<!DOCTYPE ETS PUBLIC "-//UMDLPS//DTD EEBOPROOF 2.0//EN">
<ETS>
<TEMPHEAD>
<REVDESCR>
<CHANGE>
<DATE>2013-06-19</DATE>
<RESPSTMT>
<NAME>Lauren Proux</NAME>
<RESP>MURP</RESP>
</RESPSTMT>
<ITEM>Checklist: x Add TEMPHEAD, change DATE, validate x Add DIV TYPEs, validate x Review structure, use BODY or rarely GROUP x Check PB placement and completeness, ensure sequence of N="" x Proof title page(s) x Check HEAD TRAILER ARGUMENT EPIGRAPH OPENER CLOSER SIGNED SALUTE BYLINE x Check ^, oe, abq (Esq;), italic I / J, _Initals, &amp;c. x Check # @ -- UNCLEAR LB FIGURE x Check q; startq endq Q&#62; x Correct illegibles from proofsheet x Check illegible page, para, line, span, word, dollar signs Final validate Corrected [ ] illegible groups out of [ ]. Converted [ ] illegible groups to GAP DESC="illegible". DONE</ITEM>
</CHANGE>
</REVDESCR>
</TEMPHEAD>
<EEBO>
<IDG S="marc" R="UM" ID="A29766">
<STC T="W">B5047</STC>
<STC T="C">R224311</STC>
<BIBNO T="oclc">7952144</BIBNO>
<VID>40698</VID>
</IDG>
<TEXT LANG="eng">
<FRONT>
<DIV1 TYPE="title page">
<PB REF="1" MS="y">
<PB REF="1">
<P>JERUBBAAL. OR, A Vindication of the Sober Te&s;timony again&s;t Sinful Complyance, from the Exceptions of Mr. <HI>Tombs,</HI> in An&s;wer to his THEODULIA.</P>
<P>Wherein the unlawfulne&s;s of hearing the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters, is more largely di&s;cu&s;&s;ed, and proved. The Arguments pro|duced in the Sober Te&s;timony, reinforced: The Vanity of Mr. <HI>Tombs</HI> his Reply thereunto, evinced: His forty Argu|ments for Hearing, fully an&s;wered. The Incon&s;i&s;tency of Mr. <HI>T.</HI> his pre&s;ent Principles and Practices, with pa&s;&s;ages in his former Writings, remarked; and manife&s;ted, in an Appendix hereunto annexed.</P>
<Q>Will ye plead for Baal? will ye &s;ave him? he that will plead for him, let him be put to death, whil&s;t it is yet morning: If he be a God let him plead for him&s;elf, becau&s;e one hath ca&s;t down his Altar. <BIBL>Judg. 6. 31.</BIBL></Q>
<Q><GAP DESC="foreign">. <BIBL>Gal. 2. 18.</BIBL></Q>
<Q>Nulla pote&s;t lingua &s;atis exprimere, quantum malum, quantum peri<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">ulum, quan|tum confu&s;ionem, &s;acrae Scripturae contemp<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">us quae p<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">ocul dubio &s;ufficiens e&s;t, pro Eccle&s;iae gubernatione, alias Chri&s;tus imperfectus Legi&s;lator e&s;&s;et) Et humanorum inventorum affectatio, in Eccle&s;iam invexit. Ad hujus rei eviden|tiam, con&s;ideretur clari &s;tatus, cui &s;apientia coele&s;tis, de&s;pon&s;ari debuit: &s;ua cum me etrice ilia, &s;apientia humana adulteriam commi&s;erunt illi: &s;i ut &s;ta|tus Eccle&s;iae mere be&s;tialis, &amp; mon&s;tro&s;us eva&s;e<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">it: infra coelum, &s;upra vero terra, &s;ube&s;t Spiritus, dominatur caro, &amp;c. non erube&s;cunt tamen quidam dicere humanis inventionibus melius Eccle&s;iam gubernari, quam Lege Divina, &amp; Lege Evangelii Chri&s;ti quae a&s;&s;ertio bla&s;phema e&s;t, &amp;c, <BIBL><HI>Johannes Ger&s;on,</HI> Se<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">. in die Circumci&s;. p. 3. con&s;ider. 1.</BIBL></Q>
<P><HI>London,</HI> Printed in the Year, 1668.</P>
<PB REF="2">
</DIV1>
<DIV1 TYPE="preface">
<PB N="3" REF="2">
<HEAD><HI>An</HI> ANSWER <HI>to the</HI> Epi&s;tolary Pre|face <HI>of Mr.</HI> Tombs <HI>his Theodulia.</HI></HEAD>
<HEAD TYPE="sub">To the Chri&s;tian Readers, e&s;pecially tho&s;e who by rea&s;on of u&s;e, have their &s;en&s;es exerci&s;ed to di&s;cern both good and evil.</HEAD>
<OPENER><SALUTE>Dearly Beloved,</SALUTE></OPENER>
<P>_TIs now &s;ome five years &s;ince, <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 word"> little Treati&s;e, call'd <HI>A Sober Te&s;timony again&s;t Sinful Complyance,</HI> was for my own (and &s;ome few <HI>Chri&s;tians</HI> of my intimate acquaintance) u&s;e and further information in the grand Controver&s;ie of the Time (viz. <HI>the Hearing of the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters of England)</HI> compiled, and about two years after, upon the earne&s;t reque&s;t of &s;ome Friends (whom I could not deny) publi&s;hed; for the &s;atisfaction, and further e&s;tabli&s;hment of others al&s;o. What the &s;ucce&s;s, by the ble&s;&s;ing of the Lord, of that undertaking was, with the acceptance it had with many truly fearing God, I li&s;t not now to declare. Not long after its publi|cation, (without any enquiry of mine) I had frequent intimations of an <HI>An&s;wer,</HI> by &s;ome one or other thereunto (which by &s;everal it &s;eems was deemed nece&s;&s;ary.) I confe&s;s, being in my own &s;pirit a&s;&s;ured, I had pleaded for nothing but what (in the &s;ub&s;tance of it) would be found to be the Truth of Chri&s;t; I was not over-&s;olicitous into who&s;e hands that undertaking would be committed. When I heard (not long after) that the party (who&s;e Exceptions thereunto, we have in the en&s;uing Treati&s;e con&s;idered) had undertaken the refutation thereof, I was not a little well-plea&s;ed, (&s;ince an oppo&s;ition thereunto was deemed nece&s;|&s;ary) that it fell into &s;uch a hand. For although I had frequent inti|mations of that &s;ad frame of &s;pirit he hath of late been under (and from &s;ome Tractulates lately publi&s;hed by him, had &s;ome ground to believe it:) yet was I unwilling to entertain any evil &s;urmi&s;e concerning him (which I knew to be a fruit of the fle&s;h) or to give way (without mo&s;t evident proof) to the belief of the &s;ugge&s;tion intimated. Two things I did a&s;&s;ure my &s;elf of; 1. That he would deal like a Scholar, in the management of the pre&s;ent Controver&s;ie, candidly and fairly,
<PB N="4" REF="3"> for the bolting-out of Truth (as he phra&s;eologi&s;eth <HI>p.</HI> 1.) Nor could it enter into my mind, that a per&s;on of &s;uch Learning as Mr. <HI>Tombs</HI> would be accounted to be, in &s;tead of a fair and &s;ober An&s;wer, &s;hould have turn'd a&s;ide by Cobweb-like and unnece&s;&s;ary di&s;tinctions, like the <HI>obs</HI> and <HI>&s;ols</HI> of the Schoolmen, of which it may be &s;aid, as one <NOTE N="&dagger;" PLACE="marg"><HI>Prudent. Apothe.</HI> of &s;ome of the Ancient Philo&s;o|phers.</NOTE> of old-&s;pake of others,
<Q><LG>
<L>Statum lace&s;&s;unt omnipotentis Dei,</L>
<L>Calumnio&s;is litibus.</L>
<L>Fidem minutis di&s;&s;ecant ambagibus,</L>
<L>Ut qui&s;que e&s;t lingua nequior.</L>
<L>Solvant, ligantque quae&s;tionum vincula,</L>
<L>Per Syllogi&s;mos plectiles.</L>
</LG></Q> to the clouding and ob&s;curing, of what was plain and obvious to the un|der&s;tanding of the meane&s;t capacity, and the perverting the intend|ment of his <HI>Antagoni&s;t,</HI> nakedly repre&s;ented to a meaning never in|tended by him: as not once (that he might &s;eem to &s;ay &s;omewhat) he hath done; &s;etting up a man of &s;traw of his own fo<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">ming, to &s;pend the heat of his mi&s;g<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">ided zeal upon. 2dly, I &s;uppo&s;ed al&s;o, that a man of that repute in days pa&s;t, for Sobriety (to which he is &s;till no mean pretender) and Holine&s;s as Mr. <HI>T.</HI> would never have defiled him|&s;elf with the vomit and &s;hameful &s;pewing of pa&s;&s;ionate and mo&s;t un|chri&s;tian expre&s;&s;ions (wor&s;e than which, had he been di&s;puting with the Devil, if he would have taken a mea&s;ure of mode&s;ty from the Arch|angel, he could not have made u&s;e of) he is frequently venting and di&s;gorging again&s;t his Adver&s;a<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">y. The review whereof, I am a&s;&s;ured, will not be over-plea&s;ing to him, if his heart be but in the lea&s;t fixt up|on that frame of &s;pirit in which our &s;ervices for God (of which he deems his pre&s;ent undertaking to be a part) &s;hould be managed. He hath &s;ure read (and I wi&s;h he would lay it to his very heart) <HI>Jam.</HI> 1. 20. <HI>that the wrath of man worketh not the Righteou&s;ne&s;s of God;</HI> and 2 <HI>Tim.</HI> 2. 24. <GAP DESC="foreign">, (which <HI>Lud. de Dieu</HI> and others interpret <HI>de verborum,</HI> as well as <HI>verberum pugna,</HI> of tongue-&s;trifes, and contentions, and is by &s;ome rendred <HI>to &s;cold)</HI> as al&s;o <HI>Tit.</HI> 1. 7. from the guilt whereof I know not how he will acquit him&s;elf. He talks indeed of <HI>Billings-gate Rhetorick,</HI> u&s;ed by others, <HI>p.</HI> 16. and expects, he &s;aith in his Epi&s;tle to the then Lord <HI>Chancellor,</HI> no other event than Obloquy from per&s;ons of the mind of this Author. For my part I am not con&s;cious to my &s;elf of giving the lea&s;t occa&s;ion of &s;uch expre&s;&s;ions
<PB N="5" REF="3"> from this <HI>Animadverter,</HI> not remembring what one &s;entence through|out the whole Treati&s;e, doth ju&s;tly de&s;erve &s;uch a ca&s;tigation; and am re&s;olved not to return him the &s;ame mea&s;ure he is plea&s;ed to mete out, not liking the Copy &s;o well as to write after it. So that what-ever he meets with from others, I a&s;&s;ure him, how grateful &s;oever it may be unto him, upon &s;ome accounts (which may make him expect it as he &s;peaks) he &s;hall mi&s;s of the returnal of Obloquy; for Obloquy &amp; tho&s;e wrathful &amp; pa&s;&s;ionate expre&s;&s;ions he is frequently venting in the Papers under con&s;ideration. Through Grace we have otherwi&s;e learned Chri&s;t, and can &s;ay touching this Animadverter, as <HI>Calvin</HI> touching <HI>Luther, Though</HI> Luther <HI>call me Dog, &amp;c. yet I will &s;ay of him, he is (I hope) the Servant of Je&s;us Chri&s;t.</HI> Though I mu&s;t crave leave to add, that the&s;e Animadver&s;ions of his will be no joy of heart to him in the day of the Lord, when all our works &s;hall be tryed by fire of what &s;ort they are, becau&s;e they will be found hay and &s;tubble in that day; 'Tis an Argu|ment Mr. <HI>T.</HI> is an utter &s;tranger to the Author of <HI>S. T.</HI> el&s;e he would never have expected &s;uch a returnal from him. In <HI>&s;ect.</HI> 1. of this <HI>Preface</HI> he inveighs again&s;t Prefaces and expre&s;&s;ions which tend to create pre|judice, and partial propen&s;ity to one part more than to another, which he would have prohibited and re&s;trained &s;everely. In which that I am not in the lea&s;t concerned, I mu&s;t profe&s;s my &s;elf to be wholly a &s;tranger not being con&s;cious to my &s;elf of any &s;uch Preface, or expre&s;&s;ion u&s;ed by me, and do heartily wi&s;h that all &s;uch might be forborn that have a tendency to fore&s;tall the judgment of any; being de&s;irous that what I write, may be impartially and candidly weighed in the Ballance of the Sanctuary, where if it be not found weight, I de&s;ire it may be rejected, not having (as I know of) e&s;pou&s;ed any private opinion, nor imbraced what, upon Scriptural evidence to the contrary, I cannot more chear|fully lay down, than ever I a&s;&s;umed it: And am &s;o far from &s;uch a tem|per of &s;pirit, as to return any that &s;hall labour to convince me of my mi&s;takes (for I am a man, and &s;ubject to them) obloquie for their love and pains, that I &s;hall thankfully acknowledge both, in &s;uch a Chri&s;tian undertaking, and profe&s;s my &s;elf their debtor. With what &s;everity, or under what penalty Mr. <HI>T.</HI> would have &s;uch procedures interdicted and re&s;trained, and who &s;hall be con&s;tituted of the Com|mittee of Tryers touching expre&s;&s;ions and prefaces of &s;uch a tendency, becau&s;e he hath not expre&s;&s;ed him&s;elf, I cannot divine: I hope he is not &s;anguinary in this dictate, and de&s;ire! There are (I pre&s;ume he thinks) Laws enough, by penalties &s;ufficiently &s;evere, interdicting the writing and preaching of the men of his &s;eeming indignation, and he
<PB N="6" REF="4"> hath more pitty to per&s;ons under heavy &s;trokes and burdens, than to have them encrea&s;ed. If it be (as he intimates towards the clo&s;e of this his <HI>Epi&s;tolary Preface)</HI> the <HI>Epi&s;tle to the Reader,</HI> prefixt to the <HI>S. T.</HI> he thus inveighs again&s;t, as guilty of the wretched de&s;ign mentioned, he knows there is nothing therein new, nothing but what is u&s;ually done by per&s;ons writing le&s;&s;er Tractates; nothing to fore&s;tall the judgment of any is thereby intended. And &s;ome think that this Animadverter is in this matter <GAP DESC="foreign">, doing more in a few lines to balla&s;t the Reader to his per&s;wa&s;ion, th<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">n the Author of the <HI>S. T.</HI> hath done in his whole Epi&s;tle.</P>
<Q>Qui alterum incu&s;at probri ipfum &s;e intueri oportet.</Q>
<P>Towards the end of <HI>&s;ect.</HI> 1. he intimates, and <HI>&s;ect.</HI> 2. plainly expre&s;|&s;es, that &s;ome per&s;onal exceptions have been entertained again&s;t him, and &s;uch aver&s;ne&s;s to his later Writings found in the &s;pirits of a great number of tho&s;e that &s;eem to be inqui&s;itive after Truth, that they have not found &s;uch reception as &s;uch Arguments were deemed to require, which he attributes to his writing about a point that few can concoct. That this is the ground of their prejudice (many of them) who are per&s;ons of the complexion intimated, is a mi&s;take of the Animadverter, which a little enquiry might ea&s;ily deliver him from. My &s;mall ac|quainrance among&s;t &s;uch, as do not only &s;eem (as Mr. <HI>Tombs</HI> out of the abundance of that charity, which he frequently condemns <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">is Anta|goni&s;t for the want of, &s;peaks) but are really inqui&s;itive into Truth, gives me ground to &s;ay, That not tho&s;e (for the mo&s;t part) who cannot, but &s;uch as have well concocted the point he mentions, which, if I mi&s;|take not, is the Bapti&s;m of Believers, upon a manife&s;tation and decla|ration of Faith received, are the per&s;ons (chiefly) of the prejudices in|timated. And 'twere well if the non-reception of his late Writings, among&s;t per&s;ons of &s;uch a denomination as he &s;peaks of, did put him upon a review of them, the frame of &s;pirit in which he writ them, to|gether with the temper of his &s;pirit and actions in dayes pa&s;t, that he may &s;ee from whence he hath fallen, and repent. I am very apt to think that the pre&s;ent undertaking of the Animadverter, is not like to meet with better entertainment, than the fore-mentioned, among&s;t per&s;ons inqui&s;itive into Truth: E&s;pecially con&s;idering, how oppo&s;ite to former &s;ayings of his, this undertaking of his is. The Tables are ea&s;ily to be con&s;ulted with; where, in legible characters, the mind of Mr. <HI>Tombs</HI> (in his Book intituled, <HI>Fermentum Phari&s;aeorum,</HI> being a Sermon preached at <HI>Lem&s;ter</HI> in <HI>Hereford&s;hire</HI> Novemb. 24. 1641. on <HI>Mat.</HI> 15. 19. ordered by the Committee of the Hou&s;e of Commons,
<PB N="7" REF="4"> <HI>April</HI> 19. 1643. to be printed, when Reformation began to be coun|tenanced) is to be read, contrary to what now he &s;eems to plead for. <Q>Hear him &s;peak. Having in pag. 17, 18. in his third u&s;e of his Do|ctrine rai&s;ed from the words, <HI>viz. That however they think of their actions, they in vain wor&s;hip God who teach for doctrines Mans precepts.</HI> P. 2. <HI>S.</HI> 2. He takes occa&s;ion to admoni&s;h Mini&s;ters to avoid the way of tho&s;e Phari&s;ees who taught for Doctrine mans Precepts, and pi|thily expo&s;tulates the ca&s;e with them, <HI>Sect.</HI> 14. And <HI>P.</HI> 18. <HI>Sect.</HI> 15. he &s;aith, <HI>4ly. From hence we may take occa&s;ion to admoni&s;h the people, to take heed of &s;uch Phari&s;aical Teachers, as teach for Doctrine the Com|mandments of men.</HI> Our Saviour Chri&s;t having manife&s;ted the hypo|cri&s;ie of the Scribes and Phari&s;ees in this thing, bids his Di&s;ciples <HI>l<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">t them alone,</HI> telling them that they were <HI>blind leaders of the blind; and if the blind lead the blind, both fall into the ditch, Mat.</HI> 15. 14. And el&s;ewhere, <HI>Beware of the leaven of the Phari&s;ees, which is hypocri&s;ie; Lake</HI> 12. 1. And &s;urely people have need to take heed of &s;uch Tea|chers, &s;ith Super&s;tition, as it is a pernicious evil, &s;o it ea&s;ily in&s;inu|ates into peoples minds, and &s;ticks fa&s;t in them under &s;hew of Anti|quity, Decency and Gravity. I know this will be interpreted as if it were a heinous thing, to per&s;wade people to withdraw them&s;elves from the Mini&s;ters of their Pari&s;h, though never &s;o negligent or corrupt. But let Bi&s;hop <HI>Bil&s;on</HI> an&s;wer for me. <HI>Primo populus ip&s;e de|ficiente Magi&s;tratu Chri&s;tiano de&s;erere fal&s;os, et improbos pa&s;tores jure di|vino pote&s;t, coercere vero minime. Declinare, et derelinquere eos po&s;&s;unt, cogere, aut pnnire non po&s;&s;unt. Vis &amp; vindicta gladio alligatae, extra priva|torum &s;ortem, ac caetum collocata &s;unt. Unde Paulus,</HI> Rom. 16. <HI>ob&s;ervate eos qui di&s;&s;idia, &amp; &s;candala contra doctrinam quam edocti e&s;tis, faciunt, &amp; declinare ab iis. Oves meae, inquit Dominus no&s;ter, vocem meam audi|unt, &amp; &s;equuntur me. Alienum autem nequaquam &s;equentur, &s;ed fugient ab eo. Idem</HI> Cyprianus <HI>&amp; reliqui Epi&s;copi con&s;ulti re&s;crip&s;erunt Epi&s;t|l.</HI> 1. <HI>ep.</HI> 4. <HI>Soperemini inquit Dominus a taberuaculis hominum i&s;torum duri&s;&s;imorum, &amp; nolite tangere ea, qua ad eos pertinent, ne &s;imul pereat is in peccatis eorum. Propter quod plebs ob&s;equens praeceptis Domini, &amp; De|um meturus, &agrave; peccato praepofit&oacute; &s;eperare &s;e debet, nec &s;e ad Sacrilegi Sa|cerdotis Sacrificia mi&s;are quando ip&s;a (defectu &s;idelis Magi&s;tratus) maxi|me habeat pote&s;tatem, vel eligendi dignos Sacerdotes, vel recu&s;andi indig|nos.</HI></Q> Thus far he in open defiance of his pre&s;ent undertaking. But to proceed in <HI>Sect.</HI> 2. and afterwards, we have an account, notwith|&s;tanding his late di&s;couragement in writing, why he &s;till follows that employment, and in particular, of his engaging in the confutation of
<PB N="8" REF="5"> the Treati&s;e under con&s;ideration, which may be reduced to the&s;e heads.</P>
<P N="1">1. The expectation of h<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="2 letters"> giving account of the Talents, committed to him by h<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">s <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">ord and Ma&s;ter, which being re&s;trained from publick preaching, he thinks he ought to make u&s;e of this way.</P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> That a &s;trict account mu&s;t be given to the Lord for the im|provement of Talents received, is undeniable. The Parable, <HI>Mat.</HI> 25. 14 to 31. ev<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">nceth as much. The con&s;ideration whereof &s;hould quic|ken us to our duty: the mo&s;t exact and diligent performance of it ima|ginable, that we have not at the la&s;t the mo&s;t direful judgment of the wicked and &s;lothful Servant, <HI>ver.</HI> 26, 28, 30. pa&s;t upon us. But every u&s;e of our Talent is not a faithful improvement of it for God: Wi&s;|dom, parts, <HI>&amp;c.</HI> are Talents given by him: many have u&s;ed them a|gain&s;t him; and &s;mitten him (if I may &s;o &s;ay) with his own weapons; nor had they been in a capacity of doing &s;o much again&s;t him&punc; had they not received &s;o much from him. Whether Mr. <HI>T.</HI> hath in his pre&s;ent undertaking been improving his Talent according to the mind of <HI>Chri&s;t,</HI> I humbly beg him in his more retired thoughts to con&s;ider. That none can &s;o improve their Talents without the ble&s;&s;ed &s;upplies of the Spirit of Chri&s;t, this Animadverter will not deny: 'Tis impo&s;&s;ible any duty or &s;ervice &s;hould be accepted of God, without the&s;e. 'Tis one end for which he is &s;ent from the Father and the Son, to in-dwell in the hearts of Believers to enable them hereunto, <HI>Rom.</HI> 8. 26. How little of the Spirit of the Lord in tho&s;e Magi&s;terial and Dictator-like expre&s;|&s;ions, (manife&s;ting too much of a &s;pirit of pride and &s;elf-ful<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">e&s;s, with an horrible contempt of what is oppo&s;it to the mind of this Animadv.) together with tho&s;e reproachful, biting, pa&s;&s;ionate words, that without any ju&s;t cau&s;e given, do ever and anon drop from him, he will upon a review be able to di&s;cern, I am not able to fore&s;ee? We are <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">oo apt to judge partially in our own cau&s;es, and of our own actions; but the day will declare it. Should I mu&s;ter up the many expre&s;&s;ions of this nature, &s;cattered almo&s;t from the one end of this Book to <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">he other, and repre&s;ent them at once, po&s;&s;ibly it might &s;omewhat &s;tartle this A|nimadverter of his being re&s;t<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">ained from publick preaching; I have nothing to &s;ay but only this, That if Mr. <HI>Tombs</HI> &s;uppo&s;eth him&s;elf to be called forth by the Lord to the work of preaching the Go&s;pel, I &s;ee not now (at lea&s;t whil&s;t not under corporal re&s;traint) he can an|&s;wer the obligation is upon him, by &s;uch a call, by a total neglect of that duty, either publickly or privately, notwith&s;tanding the interdicti|on of any. Our retreat in &s;uch ca&s;es to the old Apo&s;tolical Maxime, <HI>Act.</HI> 5. 29. <HI>Whether it be lawful to obey God or man, judge ye?</HI> being &s;ui|table
<PB N="9" REF="5"> and warrantable. Nor is it I believe ju&s;tifiable, to improve Ta|lents given in one work or duty with the neglect of another, to which we are as equally obliged by the reception of them. He adds, as a &s;e|cond Rea&s;on of this undertaking, his meeting with the Book under con|&s;ideration, and another, entituled, <HI>Prelatical Preachers none of Chri&s;t's Teachers,</HI> which manife&s;ting that the &s;eeds of mo&s;t rigid Separation were &s;own, and &s;pread them&s;elves among&s;t many, out of the greatne&s;s of his love, and de&s;ign to do them good, and for the publick peace of the Nation he conceiv'd him&s;elf bound to pluck up &s;uch roots of bit|terne&s;s; and the rather, becau&s;e &s;ome that had known him to be for Believers Bapti&s;m, have been ready to think him for Separation al&s;o. <HI>An&s;w.</HI> That he met with the Book under con&s;ideration I readily yeeld him, being informed that in &s;ome heat of &s;pirit, about two years before the publi&s;hing his <HI>Theodulia,</HI> he threatned the Refutation thereof. But that the <HI>&s;eeds of Separation</HI> are <HI>roots of bitterne&s;s,</HI> is as <HI>warmly &s;aid</HI> as <HI>weak|ly proved,</HI> in his following Treati&s;e. The word (though it &s;ounds ill in the ears of the world) is of a middle &s;ignification, denoting neither that which is evil nor good in it &s;elf (as Mr. <HI>T.</HI> well knows) A twofold Separation we read of in the Scripture. 1. A wicked and unlawful Separation, which is a cau&s;le&s;s departure from the People and Appoint|ments of Chri&s;t, as not able to bear their &s;pirituality, &s;trictne&s;s, purity, and glory, in contempt of Chri&s;t's In&s;titution, and meerly for the &s;a|tisfying their lu&s;ts, <HI>Jude</HI> 19. This is the Separation that is condemned in the Scripture. Do either of the Tracts mentioned, undertake the defence or vindication of it? Are there not Principles laid down, and a&s;&s;erted therein, wholly oppo&s;ite hereunto? 2dly. A warrantable lawful Separation enjoyned by Je&s;us Chri&s;t, which is a peaceable de|parture from a Church (or People) not rightly con&s;tituted according to the mind of Chri&s;t, the pattern exhibited by him, or degenerated therefrom, beyond a po&s;&s;ibility of recovering their fir&s;t &s;tate, purely for the enjoyment of the Ordinances of God in power and purity. This is the Separation (no other) pleaded for in the Papers mentioned. Which <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="2 letters">ch poor worms as we are apt to think there is ground enough in the Scriptures for. 1. 'Tis of old prophe&s;ied of, <HI>Num.</HI> 23. 9. <HI>I&s;a.</HI> 52. 11, 12. &amp; 62. 10. 2dly. Commanded by the Lord, <HI>Prov.</HI> 4. 14. &amp; 9. 6. &amp; 14. 7. <HI>Eph.</HI> 5. 11. 2 <HI>Cor.</HI> 6. 16. Act. 2. 39. <HI>P&s;a.</HI> 45. 10. 2 <HI>Tim.</HI> 3. 5. <HI>Rev.</HI> 18. 4. 3dly. Practi&s;ed by the Saints (not to mention them of old, <HI>Gen.</HI> 4. 26.) <HI>Exod.</HI> 19. 5. <HI>Deut.</HI> 7. 6. &amp; 33. 28. <HI>Numb.</HI> 33. 52. <HI>Exod.</HI> 24. 12, 15. <HI>John</HI> 15. 19. <HI>Rev.</HI> 19. 7, 8, 9. which the Epi&s;tles of the Apo&s;tles to the Churches ju&s;tifie, who writ to them as Saints &s;epa|rated
<PB N="10" REF="6"> from the World, and the Wor&s;hip thereof. What the Animad|verter hath done, in order to the plucking up the &s;eeds of this Separa|tion, is afterwards con&s;idered. He that is &s;ucce&s;sfull in &s;uch an under|taking (o<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter"> de&s;ires to be &s;o), had need do more than <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">ent his pa&s;&s;ion in &s;ome biting &s;atyrical expre&s;&s;ions, again&s;t the men of his conte&s;t, or dictate to them as if Wi&s;dom only re&s;ted with him, and all others were to hang on his lips for Indoctrination: who&s;e <GAP DESC="foreign"> without con|troul were to be &s;ubmitted&punc; But Chri&s;t's School knows no &s;uch <HI>Rabbi</HI> be&s;ides him&s;elf. If a man &s;eriou&s;ly intend to pluck up the roots of this Separation he mu&s;t (I humbly conceive) do the&s;e five things. 1. Ma|nife&s;t that the <HI>terminus a quo,</HI> or that from which any &s;eparate, i<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter"> of the In&s;titution of Chri&s;t: becau&s;e to &s;eparate from that which is not &s;o, is no-where (that I know of) in the Scripture condemned as &s;infull, but enjoyned us as our duty. To pur&s;ue us with outcryes, that we are <HI>Separati&s;ts</HI> and <HI>Schi&s;maticks,</HI> becau&s;e we have &s;eparated from the Church of <HI>England,</HI> without any tender of proof that it was ever rightly con|&s;tituted according to the mind of Chri&s;t, is but (in my poor judgment) to do as he,
<Q><L>&mdash;Caput altum in praelia tollit,</L>
<L>O&s;tendit que humeros latos, alternaque jactat,</L>
<L>Brachia, protendens &amp; verberat ict. bus auras,</L></Q> but beat the Air. 2dly, That the Church (on People &s;eparated from, if ever of the In&s;titution of Chri&s;t, are not &s;o degenerated and apo&s;ta|tized from what it was at fir&s;t, that 'tis now qui<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="2 letters"> another th<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">ng, retain|ing little, be&s;ides the name and &s;hadow, o<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter"> a <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">hurch; &s;o dreadfully corrupted and fallen, that the ends of Go&s;pel-communion cannot be attained, nor enjoyed in it; nor is it in <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">n utter impo&s;&s;ibil<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">ty of reco|vering to its pri&s;tine &s;tate of Go&s;pel-order and purity. A departure from &s;uch a collap&s;ed Church, being abundantly warranted in Scrip|ture, enjoyned to Saints as their duty. The Church of <HI>Rome</HI> was once a pure Church, of the In&s;titution of Chri&s;t; whil&s;t it abode &s;o, it was (ordinarily) the duty of its Members to continue in the communion thereof; but when once it apo&s;tatized, and &s;o irrecoverably fell, as that there remained no probability or po&s;&s;ibility of its recovery and healing, it became the duty of the Saints concerned in its Communi|on, to &s;eparate from her, according to <HI>Rev.</HI> 18. 4. 3dly, That tho&s;e again&s;t whom this Charge is laid, be proved once regularly to belong to that Church, (which, what&s;oever is pretended by this Animadverter, none can do but by their voluntary con&s;ent) from which they are &s;up|po&s;ed to &s;eparate. For &s;ure it will not be pleaded, that a man is <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 word"> a
<PB N="11" REF="6"> Separati&s;t from that Church, true or fal&s;e, to which he had no union or relation, as a vi&s;ible Member thereof. For any one to have joyn'd to the Church of <HI>Sardis,</HI> could not (as I conceive) be adjudged &s;epara|tion from the Church of <HI>Ephe&s;us,</HI> &s;uppo&s;ing he never was by his own free con&s;ent a member of the <HI>Ephe&s;ins.</HI> Church. Now this is the ca&s;e of mo&s;t of the Members of the <HI>Congregated Churches;</HI> they were never by their own voluntary con&s;ent, Members of the Church of <HI>England,</HI> and therefore cannot ju&s;tly be charged with &s;inful &s;eparation from it. 4thly. That the means or way of Separation, Sece&s;&s;ion, or departure be unwarrantable. I conceive the Animadverter is of that opinion, that it is lawful, under &s;ome circum&s;tances, to depart from the vi&s;ible Com|munion of a true Church of Chri&s;t, without being guilty of &s;uch rigid Separation. If he judge the Church of <HI>England</HI> to be a true Church; and the Pari&s;h-Churches thereof as &s;uch; it's po&s;&s;ible to leave the out|ward Communion of the one, and the other, without being guilty of &s;inful Separation: otherwi&s;e Mr. <HI>T.</HI> will make more Separati&s;ts than he is aware of; every one removing out of one Pari&s;h to dwell in ano|ther, and joyning with the &s;ame numerical Ordinances there; that goes out of the Nation and joyns with the Church, &s;uppo&s;e in <HI>France</HI> or <HI>Bo|hemia</HI> being &s;o. 5thly, He had need al&s;o prove that their Separation be not for this end, to enjoy the Ordinances of God in power and pu|rity, but meerly for the &s;atisfying their lu&s;ts; no other Separation be|ing condemned in the Scripture. Till this be done, the di&s;charging of many vollies of hard and lofty expre&s;&s;ions, of gathering Churches out of Churches, being Schi&s;maticks, Separati&s;ts, <HI>&amp;c.</HI> will be very in&s;ig|nificant to the Judicious: however they may affright the the weak from clo&s;ing with that way (though of God) which is with much obloquy de|claimed again&s;t by per&s;ons of Mr. <HI>T.</HI> his learning and &s;obriety. But he hath not yet done, he thinks him&s;elf obliged to pluck up the&s;e roots of bitterne&s;s, out of his great re&s;pect to the publick peace. <HI>An unhand|&s;ome in&s;inuation,</HI> to &s;ay no more; &s;ecretly accu&s;ing tho&s;e, that are for the principles in the afore&s;aid Tracts (which he cannot but know many truly fearing God in the Nation are) as the di&s;turbers of the Peace of the Nation, thereby rendring them odious to the Rulers thereof; and him&s;elf lovely,</P>
<Q>Gallinae Filius albae.</Q>
<P>But Sir, what are the Seeds &s;own in tho&s;e Treati&s;es that do endanger the di&s;turbance of the peace of the Nations? If he conceive that an Uniformity of Wor&s;hip is nece&s;&s;ary for the pre&s;ervation of the Na|tions peace; and &s;omewhat oppo&s;it to this Uniformity, being a&s;&s;erted
<PB N="12" REF="7"> in them, they are de&s;tructive thereof, he knows he hath more Antago|ni&s;ts than one in that A&s;&s;ertion: and who they are that have a&s;&s;erted, and proved, that the ground of the late Confu&s;ions, and Garments rolled in Blood, was not di&s;crepamy in Wor&s;hip, but the rigid pre&s;|&s;ing of Conformity. Nor is he a &s;tranger to this, That the peace of the Nations abroad is pre&s;erved, where Uniformity is not pre&s;&s;ed, and hath been at home in the dayes of the greate&s;t Toleration, and there|fore no rea&s;on but it may be here again. If he mean that the &s;pirits of his Antagoni&s;ts, and &s;uch like, are again&s;t the Peace of the Nation, he deals injuriou&s;ly, none being more for Peace upon the mo&s;t righ|teous and la&s;ting foundations, than they; which will be (and not till then) whatever the contrivements and attempts of men are, when the Intere&s;t of Nations is laid in a &s;ub&s;erviency to the true Intere&s;t and Kingdom of Chri&s;t, which we are praying for, that the time <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">ay come in which tho&s;e Prophecies &s;hall have their full accompli&s;hment, <HI>I&s;a.</HI> 2. 4. <HI>Mic.</HI> 4. 3, 4. In the mean while we are not a little comforted, that <HI>thus per&s;ecuted they the Prophets; Elijah</HI> was the <HI>troubler of I&s;rael,</HI> &s;o was <HI>Jeremy:</HI> Chri&s;t, he was <HI>an enemy to Cae&s;ar,</HI> likely enough to a&s;&s;ume the Government; and he is no friend to Cae&s;ar that goes about to pre|&s;erve his life: the Apo&s;tles, who were men <HI>that turned the world up &s;ide down.</HI> This &s;miting his fellow-&s;ervants, will one day be no joy of heart to him to think of.</P>
<P>He tells us, thirdly, <HI>He was hereunto provoked by the direful imputa|tion of &s;erving the Image of the Bea&s;t, which the Title chargeth upon the hearing the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> But, 1. why &s;hould this provoke him, when he tells us <HI>pag.</HI> 7. that the Book, &s;o far as he can learn, hath been di&s;per&s;ed (chiefly if not only) among&s;t per&s;ons, who were not able to examine what is &s;aid by Fathers, Councils, Schoolmen, who, 'tis more than probable, thought that the Engli&s;h Title was all that was &s;ignified by the Greek one, till Mr. <HI>T.</HI> explained it to them. 2dly, What I mean by the Image of the Bea&s;t, I intimate, p. 53. of <HI>S. T.</HI> where are the&s;e words, <HI>They make an Image to the Beast,</HI> Rev. 13. 14, 15. i. e. <HI>erect an Eccle&s;ia|&s;tical &s;tate of Government, in a proportionablene&s;s to, and re&s;emblance of the Civil State.</HI> This Eccle&s;ia&s;tical &s;tate of Government, I a&s;&s;ert to be the Image of the Bea&s;t; by wor&s;hipping it, I mean no more, than &s;ubject|ing, bowing down to, or owning of this Eccle&s;ia&s;tical-State, which is no &s;uch direful expre&s;&s;ion, amounting only to thus much, <HI>A Chri&s;tian Te&s;timony again&s;t &s;uch as own, &s;ubject to, are partakers with, the Eccle&s;ia|&s;tical State, and Government of the Church of England.</HI> That there are
<PB N="13" REF="7"> &s;ome that do &s;o, Mr. <HI>T.</HI> will not deny; nor can he, that the Govern|ment of the Church is laid in a proportionablene&s;s to, and re&s;emblance of the Civil-State: which I apprehending to be an evil, 'tis much to me a man of Mr. <HI>T.</HI> his &s;obriety &s;hould be offended at my bearing a Chri&s;tian Te&s;timony again&s;t it, or interpret &s;o &s;ober a Title to be a <HI>dire|full imputation, &amp;c.</HI> I think not what he pleads for in the Treati&s;e un|der con&s;ideration, to be <HI>Theodulia,</HI> or the Wor&s;hip of God, but am not provoked he &s;o &s;tyles his Book, becau&s;e he thinks it is &s;o; yet have I as ju&s;t cau&s;e to be offended thereat, as he hath by the Title of the <HI>S. T.</HI> given him to be provoked.</P>
<P>Another &s;tone of Offence in Mr. <HI>T.</HI> his way is, <HI>That there are direful Predictions in the Epistle again&s;t hearing the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters of</HI> England, <HI>as if likely to meet with the &s;ame Judgments in the day of Gods wrath with the Antichri&s;tian Bea&s;t, and &s;eeming commi&s;eration of &s;uch as joyn in Com|munion with the publick Church-A&s;&s;emblies.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> And I am &s;orry the&s;e things are provoking to him: Can he not hear &s;in condemned, and the warning of God again&s;t &s;inners given forth in Scriptural expre&s;&s;ions from the Prophecies thereof, but his &s;pi|rit mu&s;t ri&s;e again&s;t them? He will one day know that another frame of &s;pirit had better become him, and would have conduced more to his true peace, comfort and intere&s;t, than that which was upon him under the reading tho&s;e Scriptural Predictions; for &s;uch are tho&s;e mentioned in the Epi&s;tle, though, as Mr. <HI>T.</HI> &s;peaks, one would rather think them to be &s;ome Enthu&s;ia&s;tical dreams, than the Warnings of the Lord in the Scriptures, &s;ounded forth by an unworthy du&s;t. Commi&s;eration he al&s;o di&s;cerns in tho&s;e lines, but under&s;tanding the hearts of the Children of men, he can roundly pronounce of it, <HI>Audacter &s;atis,</HI> that I &s;ay not bla&s;pheme, that it is but <HI>&s;eeming commi&s;eration;</HI> at the be&s;t this is an <HI>evil &s;urmi&s;e,</HI> a <HI>fruit of the fle&s;h, to be bemoaned and mourned over.</HI> I can a&s;&s;ure Mr. <HI>T.</HI> that they are not <HI>&s;eeming,</HI> but <HI>real Commi&s;erations;</HI> and that my &s;oul is &s;orely afflicted within me becau&s;e of the Wrath of the Lord that is like to be poured forth, for the tran&s;gre&s;&s;ion and &s;inful complyance with the corrupt and &s;uper&s;titious Wor&s;hip of the Nation, (after God hath from Heaven witne&s;&s;ed again&s;t it, and &s;o many of the precious Children of God have &s;ealed a Te&s;timony with their deare&s;t Blood again&s;t it) of the profe&s;&s;ing People of God in <HI>England</HI> upon them; and I cannot but once more cry aloud to them, and to this Animadver|ter, to ha&s;ten their e&s;cape from the Tents of the&s;e fal&s;e Shepherds and A&s;&s;emblies, le&s;t being complicated and twi&s;ted together with them, they &s;hare of the judgement is like to be poured forth upon them.
<PB N="14" REF="8"> God is a jealous God, and will in his jealou&s;ie plead with tho&s;e, that teach for Doctrines the Commandments of men, and wor&s;hi<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter"> according to their Precepts: And what I &s;aid then, I &s;ay again now, who knows (not intimating, as Mr. <HI>T.</HI> fal&s;ly &s;ugge&s;ts, that it would be, but my own darkne&s;s as touching the extent of the <HI>long-&s;uffering of the Lord</HI> to &s;uch as continue di&s;obedient to his voice) but this may be the la&s;t Warning you may have from God. For his Throne is like the fiery flame, and his Wheels as burning fire, a fiery &s;tream i&s;&s;ues, and comes for<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">h from be|fore him, <HI>Dan.</HI> 7. 9, 10. He &s;eems to be ri&s;en up again&s;t an hypo<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">riti|cal people, and a &s;peedy riddance will he make in the earth. However the&s;e things may &s;eem to Mr. <HI>T.</HI> to be <HI>brutum fulmen,</HI> like a great thun|derclap without any thunder-bolt in it, (as he &s;peaks) which makes my very &s;oul pity him, e&s;pecially they being (as I &s;aid) the Prophecies of the Lord levell'd again&s;t the very per&s;ons again&s;t whom I level them. My prayers to God for him &s;hall be, that they may prove words of a|wakening and humbling, and not of de&s;truction and further <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">ddition of mi&s;ery in the day of the Lord, which without faith and repentance come between, if for nothing but for that &s;light contemptuous frame of &s;pirit upon him in the reading of them they are too like to be. He adds, that I judge &s;uch Complyance a damnable &s;in. If he mean a &s;in that in its own nature de&s;erves damnation, I do &s;o indeed, nor can <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter"> do other|wi&s;e, not having imbraced that novel di&s;tinction of the <HI>Papi&s;ts</HI> between <HI>damnable</HI> (or deadly) and <HI>venial</HI> &s;ins: as if the merit (or wages) of all &s;in were not death, judging it (as I do) to be a &s;in. But if by dam|nable he mean <HI>irremi&s;&s;ible,</HI> like that of Bla&s;phemy again&s;t the Holy Gho&s;t, which he intimates as if I judged and &s;ugge&s;ted the &s;in of Com|plyance in &s;ome to be, I mu&s;t crave leave to tell him, That I dete&s;t and abhor the lea&s;t thought of any &s;uch thing. 'Tis true, in the event it may be irremi&s;&s;ible, like the &s;in again&s;t the Holy Gho&s;t, and &s;o may the lea&s;t vain word; but that I judge it is &s;o in its own nature, is an A&s;&s;ertion of that nature that nothing is more fal&s;e and unt<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">ue. And I cannot but wonder with what forehead this Animadverter could im|pute it to me. Nor can I gue&s;s at his de&s;ign in &s;o doing, not the occa|&s;ion admini&s;tred by me. I have read the Epi&s;tle over, and find not the lea&s;t prints or marks of &s;uch an A&s;&s;ertion. If any words may be wre&s;t|ed to &s;uch an intendment, I do here &s;olemnly di&s;claim and <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">i&s;avow it, profe&s;&s;ing from my very heart that I believe quite otherwi&s;e. Our God is a God ready to pardon, to multiply pardons: though you have turn'd a&s;ide from him, he will heal back&s;lidings, and love freely; therefore poor hearts be not deterr'd from looking to him. But he goes
<PB N="15" REF="8"> on, which mu&s;t needs produce the&s;e wofull effects. 1. An irr<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">con|cileable enmity betwixt the Sep<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="3 letters">ti&s;ts, and &s;uch as hold communion with the pre&s;ent Churches and their Pa&s;tors. <HI>An&s;w.</HI> But what will produce this effect? will judging their &s;in to be irremi&s;&s;ible? This is a Calumny. I know none that doth &s;o. Will the pleading for &s;epara|tion from that which God calls aloud to &s;eparate from? I hope better. And wi&s;h this Animadverter takes not a mea&s;ure of others &s;pirits by his own. God forbid that any &s;hould be returning enmity for love. The Lord knows out of greatned bowels of compa&s;&s;ion I write what I write; and after all if I meet with &s;uch a returnal as that intimated, I hope never to live (through the rich grace of the Lord) to &s;ee that day in which I &s;hould be repaying any that may be po&s;&s;e&s;&s;ed with enmity again&s;t me in their own kind, or cea&s;e to love, pity, and pray for them. Can we not differ in opinion, and tell each other in plainne&s;s, of the guilt and evil we di&s;cern on each other, but this direful effect of irre|concilable enmity mu&s;t be produced? I hope not enmity, much le&s;s ir|reconcilable enmity. And am per&s;waded that this Animadv. cannot ju&s;tly charge any of the <HI>Separati&s;ts</HI> (as he in &s;corn calls them) with any &s;uch thing. And believe that God will help poor du&s;ts to &s;uch a mea&s;ure of a Go&s;pel-&s;pirit, that there &s;hall not be the lea&s;t of the frame menti|oned, budding, or putting forth upon them. And becau&s;e I conceive it may be needful, I &s;hall mind Mr. <HI>Tombs</HI> of what he hath &s;ometimes read in the Preface to the Harmony of Confe&s;&s;ions, publi&s;hed in the name of the <HI>French</HI> and <HI>Belgick</HI> Reformed Churches, <HI>Praeclare quodam loco dicit Ambro&s;ius, inter &s;ervos Chri&s;ti contentio non debet e&s;&s;e, &s;ed colla<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">io; qnum enim &s;it ea mentis humanae hebetudo, in rebus prae&s;ertim divinis, ut res alioqui maxime claras, &s;aepe perspicere non po&s;&s;imus, quin ex mutua</HI> <GAP DESC="foreign">, <HI>&amp; amic&acirc; fratern&acirc;que di&s;ceptatione plurimum lucis a&s;&s;equamur negari nullo modo pote&s;t&mdash;Contendere, vero, rixari &amp; ferociter ac proterve digladi|ari tantum abe&s;t, ut deceat &agrave; Deo in&s;titutos homines, ut ne mode&s;tis, aut hu|manis quidem conveniat&mdash;Equidem Sancta Sanct&egrave; ac Religio&s;e &s;unt tra|ctanda in timore Divini Numinis, et Charitate proximi,</HI> which I wi&s;h him to make his Copy when he next writes Controver&s;ies. 2dly. The ruine of many thou&s;ands in their Liberties, E&s;tates, Lives, if the Law &s;hould not be mitigated, is the next doleful effect mentioned&punc; <HI>An&s;w.</HI> That the pre&s;ervation of the&s;e, &s;o far as hone&s;tly we may, is a moral duty I grant. The&s;e effects are not the i&s;&s;ue of imbracing the opini|ons and principles pleaded for in that Treati&s;e, but of tho&s;e grievous and unrighteous Decrees (by which the Child of this mans tuition, hath ever, even from its &s;wadling-clou<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">s; I mean the Common-Prayer-Book
<PB N="16" REF="9"> Wor&s;hip, been fo&s;tred and &s;u&s;tained. The effects mentioned are no other than hath been the u&s;ual attendment of imbracing the Go&s;pel: which our Lord tells us we mu&s;t expect, if we will be his Di&s;ciples. Nor are they, as this Animadverter calls them, woful effects, but ble&s;|&s;ed and glorious, being brought upon us for Chri&s;t's, for the Go&s;pels|&s;ake; in which he would have us to rejoyce with leaping joy, <HI>Mat.</HI> 5. 10, 11, 12. And many of the Children of the Lord have taken them joyfully, <HI>Heb.</HI> 10. 34. Nor is this any better rea&s;on for the Animad|verter's advance again&s;t the Treati&s;e under con&s;ideration, than was that of <HI>Lycurgus,</HI> who would have the Vines de&s;troyed becau&s;e the fruit of them made men drunk, (nor yet indeed is it &s;o good) <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">or any other than what he might frequently have had to engage him to write again&s;t the reception of the Go&s;pel; and at this day in many places again&s;t the Doctrine of the Reformed <HI>Prote&s;tants;</HI> The imbracing that Doctrine producing &s;uch a woful effect (if it mu&s;t be &s;o called) An Apology for <HI>Chri&s;tians</HI> that could not in con&s;cience &s;ubmit to the Cere<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">onies of the Church of <HI>England,</HI> to the Rulers thereof (as <HI>Ju&s;tin Martyr</HI> and others in their day) for the repealing or mitigating the g<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">ievous Decrees e&s;ta|bli&s;hed, had been a more proper and Chri&s;tian imployment, than by &s;uch invectives as are frequently, and fal&s;e charges given forth in the&s;e Animadver&s;ions, for the further incen&s;ing per&s;ons in authority again&s;t them. As touching what is added from Dr. <HI>Burge&s;s,</HI> I a&s;&s;ent to it, but add, 'tis mo&s;t impertinently and &s;candalou&s;ly applyed to the men of his pre&s;ent conte&s;t. God forbid we &s;hould call light darkne&s;s, or darkne&s;s light; Chri&s;t Antichri&s;t, or Antichri&s;t Chri&s;t: We de&s;ire the pulling down of nothing but what hath the lineaments of Antichri&s;t (as lively deciphered by the Spirit) upon it. And that God will pull down whe|ther we &s;peak one word again&s;t it or not. The la&s;t account he gives us of his pre&s;ent undertaking, is &s;econd to none in his Epi&s;tolary Preface, <HI>viz.</HI> 1. The relation he hath met with of the endle&s;s brawls, prodigi|ous errours, that have been the i&s;&s;ue of Separation in former and latter times. <HI>An&s;w.</HI> And he knows, 1. That the &s;ame might have been ob|jected again&s;t the preaching of the Go&s;pel at the very fir&s;<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">; (As it was by the <HI>Heathens</HI> (who boa&s;ted that no &s;uch things were the off-&s;pring of their way) as witne&s;s <HI>Clemens Alexandrinus, Stromat. l.</HI> 7. and <HI>Aug. L. de Ovibus,</HI> chap. 15. what brawls and contentions? what prodigious errours, denying the Re&s;urrection, were there among&s;t the members of the Church of <HI>Corinth;</HI> even when they met together for the &s;olemni|zation of the &s;ame Ordinances, the carrying on the &s;ame Wor&s;hip in <HI>Paul</HI>'s time, and afterwards, as appears from the Epi&s;tle of <HI>Clemens</HI> (or
<PB N="17" REF="9"> the Church of <HI>Rome)</HI> to them. 2dly. That the &s;ame things were ob|jected again&s;t <HI>Luther,</HI> and the great work of Reformation he was in the hand of the Lord carrying-on at that day; who was &s;o far from being &s;tartled hereat, that he profe&s;&s;eth, <HI>Ni&s;i tumultus hos vidi&s;&s;em, Evange|lium e&s;&s;e in mundo non crederem,</HI> he &s;hould not have believed the Go|&s;pel had been preached in the world, if he had not &s;een the&s;e brawls and tumults. Nor, 3dly, is Mr. <HI>T.</HI> a &s;tranger to what of late hath been charged upon <HI>Prote&s;tants,</HI> with a de&s;ign to per&s;wade to a returnal to the Church of <HI>Rome,</HI> upon the account of the &s;chi&s;ms, divi&s;ions, brawls that have en&s;ued &s;eparation from thence; And with as good rea&s;on as this Animadverter chargeth the&s;e upon the <HI>Separati&s;ts,</HI> out of a de&s;ign to allure to Conformity. Sir, the&s;e things are to be charged upon the corruptions of mens hearts, the malice and wrath of Satan again&s;t Truth, which the more it di&s;playes its Banner, and breaks forth as the Sun out of the dark and thick clouds of Ignorance and Antichri&s;tian confu&s;ion, &s;hining gloriou&s;ly in its native brightne&s;s, the more mad is he again&s;t it, and indu&s;trious to rai&s;e prejudices in the minds of men again&s;t its reception. In which work I am &s;orry to find this Animad|verter a coadjutor. Though, ble&s;&s;ed be the Lord, as to all the Con|gregations of the <HI>Separati&s;ts</HI> in <HI>England,</HI> I know not one of whome it may not be &s;aid, that the things here &s;poken by Mr. <HI>T.</HI> are fal&s;e, a meer calumny; and yet they are not a few I am acquainted with. The truth is, the&s;e things may more truly be charged upon the members of the Church of <HI>England,</HI> than on the <HI>Separati&s;ts</HI> (as he calls them.) As for any brawls that may be among&s;t any of them, 'tis hoped touching them Mr. <HI>T.</HI> will be found a fal&s;e Prophet, and that they will not prove end|le&s;s. God can heal the Waters, and through wonderful Grace hath given down much of a &s;pirit of love and mutual forbearance among&s;t the <HI>Nonconforming Separatists,</HI> though in &s;ome &s;mall matters of diffe|rent apprehen&s;ions. And I hope that &s;uch carriage, as this Adimadver|ter u&s;eth towards them, will engage us to pre&s;s more than ever after it, that this &s;tone of offence may be rolled out of the way, and the mouth of ab&s;urd and unrea&s;onable men may be muzled, that they may have nothing ju&s;tly to object again&s;t us, while they behold our Love, as the Di&s;ciples of Chri&s;t, to one another, and to all the Saints, and our god|ly conver&s;ation accompanied with fear. As for the promi&s;cuous pro|phe&s;ying mentioned, though we dare not quench the Spirit in any Be|liever, nor de&s;pi&s;e its operation and breathings, yet I know not any that are in the Animadverter's &s;en&s;e for it: Gifts and abilities for that work with the con&s;ent and approbation of the Church (which is before
<PB N="18" REF="10"> &s;atisfied in their per&s;onal holine&s;s, and &s;oundne&s;s in the Faith, is <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">equired in tho&s;e to whom a con&s;tant libe<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">ty of prop<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">e&s;ying is granted. As for the vain fancies and opinions de&s;tructive of true Religion, I mu&s;t crave leave to profe&s;s I know not any &s;uch vented among&s;t the Congregations of mine acquain<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">ance: And if they were, they could not rationally be charged upon the <HI>Congregational way,</HI> (more than that horrible Ignorance, Athei&s;m, tho&s;e wretched Oaths, Bla&s;phe|mies, Adulteries, horrid Abominations (not to be named among&s;t the Saints) daily, hourly committed by the members of the Church of <HI>England,</HI> are to be charged upon it) or any principles owned by &s;uch as walk therein, which are, as they have manife&s;ted to the world, directly and <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">iametrically oppo&s;it thereunto. That the practices of the <HI>Separati&s;ts</HI> have cau&s;ed a di&s;turbance of Eccle&s;ia&s;tical and Civil peace in tho&s;e places where they have had any con&s;iderable duration, is another crimination. And it brings to my mind that pa&s;&s;age, <HI>Acts</HI> 17. 6. <HI>The&s;e that have turned the world up&s;ide down, are come hither al&s;o.</HI> I &s;ha<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">l crave leave to add, that there is a wicked fal&s;e peace, a very conjuration and con&s;piracy again&s;t Chri&s;t and Truth; where the Go&s;pel comes in power, it breaks and di&s;&s;olves this peace There is an Eccle&s;ia&s;tical peace that is the re&s;ult of &s;uch a confede|racy, and Mr. <HI>T.</HI> knows who pleads this on the behalf of the mo&s;t Idolatrous Church, (&s;o call'd) in the world. And am &s;orry to find him writing after &s;o &s;orry a copy, on the behalf of one of her daughters. There was an Eccle&s;ia&s;tical peace among&s;t the <HI>Heathens</HI> when the Go&s;pel was fir&s;t promulgared, as it was received in power: this peace was broken and di&s;&s;ipated, without any ju&s;t reflection o<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter"> di&s;paragement to the Go&s;pel, or the way thereof; being rather its glory, manife&s;t|ly di&s;covering it &s;elf hereby to be the power of God. When the Animadverter proves that any Eccle&s;ia&s;tical peace of the appointment of Chri&s;t is broken, and di&s;turbed by the per&s;ons he inveighs again&s;t, we &s;hall conceive our &s;elves con|cerned; till then the&s;e words are but &s;car-crows, vain and t<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">ivial. As touching the di&s;tu<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">bance of the Civil peace, we have already &s;poken &s;ome what, we &s;hall only add, That it was not <HI>Elijah,</HI> but the whoredoms of <HI>Jezebel,</HI> that was the troubler of <HI>I&s;rael,</HI> though he (good man) mu&s;t <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">ear the blame of all. And Mr. <HI>T.</HI> knows, that if any trouble or evil had befallen the Empire, the voice was, <HI>Chri|&s;tianos ad Leones,</HI> they are pre&s;ently charged and dealt with as the only occa&s;ions and cau&s;ers of it. Nor can he be ignorant, that not the <HI>Separati&s;ts</HI> (but &s;ome o|thers) have been the di&s;turbers of the Nations peace. I &s;uppo&s;e a &s;o that he is no &s;tranger to a Treati&s;e written by Mr. <HI>Pryn,</HI> di&s;playing the Trea&s;ons committed again&s;t the peace of Kings and Kingdoms by the Prelatical party, and I &s;hould be &s;orry if he can produce one parallel in&s;tance among the Congregational Churches. The&s;e are the rea&s;ons the Animadverter is plea&s;ed to give of his pre&s;ent under|taking, which I thought it my duty to examine. I &s;hall detain thee, <HI>Chri&s;tian Reader,</HI> no longer in this Epi&s;tolary Preface, but de&s;ire from my very &s;oul, that thou would&s;t impartially wei<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">h what is offered on each &s;ide in this Controver&s;ie, and beg of God for his good Spirit to lead thee and guide thee, that thou maye&s;t judge righteous judgment, and walk in the good old paths, that thou maye&s;t find <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">e&s;t to thy &s;oul. And if we differ in opinion (as to the whole, or part, of any thing herein controverted) let us keep up Love, and a Spirit of Chri&s;tianity; be labouring to reduce each other into the way of Truth. Which is the earne&s;t re|que&s;t of him, who is, in truth,</P>
<CLOSER><SIGNED>Thy &s;ouls friend, and &s;ervant, for Chri&s;t's &s;ake; C. A.</SIGNED></CLOSER>
</DIV1>
</FRONT>
<BODY>
<DIV1 TYPE="text">
<PB N="19" REF="10">
<HEAD><HI>JERUBBAAL:</HI> OR, <HI>A Review of the</HI> Sober Te&s;timony: <HI>The Vindi|cation of the Preface thereof, from the Exceptions of Mr.</HI> Tombs.</HEAD>
<DIV2 N="1" TYPE="chapter">
<HEAD>CHAP. 1.</HEAD>
<DIV3 N="1" TYPE="section">
<HEAD>Sect. 1:</HEAD>
<ARGUMENT>
<P><HI>A twofold Wor&s;hip of God. Natural Wor&s;hip what it is. What the Law of Nature teacheth with respect to Wor&s;hip. That God is to be wor&s;hipped. Of Athei&s;m. The &s;ayings of</HI> Cicero <HI>and</HI> Seneca <HI>touching the Opinions of the Nations with respect to a Deity. That God is to be wor&s;hipped in a Community: that he is to be wor&s;hipped according to his own will. The pretences of</HI> Zaleucus, Lycurgus, Minos, Numa, <HI>the mo&s;t famous Lawgivers amongst the Gentiles: and their impo&s;ition of Laws. The famous &s;aying of</HI> Socrates <HI>in</HI> Plato <HI>touching the</HI> <GAP DESC="foreign">, <HI>or manner of Wor&s;hip pre&s;cribed by the Godds. That the Voice of God is to be hearken|ed unto, when, and in what manner he &s;hall be plea&s;ed to &s;peak. The Gen|tiles owned but one chief Deity. The cu&s;tom of the Nations in their</HI> <GAP DESC="foreign">, <HI>Diabolical Oracles leading them thereunto; which they &s;uppo&s;ing to be the voice of the Godds, obeyed. In&s;tituted or Ceremonial Wor&s;hip wherein it con&s;i&s;ts. Hearing the Word, &s;uch a Wor&s;hip. Mr.</HI> T. <HI>declines the matter in controver&s;ie. Men do not wor&s;hip God in Hearing when they hear.</HI> 1 The&s;&s;. 2. 13. <HI>opened, and explained.</HI></P>
</ARGUMENT>
<P>HAving already an&s;wered what Mr. <HI>T.</HI> was plea&s;ed to premi&s;e in his Epi&s;tolary Preface to the Reader, &s;o far as we are (or can be &s;uppo&s;ed to be) concerned, we are now ready to attend his further motion toward the di&s;cu&s;&s;ion (as he phra|&s;eth it) of the Book it &s;elf; which is (as he &s;aith) di&s;tingui&s;hed into a Preface and ten Chapters. How &s;uitable the method is, or comprehen|&s;ive in his judgment, I am little concerned: it &s;eem'd to me to an|&s;wer my aim and intendment, which was &s;olely the clearing Truth, and &s;atisfying the Scruples of tender Con&s;ciences in the matters we were enquiring after.</P>
<PB N="20" REF="11">
<P> The fir&s;t thing Mr. <HI>T.</HI> is plea&s;ed to take notice of, is an A&s;&s;ertion of mine in the Preface to the en&s;uing Di&s;cour&s;e; wherein I affirm that the matter we were to treat of, is one part of the in&s;tituted Wor&s;hip of Chri&s;t under the Go&s;pel: from whence he takes occa&s;ion in his fir&s;t Section to run forth into a di&s;cour&s;e touching the derivation of the word <HI>Wor&s;hip,</HI> and very learnedly tells us, that it is a contract of the word <HI>Worthy-&s;hip,</HI> and notes &s;ingular re&s;pect&mdash;by rea&s;on of &s;ome worth in the thing wor&s;hipped, conceived in the heart, and expre&s;&s;ed by &s;ome &s;ign, which he gathers from the u&s;e of the word <HI>Wor&s;hipful,</HI> and <HI>your Wor&s;hip,</HI> given to Superiours,&mdash;and gives us &s;everal di&s;tinctions about Wor|&s;hip, which as they are trite and ob&s;olete, &s;o what the intendment of the Animadverter &s;hould be in producing them, excep<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter"> to &s;hew his reading, or amu&s;e the Reader with a multiplicity of words and di&s;tin|ctions, and thereby render him the more unfit to examine what is of|fered in the Controver&s;ie to con&s;ideration, I cannot divine. As the quibling upon every particular word in a Di&s;pute, is much like that which the Apo&s;tle condemns, 1 <HI>Tim.</HI> 6. 4. 2 <HI>Tim.</HI> 2. 14. &s;o I know not of what u&s;e it can be to the Reader, nor that it &s;erves to any thing, &s;ave to render the Controver&s;ie more arduous and difficult, when the meaning of each other is obvious to any con&s;iderate under&s;tanding without it. There is (as I know of) no more than a twofold Wor&s;hip of God; 1. That which is natural, original, or moral: which I call natural, becau&s;e in the principle of it it was concreated with man; and moral, becau&s;e it is invariable and alway the &s;ame; and is com|prehen&s;ive of our &s;aith, affiance and tru&s;t in God, our &s;ubjection to him, as the God, &s;overeign Lord and King, and Lawgiver to all. That Wor&s;hip which the Law of Nature, or the Law written and engraven upon the hearts of the children of men, teacheth, is that I call the na|tural Wor&s;hip of God. Four things this Law teacheth with re&s;pect to Wor&s;hip. Fir&s;t, that God is to be wor&s;hipped. Whether there were ever any &s;o guilty of Athei&s;m as to deny a Deity, is not much to our pre&s;ent purpo&s;e to enquire. <HI>Cicero</HI> &s;aith, <HI>Nullam unquam fui&s;&s;e Gentem, &amp;c.</HI> That there was never any Nation &s;o barbarous, which knew not that there was a God. And to the &s;ame purpo&s;e <HI>Seneca, Epi&s;t.</HI> 3. <HI>Verita|tis Argumentum e&s;t, omnibus aliquid videri tanquam Deos e&s;&s;e, quod omni|bus de Diis opinio in &s;ita &s;it, neque ulla gens u&s;quam e&s;t adeo extra Leges, more&s;que po&s;ita, ut non aliquos Deos credat.</HI> Nor is there any thing, <HI>P&s;al.</HI> 14. 1. oppo&s;it thereunto, which the Chaldee Paraphra&s;t renders, <HI>No power or dominion of God in the Earth.</HI> But this (as was &s;aid) is not of our pre&s;ent di&s;qui&s;ition. Upon the acknowledgment of a Deity, the
<PB N="21" REF="11" MS="y"> principles of Nature dictate that he is to be wor&s;hipped. 2dly, That as God is to be wor&s;hipped, &s;o is he (not only &s;everally, each one by him&s;elf, but) by per&s;ons in particular bodies and &s;ocieties to be wor|&s;hipped and &s;erved, is another dictate of Nature. The erection of Temples for Wor&s;hip, with the forms of publick Service, and Prie&s;ts for the managery thereof, to be found among&s;t the mo&s;t ignorant and dark corners of the World, both before and &s;ince the Go&s;pel-di&s;pen|&s;ation, &s;ufficiently evince the truth of the &s;ugge&s;tion. Yea,</P>
<P>3dly. That God is to be wor&s;hipped according to that Revelation <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="2 letters"> Him&s;elf he is plea&s;ed to exhibit to the children of men, not accord|ing to their wills one or other of them. Hence when any had a de&s;ign of impo&s;ing Laws upon others of their own devi&s;ing, they pre&s;ented them unto them, not as their own inventions; upon which foot of ac|count they knew they would meet with little re&s;pect from per&s;ons at|tending the dictates of Nature, but as received from the Godds. Thus did <HI>Zaleucus, Lycurgus, Minos, Numa,</HI> the mo&s;t famous Lawgivers a|mong&s;t the Gentiles. Famous is the &s;aying of <HI>Socrates</HI> in <HI>Plato</HI> to this purpo&s;e, <HI>That every God will be wor&s;hipped,</HI> <GAP DESC="foreign">, <HI>in that way which plea&s;eth be&s;t his own mind.</HI> Contrary to which, as if tho&s;e <GAP DESC="foreign">, en&s;tamped upon the hearts of men, as men, were totally obliterated. Some a&s;&s;ume the confidence to plead, that the <GAP DESC="foreign">, or manner of Wor&s;hip, is not from divine direction and pre|&s;cription; but only the <GAP DESC="foreign"> or Wor&s;hip it &s;elf.</P>
<P>4thly. That the Voice of God when he &s;hould be plea&s;ed, or in what manner &s;oever, to &s;peak to them, was to be hearkned and attended to, the &s;ame Law of Nature did indoct<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">inate them in; I &s;ay the Voice of God: for however unto &s;ome of them there were Godds many and Lords many, yet the wi&s;e&s;t and mo&s;t learned among&s;t them, did acknowledge but one chief Deity or God, at who&s;e beck and or|dinance all the re&s;t were, whom therefore they contemn'd as things of naught. Hence <HI>Plautus</HI> in <HI>Ca&s;ina,</HI> Act. 2.</P>
<Q><L>Unus Tibi hic dum &s;it propitius Jupiter,</L>
<L>Tui&s;tos minutos cave Deos flocci feceris.</L></Q>
<P>Hence Satan ea&s;ily abu&s;ed them to an attendance upon his dictates as the Oracles of God, though never &s;o cruel and &s;anguinary. That it was u&s;ual among&s;t the Gentile Nations to offer up Men and Women in Sacrifice to the Godds, is known. <HI>Tacitus</HI> tells us of the Germans, that they were wont to &s;acrifice Men to <HI>Mercury; Tacit. de morib. German. Tertullian</HI> a&s;&s;ures us that the people of <HI>Africa</HI> &s;acrificed their Children to <HI>Saturn,</HI> and that openly, even to the time of the Procon|ful&s;hip
<PB N="22" REF="12"> of <HI>Tiberius; Apol. c.</HI> 8. And when the Carthaginians were o|vercome by <HI>Agathocles</HI> the Sicilian Tyrant, judging the Godds to be greatly angry with them, they at once &s;acrificed two hundred Noble|mens Sons to <HI>Saturn,</HI> as <HI>Pe&s;cenninus Fe&s;tus</HI> witne&s;s. The &s;ame Abomi|nation was rife among the <HI>Romans,</HI> which &s;eems to have continued among&s;t them to the time of the Con&s;ul&s;hip of <HI>Cornelius Lentulus,</HI> and <HI>Publius Licinius Cra&s;&s;us,</HI> as witne&s;&s;eth <HI>Pliny, Natur. Hi&s;t. l.</HI> 3. <HI>c.</HI> 1. the French (as <HI>Cicero, Orat per Fontei.)</HI> the Britans (as <HI>Tacitus, Annal.</HI> 14.) (of whom &s;aith <HI>Horace, Vi&s;am Britannos ho&s;pitibus feros)</HI> were led captive to the like fero&s;ity to their own fle&s;h.</P>
<P>That they received this Abomination from their diabolical Oracles (which they mi&s;took for the voice of the Gods to them) is more than probable. That the de&s;truction of <HI>Menecaeus</HI> and <HI>Iphigenia</HI> is to be fixed here, is known. Nor had the maner of the <HI>Lacedemonians,</HI> wounding them&s;elves in the wor&s;hip of their Gods, any other &s;pring, as witne&s;&s;eth <HI>Apollonius, apud Philo&s;trat. l.</HI> 6. <HI>c.</HI> 10. <GAP DESC="foreign">, <HI>&amp;c. i. e.</HI> in the honour of <HI>Diana</HI> it was their cu&s;tom to wound them&s;elves, according (as men &s;ay) to the Commandment of the Oracles. And <HI>Pau&s;anias Baeotic.</HI> <GAP DESC="foreign">: The Oracle of <HI>Delphos</HI> enjoyns that a beauteous Child be offered in Sacrifice to <HI>Bacchus.</HI> This was the &s;tate and condition of the Gentile World, whil&s;t God was known only in <HI>Jewry,</HI> the times of which ignorance he winked at, and &s;uffered each Nation to do what was good in their own eyes under the regiment of Satan, perpetrating the mo&s;t horrible abomination, being fearfully cruel to their own fle&s;h. The review of which may fill us with pity and bowels towards the poor dark corners of the World, w<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">ere this gro&s;s darkne&s;s is &s;till re&s;iding, and the &s;ame or greater wickedne&s;&s;es are com|mitted; and increa&s;e groans to the Lord in us, to cau&s;e the light of his glorious Go&s;pel to ari&s;e and &s;hine upon them; as al&s;o &s;tir us up to thankfulne&s;s for the light of the Go&s;pel he hath &s;ent among&s;t us: and whil&s;t we have it to walk in it, not loving darkne&s;s more than light. But thus far will the light of Nature, engraven upon the heart, lead us with re&s;pect to the right Wor&s;hip of God, and I humbly conceive <HI>ne plus ultra,</HI> not a &s;tep farther.</P>
<P>2dly. As there is a natural or moral Wor&s;hip of God, &s;o is there that which is ceremonial or in&s;tituted; which depends upon Divine Revelation, and is nothing but the expre&s;&s;ion of the moral and internal Wor&s;hip of God, our love, faith, fear, &s;ubjection of, and to him in
<PB N="23" REF="12"> tho&s;e external wayes that are of his own revelation, wherein he hath &s;aid he will have us manife&s;t and expre&s;s them; and, as a great encou|ragement thereunto, hath promi&s;ed in our &s;o doing to meet with us, and ble&s;s us. This is that which is mo&s;t u&s;ually in Scripture called the Wor&s;hip of God and Chri&s;t. And this is that Wor&s;hip whereunto I re|fer hearing the Word as 'tis a Go&s;pel-In&s;titution to be practi&s;ed by the Saints: which was &s;o plainly a&s;&s;erted in the <HI>Sober Te&s;timony,</HI> that there was no occa&s;ion for Mr. <HI>T.</HI> to trouble him&s;elf or the Reader with his gue&s;&s;ing at the meaning of the Author, did he not delight to mul|tiply words: but to have owned it, if true; or otherwi&s;e to have ad|dre&s;&s;ed him&s;elf to the confutation thereof. That which I a&s;&s;erted was; <HI>that Hearing</HI> (by the Saints under the di&s;pen&s;ation of the Go&s;pel, for of them and their duty is the que&s;tion propo&s;ed, <HI>pag.</HI> 13.) <HI>is part of In&s;ti|tuted Wor&s;hip.</HI> Which when Mr. <HI>T.</HI> endeavours the confutation of, I may be &s;uppo&s;ed to be concern'd in his di&s;cour&s;es; but till then, the mo&s;t partially addicted Reader will acquit me from any bounden &s;er|vice or attendance on them. 'Tis an ea&s;ie way of an&s;wering Books (though not much to edification) to de&s;ert the main point to be im|pugned, and diverti&s;e ones &s;elf and Reader with di&s;cour&s;es that are but at be&s;t collateral thereunto, and &s;carce &s;peak a word to that which is the <HI>alone</HI> thing to be &s;poken to, as Mr. <HI>T.</HI> in this matter hath done. So that in what he &s;aith, not &s;peaking to the thing in que&s;tion in the&s;e two fir&s;t Sections, I am little concerned, yet can I not but take notice of one thing, <GAP DESC="foreign">, as we pa&s;s on, which I cannot clo&s;e with him in; <HI>viz. That we wor&s;hip God in hearing when we hear;</HI> which he pretends to prove from 1 <HI>The&s;&s;.</HI> 2. 13. which as thus crudely propo&s;ed, I humbly conceive is very remote from truth. There is more to be done than &s;o. I am apt to think that tho&s;e who wor&s;hip God in hearing, mu&s;t fir&s;t come to it as to an In&s;titution of Chri&s;t. Which if a man doth nor, he wor&s;hips not God at all therein. For per&s;ons to come to hear a Sermon out of cu&s;tom, curio&s;ity, lothne&s;s to undergo the penalties of the Land, cen&s;ures of others, for company, or the like; not heeding it, or coming to it as an In&s;titution of Chri&s;t, will hardly be accounted by the Lord as wor&s;hipping him, being indeed not at all &s;o. 2dly, That they &s;et them&s;elves to hear what is &s;poken as the Word of the eternal God, receive it in meekne&s;s, faith, love, giving up them&s;elves to its authority and conduct; which except we do, we wor&s;hip not God. <HI>Je|hoiakim</HI> in <HI>Jeremiah</HI> heard the Roll read, but he takes his Penknife, cuts it in pieces, and throws it into the fire. The Phari&s;ees hear Chri&s;t preach, <HI>Luke</HI> 16. 14. <GAP DESC="foreign">, <HI>they blew their no&s;es at him in</HI>
<PB N="24" REF="13"> <HI>&s;corn and deri&s;ion.</HI> Act. 7. you have <HI>Stephen</HI> preaching to the <HI>Jews,</HI> who for a great while hear him with &s;ilence and attention, b<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">t <HI>v.</HI> 54. <GAP DESC="foreign">, <HI>they were vexed &s;o as if they had been cut with a Saw,</HI> <GAP DESC="foreign">; <HI>they &s;hewed their teeth, and grind them like mad dogs again&s;t him.</HI> To which many more in&s;tances might be added of &s;uch as heard the Word of God under &s;uch abominable pa&s;|&s;ions. Will Mr. <HI>T.</HI> &s;ay, that &s;uch as the&s;e wor&s;hip God in hearing? what more ab&s;urd? And yet if he deny it, his A&s;&s;ertion falls to the ground, That men wor&s;hip God in hearing when they hear. 'Tis one device of Satan to undo &s;ouls (and no mean one) by mi&s;calling things, and appropriating tho&s;e names and titles to them, that do not belong to them, to cau&s;e them to think that they have and do, what they neither have nor do. Some tran&s;ient checks of con&s;cience, &s;light and &s;uperficial &s;orrow for &s;in, a&s;&s;ent to propo&s;itions of truth, e&s;caping the pollutions of the world, &s;aying their prayers, going to hear, he calls (and would make poor hearts believe they are &s;o) the &s;aving convictions of the Spi|rit, Go&s;pel-humiliation, precious, unfeigned Faith, Evangelical San|ctication and Holine&s;s, wor&s;hipping God, <HI>&amp;c.</HI> which if they do, they have only this advantage, that they go down with more pomp and &s;tate to Hell, than tho&s;e that know nothing of the&s;e &s;emblances of Grace and Holine&s;s. 'Tis a fond conceit that poor blind ignorant creatures flatter them&s;elves with, that their going to Church (as they call it) and joyn|ing with the Preacher in the outward acts of praying and preaching, (&s;uppo&s;ing it to be according to the In&s;titution of Chri&s;t) is wor&s;hiping God; and I am &s;orry to find Mr. <HI>T.</HI> by &s;uch expre&s;&s;ions hardning them in this dangerous conceit. Alas, ye cannot thus wor&s;h<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">p God, for he is a jealous God; he is a Spirit, and will be wor&s;hipped in Spirit and in Truth. Precious Mr. <HI>Burroughs</HI> in his Treati&s;e of Go&s;pel-Wor&s;hip, &s;peaks excellently to this matter, pag. 93. <HI>Though I do kneel down in prayer, and pre&s;ent my body to hear the Word&mdash;this is no<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter"> to wor&s;hip God as a Spirit (and yet he that wor&s;hips him not as a Spirit, wor&s;hips him not at all:)</HI> And p. 109. <HI>Many people think it a very ea&s;ie matter to wor&s;hip God</HI> (and &s;o it were, if Mr. <HI>T.</HI> his A&s;&s;ertion were true) <HI>If it were nothing el&s;e to wor&s;hip God but to come and hear a Sermon, then it were the ea&s;ie&s;t mat|ter in the world to wor&s;hip God, but there is more required in the duty of God's Wor&s;hip than thou ha&s;t been acquainted with, there is a power of God|line&s;s in it.</HI> And citing <HI>Jo&s;h.</HI> 24. 19. he adds, <HI>q. d. You think it is nothing to &s;erve the Lord&mdash;alas, you cannot &s;erve the Lord, for he is a holy God, and a jealous God&mdash;you mu&s;t have other manner of hearts than yet you have&mdash;you mu&s;t under&s;tand his Wor&s;hip in another manner than yet you do:</HI>
<PB N="25" REF="13"> <HI>until you under&s;tand God, his Wayes and Wor&s;hip, you cannot &s;erve the Lord, i. e.</HI> you do not, cannot wor&s;hip him. Nor doth the Scripture, 1 <HI>The&s;&s;.</HI> 2. 13. prove his A&s;&s;ertion, but rather the contrary. The words are, <HI>For this cau&s;e thank we God without cea&s;ing, becau&s;e when ye received the Word of God which ye heard of us, ye received it not as the word of man, but as it is in truth the Word of God, which effectually worketh al&s;o in you that believe.</HI> Not to multiply words, the Apo&s;tle (with <HI>Silvanus</HI> and <HI>Timo|theus,</HI> chap. 1. 1.) acquaints them in this ver&s;e, 1. of the returns they were on their behalf making to God, for the Grace was be&s;towed on them; <HI>We thank God without cea&s;ing.</HI> 2. Particularly declares the ground and rea&s;on of this their thank&s;giving; which was their reception of, obedience to, the Go&s;pel, which he calls <GAP DESC="foreign">, <HI>the Word of God;</HI> which becau&s;e they mini&s;terially brought to them, he calls al&s;o <GAP DESC="foreign">, <HI>the word of hearing &s;peech, or report from them.</HI> This he &s;aith they did <GAP DESC="foreign">, they tryed, proved, con&s;idered, weighed in their &s;pirits what was offered to them by the Apo&s;tles (as learned <HI>Be|za</HI> tells us the word &s;ignifies, whereby it is &s;aith he di&s;tingui&s;hed from the word <GAP DESC="foreign">) An entertainment that the Go&s;pel did not every|where meet with, being many times cryed out again&s;t, run upon, and violently oppo&s;ed, as were the Publi&s;hers of it) without &s;o much as &s;o|berly con&s;idering whether things be &s;o or no: nor here but by a very few, the Rabble in an hurly-burly, furiou&s;ly a&s;&s;aulting the hou&s;e of <HI>Ja|&s;on, Act.</HI> 17. 5. (whither 'twas like the Di&s;ciples were wont to repair) And <GAP DESC="foreign"> having upon tryal found it to be of worth and weight, they received, imbraced it (as <HI>Beza, Zanchy, &amp;c.</HI> on the place, &s;ay the word &s;ignifies) and that as the Word of God; with reverence giving up them&s;elves to his conduct. How this came to pa&s;s he al&s;o a&s;&s;ert|eth, it was from the effectual energy of the Lord upon their hearts by his mighty Power (<GAP DESC="foreign">) which they were not able to re&s;i&s;t. As lear|ned <HI>Cameron</HI> in <HI>Myroth. Evang. ad Phil.</HI> 2. And <HI>Praelect.</HI> and holy <HI>Bains</HI> on <HI>Eph.</HI> 1. 11. &s;ay. And they being thus powerfully and effectually wrought upon to the imbracing the Doctrine of the Go&s;pel as the Word of God, they become followers of the Churches of God; which in <HI>Ju|daea</HI> were in Chri&s;t Je&s;us, <HI>i. e.</HI> as they had before done who were in Chri&s;t before them, &s;o do they gather together into a di&s;tinct Body, or particular Congregation, for the celebrating the Ordinances of God together, and wor&s;hipping him according to his will. Therefore we wor&s;hip God in hearing when we hear; of which the Apo&s;tle &s;peaks, <HI>ne gry quidem,</HI> as Mr. <HI>T.</HI> well knows. Yet is this the only Scripture produced for the confirmation of his A&s;&s;ertion. They were &s;o far
<PB N="26" REF="14"> from wor&s;hipping God in their bare hearing, that had they done no more, they had not wor&s;hipped him at all; no more than the re&s;t of them of <HI>The&s;&s;alonica</HI> with the <HI>Jews,</HI> who although they heard the Apo|&s;tles, con&s;orted not with them, but afterwards per&s;ecuted and oppo&s;ed them, <HI>Act.</HI> 17. 4, 5. who 'tis to be thought Mr. <HI>T.</HI> will not &s;ay, wor|&s;hipped him at all. He need never fear mi&s;carrying in any cau&s;e he thinks meet to undertake: if he can but beforehand a&s;&s;ure him&s;elf he &s;hall meet with &s;uch partially addicted Readers as will take &s;uch proofs as the&s;e to be cogent and convincing, but</P>
<Q>Parvas habet &s;pes Troja &s;i tales habet,</Q>
<P>Strong and confident A&s;&s;ertions, without more clear and evident proof, are not likely to lead the under&s;tanding of per&s;ons, &s;oberly inqui&s;itive after Truth, into obedience of them.</P>
</DIV3>
<DIV3 N="2" TYPE="section">
<HEAD>Sect. 2.</HEAD>
<ARGUMENT>
<P><HI>Of In&s;tituted Wor&s;hip.</HI> Mat. 17. 5. <HI>explained. What ever is to be practi&s;ed by N. T. Saints in re&s;pect of Wor&s;hip, is &s;olely to be bottom'd upon the au|thority of Chri&s;t.</HI> Luke 10. 16. <HI>con&s;idered. O. T. Precepts with re&s;pect to Hearing, how obliging.</HI> Luke 16. 29. <HI>explained. The intendment of Chri&s;t in the Parable, evinced.</HI> 2 Pet. 1. 19. <HI>opened. VVhom we are prohibited from hearing in the N. T.</HI> Mat. 15. 4. <HI>explained.</HI> 2 Tim. 3. 5. <HI>con&s;idered and opened. Of the &s;cattered Di&s;ciples,</HI> Acts 8. 1, 4. <HI>touching whom Mr.</HI> T. <HI>egregiou&s;ly trifles, and abu&s;eth his Reader. No hearing the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters as gifted Brethren. VVhether hearing of Preachers be a moral and perpetual Wor&s;hip common to all times.</HI></P>
</ARGUMENT>
<P>MR. <HI>T.</HI> his fir&s;t Section being &s;pent in the con&s;ideration of the word <HI>Wor&s;hip;</HI> and &s;ome di&s;tinctions about the Wor&s;hip of God, the &s;econd is de&s;igned to the con&s;ideration of the word <HI>In&s;tituted.</HI> And having learnedly told us that the In&s;tituted Wor&s;hip of Chri&s;t is &s;uch as is by Chri&s;t's In&s;titution; <HI>i. e.</HI> the In&s;tituted Wor&s;hip of Chri&s;t is the In&s;tituted Wor&s;hip of Chri&s;t. He further acquaints <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">s what a Civil Lawyer &s;aith of In&s;titutions, <HI>viz.</HI> That they are preceptions by which men are in&s;tructed and taught: which after &s;ome exe<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">plification by particular in&s;tances, he applies to the Wor&s;hip of Chri&s;t under the Go|&s;pel, and tells us that 'tis &s;uch that is by Chri&s;t's preceptions taught, directed or appointed in the time thereof, which may be meant (he &s;aith) of the Natural Wor&s;hip which belongs to God or Chri&s;t, &s;uch as Prayer to God, giving Thanks to him, Hearing, which yet in re&s;pect of &s;ome peculiarities, are to be divolved upon the Scriptures of the New
