoyncd to be done, if, to com-
mit a trefpafs ag&inlt him, to turn away from following, to rebel againft
bim. Therefore —
The Major no fobtr Chriftian will deny. The Minor is evident from
z/. 1^,18,19. Nor will Mr. T. his old iHft of Effential and Accidental
parts of Worfhip ferve him in this cafe. For, i. The credion of an
Altar, he fuppofeth to be but an accidental part of Worfhip. 2, He
produceth this Scripture to prove the lawfulncfs of mens orders in,
and about the Accidentals of InfHtuted Worfhip. As for his other
Scriptures, 2Chron.^o. 23. hath been already confidered and anfwered
in our Anfwer to Pref. SeU.^, 2 Chrsn.io.^, Sfth. 9.27y 3 1. fpeak
only of the Proclamation and Decree, or Purpofe of the King and Pco-
plcjto obferve and keep certain dayesunto the Lord, upon the account
of fuch fignal providences that the Lord had brought them under, where?
m they judged he wis calling them. thereunto.
To what is added in Sf T. touching the judgment of the Ancientry'
Mr.T. replies, but fo jejunely, that it deferves not to be taken notice
of. As for Cyprian's teftimony, 'tis full up to the matter in hand, ths
foundation upon yyhich he dealt againft the Aqmrii^ being no other than
what we are pleadiog-for, that Chrift alone is to be heard in matters
of Inftituted Worfhip ( as Mr. T. will grant the Sacrament to be.) X
ftand amazed at the confidence of the Animtdverter,,in afTcrtin^ that
Be^ai words on Phil, i. i. are to be underftood of things determined
in the Scripture, when, he cxprefly fpeaks of giving the title of Bifhof
( for Politics fake ) peculiarly' to hitn that did prefide in the Affsmbly,
whereof he tels us the Devil- began to lay thefiift foundation of TjranKij^
1 5^ A ^vindication of the Sober Tefttmony,
in tht Church of God : and then he adds, " Behold of how great mo-
*'menr it is to decline from the Word of God, though but an hiirs
** breadth, if it be butin giving titles peculiarly to pcrfons, which arc
** not fo given to them in the Scripture. And much more do I wonder
if he did without blufhing, write, that Luther is to be undeiftood o£
Doftrincs and Decrees, ( if he oppofc thefe to Church-Ceremonies,
which if he do not, he yeelds his Caufe) when he exptefly faith, he
means, that mthlng with rejpeU to external Rites (which he calls Tradim
tions^ani the mixing the fVorfhip of God rvith foolijh Gervgarvs) fi to be
taught^ without the exfref words of God for our warrant. 'Tis true, Dr.
^hitakjrs words arc meant of the Popiih ufc of Oyl in their Sacrt-
cients; but the ground of his oppofing it, is plainly the fame with that
weare'conteBing about, viz.. That nothing is to be added to the Infti-
tuted WovQiip, as a part thereof, without warrant from the Scripture ;
for, faith he, we acknowledge no Oyl, becaufe we read nothing of Oyl
in the Scriptures. To thefe I fay many may be added. Take a few in-
^ances inftead of many ; «' Whatfoever things men find and fain,
" without the Authority andTeftimony of the Scripture, as if they were
«* from Apoftolical Tradition, are fmittcn by the Sword of God, faith
<« Hieromy Comment in Bug. c. 2. And again, Men arc (faith he) fct
<* to eat their meat without Salt, when they ate commanded any thing
f* that hath no relifli from the Word; and to build without Hay and
«* Stubble, like Ifrael in Egypty when they be not allowed fomc warrant
« * out of the Scripture, which only can combine the matter of the work,
«* and make the frame of the building fare. And Chryfofiom giveth a
**rearon, why we muft take nothing from the Prelates, which is not
*^ cUre perfpicuouQy demonltrated from the Scriptures: for our Co-
<* gitation halteth when the Word wanteth, which halting is fin, bc-
^* caufe we are bound to the ?tXn^(^oeJ.» of a full perfwafion> even in in-
*f different things and all. Chryf.tn i Cor. Homil.i^. So the Churches
of Helvetia^ ** The univetfal Church of Chrirt hath fully explained in
«' the Scriptures, whatever things appertain to faving Faith, and to the
*' informing the Life, rightly to pleafe God. To which that nothing
«< may be added or diminiftied, is diftinftly commanded by the Lord.
«' We judge therefore that from thefe Scriptures, true Wifdom and Pic-
*' ty is to be fought. Alfo the Reformation and Government of the
< Church (which are with Mr* T. Adjuncts of Worftiip) and the In-
* ftitution of all duties of Piety. C. i. Conf. Helvet. pofier. in Harmon:
«' CoKJ. And thofe famous Witnefles of Chrift, the li'a/denfes, fpeak
S 'ter the fadne rate : In hac mm (de Scriptma & ejttt perfeUione loquun^
tnr)
>'■ • - ...
in Anfwer to Mr, T. hs Exceptions. i6j
tttr) Difcip/iMam & GtiUrnationem^
ad CiKtrHlos & Hnwerfos^ i» ordlnario [alutis Mtni/ierto ( ftfide & vera fides
exliiit ^ neceffariaffiyt : Ea lyicjtuim, omnia plerte omnlno.^ & c^Hantum oftu
est ut in exintioy artificioeljfimo^; San^l Spiritfts opere^ In hac comprehenfa
fttnt c^conclnfa^ q^a nee An^tlm de Ccelo hUh* prtfferre alif-ad cert ins po*
teft & li adferret diverftim aliqmd credi ei mn deberet. Co^fef, Bohem. fed
y/aken. in Harmo. Confef, Which if Mr. T. will nor, others will be-
lieve rpcak home to the matter in hand.
The Dedaiation of the Congregational Elderf, ch^p.i. IovYn> and
told Mv, T. as much as they fay, in S.T. Circamftinces concerning the
Worlhioof God, Sec comcuon to humane anions and focieticJ, are to
be ordered by thi Light oFNiture and CtiritHaa prudence, as placCj
time of meeting?, 8cc» but they altert not that Circumf^nces of Wor-
fKip, and this Animadverter is not wanting
to blow the coals. That it hinders the publick peace, is a papiftical,
wicked, and falfe faggeftion, than which a more malicious one, could
not have been invented by the Divil. That the furtherance of the
Gofpel is thereby hindered, is monftroufly falfe. The aim and motive
ofthc author of the ^* T. in that Treatife, and Mr. T. in this Reply, is
known to the Lord, and may fhortly be more manifeftly difcovered then
fome would widi. And confidering how he doth -/t;p^ x£,^«ah, contra-
dict, and oppofc now, what not many years agonc he fo confidently
pleaded for, I wifh him to examine his heart,and to take heed he be not
found dvnncfiKfimt , Who they are fpeak for, or againft things according
to the aflfedion they bear to men, I know not. And do heartily, wiih
they may be reduced from that evil cuftom, trying, and proving thiagj
offered to them, by the Scriptures, whether they be fo, or not. I ap- -
prove of the faying o^Hlerome^ Epift. i J2. NonJHxta 'Pythagora dlfcl-
pftlos^ prajffdlcata DoBoris opinio^ fed do[lrln£ ratio ponder anda eji : omnia,
probate^ qmd bontim efi tentte : Et ejlote probatl nHrHmularliy ut fi quiif num-r
mpii adulter ^y?, etfigaram Cttfarls non habet, nee fgnatus e/iy monetapMbllca
reprobatUf^: qnj antemChrifil faclemclaro iHmlnepr&ferty in cordis nojiri
mar f upturn recondJkur. Cur me lacerant awlci meiy & adverfum filentem
crajftsfues grunnluKt f efnarum omne ftudlum efty imo felentU fuperclllum
allena carper Cy et fie Veterum ferfidiam defendere^ ut perdant fidem fuam,
Jl^eum propofitpim eft antiques legere^ probarefingula^ retlnere q'Aoiirine me hear^ but of the Per fans
Tfohom we fhonld hear. The Principle pleaded-for^ no hindrance of a mans
edification^ &c. Of the old Apofiolical RttUiof receiving none rvithoHt
the Teftimonial of Brethren of known integrity in the Churches yCtc
N his fecond Chap. Mr. T. attertipts the confutitibn- of thi fccond
Argument produced in S.T. to prove the unUwfulncfsof hearing
the prefcnt Minifters oi England-, the fum whereof ij ;
// it be Uv^fnl to hear the prefent Minifiers^ it is lawful to hear
them^ either as Minifiers »f the Gajpel^ or as gifted Brethren : But it is not
lawful to bear them^ either oa Minijiers of theCojpely or as gifted Brethren^
Therefore — •
The Major I took for granted, but this Animadverter is-.|^afed to
^cnyit, and that for a twofold R{j»ron. i. BecaufethedisjunaionUof
terms not oppofite, but cc-incident.
_ Anfw. Very good ! It Icems then that Minifters of the Gofpel, and
gifted Brethren, are terms co-incident : but this Mr. T. upon fecond
thoughts will be aQiamed of. This is not the firft inftance, that his
Theodaha.\y is writ in haft^^ and requites a review. 'Tis true, every
MiniftcJ?
in Anfwer to Mr, T. hn Exceptiohf] iji
Miniftcr of the Gofpcl is a gifted Brother, yet not qua Minifter of the
Gofpel ; 'Tis moft falfe, that every gifted Brother i$ a Minifter of the
Gofpel: fo that the terms are not (as he fuggefts) co-incident.
He addf> 2. The disjunUion is- not fult^ Jich a third member may he af*
ftmeiy that they^a/ he heard oi f reaching the Word of God, • « ^"
Anfrc. This Animadvctter bath a rare invention, but it will not al^
way fetve his turn : What ftrangc Preachers of the Word of God he
furmifcthjtbat are neither MiniHers of the Gofpel, nor gifted Brethren
if[e videat, for my part I defire not to be acquainted with them. 1 had
ever thought, that at leaft, gifts enabling a man for the creditable dif-
charge of the office of preaching the Gofpel, had been required in cvc-,
ry one, that ftiould have undertaken that employment.
CttcnUtu noK facit MonachHrn^ nee barba Phtlofophum,
But this Animadverter will prove, That ffeakingthe truth oftheGa^
Ipely fcf the only confideration requifte to the hearer, to be reifieSled in hearing,
Anfrv. I. Helliould have excepted the Devil, whofpake the truth
of the Gofpel, yet fomevvhat elfe was requifitc to the hearer to be rc-
fpeftcd in hearing, for him he might not hear*
2. He fhould have put in, the mixed truth of the Gofpel, the Jincere
Word of God. For thofe that arc partial therein, ate not to be attend-
ed. Such were the Preachers of the Circumcifion,whom Paul condemns>
and chargeth us to feparatc from them, Thil. 3. 2. ( i. e. keep at the
gtcateft diftancc from them, have no communion with them) yet they
fpake the truth of the Gofpcl, they only added therewith the Ceremo-
nies of the Law.
3. Yet upon fccond thoughts, he did wifely, not to make that addi-
tion, for then he knew what he had faid had not been applicable to the
prefent Minifters (who though they preach the Truth of the Gofpel, yet
addc thereto the Ceremonies of humane devifing, as thofe of the Cir-
cumcifion did, the Ordinances once of divine appointment) But we at-
tend his proof.
Six Reafons he gives of this Aflcition.
Reaf.i. Bccaufe God hath forbiddtn to hear neney bm fach at preach falf^
hood. m
Anfvf. This hath Dccn often before inculcated, and as often anfwerM:
its fallliood, and impertinent application to the prefent Minifters jufti-
fication (who preach falfliood) manifefted. So that we need not fur-
ther trouble our felves 01 the Reader with it.
Reaf. 2. Becaufe hearers are not fit to examine the Offce^ Power, Gifts,
prBrotherhoodof thofe they hear*
Y 2 Anfif*
17 1 A Vindication of the Sober Tefiimony^ '^
Anl^, If he fpeak of the generality of hetrers, tlf granted, they have
not abilities fo to do: the queftion relates not to theaa.
2. If he mean theSaints, fpintual hearers, he cootradi(as the Spirit
of the Lord, \Cor.2., ly. l-l^nvf^'n%a<:k'iAK{ii6i^'7m>,^y tht Spiritual
man throughly difcerneth or judgeth all things, viz. belonging to ihc
Worftiip of God, and eteinallifc.
Rctf. 3 . he adds, It U lavpful to hearfueh as are neithtr in Offiee-porver^
nor gifted. Brethren, oiAa.iS. 2(5. i Tim. i. j". 2Tim. j.iy. The
Iberian Prince, the captive Maidy the Indians Frumntim. ■ ,
Anfw. r. But when we fpcak of hearing, we fpeak of it,, as in i
Church-focicty, true, oi falfe, the Animadverters examples reach,
onely to private inftrudlions of patticulai perfons.
2ly. He himfclf p. ^6. when he thought it would fetvc his turn,
irould not have a Woman to fpeak in the Church; now he would have
them Preachers to a Congregation, for clfc he fpcaks impertinently.
3ly. Our aflertion is of the Miniftets of England who muft be heard
(we fay) as Miniftersof theGofpel, or gifted Brethren, to which his
ftory of PrifcilU, Lois&c. hath no relation.
Reaf 4. He acquaints us, That the Bertcans are commended for their
examining Pauls doUrine., without examining his office, &C. Ad. 17. n.
Jnfjv. I. The Beraans were not Chriliians : what they did is hete-
rogeneous to our prefent difputc, which r$ of the duty of Believers.
2ly. Of the gifts of Paul they had fufEcient evidence,nor could they
be ignorant of the wonders that were wrought by him, t fufficient evi-
dence of his Office-power.
3dly. That becaufe the Beraans arc commended for examining Patois
Dodtinc, without examining his Office, Sec. Therefore the fpeaking:
the Truth of the Gofpel, is the only confideration requifit to the hearer
to be tefpcaed in hearing, is fuch an Inconfequcnt Confcquencc that
be will never make good : poffibly they might examine his Office,though
it be not recorded ; if they did not, it doth not follow thit it was not
their duty to have done fo ; becaufe they are commended fordoing what
they did ; which was alfo their duty.
He adds, ythly. The Scriptures are the Rule of the DoHrine mare t».
hear ; therefore we are bound to look to no more for the lavfulnefi of our hsar-
ir>g, than the congruity of what rve hear with it,
Anf». I. We deny the Confcquencc, and challenge Mr.T. to make,
it good : would I could perfwade him to ceafe his Lordly didbates ; and
think it concerns him to prove what he faith, as well as other men ;
which (coniideiing his frequent change of opinions, with the change o£
(timts
in Ahjwer to Mr . T. his Exceptioni, 1 7 j
dffles) I iffurc him it doth ; elfe whatever he tenders, wffi levi bra'
chiobc rcjefted. The Scripture is not only a Rule of the Do»ftrinc wc
hear, but tousof theperfonswhotn we ftiouldhear* tMat.ij.s. John
lo. 3, 5*. V. 8, 27. A^'^. 22. & 7. 37. Rom. 10. 14. L>//.3.2, xjohn^.x. Adat.?. \S'
2dly. Ghrill having inftitutcd Officers of his own, laid down Rules
touching orderly prophefying;foretold us that falfc Teachers would arife,
thatftiould pretend to come in his Name, when he never fcnt them;
charged us to try the Spirits : Wc are ready to conclude, that the Com-
miifton of men is- to be trycd and examined by vvhich they tft, as well
as the Doftrinc they bring, according to the Scripture.
^dly. This Argument will as well prove the lavvfulnefs of hearing,
the Pope, Cardinals, Jefuites, the D:vil himfelf, as the prefent Mini-
fters, whilft they preach Truth,
Ntilloi habet jpes Troja f' tales habet.
He tells us, <5thly. To forbid a mAn to hear him that preacheth, becaufe
he k»ovps him not to be a Mmlfter in Ofice, or gifted Brother:, may be a means
to hinder hit Sdlfication and Salvation^ and to harden himto his perdition,
Anfrv. I. This, as ptopofed by Mr. T, reachetb not fully the cafe o£
the Miniftets of England^ whom wc do not only know to be Miniftcrs m
Office, or gifted brethren, but w^ are aflured they arc not fo*
2. That 'tis lawful to hear all Preachers, he will not, when out of
heat and paffion of a difputc,aflcrt : I muft know them to be Chriftianj^
crc it be lawful for me to hear them ; and fuch as are at Icafi found in
the fundamental Dodrines of the Gofpel. How I fhould know this of
a ftrangcr, and not at the fame time be able to inform my fclf, whether
he be a Miniftcr or a gifted Brother^ I am not able to divine : So that
I do no more hinder my Edification and Salvation, by rcfufing to hear
bim, till r am fatisficd hcrciti, than I do by icfufing to hear him, be-
caufe I know him not to be a Chriftian, which yet lam bound to do^
Itweic well if the old Apoftolical Rule were leaffumed, ^^x p. 25,27.
(of which mwc afterwards, p. 124.) as it is amongft fome) of receiving
none but fuch, of whofe ability and faithfulncfs they received Tcflimo-
uial from Brethren of known integrity in th« Churches, more univer-
fally among Chriftifcs, which yet thi^ Animadverter dares not fay did-
(or would) hinder the Edification or Salvation of any. .
3. That the rcfufing to hear the prefent Miniflersflitould have fa
fad an iflue, thofc who know how little to EdifiGation,&c. the pr-cach-
ing.of moft of them is, will not in haf^e believ«.
\^ Befidcs, 4:hly, When Cfaiift hath (as was faid) not only> appointed
174 4 Vindication of the Soler Tejlimony, '
that rhe V^fd be heard, but alfo from fuch as are fent by him, upon the
account whereof they are to be received by MS^Mat. lo. 40. with verf^
y^ and no fpiritual advantage can gtoundedly be cxpcftcd, from any
hearing but that vvhich is the inrtitution of Chrift ; fo that Mr. T. ar-
gues ( if dictating may be fo called ) exceeding weakly, vvhilft he tell$
u$, ' That to forbid to hear fuch as are not of Chrifts appointment, is to
* hinder mens falvation.cTf . And give me leave to fay,what I believe,
the moft that truly fear God in Englanii will attcft, That more fouls
( its to be feared ) by far have been hardned by attendirjg on the pre-
fent Minifters, for thefe feven yeatSj than have been converted, favcd
by them from the evill of their way.
His fubfequent difcourfc, being compofed of fcurrilous reflcd^ionf,
( being now pretty well ufed to them ) I pafs over. Who they arc that
reje<^ perfons becaufe not of their party Mr. T. may better know than
I, who ( as I am credibly informed ) refufed to admit an honeft godly
man, defiring it, to fit down and break bread with thofe he had gathered
together into Chuich-Communion at Bewiljy for no other leafon, but
l)ccaufc he was not baptized, according to his conception of Baptifm.
For my part I own my fclf of no party,it being my avowed principle, to
.own Siints upon the account of Saintfliip, and the fhines of the iwage
of the blilfcd God upon them, though in leffer matters differing in
judgmentfrom me, according to that Apoftolictliule,?/?//.^, ij.Rom,
14. I.
That from Chtifts appointment of fomc, as Minifters, enjoyning
others as their duty, upon the collation of Gifts upon them, to preach
the Gofpel, for the edification of his Body, a lawfulncfs to hear them,
as Minifters or gifted Brethren, doth not ncccffarily arifc, is, to fay no
more, a ihange affertion ! as implying that 'tis unlawful to hear fomc
whom Chrift hath appointed to preach, which is- abfurd, as good wc
may reject Chrift.
The rcafon he gives us \\tizo^^viz..'BecaHfe a Miniver ^or glftei Brother ^
'tis fojjlble may be Heretical:, andfo to be fhm'dyXiu^.io. is of no weight.
For, thofe whom it is our duty to hear at one time,whilft walking in the
waycs of Chrift, *tis moft undoubtedly our fin to hear at another, when
departed from thofe v?aycs« But he hath found mdum in fcirpOytnti^
fertion of mine, that he makes himfelf, for t feafon, merry with, and
thinks he hath no fmall advantage by. I fay (faith he ) 'tis lawful to
.others to preach, as their libeicy permitted to them : which if fo, then,
Flrfli 'Tis larvfnl for tJHinifters to Preach as their Ithrtj*
Mw, I. Who denies it?
3. Why
^ " in Atifwer to Mr. T. his Exoe}ihnu ij^
2. Why dotb this Animtdvciters good friends, the Bi(hop5, hinder
them?
' 3, It doth not furc thence follofr, that 'tis lawful for Antichriftim
Miniftcrsfotodo, .•....,;':.;.•■.
' He %^s^ Sei:onUy^ Then it follor>i>s, that there is fome fralTue that is a
partoflfjffltHted fVorjhtpy that is xo arrant el In Scripture, at per fans Libert f
hy permljjton withom commjini-^ Therefore hearing the prefent Minifters
may h warranted by permljfion^ rvithoftt command : which was my An-
fweito this Authors firft Argument againlt hcafing.them, is now con-
firmed by hisConccflion. vr; :.
Anfrv^ i.- But whit if this be not any Aflertioti of the Author of S,
T. but a miftake of this Animadvertcro His conceived advanta^'e, and
triumph is then fuddenlyextin<^. ^'
2. That I no where aflert it, not in the place mentioned, the review
of the paflage he defcants upon may inform him.
ift, I fay only, that the permiifion of fuch, as have received en-'
able ments from the Lord, to cxcrcifc and improve them in praying
and preaching, for the edification of the Body of Chrift, thou^'hnoc
folemnly invefted into Office, is affented umo byfoaeof thofcwith
whom I have to do.
2dly, I immediately add, that *tis enjoyned them as their duty {vixil
by Chrift ) fo to do. Which, with what Confcience the Animadvcrter
could over-look, that he might impofe upon his Antagonift (to his
own feeming advantage ) what wa$ never affcrted by him, I know not,-
Thefe things ought not to be,
Se^r. 2.
"Tis not lawful to bear the prefent Minljlers oi Mimfiers of the gofpeL Thef-
are not fnch, therefore may not he heard as fnch. The validity of the eon-
fequence evinced. Mr. T. his Exceptions enervated. Hearers hound to
fatufie themfelvesy that he who pretends to come and aB in the Name of
Chrift^ is indeed fent hy him, 'Tis not above the ability of hearers to
judge of the Minijiers caU. Peaceable poffejfion no evidence of <^ofpeU
right. The tef^imony of Ntz{ir\ztD, 7he impertinency of Mr. T. his ar--
guingfrom^iuls jfeech to AnaniaSjAds 2-3 . j./J'*?^ Caiaphas hisprs-^
fhefytng. John11.51.8cc. evinced. '
IN SeSi. 2. Mr. T* confiders the proof we faring for the confirmation
of the Minor Propofition, vis:.. That 'tts not lawful tohenrthefxfj ei-
ther as Miniftsrs of the Gofpel^,,©! as gifted: Biex^cen,.
X76 A Vindication of the Sober Te^imony 9 ^
I. Not ts Mioiftcrs of the Gofpel, they arc not fuch, therefore may
not be heard as fuch
To this Mr. T. replies. / deny this confequence ; a manmay be heard
4u a Minljier of the Gofpely though he he not fuch.
Attfvf. i^ Nor can I help it, or any man in thcworld (if Mr. 7*.
be refoiv'd on't ) if he deny the Sun to fhinc at noon-day.
l^dly, The confequence ptefents it felf ffith that evidence to the
underthnding of unbiaffsd men, and ihines fo cleaily in its own bright-
ncfs, iha '-tis hardly capable of, further demonftration.
3dly, To hear a man as a Mioifter of the Gofpel, is to hear him as a
Preacher fcnt from Ghriltj that I may, that is, that it is my duty to hear
oncas fent fjoai Chtift, that is not fent from Chrift, is an Afferiion
that the bear naming of is confutation fufificient.
I mult believe that he is fent from Chrift ere I can hear him,as fuch:
that I am bound to believe a lie, Mr.T, will not in haftc prove. We at-
tend to what he is able to fay for the confirmation of this Aflertion,
whereof he gives you three Reafons.
Firjiy Becmfe every hearer is mt hoHni to examine the tnterance of the
Teacher into his FunUion,
Anfrv. I . This ( if m:ant of Chriftian hearers ) is falfe ; every fuch
hearer is bound to faiisfie himfelf, that he who pretends to come and
act in the Name of Ghrift,is indeed fent by him ; elfe I fee not how he
can own, or receive him as a Minifter of Chrift to him, and perform
thofe other duties (ifhefodo) he is obliged to do and perform to
him by exprefs command fiom Chrift*
^. Should it be granted, That every hearer is not bound to examine
the entrance of the Teacher int6 his Funftion, it doth not follow that
its lawful, or the duty of pcrfons to hear fuch as are not Miniftersof
Chrift, as Minifters of Chrift. This indeed would follow. That 'tis
polTiblc ( had they no other way of fatisfying themfelves in the truth of
theit Miniftry)thcy might through miftake do fo,but that the^ are bound
by command from Chrift fo to do,Mf T. cannot prove.
3 . What if they receive Letters Teftimonial from perfons of known
integrity in the Church ( or fome verbal fatisfa^tion from themj touch-
ing them, and it be the duty of Hearers not to receive them without
thcfe; this may fure help to mend the matter. No^ this feems to be
evident from the pra£tife of the Saints, 2<^o«;. i6. ij2. Col. ^. lo.AUs
18.27. 2.Cor, I. i.AEis^.z6yi7,
- Yet 4. His inference makes much againft himfelf. Therefore {^{\ih
he} it isenoHgh to hear ihemoi fnchi that there is nothing appears to the
con-
/^ inAnJwer to Mr, T, his Exceptions^ xjy
cMtrary : for hence it follows, thtt if there be any thing appjiring to
the contrary) *tis not lawful to hear them as fucb : Now we maniteft
in SJ'- chap. 3, 4, f ? <^> 7, &c. that there is much appears to the con-
Itary : Therefore 'tis not our duty to hear them.
He adds, 2dly. *Tis lawffftl to hear them m Mlmfiers of the Gojpel^
though they tire not fnchj hcaufe it is above the t^ility of the hearers t*
judge of the CMimfters eaO^&c,
Anfw. I. We deny this Confequcnce. 'Tis above the ability of
Hearers to judge of the Minifters call, therefore 'tis la.vful for them to
hear as Minifters of the Gofpel fuch as are not fuch : who have indeed
nothing like fuch a call, as the Scriptures mention in thz Mimjiers of
• Chrift,
adly. That 'tis above the ability of Chriftian hearers, to judge of
the Minifters call, when 'tis fo plainly declared in the Scriptures, is
Mr. T. his miftake ; an Affertion that he will never be able to prove :
nor need they to fit themfelves herein,to fpend their time — to enquire
into their many proceedings, in getting Teftimonials, ufing means for
the obtaining Ordination, Inftitution, &c, ( as he talks) they have
through the great kindnefs of God to them, the Bible in their hands,
and the holy Spirit dwelling in them, to lead them into all Truth ,• they
have the qualification of Gofpel-Minifters laid down, i T/iw.j 2. to 8.
TVV.i.y to lo.&c. the manner of their call and folcmn inauguration
into their office: where they find perfonSjlet their pretences be never fo
high, that are not able to acquit themfelves according to tbofc Rules,
they may judg (and yet 'tis not they fo much as the Spirit of God fpeak-
ing in the Scripture) that they are not the Minifters of Chrift:.
But he hath a third Reafon ; In all Governments a»d Societies thepeace-
tihle fojfejfor is J>re fumed to have right y tiU the contrary be evinced. Ergo
'tis larvful to hear them at Minifters of the Geffel that are not fuch,
rlfum te neat is amici.
If this be good arguing,'tis eafie to prove it lawful to hear the Pope,
yea the grcatcft Hereticks that ever were in the world. He is in the
peaceable pofleflion of St, Peter's Chair (as they call it:) The Arrian
Biftiops once had it gcncrally,yct not to be heard (I hope) as Minifters
of Chrift.The learned Field de Ecel.c\its'h{az,ianx.en fpeaking fir other-
wife, '* Neqtie qui fer vim irrupit, fuccejfor hahendpu efty &c. Nor is he
** to be accounted the Succeflbr, who gets pofl'eiTion by violence, but
" he who fuffers violence; not he who defends a falfe opinion, buthc •
** who is endued with the fame Faith : unlefs any one perchance may
^* be called a fuccclfor, as we fay t difeafe fuccecds health, daikncfs
Z light,
i
,7 J * ji Vindication of the Sober Te^imany^ *\
*' light, 1 tempcft tranquillity, wifdom raadnefj,^ And fo wc confeft
the prcfent Mmifters are ihc SucceCfois of the Mimfiers of Chiift, and
poiTeCTors of their roo.n.
zdly. If h ^'^^h he mean right to thtir Parfonagc and Vicaragc-
houfc and Gjcbe-Iands, &c. t right they have (for ought I know) "by
tlie Law of the Nation (js things npyv ftand) thereunto. If a right o£ .
Rutedom over the People of God, in the Nation; i. They are not
peaceably poffeft of this right, they proteft againft them, aslntjEuderj,
adly, Thefc being the People and Flock of Chrift, they can have no
light over them except it be given them from him ; let us fee his Com-
mifTion whereby they are authorized) and wc are fatisfied. 3dly. li
he fuppofe that a Patron's prefcntation of a ferry thing in black, (fup-
poCe a debauch'd Sir John, a Knight Errant of the Popes make ) with
the Bifliopj inft tution and indu6tion into a Benefice, and he is in the
peaceable poiTcflTion hereof, that therefore he is to be heard as aMini-
ftev of Chrift,and would impofe it upon others, as Truth, he muft know,
that he hath to do with Tuc^i who pitty him bccaufe of his folly, and
expeft proof of what he afferts, before they will believe him. The la-
fiances of Panics fpeech to t/€nMlaSyhSt. 23. y. of Calaphas prophefy-
itio^john II. y I* Cbrift's not excepting againft him, when convcnted
before him ; are fuch pitiiful ftorics, that I muft crave pardon of the
Reader whilft I mention them. Panl owned Annnltu as High-Piieft,.
j4B.2^.f. (which yet 'cis probable he did not, butfpakc ironically)
Calaphas prophcfied, John 1 1.5 1. (and fo did Balaam^ Num.zi ^ ^4-)
and Chrift doth not objc6t againft his Office, though both fuppofed to be
unlawful Officers : Therefore it's lawful, from Chrl^s and PauVs exam-
ple, to hear them who are not right Officers (though neither of them
heard thefc preach, nor had they to do with them in any ad of InftU
tuted Worfhip) when they peaceably poffefs the place, andconfequent-
ly it is lawful to hear them as Minifters of the Gofpel, who are not fuch
^/NUghtly called. Such non-fef^ltnrs ( introduced with pomp and ftate) I
muft ptofefs I never before read in any Author, which others it may be
take notice of with contempt; for my part I heartily pitty him, and beg-
him to coQfider,wh£ther the band of God be not gone forth againft him,
in ftrtpping him of the parts he once had (as well as in other things) as
H juft judgment upon him, for his lifting up his hand againft his Truths,
and the Kingdom of his Son in the World. Till he prove thefc confe-
quences of his, we are not concerned to take furthernotice of them ,*
there being indeed not thi Icaft fhcw of Argument in what he doth,'
with-fo much-ConfidiDce and pomp of words; afilrm and declare.
Sea.
/ in ^nfwer to Mr,T,bt/ Exceptions, 179
Sea. ^.
The Mtnlfiers of EDghod ftot Mlnlfters of the Coffel^ They come not in
by the Doory froved. John 10. i, 9. opened. . O/Pctr us Waldo, and
other %efottners. Their contrariety to what Mr, T. attempts, toercii.
Of Ordination by particular Churches. The Exceptions of the Animai-
verter refuted. Ad. 14* 23. explained. The Minifiers of England
impofed upon the People without tosiKcotifcnt* . F arifh*Churc.hes m trite
Churches of Chrifi, nni j[jf=^« j-^v ,7;ivrc> -o ijc;?-c; , • -
IN SeB.^. this Animidvertcr begins to confidet the proof of our AC
fertion, viz. That the Miniflers of England 4r^ not Minifiers of the
Cosjel. The fum whereof is, They that eruer not in by the Door, viz.,
Chrift, i. e. by vcrtuc of fome authority derived to them from him,im-
mediately or mediately, are not Miniftersof the Gofpei, John 10. p.
But the Miniftersof Engl, come not in by the Door, receive.no Com-
miflion or Authority from Chrift^ either immediately or mediitciy.
The firft we fay will not be aflcrtcd- — The fecond cannot, for they re-
ceive no Authority from any particular Church of Chrift, to whom po-
wer is folely delegated, for the cleding their own Officers; A^s 6. 5*.
* 6c 14. 23.
What faith Mr. T. hereunto ? Wliy after he hath eafed his fplefen,
bydifgorginghimfelfof that choller that did (itfecms) opprefait; id
fomz Billingsgate flhetorick^ {is be (^ttktth) he tells OS, r. That t hit
may he urged againft the Preshyterian Preachers.
'v Anfw. This is only mentioned adphaUraspopali, to take the peoples
Bat good Sir, why may this be urged ag*inft the Presbyterian Preachers }
is it, becaufe they difown Particul-ar Congtcgations,or Churches of Be-
lievers ? or, becaufe they abfolutcly deny the dcfignationof particular
perfons, to Offices Ecclefiaftical by themr ? But each of thefciiowfle4
by them, atieaftby fome of them; ^^ V ;: ;rn? - : - . y\\.:\\ >. \vV >
t^ He adds, 2dlyi This makes againft hk gifted Brethren, ' :<
-'Anfvo. I. Why \iis gifted Brethren ? is Mr. T. become a Scomei? of
the Brethren h or^are there none ttbinks he) that have received gifts
from Chriftj for the edification of his Body ?'
• 2.. Why doth it make againft thcfe? They pretend not to aft as Mi--
niftle ; and lefs probable, that by the
Door, v.p. (hould be meant the Scriptures of the Prophets,who although
they foretold of Chrift, yet can in no fenfe, that I know of, befaidto
be the Door through whicb he entted. But this he is unwilling to abide
by.
Hcadds4ly. That ifthe door be the fattfejoh, xo. 1,9. theenteu^tg
in V, 9 cannot be entring into the Mlniftry by the lawful eleSlion of a parti-
cular Chmeh ; for thtn it vfouU follow that every one that fo enteri *», [haU
hfavedy but that is manlfe/ilj falfc,
An[x», I. Butifby/4t/r according
to ABs6. f. & 14.23. as weak and impertinent. He tells us, i. That
thaugb this fhould be grant ed^ yet power may l^t given to others y tocboofe^
ftnd and ardain Preachers for (he tinconverted, who arc and way be bear4
as Mimflers of the Golfet,
Anf. I. This we deny, the Keys being given to the Church by Chrifty
Mat:i6, rp, with 1-8. 17, 18 . we cannot conceive how any can legally
choofe or fend forth perfonSjto z^ by vertuc of an Office-power, in the
J)reaching of the Gofpel, but the Church.
2dly. Wcnever^ct undeift^od, that Interrogations were fufficient
•Anfwers ; his may not for all thii — it no evidence that it may.
HeaddS) TV«i, may not fome others ordain Elders for particular Infli^
tuted Churches ?
Anfx9, I. Without the Chufches confent, Eledion, &c. they m^
not: Tis true TitHS\yi<^ left by Pattlin Crete to ordain Elders in evtry
Cit/} Tit, s.^« but that be might do this mthout the.choice, ele&ioiSi,
f\
/
1 8 2 A y indication of tie Sober Teflimonyy ^,
and concurrent t&. of the Church (as a Dioccfan Biihcp as fome fondly
imjginc) is a fancy, that as it hath ovcv and over been confuted by
man'y Godly Learned, to Mr.T. will never be able to make it good.
aly. Should it be granted (which yet is moft falfe, contrary to the
pradice of ihofe times, and many years after ) that T*V«j ordained by
himfelf, (without the knowledg>coun(el and approbation of the people)
Elders, it doth not in the leart follow that any perfons may do fo now.
For. I. He hadexpiefs warrant and direction from the Apoftle to do
what he did.
2. He was an extraordinary Officer, an Evangelift, not limited to a
certain Church, the continuance of which office we have no diredion
for in theSciipture.
3 . The officers that were to be continued in the Churches are faid to
be Elders, or Bifhops (which were not namei of diftindi officers, but
of the fame T/V» i. y, 7.) to be confined, or limited to one particuhi
Congregation, not having 01 excrcifing juiifdi6tion over many, ^biL
5.r./4S/.i4.23. & 2o.i7,28.Tif.i,j,6,7. fo that this inftance makef
little to his purpofe. When he proves his fuggelHon, that there are any
invefted with authority, derived to them from Chrift,to elc(ft & ordain
e perpetual^ in all a^es, to all Chur-ches.
Anfxv, I, This is a mscr conjedure of his own,, without the lead
iender of proof.
* idly. 'Tis the ready way to banifh all the infti tilted Worftiip of
Chriftoutof thevvorld. 'Tis but£aying,*tis truc,thisor that was donc-^
tbut without any Rule that wis to. be perpetually binding, tod the work
u eife.aed, S^iy.
/^ in Anfwer to Mr, T. bis Exeeptiam.. j g ^
jdly. *Tis injarious to the Apoftlc?, and the primitive Believers, to-
imagine (tod indeed ridiculous) that they (hould devife an Office in
tha Church without authority derived to thetn from Chrift, and that fo
neceflary an Office, as the experience of above fixtcen hundred year*
manifefts the Church of God could not have been without ,• which wa*
not only continued in the Churches afterwards, Phtl. 1,1. but Rules
hid down for their future eledion and choice, i Jim.^, 8/013. with
t folemn injunction to Timothy ( and in hitn to fucceeding Believers )
to keep that Cotntnandment (amoogft others) without fpor, unrebuke-
iblc, until (he appearing of our Lord Jefus Chrift, ch3p.($. 14. So that
thefe arc but fhifts, our reverend DiCtaror fcarce knows what to an.
fwcr it feetnstothe Evidence introduced. I (hall only add,^/;?/^r^j
agUur, mm tot opus efl remtdm, it is a bad roi:e that muft be wrapped in
fo many clouts. Yet he hath not done.
He adds, 4thly.T^^ can be no r-uUfor chttjtng other Offcers ; there was
4t peculiar reafon rehy theyfhouU choofe 'Deacons ^ whofe hone^y'~was to be
afcernd^ and not other Officer s^ whofe [ttffic'iencyto teach — was to be confr-
deredi of which the mftltitude of Church-member j then and now nre rarely
eontpetent Judges.
Anfvif.i. But we had, thought honefty had been as neceflary a quali-
fication of a Paftor or Teacher, as of a Deacon.
■ 2dly. The Apoftles mention it as the Churches priviledge, without
the lead intimation of anypeculiai reafon thereof, AU.6. 3.
3dly. Therein the fame reafon for the cleaion of one Officer in the
_ Church as another : thofe with whom power is entruftcd for the choice
of one, it is for the choice of all the relh
4thly* That the Saints then, and noW, are not competent Judges of
the abilities and Orfhodoxie of other Ofticcrj this Animadverter \i dc-
fired to prove, i. 'Tis derogatory to the Spirit of Chrifi that indwell?
in Believers. 2. Contrary to the cxprefs Teftimony of the Spirit o£
God touching them. 3. Ameer Petitioprimipii, The qucllion is, whe-
ther they did cledt and choofe them ? the Anfwcris, ihey were not fit
to do fo : but their fitnefj is prefuppofed in that they had liberty 01^
power to do it.
To the other Scnptnre, AUsi^.i-^. he replyes. i. By way of
feeming concclTion. The word :^^'Tt^ they fct them apart to
that work. An allufion to the ctiftomof the Greeks in theeledionof
their Of!icers by Su&ages and Votes, fignified by the ihetching out of
thte
J 3 4. A Vindicaiion of tie Sober TeJIimony, «\
the hand : which was unqueftionably the pra^icc of the Church foi the
fiitt three hundred years. Cjfriaft who lived a».2.^o often intimates as
much. Take one inftance in the (lead of many : Tropter qnod diligcmer
de tradltlone divina, & AfojioUca oh[ervatione vkfervandum ^/?, ^ tenen-
dum^ quod Afttd nos qttoqHe & fere per provincias umverfas tettetHry ut ad
ordinal tones rite celehrandas^ ad earn plebem cm Prapofttus ordinatur, Epif.
copi ejnfdem Provincia proximi ^«;f; convenianty & EpifcopHS delegatnr
PLEBE PRJESENTE qttiz fwgubrum vitamplentjfme novity& untif-
cftjHfque aUnm ; de ejus converfaiione perfpexlt : Qned & apttd vos factum
videruHS in Sabina coUeg^ mfiri ordinatione^ ut de VNIVERS& FRA~
TERNlTATIS SUFFRAGIOy & de Epifcopornm (^ui in prafentia
convener ant y qniqi de eo ad vos liter as fecerant)pdicio Epifcopatus ei defer"
rctur Epift.6%.
2dly. By way of Exception he tells US, i. This u hut one example^
ndt ffij^cient to infer a perpetual Rule.
Anfw. I. Tis intended but for one example.
idly. We find the thing praaiCed afterwards ; Elders arc ordained,
TiV. If. I Tim. J. 22. That they (hould fo fuddenly vary from the
praaice of the ApolUes here (no intimation thereof being given, but
wther the contrary, iT/w. 1. 14. & 3.10. Tit. i. y. (V»* &' piWtibw
\m^c0^'«r,, that thou mayeji fetflreighty or according to the hne. or rule that
thou hafi learned ofusy the things that are rvantingy and ordain {viz,, ac-
cordint' to that rule) Elders in every City) is not probable: That they
did no?dofo for fome hundreds of years after Mr. T, grants, and wc
have proved. Which is a fufficicnt Anfwcr to his Exception about
conftituting Elders, without the mention of any fuch elcaicn of the
People, 7ir. I.J.
3dly. In the elc^ion of otherOfficer$,is an Apolilc,vvc find the peo-
ple concerned, i. Out of an hundred aud twenty pcrfons, they chofc
and prcfcnted two, i/.ij. out of which two, one being chofen by lor,
CvyyJ^T.^>ii} he was counted amongft the Apoftlcs by the common
Surtraoes of them all, v 26. And this very Scripture amongft others is
ufed b^y Cjprian to con-firm the power of the people, in chufing or refu-
finq their Minifters. Epifi-^. /• i. Deacons (as was faid) was io chofen,
y4ci.d.3,5,6. Put all together, and you have as full an evidence of the
tiuih of the Affertion as can be defired.
But our Animadvcrter, 2dly, acquaints us from Dr. Fteldy &c. that
the word ^ies"^'^' is ipplycd to other creating then by Suffrages, is
Ar/iv, Tis gnntcd.it fomctiaes IS To ipplycd J but the proper and
. moft
/ in Anfvper to Mr. TJ?is Exceptions, 1iSy
inoft ufuil fignification of tht vvord i$ totle^ by Sujfroiges, as Mr. T,
.knows : That becauCc it's once ( or twice it may be ) uled in a meta-
phorical [enfe, where it cannot be otherwife interpreted, therefore We
muli depart from the proper notation of the Word, where the cohtext
of the place doth induce u», and the pra6i:icc of the Chuich and People
t)f God inafter-gefierationj, to abide by it is not tolerable arguing.
Hi? next Exception i?, ^dly. "H^fieare [aid to xle9'^''fi'ii'f*tPiu\a>id
Barnabas, a^d the; are /aid u do it ^vrohy for them, viz. the Churchy or
Dlfcifles, '--■- V;^-' -^^^' ,. ' •
Ak[w, I. Nor i«itftktfflarythat we affirm-JM^-orberfo tddo: thdy
herein prefiding over them, and regulating the vvhplc affair acciording
to the inftruftions vcceivcd' from Chrift, bear the name of the whole
work, though the Votes and Suffrages of the^DifcipIes were in italfo:
The Apofiles ordained by Suffrages, viz>. the Suffrages of the Church,
Elders for them ; But this proves not that the Vote of iheDifciplef
was excluded; it r-athetevi'hcctb^hecantravy. . ..V
Yet 2dly, Why ^t^i'mcm-n? it7«7«-,-muft bfe ■reildrcd ^reUtlng hy Shf.
" frages (or ordaining) forthefn^ I do not underftand : It- may every whit
ti properly be rendrcd with them, viz.. with the Church or Difciples.
- For fo the word « t^s is frequently rendred -' fo (^at. i_j» 2.p. «»f^3a" 5^^
ont or otherparticufar inftitutedChurch of Chrift • if -tkey ptfjtead
nottoit, have itindcrifion, come barely with a prcfcntation from' t
Patron, Ordination, InlHtution and Indu6libn from a Lord«-6ifi^6p5
things forriign to the Scripture, and impofc themfelves Updn-tic P^o«
pic whether they will or no (as itmaymoft trulybeafiirited of iliQm^
they are not -Miaiftcrs of the Gofpel, nor may be htird ts'fuch^' -^
Aa
jg^ \A Vindication of tie SoherTe^mony^ \
But Mr. T. hath fomcwhat more to addc, he tells ns, i. That h
will be hirdfor hs to prove that the Parlfh-Chfirches in England arc notfar-
ticular Injiitnteci Churches of Chrifl.
Anftp. I. Of what is hard or eafic for us to do, or »ny man clfc, out
Animadvertcr fcems a very incompetent Ju
but called out of the World, Jc^.iy.i8,ic?. whom God had received,
Rom,i4-i,:S\\ckts pleafe Chrift, and are dearly beloved by him, Epb.
5.29. are built upon the foundation of the Prophets and Apoftles,£/'^.
2.20. have the Spirit of Chrift,£;>ib.4.4. arc built up together an holy
md fpiritual Houfe to God — i Pet.2.^. God's Houfe, x Tim. 3. i j.
Htb.1^6' are liviag Stones, a chofea Generation, a Royal Priefihood>
an holy Nation, a peculiar People, v.9. faithful in Chrift Jefus, Eph,
X.I. The foa#»nd daughters ofthe Lord God Almighty, 2 0r. (5. 17,
xia'Chria iiuid to be their Husband, their Head- They his Bride,
** in Anfiver to Mr, T, bis Exceptions. i S 7
Eph,^*2^, C0/.1.18. his Temple, iCor.^,16, Nov¥ he muft have a
browofbrifs, that (hall affiiin that thefe Charadeis arc applicable to
thePariQi-Affembliesof Englmij when they themfelvej will confcfs
they appertain not to therti. Are Drunkards, Swearers, RevilerSj Per-
fecut€r$ of God and HolinefSj loofe, prophane, fcandaUus livers ( of
which thefe Afl'emblics (for the moft part) are conflituted and made up)
Saints, holy Brethren, fuch as arc called out of the World ? &c. None
will dare to aver it.
2dly. Where there is not the true form of a Church, there Is notthi
true Church : But in the Parifti-Affemblics oiEngland there is not the
tiue form of a Church ,• Therefore ^
The Minor (which is alone liable tp exception) is evident. The
form of a Church confifts in the free and voluntary embodying together
of Saints, giving up themfelvcs to the Lordjind one another, accord-
ing to his \vill (as we have already proved.) Now this cannot be alTcrt-
cd of the Parifih-Aflcmblies. Thofe Civil divifions (for they are no
others) were of the inftitution of man (as we have demonftrated) And
to this day they are held together by penal Statutes and Ordinances,
fuch as never came into the heart of Chrift to eftabliili.
3dly. There where there is not the Church-power, that of right be-
longs to a true Church of Chrift, there is not a true Church of Chiift :
But in the Parirti-Churches oi England, there is not that Church- powei
(nor as fuch are they capable of it) Therefore —
The LMinor (which alone is to be proved) is pcrfpicuouj. i. The
power of eleding their own Officers they have not ; This belongs to
Patrons, Lord-Bilhops, &c. 2. The power of admiflion of Members,
and eje(:^ion of the Scandalous by excommunication th^y have not.
The firft a man hath by buying or renting a piece of Land in the Parifh,
and dwelling there : the other is managed in the Bifhops Courts , by a
forry thing call'd a Chancellor, it may be as deboift as the worft that is
brought before him. Now that with refpe^ft to thefe things Chrift hath
cntrufted his Church with power, we evince, chap. 2 gc 4.of S.T,
4ly. That company of men that are not capable of performing thofe
duties,and cannot anfwer that end that Chrift requires of his Churches,
for which he inftitu Ad them, are not a true Church of Chrift : But the
Parifli-AfTcmbliesof England m not capable of performing thofe du-
ties — Therefore.
' lis the Minor needs proof. The duties Chrift requires to be per-
formed by them, the end he aimed ac in inftituting his Churches was^
• If Tofet forth his honour and praife, Eph.-^, zi. iPet^i.p,
A a 2 2, To
\>
1 8 8 J Vindication of the Sober Teftimmty^
1^ To promote the- tiuc Light and Knowledge o£ God , £>*r/.i.^
5. The matual edificition of one tnother in the^ thingj ofGod,
iThff.^.ii' £/?/?. 4. 29. iCor. 1^.26, Ji*de2o. I appeal to any un-
byaflfcd man in the world, whether he tbidks in his cohfcienee that the
Parifh-AfTembliesof Syigland can perform tlief^ duties, anfwcr this
end. Thecontrary is moft'evident, and too- rioforioufl-y known to btf
true, than to admit of a denial. But I (hill not enlarge on whit is al-
ready fo judicioufiy affcttcd and argued by others, which Mr. 7*. is not
able to evert. The Ordination of Lord-BiOiops (of which he next?
fpeaks) is forreign from Scripture, if the Office it felf be. This wo
prove, chap. 3. of 5". T. and Mr. T. oricefwore to extirpate it as fucb,
and I am forty to find him now pleading for it. Wncther I have abufed
Johfj 10. 1) 9, neither Mr. r. nor! muft now be judge ; the judicious-
Readerwill judge for us both, and I doubt not according to truth.
Sea. 4.
The Mlnlflers of EMgl. not to be heard as gifted-Brethren. Judas not far'
ticularly declared by Chrifty Joh.5. 70. to be a Devil. The Anlmai-
verter abufeth the Author of the S. T. In affirming he ties tip Salntfhip
to particular Churches ; whom the Scripture m^kts Brethrent Mr. T,'
rednceth the Brotherhood to a [mailer fcantUng th'an we. We cannot 'per^'
form the duties of Brethren to the Mimjlers of Engl, and why. If we
own the befl of them for Brethren^ we mnfi own the worfi. 0/ Judas his
receiving the Sacrament. The mixt mnUitHde making acclamation to
Chrlji of joyning with other in Worship. We feparate no more from the
Chttrch of England than they do from us. i Cor. j. 1 1. 'Ti^Kot law^
ful to break Bread with the vlfibly prophane:, proved. In what fenfe the
Bifhops are ftyled Reverend Fathers. Thty are not' to be owned as fnch.
The Mlnlflers of Engl, diforderly walkers :> proved. They engage agaln^
Scripture-Reformation. 2 Thef.3. 6. explained. Of Obedience to Mi-
filfers. — Rom«i3.i. Htb. 1^.7. opened. We ought not to hear thef4
from whom 'tis our duty to withdraw. Mr. T. his Arguments to. the
contrary^ anfwered.
IN SeB. 4. our Animad verter replies to the proofs produced in .^.7*.
for the confirmation of the fecond part of ouv Minor Propo(ition,z/;a.
That 'tis not lawful to hear themasglfed-Brethren ; becaufe^ i. The rmji
of them are not gifted , nor 2. Brethren^ being Canonical Drunk^rdst
SvpcATcrSy c^a^
TO'
jT^ in Anjwer to Mr, '^Jns Exceptions, 18^
To this he faith, i. That any of them are fucb, is to be bswaylei in 4
ChrijiiamvAy I the ^erfons guilty are toberehnked^ Lev. 19. 17, not to be
thus charged \n printi in a Book^ vented in the dark.^ tending to make them
9iiotn. • f *■-•-'■..
AnfrP'. T.iWhen he (hiW 'bs pie a fed to manifeft the Rult of Chrift
I have trangrcfledj in thus chtrgirfg them, I iliall as publickly acknow-
ledge my errOFf Thofe that/in^ rebuke before ally 1 Tim. 5-. 20. ijfomc
part of what I have to plead for my to doing.' 2. If the Book were
vented in the dark, I may thank them for it, who vvould have fuch
- things (Viflcd, that their works may not be made manifert. 3. I make
them not odious, they have made themfelves fo, throughout the Nb-
tioik' 4. Mr.TV his hoping this is not true, proves nothing: the con-
trary- is manifef-t to thoufands.
He adds, 2dlyf Were all this and more trne^ yet they)njght be heard
f reach the Goffel^ as Brethren gifted,
Anfrv. But knows he what he fairh? We affirm that they are not
gifted, nor Brethren ; that this ihould be true, and more too, and yet
they might be heard as gifted Brethren, is fuch a Paradox tome, that
comes but a little fhort (if a little) of down-right nonfenfe ; i.e. there
are fome may bs heard as Brethren g'fredj that are neither gifted, nor
Brethieo. That Judas was declared by Cbrift to be a D *vil, John 6.70,.
as he fuggefts, is falfc. *He faith one of them was fo, but names him
not. 'Tis true, John tells us, ver. 71. that he fpake ofjudoij but this
neither he nor any of the reft knew till afterward?.
We add in S-.T, 3dly. The beft of rhem cannot by Saints, in refpcdi
©f Gofpel-corftmunion, be accounted Brethren. For, i. There was
never any giving up our felves each to other, whence fuchiBiother*
hood doth refult.
To thisMr. T. infwers. i. By Saints he means fuch as are mem-
bers of a particular, inftituted, Congregationil Church, diftin. Very well 1 How proves he that, with refpe^ft faereuntOj.wc
may own them, as Brethren ?
- Why, I . "^ui^ might be heardy at an Apofiicy was ( perhafs} a.Qom-,
mmicant at the Lords Suffer ; It's therefore lavpfnl to htar andjQ^n ijt thf_
Lords Supper, with the worfi of the frefent Mim/iers. . ' "
Anftv. I. Of the cafe of Jadtts, that is repeated, i«/f«^<«'^»«*»A<««» >
we (hall have occafion to fpeak hereafter;' At prefect we j(hall only
fay.
2. He was an- Apoftle fent forth by Jefus Chvift, which the piefcnt
Miniflers of England are not.
3. He was a vifible Saint, carried it fo well, that but immediately
before his betraying his Lord, the Difciples fecmed rather tofufpe u. ..-.
3. From an extraordinary impulfe of Spirit. ; n^i b-rS
4. They joyned with the Difciples, were not the mouth of the Dif-.
Ciples to God, and therefore reachcth not at all our ptefent Cafe.
y. Mr. T. Can never prove this Confcqucncc valid. The Difciples
fing Hofafina to Cbrift, and others, a mixt multitude, by an extraordi-
nary impulfe of Spirit, fing fo to ; Ergoy It's our duty to joyn with the
prefent Minift^rs, as Brethren, in praying, preaching,recciving the Sa-
crament, &c. which yet he mud make good, or confefs he hath hither-
to proved nothing.
He adds, 4th ly, 'Tia no Jin to joyn in the true fVorjhip of. Cody with anj^
if tee have no command to withdraw from that Service^ hecauff of their ^rt*
fence y nor power to exclude them-.arj.jtet hound to the duties then performed ; .
Believers might propbe/te and hear it^ though unbtlicvtrs came, in, i Cor.
14. 24. Anfw^
m Anfvper to Mr, T. his Es^cepmntl 193
'An[rf. I. This Animadvcrtcr takes for granted, What we deny,
¥ir(l. That the true Worftiip of God is peifoimed in the Parifh Aflem-
blics. All praying and preaching is not the true Woifliip of God. The
offering Sacrihce itjerufalem was fo, but not clfewhere. Thefe things
muft be performed in the vyay appointed by him, clfc they cannot be lo
accounted.
adiy. 'Tis true,bound we arc to perform the duties they pretend to
perform, but according to the Inftitution of the Lord, not mans devi-
iing, as they are performed in the Church of England^ I[a. 2p. 13. Mat,
iy.7.
3 ly. Though it be no fin to joyn in the true Worfhip of God, yet 'cis
a fin to joyn with falfe worfliippers, in a falfe way of Woifhip, as pray-
ing after the way of the Common-Prajer-Book^y hearing an Antichiifti-
an Minifier.
4thly, Believers, 'cis trucmight ptophefie though unbelievers came
in; but it doth not therefore follow,that '(is lawful for Believers to joya
with Uobclicvers, or forfake the Way and Inftitutions of Chrift, to go
to the Aflemblies of Unbelievers and hear them Prophcfie. As the
worft of Minifters ( of whom he is difcourfing ) and the generality of
Parochial Affembliesundonbtedly are, if a Spirit of prophanefs, vi-
fibie debauchery, an cxcefs of riot befpeak perfons to be fuch. And from
fuch he grants we arc to fcparate by command from Chrift, aCor.cJ.i/.
to which may be added, £;?i[>. 5*. 1 1. 2T»w.3.j. -^^^ 2. 39,40. But
why talks he of oui feparating from them, when they fcparate as much
from us as we do from them ; we were never no more of them than
they were of us. Of Rev.\Z./\.. we (hall hereafter fpeak. For the
prclcnt we deny, that by Babylon there, is meant only literal Romcy and
expeft the proof ofhisdidate. * The keeping company, and eating in-
• terdi6ted, i Cor. y. 11. he tells us, muft be meant of eating Common
*■ Bready — Becaufe verf. xo. That keeping company which is forbid-
* den to fuch Brethren, is allowed in verf. p, 10. to the Fornicators o£
'the world, which cannot be Gofpel-Communion, keeping company
' in eating of the Lords Supper.
u4»frv. I. It fcer|s then that with the Fornicators of the world, we
may not have Gofpel-Communion j if fo, then not with the Church of
Englandy for with it we cannot have Communion without holding fdr
lowftiip with fuch as thefe.
adly. If it be not lawful to have Communion with a Brother, one
of the fame particular Church ( for of fuch an one the Apoftlc fpeaks )
that is A Fornicator ^ or Covetous ^or an Idolater^ or a RaiUr^or a Drnnkardi,
Bb «r
^g^ ji Vmdkation of tie Sober Teftmony^
Or an Uxtortloneu fo far as to common eating and drinking, then, a for^
tiori tniy wc aiguc, it is utterly unlawful to have communion with him
in the WorQiip of God, and much more unlawful to have fellowftiip
with one we never walked with in the way of the Gofpel,. accoiding to
any inliitution of Chrift. ^ ^ . . t j ^
2 * That 'tis hwful to hold Communion in eating the Lords Supper,
« with Rdlers, Drunkjirds, &c. I am forry to find Mr. T. afferting, of
which wc expea his proof. The contrary is evident, i. Petfons muft
bein aChurch-ftate, before they arc capable of the regular enjoyment
of that Ordinance j which is a Church-Ordmance, and part of lurti-
tuted Woifhip) butPerConsof fuch a Complexion, arc not fit matter
for t Church, as we before proved. Therefore — 2, Thofe who
Gu^ht to be excommunicated out of t Church,were they in, we may not
have Communion with ( efpecially when in a falfe Church-ftate, as i«
the cafe of the members of the Church of England) But perfons of fuch
a chara(fter, as the Apoftle mentions, (hould be excommunicatcil out
of the Church. Therefore — 3- Thofe with whom we have Cotn^
munion in breaking Bread as a Gofpel- Ordinance, with them we arc
one Bread, i Cor. lo. 17. But we may not be one Bread with Drunk-
ards, &c. Therefore — 4- Thofe with whom wc are commanded
to have no fellowfiiip, with them we may not have fellowiliip in that
Ordinance of breaking Bread : But with fuch as thefe we are com-
manded tohavenofellowiliip, £^^5. ". That the People of God
can fcarce ever break Bread with comfort in the beft mftituted Churches
(as he tells us) from this dofttine, is 1 notoiiouQy falfe Crimination,
t mecr Calumny. His fubfequcnt fcoff,i$ fuch froth and vanity as be-
comes not his years nor profeflion, wc ptfs it over ts beneath us to
take further notice of. , , i r r »•• •
We add in S. T. 3dly, That rve cannot acknoMeige theprefent /w»-
mjitrs for oHT Brethren., h(*t m mftfi acknowledge the Btjhops for our Rt-
verendFathers, for theirs they are ', h»t that m cannot do.
To this Mr. T. adjoyns, Sea. y. i. They are call'd their Reverend
Fathers, in relpeB of their Ordination, , l -u
jiMfa I. But we cannot own them as Reverend Fathers,, with rc-
Iped hereunto, when we affuredly know they are herein ufurpersof
what doth not appertain to them.
But 2dly, This is not all, they own them as fuch upon the account
df their Authority over them, and the Parochial-Airembhes in the re-
fpcaive Dioceffc$,who are to give forth Canons and Laws for them tc^
m\k by, inoot 1 few. things i^ating to WoiOiip (*« i» )^nom) Now fo
tnAnJrvertoMr.t.hifExceptidny, 19 j
fft cannot own them as our Reverend Fathers, we J?now no honour or
obedience we owe them as fnch. We think the inrpeig tnBaptifm, &c.
Anfw. I. No one doubts but they would ; nor can any other be ex-
pefted from them, who are in the pradJce of thefe things. But that
bccaufe they will juftifie them, therefore they are no diforderly walk-
tis^iinot (in my poor judgment) an argument of the Icalt weight.
The
in AnfwBY to Mr . T. his Exceptionfl i p 7
The Paplfts will juftifie their ^jcpa^t?/*,, or Image- wor (Lip, tnd the
reft of their abominable idoUtries, anl bring Scripture to prove it lawful
too. Cregorita de Valentia tels us, there is foxTie worfhip of Images law-
ful, and proves it from i Pet 4. 3. becaule the Apoftle would there de-
terrc them from the ttyj/awfttl woiihip of Idols : yet I hope Mr. T. will
not affitm they arc not difordetly walkers, and to be fcparatcd from as
fuch.
2ly. We fay not, that they themfclves will confefs that they are dif-
ordcrly walkers; but that fuch as Mr. T. who have covenanted againft
Bifliops, and pretended to be for Reformation, cannot deny, but thai
they are indeed fo, with refpeft to the matters inlianced in : which he
murt acknowledge to be true ; for they are the very things they cove-
nanted againft, as intolerable diforders and abufes to remove out of
the way. So that however they might call me an egregious falfe accu-
fer (which yet were but a forty anfwer to the charge laid againft them)
yet one would not have expeilid fuch language" fiom Mr. 7". Thefc
things are diforders, or they are not : If they are not, why did this Ani-
madverter Coreninr, Preach, Print againft them, glory that he was
one of the firft that in print teftified his diffatisfatftion touching them.
If they are, moftaffuredly thofe thatpradife them are with refpeato
thetn diforderly walkers. And is Mr. T. of late grown fuch a fond
Admirer of them, that a man cannot fpeak truth of them, but he mu(^
call him a^n egregious falfe accufer, I am afraid xexafi^i 7?» z/. inf, i^^
to withdraw from every Brother that fhall walk diforderly, and not
according to their Traditions, i.e. fhall fo far fide wirh Antichrift and
his Minirters, as to pra<5kife & conforn:! to his Innovations in the Wor-
ship of Ghrirt ; which we prove they do. And the things mentioned
arc known to be luch. N:>r is it neccffary that we produce an Apcfto-
lical tradition cxprcfly againft them, becaufc in matrers of Wor/hip,.
that which is not commanded, is forbidden. What Mr. T. haihfaid
in anfwer to Chap^i* Sc6l.5» we have already replied to.
To his Qiery, fVhere is yonr ApofloUcal tradition for par Church-Co-
venant^ EleShionof Miniflers ? we fhall only fay, That when Mr. T. (or
any one for him) fhall beabletofhew as much Apoftolical tradition,
for the matters with refpe(ft to which we charge the Mmiftcrsof £«jj-
taniti diforderly walkers, a$ the learned Ain[worth^ Cotton ^Bart let ^^nd
we our felves in S.T. have /hewed for the matters inftanced in by him,
weftiallfurccafeouraccufation, and acknowledge we have done them;
wrong.
That which he adds, 3dly, If every one that hath not a written Apofio^
Ileal tradition for what he dothy rvalkj diforderly ^ then every one that fins
walks diforderly, will receive a (peedy dijpatch. Anfw. He doth fo !
Tea but then this Apithor {{i\\)\ he) // he be not a Perfe^ilonifi, nor t kinks'
hlmfelf excluded from the number of thofe^ of whom Jam .3,2. x Joh , i . 8.
is a diforderly walker ^ and to befeparatedfiom,
Anfpp. Setting afide his feoff, which becomes him not at all, I an»
fwer, F/r/?; Diforderly walking is twofold, i. Private, known only to
a mans own felf, which is matter of burden, forrow^nd lamentation
to him, under which he groans and wars agiinft it. 2dly, More pub-
lick, which is twofold: i. Such as through weakncfs, and the re-
mainders of corruption the Children of the Lord do fall into, which
they are aOiamed of, grieved for, and arc thankful to any that (hall re-
prove them for it, and help them againft if. Or 2. Such as is owned,
avowed, men juftifie themfelves in the pra^Hce of, will not, whatever
is faid againft them, be reclaimed from. Perfons guilty of diforderly
walking in this laft fenfe, wc fay are to be fepa rated from; and that
this is the cafe of the Minifters of the Church of England is noto^iou{ly^
known. * -
He proceeds and tells us 4thly. The frefentMimflers wlSbe apt taai^
Ud^ for themfe Ives i that they have eApo/lollcal tradition for thofe praUices-
for which they are accuf:d as diforderly walkers^ w"^. Rom. 131. Heb. i ?,.
17. and be ready to recriminate ui far fepn.rating from our Brethren dUo-
heying our Minifiers and Gover»ours commandlngthlnos lawful,
A:nfa>^
^ oo ^ Vindication of the Sober Tejlimdny,
Anfvfi. I. 'Tis very like they may do the one, and the other. h$
for the latter, Si accufarifuffciaty nemo trit imoccMS : Let them (or any
tor them) prove that we have fcparatcd from any of them, and therein
broken any rule of the Gofpel of Chrift ; that they are by vertuc of any
appointment of Chtift out Minifteis and Governors, whom we ought
to obey, and that the things required are lawful, and they will be fuppo-
fed to fay fomewhat that we are concern'd to take notice of, but till then
we are innocent. T^ow. 13. i. JtWsnsfVemufiohy the Powers that are
cfGody but faith not we mult do fo in that which is fiiiful, in their addi-
taments to the Woifliip of Chtift. In fuch cafes, neither Solomon^ nor
Jrro^p 2ly, That the mthdrawmcnt mentioned 2 Thef.3.<^,i4. is only
from arbitrary commtimon in entertainments &c»
Anfw, This is an old (hift of Mr. T. we have already refuted.
He further tells us, 3ly. // we omit it, we omit the ff'orfhip of God, and
fo Ireak^his Commandments,
Anfjv. I. Thii is imzzt pet itioprincipa^ we deny the miniflrationof
the Sacraments according to the lights of the Church of England^ to be
the Worftiipof God,ftriaiy fo called.
2ly. There's no need, through grace, of omitting the Worfiiipof
God ; if we wotfliip not with them, there are meetings of his people,
whither we may have recourfe to worfhip him in his own way. To what
follows in this chapter, we have already an[wered. We attend his ad-
vance towards the difcu0ion of our third argument, of which in th«
next_ chapter.
C c CHAP,
^^i 'A Vindication of tie Sober TeJ^mony,
CHAP. mi.
Sed. I.
Sach Oi aB from an Amichrljllatt calling — not t& be heard, provei. 'AyrA
;^ijt?^vphat itfyKtfief. ^Vho is Antlchrid^what isAntichrijilan^expUlned,
The Mmlfltrs of England, derive their Office-power from the Papacie.
The Blfhops of England , Petty- Popes. 'Tis ttnUrvful to attend upon tht
teachings of Antlchrlfii therefore ttpon the teachings of [mh a* aEi hj a
power derived from him* Chrlj} calls his People to ftparate from evfrj
thing of Antichrift, Rcv. 18.4. and 14* 9. explained^ Of trying the
Spirits^ ijoh.4. 1. of Chrids inflitHting Officers of his own, Nopromifs
of a hleffing in attending upon an Ant ichrifiian Mimjhrj,
IM Chap. 3. of 5. T. a third Arguaaeat is produced againft hear-
ing the prcfent MmifterS; viz..
Thofe that aU in the holy things of God, by vertue of an Antichriji'iAH
Povfery Office^ or Callings are not to be heard ^ bm to befeperatedfrom °
But the prefent Miniftersof England, aEi in the holy things of God, byver^
tas of an Amichrlfilan Power , Office ^ or Calling, Therefore —
The {J^ajor is evident : for, i. The Povver, Office and Calling o£
Antichrift is oppofite and contrary to th^ Power, Office, and calling
of Chrift : not to feparate from fuch as id: by vcrtae of fuch an Officc-
povver, is to ftaad by, and plead for Antichrift, againft Chrift.
