. $^.^llI '5 M r - LOCKY JbRS ■ -fg iVJL. ' !_, V^ Vj IV 1 JJ XV J jff Lecture, Preached at 'Edtnhnrgb > H> 4 || Anno 1651. Concerning the Mat «r of the 1 VISIBLE CHURCH;! ^gj And afterwards Printed with an A? p e nmx for ^gj Popular Go vernment of (ingle Con g r e g at 10 ns. ^ ^ Together with an S#- f*&! |§ EXAM IN ATION,^two APPENDICES, || 4S Of what is faid on thefc fame purpofes in a Letter $& , Profefforof Theol. in S. Andrews* *£ E DINBVKGH 3 §& ^^j Pftnted by An dro Anderson, for George S>mntoun y and J§£. -?c*w J?rw» , and are to be fold at their Shops, fo$. *5f Whs-wip'C^^ N* V $ V C J)UA^'XO THE RIGHT HONOURABLE, J O H N EARLEofCASSILS LORD KENNEDY My Lord, &Bat the wife observing King uttered, Ung agoe y that of making of Books {here is no end., was never mere veri- fied in any then it is in the pre fent age,, wherein 5 fcribunt do&i indodtiqUe, every (matter er and every fancie-f till head mufl have the Prefle travel to bring forth their fioathj conceptions : And PrefJ'es by many are madeafe of as engines to difcharge revylings y reproaches, and blafphewies again f the God of Heaven,* his bleff'ed truths 5 wayes and Ordinances. For. myjelf, I can jay in truth, it hath not hitherto been my ambition taincreafe wearinefie of the fie jh by much Reading} And that now I come this way to the worlds view, 'tis -not of mine own meer choije, but became a neceffity Wits laid upon me. The Author with whom 1 have to do in this enfaeim Achate y having mi wly opened his mouth to Preach in m % ?- 2 * ¥ffl}$ • TKc Epift'lc Dcdicatoric.' motf eminent place in this Land ,.. but alfo adventured t§ Write And Print again/} the Orthodox Doctrine touching?$£ conftitution and Government of the Vifible Church ofChrtW^ revileihginffecidlfahe Church inthis^and^Cyet Vfojutgb>'' - its fide alfoftrkkingat all the Orthodox* Churches in : £urope). as no Churchy but a dead carcaffe having neither matttlk nor form of a true Church , a nejl of unclean birds *- id6f$4 irons ; &c. And thereupon charging with a- great deal confidence and big words, all tmely Godly to come out o< and to (epar ate from it : It wot by fome Reverend and Godly men thought expedient ,that (alt ho there appear little or no- thing in what is f aid by him, which may br angle the mind of any judicious Reader : Yet 'becaufe it is a thing ufmll to adverjaries of the truth, if [what they fay , be it never Jo weak, get not an Anfwer, to brag of it as unanfwerable - And unsettled minds that have not their fenfes exercifed to difcern good and evilly are ready to be taken with any thing busked up with gay words ; andfo to be carried about , like weather-Cocks with every wind of, Bodlrine , as many fad examples of this time prove,) an Anfwer fhould be returned to him, left truth fhould fo much asfeem tofufer prejudice anyway. Andthis taske they were pie af'ed to lay upon me. Who albtit I do, and cannot but ingenuoufly acknowledge my f elf one of the leafi andweakeft Servants ofChrifl,andthat many others there are in this Churchy who might far more worthily acquit themfelves in this fervice : Tet durft not with fjland the motion > having (o clear a Callings and con* ftderingwithaUhow I ft and oblidged, in my [lation , to maintain the true Religion, in Doctrine, Worfhip, Disci- pline and Government, by the mercy of God ejlablifhea a- mongfl us 9 in common with the reft of the Lords people in the Land, by Solemn Vow and Covenant? and more parti* cularly . The- Epiftlc Dedicator ie. Marly by the Lords bringing me jvho had been in my young- er years educated^ as to many things, in a contrary way, to the acknowledgment of the truth, in a very gracious man- ner ,rvith afirong handed in much long-jujfering patience,, whereby he waited to be \graciom \that he might be ex fit edit* (hewing mercy on me. Haply it will be matter aft diking to foment bat this of mint has been fo long in coming forth after M*". Lockier publi- fhed his. But it is not unknown to many who have been wit^ mftes to mf diligence, that my Anfwer was in readineffe within a few Monet bs after his Peececame to my hands, and the task was- laid upon me. And, had come abroad if fever al difficulties had not interveened, Now when it is to bepublifhed, 1 dtfire humbly to prefent ittoyourLordJhipfirft, andunder your Honourable name to the view of the world. Imujtfpare to expreffe all the great caufes obliaging mefo to do t Becaufe to expreffe them would not only be, haply inexpedient • But aljo would be, I kmw^ unfavourpo ^ourf elf, whom I have alwayes found de fir ohs ta aproveyourfelfin reality of weljdoing,but never liking well to hear of other mens euges* Only this much 1 cannot for- bear and mujl beggeyour Lordfhips leave to fay* . The per* jonall obligations which you have laid upon me by a continue edmft of undefervedreftetfs, ever fxnee the fir/i time I was known to your Lordfhips would require a worthier tefii- monj of acknowledgment, then is this mean prefent, or any thing elfe myfmallflore of abilities can afford. Buttojpeak truth, it is not fo much anyperfonaH concernment that hath engaged my heart to your Lordfhip, as that which hath en- deared you to all who know the truth and you : That grace which God hath vouch fa fed upon you to walk in tenderneffe and clofenejfe with himplf in your privat courfe and with €Wpnt . r The Epiftle Dedicatoric* tonflant %e*lto impftoveyotir pttblick (lationwhereinye have ftood^ fprfromoving the inter eft of Religion And right e- oufnefje and the good [of \Gods people without hyaffe or wave- ring in any revolution of timfs ^wherewith many turning ^fpon the axletree of their orl^fdf -inter efi, have whirled about) the [weet fruit whereof , IdouU mt but you find in thefe glowmie dayes, and fflufifhaU afode with you to the end, through the mercy of the%^dwhSfe gifts and graces are without repentance . , ' I will not adventure upon fuch fever e feff^dtnyedneffe t$ (peak more of what I have had the happineffefobe acquain- ted with y in pur Lordfhip. I hope this t eft immy of my fenfe of the obligation I ly under to honour your Lordfhip jhal fride favourable acceptance at your hands. I will not pre- fume {for indeed it were prefumptton) to commend my work in it : I pretend to nothing therein, but that, through the Grace of God y I have ingenuoujly and in fimplicity, tho in much weaknejfe, fpoken for truth : But the matter it f elf is precious and of great weighty confifiing of two great interests ofChrifl J>efu* his Fifible Church, which is his Viftble Kingdom on earth* The one touching the qualifica- tions of the perfons that are to be acknowledged members of his Viftble Church, and fo, in effeB, comes to he a Quez- on dc flnibus, of the marches of his Vifihle Kingdom: The other touching the matter and way of the est email Viftble Government thereof. As to the former y my Author h^sfo flraitned the bounds gfChrifts Fifible Church, that by his fentence none are to be acknowledged as members thereof, and confequently to be under the Minifleriall diffenfation of the publick Ordinan- ces of Chrijl, the ordinary means of javing fouls, but fuch ** arc already and antecedently found to be favingly convert ted, Tlie Epiftlc Dedicatoric. ted regenerated and feafed^f God for bis by the Holy Spirit^ if not in the trnth*ofthe object {which yet mofl fart of h& reatoning and difcourfe pleads for) yet inthepjfitive judges merit ofi> ery ffiritnall and discerning men: And that as Jome > others of his way further lay j/a*the matter, upon triall and proof thereof given, by a converfario/rled without the omif Jion of any known duty, orcommijjionofanyknownfin: A public k declaration aj 'their knowledge in the fundamental and of other joints of Religion neceff'ary to lead a life with- out fcandall, hgither with a narration of the experimentall work of their Effeffua/l Calling unto Repentance and faith : And all Churches that are not conjlitutedof only fuch mat- ter as this, are, to our Author ,wrong conflitute\ In the for- mer part of this Examination y my labour is to discover the nnwarrantablneffe and contrariety of this Tenent,to the Word of God; And to fhew that all who being of years does fer?~ pu(ly prof ejfe the Chriftian faith, and fubjeffion to be dif ciplin 'd 'and governed by the Ordinances ofChrifr, ought to be admitted into the fellowfhip of his VifibUQhurch^without any necejjity ofputing them to a triall touching their inward fpirituall ejlate, and judging upon the fame whether regene- rator not, as to that effe cJ : And are to be dealt wit h, by Fafl ours and [privat Chriftians in their rejfeclive wayes as the fe that are hle)fo cannot but unavoidably draw after it much confufion and frequent fchifmsin the Church of God, whereof experience off or deth plenty of examples. % . That this power of Government fhould bi folely, intirehj^ and Independently in a ftngle Congregation, A Tenent * * -that- The Epiftle Dedicator ic.^ thatbefides the contrariety thereof to the Word of God and' the- very light of nature jarrieth with it a multitude ofgrofs absurdities and inconveniencies. By this means let a, parti- whir Congregation 2/30. or 20 . or fewer ^ 10 . orj. per- jens {for of Jo few may a Churchy as our Brethren Jay jbc com-* pleat ly conjl Hut e) run into never fo grojje an err our ^ as to Excommunicate a per [on unjuflly^ to hold and maintain He* re fie in Doctrine^ tofet up idolatrous worjhip^ there is .n& Bcclefiafiick authoritative remedy left under Heaven to re* Bifie it : All Church* communion among fi the Churches of, Chrifl is taken away X The unity ofChrifis fheep-fold y the Vifible Church upon earth is dijfolved,and ' Chriji } jhoula I have as many vifible bodies at there are particular Congregations: . A Minijler could not perform any Mi nijleria/l ac7 out of his own Congregation : Not Preach but as aprivat gifted Bro- ther : Not Adminifterthe Sacraments out of his own Con- gregation? nor give the Sacrament to a member of another Congregation {as ..'Ms. Hooker ingenuoujly acknowledges^ $airv. Part. 2. ) admiffion and ejection of mem- bers (bouldonly be into^ and from a particular Congregations A.childfhGuld be Baptised into a particular Congregation only^ and not into the Univ erf all church : And one Ex^ communicated^ cafi outonlyofa particular Congregation, be* cauje the power extends no further : Way is made to let in All err ours and henfics^ and as many Religions as there, are particular Congregations, and none can hinderit -in an Ec- defiaftick way^ and many more absurdities jhould follow ^ as Learned and Godly men have judiciously obferved. Con*? trairto thofe Ajfertions^ is myfecond Part imployedfor vin. dication of the true way of Government which Chriji ha* in* Jlitutedinhis Word^and in great mercy fet up in this Churchy Hwkyty his Jtfinijlcrs and Officers^ not Lording over the, people The Epiftlc Dcdicatotfe." yeopie of Godina Papall or Prelaticallway {as this Author tit her mifiakes orcaltmniats) but Mini fieria fly under Chrifi the only Lord of his Churchy Ruling them according to tht Ride of his Word, in a jvdy ofrationall obedience : And that in a way of communion And afjociation of Churches andf'uh- ordination of lejjer aff'ociations unto greater and larger, m the Lord grants by his providence conveniency. On this I have not infifiedfo largly as the matter it f elf might afftr- dedoccafton ofdifcourfe : Becaufe it has be en by learned and reverend -men already fo fully debated^ the proofs of the truth jo clearly made out^ and aU contrary Objections (o abundantly dif cuff ed and [atisfied, that I had little or nothing to adit: let ttrujt I havt through the Lords help, in feme meajure> difoveredthe inf efficiency and invalidity of what is brought by this Author ; who 9 J wonder much fhould have adventu- red to prefect the world with fuch a difcourft upon the mater tfttrfo learned labours of of hers, as art extant upon the fame* 1 have a If o in two Appendices taken into confideration what is [did upon theft fame points byfome in Aberdene late- ly turned afide from the truth, in a Letter vf theirs directed tofome Godly men in the South^Mzy \6 5 % rfhe rtafons moving me hereto were 1 . Becaufe of their corrtfpondence with Mr, Lockiers Feece,anditfeemeth they have been in & manner his prof elytes. Then having fome time hadmore par- ticular and -intimat ac quaint am t withjoms of them, it would he tomt wdt.tr of nf&ch rejoicing in the Lord, if bcould be im (Irhmentalt to discover to thtm tjoe we^kneffe of the grounds whereupon they have fallen fom their fit dfa ft neffe, that fo^ ifpoffible y which 1 wifhfrom my heart, they might be mo- vedto remember whence they have fallen jo repent and to do their fir ft works: 4nd finally thatjvhat ever fhould be the ef~_ K - ALhettit hath p leafed Mr.Lockier to pre fixe unto his Book, two Epiftlcs of his own, anda third of three of, his fiends, containing many Jharp inveBivts^ againft tUis Qhurch , and fttangh Commentaries upon the Lords dffpenfattons toward us, as ft r thing again ft our Church conft nation and Government s Tet I /hall not detain the Reader With fcannwg of the fame, be~ ing confident that upon the charing and vindicating of the truth in the following Treatife, thefe difcourfes will : be, found, by the Godly and fudiciom to be not only bitter again ft Brethren in afflitlion ( proving them to beThyfitians of 'no value ) but in* juriom toC/odand his Truth, inafcribing our calamities to our adhering thereto, and judging of the truth of our Religion by th$ Lgrds wtVrard dijp en fattens toward m\ AN An Index of the Seditions. PART. I. Concerning the Mater of the vifible Kirk. Sect.L |l IR. Lockitr his Analyfis and explication of the 1V1 Text, Aft. 1 5 . 3. for laying a ground to his Do, <5lrine concerning the Mater ofehe.Vifible Kirk, confidered. p*u II. His Do&rine pondered and the ftate of the controverfie be- tween irs and the Independent Brethren touching the neccflary qualification of Members of the Vifible Kirk cleared. i6 # III. His firft Gaffe of Arguments from A6i. $.%6* and 2. 47. and #^.3. 5,6* brought as dire&ly holding forth his Dodrinc, Anfwcred. 3I . IV, The Authors Tests which he calls hints and fhadowsof his Do&rine. :; ■ ' 4©. V.Examination of the proof of his Dofirine by induftion. 56* VI .Examinatio of his proofs brought under the name of reafon.8 3 VII. A ftiort modeft reply to the bitter ufc he ^maketh of his Do&rine. 102. VIII. The Obje&ions he maketfa to himfelf and his Anfwers thereto, con (i dered : 107. IX. Some Arguments confirming our Dodrine and everting the adverfe opinion about the neccflary qualification ©f Mem- bers of the Vifible Kirk. ^7. Append. Wherein is Examined fo much of that Letter, written by thefc of Aberdene^ who lately have feparated from this Kirk upon the Independent grounds,as relate th to the prefent Queftion touching the^neCeflary qualification of Members of the Vifible Kirk. i6%,. PART. II. Concerning Kirk Government , Sict.'I. \A R.Lockier his firft Affcrtion. That the Elder/hip ^-» within a particular Congregation is not in moft weighty THE INDEX. weighty things to exert power without the confent and approba- tion of the Kirk whereof they are, certfideied. i94» II. Examination of his 1,2,3,4. Argument. 203. III. His j, Argument difcuflcd. 225. IV. His Argument from common teftimony . cbnfidered and Anfwcred. A „? 51 / V. His Anfwers to fome Obje&ions made againft his Aiierti^, onfrom fome Paffages of Scripture, examined. 255.^ VI. His Anfvers tofome other Obje&ions made by way of reafon, examined. 263* VII. His fecond Aflfertion touching Presbyteries of many particular Congregations combined, and the true ftate of the con- troverfie touching this mater betweeen Presbyterians and Inde- pendents laid forth. ' 2830 VIII. His firft ground againft a Presbytery having authorita. tiv.e juridicall power over more Congregations, that it is without foundation in the Word 5 examined. 288* IX. Examination of his 2 .- mtdittm^ that what power of ruling an Elderfhip hath, it hath it in the fame extent with its P aftorall* power. ^ 3 1 1 * X. Examination of his 3. medium^ thatitdeftroyestheendfor which Kirk power is. 3*7- XI. Examination of his 4. medum r that a particular Congre- gation is compleatand iufficient in it felf without an aflbciatc Presbytery over more Congregations, 32 5V XII. A reply to his Anfwers to fome Obje&ions wherein repara- tion from, not only the Kirk of Scotlxni^ but all the Proteftant Presbyterian Kirks, as Idolatrous, is driven at. 340. Ap psnd. Wherein isExamined what is faid in the iorenfen- ritmed Letter of the new Independents otAberdene, for the Inde- pendent Congregational!/ and againft the Prcsbyterialiway of Kirk- Government, ydo.- An m< I N E X AN D ©f die places of SCRIPTURE Vindicated or Explained, NUtnb. II. 1.7. 227. Doit. 2$. 2, $» 4. ^ i? Ifa. *£.i$.totheen«lV 97- Jercm. 12.9^ 101. Dan. rx„f- ioi- Mai. mi. 9 j. Mat. j. 1.6. 134- 7. 18 1. 13.24.47. 161. 16,17,18,19, 40.2$ j. |8. x?,i6 3 17/18. ,227.364- Luke 7. 50. r8i. Johnj. 26. 137- A&s i.if.ij. 2-89. 2 6. 244- 4.38, 1x9.136. 47. *4 4-U- *9*< *3»4>M- *94< 8.13. 118, 11, io,,2ij2j. 9 z*. n *$'*^ *59 41.44. 104, 14.23. 245, 27,1?. 12. I 'XJ , .8.iiJ* a i7,i8 A !9. !4, J 22,23. 239. 371. 27. i8j 28. 297 16, 4. 242- 20 c 28. {!■ 66 I76 *9. ( as Cjrotim exponeth it well, aliquouf^ dedutli.afidelium-qm~ bufdam, i. e.) they were convoyed on a part of their journey by fome of the Church. This was a Chriftian, arYeclionat courtefie, and refpeclput upon them by the Church : SoM«*. Locker him- felf exponeth it, pag. 2. 1. 1,2, 3. forgetting himfelf in fo fhort bounds. 2. What hint or ground of the leaft conjecture can he point us at in the Text, that thefe CommifHoners, when they told the Converfion of the Gentiles, did fet up fome of thofe Gentiles, before the Churches by which they pafled , to bedifcourfed with, tryed, and examined concerning their foul- complexion, the Spirit: of Adoption, their experiences in the work of grace ? nug&. 3. He will have thofe Gentiles whom he thinks the Commidioners brought thus upon the ftage, to be the fame by whom they were brought on their way. But firft, how fhall we know that thofe that brought them on their way were Gentiles and not Jews ? for fure, the Church at Antioch did not conlift of Gentiles only, and it is not like that the whole Church of zAntioch went along with them, ancTwas thus fet up. Again, how will it be made out, that thofe who brought them on their way ? went fofar on with them as ■Ph evict Fart.L (p) Sect J." P } he nic e and Samaria, where the Declaration was made ? Bug. Grot, amanweilskiirdin the Greek Language, tho little to be refpeded in Dogmacicks of Divinity, gives us to underftand the contrary , from the genuine fignification of the word $ for faith hr vfOTripfafltf- i. e. alioquoufque dedutli a quibufdam fidelium : nam *§cz"wzeiv non eft fe comitemdare itineri, fed honoris caufa a/iquhufque profequi : much more might be noted in this pafiage r , but enough. I leave it to all indifferent Readers, if this be not to do violence to the Word of God, and to make the Scripture fpeak what a man himfelf fancies: if not, I know not what is. Yet when all is done, one thing is omitted by Mr. Lockier in this pretty s fidion, which, as is the old Scottijb Proverb, is the tongue of the Trump. For to all that he makes to have been thefubftance of the Commiflloners Declaration, he fhould have added this alio as fpo- ken by them, And we afure you that all and every one of ths Cj entiles converted to Chriftian Religion, at leafl all of them that are admitted ta the felloVefhip of Fijible Churches, not one of them excepted, no, not one, in a Whole Church, are jufifuch ai thefc you fee, of that fame foul-complexion, dec. Without this, the reft will not give a certain found to his purpofe. And there is as muck gjpound for this as for the reft in the Text, and that is necvola nec veftigiptm* We proceed. That there was aneffeBuallworkj( viz. of true faving Grace) wrought in the hearts ofthofe my Text Jpeakj of 9 .v I0 * I judge willfuffciently appear t by comparing with my Text thefe Scriptures^ Aft* 1 1 20, 21, 23. <*Anf. u Mr. Lockier fuppofeth, atleaft ought ftippofe, if he would have his Argument here hold - good, that thefe fpoken of in his Text, and thefe fpoken cf^ AB.u. to. the Grecians, are the fame perfons. But firft, fome judicious Interpreters, namely the TS^ther -Dutches, undetftand< by thefe,the Jews that ufed the Greek tongue,and the Greek verfc on of the Bible. And indeed the name is EAAtu/isa/jOrdinarily ufed foe thpfe, and not EaaLu&* ufed for the Gentiles: though I know Bety and other? judge otherwayes^ But however, underftand we Gentiles-, yet thefe were buta fmall part of them fpoken of InMx. Lockier s Text, whom HugvGrotitu,(mihz word a&# in tile Test, reckoned! uprfius, », Gormli'^ Ant'mhivfwm, Cy- t |U-- frhrftm, Sect. I. Cio-) Part;L p r tor utft) Tlfi 'darum> Pamphiliorum $ Lycamorum , Lj durum. 2. What ever they be, that are fpoken of there, Act. n. yet it can not be proven from any thing in thefc verfes cited, that all and every one of them, had an erTecluall work of faving Grace wrought in their hearts. Nay, nor will the Author himfelf abide by fo much ; but will come prefentiy in with this qualification,**^ ording to what Chriftian can difcern of Qhri^ian i which may be no ef- fecluall faving work at the heart at all . I deny not abfelutely that there was fuch erTectuall work wrought in hearts amongft them : Bat I deny that the Text imports that there was fuch a work in the hearts of all and every one of them. Ye will fay, what then mean thefe expreffions? i. the hand (i.e. the mighty power of the Lord) was with them, viz,, that Preached the^Gofpel; ver. 21. 2. A great number beleeved and turned to the Lord, ibidem. 3. When he came and had feentheXf mace of God, v. 23. petentlie able to judge, had ftayedas loiig in every one of thefe other places ? 2. But to hold our felves to this Church of Antiochi XconfefTe indeed it were dangerous univerfally to fay, that thefe firft Chriftians at Antioch had not ( I fay not only, as Mr. Lockjer hath it r .as far as able, men- could apprehend, but ) in -very deed, both name and things Lh. gracious heart-.Chriftianity : But I fee ft not fo very dangerous to fay that not all and every one of them had fo much! Nay , I think it very dangerous pofkively to fay they had •• for 'tis clearly contrary to what the Scripture fpeaketh of the erTed: and fuccelle of the Preaching of the Gofpel and to many paffagesof this very Story ofihe- ABs.i 3. True, Paul and Barnabas weredifcerning.men, able to give a good judgement m fl) much" time, what they found amongft thofe Chritlians. But what evidence can the Author give us from the Text, that this - was their intended work during that fpace,to examine and try what heart was in every one of thefe ProfefTours, and that in relation to " conflicting them a Vifibfe Church after that tryall, and judgment: paffed thereupon ? The only work we find mentioned in the le^t, ver. 26. is their teaching, they taught much people,. And there is nothing in it fo much as hinting. at this, that they- were not in ftateof a Vifibie Church, until), after that whole yearstryail,iW asd Barnabas had -given judgement what they did find amongft K2 shem-^ them as to their inward fpirituall eftate. Nay, there is a right ap- parent intimation that all along that years fpace, they were a Vi- fible Church and fo e fteemed : a whole year they affembled them- f elves with the Church, or, in the Churchy h7»w\nffiA. 4. I will note but another thing here. The Author intimateth that Barna- bas y his being full of the Holy Ghoft, isfpokenofintbat Text in relation to, and as the Principle of tailing, trying, and judging thefe Chriftians foul»complexion for Church communion with them, this is a meer forgerie ; It being clear as day light, that *tis mentioned as the reafon and Principle of the zealous exhorting them to fincere and conftant continuing in the faitho §.ti, Ke goeth on thus. In particular Churches fome tompetent judgement may be made of every particular member^ by able men in a long tract of time \ Andfo are thefe worthies elfe Where [aid With this Church to have had intimat communion ,*sfct. 14. 27,28. —-'And there they abode a long time with the "DifcipleSjpag. $ ,& ipel : and having after a long peregrination returned again to can bear witneffebf, as indeed fealedforhis, by his Holy Sprit, (thus far he hath in a different Character, and then addeth, it would feem, by way of fome ex- plication) Ifay 1 this is the matter -we ought now to take* to raife again the Tabernacle ' of David, and none > other ^ not one other , no notina^hole £hurch, fo far as men truly, converted, and v erf , Jpirituall 9 are able to difcern and judge. . §* i. Fkft, I defire humbly to know of the Author, why he reftd* cteth this Dodrine, touching this point, -.to the Vifible Churchy nowinthedayesoftheGofpel? For 1 I had ever thought it the received Doclrineof all Orthodox Reformed Divines, that the Churches of the Old and of the New Teft. are of one and the fame nature, as to efientials ;. and that the difference between them ftandeth in accidentals only. 2. Why do many of his way bring Arguments for this his Tenet, touching the allowed matter of a Vifible Church, from PafFages of the Old Teft. fpoken in relation to the then Church? 3. If the Vifible Church in the dayes of the Old Teft. might have confifted of others * as allowed matter, then are deferibed here ( which his reft ri&ion infinua- teth) 'i.e. of perfons not truly converted^. &c. ther^ to borrow his Arguments brought afterward. 1. Either Chrift was not the Rock and foundation of that Church, and that Chiirch not a buil- ding being and bearing upon him, as a fuperftrudion ; or elfe then there might have beenno Symmetrie,but Antilogie and Antiftafiej »0 agreement, but a fighting of the materials of the building with Part.I. ( 17) .Si^t.II-r' the foundation, and one with another : and yet the building might {hnd well enough, fuch incongruous fuperftructions, and unfoite- able to the foundation, were good enough then, 2. Either that Church was not -the Church of the livingGod, fuch as in which God ii ves,d wels and walks ; or then God d id ii ve and dwell in dead perfbns, who'only make a Profeffion of Religion : and thcn,eithec the Church was not a pillar and ground to bear up truth unto the world : or dead perfons, who only made a Profefllon of Religion, might have done that office we'l enough. 3 . Then either in the Church of God there was none, atlealt there might have been a true Church orTering,and yet no pure offering, no offering fpirk-uak Qt then a pure offering, /. e. fervice fpirituall, holy and acceptable unto God, might have been offered by perfons who only did pro- feiTe Religion , were dead ftones, having nothing of fpirituality in them, but meer formality: and fo hypocriticali, and amongft the number of them that are moft abominable. Let the Author, if he hold that difference, intimated in his redaction, hetween the Churches of the Old and New Teftam. extricate himfelf of thefe things : which, I am much deceived, 1 if he (hall be able to do, un- tetfe either he retract his restriction, or otherwife (hoar upon feme Socinian and Anabaptiftick Fancy concerning the ancient Church. Secondly, Let it be marked here/that Mr. Lockjcr clearly afTer. ^ teth that the neceffary and efientiall qualification, abfbluteiy re. quifite to conftitute perfons,matter, or in a capacity to be Members* of a Vifible Churches true faving Grace known to God thefesreher of heartsiand that is fuch grace in the verity of the thing^nd not on. ly in the judgment ©fcharity. Others in the Independent way 3 have fpoken more warily in this matter ; though indeed I confeffe 1 do not fee how, considering their profecution of the point and the Ar- guments they ufe in it, they do not run into this lame in the iffue. However, it may hence appear, it was not for nought that the Author faid in hisEpiftie to the Reader, That he has-.jpoken with more plain dealing thenfome other of his 'Brethren who have Wrote of this Subject. But haply it may be faid that he explaineth himfelfin the next §«4-— wordsj viz. fo far as. men converted are able to difcern and judge* Which feeraeth to import a refolving of the matter into the judge- ■Q ment SBCt.L , (l§) P-ART.Xl. ment of charityl Anf. This feemeth not fufficiently to falve die; raster, for this additament feemeth to be brought in rather to e%- preflfe the mean whereby perfons fo qualified as is faid before (viz,* truly converted^ 8cc. ) are to be found out * then to expreflfe any thing in the objective qualification of the mater of a vifible Ghurch. And certainly the Arguments brought afterward by the Author to confirm his Thefis s fpeak all for men godly in the truth of the tbing 3 as will appear when we come at them... &y, The third thing I would have marked in the Authors propofall of his Doctrine, is this, chat the judges by whofe eftimationnien. are to paiTe as the qualified mater of a Vifible Church, are by him determined to be men truely converted and very fyfakhklh All Writers of the independent way, have not, 1 confetfe, come to my hand ; butofthefe I have feen, Irememher of none that fair.rT this much : fo that it feemeth to be a new conception of his own, touching which I humbly defire fatisfaclion in thefe particulars, '., i. By this, when a perfon defireth to be admitted a member of a Church, it foiloweth that his qualification is to be judged, not by - : the efttmation of the whole Ghurch, but of fome fpeciall members thereof : which is point-blank contrary to the Independent way of Government, The confequence I prove, u thus : Either it mutt be faid that all and every one of the Church are truely converted de faBo: or if that be not faid, this which we have faid doth una- voidably follow : but the former will not be undertaken by the Author ; becaufe it is point-blank contrary to plain Scripture, tel- ling us that many are called but few chofen : and this is confefTed by fuch as are moft peremptory for his way of Church conftituti- ^Rtfwtfon*. Objection. Ay, but all are true Converts in the judgment difcov.falfe of charity. iAnfw. Such explanation is not mentioned or hinted ; Church, £ by t hc Author when he fpeaketh .to this point of the Judges, by mitb wn0 ^ e eftimation Church-mater istopafife. j;.J prove the con- fequence thus : M?. Lockier fpeaketh of fuch men to be Judges, as are not only truely converted, but alfo very fpirituall* Now ve- ry fpirituall imporceth, I conceive, in phin Englifh, if not a fupe re- lative degree, yet,certainly fomewhat above the meer pofitive ; to • be very fpirituall , is more, yea much more then (Imply to be really and truely fpirituall .:- So that either he mutt of neceffity fay thac TartX (19) S'&cv.lti- that a Vifible Church muftconfift of fuch only, who are not only, jimply true converts; but alfo much more, far advanced Chrifti- ans; and fo new born Babes, bruifed reeds, and fmoaking fiax, mult be held our, crufhed, and quenched $ or that which we laid mull: follow. Now I fuppofe yet further that moli part of the - Congregation be fpirituail, but in the pojttive degree, and onely . two or three,or a few number in companion ,be very Jpimual (est* tainly this may be by our Brethrens way of conftituting a Church : for they grant fuch as have any thing, the leaft thing in truth of ■Chri'ft appearing in them,are not to be excluded J then the refoiis- tionand judging of the whole bufineiTe, muft be devolved upon thefefew. Nay [muft preffe it yet further: Albeit it may be granted chat when a Church is now compleatly conflitute in its in- tegrality,and organized with all its members, it cannot.be well [up* poled, but there will be therein fome fuch men, very jpir it nail $ at lead Rulers ; whom if fo be they had not of themfelves, while they were yet a gathering, yet it may well be fuppofed, that while they are yet but a gathering, all of them are but fpkituall in the pofitive degree. For what hinders,but fuch. a company of perfons may come together to gather into a Church ? Now, I pray, what fhall be done in this cafe, if Church-mater in point of ficneffe mufl: paffe by the efiimation of men, more then pofitive in fpiritualitie? 'Mud it be fa-id in fuch a cafethat though they he all fatisfied in con- science concerning the truth ofone anothers conversion , Yet they are not fit mater to make themfelves a Church > I would fee fem- blance or Oiadowof reafonfor this. Yea it appeareth contrary to found reafoa , beeaufe in homogeneail bodies finch as a Church 4s, by the Dodbine of our Brethren, in the, inftance and period we are now fpeaking to) what is fufficient tocQnftituteapart, is fu?- ficient alfo to conftitute the whole. Therefore if Conveifion and fpiritualneife in the pofitive degree,be fumxient for one member of -the Vifible Church , its fufficrent alfo for the whole, I mean, con- sidered yet as totum homogenenm. The Author would dawell to aiTay a clearing and extricating of thefe things upon his Principles. ! The fourth thing to be confideredis, that the Author hath cho- §. & fen an ambiguous term .to be the fub]etl of his thefts, not diftin- f uifhing nor (hewing in what fenfeh^ takes ic (which is not a little C 2 fault SeCT.IL (2d) PART.r. fault in determining contraverted points ) while as he fpeaks thus, allowed mater of ths Vifible Qhurcb : Ftfr mater of a Vifible Church may be (aid to be allowed in a double fenfe or relation,^, either in regard of what is incumbent to a man bimfelf by way of duty before God : or in regard of what is requifice in him by way of -qualification in the outward Ecclefiaftick Court, whereupon the. Church may and ought to proceed in admitting him to the exter- nail communion of the Church. IconfeHb that none are mater of a Vifible Church" allowed in the former fenfe or relation, but ftfehasare*(noton!y fofar as men moll: fpirituall can difcern or judge; but aifo) in very deed true converts and beleevers. Its a mans duty inprofeHing Chriftianityandadjoyning himfelf to the Church of Chrift:, tobeleeve with his heart as he profefieth with his mouth ; otherwife he is matter not approver*, not allowed of God, But I beleeve its another thing- to enquire what is mater of the Vifible Church aligned in the latter fenfe ; and thinks that advifed men among our Brethren of the Independent way will fay ■ thefameinthegenerall. Yet I trow it (hail be found afterward that the ftrength and ftream of our Authors Arguments, runs in the former; and fo are little to the purpofe of the Controverfie. between us and our Brethren, touching the mater of the VifiblS Church; §^7. To make way- for a more clear difcovery of this, and to the ef- fect we may in the whole enfueing difput know what we are do- ing, and not fight in the dark- Andabatdrttm more^ it is necefiary before we proceed further to open up and bound the ftate of the controverfie, which Mr. Lockier hes not done, I cannot tell upon what intention, or if upon any defign at all, and not rather out of pure neglect,* or feme other fuch thing. If he fay he was Preach- ing to people, and notDifputing in the Schoole; and that there* fore it was not needfull, nor becoming, Scholaftically to ftate a controverfie. I Anfw. Whether in Pulpit or Schoole, his purpofe was to draw his hearers of this Nation from a Doctrine which they had learned and profeffed before the world » to a new way. Sure, ingenuous dealing would have required that the Doctrine of thjs Church, which he intended to refute,and to take them off, (hould keen, once at Uaft* plainly and (Imply propounded and prefented before Part. I. (n) . Sfect.IL before them. This be doth not all along,- but in erred: fperaks fo- indirettlj, as if we allowed all meer profellours whatfoever, to be> members of the Vifible Church. Well, what he hes not done, we fhall endeavour according to our weakneiTe to do : and (hall deal' more liberally with his fide, then he hes done with ours. Now then let thefe confiderations be prernifed. i. Letit be confidercd that thiscontroverlle is not about the §. g. Members of the Myfticall, Invifible Church, or of the Church ac^ cording to its inward ftate : but of the Members of the Vifible Church, asfttch\ or of die Church accordingto its external ftate. The Church Myfticall, Invifible, or according to its inward Hate- is the focietie of men effectually called -unto faving communion- with Chri!*, to which doth belong jn the-intention and purpofe of God,alithe promifesoffpirituallbleflings pertaining to life and falVation. The Church Vifible and confidered according to its ex^ ternall ftate, is the ibcietie of men profefling true Ghriftian faith and Religion, for communion in the outward exercifes of the Wor- fhip and Ordinances of God,: AdmiiTion of members into the Church Invifible is the work of God by the operation of the Spirit* in ErTe&uall Calling and ingraffing men into Chrift, Admi'ffion of membeis into the Church Vifible, and according to its externall : ftate is committed to the Paftors-and Pollers of the Church, who being men, and fo not feeing the inward conftitution and condition of hearts, mull: look at things obvious to the fenfes, in their ad- miniftration of this work. Whence, one may be -orderly and /^/Wty admitted a member of the Church Vifible, who is not a member of the Church Invifible, And about this our adverfariesL I conceive, at leaft fuch as are mod found and intelligent amongfl: % thero, will make no controverfie. Further, it is to" be obferved i' that the queftion and controverfie between us and the Independeni Brethren, much differs from that which is debated between thg Papifts and the orthodox concerning Church-members The ftate ° of the controverfie with Papifts, which they, and namely Bellar- mine % involve with many Sophifmes- is truely and really this ( as the judicious Amef % pes well obferved, BelUr. Enerv. lip. 2. de Ecclefia cap. 1. theft. 10, others have not fo well confidered J whether At whole multitude of profeflburs, comprehending 2*s C} well-- well unregenerate aypocrices and reprobats, as true ele& believers, be that Church of Chrili: to which properly doth belong all thefe excellent things,, fpoken of the Church in Scripture, mk, that ic is redeemed by Chrijh, theBodyofQhrift, the Spottfe of Chrift, qtilcl^cnedj a&ed and led hy the Holy Sprit, partakers of all the Jpirittcall blejftngs, fo that the gates of HeltjhaU not prevail again ft it. Albeit Papifts dare nor, ftate the queiiion in thefe 'terms ; yet the affirmative thereof is the thing they intend, that they might obtain a Catholick Vitlble Church at all times illu- ftrioufly viiible, infaliibie.and unfailable ; and that there Romane is it. But it is a far other matter that is debated between us and our prefent adverfaries, vi^ what perfons are to be admitted and accounted to belong to the Church Viiible, according to its out- ward (lite. So that thefe, who ihail make life of Arguments ufed by Orthodox Writers, in (hewing that not wicked, hypocrites and reprobates,but only the elect true beleeversare members of Chrifls _ Church, againft us for affirming that all who outwardly do feri* oully profeile the Chriftian faith arc to be admitted, and account- ed members of the Vifibie Church : they are clearly in a great mtf- take and impertinen'cy. §, p. 2 Confider , we are to diftinguifli Viiible Chiirch- membership in dtJu prima, and in aBufccnndo. I muO: crave leave to ufe thefe terms, and ihali explain what I mean by them. By the aBm pri- mus of Church- memberfhip, I mean fuch a irate and condition of apeifonasmakesthatnow he is not to be reckoned and looked upon by the Church, Paftors or ProfelTours as *ifcandall, and comprehendeth alfo in it that he lineiTe relative and of dedication* Further it is worthy diligent obfervation heret that when it is faid the Church is a iocietie of vifible faints , this may be underftood in a double fenfe ; for the Epithete C vifible ] may either be taken as a note fignifying not the nature of the form which gives the denomination of Saints or holy ! but an adjunct thereof, viz. the notoreitie and manifeftati- on of it before men. In which fenfe if it be taken in that defcripti- on, vifible Saints are fuch as by outward, manifeil and evident fignes and tokens are perceived and acknowledged to be endued with true inward holinerfe, and grace of regeneration. Or it maybe taken as a note fignifying the very nature and kind of the form , i. e. ho. iinefTe which glveth that denomination. In which fenfe if it may betaken, then men are faid to be vifible Saints, in fo far as they are adorned with externall holinefle, although abftracl: from that internali and true grace of regeneration. The (late of the Controverfie then lyeth in this, to expreflfeit as §.i*; plainly as I may, what is requifite in a perfon as the necelTary qua- lification in the Ecc I eJiafticl^C our t, whereupon he is to be received or acknowledged as^ member of the Vifible Church, and is to be accounted as not blohl^ } /. e% among thefe that are without, but hVu i a true inward Saint, or if fome* what elfe." As for the Tenet of the Independent Brethren, all of them fpeak §, 13, not the fame way. Mr, Hookjr, Survey pan. 1. e .„ 2. pag. 20, 21. dion be put upon their words. See D. Holmes and Mr. Banlets expreflions fet down by Daniel Cawdry in his Schem of contradi- ctions in the Independent way, n. 17. And W. Lockiers exprefli- ons of this putpofe along his Lecture can as hardly fufrer fuch a con,* {traction. Others of them indeed have fpoker* more warily and in a lower ftrain, as Mr. Hooker himfelf, Hating the Queftion, p. i.j fag. 15. tells us perfons who,may be,are hypocrites inwardly ; yet if their converfations and expreflions be fuch, that we cannot bur conclude in charity, there maybe and is fome fpirituall good in ., them, we fay and hope, and ar§ bound to conceive they are Saints • *B is f -^ are ^ c mater °^ a Vifible Church. Only it is to, be obferved tive^judge* tnat lt cannot De well difcerned by his words, whether he meaneth mem* wee a * negative judgment of charity, or a pofitive : his words,, as to meane the this^ are fo wavering and fluctuating, and that very remarkably,! elicitiagof^. tl ^ erl ^ and if, begin, he fpeaketh of the mater thus.- So tht\ndci-f ar M rat i° na ft charity directed by rule from the JVord, a man can ftanding, not but conclude that there may be fome feeds of fome spiritual work whereby we of grace in the hearts Here if we look at thele word§ r A man can affirme the mt y ut conclude, one would think that a pofitive Judgement were ^. to a ^ intended ? for that expreffion doth import a neceflity of eliciting - by anega- pofittvely an act of Judgement affirming of the fubjeel, that form tive judge- touching which the Queftion is. Bit the next word which is but mem, the a may be (nothing being more faid there, before he concludech abftalninj t j ie cJ e (cription of Vifible Saints ) feemeth to caft down that and to rnatTon of im P ort Je ^ Ci Then a little after he exprefleth clearly a pofitive ?he contra- judgement ,• we fay and hope $ and are bound to conceive they are rlr Saints • Part. I. (17) Secy.IL Saints. Again in propounding che (late of the Queftion , the ma- ter is involved in a cloud : We cannot conclude but in charity there may be and, is [omejpirituall good in them . &c. If we look at that, Vce cannot conclude but, &c. one would think only a negative judgment were intended: forthefe words import no more but a neceflity of abftaining from an ad of judgment, whereby the form in QueiUon is denyed of the fubjecV or the contrair thereunto af- firmed. But when it is added 9 there may be and is, &c f this feems to fpeak for a pofitive. Before it was, we cannot but conclude -and therewith, there may be, only , Now it is, we cannot conclude butt and herewith there may be and is. I verily think the godly man has been at a puzzle in his conceptions about the mater. Of all the Brethren of the Independent w&y, whofe Writings I have had oc~ cafion to fee, Mx^Nortoun in his Anfwer to GullieL Apoll. his \Queftions are moft moderate, and come neareft to the truth. In many particulars he cometh below that which is required by moft part of all others of that way, particularly in that exprefly heaf- ferteth that it is not a pofitive judgement, but only negative, that we are to have of the graceof Church-members^ c, i 6 that we are not pofitively to judge ill df them. But not to infill on thefe differences: this in general! is their § , -> common Tenet, that only fuch can be taken to be members of the -Vifible Church, ^whether asfoundationalls at the firft gathering of : the Churchy oras addittonalls by admifllon into feilowihip of the Church; as may and ought to be accompted in the judgement of * chanty true heart-Wee vers, having reall communion with Christ, and that upon fu&tent evidences given thereof. 1. By knowledge in the Fundamental! points of Religion, and iWh other as are re - quifite and neceltary to be known for leading a life without fcandaf. a . An experimentall work of Grace upon their hearts, of Repen- tance towards God, and Faith in the Lord Je sus Christ, 3. A convention, not only without fcandall and offence before men ( indeed Norton goeth no further ) but alfo without neglecl of any known duty, and comrniflion of any known ill, concerning which they mult be a good fpace tryed firft in a way privat : if the Church be a gathering, by one another mutually, untill they be mutually fatisfied in the judgement of charity touching the truth Da of 3acr.IL (aS) Part.!.-.. of the grace of each other. If it be in the admiffion of additional! members, the triall is firft by the Ruling Elder or Elders, both by way of diligent enquiry, for information, from others, and by way of conference with, and examination of the parties themfeives, Then all things being clear and fatisfac'tory to the Elder, the per- son being propounded to the Church, the people alfo mull: ( as opportunity may ferve them ) try their fpirkuali condition, and that both wayes too. If thefe find no reaiitie of fatisfaclion, they , prefent their diffatisfaclion to the Elder or Elders,which ftayes the proceeding for the prefent. But if fatisfaction hath been gotten by Elders and People in this privat wiy 3 then the perfons to be ad- mitted muftfurther f every one after another, if it be at the firft gathering of the Church; make, firft a publick confeffion of their , knowledge and faith in the grounds of Religion ; then a declarati- on of the experimental! work of their erfeduail vocation* i. In Repentance from dead works. 2. In their unfeigned faith towards the Lord Jefus • and then rauft produce, if required, a teftimony of their blameleffe convention. For a teftimony to my faithful- aefTe in this reprefentatioii of their Doctrine, I refer the Reader to * Hook*?* tfaefe on the Margent* 6 So in a word their Doctrine in this point Survey, p.i. jg, that none are to be received members into externall fellowfhip c2.pag.14> £ t fe vifible Church, but fuch as are already true heart-converts p^^p^.' indued with faving grace, and having feall internall fellowfhip pag. 4, * • with Chrift, in the judgement of charity grounded opoir fuch tri- Brief Nar- a ll and evidences, as we have heard. rat ' of £ |j e As for our judgement in the controverfie (I mean of the Church Churches 2 of Scot land u which the adverfaries, efpecially this with whom of N.E.pa. we have to do,mainly hath an eye. Albeit we know no Proteftant i 9 i,8..f. Church in the worlds, differing from us in this, but the Indepen- Mr .Cottons dents >) fcarcely fhall you find any of our adverfaries directly make fta'" P a J ! a P* ^^ °^ a wnat ' lt IS - kut ^ or ^ e m .°ftpart, as they give inti- l*>'si&&» mat * ons thereof here and there, would bear men in hand that we 3. pag. $6, do allow any whofoever profeffe the Chriftian faith, although S7i s 8 « their lives and conventions were never fo wicked and prophane,to $ „ be fit matter and members of the Vifible Church. Which is, 1 mutt fay, much want of ingenuitie in them, and great injurie done to us, as will appear fhortly . So Mr. Lockier along this Peece in» . timating iA&T.fc. (29) Sect. IT." timating our Doctrine fpeaks alwayes of per ions meetly prof effing the things of God. But I wonder much how that did fall from the Pen of Reverend Mr. Hooker, fpeaking of our judgement, Surv. p, ~I..C>.2. pag. 20. The pinch of 'the difference Ijeth in this, whether fuch as walhjn # ^ a J °f prophanenejfe, or remain pertinaciously obfiinatein feme wkkednejfe y though otherwayes prof effing and trafhifing the things of the Gojpeljbave any allowance from Chrifi^ or may be accounted fit mater to conftilute a Church : this is that which is controverted and Jhould have been evitled by upon the examination of a particular Peece of an adverfary, whofe method we refolve to trace ftep for ftep. Therefore proceeds now so confider his Arguments what force they have to confirm his, or infringe our Doctrine, Afterward having considered what Obje- clions he brings againft himfelf as ours, and his anfwers to the fame, we friall adde fome fuch other Arguments as may be fatisfa&ory to Readers, and the Author may, if he think fit, take to his con«, fidefationo > SECTION III. Rl r v Lockycrs firft Claffe * of Arguments, viz. Texts of Scripture, Acl:. 9. 26. Ad. 2.47. Hcb. 3. f-y 6 ^brought as direffly holding forth his T>o£lrine % anfwered , His Arguments are of four Gaffes. i.Some Texts of Scripture §. ti .*• as diredly holding forth his Doclrine. 2. Some others hol- ding forth hints and (hadows of it. 3. An induclion of inftances of particular Churches, mentioned in Scripture, as fo conftitute, 4. Some reafons. We (hall take them into consideration in fo ma-^ ny Sections according to their order in the Author* To his Texts of Scripture he is pleafed to preface with this conn- §,i '- dent expreffion. That ye may know how richly the Scripture con- fents to this : To which we fay no more but that,it is moft futeable to found a triumph after the vi&ory : And fo comes to his firll: Texr^ Ac~ls9.i6» ayfnd^hen Saul was cometoferufahmheafyts to joyn himfelf to the r Dijciples i but they Were all afraid ofhim$and ■ bdeeved not that he -was a Difciple, On which place, he, for effecting his purpofe from it, commenteth thus : Firft in a paren- thefis, he fuppofeth that the Difciples carriage here towards Paul proceeded from light and confcience, and tenderneiTe in this ma- tSTz vi** of admitting members into their Vifible Church-commu- nion s nion: and makes a note upon that particle all, that they were a Jiomogeneall body under the fame light, &c. in the mater. Then addeth, What did they fear ? That he did not make profejfion of Chrifiianity & Why, now he tendered him/elf to do it : Why Jhould the J have denyed him now if bare profejfion had been enough ? It u evident they feared that he did but meerly profejje, and that they Jhould takj in an heterogeneall peece ; onethtithad but the cutfide of that qualification which this ne^Q building Jhould have » and therefore Barnabas took^him to the Apofiles, and declared to them how he hadfeen the Lord in the way , and ufed all means tofatisfie them of the rsalitj of Gods worhjtpon his heart. And upon this he was received as fit mater for this new honfe^ and as fmeabte mater to that which Was already in the building, §• $• zAnfw Q 'Tis a wonder to me, and I profefie I cannot wonder enough that any judicious and learned of the Independent Bre- thren fhould ever alledged this place for their Tenet in this Que- flion : yet not only our Author here, but others alio before him, have brought it to that purpofe. But! have obferved it a thing incident even to good men, and in other things difcerning , that when they have once taken up an opinion in a mater of Religion, and it has gotten rooting in them,they become fo fond in love with their own conception, that either readily they will even bend their wits to ftraine and fprce Scripture to fpeak for it ; or elfe their judgement being fomewhat vitiate, as to that particular, with af- fection, trowes any word almoft fpeakes clear for it. How others of them have improven this place, I rlay not to confider: but to what Mr. Lockjer hes on it . I . He fuppofeth that the matter be- tween Paul and the Difci pies at Jerufalem, was about admiflion of him to be ftated a member of that Vifible Church. Now where appeareth that in the Text ? Youl fay there he ejfayed to joyn him- felftotheDifciplesx good enough, forfooth, to pleafe credulous J and unliable minds. The fimple meaning of the words is no other thing but that he aflayed to be familiarly with them. So the * *om£- word * is ufed afterward, c. 10. v. 28. TeknoW that it is unlaw- ** ai full for a man that is a Jew jtoM*a*f i. e. to keep company or fami- liarly converfe with, or come unto one of another nation. 'Tis of the fame fenfe with g*yxx**fat J.oh. 4. but a particular Congregation ; I would ask whether Paul had been a Vifibie Church* member before this time any other where ? And if fo, whether he did now ceafe to be a Vifibie member of that former Church, and fo of all'Churches, by fuiting to be a member of the Church at Jernfalem , untill he was received in there ? Then when he removed again from fem- faUm % whether he laid down his memberlhip in that Church I Or if he continued (landing in it, when he was travelling through the / world f Then if he laid it down , whether he behoved to be ftated a member in another Vifibie Church, and then in another, accor- ding as he removed from one. place to another ? 2 a Whereas the Author fayes that the Difciples at ferufalem their carriage toward P^/wasfrom light, and conference , and tenderne fie in the mater oftheconftitution-of the Vifibie Church, and that they did feat* they fhould take in a heterogeneal peece,is evidently a bold fi&ior* befide the Text ; And he muft give me leave to doubt if he fpoke that in good fad-earneft, can any man conceive any other thing to be meant by thefe words they all feared him , but this s that when as he had before been a violent perfecutor of Chriftians, they ap- prehended he was ftill fuch an one, and might be now only feeking to infinuate himfelf amongfl them as a Wolfe to deftroy them : That they feared him Che fame way that tAnanias did, v. 13 ,14. of this fame Chap. Will any man, I fay, that reads the Story ,when he comes to this Pafiage* conceive otherwayes of the meaning thereof? Nay, I appeal to the Authors own confcience, if upon ferious looking again upon the words and the (eries of the Story, himfelf can conceive otherwife of it. Now fuch a fear as this, and that light, confidence, and tenderneffe in the mater of Church conftitucion are very different things. As for his Argumentative queftioning, what did they fear ? That he did not make a Pro- f effort of Chriflianity ? Why, now he tendered himfelf to do it, —bm it u evident that they feared he did hut meerly profeffe, &c* I %Anf* *Tis very poor and unbefeeming a man of undemanding E . pretending SiCT.XII. 0-4) Part J; pretending to fpeakferiouffy :.. I fay, that was not it they feared, that he did not.make Profefllon of Chriftiamty : nor yet that,tha& he did but meerly profefTe, taking meer ProfelEon only in oppoli- tion to Profellion from a Principle of faving grace :. but the thing they feared was his cruelty, which they had feen Before^not know- ing but he was ftill on that fame way : and they feared his profef- finghimfelfa Difciple, and efTaying to convede familiarly with them, was but fraudulent counterfeiting to get advantage to exe- cute his cruelty. And Barnabas his bringing him to the Apoftle^ and his difcourfe touching the Lordsdeaiing with him ( wherein 1 confefTe there is fo much, as might fway their judgements to ac- count him not only one feriouily and fine dolo malo Profefling Chriftianity: but alfo a truely gracious convert, yea, and an An poftle of J cfus Chrift too) was to take this fear out.of their hearts,, that they might without apprehenfion of danger converfe with him . And accordingly when the erfed of Barnabas difcourfe and information is fetdown, v. 28, we find not a word nor a hint of, an Ecclefiaftick.admiffion, or (taring him into Church-membetfhipv But this is faid, he was with them coming in andgoingout at Jeru- falem, i.e. he was daily converting Eamiliarly with them. , I need fay no more to this Pallage, but (hail only adde this : Godly merit would be more tender of Scripture then to ufe or rather to abufe it thus; by fhaping conceptions of their Own , and then driving them into it by force. Come we to the next Text. . & 4; It is Atl* 2. 47. And the Lord adMdno the Church day ly %s (Tropin;: t {j- c f a ved, eos quifalvi pebant ( fo he tranflateth itj. but what hence to his purpofe ? He added to the Church thefaved y thofe which were out of harms- way, as we fay , in ajafe and fur& ft ate, andfo are noperfons, but fuch who have received the fure mercies of (David* .. Afinner is ywtfafe nor out of Gun-Jbot till in~ deed in Chrift. And this is the mat-er accepted and taken in to build tyitha/l^. and none elfe fofar as they could make judgement between things that differed. After this he concluds by a dilemma thus : Either they were thus fit ill, upon their own Vvill and fo not to be followed: Or elfe by divine and infallible Vparrand ; and fo as a precedent which hath the force of a precept. And then takes OccafioQ Pakt.I. 05) SfiCY.llI. occafion to anticipate aft Objection thus*. Add this u 6ver knd 4- (rove a plain demonftrationvf the pojfibilitie of the precept to be 0- teyedjvhicb taketh off 'that Objetlion^ 'twere well, Sir, if'twersfo\ But how can it be ? Howjha/lwedo it ? Whj y irhath been done % therefore may be-, therefore Jbouldbe^ and no otberftife. lAnfw. Here are involved a number of things, fome gratis affir- § -. med, fome evidently falfe* 1. He fuppofeth allthefe safypim t were already and antecedently to their addition to the Church, in, wardly delivered and tranflated from the ftate of nature and fin in- to the Hate of grace , and begun reall union by faith in Chnft, and this he grounds upon the Greek participle, which he will have tranflated thefaved^s noting a thing then already done. But this is a very weak ground to bear up that fuppo(ition.Why 3 who knoweth not that oftentimes in the Gteek Language, paffive participles of theprefent tenfe are ufed in the (ignification of gerundive names: So that £ wfyuMH ] may be well rendered fervandi, fuch as were to be faved. And fo hath Bez,a and the old Latine Interpreters rendered it, quifalvifierent, and the Englifi Tranflation, fuch vsjhoutd be faved; and fo the word doth not neceflarily import, as the Author would haveit 5 that thefe 'added were, antecedently to their addition, faved by the begun work of grace in them ( tho we are not denying but it might been fo with them ) and that un- der that confideration, and upon that account they were added. But this it doth import, that they were fuch as God by the decree ef Election bad appointed to be faved, and that he added them tQ the Church as the means whereby they were to be actually made partakers of Salvation* as Calvine well taketh it up* 'Tis true, the tyrjW^Interpreter, as expounded by Tremel. hath it, qui falvifiebant, but withall he hath the whole place thus, addebat MuotUie eos qui fahi fiebantin Ecclefia, ke. fuch as were faved •in the Chui ch. 2. He fuppofeth that-this Text fpeaketh of Eccle- fiaftick addition of members, in foro exterior'^ in the outward Court; by the Church Rulers, or them, and the Congregation together ( to which of thefe belongeth this Ad, we difculle not now J upon outward tryall and discerning. This again isbefides the Text, which fpeaketii not one word of this, I mean, the £ % Churches S-BCtJll. (36) fART.L. Churches adding -or admitting; but of Gods adding, which Inter- preters expound of the work of faving grace upon their hearts, converting and drawing them effectually to Chrift: and diftinguifh- eth it from the acls of the outward Miniftry upoa them . See Cal- vin, in locumimoft plain are the words of Eraf.Sarcerim in Mar* lorat. dicit Dotninum eos addidiffe Ecclejlfr qui falvi fierenti pefinde enirn eft dc fi diceret Lucas y quos Hon addebat Depart iamfi fe ipfi [adder ent Bcclefid^non tdmen fiebantfalvi. So Mx.Lochiers dilemma falls to the ground, having no ground in the Text to f ub- fidon. It fuppofeth the Text to be fpeaking of an Ecclefisftick. procedure with perfons^ upon Outward £riali and difcerning ; when as the Text is fpeaking of no fuch thing, but of a divine efficiency nponperfons. 3. He fuppofeth that all and every one that were fchenvifibly added to the Church, and none elfe were added but- fuch afc were translated to the ftate Of grace, partakers of the fure mercies 0? David, really in Ghrift,at leaft fo far as they could make judgement between things that differed : But firft, I ask where doth he find, or how will he makeout of the Text that interpreta- tion, fdfaras they could makj judgement t &c. andthat the word ddQ$m%. muft nos be underftood without any fuch qualification, to import fuch as were really faved. I think this, in divine deftina- tion, is that indeed is meant, and he fhall never inltrucl: from the Text that which he faith. 2. How will he make out from the Text, that all and every one that were by Jlcciefkftick admiffion added to the Church , and none elfe ? The Text iftdeed faiths the Lord ad- ded fuch as Vcere to be faved, tr®fy$tfmi{ Doetfi it hence follow, none elfe were by Ecclefiaftick admiffion added to the Church ? The Author muft give us leave not to believe every thing upon his bare AfTertipn, and muft finde out new Logick ere he prove that consequence; fo then we fee not how this Scripture confentethto this point of Doftrine : the ilmple meaning of the words being thusmuch,that daily the Lord was by his effectual! aflifting the Mi- niftry of the Gofpel, and working upon the hearts of men, bringing inch as he had a purpofe to fave unto the fellowship of the Church: that therein, as the ordinary way inftituted by bimfelf,they might be led on to the participation of eternail falvation,. But this no wayes- FART*!. (3T) S^cf.in c , wayes importeth, but many othersnot Co deftinateto falvation, might adjoin themfelves, and be by Ecclefiaftick admiffion received into the outward fellowfhip of the Church. The 3 d . Text is Heb, 3.5,6. And Mofes verily was faithfuH §,..£. in all his houfe, as afervant y for atefiimony ofthofe things that were to be jp.oken after : but Chrifi as a Senne over his own houfe Whofe houfe are We, if we holdfafi our confidence, and rejoicing of hope firm unto the end. Hereupon the Author commemeth thus : To a Church of the Jews this is Jpofen, who did atwftati^emuck^. and fo forfoohjheir ajfemblings, andfo their exhorting one another with all thefe means of grace and life,which God hath infiituted in this new houfeiandfo indeed %rew Worfe and worfe, till at lafl they came as the refi of the fewijh Churches y to nothing. As /o^faith the Apofde> as ye holdfafi thepratlice and power of what you profefs, , fo long you are a Church : but When you let go this, you unchurch your f elves, and fvouldit beperfued uponjou, you fhouldbe thrown out as unhallowed mater : but if others, which Jhould do it , will not do it, the Mafter himfelf, who is faithfully will do it, Be Wit cafifuch a Church Wholly off, which thus fuffer his infiitmion to be corrupted: and fo indeed he did Write Loammi upon the fir ft Churches, quickly after the tApo files time, for this thing. eAnf t Ifthisbenot to force Scripture and make itfpeak what ■■§-, y a men pleafe, I know not what ehe is. Let's firfi: mark &me ground- SefTe Aflfertions, and then we fhall come to the main point of our Anfwer. 1 . 1 wonder at that rafh aflertion in the clofe of this,and Jo indeed did he Write Loammi upon the firfi Churches, quickly af- ter the Apofiles time, for this thing. What . ? and were the firfi Churches fo foon caften off by God, as no Churches ? What di- vine warrant is brought for this Aflertion ? Sir, produce the Bill of/ Divorcement given to therrr from the Lord. And was there never a Church Hnce, untill they were erefted of the new Independent frame and model / Were all the Chriftian- Churches in Afia,Afick^ and Europe, in the times of the four famous Generall Counfels (the firft whereof was about three^hundred years after the Apofiles time J now no Churches at all > Here indeed look out the Dona- 0s 3 nbi cuhu< in mtridie, efpecially if we'll confider upon what E3 account Ssct.IIL (.38- J Ba*tJ. accciint tlie Author unchurches them, bec&ufc forfooth they ad- mitted members into their fellowfhip which were not true Con- verts, partakers of the lure mercies of David, dec- this is very Do- natifm in grain. 2. The Author fuppofeth that the.Apoftle here is (peaking to a Church of the Jews, i.e. to one particular Congre- gation, diftinctfroro all the reft ofthejewifh Churches. This is but a bare Aflertion without any proof or femblance of proof join- ed with it. We know that fome of the Learned Interpreters take this Epiftle to have been written not to any particular Church oi; Congregation, but to the whole multitude of the few's profelfing Chriftian Religion, fcattered abroad through the world, as were the Epiftles of fames and Peter ; and havefor them an argument r,ot improbable from that 2. "Epift. of Peter % c. 3.V.1 5, 'Tis true that others think otherwayes upon consideration of what we read, Heb. 13. ip. where the divine Author deftres them he writes to, to pray for him, that he might be reftored the fooner to them,which feeraeth to import a more limited compaffe then the whole difper- fion. But granting this that it was not written to ail the fews',why might it not be written to all the Chriftian feVtsimt were in Pa- Jcpinamdjftdaa. JMoft part; Interpreters take it To, but that it was written to one fingle Congregation of the jews, as Mr. Lockitr would have it, who will believe upon his bare word ? 3. He feertfs tofuppofeaclear untruth of thefe to whom the Apoftle fpcaketh, ?#«.,th.at they did apoftatize much, forfook their Aflemblies, their mutuall exhorting with all the means of grace and life : Indeed the Apoftle war neth them to take heed of thefe things, and fpeaks offome.that didfo; but as for them he writeth unto, helayeth no fuch thing to their charge as hen you let go, &c. Joh tin- (fhurch your fclves,&c. Andfo, as we fee, will have the words to involve a threatning of lofing that vifibleCliurch~itate,upon failing of perfor- mance of that which is urgedif /*.. holding faft the confidence* &c. contrary PartJ; (39) , Sac/r.IIL contrary to the current of all Orchodox Interpreters ^ , wh6-*3ee fm&- ezpone ihzt wbofe bouf eye are, of the ftate of grace and fpiritual! Mifyffr.Sc communion with Chrift, proper to the MyfticalL Invifible Church, faj^J** in regard of which Ghriildweiis in the heart by. faith : and confe- Excellent: quently conceive, p.ot the context of the vcrfe to import a turning b Mr.Z£*i. of them out of one (late which now they were, in, into another" e- p&hfi* ( a ftate, upon non- performance of that duty which is required: -But m ^ f p X " to intimate that the non- performance thereof would difco ver that . " s c ^ t ^ they were not in that ftate which they profeffed themfelves , and Word ' of feemed to others to be in. And I prove that it is to be Interpreted God ) his thus-, and not as M<\ Luckier will have it. The Apoftle meaneth opting of the fame here, whofehoufeye are, &c. which he fiith v. 14. We ^ Iswor J s are partakers of Chrift if we hold f aft the beginning of oar con ft- ( c h c *Apo- denee^ &c. So Interpreters agree that one and the fame thing is itie)addech faid in both verfes, and the very purpofe i&felf evidenceth fo much, a copltidon But now is fartaki'/tg of £hrift nothing elfe but .to be in. a Vifible *! l?i ^ Church ftate ? Yea for confirmation let it be obferved that the A- $^^1 port le faith not whofehoufeye are-^ but we are^ fo that he fpeaks cinue fted- offome what under the metaphor of ho fife which he fuppofeth faft,inward common to him- and them together. What was this? --Vifible ly- gripping Church- member- (hip of a certain (we are not told where refiding) ^ P romi - particular congregation of Tewes ?.Mr.. Lockier hes not heeded b y hop°& this, or has purpofely paded it over*. 5 . There feemeth to me in- outwardly Mr. Lockier s words here fomewbat very like the ^Arminian apo-- avowing^ ftacy of Saints, while yoti hold faft (faith he} the practice ^^confeffion, poft er of what you prof effe\ and when yon let tt go\ &c. is he in-^ T HR u STS deed of this judgement, that men may -have thepradice and power whereby ofgodlineffe, and afterward let it go ? If he fay, he meaneth of he neither fuch as have had it, fo far as men could judge* &c. well, this qua- imporc«h lihcation, if in any place, {hould have been mentioned here,where* $* . P o( * .■ - hbiiitie cf £mll aporhcy ofthe Saints, nor mindetk to weaken the confidence of BHieverSj more then h< doubteth of his own perfeverance, or mlndeth co weaken his own faith, bur writing to the number of the vifible Church, heputtetha difference between true be- Hevers who do indeed perfeverei and time-fervers, who do not perfev re, to whom he. doth not grant for theprefent, the priviiedge of being the .houfe of God. And then he hath this i«i. Do&. fuch as lliall mike defection finall are not a part of Gods ho-jfe for the. prefent; bowfoever they be efteerred. I believe any judicious Reader will fe? this laser- prctation fornewhat more genuine then that of M r . Uchjers. wkhout * Which if without it, th^re might be fo readily an apprehenfion of apoftacy he vvil have from true grace. But tell me, doth the Apoftle when he faith tobesderu^yjf hold fafi the confidence, and the rejoicing of hop firm unto ©uaHficati- '^ ^ mean thus.; if ye have and hold faftthefe things (b far as orToAhe men can judge ? Whuvefiiglumoi this appcareth in the Text g) matter of Nay is not the Apoftle in that whole Chapter fpeaking of grace to of the vlfi- be performed and held faft in veritati ret * , in very Attd .? Was blecburch, t h erc ever any Interpreter that expoundeth him otherwife. ciefiaftick Court, be may as foon get a Vifible Churchy as a new World in the Itfoon, or-M' Mores Vtofa. SECTION IV. TheAmhm "texts which he calls hints and [Jh adorn of his Doctrine* §•1. "T*~He firft is, (Jfyfat. 16. on which place the Author, thus : note JL thefe things. I. That Chrifi doth not fpeakhere of the In* vifible Church : For hejpeakj of the poWer of the kjjes, bindina and loofing on earth • the Invifible Church is the greatest part in heaven ; and they which are in earthy considered as one With them, as one intire univtrfall Body whereof Chrifi is the Head, are not capable of Vifible^ and limit edlDijcipline^ therefore 1 fit doe we are to gather from (fkrifis Words, that hejpeakj, by way of antici* pat ion, of that vifible order Which he didpurpofe to infiitute, after his departure, by hi* Apoftles , Whereof Teter Was one. 2. Ob- ferveof what mater he faith this building Jbou^ld be, viz. of fuck as have a faith which fiejh anh bloud cannot reveal, and to a body thus confiitute is the power of the keyes, and both thefe reprefented andperfonated to us in Peter. I do not find the learned and Ortho" dox of latter times apply this place to the Invifible Church, and I thinkj am not then a forcer of the Scripture in the/enfe I gave of it. § 2 lAnftoer. I wonder much how this has fallen from the Au- ' thors mouth, and Pen, that he faith he doth not find the learned and Orthodox of latter times to apply this place to the -Invifible Church. . Do not all the learned and Orthodox Writing againft the Papiffcs on the Controverfie of the Church, refute the Papifts expounding Pahy.L (41). .SBcr.iy:- expounding^ of the Vifibie Church, and prove it to be understood ^hm»ker of the Invilibie Church and every member thereof, and do not the f f J e f e '?* 9 m learned Orthodox commonly Writing agair.ft the Armmians tmuf y ^ upon the controverfie of perfeverance, apply it to the Invifible fenim Ma Church, and ufe it as one of the prime Arguments for proving the loca q.i c.u certain rinail perfeverance of true Beleevers. See thefe noted on Eca tf a &~ the Margin. Nay tome eminent Papifts themfelves have acknow- jj* 1 °™^ iedged that is fpoken not of the Vifibie Church,but of the Invifible. elettorumfi* Ferns, non loquitur de Ecclefia tit commttftiter jumitur pro his delium tgr qui Chriftiani dicuntur^ fivebonifint five mail, fed de Ecclefia fwftorumf^ fecundum Spiritum qmfolos eleclos completthur. So Caietan on f f- f*i *f the lame place, Adverfus Ecclefiam qudconftat ex Congregatione b i fa c j tur [fide Hum una fide , fpe & cbaritatc, &c. Qredo Ec- ckfiam C* m lbolkam\ fie in hoc loco Math. 16. if. & c. 1 $. par- r. p€r tot. isf q. i.e. r. he propounded the Queftion with the Papifts thus .- Ve Ecclefia in Petn adificata qu&fitur inter adverfarios -if nos, fitnevifibilisan invifibilu > Andpart. g. he determines according to the Proteftane Doftdne that it is invifibilk (? c» 1, Bellarminus dim Calvinum non potuifje unum Scriptu- re locum proferre ubi nomen Ecclefia invifibili Congregation tribaeretur. Refp. (hquit) falfum boe ejje ~ — -v nam Ecclefia aliqua?ido invifibilem Congregationcm fignificat, — * — utin hoc ipfo loc$ quern tract amies 3 *uper hanc Petram asdiricabo Ecclefiam meam.C^ q-^.e. *• §.*.»"*. Adverf. wgumentum fumitur ex its lock in ({uibm nomen Ecclefia experfie ponitur t ut Math. 16. 18. iTinit 3.1?. in utroque loco (inquittAdvtrfatM) agit ari de Ecclefia vifibili, & 1 t amen ipfam verba- mm audivimxs ajjerentem porta infer orum non pravalituras. - • Refp. (rnquit Whitt.) Mam quidem Ecckfixm de qua loquitur Chriflm \ *—*nun§um pofie deficere, ■ fed quod affu* ffih Mam Ecclefidm ) de qua loquitur Chriflm, effevifibilern. Mud affimo ejje falfiffimum. Here is a plain and round contradiction to M*. Lodgers note upon this place. $oan> tAlfted* fuppL -Chamier. de Ecclef. nat. tic. ij.pat. 1. Refp, s. Duo ijia loci ( N.Math. t6. 18. iTkn. 3. **. ) a i !tnt de Ecclefia Catboiica & invifibili feu interna, qua conftat ex folk fonts, neqm enim Ef- defia vifibilk qua conftatex bonii & malU eft jundata fuper Petram Anton. Wail. Loc Com, de Ecclefia militant, on the queition, An Ecclefia pojftt errare, in Anf. to the a 4 . Ob), of Papifts upon this place 3 Math 16* s8. ^egamus [inquit') hum locum ejfe imtlligendum de Eccltfit -%ifibili fed uMverfiili& invifibili cui proprie cempetit bacfirmim infuperabilU. The Orthodox an QoUoq. fiagien. and Amcfim in his Coron. prelie it as a prime place for the perfeverance r of Sxints. We might inftance very many moe, buc we need not J toe thing is known to all acquainted in Orthodox Writers. Mr. Lochiers reafon brought to prove that it is not fpoken of the Church Invilibie, is but weak: which will appear the better if it be put into form ( for it is fomewhat confufedly propounded by hiffifelf ) as I conceive it may be thus : That Church is underftood ¥ here Sect.XV. (4*) Part, j- here which is capable of vifiblc & limited Difciplinj but the Churdi Invifible is not capable of this .- Therefore, &c. Anf 1. How is the Major or firft Propofition proven I By infinuation thus: He Jpeakj of the potyer of the hjes r binding and, loofingon eartk.\N\n.t thence? Ergo, he fpeaks before of fucha Church as is capable of vifible limited Difcipline. If I deny the Gonfequence, how will he prove it ? I do not fee it, nor think he fhall ever bcable to make it out. 2. But topaffe-the Propofition, lets fee the proof of the Aflfumption. The Invifible (fhurch is the great eft part ia Hea- ven, and ihey which are inearth alone 'With them, as one emire univerfall body whereof Chrift is the Header e, not capable of, &c. Anf. 1. That pare of the univerfall Church which is in Heaven is impertinently brought on theftage here : Chrift is fpeaking of thofe that are yet to be built, or are a building ; therefore we fay He is fpeaking of fuch as are on earth. 2. A4bek that part of the Invifible Church that is on earth be not capable of vifible and limited Difci- pline, formally confideredas fetch, i. e. as the Invifible Church : nor yet collectively confidered, as one intire body : yet the Invi- fible Church materially, i.e. thefe that are the Invifible Church, being alfo apart of the Church vifible, and confidered diftributivc- ly in parrs, may be capable of vifible Difcipline. David? Peter John, and the reft who make up the Church Invifible, as they are alfo outward Profeffours with others, are capable of vifible Difci- pline. O ! then you will fay v why? Are they notfpokenof here, / Voill build my Church, as they are a vifible Church ... Anfe It doth not neceiTarly follow :.. for to perfons ftandihg under diverfe confe- derations, one thing may be attributed^ according to one confede- ration, and another according to another. §. j; As to his 2<*. Obfervation. 1 . It is contrair in it felf to Truth, that the vifible Church is to confift only of fuch as have.a faith ( he means {idem, qua creditur, or taken fubjeclive : for we fhal grant it of faith qua cr edit ur. t or taken objective ) which fMh and blood cannot reveal, i. e. true faving faith. The Church may confift of fuch as have not that faith: and the Author addeth not here his qualification of fo far as men can judge : neither can it be admitted here. 2. Qualifie it as he will, it isameerviolentingoftheText, fundry Interpretations by diverfe have been given on thefe. words : Yart.I. (43) . :■'■ SzcT.W; V fori this RochjpiH 1 build mj ghurch : but 1 think few* or none ever before out Author gave fuch an interpretation as this ; The vifiblt Church Shall be conftitute only of fuch as have true faving faith in them, fo far at men can judge Certainly whether we take _ the Ghurch Invifible or the Church Vifible to be meant here under the name of the Church, MX Lockiers fenfe cannot have place ; For, 1. Underftanding by the name of Church, the Church Invi- fible in that fentenee ? Vpon this Rock^^ill I build my Church* Cbrift is not fpeaking of gathering and conftituting a certain incor- poration or fociety, in the ftate and condition of fuch an incorpo- ration or fociety, and how perfons, of whom it is to be made up 8 mufi be antecedently qualified, that they may be capable of admifc iionto be conitiment members thereof : but fpeaking of his own -acl: of efficacious grace ( put forth in deed with the Miniftry of the GofpelJ upon the hearts of Tome perfons ("whom he calshis Church, became they are called out fromamongft the reft of the world to himfelf) which doth not fuppofethem antecedently ha- ving faith, and, taking them as fuch, ftate them in a fociety : But indeed is the very giving to them that faith, and Hating them in an impregnable condition of grace and falvation. Whether by, this RockjWe underftand that faith which Peter confefTed,or Chrift the ■'Object of that faithjor 9tfm himfelf eonfidered in regard of his Mini, dry oftheGofpe!.- or the Gofpel Preached by him fasfomeofthe Orthodox do) certainly this is the meaning of building the Church upon the Rock, fuppoling ( that whichldorncline moftto, with the moft part of Reformed Divines ) that by the Church is meant the Church Invifible 2. If by the name of the Church here be un- derftood the Church Vifible, as fome later Orthodox Divines have expounded it, namely judicious and learned Hudfonln his acurate and elaborate Vindication of the Ejfencemd V-nhy of the Catho- Ikk Vifible Ghurch : Yet it will little avail M*. Lockiers purpofe. U Becaufe it is a particular Congregation, and the qualification of members, to be admitted thereunto, that he is fpeaking of all along under the name of a vifible Church. But fuppofing this place to fpeak of the vifible Church, it cannot be underftood of a particular vifible Church or Congregation, but muft of neceffity be under- stood of the Catholkk vifible Church, becaufe it is fuch a Ghurch ¥ % as Sec*. IV. C44> Part.L as is to ftand firm and impregnable that the gates ofhell cannot pre- vail againft it: but any particular Church may be prevailed againft. 2.Taking the name of the CW<^fo,here the meaning of the whole- fentence upon this Roch^ I will build my Church, is nothing elfe but this ( as the learned Author, but now cited, well obferveth ) that the Profeflion and Doctrine of this Truth,that the MeiBah is already come,& that this Jefus is the Mefiiab,& this Jefus the MeiTt% ah is the Son of God,the Doclrine and confedlon that fefm Chrift is come in the flejb , 1 3oh?4* % 3 . and the beleeving that / am he (faith Chrift) foh. 8. 24. is the foundation whereon the Church of the New Ted. is to be built; out of all which nothing more can foilow,a$ to the qualification o£members of the vifible Churchy of the New Teft. then this ; that when as the Jews under the Old Teft. beleeved in an indefinite Meffiah to come: now under the New Teft. none can be of the Chriftian Church, butfuch as be- - leeves and eonfe/fes that the Meffiah is come, &c. Now I ap- peal to all the Orthodox World, if Mr. Lochier his commenting^ upon this place be not a forcing of the Text a As for what he ad- deth, that t$ a body thm conftkute ( k e. a V-ifible Church fo com fhtute as h^ hes been faying) is the power of the kgyes given, and both thefe reprefented, and perforated to us in Peter. To pafTe, I cannot well undetftand how it can be faid that the power of the keyes could be reprefented and perfonated in Peter (poflibly the Church might be reprefented and perfonated in him) This belong- eth not to our prefent Queftion, and therefore we pafle it now, trafting with the Lords alfiftance afterward to evidence that both aflertions,^"^. that the power of the keyes were given to a Church Vifible, I mean the collective Church , and fo to it is as the fub- ject, and that Peter in receiving them here did reprefent and per- fonat the Church ; are groundleflfe. 4; 4 ; The next ftiadow or hint is, Rev. 11. J, zl zAnd there was given me a Reed, &c 9 Hereupon the Author maketh much adoel l.He layeth down grounds by Interpreting particulars in the words. i* Saith he, by the Temple is meant the Vifible Church.the ftatc and welfare of which, though moft infefted of any publick condi- tion, fhallnot be left and ruined, but be carefully looked to and raifed from its corruptions, intrufions, and ruines made by unfound men.This is confirmed by a Teftimony oi Mar lor attune in modern FartJ;. , . _(45) Ssct.IV. jstbetut Eccttfam, &e. t\. By altar is meant , ftrfynecdochen, the whole Worfhip of God, this is confirmed by the Teftimony' of the fame Author. 3. What is meant by worfhippers is plain of it felf. 4,- The flate of worfhip and worfhippers now under the Gofpel is to be meafured, kept regulated to an exacl rule. What is that ( viz,, rule ) by the Word of God £ To connrme this is brought the teftimony of the fame Author. 5. By the Court which is without the Temple is meant men which have only out- fide Religion and devotion, but are deftitute of the power thereof/ 6. What is meant by the not meafuring of thefe ? That fame Au- thor ( faith he ) telleth us m compleFtaris eos in Jpiritmli *di-~ ficio Domini, do not imbrace them to be matter of the fpirituali houfe, they are without, and let them be caft out. Why? mud not fuch be received nor abide in the Church feing they have a pro- feflion? Becaufe, flrft, faith that Author ( CMarhrat ) the . houfe is fpirituali, holy, they are not congruous matter. Second- ly, faith John, thefe are given to the Gentiles* i. e . ( faith Mar* lor at ) ipfifuntfa&iconformesgentibw incredulity immo dete* riores funt illu quant alib el janUit at is Jpecie -polleant , nam tra~ ditifum in reprobtimfenfum, &c. And faith Mr. Lockier him- felf fuch kind of Profeffours and outfide Chriftians will foon irr times of temptations conform themfelves to the worftof men,, yea and be worfe then they, and will ftrike in with the viieft to tread down the holy ciiie, i.e. the true worfhippers in Gods Vifibie Church, that have name and thing , form and power of Godliness Then he tells that he cites UMarlorat not as finding him fully of his judgement, but to fee how he and other good men of the re- formed Churches, fpeakunawars his judgement, and cannot tell how eife to give any life to places of Scripture. Neither can a man tell how to make themfelves agree with themfelves in their com- mentaries without taking them with a grain of fait in this maner. After all thefe grounds laid down, he inferreth upon the whole this conclufion, thatperfons profeffing meerly the things of God' are not approved and allowed mater by the Lord in a Vifibie Church, they are fuch as he doth not meafure, embrace for his ; building ; they are fuch as are fit to deftroy, not to build the holy -City. And thefe Ghrift not allowing of them, nor meafuring of $3 thenK Secy.Pv*. (46) Pa^t.Xo them : but cafting them by, and will do if we do not ; how then we can, but at our perill, both in order to God, and order to fuch men, imbracc them J know not.' Thus he upon this place. § ?. Anf 1. Here a word or two in the general!. Firft, I fay, MrJ Lcckjer doth confidently enough ( to fay no more J but very poorly, with bare aiTertions without theleaft proof triumph ovec thefe good men ( as hexalls them, hinting as it feemeth, that tho good, yet they were not very deep nor difcerning, at leaft in this matter) of the reformed Churches, as fpeaking his opinion una» wars, andnotable to expound Scriptures elfe, and as contradicting and clafhing againft themfelves, unleffe a grain of his Interpreta- tion be allowed them ; Parcim iff a vim. Who are thefe good roen in the Reformed Churches that have fpoken unawars his opi- nion concerning the conftkution of the Vifible Church ? I wrth he had named the men and defigaed the place where they fay it $ Nay were it not we are unwilling this peece fhould grow too big, we could produce of thefe good men, who have directly and folidely refuted Mr. Lockiers Tenet , as he hath it* in ancient Anabaptifts. He would have done well aifo to have pointed us to fome of thefe places of Scripture which they could not tell how to give life to , Without complyance with his Tenet, and fome of thofe feeming contradictions in their commentaries,which cannot be agreed with- out that graine he fpeaketh of 5 untiil he do this, we muilaccount what is fpoken by him here, but groundleffe and empty boafting. 2. That in the whole difcourfe upon this place Mr. Lochler fpeaks fo, as that he cannot be Interpret, but to hold none to be members of the Vifible Church, but fuch as are endued with true faving grace and the power of GodlinenV/tfwr*Wf? reix He ne- ver once in it mentioneth that qualification,/^ jar as men can judges, Yea, his expreflions are fuch as cannot pofliblie admit it, as will appear in following the particulars ; To whicjh now we come. §,£« We begin with fome notes upon the coneinfion. 1. 1 aske here what he underftands by meer prof effing the things of God ? Whe- ther fuch profefling, as is oppofite to, and deftitute of, even mo- rall and ordinary fcrioufnelTe, which may fometimes be without an inward faving worke of grace ; yea or outward convincing pofitive evidences of it: Or as it is oppofite unto an ihward faving work. ? If Part.L: (47) f . rtf . SficT.IY, If he meant the former, be (hall not have us to contradict his con- slufion • we (hall grant him that fuch as have not fo much as an or- dinary morally ferious profeflion , fuch as evidently profeilethe things of God hiftrionically , mockingly, manifeftly purpofing to deceive, are neither allowed of Chrift, nor to be -admitted by men as mater of the Vifib'le Church. If he fay the other, and fo that none are to be admitted into the Vifibje Church, but fuch as befide profeflion, have aifo really true, inward, faving grace, he ■putteth the Church upon an impoilibility ; and in this will be dif- ciaimed by all the judicious of his way.- If it fhall be faid, it may be he meaneth neither* but fuch a profefnon as is oppofire to po- fttive convincing evidences of grace to the Judgement of decerning men, and fo far as they can judge. Ifay, i. This is not faid by himfelf there, nay, he cannot (ay it and hold to all what, he faith here. Why ? becaufe fome may be fuch, as far as- men can judge, and yet fuch as Ch rift will caft out, yea, and hath caften out : and men may be fuch and yet rrt to deftroy the holy City. 2. Perfons may be fuch as are not approved and allowed mater by the Lord in theVifible Church >, and yet the Church may admit them into the Church, without any periil in order to God^ h e. without finning by admitting them: -as for inftance, Simon \.U\i agm: If he fay he m'eanes not here the Lords not approving & not allowing pertons Jimpliciter andin point of their duty,but in relation to Ec- ckfiaftick proceeding with them in fore exteriore ; he fhaii not have us diifentient from him about this in the general). But him- felf hath never this diftindion of the Lords approving or not ap— proving,when from it at any time hereafoneth to the admitting or not admitting of fuch perfons.Yea for ought that can be perceived ._. along this Peece, he feemeth alwayes to (peak of Gods -approbati- on or not-approbation of perfons in point of their owndutie Scjim- plicicer. But now to put the moftcandid conftrudion and Inter- pretationupon his conclu(ion,let it be fo,thatby mater not- appro verr and not- allowed of the Lord in the Vifible Church is meant not- approved and nouallowed (no fimpliciter) but in relation to Ec- clefiafttck proceeding, in faro exteriore : and by perfons meerly. profiling, be meant perfons not truely gracious fnotofneceflity- m truth. o£ exiftence, but) atieaftfofar as men can. difcern and judges. judge. Come we now to fee what (hadow of this point is in the Scripture alledged here : I (hall go through the grounds laid denvn from it in order, 5*7* Tothefirft, rt hath fome fhew of contradiction, that he faith, i. That the Vifible Church (hail not be left and ruined • and then again that it (hall be railed from its ruines made by unfound men. If he fay that in the former he means utter and iatting ruine, and in the latter, ruine in part and for a time : Well, that would' have been expreffed, fo it appears not well how this faid here, the fiat e and Vo elf are of the Vifible Church /ball not be left and ruined, can confift with that faid, fag* 1 I 1 that the infiitutien of Chrift was f@ corrupted in the fir ft Churches 3 that Chrijl did write Loamml upon them^nd that quickly after the Apofiles dayes* But I would ask here the Author, what he means by the Vifible Church, that Jhall not be left and ruined ? Whether anyone particular Congre- gation or the Catholick Vifible. Church ? If the Catholick Vifible Church, I fhall grant that the ftate and welfare thereof though never fo much infefted (hall not be left and ruined utterly ; But I *Note the <*oubt m uch \fofo.Lockier will acknowledge fuch a Vifible Churchs parages fure I am, thefe of his way, are very averfe from acknowledging dtedoutofit, fthough it be a thing mod: certain and clear in. the Word of M * r J°^ ve> Go&) becaufe indeed the granting of it undermines all the frame ^/erandTo °f tne i r Independent way : Yea and he himself all along his Peece, becited by treating of the mater of the Vifible Church, fpeaks of a Vifible us, are not Church, which is nothing elfe but a particular Congregation. If all Mario- he mean any one particular Congregation ( which is molt futeahle tats own t0 kj s wa y j j f ge not now j c can 5 e true ly faid that it (hall not be because*" ^ e ^ c an( * m 'med ; fure, we find no promife in the Word for this , they are by and the experience of many particular Churches that have been bim gathe- ruined utterly and never raifed again, proves the contrary. 