<PB N="27" REF="14"> Te&s;tament, yet not excluding the Old, or the Light of Nature, &s;o far as the Wor&s;hip is perpetual and general to all people and times, as being either natural or moral. <HI>An&s;w.</HI> Very good! Hearing it &s;eems then, as a Go&s;pel-duty to be performed by the Saints in the time thereof, is part of Natural Wor&s;hip; for hereof mu&s;t he &s;peak, or he &s;peaks im|pertinently, the que&s;tion being about the duty of the&s;e, <HI>Sober Te&s;tim.</HI> pag. 13. which not attempting the lea&s;t proof of, we are bound to take no further notice thereof than to avouch the contrary. If the Animad|verter thinks, that becau&s;e &s;ome things are con&s;onant to the dictates of right Rea&s;on, the Light and Law of Nature; therefore, as to be per|formed by Saints under the Go&s;pel, they are not meerly of the in&s;titu|tion of Chri&s;t, and to be performed &s;olely upon the account of his Au|thority and Command, he &s;hall not have me for his Rival. Nor will any &s;ober Chri&s;tian, tender of the honour and glory of his Lord and Ma&s;ter <HI>Chri&s;t,</HI> &s;wallow down &s;uch an A&s;&s;ertion without better proof. About this matter a worthy and learned per&s;on hath &s;poken excellently in a Catechi&s;e lately publi&s;hed, called <HI>A brief In&s;truction in the Wor&s;hip of God,</HI> where in pag. 84. <HI>Q.</HI> 18. are the&s;e words; <HI>VVhereas &s;undry of the&s;e things, (viz.</HI> Prayer, Preaching, &amp;c. of which he had &s;poken be|fore, as principal In&s;titutions of the Go&s;pel) <HI>are founded in the Light and Law of Nature, as requi&s;it unto all &s;olemn Wor&s;hip, and are moreover commanded in the Moral Law, and explications of it in the Old Te&s;tament, how do you look upon them as Evangelical In&s;titutions to be ob&s;erved princi|pally on the Authority of Je&s;us Chri&s;t?</HI> An&s;w. <HI>Neither their general &s;ui|tablene&s;s unto the principles of right Rea&s;on, and the dictates of the Light and Law of Nature, nor the practice of them in the Wor&s;hip of God under the Old Te&s;tament do at all hinder them from depending on the meer In&s;titution of Je&s;us Chri&s;t, as to tho&s;e especial ends of the glory of God, in and by him&s;elf, and the edification of his Church in the Faith which is in him, whereunto he hath appointed them: nor as unto the &s;pecial manner of their performance, which he requireth; in which respects they are to be ob&s;erved on the account of his Authority and Command only,</HI> Mat. 17. 5. &amp; 28. 20. John 16. 23, 24. Heb. 3. 4, 5, 6. Eph. 1. 22. &amp; 2. 20, 21, 22. Heb. 12. 25. In the explication whereof he &s;peaketh after this wi&s;e: <HI>The principal thing we are to aim at in the whole Wor&s;hip of God, is the di&s;charge of that duty which we owe to Je&s;us Chri&s;t the King and Head of the Church,</HI> Heb. 3. 6. 1 Tim. 3. 15. This we cannot do unle&s;s we con&s;ider his Authority as the formal rea&s;on and cau&s;e of our ob&s;ervance of all that we do therein. If we perform any thing in the Wor&s;hip of God on any other account, it is no part of our obedience unto him, and &s;o we can neither expect his
<PB N="28" REF="15"> Grace to a&s;&s;i&s;t us; nor have we his Promi&s;e to accept us therein; for that he hath annexed unto our doing, and ob&s;erving what ever he hath commanded, and that becau&s;e he hath commanded us, <HI>Matth.</HI> 28. 20. This promi&s;ed Pre&s;ence re&s;pects only the ob&s;ervance of his Commands. Some men are apt to look on this Authority of Chri&s;t as that which hath the lea&s;t influence into what they do. If in any of his In&s;titutions they find any thing that is &s;uited or agreeable to the Light of Nature, as Eccle&s;ia&s;tical Societies, the Government of the Church, and the like, they &s;ay are; they &s;uppo&s;e and contend that that is the ground on which they are to be attended unto, and &s;o are to be regulated ac|cordingly. The interpo&s;ition of his Authority they will allow only in the Sacraments, which have no light in Rea&s;on or Nature, &s;o de&s;irous are &s;ome to have as little to do with Chri&s;t as they can, even in the things that concern the Wor&s;hip of God. But it would be &s;omewhat &s;trange, that if what the Lord Chri&s;t hath appointed i<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter"> his Church to be ob&s;erved in particular in an e&s;pecial manner, for &s;pecial ends of his own, hath in the general nature of it an agreement with what in like ca&s;es the Light of Nature &s;eems to direct unto, that therefore his Au|thority is not to be con&s;idered as the &s;ole immediate rea&s;on of our per|formance of it. But it is evident,</P>
<P>Fir&s;t, that our Lord Je&s;us Chri&s;t, being the King and Head of his Church, the Lord over the Hou&s;e of God, nothing is to be done there|in but with re&s;pect unto his Authority, <HI>Mat.</HI> 17. 5. <HI>Eph.</HI> 4. 15. &amp; 2. 20, 21. Secondly, and that therefore the &s;uitablene&s;s of any thing to right Rea&s;on, or the Light of Nature, is no ground for a Church-ob|&s;ervation of it, unle&s;s it be al&s;o appointed and commanded in e&s;pecial by Je&s;us Chri&s;t. Thirdly, That being &s;o appointed and commanded, it becomes an e&s;pecial In&s;titution of his, and as &s;uch is to be ob&s;erved; &s;o that in all things that are done or to be done, with re&s;pect unto the Wor&s;hip of God in the Church, the Authority of Chri&s;t is alway prin|cipally to be con&s;idered, and every thing to be ob&s;erved is commanded by him, without which con&s;ideration it hath no place in the Wor&s;hip of God. Thus far he with convincing brightne&s;s and evidence.</P>
<P>'Tis true, Mr. <HI>T.</HI> tells us there are &s;ome particularities which God hath tied us to in the New Te&s;tament in hearing: But of what nature they are he expre&s;ly tells us not: Whether &s;uch as do con&s;titute it New-Te&s;tament-Wor&s;hip, without which it is not, or cannot be ac|counted to be &s;o. The Scriptures cited by him are not wholly &s;trangers to &s;uch a thing. Fir&s;t, <HI>Mat.</HI> 17. 5. fairly intimates that what ever is to be done in the New-Te&s;tament-Wor&s;hip, is to be done &s;olely upon the
<PB N="29" REF="15"> Authority of Chri&s;t. In <HI>v.</HI> 2. we have an account of Chri&s;t's transfigu|ration before <HI>Peter, James,</HI> and <HI>John.</HI> Ver&s;. 3. <HI>Mo&s;es</HI> and <HI>Elias</HI> appear talking with him. <HI>Mo&s;es</HI> was the great Lawgiver to the Old-Te&s;tament-Church, <HI>Deut.</HI> 33. 21. <HI>(i. e.</HI> in the portion or inheritance which <HI>Mo&s;es</HI> the Lawgiver according to the Command God had given to the <HI>Gadites) Elias</HI> was the great Reformer of the Church in the dayes of <HI>Jezebels</HI> Apo&s;tacy from God: men of great renown in their day. <HI>Peter</HI> (and the re&s;t of them being amazed) cryes out, <HI>It is good for us to be here; let us make three Tabernacles, one for thee, one for Mo&s;es, and one for Elias;</HI> Whereby he &s;eems to equalize them with Chri&s;t, each of them a taber|nacle, <HI>v.</HI> 4. What &s;aith the voice of God? <HI>v.</HI> 6. <HI>While he yet &s;pake, behold a bright cloud over&s;hadowed them; and behold a voice out of the cloud, which &s;aid, This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well plea&s;ed, hear ye him.</HI> And <HI>Mark</HI> tells us, chap. 9. 9. <HI>That &s;uddenly when they looked about, they &s;aw none but Je&s;us: Mo&s;es</HI> and <HI>Elias</HI> were vani&s;hed and gone. The in|tendment of the whole &s;eems to be this; That though betwixt <HI>Christ, Mo&s;es</HI> and <HI>Elias</HI> there was a &s;weet coale&s;cency and agreement (they talked together) yet in the Wor&s;hip of God under the Go&s;pel, not <HI>Mo&s;es</HI> nor <HI>Elias,</HI> but only <HI>Chri&s;t</HI> is to be hearkned and attended unto. Therefore but a rea&s;onable <HI>po&s;tulatum,</HI> that the whole of the Wor&s;hip of Chri&s;t, in the times of the Go&s;pel, be divolved upon the Scriptures of the New-Te&s;tament, He being appointed and deputed by the Fa|ther, &s;olely to be attended unto for Laws and Directions touching it; for which al&s;o he came from the bo&s;ome of the Father, <HI>John</HI> 1. 18. By whom he hath &s;poken to us in the&s;e la&s;t dayes, <HI>Heb.</HI> 1. 2. To whom fulne&s;s of Power and Authority is delegated by the Father, <HI>Mat.</HI> 28. 18. From whence the Commi&s;&s;ion to the Apo&s;tles for preaching the Go&s;pel <HI>(v.</HI> 20.) doth originally &s;pring; and con&s;equently our hearing or at|tending upon Preachers in that work, is to take its mea&s;ure from the Laws and Statutes, which, as Lord of the Family, he hath given forth, thereabout, for his Hou&s;hold to ob&s;erve and do. Nor, 2dly, doth <HI>Luk.</HI> 10. 16. cited in the &s;econd place by this Animadverter, &s;erve to any other purpo&s;e but to cut the throat of the cau&s;e he hath at pre&s;ent un|dertaken the management of. They are the words of Chri&s;t unto the Seventy, whom he &s;ent two and two before his face, <HI>v.</HI> 1. and prove thus much, That hearing tho&s;e that are &s;ent out by Chri&s;t, is a po&s;itive In&s;titution of his, and &s;uch an In&s;titution, that therein we hear him: which proves not the lawfulne&s;s of attending upon the Mini&s;try of &s;uch as act not by vertue of any Authority received from him, but the con|trary. If the Argument Chri&s;t here u&s;eth be valid, That <HI>he who heareth</HI>
<PB N="30" REF="16"> <HI>them whom he &s;ends in his Name, heareth him, and he that heareth</HI> (or receiveth, <HI>Mat.</HI> 10. 40.) <HI>him, heareth</HI> (or receiveth) <HI>him that &s;ent him, (viz.</HI> the Father) as mo&s;t certain it is: I do not &s;ee that this can be accu&s;ed of weakne&s;s and invalidity; though &s;uch an one as Mr. <HI>T.</HI> cares not (it may be) to hear of, <HI>viz.</HI> that he who heareth the Pari&s;h-Mi|ni&s;ters, heareth the Bi&s;hops; and he who heareth the Bi&s;hops, heareth the Pope, from whom they originally received and derive their power and authority. And yet it may be this may not be &s;o di&s;ta&s;tful to this Animadverter as I had thought, whom I already find, pag. 344. plead|ing it lawful to hear the <HI>Je&s;uites;</HI> a fair advance towards the per&s;onal hearing of his <HI>Holine&s;s.</HI></P>
<P>Thus in&s;uccesful is Mr. <HI>T.</HI> in producing Te&s;timonies, every one of them &s;peaking otherwi&s;e than he would have them, and much to the di&s;advantage of the cau&s;e he undertakes the management of. Nor do we &s;ay, that the many Precepts in the Old-Te&s;tament about Hearing, are vacated, we rather e&s;tabli&s;h them, whil&s;t we make it part of in&s;ti|tuted Wor&s;hip. God was of old to be attended, in his &s;peaking in and by his Servants and Prophets, whom he in&s;tituted and in&s;pired, to whom the Word of God came to communicate it to his People. They that in|deed came in his Name were to be heeded and hearkned unto, and that by obligation from po&s;itive Law and In&s;titution: So are tho&s;e that now come in the Name of Chri&s;t, the alone Lord, L<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">wgiver, and King over his Hou&s;e; to whom all Power is given and intru&s;ted by the Fa|ther; who hath appointed his Stewards in his ab&s;ence over his Hou&s;|hold, to give them their portion of meat in due &s;ea&s;on, <HI>Luke</HI> 12. 42. Nor will tho&s;e of the Hou&s;hold be ever able to acquit or ju&s;tifie them|&s;elves before the Lord when he cometh, if a thief or &s;tranger break-in upon them (and eject the Stewards appointed by him) in their attend|ance upon him, to &s;ay the meat he feeds us with is our Lord's meat, which 'tis true they &s;hould be ready to receive, but from the hands de&s;tined and appointed to give it them.</P>
<P>2dly. Mr. <HI>T.</HI> &s;uppo&s;eth that what is &s;poken of the Law and the Prophets, <HI>Luk.</HI> 16. 29. is &s;poken as obliging to New-Te&s;tament-Saints, but without the lea&s;t attempt of proof. If his own <HI>Ip&s;e dixit</HI> will not carry the cau&s;e, and per&s;ons will not &s;uffer them&s;elves to be guided by a wor&s;e (if po&s;&s;ible) than the Popi&s;h <HI>phanatique C<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">edo,</HI> or implicite Faith, there is not much danger of his captivating any to his [at pre|&s;ent] e&s;pou&s;ed opinion: This being mo&s;t u&s;ually the whole of what is tendred by way of evidence of what he is plea&s;ed confidently to aver from one end of his <HI>Theodulia</HI> to the other. The contrary is evident.</P>
<P N="1"><PB N="31" REF="16"> 1. 'Tis &s;poken to the Phari&s;ees, <HI>v.</HI> 14, 15. 2dly, One part of the aim and intendment of our Lord in the Parable, &s;eems to be to exalt the In&s;titutions of God, above whatever may be fixt upon by the chil|dren of men (one or other of them) as more probable to effect what they are in&s;tituted and appointed by the Lord for. The rich man &s;up|po&s;ed that if one ro&s;e from the dead, and te&s;tified to his Brethren, they would repent, <HI>v.</HI> 28. 30. No, &s;aith <HI>Abraham, (i. e.</HI> Chri&s;t) <HI>If they will not hear Mo&s;es and the Prophets, neither will they be per&s;waded though one aro&s;e from the dead.</HI> Hereby te&s;tifying the unalterable obligations that lie upon per&s;ons (what ever &s;pecious pretences of edification, profit, or the like, may be urged by the &s;ons of men) to an attendment upon Divine In&s;titutions: Not as if the Lord would have his New-Te&s;ta|ment Saints attend upon <HI>Mo&s;es</HI>'s Appointments, or go to Mount <HI>Sinai</HI> for the pattern of his Go&s;pel-Wor&s;hip. 3dly. <HI>v.</HI> 16. he expre&s;ly tells us that the Law and the Prophets were but until <HI>John,</HI> and &s;ince that time the Kingdom of God, or Go&s;pel-Church-&s;tate (frequently &s;o cal|led in Scripture) is preached. But &s;uppo&s;e Mr. <HI>T.</HI> had evinced (or &s;hould ever be able to do &s;o) that the words of Chri&s;t did re&s;pect New-Te&s;tament-Believers (any otherwi&s;e than hath already been intimated by us) he had need do one thing more before they will &s;tand him in any &s;tead, <HI>viz.</HI> manife&s;t that they are &s;poken by Chri&s;t with relation to Wor&s;hip; that therein New-Te&s;tament-Believers are to be regulated by <HI>Mo&s;es</HI> and the Prophets, (for if they re&s;pect onely the Doctrine taught by the peculiar Types of that day, and the Truths dropped by them touching Chri&s;t the Me&s;&s;iah, they make nothing at all to his pur|po&s;e) which when he hath done,</P>
<Q>Erit mihi magnus Apollo.</Q>
<P>Nor doth 2 <HI>Pet.</HI> 1. 19. the other place cited by him, contribute the lea&s;t mite of a&s;&s;i&s;tance to his dying cau&s;e. The Apo&s;tle under&s;tanding by Divine Revelation (as 'tis thought) that he mu&s;t &s;hortly dye, <HI>v.</HI> 14. As he was re&s;olved whil&s;t he lived not to cea&s;e to call upon them, and &s;tir them up (as <HI>v.</HI> 12, 13.) &s;o he was willing to leave this Epi&s;tle with them, to put them in remembrance of the great things he had taught and communicated to them, <HI>v.</HI> 15. which he tells them, <HI>v.</HI> 16. were <HI>not cunningly devi&s;ed fables,</HI> &s;o artificially interwoven as though they &s;eemed to be true, they were mo&s;t fal&s;e: &s;tore of which had been in tho&s;e dayes invented by Jews and Poets. Oh no! had they been &s;o, he could have had no comfort in the review of them now he was going off the &s;tage of the world, which he had, not having followed the&s;e when he made known unto them the power and coming (or the powerful
<PB N="32" REF="17"> coming, or coming in the power of our Lord Je&s;us C<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">ri&s;t (manife&s;ted to be &s;o in the efficacy of his Doctrine, working Miracles, his Re&s;ur|rection from the dead) they were, he tells them, eye-witne&s;&s;es of his Maje&s;ty. The honour and glory whereof he proves by a double Argu|ment; 1. The te&s;timony and witne&s;s the Father bare of Chri&s;t, the honour and glory put upon him when that Voice came from Heaven, when he was on the Mount transfigured before them (viz. <HI>Peter, James</HI> and <HI>John.)</HI> 2dly, From the word of Prophecy: le&s;t they &s;hould think the former Apparition was a fiction of his own, he acquaints them that the Prophets have te&s;tified of his coming and glory. Of which Word of Prophecy he a&s;&s;erts, 1. That <HI>'tis of no private <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">nterpretation (i. e.</HI> the holy men to whom it came, gave it forth as they received it from God, without putting any of their own glo&s;&s;es, meanings, private in|terpretations to it.) 2dly, That <HI>to this they do well to take heed,</HI> (<GAP DESC="foreign">, to which taking heed ye do excellently, worthi|ly, and as becometh Saints) <HI>as unto a light that &s;hine<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">h in a dark place.</HI> Yet, 3dly, with this limitation, as to the time of their &s;o doing, <GAP DESC="foreign">, <HI>until the day dawn, and the day-&s;tar ari&s;e in their hearts.</HI> Which if we &s;hould interpret of the day of the Go&s;pel, and the more clear revelation of the admini|&s;trations thereof, which &s;ome learned and judicious men do, as the A&s;&s;embly in their Annotations on the place (and indeed as by <HI>&s;hadows</HI> we are &s;ometimes to under&s;tand the Jewi&s;h admini&s;tration of affairs under the old paedagogy; &s;o by <HI>day,</HI> the time of the di&s;per&s;ion of tho&s;e Shadows, and the introduction of the Go&s;pel-Churc<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">-&s;tate, <HI>Cant.</HI> 2. 17. &amp; 4. 6.) The whole of what Mr. <HI>T.</HI> would infer from this place would not only be enervated, but a Sword ready furbi&s;hed put into the hands of his Antagoni&s;t to put an end to his expiring cau&s;e. Nor wil it at all avail him to &s;ay, that the Go&s;pel-admini&s;tration was already introduced and brought in: for although that was afoot &s;ome while before, yet many Jewi&s;h Ceremonies were yet winked at, and practi&s;ed by the believing Jews, of whom the charge was committed unto <HI>Peter, Gal.</HI> 2. 7, 8, 9. to whom he writes the&s;e Epi&s;tles, who were much in pra|cti&s;e of their old Ordinances (&s;ome of them) till the time of the ruine and deva&s;tation of their Temple by <HI>Titus Vespa&s;ian,</HI> when &s;ome think 2 <HI>Pet.</HI> 3. 7, 9, 10. of the burning and con&s;uming of the then Heavens and Earth <HI>(viz.</HI> the Jewi&s;h Paedagogy and old Admini&s;tration of affairs) had its accompli&s;hment, and the new Heavens or Go&s;pel-Church-&s;tate was fully introduced. Though we need not a&s;&s;ert any thing of this nature. The Apo&s;tle, as was &s;aid, is treating not of the
<PB N="33" REF="17"> Wor&s;hip, but Doctrine of the Me&s;&s;iah, in particular of his Glory, Po|wer and Coming, which the Prophets he tells them had abundantly bore witne&s;s to, and to their Te&s;timony it was their duty (is ours) to at|tend. That hence &s;uch a conclu&s;ion as this, is or can be logically infer|red; that therefore the Precepts and Directions of the Old-Te&s;tament are to be heeded and learned in re&s;pect of the matter therein contain|ed, and the per&s;ons that reveal it (with re&s;pect to Wor&s;hip, of which he mu&s;t &s;peak or he &s;aith nothing to the matter in hand) is the fir&s;t-born of ab&s;urdities, and needs the abilities of one tran&s;cending the degree of a B. D. to make good. But this Mr. <HI>T.</HI> thought not of. No won|der his late Writings, as he complains, find &s;o little acceptance among&s;t per&s;ons inqui&s;itive after Truth, if there be &s;uch <HI>cha&s;ma's</HI> betwixt the head and heels of his Arguments, that 'tis impo&s;&s;ible the Reader &s;hould find <HI>mediums</HI> enough to fill up and render them in the lea&s;t conclu&s;ive. But he goes on, and tells us, that he meets with no prohibition to hear any but fal&s;e Prophets, <HI>Mat.</HI> 7. 15. Deceivers, <HI>Tit.</HI> 1. 10. That teach other Doctrine, 1 <HI>Tim.</HI> 1. 3. 2 <HI>John</HI> 10. Another Go&s;pel, <HI>Gal.</HI> 1. 8, 9. <HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. Chri&s;t's in&s;titution of Officers of his own for the admini|&s;tration of the affairs of his Hou&s;e, had there been no expre&s;s interdi|ction, had been interdiction &s;ufficient to hear a Mini&s;try not of his ap|pointment. The Lord having cau&s;ed Fire to come down from Heaven, and giving a charge that it &s;hould be kept alive continually upon his Altar, was &s;uch an interdiction of offering Sacrifice with &s;trange Fire, that <HI>Nadab</HI> and <HI>Abihu</HI> not ob&s;erving it (though no expre&s;s command again&s;t offering &s;trange fire) die by the immediate hand of the Lord, as a puni&s;hment for their tran&s;gre&s;&s;ion. But, 2dly, we reade of other prohibitions in the Scripture, though Mr. <HI>T.</HI> is not plea&s;ed [now] to take notice of them; as <HI>Mat.</HI> 15. 14. which about twenty five years ago he &s;eems to &s;uppo&s;e to be an injunction of Chri&s;t not to hear the Scribes and Phari&s;ees (and indeed the word there u&s;ed plainly imports as much, <GAP DESC="foreign">, which &s;ignifies <HI>to remove from, for&s;aken &s;o as never to come at them more,</HI> which <HI>Beza</HI> &s;aith is the proper &s;ignification of the word; and the learned <HI>Grotias</HI> <NOTE N="*" PLACE="marg"><GAP DESC="foreign"> <HI>ut &amp; remittere proprie, et primigenio &s;ignificatu est, a &s;e amovere at&abque; ita &s;umitur,</HI> Mat. 4. 20. <HI>et alibi &s;aepe unde &s;umpta metaphora &s;ignificat &amp; de&s;erere, &amp; dimittere, &amp; permit|tere, frequenti&s;&s;ime autem rationem alicujus rei&punc; non habere, quod Latini &s;imili locutione dicunt mi&s;&s;um aliquid facere: ita &s;umi ha<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">c vo<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">em apparet,</HI> Mat. 15. 14. G<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">ot. <HI>de &s;a<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">i&s;. Chri&s;ti.</HI></NOTE> &s;aith little le&s;s) and in them a prohibition to hear &s;uch as &s;hould act like them, <HI>viz. teach for doctrines the traditions of men.</HI> Nor is the Animadverter a &s;tranger to that &s;olemn Injunction of
<PB N="34" REF="18"> the Apo&s;tle, 2 <HI>Tim.</HI> 3. 5. <GAP DESC="foreign">, <HI>from &s;uch turn away.</HI> [The word &s;ignifies <HI>devocare &amp; avocare,</HI> &s;aith <HI>Aretius;</HI> whence, &s;aith he, we may under&s;tand that 'tis our duty to &s;hun them, that we be not made like them.] That there is a di&s;pen&s;ation granted to abide with Mini|&s;ters of &s;uch a complexion, I never yet read. 3dly, Were there no more prohibitions than tho&s;e in&s;tanced by Mr. <HI>T.</HI> the&s;e were enow to prove it the duty of Saints to &s;eparate from the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters of <HI>England.</HI> That they are fal&s;e Prophets, <HI>Mat.</HI> 7. 15. we have evinced, ch 6. of <HI>S. Te&s;t.</HI> (which is vindicated from Mr. <HI>T.</HI> his Exceptions, chap. 7th of this Treati&s;e) and Sect. 10. of this chapter. That they are Deceivers, according to <HI>Tit.</HI> 1. 10. the &s;econd place in&s;tanc'd in by him were ea&s;ie to demon&s;trate. That they teach other Doctrine, ac|cording to 1 <HI>Tim.</HI> 1. 5. the third place he is plea&s;ed to introduce, he that thinks it any part of his concern to examine what they do, cannot be ignorant. Is not Canonical obedience, compul&s;ion in matters of Religion and Faith, conveniency at lea&s;t of Surplice, Organs, Cro&s;s in Bapti&s;m, Regeneration thereby, with many more that might be in&s;tan|ced in, as a National Church in the time of the Go&s;pel, Communion with per&s;ons vi&s;ibly wicked and prophane (Subjection to which they have a Law to compel men to) the nece&s;&s;ity of Godfa<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">hers and God|mothers, <HI>another Doctrine?</HI> Did they learn the&s;e things from Chri&s;t and his Apo&s;tles, or from the Cabal at <HI>Rome?</HI> Nor will it avail this Animadverter to &s;ay, that the&s;e cannot be called anothe<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter"> Doctrine, be|cau&s;e &s;ome of them not expre&s;ly forbidden, nor directly contrary to what is taught by them. For what is more than they taught, is another Doctrine, though not directly contrary thereunto. Hear what the A&s;|&s;embly in their Annotations upon the place &s;ay, <HI>Teach no other doctrine]</HI> the chief Pa&s;tors of the Church, who were endued with Apo&s;tolical Au|thority, as was <HI>Timothy,</HI> were to forbid any to preach, not only doctrine that was contrary, but that which was be&s;ide that which the Faithful have received from the Apo&s;tles. And indeed the word is plainly &s;o, <GAP DESC="foreign">, <HI>e. i.</HI> &s;aith <HI>Pi&s;cator,</HI> <GAP DESC="foreign">, that <HI>they teach not things divers,</HI> viz. <HI>from the Doctrine of the Apo&s;tles.</HI> So <HI>Beza.</HI> And <HI>Hy|perius</HI> is very full, <HI>that they teach no other Doctrine, either for matter or manner, for &s;ub&s;tance or circum&s;tance.</HI> As to what he adds, that Chri&s;t more e&s;pecially tied his Di&s;ciples, to hear his Apo&s;tles and &s;uch as were &s;ent by them to them, yet when all the Church at <HI>Jeru&s;alem,</HI> except the Apo&s;tles, were &s;cattered abroad by per&s;ecution, and went every where preaching the Go&s;pel, <HI>Acts</HI> 8. 1, 4. it was no &s;in to hear them, they were not the &s;trangers meant, <HI>John</HI> 10. 5, <HI>&amp;c.</HI></P>
<PB N="35" REF="18">
<P> I mu&s;t crave leave to inform him, of what he cannot be ignorant, that he trifles and abu&s;es his Reader egregiou&s;ly. 1. Chri&s;t did not only chiefly, but &s;olely enjoyn his Di&s;ciples to hear his Apo&s;tles, and tho&s;e that afterwards were &s;ent by his appointment in his Name, as acting in the mini&s;tration of the Go&s;pel by vertue of an Office-power. The in&s;tance of the &s;cattered Brethren, <HI>Act.</HI> 8. 1, 4. is not at all to his pur|po&s;e; they were indeed to be heard, but not as Mini&s;ters of the Go|&s;pel acting by Office-power in the promulgation thereof (which they were not, nor pretended to be) but as gifted Brethren or private Chri|&s;tians, receiving abilities from the Lord for that work and duty they were now providentially called unto. 2dly, Mr. <HI>T.</HI> knows that the Author of <HI>S. Test.</HI> is for the liberty of Prophe&s;ying, though he &s;eems to &s;ugge&s;t the contrary in the&s;e expre&s;&s;ions. Nor did I ever think (nor any man in the world in his wits) that tho&s;e &s;cattered Brethren, <HI>Acts</HI> 8. 1, 4. were the &s;trangers mentioned <HI>John</HI> 10. but &s;ome others, as is proved in the Treati&s;e under his con&s;ideration. Tho&s;e in <HI>Acts</HI> 8. were to be heard (as was &s;aid) as gifted Brethren, not as Officers of Chri&s;t, which they were not. What this makes to proving the lawfulne&s;s of hearing the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters, to which good &s;ervice it &s;eems tran&s;ient|ly de&s;igned, is not ea&s;ie to under&s;tand, who preach not &s;o, whom we cannot hear as &s;uch, except we would put out our eyes and renounce our under&s;tanding, when they avouch they preach as Mini&s;ters, and we &s;ee them daily in the exerci&s;e of that, which &s;uppo&s;e an Office-power, as Bapti&s;m and breaking Bread, for the doing of it. <GAP DESC="foreign">; the&s;e things mu&s;t he &s;peak to, who con&s;iders Mr. <HI>T.</HI> his Papers, for want of what is more material. But perhaps <HI>Sect.</HI> 3. doth the bu&s;ine&s;s, where he flouri&s;heth on the head of it, as if he were re&s;olv'd to come up clo&s;e to the matter in hand, and demon&s;trate by irrefragable Arguments, that Hearing, as a duty incumbent upon the Saints in the time of the Go|&s;pel in the way appointed by Chri&s;t, is not a meer po&s;itive or ceremo|nial Wor&s;hip: <HI>But perhaps</HI> (&s;aith he) <HI>the Author means by in&s;tituted Wor|&s;hip, &s;uch as is meerly Po&s;itive, or, as we u&s;e to &s;peak, Ceremonial, &s;uch as Bapti&s;m and the Lord's Supper, &amp;c.</HI> In which he hath almo&s;t hit the white of the Author's intendment and meaning, as plainly expre&s;&s;ed as he knew how: which is this, <HI>That however Hearing may put on the endu|ment and property of Moral Wor&s;hip, yet as practi&s;ed under the New-Te&s;ta|ment, it &s;olely appertains to Po&s;itive Wor&s;hip, or the In&s;titution of Chri&s;t: and whoever performs it not as &s;uch, I am apt to conceive wor&s;hips not Chri&s;t at all therein.</HI> What &s;aith the Animadverter to this? Why, <HI>this Author &s;eems to me very incon&s;iderate.</HI> But &s;eriou&s;ly, Sir, I was well aware,
<PB N="36" REF="19"> knew, and well con&s;idered of what I writ in this matter. <HI>He &s;eemeth to me very incon&s;iderate,</HI> is a pitiful Argument to evert the A&s;&s;ertion im|pleaded by Mr. <HI>T.</HI> it being not much to the purpo&s;e what &s;eems to him, or me, to be con&s;iderate or otherwi&s;e. The&s;e matters will be judged by others whether we will or no. As for what he adds, 'tis of no more weight than what went before, <HI>That hearing of Preachers is a moral and perpetual Wor&s;hip, common to all times and per&s;ons.</HI> He mu&s;t 1. except <HI>Adam,</HI> to whom at fir&s;t it was no duty &s;o to do, except he make God the Preacher, and then he altars the &s;tate of the que&s;tion: and after|wards 'tis more than probable he preached to his Family, not they to him. 2. Except the time of ignorance God winked at, when he &s;ent no Preachers to the Gentile world, but &s;uffered them to walk in their own wayes. 3. He had need to qualifie his A&s;&s;ertion a little better, el&s;e it will not be found weight. I am apt to think that hearing all Preachers (and an indefinite Propo&s;ition (as Mr. <HI>T.</HI> his is) is equipollent to an univer&s;al, is neither part of moral, nor in&s;tituted Wor&s;hip. The <HI>Romans</HI> had their Flamins and Arch-Flamins, (from whence the pat|tern of Bi&s;hops and Arch-Bi&s;hops;) <HI>Baal</HI> had his <HI>Chemarims;</HI> our fore|fathers in <HI>England,</HI> the <HI>Druides</HI> (who in their &s;olemn acts of Wor&s;hip were clad in a white-garment, you may call it a Surplice, from whence 'tis probable that rag had its original) all Preachers; yet the hearing of them no part (I hope) of moral Wor&s;hip. Yea, the Devil was once a Preacher, and of the Go&s;pel too, till Chri&s;t &s;ilenced him, <HI>Luke</HI> 4. 41. yet I very much que&s;tion whether &s;hould he do &s;o again, as 'tis not impo&s;&s;ible, our Animadverter would a&s;&s;ert it lawful to hear him. There were al&s;o Preachers of the Circumci&s;ion; whom <HI>Paul</HI> thought it no part of the Wor&s;hip of God to hear; the duty of Saints lying in the direct contrary part by vertue of the Apo&s;tolical Injunction, <HI>Phil.</HI> 3. 2. So that 'tis evidently a mi&s;take of Mr. <HI>T.</HI> to &s;ay that hearing of Preachers is a moral and perpetual Wor&s;hip, common to all times and per&s;ons. Whereas, 4. the very truth is, Though hearing the Word of God, whenever and however it &s;hall plea&s;e him to di&s;pen&s;e it, be a moral and perpetual Wor&s;hip; yet hearing the&s;e or tho&s;e Preachers appoint|ed by him to di&s;pen&s;e it, is purely of Sovereign In&s;titution. It being free to the Lord to have &s;ent his Word alway by the hands of his An|gels (as &s;ometimes he did to his Children) as well as otherwi&s;e; which had he done, it had been &s;o far from being our duty to attend upon Men-Preachers, that it had been our &s;in to have heeded any other than the&s;e Angelical ones. I mu&s;t de&s;ire the Animadverter by the way to correct one pa&s;&s;age of his, it being a gro&s;s mi&s;take, wherein he &s;eems to
<PB N="37" REF="19"> intimate, <HI>that I make the hearing the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters, &s;uch an instituted Wor&s;hip of Chri&s;t, as is meerly po&s;itive;</HI> and adds, <HI>that herein I &s;eem to be very incon&s;id&egrave;rate;</HI> Which I confe&s;s I &s;hould be if I did &s;o. Mr. <HI>T.</HI> knows I am &s;o far from making it &s;uch an In&s;tituted Wor&s;hip of Chri&s;t, that I &s;ay 'tis no Wor&s;hip of Chri&s;t at all, either moral or in&s;tituted, to hear them; and, <HI>exprofe&s;&s;o,</HI> prove, as well as I can, the contrary: which that it is not &s;atisfactory to Mr. <HI>T.</HI> I cannot help. Some men will be &s;atisfied with little except what hath the countenance of Authority on its &s;ide. However I never &s;aid <HI>that hearing the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters is any part of the instituted Wor&s;hip of Chri&s;t;</HI> which had I believed to be &s;o, I had done very wickedly to have oppo&s;ed it. He adds, <HI>that &s;hould it be granted me that the whole of Gospel-In&s;titutions were to be devolved upon the Scriptures of the New-Te&s;tament, yet would it be to the di&s;advantage of my &s;elf and the re&s;t of the Separati&s;ts, who u&s;e many places of the Old-Testa|ment about the Sabbath, Bapti&s;m, Lord's Supper, &amp;c. and I do &s;o in this di&s;pute.</HI> An&s;w. <HI>Egregie dictum,</HI> excellently &s;aid indeed! as if becau&s;e we affirm, that whatever is to be practi&s;ed in In&s;tituted Wor&s;hip in the time of the Go&s;pel, is to be wholly bottom'd, as to the Law and Pre|cept in&s;tituting it upon &s;ome Commandment of Chri&s;t in the New-Te|&s;tament, therefore we a&s;&s;ert that no u&s;e may be made of the Scriptures of the Old-Te&s;tament, treating thereabout by way of prophecy or other|wi&s;e; which is a Con&s;equence this learned Animadverter will never be able to make good. 'Tis true, many learned men do make u&s;e of &s;ome places of the Old-Te&s;tament to prove the morality of one day in &s;even, or the &s;eventh part of time, not as I remember, except <HI>P&s;a.</HI> 118. 24) which &s;ome conceive, by way of prophecy, &s;peaks of the Lord's ho|nouring the fir&s;t day) for the confirmation of the ob&s;ervation of the fir&s;t day; which they conceive Chri&s;t's re&s;urrection on that day, the pra|ctice of the Primitive-Church meeting together for the &s;olemn Wor|&s;hip of God, 1 <HI>Cor.</HI> 16. 2. <HI>Acts</HI> 20. 7. the appellation <HI>[the Lord's Day]</HI> which they judge is given to it, <HI>&amp;c.</HI> is a &s;ufficient warrant for their ob&s;ervation thereof in Go&s;pel-times. They plead not for Bapti&s;m or the Lord's Supper upon any other bottom than Go&s;pel-In&s;titution, or their preception by Chri&s;t in the New-Te&s;tament: Though 'tis true, as touching the &s;ubjects of the one and the other, they judg they may by way of analogy argue &s;omewhat from Old-Te&s;tament-Scriptures; from which apprehen&s;ion they &s;ee nothing &s;o weighty in what is tendred by Mr. <HI>T.</HI> (notwith&s;tanding his brag and immode&s;t A&s;&s;ertion, pag. 18. Sect. 14. <HI>that &s;uch a way of arguing is irrational;</HI> as if wi&s;dom re&s;ted with him, and he had the mea&s;ure of it, and a man could not differ from him
<PB N="38" REF="20"> but he mu&s;t be a block or bruit) to influence their departure. That be|cau&s;e the granting the A&s;&s;ertion would be di&s;advantagious to the Au|thor and the Separati&s;ts; therefore it &s;hould be in Mr. <HI>T.</HI> his opinion an unrea&s;onable <HI>postulatum,</HI> to devolve the que&s;tion upon the Scriptures of the New-Te&s;tament, I under&s;tand not. He takes not a mea&s;ure (I pre&s;ume) of the rea&s;onablene&s;s or unrea&s;onablene&s;s of reque&s;ts from their advantagiou&s;ne&s;s or di&s;advantagiou&s;ne&s;s to &s;uch contemptible creatures as we, and &s;hould he do &s;o he were much to blame, as to in|fer from hence; therefore I &s;ee no rea&s;onablene&s;s in his <HI>Po&s;tulatum,</HI> which is introduced not as the natural i&s;&s;ue of any thing premi&s;ed which he knows it is not, but meerly for pomp and &s;hew.</P>
</DIV3>
<DIV3 N="3" TYPE="section">
<HEAD>Sect. 3.</HEAD>
<ARGUMENT>
<P><HI>The judgments of the Antients no &s;ufficient</HI> &s;ub&s;tratum <HI>to build my practice upon in the Wor&s;hip of God. The opinion of the Antients <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">hem&s;elves in this matter. None but the Spirit of God &s;peaking in the Scriptures can &s;a|tisfie the con&s;ciences of any di&s;&s;atisfied in matters relating to Wor&s;hip. Our Faith not to be re&s;olved into the Testimony of men: which is a principle decryed by the Antients and Prote&s;tant Churches. The con&s;ciences of none can be &s;atisfied in what is written by the Ancients, before they are a&s;&s;ured,</HI> 1. <HI>that what they read as, or are told is theirs, be indeed &s;o, and not coun|terfeited nor adulterated.</HI> 2. <HI>That in their Writings they were, as the A|postles and Prophets, guided by an unerring Spirit. The true u&s;e of the Testimony of the Ancients. Congregational-Principles owned by them. Of Councils and Schoolmen.</HI></P>
</ARGUMENT>
<P>THe fourth Section is fronted with this, <HI>The judgement of the Anci|ents not u&s;ele&s;s in this Controver&s;ie,</HI> as if the Author of the <HI>Sober-Te&s;timony</HI> had a&s;&s;erted it to be &s;o; which Mr. T. knows he no where doth: This indeed the words of the Author, not perplexing our &s;elves nor the con&s;ciences of any with the judgments of men in generations pa&s;t, wherein they cannot acquie&s;ce fairly, intimate, 1. That the judgment of none of the children of men, though never &s;o famous in their generation, &s;ince the Apo&s;tles fell a&s;leep, is a &s;ufficient <HI>Sub&s;tratum</HI> to build my faith and practice upon in the Wor&s;hip of my God. In which we have the concurrence of the Ancients them&s;elves. <HI>Ba&s;il</HI> tels us, <HI>that it is nece&s;&s;ary and con&s;onant to Rea&s;on, that every man learn that which is needful out of the Scriptures, both for the fulne&s;s of Godline&s;s, and lest they be inured to humane traditions; Regul. contract.</HI> 95. <HI>p.</HI> 902. And <HI>Austin (Epi&s;t.</HI> 112. <HI>ad Paulin.)</HI> &s;aith, <HI>If a matter be grounded on the clear</HI>
<PB N="39" REF="20"> <HI>authority of the holy Scriptures, it is to be believed without all doubt; but as for other witne&s;&s;es and te&s;timonies, upon who&s;e credit any thing may be urged unto us to believe it, it is lawful for thee either to credit or not to credit them; according as thou &s;halt perceive them of weight to de&s;erve or not to de&s;erve credit. Origin</HI> &s;aith <HI>(Homil.</HI> 1. <HI>in Hierem.) We mu&s;t of nece&s;&s;ity call the Scriptures to witne&s;s; for our &s;en&s;es and interpretations without them are of no credit.</HI> Famous is the &s;aying of <HI>Cyril</HI> Bi&s;hop of <HI>Jeru&s;alem</HI> (Catech. 4. p. 15.) <HI>We mu&s;t not deliver any thing, though never &s;o &s;mall, without the holy Scriptures; neither may we be led away with probabilities and &s;hews of words; neither yet believe me barely &s;aying the&s;e things unto you, unle&s;s you al&s;o believe the demon&s;tration thereof from the Scriptures; for the &s;ecurity of our faith ari&s;eth from the demon&s;tration of the holy Scripture.</HI></P>
<P>2dly. That not the &s;ayings or judgment of the Ancients, but the clear Te&s;timony of the Spirit of God &s;peaking in the Scriptures, is &s;uffi|cient and efficacious for the &s;atisfying per&s;ons that are di&s;&s;atisfied in any thing relating to Faith or Wor&s;hip. Come to a poor &s;oul under real &s;cruples of &s;pirit with re&s;pect to the&s;e, and tell him, this Father is of this opinion and that Father of that, you do but <HI>oleum &amp; operam per|dere;</HI> when you have &s;aid all, he remains as he was, di&s;&s;atisfied, and &s;o will do, without evidence from Scripture. More than the&s;e two things the Animadverter cannot righteou&s;ly infer from the expre&s;&s;ion he di&s;cants on. What &s;aith he to the&s;e? not a word more or le&s;s. And I am apt to believe of <HI>Mr.</HI> T. that he is a man of greater mode&s;ty than to oppo&s;e them. He tells us indeed that it may be of good u&s;e to &s;atisfie mens con&s;ciences, that no &s;uch &s;eparation as now is from the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters of the Church of <HI>England</HI> was allowed of by the fir&s;t Fathers and Writers (what truth there is in this &s;ugge&s;tion &s;hall by and by be manife&s;ted) He will not &s;ay &s;urely of what good u&s;e he &s;uppo&s;eth it to be, that the faith of any is to be re&s;olved into their te&s;timony, which it mu&s;t be if what they &s;ay &s;atisfie the &s;crupling con&s;cience, <HI>i. e.</HI> I mu&s;t believe what they &s;ay is true, becau&s;e they &s;ay it, el&s;e that they &s;ay it, will never tend to my &s;atisfaction; which yet is an homage and duty that we owe to none but the Lord. A principle decryed and abhorred by the Ancients them&s;elves. The &s;aying of <HI>Au&s;tin (Epi&s;t.</HI> 48.) is known, <HI>Audi dicit Dominus non dicit Donatus, aut Rogatus aut Vincentius, a<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">t Hilarius, aut Ambro&s;ius, aut Augustinus, &s;ed dicit Dominus.</HI> And, <HI>Epi&s;t.</HI> 112. <HI>I will not have you follow mine authority, to think it nece&s;&s;ary that you believe any thing therefore becau&s;e I &s;ay it.</HI> And generally abhorred by the Reformed Churches. The <HI>Helvetian</HI> Confe&s;&s;ion &s;peaks roundly and fully to this matter; <HI>Quapropter non patimur nos,</HI> &amp;c. <HI>Wherefore we &s;uf|fer</HI>
<PB N="40" REF="21"> <HI>not our &s;elves in controver&s;ies of Religion, or matters of Faith, to be im|po&s;ed upon with the bare opinions of the Fathers, or determinations of Coun|cils, much le&s;s by received cu&s;toms, or the multitude of per&s;ons thinking the &s;ame things, or by pre&s;cription of long time. We admit no other Judge of Faith than God him&s;elf, pronouncing by the holy Scriptures what is true, what fal&s;e; what is to be imbraced, what not. We rest in the judgments of none but &s;uch as are &s;piritual, taken from the Word of God.</HI> Harmon. Conf. cap. 2. Certainly <HI>Jeremiah</HI> and the re&s;t of the Prophets grievou&s;ly condemned the Councils of the Prie&s;ts in&s;tituted again&s;t the Law of God; and diligently admoni&s;hed that we hearken not to Fathers, or go in their wayes, who walking in their own inventions decline from the Law of God. Before the con&s;ciences of any can be &s;atisfied in the judgment and practice of the Fathers &amp; primitive Writers, two things they had need be a&s;&s;ured of; 1. That what is handed out to them be indeed their &s;ayings and practices who&s;e they are pretended to be. For &s;uppo&s;e my con&s;cience ought to be &s;atisfied in what they &s;ay or do, yet I had need be a&s;&s;ured, that what I reade or hear of their &s;ayings or practices, be indeed theirs, and not the interpolations or impo&s;tures of others, fraudulently mixed in their Writings and imouted to them; which this Animadverter knows to be no ea&s;ie matter to a&s;&s;ure any bo|dy of: The mo&s;t of them have unque&s;tionably been expo&s;ed to corrup|tion and adulteration by them into who&s;e hands they have fallen; from whom we have received them. Particular in&s;tances whereof lie near at hand to be produced, were it needful. Of <HI>Ignatius</HI> his Epi&s;tles &s;ome talk much; that they are (at lea&s;t) wondrou&s;ly corrupted, if not wholly forged and counterfeit, were ea&s;ie to demon&s;trate. To mention only what you have, <HI>Epist.</HI> 2. <HI>Fear and reverence your Bi&s;hop, as Christ; for &s;o the holy Apostles commanded you. He that obeyeth the Bi&s;hop and Presby|ters, is within the Altar and abides pure: but he who doth any thing without the Bi&s;hops and Presbyters, is without the Altar, defiled in his con&s;cience, and more mi&s;erable than an Infidel. For what is a Bi&s;hop but one endued with the power of Christ, who is God, who&s;e pre&s;cript as man he follows, and ob|tains Authority more &s;ublime than all Empire and Principality? And what is the Presbytery but an holy Council, the Coun&s;ellors and A&s;&s;e&s;&s;ors of the Bi|&s;hop.</HI> And Epi&s;t. 7. &s;peaking of the &s;ame per&s;ons, <HI>Amongst all men I will not &s;ay none are more excellent, but none can be found &s;o like to God, &amp;c.</HI> Expre&s;&s;ions that the &s;implicity of that Age was wholly ignorant of, and could not entertain without a blu&s;h, nor think of but with great abhor|rency of &s;pirit. The like may be &s;aid of other of the Ancients. <HI>Am|bro&s;e</HI> is made to &s;peak after this rate, <HI>The Epi&s;copal honour and dignity</HI>
<PB N="41" REF="22"> <HI>can be by no compari&s;ons adaequated; if you compare it to the fulgor of Kings, and diadem of Princes: this would <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">e as much beneath it, as if thou &s;houldst compare Lead to the brightne&s;s of Gold. For thou mayest &s;ee the necks of Kings and Princes bowed down to the knees of Priests, &amp;c.</HI> De Dignitat. Sacerd. cap. 2. And cap. 3. <HI>There is nothing in this World to be found more excellent than Prie&s;ts, nothing more &s;ublime than Bi&s;hops.</HI> Which tho&s;e who have in the lea&s;t enquired into the &s;tate of affairs in that Age, will be con&s;trained to acknowledge to be counterfeit and &s;purious. The like may be manife&s;ted of the re&s;t, and of the&s;e in other points; but that de&s;ign would require a Treati&s;e by i<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter"> &s;elf, larger than we in|tend this to be. But, 2ly, &s;uppo&s;e things with re&s;pect to them, were otherwi&s;e than we have manife&s;ted them to be; and we could be a&s;cer|tained that thus they &s;aid and writ, thus they did and practi&s;ed; we had need, ere our con&s;ciences could be &s;atisfied, be a&s;certained of one thing more, <HI>viz.</HI> That in their Writings they were, as the Prophets and A|po&s;tles, guided by an unerring Spirit, that in their practice they were to be our examples: for if I am not a&s;&s;ured that what they write is in|fallibly true, I am not to believe it; for &s;ure it will not be pleaded that there is any obligation lies upon me to imbrace what any man &s;aith, right or wrong, becau&s;e he &s;aith it; and yet except I believe it, con|&s;cience will not, cannot be &s;atisfied in their indoctrination. Now this is infallibly fal&s;e Mr. <HI>T.</HI> knows, who writ retractations of a great deal he had writ before; and had he lived longer, we might have &s;ee more Books of retractations. And this they them&s;elves acknowledg. So <HI>Au|&s;tine; I cannot deny but there are many things in my Works, as there are in the Writings of my Ance&s;tors, which ju&s;tly and with good di&s;cretion may be blamed.</HI> D. 9. Negat. And <HI>An&s;elme</HI> writes, <HI>that in their Books which the Church reads, many times are found things corrupt and heretical.</HI> Com|ment. in 2 <HI>Cor.</HI> Let the wi&s;e Reader peru&s;e their Books, and he &s;hall find this true that I &s;ay. The &s;ame may be &s;aid of the practice of the Fathers. Of what they did we have uncertain rumours; wherein they acted exorbitantly and not according to rule, they are not to be heeded. So that not what the Fathers &s;aid and did is &s;ufficient to &s;atisfie my con|&s;cience in any point, but only what <HI>Jehovah</HI> &s;peaks in the Scripture. All which I &s;ay, not to detract from the true worth of the Worthies of old, but to manife&s;t the weakne&s;s of Mr. <HI>T.</HI> his A&s;&s;ertion, That it will not conduce much, or be of good u&s;e to &s;atisfie mens con&s;ciences, <HI>&amp;c.</HI> wherein truly it is of no u&s;e at all, not being appointed by the Lord for &s;uch an end; though I deny not but to other&punc; ends and purpo&s;es it may be u&s;eful, as for &s;topping the mouths of Adver&s;aries, who glory in
<PB N="42" REF="23"> the Fathers and primitive Writers as if they were all for them; To remove prejudices out of the minds of people again&s;t Truth upon ac|count of its &s;eeming novelty, <HI>&amp;c.</HI> as I &s;aid in <HI>S. T.</HI> Nor &s;hall I at any time refu&s;e for the manife&s;tation of the vain brag of per&s;ons, that they have all Antiquity on their &s;ide, though I cannot admit of what they &s;ay into my Creed becau&s;e they &s;ay it (the only foundation of Faith being the infallible &s;peakings of God in the Scriptures) to debate from thence the matters in controver&s;ie with Mr. <HI>T.</HI> And doubt not but it may be made manife&s;tly to appear, that things are far otherwi&s;e with re&s;pect to the Te&s;timony of the Fathers, than is by him intima|ted; and that the foot&s;teps not of the Epi&s;copal Hierarchy, Common-Prayer-Book-&s;ervice, Church of <HI>England, &amp;c.</HI> but of the way of the <HI>Congregational-Churches,</HI> are to be found in and among&s;t them. And &s;uch principles laid down by them that will abundantly ju&s;tifie per&s;ons &s;eparating from &s;uch a Mini&s;try as that of the Ch. of <HI>Engl. Cyprian (l.</HI> 1. <HI>epi&s;t.</HI> 4.) tells plainly, <HI>Nor let the people flatter them&s;elves, as if they were free from the contagion of &s;in when they communicate with a wicked Priest, yea that they ought to &s;eparate from them: wherefore the people that obey the Laws of God and fear him, ought to &s;eparate them&s;elves from a wicked &s;hep|herd, and not be pre&s;ent at the &s;acrifices of a &s;acrilegious Prie&s;t:</HI> directly contrary to what this Animadverter affirms, <HI>Sect.</HI> 9. <HI>Evil per&s;ons may be heard as true Mini&s;ters.</HI> And Epi&s;t. 6. <HI>He may by no mean<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter"> have or keep a Church, who is not ordained in the Church</HI> (viz.) <HI>to which he is related as Mini&s;ter;</HI> which the Mini&s;ters of <HI>England</HI> are not. 'Twe<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">e ea&s;ie to fill many pages with citations to this purpo&s;e. Mr. <HI>T.</HI> &s;peaks of Councils and Schoolmen, and of &s;ome that are not able to examine what is &s;aid by them. As for the latter of the&s;e, it had been well for the Church of God if they had never been: And the former, for the mo&s;t of them, it might have been well without. <HI>Nazienzen,</HI> who 'tis thought knew as much of them as many other men, &s;aith, <HI>If I mu&s;t write the truth, I am much enclined to flee from all the Councils of Bi&s;hops; becau&s;e I never &s;aw a joyful and happy end of any Council; nor was there by them any &s;up|pre&s;&s;ion of evils, but rather an addition and encrea&s;e of them;</HI> Greg. Naz. ep. ad Procul. And <HI>Luther</HI> affirms of the very be&s;t of them, <HI>I under&s;tand not that the holy Spirit is in this Council: All the&s;e Articles are hay, &s;tubble, wood, &amp;c.</HI> And learned <HI>Beza</HI> tells us, <HI>that &s;uch was the folly, ignorance, ambition, wickedne&s;s of many Bi&s;hops in the be&s;t times, that you would &s;uppo&s;e the Devil to be Pre&s;ident in their A&s;&s;emblies. (Praef. ad N. Te&s;t.)</HI> Which if &s;o, that which Mr. <HI>T.</HI> intends as a di&s;paragement, will be found to be clean contrary. No matter how little we have to do with them: had
<PB N="43" REF="23"> they been &s;tudied le&s;s than they are, and the Scriptures of the Lord more, we had ('tis more than probable) been at a nearer agreement in more controver&s;ies than one at this day. Had the <HI>Lebian</HI> Rule of Re|formation been laid a&s;ide, and this <HI>Ezratical</HI> Golden one been &s;olely made u&s;e of in mea&s;uring the Temple and them that dwell therein, Re|formation had been carried on with more celerity, and another Go&s;pel-Church-&s;tate introduced than many are aware of.</P>
</DIV3>
<DIV3 N="4" TYPE="section">
<HEAD>Sect. 4.</HEAD>
<ARGUMENT>
<P><HI>Some beams of Light may be communicated by a retrospection into the estate of affairs in the time of the old Law into the pre&s;ent enquiry, though the whole thereof be devolved in our pre&s;ent di&s;qui&s;ition upon the Scriptures of the New-Te&s;tament.</HI> Gen. 4. 26. <HI>con&s;idered. The Reformation of the then Church by &s;egregation and aggregation. The i&s;&s;ue hereof was the continuation of their Church-&s;tate for about a thou&s;and years after. The lawfulne&s;s of &s;eparation from the Church of</HI> England, <HI>proved by</HI> Ain&s;|worth, Cotton, Bartlet, &amp;c. <HI>No more pollution to be found among tho&s;e,</HI> Gen. 4. 26. <HI>from whom the Saints then &s;eparated, than is to be found upon the Church of</HI> England. <HI>The Animadverter begs the que&s;tion in &s;uppo&s;ing the Church of</HI> England, <HI>to be a true, and rightly con&s;tituted Church. The end of Separation of calling upon the Name of God. Tho&s;e from whom they &s;eparated,</HI> Gen. 4. <HI>in what &s;en&s;e they called upon the Name of God. Of the Noachical Separation,</HI> Gen. 6. <HI>The &s;pring of the Apo&s;tacy of tho&s;e from whom they &s;eparated. Of the old Iron Age. The wickedne&s;s of the Church of</HI> England. <HI>The duties we owe to per&s;ons from whom we &s;eparate.</HI></P>
</ARGUMENT>
<P>IN his fifth Section this Animadverter takes notice of &s;ome expre&s;&s;i|ons in <HI>S. T.</HI> to this purpo&s;e, That &s;ince &s;ome beams of Light may be communicated into the pre&s;ent enquiry by a retro&s;pection into the &s;tate of things under the Law, we are willing to take a little notice of the admini&s;tration of affairs in the Hou&s;e of God then; which after a bare mentioning of what was done by the Faithful in the dayes of <HI>Seth, Gen.</HI> 4. 26. We begin to con&s;ider from the time of the giving forth of the Law upon Mount <HI>Sinai,</HI> when we &s;ay the People of <HI>I&s;rael</HI> had a &s;tan|dard &s;et up for them to repair unto, and they became as a City on an Hill, con&s;picuous unto all. What &s;aith Mr. <HI>T.</HI> to this? Why, 1. It will not be ea&s;ie to di&s;cern how &s;ome beams of Light may be commu|nicated from a retro&s;pection into the &s;tate of affairs of old unto the pre&s;ent enquiry, if the whole thereof be devolved on the Scriptures of
<PB N="44" REF="24"> the New-Te&s;tament: which being a meer &s;light and &s;coff put upon the words of his Antagoni&s;t, might be pa&s;&s;ed over in &s;ilence. That Saints may not receive &s;ome beams of Light with re&s;pect to their de|portment towards the Appointments of Chri&s;t now, by a view of what was of old in&s;tituted, and carriage of the Saints then towards tho&s;e In|&s;titutions, becau&s;e the pre&s;ent In&s;titutions (in the practice whereof the Saints now are concerned) are bottom'd &s;ingly upon the Scriptures of the New-Te&s;tament, had the Animadverter by one Argument laboured to have evinced, we &s;hould (though notwith&s;tanding Mr. <HI>T.</HI> thinks to the contrary, 'tis in it &s;elf evident they may) have further con&s;idered it. When I find the Lord giving forth Laws to his People of old to walk by, and &s;trictly enjoyning them to conform to tho&s;e Laws, without adding any thing of their own thereunto, I had thought that the Lord having given forth Laws under the New-Te&s;tament for the ordering the affairs of his Hou&s;e now, &s;ome beams of Light might from hence be communicated touching my deportment towards the&s;e Laws from what was done of old; and rejecting all mixtures of humane inventions with them, which the Soul of the Lord in dayes pa&s;t manife&s;ted his indig|nation again&s;t, with relation to his then In&s;titutions. The like may be &s;aid of the other ob&s;ervations, and Laws enjoyned upon that People, we have briefly remarked. But 2dly, he grants he tells us, that Dr. <HI>Owon</HI> hath in his Latine Book of the nature, &s;tudy, and progre&s;s of true Theology, &s;hewed divers corruptions in the Ages before and after the Flood in the pure Wor&s;hip of God unto <HI>Mo&s;es</HI> his time, and that the re&s;titution of true Theology was &s;ometimes by a &s;eparation from the Wicked, when there was a general Apo&s;tacy from the true wayes of God unto a prophanity of his Name (as &s;ome conceive, <HI>Gen.</HI> 4. 26. is meant either by Bla&s;phemy, or &s;etting up of Idol-wor&s;hip) as it was before <HI>Abraham</HI>'s &s;eparation, <HI>Jo&s;h.</HI> 24. 15. <HI>An&s;w.</HI> 'Tis very true, that learned per&s;on hath done &s;o in that excellent Treati&s;e, and manife&s;ted, that not the prophaning the Name of God by the wayes mentioned by the Animadverter (which they did not); but the Reformation of the Church is by tho&s;e expre&s;&s;ions, <HI>Gen.</HI> 4. 26. held forth. Two things he tells us the words import. 1. That the Saints &s;et up di&s;tinct or &s;epa|rated A&s;&s;emblies for the &s;olemn performance of the Wor&s;hip of God, &s;eparating them&s;elves from the Wicked of the day (which they had not done before, nor had they any need &s;o to do, whil&s;t a Reformation might be accompli&s;hed without it, which it might whil&s;t the Church was contained within the limits of one family, <HI>viz.</HI> by the ejection of the Contumacious.) 2<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">ly. That being thus &s;eparated they took upon them
<PB N="45" REF="24"> the peculiar name of the Wor&s;hippers; or Sons of God (which they re|tained to the next horrible defection from the wayes of God about one thou&s;and years after) both which our Interpreters approve, who in the Text read, <HI>then began men to call upon the Name of the Lord,</HI> and in the margent add, <HI>to call them&s;elves by the Name of the Lord.</HI> That from this act of the Church of God &s;ome beams of Light may be communi|cated to Saints now, under the &s;ame circum&s;tances they were then tou|ching the duty of <HI>&s;egregation</HI> and <HI>aggregation,</HI> though bottom'd on New-Te&s;tament-Precepts, we are apt to conceive: but Mr. <HI>T.</HI> knows bet|ter. Yea, but 2dly, this Animadverter thinks that neither by him nor any other is it &s;hewed, that a &s;eparation was approved from Preach|ers that teach no wor&s;e doctrine than that is held forth by the Articles, Homilies, <HI>&amp;c.</HI> of the Church of <HI>England,</HI> or from a Church no more polluted by Idolatry or other corruptions in Wor&s;hip, than are charged upon the Publick enjoyned Wor&s;hip of the Church of <HI>England.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. That &s;uch a &s;eparation as that from the Church of <HI>England</HI> hath not been proved lawful, Mr. T. doth but think. The works of <HI>Ain&s;worth, Cotton, Bartlet, &amp;c.</HI> manife&s;t the contrary. 2dly, If he mean that it hath not been proved by that learned Author, nor any o|thers, that tho&s;e from whom they &s;eparated were not more guilty of pollution by Idolatry or other corruptions, than the Church of <HI>England,</HI> he is not a little mi&s;taken. Dr. <HI>Owen</HI> in the fore&s;aid place manife&s;ts (as far as a matter of &s;o long &s;tanding can be &s;uppo&s;ed to be capable of evi|dence) that they were not guilty of Idolatry, in the &s;en&s;e that the word is taken by this Animadverter, the Wor&s;hip of the only true God con|tinuing, as &s;aith <HI>Jo&s;ephus,</HI> even to the 7th Age, (with whom <HI>R. Eliezer</HI> accords, and mo&s;t of the Ancient Chri&s;tians, as <HI>Cyril, Epiphanius, &amp;c.)</HI> But 3dly. Mr. T. pittifully begs the que&s;tion, whil&s;t he talks of &s;epa|ration from a Church, no more polluted than the Church of <HI>England.</HI> which &s;hould we grant him was never proved lawful (nor could be), yet would it advantage him nothing; except he prove, that the Church (&s;o called) of <HI>Engl.</HI> was ever a rightly con&s;tituted Church of Chri&s;t, which he knows we deny; and though he frequently beg it of us, in the&s;e A|nimadver&s;ions, yet &s;hall we never (upon tho&s;e terms) grant him that it is &s;o, being abundantly a&s;&s;ured of the contrary. What pollution and Idolatry the Church of <HI>Engl.</HI> may be charged with, and whether the&s;e are &s;ufficient to ju&s;tifie our &s;eparation from her, mu&s;t afterwards be re|viewed. He adds, If <HI>Gen.</HI> 4. 26. be meant of a Reformation by &s;etting up &s;eparate Congregations, as Dr. <HI>Owen</HI> conceives, <HI>S.</HI> 2. <HI>cap.</HI> 3. it was that therein they might call on the Name of the Lord, which &s;hews it
<PB N="46" REF="25"> was from them that did not call on the Name of the Lord, not from them that did, as in the Wor&s;hip of the Church of <HI>Engl.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. Others be&s;ide that learned man, judge the words import a Reformation by &s;etting up Separate Congregations. So doth Dr. <HI>Wil|let</HI> (who I dare &s;ay Mr. T. will acquit of the guilt of Separation) who having rejected other interpretations of the words, fixeth upon this, a&s;|&s;erted by him; <HI>But now</HI> (&s;aith he) <HI>when as the Wor&s;hip of God began to be corrupted and prophaned, in the wicked po&s;terity of Cain, then Adam, Seth, and other of the Righteous Seed, began publickly to exerci&s;e Religion, and to have their holy Meetings and A&s;&s;emblies for the Service of God.</HI> And after|wards more fully (from <HI>Mercerus.)</HI> Wherefore the true meaning is, as before expre&s;&s;ed, that now the Church of God being increa&s;ed to a full number, did make a publick Separation in their Wor&s;hip, from the ge|neration of the Wicked, and began apart, in a &s;olemn manner, to wor|&s;hip God. But 2dly. That they &s;eparated to call on the Name of the Lord, is true; The end of their Separation was to wor&s;hip God, as a people alone, from the wicked of the world, among&s;t whom they lived, according to his own Appointments: nor can a Separation from any, for any other ends be ju&s;tified. But this evidenceth that tho&s;e they &s;e|parated from, did not call on the Name of the Lord. <HI>An&s;.</HI> Not at all. They did call upon his Name. That there was no Wor&s;hip among&s;t them, will not be a&s;&s;erted: No Nation under the thicke&s;t darkne&s;s that ever over&s;pred the World, but had &s;ome wor&s;hip of the Godds among&s;t them. The wor&s;hip of Idols (properly &s;o called) was not yet invented (as was &s;aid from <HI>Jo&s;ephus, &amp;c.)</HI> nor introduced: &s;o that 'tis evident they did call upon the Name of the Lord, <HI>i. e.</HI> they had not rejected the true God, nor all Wor&s;hip of him. This indeed follows, that they had much degenerated in their Wor&s;hip of him: This we prove of the Church of <HI>England,</HI> which would ju&s;tifie our Separation from it, as it did theirs from them, could no more be &s;aid therein. As for what he &s;aith of <HI>Noahs</HI> Separation, that it was from men that had fill'd the earth with violence; 'Tis true, they had done &s;o, and that with other things mentioned, <HI>chap.</HI> 6. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 11. was the ground of <HI>Noah's</HI> Separa|tion from them, and God's &s;weeping de&s;truction upon them. Their apo&s;tacy from the pure Wayes of God (that began in their toleration of the Wicked upon carnal re&s;pects in their &s;ocieties) aro&s;e at length to that height, that the whole Earth was corrupt <HI>(i. e.</HI> all the inhabitants of the World) except <HI>Noah</HI> and his Family, had depraved God's pure Wor&s;hip, (as precious <HI>Ain&s;worth</HI> expounds it, and the word frequently &s;ignifies, <HI>Exod.</HI> 32. 7. <HI>Deut.</HI> 32. 5. <HI>Judg.</HI> 2. 19. 2 <HI>Chron.</HI> 27. 2. with
<PB N="47" REF="25"> 2 <HI>King.</HI> 15. 35.) and filled with Violence, or Inju&s;tice, and cruel deal|ings to men. The u&s;ual pair we find walking hand in hand all along the Scripture, Degeneracy in re&s;pect of Wor&s;hip in the Eccle&s;ia&s;tical, Vio|lence and Oppre&s;&s;ion in the Civil &s;tate. And now the Animadverter will yeeld it nece&s;&s;ary to &s;eparate, which is as much as we need to ju&s;ti|fie our Separation. Degeneracy of Wor&s;hop we prove the Church of <HI>England</HI> guilty of, and Violence and Oppre&s;&s;ion, open Unrighteou&s;|ne&s;s and Inju&s;tice we every where meet with; As if the Iron-Age had again took place in the world, of which the Poet</P>
<Q><LG>
<L>&mdash;Erupit Venae pejoris in aevum</L>
<L>Omne nefas: fugere pudor, verumque fide&s;que.</L>
<L>In quorum &s;ubiere locum, fraude&s;&abque; deli&abque;</L>
<L>In&s;idiae&abque; &amp; Vis, &amp; amor &s;celeratus habendi.</L>
<L>Vivitur ex rapto, non ho&s;pes ab ho&s;pite tutus,</L>
<L>Nec &s;ocer &agrave; genero, fratrum quo&abque; gratia raraest.</L>
</LG></Q>
<P>But this &s;aith Mr. T. is not the cau&s;e of the Separation avowed by this Author. <HI>An&s;w.</HI> 'Tis not indeed the alone cau&s;e, but one among&s;t the re&s;t; So that in the judgment of this Animadverter, the Separa|tion pleaded-for, is nece&s;&s;ary. For whom he intends what he puts in a parenthe&s;is [though it appears not, but <HI>Noah</HI> continued to preach to them, and live among them] I know not. <Q>As rigid as the Separation pleaded-for, is, 'Tis not &s;o rigid, but we do, and can do both and more than &s;o too. We look upon it as our duty, to follow the Callings and Imployments the Lord-hath placed us in in the World, to have civil conver&s;e among&s;t the men thereof, 1 <HI>Cor.</HI> 5. 10. to fill up all the duties of the relation we &s;tand in, to the wor&s;t among&s;t them; to do any office of love we can for them; nor do we cea&s;e to pour forth our &s;ouls (though they are &s;ome of them de&s;irous to pour out our blood) to the Lord on their behalf, <HI>that they may be turned from darkne&s;s to light, from the power of Satan unto God:</HI> And are (as we have opportunity) preaching to them, though we run the hazard of the lo&s;s of our Liberties, if not Life it &s;elf: thereby we know Chri&s;ts bowels and pity to poor &s;inners is great; we have found it to be &s;o, who have obtained grace from God, and we cannot (knowing al&s;o the terrors of the Lord) but warn and be&s;eech them to flee from the wrath that is to come.</Q> What follows in this Section, not at all relating to the matter in controver&s;ie, being only a captions exception again&s;t an expre&s;&s;ion made u&s;e of by me, my intendment wherein is obvious to any ordinary under&s;tanding, might be pa&s;&s;ed over in &s;ilence. I &s;ay not
<PB N="48" REF="26"> as Mr. T. fal&s;ly repre&s;ents my words, that he might take occa&s;ion to talk of <HI>Job</HI> and other holy men, who (he thinks) were not bound to repair to the people of <HI>I&s;rael,</HI> except they would become Pro&s;e<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">ytes, which the avoiding the Idolatry of the Gentiles might require of them; not &s;uch corruptions only as are in the Church of <HI>Engl.</HI> that a Standard was &s;et up for the people to repair unto, <HI>i. e.</HI> as he &s;eems to intimate, the peo|ple of the Gentile world, at lea&s;t tho&s;e that feared the Lord among&s;t them, but them, <HI>viz.</HI> the People of the <HI>Jews.</HI> So that his di&s;cour&s;e about <HI>Job</HI> and &s;uch like is impertinent and frivolous. <HI>Job</HI> lived about the year of the World 2100, &s;everal years after the giving the Land. He with the re&s;t, he tels us, were not bound to repair to them, except they would become Pro&s;elytes, which the avoiding the Idolatry of the <HI>Gentiles</HI> might require; <HI>i. e.</HI> they were bound to repair to them, which indeed they could not do; or if they did, they would no<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter"> nor could they be accepted, except they turned Pro&s;elytes. But the corruptions that were among&s;t the <HI>Gentiles,</HI> were not only &s;uch as are in the Church of <HI>England, (i. e.</HI> they were &s;omewhat more, and greater) and God for|bid they &s;hould: Le&s;&s;er abominations in a once rightly con&s;tituted Church, are warrant &s;ufficient for &s;eparation from it, than what were at that day to be found among&s;t the <HI>Gentiles.</HI> But the&s;e things are not at all to the bu&s;ine&s;s in hand.</P>
</DIV3>
<DIV3 N="5" TYPE="section">
<HEAD>Sect. 5.</HEAD>
<ARGUMENT>
<P><HI>The People of the</HI> Jews <HI>indispen&s;ibly bound to the Statutes and Ordinances Jehovah gave forth to them, with respect to Eccle&s;ia&s;ticals and Civils, without addition or detraction. The ca&s;e of the Di&s;ciples plucking the ears of Corn, and</HI> David<HI>'s eating the Shew-bread, con&s;idered.</HI> Ho&s;. 6. 6. <HI>ex|plained. God's di&s;pen&s;ing with his own Law no argument that the</HI> Jews <HI>might add to or dimini&s;h therefrom. Of the &s;even other dayes kept by the A&s;&s;embly,</HI> 2 Chron. 30. 23. <HI>Of</HI> David's <HI>Ordinance,</HI> 1 Sam. 30. 20, 25.</P>
</ARGUMENT>
<P>MR. T. in his 6th Section repeats what I affirmed pag. 8. of <HI>S. T.</HI> touching the people of the <HI>Jews,</HI> the &s;um where of is, That God gave them Statutes and Ordinances, both with relation to Civils and Eccle&s;ia&s;ticks, which they were, without adding to, or detracting from, indi&s;pen&s;ibly bound to conform to. To this the Animadverter replies,</P>
<P N="1">1. By way of conce&s;&s;ion, <HI>They were</HI> (he &s;aith) <HI>bound to conform to them, and &s;o much the Texts alledged do prove.</HI> 2dly, By way of negation, <HI>That they were bound indi&s;pen&s;ibly, without adding to or detracting therefrom, to conform hereunto, not one of the Scriptures prove.</HI> This is to be con&s;idered.</P>
<PB N="49" REF="27">
<P> The fir&s;t Scripture in&s;tanc'd in, is <HI>Exod.</HI> 21. 1. <HI>Now the&s;e are the Judgments thou &s;halt &s;et before them,</HI> (the <HI>Judgments, i. e.</HI> the Judicial Laws or Civil Sanctions, as by Statutes or Decrees the Ordinances relating to Wor&s;hip are u&s;ually under&s;tood) which he particularly doth in the following ver&s;es. (To what purpo&s;e he is charged to &s;et them before them is ea&s;ie to be conjectured, <HI>viz.</HI> that they might conform to them; and not &s;olely to do &s;o, had been a contempt and di&s;valuation of the wi&s;dom and love of God who gave them forth); and chargeth them, chap. 23. 13. <HI>that with respect unto them they be circum&s;pect, (i. e.</HI> that they heed them, and them only.) <HI>Lev.</HI> 18. 4. (the &s;econd place in|&s;tanced) &s;peaks after this wi&s;e, <HI>Ye &s;hall do my Judgments, (i. e.)</HI> mine on|ly; as, <HI>him thou &s;halt &s;erve,</HI> Deut. 6. 13. is expounded by Chri&s;t, <HI>Mat.</HI> 4. 10. <HI>him only &s;halt thou &s;erve.</HI> Nor is there any thing more frequent in the Hebrew language (which is &s;hort and conci&s;e) as is known, than &s;uch a manner of &s;peech.) The &s;ame line of interpretation is to be &s;tretched over, <HI>Lev.</HI> 19. 37. &amp; 20. 22. &amp; 25. 18. But how egregiou&s;ly doth Mr. <HI>T.</HI> mi&s;take in affirming, <HI>that not one of the Scriptures in&s;tanced in, &s;aith, that they were indi&s;pen&s;ibly bound, without adding or detracting, to conform to the&s;e Statutes and Judgments,</HI> when <HI>Deut.</HI> 4. 2. the 7th Scrip|ture in&s;tanc'd in, expre&s;ly a&s;&s;erts it? <HI>Now therefore hearken, O I&s;rael, unto the Statutes and Judgments which I teach you, for to do them; Ye &s;hall not add unto the Word which I command you, neither &s;hall ye dimini&s;h ought from it, that you may keep the Commandments of the Lord you God which I command you.</HI> Bound they were by this Scripture to conform to the Statutes and Judgments, without addition to them <HI>[thou &s;halt not adde]</HI> or detraction from them <HI>[neither &s;halt thou dimini&s;h.]</HI> And if bound they were indi&s;pen&s;ibly &s;o: For no man hath power (though the <HI>Papi&s;ts</HI> bla&s;|phemou&s;ly a&s;&s;ert their Pope hath) to di&s;pen&s;e with the breach of Jeho|vah's Law; what he him&s;elf may do is not of our pre&s;ent di&s;qui&s;ition: which is enough to evince the fal&s;ity of Mr. <HI>T.</HI> his A&s;&s;ertion. This one Scripture (if there had been no more) as it is a &s;ufficient proof of what we a&s;&s;erted, &s;o it gives us light into the intendment of the Spirit of the Lord in the re&s;t in&s;tanced, according to the mea&s;ure whereof they are to be interpreted. Nor can it be otherwi&s;e, the holy and wi&s;e God having given forth Laws for his People to walk by, they mu&s;t needs be perfect and compleat: To accu&s;e them of Imperfection, as to the end for which they were given forth (and they were given forth for a Law and Rule to walk by) is to accu&s;e and charge the infinitly holy and ble&s;&s;ed God with Imperfection. That a People having a perfect Law revealed to them to conform to, &s;hould not be indi&s;pen&s;ibly bound
<PB N="50" REF="28"> &s;o to do, is the fir&s;t-born of improbabilities and ab&s;urdities. But Mr. <HI>T.</HI> will prove the contrary: we attend his dict<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">tes. He tells us, 1. <HI>Our Lord hath determined the contrary. An&s;w.</HI> But this is nothing to the purpo&s;e: We &s;ay not that they were &s;o bound to the ob&s;ervation of the&s;e Laws, that God could not di&s;pen&s;e with them (that he &s;ometimes did, and at la&s;t, at the lea&s;t as to one part of them that emi<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">ently rela|ted to in&s;tituted Wor&s;hip, he hath wholly removed and taken out of the way) but &s;o bound, that it was not lawful for any of the &s;ons of men to add to or de<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="2 letters">act from them. The ca&s;e of the Di&s;ciples plucking the ears of Corn, and <HI>David</HI>'s eating the Shew-bread, is not at all to the bu&s;ine&s;s: Chri&s;t who was pre&s;ent with the Di&s;ciples, wa<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">r<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">nting the action, who is Lord of the Sabbath; and might have done &s;o, had they on that day done &s;ome greater work than the plucking the ears of corn. And this he a&s;&s;erts as one part of the plea he makes for them, <HI>Matth.</HI> 12. 8. The Animadverter will never be able to make good this con&s;e|quence. Chri&s;t, the Lord of the Sabbath, di&s;pen&s;ed with his Di&s;ciples when they brake a Law of the Sabbath (though indeed the plucking the ears of Corn, was no breach of any Law of the Sabbath, but of the Tradi|tion of the Elders, who by their corrupt glo&s;&s;es had nefariou&s;ly added to the Law) granting for Argument-&s;ake that they had done &s;o. Therefore the people of the <HI>Jews</HI> were not bound to conform to the Laws given to them by the Lord, for the management of their Eccle&s;ia&s;tical and Civil Affairs, without addition or diminution. And as for the matter of Shew|bread, and <HI>David</HI>'s eating it: it was, 1. A ca&s;e of nece&s;&s;ity, an extra|ordinary ca&s;e, which the Lawgiver might di&s;pen&s;e with, under &s;uch a circum&s;tance, and yet the people of the <HI>Jews</HI> bound to conform to his Statues and Judgments, without addition or diminution. 2dly, 'Tis evident that <HI>David</HI> did nothing but what the Law of God permitted him to do. 'Tis true, Chri&s;t &s;aith, <HI>Mat.</HI> 12. 4. <HI>that it was not lawful for him to eat;</HI> But that is to be interpreted, that out of the ca&s;e of nece&s;&s;ity (as <HI>David</HI>'s ca&s;e at pre&s;ent was) it was not lawful for him &s;o to do: or that by the Ceremonial Law, or Law of the Prie&s;thood (which by the Law of God ought to give place to works of mercy and nece&s;&s;ity) it was not lawful. But that it was not ab&s;olutely forbidden him, is evident. 1. The Prie&s;t when he comes to him makes little or no &s;cruple of his taking the Bread, &s;o be the young men that were with him were legally clean, 1 <HI>Sam.</HI> 21. 4. 2dly, <HI>David</HI> tells him (as the ca&s;e &s;tood) the Bread was in a manner common, <HI>v.</HI> 5. for Ceremonies ought to give place to Charity, by the Law of the &s;ame Lawgiver that in&s;tituted them. Yea, 3dly, Our dear Lord in the place mentioned by Mr. <HI>T. Matth.</HI>
<PB N="51" REF="28"> 12. 5. tells us, that the practice both of his Di&s;ciples and <HI>David,</HI> was according to the Warrant and Law of God; <HI>v.</HI> 7. <HI>But if ye had known what that means, I will have mercy and not &s;acrifice, ye would not have con|demned the guiltle&s;s.</HI> Which is a citation out of the Prophet, <HI>Ho&s;.</HI> 6. 6. The meaning &s;eems to be, that in ca&s;es of real nece&s;&s;ity &s;ome Ceremo|nial In&s;titutions &s;hould give place to Moral Duties. Now how weakly doth Mr. <HI>T.</HI> argue! God did in the Law in &s;ome ca&s;es di&s;pen&s;e with the violation of &s;ome particular branches of the Ceremonial Law, there|fore the People of the <HI>Jews</HI> were not indi&s;pen&s;ibly bound to the ob&s;er|vation of it. The que&s;tion not being, what God did or could di&s;pen&s;e with, who was the ab&s;olute and &s;upream Lawgiver, but what the duty of the &s;ons of men was, with re&s;pect to the Law, where there was no &s;uch di&s;pen&s;ation; and whether they were not bound without additions and diminutions of their own, &s;olely to conform to it? So that Mr. <HI>T.</HI> his Argument is no better than
<Q>A Baculo ad Angulum;</Q> and altogether inconclu&s;ive of what he would prove thereby.</P>
<P>But it may be what follows is more to his purpo&s;e? Let that be con|&s;idered. He tells us, <HI>that as for additions to Laws Eccle&s;ia&s;tical, the A&s;|&s;emblies keeping other &s;even dayes be&s;ides tho&s;e pre&s;cribed in the Law of the Pa&s;sover,</HI> 2 Chron. 30. 23. <HI>and to Civils, the Ordinance of David,</HI> 1 Sam. 30. 20, 25. <HI>&s;hew that in both &s;ome additions might be by the Prince, &amp;c.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;.</HI> 'Tis true indeed, the A&s;&s;embly in <HI>Hezekiah</HI>'s time did over and above the &s;even dayes pre&s;cribed by the Law of the Pa&s;sover, keep al&s;o other &s;even dayes: and 'tis as true that this Animadv. openly prevari|cates in the cau&s;e he is pleading. For, 1. This was an extraordinary ca&s;e, not to be reduced to ordinary practice, nor of force to enervate a general Rule. 2dly, This was no In&s;titution or po&s;itive Law, nor was there any Injunction laid upon the People for the ob&s;ervation of tho&s;e Laws, but the People might if they would (or otherwi&s;e) ob&s;erve them: and therefore cannot properly be &s;aid to be an addition to the Laws Eccle&s;ia&s;tical; (it being no more than any agreement of men a|mong&s;t them&s;elves to keep a day or dayes of Thank&s;giving or Humi|liation) which had there been, it had been abominable wickedne&s;s. Mr. T. him&s;elf &s;aith, in his third part of the full review of the Di&s;pute concering <HI>Infant-Bapti&s;m,</HI> &amp;c. <HI>That Jeroboams Sacrifice and keeping a Fea&s;t at another time than God appointed&mdash;is condemned as Will-wor&s;hip, p.</HI> 3, 4. The Ordinance of <HI>David,</HI> 1 <HI>Sam.</HI> 30. 20. is to as little pur|po&s;e in&s;tanc'd in by this Animadverter. 1. It was a Military Ordi|nance, made by <HI>David</HI> when in a wandring &s;tate driven out of the bor|ders
<PB N="52" REF="29"> of <HI>I&s;rael.</HI> 2dly, Some refer the words, <HI>v.</HI> 25. to <HI>David,</HI> as if he alledged an old Law and Cu&s;tom, as if it were written, It is both now and hath been ever. So <HI>Vatablus</HI> who renders the words, <HI>that was ob|&s;erved from that day and above, i. e.</HI> from the beginning of the World to that day. Some &s;ay it was a Statute from <HI>Abraham</HI>'s time, (&s;o <HI>Gro|tius</HI> acquaints us) who a&s;&s;erts, that <HI>E&s;chol</HI> and <HI>Mamre. Gen.</HI> 14. 24. abode by the Carriages, yet <HI>Abraham</HI> will have them receive a part of the &s;poil. 3dly, This Ordinance is no more than a particular exem|plification of what Chri&s;t tells us is the Law and the Prophets, <HI>Mat.</HI> 7. 12. <HI>(i. e.</HI> what is required in the doctrine of the Law and the Prophets) and is the &s;um of what they teach concerning the duties of man to man, viz. <HI>That what&s;oever we would that men &s;hould do to us, we &s;hould do to them.</HI> But, 4thly, This Ordinance is expre&s;ly e&s;tabli&s;hed by the Lord, <HI>Numb.</HI> 31. 26, 27. <HI>Take the &s;um of the Prey that was taken&mdash;and divid<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter"> the Prey into two parts: between them that took the War upon them, who went out to Battel, and between all the Congregation.</HI> And <HI>Jo&s;.</HI> 22. 8. <HI>And he &s;pake unto them &s;aying, Return with much Riches unto your Tents, and with very much Cattel&mdash;divide the &s;poyl of your enemies with your Bre|thren.</HI> So that this Ordinance of <HI>David</HI> is no addition to the Civil-Laws of <HI>I&s;rael.</HI> What Mr. T. hath further to add touching this matter, chap. 1. &s;hall there be con&s;idered.</P>
</DIV3>
<DIV3 N="6" TYPE="section">
<HEAD>Sect. 6.</HEAD>
<ARGUMENT>
<P><HI>The Election or Ordination of Levites not a&s;&s;erted by the Author of the</HI> So|ber Te&s;timony, <HI>to be a Rule for the Ordination and Election of Mini&s;ters now. Mr.</HI> Tombs <HI>his mi&s;take, and injurious dealing therein, manifested. Mr.</HI> T. <HI>grants as much as we a&s;&s;ert in this matter. The ground of giving the fir&s;t-born to God. The Levites given to him by the Congregation in the room of the fir&s;t-born. The People &s;et apart the Levites to the Mi|ni&s;try.</HI> Exod. 22. 29. Numb. 8. 16, 17, 18. <HI>explained. The rea&s;on of the Peoples laying on of hands.</HI> Aaron <HI>and his &s;ons Levites. In what &s;en&s;e the Levites are called Prie&s;ts: their office and work.</HI></P>
</ARGUMENT>
<P>THe &s;eventh Section is by this Animadverter fronted with this, <HI>The Election and Ordination of the Levites is no Rule for Election and Or|dination of Mini&s;ters now:</HI> which if with an intendment to in&s;inuate in|to the mind of the Reader, as the A&s;&s;ertion of the Author of the <HI>S. T.</HI> he egregiou&s;ly abu&s;eth both the one and the other; There being not the lea&s;t word, &s;yllable or tittle throughout the whole Treati&s;e, that gives him the lea&s;t ground to &s;urmi&s;e any &s;uch thing, but rather the con|trary.