ThefutnofwhatMr. T* anfwets hereunto if, If by Anticbrlftiaa
Powir, Office, and Cilling be naeant the Papal Powct— and the aaing
in the holy things, be by preaching the dodrine of the Trent Comcil^m
the points determined therein againft /*ri?.'^y?*««f/, by adminiftring Sa-
ciamtncs according to the Romxn MijfJ^ and Difcipline according to
the Canon-Law of the Popes ; the Afajor ig granted and the Minor Az-
nicd. But if by Antichrlfllanpower^&c. be meant by vertue of miniftry
according to the Liturgy, Articles of Religion, and Homilies of the
Cnutch of England^ frona the Ordination and Licence of the Bifliops,
his Major is denied: that vvhicb he CillJ Antichriflian, is not truly
fuch ; and it is denied that what He calif Antichriftian is oppofvce,
and contrary to ih.e Po wer ^ Office, and Calling of Chiift— ^
Anfi»>
in Anfwer td Mr. T, his Exceptions] 203
'Jnfwf. I. The woid A*'r!;i^,9ti\s (as this Animadvertcr tells us}found
only in the Epifllc of John ; and principally 1 Joh» 2. x8. where the
Apoftlc diftinguifticth between *Av7/^.^/, & o'Am;^;^.^^?, between the
WM^AntichnHsand the wrf/« Aniicbiift. The belt inteiprctttion of
the word, Ceems to be ifalfe Chrifi, or a Count er-Chrlft ; one that undci
the prctenQe of being for ehrift, doth really cppofe Chiift (the word
«i*-n\ both in oppofiiion and compofition fignifies [Fcr] in the Scripture
as Mat.z,22.jas,J^.7, and in ClalTical Writers, as Homer^Hefycheitu
&c.) in his Offices, Miniftry, Difciplinc, Worship — He is Antichrift
thatunder the pretence of ading for Chriftj doth indeed (though co-
vertly) ar//?M« Office -Power, Chrijllan) Idmini-
ftration of Sacraments according to the %gman Mljfd, and difciplinc
according to the Canon-Law) by vertue ot an AnticbrilHan Papal Po-
wer,is not to be heard— but in this fenfc he denies tlje Minor, And I
cannot but wonder at the confidence of the man j doth he not know
that they derive their Office-Power from the Tapacy} he is not fo i*'-
corant, as not to know ir. Do not the Biftiops of England^ exercifc the
fame power over t^ Clergy zu^ Laity (as they arc called) thereof, as
the Pope doth over his, fo that they are upon the matter ?«/>///* Petty-
Popes ? 1$ this power Antichriftan in the Papacy, iiVid not fo in the Pre-
lacy ? Is not the manner of admibilhtion of Sacraments inufe amongft
us, taken our of the T>opllh Mifa/ ? Mr, T. knows it is. Is not th? *
Dilcipline oh heir Church fromthe Canon-Law? with what forehead
cm he deny it ? Whence is the Hierarchy, Ecclehaftical decrees, Epif-
Cc 2 coptl
2 oi ^ ^Indication of the Sober Tejlimony^
copil jurlfdiftion, ProcuritioDSj Difpcnfations, Pluralities, Non-refi-
dcncicsj Popirh-retaincd-Cercmonies, their Excommunications by %
Commiflfary, Ordinations, Abfolutions, Degradations, Vifitationj,
Offerings, Courts, Silencing of Godly Picachcrs, difquicting the
Lords people for Non-conformity, if not from the Cannon-Ltw ? Thefc
things ire notorioufly known to be from them. So that Mr. T. grants
the prefeni Mmifters may lawfully be feparatcd from. But this might
be a flip ofhis pen before he was aware. That it is our duty tofeparatc
from perfons ading from an Antichriltian Power, Office, or Calling wc
prove.
zly. 'TisHnUvpftil to attend upntbe Teachings of Antlchrlfiy therefore
upon the teachings offttch M aB by virtue of a power derived from him.
To this Mr. T. rcplyes. // by teachings of Antichrijl be meant the
teachings of tbeprefent Do^rineof the Charch of Rome — - and the power
derived from him be meant the Englijh Bljhops Ordination^ it is impudency to
fay they derived their parvtr from Rome, — •
Anfvc. I. We arenotyetfpeaking of the Miniflers of England, to
feparate from thofe that aft from an An tichrilHan power, be they Mi-
nilkrs oiGermanj, Holland — if they fo a6l in thdr Miniftry, they arc
to be feperated from, and thatbecaufe vve may not attend upon Anti-
chrillin hi$Teachings,or Miniftration : doth Mr.T. deny this? He faith
indeed if they preach truth, we may attend upon their Miniftry though
they fo a£l.
Anfw. But this hath been often faid without the leaft proof, and as
frequently replyed to, and its inconfutiloufnefs in its application to the
prefent Minifters, who preach Poplfh Errours, and are interdifted the
preaching all truth manifefted. *Tis an afTertion moft derogatory to the
Dignity, and Authority of our Lord and King, and not to be born by
his Loyal Subjeas. Hath not he Servants enough of his own, to do his
work, to preach his Gofpel, but he muft be beholding to the greateft
enemies he hath in the world, to fend forth Servants into his Vineyard.
2dly. The prefent Miniftjrs of £«^/4«^ deny their power from the
P.pacy, or theydonot; if they do not, it had b:en my miftakc, not
impudency to fay they did. If they do, ( as moft certain it is they do,
and they themfelves acknowledge it and plead it) the Impudency li ra-
ther in Mr, T. to deny it.
I addinS. T. 3dly. Chrift calls his to feparatefrsm every thlngofAn-
r»VW/?;Rev.i8.4. & 14.9,10,11. Therefore from his Miniftry ^ err f»ch
4ti aci by vert tie of an Antichriftian pswer —
To which our Animadveitct replies, i ^?/.i8, 4. may beunderftood
of
in Anfiver to "Mr . T. his Exceptions] 20/
jf a local departure from Babylon, rfhsn her judgment of dejlrHElion from
the Kings of the Sarth draws nigh,
Anfvf. I. And who can hinder Mr. T. froT. making conjcdurcs ?
his it may bs is no proof that it is. However the ground of the Lord's
"calling the.TiOLitof -^O7»r(niould it be granted him, that by BubylonTiziz
meant the City of T^-JwO i^ plainly intimated to be, /f/?ri&f;y5^3«/(^^<
which ii to be cleaved to, becaufc truth) much lefs a rejection of the
Bible — Thefe are but vain words, empty^flouriihes, this Animad-
vertcr knows full well that thefe things are not affirmed by ihofe with
whom he hath to do.
Sdly. To a departure from her by forfaking Communion with her
in Worfhip, and leaving fubjcftion to her Governmenr, he grants this
Scripture may be extended : which is all we need contend for. The
Wor(hip of Rome and England are much the fame, as we prove. The
Church-government in ufc amongft us by Arch-Birhops,Bi(liops, ilTues
from the fame fourfc and fpring, as is known. Therefore a feparatioa
from the Wordiip and Miniftry of England lawful by the Animadver-
ter's confefTion.
4tbly. When God comoaands to come out of her, he muft be inter-
preted to come out of every thing of her, viz., that which is truly hers j
whatever hath not the ftamp and authority of God upon it ; for the rea-
fon why the Lord would have his forfake any thing of hers, is, becaufc
it is hers, and hath not his own Image and Superfcription- Tis ridi-
culous to iaiiagine> that God (hould commind a feparation from her
WorlKip and Government, and not from her Miniftry, when this is s
main part of her 'Ry.xx^nx'nx.K 7n»LTfict^^ or Chuich-Governmcnr.
He adds, 2dly. Bjf the Beafi and his Intagt^ Rev. 14. 9, 10, 11. ii
meant fome Empire or Statey vfhich promotes Idolatry, the Roman PapAcy^
the vf or (hipping of which is undoubtedly the acknovfledging of its power:, ani
fubjeEiion to their IdolatroHi Decrees and EdiEis ; The receiving his mark^is
a profejfion of our being the fervantsof the Pope., to fubjeci to his authority :
and after the citation of M.t.Brigh[mamnd Mr. CMede fpeaking to
this purpofe, he faith, which doth evince that the worship of the Beafi and.
his Im.tge— is not retaining every ufage of the Papifls, though fuperjiitioro
and corrupt, but acknowledgingthi Hnivsrfal MtnArchy^ of the Popes ado^
ring Images^ the Hofi^ ^c. Anfvf^
2C^ A vindication of tie Sober Tepimony,
An[vff, I. Bnt what doth evince that this is all that is Intended by
woiihipping the Image of the Beaft ? Mr. T. would beai his Reader ia
hand; as if he had produced forrcwhatfor the confirmation orhisAfler-
tion, when he hath not faid the lealt word tending ihtieunto.
The very truth i$> 2ly. The Beaft mentioned, ^ev. 14. 5), 10. is the
fame with the Beaft mentioned Rev.i^. 11. or the falfe Prophet,* Rev*
19. 21. or Antichriftconfider'din hisEcclefiaftical State, compofedof
head (the Popes) and members, the reft of the Antichiiftian Clergy
(whether at Romg, or elfewhere : ) for as the learned Mede faith, the
Pope alone maketh not up the Beaft, except the Clergy be joyn'd with
him : fince the Beaft doth fignifie a company of men compofed oft cer-
tain order of members (like as the Beaft hath) not one man alone : the
Image of the Beaft cannot be a dumb Image, 'tis cxprefly faid to be
a fpeaking one, viz,, the Ecclefiaftical policy, that in its Cannon- Laws
(upon which both that o( Rome and Eng^iani is founded) btetthcih forth
nothing but Excommunication againft fuch as ftiall difobey them, upon
which they are deliver'd over to the Secular Power here with us, though
not to be burned, yet to perpetual Imprifonment. The wor /hipping
the Beaft and receiving the mark, is fubjedion to an Antichriftian Mi-
niftry, and Church-polity, from which it is the duty of the people of
God to feparate ,* and if we prove not the Minift^rsof England to be
fo, wcacknowledg this Argument to be «»i/, and that notwithftanding
any thing in it hitherto averted, it may be lawful to attend them*
We fay in 5. T. 4ly. That there is not a command in the Scripture,
enjojnlfig Saints to take heed of being deceived, to try thlJf^irits — but is an
abundant demonjiration of the trttth ofthefirfi Propojition,
To which A r. T. lubjoyns ; i . Ifbj/ aBing in the holy things of God b^
venue of nn Antichrifiian poiver be meant their acknorvledgingthe fow^
er, teachiyig the doUriney owning the calling of him that is truly Antichrifi^
'tis granted^
Anfvs). To this we have already rcplyed ; 'Tis enough to prove any
perfon ought to be feparatcd from, if he tOt. in the holy things of God
by vertue of an Antichriftian power, though the do(Strinc he preach be
ttue.
Hcadds,2ly. The Scriptures mentioned for^iV (command he means)
Only toreje^ Antichrifiian Doclrine,- andtforfhlp^ not every thing faid bjl
Any without proof to be a thing of Antichrifi.
Aufw. I. Very well; If we prove then the Worftiip of the Church
of Eng/aKd to be Antichriftian, it is to be reiedicd. Now it being the
Woiftripof the Papacy, which is acknowledged by him to be fo, I can-
not fee how it can be oiherwife. 2ly. The
' in Anfwer to Mr, T. his ExcepHonr. '207
2ly. Th2 Scriptures mintionsd, fairly iinport,not only a command
for the rcjedion of the Doaans and Worlliip which is Antichriftian,
but them alfo that pretend to be, but really are not of God. The
parfons are to \iz pioved and tryed, h>Ki^.\T€y try them as Goldfmithf
try Gold, whether it be pure and right ; and if you find them not to be
fo, re'jeftthcm. xjohn,^, i.
We proceed, and in SX, fay further, fly. Theinflitution of Officen
of hlso^vHy by Chrlji to be comlntted to the end of thePVorU, Eph. 4. 11.
ivinceth the trmh of the Mmjor propo/ition^
. To this our AnimadvcrtertnfwcrJ, i. ^TUtrue fome of the Officers
mentioned Ephef. 4. are to be continued to the end of the fVorld in the way
appointed by him^ bm that there is any particular rvay of Eled:ion~—'of ordi^
nary PafiorSy and Teachers^ in thofe words appears not,
Anfiv, Who faith there is ? 'Tisfufficient they prove the continua-
tion of the Officers in the Church to be an Inflitution of Cnrift. Of the
particaUi»way of their election we have mentioned clfewhcrc, as wc
have (hivved. ,2ly. Tis well this Animidvertet will acknowledg that
there is a way appointed by Chrift, in which Church-Officers are to be
continued : which as I conceive is a part of Church-Government,whicb
therefore cafinot be left to fuch an indiff^rency as he fametimes inti-
mates.
\iz tels us 2ly. How the Major is proved by it he difcerns not, mlefs
thifk the Argument ; Chrifi hath appointed thefe ^therefore no other are to
he heardywhlch overthrowes the hearing of Gifted-Brethren,
Anftv. We arc contented with the form our words are byhimcaft
into : only with this alteration, therefore no other are to be heard oi Mi^
ttijfersy aSiln^byvertuesf anOffce-Porpery which makes nothing againlt
the hearing of gifted Brethiea. Wc further add in S. T.
(5ly. That there » nopromlfe of a blejfmg in the whole Scripture ^ upon
peyfoMS attending upon fuch a {Ji^ini/fry ——
Mr. T. replies, i. Though there be no promlfe of a blejjlngupon perfons
attending on fuch a Mlnlftryy yet if they Preach th€ Gofpel truly, there is„
Anf^. I. 'Tis t^i prohiWe they n->ould Preach the Gofpel truly ; as
touching the prefent Minifters of England-, they do not fo. i* They
preach it from afalfe milfion. sly. They pfeich it by halves (as is
known) j. They mixt many humane traditions therewith, and thereby
obfcure the Gofpel, as Mr. T. hitnfelf in his Fermentum Fh^rifaoruns-
tfferts. .4ly. There is noblefTinjpromifed to perfons attending upon
fuch a Miniftry, I/ff^. 11.28, Chiift fpeaks not thereof any fuch Mt-
niiiiy
^ q8 a Vindication of the Sober Tefltmony,
oittry ; the whole of bis intendment is, thit no external piiviledge,
though it were to bear him in the Womb, &c. who was a true Mejfiah^
lenders t man glorious> blcffed, and excellent, as a conformity to ihc
divine will, which how thuch it is to his purpoCc others will judge.
He faith, 2ly. // there were rtn promifc of ahhjftng:, the Major is not
troved, mle[s this were trufy They are not to be heard, bm feparated from,
to whofe Mimfiry asftich, a hlejfi-ng « m promifed ; which makes ttnlawful
the hearing of gifted Bretheren, unlefs they can prodace fhch a promife,
^nfiv. Let me ferioufly ask this Animadverter, whether he doth
not when he goes to hear,— go to meet with God in that duty, and to
receive a blsllingfrom him ? This he will not fure deny : now, I would
know further, whence it is he expeds to meet with God, and be bleffed
by him in his fo doing ? can he or any one in the world, give any other
reafon^but this, Becaufe God hath promifed to meet and blefshis peo-
ple, while they are waiting on him, in his ownwayes? Whether the
work be managed by a Minifter of Chrift, as ailing by Office-power,
or a private Brother afting by vertue of Talents received, for the pro-
fiting and edification of the Body, we ate not deftitutc of a promife of
iblelfing; £.voi-20.24. Ifa.6^.^. Mat. 1^.20. Eph.j^.iito i^. But
if we run to a falfe Miniftry, to fuch as ad from an Antichriftian office
and calling, I know not any promife of a bleffing, but rather the con-
trary. So that the Major Proportion remains unfhaken, notwithftand-
ing Mr. T. his Battery agjinrt it. His next attempt is againft the Mi'
mr^ of which in the next Sedion.
Seft. 2.
The prefcnt CMinljiefS of England^ aU in the holy things of God hj ver-
tue of an Antichrlflxan porver, office y orcallmgy proved. _ I'hey Ht notvoithjlandiug his Ordination:, their miniftry may be the Minifiry of
Jefm Chri^^ as was the Minifiry of Luther, Huj, &c^
Anfw. I. All that Mr. Bradfhaw faith is not Gofpd, nor to be be-
lieved becaufe he faith it.
2dly. That the thing niiniftred {hould render that Miniftry,that with
rcfpcft to the way of entry into it is Antichriftian, a Miniftry of Chiift,
is to me fuch a liddlc, as needs an Oediftu to unravel ; I am fure the
diflin(5^ion is unfctipturaU We reade therein but of two Churches,
I. The Woman cloathed with the Sm^ (afterwards in the Wilderncfs) tht
Bride the Lambs Wife., with her Miniftry, OrdInanccS3Worftiip,(though
in a mean pcrfecuted ftate) called the Minifters ofChrift^ Men of God^
Stewards of the Myfiery of God^ 9y4ngelSy Pa/iorSi &c. 2. The f alfe An-
tichriftian Church, called Babylon^ the Whore, the Mother of Harlots^
the Woman in fomfotu array, oHtward fflendoHr and glory, drunks with the
l>Ioodof the Saints, Kcv. 17.2,^ A' her Woifhip called the Wine of her
Fornication, Abominations of the Earth her Miniftry called Palfe-
'prophets, Lo c ufi s (zsiomc think ) Rev.9.3. f*»clean fpirits H\eFrogs^
Rev. 1(5. 13. And to one of thefe every (called Chrifiian) Minifter in
the world muft appertain : if to the fiift, they are of Chrift ; if to the
fecond, of Anticbrift.
3dly. That a Miniftry of Prieflf — ordained by Antichtift himfdf, is
not a Miniftry of his Apcftafie, but a Miniftry of Chrift, had need be
attended with more evidence than a bare affertionj it being lo evi,
dentlyfalfe and Untrue. How there ftiould be any Antichiifiian Mi-
niftry in the world if thatvvcre true, I know not.
4ly. The Miniftry of L«^^tfr — was the Miniftry of Chrift: but he
received not his Miniftry from Rome, but his Friardom.
Mr.T. adds of his own. If by being from Chrifi^or Antichri(l,be under^
jfood of outward calling, Mmifters may be neither from Chrijl nor Antichrlfl<^
and yet true Minifiers (he {hould have faid of Chrift) as thofe that preach^
ed Chrift even of envy Vh\\,i, rj>i8.
Anlw. I. That a man (hould be a Minifter of Chrift, and not froti
Chrift, or externally called according to his appointment, i.r.a Miniftei
of Chrift, and not a Minifter of Chrift, is fomewhat a ftrange Affertion,
adly. How doth he prove that thofe, mentioned Thil. i. preached
Chrift by vertue of an Office- power, as Minifters and not as gifted Bre--
thren.
Dd 3dly.
210 -^ vindication of the Sober Teflimonyj
3dly. IfMiniftcrsj how proves he that they were not from Chrift iJ*
xtiotSt of outward calling. This ht iliould have proved if he woul^
have mide good his Affertion, his failure wherein cxpofes it to the con-
tempt of the judiciouj Reader. But our Anianadvertei delights in di"
^ites without proof.
His next advance is to the confidcration of the evidence vve bring to
prove the prefent Minifters not to be from Chri(i. i. Their names are
foraif^n to the Scripture ; where read we o(Pric/}s^i$ diflinguiflied from
Chritliins, in the new Teftiir.snt, Dcans^ Canonsy Ptttj-Camns — .
thefc are only found in the Popes Pontifical, whence they arc derived.
To this he anfwers, i . Th^t the term Pricjis U the fame with Prtshjters^
and, that is [urt found, in Serif ture^ Ad:s.i i. 50. ■
Anfvsf, I. Thus indeed Hooker Ecclef, Pel, I y. md before him
Whitgift Afifrver to theAdmomt.Uy, but in vain. For, i. The words arc
never ufcd to fignifie the fame thing, but divers. 2. The firft Alfumers
of the title (under the times of th« Gofpcl) never intended to fignifie
any fuch thing thereby. They afl'umed it not (meerly ) to diflingulh
themfclves from the people, but as a note of diftance amongft them-
felvcs.
2dly. Theothernamei (faith M.T.) note not any Minifiry different
ftomtheMinifiry ofChrifi. — •
Arifw. 1. 1 rtand albnilhed to hear Mr.T". fay fo : if they do not,thofe
who bear thofe names are the Miniftvy of Chrift : 59 o-l -nnvti? Is this
the draught of that hand, which was folemnly lift up to Heaven, when
he fworc to extirpate them , as none of Chrift's Minilhy ?
adly. Where read we of any fuch Officers of Chrift in the Scripture
(who arc not fo called, is Lecturers with refpc6t to the manner
of their doing the work of the Miniftry) but with rerpe<5t to fome place
in the Church, higher or lower then the vefiduc of the Clergy ?
3dly. The Author of the S. T. argues not the names are forraign to
Scripture, therefore the things, as this Animadverterfalfly pretends,
hcaflTerts, as fall as he can, that both name and thing isfo.
4thly, 'Tis a ihrewd fign that thofe Minifters came out of the Mint of
Antichrift, who bear the names wherewith he ftamps his Minifters.
We add, 2dly. As their names are forraign to the Scripture^ fo are their
Oifces. Deacons attending tables rve read of'^ But Deacons fraying) preach-
ings adnxnifiring Sacraments hy vert pie of anOffce-porver, an order of the
ftrftjlep to the Priefihsody vpefind not : Priefls in the old Tejiament tve read of^
in the NevP) Saints ar& fo called ~ hut an Office of Prie/lhood in men for the
Mini fry of the Gbf^el^ that are to be huaded hy men in that their Office,
I
in Anjwer to Mr.T, his Exceptionf, 1 1 j
tmfl preach what they would havethemy ani ceafe when they would have
them (as in the cafe of the prefect Mimftry of England^ the Scripture k a
flranger to.
To which Mr. Tl adjoyns, i. If they be appointed to praj:> preach and
admini/ier Sacraments, they have this tofay^that Philip or in any orher capacity then as a oifted
Brother. 5. 'Tis moft certain it ms no part of his work ai Deacon,
Aas.6, 2. the attending on the Miniftry of the Word is peculiarly di-
ttinguiflied from the attending Tables. 4. His baptizing feems to be by
ri)e extraordinary, and immediate call and impuife of the Spirit : none
ofwhichcanbeaflertedof thefe Deacons.
He adds, 2dly. The Deacons Office may be well conceived the fir/l flep to
the Priefihood in that Paul requires of the Deacons ^ that they hold thf
Minifiry of Faith ^ in a pure Confcience^ and tells m that they who have ufed
the Office of a Deacon well, purcbafe to themfelves a good degree - 1 Tim. 3 .
Anfw. 'Tis true, P<««/ faith fo, but that thence this Animadvsrter
(houldbcable toinfctre, therefore the Deacons OfBcc may be well
accounted the firft ftcpto the Priefthood, muft be imputed to that
acutenefs of his, whereby he is enabled to deduce quidlibet ex qnolibet^
what conclufion he hath a mind from any premifles. There beinc not
a tittle moreorlefsfpokenby PV» 1.3. and
7iV«itoreie6t anHeretick, T»V. 3. 10. and faith, iC^r. 14.30. If any
thing be revealed to another that Jltteth by^ thefirji mttfi hold his peace
But that b:caufe Pattl took all the tare he could, to hinder the fpreadrng
of error, and the preventing diforderly prophefyingf, (aj more than
one fpeaking at once) therefore 'tis lawful for the Biihops in an Anti-
chriftian way, by force and violence, to hinder the free paffige of Gof-
pel-traths, is like the reft of this B, D» Logick, for which I dare fay the
Icaft Smattcrei in that kind of learmng,will fay, he needed not to have
taken any degree in the Schools.
3dly. That the practice inftanced in, is not without example in the
beft ordered Churches (after an unufual rate of modefty with him) our
Dilator tells us, he doth thi»k\ bat he might eafily have informed
himfclf otherwife. 'Tis fuch apiece of tyranny, that well ordered
Churches cannot bear, that petfonsfanfHfied, and taught by the Spirit
of the Lord, found in the Faith, called alfo according to the appoint-
ment, and wayof Chrift, to preach theGofpel, (hould not befuffered
fo to do without the licence of an AntichrifHan Fonndlingy a dumb Idol
of the Popes make, call'd a Lordaln ( I iliould have faid a Lord) Bi[hop',
Many of the worthies of the Lord have protefted againft,as the renown-
ed John Hfts^tht Churches in Bohemlaytht moft eminent in the Council
of Bafl as abominable and Antichriftian.
But Mr. T, further tells us, that if the Prelates Jllence perfons rvhen
they (houldnotj they are accountable to Chrift^ but it U m proof that their
tjiiinijiry is not pom Chriji ; vpho ftibmit to the commands ofmeftjwho havf
power over them^ forbiding them to preach fome truths^ — ■
Anftv. I. That the Pxelates are accountable t© notte but Chrift (as
this Animadverters exprelTions intimates) I am forry to heat from himj
the moft flatttingCanonift would not fay more of the Pope himfclf.
2ly. 'Tis a proof that the Miniftry is not of Chrift, that i-s fo bound-
ed, if P«««/s words be true, Gal. i* 10.
5. That Lord Biftiops have any power ovei the Minifters of Chrift,'
by vertuc of any inftitution of bis, he cannot prove ; the fubmiffion of
Minifters unto them, in things Ecclefiaftical, when they are diftitute of
fuch authority,i$ fo fat from being an extenuation, that it is an aggrava-
tion of their crim&«
in Anjwer to Mr . T. his Exception f, '213
We add in S, T, ^d\y. That the admtjfun of the prefect Mlniflers Into
their Office, by a Lord, Bijhop^ without the confent of the Congregation^ in
which they aU m OjfcerSy is a/fo forraign to the Scri-piure.
What Mr. T. hath before faid m oppofition hereunto, is already
anrwercd. What he hath further to argue, fhall be now confidered.
He tells UJ> i. The aimijfion of the prefent Mlmjiers hath not'alwayes been
by Lord.BijhopSy fome have been made by Suffragan Bifhops
Anfro. I. The moft of the prefent Miniftcrs (Mr. T. denyes not, oor
ctQ he) have their admiiTion from a Lord-Biftiop.
2dly. The very truth is, they all have fo, the Suffragan BiHiops (he
fpeaksof) is but the Lord Bifhops Deputy,vrho reptefents his Lordfhips
perfonin that t6t of Ordination j and therefore what is done by him, is
done by the Lord Bifliop.
3dly. Admiffion by a Suffragan, titular Bilhop, is forraign to Scrip-
ture, as well as admilfion by a Lord-Bi{hop.
He proceeds, 2dly. ivhere the Pari[hioners are Patrons, there is the ele-
^ion of the Congregation*
Anfrv. There arc but fewPari/hes, that as Patrons, prefent theii
own Minifters, and yet thofe that do, muft not have any Minifter, but
whom the Lord-BiQiop pleafeth ; his admiirion is ftill from him.
He further tells us, 3dly. In others there is an implicit confent^ in thei;*
Ancefiors yielding that power to their Fatron^to prefent -and an after-confent^
by receiving him that is injiitttted as their Mimjier,
Anfvv, This is a vanity not worth the minding, i. He cannot pro*
duce any tuthentick Writing, teftifying fuch a reddition by our Ance-
ftors. 2. If he could, though it may be fuppofed they may alienate
what of right belongs to us as men (which yet in many cafes i$fakc)*ds
impoflible they fliould do fo, with refpcd of what appertains to us as
Ghriftianf. 3. The after-confent fignifies nothing, they muft con-
fent whether they will or no ; if they do not, but teftifie their diffent,
by abftaining from heating them? — they are prefented into their Ec-
clefiaftick Courts, excommunicated, imprjfoned, ruined.
He adds, 4thly. But whether ihefe ufages be rights or vorong^ notrvith"
fianding them, yet may the Offices of the prefent Minifiers of Hogland be-
from Chrifi. *
Anfiv. I. This is a dictate without proof, which vYerejc(5t. a. Tha£
a Minifter fhould in their names, office, and admiflwn thereunto, not
fymbolizewith the Minifters of Chrift, and yet be his Miniftcrs, is ab<-
fur'd and irrational to imagine. This we have proved of the prefent Mi-
nifteij, aad «dd, that in all ihefc they fymbolize with the Popi(h order
i 1 4 * >^ Yhidication of the Sober Te/Imony,
of Prieftj : which we at large demonftrate in S. T. what Mr. T. excepts
igainfl ir, /hall be confidered in tlj« next Section.
"Sea. 3.
The frefent Mlmflers of EngUnd []fmhlix,e voltb the Popijh order of Priefis.
Of the name P.ietts. The ahoUtisn of names once tabufeA, to idolatry,
Ho[,2.. I ^. Zich. i^. 2^ explained, Bi&li what it Jtgnlfies. Exod.23.
13. VUl.iS^'^.opened. Of Orthodox Antiquity y "tis no ftiffcient jufH-
ficationofvohatvpedoindivine things. The Tejiimonyof the Ancient^s^
M, T. his argning and Baronius the Papl(iy alike. Ignatius his
T<» 'A^^^x,. The hook, of ordering Priefls and Deacons is J}olen out of the
Popes Pontifical : Oi is evident hy the parallel drawn hetwixt them*
THat the prcfent Minifteis of England fy cnboli 2 e with the Popish
order of Piiefts, we evince in S. T. under feveral confiderations.
I. They are both called, and own thctniclves Piicfts ; which being
a term borrowed either from the Priefts of the Law, the affertion of fucti
a Priefthood, being a denial ofGhrift come in the flsih ; or from the
Piiefts of the Heathen (from whom the wordOrders is undoubtedly bor-
rowed)'or from the Antichriftian Church of Rome, fuch idolatrou*, fu-
ptrftitious names, being commanded by the Lord to be abolilhed.
0of.2.jf^Zech ij. 2. wantsnotits fufficient vyeigiit — - ■
To which Mr.T. i. The word Priejl is no more than Presbyter^ nor fifed
in any other fenfe by the Papifls^ or the Church of England.
Anfrv. I . this hath already been replyed to, than which there is no«
thing more fallc : The Er\%X\(hoi Sacerdos^ is not, (not ever was) Pref-
byEcr or Elder, but Piieft*
2ly. This is not to his purpofe : The Miniftcrs of £«^/^«(i and .Kowtf
• fymb^lize in name, if ihey are both call'd Piiefls, which this Animad-
verter cannot deny. Whether there hath not been a willingnefs in
fomc to return to Popery manifeftly difcovered, let the Nation judge.
He adds, 2dly. Zach.i^.i.is not a commMd^hut apromife. 2\^.Its,
the abolition of the names of Idols, not of Priefts^ that is there promifed,
Anfrv. I. 'lis true Zach. 13.3. is a promire, but fuch an one as
abundantly manifefts the deteftation of the Lord againft them, vvhich
implyes a command from God to his people, not to make ufe of them,
adly. The names of Idols are the names ufed (peculiarly) in Idolatrous
Wor/hip; fo that chough Mj, T. never found Priefts to be reckoned
amongft Idols, (whichcye? ^he.y might too in dayes pali have been^whea
too much.idolized by the peopk. ) Yqc |i.c knovys the iiamc Prieji^ hach
been
in Anfwer to Mr, T, his Exceptimi, 215'
been ufcd in idolatrous worfhip, both Heathen and Antichriftlin, pecu-
liarly appropriated unto their Miniftcrs therein employed*
jdly* Ho[.2.. 15,17. is rather, btitUus^ a predi^ion then a prohU
bition, God veoald be called Illii not Baali, becanfe that nam? Jtgnlfies a kind
husbind, f^/.f,one that is cruel and rigorous : or Je/i (he jhoiild in thought
remember the Idolt &r be thonght by others to continue that IdoUtrotu name^
Anfw, 1. The words are not meerly a prcdidion, they are a prohibi-
tion alfo : Thoftfkalt call me no more B.iali^ we had thought had been an'
cxprefs forbidding them fo to call him.
2dly. The Qucftion is, Whether thcfc names were fuperftitious
Bames, commanded by the Lord tobeabolifhed, or not? uponwhat-
othcr accounts they were fo commanded : fo that till Mr. T. proves
that this was not abufed to Idolatry, nor commanded by the Lord to be
aboliflied, hedoth but auram vapuUrcy fpeak nothing to the purpofc.
Yet, 3dly. That God would not be called Baaliy becaufc that name
fignifies a cruel and rigorous husband, is i. more then puerile, every
fmitterer in thatlanguage knows the word Bagnal, or Baal^ fignifies not
an auftere, but a kind husband, (coming of Sw^ exceedingly to love) it fi*'-
nifies indeed a Lflr^j but that is mctaphoricallyj and not a tyrannous
and cruel Lord neither. 2dly,- Tis wicked, being a charging of the holy
God falfly ; He is called Baali^ their Lord, I fa. 54. 5". yet no cruel,
and rigorous one I hope : I 4m fure he is there fo called upon the ac«
count of his love and tendernefs to his people, rolling away their re-
proach',and crowning them with dignity & glory. 3. The Spirit of the
Lord gives us another reafon of the rejeaion of the name v, 17. Groti.
«/ faith well upon the place, " the Church is interdiaed theufeofihc
" name^ out of horrour of that name which hath been impofed on an.
*c®v i 'luw^f,
Chrift is our Antiquity .
Yet, 4thlyj the Animadvciter cannot jiirtifie thefe things from Or-
thodox Antiquity, any better than thePapirtscan juftifie their Oyl,
Spittle, Salt, — in Baptifm, iheir orders Ecdcfiaftical of Exorcilis,
^^Qlytcs — And indeed his arguing tnd^Baronit^'s for thefej feems to
be much a like, although there is mention madein Scripture only of
Bifhovs, Presbyters:, and Deacons ; yet (faith he) Ignatius (in thofe coun-
terfeit Epiftks you muft underftand that pafi under his name) tnentions
morej fo that it is neceflary that either they were in the Apoilles time,
or at leaft were approved of by them. By (uch Orthodox Antiqmtfy
Mr. T. may foon juftifie, not only the forementioned pradiccs of cui
Clerc^y J but all the inventions of the Romifh Bawd : 'tis a trick of the
Devil, faith ^«^«/?»W, under the pretext of Antiquity, to commend
fallacies to us : de qu£J}. Vet, & Nov. Te(la. q. 14. fome things
feem'd to be new, that were indeed ancient, as Chiift's Do(ftiine to the
PharifecS) Ghriftian Religion to Cel[us and his Pagans : fome things
fecm to be ancient, that ate but the impoftures, cheats, and fallacies
of the later dayef. ^ " . ,
We add in S. T. jthly. The Triefls of Rome, mnfl he ordained to
iheir Office^ according to their Pontifical •, the Priefisof England according
to their Book^ of ordering griefs and Deacons^ which is taken out of the
Popes Pontifical. -*
To this Mr, T. returns the fame anfwec that Arch-Blfhop fVhitgift
five, the fumme vvhereof is : i . That what is good in the Popes Pontifi^'
^al^ if incur Pontificaly our Pontifical is never the worfe for having it,
Anfw. That nothing but Divine Intiitution, in the Scripture of the
Lord, tenders any thing good, confidcr'd as it relates to the Worfhip
of God, as fuch, we have already proved: In fuch cafes to talk of
thing's as good, for which no precept inftituting them can be produced,
is to talk without book* 'Tis diahoHcal, faith TheophylaU.
He proceeds, 2dly, 'Tis mofi falfe, that the hook, of ordering Mini'
f}ers —is word for word drawn ont of the ^opes Pontifical — Ignorance^ ani
rafhnefs drives yon into many Erroars.
Anfw. I. Why the Book of ordering Minifiers fhould be called &
Pontificaly if not from the chief /'<3«.'//j i.e. foi the fubftance thereof. 3. I have
oftei}
i
in Anjher to'Mf.li, lis Exceptions,
often oMerved thatperfons moft guilty of ignorance and rafuner^^
have been inoft free in charging their Antagonifts therewith^ Tiiuj
fares it with our Animadverter, as is evident to the eye of »n ordinary
Reader from the view of the enfuing parallel.
Rom ifb Pontifical.
1. Tempora orcllnatUnHm [ptnty
&c. The times of ordination are
the Sabbaths, in omnibm qmtuor
temporibtts Rom,Po»tif. de or-
dinihHS confer endis.
2. Ordinationes Sacrorum Ordi-
nttm The ordination of holy
Orders (hall be in the times ap-
pointed, and in the Cathedral
Church, the Canons of the faid
Church being prefentthereat,{hall
be publickly celebrated in the
time of Divine Service, ibid.
3. They are taken to the order
ofPresbytery who have continued
in the Office of t Deacon at icaft
a whole year except for the profit,
and neccffity of the Church it ftiall
otherwife feemgood unto the Bi-
fliop — ibid,
4. EpifcopHs AHtem Sacerdotibus-
but the Birfiop, Priefts being ad-
joyncd to him,, and other prudent
men, skilful in the Divine Law,
and exercifcd in Ecclefiafiical
fundlions, Ihall diligently examine
the perfons age of him that is
to be ordained.
5. NhUhs ai ordiMem—' None
fliall be admitted to the order of a
Deacon
Englijh Pontifical,
1. We decree that no Deacons,
or Minifters, be ordained, but on-^
ly upon the Sundays (more bea-
thecifhly fpokcn, then the Pope iq
his Pontifical ) immediatly fol-
lowing, ;<7««/<« quatuor Temporum^
commonly cald Ember-weeks —
Coajiit, & Can, Eccl. can, 3 1.
2. And this be done in the Ca-
thedral, or Parifli Church where
the Bilhop refidcth, and in the
time of Divine ServicCjin the pre-
fence not only of the Archdeacon,
but of the Dean ibid.
3. And here it muft be declared
unto the Deacon that he muft con-
tinue in that office the fpacc of a
whole year (except for rcafcnable
caufes it (liall otherwife feem good
unto the Bifliop. The Book, of or--
deri^g Priefis and Deacons, •
4. The Bifliop, before he admit
any perfon to holy Orders , jfhall
diligently examine him in the pre-
fence of thofe Minifters that ihall
affift him at the impoiition o£
hands Can.^^,
• 5. None fLall .be admitted a
Deacon except he be twenty three
£e 2 years
220 'A Vindication of
The Romifh Pontifical,
Deacon b:fore he be twenty three
years oldjoor to the order of Pres-
bytery before the twenty fifth year
of his age.
the Re-
tvtty onCf Receive the Holy Ghofi ; ceivers humbly kneeling upon
whdfe Sins thou dofiforgivey they are their knces>and the Bidiop faying,
forgiven ; and r»hofe Sins thoft dofi Receive the Holy Ghojh : vehofe Sins
retain they are retained* thou dojl forgive, they are forgiven ;
and vhofe Sins thoa dotji retain^
they are retained,
1 3 . Pax—- The "Peace of God 9e i^. The Peace of God — and the
alvt>ayeswithyoii,the bleffmgof God Blejfing of Cod Almighty^ the Fa-
t^lmightjithe Father ^ Son and Ho~ ther:,Son^ and holy Choji be amongft
Ij Ghofl defcend Hpn yoH—^ yotty and remain with y oh always.
Amen,
To which it vvcic cafic to adde other parallel particulars, but thefe
upon a flight view of the Roman Pontifical:, offering themfclvcs, being
Sufficient to confute that affcrtion o^fVhitgift, and Mr. T. that the Book
of ordering Minifters and Deacons is almoft in no point correfpondent
to the Roman Pontifical, we content our felves with them. From
whence the ingenuous Reader will foon determine} to whom ignoiance
and rafhnefs n:iay jultly be imputed.
We add, (Jthly. The Popifli Piiefts muft kneel down upon thcit
knees, at the feet of the Lord Bifhop that ordains them ; and he muft
lay to them (blafphemoufly enough) %fceive the Holy Ghofi; whofe Sins
yf forgive i they are forgiven ; whofe Sins ye retain^ they are retained:
which exa<^ly accords with the fafhion of ordaining the Pciefts of Eng-
land^
To
2 2 2 A f indication of the Sober Teftimony,
To which Mr.T. replies in a long harangue, not at all to the purpofc; ^
giving us an account what whUglft and Hooker fay to this pndice, con-^
felVes at laft, they o&zt feme foice to the Scripture to which they al-
lude, tells us, thofc words may be ufcd prayer-wife,
Ar.(vi>, I. The Qucftionis, Whether in the particular inftanc'd in,
there be an exaftCymmetry betwixt the Ordination of the prcfent Mi-
niiteis of EngUyidj and the Ptiefts of Rome ? This Mr. T. denies not ;
but leads the Reader to the confideration of fomewhat clfc. ■
2. The ufe of the words, John 2o^22,23 . he gr;i[nt$ to be an offering
force to the Scripture, and if fo, it is wicked and abominable ; to wictt
the Scripture to our private interpretation is undoubtedly fo.
3. That they fhould be ufed ptayer-VYife is a moft ridiculous evasi-
on, the manner of exprelfion evinceth the contrary.
4. Mr. %tchard, Hooker Ecelef.Pblit. Uh.$. feEi.77, ts cited by oul"
Animadverter, iriterprets it of the collation of the gifts of the boly
Ghoft, which if we iliould interpret of the Office of Miniftry, it belongs
(as we have faid) to the Church, not to fuch a thing as a Lord-Bifhopj
to collate. We proceed in the Parallel.
7thly, Thff Popifh Prlefls are not ordained inland before the Congregation
tc whom they are to hePrieJisy but infome Metrofolltan^ Cathedral City—^
■ So the Priefis of England.
To which Mr. T* replies, i. Thus is not altvayes fo.
Anfrv, I challenge him to give one inftanceof the contrary, for
thcfe fixorfcven years laft paft.
2.dly* It may be before the Congregation to whom theferfon is to he Prie^.
A^fw. What may bs is one thing, voh^t is, another. . We fiy not only
that it may be^ but that it ought to be, yet we know it is not. Tis ad-
ded in 5. T.
8thly. The Pop'jJj Priejis take the care of Souls, though not elected by
them, from the prefentation of a Patron^ by the InjiitHtionand IndnSiion
ef a LordBifkop : fo the Minijlers of England,
To which our Animadverter, This is not alvoaysfo, nf^r whenfo, Popijh,
Anfxv, I. The firft is moft notorioufly falfe, and we challenge Mr. T*.
to make it good if he can. 2. the latter remains to be proved by hini-:
toaffert it is not Popifti, is a piece of beggary this Animadverter is
much ufed to. What he hath before faid is already anfwered. We add,
pthly. The Popifh Prlefts wait not the Churches call to the Mini/lry, but
makefffit to feme Prelate, to be ordained Prlefi^ and living money for their
Letters of Ordination-^ fo the Prlefis of En°\tn(i»'' --*•'■
.Vr.T. tzpViCS.Toofera perfotts f elf for ordination , is in fome cafe 4
dnty, lTim.3.1. Ifa.(^.8. Anfw.
in An fiver to Mr, T. hps Exception f] • ■ 225
t Anfto.i, The Scriptures produced, prove not his affertion. /p, 6,%,
^^ijfufficiently remote from any fuch thing, there's not the leali menti-
on of Ordination therein, itsonlyt tcrtimony of //^;W;'j readinefs to
obey the voice of the Lord, in going forth to bear a tcRimony for him
againft an unto'vard rebellious people, i 77^.3.1. only tels us, that he
that dejtres the office of a Bijhop^ -de fires a good rvorl^ (i.e. as fay our An-
notators, is inwardly moved by the Spirit of the Lovd thereunto) which
he may do, andy,et Ihopewat the Churches cill thereunto.
Bcfides, 2ly. Should this be granted, it fignitics little, till he prove
that-it*s the duty of tny, with thenegleft of the Churches call to this
OflficCjtofcek ordination thereunto from an unfcriptural Prelate, which
is that we charge upon them ; which Mr,T. knows they do.
He tells us^ 2dly. Giving money for their L^tiers ofOriinathn^ is onlf
fVageitotheRegifterforvorlting.
■Anfrv. I. Be itfojthatthey give money for their Letters of 0:di-
Bation, is all that is aflerted byus, which Mr. 7'. grants they do. 2. 'Tis-
well if there be no Simony (as it's call'd) found amongft them. 3. If
provifion be made againft the Regillers cxaAing over-much, by the
Canons of the Church of SngUniy he informs us that the fame provi-
fion is made by rhc Popiili rr^«f-Council. The Parallel in this parti-
cular holds good. We fay,
I othly. Ihe Poplfh Priefts are ordained to their OfficCythoHgh they havs
no F locket attend Hpon : So the Priefts of England.
Mr. T. replies. The Priefts of England are not to be ordained without
fometitley according to Ctn, ^■^. even the Xlzni-CoHncli hath made fom&
provlfion thereabout.
Anfvf. I. Mr. T. doth well to confociate the Canons of the Church
o£ Englandytnd the Church of Rome in the 7Vf«r-Council togethcr,they
arc (in not a few things) near of kin. 2. However I cannot but ftand
aftonirhed at his confidence, in telling us that the Priefts o^SngUndite
not to be ordained v\ithout fome title, according to Can. ^-i. when that
Canon faith exprefly, ** That they may, if a Fellow, or in right as a
*' Fellow.or to be a Chaplain in fome Coiledge in Oxfard or CambrUa-^
«'if a Mafterof Arw of five years ftanding, that liveth of his ovvri
** charge in either 5f the Unlverftiles, if to be ("hortly admitred either to
** fome Benefice or Curatfliip then void ; or if the Biiliop do after his
«* admiirtoQ into the faid office, keep 2nd maiafain him with All things
** ncceflary till he prefer him to fome Ecclefiaftical Living. 3. But
it may be the A/iimadverter, by titUy means fome one of thofe thincs
memioned. To which I ihail only fayj that if foj be doth openly pre-
varicate;
2^24 ^ y indie at ionof the Sober Tefimony,
varicite j pretends to anfvverj to what he fpc*ks not one word j fuch \
Titles lie fuppofed to be without a Flock to attend upon. ^
What he adds, of Minilters being ncceffaryfor Siva\Q.Sy&c. is no- ^
thin'' to the purpofc : This proves not that they may be ordained Mi-
nirtc°$, without a Flock to attend upon, which they may have, and by
thtmbe fcnt forth for the vvoiks mentioned for a feafon : We know
it hath been the praaice of the Churches fo to do. 2. Piivitc Bre-
thren may a^foi the fupply of ihe fervices mentioned, (and frequently,
have done fo) nor indeed do I conceive how any can aft therein in any
othei- capacity. Which is not incongruous to J^s 23.2. (as this Ani-
madvettcr fuggefts) which fpeaks not a tittle of their ordination to the .
Oflicc of Minirtry which they had before, but only a folcmn commen-
ding of tiiem, by Fafting and Prayer, to the BlefTiog of the Lord by the .
Church, in the Service they were now fetting upon ; in which they tc-
ftified their confent, by the laying on their hands, as fay out Annota-
To the nth Parallel, viz. That the Priefls of England mftff fjvear
Cammcal Obedience to their Or Unary, M the Pr'tejisof Rome. Mr. T. only
faith. That 'tis, true at their infthmion into Benefices they do /<;, hm it is
/o bounded that it is not intolerable^ 'tis mthlng likf that which is reqmrei
cf the Pafiits.
An[w. I. The Parallel herein betwixt the EngUjhind the Popi(h
Pfielis is acknowledged, which is all wc affirm. 2. That the Oath is
tolerable, that 'tis nothing like the Oath of Canonical Obedience, ten-
dred to the Popilli PricHs, is only affirmed by Mr. T. without proof:
that was the copy and pattern of this, as he cannot be ignorant.
The 1 2th Parallel (touching their leaving their Benefices for ad-
vantsge-fakcjwithout confent of the People ; The 13th, touching their
fpecial Licence to preach (without which they muft not) from the Pre-
lates, though thereunto before ordained. The 14th, (touching their
fubjc:aion to be filenced — by the Prelates ) betwixt the Minilters of
Eftgland and Rome, he grants to be true, nor faith he any thing by way
of reply that defer ves the taking notice of. To the if th, vix,. the
Popiih Prierts are not of like and equal power, degree and authority a-
mongli themfelves, but ate fomc of them infcriour to others hereiii,
tsPalbts to Archdeacons, Archdeacons to Lord-Bitliops, Lord-Bi-
fliops to Arch-BiSiops fo the Priefts of £«g/<»»he fas
were (as I remember) well-ordered Churches, yet cannot he manifcft
any inequality amongft their Elders. No Superintendent, Lord-Bi-
(hop, or Arch-Bi(hop as I read of.
2dly. What thinks he of the Church of the fValdenfes,wzti they well-
ordered Churches ? They were from the beginning without this Supe-
riority of Elders, one above the other. The like may be faid of moft,
or all the Reformed-Churches. The Churches of Helvetia izcVomn^
up the degrees of Arch-Bifhops, Suffragans, Metropolitans, Deacs,
Subdcans — tell us plainly, they are not follicitous about them. That
theApoftlcs Do<^rine touching Minifters, is fufficient for them, caf,
Confes. Hehet. fofier. f. 18. And afterward, there is one, and the
fame equal Power, and Fun6lion, in all the Minifters of the Church;and
though in procefs of time, one was chofen from amongft the reft to
prefide in Synods, yet was he not fet over others, nor endowed with
greater power, thin the reft- r^;. conf, Helvet. frior. Arti : ly. the
French Churches fay, " We believe that all true Paftors whereCoever
*«they are placed, are endowed with equal authority, under that only
«* head, high, and folc univcrfal Billiop, Jefus Chrift; and thei-cfore
**itis lawful for no one Church, to claim authority, and dominion
"over another, cap : conf . ^al : Confes. Art. 30. So fay the B^/g»V^
Churches. Bely.conf.An : 3i» So that Mr. T. out of his great love
and dutifulncfs to his Mother the Cnurch of Engla>tdy is not fpjii'ng to
• caft dirt in the face of the Churches planted by the Apoftles themfelves,
andmoft, or all the Rtformed Churches at this day, who own nofuch
incquility »s he pleads for: and therefore were, ate all oi chem raot
well-ordered Churq^ies, in comparifon at the leift, to her, and the
Church of Rome^ where the Hierarchie is eftablifhed.
Totheidth. parallelaboutholy Veftments heis able toobj:aon-
. thing worth the confidcring.
The 1 7th. i-?, The Popi(h Prlefts are tyed to a book^ offltnted Prayers and
a frefcrlft Order devifed by man, for their IVorjhip and Minidration : fo an
the Mtnlflers of England, and that tefnch a c^e m is taken am of the Popes
Porifiis Ft I'O
^2S 'ji Vindication of the Sober Te^imonyy
To this Mr. T. replies, i . The AJfembly of Wcfttninftcr frefcr'ibtd a^
Direclery forfVor(hif, ^ ^
Anfw. I. Qj^i^ hoc aiRhombum f I atn not in the Icift concern *d to
juftifie »H that was done by that Affembly ; and am apt to think they
might in that matter have fparcd their pains. 2dly. The fame Af-
fembly abhorred theComtnon-Pfayer-Book Service, as a ir.oft detcfta-
bk, and filthy Idol, preached, printed againft it, procured its Abo-
liiion. 3dly, Every one ihat knows any thing, knows that upon va-
lious accounts, there is no likenefs betwixt thefe two. None were
cotnpcU'd to the ufe of this or that form of words, by the Ditedory, at
in the Book of Common-Praycr.
He adds, 2dly. Thofe prayers^ and fortiam of ScrlpHrCy rvhich are holy,
a»i goody are never the voorfe because they were in the Popes Port uis, yio-
wore than the acknowledgement of Jeftts to be the Son of themoji High God,
is the rcorfe becaufe the Devil ufed ity Mar. j. 7.
Anfrv. I. Of the Scriptures, and that glorious Truth of Chrift's E-
tetnai Deity, as the Son of the moft High God, and the Common-
Ptayer-Book-Service, there is not the fame rcafon : They were from
the infpiratron of the Holy Spirit, originally Divine ; this of man, dc-
vifid upon the prevailing of Apoftacy upon the Churches of Chiiii, im-
pofed with threatnings, cruelties and flaughtcrs upon the Children of
Chrift by his profeffed Enemy, abuled by a confcffcd Idolatrous gcne-
lation of men ( if there be any fuch in the world:) That becaufe the a-
bufc of the Scriptures, and the Truths contained in them, doth not ren-
der them the woife, theriforc 1 devifcd Service (that at the beft i»
wicked and abominable, in its impofition intolerable ) ufed by Idola-
ters is not the worfe, I chalengc Mr.T» to make good. 2. Though the
Scriptures are not the worfe becaufe portions of them arc read in the
Jiomi(h Idolatrous Service, yet the following the Komifh Synagogue in
curtailing the Scriptures, reading one part of t Chapter at one iimc,an-
oiher at aaother, and manifcftly mifapplying them, caufing them alfo-
to oive place to the Apochryphal Writings, is abominable.
He '^oes on, 3dly. That which is [ttggefted oa If the Common-Prayer-^
3oq\ now innffy were little different from the Topes Mijfal ( he tells us)
*f untrue.
Anfw. I. The Animadverter it a little miftaken : We affirm in 5.7*.
that the Common- Prayer-Book-Service ufed in King Edwardtbz <5th's
daycs, and the Popes Mifitl were not much different : And for the
proof of that we produced the Tcftimony of the King and Council :
Vatbichwe thought ivi.T, would never have queliioncd. That the Com*
mon-
in Jnjwer toMr,*T^lis ExcepUont, \i^
mon-Prayer-Book now in ufc, and that then ufed is not much diffc-
lent, every body knows.
2dly. 'Tis true, ail that is in the Pope's AfifalU not in the Com-
mon-Praycr-Book (nor did any one ever affctt this) but the naoft that
is in the Cooamon-Prayer-Book is ftolcn cut of the Popes iMiffmi.
The Epiftlcs and Gofpcls, the Prayers ( or CoIle6^s ) the rites and
ufages therein joyncd are fo : and this Mr. T. denyes not. I had
thought to have reprcfcnted the truth of this, to the eye of the Reader,
by exhibiting oni EngUfhy and the Popes Z/^t/wr MafTeatone view to
him ; which I have by me faithfully collci^ed, and compared toge-
ther. But the fwclling of this Treatife unexpectedly, and the difficulty
of printing anything of this nature that is voluminous, through the
tyranny of the Prelates, makes me wholly to lay afidc that intendment
toafittetfeafon, if need be.
The fumme of what we have been offering in this matter, (wc fay
\nS,T.) is this:
. I. Thofe Minifters, that in theirnames, office, admiffion into theit
offices, are not to be found in the Scripture, are not Minifters of Chtift,
t&. not by vertue of an Authority, Office-power, Calling received
from him.
2. Thofe Minifters that in their names, office, admiffion into theit
office, are at t perfect agreement with the Minifters of Antichrift,
(fucharc the Popifti Ptiefts acknowledged to be) are not the Mini-
fters of Chiift But fuch, as have been abundantly demonftratcd,
arc the prefent Minifters of England., Therefore
The Minor Mr. t, faith is manifettly falfe, he hath faid nothing to
prove it in the main.
Anfiv, This isfoon faid : had he proved it manifeftly falfe, be had
done fomcwhar. Whether any thing confiderable bath been offered by
us, for the proof of the Minor t others befides Mr. T. and I, will now
judge.
V f i ScX
^-xi A Vindication of the Sober Te^monyy
Sed. 4.
The frefent Mlmfltrs pf Engl, frovei AntiehrifHaH, They aEl from a
Poveer^ Office J and Calting received from a Lord- Bi [hop: vphofe Oj^ce is
Antichrijiian, The opinion of the Learned toachif}^ them. Their Office
is not to befomdin the Scripture : Epb. 4. 1 1. Ron. 12. 7,8. I Tim.
3. 12. Adii 14. 23. Tit. I. J, 7. A(5ls 20. 28. )^>?ojp them not. They
were not knovon in the Chftrch for feme hn-ndreds of years after. The Office
of Lord-Bifh'jpi wherein it coKJifts. Of Diotiephcs his ajferting SHpre"
macj. Our Bifhops neithtr Evangelijis^ nor Pajiors^ nor Teachers y nor
Apojlles^ proved. Mat. 28. 19. explained. Of the Rifeof Eflfcopacj,
The Tejiimonies of 2)r. Himmond, Whitaker, Reynolds, Eufcbiuj,
^c, touching it,
WE further prove in S. T. The piefent Minifters of England i^
in the holy things of God by virtue of an Antichrillin Power,
Office and Calling. Becaufe, 2dly, That they aft from a Power, Of-
fice, and Calling received from a Lord-BiQiop, wfaofe Office is Anti-
chiiftian. This the fumnae.
To which Mr. T. replies, That neithtr him ft If ^ nor any foher fVritev>
jndged them Antichriflian.
Anfw, I. Whether he once fo judged of them, his taking the Cove-
nant to extirpate them, wherein they arc condenaned as Antichriftian,
will evince.
2, What he or I judge thetnis not miterialjthat no fobcr Writer,or
coniideratc man (that ever he met with) hath judged them Antichrifti-
*?»,muft be imputed to the fhortnefs of his memory : He hath, I fuppofe
met with Zningliw^ Keckerman^ who fay little iefs. The former, «x^rf.
34,p. 25-4,2 J J, tells us, That for any to claim any Rttle, Tower^ or Sftperi--
orityover any Church af Chrifi (which we knowour Billaops do ) »>
Devilijhy Proftd,and Popijh Arrogancy. And Avetins in his Problems pro-
ducing Chiift's prohibition of Supcriour power to his Apoft 1 es, A/vir.
10. J*. Luks 2-2.. 2jr. faith, None but Antichrift dare be fo fancy as tO'
ttfnrp it. Mar lor at, on Rev. 1 J. ^. faith, That Arch- Bijhops—-
are in Offce finder Antichrifl. And on Chap. ip. The tailes of Anfichriff,
Bale on Rev. 17 faith, That Canterbury and Yoik are the Beaflly Antt--
ehrifis Metropolitans. And on Ci&4^. 13. That Arch -Bifhop, Dioce fan — .
4r every Names 'of Blafphewy. Of thefc we fpike pag. 28. S. T. who I
dare fay, were fob:r Wiiters, and coniideratc men. Mr. T» hisanfwcr
«0 tb«ir Tcftimony, vi^. Thak they- mil thm again ff the Romifh Hierar^
<^'
in An/wer to Mr, T!. his Exceptions, 229
I cby, U ridiculous ; they writ agtinftthe Offices of Arch-BI(Tiops as fuch»
1 which tre not a whit the bsttct becaufc they conftitute the Eng/ijh Hie-
^'•rarchy. We mentioQ Cartwright^ the feckers of Reformation m Q^een
EUz.abeths daycs, proclaiming them to come out of the bottotnlcfs
Pit of Hell, to be Anticbriftian, DivililK Thcfc alfo muft pjfs in the
Roll of inconfiderarc fellowj . yet others ( as wife as Mr. T. ) think
othcrwifeofthem. For the proof of the Antichiiltianifm of the Office of
Lord-Bidiops, I propofe a few things briefly in the S. T. as,
I ft, That Office that is not to be found in the Scripture of the Infll-
tutionof Chrifi, but is contrary ta cxprefs Precepts of his>isAnti-
chrif^ian : 5ut the Office of Lord-Bifhop$ is not to be found in the
Scriptures, is contrary ro exprcfs Precepts : Therefore
Thc/^<«/>Mr. T. isnibliog at, but he doth but think he tells us,
if Univerfalj it is not trpte. The Office of the Religious Votaries he
talks of, is Antichriftian. If there be any Antichiirtian Office in the
World, that muft needs bcfo, that is introduced into the Church of
Chriit, though not of his Inftitution, dire<5lly contrary to cxprefs Pre-
cepts. That this AfTertion Should necciBtate any one to affirm every fin
to be Antichriftian ( thongh in a large fence, as Antichvifiian fignifiej,
that which is againfChrijiy every fin, every errour is fo ) is abfurd to
imagine.
The Minor y I fay, confif^sof two parts, i. That the Office of Lord
Bidiops, is not to be found in Scripture of the Inflitution of Chrift. Thi?
I manifeft by confideting the moft remarkable places, where the Offi-
cers and Offices that are of Chrifls appointment are enumerated, in
which we have a total (ilence of them; Efhef. 4.. 11. Rom. iz. 7yS.
I Tim. 3. 12. ASis 14. 2j. Tit. i. 5,7. A^s 20. 28. I add alfo, that
they were never di-eamt of in the world for fomc hundreds of years af-
ter Chrift : We introduce the Tcflimony of Clemens, LomUrdiDr,
Hamoffds acknowledgment of their Rife*
To which Mr. T. anfwers, The whole Difcoptrfe is 'tmpeninent : the
thlttgtobe f roved vfos^ that the Office of Lord-Bifhops wm not to befoHnd in
thf Scriptures ; and the ivhole Difcourfe is about the Stiperionty of Ordtr
above Tresbyters^ Primacy ^ or SnpremAcy of Degrees among Bijhops.
Anffv. I. We haire examined the particular places wherein menti-
6n is made of the Officers of Chrifts Infiitution, and find no Lord-
Bifhops inlVituted in any of them, which manifelts that they are not •
If this be not taken for proof, I know not what will ; If this be not to
the purpofe , I «cn ia difpiiir of producing, any thing that he will ac-
count fo»
sdlyj,
a JO A vindication of the SohrTefiimcny 9
adly, The Office of Lord-Billiopj, isfucb, confifts in the Pritnicy, ,
Superiority , and Supremacy mentioned ( as is known. ) If Mr. T. J
grants this not to be found of the Inftitution of Chiift in the Scripture,^"
he gives away the Caufc.
3dly, They themfelves do own and avow a great part of their Office
to coniirt in the forefaid Primacy, Juiifdi(^ion.— And if this be not it,
I am fure feme of them are feldom or never minding theii Office, thefc
things are what is moft attended by them. Of whom we may complain
ti Bernard oi old, Vtdes omnent Ecclepajiicum Zelnrnfervere fro [oladi-
g^nitate tuenia : honori tantum datur, fanHttati nihil am parum. Si caufa
requlrente paHlofuhmiJfittSy agtre^ aHtfocialim te habere tentaverisy ah ft in-
qdiunty non decet^ tempori non congruu^ majefiati non convenit ; qnam ge^
ras perfoKam attendho : De plactto Dei ultima mentio ejiy projaBttra [alutis
nulla cHnBatio : quod [ubllme efl hoc falutare putamus, & quod gloriarare^
dolet idjufiuM. VeConJiderat. Lib. 4.
His following Exceptions arc not worth the heeding. I mention D;-
ctrephes in 5, T. and fay, That fomc appearances of a Spirit ftriving to
afcend into this Cbair of wickednefs was fcen in him, and others in tbc
Apcftlcsdaycs.
To this Mr. T. But this root not tht ufurpixg the Superiority of Order,
of a Bijhop above a Presbyter.
Anfxv. Nor do I fay it was, I exprefly affirm the contrary, when I fay
that fuch a Superiority was not in the world, for fomc hundred of years
after ChriH ,• we only fay, that fome appearances of that Spirit was fecn
in him, which the Apoftlc affirms, John Splft, 3. Verf. 9. <^(A«»g#T^*»
^Jt^v, — He ioveth the prehemlnence among them ; attempts the Primacy,
fo Bez,a. Which if it be not an appearance of the Spirit mentioned, I
know not what is ; he endeavoured to rule all himfelf, carried it proud-
ly, pragmatically, arrogantly over the Church, the Brethren, John
himfelf, who was an Elder, faith Mr. T. He that cannot fee fomewhat
of our Epifcopal Spirit in this, is ( I fear ) vvillfully blind, I am fuic
he muft wink hard.
He takes notice that in reciting Ephef. 4* 11. 1 twice leave out
Evangelifisy which he know5 not the reafon of.
Ayjfiv. Nor do I my fclf, poiTibly it was an overfighf, it may be an
omiffion of the Amanuenfis : However it was, it was not I aflure bim>
my fear I had that be, or any one could juftly plead, that our Prelates
were Evangelifis,
I. I know that Title is declined by Pleadcis foi Epifcopal JurisdU
Bion,
2 OUI
inAnfjver toMr,'t,hisExcepti, 2 Cor. 12. 18. At LMacedonU^ zCor. 7. 5,d,
Such an itinerant laborious life that out Biihops are unacquainted
with.
3. S vAnge lifl s ^trt fuch extraordinary Officers as ceafed with that
Age ; for we find no diteitions given touching their future Eledion ia
in the Churches.
Mr. T. tells us, Oar Freiatts chalenge the term of Pafiors ani Teach"
trs; this, I had faidj was too great a debafement of their Lord{hipSj he
tells us, This U a Satjrical Sarcafmy m proof.
Anf, I. However it is evidently true. Paftors and Teachers we have
already proved arc Officers appertaining to one particular Church* 'lis
certainly a debafement of their Lordfhips, who pfefide(a$ petty Princes)
over hundreds of Paftors, and Churches (fo called) to be reduced to
1 laborious over-fight over one.
2dly, I had faid in S. T. That their Parochial Piiefts, over whoiu
they prefide, are fuppofed to be Oncers in that degree.
The Aroument is this ( which Mr. T. may take time to anfwer ) //
the Parochial Priejis, over rvhom the Bijhops of England pre/ide, he [neb
Pafiors and Teachers Oi the Serif ture mentions ^ then the Blfhops of England
are mt^ cannot he ftich ( for they are an Order and Degree above thetn,
to them as their Supeiiours they promife and fwear fealty : ) Bnt the
former (according to the judgment of the Church of £«^/<««4) is true t-
. Therefore ;
The Story he after tdis us of a Preshyters havings mcafeofliflrmity,
ji^ifiants, who notwlthftandlng may he called a Teacher^ is fo remote frblli
the bufincfsin hand, that though fome would cry out^
^is temper et a rlft^.
For my part 1 hearti4| pitty him.
ift, This is known not to be the reafon of the Bidiops having Paxo»
chial Priefts under them ; were they never fo ftrong, it were i-mpolTible:
they (hould perform the Office of Pallors to the feveral Congregations
in England.
adiy^ The Presbyter is nor an Older above his Co-ad juioK (as is the
♦ cafe
^j2 A Vindication of the Sober-Te^imonyt
cafe of the Bifliops ) he is a Co-Presbytcr ; one of the fimc degree j
with himfclf. So that of this, we ftiall 1 fuppofc, hear no mere. ^
We add in 5. 7. That they pretend to be ( and are fo accounted by
fome ) the Apoftles Succeflbrs : but if they deiive their fuccefTion
through the Papacy j 'tis an evident Argument they are Antichriftian,
if th: Pope be the Antichriftian head over many Countries, as Pro-
teftanis afeim. In refpci^ of their Office we prove they ire not their
SuccefTors.
Becaufe, i. The Apoftles were immediately fcnt by Chrift.
2. Extraordinary Officers Tent forth to preach the Gofpel thiough-
ont the Nations of the world.
3 . We find no Apoftles after them*
4. None appointed by them, to fucceed them.
5. None arc qualified with gifts for the difchargeof fuch an Office;
and Chrift fends not forth fervants in any imployment, hut he furnifti- '
eifa ihcm with gifts fuitable thereunto. This the fummc.
To which our Anlmadvertet pretends to anfwer, St^. j. Chap, 5.
I. Apoftles he grants they may not be reckoned ; yet 2. They may
be their S jcceffors.
ift, Dr. Owen (0^ Sch'ifm. Cap. 6. ScB. 5y.) grants * Thatperfons
'adhering to ordination by fucccffion from Popifti Billiops, may be
' light worthy Minifters of the Gofpeljbut not upon the account of that
* ^heir Succeffional Ordination, but the eminent gifts God hath vouch-
* fafed them, and the Lovds people fubmitting themfelvcs to them in
* the adminiftration of Ordinances. And the Author of 5. 7. denies
not they fucceed them asChriftians ; and if fo, they may be heard as
gifted brethren, which wis denied by bim,C/?*?p. 2.
Ayifw. I. How all this proves the Bilhops of England, to be the Suc-
cefl'ors of the Apoftles, inrefpcaof their Office, vvhich was what he
pretends to attempt the proof of, 1 know not.
2. I detjy indeed that they may be heard as gifted Brethren,C^4;i.2.
and give my reafons of my fo doing, which I have vindicated from this
Diilators exceptions. That vve are to have communion vvith all,that we
cannot deny 10 be Chiiftiins, in that wherein they aft not as fuch, bat
by viitue of an Office-power ( we know ) they have not received from
Chrift, Mv. T, will not in haft attempt the proof of.
He asks, ^Vhy may they net fucceed them in Office f
A»fiv. I wonder heftiouldask fuch a Queftion. EnTahloi! The
reafons thereof arc given in the place he undertakes the confutation of ;
• They
k
in jinfiper to Mr, T. bis Exception}^ 233
They were (it fccms) loo weighty for him, & he wifely lets them alone
without bunhening himfclf fo far with them as to attempt their remo-
val. The Apoftles Office was indeed no other than that mentioned,
Mat, 28, ip, 20. OW«ir. 16. if. but that was,
ift, An Office of Preaching, not of Lording and Loytering.
2dly, Into it they were immediately invefted by Chrift.
3dly, They were to preach the Gofpel through the Nations of the
Woild, (not to ftrctch themfclves npon Beds of Ivory, in a Lordly
Pallace ) which was as much their Office as Preaching the Gofpel ; up-
on the account whereof, Fanl faith. He rvas a debtor both to the Greekjy
Und to the Binrbarians, — 'Kom^ 1. 14. Chrift its true, promifeth his
prefence with them> 'itarAi mnt\Hec« j^ utm®" , ^
Bur, I. I am not fatisfied that the m-nxetoi t5 «ttom'd upon the Scriptures, I ought to confefs it. But this i$
remote from what he is pleading for, viz.. A perfonal fucceflion of Bi-
shops through the I^pacy, receiving theic Power and Authority from
the man of Sin, — which ( I fay ftill ) whiKt the Biihops pretend te,.
tbcy do therein proclaim thcii Ihame, atvd yecld the matter in contto-
vcifie ; though their Advocate fliamefully prevaricates, that he may
with a multitude of words cover their nakcdncfs ; omitting the confi-
deration of what was incumbent upon him, cfpccially to have removed
out of the way, viz.. Th* Arguments produced to evince, That the
Apoftles, asAp^ftlcs, had no fucccflbr in that their Office : Which if
it remain good, the prefent Biihops moft afluredly cannot be their Suc-
cefl'on as Apoftles.
He adds, Jthly. That Bi(hops as a Superior order, or decree above Pres^
byters^ vtere not dream of in the world for [everal hundreds of je <' But certainly if,as the Dr.