2. He red from f a j t [^ t fa t by t he Temple in that place > Rev. 1 1. is meant the VL ma'beac- ^* e Cnurch > anc * doth n0 more buc fa Y ic : ^ ac wJlicn is ^Hedged compced hom Mar lor at* maketh nothing for this. This Author only bis by ap- faith, hunc inmodumpibet utEcclcfiam Joannes metiatur ^ efrc* probati6& butiaithnot, EcclefiamVifibilem. Nay, it may appear evid'ent- fo be con- jy t0 an y atteni: j ve Reader, that this Author all along his comen- 7teTun/et tar Y u F on tne P^ ace m bandjiinderibnds by the name of the Church, his name. the PartJ* ("49") SecyJV. the Church Inviftble, the fbciety of the Elect true Belee vers, who * z.qh are Chrifts.Myfticall body. See efpecially thefe pafTages *■ noted in ^"° rd /? the Margin. But Jet it be fo, that by the Temple is meant the Vi- % ibi *T J£ fible Church, we conceive this may well be meant, and the diffe- a \\ g t ^ rencing and diftinguifhing thereof from the Antichrifaan.Syna- p/wPeiM/. gogue falfly arrogating to themfelves the title and privtledges of tores', mm the Church. Go we on then to fee what the Author out of this, ^ os - *• and what foiiowcs, will make out for his point. atttum%t (fc) calls tbem Eaiefim de qui non funt bateiid&'bypmito, quanquam in ea verfarivtieamur, znd cices for clearing thereof, tfoh.'z, 19, which all Orthodox againft Amin:ans r ott the point cfper&verancej expounds of the elect and truly gracious, i.e. the Church in- vifibie. 3. On tbefe & ne mctkrU iUui ] calls it jpiritu&le adificium quod nunqjum cor- rucre pote?u , and diftmguiiheth fuch from thefe that are caiten out 3 as cleft from reprobates ► For the ai. ground : Albeit by the Altar fome learnedjand God* §. *. ly commentators, as namely Param, under ftandGh rift : Yet let it be, as the Author.faith, that thereby is meant by a Synecdoche the whole Worfhip of God, and pafllng the third. As to the fourth, J would firft inquire why the Author faith by way of reftriclion that the worfhip and worfhippers now under the Gojpel arc to be raeafured , and kept regulated to an exact rule/ viz,, the Word of God} What, were not the worfhip and worfhippers under the Old Teft. alio to be meafured, and kept regulated to the Word of God . ? Were thefe things then left loofe to be difpofed on and ordered at mens pleafure? I wot not well what this reftriclion means $ but fure I am it looks ill-favouredly r s The Author will do welltoclearhimfelfinit. a. But how will he prove , that which he only takes here for granted, that the intention of the Spirit of God in this Scripture is to hold forth a generail rule concerning the outward conftitution ofthe Vifible Church, as to the mater there- of, and how members ought to be qualified for admiiTxon to it, and not rather in a Propheticall vifion, to fortell what was to come to pafTe defaclo concerning the Church- worfhip, and adherers to the true worfhip ; fundry learned Interpreters conceive that this latter is the intention and purpofe of this vifion^hat the true Church;the true-worffiipof God, and the worfhippers after that true manerof worfhip ofGodinftituted by himfelf, "was to be brought to great ? G ftraits, SictJV. ? (50) Fart.L ftraits, obfcunty, and paucine, in comparifon of the ftlfe and An- tichriiiian Church, worffiip, and worfhippers ; and that this is meant by the meaf firing with the Rod, and not the regulating of the ftate of the Church, and qualification of .members. See both Bright mat and CHerhiflon vpon the place. But 3. Grant the meaning of the place to be, as if the Spirit had faid $0 ?ohv,hold forth dogmatically that the Church (as to its confutation ) the worfhip, and fuch asare to be acknowledged worfhippers s are to be regulated by the rule of the Word of God ( which we deny not in the generall) then I ask what is that particular rule held forth in the Word by which perfons are to be regulated, and difcerned in relation to their admiilion to fellowship of outward worfhippmg ? §. 9 . He goeth about to make this manifeft in the fifth and fixth grounds we marked laid down by him, to which, and what is faid by him in the following forth thereof, we repone thefe things. 1 . The Court which is without ( or as fome others read, within) and to be caften out ; others underftand far otherwayes, not of perfons,but of the outward and vifible face and ftate of the Church; and by the calling of it out, rejecting, caftingoff care of it, and giving of it over for a time, vl&. of AntichrHts power and preva- lency to be poflefled by Antichriftian and idolatrous people,becaujfe of their following and praclifingheathenifh-like wayes and idola- trie : So CMerhiflen. And certainly it is very likely that the Court here cannot denotate perfons, I mean profeflburs to be caften out of the Vifible Church ; becaufe it is (aid to be given to the heathen, and thefe heathen are thefe very perfons, that are faid to be caften out. The Interpretation in Marlorat is exceeding harflv and hath no probability in congruity of fpeech, to wit, to caft out hy- pocrites and idolaters, i.e. the Court, becaufe it is given to the heathen. 1. Becaufe they are become like the infidel heathens. Where fhall we finde the like fpeech, that perfons are laid to be given unto fuch and fuch perfons becaufe they are become like unto them. 2. But grant, by this Court perfons are meant, and that by not meafuring of them is meant not imbraceing of them, but calling them out. How doth M*. Lockicr prove, that thefe per- fons are all fuch as have but an outfide of worfhip, and arc deilitute of the power of Religion, even albeit their Religion be true and right .Faht.1. (u), Shct.IV. right objectively, and in the nature and kinde of it ; and their pro- fefllon morally r ferious. This he muft not only affirm, but prove 5 i£ he would fay any thing convincingly to the point he take^h in hand to deduce. What if I fhaii fay, not inch per fans, but Antichrifti- aa, idolatrous perfons are understood hereby ? What can he bring from the Text, or reafon to prove what he faith ? 3 . Let's fee his reafons he bringeth to (hew that fuch as have only art outride wor- UiJp, Religion, and devotion^t are detlitute of the power there- of are not to be imbraced as mater of the Vifible Church, but held outorcaftout. The 1. is brought from Marlorat > becaufe the houfe, faith he, is fpirituali, and holy, they are not congruous mater, ne compleElaris eos injpiritnali tedificio Domini ssfnf. 1 . That fpirituali houfe or edifice Mar lor at fpeaks of, is the true Church InViHble, fpirituali adificio Domini qxod nunqti&m cor* ruere_poterit : Mr. Lockitr has flipped thefe words. - 2, Mar lor ap comprehends under thefe that are the Court, alhthe reprobate ' mixed with the E!e.^, tho they were even as guiided hypocrites, as- of whom it may be faid (which Mr. Lochier faith) they are true converts as for as men can judge ; as is evident ail along, g. Marlordt fpeaks not of carting them oat of vifible focietie with the fpirituali houfe oftheElecl, hyJDifcipiinarie ejection of lingular perfons diftincHy, ( but by "Do^fr/W/Zconvictionj and denunciati- on of deftrudion againilthem ) except in the cafe of evidently ma- nifefted rebellion or obftinacy. So he upon thefe words, & ado-^ r antes in eo ~] quando hypocritarum magna jemper fait copia in? mundo , & reprobi ele&is nunquarfr non permixti fuerunt , Pafio~- rk muntti efl,quo ad fieri pot eft , inter mrofque dlfcernere^ ut pics^ Deicultores, verbi Dei pabulo yafcat 9 exhortetur^ confoletar > fovea?; r ell qnos ad Dei tribunal eit.et, & extremum illis exiti*< am Dei nomine pronunciet ( allthis is but Dodtrinall not terminat adfignatu indivUua^ fas they call theraj i. e, to deHnite fmguUr. perfons J. at^etiamfife prorftttrebelles prodiierint impii, publico, &xtoritatecoerceanttir& ac&iureliquorum eficiantm\ All this - wegranf willingly, yet without any advantage to Mr. Lcckhr* 2. Reaf. Why muft thefe out^court-Chriitians not be taken in? Why; ? oh » fa\th, thole are given to the Gentiles, i.e. kith Mar- lor -at 3 ipfifaUifrntconforwesventibmincredfili'S^c. .%Anf. U . G 2 * As.- SlCT.IV. (5*) ?awJ. As we faid before it is altogether improbable that by the Court is meant perfons, but a thing, and it feemeth to be a moil forced knfc, and without example, given ftp to the gentiles, i, e , they are hexome like the Gentiles. Next we fay it is mod evident from the end ofthis©^. that the Spjatfpeaks not thefe words as a ru j e prefcribing what he or others ftiould do in governing the Church - but as a prediction of fome what that was to come to paiTe, this I fay is evident by thedeflgnationofthecircumftancc of the time or duration of that which is fpoken of in the end of the verf. But *!/. M^ £»?£*> fuppofeth two things which he mainly Should have proven, that the outer-court-Chriftians ace ail that have not the power of GodlineiTe in their heart, though their profefllon and pradife in Religion be objedively right and true, and fubjecTiveiy fcrious. 2. That cafting them out and not meafuring them muft be understood of Diiciplinariee/ection, upon that very account that the^ have not the power of GodlineiTe. 3. As to that he addeth hirnfelf fuch kind of P r of e fours mil John in times' of temptati- ons, &c. /tis true, they may be ready to do foj but tell me, will not even fome fuch fine, well guilded Profetfburs, who mayVeem as far as men can judge to have the power of GodlineiTe in their heart, be fuch as will be ready foon to do the fame ? Yes ; be- caufe when all is done they may be but outfide ProfeiTours, Simon (Jbtagus , Hymenem, and Alexander muft have been at their reception into the Church, by Mr. Lodgers principles,fuch as were true converts fo far as men could judge; yet we fee them ready foon to conform therrifelves to the worft of men. Thus, I humbly conceive,we have made it clear that Mr. Lodger hath little ground for his doclrinc from this Text, mod part of the pillars of his dif- courfe being meer fuppofitions, taken for granted, but having no light of proof from the words, as alfo that he had as little caufe to boaft of a holy Nation, according to inward call and choife, and fo a fpirituallPriefthood. Anfw. i . Here again we are to mark the Conclusion that Mr, § 1 1 Lochier would be at, touching the mater of the Vifible Church, fuch as are all indeed from above, as have indeed an interna!! con- federation, the Law given into the minil, made Jews inwardly, ah holy Nation, according^ inward choife and call. Here indeed is an Anabaptifticall model of the Vifible Church, all rcall faints, and not in the judgement of charity only. Mr, Lockiers fo far as Jpi* rituall men can judge* as it is wholly left out by himfelf, fo it can- not well be admitted to have any place here, u Becaufe he faith they are all indeed from above, and have indeed an inter nail con- fecration, that indeed I think to every mans apprehenfion noceth veritatem reiinfe, or judicio veritatis (as they call it) as contra* diftinguifhedajW/V/o^m^z-^offpirituallmen. 2. Becaufe chat place, Heb. 8. 10. cited from Jer. 32. 33. broughtin byhimfor confirmation of his purpofe, he is fpeaking of, (of the impertinency we fhouid either think it utterly extinguiflied, or at ieaft m*t?'L Co *Wigh ignorance.of her right form and figure, we fho.uid be k(f Q Gomar. aD Ia -Part J. (55) Ssc T .IV, able to know which is (he (isMt.'SrightManCmh) it feemeth the ■ wifedom of the Spirit of God would have portraicted the figure and form of the Church in thefe things that are moft fubftantiall in the conftitution of it,' fo as Ghriftians of ordinary capacitie might been able to difcern 8c take up the true Church by; but Mr. Bright, man himfelf is even troubled to find what things are meant by eve* ry particular in the vifion. And in fome he bringeth but meer con- jectures, yea and likely is miftaken, as, could we ftay, might be Very probably (hown ; as for example, in his Expofition of the fea . of Giafte like Chriftali before the Throne. 3. But what is the particular in the vifion from which Mr. Lochier deduceth his con- clusions ? this, vi^ that it was in Heaven he (aw it, a door was ope- ned in Heaven and the Throne was Jet in Heavenjhis^ faith he, Veas tojhadow that the • Veer flippers [houldbe indeed from a~ hove , '&c % and to make it the ftronger,tt is confirmed by a com- panion of what was done with (JWofes, Mofes had his pat em upon the Mount nigh Heaven, &c. Anfw. i . Here is a thing begged for a ground, that as Mofes was taken up to the Mount, to get a f atern of thefe, things, which -he was to appoint in the ancient Church, fo John is here taken up to get a patern of the Vifible Church, and the things to be ordered in it under the New Teft. This, Hay, is ground Iefly fuppofed : For thefe things that were to fee done by Mofes were but now a inftituting, and to be firft fet up: and therefore it was necelTary that he (hould have a patern of them reprefented to him to regulate him ; but ere the time of this reve- lation, Chrift had fully inftituted all particulars belonging to the Church of the New Teftament, and many Churches through the World, were already actually fetled and ordered according to that inftitution, and befide fundry of the Books of the New Teft. writ- ten, wherein the inftitution and rule was already plainly written down, and this indeed is one reafon which inclineth me to think that the (cope and intention of the Spirit in this vifion was not to give a patern, and portraiture, or modeil of the Vifible Church for the time to come. 2. As to that alledged meaning of Mofes receiving his patern near Heaven, viz,', to (hew of what qu?.lifica» tion tfi e people, i.e. the members of the ancient Vifible Church ihould be, %vfc,; inforo exteriori, fo muft he underftand it, if he ~~ . fpeak' SscT.IV. ($6) Part.I; fpeak to the purpofe in handj I will not trouble my felf to inquire who may be thefe very learned men that fay fo. "But the thing it feif is but a conjecture : and I defire Mv.Lockier concerning this* and the expounding of Heaven here, to remember the axiome ac- knowledged by Schoole-men themfeives, otherwife doting on al- legories, theologla fjmbolic^ non efi Argument dtiv-a y ezce$t where. the Spirit of God himfeif openeth the fignificatipn. 3. ■ I defire to know what Mr. Locker r^eanethby perfons really living very near Beaven^ if truefy gracious, then what difference between thofe, and thefe afterward brought in with an adverfative oppofing them to the former, and why did he propound his Doctrine with a reftridion to the time of the Gofpel f 4. That patern which Mo- fes had fhown to him in the Mount, according to which he was I commanded to make, did not concern the conftitution of the body of the then Vifibie Church, of what, and how qualified perfons it was to be made up. But was a patern of the Tabernacle and the things pertaining to it, Exod. 2,5. 9* 40. 5. The place, £^^44.7* , referred as fpeaking of the ordinary members of the then Vifibie Church is not to the purpofe, for it fpeaks of fuch as were admits ted to the Priefts Office. See funius and Tardus in locum. 5. As impertinently, and much more impertinently is the place of Hekh. 10. cited from lef. 31. 33. brought into this difcourfe concerning the Vifibie Church, and the mater thereof. I appeal to all judicious Ghriftians in the World, and to Mt.Lockjer himfeif in fecond ferio\is thoughts, if that Scripture was intended to be a rule of conftituting Congregations : Or if it be not a declaration or revelation of Gods purpofe and Decree what he is to do himfeif by^ his efficacious grace y and if that Covenant and the promifes there- of beiongeth not in the fulfilling thereof only to the Lords elect.. SECTION V. Examination of "Mr. Locky cy$ proof e of his Dottrine by induction. 5« i* "R ^^ ( kith ^ e ) *^** ** not the way which J moft mind to make A-J probation by, of this pint 1 Irrotild prove it by tnduclion, , * h Pakt.L (570 - SicTrV it feeraeth then, that he hes not had fuch confidence in that former way of probation, by teftimonies ailedged to fpeak the point in tbefi .: And I humbly leave it to the judicious and impartial! Reader to judge,by what hath been faid in anfwer to thefe paflages, if it be not made clearer that he had little ground of confidence in them for proof of his point, and comes now to that way of probation, wherein it feerneth he conceiveth more ftrength to ly. The Churches of the Evmanes, Corinthians^ Bphefians^ Gala- % % \l tians, Coiloffians, Thejfalonians, of the ] l eWs which are mentio- ned by Peter , Iamts^ and the Author to the Hebrews^ &n& in theAfts, were all thus conftitute oftruely Godly % fo far as a God- ly mam can make judgement of one like him f elf, Ergo, if thefe be deny ed as prejidents, then 1 would aske our Brethren of the Pres- bytery by what rule they wdlkj Hut if thefe be conjidered as pre- fidents y I have only toJheVe that thefe Churches did all thus confii- tute, though Ithinkjhey did not long keep and maintain this pure conftitutionfor Which they bore their judgement^ yet bear. Anf. Where did Mr. Lochier read, that the judgement corned and yet lying upon thefe Churches,came upon them for their admitting and permitting to be in their vifible fociety fuch as were not true con- . verts, fuch as God the fearcher ofthe hearts of all men can bear witneffe of as indeed fealed for his by his Holy Spirit, as far as men truely converted and very fpirituail can difcern and judge? We find indeed bid to fome of their charge that they iurfered fcanda- lous perfonSj broatchers of errors, and feducers of others into their errors, ffuch, I mean, maintarners of errors, I trow he and others of his way are not averfe from receiving andfufFering into their In- dependent Churches) and I doubt not but for this among other caufes, Judgement came upon them l- But that ever that which he (kith was hid to tbeir charge, or that the judgement of God came upon them for that caufe , we cannot believe his afTertton ; we re-. quire it to be inftanced by proofe : but to the purpofe ; he fuppof- eth that befide thefe particular Churches inftanced, and what is faid of them In the Epiftles written to them, there can be no where in Scripture found any thing holden forth as a rule by which we may walk in the conftitution ofthe vifible Church as to the mater or member* thereof, So doth his Queftion ( then I would aske ouc H f Brethren SfiCT.V. (53) FaRT.K Brethren by what rule they walk) import : But we trull ere we have done, to find a rule elfe- where ; yet we (hail not deny nor re- fufe thefe Churches as prefidents in this bufineffe, in whatfoever can be made clear to have been their practice in this mater, I mesn 3 the notion and .confideration under which- perfons- were admitted unto, and reckoned in their externail Church-feliowfriip. Conic we then to confider-the antecedent of this Argument, or what is affirmed in his induction. of thefe Churches. Eirft in. the generall, and then his proof thereof particularly. The affertion of them all in generall is, that ail of them were constitute of perfons truely Godly fo far as Godly men could make judgement. Anf. 1. Mr, Lockjer if he would have made the attribmum of this induction an. fwerable to his conclufion intended, he fhould. have laid they were conftitute of perfons all and every one of them truely Godly* and none elfe. But he (peaks only indefinitely ,which might be granted: But let us take him to mean fo ; this affertion as it lyeth, may be granted in fome fenfe which it may carry , and never a whit advan- tage redound thereby to his Doctrine ; for it may carry this fenfe, that thefe Churches were made up, or did confill: of perfons all of them truely materially Godly defafito y and quoad event urn ; or it may carry this fenfe, that they were conftitute of perfons all truly godly, for mallj confideredas fuch,in their taking them into the con* ftitution and external fociety of them.Now in the firflfenfe it might be granted (as I fuppofe fome Congregation or Congregations may be fuch eventually ,that all the members maybe truely godly) & yet no advantage come thereby to his Tenet,, unleffe he could prove that the enumeration which he makes is a perfect enumeration of ail the particular Churches in Scripture fwhich he cannot, becaufe it is clearly contrary to truths and therefore his induction is imperfect,) Yea and this alfo, that there is no other Paffage of Scripture, that holds forth a rule or warrand of any larger latitude touching ad- mitting of members into the fellowfhip of the Vifible Church then what is (aid of thefe Churches. He mud prove then the affertion an the latter fenfe, viz,* that thefe Churches were conftitute of perfons all truely godly as far, &c. formally confidered as fuch, and under no other confederation, in their in taking and being rec- koned members ia their outward vhjble focietie : If he could prove " " '" " "~" ;■*';" " ' "'" ' this Part. I. (59 ) . Ssct.V, this of any one of them we (hould go over to his fide of thecontro- -verfie : But now fee how he pro vet h this, nay all that is brought or can be brought by him, is only this, that the Apoftle Writing to thefe Churches 5 caileth them faints, behevers, fantlified in Chrifi Jefus, and the like, which (hould we grant to mean inward true grace of regeneration, and to befpoken not of the whole body col* leclively and confufe, only, giving the denomination of the whole from the better part ; buz difirib mi vely of all and every one of them > yet nothing elfe could neceffarily be concluded from this, hut that they were fuch defaEbo and quo ad event um^vA not that they were gathered and received into the externall fdlowfhip of thefe Churches formally upon this and no other account : that they were fuch reall, internall, truely regenerate faints. The A- poftles in the place cited fpeaks not, nor intimates one word con- cerning the order of proceeding, or account whereupon the pro- ceeding was made in the vilible external! conftituting and fetting up hofe faith isjpoken of through all the World) and the Apople writes to all that are at Bc?ne y and thanks God for them aU» and made mention of them all in bis prayers. Well what hence? I cannot thinks ( faith he ) that a faith of fo high e fie em- with Paul \ and ofjuch renown through the Chriftian World, and the mater of fuch fervent Prayer fhauld mean, only a temporary faith. Why? Some of thefe were fitch as laid down their necl^for Paul, Rom. 16. 2S[jro, as \Paul caileth him ( it mould be Lion ) or hracron., or John calls all Heathen Emperours of that' place. Anfw. \ . We will not fay it is a temporary faith he fpeaks of, we grant it to be a faving perfevering faith, and for confirmation of this he might ad- ded a ftronger ground from the Text then thefe he hath chofer^ that they are all called beloved of God, and called Saints, where?. as Eftius noteth well, inteiligitur vocatio non communis & exter- na, &c. i.e. is understood, not common and outward calling, but that whereby men are effectually cajled to faith, holinefTe,and falvation, which is the calling according*to purpofe and Predeftina* tion : But now will Mr. Lockier or any. man take upon them to fay 9 that Paul mean'd that all and every one in the Vifible Church of Rome, were fuch as had not a temporary faith only, but a true fa- ving faith, and fo were all and every one fuch as were to be un- doubtedly faved. I doubt he will hazard upon this alTertion : or if he will, I doubt much ifhe (hall have any other to bear him com- pany in it. May be, he will fay, he intends not that, but this that- they were all and every one fuch, fo far as. in his judgement he could difcern \ and he was a man very able to difcern in fpirituail matters, as he faith a little before. But, 1. This is an addition to the Text, and how will .hcjprovc that it was Pauls mind to fpeak with Part J* (6-t)- Shct.V. withfuch a qualification I 2. He iuppofeth that Tar^l had ac- quaintance and experience of every one of them fufficient to difcern what they were, fo doth that he faith import, read Paul who Curdy t»m able to difcern injpiruuall matters. But this behoved to have been by converfing with them coram ; and that he con id not have, k feemeth ; * bccaufe he had not yet been at Rome to f ? ^^.. meet with every one of them there, nor is it likely that every one 4 £ or . ls x . ©f them had come from ics/7^ and met with him otherwhere, or: P. Mm. he behoved to have it by communication by Letters from every Kom - *• i\ one of them : &nd what ground of conjecture have we for this > c ^ % r $$ I think to fay it, would be accounted a Dream. As for report of m jlfi .1.1 every one of them and their ieverall evidences of grace, by others. Efti& 9 Rom. 1. We have as little ground of conjecture for that, though we t.7. iCor. find that there hes bQQn great fame of their faith in common and in l > *• generall, ven S. z. Report may be a ground of charitable beliefe (I take beleef hete in the generall logicall Signification of it, as it is contradiftinguiihed from opinion and fcience) but it cannot be a ground of a pofltive difcretive judgement, fuch as Mr. Lockier at* tributeth to Taxi touching the Romanes faith, for it implyes a mans own perfonall experience of things. 2. VVe fay the Apoftle in thefe titles of beloved of God, Saints, Beleevers,,memethttUQ. faving grace, truely exifting, and not in the judgement of charity enly : But fpeaketh there not of all the Romanes univerfi liter & 'difiributivet as we fay all men are finners, but communiter & col- lective, &confufe^ i. e. in common, collectively, and confufed~ ly ; becaufe undoubtedly faving grace was amongft them, and he could not take upon him to determine, whether moe or fewer of them were endued with it, and as it feems knew nothing to the • contrary of any of them particularly, but they might be fuch. Thus verily I think the Apoftles writing to whole Churches, and calling them generally by the name of Saints, faithfull, &c. may well be underftood 5 and no other thing can be demonftrate of their mea^ ning : Take herewith the judgement of the Learned Commenta* tors on the place,all of which do unanimoufly determine that thefe titles of Saints, faithfull, and the like, are given by the Apoftles to the Churches ; partly in refpeel: of the end of their calling, and the duty of every one ia the Churchy viz,* that the end of theii H %_ ' calling. ; Sec~*:V. (Si") 'Pa*tJ. calling, and their duty is to be fuch ; and partly by a denomina- tion taken a parte potior i, from the better part, becaufe there were true reall Saints and beleevers amongft them. And I think it is a worthy and foJide confideration, which my worthy Collegue in the Mmiftry and my Reverend Superior in the Colledge I live in hath in his due right of Presbytery, pag,2$p. in anfwer to. Mr. Cot- ton upon this fame Queftion and Argument, the ftjles given to the Church of (forinth are too high to he given to hypocrites ( fuch as many of Mr. Lockiers truely godly fo far as men can judge, may be and often are J hut the fe ftjles are not given to that Church precifelj, as Vifible, and as a prof effing Church, but as an Invi- fible, and, true £hurch of Beleevers : He Writeth to a Vifible Churchy but he doth not fpeakjjf them alwajes as a Vifible Church but as of an Invifible Vphen he caJleth them Temples of the Holy Ghoft, &c. §, 4. What we have fatd ro his alledgeance concerning the Church of Rome, is applicable to what is faid to themoft part of the reft : fo that weihail not inlift much on them. Only a word or two of fomeofthem. And 1. For the Corinthians, after he hath fee down what is fpokento them, chap, 1. verfi 2, 4, 5, 6, 7, $„ and chap. 4.15. hefubjoyneth perfons having fuch grace in them, as fbaU be confirmed to the end, as ^eepeth them waiting to the com~ ino- of the Lord fef us, as are the comfortable feals of a faithful Utyfiniftrj, that all tht4 (houldfignipe but an. outward Profeffion, or to fay that this Church Should conftitute, and Congregate to* get her upon any other account , hut as there was the true grace of God evident^ a* far as men could judge, I cannot indeed fee. <±Anfw. i. Let it be marked how in citing the place, chap, 4,15. he maketh an addition to the Text, for in Chrift Jefus I have be- gotten you all, this all is put in as the Apoftles word, when as in the Text there is no rcore but I have begotten you. This is a grofs, fouleflip, I will not fay it hath been done out of defigne, may be it hesbeen done inconilderately, without prefent turning over to the place ; however, adding to the Word of God is a dangerous practice. 2. As for that to jay that this Church did constitute and gather upon another account, &c, we have noted on it fuifici- cntly before. I adde now this, by what M r . Lockter faith here , and and indeed by the Doclrine of all the Independent Brethren' of his wayi in this mater of the conftitution of the -Vifible Church, it ap_ peareth that their conception about the order of gathering the Vifible Church by the Apoftles was this, that men being ffrft turned to the Profeflion of Chriilian Religion, there was a tryail made of their evidences of true inward faving grace, and fuch as eviden- ces fatisfaclory of this were found in, thefe were gathered in ; and the reft caften by, which I dare fay is a meer fiction, of which not the leaft veftige can be fhown in Scripture, and never man dreamed of untiil thefe fad times, broodie of many new fancies under the name of new lights, 3. I eqnfeffe perfons having fuch grace in them as (ball be confirmed to the end, as keeps them waiting; for the coming of Chrift, as are the comfortable feals of a faithful! Miniftry, are not outward Profeifours only, but are reail Saints and Elect, and thence I conclude, it cannot be underftood univer- fally of all and every one of the Vifible Church of Corinth. Will he fay that all and every one were reall Saints, Elect , to be confirmed unto the end, and fo eternally faved | if he fay, yes, in> ^Patils judgement, fo far as he could judge upon evidences of true grace. I lay, 1 . That is an addition to the Text, Pax/Smb. fimply he fhall confirm you unto the end, &c. not fofar as I can judge he fhall confirmyou. Yea, t. It enervats the comfort held forth by the Apoftleto them hefpeaks to, fork imports no more upon^ the matet\ but this, poffi^Jy ye may be confirmed to the end, and fo when all is done ye may be poflibly not confirmed to the end .* (mans judgement can go no further) and is contrary to the drain of all the Orthodox, writing againft the Remonftrants in the Ar- ticle of perfeverance, whounderftandthe place of Saints, and the Lords erTeduail gracious preferving them in veritate rei, and Co make ufe of the place, and preffe it againft the Remonftrants. But let Mr. Lockitr rid himfelf here ; if he will have Paul to fpeak thus of all and every one of the Vifible Church of Corinth, either he • muft conceive it fpoken only with relation to the ftate of that Church as its-firft upsetting : or alfo in relation to what it was at the prefent time of the Writing of this Epiftle : The former cannot be faid, becaufe its moft evident all along that Paflage, Chap. 1. he isfpeaking ofit a*ftill a as the time of his writrng^ftandingin that con- dition SlCT.V. (H) Paht.L dition he exprefTeth in his words, albeit fome of the Verbs be ufed in the preterit perfect tenfe, no man can deny this who hath any judgement. If he fay the latter, the very Epiille it felf will con- fute ic, wherein, to wit, fo grofTe wickedneiles, and impieties are difcovered to have been amcngu: them, and laid to their charge, fchifmes, contentious fuits of Law, fornications , communion and fellowfliip at Idolatrous Tables,drunkenneffe at the Sacrament of the Lords Supper, denial! of the Refurreclion. Will any man fay, that the Apoftle knowing fuch things to be amongft them, fpeaks of ail and every one of them as reail inward Saints as far as men can Judge. §«*. For the Church of the galatlans is cited, Gal. 4. 9. chap.6.i. the latter whereof is fo impertinent to the purpofe, that I wonder how it came in his minde to aliedge it . The point to be proven is, that the Church of the Galat. was conftitute of per ions all truely godly fo far as men could judge: The Apoflies meaning in this place "Is this much, if any amongft you through inhrmiry or ignorance be furprized and fall into a fault, fuch among you as are fpirituall, i.e. more advanced and confirmed in knowledge and piery, and more experimentally skilled in CLriftianky, being conic ious of your own lyableneffe to temptations, apply your (elves to recover and reftorc fuch an one with meeknede and gemlenefle.; what is this to that conclusion? If Mr. Lockier had aflayed to make up a Syilogifme upon it, for inferring that conclufion, he would, I no wayes doubt, have perceived the imperdnency of his alledging it.Neitheryetdorfi the former prove the point: for let that knowing of God, and their being known of God, be understood of reality of laving grace: Yet the fpeech is but indefinite, after ye have known God,or rather are known of GoL And every body knows, what an indefinite fpeech can bear in materia contingent e. §. 6. For the Church of Ephefus is cited, Eph. 1. 1. 13. and ABs 20. 28. 3 2. For the firfl: citation, I mean what is faid in the EpiftJe, we need fay no more then what is faid upon the Romanes and Ccrin* thians : The places are a i! alike, and the fame anfwer ferveth all. Only I will fay, I am aftonifhed that any man fhould think or fay that thcfe high Heavenly blelTings, priviiedges , and graces fpoken - of by the Apoftle to the Bphejians, as bieffed with fpirituall blef- fings Tart. I. (65) Ssct.V* fings in Heavenly places, chofen before the Foundation of the World , predeftinat to the adoption of Children , to the praife of the Glory of His Grace, accepted in the Beloved , having Redem- ption through His Blood , the forgiveneiTe of fins , obtained the inheritance, fealed with the Spirit of promife, quickned with Chrift, raifed up together with him to fit in heavenly places &c. are all by the Apoftle fpoken of and attributed to all and every one in the vifiblc focietie of the Church of Ephefusfo far as he could judge , wherein he himfelf clearly intimats there were fome (and he-fpeaks according to his own knowledge) that were given to teach other Doctrine , giving heed to fables , 1 Tim. 1 . $,4. fome that had fwerved afide to vain Jangling , defiring to be Teachers of the Law, ^-c. ^.6,7. that teached otherwife, not confentingto wholefome words, proud, knowing nothing , doting about Queftions and Strifes of words, ^.6.3,4. fome addicted to the love of Money and Covetoufneffe , v. 9, 10. driving about words to no profite, but to the fubverting of the hearers, veffels to diihonour, as vefTels-to honour, Reprobates and Caft-awayes , as well as Elect, the foundation ofthe Lord having the feal of Gods Eternal Predeftinxtion & Fore- knowledge fet upon them, 2 Tim.i^. 20, thofethatLoppofe themfelves and were to be brought with meek- ncfie unto Repentance , and recovered out of the fnare of Satan who had them captive at his will , v.i$,26. fuchas had a forme of Godiinefte but denyed the Power thereof , Mifieaders and Mif- lead , cap. 3. 6» 7. compare with v. 5.. who will dare to fay that the Apoftle writing to a Church , and giving them all thefe high (tiles and commendations , mentioned before; did intend them to all and evexy one feverally and diftributively in that Church . ? Nei- ther will it avail to fay , that this Church might been foconfcitute at fir ft , as that all the Members might been fuch as thefe ftiles might been given to them , as far as men could judge , though af- terward many of them degenerated , and diicovered themfelves. UnlelTe Mr* Lockier make it good , that fuch was the ft ate of that Church in all the Members of it , at the time of the writing of this Epiftle to the Epkefians , he alleadgetfi what is faid in it to no ef- fect for his purpofe. But it is certain that the firft Epiftle to Timo- Me was written long before it, this being written long ere lie came I to Sec*.V. (66) Pary.I. toRome y as Interpreters agree, and that being written from Rome % and that,-as moft think,in the time of his fecond imprifonment there, and fo it feemeth buc a little before the fecond to Timothie^ which was the laft of all. §7* For the other citation, ,ABs 20. 2S, 32. 1* Tie -latter verf. 3?.. any man who fees any thing , may fee it clearly- impertinent to the purpofe in hand. 2. To the other feed the Church of God which he hath pur chafed -with his otyn blood r We Anfw. That by the Church bought with the blood of Jems Chrift: , true God , is not meant the Vifible Church, as fuch , as if the meaning of the words were , bought with the blood of Chrift in the judgement of chad, tie, or fo far as men can judge , ( which is a meer addition to the Text ; ) but the Invifible Church of the Elecl , really redeemed f So do all Orthodox Divines writing againfl: Remonltrants on the Article of Redemption, expound it of the Church of the Elecl on- ly , and prefle it as an Argument againit the Remonftrants Univer- fail Redemption, and Remonltrants upon the contrare would have: it meant of the whole Vifible Church, hi?. Lochier hath given no' proof that it is fpoken of the'Vifible Church, as ? fuch; but thought it enough to point us to the place, and to fuppofe it be as he would have it. But becaufe Reverend M -. Booker in his Survey, par. 1. r. 3. pag. 39,4c alferteth the fame interpretation of the place with Mr. Lockier, againfl: my Reverend Collegue W. Rutherfurd % , and alTayes to give fome reafon for it , albeit I doubt not ere long, the Church fnxll have a fufficient anfwer from Mr. Rutherfurd himfelf , to that and other things in the Survey : Yet I muff crave humble leave of him to fay fome what to M r . Hooker in. this parti- cular , feeing itcometh fofar in my way, and otherwife , Mr. Zockjer and his followers might haply fay , I had purpofely fliun'd it. §-,. 8, The £hnrch here ( fayeth he) whether Congregational!' or 'Presbyteriall, mufl needs be vifible 1 *s€n(. That is not the queftion , nor the thing he (hould have proven j for we (hall con. feiTe the Church here fpoken of, and as fpoken of in the context, muft be vifible ; but he (hould have faid and proven the Church, here fpoken of, and faid to be bought with the blood of Chrift aaiift be the Church Vifible, and as fuch 3 confidered according to ~; " ~ "'"" " ' its PartJ. (6 7 ) Sict.V. its vifible ftate , and confequently chat the attribute of the ennncL ation is enunciat ©f all and every one in that ftate ; fee we then if the argument lie formeth maketh out this. That over whom El- ders and Officers are fit to attend to feed by Dotlrine and DifcL pline > this mufi needs be a vifible (fhurch : for unleffe they did fee them andknoty themfow could they execute cenfure uporrthem? but thefe , viz. over ¥?hom Elders and Officers are fit to ajttend and feed, See. are called the Church Redeemed with the Blood of God, The conclufion is fuppreffed but according to the terms of the premises: It can be no other then this, Ergo the Church here fpoken of muft needs be vifible. And this we may and do grant,and yet without any prejudice, or difad vantage, for that may well (land with this affertion , - that only the Elect or the Church Invillble are -intended by that name Church, when it is faid there to be bought by the blood of God. For why? becaufe the Eled or Invifible Church is vifible, i: e. perfons feen and -obvious to the outward fenfes , Phyfically vifible , and certainly Mr. Hooker fpeaks of no ^rnore in his Major and the proof thereof , unlejfethey do fee them andkyow them &c. the thing that he fhould have concluded was this Ergo , they are called , redeemed by the blood of God as the vifible Church ", or according to their Vifible Church flat e; but that will not be inferred upon his premifTes. If any man will fay, his argument may be upon the terms taken in it, mended and urged to the point thus : Thefe over whom Officers and Elders are fet,to attend and feed by Doctrine arid Difcipline, muft needs be a Vi- fible Church , and that coufidered according to its Vifible State, and as Vifible ; but thefe over whom Elders and Officers are fee , &c. are called the Church Redeemed by the Blood of God, Ergo , thefe called the Church Redeemed , &c. muft needs be a Church Vifible : and that as fuch , and confidered according to its Vifible State ; Then I fay, yet the conclufion toucheth not us., for thefe that are called the Church Redeemed , may be granted to be a Church Vnfible , and that confidered as vifible , viz,, in rela- tion to fome other adjunbl of it diftincl: from that epithet contained in the fuhject of the conclufion , vPz. the denomination of Re- deemed by the Blood of God • and this argument as thus formed carriet h no more. But y e.t if one (hall infer the conclufion thus,. I 2 E> r g°> , Sect.V. (6&) PartJ*, Ergo, thefe are called the Church Redeemed by the blood of God, as a Church Vifible,or confidered according to their VifibleChurch ftate: Then I fay this putteth the Syllogifme out of the wits and whole frame of it, takes the medium into the conclufion, for the. minus extremum or attribute of the ,- a'ffiim prion* (for the Syllo- gifme is in the third figure) and jumbles the majus extremum and minus extremum the attribute of the Major Proportion, and the attribute of the alTumption together in the attribute of the conclu- fion^ and fo makes the Syllogifm in whole, to confift of four terms* . in a word, let any man take thefe premifes of W. Hookers , mend them, flnpe, and change them as he will, he-fliallnever.be able, to infer the conclufion that fliould be inferred to his purpofe, that the Church Vifible is called the redeemed by, the blood of God, as- it is vifible, or according to its vifible ftate, . ^ But, kith he ^ if any man fay*, that the Eleft are only there, intended by that name, lanfWer, that conceit is contrary to the very ftrain of the words andfcope of the Text, for they muft attend £ ttavI* ] to the whole flockj The charge puts no difference between, perfon and perfon, nor moft their care be different ; nay upon this, ground the Elders Should not know- r tyhafctheir care Veas , nor up°~ c# whom they Should befioty it,, for they wight reply, Lord we cannot fearch into thy fecretsjwho are Eletl and Invifible Saints ,. •we cannot difcern them, and therefore we cannot tell how to feed> them ; whereas by the current -and common fenfe of the Scriptures, taking redeemed and fantlifi'ed as vijikly, though not really fuch the fir earn of the Text runneth pleafantly without the leafi appea- rance of doubt 'i Anfw. i. Reverend Mr. Hc/o^r affitmeth more: then he proves well, in calling that anfwer a conceit contrary to theftream of the words and fcope of the Text. His firft Argument comes to this much ; All thefe are of the Church, which is (aid to be redeemed by the blood of God, whom the, Elders and Officers are required to attend • But the Apoftle requires them to attend all she flock without putting difference between perfon and perfon, ergo, all the flock, i. e. every one of the Vifible Church are o: that Church which is faid to.be redeemed &c. Anf What ever might be fatdofhis Interpretation of the flock to be the Vifible Church as Vifible, wcdeny theneceflity of the Major Propofiti~ s Fart. I. (*9-> Si-cr-V* on. The flock as it is the object of the Mintfters external! charge and adminiftration of Ordinances , may be of a larger extent and eomprehenflon- then is the Signification of the Church as it ftand- eth under that attribute of being redeemed by the blood of God* And that you may fee that is not my conceit, fee it exprefly given by worthy and Learned Whittaker, inanfwerto BelUrmine prov- ing that the Church is Vifible from this very Text, 4e Ecclef q t %, c. 2. Refp- ad locum* 5. particular es Ecclefia ( fuch as was- .£- phefus % ofwhich the Apoftle is (peaking) forifti Religionempro* fitentes, dicuntur Ecclejia Synecdochic*s, propter fantlos nimi~ rum & eletlos, qui in its f tint r fed quia ¥ aft ores non pojfunt eh" Bos a reprobis difcernere^ itaque tot um -cat um paj cere , regere 9 curare deb en t, & judicium ^Deo relinquere ; where it is evident, that this Learned Author underftood, that that whole Congre- gation or flock of the Ephefians which the Paftours are required to attend, is called that Church which is redeemed , not properly, but fynecdochieally, becaufeofapart of it ; and that is in effect as much as to fay, not the whole flock, but a part of it, is the Church redeemed by the blood of God. The fecond argument t- nay upon this ground the Elders fhonld not know , dec* To fay 'it , with reverence to the memory of thenAuthor, is clear- ly to any body of common judgement, exceedingly weak ; For, i, How followeth that, if the Church redeemed by the blood of God, be the Elect only, then the Eiders fhould not, know what- their care was , nor upon whom they fhould beftow it, for it mult have this for a reafon of it, that- Church which is faid to be redeem- ed is the only ob j eel: of the Elders care, which they are required to attend. This we deny, we fay they are part of it, with Vfhit- taker. 2. How weak is that, they might reply 3 we cannot fearch into thy fecrets to perceive who are Elect— - and therefore we can- not tell how to feed them.Then it feemsby the Reverend mans rear- foning,when our Lord laid that charge upon P eterjf oh, 20 feed my Sheep, my Lambs ,whfch are no other, but thefe fame he fpeaks oH, f oh.io, 26,17 J. r redeemed vijibly^hough not realty. I doubt he can bring many paffages of Scripture, wherein it can with any appearance be fo exponed ; yea vifibly redeemed, is an expreffion in my judgement ftrange to Scripture : Let this fuffice us in anfwer to M<\ Hooker in this particular: We doubt not but Mx^Rmher^ furd, will have more full and acurate confederations on it. §. 10. I fliall adde a word or two for proofe that by the Church redeem- ed by the blood of Chrift cannot be understood all and every one of the Vifible Church, but only the Elect, defiring Mr. Lockier to take the fame to hisconfideration •, if the Church which Ephef. 5. 25, 26, 27. Chrift is faid to have loved, and given himfelf for, that he might fenctifie and cleanfe it, be not the Vifible Church,as fuch, and foall members of the Vifible Church, then neither is it fo to be taken here ; the confequence and connexion of this proportion, is necedary and clear, becaufe the attribute enunciate of it in both places is all one upon the matter j forwlmelfe is it, that Chrift loved Pa*t.I. (Jr) : Sict.V, loved the Church and gave himfelf for it, that, &c. hut that he redeemed it by his own blood ; But that, Eph, 5. by the Church is meant only the ele&, i.e. the Invifible Church, is the conftant Doclrine of all Orthodox Divines in their difputes againft the Re- monftrants univerfall Redemption, for the Redemption of the e? feci only, and likewife of all Orthodox Divines writing againft Pa- pifts, on the Queftion concerning the members of the true, Invi- fible Church, the Myfticallbody of Chrift,and alfo upon the Que- ^ T ^| c ® fiaon of the Vifibiiity of the Church: I inibnce but a teftimonie & *IqI' of one, viz. Learned JVhittaker^ deEcclef. q. 1. c±9. tert. arg. { uc h head- where you (hall find him not only affirm, but iolidely prove this Aip as has we fay, realoning thus from the place .- Chrift isrsot the Head *, a ^ u ^ 0n to c kit of that Church which he (hall fave, which he (hall prefent to l f head of fiimfeif on the day of Judgement, glorious, not having fpot or^ubody, wrinkle ; But only the predeftmate fhall be faved, Ergo, only the which hath Eled belong to the Church of Chritt, i.e. the Church mentioned 3 reall m- there ; and to Bellarmins anfwer , that Chnft is Head to that flue " ce m " Church which he (hall not fave, he faith, falfffimum ejfe 5 Read a° y 5 fo nJ that whole paragraph, and you (hall find fundry other folide Ar- h J that thQ Officers were members of the Church of Ephefm % and as &c> Chriihanswere partakers of the common Priviledges and Titles * Surgendl competent to the Vifible Church ; now if Paul (hill be conceived who , quo to fpeak, that redeemed bj the blood ofChrift (let it be out of the lf ur - 3 ^f' pofidve judgement of charity, and fo far as he could judge ) uni- l^i™ j \ verlally of all the Vifible Church of Ephefus ;. how could this con- verecUnds^ filt with what he faith , v. 30. * that he knew there was fome a- ftinam per- mongft them prefently foftering fecret and clandeftine wlckedneffe, rddcmdoMC who would afterward openly kyth, apoftatizefrom the truth, and ^7m4- fcecomefcdacers of others. Could the Apoftte have a judgement pm t, c&iv> fuch in toc t . Sxc-t.V. f'7*) Part. I, fuch as is mentioned , of fuch that they were Redeemed by \ &c. Sure , underftand the Word, v. 20. as Mr. Lockjer would, and wc fhall have clearly contradictory judgements of Paul at once : I judge the Church of Ephefus Univerfally , all and every one of you Redeemed ; and yet I know fome among you are lurking trai- tourswho will kyth afterward: he fayethnot, maybe fome of youwili, but pojitively Some o£ you. will, 5. u. For the Church of the Philippians is cited chap.i.v*-6^ani& chap^ 4. v. 15, 16. For the latter, I fee nothing in it that hath any colour of a ground for his point,nor yet doth the former liold forth i a proof of it: The Apoftle writethto all the Saints.at Philippi, and v. 6. declares the confidence that he hz&jhat Gvd who had begun ■ the workjn them would perfite it to the coming of the Lord Jefus 5 Will it follow hence that all and every one of the. Vifible Church *TM?' of 'Philippi were reall Saints fo far as man could judge, * Q-thodc* n0 L°& c k will evince this from thefe words cited : If he had taken writing a- m the 7 verfi\\e might had a fairer (hew of an argument , even as gainft the it is meet for me to thinks fo of you all , becaufe 1 have you in mf Rcmon- heart, in as much at both in my bonds and in defence and con fir map toms up* t i on o y t ^ e Q fp e i y y € a n a re partakers of my grace. Here indeed I head of acknowledge is a judgment of charity paiTed upon them all at Phi- perfeve- ^ffh' as truely gracious, and fuch as .God would perfect his Work ranee , is in , and thinks not that it can be exponed fo as to be underftood, applyed on jy of that whole Church collectively: for as it is well marked By ' °, nly *° « judicious Awefius on the place now cited , the Apoftle in this v m and true putteth in the Univerfall particle^//, which he hath not in the BeiieverSj former, wherein he expretfeth a, certain affured judgement of m the faith ( irswUf JvjbWlo , being perfwaded of this very thing ) of judgement perfeverance of thefe he fpeaks of, and therefore that being fpo- or truthof k en indefinitely, this mud be underftood univerfally of all and eve- the thing it *y one of them; it is very evident that in the^ following verf. felf. Sec where that particle is put in , though the act of judgement be lefTe tAmcf Co- intenfive , but * judgement of charity, a hoping and probable efti- ron.m, *. mat j on r anc } indeed the word is changed , it Is here pjwsft ) yet ving 2 ' this ^ W ec ^ is of larger extenfion and muft be underftood of them by folide univerfilly. Then will you Cay , do you not yeeld the point in reafons. comraverlie, toM > Lockitr. A*fw< "No wayes : .1. Remember what PartJ^ (73) Sect.V. whatwefaid; the main point which Mr. Lockier (hould have proven to make out his generall Doctrine or Thefts , was, that thefe particular Churches did gather, that is, receive inper- fonsto their vifible fociety , formally upon this account, and no othervvife , that they were truely Godly fo far as men could Judge, or as others fay in the judgement of charity ; But all that I grant here of the Church of Philippe is that they were all fuch de fall* dr quoad eventum* and no more can be proven from the Test. 2. Though this much be granted of this Church, yet his induction is not made out, no, not as to this much : Becaufe neither hath he proven 3 nor can be proven fo much of the reft of the Churches which he named : Yea this is only the Church mentioned in the Epifties that hath fo high and generall commendation as this, except it be that there is an hint of the like title given to the TheiTalonians 9 I Thejf. 5 . v. J. Te are all the Children of the light. Yet this ex- preffion is much different from that fpoken of the Philippians, and may well fuffer that expofition given of it by the Learned Nether- Dutch Interpreters in their notes, ye are all, namely all who be- leeve in Chrift. And indeed it is not likely he fhould be Interpre- ted to fpeak fo of all and every one of the members of that Church, feeing he not only intimateth in both the EpiftleSjbut in the fecond poficively atfirmeth, that he heard there were among them fome that walked diforderly, working not at all,but bufie bodies. Oh), But he bids them not keep company with them , that they may be afhamed, i. e. as fome expone it, Excommunicate and cafi: them tout of the Church. Anf. He requires not this to be done to them, but in cafe of obmnacy : Now I fuppofe they had not proven obftinate, but left that diforderly walking, in taking themfelves to work for their li- ning in fome calling, fothey would efcaped the infliction of that -cenfure ; but would that been ground fufficient prefently to hold fuch who had been fo walking before, for truely gracious fo far^s men can judge ? I doubt much if any man will ailert it. Mr. Lockier (lips the Coloffians in the proof of his indu&ion,but § lu What might been alledged of it, is alike with what was cited for the 1 Ephefians. For the Churches of the Jews,firft concerning that at Jernfahm, he referreth back to what he hath faid already out •X of Sscr.V. f74) Part.R' oftheEpinMetothe Hebrews ;. and we refer the Reader to what we anfwered thereunto. Next for them altogether he citeth, i Pet. i, a, 3. 1 Pet. 5. 13. with GaL 1. 22. And then to the iTheff. 2. 13, 14. and then addeth, the Church of the JeVvs Voerc fuch ^Profeffors, as indured perfecution^fharf try alls for the truth; and Were eminently exemplary to the World this Vady, as indeed Frofejfion did then generally expofe unto, though now net ; and f6 'voluntary frofejfion there fignified a great deal-e more than the forced Profeffion of the Gofyel^ which now we makf* under fuch powers as call for r and countenance the fe things \doth ; which Jhould be obferved^ and allowed by them ^ which compare Prof effi on then± with Profeffion now^ if they dealt equally in this Contr over fie.- Anf% 1. The Apoftle Peter clearly writeth to the Elect, truely regenerated, who have obtained the like precious faith with him^ feif, are kept by the power of God to falvation, rejoiced in the hope thereof, though they had not feen Chtift yet loved him, be- !eeving on him, rejoiced with joy urifpeakable and full of glory- already (in the firft fruits, and undoubted intereftj received the end of their faith, the falvation of their fouls. What ? Are thefe - things that ufe to be given or attributed to hypocrites (fuch as M<\ Lockiers Vifible Saints may be ) and that in fuch a pofitive way ? Of were there never a hypocrite in thefe Vifible Churches of the Jews? 2. The place of the Theffalonians fpeaks of the Churches in lud&a indefinitely and collectively, not univerfally ; faith not tfrat all and every one of them endured fuch perfecution and trialls, again, fuppofe they did fo after they were Church members, this is nothing to the point in hand ; the Queftion is upon what account they were taken in. It feemethhe faw tm\ and therefore fub* joyneth that Profeffion did then generally expofe unto fuch trlallu But undertaking of a profeffion of Religio expofing to trials,if there be not acluall aiTaulting, is no fufficient ground or evidence pofi* lively to hold a man truely gracious fo far as men can judge. 3. Such wonders and fignes as the Gofpel was accompanied with then, may be as forcible to draw men without change of heart, un- to the profeffion of it (as we fee in Simon Cfttagus) as a Magr- ftrats call and countenancing of it, when there is no fuch miracle's and fignes ; and therefore- there- is not fuch inequality between pro, feffion- Part. I. (75 ) m Sect.W fetflon then and now, nor fuch inequall dealing in comparing the one profeflion with the other as Mr. Lockier imagines. After this induction neither full in the enumeration ( for there § r l he other Churches in the New Teft. mentioned befide thefe, as the Churches of Ajia , befide Ephefus , Rev. 2. and 3. which I think fee did forbear to bring in his induction , becaufe their cafe would fpoken ted clear againft his undertaking,) nor made good In the par- ticulars , as to the thing affirmed of them, he formeth an ob/eclion at his own pleafure againft himfelf , and aflfayes to anfwer it $ Lee usconfiderboth, If it be ob jetted ( fay eth he ) that there Were wicked perfons in § • « 4- thefe Churches , therefore we may conftitute Churches noVpin the dajes of the Gojp el With good and bad , with truely good and feem- inglj goody fuch as ma^e onely a profejfion, thoughwe know no- thing of the power of Religion in them. To this I Anfw. u Will you with Anabaptifls have the Church under the New Teftament conftitute onely with truely good, and not at all with feemingly good } this indeed is your frequently repeated aflertion in this le- cture ; But firft , 'tis contrare to the exprelTe judgement of fome of the molt judicious and advifed of your own fide, how often hath M r . Hooker this, that thefe of whom the Church is conftitute may be feemingly good , notfavingly, not really } gilt not gold, Saints in trie judgement of charity though they be notinwardly fan&ified, 2. Jt contradids himfelf in his additional! qualification , which fometimes he inferteth as farreat lea ft as men can judge. Well then, a Church Vifible now in the dayes of the Gofpel may be con- - fhtute of any who are truely good as far as men can judge, but ma- ny fuch are but feemingly good , and really bad ; for mans judge- ment cannot difcern the power of Religion in the heart , neither intuitively^ nor yet by difcourfe from outward dfecls infallibly, but only probably , cui judicio porefi fubejfe fal/um , it may be deceived and the object of it is but w/oy.wv U h /£*« which feerru eth but is not alwayes what it is judged to bel 2. We forme not our objection fo naked and waterifhly as you make it , there were, wicked perfons in thefe Churches , therefore, &c. But take it thus and anfwer it then : In thefe Churches , at leaft feverafls of them, .there were perfons, whofewayes were foch that they could" nor K 2 positively i pofitively be accounted Co far as men could Judge, truely gracious fuch as God could bear witnes to asfealed for his by his holy Spirit* and the Churches are not required to un-.Church and Excommu- nicate any upon that account , that they were not fuch , as might befo accounted and judged of, &c. Ergo,&c. But this is not theonely objection we have againft thisindu&ive argument,he may, find fome others before this. Now to his anfwer. §.tf. *• Sayethhe, a faSio ad jus nonvalct argununtum , becaufe fuch things are, therefore thej ought to be, Vcill not hold, BcCsufe bad men Xvere ifathe Churches, the generall /late of Vehich in inch a time of the world, John jpeaks of Rev. u. I, 2. therefore they fhouldbe there , will not follow ; for then why is John bid cafl out that which is Without , and not meafure it ^ what is allowed to a~ bide , is rather the Index , Jhe^cing what k the allowed and proper matter , the true conftitutio n of Church- ft ate. AnfVv. Here are a heap of things to be noted. 1. If that maxime hold good i fatlo adj us non valet argument urn, becaufe fuch things are there* fore they ought to be , will not hold ;. then Mr. Lockjer, your in- ductive argument for any thing alleadged in it falls to the ground without force ; for all that you have alledged in it is a mater of fad; and therefore I may retort upon you thus s Becaufe thefe Churches did confift ofperfons truely good fo far as men could judge ( which is the only thing you can alledge from what is faid in the Epiftles to them, and yet proves not ) therefore they fhould confift of fuch only, and no other, will not follow. 2. You whol- ly loofe your Argument taken from them again if you grant but: that de faclo there were other. perfons in them then truely godly as far as men could judge, at that time when the Epiftles were writ- ten to them. For unlelTe you aiTert that at that time they were Gonftitute ofperfons all fuch, you alledge the Epiftles to no purpofe t> becaufe the Epiftles fpeaks to them with relation to that very time they were written in. 3. Itisrafhlie and ineoniideratlie faid by Mr.. Lockjer, without exception, limitation, or qualification, (e* fpecially he being now fpeaking of maters of Religion) a faclo ad jus non valet Argumemum, why, then let all Arguments which Orthodox Writers have brought from the practice of the Apoftles ^aad Primitive Churches regiftrate in Scripture to prove they ought Part J. (77) Sict.V* ought^;^fotodo, as in the mater of fanclifynig tSe firft day of the Week as the Chriftian Sabbath, and many others in other matters, be caften as null. If Mr. Lock&er fay cms, he (hall gratifie much the Papifts for their Dodriae oftheneceffity of un- written traditions ; but (hall be difclaimed in this by all Proteftant, Divines, who give us fundry cafes in matters of Religion, wherein* it is good and foiide reafoning from fads and pradifes regiftrate in ~ Scripture, to duty; fofuch perfonsdid, and therefore fo oughe we to do; especially in matters of Church Government hath this- way of reafoning place ; the Lord having left many things belong- ing thereunto, only in examples of pradifes ( let the Reader fee concerning this purpofethe Authors of/ w divinum of Church-Go- vernment,/^*-. 1. cap. 4J from which we are to gather and take our rule : Now amongft other rules belonging to this head, this certainly is one, what was the pradice of Primitive Churches, re- giftrate in Scripture, in maters of Religion, of common concern- ment to the Churches in all ages, and is not diilallowed nor diilap- proven in them, elpecially when many other things are reproved in them, nor is againft a general! precept otherwhere in Scripture; (uch a pradice hath the force of a rule •. and we may well reafon *b h'ocfatfo ad]Ui. See r Perkjns y Heb-u. 6. fag. in fol. 29; col. 1 . A, fo they did , therefore fo may we lawfully. But I aiTume, thefe Primitive Churches, admitted and retained mem- bers, all of which were not truely Godly and Saints as far as men could judge , and were not reproved for this , even when they were reproved for other things done by them ; Nor can their be a generall precept fhewn in the word contrary there- unto , Ergo y &c. 4. What may feem to be aliedged by hkn> from Rev. ii. 2. as containing fuch a generall precept, is fuffici- ently difculTed before. The intention and fcope of that place is not to hold forth a rule concerning the ordering of the conftitution of the Church , but to foretell an event that was to come to paffe upon the Church in time of Antichrifts prevalence j that Which if without fignifieth not perfons, but the face & outward frate of the Yifible Chufch y and caftingom is not un-Churching of perfons, but judicial giving up the outward Rate of the Vifible Church to Anti- chrift and his followers , and by meafming there- is not meant re- K f, ' gulating Sb-ct.V. (7$) Part,! gulating of the confUtution of a Society , but a typicail predicli- on of the ftraitnefle that Orthodox and Godly Worfhippers were to be at that time redacted unto. 5. But what meaneth Mr. Loc- kjer , when being about to infringe the objection brought againft his induction of thefe Churches , (viz. that there were wicked perfons in them ) and faying that becaufe bad men were in-the Churches it doth not follow } therefore they (hould be in them he cafteth in that , the gener all eft ate of which in fuch a time vf the World John fpeakjth^ Rev- 11.1,2. what meaneth he > I fay, by fuch a time of the World wherein the generall ftate of the Churches were fuch ? if he mean that time wherein the E'piftles were written to the Churches. 1. That paiTage of the Rev e la* tion is impertinently alledged; for, be the meaning of it what it will , itfpeaks in relation to another time, long afterward to come. 2. It is certain 'tis the alledgeance in his own induction that thefe Epiftles importe that then they were all; conftitute of true. ly good ones fo far as men could judge , If he mean another time then thatjhe fpeaks this as impertinently; for the objection fpeaks of thefe Churches in relation to the time when the Epiftles were written to them. zly> Saith he in his anfwer, Churches may he negligent^ and not foftriB to their rule to examine and prove the grace of God in fuch ai offer to joy n themf elves , as the Church of ferufalem did, 'if Churches do not mind diligently their rule f they may have evil ferfons' among them enough) and yet not be able to maintain that it (hould be fo \ 'tis like the aAfian Churches^ and mo ft -of the fir ft quickly after the zApoftles time grew faulty in this kind. Anf. 1. Reader, fee here pretty Logick: Mr. Lockjer inhis induction undertook to prove and conclude a rule from the examples of thefe particular Churches, that becaufe thefe particular Churches were conftitute of perfons truely good, therefore all Churches ought to be conftitute only of fuch perfons ; it is objected, there were many other perfons then fuch, in thefe Churches ; and now he anfwe- reth. Churches ( he muft apply it to thefe Churches, elfe he is extra eleas) may be negligent and not fo itrict to their rule ; is not this a running in a round ? Thefe Churches were conftitute of fuch members, £rgo, fo ought all Churches generally to be, if they were <& T ( 19) Sect.Y* wereVo'nftitute of any other, it was becaufe they were not ftria to their rule, i.e. in plain Language, becaufe they Were not conf- ute as Churches ought to be *. Butlet goth.s, and the .ndu- dive Argument ;- for it is clearly quite here, and refuge had to the senetall rule; I fay where is that rule of examimng and proving Race of God infach as offer themfelvesto joyn,that they were not fo ftria to as they fhould ? And where have we an inftance of the Chnrch of Jerujalems greater ftnftneffe to -that- rule then thefe other Churches? Thus to fet down naked affert.ons is.c not to defpife hearers and Readers? 3. To what purpofe do ye feeak of the Churches of Afia, and other ^ftChurchei i their pra- ctice after the Apoftles time? The objea.on ein the world. For fuppofe a, Church confifting of members all which may be accounted trueiy gracious fo far as men can judge $ yet feeing mens judgements here- in are not infallible 5 fomeofthem, many of them, yea moft of *them, are notindeed trueiy gracious and believers ; Then fay. I, according to Mr. Z^^r/reafoning here^ how can thefe bear and hold upon Chrift who have no faith ? And how can that building -ftand Wihofe materials have not a fymmetrie, &c. Let-men judge of them what they will, and how probably foever , that helps not; for they want the bond by which they {houid bear upon Chrift, and they have no fymmetrie one with another. 2. *Tis grounded upon a meer tniftake or falfe fuppofition that the building built upon Chrift at a Rock and foundation, Eph. 2.20, 21. is the Vilible Church as fuch : Ms. Lockjer faith well, that itisconfelTed on all hands, that Chrift is the Rock and foundation-Rone ; but he could not (ay it is agreed upon by all that the Church Vifible is the buil- ding that is faid to be built upon that foundation growing up into a holy Temple, &c. Papifts indeed fay it is the Vifible Church* that TaKvX . (85) 5fiCT-VL that they may draw all the priviledges of the Church Invifible/ which is the Myfticall body of Chrift, to the Church vifible : and by that means at leaft to their own ftinkisg whore the Antichrifti- an Roman Synagogue : But Orthodoxltoteftant Divines have e, ver maintained the contrary , that it is the Catholick Invifible Church of the elefl that is the building built upon Chrift as the Rock and foundation Itone (fee whittak^r de Ecclef. in many places known to any that hath read him) untill of late Separatifts and Independents have joyned with Papifts in this, and drawn ail the priviledges , proper to the Church Invifible, which Is the Myfticall body of Chrift, unto every Independent vifible Congre. gation. Mr, Lockier fhould have proven, and not meerly taken for granted, that tire Vifible^ Church is the building built upon Chrift as the foundation-ftone, feeing he knew that it was denyed generally by Proteftant Divines. The Vifible Church , according to its vifible ftate is not the building, but the worLhoufe wherein the ftones are fitted for to be laid in the building and built up. 5. Mr. Lockier fuppofeth in this Argument that the Vifible Churchy *. e* a particular Independent Congregation muft be a ftanding/aft. iafting houfe, quae non deficiat^ which is not to fail,and that perpe- tuity is the priviiedge*and property of it, in this alio joyning with Papifts, again^l whom all Proteftant Divines maintain that to be- long only to the Church of the eiecl:, or if to the Ghurch Vifible, not to any particular, but to the univerfall. We grant then that any Church Vifible is defectibie and may indeed fall, and that even upon that ground amongft others that there is not an uniformity and homogeneoufneffe amongft all parts of k, fome are of the feed of the Woman, really good 5 fome be,at the beft, feemingly good, and really bad, arid the feed of the 'Serpent (and Mr. Loekjers way will not make it to be otherwayes ) and we confeflfe that it is by the finger of God, that any Chu«j|h is any long fpace kept (lan- ding: Yet Godwill keep Vidble Cnurches (landing, for all the afymmetry and heterogeneoufneffe of members amongftthemfelves (as to their inward , fpirituall , eternall ftate ) fo long as he has a work for -gathering and building up his elect amongft them , for whofe fake it is that a Vifible Church andhis Ordinances therein are ftt up. You will fay t but doth not God this by means ? zAnf; Yea Sect.VI. (86) PartL yea verily he ufeth means which he bieffeth and maketh effecluall for that end, to the keeping down of the eviiis that are in many and would be ready to break out to the undoeing of all, as long as he fees meet} as the Preaching of the Word, exereife of Diicipline againft fcandals ; but Cod never prefcribed this as a means for keep- ing up Vifibie Churches that no perfons fhould be admitted or per- mitted to be in the Vifibie Church, but fuch as are fymmetricaU and homogeneall in true faving grace. This is a means altogether unpraclicable by men, unleffe God by an immediat revelation, (hould point out the men. §• 3 • Mr. Lockier for the ftrengthning of this firfl: reafon bringeth in ; i (for. 3. from verf 10. thus : (fhrift ( &yeth he , it ihould be Paul) doth argue from this medium ,,, that fuit able to the founda- tion Jhould be the building : otherwife fuch uncongruom l fuperfiru- Elions Veill be fired and they which make them , verf. io, u, 12, 13.— -in which' words the Apvfi I e argues as I do, that if Chriff be laid as the Foundations Stone in a building , 'tis good for men to take heed that they mak£ congruous fuperftru&ions, leafi all the building fall about their ears : and fee hu\V he apply eth this verf. 1 6,, 1 7- incongruous f up erfkrullions if it be in point of _ Do~ Urine , it maheth incongruous matter , it dt filet h th/ Temple of Cjody deftrojes it, fay eth the margent ; and fuch \H// Goddeftroyy .-, , for the Temple of god ( fayeth he ) is holy, vehichT emple y e are^ t i.e. fuch are the Temple which are holy y . which have the Spirit of God duelling in their hearty and none elfe, Anf I, ( I profeiTe I cannot forbear to fay that I find Mr. Lochier abufe much Scripture in, the little bounds of this Peece , by moft impertinent Citations. What is there in this place to the purpofe of the conftitution of the Vifibie Church as to its matter or Members? the Apoftie here ver. 10, 11,12,13,14, 1 J* is fpeakingof Doclrines fundamental! and fuperftrucled , and that thefe ought to be fuitable and agree- able to th'at, what is this to me mater of the Vifibie Church ? Ay, Yes, by Analogie would he fay firfl , becaufe the Apoftie ufeth the fame medium and argues as I do , that if Chrift be layed as a foun« dation, &c. Anf. Andmuft that hold Univerfallie I becaufe one ufing a medium in one mater reafons truelie and folidlie, there- fore another ufing that medium in another mater and reafoning » that PART,!. (8?) / SSCT.VL that fame way for forme, muft alio reaioir truelie and foiideke ? What if this other erre in the application of the medium , and if fomeof his premiflerand principles, whereof his argument confifts, befalfe upon the matter? fo it is here: The Apoftle reafonetli well and concludently upon that principle,that the fuperftructure fhouldbe fuitable to the foundation that Teachers fhould take heed what Doctrines they teach in the Church ; Becaufe he aflum- eth well that Chrift or the Doctrine of Chrift is the foundation- point of Doctrine in Religion , and all other Doctrines are the fu- perftructures; But Mr. Lockier aflumeth amille that the Vifible Church as fuch, is the fuperltructure built upon Ghrift as the Foundation. The Scripture fayeth no where fo, a Vifible Church- ftate » or to be received unto , or to be in the Vifible Church ftate, is not to be built on Ghrift as a Foundation , but is to be taken in under , or to be under the means of being built, either firft or in a further degree of advancement , on Chrift as a Foundation. But further ( fayeth he ) fee hoty-he apply es this^ ver. 1 6$?. incongru- ous fziperfiruBions , if in point of DoSlrine , &C. jlnf This is fomewhat fpoken in themift, but for ought I can conjecture oc conceive 5 the meaning feemeth to be this ; that wrong Doctrines taught-in the Church makes perfons unholy, and fo unfit mater for the Church toconfift of; and fo deftroyes or defiles the Temple of God, which is , as he conceiveth, the Vifible Church. And thus he will have the Apoftle, v. 16, iy. to apply that which he had been fpeaking in the preceeding verfes. Now if this be not a forceing of thepurpofe and meaning of thefe two verfes , let any underftanding man in the Chriftian World judge. The plain, ge- nuine intention and purpofe of the Apoftle in thefe verfes is, to warne and dehort the Corinthians -from defiling and laying wafte :the Church, either by corrupt, idle, or curious Doctrine not 'fuitable to the foundation Chrift; or by Schifrnaticail addicting themfelvestothisor that man who were teachers among them ( which was the purpofe whereupon he began this difcourfe , ^.4.) or both; and-that upon thefe three grounds. i.Thecbnfideration of the dignity they were advanced to, that they were the Temple of God, consecrated by the indwelling Spirit to him, 2. That fuch things did defile, and lay them watte. 3. That God would ieverly Sscr.VL (.ftg ; Part. I; fevedy puniih luch as any wayes defiled and deftroyed them that were a Temple confecrated to him. Ay but,, 3 . Saith he, it m added., for the Temple of God is holj, which Temple je are, i,e± fuch are the Temple of God which are holy^ which hath the Spirit of *God dwelling in their hearts, and none elfe. Anf.i. Mr. Loc<* kler then conceiveth that thefe words are brought in as a reafor* - why he that teacheth wrong or incongruous DocTrines defiles or deftroyes the Temple of God : To this fenfe, the Vifible Church confifts of fuch as are holy, and hes the Spirit dwelling, in them and none elfe, therefore men by teaching incongruous Dodrine , ma- king men in the Church.incongruous mater, u e .unholy, deftroyes the Temple, i.e. the Vifible Church. A,meer forgerie com trary to clear fhining evidence of the Apoftlescontext,wherein any man thatis not blind may fee that thefe words -for the Temple of Godishdy, are given as a reafon why thefe that defile the Temple willbefeverlypumfhedofGod ; the reafqn ofavhich confequencs clearly intimate in the words is, becaufe God will not indure the* defiling or violating of that which is holy and confecrate to himfelf. *Mmyr in 2. True indeed, fuch are the Temple of God which are holy and loc.non fo- none c jf e p So Mr. Lockjer fuppofethjbut without reafon or proof. lumfidelium ^^ t he ^Apoftle borroweth this denomination from the typicali , TufEcclefid Temple of Jemfalem, but that was no type of a Vifible Churchy AmuiYjem* but of Chrifts Myfticail body and every member thereof. And flumVddi- hence I reafon thus, the denomination of the, Temple of God is mur 5 fed fuch as is competent to, and preditable of thefe to whom it is attri* - umifaiufquc but^ not only collectively, i. e. to the whole fociety of them 3 • hchritutm ^ yut a ^° unt0 ever y one Severally * : But if it be taken for the Vil I reperhur ha fible Church it could not be attributed to every member thereof:. cogiwmina- Every one in it is not a Vifible Church. 3. If fuch only be the m ; "*m Temple of God in Mr. Itockjers fenfe, i.e. a Vifible Church, which Pfi'*^* are holy and has the Spirit of God dwelling in their hearts and ^c;/^!^p^ol none elfe 5 he may feek fuch a Vifihle Church in the new. world of %s fcap.6.) the Moon*. corpus cu- in the end of this paragraph he prompts us another Argument r 4que ere- equivalent to this firft,from this that -drift is called the Head, and i™\™£ the Church the Body: In formitmuft ftand thus: If Chrift be ITnSdTtfL the Headjthere muft be an homogenealneffc in the Church to him , , he ■Part. I. ( %9 ) Sect.VL lie meaneth they muft be truely gracious, and endued with true faving faith ; But Chrift \s the Head, and the Vifibie Church his Body. Therefore, &c. The reafon of the connexion of the firft Propofition is, beeaufe elfe there can be no mutual! derivation from one to* another. *Anf. i. Protectant Divines will with one con- fent deny your aftumption as PopiCh, and tell you that it is the Church of the Elect that is the Body ofGhrift the Head. See but Whituhr de Eccfef. f, i.r. 13. p(gAA9* '^ foL Yet. 2. For more clear and particular anfwer we are to cenfider,that Chrift may be faid to be the Head, and the Church his body, either in a poli- tical/ fenfe, as a King is called the Head of the Common- wealth, and the People are called his Body ; Or (to fpeak (o) in a phjfi- call fenfe according to the fimilitude of mans body.^ow we grant that Chrift is a Head to the Vifibie Church, and the Vifibie Church bath unto him the relation of a body in the former fenfe, Chrift is a King of the Vifibie Church, and the Vifibie Church is his poii- ttcall Body : But hence it followeth not tliat there mult be fuch a homogenealneiTe in the Church Vifibie as Mr. Lockjer meaneth, that it be endued with true faith and have the Spirit dwelling in their hearts. And as to the reafon of the connexion of the propo- fition, we anfwer, fuch a homogenealneiTe is not requifite for fuch a derivation, as is from a head political! to its political! body ; this derivation being only morall, by commands, prohibitions and the like morall actings. But Chrift is not a Head in the latter fenfe, (as the head in the naturall body is) to the'Church Vifibie as fiich; nor is the Vifibie Church a body to him in this fenfe, but only vo- cation e aEtiv a and in externall profeftion : Neither is that deriva- tion from Chrift unto the Church, whereby it groweth up in the Lord, unto the Church as a Vifibie Church, or confidered accor- ding to its vifibie conftitution ; But unto the Church Invifible, in- ternal^ Mylticallasfuch. • -His 2<$. Reafon is thus fhorth'e. If the Vifibie Church be the §. ^ Church of the ' Living God y the pilar and fay of truth , andconfe- quently fuch as fhouldbear up the truth into the World, . and be a flay to truth holding it out fir ml J a'nd faithfully in the midft of all try alls 3 and fuch as in which Godlivesi and dwells, and walk*» 'Then none can be mater &r members of the Vifibie Church, but real M Saints. Sect.VI. (9o) Part J. Saints. For tyhy I Doth God live and dwell in dead p erf on s, who only make a Profejfion of Religion f Will fuch perfons be a fray to truth and the things of God ? will they be a ft ay to truth i£&ia[/.(L . firmamenium, as the firmament to the ftars, who fall from Heaven themfelves! Andfo how can God have glory in the Church through^ out all ages. But the Vifible Church is the (fhurch of the Living God, the pillar and ground of truth, 1 Tim. 3. 5. in which GodL lives, dwells, walks, Ergo, &c. Anf. M% Lockjtr fUll in tbis 3 as in all his other Arguments,, fhews that in propounding his Do- clrine, he added that qualification truely graci&wfofar 04 men can judge, but diciscaufa, and in £hew 3 to avoid for a while the: odium of the greateft Anabaptifts Tenent,of the mater or members . of the Vifible Church. Vox fuch as may be gracious and Godly fo farasmejican^Jtfd^e, mens judgement being not infallible in this (as himfelf confefTeth) may be destitute of the power of Godlines in their hearts, and i'o fuch as will not hold out truth firmly in the midft of all trials, may be but dead perfons, and fo fuch as in whom God doth not live, walk and dwell, 2, As to that firft property and characler attributed to a Vifible Church from, 1 Tim. 3.15. by Mr . Lockjer : Firft, I would aske hm if in good earneft he meaneththattobea property of a Vifible Church rightly confti- tute in its mater ? as it fhould be, that it will bear up the truth and things of God firmly and faithfully to the world in the midft of all trials ? Sure, this is the very thing that Papifis alledge from this- place for the unerrabilitie and indefedibilitie of the Vifible Church: againft which all Proteltant Divines difputes. Yea it is much more, for Papifts attribute this only to the Catholick Church Vifible, acknowledging that ail particular Vifible Churches may erre and make defection, and let the truth and things of God fall down 3 excepting only the Roman Church, becaufe they make it to be the Catholick Church virtually: but Mr. Lockier acknowledges no Church Vifible, but an Independent Congregation, and wilt have this to be the property of any particular Vifible Church, and therefore propounds the fubjecl of his conclusion here thus, a Church Vifible, i. e. any Vifible Church ; now Jet me put him further to it ; either there was never a Church Vifible rightly con- stitute format^ from the beginning, feeing all the firft conftitute Churches Part. I. ( 9 J ) . Sect .VI. Churches have made defection and kt truth fall down, which if he fay, befidesthat itisabfurdin itfelf, I ask why then did he a little before bring us paterns of right conllitute Churches from thefe firft mentioned in Scripture? Or if they were right conftitute, how comes it that they made defection and did not bear up and hold out the truth and things of God, but did let them fall ? If he anfwer, that came to palTe, becaufe they kept not a right con- stitution for their mater. I repone, that taks not away the force of the Queftion, For that fame if it was fo was a not bearing up and holding out firmly and faithfully the things of God, and fo the Queftionreturneth upon this. 2. But to anfwer directly to the place ; though Interpreters have fome variety amongft themfelves about the meaning of it : Yet never one of them acknowledges that Interpretation which Mx. Lockler gives, but oppofeth it, and refuteth it in Papifts : Some indeed expone the attribute the pilar and ground of trmh much as he doth ; but thefe by the Church to which it is attributed, underftand not the Vifible Church, but the Invifible of Elect. So Whittaker de Ecclef. q. i.e. 2- ilia quidem Ecclefia qu*g. 244, 245. where you have an excellent difcourfe "t, before" of the diverfe Orthodox Interpretations thereof, both ancient and but that * moderne Divines. which fol- Forthe 2^. property and chara^er out of the 2 Cor. 6. i6\ We Ioweth. \tAnft With all Proteftant Divines, that it is not the Vifible, but § ' 6 ' M 2 the Sect. VI. (£2) J?artI1, SttiVbhtA. the Invifible Church,that is the Temple of the living God in which \ti yde Lc- j^ e Jiveth, dwelleth, and walketh. To omit many other Argu- /ce M' lc,lU ments for proof of this, take bux this one from the Text, the ff^l 4 ** Temple of the Living Qod, in this place, is taken in fuch a fenfe,, as that it is fpoken and predicated of lingular perfons, federally , as well as collectively and joy ntly; But if it fignifiethe Vifible Church it cannot be predicated of every one of the perfons feverally ; each perfon is not a Temple in this fenfe, a Vifible Church, Ergo, &c Obj. But.the Apoftle is fpeaking here to the Vifible Church of Corinth, *Anf True, but every thing he fpeaketh of them, is not for that, competent to them as a Vifible Church. § 7» I cannot but wonder much at that wherewith Mr. Lacker clef- eth this reaforf, and fa how canGod have glory in the Church throughout all ages > Eph. 3.21. Anf. And doth continuatioa of the Glory of God in the Church throughout all ages,, depend upon his particular way of configuring particular Vilible Congres gations of all true Saints^ andaparticular Congregations firmnefle, and conftancy in. holding out the.truth ? Hes God then not beea glorified in the Church throughoi&t the many preceeding generati- ons, wherein there was never hearf of Churches fo constitute, un-i till of yefterday Separates and Independents erected theirs ? And yet wailethem as well as they will they (hall never get one fuch as Mr Lockjer would be at in this Argument. And how many, particular Churches have fallen aw-ay, and for their part .letter* $ruth fall 'h s. £ The 3 J Argument grounded on LMalacbi 1. 11, rauft be thus:. If the mater of a Vifible Church be not perfons truly Gohly^ then there cannot be offered up in Gods houfe a pure offerings and the. Churches of the Gentiles cannot fulfill that Trophejie, LMal. I. If* For why t Vntojhe impure andunbeleeving all things are fo ; e- very mans offering is as he is, let his offering be \X>hat it Vpifr, let a man make up his offering of never fo much c oft l and worth, yet it isftill in the account of God as the man is \ if the man be impure fo is his offering ; But it- is contrary to that Prophejie to fay the latter, Ergo. Sec* Anf. Mr. Lockjer himfelf will not be able to avoyd the ftroak of this Argument ; no, not by his own way, as fome sijnes he expreffeth it, > for thereby all fuch as may be accounted truJy PartX, (93) Secv.VL truely godly fo far as men can judge are to be acknowledged and admitted as mater ofa Vifible Church; now many of thefe may be, and undoubtedly are really impure and unbeleeving, and fo of neceflltymuft their offering be impure. Ifkbefaid, yet it is no t the fault of the admitters that they do fb. Anf. That's nothing; to the purpofe, for whether they be faulty or not, ftill it fhndetR good, that by that way it cannot be avoyded but impure and unbe, leeving will be inthe Vifible Churcht uich as cannot offer a pure, offering. 