<PB N="53" REF="29"> The Election and Ordination of Mini&s;ters is a po&s;itive In&s;titu|tion of Chri&s;t, to be managed according to Rules given forth by him in the New-Te&s;tament. This I prove as well as I can, chap. 4. pag. 33. So that what Mr. T. clo&s;eth this Section with, <HI>that if it were true, that in this act of impo&s;ing their hands there were Election and Ordination,</HI> this was not a &s;ucce&s;&s;ive Election and Ordination, as is when one dies and another is cho&s;en and ordained in his room, as oft as there is &s;uch a va|cancy, when one Mini&s;ter dies and another comes in his &s;tead. For this Election and Ordination (if it may be &s;o called) was but once, and of the whole company together; and &s;o is no pattern for Election or Or|dination of Elders &s;ucce&s;&s;ively, by a particular Congregation &s;ucce&s;|&s;ively, or the major part of them, is not at all to the purpo&s;e. I no where intimate that it is a pattern of &s;uch an Election; Though I know as wi&s;e men as this Animadverter that do: as <HI>Cyprian Epi&s;t. lib.</HI> 1. <HI>ep.</HI> 4. and others. Yet I &s;ee no rea&s;on but that we may review what was by the appointment of the Lord practi&s;ed among&s;t his people, that bears &s;ome analogy and re&s;emblance to what is commanded under the Go|&s;pel for our further enlightning therein. (Mr. T. him&s;elf in his Apolo|gy, or Plea for the two Treati&s;es, grants, p. 141. <HI>that we may u&s;e an Analogie to enforce a Duty, before proved)</HI> And this is the whole of what I profe&s;s to be my aim in this Review of Ancient In&s;titutions; in the Prologue thereunto, in the&s;e words, <HI>Yet ina&s;much as &s;ome beams of light may be communicated unto the pre&s;ent enquiry, by a retro&s;pection into the &s;tate of things in the time of the old Law, it &s;hall not be grievous to us, briefly to remark the &s;tate and management of affairs under that Oeconomy:</HI> which was &s;o plainly a&s;&s;erted to be my &s;ole aim therein, that I cannot but won|der Mr. <HI>T.</HI> &s;hould have the confidence to impo&s;e upon me, as if from thence I would deduce a pattern for New-Te&s;tament-In&s;titutions, which he knows I do not. But I &s;ay, that per&s;ons were appointed by the Lord to be cho&s;en by the Congregation, for the publick admini&s;tra|tion of Ordinances and Wor&s;hip. Thus were the <HI>Levites,</HI> Exod. 13. 2, 12, 13. &amp; 22. 29. <HI>Num.</HI> 3. 12. <HI>An&s;w.</HI> I do &s;o indeed: what hath this Animadverter to &s;ay again&s;t it? 'Tis true, he grants they were given to God from among the Children of <HI>I&s;rael</HI> to do the &s;ervice of the Congregation; but it is not true that they-were appointed by the Lord to be cho&s;en by the Congregation. <HI>An&s;w.</HI> This mu&s;t be a little further con&s;idered. Upon the account of his &s;paring the fir&s;t-born of the chil|dren of <HI>I&s;rael,</HI> when he &s;lew the fir&s;tborn of the <HI>Egyptians,</HI> doth the Lord challenge them to be his, <HI>Exod.</HI> 13. 14, 15. <HI>The&s;e were the Congregation of I&s;rael to &s;et apart unto the Lord,</HI> v. 12. <HI>Thou</HI> (the People or Con|gregation
<PB N="54" REF="30"> of <HI>I&s;rael,</HI> v. 3.) <HI>&s;halt &s;et apart unto the Lord, all that openeth the matrix,</HI> (or, as the Serventy renders it, <HI>thou &s;halt put them apart unto the Lord.)</HI> This is call'd, chap. 22. 29. <HI>the giving of the fir&s;t born of their &s;ons to God,</HI> viz. to his work and &s;ervice. In the &s;tead of the&s;e he af|terwards appointeth the Levites, <HI>Numb.</HI> 8. 16, 18. <HI>For they</HI> (the Levits) <HI>are wholly given unto me from among the children of I&s;rael, in &s;tead of &s;uch as open every womb, even in&s;tead of all the fir&s;t-born of the children of I&s;rael.</HI> Concerning whom the&s;e few things are con&s;iderable: 1. That the <HI>Le|vites</HI> are &s;aid to be given, wholly given unto God, and that in the &s;tead or room of the fir&s;t-born, <HI>v.</HI> 16, 17, 18. (who they were that &s;et apart the fir&s;t-born to God was before &s;hewed) 2dly, That by the<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">r being given unto God, is intended their donation for his work and &s;ervice, is evi|dent, <HI>v.</HI> 11. <HI>for an offering of the children of I&s;rael, that they</HI> (the Le|vites) <HI>may execute the &s;ervice of the Lord.</HI> Whether the people had any hand in &s;etting them apart to this work and &s;ervice, is the que&s;tion to which the Spirit &s;peaks fully, <HI>ver.</HI> 9, 10. 1. The <HI>Levites</HI> were to be brought before the Tabernacle of the Congregation. 2. The whole A&s;&s;embly of the children of <HI>I&s;rael</HI> is to be gathered together, <HI>v.</HI> 9. which had been needle&s;s had they not been concerned in their approbation, (which is all I intended by the word <HI>cho&s;en,</HI> which the Animadverter afterward carps at, or can be &s;uppo&s;ed to do, having before a&s;&s;erted <HI>that they were appointed by the Lord,</HI> a word frequently u&s;ed in that &s;en&s;e as he knows.) Precious <HI>Ain&s;worth</HI> &s;aith as much upon the place: <HI>The whole, or all the Congregation</HI> (&s;aith he) <HI>becau&s;e the thing concerned them all to know and approve, the Levites being now taken in&s;tead of the fir&s;t-born.</HI> 3dly, Whether this were te&s;tified by the peoples impo&s;ition of hands, let the Scripture determine, <HI>v.</HI> 10. <HI>And the children of I&s;rael</HI> (i. e. &s;ome of the chief among&s;t them in the name of the whole, as &s;ay our Anno|tators) <HI>&s;hall put their hands upon the Levites,</HI> by which &s;ign (&s;aith <HI>Ain&s;|worth)</HI> they put the charge and &s;ervice of the Church upon them, and con&s;ecrated them to God in their name (wherein they figured the Church of Chri&s;t, called <HI>the General A&s;&s;embly of the Fir&s;t-born)</HI> from whence in the very next ver&s;e, they are called <HI>the Offering,</HI> or <HI>Wave-Offering of the children of I&s;rael,</HI> (which <HI>Aaron</HI> is &s;aid to offer or wave for them, <HI>v.</HI> 11.) and are &s;aid, <HI>v.</HI> 14. to be thus <HI>&s;eparated from amongst the children of I&s;rael (i. e.</HI> according to the Rites before-mentioned) in allu&s;ion to which &s;ome think the &s;ame word is u&s;ed, <HI>Acts</HI> 13. 2. and <HI>Paul, Rom.</HI> 1. 1. &s;aith of him&s;elf, that he was <GAP DESC="foreign">, <HI>&s;eparated to the Gospel of God.</HI> If it be objected, that it is &s;aid <HI>ver.</HI> 14. <HI>Thus &s;halt thou &s;eparate,</HI> as if it were <HI>Mo&s;es</HI> his act alone: the whole
<PB N="55" REF="30"> context confutes that vanity, in which there is an apparent di&s;tinction betwixt the act of <HI>Mo&s;es, Aaron,</HI> and <HI>the People.</HI> But here he is &s;aid to <HI>&s;eparate them,</HI> becau&s;e the whole of this affair was managed according to the directions given by him from the Lord to them. And ver&s;. 16. <HI>to be wholly given to the Lord, viz.</HI> by the People. <HI>Given of the &s;ons of I&s;|rael unto God,</HI> i. e. <HI>for his Service,</HI> faith <HI>Chazkum.</HI> After all which they enter upon the work of the Lord to which they were thus &s;olemnly de|puted and &s;et apart, <HI>v.</HI> 11, 15. This Animadverter &s;aith indeed, <HI>that the rea&s;on of the laying on of the hands of the children of I&s;rael upon the Le|vites, was to &s;ignifie their obedient yeelding them in their &s;tead to God, &amp;c.</HI> If he mean, that it was one rea&s;on whereof, it's granted, no act of wor|&s;hip which we perform, but we thereby &s;ignifie our &s;ubjection and obe|dience to God. If the formal and only rea&s;on, his A&s;&s;ertion is void of truth; it being, as was &s;hewed, to &s;et them apart to the office of Mini|&s;try or Service of God, that they laid their hands on them: nor is there the lea&s;t print in <HI>v.</HI> 19 (the only proof of this A&s;&s;ertion) of any &s;uch thing. 'Tis true the choice <HI>(i. e.</HI> the fir&s;t-choice or appointment of them to this Mini&s;try) was God's; the pre&s;entment of them to the Con|gregation <HI>Mo&s;es</HI> his act; the yeelding of them, or rather the &s;olemn deputation of them to the work of the Lord, not the act of the fir&s;t|born meerly, but of the Congregation who were called together for this purpo&s;e. The A&s;&s;embly in their Annotations &s;peak clearly hereunto, <HI>Numb.</HI> 8. 10. <HI>The Children]</HI> meaning &s;ome of the chief among them in the name of the whole. <HI>Their hands]</HI> the impo&s;ition of hands was u&s;ed in Benedictions and Ordinations, not only in the Old-Te&s;tament as <HI>Gen.</HI> 48. 17, 20. <HI>Numb.</HI> 27. 23. but in the New, See <HI>Acts</HI> 6. 6. &amp; 13. 3. 1 <HI>Tim.</HI> 4. 14. &amp; 2 <HI>Tim.</HI> 1. 6. The Peoples putting their hands upon the <HI>Levites,</HI> was partly to te&s;tifie that they gave up all carnal and worldly re&s;pects, and intere&s;ts in them, and bequeathed them wholly to God, and that they did approve of their office in the behalf of them|&s;elves, in who&s;e &s;tead they &s;tood in the performance of many of their mini&s;trations. But Mr. T. hath found out a grievous mi&s;take, which he again takes notice of <HI>Sect.</HI> 8. which if true, enervates all that we have a&s;&s;erted; and that is, <HI>that the&s;e were not Prie&s;ts, they were di&s;tinct from the Levites,</HI> viz. <HI>Aaron and his &s;ons, who were called of God,</HI> Heb. 5. 4. <HI>without the Peoples laying on of hands.</HI> But 1. <HI>Aaron</HI> and his &s;ons were <HI>Levites,</HI> Exod. 4. 14, 16, 18, 20. 2dly, Calling of God, and Con&s;ent and Ordination of the People are not <GAP DESC="foreign">; &s;o that though. <HI>Aaron</HI> w<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">s called of God, he might al&s;o be &s;et apart by the People unto that work, who were not altogether therein unconcerned, as is evident <HI>Exo.</HI> 29. 4.
<PB N="56" REF="31"> <HI>Lev.</HI> 8. 2, 3, 4. This Animadverter is not ignorant of the &s;aying of <HI>Cyprian</HI> upon that action of <HI>Mo&s;es,</HI> Num. 20. 26. <HI>Sic<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">t in Numeris, &amp;c. As in the book of Numbers God commanded Mo&s;es, &s;aying,</HI> Take Aaron thy brother, and Eleazer his &s;on, and &s;et them before all the Synagogue<HI>&mdash;God commands him to be con&s;tituted Prie&s;t before all the Synagogue; where|by he in&s;tructeth and &s;heweth, that Sacerdotal Ordinations ought not to be managed without the knowledge of the People, who are to a&s;&s;ist therein, &amp;c.</HI> And <HI>Pi&s;cator</HI> upon <HI>Heb.</HI> 5. 4. &s;aith, <HI>Mini&s;terio Eccle&s;iae,</HI> &amp;c. i. e. <HI>None ought to exerci&s;e the Mini&s;terial Function, except he who is thereunto called of God. Now this vocation is either immediate or mediate. The Prophets, Apo&s;tles, and Chri&s;t the Prince of them, were immediately called. Mediately were the PRIESTS of old, and Evangeli&s;ts called; as are at this day Pa&s;tors, Teachers, Governors and Deacons, each of who&s;e vocation is by the Church.</HI> And <HI>Jo&s;ephus</HI> tells us plainly, <HI>Lib.</HI> 3. <HI>cap.</HI> 9. <HI>that all the People approved the election of</HI> Aaron <HI>to the Priesthood, which God had made.</HI> And <HI>l.</HI> 4. <HI>c.</HI> 2. introduceth <HI>Mo&s;es</HI> &s;peaking to the People upon the occa&s;ion of <HI>Korah</HI>'s Rebellion, thus, <HI>Although by the lo&s;s of that honour (viz.</HI> of the Prie&s;t|hood) <HI>which he</HI> (Aaron) <HI>hath received from your own election. And 'tis most certain that a long time after Zadok was anointed to the office of High-Priest by the People,</HI> 1 Chron. 29. 22. <HI>But the Levites were not Priests.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. That they were not &s;uch Prie&s;ts as <HI>Aaron</HI> and his &s;ons, is granted; Prie&s;ts to offer Sacrifice or burn Incen&s;e they were not: nor do I any where a&s;&s;ert them &s;o to be. Prie&s;ts and Levites are &s;ome|times in Scripture di&s;tingui&s;hed I al&s;o grant: but then Prie&s;ts are taken for the Sacrificing-Prie&s;ts, <HI>viz. Aaron</HI> and his &s;ons, to who&s;e a&s;|&s;i&s;tance in their mini&s;try and &s;ervice they were appointed by the Lord.</P>
<P>Yet 2dly, That the word <HI>Prie&s;ts</HI> is of various acceptions in the Scrip|ture Mr. <HI>T.</HI> cannot deny. 1. The People of <HI>I&s;rael</HI> (all of them) are called a Kingdom of Prie&s;ts, <HI>Exod.</HI> 19. 6. 2dly, Per&s;ons of note, emi|nency, power and authority, <HI>Gen.</HI> 41. 45. <HI>Exod.</HI> 2. 16. pa&s;s under the &s;ame denomination. 3dly. The fir&s;t-born of the male-children, <HI>Exod.</HI> 19. 22. with 13. 2. are (&s;ay &s;ome) &s;o called. As <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">s (4thly) Chri&s;t, <HI>Heb.</HI> 7. 17. 5thly, The Saints, 1 <HI>Pet.</HI> 2. 5. The word is (6thly) u&s;ually taken for Church-officers that were &s;olemnly &s;et apart as Mini&s;ters of the Sanctuary for the &s;olemn management of the publick Wor&s;hip and Service of God. And of the&s;e, with the leave of <HI>Mr. T.</HI> I would take the confidence to a&s;&s;ert, that (among&s;t others) there were of the&s;e three &s;orts. 1. The Chief, or High-Prie&s;t, who (alone) might once in the year enter into the mo&s;t Holy, but not withou<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter"> Blood, <HI>Heb.</HI> 9. 7. 2dly. The inferiour and ordinary Prie&s;ts, who approached to the Altar
<PB N="57" REF="31"> of Burnt-Incen&s;e, offered Sacrifices, <HI>&amp;c.</HI> 3. The <HI>Levites,</HI> who were a more inferiour order of Mini&s;ters, given for the help of the Prie&s;ts to them in the work of the Sanctuary, and &s;olemn &s;ervice of God; Who are called <HI>Priests,</HI> P&s;al. 132. 9. and are &s;aid to have a <HI>Prie&s;thood,</HI> Jo&s;h. 18. 7. upon the account of their de&s;tination unto the &s;ervice of the Tabernacle and work of the Mini&s;try, to di&s;tingui&s;h them from the Con|gregation or Body of the People of <HI>I&s;rael,</HI> they are &s;o called. They were indeed (as was &s;aid) an inferiour order to <HI>Aaron</HI> and his &s;ons, but draw nigh to God they did, in the Service of God they were imployed on the behalf of the Congregation, and are called <HI>Priests,</HI> and &s;aid to have a Prie&s;thood; and hereupon one would think one might a&s;&s;ume the boldne&s;s to call them &s;o. Mr. <HI>T.</HI> tells us indeed, it was the Prie&s;ts office to do that work in which was the Wor&s;hip of God, <HI>viz. to offer the Sacrifices, &s;prinkle the Blood, and &s;uch other duties; the Levites were imployed to do other &s;ervices, as the bearing of the uten&s;ils, and &s;uch like.</HI> Wherein how truly and candidly he &s;peaks, is to be con&s;idered. 1. 'Tis true it was the Prie&s;ts office <HI>(Aaron</HI> and his &s;ons) to do that work in which was the Wor&s;hip of God, <HI>(i. e.</HI> the work they did when they drew nigh to God, or wor&s;hipped him, was the Wor&s;hip of God, which by office they were bound to do); But that it was their office exclu&s;ively to the Levites to do that work in which was the Wor&s;hip of God (as he mu&s;t be interpreted if we &s;uppo&s;e him to &s;peak pertinently) is fal&s;e. They mini&s;tred, and by office (whereunto they were &s;et apart) in the Service and Wor&s;hip of God, as was before proved. Their bearing the uten&s;ils was as much the Wor&s;hip of God, being commanded by him, as &s;acrificing or &s;prinkling the Blood of the Sacrifices upon the unclean. And this Animadverter, if I may a&s;&s;ume the boldne&s;s to &s;ay &s;o, writes indi&s;creetly and fallaciou&s;ly to oppo&s;e the&s;e. 2dly. 'Tis true, that to <HI>Aaron</HI> and his &s;ons it did by office, and exclu&s;ively to the Levites, ap|pertain to offer Sacrifice, and &s;prinkle the Blood; but that the Levites were only imployed in bearing the uten<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="2 letters">ls and the like, is not &s;o. They were, as well as the Prie&s;ts, the &s;on<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter"> of <HI>Aaron;</HI> 1. To teach the peo|ple, and in&s;truct them in the Law, <HI>Deut.</HI> 33. 10. 2 <HI>Chron.</HI> 17. 7, 8, 9. 80 30. 22. &amp; 31. 4. &amp; 35. 3. <HI>Ezra</HI> 7. 10, 11. <HI>Nehem.</HI> 8. 7, 8. &amp; 9. 4, 5. 2dly. They were &s;olemnly to prai&s;e God, 1 <HI>Chron.</HI> 16. 4. &amp; 23. 30. 2 <HI>Chron.</HI> 8. 14. &amp; 20. 19. &amp; 30. 21. &amp; 31. 2. <HI>Ezr.</HI> 3. 10. <HI>Neh.</HI> 9. 9. &amp; 12. 24. 3dly. To ble&s;s in his Name, <HI>Deut.</HI> 10. 8. 4thly. The Judgment of things &s;acred appertained to them, as touching Lepro&s;ie, <HI>Deut.</HI> 24. 8. 2 <HI>Chron.</HI> 19. 8, 10, 11. works in which the Wor&s;hip of God was as eminently as Sacrifice, <HI>&amp;c.</HI> upon the account of their de&s;igna|tion
<PB N="58" REF="32"> whereunto they may be called <HI>Priests,</HI> and are &s;o in the Scrip|ture. Yet 3dly. I no where u&s;e the name <HI>Priests,</HI> to denote the <HI>Le|vites</HI> only (in di&s;tinction from <HI>Aaron</HI> and his &s;ons) but make u&s;e of that term, to denote the Officers or Mini&s;ters among&s;t the <HI>Jews,</HI> de&s;igned and &s;eparated for the Wor&s;hip of God, and the management of holy things for and to them, whether Prie&s;ts or Levites; who being &s;o cal|led by the Spirit of the Lord, I thought I might warrantably u&s;e that appellation without di&s;ta&s;ting any one; and as yet &s;ee no ju&s;t ground for the change of my thoughts in that matter.</P>
</DIV3>
<DIV3 N="7" TYPE="section">
<HEAD>Sect. 7.</HEAD>
<ARGUMENT>
<P>Per&s;ons invested into the office of Priesthood, not left to the liberty of their own wills, or the wills of any: the whole of their Wor&s;hip, with respect to the matter and manner thereof, of divine In&s;titution. Of the Candle&s;tick made by Mo&s;es. The matter of it. His obligation to the pattern in making it. What it typed out. The ground of the acceptance of Wor&s;hip. Several places of Scripture revi&s;ed and con&s;idered.</P>
</ARGUMENT>
<P>THat per&s;ons inve&s;ted into the office of Prie&s;thood were not left to the liberty of their own wills, or the wills of any of the &s;ons of men, that the whole of their Wor&s;hip, with re&s;pect to the matter and manner thereof, was purely of divine In&s;titution, is a third A&s;&s;ertion of mine touching the &s;tate of things under the old Law, which Mr. <HI>T.</HI> takes notice of <HI>Sect.</HI> 8. which he grants to be thus far true; <HI>that what was of the In&s;titution of the Lord, both as to matter and manner, they were not in their office left to their own wills, or the wills of any others;</HI> and &s;o much he &s;aith the Scriptures produced prove.</P>
<Q>Sed dabitur ignis tamen et&s;i ab inimicis petam.</Q>
<P>We will not thank him for his grant, and doubt not but to manife&s;t &s;omewhat more, <HI>viz.</HI> That nothing was to be intermixed with what the Lord had in&s;tituted, nothing of man to be &s;uper-added thereunto, whe|ther you re&s;pect the matter or manner of the Wor&s;hip. And this the Scriptures in&s;tanced do prove. <HI>Exod.</HI> 25. 9, 40. <HI>According to all that I &s;hew thee, after the pattern of the Tabernacle, and the pattern of all the In|&s;truments thereof, even &s;o &s;hall ye make it&mdash;And look that ye make them after their pattern which was &s;hewed thee in the Mount.</HI> And this Dr. <HI>Willet</HI> upon the place plainly a&s;&s;erts, <HI>It is hence gathered</HI> (&s;aith he) <HI>the form of the Tabernacle is not left to the will of man, no not to the judgment of Mo&s;es; to teach us that God will not be &s;erved with will-wor&s;hip, according to the devices and inventions of men, but as he him&s;elf hath pre&s;cribed.</HI> Prelarg.
<PB N="59" REF="32"> Pi&s;cat. So our ble&s;&s;ed Saviour alledgeth in the Go&s;pel out of the Pro|phet. <HI>Mark.</HI> 7. 7. <HI>Num.</HI> 8. 4. <HI>According to the pattern which the Lord had &s;hewed Mo&s;es, &s;o he made the Candle&s;tick.</HI> The Candle&s;tick was a figure of the Church, &s;aid to be but one here, becau&s;e the Church at this day was National (as al&s;o <HI>Zech.</HI> 4. 1.) But <HI>Rev.</HI> 1. 20. we reade of &s;even Candle&s;ticks, which are expre&s;ly &s;aid to be <HI>the &s;even Churches of</HI> A&s;ia, <HI>i. e.</HI> they &s;ignified the &s;even Churches of <HI>A&s;ia;</HI> they were repre&s;ented by the &s;even Candle&s;ticks &s;aid here, and there to be made of Gold, bea|ten Gold; to point forth the matter con&s;tituting them to be vi&s;ible Saints, and to be made according to the pattern (of which <HI>Exod.</HI> 25. 31.) to type forth that no other ground or form of Doctrine, or of the Church, is to be brought in, than that which is &s;hewed of God, 2 <HI>Tim.</HI> 1. 13. 1 <HI>Tim.</HI> 1. 3, 4. &amp; 3. 15. <HI>Mat.</HI> 28. 20. To this Pattern <HI>Mo&s;es</HI> was &s;o &s;trictly bound, that it was utterly unlawful for him to have ad|ded the lea&s;t of his own invention; which to have done had been not only great unfaithfulne&s;s in him, but an impeachment of the Wi&s;dom of God, and his Love to his People. Heb. 8. 5. <HI>Who &s;erve unto the ex|ample and &s;hadow of heavenly things, as Mo&s;es was admoni&s;hed of God when he was about to make the Tabernacle: For &s;ee (&s;aith he) that thou make all things according to the pattern &s;hewed to thee in the Mount; i. e.</HI> To the type and example &s;et before him to imitate, to which he was not to add the lea&s;t pin of his own, 1 <HI>Chr.</HI> 28. 11. (The pattern of the Porch, <HI>i. e.</HI> of the Temple (&s;aith <HI>Vatablus</HI>) which <HI>David</HI> received either by re|velation, or by the hand of the Prophet, 1 <HI>Chr.</HI> 28. 12, 19. <HI>Exod.</HI> 8. 27. &amp; 39. 1, 5, 7, 21, 26, 31, 43. (other places in&s;tanced in the <HI>S. T.</HI> preach forth the &s;ame thing) The&s;e were types of the heavenly Ordinances in the Church of Chri&s;t, <HI>Heb.</HI> 8. 5. And type out that nothing of man is to be &s;uperadded thereto, but all things to be done according to Di|vine Commandment.) To the &s;ame thing doth the Spirit of the Lord bear witne&s;s, <HI>Exod.</HI> 40. 23, 25, 29. <HI>Num.</HI> 8. 3. <HI>Exod.</HI> 35. 10, 29. <HI>&amp;</HI> 36. 1, 5. <HI>I&s;a.</HI> 29. 13. To which may be further added, <HI>Deut.</HI> 4. 1, 2, 40. <HI>Now therefore hearken, O I&s;rael, unto the Statutes and Judgments which I teach you, for to do them&mdash;Ye &s;hall not add to the Word which I command you, neither &s;hall you dimini&s;h ought from it, that you may keep the Command|ments of the Lord your God&mdash;Thou &s;halt keep therefore his Statutes and Commandments which I command thee this day&mdash;.</HI> All which prove not only the obligation that lay upon them to conform to what was of the In&s;titution of the Lord, but the utter unlawfulne&s;s to add thereto, or introduce any thing of their own in his &s;ervice; (The ground of the acceptance of any Wor&s;hip or Service offered to him, being his Com|mand
<PB N="60" REF="33"> and In&s;titution) and that with &s;uch evidence and brightne&s;s, that it &s;eems Mr. <HI>T.</HI> dur&s;t not look them in the face, le&s;t they &s;hou<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">d have &s;o reproved him as to have hindred his further advance in that good work and cau&s;e, he was re&s;olved (having undertaken its defence) to pro&s;ecute. He only takes notice of two of the&s;e many places in&s;tanced in, <HI>viz. Lev.</HI> 8. throughout, which he grants &s;peak of the inve&s;ture of the Prie&s;ts into their Office, according to the Rites &s;et down; but whe|ther any other might to the&s;e have been added to the &s;ons of men, he tells us not: which yet he &s;hould have proved, if he would have demo|li&s;hed and thrown down what it was his good plea&s;ure to &s;et him&s;elf again&s;t. And he doth wi&s;ely not to approach too near this Scripture, which &s;tands with a two-edged Sword in its hand to defend the Truth oppo&s;ed by this Animadverter. No le&s;s than ten times, <HI>viz.</HI> v. 4, 5, 9, 13, 17, 21, 29, 34, 35, 36. The Commandment of the Lord is laid as the foundation of the whole of that procedure, clearly importing that matters of this nature, <HI>(viz.</HI> things relating to his Wor&s;hip) are &s;ole|ly to be bottom'd on Divine Precepts; and condemning and interdict|ing whatever of the like nature is offered to him on any other bottom. Which <HI>Aaron</HI>'s &s;ons afterwards attempting to do, <HI>Lev.</HI> 10. 1. peri&s;h in the flames of God's jealou&s;ie and wrath. <HI>R. Menachem</HI> on <HI>Lev.</HI> 8. 36. hath the&s;e words, <Q>In every other place it is &s;aid, <HI>as the Lord com|manded Mo&s;es;</HI> but here, becau&s;e they added unto the Command|ment, he &s;aith not &s;o, for they did not as the Lord had commanded; and added moreover unto them &s;trange Fire which he had not com|manded them, <HI>Lev.</HI> 10. 1. And <HI>Jo&s;ephus</HI> b. 3. c. 9. &s;aith th<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">s, <HI>Na|dab</HI> and <HI>Abihu</HI> bringing Sacrifices unto the Altar, not &s;uch as were appointed by <HI>Mo&s;es,</HI> but of that &s;ort they were accu&s;tomed to offer aforetimes, were burned by the violent flame that i&s;&s;ued from the Altar, that at length they died.</Q> The other place he takes notice of is <HI>I&s;a.</HI> 29. 13. which he refers to be di&s;cu&s;&s;ed to the fir&s;t chapter: All the other places (as was &s;aid) are pa&s;&s;ed over in &s;ilence: which man|ner of dealing is a great abu&s;e both to the Truth and Reader. To the Truth, by waving the con&s;ideration of what is offered as the <HI>&s;ubstratum</HI> upon which it is built: To the Reader, by pretending to an&s;wer to what is a&s;&s;erted by his Antagoni&s;t, for the confirmation of Truth, without advancing one &s;tep forward towards its confutation. But perhaps he means not, that where God hath given direction about any part of Wor&s;hip it's lawful to add any thing thereunto, but onely wherein God hath not &s;poken and determined as touching the management of his Wor&s;hip, there the will of &s;ome of the children of men takes place,
<PB N="61" REF="33"> and they may determine. But if &s;o. 1. This is a mo&s;t pitiful <HI>Petitio principii</HI> or begging the thing in que&s;tion, <HI>viz.</HI> That God hath not de|termined the whole of his Wor&s;hip and Service, but hath left &s;ome|what to the wills of men relating to Wor&s;hip, as &s;uch, to be determined by them, which is the <GAP DESC="foreign">, or the thing in que&s;tion, and will never be granted him upon tho&s;e terms. 2dly. Contrary to that fun|damental principle placed in the nature of man, and implyed and fairly intimated in each Scripture before in&s;tanced in, that nothing in his Wor&s;hip and Service is acceptable to him but what is of his own pre|&s;cription. 3dly. Diametrically oppo&s;ite to <HI>Deut.</HI> 4. 1, 2. (the&s;e addi|tions let them be of what nature, or in what ca&s;e they will, are additi|ons to the Word of <HI>Jehovah) I&s;a.</HI> 29. 13. with <HI>Mark</HI> 7. 7. (being evi|dently doctrines and in&s;titutions of men, which the Spirit there tells us mu&s;t have no place in the Wor&s;hip of God) That the Jews had their Service more fully particularized in all things pertaining to it than we have, (if he mean things relating to Service, or Wor&s;hip, as &s;uch) is &s;poken after the rate that a great many other things in this Treati&s;e are, <HI>viz.</HI> with confidence enough, but without proof. There being nothing relating to Go&s;pel-Wor&s;hip, as &s;uch, but is determined by Chri&s;t, and appointed in the Scripture. When he &s;ends forth his Apo&s;tles, <HI>Mat.</HI> 28. they were to teach what he had commanded them, nothing more or le&s;s. And he being Lord and Ma&s;ter of his Hou&s;e <HI>(who&s;e Hou&s;e are we, Heb.</HI> 3. 6.) who dares be &s;o bold as to intermeddle with the affairs thereof, without his appointment, or can do &s;o without an incroachment upon his Soveraignty? He was faithful as <HI>Mo&s;es,</HI> who received and revealed the Ordinances of the then Hou&s;e of God, that he left nothing relating to the Wor&s;hip thereof, as &s;uch, to the wills of men. But of this more hereafter.</P>
</DIV3>
<DIV3 N="8" TYPE="section">
<HEAD>Sect. 8.</HEAD>
<ARGUMENT>
<P><HI>Of the apo&s;ta&s;ie of the Jews from Divine In&s;titutions. The aim of the Au|thor in remarking it. Its application to the Church of</HI> England. <HI>Who&s;e Investions are expre&s;ly forbidden. Of things in them&s;elves out of the ca&s;<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter"> of Wor&s;hip indifferent. 'Tis not in the power of the Church to make that which is left indifferent by the Lord, a nece&s;&s;ary Wor&s;hip. The judgement of the Prote&s;tant Writers. Of the decency and order is in the Ceremonies of the Church of</HI> England. <HI>Of their being impo&s;ed by Publick Authority. How they draw from God. Of their ri&s;e from the cu&s;toms and manner of the Nations, directly contrary to many precepts. The introduction of mens Inventions into the Wor&s;hip of God idolatrous. Will-wor&s;hip Idolatry. The judgment of the Ancients and others thereabout. A departure from the</HI>
<PB N="62" REF="34"> <HI>In&s;titutions of God, to the Cu&s;toms of the Nations, called in Scripture a for&s;aking of God. Several Scriptures reviewed. Of the Jews wor&s;hipping other Godds. How the&s;e things are applicable to the Church of</HI> England.</P>
</ARGUMENT>
<P>IN <HI>Sect.</HI> 9. This Animadverter examines, what was a&s;&s;erted in <HI>S. T.</HI> touching the Apo&s;ta&s;ie of the Church of the Jews from the pure In|&s;titutions of the Lord, mingling therewith the Inventions of Men, and Cu&s;toms of the Nations, of which God &s;orely complaines, and for it &s;e|verely puni&s;heth them; the Conte&s;ts of God from fir&s;t to la&s;t being bot|tomed upon this foot of account; which as it relates to the People of the <HI>Jews,</HI> he acknowledgeth the truth of. But to apply the&s;e things (with the threatnings and puni&s;hments in the places mentioned) to the impo&s;ing or u&s;ing of &s;uch Ceremonies as are retained in the Church of <HI>England,</HI> is a gro&s;s abu&s;e. <HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. But who applied them hereunto? The utmo&s;t of the Athors intention in this a&s;&s;ertion, was only to mani|fe&s;t, That a Church might be wonderfully gathered and &s;eparated by the Lord out of the World, taken near to him&s;elf for his People, yet &s;oon apo&s;tatize and depart from him, which the <HI>Jews</HI> did: From whence I thought it had been lawful to conclude, That another Church, or Churches (except &s;ome &s;pecial Priviledge or grant to the contrary, given to them of the Lord, could be produced) might likewi&s;e apo&s;tatize from God; which when applied to the Church of <HI>England</HI> (as <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">e calls it) only amounts to thus much, that &s;uppo&s;ing it once was a true Church, 'tis po&s;&s;ible (if it hath not already) it may apo&s;tatize and depart from God; which Mr. <HI>T.</HI> will not deny. And that this was the utmo&s;t of my intendment in this matter is evident, from <HI>Q.</HI> 7. <HI>P.</HI> 11. Where are the&s;e words, <HI>Whether any Church in the world</HI> (we &s;peak of a vi&s;ible in&s;tituted Church) <HI>hath greater &s;ecurity again&s;t Apo&s;ta&s;ie from God, and that &s;ore Judgment of having its Candle&s;tick removed (and being unchurch|ed) than the People of the Jews had? If not, Then whether, &s;uppo&s;ing a Na|tional Church of the In&s;titution of Chri&s;t, it may not &s;o come to pa&s;s, that it may be &s;o over&s;pread with corruptions, that it may lo&s;e the e&s;&s;ence of a Church, and ju&s;tly be di&s;robed of that appellation.</HI> Yet upon &s;econd thoughts, I &s;ee not that there is &s;uch a va&s;t di&s;crepancy betwixt the Inventions of men, charged upon the <HI>Jews,</HI> for which they were threatned and puni&s;hed, and the Inventions are to be found in the Church of <HI>England,</HI> as this Animadverter would compel us to the belief of. He tells us, 1. <HI>That their Inventions were expre&s;ly forbidden;</HI> And are not the Ceremonies of the Church of <HI>England?</HI> Inventions of Men he grants at lea&s;t &s;ome of them to be. Now all the Inventions of man in the Wor&s;hip of God,
<PB N="63" REF="34"> relating to it as &s;uch, were then and now expre&s;ly forbidden; (while&s;t he &s;uppo&s;eth the contrary he doth but beg the Que&s;tion) by the &s;econd Commandment, and el&s;ewhere, as hath been &s;hewed. The learned Dr. <HI>Willet</HI> in his <HI>Coment&punc;</HI> on the 2d. Com. tells us, <HI>That the true Wor&s;hip of God, which according to his nature, mu&s;t be &s;piritual, is commanded in this 2d. Pre|cept, and that he will be wor&s;hipped according to his Will revealed in his Word; to which it is not lawful to add to, or take any thing therefrom, as the Lord &s;aid to</HI> Mo&s;es, Exod. 25. 9. He further acquaints us, <HI>That all other kinds of &s;uper&s;titious Wor&s;hip, devi&s;ed by man, which the Apo&s;tle calleth</HI> <GAP DESC="foreign">, <HI>Will-wor&s;hip,</HI> Col. 2. 23. <HI>(for we mu&s;t</HI> (&s;aith he) <HI>be con|tented with Rites and Ceremonies pre&s;cribed of God him&s;elf) and the appli|cation of things of them&s;elves indifferent, &s;o unto the Service of God, as to make them a nece&s;&s;ary part thereof, is condemned by this Precept:</HI> 2dly. Mr. <HI>T.</HI> a&s;&s;erts, <HI>That the Ceremonies of the Church of</HI> England, <HI>are confe&s;&s;ed out of the Ca&s;e of Wor&s;hip, in them&s;elves to be things indifferent. An&s;w.</HI> 1. And were there no Ceremonies among&s;t the <HI>Jews,</HI> confe&s;&s;ed out of the ca&s;e of Wor&s;hip to be &s;o? This Animadverter knows the contrary. 2. By what authority doth any of the children of men make that nece&s;|&s;ary in ca&s;e of Wor&s;hip, that is confe&s;&s;edly not &s;o out of it; <HI>i. e.</HI> make it a part of Wor&s;hip; for if nece&s;&s;ary in ca&s;e of Wor&s;hip, 'tis evident|ly made a part thereof, without which it cannot acceptablly be perform|ed. I confe&s;s (Dr. <HI>Foen. in Comitiis Oxon. An.</HI> 1605.) one of their own Poets &s;ings.</P>
<Q><LG>
<L>In Domini cultu, &s;i quid medium e&s;&s;e videtur</L>
<L>Quod populti dubio, &s;tat, cadit arbitrio.</L>
<L>Hoc Sacro-&s;ancta parens Eccle&s;ia &s;i modo &s;anxit,</L>
<L>Inque &s;acris cultum hunc &s;i velit e&s;&s;e ratum.</L>
<L>Non erit hic cultus medius, cogetur ad illum</L>
<L>Qui&s;que nece&s;&s;arius, hic quoque cultus erit.</L>
</LG></Q>
<P>Wherein he tels us, <HI>That if any thing be indifferent in the Wor&s;hip of God, and Holy-Mother-Church &s;hall e&s;tabli&s;h and confirm it, it cea&s;eth to be indifferent, and becomes nece&s;&s;ary Wor&s;hip, which every one is to be compelled to.</HI> In which he &s;peaks, &s;hall I &s;ay, like a true Son of the Church of <HI>England,</HI> or of <HI>Rome?</HI> But he forgets to tell us upon what Scripture he bottoms the&s;e two A&s;&s;ertions. <HI>Fir&s;t,</HI> That there is any thing relating to the Wor&s;hip of God, as &s;uch, of an indifferent nature. <HI>Secondly,</HI> That 'tis in the power of the Church to make that which is left indif|ferent by the Lord, a nece&s;&s;ary Wor&s;hip; nor can he produce any, but the unwritten Word or Law communicated to the Pope or his Con|clave,
<PB N="64" REF="35"> I know not when, and kept I know not where; which will prove no better (at be&s;t) than the proof the <HI>Jews</HI> bring for their Fopperies, &s;ince their Apo&s;tacy and &s;cattering abroad, out of their <HI>Talmudical</HI> Writers; or the <HI>Turks</HI> from their <HI>Alcoran, i. e.</HI> frivolous and ridicu|lous. This is generally decried and exploded by Prote&s;tant Writers. <HI>Peter Martyr (In Epi&s;t. ad Hoop. Epi&s;cop. Gloce&s;t.)</HI> affirms of the <HI>Eng|li&s;h</HI> Ceremonies, That, <HI>Quoad aliter facere non liceat, i. e.</HI> in their im|po&s;ition, as nece&s;&s;ary parts of Wor&s;hip, they were grievous and burden|&s;om. Certain Princes of <HI>Germany,</HI> to plea&s;e <HI>Charles</HI> the Emperor, Im|po&s;ed the Surplice, and other Rites, upon the Mini&s;ters of their &s;eve|ral Territories, and are all condemned (<HI>Supplicat. Teolog. German. A.</HI> 1561.) for this, <HI>That they cau&s;ed to &s;igh the Spirit of God, and the hearts of good men.</HI> <Q>It is Bla&s;phemy to think that any outward thing may be made a Sign in the Church of any thing that is &s;piritual (as the Cro&s;s in Bapti&s;m is) unle&s;s it be expre&s;ly ordained in the Word, and Com|manded by God him&s;elf to be u&s;ed to that end, &s;aith <HI>Lambert.</HI></Q> Danaeus <HI>(Cont. Bellar. de Cult. Sanct. Lib.</HI> 3. <HI>Cap.</HI> 7.) <Q>Contrary whereto is the Doctrine of none of the Reformed Churches, be&s;ides the Church of <HI>England,</HI> but of the Church of <HI>Rome;</HI> the Ba&s;is upon which her pom|pous Wor&s;hip is built, which being removed would fall to the ground, and peri&s;h with its own weight.</Q> Yea, but <HI>Thirdly, The Ceremonies of the Church of</HI> England <HI>are for Decency and Order.</HI> To which I &s;hall onely &s;ay what one &s;aid of the like &s;peech of the Monks of <HI>Burdeaux,</HI> when they affirmed, <HI>That the Signs added to Bapti&s;m, were an Ornament to it:</HI> <Q>We Reply, &s;aith he to them, <HI>Num igitur &s;unt, &amp;c.</HI> Are they wi&s;er than Chri&s;t Je&s;us, who hath ordained his Sacrament in &s;o great Purity, and &s;implicity, and who knoweth better than all the men in the world, what Ornament was &s;itte&s;t for it. If it be but the Cove|nant of a man, when it is confirmed, no man abrogateth it, or addeth any thing to it; What arrogancy is it then to add to the In&s;titution of Chri&s;t?</Q> What the Animadverters private thoughts of the Ceremo|nies of the Church of <HI>England</HI> are, with re&s;pect to their Decency and O<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">der, I know not; as wi&s;e men as he think the contrary. <HI>The Cere|monies which have been abu&s;ed to Super&s;tition (as the Ceremonies of the Church of</HI> England <HI>have been) can never &s;erve for Order or Comeline&s;s;</HI> &s;ay the Divines of <HI>Germany,</HI> who &s;tood again&s;t the Ceremonies then en|forced. And for the Surplice, one calls it, <HI>A Player-like apparel (Gualt. in Ho&s;.</HI> 2.) and <HI>(Calv. In&s;tit. Lib.</HI> 4. <HI>Cap.</HI> 10. <HI>Sect.</HI> 29.) <HI>A vain Vi|zard.</HI> Another <HI>(Baleus in Declar.</HI> of <HI>Bon. Arti.</HI> p. 100.) <HI>A pretty Toy.</HI> And (Dr. <HI>Taylor Act.</HI> and <HI>Mon.</HI> p. 1659.) <HI>An Api&s;h Toy.</HI> Another <HI>(Baecon.</HI>
<PB N="65" REF="35"> p. 1. <HI>Cathe.</HI> p. 486.) <HI>Hi&s;trionical, Scenical, and Scorner-like.</HI> As for their being, <HI>4thly, Impo&s;ed by Publick Authority,</HI> So were the <HI>Jewi&s;h</HI> Inven|tions. <HI>Jeroboam</HI> impo&s;eth them upon the People, who are &s;o far from be|ing excu&s;ed upon that account, that they are condemned for their fear|ful and &s;lavi&s;h &s;ubjection to him, <HI>Ho&s;.</HI> 5. 11. and el&s;ewhere. But <HI>Fifthly, Their Inventions were &s;uch as drew them to &s;erve other Godds, and for&s;ake the Lord. An&s;w.</HI> If he means that they were by the&s;e immediately in|fluenced to the rejecting the true God, that made the Heavens and the Earth, he talks like him&s;elf, confidently, and without proof. This in|deed they did draw them to, a rejection of Divine Appointments, and ca&s;ting off that Obedience and Subjection they owed to God&punc; and &s;o do the Inventions and Ceremonies of the Church of <HI>England.</HI> No Inno|vation in Wor&s;hip but is a &s;tealing from God, that Obedience and Ser|vice that is alone due to him, and giving it to another <HI>(viz.</HI> the Inno|vator.) In time al&s;o God gives them up in a judicial way, as a puni&s;h|ment of this their departure from Divine In&s;titutions, to the Inventi|ons of man, <HI>to blindne&s;s of mind, and &s;trong delu&s;ions.</HI> Thus he dealt with <HI>I&s;rael, I&s;a.</HI> 6. 9, 10. and 29. 10, 13. So that they at la&s;t grew &s;o &s;otti&s;h, as to fall down before the &s;tump of a Tree, yet without the utter re|jection or denial of the true God, whom they wor&s;hipped through that fal&s;e <HI>Medium.</HI> They &s;ware by the Lord <HI>(i. e.</HI> Wor&s;hiped him) when they &s;ware by <HI>Malcham.</HI> Unto what blindne&s;s of mind God hath given up many of the Pleaders for, and Conformers to the pre&s;ent Inventions and Ceremonies, I had rather leave to the &s;ilent thoughts of the <HI>Reader,</HI> than expre&s;s. And what in time, as a puni&s;hment for mingling the Wor|&s;hip of God with the Inventions of men, and departure from Divine In|&s;titutions, befel the Synagogue of <HI>Rome</HI> in re&s;pect of their <HI>Icolatria,</HI> or <HI>Image-wor&s;hip;</HI> and the Church of <HI>England</HI> in dayes pa&s;t, (and now in their falling down before the Sacrament, of which in its proper place we mu&s;t &s;peak) is known to all. And I heartily wi&s;h that the review thereof might make us to tremble to provoke the Lord to jealou&s;ie by the works of ourhands. But he adds, <HI>None of the Inventions of men men|tioned in the places cited, are &s;uch as can be charged upon the Church of</HI> England, (for that I take to be his meaning;) <HI>nor are any threatned by the Lord, or did he conte&s;t with the</HI> Jews <HI>upon the account of any Cu&s;toms of the Nations, but &s;uch as were Idolatrous;</HI> and of this he &s;aith, <HI>Let all the Texts alledged be viewed. An&s;wer.</HI> And we are contented they be reviewed, only we crave leave to premi&s;e; 1. That this Animad|verter doth not deny, that the Ceremonies of the Church of <HI>England,</HI> (at lea&s;t &s;ome of them) are derived from the Cu&s;toms of the Nations,
<PB N="66" REF="36"> nor indeed that mediately (through the Church of <HI>Rome,</HI> from whom we immediately received them) they are &s;o, can be denied. The Sur|plice, <HI>Durandus</HI> indeed thinks <HI>(Rational. Lib.</HI> 3. <HI>Cap.</HI> 1.) was borrow|ed from the <HI>Jews.</HI> It was rather (as we &s;aid) from the Heathen Prie&s;ts, who were clad in white in their Mini&s;tration. The Ri<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">g in Marriage, the Cro&s;s in Bapti&s;me, the di&s;tinction of the Prie&s;ts (from the <HI>Roman</HI> Heathen <HI>Flamins,</HI> and <HI>Arch-Flamins;)</HI> and many of their Fea&s;ts, as <HI>Eo&s;tar,</HI> or <HI>Ea&s;ter, Epiphany, &amp;c.</HI> &s;mell of the &s;ame Forge; which is directly contrary to many Precepts of the Lord in the Scrip|ture, <HI>Lev.</HI> 20. 23. <HI>Deut.</HI> 12. 30. <HI>(So will I do,</HI> i. e. <HI>not unto Idols, but unto the Lord,</HI> a<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter"> the next <HI>ver&s;e</HI> manife&s;ts.) Hereupon the <HI>Hebrews</HI> &s;ay, <HI>Thou maye&s;t not enquire or ask concerning the way of the &s;ervice of an Idol, how it is, although thou &s;erve it not; for this thing occa&s;ions to turn after it, and to do as they do. Maimon Tract.</HI> of Idol. <HI>Cap.</HI> 2. <HI>Sect.</HI> 2. <HI>Not only the Wor|&s;hip of fal&s;e Godds, but fal&s;e or Idolatrous Wor&s;hip of the true God is here for|bidden, and all imitation of Idolaters is condemned,</HI> 2 Kings 17. 15. Jer. 10. 2. P&s;al. 106. 35. 2dly. That this Animadverter &s;uppo&s;eth, <HI>That the Introduction of the Inventions of Men into the Wor&s;hip of God, is not Ido|latry; That &s;uch Ceremonies are not Idolatrous:</HI> which we cannot yeild him, it being the making an Image to our &s;elves, contrary to the &s;econd Commandment. Nor am I &s;ingular in this opinion. <HI>Augu&s;t. de Con&s;en&s;. Evang. Lib.</HI> 2. <HI>Cap.</HI> 18. <HI>Va&s;q. de Adorat. Lib.</HI> 2. <HI>Di&s;put.</HI> 1. <HI>Cap.</HI> 3. Dr. <HI>Bils.</HI> again&s;t <HI>Apolog.</HI> p. 4. p. 344. a&s;&s;ert, <HI>That all Will-Wor&s;hip is flat Idolatry.</HI> And Mr. <HI>T.</HI> will yeeld, <HI>That what is</HI> Praeter mandatum, <HI>be|&s;ide the Commandment, is Will-wor&s;hip.</HI> 3dly. <HI>That a departure from one or more of the In&s;titutions of God, to the embracement of the Cu&s;toms of the Nations, is in Scripture called,</HI> a for&s;aking of God, 2 <HI>Kings</HI> 17. 15&punc; <HI>Deut.</HI> 28. 20, with 15. <HI>I&s;a.</HI> 1. 4. which cannot be interpreted of their ca&s;t|ing off the whole Wor&s;hip of God, which they did not; for they con|tinued to &s;acrifice to him, to tread his Courts, and made many Prayers, they ob&s;erved the New-Moons, Sabbaths, <HI>&amp;c. ver&s;.</HI> 11, 12, 13, &s;o that totally they had not rejected him and his &s;ervice, but turning a&s;ide to the Inventions of men, and mixing them with the Wor&s;hip of God, he &s;aith, <HI>They had for&s;aken him:</HI> which that the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters and Church of <HI>England</HI> have done, we have evinced in <HI>Chap.</HI> 4, and 5, of <HI>S. T.</HI> And now let the judicious Reader con&s;ider the places produced, <HI>Deut.</HI> 32. 18. <HI>Jer.</HI> 23. 27. <HI>and</HI> 9. 13, 14. <HI>and</HI> 15. 6. <HI>Ezr.</HI> 9. 10. <HI>Jer.</HI> 16. 11, 12. <HI>and</HI> 19. 4, 5. and I doubt not but he will &s;ay, that they are not gro&s;ly abu&s;ed (as Mr. <HI>T.</HI> &s;peaks) when applied (though we did not do &s;o) to the impo&s;ition or u&s;e of the Ceremonies in the Church
<PB N="67" REF="36"> of <HI>England.</HI> 'Tis true the <HI>Jews</HI> are, in &s;ome of the places mentioned, ac|cu&s;ed with wor&s;hipping of Idols, but the great thing that is charged up|on them is their departing from the Appointments of the Lord; which had they not done, they had never wor&s;hiped tho&s;e fal&s;e Godds; who yet, &s;o far as I am able to di&s;cern, were not &s;trictly the Object of their Wor&s;hip, but fal&s;e <HI>Mediums,</HI> through which they wor&s;hiped and went to the true God; as others do through the Common-Prayer-Book-Ser|vice, as great an Idol as ever was in the World, and as much the in|vention of man as the Calf in the Wilderne&s;s, or the Calves at <HI>Dan</HI> and <HI>Bethel.</HI></P>
</DIV3>
<DIV3 N="9" TYPE="section">
<HEAD>Sect. 9.</HEAD>
<ARGUMENT>
<P><HI>Of the confidence of the People of the Jews under their Apo&s;ta&s;ie, that they were the People of God. Their Per&s;ecution, even to death, of &s;uch as te&s;tified again&s;t their Innovations. The Church and Mini&s;ters of England guilty of &s;uch Innovations, as the Prophets, Chri&s;t, &amp;c. condemned the Jews for. Our bearing Te&s;timony again&s;t the&s;e hath no tendency to the infringment of the Peace of the Nation. The way of ridged Conformity no Ba&s;is &s;uf|ficient to &s;upport the Nations Peace. The &s;aying of</HI> Cyril. <HI>The unju&s;t Accu&s;ations of Mr.</HI> T. <HI>again&s;t us</HI></P>
</ARGUMENT>
<P>WHat I remark in the fifth place touching the People of the <HI>Jews,</HI> that notwith&s;tanding their Apo&s;ta&s;ie they remained confident that they were the People of God, and per&s;ecuted, and put to death the Prophets and Servants of the Lord, that bore their Te&s;timony again&s;t their Innovations, Mr. <HI>T.</HI> grants to be true, <HI>Sect.</HI> 10. But intimates 1. <HI>That the People and Teachers of</HI> England <HI>are not guilty of &s;uch Innova|tions, as the Prophets, Chri&s;t and his Apo&s;tles charged upon the Jews:</HI> Whe|ther they are or no, let the judicious Reader judge from what is offer|ed in the foregoing Section. To which we &s;hall only add, that <HI>Mal.</HI> 1. 6, 7. may mo&s;t truly be &s;poken of them. They call God indeed <HI>Father,</HI> and <HI>Ma&s;ter,</HI> but they fear and reverence others as &s;uch, who&s;e Canons and Con&s;titutions they are bound to yeeld Canonical obedience unto. They de&s;pi&s;e his Name by offering polluted bread upon his Altar; a &s;er|vice not commanded by him, that hath been polluted, defiled by Anti|chri&s;t. Nor can they be cleared from that imputation of Chri&s;t, <HI>Mat.</HI> 15. 9. <HI>Teaching for Doctrines the Commandments of men.</HI> Which that they do, Mr. <HI>T.</HI> him&s;elf in his <HI>Fermentum Phari&s;aeorum,</HI> yet &s;peaketh, and every one knows. So that by this Animadverters confe&s;&s;ion we do well to bear our Te&s;timony again&s;t them. 2dly, That our witne&s;&s;ing
<PB N="68" REF="37"> <HI>again&s;t them tends to infringe the publick Peace. An&s;w.</HI> This was an ac|cu&s;ation managed in every day again&s;t the witne&s;&s;es of Chri&s;t. The Prophets infringed the Peace, &s;o did Chri&s;t, the Apo&s;tles, <HI>&amp;c.</HI> It was thought therefore not to be for the &s;afety of the Nations to &s;uffer them to live. And Mr. <HI>T.</HI> doth what he can (by &s;uch wicked and unchri|&s;tian intimations as the&s;e) to irritate the pre&s;ent Rulers to proceed a|gain&s;t us in like manner: Which (through the grace of the Lord) is a &s;mall matter to us, who would not account our lives dear <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">o our &s;elves, &s;o we may fini&s;h our work and te&s;timony for Chri&s;t with faith|fulne&s;s and joy. What peace the&s;e expre&s;&s;ions will in the review of them admini&s;ter to Mr. T. I know not; I am &s;ure they will be bitter|ne&s;s in the latter end. For our parts, where is the per&s;on that can te&s;tifie ought again&s;t us, as the di&s;turbers of the peace of the Nation? Are there any in it, that do more covet and de&s;ire the introducing what may and will mo&s;t a&s;&s;uredly be a Ba&s;is to &s;upport its continual peace and welfare? The way of rigid Conformity will never do it, as &s;ome hun|dreds of years experience manife&s;t. To this Animadverter I &s;hall only further &s;ay, as <HI>Cyril</HI> of old <HI>(Cyril Epi&s;t. ad Cleric. Con&s;tan. in Concil. Ephe&s;.</HI> p. 72.) <GAP DESC="foreign">. <HI>Are we Enemies to Peace? In no wi&s;e, we rather will pull it to us with violence, &s;o that the true Faith withal may be confe&s;&s;ed.</HI> If ou<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter"> Te|&s;timony do not eventually rectify any thing, we cannot help it, 'tis no other than what the &s;ervants of God (yea Chri&s;t him&s;elf, his <GAP DESC="foreign"> &s;ervant) met with. The people would go on in their &s;uper&s;titious pra|ctices, &s;ay what they could in the Name of the Lord unto them; yet were they bound to te&s;tify again&s;t them. This is our comfort, <HI>that our judge|ment is with the Lord, and our reward with our God.</HI> That this Animad|verter accu&s;eth us of being guilty of Calumny, and our practice as pro|ceeding not from holy zeal but evil pa&s;&s;ion, we are not much conce<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">ned. 'Tis a &s;mall matter to be judged of mans day; we mu&s;t &s;hortly &s;tand before an higher Tribunal, whither we can chearfully appeal; and heartily wi&s;h that Mr. T. had manife&s;ted le&s;s pa&s;&s;ion, and more holy zeal in this Treati&s;e than I am able to di&s;cern; then would he have had greater cau&s;e of rejoycing in the day of Chri&s;t.</P>
</DIV3>
<DIV3 N="10" TYPE="section">
<HEAD>Sect. 10.</HEAD>
<ARGUMENT>
<P><HI>Of the fal&s;e Prophets that were among&s;t the Jews. To whom the Mini&s;ters of</HI> England <HI>bear a great re&s;emblance, manife&s;ted in</HI> 6 <HI>particulars.</HI> I&s;a. 9. 15. <HI>and</HI> 28. 7, 8. Jer. 23. 11. Zeph. 3. 4. Ho&s;. 9. 8. 2 Pet. 2. 1.
<PB N="96" REF="37"> <HI>explained. To prophe&s;ie lies in the Name of the Lord, what. Eccle&s;ia&s;ti|cal Canons again&s;t the practice of the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters. To do violence to the Law: to be a &s;nare of a fowler: What they import.</HI> <GAP DESC="foreign">, <HI>or fal&s;e Teachers, who they are. Damnable Here&s;ies what, and why &s;o called. Denying the Lord that bought them, what it imports. The Plea of the Animadverter for the Church and Mini&s;ters of England, not much better than what was, or might have been made u&s;e of by Jeroboam him|&s;elf.</HI></P>
</ARGUMENT>
<P>WHat I mention in the 6th place touching the fal&s;e Prophets that were among&s;t them of Old, who ran before they were &s;ent, and prophe&s;ied &s;mooth things to them in the name of the Lord, according to the de&s;ire of the heart of them and their Rulers, upon the account whereof they were in great e&s;teem among&s;t them, Mr. T. grants. But intimates. 1. <HI>That the Mini&s;ters of England are not &s;uch as the texts produced de&s;cribe, and therefore tho&s;e that accu&s;e them, as if they were &s;uch, are fal&s;e accu&s;ers.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> But<HI>&mdash;Ne &s;aevi magne Sacerdos.</HI></P>
<P>Have a little patience, and we doubt not but to manife&s;t, that they bear a very great re&s;emblance and likene&s;s to them.</P>
<P>1&s;t. <HI>Did they run before they were &s;ent,</HI> Jer. 14. 14, 21. <HI>and</HI> 23. 21. <HI>(i. e.</HI> pretend to come and act in the Name of the Lord, when he ne|ver commanded them, nor &s;pake to them?) Do not the Mini&s;ters of <HI>England</HI> the &s;ame? This we afterward manife&s;t.</P>
<P>2dly, <HI>Did they Prophe&s;ie lies in the Name of the Lord,</HI> I&s;a. 9. 15. Lies, what are they? They are called, <HI>Fal&s;e Vi&s;ions, and Divinations, a thing of nought, and the deceit of their hearts, which God never commanded, nei|ther ever entred it into his heart to do &s;o,</HI> Jer. 14. 14. <HI>Dreams,</HI> Jer. 23. 27. Ezek 13. 2. <HI>and</HI> 22. 28. <HI>(i. e.</HI> the Inventions and Traditions of men, which they mingled with the Word of the Lord.) That of this the Mini&s;ters of <HI>England</HI> are guilty, we prove <HI>Chap.</HI> 4, <HI>and</HI> 5, of S. T.</P>
<P>3dly. <HI>Were they</HI> (&s;ome of them) <HI>&s;wallowed up of Wine, erring through &s;trong drink, (i. e.</HI> a parcel of drunken Sots) <HI>I&s;a.</HI> 28. 7, 8. <HI>and</HI> 56. 12. And hath Mr. T. the forehead to deny this of the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters of the Church of <HI>England?</HI> I &s;peak it without pa&s;&s;ion or prejudice again&s;t their per&s;ons; I believe, (and the the whole Nation will (I judge) atte&s;t the truth thereof) that there are not &s;uch a parcel of drunkards and debaucht per&s;ons to be found among&s;t any one profe&s;&s;ion of men in <HI>England,</HI> as among&s;t this Tribe.</P>
<PB N="70" REF="38">
<P> 4thly, <HI>Were they given to Covetou&s;ne&s;s? Jer.</HI> 6. 13. <HI>(i. e.</HI> the gene|rality of them were &s;o) &amp; 8. 10. <HI>I&s;a.</HI> 56. 11. And is it not the gene|ral complaint of the people of the Nation, who have eyes to &s;ee, and under&s;tandings to judge of per&s;ons and things, as well as this Animad|verter, that the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters of <HI>England</HI> are &s;o. From whom (were they Brethren) it is therefore our duty to &s;eparate by Apo&s;tolical Pre|cept, 1 <HI>Cor.</HI> 5. 11. Their greedy gaping after preferment and greater places of emolument&mdash;heaping one Steeple upon another (could no more be &s;aid) abundantly evince the truth hereof. Which is not only contrary to Chri&s;t's Canons (to which many have too little regard) but to Canons Eccle&s;ia&s;tical in former dayes, which interdict &s;uch practi|ces, upon penalty of being deprived of their Office and Benefice. <HI>Lib. Concil. Epi&s;t. Leo. Pap.</HI> 54. &amp; <HI>Decret. cau&s;a:</HI> 7. <HI>Qu.</HI> 1.</P>
<P>5thly. <HI>Were they prophane? did the Lord find their wickedne&s;s in his Hou&s;e? Jer.</HI> 23. 11. (are prophane, <HI>i. e.</HI> have little or no re&s;pect to my In&s;titutions; <HI>their wickedne&s;s have I found in my Hou&s;e,</HI> i. e. my very Temple is full of their Super&s;titions and Idolatries; &s;o our Annotators. <HI>Did they do violence to the Law?</HI> Zeph. 3. 4. i. e. corrupt it with their glo&s;&s;es, forced interpretations, con&s;tructions, &s;uch as God never put in|to it; they &s;et by the Law, and &s;et up their own inventions, wills, traditions, by which the Law was made void.) And can the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters be acquitted from a copartner&s;hip with them herein? we prove the contrary, chap. 4, &amp; 5. of <HI>S. T.</HI></P>
<P>6thly. <HI>Were they as a &s;nare of a Fowler in all his wayes, and batred in or again&s;t the Hou&s;e of the Lord?</HI> Ho&s;. 9. 8. <HI>(i. e.</HI> they watched the God|ly in <HI>Ephraim,</HI> or among&s;t the ten Tribes, who dur&s;t not &s;trike in with <HI>Jeroboam</HI>'s Abominations, but went up though by &s;tealth and &s;ecretly (&s;ome of them) to the Hou&s;e of God which was at <HI>Jeru&s;alem;</HI> and pri|vily) as the &s;nare of a Fowler that is laid &s;ecret, not in the &s;ight of the filly Bird) accu&s;ed and mole&s;ted them, being full of hatred again&s;t them, or the Wor&s;hip that was managed and carried-on at <HI>Jeru&s;alem,</HI> whither they went. The very &s;ame thing is practi&s;ed by the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters again&s;t &s;uch as dare not comply with them in their e&s;tabli&s;hed inventi|ons: which is &s;o generally known, and by &s;ome felt at this day, that it cannot be denyed; Who if they do not (&s;ome of them) openly, yet &s;e|cretly labour to en&s;nare, mole&s;t and trouble, by cau&s;ing to be pre&s;ented into the Bi&s;hops Courts, <HI>&amp;c.</HI> per&s;ons of &s;uch a complexion. What the frame of their &s;pirits is with re&s;pect to the Wor&s;hip which is of the ap|pointment of Chri&s;t, and will be found at the la&s;t to be &s;o; their rail|ing (not being able to do more) and &s;narling again&s;t it in their preach|ing,
<PB N="71" REF="38"> <HI>&amp;c.</HI> together with their prayers and endeavours for its extirpation, &s;ufficiently evince.</P>
<P>7thly. <HI>Did they prepare War against &s;uch as put not into their mouths? Mic.</HI> 3. 5. <HI>Had they no Vi&s;ion, were they dark, blind, without an an&s;wer of God?</HI> ver. 6, 7. And doth Mr. <HI>T.</HI> think that he will ever per&s;wade the enlightned people of God in <HI>England</HI> that the&s;e things are not true of the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters of <HI>England?</HI> Hath he alone been &s;uch a &s;tranger in our <HI>I&s;rael,</HI> as not to know that they are legible, and vi&s;ible upon the Clergy thereof? And if he a thou&s;and times over call us Calumniators and fal&s;e Accu&s;ers, for our affixing them to them: <HI>Wi&s;dom will be ju&s;tified of her Children</HI> whether he will or no. The good People of the Nation (yea tho&s;e that are but &s;ober among&s;t them&s;elves) will acquit us that we &s;peak nothing but truth of and touching them in this matter; know|ing full well that the&s;e things are indeed &s;o.</P>
<P>But Mr. T. adds, 2dly, <HI>They do not bring-in damnable Here&s;ies, denying the Lord that bought them,</HI> 2 Pet. 2. 1.</P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. Nor did I in <HI>S. T.</HI> charge them with &s;o doing: 'Tis true, I cite 2 <HI><GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">et.</HI> 2. 1. but the utmo&s;t of my intendment therein was to ma|nife&s;t, That as under the Law there were fal&s;e Prophets, &s;o under the Go&s;pel there are fal&s;e Teachers: which that Scripture proves. And one &s;tep further can none compel me to go.</P>
<P N="2">2. If the Animadverter thinks that becau&s;e they are not guilty (if indeed they are not) of what tho&s;e fal&s;e Teachers are there charged with, therefore they cannot be charged as fal&s;e Teachers, or &s;uch as &s;ymbolize with the fal&s;e Prophets of old, he is mi&s;taken. They are &s;o, do &s;o upon other accounts, though they &s;hould be acquitted of what is there mentioned. The Apo&s;tle &s;aith not, <HI>the fal&s;e Prophets of old brought in damnable Here&s;ies,</HI> and <HI>denyed the Lord that bought them,</HI> (which latter in plain terms they did not) they pretended as much to him as the true; that they came acted in his Name, that the Spirit of God was with them, 1 <HI>King.</HI> 2. 24. yet were they ju&s;tly and frequently charged as &s;uch.</P>
<P>But 3dly, upon &s;econd thoughts I &s;ee not but the characters of fal&s;e Teachers there mentioned, may truly and properly be charged upon the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters. <HI>Fir&s;t,</HI> They are called <GAP DESC="foreign">, which im|ports either that they, 1. fal&s;ly arrogated to them&s;elves the title of <HI>Teachers,</HI> when really and indeed they are not &s;o; or 2dly, that they taught <HI>fal&s;e things for true,</HI> thus &s;ome carry it. But 3dly, the corrupt and abominable innovations of Antichri&s;t are in 2 <HI>The&s;&s;.</HI> 2. 11. called <GAP DESC="foreign">, <HI>a lie;</HI> with allu&s;ion hereunto the&s;e Doctors or Teachers are here called <GAP DESC="foreign">, or <HI>teachers of a lie,</HI> viz. the great Anti|chri&s;tian
<PB N="72" REF="39"> Lie. Hence though there were many fal&s;e Teachers at that day (as is known) the Apo&s;tle &s;aith not in the pre&s;ent ten&s;e, <HI>there are,</HI> but in the future, <HI>there &s;hall be,</HI> viz. <HI>when Antichrist</HI> (according to <HI>Paul,</HI> who&s;e Epi&s;tles <HI>Peter</HI> conver&s;ed with, 2 <HI>Pet.</HI> 3. 15.) <HI>&s;hould be re|vealed.</HI> In re&s;pect of each of which the title is applicable to the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters. 1. They a&s;&s;ume the title of Teachers fal&s;ly, (as is proved, chap. 3. of <HI>S. T.)</HI> 2dly. They teach fal&s;e things, as we demon&s;trate, ch. 5. &amp; 10. of <HI>S. T.</HI> 3dly. That they are teachers of a great part of the Lie of Antichri&s;t; their Di&s;cipline, Wor&s;hip and Doctrine there|about, being for the mo&s;t part hammered at his forge, cannot be denied. <HI>Secondly,</HI> Of them it is &s;aid, <GAP DESC="foreign">, <HI>that they &s;hall bring in Here&s;ies of de&s;truction.</HI> The word <GAP DESC="foreign"> &s;ignifies to <HI>bring in be&s;ides,</HI> i. e. be&s;ides mens expectations, or be&s;ides the Truth taught by Godly Teachers, by them&s;elves in part al&s;o to countenance their Er|rors, &s;o the A&s;&s;embly; They &s;hall do it <HI>fraudulently under the vizard of Truth,</HI> &s;o <HI>Aretius.</HI> They &s;hall do it <HI>privily and &s;ubtilly, pretending a &s;hew of Piety and name of the Church,</HI> &s;o <HI>Gerh.</HI> Here&s;ies of ce&s;truction are no other but the Here&s;ies or fal&s;e Doctrines of Antichri<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="2 letters">, &s;uch as de&s;troy and lay wa&s;te the Church, the Truths and In&s;titutions of Chri&s;t, being alien and contrary to what is of his pre&s;cription, and are &s;up|ported by force and violence again&s;t them that do oppo&s;e them. For which at the la&s;t &s;wift de&s;truction is brought upon them&s;elves. Upon which account Antichri&s;t (as is thought) is called <GAP DESC="foreign">, <HI>Rev.</HI> 9. 11. i. e. <HI>a De&s;troyer,</HI> and <GAP DESC="foreign">, 2 The&s;&s;. 2. 3. <HI>the &s;on of de&s;truction,</HI> or <HI>perdition.</HI> That the Mini&s;ters and Church of <HI>England</HI> do thus, is too e|vident to admit of a denial. They a&s;&s;ume to them&s;elves the name of the Church, cry out again&s;t all others that &s;eparate from them as Here|ticks and Schi&s;maticks; preach &s;ome truth, with which they &s;lily mix their Errours; that lay wa&s;te the In&s;titutions of Chri&s;t, and per&s;ecute all the&s;e, impri&s;on, wa&s;te, ruine, de&s;troy them (or at the lea&s;t attempt it to the utmo&s;t of their power) that &s;tand up again&s;t their Innovations, and Church-de&s;troying Doctrines. The greate&s;t difficulty may &s;eem to be in tho&s;e words that are &s;poken of them, <HI>Thirdly,</HI> That <HI>they &s;hall de|ny the Lord that bought them;</HI> the words are, <GAP DESC="foreign">. They denied not that he bought them (if it be meant of Chri&s;t) but denied him, as <GAP DESC="foreign">, or <HI>Lord,</HI> ca&s;t off (in part at lea&s;t) his Au|thority as &s;ole King and Lord of his Church. And this too, not openly and in words, which is again&s;t the expre&s;s letter of the Text, <HI>they &s;hall privily</HI> or <HI>&s;lily bring it in,</HI> but in practice doing that which doth invelop or wrap up in it a denial of the De&s;potical or Kingly Office and Autho|rity
<PB N="73" REF="39"> of Chri&s;t. And this &s;aith <HI>Grotius</HI> the word &s;ignifies; <HI>De tali de&s;er|tione quae non verbo, &s;ed reip&s;a fiat, figurate u&s;urpatur. Hugo Grot.</HI> Whence <HI>Dux Gregis,</HI> the Captain of this Herd is called, <GAP DESC="foreign">, that lawle&s;s-one, that de&s;pi&s;eth, &s;ets light by the Laws and Authority of Chri&s;t. That hereof the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters are guilty we prove, chap. 4. &amp; 5. of <HI>S. T.</HI> So that not one of the Scriptures produced but may ju&s;tly be applyed to them. And the Conforming-Mini&s;ters are rightly charged, as the fal&s;e Prophets of the Jews are in the places produced in <HI>S. T.</HI> This Mr. <HI>T.</HI> denies: but if he would have made good his denial (in my conceit) he &s;hould have produced the particular places mentioned, and manife&s;ted that they could not properly be applyed to them. But he knew an ea|&s;ier way, <HI>Mentiris, Bellarmine, mentiris;</HI> a few keen words again&s;t his Antagoni&s;t would co&s;t him little. 'Tis true, he tells us that the pre|&s;ent Mini&s;ters teach the Fundamentals of Chri&s;tian Religion, but what he means by the <HI>Fundamentals of Religion</HI> he tells us not: Doth he in|tend that they own one God, <HI>&amp;c.</HI> &s;o did the fal&s;e-Prophets. The great Fundamental of true Religion is, That God is to be wor&s;hipped ac|cording to the Revelation he hath made of him&s;elf in the Scriptures of Truth: that all we do in his Wor&s;hip and Service, that relates to it as &s;uch, be bottom'd on divine pre&s;cript. This fundamental they deny, (introducing the Ordinances and Inventions of man, and making the&s;e a part of Wor&s;hip) A departure from which is the ground of all the Apo&s;tacy that ever was in the World.</P>
<P>4thly. This Animadverter's plea for the Church and Mini&s;ters of <HI>England</HI> is not much better than what was or might have been made u&s;e of by <HI>Jeroboam</HI> him&s;elf, for his Mini&s;try, Church and Wor&s;hip. Touching which precious <HI>Ain&s;worth</HI> in his <HI>Arrow against Idolatry,</HI> ch. 3. introduceth <HI>Jeroboam</HI> &s;peaking after this rate, <Q>I &s;ee my cour&s;e (O men of <HI>I&s;rael)</HI> to be much &s;u&s;pected, if not wholly mi&s;liked of many; &s;ome thinking my Ceremonies to &s;avour too rankly of Heathen Su|per&s;tition; &s;ome charging me plainly with flat Apo&s;ta&s;ie, and for|&s;aking of God: But how far off I am from all &s;uch Impiety, I hope to manife&s;t to all indifferent per&s;ons, chiefly &s;ith that I have neither &s;poken nor done again&s;t any Article of the Ancient Faith, not changed any Fundamental Ordinance of Religion (The very plea of Mr. T. for the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters) given us by <HI>Mo&s;es,</HI> but wor&s;hip with re|verence the God of my Fathers, and love him (as I am taught) with all my heart, and with all my &s;oul, cleaving unto him alone who is my life and the length of my dayes. Other Godds of the Nations I utterly abhor, with all their impure rites and &s;ervices&mdash;The alte|ration
<PB N="74" REF="40"> I have made is in matters of circum&s;tance, things whereof there is no expre&s;s, certain or permanent Law given us of God, and which are variable, as time, place, or per&s;on give occa&s;ion, and &s;uch as good Kings have changed before me, and have been blamele&s;s.</Q> This the &s;um, upon which he dilates excellently; and <HI>Sect.</HI> 12. introduceth him a&s;&s;erting his Wor&s;hip for &s;ub&s;tance to be the &s;ame that God comman|ded by <HI>Mo&s;es: We wor&s;hip</HI> (&s;aith he) <HI>the &s;ame God: we offer the Sacri|fices of Beeves and Sheep, burn Incen&s;e, pay Fir&s;t-fruits and Tythes, and ob|&s;erve all the Ordinances that our Fathers have kept &s;ince the World began: We hold the main Article of our Me&s;&s;iah to come, and of Redemption from our &s;ins by him&mdash;</HI>Thus plau&s;ibly, with much more mentioned by that worthy per&s;on before-named, in his <HI>Arrow against Idolatry;</HI> a Tract, to &s;ay no more, worthy the peru&s;al. Might <HI>Jeroboam</HI> plead for him&s;elf and practice (as <HI>Jo&s;ephus</HI> tells us he did, <HI>B.</HI> 8. <HI>Jews Antiq. <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">ap.</HI> 3.) yet are his wayes and wor&s;hip abominable and not to be joyned with. And yet Mr. <HI>T.</HI> hath not hitherto &s;aid more for the ju&s;tification of the Mini|&s;ters and Wor&s;hip of <HI>England.</HI></P>
<Q>Parvas habet &s;pes Troja &s;i tales habet.</Q>
<P>If no more can be pleaded in defence of the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters and Wor&s;hip than <HI>Jeroboam</HI> could plead for his Innovations and horrible Apo&s;tacy from God, their ca&s;e is deplorable indeed.</P>
</DIV3>
<DIV3 N="11" TYPE="section">
<HEAD>Sect. 11.</HEAD>
<ARGUMENT>
<P><HI>In the height of the I&s;raeliti&s;h Apo&s;ta&s;ie, God left not him&s;elf without a Wit|ne&s;s, re&s;erved to him&s;elf a Remnant. Of the &s;elf-invented Wor&s;hip of that day. Whether there be no &s;uch Wor&s;hip to be found in</HI> England. <HI>The duty of Saints with relation thereunto. Of Mr.</HI> T. <HI>his ra&s;h judging.</HI></P>
</ARGUMENT>
<P>THat God left not him&s;elf without a Witne&s;s in the height of the I&s;raeliti&s;h Apo&s;ta&s;ie, but rai&s;ed up one or other to te&s;tifie for him again&s;t their &s;elf-invented Wor&s;hip, that he re&s;erv'd unto him&s;elf a Remnant that clave to him and his pure Appointments, is a &s;eventh A&s;&s;ertion in the <HI>S. T.</HI> which Mr. <HI>T.</HI> al&s;o grants to be true, <HI>Sect.</HI> 12. but yet hath &s;omewhat to &s;ay hereunto.</P>
<P N="1">1. That <HI>&s;elf-invented Wor&s;hip was bowing the knee to Baal,</HI> 1 King. 19. 18. Rom. 11. 3, 4. <HI>Serving Idols,</HI> 2 King. 17. 12. <HI>Burning Incen&s;e to Vanity,</HI> Jer. 18. 15. <HI>Going after other Godds, to &s;erve them and wor&s;hip them,</HI> Jer. 25. 6. &amp; 35. 15.</P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> Very good! Doth the Author of the <HI>S. T.</HI> deny, that when the Apo&s;tacy of the Jews aro&s;e to its height, it came indeed to this?