' faith, a Primary & Mettopolitical feat wasconltituted over Epifcopal
* Seats and Churches (•^ix-. (iich as are Diocefan) that their ftatc and
•frame may be accommodated to the ftate and condition of the Go-
* yernment gf the Nations, in the Empire ; he that hath but half an eye
will fee, that hence it follows that the Primacy> and Supremacy of the
Bifliopsover thefe Churches, was the refultofthedefignsof men, to
accommodate the ftate and frame of the Church, to the ftate and condi-
tion of the Government of the Nations. But the truth of this Aflertion
depends not upon t|eDoaor$ conceflion ; its notorioufly known, and
acknowledged by feveral others ; ** The diftribution of Churches ordi-
* narily followed the deftribation of the Common-wealth : fo that
* when fome Regions were fubjeacd to the CiviJ jurifdiaion in any Ci-
* ty, the fame were ordinarily fubjcded alfo to the Ecclcfiaftical ; and
< as they were reckoned to be of the fame Province in rcfpe^ of the Ci-
5 vil, fo were they of the fame Church or Diccefs, in rcfpc^ of the Spi-
G g 2 '^■. lituil
2 ji ^ P^indlcaiion of the Sober Teflm&ny^
« ritual Governmcnr, faith %amoldes Confer, with Han, And ths
< Council of Conftantino^e decreed, That if any new City, by the Au- ^
c thority of the Empeior, waseredcd, that the order of Ecclefuftical
* thiols lliould follow the Civil and Publick form. Hence by the fame
« Co\inc\lyCo»ftantwople leceivcs the Primacy,becaufe it was NewRome^
* Ca».$. which before Old Rome enjoyed for that very rcafon. But that
* you'mayunderftand, how the Pope incroachcdon Bifliops by degrees,
•untillofm Equal he bccainea Soveraign,firftover a few, nextovei
* many, at Uft over all : I muft fetch the matter of Biiliops Metropoli-
< tans, and Arch-Bi{bops fomewhat higher ; and fhew how Chriftian
* Cities, Provinces, and Dioceffcs, were alotted to them» Firft ihcrc-
*fore when Elders were ordained by the Apoftles in every Church, >45,
« 14. 23. through every City, Tit, i, $^ to feed the flock of Chtift,
« whereof the Holy Ghoft had made them overfeers, JB. 20. 28. They,
< to the intent they might the better do it by common counccl and con-
« fent, did ufc to affemble themfclves and meet together. In which
•meetings, for the more orderly handling, and concluding of things
« pertaining to their charge, they chofc one amongft them, to be the
* Piefident of their Company, and Moderator of their aaions — (And
* this is he, whom afterward , in the Primitive Church, the Fathers cal-
*\tdBi(hop. i.e, the Prefidcnt of thfi Presbyters ) who was the
' Biihop of the chiefeft City, whom they called the MetrofoUtane, For
* a Province, as they termed it, was the fame with them, that a Shire is
* with us : And the Shire-town, as you would fay of the Province, was
« called Metropolis, i, e. the Mother-City : In which as the Judges and
* Jufticcs with us do hear at certain times the caufcs of the whole Shire i
* So the Ruler of the Province with them did minifter Juftice,and made
* his abode there ordinarily. Whereupon, by reafon that men for their
♦bufmefs, made great concourfc thither, the Church was wont to
« furnifh it . But agreed alfo, that
* none throughout all the Province, Qiould be made Bilhop without his
< confcnt ; nor any weightier matter be done by them, without him.
* Concil. Nic. can. 4^6. Coyicil. Antioe. can 9. Now the Roman Em-
< pirc was governed in fuch fort,that the Circuits of the Lord- Prefidents
< had many Provinces within them,and were called Dioceffcs. Through
* occafion whereof ihc Bil'hops of thofe Cities, in which thefe Lievte-
* nanis of the Emperor were icfident (The ftaie Ecclefiaftical following
ihc
c
in Anfvper to Mr, T. hu Exception/, • 22 j
2 « the Civil. fVolfgang, Lazjtt, Comment. Reif. Rom. 1.2. c.2.) did "row ia
V^ < power too. Neichcr were they only named Arch.Bifhofs^ znd Patri^
* arks of the Dioccfsj i. e. the chicfeft Billiops, md Fathers of that Cir-
*cuit, which the Lieutenant ruled, but alio obtained that the Metro-
*polixanj of the Provinces in their Dloccfs, (hould be like^vife fubjedl
« and obedient to them, as Bifliops were to Metropolitans. So the Arch-
< Bifliop and Patriarch of Antioch had Prerogatives given him throiioh
' the Diocefs of the Eaft, wherein wercfcven Provinces* Concil. Coyift°x.
*can, 2. Concil. Antio. in exord. So nothing could be done in the Diocefs
^o^Egrpty which under the Bifliop had ten Metropolitans, without the
* conlcnt of the Arch-Bi(hop and Patriarch o( Alexandria. Cone. Chalc,
' A^.4. fo it was granted to the Arch- Bifliop and Patriarch o( Confiantl'--
^ttopUyXhtt the Metropolitans of the DiocelTes oiPontiu^AJia^Thracijt
* (within which were twenty eight Provinces) fliould be ordained by
*him. Finally fovvas it decreed, that if t Bifliop had any matter of
/ Controverdes vvith the Metropolitan of his own Province, th: Pa-
* triarkof the Diocefs fhould be Judge thereof, ConcU. Chalced. can.^,
* ^ i7» a« alfo if any mm did receive injury of his own Bifliop, or McI
< tropolitan. Thus were the Roman Popes ( as they are called now)
' firft Bifliops over Elders within their own City, next Metropolitans
* over Bilhops within their own Province; Then Arch-Billiops and
* Patriarks over Metropolitans within their own Diocefs : And this is
* the Princely Diocefs which I meant, when I faid that the Pope in the
* time of Pelagltis was become Arch- Bifliop of the Princely Diocefs;
•bit he was yet but an Arch- Bi/hop : He was not univerfal Pope and
* Patriarch of the whole World. For although the Patiisrk of Conftan-
* tinopUy being puffed up, becaufe in his City, the Emperor himfelf was
'rcfidcnt, he would be called the Patrirark of the whole world, as the
* Emperor was called the Lord of the world, Greg. Reglfl. 1. 4. Efiji.i^^^
*yct the Roman Patriarks, PeUglus & Gregory did withfland his Pnde.
* Rainolds Confer, with Hart^ c. 8. Bezj4 alfo 7A?/. Geneves, tells us,
* that the Fathers in the diftribution of Churches (under Bilhops, Arch-
* Bifliops, &c. ) followed the type or pattern of the Roman Emperor.
* And the learned Bng^fw4« in ^tff. 13.4. tells us, that they are the
* worfiiipers of the Dragon in the Bealt, who wonder at the P.imacy
•for the Political Majclty of the Dragon, granted by thcCooncelof
< ChaUedofty Ail. 16. Indeed in Clements Conftitutions «ve find, if pofTt-
' * bte,amore filthy fource from whence rheir original is afTerred : In the
* place where they were before firft-Flamines, Peter commanded Patri-
f aiks to be placed ; and in Ciiiei where befoie were Aich-FIamines,
Arch*
^3 S ^A r indication of tie Sober Tefimowfi
< Arch-Bi(liops the reft wcic only Biftiopi— That wc hid here in Bng* /
< Unii twenty eight Head-Piiefls, which they ctUcd FUmincSjand ihrc« J
< Arch-Pficfts among them, which were called .Arch-Flamincs,which
*had the ovcrfightof their manners, and were as Judges over the icft,
* is known : hence the pattern of our Aich-BLftiops tad Bifhops,
Sea. f.
The cjjice of LorLBlfhcffs contrary to exfref precepts ofChrifl, Mat. 20;
2y. Mark 10. 42. Luke 22.2^. i Pff.y.j. canfidered* Of the thhi
of Dr. ofDivimty&c. The office of Lord-Bijhops derived from, and only
to be found in t he Papacy. The Popes of Rome the head of Antichrtfi. N»
Lsrd-Bljhop tiU after CoTi(\iiminQ. Of the firjt Nlcene Comcii : whe*
ther there were any Lord-Bijhops before : what difference betrcixt Lord*
Si/hops then and novo. Of the retention of the fame office in the Greek >
Eafterny %ttffim Churches, The difference betwixt the Superiptendency
of the Lmheran Churches, and our Bijhops. An ObjeSion anfivered.
The Bijhops of England aU not in the matter of Ordination as Presbyters,
THat the office of Lord-Bifliops is contrary to exprcfi precepts of
Chiift in the Scripture, is the fccond part of our Minor Propofi-
tion, which in ST. wc prove from Mat.xo,, 2y. Mark, 10. 42* Lukf
22 2j. I Fet.^.^.
To which Mr. T, anfwcrs, i. That rot jhoot wide of the mark,,
Anfxv. This we have already replied to. His inftance of the Tides
of DoUor of Divinity in the Schools, is not at all to the purpofc : They
pretend not to any Ecclcfiaftical jurifdi6lion over Elders and Churches,
by vertue of their being inverted into fuch titles, as our L-Biftiops do»
idly. He confiders the particular Scriptures inlhnccd in, to which
what to reply he feems to be much at a lofs. i. He would have the
words of the Evangelifts not to be a precept (hewing thcii duty, but t
predidion manifefting the event of what ("hould be.
Anfrv. I. This is cxprclly contrary to the letter of the Text.
2. The Lordlhip, Supremacy, Superiority (call it what you pleafe)
is a Lordfhip — c* y/*«y^ amongH themfelves^ over one another, that if
interdifted and forbidden by Chrift ; that it was lawful for them to ex-
ercifc fuch a Supremacy, this Animadverter will not fay; now this
muft be fuppofcd, if the words be not a precept, but a prediction.
3dly. He cxprefly tells us in his %omanlfm dlfcuffied, Art.7. Seti. 8,
p.174. /. 14. That Superiority is (in theCc words) plainly forbidden, 2ly.
He is inclined to think, th^t if it be a precept ^ it ia a precept to the Apo*
pies onlji not to others, Anjw,
in Anfwer to Mr. T. his Exceptions. > 239
: Anfvf, I. Then not to the Pops; then Mr.r. palpably abufeth thif
Sct\^i\xttixi\i\t Roman. dlfcHJfeiy Art. J. Sell. 8. p. 173. v\here from
hence he argues and cnveighs againrt the Pope's Supremacy. But 2ly,
« good he may fay that the great Doarines of Self-denijl - frequently
preflcd byChrift-upcra the Apoftles,is a precept only to them. ^iy.We.
find the Apoftlex±arging the fame thing upon the Elders, i Pet. '^. 5.
wiioknewihc mindof his Lord in this muter it's to be thought a*s well
asMr.T.
He tells us, ^dly, // it be a precept to others hefUes the ^ApojileSy whe-
ther to all Cbrijiiaurror only to Mtmflers of the Gcfpel ? and whether it for-
hidjtmplj Dominion at all, or tyranical Dominion— U doubtful.
AnftP. Andyctthefiift he pofitively affirms within ten or eleven
lines afterwards : and here, and in his Romnn.Mf cuffed afferts, that 'its'
not tyrannical Dominioni but the Dominion of one ^ykpo/lle over another that
U interdiBed. So that the fame thing is doubtful, and not doubtful with
Mr. r. in the writing a few lines. And this he proves by no fewer than
ten rcafons in his Rom. difcttffed.
2dly. Here he tels us, that 'tU an afeBation of the Rule which a perfon.
may bave^ and lawfully exercife, that is forbidden there^ that the Dominion
or Rftleit felf u interdiUed: which he would do well to reconcile, and
anfwer his Arguments he there produceth for its confirmation. The fum
whereof is, Chrift would have none amongft them fuperiour, but all
equal ; he forbids not only tyrannical Dominion, but alfo any Domi-
nionatall over one another : which is (faith he) apparent, i. From
the occaiion of the words : Qhni\ forbids what they fought for,- — ■
but they fought for chief Dignity, Seniority and priority of Ordei
(as do the Bi/hops of England.) 2dly. From the Subje^s whofc Do-
minion is forbidden, vix.. Kings, that had lawfull Authority, and
therefore fuch Rule, is forbidden as the bcfl: Rulers, ufed amongli
the Nations, sdly.. The word >e»^Kt^figJK fith »ff/J«i. to ufe
Dominion at all, and to have power at all over one another, is for*
bidden Luke 22. ajf* 4thly. Kj.T4«vt7Xf, ».r. to affed that title which implies one
to be under another, and to be beholden one to another, as perfons that
could gratifie one another — which doth imply fuperioiity. in fome.
&it». 6ihly. The additional fpccch of Chrift commandiDg in th^ itead
ail
240 A Vindication of the Sober TeJIimony,
of Dominion, Mat. 2.0. 2(5,27, rathei Miniftry and Scivice, {hews he
would have none among them rupciiour, buc all equal, ^ly. Chiift'f
propounding himfclt as their example, only in fcrvicc. 8ly. He re-
quires fuch a mutual debafcment — as takes away the taking to them-
fclvcs priority of order, or place — or rule over one another, Mat^zo,
2.6, 27. Mark. *o. 43 , 44-. Ln^e 22. 2<5. ply. This is confirmed by
other places upon a like occafion> Mat.x'^, 1,2, 3,4. Mark^9.^^,-^
Lnkj 9' 4<^. In which Chrift refolVwS them that they fliould be as a
little child, that afl'uoaes not Empirc,but is humblcjand accounts others
as equal to him. loly. From Z*«i^(f 22. 28.— that Chtift having for-t
bidden fuperiority in any of them, among themfelves, promifcs therh
a Kingdom^ afterward, in recompcnce of their abiding with him in his
temptations.
All which manifeft, i. a Superiority intcrdiftedi 2. That the
Superiority interdiin their Confejfion
to the world. What refpe^t any of thcoi give them (eith>:r in point of
civility,or as M^ffengers,orperfonS fent fcom the King, or perhaps not
being truly informed what the Jutifdi^tion andOffke is theyexercife)
in their private Letters, or otherwife, is not confidcrable in the matter
in hand* The Office of Lord-Bifliops, or a fupcriority of Order above
Presbyters or Elders,they abfolutely condemn,as we have proved.
"^ We add in S* T. One Stone of Offence mftfi be removed out of our way—-
Jt isfaid) that though Lord-Bijhops are Antichrijiiany yet it doth mt follo-»
that the Office and Minljlry derived from them isfo .- for they are alfo Pres^
byters^ and ordained oi Presbyters,
To which Mr.T. fubjoyns, i. There is nothing replied to the allegati^
on that Bijhops ordain with Presbyters,
Anfw. I. Nor is there any fuch allegation in the obje
Anfff. Andhemayaswellfay it is uncertain that the Sunfhlnesat
noon-day : The leaft fmattercr in the ufages of the Church of England,
and principles of thefe Doftois thereof,fce,and know it to be certainly
true. 2. Contrary to the known Law of the Land, by vvhich they re-
ceive power to aft therein, in which they are known, and owned only in
the capacity of Lord-Bi(hop.
Mr. T. replies, ^ This is not true, for the ordination of Sufragan-Bljhopi
who are not LordSf is valid by Law,
^nfxv. A weak proof of fuch a crimination. A Suffragan- Billiop is •
a Titular-Bi(hop when he afts : in the matter of ordination^ he repre-
fcnts the Lord-Bi(hop whofe Suffragan he is. And the Law accounts his
ift, not his own, but the aft of the Lord-Bifhop, whofe Reprefentee he
is. And this Mr. T. could not be ignorant of.
We fay, jdly. 'Tis contrary to their late praftice, whereby they
have fufficiently declared, the nullity of a Minifteiial Office, received
from the hands of a Presbytery, in thrufting out of doors fevcial hun-
dreds of Minifters, fo ordained. Strange ! that it fliould be pleaded
they aft asPresbytIrs in tbe matter of ordination, and yet they thcm-
felves judge a Presbyterian ordination invalid.
What faith Mr. T. f Why, i. They do not ntdify ordination by a Pres»
iytcry in forrain Chftrches,
Anfw, But this is not at all to the purpofe • have they not done fo
at home ? To attempt to do fo in fonaiga Churches, where they have
ttO-
2^'6 A V'mdicatwn of th Sober Teliimonyt
no power ,• were but to cxpofc themfelvcs to greater contempt, as bufy
Bifhops indeed,
adly. In England thej do hy becaufe the Laws (faith he) rtquin Epfm
copal Ordination
Anfnf. But Sir, the queftion is not upon what accounts they havefo
done in England^ but whether their fo doing, be not a tnanifeftation,
that they adt not in the capacity of Presbyters in the bufincfs of Ordina-
tion ; for if they did, they fore-condemn their own aft, in condem-
ning Presbyterian ordination i their ordination being upon this fuppo-
fuiononelyfuch.
2dly. Hz Of inti The Larv ret^itires Epifcopal ordination I if fo> it doth
fure tie them that aft in it, to think themfelvcs BiQiops, to aft with
fuchan intention, and under that notion, which not many lines before
hcdcnyed.
We further anfwer in S. T, What if this (hould be granted ; it
would avail nothing, except it can be proved, that they arc, and aft as
Presbyters of the inftitution of Chrift, which (thefe being only in
a parcicular inftitutcd Church of Chiift) will nevei be to the worlds
end,
To which our Animadverter replies. If this be held, then nil the Tres-
hyters of the French, Dutch, and other Churches under Presbyterial gover-.
menty are not of Chrijis injlitution, and fo a feparation avowed from all Pro-
ujlant Cbarches^ except their own,
Anfw, I. But this is no proof, that the Bifliops of £«^/klng him Thus the Paplfls do
fvhile they will have unwritten traditions to he received
A^fw, ift* To ^ifpute about words with any man living) I (liall
not : by a verbal profciTional denying of Chrifis Office?, I mean, ex-
prefs, and down-right afTcrting, that he is not King — of his Church ;
this I fay the Papilisdo nor, they own, preach up all the Oitices of
Chrifk, I. e. they acknowledge him in their difcouifes of his Ofiices to
be King — to his Church, which MiVT. knows theydo. Theii- afcrip^
tior^
24.S -^ Vindication of the Sober Teftimony,
tion of Kingly power to any but Chrift,in afferiions mentioned, I mikc
a real and aitual denyal and oppugning the Offices ofChrirt. It being
a doing what cn.vraps in the bowels of it fuch a denial of them.
2dly. This Anicnadvcrcet hath ailrcadyafferted, what vvill in part at
leart make good our charge in this matter againft the Minifters of £«g-
ttnd. The afciiprion of Kingly power to any butChrift,i$ a denying hit
Kingly authority ; the PapiUs [Ptelats and Minifters of EngUni] do fo,
in alfctting, that traditions unwritten are to be received That
the Pope [a Convocation, or Affcmbly of Prelates and Priefts ] can
make Laws to bind the Confcience by vertue of his [ their ] authority,
Can difpenlc with Gods Law$,inceftuor.s Marriages (by granting a Li-
cenfefor agood Spill) prohibited by God therefore the Papifts
[the Minillets oi England'] do deny the Kingly authoii'ty of Cbrift.
We pfctnife in S. T. 2dly. That a verbal frofeJ[io»al ack^Morvledgemtnt
cfChri/ly is nothing nhen contradicted in praSlice : To which we fubjoyn>
that fuch 04 really opfofe^ or deny an]f of the Offices of Chri/i, are nottabt
heariy hm feparated from : which we prove, i. Becanfe fuch at dofo,are
the Jntichrifisy i Joh.2. 22. and 4.2,3. 2joh.7. ^dly. To hearftich,
is to (Irengthen and encourage them i» that their denial of ^ and opfojition to
the Cffces ofChrifl^ and thereby to become partakers with them in their fin.
Of which we treat more at large in 5. T. chap. 4. p. 29, 30;
Whereunto Mr. T. replies; i. That a verbal prof e^ional acknow*
led^ement of the Offices of Chriff, whencontradi^ed bjprMite^ is nothing
to ihefalvation of ihe perfonfo prof effing ; his plea fhall not be admitted before
Cod^ or mans Eccle/iafical cenfttre {'\. c. he may be fftfp ended ^ excemmnni'
cated for his fo acting not mthfi an ding his prof ejfion^ J yet all this doth not
prove — that his doctrine may not.be heard—
Anfvi). I. 1 tlcems then its lawful to hear perfons, not walking cx-
oibirantly, but ucder Church cenfure for fo doing, which pours forth
moft fearful concerr.pt upon that inftitution of Chrift, Excommunicati-
on. To what purpoie is it that any one is caft out of the Church, if it
may be hwful to hear them notwithftanding — ;. e. own them as the
mouth of God to me, and my mouth to God, whom the Church thought
pot meet to be continued as a member in the body.
2dly. Invain (then) are all the exhortations of the Apcftic to the
Siints with relation to their wiihdrawment from fuch as thefe, i Cor.y.
5>,io,ii. Ephef, f. II.
:5dly. To nopurpofe did Taul wiitc to the Corinthians to receive the
inccliuoDS perfon, had ihcy but known their liberty, they might have
Qorc fo before : for if his doftrine did not oppugn the Offices of Chrift,
- it
in Anfwer to Mr, T. his Exceptionf] ' '249
k might hive been heard, to their profit ( according toour Diaators
didates) they might not only have received him, but as a Preacher
among(i them.
Nay, 4thly, In vain is the charge of the Apoflic, 2 Or. 3. 5. for
if they profeCs to own the Offices of Chrift ( i. e, Havs a Form of^oi^
iine.[s) though they contradift it. in their walk {i.e. deny the ^9Wir
thereof ) they may be joyned with. Poor Paul underftood not fo much
of our Chriftian Libevty, as rich; confident Mr T. who is df iven to fuch
pittiful fliifts, and grofs abfurditics in the management of this Contro-
vcrfie, that I really pitty him.
He adds, 'TismtrHe^ that Chrifi faith ^ the falfe Prophets are to h
def cried by their vitiom Life only. Nor do I fiy (ia this place) he doth j
I fay, he faith, they are to be knoyvn by their frstits. Preaching, and, pra-
ftifing what invclops iq it a denial of the Offices of Chriil, though at-,
tended with a vifible holy Converfadon I am contented that he make
the fruits mentioned to be. His difcourfe of JW^, and falfe Prophets
being fo called,not in refpecl of their outward Calling,or vitious Lives,
but of their Do6lrinc, that upon the leaft occafion be runs frequently
forth into, we have already, anfwered. Nor fay we, that teschin" Tomc-
ching (through ignorancc>and inadvertency) as is appointed by Chrift,
which is not, or denying fomething to be inftituted which was fo ap-
poiated, is what doth denominate a man a falfe Prophet.
The A-almadvertcr forgets what it is he attempts to anfwer ; we arc
not talking of falfe Prophets, but of fuch as deny the CfKces of Chrift,
nordowcfay that this ( as thus propofed by him) dorh render a man
guilty of real.denying the Offices of Chrift ( or is a fufHcient ground of
fcparation from him, much Icfs then anoppofing in heart any of the
Offices of Chrift is fo, as he fuggc^s afterwards we do ) but that thofc
that do really oppofe any of the Offices of Chrift, x/;;?,. by fctting theni-
felvesagainftthemoft,ifnotthe wholeofGofpeUlnftitutions, by own-
ing a power in others, to conftitiue Laws for the. Family and Houftiold
of Ch-iift, even contrary to his InRitutions, and acknowledging anothec
Head befid.^ hina, of his Church, is fuch a real denial of the Offices of
Cbrift,, that upop wjomfoe- /er it is found, ?tis the duty of Saints to fe=
parate from them, and that ;:br the reafons before mentioned j which
Mr. T, may difprove when h can. ^
^ The reft of this Seciioa biing ipent' in lailing, and forry impertiticn-^
cies • I come his fecond Se^ion., were he fets hibfelf to confider our
C^/«or piopofirio.J, t//^,. That the prefer Mipifiers of Er^o\iYi6 do op.
pje and deny the Prophetical and Kingly Offces ofChriJi :^ Which we
iA^Vve thus, . )i Xhofc
2^0 'ji Vindication^ the Sober Teflimony^
Thofe that hearken not to the ReveUtion Chrift hath made, andar
Supveam Lord and Lawgiver hath cnjoya^d tor be obfcrvcd, touching
the Orders and Ordinances of his Houfc, deny the Prophetical and
Kingly Office of Chrift, Dif«M8. l8. AUs ^.Z2. Ifa,p.6. But the
prefent Minifteis of England hearken, and conform not to, the Revela-
tion Chrift hath tnadc,touching the Orders and Ordinances of his HouCej
therefore.-— ; " ^- '^'^ ■ -/'f^
To which Mr. T. replies by denying the Major, (or firft Propofition)
But he wifely takes nc^ notice of the Scriptures produced for the Proof
hereof, as Dem. i8. i8, ip. where the Lord promifethfo ralfe uj> Chrifi
fr6m armng his Brethre»iin who[e momh hevfonUpMt his woris^by whom he
vtonUffSakjo thtm^ to whom vihofoever mil »9t hearken, God faith, he M
require it of him ; {i.e, take vengeance on hlmt as the Gr^ri^ renders it,
or asthe Apoftlc, -^^^ J. 23. \\fXt^fiv^^irerctiz*T^ x*^^ He (hallbeex*
terminated from amongfl the People ; rejected by the Saints, as a Dcfpi-
i^r,oppugnerofthe Offices of Chrift, into which he was fo folemnly
inverted by the Father, Mat. 3. 17. ) In Ifa. 9.6, It is Prophefied of
Chrift, That the Government fhouU be laid upon his jhoftlders, hefhouU be
King in Sion^ give forth ( atftich) Laws and ConjlitHtionSy for the Govern^
mem of his People-^ which accordingly he doth, and folemnly promul-
gates them by his Heralds, and Meffcngers, fixeth them as upon pub*
fick Pillars, in the Scriptures of Truth, to be fcen and read of all men*
That after all this ; perfons ftiould refufe, flight, neglea to hearken to
thefe Inftitutions of Ghdft, violate, oppofe preach againft themjand yet
not be guilty of denying his Prophetical and Kingly Offices, is the firft^
bom of abfurdities. Go, and offer it to thy Prince ; deal fo by the con-
ftitutions of thy Rulers, and fee vvhat they will fay to thee, what inter-
pretation will be by them pat upon thy fo dealing with them* But he
gives the rcafons of his denial j and tells us,
». Venial is more than not hearkff'mgto,
Anftv. There is a denial its true, that is more than a not hearkening
to, but there is a not hearkening to, that is a real denial, rejeftion of the
Authority of hitn to whom we refufe to hearken. The Scripture exprefly
iffirnisit Pfal. 81. 11. Bnt my People would not hearken to my voice z
J^rael wmld none of me, Ezek. 20. 8. bm they rebelled againji me, {i.e,
oppofed, rejc otherwife not ) fuch ttaflias this, will never pafs for
found reafon: abfurd dictates, without proof, though never fo impor-
tunely impofed, Mr. T. muftnot imagine will meet with reception
amongrt judicious Chriftian j.
tf thly, That it (hou-ld b^ fcandalous to hearken to the Inftitutions of
Ghritt ( as he fuggefts) is l""ch a monftrous aflfcrtion, that I am amazed
to think it fhould drop from fuch apcrfon. The reciting it is refuta-
tion fufficient. So that the LMajor Propofuion I ftill take for mani-
it{\ truth, notvyithftanding his three didates to the contrary, which arc
now abundantly refuted.
The prefent Mlftlflers ofEn^hnd do not hearkf» and conform to the RevS'
lation Chrifi hath wade touching the Orders and Ordinances of his Hottfe^
trsvedby the ininUion of [even particulars. All power for the Callings
i nft it utiony Order, and Government of his Churchy is invtfted [olelj in
Chrifi,, Mat. 28. 15?. i Tim. 6. 14, ij. John 3. 3j. Ads 3. 22,
andidly.rx^Hat the prefent ^'Mimftcri- of Shgland diO not'hearkcn and
A coflforto'to the -RevelationChritt ^ath m»d« touching tha-
Orders,
in Anfwer to Mr . T. his Excepttonr, . 2 / 3
Orders and Ordinances of his Houfcj we prove in.?. T, by the in-
duftion of feven particulars.
'^ To this Mr. T. leplies, in SeSi, 3. Chap. 4. ift, /« the /lead of Jr-
ffftmeatj he proves all vith Interrogations,
Kn[vo. Falfe and untrue ; I wonder at the confcicnce and confidence
of th^man in averting ic. He knows I prove it by the iodudion of the
moft remarkable Orders of the Houfe of Chrift, which they hcaiken
not to.
2dly, He askef, which of the Ordinances of Chriji have they made
void ?
hnfw, Thcywere under his view whilefthe wrote thcfc words ; fo
that his queftion is frivolous. I enumeiate feven of the Ordeis and In-
ftitutions of Chrill they have fo dealt with.
He adds, jdly, He fhonld have reckoned up [even times ftven.
hnfwi I. And why fo? If guilty of a rejcdion of thsfe, which are
the principal ; they oppofe his Kingly and Prophetical Oftice, thougb
they embrace fotne others that are of his appointment. The %omamfts
do fo, yet this Aw^Wiiz/^rfrr grants they are guilty of thecrimc inlUn-
cedin.
2, Mr. T. cannot reckon up feven times feven Inftitutions of Chrift
that are of the peculiar Inftitutions of his Houfe, to be performed by
Saints embodied, and united together in the fcllowrhipof the Gofpel^
nor many more than: thefe feven mentioned by us. He inftanceth in
hearing the fi^ord^ prajlng to the Father in the Name of ChrlJl, which
he tells tii they have not made void by their Traditions.
Anffp. I. Thefirft of thefe is in a great mcafure (if not totally >
made void by them. i. They oppofe and deny the management of
this duty, in the way of Chrift's appointment, whileft they debar Chti-
ftians from;elefting their own Officers, or attending upon the Minillr/'
offuch as are according to the mind of Chiift elected by them. 2. The
Preaching of the Word muft give way to their Scrvice-Book^fi^orfhip) or
Forms of humane devifmg ; which 1 am much miftakcn, if it be not,
in a great meafure, a making void of that Inftitution ofChrirt (hs
fpeaksof) by their Traditions*
2. lwi("h thefan^ may not be faid ( with refpcvft to the mofl of
thematleaft) of praying to the Father in the N^me of Cbrirt, which
none can do but by the Spirit, whom they defpife, reproach, fet up theit
liinred Forms in oppofition to him andhisbreathing<;.
Thefirft of the_ Orders ofChiift's Houfe. inrtanced in,i is, That aH
Towsrfor the Callings InfiitHtion^ Order and Government of his Churchy it
iovejlfci
J j4 -^ Vindication of the Sober Teftimony,
inve^ei [oldj in him y as tht Mone Lordy SoverAtgn Ruler, And Headthtrt^
of, Mil. 28. ip. I Tim. (5. 14,15:. John 3. 3^. Aa$ 3. 22. 4«^6, ly, Kev.iS, 4. John i:;.i$>.
i 5 ^ A Vindication of the Sober Teflimony,
apdij^d. ABs2,i^o, and ip'P- Fhil.i.^. AuSf^2. 41. and i;». 4.
2 Car. 8. 5.— This Inttitution we fay the Minillcrs of England arc at
open defiance with ; admitting perfons vifibly wicked and piophanc,
info their Communion.
To this Mr. T, replies, SM. 4. ift. He hath read fomemhat in Ainf-
worth, Cottons ffritings ( for to them we refer the Reader for further
fati$fa£lion ) But he doth not find in them^ nor the Serif tures mentioned ^
a»yf(ich [efAration as thefe Authors prefs, -'—
Anfrv.Thc Separation we prefs is a fcparation from the vifiblc wick-
ed and ptophane ; cannot the Animadvertet find this in the Scripturej,
nor in the Author^ ityftanced in ? Let me prevail with him in a fedatc
frame without palTion or prejudice, once more to revievYthcm, and beg
of the Lord to opsn the eyes of his underftanding, that he may fee his
mind therein, i Cor. i. 2. Phil. 1. 1, $- zCor. 8. j-. Give us an ac-
count that thofc who conftitutcd and made up thole particular Chur-
ches, were vifible Saints, fan£lified in Chrift Jefus. ( The like inftancc
might be given of the reft of the Churches mentioned in the Scripture.)
The Difciplcs of Chrift are faid to be chofcn out of the World, John
jy. 19. and 17. 6. The Saints in a Church-ftate are commanded not
to fuffcr a Fornicator, Covetous perfon, an Idolater, or aRailer,or»
Drunkard, or an Extoriioner, in their Communion ( though allowed
civil commerce with them in the world ) i Cor. f. 12. In A^s 2. 40.
2.Cor.6. 17. we findthe Apoftlesprelfiog, and Chap.ip.p. pra6tifing
Sepavaiion ficm the wicked World ; which is alfo commanded with le-
fpe6i ro Antichiiftian wor(hip, Rev. 18. 4. If Mr. T. cannot fee fuch
a Separation as we prefs, co-ntaincd in thefe Scriptures, I cannot but
pitty him. Tis faid that when this way was more countenanced, he
prsftiied fomewhat not much unlike thereunto.
2dly, He grants, That Separation front the fVorld^ In refpeSi of H^orjhip^
is ihe duty ef Saints y 2 Cor. <5^ 17. ^f*t then hy the World is meant pro-
fejfed Ir.fidelSy or atieajiftich oa were profejfed nnhelievsrs, ^John i J.
■i.9.a.ndi7.6.AUs2.j^0.andJ9.9.
Ak/w. I. That the word iVorld is 7ra>i«!,Mk, a word of various accep-
tions in the Scrip- ure is known, with which we (hall not trouble the
Reader. Tlu Animadvertet grants, That it is taken for perfons Uvin'g in
theJyorld '. Now thefe are but of two forts, that I know of, regenerate^
oiHnregenerAte ; fuch as walk after the Flefh^ or (uch as w,ilk after the
Spirit ; BeUevers, or Unhelievtrs. And when the word fi'orld is put in
oppofition to the Saints, its alwayes taken tor the World of unregcne-
■ratcp^rions thatlicsinwickednefsj or h ru ynnf^^ i$ in fubje(5tion to
the
in Anfiper to Afr. T. his Exception f^ • ijy
the wicked one, i Johns, ip. That men are not of the World, be-
ctufe fiom Tradition , Education , Compulfion , Intereft , or the
like, they profcfs the Name of Chiift, though they never knew t
work of Gvacc, or change upon their fpirits is a fiaion of this Animad-
verterthit he will never make good. If fuch at thefc are not of the
world, they are chofen, called out of it, let us a little confider whether
the Charadersof thefebe found upon them.
If They are faid to be Branches in Chrift, that abide in him, and
bring forth fiuit,yo^« ly. 2, 4, y.
2dly, They are clean through the word that he hath fpoken to them,
f^r/. 5.
5dly, They have a mighty power and prevalency with God, z/rr/,
7, 16.
4thly, They have the words of Chrift abiding in them, verf. 7.
fthly, Are fuch whom Chrift loves, verf. 9,
They are hated of the world, verf, 18, ip, 20, 21. ani Chap.
irf/;. 17.22. will have them to be with him where he is, to be-
hold his glory, verf 24. with much more that might be inftanced. Elfe-
where they are called fuch as are delivered from the power of dark-
nefs, Co/. 1. 13. Quickened, who were dead in trcfpaffes, and fins,
Efhef.2..i. Called to be Saints, Rom. 1.7. i Cor. i. 2. Are Light
in the Lord, Bfhe[, 5. 8. have received the Spirit, vvhich the World,
or Men of the world cannot receive ( and abide fuch ) John 14. 17,
Thefe are the Characters of thofe that are not of the world. Do we rc-
fufe to hold communion with, do we feparate from perfons of this com-
plexion ? What moi^ falfe ? We cry aloud to them, woe, befeech, in-
treat them, as many of ihem, as are yet, too much holding fellowftiip
with the carnal wicked world in Worftiip, to come out from them ;
which was one, and no fmall part of out defign in S. T, As for others,
that know nothing of the things mentioned, they are yet in their
fins, though they profefs the Name of Chrift , under the regiment
of the wicked one , and of the world ; and therefore to be fe-
K k parated
1
. g A Vindication of the Sober Tefiimny,
pirated from; a$ this Aoiaii Jvertet giants. Of rnc Apoftlcs going into
the Jawlfh Synagogue?; &c. we (hill fpsak in r.? proper place. Though
wehavenocotnniind to feparatc ffora 'he tcue WorOiip of God, and
the profeffors of the true Fiif'a, w.rlkiug fuitable thereunto, yet wc
have cxpreCs precepts, to hwe nocornoiuoion in Woidiip, thatijof
the devifmgof man, the Pope, Aauchrili, .vith perfons as members o£
the fame Body,and that have the very Lineaments of Satan,the portrai-
ture of Hill upon them, with whomCinit doth not, will not mlk. The
Scriptures but now Inftmccd in, evince as much. Rev. 18.4. com-
mands feparation from a falfe Church ; falfc cither in conftitution OE
by apolhcy : The Church of EngUni ( Rome ) is fo, as we have pro-
ved, and the falfe Wotftiip thereof, of thiswc have already fpoken.
Let the Reader fetioufly confidcr the Scriptures, he will find it to be fo.
In a word, the 'Babylon mentioned, our Anitnadverter will grant, is the
%omAn Church, Cha^, 17. i, 2, 3. The fcarlet colouicd Bcaft is th Ci-
vil Power ( not once reptcfcnted under the notion of Bcafts, D be very unrightcouflyGiid,
otheis will judge, I am furc as was faid in 5. T. They arefuchj of which
it way right eoHJly he faid, he did at m time command them, neither did it e*
verenter into his heart fo to do. And 1 chalUxige Mr, T. to give an in-
ilance of the contrary.
We remark a jth Inflitution of Chrifl in S. T. viz. That thefe Of^
ficers be chofen by the common Suffrage of the Church ofChrifiy — accord-
ing to ABs I. If, 23,26. and 6, i, 2, 3, y. and 14. 23. and 9.2.6,
yvhich we find the Church in the pra^ife of for fome Centuries of Tears, As
the Efiftie «•/ Clemens to the Church of Corinth, Martin Luther, Cypri-
an, lambard, Peter Martyr, Bullingcr,Gualter, Zanchy, Calvin, Bc-
za, the united Brethren of Bohemia, manifefl. Of which at large we there
treat. This Infticution of Chrilt, we fay, the ptcfcnt Minil^ers conform
Dot to. «
Mr. 7. replies, i . He finds not this to be an appointment ofChriji^ in
the Scriptures mentioned.
Anfvp. Whether it be or not,let the Reader judge; the impertinency
of his Anfwer to the three firft, we have already fhewed^ AUs^, 26,
27. proves thus much. That 'tis in the Churches power to vejcaany
one, or refufe to receive him as a Preacher amongft them,till they have
received faiisfaaion touching him ; which doth not a little demonftrate
the power of Eleftion of their own Officers, to be feated in them. For
he ^fayed^ t{9»^S'B-ai^ to joyn himfelf to the DifcipleSj as a Brother in the
fellowlliip of the Gofpel, (as the word fignifies, A^s^.i^. iCor.4.
\6,x7.) but they vvould not fuffer him fotodo, till better informed
of hitn, and then he comes in, and goes out at Jerufalemt ver. 28. i.e. is
owned,veceivedByth£m. What follows is a repetition of what he had
before faid, ScB. 22. in anfwct to the Preface, to which we have there
fpoken. Clemens fpeaks fully to our purpofe, Minifters mufi be appoint,
ed by famous and difcreet me»y with the good liking a*id confent of ALL the
Churchy ( without which it feems they could not be conftituted) la
that
in Anfrver to Mr, T. his Exceptionrl • 26 ^
ihat which follows in Clemens his Epiftle , touching a rcadinefs in
the Elder or Paftor to dcparr,or return, according as the muUitudc of
Believers ihould determine. We have lure a proof that the choice or
icjeflion of a Paftor is feated in the[n. That Lmher^ Bnllinger, meant
no more, than the not obtruding unable Minifters on the Churches of
Chtift, is Mr. T, his miftakc- They boch affert the Churches priviledgc
in the choice of their own P^ftors. ThcW voice ( faith Lnther ) ought
»tt to he [ever eci from the choofing Ecclefiafilcal Persons : 'Tis tyramj to do^
fo, faith BftUifjger. Let the judicious Reader perufc the words of the reft
recited in S^ T» and he will be convinced that they fpeak hoins to th^
matter in hand, and that Mr.T. doth but trifle whileft he labours to
avoid their Teftimony. That there is nothing like this Inftltution of
Chrift, pra<^ifcd amongft the Minifters of t>e Church of England^ is
known. And Mr. T. ackoowledgeth, That by reafon of the continnAnce In
force ^ of fo rnnch of the Popes Canon LavOy things are far otherwife than they
jhonldbe. Now this is that |we fay, A non-hearkening to the Inftttu-
tionsj^and Laws] of Chrift, with an imbraceraent and fubje(5lion to the
Cannon-Law of Antichrift, is a real denial of Chrifts Kingly Authority.
This the Minifters of England are guilty of. The latter our Animadver-
tcr hath the ingenuity to confefs j the former wc have proved. What
difficulties Congregational men have found in the tedifying thefe
things, befidcsvvhat they have ground to cxped, in any work of God,
( in which *tis no new thing to find Satan at our right hand to refift us )
1 know not»
That Separation and Elet^ion by the Churches makes things worfc
than they arc, is a plain calumny againft the known experience of
them all.
We proceed, and in S. T.inftance a fixth Inftitution of Chrift, viz,.
6thly, l^hat Saints may Prophtjte one by one, and ought to admonip?^ exhorc
and build up one another in their mofi holy Fai'h, l Cor. 14. 40. Rom. 8.
26, and 12> 6. i Cor. 4.17' and y. 4. md 11.23c Ephef
4.7,11512. I Tim. 2. I. and ^. I ^. Jade 20. i (^or. 12. 7^ 11. Mar.
2 J-. 24. I Pet. 4. 10, I J, I Cor. 12. 15-. and 14. 12, 24. Ephef. 4. 3,
7, If J i<^. KUs 2.A2. Rom. 15. 14. Ephef. ^. 19. Col. 3. 16. i Jhef.-
5.14. zThef.^.if. Heb.$.i^. to which might be added the ficquen-c
JExampIcs of the Saints in the Old and New Teftamenr, 2 Chr. 17.7,8,
5?. John 2. II. Mai, 3. 1(5. Lit\e ^. 16, A^s 13. ly. i Cor. 14, 24,
to 34. and the prat^licc of the Piirhicivc Church, as witnefs Origen^ ( in
his Epift:e to Celjam.) TertuUian ( in his Apol. ) Ju/iin Martyr ( in his
Apol. ) and many others, Thii laftitaiioc of. Chrift, the prefect Mini-
fters-
254 ^ Vindication of the Sober Te^imony]
&.ZIS trample under foot, rail tgainft, oppofe, reproach, do all they caa
tocaufe to perifh from amongti the people of Chxift.
To which Mr. T. Se£i. 8. upon the matter fpeaks not one word, in a
way of contradi6lion,telIs us, Prophefylng re at an extraordinary gift ^hy
an immediate Revelation of the Spirit y vpkertby fome hidden thingts dijco-
lereii and this prophefying the Mini/if rs of England neither do nor can hinm
der ; none that he kpows ofhavs thi6 gift. —
Anfro. I. Were all this granted, it would not at all advantage him.
There IsaPiophefyingthat was (as he faith) an extraordinary gift.
But that is not the Ptophefying ( as he knows ) we 4^e treating
of, but a fpeaking to men to edification, exhortation, and comfort :
Tnis we fay is an Inftitution of Chrift,bottom*d upon the forecited Scri-
ptures, which not^vithftanding the prcfcnt Miniftetsof England oppofe
and deny.
Are not thefe things fo ? Is Mr. T. able to difprove them ? Doth He
attempt to do fo ? nothing Icfs. A very fardle of Contradi6tions, not
worth the mentioning, is the whole of what he is pleafed to return in
Anfwer hereunto ; one while the reftraintof fuch cxcrcifcs, is notranf-
greillon of Chrift's Command, and yet immediately adds, that the du-
ties in the TextSj ought to be cheriflicd, furthered, and fuch meetiogs
countenanced.
Quo terieam vultui mutant em Trotea nodo.
An Inftitution of Chnft he denies not this to be, nor that it is not
hearkened to, but rejedled, oppofed by the prefcnt Minifters. His, im-
puting pra6tifes to us, tending to Sedition and Difturbance very ill be-
comes him. The whole Nation is under the conviction of the contrary.
Tis no more than what of old was charged upon the Saints. A very falfe
criminstix)n, for which I advife him, that he pray to God to give him
lepcntance unto Life.
A 7th Inftitution of Chrift remarked in S.7. is this, That nothing
he offered up to God^ hut vahat is of his own prefer iption^ divine andfpiritnaly
mikoHt affe^ation of Legal ShadoivSy John 4 24. Of worldly Pompi or
tarn at Excellency, 2 Cor. i. 12. and 2. 17- I Cor. 2. 12. and 6. ij.
1 Cor. 12. 28. Ifa. II, 22. Jam. 4. 12. Mar. ij* <^> p* Heb. 8-5-.
I King. 13. 33* and 12. 13. Jcr.7. 3 1- Numb. 15.39- Deut. i2.r.Sc
4. 3 1." This the Minifters of England conform not to, they atft what is
contrary thercunto,whilft they oScr up a Service not of his prefcription,
affett Legal Shadows, worldly Pomp, and carnal Excellency. ^
Mr. T. replies, 5efl.p. where God hath left w free, not forhiddingm to.
ufe a prefer ipt form of words ; Mnjick^ in thepraijing of Cod, there we may
Uio, Anfvf,
in Anfiper to Mr. T. his Exception}'^ . ^(j^f
Anfr, I. Thisijfuch a fliamcful pethioprltjcipUt or beggin" the
thing in qucftion, that he could not furc write without bluHiing.
2dly. Contrary to what he hath in other Treatifes formerly affertcd.
3diy. Direaiy oppofitc tofome of the Scriptures inftanccd in,which
he takes no notice of.
4thly, An open door for the Introdudion of all the Popldi trinkctf,
and fopperies.
S thly, A moft Papiftical afleriion, generally exploded by Protcftant
Writers, when they difputc agiinft the Papifts, who affirm that an Ar-
gument from the authority of the Scripture negatively, is valid, i. e,
'cis not commanded in Scripture, not to be proved thence, therefore
not to be believed nor praftifcd, as SmcUfe argues againft Bellarmlne^
tiePomf.l.2.,c.9.p,i3^yi^$, and others. So that notwithftanding
what Mr.T.is able to fay to the contraiy,the prefent Minifters of EeiU
refufc to fubjeft to, dcfpifc,oppofe, persecute the Orders and InfUtuti-
ons of Chrift in bis Houfc, and therefore deny his Prophetical and
Kingly Office.
We proceed in S, T, to the removing an Objeaion, which is thus
propofed.
Bnt perhaps to thefe things feme may fay ^ Thefe are htfmall matters, god
men differ among themfelves herein.
To which we Anfwer, i. That they are part of the Inftitutcd Wor-
iliip of God, — hath already been proved : To fay that any part there-
of is a fmall matter, is no fmall derogation to the wifdomof him who
inftituted it.
To this Mr. T. SeU,io. Replies, ift, Though nothing ammandecL
by GodufmaS^ yet fame things are comparatively fmaUy Mat. 23 . 23 .
Anfiv. i» Chrili fpeaks not of Gofpel-Inftitutions, of which we are
treating.
But, 2. Of Commandments, and Ccremonies,that were then draw-
ing apace to their periods and full point.
3. He fai h not that they were fo fmall that they ought not to be ob-
fetved» but the contrary.
4. The Appointments inftanced in by us arc of fuch import, as that
in them, the vifibll Kingdiip of Chrift, in and over his Churches, doth
confift ; the taking away, rejeaion of which, is to take away,and rejea
the vifible Sc>:ptcr of his Kingdom ; So that betwixt thefe two there is
CO compare.
He aad$ idly, That they are part of Gods injiltmed fforfhip needs better
froof,
Li hnfvf.
/^^^ 'AVindkationQf the Sober Te^imony^
Anfxv. I. This is but Mr. T*. his-opinioD, he hath not manifcfte3 the
wsaknefs of the proof exhibited.
2. He acknowledgeth Come of the Inftitutions mentioned -o ''^e the
Appointments of Chrift. We fay, ^"\ { r v-r -"^^' '
2dly, What if it fhould appear, that as fmiH aj there tbirM; C;ein to
b?, they are the grounds of the lateControverfies of Gc 1,ple-.did with
fire and fword in moft of the European Kingdoms ? Thi may perhaps
a little ftay fober perfons from To rafh a Conclulion, That ihefe arc [mall
watters. .
To which our h^madverter ^iitn, This ts mt den%onftratei,
A^/w. I am upon fome accounts unwilling to review things • he
cannot be ignorant of the truth of the fuggeftion. What was the ground
of the fivft: conteft in ScotUni^ was it not the impofition of the Litmgy ?
What bef'at the bad blood in England ? was it not the Prelates Pride,
impofition of their Inventions upon the Saints ? What the Covenant
was agtinft, this hnlmdverter hath not ytt forgot • But enough of this.
I add, 5dly, As fmall matters as thefe have been feverely punifh-
cdby the Lord, as zChr. 16. 16. Nt4m, i6. i Chr. if. 13. with Nnm.
4. 11^ I J. I Sam. 8. 7. which we more at large fpeak to in S, T.
Mr. T'. Replies, '7"^ wf't demofjflrated that Ift the rrjeBiifft efthefe I»"
fiUmlons that the Mhflers fm, oi Uzriah,^^;. ; ^ ■•,::'.-'^C: . p
A«/W. But that herein they do fo, and that at an higher tite, is evi-
dent. I. Uz,7jlah,&c^ finn'dbutagainft one Inftitution of the Lord,
thefc againft many*
2. They finn'd under thcLaw, againft the carnal adminiftrations
thereof, thefc under the Gofpcl.
- 5. They finn'd of ignorance and weakncfs , ( as may charitably be
deemed, at leaft fome of them ; ) which ('tis to be fear'd ) cannot be
faid of many of the prefeiyt Minifters ; who have preached, printed^
fworn,againft, what they now own and pra<5tire.
We add, 4^ As fmallmattersas thefe, when once commanded by
the Lord, are.of that force, as not only to deface the well-being, but to
overturn the true being of the Worrfiip of God. We inftance in the
caCe of Sacrifices,vvhich being appointed to be offered at a certai-n place,
i[f offered elfewhere (which was but a failure in a circumftancc of place)
they were a ftink in the Noftrils of God , and not accounted by
him as any WorlVip ,per<'orm?d4Q him. Doth Mr. T. deny thcfe things
- robe fo?N6tkt ail. He^only fells u.v '7l>kfrfc^M;?«y?firAtd, Which how much it is to the piiipofe others will
judge. The judicious Reader knows, we were not upon the proof of any
fuch thing, the utmoft of our intendment, being only to demonftrate,
that the particular InlVuutions remarked} were not fuch fmall matter s
ts fome made them, fince as fmall matters ( vU. t circumftance of
place commanded ) ncgle or that by mentioning thefc I hive made any breach
upon any rule of Cbrirt, 1 do affurc him in the word of a Chrittian, to
make a publick acknowledgment and recantation thereof : till then I
bavcfo little caufe of being afraid or afliamed, that I have boldneCf,
and coHfidence through the grace of God in the Teftimony I beat
( though unworthy) againft their enormities, and caufe of rejoyciog in
thrift, whatever I may fuffer.
^dly. That goo^ mtn^ ( that in the Account ofGoi may befo) ought not
tokefeparatedfroffff when under the guilt of [canialous offences^ this Ani'
madverter cannot prove ; many Scriptures have already in this Treatifc
been produced for the confirmation of the contrary.
We add in S,T. 3. That good meti differ is an Argamcnt of thcit
ignorance and darknefs, which though in fome cafes it excules a tantty^
yet not a toto; it may alter the degree, never the nature of the fin.
To this oui jinimadverter replies, There may be darkjtefs in this Ati-*
ihor. •
jinfw, I. And this Author faith fo to ; '{is what he is daily bemoan-;
iBg before the Lord.
But 2dly, In the matters heis treating of, be knows, and is perfwi*.
ded by the Lord Jcfus, that the truth is with him,and he dares not call
Lighty 'Darknefsy for fear of man, or advantage in the world.
jdly, He conceives thefe words might have been fparcd, inafmuch
as they arc greatly impertinent, whether Darknefs be with them or me ;
If we fin, though our fiabc not a fin of that mtgnitude,as if it had been
committed againft Lights yet *tis a fin ftill, and fo to be cenfured; and
if fcandaious in fome cafes, the perfons guilty of it to be feparated
from.
We fay moreover in S. T, 4thly, 'Tis falfc, that good men prefTing
after Reformation — according to the primitive pattern, do differ
touching the fubftance of the things inftanced in. —
To which Mr. T. adjpyns, The more to bhme. is this Anther to widen
the Breach. —
A. But this Author doth no fuch thing, he vvidensnot the Breach, ur-
ges not Separation from good men,vYho prefs after Reformation accords
bg to the primitive pattern : But fuch as have renounced the piufuing
fuch a Reformation ( though they were once fvvorn. ( fome of them ) to
profecute it to the uttcrmoft of their, power ) perfecute, oppofe it in
them that are preiTing after it. As is the known cafe of the piefent Mi-
Biftcrs of Snglani,
What if added by us,, in. the yjh place,, W*.. That ths^articttlarsln-
fianee^
in Anfwer to Mr, T. his Exceptionf, 1 6^
ffaftceditty being commanded, by ChrtJ}, they are not difeharged from the im-
■peachment drawn uf agatnji them {who conform not to them ) of Noncon-
formity to the Laws ofChrift by this Plea, That good men differ in ihefe
maticri, ( /. r. fome good men trtnfgrcfs the Laws of Chrift — ) he
grints to be tfue : Nor doth he offer anything further in this Chapter
that dcferves our attcndmeDt.
CHAP. VL
Se/ England do own^ fubmit and fubfcribe to Orders and Ordi"
nances that arc not only not ef Chrift s revealing^ but contrary thereunto:
Therefore.
The Major (or firft Propofition) is beyond exception. Perfons non-
conformity to the Laws of Magiftratej ( if in what they have power to
command ) their giving forth Laws of their own, without the confent
of their Rulers, diig^tly contrary to their Lawf, is a vifiblcj notorious,
oppofuion, denyal, and teje6^ion of their Authority, in them that give
forth fuch Laws, and in them that conform and fubje^ to them. This-
wc manifcftly prove to be true of the prefent Minifters ol EngUnd^mih.
iefpc(a to Chrift> the ilonz Indepcndant Lord ^ Kingzad Sovcraignot
his Church and People,
Thar which Mr.T. oppoieth hereunto Chap, y. Se^^ i. will receive.
* fneedw .iifpatcb-. 1,. HiSi
270 A Findkatwnof the SoherTejlmony]
I. His diftin(5kions about the Orders and Ordinances of Chrirt are.
ncedlcfs, they are but a clouding and daikning of Truth, by words
without knowledge : The Orders we fpeak of, are the Appointments of
Chrift to his Church, withiefpc6t to WoiQiip, wherein their practice is
more orTefs concerned; to deny and reject tbefe, and in the place of
them to fublVuute otherSjof their own, of Antichrilt,and fubjeci there-
unto, is a denial of the Offices of Chiift mentioned, or it is not : If
Mr. T^ hisconfcience tells him, that it is, he doth ill to equivocatCi
This he grants to be true of the Pope of ^^^.w^. Chap. 4. fag. up, 120.
Why it rhould not be fo ofthePope of Cantkwury and his PielateSj ^
I yet underftand not. That the giving forth and fubjc(5lion to the Can-
non-Law in the Papacy, fliould be Antichriftian and axicmal of the Of^
ficcs of Chiirt, and the fame thing in the Church of England not fo, is
a Riddle to me.
Henry i[i;t^'^ rejected the Popes Supremacy ; an A
6tice, that they will have none of his Inftitutions; they prefer Ami-'
chrifts Canon-i-Law before them) which is fluflFcwith fuch hlihy Abo-
minations, that I/«rAfr was wont to call the Decretals^ ExcretalSy and
had them publickly burned at mtteinburge. And Whitaker ( one of their
own ) faith. The Canonical^ Decretal^ and Pontifical'Lai», ought to have
no fUce amongft m, hecaufe it is Antichriftian andnlf^ih^r a flmnger tc^
all Piety and Religion^ Lib. dc GoBcil. 9^ i.i*ST*'^^ .Tf.iM ri'j.f.^ '.T
■min Anfw^r to Mr, T, his Exceptions. -271
• 2. UthtJkimadverter Will fpeak to the purpofc, and evert what
hith been offered in thif matter, he muft, I conceive, cither manifell
fhat the Popes Canon-Law , is not the Law of Government to the
Giiirch of SngUniy or taat a retention thereof ( with a rejection of the
Inftitutions ot Ghrift ) is not a denial of his Offices.
Totellftories of things done of ignorance— ( which we have ovei
and over, and in this matter cannot have place, they thsmfelvcs know
that things are with them ts we have reported them ) the fetting up
open Antichrifts, and Univerfal Monarchs, is the ready way to expofe
himfelf to contempt forhis impertinencies, no probable one to.carry
the Caufe he undertakes the defence of.
There being nothing further worth the confideting in this firft 5r^.we
feaften tp the 2A.
In order to the conftrmation of the iMlnor Propoiition of the fore-
mentioned Argument, t^o things, we fay in S^ T. are incumbent upon
us to prove. - ' ■
X. That the prefent Mlnifiers of England do own> fubmit> and fub-
fcribe to Orders and Ordinances that are not of Chritts revealing,which
we manifeft by the Induftion of 14 particular Inttances.
As Firji, They own the Orders and Offices of Arch-Biihops, Bi»
(tio^p^&c. andpromifcCubjeftionand obedience to theinj.£cc-/f/;C4flu
ca». 7. . . - ' ■
To which Mi. T. '■ I. Hg mil not undertake to jfijilfe all that U In the
Ecelejiajiical Canons^ nor need he^ nor perhaps wiU the pre[e»t Minijlers or
Blfho^s,
An[vp. I. But he having undertaken to be their Advocate, he muft
chher juftiftc their Canon'«,or manifeft that they themfclves do not.
- Secondly J ^I^S norotioufly known that riiat the p.-eicnt Minifters ju-
ftifie the aforefaid Canons EcclcfiafticaJ, and dare not but do fo.
He adds 2dly, 'TU not [aid- Can. 7. That the Orders and Offices of
^rch-BijhopSy BifhopSiCJrc, are Orders, needful and necejfary in the Church
ofChriJly nor is it required therein that Minifiers promife [nhjeUion and oht-^
dienceto therfU-^ :.. i'-' .v.. .' ^' .; ,
Anfw. I. But the former of thefe is fairly implied, in the forefaid
Canon, which filrif, Tu awic\ed Error to ajftrt them to be Antichrijiian
cr repHgnant to the fVard of Cod ; for which perfons' are 1^(0 iiiStoto he ex*
commmicated.
-^ 3tf -The latte*'^hcy-a;ftyially do when they; are Ordained Minifiers,
/^'tiitXti.Artici'^^.' They ar« 10 fubfcribc to this, Tnat the Book, of Com*
mon- Prayer, and of "Or during Bi^ops-yPriePs^andDeacons^contains nothing,
■ • conirarp
±yi A Vindication of the Sober TB^imony]
contrary to the^ord of ^od^ and that it may Uxvfully be u[edy and that tbtj
thtwf elves mil ufe the Form in the [aid Book, prefer ihed, in pttblick. Prayers
and admini(irati9»of the Sacraments ^ and none other. Whence it follows,
that they awtj, fubmit to whatever is contained in theCtnons Ecclcfi-
aftical ( though in every particnlti Canon it is not faid they do ) and
the Cotntnon-Prayer-Book-Seivice, the Orders and Rites thereof,
with the Orders and Rites of the Book o( Ordering BijhopSy Prieflsand
Deacons. So that when we prove this, or that, to be contained in this or
that Canon, we prove their fubmifiTion thereunto, Canonical Obedience
(^0): Obedience to thefe Canons ) being what at the time of their Ordina-
tion ( as was faid ) they promife to the Bi(hop,vThich is a fufficient an-
fwer to all that Mr. T. affetts in this SeUi In Can. 4. The Liturgy.
Worfhlf is affcrted to be the Wordhip ofGod^ whoever affirms, Itua cor-
ruftyJuperJiitiodSy and tinlaivfull fVorjhip of God, is to he excommunicated.
They promife at the time of their Ordination ( as was faid ) To ufe the
Form in the Common- Prayer- Book, prefcribed, in Publick, Prayers • and
tjone other • which if it be not a fufficient proof, that they own and fub-
mit to it, I muft profefs I (hall for ever defpair of ability to prove any
thingf
His exceptions to the Third Particular, touching their engaging to
conform to the ^ites oi the Common- Praj/ir Bookytrc not worth the men-
tioning.
Thtj own Fomthlyy The Office of a Deacon to be thefirjl fiep to the Or-
derof Priefikood^ inasmuch as this is afferted fo to be in the Book of
Ordering Priefis and Deacons, to which they aie to fubfcribc by Can. ^6,
and Can. 32.
It's faivly intimated alfo, Fifthly, That no perfm be admitted toex'
found t he Scriptures ^t hough judged worthy ff the Cure of SoulSytvithout Li-
cenfe from the Bifhof thereuntOy is plainly afferted, Can, 49. Though the
vtoids, judged worthy of the cure of Souls, be not cxpreffcd,they are evi-
dently implied ; the Cute they there fpeak of, can be no other than that
they to call.
Sixthly y That there hz feme lawful Minifters, which are no Picach-
crs. And,
Seventhlyy That thefe unpreaching Minifters, may lawfully adminifler
the Ordinances of Baptifm, and the Lords Supper, is fully a{rerted,C<»».
49) f 7.
So is the Eighth particular, touching the fentencc of Sxcommumca'
f iff 7 to bs paffed upon fuch as refufc to have their Children Baptix^d^
Of to receive the Sacramtnt fiom fuch dumb Minijiers,
Ninthly,
in Anfjvtr to Mr. T. bis Exceptions I • 27?
ifJinthly, Though it be not faid in fo miny words, That CenfirmMtio»
hy Diifcefan BifhopSy u An Ordimnce ofgoi^ Cm. 6, yet it is faircly im-
plied, and in the Common-Praytr-Book^ they bottom it upon the Apo-
ftlef praftice, which fully cvinceth, they cttecm it as fuch.
That it ( Ttnthly ) appertains to the Office of Minift:ti to Marry^ the
regulation of the Minifters therein by Can. 62. clearly manifefts*
Eleven. That the Bi(hop of the Dloccfe miy lawfully fufpend a Mi*
nifter from his Miniftry, for rcfufing to bury the Dead, Mr. T. grants
is prefuppofed, Can. 6S.
So is, iith/y^ Thcunlawfulncfs of Minifters Preaching, and ad ml-
uiftring the Communion in private Houfcf, except in time of nccelTii
And i^thlyy The unlawfulnefs of appointing F<:
7 hat though theft Canons, and ConfiitHtlons, owned by the Mlnlflers 0/ Eng-
land be not p«T«f , to be found In the Scripture of the Infiltution of Chrift ^ in
fo many wordsy yet by conftejHence they may rationally be deduced from thencft.
As where it is commanded, that all things be done decent ly, and In order,
I Cor.14. 40. which 'tis the duty of the Church to make Rules and
Conftitutions about ; which when it hath done, it is the duty of every
Son thereof, to own, o: fubjeft to them without queftioning its Autho-
rity. -. >jii
To this Mr. T SeB^. 3. fubjoyns. i. He afferts not, that the Canons
Mnd Conftltmlons of the Church of England, may rationally be deduced from ■ .
^rlpiure^ ^
inAnfwertoMr^TMsExceptionf. - iy^
'Jnfr», Goodly Conftitutionj furely, that cannot rationally be de-
duced from Scripture, but have their Original fingly from the bloody
Canon-Law of the Papacy, and worthy to be fubmittcd to by fuch as
profcfs tbemfelves Minifters of the Gofpcl ! what greater contempt
any one could pour forth upon them I know not ! -,i
But 2dly, Whilft Mr. T. rcfufeth to aflert thij, he plainly relin-
quiiheth his concern in the Objcdion piopofed by us, and tells us He
will not ftand up in its defence. However, 2. This he afferts in the room
thereof, That Canons and, Conflttmions Ecclejiafiicaly concerning Divine
fVorjhipi andChHrch-governmnti may he made by Govermnrs, if not oppo~
fite to fuch Rules Oi are tM Scripture about Gods mr(hipy and the Mule of his
Church f and he indeed fubfervient and conducihle to the welUordering of fuch
tVorjhip and Rule j which 'tis the duty of the Members of fuch a Church to
^bey,
^ Anfw. I. But I would be informed, whether by Canons and Conflitu.
tiotts Ecclejiafticaly concerning Divine PForfhip^ he means only C<««(7«^
touching the fpreading the Table at the Communion, with a linncn
Cloth; the Sermons beginning at the Reading of the Text— at which
rate he fpeaks in Se£i. 4. Or whether he means Canons and Laws for
the Inftitution of confiderable parts of Woifhip, together with fuch ac-
cidentals ( as he calls them ) that muft be fubmitted to, by fuch as arc
admitted to the publick managcry of Worftiipj without which they ftiall
not be permitted fo to do. If the firft, he doth but trifle, we have not
been taking notice of things of fuch an inferiour allay. If the latter, I
defirc to be fatisfied by what Law any Rulers or Governours do aflumc
to themfelves fuch an Authority, which when Mr, T. ihall be pleafed
toihew us, wc {hall further confider it. Heh. 13. 17. fpeaks not a tittle
thereunto. Of the vanity of its Application to the Governours of the
Church of England we have already fpoken. The ReaCons of his Alfei-
lion are thefc.
I. without fuch Regulations Church.Soeieties cannot he continued hf
rcafon of the difference of minds.
A»fn>. I. The contrary is manifeft} before ever fuch conftiiutions
as thofe he fpeaks of were in the World, Church-Societies were conti.
nued. One of the firft open breaches amongft them, was becaufc of
them : as he knows fell out, betwixt ^i^lor Billiop of Rome, andf the
£rt/?^r».Churches, about the obfervation of Eafter. All the confufion,
differences, breaches, that have been in the Churches ( fo called ) is
for the moft part to be charged upon their Impofitions.
2dly, The 4«w^^z/^mr fuppofeth, That without fuch Con^itutionSt
Mm 2 fhf
47^ ^ y'indicaiion of the Sober Teftimonyl
tbt Chttrches fhsuli be wholly deft It me of RegitUtion, but ftlfly • *Ti$ dew
Togttory to Chrift, the Scriptures pcrfcdion, a pitiful bsgging the thin<>
ioqueftioD. As Cbiill hith i Church in the world, he hath Laws (with
tdpid to external politie ) by which he rules it ; needs not be be-
holding to Antichriftfoi his. "Til impious, fcandalous^o conceive, en-
dtte fucb di<5lates.
He further adds, adly, ^11 forts of Churches have had their Sjttods to
tbii end.
Aifw, I. To whit end ? To make Laws and Conftituiions for an
Order of Miniftry that Chrift never eftiblilhcd, to impofc a Lyturglcal
mrjhlp upon his Churches, to fetupan unpreaching Miniftry, in his
Houfe — Mr. T*. knows that thsfc things are falfc, and untrue. If he
mean not thefe, I would advife him to fpeak pertinently in his next.
Tbefe are the Inftituiions we charge the prercniMinifteif withfub*
mittingto. -
2. That all forts of Churches have fotmd it neceffarytohave Synods ^ if
more than Mr.T. can prove. The Learned fVhitaksr tells us^ That the j
are mt fimply and abfolutely neceffary^ DeConcil.q. i.p, 22. and I am
furc they may be well enough without them. Licinias inteidi(5ls them^
Ettfeb. Je Vit. Conjiant. /.i.-r. 44. yet the Churches coatinued,and in a
fiouiilhing fttaic*
5dly, That few or no Synods that ever were yet in the World, have
had a right Confti^uiion, were a facile undertaking to demonftrate. The
Synod ( fo called ) of the Church oiEn^landy ( by which the Laws we
msntionwereoutof the Pop:f Canon-Law coUeded ) was not fo. A
light Synod isconlVuuicd of the M-iffengets of the Churches (upon the
account whereof they arc faid tob: the Churches Reprefentativts ) fcnt
by them with Iaftru6Vions frona them, touching matters to be debated
in thit CoaventioD. This cannot be aflrriaed of the aforefaid Synod,
nor of any Synod that ever was in the World, fince the Apoftles fell a-
ileep.- So that whilftout Animadvert er\$ difcourfing of them as ncccf-
fary, he is talking of the necelTity of a Nan-ens , a meet Chimara.
4rhly, The Churches of Chrift had a peife*St Difcipline, ijcforc cvei
the Synods he fpeaks of had a being in the World.
Nor, ytbly, had thefe wcr from Jefus Chrift any Authority ( *^^
what they have not from him, is not Obligatory ) to impofe any thing
upon the Churches, to bi obferved by them by virtue of an Authorita-
tive power feated in themfelves. Tis- a Yoke not to be endured by the
free- born Subjcds of Chiift, that any of the Children of men rtiouldr
impofc i^poathem in the matters o£ their God,. The Synod of Jerftfa*
in Anjwer to Mr . T. his Eoceeplionr. 277
/#«» did not do fo. If vvc h»ve proved. His third Reafon Is down-right
begging the thing in qudlion ; Chrifi bdtb left nothing relating to tkc
fVor]hipa»d Governme>ft of his Hottfty asfncb^ uttdeiermintd ; agtinlt which
I advife him not to talk fo confidently in his ncxr, till he harh proved
thecontiary. The Texts mentioned by him, iCor. 14,4c. Heh.i^,
17. prove no fuch thing, as the Uwfulnefs of additional Inftitutions,
in matters of Church-Polity, as a part thereof to the Inftitutions of
*Chvift, I Cor» 14. 40. is iftcrivard in S.T. ( Hcb.ii, 17. hath alrea-
dy been ) confidered. That becaufe /*<««/ gives direction, in fome ca-
fes, to the Church of Corinth, 1 Cor. 11.54. and tells them, the refi ht
mllfet in order when be comes to them, therefore 'tis left to Church-Go-
vernourf to inftitute, de novo, Ordinances md Inftitutions of their own,
tnd impofc them upon the Churches, is fach a Confeq :iencc, that would
put ft modeft ( concerned ) perfon to i blufti, to review : we have no
Apoftles, none ifted by an infallible Spirit as they.