2. It reproacheth the difpenfation and wifdome of the bleffed Lord God himfelf, becaufe he hes not left in his Word a rule and way whereby the Church Vifible may be conftkute fo as that Prophefieand his decree revealed therein concerning his fer~ vice among the Gentiles may be fulfilled, for he hes given no rule whereby the Church Vifibie may be gotten, fo conftitute as that, all the mater thereof fhill be perfonstrueiy Godly; But there may be and cannot but be, in it many impure and unbeleeving who can- not offer a pure offering. But 3 To anfwer direclly, we deny the connexion or confequence of the firft proportion; 'tis groun- ded upon a falfe fuppofition^ that there can be no pure offering in. the Church, unleffe all the mater, that is, members of the Vifible Church,, be truly godly, WhatPmay there not be a pure offe- ring to God in the Church, and fo that Prophefie be fulfilled of the Churhes of the Gentiles, iffomeinthe Churches Vifible be . truely Godly, though all be not fuch . ? Therefore he takes paines without neceHIty to prove that impureand unbeieevers cannot of-* ferapure offering-, that we grant ( I mean not. this materially and objectively, for fo an impure man may offer a pure* offering ) he fhoujd have proven to make his confequence good, that if all the mater be not fuch as cannot offer a pure offering there can be no pm^e offering in the Church at.all. If M^.Lockjsr (ay: here, that not only the offering of the unbeleeving and impure themfeives, but alfo the offering of all.that are in the Vifible Church- Commu- nion with them, is impure ; This is plain and down right Separa. tifm, and is difclaimed of all the pious and learned amongll: the In- dependents, -at leaftiff dorrmte, and is moflcontrary to the Word of God; los SjictVVL ; ' T may be, is fpoken to all and every one; Rut what is fpoken of by way of aflertion , .as a priviledge or bleflmg exifting , it is not fpoken Uni- verfally of all and every on in their vifible focietie; But indefinitely, which may be verified though it be competent but to fome among them ; Yea, though it were fpoken Univerfally of them all ; Yet it would only prove what they were de faBo and quoad eventtm^ and not what their Vifible Church ought to have been bynecefli- ty of a command , that it might be a right conititute Vifible Church. s \o. ^he f° urt h feafon mud be formed either of thefe ways: 1. Thus : if the Jews be to be provoked by the glory and purity of his Woifhiip and Worfhippers , then a Vifible Church , i. e, eyery Vifible Church ought to be conftkute of fuch matter , i, e. Mem- bers, Part.!. (95 J Sicf.Vh hers, as are all truely Godly; Buc the former is true, ■..E^,&c. and if thus, then we deny the connexion or confequenceof che fiift Propofition y And my reafon , for the denyall thereof is this : Be* caufe I may fay> if the Churches Vifible be defatlo fuch that all or molt part of their Members be truely Godly , and Alining .in the Power of GodlinefTe , at the time wherein God hath decreed to brintf in the Jews , that will be fufficienc for provoking the jews, although it be not constitute by a Rule or Precept that che Church in admitting Members into externall^hurch- fellowship , admit none but thofe that are truely Godly. And why may we not fay, that the Lord will at fome time , for carrying on a defign decreed byhimfelf in the way of the difpenfation of his efficacious Grace, make his Vifible Church, at leaft in mod part, the Members there- of, better as to the reality and Power of Religion , then he re- quires them to be by way of Rule, relating to Ecclefiaftick procee- ding with Perlbns in admicing them to externall Viilbte Church* communion. In a word, the futurition of the provocation of the Tews by the Power of GodlinefTe in Gentile Profe (Tours, pro vet h only , that God is to make the Gentile Profeflburs- fiich de fatlo , or at moft, what they ought to be in point of their duty, for ferving and glorifying God : But proves not that they ought to be fuch in point of qualification inforo exteriori Ec-clejia and iti relation to admilTion to the externall fociety of the Vifible, Church. Or, Secondly, It maybe formed thus 5 If the Jews (hall be § tI# provoked to turn unto the Lord , and imbrace Chriftian Religion,, by the glory and purity of his Worftiip and Worfhippers, then the Viiible Church or Churches f ufe which ye- wilt now) (hall be conftitute or confift of fuch as are truely Godly t But the former is true, Ergojihe latter alfo. And I anfwer : 1 . Suppofe the con- fequent be granted in as large an untverfality as it can be taken in i Yetk fpeaks nothing to the Queftion in hand. Why? Becaule only of what is to be de faBo & quoad event am , by difpenfation of erTecluall Grace in the Vifible Church 5 And not what ought to be , by rule , -of necefficy, that the Church Vifible may be rightly conftitute in its Vifible Church-ftate; and the Queftion is about this latter, not that former ; And difpenfations of effeduail Grace are not our rule in this, 2. Nor yet doth it follow of .neceffity, that Ecr.VL (9#) Part^I, that even de facto the Chiirch Vifible (hall be fo conftitute , as to its matter in every difference of time , but only that it (hall be ac that time that the Jews are to be brought in and converted to the Chriftian Faith, Yea* nor doeth it fellow that defaBo even at that time the Church Vifible (hall be fo conftitute in its mater, that ail and every Member thereof (hail be truely Godly and (hining in the manifeitations of Purity and the Power of GodlinefTe 5 but that fo.it- (hall be for the moll: part , and commonly -in the Vifible Church. I acknowledge that #meansof awaking up the Jews to come unto,and imbrace the Chriftian Reiigiosi,will be a more glorious& full Reformation of Chtiftians, both 'm point of Worftiip and in point of convention : Now Superftition and Antichriftian Idolatry amongft thofe that^are called Chriftians (which are thefe they on- ly fee for the moft part J is a ftumbling^block to them that ly in their way at this day and I will not fay,, but the impurity and unrighteoufneffe of Chriftians is alfo a Humbling block tothercn Albeit I think they do not fo much (tumble at this as at the former, confidering that , which is well known in the places where they live, how much notour and known unrigbteoufnetfe is amongft them generally, being for the moft part moft covetous , exorbi- tant ufurers, cheaters, &c. moft evidently, thedeadeft, formall, flight in performance of their way of Worfhip ( as mine eyes have been witneflfes ) of any people in the World. Yet I fay ^ I will not deny that this may (tumble them,and they, may be,do pretend it alfo • Therefore Babylon the Mother of fornications muft,and will down > And the Princes of the earth that have given up their power to that Whoore,will hate her & burn her rlefti with firejand the Lord will purge and reforme his Worftiip, and Ordinances, and the Chriftian World from Superftition and Idolatry : And! believe alfo that their is a time coming when there (hall bealfoa more general and (hining Reformation of the lives of Chriftians;& that both thefe (hall concur as means to provock the Jews, to fall in love with the Chriftian Religion , and to feek unto Jefus Chrift ; Eue that all and every Profoflbur in the Vifible Church (hall be truely Godly , or (hining fo gloriouQy in the Power of Godlineffe (forindeedit is not Godlinejfe (imply. fo much , as a more then ordinary tVkaxX? (97) t ' S'acV.VL v ordinary fhining and eminency of it, that will be the means of this great work, which M*. Lockier has not heeded well in this Argu- ment) or that if any in the Vifible Church be not fuch convincing- ly, though otherwayes profeffing the truth and pure Worftiip^ • and living without fcandali , (hail be caften out ; neither the- ne- ceiTkyofchateffed doth require, nor can there be warrant of Scripture produced to fay or beleeve that it (hall be fo. As for the paflfages of Scripture brought for tllutiration and con- §» u * firmation of this fourth reafonj though the very fenfe of them given by him were granted, they bear no more but what we have granted, that God will,by difpenfation of providence, puniih, de« itroy and purge out among his Eled: in the Church, wicked, idola- trous, godleiTcandprofaneones {and this we deny n^t; but thac the Lord how, and then, may be, towards the end more, is and will be doing this) But (peaks 'nothing exprefly and directly, nor by way of confequence , of a rule concerning Ecclefiaftiek qualifi- cation of perfons in relation to admiffion into externall Vifible Church fellowihip, But verily the mod part, if not all of them, are but abiurdiy and violently, contrary to the genuine fcopeof the Spirit in them^drawn to this purpofe in hand; I (hall not now in- fifl: much upon them 5 But briefly point out the perverting of them, For the firft, Efay 66. From ver* 1$. to the end,let the Reader § , • be at the pains to read but upon the place, Calvin^ f mi us and the Ehglifh notes, and efpecially (if he have any skill in the Language) j the notes of the learned judicious 2{jther- t Z>fttch Interpreters, aqd^ doubt not but he (hall find fuch an Expofiti'on and up- taking oftheferies and threed of that context, as (hail fill and fatisfie his rninde., much different from that of Mr. Lockiers, which is but a new coyn'd Interpretation by men addicted to the millenarianphari* cy, and forced upon the Text, Ifhall only give fome little evi- dence of this, I mean that his Interpretation is forced and contrary toiheGrammeroftheText. \ He^ by tbefe fppkenof in the beginning of the v erf. 19. / will § x fgj&i figne among them and will fend thofe that efiap e of them,uh~ derftandethChriftian Gentiles, and then faith the meaning of the words^foliowing, is thatthefeieiined Gentiles (hall be Cent unto ■N ' the the Nation* ( as he mm take it ) to the countries where the Jews., are fcatteced, and then by thefe fpoken of, verf.12.jour brethren^ he underftandeth the Jews fcattered through the Nations. And then-he tells us that thefe Gentiles fent abroad unto the Nations, their end and eflFecl here is, that by declaring the glory of God they (hail not only gain the Gentile World, but ffiaii alio bringin ', thefe Brethren, thejews^ thej fi. a Jl, alfo (faith he) bring all johy ' Bretken, faith the Prophet. Further* ere I difcover the ma- nifold violence don^^ I would ask M*. Lockier what he meaneth by the Glory of God, which thefe refined Gen- tiles fent abroad, where the lews are fcattered, (ball declare ? For he doth not explaire himfeif in this, Certainly if he hold to his, fcope, i. e. the illufoation and confirmation of his former Argu- ment, he_ muft inean^ the glorious reformation of Woiihip and> Ordinances in their exercife, and ofprofeiTours in their conventi- on fpoken of there,as the means which,by the light thereof, fhou Id provoke the Jews to emulation* Now here, 1, One point of vio- lence done to the Text, ( the clear difcovery to every body likely- he hes (hand by not explaining what he underftood by that gloiy- of God)for by, theglory of God here,I think-no Chriflianilnterpre° ter will underftandany other thing, but the true knowledge of God in Jefus Ghrift declared by the Preaching of the Gofpel, that- fame which the Apoftle meaneth^ 3 0*3. #//-, — the glory of \the_ Lord 'beheld [with 'open face* fa maglaffe, viz.. in the Go- fpel, and Chap. 4*6. hathfyweddn^m hearts to give the light- af the glory of Go din thefmeofChrifi: If he fay he meaneth the- fame, then I fay he paifej from the.pnrpofeof his Argument, for clearing of which he brought inthis. tj, Another deaf violence- done to the Text is, that he maks an:addition to the Text, while as he faith upon ver, 20. fialLthey avljt' gam the Gentiles World h they frail [_ alfo] bring-in all your Brethren. As if the Text' held forth two forts of people gained by thefe fent abroad through the nations, one fort and alfo another calleditheir brethren. The Srftiniplyedin w»\ 19. andtheother, ver. 20, When as there is not fuch a thing as alfo in the Text- but the fim pie copulative *nd^ which only coupleth together thefe Verbs, they Jballdtrlare m J glwy and they \{b*ft bring. Andib, % t There is not the lead infinuatios infinuation of the gaining two forts of perfons asthe effecl of their labour and pains ; But in tbe end of v. 19.1s fet down their labour and work, they fi.afl declare nt) [glory among the GentUts^vA v+ 20. is fet down the effed of that their work, the bringing of one fort ofperfons called their Brethren. 3. By thefe Brethren who are faid to be brought in, cannot be underftood j ews ( I mean a* the name of Jews is now taken under the New Teft. as comprehen- ding all that are remaining of the ancient people profeflkg the Jewifh Religion,whether of the Tribe of fudah or of other Tribes) my reafon, from the Text, is this, becaule, verf 21. its kt down as a new and unufuall priviledge and dignity vouchfafed upon thefe Brethren brought, that God would alio take of them Priefts and Levits, u e. Mmifters toofficiat in his Wortfiip and Ordinances* Now it can be no new & unufuall thing to take of Jews to be fuch: for it had been alwayes fo ; therefore we do conceive, with thefe Learned Interpretets we named and others, by thefe Brethren, muft be meant Gentiles who are called the Jews Brethren becaufe when now brought irrby the Gofpel, in regard of faith, they are Abrahams children, Rom.q. and Gods Children, yea and arc called Gods Children, even while yet not actually called, viz* in the decree and purpofe of God, fohn m* Jr. T no wife doubt> but the Children of <3od fcattered, diftinguiftied from the Nati- on of the Jews, to be gathered in, fpoken of by Chrift, foh.u^^ And thefe Brethren to be brought in out of all Nations are all one and the fame. 4. thefe fpoken of, *ver. 1 9. IwiUfetafigne among them^ and fend thefe that efca'pe % among them, are not of the Gentiles. 1. For-that which we faid of thefe Brethren that are brought in by them* If thefe Brethren be the Gentiles, thefe fent out to bring them in muft be Jews* 2. Clearly, nter. .1.9, 20, thefe fent forth are diftinguifhed from the Gentiles,even the whole univerfality of the Gentiles, which are fet down, 1. Generally unto the T^jtions^ then by a particular enumeration or diftributiori of them according'to the feverall quarters of the World , Eaft, Weft, . South and North,Iles and Continent, See Snglifi notes on the particulars. Therefore thefe fent forth muft be of the Jews; and it is remarkable that where the name ^^ and another people m other perfons are fet down by way of cantradiftinclion, xtfigm- N 2 ~ - fieth Sect.VL x (iacx)' PaktJ\ fiech not fimply people, but the reft of the people of the World diftingaiftied from the J ewe. Therefore we conclude with the generality of Chriftian Interpreters, in thefe verfes is defcribed-not the Calling of the Jews, but the Calling of the Gentiles into the fellowfliip of the Church, and that by thefe flgned and Tent forth are meant the Apoftles and others~of the Jews fent forth to Preach the Gofpel among the Gentiles to bring about their Converfion which we fee fulfilled and accompiidied, CfrEat. 1 8. 18. Olfarj^ i6.i$. AclsS.i^. Rom. 10. 1% 18. places alfo cited by the En- glifanotes to clear this purpofe. , §"•* $• For that which'he hath upon the iaft words of this Chapter- ah! let men read & with much dread lay to heart which make livhb of thefe things we are upon , its true indeed men efpecially fuch as that verfe fpeaketh againft, fhouldnot, and,had they any /pirkual feeling, could not without much dread of heart ( tranfgreifours again ft God) read that*, but when as M% Lockjer in fo (peaking; fuppofeth that fuch as will not acknowledge his way of coa I itucion of a Vitible Church, of fuch only as are already trueiy gracious and regenerate, in (0 doing makes light of the things fpoken of in that Text,he fuppofeth it without ground or warn nd in this place, er any otherwhere in Scripture. The thing that he is upon , and thatthis Text is upon, are not one and the fame. And therefore the things he is on may be made light of, as being bin hisowi^and yet no hazard of the terrour of this TeUt for that-: ft 1 6. The pl ace Rev - 3- IG - fp°^ to the Church of Philadelphia \ is; butiabufed. For, 1. What warrand is there to expone that . hour of temptation fpoken of there, of the^time immediatly before theCailing of the Jews ? And the Church of Philadelphia in a typicailfenfeoffome^Churchestobethen ? *Tis too much bold- nefle to force fuchtypicall Interpretations upon Scripture, where the Spirit of God-in she Word goeth not before us ib wfrrand us. Tistrue Rev Trend Brightman has Interpreted all the Churches . and the things written to them, as types of other Churches in thefe latter dayes. But i. All" foiide 1 Divines have fhown their difcontentment with his conceit as groundlefle. z. Yet doth not lie underftand by Philadelphia fuch Churches immediatly before tie irxalling of the Jews, as Mr. Lockjtr fancies, But hes exprefly named Paat.IU , (roi> Sfi'CT.VI, named fome prefent Churches, which he will have to be fignificd thereby* Geneva, France, Lm-Conntreys , and with the fe& even that Church of Scotland, ( which Mr. Lockier counts an evillvefieli that will be broken in pieces j and that becaufe of the , order and Government fet up in them, 3 . The place fpeaks not here of cutting off Churches, but of trying the Inhabitants of the World. 4. If thefe Churches typified by Philadelphia, are not to be cut off, becaufe of their conftitution like its , how comes that it felf which was the Patern and to whom this word was fpoken in , the firft- inftance and place , hath been cut The place of Daniel, is as grotTely abufed. What" ground or §. 17. appearance can Mr. Lockier give us that the Holy Ghoft means one and the fame time, Daniel 12, and Rev. 3. in the Epiftle of Philadelphia ? He fayeth by thefe words, Daniel 12- 1. It doth plainly appear that this hour of temptation , viz,. Rev. 3 - I o. will be immediatlj before the Calling of the Jews^nd he4oth no more but fay it? Learned men and that upon confiderable grounds and reafons, have conceived that time, Daniel 1 2. 1. not to be a time after Chrifts firlt comming, but before it, the time of Antiochm perfecution : And mud Vlx. Lockier s naked aflertion, without reafon, that it is a time immediatiy before, the Jews incaliing be furficient to obtain beiiefe,. The New ferttfatiemfyoken of ^ Rev. 2i. isgroundleflelyex* § im- pounded to be the Vifibie Church of the Jews, as contradiftin- guifhed from the Church of the Gentiles 1 And 1 verily think that k cannot be underftood of the Church upon earth , at all> ver. 2 j. feemeth to me to fpeak this much clearly. The place I fa. 1 1 . 7* isaKbgrofTelymiirapplyedto the ViiibleChurcbof Gentiles to be joyned with the Vifibie Church of the Jews after their incaliing, - it bein&ctearly, a Prophe(te concerning the UniverfalL Church of the Gofpe], reaching along from the time of Ghrifts firft comming : unto the end, as all Interpreters expound it, and the context it felf hoideth it forth evidently. And fo is the place- of Zechariah pointed.at to be underftood. The hint at fer. 1 2I 9. where that ancient people are likned to &> . fpeckled bird, as if thereby were meant, that .becaufe that Church, in fts viGbie '.constitution, was * ----- »*- .. - mixed. --. icrm. ( 102 ) Part.!. B mixed of hypocrites with the Godly, therefore it is called a fpeck- led bird, and that upon that account they were caften off, might ■make a man laugh faere we not on a ferious matter, and its rather . * mater of mourning, to fee Scripture, and io much of it, fo fretted; The Ample meaning of the words being this, that as awildeftrangebird, of an uncouth colour, coming in among other birds, ail flieth about it and puriueth it; So becaufc the ^people were become uncouth, eftranged from God, wilde, un- tame, the Lord would raife up the Nations round about to deftroy them. But what meaneth Mv.Zockier to fpeak here of the cafting offtheancientVifible Church of the Jews under the^Old Tefta- ment, for not conftituting their outward Vifible fociety, of all trueiy Saints but furfering it to be fpeckledr Seeing all along this difcourfe, he hesreftrided his Doctrine concerning the mater of the Vifible Church, to the dayes of the Gofpel ? M for his in- ference wherewith he clofeth, consequently the allowed mater of a Vifible Qhureh, ( Remember we are fpeaking of Mater allowed in relation to the outward Ecclefiaftick Court its proceeding in ad* mitting perfons to externall Church fellowihip) now in the dayes pfthe Gofpel are perfons truely holy, we fay it folio weth not upon any thing you have been a Hedging in this paragraph: For were all granted, you have been writing out of thefe places, all comes to this that God fometime after this will bring the Church Vifible to fiich arteftate that all in it ihall be truely holy, ^/^(?. But difpenfattons ofefficacious grace are not a rule of Ecclefiaftick pro- ceeding in admitting perfons, to the outward communion of She ^Vifible Church. SECTION VII. A jhort modest reply to Mr. Lockyers bitter ufe mik of bis1)o£irine. S. i\ I had heard oftentimes before this time Mr. Lockler commended i for a man of an ingcnuous,humble, meek, fweet fpirit : and when I read the Epiftle of his three Bfethren prefixed to this Peece, wherein they called him a foft, fweet whifyerer, I expected to have Part X ( ^3 ) SVct .Yllv have found him fuch here. Bat fare I am any impartial! man who readeth his Ufe and application of his- Doctrine, may fee great want of ingenuity, and fuch bitternefje vented again ft men, defirous to keep the truth and to walk before God in fimplicity and .godly fin- cerity, as becometh not any man of a Chriftian fpirit ; and the like whereofcould hardly been expeded to come from the very fons of Babel themfeives again ft any Proteftants, He begins with this, Tak^ heed then offetting againft a Church §, t ; effuch a complexion and conftitmion^ Wih thou oppofe a thing be* caufe it is us it ought to be I To whom do you fpesfe^Mr, Lovkjer} To uswho oppofe your Declrine concerning the neceflfary qualifr* cation of Church members in relation taextermll Church fellow- fhip I Do we by oppofing this, oppofea thmgvbecaufe it is fuch as ; - it ought to be I Nay, we do* but oppofe you who fayes the Church Vifible, a-s fuch, ought to be, even in the Eecleiialtick Court, that* which God never faid in his Word , that it ought to be, and makes the door of the Vifibie Church ftratter then ever the Lord made it, and fo in erfecl: difclaimes the way allowed by God himfelf, for or- dering his Church, as not wife enough nor accurate enough. Or do we fee our felves againfH Church of fuch complexion and conftitu- tion as yoirdcfcrive, confiding of all trulygodly fo far as men can judge? God forbid, and far be it from us, were there fach a Church in the world of fuch complexion and conftitution, it fhould be very dear and precious in our eltrmation, and we fhould bleffe the Lord for the riches-and power of his grace befto wed uponthern, We wifh from our fouls, that our Churches and all the Churches in the world were of fuch a complexion and- conftirution. And we 8 acknowledge that as it is the duty of every-profeflbur in the Vifible Griurch in the fight of God, that they be not only fo far as men can judge, but in truth and indeed truly gracious, having true faving Faith, Repentance and "Sancliftcation; So that it is the duety of Minifters, andofevery one in the Church, according to their Na- tion and capacity, to endeavour bv all means inftituted by God a that it may be fo, But the thing that we oppofe is your rigid opi- nion; that will haye no Church Vifible at all unleffe you have it of fucha complexion, and will have none permitted to -enter the (bci- tty of the Vifible Ghurch, unleffe before they, be truly gracious, ■■'.•* fealed S-ECT.VII. (XO4) PART-L fealed of God by his Spirit ; at lealt giving fuch convincing eviden- ces hereof, as they may be accounted fuch, as far asmentruely godly can difcern and judge, and will have all who are not fuch caften out to be as heathens, This we oppofe becaufe it hath no warrand in the -Word, is contrary to the Word, is obftruclive to the falvation of many fouls, tendethtothe ruineofthe Chriftian Church and Relig on ; But to oppofe this, and to oppofe a Church of that complexion and conftitution you (peak of, are much diffe- rent « Here then firft we defiderate ingenuous dealing with us. §.5, . But what a flood of bitternefle followeth upon this t What horrid crimes laid to the charge of his Oppofers ? and what terrible dooms and woes denounced againfl: them ? They have ameer jpi- rit of ContraMElion, bordering uf on malice and blajphemy, like Jews, who not ahle to dijpvoue things that were taught, yet would contradifl^ being filled With envy , Acls 13. 44. A Jpirit of p%re contra dill: ion haunting -men > not a Jpirit of fuperiour light 5 a tempter /hewing men to bepoifoned with Sauls j^W/, leaven d pith envy and malice : and out of this do little elfe, but bUjpheme the Tabernacle of God and thefe which dtyell in heaven, which is no ether but a fpirit of Antichrifi , -Rev. IJ» 6. whereupon- is denoun* ced Ads 13. 41. 'Beholdyedefpiferi Wonder^ perijh, &c* and not wondering at nor believing the things that God fayeth and doeth : no other effetl produced by the Word andfVorkj of God brought to their door but defpifingx and thereupon with, the repetition of the former, 1 . New denunciation of the curfe, B^ra^. u. and then here fpoken to as heathen ( fuch as he doubteth Darius was 1 buc ifhewasone, then) curfed by one of their oVi?n$ high and low of* them, one as well as another, as alterers and dtfiroyers of Cjods Vvorjhip and People, -and will have them take this off his hand, as an article of their Creed. Will ye not believe ? And then the Pro- phefie denounced againft the Antichrift and his followers, Rev<\9. from^. u.foreward, is applyed to them. Is this the foft, ffreet whifpering we were told of ? Ah Mr. Lockjer ! my foul is forrow- full and heavy to think, a man, profeffing Chrifhanity, aMinifter ofthe Gofpel, (landing tofpeak in the Lords fight, and in his Name, fhould have uttered fuch a horrid accufation and bitter in- vedive againft many whom JefusChrift hath interefl in, and will owa ovvne at the laft day. I befeech you, Sir, return into your own thoughts, and confider as in the Lords prefence. 1. Againft whom you have fpoken thefe things, who were the Oppofers of that your Doctrine neareft to you at that time, and fo to whom moft near- ly you intended your fpeech then uttered and now Printed ? Were they not the honeft and faithful! fervants of Jefus Chrift, the Mi- niftersof£^W£&and other ancient Chriftians there? Were any ofthe people of that place fooppofite to you in this mater, as the mofl: ancient and folide Chriftians, many of whom, were in Chrift ere you or I had a being in the World, and then with them dottmot the Godly Presbyterians in the three Nations oppofe you in this mater, and the Godly Divines over-feas, Tome of which F ^/jf have positively Printed their judgement in oppofition to your way? ciaffe. And are all thefe led by a meer fpirit of contradiction, &c. 2. Confider, Sir, what is the mater of quarrell : Becaufe they op- pofe your way of outward constitution of the Vifible Church, which will permit none to enter or abide in the fellowfhip of the Vi- able Church under the care ofthe Minifters of Chrift, but fuch as are already truely regenerate, as far as the moft difcerning men canjudgei though they wifti and endeavour by Prayers to God* by pains upon men, that all in their Churches might be fuch, and would account it their Crown and rejoicing how many they may liave fuch. B this to biafpheme the Tabernacle of God,to deftroy his Worftiip and People, a fpirit of Antichrift ? For which they muftperifh, becurfed, deftroyed, and all that written Rev, 19. from verf* 1 1 .come upon them f Suppofe tbey were in an error ;( as it is not an error, but the way of Chrift) might it not have paffed amongft the Wood, Hay, or Stubble, built upon the foun- dation , but not deftroy ing the foundation *. which may burn, the builders beingfafe? Ay but, fay you, they maintain it out of a meer fpirit of contradiction, as did the learned Jews, feeing a great aptnefle in many of their Countrey.men to receive the Doctrine of Chrift, and they not being able to difprove the things that were taught, yet would contradict, fo they, &c. Ah M«". Loc^ "kter ! What could the accuferof the Brethren faid more boldly , and more bitterly ? 'Tistrue, fome of our Countrey-men have thown themfelves too ready to receive your Doctrine, ye^blefled O foe Sect.VII. (106) Part.II be God, cot Co many as you by infinuation boaft of* Thefe few thai: hes done, fo I judge not their perfons,they will ftand and an* fwer for it before their Judge at the laft day. Some are now but fulfilling that which they had once prophefted of themfelves; But to you here Mr. Lecher. 1. Suppofe they be in an errour that oppofe your Dodrine concerning the neceffary qualification of per- ions for being mater of a Vifible Church : What are ye to judge them, to do-it out of a meer fpirit of contradictions that they are poyfoned with Sauls fpirit, leavenM with malice and envy, &c; Would not charity have required that you fhould have judged, poflibiy they do it out of ignorance, and not out of malice, againft knowledge of the truth. Were thefe Godly modeft men, Hooker^ Cotton alive, they would, and fudus^are alive of that way, that are pious and judicious willi I am confident; deteft and abhorre this your unchriltian cruell judging of us. Blefled be God we ftand not nor fall at roans judgement we have one that judgeth us, our tcrd Jefus Chrift, and to him we referre this challenge yon- have laid to our charge, and, Sir, if you do not repent of the rafhneflfe and cruelty of it (which from our fouls we wifti you may do) we cite you before his Tribunal! to anfwer for it. But, 2. Sir we are content alio to ftand at the Barre of any impartial!, judicious Divines, in the Chriftian World, and that they give their judgement, by that fame much which I (who pretends not to be one oft he Learned Men in this Land:) have Anfwered to your preceeding Difcourfe, if your- Doctrine be fuch as we are not able todifprove* and if we do not upon fome good grounds of reafon, and not out of a meer fpirit of contradiction , oppofe the fame : And thus Ifhall leave your invective without faying any more to k: we have not learned Chrift fo, as to repay cvill with evilU bit« terneflfe with bitternefte, you have curfed us, we bleffe you, we wifli you heartily a blefiing, Repentance and forgivennefle of this art.I. ( 107 ) 'Sicy.YIlU SECTION VIII. Mr. Lockycrs obje ciions he maketh to himfelf, and his Anfmrs thereto^ confidered. MR. Lockter having difcharged that bitter foregoing invective § i; againft the oppofers of his way, comes to propound and an* fwer Tome Objections againft himfelf, choifed out, and formed at his own pleafure, ¥ ive,in number, whereof two only are in caafa. Were there no other Arguments worthy of his confideration, befides thefe, to be found in Orthodox Writers oppoficeto his way ? If he thinks not ; it will feem he hes not read fuch Writers on this purpofe as he might and ought, for clearing of himfelf and others: If he knew others, why did he not affay to clear them aL fo ? I think he had not will to prefent before his hearers all Argu- ments brought againft his Doctrine, leaft he fhould not ridde his feet well of them, and fomexhing thereof might have ftuck to fuch as was judicious. Whatfoever hes moved him fo to pafle them e- ver, we hope it {hall fhortly appear, he had fome caufe rather ta pafle them in filence ; then to hazard grappling with them ; it 'was^hisprudefscefotodos But let's fee thefe he hath,and his an- swers to them; Obj.uPFhjff But they gather Churches out ef Churches ^phorff §.£' - you plead for. Why ? I thought the Difpute hitherto ye have -been on, was not about perfons and their practifes.; but about a •dogmatick point. Had we been propounding Objections to you, we (hould not troubled our felves with thefe extriofecall ones, taken from pre/udices againft perfons, abaters of your Doctrine* But ftiould more directly pointed atthe throat of the caufe it felf. Yet we think all Godly Orthodox men in the Chriftian World, be. fides your felves, will judge that the Godly Minifters of Chrift in this Hand have juft caufe to lay this practice of picking out of Or- thodox Churches ( in which Jefus Chrift is foundly Taught, Sa- craments adminiftred according to their inftitution, and are by the moft judicious of your own way confefted to be true Churches from which it k not lawfuil tomake reparation ) fuch ProfeiTours O 2 as Sict.VIfr. . <*<&*>■ Part J, as by Gods blefling upon his Ordinances in theie Churches have gotten moft good , to make up of them Ghurches to your felves. Ail Orthodox Chriftians will judge this juftly laid to your charge , asaSchifmatick praclice having no warrand or prefident in the Word of God, tending to the begetting of heart-burnings, divU fions, hatred amongft Chriftians, yea thefe of -neareft relations, Husband and Wife, Parents and Children, Magiftrats arid People ^ to the hindring and no wayes to the; promoving of the Work of Reformation.. But fee what is faid to this. §-$♦ 3fe7i' ** ® but ghurches out of a Church t. G off el Churches out of a ttgall National Churchy and the one being aboHfhedfhere may be, yea, there ought to be a departing from h and a gathering* but of it unto the order which God hath inflituted^fo we finde- Churches gathered out of thaf Church of the fews, Gal. i. ii a Jind whether he 'meaneth by being in Chrifi meerly according t$ profeffionjee i Thef. 2. 14* ssfnf. 1. The citation of the iThef. *. 14, for clearing what is meant £7 being in Chrift, mentioned^ Gal a. 22. is adigreflionfromthepiu"po5of the^bbjeclion and hath been fufficiently anfwered before. 2, You gather Churches, fay you, out of a Church, not out of Ghurches. This is ftrangc, ate not the Church oiEdinburgh r and the Church of *s4berdene, Churches? Again if it be a fault to gather Churches out of Churches, foail it be no fault to gather Churches out of a Church - ma)us & minus non variant -Jpeciem. Ay,. *t is a le^a 11 Isla t iana U : Church he meaneth, fuch as the Jewiirt, fuch a Church is abo- lifhedj therefore *tis no fault, yea we ought togather, &c. For Anfwer. We may confider a National! or Provincial! Church of a threefold fort and notion. 1. Wherein all of the Nation are bound to a publick and folemn typical! fervice and Worfbip to bfc performed in one place chofen by God, under the infpeclion of one Vifible Paftor or Prieft, who in Worfhip and' Sacrifices doth hold forth and reprefent the whole People of the Nation. i a Such a Nationall and Provinciall Church , in which many parti- cular Churches are united and fubjec'ted unto one Church ( as they call it, Mother or Cathedrall Church) and depend upon a .Vifible Pattor ; who is Paftor and Ruler of all other Paftors and particular Chu rches in the Nation w Province 5 And wherein the Inferior Fa-ktX (roir) S*ct.VII&, Inferiour Churches enjoy Divine Ordinances, and Ecclefiafricall power and jurifdiftion, of that Mother and Cathedral! Church or that Provinciail or Nationall Paftor. 3.Such a Nationall Church wherein many particular Churches are joyned and united together under one Vifible Church- Government) wherein all are equally and collaterally concerned ; and have equall intereft for the ufe and exercife of all thefe Ordinances, which areneceflary to ttie Vifible Minifteriall Government of thefe Churches, and mutual! Ecclefia- [ticail feliowlhtp in it,, and edification and prefervation by ic. Now a Nationall Church tri the fecund notion is not, nor ever was an Ordinance of God r but a meer invention of men and Antichriftian tyrannic, overthrowing the power granted by G O D to the « Churches^ and Pallors- A national! Church of thefirft notion and knk was indeed an Ordinance of God. Such were the j ews; but inftituted and to continue for a definite time,, viz,, until! the folneiTe of time (hould come, and then it was abolifhed and eva- nifhed: And a Church Nationall in this fenfe was legal!. But a Nationall Church in the third fedie is not a legall or typical! Church and Ordinance *,. Bat morale & perpetui juru. Such was the Jewifhunder the Old Teftament in point of Government and Ecdefiaiiick Difcipline. They were many particular Churches* and Synagogues , which did in diverfe places celebrat the Morall- Worfliipof God, and the exercifes of Do&fine, Difcipline and Church-Government, Atts 15.21. AMsi$.i$,\6. Lxken.ii.- johni2»4i' All which were joyned and united under one Na- tional! Vifible Ecclefiafttck Government^ This Viable Church- (hip ( fo to fpeak ) of the Church of the Tews, as it was not le- gall ( I mean ceremonially ) nor typicall ; fo neither was it e - ver abolifhed . Let Mr. Lockier (hew me a Text in the whole New Teftament importing an abrogation of it ; Nay r we truft through the Lords grace, ere we come to an end, to give evidence from the Word of God that there is a Church Vifible under the New Tefta- ment of a larger extent and bounds ( I mean in point of Govern- ment ) then a Province or Nat ion, even a Vifible Church Univer- fa-U. Therefore I conclude that we maintaining a Nationall Church m no other fenfe then this, which is ftill warranted and allowed in <• the New Teftament, itisnoihiog e!fe but groffe Separatifme to V'"V : . ■ gather E C V. VIH. '<""<>> Part J. gather Churches out of Churches upon this account, becaufe they are united into one National! Church in this fenfe. As to that all ledgedby Mr. Zockierof gathering Churches out of that one Church of the Jews which he would confirm by Gal. u 22. I Anf The alledgeance is groflely impertinent j for why > We are now upon the practice of gathering and conftituting Churches in a new Vifible Church-ftate,of perfons withdrawn fromChurches wherein is the found Doctrine of the faith of Chrift and -pure Sa- craments according to their inftitution (fucfr as the molt judicious and Godly amongft the Independent Brethren thcmielves confetfe to be true Churches ) upon this account , becaufe they are united into one Nationail Church in point of Government. But now will Mr. Lockier fay, that the Chriftian Churches of the Jews were gathered out of the Jews, upon this account , becaufe they were a Nationail Church in this fenfe 2 He cannot upon any warrand in the world. The ground of their gathering out from the reft of the lews, was becaufe the reft would not beleeve Jefus to be the Mefliah, nor imbrace him as their Saviour : But would iftil adhere to their ceremonial! Worfhip, Sacrifices and Pried- hood, and would be faved by their own righteoufneffe, blafphe- ming Ch rift and his Doclrine. The fecond objection he propound eth to himfelf is this, Thofe men are f nil of Herejies and danger otu opinions that follow this way,, manj monfters came out of jour Independent Churches., thereforefurefj 'tis not of God, &c. I mull fay again Mr. Lockier doth prudently to make choife of fuch arguments againft himfelf to anfwer , as are little to the purpofe in hand. I think no undeman- ding adverfary , would have moved this as an objection againft his Doctrine, handled in this Lecture concerning the matter of the Vifible Church. But I think indeed, being well managed , it may be made ufe of to good purpofe againft their Independent Churches in point of their Government , thus, The Government that is apt to open a door to Errors % feemeth , -cannot be of God. But fuch is the Independent way of Church Government; Which makes every particular Congregation Independent , and fupreme in Go- vernment , fo that if any of them fall into Error , there is no Ec- clcfuftick Power on earth » that authoritatively can interpofe to redrefle, Paht.F. (mi) . Sect.VIIL redreffe, wherein they go wrong. And certame it is by this oc- eafion , many Errours have fprung up amongft them that fol- low this way. And for this very caufe it is , that fo man*? maintained of groile Errours,as Anabaptifts, Antinomians, &c lay hold on this way of Governments mod fukable to their defignes, and ferviceable for their fafetie and indemnitie. And here I £hall defire M<". Lockjer to remember, how that Reverend W. Bright- ^w^ff, parallelling the Churches of Geneva T France , Lo^coun- tries * and Scotland , put the fpeciall ppintof their commenda- tion , on the nature and way of their Government , vU^ Bref- byteriall , whereby they have more then any Reformed Churches., preferved themfelves , in Unity and Truth , free of Schifmes and Herefies. But we will have place afterward to fpeak of this point of Government. Itfeemethto mevery likely that M\ Lockier hath drawn in this objedionin this place , namely upon a delign againft a Perfon , as.weftullfee apparent ground even now in his anfwer. Anfw. I.. All is not true that is fad of Con-gregationall § 1* Ghurches , and their friends , it hath been an old wyU of the 'De- vil —-Nay , I know all is not true which is Printed of Terjom honouring and loving Churches of fuch a ' conftitHtio^ witness JtfafterEdwztdsGangren, nay Mafter Rutherfurds Sprit Hall <±Antichrift $%%.*$0$ %$i. The LordGenerall Cromwell is char- ged with f ab lick fcandall , and unfowidnefie- in the Faith 3 becaufe of a letter to the Parliament^ .then having fet down a pact of that letter out of Mr. Rutherfurd '■,.,. what Berefie- ( fayeth ht) is in this letter I hjiow not , and then apply es to Af after Ruther- furd , his confer noting ofthatietter 9 PfaL /6\ 5. and that of Solo- mon, Pro. furely the wringing of the nofe bringeth forth blood. Then cites another fftach of Mafter Rutherfurds Spirit. Antich- fag. 2 j i. ( viz. to my knowledge theres not this day in England any that is a meer Independent, which maintaineth nothing but In» dependencies with m oft of thofeofNew England, anddoeth not hold other unfound and corrupt Tenets ^ &c\ and fayeth this maketh him tremble , Vphen heremembreth from whom it cometh > Surely there be many Independents in England to whom he is^a fir anger y Andfoty then jhould hedar? to Jpeak of them all as he deeth T hoeth} EffeciaSj this makes him tremble^ comparing with Vvhat Mafter Rutherfurd hath in his Spiftle, if 1 lift up my hand or a bloody pe n^ &c. Anfw. i . * Tis a poor and fbry Vindication , all is not true that is faid , yea or Printed of Congregational Churches and of their friends. That is not the thing , you are charged with in the Objection even as formed by your feJf , that all is ttue, &c. it a great part or mod part of thefe things be true , the charge abU deth good. And true it is that more Monfters of dangerous opini- ons in matters of Religion have come from Independent Churches -and the friends thereof, and have had their recourfe to that way of Government , within thofe few years by paft , then I believe has arifen in all the Reformed Churches in Chriftendome fince the beginning of Reformation. As for your bringing M r « Rutherfurd upon the ftage upon the account of that Letter , you will do well Mr. Lockjer to enter into-your own heart, and coniider from what defrgne and intention this'hafh proeeedede "Tis very apparent , it has come from little purpofe or intention to clear that Letter in the things charged upon it $ Seeing you have not fo much as hinted at the clearing of one animadverfion on it > -But thought it enough to fay you know not what is amiffe in if , and to bid the world Judge of it. Give me leave to fay it of M*\ Lociier, If General! Cromwels Sou idiers defended him not better with the Sword, then -you do here with your pen , it were not very fafe for him to go to the fields . Well, I will not determine upon your intentions •, But if the intention of the work of this bufinefife, leoketh not to- wards ftirring up of perfecutionagainft the God^y and precious fer- vants of Jefus Chrift, I leave it to be judged of any indifferent man, confidering the pofture of affairs in thefe Lands: But I beleeve thofe whom the Authors words tends to irritate , will not be fo forewardto put forth their hand, as he isto folicit them. The other challenge made againft that precious man, is evidently a grofle and palpable wrefting of his words /the fault Mr. Lockjer had but in that fame breath almoft charged upon him without gi- ving any evidence of it ) and a very wringing of the nofe to bring forth blood. I report me to every ingenuous man. If reading MuKntherfffrds words as they arealiedged by Mr # Lockjer him- klf 7 Part. I. f U 3 ) Sec^VHL felf, he will conceive that W. Rutherford meaneth what he fay- tth of aU and every Independent in England, as M-. LockierQon~ ftrucleth them: or not rather that he (peaketh only of all within his knowledge. And what caufe then is there of fuch out-crying a- gainftMr. Rutherford fat theie words, asifchey were a mater of trembling ? Verily I cannot but think it a mater of trembling, to fee a man with fo much confidence and boldnefle palpably miicon- ftrnfting an honeft mans words to make him odious. He <>s4nfw. 3. That there is difference between a caufe and §•£• occajion. That we tyalkjn a fundament all truths in the power of it, many takj occafion hence tofcojfe, bredkjforthinto much \V*V- -kedwffe, is it not therefore the truth which we follow t And then he telleth us that as light hath broken forth in every age. Sat ban hath laboured to darken it, and gives inftanccs. As 1 » That Vvhett the fir ft Fathers bsgan to lay again that great principle and fun- dament all of the Trinity ~^ to darken this, hefetonfootArrim he- refie* • — 2. When fome of the modern Divines laid that great fundament all paint oj ? f ■ unification by faith in Chrift, to darken. this, he conjured up the Anabaptifts in Germany, which denyed proprietie, LMagiftracie 5 all which is good; and then addeth^ noW when God hath made another acteffion of light, re/pecJing the roofe and upper part of the houfe (the Independent way of confti- cution and Government of Churches J what ftirres, fogs , mifts hath he raifed ? Is all this therefore darknejfe, drojfe ? — ■-*-*» / thinhjhings about which the T> evil makethfuch adoe, may rather be thought to havefomething in them, rather then to conclude they have nothing of God within them ; becaufe the Devil doth not ufu- tsllyfet againfl his o^n: Doth not divide againft the Devil. When this Ne'^ Heaven, as the Prophet calleth it > this new order was fi r fl f et u1 P & ^erufalem, what bloody ftirres made it there ? When fir ft at Antioch what ^>or\ made it there ? jSfj (mall diffention, Aclsij 9 2. andyetthemindofGod. zsfnfw. 1. Much miftaking hes been difcovered already in this Lecture of Mr. Lockjers, but in no one patTage hath he worfe acquyted hiraielf then in this we have now in hand. 1. True, it is no good Argument or prejudice either, againft a Tenet or point of Dodrine that many take occa- Gon thence to fcorTe and break forth into much wickedeefle ; But P this Sect.VIH. (114) Part-I. this is not to the purpofe in hand. Our alledgeance is that the In* dependent way of Church- Government is fuch in the nature of it as giveth occafion to men to run freely without controlement into errours, and is a kinde of fhelter,for fuch as holds and maintains er- rours, to run to^ as experience proveth; and this, fare, if it be not an intrinfick Argument yet it is a ftrong preemption againfl: a Te- net, that it is not of God, the like cannot be faid of the Prefbyte- rianway. 2. As to the two instances brought in. They are as impertinent as the former generall ; For neither by the Doctrine of the Trinity was occafion given my wayes to the zArian herefie. BattheDeviUraifedup^m^andhisherefie, to oppofe and dar- ken that fundamentall point of Chriftianity. Nor was there, by the Do&rine of Juftification cleared by thefe modern fathers, occa- fion given to the ftirres of Anabaptifts i But thefe were railed by the Y)zv\\\ in oppofition againft that and other points of Religion then cleared. I humbly conceive it agrees not well with Htftorie- to fay that upon the fathers beginning again to lay that principal! fundamentall of the Trinity ; the DeviH did fet onfoot the Arian herefie : The Hiitory of thefe times feemeth toiay that the fet- ting on foot the Arian herefie gave occafion to thefe ancient fa- thers, to eftablilh and confirm from the Word of God that prfn. ciple and fundamental! of the Trinity. 3.While as Mr. Lockier (by way of application of thefe things noted on before ) , fir ft fayeth, now in this period of time God hath made another accejfion of light, reJpetJing the roofe and upper part of the houfe ( meaning his fn- dependent way of Church constitution and Government^ and then fubjoyneth by way of Queftion, and now \\?hat fiurres^ &c? Why, what now ? Is all therefore — — he but miferably. begs his Queftion, v'q^ that his way is a new acceflion of light. 4. Word ofalldoth-he plead for his own caufe in relation to the former Objection when as he alledgeth that it may rather fa thought a way that hath fomething of God in it^ which the Devil! oppojeth , then to conclude to the contrary becaufe the Devill doth mt ufually fet again fi his own ; Why ? The Independent way is that which this day all the emifTaries of Satan ( I mean not meer Independents themfelves,many of whom I love and reverence) and almoftalltheSecl.maftersofthetime betakes themfelves to and hugges- Pakt.L (ilf) Sztx.Vlll* hugges in their arms-, 1 And the Presbyterian Way is that which all the errours and herefies of the time oppofeth, looketh upon as the great eye-fore and hateth cane pejus & angue. 5, *Tis fome- what more then inconfiderat contempt of his hearers and readers, when he will have them beleeve ; that it was the fetting up of his Independent Church order at Jerufalerru and Antioch that was the mater and object of the bloody fturres, and no fmail didentions there. Ah Mr. Lockier I it was another mater,upon which thefe things were railed, then who (hould be members of the Vifible Church, or what form of externall Government, (hould be fol- lowed, 'twas the Preaching of Jultification and falvation through faith in Jefus Chrift, without the works of the Law. The 3. Objetl. Mr. Lockier meeteth with, till Independency* §; f no fuch (harp and bloody flirres and distentions. Where did you read this brought as an Argument againft your Doctrine of Church-.members f Will any body fay, that thefe impertinencies were.brought on the ftage for any other end ; but to catch occafi- on to vent fplen againft perfons of men j for what elfe is it that fol- io weth by way of Anfwer to this. I . Presbyterians began firft to draw the /word, and their bit' %' 8. terneffeand bafenejfe hath hightned it to that, to which otherwife in likelihood) it Would not have comev The two latter Summers Wars, bdv* been the fbarpeft, I know they will fay that they have felt. And truly whether their froWard ffirit did not prin- cipally raife thefe florins, I leave themf elves to 'judge. They converted fo many Malignants into Presbyterians , & e contra, that if God had not been more gracious? then they ingenuous, they bad undone themf elves and others too, Anfw. To this impertinent difcourfe in the generall, if I fhall fay, tliat it is nothing elfe, but an nTue of carnal I bitterneffe, I think no ingenuous indifferent man , will blame me or think I fay too much. For, 1. True, fuppofe Prefby terians began firftto draw the fvrord, ("which is falfe, they were forced to it by others ^ drawing it J but was it not for their juft defence in vindication and maintainance of the Truth of Jefus Chrift , and of their juuMiberty againft opprefiion, Prelaticall violence jand arbitrary Government.? And muft this be charged upon them, as Mr. Lockier doth here, P2 as SectVIII. f«#) Part.!, as a crime . ? Tell me Mr. Lockier^ what condition were you in *Remem- and would been in to this day, in all humane appearance, had not l l^'nd Presbyterians begun to draw the fword in that quarrell f Tell me read^Thic what was the means under God that procured liberty for the fit- fpeech of ting do?/n of a free Parliament in England, 1640 t Belike you oneofyour think it was a crime, that you got not leave to crouch under the own, fere- burden, and Religion, and Liberties were not furfered, for Pres» mC Is to ^y cer ^ ans » t0 ty ^ under oppreliion and usurpation. I believe the the^cVmon wifeft and mod ingenuous, and thofe that are mo ft eminent Counfel of amongft them, that now are in power amongftyou and in thefe- London in Lands, will not approve you in their judgement/or this challenge Guild mil, a g a j n fj; us . And unleffe I be mifinformed when they were come -to* tnl btefo." tn * s highjc of prevalency, they are now in, and we brought to this I ihal here low condition we are now continuing; in, looking back, gave telti* jnfmbuca mony of their acknowledgement , that our beginning to draw the few of his f worc j j did put the fword in their hand, tho it was never our pur* words for^ ^ Q tQ p Ut j t - m ^^ fa^ f or t i ae c ff e & s f or which at laft they ders fake have made ufe of it. 2. Your attributing the hightning of the who, may fword to that, to winch in likely hood it would not have come, to- be, hesnot the bitterdeffe and bafeneffe of Presbyterians, feeing ye give no at hand * proof nor the leaft: evidence of it ( and indeed ye could not ) we *h°tf e -e°cb mu ^ mve * eave t0 ^ lt i$2itt m J ur y- Te ^ me > s * r > was K bit- \vls\heir ' temefle of fpirit, or did.it tend to the hightning of the fword, that everfuch the Presbyterians in Scotland', ha vfng but girded their fword to aneximpk them, Anno 1639. upon promifes of tollerable fatisfaclion, laid ^T^Ttl lt a ^ e a g a,n P ce ^ cn ^y ' ere ever tne y ^ rew ic ' anc * having again in bemjof a the Year 40. being forced to it, by deadly preparations, drawn peoplc'com. it, with advantage which they might have profecuted, yetasfoon ingoutof as they were feeured by the treaty at Bippon. put it up into its a powcoun- {^ en h, and retired again * into their own land without any fur- ^fo^and tner nioleftation; and having again drawn the fword for your afllft- tid com- ance in 8 reat ft^its, and upon your earneft fuit, Anno 1643. AlK * try, and having kept it in their hand for (undry years untill all enemies were having tbefe opportunities to enrich thmfelves, to ge may fo M they did. Their greatcft enemies they now admire at them. A people that began to rife for their Liberties when the'gene. nlity of this people here was ready , &c 1 (hall transcribe 110 more, let Mr. lotkict /read wh« hWomxh swd what goet> before tbefe words. """"" Uuiht PartJ. ("7) Sect.VIIL huiht and gone, as foon as they were defired to return home , did itin a peaceable way. I pray you Sir, tell me, who were the men that kept up 'the fword then? Whether Pre (by terians, or fome others . ? 3. Indeed thefe two latter Summer-wars have been the (harped, and we cannot but fay, tfiat we have felt; And it becometh us well to juftifie the Lord our God in ail that he hath brought upon us, and to bear his indignation , becaufe we hive finned againft him, we and our Kings and our Princes and Rulers and the whole People of the Land : But if, as to the quarrell be- between us and man,rrowardneiTe of fpirit in us raifed thefe ftorms, thowecan juftifie our felves before the world ; Yet we fhali not take upon our felves to be judges of it : But fhali refer it to the Judgement of him, who is the Judge of the World; and though it fhould be his blelted good pleafure never to plead our cauie by a fenfible difpenfation of providence in this world, yet we will ac- quiefce in the approbation of his revealed will, without quiring of ourinnocency, be content to ly down in the grave, and wait for his fentence in the mater when he fhali come to Judge the quick and the dead.. And as for you Mr. Lockjer, I verily think he fhali never let you go off this world without a challenge from himfelf, for fuch unchriftian, uncharitable infulting over them whom the Lord hath fmitten, and talking to the grief of theie whom heimtli wounded. 4. As to that which followeth, they convert edfr ma- ny Malignant s into Presbyterians. 8c e contra^c. 1. Tis upon. the mater but an injurious fcoffe fmelling rank of a mind, not pur- pofed to reafon but to reproach, a thing unbefeeming a Minifrer of the Gofpel,efpeaally in a Pulpit. I will not pay you homein your coyne, Mr. Lockjer, but I may fay. Quamvis dignus ego ef- fem hac comtHmeliajndignus tu qui facer es tamen 2.Tis utter- ly impertinent to the preceeding purpofe he was upon. Was this the quarrell that did. principally raife thefe ftorms ? Where is ingenuity ? I beieeve we might had liberty to turn Malignants e«- nough unto Presbyterians or any other thing we pieafed, without any quarrell, had we been content but to have done fome one thing, which we durft not do becaufe of the Oath of God And now I obteft you Mr. Lockjer, fay candidly if either then, when thefe ftorms were raifed, qj now fince we felt the dint of. them, U;i ' .';> converting. 5Eo*/vm rut) Part.l converting Maligmnts to be what they would, for your defigne, be made bones of among you f He infift no more upon this inve. dive; but leave it fpread before the Lord, that he may } in his time, plead with the Authors heart, for the unjuftice and uncharitable- neffe of it. Come we now to the next Qbjedion he meetetb with. § - 4, Ob]t&.~ Simon tJ^Aagw was -a man in the gall of bitter neffe and injrh'e konde of iniquity y J et upon his prof e fit on of faith in ■ Qhrift he Was received into Chnrch-feilowjhip : Therefore me er ■profejpon is fujfcient to this ft ate, and no more to be looked after , dejurejiife ex abundant i i Hitherto M*. Loc'kier has been pleafed to reprefent his adverfaries as impertinent objecting prejudices a- gainft perfons, and not reafoning againft his opinion he knoweth himfelf for what end : Now at laft he vouchfafes them the credit, of faying fome little thing, a word or two, in caufa* As to the former now fet down. i. He wrongs us in forming the conclusion or confequent : 'Tis not any meer profeflion whatf: ever we allow asfufficient tothisftate, admiflion unto Church- fellowfhip, fome may profeffe mockingly, hiftrionically, or, to difcerning, on pur- pose to deceive andfubvert the Church, as thefe, Gal. 2.4. Such profeflion we allow not; but a ferious fober profeflion, fuch as we defcribed before ftating the Queftion. 2. We give him the an* tecedent fomewhat more conftringent thus, Simon LMagm hav- ing been even now a vile forcerer, bewitching people with his forceries, and facrilegioufly ufurping the honour of God, upon profeflion of faith in a fober ferioufneire, was by Thilip baptized and received into Church-fcllowfliip, without pafling any tryall, if that profeflion of his proceeded, or judgement, that it did pro- ceed, fo far as men could difcern > from true faving grace and faith in the heart. That his profeflion of faith was ferious and fober, and appeared fo, is evident in the Text; Tor he was brought to ic by conviction to aftonidiment and wondering at the miracles that were done : And the Text fpeaks not of any intended purpofe of deceiving in his taking up that profeflion. But that Fhilip tryed and examined his profeflion, if it did proceed from a true faving work of Regeneration in the heart, or that judgement was pafied upon him as one truely regenetat 3 fo far as men can difcern, the Text Pakt.I. \ \ (up) Sect.VIIL Text fayeth not this,nftr "any thing to that purpofe. Now lets fee what Mr. Lockjer replyeth. Surety ( faith he ) it was not Jhews but fub fiance that was lookt §.*°« at and conceived indeed to be in this man, fofar as man can judg (£} of d tree by his fruit : for de occultis non judicat Ecciefia. There werefurely outward Jignes of repentance in this man^&fuch a* the Apofile Peter,\^o received him unto fellow/hip y was fatufied with. Anf i.Here is a palpable grolTe efcape committed by the Au« thor,when he attributeth Simons receiving into Church- feliow- fhip to Peter i for clear it is, that Simon was received in Church- fellowfhip by Philip and continued with him therein, fome fpace ere Peter and John came down to Samaria, Atls S. 13 , 14 whether the Author has committed this efcape of inanimadvertencie, or of parpofe, I will not peremptorily determine 5 But the latter (eem- eth moll: probable, that he might have the fairer occafion to bring in Peters words, Atls z. 28- to confirm his Ailertion concerning * Simons qualification in relation to his admifllon into Church-fel- lowfhip, of which place anone^ 2. But whether Peter or Philip received him , that there were fuch outward figns of repentance in this roan, that as far as men can judge of a tree by its fruit, he was conceived, pofitively to be a regenerate and a true favingly be- liever, and that upon fatisfaction inthis,it was,thathe was received into Church- fellow(hip,how will the Author inftrud & prove this> ■Ffrfiy faifch he, what Peter required at the hands ofthofe, Acts § , , 2. 3 8. Repent and be baptised every one of you, in the name ofje- [us Chrijt, for the remifflon of fins-^ dec, he would , did follow the fame rule ofChrifi which he had received and delivered to other s r -and therefore required as much at the hands of Simon * r If he would not dijpenfe with this rule "faith none of thofe great number ( — —J there is no reafon to thinkjiedurfi exjtft lejfe of this man r to be fa- tisfied in him^ ejpecially hearing what a creature he had been, Anfw. Befidesthe continued efcape of attributing, Simons recei- ving into the Church,to Peter (whereupon yet much of the weight of this reafon dependeth ) here is another great miftake upon the mater, which is the principall ground :~ and being difcovered,the whole inference evanifheth. Mr. Lockjer fuppofeth that the A- poftle-Pfttr in thefe words {Repent and be baptised every one of von Sbct.V-III. (120) Part,L j oft for the remljfion of fins ) is fpeaking urifo thefe people and pre- ferring a rule to them fot qualification, in relation to ftating them in outward vifible Church-fellowlhip ? when as it is another mat- ter in relation to which he is fpeaking and prefcribing a direction for, viz,, how they might find pardon of their fearfull (in of crucifying the Lord of glory, be reconciled to God,and faved from the wrath to come : This is evident as the noon day to any that will look up- on the context. For this rule and direction of the Apoftles, is in order to that which at that time was preffing the fouls of thefe he fpeaketh to v and to anfwer the queftion 'they propounded out of "- 1 the anguifh of their fpirits. Now clear it is, that the mater that pre (Ted them was their conviction of their horrid fin of rejecting and crucifying Chrift : and their danger of the dreadful! wrath of God, and the queftion they propounded, what Shall we do? was not about ftating in vifible Church- membeifhip : but how they * might be freed of thatguikineiTe, and faved from the wrath of God. This is it that the Apoftles rule and direction relateth to 4 and therefore 'tis more then evidences of true repentance and faith, fofar as men can judge , even true repentance and faith in ■veritatt-reifeu e-xiftentia, that he requireth of them. This rule in relation to this end, he had indeed received from Chrift : and neither could he,nor can any other difpenfe with it, or exact leffe from any in relation to that end : But all is nothing to Mr, Lockiert purpofe, th^t Peter received from the Lord, or followed in the point of admitting into the outward fellowship of the vifible Church, fuch a rule as requireth either true repentance and faith in reality of inexiftence, or convincing evidences thereof, fo far as men can judg, as the necefTary qualification in foro exteriori £ccle(i tp carry it foia. all things, &a &ij» For confent ofthe Learnedlnterpretersjiecitethfomewor'ds, oiPifc. Englifh annot. Junius & Tr 'erne llius , Tellicannm^Be** z,a. And then;tells^ that he addeth all thefe testimonies for the Lear neds fake that they may fee and know that Simon he carted the mater that he feemed another mart then ameer profeffor^ otherVvife the osfpoflles had not received him : And whenthm his - hypecrijie did appear, the Apofiles rejected him as one not in Chrifl^ and as one Who had no /hare in reall grace, and upon that, ground rejected communion with fuch an hypocrite^ that all elfe. might know what they had to do, riamelj , to follow that rule ofth& m Apofile, 1»artX 1 (riy) StM.vnt* *Apoftle, 2 Tim. 3. 9. Having a forme ofgodlineffe, but deny* ing the power thereof : , fiomfuch turn awaj '» which place~( (kith ' he ) Jhewes plainly ^ that it ^oas the po^ errand not the ProfeJjTon^ arid not the forme that wot looked , *#<^ # to be looked at, in the admijfion of members of the Vifible Church. aAnfw. I wondec how the Author could fo contemn the Learned who might read him, as to fay that for their fakes he had added thefe tettimonies cited by him, that they may fee and know that Simon carried the mater fo, that hefeemed another man then a meer Profeflfour, u e. as he meaneth a true and real! Saint > had he been pleafed but -to Bnglifh thefe teftimonies cited by him fas it was his prudence to Jet them ly under the Latine vail) the very unlearned, who had common fenfe, would evidently have feen and known them to im- port no fuch thing, For this I appeal to the judgement of all that underftand Latine, and will be pleafed to read them : For I think it not worth the while to translate and infert them here; the moftVthatany of them amounteth-to, is that which the word cited from the \EngliJh anno t. hath, that he made outward profeffion _ of faith and conversion. Might he not done this much, and yet not carried it fo in all things, as to give ground pofitively to repute him, as far as men could judge to be a true and real Saint ? Will Mr. Lockjer acknowledge that a man hath faid enough of another, for that end, when he iaith no more of him but this, he was fo con- vinced by miracles , as to profefle faith and converfion ? Nay , he'll fay, its the power of God line ife, not profeflion, that's to be looked at. 2. That when Simons hy?ocrifie did thus appear, the Apoftle did abominat the impiety of his deed, difcover and bear in upon him the perverfenefle of his heart, and his miferable e- ftate, and denunce the terrible deferved Judgement of God againft him, is clear in the Text: But that hedidrejeel: him from out- ward communion of the Vifible Church, I fee it not. Nay, what ever became of him afterward (about it Writers are of different judgements tezCalv. in foe*) there appears to be fome grounds in the Text to think the contrary, viz* thefe^ 1, That Peter with his fevere objurgation and denunciation, joynes a ferious ex- hortation to Repentance and Prayer, with an iniinuation of fome; m ^lopeofraercie, v. 22, 2, That the Hiftorian has regiHrate that Q^Z Simon Simon did not (hew himfelf obftinate, but accepting of the words o£ Peter, and touched with the terrour of the tbreatned judge* ment, fought the help. of the Apoftles Prayers to efcape it. jL But fuppofing that Peter did at this time Excommunicate him 5 yet that it was done upon this account fimply 5 that he was not in-Chrift, that he had no (hare in reall grace, has no footing in the Text; we will find a further mater laid to his chacge-, an atrocious crime of feekingto buy the gift of the Holy Ghoft with money. Nay, that for non-regeneration Hmpiy a man fhouidhe Excommunicat > is a wild aiTertion unheard of in the Word of God, which enjoyn- eth this cenfure only in thecafe of obftinacy and contumacious con- tempt of the Difcipiineof the Church, oratfarthefl in cafe of an: atrocious fcandail, which caie yet is doubtfull, as may appear in the debates of Learned Men about the Excommunication of the inceftuous Corinthian.- 4. The places f £ Tim. 3.5. ismoftcon- trary to the fcope and purpofe of the context* alledged as a rule, holding forth ,t hat all profciTours not having true grace of Regene- ration or not giving evidences thereof, fo far as men can difcero ■> and judge , are for that to becafenout of the communion of the Viiibie Church. It is clear as noon-day , that the Apoftle by the men, of whom he faithythey have a form of godlineffe, means not every profellour unregenerate, or not giving evidences convin- cing fo far as men can judge of Regeneration ; but perfons, openly and groffely in their conversation fcandalous, flagitiojas , blafphe- motis, '&c/. As is evident both by the vfords going before and following §> 14. The laft Object he laboureth to anfwer, the Apftle^ 2. Tim. It 20. T>tit in a great houfe there are not only veffels of Gold and- vf Silver, but alfo of 'Wood and of ? Earth ; andjoTn* to-hwour and - Joint to difi&nour, by hoHfehemeantthViftble, Churchy theref&ri the Vifible Church may vonfift of good ana bad. Mr. Lochier pro- pounds Arguments again!!: his Tenet as himfelf pleafeth , in the moftfoft way for his own advantage. We hope in the next Secti- on to give an Argument from this and other like defcriptions of the Vifible Church formed fomewhat more pungent : now we fhalf . only conftder what he anfwcreth unto it as laid down Ly himfelf, His Anfwers are two* ■Krft,. *A**,r. ("5) . , . Segt-VTIT. Firft, That there may be bah menin a Church hath not been §. i% denyed ; becaufe Hypocrites may delude the judgement of the be ft wen-> but he (the Apoftle) faith not that theje vejfels of earth are there allowedly y but they are there to di /honour i That is, being 'creept inVchere the) i fiould not be^ they are to be caft out of the Church as difhonourable^. at indeed was Hymeneus^.W Philetus, of whomandofoneAtexandei: fee what the Apoftle fay eth y i lira. 1 . 20. Which -Jbftos\ that When men put d^dy that Which they feem to have, faith coupied With a good conference • they are to be put aWay to their mafter as vejfels of diftjonour appointed for wrath* &nfw, 1. PafTingnow that expreflion that bad men are not in the : Church xlleVredlie, having pondered before in w hat fenfe it may be granted, and m what not : pacing this ; what a wilde and forced Interpretation is that veffds todi/bonour, i.e. that are to be caft out of the Church by Eccleiiaftick cenfure. Excommunication f Who ever dreamed of thelike before ? Clear it is, that the Apo- ftle in the back or outfide of the comparison by being to honour, means appointed and imployed to more honed and honourable ufe§ inanhouie. And by to difhono-ur, meaneth not calling out of the houSe ( to Intcrprete him fo were ridiculous ) but to be ap- pointed and imployed to more bafeand fordid ufes 1- And in the kirnell or application of the (imilttude, under the name of veffels to honourls meaned theeledofGod, Smclified and prepared to every good work, and ordained to glory, as is clear by the verfe- going before, and the verfe following. And fo by veffels to dis- honour, are meant canV-awayes,whom, being in the Vifible Church, God makes ufe-of for fuchends as he pleafeth, and in end will Se- parate them to that wrath and confufion they are fitted for, whe* ther ever here^away they break out into fuch Scandals as Shall maka them to be caften out of the Vifible Church, or they continue in the heap or in the houfe to their ending day. That this is the ge- nuine meaning of the words I think no intelligent man will deny* 2» It is a falfe fuppofirion which Mr. Lockjer infmuateth . that bad men in the Church, *. e. men void of true grace and unregenerat., as and becaufe fuch .are to he caft out of the communion of the Wible Church, the Scripture aHoweth no cafting out of men but "becaufe they are Scandalous and contumacious, or atleaft atroci- oully Sect.VIIL t {116) "Pah-t.1. oufly fcanialous ( which latter yet as we faid before is queftion* ablej and it allowethmenthatare fuch to be caften out though they be.haply in (late, truely regenerat and juftified. And there- fore, 3 .. It is a mod; inconfiderat word of the Authors, where ex. prefluig the nature of Excommnnication, he fayeth t hey are to be fnt. away to their mafler as vejfels of dijhonop.r , and appointed un- t-o wrath , i. e. in plain words, as reprobates ordained to eternal! damnation. This is very different from ^auls theologie^ 1 Ccr, $.$. to deliver unto Satan for the deftruclion of the flefti, that thejpirit ma) 'be favedin the day of the Lordfeftu. Far be it from me and from the Churches of Chrift: to ufe Excommunication upon fuchaconfiderationofaperfonand for fuch an end as Mr. Lockjer determines here, which in effeclmakesthe Church in the fentence of Excommunication, to determine, concerning mens re- probation, afecretwhich.God hathkeped up to himfelf, and is altogether hid unto, and undifcernable.by men except in the cafe of finning againit the Holy Ghoft, which yet is hard for any to de- termine upon. 4» The Excommunication and calling out of Hy- menem.^ Fhlletm and Alexander ^ is impertinently alledged to thepurpofe, .viz,, that all men that are not true Saints, or have not true, grace (fo muft Mr. Lockier'% bad men be under- ftood) are upon this accounts be carl out of the Church; thcfe were not fuch men (Imply, but taught abominable herefies, deny- all of the Refurredion, perverfe feducers of people from the faith, ITimu'vlt. b^fphcmers, and for thefe they were caft out, ^16* His next Anfwer is this : UWoreover by this great houfe y he(?2L\i\) Fir ft-, means the Qhwrch of the EphefianS^/or who fe fake Raul wrot to Timothy, and what they ^ere according to the judgement of the>Apoftle who wrot u them ye have heard. Anfw. We take what the Author Jaith, that this great houfeis. the Church of the Efhefians^ and it may well be fo taken, as applicable to the Church of Ephefut, or any other Church ; then I fay he hatk fur- niftied a weapon againft himielf, for if this houfe be the Church of the Ephefians to which the Apollle wrot, then when as writing to them he called them Saints, he meaneth not that of all and eve- ry one of them, but fpake it of the body indefinitely and confufed- ly, why? Sjiouldthatbeunderftooduniverfally, it. jfhould be z ' '. flat 3Pakt.I. ( f27 ) Sect.IX. flat contradiction to what he faith here, that the Church of the Efhefians is a great houfe, in which there are fome vefTels to dif- honour, non- faints, yea very reprobates, appointed to wrath. Ic will not falve the mater to fay, as M r * Lockicr infinuateth,that the Apoftle in writing to th&Ephefians, fpeaketh of what they were, misjudgement i ¥ov Paul is fpeaking his judgement here too ; Now how can thefe two judgements confift in one man, To my judgement,, all and every one of the Church of Ephefm are reali Saints,, fealed as his, and yet I pronounce there are in the Church of Ephefm fome reall un-faints, very reprobates. Indeed if the Apoitle here had not determinedp^/^f/)' and pure. But by way of fufpenceand modaliter, in this houfe, the Church of Ephefm, maybe, or pofiibly there are fome verfeis of difhonour, there Would not be fuch repugnancis or incompatibilitie of this with the former. But he fpeaks abfolutely and pofaively, there are fome. veiTels to difhonour. SECTION IX. Some further Arguments confirming mr ^Doctrine and- everting the adverfe opinion about the neceffarie qua- lificationtf Members of the Vifible Qkurch, MR. L,ockier hath chofen out fome Objections againfi; his Do- ^ Sa etrine as made by. his adverfarie, but. indeed framed at-his- ownpieafare, only two of them are incaufa, the other are but extrinfecall to the caufe, Reflections and prejudices-againft perfOns; this IconfelTe has been wittily done , for gaining advantage in the minds of Hearers and Readers unacquainted with the controvert for his own, and againft his adverfanes- caufe : But it isnot very ingenuous dealing. What ? has there never a reafon more beer* brought, againft that Tenet of his, by learned meny but thefe two < I cannot think-i but he has feen and read Gut* Apohn. con* fideration of certain controverfies &c. fent to the A [Terribly at lVeftminfter^i6^ Spanhems Epiftle to M . B fitch an an r yix. Ru- tberfurd his firft and fecond book againft the Independent w$y% however -he. might have read them , and found therein,, beiwies other other writings of Orthodox Divines , fome other arguments to an fwer ; Well, becaufe he has thought it fit to content himfelf witl thefe two ( which yets how he has fatisfied, we leave it to the in- teliigent Reader to judge) ive •.(hall adde fome few more, nc< troubling our felves^nor the Reader with repetition of all that hath been faid by others. ■§. i. Arg- 1. If zMcfes did admit as Members into the external com- munion of the Vifible Church under the Old Telt. men profefling the true God of Jfrael , the Covenant with him, and his true Wor-, ihip, without enquirie for the -Work of true Grace in their heart* or pofitive evidences , chat they were truely converted , regene- rate, and gracious., fo far as men could difcern and judge j Yea ? knowing alTuredly that many of them were as yet, unconverted and hard hearted ; Item , if lohn the Baptift , the Apoftles , and the Matter Builder and Lord of the Church Jefus Chrift himfelf, did admit into the externall communion of the Vifible Church of I the New Teft. Yuch as did profelTethe Chriftian Faith ., asfoonasl v they did profefTe, without delay for trying and fearching evidences of the Work of Grace in their hearts; Then in all Churches perfons ought to be admitted upon the fame termes ; And it is not a necef- fary qualification , in foro Ecclefiaftko , for conftituting one ca- pable of 'Vifible- Ghurch-Memberfhip, that he be truely converted, fuch as God who knoweth the hearts of all men can bear witnefle to , as indeed fealed for his, by his Spirit, fo far as men truely con- verted and very fpirituall are able to difcerne and judge:, but the antecedent is true in all the parts thereof °. Ergo, &c. ^ As to the confequence or connexion of the proportion, it is likely lAt.Lockjer will not acknowledge it upon the firft part of the antecedent, vi^ the manner and ground of admitting Members into the Vifible Church of the Old Teftament , becaufe his judge • ment, as feemeth, is that the conftttutiOnof the Vifible Church of the New Teft. in this point is elTentiallydirTetent from that of the Old , for be reftri<5teth his Thefis concerning the matter of the Vi- fible Church to the dayes of the Gofpel ;' not once , which to me fmelieth rank of Anabaptifts, who, as we know, denying Infant Biptifme upon thisground , becauie they cannot give evidences of Faith j Being prefled with the Argument taken from Infants i Church. PART.!. C 129 ) SSCT.IX. t^urch- Membership, andfealing with the initiating Sacrament under the Old Teftament to efchew, if they could, the dint of that argument , do run upon the affertion of an eftentiall difference between the conftitution of the one Church and of che other, and fo denyes the confequence from pradife in the one to che other, as we fee Mr.Torrtfo doech in his difpute with M . Baxter. I will not think that Mr Lockjer doth run the Anabaptifts length in making life of that difference : But certainly if he aflfert , as he feemeth to* •do,an effentiail difference between the one and the other,he,for his part , gives them a fair ground to vilifie that argument ufed by all "Orthodox Divines for Infant Baptifme; but the Orthodox have fo- lideiy afferted and maintained > that the conftitution of the Church under the Old Teft. and New , differ not in etTentiaiis but in acci- dentals only. If our Author be otherwife minded , I defire him -to ponder and apfwer what the learned and acute Divine Mr. Bax^ ttr hath on that purpofein his difpute againft Tombs , fag, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34,3 5 , 36. and I will in the mean time fuppofe, with the content of all Orthodox Divines , the confequence of the Propoiltion^even upon that firft part of the Antecedent,to be valide. As to the confequence upon the other pare of the Antecedent^ §.£ vt^ the practice of John the BapHfi y the Apoftles, and of our Lord Jesus Christ himfelf under the New Tell, admitting ^perfons to the fellowfhip of the Vifible Church, upon £heir firft profefling faith and fubjeclion to the Ordinances, without any de- lay of time for crying the hncerity and truth of the work of grace in the heart : I know what ufes to be excepted, againft the pra- ctice of the Apoftles and tlie confequences there deduced from it, viz,, that the Apoftlefwere men indued with aneminent gift of •difcerning-; and therefore although they did admit menas foon as they made profefiion without further delay or try all; yet that -they did this as, by reafon of their gift of difcerning, perceiving in the perfons true inward faving grace. But to this, fuppofing that (which we (hall make good in the §. ^ proofeofthe afTumption) they did admit them upon their firft making profefllon without delay or further enquirie. I rejoyn thus. If the Apoftles did admit them as difcernicg, and judging positively reall grace in them $ then that difceming and judging of R theirs *ct1X. (*}Q) PartJ; theirs either did proceed from, and was the acl of an extraordinary *nfc of an Apoftolicall and Prophetical 1 Spirit ; or from an ordina- ry gift of difcredon common to beleevers. J. It cannot be faid that it was from the former. For,i J. require a proof thereof,frorri the Hiftory of Scripture,becaufe this Queflion being about a mater of fact, the probation is incumbent to my adverfarie as being the affir- ming party.But he fliali never be able to bring a pro,of of this 9 from the Hiftory of Scripture. Yet, 2, nich an extraordinary "Propheticall gift of dficercing, as other gifts of that Jtinde , E. G, the gift- of Ditiog and Writing Canonicall Scripture, was not in- herent in the mind of the Apoftle&by way of a permanent habite whereof they might make ufeby their own will in ordinary ; But was prefent to them by way of a tranfient motion or corrugation of the Spirip. Now albeit it be true that the Apoftles k>meumes v de.faBo^. had fucb an extraordinary and Propheticall infpiration, whereby they dffcovered fecrets of mens fpirits, *as Feter had in the mater of Sect. IX forth; But take one for ah\ Dent. 19. here it is evident ver. 10,11,12,13. that the whole body of the people of Ifrael ate ac- knowledged to be in the Vifible Church of God. Ton ft and all of you before the Lordy our god* your Captains of your Tribes 3 your Elders and your Officer s^ with all the men of Jfrael. — ■ . Yea fome of the Independent way will have, the Covenanting there rehearied to be underftood of a Church Covenant ( as they call it) and that thereby that people were/fc novo* reftored to the ftate of a Vifible Church from which they had fallen, as they aU ledge. And this fthoitbeficliciGus, becaufeit was only a re- newing^ the General! Covenant betwixt God and that people whereby was confirmed their Adoption to be his Church) makech Replace to militate the more ftrongly againft them. Now fee what UWofes fayeth of them, verf. 2,;, 4. 7e ( meaning a great part of that people ) have feen all the Lord did before your eyes in ^gyp?* ' L he great temptations V$hich thine eyes have feen % the fignes,and thefe.gr eat miracles 1. Tet the Lord hath not given Jhou an heart t&perceive y and eyes to fee, and ears to hear^ unto this day • Doth not CMofes hereby clearly declare, that they were void of true grace, and unrenewed men i Some of the In- dependent way have denyed this,., alledgmg, that this exprobrati- ondoth not import that they were yet in a natural! unrenued Hate : But only that they were dull and flow in hearkning to dti* cern and underftand fundry particular difpenfations of Divine favour and power: And that the like finfulLdefeds are. objeded to the Lords Apoftles, CMarki%* 17. But this corrupt and perverfe Irw terpretation upon this place (contrary to the ftream of Orthodox Writers,efpecially fuch as oppofe the Remonftrants, who expounds the place almoft the fame way $ being prefTed therewith in the con- troverfle touching the efficacy of grace in Converfion, fee namely Junius his Analyf*Deut. ip.Calv. Comment. ibLssfmef. Coron. Artie. 3. Argument i*?ifcat. ^Arnica duplicat. ad Conr t Vorfh)^ and parallelling^ with that fpoken of the Apoftles, Mar\^ 8. is abundantly refuted by Reverend Mr. Rut herfurd&ue right of f res-- byt. pag. 104,105,105. that I need not adde more to what he has (aid. Only let the Reader confider what is faid of that people, Qeut. 31-21,27, and judge if nothing elfe be meant 5 but fome par- ticular SfitT.IXi (134) . Part. I titular ilnfuli iitipetfedioxis and defecls incident to regenerat meni Mr. Hookers Anjwtr Surv.p IJk'i pag* *9> 3 * Will not falve the wound given to his opinion by this part of the Argument, He thinks to relieve the mater without the leaft troui le, by telling us that fuchperfons were in that Church having degenerated from what they were, and were to be only tolerated for a time, until! the cenfures were tryed upon them ; But if then they proved in- corrigible, they were to be "removed .% And that the Queftion is not, whether members now received, and Vifibie Chnltians (he meaneth true gracious Ghriftiansm a p»?fitive judgemeut of men J may degenerat ; But whether in orderly gathering of the Church, According to the way and warrant of Ch rift, Such ought to be reced- ed Many things might be animadverted here x But for to ihow the nullity of th s Anfwer, it-ihali i.e fufficient ro confider, that at this time, DeHt.19* CMofies^ at the Lords direction was, by renuing of the Covenant, either ftating thtmde novo into a Vifibie Church fas fome of the Independent way do expone the mater,) or (which is the truth) confirming, or renuing a confirmation of that Ado- ption whereby long agoe, the Lord had a/Turned them to be his peculiar people % And yet he takes in into this whether restoring, or confirming (there are no odds, as to the point w^e are on, which of them be faid) Covenanting all the people one and other of them knowing, the mean while,aflured!y many of them to be but grace- lefle, unconverted men. And was this not to acknowledge them as Vifibie members, but meerly to tolerat them ? Verily fuch a fidion cannot ftand in the prefence of fo clear and evident light of- Scripture* §^ § As to the other part of the antecedent pertaining to the time of the New Tell:. 1. We fee fohn "Baptifi Baptized huge multi- tudes without any delay of time, 'tis faid that all ferufaltm and J udea and the Region round about Jordan went out to him and were Baptized without delay, ■Mdt % ^yf-6* Two things princi- pally are re plyed to the inftance of Johns Baptizing. 1. That it is faid in the Text, they were Baptized conf effing their fins, v. 6. 2. that fchndld not acquiefce in their profeftion : But required of them ro bring forth fruits meet for Repentance. tsfnfVcer. For that confeffing of their fins. *Tis worthy the confideration which Part. I. flSf) ' Sect. IX. which the Reverend Godly and Judicious Cart might hath upon the place, in Amwer to the Rhemifts affirming, that they did not acknowledge themfelves ilnnersin thegenerall only ; but that Everyman did utter his fins particularly, That Learned Author denyeth downright, t hat this confe (lion was made by every one apart, or of every particular fault they had committed; and he iayeth the confeffion was only general!, not only in regard of the cbjecl (i.e.not of their particular fins, but of their fins generally ) but alio in regard of the fubjecl (i.e. that not every one of them particularly and by himfelf did make a formal] confeffion perfonal- ly, but that generally, and as it were in common they profefjfed themfelves finners) and he gives two considerable and weighty rea- fons of his ■afier.tion. Firlr, faith he, if they bad made confe.fi ion every one apar-t, he would have given his prefcrjpdon to every one apart,to every fingular perfon,buc that he doth not : but according to the generall order or profefiion of life,wheretn they iived,to the Publicans,that which pertained to that ftate of life; to the Souldi- ers, that which was agreable to their calling. Secondly 3 becaufe it was impoiUble for John alone to have heard all theie confeffions particularly. 2. Let it be granted, that everyone of them did confe ile fome particular fins : Yet this is nothing to take of the Hrengfh of our Argument : For we find it not, that Iohn did de- lay, or make inquiry of the foundneiTe of the work in,their heart, imtprefently without, more, and without delay Baptized them Secondly, True*cis> John exhort et.h them to bring forth fruits meet for Repentance.But did Iohn Baptift delay their baptifm un- til I he fhould fee thefe fruits, good works in a courfe of iife,broughr -forth, and thereby difcern them pofitively to be true Saints, and' fo duely qualified that way ? Doth t{ie Text import any. fuch thing as this ? Oris not Johns meaning and fcop in the exhortation real- ly and clearly, that which Judicious Cartwright well expreffeth in his Harmon* pag. ?6. JEdit.Lugdon Batav. fub'ymgit adhorta- tationem adteftandam earum quam Baptifmifafczptione fidew & re h-pifcentiam profit ebantur , bonis operibiu, I know that our new Aberdene- Independents in their Letter § iov • ienc tofomeGodly and Orthodox men in this Church the iaft Sura. ■ met in AJay, allcdges, that John Baptift , not content with the externail- r t Sbct.IX. Cijtf) Part.Io externail profelTIon of fuch as came to his baptifrrte, did require of them bringing forth of fruits worthy of Repentance before he ad- mitted them: That he did not baptize the Pharifees, but rejected them, upon this very account, becaufe he did not fee in them fuch -fruits. But what is brought by them for confirming this alledge- ance, and what elfe they bring for their new taken up way in this point fhall be examined afterward in an Appendix, "For the pre- sent, what we have faid is furficient to fhew that Iohn baptized fuch as came to him upon their firft profefllon, without any delay oftime, or waiting for tryallof the (incerity of their faving Con* verfion. - §.n. In like maner find we that the A poflles admitted toBaptifm per- fons as foon as they made profefllon of the Chriftian Faith without ■dehyfor trial! of the truth of graced their 'hearts-: as Afts 5.38, 41. We read they baptized and fo added to the Church three thou« fand, thai fame day that they firft profelled, without delay of the mater for fo much as one day, when as fo great a number might excufed the delay, if they would have taken longer time to the bufinefle. And certainly it being , that the converfion of thefe men was fo fuddain, one would think the Apoftles would have waited for a triall and proof of their (incerity, if fo be fuch a triall and proof had been by Chriftsinftitution necelfary to go before the admiflion of men into the Vifible Churth* But the Spirit of God which atfed and directed the Apoftles, did dictate them no fuch thing. In like maner the Samaritants, men and women were baptized without any delay, Atts g. 12. So Simon at that fame time, albeit to that very day, he had been a Sorcerer, demented that people with his devitttrti enchauntments, and with facrilegious impiety, given hini- felf out as the great power of God : yet as foon as being convinced \>y the fight of miracles, he profefled the Chriftian faith, was ba- ptized by Philip* Finally, whofoever were baptized by the A- poftles that we read of^ were baptized after this fame maner: nor -can there be given from Scripture fo much as one inftance, of any one man, who profefling the Faith, and defiringxhe communion of the Church,was refufed B jptifm for a time, untiil he fhould give atrial and evidence of the fincerity of the work of grace in his heart. To ■Part. I. (137) S&ct.IX. To the pra&ice oijohtt Baptift and the Apofdes adde the pra- § • i*» c*Hce of J efus Cbriil himfelf . 'tis worthy of obfervation (faith Ml. Baxter well agaiuft Tombs , ^p; 1 27. ) that it is (aid, fchn 3. 2<5. he baptized, (vi'f. by the Miniftry of his Difciples ) and all men came unto him. Whereby it is evident that he baptized mea prefently and without delay, as foon as they came and profelTed thenuelves his Difciples. Shall we then, raiferable men, not con- sent with our Lords example, take upon us to be more ievere and exad in his maters then himfeif ? Verily I cannot look upon this tQi great diligence, but as a counfell of mans pride, (huirlihg it felf in under a maske of purity and accuracy in the matters of God, - What further may be exceptedagainft this Argument, built upon §> ! I' that ground, whereon, as a Efficient qualification, Chrift, his Apo- &les, and John Baptift admitted perfons to baptifm, 1 know not, unleffe fome haply will fay, that baptifm doth not conftitute one a member of the Vifibie Church fas Reverend Hooker contends in a large difpute, Sum: p.i.r.4. pag. 5/. & feq.) and that to be ad- mitted to baptifm, and to be admitted a member of the Vifibie '-Church are not one and the fame thing, and that more may be re- quired as a neceffary antecedent qualification to this,then is to. that. -But as to this exception. 1. 