<PB N="75" REF="40"> (the beginning hereof being laid in the departure from that Principle, That God is to be &s;erved according to the revelation he makes of him|&s;elf, not according to mans inventions) his citation of the places now again mentioned by Mr. <HI>T.</HI> evinceth the contrary?</P>
<P N="2">2. <HI>O but there is no &s;uch &s;elf-invented Wor&s;hip found in England.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> That there is not in every particular, the &s;ame is granted. I know not that they &s;et up the image of <HI>Baal</HI> to wor&s;hip it; what they do in the chambers of their imagery, God only &s;ees; openly they &s;erve not the &s;ame Idols, nor burn Incen&s;e to Vanity, <HI>&amp;c.</HI> but that there is no &s;uch &s;elf-invented Wor&s;hip to be found in <HI>England</HI> is <HI>gratis dictum,</HI> and without proof. All &s;elf-invented Wor&s;hip being indeed &s;uch, like it in its principle, a departure from the fore-mentioned fundamental-principle of Religion, being the &s;ource and &s;pring from whence it i&s;&s;ues forth; A bowing the knee to <HI>Baal,</HI> or yielding obedience to other Lords <HI>(viz.</HI> the In&s;tituter and Commander of that Wor&s;hip which is invent|ed) a &s;erving Idols (in the &s;etting up Man in the room of the Spirit of God, and the image (or form) created and made by him in the place of Divine Appointments.)</P>
<P>But 2dly. 'Tis to me a fond conceit to imagine, that upon a &s;uppo|&s;ition that the Mini&s;ters and Church of <HI>England</HI> are not guilty of &s;uch gro&s;s Abominations, as the places mentioned intimate the <HI>Jews</HI> to be guilty of, again&s;t whom the Prophets bear their Te&s;timony; Therefore none mu&s;t bear te&s;timony again&s;t pre&s;ent Abominations, nor can they be ju&s;tified in their &s;o doing, from the&s;e Texts. Whereas had they been guilty of le&s;s wickedne&s;s than they were, it had been the duty of the Servants of the Lord to have te&s;tified again&s;t them. The doing of what was not commanded by the Lord (as well as what was expre&s;ly forbid|den) is part of their Te&s;timony, 2 <HI>King.</HI> 16. 11. &amp; 17. 11, 13. We pretend not to be extraordinarily rai&s;ed up, and &s;pirited, to witne&s;s a|gain&s;t pre&s;ent Abominations, conceiving it not at all needful in the pre&s;ent undertaking. Every Chri&s;tian that hath tenderne&s;s to the honour and glory of God, (according to the capacity they are in) being obliged to te&s;tifie for him again&s;t the Innovations and Will-wor&s;hip of the day. Whether that &s;peech of Chri&s;t to <HI>James</HI> and <HI>John</HI> be mo&s;t aptly applyed to this Animadverter, and that generation he is become the Advocate of, and who they are that call for fire to come down from Heaven up|on tho&s;e that will not imbrace their doctrines, others will judge. We have through grace otherwi&s;e learned Chri&s;t. Whether it be <HI>bitter</HI> or <HI>holy</HI> Zeal for God that moves us, by whom whether our language will be judged ju&s;t reproof, or unju&s;t reviling, will one day be declared. I
<PB N="76" REF="41"> am &s;ure Mr. <HI>T.</HI> hath adventured upon what doth not at all appertain to him in judging before the time. And in this can we rejoyce, that un|der all his Cen&s;ures we have the Te&s;timony of the Spirit of the Highe&s;t, That in godly &s;implicity, and from a principle of holy Zeal <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">o God, we are carried forth in this matter. Though we dare not acquir our &s;elves of fle&s;hly mixtures (which we too much di&s;cern to our aba&s;ement and grief in all our undertakings) But what hath this Animadv. to accu&s;e us of? 'Twere as ea&s;ie to have manife&s;ted (if it had been &s;o, and we conceive he would not have &s;pared us) could he have done it, wherein the bitterne&s;s of our Zeal did appear, as to have &s;aid it was bitter; to have &s;hewed wherein our reproof was unju&s;t, as to intimate it to be &s;o. The&s;e are but words, and I hope not &s;poken from a &s;pirit of gall and bitterne&s;s towards us, though perhaps &s;ome other will be apt to think they are &s;o.</P>
</DIV3>
<DIV3 N="12" TYPE="section">
<HEAD>Sect. 12.</HEAD>
<ARGUMENT>
<P><HI>The People of God of old not to hearken to the teachings of &s;uch as were not &s;ent by the Lord. The Command of God touching their cutting-off. Saints forbidden to hear them. The fal&s;e Prophets preached much truth, though not the whole truth. So doth Antichri&s;t. They were not called fal&s;e Pro|phets meerly for their preaching fal&s;hood, but becau&s;e they ran before they were &s;ent. The pre&s;ent Ministers preach fal&s;hoods, &amp;c. In what &s;en&s;e to be cut off. Separation from the enjoyned fal&s;e wor&s;hip of old, commanded. 'Tis a breach upon the Sovereign Authority of God, called by the names of Adultery, Whoredom, Idolatry, &amp;c. Upon what account &s;o called.</HI> Jer. 9. 2. Ho&s;. 3. 3. &amp; 1. 2. Rev. 14. 8. <HI>explained, wor&s;hipping God at</HI> Jeru&s;alem. <HI>Non-&s;eparation from his Wor&s;hip there, no argument of the unlawfulne&s;s of Separation from the Church of</HI> England.</P>
</ARGUMENT>
<P>IN his 13th Section Mr. <HI>T.</HI> takes notice of what I offer in the eighth place touching the duty of the Saints of old, <HI>viz.</HI> That they were 1. Not to hearken to the teachings of &s;uch as were not &s;ent of the Lord, though they pretended never &s;o much to be &s;ent by him. This we prove, 1. from the Command of God touching the&s;e fal&s;e Prophets, <HI>viz.</HI> to cut them off, <HI>Deut.</HI> 18. 20. 2dly. They are expre&s;ly forbidden to hear them, <HI>Deut.</HI> 13. 3. <HI>Jer.</HI> 27. 6, 16.</P>
<P>To which the Animadverter replies; 1. <HI>None are &s;aid in the Texts mentioned, nor in any other he meets with, not to be &s;ent by the Lord, who delivered the Truth of God, but &s;uch as delivered fal&s;hoods, inciting to Ido|latry, or contradictory to the me&s;&s;age to the true Prophets.</HI></P>
<PB N="77" REF="41">
<P> <HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. If by the Truth of God, he means the whole Truth of God, 'tis granted, That never any fal&s;e Prophet delivered the whole Truth of God, nor do the Mini&s;ters of <HI>England,</HI> as we prove <HI>S. T.</HI> p. 91. If he mean that all they delivered was fal&s;e and erroneous, there is no|thing more fal&s;e can be invented or &s;poken. They knew (and &s;o did Sa|tan that &s;et them on work) that &s;o to have done, had been immediatly to have mi&s;carried in the de&s;ign they were advancing. Antichri&s;t in his Eccle&s;ia&s;tical &s;tate, is called the <HI>fal&s;e Prophet, Rev.</HI> 19. 21. his Doctrine and Wor&s;hip, <HI>a Lie,</HI> 2 The&s;&s;. 2. 11. yet many Truths are imbraced and preached by him.</P>
<P N="2">2. If Mr. <HI>T.</HI> thinks they were called fal&s;e Prophets meerly upon the account of their preaching <HI>Fal&s;hoods,</HI> and &s;uch as incite to Idolatry, and contradict the me&s;&s;age of the true Prophets, he is mi&s;taken. They are called <HI>fal&s;e Prophets,</HI> upon the account of their running before they were &s;ent, <HI>Ezek.</HI> 13. 6. <HI>Jer.</HI> 14. 14, 15. which they had been though they had delivered nothing but Truth; coming in his Name, when he never &s;ent them: And as &s;uch were to be put to death. So, &s;aith <HI>Mai|monides</HI> in his Treati&s;e of Idolatry, <HI>Chap.</HI> 5. <HI>Sect.</HI> 7, 8. (one who under|&s;tood the&s;e things as well as Mr. <HI>T.) The fal&s;e Prophet is to be &s;trangled to death, although he prophe&s;ie in the Name of the Lord, and neither addeth nor dimini&s;heth,</HI> Deut. 18. 20. <HI>Whether he prophe&s;ieth that which he hath not heard by Prophetical Vi&s;ion, or who&s;o hath heard the words of his fellow-Prophet, and &s;aith, That this word was &s;aid unto him, and he prophe&s;ieth thereby; lo he is a fal&s;e Prophet, and is to be &s;trangled to death.</HI> That they preached fal&s;hoods we deny not, and &s;uch intimated (at lea&s;t &s;ome of them) but that they were &s;ingly upon this foot of account &s;o called, this Animadverter will never prove. The <HI>Hebrews</HI> (who more perfectly knew the&s;e things than we) &s;ay the contrary, as but now was manife&s;t|ed; <HI>They were fal&s;e Prophets though they prophe&s;ied Truths, without ad|ding or dimini&s;hing, if they pretended God &s;ent them, &s;pake to them when he did not.</HI></P>
<P N="3">3. The pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters, as the fal&s;e Prophets of old, preach fal&s;|hood, and &s;uch as incite to Idolatry, as we prove, <HI>S. T. chap.</HI> 7. and &s;uch as are contradictory to the great Prophet <HI>Chri&s;t,</HI> as we manife&s;t, <HI>ch.</HI> 4, <HI>&amp;</HI> 5. of <HI>S. T.</HI> Therefore not to be heard by the conce&s;&s;ion of this Animadverter, though commanded by Kings and Rulers. By which he may gue&s;s how fit the&s;e things are to my pre&s;ent purpo&s;e, and how frivolou&s;ly he &s;peaks when he &s;aith, I &s;hould have left out the&s;e Alle|gations, if I had well bethought my &s;elf how unfit they were to my pre|&s;ent de&s;ign: but I will not he pre&s;umes &s;ay, that the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters
<PB N="78" REF="42">
<GAP DESC="duplicate" EXTENT="1 page">
<PB N="81" REF="42">
<GAP DESC="duplicate" EXTENT="1 page">
<PB N="78" REF="43"> &s;hould be cut off. <HI>An&s;w.</HI> If by cutting off he means putting to death, I will not indeed &s;ay &s;o; though it may be Mr. <HI>T.</HI> when an A&s;&s;i&s;tant for the ejection of &s;candalous Mini&s;ters thought it lawful civilly to &s;lay them; the &s;aying of Divine Service being one branch of &s;candal for which they were to be ejected. And the truth is, the Author of <HI>S. T.</HI> thinks they &s;hould not open their mouthes, as if Me&s;&s;engers and Emba&s;|&s;adors for God, till he opens them by giving down the holy Unction to them (the great qualification of Go&s;pel-Preachers, which mo&s;t of them, 'tis to be feared want) and an heart to relinqui&s;h their Anti|chri&s;tian &s;tanding; that they may go forth in the work of God from Au|thority received not from his grand Enemy, but from him&s;elf. 2dly, As not harkning to the fal&s;e Prophets, was the duty of the Children of the Lord of old, &s;o is Separation from the devi&s;ed Wor&s;hip of that day, in the fore-cited places a&s;&s;erted, and proved to be (1.) From the greatne&s;s of the &s;in of &s;elf-invented Wor&s;hip; which is,</P>
<P>1&s;t, A breach upon the &s;overaign Authority of God.</P>
<P>2dly, Called by the names of Whordom, Adultery, Idolatry, For|nication, <HI>P&s;al.</HI> 73. 27. <HI>I&s;a.</HI> 57. 3, 8. <HI>Jer.</HI> 9. 2. <HI>Ezek.</HI> 23. 45. <HI>Ho&s;.</HI> 3. 7. <HI>and</HI> 7. 3. <HI>Lev.</HI> 20. 5. <HI>Jer.</HI> 13. 27. <HI>Ezek.</HI> 16. 17. <HI>and</HI> 20. 30. <HI>Ho&s;.</HI> 1. 2. <HI>Rev.</HI> 14. 8. <HI>and</HI> 18. 9. 19, 20.</P>
<P>3dly, Separation here-from, is &s;olemnly charged upon them as their duty, <HI>Ho&s;.</HI> 4. 15. <HI>Amos</HI> 5. 5. <HI>Prov.</HI> 4. 14. <HI>and</HI> 5. 8. <HI>Cant.</HI> 4. 8. To which Mr. <HI>T.</HI> reples,</P>
<P>1&s;t, <HI>That devi&s;ed Wor&s;hip, which is tearmed Adultery,</HI> &amp;c. <HI>is</HI> Lev. 20. 5. <HI>committing whordom with</HI> Molech, P&s;al. 73. 27. <HI>being far from God,</HI> &amp;c.</P>
<P><HI>An&s;.</HI> 1. But Sir, the Que&s;tion is not, what that &s;elf-invented Wor&s;hip was, that is &s;o call'd, but whether it be not &s;o call'd (let it be what it will) on the account of its being &s;elf-invented. The Lord had taken that Peo|ple into Covenant with him&s;elf, for his Bride, Beloved: To them he was <HI>I&s;hi,</HI> a Lord, a Husband. By him, as &s;uch, they were obliged by virtue of that Covenant into which he had taken them, to be &s;olely guided and ruled; to ob&s;erve his Statutes and Judgments to do them, not hark|ning to the voice of any other be&s;ide him&s;elf. Their acting contrary hereunto was a breach of this Covenant, which being a Covenant of Be|trothment or Conjugal relation, the breach of it is therefore called by the names of <HI>Adultery, Whordom, &amp;c.</HI> which they had been guilty of, had they in &s;maller matters than tho&s;e in&s;tanced in, turned a&s;ide from God, <HI>Jer.</HI> 3. 19, 20. <HI>But I &s;aid, How &s;hall I put thee among the Chil|dren, and give thee a plea&s;ant Land, a goodly Heritage of the Ho&s;ts of Na|tions?</HI>
<PB N="79" REF="43"> <HI>and I &s;aid, Thou &s;halt call me, My Father, and &s;halt not turn away from me. Surely as a Wife treacherou&s;ly departeth from her Husband: &s;o have you dealt treacherou&s;ly with me, O hou&s;e of I&s;rael.</HI> Their turning a&s;ide to their own Inventions is the bottom upon which the&s;e abominations are &s;o called. <HI>P&s;al.</HI> 106. 39. <HI>Thus were they defiled with their own works, and went a whoring with their own inventions;</HI> Jer. 9. 2. <HI>They be all adul|terers (i. e.</HI> turned away from God, &s;ay the A&s;&s;embly) <HI>Ho&s;.</HI> 3. 3. Her not playing the Harlot, is expre&s;ly &s;aid to be, her <HI>not being for another man:</HI> which &s;hould &s;he be (as by &s;ubjecting to the Ordinances of men, in the Wor&s;hip of God, we are) <HI>&s;he plays the Harlot.</HI> And <HI>Ho&s;.</HI> 1. 2. <HI>Departing from the Lord</HI> (or his In&s;titutions, and Appointments) is called, <HI>committing great whordom.</HI></P>
<P>2dly, 'Tis true the Wor&s;hip which is called <HI>Fornication, Rev.</HI> 14. 8. <HI>and</HI> 18. 9. is &s;uch as <HI>Babylon made all Nations, even the Kings of the Earth to commit.</HI> Which learned <HI>Brightman</HI> upon <HI>Rev.</HI> 14. 8. interprets to be, the Super&s;titions, Errors, and Idolatries of the Church of <HI>Rome,</HI> which the <HI>We&s;t</HI> &s;ucked from her as from her Mothers Brea&s;ts, which proved Wine of wrath or jealou&s;ie, as well as Fornication; becau&s;e hereby the jealou&s;ie of God was &s;tirred up and provoked again&s;t them, as to pur|po&s;e it hath been; manife&s;ting and di&s;playing it &s;elf in Characters of Blood and Flames, Ruine and Deva&s;tation more or le&s;s, throughout the <HI>European</HI> Kingdoms. That the very Service of the Ch. of <HI>Engl.</HI> (called by an <HI>Antiphra&s;is, Divine Service)</HI> is the Service of the Church of <HI>Rome;</HI> That many of the Fornications, Super&s;titions, Errors, <HI>&amp;c.</HI> of the old Strumpet are yet remaining in the Church of <HI>England,</HI> we have demon&s;trated, <HI>Chap.</HI> 7. of <HI>S. T.</HI> The Holy-dayes ob&s;erved by the Church of <HI>England,</HI> are the Holy-dayes of <HI>Rome,</HI> its Collects, Prayers, Litany, Rites, from thence, Mr. <HI>T.</HI> knows and in part confe&s;&s;eth, <HI>pag.</HI> 102 of his <HI>Theodulia.</HI> So that if her Wor&s;hip be Fornication, the Wor&s;hip of <HI>England</HI> (being the very Wor&s;hip of <HI>Rome)</HI> is &s;o too; <HI>From which</HI> Mr. <HI>T.</HI> tells us, in this <HI>Sect. without controver&s;ie the People of God were to &s;eparate, and have no communion with any in.</HI> So that,</P>
<Q>Habemus confitentem reum.</Q>
<P>He pa&s;&s;eth &s;entence upon him&s;elf in having communion with, and pleading for the Church and Wor&s;hip of <HI>England,</HI> and aquits the Inno|cent in their righteous Separation there-from, in that very Treati&s;e he de&s;igned to ju&s;tifie the one, and condemn the other. That which is fur|ther, is a mo&s;t &s;orry begging of the Que&s;tion (a piece of Sophi&s;try this Animadverter is frequently guilty of) the &s;um is, But neither the Texts alledged, nor any other do require &s;eparation from the Wor&s;hip
<PB N="80" REF="44"> of God, or the Mini&s;ters of God, that are in &s;ome things corrupt, even in their mini&s;tration; which he exemplifies in <HI>Samuels</HI> mini&s;tring be|fore the Lord, and <HI>Hann<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">h's</HI> pre&s;enting him and her &s;elf at the &s;olemn Fea&s;ts, when <HI>Hophni</HI> and <HI>Phinehas</HI> did corrupt the Wor&s;hip of God: And tho&s;e of <HI>Judah</HI> were not to &s;eparate from the &s;ervice at <HI>Jeru&s;alem,</HI> which was to God, while there was burning incen&s;e and &s;acri<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">icing on the high-places; and though there were &s;undry corruptions in the Church and Services of the <HI>Jews,</HI> yet did Chri&s;t joyn in the publick Service of the Temple, and per&s;waded the clean&s;ed Leaper to offer the Gift <HI>Mo&s;es</HI> had commanded. From whence he infers, <HI>That though there &s;hould be &s;ome degree of corruption in Wor&s;hip, yet this is not &s;ufficient to ju&s;ti|fie our Separation from the Church and Mini&s;ters of</HI> England.</P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. That every corruption in Wor&s;hip, that every di<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">order in Church-admini&s;trations is a &s;ufficient warrant for &s;eparation from the Wor&s;hip, Church or Churches that are of Divine In&s;titution, (as was the Wor&s;hip and Church at <HI>Jeru&s;alem)</HI> I no where a&s;&s;er<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">; never thought.</P>
<P>2dly. While&s;t from h<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">nce the Animadverter infers, <HI>That though there &s;hould be &s;ome degree of Corruption in Wor&s;hip, yet this is not &s;ufficient to ju&s;tifie our &s;eparation from the Mini&s;ters and Church of</HI> England He doth but like an unwi&s;e Souldier, that not well heeding the ground he &s;tands on, is di&s;playing his Colours till he &s;inks into the Earth. There is one thing wanting to his Inference, that makes it too light to pa&s;s with per|&s;ons but of ordinary under&s;tanding; <HI>viz.</HI> That the Church o<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter"> <HI>England</HI> is a true Church, the Wor&s;hip thereof the true Wor&s;hip of God, a &s;trong &s;uppo&s;ition whereof (in&s;tead of evident demon&s;tration) is the Ba&s;is upon which the inference is built. For what though there were Corrup|tions in the Church and Wor&s;hip of <HI>I&s;rael,</HI> in <HI>Samuels</HI> time, in Chri&s;t's time: What if notwith&s;tanding the&s;e Corruptions it were no<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter"> the duty of per&s;ons to &s;eparate from that Church and Wor&s;hip which was origi|nally from God; what is this to the ca&s;e of &s;eparation from the Church and Wor&s;hip of <HI>England,</HI> which this Animadverter knows we deny to be of God? which, when he or any one for him &s;hall prove to be, I do faithfully a&s;&s;ure him never to plead for, nor practi&s;e &s;eparation more; which I &s;peak from an a&s;&s;ured confidence they can never be able &s;o to do. Though otherwi&s;e (upon &s;uppo&s;ition it could be proved a true Church, at fir&s;t rightly con&s;tituted according to the mind of Chri&s;t) &s;uch corruptions are to be found upon it, that are &s;ufficient to j<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">&s;tifie any mans peaceable &s;eparation from it. Though every corruption in Wor|&s;hip and Church-Admini&s;trations, as was &s;aid, will not do &s;o. There is
<PB N="81" REF="44"> nothing in this 4th. <HI>Sect.</HI> of that moment as to require our &s;tay in the con&s;ideration thereof. Whether tho&s;e eight Po&s;itions a&s;&s;erted in <HI>S. T.</HI> touching the management of affairs of old, be evidently comprized in the Scripture or no, may be perceived by the examination of Mr. <HI>T.</HI> his exceptions again&s;t them, let the Chri&s;tian and judicious Reader judge. I argue not from thence by way of Analogy, though I conceive the In|&s;titution being founded upon &s;ome command of Chri&s;t in the New Te&s;t. (the only warrant for the practice of Go&s;pel-Appointments) To argue from the carriage and deportment of Saints to Divine Ordinances of old, to the carriage of Saints towards New Te&s;t. In&s;titutions, from pa|rity of Rea&s;on, is neither irrational nor unwarrantable; which when Mr. <HI>T.</HI> proves it to be, or attempts to do &s;o, his Arguments &s;hall be con|&s;idered: his &s;econd and third <HI>Sect.</HI> in his &s;econd part of the review of the di&s;pute about <HI>Paedo-Bapti&s;m</HI> (to which he directs us) &s;pake not a word hereunto as he knows.</P>
</DIV3>
<DIV3 N="13" TYPE="section">
<HEAD>Sect. 13.</HEAD>
<ARGUMENT>
<P><HI>Of the word</HI> <GAP DESC="foreign">, <HI>what it imports. Its acceptions in the Scripture.</HI> 1 Cor. 12. 28. <HI>and</HI> 15. 9. <HI>Act.</HI> 4. 32. <HI>opened. The Churches of</HI> A&s;ia, Galatia, Judaea, <HI>not National, Dioce&s;an, or Provincial, but particular Churches. The foundation of Dioce&s;an Churches.</HI> Mat. 16. 18. <HI>and</HI> 18. 17. <HI>expounded. By the Church not meant the Pope and his Car|dinals, a Synod, the Bi&s;hop, or Chancellors Court, the Magi&s;trate, the Presbytery, nor &s;elect Arbitrators, but the whole Church con&s;i&s;ting of El|ders and Brethren, proved.</HI></P>
</ARGUMENT>
<P>IN <HI>Sect.</HI> 15^t^h. Mr. <HI>T.</HI> begins to con&s;ider the Queries in the <HI>Preface</HI> of <HI>S. T.</HI> and in an&s;wer to the fir&s;t Query, whether there be any Natio|nal Church of the In&s;titution of Chri&s;t under the Oeconomy of the Go&s;pel; he falls upon the con&s;ideration of the word <HI>Church,</HI> and tells us, in the <HI>New Te&s;tament</HI> its taken for,</P>
<P N="1">1. An a&s;&s;embly of Unbelievers, <HI>Act.</HI> 19. 32, 39, 40.</P>
<P>2dly. For the Congregation of <HI>I&s;rael</HI> in the Wilderne&s;s, <HI>Acts</HI> 7. 38.</P>
<P>3^d^l^y^, The Univer&s;al Church, whether vi&s;ible or invi&s;ible, 1 <HI>Cor.</HI> 12. 28. <HI>Heb.</HI> 12. 23. <HI>Ephe&s;.</HI> 1. 22.</P>
<P>4^t^h^l^y^, The vi&s;ible Church indefinitely but not univer&s;ally, 1 <HI>Cor.</HI> 15. 9.</P>
<P>5^t^h^l^y^, The Church Topical, as of a City, Town, or Hou&s;e, <HI>Act.</HI> 8. 1. <HI>Philem.</HI> 2. or of a Country, or Nation; and then its put in the Plural
<PB N="82" REF="45"> Number; as the Churches of <HI>A&s;ia, Galatia, Judaea.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. The word, <GAP DESC="foreign">, <HI>Church,</HI> is <GAP DESC="foreign">, <HI>to advocate,</HI> or <HI>call out; Becau&s;e,</HI> as &s;aith <HI>Mu&s;culus, in Rom.</HI> 1. 7. <HI>the Church is a num|ber called out from the re&s;t; and in the general &s;ignifies any company of men, &s;ingled out, or &s;eparated from the re&s;t, for any end or purpo&s;e what&s;oever.</HI> That 'tis of various acceptations in the Scripture cannot be denied; &s;ome of which are rightly a&s;&s;igned by the Animadverter.</P>
<P><HI>Fir&s;t,</HI> 'Tis taken for an A&s;&s;embly of Unbelievers, <HI>Acts</HI> 19. 32. 39.</P>
<P><HI>Secondly,</HI> For the Congregation of <HI>I&s;rael</HI> in the Wilderne&s;s, <HI>Acts</HI> 7. 38.</P>
<P>But <HI>Thirdly,</HI> As touching the third acceptation of the word in&s;tan|ced in by this Animadverter, we mu&s;t crave leave a little to demur about it.</P>
<P>1&s;t, If by the Univer&s;al Church vi&s;ible, he mean that which &s;ome call the Church-Catholick vi&s;ible, con&s;i&s;ting of the univer&s;ality of men profe&s;&s;ing the Doctrine of the Go&s;pel, and yeelding obedience there|unto throughout the World; I do very much que&s;tion whether the name of the Church be given to them throughout the Scripture. The places in&s;tanc'd in by this Animadverter are remote from the proof of any &s;uch thing. 1 <HI>Cor.</HI> 12. 28. &s;peaks not a tittle to it: For,</P>
<P N="1">1. The Church, <HI>ver&s;.</HI> 28. is the Body of Chri&s;t, <HI>ver&s;.</HI> 27. This <HI>Paul</HI> tells them (the Church of <HI>Corinth)</HI> they were; and every Saint in the Church a Member in particular.</P>
<P N="2">2. 'Tis &s;uch a Church among&s;t whom a Schi&s;m might be, <HI>ver&s;.</HI> 25. (as in the Church of <HI>Corinth</HI> there actually was, which was the occa&s;ion of <HI>Pauls</HI> writing to them) <HI>That there &s;hould be no &s;chi&s;m in the Body.</HI> <Q>But Schi&s;m is entirely in one Church among&s;t the members of one parti|cular Society, &s;aith that learned man <HI>J. O.</HI> in his Treati&s;e of <HI>Schi&s;m.</HI></Q></P>
<P>Be&s;ides, 3. It will be hard to prove that in the Church catholick-vi&s;ible (as &s;uch) Officers are &s;et and placed, as 'tis <HI>ver&s;.</HI> 28, 29. The&s;e were in the Church of <HI>Corinth,</HI> which was founded by <HI>Paul, Acts</HI> 18. 8, 9, 10. Probably <HI>Peter</HI> had been there; for he intim<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">tes, <HI>That, at lea&s;t, &s;ome of them had gloried overmuch in him,</HI> 1 Cor. 3. 21, 22. <HI>(Ce|phas,</HI> i. e. <HI>Peter) Pr<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="2 letters">hets, Teachers, Miracles, Gifts of hea<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">ing, Helps, Governments, diver&s;ities of Tongues were found amongst them,</HI> as is known. Some of the&s;e there is no que&s;tion, but they relate to a particular Church. That the <GAP DESC="foreign">, or <HI>Teachers</HI> here, are the &s;ame who are el&s;e|where called, <GAP DESC="foreign">, <HI>Presbyters, Elders,</HI> and <HI>Over&s;eers,</HI> Mr. T. will not, I pre&s;ume, deny. Arguments lie near at hand for
<PB N="83" REF="45"> the demon&s;tration thereof, were it needful: The&s;e are placed of God in particular Churches, relate to them as &s;uch, <HI>Acts</HI> 14. 23. <HI>&amp;</HI> 15. 2, 4, 6, 22, 23, <HI>&amp;</HI> 16. 4. <HI>&amp;</HI> 20. 17. <HI>&amp;</HI> 21. 18. <HI>Tit.</HI> 1. 5. <HI>Jam.</HI> 5. 14. <HI>Act.</HI> 20. 28. Nor am I &s;ingular in the application of this Scripture to the particular Church of <HI>Corinth. Pareus</HI> hath the&s;e words upon the place, <Q><HI>Et quia, &amp;c.</HI> And becau&s;e he had &s;aid, that the Church of the <HI>Corinthians</HI> was the Body of Chri&s;t, <HI>&amp;c.</HI> manife&s;ting his con&s;ent and harmony with us herein, that <HI>Paul</HI> is not treating of the Church-Catholick-vi&s;ible, but of a par|ticular Church of Chri&s;t, <HI>viz.</HI> <GAP DESC="foreign">, of the Church of God that was in <HI>Corinth.</HI></Q> Nor can this Scripture be meant of the invi&s;ible Church of Chri&s;t, for in it God hath placed no Officers that I know of, nor will the Animadverter &s;ay he hath.</P>
<P>2dly, If by the Univer&s;al Church-vi&s;ible, he mean the Elect of God, redeemed, &s;anctified, ju&s;tified, by the &s;pirit of the Lord and the blood of Je&s;us. The&s;e are indeed called by the name of <HI>the Church,</HI> in <HI>Heb.</HI> 12. 23. <HI>Eph.</HI> 1. 22. To which we may add <HI>Mat.</HI> 16. 28. <HI>Eph.</HI> 5. 25, 26. That the word <HI>Church,</HI> 1 <HI>Cor.</HI> 15. 9. is taken for the vi&s;ible Church indefi|nitely, I cannot &s;ub&s;cribe to. Po&s;&s;ible by the <HI>Church of God</HI> he means,</P>
<P><HI>Fir&s;t,</HI> The Churches of God (by an u&s;ual Figure) there being in tho&s;e dayes, few or no Believers, but were added to one Church or other; as might ea&s;ily be demon&s;trated, <HI>Acts</HI> 2. 41, 42. <HI>and Acts</HI> 4. 32. The multitude of Believers is a <HI>Paraphra&s;tical</HI> de&s;cription of the Church, <HI>Acts</HI> 5. 11. The great care of the Apo&s;tles was to reduce them that em|braced and believed the Go&s;pel, into a Church-&s;tate, or that Order of the Go&s;pel, which, however oppugned by Mr. T. will be found to be of the In&s;titution of Chri&s;t: As is evident from the Churches in <HI>Je|ru&s;alem, Acts</HI> 7. <HI>Samaria,</HI> chap. 8. <HI>Antioch,</HI> Chap. 14, <HI>&amp;</HI> 15. In <HI>Syria, Cilicia,</HI> Acts 15. 41. <HI>Phrygia, Galatia,</HI> Acts 16. 5, 6. <HI>Macedonia,</HI> Chap. 16. <HI>The&s;&s;alonica,</HI> Chap. 17. <HI>Achaia,</HI> Chap. 18. <HI>Ephe&s;us,</HI> Chap. 19. <HI>A&s;ia,</HI> Rev. 1. <HI>and</HI> 2. <HI>and</HI> 3. <HI>Rome,</HI> Rom. 1. <HI>&amp;c.</HI> planted by them not|with&s;tanding the utmo&s;t attempts of the power of darkne&s;s, or great <HI>Red Dragon</HI> in the <HI>Roman Pagan</HI> Empire; and of the Children of the Kingdom, or the chief Prie&s;ts, Scribes, Phari&s;ees, Rulers, multitudes of People (e&s;pecially of the ba&s;er &s;ort, fit for any de&s;perate de&s;ign) con|tradicting, bla&s;pheming, oppo&s;ing them herein. When once we read of the Go&s;pel preached, and mingled with Faith in them that hear it, the next news we frequently hear, is, that the&s;e Believers embody to|gether for the wor&s;hiping God in the &s;ame numerical Ordinances, the enjoyment of tho&s;e priviledges, and mutual performance of tho&s;e du|ties, which in a &s;cattered individual &s;tate and capacity they were not
<PB N="84" REF="46"> capable of. Though <HI>Secondly,</HI> By way of eminency, he might in that ex|pre&s;&s;ion, (and no doubt he did &s;o) <HI>I per&s;ecuted the Church of God,</HI> have his eye upon that famous Church of <HI>Jeru&s;alem,</HI> in the per&s;ecution and di&s;per&s;ion whereof he had, it &s;eems, no mean hand, <HI>Acts</HI> 7. 58. <HI>and</HI> 8. 3, 4. <HI>As for Saul, he made havock of (Gr.</HI> <GAP DESC="foreign">, he laid wa&s;te) <HI>the Church; entering into every hou&s;e, halling</HI> (<GAP DESC="foreign">, <HI>by force and violence dragging them along the ground) both men and women, he committed them to Pri&s;on.</HI> And the very truth is, this is the mo&s;t con&s;iderable in&s;tance (if not the only one) of <HI>Sauls Per&s;ecuting the Church of God.</HI> 'Tis true, <HI>Acts</HI> 9. 1. 'tis &s;aid, <HI>And Saul breathing out threatnings and &s;laugh|ters again&s;t the Di&s;ciples of the Lord;</HI> but that only imports the <HI>wrath</HI> and <HI>fury</HI> that was in his &s;pirit again&s;t them, and re&s;olution to <HI>per&s;ecute, im|pri&s;on, wa&s;te</HI> and <HI>de&s;troy</HI> them (the u&s;ual i&s;&s;ue of blind zeal, for the <HI>Tra|dition</HI> of their Fathers) in other places, as he had already done at <HI>Jeru|&s;alem: For which end, he procures Letters to Dama&s;cus, to bring men and women di&s;ciples bound to Jeru&s;alem, that he &s;hould find of this Here&s;ie there.</HI> But, Oh the wonder of Love! Before he arrive thither, Chri&s;t way|layes him, &s;peakes from Heaven to him, converts him, and &s;ets him upon preaching up that very way and truth, he was thus violently per&s;e|cuting, and &s;etting him&s;elf again&s;t. So that not the vi&s;ible Church in|difinitely taken, but &s;ome particular Churches of Je&s;us Chri&s;t, and in e&s;pecial, and by way of eminency, that famous Church at <HI>Jeru&s;alem</HI> is intended, 1 <HI>Cor.</HI> 15. 9.</P>
<P>That which Mr. T. mentions in the <HI>5^t^h^.</HI> place, That the word <HI>Church</HI> is taken for the <HI>Church Topical,</HI> i. e. A <HI>particular Church of Chri&s;t, or a company of Believers (dwelling in this or that place) giving no them&s;elves to the Lord, and one another, according to his will; walking to gether in the fellow&s;hip of the Go&s;pel, and meeting,</HI> <GAP DESC="foreign">, <HI>in the &s;ame place, for the wor&s;hiping God in the &s;ame numerical Ordinances, according to the pre&s;cripti|on, will and in&s;titution of Christ,</HI> Acts 8. 1. 1 Cor. 1. 1. <HI>Ephe&s;.</HI> 1. 1. and many other places. Of which <HI>Chap.</HI> 4. of S. T. we a&s;&s;ent to as true. But that we &s;hould ever &s;ub&s;cribe,</P>
<P>6thly, To that dictate of the Animadverter, That <HI>Church</HI> in Scrip|ture is taken for <HI>a Church of a Country or Nation, and then it is put in the Plural Number, as the Churches of A&s;ia, Galatia, Judaea;</HI> being &s;o di&s;&s;o|nant to truth, and contrary to the expre&s;s language of the Spirit of the Lord, he could never imagine. For the Churches of <HI>A&s;ia,</HI> Chri&s;t tells us expre&s;ly they were <HI>Seven:</HI> Not one Provincial, or National Church, but &s;even particular in&s;tituted Churches.</P>
<P><HI>Fir&s;t,</HI> To each Church is there a di&s;tinct Epi&s;tle written.</P>
<PB N="85" REF="46">
<P> <HI>Secondly,</HI> Each Church had its particular Officer, or Angel, to whom each Epi&s;tle was directed to be communicated to the Congregation (for to them in it doth Chri&s;t by his Spirit &s;peak, <HI>Rev.</HI> 2. 7, 11, 17, 29. &amp; 3. 6, 13, 22.)</P>
<P><HI>3dly.</HI> Each Church received its particular commendation, bore its particular burden. The Evils found in one are not charged upon the re&s;t, nor the Good found in either imputed to them generally but &s;eve|rally.</P>
<P><HI>4thly.</HI> The power of Excommunication, or rejection of Scandalous Offenders, &s;eems to be &s;eated in each Church &s;everally and apart, therefore no Provincial, or National Churches, but Congregational. For the neglect of which power &s;ome of them are expre&s;ly rebuked by Chri&s;t, <HI>Rev.</HI> 2. 14, 15, 20. (which our Engli&s;h Annotators apply, and that truly, to a non-rejection of them by excommunication, and cite 1 <HI>Cor.</HI> 5. 2, 6.) Alas! a National, Dioce&s;an, Provincial Church was not then thought of. Dioce&s;an Churches were fir&s;t founded (as 'tis &s;aid, but it were no difficult task to evince that their original is antidated &s;ome &s;cores of years) by <HI>Dyoni&s;ius</HI> Bi&s;hop of <HI>Rome,</HI> about 280 years af|ter Chri&s;t (or, as &s;ome will, about 251) he was the fir&s;t that appointed the limits and bounds of Pari&s;hes. Here in <HI>England</HI> they received their ri&s;e and original from one <HI>Honorius</HI> Bi&s;hop of <HI>Canterbury, (Polyd. Virgil. de Invent. rer. lib.</HI> 4. <HI>c.</HI> 9.) Nay, the truth is, the Churches mentioned were &s;o far from being a Church of a Region or Nation, that they were not all that lived in the &s;ame Place, City or Town appertaining to the Church there. As for the Church of <HI>Ephe&s;us</HI> (one of the &s;even) <HI>Paul</HI> &s;peaks of it as di&s;tinct from the re&s;t of the Inhabitants, <HI>Eph.</HI> 1. 1. &s;o doth Chri&s;t of the Church of <HI>Pergamos, Rev.</HI> 2. 13. <HI>I know thy works, and where thou dwellest</HI> (i. e. among what manner of people thine abode is, <HI>P&s;al.</HI> 57. 4. &amp; 120. 5, 6. <HI>Ezek.</HI> 2. 6. <HI>Phil.</HI> 2. 15. <HI>viz.</HI> a wicked, gracele&s;s, ungodly people) <HI>even where Satan's &s;eat is, where Satan dwel|leth:</HI> who were &s;ure no part of the Church. The like may be &s;aid of the re&s;t of them. 'Tis &s;trange to me that when God calls them <HI>Churches,</HI> any per&s;on pretending to &s;obriety, &s;hould dare to aver them to be but one.</P>
<P>Touching the interpretation of <HI>Mat.</HI> 16. 18. &amp; 18. 17. there are indeed great debates (as our Animadverter &s;aith) betwixt <HI>Protestants</HI> and <HI>Papi&s;ts,</HI> among&s;t <HI>Prote&s;tants</HI> al&s;o and <HI>Prote&s;tants.</HI> The expo&s;ition the <HI>Papi&s;ts</HI> give of <HI>Mat.</HI> 16. 18. who from hence would infer, that <HI>Peter,</HI> and after him the Bi&s;hop of <HI>Rome,</HI> was made Univer&s;al Bi&s;hop, is &s;o frivolous, that 'tis not worth the mentioning.</P>
<P N="1"><PB N="86" REF="47"> 1. <GAP DESC="foreign">, <HI>&s;uper hanc petram,</HI> is not <GAP DESC="foreign">, <HI>&s;uper hunc Petrum;</HI> upon this <HI>Rock</HI> will I build my Church, we Engli&s;h-men think to be very different from, upon <HI>St. Peter</HI> will I build i<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">. The Faith <HI>Peter</HI> confe&s;&s;ed we take to be one thing, his per&s;on another.</P>
<P N="2">2. We find not (notwith&s;tanding this promi&s;e) that <HI>Peter</HI> was the Prince of the Apo&s;tles (at which lofty rate the&s;e Gentlemen love to &s;peak) or Univer&s;al Bi&s;hop. If he had been &s;o, <HI>Paul</HI> much forgot him|&s;elf, when he &s;aid 2 <HI>Cor.</HI> 11. 5. <HI>For I &s;uppo&s;e</HI> (Gr. <GAP DESC="foreign">, I conclude for certain) <HI>I was not a whit behind the chiefest Apo&s;tles.</HI> And much more <HI>Gal.</HI> 2. 11. <HI>But when</HI> Peter <HI>was come to</HI> Antioch, <HI>I with&s;tood him to the face, becau&s;e he was to be blamed.</HI> Strange! that he &s;hould carry it with no more re&s;pect to the Prince of the Apo&s;tles, and Univer&s;al Bi&s;hop and head of the Church-Catholick-vi&s;ible.</P>
<P N="3">3. But if the&s;e were granted them, what is this to their Pope? Why <HI>Peter</HI> was <HI>at Rome.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> That is uncertain: Yet &s;hould it be granted he was there, it would not in the lea&s;t advantage them in their pre&s;ent cau&s;e. 'Tis mo&s;t certain he was at <HI>Samaria, Antioch, Lydda, Joppa, Ce&s;aria;</HI> yet no Primacy or Supremacy affixed to either of them upon that bottom.</P>
<P>4. Yea but he placed his Chair at <HI>Rome,</HI> fixed his Seat there.</P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> This is fal&s;e and untrue, nor can they ever make it appear that he did &s;o. Yet if this &s;hould be granted, they are never a whit the nearer the mark, except they prove, 1. That a &s;ucce&s;&s;ion in this uni|ver&s;al, Unlimited, Archiepi&s;copal power was entailed to the Church of <HI>Rome,</HI> and that &s;o, that 1. Though tho&s;e who a&s;cended that Chair, came to be inve&s;ted therein, by bribery, cozenage, cruelty, bloo<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">, whil&s;t they po&s;&s;e&s;&s;ed it were Hereticks (and declared by Councils to be &s;o, and their Succe&s;&s;ors) Conjurers, Adulterers, Idolaters, Athei&s;ts, Bla&s;phemers, bloody Per&s;ecutors, de&s;troyers of bodies and &s;ouls of men, the verie&s;t Villains and Wretches that ever the Earth bore.) 2. Though this Suc|ce&s;&s;ion hath been interrupted by a Vacancy, or Interregnum, of &s;ome years; polluted by a Woman, a Whore, delivered with her Cardinals about her in &s;olemn Proce&s;&s;ion; whence</P>
<Q>Papa parit Papam, peperit Papi&s;&s;a Papillum.</Q>
<P>By the &s;etting up of <HI>Anti-Popes,</HI> two or three at a time, conte&s;ting to the pouring out of much Blood, wa&s;ting, de&s;troying Villages, Towns, Cities; Cur&s;ing, excommunicating one another, and all that adhere to each other, for the Popedom, or St. <HI>Peter's</HI> Chair; yet when in it, and tho&s;e that &s;ucceed them, be they as bad or wor&s;e than they that went be|fore, mu&s;t infallibly be his &s;ucce&s;&s;or: which when they prove, I will
<PB N="87" REF="47"> be a <HI>Papist;</HI> and before they &s;hall effect this, it being the grand Prin|ciple of their Religion (or Super&s;tition rather) it would become all that have (or would be accounted to have) the lea&s;t &s;park of Wi&s;dom re|maining in them, to have nothing to do with &s;uch a generation. For my part I am abundantly &s;atisfied, that the Church there, is neither the Church-Catholick vi&s;ible, nor any particular Church, as &s;uch, but the Invi&s;ible-Church, or Elect of God.</P>
<P><HI>Tell the Church, Mat.</HI> 18. 17. hath divers interpretations put upon it, according as the intere&s;ts of &s;ome lead and encline them. In the language of the <HI>Epi&s;copalians</HI> it is, <HI>Tell the Lord Bi&s;hop, and his Con&s;i&s;tory:</HI> but this is &s;uch an heterogeneous piece, &s;o wild an interpretation, that it would put a &s;ober man (if concern'd in them) to a blu&s;h to hear it mentioned. 1. There were no &s;uch creatures at that day, nor for &s;ome hundreds of years after. Alas! there was &s;omewhat el&s;e to do, than to think of erecting Epi&s;copal Seas and Con&s;i&s;tories, when they were eve|ry day fighting with bea&s;ts, and made a &s;pectacle to Angels and men, for the Truth and Go&s;pel-&s;ake; which was the &s;tate of the Church of God, (for the mo&s;t part) for the fir&s;t three-hundred years and upwards, as is known. 2. One man (as &s;aith precious <HI>Cotton)</HI> is not the Church, nor can he repre&s;ent the Church, unle&s;s &s;ent by them; but &s;o is neither the Bi&s;hop nor his Commi&s;&s;ary. 3. The Bi&s;hop ordinarily is no member of the Church where the offence is committed; and what is his &s;ati&s;|faction to the removal of the offence given to the Church? 4. The <HI>Pari&s;ian</HI> Doctors &s;ay truly, <Q><HI>Eccle&s;iam nunquam, &amp;c.</HI> The Church can|not be taken for one per&s;on, nor be govern'd by one. Of which the Learned <HI>Chamier</HI> gives his rea&s;on, How can it be that the Bi&s;hop &s;hould be the Church, according to who&s;e Eccle&s;ia&s;tical Authority things &s;hould be determined, <HI>Mat.</HI> 18. when a long time after the Bi&s;hop him&s;elf by humane authority had his original? of which <HI>Am|bro&s;e</HI> complains&mdash;And as &s;oon as the Lord had &s;aid, <HI>tell the Church,</HI> he &s;peaks in the plural number all along afterward? <HI>Verily I &s;ay unto you, What&s;oever Ye &s;hall bind on Earth, &amp;c.</HI> Whence it plainly appears, that the Church is not taken for one per&s;on, but for many congrega|ted together. <HI>Pol. Eccle&s;.</HI> Yea, <HI>Sutcliffe</HI> when di&s;puting again&s;t <HI>Bel|larmine,</HI> &s;aith, Chri&s;t did not con&s;titute the chief Tribunal in the hands of <HI>Peter,</HI> but of the Church: for not tho&s;e who refu&s;ed to hear <HI>Peter,</HI> but tho&s;e who refu&s;ed to hear the Church, were to be accoun|ted as Heathens and Publicans. <HI>De Pontif. Rom. l.</HI> 1. <HI>c.</HI> 5, 6.</Q> Be&s;ides in matters of controver&s;ie, <HI>Peter</HI> him&s;elf was &s;ubject to the Tribunal of the Church. But a &s;uperiour cannot be judged by an inferiour. If
<PB N="88" REF="48"> any controver&s;ie happened among&s;t the Apo&s;tles, that could not be de|fined by particular per&s;ons, but a Council of the Church was to be congregated. This we &s;ee done <HI>Acts</HI> 15. Now one would think our pre&s;ent Bi&s;hops &s;hould not be &s;o arrogant as to a&s;&s;ume that power to them&s;elves, which when di&s;puting with the Papi&s;ts they will not allow to <HI>Peter.</HI></P>
<P>2dly. In the judgment of our Brethren of the <HI>Presbyterian</HI> way, <HI>Tell the Church,</HI> is, <HI>tell the Presbytery.</HI> But they are, I humbly conceive, &s;omewhat wide of the mark too. My Rea&s;ons are, 1. The Church is &s;ometimes put for the Congregation, as di&s;tinct from the Presbytery or Elders and Officers, <HI>Acts</HI> 14. 23. &amp; 15. 22. never for the&s;e, as di&s;tinct from the Congregation, throughout the New-Te&s;tament. 2. The <HI>Pre&s;|bytery</HI> may be the party offending, and then you mu&s;t tell the Church that the Church offendeth; <HI>i. e.</HI> go tell them&s;elves: But the Scripture is expre&s;s, that after private dealing with the offenders them&s;elves, upon non-amendment, the Church, as di&s;tinct from them, is to be ac|quainted with it. 3. What if the Presbytery them&s;elves be offended? whom &s;hall they tell? mu&s;t they tell them&s;elves? If they are the Church, they can go no further. 4. Be&s;ides, we find, 1 <HI>Cor.</HI> 5. not the Presbytery alone, but the whole Church concerned in the matter of Excommunication, of which our Brethren confe&s;s Chri&s;t here treateth. This Animadverter manife&s;ts his good will to interpret it of an A&s;&s;em|bly of the Jews in their <HI>Synedrium,</HI> or if extended as a direction to Chri|&s;tian Brethren, whether to refer it to their A&s;&s;embly, under an Eccle|&s;ia&s;tical con&s;ideration, or Political, <HI>i. e.</HI> the Chri&s;tian Magi&s;trate: he &s;eems to demur with an apparent inclination to the latter. To the fir&s;t of the&s;e <HI>Mr. Cotton</HI> an&s;wers; <NOTE N="&dagger;" PLACE="marg">Treat. of the Keys, p. 40 <HI>An.</HI> 3.</NOTE> <Q>It is not credible that Chri&s;t would &s;end his Di&s;ciples to make complaint of their offences to the Jewi&s;h Synagogues: for is it likely he would &s;end his Lambs and Sheep for right and healing, unto Wolves and Tygres? Both their <HI>Sanhedrim,</HI> and mo&s;t of their Synagogues were no better. And if here and there &s;ome Elders of their Synagogues were better affected; yet how may it appear that &s;o it was, where any of them&s;elves dwelt? And if that might appear too, yet had not the Jews already agreed, <HI>that if any man did confe&s;s Chri&s;t, he &s;hould be ca&s;t out of the Synagogues?</HI> Joh. 9. 22.</Q> To which we add, 2dly, Chri&s;t knew that within a little while the Synedrim and whole Church-Policy of the Jews would be at an end. And, 3dly, in the mean while charges his Di&s;ciples to have nothing to do with them. <HI>Mat.</HI> 15. 14. Tell them that they would per&s;ecute, kill them, and think in doing &s;o they did God good &s;ervice: As it fell out
<PB N="89" REF="48"> afterwards accordingly. So that it cannot with the lea&s;t &s;hew of rea&s;on be imagined, that Chri&s;t &s;hould direct them to appeal to them, and &s;tand to their final determination. 2dly. The &s;econd de&s;ires not a re|ply. <HI>Go tell the Church,</HI> i. e. <HI>go tell the Magi&s;trate,</HI> is &s;o wild an inter|pretation, that the bare naming it is the giving it too much honour. 1. The Magi&s;trate is no where called the Church: 2dly, The Magi|&s;trate <HI>(qu&acirc; talis)</HI> hath nothing to do in the &s;tating and determining Church-Controver&s;ies. 3dly, Sometimes, and for the mo&s;t part, they have ever &s;ince been (for above three hundred years afterward they un|doubtedly were) no members of the Church, but enemies to it, de|&s;troyers of it.</P>
<P>Mr. <HI>T.</HI> adds, that he can find no In&s;titution by preception or com|mand of a Church, <HI>i. e.</HI> there is no &s;uch thing as an in&s;tituted Church of Chri&s;t under the Go&s;pel, but 'tis left to the prudence of men, <HI>&amp;c.</HI> to determine, whether they &s;hall be <HI>Dome&s;tick, Congregational, Parochial, Cla&s;&s;ical, Dioce&s;an, Provincial, Patriarchal,</HI> or <HI>Oecumenical:</HI> which how derogatory to the Honour and Sovereign Authority of Je&s;us Chri&s;t; to his love and tenderne&s;s to his Children, to his Faithfulne&s;s with re&s;pect to the obligation that lay upon him as Mediator, to reveal the whole will of the Father to them, others will judge. For my part I am fully of his mind, who &s;ome while &s;ince &s;aid, <Q>That there were particu|lar Churches in&s;tituted by the Authority of Je&s;us Chri&s;t, ordained and approved by him; that Officers for them were of his appoint|ment, and furni&s;hed with gifts from him for the execution of their employment; That Rules, Cautions and In&s;tructions for the due &s;ettlement of tho&s;e Churches were given by him: that the&s;e Chur|ches were made the only &s;eat of that Wor&s;hip, which in particular he expre&s;&s;ed his will to have continued until he came, is of &s;o much light in Scripture, that he mu&s;t wink hard that will not &s;ee it.</Q> Which is as much as we need to &s;ay to this Animadverter in this matter; what he &s;aith herein, being meer dictates of his own, without proof: which (when he &s;hall be able to evince that Chri&s;t hath not the Government of his Churches upon his &s;houlders; that he is not &s;ole King and Lord over them, or having &s;o, hath not given them Rules to walk by of his own, but left them to the liberty of their own wills, or which is wor&s;e, the wills of &s;uch as by Providence are permited to a&s;cend the Throne, though &s;uch, as whil&s;t they profe&s;s to know God, in works deny him, be|ing abominable and di&s;obedient, and to every good work reprobate) he will be &s;uppo&s;ed to &s;ay &s;omething in way of confirmation. But of this more in Sect. 15. 'Tis true, <HI>de facto,</HI> Parochial, Cla&s;&s;ical, Dioce|&s;an,
<PB N="90" REF="49"> Provincial, Patriarchical, and Oecumenical Churches, by the pru|dence of men, <HI>&amp;c.</HI> have had and yet have their being it the World: and the Animadverter deals ingenuou&s;ly, in acknowledging that their original is not from Heaven, but the i&s;&s;ue of humane p<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">udence, &amp;c. So that to them, or their Rulers and Officers, as &s;uch, we owe no tri|bute or re&s;pect by vertue of any In&s;titution of Chri&s;t, which they are (as he acknowledgeth, and that truly) de&s;titute of. 'Twe<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">e ea&s;ie to fill many pages with citations of Authors &s;peaking to this matter.</P>
<P>Whereas originally there was a &s;mall uncertain number of Presby|ters at <HI>Roms,</HI> they were brought to a certain number and order by <HI>Cletu<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter"></HI> and <HI>Evari&s;tus,</HI> Popes of <HI>Rome.</HI> Fir&s;t, <HI>Cletus</HI> reduced the Presbytery of <HI>Rome</HI> to the number of twenty five: Afterwards <HI>Evari&s;tus,</HI> about the year of Chri&s;t 100, appointed and pre&s;cribed a &s;everal Pari&s;h to every one of the&s;e Presbyters, which Pari&s;hes were afterwards <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">nlarged, and had their bounds and limits more perfectly and more exactly pre&s;cribed to them by Pope <HI>Dyoni&s;ius,</HI> as was &s;aid, about the year of Chri&s;t 260; After which time <HI>Marc<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">llus,</HI> about the year of Chri&s;t 305, limited the number of tho&s;e titles, which anciently were fir&s;t given to the Presby|ters by <HI>Evari&s;tus,</HI> and did by Decree con&s;titute, That there &s;hould be in <HI>Rome</HI> 25, as it were &s;o many Dioce&s;&s;es; for the more convenient baptizing of &s;uch Gentiles as were daily converted to Chri&s;tian Religi|on: <HI>Onuphrius Panvinius, de praecipuis urbis Romae Ba&s;ilici<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">;</HI> And <HI>Selden</HI> in his Hi&s;tory of Tythes, chap. 6. Sect. 3. writes thus, <HI>For Pari&s;h Churches, it is plain, that as Metropolitan See's, Patria<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">chats (Exar|chates, in the Ea&s;tern Church) Bi&s;hopricks, the&s;e greater dignities were most u&s;ually at first ordained and limited according to the di&s;tinction of Seats of Government and inferiour Cities, that had been a&s;&s;igned to the Sub&s;titutes, or Vicarii of the Praefect. Pratorio, or Vice-Roys of the East and Western-Empire:</HI> So were Pari&s;hes appointed, and divided to &s;everal Mini&s;ters within the Eccle&s;ia&s;tical rule of the&s;e dignities, according to the con|veniences of Country-Towns and Villages; one, or more, or le&s;s (of &s;uch as being but &s;mall Territories might not by the Canons be Bi&s;hop|ricks) to a Pari&s;h: The word Pari&s;h at fir&s;t denoting a whole Bi&s;hop|rick (which is but as a great Pari&s;h, and &s;ignifies no other <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">han Dioce&s;<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">, but afterwards being confined to what our common language re&s;trains it. The Curats of the&s;e Pari&s;hes were &s;uch as the Bi&s;hops appointed under him to have cure of &s;ouls in them, and were called <HI>Presbyterii Parochiani,</HI> i. e. Pari&s;h-Presbyters. But thus far of this matter.</P>
<P>As touching what Mr. <HI>T.</HI> adds, <HI>that there is no precept about the defining how many &s;hould go to a Church, or be accounted to belong to one Church,</HI> &amp;c.</P>
<PB N="91" REF="49">
<P> We <HI>an&s;wer,</HI> 1. That 'tis very impertinently produced by him, tend|ing not at all to the matter in hand; &s;uch a vi&s;ible <HI>non-&s;equitur</HI> as he will never be able to make good. How many &s;hould go to a Church, we have no precept of Chri&s;t directing and enjoyning us; <HI>Ergo</HI> no In|&s;titution of a Church by preception or command.</P>
<P>But 2dly, That we are in this matter wholly de&s;titute of Law or Rule is a mi&s;take of this Animadverter.</P>
<P>Fir&s;t, <HI>Mat.</HI> 18. 20. manife&s;ts that the Church cannot well con&s;i&s;t of fewer than &s;even. For, 1. there is the Brother offending. 2dly, Two or three reproving this offending Brother. And 3dly, the Church be|fore whom the matter is to be brought for final determination, which cannot be &s;uppo&s;ed to be fewer (if &s;o few) as the per&s;ons bringing it be|fore them.</P>
<P>Secondly, That they be no more than can conveniently meet toge|ther in one place, and &s;o that they may hear and be edified (which is the great end of Church-communion) the Scripture plainly intimates 1 <HI>Cor.</HI> 14. 23. <HI>If therefore the whole Church be come together in one place,</HI> ver. 26. <HI>let all things be done unto edifying.</HI> But if all cannot hear, they cannot be edified. So wide off the mark of Truth is his A&s;&s;ertion, that neither Chri&s;t nor his Apo&s;tles have given us any Rule or Law of boun|ding or modelling Churches: which (though how many members may be added to a Church be not expre&s;ly pre&s;cribed) he hath done.</P>
<P>That Text <HI>Mat.</HI> 18. 17. &s;eems much to perplex this Animadverter; what is meant by Church there he cannot tell; <HI>'Tis uncertain</HI> (he &s;aith) <HI>whether the Chri&s;tian Civil Judicatory, or Eccle&s;ia&s;tical Con&s;istory or Con|gregational A&s;&s;embly of Believers, or &s;ome &s;elect Arbitrators be meant.</HI></P>
<P>Of the three fir&s;t of the&s;e we have &s;poken already, and manife&s;ted, that not the Jewi&s;h <HI>Synedrium,</HI> but the <HI>Chri&s;tian Church;</HI> not the Chri|&s;tian Civil Judicatory or Eccle&s;ia&s;tical Con&s;i&s;tory is intended by the Church here. That &s;elect Arbitrators &s;hould be meant, is the fir&s;t-born of improbabilities. 1. They are no where called a Church in the Scrip|ture. 2. The Church in the Text are &s;uch a company to whom the par|ty or parties aggrieved may pre&s;ently have their recour&s;e; which to &s;e|lect Arbitrators they cannot have: they mu&s;t fir&s;t be cho&s;en (of which notwith&s;tanding there is not the lea&s;t tittle in the Text.) 3. Here is no mention of the con&s;ent of the party offending in the election of the Arbitrators; which of right ought in &s;uch ca&s;es to be. 4. From the Church here there &s;eems to lye no appeal. 5. The Sentence pro|nounced by the Church, is a Sentence confirmed in Heaven, <HI>ver.</HI> 18. which Mr. <HI>T.</HI> upon &s;econd thoughts will not &s;ay can be affirmed of the
<PB N="92" REF="50"> Sentence of his &s;elect Arbitrators. Yea, 6ly, if the party offending <HI>will not hear the Church, he is to be accounted as an Heathen (i. e.</HI> they are to hold no religious communion with him) <HI>and Publican (i. <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">.</HI> with|holding from them familiar, civil communion): but I much que&s;tion whether it be my duty to carry it &s;o to a Brother, that &s;hall refu&s;e to &s;ubmit to the &s;entence of Mr. <HI>Tombs</HI> his &s;elect Arbitrators; e&s;pecially if he had no hand in their election, never referr'd his affairs to their arbitrement, te&s;tifies his willingne&s;s to hearken to the Church, and &s;tand to their determination therein. But 'tis time we attend the rea|&s;ons this Animadverter gives of his opinion.</P>
<P>The fir&s;t whereof is, <HI>The offence is private that might be remitted by the party offended.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. If by <HI>private</HI> he mean &s;uch an offence as was only known to them two, it's granted: The words are a direction from Chri&s;t to Brethren how to carry it each to other in ca&s;e of &s;ecret and private &s;candals and offences: for when the fact is open, publick and notorious, there needs not this private admonition, another way of procedure is directed to, and e&s;tabli&s;hed, 1 <HI>Tim.</HI> 5. 20. <HI>Tho&s;e that &s;in</HI> (viz. <HI>cum &s;can|dalo Eccle&s;ia,</HI> &s;aith <HI>Pi&s;cator) rebuke before all; that others al&s;o may fear.</HI> And the Church of <HI>Corinth,</HI> without any &s;uch previous proce&s;s, was bound (the fact being publick and notorious) to excommunicate and purge out from among&s;t them that wicked per&s;on, 1 <HI>Cor.</HI> 5. 2, 4, 5, 7. but it follows not that becau&s;e the offence in his &s;en&s;e is priv<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">te, that therefore by <HI>Church</HI> mu&s;t be meant not a particular in&s;tituted Church, but &s;elect Arbitrators. But 'tis more than probable by <HI>private</HI> he means &s;uch a particular injury or offence committed again&s;t his Brother, that is not a &s;in again&s;t God: but in this &s;en&s;e we deny the offence here to be private; and had Mr. <HI>T.</HI> by one Argument endeavoured to have evinced it, he had done &s;omething; a failure wherein renders the en|&s;uing fabrick liable to &s;ink with its own weight. 1. Sins again&s;t our Brother, are &s;ins again&s;t God; P&s;al. 51. 4. <HI>Again&s;t thee only have I &s;in|ned,</HI> &s;aith <HI>David</HI> touching the wickedne&s;s he had wrought in the matter of <HI>Uriah.</HI> 2. The word rendred <HI>trespa&s;s again&s;t thee, Mat.</HI> 18. 15. is <GAP DESC="foreign">, which &s;ignifies properly <HI>to erre from the prefixed mark,</HI> meta|phorically, <HI>to &s;in a &s;in,</HI> or, <HI>to do that which is contrary to the Law of God; Al&s;ted in Lex Theol.</HI> which (though by it we are injured) as a &s;in, is properly again&s;t God, As all Indictments in criminal pleas are &s;tiled <HI>against the King, his Crown and Dignity.</HI> Nor can the Animadverter give one in&s;tance (throughout the whole New-Te&s;tament) of the u&s;e of the word for &s;uch a private offence or &s;candal committed again&s;t a Bro|ther,
<PB N="93" REF="50"> as is not a &s;in and tran&s;gre&s;&s;ion again&s;t God.</P>
<P>What he adds, 2dly, <HI>That the Brother against whom the trespa&s;s is committed, might remit or forgive it;</HI> is, 1. more than the Scripture will ju&s;tifie him in a&s;&s;erting: Mu&s;t be received <HI>cum grano Salis,</HI> with caution, or 'tis plainly atheological.</P>
<P N="1">1. If he mean, <HI>he might remit or forgive it &s;o far as it was an injury to him,</HI> 'tis granted (in <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">ome ca&s;es) he might; but it is al&s;o a &s;in again&s;t God, which he mu&s;t not &s;uffer to re&s;t upon his Brother, <HI>Levit.</HI> 19. 17.</P>
<P N="2">2. If he mean, <HI>that upon an acknowledgment of the offence, and mani|fe&s;tation of &s;orrow and repentance</HI> (&s;o far as he is able to di&s;cern) <HI>un|feigned, he be bound to own and receive him as formerly, without acquaint|ing any others, or the Church with it,</HI> 'tis undoubtedly true. He hath at|tained the utmo&s;t end aimed at in the whole proce&s;s, <HI>viz.</HI> the con|viction and bringing the offender to repentance; and therefore need not advance one &s;tep further: to do &s;o, were frivilous, ridiculous, ir|regular, &s;inful, an open breach upon all the rules of charity enjoyned by Chri&s;t. But yet it follows not that by <HI>Church</HI> is not meant a <HI>particular Congregation,</HI> but <HI>&s;elect Arbitrators.</HI> When Mr. <HI>T.</HI> proves the con&s;e|quence of this propo&s;ition (The offended Brother may forgive the Of|fender upon his confe&s;&s;ion of, and &s;orrow for his tre&s;pa&s;s committed, &s;o as to own him for a Brother, without publi&s;hing his fault, that was only known to them two, to any other; therefore by <HI>Church</HI> (to whom without &s;uch acknowledgment and repentance he was to have commu|nicated it) we are to under&s;tand <HI>&s;elect Arbitrators)</HI> I will be his con|vert.</P>
<P>In what he adds, <HI>that there is no act a&s;cribed to the Church, &s;ave an Admonition to the injurious Brother, to do right to him whom he hath wronged,</HI> this Animadverter is evidently mi&s;taken.</P>
<P>For, 1&s;t, Here is a <HI>Juridicial Sentence</HI> a&s;cribed to the Church, <HI>ver&s;.</HI> 18. <HI>Verily I &s;ay unto you</HI> (the Church) <HI>what&s;oever ye &s;hall bind on Earth,</HI> &amp;c.</P>
<P>2dly. The i&s;&s;ue or con&s;equence of this <HI>Juridicial Sentence</HI> is, <HI>That h<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter"> is to the Church</HI> (for what one is lawfully to a part of the Body, he is to the whole) <HI>as a Heathen or Publican, i. e.</HI> &s;hut out of their Com|munion or Fellow&s;hip. But Mr. <HI>T.</HI> is &s;ure (he tells us) the Publicans were not excluded <HI>a &s;acris.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. If by <HI>&s;acra</HI> he means tho&s;e Ordinances that peculiarly re|lated to them as members of the <HI>Judaical</HI> Church, and by <HI>Publicans</HI> un|pro&s;elyted, uncircumci&s;ed <HI>Publicans,</HI> 'tis mo&s;t fal&s;e, that &s;uch were not excluded <HI>a &s;acris. They might not partake of the Pa&s;&s;over with them</HI> (to
<PB N="94" REF="51"> in&s;tance in no more particulars) <HI>Exod.</HI> 12. 48. And <HI>Maimonides (in Korban Pe&s;ach Cap.</HI> 5. <HI>Sect.</HI> 5.) tells us, <HI>That as the Circumci&s;ion of him|&s;elf omitted, debarreth him from keeping the Pa&s;&s;over, &s;o doth the circum|ci&s;ion of his Sons and his Servants,</HI> &amp;c. <HI>if omitted: And if he kill it be|fore he do circumci&s;e them, it is unlawful.</HI> Of which <HI>R. Menache<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter"></HI> renders a rea&s;on, on <HI>Exod.</HI> 12. <HI>While&s;t the power of uncleanne&s;s, and the &s;uperfluous foreskin is upon him,</HI> &amp;c. <HI>he is unfit to be united with the divine Maje&s;ty,</HI> &amp;c.</P>
<P N="2">2. If by <HI>&s;acra,</HI> he mean coming to their Synagogue<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter"> to hear them Preach or Expound the Law; he &s;peaks nothing to the purpo&s;e: an Ex|communicated per&s;on may come to the Church-A&s;&s;emblies, and hear and &s;ee what is done there, as may an Heathen: The Scripture in|&s;tanc't in affords not the lea&s;t &s;anctuary to his A&s;&s;ertion.</P>
<P><HI>Fir&s;t,</HI> 'Tis a Parable, and &s;o (it may be) a &s;uppo&s;ition of what ne|ver was.</P>
<P><HI>Secondly,</HI> 'Tis &s;poken (it &s;eems) of a broken converted <HI>Publican. He looked down, &s;mote upon his Brea&s;t, cried out, The Lord be merciful to me a &s;inner.</HI></P>
<P><HI>Thirdly,</HI> 'Tis not &s;aid that he joyned with the <HI>Jewi&s;h</HI> Church in any act of Wor&s;hip. <HI>That he went up,</HI> <GAP DESC="foreign">, <HI>to the Holy</HI> (the whole building of the Temple, con&s;i&s;ting of an inward and outward Court, is &s;o called) <HI>to pray,</HI> is Parabolically &s;aid of him as of the Phari&s;ee; but both the one and the other prayed by them&s;elves, &s;everally and apart, <HI>ver&s;.</HI> 11. <HI>The Phari&s;ee &s;tood and prayed thus with him&s;elf,</HI> <GAP DESC="foreign">, word for word, &s;tanding to him&s;elf, (or apart from the <HI>Publican)</HI> he prayed the&s;e things; <HI>O God, I thank thee,</HI> &amp;c. <HI>ver&s;.</HI> 13. <HI>And the Publican,</HI> <GAP DESC="foreign">, <HI>&s;tanding a far off, viz.</HI> in the fir&s;t Court of the Temple, where all &s;orts of People, <HI>Publicans</HI> and <HI>Sinners</HI> might come. 1 <HI>Kings</HI> 8. 41.</P>
<P><HI>Fourthly,</HI> 'Tis mo&s;t certain, and the Animadverter cannot be igno|rant hereof, That the <HI>Publicans</HI> were excluded, not only, <HI>a &s;acris,</HI> which they were, but al&s;o from Civil Communion, &s;o far as po&s;&s;ibly they could; in&s;omuch as it was a great crime charged upon Chri&s;t by them, <HI>That heate and drank with Publicans and Sinners,</HI> and that more than once, <HI>Matth.</HI> 9. 11. <HI>and</HI> 11. 19. <HI>Mark,</HI> 2. 16. <HI>Luke</HI> 5. 30. <HI>and</HI> 7. 34. Accordingly upon this &s;entence of the Church upon the Offender, the Members of the Society are to carry it towards him, not only as towards a Heathen (with whom they might have civil Commerce) but as towards a <HI>Publican</HI> (with whom they at that day had none) 1 <HI>Cor.</HI> 5. 11. 2 <HI>The&s;.</HI> 3. 14. And he that &s;hould
<PB N="95" REF="51"> have &s;een the <HI>Publican, Luke</HI> 18. (if there was ever &s;uch a thing done) praying in one Court, and the <HI>Phari&s;ee</HI> in another; or if in the &s;ame Court, one at one Corner and the other at the other, apart by them|&s;elves, would &s;carce have concluded, that they held Communion toge|ther, or inferred therefore the <HI>Publicans</HI> were not excluded <HI>a &s;acris.</HI> Which Con&s;equence Mr. <HI>T.</HI> will take time to make good, <HI>u&s;&abque; ad Grae|cas Calendas.</HI></P>
<P>It remains, That fora&s;much as by <HI>Church, Mat.</HI> 18. 17. is not meant the <HI>J<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="2 letters">i&s;h Synedrium,</HI> nor the <HI>Lord Bi&s;hop</HI> and his <HI>Con&s;i&s;tory,</HI> nor the <HI>Civil Magi&s;trate,</HI> nor the <HI>Presbyterie,</HI> nor Mr. <HI>T.</HI> his <HI>Select Ar|bitrators;</HI> (the vanity of each of which hath been evinced) that there|fore it is a particular in&s;tituted Church of Chri&s;t in the New Te&s;ta|ment, as Mr. <HI>T.</HI> knows the learned of old, and of late have interpreted it. So <HI>Ignatius</HI> (who applies it to the particular Church of <HI>Philadelphia) Chry&s;o&s;tome, &amp;c.</HI> The judicious <HI>Ca&s;aubon (Exercit. Lib.</HI> 15. <HI>p.</HI> 433.) <HI>&amp;c.</HI></P>
<P>The&s;e things premi&s;ed, we attend his An&s;wers to the Que&s;tions pro|po&s;ed in <HI>S. T.</HI> of which in the next <HI>Section</HI> we &s;hall treat.</P>
</DIV3>
<DIV3 N="14" TYPE="section">
<HEAD>Sect. 14.</HEAD>
<ARGUMENT>
<P><HI>Whether there be any National Church under the Oeconomie of the Go&s;pel. Mr.</HI> T. <HI>his an&s;wers hereunto, con&s;idered.</HI> I&s;a. 49. 23, &amp; 66. 8. <HI>explain|ed. That they are Prophe&s;ies that wait their accompli&s;hment, demon&s;trated. Of the miraculous conver&s;ion of the Jews,</HI> Zach. 12. 10. <HI>explained. The Sign of the Son of Man,</HI> Mat. 24. 30. <HI>What.</HI></P>
</ARGUMENT>
<P>THe fir&s;t Que&s;t. in <HI>S. T.</HI> propo&s;ed by us is, <HI>Whether &s;ince the Apotomie or unchurching the Nation of the Jews, the Lord hath &s;o e&s;pou&s;ed a Nation or People to him&s;elf, as that upon the account thereof, the whole Bo|dy of the People thereof may be accounted his Church? Whether there be any National Church under the Oeconomie of the Go&s;pel?</HI> This Mr. <HI>T.</HI> is plea|&s;ed to make two Que&s;tions, though in it &s;elf but one; the latter being only <HI>exegetical</HI> to the former.</P>
<P>1&s;t. He grants, <HI>That God hath not, &s;ince the unchurching&punc; the Nation of the Jews, e&s;pou&s;ed a Nation to him&s;elf, as that the whole Body of the People thereof may be accounted his.</HI> i. e. <HI>There is no National Church of divine In&s;titution under the Go&s;pel; for if there be, the Lord hath most a&s;&s;uredly vi&s;ibly e&s;pou&s;ed that Nation to him&s;elf, and they are to be accounted his.</HI> What h<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter"> adds, <HI>viz. We own no Church vi&s;ible now, but of Believers by</HI>
<PB N="96" REF="52"> <HI>their own per&s;onal profe&s;&s;ion,</HI> we are not concerned to take notice of. His mentioning the 9^t^h Article of the Church of <HI>England,</HI> by way of appro|bation, and as if it were of the &s;ame mind with him touching the &s;ub|jects of the vi&s;ible Church, is an abu&s;e of it and the Reader. 'Tis known that the addition in the Confe&s;&s;ion of Faith of the A&s;&s;embly, <HI>Chap.</HI> 25. <HI>Art.</HI> 2. <HI>Of Childrens Church-member&s;hip, is the Doctrine of the &s;aid Church.</HI> Of this matter we are not now treating.</P>
<P><HI>Secondly,</HI> In an&s;wer to the Que&s;tion, <HI>Whether there be any National Church under the Oeconomy of the Go&s;pel?</HI> <Q>I &s;ay (&s;aith Mr. <HI>T.)</HI> that though there be no National Church, &s;o as that the whole Nation, and every member of the Nation be to be accounted of the vi&s;ible Church of Chri&s;t, by virtue of their generation and Pro&s;elyti&s;m, and &s;uch Covenant as was made to <HI>Abraham;</HI> concerning his natural Seed, or to <HI>I&s;rael</HI> at Mount <HI>Sinai,</HI> or el&s;ewhere, yet the whole number of Believers of a Nation, may by rea&s;on of their common profe&s;&s;ion be called a National Church, as well as the whole body of men through|out the world upon the account of their profe&s;&s;ing the Faith of the Go&s;pel, <HI>&amp;c.</HI> are and may be called the vi&s;ible Catholick-Church of Chri&s;t.</Q></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. But if Mr. <HI>T.</HI> thinks this to be an an&s;wer to the Que&s;tion, he will &s;carce find in this matter any Corrival: <HI>Quae&s;tio est de ollis, Re|&s;pon&s;io de &s;epis.</HI> We are not enquiring, whether a company of Believers living in a Nation, may be called, upon the account of their Faith and Profe&s;&s;ion, a National Church, which by the figure <HI>Ca<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">achre&s;is</HI> it may be they may. I am &s;ure mo&s;t abu&s;ively and improperly it is that they are &s;o called.</P>
<P>Nor, <HI>2dly,</HI> Is the enquiry <HI>de facto,</HI> of what by the Providence of God is come to pa&s;s, in which &s;en&s;e we grant there is a Natio<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">al Church un|der the Go&s;pel; the Church of <HI>England</HI> is &s;o.</P>
<P>But, 3dly, Whether upon the account of a compul&s;ed, or education-Faith and Profe&s;&s;ion (contradicted by the mo&s;t) a&s;&s;umed and profe&s;&s;ed by per&s;ons living in a Nation divided in &s;everal Pari&s;hes &amp; Dioce&s;&s;es, under the conduct of their Parochial Mini&s;ters, and Dioce&s;an, Metro|politan Bi&s;hops, united together under one (or more) Eccle&s;ia&s;tical vi&s;ible Head; This company of People thus molded, are or may truly be accounted a Church of Chri&s;t, in&s;tituted by him under the Oecono|mie of the Go&s;pel. Which, whoever will undertake to demon&s;trate, mu&s;t I conceive attempt the proof of the&s;e few things.</P>
<P><HI>Fir&s;t,</HI> That a profe&s;&s;ion of Faith forced and compelled, or at lea&s;t in which men have been trained up from their Infancy (as the <HI>Turkes</HI> are
<PB N="97" REF="52"> in the Doctrine of their <HI>Alcoran)</HI> and that for the mo&s;t part contradict|ed in their conver&s;ation, is &s;ufficient to give a man or woman a right and title to Church-member&s;hip.</P>
<P><HI>Secondly,</HI> That per&s;ons co-habiting, or living together in a Pari&s;h, are, <HI>de jure,</HI> upon the account of that their co-habitation (at lea&s;t if they make &s;o much profe&s;&s;ion as to be able to &s;ay the Creed, Lords-Prayer, and ten Commandments, though, as was &s;aid, contradicted by a cour&s;e of debauchery <HI>&amp;c.)</HI> are a Church of Chri&s;t; or that Pari&s;h-Churches, <HI>qu&acirc; tales,</HI> are of the In&s;titution of Chri&s;t.</P>
<P><HI>Thirdly,</HI> That the Subordination of the&s;e Churches and Mini&s;ters to Dioce&s;an Bi&s;hops, Archdeacons, Con&s;i&s;tories and Commi&s;&s;aries, and the&s;e again to an Arch-Bi&s;hop, or Metropolitan is of the &s;ame Origi|nal.</P>
<P><HI>Fourthly,</HI> That the&s;e Bi&s;hops, Arch-deacons, Commi&s;&s;aries, Courts Eccle&s;ia&s;tical, Metropolitical Head, are of the In&s;titution of Chri&s;t. Which when Mr. <HI>T.</HI> (or any one for him) &s;hall do, I will be a Mem|ber of the Church of <HI>England.</HI> But he knows an ea&s;ier way; 'Tis but &s;aying, <HI>That there is no In&s;titution of a Church by Preception or Command;</HI> and he avoids, he thinks, the nece&s;&s;ity of putting him&s;elf to all this toyl. But &s;eriou&s;ly Sir, very few con&s;iderate and judicious Chri&s;tians will care to be Members of &s;uch a Church as is de&s;titute of divine In|&s;titution, and whether his Clients of the Church of <HI>England</HI> will thank him for this part of his Plea, I am not certain. In the greatne&s;s of his love he &s;eems to be killing his Mother with kind embraces. The Church of <HI>England</HI> is not, he grants, of the In&s;titution of Chri&s;t (for there is no Church that is) &s;o that there is no need to alleadge, <HI>I&s;a.</HI> 49. 23. and 66. 8. for the In&s;titution of a National Church: Neverthele&s;s that the Prophe&s;ie, <HI>I&s;a.</HI> 49. 23. waits the time of its accompli&s;hment, is &s;aid by the author of the <HI>S. T.</HI> with more confidence than evidence.</P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> Well, Mr. <HI>T.</HI> will not be guilty of the &s;ame crime: what evidence brings he of this confident a&s;&s;ertion? Why, many learned In|terpreters (among whom Mr. <HI>Gataker)</HI> think otherwi&s;e. But Sir, we have not learned, <HI>Jurare in verba Magi&s;tri,</HI> to take any mans dictates for evident proof of any thing of this nature, which we are &s;ure they are not. As learned Interpreters are of the mind of the Author of <HI>S. T.</HI> The truth of the A&s;&s;ertion is evident.</P>
<P>1&s;t. The Prophe&s;ie hath re&s;pect to &s;ome time after the coming of Chri&s;t in the fle&s;h, of which he &s;peaketh, <HI>ver&s;.</HI> 1, 3, 4, 5, 7, 8. which one con&s;ideration manife&s;ts the nothingne&s;s of the fir&s;t part of Mr. <HI>Ga|takers</HI> notion; <HI>That it had its fulfilling in Cyrus, Artaxerxes, Darius,
<PB N="98" REF="53"> Aha&s;huerus, with the Queens of &s;ome of them.</HI></P>
<P>2dly, Its to receive its accompli&s;hment after the Preaching of the Go&s;pel to the <HI>Gentiles</HI> (which was not till after the A&s;cention of Chri&s;t) <HI>ver&s;.</HI> 1, 6. which the Apo&s;tle cites, <HI>Acts</HI> 13. 47. for his warrant in &s;peaking the Word of God to them.</P>
<P>3dly, The Deliverance and Glory, God doth in this Chapter engage to be&s;tow upon the twelve Tribes (as is evident from the Names of <HI>I&s;rael, ver&s;.</HI> 3, 5, 6, 7. Of <HI>Jacob, ver&s;.</HI> 5. Of the Trib<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">s of <HI>Jacob, ver&s;.</HI> 6. The pre&s;erved of <HI>I&s;rael (ibid.) i. e.</HI> the ten Tribes, in way of di|&s;tinction from whom the two Tribes are called <HI>Sion, ver&s;.</HI> 14.) evin|ceth, that as yet it waits its accompli&s;hment. For though the two Tribes were delivered from the <HI>Babyloni&s;h</HI> Captivity, yet the ten Tribes (as its known) have remained in their graves ever &s;ince they were carried captive by <HI>Salmane&s;er</HI> to this day. 'Tis true, God did once call his Peo|ple of the two Tribes from the North, in the time of <HI>Cyrus, &amp;c.</HI> But from the We&s;t, and from the Land of <HI>Sinim (i. e.</HI> from all parts of the world into which they have been &s;cattered) they have not yet been cal|led, as 'tis <HI>ver&s;.</HI> 12.</P>
<P>4thly, When God doth this, his People &s;hall not hunger nor thir&s;t, neither &s;hall the heat or Sun &s;mite them, <HI>ver&s;.</HI> 10. <HI>(i. e. they &s;hall hun|ger, or thir&s;t no more, the heat, or Sun &s;hall never after more &s;mite them,</HI> Rev. 7. 16. <HI>i. e.</HI> they &s;hall never be burnt by the heat or Sun of Per|&s;ecution more; all &s;orrow and crying &s;hall depart, <HI>and God &s;hall wipe away all tears from their eyes,</HI> (Rev. 7. 17.) which we are &s;ure is not yet accompli&s;hed.)</P>
<P>5thly, <HI>Ver&s;.</HI> 17. Was never yet fulfilled, at their return from <HI>Ba|bylon</HI> their de&s;troyers and they that made them wa&s;te went not out of them; There were then the crew of <HI>Sanballat, Tobiah, &amp;c.</HI> that oppo|&s;ed them, and that &s;o far, that they put a &s;top at the la&s;t to the work of the Lord at <HI>Jeru&s;alem,</HI> into which, anon after <HI>Alexander</HI> the Great en|ters; after him <HI>Antiochus Epiphanes</HI> wa&s;teth, after the&s;e the <HI>Romans</HI> conquer it; and now the <HI>Turks</HI> po&s;&s;e&s;s it.</P>
<P>Nor hath, 6thly, the 19^t^h <HI>ver&s;.</HI> ever been accompli&s;hed &s;ince the carrying away the ten Tribes, the Kingdoms of <HI>I&s;rael</HI> and <HI>Judah</HI> were never full of their own Inhabitants. Tho&s;e &s;ent to p<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">&s;&s;e&s;s it 2 <HI>Kings</HI> 17. 24. we never read were &s;ent for home again. They that &s;wallow|ed up the twelve Tribes have been changed (the <HI>A&s;&s;yrians, Greeks, Ro|mans, Turks,</HI> have interchangably done it) but not removed. All which abundantly evidence the truth of what I a&s;&s;erted; <HI>That the Prophe&s;ie waits the time of its accompli&s;hment.</HI> If you apply the Scripture &s;olely to
<PB N="99" REF="53"> the <HI>Gentile</HI> Saints, 'tis evident, hitherto it hath not been fulfilled. They are &s;till under Sorrow, Oppre&s;&s;ion, Sufferings, which at this day of its accompli&s;hment they &s;hall not be; (of whom this Prophe&s;ie &s;peaks) <HI>ver&s;.</HI> 10. <HI>Their Wa&s;ters, De&s;troyers,</HI> &amp;c. <HI>are not gone out from among them,</HI> as 'tis, <HI>ver&s;.</HI> 17. <HI>The prey is not yet taken from the mighty, nor the lawful Captive delivered.</HI> Nor hath God contended with the Per&s;ecutors of his People, according to the purport of <HI>ver&s;.</HI> 24, 25, 26. So that evidently the Prophe&s;ie had not its accompli&s;hment in the days of the <HI>Per&s;ian</HI> Po|tentates, or of <HI>Con&s;tantine, &amp;c.</HI> or &s;ince in any of the ten Horns; but waits the time thereof, as we think Mr. <HI>T.</HI> him&s;elf will &s;ay we now a&s;&s;ert with as much evidence as confidence. The former whereof (with a great abatement of the latter) is much de&s;ired in the writings of this Animadverter by &s;ober minded per&s;ons, not a few, who have &s;pent &s;ome of their time in peru&s;ing them. That the text, <HI>I&s;a.</HI> 66. 8. is a Prophe|&s;ie expre&s;ly relating to the Jews, and their miraculous conver&s;ion, (as is a&s;&s;erted in the <HI>S. T.)</HI> Mr. <HI>T.</HI> tells us <HI>is not certain;</HI> and cites Mr. <HI>Ga|taker,</HI> acquainting us that the mo&s;t Interpreters under&s;tand it of the &s;ud|dein delivery of the People out of the <HI>Babylonian</HI> bondage by <HI>Cyrus;</HI> Divers of the Re&s;titution and Re&s;tauration of the Church, under the Mini&s;try of the Go&s;pel, when &s;o many thou&s;ands were converted, <HI>Acts</HI> 2. 41. <HI>&amp;</HI> 4. 4.</P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. But that learned per&s;on is no Oracle, to who&s;e dictates we are indi&s;pen&s;ably bound to attend, and give evidence.</P>
<P N="2">2. Other Interpreters under&s;tand it of the miraculous conver&s;ion of the <HI>Jews;</HI> and tho&s;e not a few, nor contemptible.</P>
<P N="3">3. That it hitherto hath not had its fulfilling we have the concurrent Te&s;timony of &s;ome of the Antients. <HI>Ju&s;t. Mart.</HI> in his <HI>Dialog. cum Tryp. pag.</HI> 312. refers this place of <HI>I&s;a.</HI> 66. from the 5^t^h <HI>ver&s;. &amp;c.</HI> to Chri&s;ts &s;econd coming. In which words (&s;aith he) is <GAP DESC="foreign">, (which Mr. <HI>Mede</HI> under&s;tands as meant of the Re&s;urrection of the Godly; the my&s;tery of our being again generated, or made new at the Re&s;urrection) <GAP DESC="foreign">,&mdash;and ab&s;olutely of all who expect Chri&s;t &s;hall appear at <HI>Jeru&s;alem,</HI> and by well-doing &s;tudy to plea&s;e him. And the &s;erious con&s;ideration of the context will afford that brightne&s;s to the under&s;tanding of the judicious Reader, that will lead him captive to the belief thereof. Let any one tell me when <HI>ver&s;.</HI> 6, 11, 12, 14, 15, 16, 19, 22, 23, 24, ever had its fulfilling. Now this one ob&s;ervation removes out of the way, both the Expo&s;itions given in by that learned per&s;on. It relates not to the time either of Redempti|on
<PB N="100" REF="54"> from the <HI>Babyloni&s;h</HI> Captivity, or the conver&s;ion of tho&s;e, <HI>Acts</HI> 2. <HI>&amp;</HI> 4. For the context evinceth, that it hath not yet been fulfilled.</P>
<P N="4">4. That the <HI>Jews</HI> &s;hall not be converted by the ordinary preaching of the Go&s;pel, but by &s;ome extraordinary means; and particularly the ap|pearance of Chri&s;t in the Clouds, is no private opinion of our own. Mr. <HI>Mede</HI> in his <HI>Apocalyptical Key,</HI> is of the &s;ame mind, who thinks <HI>Pauls</HI> Conver&s;ion was a type hereof. The Scripture leads us into the belief hereof, <HI>Zach.</HI> 12. 10. <HI>And I will pour upon the hou&s;e of</HI> David <HI>and the Inhabitants of</HI> Jeru&s;alem, <HI>the Spirit of grace and &s;upplicat<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">on, and they &s;hall look on him whom they have pierced, and they &s;hall mourn for him, as one mourneth for his only Son: and &s;hall be in bitterne&s;s for him as one is in bit|terne&s;s for his fir&s;t-born.</HI></P>
<P>A few things are briefly to be remarked.</P>
<P N="1">1. That the Conver&s;ion of the <HI>Jews,</HI> the whole Nation of them, is here prope&s;ied of, who are here called, <HI>The Hou&s;e of David, and the In|habitants of Jeru&s;alem.</HI></P>