In tnfvvct to the ObjcvSlion, as propofcd by us, we fay, that the whole
ofit isbttiltuponfuch falfe fuppofitionsasthefe. ThatChrift hithnot
determined in the Sciiptuie, how the affairs of bis Houfe (hould be ma-
naged with decency and order, as well as commanded that they be fo ;
which is derogatory to the Scriptures perfciflion; to the Wiidom and'
Faithfulncfs of Chrift • diametrically oppofite to the Scripture ( i Cor.-
14. 40* ) inlUncM it ; of which we give thi^ brief account. The Apo-
ftlc having condemned them for their irregularity in the matter of Pro^
f^'fV"gi verf,26. He gives dirc<5tion touching its regular performance :
And th«t, I. Gtneralljfj verf. 26. 40. 2. Pitrticniarly^by tellfng (hern
how they ought to manage this affair in » way of decency and edifica-
tion, t/*r/. 27, 28, 2p, 30, 34, 3^. That from hence 1 power inveft-
ed in the Church, for the binding the Confcienccs of men touching
Ceremonies in Worfhip, (hould be regularly deduced, is the firft-bota
of improbabilities.
^ I. Patil fpcaking by an infallible Spirit, idvifeth ths Church of 0»
nnthy TaM all things be don; decently and in order.
a. TellTthem wherein that decency and order licsjthcrefore fuch af
pretend not to fucj^ a Sprrit,niayjof their o.vn hcadf,bind our Confcien-
ces by Laws of their own, in the Service of God, irfuch a Mn-feqmtury
as will not in haft be made good.
To this Mr. 7. pretends to anfwer, SeB\ 4-. The fum is, Chrifi hath-
left many part icpflarities undetermined in hit fVor^ijr^ and the Rule of b»
Church to he determined hy Governours,
Anfw, 2^ If by particHlaritits of f^yorfhif_^ bc-Hieftn fuch as ifilatc tc
2 7^ ' A Vindication of the S ober Teflimony]
it, *s fuch; of Church- government, fuch is aie fpccial parts thereof, as
the things mentioned by us are made to be, this hath been often denied
and difproved by us.
2. He egregioufly trifles in the matters inftanc'd in by him : though
I think it horrible wickednefs, not to be born, for Ecclefiaftical Go-
vcrnours by penal Laws and Statutes, to impofe even thofe things up-
on the Churches ; That it fhouU be criminal at the CommHnionjtfotto
have the Table fpread rvith a Cloth. That the Service begin with
the recital of the Inftitntion , or otherrvife ; ( as he fpeaks ) and bc-
feech this Animaiverter^ if he refolves again to draw the Saw of this
Controveific, that we may agree in this> not to multiply impertinen-
ciesj and fo prove what we fay. I know not any of the Sons of men that
have power to bind my Confciencc, where Chiift hath not. But this Mr.
T. proves, becaufe, i. Parents arc charged to bring up their Children
in the nurture and admonition of the Lordy Ephcf. 6, 4. 2. We arc to
pray for KingSy — that we may lead a quiet and peaceable Life under them,
Srgo, ( Antichrirtian Church-Officers, or) Governours Ecclcfiaflical
have power to make and impofe Conftitutions for Church-Govern-
ment upon the Saints. Apage ineptioi ! That the Reader ihould fuppofc
fuch arguings as thefe vvotth the confidering, I cannot be fo injurious to
him as to imagine, whilft I conceive him to be one not bereaved of
his underttanding. Much after the fame rate that Come admirers of the
Gentleman at Rome are wont to argue for his Supremacy above Prin-
ces ; becaufe 'tis faid, God made two great Lights^ the Snn to rule the
Day^ and the Moon to rule the Night : Doth Mr. T, at prefent argue for
the power of the Rulers, of the Church oiEnglandy in matteis of Wor-
fli'p and Government, without authority from Chrift.
Yea, but 3dly, The Bi[hop mnft take care of the Church of God, i Tim.
Anfjv, I. But this is a Chriftian-Gofpcl-Bi(hop, a Paftor of a parti-
cular Church, which our Bifhops are not.
2. It remains to be proved, that his taking care of the Church of
God, is his impofing inftitutions of his own upon them. A forced Inter-
pretation ; to fay no more. We read Lttke lo. 34. that the Samaritan
took care of the wounded man, and v.3 5 jbid his Hoft take care of him ;
yet I am pcrfwaded neither the one nor the other,caUed Synods to efta-
biifti Canons and Conftitutions EccUfiaftical to impofe upon him. The
whole vvork of a Bilhop Is not furely to Rule and Govern> he is to in-
ftru6^, exhort, admonifli, rebuke, with all longfuffering and meeknefs,
to ftrengthen the wsak, comfoit the comfoitlefs, and in all to have re-
fpea
in Anfvoer to lAr, T. his Exception f, 27^
fp€<^tothe will and appointments of his Soveriign Lord and King, not
to idi cxoibitantly, according to his own fvill and plcafure.
What he adds by my of Anfwer to what wc affert, that the conceit
that Chrift hath not dctcrnnincd in the Scripture how the tffiirs of his
Houfe ihould be managed, is a derogation to the perfcdtion of the
Scripture and the faithfulnefs of Chrift, is already fully replied to,
and removed out of the way. Only whereas he cites, 2 77w. 3. i y. and
intimates that the fufficlency there afcribed to the Scripture, confifts in
affording Doarines of Faith, and Rules of Life, we crave leave to tell
him,Thathis Affertionis, i. Paplftical ; exploded by our Proteftanc
Divines. 2. Falfe and untrue ; the Apoftle cxpiefly aficrts their fuf-
ficiency with tcfpcca to Church -Politic, to inftru^t Timothy wherein, is
no fmall part of his defign in this Epiftle.
He goes on and tells us, That we give mt a trne account of the Aft-
files d'lfertationj i Cor. 14. 1. He ajferts not the Libertj of Saints it$
Frofhefying-
Anfw. Of the truth of this let the Reader inform himfelf from verf^
31. *ris not material as to our prefcnt purpofe, whether by Prophefying
he meant a particular gift of fore- telling things to come,or an Expofiti-
on of Scripture for the edification of the Saints, whether it were the one
or the other, thofc to whom the gift was given were to improve itj and
this the Apoftle exprcfly afl'erts to be their Liberty and duty.
■ He tells us, 2dlyj It U not right that the Apoflle^ verf. 40. repreffcth
his iireBion^ verf. 2. I. Both Propofuions are liable to exception, i. Upon fup-
pofiuon that wha: in the Worfhip of Chiift belongs to Decency and Or-
der is left undeterminedj it doth not follow that it belongs to the
Rules of the Chtirch to determine thereof, which is to make the Rulers
Lords over Gods HeritagCt to introduce infupportable Tyranny into the
Cnurches of Chrift. — They are the Churches Seivams,not Lords,that
are her Minifters.
aily, The M'nor Propofuion is notorioufly falfc and untrue, the
m Anfwer to Mr, T. Ms Exceptionsl j g i
Apoftle is debating the bufincfs of Pfophefying, touching this he lays
down particulai rules for TieceMcyzn^ Order^^Kich he requires them to
conform to. Let any fober Chriftian perufe the Chapter, he will fee this
(hining therein in brightnefs ; So Ambrofei Aqmnas^ &c. inform us.
Decently ani In Order, that no mjecmlinefs or tumult arlfe. But thii pre*.
fcription of the Apofile u not to he applied, to any EpifcopalTraditlens, hut
the Apo[iles 0Tcvn,v\z, fuch Oi he had delivered to the ChurcheSy{n\.^ a learn-
ed man. Thus the heat of this conteft is allayed.
Fulverls exlgui jaUu.
We further reply in S.T. But let this be granted, fuppofe that 'tij
the Priviledge and Duty of the Church to make Laws and ConiHtuti-
ons for the binding of the Confcienccs of men in matters of Decency and
Order ; this Church herein is bounded by the Scripture, or 'tis not ; If
it be, then when it hath no prefcriptfon therein for its commands, it's
not to be obeyed, aod fo we are where we were before, That Decency
twd^Order'is to be determined by the Scripture. If it be not bounded
thereby, then whatever Ceremonies it introduceth, not diredly con-
trary thereunto, they muft be fubjeded to; which how fair an inlet it is
to the whole Farrago oiPopifh Inventions, who fees not ?
To this Mr. T* adjoyns. That he doth not plead, that it u the Priviledge
and Duty of the Church to make Laws and Confiitutions for the binding of
the Confciences of men in matters ofTDecency and Order.
^nfvf. Very good I The Church of England Mr. Tl thinks hath no
fuch Power, Priviledge or Authority granted unto them, by the Lord
Jefus ; Then have they, whilft they have fo done, invaded his Throne
and Kingly Authority. The Parilli Priefts whilft they own, abet and
fubfcribe to what they have done in this matter are Co-partners with
them in their iniquity are really guilty of oppofing the King-Jhipof
Chriji, which w s the matter we have been all this while contefting
tboucj and is now, in eff.ft, granccd by our wary Antagonift, We argue
thus.
Thofe th.nt affunje potue^ to wake Laws and impsfe the reception of them,
upon the People o£ a Natio>i, bejide thofe {and vnithout any Priviledge or
grant to them by Juch gl-; en ) in whom the Soveraign Power of ^uledom
reftdes^ are guilty of Rebellion afraln/} ft^ch their Kulers axd Governours :
7hofe thwahet ihem herein are guilty ef the fame Rebellion : But this the
Church of iingland, iv/r/p refpeUto Jefta Chrijl the onely ^ over aign Lord
and %ttler of his Churches Jirith done Mr Minificn have abetted her herein.
Therefore, -—
V N n The
J, J 2 ' -^ Vindkatton of the Sober Teftmony,
The Major cmnot be denied. The Minor is evident, i. That the ^
Church oi'EngUni hath made Conftitutions for the binding the Confci-
cnccs of msn in the maters of^ Decency and Order ; their Book of Ca-
mns and Co»ft'nmions Eccleftaftical Qwincz l that they have no authority
from Chiift fo to dOjMr* T. grants : So that in what follows we arc littl«
concerned, partly bccaufe he hath already yeclded the caufc, and partly
becaufe the particularities he fpeaks of, be they what they will, arc on-
ly, he tells us, of Decency and Order^ not determined in the Scripture,
Now we deny any fuch particularities undetermined, we think it a tnoft
fearful undervaluing of the Wifdotn of Chrift, to affert, Th^t mans' De-
vices can add Beauty^ Order ^ or Decency to Chrifi*s InfiitmionSy \, c. They
are not Orderly or Decent without Humane Impjitions. Nor fee wc how
thefe can be prcfciibed by Canons Scclejiaflical to be obeyed,.becaufe en-
joynedby the Rulers of the Chnichy to whom rve are y faith MT.TJnCon-
fcience boHnd to [ptbmit I if it be not the Piiviledge nor Daty of the
Church to make Laws and Conllitutions for the binding the Confcien-
ces of men in matters of this nature,and think that ttie latter part of hij
Anfwsris in contention with the former. Bcfideswe arc yet to feekfor
t proof of this matter ; That we are obliged to obey Rulers Ecclefiafti-
cal, commanding us any thing in the Worlliip of God, as fuch, under
thi noion of Decency and Order ; and believe this very affcrrion is con-
trary to the Law of Nature and right Reafon, which teacheth us, That
God ii to be ferved after that way that p/eafeth him befl : That the Will of
God ( who is th: alone Mifter of the Houfc ) not man ii [olely to be heed^
td in the Ordering of hii Family and Hmflioli,
Mr. T, would take it ill Qiould I prcfcribe Rules to him for the well-
ordering of his Family, and that without his Licence, and that after
I know he hath ConlUtuted and appointed Laws himfelf for that
very end. And yet I concei^re be is not fo far above me, as the
*'gfeat and only Vvife God is above the mightieft and wifeft of mortals.
So that whileft he would avoid the horns of the Dilemma^ that of the
P^t is verified of him,
InclAlt in Scyllam qni vnlt vltare Carybdlm,
Not do I fee hew he ai'oids the horns of the Dilemma by what he re-
plies i;v this matter : The Rulers Ecclefiaftical are either when they
make Laws binding the Confcience, indire^Pdy bounded in their fo do-
i-^g by Scripture, or they are not, i.e. they muftimpofe no Laws upori
us wahout Scripture Precept, ov ihey may. If the firfi, we are bound top
■ obey
in AnfwertoMr.T.hu Exceptions. ig^
obey them no further than they arc able to evince the jurtnefs and rioh-
teoufncfs of theii Gommands, upon the account of their bcino botfoln-
ed upon the Scripture. Then no Obligation lies lipon us to obferve the
Canons^ OrfW(7«/V/ of the Church of SngUni any further than they gart
manifeft their Obfervaiion commanded therein ; then (lie and her Mi-
nivers do wickedly to Excommunicate, itnprifon, Raine us, for not
yeelding fubjec^ion, whsn and where none is due. If the fecond, then
whatever Ceremonies they introduce, under the notion of Vecer.cyi^^
OrdeTy that are not contrary to the Scripture, muft be fubje6^ed to,
which is an open in-let to the whole Farrago of Popijk Inventions. We
(Qit the General Rales iff Scripture^ the Larps of Nature, right %eafon^
other Uftddle Cuftoms^ that Mr. T, tfells us, tfta/} be obferved in this
mattery will be but a weak defence againft them. For who fhall be judc'c
of their confonancy to thefe Principles ? Shall every man be judge for
himfelf ? This out Ruleis think to hi abfurd, and contrary to the Prin-
ciples afferted by our Ammadverter to be obferved. If our Governours,
they will tell us, whatever they impofe, 'tis confonant to all the fore-
menlioncd Principles, that we fubjcd to them therein. Ask our Bi-
ftiops they will tell you fo with refped to the whole of their Popiflj-Eng-^
lijh-CanonLavffs and Ceremonies.
Ask Mr. T. and he will tell you little lefs, than That a blind obedience
Jhould be yeeldedtcrthemin undetermined particftlarities. Chap. i.Sc<5t. i»
Ask the Pope and his Conclave, they will tell you, 'Tis coyifonantto
the fore 'mentioned Principles ^ that we fubjeU to all his Ceremonies : Nor
indeed can we fay of molt of them, that they are more diffonant to right
reaCon, — than fome that are retained anaongrt us. So ihat the horns
of the Dilemma are piercing the heart of the Caufc, whofe defence Mr.
T. hath undertaken.
-We farther argue in S. T. Yet wttz this alfo yeelded them, they
were never a jot nearer the mark aimed at, except it can be proved that
fuppofing a power of introducing Ceremonies ^ to be inverted in the
Church, thence a power for the InlVitution of new Orders and Ordinan^
r^j, the introducing of Heathenijhy J^mjhy and Superjiitiofispratiicesia
the fi^or[hip of g odmzy be evinced. And yet {hould all this be yeelded
them , how will they prove the Conftitutions mentioned, to be the
Conftitution of a right conftituted Church, a National Church ? the
Church of England i$ not fo. Yet if all this were granted, where are the
Conttiiuiions of this Church, that we may pay the homage to them that
is meet ? When wis it alTembled in the fame place together^ in its fc- ^
N n z veral
284' A Vindication of the Sober Tejlifnony^
vcral M::nb:rs,frcely to debate and determine what Laws and Conftt-
tutioas were fit to be obferved by them ?
It it be fiid, That it is enough that it be ajfemblei Ik its f ever al Officer Sy
orftichas (hallbechofcH hj their Officer ^^ rvhofe Lavfs every Member is
: bwad to be obedient to.
•We Aafmr, But thefe Officers being not the Church ( nor are true
bfficerj of a right conrtituted Church, any where fo called in the Scrip-
ture ) I o.ve no fubjedion to their Laws or Conititutions , it bsing
pleaded that 'tis the Church that hath only power in this matter. It re-
maineth thereforcj (notwithftanding what is pleaded in thi$Objc6li-
on) That the prefent Mini(tei-s of ^»^/aV» propofed do j Which if Mr,.
T. will juftifie, he muft alio plead for them; but I fhall not compel bim
to a warfare he is not willing to engage in, he may take his liberty to
ftmd by and look on, but then he had done fairly not to have pretended
tojufiifie whathcfcarcefpeaksawordto. The impertinent Quefti-.
ons he fpeaks of,»re pertinent to the Objcftion and Obje(5lor$ we have
to deal with.
Whit he hath fpoken of a National Church in anfwcr to the PrefacSi
Se5i, ly. we have removed outof the way by out Reply thereunto.
He tells US} adly. That the Church of England was Ajfembled at Lon-
don in itsfeveral Members ^ by Deputation freely to debate things ^ at rvoi the
ufage of the Synods in the antient times^ ■ oa the Kingdom is faid ta.
meet in the Parliament, fo the whole Church may be faid to meet in thtir
Synod,
^/fnfrv, I. No doubt Mr. T, ( and his. Abettors ) thinks he hath.
DOW fpokcD to the purpofc indeed, but the cmptincfsof the whole if
foon manifefted. No Synods whether antient or new, can be fuppofed.
to reprefent the Church, but upon the account of the free Eleftion of
the perfonsconftituting, them, and deputation by the Members of that
Church which they rcprefent. «* Whofoeveris fentby.the Church, re-
'^prefents theperfonof the Church, faith the Learned fvhittakjtr, De
^'^Concil.q, ^.c. ^.p. lO?. Yea Bilfon himfelf tells us, None are bound
to the Council, but thofe who fend to the Council. No Council doth bind the
^hole ChtiTch txcept the eonfent be general* Con^ Ap. p. 45^, yi. And Sa^
• - ravia^
in Anfrver to Mr . T. his Exceptimf, • 2 8 c-
rff». But that is the To k^ivo^/^.vov ; Mr. T, may be adiamed of fuch
pitiful beggery.
He adds 2ly, They do not achnovf ledge Arch-Bifhops over the whole
Church, Oi the FopCy but in their own Province.
Anfvo. This is not at all material, the authority of Arch-Billiops
• — over a Province — is as much againft the Texts mentioned, as
over the whole Church. 'Tis not the extent of Authority, Lordlliip, —
that is therein condemned, but the -thing it felf. ' _
3lv« He further tells us, They have no fuch dominion afcribed to them
e^er the Church they overfecy as is forbidden^ i Pet. y. 3. Luke 22. 2y,
2.6,
Anfrv, I . This i$ again to beg the thing in quefticn. 2ly, We have
proved the contrary. • r rr- »
He adds 4ly, They are not Lords in the Chttrch - bnt w the Kingdom
and PHrliament^
Anfrv,
in Anfwer to Mr, T. his Exceptions. ' 2S7
yinfw. Falls and untrue, I wiih he fpeak not againft knowledge in
this matter, i. When inverted into their Epiicopal Sees, they arc
ftiled Arch-Bi(hop$ of fuch a place or Province, Lord-Bifhop of fuch a
See. 2. The Piiirts fubmit to them, pray for them as their good
Lords. 5. They have Power, Authority, Precedency as fuch over
the reft of the Clergy, give forth Laws and Canons to rule and guide
them, to whom they promife obedience at their Ordination. 4. They
exercife jurifdidlion, authority over their refpeilive DiocelVcs in theit
Ecclefiartical Courts, and ConfiBories as fuch, all evident Eniicnf
and Dcmonrtrations of Lordly Dignities, even in and over that which
they call the Church,
That which he jly adds of the Eunuchs b^lng called -Au^a%7,K, Acls
8. 27. without contradik5^ion to i Tim, 6. ly^ where Cbiiit is /aid to
b: iJi.6vo; Auvxffjni,i5 frivolous.
1. The Eunuch is not faid to be Avvccfflm^ i Potentate with refpe<5l
to the Church of God, over it he was not fuch, but with refpeft to the
Kingdom of c/£thfopiay where he was a Noble Man, a Governor under
Candxce the Queen : Our Bilhops arc Potentates in and over that
vvhich they call the Church of Chrifl.
2. That any other befides Chrift fhould exercife Lordship and Au-
thority in the World, is not interdi(5tcd, as is their fo doing in the
Churches of Chrift, in the Scriptures mentioned.
He faith jly. He hath not fhewed that what is acknowledged ii a Laiv^
ConjiitHtioM ) or Ordinance y nor the Miniflers ovtinit by (ubfcripion,
Anfvf. True indeed, I did not do fo, fori thought it ncedlefs to de-
monftrate that the Sun ihines at noon-dayes. Arc not the Ofiiccs of
Arch-Biftiops, Lord-Biftiops Conftittitions and Ordinances > Have
they not their Foundation and Eftablilliment by Law ? Doth not Mr.
7; know it? Is hecnely aftrangerinour//r4^/ ? Of the Truth of this •
there are not many in the Nation that are or can be ignorant. That
the Minifters own thefe (whether by fubfcription, or otherwife, is not
confiderable, Mr. T. deals injurioufly whilft he fuggefts, I fay>they own
thefc, with the reft of the particulars mentioned by fubfcription, when I
alTert onely. That they own, fubmit, and fubfcribe to, /. fomc or" them
they manifcft thcy^vvn by Subfctiption, others other waves, but they
own fiibmiffion to them all) is too notorious to admit of a denyal «
They , do fo in their Oi'dination, when they promife Canonical Obedi--
enceto them, in their prayers for them, fub):i6iion to their precepts
from time to time, tranfmitced to them, which they dare not rranf^*^
gtefs. 2lyj Thit men may and ought to be made Minifters, onely by
theic.:
j^ S g A Vindication of the Sober Te^imotiy,
thcfe Lord-BUliops, is we fay in S, T. owned by the prefent Minifters :
wnichiscontiary to Hf^. 5:.4- Johpno. i, 7. & 1^.2.0. ^c1j 14.23.
with 6. 3, J. Whai Mr. T. adjoyns hereunto touching Ordination by
Suffra^'an'Billiops, hath already been vemovedoutof the way. How
much°heyowna Pr^j^;^fr/rf« Ordination, (of which he fpcaks) many
oood men in the Nation feel and find. Of thefe things we have al-
ready fpoken. That Ordination by Lord-Bi(hop$ is dhbliOied by Law,
is known, and that exclufively to any other without them. Hereunto
the Minifters fubfcribc,C<«». 3^. The Scriptures inftanc'd in prove this
to be contrary to the Revelation of Chrift, Heh. j. 4. Joh» 10. i, 7. i
& 1 5 . 20. manifcflly evince ; That who-ever undertakes to be a Mini- "
lierof the Lord in his Church, muft becalledofjent by him. (So was
Aaron -) A^s 14. 23. & <^. 3> J- manifcrt that the Way of the Lord's
milTion is not by Lord-Bifliops, but by his Churches and People. What
he tells us he hath faid in anfwer to any of theCe Scriptures, wt have le-
plyed to Chap. 2. , . ^, „ , ^^
We add in S.T. gly, That Prelates, their Chancellors and Officers
h^ve forver from Chriji to caft out of the Church of God, is owned hy them,
co«;r^r;roMit.i8.i6,i7. iCor.j.4- -. „ , , , ,.
To which our Animadverter fubjoyns, He finds no fitch Larv. —
Mfiv It may be he is willingly ignorant hereof. This he cannot
but know, that in the Name of Chrift the Officers mentioned do ex-
communicate out of the Church (fo call'd) of Chrift. Do they do
this without Liw? Is it not one of their Church-conftitutions, that
they may do fo ? Do not the prefent Miniftcrs own them herein ?
Wh^lrt they cite, prefent, perfecute their Neighbours for not coming to
Divine Service, (as they call it) it may be foi refufing to pay them a
* four-p^nny-due, in the Ecclefiaftical Courts, even to an Excommuni-
cation, whofe Aa therein they afterwards publickly denounce and de-
clare, once and again in obedience to them? What more evident ?
The weaknetJ of his anfwc'v to Mat, 18. iCor. 5. we have ali-cady
manifelied. , i l ^n- r l
We fay further in S. 7. That they own 4ly, that the Oftice of the
S^ffrasans, Deans, Canons, are lawful and neceflary to bchad
in thethurch, contrary to i Cor. 12. 18,28. %om. 12. 7- Ephef.^,
II. The Officers inftituted by Chrift are fufficient for the edihcatioa
and perfeaing of the Saints, till they all come unto a pcrfcft man, —
rf/>. j. from his exceptions againft
what is by us therein argued.
We fay they own— Jthly, That the Office of Deacons in the Church
u to he imfloyed inpuhllck. Praying, admlnifiratlon ofBaptlfm^ and Preach^
ing^ ifiicenfed by the Bl(hop thereunto, contrary to AS:. 6, 2. Ephcf. 4. 1 1,
MtiT. replies, T^ not contrary to Chrift's Revelation — ■ that they
jhould be imphyed in thofe works,
Anf. I. But when Chrift hath inftiputcd the office of Deacons for this
cndj to attend Tables, or look after the provifion, and neceffities of the
Saints ; That any perfons may own an Office of Deacons in the Church,
to be imploy'dby virtue of Office-power in any other work than that for
which they arc intrufted by Chrift, and called unto Office,without aa
advance agaioft that Inftitution of Chrift, is abfurd to imagine.
2. That the prefcnt Miniftcrs own fuch an Office he doth not deny,
3. What he fpeaks of Stephen and Philip ^ he had faid before, and to
it we have replied already, and need not add more.
A ftxth Law or Ordinance that we fay they own — is this. That the
Ordinance of BreaklngBready or the Sacrament of the Lords Supper^ may be
admnljlred to one alone^ Oi to afick, mm ready to die : Which is diame-
trically oppofitc to the Nature and Inftitution of that Ordinance, i Cor,
10. 16, and II. 35. Mat. 26. z6.AUs 2. 42, and 20. 7.
To which Mr. T. 7 his is not eajily proved from the Scrlp'ures injian-
ced in.
Anfrv. Whether it be or not, is left to the judgment of the judicicus
Reader to determine. I am weary in purfuing himinhis impertinen-
cies. He grants a Communion is proved in that Sacrament, i Cor. 10.
if» y^prayfayfittr
Father. — 1
2dly, That which is in Mat, 6. is a full Interpretation of Lttkc'i ex-
preflion, and thrift's intendment) vl^. vcrf.^.After this manmr pray
7/, &c. ( Gr. isT^s, to thiapHrpofe. )
3dly, We nowhere find the Dlfciplef, either themfelves ufing ths
form of words here mentioned, nor in all their directions given to the-
Churchcs, touching this important duty, is there the leaft recommen-
dation of the ufe of thel'e wordj-to ihem, not lie. they prefcnbcd aj«:
matter of duly upon any of them*
294 [A F'tndication of tie Sober Teftimmyl
4thly, There are not the fame words, nor the lame number of words
in Mat* 6. p. as in Luke 11.2.^ — So that if Chriit cnjoyns us to the
ufeof thevvords, heeojoynsusto (in ; for if I ufc the words recited by
Mattherv, I Cm againft the injundion in Lttke^ and focontrarily.
ythly, iPd«/ cxprefly laith, fVe k^ow not what to pray for as we ought ■i
Rom. 8. 2 as when we arerpcaking tom-n.
6, The Affembly in their Annotatiors interpret it of the afiiftincc of
' the Spirit, in refpeft of words, as otherwilc.
^ But Mr. r. will prove the contrary; becaufe, i. h's [aid the Spi-
rit makfth intereejfion for hs with groans ttntitterAble,
A^rv. I. Groans unutterable arc cither, i. fuch as my words and
expreflTions cannot fully reach j or, 2, fuch whofe vertue and excellency
doth not confift in the number and flourifh of words, as the prayers of
Hypocrites, Mat^ 6. 7. but in moft lively feelings and pangs of the
Spirit ; but that therefore we muftnot ufc words in prayer, or that ia
fo doing we may not expe^l the help and alfiftance of the Spirit, is yet
to be proved.
He adds 2dly, That i Cor» 14. 1$. is fuch a prajl^g in the Spirit M
ma.) hf I. without theHnderftariding of him that prayes ; or 2. others even
fuch 04 he that occupleth the room of the mlearned^ cayinotfuy^ Amen,
Anfvp. I. Thcfiift isnot faid ; M-. T. doth ill to impofe his own
crude conceptions upon the Spirit of the Lord : ' lis faid indeed, That
his undcrftanding is unfruitful, W«., toothers, what he conceives they
arc not bettcr'd by, becaufe brought forth in an unknown tongue.
2. Thevvords they fpeak in an unknown Tongue, were from the af-
fiftance of the Spirit, therefore call'd a praying in, or by the Spirit ; fo
that this is fo far from abetting what he produceth it for, viz., that'thc
Spirit doth not fuggeft words, that it proves the contrary.
5. A manifcft evidence alfo, that a form of prayer impofcd is con-
trary to this gift of praying in the Spirit ; for had they been tied to th3
former, thecxercifehereof hid been altogether (hut out; which being
a Spiritual gift, was to be coveted by the Sainrs, chap. 14.
I. As for what he adds, i. That the alTiibnce of (he Spirit, ^«?w.g^
is meant of fecret, private prayers, not of publick, is frivolous. 'Ti$
not to be imagined that God fhould promife his help in the managerie
of ptivjite duties, and not afford it io fuch as are more publick, in thcr
honourable p^formancc whereof his glory is more eminently con--
ccrncd. 'Tis, 2, fond to imagine that it (hould be meant of raptures
and exiafies in Prayer. 'Tis a promife made to the Saints in general,
which they reap the daily fruit of, to their own Souls, and cannot be
perfwaded upon fuch eafie tearms to let go their interert ihercin. Thcfe .
Textsf^anddiametricaJly oppofitc toa form of Prayer, which renders
the alfiftanceof th>e Spirit, both as to matter and wordsj uilsiefs j both
which arc ready prepared therein. . W^
2^6' A Vindication of the Sober Tejlimony,
Wc fiy in S'T, That the p/efent Mlnlflers own^ 8thly, Tnat vflckji
ani uy.gsdly pnfonSy and their Seed are larvful LMtmbtrs of the Church ,
and if iheif coyi[ent not mlUngly to be fo) they may he compelled therenntOy
contrary to Plain:! i ic 3. Aitj 2. 40, 41, 47. U ip.9. 2 Cor. d. 14^
17. & 9. 13. Which is fo notoiiouriy kno.vn to be accoiding to the
Canoes cf their Church, (and confonant to their daily practice) that I
wonder Mr. T. fhould enquire after the Law 01 Conftitution of this in-
Hance ; and n:iuch more; that he fhould fay, He k»ows not where to fni
itf (as hedoth i'fc^ 8.) He hath fure read Can. 112. 22, ^7, where
he vviil find an abjndant dcxonliration of the truth of what vve have af-
fertcd.
He adds 5 None of the Scriptures produced prove that per fans may not
be compel* d by pecuniary malcts to come to Common-Trajer^ or the Com-
mnnlon.
Aifro. I. And why pleads he onely for the lavvfulnefs of Pecuniary
Mulcts? Do h the Canor-Lavv extend no further? Doth the Bifhops
cruelty arife no higher ? What means the fighs of the poor and needy,
who to the ruine of their Families have for many years lain in noyfomc
Piifons for their non-conformity?
2. Why pleads he not for the Spanlfh Ine^mfition^ the Stake and
Faggots in the Marian dayes ? be knows they have all the fame bottom
and foundation.
3. Several of the Scriptures produced, prove that none but fuch as
of their free will (being under no ccnftraint but that cf the Spirit there-
unto) defire to be fo, were Members of the Cnurchcs of Chrift, (com-
pulfion whcrcunto we are fo foclifli as to think to be hereunto contrary)
zsT^fal. 110. ^. (a Propheficof Go/J;tf/-//>»fj, as hegiants) Alls 2. ,^1^
47. 2Cor.9. '3-
Fiom whence we ajguc. If" it be propheficd of fuch as are to confti-
ture the Gofpel-Church-State, that they fliall be a .villing people, and
vvc find only fuch in the time of the Golpel taken thereinto, their fub-
jeition of confent or vvillingRefs to the Gofpd of Chrift, both with re-
fpcd to Dextrine and Dilciplinc, being what the Saints rejoyced to
behold, then compelling any by Pecuniary ir,ul(5lj, or othe!'.vire, to
be Church- members, is wicked and unlawful, contrary to the forccited
Scriptures. But the firft is manifertly proved by them. Therefore- —
'T^vcrecafie tomanifcft that this is a Principle decried by the Primi-
tive Believers, with the Witncfles of Chrift in all Ages ; As TertuUian^
Clemens Alexand. Laclantiuiy the Council of Sard^,oi Toledo^Chrym
Joflome^ EptphanifiSj Jgnatins, Conflantine at firft made a Decree, That
Liberty
in Anfirer to ^Ir, T. his Exeepha?iK 297
Liberty of Woriliip ought not to be denied. — E^fc^. Eccief. Hifl, tik^
10. f. )-.
The noble Lord Cohbum, in mfwet to Dr. fyuUtns fpcaking coo-
tcQflptuoully ot* nickitffi i»i(h, 'Where do you find in ill God's Law,
'*• That youlliouldthus ht in judgoient of any CoalHin man,or yet give
* fentencc upon any other mm unto d;!ath, as yc do here duly: no
* ijrouod have you in all the Scriptures 10 lordly to take it upon you, but
* i^n A':n44 and Cdipb^i^ which fat thus ::pon Chrirt and his ApolUes, —
* of them only hive you taken it, to jud*e CniiU's Members a> you do ;
* and neither cf Pr.'rr nor J<7i(?«. Tis foaieof the fowt leaven oi the
* Papicy yet left aojongl^us, the only prop by which Antichiil\'i;King-
*do.Ti hath from the beginning been hipported and propigated in the
* World ; the fame Spirit animating it, that breathed in the RoT.aa
* Pagan Ecnpire, to the mine and delhuclion of multitudes of Chi iiU-
*an Souls. Whether, Acls 2. 40. & 19. 9. 2 Cor. 6. 14, 17. prove
* that wicked and ungodly men are not fit matter for Church-Comoiu-
* nion, we will leave to the Judicious Reader to determine.
We add in ^^ T. pthly. 7 hjt fr^mc: muj udmtnijUr the S-icrAwentof
Bsftifm, tJ ovfr,(dh tbem ; which is contrary to x Cor. 14. -^. 1 Tiw,
2. 12. Mat. 28. 18, 19, 20. fybs[. 4. II.
Mr. 7. replies, Tiois w.t* Atlcrvd in :h:' Ef:^iljl' Charcb hf:rethe Cjyft.
fence Mt Hampton Court, In^bt A^\^>: 1/ ^**'£ Jimei?, ht^^ n;:jsr;:i-.
A'tf^v. I. Yet the Learned H.\\n-, (who is fuppcfed to fpcak the
mind of the Church, and Minilkrs of E':^!4Hd, as m::ch as another
nun) after the aforei'aid Conference, pleads tor the laAfuloefs thereof,
Eccief. Pol. Seel. 62.
Yea, 2. I find no publick renunciation of the forcfald erroneous
Principle, nor is it any where (is I know of) cxpiclly and avowedly
condemned by them. And am pcuwadcd, that upon enquiry it will
be foi:nd, that it's generally owned by them to this very day. What
he feems touigc for the juliihcition of thispradice, is trivial, vit,,
^/v/Vp had four Daughters that did rrcphefic, Acts 21. 9. Mention is
made of the Woman Praying or Piophefying, i Cor. 1 1. y. Pr'.fcilU
in(iiu«ilcd AfoUos^ Therefore we cannot exclude them from private
Teaching of life molt able, if they be fitted thereunto : Which no body
that 1 know of denies, but that theretore they may Biptizc, which
ihould have been his inference, is lucb a « ^^*^ defetves no
other anfwer than contempt.
Wepvocccd, and in S»T, fay> lothly, Tbdt the preftnt Minyhrs
P p ifVft
29 S 'A^indkaUon of the SoherTefimmy^
awn that thi.Lorh Snffer « to be received kaieeling^ Touching which ure
affirm thxec things.
1. That the pofturc of kneeling is oppofitc to the prifticc of Chrift
in his firft inftitution of that Oidlnance, and fo it is if kneeling be di-
rct^lly oppofitc to fitting, which 'tis cxprefly faid he did, Mark^ 14;
18,22,23.
To which Mr. T. SeB.^. replies. The word M^xHuivut, ufed Mtv^
14. 18. pgnifits l/t^g along on Beds.
A»[vp. I. Diito non concejfoy Yet Kneeling is dire<^ly oppofitc to
thttpofture; fo that that obfetvition (were it true) advamagcth not
biscaufeatall.
2. Thewoid (as it's known) fignifies, to fit down, oitofitdowa
together at Meat, Mark i<5. 14- Luke 17. S7.
3. 'Tis mott evident Chrift fat with his Difciplc« in the Admlnifti*-
tion of this Ordinance.
I. So fay all the Evangellfts, Mat.26.20. Mark 14.18. Luke 14.22.*
John 13.12.
a. The Papifis themfelves confcfs as much,.
Fex fedet in cana, tnrbacinUm duodemj — Alex, Alens*
3. Moft forreign Miniflers and Commentators, (as Aretim^ Brenti-
suy Calvhy Bez^a^ Veodat, ZmMglius, Pifcator, Dan^itSi — ) together
with our Countreymen, affittn as much.
4. Till above 1460 years after Chrift, we meet with no Council or
Synod, no Rubiick in all the Ly turgies, that enjoyn people to kneel in
the iidt of Receiving.
5-. Our fiift Reformers in the time of H. 8. in their Treatifc touch-
ing the Lord's SMpfer^ defire that Chriftian Princes would command
and eftablifh a form of adminiftring the Lord's Supper ^ wherein all the
Congregation may be ordered to fit round about the Lord's Table, as
Chrift, his Apoftles, the Primitive Chriftians did.
Nor is, 6, one main end of this Inftitution, viz.. our communion
with Chrift, and one with another, fo fitly reprefented by the pofture
of Kneeling, as fitting. What elfe he mentions, is not worth the re-
minding. Chrift fat out of choice in the celebration of this appointment^
for there was no conftraint upon him fo to do, he might have ftood, or
kneeled, if he had pleafcd.
That we are rather to fubje6l to Antichrift*s Canons, andCuftomin
kneeling,than follow Chiifts. Example., fobei Ghriftiani will not be ovei
foiwardly to believe-- i. Paai^
in Anfiper to Mr. T. his Excepttms. 299
x. *P^»/. 1 Cor. II. 23. omits the gefturc, beciufcthen it had not
been in the leaft controverted.
2dly, That the pofture of Kneeling is oppofite to the priaice of the
, ChurcheJ of Chiiti for feveral hundred years after, to the time of the
invention and intiodu<5^ion of the Popi(h hreaden God^ to the judgment
and pra6^ice of moft of the Reformed Churches to this very day. The
truth of this Mr. T. denies not. The fayings of Dr. Bnrgefs the Bif^op
of Rocheftery Paybodjy &c. in oppofition to the former of thcfe, bein^
without the leafi tender of proof, and they themfelves fticklers, for
kneeling is not to be heeded. Th? contrary hath in part already, and
may be anon more fully evinced.
' We fay further in S, T. 3dly, That the pofture of kneeling^ is contrary
to I Thef. f. 22. It hath an appearance of evil in it^ being a geflnre ufei
hy the Papifis, in the adoration of their bread^n God,
To this Mr. T, replies at large. Having acquainted us with feveral
interpretations that may be given of the words, (too large to be here
repeated) j he tells u?> That Interpreters of all fortSy afply it to the ap^
fearance of evil:, in prallice j but whether the Apofile means it of that which
appears evil to another^ or to a mans felf, may be dottbted. To this lattCjC
he inclines, and gives his reafons.
jinfw. But what if a man (hould fay, That what hath in it Celf really
an appearance of evil, is to be abftained from, and that byrhis Apofto-
lical precept, and that thetryal and probation mentioned, is in order
to the finding out of this ? This renders all that Mr. T, hath afferted and
laid down, impertinent and invalid.
. r. This beft fuits with the context.
- • 2. None of the abfurdities mentioned would follow hereupon,
•i^ Kneeling at the Sacrament hatiii real appearance of evil in it felf^
were not mens eyes blinded with paffion, cuftom, feitotereft, preju*
dice, &c. they could not but fee it.
' Whatever, not of theinftitution of the Lord, hath been abufcd td
Idolatry, the greatert Idolatry in the Woildj hath a real appearance of
evil in it. Kneeling in receiving the Sacraaieat hatli be^n fO:^fbure^»
Therefore, "fi^ :J m -..::■■( i, nc ^r. n-v, »»;?-•. r:4Nj : (fl:-* ^ril * .
Thit which Dr. Burgefs (afterwards- cited by this Animadv.-)' Taitb^'
is rather a confirmation of the truth of the minor Propofition,than other-
wife. The Papifis he conhdcs receive it kneeling as. we do ; he de-
nies indeed thar in that very moment of time they inxend to adore ifi
But this is the Doctors mittakc ; they t.hemfclvcsacknovvlcdge-tbcydd
fo, and piotefi that did t he^ not bclie.ve, tl^ac the very Body and Bl^od
Pp a ©f
2 00 A Vindication of the Sober Teflimony^
of Chrlft, were really and carnally in that Sacrament, they Would'ab-
hor to kneel at the reception thereof, as do the Proteftant j.
^.Wf conceive that (hould it not be the duty of men to abftainfrom
cvi(, till it appear to them to be fo, they might commit many evili ,
without being juftly charged as Tranfgrefrors, many pra^lifing what is
really evil ( hath a real appearance of evil ) under the notionjand ap-
prchenfion of an appearance of good .
Though, 4thly, An appearance of evil in any things ( that if
indiffjrent) to t tender confciencc ( anotheis confciencc ) is what
obligeth Saints to abftain from it, as the Apoftle argues in the cafe of
the Idolothyte : afterward reviewed by us, Chap. 9 ,.
None of the abfurdities mentioned follow hereupon. Not the firft,
bccaufc till I know the thoughts of the Brother, to whom it appears to
bcevil (upon fuppofition th .t 'tis in it Cclf indifFcrent) lamnotob*.
liged to abftain fro n it : nor the fecond or third ; for there are many
things, the moft, all, that I am by pofitive Precept engaged to conform
to, that either appear not to be evil to the Saints I converfe with, 01
if they do, they b^ing my duty, I am obliged to doit j but this is not
O'jr prefcnt cafe.
Kneeling in receiving the Sicram^nt will not be pleaded to be
my duty, by virtue of any pofitive Law, or Precept from Chrift, which
is aifo a fufficient anfwer to his 4th reafon. I (hall only add what I find
delivered by one of their own, vU. Tho. Bacon, Preheni of Canterhttryy
in his Catechifm printed C««i;rm/^^/ I am fure the fame
times of abrtinence both from Meats and Marriage, is en joyncd in both-.
The ferious perufal of 2 Tim. 3. f. will abundantly fatisfie the unpre-
judiced Reader, that the prefcat Minillers of England are fuch, as are
there fpoken of. So then it bsing undeniably evident thit the prefent
Mmiftcrs 0? England do own, fabmit and fubfcribe ro Orders and Ofdi*.
nances that are contrary to the Revelation of Chiili, they do isally de-
ny his Prophetical and Kingly Ofiicc.
ScSt, 3,
jo 2 A Vindication of th Sober Tefiimony]
SeFl. 3.
The pre [cut CMimjiers deny the Kingly and Profheticxl Offices of Chrlj^y
rvhUfi they acknowledge another Head of the Church bejide him. There is
m other Head of the Chnrch hut Chrifi^ proved. Of the Head-Mp oftht
pope. H. 8. (ijfttmes the j'^me, voithin hu own Dominions. The tefiimo^
ny of the learned Fullci, Rive, Cilvin. Of Chriji's Headfhip . cf in-
flmnce and Government . H'hether particular Churches may he [aid to be
the Bodies of their Governours ? Whether the Jpojiles were the Heads of
the Church f Oje5lions anfwered. Mr* T. his Exceptions thereunto con^
fdered. i Tim. 2. 2. x Per. 2. 13* expounded. Whether the Kings of
Jfrael were Heads of the Church > Ifa. 44. 28. explained. The Govern^
^ ment of the Church and State proved dijiinU,
WE further manifcftin S.T. That the prefent Mlnifiers deny the
Prophetical and Kingly Office of Chrijiy thus.
3cHy, Thofc that acknovvledge another Head over the Church befidc
Chriftjdeny his Prophetical and Kingly Office : But the prefent Mini-
fters of Engl, do own and acknowledge another Head over the Church
bcfideChrift. Therefore. —
. To which Mr. T SeU. 11. The Author of -S. T« [peaks darkly, ^"(^
thence falls to conjeBuring what I mean by the Head of the Church,
An[w, To fatistie this Animadverter once for all, By the Head of
the Churchy I mean the King and Biihops,that as Heads and Law-giver$
thereunto aflume unto themfelves a power toinftitute Laws and Ordi-
nances of their own, and create Officers in the Church which were ne-
ver of the appointment of Chiift; ( which Z)ver»oHrmder Chri/i is given to them. They are the Fountain of all
Ecclefiaftical Jurifdiaion, it being by Statute Law annexed to the
Ciown. The Biihops Courts ought to beheld, all Procefl'cs to go out in
their Name : With a Synod of Pricfts (or without fometimes )1hey can
make and difpenfe with Laws for the binding or loofing of the Member*
of the Church thereof.
Hear what the learned Rivet faith, Expllc, Decal. Edit, 2. />.
203. touching this matter ( taxing Bifliop (j^r^^w^r for extolling the
Kings Primacy ) For he that did a* yet Koarifh the Vo^rlne of the Pa"
pacjfy Oi after it appeared, did ereB a new Papacy in the per fan of the King,
And reverend Mr. Calvin ; And at this day ( faith he ) hovo many are
there in the Papacy that heap ptpon Kings whatfoever right and porter they ^
can pojfible i fo that there may not be any Difpftte of %eHglon^ bnt tins porv^
erjhotild be in one King to Decree according to his own pleafnre^ rvhatfoever
helifly and that (hofild remain fixed mthout controverfte ? They that at fir f^^
fo mnch extolled H. King of England ( certainly they were inconfiderate
men) gave unto him Suprearn power of all things : and this grievou fly
wounded me alvf ayes ^ for they were Blafphtmirs ( and yet the prefent Mini-
fiers avow the fame ) when they called him. The Supream Headof the
Church under Chrift. — ■ Thus he, in Aacos 7 - f-3 ,
V^hil K)\\i A>iimUv:rter faith, Hir-t the Jefuite acknovvledgethof
theP(jpf, witn rcfpedt to the whole Church, is for th^ moH pirt acknow-
ledged by the prefent Minillers of the King, — with refpet^ to the
Church of England. Tne Power which we mean to the Pope ( the King
and Arch- Bi[hop ) by this Title of the Suprearn Heai.\s that the Govern--
mentofthe whole Church of Chrift throughout the World {of the C hurch
of England ) doth depend of him. In biai doth lie the powsr of judg*.
304 -^ Vindication of the Sober Teftmony]
ing and determining caufcs of Faith, of ruling Councils, (or National
Synods) as Prefident, and latifying their Decrees ; of Ordering and
Confirming Bi(hop$ and Paftors, of deciding Caufcs brought him by
Appeals fiocn all the Coafts of the Earth; {aUthe parts of the Nation)
Or icconciling any that arc Excominunicate,of Excommunicating, Su-'
fpcnding, or infli<5ling other Ccnfures and Penalties on any that offend.
— Finally ail things of ihc like fort, for governing of the Churchjeven
whaifoevct toucheth either preaching of Do6^iinc, or pra<^i(ing of Di-
fciplinc in the Church of Chrift, (of England) which whilft the^w-
maduerter goes about to infinuatc as not appertaining to the King,— .
he advanceih himfelf againft the Royal Prerogatives of his Crown and
Dignity.
Nor doth the Explanation mentioned v^rf/V. 34. and ^7.— contra-
did what we have aflcrted Juiifdi^lion and Power of cxtcriour Govern-
ment is acknowledged to belong to him ; which comprehends the fub-
Ihncc of what wc arc contending for.
In what follows wc are not in the leaft concerned ;'We abhor the Pn-
macy of the Papal ^ntlchriih ; we deny not the Kings Headship and
Supremacy over the Church of ^»^/4«urcs mentioned by him, aaubufc "he title
of Head of the Irises to Saul and the Man is called the H«ai of the
Womnni -—Therefore thcCuvernors of the World n\ay be called thc^
Head of the Churches of Chiili, when ihat title of Head of the Church
is "iven to none but Chrili in the Sciipture, is fuch a pitiful fioff-feqtfi"
tfi?, as Mr. T. will not (furely) without blufhing review.
Sir, Sanl^i.^ conftitutcd by the Lord King over IfrAcl: a Man to
have fupcriority over the Woman, with allufion hereunto, they arc
called their Head by the Spirit of the Lord : But where is the
Scripture conilitution of the Superioiity, Kiagfliip of any over the
Church befidc Chiift ? Amongft whom he faith, He will have no fuch
thing.
Where is it that any have this title of Head of the Church afcribed
to them by the Holy Ghoft ? This muft be piovcd, or you muft acknow-
ledge the impertinency and invalidity of their piefent arguing ; the
beftofitis, whether you will be lo ingenuous or no, *tis but a Fig-leaf
covering, that every eye can diCcern your nakednefs through it.
We fay in S. T. 2dly, // there be any other Head, of the Church befiies
Chrlft, he mnft be either within or mthont the Chftreh.
The latter will not be affirmed ; Chrift had not furc fo little refpcft
to his Flock as to appoint Wolves and Lyons to their Governors and
Cuides in matters Ecclefiaftical : nor can the former, for all in the
Church arc Brethren,have no Dominion or Authority over each others
Faith or Confcience, Luke 22. 2y.
Mr* T. replies. Though all in the Church are Brethren-, yet aUare not
tattal^ nor doth Luke 22. zj. ^rove it.
Anfw. 'Tis enough for our prefentpurpofe, that all in the Church
are thusfav equal, that being all brethren,nonc may exercifc any Rulc-
dom or Authority over the reft, without their confent, nor any fuch
Ruledom as to command in cafe of Worfliip where Chrift is filent,
which is at leaft affertcd, Lnkj 22.2^. and Mr*T. may confute it when
he is able* Of this Scripture we have fpoken at large, Chaf, 4. and of
Ronj.Yi, I. Heb. 13. 17. frequently; and have fully removed out of
the way what is here repeated touching the Laws of Rulers, and their
obligation upon Confcicnce, nor need we add more.
We fay further mS.T. jdly, // any other be Head of the Church ^ but
Chriji, then Ufhe Church the body of fame oihirs befidc Chriji ; but (his id
abfurdand falje^ not to fajiwpoui and blajpbemoui.
To
in Anjwer to Mr. T. his Exceptiont, 307
To which Mr. T. Particular Churches^ in rejpe^ of that miMlflratloH
and govcrnmettt vohlch their Governors afford, tkeWy maybe (aid to be the
todies of then Governors,
Anfw. Boldly ventured however! i. The Church is frequently faid
to be the Body of Cbrift, 1 Cor. 12.12, 27* E]>hef y. 30, 32, Col, i.
j8.
adiy, Is no where fai as our Diftatorfpeaks, is notorioufly falfe. '
I . There is not the leafl: intimation of any fuch thing in the N. T.
Nor, 2. any Language or Speech of any Headrhip over the Church,
but Chrifts, till the rife of that man of fin, who prophaned the Crown
of our Lord, by cafting it to the ground. : j • j'
3. We find not the Apoftles talking of themfelvcs at thislofty fate;
they confefs thcmfelves to be the Brethren of the SaintSj their. Ser-
vants for Chrifts fake.
4. Why talks he of Heads of the Church ? Doth the Scnpture men-
tion any more than one ? Is this the Language of Chrift or Antichrift ?
Will he make the Church a two-headed Mooftcr ; but
'••
Ofio pajfim fequertr corvum ?
I am fotry, and afhamed, th»t fo learned a Perfon as UuT. (liould
(uffer fuch trifles to drop from his Pen. '•--■--•.'
We proceed in S. T. and fay, ^thty, If any be Head of tW Church
bejide Chrljlj they either have their Head/hip from an origimlfiihf'-fme4
3 8 A Vindication of the S ober Teflimonyt
in themfelveSy or by donation from Chrlfi. To affcrt the firft, Were no
Ufs than blafphemy ; if the fecond, let them fhew when and where, and
how they came to be invefted in fuch a right, and this controveriie wili
be at an end.
To which our Animaiverter anfwerSj Their Headfhlp is by donatio>t
from Chrtfly in the f laces often allead^ed. He means, Rom. I ^ . i.Heb. 13.
17. That they rcfufc to afford (belter to this dying Caufc, we have
already manifefted.
We add <5thiy, He th4t isajferted In Scriptftre to be Bead of the Church -,
is [aid to govern^ feed) and noarljh it to eternal Life, is her Husband^
2 Cor. 1 1 . 2. In which fenfe none of the Sons of men can b^ the Head
thereof, and yet of any other Head, the Scripture is wholly filent. But
of this matter thus far. It cannot by any fober perfon b^denied, but
an owning a vifible Head over the Church, having power of miking
LawS} with rerpc(% to Worihip, (fuch an Headdiip not being of the
inftitution of Chiift) muft needs be a denyal of his Sovereign Authori-
ty and Power.
To which Mr. 7'. replies, None can be faldto be the Husband of the
Church as ChrijiiSi ortogovern^ feedy and nourifh as he^ bythe inftnenci
of his Spirit^, yet the ApoftleSy and fuch ai convert and build up Souls y may
in a qualified fenfe be jfaid foto doy aSy 1 Ther.2,7,11. the Apofile faith
of himfelf,
uinfrv* X. This is a meer Di(ftate without proof, and fo fit to be re-
jefted ; the Apoftle faith not any fuch thing, i Thef. 2. 7, 1 1.
2. He tells us not in what qualified fenfe they may be faid fo to do.
Nor, 3. doth he ihew us where any one is faid to be the Husband of
the Church befide Chrift, nor indeed can he ; fo that the Argument a-
bides firm. He that is in the Scripture faid to be the Head of the
Church, is alfo faid to be her Husband, to govern, feed and nourifli hei
to eternal Life ; but Chrift alone is, and doth fo. Therefore, —
We add, That the prefcnt Minifters do own fuch an Head{hip,is un-
deniable, witnefs their Subfciiption, Oath, Conformity in Worfhip to
Laws and Edi(^$^made and given forth by ihe fons of men as Heads.- of
the Church, which are not onely forreign to, but lift up themfelves a-
gainft the Royal Infiitutions of Chrift. This being matter of fadt, the
individuals charged herewith muft prove themfelves not guilty, or ma-
nifcft that what they do is lawful. TOefoimer being notorioufly knowa
to be true, the latter maft be infifted on.
Mr.T. anlwers, SeEl.xT.. i. He cannot juflif.e all the prtfent Mini..
Jltrs d& in their fubfcription and conformity^
Anfvf^
in Anjwer to Mr, T, his Exceptions, 309
^Anfvf, *Tis good to be ingenuous, we know he cannot,
Longa dies cltlorhrHmall tempore^ no x que
^ Tardtor Hyberna folflhialis erlt.
Nor ij there any one will compel him to more than he hath a will to;
He addf, 2. The Mlmfters may own Laws — given forth by men (m
the Governors and Heads of the Chttrch) that lift up themfelvts in oppofiii.
on againfl the InftitHtions of Chrifli and yet not deny his Kingly Office. Be-
caufe I . thi^ may be done out of weakvefs or error.
Anfvf. This is already removed out of the way. sdly, A mm may
fubfctibe, yeeld fubjct^tion to the commands of a Ufurpcr, (as fome did
xo Richard theThiid> who acknow-ledged him not to be Kino of ri^^ht,
and fome do to the Decrees of the Trent Council, or the Popes Edidsj
md yet not own his power.
Anfxv. I. This is fuch a legerdemain, fo like to thofe Jefuitical
equivocations condemned by our Proteftant Writers, that I underftand
not, nor defiie to be acquainted with.
2. By my fubfcription to the Laws mentioned, and promifing obe-
dience to fome of the formers of them,as my Reverend Fathers in God,
I avowedly own theii power, except I have learned
FaUertmiUemodiSy nee nonintexere frandes.
to ufc fuch bard dilTiasulation and treachery as an Heathen would abhor;
3. Will Mr. T. ftand by this plea, will he undertake the Minifters
of England inalldofo? If not, Why doth he multiply words tode^
ceivc the Reader j if he will, he egiegioufly fcandali^eih the King and
Bifliops, fuppoling them to be Ufurpcrs. Though he hath taken the
Oaths of Allegiance and Supremacy, he. hath not thereby manifefted
his loyalty in acknowledging him to be King of right, but oncly hath
fubmitted for peace-fake ; to what, though he Bwns not to be juR on
right, he cannot remedy. If the Laws of 7r^;;r Council, orthePopcs
Edia$rhould.bceftablillied amongft us, (which God forbid) Mr. TT
canitfeems fubfcribe to them, without owning them as jisft, or the
power impofing them ; he fccms well acquainted with the curfed carnal
Machiavellian principle of felf-intereft andprefeivation,
Cftm f Her is Rom a Romano vivlto mare.
No need of taking up the Crofs daily to fcUoiV Chiift^ to fubfcribe
JO
310 A Vindication of tie Sober Teflmonyl
to what is iippcrmoft (which we may do without cvvniog ir,or theAutho-
lity by which it is eftablidied) is better and fafer*
Wc proceed in S. T. to the amweringof fomc Objeftions that lay
in our way ; as, i. That the Headship qvpMei hj thun^ is an Head[hip ^
under Chrifi,
Towhich weAnfwcr, 1. But this HcadHiip is either of Chriftsap.
pointmcnr, 01 'tis not ; if it be, let it be (hevverj where it was inftitu-
ted by him. - — If it be not the affertion and owning of fuch an Head-
{hip, is a denyal of Chrift's Authority.
To this Mr. T. replies, Se^. 13. The tiarWy Head of the Churchy is
nottifedintkeOaih of Suprepjacy^ {t)ci\s WC have already anfwcrcd in
this Se^. and need not fay more) bnt Supream Cevernonr : And this is
fi^reeahle to Kcm.i^. J. 2Tim.a. 2. iPet.2.13.
Anfw, By Suprcam Governour over the Church of Chrift, is meant
one that hath power feated in him for the prefcribing Rules in things
undetermined ( as Mr. T. grants ) thecftiblifhing of Laws, Inftituti-
ons not of the appointment of Chrift (^contrary thereunto ) who is the
Fountain of all Ecclefiaftical Jurifdi^tion and Church- Politic. That
Mr. 7. fees fuch a Supream Governour to be agreeable to the Scrip-
tures produced by him,muft be imputed to that acutenefs of his where-
by he may be fuppofed to tranfcend the reft of his Neighbours,
Jliefolfd fapienSf reliqui vdttt umbra vagantnr.
Of Rom. 13. I. we have already fpoken. Though the Church be com-
prized under every foul, yet it doth not follow that Magiftratesare the
Heads, or fuch Supream Governonrs of the Church as are invcftcd with
power for the eftablidiing and inftituting of parts of Woifbip, or com-
manding them in any thing relating to Worlhip, as fuch ; of which the
Apoftlc fpeaks not a tittte in that place. Civil fubjeftion as fubje^ls of
the Empire, is the utmoft can rationally from thence be argued for.
Thofe that vvere then Rulers and Governours, were fuch as Nero^ Do-
mitiany ■ who per (ecu ted the Church, defign'd to root the Wor-
ship of Chrift out of the worldjwere Idolatersj eftablifhed by force and
violence an Heathenifli Idolatrous Worfhip, whom Chrift never in-
tended to intruft with any fuch power : vvhich is a fufficient anfvver to
I Pet, 2. 13. which is exponed by our Amotat. Of Civil Government.
I Tim. 2. 2. is impertinently cited, That becaufe the Apoftle there ty.-
hoits thit Prayers he made for Kings, — therefore they have Ecclefi-
aftical Pow^r and Soveraignty committed to them over the Churches of
Chrift, is a confequcnce that the very reciting of is confutation fuffici-
cnt.
in Anfmr to Mr. T. his Exceptmr] ■ 5 u
ent. Wbcniafcribe (aj he talks) as much power to the Church as he
doth to the King and Billiopj, I know nou That I ftould make the
Church the Head of the Church (which is downright nomcnfc ) is not
probable. For thepiefcnt I muft crave Jeavetotell him he is utterly
-^ miftaken.I afcribc no pow^r of inventing Rites and Ceremonies devi-
fing Laws and Conftitutions of their own, relating to Woifliip, as fuch
to any one Church or Churches in the World. 1 challenge him to mtke
good his affeition. 1 difpute againrt it as well as I can in S. T Chap, c^
fag. 41, 42. Whatever power I afcribe to the Church, 'tis only fuch as
Chrift hath entrufted her with; that this (houldbsas much a denial of
Chrift's Kingly Office, as the afcription of a power over the Churches of
Chrift, to any to whom he hath not committed fuch a power Mr. T,
will not in hart be able to prove. '
We further reply in S.T. idly. Th Headjhlp pleaded for i>; the Chttrch
•/ %0Tne is no other, viz. tha^t a Head-Jhip under Chrifl.
To this Mr. T. i. I grant the Church of Rome pleads for no other Head,
(hip. But 2. Theyufurpe a power in fame refpeas /nperioHr to Chrifl, in
their djfpenfing with the keeping of Uwfnl Oaths, aUorving of Inceflnom
Marriages.
Anfvo. And the fame may be faid of the Heads of the Church of £>igm
land. I fuppofe this Anintddvert er may be yet of the mind that the Oath
of the Solemn Leagtte and Covenant was a lawful Oath ; yet that can be
difpenfed with. Marriages prohibited — are not feldom allowed of
by their Ecclefiaftical jurifdidion.
We add ^dly, 'Tis not fo as is pretended j they own an Headfhip that i*
not in all things [uhordinate to C^^^'h having a Law making and a Law.
giving? oroer toHchlnglnflitut'tons of Worfhip^that never came into his heart
are flatly againfl his appointments., oa ha\b been proved.
We add in S^ T. 4'-hly, One Head inftthordlKationto another, doth ai
really make the Body a Monfier^oi two Heads conjoyrtcd.
To this Mr. 7*. The terms Head and Body^ be rg ufed only Metaphori-
cally, there's no more Monflrofl'y in making a Head nndsr a Head, than in
making a Covernour under a Gevernoftr, .
Asfw. I. ^hould it be granted there were no Monflrofity in the thing
^^P^fi yet there is in the exprclTion in the Tide j an argument it w^s
never from the Spirit of the L^rd.
2. B;r«4ri/ is of another mind ; Thou mak^fl a tJHonffer, faith he, //
removing the hand, thou makefl the Finger to ha
Piinciples of State-polity, which a Head under a Head in the Church
hath ; becaufe diffonantjcontrary to the Law and Scvcraignty of Chrift
itsSjpream Indepcndant and alone Head.
A fecond Ohjthlon is in S. T. thus propofed by us. That the Kifjgs of
Jfrael vi^ere the Heads faccefvely of the then Churchy and therefore a vijihlc
Headfjip over the Churches ofChrljl in the New Tejiament U IopoJhI,
To which we Anfwer^ i. That betwixt the Oeconomy of the Law and
Gofpcl, there is a vaft difproportion j many things were of old lawful,
which now to pra(ftice were no lefs than a denial of Chrift come in the
2. The Kings of Ifrael were Types of Chrift ; which (notwithftand-
ing Mr. T. di6lates that it is falfly and vainly affertcd, St^. 14* ) till
heprove the contrary, we take for truths. What he fpeaks with refe-
rence to the Kings of Ifrael and England^ we are unconcerned in. That
ths Rulers of the fevfs or any other Nations had, dejurej any fuch Do-
minion or Power over their Subjects as to make Laws, introduce Con-
ftitutions of their own framing, in matters relating to Worftiip, and
compel them by force and violence to fubjed thereunto,Mr. T. hach not
proved. Ifa. 44. 28. Is a Prophefieofthe Liberty the Jf»'j{hould ob-
tain under Cyrus to go up to Jernfalem to build the Temple ; of the ful-
filling whereof you have an account, Sz^ra. i^ i, 2, 3. But not a tittle
of his Dominion about things facred, or introducing Conftitutions re-
lating to their Worlliip as luch ; or compelling any to go up to Jerufa^
lem^is there mentioned. He only removes the Babylonian^oYt that was
upon them, and fets them at liberty to build the Temple of the Lord — •
( which the Kings before him would not grant them to do ) and Wor-
i¥ip him according to his own appointments, //<«. 4^. i. is imperti-
nently alledged, relating only to the Vi(^orie$ and Conquefts the Lord
would afford unto Cyrtu over the Cities and Nations of the World,
Jonah ^.7y 8. gives us an account of a Decree publiftied by order of
I he King, for a folemnization of a Faft, and to turn from impiety ; but
this comes (hort of the proof of the Headfhip argued for, which is an
Heidlliip, having power of making and giving forth Laws touching Tn-
ftltutions
in Anfwer to Mr. T. his Exceptions. ■ j j ,
ftituiions of Worftiip, Orders^ Rites, &c. tbit never entred into the
heart of Chritt ; the judicious Reader will cafily, from what we have al-
ready offered, difcern the impcrtincocy of Ex.ra 6. 7. and 7. 13. Dan.
^.29. And 6. 2.6. totheprcfent defign.
'Tistrue, as he faith, Chrijiiamtj alters not civil Relations orEftateSy
I Cor. 7. 24* And 'tis as true, that if in the time of my infidelity, I have
been thefervant of men that are my Political Matters, with relpc6t to
Woifhip, though I am, whilft I continue their fervant,to perform faith-
ful fervice to them,with refpccft tothingsCiviljyet am I not to own them
or fubjeft to them as my Lords & Governours,with refped to the Ser-
vice of God 'y therein one only being my Lord and Msfter, viz.- Chiift.
2. I fay not that all the Kings of//r<«f/ were Types of Chrirt,but that
the Kings of //r<«r/ were fo, ». e. fomeofihem; nor do I reftrain the
word I[rAcl to the ten Tribesj but to the twelve, headed by David So.
kmon^ a pair of eminent Types of the Mefliah,
That Chrift and the Apoliles yeeldcd fubjcAion to Civil Powers with
refped to things facred ( of which this Ammadverter muft fpeak, or he
fpeaks impertinently ) is a grofs miftakc unworthy fo learned a pcrfcn.
We fay in S. T. ^dlj^, That the Kings ef Ifiael were Heads of the
Church i£ falfe, God woi its alone Head and King. Hence their Hiftorian
faith, Their Government was QeeKfcttU. And when they would needs
choofc a King, God faid, They reje^ed him ; to whom even as to their
Political Head, a Shekel was paid yearly as a Tribute, called the Shekel
9f the SanElnarj. True indeed as they wcre-a Political Body , they had
vifible Political Governours, but that thefe had any Headihip
over them, to make any Laws, introduce Conftitutions of their own
framing, in matters relating to WorQiip, will never be proved.
To which Mf.T. replies, i. Th^t the Church of Ifrael re oi different
from the Kingdom of Ifrael is one of the proper opinions of thofe who would
eflabllfh from that example an Ecclefiaftlcal Independent Government iri the
Chnrchi dljlinElfrom the Civil Government of.tht State,
Anfw, I. 'Tis no matter whofe opinion 'tis ; if Truth, it ought to be
imbraced.
^ 2., That there is a real and formal diftiniftion betwixt the two Socie-
ties, Church and Common-wealth, is It large proved by feveral. Aj
Mr. Gillefpy in his Aarons Rod Blojfoming, b,i,c. i. The Affernbly ia
their Jtu Dlvlnnm. Hear their Rcafons, p. 88, Sp.
ift. The Society of the Church ia only Chrl/i's and not the Civil Magi.
flratesy its his Houfe^ and he hath no Ficar under him {as is abun.
dmly proved by Mr, Rutherford, in bii Divine Right of Church-Go-
R X vcrnmcnt.
31*4 ^ Vindication of the Sober Tef^imofiy^
vernmcDt, Chap, 2.7. Q^ 2^ Pag. jpy, to 6^7.)
2dlyj The Officers Ecclcfiiftical are Chrift's Officers, notthcMi-
o'lftratcs, I Cor, 4. i. Efhe[. 4. 8, 10, 11. i Cor. 12. 28.
3dly, Thefc Officers are cleded and ordained by the Church with-
out ComtnilTioa from the Civil Magiftrite, by virtue of Chritts Ordi-
nance, and in his Name, A^s 6, 3, 4, mth 14. 230 iTim. 4. 14.
with yiUs 1^. 1,2, 3,4,
4thlyj The Church meets not as Civil Judicatories, for Civil A^s
ofGovernmentj — but as SpiritaalAflembles, forfuchasarc fpiritu-
al, vlxj. Pleaching. —
jthly, Should not thefc two Societies be acknowledged to be ically
and effentially dirtinilfroin one another, feveral grofsabfurdities would
follow: As, I, Then there can be no Common-wealth where there
is not a Church ; but this is contrary to all experience : Heathens have
Common-wealths, yet no Churcho 2. Then there may be Church-
Officers ele<^ed where there is no Church, feeing there are Magiftratcs
where there is no Church. .3- Then thofc Magiftrates whcrethercif
no Church are no Magiftrates. — And if fo then the Church if thcfor-
mil conftituting Caufe of Magiftrates. 4. Then the Common-wealth
as the Common>wealth> is the Church ; and the Church as the Church,
is the Common-wealth. — y. Then all that are Members of the
Common-wealthj are, beeaufe fo, Members of the Church. 6, Then
the Common-wealth being formally the fame with the Church, is, as
Common-wealth, the Myfticil Body of Chrift. 7. Then the Officers
of the Church are the Officers of the Common-wealth, the power of
the Keys gives them right to the Civil Sword, and confequently the
Minlftcrs of the Gofpcl, as fuch, arc Jaftices of the peace. — All which
how abfurd let the world judge.
He adds, 2dl y. That Solomon aKd other Kings did exercifc poi»er over
Ecclejiafiical perfons « evident^ becauft he defofed Abiathar.
AKfvf* I. Who denies it? How this proves the power of the Kings
cf Ifraelyis Heads of the Church, to innovate in Worfliip ( which is the
ihing to be proved ) I know nor.
Hie /akory hoc opm eFt,
AndMr.T. hath more wit than fcrioufly to attempt it. a. Solomon
^t^oitAAfiathar not as Blih PontlfseyOi Head of the Church, for male
adminiftration in Church-atfairs, but as King of Ifrael for treafon a-
g^inft theCommon-wcaUh> in thebulincfsof -^<»p. i.SeSl. xo.