1 yeeld that baptifm in it felf gives not the being of a member of the Vifibie Church : But that one mud berlrft a member thereof dejure (which we (ay is given by - fuch externall profeflionas we have defcribed before, -to men of years, and to Infants by federaM holinetTe derived from £heir fa- rents) otherwife baptifm could not conftitute one a member- Ne- verthelefTe we hold this for certain, that baptifm is the ordinary Ordinance whereby folemne admijfion , and initiation into acloall communion of the Vifibie Church, is performed : Neither fince the time that baptifm wasinftituted can their be ihown in Scripture, €i the*: precept, or example of any externall way or means of ad- mitting members of a Vifibie Church, befide baptifm; further let , measke of the adverfaries, that they would produce from the ho- ly Scriptures an isftance of any one man who being admitted to baptifm, was not prefently and ipfo fatlo efteemed a member of the Yifible Church. They cannotiit is a thingunheard of in the Word ~ " . S* of SbctIXv (MO \ PartX of God. Therefore it is clearly evident, that upon what condi- tion men were admitted to the Laver of baptifm, that fame was ac- counted qualification (u&icient in for a Bcclefiaflico^o conftitute a member of the Vifible Churchy and how groile an abmrdity in theologie were it to fay that a man, tho orderly baptized, and no new impediment intetveening, yet were not a member of .the- Vi* ftble Church : &>r hence it fhould follow that a baptized Chriftiatr, even after he is fuch,wete yet w 701^0 i. t% amongft thefe that are without, Pagans, and infidels, iCor.%\%* for there the Apo- ftle divides the whole latitude ofmankinde into thefe two Claflesj of thiofe tliat are Within, and thefe tiat are ■without ,and as by thefe that are within he underftands fuch as are of the Vifible Church, whom alfo he; w\\s Brethren* v, 1 x, (0 by thofe. who are without, he underftands infidels, whom he calls th&men of the worlds* io» This much for pur firft Argument. §.14. aArg.1, If our Lord Jefus Chrift has not given, to any man or fociety of men upon earth, judiciary power,, authoritatively, judi- cially and poUti'vely- to pronounce fentence touching the inward fpirituall condition of all men profefling true Chriitian Religion , andfubmitting themfelves to the Ordinances of Chrift , whether they be regenerat or not : Then it cannot be, by Chrifts inftitutior?, ■ a neceltary qualification requifite to the admitting of perfons into the outward fellowship of the Vifibk Church, that they be in fo* ro Bcckfiaftico judged truely converted and regenerated; But the former is true S therefore fo : is the latter. The connexion of the propofition is evident of it felf. As to theaffumption, let it be noted. 1. That I deny not J>ut a Mini iter has power from God ; with Minifteriall Authority, to determine, UoBrinally and in theji, men regenerated and in the ftate of grace and reconciliation, or unregenerate and as yet inthe ftate of nature, according as they .want or have the characters of true regeneration and faith. They Iiavea warrandfromthe word of God to pronounce all men that have never been humbled before God for their fins, that efteem not Chrift more precious then all things befide in the World, that walk not after the Spirit but after theflefh, &c. to be unrego- neratmen and ftrangers from the life of God, & contra. 2. I grant thavMinifters have power and authority to apply the gene* raM PartX (*39) Ssct.IX, rail DodrinaH fentence to particular perionsia hp&tk'efi feat c$m dirionally. whom aifb they may and ought earneftly to prefle to make pofitive application in their own coniciences, and as they per- xetve more probable appearances of the one or the other fort ef chancers, accordingly topreife upon perfons the one more, then the other. 3. Nor deny I but it belongs tot-he duty of a Mini- Tier ferioufly and attentively to obferve with wifdome, fofar as he can, the way of fuch as are under his charge, to difcern and uo*. demand, fofar as may be, their fpirituail condition and eftate, and that he may have a probable judgement of difcretion concer- ning the fame, this is neceffary and behovefull for him, that he may the better know, how to perform that duty of-dividbg the .Word of'God aright. In erfecl it is no fmali part of a Mintftets iludy/toitudy the condition of his flock, yea, this tn fome way is Encumbent to every particular Christian in relation to others with whom they converfe, that they may be able the more accommo- daily and ptofitably to exhort and provoke one another to good works. But this I deny, that God has given to any ma», or fo» ciety of men, power and authority judicially to cognofce upon the Xpiritualleftate of every profeflbur of the Gofpel, and pofkively to pronounce every profeffour oftheGofpel, upon fuch cogniti- on, to be held a regenerat maa and in the cftate of grace, or to be "ieldunregeneratandyetintheftate of nature: Which yet Mr. Tockiermub needs force fay hy confequence of his Doclrine touching the qualification of Church mater or members. But now Jet him or any man (hew me from the Word of -God, any au- thentick Divine patent or flommifllon of this power, given to any man or fociety of men to the world. The Lord has indeed-given to the Church or rather to the Officers in the Church, a power au- thoritatively to cognofce upon all profeflburs outward actions and to determine judicially whether finfull and fcandalous, or not; but ^to cognofce, determine and judge judicially -and pofitively upoa their inward Spirituall eftate , we read not any where that he hath given power to men : this he hath referved as a prerogative to him. felf to be exercifed openly at laft , in the day of Judgement,before all Men and Angells, and in this lire fecretly , by his Word and Spirit in the court of mens confidences when it feems good to him- $ % "fcl£ Sect. IX. - (140) Bart.L felf- And this is the very ground the Apoftle Rom. 1 4. goeth upon, in difiwading men to judge one another $ Which certainly muft be onderftood of their Spirituall eftates ,. and not their a&ions ; Be- caufe thefe without queftton may be lawfully and warrantably be fudged , fee i>.9,ic s ii 5 i i,t 3 . ofthat cbap,l $-*?• Arg. 3 Which ■will aho ferve to confirme the preceeding. If it had beebour Lords will and inftitution that true heart godlinefle, conversion and faith, foiar as men can difcerne , ftiould be the ne- ceflary qualification to conftitute perfons capable of Vifible-Church- Membedhip , and confequently had inftiruted a power and autho- rity^ tocognofceand paffe judgement politiveiy upon them con- cerning the inward work of Grace in their heart , -whhher they be truely regenerate or not , that upon fiich judgement, they might be admitted unto * or debarred from the fellowship of the Vifibie Church : Then* fure, he would given in his word a rule of tryalS for regulating the Churches cognition , judgement and determina* tion in this mater, expreflltig the particular characters and evi- dences which being found in perfons they might be pofitively judg- ed, regenerate and converted* Yea , and the minimttm yuod fie, that is, the loweft degree and meafure of fuch characlers, leflfe then which, if ProfefTours (hoitkt be found to have , they are to be ac- counted non- regenerate, or at leaft,not *6 be counted Regenerate^ But there is no fuch rulein the Word of God, therefore, &c. The connexion of the proposition is certairi and evident •,' and as Icon* reive cannot be denyed by any man. Far firft - it cannot be con ? ceived how it can confift with {he Wifdome of God, that he woulct : havewdairied that only perfons (0 and (5 qualified ihould be admit* led to the fellow(htp of the Church, and alfothers debarred : And that the Church fhould have power to cog rofce; And pofitively to- Judge every profeffour , that they are fo qualified or not , in rela- tion to admitting or excluding them ; And yet not have prefcnbed a definite rule for regulating the Churches cognition and judgement Of rhis s But left it without rule to men in their confciences,as both judge and rule , to determine who is to be held regenerate or not, certainly this cannot confift: with humane, let be divine, wifedome " Alas / even gracious men being of very different and unequal! fyzes of light and difcerning s could not but vary much Gi*e from ano« sbcr, Part. I. { 141 J' 'S*ct%IX'. ther , fo that oftentimes their would be tot fentmU quct capita. Then any man will readily vary from himfelf at diverfe times : Yea, the beft of men are fubject to fmfull affections which may and would no doubt oftentimes by-aiTe the judgements, as having no fmall influence thereupon p And fo what confuGons, dif- orders, yea and oftentimes grievous injuries to perfons in the mater of admiflion into or exclufion from the fellowftvp of the Church, might not this open a door to, if the mater were committed whol- ly to mans judgement without law or rule: Therefore it muft be confeffed, that there muft be a rule for regulating the Churches xognition and judgement in this mater which the oppoiTtes will noa deny, 2. This rule muft be fuch as hoideth forth not only the par- ticular charaflers,upon the having or wanting of which the Church muft cognofce , and accordingly as is found co judge men Regene- rate or not : But alfo the very minimum quod fie , the lowelt de- gree and meafure whereupon the judgement of the Church is t© proceed. My meaning , to fpeak as plainly as I can to the weaker fort is this s the rnle muiVdeclare, how much is ftiftieient and necef- fary at leaft , to ground a pofitive judgement that a man is Regene- rate , of which if a man come fhort , or have any wayes ieffe , he is to be reputed non-Regenerate , at leaft not to be reputed Re» generate , which according to Mt.Loekiers Doclrme debars him from being received as a Member of the Church. The reafon of this is clear: becaufe other wife the mater fhould be left in ameer ancertaintie , and in effect devolved s upon the meer arbitrement of the Churches judgement ; if, to wit, the rule flsould fay no more but indefinitely : a man, that he may be pofitively judged a "■ true Regenerate Convert , muft have fome knowledge of the Ar- ticles of Religion , experience of erfeduall calling unto Faith and Repentance, and conformity of converfationtotheGofpeh Not determining, definitely this or thus much at leaft, he muft have 5 Which if he have , he is to be judged and reputed truely Regene- rated , and if he come fliort of this much, not. - Now forthe afTumption , let it be noted firft s we deny not but- s jGod hath let down in his Word a Rule, definite and certain Cha- racters and Signes , whereby every Ghriftian , having knowledge thereof/ and making confeiene^ to try and-fearch his heart and " wayes S*c;r.IX. (1.4*) "RajitX wayes , and to compare the fame with the rule ,. may patTe a pofj- *ire , yea a certain and infallible fent ence and jugement upon him- fe/f t whether he beJRcgenerate and in the ftate of Grace, or not; .This we aflert againft P^pifts maintaining, that .Believers nor have nor, by ordinary means, can have afTurance of their being in the ftate of grace: and againft the wilde Antinomians of this time main, taining that this cannot be. had by inherent works and fignes of Grace. ■ 2. We deny not but there are fome more eminent out- ward works and actings of Religion and Piety , upon which men in whom they are feen , may be warrantably by others, -io.far as is competent to men , pofitiyely judged truely ^gracious : and that there are fome outward works and hidings of the flefb defigned by the Word of God fo groffe and corrupt (fuch as areconftant knowri neglect of the Worffip of God , open contempt of Divine Ordi- nances, cuftomarie mocking of Piety and Religion, and fuch others,, fee 2 Tim. 3. *, 3 > 4« ) which appearing in men, others may efteem them void of Grace, carnal!, without the Spirit and fear of God. .Thefe things then being put out of concroyerfie, this is the thing .we cannot fee in the Word of God : a general! and univerfall ruk for trying fc and giving judgement upon all and. every ProfefTour in point of Regeneration and nonrRegeneration , by others then themfelves : and holding forth fuch deftnite limited and bounded -Cbara&ers of Regeneration, whereupon others may pafie a pofitivc fentence or judgement, vi<,. this man is to be held truely Regene- rate , becaufe he hath fo much, or fb muckProfeffion and praclife: ,and this man is to be held not Regenerate, at leaft,.xiot to be held .Regenerate , becaufe he hath not fo much. I fay wer cannot fee any . rule of this, kind, held forth in the Word of God ; let"Mr. Lockier jfhe hath feen it, pointusatjt. Verily if he had hadamindto -fatisfie his readers and hearers 9 or done that wnieh was requifite to .have been done by him in reafon to fatisfie and convin ce them of the doctrine he delivered touching the .mater or Members of the Vifible Church, viz. that. all and every .one of them mttfi be truely converted and fealedof God for his, fo far at men verj jpirituall can judge: he fhould have, told tbem and that from the Word of ,God , thef articular definite hounded Characters whereby all and every Profeffour may and are to be by others then themfelves difcerncd PARr.I; U43) SEct.IX, difeerned and judged" to be fuch or otherwife , but having never fo much as once in bis lecture aflayed to determine this we muft crave fcave to fay he has left them & his Doctrine both in the mift. How- ever let him do it yet, and we fhail paifethatefcape. Others of his way or towards it, have allayed it : btxc when that which they have faid to this purpofe is duly examined andpondered , 1 believe, itftiallbe found by judicious and impartiall men much unfatisfa- clory , and ftill leaving the mater in the dark ; let's take into con- federation what fome of the more judicious of them have deter* mined in this mater. M r . Huokjr Story, p. i*c. s. fag: 24. Jayeth down the rule or § ip- ground in thefe words, be that prof effing the faith) lives not in the neglecl of any known duty, nor in the commifflon of any kno^m evill, and'hathfuch a meafure of knowledge, as may in rea- fon , let in Qorifi' into the foul, and carry the foal to him, Thefe be grounds, by which charity faffed according to rule, may ' and ought to conceive; There be fome beginning? of jpirituatt ' good : Here are two things laid down to make up the ground to proceed upon. 1. Livingjvithout omifllon of any known duety, or in commiflion of any kno wn eviih 2. So much knowledge as may let in Chrift to the foul, and lead the foul to him. But commonly amongft them there is yeta further thing required to ground this judgement, viz,, a declaration of the experimentali work of faith and Converiioninthe heart. M*. 7^orton,fag.\^ and Mx. Hooker himfelf; p. 3. c* 1 . pag.-A* he ( the perfon to be admitted,) muft be tryed, not only tyhat his knowledge, *but What his acquaintance is Vtith the things of Chrift and his Ringdome. Experience and acquaintance with Chrifi: importeth more then -" knowledge that irfay let Chrift into the foul,' and carry the foul to Chrift: Even knowledge that he is in, de fatlo. Now let us examine thefe things fo far as concerneth our prefent purpofe. Remember then/what we are upon, whither the Lord in- his §.«&*■. Word has fet down a general! and univerfall rule for judiciall tryall of profeffours upon the point of their regeneration or non-regene- ration, holding forth fuch determinat grounds, as the Church muft take cognition of, and upon the having thereof, andnoleffe, pofitively judge perfons to be tniely regenerat and converted ones, shis 4>AiT.l. (144) Sect. IX. this prernifed, 1. *Tis to be obferved that, as to that part of the ground , knowledge - 3 M*. Hooker gives us nothing but an indefink general!, fo much knowledge as may let in thrift into the fouii But teiis not, defines not, the bounds of knowledge, that wee might know how much knowledge, will fer've for that purpofe, and lefle then which, will not do it. So the rule as to this part fet down by Mri Booker is but a blind. And verily I think it fha! be hard for any man to define particularly, how much knowledge is requifite to Jet in Chrilt and iefle then which will not do iu Mr. Norto n fpeaking of t his part of the w™$*w, upon -which -the judgement of the Church mult proceed, pag» 12. in fin. and ig e princip. he defines the knowledge required, to he the fundamen- talist and other heads of Religion, the knowledge whereof is necef- fary for leading a lifemthptitfcandalL Butbefide, that it hath never been clearly yet (ho wn by any what are the precile funda- mentals of Religion (and I fuppofe hardly can be) it were a hard atTertion to affirm that the knowledge of all thefe heads of Religi- on that are neceffary. to lead a life without fcandall, is neceflary to a mans Regeneration, and fo the declaration thereof neceflary to-ground the Churches judging ofhim to be fuch, for admitting him to Church fellowship. I think a man may be ignorant all the dayes of his life of the ftricl morality of the Lords day (the know- ledge whereof yet, it being fuppofed to be of divine inftitution (as-itiss) is necelFary to lead a life without fcandall/ and yet be truely regenerat, and fuch as the Chucch may judge iacharky tru* ly gracious. §.17. *• Whenitisfaidtheymttftbcfufhaslivesnot '(which he ex- '' prefleth, to be not, having (in, but to tread in it) in the negleel of any duty, or in thecommiffion of any known evili. 1. The Church hereby is put upon aground of proceeding and judging, which is meerly impoffible, for them to have any certain, cogniti- on of by ordinary difcerning; becaufeaman may live in a known finofomiflionor comminion, fuch to wit whereof (as Mr. Hoo- ^himfelffpeaketh) he is informed and convinced by the power of the word and evidence of reafon, which is fecret, and falls not under the cognition of any outward Judicatory. Mr. Norton faith fomewhat more purpofely that it muft be a conversation without fcandall. Part.L ( 145) SfiCT.IX. fandall, that is, offence before men. And Mr. Hcokp' himfelf a little after he hath laid down the rule,wavering from himfelf(as in- deed in handling this^Queftion , about the neceiTary qualification of Church members, he is exceeding uncertain in expre fling his mind) he fpeaks not of living in any known fin } but of committing feme gr off e ev ill. But then, 2. Is freed ome from living in grofle evills, or outward fcandails, ground fufficient, with a profeflion of the truth, for the Church to pafle a pofitive fentence or judge- ment that a man is regenerat and really in Chrift I I think indeed it may be a ground, to keep us from pofitive judging the contrary of them, which in efFecl: is nothing eife, but to abftracl from pofi- tive judgng of their inward fpirituall condition at all.. 3. If not living in the neglecl of any known duty, i. e . living in the perfor- mance of all known duty for if he will, all known duties obvious to the notice of men) and not living in the commiffion of any known eviil,*. e. living in abftinence from any known evill (or if he will, obvious to thenoticeofmen) muft be the ground where- upon to proceed upon this judgement to be palled upon a mans re- generation in relation to his admifllon to the Vifible Church, and this living importeth a trade (as Mr. Hooker exponeth) that is, a continued courfe : Then I would enquire how long time living fo is fufficient to ground the Ecclefiaflick judgement, and leflfe then which will not ferve the turn ? This was neceiTary to have been determined that the rule might be certain, u e. definite and con- ftant, that the mater might not be devolved upon the arbitrement of mans judgement, or rather pleafure. Here is ait um file nt-ium^ and fo again the mater left in the mift. To prefie this the more and the more clearly, I put the cafe the perfon defiring to be admitted to the fellowfhip of the Churchjand fo to be judged of the Church, whether Regenerat or not, is one who has been an heathen, living before and till that very time in fome known (ins ( as many fins are to heathen known (ins) ofomiflion andcommiflion. Now I in- quire how long time muft be taken to evidence him, not to be a liver in thefe known fins, to the efFecl that a pofitive judgement may patfe upon him that he is Regenerat? Let a pofitive Anfwer be .given to this. Ifanyfhallfay, a definite time is not neceiTary for trying fuch an one, if he have Repentance for thefe fins, and T as Sect.IX* (14*') PartJ;. as foon as he -hath it, it is enough according to what Mr. T^orton fpeaketh (converfatio abfque Jcandalo^ ptnitentianonfanato. ) then I fay, Repentance here muft be underftood either as compre- hending the inward grace in the heart ; but this falls not directly and immediatly under the cognition of the outward Court, to be a ground or medium of their procedour into judgement, yea it is the very thing, or a part of the thing, which is to be concluded in the Judgement; Grit muft be taken as only comprehending the outward part of it, i.e. -Reformation which is nothing elfe but per- forming of the duties formerly negieded, andabftaining from the evills formerly committed, and iffo> then weare juft where we were, in the mill yet. §-iOi 3. As for the third ground or part of the rule,: a declaration of the experimental! wo k of Converfion or acquaintance with Chrift 3 as Mr, Hooker expreiTeth it, or (as diftincliy the Author of the? narration of the pra^ices of the Churches of 7S(jw- England s fdg.9*) of their effectual! vocation, in- their found Repentance towards God and faith towards our Lord Jeius Chrift, is molt un- warrantableand rigid. What^muftthisbea generall rule for all profeffours, that they muft make a declaration of this experimen- tall work upon their hearty that they may be judged Regenerate, and Converts, and fo capable of admiffion to the Yifible Church I What warrant for this in the Word >. The places pointed at by that laft Author, LMat.^-S.., Luke 3. 8. zAU-s 8. 37. does not war- rand any fuch thing. In the former two John Baptift-mdeed char- ged thefe people to perform really the work of Reformation and • Repentance, that they might not delude themfelves with vaini- maginations of intereft in God upon common priviledges : Butre»~ •fjuireth not of them a declaration of the experimentall work there- of upon their hearts, that thereupon a pofidve judgement might be paffed concerning the truth of the work in their heart; So in the place, -Atts 8 37. Philip tells the gunuch^ what is his duety in relation to the fufception of Baptifm, that he beleeve with all his heart i And together, I confefTe, infinuateth the requiring of a pro- feflionoffo much, that he might Adminiftrat baptifme to him. But neither does Philip require, nor the Eunuch make a declarati- ««iof the experimentall work in his heart, in relation to paflinga pofitiye poficive judgement concerning the inexiftence of the work in his heart. Verily ,were this made an univerfall rule or ground where- by tojudgeofprofeiToursConvertion, and confequently of their admiflion unto Church fellowinip; many anhoneft, gracious foul fhculd never obtain fuch a judgement upon them while they live • there being many fuch, who,put them to declarations of this kind, could fay little or nothing. He that were beft read in practical! tractats of the nature of Repentance and Faith, and the way of the Spirits working of thefe, and had a gift of utterance, (hould carry thefaireitfencence, what ever were the reall work in his hearty if he could but carry fair outwardly in his converfation, as an hy- pocrite may, without fcandall. Nay, it were in effect to erect a ftage for hypocrites to out themfelves upon, and to cait a (tumbling block in the way of honeft hearts, not indued with the gift of ex- prelTing themfelves. I deny not but good ufe may be made of drawing out of Chriftians, what experience they find of the work ofthefpirit upon their hearts, and conferences between Minifters and People, andbetween Chriftians among themfelves, may and ought prudently to be exercifed for that end ; But I fpeak againft the making of declarations of this fort, a generall rule and ground for judicial! tryaU and palling judgement concerning the Regenera- tion and Conversion of Profeflburs. To conclude this Argument, when thefe particulars held forth §>ii. by the Word of God are considered and laid together, i. That Regeneration and Converfion being an inward work in the heart, no judgement can be made thereupon by man, but by outward actings. 2. That it is not the outward actings according to their mater, or the deed done* but as they are done from fuch principles, faith, and^ove, and for fuch an end, the glorifying and pleafing of God, that argues the heart to be Regenerat, and the doer to be in Chrift ; and in the ftate of grace, and confequently, that a man cannot pofitively judge of anothers Regeneration by them, but as theyappear 3 Tome way, to be done out of fuch Principles, and for fuch an end- 3. That actings good-upon the mater, mayinfome probabilitie, at leaft, appear to others, to be done from fuch prin- ciples and to fuch an md> 'tis not enough to have the mans own word and aiFertion for in but there mxt& be ,a good time of them, T 2 and Sect. IX. (148) Pa*t.I, and that under fome varietie of cafes and conditions, and Tome tes- tations. For to acl right for a ftart, or to acl: right even for a good time, a mail coming under no alteration of condition or be- ing under fmall or no tentations, does not give much appearance to men without, that thefe aclings-are right m their principles and ends. Tis evenneiTe and conftancy in alterations of cafes, and un- der tentations alTaulting to turn oft the way, that carrieth appea*- rance of difeo very of this. 4, That the greatefl: part eve n of true Converts are not eminent Saints, but weaklings and but as Chil- dren,and that unregenerat civilians and hypocrites may in outwards go far beyond many found gracious Chriftians. 5. Yea that ma- ny true Converts may be under the prevalency of fome finfull infir- mities and arTedions,. fo far, asnotonlyto have, but for a long time, may be even to their laftdayes, as to live (though not with inward liking- and allowing (which is not feen by others)" yet to the outward committing) in known finfull aclings. As for es* ample, may not gracious Chriftians be thus fubjecl to an outward courfe of known cankerdnelle or fome other the like dis- temper ? Let thefe things be confidered and laid together, and teR me if there can be a generall-rule whereby there may and fhould be a judicial! tryall and pofitive judgement palled upon all and c- very Profeflbur defiring the fellowfhip of the Church concerning their Regeneration or non-regeneration ? Wherefore I cannot but commend both the judicious and moderate determination of Mr. liprtov, who when he has laid down the-nile or grounds of the xfiT^tov, whereby judgement it to-be pafifed upon perfons about their fpiritualleftate, in relation to admitting them to Church* fellowfhip (wherein yet Icormot joyn with him as being too (trait and rigid) and coming to define what fort of judgement it is, that is to be pa(Ted upon them, he faith we mull: not judge pofitivcly y but negatively andpraBically^.i. e, (faith he) not judge evill of them, 2. To. carry our f elves towards them In common duties as if they were good, where 'tis clear, that as to the acl: of judgment; he requireth no more, but that we judge not men unregenerat, and this is nothing elfe upon the mater but that fame which we de- termined in dating the Queftion, vi^ that in admitting of perfons into the fellowfhip of the Vifible Church, we-are to look -at r and take- Part. I. ( x-49 ) Sect. IX. take for fufKcient qualifications fuch or fach outward profeffions, prefcindtng or abstracting (fimplici abftratlione) from the inward fpirituall eftate of the man ; for when I do not pofitively judge a man Regenerat or really gracious, but only judges not him unrege- Herat and gracelefle, certainly I abftracl: from both, I will not here flip by what I apprehend my felf, and while I am §< %%, Writing this, Ifinde M*. Baxter m his Book agtinO^Tombs hath diftincrly (for until! this time I had much longed for it, yet I had not the occaflon tofee that Peece) which may be replied, to that Jhave been faying in the profecution of this Argument, tho it co- meth not up to that M-. Lockjer and others of his way would be at. This Reverend Author, I find, fayeth thefe things. 1, That none is to be admitted into the fellowihip of the Vilible Church, but inch as may and are judged, to be members of the Invifible Church and true beleevers; P.i»c.iy. p^g-j^. I take it for granted ( faith hej that to be a vifible member of the Church y and to be a member of the Vifible Qhurch is all on c . And a little after, JSecaufemenfeem to be of the Invifible Church, there fore they tru- ly are of the vifible, and then, ifvee were fully afjured by his own e-xternall difcoveries y that any man were not of the Invifible Church , that man {liould not be taken to be of the Vifible. And a little after, therefore if a converted few wsre to be taken in to the Church upon his profeffion y we ought not to admit him, except his profeffion feemto be (eriom^ and fo fine ere. 2. That the judgement to be palled upon a man that he may be received into* the Vifible Church, is-not purum that he is a true beleever, but modale thzt 'tis probable that he is a true beleever, pag. 03. g. That the rule of this judgement he faith is this? aferiom profejfor efthe faith, is to be taken by tufora: true beleever, he meaneth as before, probably, Tdo much reverence and honour in my efti- mation, this Judicious acute and Godly man, and accounts the/ Ghurch of God much obliged to him under God, efpecialiy for Ms learned and profitable pains in vindicating the right of Infant. Baptifm. Yet I do confefle, in fundry things I cannot be of his * judgement, which I know by h-s frequent and ferious expreflions to this purpofe, he will not take \\\%. had it not been for diftraclions- etherwife and particularly, by this unfeaibnabfe peece, and I may fcy> . Stfctasa (150) Partjl fay, both uncharitable to this Church andunfatisfaclory to any ju- dicious man ; I would made bold ere now modeftly to have repre- sented to himfelfconfiderations upon forae things I have found in his other Peeces ; and may be if God grant us both continuance of life, and me feme kafure I (hall do that yet, and adde forae things alfo out of this Peece Jail: come to rry hands. §•2$. But now to the prefent purpofe. i„ The learned Author and I * Oh that are fully agreed upon the mater concerning the outward. ground thren "hat u ? on wm ch P er ^ ons are co ^ e admitted and acknowledged members arc Co in- of the Vifible Church, viz, aferious profeffion of the faith, in- ciineable eluding a profeflion of fubjedtion to che commands and ordinances tofeparad ofChrift, is fuificient for this, and that perfons making this pro* on becauft f e ffl om are without delay or fearching for triail and dfcoveriesof foundneffe c ^ e wor ^ °^ tnc * r heart- conversion, to be admitted. The Paffages of our he citeth for this purpofe, p. 2. c*% fag. 1 26,117. are clear for it. Church I do heartily approve his weighty exhortation fubjoined thereunto, members t0 t h e fe f t he independent way^ and prefents the fame to Mr. CJmreh Lockjer to be laid to heart by him, as in the Lords fight. See the nhole Pa- Margine *, But 2. II cannot yet agree with him in this, that men roches are not to be received into the Vifible Church but under the noti- ( Mr. Loc- on of true believers, and pofitively judged to be fuch, though but ^ ^ h probably. 1. I can fee no warrand in the Word for this. 2. The tions) and g ro unds that the learned Author hints at for it, pag. 72. do not gather ,feem convincing. 1. Whereas he faith that it is all one to be a vi- Cbarches . fible member of the Church and a member of the Vifible Church* out of And he that denyeth this will but fhew his vanity. I fay if the name they 1 ' were Church be taken in one and the fame notion in both Proportions, no Church- I confefFe 'tis true he faith: and he would fhow his vanitiethat cs, anl would deny it : But if in the former thereof Church be taken for that muft t hat fociety which isChrifts myfticall redeemed body, the Epithete ^U^d VifiM* noting fo, not the nature of memberfhip, butanadjuncl ^iC cover i es of it : I deny the identity of thefe two Propofitions : and cannot of the fee but it is folide enough to deny it. Again when he faith that the work of mens conversion before they admic them,wouId but lay to heart 3I the Scripture examples, and make more confeience of c bicrvhtg their rule and not: prefume to be wvifer and holfer then God. Ue thai gocth beyond Jcfws Chrift ihall go without me, Sx> he, and fo fay 1 m;h him. Invifible Px-RT.r.- ( 15 1 j ^ Sect.IX Invifible is properly and primatly called the Church,and the Church Vifible containing all the unfound part, is called the Church fe- cundarly and for the fake of the Invifible ; I acknowledge this is or- dinary (aid, but can fee no reafon for it. I find three fpeciall Ec- clefiaftick fignifications of this name EjwtAwi* in Scripture, viz, i. The fociety or company of redeemed ones, efTeclually called from the eftate of nature. 2. A fociety outwardly called into and ma- king profeflion of the faich, worfhipand fervice of God in Chrift. 3. An Ailembly of Officers imptoyed in government of ProfeiTors. However I contelfe the ftricKignification is principal! and moft ex- cellent as to the thing ;-■ yet I think all of them are alike proper and none of thefe things has the name by way of reference to another of them, 3. When as he faith. That if Vie were fully certain by his own ext email discoveries, that a man Were hot of the' Invifible (Jhurchy that man fhould not be taken to be of the Vifible 5 and if any few or Pagan Were to be tahjn into the Church upon hu pro- feJfTony we ought not to admit him, except his Profefflon feem to beferiom andfincere. For this I reprefent thefe confiderations, j. If we were fully certain by his own esternall discoveries, that a man were not of the Invifible Church, neither a&ually^ nor poten- tially, orinthepurpofe of God, i.e. ifwewere fully certain by fiisownexternalldifcoveries, that he were a reprobat (as thefe that fin againft theHoly Ghoft, and thefe only, difcovers them- felves to be fucb) true he were not to be received into the Vifible Church, even becaufe he were known to be, tmVway not of the - Invifible Church. 2. 1 confeffe alfo that were a mans outward carri- age and way fuch, as did difcover him positively not to be of the" Invifible Church actually, i. e.- as did- difcover him positively, toV bean unregenerat man (though I did not difcover him to be as a reprobat, j. e. not fo much as potentially of the Invifible Church) he were not to be received into the feilowiliip of the Vifible; But withall I fay he were to be debarred or not received/ not upon { the account of non- regeneration, or upon that cariage confidered l under this formality and reduplication, as a figne and difcovery of non-regeneration; but materially, as-being contrary to the very outward profeffion of the faith, for fuch a cariageonly I conceive it would be this 5 my reafon why I deny that non* regeneration or any: Sect. XX. Oja) Par*. I. any thing confidered formally under the notion or reduplication, as a figne of non-regeneration (which is all one) (hould be the caufc for excluding a manfrom admiflion into the Vifible Church, is be- caufe I conceive it is Gods revealed will in his word that men be received into the Vifible Church that they may be Regenerat and converted and that the Minifteriall dtfpenfationofthe Ordinances, are by Gods revealed will fet up in the Church to be means of Re- generation and Conversion, as well as^dification of fuch as are Re- generat. 3 . Iconceive between fuch as are in a courfe and cariage, which indeed difcovers evidently and certainly non- regeneration (e. g. as to be without the profeflion of Chriftianity , to live in fbme herefie direclly contrary to the foundation, as is Socinianifnv to live in a conftant courfe of known prophanity) and fuch as are feemingly Regenerat and fo to be pofitivelj judged fuch in proba- bility; there may be, yea and are many of a midde fort who are in fuch an.eftare and condition outward, and as relating to mans Judgement of them that as they do not, unto full certainty of judgement, difcover tbemfelves non regenerat, fo there is not fuf- ficient ground pofitively to judge them probably Regenerat, and fo to ufe them, that is to difpence Ordinances to them as fuch and in a way futeable to men fuppofed to be Regenerat : But the moft we can in our judgement of their ftate is to prcfcind from pafling ar poiltive judgement either way; as for example, a man when he comes firft to make a ferious, fober profeflion of the faith, before we haye further experience of his way, or of whom we know no more as yet, but that he ferioufly profeiTeth the truth, and offe- reth fubjedion to Ordinances, I confeffe this is a ground furficient, probably to judge the man is elect, God has a purpofe to fave him 4 and could we not judge this much probable of him, I will not fay we fhould receive him in that cafe. But it is noj fufficient this a- lone and by it felf, to ground a pofitive judgement that he is Rege* nerat or actually in the ftate of grace, though you call it a judge- • ment of probability ; my reafonis this, becaufe to ground a po- fitive aft of judgement, that a man is Regenerat inforo exteriorly there is requifite fome feemingneite (to (peak fo) of fpirituall fin- cerity inamansprofeffion, i.e. that he doth it from a fpirituall principle, upon fpirituall motives, and for a fpirituall end: But a meet ' 'Part.'!. ( 1 5-5) Sect.IX* roeer fober,not mdcking/erious profetflon wi tnoutmore is not a po* {iciveappcarace of fpirituail fupernaturali iincerityjat leaifyherefore I humbly conceive it is a miflake to confound ferioufneffe and fin- cerity,if he underftand fpiritual or fupernatural fincetity (as he mud .underftand it here J for that rs larger then this: many are ferious in their profeHion, who are not fincere in this lenfe : yea may evi- dence ferioufaeiTe when they do not as yet give any pofitive evi- dence of this. And therefore I conceive, he doth not upon good enough ground quarrel! with Tombs ^ag. 1 25?. for that M r . Tombs requiring a profeflion fober, ferious and underftahdirig 5 he doth difdaime an enquirie after thefincerity of their profeflion, if Mr, Tombs meant fupernaturali fincerity, as I conceive he did j the diftinclion of morall fincericy, and fpirituail or fupernatuali fince- rityist:ommon amongftpracrick Divines, ^nd rationall ; and there may be pofitive probable evidences of the former, when there is not yet fo much of thelatter. I humbly conceive, there cannot be had pofitive, probable evidences of this, ordinarly, without ob- servation of a mans way after profeffion for a time, wherein notice may be taken of his walking equally in the latitude of duties, and conftantly in variety of cafes and conditions. But the other may fooner and more eafily appear and polltively be judged of, as we judge of a mans feriotf ftfefie in any other aclion. And 'tis Mr. 'Baxters own judgement, that as foon as a man maketh profeftion of the faith, without delay or tryall for difcovery of his heart- Converfion, he is to be admitted into the Vifible Church. T6 conclude, M*> Baxter and I are at agreement upon the mater con- cerning the qualification that is fufticienrfor admitting perforis into the VifibleChurcb, viz. fober ferious profeffion, without/delay to enquire for more, and fo we are agreed in the maine about the tnaterofthe Vifible Church -; We differ in this that he thinks per- fons are not to be admitted, but under the confideration of perf ms judged, at lead probably, Converted and Regenerated. My mind "is'that they are to be admitted under the name of ferious, fober, outward' profefiburs, abftracfting from Converfioh or non-con- verfion. Which upon the mater, and as to the main hufineiTe of the mater of the Viiiblc Church, will only make fome dif- ferences between us in feme Arguments to prove the. maine V conclufion. jt* Sect IX. f 7 54) Part J; \ conciufion- Some Arguments chat I ufe will not fute his way : ! But that is not much to this point. Now I come to a fourth kd gument. §14, If. the Miniftry and Minifteriall difpenfatiOn of the Ordinances, efpecially the Preaching of the Gofpelin the Church, be instituted and appointed by Jefus Chnftto be a means, not only for advan- cing and perfecting the work offaving grace, where it is already begun; But alfo for converting and bringing to Chrift, and into theeltate of grace* fuchas are not yet favingly Converted, nor re- generate nor in Chrift ; then k.h not a qualification necelfarily re. quiiite in perfons iffforo Ecclefiajlko, i.e... in the outward Court of the Church, for admitting them kito the external! communion and Society of the. Vifible Church, that they belefore truely Re- generate, Converted, fealed of God. by his Spirit for his, or give fuchmanifeft evidences of this, as that they may and ought to be judged by the Churchy truely Regenerat and Convened. But the former partor antecedent is true | Therefore alfo the con* fequent. & % j. "the connexion of the propofitiorr Iconceive is clear .to any dis- cerning man. For ex fzippoji clone confecjuentis fecjuitur oppofitum antecedents, i.e. if all that are in the Vifible Church be fuppofed to be already and antecedently to their reception into the Vifible Church, truly Converted and Regenerated -What is the Mini- fter as a Minifter, or the Minifteriall difpenfation of the Gofpel adoe with Converting of fouls ? AH with whom he has to doe as a Mini- fter are fuppofed to be Converted to his hand; andfoin his Mini* .ftry he has only to do with their advancing in grace. This is, the more conftringent towards our Brethren of the Independent way, that they make the Miniftry relative to aconftitute Vifible Church only, and that a Minifter cannot acl, as a Minifter, but in relation to a particular Vifible Church and thefe that are within it : And therefore ifa Minifter by Preaching the Gofpel fliould be an in- strument of the Conversion and Regeneration of an infideM, yet that is but by accident,and that is not done by him as a Minifter. Jf any (hall fay that many of thefe who are received into the Vifible Church, albeit they be fuppofed and judged to be true Converts and Regenerat ones, yet they may really be unconverted and nn~ regenerated^. Part.T. (155) SecY.ix; regenerated, and fo may, being in the Church dnd unde^r the Mi- nil try, be converted by the Minifteriali Preaching of the Gofpel. That is nothing to the purpofe • Tis but by accident that this Co- meth to paffe, and were it known that a man - were unregenerat and unconverted, he were not to be received under the Miniftry ; Yea were he before a member, he fhoufd be by Mr. Lockiers Te- net,un-Churchedagain,untillhe were a true Convert. And that which cometh to paffe by the Miniftry of the Word, but by ac- cident, cannot be faid to be an end for which it is inftitute and fee up in the Church. Yea further I fay, if the Vlfible Church cen- fiftof ail and only fuch as are fuppofed and judged, fo far as men can difcern, to be antecedently to their admiffion into the Church, truely Converted and Regenerate Itfollowech neceffarly, that the ordinary Minifter of the Gofpell has nothing adoe to Preach points of Doctrine tending to preparatory humiliation, awaking of naturall confeiences, and Converting fouls to Chrift, but all his _ : Preaching ought to be upon points that concerne comfor- ting, directing, ilrengthning, confirming , fouk already Conver- sed ; he fhall have nothing adoe to intreat fouls to be reconciled to God, but he is only to help them to injoy the fweetnefle and com- fort of Reconciliation, ttiey are already ftated in; Farewell all Preachingofmensmiferableeftate by nature, of the terrours of the Law, except only it be to let fouls know the better what they are delivered from. . ForthealTumptionofthe Argument, vi** that the Miniftry 5 * and Minifteriali difpenfation and Preaching of the Gofpel, is irt» ftituted to be an ordinary means of Converting fouls 5 as well as of advancing grace in them that are Converted, may be proven by in- numerable Scriptures. I fhall point at fome, k Prav 9. 3,4. Wifedom hath fent forth her maidens, (he cryeth upon the high f I aces of the Citie^hofo ispmfle let him turn in hither^ as for him that tp ant eth under ft anding, Jbefayethtohim^ come eat of my bread anddrini^of the wine which I have mingled. By thefe maidens of wifedom are meant (5s Interpreters agree) the Minifters of the Word fent forth by Jefus Chrift : Now what is the end and erand for which they are fent? To call and invite fuch as are fimple and have no underftanding *V?..(as Cartwrigk welt expo undeth ) •.,.. V2 fuch, I S.Bcf.IX*" / (1^6) _ Part J. 1 fuch as yet -are void of Religion and wifdome^ (*'.>. oftruefaving I grace, tho not malicious oppofers of the truth 3 and the profeffours thereof, that is in effeel fuch as we deferibed in ftating the Con- troverfie, ferioas, fober, outward profe{Fou% but yet unregene- rjcp to invite and fo to be means of bringing in fuch to communion with Chriil: and participation of his laving grace fee forth under the Parable of a Fea ft. Hi nee then 'tis evident, that the Miniftry, and Miniflenali difpeniadon of the Gofpel is ordained and infti- tuted in. the Church, to be an ordinary means of Converfion. 2. 2,£V*.y„ 18, 19, 20 8 Hence we reafonthus • The Miniltry of the Gofpei, is a Miniftry of Reconciliation, i e. for bringing men. from their eftate of enimity, to peace with God, and it is the Of- fice of Mini fte.rs, as amba'fFidoars in Ch rifts ft cad, to treat with fouls, add bring them in to Reconciliation with God. Therefore they are appointed to be the ordinary means of Converfion. 3 . 2 Tim. 2./ 24,25<, The fervant of the Lord muft not flrive, but be gentle to all men^ aft to teach , patient. In meekne^e injiruBing thofe tha t op-pofe themfelv es^ if Qodp er adventure , ty/7/ gi ve them Repentance. Then 'tis evident Minifters are inftituted to be means - of Converting fouls, and they muftbe qualified in relation to this as the work of their Miniftry, It is well marked by Efiix$ y tho a Papift, yet in mod things* a judicious folid Interpreter, ■ doc et- hic locus Deum ad convert endum ptccatores uti velle operJi homi* num qui externum adhibeant /7 ornon appearance, or defect of pofitive evidence to ground a pofitive. judgement of his Regene- neration ought to be Excommunicat and caften out of the Vijible Church,; but theconfequentisfaife: £rgo the antecedent alfo. The connexion of the proportion Mc. Lockier cannot deny, for in effect it is his own, pag. 2.8. where he fayeth Excommunication is an Ordinance to cleanfe the Houfeof God and keep it pure, and according to what it ought to be fo far as men can difcern, accor- ding to his Tenet, confiding af only reaii Saints, :and not one o- ther. And fayeth expreily that if men creep in,where they fhould not be (Le. if men not Regenerat creep into the Vifible Church) they are to be cadout. 'lis true, pag. 19. in the end of the pa- ragraph, he mincheth the mater, and fayeth only, not one kno^.n to be otherwife can abide Within. But he fhould have (aid, by the confequence of his Tenet, not one, not known pofitivelj , to be Jitch, &c. As to the AlTumiuion, that it is falfe, that for non-re- generation limply, or defecl^f pofitive evidences of Regeneration, perfonsare to be call: out of the Vifible Church, 1. Becaufe there is neither precept nor practice in the Word ofGod for calling -out any upon this account. Ltt ,M*. Lockier produce us any thing from Scripture of this kind. The Scripture enjoyneth Excommu- nicationfor obftinacie, in known publick fcandalous fins in eonver- fation, or herefie in Doctrine, or at moll: for atrocious crimes ("whether the perfons be judged Converts and Regenerate or not) but no mention of anyotherxaufe of Excommunication : And in maters dejure in Religion, a negative Argument from Scripture, is fare, 'tis not commanded, 'tis not written in Scripture, Ergo it ought not to be done# I do profefle this confequent following upon this opinion is one of the confederations amongft others, that of a long time hasfwayed me to think, that 'tis a way which is not of God : But on the contrary (tho Ielteem reverently of many of the followers of it and has no harfh thoughts of their intentions therein) that 'tis a fubtile device of Satan transforming himfelf into an Angel of light^ fet, on foot by him as to advance Atheifm in the World, fo in fpeciall to overturn the Prbteftant Religion and Churches. For if none (hall be permitted to be members of the vifible Part. I. (159) Sect.IX. Vifible Churches, but fuch as are reall Saints, at lead fofar as men very fpirituall can difcern and judge upon fuch evidences, as_ thefe ©f this way hoideth forth. Thefe Being in all parts the far feweft number even very few in comparifomalUhe reft(of whom yet,many may have fome feeds of true iaving grace in them, albeit it be not fo perceptible to others J tho they were not outwardly contumaci- ous againft the Ordinances, mult be un-Churched v caften out, to be no more under any Paftorall care, for watching over their fouls; to live as they like, without any fpirituall means, to reftrain or re- claim them : to be'a ready prey to Satan and his inftruments, to be turned ftark Atheifis, or faiuced unto any errour or .here fie what- foe\er. What a fair field for hunting and catching of fouls, would Romifti EmilTaries have were this way of Mr, Lockers put in pra- ctice in all the Reformed Churches ? I ve.ily think- the keeping oF it on foot and driving it on in this lland is not without influence from that Antichriftian Synagogue upon this very defigne to over- turn the Proteftant Churches. ^Argument 6\ That Doclrine which tends unavoidably to the § iSv holding out from the fellowfhip of the vifible Church, and fo from all the ordinary means of grace and falvation mflituted by Ghrift, not only many who may be the elect of God, and whom we can- not but probably fudge to be elect : but alfo many, who may have iomemeafure of true Regenerating grace in them y and yet leaves a door open to any Reprobat hypocrite f whom it pietends,ought not to be there J to come in if they can but difiemble well and car- ry it fair outwardly - that Doclrine,. I fay, it feemeth, cannot be from God. But that Doclrine concerning the necelfary qualifi* cation of Church- members, aiTertedand maintained by Mr. Loc* kier \s fuch : therefore, &c. The proposition 1 conceive will not bedenyedbyany who will confide r thefe things. 1. That the means of grace and falvation, the Ordinances of God y .are ■inftitute zn& fet up in the Church , priwarly and per fe 3 for the elects fake, , that they may obtain falvation. Hence is that of the Apoiile, I.Tim. 2, 10. Therefore I endure all things for the EleBs fakj* that they way a-lfo obtain falvation which is. in ghrift J efus, v:ith ittmallghry. Notable are the words of that Judicious Popiftr Commentator Eftjm upon the words, idto ( Gracc^ propter hoc) bfiHCY.lA. (I60) 1'ART.ly i. e. ut EinVtigditim diffemineim ' nt Vcrbnm Dei c^rr^t & clarU fegtur ( acutelie pondering the connexion of this verfe with the end of the preceeding, tftoi the Word of God is not bound) omnia . dura fuffero, nullum^ labor em refugio^ idque propter cleflos % J*htamvM enim reprobifint eletJis permixti & eadem offcia per Ecc lefts Minifiros impendantur reprobis^ ut Dotlrina, oratio 9 exhort atlo^ 'correptio, Sacrament or urn Adminiflratio : Non ta- men propter reprobos fed propter eleftos fttnt* And a little after, (JAtinifiros utique oportet cum Paulo in univerfo fuo Minifterio (and fo in receiving into the Vifible Church J hoc ipfum intendere. 2. That as it is Chrift the great and chief Paftor/ his own way not to quench the fmokingflaXj fo it is his will that his fervants and Miniftcrs (ho aid not doit ; but that they fhould receive thefe that are infirni and weak. Now it being fo.; can any man think that, that way can be of Chrift, whereby the entrance into the Vifible Church, and fo to the benefit of the publick Ordinances^ which are the ordinary means of obtainingfalvation, is made fo ftrait,that many elecl* and fuch as we cannot but probably judge to be fuch may he held fortttfrom the benefit of all - thefe, (hut out of the ordinary way of falvation : Yea and even many, who may have" beginnings of the true grace of Regeneration. If this were not a way to quench fmoaking flaxes I know not what will be. §. 2p. As for the truth of the aflumption, I make it clear thus i. As to the former part many of thefe who profeflfe outwardly the faith, willingnefTe to joyn in fellowship with the Vifible Church, and to fubject themfelves to Ordinances, may be of the "elect of God. This cannot be denyed, yea nor can we but account them who comes this far on (thowe cannot yet poiitively fay we account them actually Regenerat men) probably to be elect. Yet by Mr, Lockhrs Doclrine, tho perfons profefTe the faith, be defirous Of thefellowfh p of the Church;declare willingnefle tofubjecl them- felves to the Ordinances ; Yet unlefle they be truely Converted, and Regenerat, fealed of God by his Spirit for his, fo far as men very fpirituall can difcern, they are not to be admitred into the Vi« fible Church, and are held forth from the benefit of all the publick Ordinances, the ordinary means of falvation. a. As to the other part ; 'tis alfo clear thus; becaufe there may be many fmoaking flaxes,. Part. I. {161) SectVIX* flaxes, who have feme meafure of true grace in them, who yet not only are weak in knowledge, unable to give an account of all the fundamental^ of Religion, and fuch points as areneceflary to lead a life without fcandall (which yet are required as the ground of that judgement our adverfaries will have to pafTe upon perfons, to be admitted members of the Vifible Church) but alfo under ma- ny fenfible, Gnfull infirmities, which may render them fufpected to others, to be no reall Saints, may puzle others to pafle judge- ment on them, at lead, may put them to a fufpence from pafling a I pofitive judgement upon them, as true faints/ealed of God for his, I by his Spirit. And all fuch by Mr. Lockjers Doflrine muft be held forth from the Vifible Church, and fo from the benefit of all pub- lick Ordinances,the ordinary means of Salvation. Thefetwo con- siderations, IprofeiTe have been to me further motives to make me think the way held forth by this Doctrine concerning the qua- lification in for o EccleJt£,of Church, members, not to be of Chnft, it being io obltructive to the proper end and defign of the fetting up of the Ordinances and means of grace in the Church, and contrary to Chrifts own way of dealing with fouls, and yet no caft-away or iinregenerat man fhall be excluded, if he but be fludied in tra- Places of theologie, and can carie it fair before men, as indeed by* pocrifie may ftand with great externall formalities of Religion, iri word and converfation. There are two things I find, may haply by faid by the Brethren § ' 5 °* ofthiswayinanfwer to this Argument, i. Thar fuch perfons may be hearers of the Word, tho they be not admitted members of the Vifible Church, we admit fay they even infidels to the hea- ring of the Word. To this I think Reverend Mr. Ruth erf urd has faid truely,that to be admitted as ordinary hearers of the Word^and Church prayers, is a degree of admiflion to Church* meml erihp; and they who are baptized , and ordinarly hear and profeffe a willing mind to communicat with the Church in the Ho*y things of God, they, being not fcandaloufiy wicked, ought to be admit- ted, yea are members of the Vifible Church. But 2. To fay that men are nocmembers of the Vifible Church and yet that they may be ordinary hearers of the Word, according to your principles is but a fair word to make Children fain of nothing. For fay ye, a X Minifter Sect. IX. (i6t) Part!' Minifter is a Minifter only in relation to hisparticular flock and the members thereof, therefore fay I, as a Minifter he is to Preach the Word on y to them, and therefore he muft fute his Preaching of the Word unto them, that is untomenfealedofGodbv his Spi- rit, ^fo far as men very fpirituallcandifcern, and foasa Minifter or a Mintftenall Preacher of the Word, he is not obliged to brinp anv word for hearmg, for the cafe of that man that is not a member and fo if that man hear ordinady or at ail (tho he come to hear 1 any Preaching of the Word fitted or prepared to do him good 'tis more through hap then good guiding, as we fay ; or elie you muft* fay, that a Mimfter when he is to Preach the Word he muft ore pareandftudylomethingas a Minifter, for VifibleChurch-meml bers futeabletofuchi and fomething to Preach as a privat e.fted manforfuchas are without.. But i. An ordinary Preacher of the Word as a pr.vat Chriftian ,is a Preacher unknown to Scripture 2, And one and that fame man Preaching at that fame time, as i, Minifter to fome, andas a privat man to other hearers is far more- uncouth to Scripture. I beleeve a .Minifter by Scripture rule ought in his ordinary and publick Preaching of the Word to act and Preach as a Minifter, and to be wholly taken up w.th- the work ofbisMimftry:. For to that he is appointed of God and commanded to look to and fulfill,. Eph.4. 12. Collar 4 Z? xTim. 4.2. •'■"• '' * 5 '* t. 2 * r IC ' S t fai f \ f ? me 0f th f m n tfat the y wiI! recei ve any in whom. they fee the teaft thing of Chrift, and therefore there is no fuel, hazard of holding out perfons that have not true grace in them To this, that leaft thing of Chrift is fome outward evidence to ground a pofitive judgement, that.the man is Regenerat Now I inquire what is that leaft thing of Ghrift, upon fight whereof vou fay you will receive men? Is fober ferious profeiTion of the true Religion and faith of Chrift and of fubjefiing a mans (elf ro the Ordinances and Government of Chrift,furficient to you that there- upon you will receive him ? Or muft there be fomewhat more to make it up? Ifyou faid the former, we were at agieement upon- the mater, about the qualification neceflary in foro Ecc/efh for admitting of perfons to be Church members : but this you ac- knowledge not to be.fofficient; Let men thus ferioufly and fober- Part J. (*$3) , SsctJX- ly profeffe , there mufl be a time for obferving their converfation, and their mufl be a tryall and fearching into che experimentall work in their hearts : Now if it muftrbe fomewhat more then that I en- quire, what is the leaft thing more f We have feen before what they held forth in their rules of tryail,and dare fay (yea thinks it were unchriftun , unwarrantable rigidnefle to fay the contrary^ that there may be and are many honcft, fincere Converts, in whom there is not to be feen by others, and who cannot fhew to others, that which they hold forth as the leaft, more then that which we have faid ; and therefore ftiil by their way many truly Regenerat may be held forth, tho defirous of Church communion, and offe- ring fubjcdion to the Word and Ordinances of Chrift; for my part, I had rather, twenty hypocrites were letin, then that one graci- ous foul, yea or Eled, tho yet not Regenerat, come this far on, as to deiire to be in, and to profeffe fubje&ipn, {Mould be held forth, and yet this accurate and pretended cleanly way of thefe Brethren, tho it tend to exclude many, who may be are truely Regenerat, yet it may let in any unregenerat, if they can but play the Hypocrite handfomely, and have fome Book- learned- knowledge. ^Argument 7. Shall be taken from thefe defcriptions of the §«J 2 * Vifible Church in the Word of God holding it forth to us frequent- ly as a mixed fociety of good and bad, under the fimilitudes of & barn floore, wherein is an heap of wheat andchaffe,cJW*if . il. of a corn field wherein are growing together tares and wheat, C^ a h l h 24. of a draw-net gathering in good fifla and bad, ibid. verf. 47. &c. and of a great houfe wherein are veffels of Gold and Silver, and vefTt Is of Wood and Earth, 2 Tim 1. 21. Iconfeife this Ar- gument hath not been well managed againft the oppofites, which has given them occafion to flight it, as proving nothing but what themfeives grant. Por when no more is alledged from thefe places, but that the Vifible Church is fuch a fociety, as even when rightly , conftitute, there are in it a mixture of true beleevers and hypo- crites, they- fay they yeeld the Argument wholly, that inthepa- ■feU Vifible Churches, there may andwillalwayesbea mixture of hypocrites, with true beleevers and Saints, defaBoi but that the Queftion is what fort of perfons ought, de jure tohs admitted or X 2 permitted Sier.IX. (164) Pakt.I. permitted to be members of the Vifible Church. But the places duely pondered and confidered together will afford us a more pun- gent Argument,which will not leave open a way for fuch an efcape,. We prefent it thus in form : if the Lord himfelf defcribing the Outward conftitution of the Vifible Church, as to the mater where- of it confifteth; not only holdeth it forth as a mixed fociety of ibme truely good, and gracious, and fome bad unconverted and graceleffe ones : But alfo declareth that his will is that his fervants ftiould not caft out of it all fuch as they conceive to be bad and un- converted, but that they permit even fuch in the outward Vifible Ghurch, leaving to himfelf to make the full reparation of the one from the other : Then it cannot be that by his apointment and in- ftitution,it fhould be the neceffary qualification of Vifible Church- members, in for a Eccleftaftico y that they be all-true converts and' gracious ones, at leaf!:, fofaras men can difcern and judge, this propofitioniftheconfequenceand connexion thereof hold good; leaves no door open for the former efcapes, as is evident: and! conceive that the connexion or confequence of it, is undenyable, becaufe upon the fuppofitionof the.oppofite of the confequent fol- lowes clearly the oppofite of the antecedent, that is to fay, if it were Chriftsinftitudon and will that true grace, atleaft, fo far as men can difcern and judge, fhould be the neceffary qualification, inforo Ecclefiaftico, of all Church-members, it fhould clearly follow that it were his will, and the duty of his fervaats,to caft out all fuch in the Vifible Church, as they did fee not to be qualified, not gracious converts, which is flatly contrary to that which is fup- pofed in the antecedent. Now I affume that the antecedent is clearly held forth to us in thefe places, i. 'Tis clear that in thefe places he holdeth forth the Vifible Church in its outward conftitu- tion as to the mater thereof, to be a mixed fociety of good and bad, truely gracious and fuch as are void of true grace, and not «on!y this, but 2. That not only he permits it to be fo untill the laft day : But alfo 'tis his will and he commands his fervants to permit fuch to abide in the Church as even to their difcerning are bad, leaving the feparation of them to himfelf at the laft. Thefervant faidunto him wilt thou then that vee go and gather them uf t Yes, would Mk Lvckjerhy, leave norTcne of them ; No not one Part.I. ^ ( 16$ >■ SectJX. one of them in a Vifibie Church • they are where they ought not to be, they want the complexion of the Vifibie Church, &c. But fayeth the Lord himfelf; Nay, but let both grow together untill the Harveli. ObjeB. If it (hall be objected againft this expofition and appli- §• Sh cation of this place, that hereby it (herald follow that any pro* phane ones ought to be permitted to be members of the Vifibie Church, which inconfequence is contrary to Chrifts inftitutiorr of Ecclefiaftick Difcipline enjoyning incorrigible offenders to be caften ourandExcommunicat; and that therefore by thefe tares mult be underftood latent hypocrites, which may be fuch in appearance, as may charitably be judged by men true beleevers. An[\*. It cannot be that fuch latent hypocrites as thefe only are underflood : Wh y ? They are fuch tares as are (een and known by the fervants - fhey muft therefore be fuch as falls into (ins and whofe. badneite is obvious to the fenfes of others ,• yet there is no contradiction be- tween this of Mat 13.29. (o underftood, and that of Mat. iS t verf. 17. We may fay as Augttftine on the fame places againft < Donatifis i T>omino in Euangelio dicenti in illo obtemperare de- bemus ubiaitfi neqtte Ecclefiam atidierit fit tibi tanqnam Ethni- chs & Fublicaniu^ & in illo, ubi probibnit coliigi Zizania n* fimul eradicetur & triticum, potefl enim utrumque cuftodi- ri : The reafon is becaufe they may well be conceived to fpeak not ad idem, in refped: to thefe fame fort of perfons. The command of Excommunication is againft fuch notorious offenders as to their * offences adde contumacie againft the Difcipline of the Church, or at leaft, if it be further to be extended^hofe offence is atrocious } & thefe that offends thefe wayes, whether they be tares, graceleffe men, or indued with true faving grace. But there may be finfull livers in the Vifibie Church feen to be fuch by the fervants, who falls not under either of thefe two forts. The Doclrinail notes which the Reverend Mr. Dickfon hath %$&;. upon that Parable, Mat. i$*i^, &c. are worthy the reading and eonfideration to this purpofe we are on> and they are genuine and naturally flowing from the place. The Book is common, fo that Jn^d not tranfcribe all •' I (halibut bring two or three of them for ftich as may be has not the Book at- hand; 1, The external! Vifibie '- " w * Church SterM. (166) PabltJL Church Is worthy to be called the Kingdome of Heaven even in refped of the externall conftitution of it in the world notwithftan- ding the wicked hypocrites in it ; becaufe therein Chrift rules as King, and hath his Subjecls v all profefiinghim to be King of Saints, 4't'It is mater of. grief and offence to fee in the Church of Chrift fo many unprofitable w^eds- — M< The rath- zeal of Ser- vants before they confuk their Lord and Matter is ready with the hazard of the Church and true members thereof, to have fuch a ' conftitution of the Viilble Church as they fhould fuffer none to be a member, who are not inwardly Regenerat 1 But have ail o- thers of whofe inward Regeneration they are not allured plucked from among Profeflburs. 6. The Lord although he hath give® order to cenfure fcandalous offenders, yet he discharges his fervants to preffe towards fuch a feparation, as to have all weeds and wic- ked in heart to be caft out ; Xeatt while they gather out the grace- lelTe tares, they fhould root out alfo the gracious wheat with them .5 For it is not poftiblefor any man to difcern the renewed from the unrenewed lb clearly but he may be miftaken, 8. The mixture in the Vifible Church, Chrift the Lord is minded to per- mit and commands to be permitted till the day of Judgement, and then, but not till then, fhall a full feparation of the godly and the wickedjOf the Elecl and Reprobat be made; In the timeofBarvefi I will fay gather the wheat , &c. See alio his note on the ve r.47^ This Parable teacheth us, that the Vifible Church, in the way of gathering members, and in the manner of conftitution thereof, it is like a draw-net taking in all who profefie Subjection to Chrift and his Ordinances , good and bad , true and faife Pfofeflburs, for it gathereth of every kinde, to wit, whofoever profeffe faith in, and promife fubjeclion to Chrift #.3f. Argument 8. The Dodrine which excludes the Infants of Chriftians from being members of the Vifible Church, cannot be from Chrift nor have any truth in it. But M-. Lochiers Dodrine concerning the mater of the Vifible Church excludes the Infants of Chriftians from being members of the Vifible Church, go &c^ For the proofofthe proposition I refer M* Lockjer to Mr. Ilax- ters Difpute againft Tombs : If he deny that Infants of Chriftians are members of the Vifible Church, let him take fome pains to anfwer Part.!. ( rtfjr) SYct.IX.: anfwer thefe many, folid and acute Arguments brought ty that Learned man, to prove that they are. The aflumption is mod dear. YorM^. Lackjers Doctrine is that none others, no not one other, are fit mater of a Vifible Church, but fuch as are truly converted, fo far as men truely converted and very fpirituall are able to dtfcern and judge i This is a thing that cannot be fpoken or undeiibod of nfants. And it is remarkable that M. Lockjer nor here whetiht? propoundeth his Doctrine concerning the mater of the Vifible Church ^nor elfe where in profecutrng it in this Left ijre, does fo much as once, with thefe whom he allowes to be mater of the Vifible Church, take in their Infants, as fome others of his mind are wont fometimes to do. And therefore that which Mn Cattdrie fayeth,confidering Mr. Hookas conclufion concerning the • mater of the vifible Church that bad he not added a little after , 8 a particular Congregation f Is the ne- Aa €eflary ceffary qualification of a member of the Vifible Church Univerfall, one thing, and theneceffary quaificationofamember of this or that particular Congregation, another; anil may one be fit to be a member of the Univerfall Vifible Church* and yet not qualified to be a member of a particular Congregation > If they deny the be. ing and unity of the Univerfall Vifible Church (which may be* probably, they do) thenldefire them in* the: fear of God, to confider arid, if they can , give us fatisfaclory anfwers to the weighty reafonsfrom the Word of God, brought by fendry late Divnes 5 particularly thefe of the Judicious and Learned Mr. Hudjon in his late Treadles on that purpofe, to prove the being and unity there- of. Which I am perfw ad <*d nor they nor any Hvi ng man iiall ever be able to do. 3. When as they fpeak not [imply, of members 3 but diftinUly r of conftitute members (none fay they are to be ad~ wined as con ft it me numbers of a Vifible Church) J would aske them what is the other part of the diftin&ion f What other mem- bers are there of the Vifible Church, unto which thefe conftitute members are contradiftiBguiibed ? Ho'w are they called in their ipecification ? And what is their neceffary qualification ? 4. When as they fay that none are to be admitted conftitute members, but fuch as With a frofeffion of the truth % joyn fuchblamele(fe andGq* fy el- like behaviour as the) 'may be efteemedin a ratwnall charity i?eteevers*i t e. true gracious beleevers-with ;a faving faith. 1. I would ask here why do they omit that part of the qualification re- quired and made a part of the ground of etteeming perfons helee- vers, by others of that way they have taken themfelves to ? viz,. a declaration of the experimentall workof erTecluall vocationupom their heart, and only mentioned the behaviour or convention. 3. Why have they not defined that blameleiTe and Gofpel like be^. haviour which is requifite to be a ground of efteeming perfons be- leevers, what at leaft is requifite and muft concurre to make it upr and lefle then which will not ferve t That fo we might have the gene'rall determinat rule, whereby cognition is to be made and eftimation to be patfed upon all profeiTours of the truth, that they are beleevers, or otherwayts. For certainly while as they fay,but Jndefinitly 5 fucha-blameleffe and Qofpel behaviour , and tells not d, an univerfalS definite rule whereby judgement may and ought to be pafTed upon all and every profetTour of the truth,by others, t f at they are to be held for true beleevers or otherwife. $. When as in the designation of the perfons that are fit to be admitted mem- bers of the Vifible Church, they with Parentsjoyn their children*, I do heartily acknowledge their Orthodoxy in this, beyond others of that way, who have omitted wholly that addition, and wiihes they may continue in that point of truth, confidering how eafie it is, as the Authors of that Epiftle themfetves may perceive by ex» perience in others that went off with them firft, by that ftep they fiave gone on to Aide into that other of excluding the Infants of be- leevers from the Vifible Church. But now I would know whe~ ther they acknowledge fuch Infants members compleatly, I mean inaftttprimo, or not? If they fay the former, they are at a diC* agreement with others of the Independent way. If they fay the latter, then we muft have another diftinction of constitute mem- bers and fo many forts of members of the Vifible Church, and fo alfo, wemuft have many forts of qualifications of members. But now take the mater of the Thefts as it is, that the necefla- §.4, ry qualification to make one (of years) fit to be admitted a mem- ber of the Vifible Church,is, together with profeffionof the truth, fuch a converfationas may make a man to be efte^med, L e. po- sitively judged a true beleever or Regenerat perfon. I ftiall not here adde any new reaforis to what I have brought before : But lhail come briefly to confider if thefe prefent Authors have brought any new ftrength of reafon for that Tenet 1 Only I would defire them in the fear and love of the truth, to confider if they can find in the Word of God, amoagft all thefe many, whofe adraiffion in- A a % to . to the fellowship of the Vifible Church of Chrifb is mentioned therein ; any inftance of perfons or one pecfon, who after their firft profefllng Chriftian faith and Religion, was, what ever their behaviour and courfe had been before to that very time, delayed of their admiifion to be Church- members untill they fhould be feen and found, with that their profeflion, tojoynfuch a blame- leife and Gofpel-like behaviour, as the Authors requires; many of them,j|o doubt, untill that time had been of a very blameable and un-Goipel behaviour and courfe of life t. And certain it is r that to v be feen joyning with profeflion of the truth, an unblameabie and GofpeMike behaviour requires feme delay and length of time. For my part I could never yet fee any inftance of this kind, but or> the contrary, finds, that perfons, asfoon as they once embraced the profeflion of the Chriftian faith, albeit to that very time their behaviour had been moft blameable,were forthwith baptized and fo admitted members into the Chriftkn Church. Confider this, I* befeech you dear brethren, if fo ye will yet fuffer your (elves to be? called and exhorted by me* §., j, But now we come to the grounds of confirmation of their thefts;. Such ("fay they) were the Churches founded by the &Apo flies ("which ought to be paterns to us) as appears by the title given to< them- Saints , fantlified,juft-ified,wajbed by the blood of Chrift * For Anfwer, we refer to what we laid before, to that fame indu- ctive Argument in Mr. Lockjer y now in a word only, to make this Argument good, itmufthealiedgedandmadeout, not only that all and every one of the Churches founded by the Apoftles (at leaft fuch as are mentioned in Scripture J were atlually and defatlo^ confiding of fuch members as were all and every one Saints, juftifi- ed, &c. in the pofitive judgement of charity : But alfo were in their gathering conftitute of all and every one formally confidei ed and taken in under the notion of fuch upon tryall found and judged to be fuch; But i. Tis not fo much as alledged by the Authors that thev were fo gathered and conftituted, nor can thefe ntles, let them take them astbey will, import any thing of this. 2. Nor fuppofe thefe titles fliould import that the Churches to which 4 they are given were eventually confining of fuch members, as were all and every one fnch ; Does it follow^hat all and every one , of Part.L (173) Append* of the Churches founded by the Apoftles, werefo; I mean even; fiich of them as are mentioned in Scripture : Becaufe thefe titles are j not given unto ail and every Church founded by the Apoftles or Apoltolicall men, in the Apoftles time : We give inftance of the _ Churches, Smyrna, Tergamus, Thjatira , S-ardx ,. Laodicea r nay had the Authors duely Confide red what is faid of thefe Churches, Revel. 2, and 3. I think they could not in reafon faid, what they fay here. Nor, 3. Doe thefe titles import necedari- ly that the Churches to which they are given, did de facto, and eventually confiit of all and every one fuch. Thefe titles may and muft (at leaftoffome of them J be underftood of their vifible body fynecdoc hie ally , by a denomination taken from the better pact, as I would rather fay of the body comma niter & cenfufe, DOC univcrlaliter-. The Authors of the Epiftle touches not at the two former ex- g ^ ■ ccptions ( which yet are fufficient to overturn this Argument, and I doubt not, but one of the Authors, he that, as I conceive, has been the Penner of this Epiftle , a man well enough acquainted in Argumentation, and able to difcern what may be alledged to be defective in an induction, might well pevceived) but only labours to infring the third. We cannot (fay they. J acquit fee to the common Anffter that thefeexprefpons are to be underftood of the better fart- Anfw. Yecasgood, and as judicious as you, the whole ftream of Interpreters, untill Anabaptifts, and Separates did arife, have given, and acquiefced in, that Interpretation o£ thefe titles. But if you can bring folid reafon to prove they mull be underftood otherwife, we (hall yeeld as to this ; We give more affentto one folid reafon, then to an hundred Authority es of meer men. Come we then to fee what reafon is brought to prove they ought to be underftood otherwife. 1 . For that (fay they ) they are to be underftood of them all according to the judgement of. charity : The Holy Ghoft has clearly faid y .. Rom. 1. 7. To all that^ beat Rome^ beloved of God^ calhd Saints* And again, verf. 8* I thankmy God for you all. This the firft, then they fubjoyn ano- ther. We hope when the Apofile faith; l Cor, 6. 18. flee for ni- cation^ none will deny but he f peaks to the whole Church i Yet to the fame per fans he immediatly addes, verf 1% 2Q. Tour body is, the- the Temple of the Hoi) < Ghoft -which is in y oh, J oh are mt your o&v^ you we bought with a price , this is an Argument taken from the condition of the perfons whom he exhorteth thus. 'But the ex- hortationis to all the Church of Corinth. Therefore they were afl fuch as the Apoflle judged in charity the redeemed of the Lord* Anfto. Remember what we have faid before, that tho all were granted that is here aliedged, yet the main point in Queftion touching the constitution of thefe Churches is not proven. The main point in Queftion is upon what formall consideration ontyj the members of which thefe Churches didconfift , were received and admitted into the constitution thereof. But the molt that can be made out of what is aliedged here, let it all be granted , is, that all the members were fuch defatlo and eventually} this being remembered, to the prefent purpofe. i. Suppofe it were granted jj and that the reafons aliedged did prove, that thefe titles, as given to the Churches of R ome andr Corinth were to be underftooB as the Authors will, of all and every one in thefe Churches, that they were judged by the Apoftle in charity, the Redeemed ojF the Lor<£ truly fancTified, &c. it is hereby clear and evinced that fo thefe titles, mud be underftood alfo, when they are given to the other Churches founded by the Apoftles ? I know the chief Author of the Epiftle has more skill ( however it be with others of them) ift Logick, then to think fo, and hopes he doth not fo defpife others that have any tolerable knowledge that way, as to think the^y would take fuch a thing orf his hand, and therefore wonders, that having undertaken to prove that all the Churches founded by the Apoities, were conftitute of fuch members as were all pofitively judged in charity, Redeemed and Sanctified, becaufeofthe titles of Redeemed and Sanctified given to them ; And then that thefe titles given to them* muft not be under fkoodjynecdochically by a denomination taken from the better part *, but of all and every one of them: In the proof of this he brings in two of them, without fo much as one word of affay to prove the like of the reft. If it fha! be faid that if that be proven of one or two, it is proven alfo by confequence of the red. I deny it, for the Queftion being about the fenfe wherein a title afcrtbed to feverall particujar Societies, whether, vv* % it be afcrtbed to them vniverfally as competent to Part J. ( rj? ) Av ? t n tiv all and every individuall contained therein; Or only by a deno, mination taken from a better part of thefe individoalls ? To prove that is to be fo or fo underftood of one or two of them, is not fuf- ficient to conclude, that fo it is to be underftood of the reft i If yet it fhali be replied , that there is no reafdn why it fhould not be fo understood of the reft of thefe Churches, as of thefe exprefted. I anfwer this much at leaf): fhould have been alledged ( which is not) to have made the Argument in appearance, atleaft, to have fome force for the main point intended. But what if 5 tho it fhould fce granted that thefe titles are attributed Co the two Chur- ches expreffed here y are to be underftood as fpoken ofthem#«?. verfallj: yet it fhall be fhown that in fome other of thefe Churches founded by the Apoftles, there were perfons to whom thefe titles could not be apply ed? Wrconceive this hath been done before in our anfwer toM»\ Lockj< r particularly of the Church of Efhe/tts, and that the 2 and 3, of the Rev, hold the fame clearly forth of fome others. But 2. as for that brought for the Church of Rome ■we refer to what we have anfwered before to M". Lcckjer, in that fame pu pofe. 3 . As to the Argument brought to prove that The title of Redeemed ( and confequently the reft ) is given to all and every one of the Church of Corinth^ it lyeth thus in form as propounded by the Authors themfelves.The Apoftle exhorting the Corinthians to flee fornication, taketh an Argument from the con- dition of the perfons whom he exhorteth (to wit that they were^ Redeemed J but the exhortation is to all the Church of Qorinth. Therefore they-were all fuch as the Apoftle judged in charity to be Redeemed of the Lord, Anjty. I wonder exceeding much, that fuch a looily formed Argument fhould have come from the hand of fuch a Philofophe, as Itake to have been the principall Author of this Epiftle 5 for take it as it lyeth here, it iooketh not like a peece of arte, a fyllogifm confifting of three terms : but feemeth to have fome more. But to take it in the moft candid way, I conceive it may be refofved into thofe two procefTes to make it formall, the firfV may be thus, all thefe to whom the Apoftles exhortation to flee fornication there is directed, are by him called Redeemed : And fo were at leaft te his judgement of charity. But to all the Church 6f£orfarh is that exhortation of the Apoftles directed. There- fore, fore, &c\ The other is for proofofthe major or fit ft proportion of chat, thus: Thefe perfons who are exhorted to flee fornication by an Argument taken from Redemption as their condition are cal- led Redeemed by the Apoftle : But all thefe to whom that exhor- tation is direcled are exhorted by an Argument taken from that condition. Therefore, &c. Now then to Anfwer.x. I think the alTumption of the firftfyllogifm may well be denyed $ viz. that exhortation is direcled to all and every one in the Church of CV rinth^ the Authors prove it not; Only they think it fo evident, that none will deny it. But for what reafon they are fo confident ofthislknownot, unleiTe it be this, that flying fornication was a duety incumbent to them all and every one of them. But this reafon is not conftringent; for why may not a duty, which is in a common obligation incumbent to all , be preiTed upon fome pe- culiar perfons by an exhortation particularly intended and directed for them? I can fee no circumftance in the Text here, why we may not conceive this exhortation, tho to a duty of common obli- gation, yet particularly intended and directed by the Apoftle to the elect and truely redeemed amongft them, not diftinclly by the head and name pointing them out, but c-onfufe > in the Vhible So- ciety they were amongft. 2. Faffing that alTumption of the firft fyllogifm : the alTumption of the fecond which is brought to prove the major of the firft, is as loofe, viz,, that all thefe perfons to whom the exhortation is direcled, or are exhorted to flee fornica- tion, are exhorted by that Argument taken from redemption as their condition. This may well be denyed, for why may not an exhortation to a common cluty , direcled to a whole fociety mixed of perfons of different fpirituall conditions, be preffed upon all by Tome Arguments common to all (Tuch as that whereby this exhor- tation is preffed, verf. 1.8.) and upon fome, by fome fpeciall Ar- gument relating properly to them. There can be no circumftance of the context alledged to prove , why it may not be conceived to be [o here, fuppofingthat the exhortation is direcled to all? But, 5. To beat out the bottom of this Argument^ prove from the very Text it felf that the Apoftle here fpeaking to the perfons, whom he callcth redeemed , fpeaketh of them as fuch in the verity of the thing or object,*.?. as truly and really redeemed and confequently * cannot pArr.I. (.177) Append cannot be conceived to fpeak it of ail and every one in the Church of Corinth, as the Authors themfelves will confefle, I doubt not. I prove it thus, thefe whom the Apoftles calls Redeemed here, they are fuch as might and ought themfelves to know, and be af- fured that they were Redeemed, and had the Spirit of God dwel- ling in them. But only fuch as are in real ty and the verity of the thingj Redeemed, Sec. may and ought to know and be affurcd of this of themfelves. Therefore the fecond Part of this Argu- ment is clear, becaufe otherwise a man might and ought to know and be aflured of a lie, concerning his eftate, which is deluded pre» fumption. The firft part is aifo clear from the Apoftles words,, v.19. What} knofr J?t rnot that Jour bodies are the Temples of the Holy Ghoft, &c. That know ye not fo frequently ufed by the A- poftle , efpecialiy in thefe Epiftles to the Corinthians, and in this very Chapter five times, imports a certain aflurance of the thing he is fpeaking of, and therefore here the Apoftle imports that thefe whom he is fpeaking to as redeemed, and having the Spirit dwel- ling in them, they are fuch as may and ought to be afluredly fen* fible that they Were redeemed. And is not this place parallel to that of the very like expreffion, 2 Cor. 13.5. Know ye not that Chrifi is in you ? Which all Prote Rant Divines prefle againft Pa- pills for proving Believers certain aflurance and perfwafion of grace andfalvatkm. Therefore I conclude i That the Apoftle by thefe whora he calls the Temple of tlie Holy Ohoft, underftands them that are fuch indeed and in truth of the objecl:,and not in the judg- ment of charity 5 And what an incongruous interpretation were it to put upon thefe words, Know ye not that ye are the temples of the Holy Ghoft redeemed frith a price I this fenfe > Know ye not that ye are accounted in the judgment of charity, temples of the Holy Ghoft, &c. 4. Yet I think it cannot in truth be faid that all and every one in the Church of Corinth were judged positively by the Apoftle in the judgment of charity, gracious, renewed and fan&ifled ones, even becaufe of the grolfe wickednefle he in thefe Epiftles exprefleth himfelf to have known to be amongft them. The laft exception the Authors of the Epiftle goes about to ob- § 7# viate thus, ^either hath it any freight with us to the contrair which is ofyeftedthat there were grojfe faults amongftthem, as di- Bb vifionf, AP P END* ( I78, ) P A KT .L vifions, intemperance^ quefiionmgthe Re[Hrreblion r incefl 5 Will * In eodem.fjot Lots drunkenneffe , Davids adultery , Peters deniall^provt qiiipptyfop- thefe t.o be fins, incident to the Saints, thojuftly cenf arable* as the iw/oCorm- • n. • is, > thioru quod lnce J tHoHS WM excommunicate, a man who once, as ?i, Tho that objected, hath not with you, mom fiuffeyet basic bad with many judicious and. godly men in the Church of t$> mu ad God, both ancient andmoderne, much weight to the contrair ; I *?° vt *$' name, , for the prefent but one ( there be no doubt of many others) mtonfmu- Decauie °f the Controyerfie he is upon in making ufe of this confi- dinempenv deration.. The godly Orthodox and mz\zm.Augufkine r ,adDona~ litre, fie ar~ti fiat poflcollationem, cap. M ...where difputing againft the Dona- guere repre- t ^fi s maintaining; reparation from all other Chriithn .Churches, be- bcnfibiks cau je of the mixture of many, wicked ones amongft them from Tneo °poplo Enac P* ace > 2 Cor ' 6- *4> l U $6*:*%* ( juft as tbefe Authors of this arguantur f Epiftle do afterward from that fame very place, ut mn fit oi'um tyjicalloqui ovo fimilius ,) anfwers theji from the. consideration of thefe many tauddbiles ^grofle wickedneffes expreffed by the; Apoftleas abounding in chat ^T^"^ Church, that there were many graceleite perfons amongft them, tut. Etce & y et they neither rnade ; nor were commanded to make, reparation ad Corin- from that Church. Ihumhly defire the judicious Reader to be thios fie A. at the pains to read the whole Chap, and I (hall but point at two or fojidta /o- t ^ rec rem 3rkable P^fTages of it, here fee the Marline, fuuur. . ° o Pauius voeatM Tefu Gbrifti per voluntatem Dei. & Solthenes fiater Ecelefta qua eft Gorintb Ifw ftificatu in lefu Cbrifto vocatis (avftis. Quis b%Q avdiens credat in Ecclefia Corinthiorum tfie m- quos reprobvs quandoquidem vcrbujUfic (onant,vclut ad omnes direBafit kudatio I Eltamen pub poft dicit: Qbjeero autem fr aires, utidipfnmdicatis omnes, (pnonfintinvibkfcbifnwa In ipfis etiam Co.rinthii* ity er'mt quinon crcdebant rcfurrefticnem monuorum,qux finguhn- fidestft Cbriftianorum — Auendamm verba Ma quibusG : rit\tiioru ^'Ecelefiam in princifioEpiftotx-fic laudat ut dicat 1 Gratiot ago Veo meo femper pro vobis in g* atia Vet qua data eft vobti in (fbrifto U- fu, quiain omuibut divnes fafti eftis — r - Ecccficerant diati in Cbrifto in omni verba & in ormu (cientia ha ut iU nibildecjjet in ullagrma. ut in iUisefjent qui refuneftiouem mortuorum adbuc ufque non crederent &<; where it is mo(i evident that this learned and godly Ficher expounds thefe tidas of faint!. &c given to the Church o(Corhtb not of all and every one, but of a part thereof and that upon this very con (ideration that there were amongft them perfons guilty of ftich wrckedneiTe as are afterwards fallen upon by the Apoiiic to whom his mjndc is K rkefe titles wete not competent;. Bisi Part.L 1*79) Sect. IX. But waving the Authority of men, let us con fid er the things themfelves, a»d fee if the Authors have not, as it would feem, [trained themfelves here, to make tfyisconfideration appear light unto them. Then, 2. Let it be obferved that in the account of thefegrofTewickedne lies that were amongft the Corinthians ai- iedged as a ground againft their aflfertion, that ail and every one in the Church of Corinth were fuch as were judged true Saints in the pofitive judgement of chanty by the Apoftles, fome make gro ITe faults are omitted,and Come of them reckoned up,are minced by them. Firft I fay fome are omitted ; as for example, vain car- mil abufe unto oftentation ofthe gifts of the Spirit with which th-e Apoftle meeteth, 1 Or. 12,13,14. vile envying, traducing, and labouring by ail means to difgrace and bring in difguft amongft them the bleffed Apoftle and his Miniftry : Read, 2 Cor. jo. and 1 1. and 12. andconfider what was the practices of thefe amongft the Qq* rinthians, agarnft whom the Apoftle vindicates himfdf, and fay if they were fuch as the Apoftle judged true Saints, nay does he, not in exprefie tearms, Cap. it.. ver % 13,14, 15. fay of them that they werefalfe Apoftles^ deceitfull workers^ transforming thsm- j elves into the Apofties of Cbnft, Satans UWinifiers, transfor- ming themfelves as the Ministers of Right eon fnejfe , whofe end Jhottld be according to their Worfev Again fome of them reckoned *Martyr 1% up are minced. Not only were there amongft them intemperance loc Eosnon fimply, but coming drunk to the Lords table, 1 Cor. 11. 