<P>2dly, That this their Conver&s;ion is attributed to the <HI>pouring down of the Spirit,</HI> and <HI>their looking upon Chri&s;t.</HI></P>
<P>3^d^l^y^. The Que&s;tion is, What is meant by <HI>their looking upon Christ?</HI> That their &s;eeing him in <HI>Clouds of Heaven in Maje&s;ty and great Glory,</HI> is hereby intended, we have an unque&s;tionable infallible Interpreter a&s;|&s;uring us, <HI>Rev</HI> 1. 7. <HI>Behold, he cometh with Clouds; and every eye &s;hall &s;ee him, and they al&s;o which pierced him: and all kindreds of the Earth &s;hall wail becau&s;e of him.</HI> And Mat. 24. 30. <HI>Then &s;hall appear the Sign of the Son of Man</HI> (either <HI>per Synechdochen,</HI> the great &s;igns of Glory and Ma|je&s;ty, which then &s;hall compa&s;s him round about; or the Son of Man him&s;elf, as the &s;ign of Circumci&s;ion is nothing el&s;e but Circumci&s;ion it &s;elf) <HI>in Heaven. And then &s;hall all the Tribes of the Earth mourn, and they &s;hall &s;ee the Son of Man coming in the Clouds of Heaven,</HI> viz. <HI>in Ma|je&s;ty and great glory.</HI> The &s;ight whereof &s;hall be the mea<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">s of their mira|culous Conver&s;ion. Accordingly you have here in <HI>I&s;a.</HI> 66. <HI>ver&s;.</HI> 5. <HI>The appearing of the Lord.</HI> The i&s;&s;ue whereof is (1) The ruine of his ene|mies, <HI>ver&s;.</HI> 6, 14, 15, 16, (where you have Chri&s;ts appearance, large|ly di&s;cour&s;ed of <HI>Rev.</HI> 19.) (2) The Conver&s;ion and Re&s;tauration of the <HI>Jews, ver&s;.</HI> 7, 8, 9. (3) The concomitant Glory in the new Heaven, and new Earth &s;tate, or the time of the re&s;titution of all things, <HI>ver&s;.</HI> 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 22, 23. All which con&s;idered, I humbly con|ceive I had ground enough to a&s;&s;ert, That <HI>I&s;a.</HI> 66. 8. is a Prophe&s;ie ex|pre&s;ly relating to the <HI>Jews</HI> and their miraculous Conver&s;ion. That be|cau&s;e tis &s;aid, <HI>Rom.</HI> 11. 25, 26. <HI>When the fullne&s;s of the Gentiles is come</HI>
<PB N="101" REF="54"> <HI>in, all I&s;rael &s;hall be &s;aved:</HI> Therefore I may find &s;omething of a Natio|nal Church, con&s;i&s;ting of &s;everal Pari&s;h Churches, bounded by old Cu&s;toms, Laws, Con&s;titutions, <HI>&amp;c.</HI> in &s;ubordination to <HI>Dioce&s;an, Me|tropolitan</HI> Churches, with their &s;everal Officers, of Prie&s;ts, Arch-Deacons, Bi&s;hops, Arch-Bi&s;hops on the head of them, which is the Na|tional Church we are enquiring after in <HI>I&s;a.</HI> 66. 8. is a Con&s;equence I &s;hall never &s;ee Mr. <HI>T.</HI> make good. That he &s;hould do &s;o, is <GAP DESC="foreign">, among&s;t the number of tho&s;e things that are impo&s;&s;ible. And once for all I de&s;ire him, when he writes next, not to think &s;o highly of him&s;elf, as to conceit that his dictates mu&s;t pa&s;s without controle, but to remember he is, (as well as other men) obliged to give us a rea|&s;on of them; el&s;e we &s;hall not think our &s;elves bound to take any fur|ther notice of them, then to reject them as &s;ayings of no weight or value.</P>
</DIV3>
<DIV3 N="15" TYPE="section">
<HEAD>Sect. 15.</HEAD>
<ARGUMENT>
<P><HI>Of National Mini&s;ters.</HI> Peter, Paul, Titus, <HI>no National Mini&s;ters.</HI> Ephe&s;. 4. 11, 12, 13, <HI>explained. The Body of Chri&s;t there, not the Church-Catholick vi&s;ible, but a particular Church of Chri&s;t, proved. Pa&s;tors and Teachers are only belonging to one particular Congregation. If a man be a Mini&s;ter by the appointment of Chri&s;t, of a Church-Catholick vi&s;ible, he cannot be a Mini&s;ter of Chri&s;t of a National Church. The Mini&s;ters of Chri&s;t are either Extraordinary or Ordinary. Of Saints Intere&s;t in each.</HI> 1 Cor. 3. 22, 23, <HI>expounded.</HI></P>
</ARGUMENT>
<P>THE &s;econd Querie in the <HI>S. T.</HI> is, <HI>Whether National Mini&s;ters are the Mini&s;ters of Chri&s;t?</HI> Or, <HI>Whether there can be a true Mini|&s;try in a fal&s;e Church, as a National Church mu&s;t be if not of Divine In|&s;titution?</HI></P>
<P>To this Mr. <HI>T.</HI> pretends to an&s;wer, <HI>Sect.</HI> 16. And after conjectures of what I mean by <HI>National Mini&s;ters,</HI> he gives us &s;uch a de&s;cription of them, as he could not (&s;ure) think any man be&s;ides him&s;elf would &s;ub&s;cribe to; but it &s;erved his de&s;ign (he thought.) By <HI>National Mi|ni&s;ters,</HI> I mean &s;uch as are members of a National Church, related to it as the Mini&s;ters thereof, as &s;uch; Ordained and &s;et apart by National Officers, bound up by its Canons and Laws in their Mini&s;trations: who when Mr. <HI>T.</HI> &s;hall prove to be Mini&s;ters of Chri&s;t, he will be &s;uppo&s;ed to &s;ay &s;omething in an&s;wer to the Querie, which as yet he hath not done. His en&s;uing Arguments &s;peak not a word for &s;uch National Mini&s;ters, him&s;elf being Judge.</P>
<PB N="102" REF="55">
<P> 1&s;t, Peter, <HI>though he had the Apo&s;tle&s;hip, of Circumci&s;ion, and</HI> Paul <HI>of the Gentiles,</HI> were not <HI>National Mini&s;ters.</HI></P>
<P>2dly, Nor <HI>Titus,</HI> though <HI>left in</HI> Crete, <HI>to &s;et in order things that were wanting, and to ordain Elders in every City,</HI> Tit. 1. 5. F<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">r they were,</P>
<P><HI>Fir&s;t,</HI> No members of a <HI>National Church.</HI></P>
<P><HI>Secondly,</HI> Not related to it as the <HI>Mini&s;ters</HI> thereof.</P>
<P><HI>Thirdly,</HI> Not Ordained, or &s;et apart to their Office by <HI>Natinnal Of|ficers.</HI></P>
<P><HI>Fourthly,</HI> Not bounded and circum&s;cribed in their M<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">ni&s;trations, by any <HI>devi&s;ed In&s;titutions</HI> or <HI>Canons</HI> thereof: None of which were then in being as is known. He goes on and tells us,</P>
<P>3dly, <HI>They that may be Mini&s;ters of Chri&s;t, though they be Mini|&s;ters for the Body of Chri&s;t, and all the Members thereof, ma<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter"> be Mini&s;ters of Chri&s;t, though National;</HI></P>
<P><HI>But Pa&s;tors and Teachers are given for the edifying of the Body of Chri&s;t;</HI></P>
<P><HI>Therefore,</HI> &amp;c.</P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. If by the <HI>Body of Chri&s;t,</HI> Mr. T. means the Church-Catho|lick vi&s;ible; The Apo&s;tle, <HI>Eph.</HI> 4. 11, 12, 13. &s;peaks not a word of it; not the Body of Profe&s;&s;ors, or multitude of per&s;ons profe&s;&s;ing Faith in Chri&s;t, is there intended; but &s;ome particular In&s;tituted Church of Chri&s;t. Which we prove,</P>
<P N="1">1. The Body of Chri&s;t, <HI>Eph.</HI> 4. 11, 12, 13. is the &s;ame with the Body and Church of Chri&s;t, 1 <HI>Cor.</HI> 12. 27, 28. as by the &s;erious peru&s;al of both places (comparing the one with the other) will to the &s;ober and judi|cious be evident. That there it &s;ignifies a particular Church of Chri&s;t, we have demon&s;trated <HI>Sect.</HI> 13. therefore here it al&s;o &s;o &s;ignifies.</P>
<P N="2">2. Here Pa&s;tors and Teachers are &s;aid to be given for the edifying of the Body of Chri&s;t, <HI>(i. e.</HI> particular in&s;tituted Churches of Chri&s;t) and accordingly we find them ordained in every Church, <HI>Acts</HI> 14. 23. <HI>Tit.</HI> 1. 5. and the whole of their charge limited to particular Churches, <HI>Acts</HI> 20. 17, 28. 1 <HI>Pet.</HI> 5. 2. 1 <HI>Tim.</HI> 3. 15. <HI>Col.</HI> 4. 17. who are com|manded to obey them in the Lord, 1 <HI>The&s;&s;.</HI> 5. 12. <HI>Heb.</HI> 13. 17. from whom they might not upon every occa&s;ion, nor without <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">he con&s;ent of the Congregation, upon any pretext what&s;oever, remove; (See <HI>Calv. In&s;titut. l.</HI> 4. <HI>c.</HI> 3. <HI>&s;.</HI> 7.) of which Mr. <HI>Paul Bains</HI> &s;peaks in his Expo&s;ition on the <HI>Ephe&s;ians,</HI> chap. 2. 3. p. 350, 351. <HI>As the Lord doth give a Calling and Grace, &s;o a People, towards whom it is especially ble&s;&s;ed&mdash;</HI>It is true, the Apo&s;tle had a more large Flock, the care of all Churches was upon him; but where&s;oever God giveth a Calling, there he giveth a People, of whom the Mini&s;ter may &s;ay, <HI>Toward you Grace is given me of God,</HI>
<PB N="103" REF="55"> <HI>Acts</HI> 20. 28. 1 <HI>Pet.</HI> 5. 2. God hath a&s;&s;igned every ordinary Mini&s;ter a portion of his People: for this is the difference between extraor|dinary, as the Apo&s;tles, Evangeli&s;ts, the &s;eventy Di&s;ciples, and our ordinary Pa&s;tors: The Apo&s;tles had an Univer&s;al Commi&s;&s;ion; and the Evangeli&s;ts were Delegates of the Apo&s;tles&mdash;The Seventy (if not Evangeli&s;ts, which &s;ome of the Ancients encline to) yet they were il|limited helpers, and fellow-labourers in the work of the Lord. But or|dinary Mini&s;ters the Lord commanded to fa&s;ten them to certain places, <HI>Tit.</HI> 1. 5. <HI>Ordain Elders City by City.</HI> And in the Council of <HI>Chalcedon,</HI> chap. 6. <HI>Let none be ordained at large, le&s;t he prove a wandring Jonathan.</HI> Every Mini&s;ter mu&s;t be, 1. Seperated, 2. Authorized, 3. have allotted to him a certain portion of people which may be in&s;tructed by him, which the diminutive <GAP DESC="foreign">, not <GAP DESC="foreign">, may &s;eem to in&s;inuate. Now as God doth give every Pa&s;tor his &s;everal Flock, &s;o he will that we travel in leading of them, we mu&s;t not <GAP DESC="foreign">, we mu&s;t not be Bi|&s;hops in other mens Dioce&s;&s;es, le&s;t God &s;ay, <HI>Who hath required this at your hands?</HI> When the Lord lighteth Candles he doth find Candle|&s;ticks on which to &s;et them, &amp;c.</P>
<P>The &s;um is, 1. The Body of Chri&s;t <HI>(Eph.</HI> 4. 11, 12.) is a particular Church of Chri&s;t, for the edification of which Pa&s;tors and Teachers are given. 2ly. Ordinary Officers are limited to particular Churches. From whence the vanity of this Animadverter's Argument is con&s;pi|cuous to every eye.</P>
<P>If by <HI>Body of Chri&s;t</HI> he under&s;tand, in his fir&s;t Propo&s;ition, the Uni|ver&s;al Catholick Church: 1. His Argument is naught, con&s;i&s;ting of four terms: for we have manife&s;ted that the Body of Chri&s;t in the <HI>Mi|nor</HI> (which is the Apo&s;tles) is a particular Church of Chri&s;t. 2. Hi<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter"> <HI>Major</HI> is invalid; It doth not follow, that if men may be Mini&s;ters of <HI>Chri&s;t,</HI> though they be Mini&s;ters for the <HI>Body of Chri&s;t,</HI> and all the mem|bers thereof, that they may be Mini&s;ters of Chri&s;t though National. If he think Mini&s;ters for the Body of Chri&s;t, and all the members thereof, and national Mini&s;ters are aequipollent, upon &s;econd thoughts he will be &s;o ingenious as to acknowledge he was mi&s;taken. Nay, 3dly. The very truth is, 'tis &s;o far from being true, that upon &s;uppo&s;ition a man may be a Mini&s;ter of the Body of Chri&s;t, and yet the Mini&s;ter of Chri&s;t; <HI>i. e.</HI> by the appointment of Chri&s;t a Mini&s;ter for his Body, and all the Membe<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="2 letters"> (Churches) thereof. That therefore he may be the Mini&s;ter of Chri&s;t though <HI>National,</HI> that <HI>ejus contrarium, est verum.</HI> A man cannot be a Mini&s;ter of Chri&s;t if a <HI>National Mini&s;ter,</HI> or <HI>Mini&s;ter</HI> of a <HI>National Church,</HI> upon &s;uppo&s;ition that Chri&s;t hath in&s;tituted and appointed his
<PB N="104" REF="56"> Mini&s;ters to be Mini&s;ters for his Body, <HI>i. e.</HI> his Church-Catholick-vi|&s;ible, which is not &s;ure confined within the narrow circumference of one Nation: A mans re&s;idence wherein will be accoun<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">ed but a pitti|ful di&s;charge of his Mini&s;try upon the &s;uppo&s;ition afore&s;aid. But, 4thly, By the <HI>Body of Chri&s;t, Ephe&s;.</HI> 4. we have proved a particular Church of Chri&s;t to be intended. That there is any &s;hew of rea&s;on in the Ani|madverters propo&s;ition; <HI>They that may be Mini&s;ters of Chri&s;t, though they may be Mini&s;ters of the Body of Chri&s;t, i. e.</HI> a particular Church of Chri&s;t, and all the Members thereof (which by the appointment of Chri&s;t they are) <HI>may be Mini&s;ters of Chri&s;t, though National,</HI> (which none are but by the devi&s;ings of man, and appointment of Antichri&s;t) he him&s;elf will not have the confidence to aver. There are the&s;e things incumbent up|on him to prove if he ever reinforce this Argument.</P>
<P><HI>Fir&s;t,</HI> That by <HI>Body of Christ,</HI> Ephe&s;. 4. is not meant a particular In|&s;tituted Church of Chri&s;t.</P>
<P><HI>Secondly,</HI> That ordinary Church Officers (for to run into a di&s;cour&s;e of what was done by the Apo&s;tles extraordinary Officers, who were not fixt any where, nor could be, while&s;t they made con&s;cience of their Com|mi&s;&s;ion, <HI>Mat.</HI> 28. 19. which was to <HI>Preach the Go&s;pel to every Creature;</HI> In which Office none are their Succe&s;&s;ors, as we prove <HI>Chap.</HI> 4. is &s;uch a pittiful fig-leaf to cover ones nakedne&s;s with, that every eye will &s;ee through) are not limited to, or fixed in a particular Congregation.</P>
<P><HI>Thirdly,</HI> Manife&s;t the truth of this propo&s;ition (&s;houl<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter"> it be granted him for di&s;putes &s;ake, that by <HI>Body, Ephe&s;.</HI> 4. is meant the Church-Ca|tholick-vi&s;ible) <HI>They that may be Mini&s;ters of Chri&s;t, though they may be Mini&s;ters of the Body of Christ (i. e.</HI> the Church-Catholick-vi&s;ible) <HI>and all the members thereof, may be Mini&s;ters of Christ though National.</HI> The Bottom or Ba&s;is upon which it is built, I mu&s;t acknowledge my &s;hort-&s;ightedne&s;s to be &s;uch, that I cannot ken, nor, it may be, a wi&s;er man than either of us.</P>
<P>His <HI>Fourth</HI> Argument is like the re&s;t, 'tis thus formed: <HI>If any of the Saints, as well as one particular Congregation, have an In<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">ere&s;t in all the Mini&s;ters of Christ, &s;o as that they are truly theirs, then Mini&s;ters of Chri&s;t may be National;</HI></P>
<P><HI>But</HI> 1 Cor. 3. 22, 23, Paul, <HI>and</HI> Cephas, <HI>and</HI> Apollos <HI>were all</HI> the Co|rinthians, <HI>and all others who were Chri&s;t's;</HI></P>
<P><HI>Therefore.</HI></P>
<P>An&s;w. <HI>En cor Zenodoti, en jecur cratetis.</HI></P>
<P>What is mo&s;t admirable in this Argument I know not. A few things will manife&s;t its nakedne&s;s to all.</P>
<PB N="105" REF="56">
<P> 1&s;t, The Mini&s;ters of Chri&s;t are either &s;uch as were called extraor|dinary, as were immediately &s;ent by Chri&s;t, (or a&s;&s;umed to them&s;elves by them who were &s;o &s;ent, to be coadjutors, or fellow-workers with them in that &s;ervice and employment) to preach the Go&s;pel through|out the world, and were fixed no where; related as Pa&s;tors or Teach|ers to no one particular Congregation more than another; or &s;uch as were mediately &s;ent by Chri&s;t, ordained in, and &s;et apart for particular Congregations. Of the former &s;ort were the Apo&s;tles, <HI>&amp;c.</HI> Of the lat|ter, Pa&s;tors, Teachers, as we but now proved.</P>
<P>2dly, The having an intere&s;t in Mini&s;ters, is either the having an in|tere&s;t in their gifts and abilities God hath given them, or in their per|&s;ons, as Mini&s;ters appointed by the Lord, to over&s;ee, in&s;truct, and watch over their &s;ouls, as &s;uch that mu&s;t give an account, <HI>Heb.</HI> 13. 17. Now let him take Mini&s;ters in either &s;ence, for extraordinary or ordi|nary Mini&s;ters, and an intere&s;t in them for an intere&s;t in their gifts, or in them as Mini&s;ters appointed by the Lord to watch over and in&s;truct them; the con&s;equence of his fir&s;t propo&s;ition is mo&s;t weak and inva|lid. Though all the Saints in the world might claim an intere&s;t in <HI>Paul, &amp;c.</HI> it doth not follow that they were National Mini&s;ters, which 'twas impo&s;&s;ible they &s;hould be, there being no &s;uch thing as a National Church, from whence a National Mini&s;ter hath his denomination. And Mr. <HI>T.</HI> may as well &s;urmi&s;e a King without Subjects, a Father without Children, or a Husband without a Wife, as to &s;urmi&s;e <HI>Paul, &amp;c.</HI> to be National Mini&s;ters, when there was no &s;uch thing in being as a Natio|nal Church. The like may be &s;aid of Pa&s;tors and Teachers in that day.</P>
<P>But, 3dly, If he take Mini&s;ters for ordinary Mini&s;ters (as he mu&s;t do, if he &s;peak to purpo&s;e, extraordinary Mini&s;ters being cea&s;ed with the Apo&s;tles) and their intere&s;t in them, for their intere&s;t in them as Mi|ni&s;ters, to over&s;ee and in&s;truct them in the Lord, by virtue of Office-power; there is nothing more fal&s;e than this, that every Saint hath an intere&s;t in them as &s;uch; none but that particular Congregation having in that &s;en&s;e an intere&s;t in them, to which they are related as Mini&s;ters. Nor doth the Apo&s;tle 1 <HI>Cor.</HI> 3. 22, 23. &s;ay that every Saint hath.</P>
<P N="1">1. <HI>All is yours,</HI> is no more than all is and &s;hall be for your good.</P>
<P N="2">2. He &s;peaks to the particular Church of <HI>Corinth,</HI> of which neither <HI>Paul,</HI> nor <HI>Apollos,</HI> nor <HI>Gephas,</HI> were Pa&s;tors or Teachers.</P>
<P N="3">3. He is condemning them upon the account of their crying up and preferring one before another, upon the &s;uppo&s;ition of the excellency of gifts; &s;ome thought they &s;aw in one, others in the other; which cau&s;ed them to &s;ide and tumultuate the one again&s;t the other: To allay which,
<PB N="106" REF="57"> among&s;t other things, he tells them, <HI>All is theirs, whether</HI> Paul <HI>&amp;c. i. e.</HI> the gifts of the one and the other, were for their u&s;e <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">nd emolument, as the Lord was plea&s;ed in his providence to ca&s;t them among&s;t them.</P>
<P N="4">4. He &s;peaks of extraordinary unlimited Officers, t<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">at were to con|tinue but for a &s;ea&s;on, and (whil&s;t they were) fixed and <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">etled in no par|ticular Church, &s;o that the <HI>Corinthians</HI> might lay as much claim to them upon that account as any other: Therefore <HI>National Mini&s;ters may be Mini&s;ters of Chri&s;t,</HI> is this Animadverter's Logick, wh<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">ch when I pur|po&s;e <HI>ludicr&egrave; &s;ophi&s;ticare,</HI> I may imitate him in.</P>
<P>What follows, <HI>viz.</HI> That <HI>a man may be a Commi&s;&s;ioner for approbation of Publick Preachers throughout a Nation,</HI> (as Mr. T. was when that was in fa&s;hion) <HI>and &s;o a National Mini&s;ter, or an Itinerant Preacher, and yet be a Minister of Chri&s;t,</HI> is not at all to the purpo&s;e.</P>
<P N="1">1. If Mr. T. look'd upon him&s;elf as &s;uch an one, when he &s;ate at <HI>White-Hall</HI> among&s;t the <HI>Tryers,</HI> I know many of the<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter"> that then &s;ate there, did not. And in the &s;en&s;e I &s;peak of National Mini&s;ters, as ex|plained in the beginning of this Section, he could not be one.</P>
<P>2dly. Some (at lea&s;t) of the then <HI>Tryers</HI> were &s;o far from being Nati|onal Mini&s;ters, that to my knowledge they were not Mini&s;ters at all, but private Gentlemen, whom the then Powers thought fit to entru&s;t with the management of that affair.</P>
</DIV3>
<DIV3 N="16" TYPE="section">
<HEAD>Sect. 16.</HEAD>
<ARGUMENT>
<P><HI>No National Church under the Oeconomy of the Gospel. The National Church of</HI> England <HI>de&s;titute of what Mr.</HI> T. <HI>makes e&s;&s;ential of a true Church. Somewhat more e&s;&s;ential to a true Church than the truth of Doctrine of Faith, the truth of Wor&s;hip, the truth of holy Conver&s;ation,</HI> viz. <HI>Segregation and Aggregation, proved. The A<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">imadverter's Ar|gument retorted upon him&s;elf. Though every defect of Order doth not nul|lifie a Church, yet the defect of that Order that is of the e&s;&s;ence of a true Church doth. Of the Di&s;orders of the Church of</HI> Corinth. <HI>Their imper|tinent Allegation by the Animadverter of Synods: the learned</HI> Whita|ker's <HI>judgment of them, and General Councils. The&s;e no proof for Na|tional Churches. Of many particular Congregations under one Presby|terial Government. The&s;e may be yet no National Church. The Church of Jeru&s;alem but one particular Congregation, meeting together in the &s;ame place for celebration of Ordinances. How this Church was the pattern of all other Churches. Mr.</HI> T. <HI>his Cavils refuted.</HI></P>
</ARGUMENT>
<P>THe next attempt of <HI>Mr. T.</HI> in this Section, is to prove a National Church, &s;o denominated from their &s;ubjection to &s;ome Canon-Rulers
<PB N="107" REF="57"> Eccle&s;ia&s;tical (which is the National Church we are enquiring after) or conveening by Deputies in &s;ome National Synod, though not of Divine In&s;titution, is a true Church.</P>
<P>This &s;eems at fir&s;t blu&s;h to be a difficult task: to a&s;&s;ert a Church not of Divine In&s;titution, to be a Church of God (for &s;o 'tis if a true Church) his Temple, Tabernacle, in which he walks and dwells, is to me &s;uch a Paradox as requires a &s;trong brain and hard forehead to make good. But <HI>Aquila non capit mu&s;cas,</HI> nothing but what others de&s;pair of ever accompli&s;hing is thought by daring &s;pirits worthy the attempting. We attend his proofs. Thus he argues: <HI>They may be a true Church who have all things e&s;&s;ential to a Church, and nothing de&s;tructive of its being &s;uch. But a National Church may have all things e&s;&s;ential to a Church, &amp;c. Therefore.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> Very good! We deny his minor Propo&s;ition, <HI>that a National Church may have all things e&s;&s;ential to a Church, &amp;c.</HI> What &s;aith he for the proof of it? He tells us, that <HI>a National Church may have the truth of Doctrine of Faith, the truth of Wor&s;hip, the truth of holy Conver&s;ation, be|&s;ides which there is nothing e&s;&s;ential to a true Church.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> But this is <HI>gratis dictum,</HI> and without proof.</P>
<P N="1">1. That <HI>Mr.</HI> T. can give us an account of any National Church un|der the Oeconomy of the Go&s;pel, concerning which it may be affirmed <HI>that the truth of the Doctrine of Faith, the truth of Wor&s;hip, the truth of holy Conver&s;ation did appertain to it, (i. e.)</HI> if I do not much mi&s;take him, it hath been &s;ound in Doctrinals, the true Wor&s;hip of Chri&s;t hath been managed and carried on in it, and the particular members thereof <HI>(i. e.</HI> the multitude of the Inhabitants of the Nation) <HI>holy</HI> and <HI>righteous,</HI> will not ha&s;tily be believed by &s;uch as have thought them&s;elves concerned to look into the&s;e matters. As for the Church of <HI>England</HI> we &s;uppo&s;e he will not have the confidence to a&s;&s;ert that it may be truly affirmed of it, that the members thereof are &s;o qualified. The frequent &s;taggering and &s;hameful &s;pewings, through exce&s;s, that we daily behold in no &s;mall number, even of the Captains and chief of this Herd, evince the con|trary. Of the &s;oundne&s;s of their Doctrine we give an account, <HI>Chap.</HI> 11. and of the truth of their Wor&s;hip, <HI>Chap.</HI> 8.</P>
<P>But 2dly, The Animadverter full well knew that his Antagoni&s;ts look not not upon the particulars in&s;tanced in, to be the E&s;&s;entials of a Church. We Country-folk are not wont to &s;ay, that when the mate|rials of an Hou&s;e are fitted and brought together, the Hou&s;e is built; there mu&s;t be an orderly forming and placing of each piece in the build|ing according to the Scheme or Platform thereof, before this can be af|firmed
<PB N="108" REF="58"> of it. And therefore <HI>hic pes figendus,</HI> he &s;hould have manife&s;ted the truth of his dictate, that be&s;ides the&s;e there is nothing e&s;&s;ential to a true Church.</P>
<P>We are apt to think that two things, over and above wh<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">t is in&s;tanc'd in by him, are &s;o e&s;&s;ential to a true Church, that without them it is not &s;uch. 1. <HI>Segregation,</HI> or &s;eparation from the wicked, carnal, formal, hy|pocritical world, and the wor&s;hip thereof, of which <HI>chap.</HI> 4. of the <HI>S. T.</HI> and in our Epi&s;tle to the Reader prefixt to this Treati&s;e. 2. <HI>Aggrega|tion,</HI> or a &s;olemn gathering together, by free and mutual con&s;ent, into particular Congregations, in the fear of the great God, g<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">ving up our &s;elves to him and one another, according to his will, to <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">alk together in the fellow&s;hip of the Go&s;pel, in obedience to all the In&s;titutions and Appointments of our dear Lord.</P>
<P N="1">1. That thus it &s;hould be in Go&s;pel-dayes the Prophets of old bear their Te&s;timony, Jer. 50. 5. <HI>Come let us</HI> <NOTE N="&dagger;" PLACE="marg">Heb. <GAP DESC="foreign">, <HI>which points forth not a ca&s;ual aggre|gation, not a forc'd con|junction; but a free and voluntary giving up them&s;elves to the Lord, and to one another. 'Tis u&s;ed of &s;uch a conjuncti|on as is made by marri|age.</HI></NOTE> <HI>joyn our &s;elves to the Lord, &amp;c.</HI> &s;o <HI>I&s;a.</HI> 2. 3. <HI>Mich.</HI> 4. 2. <HI>I&s;a.</HI> 44. 5. <HI>Zech.</HI> 8. 21, 22, 23.</P>
<P>2dly. Accordingly we have the Churches of Chri&s;t in the New-Te&s;tament practi&s;ing, and commended for their &s;o doing, as acting therein according to the will of God, <HI>Acts</HI> 2. 41, 42. 2 <HI>Cor.</HI> 8. 5.</P>
<P>3dly. The &s;everal names and tit<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">es given un|to particular Churches evince as much. Every &s;uch Church is called,</P>
<P N="1">1. A Body, 1 <HI>Cor.</HI> 12. 27. <HI>Col.</HI> 3. 15. <HI>Rom.</HI> 14. 4, 5. <HI>Eph.</HI> 5. 30, 32. <HI>Col.</HI> 1. 18, 21. Now 'tis not the multitude or number of members, whe|ther many or few, that con&s;titute or make a Body. We &s;ay not, if we come into a Field where a Battel hath been fought, and find an Arm in one place, a Leg in another, an Hand in a third, &amp;c. though we meet with as many members &s;cattered up and down as are in the body, yea though thrown together in heaps, that here is a body; no, no, 'tis</P>
<Q>Rudis indige&s;taque moles,</Q>
<P>Their union each with other and coale&s;cency in one, is that which gives them that denomination: Particular Saints &s;cattered here and there, or ca&s;ually coming together are not (nor can they be) called the Body of Chri&s;t; their union each with other by their free and mu|tual con&s;ent, is that which denominates them &s;o to be.</P>
<P N="2">2. An Hou&s;e or Temple, <HI>Heb.</HI> 3. 6. <HI>Ephe&s;.</HI> 2. 21, 22. 1 <HI>Tim.</HI> 3. 15. 1 <HI>Pet.</HI> 2. 5. Mr. T. knows who have thought the world was made by the ca&s;ual confluence of Atoms; he doth not &s;ure think, that a ca&s;ual con|currence
<PB N="109" REF="58"> of people profe&s;&s;ing the Name of the Lord, without more ado, are, or can become an Hou&s;e or Temple for him.</P>
<P N="3">3. A City, a Kingdom, <HI>Eph.</HI> 2. 19. <HI>Mat.</HI> 21. 43. <HI>Heb.</HI> 12. 28. <HI>Joh.</HI> 18. 36. That a man &s;hould be any way a member of the&s;e but by his free con&s;ent, cannot be a&s;&s;erted with the lea&s;t &s;hew of rea&s;on.</P>
<P N="4">4. A Fraternity or Brotherhood, <HI>Zech.</HI> 11. 14. 1 <HI>Pet.</HI> 2. 17. compared with <HI>chap.</HI> 5. 2, 13.</P>
<P N="5">5. A Candle&s;tick, in allu&s;ion to <HI>Mo&s;es</HI> his Candle&s;ticks, <HI>Exod.</HI> 25. 31. (wherein though there were many &s;hafts, yet they did all coale&s;ce in one) <HI>Rev.</HI> 1. 11, 12, 20. All which as they import <HI>Aggregation,</HI> or a &s;olemn union; &s;o they clearly evince that this cannot be but by free and mutual con&s;ent.</P>
<P N="4">4. Be&s;ides, we find Chri&s;t promi&s;ing his Pre&s;ence to his Church and People thus aggregated or gathered (an Argument of his well-plea&s;ed|ne&s;s therein) <HI>Mat.</HI> 18. 20. which accordingly he makes good to the Churches of <HI>A&s;ia</HI> (as to the re&s;t) <HI>Rev.</HI> 1. 13. which we have proved to be particular, Congregational Churches. That they were &s;eparated from the World and its Wor&s;hip, gathered together by their own free con&s;ent for the wor&s;hipping God, <HI>Mr. T.</HI> cannot deny; There were no Laws to compel them hereunto, but the contrary.</P>
<P>So that 3dly, we may righteou&s;ly retort this Animadverters Argu|ment upon him&s;elf. <HI>There cannot be a true Church where tho&s;e things e&s;|&s;ential to a true Church cannot be found: But in National Churches in ge|neral</HI> (in the Church of <HI>England</HI> in particular) <HI>tho&s;e things that are e&s;&s;en|tial to a true Church cannot be found: Therefore.</HI></P>
<P>The <HI>Major</HI> is <HI>Mr. T</HI>'s; The <HI>Minor</HI> we prove. <HI>Right matter and form is of the e&s;&s;ence of a true Church, both wanting in the Church of England.</HI></P>
<P N="1">1. The right matter <HI>Mr. T.</HI> denies not, to be vi&s;ible Saints; vi&s;ible Drunkards, Swearers, Whoremongers, covetous per&s;ons are not &s;uch: yet of &s;uch as the&s;e is the Church of <HI>England</HI> mo&s;tly compo&s;ed.</P>
<P>2dly. The form of a true Church we have manife&s;ted to con&s;i&s;t in &s;e|paration from Worldly, Formal, Antichri&s;tian Wor&s;hippers, gathering together by free con&s;ent into a Church-&s;tate, or particular Societies, for the Wor&s;hip and Service of God: neither of which can be a&s;&s;erted of the Church of <HI>England.</HI> Much of the Wor&s;hip of the Nations, of Antichri&s;t (at lea&s;t their rites and modes of Service) is retained in it. And into that Church-&s;tate (&s;uch as it is) in which they are fixed, did they never enter by their free and voluntary con&s;ent, but by the Laws of the Kingdom were they at fir&s;t (I &s;peak of their National-Church-&s;tate; that the Go&s;pel was early (whether by <HI>Jo&s;eph</HI> of <HI>Arima|thea,</HI>
<PB N="110" REF="59"> or &s;ome one of the Apo&s;tles, is not material) preached in <HI>Eng|land;</HI> that then a true Church, or Churches, were here planted I grant, but this is nothing to their pre&s;ent frame as a Church-National) com|pell'd thereunto, and by &s;evere Laws retained therein to this day. From which (as from the Lordly Prelacy) the mo&s;t &s;ober People of the Na|tion do every-where (groaning, being burdened) long to be delivered.</P>
<P>What follows will receive a &s;peedy di&s;patch. 1. 'Tis true the defect of outward order <HI>(i. e.</HI> of every outward order, though of the in&s;titution of <HI>Christ)</HI> doth not nullifie the Church; but want of that order which is of the e&s;&s;ence of the Church, as we have evinced to be the ca&s;e of the Church of <HI>England,</HI> doth &s;o. 2dly, <HI>Mr. T</HI>'s in&s;tances of the di&s;orders in the Church of <HI>Corinth,</HI> yet a true Church, are &s;o evidently imperti|nent, that the bare mentioning them is confutation &s;ufficient. The Church of <HI>Corinth</HI> was a rightly con&s;tituted Church, made up of vi&s;ible Saints, 1 <HI>Cor.</HI> 1. 1. gathered together into a particular body, 1 <HI>Cor.</HI> 12. 27. meeting together, <GAP DESC="foreign">, in the &s;ame place, for the Wor&s;hip of God, 1 <HI>Cor.</HI> 11. 20. &amp; 14. 23. Some di&s;orders found among&s;t this Church did not nullifie it: <HI>Ergo</HI> the defect of that Order that is in&s;ti|tuted by Chri&s;t <HI>ad e&s;&s;e,</HI> to the very exi&s;tence and being of a Go&s;pel-Church (as is the ca&s;e of National Churches) doth not nullifie them, will not in ha&s;t be made good. When <HI>Mr. T.</HI> proves the &s;amene&s;s of con&s;titution betwixt the particular Church of <HI>Corinth,</HI> and the National Church of <HI>England,</HI> his in&s;tance of di&s;orders among&s;t the <HI>Corinthians</HI> will be acknowledged pertinent; but till then he will not him&s;elf, up|on &s;econd thoughts, &s;ay it is &s;o. The having of Natio<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">al Rulers Ec|cle&s;ia&s;tical, either &s;ingle per&s;ons, or in a Synod or Convocation, make not a fal&s;e Church, &s;aith the Animadverter.</P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. But &s;hould this be granted, it would not follow that a Na|tional Church is not a fal&s;e Church, which it may be upon other ac|counts, though upon the account hereof it &s;hould be acq<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">itted.</P>
<P>But 2ly, National Officers (or Rulers) Eccle&s;ia&s;tical, in whom all Church-power is &s;tated (as Arch-Bi&s;hop,) and from thence derived to Dioce&s;an Bi&s;hops, and by them communicated (in part) to the ordina|ry Pari&s;h-Prie&s;ts (as is the ca&s;e of the National Eccle&s;ia&s;tical Officers of <HI>England)</HI> are fal&s;e and Antichri&s;tian Officers and <HI>Mini&s;ters,</HI> we prove <HI>chap.</HI> 3. of the <HI>S. T.</HI> That a National Church &s;o denominated from their &s;ubjection to the&s;e, &s;hould be a true Church, is beyond the reach of my under&s;tanding.</P>
<P>What he addeth touching Synods owned and &s;ubmitted unto by tho&s;e of the <HI>Congregational way,</HI> and Churches of a greater number and at a
<PB N="111" REF="59"> greater di&s;tance than could meet in one place every Lord's day, is not at all to his purpo&s;e. At the be&s;t it is but a recrimination. I know not how this Animadverter could imagine that the owning and a&s;&s;erting of the&s;e things as lawful, had the lea&s;t tendency to the e&s;tabli&s;hment of a National Church. But &s;ome men are &s;o di&s;tempered that they &s;uppo&s;e every thing makes for the advancement of that de&s;ign they are driving on. If he deems Synods, owned by men of <HI>Congregational Principles,</HI> and his <HI>Eccle&s;ia&s;tical Convocation</HI> of National Officers are of the &s;ame nature, he is mi&s;taken.</P>
<P N="1">1. Tho&s;e are cho&s;en by the particular Churches to which they are &s;everally related, and what they act and do is in their name, and upon the account of that power and authority they receive from them: The <HI>Convocation</HI> of the Clergy act in their own name and authority, being never cho&s;en by any one Congregation to &s;it and make Laws.</P>
<P>2ly. Tho&s;e pretend not to be the Church, nor to any &s;elf-power to make Laws, and impo&s;e them upon the Churches as obligatory and binding, to be received and &s;ubjected to by them, without the lea&s;t judgement of di&s;cretion allowed them, or liberty of di&s;&s;enting, if not per&s;waded in their con&s;ciences of the truth of what is decreed by them, and its con&s;onancy with the Scriptures of the Lord. As is known to be the ca&s;e of the <HI>Convocation</HI> of the Church of <HI>England,</HI> to di&s;&s;ent from who&s;e Canons (at lea&s;t to oppo&s;e them) is cen&s;ured with no le&s;s than an Excommunication, or delivering up to Satan. Which how directly it leads to the Popi&s;h implicit faith, of <HI>believing as the Church believes,</HI> every one is able to di&s;cern.</P>
<P>For my part, with reference to the&s;e, I am much of the mind of the learned <HI>Whitaker, de Concil.</HI> p. 12. General Councils may erre, and im|brace fal&s;e opinions: <HI>Nam Concilium Antiochenum veritatem damnavit &amp; haere&s;in apertam propugnavit: Similiter Ariminen&s;e &amp; Ephe&s;inum &s;ecun|dum, ex quo patet veritatem non e&s;&s;e metiendam ex numero Epi&s;coporum.</HI> Of them he &s;aith,</P>
<P N="1">1. <HI>That their calling together is a certain politick and humane invention,</HI> pag. 35, 77.</P>
<P N="2">2. <HI>That they cannot frame Articles of Faith to binde the Con&s;cience,</HI> pag. 19.</P>
<P N="3">3. <HI>That their end in coming together, is not to feed as Pa&s;tors, but to con|&s;ult what is be&s;t for the Churches,</HI> pag. 85.</P>
<P N="4">4. <HI>That they are not &s;imply nece&s;&s;ary,</HI> pag. 23.</P>
<P N="5">5. <HI>That they do not give authority to the Scripture,</HI> pag. 242, 243.</P>
<P N="6">6. <HI>That their Decrees are not immediately in&s;pired by the Holy Gho&s;t,</HI> pag. 262, 263.</P>
<P N="7"><PB N="112" REF="60"> 7. <HI>That the ultimate determination and judgment of a General Council may be fal&s;e,</HI> pag. 231.</P>
<P N="8">8. <HI>That there is no judgement of a Council properly in matters of Faith,</HI> ibid.</P>
<P N="9">9. <HI>That the truth of things determined in Councils, may afterwards be called into que&s;tion, and again di&s;puted,</HI> pag. 283.</P>
<P N="10">10. <HI>That the Churches of Chri&s;t have been kept &s;ound in Faith without them for the fir&s;t</HI> 300 <HI>years,</HI> pag. 23.</P>
<P>To which I add, 11. <HI>That I never yet read of any Council, or Synod &s;ince that Act</HI> 15. <HI>but 'twere ea&s;ie to demon&s;trate, that in one thing or other it hath erred.</HI></P>
<P>The mo&s;t of the Hay and Stubble that is built upon the Foundation at this day (not to mention their attempts <GAP DESC="foreign">) owing its ori|ginal to &s;ome of them. So that I confe&s;s I am no admirer of them; and am bold to affirm, of any that have yet been, it had been better for the Church of God that they had never been in the world. But the&s;e things are little to Mr. <HI>T.</HI> his purpo&s;e. That per&s;ons owning the lawfulne&s;s of Synods (from Scripture-warrant as they conceive) &s;hould therefore be nece&s;&s;itated to own a National Church as a true Church of Chri&s;t, is a po&s;ition that Mr. <HI>T.</HI> will never make good.</P>
<P>I &s;uppo&s;e by the view I have taken of &s;ome of his Writings, he is very confident of his own abilities; but he is a rare man indeed that can compo&s;e a Rope of Sand. The lawfulne&s;s of a Na|tional Church, or unlawfulne&s;s thereof, having no dependance upon Congregational Synods, but is to take its mea&s;ure from &s;omewhat el&s;e, of which before. Of Churches of a greater number <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">han can meet at one place, for the celebration of all the Ordinances of Chri&s;t, I &s;hall not need to &s;ay any thing; till he acquaint us what Congregational men are of that per&s;wa&s;ion, it will be accounted a meer Calumny. The a&s;|&s;embling of the members of a particular Church in the &s;ame place, for the celebration of the &s;ame Numerical Ordinances, being one con&s;ide|rable part of the definition given by our Congregational Brethren of &s;uch a Church: And yet if they did own Churches of a greater num|ber, 'tis ridiculous to imagine that they could from thence be compel|led to the owning of a National Church, which wants both the matter (and form) of a true Church of Chri&s;t, which yet the other may have. So that we need not turn a&s;ide to con&s;ider the proofs u&s;ed by tho&s;e that held, <Q>That many particular Congregations may be under one <HI>Pres|byterial</HI> Government, Printed 1645.</Q> Of which this Animadverter re|minds us. For though I am not of their mind, nor do I conceive their
<PB N="113" REF="60"> Rea&s;ons to be cogent: Yet were that true, a National Church could not from thence be proved a true Church of Chri&s;t. For,</P>
<P>1&s;t, They &s;uppo&s;e the&s;e Congregations to be particular Churches of Chri&s;t, con&s;tituted and made up of vi&s;ible Saints, which cannot (as yet) be affirmed of any National Church in the world, or any Pari&s;h Church as a part thereof.</P>
<P>2dly, They al&s;o affirm, that the&s;e particular Churches have power within them&s;elves to determine differences by their own Elders, to ex|communicate Offenders, ob&s;tinately guilty of notorious &s;candals.</P>
<P>3dly, They are utterly again&s;t all Archiepi&s;copal, National Officers, the &s;ource and &s;pring of a National Church.</P>
<P>4thly, They conceive not all in <HI>England,</HI> nor all in a Pari&s;h to be lawful Church-members becau&s;e born there; nor will they compel them, as &s;uch, to receive the Sacrament with them; which is the known ca&s;e of the Church of <HI>England.</HI> That at <HI>Jeru&s;alem</HI> there were more Churches than one under a <HI>Presbyterial</HI> Government, is a fond conceit, which the numerous multitude of Believers thereunto belonging, con|tribute not the lea&s;t mite of a&s;&s;i&s;tance to. Be they never &s;o many, they are called <HI>Acts</HI> 8. 1. <GAP DESC="foreign">, <HI>The Church which was at Jeru&s;alem.</HI> The like may be &s;aid of the Church of <HI>Corinth;</HI> it was one &s;ingle Congregation, the Church of God which was at <HI>Corinth,</HI> 1 <HI>Cor.</HI> 1, 1. 2 <HI>Cor.</HI> 1. 1. So was the Church at <HI>Ephe&s;us, Rev.</HI> 2. 1. But as was &s;aid, The grant of more Churches than one under one <HI>Presbyterial</HI> Go|vernment, is remote enough from the e&s;tabli&s;hment of a National Church, which by other bonds and ligaments (than the A&s;&s;ertors there|of will own) mu&s;t be united to one National Head; or it hath not, cannot have, a being in the world. So that the&s;e things are little to his purpo&s;e. The next attempt of this Animadverter, is to remove an ob|&s;truction which he &s;eeth to lye in his way, which in &s;um is this: <HI>The fir&s;t Church of Christ under the Oeconomy of the Go&s;pel, was undoubtedly formed according to the mind of Chri&s;t.</HI> But this was a particular in&s;titu|ted Church, which though numerous, was not &s;o numerous, but that they might meet together in the &s;ame place. Therefore not a National Church, but a particular Church of Chri&s;t is of his in&s;titution, <HI>&amp;c.</HI></P>
<P>The fir&s;t Propo&s;ition is ea&s;ily demon&s;trated: It was formed by the Apo&s;tles, men of integrity and faithfulne&s;s, who would not, dur&s;t not, innovate in the things of Chri&s;t, who had but lately received charge from him to <HI>teach Believers to ob&s;erve and do all things what&s;oever he had commanded them;</HI> and had promi&s;ed thereupon <HI>his pre&s;ence with them. To whom al&s;o, after his Re&s;urrection, he opened his heart, or plainly &s;poke of</HI>
<PB N="114" REF="61"> <HI>things pertaining to the Kingdom of God,</HI> or <HI>Go&s;pel Church-&s;tate,</HI> Acts 1. 3. Accordingly 'tis &s;aid of them, <HI>That they revealed the Coun&s;el of God;</HI> not their <HI>own,</HI> but <HI>his,</HI> Acts 20. 27. delivered to them what they had received of the Lord Chri&s;t, 1 <HI>Cor.</HI> 11. 23. To have done otherwi&s;e, had been an e&s;tabli&s;hment of Will-wor&s;hip, which they condemn, <HI>Col.</HI> 2. 13.</P>
<P>The <HI>Minor</HI> Propo&s;ition is manife&s;t: The fir&s;t Church of Chri&s;t under the Oeconomy of the Go&s;pel, was the Church at <HI>Jeru&s;alem:</HI> This was a particular Church of Chri&s;t. 'Tis &s;aid of them, <HI>Chap.</HI> 2. 46. <HI>That they continued daily with one accord in the Temple.</HI> Ver&s;. 47. <HI>Such as we converted,</HI> are &s;aid <HI>to be added</HI> <GAP DESC="foreign">, <HI>to that Church,</HI> viz. <HI>which was at Jeru&s;alem.</HI> See Chap. 4. 23, 24, 29. <HI>and</HI> 5. 12. <HI>and</HI> 8. 1, 3. <HI>and</HI> 11. 22. <HI>and</HI> 12. 5. <HI>and</HI> 15. 4, 22. 'Tis &s;trange to me, that when the Spirit of the Lord, whenever he makes mention of this Church at <HI>Jeru&s;alem</HI> &s;peaks of it as one particular in&s;tituted Church of Chri&s;t, any per&s;ons of &s;obriety &s;hould dare to a&s;&s;ert, that it was not &s;uch, lifting up them|&s;elves again&s;t his dictates and Te&s;timony. Let's con&s;ider what the Ani|madverter replies hereunto.</P>
<P>He tells us, 1. <HI>That in</HI> Luke, <HI>in many places the word</HI> multitude, <HI>with an univer&s;al &s;ign, is not taken for every one, not one exempted; as</HI> Luke 8. 37. <HI>Acts</HI> 25. 24. <HI>&amp;</HI> 6. 2. <HI>&amp;</HI> 16. 12, 30. <HI>&amp;</HI> 21. 22. To which briefly.</P>
<P>1&s;t, 'Tis granted, though what he produceth <HI>Acts</HI> 16. 12, 30, to evince I cannot tell; I am &s;ure 'tis hugely impertinent to the matter in hand.</P>
<P>Nor, 2dly, Is it at all material, whether in the places in&s;tanced in by us (where that expre&s;&s;ion is u&s;ed) it be taken for every one none ex|empted, or not. This only is incumbent on us to prove. Fir&s;t, That the Church at <HI>Jeru&s;alem</HI> was a particular Church of Chri&s;t. And 2dly, Such a particular Church as did meet (all of them when not providen|tially hindred) might do &s;o, notwith&s;tanding their multitude, for the Wor&s;hip of God: There was no impo&s;&s;ibility <HI>in rei natura</HI> of their &s;o doing: which he mu&s;t wink hard that doth not &s;ee &s;hining forth in its brightne&s;s in the fore-mentioned Scriptures: which when Mr. <HI>T.</HI> of|fers one Argument to evert, it &s;hall be con&s;idered. His 'tis not likely will not pa&s;s for demon&s;tration among&s;t per&s;ons that look for proof of that which is a&s;&s;erted. The Spirit of the Lord a&s;&s;uring us, that the mul|titude of the Di&s;ciples were called together, 'tis not only likely, but mo&s;t certain that they were &s;o. Nor is it likely that tho&s;e who&s;e parti|cular duty and concern lay in what was to be managed the<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">e, would willingly ab&s;ent them&s;elves. Mr. <HI>T.</HI> him&s;elf tells us (in his <HI>Antipaedo|bapti&s;m,</HI>
<PB N="115" REF="61"> or the 3d part, p. 340.) <HI>that all the Church did come together,</HI> Act. 5. 11, 12. <HI>were gathered together,</HI> Act. 14. 27. <HI>and that they were not parts of the Church who did not come together, &amp;c.</HI> His &s;econd Reply is &s;carce worth the mentioning. If it be granted that they then met for that bu&s;ine&s;s, yet there is no likelihood that they met for Ordinances.</P>
<P>And why &s;o I pray? why 'tis &s;aid, <HI>Act.</HI> 2. 46. that they did <HI>break bread from hou&s;e to hou&s;e.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;.</HI> 1. But that becau&s;e they &s;ometimes celebrated that Ordinance more privately, it &s;hould nece&s;&s;arily follow that they never did it all of them together, that they were not in a capacity, were in an utter impo&s;&s;ibility of &s;o doing (as is the ca&s;e of a National Church) is be|yond the verge of any mans under&s;tanding but Mr. <HI>T.</HI> And 'tis de&s;ired he would at his next leizure make good that con&s;equence.</P>
<P>I am informed (and doubt not the truth of it) that Mr. <HI>T.</HI> after he had been in hearing of the Pari&s;h-Prie&s;t at <HI>Lemp&s;ter,</HI> not long &s;ince got as many of the Church, to whom he once owned him&s;elf related as their Pa&s;tor, together as he could, and brake bread privately with them; yet may it not thence rationally be concluded that he never celebrated that Ordinance with them more publickly, or that he never intends to do &s;o, much le&s;s that the Congregation, he &s;till it &s;eems holds commu|nion with, is &s;o numerous that they cannot break bread together in the &s;ame place. Such pittiful Sophi&s;ms as the&s;e will never pa&s;s for proof among&s;t per&s;ons that have the exerci&s;e of their under&s;tanding or rea|&s;on.</P>
<P>Yet 2dly, The Animadverter's Conce&s;&s;ion is a grant of the verity of that he &s;ets him&s;elf to oppo&s;e. If, <HI>Act.</HI> 6. 2. the Church did meet in one Congregation for that bu&s;ine&s;s (as Mr. T. &s;aith) 'tis evident they were not &s;o numerous but they might meet together in one A&s;&s;embly, which is the matter in controver&s;ie betwixt us.</P>
<P>He adds, 3dly, <HI>The Church of Jeru&s;alem cannot be &s;aid to be the pattern of all Churches.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. Nor is it nece&s;&s;ary that we a&s;&s;ert it &s;o to be. The di&s;co|very of the Will of Chri&s;t, the Laws and Rules he hath given forth touching the aggregation of his Children into a Go&s;pel-Church-&s;tate, are the pattern of all the Churches of Chri&s;t in the World: and what|ever Church is not con&s;tituted according to this pattern, is none of his, nor will ever by him be owned &s;o to be.</P>
<P>Yet 2dly, This Church at <HI>Jeru&s;alem,</HI> being planted by the Apo&s;tles, according to the mind of Chri&s;t, may with reference thereunto, be &s;aid to be the pattern of all rightly con&s;tituted Churches. What hath our
<PB N="116" REF="62"> Animadverter to excep<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter"> again&s;t this? He tells us this cannot be, <HI>be|cau&s;e</HI> 1. <HI>There was no di&s;tribution of Believers under particular Off<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">cers.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. But what doth Mr. T. mean by the di&s;tribution of Belie|vers under particular Officers? doth he mean that they were not di&s;tri|buted into &s;everal Congregations, under their particular Pa&s;tors? no one &s;aith they were; we a&s;&s;ert them to be one Church. They are no le&s;s a pattern of particular Churches, than if they had been &s;o di&s;tri|buted, &s;o long as we find them in a po&s;&s;ibility of meeting in the &s;ame place.</P>
<P>2dly. Doth he mean that they had no Pa&s;tors among&s;t them? This is more than he will in ha&s;t make good. For, 1. They had Apo&s;tles. 2dly, They had fixed Officers, if Presbyters and Elders be &s;uch (as 'tis evident they are, from <HI>Act.</HI> 14. 23. &amp; 20. 17, 28.) whom we find in the Church at <HI>Jeru&s;alem,</HI> Act. 11. 29, 30. &amp; 15. 2, 4, 6, 22, 23. &amp; 16. 4. &amp; 21. 18.</P>
<P>3ly. What he further offers, <HI>That the Church of Jeru&s;alem was to be that Church from whence were to be taken &s;uch as might plant other Churches, for which end they were after di&s;per&s;ed,</HI> Acts 8. 1, 4. <HI>therefore it cannot be &s;aid to be the pattern of all Churches,</HI> is, to &s;peak mode&s;tly, &s;uch a &s;trange <HI>non-&s;equitur,</HI> that he mu&s;t take time to make good. That becau&s;e the Lord in his providence &s;uffered the enemies of his Son, to di&s;&s;ipate and &s;catter this Church, and by it took advantage, in the greatne&s;s of his Love and Wi&s;dom, for the preaching the Go&s;pel to others al&s;o, that therefore it &s;hould be a Church, not formed up according to the mind of Chri&s;t, or being &s;o formed, was not to be an example and pattern, with re&s;pect to the matter and manner of its con&s;titution to &s;ucceeding Churches, is a con&s;equence that will not be &s;wallowed down becau&s;e Mr. T. &s;aith it; and yet nothing but his <HI>ip&s;e dixit</HI> is tendred towards its &s;upport and maintenance.</P>
<P>But what he &s;aith in the 4th place, wil he thinks do his work, 'tis this: <HI>Be the Church of Jeru&s;alem of what nature or kind &s;oever, whether Con|gregational, Presbyterian or Parochial; it was &s;o, not from any In&s;titution of Christ, but came to pa&s;s according to divine Promi&s;es and Providence, which being &s;o various, as that no certain rule can be accommodated to all times, places and e&s;tates of the Church; We may judge, that Chri&s;t hath left the &s;haping of Churches much to humane prudence.</HI> That is in &s;hort, there is no Form of Churches of divine in&s;titution. An A&s;&s;ertion &s;o deroga|tory to the honour and glory of our dear Lord <HI>Je&s;us,</HI> that it cannot but be grievous to Chri&s;t-loving Saints to hear it abetted by any. I confe&s;s if this were the &s;tate of Churches, it were to no purpo&s;e to contend with
<PB N="117" REF="62"> him about his National Church: nor is it at all to be wondred at, if he hath always been for that Church-Government that was uppermo&s;t in the World. But this being an A&s;&s;ertion wherein mo&s;t of the Saints of God in the World, do look upon them&s;elves (upon more accounts than one) to be greatly concerned, Mr. T. &s;hould have brought mo&s;t irre|fragable Arguments to make it good. But behold in the &s;tead hereof, we meet with a deep &s;ilence; he onely turns a&s;ide to con&s;ider what worthy Mr. <HI>Parker</HI> offers, to prove that the form of Churches is of Di|vine In&s;titution. Of which in the next Section we &s;hall &s;peak.</P>
</DIV3>
<DIV3 N="17" TYPE="section">
<HEAD>Sect. 17.</HEAD>
<ARGUMENT>
<P><HI>The Form of Churches of Divine In&s;titution. The learned</HI> Parker<HI>'s Argu|ments vindicated from Mr.</HI> T. <HI>his Exceptions. Particular Churches called the Body of Chri&s;t, his Hou&s;e, and Temple. The plain upon which the Antichri&s;tian Church was first erected. No other foundation of the Church but Christ.</HI> 1 Cor. 3. 10. Eph. 2. 20. Zech. 6. 13. Rev. 11. 1. <HI>explained. Twelve Arguments to prove the Form of Churches is of Divine appointment.</HI></P>
</ARGUMENT>
<P>IN Sect. 17. Mr. T. pretends to an&s;wer the learned <HI>Parkers</HI> Argu|ments, by which he proves <HI>(Lib.</HI> 3. <HI>de Polit. Eccl. c.</HI> 17.) <HI>that the Form of Churches is of Divine In&s;titution:</HI> How well he hath di&s;charged this province is now to be con&s;idered. The &s;um of Mr. <HI>Parker</HI>'s fir&s;t Argument is this: <HI>The Church is the Body of Christ,</HI> 1 Cor. 12. 27. <HI>But in the fir&s;t forming of mans Body, he &s;hewed him&s;elf &s;uch an accurate worker, in the determining the dimen&s;ion and mea&s;ure of it,</HI> Gen. 2. <HI>that nothing might be added to or taken from it by any: Therefore it cannot be imagined that he &s;hould be &s;o regardle&s;s of his own Body, as not accurately to circum|&s;cribe the dimen&s;ion thereof.</HI> This Mr. T. is plea&s;ed to call a <HI>Rhetorical flouri&s;h;</HI> but by his good leave, it will be found an Argument of &s;uch weight, that he will not be able &s;oon to remove it out of his way. If the Church of Chri&s;t be his Body, he hath certainly determined the di|men&s;ions of it. Not to have done &s;o, had been an Argument of little care thereof; of his leaving it to the arbitrary di&s;po&s;ements of the chil|dren of men, of which we reade not a tittle in the New-Te&s;tament. Who, or where is he, that dares a&s;&s;ume the confidence of ordering and di&s;po&s;ing the Body of Chri&s;t without his leave, or can do &s;o with|out treading the Soveraignty of Chri&s;t over it, under foot; and pro|claims him&s;elf to be the <GAP DESC="foreign">, that <HI>lawle&s;s one,</HI> the Antichri&s;t or Bea&s;t, that a&s;cends out of the bottomle&s;s-pit, &amp; mu&s;t go into perdition?</P>
<PB N="118" REF="63">
<P> What &s;aith Mr. T? <HI>The Church of Chri&s;t,</HI> he tells us, <HI>is the Body of Chri&s;t;</HI> but this is rather true of the Univer&s;al Church, and My&s;tical Body of Chri&s;t, as may be gathered from, 1 <HI>Cor.</HI> 12. 12, 13. <HI>Eph.</HI> 1. 22, 23. <HI>&amp;</HI> 4. 4. than of a particular Congregation.</P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. But he gives us no Argument to demon&s;trate, that 1 <HI>Cor.</HI> 12. 27. is to be interpreted of the Univer&s;al Church (we have demon|&s;trated the contrary <HI>Sect.</HI> 13.) which he &s;hould have done if he would have us think our &s;elves concerned in his reply.</P>
<P>2dly, He him&s;elf grants, <HI>That a particular Church of Christ is and may be called his Body</HI> (as his words, <HI>'tis rather true,</HI> of the Univer&s;al Church, than of a particular Congregation, import) That he &s;hould en|tru&s;t any with a power to model, figure and fa&s;hion his own Body as they plea&s;e, and yet never give us the lea&s;t hint of any &s;uch betru&s;tment, is the fir&s;t-born of improbabilities and ab&s;urdities. The <GAP DESC="foreign">, the very plain in the Land of <HI>Shinar,</HI> upon which the cur&s;ed Fabrick of the Antichri&s;tian Church, <HI>Babel,</HI> was at the fir&s;t erected, as Mr. <HI>T.</HI> well knows.</P>
<P>The learned <HI>Parker</HI> further argues: <HI>Each fir&s;t Church of God is the hou&s;e and building of God,</HI> 1 Cor. 3. 9. Heb. 3. 3, 4. 1 Tim. 3. 15. And what prudent hou&s;holder will permit the Figure and Quantity of his Hou&s;e to the arbitrement and will of others? To this Mr. <HI>T.</HI> adjoyns, <HI>'Tis true the Church of God is his Hou&s;e; God built it, Christ is the only Foundation of it, yet others are &s;ubordinate Builders, and Foundations too in re&s;pect of their Doctrine,</HI> 1 Cor. 3. 10. Ephe&s;. 2. 20. <HI>to whom many things pertaining to the outward figure and quantity,</HI> i. e. <HI>the di&s;tributing of Churches into Oecumenical, National, Cla&s;&s;ical, Parochial,</HI> &amp;c. <HI>are left,</HI> &amp;c. This the Sum.</P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. 'Tis true <HI>Paul</HI> calls him&s;elf, 1 <HI>Cor.</HI> 3. 10. <HI>A Builder</HI> (with re&s;pect to his (in&s;trumental) planting and founding of that Church; <GAP DESC="foreign">, <HI>a wi&s;e Architect,</HI> or <HI>chief Builder)</HI> but that he (or any others) was to build according to the good plea&s;ure of their own wills, that they had no Idea, Platform, or Model given them by Chri&s;t the Lord and Ma&s;ter of the Hou&s;e, according to which they were oblieged to fa&s;hion their building, is not from hence proved. 'Twas of old pro|phe&s;ied of Chri&s;t, <HI>That he &s;hould build his &s;piritual Hou&s;e</HI> (or Temple) <HI>and bear the glory,</HI> Zac. 6. 13. (which accordingly 'tis &s;aid he did <HI>in which he was faithful, Heb.</HI> 3. 3, 5.) How either the one or other can be affirm|ed of Chri&s;t, if he, not at all concerned him&s;elf with the figure or quan|tity of his Hou&s;e, but left this to the prudence of men, I am not able to conceive. Certainly if there be any glory in the Structure, 'tis to be
<PB N="119" REF="63"> a&s;cribed (according to this Animadverters principles) to the dreg and net of humane prudence and policy: Man mu&s;t bear the glory there|of, not Chri&s;t; which whether it be not plainly to ju&s;tle Chri&s;t out of the Throne of his Glory, and &s;et up a Man of clay there, a very Idol in his room, let the judicious Reader determine.</P>
<P>2dly, Where any, be&s;ides Chri&s;t, is called, <HI>The Foundation of this Building,</HI> (as this Animadverter a&s;&s;erts) I know not: I remember full well, that the Apo&s;tle &s;peaks of him as the <HI>alone Foundation,</HI> 1 Cor. 3. 10, 11. an expre&s;&s;ion wholly de&s;tructive of Mr. <HI>T.</HI> his A&s;&s;ertion. 'Tis true, <HI>Eph.</HI> 2. 20. the Apo&s;tle tells the <HI>Ephe&s;ians, They were built upon the foundation of the Prophets and Apo&s;tles, i. e.</HI> on Chri&s;t, the Founda|tion upon which they, and all Believers that ever were in the world, were built. But he no where &s;aith, That the&s;e were the Churches Foun|dation: And yet were this yeelded him, it would be &s;hort of an evi|dent demon&s;tration, of what our Animadverter introduceth it to e|vince, <HI>viz. That many things appertaining to the outward figure, and quan|tity of the Church, were left to them to order and determine, in and by their own private &s;pirit. What they did in this matter, they had in&s;tructions from Chri&s;t to do, were infallibly guided by the Spirit of the Lord in.</HI> Yet were it further granted him, That the di&s;tribution of Churches was in a great mea&s;ure left to the Apo&s;tles, doth it thence follow, That others of the Children of Men, Antichri&s;t, the Son of Perdition, may di&s;tri|bute and figure them as they plea&s;e, and that in direct oppo&s;ition to the figure and quantity of them exhibited by the Apo&s;tles, in the fir&s;t In&s;ti|tution of Churches in the world? What more frivolous? The worthy <HI>Parker</HI> proceeds, <HI>The Material Temple had its breadth, and its mea&s;ure de|&s;cribed mo&s;t accurately by God; &s;hall not the Spiritual have its? Wherefore then was that Reed given to</HI> John? <HI>Wherefore a Command to mea&s;ure the Temple,</HI> Rev. 11. 1?</P>
<P>To which Mr. <HI>T.</HI> 1&s;t, By way of Conce&s;&s;ion. <HI>Each Congregational Church is the Temple of God: The true Chri&s;tian Church is &s;hadowed by the Type of the Old Temple; the &s;everal parts of which were of old mo&s;t accu|rately de&s;cribed, and mea&s;ured by the command of God: that men might know that this Hou&s;e was made by God, that it is not of humane Structure. God hath by his providence de&s;cribed the Spiritual Temple as well as the Mate|rial.</HI></P>
<P>2dly, By way of Negation. God hath not given us any &s;uch de&s;crip|tion of the outward fa&s;hion and order, the breadth, and mea&s;ure <HI>(i. e.</HI> the number, <HI>&amp;c.)</HI> of the Spiritual Temple, as he did to <HI>Mo&s;es, &amp;c.</HI> of the material Temple. And afterwards, God hath not determined the
<PB N="120" REF="64"> di&s;tribution and order of particular Churches &s;o, but that he hath left many things therein to humane prudence.</P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> And this Mr. <HI>T.</HI> calls, an An&s;wer to the forementioned Argu|ment, that any per&s;on (not bereft of his under&s;tanding) be&s;ides him|&s;elf will deem it to be &s;o, he mu&s;t not imagine. The Que&s;tion is, <HI>Whe|ther the Form of Churches be of Divine In&s;titution?</HI> Mr. <HI>T.</HI> deries it. The learned <HI>Parker</HI> proves it is, <Q>Becau&s;e the Form of the Temple (which was a Type of the Go&s;pel Churches) was &s;o, and God cannot be &s;uppo&s;ed to take le&s;s care of his Spiritual, than he did of his material Temple.</Q></P>
<P>What is our Animadverters reply? <HI>Why, the Form of Churches is not of Divine In&s;titution.</HI> He per&s;i&s;ts in his opinion, without taking the lea&s;t notice of the Argument advanced again&s;t it. But &s;eriou&s;ly Sir, per&s;ons of judgment and &s;obriety will either &s;mile at your folly, or pitty you for your &s;elf-conceit in &s;uch replies as the&s;e. In my &s;hallow judge|ment, would he have removed this Argument out of his way, he &s;hould either have proved that the material Temple of old, was not typical of Go&s;pel-Churches, or that the figure and model of it was not of divine In&s;titution, or that though both the&s;e are true (which he grants) the con&s;equence is not valid; that therefore God hath in&s;tituted the form of his New-Te&s;tament-Churches; which when he &s;hall be able to prove that the Antitype mu&s;t not corre&s;pond with the Type, or that Gods care was more about his material than his Spiritual Temple, he will be &s;up|po&s;ed to &s;ay &s;ometing, but till then, though he cry till his Lungs crack, <HI>falleris Parkere, falleris;</HI> though he may amu&s;e the &s;imple, with his noi&s;e of words, the intelligent Reader will di&s;cern his weakne&s;s, and nakedne&s;s.</P>
<P>2dly, Gods de&s;cribing the Spiritual Temple as well as the Corpo|ral by his providence, is a certain kind of Gibberi&s;h I under&s;tand not; he de&s;cribes both in his Word.</P>
<P>To that Que&s;tion, <HI>Wherefore then was the Reed given to John? Where|fore a Command to mea&s;ure the Temple?</HI> Rev. 11. 1. Our An madverter Replies, <HI>It was not that he &s;hould &s;et down the figure, or qua<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">tity of each particular Church, or the number of Per&s;ons that are to belong to it</HI> &amp;c. <HI>but his mea&s;uring the Temple was his under&s;tanding the the extent of it,</HI> i. e <HI>how large and how narrow the Church &s;hould be in after-times, in what e&s;tate of Peace or Per&s;ecution,</HI> &amp;c.</P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> But the&s;e are his wonted dictates, without any tender of proof.</P>
<P N="1">1. The Temple of God was typical of the New Te&s;tament Churches,
<PB N="121" REF="64"> who are therefore here repre&s;ented under the notion and &s;imilitude of the Temple.</P>
<P N="2">2. The&s;e had hitherto during the fir&s;t ten Per&s;ecutions remained in &s;ome mea&s;ure of Purity and con&s;onancy to the fir&s;t In&s;titution.</P>
<P N="3">3. But now they were to conte&s;t with another (an Antichri&s;tian) Bea&s;t; therefore <HI>mea&s;ure them,</HI> &s;aith the Angel to <HI>John, with a Reed:</HI> Let them look to it that they mend what is already ami&s;s in, and a|mong&s;t them by, and that they &s;werve not from the mea&s;uring Reed or Rule, for therein will lie their &s;afety (as we know it hath done) from Antichri&s;tian defilements.</P>
<P N="4">4. The Golden Reed is the Word of God, which though in it &s;elf precious and excellent as Gold to the men of the world, and the carnal Antichri&s;tian Church, it's accounted and u&s;ed as a Reed, a mean and contemptible thing: though it is indeed like unto a Rod, the Rod of Chri&s;t's &s;trength it is, by which he ruleth in the mid&s;t of his enemies. That there &s;hould be a Command given forth to mea&s;ure the Temple, the Churches, by this Reed, if their Form were not in&s;tituted and ap|pointed therein, is not to be imagined; upon that &s;uppo&s;ition a mea&s;ure of them by it, were impo&s;&s;ible to be taken.</P>
<P N="5">5. <HI>The mea&s;ured Court</HI> (&s;aith the learned <HI>Mede) &s;etteth forth the pri|mitive &s;tate of the Chri&s;tian Church conformable to the Rule of Gods Word.&mdash;</HI>The mea&s;uring is an allu&s;ion to <HI>Ezek.</HI> 43. 7 to 10. or to building, <HI>viz.</HI> That what the drawing of the Platform is to Builders, the &s;ame is Mea&s;uring to God in the language of the Prophets, <HI>i. e.</HI> the &s;tate of the Church figured thereby is God's workman&s;hip.&mdash;</P>
<P N="6">6. The mea&s;uring is, as was &s;aid, a clear allu&s;ion to <HI>Ezek.</HI> 43. 10. but that mea&s;uring was in order to the &s;hewing the form of the Hou&s;e. <HI>Let them mea&s;ure the pattern,</HI> ver. 11. <HI>Shew them the form of the Hou&s;e, and the fa&s;hion thereof&mdash;</HI>therefore the mea&s;uring here mu&s;t be for the &s;ame end too.</P>
<P>Mr. <HI>Parker</HI> further argues, <Q>If God, when the Church of the Jews is call'd to the Faith, de&s;igns the quantity, longitude, latitude thereof, it cannot be imagined that he hath left the dimen&s;ion of the Gentile Churches to humane plea&s;ure: But when the Church of the Jews is called to the Faith, he de&s;igns the quantity, <HI>&amp;c.</HI> thereof:</Q> Therefore.</P>
<P>Mr. T. replies, 1. <HI>That the Holy City is the vi&s;ible Church of the Jews, &amp;c. Or, that the mea&s;uring it was to de&s;ign the quantity of particu|lar Churches, is not probable.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> But this is more than probable, that the Holy City (be it what it will) is exactly formed and figured by the Lord, as the mea|&s;uting
<PB N="122" REF="65"> the City, the Gates, the Walls thereof&mdash;doth abundantly evince. If you take it for the converted Jews (as &s;ome learned men do) or the Gentile Churches after the fall and ruine of Antichri&s;t, to which it may be Mr. T. rather enclines, 'tis not probable that God &s;hould then take &s;uch exact care about the forming and figuring of the Church-&s;ocieties of the&s;e, and in the mean while leave his pre&s;ent Churches to the good plea&s;ure of the children of men, and tho&s;e none of the be&s;t nei|ther.</P>
<P>2dly. He tells us, <HI>Ina&s;much as the Apo&s;tle,</HI> Rom. 11. 25. <HI>a&s;&s;erts, that all I&s;rael &s;hall be &s;aved, he might better argue for a National Church of Chri&s;t's In&s;titution, from the vi&s;ible Church-&s;tate of the Jews at their future calling, than for a Congregational Church.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. But then he mu&s;t argue, that &s;ome Church-form is of di|vine in&s;titution, which would overturn his pre&s;ent &s;tructure.</P>
<P N="2">2. He mu&s;t fir&s;t prove, that the Jews Church-&s;tate upon their con|ver&s;ion, will be National, which the Apo&s;tle's words <HI>[all I&s;rael &s;hall be &s;aved]</HI> do not evince; for &s;o they may be, though formed up into par|ticular &s;ocieties, as &s;ome learned men think they &s;hall.</P>
<P N="3">3. God's de&s;igning more diligently the quantity, <HI>&amp;c.</HI> of the Jewi&s;h Church at their calling hereafter, and leaving the dimen&s;ion of ours to humane choice, may be done (Mr. T. tells us) out of more &s;pecial love to them.</P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. But pag. 39. he tells us, <HI>That God's leaving things apper|taining to the New-Te&s;tament-Churches to be &s;et down by man, more than he did to the Jewi&s;h-Church, is an Argument of greater love and care to the New-Te&s;tament-Churches than to them.</HI> This needs a Reconciler.</P>
<P N="2">2. However, he neither manife&s;ts that God bears greater love to the Jews than Gentiles, (which to &s;peak properly he cannot do) nor that if he did &s;o, he &s;hould bear &s;o little love to the New-Te&s;tament-Chur|ches, as to leave them wholly to the forming of the &s;ons of men.</P>
<P>What he adds fourthly, in an&s;wer to what is further argued by Mr. <HI>Parker, that the Church is compared to a City; but no City is &s;o negligently admini&s;tred by man, that no regard is had to the bounds and lin its thereof,</HI> is greatly impertinent: for though it may con&s;i&s;t with the pr<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">dence and care of good Princes, to leave many things to the choice of &s;ome in the City incorporated; as the ordering their Meetings, &amp;c. <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">s &s;hall be found mo&s;t convenient for them; yet to take no more care thereabout, than to &s;uffer the City to grow up into the compa&s;s of a Shire, a Na|tion, would &s;carce be accounted con&s;i&s;tant with that prudence and wi&s;|dom which &s;hould be in them. And thus far of <HI>Mr. T.</HI> his reply to
<PB N="123" REF="65"> the famous <HI>Parkers</HI> Arguments for the Divine In&s;titution of Churches. For a clo&s;e of this Section we &s;hall briefly propo&s;e twelve Arguments, for the further clearing of the truth, That the Form of Churches is of Divine In&s;titution; which our Animadverter may an&s;wer at his lei|zure.</P>
<P><HI>Argum.</HI> 1. If the Form of the Church be not of Chri&s;t's appoint|ment, 'tis not &s;o, either becau&s;e it was not needful, or becau&s;e Chri&s;t was not careful, faithful, or &s;ufficient to in&s;titute or ordain it: But nei|ther of the&s;e is true. To a&s;&s;ert the latter, were bla&s;phemous, &amp;c. That 'tis needful, is evident. 1. There are &s;ome duties which cannot well be performed, but upon &s;uppo&s;ition hereof, as <HI>Mat.</HI> 18. 15. 2dly, The care of the Apo&s;tles to bring &s;uch as they converted, into Church-order. 3dly, Their diligent in&s;tructing them in their duty, as members of particular Bodies and Congregations. 4thly, Chri&s;t's owning them, who walked together in &s;uch Societies, affording them his Pre&s;ence, promi&s;ing it to them, and that in oppo&s;ition unto <HI>Babyloni&s;h</HI> A&s;&s;emblies, of the formings of man, abundantly evince the needfulne&s;s thereof. Be&s;ides, 5thly, If it be not needful, they are bloodily cruel who per|&s;ecute men, to the lo&s;s of E&s;tates, Liberties, Lives, and give them up to the Devil by the &s;entence of Excommunication; For no other rea|&s;on, but for refu&s;ing communion with their National Church, or deny|ing its form and frame to be of the in&s;titution of <HI>Christ.</HI></P>
<P><HI>Arg.</HI> 2. If the Form of the Church be not of Chri&s;t's appointment, then there mu&s;t be more Lords over the Church be&s;ides <HI>Christ,</HI> (for the forming or figuring of Churches <HI>(pro libito)</HI> is an act of Lordly Autho|rity) But there cannot be more Lords over the Church be&s;ides <HI>Christ, I&s;a.</HI> 33. 22. 1 <HI>Cor.</HI> 8. 5. <HI>Jam.</HI> 4. 12. Therefore&mdash;</P>
<P><HI>Arg.</HI> 3. If the Form of Churches be not of Chri&s;t's appointment, Then is it in the power of man (without any precept or authority from <HI>Christ)</HI> to add to, or take away from the Body of <HI>Chri&s;t,</HI> (for &s;o are par|ticular Churches, as we have proved) But this is contrary to 1 <HI>Cor.</HI> 12. 18, 27. with <HI>Rom.</HI> 12. 4, 8. Therefore.</P>
<P><HI>Arg.</HI> 4. That which the Apo&s;tles practi&s;ed, in pur&s;uance of the Commi&s;&s;ion they received from <HI>Christ,</HI> is undoubtedly an Order and In&s;titution of his: But the gathering of Di&s;ciples into particular Con|gregations, the Apo&s;tles practi&s;ed in pur&s;uance of the Commi&s;&s;ion they received from <HI>Christ, Mat.</HI> 28. 19, 20. with <HI>Acts</HI> 2. 41, <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">2, 43. There|fore&mdash;</P>
<P><HI>Arg.</HI> 5. If the Form of Churches be not of Divine In&s;titution, Then the Church of <HI>Chri&s;t</HI> is either not his Palace, Kingdom; or <HI>Christ</HI> hath
<PB N="124" REF="66"> not that care over his Palace and Kingdom, as the Princes of the world have over theirs: But both the&s;e are fal&s;e and highly injurious to <HI>Chri&s;t:</HI> Therefore.</P>
<P><HI>Arg.</HI> 6. That Church to which <HI>Chri&s;t</HI> hath enjoyned his Di&s;ciples to appeal, in matters of Scandal found upon their Brethren, with which he hath promi&s;ed his Pre&s;ence, to which he hath given the Keys of the Kingdom, power of binding and loo&s;ing, is a Church of his own forming. But this is a particular Congregational-Church, <HI>Mat.</HI> 18. 17, 18, 19. (as we have demon&s;trated) Therefore.</P>
<P><HI>Arg.</HI> 7. If the Form of Churches be not of Chri&s;t's appointment, then there is either no beauty, &s;plendour, glory therein; or Chri&s;t bears not, cannot bear that glory. But both of the&s;e are ab&s;urd, 2 <HI>Cor.</HI> 3. 7, 8, 9. <HI>Zech.</HI> 6. 13. Therefore.</P>
<P><HI>Arg.</HI> 8. If the Form of Churches be not of Chri&s;t's appointment, Then the Church of Chri&s;t may have communion with, yeeld obedience to the inventions, con&s;titutions, ordinances and appointments of men, (of Antichri&s;t the Man of Sin.) But that they are charged <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">ot to do, upon mo&s;t dreadful penalties, <HI>Rev.</HI> 18. 4, 5. &amp; 14. 9, 10, 11. There|fore.</P>
<P><HI>Arg.</HI> 9. If the Form of Churches be not of Chri&s;t's appointment, Then either Chri&s;t hath not left &s;ufficient Laws for the government of the Saints, or man may &s;uper-add to his Laws. But both the&s;e are fal&s;e, &s;candalous and injurious to Chri&s;t, <HI>Gal.</HI> 3. 15. 2 <HI>Tim.</HI> 3. 16, 17. <HI>Rev.</HI> 22. 18, 19.</P>
<P><HI>Arg.</HI> 10. If the Form of Churches be not of Chri&s;t's appointment, Then the Church is not to be governed as 'tis taught, (for it mu&s;t be taught only by the Word of God, <HI>I&s;a.</HI> 8. 2.) But the Con&s;equence is ab&s;urd. Therefore.</P>
<P><HI>Arg.</HI> 11. If the placing of Officers in particular Churches, be of the appointment of Chri&s;t; then the Churches them&s;elves are &s;o. But the placing of Officers in particular Churches is of the appointment of Chri&s;t, 1 <HI>Cor.</HI> 12. 28. <HI>Eph.</HI> 4. 11, 12. Therefore.</P>
<P><HI>Arg.</HI> 12. Tho&s;e Churches which Chri&s;t owns for his Candle&s;ticks (in allu&s;ion to the Candle&s;ticks of the Temple, which were purely of divine in&s;titution) are of the in&s;titution of Chri&s;t. But Chri&s;t owns par|ticular Churches, for his Candle&s;ticks <HI>(viz.</HI> the Seven Churches of <HI>A&s;ia)</HI> which we have before demon&s;trated were particular Churches, <HI>Rev.</HI> 1. 20. Therefore&mdash;</P>
<P>Tho&s;e that de&s;ire further &s;atisfaction in this matter, may con&s;ult a little Treati&s;e, lately publi&s;hed, entituled, <HI>A brief In&s;truction in the</HI>
<PB N="125" REF="66"> <HI>Wor&s;hip of God, and Di&s;cipline of the Churches of the New Te&s;tament,</HI> p. 93. where they will find it clearly and amply debated.</P>
</DIV3>
<DIV3 N="18" TYPE="section">
<HEAD>Sect. 18.</HEAD>
<ARGUMENT>
<P><HI>Of National Mini&s;ters. What meant by Mini&s;try. Of extraordinary and ordinary Officers. Upon what account the Church of</HI> Engl. <HI>is a&s;&s;erted to be a fal&s;e Church. Mr.</HI> T. <HI>his Arguments to prove, that in a National Church, or a Church irregular in its con&s;titution, may be a true Mini&s;try of Chri&s;t, an&s;wered. The contrary is demon&s;trated.</HI></P>
</ARGUMENT>
<P>THE De&s;ign of Mr. <HI>T.</HI> his 18^t^h and 19^t^h Sect. is to an&s;wer the &s;e|cond Query in <HI>S. T. Whether National Mini&s;ters are the Mini&s;ters of Chri&s;t? Or, whether there can be a true Mini&s;try in a fal&s;e Church?</HI> (as a National Church mu&s;t be if not of divine In&s;titution, upon what pre|tence &s;oever it be &s;o denominated.) Before he attempts the Re&s;olution of this Query, he con&s;iders</P>
<P><HI>Fir&s;t,</HI> What the Mini&s;try is, of which it is enquired whether it be <HI>true or fal&s;e:</HI> And having at large acquainted us with the &s;ignification of the word <GAP DESC="foreign">, and <GAP DESC="foreign">, he tells us, he under&s;tands the query to be meant of that part of the Mini&s;try which is by preaching. But I mu&s;t crave leave to tell him, he &s;omewhat mi&s;&s;eth the white of the Au|thors intendment, who by it intends an Office-Power of Mini&s;try, for di&s;charge of that whole work, that peculiarly relates to the Mini&s;ters of the Go&s;pel, to be performed and managed by them according to the Will of Chri&s;t; Whether it be the Mini&s;try of the Word, the Lords Supper, <HI>&amp;c.</HI> This, as Mr. <HI>T.</HI> &s;aith rightly, <HI>is either the Mini&s;try of ex|traordinary Officers, as Apo&s;tles,</HI> &amp;c. of which our Que&s;tion is not; <HI>or of ordinary Officers, as Pa&s;tors,</HI> &amp;c. of whom it is queried, <HI>Whether ordi|nary National Officers or Mini&s;ters are of the In&s;titution of Christ?</HI> What &s;aith Mr. <HI>T?</HI></P>
<P>He tells us, 1. <HI>That</HI> Paul <HI>was a Mini&s;ter not only to a particular Church, but even to the Gentiles.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> That this doth not in the lea&s;t concern the Que&s;tion in de|bate, which is of ordinary Church-Officers, (and <HI>Paul,</HI> as I remem|ber, (with the re&s;t of the Apo&s;tles) was an extraordinary one, re|ceiving a Commi&s;&s;ion for the Preaching of the Go&s;pel to all Nations.) he will be &s;o ingenuous, as upon the review, to acknowledge.</P>
<P><HI>Secondly, A Church may be &s;aid to be fal&s;e many wayes.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> True, it may &s;o; but in his di&s;cour&s;e there abouts we are little:
<PB N="126" REF="67"> concerned, who a&s;&s;ert the Church of <HI>England</HI> to be a fal&s;e Church, be|cau&s;e it is de&s;titute of the true Matter (vi&s;ible Saints) and the true Form (freely giving up them&s;elves unto the Lord, and one another, to wor&s;hip him together as a Community, according to the revelation of his will.)</P>
<P>But he will prove, <HI>Thirdly, That in a National Church, or a Church irregular in its con&s;titution, (i. e.</HI> that hath neither the matter nor form of a true Church of Chri&s;t) <HI>or di&s;cipline, may be a true Mini&s;try of Chri&s;t.</HI></P>
<P>His fir&s;t Argument is, <HI>Arg.</HI> 1. <HI>If the truth of the Mini&s;try depend upon the truth of the Church, or its regularity; then where is no true regular Church, there is no true Mini&s;try. But that is fal&s;e, &s;ince there may be a true Mini&s;try where there is no Church at all, and therefore no true Church.</HI></P>
<P><HI>Therefore.&mdash;</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> If by a true regular Church, Mr. <HI>T.</HI> means a Church for mat|ter and form rightly con&s;tituted, according to the mind of Chri&s;t; and by a true Mini&s;try, the Mini&s;try of ordinary Officers, &s;uch as Pa&s;tors, and Teachers (as he mu&s;t do if he &s;peak pertinently) we deny his <HI>Mi|nor</HI> Propo&s;ition. Where there is no true Church at all, in a fal&s;e Church, or Church not regularly con&s;tituted, according to the mind of Chri&s;t, (as is the ca&s;e of the National Church of <HI>England)</HI> there can|not be a true Mini&s;try; which Mr. <HI>T.</HI> forgot to attempt the proof of. And indeed his abilities &s;eem to lie much in Dogmatizing, and 'tis great pitty but he were created a <HI>Rabbi</HI> in the <HI>Pithagorean</HI> School, his accutene&s;s therein being &s;o incomparably excellent.</P>
<P>1&s;t, That there can be no true ordinary Mini&s;try where there is no Church, is manife&s;t.</P>