The ift Char*der we mention iiyThat they run before they arefentJzT*
23.21* That a Mijfionfrom the Lord ia of the Ejfence of a lavoful Mintjiry,
That whoever wants fuch a Miffion ii no Officer ofChri^y but a falfe Pro-
phet and Mini ft er of Antic hri/iy may hence by way of Analogy be deduced is
tvident : Which alfoexaaiy accords with what is affcrted by the Apo-
ftlc, ^£?/». lo. ij. That the pvefent Minifters of £»^/<<» TotheQjeries he anfw^rs, The Inflitmion of Preachingthe
Cofpelthey have not mixed with their own inventions.
Anfw, Blu this they evidently do, whilli none muft bs allowed to
Preach
in Anfrver to Mr, T. his Exceptimr] ; i p
preichthcGofpel, butfuch as fubjedl to Epifcopal Ordination, pro-
mifc Canonical Obedience to thcii Ordinaries, obfervc the Regulati-
ons for Pleaching given forth by the Pope of Canterhry^thty are bound
to omit the preaching of the Gofpel when they have not time to
Preach, and read Service too. Wherein Divine Inflitution mui\ give
place to humane inventions : In Baptifm, he will tell yoa, they mix
an Inftituiion of Chrift*$ with the inventions of man, in refpc3: of the
wrong Subject, and they evidently do fo whilll they /^« with the fign
of the Crofs, and make it fuch an eflcntial part of Baptifm, that it ij
not lawful to be omitted. The Inflitution of the Lord's Supper they
mix with that Popifli humane invention of knee/ing in the A^ of re«
ceiving, which they conftitute fuch a necelTary part thereof, that they
will not admit any to receive in any other pofture. —
Tothefecond, viz, From how many have they gone a whoring f He
anfwers, it concerns him that accufcth, to lliew.
Anjw, And that concern I difpatched, chap. 4. of S. T.
To the third, viz. Is not a great pan of their fVor/hip, drops of ths
H'hores cup of Fornication ? —
Mr. T, though he multiply many words, anfweri not at all, not un«
dcrftanding, or being willingly ignorant of my intendment in thofe
exprefltons, which was folely this, that their Divine Service, wherein
a great part of their Worfhip doth confift, is for the moft part taken out
of the Setvice-Book of ^o^g^ which Mr. T, may difprove if he can,
A third CharaBer of falfe 'Prophets^ mentioned Jet, 2-5.13. A fourth^
Jcr. 6. 14. &c. h fifth} Ifa, ^6, 11. &;c, fi'hich exa^ly agree to the^
prefent Mmjlers,
THE third Ghara^^er of a falfe prophet, mentioned in S. T. is this.
That they jirengthen the hands of evil doers^ that none doth retur/$-
from his rvickednefs^ Jer. 23. 13. This it's faid the prefent Miailter*:
do, whilfl th^iigh in the general they dcnounccihe judgments of God
againfl (inners^ they Saint them in the Chancel, tell them that the bo«
dy of Chrift was broken for fhcm. —
Towhichoor Animadvertet fubjoyns, SeB. 4. i* Mr. Catakers'^i^
Mphrafe upon the Text i5, Th^.t they confirmed them in their wiokjdKefs^
hy bearing them in hand that they fhoulddo well e»oi*gh whatfoevir Gods
Mejfengers telltbem^ though they sontinHein their fins.
520 ^ Vindication of the Sober Te^imonyy
Aufvp. T. The (in laid to their charge, is fticngthcning the hands of
evildoers, whether they did this ptaiiically or dod^rinaljy, isnotex-
preCcd, 'tis all one. Probably they told thetn, they were the holy
People, the true Church, had his Temple and Ordinances with and
amongil ihcm, and therefore God could not rejstf^, deftroy them, not-
Withftanding the Prophefie of Jeremiah to the contrary, whom they re-
viled as a made feditious fellow, thereby labouring to take off the peo-
ple from an attendance on the Prophefie, and threatnings given forth
by him. This we charge the prefent Minifters to be guilty of, as the
holy People, and Church of God, they admit the vifibly prophane and
wicked to the Lords Table, and their Children to Baptifm ; bury them
as holy Brethren (whom they call fo, not upon the account of Creati-
on, but Chriftianity (which their converfations contradict) and Church-
membeirtiip with them) though they die in the veryadt of drunken-
nefs — of whofe joyfttl refurreUion to eterml Life, they profefs they have
a. fnre and, certain hope^ (which can be referred to no other bat the per-
fon interred) they afpcrfe, reproach thofe who would deal truly and
loundly with them, as feditious mad perfons that are fit for the Stock?,
Prifons, Dungeons, whereby they evidently ftrengthen their hands in
their wickedncfs.
2. It is not true, that thefalfe Prophets told them exprcfly that they
ftiould do well enough, though they continued in their fins ; they flat-
tered them with the mercy and patience of God, the priviledges and
immunities he had crowned them with, by which they lead them into
the belief of this, that God would not rejcd them.
3. The Aifembly in their ^»«(7f<«fAW, explain the Phrafe of flrerjgtb*
ening the hands of evil doers^ with this, they confirm them in thtir wlck.ed^
Kefsy and fo kjcf them from kefentance^ Ezck. 13. 22. Which by the
Waycs and means inftanced in, 'tis known the prefeat Miniftets do.
4» 'TisnotcW/f;, as he intimates, to fay to a known Druiskard,
Swearer, that the body of Chrift was broken, the blood of Chrift fibed
i >t him, that he fhould take, and eat, and drink the Bread and Wine in
t m-imbrance that Chrift died for him ,* hut^r«r/7,tending to the nou-
nfiiment of falfe peace and confidence, to the ruine of millions o£
Souls. If Judas was at the Sacrament,he was a vifible Saint,is no War-
tant to adminitter it to perfons of the complexion intimated. The ex-
preflfions above mentioned, are not at all like thofe ufed by the Apo-
ftle, I Cor, 8. II. Heb, 10. 29. He fpeaks of vifibly Saints thefe are
fpoken of, and to the vifible wicked and prophane.
y , That thefc things do not confirm and iircngthen the hands of evil
docif
in Anfwer to Mr, T. his Exceptiom, ' 321
doers, was the alone thing to have been proved by our Animadvertcr,
but to that he fpeaks not at all.
What he further mentions, is a pretended reply to what is remarked
■touching the Minifters of England, that it is a rare thing to hear of one
Soul that is brought over to Uod by all their Preaching ; fo that vif.bly
that Judgment of Godfeems to be upon them, Jfr.23. 32. Therefore
they jhall not At all profit this people.
He tells us, That the Prophets^ Ifa.4p.4. (he Qiould have faid
Chrlfi^ for the Prophet there perfonates Chrift) & yj. i. andChriJi
John 1 2. 3 7, 3 8. had the fame fuccefs,
Afnvf. Falfe and untvue : that they had not that fuccefs as was defi-
lable is truej that it was rare to hear of one foul converted by them,oui
Animadverter cannot prove.
What he cites from Mr. Kobbinfon^ is directly againft what it is the
good pleafure of Mt. T, to plead for, he faith, The Miniflers that con^
vert Souls may be faid to be fent of ^od.
We affirm that this is rarely (if at all) found to be the attcndmcnt
of the prefent Minifters preaching, and all that know any thing, know
it to be true. Not indeed do I know how upon their Principles they
can preach the Doctrine of Convcrfion, when they reckon and ac-
count all thofe to whom they preach to be Church-Members, /. e. fuch
as are converted already, for of fuch only is the Kingdom of Heaven,
or Gofpel-Church-State, John 3.
A fourth Char after of falle Prophets inftanccd in is, That they pro-
phefte pUcentlay fmooth things, according to the dcfires, tempers, and
luftsofmen, to thepleafingof whomthey addid thcmlelves, Jer.6^
14. &27. 9. Ez^ek, 13. i°-> II. This it's faid the prefent Minifterj
have been, are guilty of ; which whilft they do, they cannot be the Ser-
vants of Chrift, Gal. i. 10.
In anfwer to which . Mr. T. tells us, ScU. 5-. what Mr. Gataker faith
upon Jer. 6. 14. which is not at all oppolite to what is affirmed by us,
cor is that which is afterward added by himfelf : let it be granted that
the falfe prophets told them that they fhould not ferve the King of 5(<-
byloM^ that alWliouldbe vvelljnotwithftanding what Gods Prophets told
them, the falfe prophets knew thefc things would pleafe the people,
and therefore they gave them forth. And this is called, Ezek. i ?• io»
II. Daub'iKgyolthHKtemperedmorter. Upon which Scripture Mr. Grf*«-
ib«7 obferves, that it's a clear Argument of a blind and falfe Teacher, to
fpeak things anfweiable to the humours and conuotions of men. This
Sf ' Mr.
J 22, A Vindication of tie Sober Tejiimonyl
Mr. T. tttempts cot to difpiove- That theMiniftcis of £«^/
Beaji^ Rev. 13- an<^ M^ prophet^ Rev. ip. are the fame, proved^
THE fixth Chara£ler of falfe Prophets inftanccd in, is this, That
they faiden the hearts of the RighteouSy Ezek. 13.22. This We
fay they do b^ prophaniog the Name and Ordinances of God, by thcic
fubjeain*' to the ceremonies and inventions of men.
To whfch Mr. T. adjoyns, 'Tis granted^ that fadn'wgthe hearts of the
R]ghteomhjlicsy is aCharaUerof a falfe prophet^ bm the Amhor omits
^ A4rv That by lies is meant the inventions of men introduced inro
theWotWo of God, wc have already manifcftsdi that by their fup-
'' ^ ^ ^ S f 2 porting
5 24 [AFmdkationof the SolerTeftimony^
porting of, fubjcftion hereunto,. they make the hents of the RighteouS"
fid,weaffi-m, (and 'tis generally known ^330 felt amoogrt fucb whofs
hcaxts th^ Lord hath made tender) ; 50 iha: till l/U. T proves that by
lies is not meant devices of their own, they havi: by his confcfllon the
charailct of falfe prophets upon theni : Whi h \-aders his heap of per-
hapTes and ccnjedurcs, frivolous. The dirt he t arts, upon the Churches
ofChrift, he will one day find will rather tend to his own difparage-
ment than theirs, and that herein he hath reproached the Tibeinacles
of God. Till he prove that the Paftors of the Congregational Churches
have by introducing, pradifmg humane devices (and fuch as have been
abufed in the Papacy) in the Wotfhip of God made the hearts of tht
Righteous fad, which 'tis univerfally known they have not done, he
will acknowledge that his reflection upon them is impertinent, and not
at all to his purpofc. All that he hath as yet faid, amounts not to the
leaft mite of proof, cannot at all be called fo.
That the infinuations of the Author of S, T. againft the Miniftcrs of
EnqUni^ would have proved the Teachers of the beft Churches in
the Primitive times to have been falfe Piophets,i$ untruly faid. Thefe
made not tnc hearts of the Righteous fad, by prophaning the Ordinan-
ces of Chrifij introducing fubje6lion to the inventions of men j which
is known to be true of the prefent Minifters.
. The feventh Character mentiond, is, That they mix the fVord of Coi
with their Dreamsy ]q^.^^.2j^ 29, -
The anfwer Mr- T. intimates, Se^. 7. that he hath given to this be-
fore, is already replied to.
We add Sthly, as an eighth Charafter of falfe prophets. That they
come in Sheets clothings havmgthe Boms of a. Lamb ^ bm are inveardly
ravenincrWolveSy and, fpe^k ^'^h T)ragons, (i, e. pretend to the holinefs
andmecknefsof Chritt, and Saints, but are inwardly full of raven and
cruelty, yea^ terrible in their Edias and Laws, ftiriing up, and ma-
kin^' ufe of the powers of the World to perfecute, kill, and deftroy the
Saints) Mat..?, if. %ev. 13. 11. (which fccond Beaft is no other
thanthefalfeprophet mentioned iJfZ'. I?. 20.) This Gharaaet, we
fay, isuponthcptefentMiniilets ; Upon this Generation of men, all
the cruelties that the fiill Beaft hath cxercifed upon the Siints for thefe
^^6o. years, is to be charged : They now prefs a rigid conformity to
the infringing the liberty - of the Saints.
Mr. 7. replies. 1. Omw^ird hoUnefs ar.d mssh^efs^ imvard ravenofuy
And cruelty^ is not aftgr.al CharaUer of falfe frophets.
Jnfvv, Chiiftlaitnitisj and 'tis tit we believe him before Mr. T,
fos
in Anfwer to Mr, T, lu Exception:] 525'
for having cautioned his Difciples to beware of them, he telis them ia
whatmannerthcyvyill corns to them; what is their fignal chiraa^i
and property : Thtj mil come to you in Sheep, clothing- (which the Apo-
ftle phrafcth they fhall be trmsfonned as the Minifters of Righte-
oufnefs, 2 Cor. 11. 15'.) bntinvot^r^ly they are ravening fVolves ; which
if not their chira6lcr and property, had in vain and to no purpofe been
mentioned by Chrift.
The fecond Bcaft-, and the falfe prophet, l^^v. ip. 20. we fay, are
the fame ; by it is underftood Antichrift in his Ecclefiaftical State, or
the Antichriftian Clergy; their charader is, Rev. i^. 11. Thitthey
havetheHornsof a Lamh, (and outward femblance to the meekeftof
Lambs, the Lord Jefus) but fyeak, Uh Dragons ; are cruel in their E-
di(Sks and Laws. Doth Mr.T. difprove what is herein affirmed by us ?
dpth he attempt it ? nothing lefs !
He confidently tells us, that this did not Jheiv them falfe prophets,
Anfrv. But this is made the charadcr of the fecond Bciatt, which ij
no other than the falfe prophet, as fay Mede^ Brtghtman, — And there-
fore what fhews them to be the fecond Beaft, fluvvs them to be falfe
prophets. Which if Mr. T. will confute, he muft prove the fecond
Bcaft, iJ^z/. 13. and falfe Prophet, Rev,ip. not to be one and the fame.
Which it's manifctt they arc, by a ferious comparing what is faid of the
fecond Beaft, Rev. 13, ij, 14, ly, 16, with what is faid of the falfe
Prophet, Rev, ip, 2.0.
I. The fecond BealHs * worker of miracles. Rev, 13. 17. fo is the
falfe Prophetj^^z/.ip. 20.
2dly, The fecond B^aft deceives them that dwell on the EmhiRev^ -
13 .14. fo doth the falfe Vropbtt,ReV'i9.2o.
5dly, The firll and fecond B^aft are helpful one to the other, Rev.
13. fo are the Beaft and falfe Prophet) ^(fx/. 15). 1 9,20.
As to what follows, i. I fay not that all the perfecutions —of the
Children of God, that the Antichriftian Civil State, or powers of the
World hath exercifed, is to b; charged upon the prefent Hierarchy and
Miniflry oi England, but upon this Gencraticri j i.e. Perfons that have
appertained^p the fame Hierarchy. Yet, 2. whilft the prefent Hie-
rarchy and Priefts of England are (as 'tis known they are prefling rigid
Conformity to the ruining (as to the outward man) of the Saints, arc
walking in the fteps of their Progenitors, they entitle themfelves to all
the blood of the Martyrs of Jefus, that by the perf.vafions of thofc that
pofleffed the fame Seats before them, was- poured forth by the Civil;
Powers of the Woildj that upon them may come (as it will undoubtedly
2 2 c '^ Vifidkation of tie S ober Tefltmony]
do, if they repent not) all the blood that was flied from the beginning
to*this very day. A manifeft demonftration that the Lineaments of
the fecond Beall, oi falfe Piophet/is vifiblyto be read and found upon
them.
SeEl. 4.
A 9th, loth.iithf i2th, i^thf H^b, iph CharaBer of falfe Prophets^
each aj)plicable to the prefent Mimjiers. Ezek. 22. 2<5. & 34. 4. ex^
flalnei. Scclejiaflical Shepherds there meant. Rev* 13. 11. ex.
plained. Of the ob^£mtj of the Revelation* Rev. 13. 13, 14, 15-,
opened,
THE ninth Chara(B:cr of falfe Prophets mentioned, is, Thatthef
put no difference betwixt the holy and prophaney L.zek. 22. 2d, Of
this the prefent Minifterj (we fay) ate deeply guii:y. Drunkards,
Swearers, — (fiving and dead) arc their dear B?uthren and Sifters;
i. e. the children of them all ate admitted to thei^ont, and they them-
felves to the Lord's Table. — •
Our Animadvcrtcr replies, x. T his i^ a charge agalnjl the Priefls of
the LarVy accufing them of negleBing to dlfcern between clean and unclean
perfonsy or ojferings, hut is no charalisr dijllngulfhing a falfe Priefi from
a true.
Anfjv. Whether it be> or not, let the Reader fatisfie himfelf from
the ferious* review of the words, compared with Jer. ij, ip, Ez,ekf
44.23.
Hcvvever, 2. This is nothing (faith he) to our Mmtjiersy who are
not now to count any wan or creature ^ common or uncle an^ h&.S 10, 15*.
28.
^nfiv. I. That the Lord hath not as great care that his New-Tc-
ftamcnt Churches be not polluted by the admilTion into them of per-
fons morally unclean, as that the Saniftuary and Congregation oUfrael
cf old Wis not by the entrance thereinto of pcrfons legally fo, is this
Animadverters di<^ate, of which we expert his proof at his leifure*
In allufion to the Pricftsof old, the Porters, or Ncw-Tcftairent Offi-
cers, are commanded to watch, Mark^i^. ^4.. ('z'/x,. that as much as
in them lies, they hinder pcrfons morally unclean trom cntring into
Gofpcl-Churches.)
2. He tells us. That jione but Saints are to be admitted there-
into*
3* Threatens
in Anfrver toT^fr.T, his Exceptions], ^ ' 327
. Y* Threatens thofe Minifters that fhall be carelcfs, and negligent in
this matter, with a depofitionfrotn their O^ct^ £^^1^.44. A P.cphe-
fic, though in Old Tcftament-clothing, cxprcfly relating to New Tefta-
ment aayes ; as is acknovvicdged by oioft. And to any that iliall com-
pire what is there rpoken,wich what is recorded of ihtN^ViJerHfaUm,
Rev. 20, 21, 22. Chap, 'twill manifcftly appear fo to do.
4. y4t^j2o. 28. is moft impertinently alledged, and wretchedly a-
hn'it^h^ t^Q, Anlmaiv en cr. It only pteacheth forth thus much, That
the Gentile Nations were not To unclc-an ( as the Jews fondly ioiagined)
but that perfons might go unto them, and preach the Gofpcl amonglt
them, isverf. 28, 2p, 34, evince. But that Adulterers:, Drunk^rds^ — .
ftiould not be accounted unclean and common, fo as not to admit them
intaGharch-Gommumon,br if admitted)that'they ought not legslly to
be eje6led5 Mr* T". attempts not the proof of. The Scriptures fully ma-
nifeft that they ought fo to be. Whether every fingle Miniikrhath
power to keep any profefiTing the Faith,from theLoids Supper, is not o£
our prcfcntdifquifitioQ; if Minifters of Chiift, they with the particu-
lar Church to which they relate have power fo to do. The conftant pva^.
&\cz of the prefent Minifters in admitting the viiibly wicked and pro-
phane to the participation of Church-Ordinances and Pr-iviledge??, is t.
manifcft difcovcry, that they fymbolize with the Piicfts of Old, oS
whom the complaint of the Lord i^. That they fnt m difference htm'x^
the holy and prophane.
The lo^'^Chavader of falfeFrophcts inftanc't in, is this, that the/
do not exerclfe pity to the weak, broken, fcattered fheepof Chridjnor-
(hew bowels in their recovery, but with force and cruelty rule over
them, Ez.el{. 34. 4. This we fay is evidently true of the prefent Mini-
fters, with force and cruelty they rule over u?, ( in ftead of exerci/in^j
pity towards us ) threaten us with Excommunications, Imprifoninent,
difpoilingns of our Goods, yea condemning us to Death, if we ftoop
not to thsir lure.
All that can be called an Anfwer hereunto 5f5?, 9. is th's. i. Tl:^
Shepherds mentioned in Ezek. 34. <»''^ Civil Rnlers^ for the prophets did
not rnle over tJte People with force and cruelty, but with lies and deceit,
Anftv, 1. JuniptSy the Marginal Notes of the ^enevaT^2ir\{\iiior3^.
JDiodati^ x\\tAjf€mUy in their Annotations on the place, the moft of In-
terpreters exponnd it of falfe Ecclefiaftical Shepherds or Minifters.That:
this is the intendment of the Spirit of the Lord is evident..
sft, He fpeaks of fuch Shepherds whofe fpecial duty it is to fvjed the:
flock,the neglcd whereof he condemns them for, v.2,3. But this is the-
12% A Vlnduation w/ tie S oher Teflmony]
^uty of Ecclefiaftical Shepherds, 0»f.i.8 John 21^ iJjK^, 17, 1 CorJ
2diy, They are condemned for ruling over them with force and
cruelty , vcrf. 4. The like condemned in Ecclefiaftical Rulers, i Fct,
3d!y, Its a Prophefie that runs down to the times of the Gofpcl, and
fpcaks of fuch Shepherds, in oppofiiion to vvhomChrift i$ ftid to be the
true Shepherd, verf. 23, 24. John 10. 11 3 12, 14.
The Reafon alledged by Mr.T. to prove Civil Rulers are here meant,
b.ing weighed in the Ballancc^is found wanting. They may righteoufly
be faid to rule over the flock of God with force and cruelty, when they
provoke the Magiftrate to do fo : as the Woman or Antichriftian
Church is faid to be drunk with the blood of the Saints, 'F^ev. 17.6,
A^d In her:, 'tis faid, wof fomd the blood of all that were Jlain upon the
tmh, Rev. 1 8. 24. becaufe (he prompted and provoked the Civil Ma-
gilhate to pour it forth.
That the prefent Mlnlfters of En^hnd are not righteoHp,y charged rvith
rnllng over us with force and cruelty he faith not, thinkj there are [owe
to whom this evil may h imputed.
'Tis added in S. T. f^hat fhonld I mention^ ijthly, that they come Hf
em of the Earthy Rev. 13. ii. ». e. are raifed upby men of earthly fpi-
lits and principles.
To this, after an harangue of words, SeB. 10. that I might leave him
upon fecond thoughts to corre«5thimfclf for. As ift. That the Book.of
the Revelation is obfcuTe ; which in it felf is not,but a Lanthorn, a Light.
' Tis a horiid difparagcment to any part of the Sciipture fo to fpeak of it.
The Sun is not dark, though blind men difcern not the light and bright-
nefs of it : The cbfcurity is in us, not in the Scripture.
2. 7 hat fober men have rvifhed it were lefs read. Which wi(h (what-
ever the men are) I am Cure is not over fober, being diredly oppofite
to the advice of the Spirit, for the reading of it with an encouragement
thereunto, ^^t/. I. 3.
Ke anfwers, i . That thefirft and fecond Beafl^ Rev. ip . are differently
conceived, ■
Anfw. Who thefirft and fecond Beaft ate, we have already explain-
ed, which Mr. T. may confute when he is able. That the fecond Beaft
and thcfalfe Prophet, Rev. 19, are the fame, we have but nowdemon-
ftrated. The Hierarchy of England zn&%ome are the fame Antichrifti-
an Hierarchy, their Original the fame ; the Canon Laws, by which
their Jaiifdi'dion is fupported, their Courts, Officers, &c, the fame.
. in Anfwer to Mr. T. lis Exceptions. ' ^ 2^
He further tcqu tint J u$, 2dly, mth horrU c on fe queue et that attend
this Princiflcy that the feconiBeaflis to be interfretei the Hierarchy ani
i^imfirji of En^Und,
1. The fiift we own with this limitation ; The fiift Bcaft is the An-
tichiiftitnCivil Powers, who if at the coming of Chiift are found fuch,
and in a(^ual rebellion againft him, Jhall be caft into the Lakjt bttrmn^
withfirei.
2. The fecondjibout worfliiping the firft Beaft (if underftood of the
Po;)?>ashcfaith) may be truly affirmed of the prefent Hierarchy, who
caufe the Earth and them that dwell therein fo to do, whilft they caufc
themtooivn, bow down, fubjed to his Canon- Laws in theit ConfiRo-
rie?, Ecclefiaftical Courts. —
^ 3dly, That all who fubjea to the Image of the Beaft, or Ecclefiafti-
cal Government, j^rftf drink of the Wine of the wrath of God. — ■ Without
general or particular repentance, being no more than this, That thofe
that die in any one Cm unrcpented of (hall do fo (as Mr.T.will grant)
we affiim; and challenge Mr. T. to prove thefe things to be horrid con-
fequences, monftroufly uncharitablc,an argument of dotage,the fpeech
of a furious Bedlam.
Sir, you will one day know that your tongue is not fo your own> but
7 you murt give an account of thefe hard fpeeches with which you arc
beating youc fcllow-fervants ; I pray may not be hid to your charge*
He asks, ^dly^Hovo doth it appear that to come out of the Earthy « to be
raifed by men of earthly Spirits and Principles ?
Knfw, I. That the word £ that men o£
fuch Spirics and Principles have elev,ated them to the ftate and dignity
to which they arc afcended. Which is a full anfwer to his fecond
Query.
The 1 2th Charaifter minded is, That they exercife the power ofthefrji
Beafi yor make fife of the Civil Povper for their fuppgrtmenti vcif. 13.
T t ' ' Mr,'
^30 [A Ftfidi cation of the Sober Tejlmonyl
M. T. icpties, To exerclje thepoifer of the J^eafi u »o. to make ufe of the
Civil Tovferf&r Itsfupport^ hat to ad: mth the fame Pomrths prft Beafi ufed;
in TffaksMgrvar jvith the Saints.
An[xv. I. The Power the iirft Buaft ufed is the Civil ^oWefr, it was
the fame Power the Dragony ot Devil mzdc ufe of in the Rdnta^e^ P^gan
Emperors, Rev. 13. 2. which was foch. This Mr* T.grints the fecond
Beaft aded with, t. r . made ufe in perfecuting the Saints, which waf
done in order as he thought for his fupport j fo that HxfT. acknowledg.
eth what he fcts himfclf to oppofc.
2dly, The mind of the Spirit in Prophetical cxpicffionS) is beft un-
derftood when the Prophefics ate accompliQied. (or in accomplifhing)
Grant this fecond Beaft is the Pope and his Hierarchy (as out Aftima(U'
•^erter ijapt to think ) Have not they cxercifed the Power of the firft
Beaft; or made ufe of the Civil Power for their fupportmeat in perfe-
cuting the Saints ? they have made ufe of no other. They deliver the
Saints over to the Secular Power to be burnt by ir, they never did it
thcmfelves. This from the beginning hath been the fupport of their
Grandure and Empire, »s is known. The fame may be faid of the Pofifh
B»glilh-Hterarchj.
He adds, 2dly, But thh k no tvU^ to make ufe of the Civil Power for
their fupjtorf,
AKfw. I. To have no other Bafis or Foundation of their Hierarchy
and Government but that, is an argument 'tis not of the Inftitution of
Chrili
2. To make ufe of the Civil Power in order to their own fupport and
fecuiity, in the Banifning, Imprifoning the People of God, is an Argu-
ment of perfons being a(^ed and influenced by an Antichriftian beaftly-
fpirit ; that they are members of that Beaft or falfe Prophet, whofe pro-
per Character it is fo to do.
The 13^'' Char a
and how fliort it came of Death, if upon foifte accounts it were not ia
it fclf more grievous.
Befides 4. Thofe poor men that by Writs of Excommunication hive
been caft into ftinking Goals, and there kept many years to the uttec
undoing of themfelves and families, as to the vvorld, ( fome of them
choaked to death there) becaufe they dare not ftoop to their Hierar-
chical jurifdidion and fopperies. All which with much more that might
be mentioned , are an abundant anfwer to his queftion*
The 15''' Charadct inftanced in is, That they compel all to receive a>
mark^eitherii^their right -handf or fore-heads : i.e. fecretly or openly,
oneway or ochcr to acknowledge fubjci^ion unto this Beaft, without
which thi:y may neither buy nor fell ; being cut oft' from the Church by
lihcii Excommunications for their ftubbornnefs, I'fr/. 1(5, 17.
Mt. T. lepliesj Do all, great as well oi [mall, receive fffch a
mark?
^n[rv, I, No, through' the grace of the Lord there »rc a Remnant
Tt 2 - ^^^^
2 yi A Vindication of tie Sober Tefiimony^
that hAve not b9T»ei their k»ees to this Baal : But no thanks tothe Hie-
rarchy, who (islfaid) compel all, /.^.fomeofallfoitj ; as the par-
ticle frequently fignifiesj indfo our Annotators,. Brighman^ {Mede^
expound the place.
2. Thofc that do not,whcn they are called tbcr€unto,are cut off from
the Church by thcii Excommunications, and no man by theii Canon-
Law is permitted to eat or drink, buy or fell with them. In which they
fpeak like the Vragon indeed. For the Bloody Vioclefian fet forth thc^
like Edid againft the Chriftians, That no mm (hould [ell^ or [ecretly givg
any thing to them, except firji they wottli burn Incenfe totheGoddi. Of
whom vcoeJtable Beda thus fingeih, in the Hymn of Jnl\an the M»ity.
Non illis emendi <^mdqftAm-
atit vendendi copla :
Nee ipfant haurire aqaam
dahatttr licentiay
^Anteqmntthurificarent
deteftandii Idolis*-
Thc truth of thefe thingf is fo generally known throughout the Na-
tion, that as I am forry the mention thereof (hould drive Mr, T, into
fuch i fweatingpaffion, as it feems to do ; fo can I not but wonder at
his confidence, in calling thofe things palpable grofs untruths, when
the whole Nation knows the contrary. His Satyjical exprefiTions I omit.
The vifible Lineaments and Characters of falfe Prophets being inftamp-
ed upon the fore-heads of the prefcnt Mini(^eis,tbey are not to be hea^d
tHit fepauted fromo
CHAP^
in Anfiver to Mr, T, his Exceptions, ' 535
CHAP. VIII.
Jrg^ 6. SeB. h
Apxth Argument agalnfl hearing the prefect (J\^tmJ}ers. Saints mnfi mt
have Conimmlott with Idolaters, The vanity of Mr. T. his argulngsto
the contrary, evinced, i Cor. 10. 14. 2 Cor. 6. 14, ij", i^, 17, 18,
opened. A threefold Idolatry, whether the Idolaters of old rvorfhlpped the
creature termlnatlvely. Of the golden Calf. Baal, Molech, That the
Worfhippers of them worjhlpped them not terminatlveljyproved. Of Devil-
Worfhlp, Pfal. io5. ^7^ 38, explained. The Heathen Images dedica'-
tedtothe true God. TheTeftimony of the Heathens In this matter, Ofrt"
fined Idolatry. WorjhlplngofGod In a rvay notofhis appolntment:,ii Ida*
latry. TheTeftlmony of Calvin, Perkins, Ames, Pareus, Willet, Pe-
ter Maityt, &c. to the truth of the AJfertlon. T/?? Romans rvorfhlpped^
tht GoddS) an hundred and [eventy years and mort^ mthoat Images,
r A sixth Aigymcnt tdvtnccd in S, T, againft ^hearing the prcfcnt
XJL Miniftcrs is this.
Thofe that are guilty of Idolatrji Saints may not^have communion mth^
much lefs own them oa their Teachers^ but ought to feparate from them : Bui
thtprefent Mlnijiers of England are gnllty of Idolatry : Ttoerefore.^ •
li\izMajor\% boctomcd uponexprefsCommands.fiomrChiift, i Cori
J, II. (^ 10, 14. '2.Cor,6, 14, 18.
To which Mr. T! replies, i. The Conclufon U not thejame with that
vohlch Chap. I. was undertaken to be defended : That It is not lawful for
Saints to hear the prefent Mlnljhers^ which we nMy. do though Communion
with them be Unlawful ^though we are bound not to oivn them as. our Teacher s^^
but feparate from them. — -
Anfw, Now this I confefj I uaderftand not; Communion confifli
in giving and receiving, a conftant or freqijcot aitcndir^g upon any oacs
teaching (efpccially when by the Prelates inrtiluted and-iudui^cd toi
Ciich t.P*ii(h as a Teacher, whereof Lam a Member ) is an Argument.
33 4 -^ Vindication of the S oher Tefiimony,
of tny owning blm for my Te«chcr. Separition from any one confiSs ia
this, thai I hive no Communion vvith him in that, in refped of which
I am bound to feparatc fiom him. That I fliould with frequency hsii
a man preach as a Miniftcr of the Gofpel, and yet be faid to have no
Communion vvith him, to feparaic from him, — is an
This we fay fei» are guilty of^ In the matter of the golden Calf Iftacl wai
nety theytvorJhippedGodin itiExod, 32. 5*.
Malmonides de Idolat. 8. 2, j, tells us, That through the Idolsy Ido^^
later s rvorjhipped the God that made the Heaven and the Earth.
Mr. T. replies, i. T* ^vorfoip the Creatures terminatively is mofi ^ofs^
Idolatry^ the IjraeliteSi Exod. 32, and many Heathen Idolaters did mt do
fo, 2. *Tis not true that few or none reorfhlp the Creature terminatively^
for the mofi oftijoe Idolaters of old worfhipped the Ho/i of Heaven, and at this
day the Devil himfelf is worffnppid in the Eafl and Wefi Indies. — -
Anfv9. I. That moft of the Idolaters of old worrhipped the Hoflof
Heaven, is granted ; that they-worfhipped thefe or any other Idols tcr-
minatively, our Dictator attempts not the proof of. What is faid of
iiW, I Kings 1.6.31. oxAiolech^ Pral.ic<5. 37, 38. who is alfocaii'd
Moloch y Amos J. 25, and Milcowy i Kines 11.33. and yW^/f^^^yj
Z:ph,i.5,,
33^ "^A ^vindication of the Sober Tepimony]
Zcph. 1.5. {i, e. the Sun).proves not that they fo worfliippcd the Sud^
(in comniemoiation of which -thcfe Images were erc^cd) TistiuCa
T[al. ^06. i7i 38. 'tis faid>. They facrificed-to Devils, but that there-
fore they worlhipped the Devil asthti utmoft fcr/w/«««, cannot be con-
ceived. 'TiJ caird Devil.rvor(hipy bccaufc it was not from God, but of
the invention and inftigation of the Devil, as all the falfe worftiip in
the World is. Of their woidiipping Molech, or MilchAm\ 'tis cx-
prefly faid, that they woiQiipped the Loid too, when they woriliipped
him, Ze^h, I. f. (Hcb. to the Loid, and in Malcaw, asthePapifts
fay, they direct their worlhip to God only, in, or through their Ima-
ges) which fully anfw.ers what can be pleaded from AUs /^ 4Ij42»
43.
2. The moft learned of the Heathens do affirm. That their \m(igts
voere dedicated to the true Cod, whom in them they worjhipped, reputing the
Imagesthemfclveshtit Stocks and Stones y and that in them they rvorjhipped
hnt one Cod, Seneca faith, By J u^'uct {landing in the Capitol with Light-
ning in hii hand, they tinderfiand the Preferver and Governor of all
things ^~.\he Maker of all the World, Qa. natur. 1. 2. c. 45:. Who it was
that lang,
EVf 0€«P Iv ■srxnia-n — — —
■Mr. T, is not ignorant. See Arnobimi /. 6, contra, Cent^
We premife 2dly> That there is a fomev\hac more refined IdoIatry>--
tnd to this Head we refer,
I. The afcri.ption of a God-head to any creature, as to Herod^ Aitf
12. 22.
.2. The afctiption of the properties of the God-head to any Cri*^trre.'
3. The worfhipping God in any other way than what he harh r.c-
fcribed, which is the Idolatry forbidden in the fccond Commandracne.
4. The Oblation of Wor/hip, and Service to God that hath been
offered up to Idols, for which there is no prefcription in the Sctip-
jtures.
'Tis this fecond fort of Idolatry.we fay, the prefent Minifters o^Sng-
Lund ate guilty of.
Mr. T, aofwers, i. The definition of Idolatry by Dr, Rainold, hath hi-
therto been received by all Pioteflants that he k^ovfs of) that it is fxhtbiting^
Divine Worfhip to a Creatnre, proved from Roui^ i. ly.
AJjfrv. I, That this is Idolatry, I giant, that nothing elfc is fo;
will
in Anjwer to Mr, T. bis Exceptms, ; 3 7
will not be proved. Pm^y?
Ames^ Par^M,
Though, 2. the very truth is, when we fubmit to a Worfliip of hu-
mane devifing, we exhibit Divine Woidiip to a Creature, viz,, the
dcvifcr,ii«pofcr thereof, we vvojfliip him «a§ot toj» ;cr/Ve4.T«, bcfides the
Creator, as HiUrius, Bcx^a^ expound the Phrafc, ^^w. i. 2y.
And Param, ExplicAt, catc.f. 5. Q^. p.p. jzS. faith, * What if re-
* quired in the fecond Commandment ? Afsfw. That we cxprefs not
' Ciod by any Figure, and that we vvoifhip him not in any other way or
* manner than he hath in his Word commanded us to woiihip him>
* I Sam. J$. 23. Vcfft. 12. 30. Mat. if. 9 Idolatry is contrary to
* this Commandment, which is a falfe and fuperftitious wotfliip of ^
* the Deity, of which tHere are two chief kinds'; one more grofs, *^
* as when a falfe Deity is worfhipped j this is forbidden inthefirft
* Commandment — another more refined,vvhcn the true God is pre-
* tended to be worfliipped j but there is a miftake in the kind of Wor-
* ihip, i. t. when Wonnip is pretended to be performed to God in
' fome work which he hath not required • this \i condemned in this fe-
* cond Commandment. - ^ p. f2p. Thofc who fin againft the fe-
* cond Commandment, fin alfo againrt the firft, becaufe they who wor-
* fhip God otheiwife than he will be vvotfliipped, they feign to them-
* fclves another God, and ind.eed woifliip nor God, but the figment of
* their own brain. — To feign another Worfliip of God, is to feign a-
f nother will of God, and by confequence another God.—
Mr. 'Perkins^ Vol.i, p. <^5p. faith, Ifhen God is vforjhipped othenvlfe^
and hy other means than he hath revealed in his fVordy that u Idolatry. Ido-
latroHS Worfhips are all they which are appointed mthotit the Command of
Cody Mel. Tom. 2. p. 107.
We (hall cnely add what we find mentioned by the Learned Peter
tMartyr, in his Comment on the firft of Sam. ch- 7. p« 40. * Men are
< wont fometimes to feign to themfclves Commentitious gods, as J^f/-
*• ter^ Neptune y Mercury: Sometim«stowor{hip the one and true God,
* but with a Worfhip that is forbidden, orftrange, ( i.e. not com-
^maaded) as If anyone fiiould flay his Son, or do what King Ahaz,
^ didj who conftituied a Damafcene Altar in the Temple of God. — •
* To do thus, is nothing clfe than to worihip an Idol. For men do herc-
* by feign a God who will fo be worfhipped, who is in truth no God. — ■'
Therefore Attgafi. Qtieli'2.^, inlib.Jof. in which place the fame
thing is prcpofed to the people by Jofhtia that is here by Samuel, * He
* thac feigns to himfelf God to be other than he is, doth carry in his
Vu tic|rt
538 -A Vindication of the Sober Tejlimony]
« heart another God. Wherefore not only Jupiter^ lod the vain Dei-
< tiis, but alfo thofe Idols and Phantafms are altogether to be caft out
« of our tnind. This will be done if we conftitute ta our felves God to
* be fuch as he is deicribed to us to be in the Holy Scriptures.
Tertfil, in lib, de idololat, faith, * Not only the Crofs and made Wor-
* fliip of Images is Idolatrous, (for the Anticnts of
f The Romans /or told had Temples f without Images, who weic
**^%''.w \ ^r'/j. ' never thelefs Idolaters. . It matters not whether
woyjhippea the Goads u r it r^ j r tm -n. -
without Images , fay thou make to thy felt a God of Plaiftering, or
Vano, Plutarch! * Marble j or of a Trunk of a Tree, (I add, faith
* P. Martyr^ or of thy oWn Phantafm) — an Idol
* is fo caird of ^JV@-, w^ich is a Form, an Idol therefore is a little
f Form.
Samtfel therefore exhorts {chap, 7. 3.) that they caft away commen-
titious Godds, and vain WoiiVip, and evil Opinions of God out of
their minds.
What this Ammadverter mentions out of TertHllian in his Book of
Idolatry, c, 15. makes for us. If Idolatry be when any thing that is
not God, is extolled beyond the meafure of humane honour, then when
the Prefcribcrsof Divine Service are fo extolled (as they arc vvhen the
Service prefcribcd by them is fubjefted to, it being the peculiar ho-
nour and prerogative of God to prefcribe his own Worfhip, (as (ay
the Heathens ihemfelves from the Light and Dilates of Nature) there
is Idolatry.
2dly, Mr.T. tells us. That the worjhipfwg God in any other vpay than he
hath prefer ihdy is not the Idolatry forbidden in the [ecor>d Commandment,
that all mho rvrite upon it fay not fo^ that worjhtp (not &f divine prefcripm
tion) abufed to Idolatry, is not Idolatry.
Mfrv. I. If the firft be true, this hft is undoubtedly fo, i. e- if vvor-
{Lipping God in any other way than he hath prcfcribed be the Idolatry
forbidden in the fecond Commandment, that Worfhip that hath been
abufed to Idolatry, and was never of Divine prefcription, is undoubt-
edly fo.
2, Mr. T, grants that there is fome kind of Idolatry forbidden 10
the fecond Commandment, and I defue to he informed what it is j If
he fay the wotfhipping falfe Godds,that Idolatry is forbidden in the firft-
Commandment; If he fay the making of Images, I ask, i. Whethet
the making of Images for civil ufes, or Divine Service? The firft he
will not aflert ; if the fecond, their forming for that ufe and pnrpofe, i$
condemned, becaufc a medium of Worfhip not inftitued by the Lord ;
ift Anfwer to Mr. T, his Exceptions, 339
for had it been fo, it had not been Idolatry, butouiduty tohavefoim-
ed them.
2. Wether by Images he mean corporeal Images, or incorporesl
Idea's, or falfc Conceptions of things in the mind of man ? and whether
this la*ter, in the Judgment of molt eminent Divines, be not as really
Idolatry as the former ? and if fo (as undoubtedly it is) thcwoifl^ip-
pin'' God in any other way then he hath prefciibed, is evidencly Ijo-
latr'y, and that forbidden in the fecond Commandment j and fo fay all
that I have yet met with that wdte thereupon.
What he Ms ihc'PharifeesrvapjiKg their ha^dst and that Chrlft doth
not accufe them at Idolaters , is frivolous.
1. ThatCurtom did not fo immediately border upon the Worship
of God, m$ not made fuch a part of it as q\xi Common-Prajer-Book:.
Service, .,..„,.. j ,^ . ,
Yet 2, They placing too much of their Religion and Devotion there-
in, Chiili doth little lefs than call them fo, in the place inftanced in by
Mr. 7, CMat. ly. p. /« 'vain do they mr[hip me j Cr, ^«T»y, ». i. They
fhaUreapMofraithyit. , . t j ♦« tj ,
2. Their WorOiip is vain, frivolous, vanity, as the Lord calls Idols
and Idolatrous Worfliip, Lev, 2.6,1. Ez.ek.' 5^- ^J. Pfal.97-7.Ifa,
ip. 3- J'*"' ^4* ^4- ^'*^^' ^^' ^7\Hebr. tZ=l'»7'^7SJ^ which the 70
fetidet (and that truly ) f««m(o£) va'm things^ and fo the Apoftlc calls
ail the Godds of the Gentiles, A^. 14* ly.
3. That bccaufc Chrift doth not exprcily call them 10, therefore
they vvere not fuch, Mr. T. will not prove. Chrift calls not Pilate an «».
jufijudie, yet he was fo. — r. . , r ru 1
We add in S. T. sdly, That there is a moft refined fort of Idolatry,
when the heart goes fovth in defires after any thing beyond what is
limited by the Lord, and trufts in any thing oa this fide God, which
Mr, T, gives no occafioa of debate about.
XJu s SeB.i^,
34? 4 Vindtcalim of the Sober Tepmon^l.
Sedit. 2. Arg. I,
The prefent Mlmflers of England art Idolaters ^ proved. Of fVorfhlfplng
God in a falfe rvajf. That to do fo is Idolatry^ proved., Ads 17.23 ,24,
explained. AH9tS^etf(jt
nclius a Lapidc, M'^fculuSj on Mat. 6.^,
THat the prcfcnt Miniftcrs of England arc Idolater j, (which i^the
MW Propofition of the forccitcd Argument ) wc minifeft in 5^
7. by fcveral Arguments. Af,.
ck^g' I. Thofe that wor(hip the true God in any other wiy then
he hath faid he willbevvorfliipped in, and is prefctibed by hitn, are Ido-
laters. Bu-t the prefeat Minifters woiihip God in another way than he
hath faid he will be worlhippcd in, and is prefciibed byhioi,- Thero;
fore. — — *
T[it Major we fay is evident from this finglc confideration : To
Worfliip the true God through falfe Mediums is Idolatry.- Such as fo
woifliip him are Idolaters. But to worship God in any other way than
what is of his own prefcription , is to worftiip him through a falfe Me^
dittm. Therefore fo to vvorfliip him is Idolatry^ thofe that foworftiip
him are Idolaters.
To which Mr. T. replies, SeB. 2. ift, By dcfcanting upon the cx-
piefTion la»y other way 1 which what I meant thereby, hs might eafily
have informed himfelfftoin the Treatifc he attempts to confute, I mean
a way of drawing nigh to God,invcnted and fo cftablillied by man, as to
be made fuch a neceffary part of Woifhip, as that without it I muft not
publickly draw nigh to GDd in wot(hip at all, which is to vvordiip him
through a falfe Medium ; and this I fay is Idolatry, orelfe there is little
or no Idolatry in the World. ( The Athenians were Idolaters upon this
very account and no other, for they wot(hippcd the true God, A^s 17,
2 j> 24.) What he adds touching their worlhipping by an Image is of an
cafie dilpatcb.
li That Image through which they wordiippsd the unknown (Jod,
was a falfe Medium^ and upon this foot of account fingly arc thsy char-
ged with Idolatry. No dbubt but they had a multitude of Imiges, and
thit ia.i4fp:t^ of thefc iheii City isXadto bs jt«r&iiVu)A^, fttll ofldols^
ot
tn 'Anfwer to Mr . T. his Exceptions] 341
hi wholly given to UoUtry'y^ which it waj, in as much « through rhcfc
laagss, IS falfc CMedinmSy they worHiippcd God ; and fo it had been
if through any other falfc Medium's they had drawn nigh ro him, though
there had not been one of thefe Statuaj or pillars abiding amongft
them.
2. That the Hnk^town Cod to whom their Altar fti% dedicated, was a J
1 Damon^ is, to fay no more, a very inconfideratctffertion : When Pant
tells them, in verf. 23. It rvat God that mjtie the tvorld^ whom they lanO'
rantlj worjhiped. Nor is there the kaft footing for fuch an afTeriion from
the word (Ae^yjcAai/^ave^-fe^^^, 'ti.urne Mr. i/?^^ renders it 2i Worfhlp-
fer of D5lice5 are fuf-
ficient evidences thereof.
To this Mr. T, replies SeB. 3. i; H^xy of Wjr(h'p ntt prescribed by
^ody he teUsufjfTiy be^ i It, H^hen the fforfhip is to aytother thing be/ides or '
mth God J in rvhicbfehfe the Minor was denied and jhould have bee» pro^
vedt
Aif(v. I. But in this fenfe wedifchirged the Mi'nifters of EKgI:nd
of the guile of Idolatry : Whacobligition lies upon us to prove a.cnarge .
Jgainft them, we never impleaded them as guilty, I know nor. .
^ a» If this be all M% T. contends about, Tb« they woxlHp not-aoo-
thii-.
3 ^^ ^ Vmdication of the Sober Tejltmotiyl '
thcr thing befides, or with the true God, he fights with a maa of flaw
of his own making.
2. When he demonQiatcj (as he now dictates; that this aiouc .
proves Idolatry; /. e. there is no other Idolatry but the wor(hipping that
which is not God by Nature, I will acknowledge tny miibke ; wc have
proved the contrary^ in which we have the concurrent teftlmony of the
mort (all) Expofitors and Cafuifts that have written about Idolatry,
who make woilliippiog the true God in a way not of his prefcription, to
be the Idolatry forbidden in the fccond Commandment ,♦ Dr. willg$
(one of th-ir own) tells us as much, Com. on Exod, p. 338. So doth the
learned Ujher^ Ball^ Urjin^ Calvhy fVendcline, Altiyigius^ RavaneUtu^
Maccovius, &c. bcfides thofe we have already mentioned.
He adds ^dly. By another way may be meant i an&tber Ceremony or
Ette in rvhich the Worfhl^ of God is placed-^ but this Author goes not about
to prove the minor in this ienfe.
yi^fw. I. By worfhipping God in another way, - I undeiftand the
tendring to God a Worftiip and Service of humane dcvifing, that he no
where clUs for. This I prove the Minirters of ■E>jgtand do, when they
draw nigh to God with their Common-Prayer-Book-Servicc in their
hands : ^And Mr. T. talks idely, when he faith, The Worjhip of god is not
placed therein. If it be not, they have in many places of .the Land no
Woriliip of God at all ; 'tis frequently by them call'd Dmne Service^
and the Service of the Church, 'Tis made fuch a neceffary part of
Woiihip, that Preaching muft give place to it. .
Asto what fee adds, i. That I fnppofe that Cod hath appointed tb€
particularities. of the Tvay of hiimrfhip. —
Wcanfweri That particularities of Worlhip, as fuch, arc determi-
ned by the Lord, we have averted and proved ; what Mr.r. hath of-
fered to the contrary in anfw^r to the Preface, Sed. 20. chap. i. Se^.
^.cbap. 4. Sett, 9. ch^p. S- ^'^^- 3)4,r>7. is fully anfwercd in our Re-
ply thereunto. r ir • * • r
2 That the Argument may be retorted upon my felf; is a vanity of
x\)q' Animadvert er ', becaufe, i. our difpute is not (as he would beat
the Reader in hand) about every form of expreiTion, but of fuch a form
wherein the Worfhip of God is placed, which is Impofed upon the
Churches of Chrift, without fubjeftion to which it is denied them to
worftiipGod at all as fuch, for refufing whereof they are expofed to Ex-
communications, and total rume in this World. 2. We have alieidy
proved that forms of prayer enjoyncd, are condemned by the Lord, and
-graying in the Spirit, commended and commanded.
in Anfwer to Mr. T. his Exeeption/. ' 343
Wc ptocetd in S. T. and prove, That to worfhlp gd after the way of
tht Common 'Prajer-Book^y ii to rvorjhip him la a way that u not of his ap-
pnntmem, (which is the wj/Vpropolition) becanfe the Itaji footfteps of
JHch A way of Worfhip » not to be fonnd in the Old or Nevp left amenta en-
joyned hy Chrift or his Apofiles ; mr for feveral centnries of years after*
wards ; of which wc treat at large in 5. r.
What Mr. T. isplcafcd, Se^. 4- in the firft and fccond place to an-
fw« hereunto wehave already replied to. .
He adds, jdly, He liill acknowldgeth that the CommoK-Prayer-Book^.
WorfhlpisthemrfhipofthetTHeGod. ^ ^ . , ,^ . . .^
Anfrv. I. Idofo indeed, and fo was the /^r^f«i*««Wotfliip,^c7j 17.
2?. yet an Idolatrous Wor(hip> and they thcmfelvcs Idolaters.
zdlv Though I grant it to be the Wor(hip of the true God, yet I
prove it not to be the true Worship of God, and therefore Idolatrous.
He add?, 4thly, That he doth not except agamji the matter of the pray^
ersintheCommon.Prayer-Book, .
Anfw. True, in the place under confideration, I do not, but it
doth not therefore follow that it's not liable to exception. Somewhat
was hinted in S. T. touching this matter, sind more may be added m
it Jproper place. ^ ,, .
He adds, That thefe three things are apmed by me j i. ^nat aU Li^
tnrgies, or fiinted forms of prayer, are not of Gods appointment, bnt o^
hftmane invention,
2. That they are mdalyimpofed on Mirjjiers. , . , --
2 ThatMiniflers do ftnfully, yea, idolatroufly ufe them, becatijett s a <
way 'ofmrfhlp not appointed of God, With refped to which h. afhrms i
■ {.That fiinted forms of Prayer, and Service of Cod, which are not
otherwife faulty, tkenin that they are Jily^ted, may be Uwfully fifed by a
tMimjler of the Gofpel in his publicK Admm(lraUon
2. That fuch Prayers and Servicearc a iVor/hipof God yn avi>ayof hui
4p/,^«rm«f . ^^^ ^^^^ ^^^^^ ^ ^^^^^^^ withcut the Icaft de-
triment to the Caufe undertaken by us. For the Common-Prayer-Book.
Service is ottterwifc faulty than m that it is ftinted, viz. becaufe abu.
fed to Idolatry ; the matter of it is in not a few things liable to cxccp-. -
uons, the Rites and Modes en joyned therein aborranable.
a He iVvald have proved one thing more, viz.. That a Service ac- -
vlfed by man, (as the Common-Piayer-Book is) may lawfully be irn-
pofed> andas fo fubniitted to, and that thins juftiftable A failure -
Wiierein renders us unconcerned in whit is. nexily offerea by him, ■
2 ^4 -^ vindication of the Sober Tejimony»
This heexprefly tells us, p. 222. HewUlaot JHJiifU^
So brave a Champion is he for the Clcrgy> that when he fhould come
to a dole encounter, he fairly takes bis heels and quits the Field, leav-
ing them, poor men, to (hift for themfelves as well as they can.
However we attend the proof of his AlTcrtioDS, i. Chrlft appointed
the Lords Prayer to be ftfed by the Apojiles^ (oi a Jilntedform} tjing them
to the pife of jo many jvords ani no more) Mat.<^.9. Luke 1 1.2.
A»!r9. I. Notorioufly falfc, as we have manifefted, together with
the invalidity of mens arguingsfrom hence, for a ftinted impofed Li-
turgle, cap. 6, of this Trcatife.
2. Nor is this one of the PUclta of the Separatifts, (jrotitu is of the
fame mind, (on Luke 11. i. Teach ma compendium of thofe th'w^i vs>e
4re to pray for ; for at that time they were not honnd to the ufe of [0 many
words and fyllables. — ) as are TerttilUa»f Cyprian^ Cornelius a Lapide^,
Mafciilm^ &c-
But, jdly, fhould it be granted that Chrift en joyned the ufe of that
form of Prayer as 1 form, this will not prove that ftinted forms of
prayer are lawful, and as fuch may lawfully be inpofed andufed •
which can have no other bafis then this ; *tis as lawful for Civil or Ec-
clefiaftical Rulers to devife and impofe forms of Prayer upon the
Churches as for Chrift, a mcft abfurd and blafphemous affcrtion. ^
As touching what he adds, 2. Chriji ju/iijies the Chtldrens crying of
Hofanna, afes himfelf the forms which David ufed hefsrein the Pf alms ^
&c.
We anrwcr, That in all this he doth but beat the Air, and fpeaks not
one word to the purpofe : We find no footfteps of any enjoyned Litur-
cie or ftinted forms of Prayer impofed either in the old Tcftament or
the'New ; though we find the fame words ufed fometimcs by them, yet
that they might never ufe any other in their publick devotions, which is
the condition of ftinted enjoyned forms, & the known cafe of the Mini-
fters of Engl, wiih tefpeft to their Church-SeTvice, we find not, (which
is alfo a full anfwcr to what hs cites our of Cyprian, touching their ufe
of the Lord's Prayer, and oiher Forms, — if they ufed any, ihey were
Dot bound to ufe them and n o-hir-) When he proves this confc-
quence, the Saints of old uicd -^i fame words in prayer fometimcs,
and Chrift ufed words before ufcd by 'h j.m — Therefore a fet and ftin-
ted Liturgy was in ufe amorgft hem ^ fich an or^e as our Com ron-
Prayer-Book-Wor'liip, I will b- h-s Cor-.v-f , He knows the contra-
ry • His ar/w is re J^m M ' T • ^P-'i'-n 're impcrrinen^t, and
not ft'o..h the i-cci-.ino. T , '.» .H.J, h-6v, &c.
*A,hcilts-
4n Anfwer tQ Mr, T, his Exceptions. 34/
■iAtbcifts we irc not, feeing we wor(hip the Mikcr of the Worlds .
* And in all our Oblations wc praife him according to oui abiiitief, in
* the way of prayer and thanklgiving. And aftei wirds tells ui ,that'the
* Prefidentof the Affcmbiy pourcth our prayers-according to his abi-
' lity, and continues long in this woik. — TertfiUi^ tells us"^ The Chri-
* ftians looking towards Heaven, (not on their Comtnon-Prayer-Book)
* with their hands fpread abroad, prayed without a Monlur^ bccaufc
* from their heartSjexpreflTions wholly exdufwc of.inconfilhnt with,the
* formes of prayer contended for. The fayings of Socrates in his EccU
Hi/iJ. f. c. 21. who lived about the year 4?o. tells us, That among
till the Chrljiians in that Agty [carce trvo vrere to be fonnd that ufed the fame
vpords in prayer : He paflethoverin filcnce, as he doth the account I
give of the ufc of ihem,not till about the year(/oo, and the impofuion
by Charles the Great of Gregories Liturgy, as is thought, and the (up-
port thereof by threats and punishments ever fincc. Thefe things he
knows to be true, and yet 'they aiefuchasihc Dragon he labours to
fuppoic, cannot polTibly (^and before.
Sefi, 3.
Vommon-Prayer^Bookjf^orpyip not of the appointment of Chrlji, hecaufe an
obfirftEiioH of fome pojitive Dttty charged by Chriji upon the Saints. Mr.
T. his 'Exceptions refuted. Of refting on the Sabbath Day, Whether
Sacrtficingwai an ob/lru^ion of that Dttty. Mit.<), J 2. explained. FoU
lowing Chrlji no obfirtt^ton of pojitive Duties to Parents. Of the gift and
grace of Prayer. Rom. 8. 2.6, opened. 'Tis the duty of Saints to im-
prove Gifts received. Commofi- Prayer. Books fp'orjhtp contrary to Scrip-
tnre. *Tis not necejfary to the edification- of the Saints. Tae Judgment
of the Reformed Churches*
^ \ Second Argument advanced in S.T. to prove that Common. Pray-
Xv er-Book- Woifhip is not of the appointment of Chrift> is thus for-
med. That Wordiip which is an obftrudlion of any poiilive Duty
charged by CHf ift to be performed by the Saints, is not a VVorfhip thac
is of his appointment. But this is undeniably true of the Common-
Prayer-Book- Woilliip. Therefore. Chrift hath given Officers to
his Church, Ephef,^» 1 1. to them he hath given gifts every way fuitinf
theimployment he calls them forth unto, the improvement whereof
he expe<^s and charges upon them, 2 Tim, 1. 6, i C&r, 12. 7, £phif,
4. IX. Ptqv, 17' i .
He adds, 2dly, If they are intplieii fP!i^>*iBisMi>ifi^.V.^ ^/ (>rdiftaryy whether the gift of Prayer, at he meant, mre one ?h-'
- hnfw. This muft be one, if the exercife of the duty be for the t6\^
c«ion of the Body of Chrifltv, 7,11, 12. To imtgine thatChrirt doth
not continue to difpenfe this gift unto his Gorpci-Miniiieis, for the
foreraid er,d,is injurious to his faithfulncfs tOyIove,and care of,hi$ Chil-
dren, to conceit that better provifion can be raadCj than he makes b/
the b^ftowmcnt of his gifts for that end ;. an,d fuch asdiall exclude the'
exercife of them, is derogatory to his Wifdom, and blafpheqiou^. .
He adds; ^thly, 7 hat though the JpojiUs faid^ ASts 6. 4. Wc Will
give our fclves continually to prayer, — and Paul, i Tim. 2. i. Ex-
horts, that prayers be made for all men ; yet roe read not that it's, made
the Minijlers work ^0 exprefs ths neceffmes of the Church in the pMck, Ah-
ditory,— - .
Anfrv, I. But this is not to the queftion ; whoever they arc thararc
called forth tothiswor;:, they aie to do it according to t^e abilities the
Lord hath given them. X x 2 But
j4i 'A Vitidi cation of the Sober Teflmonyl
Bit, 2dly^ if it be not the Miniftcrs vf ork, whofc is it ? whcccc is it
that they who lep^itc thcmfelves fuch, exclude all others, and monopo-
lize this work unto themfclvcs ?■
5ly2, Chiift and his Apoftlcf ufcd no forms of prayer before or after
their preaching, he grants ; and I am furc there is not the leaft tittle of
direwhich
is a fuflicient Anfwer to what follows : though petfons are not bound to
be alway in the ai^ual exercifc of this gift,yct when call'd to the perfor-
mance of the duty of prayer, for which it is eminently given of God,
they arc obliged to be improving it ; their not being fo,is a napkenit^g
up of their Talent ; and Mr^T. may prove the contrary when he is able.
•Tis added in S. T. That it will not in the Icift take off the weight of
the Argument, to fay, Tnat liberty is granted for the exercife of tb'rt
gift before and after Sermon.
For, I. the whole Worfhipof God may according to thefe meof
Principles be difcharged without any Sermon at all, and is frequently
in raoft of the Affembliesof Englanl,
2. Thofc their prayers are alfo bounded and limited by the $$^ Gs«.
Donj and that both in words and matter, for they are cnjoyn'd to pray
in that form, or to that cfFe(3-, as briefly as conveniently they may,
which will by all fober perfons be accounted a boundary, notwithfiand-
ing Mr. T. his confident Di6lac€ tothecantjary,
3. Wc
3»
in AnfvoBY io Mr, T, his Exc£ pirns'^ ■ ^49
Wc hid alwayes thought that Chrift having given (ifts unto Men^
did rcquiic the ufc of thofc gifts whenever perfons wciccailed tothe
performance of that fcivicc, to which they were dcfignediy given by
him by virtue of the forcmcntioned precepif . When Chrift hath given
a gift of Pi-ayer unto his Children, and charged thsm tollirrup the gift
given them, and not to napkin their Talent, we had verily thought tliat
whenever they had been called forth to the performance of that duty he
did really intend, and expe(3: that they (hould be found in the exttciie
of the Gift given. —
To tbe firft and laft of ihefe Mr. T. is wholly filenr, what he faith to
the fccond we have already removed out of the way.
Mr. T, adds yet further, Tht Comrnon-Prayer^Booi^'fyorfhlp may fnr,
tbtr the duty ofexerclfng the gift of Frajtr j and, therefore may Urvfttllj
hufed. Which he proves thus,
That form may be lawfully ufe^^for fVorfhipw^tcb may he a means tofur^
ther any pficive Duty charged hy Chrifi to he performed by the Saints:
Butfuch may be th§ Forms of Prayer in the Liturgy of the Church of Engr
land ; Therefore, — .
The Major he proves thus. That which requires a Dnty^ requires thf
i^eans conducing thereto.
The Minor thus ; The Common-Prayer-Book direUs what thif7gs art
tt he frayed for^ byreafon of the brevity of the ColeBsj the Rtfponds, thefrC'
quent ufe, the plain expreJ^onSy help the memory and eloqution^ wherein the
gift of Prayer conjijis.
Anfw. I. A Papift may fay as much and as truly for their Books of
Devotion, their Whippings, Pilgrimages, — Mr. T. knows they do fo.
They arc means , they tell us, tending to the furtherance of pofitivc
duties^
To which our Divines anfwer (as we do Mr»T.) That only thfe
things are to be accounted a means of furthering anypojitlve duty-, that God,
natmanyhath appointed oi fuch thereunto. And in this fcnfe is the Rule gi-
ven by them about the Decalogue. That which req^tires the duty^ requires
the means conducing thereunto. And except means bz taken by him in this
fenfcwe dci^his Major, No Form-may lawfully be ufed in tVorfrnphta
that which is- a means of the appointment of God to further a pojitlve Duty,
if he prove his Common-Prayer- Book,- Service to be fuch a F^rmj he doth",
fomewhat, but till then,
•— Rapiunt conamina Venti^
He beats the air.
2ly. Why fpeaks he fo faintly in his Minor ? Snch May bs.the Forms —
yfhi
is'o Ji ^vindication of the Sober Teflmony]
Why fpeaks he not out, and plainly, ij one thatbtlieveshe fpeaks
Truth ? Smh Are the Forms of Prayer in the Common- Prayer- Book,
Now this we alfo deny; not only, i» Becaufc they arc not means
appointed by the Lord for that end : But alfo becaufc, 2. The gift <^
Pxayer confifts in fomwhat elfc than memory and cloquiion, vU, In an
ability of mind to form words cxprefifive of the dclircs of our hearts,
wherein thefe Forms arc not pleaded to be helpful. And yet 5. How-
ever it comes to pafs we find not the moft devout Liturgifls to excel ei«
ther in memory or cloqution. And 4. Our own cxperience,and the ex-
pcrtence of the whole Nation tells us the contrary to what Mr. T. af-
firms. The Common-Trayer-'Bookz'Prielis arc of all perfons the moft dull^
unapt, and heavy in that duty of Prayer ; who muft have a prayer penn'd
for them for every occafion, or they can fay nothing. Now Mr. T. hath
not produced one convincing Argument to prove that x man muft be-
lieve contrary to what he fees and knows.
We add in 5.r.3dly,The Common-Prayer-'BookrfVotfhifxs't Woiflilp
of which we find no foot-fteps in theScripturCjas hatk already been dc-
monftrated : Whence it follows that 'tis a Worfhip of pure humane in-
vention, which is not only not of Chrifts appointment, but contrary to
the very nature of inftituted Worfhip ( as is proved in our firft Argu-
ment ) and to very many precepts of the Lord in the Scripture, Exod,
20.4,5'. Pr«f. 4. 2. & 13.32. Prov, 30. i<^. Jer. 7, ^i,.Mat,jf,
]p,i3. Har.7, 7, 8. Rev. 22. 18. The mind of God in which Scrip-
tures we have exemplified, Lev. 10. i; 2, 3, 4. J or the fanaify-
iog prefence of the Spirit of God,is the Spirit of Prayci :£« tdft/aa ! Ltt
bim direft us to the place where we fo do. ^
2. We grant there may be the grace of Prayer vvithout the gift, and *
the gift without the grace ; but fay, that when God calls forth his Chil-
dren to the publickdifchargc of this duty, hebcBow.^ the gift of Prayer
upon them; which if they have not, they are not called forth thereun-
to : When other wife the Spirit of Adoption in 'them is abundanrly fuf-
ficient to enable them to pout forth their fouls to God, fo as that they
need not the help of the Crutches of Fcrms,as fomc fpeik.
3. TheQaeftionis whether it be lawful for Siints to ufe aftinted
Form of words in Prayer? Ofotherswe are not fpcaking. Rom, 8. is
produced to prove it is not lawful for them fo to do.
The particular Anfwcrs he gives to the Arguments produced againd
fuch Forms of Praycr,are of an cafic difpatch.
To the fiift he anfweis. i. The qne»ch'wgof the Sftrit u not meant of
tht Spirit of Pra)fir more than any- other exercife, —
Anftv. Grant it, its meant as much of the Spirit of Prayer as any 0-
ther exercife. The cxpteflion is wholly Metaphorical* Tne Spirit in hf$
operations and motions is frequently called and compircd to fire (as is
known) the quenching of him is our refifting, not giving up our felvcs
to the obedience of thofe motions i how we do this by iHnted Forms of
Prayer was but now fhewed.
He adds, zdly. The quenching of the Spirit iithe all of him imvhom
the Spirit is tptenched^
Anfw. Very true, the tying of our felves to a prefcript form of word*
in Prayer is our own aft, none can actually compel us thereunto j here-
by we quench the Spirit;
Yea but ^ly, The hearer is (linted^in all jojnt Prayer.
jinfiv. I. Not as he is when he ties hirnCelf to a Form of Word%in
Prayer;
2. Not fo, but if the Spirit ( whof^ motions arc regular, and leads,
not to fuch confufions as Mr.T. talks of, ofall fpcaking togethcr).movcs
powerfully upon the heart of the hearer, he ought after rhc other hath
done to proceed fur Cher in that work according to the ability fhall be.
J y 8 A Vindicatkn of the Svher TeJImony^
given him, and not to do fo were his fin. So thit of thefe tfaingj there
is not the fame reafon. How the true motions of the Spirit of God tic
to be difcerned , from the ttiirings of oui natural affe(^ions, is of
greater import than in this hatte to be fpokea to : caution and caicful-
nds is herein to be ufcd.
To the fecond he anfwcrs, In(ome cafes aft'wted Vorm « hclffnt to th&
H^derftandwgj memory ^ ajfeCiions^ utterance in Prayir,
uinfw. I. To this we have already replied,
2ddly> The experience of many Saints is far other wife. "
3diy, The Spirit is given to help our infirmities in Prayer, Rofn,-%^
2.6. both as to matter and manner of exprefiion; the donation of the
Spirit as to both thefe ends is by a Form of Prayer rendied uficlefs; di-
fecSlmeastomatter hemuft not, for what I am to pray for is in my
Pr,tyer-hook^ under my eye; nor as to words, for I amabfolutely tied
up to the ufc of thofe verbal exprefiions, are in the Prayer before me.
To the third he tells us, ift, That that of 2 Tim. i. 6. u to be mdtr-
fiood of his ability to preach the G of pel y fo is the improving the Talent s^
Mat. 25-. 15, 27. L/^tf ip. 13, 23.
A^fvv, By the Gift given and the Ttlents,wc are to undeiftand eve-
ry gift and ability given to us of the Lord, which we are bound to im-
prove by virtue of the forecited Scriptures 5 for to that end was it gi-
venus. If God hath given the gift of Prayer, for the edification of the
Body of Chrift to any one, wo be to that man that (hall neglect to im-
prove ir.
Mr. 7; talks carnally whilft he calls the gift of Prayer a mean thing •
Spiritual Saints know it to be fublime, excellent and glorious, being /«
them, the fruit of the Spirit of Adoption.