21, 22. mn } noti ^ and'tisfpokenofasa thing ordinary and habituall in them; not?? 1 . exuitt limply committing of fornication, but impudent flighting of k ^ LJtur^Z little or no (in at all, as appears, xCor. 6. not fimple queftioning ea mtiti* (as they Interpret it ) i.e. doubting about the Refurreclion,but qiuzfduwk (downright pofitive denying of it, 1 Cor. 15. HoVq fay fome among e ft&° a dre~ you that there is no RefnrreBion ofthe dead, How could the Au- f^^Sa- thors hearts endure to parallell fuch, habituall drunkenneflfe and «>, ignoure whoredome with Lots and T>avids lapfes through the furprizall mtemVeum effuch temptations as they were under^ Such hereticall denying hoc nomine ©fa moft fundamental! point of Religion, the Refunection from^ j^Tn^' the dead, with Peters deny all, dfa mater of fad, his knowledge ^ ^ fm and acquaintance with Chrift (which yet was a grievous fin on the reftiomein- mater) under the violence of a temptation, as if thefe former, asjfowtoar/ > B b a '•"" well Append* (180) Part- J. well as thefe latter, were to be accounted but infirmities of Saints ? Nay, albeit I deny not, but atheifticall doublings on ay arife and v infcil the hearts of gracious pnes (which yet are a torment to them,) yet Ifee not how a formed denial] of that fundamental! point of the Refurreclion, now fmce Chrifts Refurrection, and fo clear and full revelation of theGofpel,can be confifting in the heart with true Caving faith ; And is it not upon this very account that the Apoftle fpeaking to thefe QorinthUns in that ij. cap. verf, 34. fayeth, fome (he means of their Churchy as the ?{jther Dutch Notes well obferve) have not the knowledge ofGod^ i\e. they have not faving knowledge of God. z. What, {hall we yet fay that the Apoftle judged all and every one. in the Church of Qorinth truely gracious Saints. 3. As to that, a man who once fpokenof as Gains, &c. 1. 5 Tis true that fuch a man, though he be o- vertakenwithagrolTeinfirmitie, and therefore be cenfurable and cenfured with the cenfure of Excommunication, yet is not for that, toiofle the eftitnation we had of him before upon fuch grounds ; but what is this to the purpofe in hand ? Have the Au- thors (hown us, or can they (hew us any evidence or proof that thefe mentioned in the Corinth, as guilty of thefe groite wicked* nefles, were fuch as Gains is (aid to have been, appro ven of the truth it feif, yea or positively in charity judged true Saints and Regenerat? To fuppofe this, (as the Authors do but fuppofe it here) is nothing elfe but to fuppofe and beg the thing in Queftion without any proof of it. a. I conceive the Authors are in a mi- ftake, when as they take, that , 2 Thef, § . j efteem him (it is, be could the confirmation brought to hold it up. be meTn^ Their is ere they come to the next, this word caften in, but this fa jute, as is not our cafe ; our Churches are overflowed with a deluge of we fay, it- prophage Atheifts y who have been fuch from their birth to this pre- ludpoffunm fent hour, which I can no otherwise look upon in this place of their fSf^f 6 Epiftle, but as an untimous eruption of defpite againft their mother p^ to &. Church. Afterward fuch as it is, it might have, come in its place, n y that when they come to fpeak to the point of their practice of Reparation Pbyfice he from this Church 1. But here in this place of their Epi&e, they are f°^jJ crc upon the queftion de jure, of what members Churches Vifible g^^rri. ought to be constitute, what is- it to this purpofe that thefe Chur- nen t:but cheshave defatlo, fuch and fuch perfons in them? But now to that were their fecond ground : John ( fay they ) thought not a bare ver- w D J§ tHe ball prefejfton fuffcient ground to admit perfons to Baptifme. ^ ue on f Thefe who cams to him to be e Baptiz,ed r unlejfe hefawjoyned with ^y are it fruits meet for Repent ance r and upon this [core he could not (1 reafoning conceive it (hould be, * he would not* fee the reafonof my conje- from his cturc on the MargineJ admit the Pharifees who came to him to b* ^& or P ra - baptised, as is clear, comp. Mat- 3. with Luke 7. 30. the Pha- co '"lude rifees were not baptised of John. If it be reply ed that Chrifl in t h e jm ox Luke sfeakj only ofjjme of the Pharifees , the fcope of the Text rule,tbere- will eafily refute it, - For he chidesthe Pharifees as worfe then foreknow- the "Publicans , in this, that the Publicans came to Johns baptifm "?, me _ in a capacitie to be baptised and. Were baptized ofhim t which the t fe otS acii:e Pharifees did not y But if thefe many Pharifees, Mat. 3.7. had enough to been baptized of John ; and only fome others of them rejeEled his fee tech 3 baptifm, furely the Pharifees in this had been nothing behind the th,n 2». Publicans, _ for neither were all the Publicans baptised. t Jt has i D ' e * n In this Argument, thefe Authors have no fmall confidence as firft writ- appeareth, once for all then to vindicate this plate from their for- ten would eery 1. Whereas they fay John Havti/l thought not a. bare™***** #i? r m r /v • i . i , -^ -, , that the 0» v er ball prof ejji on Jupctent to admit thefe to Raptijm Who came ao ■ ^ j s sn ' him to be Baptized, unlejfe he found joy ned with it fruits meet for € f C ape of 'Repentance. Anfto. 1. Tis not abareverballprofeflion that we the tran- plead for as a fufficient ground, nor fay we that hhn 'Baptifl pro- ^ c ^ z \ Append. t (iti) Part. I. ceededuponitasagroundin admitting perfons to his baptifm, a bare verbal! profeflion may be apparently in jeft, mocking, and in grofle palpable hypocrifie. John no doubt would hot thought fiich a profeflion a fufficient ground: nor do we think it either. But between fuch a profeflion, and a profeflion wherewith are fee n prefently and actually fruits meet for iiepentancc, i\ e. pofitively evidencing and proving true Repentance in the heart; there is a profeflion fober and ferious , tho for the prefent there be not, nor can be for the prefent, feen fuch fruits , meet for Repentance joy- ned with it\ fuch a Profeflion we fay as this , is a fufficient ground to admit to Baptifme upon ; And upon fuch a Profeflion , we fay Iohn admitted thofe to baptifme, that came to him to be baptized, without enquiring or waiting to fee fruits meet for Repentance. Foritis moll: evident by comparing the Evangelifts, Matthew, Mafkjt Lnk*, yea and Iohn ^ t 3. that great multitudes of people coming to him were baptized by him together , at the fame time. Now I pray how did Iohn fee fruits meet for Repentance in all and every one of thefe by themfelves ? was he acquaint with every one of their conventions perfonall , before they came there , who will be fo impudent as to hazard upon fuch an afTertion efpecially, of him who lived in the wildernette remote from their Cities and Societies ? Or after they came forth to him and offered themfelves to be baptized, did Iohn delay their baptifm and they abide in con- verting with him, fo long a time fwhich could not be for fome few dayes, yea or weeks ) as he might fee fuch fruits in their con- vention, vfi^ fas the Authors of this way tell us) omitting no known duty , and committing no known evill, or leading a con- vention without fcandall ? Who will fay or beleeve this either ? Or did Iohn fee thefe, by examining every one of them feverally* and caudng them make a declaration of the experimentall work of Repentance upon their heart? i. But how could he do this, with fo great multitudes, yea when all is done, this would be nothing but verball profeflion of the work, and not fruits, fpokenof in the Text, which are reall good works and practices in life and conver- fatioo. And as to their hinting at the Baptifts words, bring forth fruits meet for Repentance : As if it were imported thereby, that John is requiring the. works to be brought forth, and that he might fee Fart.L f 183) Appismj.' fee them in relation unto, and before his adminiftration of baptifm to them, is a grotfe miftake or deceit ; for it is evident that John is not requiring a qualification in relation to his adrniniftration of baptifm to them ; But Preaching their duty, without which neir Cher their profeffion nor outward baptifm, nor any other outward priviledge or prerogative fhould lave them from the wrath of God. Yea it is evident that this Sermon exhortatorie was fo far from be- ing Preached to the purpofe the Authors intimats , that it was Preached either in the time of the adminilhation , or rather after the adrniniftration was performed 5 As would appear by Mar k^ I. 8. I indeed have baptized you* But they prove that J ohm Baptized not but upon feeing fruits §•?. meet for Repentance joyned with Profeffion. How? upon this fcore ( not feeing fruits meet for Repentance tyith their profeffion) he could fit fhould be would ) not admit the c Tharifees who-cawe to him to be baptized, Anjw. 1. I know Reverend Pareus thinks thefe Pharifees were not admitted to Baptiime by J ohm but he gives not this as the ground of Johns debarring them , not feeing * Mu[m~ in them fruit's meet for Repentance , but this -, that they came out 1&, Hun.: of curiontie , or malicioufneffe , todifturbhis MinilUy and were Am. Calm manifeft hypocrites : and we confefle if any were known^obe although fuch, they ought to be debarred,and that to adminifier Sacraments f^* ^ot to fuch were to froftitute them,as that Reverend Author fayeth, this in f or- for fuch are known mockers and difpirers of the Ordinances. But mal wojuis- there may be a profeilion not of this kind , with which yet there is as thole, not, at the prefent, feen joyned fruits , positively evidencing the y ^ .*"**. found work of Repentance in the heart. 1- Moft part of com*^ our{e £*"J mentators are of a judgement contrare to that of Tareus^ that athetm> they were not debarred* fee thefe on the Mirgine : * and true y materially to me there appeareth nothing in the Text ag-Jnft it , but rather { P Q * ks lc feme whatfor it, that thefe Pharifees that came to him then were ceai 7 e ~ * Obferve, that thefe two verfes, Lu\ 7.io> 30 by fome are taken to be fpoken by Cbriii bimfelfaspart othis difcourfe concerning lobn Bapriit, and To ou? yrtkm Authors of the Epiftie take them. By others they are taken to be the words of the Evangelift, ex- prefTing the 'different cffcfi , that Chrifis difcourfe concerning $obn hadnpon cfiverfe hea» rcrs, zip that the common people and very Publicans hearing that diicourfe glorified God 1 having been fuch as were before baptized of tfebn : but the Pharifees defpifed it aad reje&ed it being iuch as werexioc baptised by John, we. will not now diicuffe-whkh of the mo are moit probable^ tbc foimer interpretation is the more common. Append. \v (184) Part Jo Baptized by him : for that fharp objurgation , generation of J vipers, &c. on which weight may be laid , was fpoken not only to the Pharifees (though in fpeciail way it was to them ) but to the whole multitude of the people. Luke 3.7. Nay doth not John in the profecutionofthis difcourfe dir^cled in fpeciail way to the Pharifees fay , I baptise jou} yeaasin-^f^i I have baptized yon? If any fhall fay this was not one difcourfe , with that going before, becauie Z#4f fayeth that he uttered the laft point as the people were in expectation , and all men mufed in their hearts ,&c, I fay this proveth not .that it was another difcourfe i or that there was any interruption or intervall of time interveening : it onely fheweth that upon confideration of thefe thoughts in mens hearts concerning this , as an fpeciail reafon , lie uttered this point,which yet as appeateth in Mattfa and all other interpreters take it , he fpake alfo for clearing the Doctrine of Baptifme , tofhew what be- longed to him as theexternallMinifter of it , and what to Chrift as the principall Caufe and Author. §.10, But fee we how our Authors will prove, that thefe Pharifees that came to Jobn^ were not admitted by him , and that upon this fcore , as not feeing ( viz. at that time , fo we muft circumfhn- tiate the mater ) in them fruits meet for Repentance joyned with their Profeflion. . *Tis clear (fay they) if we compare Matth. 3. with Luke 7. 3. the Pharifees were not baptized of John. An£i. Suppofe it were granted that this were meant Univerfally of the Pharifees and ib of thofe that came to lobn, Mattb.^. with the reft: Yet were proven kit the half of that which was alleadged, viz, that they were not admitted by him to baptifme,. But no- thing is brought for the other hS,viz. that it Was upon this fcore, viz, becaufe he faw not fruits meet for repentance with their Profeflion. Migjfrf it not be that he admitted them not, not upon that negative ground, but upon this pofitive ; Becaufe he faw them coming out of curiofitie or malicioufnefTe , or jetting , and not fo much as in fober ierioufnefTe. Nay take thefe verfes, 20. 30. as a continuate part of Chrilts fpeech concerning John, (as our prefent Authors takes them ) and not fo much is proven , viz. that John refufed to admit them. They import rather , that they them- felves refufed to be baptized, defpifed and rejected his baptifmej Then P A RT .1. ( I §5 j A-P P E tf 9* Then that he refufed to baptize them defiling to bebaptizfd, and fo interpreters commonly, efpecially thofe that take thefe verfes to ■bji a part of Chrifts fpeech, underftand them. But 2. take thefe Verfes as you will , I fee not how it appears clearly by them , that thefe Pharifees that came to Iohn^ Adatth. 3-. were not baptized by him. For take them as the Evangelifts words ( as it feemeth very probable they fhould be, comparing them with Math. 1 1 . 1 $. and the beginning of ver. 31. of that 7, of Luke ) then they are meant of fuch Pharifees as were prefent hearing Chrifts difcourfe concerning Iohn, and the meaning is this much, The Pharifees that were prefent hearing this difcourfe of Chrift, not being baptized of John, dec. Now can this be brought to prove that the Pharifees that came to Iohn, Math. 3. were not baptized : unleffe you will fay, that all the Pharifees in Judea, yea in the world, were prefene bearing that difcourfe ; Which is neither fatdin'the Text, nor any wayes likely they could be prefent. And take them as a continuate part of Chrifts difcourfe concerning Iohn, and fuppofingalfo that ic were meant that Iohn debarred them from baptifm ( the contrary whereof, that thernfelves rejected, defpifedit, and would not be baptized by him,ts likely to be meant,as we faid-a little before)yet is is not clear thereby that thefe Pharifees that came to Iohn,Math*^ were not baptized, becaufe the proportion is but indefinite, and fa may be verified tho underftood particularly ; Andiffo, what evi- dence have we from the words that thefe that came to Iohn were the men. Judicious Interpreters, byname CWufcutHs\xA *Are» tiusy exprefly comparing the one place with the ether, affirm they are not the fame particular perfons fpoken of in both. Againft what is faid in the laft place, our prefent Authors fay^.u. T he f cope of the context will eafily refute it : for Chrift chideth the Pharifees as werfein this, dec. Anfw. 'Tis eafierfor men to fay, that their Adversary is eafily refuted, then to do it. 1 . It is likely as we fliew before, that in thefe verfes i% 3c. 'tis not Chrift that fpeaketh, chiding the Pharifees as worfe that way then the Publi- cans: But Luke exprefling how the people and Publicans prefent upon the one hand, and the Pharifees on the other, were affeded with Chrifts difcourfe concerning Iohn. But 2. let them be Chrifts own words, it will not be found by the context that it is Chrift his Cc ■~;-- ] f CO p e ftope to chide the Pharifees he fpeaketh of here for this, that com- ing to be baptized, they came in an incapacity, and for that in* I capacity were refufed Baptifm by-lob*, ,tho defirous , ( which they fliould have proven,and not begged ) but for this^t hat they would j not be baptized by him ; For the words are not, thauhey rejected the counlell of God,and /e/wbaptizeth them not,or therefore were cot baptized of him : but theyrejecled the counfell of God,them* felves not being baptized by htm * &a,iflt&*vns <& *vt The confequence built upon it, to prove that thefe Pharifees that came to -lohn, Mati 3. were not baptized, is feeble : For it muft be thus thrift chideth the Pharifees as worfe then the Publicans, for. this^ that when as the Publicans came in a capacity to he baptized and were baptized.* The Pharifees did not fojJSV^none of the; Pharifees were baptized, 1 & fo neither were thefe mentioned, Mat. 3. 1 deny the confequence? For the antecedent may be true, .and Chrifts chiding the Pharifees; generally, reafonaWe and juft, thpfomeof them had been others wayes affe&ed and thereupon baptized. As for the reafon of the confequence brought by the Authors, if thefe .many Pharifees; bint. 3. 7. &c, The whole ftrcngth of it lyes in a fophifticall in* firniation, that thefe Pharifees, Mat. 3. becaufe they are faid to be many, were the-greatefl: part of all the Pharifees, and thefe be- ing faid to be baptized there were but fome few befide > of whom thefe words,- Luke 7. 30. (they were not baptised) could be ex- pounded/ this I fay is but a meer fophifticall insinuation : for albeit ihefe, Mju 3. be called many, yet their might been Pharifees many more, ten to one befide* of whom that Luhej. 30. might be faid. Now confidering that the Publicansand other/uch com- mon people tho all of them were not baptized of John, yet gene* i^iy they (hew themfelves. more ebediejnt and refpedive to the Ordinances Pary.T, (187) . Appsn»# •'Ordinances Miniftred by John, as alio they did unto Chrift himfelf, then the Pharifees did, albeit feme of them alfo might been difobe- dient to him and not baptized by him, it may be clearly enough feen, that the Pharifees were much behind them in this, and that Chrift might juftly chide the Pharifees as worfe then the Publicans, for the caufe mentioned (fpeaking of them indefinitely J tho all and every one of them had not been in the blame. This is not unufuall in comparing two forts, orders or conditions of perfons, . to blame the one as worfe then the other in fuch a particular re- fpeft fin an indefinite fpeechj when the one is more generally blame-worthy that way, then the other, tho, may bejoraeofthe party blamed are free of thie fault, andfomeofthe party com- mended, may be deep enough in that fault. This much for clear, ing John Baptifts procedure in admitting perfons to baptifm, viz,. that he did baptize perfons coming to him upon their flrft profefli- on, withour delay or waiting for difcoveries of true heart Conver- sion and Saintfhip in them. Having ended this Argument from Johns order of baptizing,they §. ii tell us that, many moe and more prejjing grounds from the Word might be alledged to make forth this pint : But w? are loath (fay they) to be tedious r only jure Vvee arejoolinifie becomes the Houfe of our Cjod. It is certain our Churches are not confiitute accor- ding to this rule in the full extent of it •, Tea alas fety of our moft precious men will acknowledge it to be the rule. Anjw. 1. Al- beit the Authors conceiving to their knowledge many mee grounds to be in the Word of God for making forth their point and having fet down here but fome few of them, omitting the reft, 'might* without incurring the hazard of animadvetfion, Pledged that they paffed thefe others, being loath to be tedious, becaufe to wit they were writing an Epiftle, notaTradat: Yet their purpofe being ha this Epiftle, to give an account of their thoughts fas they fay in the beginning ) -in this mater to feme-Godly men : 1 humbly con- ceive, that When as they fay, that there might be alledged more freffing grounds (which I doubt not but they fpeak as even to their own knowledge) 'For their point then they have alledged, bat they are loath to be tedious by fetting them down: This cen- fure might juftly be put upon it, that either it isan open writing '"• C c 2 themfelvcs .A**i'kw. '-■ (i88) Pary.I. thernfelves with their own pen 3 knowingly, foolifh wrongers of their own caufe; When as purpofing to pick out fome few grounds of many, for giving an. account of their belief to men, whom they would give fome fatisfadion to , and draw to their judgement and fide, they leave out the grounds that are mofl pr effing for making out their point; But verily I think tome of them, atleaft, notfo fimple as to have committed wittingly and willingly fuch an errour* Or it i$ , give me leave to fay it , a meer windy word , to fay the ieaft, incqnfideratly uttered. And how (infuli a thing it is fo to fpeak, eipecially in maters of this kind , they are not ignorant. 2, But is that word, T/aL 93. tdt. Holineffe becometh thine Houfe for ever , hinted at to clofe up thetnater, one of thefe more pref- fing grounds , for making forth their point } O ! but firft this is an Old Teftament Scripture fpoken ia relation to the then Churches of the Old Teftament ( whatever the place importeth ) as well a? to the Gofpel Churches, Now why then did you before^ as feems with your Mafter,reftricl: your Doclrine concerning the qualificati- on of Church-members to the Gofpel Churches ? Or if you wilt now difown that reftriclion , is it your minde that this Holinefle you. plead for, was alfo the rule of admitting Members to the Vi— llble Church under the Old Teftament . ? Then fure-, Afofes was ia- a great fault , who walked not by this rule in his praclife about Church Members as no man can deny. Far be it from you to fay it, , Brethren , when the Lord hath given him a Teftimony that he was faithfull in all hisiioufe. 2. We (lull not here mention the di- verfe interpretations of thefe Words of the Pfalm given- by fevcraljh interpreters ( fee Calv. Partus in locum) the moft genuine in- terpretation I conceive to be; Either to take them, as our Englifti tranflation renders them. Holineffe becometh thine HotJjfi: and fo as holding forth the duty of thefe who are the Drds Houfe. Or thus rendringthem, tothyhoufe beautiful! holineffe,^^ be- longed as their peculiar priviledge bellowed on them by thee: but whither of thele wayes they be taken , they make nothing to the Authors point ; Not taking them in the latter interpretation i as is evident , the Authors I beleve will not fay , that God by the effi- cacy of his Grace works Holinefle in all and evecy Member of the Vifible Church, Nor yet taking therein the former 5 According Fart. I. -fi.800. Appenb* to which the fimple meaning of them , is no other but that which is exprefled in the lateft edition.of the Englifh Anaot. on the place a holy ' life and converjation becometb them thatprofefe themfelves to be fervants to fo great and glorious a Majefty, and who of us will deny this i. this importeth what is the duty of all that profeffe themfelves to be in (o neer a relation to God as his Houfe , which istobeHolyin^heTruthofthethingorobjecl:, and not only fo to cary it before men as to be efteemed by them fuch in charity* which men may doe without the reality or Trueth of the thing. And this we grant s that men profefllag themfelves the people of God ought in duty, as they would anfwer their profeffion , to be truely Holy* But what is this to the point of the qualification ne~ ceiTarily requifae in perfons in foro Ecclefiaftico that they may be admitted co the externall feliowilitp of the Church ? Where- fore. 3. we confeiTe our Churches were not contoute according to this rule 5 I mean of the HolineiTe fpoken of in that paffage of the Pfalra : Nor indeed could they, nor can ever any Churches in this world be fo contoured : becaufe it is true HolineiTe in the rea- lity and truth of the thing , that is fpoken of, which falls not un- der the cognition of the Ecclefiaftick court , to be a rule of admit- ting perfons unto the conm'tution of the Vi'fible Church. 4. I know not well whom they meanbythefe, few at leaft preck^us men whom they inftnuate to acknowledge their rule ; Except they mean themfelves who have finfully feparated themfelves from the Church of Chrift. But I may fay they have no caufe to weep and fay alas for the precious men that will not acknowledge their new rule of contouring Vifible Churches : becaufe it is a rule that God never coatouted for that purpofe; But they have caufe to weep and fay alas (which I pray God of his Grace they may do ) for" themfelves that they have feparated themfelves from the Church of Chrift upon the very ground that Don atifts feparated of old. la the refrof the former part of their Letter they declare their *' ,s * purpofe of feparating from the Communion of this Church , and their ground of fo doing, which I follow not here, it being: my purpofe to take unto confederation only fo much of their Let- ter as diretfly coacemeth the prefent Queftion I had in jiand touching ■ - . . . . ' ;; Av P B ND . ( f 190) $K*mTn touching the neceffary qualification of Church members. I doubt not but fome of thefe men to whom they dire&ed that Letter has returned them a furficient Anfwer upon that point of their repara- tion. And one of them has abundantly refuted that fame point m Print againft Separatifts, as many other Orthodox Divines has done the like , not only modern Divines in their writings againft late Se- parates ; But alfo ancient againft Donatifts and Novatians. Cer- tain it is" and cannot be denyed by any that has any toilerable in- iight in the Ancients that thefe our Authors in their feparatio goes upon that iame very ground that Donatifts and Novatians Separa- ted of old. It was one of the Errours of thefe, that by fellowihip with wicked and ungodly men in the Worfhip and Ordinances of ^God, others are polluted (as we may learn from Cyprian Epift. Ji.and52, and Angst ft. in his writings againft Donatifts, parti- prefent from Auguftine is that, contra Epiftolam Tarmeniami^ cr lib* 3. cap. x. Ab initio cum omnis pia ratio & modus Ecclefiafti- ca Difciplinaunitatem Spirit us in vinculo pacts maxime deb eat intueri quod Apo(lolHs fujferendo invicem praeepit cuftodire, & quo non cuftodito median* vindifta non tantum fuperftua fed eti- sm perniciofa, & propter ea jam nee medicina ejfe convincitur^ \ illi filii malr 9 qni non odio iniquitatum alienarum i fedfludioc6n~ tentionum fuarum infirma* plebes jaBantia fui mminis irretitas ^ - ve I tot'Oi trahere^vel certe dividere ajfeBant, fuperbia tumidijer- vicacia vefani>calumniis infidiofi y feditienibus turbulenti^ ne I nets veritate car ere oftendantur,umhram rigid&feveritatis ob tendunt^ & qua in Scripturis fanBU falva dileBionis fine erit ate >& CHftodi- tapacis unit ate ad corrigenda fraternazitia^moderatiori curatione " fmceptafunt ad Sacrilegium Schifmatis^ ad sccaficrie prtciftonis &fitrp##t AtPiKU- (19*) Part.L uf uy •pant dicentes % ecct ah Apoftolus 3 aufirte malum ex vobis ip- ps. Yea the very univerfall Argument and purpofe of thefe Books againft Parme nianus, this Ancient \{\mfe%Retracl:.lib, 1, cap. 17. £xprefTeth to be this, intribuslibrk contra Tarmen. &onatifta~ rum Qarthaginenfis Epifcopi % fuccejforifque Donatio queftie magna if erf at ur & folviiur * utrum in unit ate & corundum com* munione Sacramentorum mali contaminent bonos ( which is the very ground whereupori thefe our Brethren builds the neceflity of their reparation ) & quemadmodum non contaminent dijputatur propter Ecclefiam toto orbe dijfufam cui calumniando Schifma fi~ cerunty If I would bring here ail that, that Ancient hath againft this Tenet and practice of feparation of thefe Authors I might tran- scribe the moft part of ail his writings againft theDonatifts/There- fore I refer trie Reader to the writings themfelves , and befeeches thefe our Brethren yet in the fear of God and in humility of Spirit to confider and ponder their way they have run into was condem- ned, and folidely refuted from the Word of God, in thefe ancient Schifmaticks, by the Godly and Orthodox ancient Doclors of the Church in that time. And now I go on to M«*. Lockiers Appen- dix, PART, <*93) PART II. Wherein is Examined M r . LOCK I ERS TWO ASSERTIONS, Concerning CHVRCH-GOVEKNMENT: And what is faid for Confirmation thereof. Have been, IconfefTe, well long upon theExa- D mination of yte.Lockjers Lec1ure,becaufe I found | not fo clear and diftinft handling of that mater in $ others, as I could have wifhed : and I thought it expedient that, in regard he fpeaks with fo great a deal of confidence in it , and others made (b much noife of it, #nd this new-fangle itching- ear'd age is ready to take with every new fancy, busked up with gay words, and, like children, to be carried about with every wind of doclrine ; In this regard I thought it expedient the more fully to difcover the weak- neflfe and unfatisfadorineffe of his alledgeances therein. I fhali not * I mean need,nortnind I to infill: fo largely upon the Appendix *. The ma- as :o every ter therein touched, viz,. 'What is the proper fubjeel: of Ecclefa- g™^ ar ftick Authority and Government : And whether there be an uni- ^^^ on of more Congregations and Churches under one common Pref- here ; For bytery : has been a 1 re ady.fo learnedly and fully cleared by others/ here are that it were but needleile labour for me to infift on it ^ And I con- more P 3r " feiTe, ImervailmuchthatMr. Lochter (hould have prefented the ft^/^ world with fo %y a difcourfe upon thefe maters ( as I think every ^& , Dd judicious Sec T.I. f (IP4) PAiiT.it; judicious Reader wilt perceive this Appendix to be ) when as there areabroad fo learned Traclats and Debates on them. Alwayes we muft be at the pains to animadvert upon this part of the Stone too, elfe. the world lhould be made believe we were fell'd dead with it : But we (hall do it as briefly, as to particulars, as we may, and (hall refer M. Lockier to fuch Pieces as are written already, for, further builneiTe and work to him, as occafion ihall require. M^Lockiers Appendix SECTION L §<*, T Tls firft Affertion is this: That the Elderjhip which is within the, JL A particular Congregation, u not in moft weighty things, ta* exert potyer, Without the confent and approbation of the Church • . whereof the J are. By things mo ft weighty, I mean thefe things Vehich are moft ejfentia/l to the ft ate of a vifible Church : as ad- mijfion of Members^ ordination of Officers, and l excommunicati- on of either. §..3. 5 Tis worthy Obfervation how the Author manages this mater of hisfirfl: AfTertion, the point he propounds to be proven, is that the Elder(hip of a Congregation may not, in moll: weighty maters, exert power without the confent and approbation of the Church, and for proof of this, his firft Argument, Se ct. 2, is an alle- geance, that the power of the Keyes was primarly given to the Church of belie vers, as the fubjecT: thereof, Math.\6A6* which allegeance he ispleafed topaflfewitha very light and flight {hew of a proof, as if it were a mater of fmall Debate. Whether thus ?ie has done f from deliberate and advifed policyjto {hun Debate up- on that which is the very to ^t^wjn this Queftion about Eccle- fiaftickjiirifdiftion, and to make his common Readers the more favourable to his part, as pretending only to difputefor intereft: of confent ^approbation to them in a&s of Jurifdiclion Ecclefiaftick of greateft concernment ( and indeed as mans pride naturally car- ries him with a defire to have a finger in rule, fo it is a plaufible fub- Jeft to fpeak for it to him ) or if he has done ic ftpm fome other principle, Part.IL ( 195 ) . Sect.L principle, I will not determine ; Let the judicious Reader con ;e- dure, what he thinks mod likeiy. Onlylmuftfay it feemeth to me a very ftrange and irrationall way of procedure, to take fo greaE pains and make fo much adoe, as Mr. Lockier doth here in pleading for a certain condition of perfons formal! intereft and concurrence 3 iz afts m& the exercije of jurifdidion, and to make this the Que* (lion or conclusion to be infiifted on : And mean while, to take k aimoft for granted without proof, or at moft,in a flight overly word to alledge, that rhey are chiefly inverted with that power and au- thority from which thefe a never received fuch a power or authority, from him to whom it belongeth origi- nally.* Mr. Lockier does juft here, as if a Papift or Jefuite, going about to Difpute the Controveriie concerning the Popes fuprema- cy, {houid be taken up ail along the Difpute in bringing fome topical Arguments,that this and that and the other adof fupremacy,as caL ling of cecumenicall Couniels, to be prefiding in them,finali and in- -fallible determining of controveriies in Religiose. ought to be per- formed by the Pope of Rome ; And mean while (houid misken the Queftion,if ever Chrift gave him a grant of power and authority to perform thefe things,but only fuppofe it be fo,or content himfelf to cite for it as it were in trunfim^Tibi dabo c laves or Pa/ce oves me* 4s y as if it were out ofqueftion clear that thefe places held forth a foveraigne power and authority over all things, and perfons Eccle- fiaftick in Peter, yea and in every Pope of Rome, beftowed on them by Chrift. I think a judicious adverfary might well laugh at a Papifts difputing after fuch a manner. And io may any judici- ous man at M .Lockier s manner andmethod of difputing here,con» tending much in fome topical! Arguments to prove that the people oi'ghttohave.anhandinfuch andfuch ads of Government, and mean while flight proving that they have the power aud authority to governgranted them by Chrift: 1 think a rationall difputant . would have laboured nrft and mainly about this; And indeed were this made once clear , we (houid foon be at an agreement about the ads and exercifes -of government, once prove the forme or Dd 2 habit Sect.Iv ftp*) Part. If. * habit to be in fuch a fubjed, and there will be no queftion about the ads thereof, whether they be competent to that fubjed or not. If any man fhali fay for him here, that by (hewing fuch and fuch ads to be competent to the people, it is proven confequent- ly a pofleriori, that the habit or power from which thefe ads do flow is in them : Ianfwer, if that had been his intention Co he might have done £ But then he (hould not alledged the inexiften*- cy of the power, as a medium to prove that thefe ads are compe* tenttothem ('as he-doth in hisi. Arg.) for this is nothing elfe but to run in a round :. but we muft apply, our felves to follow his me<- thod. §• 4* To fpeaka word then to the firft Affertton , I will not queftiosa the an fit, or being of the fubjedof this AfTertion. Whether there be de jure and of Divine inftitution, wciElderJhiy^ or Ptfesby* terie within a particular Congregation , Le. a Cdlledge o£ Elders belonging to one fingle Congregation by it (elf having power of Government and exercifing Ecclefiaftick Difcipline ; although j know men Learned and much excercifed in the ftudy of the Que- iiions concerning Ecclefiallick Government, are of the judgement, that there is not fuch an Elderfhip or Prefbyterie $ And I confeile 'tis right hard to finde in Scripture either precept or example for it; But I fhali,going along with Mr. Lockier in the acknowledgment thereof, note butfome few things upon the attribute of his Alter- tion *. There be three things therein contained, i. the ading fpokenof, viz. exercing of power. 2. the objed of that ading, molt weighty things, 3 ... The limitation of that acling.about this objed, as competent to the Eldetfliip. §_- For the firft, M'. Z^^^r fpeaketh fo here as he would feem ts grant to the Elderfhip fome power and exercing of it about thefe weighty maters, providing it be with confent and approbation of the Church, i,e. the fooety of ProfelTours they are in. But ve- rily by his way the Elderfhip as contradiftinguiihed from other profellburs^ and as the Elderfhip has no power, nor can exert any power at all ; I mean power of authority in thefe maters : All .their part is meerly to prefide and moderate the meeting of the Church, and as a Moderator , or Chair- man, to propone and (late a Queftion • Ask and gather the votes, and declare the fentence ' ','.". " "*" concluded Fart.IIv (197) SfcCT.l # : concluded by thevotesof the coliedive body of the Church; con- veen and difmifle the meeting ; Or at moft as a Gommktee of & Judicatory, to prepare maters for publick cognition and fencence ; All which is no Authoritative power. I think therefore that Mr. Lockier would have dealt more candidly to have plainly faid, the Elderfhip can exert no power at all in thefe maters ; This belongs to the collective body of the Church, and their part is only to pre* fide and moderat the meeting in exerting its power : But fuch plain language, which yetfpeaksthe truth of his way, is too plainly diifonant to the language of Scripture, which fpeaketh. of Church Officers, as Governours of, and to be over the people, and having the rule over them, and many fuch other things attriSuteth unto them, which importeth another kind of thing then meer pt eliding, moderating, or being the mouth of a meeting or a preparatory Committees For the fecond, why does M*. Lockier here reftric*! his alterti* $'** on,to thefe maters of greater weight ? Does he grant that yet they may exert power in maters of leffe weight without the confent and approbation of the Church ? Nay, he cannot. For, 1. mo& of his Arguments following, if they prove ought to his purpofe 5 they prove the Elderfhip cannot exert power in any maters of Eo- clefiaftick Government withoutthe confent of the Church , whe* ther of greater or imaller weight. , Yea, 2. in his laft Argument to prove they cannot exert power in thefe greater maters, he afifu- meth that they may not do it in fmaller maters. For (faith he, Sett. 11. 'Pag. 8 1 % ) if in leffe things the Elderfhip may^ not all alone, furely not in greater. What then needed this reftriclica of the objecl: in the AiTertion ?-.- But now what are thele. maters moft weighty I He tell us, thefe §. 7* things tyhich are moft efentia/i to the fate of the Vifible Church- And then reckons up particularly thefe three aamiffon- of Mem** bers, ordination o-f Officer s % . and Ex comunication of either. To paiTe that expreffion of moft eflfentiall importing degrees in effen- tiality which Philofophy will not admit, as telling us that effentU rei nonrecipt magi* & minus. Ido humbly conceive that the fixt Preaching of the Word of God, and right adminiftration of „ Sacraments are as effenttall (to ufe his words) to the ftace of the " '' ' Vifible SftCl.T* (198) Part JL 1 Yifible Church as any Of thefe particulars mentioned. Nay they 1 are much more efTentiaii; there may be a true Vifible Church", where thefe are , tho Excommunication be wanting, and that ad- i mi-ffion of members Mr, iW&Vr fpeaks of, unknown to the Prim*, tive Apoftolick times. It has been the conftant Doctrine of Refor- med Divines, that the found Preaching of the Word and right Ad- miniftration of Sacraments, are neceffary to the being of a Church, and exercife of Difcipline only to the well-being. Some Churches have no Excommunication ; which though we approve not mthis^ yet becaufe they have the true Doclrine of the Gq- fpel taught and pVofefled in them, and the Sacraments therewith admtniftrat* right for their fubftance, God forbid we Ihould account deftitute of the mod eilentiaiis (to ipeak fo with him) of a true Church. Now if the Preaching of the Word be a thing moft ef- fentialltotheftateofaChurch, as certainly it is, muft the Mini- fters of Chrid, not Preach any Doctrine, as the Doctrine of Chrift, without the confent of the Gtwrch, i.e. of the profeflburs to -whom they Preach ? Mull it be firft propounded to them to have - their vote and fentence pafTe upon it, and upon that Preached f I conceive Mx. Lockier will not own fuch theologie. 2. That ad- million of members which hemeaneth here, is fo far from being one of thefe things mod effentiall to the ftate of a Vifible Church, that, as he and others of his mind conceive it, 'tis but a meer new dcwicQ 9 unknown in the preceeding ages of the Church, and with- out ground in the Word of God; He means admiffion into the feU lowfhlp of this or that particular Church or Congregation by a Church Covenant as they call it , which he conceives to be that which formally gives Vifible- Church- Memberihip,. and that k muft be upon fuch qualification as he has been deputing for in his Leclure. But as there is no warrand in the Word of God for fuch qualification as neceffary to Vifible- Church- Membership ( as has been cleared in. our former part ) fo it is a plain miftake that admif- fion unto the fellowfhip of this or that particular Church , is that which formally makes one a Vifible Church Member ; And that it is founded upon another milhke, which is a *y"v 4%v£& fa the Church way of the Independent Brethren, viz,, that there is no Vifible Church Catholick or Univerfail; but that a particular Con* gregation Part.II". (199) Sect.L gregar.ion is the only Church. The truth is, profeflion of the true Faith and of fubjedion to Ordinances , with the feal of bap- tifme compleatly makes a man a Member of the Vifible Churchy ( elfe, fuch were «/ we K® , without , and fo but of the world of heathens and ftrangers , which is abfurd ) and admiflion in this or that particular Congregation , gives him only the opportunity of exercife of his Church- membership and the priviiedges thereof { whereunto he had right before) hie & nuncfW w.hieh has been fo deary evinced by judicious and learned M r . Hudfon^ in his-Vin* dkation of the E fence and Vnity, dec. that any man that will not wilfully {hut his eyes againft the light, may be fully convinced thereof. So then as for admifiion of Perfons into this or that par- ticular Congregation, it is not a mater of fo high eflentiality to the ftate of the Vifible Church. And for that wherein folemnadmif* fion into the ftate of the Vifible Church formally confifts, bapti* z>ing, if Mr. Lcckjer fhall fay that this cannot be done without the fentenceof the collective body of Profetfours,. he'll fpeak befide the book of God > which holds forth to us baptifme a PariJIv • tbe Elders mull not in thefe weighty maters of Government, ad- miffion of Members, ordination of Mimfters, censures, exert powe£ without the authoritative joynt acling and concurring of the Church, i.e. the body of profeffours therein, with them. Anf. i . If this cpnfequence be good, then-it muij follow as well Aiar Minifters cannot exert power of authoritative Preaching the Go- fpel but with the joynt authoritative concurrence of the people in • Preaching with them. For certain ids that the power of Preach- ing the Gofpelis comprehended^ thefe Keyes given to Peter^ as well as the power of cenfures, &c and therefore if it follow, the- power of the keyes was ndP|ivento Peter as an Apoftle, nor as. an Elder,but as a Believer ; Ergo the Elders cannot exert power in or- dination, cenfures, &c. without the joint authorative concurrence of the body of ProfeiTours therein, it mud follow alfo : -Erg^they, cannot exert power in preaching the Gofpel without their joynt •authoritative concurrence, therein s and fo when the Mtnifter prea- .ches, all the people muft authoritatively preach with him/ elfe his preaching is null. 2. But waving this,and granting it were true that the power of the keyes was firft given to believers, and fo t© Peter ^ not as a Minifter, but as representing Believers. I do not fee how it muft of neceHity follow that the bodyof ProfefTpufs rrfaft a el authoritatively, jointly with the Rulers in the exerting ofthat power. For we may fuppofe it was given to the body of the Church, not formally, but radically and virtually to be by them derived to Rulers to be formally exerted by thefe only, and then the confe- quent will notfollowj as, fuppofe it were true, which many Poli- ticians, and with them fome Divines, maintain .(whick yet for my fclf I cannot fee folide proof of ) that the power of Civile Govern- ment is firft given of Qod by a natural! right unto che body of peo- ple : yet from this it folioweth not, tkat no Magistrates elected by people muft exert power of Government without the joint autho- ritative concurrence of the people with them ; Then when ever a • King is to exert an a& of Government, or a Parliament, they muft do nothing, unletTe the people fit down upon the Throne or in the houfe with them, and thus no doubt fundry Divines in formed time*, when they % that the power of the Keyes were given firft to the v^gle.Church of beleevers, arc fa be underflood to have meant pknT.IL, fao?) • i Sect.!!, meant, that this power was given to them not to be formally in- herent and abiding in themfelves, to be exerted and exercifed by them : But virtualiy,by them to be fetled upon fuch perfons as they fhould dellgne for Mini (teriall offices in the Church, by whom on- ly it is to be formally exerted and exercifed, which yet rs^a mifhke. But let's fee how the Author proves his antecedent, viz. Thdt §^ the poWer of 'the l{eyes Was not fir ft- given /o Peter, as an Apoftle, eras an Elder 7 but as a *Be It ever* Only by the way, firft, 'tis worthy obfervation that thefeofthe Independent way, are not at agreement among them fives, yea n#r fome of them with theai- felves, touching this mater of the firft iubjecl to which the power of the Keyes was £iyen, as we fee marked in their own expreflsons' by the learned M r . Caudrey , in his fcheme of contradictions and : contrarieties in the Independent way fubjbyned to his vindici ' fees s with all Peter received not ?>W,ibid. pag,47# Not believers as.believerx 9 evers Covenanting and fitly capabk according fpirituall £ *Hh moment, V , Hook. Surv. P gifts and power The keys ,pag. 51. 203 9. As the keys of the Kingdom of i heaven 'be dtverfe^ \ the Keys mzerlr as \ r , r t- a , T&h^^ d tAi Uoaretbe-fubjetts ,. {to Whom they are comitted diverfe The Keyes, pag. a Beleever^but as a Beleever ' p lickh fr of effing his faith. The Way cleared^V.i.fol.-fp 9, It appears that. H< So LockJerhu^ 1. p. 9* The pov, srafthe Keyes belongs fir ft to a Congre~ gation of Covenanting be-* I e evers ,Kook.Surv.Part.t 3 pag. 2 t 9. The power of the Keyes is in the Church of beleevers a* the fir ft fubjecl! , ibid p. That conceit is wide to make : om' pft fnb']e& of this Sect.1I. . • ii66) Chrifi gave the \ but that headdeth Keys to the .fiat er- nitie , Vpjth the ^Trefeytery, ibid. and the Way clea- r^,Part.2.pag.22. not profeffed. The asipoftles pere the firfi fnb- jetl of AfofloLkall power, ibid. 32. Part .11: this poVeer and jet others to jhare in this power not by means of that, for this is to ff> ea\, daggers -I and contradiBiottSy ibid. Sfh §4. Now fee the Authors Argument,*^©?* the confefpon ofhisfakh 9 had he this tru ft bequeathed. to him, Mat, 16. i£. Therefore to the C far ch of Believers, andhdievingwithfuchafaith as flejb and blood cannot reveal, was the Keyes of power primarily given, and to the Elders in the J}cond place ., as exerted out of this firfi eftate^ an J as Officers and Servants of it. Anfft* And firil n©te fome- whaf, upon the confequent. i . The confequent as here inferred is much different from that which is propounded in the beginning qT the paragraph, there it was propounded thus, the power of the Keyes was not firft given to Peter as, &c. but as a beieever, here it is the Keyes of power> the former expreflion, ( fuppofing there were fuch a dtftinftion of Keyes,as Keyes of power, and another fort of Keyes different from thefe) being indefinite, may import both, but the latter irripor- teth a fpecification of a definite fort of Keyes. What means this" variation ? That the Reader may tmderftand this myftery the bet- ter, 'tisto be obferved, that when as hitherto irrthe Church of God, by the Keyes of the Kingdom of Heaven, being underftood the Ordinances of Jefus Chnft which he hath appointed to be ad- ministrate in. his Church , or the power of adminiftring thefe Ordi- nances under himfelf, thefe Keyes have been diftributed unto the Key of Knowledge, or Doclrine,which is the preaching of the Go- fpel, taking in therewith the Sacraments as the Appendicles and feals of the Gofpel.,and the Key of furifdiclion, or Difcipline,which confifts in Cenfures and abfolutibn from C en fu res : Independents offlfcehave forged new forts of the Keyes, whereby they have confounded themfelves, and would confound the whole Church of Chrift in the mater of its Government. They tell us there is 1. a Key of Knowledge or £ uth, the firft fubjeel whereof is every Be- liever, whether joined to a particular Congregation, or not. 2. A Key. Part.I1. f *°7> - Sect.IL Kryofintereft, power or liberty, Vhich is in all the Brethren of a particular Congregation. And 3. a Key of Rule and Authority, which they fay iff in the Elders of a particular Church or* Congre- gation, The meaning and refutation of Ehefe new forged Keyes fee in Jus Divitt. of Church Govern, fart. 2. c, 10. fag. 108, 10?. &c. and Wll.Cattdreys Vindiciclav. <.z* per tot. Now when M-. Lockler in. the confequent of his Argument fpeaks of the Keyes of power, it would reemhe rnuft underftand that fecond kinde of Keyes. For I know no other going under that name amongft In- dependents. Yet maybe, by a new conception of his own, he means that all power of government diftinguifhed from the Preach- ing of the Word and Administration of Sacraments, exercifed in or- dination of Minifters, and difpenfation of cenmres. Again fee another great variation. At rlrft he propounds thatfthe Keyes \*tere given to Peter firft as a beleever. This may import (and as fpoken there by the Author without any explication, cannot be otherwife underftood but that it doth import ) that they were given to him asafingle beleever 4 ; but now in the confequent inferred in the pretended proof , he fayeth thus, they were given firil to the Church ofbekevers^ this is a fociety of*perfons collectively and unitedly taken, and not perfons fingly. 1. Where (hall we ever . read, the Elders or Minifters called the Officers and Servants of the Church, that is., (as Mr. Lockier meanethj by way of relati- on to the Church as a Superiou'r, or Miftretfe^deputing an? imploy> ing thereto pfficiat and acl in her place i We find indeed they art called*the fervants of tfie Church of beleevers by way of 'relation of a means to ah end, for their good* iQor.±, j. 1 Cor. 3. *22. as Angels or Miniftring Spirits fent forth to Minifter for- them .who (ball be heirs of falvation^H^. i. ult. But they are only Chrifis Officers and Servants, by way of relation of Deputs to officiary and imployed to ferve unto a Superior and Mafter deputing to ofli- ciat,and imploying to ferve in his place* and are. fee over the Chuah byhim. ' ' • * .- But now can&ier we how this confequent is proven. The Argu- ** .'•'•* gument as propounded by the Author is Enthymematick , and mull: fuppofe another premiiTe befide that which- is expreffeds which s>uft he crsie as well as. that expreffed , to make the confequence Sicr.IL (2oS) Part.1T; good. Now I humbly defire hinfto give us that fuppreffed 2nd fop, pofed premifTe. Verily , keep him to one fyllogifine, and it is impofc fible to do it.obferving the rules of good Logick and reaion. But it may be done, may be, ry two proceffes • Well then, they muft be thefe for ought that I c£n conceive/, ( if he jean do it otherwife and better, let him do it, |ind we ftialiconfider of it > the firu 1 is this, that which was given to "Peter upon the conFefltonof his faith, was given to him as #Beleever : But the Power of the Keyes were given to Peter upon theconfeillon of his faith Ergo^ &c t . then ta- king this concluilon for a ground of the fecond it mull: be thus That which was given to Peter as a Belflever v was given to the Church believing with fuch a faith as Peter believed. Bur to Peter as & Believer was the Keyes of Powengiven Ergo,, &c It might be no- tod upon the majocor firft proportion of thus krcer iylogifme, that which was given to Peter as a Believer was giv$fto the Church as believing with iuch a faith, as he bebeved with ; That it in the at- tribute thereof , the Church be underPcood collectively , for the. focietyof fuch Believers ; as united and al!ociated;and wichaH when it is (aid , thac'what was given to Peter as a Believer was given to the Church f thus takeacolleelively ) believing wkh'iuch faith, the meaning be ' that it was given only £0 die Church confidered, mz» collectively : then the connexion is not neceiTary ( and fo it isfaife , becaufe it is materially and indeed an hypothetick piopo- fition , *!nd m an hypochetick propofition, if the connexion be not neceiTary, the proportion is falfe 3 as Logicians knows ) for that which wasgivento feter as a believe r,might be given to the Church as believing dirtnbutively , i.e. to every one of the Church belie- ving, fingly. If it fh Ail be faid, that that propofition may be men- ded thus that which was giveu tb Peters a Believer not fingly confidered ; *But as aifociated with others , that 'was given to the thurch , &c. 1. ThaUjualification is not once mentioned by tlirs Author, nor hinted. 2, Seeing this qualification muft be again ta- ken in alfo in the afTum prion . thus the Keyes of Power was given to Peter as a.Believer , not fingly but as aiTociate'Mhen X, fay, fup- pofe we (hould grant that in the Text now under our hand. Math. 16. t6. the meaning were that the Power was given toTeter ass Believer * Yet , what could xhe Author bring from that Text to (hew Part. XL -t*09 ) Sect.IL fhewthat it was given to him as a beleever, notfingly^ but as qualified with this consideration, as afTociat with other beleever si There is not the leaft hint for this in the Texc : Buc fomewhat to the contrair. See Candrey Review, of Mr. Hookers Survey* cap. ii. p. 172. But the weight ofali this proof brought by our Author here, g£ hangs upon the major or firft proportion of the former fy llogifme,, vfc what power was given to Peter upon tfie confeflion of his faith, was given to him as a beleever, i.e. confidered under this formality, co be a power competent to him, fimpiy as he was a beleeving perfon. The weight of all the proof, I fay, hangs fo up- on this, 'that unleflfe it (land good and be necefTary, all fails to the ground, and indeed it is but a groundlefle fuppofition, of no ne- ceflity^and may be as eafily denyed, as it is fuppofed. Why f Might it not be, that Chrift did upon Peters making fo eminent a -confeflion of faith give unto him a power, competent to htm not (Imply, as beleeving with fuch a faith, ' and fo not common to all beleeving with fuch a faith : But officiall competent to him as in fuch a particular oilice amongfl: beleevers, or conftituting him for- mally, fuch an Oaicer ? Wtm evidence or neceflity of reafon can be brought to the contrair of this f I think Mr. Lockjer did wifeli* cr to fupprelTe and fuppofe this bafis of his proof, then to have ex- preffed it, becaufe the expreflion of it would too evidently difco- vered the weaknefle of his proof of hts main point s that the Keyes of power, or power of the Keyes, was firft given to beleevers, and not to the Officers in the Church. And now Imuft profene, I wonder much, that ( after fo many learned men have debated fo much on that Text and brought fo many confiderable Arguments to prove that it cannot be meant in that place, that the power of the Keyes was given to Peter (Imply as a beleever, or to the Church of beleevers ; And given fo confiderable anfwers to ail Ar- guments brought by others to the contrair, a man of reputation) " tsjLockier^ fhouldcome forth with this poor one, that power was given -to Teter . upon confeflion of his faith. Ex^o, it was given to him as a beleever, or under that reduplication, as if this were enough to dafh all, and in reafon to convince all gain- fayers. ;The Lord pity them that are caried about with fuch a wind of Do- Ff arine; Sect. II. (210) Part. II. clrine. I think it not needful! here to wade time and Paper in. bringing Arguments to prove that, the power of the Keyes was given to Peter not as a beleever, nor to the community of be- ieevers; but as a Minifter and Officer in the C hurch,tbere is aboun. dance faid to this purpofe already by learned men, to whom I refer the Reader: namely, fus Divin. of Church-Government, Part. 2. C. 10. fag. 93. & feq> M-» Rutherfurd peaceable plea C* 6. fag. 63.. I>ue right. C*l.pag. 8.. &c 9 C* S.pag.ij&.&c* Caudrey vindic.vindiciar* Cap. 1. SeSl. I., and Review of Ue&- kers Surv.c. lit Bally diffWafive fromthe err ours of the time y c* 9. What is brought againft any of thefe upon the point by Hookjr in his Survey, I doubt not but will be fuiHciently examined by another more able then I.. If Mr. Locker will be at the pains toreprefent any thing upon their Arguments, we (hall be ^ ready,with the Lo r d s afliftance, to take it to consideration. To that which the Author citeth from Gerfon, C laves data funt Ecclefia , ut in a&u friwo, & Petro , ut in atttt fecundo. I could have wifhed that: the Author had pointed us to the place where we might have found it,and confidered antecedents and con- sequents. I confefTe I have not fo much leifure as to read over e- very mans writs to find out every paflfage that may be cited out of them at randome. Yet for Anfwer,this qfGerfon, maks nothing for the Authors purpofe. For, 1. By the name of: the Church* G erf on underftands the Church Univerfall, as is clear to any that knows any thing of his and the Tarifian Doctrine of his time* Our Author means a particular Congregation, to which the Inder pendent way aflertSj the fulnelTe of the power of the Keyes to bave been given, offucha fubjecR: recipient of the power of the Keyes, Gerfonnevet dreamed,, 2; Gerfons mind was not, foe ought can be perceived in his writs, that the power of the Keyes was given firft to the Church, as diftinguifhed from the Rulers and Officers, as the fubfecl in whom it is formally inherent and fo to be* acted formally therebv .* But to the Church as conveened and re- prefentet@ be honoured and folloWed'Jjut if otherwise jo be admonified;and if impenitent , to be rejected, i.e. Excommunicated as they who/'e fins follow after to* judgment. 2fjw fuch judgment could not be exercifedupon Elders, if fuch an exempted power be taken to themf elves, Without the Church, bm might do What they pie afe with the Church in which they are Sthants i and the Church not abje,. at leafi not fuf* ficiently able to do any thing to them ;which is to make them Lords over Gods Heritage, i Pet . 5; .3. Jnfw. Here is much imper- tinency in the conclufion inferred, and in the antecedent bare Af- fertions, begged but not proven,and never will be t 1. The con* clufion propounded in the AfTertion was, that the Elders in a par- ticular Church are not to exert power in mo(l weighty maters, as admilfion of Members, ordination of Officers, Excommunication, without the confent and approbation of the Church, i. e. without the judiciall concurrence, confent, and joynt authoritative vote of the members. Now that which is inferred as the conclufion here 3 that they have not an abfolute power over the Church, an exem- pted power to do what they pleafc with the Church, I appeal to all rationall men to give their judgement if this and that be all one. Why ? May it not be that the Elders or 0ffice#fet over a parti- cular Church may exert power in putting forth fuch acxs of Go- vernment without the j'oynt authoritative confent and vote of rfie members of that Church, and yet notwithftanding, not have ab- folute power over that Church, an exempted power to do with the Church what they pleafe ? Yes verily : for notwithftanding that, they may in their exerting of power of thefeafts of Govern- ment* 1. Only acT: Miniftenally and adftrided to a certain de- finite rule over which they have no power. And a.if they in their exerting their power deviat from that rule and acT contrary to the direction thereof, the members may have liberty, upon difcerning, by the privat judgement of difcretion to refufe obediential! con- feat to them. 3, And theremay be an authoritative power over and Fart. II. ( 2T3 ) Sect. Ik and above them to which they may be countable, who -may au- thoritatively cotre<5t and redrelTe their deviation, and to which the people may have recourfe for that effect And if fo,thentheir exerting of power in the maters of Government tho without the joint judicial! 1 and authoritative confent and vote of the members therein, is not an abfolute power, an exempted power to do with the Church what they pleafe. And fo indeed it is in our Doctrine. The power it allowes to Elders and Officers to exert acls of Go- vernment, without joi*t judiciall authoritative confent of the members, is a Minifteriall power adftri ^"tfon'of mmenfine re , which is another fcorn , it isimpoflible by his way, the number to (hew us one act of authority, in regard of which, they can be of pages faid to be over the Church. See this I fay, made good impregnably mentioned by Reverend Mr. Kutherfurd, due right of Prejbjteries , pag, * p^T* . 3N.C0'323.. admoniru As to the Latrne teftirnonie cited by the Author to confirm what ou abouc he has been faying concerning the Church of believers power to Erraca. cenfure their Elders and Oificers, I profelTe I know not what Au- § - l0i thor he means, nor have leifure to enquire. But to the two Texts of Scripture pointed at in it : i. The former Acl n. 3. 'tistrue, *Peter there giveth an account of his going in to the uncircumci fed . But 1. was he required by a Church of Believers only and contra- diftinguiflied from all Elders and Officers ( in whxh notion it is that Mr. Lockier is now fpeaking of the Church) to do this before them judicially f this is a dream . The Church at fernfalem^ be- fore whom letter wasat that time , confided of Elders as well as Believers And the Apoftles and 'Brethren that were inludeq heard, &c. and it is well obferved by the Nedder Dutch Notes, that under the name of Brethren , are comprehended the Elders, who afterwards, c* 1 j. 23, are diftinguiflied from private brethren, *cis faid, v. 2. that fome of the Brethren contended with him for that deed, now, fuppofing that they challenged him judicially, and' that he made his Apology judicially, howfhall it be evidenced from the Text that he did it-, before the body of Profeflburs, and not before the Colledge of Apoftles and other Elders only , fitting andcognofcing judicially upon the mater f the fliarpeft fight in the World will not fee a veftige of any thing of this kind in the Text> nor can any man fhew us either precept or example in Scripture fos a Church of Believers alone judicially cognofcing and giving fen-. tence of cenfure upon their Elders and Rulers. 2. Suppofe ther& had been none but private Believers amongft them to whom Teter made that Apologie to remove the fcandall ; Yet that were but a poor ground to prove, that he did ic to them judicially fitting upon. him, SEctai. ■(■«*■) PAHT.n. him, and as having auchority to judge and cenfure him, for why f One Chriftian doing any thing at which offence is taken, may and ought to give an account and fatisfaclion to another pnvat brother who is offended, for removing the offence : Yet hath not-a privat Brother authority or power, judicially to cognofce and paffe fen, tence upon another Brother. §.n 2. To the other place, i (far. 3. tz. brought for that, "Peter and fo ether Church Officers are the fervants and Mtnifters of the Church. 1 . 'Tis true the Paftours there are faid tabe the Chur- ches, and fo alfo are the world, life, death, things prefent, things j to come, and all things. But I hope aone will be fo abfurd as to fay that the World Life,Death, &c> are the Churches,as fervants, in way of relation to the Church , as a Mtftrefle, calling, commifli- onating them under Her, they are the Churches as means to Her good 3 and fo are tne Piiftors and Rulers Her fervants in this ienfe. 2. Tho Independents will noc (land to arHrme that ordinary Offi- cers are the fervants of a particular Church as their M;ftre(Te com- milTIonating them and having Power over them $ Vet I am ready £0 think their ftomacks will Hand at it, to affirme fo much of the Apoftles of Jefus Chrift as Apoftles: And yet by that Text even the Apoftles themfelves as Apoftles are held forth to be the Chur- ches , as well as ordinary Paftors and Rulers, and chat in a like ma- ner for ought can be perceived by the Text. §. is. The 3. Argument, Sect. 4. Becaufeothtrtyife {if the Elders fhould exert power inthefe maters of Government without the joint Authoritative confent and vote of the members of the Church} the Elders cannot but offend the little ones of the Church, yea the tender conferences of ftronger Brethren $ 'But offence ought not to be given to Chrifts'little ones, one of the leafl of the family a Er* go y &c. To prove the affuwptionneedltjfe pains is taken. Now • if this Argument hold good, it will conclude, that not only men but women alfo, mull have joint authoritative confent and vote with the Elders in thefe maters of power and Government : For he might as well in the proposition fpoken, what he fayeth, of Sifters, whether little ones or of ftronger,but of tender confeiences, as of Brethren : And it i$ no leffe fin to offend the one, then it is to offend the other. But now fee we how the confequence of the propofition Part. II. (2:170 SWt.IT; proposition is proven, for as much (faith he,) as perfonf may be taken in and cafi out % and Officers be fet up and pulled down, con- cerning cither of which % ..thej can have no diftintl knowledge, or at lea ft no fufficient ability to hinder •-,. becaufe decifive fentence lyes altogether in the Elder Ship. $knf$i 1 . Albeit only the El- dership exert power authoritatively in thefe ads, and fentence de- ciiively, yet profeffcuts notwithftanding this, may have fufficient knowledge for their privat and obedientiall confent and concur- rence with the fentence of the Elderfhip , as we have cleared be- fore. And fo that part of the proof of the connexion of the pro- portion, that if the Elderfhip only without the Church of beiee- vers, exert power authoritatively, the Elders cannot but offend, &c.becaufeif fo, the members cannot have diftintl knowledge con- cerning thefe things, &c. this is null, it feemeth the Author was feniible and therefore paifeth from that former part to the fecond with that [\or at leaft ] which ufually fignifieth a tacite patting from that which has been faid before t and a betaking to what fol- ioweth to be faid ; They can have no diftintl knowledge or at lea ft (faith he) no fufficient ability to hinder, &c. But 3. here lurks a principle of the grofleft Levelling that 1 have heard of, and abro- gating dl Government, but of a confufed multitude ; if privak profeffours, the body of a Congregation, muft have joynt autho- ritative confent and vote with their Rulers in acls of Government, becaufe it will offend them that they have not fufficient ability by their judiciail and authoritaive interpofing to hinder the acling of the Elderfhip, the decifive fentence lying altogether in the Elder- ~ fhip: Then I fay it is as good a confequence, that a Major and common Counfeli of a City muft not act without the joynt autho- ritative concurrence and vote of the body of the Citizens, left they v be offended for want of fufficient ability to hinder, by their judicial a-nd authoritative interpofing, the actings of the Major and Coun- feli. Again fee the clear ftrength of this proof comes to this much, the people ought to have a joynt authoritative confent and vote with their Rulers, the Elderfhip ; Why? Becaufe they cannot : but be offended if they have it not : For to have ability fufficent to hinder judicially and by authoritative vote (of this way of hin- dering he muft be underftood to be now fpeaking ) mi that, is ait Gg one Sb'ct.II.- .f»i8) P-ART.tl/I one. thing. Now I fay, there being in cafe of the Elderfhip of a 1 particular Congregation erring and going wrong, fuperiour autho*- m rity to which people may have recourfe for authoritative hindering j or redreffing of the errour and wrong acling ? and withali a liberty granted to the people upon evident difcernmg in their privat judg- ment, the errour of the Elderfhip, to withhold their obediential! confentto.the wrong fentence (which is (ufficient to keep them from being acceflory , unlelleit were firft clear that by Gods ap- pointment they have a command, calling and warrand, alfo to in- terpofe by a judiciall vote to hinder it, whitknow in this Argu- ment is the conclufion to be proven and not to be fuppofedj if they be offended becaufe they cannot and has not place to hinder it by their own judicial! and authoritative concurrenee , and vote witfe the Elderfhip,the offence is not given but taken. §. I j. But forth he, neither is the offence taken but given, how proves he that ? Tor as much as in thefe great tranj actions , the benefit or hurt of every member, is not only equally, but mainly concern ned* The tranfatlion of other things, which are meerly pruden- tial!, are notof ? gener all concernment , or not of fo great general concernment > no doubts do properly and determinatly belong ta that poster which the Church doth i/iffitute within themfelves, as their eyes and hands , more*conveniently^ decently, and ewpediti- cufly to deal With. aAnfw, i. A power as eyes, &c. i.e. Of- ficers inftjtuted, *. e. made and ordained by the Church within it /elf, is a begging ofa part of the Queftion, and a dream unknown to Scripture, whichteachethus that. Chrift hath fet fuch jOfficers in the Church, and as for the infti.tuting.or ordaining of particular perfons into thefe Offices, either he doth this himfelf immediatly, as to extraordinary Officers, or by the.Minillry of other Officers, as to ordinary Officers, tho thedefignation of the perfons to thefe Offices may be by the choife of the whole Church, 2. Not Of- ficers only, but the whole Church ate eyes by lAt.Lockjers Do- ctrine, attributing to the whole Church joynt authoritative con- currence with the Officers in ads of Government : And where is the reft of the body if all be eyes ? 3. It could been wiflhed that the Author had exprelTed, what are thefe tranfaftions meerly prudentiall or not of generall concernment, or not of fo great ge~ nerail Part.IL (ii?) Sbct.IL" nerall concernment, which he faith, belongeth properly and de- terminatly to the Officers or Elders ; Which had he done Idoube cot, but we (hould have feen, either maters of meer order, no wayes importing any fuch power or authority, as -Church Officers have attributed to them in the Word of God : But only fuch as a Chair-man or Moderator of a Judicatory may do in relation to its judiciall proceedings, who yet as fuch hath no authority over the Judicatory : Or fome of them to be fuch tranfadions as are of as great generall concernment as any can be. v I remember Hooker r \\ Surv. Part. 3 . c. 3. pag. 41 , 4*. amongll: other things gives to the Elders as properly belonging to them, in mater of cenfure and Excommunication, the Examination of the caufe, and dogmatical! propounding of thefentence, and fayes that the fraternity has no more power to oppofe the fentence of the cenfure propounded by them, then they have to oppofe their Doclrine delivered in Preach- ing of the Gofpel, and fo that the one is as binding as the other. If thefe be not tranfadions, more then meerly prudentiall, of very great generall concernment, IprofefTe,Iknownotwhatis. Nay, I affirrpe it, and it is evident, that hereby greater power is given to two or three Elders in a particular Congregation,then ever Prefby- terians attiibuted, I fay not, to the Elders of a particular Congre* gation, but to any Clafllcall Prefbytery of many combyned Con- gregations : For by the way of Prefbyterians, when a Claflicall Elderftiip has given forth fentence of Excommunication, there may be an appeal to a more ample and Superiour Judicatory for judiciall recognition and redrefife. But here by this Independent way* power is given to two or three Elders to propound the fentence of Excommunication, which the fraternity are bound to joy n with as much as to obey their Preaching, and there is no fuperiour remedy of judicial! recognition and redrefte left to the party nnder Hea- ven. 4. If any maters of generall concernment wherein the bene- fit or hurt of every member is concerned, mud be authoritatively tranfadecLnot by the Elderfliip alone, but by the members joyntly with them, I fee not why all maters of generall concernment ought not to be fo alfo : teagis & minus non variant Jpeciew. But to come to the point wherinlyeth the proof of that, that it is an of- fence given and not taken when the. members are offended J>ecaufe Gg s they Sect.IL f 220) Part.TL they cannot by judiciali and authoritative vote, hinder the fentence of the Eiderfliip, the fliare If gifts forth-coming and helpful! for the good of the whole, by obirving, intruding, exhorting, admonifting, and provoc Sing t(good works one another, in the privat e&trajudiciall way of charit f Ay, but it may be faid the help of thefe gifts in them to the g. LockicrS 5^ Argument profecuted^ from Sect, 6* to $ e c t • 11. inclusive dif cuffed* r * \Zlfthlj ( faith he Se C t. 6. ) in thefe weighty things for erne n- y* J. tioned^ Cenfures, Ordinations^ &c. The Scripture is ex- prejfe, that the whole Church fhould be jojfnt/j authoritative a- bout them, and not the Trefbyterj or Elder Jhi'p ofthe Church a- ttnu Hitherto we have ba- "ilitutes of the hands and feet 1 ■ But as the body is a certain whole "whereof the feverall members have their feverallfun£ions,in the "very like manner,the Church is as a body that confifts of the com- "paction of more members, to each of which belongeth their pr> "per functions? fo that when one prefents an object to be feen by "the eye, he is faid to prefent it to the body, fo be that diiateth % matter to the Goliedge of Presbyters he feeme th to dilate it Hh 3 "to EC? lit U30) Part.TLI "to the ^Church thereof that Colledge is a part : fo far he judi- cionfly. ', §.*• Now take the name of the £h%rch in that fenfe that is compe- tent to the whole body of Chnftian Profeffours : yet that all and every one of the body fignified by that name cannot be taken as the deiinite perfons to whom thefe aclions fpoken of here belongs, as formally concurring therein, I prove 1, becaufe the aclions here Jpoken of, as belonging to the Church, are AcTs of Government and Authority, yea Ads of higheft authority and power, receiving of pubhck judicial! delations, judging upon them, authoritative \ commanding amendement of the^ifeice> inflicting of publick even the higheft ceniure of Excommunication, upon diobedience : But clear it is from Scripture that not to all aisd every one, members of the Vifible Church, for example women and children, are Aclsof Government and Authority formally competent : and therefore thefe things afcribed here to the Church cannot be undaftood to he afcribed to the, whole Church ; Therefore I thir.k.M.. Lor^ier xnuft either fay one of thefe two, that of the whole Church, wo- men and children are no parts, or that women and children mull .have an hand and concurrence formally, in receiving pubhck /udici- all delations, &c. or elie he muft correcl: thu.tvhich word ( Churd? 3 Jbfath. 18 17. ) I judge doth mean the Whole Churchy and expound it of all men ofageinthe Church, ProfeiTours as well as Elders.- and then give us leave to ask him, where he can finde the Church, fo ufed for only men of age profeOing, excluding women and chil- dren? And, to ufe his own Argument, if he cannot finde it fo ufed otherwhere in Scripture, how can he judge it to mean fo here-? But 2. that the perfons here defigned cannot be all and every one of the Chu»ch, that are men of age, but mud be the Rulers or Elderfhipojzly. Iprove l.byan Argument adhomincm, upon a ground acknowledged, confelTed and pradized by thefe of the In- dependent way themfelves, well obferved by worthy 'W.Balllie, DijJ^afivefiom Err* par. I. c.9, p. 192. they to whom offences are to\be told immediately, after the two or three witneffes in a private way are not heard, are intended and meant here, when Chrilt faith, tell the Church; But the Elders alone without the people concurring with them, are thefe to whom offences are to be told ; c: Part. II. C*3 r ) Sect. III. cold and delated immediately, &c. Ergo* the Major or firft Pro- position is clear in the Text: The Minor or AiYumptionis their own confeflion and practice. See Hookjr Surv. Part 3. c. 3. p. 36. maters are firft brought to the Elders, they muft judge whether the maters be of weight or worth, examine the caufe, callwitnef- fesjtake depoiltions, yea andatlaft ere ever the people give any' vote, propound the fentence dogmatically, which the people are oblidged to obey in the fa me way, that they areohlidged to obey their preaching of the Gofpel ; So then either our Brethren mult acknowledge that under the name of the Church here, Tell the €hi¥ch£xz intended the Elders alone,or their dodrine and practice of bringing fcandals firfl: to the Elderfhip thus as we have feen,mu{V of necefficy benot only groundleffe, befide Scripture warrand, bur directly conrrair to the Scripture in hand. And here it is remark- able thar the learned and godly Kir- Parker, albeit he be of a judg- ment 7 contrary to us touching the firft fubjecYof the power of the Keyes, yet is forced to acknowledge with us that in thefe words, Mat, 18.17. Tell the Church, in the beginning of the Verfeis meant the Elderfhip onely : T>e Polit. lib. g.r. 15. \^Ecclefiam frimo loco confderatam in hk verbis, Tr diftincl: ft°™ that Civill , for things Ecciefiaftick, and confi- rmed dering that fo many * learned men , much ftudied and acquainted GiUcJpy, in the Jewifh antiquities, have afferted this Ecciefiaftick Sanehcdrm 4anm diftinft from the Civill, and given fo many confiderable reafons for 7{od , book i c# j wonder much that M«\ Lockicr could come forth with a na- il- f ^ ked Part.IL Y-2JJ") Sect. lit ked AiTertion of the contrare without the leait fhaddowof proof; As for that he fpeaks for clearing ot 2ijimb< 1 1. chat thefe Officers mentioned there , were Civiil, is not to purpofe againlt thefe Au- thors ; Becaufe. they grant thefe ipoken of there were Civiil Ru- lers , but they bring other places for the other Ecciefiaftick Court, • If Mr. Lockier would make it out , that there was no Sanhedrim' amongft the Jews but for Civiil Affairs, he would do well to take into confideradon and folidely aniwer what is difputed for the con* trareby that man of worthy memory Mr- Gillejpy\ Aarons Rod, droek^i.c.i. throughout; and I mult put him in mind, that he will find a learned man of his own nation, Thomas godwyn, B.DJ not only afHrting,upon the like grounds with M. Gillejpy^ that di- itind Ecciefiaftick Court , in his Mofes and Aaron , lib. j,c,sj but alfo expredy affirming,that this of our Saviours,*?// the Churchy wasfpoken with relation to it. Mis words are remarkable, and " worth the inferring, pag* 199 The Office ( faith he ) of the Ec- elefiafiick Court Was to put a difference between things Holy and unholy , andbetween clean and unclean , Lev. iO. 10. and to de~ t ermine appeals incontroverfies of difficulties It was a reprefen- tative Church , hence is that y die Ecclejia , J^fatth, iS.Iy* Becaufe unt-o them be longed the power of Excommunication % be- like this Learned man has not been of Thomas goodftin, B.D a his mind touching Ecciefiaftick Government ; For fure I am thac which he fayeth here is as contrary unto the Independent way,as one part of a contradiction to another. As for the other part of his reply, Se ct .7.1 will not contend for Mr it pofitivelyc that Chrift meant the Jewifh Ecciefiaftick Court : It is enough for him that he fpeaks of the order of Judicature to be in the Gofpei Church withallufion to that of the Jewish, and fo as proportional! to it. But me thinks M*» Lockier reafons but weakly againft them that fayes it is directly meant. There is (faith be) nothing fore going or following that gives any leaning lang- wage this way : But much to infmuate and fi^nifie that he fpeaks of that Church ^hichfhould sfeedily take place, to wit , the §rder of the G osf> el Church, Anf. 1. ; Mr. Lockier fo fpeaks here, as if thefe who Interpret that tell the Church of the lewifh Ecciefiaftick Court, did founderftand it of this, as to exclude the order of the li Golpel Sec t .lit ( 234 ) Part .II.. Gofpel Church from the meaning of it. This is a miftake or a mif- reprefentation of their mind, for they comprehend both under it as is known, and fo Interprets the direction, as-for the prefent time relating to the Court ofthejewifh Church, which was then in prefent being, andenjoyning the fame courfe by Analogy to be ea- ten by Chriftians when they fhould have Churches fet up. 2. Tho I will not fay that there is ground in the words to prove demons ftratively that Chriit in faying tell, the Churchy meant it of the or- der of the Jewifh Church dire&ly, and fo was direding his prefent hearers in cafe of fuch offences mentioned there, to have recourfe to their Ecclefiaftick Court : Yet I cannot judge fo bafely of leanr- ed Divines, that have underftood fo, as to think they would of meer will,, withouutny expreffionin the words feeming to incline, or leaning that way, and indeed there are in the context two things efpeaally which feems not improbably to lean that way. 1. Not only fpeakshe to his hearers in the prefent tenfe, if thy brother offend thee, go and. tell him , tell the Church, butalfo is fpeaking of a cafe that might have in that prefent time fallen out, and which falling out, it was neceffary for them to know, and be informed, m Hutftn W( hat courfe they fhould follow for redrefle of it. 2* It inclines «A of not a little to underftand a Church that was in prefent being among an4Vnh^ c J ews ' becaufe he applyes his prefent fpeech to thecapacity of of&ec. i« tbc Jews : Let him be to thee as an Heathen and c Publican > who f.y might not have communion with Heathens, and would not with Publicans. But Chriftians might eat and drink with both ; 1 fay not thefe are demonftrative grounds; Yet they may feem to lean that way. But fee we what the Author brings from the Text that the order of the Gofpel Church, anditonly (forfohemuft be underftood ) is meant. * §r, y.' His firft Ground is this- He (Chrift)fpe akj in the verfe foregoing of little ones, -which he explaines to be true believers and converted onesjf a 6.&v°'$.& this is made the qualification of the vifible mem- bers of the New £hurch in the Chapter foregoing ,Mat. i-6.ij.Anf. I. That true faving faith and converfion is the qualification ( vi% jn theexternall Ecclefiaftick Court ) of Vifible Church members, iis a dream* and that it is taught, Matth* 16,17/is another dream* and that another kind of qualification (& to fubftance) is requifite ' """ " : "* "" ' " "" v "" & in vifible members of the Church under the N. T. then was under the Old is a third, as many of his own fide will confefTe , who ufually, in that Queftion, bring Arguments from the constitution of the Church under the Old Teft. 2, What neceflky of confe- quence is here. Chriftinthe foregoing vi 14. of CMatth. 18, .fpeaks of little ones true beleevers, and true faith is the qualificati- on of members of the New or Gofpel Church : Ergo, when v. 17. he bids a Brother, if he cannot get an offending Brother reclaimed by privat admonition, tell the Church, he is to be underftood to fpeak only of the order to be kept in fuch offences, in the Gofpel Church that was to be afterward; I confeiTe, if this confequenC can be clearly,.deduced and proven from that antecedent per deci- mamnonamcon[equentiam\%m deceived, certainly, the confc- quence of it is not immediady evident^ let the Author aiTay to make it out. 2. Ground, Then ( faith he) thevery ^ or ds of cenfure in cafe §,g; the Church be dif obey ed t are the fame he ujeth to Peter Vphen he gave the K eyes to him upon his faith, Whatsoever ye bind on earthy &c. Mat. 18.18. and juft this ht > faith to Peter, c. 16. 19. And J will give unto thee the Key es of the Kingdom af Heaven, and Whatsoever thou (halt bind on earthi&c. fo that the one explains the other^ That by (^hurch is not meant the Trefbytery or El~ ierjhip of one fort or nher but the Gospel Church the Congregate on of beleevers , thefe conjunilim have the power to cenfure > ■■ tsfnffr. I confefTe , I cannot well (fuch is, mayte, my dullnefTe) conceive what is the order and forme of this Argument in relation to prove that which he undertook a little before, viz. that in that, tell the Church , is not meant the Jewifh Elderfhip whether Civil! or Ecclefiaftick. 1 . If he would reafon thus,the words of cenfure here ufed are the fame with thefe 3 c%?*-. 16. 1.9. when the power oftheKeyes were given to Peter upon his faith, and thefe arc words exprefling the order of the Gofpel Church. Therefore by the name of the Church ufed here cannot be meant the Jewifh Elderfhip. lAnfwer, then the Author considers not, that the firft words of cenfure are fuch as are relative to the order of the Jewifb Church, let him be to thee as a Heathen man and a 'Publi- can. Or, 2. Ifhispurpofe be to reafon only thus. The power li 2 of of cenfure fpoken of here, being the fame with that fpoken of 9 Mat.i6. thefetowhomitisafcribedhere, and given to there * are the fame : the one place explains the other ■:-. But there, Mat* id, it is given to Pet eras a beleevei:, and fo in him,to the Church ofbeleeverSvtheGofpel Church, Ergo, here muft be understood, not the Prefbytery, of one kind or other, Jewifh or Chriftian* Anfw. Its begged but never yet proven, nor ever will be, that the power of the Keyes, of binding and loofing were, Mau j6'L c given to Teter, asabeleever, and to the whole Church of be- 1 leevers. §-9« He adds for confirmation, Theft conjmBitn have the power to cenfure and cafl out, according to that, iCorin. 5. 4. When you \ dre gathered together, &c. to deliver fuch a one to Satan, &c. and- 1 by the fame power received in again, that as his puwijhment was by f many , fo his conflation and reception might be by many alfo^ as 'tis 2Cor. 2\6.that Satan might take no advantage,which is enough tofheW, how that admiffion of members Jhould be by a joint atlof the Qhurch , as well as excommunication of Members, Answ. The Author contemns his Readers very much, when as he thinks- it enough, to cite controverted Paffages of Scripture, and affirm they fpeak enough for his Tenet, without the lead effayto bring ; any argument or ground to prove and clear that to be their mean- \ ing which he affirmeth. They are too too credulous that will be moved by fuch kinde of dictating, rather then difputing. We deny I that the place, iCor, 5. 4. doth import that the power to cenfure and excommunicate doth belong to the whole Congregation of be— | Jievers, as Judges and formall authoritative Aftors therein. And I we deny in like maner, that, iCor.z. 6. doth import that the r€— | ception of the ccnfured or excomunicated,is by the whole Congre-.-J gation acting therein authoritatively. When Mr. Locker (hall be pleTafed to prefent us fome reafons for what he faith, we (hall take them into confederation. In the mean while, he muft give us leave i not to be moved by his naked Aflertions, and withall we refer the.- Reader, for further fatisfaelion concerning thefe PaflTages, to Ca^j meron.pr<&lebl*\n Mat.\%. 15. p. 19, 20. Edit. Salmar. in 4 . Rutherford, due right of