<P><HI>Fir&s;t,</HI> Where ever we read of ordinary Mini&s;ters, we read of them as appertaining to &s;ome one particular Church or other, <HI>Acts</HI> 14. 23. <HI>&amp;</HI> 15. 2, 4, 22. <HI>&amp;</HI> 20. 17, 28. 1 <HI>Cor.</HI> 12. 28. <HI>Phil.</HI> 1. 1. <HI>Tit.</HI> 1. 5. 1 <HI>Pet.</HI> 5. 1, 2. As good a man may imagine an Husband to be without a Wife; or a <HI>Major,</HI> without a Corporation; or a Father, without Chil|dren; as a Mini&s;ter, without a Church; in which he is <GAP DESC="foreign">, <HI>to mi|ni&s;ter</HI> according to the will and appointment of Chri&s;t.</P>
<P><HI>Secondly,</HI> Every lawful Mini&s;ter is elected, and cho&s;en to his Office by the Church or People of God. Therefore there can be no true ordi|nary lawful Mini&s;try, where there is no Church. Of this we have &s;po|ken at large, <HI>Chap</HI> 4. of <HI>S. T.</HI> To which multitudes of Te&s;timonies might be added. The Churches of <HI>Helvetia (Harm. Confe&s;. Sect.</HI> 11. <HI>de min. Eccl.)</HI> affirm, <Q>The Mini&s;ters of the Church mu&s;t be called
<PB N="127" REF="67"> and cho&s;en, by Eccle&s;ia&s;tical and lawful election; <HI>(i. e.</HI> they mu&s;t be religiou&s;ly elected by the Church, or by &s;ome from her deputed there|unto.) So al&s;o do they &s;peak, <HI>Artic.</HI> 16. <HI>ibid.</HI></Q> So the <HI>Bohemian</HI> Churches; <Q>Men who are firm and &s;trong in the Faith, fearing God, having received nece&s;&s;ary gifts for the work of the Mini&s;try, of an hone&s;t and unblamable conver&s;ation, by People fearing God, mu&s;t be cho&s;en, and called to the admini&s;tration of holy things.</Q> (<HI>Harmon. Confe&s;. Sect</HI> 11. <HI>cap</HI> 9. <HI>de min. Eccl.)</HI> And they expre&s;ly tell us <Q>That they permit none to di&s;charge the Office of the Mini&s;try without &s;uch an Election of the Church, as appears <HI>(ibid.)</HI> by the antient Ca|nons thereof. To the &s;ame purpo&s;e the <HI>Belgick</HI> Churches declare, <HI>(ibid. Art.</HI> 31.)</Q></P>
<P>But, <HI>Thirdly,</HI> Ordinary Officers cannot be before the Church;</P>
<P>Therefore, where there is no Church there can be no lawful ordina|ry Officers.</P>
<P>The <HI>Antecedent</HI> is evident.</P>
<P N="1">1. All along the <HI>Acts</HI> we read fir&s;t of the Con&s;titution of Churches before the Ordination of Officers.</P>
<P N="2">2. The Scripture &s;aith expre&s;ly, <HI>That all Officers are &s;et in the Church,</HI> 1 <HI>Cor.</HI> 12. 28. Which &s;etting doth nece&s;&s;arily pre&s;uppo&s;e a Church in which they are &s;et.</P>
<P>2dly, A true Mini&s;try cannot be in a fal&s;e Church; fal&s;e, I mean, either with re&s;pect to its fir&s;t Con&s;titution, or by rea&s;on of &s;uch an A|po&s;tacy as hath de&s;troyed the e&s;&s;ence and being of it.</P>
<P>For, <HI>fir&s;t,</HI> A fal&s;e Church is no Church of Chri&s;t: Therefore in it can be no true ordinary Mini&s;try, according to the mind of Chri&s;t, for the rea&s;ons before mentioned.</P>
<P><HI>Secondly,</HI> Such a Church is intru&s;ted with no Authority from Chri&s;t, therefore cannot communicate any, nor &s;end forth any to act in his Name.</P>
<P>That Chri&s;t hath intru&s;ted his Church with power to elect and choo&s;e Officers, we manife&s;t, <HI>Chap.</HI> 4. <HI>Pag.</HI> 32, 33, of <HI>S. T. That any Church not right in its Con&s;titution</HI> (as is the Ca&s;e of National Churches) <HI>is in|ve&s;ted with any &s;uch power, is the fir&s;t-born of ab&s;urdities and improbabilities. 'Tis the Queen, the Bride, the Lambs Wife that hath the Keys at her girdle; not the Concubines.</HI> But Mr. <HI>T.</HI> hath more to &s;ay to evince the con|trary.</P>
<P><HI>Arg.</HI> 2. <HI>If there be a true Mini&s;try, though to, or in a National vi&s;ible Church, or Catholick; then the extent which is conceived to be incon&s;i&s;tent with a true Go&s;pel-Church, makes not the Mini&s;try fal&s;e. But</HI> Peter <HI>and</HI>
<PB N="128" REF="68"> Pauls <HI>Mini&s;try to the</HI> Jews <HI>or</HI> Gentile <HI>Churches, was a true Mini&s;try, though the Church were National or Catholick. Therefore.&mdash;</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. 'Tis a mo&s;t &s;ad thing (upon more accounts than one) to be engaged again&s;t Truth, &s;uch &s;orry &s;hifts are men put to, and driven to the u&s;e of Sophi&s;ms &s;o <HI>pu<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">rile,</HI> that at other times they would be a&s;<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">amed of. Thus fares it with this Animadverter, who argues &s;o jejunely, that con&s;idering what I have heard of him for a Di&s;putant, I am ready to que&s;tion whether the Arguments I read be his, or no. Though Truth &s;eeks no corners, yet it makes its Adver&s;aries frequently to do &s;o. The enquiry, as Mr. <HI>T.</HI> &s;aith rightly in p. 34. is <HI>of the mini&s;try of ordinary Pa|&s;tors, &amp;c.</HI> His two fir&s;t Arguments relate only to extraordinary Offi|cers, <HI>viz.</HI> the Mini&s;try of the Apo&s;tles; &s;o that we are not concerned to take the lea&s;t notice of them. Many &s;uch impertinencies is th<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">s Ani|madverters Treati&s;e &s;tuft with.</P>
<P N="2">2. Be&s;ides, the Argument is inconclu&s;ive of what Mr. <HI>T.</HI> pretends to prove, <HI>viz. That in a National Church, or a fal&s;e Church, there may be a true Mini&s;try: If there be a true Mini&s;try, though to or in a National vi&s;ible Church</HI> (&s;aith he) <HI>then the extent, which is conceived to be incon|&s;i&s;tent with a true Go&s;pel-Church, makes not the Mini&s;try fal&s;e.</HI> But Sir, whether there be a true Mini&s;try in a National Church, is the <GAP DESC="foreign">; how it comes to be the medium of your Argument, I am yet to learn. Sure I am &s;uch kind of Arguings would de&s;ervedly be hi&s;&s;ed out of the Schools, being in them&s;elves illogical. I &s;uppo&s;e he would have argued thus; If that extent which is conceived to be incon&s;i&s;t<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">nt with a true Go&s;pel-Church, makes not the Mini&s;try fal&s;e, Then there may be a true Mini&s;try, though to, or in a National Church. But the extent, which is conceived to be incon&s;i&s;tant with a true Go&s;pel-Church, makes not the Mini&s;try fal&s;e: for <HI>Peter's</HI> and <HI>Paul's</HI> Mini&s;try to the Jews and Gentiles were true Mini&s;tries, though the Churches were National, 1 <HI>Cor.</HI> 12. 28. <HI>Ergo.</HI> To the Argument I an&s;wer; 1. By denying the con&s;equence of the fir&s;t Propo&s;ition: For though the extent incon|&s;i&s;tant to a true Go&s;pel-Church, &s;hould not make the Mini&s;try fal&s;e, yet &s;omewhat el&s;e may. What thinks he of an Antichri&s;tian Ordina|tion, or a Mi&s;&s;ion to officiat from the Antichri&s;tian Per&s;ecuting Bea&s;t and Whore, though the Church were rightly con&s;tituted, in and to which a man is a Preacher? I conceive his Mini&s;try is fal&s;e. But 2dly, I deny his <HI>Minor</HI> Propo&s;ition (if by Mini&s;try he under&s;tands the Mini&s;try of ordinary Pa&s;tors, <HI>&amp;c.</HI> which if he doth not, he &s;peaks not a word to the que&s;tion, as he him&s;elf acknowledgeth, pag. 34.) the extent of a Church incon&s;tent with a Go&s;pel-Church, renders the Church fal&s;e, and
<PB N="129" REF="68"> indeed no Church, <HI>(i. e.</HI> no Go&s;pel-Church) Therefore it renders the Mini&s;try fal&s;e, as we before proved. Mr. <HI>T.</HI> his proofs are weak and impertinent. 1. <HI>Paul</HI> and <HI>Peter</HI>'s Mini&s;try was not the Mini&s;try of or|dinary Pa&s;tors, as he grants, p. 34. 2dly. They were not Mini&s;ters in, or to a National Church. 'Tis true, they preached to the <HI>Jews</HI> and <HI>Gen|tiles;</HI> but for the fir&s;t, their Church-&s;tate was virtually terminated at the death of Chri&s;t, when the Vail of the Temple was rent: as for the <HI>Gentile</HI> Nations they were no National Churches. The forming of which ows its original (as was &s;aid) to a latter date. So that hitherto Mr. <HI>T.</HI> hath onely hung out &s;igns of Arguments to prove his A&s;&s;ertion, being weighed in the ballances they are found wanting, are plainly &s;ophi&s;ti|cal. It may be in what follows he &s;peaks more pertinently. Thus he argues.</P>
<P>Arg. 3. <HI>If Mini&s;try to Churches Hypocritical, Schi&s;matical, and in &s;ome &s;ort Heretical, may be a true Mini&s;try; much more to a Church Na|tional, &amp;c. tho&s;e being greater degrees of fal&s;hood than this. But the Ante|cedent is before proved from the Epi&s;tles to the Corinthians, to the Churches of Pergamos, Thyatira and Sardis.</HI> Ergo.&mdash;</P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> No doubt but Mr. <HI>T.</HI> and his A&s;&s;ociates in this work, think they have excellently well acquitted them&s;elves in this Argument; but the emptine&s;s and invalidity of it will &s;oon appear.</P>
<P N="1">1. What if we deny the con&s;equence of the <HI>Major</HI> Propo&s;ition? up|on &s;uppo&s;ition that there may be a true Mini&s;try to Churches of &s;uch a complexion as that intimated, it doth not at all follow, that there may be a true Mini&s;try to and in a Church National. Where is Mr. <HI>T.</HI> proof of his con&s;equence? Why the&s;e are greater degrees of fal&s;hood than are to be found in a National Church. Well, this is denied al&s;o. What offers he to make it appear to be &s;o? Why you have his <GAP DESC="foreign"> for it; he &s;aith &s;o. But &s;eriou&s;lly Mr. <HI>T.</HI> is &s;o incon&s;tant to his own words, principles, and practices, that we are afraid if we &s;hould a&s;&s;ent to what he a&s;&s;erts upon that foundation, we &s;hould once in &s;even or eight years, if the minds of men in authority over us &s;hould in that time be different, believe, and disbelieve the &s;ame po&s;itions. What if the National Church be as Schi&s;matical, Heretical, Hypocritical as the Churches in&s;tanc'd in? (this were a facile undertaking to demon&s;trate) I hope then it being fal&s;e in its con&s;titution, which the others in&s;tanc'd in, were not, we may with this Animadverter's leave, a&s;&s;ert, that great|er degrees of fal&s;hood, are not to be found in and upon them, than are to be found upon his National Church. Be&s;ides, &s;uppo&s;ing the Churches in&s;tanc'd in to be &s;uch as M. <HI>T.</HI> &s;aith they were, they were once true
<PB N="130" REF="69"> Churches of Chri&s;t, to whom power was delegated from him, fo<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter"> the e|lection, and choo&s;ing of Officers to act in his Name and Auth<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">rity a|mong&s;t them: which cannot be affirmed of any National Church in the World. That becau&s;e a true Mini&s;try may be in a true Church, under great degeneracy; therefore there may be a true Mini&s;try in a fal&s;e Church: is an A&s;&s;ertion that this Animadverter had need to con&s;ult with &s;ome body el&s;e to help him to make good, than his pre&s;ent Advi|&s;er<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">. But</P>
<P N="2">2. We crave leave to deny his <HI>Minor;</HI> A <HI>true Mini&s;try</HI> c<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">nnot be in <HI>Hypocritical, Schi&s;matical, Heretical Churches.</HI> If they are &s;uch, they are no Churches of Chri&s;t; if known to be &s;o, they are not to be owned as &s;uch by them that fear him.</P>
<P>But he hath proved this from the Epi&s;tles to the <HI>Corinthians,</HI> to the Churches of <HI>Pergamos, Thyatira</HI> and <HI>Sardis.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> What hath he proved? that the&s;e Churches were Hypocritical, Schi&s;matical, Heretical? nothing le&s;s! 'Tis true, 1 <HI>Cor.</HI> 1. 11, 12. <HI>Paul</HI> tells the <HI>Corinthians,</HI> that he heard there were <HI>Contentions amongst them, &amp;c.</HI> that the Church was <HI>&s;chi&s;matical</HI> he &s;aith not. That there are Contentions among&s;t the members of the Church of <HI>England,</HI> Mr. <HI>T.</HI> cannot deny: that therefore it is to be accounted a Schi&s;matical-Church, he will &s;carce a&s;&s;ert. 'Tis true al&s;o, that there were &s;ome in the Church of <HI>Pergamos,</HI> and <HI>Thyatira,</HI> that held fal&s;e and erroneous opinions; and that the Churches were too much to blame to &s;uffer them, as they did, (for which Chri&s;t rebukes them): In <HI>Sardis</HI> the ge|nerality of the members were wonderfully declined in their &s;pirits, a time of withering, decayes, deadne&s;s was upon them; yet was not the one an Heretical, nor the other an Hypocritical Church: Nor can Mr. <HI>T.</HI> make good his charge again&s;t either of them. As for the Church of <HI>Pergamos,</HI> Chri&s;t witne&s;&s;eth of them, that although they dwelt where Sa|tan's &s;eat was, <HI>(i. e.</HI> where the Roman Governour lived, who was Sa|tan's chief in&s;trument for per&s;ecuting the Saints) yet they h<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="2 letters">d fa&s;t his Name, and did not deny his Faith: which is not a de&s;cription of an Heretical Church. They owned Chri&s;t, retained, cleaved to the Do|ct<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">ine of the Go&s;pel, <HI>i. e.</HI> the Body of the Church did (though &s;ome few among&s;t them held &s;trange Heterodoxies) therefore no Heretical-Church. The like may be &s;aid of the Church of <HI>Thyatira,</HI> doth Chri&s;t charge her with Here&s;ie? doth he &s;ay the whole Body, or ma<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">or part of the Church was infected with the doct<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">ine of <HI>Jezebel?</HI> nothing le&s;s! He &s;aith indeed that the Church was too negligent in their duty to put a &s;top to her &s;educing his Servants, and intimates as if &s;ome were led
<PB N="131" REF="69"> a&s;tray by her: But withal te&s;tifies, that there were a con&s;iderable num|ber among&s;t them, that had not received her doctrine, nor known the depths of Satan (they called them <HI>depths, i. e.</HI> deep and wonderful things, but they were the depths of Satan.) Of <HI>Sardis</HI> Chri&s;t al&s;o witne&s;&s;eth, <HI>that there were &s;ome things remaining that he would have her &s;trengthen, i. e.</HI> &s;ome graces that were not quite extinct and dead in them; and of &s;ome of them expre&s;ly, <HI>that they had not defiled their garments,</HI> and that <HI>they &s;hould walk with him in white, for they were worthy,</HI> (which cannot be affimed of Hypocrites) <HI>Rev.</HI> 2. 13, 19, 20, 24, 25. &amp; 3. 2, 4. Therefore no Heretical nor Hypocritical Churches. And I cannot but wonder at the confidence of this Animadverter to affirm it of them, after the te&s;timony Chri&s;t gives touching them: it being little le&s;s than giving him the lie to his face. So that of this Argument we &s;hall ('tis proba|ble) hear no more.</P>
<P>Of his fourth Argument we need &s;ay no more but this, that the Mini|&s;try therein mentioned is the Mini&s;try of the Apo&s;tles: which he grants not at all to relate to our pre&s;ent Que&s;tion. If he can make good this Con&s;equence, the Apo&s;tles who were extraordinary Officers, immedi|ately &s;ent forth by <HI>Je&s;us Christ,</HI> were true Mini&s;ters, afore the regular con&s;titution and di&s;cipline of Churches, without their election or mi&s;|&s;ion, Therefore Pa&s;tors and Teachers (who are to be cho&s;en by a Church regularly con&s;tituted) are true Mini&s;ters though not &s;o cho&s;en; he will be able to reinforce this Argument, el&s;e he mu&s;t never bring it into the field more.</P>
<P>His fifth Argument in brief is, <HI>The denomination of true Mini&s;ters is from the truth of their Doctrine, and no other form denominating them. But there may be a Mini&s;tration of true Doctrine in a fal&s;e Church: Ergo&mdash;</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. The <HI>Major</HI> is mo&s;t fal&s;e; the denomination of true Mi|ni&s;ters is from &s;omewhat el&s;e be&s;ide the truth of their Doctrine, <HI>viz.</HI> A regular Mi&s;&s;ion according to the mind of <HI>Christ,</HI> or an entrance in by the Door; el&s;e they are not true Mini&s;ters, but Thieves and Rob|bers. What places they are before-mentioned that he &s;aith placeth the truth of Mini&s;try in the Doctrine taught, and no other thing, I cannot tell; and do a&s;&s;ure him that when he brings one place to prove it, I will be his convert. <HI>Col.</HI> 1. 6, 7. &s;aith no &s;uch thing. <HI>Epaphras</HI> preacheth the Truth of God to the <HI>Colo&s;&s;ians,</HI> and is &s;aid to be for them a <HI>faithful Mi|ni&s;ter of Chri&s;t;</HI> therefore the denomination of true Mini&s;ters is from the truth of their Doctrine and nothing el&s;e, is one of tho&s;e con&s;equen|ces are frequently impo&s;ed upon us, without the lea&s;t &s;hadow of proof.</P>
<PB N="132" REF="70">
<P> 2dly. That 'tis the duty of true Mini&s;ters, and in &s;ome &s;en&s;e their property, to preach and promote Truth, is mo&s;t certain. <HI>Paul</HI> tells us, 2 <HI>Cor.</HI> 13. 8. that <HI>they could do nothing again&s;t the Truth, but for the Truth.</HI> But that the denomination of true Mini&s;ters is from the truth of their Doctrine, and no other form denominating them, is I &s;uppo&s;e a&s;&s;erted by our Animadverter in ha&s;te, and will upon &s;econd thoughts be re|tracted by him. For it will hence follow, that whoever brings the truth of Doctrine, is a true Mini&s;ter. Then the Devil was &s;o, <HI>Mark</HI> 1. 24. <HI>Luke</HI> 4. 34. Every private Brother, a Woman may be &s;o. For where the Form denominating is, there the Subject is rightly denomina|ted from it. But this is too ab&s;urd for Mr. <HI>T.</HI> to cleave to.</P>
<P>His &s;ixth Argument is, <HI>Fal&s;e Prophets, fal&s;e Apo&s;tles, fal&s;e Brethren are onely denominated from their fal&s;e Doctrine: therefore they are not fal&s;e Mini&s;ters, but true, who teach the truth of the Go&s;pel.</HI> The Antecedent he proves from 2 <HI>Pet.</HI> 2. 1. 2 <HI>Cor.</HI> 11. 13. <HI>Gal.</HI> 2. 4, 5. 1 <HI>Joh.</HI> 2. 18, 21, 22, 26. 2 <HI>Joh.</HI> 7.</P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. We deny the con&s;equence, it doth not follow <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">pon &s;uppo|&s;ition that fal&s;e Prophets are &s;o denominated from their fal&s;e Doctrine; that whoever preach true Doctrine are true Mini&s;ters; the proof where|of we expect by the next.</P>
<P>2ly. the Antecedent is manife&s;tly fal&s;e. Fal&s;e Prophets are &s;o cal|led, becau&s;e they ran and prophe&s;ied in the Name of the Lord, when he never &s;ent them, &s;peak in them, or to them, <HI>Jer.</HI> 14. 14, 15. &amp; 23. 21, 22. &amp; 27. 15. &amp; 28. 15. &amp; 29. 9, 31. &amp; 43. 2. <HI>Ez<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">k.</HI> 13. 6. Of fal&s;e Apo&s;tles there is the &s;ame rea&s;on. The true Apo&s;tles are &s;o call'd upon the account of their <HI>Mi&s;&s;ion</HI> from Chri&s;t: nor is any one &s;o, except lawfully called by Chri&s;t, &s;aith <HI>Pareus</HI> on 1 <HI>Cor.</HI> 1. The fal&s;e, upon the account of their pretending thereto, when indeed they were never &s;ent by him. Nor doth 2 <HI>Cor</HI> 11. 13. make void this A&s;&s;ertion, it rather e&s;tabli&s;heth it. Tis true, the <GAP DESC="foreign">, or fal&s;e Apo&s;tles, preached fal&s;e Doctrine, but they are not upon that foot of account &s;o denomi|nated, but becau&s;e they were meta&s;chematizing, or transforming them&s;elves into the Apo&s;tles of Chri&s;t, as Satan is al&s;o &s;ometimes transforming him&s;elf into an Angel of light; <HI>i, e,</HI> they come as the A|po&s;tles of Chri&s;t, pretend to be his Amba&s;&s;adors, men &s;ent by him (as M. <HI>T.</HI> knows the word &s;ignifies) when really and indeed they were not &s;o. 1 <HI>Joh.</HI> 2. 18, 21, 22, 26. tells us of Antichri&s;ts that were already come, &s;uch as <HI>Simon Magus, Ebion, Cerinthus,</HI> and that t<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">ey oppo&s;ed the Per&s;on and Doctrine of the Son of God, who with their endle&s;s ge|nealogies, and unintelligible conceptions attempted the total over|throw
<PB N="133" REF="70"> of the Go&s;pel, wondrou&s;ly perplexing the Saints of that day; but that <HI>therefore</HI> they were called <HI>fal&s;e Apo&s;tles,</HI> there is not the lea&s;t mention. <HI>Gal.</HI> 2. 4, 5. &s;peaks of <HI>fal&s;e Brethren;</HI> but that they are &s;o called &s;ingly, upon the account of their &s;preading fal&s;e opinions, is a conceit that Mr. <HI>T.</HI> will not in ha&s;te make good. They were un&s;ound, hypocritical Profe&s;&s;ors, that pretending to be Brethren, &s;ought an oc|ca&s;ion to injure and mi&s;chieve the Children of the Lord: (which <HI>Paul</HI> had too great an experiment of, 2 <HI>Cor.</HI> 11. 26.) 2 <HI>Pet.</HI> 2. 1. hath already been con&s;idered. So that with more Scripture-evidence it may be ar|gued; If fal&s;e Prophets, fal&s;e Apo&s;tles be &s;o denominated, upon the account of their running before they were &s;ent, pretending to come in his Name, when he never mi&s;&s;ionated them; Then they are <HI>fal&s;e Mi|ni&s;ters,</HI> who come in the Name of Chri&s;t, and have received no au|thentick Commi&s;&s;ion from him. But the Antecedent is true, as we have evinced. Therefore&mdash;</P>
</DIV3>
<DIV3 N="19" TYPE="section">
<HEAD>Sect. 19.</HEAD>
<ARGUMENT>
<P><HI>Of God's determining the whole of our Wor&s;hip. His &s;o doing of old in the Statutes and Judgments he gave to I&s;rael, an eminent act of Love: it is &s;o now to his New-Te&s;tament-Churches. Mr.</HI> T. <HI>his ten Arguments to the contrary, an&s;wered.</HI> Acts 15. 10. Heb. 7. 18, 19. &amp; 9. 9, 10. Joh. 1. 18. <HI>explained.</HI></P>
</ARGUMENT>
<P>THe third Query in the <HI>S. T.</HI> is, <HI>Whether God doth not bea<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter"> as much love to, and exerci&s;e as much&punc; faithfulne&s;s over his New-Te&s;tament-Churches, as over the National Church of the Jews?</HI> To this <HI>Mr. T.</HI> an|&s;wers, <HI>No doubt of it.</HI> He grants he doth.</P>
<P>To the fourth Query, <HI>Whether he hath not, as of old he did, with refe|rence to the then Church, determined the whole of the Wor&s;hip appertaining to them, to who&s;e In&s;titutions (without any humane additions) it is the duty of fouls &s;olely to conform?</HI> He an&s;wers in the Negative; <HI>God hath not de|termined Circum&s;tantials in Wor&s;hip</HI> (he mu&s;t mean Circum&s;tances of Wor&s;hip relating to it, as &s;uch, or he &s;peaks nothing to the purpo&s;e; and the&s;e are &s;uch nece&s;&s;ary parts of Wor&s;hip, that without them it is not accepted) <HI>and his not doing &s;o, is an argument of greater love to his New-Te&s;tament-Churches, than his determining the whole of his Wor&s;hip to the Church of the Jews was to them.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. In pag. 32. he tells us, <HI>that if God do de&s;ign more diligently, the longitude and latitude of the Jewi&s;h Church at their calling hereafter,</HI> (which are things <HI>Mr. T.</HI> accounts Accidentals of Wor&s;hip undeter|mined)
<PB N="134" REF="71"> <HI>and leave the dimen&s;ion of our Church to humane choice, this may be done out of more &s;pecial love to them;</HI> So that the &s;ame act of God is (it &s;eems) a manife&s;tation and no manife&s;tation of greater love from God; <HI>i. e.</HI> when it will &s;erve <HI>Mr. T.</HI> his de&s;ign to a&s;&s;ert it to be &s;o, it is &s;o, when otherwi&s;e, he will per&s;wade to the belief of the contrary.</P>
<Q>Quo teneam vultus mutantem Protea nodo.</Q>
<P>2dly. When the Lord &s;peaks of the Judgments and Statutes he had given to <HI>I&s;rael</HI> (whereby the whole of their Wor&s;hip was determined) he &s;peaks of them as the wondrous manife&s;tation of his love to the<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">, whereby they were eminently exalted above all the people in the world, <HI>P&s;al.</HI> 147. 19, 20. <HI>Ezek.</HI> 20. 11. <HI>Neh.</HI> 9. 13. <HI>Deut.</HI> 6. 24. That the de|termination of their Wor&s;hip &s;hould be an i&s;&s;ue of deare&s;t love, and the non-determination of ours, a manife&s;tation of greater love, is an A&s;|&s;ertion that had need be back't with &s;trong proofs and evidence, el&s;e it is not likely to find the lea&s;t entertainment among&s;t the Saints. But this he manife&s;ts by no le&s;s than a decad of Rea&s;ons.</P>
<P>Rea&s;. 1. <HI>Becau&s;e the determination of the whole of the Wor&s;hip of God to the Jews, was the impo&s;ing of a yoke on them which neither the elder, nor la|ter Jews were able to bear,</HI> Acts 15. 10.</P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> But this is a mi&s;take of the Animadverters. The Apo&s;tle <HI>Pe|ter</HI> &s;aith not, the determination of the whole of the Wor&s;hip of God to them was &s;uch a yoke, but the pre&s;&s;ing Circumci&s;ion and <HI>Mo&s;aical</HI> Ob|&s;ervances by &s;ome Sect-ma&s;ters among&s;t them, as the way to Ju&s;tif<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">ca|tion and Salvation, was &s;o; As is evident from <HI>ver.</HI> 1, 5, 11. The Do|ctrine of Ju&s;tification and Salvation by the works of the Law, was a yoke that they were not able to bear; <HI>Ergo,</HI> the determination of the whole of the Wor&s;hip of God was &s;o, is a mo&s;t ridiculous and puerile Conclu|&s;ion. 2. Grant the yoke to be <HI>Mo&s;aical Ob&s;ervances,</HI> their number and multitude, <HI>&amp;c.</HI> made them &s;uch an in&s;upportable yoke, not their de|te<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">mination by the Lord. Whatever he in&s;titutes and commands (as &s;uch) is the joy and delight of the Saints to conform to, not their yoke and burden.</P>
<P>Rea&s;. 2. <HI>Becau&s;e the determination of the whole of God's Wor&s;hip to the Jews, did bring in many things which were unprofitable, weak, and made nothing perfect,</HI> Heb. 7. 18, 19. <HI>And if God had &s;o determined to us, he had commanded things unprofitable, weak, &amp;c. Therefore&mdash;</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. The will of God was the ground and mea&s;ure of tho&s;e things the Apo&s;tle calls <HI>unprofitable, &amp;c.</HI> which had they been more &s;o, upon the account thereof they ought to have been &s;ubmitted unto: the unprofitablene&s;s and weakne&s;s of any thing, being no ground for its re|jection when commanded by the Lord.</P>
<PB N="135" REF="71">
<P> 2dly, This Animadverter is not &s;o much of Gods coun&s;el, as to be able to &s;ay what had been, if the whole of Go&s;pel-Wor&s;hip had been (as it is) determined by the Lord. That there is &s;ome part of Go&s;pel-Wor|&s;hip in&s;tituted, he will not deny: Is this unprofitable, weak? If not, what nece&s;&s;ity is there, that what he &s;uppo&s;eth not to be in&s;tituted, had it been &s;o, &s;hould be liable to &s;uch a crimination.</P>
<P>3dly, What is mo&s;t weak, contemptible, and unprofitable in the eye of man, is u&s;ually made the power of God to them that are &s;aved, 1 <HI>Cor.</HI> 1. 18, 23, 24, 25.</P>
<P>4thly, The&s;e &s;uppo&s;ed accidentals of Wor&s;hip non-determined of God, are left by him (according to Mr. <HI>T.</HI> his dictate) to be deter|mined by Governours. If the determination of the Lord would have rendred them weak and unprofitable, doth their determination make them efficacious and profitable? Are they wi&s;er, &s;tronger than God? or being determined by them, may we reject them as unprofitable, weak, and good for nothing? To what purpo&s;e di&s;putes he then for them?</P>
<P>5thly, If God hath left them to be &s;et down by Governours, to whom obedience is due (as &s;aith the Animadverter) 'tis out of love, and faithfulne&s;s to us, that he hath done &s;o: that it &s;hould be greater love and faithfulne&s;s in him to us, to leave them to the determination of men (with a nece&s;&s;ity of our &s;ubjection to them when determined) than to do it him&s;elf, is ab&s;urd to a&s;&s;ert.</P>
<P>But 6thly, The ob&s;ervances in&s;tanced in by <HI>Paul, Heb.</HI> 7. 18, 19. were not accidentals of Wor&s;hip, they were nece&s;&s;ary, and e&s;&s;ential parts thereof; &s;uch things wherein the greate&s;t part of the In&s;tituted Wor|&s;hip of God among&s;t the Jews did con&s;i&s;t, which are called <HI>weak, and unprofitable, &amp;c.</HI> not with re&s;pect to the determination of God, as if his determining them made them &s;o, which were impious to imagine, nor in re&s;pect of the end for which they were in&s;tituted by the Lord (which it was impo&s;&s;ible they &s;hould be, he never failing of his end, nor mi&s;taking in the choice of means proper and &s;uitable thereunto) but with re&s;pect to the great works of Ju&s;tification, Sanctification, <HI>&amp;c.</HI> ac|compli&s;hed and wrought by the <HI>Melchizedechian</HI> Prie&s;thood of the Lord Je&s;us, as the Apo&s;tle &s;peaketh: and in this &s;en&s;e all the Wor&s;hip of Chri&s;t that is determined by him is weak, unprofitable, makes nothing perfect, <HI>viz.</HI> in it &s;elf, or with re&s;pect to Ju&s;tification; and by this Animadverters Argument, it had therefore been a greater demon&s;tration of love and faithfulne&s;s in the Lord to us, to have determined no part of In&s;tituted Wor&s;hip.</P>
<P>Rea&s;. 3. <HI>The things God determined to the</HI> Jews <HI>about the Circum|&s;tantials</HI>
<PB N="136" REF="72"> <HI>of his Wor&s;hip, were but &s;hadows of good things to come, which were not fit to be continued, or to be &s;upplied with any other, Chri&s;t being come who was the Body or Sub&s;tance,</HI> Colo&s;. 2. 16, 17. Heb. 10. 1. There|fore.&mdash;</P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. What was fit or not fit for God to do, Mr. <HI>T.</HI> is too bold to a&s;&s;ume the confidence to determine: He never made him, or any of the Sons of men his Coun&s;ellor.</P>
<P N="2">2. Not the circum&s;tantials of Wor&s;hip only, but the greate&s;t part of the in&s;tituted Wor&s;hip of the Lord among&s;t them, was a &s;hadow of good things to come. The <HI>Sacrifices, Pa&s;&s;over, Ordinances</HI> of the Prie&s;t|hood, <HI>&amp;c.</HI> were eminent Types of Chri&s;t, who was the Sub&s;tance and Body of them: yet no accidentals of Wor&s;hip, but that wherein the Wor&s;hip it &s;elf did con&s;i&s;t.</P>
<P>But, 3dly, Mr. <HI>T.</HI> will never prove, That if God determine the whole of his Wor&s;hip under the Go&s;pel, he mu&s;t introduce &s;uch things as are &s;uch &s;hadows of good things to come, as the <HI>Jews</HI> Ob&s;ervances were. The determination of the whole of the Wor&s;hip of Chri<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">t, a&s;&s;ert|ed by us, &s;ecures us, we find by experience, from &s;uch things; which the a&s;&s;erting a liberty in men to determine what they plea&s;e, under the notion of accidentals of Wor&s;hip, expo&s;eth us to; (witne&s;s the Cro&s;s in Bapti&s;m, Surplice, Hood, Tippet, and a hundred &s;uch ridicu<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">ous trin|kets invented by them) and yet except he prove this, his rea&s;on is ir|rational, and ludicrous. Let us &s;ee if there be any more weig<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">t in what follows.</P>
<P>Rea&s;. 4. <HI>Such Ordinances were carnal, to endure only to the time of Reformation, which is this time of the Go&s;pel,</HI> Heb. 9. 9. <HI>Therefore it's part of Gods love,</HI> &amp;c. <HI>that neither the &s;ame in particular, nor other are preci&s;ely determined to us by God.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. The Jewi&s;h Ordinances, are called <HI>Carnal,</HI> or <GAP DESC="foreign">, the <HI>Ju&s;tifications,</HI> or <HI>Righteou&s;ne&s;&s;es</HI> of the fle&s;h, <Q>becau&s;e in their own nature they reached only to the outward man (&s;aith <HI>Pi&s;cator)</HI> becau&s;e they did &s;anctifie only to the purifying of the fle&s;h, <HI>ver&s;.</HI> 13.</Q> (&s;ay our Annotators) The&s;e were to continue but untill the time of Reformation, as the Apo&s;tle &s;aith, even to the times of the Go&s;pel; but that no other Ordinances that in their own nature (I &s;peak not of what is done by the ble&s;&s;ing of the Lord upon his own appointments) reach only to the outward man, and the purifying of the fle&s;h, are of the appointment of Chri&s;t; whatever others &s;ay, Mr. <HI>T.</HI> upon &s;econd thoughts will not a&s;&s;ert it.</P>
<P>But, 2dly, The&s;e Ordinances were carnal and vertually <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">boli&s;hed
<PB N="137" REF="72"> at the death of Chri&s;t, actually taken away and removed when the Temple was de&s;troyed by <HI>Titus Ve&s;patian,</HI> the &s;ame Ordinances in par|ticular are not determined by the Lord; but that no other Ordinances are, is a &s;lip of Mr. <HI>T.</HI> his Pen, or it may be a Typographical error, which he will not ju&s;tifie.</P>
<P>3dly, When this Animadverter proves that it was not an act of rich love and faithfulne&s;s in the Lord, upon the ce&s;&s;ation of the carnal Ordi|nances of the <HI>Jews,</HI> to in&s;titute <HI>de novo,</HI> and preci&s;ely determine, a more &s;imple or &s;piritual Wor&s;hip; or that becau&s;e the&s;e then cea&s;ed, there|fore it could not be an act of love in the Lord &s;o to do: <HI>i. e.</HI> When he &s;hall make good his Inference, he may be &s;uppo&s;ed to &s;ay &s;omething, but till then an ordinary capacity will be able to di&s;cern that he doth but trifle.</P>
<P>His 5, 6, 7, Rea&s;ons are not worth the mentioning, concluding on|ly, <HI>That New-Te&s;tament-Believers are relea&s;ed from Jewi&s;h Ob&s;ervances:</HI> which we a&s;&s;ert and own as well as he. And when he &s;hall be able to manife&s;t, that any thing el&s;e can Logically or Rationally be deduced from them, I will be his bondman.</P>
<P>Rea&s;. 5. <HI>For what though the</HI> Jews <HI>were in their minority, and therefore to be kept under tho&s;e beggarly elements,</HI> &amp;c. <HI>until the time appointed by the Father,</HI> Gal. 4. 1, 2, 3, 9. Doth it therefore follow, that God hath not determined the whole of his Wor&s;hip now? Is the Son becau&s;e grown up, to offer to God what Wor&s;hip he plea&s;eth? This indeed follows, That we are not under tho&s;e beggarly Elements, and to return to them or any like them (not of the appointment of Chri&s;t) is an act of great ingratitude to the Lord, for his love and faithfulne&s;s, manife&s;t|ed to us in the e&s;tabli&s;hment of a more &s;ublime, and &s;piritual Wor&s;hip under the Go&s;pel. As al&s;o that it is great wickedne&s;s to introduce, im|po&s;e or &s;ubject to &s;uch beggarly Elements; now the&s;e &s;tood for the mo&s;t part <HI>in bodily rites, in differences of meats and drinks, of times, places, gar|ments,</HI> &amp;c. of which he may do well humbly to inform his good Mo|ther the Church of <HI>England,</HI> that &s;he is too too guilty.</P>
<P>The like may be &s;aid of his 6th, Rea&s;on: <HI>The time before Chri&s;t, was an e&s;tate under</HI> Mo&s;es, <HI>a Servant, the e&s;tate of Chri&s;tians is under Chri&s;t, the Son,</HI> Gal. 4. 4, 5, 6, 7. Heb. 3. 5. Therefore we are no longer to be &s;ubject to <HI>Mo&s;aical</HI> appointments, had been &s;omewhat to|lerable arguing; but therefore 'tis greater love in the Lord, not to de|termine the whole of his Wor&s;hip to us now (which being the Po&s;ition he attempts the proof of, &s;hould have been his Inference) is &s;uch a pit|tifull
<PB N="138" REF="73"> illation, that one would never expect from &s;uch a learned per&s;on as Mr. <HI>T.</HI></P>
<P>It rather follows, Therefore Chri&s;t hath determined the whole of his Wor&s;hip under the New Te&s;tament, <HI>being faithful as a Son,</HI> when <HI>Mo|&s;es the Servant,</HI> according to the appointment of the Lord, gave forth Laws for the ordering the whole of the affairs of the then Hou&s;e of God: e&s;pecially con&s;idering that he was the <HI>Prophet like unto Mo&s;es,</HI> whom the Father promi&s;ed to <HI>rai&s;e up;</HI> into who&s;e mouth he &s;aid, he would <HI>put his words, and that he &s;hould &s;peak unto the Sont of Men, whatever he commanded him,</HI> Deut. 18. 18. Accordingly when he comes into the world, 'tis &s;aid of him, <HI>He revealed the Father,</HI> Joh. 1. 18. <HI>(Gr.</HI> <GAP DESC="foreign">, he <HI>plainly</HI> and <HI>delucidly</HI> expounded to them the <HI>mind and will of the Father)</HI> that <HI>the Father &s;pake to us in or by him,</HI> Heb. 1. 1. <HI>and gives us a charge to hear him,</HI> Mat. 3. 17.</P>
<P>Rea&s;. 7. His &s;eventh Rea&s;on is like the re&s;t. 'Tis true, had not the <GAP DESC="foreign">, or <HI>hand-writing of Mo&s;aical Ceromonies been aboli&s;hed,</HI> Col. 2. 14. <HI>we had not reaped the fruit of Christs death, by which they were aboli&s;hed, Ephe&s;.</HI> 2. 14, 15. <HI>and &s;o con&s;equently ta&s;ted the le&s;s of the love of the Lord.</HI> But that therefore 'tis a greater argument of love in God, not to determine the whole of his Wor&s;hip, or that if he ha<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter"> done &s;o, we had not reaped the fruit of Chri&s;ts death, is &s;uch a &s;ort of nakedne&s;s in Mr. <HI>T.</HI> his arguing, that one would not willingly di&s;cover, did not the vindication of Truth nece&s;&s;itate one hereunto.</P>
<P>Rea&s;. 8. His eighth Rea&s;on is (if po&s;&s;ible) more weak and ab|&s;urd. <HI>The Apo&s;tles judged it a great benefit to the Chri&s;tian Churches, that they were exempt from the Rites and Ceremonies of the Mo&s;aical Law,</HI> Acts 15. 28. <HI>therefore they accounted it an effect of Gods love, that he had not de|termined the whole of his Wor&s;hip to us.&mdash;</HI></P>
<P>With what affection others will peru&s;e the&s;e pa&s;&s;ages I cannot tell, for my part I heartily pitty him, that he &s;hould ever undertake the de|fence of a cau&s;e &s;o deplorable, as to be driven to &s;uch pittiful &s;hifts, in the managerie thereof: which I cannot impute to his want of Abilities (which he will one day find, he might better have imployed than in his pre&s;ent undertaking) but the de&s;peratene&s;s of the Cau&s;e he en|deavours to defend. It follows indeed, that therefore they accounted it an effect of Gods love, that they were delivered from the burden of tho&s;e external Rites and Ceremonies, (e&s;pecially as they appertained to the Covenant of Works) and &s;o do we. 'Tis &s;trange if this Ani|madverter reckon it to be &s;o, that he &s;hould plead for the &s;ame, the like, yea wor&s;e Ceremonies, impo&s;ed not by the Lord, but by men,
<PB N="139" REF="73"> who&s;e &s;ervants we never were, nor in the&s;e matters ought to be. But that they accounted it an effect of love, that God had not determined the whole of his New-Te&s;tament-Wor&s;hip, is &s;uch a c<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">imination as their &s;ouls abhorred.</P>
<P>But he proceeds: Rea&s;. 9. <HI>'Tis an effect of greater love to the Gentile Churches, that God hath not determined the whole of his Wor&s;hip; becau&s;e they being of divers Nations and Languages, under divers Governments, u&s;ed to divers Cu&s;toms, they could not conveniently (if at all) practi&s;e &s;uch an Uniformity of Circum&s;tances, as they mu&s;t have done, if God had &s;o de|termined.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. That their being of divers Nations, <HI>&amp;c.</HI> &s;hould di&s;capa|citate them with re&s;pect to their conforming to the will of God, even in Circum&s;tantials of Wor&s;hip, as &s;uch, any more than they are di&s;capacitated in their conforming to that part of In&s;tituted Wor&s;hip, Mr. <HI>T.</HI> grants to be determined by the Lord, is beyond the ken of my &s;hallow under&s;tanding.</P>
<P>2dly, That the Saints mu&s;t have practi&s;ed any external Uniformity (I &s;uppo&s;e he means it with re&s;pect to Liturgies (fal&s;ly called <HI>Divine Service)</HI> in u&s;e among&s;t the Papi&s;ts and Church of <HI>England,</HI> Ve&s;tments called <HI>Holy, &amp;c.)</HI> if God had determined the whole of his Wor&s;hip, we crave leave to deny he hath &s;o done; yet &s;uch an Uniformity ought not to be practi&s;ed, 'tis wretched and abominable. And yet had the Lord &s;een it meet to have enjoyned any &s;uch thing, it ought to have been practi&s;ed, nor would it by the Saints have been accounted a le&s;s argument of his love to them, becau&s;e thereby they &s;hould have been expo&s;ed to outward inconveniencies. This rea&s;on at the be&s;t is but car|nal and &s;elfi&s;h; from our conveniencies external, or inconveniencies, a mea&s;ure of the Lords love, in Divine Appointments, is not to be taken.</P>
<P>But there is yet one Rea&s;on behind.</P>
<P>Rea&s;. 10. <HI>The A&s;&s;ertion, That God hath determined the whole of his Wor&s;hip in Circum&s;tantials relating to it, as &s;uch, is to infringe our Chri&s;tian Liberty, and to bring us into &s;uch bondage as they were in under the Law; therefore not agreeable to that love, God bears to the New-Te&s;tament-Churches.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. That the Lords determining the whole of his Wor&s;hip, &s;hould in the lea&s;t infringe our Chri&s;tian Liberty, is a mon&s;trous a&s;&s;er|tion; it rather e&s;tabli&s;heth it, in the freedom it gives, not only from the <HI>Jewi&s;h</HI> Ceremonies, but the Inventions and Devices of men, with force and violence, attempted to be impo&s;ed upon us. For if God had
<PB N="140" REF="74"> determined the whole of his New-Te&s;tament-Wor&s;hip, it cannot be &s;uppo&s;ed that we owe the lea&s;t homage or &s;ubjection to the&s;e: We may not be the &s;ervants of men.</P>
<P>2dly, I never yet thought, that a conformity to any thing, that God had revealed and determined, as our duty, had (upon that account) been our bondage. 'Tis the liberty, joy, and delight of the Saints to do his will, <HI>P&s;al.</HI> 119. 45. 1 <HI>Joh.</HI> 5. 3. <HI>P&s;al.</HI> 19. 8. &amp; 119. 111. Such kind of weak impertinent arguings, a&s;&s;erted with &s;tate and confidence (as is the manner of the man) mu&s;t he be content to deal with, who un|dertakes the con&s;ideration of what is propo&s;ed by this Animadverter. But to recite the&s;e Arguments had been An&s;wer &s;ufficient to the judici|ous and intelligent Reader. We attend his further motion.</P>
</DIV3>
<DIV3 N="20" TYPE="section">
<HEAD>Sect. 20.</HEAD>
<ARGUMENT>
<P><HI>God had de&s;igned his own Officers for the management of the affairs of his Hou&s;e. Who they are, may be collected from</HI> Ephe&s;. 4. 11. <HI>The Animad|verter proves not, that Arch-Bi&s;hops,</HI> &amp;c. <HI>do the work of the Mini&s;ters of the Go&s;pel, are commi&s;&s;ionated by Chri&s;t. His apprehen&s;ion when he took the &s;olemn League and Covenant, not the &s;ame as now. The exten&s;ivene&s;s of the Priviledges of the Saints under the Go&s;pel-Oeconomie. What things were wanting to the Jews under the &s;econd Temple, which they had under the fir&s;t. The Election of Mini&s;ters the peculiar Priviledge of the Church. That it was practi&s;ed by the Saints in the fir&s;t Ages, granted by the Ani|madverter. Many things charged upon the Saints then living, that are fal&s;e. Neither former di&s;orders, nor pre&s;ent di&s;tempers amongst the Saints any &s;ufficient Warrant for the changing an In&s;titution of Christ. The Priviledge of Women a&s;&s;erted from Scripture, and learned Writers. Of the Decree of the Council of Carthage.</HI> 1 Cor. 14. 34, 35. 1 Tim. 2. 12. <HI>explained What is to be done in ca&s;e of difference in the Congre|gation touching the election of Officers.</HI></P>
</ARGUMENT>
<P>MR. <HI>T.</HI> in his 21. <HI>Sect.</HI> propo&s;es the 5^t^h Query in <HI>S. T.</HI> to con|&s;ideration, <HI>viz. Whether God hath not now, as then (under the time of the Law) de&s;igned the &s;everal Officers and Offices his wi&s;dom thought &s;ufficient for the management of the affairs of his Hou&s;e; &s;o that the Inven|tion of new ones by the Sons of Men, is not only needle&s;s, but a daring advance again&s;t the &s;overaignty, care and wi&s;dom of God over his Churches.</HI> To which after a large harangue touching <HI>Mo&s;es,</HI> the 70 <HI>Elders, Jo&s;hua,</HI> the <HI>Judges, David</HI> and other Kings, the Prophets, <HI>Aaron</HI> and his Sons, with the <HI>Le|vites,</HI>
<PB N="141" REF="74"> whom the Lord appointed for the management of the affairs of his Hou&s;e; (having al&s;o learnedly told us, that God hath not in the Chri&s;tian Church de&s;igned &s;uch Officers and Offices as the&s;e) the twelve Di&s;ciples, and among&s;t the re&s;t, <HI>Peter,</HI> (to whom he &s;eems to a&s;&s;ert a Primacy, by way of promi&s;e to appertain.) He re&s;olves the Que&s;tion in the affirmative. Tells us, that who the Officers of Chri&s;t's de&s;igning are, may be&s;t be gathered from <HI>Eph.</HI> 4. 11. (of which we have formerly &s;poke in <HI>Chap.</HI> 3. of <HI>S. T.)</HI> As for what follows, when Mr. <HI>T.</HI> &s;hall prove,</P>
<P>1&s;t, That the Arch-Bi&s;hops, Bi&s;hops, <HI>&amp;c.</HI> of the Church of <HI>England</HI> do the works enjoyned by Chri&s;t and his Apo&s;tles, to the Mini&s;ters of the Go&s;pel.</P>
<P>2dly, That every one that doth tho&s;e works, though not Commi&s;&s;iona|ted by Chri&s;t thereunto, nor performing them after the order appointed by him, is a Mini&s;ter of Chri&s;t.</P>
<P>3dly, That its lawful for the Sons of men, to make more degrees of Mini&s;try, (one above the other) under new Names, Titles, (with mainte|nance forreign to the maintenance of Chri&s;t) employed in works he no where charges upon them to do, than <HI>Chri&s;t</HI> ever in&s;tituted &amp; appointed, &s;hall look upon our &s;elves as concerned in what he offers in this <HI>Section.</HI> But till then we &s;hall neither trouble our &s;elves or Reader with his Lordly dictates, which being tendred without proof, may righteou&s;ly be rejected by us. Only thus much I would tell him in his ear, That if he had (when he took the &s;olemn League and Covenant) the &s;ame appre|hen&s;ion of this generation of men he now &s;eems to have, he did very wickedly to &s;wear to endeavour the extirpation of Prelacy <HI>(i. e.</HI> as in the Covenant is explained, <HI>Church-Government by Arch-Bi&s;hops, Bi&s;hops, their Chancellours, and Commi&s;&s;aries, Deans, Deans and Chapters, Arch|deacons, and all other Eccle&s;ia&s;tical Officers depending on that Hierarchie.)</HI> What? Dur&s;t he &s;ware to extirpate the Mini&s;ters and Mini&s;try of Chri&s;t, as he now &s;uppo&s;eth them to be? But</P>
<Q>Tempora mutantur, nos &amp; mutamur in illis.</Q>
<P>In <HI>Sect.</HI> 22. Mr. <HI>T.</HI> takes notice of the 6^t^h enquiry in <HI>S. T.</HI> touch|ing the exten&s;ivene&s;s of the Priviledges of the Saints under the Go&s;pel, whether not commen&s;urate with theirs under the Law: which if un|der&s;tood of Saints in appearance, or the vi&s;ible Church, he tells us, <HI>The vi&s;ible Church of the Jews had in &s;ome things greater Priviledges; as tho&s;e mentioned</HI> Rom. 9. 4, 5. &amp; 3. 1, 2. (and are they not as much com|mitted to the Church and People of God now? &s;o that the&s;e Texts are
<PB N="142" REF="75"> little to his advantage;) <HI>together with Gods revealing his mind to them by</HI> Urim <HI>and</HI> Thumim, <HI>extraordinary Prophets, and many more</HI> (which he not being plea&s;ed to particularize to us, we &s;hall not turn a&s;ide to make enquiry after:) But to tho&s;e in&s;tanced in we An&s;wer.</P>
<P><HI>Fir&s;t,</HI> That the Church and People of God are de&s;titute of &s;ome of the Priviledges mentioned, is granted: and &s;o was the Church of the Jews, after their return from the <HI>Babyloni&s;h</HI> Captivity. The Rabbies tell us, <HI>That in the &s;econd Temple there were five things wanting which had been in the fir&s;t.</HI></P>
<P N="1">1. <HI>The Ark with the Mercy-Seat and Cherubims.</HI></P>
<P N="2">2. <HI>The fire from Heaven.</HI></P>
<P N="3">3. <HI>The Urim and Thummim,</HI> Ezra 2. 63. Neh. 7. 65. <HI>whereby the Lord never an&s;wered them more.</HI></P>
<P N="4">4. <HI>The Majesty</HI> (or divine pre&s;ence) <HI>whereby they &s;eem to mean the Oracle in the mo&s;t holy place, where God hath dwelt between the Cherubims,</HI> P&s;al. 80. 2. Numb. 7. 89.</P>
<P N="5">5. <HI>The Holy Gho&s;t, or the Spirit of Prophe&s;ie, which was not in the Pro|phets after the &s;econd year of</HI> Darius, <HI>after</HI> Haggai, Zechariah, <HI>and</HI> Mala|chie <HI>had fini&s;hed their Prophe&s;ies.</HI></P>
<P><HI>Secondly,</HI> The Inference of the Animadverter is weak, <HI>Believers</HI> (or vi&s;ible Saints) <HI>under the Go&s;pel have not &s;ome things with which the Church of the Jews was priviledged, therefore their Priviledges are not as exten&s;ive; which notwith&s;tanding they might be, yea abundantly more ex|ten&s;ive.</HI> The fir&s;t Temple upon many accounts was more glorious than the &s;econd, which wanted (as was but now remarked) many things wherein its glory lay. Yet, <HI>Hag.</HI> 2. 9. the Prophet tells them, that <HI>the glory of the latter hou&s;e &s;hould be greater than of the former;</HI> which it was, though it had not the &s;ame things for its ornament and glory, upon other accounts, <HI>viz.</HI> its being honoured with the bodily pre&s;ence of Chri&s;t there, <HI>&amp;c.</HI> Of the Priviledges of the Go&s;pel-Churches, and their &s;uper-eminency, with re&s;pect to the Old-Te&s;tament-Church, we &s;hall not now treat. They are delivered from the Yoke of Ceremonial Ob&s;ervances, have the Go&s;pel unvailed, preached among&s;t them, 2 <HI>Cor.</HI> 3. 18, <HI>&amp;c.</HI> Nor need we the intendment of our pre&s;ent enquiry, being only this; <HI>Whether the &s;olemn deputation of men &s;ignally pointed out by the Lord for the admini&s;tration of holy things in his hou&s;e, by the Body of the Church, be not now as then; their peculiar priviledge?</HI></P>
<P>What &s;aith Mr. <HI>T.</HI> hereunto?</P>
<P N="1">1. <HI>The &s;olemn deputation of Apo&s;tles and other Mini&s;ters, we find not in the New Te&s;tament, to have been the peculiar priviledge of the Church.</HI></P>
<PB N="143" REF="75">
<P> <HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. But our Que&s;tion is not touching extraordinary Officers, &s;uch as Apo&s;tles, but of ordinary ones, &s;uch as Pa&s;tors, &amp;c.</P>
<P>Yet 2dly, a man need not go far to find &s;uch a deputation, even of an Apo&s;tle, to the work of the Lord by the Body of the Church, together with the re&s;t of the Apo&s;tles, <HI>Acts</HI> 1. 14, 15, 16, 23, 24, 26. being an evi|dent proof hereof beyond exception.</P>
<P>He adds, 2. <HI>Their Ordination is no where mentioned as done by the Saints, or Brethren, which were not Officers.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. The Animadverter mi&s;takes Ordination, for Impo&s;ition of hands, which is only one part of Ordination, and comprehends the whole act of deputing or &s;etting men apart to the work of the Mini&s;try.</P>
<P N="2">2. That A&s;&s;ertion, <HI>That the Church, or A&s;&s;embly of Believers, are no|where &s;aid to have an hand therein,</HI> mu&s;t be imputed to Mr. <HI>T.</HI> his for|getfulne&s;s, <HI>Acts</HI> 6. 3. &amp; 14. 23. manife&s;tly declare the contrary.</P>
<P>He grants, that <HI>in the first ages there are relations of the election of their own Mini&s;ters by the Church; but the management hereof with Tumults, Frays, Di&s;orders, nece&s;&s;itated an alteration: and con&s;idering the pre&s;ent tem|per of the Saints, how unquiet, injudicious, deceitful, factious, divided they are, he thinks it not &s;afe it be again committed to them.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. The fir&s;t Ages in that matter held fa&s;t to the Doctrine of the Go&s;pel, and the Priviledge, which according to the In&s;titution of Chri&s;t, his Church and People were inve&s;ted in.</P>
<P N="2">2. Many things are reported of the Saints in the fir&s;t Ages, notori|ou&s;ly fal&s;e and untrue; and it may be the &s;tory of their tumults, frays, <HI>&amp;c.</HI> in electing their own Pa&s;tors, may be &s;o. Contentions I know there were, early among&s;t them, about this matter; that there were tumults and frays, may perhaps be coined by &s;ome ambitious &s;pirits, that they might the better take an occa&s;ion to dive&s;t the Saints of that &s;acred Pri|viledge.</P>
<P N="3">3. The former di&s;orders, or pre&s;ent di&s;tempers among&s;t Saints, are no warrant for the variation, or nullifying an In&s;titution of Chri&s;t.</P>
<P N="4">4. What &s;trange Saints (it may be he means only the Parochians of his Mother the Church of <HI>England)</HI> Mr. T. hath his lot ca&s;t among&s;t I cannot tell. Ble&s;&s;ed be the Lord there are thou&s;ands of Saints, and many Churches in <HI>England</HI> (this little point of the World) directly of another temper and &s;pirit, being peaceable, judicious, upright, &s;erving the Lord with one con&s;ent, according to the di&s;covery he hath made to them. And if any in any thing are of different per&s;wa&s;ions, praying the Lord to reveal that al&s;o unto them. And Mr. T. doth not well thus to a&s;per&s;e and blacken the Generation of the Righteous.</P>
<PB N="144" REF="76">
<P> The ab&s;urdities that Mr. T. &s;uppo&s;eth will en&s;ue upon the a&s;&s;erting the election of Mini&s;ters to be the priviledge of the Saints, are not worth the mentioning. I know not any Law that forbids Women to intermeddle herein, who&s;e priviledge reached farther than &s;o.</P>
<P N="1">1. There are many Scriptures that &s;eem to a&s;&s;ert it as their right and liberty. (1.) In the choice of Officers they were unque&s;tionably pre|&s;ent, <HI>Act.</HI> 1. 15. &amp; 6. 2, 34. &amp; 14. 23. &amp; 16. 23. (2.) At the deciding of Controver&s;ies, <HI>Act.</HI> 15. 22. &amp; 21. 22. 1 <HI>Cor.</HI> 6. 2. (3.) At the choice of Men to carry the Benevolence of the Church to the needy Brethren, 2 <HI>Cor.</HI> 8. 19. 1 <HI>Cor.</HI> 16. 3. (4.) At the ca&s;ting-out of Offen|ders, <HI>Mat.</HI> 18. 17. 1 <HI>Cor.</HI> 5. 4, 5. (5.) In their re-admi&s;&s;ion upon Re|pentance, 2 <HI>Cor.</HI> 2. 6 <HI>to</HI> 10. They being part of the Church, mu&s;t nece&s;|&s;arily be under&s;tood as concern'd in the&s;e matters, wherein the whole Church are &s;aid to be concerned.</P>
<P N="2">2. 'Twere ea&s;ie to introduce above a Jury twice told, of learned Writers, who have written as much as this comes to: As <HI>Beza, Calvin, Bucer, Bullinger, Melancthon, Bucan. Paraeus, Junius, Cyprian, Trelcutias, Sibrandus, Rivetus, Jerome, Augu&s;tine, Nazianzen, Ambro&s;e, Chry&s;o&s;tom, Theodoret, Theophylact;</HI> So the <HI>Magdeburgen&s;es</HI> in 2 <HI>Cent. c.</HI> 7. <HI>de Con&s;o|ciatione Eccle&s;iarum;</HI> who all a&s;&s;ert that Church-affairs &s;hould be exe|cuted by the con&s;ent of the whole Church. The Council of <HI>Carthage</HI> in|deed decreed 4. <HI>can.</HI> 99. That a Woman, though never &s;o holy and learned, &s;hould not preach in publick, nor baptize; <HI>can.</HI> 100. And <HI>Tertullian</HI> tells us that in his time it was forbid to a Woman to teach in the <HI>African</HI> Church, and baptize; but they deny them not liberty to vote, con&s;ent, or di&s;&s;ent in Church-matters.</P>
<P>Nor do the Scriptures mentioned by this Animadverter in the lea&s;t advance them&s;elves again&s;t what is a&s;&s;erted by us. Not 1 <HI>Cor.</HI> 14. 34, 35.</P>
<P N="1">1. 'Tis as much, more again&s;t the practice allowed by his Mother the Church of <HI>England.</HI> In that Church Women have liberty not only to &s;ay <HI>Amen,</HI> to &s;ay Prayers after the Prie&s;t with a loud voice, but with the Men to act their parts in Wor&s;hip, the Prie&s;t &s;aying one part, and they another. They have (at lea&s;t they had not long &s;ince) liberty in ca&s;e of nece&s;&s;ity to baptize: which is greater than the Si&s;ters priviledge we plead for. Sure this is &s;peaking in the Church. But this is <HI>clavem clave pellere.</HI></P>
<P N="2">2. That Women might be cho&s;en <HI>Church-officers,</HI> is evident from 1 <HI>Tim.</HI> 5. 9. <HI>Phaebe</HI> was a Deacone&s;s, <HI>Rom.</HI> 16. 1. Touching the management of their office, they ought (e&s;pecially if called upon by them &s;o to do) to give an account to the Congregation: How they could do this without
<PB N="145" REF="76"> &s;peaking in the Church I am not able to under&s;tand. Therefore,</P>
<P N="3">3. The &s;en&s;e of the Apo&s;tle is, that they be not admitted to publick preaching or prophe&s;ying (ordinarily) by vertue of Office-power: That they do not <GAP DESC="foreign">, <HI>command,</HI> (as the word &s;ometimes &s;ignifies) or &s;peak &s;o as to u&s;urp authority over the man, as the Apo&s;tle explains it, 1 <HI>Tim.</HI> 2. 12. <HI>But I &s;uffer not a Woman to teach, or u&s;urp authority over the Man.</HI> The latter expre&s;&s;ion is exegetical of the former, <HI>i. e.</HI> not &s;o to teach as to u&s;urp authority over the man! Yea I had ever till now thought that &s;peaking &s;o as to te&s;tifie ones con&s;ent, or di&s;&s;ent, to inform the Church of what they knew not, of concern to them, and the Apo&s;tles, <GAP DESC="foreign">, 1 <HI>Tim.</HI> 2. 12. had been va&s;tly different: And indeed &s;ee no rea&s;on to change my thoughts from any thing this Animadverter offers; that the&s;e Scriptures make nothing for his purpo&s;e.</P>
<P>As for the &s;econd ab&s;urdity that Mr. <HI>T.</HI> &s;uppo&s;es would follow upon the a&s;&s;erting the Saints Priviledge in the election of their own Mini|&s;ters, viz. <HI>That whom the major part choo&s;e, the le&s;&s;er part are not to take for their Mini&s;ter&mdash;</HI>&s;carcely de&s;erves to be taken notice of.</P>
<P N="1">1. The difference &s;uppo&s;ed &s;eldom happens among&s;t the <HI>Congregated Churches;</HI> if but once, 'tis too often: Though Mr. <HI>T.</HI> his expre&s;&s;ion in|timates as if a frequent ca&s;e; which I cannot but tell him is a meer ca|lumny. 'Twill not one day be for his credit, however it may at pre&s;ent &s;erve his de&s;ign, that he walks &s;o much by that rule,</P>
<Q>Calumniare fortiter aliquid adhaerebit.</Q>
<P N="2">2. When it happens the exerci&s;e of tho&s;e Rules of Conde&s;cention, Love, and mutual forbearance, enjoyned by Chri&s;t upon his Di&s;ciples, would &s;oon put an end to the differences &s;ugge&s;ted. But,</P>
<P N="3">3. If this will not do, the calling-in the help of &s;ome Si&s;ter-Church, may quench the flames. Yet,</P>
<P N="4">4. If nothing will do, but, through the prevalency of corruption, Schi&s;ms remain among&s;t them, and &s;eparation at the la&s;t each from o|ther en&s;ue, to prevent this we mu&s;t not lay a&s;ide an In&s;titution of <HI>Chri&s;t.</HI></P>
<P N="5">5. Be&s;ides, the impo&s;ing a Mini&s;ter upon a People by a Patron with a Bi&s;hops In&s;titution and Induction, hath more frequently (and I am &s;ure more ju&s;tly and warrantably) been the occa&s;ion of the offence and difference intimated.</P>
</DIV3>
<DIV3 N="21" TYPE="section">
<PB N="146" REF="77">
<HEAD>Sect. 21.</HEAD>
<ARGUMENT>
<P><HI>Of a vi&s;ible in&s;tituted Church, and its &s;ecurity from Apo&s;ta&s;ie. What Errors and Corruptions unchurch a Church. Of the National Church of</HI> Eng|land. <HI>Of the Governours and Officers of a collap&s;ed Church. The condi|tion of</HI> England's <HI>Church-Officers. Of Separation from a collap&s;ed Church. Of Communion with a Church not rightly con&s;tituted, and compul&s;ion thereunto.</HI></P>
</ARGUMENT>
<P>IN Sect. 23. Mr. <HI>T.</HI> tran&s;cribes the 7th Query in <HI>S. T. Whether any vi&s;ible in&s;tituted Church in the world hath greater &s;ecurity against Apo|&s;ta&s;ie from God, and that &s;ore judgment of having its Candle&s;tick removed (and being unchurched) than that people of the Jews had? If not, then whe|ther, &s;uppo&s;ing a National Church to be of the In&s;titution of Christ, it may not &s;o come to pa&s;s, that it may be &s;o overspread with corruptions, <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">hat it may lo&s;e the e&s;&s;ence of a Church, and ju&s;tly be di&s;robed of that appellation.</HI> To which he an&s;wers in the Affirmative, and tells us, <HI>that they ju&s;tly plead it again&s;t the Church of</HI> Rome, <HI>and that the promi&s;e,</HI> Mat. 16. 8. <HI>doth not belong to any particular in&s;tituted Church in the World, but to the invi&s;ible Church of Gods Elect.</HI> And we are of the &s;ame mind with him in this matter. But le&s;t any reflection of di&s;paragement &s;hould from this Con|ce&s;&s;ion, happen to the Church of <HI>England,</HI> as a very dutiful Son, he adds, <HI>That not every, no nor many corruptions of &s;ome kind do unchurch, but &s;uch Errors as overthrow the foundation of Chri&s;tian Faith: Corruptions of Wor&s;hip by Idolatry, in life by evil manners, utterly incon&s;i&s;tant with Chri|&s;tianity.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. Nor did we ever a&s;&s;ert, that every or many corruptions of &s;ome kind did unchurch. So that in this matter Mr. <HI>T.</HI> might have &s;a|ved his pains.</P>
<P>Nor 2dly, had we the lea&s;t occa&s;ion to do &s;o with re&s;pect to the Church of <HI>England,</HI> which we deny to be a true Church, not becau&s;e dreadfully degenerate from what at fir&s;t it was, but becau&s;e in its fir&s;t Con&s;titution as National (which it received under the <HI>Pa<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">acy)</HI> it was never a true Church of Chri&s;t.</P>
<P>Though 3dly, &s;uch fundamental Errors, &s;uch corruptions in Wor&s;hip and evil manners, are to be found upon it, that are incon&s;i&s;tant with the power of Godline&s;s (or Chri&s;tianity) and therefore &s;uch as, by Mr. <HI>T.</HI> his Conce&s;&s;ion, were enough to unchurch it.</P>
<P>To the eighth Query in <HI>S. T.</HI> viz. <HI>Whether the Eccle&s;ia&s;tick and Spi|ritual Rulers, Governours, and Officers of &s;uch a collap&s;ed Church, may not</HI>
<PB N="147" REF="77"> <HI>righteou&s;ly, as of old, be accounted and e&s;teemed as fal&s;e Prophets, that go about to cau&s;e the people to forget the Name of the Lord (or his pure Wor&s;hip) by their lies or un&s;criptural Traditions, Innovations, and ceremonious Page|antries.</HI> Mr. T. pretends to an&s;wer, <HI>Sect.</HI> 24. which he fronts with this; <HI>Every Error makes not a fal&s;e Prophet:</HI> which no one &s;aith it doth. And further, by way of reply, having placed in the Van 2 <HI>Pet.</HI> 2. 1. <HI>Jude</HI> 4. 1 <HI>John</HI> 4. 1. 2 <HI>John</HI> 7. 1 <HI>John</HI> 2. 22. which &s;peak of fal&s;e Prophets and Antichri&s;t; but advantage him not in the lea&s;t in his pre&s;ent under|taking, as we have manife&s;ted. He adds, <HI>that &s;o long as they teach the Wor&s;hip of Christ in his Name, are without Idolatry in their Wor&s;hip, and Here&s;ie in their Doctrine, they are not to be accounted fal&s;e Prophets.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> But this, as to the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters of <HI>England,</HI> will not be granted. They practi&s;e not the Wor&s;hip of Chri&s;t, but of Antichri&s;t, as we prove <HI>ch.</HI> 7. of <HI>S. T.</HI> They come not really in Chri&s;t's Name (though they pretend to it) but in the name (by the authority) of the mo&s;t pro|fe&s;t enemy he hath in the world, as we evince <HI>ch.</HI> 3. of <HI>S. T.</HI> Though the Doctrine of the Church of <HI>Engl.</HI> be the mo&s;t &s;incere part, the greate&s;t care of our Reformers at fir&s;t being thereabout; yet they own, and preach fal&s;e Doctrine: the mo&s;t of them are greatly degenerated from the Doctrine of the Church of <HI>England</HI> in not a few points; as touching Election, Free-will, the extent of the Death of Chri&s;t, &amp;c. as might be evidenced from their Sermons, and printed Papers. Of this we have &s;poken chap. 10. of <HI>S. T.</HI> The addition of this Animadverter of</P>
<Q>In Te ip&s;um cudetur faba,</Q>
<P>as if guilty of the &s;ame things, or &s;uch like, as we charge upon the Mini|&s;ters of the Church of <HI>England,</HI> I challenge him to make good, el&s;e he doth but calumniate.</P>
<P>His 25th Section is an An&s;wer to the 9th <HI>Query</HI> in <HI>S. T.</HI> about &s;e|paration from a Church, &s;o dreadfully collap&s;ed as to lo&s;e the e&s;&s;ence of a Church. The &s;um is, 1. <HI>Separation by rea&s;on of &s;ome corruptions is un|warrantable.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> And we &s;ay &s;o too: but this is not <HI>ad Rhombum,</HI> we are &s;peak|ing not of corruptions of any kind, but of &s;uch as de&s;troy the e&s;&s;ence of a Church, as is evident from the 7th Query in <HI>S. T.</HI> upon which this hath a dependance.</P>
<P>He adds, 2dly. <HI>Separation from a Church, &s;omewhat erroneous in judg|ment, and corrupt in wor&s;hip and conver&s;ation, that is not Idolatrous nor here|tical, nor requires that to their Communion which would be &s;inful, e&s;peci|ally if from all attending on Mini&s;ters and Mini&s;try at all times is unju&s;ti|fiable.</HI></P>
<PB N="148" REF="78">
<P> <HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. All this might be granted without the lea&s;t di&s;advantage to the Cau&s;e we are pleading.</P>
<P>2dly. By his own Sword is the Cau&s;e he undertakes the defence of, wounded under the fifth rib. We prove the Church of <HI>England</HI> Ido|latrous, Heretical. She requires that to her Communion that is &s;infull, <HI>viz.</HI> Conformity to the Ma&s;s-book (I &s;hould have &s;aid the <HI>Liturgie</HI> from thence &s;tolen) bowing at the Name of <HI>Je&s;us;</HI> communicating with a Drunken Pari&s;h-Prie&s;t, and a company of Swearing Drunken Pari&s;hi|oners, whereby per&s;ons become one Bread with them; kneeling at the act of receiving; having their Children &s;igned with the &s;ign of the Cro&s;s: which we are apt to think are things &s;inful, and till Mr. <HI>T.</HI> is plea&s;ed better to inform us, are like to abide in our pre&s;ent apprehen|&s;ion thereabout: from whence Separation from her is warrantable by the Animadverters conce&s;&s;ion and grant.</P>
<P>3dly, That Separation from one part of Wor&s;hip in a Church &s;hould be &s;omewhat ju&s;tifiable, and not from the whole, at &s;ome time and not alway (things &s;till remaining as they were) is a my&s;tery that I profe&s;s I under&s;tand not. I pre&s;ume he &s;ugge&s;ts it with reference to the Pray|ers and Sacraments of the Church, a &s;eparation from which he &s;uppo|&s;eth is more ju&s;tifiable than from their Preaching.</P>
<P>But &s;eriou&s;ly I would thank Mr. T. if he would take the pains to prove, 1. That 'tis lawful for me to joyn with that Church in any part of Wor&s;hip, with whom I am not obliged, cannot in con&s;cience pray. 2dly, That where the Sacraments are not duly admini&s;tred, there is a true Church: The due admini&s;tration of Sacraments, having been hi|ther to a&s;&s;ert<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">d as one certain note of a true Church. If they are duly admini&s;tred in the Church of <HI>England,</HI> why doth Mr. T. refu&s;e to joyn in their Admini&s;tration? If they are not duly admini&s;tred, the Church of <HI>England</HI> is a fal&s;e Church, and not to be joyned with in any part of Wor&s;hip. What follows in this Section, that the Separation pleaded-for, is for the mo&s;t part, the fruit of pride, or bitter zeal, and tends to &s;trife and confu&s;ion, and every evil work, mu&s;t be imputed to the over|flowing of Mr. T. his gall and pa&s;&s;ion; 'Tis at the lea&s;t a fruit of the fle&s;h, which he will do well to wait upon God to humble him for, and mortifie in him. I &s;hall only &s;ay, <HI>The Lord forgive thee.</HI> The Scripture in&s;tanc'd, <HI>Jam.</HI> 3. 16. is more applicable to the Church of <HI>England,</HI> than to tho&s;e of the <HI>Congregational way,</HI> as every con&s;iderate Reader will acknowledge.</P>
<P>To the tenth Query in <HI>S. T.</HI> viz. <HI>Whether &s;uppo&s;ing a Church apo&s;ta|ti&s;ed, as afore&s;aid, never to be, according to Truth, a vi&s;ible in&s;tituted Church</HI>
<PB N="149" REF="78"> <HI>of Christ; and the People of God living in the Nation, never by their free con&s;ent, members thereof, as it is on the pretended Churches part, most un|heard-of cruelty to compel them &s;o it be not on the part of the free-born Chil|dren of God, most &s;tupendous folly and di&s;valuation of the In&s;titutions of Chri&s;t, and ingratitude to God for the light and liberty from the yokes of men recei|ved, imaginable, to joyn affinity with it in Wor&s;hip, or attend upon its Mini|&s;try,</HI> he pretends to an&s;wer in his 26th Sect. I &s;ay he pretends to do &s;o: for Mr. T. mu&s;t &s;uppo&s;e that Reader to be di&s;tempered in his brain, that &s;hall take what he &s;aith to be indeed an An&s;wer to the Query propo&s;ed.</P>
<P N="1">1. <HI>He grants, compul&s;ion of men may be cruelty.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> But Sir, the que&s;tion is not about every compul&s;ion, but a compul&s;ion to conformity to, and communion with a Church (&s;o called) that never was of the In&s;titution of Chri&s;t; of which we never owned our &s;elves members. Is not &s;uch a compul&s;ion cruelty? doubtle&s;s (if there be any cruelty in the world) this is &s;o.</P>
<P N="2">2. He runs to his old &s;hift, of joyning with a Church that hath &s;ome humane inventions in Wor&s;hip, a Mini&s;try that (for the main) preach the Go&s;pel, with &s;ome mixture of Errors, not requiring per&s;ons to pra|cti&s;e that which is in it &s;elf evil&mdash;</P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. This hath been an&s;wered, as it relates to the Church of <HI>England,</HI> over and over. 'Tis an Argument our Animadverter hath lit|tle to &s;ay (for the defence of his Church) that is true; when we hear the &s;ame &s;tory &s;o oft, which (yet in a great mea&s;ure) is notoriou&s;ly fal&s;e, as if he had been brought up at the feet of old <HI>Battus,</HI> he &s;peaks exactly like him</P>
<Q><L>&mdash;&s;ubillis</L>
<L>Montibus inquit erant, &amp; erant &s;ub montibus illis.</L>
<L>Montibus inquit erant, &amp; erant &s;ub montibus illis.</L></Q>
<P>the &s;ame over and over, for fear of failing.</P>
<P>But 2dly, One Key will never fit every Lock, nor one An&s;wer &s;erv<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter"> to every Que&s;tion. Sir, the Query is not, what we may do with re&s;pect to a Church collap&s;ed (of which we before &s;pake) but whether it be not great folly for the People of God, who by their own voluntary con&s;ent were never members of &s;uch a Church, to joyn affinity with it in Wor|&s;hip, and attend upon its Mini&s;try, which none of the Texts of Scrip|ture produced by Mr. T. evince. <HI>Acts</HI> 21. 18, <HI>&amp;c.</HI> &amp; 16, 3. 1 <HI>Cor.</HI> 9. 19, 20, 21. give us an account of the readine&s;s of <HI>Paul</HI> to conde&s;cend to weak Believers, in what he lawfully might: <HI>Ergo</HI> it is our duty, for peace-&s;ake, to joyn with a Church which is not of the In&s;titution of Chri&s;t. Which con&s;equence when Mr. T. makes good, he will manife&s;t him&s;elf to be a man of rare abilities indeed. <HI>Mat.</HI> 17. 27. is &s;o remote
<PB N="150" REF="79"> to his purpo&s;e, that I wonder to what purpo&s;e he produceth it. Chri&s;t works a Miracle, to pay Tribute, exacted of the Emperours Collectors; <HI>Ergo,</HI> we mu&s;t not &s;eparate from a fal&s;e Church, but attend upon its Mini&s;try, joyn in affinity with it. How he will in his next cover the&s;e palpable mi&s;takes I know not, nor can I advi&s;e him to a better Apology than that</P>
<Q><HI>&mdash;Semel in&s;anivimus omnes.</HI></Q>
</DIV3>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="2" TYPE="chapter">
<HEAD>CHAP. II.</HEAD>
<DIV3 N="1" TYPE="section">
<HEAD>Sect. 1.</HEAD>
<ARGUMENT>
<P><HI>Of Sanctifying the Name of God in our drawing nigh to him. Of particulari|ties of Wor&s;hip and their Impo&s;ition. Of an implicite Faith in matters of Wor&s;hip. The first Argument in the</HI> S. T. <HI>again&s;t hearing the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters, vindicated. Of a Warrant by permi&s;&s;ion; and part accidental of In&s;tituted Wor&s;hip. Of</HI> Shaphan's <HI>reading the Law.</HI> 2 Chr. 34. 18. Joh. 8. 47. <HI>explained. The unlawfulne&s;s of practi&s;ing any thing in In&s;ti|tuted Wor&s;hip, for which we have no warrant in the Scripture. Whether Christ hath only revealed the e&s;&s;entials of Wor&s;hip, and left accidental Parts thereof to be determined by the prudence of Rulers. The ri&s;e of Ceremonies.</HI> Col. 2. 8, 9, 10. <HI>explained. Of the Scriptures perfection. The Te&s;timonies of the Ancients.</HI> Jo&s;h. 22. 34. <HI>explained.</HI></P>
</ARGUMENT>
<P>THe Preface of the <HI>S. T.</HI> being vindicated from the exceptions of Mr. T. wherein his skirmi&s;hings have been manife&s;ted to be velitary, and weak indeed: We attend his advance and on-&s;et upon the <HI>Triarii,</HI> or main Battel (as he phra&s;eth it) again&s;t which let him do his wor&s;t, after all his endeavours to rout it, he will find it keeping the field again&s;t him.</P>
<Q>Statque ut dura &s;ilex, aut ut Marpe&s;&s;ia cautes.</Q>
<P>The fir&s;t thing he takes notice of is, a &s;aying of mine, in the begin|ning of <HI>Chap.</HI> 1. of the <HI>S. T.</HI> That <HI>God having &s;aid he will be &s;anctified in all that draw nigh to him.&mdash;It's therefore the nece&s;&s;ary duty of Saints in all their approaches to God, to &s;ee to his In&s;titution, both in re&s;pect of the matter and manner of Wor&s;hip.</HI> To which he &s;ubjoyns, <HI>This is yielded,</HI>
<PB N="151" REF="79"> <HI>with re&s;pect to determined particularities, but as to &s;uch as are undeter|mined by the Lord, there may be too anxious care, tending to be get &s;cruples, perplexities, divi&s;ions,&mdash;which experience hath proved, to cau&s;e fluctuating in mens minds, incon&s;tancy in their practice.&mdash;And its therefore advi&s;e|able, that people of weak judgements did &s;atisfie them&s;elves in the&s;e things, in the judgement of their faithful, learned, wi&s;e, and holy Teachers and Rulers.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> Bravely &s;poken, had it been at <HI>Rome,</HI> our Engli&s;h &s;tomachs can &s;carce away with &s;uch Coleworts.</P>
<Q>O dura Me&s;&s;orum ilia!</Q>
<P N="1">1. The Animadverter all along takes for granted, that which we expre&s;ly told him, <HI>Chap.</HI> 5. 7. of the <HI>S. T.</HI> pag. 41, 62. we denied, <HI>viz. That there are any circum&s;tances, or particularities of Wor&s;hip, relating to it, as &s;uch, undetermined by the Lord.</HI> 2dly. Under the notion of parti|cularities of Wor&s;hip undetermined, he &s;hrouds the many Popi&s;h toyes, and Antichri&s;tian inventions, (as Cro&s;s in Bapti&s;m, Ring in Marriage, Surplice&mdash;) yet retained in the Church of <HI>England.</HI> The&s;e he would not have per&s;ons too careful about. But &s;eriou&s;ly Sir, tho&s;e that know the Lord, know him to be a jealous God, and that he hath manife&s;ted his jealou&s;ie, in &s;uch terrible rebukes, again&s;t &s;ome of the &s;ons of men (as <HI>Nadab</HI> and <HI>Abihu,</HI> Levit. 10. 1, 2. <HI>&V;zza,</HI> 2 <HI>Sam.</HI> 6. 6, 7. whom he &s;lew in his fury, for their Wor&s;hipping him otherwi&s;e than he had determined) that be they never &s;o weak, they tremble (and ab|hor) to draw nigh to God, in a way they have no Scripture-warrant for. 3dly. They de&s;ire to be &s;atisfied in the authority of the Children of men, in their attempts to impo&s;e upon their Con&s;ciences, and make tho&s;e things the nece&s;&s;ary parts of Wor&s;hip, which they them&s;elves acknowledge, Chri&s;t hath left as particularities undetermined. 4thly. They would al&s;o be directed by Mr. T. to tho&s;e faithful, learned, wi&s;e, and holy Teachers, he &s;peaks of, for they can find few, or none &s;uch, in a whole County. And yet 5thly, One thing more they would be &s;atisfied in, Whether an implicite Faith in matters of Wor&s;hip, be any more tolerable and ju&s;tifiable than in matters of Doctrine: And whether this will ever be a &s;atisfactory an&s;wer to their mighty Sove|reign, the Lord of Ho&s;ts, when he &s;hall demand of them, <HI>Who hath re|quired this at your hands?</HI> Why, truth Lord, we never read that thou did&s;t ever do &s;o; but our faithful&mdash;Teachers told us we might, yea ought notwith&s;tanding to practi&s;e the&s;e things, and believe it will never be accepted as &s;uch. 6thly. His &s;currilous reflections they can freely pardon, though they know that the brood of <HI>Ranters, &amp;c.</HI>
<PB N="152" REF="80"> (he &s;peaks of) have not been produced by the inqui&s;itivene&s;s of any after the mind of God, with re&s;pect to In&s;tituted Wor&s;hip; but per&s;ons taking up, with &s;uch &s;light thoughts of the Wor&s;hip of the Holy God, as &s;uch expre&s;&s;ions, as the&s;e u&s;ed by him, are apt enough to beget in the minds of men, together with the in&s;tability and incon&s;tancy of per|&s;ons, whom they have (it may be) owned as their Teachers and Ru|lers; being ready to imbrace and &s;hake hands with whatever is upper|mo&s;t in the world: labouring to &s;upport, uphold, and draw others, to the imbracement of that now, which not long ago they Prayed, Prea|ched again&s;t, and with hands and eyes lift vp to Heaven, they &s;wore to &s;eek (to the uttermo&s;t of their power) to root out, and demolli&s;h. Sir, the&s;e things are &s;ome of tho&s;e occa&s;ions (through the &s;ubtilty of Satan, and the corruption of mans nature) of that <HI>Ra<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">ti&s;m, Athei&s;m, &amp;c.</HI> that is in the world. And ble&s;&s;ed be the Lord, the Congregati|ons of his People, have been but little emptied hereby; they are a brood i&s;&s;uing, for the mo&s;t part, out of the Womb of the Church of <HI>England,</HI> and are &s;uch (as it's known) that little enquired into the&s;e matters, taking all for Go&s;pel that their Preachers taught them.</P>
<P>The next attempt of the Animadverter, is the exatnination of the Arguments advanced in the <HI>S. T.</HI> again&s;t hearing the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters of <HI>England.</HI> The fir&s;t is,</P>
<P><HI>That which there is no warrant for in the Scripture, (<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">eing part of In|&s;tituted Wor&s;hip) is not lawful for the Saints to practi&s;e: But there is no warrant in the Scripture for hearing the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters (and Heariug is part of In&s;tituted Wor&s;hip.) Therefore&mdash;</HI></P>
<P>To which he an&s;wers, <HI>Sect.</HI> 2. <HI>Chap.</HI> 1. <HI>The &s;um is. There is a Twofold Warrant, by Command, or by Permi&s;&s;ion. Of In&s;tituted Wor&s;hip there are two Parts.</HI> 1. <HI>E&s;&s;ential, without which it is not, or is not rightly called In&s;tituted Wor&s;hip.</HI> 2. <HI>Accidental, which may be pre&s;ent, or ab&s;ent, and yet the Wor&s;hip be, or righteou&s;ly be &s;o called: If the</HI> Major <HI>be meant of War|rant by Command, and part accidental of In&s;tituted Wor&s;hip, it is denied; and &s;o is the</HI> Minor. <HI>Hearing the Word from this or that per&s;on, is a part accidental of In&s;tituted Wor&s;hip, undetermined, and hath a warrant by Per|mi&s;&s;ion as being not contrary to any Precept or Rule in Scripture about &s;uch Wor&s;hip.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. This Animadverter continues &s;till his old trade of beg|ging, and dictating without proof, which doth not become him; and being in matters wherein our &s;ouls are &s;o nearly concerned, we cannot bear it in him.</P>
<P N="1">1. He te<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">ls us, <HI>That with re&s;pect to In&s;tituted Wor&s;hip, there is a twofold</HI>
<PB N="153" REF="80"> <HI>warrant, by Command, or by Permi&s;&s;ion;</HI> but would he had thought it incumbent upon him, to have proved, what he a&s;&s;erted. This we deny. Whatever hath not a warrant of Command in the Scripture is plainly interdicted, and forbidden therein, <HI>Deut.</HI> 4. 2. &amp; 12. 32. <HI>Rev.</HI> 22. 18. puni&s;hed with no le&s;s than death upon tho&s;e that have adventured to act exorbitantly, without &s;uch a warrant, as we but now manife&s;ted.</P>