He adds, 2dly He mayjiir up the gift ofexprejfion at another time^ tvhs
u tied to a Lytureical Form.
Aaftv. I . The gift of Prayer is more than the gift of Expicffion,as we
have fliewed.
2. Gifts received are alwayes to be exercifed when called to the
wotkfor which they are received : Wemuftofferof our own that God
hath gracioufly given us, when we offer to him> not another mans.
5. Vv'e are alwayes obliged to thofe Lyturgical Forms ip every
Church-adminiftration, except before and after Seimonj and then we
ire not without a boundary, as was (hewed.
To the fourth he anfwers, The larvfulnefs of Saints praying in a Form
is neither bee apife they have not the Spirit y nor hecaufeheis not fHJfiCientt»
help them in their approaches to Cod, bat btcaafe thert ^ nothing tnfuch
^'»
m 'Anfwer folSlr,T, his Exceptions] -3^0
fraying done that isforifidden, nor any thing that u required omitted. .
Anfw, The falfity and vanity of this we have evinced bat even now.
not is there any thing further offered touching this matter that is worth
the confidcring, but what is already replied to.
What he hath fpokca Chap. j. SeB, 7. we have aofwercd in our Re-
ply theieiin to,
'Tvverc eafie to multiply Argument! to prove the unlawfulnefs of tin-
ted Forms of Prayer, were it ncccful J As fifthly, They are nowhere -t-'^*
commanded by ChriflyOr fermltted.
Sixthly, T^iy are neither lawful for tinre generate or regenerate per fons.
Not for thefirft, bccaufe i. They teach them toblafpheme, belie, and
mifreport (Sod, vi^. to call him Father when they are not begotten a-
gain of him. 2. They harden them in a way of fip, and ftrengthen their
viin confidences that they ire in a faved liate. 3. They lead them
forth to s plain mocking of God, viz,. In praifing him for that he nevei
beftowcd upon them; as regeneration, the holy Spirit, peace, joy
through believing, &c. Nor for the regenerate are they lawful for the
teafons but now mentioned, as alio becaufe the molt exact Forms are
Dot exprefTive of what they want. They bound them where God hath
not bound them : Aikjsvhat ye will, faith God : Aik^only what is in the
Form, faith the Formalift. They hinder their fpiritual growth, divert
the intention of the mind, cool the fervency of the Spirit in the per-
formance of the duty of Prayer ; with much more that might be offer-
ed were it needful.
We add in S, T. jdly, That the ObjeUlon fuppofeth that Forms cf
Prayer impofed, are bat meer circumjlances offVorjhipy and not parts thereof:
The contrary hereunto we fay is evident.
That which is made fo the condition of an a£lion that without it the
aftion is not to be done, is not a circumftance cf it, but fuch an adjundl-
as is a neceffary part thereof : But Forms of Prayer Impofcd are -fo
mfade by that their impofition : Therefore* —
Sacrificing of old on the Altar at the Tabernacle and Temple, was
partof the Worfliip of God that they were to perform ; this WoriLip
only at thofc jjaces being once commanded: was not a circumlhoce of
that Worfhip, but as real an effential part thereof as facrificing waif,.
The cafe is the fame here ; Prayer is commanded, fo is the ufe of thefc
Prayers, which are as really by that command made alike parts of Wor-
itip.
To this Mr. T. icplie!?. That what is made fo the condition of an aFtiott
by vlrtae of Cods appointment} oa that without it the action is r.ot to be done^
is
jgo "AVindicationof the Sober Tejlmmyl
is thereby maie a neceffary fart offVorjhip : Not fo when made fuch a conl
dition of an aS;ion by virtue of mans frecept ( asisthe cafe of Lyturgical
Forms J rvhich are therefore notvf'uhfianiing that impefition but meer circHmm
pances ofPVor(hip.)
Atsfrv. I . Whit ftrangc Circumftancei md Adiaphorifmi doth MrJ
T. make, which arc fo eSential to Worship, as that without them it .
may not be performed ? Andr. Frlfias ( though a Papift ) fpeaks better.
// it be Adiaphomsy why is it not left to the Liberty of every o»e to ufe or not
to ufe ai hepleafeth ? for that is the nature ofthofe things that are ^di-
aphorusy De Ecclef, Lib, 2, Tra5l, 13. in Epifl, ad 'Paul, 4. fol^
542.
2. How bloodily cruel and finguioary doth he make out Spiritual
Fathers ! who delivcv thcii own Children over to Satan, yea imprifon if
not banitli or hang th«n for trivial circumftances. Strange paternal
affcdions /
Yet 3dly, There is indeed fomevvhat of Truth in what if affcrted by
out Diilator ; 'Ti$ the Authority of God alone that can make any thing
a part of his own Worfliip,the impofition and commands of men make
it a part of theirs. Bowing the knee, falling down, is no effential part of
Gods Woifliip, but it was of Nebuchadnez.K>arSy when the Decree
was once publi(hed, negled^ of Conformity to which had near coft the
Three Children their Lives* Worftiipping at Dan und Bethel Ttis no
neceffary part of Gods Woifliip for the fame rcafon, but it was of Jero-
loams, when once eftablifhed and commanded by him. The cafe is the
fame here, LiturgkalFoims are no neceffary parts of Gods Worfliip,
becaufe no where commanded by him ; but arc of the Lyturgijls Wor-
fhip becaufe eftablidied by Law. And this is all we affirm, they are the
ncceflary parts of that Woilhip which is managed and carried on by
them, which they fuppofeis the Worfhipof God.
What he adds from the Preface of the Common- Prayer-Boof^yThat par-
ticularForms of Divine fi^orfhipyand the %ites and Ceremomes appointed to be
ufed therein^ are things m their own nature ind'ifferent) and alterable^ makes
mt void what we have afferted, it rather ejfablifhethit. For, ift, The
fame may be faid of many acknowledged eflential parts of Divine Wor-
fbip,Circumci(ion, Sacrificing, — ■ yet alterable and aboliflied. If it
be faid that none could abolifh them but God; the anfwer is eafie, nor
can any abolilh the Lyturgical Forms and Rites, but only thofewho
have fuch Authority as that by which they were impofed, who are to
\the Lytutgifts as Vice-Godds.
We add in S, T, 2dly, That the prefent iMini/lersof England make
the
tn Anfiper to Mr, T. hh Exceptionf^ ^^^i
the Liturgy, or Common-Vit^zt-^ock-ViorQcn^ a principal part, yta the
rvhole Worjhip of God. Whence we condudej That the prefent Minifteis
of England, vrorftiipping God in the way thereof, which he hath not pre-
fctibed, they are I dolatcrs.
To which Mr. Tl i. He doth not think, Its true that any Mlnljler of
England wohld affirm the Common- Prayet-Book to be an effientialpart of
Worfhlp. ^ y
Anfw. But what Mr. 7. thinks in this matter is not confiderable, the ^^
truth of the affenion is notorioufly known, and he may as well tell us
they difown the Crofs in Baptifm, — which they arc daily in the pra-
^icc of.
He adds, 2dly, If It were, they do not thlnkjt an ejfeatial part of fVor.
fhip hy virtue of Cods Command, bat they conceive they ought to obey their
CovernoHrs LaivSiHot judging others rvho ufe it not.
Anfxv. I. This is not at all ad Rhombum. Jeroboam* s Prierts and
thofe Apoftatick Worfliippcrsthat ftruck in with him, did not account
facrificing at Van and Bethel, an effential part of Worfliip by virtue of
Gods Command, but the Kings.
2. To ol)ey their Governours in fuch things as thefc, Mr. T. faith,if
bottomed upon Chriji's Command : and if fc, whilft they account it their
duty from divine Precept, to fubjcft to their Governours impofing it
upon them as an effential part of Worfliip, they do little lefs than ac-
count it to be fo by virtue of Divine Command.
3.1 wonder with what forehead Mr.T.couJd {iy,'They judge not others
voho ufe it not, when their Pulpits ring with invc^ives agtinft them,
and they vvrll not fuffer them to preach, but Excommanicatej and Im-
prifon them foi no other reafon but becaufe they will not conform
to it.
Z Z Seti, J.
■^z "AVindicationvf the SoherTe^imony^
SeB y.
Afecorti Argumint proving the Minifters of EogUnd Idolaters, They 01B
in hly things by virtue of an Office power received from IhUterSy ani
offer ftp to him a IVorfhip abttfed t& Idolatry rvith the Modes and Rites of
IdoUters. AH rvilljvorjhlp IdoUtry. The teflimony of the Antients, &c.
The Romlfh Church Idolaters : their rvorfhip Idolatry. The prtfent Mini-
• l^ers aU by virtue of an Office -power received from that Idolatrom Church.
Com. -?r ay er-Book^-Worfhip Idolatry . The Rites ufed by tht Minifters Ido^
tropu. Rites in themfelves indifferent y when once abufed to Idolatry ^not to
be ufedy proved. The Teftimony of the Learned touching this matter,
A Second Argument proving the Minifters of England IdoUterj, is in
5. r. thus formed.
Thofe who idt in the holy thing! of God by virtue of m Office-power
feceived from Idolaters, and ofter up to him a Worfhip mcerly of
Human? comporition,once abufed to Idolatry with the Modes and Rites
of IdoUtcis,are themCelves luch : But the prcfent Minifters of £«^/^^i
dofo: Therefore. —
In the Major two things are afTerted.
iftj That fuch as a<5^ in the holy things of God by virtue'of an Office*
power received from Idolaters, are themfelves fuch, at leaft in refpeit
of that their Office-power. Jeroboams Piiefb being Idolaters, thofc that
a<^cd by virtue of an Office-power from them muft needs be fo : as
thofe who a^ by virtue of authority to them committed from Rebels
in matters civil, arecquallyguiity of Rebellion, as thofe from whom
they derive that their authority.—
This Mr.T.denies : But, i.for the ground of his denial nothing is of-
fered but Dictates built upon this miftakcj That none can be accounted
idolaters but fuch as exhibit Divine Wor(hip to the Creature : The va-
nity of which is before evinced.
2dly, I defire at his Icifure to be informed whether there be any
truth in that Maxima, One cannot give that to another that he hath not
himfeif. If the Idolater communicate an Office-power to another, and
he have none himfeif but that which is Idolatrous, he doth moft affu-
redly communicate an Idolatrous Office-power to him. That perfons
ifting fvom author-ity received from Rebel?, if under hand they defign
the reftitution of their Pfince> arc not to be accounted Rebels ( as he
faith J isan afl'trtion, i. That will fcarce pafs for truth amongft the
learned of the Law. 2.. Impeitinenr.. For, i. The prefent Mini-
filers
. w Anfwer to Mr, T. his Exceptiom. '353
ftcrj td from fuch an authority for the fuppoit of Antichriftitn Courtf,
oppielTive diaboUical Ufurpations and Prerogativcjjfor the keeping out
theii lawful Piince,Chiift Jefus. 2. They jartify their ading from the
authority aforefaid, rcfufc to a^^ from any other, contemn and de-
fpifc it.
2dly, That vvorihipping God by a Form mccrly of humane compc-
fition with the Rites and Modes of Idolaters is Idolatry j thofc that fo
worfhip him atcldolaters. ^ ^jT
Mr. r. replies. That this makes not Idolaters, Hnle[s there h Idolatry In '*' "
the Formi ^^d the %ites be IdoUtrow in the Ufe,
Anftv, I. Thishefpeaks without proof.
2. Upon this milhke, that there is no other Idolatry bat tke giving
©f Divine honour to the Creature.
3. AI! will-worihlp is Idolatry, fo faith AttgHfl, de Confenf, Evang,
LiKi»Cap.i^, yaz^q.deAdorat. Lib . 2. Diffnt , i. Caf, 3. Di^Bils
*ig, Apol, p. 4. p. 544. and Mr. T, denies not fuch a wotlhipping God^
as that mentioned to bj will-worihip. *
What he adds, That it is not truey that they are Idolaters who ufe that
which is of divine appointment to the right «/(?, becaptje Idolaters abufed it to
Idolatry. Thofe may do well to take notice, of that are concerned in it:
For our parts wc fay no fuch thing j the allegation is impertinent to the
matter in hand, the Formufedin the Englijh Liturgy [s not of Divine
ippointment,nor the Rites thereof j neither will Mr.T. have the confi-
dence to affcit they are. That I any where revoke that affertion of
mine, That feTV or none T»or(hip the Creature termhative, is Mr, T. his
miftake. *Tis tmCy pag,6^. I fay. That Beliarmine affirms y that the
ImAfjts themselves terminate the veneration given to thewy as they are in
themfelves conjidered, — But this is but one Doctors opinion ( re-
traded by himj deSac. Ench^ I. 4, c. 25?. where he aflerts that which ij
contrary thereunto) (hould two or three more be remarked of the fame
mind with him, they amount but to a few in compaiifon of the gencii-
lity of mankind, othervvife minded.
The Minor Proportion, viz^. That the prefent Minifters of EuglanA
a^iin the hoi^ things of God by virtue of an Office- power received
from Idolaters, and offer up to him a VVoilliip meetly of humane com^
pofitionj once abufed to Idolatry, with the Modes and Rites of Idola-
ters, we do in S. T. demonftrtte. Three things are in this matter it*
■ gucd and evinced.
ift, That the Kami^ Church are Idolaters, their Worfhip in the comi
plcxion thereof Idolatry, This we prove at large, and our Animadvert,
r^r grants it to be true. 'Lz z " ^dly.
5(^4 ^ Vind\calion of the Sober Tejlimony^
2dly, Thit the prcfent Miniftcrs of England tft by virtue of in Of-
ficc-powci from this combination and ACfctnbly of Idolaters. This they
thcmfelvcs will not deny* Succeffion from hence being one of the beft
pleas they have for the juftification of their Miniftry. Tdis wc argue
at large in S, T, and Mr.T. after i great many words, grants thcii
fuccctrion from Rome.
But adds, 2dly, TIaM this k mt one of their hfl pleas they have for the
juftification oj their Miniftry,
An[rv.. J. When they (or he for them) produce a better, it (hall be
contidcred j this is what they cfpecially plead .♦ an Argument 'tis one
of their beft pleas in their account, however our Animadverter thinks
oiherwifc.
Nor indeed, 2dly, Do I fee how their Epifcopal Ordination can be
juftified without it.
HcconceiveSj 3dly, That they rviU deny that they aEl by virtue of aft
Office-power received hy fttccejjion from the combiriation of Idolaters in thi
Chftrch of Kome, «- ^ ^ ^
Anfj9, I. The derivation of their fucceflion from the Papacy they
deny not : This their fucceffion pleaded for is a fuccefiTion of Miniftry .
That they (hould be fo abfurd as to acknowledge a fuccelTton in refpea
of their Miniftry, from them, and deny ihcreceptionof their Office-
power from them, (which is nothing moreoi Icfs than then Office of
Miniftry ) I cannot imagine.
What follows in this 5^^. hath already been replied to, indthcic-^
fore we (hall not further trouble the Reader therewith.
We fay in 5. T. 3dly, That the prefent iMinifters offer up to Cod ft
Worfhifmeerly of Humane compofition ('as the Common-Frayer-BookjlVor^
(hip hath been pioved to be ) once ahfed to Idolatry (being the Worftiip
of that Church, whofe woiihip is fo ; the whole of it being taken out
of the Popes Portuis ) mthtbe Bites and Modes of Idolaters ( vixi, theii
Holy Veftmentf, Bowings, Candles, Altars, — which mc the Rites of
the Idolatrous Church of Rome^ and were introduced from thence by
AftftiftxbQ Monk ) cannot he denied. And hence conclude, That the pre-
fent Miniftersaaing in the holy things of God, by virtue of an Office-
power received from Idolater5,and offering upto him a Worftiip meer-
ly of Humane compofition, once abufcd to Idolatry, with the Rites and
Modes of Idolater*, are deeply guilty of Idolatry.
What Mr, T. replies hereunto 5^^.14. hath for the moftpart already
been removed out of the way.
I. The Form* of Piayeiitt the Service-Book, by their Impofition ire
-' - - made
in Anfwer to Mr . T. Us Exceptions] • 3 being made by
their impofition apartof Worlliip, they had been fupcrftitious, Idola-
trous, being an open violation of the fccond Commandment.
3. I wondei at the forehead with which 'tis affirmed that the Rites
tnd Modes ufed in the Church of Rome^ that are Idolatrou?, are not ob-
fcrved and ufed. What thinks he of bowing at th^ Altar, the Name of-
Jefus (which Dr. fVillet acknowledgeth to be fuperliitious, Idolatious,
Synop[» P»pf*t9; the p^^ ge»er. Contra; j&. 4p2, 493, 45 do our Prote-
ftants generally) kneeling at th^ receiving of the Sacrament, the Crofs in
Baptifm ? Thefe arefomc of the Rite§ ufed in.the Papacy, and as fa
ufed, Mr.T. will not, I prefume, deny them to be Idolatrons.
4. Tht lettncd Maceoviui proves what be aiTeits {That the [aorei
Rites of Idolattrs ( though they be thing!
in themfelves Indifferent) are •\ not to be -j- So fay our Divines ge»e^
retained^ becanfe all conformity with Ido- rally, to vehom Zmchic, Juni-;
latersis to he avoided) iiomLev.ip, us,Pelican Calvin, Be2a,Far-
19,27,28. c^2i. f. &VeHt, \/^^i. rcl, (jy^^Lyra, though a P^"
The things there intcrdi6led were in flfl) Pertlius, MDllcrus,Zc-
thcmfelves indifferent ; the ground of gedi'nus, Dansu?, Zcpperuf^
their interdi(ftion was, becaufe they Sadacl-
were the facrcd Rites of Idolatevf, is
fiy SalmajtHSy Herodotus, L 3. Malmonldes^ Treat, of IdoUtry , chap^ 12V
Sell, 7, 11. y'atahluif Faglns, &c. I cannot upon this occahon but re-
mind the judicious Reader of what the learned Zanchy writes touching
this matter to Q^Ell^. /. i, Sfifi. ;>. 431. "Tisnothonefi (faith he)
that thofe things which have a long time been ufed in idolatrous fi^orjhip , If
they are things in themf elves indifferent, fhould beretalnedintheChnrcby
with the haz^ardofthe Salvation of the Godly. The brazen Serpent which
was appointed by the Lord, and indeed for the Salvation of Jfrael, br-
caufc the JfraeUtes9ki.\{ey, or before the creature refpe^ive, or rvlth relmiott
to the creature^ is Idolatry,
WE advance in S, T. t third Argument to prove the Miniftersof
England Idolatcrj, which is thus foimcd ; Adoration iny bj^ or
before a creature icf pedlive, or rvith relation to the creature^ is tdolatrom^
fuch as fo adore or tvorfhip God are Idolaters : Bat the prefent Minijiers of
Bnglmd do adore or TV or Jhip God in f by 3 or before a creature ii,[^z&ish^ or
with relation to the creature* Theref&re^
The w^yVrpropofition, we fay, is generally owned Sy Pr(7^ objeUumaquo^
oi the motive of their kneclingj which if they were not there, they
would not do. Didoclaviusy p. 7$$. tells us, That Cemfiexionis Idola-
try ; which Maccovim affents to, Loc Com, p, 8tf i.
To which Mr. T, Scift. i f ♦ i,The Author of S. T. coHtradiEis him-
fejfi for /'^chap.y. p.40. hehathfaid, That k*teeling at the Lords Supper ^
is one peg beneath the adoration of the Breaden (jody he wiB not affirm, but
here he falthy 'tis an adoration -^ in, by^ or before the Creature rcfpedivc, or
with relation to the Creature*
Anfxv. i» Very good, and I fay fo fiill, not am I able to difccrn
the leart contradiftion betwixt thefe two affertioDS, The prefent Mi-
nittcrs may not worfliip the Popifh Breaden God, (as the Papifts do) and
yet woiHiip the true God, in, by, or before the creature, refpe^lve, 01
with relation to the creature. His pittiful jibes are beneath me to take
notice of. The Idolatry in kneeling at the Sacrament, is to be rcfcr-
led to I he fecond kind of Idolatry we at the beginning mentioned, it
being a way of adoration en joyned by man, not commanded by the
Lord J and every thing befide the Commandment is an Idol, hath been
an hitherto received Maxime.
But it cannot be this kjnd of Idolatry ^ (faith Mr. T,) for k»,
the other in the Nctv-Prlfon^ for not conforming thereunto,not to men-
tion others then, nor late fufferers for the fame caufc.
5 . Even in prayer to God, the pofture of ftanding feems to be more
ufed throughout the Scriptures, Gen. ip. 27* Levit.p.f. *2)eut,io, 8.
& 2p. 10. I iCiw^J 8.14,15'. 2 C^ro».20. 5',ip.' &25>.ii. Jcr.i^.i.
&i8,2o. £;5.f^.44.ii,if. X«)^tf i8.ii,ij. Mark, 11.2^. an Argu-
ment kneeling in that duty was no appointment of the Lord. That i*hc
Primitive Chiiftians, for above 800. years after Chrift, on all Lords
Dayes throughout the year, and from Eafier till fVhUftintlde, conftant-
ly prayed ftanding, Mr. T. knows is upon good Authority affirmed.
^ What he nextly adds, we hive already anfwered, (That I fpcak am-
biguoufly, and indiftindly, I cannot help, *tis not given to every one
to be tB, D, nor to fpcak with that eloquence and clearnefs as Mr, T,
I did what I could to be underftood.
However to make furc work on't, he denies both Major and w;W,
!♦ Adoration i»fJ>jf^ or before a creature refpeftive, or with rcUtion to the
creature-) u mt Idolatry j fuch <« fo rvorfhip ^od are not Idolaters ; for the
Holy Ghofi invites the Jews to worfhip at Cod^s Foot-Jioolj his Holy HiU^
Pfal. pp. 5 ,p. rvhich were creatures in^ by^ or before vchom refpe6live, or
with relation to them^ Oithe objedum fignificativca quo, or the motive
of their fVorjhipj they were to bow down to Cod'
Anfw, I. From God's Commands, tomans In ventions/is but lame
arguing ; God commanded Ifr^el to worrtiip at Jerufalem before the
A-ik,Altar there, which the) did without being guilty of the iin of Ido-
latry; therefore when men command us to bow down, and worfliipbe-
fore the crcit«i[e,wc may do fo without the contusion of any fuch guilt,
is a fort of reafoning that Mr. 7". upon fecond thoughts will be alliamed
to defend. As good he may argue, Tis lawful for men to. rob and
fpoyl their Neighbours, iot ibs J frac lit es, by the comaiand of God,
fpolled the Egypt ians^mihout being guilty of Theft.
But, 2dly, that ihe Temple, Altar — \yi<;th or the motive thereunto^
for the Common-Prayer-Book, faith i Ihathjieelingisnot for adoration of
tht
in Anfwer to Mr, T, his Exceftians, ^ 5p
the elements, hut for d ftgn'fjcatlon of our humhle ani p-atefnl acknorv-
leigment of the benefits of Chriji,
Anfw, I. But it faith not the Elementf trc not the motive of their
knccliDg, which they are, elfc why is not this pofturc enjoyn'd in other
parts and ads of worlliip, wherein 'cis our duty to fignific cur humble
and grateful acknowledgment of the benefits of Chrilt.
Nay, 2dly, whence i« it that in that very Ordinance aaother pofture
is after the receiving the Bread and Wine permitted ? Yea, do not our ,
kneelers teach us that we ought to ftand up at Gloria Patri, (which is as '
folemn a thanKgiving as any they have in their Common-Praycr-Book)
lifing from our knees and feats to repeat it.
Nor, 3dly, do I undeilhnd the bleating of that expredion in the
place cited by Mr. T. That genuflexion is enjojn'i for the avoiding fucb
frophanation tn the Holy Communion as might enfue : Except they ^'ive
honour more than enough to the Elements^ it being much like what was
pleaded by the Papi/is for the fame prailice, viz. that the Prierts may
put it moreeafily into the mouth of the Receiver, without danger of
(pilling it.
Nor, 4thly, know I a greater prophanation of any Ordinance,than
the adding fomething of our own devifing thereunto, as a part thereof,
and kneeling in the Ad of receiving by their impofition being fo added,
that which they pretend to do for the avoiding of prophanation in the
Communion, is the greateft prophanation thereof imaginable. I crave
leave to add that it is to be feared that there are hundreds of ignorant
people in the Countrey, who upon ftrid enquiry, would be found to
make the Bread and Wine, not only the motive, (which all know it is)
but the object of their Worlhip. Touching the Minifters bowing and
cringing at the Altar, he leaves them that are concern'd to plead for
themfelveSjhe will be no Advocate for them; only this he will [lyiThat
thofe who ufe ity avouch they do it not to any other but Gody and therefore
art not to be charged with Idolatry.
Anfvp.\.'X\\z vanity of this confcquence we have over and overconfu-
ted. 2dly,Many of the Heathens,ihe %or»ani(iszxouch as much touch-
ing bowing t4 their Images, they do it not to any other than God ; yet
he will not fure fay, therefore they arc not guilty of Idolatry. Thefc
coverings are quite too fliort to cover the nakednefs of the Minifters of
England^ which may be eafily difcern'd through them,
Oui next attempt in S. T. is, The removal of Ob jedions ; the firij
whereof is thus propofed.
pbjcd, I, The charging the prefent Minlfhrs of Englifld mtb Idala^
^70 A Vindication of tie Sober Tefimony,
trjy is exceeding harf^^i and thatMcb is an Argnment of a vtry mchrlfi^i*
an and cenferlopu Spirit,
To which vveanfwer, ift, Thit many words of Chrift himfdf were
accounted hard Tayingi, and not to be born. —
To which Mr. T. Chri/i's fayingi were unjftfil]^ counted bard, hecmfe
the]/ were trucy yours jptjil) becahfe not fo, —
Anfw, 1. Whether ours are true or falfe, is left to the Itnpiitial
R:ader to determine.
2dly, That they arc unchriftian and cenforious, is an uncharitable
Di^^atcof this Animadvert try they tend not lodivifion amongft the
Saints, but Union.
We add, fecondly, That in this matter wc have faid nothing but
what is affcrted by moft, or all, Protejiant Writers upon the fccond
Commandment, who tell us," That the worfhipping God in a way not
prefcribed by him, is Idolatry, fuch as do fo are Idolaters ; Our Ap-
plication hereof to the ptefcnt Minifters, whom wc have proved guilty
of fo worshipping God, wc fee no reafon why any fhould account un-
chriftian or cenforious. i.hiol
Mr. T. replies, TJ?at which by the Pxotcftant Writers is faid, ii Hpt aU
true.
Anfw, Nor do I fay it is ; but when the fame thing is aflerted by
them in T^efiy that we in this matter affirmed, 'twas fuppofcd that wc
mi^ht no more juttly be charged with cenforioufncfs and uncharitable^
aeS than they ; the truth whereof Mr. T. doth not deny.
We fay, sdly, What would thefc Objedors have faid to TertulUan^.
wbois by far more nice in this point of Idolatry than we have declared
out felvcs to be, yet could he not juftly be charged vvithan un-
chriftian and cenforious Spirit. - . . ,
To 'Nh'ich our Animadverttr idjoynSt^ i. TQXt\i\[\zntnthtclofeof his
iife was a man that afcrihed too much to private revelations,
' Jnfiv. I. And what if he did ? Is what he faith touching Idolatry,
bottom'd upon thofe- private revelations? Nothing lefs. Was he in
his declamations againft Idolaters uncharitable and cenforious > Who
befides himfclf will affirm it ? What rule of chaiity have we brokn in
What we have argued and offered in this matter ? What one particular
bavc I laid to the charge of the prefcnt Minifters that is not evidently
proved ? Let him manifcft the one or the other to be done by us, and
we will acknowledge our evil; till then dccjamaiions and outcries of
ancharitablencfs and cenfonoufnefs arc but empty founds.
2. His
. in AnfwertoMr,T,btf Except fonf, 37j
2. His teflc^lioD, asif vve were guilty of afcribing too much to pri-
ysteuvcladons, we can bear with contcmmenr,
N9n hoc frlmtim feUor4 vnhm mea fenferttHt ^YAViora tuli,
with this intimation, that through Grace we are not* Nor dare wc em-
brace any thing (ftiould an Angel from Heaven preach it) which is not />
confonant to the Law and Teftimony of God contained in the Sciip.^'-"'^'
turcf .
3. That TertHlllan had more reafon (as he faith) to be nice about
the point of Idolatry than we, he proves not ; the contrary is evident :
Did he live amongft Paganj?do not we live amongft RomKli Idolaters ?
who have been not a little induftrious to introduce and irnpofe upon us
the whole of their Idolatrous Worfhip and Service. Chriftianj were
then haltcning from the fuperftitions of the Heathens; many are now
polling toward Antichriftian Idolatry* Who could have thought that
fo much of the Worfhip of %omey their Prayers, Anthems, Rites,
and Inftruments of their Idolatry, as Surplice, Altar, Ondie>, Oi-
gtns — {hould in fo little time have taken root in England^ as in five or
fix years they have done ? ■ —
Thefecond Objcdion propofed in S. T. is, what fhallwe judge of
Latimer, Ridley, Hooper, — who worfhipped God after the fame way of
v9orfhip that thefe do now^ were they alfo Idolaters f
To which we anfwer, i. That they were eminent Witncflcs of Jc-
fusChrift in their day.
2dly, That they are now with Chrift, and (li all come with him to
judge their unjuft judges we believe.
But, sdly, they were but men encompaflfed about with many infir-
mities ; that they were guilty of the fin of Idolatry cannot be denycd.
Yet, I. They were in that day but jufi peeping out of the Gates of Ba-
hyhn ^ and 'tis no wonder if fomc of the filth of hci Fornications did
cleave to them* ' " "^ .•
To which Mr. T, Horv Hit that they Are now with Chrijfy iehhfHo «^-
clean thing e^mrsf ''r V ' "' " ' ' i •*"*' ^.
Anfw, I. How is it that Ji^jhttahnofi With Chrift, who'come* otit
of Bahjloftmth filthy Giiments, Zach. 3.3.
But, 2dly, his qucftion is anfvvercd in what follows in S.T. 2. God
(of pure Grace) accepted them in Chrifly granting them 4 general refen-
tance for thofeimqHitiesihey fAwmttobe jo,-~-^ '*'' - ^^'[ "
Alt a Mr. 7*.
372 -^ Vindication of the Sober Teflimonyt
Mr. T. idjoyns, That they jhottld repent of that thejf offered to jftftife a
little before they died^ is not Ukely.
Anfw. I. But that they had a general repentance for what they fee-
ing not to be evil, did not particularly bewailj he attempts not the
proof of. The Patriavks manifeftcd no particular repentance for their
poligamy, they juftified it by their pradlice to the laft* Abrahamiook
him Concubines when very old. David added to thofe he had, jihi-
[hag, when ready to leave the World. I ask, Was this their fin ? MuT,
will not deny it, nor that they vvcre defiled with it; every iniquity
' leaving defilement behind it. How is it that they arc now wiih Chrilt
where no unclean thing enters ? That they (hoirld repent of thai which
they juftified t little before they died is not likely j what will Mr.T. an-
fvvcr? If I miftake not,thc fame anfwct will ferve to ftop hisown mouth
with rcfped to his prcfent arguings. Nor know I a better than this ;
'tis true>,we find not that they particularly repented hereof,but a gene-
ral repentance we in charity believe they had, which God accepted in
Chrlft.
idly. What is that they offered to juftifie a little before they died ?
Did they oti;ir to juftifie kneeling in the t£t of receiving ? Nothing
leCs ! the wearing of the Surplice ? But fome of them, as Ridley — ab-
hord it, and were troubled at the very heart that they impofcd it upon
others, as he knowj.
We conclude in S* T. The Intelligent Reader k*Jomthat thffe things
ar^ not of any moment for the invalidating what hath been offered tifon this
SfibjeB,
Oar Animadverter replies, i^ Though this be not a direB anfrverto
their Argument, yet 'tis a very great prejudice againji it, that by Jiriking
at the prefent Minifiers youwoHnd the Holy Af art jrs, and make them Ido-
laters for that very thing for which they diedythat they might not be.JdoU'
ters.
Aiifiv, I. *Tis true, in the thoughts of fome this might be a great
prejudice againft the Argument, againft the Truth, 'Tis no new thing
Cpr the Truths of (Bod to be attended with as great prejudices as this.
2.dly, That this fhould be accounted any prejudice at all by pcrfons
that defire to weigh things uprightly in the Ballance of the Scriptures •
fetting afide the confidcration of pcrfons, cani^ot be imagined.
Not is it, 3,dly,. any greater prejudice againftour Argumcnt,thanilcs
againft the Arguments of the Pr»ent agalnji hearing the frefent M'lmfters, *Tii^n of-
fence ^ g^i^Ji fcafidalf and cauje of ftumbling to their Breathren^ for^
ill dden, hU(. 1^,6. Lukc 17. i, 2. Rom. 14. 13, ly, 2o* i Cor.
8. 8, p, ij* & 10, 24, Mr, T. his eight Arguments to the contra-
ryy refnted.
THE eighth Chapter of 5. T. contains a fcvcnth and eighth Ar-
gument againft hearing the prefcnt Minirters ; The feventh is
thus formed ; *7is not lawful for Saints to do any thing (for the
dsing vffhtreof there is no fofitive precept in the Scripture) that is
m offence^ griefs fcandal^ and caufe of (itimblingtoiheir Breathren. But
the hearing the prefent Minifters of England(is there is no pofitive pre-
cept in the Scripture for it, fo it) is an offence, grief, fcandaljtnd caufc
of Itumbling to the Brethren. —Therefore
The majory or fiift Propoiition we prove from Rom. 14. 13, ij, 20.
Il Cor. 8. 9, 13. & 10. 24. The minor, we fay, conlilbof two partf.
I. That for hearing the prefent Minifters, there is no pofitive war-
rant in the Scripture ; if there be, let it be produced, and this Contro-
vctfie is at an end
Now confidering Mr. T. his brag, p.6i.o( the facility of producing
Scripture- Warrant for hearing the prefent MinifterSj one might juftly
have expefted he fhould here produce ir. But in the ftcad thereof, Ch.
^. S. 2. you have only an intimation of what he hath already fhewed in
this matter, which hith already been refuted by us.
We add in S. T^ 2ly. Ihat the Saints hearing the prefent Miniflersof
Engl.ji an offence ^ grief Jcandal^and occafon of fiambling to their Brethren^
— to many thoufands it isfo, Oi^ their groans and tenrs alone^and together up-
on this foot of account demon jlr ate ; many have been drawn (at is known )
Ify the pratilce of fame leaditJg Brethren in this matter againfl the checkjof
their own Conferences to a conformity herein to their after grief & vpoanding.
To
itiAnfmr to Mr, T. bis Exception f] ' ^f^
To which, SeB, 3. Mr. r. replies, ( tfter he hith talked of mcnf
appropriating the tcartn vijible Saints^ to thofe of theCongregaiional
way, orPfcsbytcriil (which wc do not) that this Argument isuo-
neccflary if the other be good, that it fuppofeth all that 15 formerly dif-
puted to hz weak (which is one of his empty flouiinies) that vve affrioht
perfons by fuch Arguments to keep them to our felves ( in vvhich'^he
fpeiVs falfly, wickedly-) That hearing the prcfentMiniftcvs is not fuch
an offence, grief> fcandal, as that which is foi bidden, ^<3f. 18. 6. L»kf
17.1,2. Rom. 14. i3» ^^ 20- I Cor. 8.8, p, 15.^10. 24. and this
he will prove thus.
Arg. I. T^ffat u not fcAnd(iUz,lng forbidden, in thefe texts which ii nei-
ther by giving evil examfe in doing that which is intrinfecally evily nor by
tnticing yraUices^ or persecution intfellixg to evil^ nor by abnfe of liberty in
things lawful to the harm of another : Bat the Saints hearing the prefent
MinijierSy is not fcanializ^ing either of thefe rvayes : Therefore.
u4nfiv. I. Wc deny his Minor, for which he brings no proof. We fay
mth him, That hearing theMinifters of England is not a matter of in-
diffirency ; 'tis not the duty of the Siints^ buttheiifin; yet foma
others accounting it neither matter of duty nor fin, but liberty, wc
were willing to debate the cafe of fcandal with them, upon that iheii'
ivowed principle? as wc afterward do. So that wc arc wholly uncon-
ecrncd in what follows in this Argument, which yet we have already
fully anfwered to.
2dly, His Argument is jittly retoi;ted upon himfelf, thus j
The fcandaltz,ing of Brethren by giving of evil example y in doing that rvhich
is ofit frlfevil (as joyning with an Antichrirtian Minifbry and Worfhip
is ) by enticing p)'A^ices, or-perfecutlon^ impelling to evil ( as thofe do who
by their practices io hearing--allure,or by prefenting (or abetting thofe
that do fo by holding Communion with them — ) impel fuch as are
weak thereunto ) or by abufe of liberty in things lawful ( as fome hearers
judge their heating to be ) to the harm of another ( viz,, the wounding
grieving the confcienccs of the weak, it may be ftriking themcff the
wayes of InBituted Worflnp, when they behold the turning to ind fro
of a zealous fprwardly profdllng people) is fcandnlisjing forbidden in
the fore-cited Scriptures- ( This Mr. 7', grants ) But the Saints heari^ff
the prefent Mini(lers, is a fcandal lz,if:g with refpcB to each of thefe particu'
lars : ( as wc have fhewed ) Therefore,
Arg. 2. His fecond Argument is, That is not fcandaliz^lng forbidden
inthofeTexts which doth not tend to om of thofe evils^ for preventing of
which thofe pr-eeepis of non-fcandaliz^ngwer* given .• Bm the hearing ths^-
pref(nt-.
3 7 (J A Vtiidicat ion of the S oher Tejlimony,
frefg/it Min'ijlers tends not to any ofthofe evils : Therefore, —
An[rv. I. It tends to fome oi all of thofe evils mentioned in the
Texts; it tends to fin, 'tis a joyning with a falfe Antichriftian Mini-
fhy, to the juftification, encouraging of thecn in the excrcife of « falfc
Miniftciial power ; it tend* to the forrow, or godly vexation of the
Saints, whilftthey lee their Brethren in the conftantdifobedience of the
Calls of God to come out of Babylon-^ forfaking thofe wiyes in which
they have found tell and peace, and returning to thofe their fouls late-
ly loathed and abhorred. His following Surcafms he wili one day know
had been better omitted ; the reprefenting hearing the prefent Mini-
fieis as dangerous and ftnful> occafions not any to fall to erroneous
Principles and Pra6liccs. The compliance of Profeflbrs together with
the debauchery of the Pricfts, is for the moft part the fourcc and fpring
hereof ; fo that we may better argue,
2dly, That is the fcandalizing forbidden in thofe TextSjVvhich tends
to any of thofe evils, for preventing of which thofe Precepts of not
fcandalizing were given ; '( this Mr. T. grants ) But the hearing the
prefent Miniftcrs tends to fome of thofe evils : ( as wc but now View-
ed ) Therefore. —
-Arg. 3. His third Argument follows thus • That is not fcandalizing
forbidden in thofe TextSy -which doth not arife from any defeB -of Charity ^ or
nndtie behaviour of the ferfon offending^ but from the difiemper of theper-
fan offended : But the fcandaliz^ing by hearing doth not arife from the defe^
of either of theje^ but from the dljtemper intimated : Therefore.- —
Anfw. I. We deny his CMlnor^ and expect is proof thereof by the
next; till when Wi crave leave,
2- To retort this Argument upon himfelf ; That u fcandallz^ing
forbidden In the Text which doth arife from the defers Intimated^ and not
from the dljlemper of the perfon offended : Btii thti fi the fcandallz,ing by
hearing.
1. Tis a dere6l of Charity to the fouls of their weak brethren,\Yhom
they wound, grieve, before whom they are continually laying a temp-
tation cf apoliafie from ProfeiTion, Religion, whilft they behold noted^
Profeffors to cleave to thofe wayes, perfons and things, that they oncc<
could have no communion with,wiih hands lifted up to Heavenj cov^-.
nantedagainft,
2. 'Tis a defed of Charity to poor finneis, who are hereby encou-
raged to fit under a dead, formal, faplefs Minilhy, to abide in a lazy
formal way of vvoiChipping God. —
And 3. In both ihefe refpe(^s 'tis «n undue behaviour,'
4tThat
in Anfwer to Mr, T. bis Exception f I j 77
4. Tbit it irlfeth not from diftcmper wc Qiill evince when we come
to confidci what Mr. T. hath offered to prove that to be the fouile
tnd fpring from whence it doth anfe.
Wc attend his fourth Atgument,which is thus formed.
Arg, 4. That is not the feand.aUz.ing forbidden in thofe Texts which ii
tiot oWending fcrfons rveak^in the Faith ^ and of doubting Confciences^jet fe^ce-
ably minded^ but ofperfons conceiving themfelves (irong. • — Bnt fnch u the
difpofition And carriage ofthofe that frettnd to be offended at hearing the prr-
fent (J^iniflns : Therefore.
Anf. I. This Argument interferes with his firft, where he makes the
oiving an evil examplc^by doing that which is in it felf evil, to be the
fcandal condemned : Now 1 conceive not only pcrfons weak in the
faith, but ftrong Chriftians, will be, cannot but be fcandalized at pro-
felforslo doing.
. fiat to wave that • a. We deny his LMinor^ for the confirmation
of which he offers nothing that may deferve the Name of proof; (Fot
what if the perfons offended think themfelves ftrong, able to argue a-
gainft the practice of hearing the prcfentMinifters, oppofe it with vio-
lence,— they may be weak in the Faith notwiihftanding. The weak
brother thought himfelf able to difputc againft the pradicc of him that
ite the ldolothytei% (inful, and yet a weak brother. )
However, 3. We are engaged to him for affording us a fourth Ar-
oument, to prove the fcandalixing by hearing to be the fcandalizingin
the Texts.
That ti fcandaliz,ing forbidden in thofe Texts rohich ii of ending perfons
rfeak^in the Faith^ and of doubting confciences, jet peaceably minded : But
fuch is the fcandalisjing by hearing the prefent t^inijiers : Hundreds of
weak^SaintSy tender^ young Converts are hereby offended. Therefore. -—
Arg> J*' His fifth Argument is this. That n not fcaHdaUx,ingf orbid-
den in thofe texts which is by ujing our liberty^ where we k^ow not any prefent
that will be of ended at the ufe of »>, or that figni fie s the offence at our aBion
when we do it. In which cafe the Apoftle aUowes the eating of things offered
toldolsy I Cor. 10. 27, 28, 29. and confequently the uje of our liberty in
other thtngsj^wful -, and if any abfent be offended^we are ready to give ajufi
reafon of our doing — .• But foit is atthe offenceofpcrjonsinhearingthe
prefent Minljiers^ Therefore.
Anfw. I. We deny his Major ^ partly bccaufc that fcandalizing is
forbidden in the texts, which tends to the grieving the Siinps ; cow
this they may be, are, as much by the report and information of their
bicthrens aaion, that they conceive evil, though thefe judge it thcii
B b b liberty,
«•
^y% 'Ayindicattonof tie SoherTeftimony^
liberty* »$ if tliey were prefcnt ; of which t juft teifon cin never be
oiven • for if the thing I do be matter of liberty, I ctn never give »ny
juft reafon of my doing it to the grief and wounding of my weak brother ;
for my fo doing i$ anexprcfs violation of the commandment of Chrift
in the Scriptures mentioned ; partly bccaufe the fcandaliz'ng inhear-
in" is by giving evil example in doing that which is intrinfecally evil ;
which whether the perfon offended be prefcnt or abfeat is condemned,
and no juft reafon thereof can be given.
Not 2. I J the Minor alway true, but rarely ( if at all) there are
pcrfons prefcnt that will be, are offended at it ; it may be weak Saints
that by their example ( it dwy be ) with a doubting Confciencc arc
brought thither. o-niiiy ^ , ^ ..... ,
Arg. 6. Hisfixth ArgulRentiS, ToAt i6 not the jca»daliz.tngintht^
texts, in which if the offence be regarded, the f erf on fu^pofed to offend fhall h
alrvayss deprived of the ufe and ken fit of hi^ liberty, contrary to i Cor. lO,
29, 30. and that is a matter of the greatefi moment for his fonts welfare^
the hearing the Word of God ; -whereby his liberty will be lofi, and a yoke of
bondage received, contrary to Gi\, 2, ^, & d. i. But fo it ia iff the offence
for hearing the prefent Minijiers, Therefore. —
Aitfw. The difcovety of the unfoundnefj and rottennefs of the foun-
dation upon which this Argument is built, will totally enavaic and
lender it ufelefs,with rcfpcd to the end for which it is produced.
I. *Tis fuppofed that we ought not alway to deprive our fclvcs of that
which is the matter of our Liberty, if a weak brother be alway offended
with out ufe of it. But this is nototioufly falfe. Firjl, The ground or
leafon of my fiift forbearance to cxcrcife my Liberty remaining, Rea-
fon will disrate that I muft forbear the exercife thereof ftill. Secondly^
Dire Thelnterrogation is of one denying (hiih Pa-
r£Hi ) \, d. I will by no means do it, / wiU rather abflain from eating
fiejh for Eternity, ti he (pziks, i Cor. 8. 13.
2. *Tis fuppofed that except a man hear the prefent Minifrerf, be
cannot hear the Word of God at all, which bleffed be the Lord is far
otherwife. , t-l r
3. The Liberty mentioned, Gal. 2,^, ^'f.i* Is a Liberty from
Jewilh Ceremonies, the Bondage is owning, fubj^aing ro them, which
what it makes to his putpofe,! cannot tell. Sure his Liberty from ihefc
will
in Anfvper to Mr. T. his Exceptions. ^yc^
will cot be loft by his not hciring the prefcnt Minifteri ; Liberty from
fomc of them, together with Ceremonies of Humine Invention will
hereby be cftabliihed and obtained, in which it i$ the duty of Saints to
ftand faft.
4f 'Tiffuppofed that Vismy Liberty to hear the prcfent MInifterj
01 otheiwifc ; but that Mr. T. cannot plead, who hath denied heariD<5
them to be a matter of Liberty, °
Arg, 7. His 7'^ Argument is this, That is mt fcandaliz^lng forhiddcn
in thofe texts, the amidwg of rvhich draws after it a greater fcandal : But
infhmningtohear the p-efent Minifters there is a greater fcandal than in
hearing the^n, — Therefore, —
AnfTpp, Wc deny his Minor, his proofs whereof are a meer;^//V/a
principiii filfc and ludicrous.
ift, Theperfon refufing to hear fcandalizeth not himfclf, by con-
firming hlmfeK in his fuperftitious error, bindring hi.'? fpiritual growth,
and enfnaring himfelf in an unjuftifiable reparation. Nor doth h°e fcan-
dalize others by his example, confirming thofe that refufc to hear in
their error and fchifm, whom he ought to oppofe as Paul did 'Petery
Cal. 2. II. for, I. Refufing to hear the prefent Minifters is no er-
loi ; Nor, 2. Supetftitious; Nor, 5. An hinderanceof fpiritu?.l
good and growth. (Saints experience, through the grace of the Lord,
the contrary) Nor is, 4. Separation from them unjuftifiable; Or,
f . Schifmatical ; not cannot be : for Schifm, according to the Scripture
notion of it, as a worthy learned perfon hath lately proved, is in one
particular Church amongft the members thereof j which of the Church
oi England we are not. Nor, 6, is Cal, 2. 1 1. a ground fuflficient for
any one to reprove or oppofe pcrfonj in their non-conformity to the
prefent Minifters,
ift, ?/««/ reproves Peter for non-communion with the Saints upon
Principles purely Judaical ; thofe that refufe to hear, refufe communi-
on with vifibly debauch't and wicked petfons upon Gofpcl-Princi
pies.
2dly, 'Twas Peters diffembling that Paftl reproved, verf. 11,12.
One while WS would eat with the gentiles • other-while for fear of the
y^wihewillnot; which will rather countenance a perfons reproving
fuch as hear thofe whom not long fines they refufed to have communion
with, and fwore to extirpate.
He adds, 2dly, By refufing to bear the prefent Minifters 3 i. The (heip
of Chrift are fcattered, --^
jdnfrv. They arc rather united in one. That there is fiich bittemefs
B b b. 2 and
\%6 'A Vindication of the SoherTeflimmy I
and enmity in the bed of the Separaiifts ( ai Mr. T. mentions} to-
wards difTenteis from thccn, that breaks the bond of Charity ,is falfc and
untrue. 1 wifti that he fpcak not ag>ainrt his knowledge and confcience
in this matter. The bond of love and charity atnongft the true difciples
of Cfarift, they are fo far from going about to break, that they labour to
ftrcngthen, encrcafe it. And could wifh that all thofc names and ti-
tles of diftinaion, which either fome have affumed to themfelves, or
others have reproachfully applied to them that love Chrift in upright-
nefs, were removed ; that we might know one another ts Chriftians, and
ftudy the exaltment of truth and peace amtffigft each other, and the Ni-
tions where our lot is caft.
He tells u$, 3dly) Therefofer to goto bear ^ [canialUeth thofe that do
fo, who are cenfurei and, jhanned oi laffed Brethrett, and meer Formaltftr,
and thereby are grieved : ^ H"; Jcandaliz^eth the conforming Mini"
If en, ■tvho.art much hiniredm their performance of their Minifiry, —
Anfxv. r. Itmsybethofewhoarecenfuredas Ispfcd BrethrcOjarc
juftiy fo cenfured, being fuch as have departed from the truth and way
of the Gofpel they once embraced and walked in, and if fo the ccnfurc
isnot unjuft, but righteous ; and, if managed in a Gofpel-fpirit of lov€
andmceknefs, there isnojuftcaufeof grief adminiftred : Thecen-
furc (iftheLordblefsit for their awakening and Kcovery ) may be a
foundation of future joy and rejoycing.
2> That the Conforming Minifters (hould hereby be much hindrcd
in the performance of their Miniftry, is not likely, fince what they do
therein they have ready prepared in their hands; and if it were true,
their Miniary being a falfe Miniftiy9'tisourduty in the way of th« Gof-
pel to hinder them therein. ^ /. . . r /•#
Arg. 8. His S^'' Argument follows i That fcanialtz.ingis not forbfdH
den in thefe texts, by avoiding of Mcb the Maglftrate is fcandali^ed, bis
Government dljlurbed, his Torver excited againji others as difobedient tobts
Lam ; vfhtreby many perfons mth their Families are undone : But fo it is
when th^prefent MlniJiersare.not heard at the flat c of things norv is, Tbtri'
Anfrv. I. The LMajor Pfopofition undcrftood of fcandalizing, by
giving evil example, in doing that which is in it fclf evil ( which is oar
prefentcafe) is nototiouQy falfe and untrue. The not coming to
the Service and Sacrifices of the Gentilesi in the dxyes of the Apoftles;
The not owning the Pope, the Sacrament of the Alcar^ coming to then
PidlK- Churches in the Marian daycs, was that which fcandahzcd the
M5oiftrate,diftuibcd(a$wasfaid) the Govemmenr, excited the Ma-
° ' ?,iftiatc
in Anfwer to Mr . T. bis Exception/, '38,
giftratc iglinft others is difobtdicnt to hij Liwf, whereby many pcr-
fons were, as to tbciv FimiHcs tnd Eftatcs, undone, they thcmfelves
loft their lives, yetwere tbcy nottofcindalize the Saints, by adhcrin^'
to the forefaid abominations.. "
2. The M/W undcrliood of a juft ground of fcandal, is not true, /. r.
thcMagiftrate hath no real or juft ground to be fcandalizcd by perfons
not coming to hear the prefent Minifters, nor is the Government di-
fturbed thereby, noi hath he, as we know of, any Scripture-Warrant
to exert his power againft the No».conformijisy to their and their Fami-
Hesruinc; and if faedofo, 'tis better to fuffcrthan fin, to hazard thc^
Iof$ of all, than debauch our ConfcienceSj and fm againit God.
SeSi. 2.
Of ScandtU tsken and given. JVhcrcin the mature of it con/tfts. Of ojfcnim
ingthefVorU, Hearing the frtfcnt LMiniJierSy a [candal given, i Cor.
8, 10. explained. Of fitting in the Idols Temple. Some of the Corin-
thians thenght they might he prefent at the Sacrifice of Idols. Of having
fellorvjhtp with Devils. 1 Cor. 10. 20. exponed. The Judgment of the
Learned PirxiiS thereupon. The offended Brother had not greater reafon
to be offended at perfons eating the Idolothyte^ nor fo great ^ as we have
at perfons hearing the prefent Minlfiers. Of the Scanializ^lng. Mat. 1 8,
6. Rdm. 14. I' explained. Of offence by forbearing to go to hear.
Mat. \7*^7' iThef'f. i2*Heb, 13.17. John 10.27. Maik4»2j^.
9^ened<,
THE next attempt in S. T. is to anfwer Objc(5^ions that might bs
made againft what was in the foregoing Difcourfe, in the mattei
Of fcandal argued by us. The firft is this ;
Obje fomc one or other will be offended at it ; there arc a Generation of
men, whom the doing my duty will offend, and caufe to blarphemc,th?fe
ire not to be minded, but to be pirtied.
To-Which Mr, T* replies, St^. 4, That there k any Generation ofmtn^
whoff
382 A Flndication of the S oher Tejlimonyl
rehofe fence is mt to be minded, is not the DoBrine of the ApoflUi hut eon*
trarytoity i Cor. io.32,33» ^p. 19,20,21,22,23.
A»fw. Nor is it any do^rinc delivered by us. We fay not. That in
matters of libariy we are not bound to heed giving offence to the
World, we believe rhe contrary. But this we affirm, that fuch.per-
fons as vvili be offeaded at me, and blafpheme becaufe I do my duty,
(for fo arc the words) arc not to be heeded, i. e. I am not to furceafc
what God requires me to do, becaufe they are offeaded,and blafpheme,
which what is cited by Mr. T. doth not contradid.
That which follows touching bearing the Minifters of England, be-
ing avowedly afferted upon this Foundation, that it is lawful fo to do>
we pafs by, as what wc arc not in the leaft concern'd to take notice of ;
though there is indeed upon that fuppofition nothing of Argument in
it.
We add in S. T. 2dly, But 'tis not yet proved, nor like to be, that
the fcandal treated of is a fcandal taken and not given ; the very nature
of fcandal given, (as is confeftbyall) and evident beyond exception,
from the Apottles difcourfe, i Cor. 8. 10. lying in the doing of what is
judged by me to be my liberty, but other Saints account my fin, and
from thence have occafion of grief and ftumbling adminiftred to them.
This was the very cafe of ihe Church of Corhth, (upon the occafion
whereof P<««/ writes to them) fomeof them judged it their liberty to
fit at Meat in the Idols Temple, others not being fully perfwaded here-
of, were fcandalized many wayes at this their pradice, which the Apo-
fiie therefore condemns as unlawful.
To which Mr. T. i, 'Tis mt confefi by aU that the nature of feandal
glven-i lies in the doing what « judged by me to be my liberty^ which other
Saints are ready to conclude to be my fin) and from thence have occajion of
grief and flnmbtlng adminiflred unto them^ Dr. Hammond, /Wr . Jeans,—
are otherivlfe minded.
Anfw, Bat Mr.T. abufeth us and his Reader ; we fay not that fcan-
dal given lies in angring — our Brother j but evidently affcrt that there
are two things that conftitute it.
T. It mull be a matter that the giver of it judgeth to be his liberty,
and the receiver accounts his fin.
2. Itmultadminifter occafion of ftumbling, grief J and forrowunto
the fcandalized, i.e. he is cither grieved, troubled at it, or by it in-
fluenced to fin againft God. And this I fay is confeft by all. Nor do
the Authors cited by him,or he himfclf contradi we are little concern'd, whilft he attempts not
the confutation of what is afferted by us touching the nature of fcandal
given.
He tells us, ffV are mlftaken in thefe things^ i . That the offending per^
fon jttdgd It his liberty to fit at meat In the JdolsTempU.
^njxv. But this is Mr. T.his miftake, not mine, i Cor, 8» 10. [In
the hoHjfe of Idols y faith the Arablck,.']
And the Learned Paransy in i Cor. lo^ 21. tells us, * That fome of
* the C«n«ri&»4«j were of this Opinion, That they might be prefent at
• the Sacrifices of the Idols.
Tea but (faith our Animadvctter) this is III applied however to the cafe
of hearing ; for the fitting at meat In the Idols Temple^ vf-^ having fellowm
fhlpmth Devils, i Cor. 10. 20, Bftt thlsis the Service of the living God ;
the hearers of the prefent Minlfers jttdgeit not only their liberty, but their
dnty fo to do»
Anfrv. I , If they judge it to be their duty> they are able to produce •
fome Scripture to evince it fo tobej let them do that? and take the
Caufe.
2. Many o^thc hearers do not judge it their duty, but matter of
liberty.
3. He begs the quefiion, whilft he fup}>ofeth hearing the prefent
Minifters to be the fervice of the living God ; were it ib, it were un--
qucftionably our duty to hear them ; bttt that is the ttJ Kftnftifo^.
.4. For the reft, the Learned Parous ftiall anfwer for me, who in
Cfir» xo. 20. faith, God doth forbid the Jews, Levlt, 17.7. to fa-
^ ciificc
^84- -^ y indication of the Sober Teflimony,
crificc after the manner of ihe Gentiles, DITJ?^^, to hairy Dtvils^
Nftml>.2f, 3. fJe complains that they had joyned thcmfclves to the
Devil of the Moahites, ^y^ ^3?3j which i», the t«ri of opening, i, e.
Fornication. THIS IS THE JUDGMENT OF GOD OF EVE-
RY WORSHIP WHICH IS NOT PERFORMED ACCORD-
ING TO HIS WORD ; 'TIS NOT PERFORMED TO GOD,
BUT TO THE DEVILS. But Idolater, neither in the Pagan State
of old, not now in the Papacy, do intend to offer to DevilS} but to /i
God. What then ? The Apoftle pronounceth the contrary, whatever \
they intend. For God is vvoifhipped not by humane inventions, but by
hisownpreceptf. —
The fccond miftake Mr. 71 mentions, is his own, not mine ; I fay,
the fcindtl lay in grieving the offended Brother, and occafioning him
by the evil example of the offender to t^ with a doubtitig Confciencc,
i\ e, SomeBiethren were grieved at the liberty the Offender took;, 0-
thers ftumbled to zSt doubtingly by his example, and fo toiin: The
latter he grants, the former ?io,ii, 12,13. tbeufeof it is interdiacd for fear of offending
the weak. — So that evidently in this matter th'c cafe betwixt the Co-
rmhtani and Profeflbrs of England, (vvho fuppofe it to be their lib:rty
to hear the prefent Minifters) runs parallel. I confefs there arc fomc
things that may be argued on the behalf of the offended Brethren now,
that the offended Corinthian could not plead ; God had fpewed out this
Generation of men with loathing and contempt, with the whole fardel
of their Liturgical Rites and Ceremonies, vvoundcd them in the head,
removed their Lords the Bi(hops, from whom they derive their Autho-
rity; the prefent fcandalizers (many of them) rcjoyced in what was
done; fwote before it was done, todo their uttermoft tocffcd it ; that
after ill this they ftiould ftiikc in with them, attend on their Miniftry,
is an aggravation of their fcandal. The Offenders have no ApoftoHcal
word to warrant the lawfulnefs of hearing them, as the Corinthian Of-
fenders had to warrantize the eating the Idolothyte out of the cafe of
fcandal. So that they that hear them, are juftly charged with fcandal
given; notwithftandingtheempty flouriili, and wordie difputc of Mr.
T. to the contrary.
Wc add in 5.T1 Should it be granted for Arguments fake, (though in
truth it is not fo) that 'tis the liberty of Saints to hear the prefent Mi-
nifters, yet manyfincerc Lambs of Chrift being (groundcdJy) ftum-
bled and fcandalized hereat; for that very reafon, if no more could be
faid, it beconftsour fin : to be guilty whereof, whocanchufe but be
fiird with trembling, that hath ever with ferioufnefs read that teriibic
commination of Chrift ? MAtA%.6. —
Mr. T. replies, i. This were to maks every honefi hearted Chrlfllan *
^ofe^ a Lord over my Confcience^ — .
Anfiv. No in no wife : *Tis touching (fuppofed) matters of Liber-
ty that wc arc treating, in my aaing, wherein to the fcandalizing of
C c c the
3 ^S A Fwdi cation of the Sober Tejlimonyi
the weak Chrlftian, I fin, and this Taul sffitms, i Cor» 8. p, io,i 1,12,
13. and fo do ill that write about fcandal. Yet 'tis not to be thought
they hereby make the weak Chriftian a Pope, infallible Judge, Lord,
or Law-givei to thetn ; This is fo far from diverting Chrift of his King-
ly Authority (ashefpeaks) that it rather elhbliflieth it ; he is exalted
as King, whillt in obedience to hij command I am forbearing the cxcr-
cife of my Liberty, becaufc offensive to my Brother, though upon
every other account it were lawful for me to be found in the practice
of if.
He tells u?, 2dly, That his Treatlfe of fcandal fhervs Mat. 18. 6, t9
h meant of other fcuftdaliz^in^than [uch oi this Author means.
Anfw. But if it be afcandalizingtomake themto halt or turn away
from God, Luke 17. 2. i. e. from his Wayes and Divine Appoint-
ments ; if it be with defpifing them, promoting their perfecution, cau-
fing their perdition, that is meant, /T/-«a. 18. as Mr.T. faiih it is, 'tis
fuch a fcandalizing as we mean. The profeffing People of God that are
in the practice of hearing, are ftumbling-blocks in the way of the weak,
Gccafioning them to turn off from God to the inftitutions and inventi-
ons of men, whereby they are made vvovfe and more languid in true
godlinefs, (as fome fay the vvord 'smv^xKov fignifies, Folyc. Lyfer. )
And as by experience we find them to be, who forfaking the AiTembling
themfelves together, attend upon the Miniftry of England ; they de-
fpife, difdain, vilifie, fet at naught, bafely efteem them (as ?aul fpeak?,
Rom. 14.3' fiiie^-i^srsm) as fuch whofe grief and offence is not to be
heeded and regarded, by preferring the matter of their own liberty above
their Brothers fcandalizingjthey promote their perfecution, by ftrength-
•€ning the hands of Perfecutors, and incen(ing them fo much the more
a<'ainft them, to force them to a complyance, becaufe others of the
fame way and perfwafion in dayes pall with them, are wrought over
thereunto.—
M;. T« his Application of the fayings of Payhdy^ (an enemy to the
Nen-c^nformtfis iadtyts paft, and a bitter one, who would fpuk the
worftof them, and more tlyn is true) to fuch asareagainft hearing
the Minifters, is wicked and fcandalous ; * Do thefe mecily profefs in
« imitation — out of humour — are they fuch as cannot abide to be in-
» ftruaed by them of contrary judgmcnts,defpihng what they fay before
« they know it, that never feek to have their doubts refoived,who avow
* the ncceffity of confefiing againft kneeling, and yet upon fome other
* mans Declaration of the lawful liber'. y of it, ■ profefs they never ftudi-
*ed the Point j that make no Confcience of flandeiin^, backbiting,
* conform
in Anfwer to Mr. T, his Exceptions . '. 3 S 7
'conformity to the World in apparel, pleafurcs, fcindalous, ccve-
« toufnefs, unfaithfulnefs in their Calling??, unjuftice in their DcaHngs,
f who have confeflcd thcmfelves to be convinced of the lawfulnefs of
< Conforming, a;id yet will nor, or would, bat for theii difcrcdit in
* tbc World, cfpecially among the perfocs of that fide.
Efiffc hac tHA tunica ml pater! 0^
ij thif the voice of Mr. T, (a once zealous and forward Profeflfor)
againft tbofc who dare not attend on the piefent Minilkrs ? Arc thefe
perfonjofthe complexion intimated? How durft he affirm it? Will
notthevyorft of their Neighbours where they live give them a better
chata£^er, and tell Mr. T, to his face, that he hiih afperfed and belied
them?
Wc propofc in S. T. a fccond Objedion to be confldered, viz,. But
if I do not £9 to hear the Mlnlfltrsof this day^ many godly And foher Chri-
jiians mil be of ended at my forbearance ; [o that whether I heoTy or whether
I for bear y I jhall offend.
To which we Anfwcr, i. That granting the Cafe to be as is fuggcft-
cd, (though perhaps fomcwhat clfe upon a fedous and ftrid fearch may
be found to lie at the bottom of mens Conformity 1 am apt to be-
lieve were atolkration granted, they would not fo do.) Wc ask, i.
Do you look upon your going to hear as your duty, or liberty? If the
fitft, let the proof thereof be produced, and we are fatisficd ; if the fe-
cond, you are bound by many folemn Precepts not to ufe your liberty
to fcandalize your Brethren.
To which Mr. T. Seft. 6. i. // the Cafe be granted, at Is fuggefled^
the fame Argument which proves it unlawful to hear the prefent Mimiltrs^
proves it unlawful not to hear them.
Anfw. I. Granting the Cafe fo be as is fiiggcfted, is no more than
datononconcejfo, granting if for Arguments fake, not yeelding what is
fiiggefted to bi true ; from whence 'tis not granted by any rules of Dif-
putation that I know of,foi Mr. T. fo draw condiifions, 'twere irratio-
nal fo to do. ■•
Though, idly, were the cafe granted in /T/r. T. his fenccjyct what
he infers from thence, he hath not,wi!l not be able to demonftratc. *Tis
granted, Mat. 17-27. fpeaksof fcandalizing by omilfion.
But, I. there were none on the other fide who would have been of-
fended at the doing thereof, as is our cafe.
2. Peter had but now faid that his Mafter did pay tribute, and for him
C c c 2 to
,58 A Vindication of the Sober Tejlimony,
to hive tefufed, it had been upon that account a Tcandal with a wit-
neff.
As for what follows, vvcfaidnotin ^.T.-that fomcwhat clfe lay at
the bottom of perfons Conformity, but intimated our jealoufies, dcfi-
rcd the Conformijisio make a ftrift fearch thereabout ; which when Mr,
T. manifcfts to be untrue, we (hall be far from juftifying it*
H^ells us, 2dly, If a toUeratlon were Imbracei bj them^thii vfohUonly
fhcrpmy did not tie themfehes to the prefent Mlniflers
Ayi[^. 'Twouldfure dolomewhat more, i. Manifeft that they judge
It not matter of duty, but liberty, to hear them : for, if their duty,ihc
giving toleration would not difchaige them thereof, they w^rc as much
bound to attend them aftct.vard as before.
2. Difcover that it was not the fear of ofFending any th-at caufed
them to attend on the Miniftry of England^ for that offence continuing,
(a$ it would, Docwithftanding a toleration granted) they would hear
them mil.
His reflections upon the grounds of out feparation we can bear;
"Twoi Indeed (as he faith) fomervbat elfe that did heretofore engage here'
HtitO:, hefides offending the Lambs of Chrifly viz. his Command (of which
~ we have given an account in this Treatife) which yet (together with
the Cprings of Love, and Life, Peace and PleafantnefsinCommunion
with himfelf he is pleafed to dig up for us) ks^f^ «^ therein. His lioiies
of preferment, power, adherence to a party, I am,, through gracc>,a
ftrangci to, and do from my Soul abhor. PofTibly he may better un-
dcrfiand thcfc things.
To the queftion. Do you look, nfon your going te hear as your dttty f
He anfwers, That It is the duty of Saints to hear the prefent Miniflers^
though not chofen by them to be their PaflorSy I think, maybe proved from
iTnef,f.i2. Htb. 13.17. John 10.27. Mirk4.23.^
A4w. The impertinency of thefc citations to his purpofc will foon
be difcover e«J, i Thef j. 1 2* Paul befeeches them^ to know them that /a-
bour among them, andare over them in the Lerd^ i.e. by his appointment,
according to th; Orders and Ordinances of his Houfe are deputed Pa-
floTS-over them j But what is this to the Um^trso( England, who
(we prove) are not fct over us according to any inlUiution of Chrift,
but according to Amichriftlan Canons are obtruded, and thruft upon us
whether we will or no? The impertioency of Heb.11.17. to his prefent
p'jrpofe we have already difcovered. John 10. 27. fpeaks of Chriftj
Sheep hearing his Voice, but in the way he hath appointed* -y^^r^ 4.
23. is a proverbial exprelTionj in ufc at that day^ exciting the Auditors
to.
in An fiver to Mr. T. his Exception /. 58 9
toifolcmnattcndment unto what was fpoken to them ; Chrift'jfcth
it to piefs them to a fciious attention to what he fpakc ; ivhich that it
hath the kaft tendency towards the proof of attending'upon an Ami-
chrilHan Miniftry, or the prcfcnt Miniftcrs of England^ fuch dull pcr-
fons as we, are not able to difccrn.
Serioufly Sir, you do but cxpofc the caufe you undertake to defend,
to contempt, and your felf tothefcornof fomc, and pittyof themorc
fobcr, whilft you arc able to make no better defence for it.
'lis added in S.7. zdly, Let hoth f Arties be veelghei In an ufrlght
baUAnce, fuoh Myoujudgetobe offerMiimthyotifor noi heariyig^ and [neb
as Are offended thereat ; / am bold to [ay the Ujl mentioned, for number ho-,
linefs-, fpirituaUty and tendernefs, do far fnr mount the former .
Mr. r. his Anfwcr herento, ift, is ^ compofare ofpjfionate exprejfi^
ofiSy and reflexions upon the Brethren of the CongregMional ivay, even the
prime Leaders ofthem^ of flories of the piety o/HiUeri>»am, Ball, Brad-
(haw, Gataker ; of the rottennefs and flinkingnefs of pH§ng ttp my oivnt^r^
tjf) and difpar aging dijfenters,
Anf(9, I. But what needs all this Wrath? I own my felf of no party,
love all that love Cbrift, difpaiage not fuch as diiTent from me, have t
reverend efteemof many of them ; only fay, That fuch as attend not on.
iheprefent Minifters, for number, holinefs, fpirituality and tcndcroefj,
furmount tbofe that do; which I (hould not fay, but that this is gene-
rally known to be true. The generality of their hearers being a de-
bauch't, formal, covetous generation of men, but few, very few, fcii»
ous, enlightned fouls to be found in theii AflcmbUes, they worihip
elfe-fvhere.