then recourfe may be had yet to a Synode , may be, confifting of a hundred Minifters , and as many or more choife Elders of all the Churches of a whole Province: Yea and if haply there be a failing there , recourfe may be had to a Sy- node of feverall hundreds of the choice Minifters and Elders of all the Churches of a whole Nation. I fay again let all indifferent men judge whether of thefe wayes be neareft to thePapall Power. 2, Its afoul mifreprefentation that our Interpretationof the place* i Cor. 5. 4. is the very Doctrine of Jefuits of Rhcms. We confpfle, we fay as they ( becaufe therein they fay with the truth ) that au- thority of giving fentence was not in the whole multitude of the Church ' and that the Power of binding and loofing was not given to the whole Church, as the fubject; but for their good as the end, and in this they fay righter then they that fay the contrary ( which they falfly afcribe to all Proteftant Divines ) But the Rhemifts Je- luites puts that, power in the hands of the fole Prelates, Officers that were never of Gods appointing , excluding all other Minifters o"f Chrift, we with the Word of God , difdaiming all Prelates, maintain it to be in all the Minifters and Elders of the Church, to be ,exercifed by them conjunttiw : Rhemifts with other Papifts , make their Prelaticall power and authority lordly , foveraigne, dictatori- al, tyrannicall, oblidging the people to abfolute blind obedience. We give no power to Elders but Minifteriall , the actings and de- terminations whereof , ought not to be received by people in a way of blind obedience; but may and ought by them, be tryed and proven in the judgement of private difcretion whether they be agreeable to their rule , the Word of God, or not. $. When as Mr.Lockjer fayeth that Gods people are deprived of their.beft liber- ties, when they have not joint authoritative concurrence and vote in the Acts of -Government, but thefe are only in the hands of the Elderftiip , and that is a bondage to them , and that 'tis little oddes under whom they have this bondage , one Prelate or many Presbyters, x. I think upon more ferious advice and deliberation he will take up that word againe , where hee calls, Part.it. (239) I Sect. III. calls* liberty of judiciall authoritative voteingin Acls of Govern- ment the belt liberties of che people of God, I think he will find they have liberties much better then that. Bat* 2. does Mr. Loc m keir indeed account it a depriving of people of their Liberties, and a-bondageco be under the Government of Rulers, with whom rhey may not all and every one of them, joyn authoritatively in the Acts of Government? Certainly this principle lyes under his words here, and I beleeve tho it may pleafe Levellers well (for it is /u ft their language ) yet it wjll not rellifh very well to fuch as have the prefent Government in their hand. 4. When he fayeth that Prefbyters take power to themfelves without the word (z//^. in ading-in Government without joynt authoritative concurrence of the people ) and therefore may juftly have the fame title with other ufurpers, &c. we fay the Author but begs the Queition fthat they lake that.power without the word) which he has not yet proven, nor ever will 5 The Word of God being clear for i^, t'hat they are Rulers fet over the Church to govern them, and people commanded togive obedience unto them in that relation ^ And therefore to call them, asPrelats, whom Jems Chnft never appointed to be Rulers over his Church, ufurpers, is nothing elfe but to call good, evili, and light darkne(Te. The Authors fecond inftance to make out his general! Affertion § 4l Ej undertaken, Sect. 6, is taken from the proceedings of the Sy- nod offerufalem, zABs 15. Where the Affiles themf elves were prefent and div erf e Elders With them, the matters being of great €onfequence % as well for faith as practice ; Tet nothing was done in the beginning, carrying on, or ending of the fame J?m With inte- re ffing the Congregation and the Brethren, their names being to the Letters, they ^eahing in the AJfembly, they having fatisfacli- on by Argument, and not overborn by Authority, and thcfe join* ing their ajfent, in fending backj:hofen Afejfengers from among ft % them, as Judas and Silas, to other Churches *,they tyere the Apoftles, Elders \\>ith the whole Church that joy ned in it, A^s 15. 22, 2g . Jf at any time the (fhurch might been left out, it might have been > | at fuch a time as t his i when the injj?ired Apoftles were prefent and in matters of this nature « — -—yet VQould they not leave fuch an tmmple, tofutuwChnrchtfoffuchaway, *Anf Were Mr. Uckter$ ; Sect.III. Y-240) Part.ILI LGckjers caufe he pleadeth for, never (6 good, yet I muft crave! leave to fay 5 it is ill managed in this inftance. If I have not ground!) tofayfo, 3 leave to impartial! men to judge by theie things lol*;! lowing. 1 . Let the maters handled and concluded in this Synod- be, objectively, ofneverib great consequence ; Yet by.Mr.Xcoj! kicrs Doctrine in the profecution of his fecond Afetiom namely, \ Se cT.30.and 3 ? . The Synods Ail and determination thereupon^ was meer counfell,and no authoritative jurudidionaii decree . Nor could they do any more, butcouojell and advife, by the Inde- pendent Doctrine (which yet is contrary to truth) But from this! adhominem. If privat Brethren did joyntly concur with Apofties and Elders, inamaterofmeercounielfand advife j What is that £0 the purpofe now in controveiiie ? Becaufe privat Chriftians may joyntly concur with Eiders ra A5tsof couniell, does it follow thad . they muft-alfo joyntly and authoritatively concur with* them in au- thoritative juridicail Ac% of Government ? 2. When he faith chat nothing wasifone* in the beginning, carrying on , or ending of theie maters but with interenina the Congregation and the B.e* thren. 1. Why does he here ufefo ambiguous a word as, inte- feiling the Congregation; and faith not plainly and fpeoficalJy,: but with joynt authoritative concurrence or. &c. may therel not be a interefling of peribns, iu the managing of fuch a publidc procedure, and yet without their authoritative concurrence ? viz,. to be witneffes of the juftneile of the procedure, . that they may have the more clear fatisfadion in their conferences in giving their obediential! concurrence, to have their confultative advice upon the bufinetfe, to have their privat, tho not authoritative approba- tion ? Mr. Lochicr in all this Section does not once mention their i joynt authoritative concurrence, becaufe, as 1 conceive, he thought the act of the whole Synod to be no authoritative juridicall acl. 2. Whom means he by the Congregation, without whofe inte- refling in the whole bufineffe nothing was done . ? Whether the Congregation of Jernfalem alone, or alfo the Congregations arid Brethren of Antioch, Syria and Cilicia} The latter cannot he faid, as is evident : and to fay the former. Firil: is nothing to make out his purpofe * Becaufe thefe other Churches, being as much if not more concerned in the maters that were to be concluded in the • r\ ■ Part.1I. (*4*) , Sect\III* theSvnod, if nothing could be done without the interfiling or joyntconc'urrence of the Congregation and the Brethren of Jeru- fakm with the Elders, thefe other Congregations and Brethren^ ought as much and more to have been intereffed, and joyntly to have concurred. Again, nor yet can it J>e that all the Congrega^ tton or Church of Jerufalem could be fo intereiled as to concqt' jointly in ading and voting that bufinefle in the Synod with the Apoftles and Elders (which yet Mr. Lockier muftfay) h*rft the beleevers in Jerusalem were fo numerous that they could not all conveen with the Apoftles and Elders at one time and in one place to ad and vote in the bulinelTe. They could not all meet together at once, in one place, for ordinary ads of Worfhip, andfo were indeed a Presbytenall Church, as is demonftrat irrefragably, by fundrie , M r . 0ttherfurd. The Affemblj in their Anfwers t$ the Diftenting Brethren* Jus* Divin. of Church Government , and others : And therefore the whole Church mentioned, T/.22. rsuft not be under ftood of the whole Church of Beleevers in Jeru- salem, but of the whole catm Sj noiicm ,the Synodicali multitude, the Synodicali Church,. But to anfwer diredly, we acknowledge and maintain that not §.^ ^only this meeting was a proper Synod , but alfo the determination thereof was authoritative and juridicall, and as to that which Mir, Ztfd^>r intendeth here that the Congregation , privat Brethren, jointly concurred with the Apoftles and Elders in the determinati- on. Granting that the Brethren mentioned, were privat Chrifti- ans out of office. 1, . Thefe were not the whole Churches con- cerned in the bulineife that was determined (which yet he muft fay, if he would fay any. thing to his purpofe intended in his firft Aflertion ) as has been fhown, yea , nor all the Church of Je- rufalem as hath been alfo fhown. a. We deny that thefe privat Brethren concurred with the Apoftles and Elders authoritatively in the determination of the fentence. They gave at moft but their privat aflfent and approbation, which we grant may be given unto privat (ihriftians in any Synod. That they had not authoritative de- finitive vote,feemeth clear from fomewhat expreiTed in the hiftory it- felf of that Synod obferved by Mr. Rmherfurd peace .plea* c* 14. p. 213, Firft thefe only had definitive vote who met together Sy- uodkaily toconfideroftheCJueftion. But thefe were only A- ~ Kk poftles BCT.iir. (242) PaRT.IL pofties and Eiders, c . 1 5.2/. 7. 2S(on dicit Lucas convent (fe tot am Ecclejiam\ Sed eos qui rat tone offioij erant legittimi judices*. Caiv, com. in loc* again the Canons of the Synod are denomina- ted £*wa.ra, m$jj&\ decrees which were ordained by the Apoftles, and Eldersatjerufalem* c.\6. 4. & %i* 25. the particulars rec- koned up by M«\ Lockler proves not the contrary. 1. That there names was in the Synodicall Letters, (rather the Letters were in their name generally: Forwe read nothing of their particular fubfcriptions) Firft this is no act of authority in it felf. Second- ly, Nor doth it necefTarily import their authoritative concurrence in the determination concluded in the fentence of the Synod, and intimate by -the Letters to the Churches, For as Letters being Writen to a multitude confuting of perfons of diverfe capacities, fome publick and, in office, fome pri vat without office , may con* tain fome things peculiar to the one, fome things belonging to the other, yea may recommend one bufinefTe to both, but to be acled by them according to their different capacities and ftationsi So Letters as fent from fuch a compofed company, in name of all,. may contain fome things as common acls of all in whofe name they are written, and fome things as proper ads of a part of them* or fomethings as proceeding from all but in a different way according *o their feverall capacities, as proceeding from fome authoritative- !y,and from others, as giving their privat confent thereunto which may adde more weight to the authoritative determination amongft others. 2. For their fpeaking in the AiTemb.. 1* It is not faid in the Text that they did fpeak : The fpeech and Difputationthat was in the Affemb. for ought appears, was amongftthe Apoftles and Elders before the Brethren ; Not by the Brethren: what is faid ^.12. that all the multitude kept filence wywi y proves not that they difputed before ; the word (as Mr. Caudrej well obferveth, *uinAic. cUv. pag. 54.) fignifies no more but this, that they were quiet or held their peace from noife or murmuring, ufuall with multitudes, they heatkned attentively. 2. Suppofe they did fpeak, propofe,and reafon upon the matter fas we grant that privat Ghri- ftiansrnay in a Synod, in an orderly way, fo the 2. Book of Difci- pline of the Kirk of Scotland, c. 7 J that proves not that they did vote. authoritatively and definitively in the deterrainatiotythatthey received .received fatisfaclion by reafori, proves it not nerther : That may be neceffary and given to clear mens conferences in concurring -ty privat approbation and rationall obedience. 3. That they joined their aflent we fhali not deny, but the Queftion is , what fort of affent, whether authoritative and definitive* that is not proven, nor can be proven from the Text. Their concmring in fending Meffengers proves it not. As to what foliowes of Mr. Lockjers words in this 8. S e c t, § cenfilium & arbitrium patios quam fuffragium re" f'qmHtuv*- Adfuijfe fane plebem confilio^ & Apoftolis Prefiyte- "rifque adftitijfe, tit auditor es^ &-tefles\ <& ftlentio faltem fuo, x *fi non voce approbatores fxijfe, conCenfurnqve pri;. His 4th inftance is of ordination of Elders. This we acknow- ledge to be a poteilative acl of Ecckfiaftick authority, and affirme that in Churches conftitute and in the ordinary way of calling bv Chrifts appointment in the Word, belongs only to thefe who have EcciefMkk Authority, the Presbytery or Elderfhip, Let's fee how Ut, Lockier fheweth us expreffe Scripture, that" the peopie rnuft joyntly concur authoritatively therein. His firfl Scripture is A&ri.*n*>***iwl** Communibm calculi*, ftmnlf up agus ele- Urn eft 1 *By joynt voice Vpat Matthias ordained to Us pUce » Af- ter the Lord had pointed out which of the two Jhouldbe fucceffor to Judas, one would have thought that the Lord pointing out the man had been enough to formalize the mater • And jet left this miqht prove a means to.juftle out the priviledge of the whole Church in matters of effentiall concernment, after the Lords deflation Khifh was proper to him, they joynt ly : take this deflation, and er.ftate him among ft them, not by the fuffrages of feme, 'but by the fuffrages of the vhole Church by preparing and drawing out of the whole to this particular wor^by the 4poftle Peter, Who flood np inthemidft of the c Difciples, the number being about an hun- dred and twenty, and fpeakj of this mater joyntly to all. Anfw. :. Granting that by that word *v>w«4»rfs», were fignified an acl A ■ part-.h; Ca4f ) sVct.iir; ad of ordination performed upon Matthias formally configuring him an Apoftle : Yet there can be nothing brought out of the Text to prove that all the Church prefent concurred formally in that authoritative aft. Mr. Rutherfurds tztfomnghom the Text to the contrary, to (hew that it was only the Apoftles, is very con- siderable, Due right of Prepay tery, c. 8. j>4£. 190. I need noc tnnfcribe his grounds, Let M*. Lockier anfwer them. What he brings is either feeble and infurBcient to prove his point, or an addi- tion unto, or rather a corrupting of the Text, or a begging of the Queiiion, i . That the whole hundred and twentie were drawn out to this Work, and Teter fpake to them ail about the mater and told them that one amongft them muft be chofen ; Is a poor Argu- ment to prove that all were to acl formally in the authoritative act of the ordination of the man. They might all be called out to the Work, and Teter might fpeak to them all, and yec not all of them - . be there in one and the fame capacity ,as to that Work; But fame as witneffes andxonfenters , fo me as formal! aclors. 2. That Peter in his fpeach faid to all, that one of them, might be chofen by them, u e. all of them. This is a plain addition unto or corrupting of the Text, wherein there is no fuch thing. Peter fayeth, of thefe men that hath corapanied With m — -muft one be ordained to be a wit- neffe , he fayeth not muft be ordained by you. 3 . When he lay- ech they appointed,/^/ gave forth their lots, they numbered, mea- ning as he doth , they all, the hundred and twenty, he begs the thing in Qoeftion. But 2. Iconfefte I never thought that in this place was held forth an ordination performed by men, at all, People orApoftles, I find learned Mr. Candry of the fame judgement- Vindic. Clav.pag. 12,29. whofe folide confederations I prefenc here. That place-hd:. I. was not an ordinary cafe ^herein the people had little or no hand* ladde the Apofiles themf elves had little or no hand , For 1. they were confined tofomefort of men that had convet fed with ottr Saviour. 2. They propounded tVpo^ it.w.u not in their power fomuch as to nominate the particular mdn* 3* ■ ' The Lord himfe If determined it t and not the Apoftles, muchleffe the People > As for that word e»}*etT#tyq>i&* flood upon { as Ma- j&?r Lockier alfo ftands upon it ) it cannot he properly taken, as if they by their votes or fojfr ages had confiumsi- or ordainedMit- . thiss- Sect. III. (246) PaW.W thias to be an Apofile, but barely thus : Seeing God had chofen and ordained him they accepted him by orderly fubjetlion to the revealed Will of Chrift. With this Interpretation agrees that of the learned Nedder Dutch Interpreters , in their Annotation upon the place. All this Divine eletlion they did acknowledge and accept for good. And is it not commonly by Divines made one of the Characters and Properties of the calling of ApofHes , that they had their calling to that function , not by the ordinarie interveening Miniftry of men ; But extraordinarly and immediately from Chrife bimfeif ; As Paul alledges for himieif to prove his Apoftleihip , §aL 1. 1. Paul an Apoftle not of men ( this is common to all MinfOers ) nor by men^ ( i. e. the interveening Mtniftry of men) but by Jefus Chrift. But one word more here : That of Mr. Lockers , one wonldthinkjhat the Lords pointing out tht man had been enough — — but leafl this might prove a means to ]u file out the priviledge of the \fhole Church— fcmieth to me,to fay no more, very inconsiderately faid^ What more could the Lords full conftituting Matthias an Apoftle, without any interveening Act of the Church , prove a means , to juftle out the priviledge of the Church in maters e^entiall, than his fole immediate both electing and ordaining all the reft of theA- poftles, Markji,. 13*14. § t ,^ His fecond Scripture for the peoples for-mall concurrence in ordi- nation is Alls 14.23. and when they had ordained them Elder® in every Church. On which the Author for his purpofe commene- eth thus. 1. On the Margent he rejecleth the opinion of fome, * Not at- t ^ 10 ^ earnec ^ raen > tnat % et ^ nere was no ordination but onely an uUo but election , and giveth a reafon why there behoved to be ordination, tendtre, cx-becaufe there was Fading and Prayer joined with the action, z. tenderej.e. Then in the body, fayeth he, yfWowwrsk From X il U a hand, and to ft retch mtv* 3 Attollo^to * lift up. which Jhewethtyhat this ordination was in the formality of it ; That the Apo files in and with every * In that Church of Beleevers where they came , did make /uffrage who place »s no jj^ oh i^ m d er g this great Office of Elder Jhipin fuch Churches, and ordinary * f ]°J nt ^J w ^^ eac ^ Church, and net by diflinft exempted power ordination above them \fc as this work^done, according to "^ the firfl paterne 9 of ordina* As4s in Letters recommendatory (faith he J they were not dire- € ^ . t Bed to the Elder fhip of fuch a Church, but to the whole Churchy * **' of Which they were to be received i So Paul rccommended^hthc to the Church jofQorinth ('twas to the Church of Rome, Rem.i6. I , t.) So j ohn Xvrot e to the Church, concerning certain brethren^ that were to be received by thern^ 6»?Diotrephes the Elder Jfohich flood upon his fole authority in this and fuch like things, and ufed the Keyes at his ' oVen fleafure % io\ecp out^ and cafi out as he Would, is noted with this marh^ not to be of 'God, but of Satan, for this *mry things and one that had not feen God. zAnfW* What poor Xi > ftaffe Sect .III. (25© ) Part. II. fturTe is here to the purpofe in hand? r. Directing of Letters commendatory to perfons, Elderfhip or Church, is not their a- clings, but the actings of fbme others that wrote the Letters, and I may fay their paflion. But if it be faid fuch Letters recommen- datory might not be at ail directed unto r nor received by the EU derfhtp alone, but the whole Church. I confefle this is a ftrange Aflertion^nd he that will.beleeve.it without proofe^s too too cre.- dulous. 3. The matrer that Taul recommends \Phebe for to the Roman Chriftians, was aduty of corampn Chriftian love, to inter- tain her kindly as a Chriftian, toaffifther as they could in heraf. fairs at Rome, a duty jure naturali incumbent to all Chriftians, both conjunctly and feverally. And fo the recommendation for that on her behalf, might well be directed to all, Elders and peo- ple. But intereft of concurring in actings of Church Government, being not juris mturalis but juris pofitivi r perfons muft be fure of fpeciall warrant and vocation for concurring in them. So that 'tis but a very fick confequence, if Letters of recommendation for fuch purpofe, as thefe for Phebe, maybe (or if ye will, ought to be) directed to the whole Church, then ought the whole Church* alfo .to concur in actings of Church Government and jurifdiction 1* He muft have a good head that will make it out. 4. As to the in- ftance otDiotrephes, Mr, Lockisr is, I conceive, iaa miftake when- hefuppofes, that receiving of thefe Brethren, for which Iobndid write to the Churchy was to receive them into the Hate of Church membership ( they needed not that, they were Church members, yea it feems Minifters, before JT and an act of the Keyes : It was a receiving of them into duties of Chriftian kindlinelTe and charity* ^.5,6,7. but what is all this of Ttiotrephes to the purpofe. Be- cmfeDiotrephes, one Elder, ufurped fole authority to himfelfa^ lone in the Church, made peremptoracts inhibiting the members to receive, unto duties of Chriftian charity, ftranger- Chriftians, did tyrannically at his own pleafure Excommumcat perfons ; and than for #fobeying his unjuft acts, if he for this was marked, not to be ofGod, butofSatan, not to have feen God, muft the fame mark be put upon the Colledge of Elders in the Church, if they all jointly and equally act authoritatively injaatters of Ecclefiaftick (Government and JurildiclionjWithQutche authoritative concurrence ul* Part. II. ( 25 1 ) jS ec t .IV. of the whole Congregati5 ,yet not according to their own pleafure, but according to the Rules of Gods Word, nor yet prefling upon the people blind and abfblute obedience, but referving to them the liberty of their Judgement of difcretion > mult they for this be •Claffed with Diotrephes} 'Tis evident M^Lockjer obliquely reaches this blow at Prefbyterians : but they need not fear it. I will fpare what I might fay to this. Only this much untill he give better proof then yet we have feen, for popular concurrence in •Acts of Ecclefiaftick Government, I can judge no otherwite of fuch (jitter hints as thefe, then as isfaid oiDiotrephes words 8 verj* io« ofthatEpiftle. SECTION IV. Mr. Lockiers Argument from common Tejiimonsj > Se c t. i 2. considered and Anfwered. MR. Lockier having ailedged firft reafons, next fomeexprefle Paffagesof Scripture ("wherein how he has acquit himfelf we leave to be judged by the impartiali difcerning Reader) io the laft place. Take ( faith he) common confent for this truth ( u e» his Airertion, no truth ) that the whole Congregation are to have joint authoritative, fuffrages in all maters of greateft weight, I. e* all ads of Ecclefiaftick Government. By common confent he muft mean the tefiimony of Ecclefiaftick Writers, and now I pray what teftimonies of Ecclefiaftick Authors brings he f Juft two, one of yefterday, I may fay jugling in the bufinefle, and another nothing to the purpofe, fee we them both. Firft, In the fir/} times this was fo well known and Jo frequent . in practice - that Bijbop Whitegtft himfelf, one that wan- ted not wit nor learning, nor any other help, and fetting all his flrength to maintain a Thefe contrary te$?hat we are upon, yet is conftrainedto confeffe that in+the Apoftles times the flat e of the Church was democrat Uh lor popular, the people or multitude ha- vinghanddlmoft in every thing, Defence, pa g# 1-8 2. 'Which Vtord aimoft, doth fute with the thing I am upon. For indeed,as I have faidjn all weighty matters the whole body had their pint voice — r & hath been before prove dr LI 1 Anfw, §« & Ecr.m .(*5V) Part.IL e^W/W. i. That^te^/ft fee all his flrength to maintain al Thefe contrary to what ye are upon, is a great mifreprefentation of the mans mind. The thing he lets himfelf to maintain was, that! the power of Government and ;urifdic1:io% h in the h amis one ly! of the Lord Prelats, excluding not only people, but all other PrefJ byters of the Church. 2. Bythefefirft times wherein, he. faith, that was To well known and frequently praclifed~ either he means only that time of the Church wherein the Apoftles themfelves! lived,or therewith taking in the next fucceeding ages of the Church. ! If he mean the latter, I conceive, he would done much better to have cited fome Writers of thefe times themfeves faying fomu.ch then taken the matter upon report from white gift, . But let him ] if he can produce any Ancient Writers Ecciefiaftick of thefe times ' either fpeaking for his Tenet indogmate y or relating any practice thereof in the Church of thefe times - This he will never be able to do. If he mean the former, 'tis true Whlteglft (ayes fo that in- the Apoftles times the (late of the Church for outward Govern- ment was popular — : Buti. WhkegiftmthzW for uphol- ding the power and Government of Prelats in the Church of ZsWjl Und, excluding all other Church Officers, maintains moft falfly and pernicioufly, therewas no particular form of Government ap- pointed by precept in the New Te'ftament. But that the determi- nation of this is left m the power of the Civil Magiftrate, the chief andprincipallGovernourofthe Church in his judgement.- And' therefore grantedjbr his own deiign,that the people had fometimes an hand in matters of Government, accidentally , becaufe of the want of Civil Magiftrates to efablifh Rulers. 2. Who had hand in ad:s of Government of the Church in the Apoftles times, can be known beft by Scripture it felf, and no otherwayes certainly. VMuLockjer, has brought forth any Scripture holding forth, either by precept or practice, that the body of the people ought or did concur formally and authoritatively in ads of Government, tho he has a flayed to do, and fay es here he has proven it, I leave to the Readers to judge. Whitcgift would never alledge precept of Scripture for this, and for pradice Tfind none ailedged by him, Ibut in the mater of Election of Officers, which is no adt of govern- ment or authority, and yet he alledgeth that neither in that did they Part. IT. (a**:)- ' Sh CT JV they alwayes concur, which. I conceive to be an untruth. To clofe this, let Mr. Lockiers ingenuity be obferved here in fpeaking for a popular and democraticall Government of the Church by his ap- plauding of this faying ot White gifts* Independents commonly re- fufe altogether that the Government they maintain is popular and _ profeiTe a disclaiming of Morellius for this* But in truth it is no other, And T think our Author here is ingenuous in taking with, and applauding that name- For why fhould not a true thing have- its own name ? His fecond teftimony is the Canon of the Councell of Laodicea, §. $ # ' 3-30. years after Chrift f yea and 4, if not 8, years more) ordain- ing chat the people,afcer that,fhould have no hand in the choife of their Officers, unlefie it formerly had, What meaneth this Canon (faith he) unlefle formerly it was fo that the people had hand in it f Anfw* Let it be fo that this Canon doth import that formerly die people had hand in Eieclionof their Officers (as we grant they yet ought to have,and have with us) Election is no act of Eccieik- ftick Authority or Jurifdi&ion, nor makes on«ft.Ghurch-Oificer,as. was faid before. But what is this to the purpofe ?■ His undertaking was to bring common teitimony to prove that in the fidl times of the Church, the body of the people, the whole Congregation haci joint authoritative furfrage with the Officers in all maters of great- eft weight, /. And talh^ deceitfully for him w is it good that he jhould fearch you nut J Or as one man mocketh another do y e fo mockhim ? But now Sir, look upon the pollutions, and layings wafte of his dwelling place in England at this day, which makes all the Churches abroad the World to la- ment i §.I, Part. II. (255) . Shct.V? ment :he cafe of it, and fee whether the Prefbycerian way, or that way you ftand for has effected them : And I beleeve ye may fay it was not without a Providence of God, that ye uttered this ex- clamation in that perfon you have uttered it in: How low, fhall fTfbe, ere We lay it to heart. SECTION V. r Mr, Lockiers Answers to fome objections maderagamft his Aff'mionjrom Jome Fajfages of Scrip tlire 5 Sect. 13,14. Exam&ed. \A R. Lockjer now proceedeth to propound againft his After ti- IVjL on,arrd to Anfwer fome Objections, and in wifedom choofes a/ew of many that are extant to the World in Prefby terjan Wri- ters; of als great weight as thefe he has picked out, and propounds fome of them in as (lender a way as he can, that the force of them may appear as little as may be : But fee we them and his Anfwers to them as they are. Objetl. Firit, is from 1 Tim. 4, 1 4. Here is mention made of 4 §• *Preft>ytery or Elder (bip> by the impojition of whofe hands and by no other conjunct ^ Timothy was ordained : Therefore the Prefby* t.erj "wholly Without the Church may exert power authoritative in mefl Weighty matter s r and order and govern the Church alone. This place we conceive will carry all this and more too, even a Ciadkail Preibytery or a Presbytery of moe alTociat Churches. But for the prefent conllder we his anfwer as to the point in hand. The Trefvytery hers ( faith he J cannot be meaned of an ordinary Elder/hip y Which hath its ordination from men becaufe it is beyond the power of ordinary Officers to give being to an extraordinary. Nowfnchwas Timothy, to wit, an Evarigetift : And therefore comes not under our r Difpute i but is to be ranked with extraordi- nary Apoftolicall ab~hs % -aud ordinations to extraordinary Offices which are ceafed'. of -which nature fee Acts 13. 43 . Anfw. 1. Whether this was an ordinary Elderfhip. i.e. k Col- §,£. ledge of ordinary, perpetuall Elders, or extraordinary , yet it was an Elderlhip and not the people that performed this act of ordinati- on, on, as he himfelf yeelds. What therr is become of his Af- fertioninthe preceding Section ; That in th'efe firft times of the Church , the whole body did bear therr jo nt authoritative voice in all maters of gee at eft. weight* And Sect; io. even in an ordi- nation of an extraordinar Orf]cer,of greater eminency then anEvan- gelift, an Apoftle. Wherein he alledgech, that left it might have proved a means to juftle out the priviledge of the whole Church in maters of efTentiall concernment, he wasenftated amoagft the A- poftles rhemfelves, not by the fuffrages of fome, i.e.tht Apoftles a« lone y but by thefurTiagesof the whole Church, i; If the Pref- byterie here cannot be meaned of an ordinary Elderfhip, what was it f I hope the Author will not fay with fome Pepifh and Prelati- call writers , that it was an company of B'ibops that were. both El- ders, and more then Elders : I conceive he can mean no other thing 1 but that fame which the Author of the Queries concerning ordina- tion. Qu. 1 9* that they were fome other Apoftles or Apoftles fel- lows together with Paul, who 2 Tim, 1. 6. is faid to have laved his - hands on Timothy, and that Apoftles are called Eiders , and a com- pany of Apoftles are called a Presbytery or an Elderfhip. I fay it ! * fnd ytt feemeth the Author can conceive no other thing to he meant , for he himfelf ^ e f a y e rh it mud be an Elderfhip thatliad not * ordination from abovcSto. marl4 g ut t fc s CO j3ceit-is fo abundantly anfwered by M*. Gill? [by ef- traordina. worthy memory , MtjcelLc. x.pag. 104 &feq. that little nee- rie Elders deth to be added to what is faid by him. I (hail here briefly touch mi^hthave at f)me particulars given in Anfwer to this. 1. Suppofe xhe Pref- theic orai- by ter y i n c [ T j s pi ace x Tim. 4. 14. ,to be an Affembly of Apoftles, Wrtinsri Y et nothing fhali be gained thereby to Mr. Lockjers caufe. For the & h fxftl narr * e Presbytery or Eiderjhif , being purpofely chofen in this Text MuhmbrA which mentions laying on of hands in ordination , will prove, that his Co. So t h e Apoftles did it as Elders, and as an acl: of an Aflfemby of El- that by this c j erg ^ flot as a t kj n g p ecu jj ar t0 ihe m as Apoftles ; For no rationall ht:%^ii- man w *^ irnagine , that the Holy Ghoft intending to expreffe fome ttyas y tbo extraordinary thing , which the Apoftlesdid as Apoflles, and which an Apoftle belongs not to ordinary Elders , would in that very thing purpofely could^ nfatqdj chem ^^k^an AfTerhby of Elders. 2. That the Preshyteric this° n El° ^ ere * s not an AflTembly of Apoftles but of Elders who were not A* dcrlhip. poftles may be proven. 1. By comparing this Text with 2 Time • ?t<5. The gift of God tyhich Is in thee by the pitting on &fmj hands* If it had been an Allembly of Apoftles that had laid their hands on Timothy , and fc joined with Paul in chat action, Tkjrf had noc thus diftinguiihed his laying on of hands from that of his fellow Apoftles, as if die gifts of the Holy Ghoft had been given to Ttmo- -thy only, by, the laying on of his hands, and not by, hue with the laying on of the hands of his fellow Apoftles, Of this difference of the Phrafe in the one Text and the other, fee this fame worthy Author, pag. 10 1. 2. Apoftles and Elders are ordinarly diftin- guldiing names in Scripture, the latter fignifying the ordmary,per« petuall, ftxed Rulers in the Church. So that it muft be but a devk fed fusion, to leave the ordinary notion of the word Elder, which Signifies an Oiiice diverfe from the Apofhefhip, and to-take the Eiderfhip here for an Affembiy of Apciiies. Nay we do not find at any time in Scripture the name Elder given to the Apoftles, ac leaft never to them or any of cnem as Apoftles contradiftinguifned from other Officers, *Tis true Teter, lEpift.s- 1. calls himlelf ■ffvuif^vft^^ Butfromth.it very appellation, the worthy Au- thor, we are now borrowing from, doth excellently reafon, and for our purpofe, againft Mr. Lockjer here, I need not tranferibe this words, feeing the Book is common, the Reader may have re- courfe to it feif, and have much fatisfaclion. See pages 105, io£ B 107. We conclude then and affirm that this Eiderfhip was noo- ther but an ACFembly of Elders, as were thefe, Acts 20, 17. ordi- nary Elders of the Church ; And to expound it of an Affembly of extraordinary Oiflcers,is but a fiolion without ground in Scripture,, devifed by men, to (hut out clear light. An&Mt. Loc kier may re» member that as able judicious men as are of his way, the Diffen- ting Brethren in the Affembly at ivcftminfter, in their Reafons a* gainft the Proportion of Ordination, take it to be an ordinary Ei- derfhip, and fo reafon from it to the regulating of ordinary Ordi- nation of Elders in the Church. That afajfeient Prefbytery ( fay they, meaning, as is evident, an ordinary Presbytery ) may af- fume all andfole power of ordination, k proved^ iTim. 4. 14. by the laying on of the hands of the Prefbytery* M\ Lockiers Reafon to prove the contrary is of no force. TU .§.4? mothy was an extraordinary Qifcer,an Evangehft, and it is beyond Mm the t Sbct.V. . t (258^; . Part.IK the power of ordinary Officers to give being to an extraordinary^ That fame worthy Author, we mentioned, Sufficiently difcovereth the weakneiTe of it in the place cited, pag.10^ .. . For 1. If it fhoul befaid that Timothy was twice ordained s.-.firft to. be a Presbyter then to be an Evangelift, ( as fome Epifeopall Writers fay to be a Bifhop: but a Bifhop diftindl from a Presbyter is a humane crea- ature not in Scripture ) and the firrl to be that, mentioned iTim* 4, 14. done by the ordinary -Elder (hip 5 The fecond mentioned 2Tim< 1. 6. done by Taul an Apoftle, an ..extra ordinary Officec above an Evangelift.* I know not what M p » Lockjer will bring to- infringe this. 2. Suppofing that he was but once ordainecl, an E- vangelift and Elder both ( as who ever was-: an Evangelift was alfo an Elder) yet an ordinary Elderibip might concur with. P anl'm* his Ordination^ and.the aci of thefe ordinary Elders extend no fur- ther but to that which was common to him with other Elders, the: Office of Eiderfhip, that which was extraordinary flowing from the Apoftle Pauls concurrence in the bufineffe. In this mixt acti- on we may very well diflinguifh, what was ordinary and what ext- raordinary, afcribing that to the Presbytery (viz,, together withf ( Paul ) this to the Apoftlei 3. Yet further I fay with the worthy Author, I bring thefe things from, that I can fee no inconfiftency- or abfurdtty, if it be faid that the Presbytery fent forth and ordai ne&Timothy as an Evangelift : that it is aliedged an Evangelift is an extraordinary Officer, and therefore the Elders being ordinary Officers could not give him a being, ./. e. ordain him, I deny the neceflity of the confequence, any reafon that can be brought to, prove that confequence muft be,as I conceive,one of thofe two,?/*.. Either, 1. That which is brought by fome, from, Hebrews 7*7. The lejfe is bltjfed by the greater, to which, as to this particu- lar in hand, that worthy Author has fufficiently Anfwered, by two things Firft, that altho Timothy as an Evanelift was grea- ter then a (ingle Presbyter', yet that proves not that he was greater then the whole Presbytery, as one of the houfe of Lords is fibre was) greater then one of the houfe of Commons ; Yet not then the whole houfe of Commons, 2ly That he that blellcth is not greater then he that is blefTed, every way : But <%m talis ^ jnfofarashebkiTethj and fo why might not the Pres- bytery ^bytery be greater then an Evangeiiit, not fimpiy and abfo!utely 3 but ib far as they bleffed and ordained him ? That Author gires .two instances of the like, AB. 9. 17. and AEl.\$ % i,, 3. Or 2. the reaibnofthatconfequence muft be this: Becaufe, ordinary Offi- cers not having in themfelves that extraordinar office, can not give j chat which they have not. And if this be" it, I would then aske Mr. Ledger, how can people give the Office of a Minifter which they have not in themfelves, nay, the Office of an Apo(tle,as he alledgeth that the people ordained LMathia* an Apoftie, -whacfover he can anfwer for that will ferve our turn for the Pres- bytery, ordaining Timothy to that Office, which they had not In themfelves. The truth is, mens ordaining a perlon to an Ecdefla* -{tick Orrice, not being by way of proper efficiency, nor yet the •Ordainers acling therein as principal agents or confer rers of the of- fice ( that is Gods part by his inftitudonjbut as moral! inftruments under God: It is not, e x natura re /, requi(ite a that the ordai- ners have in themfelves formally the Office, whereunto they Or- -dain the perfon ; But it is fufficient that they have a warrand from •God to interveen as inftruments to apply the perfon to the Office inftstuted by God. And I fee nothing in the Office of an Evan- -gelid that can prove that ordinary Officers could have no warrand from God to ad in this kind ofcaufality to the applying of a per« jfon to it. Read that which the often mentioned worthy Author hach judicioudy fpoken upon the nature of the Office of an E- -yangelift, MifcdL c, 7. p.03 , 94. and it will fiiew, I fay not this without rea/on. , . ' I trull: by thefe things it appears that this inftance of ordina- §. £ tlon by a Presbytery is not (o far from this difputation as Mr. Zoeiltr would have his Reader beleeve, but that it is a patern of ordination in ordinary (which fome of the moft judicious of his own fide acknowledge with us.) (hewing us a Ho the right hands into which Chrift has committed this power, to wit the Elderfhtp, The example which he refer reth us to 9 AB.i^ t 2^. we thank him for it, as making very much againft himfelf: For albeit Barnabas and Paul* the perfons on whom the act mentioned there, palled, did not then receive any new ordination* to an Office extraordina- ry, as M*. Lockier^ in a raiftake or inaniraadvertency has imagined 'Mai z when when he wrofc this fthey were Apoftles before,) yet did they receive a new call unto a more particular application, or as it were appropriation of the exercife of theit Office unto a certain dermic charge, the Gentiles to wit, as /^/hirafelfdeclareth it, Gal.ti 7. and yet, we fee evidently that as this calling was not. per for- med by the body of the Church, fo k was performed by fome or» dinary Elders, I fay not that it was by ordinary Elders only , for there were Prophets that had hand in it ; But I fay that ordinary Elders did alio concurre in it,as appears,z>.i. Ttiere Were at Antioch- certain Prophets and Teachers j.; I hope it will not bedenyed that Teachers are ordinary Eiders. §, 6. 2. Objctt. Is from 1 Tim. 5. 22. and Tit. 1 . 5 . We read (faith he) that Titus and Timothie did ordain and are exhorted in a>v ordinary way to goto workjty an ordinary Jpirit • to wit, not to lay hands fuddenly on any man> nor to be partiall, but to weigh fit qualifications in every one, that they were blameleffe,the Hufband of one Wife, not ace fifed of riot^ not J elf Willed, not foon angry , not given to filthy lucre. And this ordination they ailed alone v. Th eref ore the Elder Jln-p s may do in mo ft weighty things in the Church Without the Church,wlthout the joint confent of the Church* Anfw. We bring not thefe places for the -general!, that Acts of Government belong to the Officers of the Church, only -, To wir 9 to a& therein authoritatively. But, for this particular, ordinatu on. Again the Author propounds the conclufion invidiouHy , without the confent of the Church, We acknowledge that in thefe weighty matters the Church, i.e. the people, are to have a ra- cionall obediential! confent, but privat ; The Queftion is whether they ought to have an authoritative decidve fuffrage . ? And in trre Calling of Minifters they ought to have fuffrage in their election : But as for the poteftative mfffion, or ordination, that, we fay, belongs to the Officers in the Church onely. ^y It is to be obfer- ved how the Author labours to cover the force of thefe places for proving of this, by flipping by the principal! words, Titus 1, M amd ordain Elders in every City, and produces only the words of the verfes following , expreffing the qualifications requifite and to be prefuppofed in the perfons that are to be ordained; In a word she argument from thefe places, is by him as flightly propounded, as,, Part. IX. (%€i ) Se ct .V. as, I chink, poflibly he could. But let him take it thus. If ordi- nation of Paftours by Apoftolick authority be committed to O ii- eersinthe Church as Officers, then it belongeth not unto the people. But the former is proven from thefe places. Therefore, #■*. The Proportion is clear of it felf. The Aflfumption is clea- red from the Texts* Firft, Timothy is charged to lay hands- fud- denly on no man in that fame way, and under that fame corifidera- tion that he is charged, not to receive an accufation againfl: an El- der, but upon two or three witneflfes testimony $ And as he is char- ged to rebuke Cms pubfickly, chat others may fear; and that he is charged to obferve thefe other Rules given to him for ordering his adminiPtrationinthe Church, v. i9 t io y iu But thefe things are a charge given to him as a Paftor i- So by what power Titus was charged to*rebuke the Cretians fharply, that they might be found in the faith, v.13. By that lame power was he kit in Crete to ordain Eidersln every City. But this he was to doe by an Official * power, and as an Officer, as is evident by comparing that v. with £§, % Therefore, &c. Again, here is an exprciTe Comrniffion to men in Office, to ordain, and charge laid upon them to be aware of doing it in a wrong way. Let the Author (how me in all the New teftament, a Commiffion given to people to ordain Minifters, or a charge laid upon them to take heed how they ordain * But fee we now the Authors Anfwers to thefe places. One of thefe places ( faith he ) anfwers another^ and openeth §■ 7 * another,, *Tis faid to Titus, that he Jhould ordain Elders in every City, as Paul had appointed him. 2Zj^ it cannot be- thought In reafon, that the Apofl/e would .appoint him to ordain ■ other x^ife then he himfelfhad ordained 1 but he himf elf did ordain by thefuf- frage of the people, and did eftablify them by the help of their fo- iling and prayer, A els 14 23. And this Is all which is left upon record^ for direction in this mater, as yet V?e can find 3 aM there- fore this appointment Timothy and Tkjjj n$U$ tind did follow, Anfw. 1. True, ir Paul would not appoint Titus to ordain other- wife then he ordained birnfelf. But that Paul M ordain by the fuffrage of the people is but begged : and that place, AcJs l4» 2> does not prove it. The mod: that can be deduced from it, is, that Paul and Barnabas ordained th^liders, being, nominated;' defi- gned- Sect.v. (2S2) Part.ii: gned arid elected, by the peoples furfrage, as is fliown before,whe- cher we refer the Author and the Reader. I fhall onely note a word here of worthy Cartwright upon that place, Aclsi^.z^, whereby it doth appear that, albeit he ftandeth for the firft fignifi- cation of the word %H$Twfodmi in that place, to wit, that it tm- porteth giving of fuffrages by lifting up of hands : yet he referreth that to Election* which he will have to have been done by the people : ( and we deny not this) but faith not that the people had hand in the ordination of theie Elders with Paul and Barnabas : But on the contrail* exprefly giveth ordinati6n to the fole Officers. Tom {peakjtntmly ( faith he to the Rhemifts ) which accufe m\as if we fo commended the Churches Eleclion^ as we {hot out the Bi~ /hops Ordination > which we not only give unto them fiat make them alfo the chief and directors in the Elec~iion% Vnderftanding by Bijhops fuch as are mentioned in the Serif tures^ and not humane creatures. 2. Is this, viz,, Abls 14. z%> all that isf left upon re- cord for direction in this matter, to wit, Ordination ? Then d its fure Mr, Luckier has little ground for his faith that Ordination ought to be done by the people, when as we have lb expreiTe Scri- ptures for Officers acting in it; And he has none for the peoples acting in it but that one, which neither mentions people, nor,?/* materia, by force of the thing fpokenin it, can by confequence import any more, as to them, but their fuffrages for Election. 2; But it feems he'has forgotten himfelf in ihort bounds : for did ' be not, Sect, 8. cite Alls 1.2$. for direction in this matter? Or has he afterward changed his minde of that place, finding that it made nothing for his purpofe? But 3^ He may, if he will, find more upon record for direction in this matter, befides theie prefent two places : Alls. 6. 3, 6. Alls 13. 1 , 2, 3. 1 Tim.q. 14. iTim. 1.6. iTim 2. 2. in all which we finde Ordination performed by Officers, without people. Alfo Tit.i. 13. Rev.i. 2,14,15, \6> 20 Acts to. 28, 29. In which places the cenfuring of Minifters is fonConCv "committed unto,and required of the Officers of the Church, which der.offun^s never committed unto or required of people. Now to whom be- drie Con- longeth the Authority of taking away an Ecclefiaftick Miniftry, to • trov. c. 4. the fame belongeth to confer it. WiV.S . ' SECT. |»ART-.iK . (263) S^CT.VI. SECTION VI. Mr. Lockiers Anjrvers tofome ether Objection made hy my of Reafort Sec?. 15.16.17* Examined. HTHe Author as be picked out fomeof the places of Scripture §•*■ I brought by the oppofites of his way to prove the power of the Ghurch Government to be in the hands of Church Officers on- ly ( and they are but a few of many and only concerning a particu- lar Aft of Government,Ordination,when as they bring many preg- 1 mnt proofs from Scripture for the whole power of Government in generail, ) fo he is pleafed to pick out at his pleafure fome few of their Arguments by way of reafon, 1. If the Elderjhi? cannot determinate!} act mtbeCvmch §.s. without the confent of the Churchy then Church-Government is a Vemocratie, all are Elders , and Officers, and T aft ors % and Tea- chers , and Rulers alike , and then what needs different names, and ftathns , When thefe, as to diftinct power, fignife nothing, tzAnf We do juftly charge that way of Church Government main- tained by fhe Author and his AlTociates, with this, that it fees up fuch a Democratic or popular Government in theChurch,condcm- ned by the French Church in Morettins : Which alfo Indepen- dents themfelves would fain feem to difclaime , but it will not be for them. The Author is. pleafed in his wifdome to propound the Argumentforevidcncingthis, as (lightly as he could:- But let him take it thus; That Government in the Church wherein.albeit there be fuch as bear the name of Officers and" Rulers ; yet not only all the power of Government is placed in the body of the people asm the firft and proper fubjed thereof, and not in their Officers;' But alfo the whole bod y of the people formally and authoritatively , concur and ad in theesercife of all the- ads of Government, at lead allaclsof jurifdiaion, fothat all maters-of this kind, are caned and determined by the authoritative furTrage , confent and difTenc of the people, nothing therein being left to the Officers as Office-is, but to prefide and moderate the body of the people in their autho- ritative acting , or, may be , to prepare and ripen maters for their authoritative decifion, and to be their mouth to declare the fen.-- tenee Sect. VI. I***) Par* J J. j tence determined by their authority , yea and wherein, the body \ of the people, may authoritatively cail all the' Officers to 'a ju- dicial! account, judicially cogncfee upon their Adminiiiration, cen- fure, degrade, yea and Excommunicate them all together , fuch a Church Government mult needs be Democraticall or popular, and therein ail are Rulers and therein different names and itations hgni- fie nothing, Q I fay not limply but as W.Lockjer) as to any diitinct power of Authority, If any will deny the connexion of this pro- portion » I befeech fuch to give a deienption of a popular Govern- ment. Sure I am that the very Government of Athens* it ieif, th£ moft popular and Democratricall that we read of- was never more popular then that which we have expreiTed in the Antecedent or firft part of the proportion. But now the Church Government maintained by the Author and his AHociaces is fuch in every one of thefe points expreffed , as is undenyably evident both by their Do- clrine and practice , Ergo , &c« §. 5. Now what anfwers the Author to this Objection"? He brings us a number of words clouted up unhandfomely enough out of Hookers Sttrv. Par. i*ai. which I think not worth the while to infill: particularly upon. Briefly, the lumme of all comes to thus ; He tells us there ts a power of ]ndging y to take in and to cait out: Members, to exert Orflce (he means to confer -Orhce ) or to de» grade from Oftice, which he calls eiTential or fundamental power,; And there is the maner of managing this, and exerting it : He ex- v preffethitalfo, To declare, act and exerciie judgment in the name of the reft, which he calls organicali power, and Pot eft as Officii pa ^ic friar is. And tells us that that former power is common to the whole Church Elders and fraternity: The latter is in the El- ders ( yet T cannot undertiand how this can Hand with what he faith, that it Ij elh formally in one : But be it fo ) And fo their (to wit, the Eiders) power is diftinclly ufefull and iignificative. Anf* To pafie by here the exagitating of that diflincHon of a power ef- fentiall and a power organicali (theabfurdity whereof in Philofo- phy might he fhown abundantly, might we (lay upon every luch triffle) and other foch minutiae. Here, to the mainpurpofe in hand. r. To talk of, and fuppofe a power of judging, intaking in and rsfting out, invetting Officers and degrading tfcenv, belong- ing in* 5 to the people and alfo exercifed by them formally, meaning, ssliedoth, of authoritative judging, is but a fuppofing and beg- ging the main thing in Qneftion. The place, i Cor, 5. it proves ft not. Tho the Epiftle be written to the whole Church of C*- rinth^ yet not every command and direction there relates to all and every one in that Church, as to acl formally in the work com- manded or required. We fay that command of calling out the inceftuous perfon judicially refpecls the Officers of that Church only. See this made good by M r . Rutherford. Due Right, pag a 36,37» GpJ. osfpollon. Confider. of certain controv. c. 4. pag. 64, 65,66. M** Lockjers Argument to the contrary, is weak^ The &4pofilefayeth cafioutfi'om among yen. But theincefrmus per* fon was not only amongft the Elders^ but among the people '.What a poor Argument ts this ? Then it fhould follow, that the Wo* men and the Children fhould judicially and authoritatively voi- £ ced in ths Excommunication of the inceftuous perfon ; For he was tiot only amongft the men., but alfo amongft the Women and Children; Thefe, fure, were apart of the people. So then cer- tainly the Apoftiehere^ iafl out from amongft you, tho Wri- ting to the Church of Corinth in generail in the Epiftle, yet in this particular command, rauft be underftood to be fpe^king with rela- tion to fuch in the Church as were invefted with a moral! capacity of power and authority to acl that which he was commanding. 2. When he fayeth the power of judging is common to the whole Church, Elders and fraternity, its but a fallacy as to Elders; For in effecl Elders as Elders, by his way have no power of judging; As fuch they have only the manner of managing the judgement* g. When he expreffeth the a& of effentiall power ( as he calleth - it J competent to the whole Church, thus, Some to judge^ and then the acl of the Origtnall or Officiall power, thus, Some to declare ^aB and exercife that judgement : I would aske him what "fie meaneth by acling and exerciling judgement f Either it muft be the determining of the judgement ; But that is nothing elfe but judging it felf, which belongeth to the eftentiall power of the whole body : Or he muft underftand the execution of the fentence 8 as for example, fhunning the company of the Excommunicat * But that is no acl of Office- power nor of authority, but is common to f^n all i all the Church Men and Women ; Orhemuft underftmd the pa, blick uttering and pronouncing the fentence of judgement : But that is juft all one with declaring, and to call this ading and exer cifing of judgement, is very abufive fpeaking : . Except thefe words. be ufed otherwife in Englifh Language then I know oL But 4 The chiefeft thing I would obferve is, that the Author in fay in much to the objection propounded, hasfaid juft nothing, but iri effed yeelded it wholl}*. For .when as he fayeth that the power and exercife of judging, to wit,, authoritatively (for of this, and not of judging by way of privat difcretionis the prefent difcourfe) belongeth equally to all the Church? and that the matter of ma- naging this only, belongeth to the Officers^., what is this but as much as if he had (aid in formalL terms s Tis true; I yeeld it, the Government of the Church is Democraticall. And as for that he fayeth^ that feeing the .Elders have in their hands the manner of managing the judgement, therefore their power is ufefnll and Ji~ gmficative, and not ufelejfe and nothing from the tyhofa. True, it is not {imply ufelefTe and nothing fignifieative; But fure I am k fignifies nothing as to any power of Authority and Government* A Mr. Speaker or Prefidents part in a Parliament, a ProlocutOB or Moderators in an AiTembly, is not (Imply ufelefle and nothing fignificative, . but it is juft nothing fignificativej as to Authority or Government, '*i §4. *• ®^j. But i* not this confujtonfor all to have an hand in thefe great things ? This abfurdity is moft juftly charged upon your way of Government. It is confuiion to fpeak fo, both formally and ef- fectively. Firft I fay i formally ■: For when as the Lord has infti- tuted his Vifible Church to be a body prganicall confiding of difli- milar parts: fome as eyes, fome as feet, fome as hands, femero rule and fome to be ruled, fome to be over others tocommand and govern in the LoRi>Jbme to obey in the Lor d : This way makes all in the Church to be Rulers^ and all to be ruled, all to command and govern, and all to obey ; all to be eyes and alfo all to be feet, and all to be one member, and fo the whole not to be a body, to wit, organicall and diffimilar. Yet more, it hath yet a greater «onfufion in it by attributing the judicial! determination of all ma- tes of Government and Jurifdi&ion to theXuffrages of die people, • .i. *Tis a very grofTe abfurdity to fay that the foul is in the whole body fundamentally and radically or potentially, as we have (hown before : It is for- mally and by way of information in the whole body. a. It is a grorfe inconfequence, the fenfitive faculties are in all the foul, and the foul is in the whole body ; Therefore the fenfitive faculties arc in the whole body fundamentally. Nay. they are fundamental- ly and radically in the foul, and therefore are not fundamentally and radically in the body, neither whole nor part. But are for. mally and by way of mhefion, in their refpedive parts or organs of the body. 3 .1 would fain know of the Author what he does make in the Church anfwerable to the foul in the naturall body, and fo that wherein the power of governing is fundamentally and radi- cally, as the fenfitive faculties of the naturall body are fundamen- tally and radically in the foul ? Is it the whole Church as tompre* bending both people and Mmifters ? That is the body. Or ts it, the people ? That is a part of the body. The truth Is^lAt. Lockjer h at a loffe here with his f mile. Jems Chrift as King of the Church is unto the Church as the foul in the naturall body 9 And the power of governing is fundamentally and radically in him, and not in the body of the Church. And therefore, 3. tomakeufe of the laft words of his- fimilitude ( for which we thank him as making clearly againft himfelf and for us) as the fenfitive faculties are radically and fundamentally in the foul, and act only fas he fayeth well) by fuch parts as are fit to acl: by, as feeing by the eye, and hearing by the ear, and the foul acls all its works by fuch organs as are proper to each work; The hands to work . the feet to go.: So (to give the apodofis which he had no will to exprcfTe) ,Ecclefiaftick organicall powers (Tuch as the fenfes are in the -naturall body) as the power of governing, teaching, adminiftrating the feals are fundamentally in Chrift the King of the Church, and acl only by fuch parts as arc fit to act by, Rulers, Teachers, and Minifters-x Thefe are the proper organs of thofe works. §.7 t The fifth and and laft O'oj he meeteth with is this. The Elders cf the Church are cat led qv erj eers, ftewards^ fhepherds, -fathers J All which in their analogy , hold forth a pec hilar and JqU fower PART.IL (FJl) ' SfiCT.Vfc to do things , fathers govern alone , fo overfeers , &c] As to this propounding of this Argument, i. We (peak not for a peculiar fole power to do things indefinitely, in Elders; But for a foie power of authoritative acting in rnaters of Government, and not excluding or denying unto people a private judgement of difcretion to try and prove the actings thereof by therule. 2.Xhe Author leaves out fome of the names and titles given to the Elders, which ufe to be alledged in this Argument , befides the name *&<#v7*iot , Elders s as nyfaiw, guides, leaders, condu&ers> governours, Heb % 13.7,17,24. *&s~«Stk s *$oi?tt}/.&ti t 1 Tim. 5, 17,. Rom. 12. 8. 1 Thejfa/. 5, 12* *#£i$vMm :, Governments, or Governours, the abftrad being put for the concrete, 2 Cor. 12. 28. 3, Becaufe the Author is pleafed to propound the Argument from-this ground , in the fofteft way for his own advantage , we defire the Reader will be pleafed to take it thus. Thefe perfons and thefe only in the Church have power and authority to govern , and confequently are to exercife formal- ly ads of Government , to whom in the Scripture by the Spirit of Chrift are appropriated fuch names and titles, which do import the power and authority o^ governing. But to the Officers of the Church are fuch names appropriat as iraporteth power and authori- ty of Governing, Ergo, &c* For the major or firft propofition , E think it may be clear to any of it (elf. And if any (hall be fo wilfull as to deny it, I would ask him (asdoth the learned Authors of jus divin* of Church Government , Par, z, pag % 170, ) to what; end and for what reafon are fuch names and denominations impor« ting power and authority of Government , appropriated to fome perfons, i.e. given to them and not to others, if not for this end and reafon, todiftinguifh them that are veited with authority to govern in the Church , from others, and to fignifie, and hold forth a duty or work incumbent to them and not to others? The aiTurn po- tion fee^videnced at length , in jus-divinum-of Church Govern- ment , Ear. 2. fag. 171,172, 173. ^k# Stew* ard, Paftor, Governments, Ruler, are names whicrf generally have power and authority graven upon them and are fuch names , as not only heathen writers , but alfo the Greek Verfion of the Old Tef- cament by. the 72,, and the OriginaJlof the- New Teftament are wont - SECT.VL 1 :("270 :; •P.ART.II; wont to give to political! Officers, to exprefle their political] pow- er and government , now ail thefe titles and denominations, are at- tributed to Ch rifts Officers in his Church , as cannot be denyed t And are not any where in Scripture attributed to the wholeChurcfe or any other member of the Church whatfoever, befides Church Officers: Nay, they are ordinarly attributed to the Officers ki contradiltinclion to the body of the Church. But fee we what the Author anfwers. § s g, Minutas ( faith he firfl in general! ) in P 'arables muft not be fafl ened onjbnt principalia, What is their main [cope. AnJ, What ? And are all thefe names given to thrifts Officers in his Church no- thing elfe but parables f Or are they Parables at all, taking them as titles or names given to the Officers in the Church? I have thought a Parable (as we take it now in the Scripture fenie ) to be narratio rei ve>*er y is to make the Apoftle oppofe him[elf % who affirmes of himfelf and others, that as Lords they did not ufe dominion over the faith of any, a Cor, it 24. Peter Hkewife, 1 Pet. 5. 3. nti- ther as being Lords over Gods heritage, but being enfamples t$ the flocks w€nf. This notion upon the fignification of the word hw%m , brought by the Author to denude the Elders of the Church of the power and authority of Ecclefiaftick Government, and borrowed from the Eraftians, who make ufe ofit to evert al- together Ecclefiaftick Government diftind from the Civill, and all that can be faid to elude the force of that place, for proving autho- ritative power of Government in the hands of the Church Officers, fee abundantly daflied by Mr. Gillejpy of worthy memory, Aaron* Rod y Boohji>c*9. pag. 272,273,274,275. which if M% Luckier has read, 1 wonder how he could prefent the World with this fory anfwer he hath here. I need not tranferibe all that worthy Author hath on this purpofe : only I (hall note a few things from him,adding what is fit to be added upon our Authors words. 1 .Tis true that the word wVf^i, Rulers, or Leaders, or Guides (take which of them you wtl)intends principally to direct according to the Rules of the Word? But that it^oth intend principally no more hsc Oa m j- Sect/vl ( 274) PtoT.m to dtrecT:, fimply, by Way at counfell or holding forth light from the Rules of the Word, as men having more skill in the Word than others, that is utterly falfe .- It intendeth direction from thefe rules authoritatively, as by men invefted with Officiail power and fuperiority over them whom they are to direct. For firft, albeit as» ^^ fayeth well on z>. 17. theApoftlein ufingthis word qmfii & , vUdnx y a fimple guide of the way f yet that is very rarely : Andf hey do ufually in innumerable places, ufe it to exprefTe one invefted with power and authority of Government* See more to this purpofe in Mr. Gillejpy himfelf> pag. ^73- Se- condly, if there were no more intended by this name but fimple direction from Rules of the Word, as by men much skilled, why is the name given to the Officers of the Church «Pi**£im»*, by way ofcontradiftindion to the whole re& of the Church, as it is is* that Chapter, Heb. 13. thriceover? If it intended no more but that, it were competent to fome othersjf not many in the Church* For fure there were fome at leafr, if not many, befides the Officer^ well skilled in the Rules of the Word. But thirdly, had Mr.Lcc- kler paiTed from the 7^ verf of that Chapter, (which is the only verfehepointethatherej to vtrf. 17. where that fame name is given to the Church Officers again, he might have obferved the Apoftle requiring of the people a duty towards their Elders, under the confideration of tiy*p*yw 9 of their Leaders or Rulers, which relates to more then to fimple direction, by way of counfell and holding forth of light meerly- even to fuperiority of power and authority: For there the Apoftle preferring to all the Church their duty towards their Leaders or Rulers fayeth not only *i/9sat- ny*t**vm , obey them that rule over you, ( which word notwfch- fUndtngis ufed not only to fignifie to follow by way of fimple per- fwafion the counfell or light held forth by another : But alfo obe- dience unto the commands of fuch as are in Authority, to Magi- ftrates, as Mr. qillefpy proveth againft Hufej, pag. 174.) But &!q Cmim* fobaut your fclves , wliicLinuftrelauto ; »uthority 9 "" " and Part.II. f &75 ) t Sb€?.YI* and cannot relate to meer fimple direction or holding forth of light. 2. 'Tis true to expone this name of fa*gto?* 9 attributed to she Officers of the Church, to abfolute power over the fiock,were to make the ApoPtie oppofite to himfelf, and were a perverfe ex- pofition : But do we expone it of fuch abfolute power £ I think the Authors confeience may challeng him of injurious mifrepre- fenting our Do&rine in this matter. It is not an abfolute, Lording power and authority of ruling that we expound that name unto, or attributes to the Officers of the Church: But Minifteriall, not only fubordinate to Chrift (who only is Lord of the Church) buc alfo limited and aftricted in the actings thereof to the rule of Ch rifts Laws revealed in his Word, in all things; r^rdowe teach that the people are obliged to give abfolute blind obedience unto them in their actings , bile maintaine their obedience to be free and ra- tional! grounded upon their own knowledge , and proving of the v actings of the Oificers, in the judgement of difcretion , by the rule of the word. Doeth not Mr. Lochier know , that between meer fimple directive power, by way of counfell holding forth of light and perfwafion , and an abfolute power of dominion, or Lord- ly government, there lyeth fuch a power and authority of Mini- fteriall Government ? and can he be ignorant, that it is of this that Presbyterians mean f if he be of the mind, that if their power be not meerly directive by way of holding forth of light , as men of greater knowledge of the rule ( which is competent to any private man of knowledge out of office ) that it cannot but be an abfolute power of dominion or Lording government , as Mr. Hujfey the Eraftian fayeth ; / k»oVo not how Lordfiip and Government doeth differ one from another (cited tAarons Rod 3 'pag.i(p.) I. It is moft contrary to common light and experience even in civil govern- ment. 2. I would ask the Author , does he not attribute to the whole body of the Congregation, together with the Elders, more then meer direction in relation to particular members , even an au- thoritative power of government over them ? and will he fay then that their power over them is abfolute dominion, and Lording o* ver their faith ? I think he will not fay. that , but will fay it is only Minifteriall and fuch as we have defcribed* 3. The Apoftle in that veryplajg, a Com, as inf. 24. cited by the Author 5 he affirms O02 gf ofhimfelfand other Officers, that they did not take unto them* felves a Lording, domineering power over the faith of the Church* So in the preceding verfe clearly imports that he and other Officers had a power and authority of another kinde over them , then o£ meer counfeil and perfwaf ton, even a corredive power. To Jpars. you ( fayeth he ) 1 came not yet unto Corinth^ then he had power. to correcl them , and he imports that had he come he behooved to, have exercifed fuch power and authority towards them. Go we 'r on with the Author. 3. to. They art called overfeers \fyftom , fuch as fiouldufe diligent Inflection^ Watchftilnejfe , Heed taking to thefloc^ that none ga^. tftraj , none perijh, for Want of counfell, reproof confo/ation 9 6iC hut doeth not intend , by thti terme Lord Bifhops or Lording Pre f- byters^ Lordly overlookers ,. vi & f aviti a dominant es in Ecclejia* lAnpto* We acknowledge the Apoftle doth not by that terme. ivUx.**'t- overfeed intend Lord Bifhops or Lording Presbyters or Lordly overlookers, dominieting over the Church by force and vio-^ knee : M*. Lockier but danders the Do&rine.of Presbyterians in. charging fuch an interpretation of the terme upon them and fights- againfr a fiction of his own head ; We afcribe no other fort of pow- er and authority, of ruling to Presbyters over the Church , than he? himfelf mud afcribe to the Congregation and Presbyters joyntry, over every particular member (Unleflehe will with State- fyco^ phant Efaflians deny alt Ecclefiaftick rule and government ) and I think he will not fay, this is Lording, or Lordly rule, , domineering; by force and violence. The Queftion between Presbyterians and Independents , is not touching the nature of Ecclefiaftick power cf government in it felf, whether Lordly dominieringor.not, but tou- ching the Subject in which it is , and by which it is to be formally, exercifed, whether the Officers of the Church , or the whole coU leclive body of the Church. We fay, the Officers or Elders on lyy and that the name of W<™»®»/ importing a ruling power and autho- rity given to them by the Spirit of God /wtmiufr . . in contradi- ftin&ionto the body of the Church, proves this , which is not in" fringed by what is laid by Mr. Lockier here. For r. when as he fryeth that they are called £*!**•»•/ becaufe of diligent mfpectiony watchfula^ , heed taking to the flock that none goaftray foe ... .. ___ . .. m ^^ Part.IL (277) S*ct.VL want of counfe II, reproof, confolation, I would ask xSim, whether he means infpe&ion, watching over, heed caking, in adhibiting re- proof, confolation* &c in an authoritative Way y or in a not-au- thoritative but meerly charitative ? If he fay the former, we have our point ; For if that way of infpeehon, &c. be imported by that name , and the name be given to the Elders as contradiftinguifhed from the reft of the Church , then it is evident that the power of ruiingjs only in the Elders , and to be exercifed by them only. If he fay the later, that is competent and incumbent to every (ingle ■_ Beleever , Hek 3. 12, 1 j % 10. 24. 1 Tbejf. j. it, 12. CoUJf. 5. 16. Galat. 6. 1. and fo every (ingle Beleever might have the name of *iiiK0-v*{ as well as the Elders. But fure the Spirit of God gives it to Eiders as contradiftinguifhed not only from nnglc Belee vers, but aKo from the whole fleck ,e^&. 20.28. and why would the Spirit of God give this name to Elders as contradiftinguifhed from the whole flock , if thereby were imported nothing die but what t is common , competent and incumbent to, may and ought to be done by,every (ingle Beleever ?■ 2. When as Mr. Lochier % reckoningup the acls whereby the Elders as 4ar/**«*# X'fi °S$*&9. FAKx.n* (281) Sect.vL This which we have confidered is all that Mr 6 Zor/^Vranfwereth § u. to the Argument for proving the power of Ecclefiaftick Govern- ment to belong to Chrifts Officers in the Church only, and not to the whole body of Beleevers or Profeifours, taken from the names and denominations, importing .power and authority of Govern- ment given by the Spirit of God in Scripture to the OcHcers, but never to the people , then to them in contradiftinclion to the people. And all that he has faid as is it is but weak m it felf (as we truft we have made evident ) fo he has therein palled by a great part of the Argument, having neglecled fundrie of thefe Titles, and altogether miskenned the PafTagesof Scripture, which by Pre- fbyterians ufe to be produced for them, and are urged npon the point as containing much ground for their Dodrine r befides the names or titles given therein to the Officers. } humbly defire the reader, & our Author tf he will be pleafed 9 to be at the pains, to con, fider what M. Gillejpy hath to this purpofe,^^/ Rod,Boo^2.c.p. wherein he proveth that there ought to be an EcclefMical Govern, ment in the hands of the Church Oncers, fee there Arg. 1, 2,3 ,10, uapri&n But now are thefe Objections brought by the Author and as (lightly propounded as he might, and , I may fay, Anfwe* redjuftfo; Are thefe, I fay, all the materiall Arguments that he could find ufed by Prefoyterians to prove the power and authority of Ecclefiaftick Government to be in the hands not of the people but only of the Church Oificers ? I cannot think he will fay fa* if he has been at the pains to Read them. Why then has he pa£ fed others in fiience, if he minded to give his rationall Readers fatisfaclion touching his Tenet in this Question I We refer die Reader to fee thefe touched at by the Author here, more pre- gnantly managed , and others befides them, in Jus Bivin. of # Church government^ fart, 2. c. 10, and c. n» Seft.-i GhL A* pollen* Confiderat, of certain Gontrov. c. 4. Spanhew. Efiflt £o David Btichan, q. 2. Mr. Rath. Peaceable Vlea y and Dm Right . Now come we to M*. lockers fecond Afferti- Pp- SECT] SECTION VII. Mr- Lockiers 2. AJfertion touching Presbyteries of ma< py particular Congregations combined ( whether GlafftcaU or Synodic all ) and their power consider ed^ and the true (late of the Controverfie touching this matter between Presbyterians and Indepen- dents layed forth. . s= IN the Former Affertion the Author would throw the Keyes of the Kingdome of Heaven, the power of the Government of the Church, out of the hands of them whom Chrift has appointed to be Rulers over the Church, his -Officers, to put the fame in the hands of all and every one of the people. And in the fecond he would fo put them in the hands of one particular Congregation (maybe, of (even or ten perfbns : Foroffo many may a Church be compleatly conftitute by their way) as that they fhali exerrife ail that power, even to the highefi: acls thereof- Independently as the fupream Tri'bunall in Ecclefiaftick Government under jefus Chrift, upon earth: So as that if there fhould be any errou r com- mitted by luch a particular Congregation , fuppofe the greateft errour or herefie inDo'51rine maintained by it, or a man unjuftly Excommunicated and caften out of the Church, thereis.no Eccle- fiaftick authoritative remedy under Heaven to rcdreffe fuch an errour : No Ecclefiaftick Judicatory , to which a grieved per- fon may have recourfe , by appeal for Authoritative re- cognition , or redrefie of his grievance ; But fee we his Affer- tion. §. 1. ' ThatTrefbyteries or Elder /hips without the particular Con- gregations, exercing authoritative and coercive power over it, are an invention of man. Having thus propounded his Affertion, He explaines the fubje#l of it thus. By Presbyteries or Elder fhips reithtut the (Congregation, I mean fuch an Elderjbip as is chofen out of fever all particular Congregations, ajfuming to themfelves, fttperiour and decifive power over them* Afterward he calls it forrain Fart.1I; (z23) S-hct.VII forrain Elderfhip, Se CT'.2c. And fo forth in the reft of his Book. And then again undertaking to explain the nature thereof, fayeth, * I find among our Brethren themj elves that Elders ard Brethren^ fent and importer ed from their feverall Congregations^ rcfpetlive- Jj, totranfaff, and cone iud.efpicb and fuch E cc I efia ft icl^ affairs within fuch a limited bounds, exfua poteflate, are a forrain Pre- (bytery, A note or two upon thefe things and then we (hail more clearly and diftinclly fet forth the true fiate of she ControverfIe a an&what is our Dodrine therein, i. Whereas he propounds to himfelf to Difpute againft the Authority of an Elderfhip or Prefby- tery without the particular Congregation, i.e. as he calls it after- ward, forrain to the Congregation, he but enters in a conflict a* gainft his own fiction. And whereas he fayeth, Se ct. 20. that he finds, amongft their Brethren, ( he means Presbyterians) that a- Presbytery fent from feverall Congregations is a forrain Presby- tery. I humbly conceive, for ought I can remember of any of them, he wrongs them exceeding much* I do not remember of any Presbyterian, that acknowledger the Presbytery of feverall Congregations aflbciat in Government, to be a forrain or extrin- fecall Presbytery, to thcie Congregations: Nor is it fo indeed- It cannot be called a forrain Presbytery to all the Congregations aflbciat under it ; Becaufe it is made of their own feverall Elder- ftiips : Nor yet can it be forrain or external! to any of them ; Be- caufe every one is a part of it, and in it as a part of the whole. As a Parliament cannot be called a forrain Judicatory to the whok Kingdom whereof it is the Parliament , nor unto any of the feve* rail Cities or Counties, which are parts of the Kingdom, and are in the Parliament by their Deputies or Commiffioners, as parts conltituents thereof. Indeed the Prelate and his Cathedrall con- fiftory taking to themfelves the Government and jurifdidtion oves all Congregations in the Diocefe were an external! & forrain Judi- catory to thefe Churches, becaufe they excluded the other Con-? gregations and their Elderflirps from all collateral! concurrence and copartnerfhip with them in the Government. But the Presbytery we fpeak for , is made up of the Elders of the feverall Congregati- ons which it governs, as intrinfecall collateral! parts conftituent thereof, and therefore cannot be calfed forrain to thefe feveral! P p %. Congregations* t.VIL (284) PartJI. fc Congregations. 2. When as he expreffeth the power of thefe Pref, "bytenes againft which he propounds thisdifpute, under the name of coercitiori, catling it a coercive power. He feerneth on purpofe to choife an odious word, to render it fufpicious by the very name; For the word or* 'coercing , in the common ufe, moftly feemerh to import, outward bodily orciviil force exercifed uponperfons ok things to ftopand repreife their a&ions , ipfis etiam renitentibnt^ we afcrihe no fuch power unto Presbyteries ; But a power of exe« cuting fpirttuail cenfures which have no external! force uponper- fons, yea nor Phyikali neither, but only Mo tall, as adminiftred by the Eiderlhip ; Tho they may be accompanied by God , Wth a Phyficall ( I mean a reall ) operation upon the peribns , either in mercy or judgement. And if at any time thofe who are for Pref- by teries over more Congregations, fpeaking of their power, call it coercive , they mean no other thing, but a power of Spirituall ju- rifdiclion exercifed in Spiritual! cenfures , fach as the Author him- felf and thefe of his way, attributes to particular El Jerlhips of a finale Congregation together w : th t!>e Congregation over every member thereof* If the Author had dealt ingenuoufiy with us,he fhouFd not ufed fuch a word without explanation of the thing , he knoweth we mean. But now let's fee the clear ftate of the contro- verfie in this maten The fubjeft in generall , whereupon the Q^eMion runneth be- §• *' tween us and the Independent Brethren , is a Presbytery or Elder- (hip of more Congregations then one. Concerning which, there are fome things, confeHed and uncontroverted, whereof we fhould take notice in tbrfrit place that we may the better fee where the difference and contoverlie U'eth. 1. 'Tis confefFed by our Bre- thren themfelves that confociation of more particular Churches or Congregations in one Presbytery or Elderifop is lawful! and ufefull Hooker Surv. />. 4. c. i , 2. 2. That thefe confociations are and may be of feverall forts and degrees , fome lefTer, fome greater, Cla'ffes, Synods, and thefe Provinciall, Nationall, Oecumenical!, Idem, ibid : So then there is no controverfie about the being (im- ply of Elderfhips and Presbyteries of more Congregations confori- at. $ greater* greater. The Independent Brethren deny altogether fubordt- lution of InferiourAiTemblies to Superiour as juridical! Ecclefia- fticall Courts. Albeit they acknowledge that difficulties arifing in a particular Congregation in matters of Government, there may be a going out to an AfTembly of more Churches, and if need be, full fatisfaclion and clearing not being found there, there may be ago- ing forth yet to a greater and more large AfTembly. Yet they fay, that is elective and only by way of *eference and arbitration, and only for counfeil and direction > and afiert, that a particular CongregitioQjisthefupreamEccieliAllicalllufidicail Tribunall tra- der jefus Chrift upon earth. So that a perlon akhough wronged i .by an.anjuft fentence there fas they are not in their: determinati- ons infallible) fuppofe fentenced to Excommunication "(which cut- teth him off from die benefit of Church Ordinances and feliowfhip ofCh'riftians in ail the Churches of the World) he may have no appeal from their fentence to another Superiour Judicatory to have ♦bis proceiTe juridically recognofced, and the injurious fentence re- fcinded, but muft ly under it without any Ecclefiaftick remedy till death, unleffe that particular Congregation bepleafedthemfelves to revoke their fentence. So doth Mr. Hooker tell us, Survey., far. 3. c. 3. pag. 40,41 ,4£. and par. 4. fag. 19. We, on the con- trary, afFert that both trre Law of Nature, and the pofitive Lawr of God revealed in his Word,botb in the Old and New Te (lament, toldeth out to us a jnridicall fubordination of leiTer AfTemblies Ecclefiafticail unto greater, fo that appeals may be made from In- feriour and letter , to Superiour and greater AfTemblies, That it is both againft the Law of nature and the pofitive Law of God to place a fupream, Independent Eccleliarricall juridicall power in a •particular Congregation, yea, or in any lefTer AfTembly when as a greater and Superiour is to be had and may conveniently be had. We ailert alio that, that feries and gradation of this fubordination jwhich is acknowledged and maintained by Proteftant Churches, viz,, of Congregational!., ClafHcall , Provincial! and National! AfTemblies is lawfuil and agreeable to the Word of God. Whereas there are theie three principal points of Controverfie %*h. fonceming the matter in hand. \ The thing Mr. Lockjer propoun* deth to difpute a^gainfl; in his Affertiorys that which is afferted by Sect. VIII. fa8-8> # . Paht.IL us in the Srft point r Yet fome of his Arguments afterward ufed,, teucbeth not at that, but againft the third, a feries of fubordina- tionof Inferiour AfTemblies to Superiour . But come we now to confiderhis proofs fuchas they are , and let the Reader have before his eyes the true ftate of the Qtieftion as laid forth by us, SECTION VIII- ■Bis firfl Ground brought againfl a Presbytery, having Authoritative juridica/l power ever more Congregati- ons (projecttte bj him, $e0. 22,23,2^25^26} 27,28329,30,31,32,33.) Examined. S 1. l^yf ^ Lockjer undertakes by four mediums to prove that a Pre^ IV 1 bytery having juridicall power and authority over more i Congregations is but an humane invention, 1. Becaufe they are without a foundation in the Word. This he undertakes to make good by clearing thefe Scriptures on which ilich Presbyteries are built: And hringsinfour Scriptures, Aft a. ispl.AEl.q.tf.Atl.i^ 38.' i 77*0.4:14, So that his firft Argument comes to this much i$J full matter and forme. If fuch a Presbytery over more Congrega* tions had any foundation in the Word it were in fome of thofe four places: But in none ofthofe Jiath it foundation, therefore not ^t all in Scripture : But now tho his affumptson were granted,, and he did clearly evidence that in none of thefe mentioned places, it hath fufficient foundation ; Yet I muit fay, he does very groflfe* lydcfpifehis Reader ( to fay the lead: ) in his major propofltion. What,did never M«\ Lochier read in Presbyteriall writers any other Scripturall grounds brought to prove fuch a Presbytery but thefe 4, places, might he not at lead have read (undry others? Let him read them over again , and I believe, befides thefe mentioned , he (hall find other grounds of Scripture brought to prove fuch a Presbytery, as he fhall never be able to withftand the force of. For inftance, let him confider the Argument grounded upon Matth. 18. 17, i8 a brought by Gul. ApoII- ctnfiderat. of certain controv. c ,6./>.P4>,9j* tm which place Parker himfelf 3 de ?olit % Ecclef. lib. $. c 24. groundetfi- g oundech theauthority of Synods. 2. The Argument grounded upon 1 Cor. 14. 1 2. in that fame Author, /> ask what he intends by this ? Is his meaning, that It was but by accident that they did act togetker in Cellegio, in this bufineffe, and, and that they afled as Apoftles only, becaufe what they did any one of them might aione have done what they did? And therefore It is no wayes a patern for a Coiledge of .ordinary Elders acting jointly their ordinary power ? But i.-thoit be true that they were together in ferufatem, by Gods command waiting together for the powring out of the Holy Ghoft : Yet it follows not, that by accident they did joyne in CelUgh for that bufinefle : Becaufe being together, by Chrifts institution they were to joyne together in managing the affairs of-the Church; They were bound and it was neceiTary that they fhould do io 9 2. True, what was done might have been done by any one of them aione ; had they been alone : But it followeth not that>being all in one place,where they might joyn together,^ ^##»f,anyoneof them might do it alones Nor does it follow either, that they acled as Apoftles, becaufe any of them might have done it alone. Any of the Apoftles might alone, by decifive fcntence, determined the controverfie Synodicaily concluded, Atl. 1$, yet the Author will not for chit, fay, that in that bufinefle the Apoftles acted as Apoftles The next thing I note, is a great miftake of our mind concerning the nature < of the Presbytery ruling over more Congregations then one. That it Jhonld be a combination of appropriate Elders to fever all parti* cular Chnrthes^ which thefe Ails I. were not, but generali Officers, "We do not think it is neceiTary to the effence of fuch a .Presbytery, that it be made up of Elders, appropriated to feverai fixed Congregations. We fay, at the firft where there were more ProfeiTours then could meet in one Congregation, their Paftours and Elders did te ch and rule them in common, not being diftri- butively appropriated to thefeverall Congregations, and that yet in fome Cities where there are more Congregations, it may be io s as it is at this day in fome Proreftant Churches; Tho we think,that -now in the ordinary condition of the Church, it is convenient that Congregations be fixed, and have their feverall fixed Offi- cers. Therefore we fay further ,what ever ufe be to be made of the prefent pafiage,. Aft. 1. in the Queftion in hand, it is but a poor Argument the Author infinuateth. There was not here concurring "Elders of other Churches, this of }trufalem being the flrft and ©niyGofpel Church, £rj^, there was not here a Presbytery ru- Oil \ -Kng ling over more Congregations then one, it doth not neceitarily follow. For that very Church : of Jerufalem might be made up of feverali GongregationSjnor can the contrary be provenjthc num- ber of names fet do wn^ v. 15. will not prove it , bccaufeit can- not be demonftrate that that was the whole number of Chriftians in Jerufalem. § t j. The fecond Scripture he meeteth with is, Aft. 4.45. Tor as many as tt> 'ere Sure it was not extraordina- ry in the nature of the aclsx For then it fhould not be an ad competent to any ordinary Officer in the Church, which is con- fefledly falfe , it being an ordinary ad: which may be, and is dayly done by ordinary Officers. Nor yet can it be faid to have been am extraordinary deed as done by luch Officers , che Apoftles : The Author indeed imports this in his reafon. Becaufe the Officers fit for this Veorl^ were not yet ordained , fo he would fay the Apoftles were not fit Officers for that work, and therefore their doing of k was extraordinary , but either they were not fit Officers in point of qualification and endewment requisite to manage that work, and this I think the Author will not fay; Or they were not fain pint of vocation to exercife fuch an a, is yet to find. Anfw. I. I won- der that Mr. Lockier ihould obtrude upon us fuch a naked AfTerti- on, that the Apoftles did lay hands upon and ordain thefe Deaconr as extraordinary perfons. i.e. as Apoftles and not as Elders, with- out making thelafteflayof anfwertothat reafon brought by the Reverend Affembly of Divines againft the diffenting Brethren af- ferting the. fame. Anf-ta the reasons of the Diffenting Brethren, fag. 5 2. I prefent it here in their own words, that the Reader may eonfider if it be not of fuch weight as Mr. Lockjer had caufe to take it unto confideration if he had not thought fitter to didate to,then by light of realbn to convince the judgement, of his Readers. "As ■* for that ordination, Act . 6. we doubt not to fay that in it they "did ad partly as Apoftles, partly as Elders: In conftituting aa H office in the Church which was not before , they did act their. Ct Apoftolicall authority ; But in ordaining unto that office men " whom the Church had chofcn, they did ad as Presbyters $ And w we doubt not but that our Brethren will herein concur with uss- fl For if they will not fay that they did herein ad partly as Apoftles, K and partly as Elders , they muft fay they aded either only as A- "poftles, c* only as Elders* If only as Elders , thence it will fol- low that all Elders have power not only to ordain men, but to "ered new Offices in the Church: If only as Apoftles,then hence te is no warrand for any Elders , fo much as to ordain men unto m " office. But I yet wonder fo much the more at this Aflfertion of Mr. Locker httc , remembering what he had delivered before, Sect, lo. where he drawes an Argument from ordination of El* ders performed by the Apoftles for regulating the ordination of Elders in Churches now , and thereupon alledging / tho ground- leflely ) that the Apoftles in ordmation took in^the people to con- currence with them, concludeth r that now alfo they ought to concur formally in that ad. If they had aded as extraordinary perfons, as Apoftles, the peoplecould not concur jointly with thera in fuch an ad , nor could it been anArgument brought as a patern inordinary. Now if they aded not by their extraordinary office and power in -ordaining Elders, what reafon is there to fay , that in the ordination of thefe Deacons , . they aded in that way f 2. Sect. VIII. (^6) PartJL As to that, but what appears from hence \ &c. We fay, fuppofing that the Church of Jerufalem was made up of many Congregati- ons, and thefe Congregations were one Church (which are proven from other Scriptures ) we find from hence, for proving fuch a Presbytery as we fpeak for , Officers of thefe Congregations meet- ing together for Government , and joining in an ad: of Govern- ment , ordination of Church Officers , viz,. The Apoftles doing this , and that as Elders , which is the thing it is brought for by Presbyterians ; Which tho by it felf makes not a full medium to prove that Presbytery , yet with the other fuppuiuioas taken with it, makes very much to prove it. §. 10. 2. Place is, A fits to- iZ.