<P>2dly. He tells us, <HI>That there are two Parts of In&s;tituted Wor&s;hip, E&s;|&s;ential,</HI> and <HI>Accidental;</HI> but this al&s;o is fal&s;e, and untrue, we expect his proof of it. A part Accidental of In&s;tituted Wor&s;hip, is a &s;ort of gibberi&s;h (that as it is un&s;criptural &s;o) it is little le&s;s than down-right-non&s;ence. <Q>In&s;tituted Wor&s;hip is &s;uch Wor&s;hip as is appointed by command from Chri&s;t, or that is by Chri&s;ts in&s;titution, &s;aith Mr. <HI>T.</HI> (in an&s;wer to the Preface of <HI>S.</HI> T. <HI>Sect.</HI> 2.)</Q> How any part of in&s;ti|tuted Wor&s;hip, can be an accidental part <HI>i. e.</HI> &s;uch a part of Wor&s;hip, (as though enjoyned by Chri&s;t, which if it be not, it is not in&s;tituted) as may be done, or not done, without &s;in, I mu&s;t profe&s;s I under&s;tand not. And de&s;ire Mr. T. would inform me (not in a Dictator-like way, as if he were a &s;econd <HI>Pythagoras,</HI> but) from Scripture-evidence. And le&s;t he &s;hould mi&s;take, this is that which is incumbent upon him to prove, <HI>That a part of in&s;tituted Wor&s;hip</HI> (which is a Wor&s;hip commanded by Chri&s;t) <HI>may be accidental,</HI> i. e. performed, or not performed without &s;in.</P>
<P>3dly, <HI>That hearing the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters of England preach the Doctrines and Traditions of men</HI> (as he mu&s;t do at &s;ome time or other, that con|&s;tantly attends on their Mini&s;try) <HI>or</HI> (according to <HI>Mr. T.) the Word of God, hath Warrant in Scripture by permi&s;&s;ion, as being not contrary to any Precept about Wor&s;hip,</HI> is another dictate of his, that he will make good <HI>ad Graecas Calendas.</HI> 'Tis true the Light of Nature dictates, That God is to be heard by whom&s;oever he &s;peaks; and 'tis as true, that God ha|ving in&s;tituted Officers of his own, none are to be heard, as &s;peaking in his Name, by virtue of an office-power, but tho&s;e that are &s;o in&s;tituted by him: for if we may hear any one, what need of &s;uch an in&s;titution?</P>
<P>That hearing them is contrary to Scripture-Rule, we demon&s;trate in the &s;ub&s;equent Chapters in <HI>S. T.</HI> What <HI>Mr. T.</HI> further offers in this matter is nothing to the purpo&s;e. <HI>God commanded the Levites to read the Law,&mdash;</HI>Deut. 31. 9.<HI>&mdash;Yet</HI> Shaphan <HI>reads it before</HI> Jo&s;iah, 2 Chron. 34. 18. <HI>which was an accidental part of Wor&s;hip warranted by permi&s;|&s;ion.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. The reading of the Law by <HI>Shaphan,</HI> was not an accidental part of Wor&s;hip warranted by permi&s;&s;ion (which Mr. <HI>T.</HI> doth ill &s;o
<PB N="154" REF="81"> impo&s;e upon us) it was commanded, <HI>Deut.</HI> 6. 6, 7, 8, 9. and 11. 18.</P>
<P>2dly. Had <HI>Shaphan</HI> acted therein as a Church-officer (as is the ca&s;e of the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters) it had been his &s;in, and utterly unlawful for any one to have attended on him in &s;o doing. <HI>Luke</HI> 10. 16. hath been con&s;idered in our An&s;wer to Mr. <HI>T.</HI> his Exceptions again&s;t the Pre|face of the <HI>S. T. Sect.</HI> 2. where we have manife&s;ted, That the Spirit of the Lord, in it, lifts up him&s;elf again&s;t what Mr. <HI>T.</HI> endeavours to &s;up|port by it. Nor doth <HI>John</HI> 8. 47. communicate the lea&s;t mite of a&s;&s;i&s;t|ance to his a&s;&s;ertion. 'Tis expre&s;ly and particularly &s;poken with rela|tion to Chri&s;t. The <HI>Jews</HI> brag'd that they <HI>were Abrahams Children, ver&s;.</HI> 39. Chri&s;t labours to drive them out of that hold, <HI>Ver&s;.</HI> 39, 40, by manife&s;ting to them, that <HI>they did not the works of Abraham.</HI> They tell him, <HI>that God was their Father, Ver&s;.</HI> 41. He labours to convince them of the contrary; and among&s;t other things a&s;&s;erts that general <HI>Apho|ri&s;m, Ver&s;.</HI> 47. <GAP DESC="foreign">, <HI>He that is of God</HI> (i. e. <HI>He that is born of God</HI> (as 'tis <HI>John</HI> 1. 13.) <GAP DESC="foreign">, <HI>heareth Gods Words, (i. e.</HI> &s;ubjects, conforms to, obeys them) <HI>q. d.</HI> If ye were of God as ye &s;ay, ye would believe, obey the Word of God, that I the Son of God, the great Prophet of the Church preach to you; <HI>Ergo,</HI> Its lawful to hear Gods Word who ever brings it, <HI>i. e.</HI> attend upon any Mini&s;try, though of evil Spirits, unclean Frogs, that come out of the mouth of the <HI>Dragon, Bea&s;t, and fal&s;e Prophet,</HI> Rev. 16. 13.</P>
<Q><HI>&mdash;quod erat demon&s;trandum.</HI></Q>
<P>The Apo&s;tle &s;eems to be of another mind, 1 <HI>John</HI> 4. 5, 6.</P>
<P>The next attempt of the Animadverter, <HI>Sect.</HI> 3. is to di&s;&s;ipate, what we offer for the confirmation of the <HI>Major</HI> Propo&s;ition, <HI>vi<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">. That 'tis not lawful to practi&s;e any thing, being part of instituted Wor&s;hip, for which we have no warrant in the Scripture.</HI></P>
<P>This I &s;ay is evident, 1. From the nature of in&s;tituted Wor&s;hip, which con&s;i&s;ts in this, that it be of divine Revelation.<HI>&mdash;This is true</HI> &s;aith he, <HI>of e&s;&s;ential, not of accidental parts of in&s;tituted Wor&s;hip.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. But we deny that there are any accidental parts of in&s;tituted Wor&s;hip; for if in&s;tituted <HI>(i. e.</HI> commanded by Chri&s;t) it cannot be accidental <HI>(i. e.</HI> left to our liberty as what may or <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">ay not be done without &s;in.) If accidental, it may be a part of &s;omewhat el&s;e, but of the in&s;tituted Wor&s;hip of Chri&s;t it cannot be. And this was in effect told Mr. T. in <HI>S. T.</HI> but he is wi&s;e and re&s;olves to take no notice of what he &s;ees he is not able to make &s;ome kind of reply or other to! His di&s;|cour&s;e
<PB N="155" REF="81"> of <HI>Jeho<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">akims</HI> hearing <HI>Jehudi,</HI> read the Roll, is not at all perti|nent: what may be thought to be of weight in it, is already an&s;wered in the ca&s;e of <HI>Shaphans</HI> reading the Law, but now replied to.</P>
<P>2dly, From the Verdict of Chri&s;t, who pronounceth all the Wor&s;hip of man to be vain and fruitle&s;s (and &s;o unlawful) that is bottomed on any thing but divine Revelation, <HI>Mar.</HI> 7. 7. To which he an&s;wers, <Q>This is true of tho&s;e Actions in which the Wor&s;hip of God is pla|ced.</Q></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> Very good: in hearing the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters, Mr. T. &s;uppo|&s;eth the Wor&s;hip of God to be placed; Let him produce an In&s;titution for his &s;o doing, or, his Wor&s;hip (by his own confe&s;&s;ion) is vain, &s;inful, unlawful. So that to what follows we need not &s;ay any thing.</P>
<P>The hearing the Law of God read, was a part of Wor&s;hip, but whe|ther in the Synagogue, or in their own Hou&s;es, was not &s;o; it related not to Wor&s;hip as &s;uch at all, being nothing but what was common to other actions, to be performed by them in a Community. Circum|&s;tances of Wor&s;hip [as &s;uch] undetermined by the Lord, to be ap|pointed by men, we deny, and chalenge Mr. T. to make good. The&s;e circum&s;tances are &s;uch as without which the Wor&s;hip of God is perfect or tis not; if the fir&s;t, we need them not, they are vain, fruitle&s;s, having without them a perfect Wor&s;hip. If the &s;econd, the Wor&s;hip God hath commanded, as it comes out of his hands, without humane additaments is imperfect; but this is little le&s;s than bla&s;phemy.</P>
<P>We a&s;&s;ert, 3dly. If it be lawful to conform to any one part of in&s;ti|tuted Wor&s;hip, without warrant from the Scripture; 'Tis al&s;o lawful to conform to another, a third, the whole. This is granted &s;aith Mr. T. and therein hath he yeelded the matter in controver&s;ie. 'Tis no more lawful to conform to any one part of in&s;tituted Wor&s;hip, without war|rant from the Scripture, than 'tis to conform to the whole (as our Animadverter grants) but no man in his witts will &s;ay 'tis lawful to conform to the whole of In&s;tituted Wor&s;hip, without Warrant from Scripture; Therefore.&mdash;</P>
<P>But I add in <HI>S. T.</HI> That the a&s;&s;erting it lawful to conform to the whole of In&s;tituted Wor&s;hip, without warrant from Scripture, is the rea|dy way to bani&s;h In&s;tituted Wor&s;hip out of the World. This Mr. <HI>T.</HI> denies for this rea&s;on, <HI>The</HI> Phari&s;ees <HI>ob&s;erved many Traditions from the Elders,</HI> Mar. 7. 3, 4. <HI>but this did not bani&s;h the In&s;tituted Wor&s;hip of the Pa&s;&s;over out of the world.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w. Egregie dictum,</HI> and as became &s;uch a Doctor!</P>
<P>For, 1&s;t, The many Traditions they practi&s;ed from the Elders,
<PB N="156" REF="82"> were but a part of their Religious Ob&s;ervances, not the whole.</P>
<P>2dly, Had they practi&s;ed nothing as a part of their in&s;tituted Wor|&s;hip, but what they had received by Tradition from them, they mu&s;t mo&s;t a&s;&s;uredly have bani&s;hed the truly In&s;tituted Wor&s;hip of the Lord out of the world; which except revealed by him, is not his in&s;tituted Wor&s;hip, nor can it properly be &s;o called.</P>
<P>We affirm, 4thly, That to a&s;&s;ert, it is lawful to conform <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">o any part of in&s;tituted Wor&s;hip, without warrant from the Scripture, reflects &s;ad|ly upon the wi&s;dom, and faithfulne&s;s of Chri&s;t; for either he was not wi&s;e enough to fore&s;ee, that &s;uch a part of Wor&s;hip was, or would be requi&s;ite, or had not faithfulne&s;s enough to reveal it: though the Scripture compares him to <HI>Mo&s;es</HI> for faithfulne&s;s, who revealed the whole will of God, to the making of a pin in the Tabernacle.</P>
<P>Mr. <HI>T.</HI> replies, <HI>It was neither for want of wi&s;dom, nor faithfulne&s;s in Chri&s;t: he did fore&s;ee what parts of Wor&s;hip were and &s;hould be requi&s;ite, and what parts were e&s;&s;ential and nece&s;&s;ary to be ob&s;erved, were determined in Scrip|ture; as for accidental things, they were left to the prudence and authority chiefly of Rulers,</HI> (Who told him &s;o? This canting he &s;urely learned of the <HI>Romi&s;h Cabal.) Chri&s;t was faithful, in that he revealed what was his Fathers will in Spirituals, but for Externals appointed but a few things, and left the re&s;t to be ordered under general Rules, as it &s;hould be found conveni|ent in after times.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. The&s;e are Mr. T. his dictates, of which you mu&s;t expect his proofs when he hath greater lei&s;ure; but in the mean while no man can rea&s;onably be blamed, if he refu&s;e to &s;ub&s;cribe to them.</P>
<P>2dly, If Chri&s;t hath determined what parts of wor&s;hip are e&s;&s;ential, and nece&s;&s;ary to be ob&s;erved, as he grants, this part of the Controver&s;ie is at an end, and mu&s;t be by him acknowledged to be &s;o, till he have proved,</P>
<P><HI>Fir&s;t,</HI> That there are accidental parts of In&s;tituted Wor&s;hip.</P>
<P><HI>Secondly,</HI> That unnece&s;&s;ary trifles may be added to the e&s;&s;ential and nece&s;&s;ary parts of Wor&s;hip, as parts thereof.</P>
<P><HI>Thirdly,</HI> That what Chri&s;t thought not nece&s;&s;ary to be ob&s;erved, is nece&s;&s;ary to be ob&s;erved, becau&s;e men think &s;o.</P>
<P>But 3dly, Would Mr. <HI>T.</HI> would direct us, to the place where Chri&s;t hath granted that power to the Rulers (or any el&s;e) to add what they &s;hall judge convenient to his Wor&s;hip, he being Head of his Body, the Church, and King of Saints, we &s;uppo&s;e he will not have the confidence to a&s;&s;ert; they may do this without his leave (the doing &s;o being a plain u&s;urpation of his Throne and Kingly Authority.) I have read
<PB N="157" REF="82"> over the New Te&s;tament more than once, and mu&s;t profe&s;s, I find not the lea&s;t intimation of any &s;uch thing therein, but the contrary.</P>
<P>4thly. We do not under&s;tand how Chri&s;t could be faithful, if he re|vealed only what was his Fathers will in Spirituals, and neglected to do &s;o, with re&s;pect to Externals (as Mr. <HI>T.</HI> intimates) when he was to reveal the whole will of his Father to his Church, and for that end came into the world, <HI>John</HI> 1. 18. <HI>Heb.</HI> 1. 2.</P>
<P>Nor 5thly, Can we conceive, how it con&s;i&s;ts with the wi&s;dom of Chri&s;t to leave it to men (the greate&s;t and wi&s;e&s;t of them) to deter|mine what is fit and convenient to be added to his Wor&s;hip; becau&s;e nothing is more evident, than that they are incompetent Judges hereof. Their folly herein being frequently remarked in the Scripture. <HI>Jerobo|am</HI> thinks it convenient that the People wor&s;hip at <HI>Dan</HI> and <HI>Bethel,</HI> and that they have golden Calves, as vi&s;ible repre&s;entations of that God whom they wor&s;hipped. <HI>Ahaz</HI> thinks it decent and convenient, that a &s;tately Altar, (the pattern whereof he had &s;een at <HI>Dama&s;cus)</HI> be &s;et up by the Altar of the Lord that was at <HI>Jeru&s;alem,</HI> which things were the provocation of the eyes of his glory. The truth is, the wretched ad|ditaments of the Sons of men to the Wor&s;hip of Chri&s;t, owe their ori|ginal to this one abominable figment of Mr. <HI>T. That what is by men thought convenient, in the Wor&s;hip of Chri&s;t, is left to be ordered by them.</HI> In the Papacy, <HI>Holy Water</HI> is by Pope <HI>Alexander</HI> thought to be convenient to be re&s;erved in Temples, to &s;anctifie the People, and drive away De|vils; So is the Dedication of Temples by Pope <HI>Higinus:</HI> That all of ripe years, do every <HI>Ea&s;ter</HI> receive the Sacrament, by Pope <HI>Zephirinus.</HI> That Prie&s;ts Stand when the Go&s;pel is read, by Pope <HI>Ana&s;tatius:</HI> The Letany, by Pope <HI>Gregory:</HI> Confirmation of the Baptized, by <HI>Clemens</HI> (as 'tis &s;aid:) (though many of the&s;e things are antedated, and a&s;cri|bed, as to their Original, to per&s;ons that would have abhorred them. <HI>Scultetus Med. Patr. p.</HI> 1. <HI>l.</HI> 11. <HI>c.</HI> 10. &s;aith, <HI>Of all the Epi&s;tles of the fir&s;t Popes, no man that reads them attentively, but acknowledgeth them to be for|ged. The Epi&s;tles Decretal which pa&s;s under the Names of</HI> Clement, <HI>&amp;c. are all forged, and that for &s;ix Rea&s;ons,</HI> &s;aith <HI>Perkins.</HI> The like &s;aith Dr. <HI>Prideaux</HI> in his 9^t^h <HI>Orat. de P&s;eudoepigraphis, Sect.</HI> 3.) The Celebration of the Ma&s;s upon the Altar, by <HI>Xistus</HI> (or <HI>Sixtus:)</HI> The Di&s;tinction of Pari&s;hes by <HI>Diony&s;ius,</HI> with a command to Preachers to keep within their Bounds. The &s;inging the Creed, by Pope <HI>Marcus:</HI> The <HI>Glory to the Father,</HI> to be &s;aid after the <HI>P&s;alms:</HI> And the Order of <HI>Queri&s;ters</HI> or <HI>Sing|ing-Men,</HI> by Pope <HI>Dama&s;us:</HI> The Dedication of Churches by Bi&s;hops, by <HI>Foelix:</HI> Pope <HI>Stephen</HI> the 7^t^h thinks it convenient to Degrade all that
<PB N="158" REF="83"> had taken Orders from P. <HI>Formo&s;us,</HI> &amp; he him&s;elf gives them new ones. <HI>John Sicco</HI> the Succe&s;&s;or of <HI>Silve&s;ter, an.</HI> 1003 makes a Decree, that the election of the Roman Popes, &s;hould belong only to the Roman Clergy, without the con&s;ent of the People; becau&s;e the People are to be led, and not followed: he e&s;tabli&s;heth the Fea&s;t of <HI>All Souls.</HI> P. <HI>Urban An.</HI> 1096, ordained, That no Clergy or Layman &s;hould eat Fle&s;h from <HI>Shrovetide</HI> to <HI>Ea&s;ter. Innocent</HI> the third, ordained <HI>Tran&s;ub&s;tantiatio<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">:</HI> yea the Fathers of the Council of <HI>Con&s;tance,</HI> publi&s;h a Decree in the&s;e words, <Q>Although Chri&s;t after Supper hath in&s;tituted and admini&s;tred to his Di&s;ciples this venerable Sacrament, under both kinds, of Bread and Wine; yet notwith&s;tanding, the Authority of the &s;acred Ca|nons, the laudable and approved cu&s;tom of the Church, hath ob&s;erved, and doth ob&s;erve, that this Sacrament ought not to be fini&s;hed after Supper, nor admini&s;tred under both kinds&mdash;and &s;eeing this cu&s;tom hath been according to rea&s;on brought in, and a long time ob&s;erved by the Church and holy Fathers, it is to be held for a Law. <HI>Concil. Const. Se&s;&s;.</HI> 3.</Q></P>
<P>And if the ca&s;e be &s;o with us, as is &s;ugge&s;ted by this Animadverter, 'tis not to be thought that our condition is in the lea&s;t better'd by the removing the carnal ordinances of the Jews, 'tis by many degrees wor&s;e than theirs. They had a &s;tinted number of Ceremonies, of the in&s;titu|tion of the Lord: We have an innumerable company of the devi&s;ing of man, nor any &s;ecurity, but we may have a thou&s;and more: for if <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="2 letters">e Rulers &s;hall judge them convenient, they may ordain them, and we are bound to &s;ubmit unto them, if <HI>Mr. T.</HI> his Doctrine be true. But ble&s;&s;ed be the Lord, things are far otherwi&s;e: Chri&s;t hat<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter"> not broken the yoke of the Jewi&s;h ob&s;ervances off the necks of his Di&s;ciples, to have them become &s;uch &s;ervants of men as to &s;toop to every Theatri|cal and Ludicrous Ceremony (that under the notion of Conveniency) &s;hall be by them thought fit to be impo&s;ed on them. If he hath, let Mr. T. produce one Scripture in which he hath &s;o done; if not, we expect he manife&s;t &s;o much Chri&s;tian mode&s;ty, as to retract his over-confident A&s;&s;ertion, <HI>that Christ hath under general rules left what</HI> (relating to the externals of Wor&s;hip) <HI>was to be added, to be ordered as it &s;hould be found convenient in after-times.</HI></P>
<P>We further add in S. T. That 'tis not lawful for the Sa<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">nts, in mat|ters of In&s;tituted Wor&s;hip, to practi&s;e what there is no warrant for in the Scripture, becau&s;e &s;o to do (5thly) pours out contempt upon the care of God over the New-Te&s;tament-Churches (as if it were le&s;s to the&s;e, than to that under the Law) and the Oeconomy of the Go&s;pel,
<PB N="159" REF="83"> as not &s;o compleat as that of old; the whole of who&s;e Wor&s;hip, Or|ders and Ordinances (as was &s;aid) was bottom'd upon pure revelation.</P>
<P>To this &s;aith Mr. T. 1. <HI>This pours out no contempt upon the care of God over the New-Te&s;tament-Churches, as is before proved, in an&s;wer to the Pre|face, Sect.</HI> 20.</P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> What Mr. T. there dictates (for he proves little) we have already con&s;idered, and removed out of the way, in our reply there|unto. 2dly. He begs of us to yeeld him, <HI>that Circum&s;tantials of Wor|&s;hip, as &s;uch, are liable to variation, are not bottom'd upon pure revelation divine, but in many things left to humane prudence.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. But be he never &s;o importunately preca<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">ious herein, we cannot yeeld it him, but demand his proofs hereof, el&s;e we judge he &s;peaks injuriou&s;ly both to Chri&s;t, and Saints.</P>
<P>2dly. We cannot but demur a little upon that expre&s;&s;ion, <HI>pure re|velation divine,</HI> upon which he &s;aith the&s;e circum&s;tantials of Wor&s;hip are not bottom'd. I hope he doth not think his Antagoni&s;ts own any Revelation, but that which is Divine. Though as touching the Cere|monies, he is (under the notion of Circum&s;tantials) pleading for, they are not, indeed, built upon Revelation Divine, but Diabolical, diame|trically oppo&s;it to that which is Divine. The language whereof is, that nothing be offered up to God, but that which is of his own pre&s;cription.</P>
<P>3dly. <HI>In many things</HI> (he &s;aith) <HI>the&s;e Circum&s;tantials of Wor&s;hip are left to humane prudence.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. Would he had told us in what things; 2. Thought it in|cumbent upon him to prove his dictate. 3. Manife&s;ted how we might be able to di&s;cern (if an exect enumeration of particulars is not to be obtained) betwixt tho&s;e <HI>many</HI> that are left to humane prudence, and the <HI>&s;ome</HI> that are not. 4. Di&s;cover to us what &s;ecurity we have, that if a Prote&s;tant-Bi&s;hop&mdash;impo&s;e on us &s;ome of the Rites and Ceremo|nies of the Church of <HI>Rome,</HI> under the notion of Circum&s;tantials and Ac|cidentals of Wor&s;hip (though they are indeed &s;uch &s;trange accidentals, as were never heard-of in the world before, <HI>viz.</HI> &s;uch, as without which the Wor&s;hip mu&s;t not be performed) that if the Papi&s;ts &s;hould ever bear &s;way (which is not impo&s;&s;ible) his Holine&s;s the Pope &s;hall not im|po&s;e upon us all the re&s;t, (that are as yet behind the Curtain) upon the &s;ame pretentions.</P>
<P N="4">4. He tells us, <HI>'Tis an effect of God's love and care over the New-Te|&s;tament-Churches, that he hath not tied them in &s;o many things, to external rites&mdash;as he did the Jews.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> And we &s;ay &s;o too; but herein Mr. T. &s;peaks not pertinent|ly:
<PB N="160" REF="84"> The Que&s;tion is not, Whether the Lord's not tying us in &s;o many things, as he did the Jews, to external rites, be an effect of his care and love, or no, which we &s;ay it is: but whether it be con&s;i&s;tant with that his care and love, in delivering us from the&s;e, not to determine the whole of our Wor&s;hip, as he did determine the whole of theirs, but leave us to the wills, lu&s;ts and inventions of men, to be ordered and ruled by them according as they &s;hould think meet and convenient: Which when Mr. <HI>T.</HI> &s;hall think him&s;elf able to per&s;wade any, but the blind, when the Sun &s;hines in its &s;trength, that it is not day, he may attempt the proof of.</P>
<P N="5">5. He adds, <HI>The Occonomy of the Gospel is not le&s;s compleat than that of old, for this cau&s;e: This rea&s;oning if he under&s;tands the Apo&s;tle,</HI> Col. 2. 8, 9, 10. <HI>is either the &s;ame, or very like that of the Philo&s;ophical Judaizing-Teacher.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. But Mr. T. his A&s;&s;ertion is no proof. If the whole of the Wor&s;hip of the Jews was compleat without humane additaments (be|ing built upon <HI>pure Revelation)</HI> and ours be not compleat without many things, that are left to humane prudence to determine, relating to Wor&s;hip as &s;uch, ours is mo&s;t a&s;&s;uredly le&s;s compleat than theirs.</P>
<P>2dly. Mr. T. his abilities of under&s;tanding, I have little to &s;ay to, <HI>Bernardus non videt omnia.</HI> And he hath a &s;trange faculty of di&s;cerning, that can &s;ee our rea&s;oning to be the &s;ame, or much like to the rea&s;oning of the Judaizing Teachers, <HI>Col.</HI> 2. 8, 9, 10. 1&s;t. They di<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">puted for Jewi&s;h ob&s;ervances; we argue as well as we can again&s;t them. 2dly. They a&s;&s;erted that they were not, nor could be compleat without them; this we oppo&s;e, and affirm the contrary, That neither our Per&s;ons, or Wor&s;hip are, or can be any whit the more compleated by them, or any other Ob&s;ervances in the world, not in&s;tituted by Chri&s;t in the New-Te&s;tament. Mr. T. indeed a&s;&s;erts, <HI>that there are &s;ome Ceremonies left to be ordered by men, according as they &s;hall &s;ee convenient:</HI> Which is &s;ome|what like to the Doctrine of the&s;e Judaizing Teachers, which the Apo|&s;tle cautions the Church of <HI>Colo&s;&s;e</HI> again&s;t, v. 8. That by the <HI>Rudiments of the world</HI> is meant Jewi&s;h Ri<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">es, we may grant; the <GAP DESC="foreign">, or <HI>the Traditions of men,</HI> &s;eems to be &s;omewhat el&s;e, <HI>viz.</HI> humane Additions to Divine In&s;titutions, &s;uch as were tho&s;e among&s;t the Jews, that Chri&s;t calls <GAP DESC="foreign">, <HI>Mat.</HI> 15. 3, 6. which he interprets, <HI>v.</HI> 9. to be <GAP DESC="foreign">, <HI>the Commandments of men.</HI> Whether our rea|&s;oning, or the Animadverter's be more like that here of the Philo&s;ophi|cal Teachers, is left to the judgment of the Judicious to de<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">ermine.</P>
<P>3dly. How little to Mr. T. his purpo&s;e this Scripture-citation is, he
<PB N="161" REF="84"> already may di&s;cern, how much it makes again&s;t the grand De&s;ign he is labouring to advance, the propo&s;ing of one or two Arguments from it will fully evince.</P>
<P N="1">1. Tho&s;e Traditions and Rudiments that are not <GAP DESC="foreign">, <HI>after Christ, (i. e.</HI> according to the Doctrine and In&s;titution of Chri&s;t, which only ought to take place in the Church (as &s;ay our Annotators upon the place) are not to be complied with, but to be watched &amp; warred again&s;t, as &s;uch that do <GAP DESC="foreign">, lead us captive from Chri&s;t. But the Ru|diments Mr. T. pleads for, are &s;uch as are not <GAP DESC="foreign">, after the In|&s;titution of Chri&s;t (if they are, let Mr. <HI>T.</HI> produce the place where they are &s;o) Therefore&mdash;</P>
<P N="2">2. If the Church at <HI>Colo&s;&s;e</HI> was &s;o compleat in Chri&s;t that they need|ed not to &s;ubject (ought not to do &s;o) to the Jewi&s;h Rites, and Tradi|tions of the Elders; then much le&s;s need we to &s;ubject to the Rudi|ments of men, or any of the accur&s;ed Rites and Ceremonies of the Papacy. The&s;e Rites are much more weak and ab&s;urd than the former, as never being of the In&s;titution of the Lord, but the devi&s;ing and im|po&s;ing of his profe&s;t enemy. Therefore&mdash;</P>
<P>6thly. The A&s;&s;ertion, <HI>That it's lawful to practi&s;e any thing in In&s;ti|tuted Wor&s;hip, without warrant from Scripture,</HI> we &s;ay in <HI>S. T.</HI> reflects &s;adly upon its authority, and perfection, which is the next thing we affirm to evidence the truth of the major Propo&s;ition. This M. <HI>T.</HI> &s;aith is true, with re&s;pect to all Doctrinals of Faith, and Manners, and Wor|&s;hip, in re&s;pect of E&s;&s;entials, but not of Accidentals thereof, undeter|mined in the Scripture.</P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. The un&s;cripturalne&s;s, and vanity of that di&s;tinction we have already di&s;covered.</P>
<P>2ly. We had thought that the perfection of the Scripture, had con&s;i&s;t|ed in this, that the whole of that obedience, that God required of us, had therein been &s;tated and enjoyned; for which end we conceive it was at fir&s;t commanded to be written, and hitherto by the wonderful gracious providence of the Lord continued to us. The Accidentals of Wor&s;hip are either part of that Obedience we owe to God, or they are not. If not, how come they to be &s;uch parts of Wor&s;hip, as without them we are interdicted to perform it? or indeed, whence is it that we are tendring them up to God, when all our Wor&s;hip is nothing el&s;e but the &s;olemn tender of that Obedience that we owe to him: if they are, then there is &s;ome part of our Obedience, that is not pre&s;cribed in the Scripture; then is the Scripture imperfect, and that with re&s;pect to the main end for which it was given forth, <HI>viz.</HI> to indoctrinate and direct
<PB N="162" REF="85"> us in the whole of that Obedience that God requires of us (and <GAP DESC="foreign">, &s;aith <HI>Ari&s;totle, l.</HI> 2. <HI>de Coelo. c.</HI> 4.)</P>
<P>But this is contrary to 1. The te&s;timony and witne&s;s of the Spirit of God &s;peaking in the Scriptures, 2 <HI>Tim.</HI> 3. 15. <HI>Prov.</HI> 2. 1, 9. <HI>I&s;a.</HI> 8. 20. 2 <HI>Pet.</HI> 1. 19. <HI>Luke</HI> 1. 4. <HI>John</HI> 5. 39. &amp; 20. 31. 2 <HI>Cor.</HI> 4. 6. <HI>Luk<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter"></HI> 10. 26. &amp; 16. 29. <HI>Deut.</HI> 12. 8, 32. <HI>Prov.</HI> 30. 5. <HI>Mat.</HI> 22. 29. <HI>Gal.</HI> 1. 8. <HI>Eph.</HI> 2. 20. <HI>Heb.</HI> 4. 12. <HI>Rev.</HI> 22. 18. 2dly. To the Witne&s;s of many of the Worthies of the Lord in their day. <Q>The renowned <HI>Walden&s;es</HI> (or the Church of Chri&s;t in the Wilderne&s;s) &s;ome hundreds of years ago, declare and atte&s;t, that nothing is to be admitted in Religion but what only is commanded in the Word of God; that all mens Tradi|tions are to be rejected&mdash;and therefore this &s;inging and &s;uperfluous chanting in the Chancel to be left. It is nece&s;&s;ary and con&s;onant to rea&s;on, that every man learn that which is needful out of the Scrip|tures, both for the fulne&s;s of Godline&s;s, and le&s;t they be inured to hu|mane traditions, &s;aith <HI>Ba&s;il, Regul. contract.</HI> 95. pag. 502. God will ask no more of a Chri&s;tian Believer in this life, but only to obey the Precepts of that mo&s;t ble&s;&s;ed Law. If any Prelate of the Church re|quire more, or el&s;e any other kind of obedience than this to be u&s;ed, he contemneth Chri&s;t, exalting him&s;elf above God, and &s;o bec<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">meth an open Antichri&s;t, &s;aith the Lord <HI>Cobham</HI> in the Confe&s;&s;ion of his Faith, offered to <HI>Hen. the 5th,</HI> about the year 1413. <HI>Chry&s;o&s;tom</HI> calls them a mo&s;t exqui&s;ite rule, and exact &s;quare and ballance to try all things by. <HI>Augu&s;tine</HI> expounding <HI>Gal.</HI> 1. 8. &s;aith, <HI>If we, or an Angel from Heaven, declare unto you, either concerning Chri&s;t, or his</HI> Church, <HI>any other matter belonging to our Faith, or Life,</HI> any thing <HI>but that which you have received in the writings of the Law and the Go&s;pel, let him be accur&s;ed.</HI> Cont. Lit. Petilian. Don. l. 3. c. 6. &amp; <HI>de unitat. Eccle&s;.</HI> cap. 11. <HI>Et honos praeter mandatum est dedecus,</HI> God is di&s;honoured by that honour that is a&s;cribed to him beyond his own pre&s;cription, &s;aith <HI>Hierome.</HI></Q> Yea, 3dly, our Prote&s;tant Divines di&s;puting with the Papi&s;ts, about an univer&s;al Head of the Church, Cardinals, Purgatory, Ma&s;s, <HI>&amp;c.</HI> have ever thought this one good Argument again&s;t them, <HI>that they find them not commanded in the Scripture;</HI> and to a&s;&s;ert them needful, or lawful to be u&s;ed in the Church of Chri&s;t, they affirm to be derogatory to the perfection of the Scripture. Suppo&s;e a Papi&s;t <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">o &s;ay, 'Tis true the Scripture is perfect with re&s;pect to the e&s;&s;ential parts of Wor&s;hip, not &s;o with re&s;pect to Accidentals, &s;uch as are <HI>Cro&s;s, Spittle, Salt in Bapti&s;m, Holy Water, Pope, Cardinals, Cro&s;&s;es, &amp;c.</HI> What would Mr. T. an&s;wer hereunto? 'Tis a thou&s;and to one, but the &s;ame An&s;wer
<PB N="163" REF="85"> would &s;top his own mouth, in the reply to the Argument undertaken to be refuted by him. We add in <HI>S. T.</HI> as a further confirmation of the truth of the Propo&s;ition under debate,</P>
<P>7thly, That God condemns not only that which is done again&s;t the warrant and direction of the Word, but al&s;o that which is done be&s;ide it, <HI>Deut.</HI> 4. 2. &amp; 12. 32. <HI>Mat.</HI> 15. 9. <HI>Lev.</HI> 10. 1. <HI>Prov.</HI> 30. 6. <HI>Jer.</HI> 7. 31.</P>
<P>To which Mr. <HI>T.</HI> replies, 1. <HI>That the A&s;&s;ertion under&s;tood of Acciden|tals of In&s;tituted Wor&s;hip is fal&s;e.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w. 1st.</HI> Very good! It &s;eems then it is lawful to add, what we plea&s;e as accidental parts of in&s;tituted Wor&s;hip, for God no where condemns our doing &s;o. <HI>Altars, Candles, Crucifixes, Bapti&s;m with Spit|tle, Salt, &amp;c. Dedication of Churches to He-Saints, and She-Saints</HI> (with the In&s;cription of <HI>Laus Deo, S^t^a Helena,) of the Popes make; Bapti&s;m of Bells;</HI> the whole <HI>Farrago of Popi&s;h Inventions,</HI> may by Mr. <HI>T.</HI> his argu|ing, be introduced; for the&s;e are but Accidentals of Wor&s;hip, and no where expre&s;ly interdicted.</P>
<P><HI>Secondly,</HI> The Prote&s;tant Divines have ever thought this a &s;ufficient convincing Argument, again&s;t the&s;e fooleries of the <HI>Papi&s;ts,</HI> That Chri&s;t hath no where commanded them, therefore they may ju&s;tly re|ject them as unlawful; Chri&s;t being the alone Pa&s;tor, <HI>Eccl.</HI> 12. 11. Ma&s;ter, <HI>Mat.</HI> 23. 8, 10. Prophet of his Church, <HI>Acts&punc;</HI> 7. 37. Who &s;hall dare to &s;peak where he is &s;ilent, or can do &s;o without an open un|dervaluing and contempt of his Authority? 'Twere ea&s;ie to fill many Pages with citations of Prote&s;tants to this purpo&s;e; in who&s;e Writings nothing is more frequent than this, <Q><HI>Nihil &s;ine, nihil extra, nihil prae|ter, nihil ultra Divinam Scripturam admittendum e&s;&s;e. Peter Mar|tyr,</HI> on 2 <HI>Sam. cap.</HI> 6. <HI>pag.</HI> 212, 213, &s;aith; From this Hi&s;tory we may &s;ee, that the true Wor&s;hip of God (he &s;peaks of <HI>Uzzah's</HI> touching the Ark) is not to be deduced from the <HI>Pale&s;tines</HI> or <HI>Eth|nicks,</HI> but the Word of God. For God will be wor&s;hipped according to his own Prae&s;cript, not our Inventions.&mdash;But as touching what pertains to the Wor&s;hip of God, nothing is to be &s;ought without the Word of God. It went ill with <HI>Uzza,</HI> that he would imitate the <HI>Pa|le&s;tines;</HI> with <HI>Nadab</HI> and <HI>Abihu,</HI> that they would offer profane fire; with <HI>Ozias</HI> the King, that he would offer Incen&s;e in the Tabernacle, when he was neither Prie&s;t nor of the Tribe of <HI>Levi.</HI></Q></P>
<P>But <HI>Thirdly,</HI> The Scriptures produced, abundantly manife&s;t the truth of the A&s;&s;ertion; Let the judicious Reader &s;eriou&s;ly peru&s;e them, and they will lead him captive to the belief of it, <HI>Deut.</HI> 4. 2. &amp; 12. 32.
<PB N="164" REF="86"> <HI>Pro.</HI> 30. 6. Strictly interdict mans adding to the Word of God; which if it be not a condemnation of what is practi&s;ed in his Wor&s;hip, without any warrant from him, I mu&s;t confe&s;s I know not what is. Is not, <HI>You &s;hall &s;ign with the Cro&s;s in Bapti&s;m, kneel at the Sacrament, wear the Sur|plice, &amp;c.</HI> an adding to the Word of God, when he is altogethe<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter"> in the Scriptures &s;ilent in the&s;e matters? <HI>Mat.</HI> 15. 9. &s;peaks of the Inventi|ons of men, with re&s;pect to accidental parts of Wor&s;hip (as Mr. <HI>T.</HI> ac|counts them.) The e&s;&s;entials of Wor&s;hip, as praying, hearing, <HI>&amp;c.</HI> they had from the Lord, the&s;e things were not what Chri&s;t condemns in them, as <HI>the Doctrines of men;</HI> What was it then? Mr. <HI>T.</HI> in his <HI>Fer|mentum Phari&s;aeorum,</HI> on <HI>Mat.</HI> 15. 9. &s;hall an&s;wer for me. <Q>But in this place (&s;aith he) that which our Saviour objects to them is; That they &s;ought to e&s;tabli&s;h the Traditions of men,&mdash;chiefly that they taught men to ob&s;erve things, <HI>praeter Legem,</HI> be&s;ides the Law, in &s;tead of Gods Law, as the wa&s;hing of hands before meals, the wa&s;hing of Cups and Potts,&mdash;with many &s;uch like Traditions inve<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">ted by men.&mdash;And afterwards <HI>(Sect.</HI> 5.) tells us, That Bowings, Duckings, and &s;uch like Ge&s;tures, U&s;ages and Rites, invented by men to expre&s;s Humility, Devotion, and Reverence to God, he con|temns as Childi&s;h, Api&s;h, Theatrical, and ridiculous. And <HI>Sect.</HI> 7. he adds, That this <HI>teaching for Doctrine the Commandments of men,</HI> in|trencheth on Gods Prerogative, who is the only Law-giver to his Church, <HI>Jam.</HI> 4. 12. for his Wor&s;hip, and that with re&s;pect to the fa&s;hion, and way of Service. 'Tis an injuring God, while&s;t we con|ceive him to be &s;o childi&s;h, as to be affected with pomps and &s;hews, ge&s;tures and carnal Rites, which he never appointed. It oppo&s;eth Gods Word, his Law, his Go&s;pel: becau&s;e it brings in another Rule of Wor&s;hip than God's Law, <HI>viz.</HI> Tradition of Elders, Cu&s;tom, Example; contrary to <HI>Deut.</HI> 4. 2. <HI>Pro.</HI> 30. 6. It oppo&s;eth the mani|fe&s;tation of the clear light of the Go&s;pel, as &s;hadows, the light of the Sun: Look into the places where there is &s;o much preaching of Cere|monies, and Church-orders, and &s;uch a regular ob&s;ervation of them, as in places where the Cathedral and Canonical Preachers, and offici|ating Prie&s;ts do bear &s;way; there is little &s;piritual under&s;tanding, and lively feeling of the Doctrine and Grace of Chri&s;t, to be found. <HI>Sect.</HI> 8. with much more to the &s;ame purpo&s;e. <HI>Lev.</HI> 10. <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">. <HI>Jer.</HI> 7. 31.</Q> expre&s;ly a&s;&s;ert, that their &s;in lay in doing that which God com|manded them not, which had he done, it had been lawful. Let Mr. <HI>T.</HI> &s;hew where the offering of &s;trange fire was expre&s;ly forbidden, and he may be &s;uppo&s;ed to &s;ay &s;omewhat that is pertinent. Mr. <HI>Ain&s;worth,</HI>
<PB N="165" REF="86"> whom he cites on <HI>Lev.</HI> 10. 1. is again&s;t him; <HI>Strange fire,</HI> he tells us, <HI>is other fire than God hath &s;anctified on his Altar, fire not commanded&mdash;</HI>And the A&s;&s;embly upon the place &s;ay rightly, <HI>In God's Wor&s;hip his Command, not man's wit or will, must be our rule.</HI> The citation of <HI>Jo&s;h.</HI> 22. 34. 2 <HI>Chron.</HI> 20. 3. &amp; 30. 23. <HI>E&s;th.</HI> 9. 27, 31. by this Animadverter is im|pertinent. <HI>Jo&s;h.</HI> 22. 34. gives us an account of their building an Altar, but they expre&s;ly affirm it was not for burnt-offerings nor for Sacrifices; not for an Eccle&s;ia&s;tical, but a Civil u&s;e, <HI>v.</HI> 22, 23, 24, 26, 28. Had they built it for the Wor&s;hip of God, it had in the judgment of the whole Congregation of <HI>I&s;rael,</HI> been Rebellion again&s;t him, <HI>ver.</HI> 16. So that this Scripture, in&s;tead of &s;upporting, cuts the throat of his dying cau&s;e: nor can Mr. T. ever &s;atisfactorily an&s;wer this Argument. 'Tis great wickedne&s;s to commit a tre&s;pa&s;s again&s;t, to turn away from following, to rebel again&s;t the Lord: But the doing, or practi&s;ing any thing in his Wor&s;hip, be&s;ides what God hath enjoyned to be done, is, to com|mit a tre&s;pa&s;s again&s;t him, to turn away from following, to rebel again&s;t him. Therefore&mdash;</P>
<P>The <HI>Major</HI> no &s;ober Chri&s;tian will deny. The <HI>Minor</HI> is evident from <HI>v.</HI> 16, 18, 19. Nor will Mr. T. his old &s;hift of E&s;&s;ential and Accidental parts of Wor&s;hip &s;erve him in this ca&s;e. For, 1. The erection of an Altar, he &s;uppo&s;eth to be but an accidental part of Wor&s;hip. 2. He produceth this Scripture to prove the lawfulne&s;s of mens orders in, and about the Accidentals of In&s;tituted Wor&s;hip. As for his other Scriptures, 2 <HI>Chron.</HI> 30. 23. hath been already con&s;idered and an&s;wered in our An&s;wer to <HI>Prof. Sect.</HI> 5. 2 <HI>Chron.</HI> 20. 3. <HI>E&s;th.</HI> 9. 27, 31. &s;peak only of the Proclamation and Decree, or Purpo&s;e of the King and Peo|ple, to ob&s;erve and keep certain dayes unto the Lord, upon the account of &s;uch &s;ignal providences that the Lord had brought them under, where|in they judged he was calling them thereunto.</P>
<P>To what is added in <HI>S. T.</HI> touching the judgment of the Ancients, Mr. <HI>T.</HI> replies, but &s;o jejunely, that it de&s;erves not to be taken notice of. As for <HI>Cyprian's</HI> te&s;timony, 'tis full up to the matter in hand, the foundation upon which he dealt again&s;t the <HI>Aquarii,</HI> being no other than what we are pleading-for, that Chri&s;t alone is to be heard in matters of In&s;tituted Wor&s;hip (as Mr. T. will grant the Sacrament to be.) I &s;tand amazed at the confidence of the Animadverter, in a&s;&s;erting, that <HI>Beza</HI>'s words on <HI>Phil.</HI> 1. 1. are to be under&s;tood of things determined in the Scripture, when he expre&s;ly &s;peaks of giving the title of <HI>Bi&s;hop</HI> (for Polities &s;ake) peculiarly to him that did pre&s;ide in the A&s;&s;embly, whereof he tels us the Devil began to lay the fir&s;t foundation of <HI>Tyranny</HI>
<PB N="166" REF="87"> in the Church of God: and then he adds, <Q>Behold of how great mo|ment it is to decline from the Word of God, though but an hairs breadth, if it be but in giving titles peculiarly to per&s;ons, which are not &s;o given to them in the Scripture.</Q> And much more do I wonder if he did without blu&s;hing, write, that <HI>Luther</HI> is to be under&s;tood of Doctrines and Decrees, (if he oppo&s;e the&s;e to Church-Ceremonies, which if he do not, he yeelds his Cau&s;e) when he expre&s;ly &s;aith, he means, <HI>that nothing with re&s;pect to external Rites</HI> (which he calls <HI>Tradi|tions, and the mixing the Wor&s;hip of God with fooli&s;h Gewgaws) is to be taught, without the expre&s;s words of God for our warrant.</HI> 'Tis true, Dr. <HI>Whitakers</HI> words are meant of the Popi&s;h u&s;e of Oyl in their Sacra|ments; but the ground of his oppo&s;ing it, is plainly the &s;ame with that we are conte&s;ting about, <HI>viz.</HI> That nothing is to be added to the In&s;ti|tuted Wor&s;hip, as a part thereof, without warrant from the Scripture; for, &s;aith he, we acknowledge no Oyl, becau&s;e we read nothing of Oyl in the Scriptures. To the&s;e I &s;ay many may be added. Take a few in|&s;tances in&s;tead of many; <Q>What&s;oever things men find and fain, without the Authority and Te&s;timony of the Scripture, as if they were from Apo&s;tolical Tradition, are &s;mitten by the Sword of God, &s;aith <HI>Hierom, Comment in Hag. c.</HI> 2. And again, Men are (&s;aith he) &s;et to eat their meat without Salt, when they are commanded any thing that hath no reli&s;h from the Word; and to build without Hay and Stubble, like <HI>I&s;rael</HI> in <HI>Egypt,</HI> when they be not allowed &s;ome warrant out of the Scripture, which only can combine the matter of the work, and make the frame of the building &s;ure. And <HI>Chry&s;o&s;tom</HI> giveth a rea&s;on, why we mu&s;t take nothing from the Prelates, which is not <HI>clar&egrave;</HI> per&s;picuou&s;ly demon&s;trated from the Scriptures: for our Co|gitation halteth when the Word wanteth, which halting is &s;<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">n, be|cau&s;e we are bound to the <GAP DESC="foreign"> of a full per&s;wa&s;ion, even in in|different things and all.</Q> <HI>Chry&s;. in</HI> 1 <HI>Cor. Homil.</HI> 13. So the Churches of <HI>Helvetia,</HI> <Q>The univer&s;al Church of Chri&s;t hath fully explained in the Scriptures, whatever things appertain to &s;aving Faith, and to the informing the Life, rightly to plea&s;e God. To which that nothing may be added or dimini&s;hed, is di&s;tinctly commanded by the Lord. We judge therefore that from the&s;e Scriptures, true Wi&s;dom and Pie|ty is to be &s;ought. Al&s;o the Reformation and Government of the Church (which are with Mr. T. Adjuncts of Wor&s;hip) and the In|&s;titution of all duties of Piety. <HI>C.</HI> 1. <HI>Conf. Helvet. po&s;ter. in Harmon. Conf.</HI></Q> And tho&s;e famous Witne&s;&s;es of Chri&s;t, the <HI>Walden&s;es,</HI> &s;peak after the &s;ame rate: <HI>In hac enim (de Scriptur&acirc; &amp; ejus perfectione loquun|tur)</HI>
<PB N="167" REF="87"> <HI>quae ad Doctrinam, &amp; Sanctae Eccle&s;iae Di&s;ciplinam &amp; Gubernationem, ad &s;ingulos &amp; univer&s;os, in ordinario &s;alutis Mini&s;terio (unde &amp; vera fides exi&s;tit) nece&s;&s;aria &s;unt: Ea inquam, omnia plene omnino, &amp; quantum opus est, ut in eximio, artificioci&s;&s;imo&abque; Sancti Spiritus opere, in hac comprehen&s;ae &s;unt, &amp; conclu&s;a, qu&acirc; nec Angelus de Coelo ullus proferre aliquid certius po|test, &amp; &s;i adferret diver&s;um aliquid credi ei non deberet. Con&s;e&s;. Bohem. &s;eu Walden. in Harmo. Confe&s;.</HI> Which if Mr. <HI>T.</HI> will not, others will be|lieve, &s;peak home to the matter in hand.</P>
<P>The Declaration of the Congregational Elders, <HI>chap.</HI> 1. I own, and told Mr. <HI>T.</HI> as much as they &s;ay, in <HI>S. T.</HI> Circum&s;tances concerning the Wor&s;hip of God, &amp;c. common to humane actions and &s;ocieties, are to be ordered by the Light of Nature and Chri&s;tian prudence, as place, time of meetings, &amp;c. but they a&s;&s;ert not that Circum&s;tances of Wor|&s;hip, <HI>as &s;uch,</HI> are &s;o to be ordered, or to be practi&s;ed without warrant from Scripture, which is that we deny. Thus far of the <HI>Major</HI> Propo&s;i|tion of our fir&s;t Argument. His Exceptions to the <HI>Minor</HI> will receive a &s;peedy di&s;patch, of which in the next Section.</P>
</DIV3>
<DIV3 N="2" TYPE="section">
<HEAD>Sect. 2.</HEAD>
<ARGUMENT>
<P><HI>Hearing the Word part of In&s;tituted Wor&s;hip, proved. Mr.</HI> T. <HI>his Objection refelled. The Judgment of Mr.</HI> Burroughs <HI>in this matter. Hearing the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters, not warranted in the Scripture. Of the tendency of the Separation pleaded-for. Mr.</HI> T. <HI>a &s;elf-contradicter. Of declaring for, or against things, according to affection. The &s;aying of</HI> Hierome.</P>
</ARGUMENT>
<P>THe <HI>Minor</HI> Propo&s;ition of our fir&s;t Argument again&s;t Hearing, we &s;ay, con&s;i&s;ts of two parts. 1. <HI>That Hearing is part of In&s;tituted Wor&s;hip,</HI> which we proved by this Argument: <HI>That in which we wait upon God, in the way of an Ordinance, for the communication of good, beyond the vertue of any creature to conveigh, is part of In&s;tituted Wor&s;hip: But in the hearing the Word we thus wait upon God: Therefore&mdash;</HI></P>
<P>To which Mr. <HI>T.</HI> replies, 1. by way of conce&s;&s;ion. In &s;ome &s;en&s;e he grants Hearing to be part of In&s;tituted Wor&s;hip. But 2dly, if he takes not the Argument to be demon&s;trative, &s;ith there be many things, As Marriage, Eating, Drinking, <HI>&amp;c.</HI> in which we wait upon God in the way of an Ordinance for the communication of good beyond the vertue of any creature to convey to us, and yet are not parts of the In&s;titu|ted Wor&s;hip of God.</P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. But how &s;ophi&s;tically and ludicrou&s;ly doth he argue? The Argument is of Good Spiritual and Eternal, Mr. <HI>T.</HI> talks of Good Na|tural,
<PB N="168" REF="88"> Political, Temporary. If he will prove the Argumen<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">, not to be demon&s;trative, he mu&s;t prove, that that in which we wait upon God in the way of an Ordinance, for the communication of Spiritual and E|ternal Good, beyond the vertue of any creature to convey to us, is not part of In&s;tituted Wor&s;hip.</P>
<P N="2">2. Precious Mr. <HI>Burroughs</HI> &s;peaks fully to this Objection; <Q>When I am bu&s;ied in natural &amp; civil actions, there I mu&s;t profe&s;s that the&s;e things can do me no good without God; but I do not wait <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">pon God in an Ordinance for the conveyance of Natural good, beyond what God hath put into the creature; 'tis his ble&s;&s;ing with it, that God in the ordinary cour&s;e of his Providence, doth convey &s;uch natural or civil good in the u&s;e of tho&s;e creatures: But now when <HI>I</HI> come to hear his Word, I here come to wait on God in the way of an Ordinance, for the conveyance of &s;ome &s;piritual good, that this Ordinance hath not in it &s;elf, take it materially, but meerly as it hath an I<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">&s;titution in it, and is appointed by God for the conveyance of &s;uch and &s;uch things. God doth appoint meat to nouri&s;h me, and toge|ther with his Appointment, he hath given a natural power to meat to nouri&s;h my body; that, in an ordinary cour&s;e of Providence, is e|nough for the nouri&s;hment of my body: But now when I come to hear the Word, I mu&s;t look upon that, not only as a thing to work upon my &s;oul, and to &s;ave my &s;oul by, not as a thing that hath any ef|ficacy put into it, as the other hath, in a natural way; it is not in the nature of the thing that carries &s;uch a power in it, but it is the In&s;ti|tution of God, and the Ordinance of God in it.</Q></P>
<P>But I &s;ay, 3dly, Hearing the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters is not warranted in the Scriptures. This will be manife&s;ted when we come to th<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter"> ventila|ting and &s;canning tho&s;e places which u&s;ually are produced for the abet|ting the practice of &s;ome in this matter.&mdash;</P>
<P>To which Mr. <HI>T.</HI> &s;ubjoyns, 1. <HI>The Scripture warrants the hearing them, whilst they teach the Doctrine of Gods Word.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> When he &s;hews us where it doth &s;o, he will &s;ay &s;omewhat; till then, we are not bound to believe him: Every one that teacheth true Doctrine, we have proved, is not to be heard.</P>
<P>He adds 2. <HI>The Scripture forbids only the hearing fal&s;e Prophets,</HI> Mat. 7. 15. <HI>Antichri&s;ts,</HI> 1 John 2. 18. &amp;c.</P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. This A&s;&s;ertion is fal&s;e, as we have already manife&s;ted. 2. We have in <HI>S. T.</HI> chap. 6. proved the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters to be fal&s;e Prophets, and in our An&s;wer to Mr. <HI>T.</HI> his Exceptions to the Preface, Sect. 10.</P>
<PB N="169" REF="88">
<P> He &s;aith further, 3. <HI>Per&s;onal Exceptions against their entry into the Mini&s;try, or their &s;inful practices; or the ventilating the places produced for the abetting the practices of &s;ome in this matter, will not prove the Minor.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> But if we prove they act from an Antichri&s;tian Call, and that 'tis the mind of Chri&s;t we &s;hould not attend upon a Mini&s;try that &s;o acts: if we prove them guilty of &s;uch &s;inful practices, as Chri&s;t com|mands us to withdraw from per&s;ons that are guilty of them; if we de|mon&s;trate that there is not a word in Scripture to ju&s;tifie any in their practi&s;e of hearing them, the mo&s;t partially addicted Reader to the cau&s;e of the Church of <HI>England</HI> will acknowledge we have fully proved the unlawfulne&s;s of attending on its Mini&s;try. This we do chap. 2, 3, <HI>&amp;c.</HI> of <HI>S. T.</HI></P>
<P>The Argument drawn from <HI>Judas</HI> his preaching the Go&s;pel, we an|&s;wer ch. 10. of <HI>S. T.</HI> and we are unwilling <HI>actum agere.</HI></P>
<P>That the Separation pleaded-for tends to the undoing of men in their e&s;tates, we may thank &s;ome for, and this Animadver<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">er is not wanting to blow the coals. That it hinders the publick peace, is a papi&s;tical, wicked, and fal&s;e &s;ugge&s;tion, than which a more malicious one, could not have been invented by the Devil. That the furtherance of the Go&s;pel is thereby hindered, is mon&s;trou&s;ly fal&s;e. The aim and motive of the author of the <HI>S. T.</HI> in that Treati&s;e, and Mr. <HI>T.</HI> in this Reply, is known to the Lord, and may &s;hortly be more manife&s;tly di&s;covered then &s;ome would wi&s;h. And con&s;idering how he doth <GAP DESC="foreign">, contra|dict, and oppo&s;e now, what not many years agone he &s;o confidently pleaded for, I wi&s;h him to examine his heart, and to take heed he be not found <GAP DESC="foreign">. Who they are &s;peak for, or again&s;t things according to the affection they bear to men, I know not. And do heartily, wi&s;h they may be reduced from that evil cu&s;tom, trying, and proving things offered to them, by the Scriptures, whether they be &s;o, or not. I ap|prove of the &s;aying of <HI>Hierome,</HI> Epi&s;t. 152. <HI>Non juxta Pythagorae di&s;ci|pulos, praejudicata Doctoris opinio, &s;ed doctrinae ratio ponderanda e&s;t: omnia probate, quod bonum e&s;t tenete: Et e&s;tote probati nummularii, ut &s;i quis num|mus adulter e&s;t, et figuram Cae&s;aris non habet, nec &s;ignatus e&s;t, moneta publica reprobatur: quj autem Chri&s;ti faciem claro lumine praefert, in cordis no&s;tri mar&s;upium recondatur. Cur me lacerant amici mei, &amp; adver&s;um &s;ilentem cra&s;&s;ae &s;ues grunniunt? quarum omne &s;tudium e&s;t, imo &s;cientiae &s;upercilium aliena carpere, et &s;ic Veterum perfidiam defendere, ut perdant fidem &s;uam. Meum propo&s;itum e&s;t antiquos legere, probare &s;ingula, retinere quae bona &s;unt, et a fide Eccle&s;iae Catholicae non recedere;</HI> which &s;hould all practi&s;e, the &s;er|vice and ceremonies of the Church of <HI>England</HI> would &s;oon be return'd
<PB N="170" REF="89"> into her Mother's lap of <HI>Rome,</HI> from whence they were borrowed. Mr. <HI>T.</HI> promi&s;eth fair, he will &s;hew Scripture warrant (he &s;aith) for hearing the Mini&s;ters of <HI>England.&mdash;</HI>And I a&s;&s;ure him if he doth, I will do what penance, they &s;hall be plea&s;ed to impo&s;e on me (though it be to hear them, in a white &s;heet) for lifting up my pen again&s;t them; I only ad|vi&s;e Mr. <HI>T.</HI></P>
<Q>Ne impo&s;&s;ibilia captas.</Q>
</DIV3>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="3" TYPE="chapter">
<HEAD>CHAP. III.</HEAD>
<DIV3 N="1" TYPE="section">
<HEAD>Sect. 1.</HEAD>
<ARGUMENT>
<P><HI>The &s;econd Argument in</HI> S. T. <HI>vindicated from Mr.</HI> T. <HI>his Exceptions. Speaking the truth of the Go&s;pel, not the only con&s;ideration requi&s;ite to the Hearers to be re&s;pected in hearing. Mr.</HI> T. <HI>his &s;ix Rea&s;on an&s;wered. Christ forbids to hear others be&s;ides &s;uch as preach fal&s;hood. Saints fit to examine the office, &amp;c, of tho&s;e they hear. Of hearing &s;uch who are not in Office, nor gifted Brethren. The practice of the Bar<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">ans. The Scriptures not onely the Rule of the Doctrine we hear, but of the Per&s;ons whom we &s;hould hear. The Principle pleaded-for, no hindran<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">e of a mans edification, &amp;c. Of the old Apo&s;tolical Rule, of receiving <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">one without the Te&s;timonial of Brethren of known integrity in the Churches, &amp;c.</HI></P>
</ARGUMENT>
<P>IN his &s;econd Chap. Mr. T. attempts the confutation of the &s;econd Argument produced in <HI>S. T.</HI> to prove the unlawfulne&s;s of hearing the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters of <HI>England,</HI> the &s;um whereof is:</P>
<P><HI>If it be lawful to hear the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters, it is lawful to hear them, either as Mini&s;ters of the Go&s;pel, or as gifted Brethren: But it is not lawful to hear them, either as Mini&s;ters of the Go&s;pel, or as gifted Brethren. Therefore&mdash;</HI></P>
<P>The <HI>Major</HI> I took for granted, but this Animadverter is plea&s;ed to deny it, and that for a two fold Rea&s;on. 1. <HI>Becau&s;e the dis<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">unction is of terms not oppo&s;ite, but co-incident.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> Very good! It &s;eems then that Mini&s;ters of the Go&s;pel, and gifted Brethren, are terms co-incident: but this Mr. T. upon &s;econd thoughts will be a&s;hamed of. This is not the fir&s;t in&s;tance, that his <HI>Theodulia</HI> was writ in ha&s;te, and requires a review. 'Tis true, every
<PB N="171" REF="89"> Mini&s;ter of the Go&s;pel is a gifted Brother, yet not <HI>qu&acirc;</HI> Mini&s;ter of the Go&s;pel; 'Tis mo&s;t fal&s;e, that every gifted Brother is a Mini&s;ter of the Go&s;pel: &s;o that the terms are not (as he &s;ugge&s;ts) co-incident.</P>
<P>He adds, 2. <HI>The disjunction is not full, &s;ith a third member may be a&s;|&s;igned, that they may be heard as preaching the Word of God.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> This Animadverter hath a rare invention, but it will not al|way &s;erve his turn: What &s;trange Preachers of the Word of God he &s;urmi&s;eth, that are neither Mini&s;ters of the Go&s;pel; nor gifted Brethren <HI>ip&s;e videat,</HI> for my part I de&s;ire not to be acquainted with them. I had ever thought, that at lea&s;t, gifts enabling a man for the creditable di&s;|charge of the office of preaching the Go&s;pel, had been required in eve|ry one, that &s;hould have undertaken that employment.</P>
<Q>Cucullus non facit Monachum, nec barba Philo&s;ophum.</Q>
<P>But this Animadverter will prove, <HI>That &s;peaking the truth of the Go|&s;pel, is the only con&s;ideration requi&s;ite to the hearer, to be respected in hearing.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. He &s;hould have excepted the Devil, who &s;pake the truth of the Go&s;pel, yet &s;omewhat el&s;e was requi&s;ite to the hearer to be re|&s;pected in hearing, for him he might not hear.</P>
<P N="2">2. He &s;hould have put in, the <HI>mixed</HI> truth of the Go&s;pel, the <HI>&s;incere</HI> Word of God. For tho&s;e that are partial therein, are not to be attend|ed. Such were the Preache<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">s of the Circumci&s;ion, whom <HI>Paul</HI> condemns, and chargeth us to &s;eparate from them, <HI>Phil.</HI> 3. 2. <HI>(i. e.</HI> keep at the greate&s;t di&s;tance from them, have no communion with them) yet they &s;pake the truth of the Go&s;pel, they only added therewith the Ceremo|nies of the Law.</P>
<P N="3">3. Yet upon &s;econd thoughts, he did wi&s;ely, not to make that addi|tion, for then he knew what he had &s;aid had not been applicable to the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters (who though they preach the Truth of the Go&s;pel, yet adde thereto the Ceremonies of humane devi&s;ing, as tho&s;e of the Cir|cumci&s;ion did, the Ordinances once of divine appointment) But we at|tend his proof.</P>
<P>Six Rea&s;ons he gives of this A&s;&s;ertion.</P>
<P>Rea&s;. 1. <HI>Becau&s;e God hath forbidden to hear none, but &s;uch as preach fal&s;|hood.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> This hath been often before inculcated, and as often an&s;wer'd: its fal&s;hood, and impertinent application to the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters ju&s;ti|fication (who preach fal&s;hood) manife&s;ted. So that we need not fur|ther trouble our &s;elves or the Reader with it.</P>
<P>Rea&s;. 2. <HI>Becau&s;e hearers are not fit to examine the Office, Power, Gifts, or Brotherhood of tho&s;e they hear.</HI></P>
<PB N="172" REF="90">
<P> <HI>An&s;w.</HI> If he &s;peak of the generality of hearers, tis granted, they have not abilities &s;o to do: the que&s;tion relates not to them.</P>
<P N="2">2. If he mean the Saints, &s;piritual hearers, he contradicts the Spirit of the Lord, 1 <HI>Cor.</HI> 2. 15. <GAP DESC="foreign">, <HI>the Spiritual man throughly di&s;cerneth or judgeth all things,</HI> viz. belonging to the Wor&s;hip of God, and eternal life.</P>
<P>Rea&s;. 3. he adds, <HI>It is lawful to hear &s;uch as are neither in Office-power, nor gifted. Brethren, as</HI> Act. 18. 26. 1 Tim. 1. 5. 2 Tim. 3. 15. <HI>The Iberian Prince, the captive Maid, the Indians Frumentius.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. But when we &s;peak of hearing, we &s;peak of it, as in a Church-&s;ociety, true, or fal&s;e, the Animadverters examples reach onely to private in&s;tructions of particular per&s;ons.</P>
<P>2ly. He him&s;elf <HI>p.</HI> 46. when he thought it would &s;erve his turn, would not have a Woman to &s;peak in the Church; now he would have them Preachers to a Congregation, for el&s;e he &s;peaks impertinently.</P>
<P>3ly. Our a&s;&s;ertion is of the Mini&s;ters of <HI>England</HI> who mu&s;t be heard (we &s;ay) as Mini&s;ters of the Go&s;pel, or gifted Brethren, to which his &s;tory of <HI>Pri&s;cilla, Lois &amp;c.</HI> hath no relation.</P>
<P><HI>Rea&s;.</HI> 4. He acquaints us, <HI>That the Beraeans are commended for their examining Pauls doctrine, without examining his office,</HI> &amp;c. Act. 17. 11.</P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. The <HI>Beraeans</HI> were not Chri&s;tians: what they did is hete|rogeneous to our pre&s;ent di&s;pute, which is of the duty of Believers.</P>
<P>2ly. Of the gifts of <HI>Paul</HI> they had &s;ufficient evidence, nor could they be ignorant of the wonders that were wrought by him, a &s;uf<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">icient evi|dence of his Office-power.</P>
<P>3dly. That becau&s;e the <HI>Beraeans</HI> are commended for examining <HI>Pauls</HI> Doctrine, without examining his Office, &amp;c. Therefore the &s;peaking the Truth of the Go&s;pel, is the only con&s;ideration requi&s;it to the hearer to be re&s;pected in hearing, is &s;uch an incon&s;equent Con&s;equence that he will never make good: po&s;&s;ibly they might examine his Office, though it be not recorded; if they did not, it doth not follow that it was not their duty to have done &s;o; becau&s;e they are commended for doing what they did; which was al&s;o their duty.</P>
<P>He adds, 5thly. <HI>The Scriptures are the Rule of the Doctrine we are to hear; therefore we are bound to look to no more for the lawfulne&s;s of our hear|ing, than the congruity of what we hear with it.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. We deny the Con&s;equence, and challenge Mr. T. to make it good: would I could per&s;w<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">de him to cea&s;e his Lordly dictates; and think it concerns him to prove what he &s;aith, as well as other men; which (con&s;idering his frequent change of opinions, with the change of
<PB N="173" REF="90"> times) I affure him it doth; el&s;e whatever he tenders, will <HI>levi bra|chio</HI> be rejected. The Scripture is not only a Rule of the Doctrine we hear, but to us of the per&s;ons whom we &s;hould hear. <HI>Mat.</HI> 17. 5. <HI>John</HI> 10. 3, 5. <HI>v.</HI> 8, 27. <HI>Act.</HI> 3. 22. &amp; 7. 37. <HI>Rom.</HI> 10. 14. <HI>Luke</HI> 10. 16. 1 <HI>John</HI> 4. 5, 6. <HI>Phil.</HI> 3. 2. 1 <HI>John</HI> 4. 1. <HI>Mat.</HI> 7. 15.</P>
<P>2dly. Chri&s;t having in&s;tituted Officers of his own, laid down Rules touching orderly prophe&s;ying; foretold us that fal&s;e Teachers would ari&s;e, that &s;hould pretend to come in his Name, when he never &s;ent them; charged us to try the Spirits: We are ready to conclude, that the Com|mi&s;&s;ion of men is to be tryed and examined by which they act, as well as the Doctrine they bring, according to the Scripture.</P>
<P>3dly. This Argument will as well prove the lawfulne&s;s of hearing, the Pope, Cardinals, Je&s;uites, the Devil him&s;elf, as the pre&s;ent Mini|&s;ters, whil&s;t they preach Truth,</P>
<Q>Nullas habet &s;pes Troja &s;i tales habet.</Q>
<P>He tells us, 6thly. <HI>To forbid a man to hear him that preacheth, becau&s;e he knows him not to be a Mini&s;ter in Office, or gifted Brother, may be a means to hinder his Edification and Salvation, and to harden him to his perdition.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. This, as propo&s;ed by Mr. <HI>T.</HI> reacheth not fully the ca&s;e of the Mini&s;ters of <HI>England,</HI> whom we do not only know to be Mini&s;ters in Office, or gifted Brethren, but we are a&s;&s;ured they are not &s;o.</P>
<P N="2">2. That 'tis lawful to hear all Preachers, he will not, when out of heat and pa&s;&s;ion of a di&s;pute, a&s;&s;ert: I mu&s;t know them to be Chri&s;tians, ere it be lawful for me to hear them; and &s;uch as are at lea&s;t &s;ound in the fundamental Doctrines of the Go&s;pel. How I &s;hould know this of a &s;tranger, and not at the &s;ame time be able to inform my &s;elf, whether he be a Mini&s;ter or a gifted Brother, <HI>I</HI> am not able to divine: So that I do no more hinder my Edification and Salvation, by refu&s;ing to hear him, till I am &s;atisfied herein, than I do by refu&s;ing to hear him, be|cau&s;e I know him not to be a Chri&s;tian, which yet I am bound to do. It were well if the old Apo&s;tolical Rule were rea&s;&s;umed, <HI>Acts</HI> 9. 26, 27. (of which more afterwards, p. 124.) as it is among&s;t &s;ome) of receiving none but &s;uch, of who&s;e ability and faithfulne&s;s they received Te&s;timo|nial from Brethren of known integrity in the Churches, more univer|&s;ally among Chri&s;tians, which yet this Animadverter dares not &s;ay did (or would) hinder the Edification or Salvation of any.</P>
<P N="3">3. That the refu&s;ing to hear the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters &s;hould have &s;o &s;ad an i&s;&s;ue, tho&s;e who know how little to Edification, &amp;c. the preach|ing of mo&s;t of them is, will not in ha&s;te believe.</P>
<P>Be&s;ides, 4thly. When Chri&s;t hath (as was &s;aid) not only appointed
<PB N="174" REF="91"> that the Word be heard, but al&s;o from &s;uch as are &s;ent by him, upon the account whereof they are to be received by us, <HI>Mat.</HI> 10. 40. with <HI>ver&s;.</HI> 5. and no &s;piritual advantage can groundedly be expected, from any hearing but that which is the in&s;titution of Chri&s;t; &s;o that Mr. T. <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">r|gues (if dictating may be &s;o called) exceeding weakly, whil&s;t he tells us, <Q>That to forbid to hear &s;uch as are not of Chri&s;ts appointment, is to hinder mens &s;alvation, <HI>&amp;c.</HI></Q> And give me leave to &s;ay, what I believe, the mo&s;t that truly fear God in <HI>England</HI> will atte&s;t, That more &s;ouls (its to be feared) by far have been hardned by attending on the pre|&s;ent Mini&s;ters, for the&s;e &s;even years, than have been conve<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">ted, &s;aved by them from the evill of their way.</P>
<P>His &s;ub&s;equent di&s;cour&s;e, being compo&s;ed of &s;currilous reflections, (being now pretty well u&s;ed to them) I pa&s;s over. Who they are that reject per&s;ons becau&s;e not of their party Mr. <HI>T.</HI> may better know than I, who (as I am credibly informed) refu&s;ed to admit an hone&s;t godly man, de&s;iring it, to &s;it down and break bread with tho&s;e he had gathered together into Church-Communion at <HI>Bewdly,</HI> for no other rea&s;on, but becau&s;e he was not baptized, according to his conception of Bapti&s;m. For my part I own my &s;elf of no party, it being my avowed principle, to own Saints upon the account of Saint&s;hip, and the &s;hines of the image of the ble&s;&s;ed God upon them, though in le&s;&s;er matters differing in judgment from me, according to that Apo&s;tolical rule, <HI>Phil.</HI> 3. 15. <HI>Rom.</HI> 14. 1.</P>
<P>That from Chri&s;ts appointment of &s;ome, as Mini&s;ters, enjoyning others as their duty, upon the collation of Gifts upon them, to preach the Go&s;pel, for the edification of his Body, a lawfulne&s;s to hear them, as Mini&s;ters or gifted Brethren, doth not nece&s;&s;arily ari&s;e, is, to &s;ay no more, a &s;trange a&s;&s;ertion! as implying that 'tis unlawful to hear &s;ome whom Chri&s;t hath appointed to preach, which is ab&s;urd, as good we may reject Chri&s;t.</P>
<P>The rea&s;on he gives us hereof, <HI>viz. Becau&s;e a Mini&s;ter; or gifted Brother, 'tis po&s;&s;ible may be Heretical, and &s;o to be &s;hun'd,</HI> Tit. 3. 10. is of no weight. For, tho&s;e whom it is our duty to hear at one time, whil&s;t walking in the wayes of Chri&s;t, 'tis mo&s;t undoubtedly our &s;in to hear at another, when departed from tho&s;e wayes. But he hath found <HI>nodum in &s;cirpo,</HI> an a&s;|&s;ertion of mine, that he makes him&s;elf, for a &s;ea&s;on, merry with, and thinks he hath no &s;mall advantage by. I &s;ay (&s;aith he) 'tis lawful to others to preach, as their liberty permitted to them: which if &s;o, then,</P>
<P><HI>Fir&s;t, 'Tis lawful for Mini&s;ters to Preach as their liberty.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. Who denies it?</P>
<P N="2"><PB N="175" REF="91"> 2. Why doth this Animadverters good friends, the Bi&s;hops, hinder them?</P>
<P N="3">3. It doth not &s;ure thence follow, that 'tis lawful for Antichri&s;tian Mini&s;ters &s;o to do.</P>
<P>He adds, <HI>Secondly, Then it follows, that there is &s;ome practice that is a part of in&s;tituted Wor&s;hip, that is warranted in Scripture, as per&s;ons Liberty by permi&s;&s;ion without command; Therefore hearing the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters may be warranted by permi&s;&s;ion, without command:</HI> which was my An|&s;wer to this Authors fir&s;t Argument again&s;t hearing them, is now con|firmed by his Conce&s;&s;ion.</P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. But what if this be not any A&s;&s;ertion of the Author of <HI>S. T.</HI> but a mi&s;take of this Animadverter. His conceived advantage, and triumph is then &s;uddenly extinct.</P>
<P N="2">2. That I no where a&s;&s;ert it, not in the place mentioned, the review of the pa&s;&s;age he de&s;cants upon may inform him.</P>
<P>1&s;t, I &s;ay only, that the permi&s;&s;ion of &s;uch, as have received en|ablements from the Lord, to exerci&s;e and improve them in praying and preaching, for the edification of the Body of Chri&s;t, though not &s;olemnly inve&s;ted into Office, is a&s;&s;ented unto by &s;ome of tho&s;e with whom I have to do.</P>
<P>2dly, I immediately add, that 'tis enjoyned them as their duty <HI>(viz.</HI> by Chri&s;t) &s;o to do. Which, with what Con&s;cience the Animadverter could over-look, that he might impo&s;e upon his Antagoni&s;t (to his own &s;eeming advantage) what was never a&s;&s;erted by him, I know not. The&s;e things ought not to be.</P>
</DIV3>
<DIV3 N="2" TYPE="section">
<HEAD>Sect. 2.</HEAD>
<ARGUMENT>
<P><HI>'Tis not lawful to hear the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters as Mini&s;ters of the Go&s;pel. They are not &s;uch, therefore may not be heard as &s;uch. The validity of the con|&s;equence evinced.</HI> Mr. T. <HI>his Exceptions enervated. Hearers bound to &s;atisfie them&s;elves, that he who pretends to come and act in the Name of Christ, is indeed &s;ent by him. 'Tis not above the ability of hearers to judge of the Mini&s;ters call. Peaceable po&s;&s;e&s;&s;ion no evidence of Go&s;pel-right. The te&s;timony of</HI> Nazianzen. <HI>The impertinency of</HI> Mr. T. <HI>his ar|guing from</HI> Pauls <HI>&s;peech to</HI> Ananias, Acts 23. 5. <HI>from</HI> Caiaphas <HI>his pro|phe&s;ying.</HI> John 11. 51. &amp;c. <HI>evinced.</HI></P>
</ARGUMENT>
<P>IN <HI>Sect.</HI> 2. Mr. T. con&s;iders the proof we bring for the confirmation of the <HI>Minor</HI> Propo&s;ition, <HI>viz. That 'tis not lawful to hear them,</HI> ei|ther as Mini&s;ters of the Go&s;pel, or as gifted Brethren.</P>
<P N="1"><PB N="176" REF="92"> 1. Not as Mini&s;ters of the Go&s;pel, they are not &s;uch, therefore may not be heard as &s;uch</P>
<P>To this Mr. T. replies. <HI>I deny this con&s;equence; a man may be heard as a Mini&s;ter of the Go&s;pel, though he be not &s;uch.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. Nor can I help it, or any man in the world (if Mr. <HI>T.</HI> be re&s;olv'd on't) if he deny the Sun to &s;hine at noon-day.</P>
<P>2dly, The con&s;equence pre&s;ents it &s;elf with that evidence to the under&s;tanding of unbia&s;&s;ed men, and &s;hines &s;o clearly in its own bright|ne&s;s, that 'tis hardly capable of, further demon&s;tration.</P>
<P>3dly, To hear a man as a Mini&s;ter of the Go&s;pel, is to hear him as a Preacher &s;ent from Chri&s;t, that I may, that is, that it is my duty to hear one as &s;ent from Chri&s;t, that is not &s;ent from Chri&s;t, is an A&s;&s;ertion that the bear naming of is confutation &s;ufficient.</P>
<P>I mu&s;t believe that he is &s;ent from Chri&s;t ere I can hear him, as &s;uch: that I am bound to believe a lie, Mr. T. will not in ha&s;te prove. We at|tend to what he is able to &s;ay for the confirmation of this A&s;&s;ertion, whereof he gives you three Rea&s;ons.</P>
<P><HI>Fir&s;t, Becau&s;e every hearer is not bound to examine the enterance of the Teacher into his Function.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. This (if meant of Chri&s;tian hearers) is fal&s;e; every &s;uch hearer is bound to &s;atisfie him&s;elf, that he who pretends to come and act in the Name of Chri&s;t, is indeed &s;ent by him; el&s;e I &s;ee not how he can own, or receive him as a Mini&s;ter of Chri&s;t to him, and perform tho&s;e other duties (if he &s;o do) he is obliged to do and perform to him by expre&s;s command from Chri&s;t.</P>
<P N="2">2. Should it be granted, That every hearer is not bound to examine the entrance of the Teacher into his Function, it doth not follow that its lawful, or the duty of per&s;ons to hear &s;uch as are not Mini&s;ters of Chri&s;t, as Mini&s;ters of Chri&s;t. This indeed would follow, That 'tis po&s;&s;ible (had they no other way of &s;atisfying them&s;elves in the truth of their Mini&s;try) they might through mi&s;take do &s;o, but that they are bound by command from Chri&s;t &s;o to do, M. T. cannot prove.</P>
<P N="3">3. What if they receive Letters Te&s;timonial from per&s;ons of known integrity in the Church (or &s;ome verbal &s;atisfaction from them) touch|ing them, and it be the duty of Hearers not to receive them without the&s;e; this may &s;ure help to mend the matter. Now this &s;eems to be evident from the practi&s;e of the Saints, <HI>Rom.</HI> 16. 1, 2. <HI>Col.</HI> 4. 10. <HI>Acts</HI> 18. 27. 2 <HI>Cor.</HI> 3. 1. <HI>Acts</HI> 9. 26, 27.</P>
<P>Y<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">t 4. His inference makes much again&s;t him&s;elf. <HI>Therefore</HI> (&s;aith he) <HI>it is enough to hear them as &s;uch, that there is nothing appears to the</HI>
<PB N="177" REF="92"> <HI>contrary:</HI> for hence it follows, that if there be any thing appearing to the contrary, 'tis not lawful to hear them as &s;uch: Now we manife&s;t in <HI>S. T.</HI> chap. 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, &amp;c. that there is much appears to the con|trary: Therefore 'tis not our duty to hear them.</P>
<P>He adds, 2dly. <HI>'Tis lawful to hear them as Mini&s;ters of the Go&s;pel, though they are not &s;uch, becau&s;e it is above the ability of the hearers to judge of the Mini&s;ters call, &amp;c.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. We deny this Con&s;equence. 'Tis above the ability of Hearers to judge of the Mini&s;ters call, therefore 'tis lawful for them to hear as Mini&s;ters of the Go&s;pel &s;uch as are not &s;uch: who have indeed nothing like &s;uch a call, as the Scriptures mention in the <HI>Mini&s;ters of Chri&s;t.</HI></P>
<P>2dly. That 'tis above the ability of Chri&s;tian hearers, to judge of the Mini&s;ters call, when 'tis &s;o plainly declared in the Scriptures, is Mr. T. his mi&s;take; an A&s;&s;ertion that he will never be able to prove: nor need they to fit them&s;elves herein, to &s;pend their time&mdash;to enquire into their many proceedings, in getting Te&s;timonials, u&s;ing means for the obtaining Ordination, In&s;titution, <HI>&amp;c.</HI> (as he talks) they have through the great kindne&s;s of God to them, the Bible in their hands, and the holy Spirit dwelling in them, to lead them into all Truth; they have the qualification of Go&s;pel-Mini&s;ters laid down, 1 <HI>Tim.</HI> 32. to 8. <HI>Tit.</HI> 1. 5 <HI>to</HI> 10. <HI>&amp;c.</HI> the manner of their call and &s;olemn inauguration into their office: where they find per&s;ons, let their pretences be never &s;o high, that are not able to acquit them&s;elves according to tho&s;e Rules, they may judg (and yet 'tis not they &s;o much as the Spirit of God &s;peak|ing in the Scripture) that they are not the Mini&s;ters of Chri&s;t.</P>
<P>But he hath a third Rea&s;on; <HI>In all Governments and Societies the peace|able po&s;&s;e&s;&s;or is pre&s;umed to have right, till the contrary be evinced.</HI> Ergo <HI>'tis lawful to hear them as Mini&s;ters of the Gospel that are not &s;uch.</HI></P>
<Q>&mdash;ri&s;um teneatis amici.</Q>
<P>If this be good arguing, 'tis ea&s;ie to prove it lawful to hear the Pope, yea the greate&s;t Hereticks that ever were in the world. He is in the peaceable po&s;&s;e&s;&s;ion of <HI>St. Peter's Chair</HI> (as they call it:) The <HI>Arrian</HI> Bi&s;hops once had it generally, yet not to be heard (I hope) as Mini&s;ters of Chri&s;t. The learned <HI>Field de Eccl.</HI> cites <HI>Nazianzen</HI> &s;peaking far other|wi&s;e, <Q><HI>Neque qui per vim irrupit, &s;ucce&s;&s;or habendus est, &amp;c.</HI> Nor is he to be accounted the Succe&s;&s;or, who gets po&s;&s;e&s;&s;ion by violence, but he who &s;uffers violence; not he who defends a fal&s;e opinion, but he who is endued with the &s;ame Faith: unle&s;s any one perchance may be called a &s;ucce&s;&s;or, as we &s;ay a di&s;ea&s;e &s;ucceeds health, darkne&s;s
<PB N="178" REF="93"> light, a tempe&s;t tranquillity, wi&s;dom madne&s;s.</Q> And &s;o we confe&s;s the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters are the Succe&s;&s;ors of the <HI>Mini&s;ters</HI> of Chri&s;t, and po&s;&s;e&s;&s;ors of their room.</P>
<P>2dly. If <HI>by right,</HI> he m<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">an right to their Par&s;onage and Vicarage-hou&s;e and Globe-lands, &amp;c. a right they have (for ought I know) by the Law of the Nation (as things now &s;tand) thereunto. If a right of Ruledom over the People of God, in the Nation; 1. They are not peaceably po&s;&s;e&s;t of this right, they prote&s;t again&s;t them, as Intruders. 2dly. The&s;e being the People and Flock of Chri&s;t, they can have no right over them except it be given them from him; let us &s;ee his Com|mi&s;&s;ion whereby they are authorized, and we are &s;atisfied. 3dly. If he &s;uppo&s;e that a Patron's pre&s;entation of a &s;orry thing in black, (&s;up|po&s;e a debauch'd <HI>Sir John,</HI> a <HI>Knight Errant</HI> of the Pope<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter"> make) with the Bi&s;hops in&s;titution and induction into a Benefice, and he is in the peaceable po&s;&s;e&s;&s;ion hereof, that therefore he is to be heard as a Mini|&s;ter of Chri&s;t, and would impo&s;e it upon others, as Truth, he mu&s;t know, that he hath to do with &s;uch who pitty him becau&s;e of his folly, and expect proof of what he a&s;&s;erts, before they will believe him. The in|&s;tances of <HI>Paul's</HI> &s;peech to <HI>Ananias,</HI> Act. 23. 5. of <HI>Caiap<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">as</HI> prophe&s;y|ing, <HI>John</HI> 11. 51. Chri&s;t's not excepting again&s;t him, when convented before him; are &s;uch pittiful &s;tories, that I mu&s;t crave pardon of the Reader whil&s;t I mention them. <HI>Paul</HI> owned <HI>Ananias</HI> as High-Prie&s;t, <HI>Act.</HI> 23. 5. (which yet 'tis probable he did not, but &s;pake ironically) <HI>Caiaphas</HI> prophe&s;ied, <HI>John</HI> 11. 51. (and &s;o did <HI>Balaam, Num.</HI> 23 &amp; 24.) and Chri&s;t doth not object again&s;t his Office, though both &s;uppo&s;ed to be unlawful Officers: Therefore it's lawful, from <HI>Chri&s;ts</HI> and <HI>Paul's</HI> exam|ple, to hear them who are not right Officers (though neither of them heard the&s;e preach, nor had they to do with them in any act of In&s;ti|tuted Wor&s;hip) when they peaceably po&s;&s;e&s;s the place, and con&s;equent|ly it is lawful to hear them as Mini&s;ters of the Go&s;pel, who are not &s;uch rightly called. Such <HI>non-&s;equiturs</HI> (introduced with pomp and &s;tate) I mu&s;t profe&s;s I never before read in any Author, which others it may be take notice of with contempt; for my part I heartily pitty him, and beg him to con&s;ider, whether the hand of God be not gone forth again&s;t him, in &s;tripping him of the parts he once had (as well as in other things) as a ju&s;t judgment upon him, for his lifting up his hand again&s;t his Truths, and the Kingdom of his Son in the World. Till he prove the&s;e con&s;e|quences of his, we are not concerned to take further no<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">ice of them; there being indeed not the lea&s;t &s;hew of Argument in what he doth, with &s;o much confidence and pomp of words, affirm and declare.</P>
</DIV3>
<DIV3 N="3" TYPE="section">
<PB N="179" REF="93">
<HEAD>Sect. 3.</HEAD>
<ARGUMENT>