2. That which he faithj That by the Authors Rule if we wotild know
our dftty^ we mufl leave jiudymg of the Scriptures,and/?udy men, is falfe and
fcandalous. 1 am fully of TertHllian's mind, Non ex perfonis fides ejlU
manda^fed exfideperfona : and crave leave to tclj him, that had he l\U-
died men lefs, and the Scriptures more, we (hould have met with few-
er Antifcriptural Notions than we do in h\sTheodulia.
I conceive the Rule, msntioned by the Author of 5". T. isbotrom'd
uponScriptufQb
ift, Let it be remembred that the matter of our d;bate is fouchin'^
fvhat is at the.lcaft conceived to be the ChriHians Liberty, not Dury.
2dly, That thecafcaspropofedisof fcandal by the ulc of my Liber-
ty, whecber it be this way or that. The eating the Idolpthyte is my li-
berty, I may do it or not do it without fin. If I do it nor, tny Heachco
Ncighboui will be offended, and fay I am proud and imfociablc. — If I
d©
J 9 o ^ Vtndication of the S ober Tejlmony,
do it, my Cbriftian Brother will be fcatidilizcd. Wh»t fhdl I do ?0/-
feninotthyweak^Brothtr^ faith Panl : He bears the Image of Chiirt,
th: other doth not. But what if fome Brethren be offended at my going,
others at my forbearing, What'Thall I do now ? Why truly I know no
better way to determine the doubt by a parity of Reafon, than by the
AnC»ver before given : Confider who they are that will be offended,
that exceed in number. For certainly if it be not my duty to of-
fend one Saint becaufe a Saint, then when the cafe is brought to that
pafs, that I muft neceffarily offend fome Saints, my duty lies in doing
that whereby I fhall offend the fmalleft number of Saints • which Mr,
T. may confute at his leifure.
We add 3 dl y» Let alfo the groHnis of the offence on both /ides be weigh-
eci : the one are offended at you that yon baild not up mpratiiee in n day of
tronble^and caufe thereby the enemies of the Lord tobUfphewe and triumph,
what in a day of liberty you did in your preaching and praUice pull down and
dejirdy : Use other ^ becaufe of your difobedience to what they are fat us fed ^
and ym your f elves once were^ God is calling you to ( viz. to have nothing t9
dowithyfeparate from this generation ef men. )
To which Mr. T. ift, Thefe words are (y£nigmaticaly and require an
Oidlptx^ to unriddle them. _ •
n/fufw. I. It may be Sir, you your felf ftood fo in yoiir own light,
that you could not fee to unriddle them. 2. It may be you were not
vvilling to have them unridled. 3. If they need an O^^jp^*, you your
felf (liall be the man. Sir, you w^re he that in your Fermentum Phari^
fAornm^ci^Xd the People from attending upon the Miniftets o( England,
as Preachers of Superftition; though for the genciality of them (in
fome things ) much better then than now : 'tis an offence, and juft
ground of offence, to your Brethren, to fee you in this day of their di-
ihefs, to plead for what in the dawnings of Liberty you preached down.
You are ihe man that, with hands lift up to Heaven, fwore to extirpate
the Hierarchy, with its Appurtenances, Traditions, who rc-
joyced, and were glad at the profperity of thofe who carried on that
work, refifting unto blood : Yon are he whofate at Af'/>;V^ //^//as a-
Commillioner for the anpvobition of MinifterSj and rcjc<5lioa of fuch as
were fcandalous ( gloried in Print, that the then TroteSior had fo good
an opinion of you, as to conftitute you one of that number ) and 'twas
one pirtof fcandal to ufe the Service-Book, : Now after all this,for you
to write a Book for the defence of this very Hierarcy ard Wor{hip,your
Bvethren think it a juft ground of Scandal, snd at their refufing to hear,
you have ( andfuch asyouat Icaft) no real ground at ail, fince 'tis no
^ more
in Av fiver to Mr. T, his Exceptions. 19^
more thm what they pradifediu dayej paft, ani that without your of-
fence, by your icavc, or at lea(i connivance, as the People you particu-
larly walk't with at Lcmffier did. Hereby you have given occafion to
Saints to mourn, wicked prophane pcrfonsto rejoycc ; : So that the
grounds of offence on your fide arc not in the leart coDliderablc in
cotnparifon of thcirs.What follows is a heap of impettiucncies that I
aim not concerned in.
1. I count not any the enemies of the Lord, bat fuch as arc evident-
ly fuch ; a generation of Swearer^, Drunkards, Adulterers and Adulte-
reflcs J thsfe, the turnings about of Profeflors caufc to blafpheme,
thereat they tejoyce.
2. He is milhken whilft he thinks the Author of S.T. was for violent
practices in dayes of Liberty, who more or lefs was not concerned with
thofe p.iblick tranfa6lions, nor ever was the profecutor of onepcrlonio
any kind, who by the then Law m'ght be obnoxious to ejev^lion out of
their places of fpiritual or temporal promotion, or othervifc.
?♦ Of fome of the things he mention$,he himfeifw:.s once guilty,
particularly of fctting up private Brethren to preach ; which I account
not his fault , but wifti he had had a little more reipvTifl to his
own repute , ( if regard to the wayes of truth jnd p^ice hid net
been prevalent upon him) than to condemn others for pracftihng
the very things he himfelf hath been found in the practice of. That wc
gather Churches out of Churches, that particular Churches of Chri(t
have not the power of government vvithin chemfclves, — helliould
have proved before he had given liberty to his Pen to wander at this
wild rate. That eminent Independent (a-; he calls him) who would not
have the Lords Prayer ufed in a prelcript form of words, is of age to
tnfwer for himfelf ; that he hath given any one ]x[\ caufe of offence by
t'lat iflertion, Mr. T. may evince by difproving what he hath written
thereabout in his, VtndicU Evangeltciz. f^ig. 667. when he is
tble.
The ground of the offence on the Non-bearers fide, is fo vifibly juft
and righteous, the others lo notorioully groundlefs, that his imperti-
nent and fairwftories( fome of them con.iary to his own knowledge
and Confcience) ate infignificant to remove the one, or julVifie the
other.
, We add, 4thlyj That 'tis the duty of Saints^ efpeciallp'f $n a Chtfrch-
reUtion^ to meet together 04 a people called and puked by the Lord out of
the Nations of the yVorld^ cannot he denied ; The ntgleU of which is charged
iiy the Lord M the firji jiep to Apofiacy^ He b. 10. 25 . Be yon In the practice
of
3 p 2 A vindication of the Sober Te/iifKony,
cf this dtitji and, fee what Sfiritttat Saint rvlU he ojfended at you : If anj
pponldy yofi might have feace therein ; JOH doing jour dnty^ no jujl canft
of fcandal is given.
Mr. T", replies, They do mt think^it their duty to meet together as a fepa-
rated Church.
Anfir. I. Who do not fo think ? Do not they that arc for Scpcratc
Churches fo think ? To thefe we are fpeaking.
2. That 'cIs the duty of Saints fo to do, we evince Ch. p. of S. 7,
JJeb. 10. 2 J. is again taken notice of by him, Chap. p.S. 2. where we
aQiall confiderir.
We yet add in S. T. f thly, Confider on whi^Jide the Crofs /ies, which
thefi/h Andfiefhly intereji is moji oppojite to, whether ingoing, or forhearinir
to go to hear thefe men: Ufually that is the way of God that hath molt of
the Crofs in it, and the flrfh is oioll ftrugling and contefting againft.
In which I only affert. That the way of God hath ufually moft of the
Crofs in it,and is moftly oppofed by flefli and blood jwhich Mr.T. knows
is true, and therefore though of it felf this be no certain fufficient Rule
to judge by, yet is it not, together with othcrs,inconfidcuble : which
Mr. T. doth not oppofc.
SeU, 3.
jin eighth Afguntent again Ft hearing the prefent Minifiers, Wt cannot do fo
reithom being guilty of partalningmih them in their fin^ The feveral
wayes of partaking with others in their fin, Rom* ii'» i/. 2 Thef. 3,
14^ ly. explained,
THE 8'*' Argument againft hearing the prefenr Minifters is in ,?.
T. thus formed.
That which SatKts cannot do without being gptlltj with others in their Jins^
is utterly unUvpful for them to do : But the Saints cannot attend upon the
Minifiers of England, without being guilty ofpartakjng with them in their
fins. Therefore.
The^gz except that Mat, 18. ij, i<5, 17. the
vanity of his exceptions vvhereunto we have demonftratcd, pag. 87. of
this Treatife,)
4thly, fvhen they (notwithftandin^ all that they can do ) perceive
them to perfevere in their finyfhalljiill continue to hold Communion wtth them
andnotfeparatefromthemy Rev. 18.4. The abiding with objlinate offen-
ders ^ 04 it is againji pojitive injur.Bions of the mofi hlghy Rom. 16. 17,
2 Cor. <^. 14, ly, i<^, 17. iTim. <5. 5. Ephf. j". 8. ii» Rev. iS. 4.
fo in the lafi place in/lanced tn, 'tis ajfigned by the Spirit to be one way of per.
taking withotbirs in their Jins.So faith Iciinzd Brightman upon the place.
To which Mr. T. SeU. 7. This is not true-, we may heartheHordof
Cody pray with^receive the Lords Supper from a Minlfler that is an d-flinate
offender y and yet not be partakjr with him in his fin. The texts aHedged prjv^
not feparanon from fuch,
Anfw. Whether they do or not we leave to the judgment of the dif-
crcct and pious Rcadci to determine ; yea to Mr.T". himfelf ( the texts
Ddd arc
j'^4 '^ji Vindication of the S ober Tejlimonyi
are fo marveloufly plain for the proof of fuch a fcparation ) whctthc is
able, in an undirtcmpeved unprejudiced fpiiii to levicw them. What
he here offers to the contrary is not worth the fpotting Paper with.
I. A man tniy caufe divifions and offences, contrary to the Apoftlef
Do6lrinej Rom. 14, and 1 j. touching the ufe of Liberty in matters ia-
diffi rent to the offence and fcandal of the Saints; as tbeMinifters of
EngUni do, ( if Mr. T. his notion about the indifferency of their Cere-
monies be true ) whilft they pra(5lire them to the offence of the SaintSs,
and yet preach the fameDo6lnne in other things the Apoftlcs preach-
ed, vvhich yettheprefent Miniftetsdonot.
2dly, When Mr. T. is at leifure, he may prove that feparation from
the wicked and prophane, or from a falfc Church, is contrary to Rom,
_id. 17. Becaufe the Apoftle charges them tonote and avoid thofc that
caufe devifions in a true Church. By the ufe of things indifferent, con-
trary to his Do6lrine thereabout of 2Cif,id,i7.c^^^'z/.i8.4^
we have already fpokcn and vindicated it from Mr. T, his exceptionf.
We add in 5. T, Not to mHhiply more particulars, let m in a ferv
words make application of thefe remarked, to the i?Hjine[sinhani, Is there
any thing in the rvorld that carries a greater hightnefsy and evidence with it
than thisy that the hearing the ^refem Minifters U to be partakers rvith them
in their Jin >
To which Mr. T. Jufl 04 if one (honldfay, he that heard Judoi preach the
Gofptl, -was partaker rvith him in hi^ theft ; rvhich is like the inference of a
man craz^ed in his tntelleBttals, »
A^ftv, I. With thanks to him for the civility of his exprcfllon I an-
fwer,thc cafe is not at all the fame ; Jnda^ aded from a true Commif-
(ion,vvas not a known Thief, nor guilty of any notorious vifible wicked-
nefs till he betrayed his Lord : The Minifters oi England i^ from*
falfe Antichriftian Authority, and fome of them are vifibly fcandalous
and prophane.
2. Had Jndas a<^ed from a falfe Commiffion, as thefc do,fuch as had
attended on his falfe Miniftry had been guilty of the fin thereof, whilft
by their fo doing they had encouraged him in the exercife of if.
5, Paul was fure found in his Intelle6lual5, yet he tells the Corinthi"
anSf That their not cafiing the incejiuotis perfon om of their Commnnion vpoi
a partaking rvith him in his fn.
We add in S. T. Our hearing them is a fecret cenfenting rvith them^and
encouraging them in their evil deeds,
Oai Ammaiverter i^pViZS* 'Tis not fo^ bttt a comfentingwith them and
encouraging them in preaching theGofpelt which is mll'doing.
Anfrv*
ia Anfvoer to 'Mr, T, Us Exceptions' 1^1
^An[^, 1. Misyof them preach not It all.
2. Many of thcnithitdo, pieich notthcGofpcI.
3. Few or nonepreich it without the mixture of humane Inventions,
4. They all preach it from an Antichriftian call.
y. They read the Service-Book^, and conform to the Rites thereof
which is evil doing ; and our attendment upon their pteachino encou-
rageth them herein.
In what nextly follows we arc little concerned till he prove, That
becaufe mens withdrawment from a godly lawful Chriftian Miniftry,
was to them ground of difcouragement and complaint, therefore we
murt hear fuch as ad from an Antichriftian calling in their Office of
Miniftry, and for the moft pait are vicious and deboyft.
Oi Phil. I. 18. we fpeak afterwards. We fighteoufly blame them
that attempt to filence good Preachers, for non-afl'enting to the Litur^
gie becaufe it's a fetting up an Idol of Man in oppofition to the Com-
mand and Work of God.
He tells us, The Prelatiftsmay oi vc ell argue y Ifvoe fhouU permit the
Separatifts to preach, we (hottld co^fent fecretly with them, ani encourage
them in their evil deeds ^ fuch as gathering a feparate Congregation j and ta»
king A Commtjfion from it»
Anffv. I. But they muft prove thefe ihinos to be evil deeds j they
are (as we have proved ) the Inflitutions of Chrift.
2. Betwixt hearing men preach, and permitting them fotodo, we
conceive there is a vaft difference. For our parts, were it in our power,
we (hould not by outward force and violence hinder a Prelatili from
preaching. We know Chrifts Kingdom admits of no fuch weapons foi
its propagation in the world.
We add in S. T, That hearing the prefect Minifters is very remote from
the dif charge of thofe duties are incumbent upon m (if we account them as
Brethren ) for their reclaiming ; Vw mt feparating from them, 'tis in re-
[peEh offome or all the particulars remarked, a participation with them in
their fin.
To which our Animadverter adjoyns j If it be mt the discharging their
duty for their If claiming them, (which, at it'sflated, rvould perhaps he ra-"
thcr their fin ) yet it is to difcharge their duty in hearing Gods PVori.
Anfw. I. But that 'tis our duty to hear the Word of God from An-
tichriftian Officers, when Chrift hath appointed tome of his own to dif-
penfe it, ihould have been proved and not beg'd.
2. That it fhould be the fin of any Brother to reprove his Miniftec
for what he fees evil upon him in che way of the Gofpel, is fomethiog
Ddd 2 ftian
e
396 A Vindication of the Sobtr Teflimonyl
ftrange Doflrinc, which wc know not what to mike of • that vrhcn he
hath done fo, and no Reformation follows, ind he hath proceeded as
far as he i$ able for his amendment, that he ought to attend ftill on his
Miniftry, to his grief and woanding, and not fcparate from him, is con-
trary to the many Sctiptuies produced by us in this Argument.
3. Not to reprove, rebuke, admonifla x guilty (inner (being a Bro-
ther) of his fin, I have but now proved to be a partaker with him in his
fin; to which Mr. 7". fcts his frobatHtntfty p.2p5. That the fame id
negleded and done (hould be 1 fin,fecm$ to me to be inconfiftent : Thit
I (hould be guilty of fin in not reproving in oflFcndcr, and guilty whea
I reprove him, feems to me 1 contradiftion.
HeiddSj Hearingthemfits them for the reclaiming of Minlfltrsfrom
gnjfin they are to reprove in them ; for thie fyeivs theyaccoHMt them not as
their or the Lords enemies ; which is agreeahle to the Apojiles RttUi 2 Thef.
3. ij.
An[t9» I. In hearing them I joynwiih them in ( im partaker of )
their fin, z//*. the fin of their falfc miniftry : That partaking with
others in their fins fhould fit me for the reclaiming them from them, is
tn abfurddietatc.
2. The Apoftle intends not in thatRuls 2 Thef. 3.1 j. Thtt we ftill.
hold Communion with thcBtother there fpoken off;nor,fiith hc,thatour
ftJ doing is the beft way to reclaim him but the contrary, -v. i4.T5T0ir jk,
/wGiS3e, Note him with a hand of infamy, that all may avoid him^ y^ (z^i
Cvvxv(x{A.'yVv9. There dwelling aJone not being reckoned amongrt the Naticn.*|
I. e. their reparation from the Nations of the World, wiih refped to
Faith and Worftiip, as Exod. ip. 5-. Levit. 20. 24, 26. Ez.ra.(). 2.
was Typical of the feparation of the New-Tjft>mcnt Saints from the
Wicked of the World in their Communion, Worfliip, and S-tvice of
. God.
Aftfvo. I. That l{rael (liould in mofl remarkable paffages be Typical
of Ncw-TeftamcHt Saints, and not in this, as i^emaikible asany, upon
feme accounts the moft remarkable of them all, is not probable.
2. With rcfpe6l to their Separation from the World, they are called,
Exod, 1^,^,6, A peculiar Treafure to God, aKinodom of Prieftf> an
Holy Nation. In anfwer ^hereunto Peter fo calls Niw- Tcftament-Bc-
lievcrs, i Pet, 2.9. The CWr.3p, is the K;y of the Parable of the
Draw-Net. ' Which
in Anfwer U Mr, T. hu Exception/, 4 01
Which, I. fiirJy intimates to usthit the fame line of Interpretation
is to be ftretched over it,as over the Pirablc of the Tires.
But, 2, grant it to be meant of a GofpeUChurch-Statc, itoppc-
fethnotthe Separation pleaded for; there's no doubt there may be
foolifti Virgins as well as wife, Jttdajfes as well as Peters in the bcH con-
ftituted Churches, and are like to be to the end of the World ; but
though they ate known to God to be Devils, they are not upon their
tdtnilTion into the Churches for other than real Saints, and when ihcy
are found to be othcrwife, they arc to be cut off from them as ufclcis
Members. The feparation pleaded for, is not t reparation from fuch
refined Hypocrites, as can t£t the part of Saints fo wclU as that none
butCod isabletodifcern them from fuch ; but from thofe who have
the vifiblc Lineaments of men of the World, aiid Children of Difo-
bediencc upon them, which is not in the lealt oppofitc to either of thefc
Parables. The Fi(h in the Draw-Net were fuppofcd to be good whilft
in the Draw-Net, till brought to Land, and taken out from thence.
The account is given of the Churches o(A/iay Cmnth — manifcfts that
they were conftitutcd of viribleSaints,/?fz/.2.i,2j3,p,i3,i9. 1 Cor.1.2.
They are blamed for fuffering thofe that had difcoveted the rottcnnefs
of their hearts by works of unrighteoufnefs, (though when admitted
they fecmed to be Saints) to continue in their Communion, %ev. 2,
14.20. —
What he adds, Tb^tt the Separation pleaded for^ wot ever judged
Schifmaticaly and proved unhappy in the conc/ufon.
Is, I, an Arrow drawn out of the Popijh Quiver : What the
Papifls ufually obje(5t againft the Separation of the ProteflaKts from the
Church of Rome\ as indeed many of his Arguments and A.nfwers iw
this Treatife are, which I had thought to have manifefted at the ciofe,
by the induction of particular inftances, but that this Treadle To un-
expedcdly fwdls under our hands.
2. All that is accounted Schifmatical, is not prcfently fo bccaufc fo '
accounted.
J. Schifm being a breach of fomc Union of the Inflitution of
Chrift, be muHproveour Sepiiation to be a breach of fome fuch Uni-
on before he proves it ichifmaticaJ.
What unhappinefs the Animadverter means that hath attended fepi-
ratloQ from the vifibly wicked and prophane, I know not ; all things
ar^ not unhappy that men account fo. That which is of God in the
Preraiires (as we have proved Separation to be) cannot have unhap-
pinefs in the conclufion.
Eec He
40 2 A Vindication of the Sober Teftimony]
He adds, The ftpurauoK pleaded for is daugerBUS^ Jith k puts perfotjs
Hpm withdrawlngtheir [HbjeUlon from fcclejia/iical, Civile JJotifhold' Ra^
lers and Governors ^it vfoitld overthrow all SiateSyBodies Politick, , and Honf^
hold.Government.
A^fvf. I. If by EccUfiaftical Rulers and GovcrnorSj hemcinfuch
as ire of the Inftitution of Chrift, (and to others wc owe no fubjedVion
as fuch) the whole (and every part) of what is affiftned by him in this
matter, is moft fcandaloufly, falfiy, and wickedly fpoken ; I qneftion
whether not contrary to his own koowlcdge and Confcicncc ; if not> he
undertook to anfw^r a matter before he underftood it, which is not much
Co his honour.
2. The feparation pleaded for, is no other than what was pleaded for
by the Apoftlesof old, and Primitive Believers; So that if it over-
throws Government, theirs did alfo ; and indeed this was laid to their
charge, as 'tis to ours, how truly let the whole Nation judge : of this wc
have already fpokcn.
A fecond inftitution of Chrift inftancedin, in S,T, if this, That
Saints feparate from the fVorld^ (hoald frequently meet together as a di(linU
Body therefrom^ for the edification and bttilding up of each other in the roaj
ttndvpiUof Cody according to the gifts hjiowedy Mil. 3. i then Miniftcrs are no
more by virtue of Chritts appointment Miniilers of this Company or
Flock of Chtiftians, than of another, which is cxpreOy contrary to AUs
ao. 28,
2. Then either Miniftcrs have no Authority over this or that particu-
lar Fiockj to which, as fuch, they minifter ; or if fo they have as much
authority over every particular focicty of Chriftians to whom they
providentially preach, and thls.mthout their actual conlJcnt, which is
abfuvd andtyunDicala
3. Then
in Anfwer to t4r. T, hi: Exceptifnr] 40^
3. Then no Church can claim by virtue of Divine appoiotmcni a
greater right and Iniereft in one Miniftcr than in another, nor is any
by virtue of fuch an appointment, more obliged to minirter tothcm
then toothers ; though we deny not but the gifts given to Minilkrs
C to Brechren ) are given for the Edification of all Chrillianj, amongft
whom by the Piovidence of God they are caft, which they arc bound
for that end to improve ; nor that its unlawful to hear others b^fidcs Pa-
ftors of Congregational Churches, we afl'crt the contrary in the Trcatifc
he undertakes to confute. Yet doth it not hence in the Icaft follow,thai
w«may lawfully hear the prefentMini(iers,we have proved the contra-
ry ; thcnon-actendment upon whom rends not to the decay of Spiritual
Life, it promotes it rather. —
We fay in 5. T. That the htarlng the prefect Minifters fours forth cor.^
tem^t upon each ofthefe InjiitHtions ofChriji,
Itfuppofeth, ift, That feparadon from the AffemblicJ of £«^A««but that National Churches are alfo to be accounted true Chur*
chcsofChrift.
4. That the Officers of Chrlfts appointment are not fufficientfcp
the Saints, but together withthem, the help of falfe and Idol Shepherds
is to be foughtaftcr. Than which, what greater contempt can be pout-
ed forth upon the foremcntioned InlUtutions of our dear Lord.
The truth of the afferiion we fully manifell in S, T. nor doth Mr. T,
deny, but that the bearing the prcfent Minilicrs doth "pour out con-
tempt upon the Inftitutions mentioned, hedenies them to b^ the InHi-
tutionsof Chrift. SeB. y. tells us, 'Xhat 'tis a grofs error vfhich is oft iir
the mouthes Hfthe Seperatifis, that they way not hear with the worldy nor
pray with the Tforld^rehence it hath come to pt^fs^ that fome have left i.ff>
frayingin their Families^ anlefs A^cmi^rs of their Church.
Anfve. The firft and fecond we have proved, beyond what Mr. 7"/
hath as yet been able to reply to.
adiy, The laft I hope is not true ; God forbid that «ny that pretend
£0 Chrirtianity, much men fuch as arc fo in truth, ihould lo Car dege^
ratft.1
%qS a Vindication of the Sober TeJImony,
generate Into the Spirit of Heathenlfm^ as not to call upon God in their
Fatnilicj, or ccafe to do their uttermoft to convert their Children and
Servants to the Lord, and inftru6l them in his fear.
3. That this is the confcquence of the principle of Scperation>Gi
that 'til in it felf a grorsEtiot)that 'tis unlawful for me to bear with the
world, or pray with the world, /. *. joyn vvith them in their WorlVip,
he may prove when be is able.
What follows hath either already been replied to^or will be in its pro-
per place ; fo that we need not attend it here.
The fecond thing in the w^iw^r Proportion incumbent upon us to
prove, we fay in S. T. ij, 2dly, That hereby poor louls arc hardned
in a falfe way of Wotfhipj what can be thought lefs ( fuppoling the wor-
(hip in the Paii(h- Aflemblies of England to be fo,a« hath been proved)
when they (hall fee Profeffors that were wont to pray and preach toge-
ther, to profefs and ptoteft againft Common-Prayer-Book^Worfhlf, and
Prierts, to cry up, or at leaft approve of ( as Mr. T. 'tis thought, did )
Laws made for their ejc6lion,if guilty of no other crime than conformi-
ty to the "Worihip they now conform to and pra6^ife, now flock to their
Aflcmblics, and hear their Priefts. What can they imagine lefs than
that thefe perfons thus afting in a direft contrariety to their former
judgment and pra*aice, do now fee they were miftakcn ; and are begin- j
ing at leaft to return unto thofepathes from whence they departed ;
and that thefe waycs in which they and their forefathers have walked,
are the good Old Way in which reft is to be found ? To which Mr. T^
Anfwers nothing but what hath already been confideted, nor any thing
that deferves our ftay.
The 5d, Particular affcrtedin the Miner Propofition, its faid in S.T.
is, That hereby poor fouls arc hardned in their rebellion and blafphc-
my againft God, his Spirit, and Tabcrnacle,and them that dwell there-
in. This is not to be queftioned, we every day bear ftout words fpoken
againft the Lord becaufc of the praflice of fome in this thing ; what fay
the wicked M$^thantkat RtH^lon U but a fancy ; that the frofejfors thenof
are but a general ton of Hypocrites, that mil turn to any thing tofave them-
j elves ; that the Spirit by which they are a^edy ii but a Spirit of PhanatU
cijm and delnfion ? Yea how do they blefs themfelves,that they are not
cor ever were of the number of fuch Profeflors ! and that becauiethcy
fee thefe for fear of Perfecution defcrt their former principles, ftrike in
with their Affembly and Mitiifters. —
To which Mr.-T. adjoyns, ift, Papifls have thns infulted over Tro-
tejiatits upon the return of Any [eemiyg ^calom Frotejiant into the Romans
Church
in AnJvoeY to Mr. T, his Excepims. ' 407
Churcbyyetthe Atfvferer knows how tor eflj to [ttch^ that mens InflahilU
tyfhews their own wcak^efs^ not the thing in which they have been z^ea/out to
have been good or had, — .
^-/jp. Very tighr, and wc know how to reply to th2 infuhing of th^
Con for mifts upon the account of the return of any fecmin" zcaloujPio-
feffors to them ; but ftill vye fay, that their return to them gives them
too juft occafion of infulting. The contrary to which Mr. T. iliould have
proved, of which he fpeaks not one word.
He adds, 2dly, Thii Author doth not do well to caU the Obloquies agalK(i
his f'trtjy ffeaklng agalnji Religion) blaffheming (jod, the Splrlty T^ lo"* Argument frovingthe ntjUnvftilnefs of hearing the frefent MImI"
Jlers. ' Tts not lavuful to go to the places sf falfe fVorjhip* AH Monument i
of Idolatry to he ahlljhedy proved. The judgmem of the ledrned Mede,
Cotton, Ainfwonh, Robbinfon. 2 Cor, 6. 17, i Johft $. 21. Jude
23. 1 Sam, 2, 17. I Cor. . 11. zo. & 14. 24/»/»'mi&,
Mobinfoni.ind other Worthies and WitncfTcs of Chiifl in their day, and
being fatisfied, (which is the ail in all to us) that they have in this
matter the Spirit for their Guide and Leader, we ate contented to ad-
vance a/ftep or two farther with them.
The Propofiiion but now laid down by Mi. T. we fubfcribc to, and
judge its clearly proved by Exod. 20. 4^ f, 6. & 23. 13. Jfa. 30. ■22.
C7^». 3J.2, 3,4. Deut, 12.2, 3, 30, 32. ^ 17. 18, ip, 20. 2. King.
10,26)27 J 28. €^18.4. & 23. 12, 13, 14, ly. zChr* 17. (S' AUt
17.
in Anfrver to Mr, T. his Exceptions. ' ^q-
-17. ij- ^ ip. 2<^i 27. 7«^f 25. with Lev. 15. 47, yi, y2. J?^t/. 17.
id. (^ .18. ir, 12. The Scriptures cited by the Separatifts of old. VVc
ire not willing to debate this matter at laige. That the things menti-
oned (liould be iboliflied they give thcii Keafons in theii Apolooje
fag. 7^. The fum whereofis, ° '
1. The retaining of them is a breach of the fccond Comtnandcnent,
Exod. 20. 4, J, 6, with D(m. 12. 2, 3. Ifa. 30. 22.
2. So long as ihey are continued Amichria is not fully aboli(hed, ac-
cording to Rev. 17. 16, & 18. II, 12; 13, . 2 Thef. 2. 8. with
2 KfK£.io.26^ 27, 28.
3. The consecrating of any Garments, Places, or the like, peculi-
arly to the Worship of God now in the time of the Gofpel, hach n6
Warrant in the Word.
4. The worshipping God in the places, and by the things appoint-
ed, and hallowed of God himfelf, was under the Law a part of honour
done to him, and pleafing him. Dent. 12. j, 6, Lev. 17. 3,4. The
deftroying them tended to his diflionour, P[al. 7^. i. cr 74. 6, 7, 8.
The building and repairing them pertained to the eftablifhing and rc-
ftoringhis trueWoiiVip, Hag.\.^j 8. So on the contrary, the wor-
{hipping God now in the places and by the things dedicated, and hallow-
ed by Antichrift,is a fpecial part of Popifli Devotion; fuch is the build-
ing, repairing them, as the razing them will be to their diihonour acd
greater confufion : The like may be faid of the Heathen Placcs,touch-
ing which, fee Dem, 12. 2, 3, 4. with 2 King. 10. 26, 27, 28. & 14.
3,4. d-23. 8, 13, 15-, ip.
y. Godly Pdnces arc commended fov abolifliing the Monuments of
falfc WorQiip, 2C^r. i7.<^» 2X^;»^i8. 4. cr 23.12,13,14,15-.
6. This being done the People are more ealily pcrfivaded to the riuc
worfhip of God in Spirit and Truth ; whereas othcrwife they are llill
nourirfied in Superftition, — (je«.35'.2,3,4. 2iC/«^^i8.4. 2Chr.i1.
34.^^^17.23.07-19.2^,27. Lev. i-^y cr i^y Chap, mth Judez^.
7. The Lord hath promifed ablcfllngto them which do rcjcdand
abolifh them, and threatned a curfe to the contrary, and fo alfo hath
doncj //<«. 3* 22,23* £aW. 20. J, d. 2 CJbr. 17. fi&<»/>. Cr 3 i. 20, 21,
with 2 Chr. 21. 13, 14. cr 24. 17, 25-. c^ 28. chap.
Wc (hall only add, 8. That the foul of the Lord did deteft and ab-
hor whatever was ufed to Idolatry, whether Vcftments, or Places, • —
under the Law,is evident from the fore-cited Scriptures ; that he is as
jealous a God now as ever, the Anlmadverter will not deny,nor can he,
Thjkt the IdoUtrom High. Placesydcdiatsd to the Popi[h Mahuz.z,ims^ ot
F f f S,ur.ti'
4
.JO ^A Vindication of the SohrTefiimony^
Saints- Idol Godds ( «$ the oaoft of the High-pliccsof %/«!» it being expreQy againft the Canons of their Church.
To which he adds, That tve are gpnlty of Judmz^ing^ in tying people to
yeorihiponljinthe place of the (eparatedChnrches^contraryto John 4.2-1.
I Tim. 2. 8.
Anfrv, I. Thls-is notorioufly falfc, vvctieperfons towor(hip in no
place upon the account of its holinefSj but an Houfe, a Mountaioj a
Ship, any place, if not polluted with Idolatry,is equal and alike eftcem-
cd oy us.
2. This may righteoufly be retorted upon the Clergy of England.who
judaize in their going about to compel us to worfhip in their Temples
dedicated to Antichriftian Mahuz,z.imsy and confecrated with Popiih
Holy Water, and Prayers, and accounted more holy than other places
in the Nation, of which they arc notoiiouily guilty, contrary to 7j this fenfe the Mtjo: ii true. 2. Collation of fome
[fecial good j in this fenfe it is not true • there are many things lawful to he
done) at eating, drinking-, buying, jelling, in refpe^ of which men have no
ground to expe^ any fuch hlejfmg. Ezckicl preached laivfully when he was
fo/ that God did of meer Grace honour his own Word for the
convetlion of finncrs, — not that we have any ground to expeft a blcf-
fing upon our attendment on that fallc Miniftry, by whom 'tis dif-
penfed.
We fay in S. T, To prove a promife of a bleffing — upon onr attendment
en the prefect Minlfters^ wt cone five ^ »9 eajic task, for any to do ; for thefe
Reafons, ^. ^
in An/wer to Mr, T. his Exceptm}] 41 y
f . The hlejfing of the Lori U upon Sion^ Pfal.87.2. d" 7 8. 6%» Thers
hidrvells, Pfal. p* n. & 74. 2. Jer. 8. ip. Ifi. 8. 18. Jodj. 17,21.
The prefcKce of Chrlft is in the mU(l of hit Golden CandUjiickt^ Rev. i .i2>
13. & 2. I. *7» ^« Garden in which he feedeth and drveffft Cant. 6. 2»
&S. 13. And we arc not furer of any thing than we arc. of this, that
the AffemWies of Englandy in their prefent conftitudon are not the Si^
o»o£ eod, his Candleftick, his Garden, but a very wilderncff, and
that Bahl, out of which the Lord commands his People to haften their
cfcapc, Rev, 18. 4.
a. ^od never promifetb a BleJfiMg to a people waiting upon him in that-
way which is pollmed, andnot of his appointment , (as We have proved the
Wor/hip of England to be.)
3 . The Lord hath exprejly faidy concerning fuch as tun before they
arc fCDt, that they jhall not profit the people^ Jer. 23. 32.
4. HzpTo(z{ic. & 17.6. & 18.24. is fo evident, that none ctn deny it.
' So that, 7thly, except Mr. T. can prove the Aflemblies oiEn^Und^
\f\ their prefent confticution, to be Gofpel-Churchcs, they are not the
Sionoi God, nor to be accounted fo.
' Of this we have already fpoken, and dial 1 only add, Tho[e Churphes
that have no nT^f^verghlenefs to Mount Sion, the Type of the true Gofpcl-
Churches^ hut are the very PitlHTe of oH Babylon , the Type of Antichrijii-
an Churches^ are not the Gofpel-Churches tjpd out by Mount Sion, bm the
Bubel, oHtof rvhich 'tis the dnty of the Lords People to file, in rohomCoi
divels not. But NatianaUChftrches are not anfrverable to Mount Sion, bnt
old B^ihel. Therefore. , - .
. Look upon 5/c«,coisrider her diligently-, li^She was an Holy Moun.
tain or HiU, Pfal. 2. ^. & 15. i. where the holy People dwelt.-
2dly,
in Anfmr to Mr. T, his Exceptions] 4 1 7
2dly, There was the Temple of God built according td his appoint-
ment, of he wen ftone ready fitted and prepared, • ptcciouj coaiy
ftoBCS, :^Cibrw. 3. ^, the Saints affembjing thcm-
felvcs together as a people diftinft from the World and its Affemblics,
to exhort and edifie one anothcr.-^^
To which our Ammadverter replies, i . They may hear thjt Mimfters^
and do the duty enjoj/ncdy Hcb. lO. 25 . they may do the one (ome hours ^aud
the other fome other,
Ahfw. I. But the Scripture inftanc'd in, requires as frequent an it-
tendmcnt upon this duty as may be, which whilft they arc hearing ths
Minifters they muft ncgle*^. 2, It commands that they go not forth
to meet with any other than thcmfelves, »ot forfaking the ajfembling of
yonr feli/es togrther* —
Teay but 2dly, they were Hebrew Infidel Sy from whom the Apofile woftU
have them meet as a body diftlnB,
Anfw, And they are Chriftian Infidels, (for the vifibly wicked, and
prophane, are notwithftanding their aflumed Chriftianity, iw/5-oi, un-
believers,, or Infidels) from whom wc would have Saints now to meet
ajabodydiftin^t; for as to any that fear God iW the AfTemblies of
England^ it Would be the joy and rejoycing of our Souls to fee them foi-
faking them, we {hould gladly receive them into our Communion,
iiid in the mean while wc love and tender them; nor do wefeparatc any
more from them than they do from us. If thofc that fcpsrated thcm-
felves, Heb.10.2.'). departed toJWrfj/wjthepiopk of England tic Az-
parted to Antichrifiianlfm, (a mixture of Jiudaifm and Hcachcnifm) in-
afmuchasthey cmbuce thevcry Woxftiip, Modes,; tndB.i;tc3:Qfi A^ti*.
chrift* .' -■■"■ '-^*
in Anjwer to Mr. TJm Exceptionr] 4 21
To whtt he adds, That he fees no reafon vfhy perfoMS of Coyia^egadsnal.
P^i»cipUs way not hear Parochial Mlnijicrs oa formerly.
We Anfvrer, i. They iic not the fame psrfons, have not the fame
. gift*, qualifications. 2. They pretend to prefs after the work of Re-
'" formation, thefe have^protcfted againft it. 3. They cami with the
Word of God, thefe with the Inftruments of foolilli Shepherds, the
Comanon- Prayer. Book and Surplice. 4. They abhorred the Inventi-
ons of men in Woifhip ; thefe plead for, imbracc,promife obedience to-
thcm ; which arc fome of thofe many Reafons may be given of perfocf-
icfufing to hear in Parochial Affemblies as formerly.
To tbeQuciiei ptopofcd in S. T. he anfwers, SeU. 10. i. fvhether
tht LardJefHS he not the alone Head^ King and, Law- giver to hit Church ?
To which he replies, meaning it of the fuprcam abfolute Independent
Head, —Hip is. Which is no more than what Bellarmine himfelf ^^ramr;
a very Papiftical AnfWcr. There arc other Heads of the Church, (k
fecms) though Chrift be the alone Supretm-Of this matter we have al-
feadyfpoken.
The fccond, whether the Larps^ — Orders^ and Ordlxances of Chrijl be
not faithfuHy to he kt^t^ thoagb all the Princes in the World fkottld inters
di^ and forhtd it ?
He Anfwers, They are. Whereby he juftifTes the men of his indig-
Bation, in their Non-coflformity, feparation from the prefent Mini-
ftery, and Worfhip— notvvithftanding the Edi^s of men to the contri-
f y, till he be able to remove out of the way what they produce to prove
'their pta(5ttcc herein to be according to the Orders and Inflitutions of
Chrift.
• To the third, whether to introduce other Laves for the Government of
the Church ofChri/l, and the Worfhip of his Houfe^ he not an high ddvanft
againfiy and intrHJion into his Kingfhip and Headjkip ?
He replies. No ; If they be no other than fuch as are Jj7erved to he jvas-
ranted in this anfwer tathe Preface^ Sc6l. 8. 20. foCbap. i. Sc6t. 3. to
Ghap.j.S^.ii,i2. —
Anfxv. The unwarrantablcnef* of his Warrant we have difcovercd in
our Anfwer to the places quoted by him. ■ r< ":'•.
To the fourth, whether the Lord Jifns^ oi King and Head over his
Churchy hath not inftituted fujficier.t Officers and Offices for the admihl-
^ration of holy things in his Houfe^ to whom no more can he added^ withant
a defperate Hndervaluation and contempt of bis Wifdom^^ Htvtdjhip^ and Si-
'vereignty over it V
42.2 A Vindication of the Soher Te^mmy\
He Anfwer$,5'ow^ fervantf andfeniccs mn; be apfointed bj Rulers with"
cdtfuch an undervalpiation,
Anfrv, If by Servants— he underftand Chuich- Officers, ( at he muft
if he fpeak pertinently, the enquiry being of thetn ) he would have
done well to have proved his dii^ate j we can fee no foundation foi it
in Scripture or Rcafon; but believe had he fctled his Family, and ap-
pointed every one their Place and Office in it, he would account others
appointing new Officers, and Offices, that he thought not of, and in-
troducing them without his confent as neceffary to the well-being of hi*
Family, fuch a difvaluation as that intimated. Of this we hjive alieady
treated*
To the 5''\ Whether Ojpc^r/inftitutcd by Chtift arc not only Pajiorsy
Teachers, Deacons and Heifers^ he replies ; I find not Heifers Officers in^
ftitutedbyChrifly i;ut others J find here mentioned) i Cor. 12. 28. Epb,
4. II.
yinftv, I. Of helpers you may read, ^w. i<^. 3,p. 2. Theic
are indeed other Officers mentioned of Chrift's Inftitution in the places
-cited by him, but they being fuch as are confelTedly gone off the Stage,
we purpofely omitted them.Thofe mention'd,tre the alone knownftand-
ing officers in the Churches of Chrift j diret^ions touching whofe qua-
lifications. Election, Office, Work, are laid down in the Scripiurei.
To the 6'\ Whether the Offices of Arch.Bi(hofs ^ Lord'BlJhops,
M>eans-, SubdeanSy prebendaries. Chancellors^ Priefis, Deacons^ (as the
firft ftep to a Pricfthood) Arch-Deacons^ Subdeacons, Commijfariesy Offi-
cials, PraBors, Regifiers^ Apparitors, Parfons, Vicars ^ Curat Sy Canons. ^
Petty-Canons^ Gofpellers, Epiftolers, Chanter SyVirgerSyOrgan-playerSyQue"
rifiersy be OlTiceis any where inftitated by the Lord Jcfas in the Scrip-
ture ? He Anfwers, Some are, feme are not. See the Anfwer to Chap.3,
Anfio. To our Reply thereunto, we refer the Reader for fatisfa<^ion
in this matter.
To the 7th, Whether the Calling and admiffion into thefc laft men-
tioned Offices, their Adminiftration and Maintenance,now had and re-
ceived in Englandi be according to the Word of God j-^c; leplLes, Thia
IS anfvDered before in [pindry places. ' r-— *,
Anfvf. The vanity of his Anfwers we have already difcovered.
To the 8th, Whether every true vifibic, particular Church of Chrift
be not a fcleft company of People, called andfeparitcd from the world
.and the falfc worfhip thereof, by the Spirit and Word of God,and joyn-
ed together in thefello?v(hipof theGofpel, by their sown, free and ve-
'lantary conlent, giving up themfelves to Chritt, and one another, ac-
cording
in Anfwer to Mr. T. bts Exception f, 4^ ^
cording to the will of God; He anfwery, The terms are fo amh'igmufy
nfed^ that: in fame fence it may be anfxvered j^ffirmativtly, in fame Negu^
lively.
An[vi>. We have already explained the terms and dcmonftrated the
truth of the Qucftion in the Affirmative, in all the branches thereof.
• Tothepth, Whether a company of People living in a Paritlijthough
the moll of them, be vifible Drunkards and Swearers, — or at leaft
ftiangeis to the work of Regeneration upon their fouls, coming by com-
pulfion or othetwife to the hearing of publick Prayers or Preachin^^, are
in the Sciipturc account Saints, and the Church of Chrift according to
the pattern given forth by him,— He anfwets, // their Fail h h rights
they are : i> e. if I miftake not, If they ajfent to the DoElrine of the Chnrck
of England, if they own no other DoUrinfils hm what are right ( for as to
true faving Faith,the perfons defcribcd are undoubtedly ltrang;rs to it,,
^cis impolTrble but they (hould be fo whilft they abide fuch>) Now I be-
lieve never man in the world gave fuch an account of Saints; Saint
Drunkard, .and St. Swearer, and St. Whoremafter, founds but harfh in
the cars of men of underftanding, they themfelves will fwear they are
no Saints. That external profefTton of Fiith is fufficicnt to conftitutc
a perfon a Chuich-Member, BdUrmine indeed affirms ( it may be Mr.
T. received his notion from him ) and is therein oppofed by the learn-
ed fVhity us,which contains the fum of Mr.T,
his two Arguments, we anfwer in S-T, That there are fome things
which the Objcaors take for granted, which are the very Bafis upon
which the ftrcfs of the Objcaion lies, that will never be proved.
As, ^ft, 'Tisfuppofed that the Scribes and Pharifees here fpoken
of, were in the Minifterial Seat Teachers and Expounders of the La.y.
Some of them 'tis granted were, thefe here mentioned, are faid iofn in
Mofes Seat, which vvas the Magiftratical Seat ( to the Pofterity of ^-.
^r(?« the Office of Pricfthood did appertain ) and are condemned for
ttegUamg judgment and ijMercy^ things moft nearly relating to the Of-
fice of Magiftracy. Now 'twill not in the leaft follow, that fuppofing
Chrift enjoyncd his Difciples to attend upon the Scribes and Pharifees,
aaing as Migiftrares, and conform to what is juftly and rightcoufly prc^
fcribed by them, as fuch j that therefore 'tis lawful to attend upon the
prefent Miniftcts* ^
^ To
in Anher to Mr, T. hisExceptimI 41^
To which Mr. T. Se5i, 2. 'Tis fufpofd that the Scrihsand Pharifees
4itrt [foken of ^wcre Teachers and Expounders of the Law : which be it-
icmpts the proof of, i. Becaufe^ ycrf. 4. 'cis faid, They hind heavy
l^HrdenSy and lay them on mens {houlders,
- jinfw. But Mr. 7", ihonld have proved, that they did thif as expoun-
ders of the Liw, and not as Migiftraies by civil fanaions j till when
he faith nothing.
2. They affeUtd to be called of men Rabbi , Majlers^ Fathers, Leaders,
^crf. 8, p, 10. —
Aufw, What then ? This is no proof that they were Ecdefiaftical
Officcrf. 1. They might affed thefe Titles and not have them. 2. 0-
thcrs bcfidesfuch who were Expounders of the Law had them given to
them. ift> The very words that were fpoken at the time of the In-
veftmentof any intothc Title of ^^^^/, •://«,. n^tDT iV Xy^l 1120 HN
^in niOJp '•Jn lY^a ^y\^ .Behold thou art promoted^and there ii pw^
tr given to thee of exercifing capital Judgments ; ( which I am fure apper-
tained not to them as Expounders of the Law) abundantly evince, that
that Title was givento thofc that had authority in things Civil. Asij
the Title. 2dly, Of Mafter, Exod, 1. 11. i Sam^26^ id. 2 Sam, 2.
7^ 2 King, 10. 2, 3, 6, I Sam^ 29. 4. 2 King. 9.31. & 19.4.. i Chr:
12.19. jdly, Oi Father i i 5<««;. 24. 12, iKing.^.i^. & 16,/,
In which fenfe /l/<f that Country, i Chr. 2. 21, 23. And David is called the Father of
the Jen9SyMark^\i,\o, Nor, 4thly, Is it neceflary that we reftrain the
moA KccHynrAi^Leadersjto Ecdefiaftical Leaders 01 Guidesjiihcn it may
as proppetly be referred to Civil Rulers, ythly, The Title Ai by virtue thereof, did the Expoiiiion of the Liy tppcrtiin ( as if
known. )
2. Hefcems to grant that they were fuch ordinary Magiftratesai
were in thcJemlhSpedrlon^^ihich is as much as we need plead for. From
an attend:nent upon the Syndrion of the Jevps determining in cafes of
Judgment and Jufticc, a lawful attendmcnt on the prefent Minifters
will^nevcrbe proved. He himfelf afterwards grants, That the Scni>»t
and Pharifees mrej m^»y of thmy Ktilers oftbtjem-, but, very learnedly
tells us »ot as Scribes ani Pharlfees; which none ever thought they
were, bsin** as he acknowlcdgeth p^rf >f «/<«r Sc^s amongthe Jews : That
thefe here mentioned were not fuch,he is not able to deoRonftrate. They
fate In Mofes Seat as Miglftiates, though their jurifdidion or power wif
not fo great as his.
He adds, That what we [aj[t>me ohferve^ that thefe Scrlhs and. *PharU
fees are effecially charged with the om'tffion of JudgetMnt and Mercy ^ things
woft nearly relating to the Office of Magijiracy, to whom it doth efpuiaHj
appertain to look^thereuntOjUfrivolom.
Anfi», But others think not fo, nor hath Mr. T faid any thing to cn-
cline them to think fo. That r^ktjs. Judgment^ is any where taken for
riffht orderingthe converfation towards God and man^ht cannotprove ; in
Mat. 12. 18. 'tis not fo taken : 'Tis lathcr taken for the Ruledom
and Government of God. Chrift was to publifh true Religion among
the Gentiles, tnd to caft out Supetftition ; which thing, where ever it
is done, the Lord is faid to Reign and Judge there. And Mr. T. can-
not be i^'norant, that K^Krhy Judgntenty is the acft, k^jtS, of the Jndge^
or Ma^ftratCy o's K^n'Sy which paffeth fentence^ or judgethy and that this
is the proper notation of tht word, which its being joyned with Mercy
and Faith, Z/«i^ . rvh ^ > ' • <
Mr. T, replies, i. *7is no wonder that Chrijis charing them herewith
is not inexprefs tearms related, fth their injiigation of Herod to taks away
John Baptifts life^ {related by Jofephus) iamt related as imputed to them
i>y him.
An[w. I. 'Tis very uncertain whether they were guilty of any fuch
Clime. 2. If they were, it might might not be known. 3. The Scrip-
ture gives us another account of H^ro fhould be omitted,men of reafon, (with the leave of our Ammad^
verier be it fpoken) will be apt to conclude irrational to imagine.
Wctdd in S. T. That if this alfo be granted exceft It h granted^ ^61^^
thatrphen-ChriJi fatthf What they fay unto you, do; he is to he inter-
frtted to command, oratleafito permit an attendance uf on their minlfiryy it
win advantage the Obje^ors nothing.Novo this rve deny, for thefe reafons^ r .
The roords are in the Original evri tv\s M6)j-e(j)S KaSecA^as" tK-oc^icav 01 V^ocfA-
fi«T&t9, it) 01 <$«?ia-aToj J 7rSv7ci §v bVa ocv 'inroicriif v(a.7v, — fvhich may
more firi^lybe rendred^ the Scribes and Pharifees have fat in Mofes Seat^
all things therefore v^hatfoever they have faidnnto /<^^^^<^^'9
iuTr^j - and laid wait for him. To which many more might be added.
He proceeds, and faith, iVere it granted, that the bidding-were meant
of the time. pa/} y the Argument rvere of force I they heardy therefore they
may hear^ for Chriji doth not dif prove their former praClicey bm gives a
reafoftf which infers a continued perm'ffion to hear them, becaufe they fat in
Ho^ts Chair, (i. e.) taught the Law of Mofes, which while they dtd^
they were t^ hear them, mtwithjlanding other corruptions,—)
A^fve. I. That becaufe the Difciplcs had heard the Scribes and Pha-
rifccs, therefore they might hear them, our Di6tator will never be able
to make good, it being no better an Argument than this ; Paul fat at
the feet of Gamaliel before bis Converfion, therefore he might do fo
fiill. The Corinthian Btlicvfirs had communion with Idolaters, there-
fore they might fiill. Thofe that have gone to Mafs may do fo ftill.
That what they did in an uncovered ftatc, when they were indarknefj,
blindncfSjfin, and Hell, they might do when converted toChrift, fan-
aified, enlightncd, is fuch an abfurd affcrtion, that the very naming
it is confutation fufficient. — Yet this is one of thofe folid Foundati-
ons upon which this Anfw.r is built.
2. That Chrifi doth not difprovc their practice of hearing them, is
no better reafon that they might do fo than the former, i. Twas
ncedl«fs that he/houlddofo, when they themfclvcs were already ta-
ken cff their attendment on their Miniftry, fawits emptinefs,difcern-
cd the wickednefs, bliodncfj, hypocrific of the guides they once fol-
lowed. Yet, 2. the very difcouvfe of Chrift in this Chaptcr^and elfc-
where touching them, is a fufficicnt difapprobation of, and diffwafivc
from the hearing of them. 3. Mr. T. takes for granted, that which
we deny, and he lliould have proved, that their fitting in Mofes feat was
their teaching the Law of Mofes, which for the moft part they did not
do. l[-it^taaght for DoUrines theComwarJments of men. Mat. if. p.
They made void the Law by their Traditions y Mat. i y . 6. Corrupted it with
their falfe glofes, Mar. f . So that their teaching the Law of CHofes^
could not be any reafon at all why they fliould hear them.
We add in 5. T, 2. Let the words be as they are rtndred • the Difciples
mighc
in Anjwer ^o Mr, T. his Exceptmt, 4 5 j
^]^t ohfcrvCy and do what thtj [aid from the knowledge thereof ^ through
their particular occajional meeting and difconrfe with them^ (as otherrvife)
though they h^d never [petit one hour in attending upon their Minijiry • which
that ottr Saviour did not enjojn^no not fo much as permits—we [uppofe may
be clearly demonfirated from the enfuing confiderations. ,,■
To which Mr. T.SeB.^, i. If by attendance on their Miniftry be meant
a cofsfiant and ordinary hearing of them, as their ordinary Shepherds^ doubt'
kfs neither Chrift did command nor permit his Difciples fuch an atten*
dance-
Knfw, I. Very good ! a conftant attcndmcnt upon the prefent Mi,
nifters of €ngland^ cannot be proved from, this Scripture ; Chrift did
act permit his Difciples fo to attend on the teaching of the Scribes
»nd Phatifees. 2. Own them as our ordinary Shepherds we may not,
for fo the Scribes and Pharifees were not to be own'd by the Difciples
of ehrift, as Mr. T. grants. Wherein how much the greatncfs of Truth
haih prevailed upon him, others will judge. Bur, 3 . hearing being an
inftitution of Chrift, to be conformed to according to the direijr,i<^,i5,24,2(J.and
V. 16,17,18,53,34. Andean it be imagined that Chrift Oiould have
no more tendernefs to poor Souls than to dire6l them to an attendance
upon fuch pcifoDj as thcfc for teachings ? arc they likely motives to per^
lii fwade
4 3 4 ^ Vindication of tie Sober Teflimnyi
fwade Of eafoice any thereunto ? 2. Yet this is what he immediately
fubjoyns, having faid, Whatcvei they bid you obfcivc, that obfeivc
and do. /• /r > •
To which Mr. T. Thefe pcrfonal eviU were not JHjjicunt moHv€S ta
keep them back^from hearing Gois Law expomded hj them,
9A»f^* I* But their cxpofuion of Gods Law was abominable, in-"
tollcrablc ; had they been guilty of no ptrfonal evils not to have beea
bom, a fufficient ground of it felf to have forbovn hearing them ; they
corrupted, perverted it by their expofitionj.
2. We are in the mind Mr. T. hath not his fecond in the World of
fober-minded men, who will aver that fuch perfonal evils as thofe men-
tioned, are not a fufficient Bar to hinder the attcndment of Saints up-
on preaching, (or expounding cf the Law) by thofe upon whom they
tic to be found. , , .
3. 'Tis furc, a bad caufe he hath undertaken the defence of, that m
the purfuit thereof he is forced to affert the lawfulnefs of hearing pet-
fons that we infallibly know to be Hypocrites, (for Chrift having told
themfo, they knew it to be infallibly true) proud men (whom the
Lord abhors) fuch as (hut up the Kingdom of Heaven againft men j.
will not go in themfclves, nor fuffer others ; fuch as make their Profc-
iitcs worfe than themfelves, cither by their evil example,or by making
them more zealous for their Tradiiioni, and more bitter againft the
Preachers and preaching the Gofpcl than themfelves ;. who are blind
^uides, pcrverrers of Scripture^fuch as make void the Commandments
©f God by their Traditions ; that are Serpents, a Generation of Vi-
pcrs> that cannot efcape the damnation of Hell ; that kill, crucific,
fcourge, perfecutc the Meflcngcrs of the Lord. To repeat fo abfurd t
Pofiiion, is confutation fufficient, and honour more than enough. I
wonder if our Ammadverter could write it without bluftiing. Jmboanfi'
was.not to be blamed, who made Priefts of the lowermoft of the peo-
ple. Out Animadvcrter thinks, if the fcum of the World, and Hell
oet'into a Pulpit with a Bible and Common-Praycr-Book in their hand,
and a Surplice on their back, they may lawfully be attended. Tufti 1
P 3, 2.Tm. 2. Tit. i. 'Tis no great mat-
ter what they are, fo they read Come Scripture, and interlace it with
the traditions of men, perfons may lawfully hear them without more
adoe. This is fome of that Hay and Stubble that Mr. T. his TheodulU.
irftuft with, that will one day be burnt up.
Wctdd, 2. Yii not likely thatChrtJl mttli command or permit his
Difciplfs
in Anfwer to Mr. T, his Exceptioni* 43 jr
Vlfciplfs to atteftd upon the ^re Aching of the Scrihei axd Fharifees ; bc^mfe
they preached, falfe DoUrine, viz. jajiif cation hj the workj of the Larv,
which root diametrically oppojite to the VoUriyte he preached^ and the work^hc
VfOi npon*
To which our Animadvcrter rcpliej, Chrifl doth not permit them to
hear the Pharifees teach all the DoElrines of their SeCij touching fame of
which he forervarns them^ Mat, if. 14. 8c. 1(5.12. bm as they taught
themthedntiesofMo^cs Law.
Anftv. I. But if Mr. T. calli this an anfwer, I am afraid he will not
find a fccond in his Affertion J it being indeed nothing like one : The
Qncftion i J, Whether Chrift commanded or permitted his Difciples to hear
the Scribes and Pb^ifees ? We prove he did not, bccaufc they preached
falfe Do(arine, another Gofpel to what was preached jjy Chrift.^ Mr.
T. anfwers, He did not permit them to hear aU the *Do[irines of their SeU,
But Sir, the Queftion is, Whether he permitted them to hear any at all,
to attend upon their preaching, who were every way fuch Anti-Gofpel-
larians ; that he fliould do (0, vve conceive is not rational to imagine,
when the very fcope of their preaching tended to the overthrow of that
he came to promulgate.
But, 2. if they were to attend them, only as ibcy taught the duties
ciMofesLifif (as he faith) they were fo fcldom to attend them, that
upon fearch it will be found they were not to do fo at all, fincc they had
fo foully perverted it, that upon the matter they made it anothci
thing.
3. By Mr. T. his Argument, 'tis lawful for perfons to hear fuch as
preach another Gofpcl ; for fo did the Scribes and Pharifees. "Paul was
out when he wifheth fuch4c<;»r/>(?^j, Gal. i. 8. — Phil.
3.2. and bids them beware of them, i.e. not attending upon their
preaching.
We add, as a third Reafon of our Affertion, that they defied Chrift
to be the Mcffiah, blafphemed him in his Dodrine, {ts thz deceiver o£
the people;) in his Life, as a Mne-bilber znd gluttonous perfon j in his Mi-
faclcs, asone that wr^«^^f them by the Devily who arc therefore con-
demned by Chrift as guilty of the very fin of blafpheming againft the
Ifoly Ghoft, Mat. 12. 3 1. And we cannot imagine that Chtitt would
permit his Difciples to hear fuch as thus blafphemed him.
OurAnimadverterieplies, The third Reafon hath the fame anfrver,
with this overplusy that to prevent any conceit of allowing the hearing of
them in their blafphemy.he avoftcheth himfelfto be their M after and Teach-
er^ Vt 8, 10.
lii 2 jififw.
^ J g A Vindication tf th Sober TejHmoHf,
Aif{riff, 1. They took all occafions to blafphcme him, and if they at^
tended their MiDiliry with any conftancy, 'twas itnpoffiblc but at one
tims or other they tnuft heai them fo doing.. But, idly, What is this
to the purpofe ? Is it lawful to heat fuch as blafphcme Chrift } 1$ it
lik Jy that Chiift wonld permit his Difciples to do fo ? That the Scribes
and Pharifees were pcrfons of fuch a comglc6lioa is known, jdly, The
hmc Anfwer he talksof is already replied to.
We add, 4thly, We no where find the Difciples ittcnding upon,
the Miniftry of the Scribes and Pharifees, notwithltanding this fuppo-
fcd command or permilTion of Chrift. —
Mr. "T. replies> Thti is hm from a tefiintony ne^ntivelj/y And foofntt
force ; roe read not that they ttfei the Lords Prayer > jet none will [aj.they dil
not-) lefs that they might nat^
Anfw. I. But if Chrift had commanded or permitted them fo to do,'
and that with an intendment to make it a piefident to walk by,with re-
fpcd to perfons of the fame or like qualifications with thefe who ftiould-
inthelaftdaycsftandup to fpeak in his Name to his Children : Tia
more than probable that the ptaftice of the Apoftles herein would have
been regiftred^as well as in matters of leffer concern. 2dly;, We find
exprefiions touching the pra^ftice and deportment of the Difciples that
utterly evert this figment, ^4^/1.23. (^10.41. 3dly, That we na
where read of the Difciples ufing the Lords Prayer ( when we have aa
account of other of their Prayers ) its an Argument they did not ufe it,,
that they might not fo do. Of which before at large. 4thly, Oftheit
Almes, we have mention AUs 11. 2p. Although they having little in
the world, it wi^not poflible they lliould be ovet-libewl or over-fre-
quent in times-giving, jthly, 'Tis more than probable they did not
faft while Chrift was with them, Mat. p. ij-. No wonder we have no
account of their doing fo during that feafon. Afterwards we have men-
tioti made hereof, ^^ji3»2, 3. &.10. ^q,& 1^.23. 2.Cor.6,<},
We fay in 5* 7. ythly, f^e cannot httt thinks the fuppo/ttion ofChrifi's
permitting bin Difciples to jjear the Scribes and Pharifees ^not only inconfifient
with ^ and oppofue to that expreffton cancer mn,gChr'ifi^ Mar. 6. 31. but alfa^
to that command, hdci 2. 4Q. and the praUice of the Difciples, verf. 42.
Towhichouv Animadverter, ift, Chriji did. conceive the People to h
without a Shepherd) netmthjlaading.the Pharifees teaching the duties of the
Law ; becaufe though that doU.rini were right ^and to be tbferved, yet it.wai-
not f efficient to feed them to Eternal Ltfe^
Anfw, Here are fcveral, miftikes in thefeicwvvords. ift, Thatthe.
Phaiifces teaching the duties, of the Law- Wis tight Dt»5liine, which is
iroft
^ in An fiver tQ Mr, T. hps Exceptioni. 4.; 7
moft BOtorioufly untrue : 'Tis true, the Doarineof the LiWWAj right
Dodrinc ; but the Pharifces teaching the duties of the Law, was not fo.
For, 1. they taught duties of the Law that vvcre not contained in the
Law, U^at, j. 45. 2. They corrupted, perverted the duties
of the Law by their traditions, ^<3^ 15. 3. They prcft the duties of
the Law for juftification of Jife>which was not right Do6lrine. 2dly,'Tif
falfe, and not to be fuppofed without great reproach to Chrift, that he.
fliould fend hij Difciples to attend upon fuch a Miniftry as break not
the Bread of life, picached not the Dodtrine which was fufficicntto
feed theoitacternallife. —
He faith further, 2. Peter did well to exhort his Auditors to favs them-*
fehes from that u»toi»ardGeneratioft/ viz, in not doltia their rvorkj^ nor
foUowing their perverfe DoElrine ; and the Church did right I j fraBifeyin cok-^
tinuing in the ApojilesDoEirine^ — v. 42. Tet- he woi nn to dtjfwade them
from hearing or fraUifwg the "Pharifees Do^rine of ol'ferviNgthe-dttties of
MofesV Laiv,—
Anfw. I. The Pharifecs Do That the exhortation of Vacty tA^si,/^o. wot
only meant of their not doing their vcorkjy non-embracement of their perverfe
DoEiritie i but 'tis evident from v. 42. that Peter mzzm it of non-com-
munion with them in a»ftsof Worrhip. And I cannot difcern how I
can heat a man preach, but I mufir have Communion with him in that
ad, which is an ad of Wotdiip.
We add, 6. Were that the intendment of Cbiift, as is fuggef^ed, (and
the Argument of our Brethren Vilid) a lawfulncfs to hear the veiicft
hlafphemer in the World, that denies Cdrift is the M^iTiah, affirms thit
he was a deluder of the people, a gluttonous perfon, a VVine-bibb:r,
©ne that did Miracles by Belx^ebub the Prince of Devils, that pctfecutes
even to death Chrift io his people, might by a lik^ parity of reafon bs
deduced. Chrift commanded, or atleaft permitted his Difciples to
heartticPhatifees, who were fuch, -as hath been pi oved ; therefore itr
lawful to hear peifons with the fam^ Charader upon them. But God
forbid any fuch injurious dealing fhould be offered toChrift, or tha^ -
any who pretend to feat God, and I hope do io kircalicy, llioiildftand
by a csufe that hath no better Arguments to defend it, than what may
be as lighteoufly every way made ulc of for their artendin^ npon the
Miniftry of the. greatcft'blafphemcry andoppofcrof Cbrirt inthe-
Woild. .
4 3 S 'A Vindication of the Sober Tejiimony^,
To which Mr. T. I grant It larvfuU to hear any man f reach Truth with
vphom God aUows tu converfe and cornmunionj oi we are men,
A>7fip. I. Would he had given us his icafons of his mcnftrous af-
fertion. 2. Thought it incumbent upon hitn to have reconciled it with
former printed paflagcs of his own. 3. I am allowed converfe and
cooitnunion (if my occa{ions,and calling in the world compel me there-
unto ) with the wotft of men, as men, a Turk, a Jew, the Pope him-
felf, a Drunkard, Swearer, Adulterer or Adultercfs, but that I
may have Communion with thefc in inftituted Worniip,af I have whca
I hear them, is fuch a monftrous Figment, fo devoid of Scripture evi-
dence, fo oppofite thereunto, fo abhorred, and abominable to the Spi-
rit of God breathing ia his Children, that I ftand amazed he Should aC-
fert it.
But enough of this ; Vis evident that Mat, 23. i, 2. rcfufeth to
afford theleart fanituary to the opinion of hearing the ptefcntMinifters-
iS'ffS. 2.
The A/ifvper to the [econi ObjeBlon vindicated from Mr. T. hU Exceptions,
Of Chrtfly and the Afoflles going into the Synagogues. The ends of their
fo doing. The id OhjeBion vindicated, Phil, i, ly, 16, opened'
u4ll preaching of Chriji not to he rejoyced in, proved,
f A Second Objed^ion propofed in S,T, to be confidered, ij thisj Wc
Jl~\. fnd ChriH and his Apojiles goingfreqttently into the Synagogues where
the Scribes and Pharifees preached.
Which Mr, T. proves they did from Luke 2. 4^. c^ 4. 16, AEis 3.
1. c^ 13. 14, ly^ i England, wc have proved, is no rightly conftitutcd Church, we were
never Members thereof. So that hitherto be hath faid nothing that is
pertinent.
Wc further anfvver in S. T. 2dly, That his one thing to go into the-
SynagogneSy and another thing to go thither to attend upon the Minijiry of
fuch M tmght there. This the pteient cafe,wbich that Chrift or his Apo-
Mt^ ever did, cannot be proved.
Our Animadverter replies. Though Chrifl and hii Apofiles did not gg fg ■
attend on the Miniftry of fach m taught there ^ yet thcj did there hear the
Law and the Prophets ready andjojn in Prayers.
Anfrv. I, If they went not to attend on the Miniftry of fuch as taught
there, an attendment upon the prcfent Minifters of England cannot be
proved frona their example. In which aflertion, that Mr. T. hath given
tway the ctufe he hath all this while been pleading for, is in it felf evi-
dent. If wc may not attend on their MiniHry, we may not hear them
as Minifters. Nor indeed 2dly, can we hear them at all, for in that
their Miniftry they ad as Minifters. Tis true Chrift and the Apoftlcs-
wcnt to the Synagogues whither the People were gathered together,.and
fomtimcs they heard the Law, and the Prophets read ( that they joyned
in Prayer with them is no where affirmed, ) ABs^.i, 'dsfaid. They
went Hp to the Temple at the hour of Prayer ; but 'tis evident they went
not in to pray with theni,for Peter having wrought that miracle in cure-
HJgtheCripple,theyflocktohim,and hepreachethto them. And^^^
16. i'}. *tis faid, Paul went to 'the Rivers fide where Prayer was wont to-
he madci bat that heprayed with them there,is not intimated (norpro-
bable ) but their end in going thither, as is evident by their pradice, .
was to take »n opportunity to teach and inftrud the People who were
convened together, which is no warrant for our going to the prcfent
Affemblies, where liberty fo to do is not afforded us j nor do wc or caa
we propofe fuch in end to our felves in going thither.
Wc add in S. T, 3dly,. Thej wint thither to ofpo[$them inandconfuts'-
ths-ir
^40 ^ vindication of tie Sober Teftmonyy
their InmVAtloKs and Traditions in the fVorfhip of God, to takji anoffBrtumtf
to teach and inJlrHU the Peofle^ Which when any have a Ipirit to
do, and are fatisfied they are thereunto called by the Lord, in refpcft
of the prefent Miniftcrs and Woilhip of England j we (hall be fo
fir from condemning them therein, that wc {hall blefs God foi them.
But this Is not to the purpofc in hand.
The attendance of our Brethren upon the Minifters of £»^/W isquite
another thing, that requires other Arguments for its fupport than wc
have hitherto met with. What faith Mr. T. hereunto ? Doth he mani-
feft that thefe were not the ends of their going to the Temple and Sy-
nagogues ? Doth he manifeft that upon luppofition they were, the Ar-
gument fiom their example is valid. — He attempts not the one or
the other ,• which yet if he will-not give tip his concern in the prefent
Argument, he could not but fee was incumbent upon him to prove.