-Th* Elders there art >J&etfe'd net U be Elders of many £hurches Which Vmlfent for. but the EUers of the Church, v. 17. of on? Qhurch, of the Church of Ephefus, and charging them to attend to the flocks and not to flock** ver. 28* here is no jojnt veice of various commijftoned Elders, Anfw. To palle that fome of his own , the DiiTenting Brethren in the Affera- bly, once in their Reafons againft the inftance of the Church of Ephefus, make thefe, both Elders and flocks, to whom the A- poftie fpeaketh to be of all Afiaific not only of Ephefus) where no doubt there were more particular Churches \ To pafte tfcis, becaufe indeed thefe fame Authors a little after, when it may ferve their turn, they confine them to Ephefus : We grant 'tis ttue they were Elders of one Church, the Church of Ephefus ; But withall, we fay,that one Church,was not one fingle Congregation, but made up of more then one, and eonfequently was one Presbyteriall Church. This is proven by fundry Learned, particularly by the Reverend Affembly of Divines in their inftance of the Church of Ephefus, and all the Reafons of the DiiTenting Brethren brought to the contrare fully difcufTed in their Anfwers rhreunto. As for the Authors Grammatical! Argument, they are called Elders of the (fhurch in the Singular Number, not Churches, and they are bid attend the focj^ not flocks, Ergo, it was but one (ingle Congre- gation, 'tis filly, and might well be faid among Children, but may blufti to come out before understanding Men. By this Argument when our Saviour fayeth, upon this RockJbM I build my Church. And the Apoftle, I Cor* 12% He hath fa in the Chunk, finft ^art.'II/ . (297) : ^ SEct.Yill; fome Apoftlcs, &c* And Ephef.$, He love A his Church and gave himfelffor it % Becaufe it is in the Singular Number, Church, not Churches in all thefe places ; Therefore it muft be only one fingle -Congregation meant in all of them. When as it is indeed the whole Catholick Church, and not any particular lingular Congre- gation. So the name flock in the Singular Number, why may it not be taken collective for fuch a flock as contained in it diverfc particular flocks, as Gen. 33.13. yea and in the very prefent Me- taphoricallfenfef"'*^ nUpvm Luke 12.32. little Mock, and pfa vroipM J h n 10. itf.one Sheep fold,tho both in the Singular Number yea, and in the latter place, with the Cardinall number added to it 9 one, fignifieth the Church Catholick, and fo cemprehendeth many particular Hocks, Folds, and Churches. As to Mr. Lockjers laft words in this Seel, here is no joint voice, &c, indeed we grant that in that meeting there was no joint voting of Elders ; Becaufe thefe Elders then were not meet to ad in Government, but had been fent for by Taul % to receive direction from him concerning the managing of their charge : But fuppofing that which is proved from other places, that there were more (ingle Congregations in Ephefus then one, we find here thefe Congregations held forth to be one Church, and there were many Elders over thefe many 'Congregations as one flock, one Church. And that is enough foe our purpofe. The next place he meeteth with and which he calleth one of the mod weighty (indeed it is fo weighty to the purpofe we are on, that it crufheth the new fupream Independent Tribunal! e- recledbyour Brethren in (ingle Congregations ) is that concer- ning the Synod, ^#.15.28. To this the Author Anfwers, r. Here (fayethhe) is an Elder flip of 'feverall Churches (indeed) met : But as touching the coercion of their pvwer, as fuch excer* ped Elaerfbip enforcing their refults upon other £hurches^ this is the other thing to be brought in to make up the bujinejfe we D^ fputeagainfi. An fa, Firft. 'tis well Mt Lockier acknowledge ith that was an Elderfhip of feverali Churches, even a Synodicall Presbytery, a Synod, as himfelf calls it afterward, Seel 2p.Some of his fide have (aid otherwife, tire Diffenting Brethren in their Reafons againft the Membiies allegation of Afts 15, for fubordi. Et nauos s&cY.viir. ( ?9%) pxm.h; nation of Synods. That Ajf. was mt & formal! Synod but only «,; reference by the particular Church o/Antioch, unto this particu- lar Church of Jerufalem and no other. But wc think Mr. Lochia /peaketh the truth that it was a Synod. 2. Wemuft here agaia- note his invidious mifreprefenting of our Doc%ine» We do no& afcrtbe to that or any other Synod, a power of coertion to enforce their refuks upon any, but an authoritative juridieall power to en- joyn authoritatively their determinations agreeable to the Word* of God, and to cenfure the difobcdient and diforderly with meer fpirituall cenfures , as admonition, Excommunication, which im- port no cnforceingji propriety of fpeecli. Nor do we fay, that, that or any other Synod hath power thus authoritatively , to enjoyn their determinations* upon other Churches, we fay they have this power only in relation to thefe Churches* afTocia red in the Synod and none other*.. So not that which Wix.Lockjer iayeth,but this is* the other thing to be brought in to make the Presbytery we fpeak for ( what ever it be that heDifputesagainft, which; oftentimes is his own fiction) an juridieall power authoritatively enjoining its determinations, and which may cenfure with fpirituall Ecclefia- flick cenfures the difobeyers and diforderly. .And this, we-doubs not, will be found in this place, Act. 1$. $»u • After this the Author pretending to be ckar and fall in anfwe^ ring this place, he premitteth two things, which Reverend Hoo<< ker hath alfo, Survey, Part. 4. c. 1. 1, That the Apoftles tho they were extraordinary Officers, yet in this meeting they did no2 a& as fuch, becaufe they joined with them ordinary Churches (what ordinary Churches is contradiitinguifhed unto, I know nog well) and Officers, and all Difputed, and enquired. And fo here was left a famplar to all fucceeding generations. In this we agree with him. Only by the way we note, that we- fee not why he Ihouldhave faid before, Seel. 25* that in the ordination of Dea- cons the Apoftles aded as extra9rdinary perfons, feeing there alfo they joined the Church with them^ in the election of the perfonsv to be ordained* His 2. premifte is, that the fentence decreed in- that Synod was not Scripture becaufe they decreed it, as dill in was when the Apoftles moved by the proper Spirit of their Apo- lolicallftatipnjaccordingCQthat, fAftjtgfc bat what they de-- i~ ' "- " " ~~ creed. •creed was by debate found out co be eitfiei: exprexfc hi Scripture jor underiyably deduced from thence : So by one of thefe wayes 3 was found to be Scripture, and was therefore decreed and injoyned by them upon others. And then goes out a whiie in clearing this, .which we need not infift on. And to pafie other things that might be noted in this fecondpremiiTe granting both, what -would he infer hereupon? That in the clofe of Sect. 28. So that what they produced by debate was materially binding f or af much as what they produced V?as 9 for the matter ofit % no other but the "frill of God, but not formally as therefult of fuck a Collegiat E Iderjhip . An fa* This laft folioweth not upon any thing in the former premises: For tho their decrees were not Scripture becaufe decreed by them, but decreed by them becaufe found to be Scripture, or agreeable to generalities of Scripture, and therefore in joined by them to ihe Churches:It foJlowes indeed that their primary and fundamen* tall obligatoriness is materiall ; And were they not fuch, they could not formally, as decrees of the Synod, be obligatory or bin- ding ; But itdoth not follow that, fimpliciter they are not bin- ding formally, as decrees of the Synod. The obligatorinefTe of decrees of a Synod formally as decrees of a Synod is fee undary fob* •ordinate^ and regulate^ but for that, it is not no obligatorinefTe at all. Yea one of his own contradi&s him in terming in this. J4r. Cotton fpeakingof the decrees of this very Synod : Keyes 9 *.6. this binding power is not only materially from the weight §f the matters impojed (tohic hare necejfary , necejptate prgcept* from the Word) but alfo formally from the Authority of the Synod m But come we to his clear Anfw. he brings it in by way of reply ^ lz ; to an Object. Had then this. Synod no authoritative p&toer at M ? For What end then is the Ordinance f This indeed is a per- tinent Queftion- propounded by the Author to himfelf. And if he, aiTerting, as but in his immediatly preceeding words he has done , that the decrees of this Synod, were binding only materially, as matters revealed in the Scripture, and not formally, ca&withail Anfwer this Queftion affirmatively that this Synod had an authori- tative power as fuch an Ordinance, ^as a Synod, Brit mihi magma Apollo 9 ,my } I (hall fay M*. Lcckjer can make contradictories agree well enough. See we then his Anfw. to this, Aforrain Elder-* Rr % fih fhip rightly conftituted hath particular authority, (I) a power of prcheminent and prevailing cottnfel^ though not a power ofjurifdi* Elton to conflrain their refults to be pratlifed f or to cenfure Ecclefi*. afticalljjn cafe per fons^who have the refult of things produced by themjio not follow them/They have as an Ordinance of God, a poWer cf preheminent and prevailing counf el: That is % their refult ought to be preferred and prevail more upon our hearts, then Vvhatln* terpretation other Jingle perfons , and ordinary helps , ordinarily afford. Anfw. Firft here ere I come to the main buiinetfe, note fhortly fome few things, i. We never attributed authority to a forrain Elderfhip, over any perforis or Churches. Mr, Lockier here faying that a forrain Elderfhip hath peculiar authority ( if his meaning be according to his words, ifheunderftand authority hv deed) that is an Elderfhip extrinfecali to Churches, yet hath pe- culiar authority over them, goeth farther then ever Prefbyterians did, and indeed goeth clearly contrary to truth, and in terror fpeaketh very like the Prelatick way, which attributed to a forrain Elderfhip, the Prelate and his Cathedrall, authority over all the Churches in the Diocgfe. But indeed his words and his fenfe agree not: For his peculiar authority, is no authority , as we fhall fee anone. 2. We fay yet it is but an odious feigned defcripcion of that power of jurifdidion, we attribute to Synods and other af« fociated Presbyteries, when it is called a power to conflrain their results to be practife^ as we have difcovered it before. 5. It is yec a groffer mifreprefentation, that we attribute unto fuch Presby- teries a power to cenfure perfons Ecclejlaftically in cafe they have the refult of things produced by them and do not follow them. Did ever any Pcrsbyterian fay fuch a thing as this,, that a Synod or Presbytery has power to cenfure perfons who have their refuks by them and does not follow them. For example, that a Synod m Scotland hath power to cenfure perfons, in England or France^ that have their remits by them and does not follow them, or that any Presbytery hath power to cenfure perfons of the Church with- in the bounds of their afTociation, who, may be, have their refuks by them and not follow them ? If this has been faid out of a mi- ftake and ignorance we pity it, andwifhes the Author to know pag. 13, 14, he borrowed* two. **' i* Is 1. Is made up of two precedes, the firft whereof is this. 21*/"* decrees are [aid to bind thefe to whom they are fent : But they were fent to all the Churches of the Gentiles. This is evident faith Me, JLockjer , ^4^ 21. * J. ^ touching the Gentiles that believe , tp? hav ^Written and concluded that they obferve\ Sec. Ergo, they did bind all the Churches of the Gentiles. Anfw. To this 1 . for the 1 Major, where is it fo faid I I cannot remember any place of the ftory where this is faid. If he and Hooker , from whom he hath this, mean, that we fay and confeife this 4 that the decrees of the* Synod bind all thefe to whom they are fent^ that we never laid' ; If it be underltood of binding as Synodicall decrees. A Synod in one Natfonmay fend their decrees unto Churches of another Nation* fas was ordinary to do-in the Primitive times ) yet we fay not, that, the decrees of a Synod of one Nation ,.. binds the Churches in- another Nation, though, may be, the mater of them binds them. 2. For the minor : If the meaning be , (as it muft be , that the Argument may fpeak to the purpofe it is intended for ) that they • were fent by way of Synodiall decrees to all the Churches of the Gentiles (as certainty they were to fome) we deny it, the place- cited, Act, 2i» *5' proves it not i For it fpeaks of the Gentiles in- definitiy , and clearly relates, to the Letter written, Act. iy. wherethe very inieriptiorvbears, that fo they were fent only to the- Gentilesin Antioch, Syria, and Ciliciav. 23. ' lis true Paul and 'Barnabas delivered the decrees to othersas they went through the cities, Act. id. 4. but it is not (aid that they were fent to them by way of Synodicall decrees , as they were to thefe other Churches, But grant that -one way or other they were fent alfo to the reft of- the Churches of the Gentiles , that is, that it was the will and in* tention of the Synod , that as occafion fhould ferve they (hould be delivered to them , and wefhall alfo grant the conclufion of this- fifftprocede infomefenfe, that they did bind all the Churches- of the Gentiles. See we what M?. Lockjer will infer upon -this in his next procefTe. 2^jw thefe ( faith he ) ( u )_ all the Churches of the Gentiles ■ had no Commiffioners delegated to that Sy nodi Therefore what the Synod did could not bind them by Way of authoritative jurifdi* sthn 3 . becaufe Where kgo delegation of Commiffioners- there is »&* Ssct.VIIL (304) Part .I!; right of jurifdiciion.% They did hind them only by way of counfell -and materially , as things clearly held forth in the Word of God Anfw. If Mr. £ when he fayeth , now thefe had no Com- miffioners there, &c. if he mean this Univerfally , that none of the Churches of the Gentiles had CommiiTioners there, it is clearly falfe. If he mean only that feme of them had no Commiifionefs there , it is true , and we grant that the decrees of the Synod did not bind thefe Churches by way of jurifdi<5tion and formally as de- crees of the Synod, but materially. But hence it folioweth not that they did not bind at all, nor any, by way of jurifdi&ion. For fome Gentile Churches had their Commiflioners there, and were Members of the Synod, Antioch^ Syria, and Cilicia 9 ( thefetwo laft, if they had not, yet they might and ought to have had , and it is mod probable they had) and fo thefe Churches might be bound by them by way of jurifdidion and formally, for ought that is brought in this Argument , and they did fo bind them as is abun- dantly proven in the Authors cited before. §. **• I cannot here pafle by the Obfervation of the two Syllogiftick moulds , whereinto Hooker cafts this laft procefle , that Mr- L$c- kier has borrowed from him , in the place of his Survey laft cited*' The i» is this. The decrees of a Synod bind only fnch by Ecclefia- flic all jurij "diction ., ^oho delegate meffengers tsthe Synod: But the decrees of this Synod bind more then thefe -who delegated mef* fengers to it, to wit, all the Churches of the Gentiles, Therefore it did not intend to bind by Ecclefiafticpil jurifdiction, Truely 'tis a pity to fee a Godly man beguiling himfelf in fuch maters , with fuch illogicall (illie Arguments. I will not (lay to exaggerate this to the full , who fees not the groiTe peccancy of this : And if the Author would have concluded formally and right upon his premife^ the conclufion fhould have been this: Therefore the decrees of this Synod did bind more Churches then fuch as it did bind by Ec- clefiafticali jurifdiclion. And this he fhaii have granted by us with- out contradiction, butalfo without any advantage to hiscaufe. His fecond mould ( which he fayeth is more plain ) is this. Thefe who fend the decrees of the Synod to fuch Qhurches Vchd never fent their Commiffi oners thither ; They fend only byway of coun- felL But thk Synod fent their decrees t$ all the Churches- of the Gentiles - Centiles y who \ never fent their Commijftoners 'thither i Ergo y thej ■fent only by way of conn fell : This is as loufe for mater, as co bis |>oint in hand s as the former was peccant in forme. For as co the Major; The Synod which fend their decrees to Churches who never fen t ( at ieaft ought to have fent) their Corataiffionerf thither, fend only by way of counfeli to thefe Churches, true in- . deed: But if the meaning be 3 that that Synod which fends thek decrees to fuch Churches as never fent their Commiflloners thither; fend only by way of counfel to all to whom they fend them, this is as eafily denyed as it is affirmed : and I believe it (hall be long ere we hear a proof of it. Then to the Minor, That this Synod of fe* rufalemknx. their decrees to fome Churches of the Gentiles that never fent their Commiflioners thitherjet it be granted : Yet k is as certain, fome, to whom they fent them, had their Commtflio- cers there as members. And fo for the Conclufion, it may be gran- ted that this Synod lent their decrees to fome,only by way of coun«* fel : But from nothing in the Argument doth it follow, that they fent them only thus, to all to whom they fent them. Having briefly noted thus upon Mr. Hookers two Syllogifrnes, we return to our Author. In the clofe of this Tiis firft Argument, for confirmation there- §. t |; of he addeth thus .• That- here they did acquiefce, (viz. in binding, ^the Churches to Which they fent only by way of counfel and mater i~ ally ) and did not further meddle with any juriRicall proce f[e upon; them y appears by thefe pacific kjvordsjvhich would they were Writ* ten not With ink^ and pen y but with thejpirit of the Lord upon aH. Frejbyters hearts Who are fo turbulent in thefe times : From which if you keep your f elves you fhall do well. Anf. M**. Loc kier Is here in a great miftake, while as he iniinuateth, that if the Synod did not meddle with juridkalL proce (Te ( viz. as I cenceive,to cen- £me) upon them to whom they fent the decrees s that it muft then befaid, they acquiefced in meer giving of counfel! ; As if a Court' or Judicatory had no other aft of authoritative Jurifdiftion, but- pjrocefling perfons to cenfure ; When as the making and authorita-, tive impoiing of constitutions ( which indeed makes perfons liable, to cenfure in cafe of difobedience ) is an aft of juridicail- Authori- | ty, chough there be nopxocefling perfons to cenfore ptefencly joi- sr 7 m& lied therewith. And that thus this Synod did make* and autho* ritatively (1 mean Ministerially,} impofe conftitutions upon the Churches, tho they went not on to proceffe any of them, ha* been abundantly proven by the Authors referred to. 2. Yea they did actually put forth a cenfuring power againfi: the <*™ fchifme and diffention made in the Church by the Judaizing Teachers, by ftigmatizing thefe falfe Teachers, and branding them, by decla- ring them to be troublers of the Church, fubverters of fouls, and tacitely fas fome conceive from thefe words, unto whomwegavt nofuchcommandement ) tobebelyersof the Apoftles and Elders oljerttfalem, as if they had fent them abroad to Preach this Do- 8rine: This mark of infamy Was a degree of cenfure, and tended to more,if they (hould perfiftin their courfe incorrigible t and obfti- nat. $. But doth Mr. Lockjer fpeak in good earneft, when as he fayeth that by thefe laft words of the Synodicall Epiftle to thefe Churches, that the Synod did no more as to thefe. matters, but give counfell and advice*to thefe Churches, and wifh that for this purpofethey were Written not with Ink and Pen, &c % as if for- footh,becaufe the Synod fend their decrees in an Epiftle (which was a refpedfull way;,) becaufe they recommend the practice and obedience of them by the goodneiTe thereof % this did necefTa- rily import they did not enjoin them by authority* but only ad* vifed them by way of ChriPtian counfell 1 Verily fuch reafoning* floured with fuch a rhetoricall wifhj Would they were Written, &c„ I think may blufli in the pretence of any intelligent man. As for that bitter aceufation the Author gives in againft all Prefby ters ( he means Prefby terians not Pre/by ters of his own way, fure ) as turbulent perfons, we wiflt the Lord may lay it to his confidence, but not to hi6 charge. For our felves* it being call: up^n us for no other caufe, but for ftanding to the maintainance and avowing of the Caufe of Jefus Chriftjand the due authority of his Ordinances, We ftwllfuWly content our felves with that of his, Blepdareye when fnen fhall revile j oh — and jhall fay all manner of e- *>i II againft j oh fat fly for tnyfak* — * fo perfected tkey the Pro* phets which were before J6tt. &*$• His fccbnd reafon alledged to prove this Synod did exercife only apowerofcounfcil> S«£t. 32* in fumrae is this much. The con* troverjis Fart.TI.' , f3©7> Sect.VIII,; trover fie decided in this Synod being beftoeen the Church o/Antioch 4ttd feme J udai%ing Teachers , i^$s evident that one fide in the Synod was a party, to w*>, themtf&niiQch : Now for the fe whs ypere a party, and contefted againft their oppofitcs, t+ be judge in, their own caufe y and to be juridical} upon their Antagonifts bj their < $wn power, cannot equitably or confcionably be imagined. It it (faith Hooker) againfiyule. *Anpto. I remember this very ob- Je&ionis one of the grounds of that Proceflation and Declinator, made by the Remonftrantv againft that famous and Reverend Sy- nod ofDort. Becaufe (to wit) a great part pf the Members of the Synod were their adverfe party, had by Preaching and Writing before condemned their 'Doctrine as errour, and that the Law of Nature doth not permit, that an adverfe parry be Judge in their own caufe : Which ground was rejected and refuted, by the unani- mous fuffrageof the Learned forrain Divines then prefent, as null* and the reafons whereupon they did reject it f which are to be feen in the a<$s of the Syisod, Seff. 29. ) do abundantly refufe thi§ reafon alkdged to prove that this Synod of Jerufaltm did only efc? ercife a power of counfell, and could not judicially and authorita- lively determine the mater they had in hand. Not being willing to fill up much paper with tranferiptions, I refer the judicious Rea- der to the frarfrages of thefe reverend and learned Divines them- felves for more full fatisfaclion. For the prefent briefly, kiss groiTe miftake of our -Author and Mr. Hookjr from whom he hath it, that thefe CommuTioners of the Church of Antioch, members -of this Synod, if the Synod did juridically and authoritatively judg and determine in the mater that was before them,did judge in their own caufe, ( if he mean their own proper private caufe ) the ma- ter of their judgement was not the proper private caufe of any ^member of the Synod, but the publick caufe of GO D and his Church; the dodrineof juftification, which the j udaizing Tea*-; chers did corrupt, and the peace of the Church which they diftuc- bed. Now tho perfbns cannot be both an adverfe party and Judge in their own private esule which concerneth themfeives, yet inp publick caufe this may be. Even in ci-vill maters this may and muft be in forne cafes ; The pcrfons that coniikute the fupream Judica- tory of a Nation (fuppofe the Parliament) ifeey are both ad- Sfz verfc Sect, Vim (jog) Part. XIV verfe party and Judge in publick caufes, as in maters of treafon,e^« Efpecially this exception, from* that Masime which is alledgei, that perions cannot be both adverfe party and Judge in their own eaufe, muft not have place in maters and controverts of Religion, ocherwife there could be no judicial! way at all for condemning falfe and tmeticall Teachers : For certain it is that all Minifters of JeiusChriftareobltdged by their Gallingand the Commandement of God, not only to teach and inftruet the people of God positive- ly in the truth j But alfo to refute the errors, and ftop the mouths . of oppofers and adverfaries of the Truth, fo that when any broach and vent errors in the Church of God, the Minifters of Chrift mcft . not ftand neutrals and indifferent, but mufl: and ought both by word and writ refute and condemne them, and be an adverfe party to them. Muft they therefore, becaufe they do their duty In oppofing Teachers of errors in their feverall particular ftations^ be uneapablein an Alterably to judge and condemne thefe errors and abettors of them judicially ? Verily this were nothing elfe bur to proclaim a licence to all erroneous fpirits in the world, to teach and fpread their poyfonable Do&rines without any controlemenc in an Ecclefiaiucall way. And verily this principle, That perfons that are an adverfe party to falfe Teachers in maters of Religion; cannot be Judges on the controverfie between them and thefe Tea- chersj was very far from the the thoughts of the Churches of Godj in the times of thefe famous ancient Co uneels of Nice, ConffiantU &ople, Sphefm^ Chalcedon, wherein, as in many Provinciall Sy* xiods of thefe times ^ it is well known, Orthodox Divines, that had pubiickly and zealouily appeared before, againft theHasreticks of thefe times, did unqueftionably fit and voteas Judges in the very controverts they had appeared parties in. But yet to put this mater c! offer home to Mr.Loekjer ; Suppofe in one of his Inde- pendent Congregations, One or two or more members fhculd vent Ha?reticall Doctrine, and labour to inftill it into, and infecl there- with, their fellow members J think -he will not deny but the Elders of that Congregation, yea and every particular member ought to contendagainft them for the truth in privat, refute and condemn their errors and their Schifmatick praclifes. Now I think he will mot-deny- ( except he will deny altogether, that tfiere can be ar:y EcclefiafticallU Part.il (J09). Shct.VIIL Ecclehafticall Judicature to condemn errors Juridically and authori- tatively) but theYe Eiders and private Chriftians, though a con- trair party to the fuppofed erroneous perfons, yet may in the mee- ting of the Congregation affembled as a Judicatory and Court, fie and vote as Judges upon the mater in controverfy with their anta- gonifts. If this may be in a Congregationall Judicatory, and yet not againft equity nor conference nor rule, why may it not be fo in a Synod too.- The laft place that M<*. Lockier meeteth with, and faith is fre- ^ 10i " quently ufed by the Presbyterian Brethren, is iTim. 4. i4.to which place he faith that he hath fpoken fomewhat before on the firft Af- fertion,which he repeats htitiThatit vpos not an ordinary Elder- fljip becaufe of the reafon he gave there, andaddes, that being an Eldtrjhip of extraordinary Officers, not pr&cifely from fuch and fuch particular (fhurches, but fuch as were equally of all, as of any one^ "twill not amount to the nature of abater n and binding ■precedent to build upon* Anfw. 1 . This place is not fo frequently urged, as Mr. Lockier pxcttndQth, for this purpofe,to prove an af- fociate Presbytery over more Congregations then one. The thing it is ufually urged for, is to prove that the Government of the Church, whereof Ordination is a principal! part, is in the hands of Officers, and not in the body of ProfetTors .- and this it doth clearly prove. Yet i. We conceive considerable grounds may be brought thatit was a Presbytery^not only not of one Congregate ©n ( this Mr. Lockier himfelf acknowledge trO but alfo of ordinary Elders for the mofl: part, of feverall particular Congregations : For 1. There is not an example can be brought from Scripture of the Elderfhipofone Congregation performing Ordination,- nor any rule that may warrand fuch a practice, when aflbciation with other Congregations may conveniently be.had: And there is in Scrip- ture example of Ordination by a Presbytery over diverfe Congre* gatior>s, as in the Church of ferufalem, where were many Con- gregations, as has been often demonftrated againft all exceptions . that has been alledged. That that Presbytery which ordained in Jerufahm, was the Apoftles, extraordinary OrBcersjs nothing to the contrair ; Becaufe therein they acled not as extraordinary Of- ficers, but as ordinary Elders, as hath been fhewed before. 2* ""."" • "" ~"~ (Juliet S*rr.Vin: (310) m PaktM, Gttlid> Apothn. reafon to this pu r po fe , C en filer* efce rtaitt Con- trov. Cap. 6. 9. 2. is very conftderable. This ofdination oiTimom thy feemethto have been done in the Church of Ljftra, as the Belgkk Interpreters obferve upon the place from Atl. 6, 1,2,3. fa laid there that *Paul would have hint to go forth With him ,v.3-.w«* to ferve with him in the work of the Miniftry of the Gofpel : And *. t.!t is faid he had a good report froof the brethren ofLjftra and Iconiumwhzt elfc could that report be but a teftimony of his piety and underftanding in the Scriptures^ /of which the Apoftlefpea- keth, $Tim.\. 15. ) which the Apoftle requires of a perfon to be called to the Miniftry, and feemeth there to be mentioned as gi- ven in relation to Timothies calling thereunto : And in this we fee the brethren oiDerhe mdlconrnm, with thefe of Ljftra concur- ring as adors 4 under whom are included alio the Churches of the Region round about, as may be gathered from J£hi 4. 6. Thefe considerations are, I conceive, of fome weight, to incline us to think this Presbytery, as it was not Congregational!, fo was not extraordinary. As to what Mr. Leckjer aliedgeth to the contrail; #. f.tothac he fpoke before upon Atfertion u We ar/wwdit fufficiently then, and referres the Reader back to our 5. Se ct 2* To the littlething added here, we fay ; Albeit the Oificers ma. king up this Presbytery, were not precisely from fuch and fuch particular Churches fas I conceive hismeaning ) were not fixed and appropriated Officers of particular Congregations (which yet cannot be proven) yet they might have been a Presbytery of more Congregations, fuch as we (land for. Fixed neffe of Presby- ters to feverall particular Congregation^ is not neceflary by any positive divine inftitution. Again, though all the members ma* king up a Presbytery, were extrordinary Oificers, and fo fuch as were of all Congregations as well as of one ( which yet was not the cafeof this Presbytery) yet joining-** Collegh, in an ordinary aft, as Ordination ithey might beapatern and binding pracedenc to build upon, elfe from that Ordination, ABs 6. can no warrand be deduced for Ordination of Officers by the Elders in ordinary. Hitherto we have feen and considered Mr. Lockiers purfuing of his firit Medium, ufed againft authoritative Presbyteries over more Congregations ;hcn one : Let the Reader judge how he has made ic Fakt.1I. (jit) S*ctJX, it good, by what we have anfwered, and what we have referred to 2 for further fatisfaclion in others. SECTION IX. Examination cf his 2d. Medium prfued in his Sect I oh- 34^35^3^37- His fecond Medium is, that fuch a Presbytery oppofes the word. §, x; His Argument here comes to this much in fumme. The Scrip- tures give in their teftimony\not one or two but inplentjfhat what tower of juri/diction or ruling an Elder/hip hath, it hath it in tht fame extent it hath its P aft or all ' peVeer , and no further; Tea, that an Officers Paftorall power r exceeds in extent his Ruling power,, rather then e contra : Therefore a Prefbyterj over more Congregations then onejvhich extends the Paftors ordinary ruling poWer beyond the extent of his ordinary Teaching, doth oppofe the Word of God. aAnfw. When as this Argument, which is but a limme of that firft large one brought by the Ditfenting BVethren againft the AlTemblies third Propofition concerning Prefbyteriall Government, and all the confirmations thereof brought by thefe. fame Brethren^ hath already received fo considerable anfwers from the AiTembiy of Divines in their Paperrextant to the World; I Wonder why Mt.Lockjer fhould prefent it again to us here fo bare- ly, without taking thefe anfwers to confideration, or afifaying to infringe them any wayes $ UnlelTe it has been his purpofe to defpife all his Readers. Well, we refer the Reader to thefe Anfwers of theAflembly for full fatisfa&ion, and for the prefent fay onely in brief. 1 . If all that is faid in this Argument were granted, yet Would it not conclude (imply againft an Eiderfhip Ruling more Congregations then one, but only againft an Eiderfhip made up of Eiders fixed in their Teaching to feverall particular Congrega- tions % But nothing againft an ElderChtp confiftingof Orricers not fixed to feverall particular Congregations, but Teaching and Go- verning in common the feverall Congregatk>ns affociated under their one Government : And likely it is, that fo it was in the Church of ]erufahm and others thefe firft Churches | Certainly the contrdr cannot be proven; And we think fo it may be at this day, as it is indeed in fome Reformed Churches without repugnan- cy to any pofitive Divine inftitution. But, 2. granting that the Scriptures doe teftifie, that the ordinary Ruling power of Elders is not extendended beyond their ordinary power of Teaching (for that which Mr. Zo^er addeth that the Scripture hoideth forth that rather the Teaching power exceeds in extent his Ruling po- wer, we d dire proof of it , for he brings nonej we fay that it is a millake which isalledged, that the Presbytery we (peak for, Ru- ling over more Congregations extends the ordinary Ruling power of Paftours beyond the extent of their ordinary Teaching power.* It does only extend the ordinary exercife or atttts fecundus of the one, beyond the ordinary exercife or atlusfecumdos of the other, having herein a call to the one and not to the other, which is no incongruity, nor doth oppofe any part of the* Word of God. As for the Scriptures alledged by the DifTenting Brethren in their foreciied Reafons, and from them here by M r . Lockier, we ftiil affirm, with the Reverend Aflembly in their Anfwers,none of them proves the contrary, they only (hew that all thefe things belong to their Office , and that this is the nfuall pradice and work of Elders where their work lyes : But none of them prove it prohi- bited of God or unlawfull, for an Elder upon a call to do or exer- cife one of thefe, where they have not occafion and a call to do th« reft. Any thing that M". Lochier fayeth to the contrary of this is but his meer adertion, but no proof from the words of the Texts, for which I appeal to the judgement of any underftanding man reading and confjdering the Texts themfelves : Let any man (hew me out of thefe Scripures any thing bearing this mnch, Elders rule thefe particular Congregations only 9 which you do ordinarily teach : So we (ha^i not need to infilt upon them particularly , only a note upon fome what faid by him upon fome of them. §. x. When as upon that, Act. 2c. 28. That there were many Offi- cers belonging to this Church of Ephefus, herein we join with him, and that it is manifeit here was but one flock , on this wee join alfo, as to the word one flock : But that it was one /ingle flock* or Congregation only, as he meaneth, we utterly deny, ;md af- firme it was an aflbciate. flock or Church, made up of feverall fiogle particular particular Congregations ; For proof and fatis&ftion herein we re. fer the Reader to the Aifemblies Anfwers to the DifFenting Bre- threns reafons againft the inftance of the Church ofEphejus. And here again I muft crave leave to fay Mr. Lockjer exceedingly con- temneth hi^Readers, when as fuch confiderable Anfwers being gi- ven and extant againft all that could bee alledged by thefe abieftmenof his fide, to prove that there was not many 5 but one ilngle Congregation in Ephefus, he without any afTay to infringe thefe Anfwers , obtrudes his bare naked Aflfertion, that it was but one. What ? Muft all men be to him,as Pythagoras Difciples to captivate their judgement and acquiefce with »w»i w* ■? Againft his reafoning upon this UvUdium , he propounds an §.j, Objection as one of our Arguments , Sett. %6. and Anfwers it, Seel, 37. Obj. Elders may Preach in this Church and that, and many particular Churches * Therefore they may, according to this yen havcfaidftile ever many particular Churches* To which he Anfwers, 'tis not occafionail Preaching Vvhich one Chttrch by con- fent and dejire may admit to another^ that the Scriptures foremen* Honed make the bound of rule ; 3ut Cohere mens fixed call A,>d Veorl^ (he muft mean the work of Preaching J properly lyeth. T* Where lam called to Preach ( he muft mean ordinarily ) this bounds r commenf urates and proportions my power as an Officer t& v Rule, fo that to go beyond 'this, is togo'beyond the JVord, to oppofe the Word. *Anf. 1. Albeit from what you have laid, viz. that " the power of Preaching and the power of Ruling are commenfurat and of equall extent, it ftiould not follow that If Presbyters may Preach to more Congregations then one occasionally ; Therefore may Rule over more Congregations then one ordinarily. Yet it will follow they may rule over more' Congregations then one, in fuch a way as they mav Preach to them : For fay yee their Preach- ing and Ruling are comraenfurate by Scripture.; Yea further, if Elders may Preach to more Congregations then one, pot only oc- cafionaliy but ordinarily, which they may (as fuppofe*in a City where" are many Congregations, the Minifters be not fixed to them feveraily, but teach them in common, as they may do without vio- lation of any Divine inftitution, and that defailo it was not fo in .the firft Churches , nothing can be brought to demonftrat) it will Te follow ^* «*'ct.E£ tlH) Pam.IL. follow fuchSders may Rule over more Congregations then one; 2. We do not make the occafionall Preaching of Elders to more Congregations then one the reafonand ground why they may rule over more thenone ordinarily : But thus we ground it , a Mini- fter by Chrifts iriftitutiorrand his ordination to that Office, is a Mk nifter, and hath that office habitually, in relation to the Univerfali Vifibie Church of Jefus Chrift, and not only to one fingle Con- gregation (fee this abundantly demonftrat by the Learned Mr. Hudfon, Vindic. of the 8 fence and 'Vnlty, &c. c.6.pag. i j 8 &feq.) and fo may and ought to exercife that Office and any part thereof in relation to one or more parts of the Church, ( i ) par- ticular Congregation or Congregations^ according as the promo- virig of the good of the whole does require , and he hath a par- ticular call there unto, and fo alcho a Minifters fixed ordinary work of Preaching be bounded to one Congregation , yet his work of Ruling may be ordinarily extended to more Congregations having a call thereunto, by the affociation of that Congregation and ou- tliers together for matters of Government and Difcipline $ Which - affociation particular Congregations are^by warraud of Gods Word, obliged to enter into. In the reft of his 37 Seftl three things ( as I can take it up) are brought to prove, that a Minifters fixed ordinary work of Preaching bounds his ordinary power of ruling; So that where he does not that, he cannot do this. 1. That 1 Thejf. /. 12. *The Aa- KnoVp them that labour among you, and are over you in the Lord^ shor hath andadmonijhyou 5 compared with, tTim* * j. 17 . which expounds it, I.17- that labouring; to be in the Word and Doctrine. Thefe places, r W but?t° l ^y et ^^ e ' tcacheth that fixed Teaching and fixed Ruling go to- may be an gether. esfnfw. Thefe places indeed teach, that whereminifters efcapc of Preach ordinarily, over thefe they alfo rule,but not that over thefe ihePrlnter. only they rule. M*. Lecfar affertcth indeed but proveth not 3 ° n L y lI i &or can prove from the words* to be no- * # ted , that the place is juft fo Printed in the 7{$afons of the Diflcming Bmbwi ggthft the' jjjfemblks $. "fropofitm tonctrning PresbytmaU Government ( whence the Author borrowcth it here) j Tim, 1, 17. where k doubt not bur the fault has been the Printer*. Another ^>ak?:ii. ; (315 sisc^.ix; Another ground he hath is this , It is not ban labouring in the §. y. ,}Vord in a place that-notes an Elder ( /.as I conceive, that formal- ly condi tuxes and denominates one an Elder,) but being over them fixed and commi.Jfioned tofuch a flatten over them $ And then tyhem this is pitched and bounded , this boundsi hisftork^of conduct and difcipline. Anfw. *Tis true , that it is not bare labouring in the Word in a place, notes, conftitutes, and denominates an Elder or Minifter (fome men may labour in the Word in a place , fu-chla- bouring as it may be , who were never fent , nor called to that work , And thofe indeed are no Minifters of Chrift ) but it is as Erue , that neither is being fet over, fixed, commiffioned to fuch a fiatlon (#. ) to fuch a particular Congregation , that notes him or conftitutes him a Minifter. The truth is, that which notes, and . conftitutes a Minifter , is poteftative million , according to the or- der inftituted by Chvrft, and in veiling with Office to preach the ; Gofpel , and to difpence other ordinances : Which Office habitu- , ally confidered , is in relation to the Church Cathoiick indefinite- ly : And his fixing to this or that particular Congregation,doth noe make him a Minifter, but only apply eth the fame to fuch a Congre- gation for the conftant and ordinary exercife thereof. See this we day here aboundantly deraonftrate by learned Hudfon, Vindic. of • the Bjf. andZJnitie, ef-c* c. 6. fag, itf.&feq. The third thing he bringeth is this much. The Keyes ( viz.oi -DocVme and Difcipline,) altho diftinguified, jet are not divided,, < Chrift hdth joined and tyed them together : But to rule where wee . are not fix ed and called to p reach , ps to divide them : Which foW Well Chrift W W take that , orhoVv Well men will ufe fever all hundred of years in blood and tyranny, hath Shewed us* Anfto. 1. The Keyes of Dodrine and Difcipline are not fo infeparable on from another, as the Author by his big words would bear his •Readers in handi 1. In the very habit or aEbus primus , they are Separated ; The Ruling Elder hath the Key of Jurifdidtion or Dif- cipline, andexercifechtt , but not the Key of Dodrine. *«Even where they are joyned together in habit , they are divided and fe- paratedinacl : The Paftor of a Congregation when he teacheth ^doth not exercife Difcipline , 4ior when he exercifeth Difcipline or Jurifdi&iondothheat that fame time teach: Yea further $ He T t 2 may Sect.IX. (316) Part .IK may and doth teach alone , but he may not exercife Jurifdhfhon alone , but in combination and in collegio with others. Obj. But they are divided in regard of the objed by the Presbyterian way. The Paftor in the alfociate Presbytery exerciieth Juriididion over them whom he'doth not teach 5 And Chrift hath fo joined them together in this relation , that the one cannot be exercifed towards any , but to whom the other is aifo. Anfw. The Author indeed fayeth fo,that Chrift hath appointed this - r But hath never brought a place of Scripture that holdeth it forth, nor ever will. The places by him here alledged'cary no fuch thing. But to put home this to the Author himfelf , he affirmeth that a Pallor can exercife Tule onely in relation to that particular Congregation where he & fixed to preach ordinariy ; Becaufe elk it were to divide the Keye^- which he aiiedgeth to be even in the exercife fo tyed together as he hath faid. But I ask him, may not a Paftor preach the Gofpel to others then of his own Congregation either by going to them , or admitting them to him ; May he not adminiftrate the Sacrament of the Lords Supper to them in like maner either wayes ? If he den^ this, hedenyes with all , all communion of Chriftians, except of thefe of one flngle Congregation , in publick Ordinances of Jefus Chrift; ifhegrantit, then he divides the Keyes which he &yt3 Chrift hath tyed together. As to his bloody word ,'tis like many others in this Bis little peece, . . 3*** a ground lefleflander; There have not been feverall hundreds of years , fince that way of Government which we ftand for , by Chrifts Officers, in affociated Presbyteries was reftored in the Chriftian Church ; Which for many hundreds of years was robbed thereof by Popes, and papall Prelates. And fihee by the Lords mer^ cyit was reftored to the Church, ithathbeena bleffed meane, where it has had place, to preferve the Church of Jefus Chrift': But for blood, if he mean (Bedding of blood by it, 'tis bota: very bloody (lander to attribute this to it: And for tyranny, I think no man cpii non perfricmt front em , can fay v , it is a way of it felf inclinable to that , when as the very constitution of it, is to afford to perfons alledging themfelves wronged , (and poffibly wronged Indeed) by the fentence and judgement of a fmaller judicatory, a, way of recognition and relief by a larger affociated Judicatory. If i this> Part-.IL (317) Sbct.X. this be a way in it felf inclinable to tyranny, I confelTe I fee nor, but we may as well fay that upward is dounward , and dounward is upward. But now to tye the exercife of the Keyes fo together and in fo narrow bounds , as Mr, Lockter would have them : That is to fay , fo in the hands of an Elderfhip of a particular Congrega- tion 9 together with their people ■( may be 7, 10, or 20, perfons ) chat they axe made the fupreme tribunall Eccleflaftical on earth,and there may be no combination or aflbciation of the Churches of Chrift in an authoritative way to recognofce and redreffe any wrong, whatfoeverthey may do, either to Religion andTrueth in their dogmaticall determinations , or in their fentences and cenfures up- on perfons , if this be not a way in it feif inclinable to tyranny, yea and loofenefTe , and confufion aifo in the Churches, let any man of common feme judge : Yea what reall and acluall proof even a few years hath given of this , I need not infill to tell ; Who may not fee it , and what true Chriftian can look upon it without bleeding heart and weeping eyes , in the cafe of the Church of England a£; this day •.. SECTION X. ExAminntion of Mr. Lockiers 3d Medium, fwjuedin Section 385 *nd 39, His third Medium to prove that a Prefbyeery paving power of §* l v jurifdidion over more Congregations then one, is but a de- vice of man and not an ordinance of God , is* that itdeftroyes the end for which Church power and jurifdi&ion is, & to which it pre- tends. In the profecution whereof it is a mater of wonder to fee,* .what confufion, loofenefTe of ^afoning , and ( I may -'fay alfo ) none-fenfe there is. * Tis not worth the while to infift on the Ob- servation of every particular that might beobferved. Infumme hebringeth three confiderations to make it out ,. thatfuch Prefby- teries deftroyesor eludes the end of Church power and jurifdi&i- on to which itjpretendeth. One is in Se&* 38* two others in the following Sections. Eirft; Thefefojo^jnng.ElierJhi^s (Sojourning Elderfhips we §so SectX <-fji«) Part. II- know not what, nowhere they are , we fpeak for an Elderihip o* many aiTociating Congregations Ruling over them in common ) while thm pretending(to wit an effetluall remedy of offences ficc, do like the lapsing draw off travellers from their nefl & from their young, my meaning is , from looking into their nakjdnejfejt takes off people from that Which indeed fits , and upon Scripture grounds may warrand means unto fuch ends. sAnfw. J profeffe all this is a riddle to me , not able to conjecture what fenfe it carieth. u What is meant by nakednes ? Next 3 to whom doth the pronoune t heir, relate ? whether to the Elderrfiip compared to the lapwing, or to the people likened by the travellers , which Co eYer of them be faid I cannot fee any thing in thefe words to purpofe. Againe, for that which followech , It takes off people from that which in* deed fits, &c. What is that , that fits ? the Judicatory of a parti- cular Congregation ? but an aflbciate Prelbyterie takes not off people from the Elderihip of a particular Congregation, but in cafe ©f mai-adminiftration , or fuppofed mal-adminiltration in the par* tkular Congregation, or in cafe of appeal ; Or in cafe of a bufinelfe of common concernment , or of great weight , and difficulty , or contravened , and not determinable amongft themfelves, and that not to prejudice but to ftrengthen the particular Congregation* And how a particular Congregation, may warrand means ( as the Author fpeaks ) upon Scripture grounds , for fiich ends ; ( L J for removing offences, more then an alfociate Presbyterie of more Congregations,. I underftand not : I fay againe thefe things are to me riddles : But go we on to fee if we can find an Interpretation of them in that which followeth. §.j. To fay that we have many learned men in our Synods andGe~ \ ntrall Affemblies which are more able to fearch into things then a private Elder Jhip of a Congregation , is to holdout mans wifedomt to people and an arm of flefi , Which much takes uponpoor people, yea and much prevails uponflefh and blood , with others of greater parts,andfo isagaudyfnare. Anfwl do not here yet find the for- mer riddles cleared. But to what is in thefe words: i. That there . injiy be more able menirra Synod of many Churches, then a parti* cular Congregation : I^iink^r. Lockier will not readily deny t And farely it cannot be denyed in reafon that this is aground, whereupon It Fart. XL ( 2*9 ) StcuXt whereuponwemayfayitismorefafe, that befides the Prcsbyte- rie of a particular Congregation, there fhould be fuch more ample Presbyteries and AfTemblies , unto which recourfe may be had in cafe of fuppofed Errour in the determinations of the Elderfhip of a particular Congregation , and to which, particular Elderfnips* may themfelves have recourfe in difficult cafes or cafes controver- fall amongft them fe Ives ; Then to make fuch particular Elderfhips fupreme tribunals in all Ecclefiaftick maters fubjed to no Superiour authoritative cognition on earth. 2. We do not hold forth the plurality ofable men in a Synod or an aflbciate Presbyterie above the Presbytery of a (ingle Congregation , ro people as an objed or ground to leane their faith upon in maters Ecclefiafticall, that were \ indeed to hold out an arm of flefh unto them; But we hold it forth as a more probable and eminent mean for attaining right determi- nations in maters Eccleiiafticallj And to call this the holding forth • of an arm of flefh, and a gaudy fnare , i^nothing elfe but to fight againft that principle both clear by naturall light, and confirmed by divine teftimonie of Scripture , that in tfa multitude of cou-nfd- Uurs there is fafetie. Yea, doe not Independent Brethren them- felves , make and hold this fame confideration as a ground of 'the neceflity of their confultatory Synods ? See Mr. B.ooks r Part* 4. pjig. 2. and if it be called an holding forth of an arm of flefh when it is held forth as a ground of the conveniencie of decifive and au* thoritative Synods : I fee not, how it may not as well be called (o f a6 held forth for conful rati ve Synods: But now let all indifferent judicious men fay, whether the holding forth to people an Inde- pendent judiciall power in every flngle Congregation , ( may be of 60. or 40. or fewer perfons ) fubject to the judiciall and authorita- tive tryall and cognition of no Superiour Ecclefiaftick Judicatory on earth, be not much liker to prove a gaudy fnare to people,poor and greater both, and readier to prevail with flefh and blood ; Th?n : to hold forth unto them the multitude of able men more then is in a (ingle Congregation , when it is with relation to fetting.up over particular -Congregations a Superiour authoritative Judicatories feet judicious men, conlidering how much flefh- and blood inclined to licence , to do what they will without controulement,and with* ontbeing lyable to bs -called to an account of their doings by others, Sect.X; (320) Part. Ii: fay , which of thefe is likeft to prove a gaudy and taking fnare up- on flefh and blood. S. 4. But go we on to the reft of this SecT. Let Minifiers\ B$ttort^ &c. men of never fo great Learning be in a fojournin g .( we fay affociate) Prefiyterj ; Tet the Prejhjtery of a Congregation u like in reafon to be wore learned in the bufincffe of thtir particular members which offend, then fir angers ; N Becaufe they are eye wit- fteffes of perjons and things, and have bj intimate convtrfation advantage to Judge of Men and matters concerning them more then others. Here indeed Iyetb the pith (fuch as it is) of the thing that the Author would have faid, to make out his 3. proof againft Presbyteries over more Congregations then one, zi^ that they deftroy andelude the end of Church power and jurifdictiora to which they pretend. For Anfw, 1. This reafon if it have truth and force in ir, is as much againft any Synod wbatfoever, even their own consultative Synods, as againft authoritative Synods and Presbyteries over more Congregations. For thus I may well rea- fon againft the ufe of fuch confultative Synods upon the fame very fuppofition alledged by Mr. Lockjcr here. Consultative Synods, are no Ordinance of God, bujc a device of man, becaufe they dudt the end whereunto they pretend, to wit, iincfing out more clear and fatisfaclory light concerning difficult matters in particular Con- gregations : Nay • Becaufe Jet never fo many able Minifters, El- ders, and other Chriftians be in fuch a Synod, yet the Presbyterie of the particular Congregation is like rn reafon to be more learned in the bufineffe of their particular members^ then, &c. And f© are move able to give light and refolution in fuch matters, then ftrangers in a Synod can do. But 2. This Argument runneth upon fundry tacit and fnppreffed falfe fuppofitions and miftakes. As, t. it is fuppofed that the only matter which Synods can have to cognofce upon, and determine, are bufineiTes of the exercife ofDifcipline about particular members of particular Congregati- ons : This is a great miftake : For befides buflneiTes of the exer- cife ofDifcipline about particular members of Congregations, thtre are firft matters of faith and of the Worfhip of God, to be defined from the Word of God ; And contrary errors, herefies, and cor- ruptions to be condemned and declared againft, Secondly , there ' are are matters of external order and policy, which are determinable by the true light of nature, right reafon, and generall Rules in the Scripture, about which is exerted that power which k called Diatadick; there are alfo tryalls and ordinations of Minifters. Now J do not think that Me. Lockjer will take it upon him, to averre, that the Elders of a (ingle Congregation are like in reafon to be more learned, and fo more advantaged to judge in matters of this -kind, then all the able choife men, Minifters, and Eiders from ma, ny Congregations affembled together in a Synod, or in a Clafficali Presbytery. 2. He infinuateth alfo this fuppofition, that in 'ba- finefles of Difcipline about particular perfons there is no other mat- ter to be cognofced and determined, but Queftions efmeer faff* 3?or, he (peaks of mch matters as are known and difcerned by fenfe* and whereof men are eye.witneffes. This is another miftake, For -often times in fuch bufmefTes are involved intricat Queftions of Caw or (fur is) as frequent experiences in the exercifes and pro- ceffes of Difcipline, prove daily. As, fuppofethe phyficali be- ing,© r doing of an acl alledged upon a perfon,as fcandall, be found proven, for example, that he has eaten Swines flefh before a weak beleeving Jew : Yet there may be this Qucftion of Law whether iuch an acl: (6 circumftantiat , be under the kind of a fcandalls Upoa xefolution of which doth depend the convicling of a perfon guilty -©fafcandalous&ct And again, ftippofe a perfon be found unque- stionably guilty of a fcandalous fad, yet there may be Queftion of the demerit and weight of it in relation to cenfure : Now altho it be true, that the Presbytery of a particular Congregation is like to be more Learned, as to matters of meer facl in bufinefTes of par» ticular members ; Yet it can hardly be faid in reafon, that ^is like t:hey will be more Lamed in Queftions of Law involved therein, then many choife able men from many Congregations. 3. He in- finuateth alfo a fuppofition that the Elderfhip of a Congregation being morelearned or underftanding in the bufineffe of their mem- bers fwhkhyetcanreafonably be fuppofed only for matters of facl) that there can be no other ground of conveniency and expedi- ency to bring their matters to be judged by a more ample Elderlhip evermore Congregations; Which alfo is falfe : Whereas a Claf- fical Presbytery or Synod is not like in Judging to be fo liable to per- Vy fon&H Sict.X. '■(.&*) PartJIv foiiall prejudice againftthe accufed,nor fo likely to be fwayed with fear or favour, orfinifter refpe&s. And as for the learning and knowledge that the Elders of the particular Congregation have ot may have in the bufineflfe of their members, more then other Elders, may not all that by them be communicate to a Claffick Presbytery and Synod, themfelves being included in it as a part ? 4. I adde but this, fuppofethe Elderihipof a. Congregation may be more learned in the budnefles of their members, yet I fuppofe f that which is not unufuaii to fall out ) there may be differences a.- mongthe Elders, or between the Elders and: the. people (who,'' according to Mr. Lockier, may have as much hand and more,in the jurifdidion, as the Elders,) or both may be divided in their judge- ments, that nothing can be concluded amongft them : What will you have doneinfuch a cafe? By all thefe may fufficiently appear the weaknefTe of his firft^round to prove that aflbciat El- derfhips of more Congregations deftroye and elude the end of Church power and jurifdidion. Come we to the fecond. 9* f His prefaces to it with a big word, as if fome great matter were to be brought forth, 'tis good to enquire wifely into, this matter, as Solom. faith, what is An \nftitntion of God into fmh an end. Who would not look for fome great matter here $ Let's fee then the product of this wife enquirie. If the. poster at home in the parti- cular Congregation be the infihution of Cjod for its 6#vn affairs, this fhall difcern better, and )udge better, and heal better, then ail the Learned Ajfemblies in Vvorld^ which people title looks after^ whilft this great noife is make with men of fo great parts and.^porth^ , which fojourning Trejbjteries affemble, withall. Parturiunt mon- ies, &c. oAnfw. If this reafon have |my force, it alfo militats as well againft all Synods, even confultitory as- well as juridical^ It (hall follow, it was a wrong courfe ihty of Antiosh took, to carry their controverfie to the Synod off eruf at em. Why? By Mr. ^c^^theologicallreafoninghere, the power at home in ithe particular Congregation of . Antioch (if it was a particular Congregation, as thefe of our Authors mind may fuppofe it to jhavc been) being an inftitution of God for its own affairs, it could difcern better, judge better, and heal better their controverfie ahen all the learned Aflcmblies in the world, and fo then that ae fervfalem 7 > Part.TL f 323) SactX fernfalem&c. 2. Bat what if the matter to be difcerned Judged and healed be not the particular Congregations cvn ( *. ) pro- per affairs; but common , equally concerning other Congregations alfo. 3. But the grand, and I may fay too, groffe iophtfme^ere is a clear petitio JJZtpfiti,* begging of the thing mainely in Questi- on, that only the Judicature of a particular Congregation is of Di* vine inftitution, and an affociate Presbytery Clafficall or Synodi- call is not of Divine inftitution, unleffe this be fuppoied, thecon- fequence is null. One Ordinance inftituted of God for one end iioth not make void and ufelefFe, another Ordinance inftituted For that fame end : But we fay that an affociate Presbytery of mure Congregations is inftituted of God,as well as that of a parti- cular Congregation. The contrary of this, MuLocfyer fhould have proven, and not barely fuppofed- and upon that fuppofitioa alledged that the power in the particular Congregation being inftituted of God, (hail do better then any Presbytery of thae kind . Thirdy (faith he) in the nature of the the thing, *t is a courfe %.-% which cajieth thofe which fubjefl to it upon a multiplication of ap** peals, and references forth and hack^ from the Sejfion to the Sy* nod\ &c+ and whether this looks like Scripture Ordinance, or {ike the thing it pretends to, an ejfeftuall removall of 'burden and, offences, whilfl it thus hurry es poor people up and down, let Chrti .fiians judge : This is ne quid detrimenti capiant -capita Eccle- Jia : •** it may be, the crjes of this andfuch lik e t # come up into the ears of the Lord, andah alati that good men fhould be deaf. Anfw. r. This reafon what ever it fay eth, fay ech nothing againft the being of Presbyteries over more particular Congregati- ons, the unlawfulneffe orwhich is the thing Mr. Lockjer in his AfFertion undertooke to prove, but againft the fubordination of theieffer Presbyteries unto the greater. 2. Neither fayeth it any thing to purpofe againft this point : But in effecT:, is rather a ca- vil lation then folide reafoning^ The fubordination of lefler Pres- byteries unto greater, as of Congregationall to Clafficall, of both to Synodicall ; Presbyteries, in the nature of the thing ca« fteth not perfons upon needlefle multiplication of appeals, nor Ju- ikators upon needleffe multiplication of references, Butprovides i McxX. (P40 Part. II*. a courfe for relief to perfons, when they are, or may be probative wronged by the fentence of a leiler Presbytery, by appeal to the cognition and judgement of a greater :.< And an help to lefTer Pres byteries, by having tecourie by reference to the judgement an authority of a greater* When fuch help is needfuil for them , a: when they find -difficult ie in their affairs, either through dark nefleor weightineffe of the matter, or through differences ordi- vifions amongft themfelves, or through power and prevalency of perfons with whom they have to do in the exercife of their au- thority .:. And if this be not more agreeable to Scripture, and a way more likely to remove offences out of the Church of Chrift, then , to put fuch an Independent power in the hands of a (ingle Con- gregation ( may be, of 50. or, 4c. or, 20. or fewer perfons) thatif theyihail Escommunicataperfon, andfo deprive him of the fellowfhipof all Churches in the World, or determine , main- tain, and teach Idolatrie, and groffeft Herefie ; There fhallbeno power on earth in an Eeclefiaftical! authoritative way, to cognofce upon and redrefTe what they do amuTe ; Let ail Chriftians judge. But that way offubordination of lefTer Presbyteries to greater,, and of appeals is very agreeable unto, and warranted by the ScrL pturesofGod, Has been fufficiently demonftrated, and vindicate * See Mr. againft all the exceptions of oppofers^by fundry Learned Writers % „ Bitttfp. A£ t ^ at we nee d not infift more on it f till we hear more from Mr.Loc- clvemof H&' tnen &&&■ againft it here. As to that , this is ne quid dctri* the Cburcbme»tH&c. we fay plainly 'tis but flandering, not reafoning, We */ Scotland, acknowledge no -capita Ecclefiai but one head, J efus Chrift, and ^ffcmblkj that all his Minifters, are pari confortioprtditi & honoris & pote* ®wn* fi at ^' And * frefeech you Sr. what is the emolument, that any Minifters may reap by the fubordination of lefTer AfTemblies or Presbyteries unto greater, in regard of which they might be faid to receive detriment, if the Government were otherwayes, to wit a Independent in fingle Congregations? Indeed if they fhould look to their temporary emolument, they might fee much reafon to imbrace the Independent way , as that which were the fkteft means nequid detrimenti caferent^ as any body may eafily dif- cern, and I conceive fome knowes well enough by experience* A* to that which is fpoken in the end of this Seel, againft this way of Ecdeiiaftick Government allowing appeals from lefFet Pre' Dy-.- teries to greater, as railing cryes that have coroe up into the ears of the LORD, we (hall fay no more bat this, if any men, at any time, or any where, inminagingthat Government, have intan- gled and perplexed perfons rather then extricated and iflbed theic diftreffe, and thereby raifed cryes into the earsof the LORD, by oppreflion of perfons, that is nothing againft the thing it felf. Sin- full men will abufe even the beft of Divine inftitutions, and may be, thereare not wanting cryes comming up to the ears of the LORD by oapreflion of perfons in managing of the Independent power of Congregations r Sure lam, it is more apt an hundreth fold to caufe fuch cryes. 'Tis a remarkable Story Mr. Caudrey hath to this purpofe, in his Epiftle before his VindicVindicia.ffi the fourth inftance of mifchievous confequences of the Indepen- dent way,, I need not tranfcribe it, but refers the Reader to the place : Bnt now feeing Mr. Lockjer directeth this bitter charge againft the thing it felf in its own nature (fo he propounds in the beginning of his third Reafon) we (hall comfort our felves in this, that it is no new thing and ought not to feem firange to us, that fin is imputed to the truth and ; pure Ordinances of God, by ad- ver fanes, and Gods anger alledged to be drawn on by cleaving to- the fame. We remember how H*z,ek*abv?&$ upbraided upon ihir account, //037. 7*io - SECTION XL Examfaaii* of Mr. Loekiers^ Medmm^fmjned ' fim his Section 40, U 47. TTIs fourth Medium te ? that a particular Congregation i§ com- g a ^ jLX pleat and fufficient in it felf without an afToriate Preibytery over more Congregations; Whereby he intends to prove fuch PreiByteriesufeleiTe and a device of man and no divine inftkution, becaufe God would not appoint ufeleffe things. His Argument: fully fet up is this : If every particular Congregation rightly con- ftituted and compleated hath fufficiencie within it felf to exercife all the Ordinances of Chrift, to Ordaiae,toExcommux»cate,with-. Sect.XI. (t*6) Part.IL out the larger Elderfhips , then larger Elderfhips are ufeleffe ; But evesy particular Congregation rightly conftkute and compleat hath fufficiencie within it felf, &c Therefore, &c% Anjw, Ere I reply particularly , firft we would underftand , what the Author doeth underftand by the compleatneffe of a particular Congregation, and what may be underftood , by having fufficiency within it (elf to exercife ail the Ordinances of Ch'rift : for the former 9 . 1 conceive the Author meaneth a particular Congregation to be compleat in its conftitution , when as, befidethe body of private Profeffours, there is in it an Elderfhip made up of all the integrall parts thereof, Paftours, or one Paftour, Teachers, or one Teacher at ieaft. and fome competent number of Ruling Elders , three at leaft, fo many Officers, according to our Brethren , make up a compleat Elder- fhip for a Congregation. For the other we would confider , that by fufficie^ncie to exercife the Ordinances of Chrtft, we muft under- ftand not only a competence of gifts and abilities of wiiedome and underfta-nding for exercifing fuch and fuchacls; Butalfo, power and authority by a divine warrand, institution and call. A private gifted man may have the competencie of gifts for Preaching the ■GofpelV Adminiftration of Sacraments , yet he hath not (imply fofficiencie to exercife that Ordinance, becaufe he hath not power tad authority by calling from God to do it.- Thefe premifed , for Anfov* i . The major Proposition is a groffe non^equkm , and in- ~ jurious to the wifdom of God in his Ordinances : for there may be for a certain end a meanappointed of God , which is by it felf Ef- ficient for effecting that end fimply , and another mean appointed of God for that fame end, and yet this is not ufeleffe becaufe the Other is fufficient ; Becaufe this may be for the better , more eafle, more fafe effecting of it. Manifold inftances might be given of this, the promife of falvation or of the bleffing of Believers , is of and by it felf fufficient enough to give affurance to the Children of God of the immutability of Godscounfell and purpofe of their falvation : Was therefore the oath added to the word of promife ufeleffe. God forbid it (hould be faid, it is added of fuperabundant good will that we might have the more abou^ Jant affurance and confolation, Heb.6.\j, 1 8. So the Preaching of the Gofpclisof k&lfa mean fufficient^f faith and falvation: Are therefore the Sacraments, Part. II. (317) . Sic* .XI; Sacraments, and Discipline, ufelerfe? God has appointed , in his Church, means for his fpirituall works therein , not only fufficiens but abpundant , not only for their ejfe fimp licit er , but alio foe their bene ejfe , yea for their optimum ejfe. So that although £ particular Congregation have (ufficieneie to exercife all thefe Ordi« nances of Chrift , yet larger Elderfhips of more Congregations af- fociated together , may, be of much and Singular good ufe, for the better, orbed performance or exercifing of them , for exercifing them with lefTe danger, of erring and mifcarying, with the more authority , arrd to-the begetting of the more reverence , refpeel and obedience in people. So Mr, Lockjers major which he ne- gle&s to prove , but fuppofeth as if it were without Qyeftion , is rotten and falfe, and confequently the whole frame of his Argu- ment by this fals to the ground, fo that we need not infift upon the minor or afTumption ; But 2. here I would ask M^. Leckjer. What if a particular Congregation be not compleat , have not an entire Elderfhip of its own , Jfuppofe, Paftour and Teacher be removed* the Ruling Eiders only remaining , or all of them being removed, in this cafe whether has the particular Congregation furffciencie in it felf to exercife thefe ordinances, to Ordain, to Excommunicate ? If he Anfwer yes, as it is raoft abfurd and contrary to the Scriptures of God to make a Church exerciung the publike Ordinances of Chrift without the Officers and Minifters of Chrift ; So, if fo,wha$ needed him propound the Argument of a Congregation compleat > If he Anfwer no ; May not a Claflicall Presbytery be of ufe here ? Elfe howJhall their ordinances be exercifed to them ? For certain* ly there will be a neceflrt y of exercifing fome of them, of O.cdini* sion at Ieaft. But fee the minor alfo, A particular Congregation rightly confiituteddnd compleat ed §,zl fas was expounded before, having with the body of ProfefTbrsa Paftor, Teacher, and a competent number of Ruling Elders, three may be the number, hath j efficiency in it felf to exercife all the Ordinances of Chrift * to Ordain* to Excommunicate^ byitfclf> without forraign 9 we fay, , larger afTociated Trefiyteries. Anf. u We conceive that a particular Congregation may be compleat in Mr. Lockiers fenfe , &' e. having an Elderfhip ineier in all parts thereof, fUch as isr an Elderfhip. coufifting of one Paftor, one Tea- cher^ $E€r.XT; . (328) Pa~ht.IL cher, and three Ruling Elders, five in all, who, maybe, have not fufficiency of abilities, as is requifite for due and fafe exercifing thefe Ordinances, of Ordination and Excommunication. But 2. Suppofe they had competency of gifts for managing the exercifes of thefe Ordinances : yet we fay they have not fufficiency in them- felves to exercife them without an ailbciate Presbytery where they may conveniently aifociate, becaufe they have not authority and Warrand from God in his Word to do ic. I fay, where they may conveniently affociate .: For we deny not but a particular Congre- gation, being in fuch a cafe that it cannot enjoy afTociation with other Churches, through a phyficail impoflibility or impediment, in this cafe of neceffity, may, as it is alone, exercife fuch acls of Government ; but particular Congregations, where they can con- veniently aflbciate together, they are oblidged by the rule and warrand of Gods Word, to aflbciate under common Presbyteries, Glaflicall and Sy nodical!: and in this cafe, that a particular Con- gregation ought not, nor may, by warrand of Gods Word, exer- cife thefe acls of Government of publike and common concern- ment, as Ordination and Deposition of Miniflers, Excommunica- tion of perfons, by it felf alone 1 But thefe ads ought to be done by the common Presbytery Claflicall or SynodicalL And that a particular Congregation ought not, nor may not, by warrand of Gods Word, perform any a&in maters particularly concerning themfelves, fo without the common Presbytery of the aflbciation, but that there fhould be liberty of appeal to the common Presby- tery .• And that the common Presbytery may juridically and au- thoritatively cognofce , and judge upon their proceedings anda- ftings : In a word, it may do things of Government particularly belonging to it felf in and by it felf, but with fubordination, to the larger and common Presbyteries, tbefe things have been abundant- ly proven by fundry learned men, as Mr. GiRcfy. in his Affert . of the Government , &c. Mr, Rutherford. Gull Apollon. in hie consideration of fundry contr over fits, fm Divin. The Ajf. of Divinesfomewe to fee what Mr. Lockjer bringeth for the con- trair. 9l* Firft, It Is granted by our Brethren (fayethhej that fuch a Church hath this fufficiencj in the exercife offome Ordinances, as Preaching, '■PART-.lt' . 6 (3*9) SfCT^XI. preaching, Admimflration of Sacraments, without feeding ths ■ sonfent or help of the Clafes i Tfyr were the Church to neglecj thefe. Whence he concludeth that it may alio exercife the other, Ordination and Excommunication. And gives for a proof of the confequenee upon that grant, If they may do the greater fun iy they may do the I ej[ errand there is no dijpenfation of fo choife an cx« teltency as Preachings < Paulfyitne ; jfeth t niaking it the chief fart of his errand. Iwasfent to Preach the Gojpel, not to Baptize.—* ttAnfov* i* 'Tistrue, we grant that fuch a Church, iVe. a parti- cular Congregation having allits Officers hath fuificiency in it to exercife thefe Ordinances of Preaching and Adminiftration of Sa- craments, i. e. the Paftors of a particular Congregation may Preach the Word, and Adminifter the Sacraments without fpccial! content or help and concurrence^ of the Claflkall Presbytery to e- very aft, nor were he to negled: or ceafe-from thefe, if the Gallic Should forbid, I mean without juft caufe j Yet it may be, *nd it h fo indeed by the warrand of Gods Word, that the particular Con- gregation cannot have, in the ordinary way of the Church in * fetled and conftituteftate, the Paftor to exercife thefe Ordinances but by the confent an&poteftative miflion and Ordination of the Claffis* orfomc aflbciate Presbyteric, and thothe Paftor of the particular Congregation his exercifing thefe Ordinances be not de- pendent upon the aftuall concurrence in the feverall individual! ads 5 Yet therein he is fubordinate to their Minifteriall Authori- ty, to try and judge his Preaching according to the Word of God, and, if they find juft caufe, may forbid him to preach, and they forbidding, hemuftobey. But z. Its a grdtle non-fequitur^z, particular Church, or the Paftors in a particular Church, havefuf- 'ficiency or power to preach the Gofpel, and admraifter Sacraments, without the' help or concurrence of the Clailicall Presbyteries^ they may aifo exercife thefe other Ordinances, Ordination and Excommunication, without their concurrence > And the proof of it is invalide, becaufe that is greater,and if they may dothe greater alone- by themfelves/ they may alfo do the lelTer : For by that v fame reafon it ftiould follow, A Paftor hath fufHciency and power by himfcif alone to preach the Gofpei, to Baptize without the help and concurrence of his fellow-Elders in the Congregation, X x E r £° Ergo he may alfo by hirafelf alone Ordain and Excommunicato wichout their help and concurrence. Why? That is the greater and if he may do the greater alone, he may alfo do the ietfer! The Author himfelf will not, Jconceive, admit the Gonfequence here. The truth is, the.mfereft of perfons to exercife this, or that> or the other, Ordinance is not to be attended or determined, ac* cording to the greater orlelFer excellency of the work ; But ac- cording to Chrilts commiffion, inftitutionj and grant of power to them. The exercife of Ecclcfiaftieall power in Tome things, ( which is commonly called poWer of order) as Preaching of the Word^ Adminiftration of Sacraments, is given to Chrifts Minifters, feve- rally and a part,confidered as fingle Paftors. So a Paftor may preach the Word and adminifter Sacraments alone, without concur- rence, or fpeciall confent, either of the whole Church, or other Rulers to every act: But in other things (thefe of the ppwer, called the power of jurifdiEtion) the exercife and power thereof is not given to one, but to an unity : To the community of Go- vernors of the Church united together i not any fingle Rulers fe« verally. Therefore tho a Paftor may preach/ and baptize alone, yet he may not Ccnfure nor Excommunicate alone ; And if he fhould do this, the ad were invalide, both infero Dei, and in fo« ro Ecclejiaflico. Now the power of Ordination and Excommuni- cation being given to a community, the Queftionis, whether this community be a particular Congregation, having an intire par- ticular Elderfhip, or the Elderftiip of a particular Congregation,, by it felf and independent from a larger Presbyterie, this Mr* Lockjer faith, but his Argument, grounded upoa our grant, to proveit, is impertinent, aswehavefeen. ( Si 4. But further he would prove that a particular Congregation hath power to exercife all Ordinances, as well as any, thus*, Se *Jinfto\ 1. As to that of divi- ding the Keyes,we have &id fufficient before, a. As to that alledged, the Kcyes were al! given to Peter, as perfonating the Church of Believers, &c we have fpoken alfo before in the Examination of his firft proof of the firft Affertion. Now we adde but thefe things here. 1 . I would ask Mr. Lockier w hat he means by t h e £hurch •/ Believers in the Gojpel} Whether the univerfallChurch Viti- ble of Believers f Then he muft acknowledge a Church Univerfail Vifible individually one : For certainly the article ( the) denota- teth a certain lingular one thing. But this, I doubt, Mr. Lockier will grant, A Vifible Church Catholick, exifting really one. And however j it is not his purpofe here, to alledge that Peter received fche Keyes, as perfonating the Univerfail Church Vifible. For the thing he would beat and mail: prove, is, that all the ICey^s and exercife thereof are given to every one particular Church or Con- gregation, fingly and Within it felf. If he fay'he means a particu- lar Vifible Church, I ask which is i^of Rome, or Corinth, erlj- phejut f If any-one of thefe definitely, what then becommeth of all the reft ? Nay but will he fay, not any one Articular Vifible Church definitely, but indefinitely any and every one. But i.- Kis words are, that "Peter in this mater perfonated the iZbutch Vifible, which in propriety of fpeech, feeraeth to me to note a de- terminate and definite individual!, but patting this. 2. It cannot be a particular Vifible Church, whether definitely, or fome cer- tain one: or indefinitely for any one ; Becaufe, as Mr. Lockier himfelf fayech, the Church that "Peter perfonated is thxt which Chrift faith* ver,i%* that he would build upon the roc^ that the gates of hell ffiould not prevail again ft it* But this is not any par- ticular VifibleChurch, but either the Church Invifible of the eiecl and redeemed ones, or the Church Vifible Catholick ; Becaufe any particular Vifible Church may be prevailed againft. 3. That Affertion, Surely thU particular here ufed (to wit,the Pronoun of thsiecond perfori twife in the kntencejhee zn&tfo&)i* not in vain* Xx 2 but 5%e*.Xt» fp!#l: Part .in. but to (let forth that every Gojpel Churchy &e. is, I may fay, an Affertionof fuch boldneffe without proof, as any manofunder- ftanding may wonder, that a model! man (hould have uttered it, before men that have not fold away their judgments to -be- (laves to any mans diclats. What? Muft ourSaviourefpeaking to Tetef* here, in the fingular number, be in vain, unlelTe: hereby he inten- ded to fee outi every particular Congregation, and furcly itmuft he fo, and we mud beUe*ve\t furely to hefo, hecaufe Mr. Lodger - faith it, thohe do no more but fay- it v *&&**$* > 3 j s enough. Is there not another poflible Reafon to be given of this 5 that Chrift in this giving of the Keyes directs his fpeech particular* ly to Peter, but thisthat Mr. Leckier devifeth , fo that h\$ fpeak- ing to Peter thus particularly muft be in vain, if this Reafon be not laken, to make it to purpofe ? Know we not that long agoe Cj - prian in his treatife , deVmtateEccleft<&, has given another rea- fon of this, which I conceive, any judicious man will think much more purpofe- like then Mr, Loc kjers^ Quamvis f faith that An- cient of this matter) "Jpoftotus omnibus pofi refurrellionemfuam^, "parent peteftattrntrihuati — — tamen ut unit at em manife- *- ftaret) unit -at uxjujldem origin em ah um incipient em fuaauth Here they are given to Peter as -perfona-ting.* Congregation of be* leevers united as an organicali body and fo as perfomting both rtmple beleevers and Elders : There they are given to Tetcr not as an Elder, nor reprefenting Elders, bnt as a believer and perfo- rating beleevers as bckeving. 2. If Peter in receiving the Keyes perfonated, a Congregation of beleevers, united as an organicali body for Gods Worfliip,that is,as now conftituted, of people and Officers * Then who mult exercife the Keyes, in relation to a Con* - gregation, wanting its^own organs; Ministers and Elders > Go we on. And for the Key of Excommunication (faith he) \\>hich is fo § .£ much denjed to the particular Congregation , the Church of Co- rinth, is blamed by the Apoftie r that they did not this- of them* ftlvts^>ithonrhim\ and his urging of them^ much more without a Collegiat Church fentevce. Anfw. True,tbe Church of Corinth is blamed that they did not thisofthemfelves: But that the Church of Corinth was but an fingle Congregation, and not a Presby teriaH Church, compofed of feverai particular Congregations, under one Presby teriail Government,fhould been proven^and not barely alledged, orfuppofed. See the contrary proven by Mr. Rmher~ ■ fnrd^ Due Right, pag, 460. 6* feq » the Authors oifus Divih, p*g. 16. &feq. upon thefe grounds. 1. The multitude of be- kevers; s. Theplentyvof Minifters. ^.Thediverfity of tongue^ Sect. XI. ' (334) Parx.TIj' arid languages. 4. The plurality of Churches mentioned therein] 5. A Presbyteriali meeting of Prophets. § & He proceeds to reafon, by way of removing an .Objeclion,chus. If it befaidthej befit to Preach and Adminifier feats , but not to Ordain or Sxcommumcat , becaufe the particular Churches can** mt makeup a f efficient Elderjhip. This is the Objection he frames to himfelf as if it were ours, on which. 1. We fay not they, u e. the particular Congregation, wholly taken, are fie to Preach, or may Preach 1 But we fay that any one Paftouc rightly called is fit to Preach and adminilter Teals, his alone* -2. We fay not (imply that the Elderfhip of ^particular Gongrega^ tion may not in any cafe ordaine, or Excommunicate ; But we fay that when there are more Congregations , to affociate with ana when affociation may be had , they fhould not performe thefe acts alone, but in an aflfociate Presbytery. And we make not the princi- pal! ground of this^hat the Elderfhip of a particular Congregation, is not fufficient ( vU. for gifts and ability J for exercifing thefe ads ( although there be a ground of necefiity of it ordinarly from this; It being feidome that in particular Congregations there will bee found Elderfhips fufficient for managing thefe maters. ) For al- though the Elderfhip of a particular Congregation were very fuffi» eient this way , yet we fay they ought not to exercife,thefe acts, by themfeives without an affociate Presbytery , at lead they ought not to do by themfeives independently , without fubordimtion to larger affociate Presbyteries (as W.Lockjer intends J becaufe the Scripture doeth not warrand , Chrift hath not inflituted this, but the contrare. Now his reafon following , being founded upon this miftake in his Objection , which we have cleared , there is no great need to infill in following it ., efpecially considering it is no- thing elfe , but, the fame in very words with the fecond reafon by the Diffenting Brethren to prove the minor of their firft reafon againfl the Affemblie of Divines, their Propofition touching Ordi- nation, and you have it fully confidered and anfwe red by theAf- femblie in their anfwers , fee their Papers pag. 195. 196. might not Mr. Luckier have read their anfwer, and either fpared the pre- senting us with that reafon, anew again, or given it with fomenew ftrengch againft the A,flemblies anlwers to it? cxedit mifcros cram- be repent*. He I Part. II. (335> $b cT .XL He further proceedeth thus * Sect/44^ 7f one particular Con- §,/. gregation fo conflituted , as is before mentioned r be not Sufficient i to exercife the full power of the Ksyes , without a forraine ( (Hit y wermuft bid you correct your nicknaming things, and foyanaffo- \ date Presbytery) -then t he firft Church, to wit, that */Jerufalero, was lame inMt power r . till ethers were erefted $ tAnd Antiocti l lame in its power , bfcaufe but one Church' in ajfociationwithit 9 and anf&erably they made lame work* And other Congregations '■ which'Vverefc altered up dr doyvn in Po{3tus,Cappadocia,d"f. ^hich in all likely 'hood by diflancecf place ', and by~ violence of Hea- thens , Were m an utter incapacity ,■ to any ftanding, affociate Blderjhips , tyers all lame and could not fupplie the mortality of their Mini ft ers and Oncers , and fomufi indeed finl^, from a de- feci ' intrinfec all , being not able to relieve themf elves without a forraine , an a ffpciat e^pd^sr. Anf.i* From that which is faid by the men Mt. Xor^/^difputes againft it, to wit, that Elderfhips of particular Congregations , when they may aflociate with others have not fufficiencie by divine warrand , to exercife ads of jurif- ' L di&ion of publike and common concernment, alone, and by them- felves, without the concurrence of affociate Elderfhips, much lefle, without fubordination to them , doeth not follow , that the Elderfhip of one fmgle Congregation , when there is but that one exifting in the world^ ( fuch as he fuppofeth that of Jerufalem to have been at thefirftj Or if a (ingle Congregation, when though there be others exifting in the Word , yet it is under a Phyficail in» capacity, by fome infuperable impediment^ to ailbeiate with others (fuch as he fuppofeth thefe Congregations in Pontus, Cappado* Gia^&c have been) arc fo lame and imperfect,- that they, can* not in that cafe when necefifay required), or may not exercife thefe a£ls. 'Tis granted in thefe cafes they may . Yet this we fay with- all , a Congregation in fuch a condition , though it be not in fuch 5 a cafe of abfolute imperfedion , that it cannot perform neceffarie acts of Government for its own prefervation, yet it is not in fo com- pieatand perfect a ftate of Government, as^ when it may be and is aflociate with others , for exercife of Government , this is furficu ent to this reafon. Onely 2. there is,one or two particulars would bs noted, u While ss he fuppofeth that the Church of fernfaUr^ 7 Secy. XL , . .2©4. Further, did not Mr.Xcc/^.before acknowledge that meeting at ferufalem, to be a Synod, oftnet then once, whether it was an allociation of two Churches or more, this he acknowledged, that it was a Synod, 'tis true he would have it to have been only confultative, and not juridical!: But it fufficeth my piitpofe in calling to mind his acknowledgment, which is to rtiew that he doth very impertinently. bring in the Church of Antioch in this Argument, feeing he confefleth it to have been iis fueh an aflbciation as made up a Synod, which is an ilbdate Pref- bytery fuperior to a Claflicail Presbytery. To that we faid in the Anfwer to this ReaforiMr. Locker would, * itfeemeth, fay fomewhatin theclofeof this Sect. 44. To fay , that in extraordinary cafes, inordinary things may be done, u little to the fails jatlion of a tender heart, ejpeciallyin divine things, Vvho is apt to believe, that God hath fo Jhaped his publicity Ordinances, Vehich are injoinedto be ufedin all places, that pla- ces Jball not be a (landing let to put his people continually to run be fide the inftituted rule. To this t. In extraordinary cafes, to do things unordinary, I mean as to the courfe appointed by a pofi- tive law, may be with very good fatisfaction to a moft tender heart, that is, a well informed and rightly tender heart, and not a fuper- Crftious heart : Have ye not read (faith our Saviour, Math, 12. 4, S>) v >amvIi: fsirf sict.xl f> ) what David did when ha Was an hungred, and they that were With him, how he entred into; the ho fife of God, and did eat the | fheW-bread, Which Wm nst lawful I for him to eat, neither for them Which Were with him, but only for the Priefis f It was an unordi- nacy thing for David, or any other men, not Priefts, to eat the She w,bread :'- Yet in that extraordinary cafe, when David and his , company were hungry, and no other bread was to be had, let their i hearts be never fo tender, if rightly informed, as they did eat,,. To I with good fatisfaftion they might eat it. And generally what is (not ordinarily to be done by a pofitive law, in an extraordinarie • -cafe, when neceiftty requires, may be done, and a tender heart have good fatisfaction in the doing of it, even in things divine, i. The nature and conditirtion of Gods Ordinances is not eftimat and defined according to what fhape, the hearts of men are apt to con- ceive he has put upon them : but according to what his own word faith of his will concerning them. It was yeelding to this aptitude of mens hearts in conceiving Gods fhaping of Ordinances, that ba- ptizing by private perfons, and even midwives, did fpring frorrs^ into the Church of God. 3 • The ordinary and expreflfe rule that • we fpeak of, that (ingle Congregations (houkl not exercife ads of jiurifdiclion of pubhek and common concernment, bythemfelves alone without affociat Eiderfhips, relates to the cafe when aflbci- ation may be had. But when aflbciation cannot poHibly be had, as if a Congregation be in a remote Hand* or divided from all other Churches by fome-other infuperable- impediment of fellowihip,we fay that in that cafe of neceflity, it is the ordinary rule to that Congregation to acTas it is, alone by it felf : If it (hall be faid, fee- ing when it is that way alone, it may exercife thefe Ordinances within it felf, then if, other Congregations being in a capacitie to be joined with, it may not exercife thenralonejit is abridged off the • former liberty it had before when it was alone by it (elf, I anfw.this is no abridgement of its liberty, but only a ftrengthening of their power in things of common concernmeut $ As, fuppofe there be- ing five Elders in a Congregation, while as they are only shefe five, they may a& in the Government of that Congregation. Yec af other (ix be added to them, they may not now "act without thefe, fee this is no abridging of any liberty they had., but a ftrengthening Sm*;xi. ^fjfS) Part.il of their power. The truth is, chat a Congregation in an incapa- city of affociation with other Congregations, exercifeth and dif- penfeth ail thefe Ordinances within it feif, not as being one fingle Congregation, but as being the whole Church. A Congregation in fuch a cafe,is as if there were not another Congregation in the world, and that is to be the whole Church interpretative. Juft as there being in a Congregation five Elders only, thefe five act all things belonging to Elders in the.Congregation, not becaufe they are fuch, a definite competent number, but becaufe they are the whole number; Eecaufe if they did act as being fuch a definite aurnber, they could not admit any moe tojoyne with them in the work. §.9. Further, it is (faith he) confeffedby our Brethren that the fn- die attires of 'Clajfes and Congregations do not differ fpecifically., bat only in extenfion : Then ifthej differ only in extenfion, the intrinfecallpo^er of the Slders 'of the Congregation^ ^ the fame with the Elders of Clajfes ; And then there it no jpectfi^aJL^ii that the one puts forth, but the other can put forth too, as occafc-* onJballrequire> can Ordain and Excommunicate as the Collegian Churchy and f o is the Congregation all Church complect if the Clajjicall Church be. Anfw. 1. Mr. Loc^ier is not well enough acquainted, it feemeth, with the judgement of ail.Prefbyterians concerning the difference between Congregational! and Clailical! Eiderfhips, when as he fayeth that they confeflTe there is no fpe- cificall or formall difference between them, if he were acquainted better with them, he would find fome to be of that mind, that tho there be Elders of a fingle Congregation, yet that there is not a Prefbytery of a fingle Congregation, having power, to exercife Ecdefiafticall jurifdi&ion, andlconfefleit is hard to find any pat- tern in the Word of God of fuch a Presbytery. But, 2, When as he fayeth, that in the confefilon of Presbyterians they differ only in extenfion, he miftakes the judgement of the moft part of all Presbyterians, who, and that indeed according to truth, hold that the power of a Clafllcall Presbytery , as to the exercife of Government, not only reaches a larger object, i. e. differs in ex- tenfion, but alfo more afts of jurifdidion, as Ordination, Excom- munication, which the Elderfhip of a fingle Congregation, is one fingle part. iio * (339) ■■Sb^.xi; fingle Congregation, cannot exercife, and that is to differ intern five. But I fuppofe all were granted which is asked here, that Clafiicail Presbyteries differ not fpecificaily from Congregationall, that their power of jurifdidion differs only extenfive, that there isnofpecificalla&exercifedby the Claflicall, but the Congrega- tionall may exercife in it felf, when oceafion requires, and fo that itiscompleat, this way, (which is juft fuch compleatnefle, as we mean when we fay that a Boy is a compleat Man) tho all this were granted, does it hereupon follow that larger afibciate Presbyteries juridicall are ufeleffe devices of men ? No wayes as has been (he- wed before- - Altho it were granted that the Elderfhip of a par- ticular Congregation may exercife all thefe fpecificail acls, there may be many cafes, wherein it may be not only expedient, but ne- ceffary that the matter be fudged and determined by an afTociate Presbytery, as when it is a matter of great difficuitie, when other Congregations are much and nearly, or equally concerned, when there is divifion and difference in the Congregational! Elderfhip or , Church that the matter cannot be agreed upon and determined amongft themfelyes , when there is an appeal propter maUm adminifirationem y velmalamadminiftrationempr&fumptamfcCo - Finally, Sect. 46. If the particular Church had net been §. m , compieat to do its own w^rkj without a ferrain^ an affociate Elder* fhlp y the Apeftles, Would have mentioned fomething of this com- bineing of Elder fkips .— — and when this •-might been fur elj the Church ofChrifi durfl not neglect the nfe of it 1 And jet We find fist the one^ and do find the other, — the Apoftle when he tookjou leave of the Church of Ephefus, commends it not to affociat Elders^ , but both Elders and people-as one floe kjo the grace ofGod y AcT:.20 a 3 2. Anfw. 1 . Let it be fo that the particular Church is cornpieac to do its own work. Yet, 1. Is not every Congregation, as a pare ©fthe whole body ofthe Vifible Church of Chrift, tolooktothe work offeiiow members, and parts, and of the whole, according to its meafure and proportion ef power? Should one member fay to another, I muft fee to ray own work; Ought I to care for thee? Are there not matters of publick and common concernment? 2, No particular Church is politically fo compieat as to do every work of its own in every cafe, ashasbeenfhewedj but it will iri SecTcXII. (34°*) • Bart .Ii; this,ftartd in need of an aflbciat SuperiourElderftiip. 3. it bath been abundantly proven by the Authors we referred to before ,thae Scripture is not filent, but often raencioneth the thing of affociated Presbyteries, and ail exceptions made. to the contrary abundantly confuted. 4, What Mr. Lockier has found or not found we know not, nor (hnds on it, but he might have found a Presbyte- ry over more Congregations then one, in Jerufalem, Antioch, Corinth, Ephefus, and he cannot deny but he has found the Church of Antioch making ufe of an aiTociate Synodicail Presby- tery at ferufalem, and that that Presbytery was more then con- fultative, even authoritative and juridicall has been proven : But I think what ever he conceives that he has found of a Congregatio- nal! Elderfhip exercifing jurifdiftton, Ordaining or Excommunica- ting by it felf, he (hall hardly point us to the place of Scripture where he found the inftance of it, what he faith of the Elders and Church oiEphefw from AUsi^i has been anfwered before. SECTION XII. ■Meply to Mr. Lockiers Anf'rvers to [owe objections from S e c t 1 o n 47 • 1 th e end , rvh srein fejtaration from not onety this Church of Scotland , but all the Froteftani Presbyterian Churches^ as Ido- latrous , is driven, at. ,§.t, \ylR. £od»^r having hitherto gone about, as -he could ,t® XVI maintain that the power of the Keyes and Government of -the Church of Ch rift, ought not to be in the hands of Officers and Governours fet over the Church in the Lord , by the Lord himfelfj but in the hands of the whole Church, and that in the hands of every particular Congregation, independently and fuprcmely with- out arfociation in or fubordination unto any common Ecclefiaftick Government ( which how well he has aderted and maintained, we leave it to all underfhnding impartiali Readers to give their judge- ment ) he applyes himfelf, to Anfwer fome Objections againft the things he has handled, as he fayeth. But what Objections arc they I pray I none of thofe which are brought directly againft the points joints maintained by him before this. Likel y he found thefe too hard for him ip grapple with, and therefore thought it his wife- 4ome to palTe them rather by in filcnce. And the Objections he brings,are oneiy fome things which he conceived might been faid -a- gaintfc his defigne in cafting this Little Stone at Presbyterian Chur- ches , to drive all good Chriftiaris , if they might be affrighted, to - feparation from them. A wicked andfhamerull defigne, efpecialiy for a man profefling Godlineffe to have fet before him. I mind noc ' here to infift or enlarge my felf upon the Queftionof Separation I from Churches, not onely becaufe other learned men have fpo- ken abundantly and well upon that purpofe , namely my Reverend and Learned Collegue in the Miniltrie, and Superiour in the fociety wherein I live, Mr. Rutherfurd in his Peaceable 'Plea and 'Due \ . Right : Bat alfo becaufe I find nothing brought by this Author,up- on the mater, worth the (laying upon, in handling that mater. I fhall onely give fome few notes upon fome things the Author , I ; think out of heat of paflvon, hath vented himfelf in. Having Sebe communicated "frith in any thing Vehich Jhottld argus Church Communion, more is [aid and done by thofe tt>ho account themfalfe Churches. His fecondobjo SeEl. 4$. Anpto. Sell. $o» is but a -fiction fet up by himfeif, that he may feem at leaft, to gain a victory. § '** We ufe not to reafon fo, many has been converted under Prejby- teriall government, doth not this [eat it to be of God. We know many have been, and doubts not but fome are at this day conver- ted, under Papail Government which is very Antichrrftianifme,, But this, Sr, we tell you, that Presbyteriail Government in the **«xercife thereof, hasheen the blefled means under God of Con- verting fouls, reducemg them from their finfull wayes to God ^nd his Son Chrift Jems, theterrourofeviil doers, the preferver of his Church, the Hedge that has guarded the Vineyard of the Lord from "Fofcesu the very Hammer of Errours, Hserelles and Ha?- reticks, and therefore is fo much at this day maligned and hated of , all fuch , that, in thefe lamentable times, has turned allde unto their loofe and erroneous wayes* 3 Tis true, Presbyterians takes SficT.XIf; (J44V PahtJIo^ it for no good Argument to prove Epifcopall Government 7 to be of God, that many were Converted under it s and Re- lieves it was a Government of. mans invention ; Yet, Presbyteri- ans never thought of Churches under Epifcopali Government, uv which the truth of the Gofpsl was Preached, and Sacraments ad- miniftred according to Chrifts institution, for their fub/tanee , as» you think of Presbyteriail, that they were falfe Churches. But: fomething more of this in conildering his next Obje&ion and Anfwv : thereunto,- which fully unbowels the Authors defign againft Pres-~ byterian Churches; ! §< 4. The Objection he frameth to himfeifis this. But mmy God- 1 lj being in the Prejbyterian way, is it not more proper to purge' then to pull down all * To make ufe of the root, and not up with' root and branch. To which his Anfwer in fummeis : that it was jjuftfo objecledbjthe-. godly in England Vchen the PrefijterianF Would have down with our Bpifcopall Church ; But it bvhovedtfr be up root and branch. So mufl noty the Prejbyterian. The Lords cpntroverfie has come about to it,and means the fame. And there- upon he gives his plain and faithfull warning to his 4e3r Brethren, Does this man know of what fpirit he is ? To fpeak fo Edomite- like of all Presbyterian Churches. Down with them, raze them to the ground, up with root and branch of them. Hoc Ithacm <®e!it & magno mercentur Atridx. I think the man has wirtied a peece of acceptable fervice to Antichrift, and his father the Devii; Lord grant him mercy of it. Tis none of our pleading for the Presbyterianway, that many godly being in it, therefore (Imply purging of Presbyterian Churches, were more proper then rooting ap and pulling down alt. If any man, Sir, has come to reafon with you, thus poorly for Presbyterian Churches, we doubt not but ere that time he has dealt treacheroufly againft the truth. We* tell you, the Presbyterian way.is Gods way inftituted in his Word' the contrary whereof you,but beggingly fuppofe in framing your Objection, but has not,nor ever will prove. Yet*tbis we arfirme, that albeit there be inChurches, corruptions, not only in the con* verfations of many perfons, but alfo in fome things in the Wor- ship and Ordinances, yet if they be not fuch corruptions as everts and deftrpyes the foundation and fabftance of Religion : Buc there is ^ 'Pakt.H. (345) Sect.XH I irtherein, the fubftance of the Gofpel orthodoxly Preached, the Sacraments for their iubftantialls agreeable to their institution, the - way to be kept i$ i purge out the old leaven. Arid there is neither in Old nor in New Teftamenc,' warrant for feparating from, ot • pulling down and rooting up fuch Churches. And as to that Mr. Lockjer alledgeth , that Presbyterians would have down Epifcopail -Churches: Either he has not underftood or mifreprefented. Presby- terians mind in that matter : Indeed Presbyterians were zealous to have the corrupt office of Prelacy plucked up, root and brancb,be- caufe a plant that God had never planted in his Church, and could not hear ofa purging or circumcifing of it, that fome would been at, by dipping from them officialls and fuch other appendicles and limiting them thus and thus. But that the whole frame of Chur- ches that were under Prelaticall governmentlhould be razed down to the ground, pluckt up root and branch, caft all in a heap of mine, that out of the ruines thereof, their (hould been picked out here and there fome ftones, to build up new Churches, it ne- ver entered in the thoughts of fome Presbyterians. Nay, but on the contrary, even in the time that Prelats pofTefled their Govern- ment, found Presbyterians, as with the one 'hand they did fighe againft Prelats, the corrupt Officers; So did they at that fame time with the other hand, againft Separatifts (with whom Mr, Lochier here agrees) maintaining the Churches of £n gland to be true Churches from whofe communion it was not lawfull to fepa- rat. WitnefTe amongft fundry others, that grave and judicious peece written by fundry non-conforme Divines jointly, in the times of Prelats, and publifhed by Mr. Rathband, An. 1604. But Mr. Lockjer in his S'e c t. 53. goes about to prove that it § t £ is not purging that muft be applyed to Presbyterian Churches, but they muft be pulled down and pluckt up root and branch, or utter- ly feparated from. His difcourfe in fumme commech to this much. When the forme of Churches or their matter is right, tho ma- ny things may be done amijft, then purging may be ufed, but -when matter and forme both are corrupt and naught, as it is in 'Prejbyterian Churches . For forme, knit by fituation, and by forrain forinfecall Elderjhips : For matter three parts of four -naught, prophage, Atbsifts % of Elders and people; So that the Zz C birch * $ECT,XIT. (34^) PXRT.II Churchfiateu quite dead ; * Tts not a wan but a car cafe , not Church, but a nefl of unclean birds, a den oftheeves: to depart u proper. But to talk of purging fuch, the dead, is difcourfe full cfweaknejfe, if not ofunVeillingnejfe to fee and cenfure our own fiame *Anf\V. Verily Sr, I am of the rpind that any judi- ous man that reads your difcourfe in this Section, will account it fuch as is full of that which ye charge on others, weakneffe and much worfe, I will not fay the worft that rr»ig&t be faid, but Ihall rather pray God. to be mercifull to you in this matter, fo blinded with prejudice and tranfported with paffion, far otherwife then becometh a man profeffiog, to have the meek and wife Spirit of Ghrift. i. If f peaking fo broadly ,he mean of Presbyterian Churches through the World fas indeed your difcourfe here for pulling them down and feparating from them, runneth generally without any exception or limitation^ that for their matter, three parts of four are naught, prophane atheifts, &c What bold, and blind conjecturing is this ?: 2. If ye mean only the Church of Scotland* and that therein three parts of four are naught, prophane, atheifts, both Elders and people : Yet I fay, who art tbou that judgeth another mans fervant ? No doubt many amongft us are nothing fuch as they ought to be, and it has been alwayes fo for the mott part, in Churches from the beginning : But that they are fo many andfogrofTe, prophane, atheifts, both people and Elders, for a man that is a ftranger to the moft part of our Churches, Elders and people thereof, to pronounce fo peremptorly, is more then he dare anfwer to God or his own conscience upon fecond confide- nt thoughts* 3. Suppofe it were fo indeed, that three of four in Churches, were naught, yet, fuppofing in Churches, there be the true Doctrine of the Gofpel Preached, the Sacraments, for their fubftance and effentialls agreeable to their inftitution, the acts ofworftiip for matter pure, mu ft therefore, Gods people feparat from thofe Churches, and the true Ordinances and Worfhip of God therein : Or muft the Churches be pulled down, and plucked cp root and branch t Shew us warrand either of precept or practice for this in the whole Word of God. Nay the ftrain of Prophets, Apoftles, and Chrifthimfelf are clearly, as the Sun-fhine, againft it. How often was it fo with the ancient Church, that we may fay v pAKrni. (fry) $*c*.xil&* fay, more then three parts of four were prophane and naught ? And yet did not the Godly and the Prophets of the Lord continue in the exerife of the Ordinances and Worfhip of God in thai Church? Was it not foin the Church of the Jews, in the time of Chrifts being amongft them upon earth / Did ever Chrifl: for that require his Difciples to depart and feparat from that Church f Or did he not himfclf, never a white the leffe, continue in the Church communion thereof t Yea when in glory writing a Letter to the Church of Sardk 7 ofwhom he teftifies, that they had a namethac they were living, but yet were dead t and that there were but a few names there which had not defiled their garments : Yet hi€ wife and meek zeal is not for pulling down and rooting up and fepa- rating from the Church Communion in his Ordinances and Won 4hip* But that is his direction, v . 2,3 . Be watchfull andftrengtk* en the things Which remain and are ready to die. *— - -Remember , therefore how thoti haft received and heard, and hold f aft and re- cent. 4. But fuppofe that defal~lo t in fome Churches the ge- nerality of perfons Elders and people were fogrofTe and abominably prophane, that there were no living for godly onesamongfi: them, is this a good Argument to prove that the very fpecks and kindc muft be deftroyed and plucked up root and branch ? Unlefle thae *Mr. Z^'mcouid fhew that the way of Presbyterian Churches of it (elf, in its very kind, alio wes Churches to be conftitute fo, of perfons notorioufly prophane, and atheifts, that will not follow s But if he (hall fay this, wc will avow it to be a (lander. % . When as he will have our Churches to be deftitute of a right forme, be- -eaufe they are not united by way of their Church- Covenant, but are knit together only byfituation, andbyforrain forenficall EI- der(hips : And upon this account, will have them no Churches, but only carcaite^of Churches, It is utterly falfe that we make (ituation or cohabitation in place or a forrain Elder(hip the form of our Churches. We fay according to the Word of God , that the form which gives the being to the irniverfall Church Vifible, and unto every member thereof, is the profeflion of, and entering un- to that gene rail Covenant with God in his Son Jefus Chrift, and whereby every Chriftian is oblidged and engaged to walk in all the wayes of God and perform all dudes towardsGodjand other Chri- Zz % {fens, Sict.^ 11 - . (348) PartJI; ftians, in all their relations, required of them, according as God giveth opportunity and occafion to perform and exercife them. As for Mr. Luckier s Church- Covenant, diftinct from that generall Covenant with God in Chrift, as the form of a particular Church giving it the being of a Church, and right to the Ordinances of Chrift, 'tis nothing elfe but a new device of men, having uo war- rand of precept or example in th e Word of God either of the Old ^' or New Teftament : And his un-Churching of our Churches for want of fuch a Covenant as this, is like-many other things in this. peece,has more boldneffe in it then underftanding or reafon. Con* cerning this matter of the Ghurch- Covenant. See Mr. Ruther- furd.Uue Right of Prefbytery. Caudrey. Review ofMr.Hoo* kjrs Survey , cap. -4.. Gul % Apolion. (fonfider, -of certain Centre- verftes. § . & Mr. Xockier going on yet more to vent his Brounifticall fepara* tion objects Co himfeif thus, Sect. 54. 'Butwill not my proteft. fervethe turn ? If things be corrupt in the (fhurch^ and 1 proteft againft them^ may not I go on with that Church ? As for infiancez- Jfthey take in corrpipt members or admit [corrupt or impenitent . communicants ; 'And Iprot eft againft thofe ¥ may 1 [not go on and partake Withtheje, andyetbe innocent, and enjoy as much pre- fence of God in his Ordinances , as if all Were holy and good ? lb' which he anfwereth,,. S e c.t . $ \. 1- If proteft ing Were only Words . then fuch a thing Will do. But to fay, the precious Jhould not mingle • with the vile^and jet the man doth this daily and continually ,k not* to proteft but to mockj a&ddijfemble; Becaufe here k not a meer pajjivenejfe in this man, as to the going en in that thing Which he proteft s againft. 2, , Again r in practical things, tis not fo much a mans word as his practice, which gives the di [like » If a man of. ax idolatrous Church,' Jhould ft and up and proteft againft the< Cfrfajfe^ and yet ft ill go to CMafie^ I doubt how well this Would pleafeGad^ or deliver him from guilt'. Numm? implicit ely pro- lefts againft the idolatry he had praBifed, that he Would worjhip* na God, but the God of Ifrael : and did he continue to bow doWn ? . ^B/* fay fomt ', but he begs pardon for it. - Butmoft aptly in our laft Englifh Annot. The Word being rendered in the time paft ;- Pardon that I bwed d%wn* 3. Preteftiflg ii a piece of revenge ,.. Whkk Fart.II. (349) ■, t ;. Mf/tM vhichk the vehemence of Repentance^ and *fe^% *£ Sfflfe Mf which how well this will accordwtth halnngand halving u worthy of deep thoughts of heart: Can two ^[K^ther Ac. ™M.»l Brethren, Uenthej protefi againfr an ^emblj_ Jtf? That if any things be corrupted in a Church fuppofe, Ed and fondalous pcrfons be retained therein and admitted to OrduVanc" albeit therein be the true Dodrine of the Gofpel Seached «nd worfhip, for the ads thereof, and other Ord.nan- cSr their fubftancexight, Godly Chr.fiuns muft feparate from fuh Churches and may not in the very mft.tuted Ord.nances of Chrift and trueexercileof worftip, joyn with fuch Churches wherein fuch wicked perfons joins with them. This is the drift / ^ r nf7hi s naffase as anv decerning, man may perceive, need to fall upon a refutation of this vile errour, which has been fotarnediy awfully refuted, ofoldby the O^K^m efceciallv A^ftin and OptamiaDonattp, by the tali . Ketor mers n Lfaftaftick Anabaptifts: See particularly, ^- **}«*. S" earned Difputes on this purpofe , in his Peaceable Plea, iLtentmlht of Trebly. Ifhall forthe prefent note but fome few things onthat which Mr. Lockter jiatn here. And firft to the propounding of the cafe in the Objea as it is § f fo^erUyandcomprehenfively exprefled. If things be corr,- pud in the Church, and Iprcteft againff them, may I not go on *lhhthat Church .' We owne not the affirmative of it. We ac, knowledge that it is not lawfuU to go on with any Church in the pradie of things that are corrupt in it. a. We acknowledge fur- fhef hat there may be fuch corrupt things in a Church , or a foc.e. X unto them the name and profeffion of a Church, as that Sotlawfulltogoon with fuch a Church orpin with them , in- Church communion at all, as where the Worftup is groffely .do- Sous orWine is pu'blickly taught or profeffed contrary to the very foundation of Chriftianity. But bring the cafe to the mrtSr corruption inftanced by the Authored then we fay.tha £chu £ ch,A^^^ members be admitted, or wicked fcandalous perfons be admitted to the Communion, the Godly indeed ought in an orderly way to teftify againft fuch a corruption, to fay to Archippm to the Mini- fler and Rulers, take heed to your Miniftry, to mourn for fuch abufes in the Church : But,ought not to feparat from that Churchy and the exercife of the true Worship and Ordinances of Chrift therein: But, may go on and partake with that Church in war- ranted acts of Worfhip, participation of the Sacraments, in the exercife of all Gods infrituted Ordinances, and yet be free of the fin of corrupt fellow partakers of thefe Ordinances, and of the Cm of Rulers (infully admitting fuch.; enjoy Gods prefence in the Or- dinances, as well as if all joining with them were holy and good 8 and to fay that other mens wickednetfes in abufe of Ordinances, prejudices or defiles thefe Ordinances to me ufing them aright for my felf, and teftifying againft, mourning for others abufe thereof, is a wild errour contrary to the ftream of holy Scripture both in the Old and new Ted. as has been abundantly demonlirated by thefe I laft mentioned. §,9. Now for his exceptions againft this. To the firft , to proteft a* gainft a thing as evil and wicked , and yet daily and continually to go on in the acling of that thing and pradizing it , is indeed a wic- ked mocking of God and man. But daily and continually to go oa in the exercife of a lawfull and necefTary duty , in the company of wicked perfons , againft whofe wickednefTc I do teftifie , and docs all that is incumbent to me in my ftation,is not to mock or diffemble, nor to do the thing I proteft againft •: I am but a mere paffive , or has no concurrence, to the wickednefle of others. But there is here in Mr. Lockjers words , a groffe fuppofing or begging of the very thing mainly in Quetlion, vU. That if wicked perfons be admitted to fellowfhip in a Church , as to the communion of the Lords Sup- per , that the thing a Godly Chriftian ought to proteft or teftifie againft, is all joyning in the Ordinance when fuch wicked perfons are joining therein with them .• This is a very begging of the thing in Queftion and utterly falle. The thing the Godly ought to tefti- fie and proteft againft , isthewickeds prefuming to abufe the Or- dinance , and the Rulers finfull permitting them fo to do. But to (ay he does or fhould proteft that no Godly perfon ought to ufe the Ordinance Paht.IL (SSI) SECt.XXI. Ordinance of God , or performe warrantable \Vorftiip, when wic- ked perfons either thruft themfelves in with them, or negligent Ru- lers permits them fo co do , is to fuppofe the thing in Queftion,and is unwarrantable , yea contrare to the current ftreame of the pra~ clife of the Godly under the Old and New Teftament both, yea to the pra&ife of Jefus Chrift himfelf in the Church of the Jews. To his fecond exception. ' fis true, in pradticall things it is not fo much a mans word as his praftife which gives the diflike. But the Que* ftion is> whether, the performance of a lawfull and neceflary duty of worlhip , or exercife of a true Ordinance of Jefus Chrift, for in- ftance, partaking of the Lords Supper to remember his death till he- come againe , when and where wicked and fcandalous perfons will thruft themfelves in to do it prophanely , or are permitted by Ru- lers fo to do , be fuch a pradicall thing as I am oblidged to diflike, as a thing unlawfull for me to do^ this is the Q^eftion, the negative whereof we hold to be the truth of God held forth in his Word. The inftance produced by the Author, for clearing this his fecond exception, viz,, of a man in an Idolatrous Church protecting againft the Mafle , and yet ftill going to Made , is fo groflely and abfurd- !y impertinent , that one may wonder how it could be alledged^a thispurpofe, by an intelligent man. The Mafle is even upon the mater one of the grofleft Idolatries that ever was in the world. And for a man to go to Mafle, when he pretends to proteft to go againft it, istoadde, to commiffion of Idolatry , mocking, of God and finning againftlight profefledly. So that Mr. Lockier^ needed not make it a mater of doubting how well fuch a pra&ife fhould pleafe God , or deliver the man from guiltinefle. But what is this , to participating of a true Ordinance of jefus Chrift ( for inftance, the communion of the Lords Table ) in a Church not Idolatrous, but may be , negligent and loofe in the exercife of Difcipline, and per* mitting wicked fcandalous perfons to participate in that Ordinance, whenthe Godly participating with them, teftifies againft fuch a- bufe in the Ordinances? Nay, can it be freed, from great rafh* nefle , ( I will not fay that which I might ) to parallel! thefe two together? Bat yet farther to bring in as a parallcll to clear the bufinefle, Naamans pra&ifing of heathnifh Idolatry in the houfe sARimimni amongft a people not fo much as proftffing the true God God , but an Heathnift? [people profeffedly , denying the God of Ifrael,. what will' in* cogent lousmen fay to this f To the third exception. WB&Wr Mt. I^^ier defines protefting well , to beu peece of revenge , the vei *mende of Repentance , let Lawyers judge. To my fimple apprt-ienfion , protefting j in the nature of £t,h as nothing to dp with Kepentance , as noc importing guiltineffe in the perfon protefting ,' but being p ac\ whereby he certifies a- gainft the finfulnefle and unjuftice Wtht dead of fome others, that he himfelf may appear clear and free from the concurrence in or the acceflion to it , and preferves hirnfelf ina iegallcapacitie to chal- lenge it before a judge competent , but whe reals Mr. Lockjer Jbp- pofeth that a man protefting or teftifying againft thelntrufionor admifllonof fcandalous wicked perfqns,- i6tp the ptrHcipation of an Or&nance of Chrift or lawful! neceitarie acl of Wo'rfhip if tie participate in that Ordinance or VVorfhip \ when and where fcan- daious perlons participates therein , that in this the man halts and halves, he does but bej* the thing which will not be grant d to hira, and lie will never prove. And on begged fuppofitions to fay , how thefe will accord % is worthy deep thoughts of heart t favours of con- tempt of Readers , if not of fbmewhat eife. To the fourth, when there is a Proteftation againft the conftitution and very being of an Affembly, 'tis true there is no fubmitting to jt by the Protefterss But yet there may be a protefting againft fome on or more particu- lar deeds of an Aflembly when the conftitution and being of it is ac- knowledged , and to fuch an Ailembly fubmiftlon is not refu fed or denyed by any principles of ours ; So there may be a protefting or Xeftifying againft fome particular abufes in a Church ', and yet com* munionkeeped with that Church in lawfuil, true, neceflfarie ads of Divine Worihip. But if the Author mean, that if fuch an abufe be in a Church, as that wicked perfons are permitted in it, or com- ing to Communion , that in that cafe, the Godly muft proteft not only againft the deed , but the very thing of that Church , as no Church, and therefore muft not joine therewith, in warranted acts of Worftiip , but fepame from its Communion altogether, he will not have the fimile of Aflfemblies and our cariage to them 3 to go along with him , and it is in it felf without warrand contrare to thewarrandof Scripture, aad we doubt not to fay a moft Schif- matick Aflcition. Ms Lockjer par?. it. ... : ( my _ s^e tt m: Mr. Lockier in Sc&. : '$6. and 57, brings and anfwers anew Obje- ction , and therein raifeth much duft to fmall purpofe , about the cau&Btie of Baptifme , as to the configuring a Church , The Ob* jeclion, is this, 'Deeth not Baptifme give the forme of a trim &mrch f and J on fay if the forme and foundation be right , it mh be capable to purge it felf right. Sir , you are much mtfta- ken , if you think that we hold Baptifme atone to give the forme of a trut Church. We fay it is the initial! feal and folemne entry and -admilfion of Members into the Vifibie Church , fo "this, is a need- led Objection brought in, it would feeme to vent a new conceit borrowed out of Mr. Hookers Surv ey, parti. c.$. of a Church without Baptifme, of which a word fhortly upon his Anfwerta this ODjeftion : Only here we fay this, that which gives form and being to a Church is the true Doctrine of the Gofpei and Covenant of Grace , for fubftantials at leaft, folemnly avowed by the feaiing of gaptifnr, and preached by a lawfull Miniftry ( Lafofuil Miniffry, Iiay,astotheeffentialsofa Gofpei- Miniftry) thefe three at lead are necetfary to give the being of a Go fpeU Church. And where theie are,tho there be many corruptions and defects in the Church, yet it is capable to purge it felf from its corruptions, and to fupply its defects, and to urge unchurching of fuch a fociety, and diffoi- ■ving of it, as no Church, or totail feparation from it, is not of GOD. But come weto fpeak a little to the Authors Anfwer tahis Ob^ Jeclion : Baptifm ' ( faith he ) doth not give the form of Church memberfhip. So fay we too : Profeflion of the true Chriftiart -faith is that which giveth the form of Chureh-memberfhip d'ejure* Baptifm is the folemn feal thereof. But Mr.Lock* having in his Ob- jection fpoken of that which giveth form & being to a Church 5 hote falleth he now to fpeak of that which giveth form of Chureh-mem- berfhip } Is there no more requifite to give form and being to a Church (we are now fpeaking of a Church Vifibie ) but thae which giveth form to Church memberfhip (imply ? This is a groite. miflake. .Profeffion of the Chriftian Faith, fimpliciter, is that which adequately gives the form and being to Church-member- ihip (imply. But to give form and being to a Churchy there rauft be concurring with this, a Minifteriail difpenfation of the Do&rine Aaa of of Faith and Ordinances, by fuch means as Chrift hath Mituted them to be difpen fed by. A Church exifting without a Miniftry,corrH pleat in the nature and being of a Vifible Church, is a thing un- heard of in the Word of God* SeeHudf. c. 6. vindic. - But to ftfe Lockiers purpofe in hand. His aim here in his foluti- . on- is to maintain that Baptifm isnowayes neceilaryto Church, memberfhip. We confelfe it is not that which giveth the forme, and being of a member or the;^j, but yet .we fay it is necefTary as the foiemn feal of aduali admiffion into the poffeflicn of Church- memberfhip in the ordinary way appointed by Chrifl: The Au- thors Reafons for his Afiertkm are two. 1. There may bee OL Church, andfo consequently members of a Church before Bap- tifme. Minifters are before Baptifmc, and the Church is before . Minifters y for out of it are they made and have their keyes, &c. . See this abundantly dafhed by , Candry'm Mr. Hookers Surv. c. 5. .2. Saith he, The (fhurch was vifible when there was no feal, nei- ther fircumcifion, nor Baptifme, and then how could thefe con/lim tute a Church f Anfw* What a childifh reafoning is this ? There . was.a Church without Circumciiion and without Baptifm, when neither of them was yet inftituted by God. Ergo, afterCircuro- cifion wasinftituted to be the foiemn feal of bis Church, there- might yet been a Jewifh Vifible Church without it, and now af~. ter Baptifme is inftituted to be a foiemn initiall feal of the Chriftiaa Church, there may be a Chrhlian Church without .Baptifme : he anight as well fay that there may be a Chriftian- Church without the profeflion and belief of that Articles Je sus the Son of Mart: is the Ch b.i s x, why ? the Church was fometime when there was, no fach Article tQ be believed. $*# Headdeth to thefetwo Reafons, this prejudice: Befides hoW much this gratifieth the judgement and pratlice of Anabaptifts^ any one may fee, Who con flit me Church members by baptifm y and koty much Prcjbyteritns are againfi Anabaptifts y all their VVr/- tings fhe^Q^ and hoVv much they lay to our charge for ufherin^ in,. *nd countenancing this Tenent* nAnfw. How we, holding Ba- ptifm to be the feal and foiemn admiflion of Vifible Church mem^ feers, do gratifie the judgement and practice of the Anabaptifts in tfouwhicLis Anabaptifm, their excluding of Infants of Chriftians ~ " "' \ frorcu ■*AiT.ii;'- t r m) sft T ,xa from Baptifm J profeffe my felf one that cannot fee. The Author vionld havedone well to have afTayed to ihew" us how that any way -advantageth theirTenent;Indeed he fayeth true,thar Presbyterians are much againft Anabaptifts Do&rine. But would hercby/aften a p eece of dottage upon them :• Becaufe that being fa much againft that Doctrine, they yet maintain a Tenet -concerning Baptifme, that much gratifies it, but let htm aifay to clear this, for it is not -enough to fty >#£ one may fee it. What-ground there is to loofcc =upon his Tenet concerning the allowed matter of the vifible Church -as tending to 'Anabaptifm, we have fhewed before in the u part -of this Examination ; But it feems to me, that in this place -ttoe Author does not a little gratifie the judgement of the totaii ene- mies of Baptifm, and Socinians that accounts it needleife arnongft ^ Chriitians. While as he averres that there may be a Church ( he -muft mean a Chriftian Church elfe he fpeaks not to purpofe) before baptifm, and that even "before they be baptized, acting eminent - Church ads, as making to themfelves Minifters. If this;to averre y the Covenant and Oath of GOD to maintain and defend, raken the g m (faith he) if Tares and wheat "mufl grow together into the Covenant. ^ or /^ t m t y en ^ thereof \ the Civill Magifirate had need to be 5* i£. -wary, how he ufethhis Sword for a-JVeed-hook^ in maculis mentis, .fbotscfthe mind, left Pre/by tery get a by-bloW amongfl the reft^ Some mens weapons to fight in their epuarrels % are to us as Sauls Armour to David, too heavy, we cannot tell how to Wield them ; Becaufe We talis * title from * and a fling, when others would tak$ An halter and a croffe, do We then give 4 v*ft toleration . ? Not by wight nor by power Civill, but by Gods Spirit in his PFord and mhtr Ordinances, Wc fight in theft quarrels : Which weapons tfo mtfo terrible to hohjn r jet aremtghty ihrmgh God it c aft do^n firong imaginations of vain men. Anf\\\ i. They are not meer -macula mentis .thn we think the. Magistrates Sword flioui.d medle with : But toextenuat damnable Dodrines vented to the high difhonourofGod and feduceing of fouls from the Truth of God to the deftrucHon of their fouls, under the name of Jpo-ts of the mind, favours little of the true zeal of God, and to' reckon in Presby terie amongft thefe is to call light datknefle, for which,.! pray God grajit the Auhor Repentance. 2* If the Civil Magi- strate mud ufe the Sword to be a.terrour to evill works, either he muftufeitas a Weed- hook agamltfuch Haeretieaii Doflrines, or: you muiHay that H^reticall Doclrinesare no evill works, whiclr is to contradict the Word of God in terming Philip. 3,2. -.3. It is but an odious intimation that we would have an halter aid croile taken againft the teachers of every erroneous Dodrine. Indeed there be fome blafphemeus Do&rines, ( and not a few of tjiem in the time) As a halter or a croffe is too little for the obftinat- venters of them * : but there are others wayes whereby the Ci- *T have vil Magiftrats might imploy their power for fuppreffing falfe Do- fcardwfchr ftrines from being brought forth to the dishonouring of God, tf/g 1 , !?^ they were as zealous for Gods honour as they are for their own in- °y .,v°thal: terefts. 4. While as you do here take off the Givil power from every man medling with thefe ftrange and damnable doclrines, and allowes anointed no other means of dealing againft them but by the Word and other ™ t[ ) . th * Ipirituall Ordinances,if you do not give a toleration to -them Jet all ^ s ^ 3 is zs men of common fenfe judge, the Pailages of Scripture hinted at by cS a as the Author for putting a colour upon this opinion of his,- are mife- Jesus 'the rably abufed. For the former, the parable of the tares, I refer the Sonne of Reader to Mr. Butherfard. G ® P* For the latter, -Z'achar. 4. 6. 2%ct by might nor by fewer bur h m J Spirit /ait h the Lord efHofts. Certain it is from the whole context, that the Lords meaning there is this 5 Becaufe the people lately returned. from JBaylon and now imployed in the work of building the Temple, were much difcouraged in the profecution of the work, by the thoughts of the greatnefle of the urcrk, of the greatnefle of the power and opposition of their enemies, and seftheir. own weakneHe^he would hav^ them to know, that it was sior '• not by the power of the creature but by his mm power, that,that work was to be carried through, and that therefore they ought not to be difcouraged, feeing his power* w*.s fuHttfent to bear down and remove the greateft impediments and to make the weakefl means effectual! to accomplilTi the work. 5. It is true that the word and other Ordinances are mighty through God to caft down ilrong imaginations of vain men, but is k therefore a good Argu- ment and Confequence, the Word of God and other Ordinances are mighty through God to call: down fuch (kong imaginations, .as Heretical! Doctrines, Ergo, the Civil Magiftrate has nothing to do to fuppreffe the teaching of them by his Sword and power ; If fo, then k will as well follow, he has nothing to do to fuppreffe, or pimifli the out- breakings of carnall lufts in adulteries, thefts, mur- ders, &c. Why ? For I beleeve the Word and other Ordinancesof Cod are mighty throughGod to call down thefe as well as the other. The Author addeth, Order is but making to in Church and State, and therefore things are but dlforderly in this Nation^ Warresmake La^esmute. iAnf$* *Tis well that at laft he ac- knowledges that it is fo, .that errours are tolef at (for that is the charge he isanfwering to ) and that this is diforderly ( which yet how it can coniid well with what he hath now been faying in the preceeding words, I fee not) but if the excufe for this be relevant, I leave it to God and all judicious indifferent men knowing the progreffe of matters thefe ten or twelve years , andwhat ought to have been done, and might have been done, had men been willing to have it dorte 5 for fetling truth, and removing things contrary to found Doctrine, as war undertaken by Covenant and Oath to the moil: high God to be done. §. 17. He fhutteth up ail, thus. Se c t. 5 8. Finally \Chrijliansjake this anfwer to all that may be further objefted'i To be enquiring is honourable, but to be ever learning and never paUifmg ps dan- gerous ; It wai an heavy curfe that Jeremiah Wijhed#pjm him f elf 9 Jerenu 20, 17. It is an heavy curfe indeed upon that poor foul con- cerning whom it may befaid^ the w&mb of truth is alviayes great -with him, alwayes in pangs and throws Wnth him, but cannot bring forth, Forfoothj Sir, you have foon done with it. We ^ . muft Parx.IL C3590 Sscr.XIL mud: take this for anfwer to all that may be further objected a- gainft that you have been pleading for. Stand not upon thefe Objections, but fall to practice, down with our Church Govern- ment and Churches to the ground (this to my conception is the fcope of thefe words, eife, I confeiTe I underftand them not) fare this man has had a wonderful! conceit of what he has been laying ] in this debate, . that thinks we Ihould all be fo convinced hereby of the truth of that which he has been pleading for, that tho we had twenty Objections moeagainft it then he has touched (as indeed we have many) yet we fhould ftep over all, and do what he bid- dethlis. I will crave leave 60 fay it, I think no man of under- fhnding befide himfeif, will have fuch a conceit of it. As for us, we tell him, we are not now to be enquiring about the matter he- has been Difputing againft, I mean whether it be truth,or if the contrary maintained be him be truth. We have declared before God, Angels, and the World, that the Religion eftablifhed in this Church by the mercy of God, in Doctrine, Worfliip, and Government ofthe Church is the truth of God taught in his Word, and we are fure it is fo, and as we are bound by the will of God, and our vowes, and Covenants, to abide in the profelTIon and practice of this truth : So we t'ruft that God will eftabliih our hearts with his grace to abide therein. As for fuch, as are fallen away from it, we lament their cafe, that if they have been moved by any of thefe things prefented by this Author, that they fhouid kythed fo ready to be turned about with every wind of doctrine; the God of grace awaken them to remember whence they have fallen, to repent, and do their firftworks^ Amm* APPEND. 'ArMN'B? tj6o) PAst.IL' S.i. I* APPENDIX. Wherein is Examine! what u (aid in the forementioned letter of the new Independents of Aber> dene \ for the Independent Congregational and ag&inft the Presbyter tall my of Church* Government. THefe Authors u(her in what they fay on this purpofe with this preface. Touching ^refiyterian government, indeed when-thought s of fVueftioning it were firfi born in upon us^ we did a long time fuppreffe them as tentations : Becaufe We had . fofolemnly* ( though too implicit elj ) engaged to the maintenance thereof i Tet afterwards , knowing that Truth cannot loftc by a fearch , we brought the maters to the ballance of the Sanctuaries And no'vO after Jeeking tf God 9 a* he was pieafed to give us grace, -andufing all helps which we could have ^ we profejfe fo far as we can fee ( with reverence to precious and learned men of another judgement) the Congregationall way comes nearer to the pateme of the JVord then the C I ajfi call forme.. And to us it appears^ &c. Indeed when thefe thoughts wereborn in upon them, they had juft caufe to look upon them as tentations , and for ought that they have brought for justifying tKem here , they may juftiy yet look upon them as tentations , as we truft (hall appear in the confe- deration thereof, But here i. It may be juft mater of enquiry to others , and haply may be of good purpofe to themfelves to reflect andconfider, when thefe thoughts began firft to be born in upon thera, at leaft when they began to out any thing of them. Did we hear any thing of fuch thoughts in them , butfince the late great revolution of State in this Kingdom, after tVorcefterf and how foone thereafter did we hear of them by fomc of the num- ber, although others thought fit to fupprefle them fome longer ? This may fe^m to be ground of fearching of heart , which is de- ceitfull -ceitfuil above meafure. %\ Xtfeemeth by the Authors own con- feflion, that the bearing in of thefe thoughts upon them at firit has beeri from no good caufe or principle ; Not from the Spirit of Gocl s unlefle they will fay 3 it has been by an immediate impuife or Enthufialme. For fay they , it was after a long times fuppref- flng of them that they began to confuk with the Word of God a- bout them, for that is, as I conceive, to bring them to the bailance of the Sanctuary. 3. If implicitely they engaged themfelves to the maintenance of the Government defined and fettled in this Ghnrch , fure then if they will reflect upon the nature and tenor of the engagement, they may find themfelves to have committed^ in the very act , more fin, than they infinuate here, or I will name. Wot let them look back again unto the National! Covenant , and they (hall find that they not only engaged themfelves to the main- tenance of the Religion profefTed in this Church in all the points thereof.- But alfo declared and protefted themfelves under Oath, after due Examination of their own conferences in maters of true and falfe Religion , to be throughly refolved of the Truth thereof by the Word and Spirit of God , and therefore to believe with, their hearts , confeile with their mouth , andfubferibe withtheic hands. 1 do indeed fear that many did run unto that Engagement without fuch conviction of mind upon clear warrand of Gods Word found by Examination of the maters. And as to do this with fa folemne and dreadfull an atteftation of God , that they did it upon. convi6tionjo£confcience , was horrible guiltineffe : So it may wel be apprehended* that God in his holy judgement , has furtered many, for the difcovery of the falihood of their hearts ( may be in mercy to fome , may be in wrath to others^ to revolt from thefe, theirformer Engagements. I wifli from my heart thefe Brethren ( fo I will yet call them , if they will yet be fo called by us ) if it be true which they fay now, that they engaged impliciteiy, where- as they protelbd before God that they did it upon through convi- ction v they would confider this, lay it to heart, and yet againe bring their prefent way to the bailance of the Sanctuary. Ihave been wth oihers witneffe of fome who having engaged in the caufe of God in thefe lands, and caried thenafeves therein for a long timt refolutely and actively , and having afterward foully lapfed Bbi> * intfc. &p?£K3^ fpskj Fam.ii; Into contrary courfes, when they have45e en brought to Repen~ tance for their backfliding ; Have declared that they found that their back-fliding had arifen from this, that their engaging^ the caufe at firft and going on in it formerly, was not upon donvuftiocfc from grounds of the Word of God, but implicitely and for by and extrinfecall refpecls. 4. It is not competent to me to queftion, nor will I queftion their diligence in feeking of God when they ;be* gan to enquire about this matter (thoit be a things ufuall nowi-a* Hayes, for men to {qi out naughtieft wares with this mfiriftfionk afterfeekjngofGod) but as for ufing of all helps they cbujd have to be cleared* I think forae thing may be queftioned : For befidesi. helps of mens Writings upon this purpofe, might they not have- nfed the help ofthe advice of the Judicatories of this Kirk and r#^[ prefented the grounds of their doubtmg to fome of themt [] MH of CSenerail Affemblies require this, that before men "vent fanyitcno- vations in matters of Religion, they fliould firft peaceably, repre- sent their Reafons to the publiek Judicatures: And albeit* they may haply fay that the very matters they were queftioiiing Was- she Authority of theie Judicatories - 3 Yet humility, if thtfy had? not overweening conceits of their own wits above the judgement : ofthefe Judicatures, and charity, if they had fo? much ; as, they ought towards the Church, wherein they were born, baptized,in- ftrueled, fome of them had been for fome years Minifters, and acting in afTociation in the eftablifhed judicatures thereof, might, [ kfeemeth* led them tofo much., But if they accounted the IJu* dicatures unworthy the confulting with* mi'gfetChey nbtiiave ufed' the help of conference with fome ofthefe precious and learned men, whom they profeiTe to reverence ? Iftheydidconfult with any of them before they were determined in the matter, yea be* fore they did vent thetr new judgement, is more then I know or can learn. 1 But come we to their determination and the confirm**! lion of it. §, 1 '. So far ( fay they) as we can fee % the CongregationaHway ccmes nearer to the patern of the Word then the (flafficall form. Here it may be asked why they fay only that the Congregational! way comes nearer to the patern, arid not firnply that it is the way, con- form to the Patern of the Word? What, does the Congregatici* c •' * ~ mil. Part.IL (l$3) m tiall way it felf come fomewhat fho'rtof the patern, and is there a third way diftind both from it and the Clafficall , that comes full up to it ? Is there here a refervation for a further light . ? It may be we may hear fomewhat of this ere all be done I But go we on to their definition or proportion of the Congregational! way. T& us (fay fay) it appear eth that Qhrifi bath fur -yiijhed a Congrega- tion with their Elder [hip with compleat power rff-ttrij 'diction and cenfur e Within themf elves. There are here two things afferteci by the Authors which accordingly they intend to proVe by their two Arguments rejpe&ivi, afterward built upon the paitage* of Scripture which they cite. i. That by Ghrifts appointment the power of Ecclefiaftick jurifdiftion and cenfure is in the Congregati- on (ue* the body of privat profeffours) and the Elder/hip joint- ly (both being to concur formally in the a<5h'ng thereof) and not only in the Eiderfhip. 2* That any one (ingle Congregation with its Eiderfhip has compleat power of jurifdi&ion and cenfure within it felf, fupreamly and without fubordination to any larger or fupe- riour Presbyterie. But for further clearing of their minde here k were requifit they fhould explain thefe two things to us. 1 .Whom they mean by the Congregation contradiftinguifhed from the Ei- derfhip, whether the whole colle&ion of Church-members, or only men and thofe of years of discretion. If the former, then Women and Children muftbe joint with the Eiderfhip in the po- wer of jurifdidion andcentures. If this be their minde we would know it and they would fpeak it plainly. ■ If t-he.lacter, then it is not the Congregation, butfome part of the Congregation with the Eiderfhip that has the power of jurifditfion and cenfure, or clfe Women and Children are not parts conititueot of the Congre- gation ,• and then let them tell me where fhall they find the name of the Church, in all the Gofpel in this notion, taken for the Ei- derfhip with the male- profeffours of adult years , excluding Wo- men and Children ? 2. Suppofe the whole Eiderfhip of a Congre- gation be fcandalous and cenfurable who has the power of jurifdi- ffion and : But I beleeve itfhal • be long ere they let us fee them) viz. Mat* 1$. 15,16,17,18; and do build two Arguments on it according to the two things in- volved in thek Affertion- .. The former lyeth thus ia their own words. 5,3. The Church there (tell it unto the Church ) fyokenof, has compleat power of binding and loofing, as is clear from v» 17. and 1 8. but the Church is not the Clafficall Frejbytery : But the EU derfhip with the (Congregation ' Therefore, &c. The A gumption is clear, becaufeit is not to be found in all the (jo/pel, that a com* panj of Elders, whether of a ClaJJis or a Congregation, apart from the Congregation is called a £hurch. Indeed a Congregation yrith Sixers commonly, J ca andfowetime contradiflinguijked from Elders % ' Elders , ay' fomttime without Elders, is, termed a Church. Adl. Ij-. 4.22,23. And AA.^14. 23. A 7 ob> \V&*£ an abfurdhy "ftere lt 3 to reyeB: the ufuall deception of the word in the NeVv Te(k„ And without any colourof reafon t6'come afenfe tyhieh no where it to &]$ found in all the Gojpel, though the Vvord be moft frequently ufed> in it, asfnfw. To paffe fundry things which might be noted upon $$j this Argument and for brevities fake to infill: only upon that which is material!, the drift of this nrft Argument tends to the probation of the former part involved in the Authors Afifertion, to wit, thas the power of jurifdiclion Ecclefiaftick is not in the Elder(hip or Of- ficers of the Church, but in the community of believers jointly with the Elders : and the weight of. the. whole Argument lyeth upon the (ignification of the term, Church. And ail which is faid is but an old fong that has been an hundred times dafhed by wor- thy and learned men already : See what we have faid already upon iht fame alledgeance by Mr. Lockjer, above, P. 2. Setl.-^. §.2, and %% For the prefent I (hall fay but thefe things on it. 1. When as thefe Authors fay that in the New Tedament the: name of the Church is taken, fometiroesfor the Congregation ( u- e. in their. fenfe, the community of beleevers) with the Elderfbup jointly^ fometimes for the Congregation as contradiftinguiilied from Ei- ders, and fometime for a Congregation without Elders, and af- ferteth that here, inthispiaceitistobeunderftood in the fit ft of thefe three acceptions, to wit, asitcomprehendeth both Congre- gation and Elders, I wouKi gladly know, how, and by what Ar- gument they prove that it is fo to be underftood here, and not ra- ther in one of the other two, for the Congregation as contradn ftinguiftied from the Elders, or for the Congregation without- El- ders. For that we fee only afiferted by them , but. no proof of it brought i Only this much they infinuat, that- it is commonly fo ufed : Biit that will not prove that fo it mult be taken in this par^ ticular place. If they would afTayed to bring any Arguments to- prove that the name of the Church here muftbe taken, not forthe Congregation as contradiftinguifhed.from, or without Elders,bo§ for the Congregation with the Elderfhip jointly ; I doubt not bus wediouldfoiindthemailtobcfuch^as fpeaks power of jurifdi? dion - ^m^mi {%66) t # Part .II; firfif^fcktdHe ioyhichapfermtms j&dkmtl ccagm^ance of: vffemks- W Bop- 'ffcft^t bey come to Seffions^ knd&nfy kjrefers fi*om the SejftoiiS^o T-refif 'tenet. Therefore thkChmeh. hmejpoken of y ds having compl eat po\^er : of binding and/l&sfing^ cannot be the GUfftcailTrjfkjterh : , &#§ ih&Etde&Jhipy$ith.the Congregation; Mb where do^^re^dHn th$(joffel ^^frjMfdiftiisnyin relation to] zenfure c^^miH^d^o^Gidff^'AAl '^Pmefb^uryl ' 1 :..-.. , J Anf. i ; To the Affumptiorf or fecohd'Prjopoiition/t fetmeth thefe §,& Authors fevenoc well undeiftood % 61 been acquainted with the Sate and way of Presbygeriall Government fettled in this' Church, and thereforehaveheen totf fafh^ndriiaftifi inicoademningit or au guir3fgaga^Ai¥ 9 -before^hey mfav&w&fc, ;For; i. *Tis not on- ly falfe whidithey &f\ r tha'Pth&'€->Uffic~$ nop the firfi Jtidicatarie to which afpertaines juMciali cogni&anc e of of- fence^ but that firfb they come to Sejftons^ &c. If this be meant : Univerfaily of all offices. Indeed, offences committed by particu- Wperfolir* ^^ fe&tfel r raeKAets/of parricukr Congregations 3 and as yer ,-v ? end". ( 3^S) ParxJL yet abiding within the bounds of the Congregation 3 comes firft to the Seftionor l£i viz, q that the power of. jurifdr^pn is given to the Congregation with the Elderihip. jointly , if they grant not an affociate Presbytery to take judietaJl cognizance of their offence, they muft exempt them from being fabjecl to any judicial! cogni- zance at all : for they cannot come under the judiciall cognizance of another Angle Congregation) Of ®m offence therein more fingic Congregations' are alike cbricened; aiad mg^y cafes more ; I won- der that thefe Brethren chd 'not < remember thatthe.firft judiciall cognizance, of famh'Grahrtwts o Sis nee v of j ^^fW, and many other publick Malignant wicked pracfiie^ wasnoc by Sefllons, and from them came by reference to the Guflkal Pre$bytefy,but by the publick Auemblies, \\m rl^anclcher gmU mftake too that thefe offences which comesTtp iScfsion^ oi Congregational! Eiderfhips to be judicially cognofced upon, and from themcomes to the Cbill- call Presbyterie , orto aSynode, ;that they come only by rfcrres from the Scffions to the Presbyteries. For they come alfo by ap- peal of the party whois. under the. judiciall cognition of the oefli- on, upon mai»'adminiftration ,, or .fuppofed mal-ad.*miillration: They may alfo anddo often c6me\by way of -.^horitative viutati- on of Sefsions and their proceedings by the P;e$kyterie. 2. To the Major or firft Proportion, i. Suppoje it were gran* $' 7 ' ted as it ftandeth , yet it could not make fully againft us, to take away altogether affociate juridicall Presbyteries of more then one fingle Congregation : Becaufe, as we have fliewn upon the Af- fumption* PAUT .II. ( 369 ) Atffi -*#©.« fumption, fach a'ffbciat Prefbyteries or Ecclefiaftick Aflemblies,. tnaybe, and mull be the firft judicatories, in ra any cafes,to which the judiciall cognizance of offences doth belong, But, i. If the Major be taken in this fenfe, the Church having power of binding andloofingisthe firft Judicatories to which, &c. And it only, taking it with the exclufive note, asit muftof neceflity be- taken, to infer that negative conciufion, Brgo^ a Claflicall or aflbciate presbyterie is not that Church 5 We deny it as utterly faife having no proof from the Text. We fay here that the Church inverted with authority to cognoice judicially and inflict cenfure upon of- fences is the Rulers of the Vifible Church Univerfall, as joined/;* Collegia ^ oraffembled, whether in the letter and Inferiour Col- ledges or Aflemblies (as a Congregationall Elderftiip is in refpeft of all others; a Claflicall Presbytery, in regard of Synods; a Pro- vinciall Synod in regard of a Nationally this in regard of a Synod of more Nations, haply alTociate for Government) to which as the firft Judicatory matters may come for judiciall cognizance , or in larger and fuperiour, ( fuch as is a Clafllcall Preibytery in rela- tion to a Congregationall,a Synod in relation to a Clafllcal Presby- tery, c.) to which,may be, the matter cannot come at firft or as to the firft Judicatory having power of judiciall cognizance of it. *Tis true, that in fuch a cafe as our Saviour inftanceth in the Text, when offence is given by one particular member of a Congregation fingle and fixed in its conftitution and proper Officers (which fix- ing of (ingle Congregations under appropriated Officers, is not ne, celTary by any divine inftitution : For more Congregations , may be, have been, as it feemeth, in feverallsof the primitive Churches, and are at this day in fbme orthodox Churches ferved by the fame Officers in common without violation of any divine inftitution) Chrifts command Tell the Church intends that the matter (hould be brought to the Elderfhip of the Congregation as die firft Judi- cature to which belongeth judiciall cognizance of it. Like as if the Congregation be not fixed by its feif in itsconftkurion and Officers, that Command intends the bringing of the matter at firft to an El- derfhip common to more Congregations. As alfo if the matter to foe judged , be of publick and more common concernment then of ®ne Congregation, that fame Coarmandement, warrands by aria- Ccc logic logie and proportion, the bringing of the matter firft to ibme more large Presbytery or Colledge of Elders, then the Congregational as the firft Judicature to cognofce judicially upon it : But withall let it be fo obferved that when Chrift inftituteth this order, that offences when they cannot be removed otherwife, fhouid be brought to the Church* that is, to an Ecclefiaftick Judicature, he fayeth not, that they may not in any cafe proceed further for ju- diciall cognition and fentence upon the mater, then to the fir ft Ju- dicature to which the judiciall cognition of it belongeth ; Nor is there any ground in his words 3 whereupon this can by goo'd confe- rence be inferred: In a word, there is nothing in this Text either againftthe juridicall power of larger Eiderfhips then Congregatio- nall, fach as are Claflkall Presbyteries and Synods: Nor againft the Subordination of Congregational! Elderships, to the jurifdi- clionand authority of fuch larger Elderihips. But upon the con- trary, there is in them folid ground whereupon both have been clearly demonftrat by feverall Presbyterian Writers, and difculTed all contrary exceptions and reafonings upon the place:for ftiortnefs 3 I refer the Reader to. Anfte. of the Aftembly of Divines to, &c pag. 178. GulieL Appall. Gonfiderat. of certain Controverfies cap. 6. pag.94, 95- w& pagi-iij. Spanhem. Epifiol, ad Day m B achats. Clajf. 3. Arg. 2. Hudf. Vindicat. of the £ fence andfiiQ. fag. 156, 1J7, 15^ aQ d { f&jiV-\6^}M$i M r . Rmberfurd. Due Might, cap. 10* pag. 310. &je# r ft 8. ^Ti-wMt the Authors adde, that no where do "foe read in the Gkffi'tl sfjnrifdiBi'cn in relation iocenfure committed to Claffi 'call Ptr^fiyiery.' Anfft. 1. If the meaning be no where in' the Go- fpel do we read, this power committed, by a formall precept, to Claflicall Presbytery by name, or fpecifically by it felf - it may be grarite&without prejudice to what we aflert (and I pray where will thefe Authors read in the Gofpel this power committed to the Elderfhipofafingle Congregation, Specifically, and that as they maintain Independently and fupreamly ? ) 2. It is fufficient for us, if we read in the Gofpel this power of Jurifdidion committed to ihe Officers and Pvulersof the Church as united together in Qol- legio, either in 6he fingle Congregation, or over more Congrega- tions combined and affociat together as is moft convenient for ex- ercife Part.IL ( 37 1 ) rAwwistfjjb ercife of their Ecclefiaftick communion .* And this we "read, Mat, 18. 17, 18. for there, Difciplir^aai^ tute by Chrill: is committed unto the Officers and Rulers of the Church as united in Collegio : Not to Officers of a (ingle Con- gregation only, as united; but unto the Officers of the whole Ca- thoikk Vilibie Church of Chriit, as united in leiler or larger com- binations even to an Oeairnenieall Ailembly. Becaufe the power of junichction and Dilcipline Ecclefiafock there is Mituted and in- tended by Chrill: to be a remedy againft all fcandails and offences in his Church 5 but all and every fort of fcandall falling out in the Vifible Church of Chrift cannot be (0 remeeded or removed by the ■Colledge of Officers in. a fingie Congregation. They can only be a means for remedying and removing this way fcandails and offen- ces concerning their particular Congregation , and therefore there mult be understood, as intended here by Chrift, larger Ecclefiafti- cali AfTembiies and judicatures to exercife Difcipline and Jurifdi- • clion for remedying offences and fcandails which Gongregationall Elderfhips cannot reach. 2. It is mfficient if we read in the iGo* fpel aoproven examples of larger Presbyteries, then Congregation nail, Clailicall, or Sy nodicall, authoritatively governing and ^xer- cifing Acts of Rule over more particular Churches. We read of men a Presbytery as we call Claiikall, in Jerufalem, Ephefus^ (forinth, Ruling authoritatively more Congregations, as has been demonttrat by feverali Learned men. See namely, AjfemMj :ef Divines in their Anfwer ■ f 0, &c. upon the proportion 3. of Pre- fbyteriall Government. Jus Divin, par. 2. c. 13. We read alio an example of a Synod exercifing fuch power and authori- ty, All. 15. With this laft inMance, dcethefe Authors meet, thus, and troublers of the Church •*■ This was a degree ofcen- fure , and a virtual! admonition tending to further cenfure ; BuC actually to have proceeded further to Excommunication , at firft was not feafonable , prudent nor needful!. 4. If people and pri- vate. Part. II. 1 (31?) Appends vate Brethren were in that Synod ( as we deny not but they might be ) their intereft in the determinations and confutations of the Synode was not by way of authoritative and definitive vote ': But at moft confultative and by way of private confent and appro*, bation, as we cleared before againft M r . Lotkier. j. That re- commendation of obedience to the ads of that Synode from the goodnefie and benefite thereof, expreffed in the clofe of the Sy* nodical! letter, doth not argue their conftitutions not to have been made and enjoined by an authoritative power obleiging under ha- zard of cenfure. The moft authoritative ads of any juridical! Court , being fent in a refpedive way , may be fo recommended in fuch a way. Neither that ,that in the conftitutions of that Sy- node there is not an exprelfe and formall threatningof thofe that difobey with cenfure , doth import by any neceflity of confe- quence , that the power they exercifed was not Hithoritative 3 ^nd fuch as might proceed to cenfure. Juridicall courts do not alwayes adde to their conftitutions exprefTe and formall comminations of punifbraent : Here efpecially it was not neceffarie, it being a clear cafe in it felf that thofe Hsereticks and Schifmaticks who could by no other means bereduced , were not to be fuffered but cenfured and call: forth. Now is this, which we have been confidering, the pith and§, ftrength of the grounds, whereupon thefe Authors have not only adventured themfelves , to defert and feparate from this Ghurch .♦ But alfo have darred to advife the Brethren to whom they direded their Epiftle r to appear with them upon the head of the bufinefle, ( that is, to put to their hands as chief adbuts , to throwdown to the ground that beautifuli order of GovernmenUin this Church, by the Officers of Jems Chrift appointed to rule his Church on earth, in Congregationail and Clafllcall Presbyteries , Synodes Provincial! and Nati6nall,ordered in a fweet and excellent fubordination among themfelves , which was after the firft Reformation , upon much deliberation for many years, fettled in the Church as warranted and grounded upon the Word of God, was afterward , when oppo- fed, born down and oppre fled , fealed bymany precious fervants of Jefus Chrift a with bitter and grievous fufTerings , oflmprifon- mmt> Bamlhmentj and even fentences unto death f which the only.. IO, A*piiri>- f 174) Part. Ii: only band of God retrained from being put in execution ) and was again by the good hand of God upon his people in this land , after long oppreflion under Prelacie , raifedup; has been attefted by forraine Divines and Churches as the true Government of Jefus Chrift in his Vifible Church; has been aiwayes the hammer to break wickedneiTeandprophanitie , and the hedge to keep out Errours, HsereiTes and Schifmes ; made this Church againft ail evil doers and enemies of truth, terrible as anArmie with Banners, which at this day is the eye fore of all the Seels and Hereticks of the times,& the butt of Satans malice , to throw down and raze this to the ground ( which fome of the fame Reverend men to whom they wrote , have through the grace of God , to their praife in all the Churches,Vindieated againft all enemies thereof upon one hand and other, and (land engaged by folemne vows, and the- dreadfull Oath of God to maintain and defend to their lives end ) to fet up, I wot not what s and I think the Authors themfelves wots not what J and if they do not this, to threaten them with the ftreaching out of GODS hand, and to lay upon them the horrid imputation of being mares toGODS people ? O Lord, how terrible are thy judgements in thefe times as upon outward things , fo upon the Spirits of men , while men are thus caried a» bout with every winde of Do&rine I What need have thefe that profeiTe the Truth , to take heed that they have received it in love, left they be given up to believe lies ? § ( lu The Authors adde only , That there might be famewhat faid from antiquity , that the Government of the Church wot partly Arifiocraticall , partly Democraticall , in much of the firft three hundred, years , and that the people had no [mall influence in maters of Difcipline , but that they forbear , as defining to leane on a fur er foundation. Anfw. What they have produced of this furer foundation, u e, the Holy Scripture, to leane themfelves upon in their departure from the Church of God in this land wee have feen , and how little ground it affords to fuftain them , we have feen too. I wifh from my heart they had brought fomewhat alfo , though it had been but a little , of that which they alledge may be faid from antiquitie of thefe ages for their tenent of Church Government, For in truth we profeffeour felves to be fuchas reverence Part .IT. f 375 ) Appends reverence very much, under the Holy Scriptures (which wee ieane to only , as the foundation of our faith in all maters of Reli- gion ) the teftimonie of the Orthodox Churches in thefe ages. Mr. Lockjer , as we faw before , undertook fomewhat of this be- fore , magno biatu^ under the name of common confent , but what he produced to inftrud it, may blufh before all men that has any wic , and are not (lark fools : And I am perfwaded what thefe Au- thors would have produced , had they allayed it, (hould have pro- . ven as little to their purpofe. There are two mam points whereof the Independent Govern- §> 1 1. ment confifts. i . That the power of Ecclefiaftick jurifdiction is in, and formally to be exercifed by the coromunitie of ProfefTours , if not wholly and by themfelves, yet jointly with the Elders and Officers , they as well as the Elders concurring authoritatively, in ail acts of Government and jurifdiclion. 2. That there is nor any larger Judicatories or Ademblies Ecclefiafrick, than of a fingle Con- gregation , whether Claflicall Presbyterie or Synod, juridical!; But that the Judicatorie of every firigle Congregation is the fu-- preme Eccleflafiick juridicall court upon earth , Independent upon and without (ubordination to any larger or Superiour EccleOailick Judicatorie. They grant indeedfome fort of Synods, but denude them of all authoritative and juridicall power over particular Chur- ches , leaving them only power of advice and counfell ; or at molt adogmaticalipowerto determine cafes and queftions in Religion? but without power authoritatively to enjoine their determinations upon particular Churches j foas to obleige them to becenfurable in cafe of difobedience , or to inflict any cenfure at all upon of- fenders. Now 1, fuppofe (which yet cannot be granted) that fome- §n? what might be brought from antiquitie to (hew that there was in the Government of the Church then a mixture of Ariftocracie and Democracies and that the people had fome influence in the exer- cife of Government : Yet none dare be fo impudent as to aliedge J that antiquitie for the fecond point of Independent Government, Ithink thefe Authors, fomeof them atleaft (for others of them 9 though, they all fpeak in this Epiftle referring this to antiquitie, yen we may acquire from all guildneiTe of acquaintance with antiqui- Append; IJ7'6) Part .If J tie) knew this very well • And therefore they have wittily enough £'xprefled this reference to antiquitie, in that, whereas in their two former Arguments 3 they affirmed thefe two points of Indepen- dent Government diftinclly , now in this reference to antiquitie, they alledge only generally and confufediy , th&t there was then a mixture of Ariilocracie and Democracie , and that the people had mo fmall influence in Difcipline. There is nothing more clear and undenyabk in humane Hiftorie then authoritative juridical! Governing A'flemblies and Synodes of more Churches in thefe ages of the Church. Oecumenicali Synod, there were none (nor ccould be,becaufe of the evils of thefe times ) after the dayes of the Apoftlesuntillthe Nicen Councel, yet the thing it felf was ac- knowledged, could the benefit thereof been had, as is evident by that of Cyprian, Lib. i. Epift.%. in PameL order. Epift.qo t (fumfemel placuerit y tarn nobis quam confejforibus & clericis ur- bicis 9 item ZJniverfis Epifcopu vtl in noftra Provincial el tr*ws mare confiitutis , m nihil innovator circa lap for urn caufam 9 nifiomnesinmnumconvenerimus & c^llatis conpliis cum Difci* plina pariter ejr mifericordia temperatam fixerimus fententiam. That Provincial 1 Synods (i.e. of many nejgbouring Churches ha- ving Colledges of Presbyters and Officers over them) were then inaclualiufeisfoclear as cannot be denyed. See the Magde* hurgen Qenu 2. Cap* 7. in princip. they fay. Duplex atuem regiminis Ecclejiaftici forma ( ut hoc faculo) fefe nobis offert conftderanda, quarum prior communem fingularum Ecclejiarum Adminiftrationem : Altera veroplurium am omnium inter ft confociatarum gubernathnem completlitur ( note here by the way, that rJhofe finguU Ecclejia, particular Churches, to which they give privatas Synodos afterward, were not, alwayes at leaft (as we fhall fhew after this J fuch (ingle Congregations as the In- dependents ftand for, which may meet together at one time in one place, but more ample. Then afterward, p.itf.De confocia- tione Ecclefiar* they fay 5 fi quando Harefes oboriebantur A-ut a- lite Qtiafijenes graviores\ Tumconveniebant vel omnes provin- ciales, autplerique Dottores t Et examinata re tomtnuni judi- cioftatuebant^ quodvitandum am fequendum ejfet, Eufeb. l.J.f. l£% Ex Appollinario dicit : etenim fideles per Afiam mu/tis fa- n P ART. It. (377) AVpYnC.' pe nnmero Afia locls ob hanc catifam conveniebant, & nuper na» tat Doctrines examinabant^ & -prof anas pronunciabant , hare- f%ma ift am reprob antes Ecclefia ejiciebant & Excommunicabant. In like manner Cent. 3. c,j. tituL De confociaticne plurinm Scclef.intina aliquaProvincia, p. 158. Diximus Juperiori fa- culo, Ecclefia* ejafdem&rwincUfolita* e(feplerftm%_ ad unam aliqnam maximl infignem rejpicere r eam^ venerari , & ab ea confilia & mutm ojjicia pet ere & retle monitis obtemperare.-Ea ve» ro res tit paulatim in confuetudinem abut, ita hocfaculo obferva* ta eft l Nam in pleriffc Provincik, cater® Ecclejia> 9 eorumque Epifcopi & Qlerki, fe ad ejufmodi alicttjus urbis Epifcopum, Do- llrina, pietate &_conftantiainfignem, & 'facerdotum Collegium alj'ociarunt, tit eorum operant anquam communittm in/peel or urn (J* gtibernatorum titer enttir. And in the fame Qent . p. 1 63. /.40. De confociatione Vniverf. they fay. Si atitem graviorps £1^- ftiones attt controverfiaincidebant^ ant alia negetia qua non ad twins e ProvincU Ecclefia* attinebantfed ad ' plttres, tarn 8cclc~ ft&etiamindiverfis Provincii* fuas operas conjungebant 9 in pe~ tendis am dandis confiUis, in componendk fchifmatibus , in reft*- tandU erroribus^inCongregandi* Synodis^ in Excommunicandis Haretecis & alii* facinorofis. See alio after. pag.\66. L 22, &feq. Seealfo. Cent* 4. c*j, p. 517./. zi. & pag. 522. /. 8.- But why infill: we in this, inftances of Synods of this kind, exerci- sing Juridical! power authoritatively ( I mean Minifteriail autho- rity fubordinat to the Word of God) determining Queftions in Religion , condemning Herefies , Excommunicating Ha?reticks 3 Schifmaticks, and other flagitious perfons, in thefe ages are notour to all that have read any thing of antiquity. Cyprian alone in his Ep files affordeth abundant teftimony of this. And as for Claf- ftcaii fas we call them ) Presbyteries* what elfe were the Bifhop with his Prefiyterittm.ot Collegium facerdotum * 3 in thefe times. * Which Khali not contend here whether in thtk times there were any the Qtmu~- fingle Congregations having a full Prefayterium within them- r 'ft s ca ^r felves, albeit I think it (hall be hard for any man to give any parti- ?' os £ n ^f~ cular inftance in thefe ages of a Prejbjterium of one particular rum Ea ^ Congregation fuch as our Independent Brethren (peak- for. But pawn* Dxid certain A p p e * » - . ( 37 8 ) Part . IL 1 certain it is, that the Bifhops (who were then but conftant praefi- dents differing from other Presbyters, ordine tantum non grada mt pot e flat e) with their Prejbyterium^ or Collegium Clericorum^ for the moft part were DUcefanj.e. over fuch numerous Churches, as could not be one fingle Congregation , to meet in one place at one time for divine Worfh!p> but behoved to be made up of many fuch (ingle AffenMes ("which whether they were fixed or not fix- ed, we debate not now, nor does the one or the other make any oddes in the purpofe we are now upon ) and fo was juft fuch a Presbytery as we call Clafiicali : fuch was Cornelius in Rome With hU Presbyterj*m& Cyprian with his Presbytery in Carthage^ and other Bifhops with their Presbyteries In other populous Cities. Certain it is that thefe Presbyteries were juridical! Ecciefiaftick Courts : And as certain it is that they were not Presbyteries of one (ingle Congregation, fuch as Independents fpeak of* § t A As for the other point of Independent Government,if we fpeak of the authoritative and juridical! Acts of Government ( foch as are Ordination and potestative raiffion of Miniftersjudiciall deter- mination of controverfies in Religion, Excommunication of Here- ticalland fcandalous perfons ) I darre affirm that in antiquitie a man may as foon find a mixture of Ariftocracy and Democracy, let beMorellian, or compleat Democracy (which yet is the thing maintained by moft part Independents) as in fylvis c Delpbinum^ We (hail not deny that the people then had an hand in the electi- on of Minifters, as is evident by many paffages of thefe times, fee efpecially, Cyprian lib. i. Epifl. 4. inPamel. Ord. Epifi. 6& But election is no aft of Ecciefiaftick Authority or Government, nor doth it conftitute any one a Paftour, but is oniy a defignatiofl of the perfon, to be authoritatively put in that Office by ordina- tion, or to be applycd to fome particular charge, if he be one al- ready in Office. Nor do we deny but the people might be pre- fent at the handling of matters of faith in AfTemblies, be hearers and witneffes of the whole proceedings thereanent,give their coun- fell and advice in confutation, alfo tcftifie their affent and appro* bation to the determinations : We grant alfo that Excommunica- tion and loofing from Excommunication of perfons was not perfor- med pARt.IIv (319) Appeni>v med without at ieaft the tacit agreement and confentof the people. They are to concur atlive and executive to both ; And therefore when any perfon was to be Excommunicat, the grounds and caufes thereof were made known to the people; And when perfons Ex- communicat were to be received again into the Church, they were brought before the people to make their i&^rnm publick con- feffion before them, as we do in our Churches now, but none of thefe, nor all of thern^ amounts to an authoritative and juridical! power of Government. But as for fuch acls as belong directly to authoritative and juridicall Government, as Ordination of Mi- nifters, judicial! fentencing perfons to be Excommunicat, or abfo- lution from Excommunication, giving of definitive fentence in pu- blick determinations of.controverfies of faith, or of matters per- taining to order, and rites to be obferved in the Church, let our Authors produce any teftimony, or allowed practice, of the peo- ples formal! influence and concurrence in thefe, if they would fay any thing from that antiquity for an Ecclefiaftick Government pro- perly .Democraticail, either in whole, or in partt Hierome, who was near thefe ages, and better acquaint with' §. x ^ their way, thenthefe Authors,, tells us in the generall, in whofe hands the power of Government was then, in that remarkable and famous faying of his, on the Epiftle to Tit. c« u zAntequam Dia- bdliinfiinEiuftudiain Religions fierent & diceretur in popu/o 9 ego fum Pauli y ego zApollo^ ego veto Cepb concerning the re- turn offoraeConfellburs from the Nov^tian fchifm to the unity of the Church there : Cornelius after he has related how theie Con* feflfours, had exprelTed their deiire of reconciliation, to the Pres- byters, and taken with the faults laid to their charge in a privat and extra judicia 11 way, he proceedeth thus. Omni igitur acta ad me per I d to, placuit contrahi Frefbyterium. Adfnerunt etiam Epifcopi quinque qui & hodie pr&fentes fue-runt, ut (irmato con* jilio r quid circa perfonam coram obfervari deberet, confenfu cm- nium ftatueretur* Et ut mot am omnium > &' con ft Hum fingulo- rum dtgnofceres^etiam fententias noftras plaeuit in notitiam veftri p erf err i , qnas & /abject as leges. His it a geftis in Prejbjteri- umveneruntVrbanus^ dec. Et plenquefratres qui fe its ad- junxeranty fummis precibus defederantes, ut ea qua antefuerunt gefta, in oblivionem cederent % nullaque eorum mentio habere-* tU Y *———» quod erat conj equens omnis hie actus populo erat infinuandtts ut &ipfosviderent in Ec cleft a conftitutos. Having related the peoples expreilion of their joy he fets down the con- feffion which the penitents made. Nos error em no ft rum con fit e- mur , &c. And then addeth, ift a eorum prof ejfione non mover e- tnur} ZJt quod apud pot e ft at em fee -# "Her ant confefft^ in Ecclefta, conftituti comproharent : ^uamobrem ^Maximum Prefpyterum^ juffimus locum funm agnofcere, aeteros cum mgenti populi fuf- fragio recepimus. I need not comment ?:pori the place, it fpeaks plain enough of it Mf what we are pleading for, 3 ..That Apfenb. (382) Part. IP* §. 18. 3. That the giving of definitive fentence in queftions of faiths or making Ecckfiallick conftitutions and canons concerning order- to be obferved in the Church jn thefe ages did ordinarily pertaine only to Minifters of the Church,Bi(hops and Elders, & that thougrr othersprivat Christians might be prefent, hear and confult^ that yet thefe only did (it and vote as ordinary judges, is unden) ablie clear by the HiftorieofallCouncels that were then held in the Church : I fay ordinary. For I deny not but fchat fometimes fuch as were not in any fuch Minifteriaii office ; did alfo fit and concur in giving definitive fentence : But thefe were not any whatsoever privat Chriftians promifcuoufly : But eminent learned and pious men, and having authoritie and calling thereunto, either by an- tecedent agreement of the Churches that were to meet in the Af- fembly, or by a fubfequent affuming and calling of them by the Affembly it felf. Which was an efpeciall vocation unto the Mini- fteriaii office, ad tempm and in relation to thefe particular acts which were to be done in the Synode, and in fo far did exempt them e forte, out of the ftate of meer private Chriftians: But that fuch as were meer privat Chriftians, i.e. were neither ordi- nary Minifters, nor had a fpeciall calling extra ordinem, concurred to give definitive fentence in Aflemblies, was a thing unknowne. See what funiw, a man well verfed in antiquitie, fayeth to Rel- larm. Com. 3. lib. .2. 0. 2$: n. 2. fpeaking in relation to ancient Councels. Eorum qui Conciliis inter funt, varia ejfe genera ; £(feaudientesqui in DoBrina & or dine exauditione informant ur\ gffe doclos , qui ad consultation em adhibentur : £Jfe denique Spifcopos & Presbjteros^quidecidunt res fi'rendisfententiu : And again (font. ^ lib. i.e. 15. n. 15. qui fine author it ate Ecclejia adjunty eof urn alii etiam confultationibus adhiberi pojfuwt , ut doBi,pratertim Scclefiaftioitfed dicer* fententiam defimtivam non poffunu \ I hear of two main Objections which ufe to be be made againft * 9 ' what I have been pleading for, and for the concurrence of the people in the exercife of the Government of the Church, ij That is alledged of the Magdeburg. Cent. 2. c. 7. p. 134. coste- rumfi q»u probata am ores hujusfaculi perjpiciat , videbit for* mam Part.IL ( 3S3 ) A?pt-n»; warn gubernationis prepemodum a«u»»s«m7** fmilem fuiffe, To which may be added that of learned whitak^ Com. 4. q, x. c. 1. Jib pa^tim Ariftocraticum, partim Democraticum, partim etiam CM on archie urn ( n. fi velimus Chrvftnm ipfum rejpicere , as he fayeth a little before ) eft, femperquefuit Ecclejia Regimen-. <^/z/\WThat thefe Authors called the Government of the Church, either much like unto a Deraocraticall, or in part Democraticall, their meaning and intention was not, that the whole body of pri- vate ProfeHburs did formally concur in the exercife of fuch acts, as are formally authoritative aud judiciall ads of Government, ( which were require to make the Government formally and pro» perly Deraocraticall, either in whole or in part ) But only becaufe of fuch things competent to them , as we have mentioned , S.14, which are no authoritative or jndiciall acls of Government. And firft for the Magdeburg, fee how they explicate that which they fay in the next following words. Singula enim Ecclefi& par em habebant poteftatem verbum Del pure docendi ", Sacramenta Ad* miniftrandi , abfolvtndi & excommunicandi Hareticos & fcele*, ratos 3 & ceremonies ab Apoftolis accepts exercendi, aut eti- am pro ratione ^edifications novas condendi , Afiniftros eligendi 9 vocandi, ordinandi, & juftijfimat ob caufai iterum deponendi — ■ In thefe words there are two things expreily obfervable to our purpofe. 1 . That they in explicating the Democracy they fpeak of, fpeak not of the power of (ingle perfons as to maters of Go- vernment, but of fingle or particular Churches. Singula enim Scclefia ( fay they ) par em habebant poteftatem, &c. where- by it may eafily and evidently appear, that while they fay that the Government of the Church was much like a Democracy,they mean this, not to take away the Government out of the hands of Chrifts Officers of the Church, to put it in the hands of the tvhole people, at leaft to joine thefe with them in the for nail and proper actings of it ; But in oppofitionto that authoritative and juridical! fuperi- ority of any one particular Chutch over other particular Churches., as the Prelaticall men pleaded for authoritative fuperioritie in their cathedrall Churches, over all particular Churches in the Discefe, and the Papalins for an univerfali fuperioritie and fupremacie m the Church Append, ( 3^) ^^^^pT.IL' Church of Rome over all other Churches in the world/ Pp It is to-be obferved that among other things which they reckon up as parts of the Church Government which they fay was much like De, mocracie , they put in , the Preaching of the Word , and Admi- foation of Sacraments, which themfelves before fay ( and ho man of found judgment will deny) are acls proper to the called Miniflers of Cbrift : Whence alfo , it is manifeft that they mean not a Demo- cracie properly fo called 3 which putteth thefoxmall power and ex- ercife of Government in the hands of all and every one of the mul- titude , which the Independent Brethren plead for. And indeed will any man confider, what the. particular Churches were , to which thefe Centuriators attribute private Synods ( Cent , i.-c. 7. pag* 130. ) wherein it may poffibly be conceived , that Democrat cie could have place elpecially , and it may eafily be perceived that they were fuch, as the whole, body of the people (for whole right to concur in juridical! ads, the Independent Brethren pleads ).. could not poffibly meet; together in one » or be prefent at once , in their Synods when affembledfor exercife of jurifdidion. For moft part , at leaft of them which they call particular Churches , were of fuch amplitude , and fo numerous , that fuch an atfembling of their whole body was not poffible , and in truth they were Di#» cefan or Prefbyteriall Churches , and not fuch fingle Congregati- ons, as the Queftion between us and the Independent Brethren . eoncernetru. For mark it , in that very place laft cited , fpeaking Qf thefe particular Churches and their private Synods, thef bring in the Romane Church for an inftance : And who knows not how numerous the Chriftians in Rom?wer? become ere that time. Adde to thefe things that thefe fame Authors , Cent. 3, c. 7. p. 151. fay exprefly that )w tra&andi de excommunicandis am recipien- dis pnblice lapfis , penes Senior es Beclefta erat \ and cite TertuL Apolog. for it, read alfo c. <5. ejufdem Cent, fag* 129, /.30. de ri* tibits circa claves^ and you will finde that the judiciall power of Difcipiine was not common to the people but proper to the Mini- flers , only fome intereft therein was for honours fake , given to Martyres. 2, As to that cited from Whittaker^ that learned The* ologaehimfelf in the words imroediatiy going before thefe cited, clears PaktUI* b (385) J Ap^n>, rfears in what refpeft it is that he fayes the Government of the hurch was alwayes in part Democratically when he faith.' 'Si it time or pit* Eccle/ia {n.VQlumw rejpicere) quatenas in ele~ If tone Epifcc forum & Prefijterorum fufragia ftrebat, itatamen itivretZtd femper a r Preft>Jteri$ fervaretur, 'Democraeitum. S3 jhen he callsit partly Democraticail, in this refped that the people lad vote in the eiedion of their Minifters, which we grant the People ought to have, and if any will in this refpeft call the Go- cernment of the Church in part Democratically we fhali not con- .-end about the name, only we will fay that the eledton of Mini- iers, being no more but the nomination or designation' of a ptr- bntotheMiniftry, is no proper or formal! aft -of authoritative tower. The other Objection made ufe of is from Cyprian. Lib. 1. Spift. O. in Tamel. Ord. Epift. 6, Ad id-verb qUod fcripferunt mini, Oonatus & Fortunate ,2{ovat us & Curdius jolm refer ib er e ni~ rilpotui; quando a primordio Epifcopatus'mei flktuerim, nihil %ne Covfili-o veflro, & fine conienfu plebis x * mek priyatim*Pam t mea t ententia gerere. An fa. How far that grave, pious and zealous pivatafm* flcient was from the Independent way of Churth Government, mt **' tmongft many places it> his Writings, that one" famous PaiTage in Lib r isde V nit Ate Ecciejit _ . 1 ■ . 1. ,1 .. . FINIS- <, 1 o o o n ha 1