He only tells wSiThat Chrifl or hit Afojiles went into their Synagogues:
tooppofe them in^ or confute their Innovations^ Traditions mthevyorfhif of
Cody he doth not remefnhet to have read,
Anfiv. I. That they came thither to take an opportunity to teach
the People, Ut.T denies not, which were enough to enervate what
can be argued, for the hearing the piefent Minifters from their example,
as was faid before. But 2dly, The (hortnefsof bis memory I am not
able to mend ; would he converfe with the Scriptures of the Lord more,
pofTibly that might make him more ready than he feems to be in them.-
'lis evident they did oppofe them in, and confute their Innova.
tions. Chrift did fo in the Temple, Mattb. 21. 12, 13.
andC^^;>. 23. For that Difcourfe of his was in the Temple, as is
evident from Chap. 24 i. In the Synagogue^ Mark. 3. i. where he
confutes their Innovation touching the Sabbath, by manifefting that
works of mercy might be done on that day. vcrf. 4, 5-. ( fee Mat,
.12. 9,10,11,12,13. Lnke 6, d,7,8^^, p, 10. and 13.10. )
contrary to the Tradition of the Elders. The Apoftles, ^cis 17.
1,2,17. & 18.4, 19. d" ip. 8. , How little Mr. T, hath faid to rein-
force the Argumenr,the Reader will judge.
We proceed in S. T. and propofe a 3d ObjeeVion. ObjeSi. 3. Paul
rejoyceth at the preaching oftheGoJpeii though it veas preached om of envfy
Phil. 1. 15, \6,
From whence our Animadverter argues* Arg. i. They in whofe
preaching ofChrij} we may re Joyce, thoHgb they fhould mt preach Chrifl Jin-
cerely, but in pretence, out of envy, may be heard by the Saints law-
fully : But the Saints may rejoycc in thf prefent Mim'Bers p/ England
preach*
in Anfwer toMr. T, hi f Exceptions. 441
frUchlftg Chrlfl^thoHgh thejjhouU not freach hlmfmctrely ht in pretence: -
Therefore, — •
Anfrv. I. We deny his Major. I may lejoyce and that lawfully in
thofcmens preaching Chrift, whom I have no warrant to hear. There
itJty be caufe of rejoycing, as we told Mr. T. in S. T. in refpeft of the
iffue and event of things, by the wife Providence of God, though thi
means ufed for their produftion be evil, and not to be complied with.
In what have Chiiftians greater caufe of rejoycing than in the death of
Chrift .? Yet had it been utterly unlawful ta have joyn*d in Counfel
Withjor any waycs abetted or encouraged thofc wicked perfons that cru-
cified or flew him. Should the Pope fend Xome Jefuites i|ito any re-
mote parts of Afta to preach the Gofpel to the poor Indians there,
here were upon fome accounts ground of rejoycing, yet no ground to
attend upon a Jefuitical Miniftry. Nor do his Scnptures in the leaft
prove his ^/-«/o^ Ifa.^2.7> Nttm.i. 15^. being applied by the Apcftlc
to Gofpel-Preachets : Rom, to. 1^. evince onely thus much, That
fuch as aa from Gofpel-Authority in that work, are to be welcomed
andheard* What Mr. T. replies is not confidcrable. ift, 'Tistrue
preaching Chrift is a good thing and to be rejoyced in, but preaching
Chrift by virtue of an Antichiiftian Call and Office-power is not fo,
nor to be rejoyced in, or complied with, sdly, That he knows no
leafon why the Saints may not attend on the Miniftry. of the Jefuites
fent from the Pope to preach the Gofpel, if they do fo, is no Argument
that there is no reafon. That they aa from an Antichiiaian Call and
Commiflion, is to Chiift-loving Saints reafon fufficient.
2dly, We deny his Minor Propofuion ; Saints may not rejoyce in
the prefenrMinifters of £a?^/4«!ived by the Lord for his
own Children by adoption. ( Common-Prayer-Book^oi PHblick, Baptifm)
5. That Children being bapriz-d have all things neceflary for their fal-
vation, and fliall undoubtedly be fa ved. 6. That all that are bapti-
zed have received remiiTion of fins. Confirmation before the impofiti-
on of hands. 7. They feem to make the impofition of hands a Sacra-
ment, when they fay, 'Tis a ftgn tocmifit ChiUrcn of (jods grace and fa*
voHT towards them, {Ibid.in the Prayer after the impofitionof hands) Yea
they really do fo; if the definition they thcmfelves give of a Sacrament
be right, W*. That it is an otttw^ard and viflble Sign of an inn>ard andfpi^
ritual Grace. 8. So they; to make Matrimony, by that exprefiion'
ufed by them, confecratcd theftate of Matrimony to fuch an excellent
myftery — in one of the Colleds in the form of the folemnization
of Matrimony* 9- They adore before the Elements of Bread and Winc.-
10. That the wicked and ungodly may receive it. 1 1. That though
the moft notorious offenders be partakers of itjyet the People that jofn
with them are not defiled thereby. 12. That the Body of Chrift was
broken, the blood of Chrift was (bed ( particularly ) for them. •
6. Touching the Church, i. That under the time of theGofpel
there is a National Church. 2. That the moft wicked ana their feed
may be compelled and received to be members of the Church, which is
notoiiobfly known ( nor have they the face to deny it, though Mr. T;
talkcs as if they would ) to be confonant to their piinciplcs and pra-
aice. 5* That 'tis not lawful to feparate from this Church ; whoever >
do fo are Se2g thlyjgs fuppofed indiffereitt,, ■ i» That 'tis in the powei
of the Church (^/. f. the Billiops in their Convocation—) to cnake
that which is in it felf indifFerenr,a necefTary part of Wor(hip. 2. To
devile what Rites it pleafeth,and add to the Worfliip oiChrili. 3.That
Marriage may be fovbiddenat certain (Popiili) feafons,- as in Lent ^
Advent, Rogation week.. — - 4.- That, th€ Cope^ Surplice, Tippet,
Rochet,.- are meet and decent Ornament-s for the Wotfliipof God,
and min rtry of the Gofpel. f. That Altars, Candles, Organs, — -
are neceilary and uCeful in the Church of God. Mr.T. his thoughts are
vain, when he thinks that they will not aiTeri this. Certainly they will
cot be lb imprudent a^ to aver that they lavidi the Gold out of the Bag
for the erc6lion of that in the Service of God, which is neither necclTa-
ry nor ufcfu/. 6. That there may be Holy Dayes appointed to the
Viioin AUr^j John^Baptlfiy theApoftles, all Saints and Angels, toge-
ther alio with FaHs on their Eves, on Erfther daps, Fridayes, Satar-
dayes, (lb called, heathenillily enough.) ; ,
.Mr. T. anlVvers, They velll deny this to be their Tenent, and cites fVhU.
rz/f, &C' telling uSj That they mean not that tn phefe dayes the Saint j
ibotild be honoured. ...
A-^ve. I. TothefeSaints, for their VVorlliip and Service dayes were
inftituted by the Popes of Rome— to be cbrcrveq ; LeiVons peculiar and
proper thereunto, appointed to be lead in their Service-Books : If no
intendment of honour to the Saints were in thsir prefent obfervitioii*
' whence isle ehat the very fame dayes, the very ianje Leflbns, tht very
fame Collects and Prayers are appointed to be ufed in the Church of
J^ngUnd^oTi many of the Saints dayes that are appointed in the Church
of Rome on the fame dayes > 'Tvverc eafie to demonftrate the truth of
thisby particular inftanccs, but that would be too tedious. 2. They
axe called IVill (in their Common-Prayer-Book) by the names of the
Saints,
i5
m Anjwer to Mr, T, his Exceptions. 449
Saints, asS'.7«A»'sday, — and arc accounted Holy, (for not reftin*'
•on tiicm, perfoos arc more liable to be excotnmiinicitcd by their
.Church; than for Swearing and Diunkennefs) which as it is an imitati-
on of Heathcni/h and Antichriftian Superftition, fo it is an occafion of
nourifliing a moft horrid error, if not Idolatry in the heart! of the fim-
ple and ignorant, who think that day to be fet apart in honour of the
Saint vvhofc name it beau. Which, 3. if it be not, I fee no ground
why it (hould be called by his name ; as the fame day is in the Pa-
pacy, from whence the rife and fpring of our obfervation thereof.
Now although v\c fay not that 'cis unlawful to hold communion with
pcrfons that hold fome errors, yet this we are bold to affirm, i. That
the ground or foundation is laid by Mr. T. upon which we m'ay hear the
prcfent Minifters, vi^. Their preaching truth is hereby difcovered to
be fandy and rotten, they being guilty of fo many errors. Which 2.
beicgof fuch anatuie as enwrap in them (fomeof them) a denyal of
the Offices of Chrift. 3 . Such as liz at the bottom of that fuperftitious
corrupt, idolatrous W.or/hip and Service, that is direftly contrary to
the fimplicity of the Gofpcl, Clouds, and obfufcates the fplcndor and
glory thereof, (as this AnimUvmcr clfewhcrc acquaints us.) Yea,
4. Such as they have frequently, facrificed, the Liberty, Eltates, and
precious blood of the Children of the Lord for the fupport of, they may
well caufc a Saint to enter his demurrer againft hearing them j yea i£
they obftinatcly hold and maintain them as they do. Though many of
' the Witneffes of Chrift have born a teftimony againft them, whom they
have no otherwife been able to refill, but by force and violence utterly
to feparate from them, and have nothing to do with fuch an hardned and
bloody Generation,
. . , SeB:. 4,
TheM»>erto the r\ 6^\ 7^", 8"'', p^\ to^^ OhjeBlon, vindicated.
Of the cafe of Judas hi4 f reaching. Of hearing good men. Of the
fraUice of Learned, And good mea in this matter. Of the Magifirates
command ; hovf jar obligatory. Of mens converting Souls, whether an
Argument of trHeGofpeUMint/lers, Of fpendingthe Lords Day, fVhere-
tn the fan^tfication of it conffis,
THE fifth Objeaion in S. T, is, Judas preached, though a wicked
man, and no doubt tt was lawful ; yea, the duty of Saints to hear him.
To this we fay, no doubt it was fo. Bu,t, i. Jndas was not a vifiblc
Wicked man at the time of his preaching, (that Chrift, as God, knew
LU hinj
4 f o ^A' Ftndication 6f the S ober Tefiimonyi;
him to be fo, is not in our ctfc confidciablc) but fo dofc an Hypocrite,;
that he was not known, no not to the EHfciplef to be fo ; but fomc of
the prefcnt Miniftcis arc vifibly wicked and prophane. What Mr» T.
tnfwcii hereunto hath already been confidered* There was a fpecial
reafon in the cafe of Judas his preaching to anfwer the Prophefie, Ffal^
41.8, of which y4^i J. iavid, Solomon, Peter, — were good men, yet leprefcBted by the
Spirit of the Lord is guilty of hainousiniquities.
We add in S. T. Tet we crave leave to fay, Ihat they are aH of them
fuch at are fadly foUuted ly tkeircomplianct, in reffcB of their (landing in
the A^tinlftry, Antiehrifllan, whofe teachings Saints have no warrant to at"
tend tffotj^
Mr.T. fubjoyns,i.T^iqnies He tells us plainly, That fuch as fear to offend their [u^
fer'iQttrSy fhottld much more fear to offend God who is greater than all. The
Bmpcrors and Monarchs of the World threaten us with a Prifon if wc
difobey them; The Lord threatens us with Hell upon our difobcdiencc
to him- To vvhich Mr. T: anfvvcrs not at alU
Thep''' Ob]eBlon\nS,T.\iy The Minlflerj of En^Und are trt*e Cof^
fel Minlfiers^ for they convert fonts ; vfhich the Apofile makes the Seal ofhi«
Mimftry or ApojlUfhif : Therefore its larpfnl to hear them.
To which we fay. That the convcrfion of Souls proves not a lawful
Miniftry. i. T^«/ makes it nor, i Cor.p. 2. (ingly 1 fuflRcientdc-
monft ration of his Apoftlefliip.— z. Many have <:on verted fouls that
were not Apoftlcj, is ordinary Miniftett, yea Brethren, Women, re-
markable Providences ; yet who will fay that thefe laft are Apoftles or
Minifters of the Lord Jefus ? 5, Should it be granted, that Convcrfion
offoulsisan Argument of a lawfal Miniftry, Where are the Church-
es, nay where are the particular perfons converted by them ? — In
anfwer to vvhich Mr. T. grants. That Convcrfion of fouls u no certain fign
of a true Gofpel Mlnljler ; whereby he hath difcharged this Argument (af
infuflicient) from further attendance upon this fervice. In what follows
there is nothing ( but what hath already been replied to ) in this 5#/?.
that requires our ftay.
The 1 aft ObjeUlon propofed and anfwer cd in 5. T. i?. Our Minlfiert
Are removed y and we know not where to go to hear j would you have wfit at
home idle}
Anfiv, I. Though we are not againft any Ordinance ofChrift, yet
we are afraid that thofc that know not how to fpcnd the Lords day with-
out hearingjdo too much Idolize that Ordinance, and never knew what
'twas to fpcnd that day with him.
Mr. T. adjoyns, That fttch perfons conceive they cannot fpcnd the Lords
Aay without hearings is not out of any ldollz.ing that Ordinance of God ; but
becaufe it is one duty of farMifj'ing the Lords Aay ; not only to exercife them*
f elves in Reading and Prayer at home^ for that is every days duty, tut at"
fo tofretfuent the publick^Affemhlies where God is worjbipped,—^ Heb. 10,
in Anfiper to Mr» T, his Exceptionr, 4 y j-
25', Exod, 20. 8' Afts 20. 7* Rev. 1. 10. I Cor, i<<;>and yet I hope fan(ftified it according to the will of God.
2» I cannot but wonder thatPeople (efpecially men of learning & read-
ing ) {hould talk fomuch of Publick Aflcmblies, and Publick Ordinan-
ces, when they cannot but know that ever fince Chriftianity had a be-
ing in the world, for the moft part,the Affemblies of P<«^^»/, and Juti-
tfJbr//i?;tf»j with their Ordinances and Worfhip, were publick, and the
Affemblics of the true Church and Worfliip of Chrift retired and pri-
vate. Whence in Rev. 12, 6, ( when you have the Bra/i and fVhorg
in their Ruffe and Gallantry, the whole World wondering after them.
Rev. 13. 3. you have the poor witnejfes of Chrift prophefying in fack-
cloth, Rev.i^. and the Church flying into the Wildernefs, a ftatc of
folitarinefs and retirement. Rev. 12. d, 14. Might not the Papifts in
i\iz Marian dayes have pleaded thus againft the Protcftants ? Such
fubllck^AJfemblies isMx>Cotton — fpake of, "Z//;?;. The Affemhlies of Be-
lievers in a particular Church-Sratfy we fay are not carelcfly or willful-
ly to be neglcfted or forfaken. But what's this to the Parochial^ AJfctn^
hliesoi E>igla»dyVvho are not fuch ?
Mr* Crofton's Argument cited by him is eafily anfwcrcd ; 'Tis this,
Commttnion with the CbHrch'viftble in Cods [olemn fVorfhlf^ is an (Jfmtial
part of the fanBif cation of the Sabbathy an indifpenfible duty : Bar CoW'^
munion with the Englifli Churchy in the Worfhip by her celebrated^ is Com<^
ntHnion with the Church'vifible in Godsfolemn Worjh'rp : Therefore. —
Anfw. 1. By the Church-vifible he muft underlhnd a particular in-
ftituted Church (for with the Unlvcrfal-Church-Vifible , of which
fome talk, as fuch, I cannot have Communion in the cekbiation^of
Oidinanccs ) of the appointment of Chrift, by Goo's folemn WoiHiip,
Worfnipappointedj inftimicd byhim, to be managed and performed
accord*
451^ '^ vindication if the Sober Teftimony,
according to his will , for othetwifc it is not his Worfhip : In whkli,
fenfc we grant his Major, Communion with the Church-vifiblc ( /. r,
a particular inftitutcd Church of Chiift) in Gods foletnn Worftiip, (i.e.
Worfhip of his own appointment, celebrated in his own way ) is tn
tffential part of thefanaification of the Sabbath, anindifpenfiblcduty,
(with this limitation, when and where there is any fuch Church with
whom I may meet. ) But then the Minor is moft notorioufly falfc and
untrue, becaufe the Church of England is no fuch particular infiituted
Church, as we have proved ; the Woidiip celebrated by her is
not Wordiip of the appointment of God , managed in his own way,
but of mans deviling, performed by Aniichriftian Officers, n we have
demonftratcd.
We fay further in S.T, iidly, Ton need not ft athomeiiJey — yoH
mayfoon hear offome or other of the ^jfemblits of the Saints^ whither joh
may repair to wait upon the Lord mth them. Mr. T. is miftaken that fuch
Alkmblies as thefe are not in many places to be found. Through the
grace of the Lord, 'cis for the moft part far otherwifc than he intimates.
We add, 3dly, Were it^ or jhouU it he othervoife, yet better he idle than
do vBorfcy better do nothing than fin agaln(i Gody encourage others in thtir
evil deeds. — — Which he confefleih to be true upon fuppofition that
publick hearing is a fin, 'twere better be idle than do that. Whether
we have manifefted it to be fo, let the indifferent Reader judge. —
We add, 4thly, There i^ no necejftty of being idle ^ ifthouknowefi not
where to hear on that day. — - — If thou hafi a fight of thy Inter eft in (joi^
thou mayji [pendthy time in admiring^ magmfying the rich love of the Lord
to thee J If not in getting thy intereft cleared up mto thee ; In fiudying thine
own hearty getting fm wortlficdy grace quickened^ ftrengthened, reaching af-
ter commmion with God, getting ready tritfid for the coming ofjefw
That aay of thefe dirediions arc fu,ch as weak Chiiftians are not able to
make ufe of, that they would be dangerous to them, (as Mr. T. fpcaks)
caufing them to decay in the cxercile of Godlinefs, grow barren and
lifelefs in Prayer, occafioning them to fall into errors, enthufiaftick
conceiis, to turn Seekersy — is abfurd'to imagine. How far publick
hearing is required for hallowing the Lords Day, when, and how, not,
we have but now declared, and need nor add more.
c H A p.
In '^Anfwef to Mr, T, hu Exceptimf, j^s?
CHAP. XII.
SeEl. I.
Mr. T. his Argumtnts for hearing the freffttt Mlnifiers , aMfmred,
Some things are unlanffal in which is no fin. There is Jin in hearing the
prefent Minifters. (Nothing relating to inflituted ff^orfhip^ asfHcb, hnt
is necejf/try,) Againji hearing them lie Exceptions that are not meerly
extrinfecal but efential to the duty of hearing, Gods cautions reflrain tu
from hearing them. ^Tis no chara^eriflical property of Chrifi's Sheep fa
to do, ht the contrary, John 8. 27. & 10.27. conjidered, ?^ot to
hear them is nojign of one that is not of God, No fuch prophannefs that
is condemned in El»u. Norefufng the Pearl of great price. Of the
ejjicaciopifnefs of the fVord. fVe have no ground to expeU ihe prefent Mi-
rtijlers preaching fhould he made effe^ual to us. The neglcB of which is no
occajion or reajon of mens condemnation. John 3.20. opened. They have
not the words of eternal life. John
( of which wc have proved hearing to be a put ) that is lawful, but is
our ncccflary duty, viz*, nccclfary, necf£i(ate frtecepti inilitntin^ lU
2. That at exprefs command may befheveed for hearing them^ ( as he faitl; )
Of for hearing the Congregational MinifierSy— is his tniftakc. The hearing
thefc is (hewed to be a pofitive duiy by command from Chtift ; — The
other,contrary to many folemn commands given forth by him,all along
this Treatife. So that
His Argument may be Retorted upon himfelf. — That which is a
breach of the Lavo of Nature ^ and Scripture,, moral or psjitive, in exprefs
• tearmSy or by good confequence^ isjinful and ttnlav^ful to be pra^ifed* ( This
Mr.T. grants. ) But fuch is the hearing the prefent Minifter's ( this WC
have already proved) Therefore. Headd Argnment is thus foimed. That is not unlavpful from which
^dds cautions refirain us not : But from hearing-tbs prefent Mimflcrs Gods
iiautionsreftralntu not^ for they only rejirain m from hearingfuch 04 tench
falfeDoUrine, Dcut. 13- 3. Mat. 7. if . Mar. 4. 24.
: Anfrv. i. We deny his /J/iW. i. Every commtnd enjoyningus
not to attend apon,havc communion with Antichriftian Minifters,fuch
as walk difotdcily, — are cautions againft hearing them. As arc adly,
the Scriptures produced by him? fincc we prove that they are falfe Pro-
phets who labour to draw the People off the pure Inftitutions of Chritt
to the putrid Inventions of men.
Whence we argue, 3dly, That is unlawful for m from which Gods
cautions rejirain w : But Gods cautions rejirain m from hearing the prefent
Minijiers^for they rejirain m from having to do with a falfe Minijiryt falfe
Prophets^ who mingle their own Dreams and Humane Inventions with the
Word and Truths of the Lord ; which we have provfd true of the prefent Mi^
nijiers. Therefore, He adds,
Arg, 4. That is not unlawful which may be a duty and char aUeriJl leal
property of one that is of God, or Chrijis Sheep. But to hear the prefent
MiniJierSy being fuppofed to teach the Word of Gody and the f^oice ofChriJiy
may be a duty and charalierifiical property of one that is of Cody or CbriJis
Sheep) John 8.47. & 10. 27. Therefore.
Anfw, We deny the w/W ; the Scriptures produced prove not that
it is the duty — of one that is of God,— to hear every one that teacheih
fomewhat of the Word of God, but oncly fuch as teach it according tp
Chrifts appointment, (nor will Mr. T. fay it is> the Devil did fo, Wo-
•mcnmay dofo, yet he faith they are not to bi heard) muchlefs, that it
is the duty of one that is of God to hear the prefent Minifters of Englani
who preach Chrifts Word from Authority humane, Antichiiftitn, an^
that mixed with a multitude of humane Inventions. We may bett^y ajfi-
guc,that is unlawful which is not a duty and chari6leriftical prop?rty.of
one that is of God, or Chrifts Sheep, but to hear the prefent Minifters
olEnglandy is not a duty and chara6teriftical property of Chrifts Sheep^^
(as we have proved : ) And have yet to add, i. They preach not the
Word of God lawfully from Authority in his Name, of which the Scri-
ptures mentioned are to be underftood* 2. They preach the Com-
mandments, traditions of men in the ftead of Gods Word. 3. They
hinder, oppofc, peifecutc fuch as have authority to preach it, 4. They
Mmm 2 are
4^0 ^ Vindication of the Sober Tepimny^
arc the ftangcrs msntioncd, Johmo, from whom *tis the property of
Chrifts Shrep to Hcc. y. Many of them preach not the Woid it »1J,
nor can they fo do. Therefore. — - He tdds.
Arg. 5 . That may be mUvffHl rvhicb may be a fi^n of one that U not of
Cod, nor of Chrifis Sheep : But not to hear the prefent LMlnifiers when they
teach the fVord of God, — may be a fign of one that is not of Cody John 8^
47. & lO. 26.
A. This is anfwercd in what was replied to the former Argument.]. The
wi^tfj' is denied, foi the fame leafons of out denial of the minor \t\ the
precedent Argument. 2, This Patron of charity at once rejeds the
many thoufands of England^ precious in the fight of the Lord, and
beloved of him, as pcrfons not of God, notof Chtifts Sheep, becauCe
they hear not the prefent Miniftcrs. 3. We may more
righteoufly argue ; To hear thofc that pretend to teach the Word of
God, as Minifters, (intermixed with the traditions of men) but art
not commiflTionatcd by him, fo to do is unlawful, for 'tis a rejection, and
contempt of Chrifts Authority, (who alone hath power to appoint his
0'.vn Officers, by whom he will communicate his mind and will.) But
to hear the prefent Minifters, is to hear fuch as pretend to teach the
Word of God, (intermixed with the traditions of men) but are not
commifHonatcd by him fo to doj (as we have before dcmonftiaced.)
Therefore.
h^o.6. His fixth Argument is thus formed, To refufeto hear the fVord
df Godj though delivered by the prefent C^mjiers^ U fuch prophaMfte>fs
Oi is condemned in Efau, Heir. 12.16. for it is the rejeiiing or negleBing of
an holy thing-, Matth. 7. 6. therefore it may he unlaw ful to fhun hearing
them^ and confeejuently lawful to hear them.
Anfrv. I. Very good 1 Itfecmsthen that all that refufe to hear the
prefent Minifters, are prophanc Efaus.- this he will have fo much in-
<^enuity as to retraft in his next^ 2. He fuppofcth that the non-hear-
tng of the Minift:ersisa refafing to hear the Word of God, which is a
moft nefarious and diabolical accufation. We refufe not to hear the
Word ofGod in the way of his own appointment, but to comply with
amdabetafalfe Antichriftian-Miniftry. 3. The People of God con-
ceive it to be one part of their birth-right as Men and Chriftians, not
to be compelled to bear thofe who ccme in their ovn names, in the
name of Antichiift, which they refufe to fell for advantage, in the
World, with prophanc £/««, and therefore judge it irrational, acon-
trJKJiftion, to be accufd, as if prophanc, like him, for not doing that,
upon the account gf his doing whereof,, he was bunded by the Spirit of
the
in Anfiver to Mr, T. bis Exceptant. 4.S1
the Lord as fach.^ 4. They judge they rrny more ratio-
nally argue, To hear the Word of God as delivered by the prcfentMi-
niftv'.s is an EfauMVs prophancoefs, (bccaufc, i. 'tis a reje6^ion of
theii birth-right, asMen and Chiiftians. a. 'Tis a compliance with,
cncourigtmtnt of ihofc who trample upon the Sovereignty, Auihoriry
ofChrift. 3. ' Tis a departing from the appointments of Chriltj to the
Ordinances o AncichriH, which is no fmall undei valuing of the Grace
of Chrilt, of the Golpel, whereof Efaa's prophancnefs was a Type.)
Therefore 'tis unlawful to hear them.
jir^. 7. The fcventh Argument advanced by him for this good fer-
vicCj is, The (^erd of God is a Pearl of great pricey Mat. 7. 6. dr 1^,
' 44, 4<^. Therefore to be he^rd and received by whomfoever heU forth ; and
ci)nfeqfieytt[j it's folly and fin to reffije hearing it) hecatt/e of prfonal ex»
eeptions againjithe bringer.
Anfvf, I. We deny the confequence, nor will Mr. T. affirm if, oirt
of ihcheat ofdifpute, to be true; he hath affeited the contrary in his
7 head. 2. Tiswifdom, not folly, to rcfufe to meddle with the Pearl
of the Prince, whsn brought us by the hands of thofe from whom he
hath charged us not to receive it, who were never authorized by him 10
bring « to us, efpecially when it is to be had from perfons of his own
authorifement. '3. We have found the prefent Minifters fuch merchan-
dizers for thcit own profit in the World-, that they put off drofs fof
Gold, and ftones for Pearls ; at the beft, mix it with the dirt and travel
of the Antichriftian City, the traditions of the great Whore, which they
alfo impofe upon us. 4. Wc think we may more
juftly argue ; The Word of God is a precious Pearl, {Mat. 7. 6. ^ i^;
44,45.) therefore they ought nor to hear the prefent MiniHcrs, who
fpoil, coriupt it with their traditions, and thereby offer violence to it •
who contemn, defpifc, tread underfoot much of the Contents thereof •
who huckftir, and make merchandize of it ; who prefer the Canon-
Law of Antichrift before it, fodebafeingittotheir luft?, andwillsof
their Lords and Mafters, left they fhould partake of the guilt of thoft
injuries they offer thereunto,whom they fee (many of them) more zca*
lous and nice in the pundlual obfervance of an Edid, or Inftitution',
given forth by their Mafters the Bifhops, as bowing the knee, uncover- '
ing the head, or the like, than the Inftirutions of their Lord Chrift. So
that we may too truly fay of them as Theodoricm Nlemenfis once faid ; As
the Piiefts of the Jews were at Uft pofTsfled with that madnefSjthit they
cried out, fVe have no King but Cafmr ; So 1 have a long time feared and
do fear, that our Piiefts may fay, We have no other King but the Pre*.
late. He adds, Ar^. {J.
I
4(j 2 A Vindication p[ the Soher T^flimonfy
Ar<'. 8. // the fVord of God freafhed hj the frefcKt LMmfiers may he
ejfeUud {or that good, which U the end rvherefore.it is preached^ then it
ought to he heard from thenty according to James i.2j^ \VtK. 2. i.
Bytt the PVord of God frcacktd ^y phe frefent Mim/iersmaj bt thtu efe^aal'
Therefore, •..«:; r«v.-j i^'/r- -.: '^t^
Anfw. I. If he underftand the Major of a maybe of pi^jjlbility^ vsfith
refped: to the powei of God, we deny the qonfcquence of the Major
Propofition. God can, if he pleafc, by the miniltrttion of Angclf,
good or bad, effect that foi which the Word is preached ; but it doth
jjot therefore follow that we may attend the Miniftry of thefejefpecially
the Utter of them. 2., If of zmay he of credibility^ with rcfpea to
inftitution, /♦ e, I have ground to expert it will be, by virtue of the pro-
mife of God, for the bleffing of his own Inftitution, and making it ef-
fectual for the end intended, we deny his Minor ; which he will be a-
ble to make good, when he proves that the preaching the Word of God
by the prelent Minifters,. is a Divine Inftitution, upon which the Lord
hath promifed his bleiTmg for the making it effe^ual fot the ends "for
which he haih inftituted the preaching of theGofpel; which we have
already diiproved. 3. This Argument may be righte-
oufly retorted againft himfelfi. That preaching the Word of God, in
which (by virtue of any Inftitution*of the Lord, or promifc of his
Bkfling and Pr^fence thereupon) I may not expeA fhould be effe.ftual
ior that good for- which preaching the Word was inftituted by him, it
not to hi attended^ But this is true, with refpe5. ^T
Anfw» I. By the words of £f^r»^/I,//> he means, the Doarine ot
Matter of the Gofpel, in which fenfe we deny his Major, That becaufc
a man hath read the Scriptures, and got a Syfteme of Divinity into his
head, (without one drop of the Spirit, or inward experience of the
things he notionallv underftands) therefore he is fir to be a Teacher of
the Gofpel, and muft be attended, will not in haft be believed by fuch
as have acquaintance with the Myfteries thereof. John d. 68. proves it
nor, being fpoken of Chrift, who was in the bofom cf the Father, fenc
into the World, commilTionated by him to preach the words of erernai '
Life. 2. ThattheGofpei>fromthem3ttero.rit,i^ihe Power of God
to Salvation, I muft crave leave to enter my d^hiuTYer aoainft . 'tis the
cnergie, or powerful working of the Spirit of the Lord with it, which ■
makes it to be fo, (upon the account whereof, the words of Ghrift arc -
by Pererhid to be §v;i/aT«tCa»f U^yvi'^t fhe words of etern.il Life, which
to affirm, that any of the Sons of Men have as Chrift had, to whom the
Spirit was given without meafure, is little Icfs thaii blafphemy) with-
out which the matter of the Gofpel, ortBeGlorfous Truths contained
therein operate not to the filvaiioriof any,' foi waniwhereof 'tis-. to
^ fOIJlSi
47^/<2«<^foibid to preach, — For, i. there
was no previous Eleilion or Call required to that work, it there is to
the authoritative preaching of the GofpcI. 2. He caii out Devi/sin
the Name and Authority of Chtiftj Thefe men a6l from the authority
of Antichrift. 5 • He was not againft Chtift ; thefe fpeak evil of, op-
pofe, perfecute him in his wayesand people. 4. By this Argument,
for ought I know, he may as well prove it lawful to hear an unconver-
ted P that therefore the teaching and ♦
hearing the prefent Minifters of EngUni is allowable. For, i. though ,
Chrift tells them that they arc workers of iniquity, yet they fcera to be
fuch clofe Hypocrites that no body clfe knew them to be fo, no it feems
not they themfelvcs, for they come at the very laft to Chrift for own-
ings and admifTion. They fecm much like to the foolifti Virgins,
Mm. 25-. Many of the prefent Minifters are vifibly wicked and pro-
phanc. 2. They propheficd in Chrifts Name from a vifible authority
•committed to them by him j thefe not fo, as we have proved* 3 . They
vifibly owned the Kingfhip and Lordly Authority of Chrift, thefe deny
it, as we have proved. He adds>
Arg. 15. They may be Urvfull/ heard, in htaring whom rve way hear
Chrlji ; hm hy hearing the prefent Minifters, who preach the VoUrine of
Chrift, we hear Chrift. Therefore* — The reafon of r^r Minor is from
the Speech of Chrift, John 7. i6. My Doftrine is not mine, but him
4hat fent me ; fo the Preachers DoBrine which he preacheth, after Chrift^
u not his own, but Chrifts, who fent him ; a* an Amhaffaiors Menage is
his Kings, not his ervn, and by hearing him deliver it according to his Com-
mljjion, his Maftir Is heard.
Anfv0. We deny his Minor ; which John 7. 16. proves not.He vain-
ly furmizethi i. That every one that preacheth the Dodrine of Chrift,
i*fent by Chrift, which we have over and over confuted. 2. That
the prefent Minifters are the Ambaffadois of Chrift, Ad by virtue-of
Commiflion from him) which he fhould have proved, not bcgg'd, wc
have evinced the contrary. 3. Wemaymorcjuftly argue, They on-
ly are lawfully to be heard, by hearing whom we hear Chrift, (for he is
the great Prophet of the Chuicb, whom we are to hear in all things)
but in hearing the prefent Minifters, we hear not Chrift. Therefore. — •
The CMajor will hz denied ; the CMlnor is evident, partly from the
leafon given by the Anlmadverter, their Dod^rine for a great part of it •
is not Chrifti?, but their own ; bnt chiefly, becaufe they are not fent by '
Chrift, upon the account whereof 'tis thatChiift faich, Luke 10. 16.
He that heareth you, heareth me ; as is evident from, v, i, 2, 3. He
proceeds, and fairh.
Arg. ^6. Thofe that preach theCofpel erf Peace, that bring the gUi
tydir?gs of good thlyigs^ are fent to preachy , their feet are beaatlful^and they
ar9-
in Anfwer to Mr. T, his Exceptions^ 4
Power, lawfully) preach the Gofpel of glad Tydings except he be
fent. And how (hall they preach except they be fent, /. e, they can-
not <(i«f/>mr<»f/f^, andlawfuUy do fo. So that, 2. we may better ar-
gue, Thofe that have no Gofpel Miflion for the preaching of the Go-
fpel, and in the ftead of preaching thereof, preach the Traditions of
men, arc not to be heard a$ Miniftcrs of the Gofpel ; But this is true
of theprefent Miniftcrs. Therefore.
We proceed to the confideration of fiis feventccnth Argument, the
fubftance whereof is, Thofe who have received abilities from Christ ts
preach the Gofpel, oHght to improve thofe abilities in their Jo doingy and are
therein to be attended^ Mat.2j. 15, Luke 19. ij. iCor. 12. 7> 8, 28,
2p. Ephcf. 4. II. Bm the prefent Minljiers have received abilities to
preach the Gofpel, and ought to improve their abilities in that work. TherC"
fort,
Anfrv. I. The iW is not abfolutdy true, 'Tis the duty of thofe
who have received gifts from God to improve them, and to be attend-
ed in their fo doing ; but both the one and the other is to be done law-
fully. Becaufc a Friar hath received gifts from God, a Diunkard,Idc-
latcr, it doth not therefore follow that he is bound to exercife thcfc
gifts in a falfe Miniftry, or that I am bound to attend upon perfods of
fuch a Character in the exercife thereof. 2. Nor do the Scriptures pro-
duced in this Argument, or i Pet, 4. 10, 11. (in the following Argu-
ment, which is comprehended in this, and requires no other anfwer)
fpeak any fuch thing. They relate to perfons in, and of the Kingdom
of Heaven, in a regular Gofpel-Church- State, and the improvement
of gifts in a regular, orderly way, according to the appointment of
Chrift. 3. This Principle lies at the bottom of this Argument, That
gifts received make a lawful Minifter, and wc are bound to attend up- ^
on fuch, as fuch who have received gifts from God, be they never fo
wicked and fcandalousin their Convcrfation ; which Mr. 71 upon fe-
cond thoughts will not affert. 4. As to the moft of the prefcni Mini-
ftry, the Minor may be righteoufly denyed.Thcy preach not the Gofpel,
noi have they received gifts fo to ^0.-
< Nnn a His
46$ ^^ Vindication of the Sober Te^mony J
•s M\s 18/'* ArgHment Ufor Tubftancp tfa^ iimc with thij) and hath re*
ceived i.s AnfvVer. W.2 proceed to hij ipcb..
A ^- 19. £t^rry ChrifiUn hath an Inter eft In tvety Preacher of the Go-
fpelffo'ihat'nb Minili-er is to he acconnted m prcatiar to any party ofChriftU
ansy fooi to bf impropriated by themy that the abtltty of every one may be ttfed
by anyl thotigh nac heir proper M.^ijlerynvr per fans regularly ordained^ oa is
evident frOTHy iCar. 3. 22. Atts Ji»i24 25',;2d. Xherefore thf prefent
Mim(le-rs r»niy he hearlbya^y Sairtts while they teach the Gofpel-> though
fach irregnUrltiesa6are objelied ag^anft thef», were granted to be in thentyVr
their Mimftry', '
Aa^v». I. Every Chriftittthith *q Intcreft in every Gofpd Mini-
fter, X Ad mty lawfully tieai him, is true : But Mr. T. muft prove the pre-
fen^Mn ft:rs tobeiuch, clfehc hioafclf will acknowledge the >4r^».
went is invalid. 2. Grant Apohs was not fcnt forth to preach the Go-
fpel by virtue of Office; he might bi heard as a gifted Brother, which
we have proved the prefent Mmifters cannot. 3. It doth not follow
that becaufc the Sainw at Corinth had an Intereft in every Minifter : — '^
Therefore 'tis lawful for Saints to hear the piefent Minifters.
' Ar^. 20. Thefumof hi<; 20*-^ ^r^«wfwM$> Preferring oAe Minifter
ef the Gofpel — ■ hefore another^ becAufe of onr party and way, is glorying in
meny forbidden by the Apoftle i Cor. 3 .2 1. & 4.(^. Bnt to forbid hearing the
prefent Mtnifters of Enghr\6^ though Minifters of the Gofpel, and
tying men to hear thofe only who are their ele^ed Mtnifters^ is a preferring
one Minifler of the Gofpel before another. Therefore,
Anfw. We deny his A6W 5 Becaufe, i. Ths Minifters of England
are not Minifters of the Gofpel. 2. We tie not perfocs to hear only
thofe of our own way, as he calls it. Such as fear God, aft riot as Mini-
fters of the Gofpel from an Antichriftian Call, walk orderly, • — let
Saints heat : None as I know of will interdid them fo to do. I am
forty Mr. T, fliould difcover his nakednefs fo much, that every Argu*
ment almoft ftiould be a meer fetitio principi, a foriy begging the thing
in queftion, or build upon feme monftrous notorious tniftake, in the
review whereof he will fuicly bz aftiamcd. Thus fares it with him in
his 21'*' Argtiment. '- *' • \^ '■' '^ V' "
• Arg. 21. Thofe Mmlflers who are the Tl^ifrifiers of Chrift,- — who la-
bour among the Saints and are over them in the Lord, and admomfh them
that are Elders that rule well^ efpecially thofe who labour in the fi'ord and
Vc^rine, who are their Rulers or Guides, who fpeai^to them the fVord ofGod,
are to be efteemed^ honoured^ rcmembred for their warh fakfy i Cor. 4. i^
iXhef. 5, 12, 13. 1 Tim. J- 13.. Hr^- *3'-7. and therefore much more
in Anfvoer to Mr, T. his Exceptiont. 4^0
art to be hard : Bnt the fre[ent Minifiers 0/ England are the Mmfltrs of
Chrtft : — • Therefore,
An[w. The Minor is denied, wherein the Ammaiverter pittifu.'Iy
bcggs us to grant what he fhculd have proved ; That the Mjniftcis of
England tit the Miniiiers of Chrift, which no one in their right wits
Will fuppofc he proves by this Argument. The Mmirtcrs of Chiift arc
Stewards of the mytterics of God, who labour in the Word and Do-
ctrine, who fpcak unto us the Word of God : But ih^ Mini(krsof £;?f-
Und arc Stewards of the myftciics of God, • — for befides the bcgoin''
of whu we (hall not grant him; vU. That the Mini/iers of En^hnd
areStevfardsofthemyjierlesofGod^ which none can be but thofc who
are put into the Office of Stewardthip by the Lord of the Family^ which
wc challenge Mr.T. or any one for him, to make good with relation to
the Minifteri of England. It invelops and wraps up in it this abfurdity.
That whoever Ubonrs in the fVord and DoEirine — is a Mlnijier of Chrifl^
Of which wc have frequently fpoken, and beg Mr'. T. for the future not
to itnpofc thus crudely upon as without proof. 2. That they are over
the People of God in the Lord, i. e. by virtue of Divine appointment,
which we have difproved.^.That they are Elders,. vho being only in and
over a particularChurch of Chritt ( as we have proved) they cannot be.
4. That they are Elders who rule well, whereas they have no authority
to rule at all, that is a flower that grows only in their Lord-Biihops
Garden, intruded moftly inths hands of an Antichiiftian Officer call'd
xChancelloHr^ y. That they labour in the Word and D offline, which
as touching the generality of them is falfe, who labour only in their
Ceremonies and Service-book. 6. That they are their Rulers and
Guides, which they cannot be but by their free confcnt ( as hathbeen
(hewed ) which they never had nor fought after.
Arg. 21. Retorted ; It may more juftly be Argued, Thofe LMini.
fieri who are not the Minljiers of Chrift, nor Steivards of the Myfteriei of
Cod, who labonr not among the Saints^ nor are over them in the Lord, nor
admonifh them, rvho are not Elders that Rptle well, non labour in the fVerd
and DuBrine^ who are not legally their Riders and Guides^ who fpeak not to-
them thefnre iVord of God, but the Traditions of men^ 'tii unUxcfulfor
Saints to hear : But this is all true concerning fame oftheprefent MimJlerSy
Mndfome what of it concerning all of them. Therefore.
What he faith of denying the Saints Liberty, - That^tisajt'n again/}-
the^th Commandment, is lidiculous, till he hath proved them out ipii"
1-
tual Parents.
Sea..
470 A Vindication of the Sober Tejlimonyt
Sed. 3. ^
X^on-hearltjgthe-prefojt Mlmjiers tends not to Schlfm. ( The natttre ef
- Schifnt. The Schlfm condemned l>t the Church of Corinth^ T»hat ? ) *Tis
Kot to have the Faith of our Lord JefusChrift rvith reffe^ of ferfons,
( The ■n^a'SQ-raXiMcf-^ or accenting perfons condemned y Jam* 2« i» what
it is.) 'Tis not to canfe offences and divijions, contrary to RoOl. I2. 4, j",
& 14. 1. & ij-.i.Sc i<$,i7. Nor making inclofureS) contrary to 1 Cor.
14. 35. Phil. 3. ij*! 16. explained. The vanity of Ml. T . his arguings
from thence^ manifefted. The Holy Ghofts recording the Profhejte ofhi-
laam. O/Caiphis, of Infidel Idolatrous Poets, no grounds for the Saint t
to hear the frefent Minifiers. The imperttnency of i Thcf. f. 20, ii, t9
hispurpofe. Nothing can be argued to prove the lavefdnejs of hearing
them from the Authors conceJfionChi^. 2. Our Reafens agatnft hearing
themy cannot righteoujly be retorted againfl our f elves. 7 he grounds of our
denying the lawfulnefs thereof^ neither falfe nor doubtful. The MiniSiers
of England have not fufficiently proved the truth of their Miniflry. Of
the duty fif Chriflians with refpeEl to hearing. The power of the Church
ever Mimjlers. lion-hearing the frefent MiniBers^ takes not away the
the Chriflians Liberty. Is no negative Superfiition, Our denial of the
larvfulnefs of hearing them, no denial of the King(hip ofChrifi) or ufurpa^
tion thereof. No hindrance of the knowledge of ^ods fi'ordf No evilcon~
fequences or ahfurdities follow hereupon,
T7 O R the lawfulnefs of healing the prefcnt Miaiftcrs, Mr. T". further
Jr argues thus.
Ar^. 22. That which tends to Schifm amongfi Chriflians, or to a breach
ef that peace ^ unity and love, fhould be among them who have the fame or tiie like ; which cannot be charged upon us with refpea to
the prefent Minifters ; fo that this inftance of the Apoftle is not at all to .
his purpofe. He adds ,•
Arg. 24.^ To canfe offences and divifions contrary totheDoHrine taughp
win the Scriptures^ is finfnl and unlawful, Rom. 16. 17. But thvfe who
teach men not to hear their MlniHers,which preach to them the truth ofGods
Vf^ord^ becaufe they are not in aCowgre Rational Church) or not SleEied, ani'
Ordained^
4.7-2 A vindication of the Soier Tefilmnyy
Ordalncdi accorditfg to the Rules offuch Chttrcbes^ or becaufe they conform
to feme things conceived Hnrvarrantahle) which are w^de thereafetts efun-
Uvfftilnefs to har the frefent Mlnifi-erSy do CMtfe ofences Mud divijiousj con*
trMrytotheVo^rine) Rom. 12.4. j. & 14. i. & if. i. Therefore.^-^
Anfvp, This Argument is bottom'd upon many mifcrtblc miftakeSjths
dilcovery whereof will cxpofc it to the contempt of ail ttiat pifs by, for
its infufficiency and wcaknefs, in lefpcd of the end aimed at by it. ift.
We teach not mcn> not to hear their own Minifters, but ruch,as accord-
ing to the appointment of Chrift> were never fuch. 2dly, Wc teach
them not to avoid fuch as preach the pure Word of God,but fuch as cor-
rupt it, intermixing therewith the leaven of Antichriftianifm and Su-
perrtiiioD, which Mr. T. tells us, in his FermentttmTharifAprHm^'ist
good ground to avoid hearing them. 3dly, Wc fay not that they arc
not to be heard meerly becaufe not in a Congregational Church, — but
becaufe we arc deftitutc of any Scripture- Warrant for our fo doing,
becaufe they walk diforderly, a6l from an Antichriftian Gtll. — That
this is to caufe offences contrary to the Doftrine, Rom, 12. 4. & r4,i.
& I J. I. which forbids the giving offence to weak Believers, by the
intempeftive ufing of our Liberty in things indifferent, is fuch a frivo-
lous conceit, as perfons may put Mr. T, to the bluili upon the rpvicw
thereof. He argues further ; .\.-.'a-.
Arg. 25". Schifmatical and arrogant conceits^ that the Vf^ord of Cod is
from them as the only right Teachers^ or confined to them ^as the only perfons
to vohom It moi commptmcated, and from whom it might he receivedy u cen~
demned by the ApofiUi i Cor. 14. 5 ^. Bm fuch conceits and inclofures
they have and make^ who deny the prefent Mlnlfiers to be heardt conceiving
the feparated Churches and Minijiers the only right Chnrches and Mim/iers
to be heard. Therefore.'
Anfw. I. Wedeny.the Mj«or; wc make no fuch indofures as the
Apoftle condemns, which arc not what are mentioned by this Animad-
verier ; There were no Churches of Chrift in the world at that day, fo
much as in Name and pretence, but fuch as were fcparated , thefc were
the right Cdurches and no other,no ordinary Minifters but fuch as were
related tcjtnd Minifters of fuch fcparated Churches. This the Apoftle
cannot be fuppofcd tocondcmn. B.it if this be not that he condemns.
What is it? Briefly, 2. The Church of C without fome-
what that alienates them from others, and cngageth them to our own
Society, with diminution of love to others, — is a moftfalfe fuooeftion*
Hlsjp^'^Argumentiscompofedof unproved Didates; to which ws
have over and over anfwered in this Treatife.
Touching his laft Argument, we fay in the general, i. There is not
one of the abfurditics, he faith, are confequent on the Opinion of non-
heaving of the prefent Minifters, but is as much the confequent of the
Opinion of the unlawfulnefs of going to Mafs^ or hearing a Popilh Mi*
niftry> were it eftabli/hed by Law.
2, Particularly; i. We cannot (confider'd in their prefent ftatc '.
as an Antichriftian Miniftry, fet up in oppofition to the Miniftry of
Chiift) tejoycein, or pray to God that they may, or praife God for
their preaching. 2. It follows not that 'tis then' better that Barbarifni "
-^-fpread among the people. — There is no neceflity of the one or the
other. Birbarifm and rudenefs may call them, their Fathers, or fotter-
Fathers, fincc whofe return barbarity and rudenefs is broken in like s
mighty torrent upon us. Who were the promoters the Book of Sports,
(in dayes paft) a great piece of baibarifm and rudenefs, Mx. T. knows, .
Who.
47 8 A Vindication of the Sober Teflmony,
Who are more the encuragcrs of perfcns lying at an Alc-houfc, than
their fudling PrieBs? who by their pradice rtrcngthen the hands of thcii
drunken Pariftiioners therein. There are other meetings in moft places
within a fmall compafs, whither they may go to hear, fo that they need
not lie at an Alehoufe,not fit at home idle. 3. Wc think the Magifttatcs
do evil to compel people to hear them. 4. In rcfpe(5t of their Antichri-
ftian calling, non-preaching Readers, and their preaching Minifters arc
alike tolerable. Their Pedigree is the fame, their oppofition to Chrift
and his People the fame. 5- The lefs they preach, inrefpcftof their
Antichriftian ftanding and Office, the lefs they fin. Though, 6, they,
accounting themfelves Minifters of Chrift,and receiving wages from the
people to preach to them,— 'tis open injuftice, and unrighteoiifnefs for
them rarely or not at all fo to do ; as it is Lordly Papal pride,and arro-
gancy in the Prelates to ufurp Authority over thofe they account Mini-
ttersof theGofpeJ, and hinder them from preaching, who, they fay,
arc rightly ordained thereunto. Of the feeming contradiftions Mr. T,
hath found in Come Writings of J, G. to the Book Intituled, PreUtical
Preachers none of Chrifts Teachers, I am not concerned to take notice.
Though they might ealily be reconciled. And the Judicious Reader
can do it himfclf. 'Tis feparation from a true Church, and Gofpel-Mi-
niftry, (not a falfe Antichriftian-Church and Miniftry) upon the ac-
count mcerly of fome difference about the fubjeft of Biptifm, that he
condemns, which that it rifeth up in oppofition to what is alTertedin
the forementioned Treatife, 1 am not able to difcern. If Mr.' T.
dreams that a man cannot fpeak againft feparation from a true Church,
without condemning feparation from a falfe, he v\illfcarce find his Ri-
val amongftperfons of Learning and Judgment.
CHAF^
in Anfvoer to Mr, T. htif Exception f, 47 9
CHAP. XIII.
^S"^^.
I.
SerioM advice to Saints that wor(htp with the l^tion^ and. cleave to the Ml^
mftry thereof. The ground of their frefent fra^ice to be conjidered. The
thoughts of their hearts in dajes fait. For what Saints then and now juf-
fer hard things. Their alms and ends in this muter to be fondered^ with
the prefent ttmper of their Spirit. A {olemn Call out ef the Parochial
Ajfemblles, The Renowned Huflc his Prophefie touching Reformat Iom,
HAving through Divine AflTiftance examined, and fully anfwcrcd
what Mr. T. wis plcafed to objeft in hi? Theodulia againft the
S, t; I dcfirc the patience of the Chriftian Reader foi one mo-
ment longer, whilft I open my "heart in a few word*.
I. To the precious Children of God, who arc yet worfhipping with
the Nation, and cleaving to the Miniftry thereof, would I humbly offer
thefc feven things.
1 . Scrioufly weigh without prejudice, in the ballance of the Saat^u t-
ly, what we have been tendring to you in thisTreatife, and think not
what you read to be the. words of an Enemy ; they are the counfels of tl
Friend, of one who hath through wonderful grace fo far learned Chrift>
that he annot but love you, pray for you, fliould you account him, and
ufe him as an Enemy.
2 . Stri(ftly examine by the Scriptures of Tiuth,thc bottom and ground
of youi prefent pradicc. Where is the word of InfUtution by Jefuf
Chrift, that warrants your attending on the prefent Miniftry. Mr. T,
hath written a large Treatife thereabout, but is not able to produce one
Scripture to warrant your pra»Slice in this matter,
3^ Recollcft the thoughts of ) our heart in dayerpaftj Should any
one have told you, when you were for a godly, preaching, praying Mu
aiftry, for Gofpel-Reformation, that there would a day come when an
Epifcopal, drunken, Common-Prayer- Book, dumb ignorant Clergy'
(hould be fet over you, to the calling out of the godly, fober, and judl-
cious,and that you would fide with them, attend their Miniftry ? would
your anCwer have been other then that of Haz^ely But are we dead Dogs
that we. jhould do thm f
4' Remcm*
4 8 A Vindication of the S ober Teftimony,
4. Remember what it wasyour Brethren loft their Eirj, Liberty!,
Lives in days paft for, what they and you covcnarited againft,.VYisit
not for witneifing agiinrt, utterly -to extirpate this ptefent Hierarchic
and Wovlliip ? Did you not rejoyce in its extirpation ? and will you
again encourage, or comply with the building of that you once cndea-
vour,;d to evert and decnolidi.
5. Conlidet fobsrly of your aims and ends in your prefent attcnd-
ment upon the Miniftry and Worfliip of the Nation ? Whether they
are fuch as you can comfortably oWn in the great Day of Aflizc, that is
CO vy ready to fpring in upon the World ?
6. Obferve the prefent temper of fpirit, whilft attending upon the
preftnt Miniftry and Wor(hip ; Have you grown in grace ? is there not
rather afpiritof declenfion, formality,deadncf53earthinef5,feifing you ?
do you meet with Chrift in the Publick Aflemblies .? Are you noj rather
with i-efpe6l to them forced to fay. He is mt here, he is rifen, 'If ~i
7. Halkn your efcape from Parochial National Ghivrches and Alfem-
b!ics,and get into the Aflemblies of his Children, wherehe hath record-
ed his Nime, will ineet with you and blefs you» The Vials of written
vengeance are ready to be poured forth upon falfc Worfliip and Wor-
ftiippifS. And ere long the fubjeft of our prefent contcft will be remo-
ved. Not anArch-Bifhopj crLord-Billiopinor anyof their Hierarchy
ihill be known in the Nation, or Nations of the World ; none fpoken
of but with loathing and abhonency. Their nakednefs, infolency^pridc
and contrariety to The true intereft of ^Chvift, and Nations, (hall be fo
diCcoveredjthat they iliall b: the hifling and reproach of the People ; in-
fomuch that they (hall be afliamed to own theirfunftion. I have n?iany
time^ thought of that Prophelie oijohn Hafs^ cited in Foxes Martyrob-
fie, yoL 1° fag' 83c. Monover, faith he, hereupon note md mark^l^y the
way^ That the Ch'Arch of God campt be rednied tv her former dignity^ or he
reformed^ before all things firft be made mw : The truth rvhereof U plain by
the Temple of Solomon. Like oa the Clergie and ^riejis^ fo alfo the People
and Laity ; or elfetfinUfs all fuch 06 be now addiU: unto avance^from^ the leafi
to the mofl hefirllreclalmed^ai well the People oithe Clergie and Priefls^ Al-
belt, as my mind now glveth me, I belleverather thefirfi ; that then jhalla-
rife a nexv People, formed fifter the nerv man, vffhlchis created after Cjod, of
the whichPeople.new Clerkj a>dPrief}s fh^ll comeanlbe taken^that (hall hate
'coTe'9iffnefsy and the glory of this Life, haflening to a heavenly converfation;
notvpithfianding all thefe things fhall come topafs.and be brought by little and
little. In order of times ^ difpenfed of God for the fame pttrpofe. And thk^ God
doth And will do for his owngoodnefs^md the riches -of htf grettt longammity
and
in Anfwer to Mr, T. his Exceptiont, 4 B i
gndtattenctf giving time andfpdce of rtpentance to them that have lotijrlien
in their jinsyto amend &flee from the face of the Lords fur j whilji that in llkg
manner, the carnal People and Priejlsjucceffivelj and in tmefhallfaU away,
h confamed with the Moth, But wc have a more furc Word of Prophe-
fic , thit the pompous cirnil Church and Miniftry, the Whoie and
f life Prophet, with all their retinue, (hall be dethroned, andforev^l
ccafc to be : And then (hall piety flourifh, and the knowledge of the
Lord (hall cover the Earth as the waters do the Seas. Then what (himc
will cover you that have not hearkened to Chrilts voice, though he
loudly calls you to come with him from Lebanon^ to look from the top
of Amana and Shenirj from the Lyons Dens; and Mountains of the Leo»
fards, that you have not forfakcn the Tents of falfe Worihippeis. •
Scd. 2,
Counfel and advice to Saints feparated from the carnal worldly Church-
2. rj^ O you that have heard,and obeyed the voice of your Beloved,
X in fcparating from the prefent Wor(hip and Worihippcrs,
would I alfo rpeak a few words.
1. Pray hard for the making the vifion plain; that you may under-
ftand how iocg it is to the end of ihefe wonders. The wife (hall under-
hand.
2. Wait, watch, and pray for the glorious cflFufion of theTSpitit,
tccording to the promife of the Father. Antichrift's day is now even
lun out ; not the fir(t fruits only,but the full harvelt of Ncw-Covenant
glories (hall fhortly be upon you.
3» Get on the whole Armour of God, that you may be fitted and
fixed to accoft the Prince of darknefs, and his Helliih Armado in their
next and lalt attempt again(t the Saints, when the Dragon will h wrothy
and go about to make war with the remnant of the Womans Seedy that k^tp
the Commandments of God, and have the Tejilmonj ofjefus,
4. Condemn the world and worldly Church by thofc (hines of holy-
neCs, and that heavenly converfation (hall be found amongfl you.
f . Take heed of degenerating into the Form, mind^he power o£
Chriftianity and Godlincfs : Be not contented to have a Name to Live
ff\itTiDead, Take heed of the Temptation of the Day; a Temptation ^
to flumbring, efpecialjy confidering the Cry at Midnight ( which is a
Mini(^erial voice or o\iX'Ciy)T he Bridegroom cometh go ye out to meet him,
6. Prefs after a Gofpel-Spirit of Love and Union one with another.
Study to be of one Spirit, of one Mind. Wherein you di{Fcr ( for vvanc
of the fame meifurc of Light) bear one with another as becometh Bre=
PPP ih!en
48 2 A fitidicativnaf the S oher Tefiimon^y
thrcn of the fame Father, Members of the fame Body, pray one for tno-
ther,andif any one be otherwife minded, God will reveal this alfounto
him in due time. Know not one another as Men only, but as Chriftianj,
Let the bottom of your Communion each with other be not the founda-
tion of agreement in extrafundamental Principles ( which the Spirit of
Antichri'ft leads to ) but blcffed fatisfai^ion that you arc received, be-
loved, begotten again of God, and bear his Image. Study to forget the
names of dilVindion that have been too much ufed in daycs paft. Nei-
ther PreshytertaHi nor Iniefendant^ nor Anahaftifl is any thing, but if re-
al Saint?, we arc all one in Chiift. Remember the Difciples werefirfl cal^
led Chrifilans at Antioch. The departure from Scripture words and ap-
pellations, hath had no fmall influence into thit Anticbriftian Apofti-
fie that harhoverfpread the Nations. Take heed of animofities and di-
vifions one amongft anoihev. ' Tis the Devils grand Maximc, Divide &
Impera, Divide and Rnle. Bear with and forbear one another in love.
Prefer your peace and edification before private intereft. Methinkj
fuch Difcoutfes, with t Pen dipt in Gall, as drop from this Animadv,
ftiould engage us to make it out ftudy to be of one heart, and.one foul,
if we cannot in all things be of one Judgement and Opinion; But whi-
rher fail I ? 'Tis a plcalant Sea,a fweet Theamjthe Lord bow the hearts
of his Pgoplc every one of them to an imbracemcnt of it. I muft not ex-
patiate.
7. Hold f^fi that joH have y that no one take yonr Crown, Tet alittU
while and he that [hall come mil comet and wlllnot tarry.
An Appendix, orFwl'odefe; being a brief but faithful CoUeUlon of fe^
veral pajfa^es In bis former Ifrltlngs^oppofte to what ii averted by him in
his Tdeodulia.
LAftly, to Mr. T, our prefcnt Antagonljl would I fpeak a few words
by way of Counfel and advice. 1 bcfeech you Sir in tRe bowels of
Chrift,
I. With a fober fpirit to review your TheeduUa, and confidcr Whe-
ther you will be able to juftifie your undertaking therein* What have
you been doing but fadning the hearts of the rightcous^and gladding the
hearts of the wick:d ? Had it not been better you had let Baal have
pleaded for hi mfelf, fincc one had thrown down his Altar? It may be
in your retired thoughts, you now begin to think To. The defign it fel£
was bad ; but Sir, how can you review the fram€ of fpirir, the gall and
bitteincis, the reviling and reproachful language with which youi Book
in Anjwer to Mr, T, his Exceptions'i 483
is fluftfrom the one end thereof to the other, tgainft the VVayes and
People of Chiift, whom you in your Confcicncc think to be fo, and
hold up yout face with confidence before God and his People. 1 had
once thought to have gathered into one heap the feveral parcels of fcur-
lilouj, unfavoury, fcandalous and falfe exprcflions you were pleafcd to
make ufe of, but I found the dunghill would fvvell fo big, and the fmeil
of it might be fo offenfive, that after 1 had made fome piogrtls therein,
I forbore.'
2. Read with ferioufnefs the Reply we have made to the Treatifc
mentioned : You fee Sir, we have not writ after your Copy, nor ren-
dred reviling for reviling into your bolom^; we have otherwife learned
Chrift, and commit our Caufe to him that judgeth righteoufly. The
Lord, the Lord God, his Spirit, Scriptures and People be judge be-
twixt uj.
5. Read twice ere you Reply once ; You know. Sir, whofe Motto it
was, Feftifta lente ; fat cithjifat bene. Too much hafte to oppofe Truth,
never brings with it t return of fweetnefs ; every motion and advance
againft it, though of the {loweft,is too great hafte.
4. Pray much for Divine Leadings and Dirc»5tion before you fet up-
on the work of making your Reply hereunto, and every ftcp you take in
it. And let's difcern you have been much in this duty, by that meek,
and Gofpel-Spirit with which yoar next fliall be leavened.
5. If youihinkit of concern, ferioiifly weigh whether this writing of
yours tend to the extirpation of Popery and Prelacy,with its Hierarchy,
and the promoting Reformation according to the Word of God, and
the beft Reformed Churches. For Oaths the Land mourns^ The Lord
grant we may do fo too.
Laftly, Review, if you pleafe, the enfuingColleaions we have ga-
thered out of your own Writing J,from a curfory view of fome of them;
which are, if we miftake not, oppoiite to what you at prefcnt plead for.
And if you think meet, reconcile your felf unto your felf ; and blame
not me. Sir, that 1 thus deal with you, I do but follow the pattern you
have given me, in your dealing with Mr Baxter foimstly, and Mr. John
{jooimn of late, after this manner.
ColleaionsoutofMr.T. his Writings.
If this Argument froceei-, it mil follorv there is fome 'Rational Church
amongfl the Gentiles as of old amongfi the Jews^rvhich is not to he grantei —
In his excrcitation concerning Infant Biptifm, p4^. 21. InfUtutionis
the Knle of exhibiting fVorJhip to God, ibid.pag. 23. If Inflhution he the
ppp 2 Rfils
484 -^ ymdication of the Sober Tefimony^
Rule of fVorfhtfy it is necejfarj that; he that (hall admimfier the fVof/hlp^indf
himfelf to the Rule^ othermfe he vfi& devife fVtU-worJhip^ and arrogate the
Lords Authority to himfelf. Surely the Apofile in thehnjlnefs of the Lords
Supper injinuates this; when being about tocorreEt the (Serrations of thr
Corinih'uns concemingthe L^rds Supper ^he brings forth thefewordsyi Cor,
II. 23. For I have received of the Lord, ibid.pag. 24.
Theufe of Sureties in Baptifm^ and Epif copal Ordination^ he ifferts to be
Humane Inventions. Ibid. p. 29.
Ttje Common-Prayer-Book^and Hierarchy have no true ground from Chrijls
Jnftitutiony which alone can acquit it from fyill.rvorjpip, Examcn. p. 3,
Eptfcopac) is now found an abufe^ ibid. p. 24, / have entred into Covenant
to endeavour a Reformation a* well at yoUy and though I have not bad the
happinefs, as indeed wanting ability to be imployedtn that eminent manner yon
have been in the promoting of it ( in which I re Joyce ) yet have I in my af»
feUions Jincerely dejired it) in my intentions truly aim'd at it, in my Prayers
heartily fought it, in my Studies conjiantly minded it y in my endea-
vours ferioufiy profecuted it, for the promoting of it greatly fufftred^ as having.
as deep an Interest in it as other men, ibid, pag- 2(5. ivhen I confider how ex-
aUa Reformation our Solctnn CovcDant binds tu to endeavour^ ibid, p,
27. 'Tis a dangerous principle, That in meer pofitive things we may frame.
an addition to Gods fVorjhip, They that read the Popifh BxpoJit»rs of
their Rituals do know that this very Principle bath brought in Surplice, Puri-
fication of yi^omen^ — ibid. p. 29.
// any take upon them to appoint to mens confcienctt any rite^ iu whole or iti
part, it is an high prefumption in fucb again/l Chriff, and again ft the
Apoflles commands to yeeld to it. Col. 2. 20. Though it hath a fhew ofwif-.
dom, verf. 23. Knd the hpojiles example. Gal. 2. 3, 4, 5 . binds us to oppofe
it, ibid.pag. 30. And p.^ i. He commends a paffage in a Sermon of Mr.
Marjhals on 2 Chr. 15.2. ffho admires that ever mortal mjinjhould dare i»
Cods Worfhlp, to meddle any further than the Lord himfelf hath commanded^
For had it been a wiH-fVorjhlp, it had been a Jin if they had received ity
(f peaking of the Circumcijion of the Females) there being no command to do
it. As it had been a fin for a Child to be circumtlfed afore or after the,
eighth day, in them that altered or fwerved from the appointment of God^
ibid. p. 5 7. 'Hs Tfafon of ours in pofitive fVorfhip can acqmt an atiion that
is performed from wilt fVorfhip^ nothing but Gods fVill manife/l in his hjli^
r«f/(7«— crf«tiz,ed kfore they hak^t head together^
therefore the talking any without Baptifm to the Lords Supper rvill hut
flrengihen men in their opinion^ that their Infant Sprinkling it fujjicient .—r^
Therefore he fees a neccccfitty of defining from that enteiprilc of ad-
mitting pcifons of different pcrfwafions touching Bapiifm into their
communion, ibid. p. 4P«
The Chriflian-Church'Conjiitution of Volunteers i6 hettery ibid. Sc(Sl. ii»
pag-43*»
In the Worjhlp of God it wad wont to he accounted a certain Rule that Codt
Worfhip fhould he obferved according to his appoint fitentj and no othermfe^ ib,
Se£i:. 16. p. 66,
(JHy oppoftng the Bijhops began with thefoonefl* — And for my noncon^
formity^ Reafons were given withjome ofthefirfi. I jufiifie not the CerC"
monies y ibid. Se£t. 21. p. 8p,
It is true our SngUfh Trelatical Divines do account Baptifrnft^ffciently ad-
mlnifired that is fo done, yea though it were by a Pepifh Priejl^ or a Midwife^
ibid. p. 91.
However^ for the tenet, of the peoples governing by Vote^ I k»ow «p rea-
fan why they ( he fpeaks of thofe czihd I ndependants J fhould be called a
SeBy rather than their oppofices. The Excomntunic/itlon which the Scrip-
ture f peaks of .^—^ is no where made a part of Government or of the Elden
Office, any more than the Peoples. In Antiquity its apparent out ef Cyprian
. That the People had a great hand in Ele^ions, Excommunications y Abfo^
lutions, ibid. p. 93.
No one Country, City, orTribe together) were gathered by the Apofi/es or
aher Preachers, into the Chrifiian viftble Church, hut fo many of atlas the
Lord vouchfafed to call by hii H^'ordand Spirit, i Cor. 1.26. Not many
wife men, — ErgOy Not the whole Nation, And afterward to Mr. B,
Qlieftion, Hath he not commandtd to difclple Nations ? He aofwers, Tes^
to make Difciplcs of aU Nations, by pre<^iching the Gofjel to every creature,
but no Inhere by Civil Authority to gather a whole City, Country or Tribe^
and to draw them into a National,and City Covenant together ^^^ ibid.Scf^.
22.p. p7»
Jeroboams Sacrificing and keeping a Feafi at another time than Godap-.
pointed. Ahaz hu forming an Altar- after the pattern of that of Damafcuf,
Nadab and Abihu their offering fir ange fre, keeping Holy Dayes to Saints,
he condemns as wiH-worfhip-, Full Review of the Difpute conccr. Infant-
Baptifirij p. 3,
I Pet. 2. 9.-— which are meant only of the EleU and true Believers of
every
in Anfioer to Mr, T, hts Excepttonr] tf^j
ivery NAtiotty are af plied to a National Churchy ~ conffliyig of a ^eat part
ef either ignorant perfons, that k.now little or nothing of Chrifiianity, or per-
[ecfttors ofGodlinefs^ profanely defpijing the fford^ani hating the Godly j ibid,
pig. 27.
God forbad Infants under eight dayes old to be circuwcifedi in that he ap-
pointed the eighth day to be Circttmcifed. '^orv if this be a forbidding to Cir-'
eumcife before (a^ [ ack.»oJvledgett is^ and [o do many Prote/iant DivineSy
.