<P><HI>The Mini&s;ters of</HI> England <HI>not Mini&s;ters of the Gospel. They come not in by the Door, proved.</HI> John 10. 1, 9. <HI>opened. Of</HI> Petrus Waldo, <HI>and other Reformers. Their contrariety to what</HI> Mr. T. <HI>attempts to erect. Of Ordination by particular Churches. The Exceptions of the Animad|verter ref<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">ted.</HI> Act. 14. 23. <HI>explained. The Mini&s;ters of</HI> England <HI>impo&s;ed upon the People without their con&s;ent. Pari&s;h-Churches no true Churches of Christ.</HI></P>
</ARGUMENT>
<P>IN <HI>Sect.</HI> 3. this Animadverter begins to con&s;ider the proof of our A&s;|&s;ertion, viz. <HI>That the Mini&s;ters of</HI> England <HI>are not Mini&s;ters of the Gospel.</HI> The &s;um whereof is, They that enter not in by the Door, <HI>viz.</HI> Chri&s;t, <HI>i. e.</HI> by vertue of &s;ome authority derived to them from him, im|mediately or mediately, are not Mini&s;ters of the Go&s;pel, <HI>John</HI> 10. 9. But the Mini&s;ters of <HI>Engl.</HI> come not in by the Door, receive no Com|mi&s;&s;ion or Authority from Chri&s;t, either immediately or mediately. The fir&s;t we &s;ay will not be a&s;&s;erted&mdash;The &s;econd cannot, for they re|ceive no Authority from any particular Church of Chri&s;t, to whom po|wer is &s;olely delegated, for the electing their own Officers, <HI>Acts</HI> 6. 5. &amp; 14. 23.</P>
<P>What &s;aith Mr. T. hereunto? Why after he hath ea&s;ed his &s;pleen, by di&s;gorging him&s;elf of that choller that did (it &s;eems) oppre&s;s it; in &s;ome <HI>Billingsgate Rhetorick</HI> (as he &s;peaketh) he tells us, 1. <HI>That th<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="2 letters"> may be urged against the Presbyterian Preachers.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> This is only mentioned <HI>ad phaleras populi,</HI> to take the people: But good Sir, why may this be urged again&s;t the <HI>Presbyterian</HI> Preachers? is it, becau&s;e they di&s;own Particular Congregations, or Churches of Be|lievers? or, becau&s;e they ab&s;olutely deny the de&s;ignation of particular per&s;ons, to Offices Eccle&s;ia&s;tical by them? But each of the&s;e is owned by them, at lea&s;t by &s;ome of them.</P>
<P>He adds, 2dly, <HI>This makes against his gifted Brethren.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. Why his <HI>gifted Brethren?</HI> is Mr. <HI>T.</HI> become a Scorner of the Brethren? or, are there none (thinks he) that have received gifts from Chri&s;t, for the edification of his Body?</P>
<P N="2">2. Why doth it make again&s;t the&s;e? They pretend not to act as Mi|ni&s;ters of Chri&s;t, when they prophe&s;ie for the edifying the Body of Chri&s;t by vertue of any Office-power, &s;o that they need not any &s;uch Election. What follows is a Rhap&s;ody of words, that the ingenuous Reader knows proves nothing; introduced to ca&s;t the <HI><GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">dium</HI> of Irreli|gion-upon
<PB N="180" REF="94"> the men of his Conte&s;t: The be&s;t is, the Nation knows him to be (at lea&s;t in this matter) a fal&s;e Accu&s;er.</P>
<P>He tells us, 3dly, <HI>That it may be doubted whether Christ be meant by the Door,</HI> John&punc; 10. 1.</P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> But why it &s;hould be doubted when Chri&s;t expre&s;ly tells us, v. 9. that <HI>He is the Door,</HI> I cannot tell. That the Door, <HI>v.</HI> 1, &amp; <HI>v.</HI> 9. is not the &s;ame Door, is not probable; and le&s;s probable, that by the Door, <HI>v.</HI> 9. &s;hould be meant the Scriptures of the Prophets, who although they foretold of Chri&s;t, yet can in no &s;en&s;e, that I know of, be &s;aid to be the Door through which he entred. But this he is unwilling to abide by.</P>
<P>He adds 4ly. <HI>That if the door be the &s;ame</HI> Joh. 10. 1, 9. <HI>the entering in v.</HI> 9 <HI>cannot be entring into the Mini&s;try by the lawful election of a parti|cular Church; for then it would follow that every one that &s;o enters in, &s;hall be &s;aved, but that is manife&s;tly fal&s;e.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. But if by <HI>&s;aved</HI> he mean everla&s;tingly &s;aved, this doth not at all follow, he knows right well, that the word <GAP DESC="foreign">, is not alwayes to be re&s;trained, to &s;uch a &s;ignification.</P>
<P>2ly. The whole expre&s;&s;ion <HI>he &s;hall be &s;aved, and &s;hall go in, and out, and find pa&s;ture,</HI> &s;eems to intimate no more than this, that he may expect the ble&s;&s;ing of God with him, the defence of God upon him in his Mi|ni&s;try, that thus enters into it according to his mind: according to <HI>Deut.</HI> 28. 6. So the A&s;&s;embly, <HI>Beza, &amp;c.</HI> interpret the words: which I think is &s;o far from being manife&s;tly fal&s;e, that nothing is more true. Of immediate Calls to the Mini&s;try, and the wayes whereby men may prove them&s;elves to be &s;o called, I &s;hall not now turn a&s;ide to &s;peak, nor in what &s;en&s;e I a&s;&s;erted, that per&s;ons receiving Commi&s;&s;ion immediatly from Chri&s;t to preach the Go&s;pel, will never be made good without the working of miracles, it not being pleaded (as I know of) that the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters, have any &s;uch Commi&s;&s;ion, nor do they pretend to it. Of <HI>Petrus Waldo</HI> (and other Reformers) I think as honourably as this Animadverter. They were worthy, and eminent witne&s;&s;es for Chri&s;t, in their day, no &s;mall part of their Te&s;timony was again&s;t the Abomi|nations pleaded for, by Mr. <HI>T.</HI> in his <HI>Theodulia.</HI> They admited no|thing into their Church, but what is written in the <HI>Bible,</HI> no Decrees, no Epi&s;tles, Decretals, nor the Legends of the Saints, nor the traditi|ons of the Church, <Q>They held that the Preaching of the word of God is free to every man (that hath received abilities from the Lord for that work) That the Prie&s;ts Ve&s;tments are little worth. That no day a man may cea&s;e from his labour, except the Lords day, and not the fea&s;ts of
<PB N="181" REF="94"> of Saints. <HI>Zanchy</HI> introduceth a certain Orthodox man, &s;peaking thus, <GAP DESC="foreign">, and afterwards adds, the Churches are to be reformed according to the be&s;t form: a better from of the Church cannot be invented, than that which Chri&s;t and his Apo&s;tles, in the be|ginning of the Church did con&s;titute, and appoint. And afterwards all Doctrines of Wor&s;hip and Di&s;cipline are to be examined not by the <HI>Lesbian</HI> rule of humane judgment, but by the Touch&s;tone of the Di|vine Word <HI>&mdash; Zanch. de ver. Eccl. reformand. ration. Johannes Ger|&s;on,</HI> affirms, That the authority of the Primitive Church was greater than now it is: for it is not in the power of the Pope, or Council, or Church, to change the Traditions taught by the Evangeli&s;ts and <HI>Paul,</HI> as &s;ome dream; <HI>de vit. Spirit. animae. Budaeus</HI> &s;aith, <HI>Canonum canities, vel caries potius nulli jam u&s;ui est, &s;ed velut anus delira &egrave; foro explo&s;a e&s;t: de ponte enim jam diu comitiorum paracleti, dejecta e&s;t di&s;ciplina Canonica, ut annis &s;exaginta major, atque etiam &s;excentis de Tran&s;lat. Hecleri&s;mi; lib.</HI> 2. And afterwards, <HI>Navis nobis di&s;ciplinae &agrave; &s;ervator<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter"> relicta est, Eccle&s;iae conditore, quae Cantico, Mini&s;terio, in&s;trumento, miraculi&s;&abque; in|&s;tructa fuit ab ip&s;o aut ejus auspiciis.</HI></Q> The&s;e were &s;ome of the Witne&s;|&s;es of Chri&s;t in their day (whom we honour as &s;uch) that bear their Te&s;timony again&s;t what Mr. <HI>T.</HI> thinks good for the pre&s;ent to e&s;pou&s;e to him&s;elf.</P>
<P>5ly. This Animadv. &s;peaks of the proof of our A&s;&s;ertion, that tho&s;e that receive authority to preach the Go&s;pel mediately from Chri&s;t, have it from &s;ome particular in&s;tituted Church of Chri&s;t, to whom po|wer is &s;olely delegated for the electing their own Officers, according to <HI>Acts</HI> 6. 5. &amp; 14. 23. as weak and impertinent. He tells us, 1. <HI>That though this &s;hould be granted, yet power may be given to others, to choo&s;e, &s;end and ordain Preachers for the unconverted, who are and may be heard as Mini&s;ters of the Gospel.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;.</HI> 1. This we deny, the Keys being given to the Church by <HI>Chri&s;t, Mat.</HI> 16. 19. with 18. 17, 18. we cannot conceive how any can legally choo&s;e or &s;end forth per&s;ons, to act by vertue of an Office-power, in the preaching of the Go&s;pel, but the Church.</P>
<P>2dly. We never yet under&s;tood, that Interrogations were &s;ufficient An&s;wers; his may not for all this&mdash;is no evidence that it may.</P>
<P>He adds, <HI>Yea, may not &s;ome others ordain Elders for particular In&s;ti|tuted Churches?</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. Without the Churches con&s;ent, Election, &amp;c. they may not: 'Tis true <HI>Titus</HI> was left by <HI>Paul</HI> in <HI>Crete</HI> to ordain Elders in every City, <HI>Tit.</HI> 1. 5. but that he might do this without the choice, election,
<PB N="182" REF="95"> and concurrent act of the Church (as a Dioce&s;an Bi&s;hop as &s;ome fondly imagine) is a fancy, that as it hath over and over been confuted by many Godly Learned, &s;o Mr. <HI>T.</HI> will never be able to make it good.</P>
<P>2ly. Should it be granted (which yet is mo&s;t fal&s;e, contrary to the practice of tho&s;e times, and many years after) that <HI>Titus</HI> ordained by him&s;elf, (without the knowledg, coun&s;el and approbation of the people) Elders, it doth not in the lea&s;t follow that any per&s;ons may do &s;o now.</P>
<P>For. 1. He had expre&s;s warrant and direction from the Apo&s;tle to do what he did.</P>
<P N="2">2. He was an extraordinary Officer, an Evangeli&s;t, not limited to a certain Church, the continuance of which office we have no direction for in the Scripture.</P>
<P N="3">3. The officers that were to be continued in the Churches are &s;aid to be Elders, or Bi&s;hops (which were not names of di&s;tinct officers, but of the &s;ame <HI>Tit.</HI> 1. 5, 7.) to be confined, or limited to o<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">e particular Congregation, not having or exerci&s;ing juri&s;diction over many, <HI>Phil.</HI> 1. 1. <HI>Acts.</HI> 14. 23. &amp; 20. 17, 28. <HI>Tit.</HI> 1. 5, 6, 7. &s;o that this in&s;tance makes little to his purpo&s;e. When he proves his &s;ugge&s;tion, that there are any inve&s;ted with authority, derived to them from Chri&s;t, to elect &amp; ordain officers to, and for the Churches of Chri&s;t without their knowledge and con&s;ent, he will be &s;uppo&s;ed to &s;peak pertinently, which in this matter hitherto he hath not done. Let us con&s;ider if there be ought more to the purpo&s;e in what follows.</P>
<P>To <HI>Acts.</HI> 6. 5. he replies. 1. <HI>That was but one act.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. Who &s;aith it was many? Con&s;onant to this one act was the practice of the primitive Church for many years after, &s;ome prints whereof in the election of the Over&s;eers of the Poor do yet remain a|mong&s;t us.</P>
<P>He adds, 2. <HI>They were not &s;uch a particular Church as made up one Congregation that could meet together for all Offices.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> This vanity we have already refelled <HI>Sect.</HI> <NOTE PLACE="marg">of our Reply</NOTE> to Mr. T. his Exceptions again&s;t the Preface of <HI>S. T.</HI></P>
<P>He proceeds and tells us, 3dly. <HI>They did not choo&s;e the Deacons upon any conceived power delegated from Chri&s;t, by vertue of any rul<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter"> that was to be perpetual, in all ages, to all Churches.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. This is a meer conjecture of his own, without the lea&s;t tender of proof.</P>
<P>2dly. 'Tis the ready way to bani&s;h all the in&s;tituted Wor&s;hip of Chri&s;t out of the world. 'Tis but &s;aying, 'tis true, this or that was done; but without any Rule that was to be perpetually binding, and the work is effected.</P>
<PB N="183" REF="95">
<P> 3dly. 'Tis injuriou<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter"> to the Apo&s;tles, and the primitive Believers, to imagine (and indeed ridiculous) that they &s;hould devi&s;e an Office in the Church without authority derived to them from Chri&s;t, and that &s;o nece&s;&s;ary an Office, as the experience of above &s;ixteen hundred years manife&s;ts the Church of God could not have been without; which was not only continued in the Churches afterwards, <HI>Phil.</HI> 1. 1. but Rules laid down for their future election and choice, 1 <HI>Tim.</HI> 3. 8 <HI>to</HI> 13. with a &s;olemn injunction to <HI>Timothy</HI> (and in him to &s;ucceeding Believers) to keep that Commandment (among&s;t others) without &s;pot, unrebuke|able, until the appearing of our Lord Je&s;us Chri&s;t, chap. 6. 14. So that the&s;e are but &s;hifts, our reverend Dictator &s;carce knows what to an|&s;wer it &s;eems to the Evidence introduced. I &s;hall only add, <HI>Mal&egrave; res agitur, cum tot opus e&s;t remediis,</HI> it is a bad &s;ore that mu&s;t be wrapped in <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="2 letters"> many clouts. Yet he hath not done.</P>
<P>He adds, 4thly. <HI>This can be no rul<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter"> for chu&s;ing other Officers; there was a peculiar rea&s;on why they &s;hould choo&s;e Deacons, who&s;e honesty&mdash;was to be di&s;cern'd, and not other Officers, who&s;e &s;ufficiency to teach&mdash;was to be con&s;i|dered, of which th<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter"> multitude of Church-members then and now are rarely competent Judges.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. But we had, thought hone&s;ty had been as nece&s;&s;ary a quali|fication of a Pa&s;tor or Teacher, as of a Deacon.</P>
<P>2dly. The Apo&s;tles mention it as the Churches priviledge, without the lea&s;t intimation of any peculiar rea&s;on thereof, <HI>Act.</HI> 6. 3.</P>
<P>3dly. There is the &s;ame rea&s;on for the election of one Officer in the Church as another: tho&s;e with whom power is entru&s;ted for the choice of one, it is for the choice of all the re&s;t.</P>
<P>4thly. That the Saints then, and now, are not competent Judges of the abilities and Orthodoxie of other Officers this Animadverter is de|&s;ired to prove. 1. 'Tis derogatory to the Spirit of Chri&s;t that indwells in Believers. 2. Contrary to the expre&s;s Te&s;timony of the Spirit of God touching them. 3. A meer <HI>Petitio principii.</HI> The que&s;tion is, whe|ther they did elect and choo&s;e them? the An&s;wer is, they were not fit to do &s;o: but their fitne&s;s is pre&s;uppo&s;ed in that they had liberty or power to do it.</P>
<P>To the other Scripture, <HI>Acts</HI> 14. 23. he replyes. 1. By way of &s;eeming conce&s;&s;ion. The word <GAP DESC="foreign">, is rendred by <HI>Beza, They created by Suffrages,</HI> i. e. when the people by lifting up their hands, had te&s;tified their con&s;ent in the election of them, they &s;et them apart to that work. An allu&s;ion to the cu&s;tom of the Greeks in the election of their Officers by Suffrages and Votes, &s;ignified by the &s;tretching out of
<PB N="184" REF="96"> the hand: which was unque&s;tionably the practice of the Church for the fir&s;t three hundred years. <HI>Cyprian</HI> who lived <HI>an.</HI> 240 often intimates as much. Take one in&s;tance in the &s;tead of many: <HI>Propter quod diligenter de traditione divin&acirc;, &amp; Apo&s;tolica ob&s;ervatione ob&s;ervandum est, &amp; tenen|dum, quod apud nos quoque &amp; fere per provincias univer&s;as tenetur, ut ad ordinationes rite celebrandas, ad eam plebem cui Praepo&s;itus ordinatur, Epi&s;|copi eju&s;dem Provinciae proximi qui&abque; conveniant, &amp; Epi&s;copus delegatur PLEBE PRAESENTE quae &s;ingulorum vitam plene&s;&s;ime novit, &amp; unu&s;|cuju&s;que actum; de ejus conver&s;atione per&s;pexit: Quod &amp; apud vos factum videmus in Sabinae collegae no&s;tri ordinatione, ut de &V;NIVERSAE FRA|TERNITATIS SUFFRAGIO, &amp; de Epi&s;coporum (qui in prae&s;entia convenerant, qui&abque; de eo ad vos literas fecerant) judicio Epi&s;copatus ei defer|retur&mdash;Epist.</HI> <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">8.</P>
<P>2dly. By way of Exception he tells us, 1. <HI>This is but one example, not &s;ufficient to infer a perpetual Rule.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. 'Tis intended but for one example.</P>
<P>2dly. We find the thing practi&s;ed afterwards; Elders are ordained, <HI>Tit.</HI> 1. 5. 1 <HI>Tim.</HI> 5. 22. That they &s;hould &s;o &s;uddenly vary from the practice of the Apo&s;tles here (no intimation thereof being given, but rather the contrary, 2 <HI>Tim.</HI> 1. 14. &amp; 3. 10. <HI>Tit.</HI> 1. 5. (<GAP DESC="foreign">, <HI>that thou maye&s;t &s;et &s;treight, or according to the li<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">e or rule that thou ha&s;t learned of us, the things that are wanting, and ordain (viz.</HI> ac|cording to that rule) <HI>Elders in every City)</HI> is not probable: That they did not do &s;o for &s;ome hundreds of years after Mr. <HI>T.</HI> grants, and we have proved. Which is a &s;ufficient An&s;wer to his Exception about con&s;tituting Elders, without the mention of any &s;uch election of the People, <HI>Tit.</HI> 1. 5.</P>
<P>3dly. In the election of other Officers, as an Apo&s;tle, we find the peo|ple concerned. 1. Out of an hundred and twenty per&s;ons, they cho&s;e and pre&s;ented two, <HI>v.</HI> 23. out of which two, one being c<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">o&s;en by lot, <GAP DESC="foreign">, he was counted among&s;t the Apo&s;tles by the common Suffrages of them all, <HI>v</HI> 26. And this very Scripture among&s;t others is u&s;ed by <HI>Cyprian</HI> to confirm the power of the people, in ch<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">&s;ing or refu|&s;ing their Mini&s;ters. <HI>Epi&s;t.</HI> 4. <HI>l.</HI> 1. Deacons (as was &s;aid) was &s;o cho&s;en, <HI>Act.</HI> 6. 3, 5, 6. Put all together, and you have as full an evidence of the truth of the A&s;&s;ertion as can be de&s;ired.</P>
<P>But our Animadverter, 2dly, acquaints us from Dr. <HI>Field, &amp;c.</HI> that the word <GAP DESC="foreign"> is applyed to other creating then by Suffrages, as <HI>Acts</HI> 10. 41.</P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 'Tis granted, it &s;ometimes is &s;o applyed; but the proper and
<PB N="185" REF="96"> mo&s;t u&s;ual &s;ignification of the word is <HI>to elect by Suffrages,</HI> as Mr. <HI>T.</HI> knows: That becau&s;e it's once (or twice it may be) u&s;ed in a meta|phorical &s;en&s;e, where it cannot be otherwi&s;e interpreted, therefore we mu&s;t depart from the proper notation of the word, where the context of the place doth induce us, and the practice of the Church and People of God in after-generations, to abide by it is not tolerable arguing.</P>
<P>His next Exception is, 3dly. <HI>None are &s;aid to</HI> <GAP DESC="foreign">, <HI>but</HI> Paul <HI>and</HI> Barnabas, <HI>and they are &s;aid to do it</HI> <GAP DESC="foreign">, <HI>for them,</HI> viz. <HI>t<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="2 letters"> Church, or Di&s;ciples.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. Nor is it nece&s;&s;ary that we affirm any other &s;o to do: They herein pre&s;iding over them, and regulating the whole affair according to the in&s;tructions received from Chri&s;t, bear the name of the whole work, though the Votes and Suffrages of the Di&s;ciples were in it al&s;o: The Apo&s;tles ordained by Suffrages, <HI>viz.</HI> the Suffrages of the Church, Elders for them; But this proves not that the Vote of the Di&s;ciples was excluded, it rather evinceth the cantra<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">y.</P>
<P>Yet 2dly, Why <GAP DESC="foreign">, mu&s;t be rendred <HI>creating by Suf|frages</HI> (or ordaining) <HI>for them,</HI> I do not under&s;tand: It may every whit as properly be rendred with them, <HI>viz.</HI> with the Church or Di&s;ciples. For &s;o the word <GAP DESC="foreign"> is frequently rendred; &s;o <HI>Mat.</HI> 13. 29. <GAP DESC="foreign">, <HI>ye root up al&s;o the Wheat</HI> (not for, but) <HI>with them.</HI> Act. 17. 2. <GAP DESC="foreign">, <HI>rea&s;o<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">ed with them,</HI> Heb. 8. 18. <GAP DESC="foreign">, <HI>for finding fault with them:</HI> and in many places be&s;ides. That it &s;hould be &s;o rendred here is evident; 1. 'Tis con&s;onant to the practice of the Saints then, and in after-generations, as is known. 2. How <HI>Paul</HI> and <HI>Barnabas</HI> may be &s;aid properly <GAP DESC="foreign">; to ordain by Suffrages alone by them&s;elves, every under&s;tanding is not able to reach, render the word with them, <HI>i. e.</HI> with the Di&s;ciples, and the c<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">&s;e is plain <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">nd evi|dent, <HI>viz.</HI> the Apo&s;tles with the Church or Congregation of Believers, by Suffrages and Votes ordained Elders, which is the matter enquired after. So that whatever this Animadverter is able to &s;ay to the con|trary, this Scripture proves the power of particular Churches, to elect their own Officers: and therefore if the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters have not re|ceived a Commi&s;&s;ion from <HI>Chri&s;t</HI> thus mediately by the election of &s;ome one or other particular in&s;tituted Church of Chri&s;t; if they pretend not to it, have it in deri&s;ion, come barely with a pre&s;entation from a Patron, Ordination, In&s;titution and Induction from a Lord-Bi&s;hop, things forreign to the Scripture, and impo&s;e them&s;elves upon the Peo|ple whether they will or no (as it may mo&s;t truly be affirmed of them) they are not Mini&s;ters of the Go&s;pel, nor may be heard as &s;uch.</P>
<PB N="186" REF="97">
<P> But Mr. T. hath &s;omewhat more to adde, he tells us, 1. <HI>That it will be hard for us to prove that the Pari&s;h-Churches in England are not par|ticular in&s;tituted Churches of Chri&s;t.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. Of what is hard or ea&s;ie for us to do, or any man el&s;e, our Animadverter &s;eems a very incompetent Judge.</P>
<P>2dly. He is not ignorant that this is already done to our hands by &s;everal learned men, and 'tis &s;ure no difficult task <HI>actum agere,</HI> to do over again what we find done to our hands before.</P>
<P>He further affirms, 2dly, <HI>It will al&s;o be hard to prove that the Mini&s;ters of England are impo&s;ed on the People whether they will or no.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. The generality of the People of <HI>England</HI> will atte&s;t the verity hereof: who for the mo&s;t part know not their Mini&s;ter till he comes to them with his Orders; nor is their Con&s;ent touching his Re|ception de&s;ired, or at all &s;ignificant, with re&s;pect to his exerci&s;ing an Office-power over them.</P>
<P>2dly. What they do in <HI>London,</HI> and &s;ome few particular places where the Inhabitants it may be are the Patrons, is not con&s;iderable or worth the minding. 1. For the mo&s;t part they are impo&s;ed upon the people whether they will or no. 2. Were they cho&s;en by their Parochial In|habitants, they were never the nearer Mini&s;ters of Chri&s;t; Becau&s;e, 1. That their choice hath not the lea&s;t influence upon their being con|&s;tituted &s;uch, 'tis the Bi&s;hops Ordination&mdash;that in this matter doth all. 2. The Pari&s;h-Churches of <HI>England</HI> are not true Churches of Chri&s;t: which we demon&s;trate,</P>
<P N="1">1. Where there is not the true matter of a Church, there is not a true Church: But in the Pari&s;h-Churches of <HI>England</HI> there is not the true matter of a Church: Therefore&mdash;</P>
<P>The <HI>Minor,</HI> which alone is capable of a denial, is evident. That on|ly is fit matter of a Church, which corre&s;ponds to the matter of the Pri|mitive Churches, planted by the Apo&s;tles. The&s;e were Saints, <HI>Ephe&s;.</HI> 1. 1. <HI>Col.</HI> 1. 2. Holy Brethren, 1 <HI>The&s;&s;.</HI> 5. 27. Such <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="2 letters"> were not of, but called out of the World, <HI>Joh.</HI> 15. 18, 19. whom God had received, <HI>Rom.</HI> 14. 3. Such as plea&s;e Chri&s;t, and are dearly beloved by him, <HI>Eph.</HI> 5. 29. are built upon the foundation of the Prophets an<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter"> Apo&s;tles, <HI>Eph.</HI> 2. 20. have the Spirit of Chri&s;t, <HI>Eph.</HI> 4. 4. are built up together an holy and &s;piritual Hou&s;e to God&mdash;1 <HI>Pet.</HI> 2. 5. God<HI>'s</HI> Hou&s;e, 1 <HI>Tim.</HI> 3. 15. <HI>Heb.</HI> 3. 6. are living Stones, a cho&s;en Generation, a Royal Prie&s;thood, an holy Nation, a peculiar People, <HI>v.</HI> 9. faithful in Chri&s;t Je&s;us, <HI>Eph.</HI> 1. 1. The &s;ons and daughters of the Lord God Almighty, 2 <HI>Cor.</HI> 6. 17, 18. Chri&s;t is &s;aid to be their Husband, their Head; They his Bride,
<PB N="187" REF="97"> <HI>Eph.</HI> 5. 23. <HI>Col.</HI> 1. 18. his Temple, 1 <HI>Cor.</HI> 3. 16. Now he mu&s;t have a brow of bra&s;s, that &s;hall affirm that the&s;e Characters are applicable to the Pari&s;h-A&s;&s;emblies of <HI>England,</HI> when they them&s;elves will confe&s;s they appertain not to them. Are Drunkards, Swearers, Revilers, Per|&s;ecuters of God and Holine&s;s, loo&s;e, prophane, &s;candalous livers (of which the&s;e A&s;&s;emblies (for the mo&s;t part) are con&s;tituted and made up) Saints, holy Brethren, &s;uch as are called out of the World? <HI>&amp;c.</HI> None will dare to aver it.</P>
<P>2dly. Where there is not the true form of a Church, there is not the true Church: But in the Pari&s;h-A&s;&s;emblies of <HI>England</HI> there is not the true form of a Church; Therefore&mdash;</P>
<P>The <HI>Minor</HI> (which is alone liable to exception) is evident. The form of a Church con&s;i&s;ts in the free and voluntary embodying together of Saints, giving up them&s;elves to the Lord, and one another, accord|ing to his will (as we have already proved.) Now this cannot be a&s;&s;ert|ed of the Pari&s;h-A&s;&s;emblies. Tho&s;e Civil divi&s;ions (for they are no others) were of the in&s;titution of man (as we have demon&s;trated) And to this day they are held together by penal Statutes and Ordinances, &s;uch as never came into the heart of Chri&s;t to e&s;tabli&s;h.</P>
<P>3dly. There where there is not the Church-power, that of right be|longs to a true Church of Chri&s;t, there is not a true Church of Chri&s;t: But in the Pari&s;h-Churches of <HI>England</HI> there is not that Church-power (nor as &s;uch are they capable of it) Therefore&mdash;</P>
<P>The <HI>Minor</HI> (which alone is to be proved) is per&s;picuous. 1. The power of electing their own Officers they have not; This belongs to Patrons, Lord-Bi&s;hops, <HI>&amp;c.</HI> 2. The power of admi&s;&s;ion of Members, and ejection of the Scandalous by excommunication they have not. The fir&s;t a man hath by buying or renting a piece of Land in the Pari&s;h, and dwelling there: the other is managed in the Bi&s;hops Courts, by a &s;orry thing call'd a <HI>Chancellor,</HI> it may be as deboi&s;t as the wor&s;t that is brought before him. Now that with re&s;pect to the&s;e things Chri&s;t hath entru&s;ted his Church with power, we evince, chap. 2 &amp; 4. of <HI>S. T.</HI></P>
<P>4ly. That company of men that are not capable of performing tho&s;e duties, and cannot an&s;wer that end that Chri&s;t requires of his Churches, for which he in&s;tituted them, are not a true Church of Chri&s;t: But the Pari&s;h-A&s;&s;emblies of <HI>England</HI> are not capable of performing tho&s;e du|ties&mdash;Therefore.</P>
<P>'Tis the <HI>Minor</HI> needs proof. The duties Chri&s;t requires to be per|formed by them, the end he aimed at in in&s;tituting his Churches was&punc;</P>
<P N="1">1. To &s;et forth his honour and prai&s;e, <HI>Eph.</HI> 3. 21. 1 <HI>Pet.</HI> 2. 9.</P>
<P N="2"><PB N="188" REF="98"> 2. To promote the true Light and Knowledge of God, <HI>Ephe&s;.</HI> 1. 8. 1 <HI>John</HI> 1. 6, 7.</P>
<P N="3">3. The mutual edification of one another in the things of God, 1 <HI>The&s;&s;.</HI> 5. 11. <HI>Eph.</HI> 4. 29. 1 <HI>Cor.</HI> 14. 26. <HI>Jude</HI> 20. I appeal to any un|bya&s;&s;ed man in the world, whether he thinks in his con&s;cience that the Pari&s;h-A&s;&s;emblies of <HI>England</HI> can perform the&s;e duties, an&s;wer this end. The contrary is mo&s;t evident, and too notoriou&s;ly known to be true, than to admit of a denial. But I &s;hall not enlarge on what is al|ready &s;o judiciou&s;ly a&s;&s;erted and argued by others, which Mr. <HI>T.</HI> is not able to evert. The Ordination of Lord-Bi&s;hops (of which he next &s;peaks) is forreign from Scripture, if the Office it &s;el<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter"> be. This we prove, chap. 3. of <HI>S. T.</HI> and Mr. <HI>T.</HI> once &s;wore to exti<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">pate it as &s;uch, and I am &s;orry to find him now pleading for it. Whether I have abu&s;ed <HI>John</HI> 10. 1, 9. neither Mr. <HI>T.</HI> nor I mu&s;t now be judge; the judicious Reader will judge for us both, and I doubt not according to truth.</P>
</DIV3>
<DIV3 N="4" TYPE="section">
<HEAD>Sect. 4.</HEAD>
<ARGUMENT>
<P><HI>The Mini&s;ters of Engl. not to be heard as gifted-Brothren.</HI> Judas <HI>not par|ticularly declared by Christ,</HI> Joh. 6. 70. <HI>to be a Devil. The Animad|verter abu&s;eth the Author of the</HI> S. T. <HI>in affirming he <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">ies up Saint&s;hip to particular Churches; whom the Scripture makes Brethren. Mr.</HI> T. <HI>reduceth the Brotherhood to a &s;maller &s;cantling than we. We cannot per|form the duties of Brethren to the Mini&s;ters of Engl. and why. If we own the be&s;t of them for Brethren, we mu&s;t own the wor&s;t. Of</HI> Judas <HI>his receiving the Sacrament. The mixt multitude making acclamation to Chri&s;t of joyning with other in Wor&s;hip. We &s;eparate no more from the Church of England than they do from us.</HI> 1 Cor. 5. 1<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">. <HI>'Tis not law|ful to break Bread with the vi&s;ibly prophane, proved. I<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter"> what &s;en&s;e the Bi&s;hops are &s;tyled Reverend Fathers. They are not to be owned as &s;uch. The Mini&s;ters of Engl. di&s;orderly walkers, proved. They engage again&s;t Scripture-Reformation.</HI> 2 The&s;. 3. 6. <HI>explained. Of Obedience to Mi|ni&s;ters.&mdash;</HI>Rom. 13. 1. Heb. 13. 7. <HI>opened. We ought not to hear tho&s;e from whom 'tis our duty to withdraw. Mr.</HI> T. <HI>his A<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">guments to the contrary, an&s;wered.</HI></P>
</ARGUMENT>
<P>IN <HI>Sect.</HI> 4. our Animadverter replies to the proofs produced in <HI>S. T.</HI> for the confirmation of the &s;econd part of our <HI>Minor</HI> Propo&s;ition, <HI>viz. That 'tis not lawful to hear them as gifted-Brethren; becau&s;e,</HI> 1. <HI>The mo&s;t of them are not gifted, nor</HI> 2. <HI>Brethren, being Canonical Drunkards, Swearers, &amp;c.</HI></P>
<PB N="189" REF="98">
<P> To this he &s;aith, 1. <HI>That any of them are &s;uch, is to be bewayled in a Chri&s;tian way; the per&s;ons guilty are to be rebuked,</HI> Lev. 19. 17. <HI>not to be thus charged in print, in a Book vented in the dark, tending to make them odious.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. When he &s;hall be plea&s;ed to manife&s;t the Rule of Chri&s;t I have trangre&s;&s;ed, in thus charging them, I &s;hall as publickly acknow|ledge my error. <HI>Tho&s;e that &s;in, rebuke before all,</HI> 1 Tim. 5. 20. is &s;ome part of what I have to plead for my &s;o doing. 2. If the Book were vented in the dark, I may thank them for it, who would have &s;uch things &s;tifled, that their works may not be made manife&s;t. 3. <HI>I</HI> make them not odious, they have made them&s;elves &s;o, throughout the Na|tion. 4. Mr. <HI>T.</HI> his hoping this is not true, proves nothing: the con|trary is manife&s;t to thou&s;ands.</P>
<P>He adds, 2dly. <HI>Were all this and more true, yet they might be heard preach the Gospel, as Brethren gifted.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> But knows he what he &s;aith? We affirm that they are not gifted, nor Brethren; that this &s;hould be true, and more too, and yet they might be heard as gifted Brethren, is &s;uch a Paradox to me, that comes but a little &s;hort (if a little) of down-right non&s;en&s;e; <HI>i. e.</HI> there are &s;ome may be heard as Brethren gifted, that are neither gifted, nor Brethren. That <HI>Judas</HI> was declared by Chri&s;t to be a Devil, <HI>John</HI> 6. 70. as he &s;ugge&s;ts, is fal&s;e. He &s;aith one of them was &s;o, but names him not. 'Tis true, <HI>John</HI> tells us, <HI>ver.</HI> 71. that he &s;pake of <HI>Judas,</HI> but this neither he nor any of the re&s;t knew till afterwards.</P>
<P>We add in <HI>S. T.</HI> 3dly. The be&s;t of them cannot by Saints, in re&s;pect of Go&s;pel-communion, be accounted Brethren. For, 1. There was never any giving up our &s;elves each to other, whence &s;uch a Brother|hood doth re&s;ult.</P>
<P>To this Mr. <HI>T.</HI> an&s;wers. 1. By Saints he means &s;uch as are mem|bers of a particular, in&s;tituted, Congregational Church, di&s;tinct from the <HI>Presbyterian;</HI> for &s;uch only are accounted Saints by him, as give up them&s;elves each to other, &amp;c.</P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> Fal&s;e, and untrue. I am amazed to &s;ee with what con&s;cience this matter is managed by him, no regard &s;eems to be had to truth and hone&s;ty, &s;o he can ca&s;t dirt upon his Antagoni&s;t. 2. 'Tis contrary to my avowed principle and practice. 3. I do verily believe that there are many Saints in <HI>England</HI> that are neither for the <HI>Presbyterian, Paro|chial,</HI> or <HI>Congregational way;</HI> yea, with Dr. <HI>Ames, Trip.</HI> p. 523. after|wards cited by him, I doubt not to &s;ay (according to my con&s;cience) that among&s;t tho&s;e which live under the tyranny of the Pop<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">s and do
<PB N="190" REF="99"> not utterly &s;eparate from him, through ignorance, there be many Chri&s;tians&mdash;belonging to the true Catholick Church, and &s;o to be ac|counted our godly Brethren <HI>(viz.</HI> upon the account of their Catholi|ci&s;m) and &s;o I believe there are in the Church of <HI>England,</HI> &s;om<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter"> a|mong&s;t the Mini&s;ters thereof, of whom I &s;ay &s;till, I deny not, but they may be good men. But yet we &s;ay, 4. That upon the account of Go&s;|pel-Communion, they cannot be accounted by us, as Brethren, becau&s;e they are (as Mr. <HI>T.</HI> &s;aith rightly) no members of a Chri&s;ti|an Church, <HI>i. e.</HI> any particular in&s;tituted Church of Chri&s;t.</P>
<P>That which is added by him, makes much again&s;t him. 1. 'Tis fal&s;e <HI>That the Scriptures make all who hold the &s;ame Faith, and are Baptized in|to Chri&s;t, to be Brethren, and Members of all the Churches in the world,</HI> Gal. 3. 26,&mdash;1 Cor. 10. 16.<HI>&mdash;and</HI> 12. 12,&mdash;Eph. 4. 4. They make them to be Brethren only of tho&s;e particular Churches to whom tho&s;e Epi&s;tles are directed, as the &s;erious reading them will evince.</P>
<P N="2">2. Were what he &s;aith true, <HI>He would reduce the brotherhood, to a narro|er compa&s;s, than we, either do or dare;</HI> For if his notion be true, only tho&s;e that are baptized into Chri&s;t, can be &s;o accounted, but Mr. <HI>T.</HI> thinks, that only &s;uch as are baptized at years of di&s;cretion are thus ba|ptized into Chri&s;t; Therefore only &s;uch are Brethren, and then I am &s;ure the Mini&s;ters of <HI>England</HI> are not to be &s;o accounted. Thus fre|quently doth he wound to the heart the cau&s;e he undertakes the man|agement of with his own &s;word. We add in <HI>S. T.</HI></P>
<P><HI>Secondly,</HI> We cannot (as things &s;tand) perform the duties of Bre|thren to them, according to <HI>Mat.</HI> 18. nor will they, or can they, in the &s;tate in which they &s;tand to us. What Mr. T. hath an&s;wered to <HI>Ma<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">.</HI> 18. in his an&s;wer to the Preface, <HI>Sect.</HI> 15. we have refuted in the Vindi|cation thereof, <HI>Sect.</HI> and have evinced a Congregational Church is there meant. 'Tis no Argument of hatred (as Mr. T. according to his wonted candor &s;ugge&s;ts) that we cannot perform the duties of Bre|thren to them.</P>
<P N="1">1. They are a Church of &s;uch a Latitude, that 'tis almo&s;t impo&s;&s;ible we &s;hould do &s;o.</P>
<P N="2">2. We are in no Church-&s;tate together.</P>
<P N="3">3. Should we reprove them, we could do no more, (therefore we cannot perform the duties of Brethren, required by that Scripture, which indoctrinates us, in ca&s;e of non-repentance, to bring it before the Church) we know no Churth to whom we may complain: The Parochial A&s;&s;emblies have no power to deal with them: The Bi&s;hops Court is no Church of Chri&s;t, yet thither mu&s;t we appeal, if any where,
<PB N="191" REF="99"> and we have little encouragement to do &s;o, it con&s;i&s;ting of per&s;ons alto|gether <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="2 letters"> vicious and deboy&s;t as tho&s;e we are to complain of. We &s;ay further in <HI>S. T.</HI></P>
<P><HI>Thirdly,</HI> If we acknowledge the be&s;t of them for Brethren, we mu&s;t acknowledge the wor&s;t of them. For, 1. They are all members of the the &s;ame Church. 2. They profe&s;s them&s;elves to be one Brother|hood.</P>
<P>To which Mr. T. pretends a Reply, in a Rhap&s;odie of words, little, or not at all, to purpo&s;e.</P>
<P>He tells us, 1&s;t, <HI>Of a twofold Communion, Private, or Publick, and that the wor&s;t of the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters, are to be accounted as Brethren, in re&s;pect of private Go&s;pel-Communion;</HI> i. e. <HI>we are to re&s;tore them as Bre|thren, open our hearts to them, according to</HI> Gal. 6. 1. Mal. 3. 16. Jam. 5. 16. I indu&s;triou&s;ly omit his Scoffe, of <HI>Phari&s;aically minded, reputed Saints, which he mu&s;t &s;hortly account for, to him, who will reckon with men for their hard and reproachful words to his Children.</HI> And to what may be thought of any moment in this his An&s;wer, we Reply.</P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. His di&s;tinction of <HI>Private</HI> and <HI>Publick Go&s;pel-Communion,</HI> is impertinent, as is his di&s;cour&s;e of <HI>the lawfulne&s;s of holding private Go&s;pel-Communion with them.</HI> 'Tis of Communion with them in preach|ing, <HI>&amp;c.</HI> that we are treating, which he accounts <HI>Publick Commu|nion.</HI></P>
<P N="2">2. Not one of the Scriptures produced, but condemn what he would have them ju&s;tifie. The Brethren <HI>Paul</HI> &s;peaks of, <HI>Gal.</HI> 6. 1. were Mem|bers of a particular in&s;tituted Church. <HI>Gal.</HI> 1. 2. Such as had received the Spirit. <HI>Chap.</HI> 3. 2. The Sons of God by Faith. <HI>Ver&s;.</HI> 26. Baptized into Chri&s;t; putting him on. <HI>Ver&s;.</HI> 27. Sons into who&s;e hearts God had &s;ent forth the Spirit of his Son, crying <HI>Abba Father. Chap.</HI> 4. 6. Heirs of God through Chri&s;t, <HI>Ver&s;.</HI> 7. Such as knew God; were known of him, <HI>Ver&s;.</HI> 9, <HI>&amp;c. Mal.</HI> 3. 16. Speakes expre&s;ly concern-&s;uch as feared the Lord, in oppo&s;ition to the proud and them that work wickedne&s;s; &s;uch as tho&s;e mentioned, <HI>Jam.</HI> 5. 16. which Mr. T. knows in his con&s;cience cannot be affirmed of the wor&s;t of the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters. Certainly the forementioned Characters fit not the drunk|ards, &s;wearers, adulterers (that are known to be) of that Tribe.</P>
<P>Nor, 3. Am I able to make any tollerable &s;ence of what follows, that concerning this, it follows not, if we acknowledge the be&s;t of them as Brethren, we mu&s;t al&s;o acknowledge the wor&s;t of them, he having a&s;&s;erted, and introduced the Scriptures but now requoted, to prove it, that concerning this, <HI>The wor&s;t of the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters are to be accounted as Brethren.</HI></P>
<PB N="192" REF="100">
<P> 2dly, As touching publick Go&s;pel-Communion, he tells us, <HI>It con|&s;i&s;ts in hearing them, praying with them, receiving the Lords. Supper,</HI> &amp;c.</P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> Very well! How proves he that, with re&s;pect hereunto, we m<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">y own them, as Brethren?</P>
<P>Why, 1. <HI>Judas might be heard, as an Apo&s;tle, was (perhaps) a Com|municant at the Lords Supper; It's therefore lawful to hear and joy<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter"> in the Lords Supper, with the wor&s;t of the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. Of the ca&s;e of <HI>Judas,</HI> that is repeated, <HI>u&s;que ad na<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">&s;<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">am;</HI> we &s;hall have occa&s;ion to &s;peak hereafter. At pre&s;ent we &s;hall only &s;ay.</P>
<P N="2">2. He was an Apo&s;tle &s;ent forth by Je&s;us Chri&s;t, which the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters of <HI>England</HI> are not.</P>
<P N="3">3. He was a vi&s;ible Saint, carried it &s;o well, that but immediately before his betraying his Lord, the Di&s;ciples &s;eemed rather to &s;u&s;pect them&s;elves than him; which cannot be affirmed of vi&s;ible Drunk|ards.</P>
<P N="4">4. That he received the Communion is uncertain; If he did, they were in a Church-&s;tate, he was a vi&s;ible Saint, no actual crime, or evil could be laid to his charge; &s;o that this in&s;tance makes not a<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter"> all for Communion with the wor&s;t (or be&s;t) of the Mini&s;ters of <HI>England,</HI> who are not in a Go&s;pel Church &s;tate, <HI>&amp;c.</HI></P>
<P>He further tells, 3dly, <HI>A mixt multitude made acclamation to Chri&s;t, yet our Lord ju&s;tified their joyning together in their praying and prai&s;ing God,</HI> Mat. 21. 16. Luke 19. 39.</P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. This was but one act.</P>
<P N="2">2. Out of a Church-&s;tate.</P>
<P N="3">3. From an extraordinary impul&s;e of Spirit.</P>
<P N="4">4. They joyned with the Di&s;ciples, were not the mouth of the Di&s;|ciples to God, and therefore reacheth not at all our pre&s;ent Ca&s;<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">.</P>
<P N="5">5. Mr. T. Can never prove this Con&s;equence valid. The Di&s;ciples &s;ing <HI>Ho&s;anna</HI> to Chri&s;t, and others, a mixt multitude, by an extraordi|nary impul&s;e of Spirit, &s;ing &s;o to; <HI>Ergo,</HI> It's our duty to joyn with the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters, as Brethren, in praying, preaching, receiving the Sa|crament, <HI>&amp;c.</HI> which yet he mu&s;t make good, or confe&s;s he hath hither|to proved nothing.</P>
<P>He adds, 4thly, <HI>'Tis no &s;in to joyn in the true Wor&s;hip of God, w<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">th any, if we have no command to withdraw from that Service, becau&s;e of their pre|&s;ence, nor power to exclude them, and yet bound to the duties then performed; Believers might prophe&s;ie and hear it, though unbelievers came in,</HI> 1 Cor. 14. 24.</P>
<PB N="193" REF="100">
<P> <HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. This Animadverter takes for granted, what we deny, <HI>Fir&s;t,</HI> That the true Wor&s;hip of God is performed in the Pari&s;h A&s;&s;em|blies. All praying and preaching is not the true Wor&s;hip of God. The offering Sacrifice at <HI>Jeru&s;alem</HI> was &s;o, but not el&s;ewhere. The&s;e things mu&s;t be performed in the way appointed by him, el&s;e they cannot be &s;o accounted.</P>
<P>2dly. 'Tis true, bound we are to perform the duties they pretend to perform, but according to the In&s;titution of the Lord, not mans devi|&s;ing, as they are performed in the Church of <HI>England, I&s;a.</HI> 29. 13. <HI>Mat.</HI> 15. 7.</P>
<P>3ly. Though it be no &s;in to joyn in the true Wor&s;hip of God, yet 'tis a &s;in to joyn with fal&s;e wor&s;hippers, in a fal&s;e way of Wor&s;hip, as pray|ing after the way of the <HI>Common-Prayer-Book,</HI> hearing an Antichri&s;ti|an Mini&s;ter.</P>
<P>4thly, Believers, 'tis true, might prophe&s;ie though unbelievers came in; but it doth not therefore follow, that '<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">is lawful for Believers to joyn with Unbelievers, or for&s;ake the Way and In&s;titutions of Chri&s;t, to go to the A&s;&s;emblies of Unbelievers and hear them Prophe&s;ie. As the wor&s;t of Mini&s;ters (of whom he is di&s;cour&s;ing) and the generality of Parochial A&s;&s;emblies undoubtedly are, if a Spirit of prophane&s;s, vi|&s;ible debauchery, an exce&s;s of riot be&s;peak per&s;ons to be &s;uch. And from &s;uch he grants we are to &s;eparate by command from Chri&s;t, 2 <HI>Cor.</HI> 6. 17. to which may be added, <HI>Eph.</HI> 5. 11. 2 <HI>Tim.</HI> 3. 5. <HI>Acts</HI> 2. 39, 40. But why talks he of our &s;eparating from them, when they &s;eparate as much from us as we do from them; we were never no more of them than they were of us. Of <HI>Rev.</HI> 18. 4. we &s;hall hereafter &s;peak. For the pre&s;ent we deny, that by <HI>Babylon</HI> there, is meant only literal <HI>Rome,</HI> and expect the proof of his dictate. <Q>The keeping company, and eating in|terdicted, 1 <HI>Cor.</HI> 5. 11. he tells us, mu&s;t be meant of eating <HI>Common Bread,&mdash;</HI>Becau&s;e <HI>ver&s;.</HI> 10. That keeping company which is forbid|den to &s;uch Brethren, is allowed in <HI>ver&s;.</HI> 9, 10. to the Fornicators of the world, which cannot be Go&s;pel-Communion, keeping company in eating of the Lords Supper.</Q></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. It &s;eems then that with the Fornicators of the world, we may not have Go&s;pel-Communion; if &s;o, then not with the Church of <HI>England,</HI> for with it we cannot have Communion without holding fel|low&s;hip with &s;uch as the&s;e.</P>
<P>2dly, If it be not lawful to have Communion with a Brother, one of the &s;ame particular Church (for of &s;uch an one the Apo&s;tle &s;peaks) that is <HI>a Fornicator, or Covetous, or an Idolater, or a Railer, or a Drunkard,</HI>
<PB N="194" REF="101"> <HI>or an Extortioner,</HI> &s;o far as to common eating and drinking, then, <HI>a for|tiori,</HI> may we argue, it is utterly unlawful to have communion with him in the Wor&s;hip of God, and much more unlawful to have fellow&s;hip with one we never walked with in the way of the Go&s;pel, according to any in&s;titution of Chri&s;t.</P>
<P N="3">3. <Q>That 'tis lawful to hold Communion in eating the Lords Supper, with <HI>Railers, Drunkards,</HI> &amp;c.</Q> I am &s;orry to find Mr. T. a&s;&s;erting, of which we expect his proof. The contrary is evident. 1. Per&s;ons mu&s;t be in a Church-&s;tate, before they are capable of the regular enjoyment of that Ordinance; which is a Church-Ordinance, and part of In&s;ti|tuted Wor&s;hip; but Per&s;ons of &s;uch a Complexion, are not fi<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter"> matter for a Church, as we before proved. Therefore&mdash;2. Tho&s;e who ought to be excommunicated out of a Church, were they in, we may not have Communion with (e&s;pecially when in a fal&s;e Church-&s;tate, as is the ca&s;e of the members of the Church of <HI>England)</HI> But per&s;ons of &s;uch a character, as the Apo&s;tle mentions, &s;hould be excommunicated out of the Church. Therefore&mdash;3. Tho&s;e with whom we have Com|munion in breaking Bread as a Go&s;pel-Ordinance, with them we are one Bread, 1 <HI>Cor.</HI> 10. 17. But we may not be one Bread with Drunk|ards, <HI>&amp;c.</HI> Therefore&mdash;4. Tho&s;e with whom we are commanded to have no fellow&s;hip, with them we may not have fellow&s;hip in that Ordinance of breaking Bread: But with &s;uch as the&s;e we are com|manded to have no fellow&s;hip, <HI>Eph.</HI> 5. 11. That the People of God can &s;carce ever break Bread with comfort in the be&s;t in&s;tituted Churches (as he tells us) from this doctrine, is a notoriou&s;ly fal&s;e Crimination, a meer Calumny. His &s;ub&s;equent &s;coff, is &s;uch froth and vanity as be|comes not his years nor profe&s;&s;ion, we pa&s;s it over as beneath us to take further notice of.</P>
<P>We add in <HI>S. T.</HI> 3dly, <HI>That we cannot acknowledge the pre&s;ent Mi|ni&s;ters for our Brethren, but we mu&s;t acknowledge the Bi&s;hops for our Re|verend Fathers, for theirs they are; but that we cannot do.</HI></P>
<P>To this Mr. T. adjoyns, Sect. 5. 1. <HI>They are call'd their Reverend Fathers, in re&s;pect of their Ordination.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. But we cannot own them as Reverend Fathers, with re|&s;pect hereunto, when we a&s;&s;uredly know they are herein u&s;urpers of what doth not appertain to them.</P>
<P>But 2dly, This is not all, they own them as &s;uch upon the account of their Authority over them, and the Parochial-A&s;&s;emblies in the re|&s;pective Dioce&s;&s;es, who are to give forth Canons and Laws for them to walk by, in not a few things relating to Wor&s;hip (as is known) Now &s;o
<PB N="195" REF="101"> we cannot own them as our Reverend Fathers, we know no honour or obedience we owe them as &s;uch. We think the in&s;pection of one Bi|&s;hop over an hundred Congregations, can be proved by no better Argu|ments than the in&s;pection of the Pope over an hundred thou&s;and: That a Dioce&s;an and Oecumenical Bi&s;hop are much of the &s;ame kind, and have their &s;tanding on the &s;ame foundation. We know no Bi&s;hop of the in&s;titution of Chri&s;t, but a Pa&s;tor of a particular Congregation. He that pretends to more, mu&s;t prove his preten&s;ions, or we cannot but look upon him as an u&s;urper. I would gladly know whether Mr. <HI>T.</HI> thought it lawful to own them as his Reverend Fathers, when he &s;wore to ex<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">irpate them with the whole Hierarchy? and whether his &s;o doing were an act of filial obedience? That they are to be accounted Fa|thers, in re&s;pect of their (Antichri&s;tian) Office; becau&s;e the Apo&s;tle &s;aith, 1 <HI>Tim.</HI> 5. 1. <HI>That an Elder is to be entreated as a Father,</HI> when they are not Elders, but a degree above them, not from the In&s;titution of Chri&s;t, but the Courte&s;ie (at the be&s;t) of Princes, he will never prove. Of their &s;ucce&s;s in begetting others to Chri&s;t, I under&s;tand nothing: Tho&s;e whom they have begotten, may upon the account thereof e&s;teem them as their Reverend Fathers; but yet I am apt to think, &s;hould they not be inve&s;ted in the Title till then, (for the mo&s;t of them at lea&s;t) they would go to their graves without it. The&s;e are but Figleave-co|verings, The Animadverter knows they are not upon this bottom &s;o called or accounted, but with re&s;pect to that Office-power they have in the Church over the re&s;t of the Mini&s;ters and Parochial-A&s;&s;emblies thereof; which being a meer incroachment, u&s;urpation and innova|tion, we dare not own them as &s;uch. We further argue in <HI>S. T.</HI></P>
<P>4thly. <HI>We cannot hear them as Brethren; becau&s;e they are, if Brethren, &s;uch as walk di&s;orderly, from whom we are bound to &s;eparate by expre&s;s pre|cept, Mat</HI> 18. 2 <HI>The&s;&s;.</HI> 3. 6. That they walk di&s;orderly we prove. Tho&s;e that walk not after the tradition received from the Apo&s;tles (and from the Primi<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">ive Church, for above 300 years after Chri&s;t, but according to the traditions of the old Bawd, and Strumpet of <HI>Rome)</HI> are &s;uch as walk di&s;orderly: But the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters walk not after the traditi|on received from the Apo&s;tles, but after the traditions of the Whori&s;h Church of <HI>Rome:</HI> Therefore&mdash;The <HI>Major</HI> is bottom'd upon the ex|pre&s;s words of the Apo&s;tle, in the place in&s;tanc'd in, and were it not, no per&s;on of ingenuity would have the confidence to deny it. The <HI>Minor</HI> we prove by particular in&s;tances. They have no Apo&s;tolical written Tradition for Liturgies, Surplice, Cro&s;s in Bapti&s;m, <HI>&amp;c.</HI> If they have, let them produce it, and we are &s;atisfied; if not, they are
<PB N="196" REF="102"> di&s;orderly walkers (and to be &s;eperated from) that they are &s;uch, 2. cannot be denied by &s;uch as pretend to Reformation, if &s;ubmitting to ordination, or reordination by a Lord-Bi&s;hop, covenanting, and pro|te&s;ting with dete&s;tation again&s;t a Reformation according to the Scrip|tures, and the be&s;t reformed Churches be &s;o.</P>
<P>In an&s;wer to which, Mr. <HI>T.</HI> tells us. 1. <HI>That it belongs not to him to &s;peak for the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters, but to them&s;elves.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. And indeed many &s;ober minded per&s;ons think &s;o too. It very ill becoms any man <GAP DESC="foreign">, and to go about to build again the things he once de&s;troyed.</P>
<P>But yet 2ly, Its not the part of an Advocate thus to de&s;ert his Clients in open Court. If he undertake their defence, it appertains to him to an&s;wer for them, to what is objected again&s;t them.</P>
<P>However, he acquaints us, 2ly, what he conceives they would &s;ay for them&s;elves. 1. <HI>That they do not covenant and prote&s;t with dete&s;tation again&s;t a Reformation, according to the Scripture, and the be&s;t reformed Churches&mdash;</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;wer.</HI> The whole of my intendment in that expre&s;&s;ion, was to intimate their renunciation of that Covenant, wherein the Reformati|on intimated, was &s;olemnly engaged to be promoted: whic<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter"> what is it le&s;s then to prote&s;t again&s;t the Reformation therein a&s;&s;erted, and en|joyned? That they did this is evident, from their &s;ub&s;cription of the declaration, or acknowledgement following. <HI>I</HI> A. B. <HI>do declare that I do hold, there lies no obligation upon me, or on any other per&s;on, from the Oath commonly called the Solemn League and Covenant, to endeavour any change, or alteration of Government, either in Church or State; and that the &s;ame was in it &s;elf an unlawful Oath&mdash;</HI></P>
<P>That they did, becau&s;e they judged the matter of the Covenant at lea&s;t with re&s;pect to reformation of the Church, by purging it of the Hierarchie, to be &s;inful, I do &s;uppo&s;e they will not deny, nor that they renounce &s;in without dete&s;tation. So that the Author of <HI>S. T.</HI> will in the judgment of &s;ober minded per&s;ons, be &s;oon acquitted fro<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter"> being in this matter a Calumniator.</P>
<P>He tels us, 2ly. <HI>He conceivs they would ju&s;tifie their &s;ubmitting to Ordi|nation, or reordination by a Lord-Bi&s;hop, their owning, and reading a Liturgy in the Church, their wearing the Surplice, Cro&s;&s;ing in Bapti&s;m, &amp;c.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. No one doubts but they would; nor can any other be ex|pected from them, who are in the practice of the&s;e things. But that becau&s;e they will ju&s;tifie them, therefore they are no di&s;orderly walk|e<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">s, is not (in my poor judgment) an argument of the lea&s;t weight.
<PB N="197" REF="102"> The Papi&s;ts will ju&s;tifie their <GAP DESC="foreign">, or Image-wor&s;hip, and the re&s;t of their abominable idolatries, and bring Scripture to prove it lawful too. <HI>Gregorius de Valentia</HI> tels us, there is &s;ome wor&s;hip of Images law|ful, and proves it from 1 <HI>Pet</HI> 4. 3. becau&s;e the Apo&s;tle would there de|terre them from the <HI>unlawful</HI> wor&s;hip of Idols: yet I hope Mr. T. will not affirm they are not di&s;orderly walkers, and to be &s;eparated from as &s;uch.</P>
<P>2ly. We &s;ay not, that they them&s;elves will confe&s;s that they are di&s;|orderly walkers; but that &s;uch as Mr. <HI>T.</HI> who have covenanted again&s;t Bi&s;hops, and pretended to be for Reformation, cannot deny, but that they are indeed &s;o, with re&s;pect to the matters in&s;tanced in: which he mu&s;t acknowledge to be true; for they are the very things they cove|nanted again&s;t, as intolerable di&s;orders and abu&s;es to remove out of the way. So that however they might call me an egregious fal&s;e accu|&s;er (which yet were but a &s;orry an&s;wer to the charge laid again&s;t them) yet one would not have expected &s;uch language from Mr. <HI>T.</HI> The&s;e things are di&s;orders, or they are not: If they are not, why did this Ani|madverter Covenant, Preach, Print again&s;t them, glory that he was one of the fir&s;t that in print te&s;tified his di&s;&s;atisfaction touching them. If they are, mo&s;t a&s;&s;uredly tho&s;e that practi&s;e them are with re&s;pect to them di&s;orderly walkers. And is Mr. <HI>T.</HI> of late grown &s;uch a fond Admirer of them, that a man cannot &s;peak truth of them, but he mu&s;t call him an egregious fal&s;e accu&s;er, I am afraid <GAP DESC="foreign">, and &s;eriou&s;ly to review with what &s;pirit he writ &s;uch pa&s;&s;ages as the&s;e.</P>
<P>He adds, 3dly. <HI>The&s;e practices (except the fir&s;t) are not of &s;uch a de|gree of pravity (whether ju&s;tifiable or &s;inful) as that barely for them they &s;hould be reputed in the number of Di&s;orderly walkers, and &s;o after due pro|ce&s;s, to be &s;eparated from, by vertue of po&s;itive precept from Christ,</HI> Mat. 18. 2 The&s;&s;. 3. 6. <HI>For</HI> 1. Mat. 18. 15, 16. <HI>is meant of per&s;onal injuries, the Separation permitted is a Separation only from civil eating and familiar re|ception, not from Gospel-communion.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. This is <GAP DESC="foreign">, and hath already been fully confuted.</P>
<P>2dly. He further affirms, <HI>that the di&s;orderly walking,</HI> 2 The&s;&s;. 3. 6. <HI>mu&s;t be under&s;tood of &s;ins of greater pravity, than the particulars in&s;tanced in, and charged upon them, except the fir&s;t, which they will deny.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. But the fir&s;t we have proved again&s;t them; therefore they are di&s;orderly walkers, according to this Scripture, by Mr. <HI>T.</HI> his con|fe&s;&s;ion, and &s;o to be &s;eparated from.</P>
<P N="2"><PB N="198" REF="103"> 2. Every &s;in is a di&s;orderly walking; if per&s;ons will &s;tand in, ju|&s;tifie, plead for any &s;in, they are to be &s;eparated from, by vertue of this Apo&s;tolical precept.</P>
<P>But 3dly. If the &s;ins charged upon the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters be too &s;mall to con&s;titute the di&s;orderly walking here mentioned, what are the greater that do &s;o? The gro&s;s &s;ins (he tells us of) of any Brother, not a Mini&s;ter, who was bound to work<HI>&mdash;v.</HI> 10. &s;uch as tho&s;e, 1 <HI>Cor.</HI> 5. 11. 2 <HI>Cor.</HI> 12. 20, 21.</P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. Why the gro&s;s &s;ins of a Brother, not a Mini&s;ter? Is not the Ordinance of private admonition, Church-Cen&s;ures, an In&s;titution of Chri&s;t, out of the abundance of his love for the good of his Children? Is a Mini&s;ter exempt from it more than others? he will not &s;ure &s;ay &s;o.</P>
<P>2dly. Why &s;uch gro&s;s &s;ins as tho&s;e mentioned 1 <HI>Cor.</HI> 5. 11. 2. <HI>Cor.</HI> 12. 20, 21. doth the Apo&s;tle charge the Church of <HI>The&s;&s;alonica</HI> with any &s;uch evils as tho&s;e there mentioned? nothing le&s;s! The&s;e are in&s;tan|ced in, becau&s;e the Animadverter &s;uppo&s;eth (at the lea&s;t &s;ome of) the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters are not guilty of them. Let the Scriptures be peru|&s;ed, if the evils mentioned may not be charged upon the mo&s;t (if not all of them) and that without the lea&s;t breach of charity, I am mi&s;taken.</P>
<P>Though 3dly, The evil the Apo&s;tle calls <HI>di&s;orderly walking,</HI> is <HI>&s;uppo|&s;ed</HI> to be only a Brother's living idely, or not working; which that it is a greater &s;in, than what we have here charged the Mini&s;ters of <HI>England</HI> with, will not in ha&s;t be believed, by &s;uch as know the Lord to be a jea|lous God, and the abhorrency of his Soul again&s;t humane Inventions in, and additaments to his Wor&s;hip; I &s;ay, &s;uppo&s;ed to be&mdash;For I am of the mind, that the di&s;orderly walking, <HI>v.</HI> 10. is but a branch of that di&s;orderly walking, <HI>v.</HI> 6. which may be taken in general for all kind of evil carriage; and &s;o includes in it the particulars mentioned. That by tradition <HI>v.</HI> 6. &s;hould be meant only that command, <HI>v.</HI> 10. is not likely. 'Tis rather to be extended to tho&s;e mentioned 2 <HI>The&s;.</HI> 2. 15. And laid down as a direction, or help to &s;ecure them from the cheats, and innovations of Antichri&s;t, and his mini&s;t<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="2 letters">s, whom he tells them &s;hould come, and that with all deceivablene&s;s of unrighteou&s;ne&s;s, inti|mates that many &s;hould believe their lie, <HI>v.</HI> 7, 8, 9, 10, 11. pre&s;&s;es <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">hem <HI>v.</HI> 15. to &s;tand fa&s;t, <HI>viz.</HI> in the doctrine of the Go&s;pel, with re&s;pect to Faith and Wor&s;hip, to hold the Traditions they had been taught by them, <HI>v.</HI> 15. And having prayed for them, <HI>v.</HI> 16, 17. and exhorted them to pray for him; he tells them of his Faith and Confidence tou|ching their e&s;tabli&s;hment by the Lord, and keeping them from evil, chap. 3. 1, 2, 3. And again, praying for them, <HI>v.</HI> 5. he pre&s;&s;eth, <HI>v.</HI> 6.
<PB N="199" REF="103"> to withdraw from every Brother that &s;hall walk di&s;orderly, and not according to their Traditions, <HI>i. e.</HI> &s;hall &s;o far &s;ide with Antichri&s;t and his Mini&s;ters, as to practi&s;e &amp; conform to his Innovations in the Wor|&s;hip of Chri&s;t; which we prove they do. And the things mentioned are known to be &s;uch. Nor is it nece&s;&s;ary that we produce an Apo&s;to|lical tradition expre&s;ly again&s;t them, becau&s;e in matters of Wor&s;hip, that which is not commanded, is forbidden. What Mr. T. hath &s;aid in an&s;wer to Chap. 1. Sect. 3. we have already replied to.</P>
<P>To his Query, <HI>Where is your Apo&s;tolical tradition for your Church-Co|venant, Election of Mini&s;ters?</HI> we &s;hall only &s;ay, That when Mr. T. (or any one for him) &s;hall be able to &s;hew as much Apo&s;tolical tradition, for the matters with re&s;pect to which we charge the Mini&s;ters of <HI>Eng|land</HI> as di&s;orderly walkers, as the learned <HI>Ain&s;worth, Cotton, Bartlet,</HI> and we our &s;elves in <HI>S.</HI> T. have &s;hewed for the matters in&s;tanced in by him, we &s;hall &s;urcea&s;e our accu&s;ation, and acknowledge we have done them wrong.</P>
<P>That which he adds, 3dly, <HI>If every one that hath not a written Apo&s;to|lical tradition for what he doth, walks di&s;orderly, then every one that &s;ins walks di&s;orderly, will receive a &s;peedy di&s;patch. An&s;w.</HI> He doth &s;o!</P>
<P><HI>Yea but then this Author</HI> (&s;aith he) <HI>if he be not a Perfectioni&s;t, nor thinks him&s;elf excluded from the number of tho&s;e, of whom</HI> Jam. 3. 2. 1 Joh. 1. 8. <HI>is a di&s;orderly walker, and to be &s;eparated from.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> Setting a&s;ide his &s;coff, which becomes him not at all, I an|&s;wer, <HI>Fir&s;t;</HI> Di&s;orderly walking is twofold. 1. Private, known only to a mans own &s;elf, which is matter of burden&punc; &s;orrow and lamentation to him, under which he groans and wars again&s;t it. 2dly, More pub|lick, which is twofold: 1. Such as through weakne&s;s, and the re|mainders of corruption the Children of the Lord do fall into, which they are a&s;hamed of, grieved for, and are thankful to any that &s;hall re|prove them for it, and help them again&s;t it. Or 2. Such as is owned, avowed, men ju&s;tifie them&s;elves in the practice of, will not, whatever is &s;aid again&s;t them, be reclaimed from. Per&s;ons guilty of di&s;orderly walking in this la&s;t &s;en&s;e, we &s;ay are to be &s;eparated from; and that this is the ca&s;e of the Mini&s;ters of the Church of <HI>England</HI> is notoriou&s;ly known.</P>
<P>He proceeds and tells us 4thly. <HI>The pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters will be apt to al|ledge for them&s;elves, that they have Apo&s;tolical tradition for tho&s;e practices for which they are accu&s;ed as di&s;orderly walkers, viz.</HI> Rom. 13 1. Heb. 13. 17. <HI>and be ready to recriminate us for &s;eparating from our Brethren, di&s;o|beying our Mini&s;ters and Governours commanding things lawful.</HI></P>
<PB N="200" REF="104">
<P> <HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. 'Tis very like they may do the one, and the other. As for the latter, <HI>Si accu&s;ari &s;ufficiat, nemo erit innocens:</HI> Let them (or <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">ny for them) prove that we have &s;eparated from any of them, and therein broken any rule of the Go&s;pel of Chri&s;t; that they are by vertue of any appointment of Chri&s;t our Mini&s;ters and Governors, whom we ought to obey, and that the things required are lawful, and they will be &s;uppo|&s;ed to &s;ay &s;omewhat that we are concern'd to take notice of, but till then we are innocent. <HI>Rom.</HI> 13. 1. Tells us <HI>We mu&s;t obey the Powers that are of God,</HI> but &s;aith not we mu&s;t do &s;o in that which is &s;inful, in their addi|taments to the Wor&s;hip of Chri&s;t. In &s;uch ca&s;es, neither <HI>Solomon,</HI> nor <HI>Jeroboam</HI> was to be obeyed; neither Kings, Popes, or Bi&s;hopes are to be &s;ubjected to. The Renowned <HI>Hus</HI> tels the Council of <HI>Con&s;tanc<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter"></HI> to their face, that <HI>If the Popes Commandment be not concordant and agreeable with the Doctrine of the Go&s;pel, or the Apo&s;tles, 'tis not to be obeyed.</HI> And cites <HI>I&s;idore</HI> &s;peaking thus, <HI>He which doth rule, and doth &s;ay or command any thing contrary or BESIDES the will of God, or that which is evidently commanded in the Scriptures, he is honoured as a fal&s;e-witne&s;s of God, or Church-Robber: whereupon we are bounden to obey no Prelate, but in &s;uch ca&s;e as he doth command or take coun&s;el of the coun&s;els and commandments of Chri&s;t.</HI> Heb. 13. 17. tels us we mu&s;t <GAP DESC="foreign">, <HI>obey our Rulers, or Leaders;</HI> but this doth not prove, that we mu&s;t obey tho&s;e that we never own'd to be our Leaders, that we are &s;ure by vertue of any in&s;titution of Chri&s;t are not &s;uch, and that in every foppery they &s;hall devi&s;e. Sure it was not the duty of the good people of <HI>England,</HI> to obey the Guides or Rulers were &s;et over them in the <HI>Marian</HI> dayes, and yet they might with as good rea&s;on have urged this Scripture for &s;ubjection to them, as the&s;e now. It was a pre&s;entation, in&s;titution and induction then as now, (together with an Epi&s;copal Ordination) that con&s;tituted them Mini&s;ters of this or that Pari&s;h. Let the Individuals acquit them&s;elves to be Mini&s;ters of Chri&s;t, and we &s;hall pay them whatever obedience can be manife&s;ted from any precept of Chri&s;t, to be due to them from us, but till then.</P>
<Q><GAP DESC="foreign">.</Q>
<P>But for a conclu&s;ion of all, our Animadverter adds, <HI>That if the Mi|ni&s;ters were di&s;orderly walkers, and to be withdrawn from, yet it doth not fol|low, that they might not be heard as gifted Brethren. Of which he gives us three learned rea&s;ons.</HI> 1. <HI>Becau&s;e the withdrawing them&s;elves, from every Brother that walks di&s;orderly, cannot be meant of their excluding them&s;elves from Hearing, Praying, or receiving the Lords Supper if &s;uch an one be pre&s;ent.</HI></P>
<PB N="201" REF="104">
<P> <HI>An&s;w.</HI> Right! but though this withdrawment from &s;uch a Brother cannot be meant of exclu&s;ion from hearing, whil&s;t he is pre&s;ent, yet I hope it may from hearing him, who walks thus di&s;orderly. The &s;ame may be &s;aid of receiving the Lords Supper. If he be there as a looker-on, meerly; this ought not to hinder any from waiting upon Chri&s;t, in that in&s;titution (though the Church of <HI>England</HI> in imitation of the old Pagan cu&s;tom, of the <HI>Druides &amp;c.</HI> of old, interdicts the Prie&s;ts &s;aying &s;ervice, whil&s;t an excommunicate per&s;on is there;) but if he &s;hall be forced upon the Congregation, as a member to joyn with them in that ordinance, and much more, as their Mini&s;ter to celebrate it, as is our ca&s;e, it is the duty of the Saints to &s;urcea&s;e the performance of that duty, for that &s;ea&s;on. It was the keeping them&s;elves from being pol|luted that cau&s;ed them to &s;ever from him, that rea&s;on remaining, (which it doth, till he hath te&s;tified his repentance) their withdrawment is to continue.</P>
<P>He adds, 2ly. <HI>That the withdrawment mentioned</HI> 2 The&s;. 3. 6, 14. <HI>is only from arbitrary communion in entertainments &amp;c.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> This is an old &s;hift of Mr. <HI>T.</HI> we have already refuted.</P>
<P>He further tells us, 3ly. <HI>If we omit it, we omit the Wor&s;hip of God, and &s;o break his Commandments.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. This is a meer <HI>petitio principii,</HI> we deny the mini&s;tration of the Sacraments according to the rights of the Church of <HI>England,</HI> to be the Wor&s;hip of God, &s;trictly &s;o called.</P>
<P>2ly. There's no need, through grace, of omitting the Wor&s;hip of God; if we wor&s;hip not with them, there are meetings of his people, whither we may have recour&s;e to wor&s;hip him in his own way. To what follows in this chapter, we have already an&s;wered. We attend his ad|vance towards the di&s;cu&s;&s;ion of our third argument, of which in the next chapter.</P>
</DIV3>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="4" TYPE="chapter">
<PB N="202" REF="105">
<HEAD>CHAP. IIII.</HEAD>
<DIV3 N="1" TYPE="section">
<HEAD>Sect. 1.</HEAD>
<ARGUMENT>
<P><HI>Such as act from an Antichri&s;tian calling&mdash;not to be heard, proved.</HI> <GAP DESC="foreign">, <HI>what it &s;ignifies. Who is Antichri&s;t, what is Antichri&s;tian, explained. The Mini&s;ters of</HI> England, <HI>derive their Office-power from the Papacie. The Bi&s;hops of</HI> England, <HI>Petty-Popes. 'Tis unlawful to attend upon the teachings of Antichri&s;t, therefore upon the teachings of &s;uch as act by a power derived from him. Chri&s;t calls his People to &s;eparate from every thing of Antichri&s;t.</HI> Rev. 18. 4. <HI>and</HI> 14. 9. <HI>explained. Of trying the Spirits,</HI> 1 Joh. 4. 1. <HI>of Chri&s;ts in&s;tituting Officers of his ow<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">. No promi&s;e of a ble&s;&s;ing in attending upon an Antichri&s;tian Mini&s;try.</HI></P>
</ARGUMENT>
<P>IN Chap. 3. of <HI>S. T.</HI> a third Argument is produced again&s;t hear|ing the pre&s;ent M<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">ni&s;ters, <HI>viz.</HI></P>
<P><HI>Tho&s;e that act in the holy things of God, by vertue of an Antichri&s;tian Power, Office, or Calling, are not to be heard, but to be &s;eperated from: But the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters of</HI> England, <HI>act in the holy things of God, by ver|tue of an Antichri&s;tian Power, Office, or Calling. Therefore&mdash;</HI></P>
<P>The <HI>Major</HI> is evident: for, 1. The Power, Office and Calling of Antichri&s;t is oppo&s;ite and contrary to the Power, Office, and calling of Chri&s;t: not to &s;eparate from &s;uch as act by vertue of &s;uch an Office-power, is to &s;tand by, and plead for Antichri&s;t, again&s;t Chri&s;t.</P>
<P>The &s;um of what Mr. T. an&s;wers hereunto is, If by Antichri&s;tian Power, Office, and Calling be meant the Papal Power&mdash;and the acting in the holy things, be by preaching the doctrine of the <HI>Trent Council,</HI> in the points determined therein again&s;t <HI>Prote&s;tants,</HI> by admini&s;tring Sa|craments according to the <HI>Roman Mi&s;&s;al,</HI> and Di&s;cipline according to the Canon-Law of the Popes; the <HI>Major</HI> is granted and the <HI>Minor</HI> de|nied. But if by <HI>Antichri&s;tian power, &amp;c.</HI> be meant by vertue of mini&s;try according to the Liturgy, Articles of Religion, and Homilies of the C<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">urch of <HI>England,</HI> from the Ordination and Licence of the Bi&s;hops, his <HI>Major</HI> is denied: that which he calls <HI>Antichri&s;tian,</HI> is not truly &s;uch; and it is denied that what he calls Antichri&s;tian is oppo&s;ite, and contrary to the Power, Office, and Calling of Chri&s;t&mdash;</P>
<PB N="203" REF="105">
<P> <HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. The word <GAP DESC="foreign"> (as this Animadverter tells us) found only in the Epi&s;tle of <HI>John;</HI> and principally 1 <HI>John</HI> 2. 18. where the Apo&s;tle di&s;tingui&s;heth between <GAP DESC="foreign"> &amp; <GAP DESC="foreign">, between the <HI>mean</HI> Antichri&s;ts and the <HI>main</HI> Antichri&s;t. The be&s;t interpretation of the word, &s;eems to be a <HI>fal&s;e Chri&s;t,</HI> or <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter"> <HI>Counter-Chri&s;t;</HI> one that under the pretence of being for Chri&s;t, doth really oppo&s;e Chri&s;t (the word <GAP DESC="foreign">, both in oppo&s;ition and compo&s;ition &s;ignifies <HI>[For]</HI> in the Scripture, as <HI>Mat.</HI> 2. 22. <HI>Acts.</HI> 13. 7. and in Cla&s;&s;ical Writers, as <HI>Homer, He&s;ycheius &amp;c.)</HI> in his Offices, Mini&s;try, Di&s;cipline, Wor&s;hip&mdash;He is Antichri&s;t that under the pretence of acting for Chri&s;t, doth indeed (though co|vertly) act again&s;t him, in his name, and under the vizard of his autho|rity. That is Antichri&s;tian, that though it be pretendedly for, and from Chri&s;t, it really is not. And in this &s;en&s;e the Major is to be under&s;tood, Tho&s;e that act in the holy things of God, (viz. Praying, Preaching, Admini&s;tration of Sacraments, <HI>&amp;c.)</HI> by vertue of a Power, Office, and Calling, that is not (though pretendedly) really from Chri&s;t, are to be &s;eparated from, as we plainly declare in the fir&s;t proof of the Major propo&s;ition, in <HI>S. T.</HI> which Mr. <HI>T.</HI> would have di&s;proved if he could: But in the &s;tead thereof he labours to rai&s;e a du&s;t with a multitude of words, before the eyes of the Reader, that he might not be able to per|ceive wherein the weight of the Argument lay.</P>
<P>2ly. He acknowledges the <HI>Major</HI> to be true, if under&s;tood of the Papal Power, Office, and Calling, &s;o that he which acts in the Holy things of God <HI>(i. e.</HI> in Preaching, for whether it be the doctrine of the <HI>Trent Councel,</HI> (or otherwi&s;e) is not in this ca&s;e con&s;iderable; for if he act from an Antichri&s;tian Office-Power, 'tis not his preaching Truth which would make that <HI>Antichri&s;tian</HI> Office-Power, <HI>Chri&s;tian)</HI> admini|&s;tration of Sacraments according to the <HI>Roman Mi&s;&s;al,</HI> and di&s;cipline according to the Canon-Law) by vertue of an Antichri&s;tian Papal Po|wer, is not to be heard&mdash;but in this &s;en&s;e he denies the <HI>Minor.</HI> And I cannot but wonder at the confidence of the man; doth he not know that they derive their Office-Power from the <HI>Papacy?</HI> he is not &s;o ig|norant, as no<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter"> to know it. Do not the Bi&s;hops of <HI>England,</HI> exerci&s;e, the &s;ame power over the <HI>Clergy</HI> and <HI>Laity</HI> (as they are called) thereof, as the Pope doth over his, &s;o that they are upon the matter <HI>Papilli</HI> Petty-Popes? Is this power Antichri&s;tan in the <HI>Papacy,</HI> and not &s;o in the <HI>Pre|lacy?</HI> Is not the manner of admini&s;tation of Sacraments in u&s;e among&s;t us, taken out of the <HI>Popi&s;h Mi&s;&s;al?</HI> Mr. <HI>T.</HI> knows it is. Is not the Di&s;cipline of their Church from the Canon Law? with what forehead can he deny it? Whence is the Hierarchy, Eccle&s;ia&s;tical decrees, Epi&s;|copal
<PB N="204" REF="106"> juri&s;diction, Procurations, Di&s;pen&s;ations, Pluralities, Non-re&s;i|dencies, Popi&s;h-retained-Ceremonies, their Excommunications by a Commi&s;&s;ary, Ordinations, Ab&s;olutions, Degradations, Vi&s;itations, Offerings, Courts, Silencing of Godly Preachers, di&s;quieting the Lords people for Non-conformity, if not from the Cannon-Law? The&s;e things are notoriou&s;ly known to be from them. So that Mr. <HI>T.</HI> grants the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters may lawfully be &s;eparated from. But this might be a &s;lip of his pen before he was aware. That it is our duty to &s;eparate from per&s;ons acting from an Antichri&s;tian Power, Office, or Calling we prove.</P>
<P>2ly. <HI>'Tis unlawful to attend upon the Teachings of Antichri&s;t, therefore upon the teachings of &s;uch as act by vertue of a power derived from him.</HI></P>
<P>To this Mr. <HI>T.</HI> replyes. <HI>If by teachings of Antichri&s;t be meant the teachings of the pre&s;ent Doctrine of the Church of</HI> Rome<HI>&mdash;and the power derived from him be meant the Engli&s;h Bi&s;hops Ordination, it is impudency to &s;ay they derived their power from</HI> Rome.&mdash;</P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. We are not yet &s;peaking of the Mini&s;ters of <HI>England,</HI> to &s;eparate from tho&s;e that act from an Antichri&s;tian power, be they Mi|ni&s;ters of <HI>Germany, Holland&mdash;</HI>if they &s;o act in their Mini&s;try, they are to be &s;eperated from, and that becau&s;e we may not attend upon Anti|chri&s;t in his Teachings, or Mini&s;tration: doth Mr. <HI>T.</HI> deny t<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">is? He &s;aith indeed if they preach truth, we may attend upon their Mini&s;try though they &s;o act.</P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> But this hath been often &s;aid without the lea&s;t proof, and as frequently replyed to, and its incon&s;utilou&s;ne&s;s in its appl<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">cation to the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters, who preach Popi&s;h Errours, and are interdicted the preaching all truth manife&s;ted. 'Tis an a&s;&s;ertion mo&s;t derogatory to the Dignity, and Authority of our Lord and King, and not to be born by his Loyal Subjects. Hath not he Servants enough of his own, to do his work, to preach his Go&s;pel, but he mu&s;t be beholding to the greate&s;t enemies he hath in the world, to &s;end forth Servants into his Vineyard.</P>
<P>2dly. The pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters of <HI>England</HI> deny their power from the Papacy, or they do not; if they do not, it had been my mi&s;take, not impudency to &s;ay they did. If they do, (as mo&s;t certain it is they do, and they them&s;elves acknowledge it and plead it) the Impudency is ra|ther in Mr. T. to deny it.</P>
<P>I add in S. T. 3dly. <HI>Chri&s;t calls his to &s;eparate from every thing of An|tichri&s;t,</HI> Rev. 18. 4. &amp; 14. 9, 10, 11. <HI>Therefore from his Mini&s;try, or &s;uch as act by vertue of an Antichri&s;tian power&mdash;</HI></P>
<P>To which our Animadverter replies. 1 <HI>Rev.</HI> 18. 4. <HI>may be under&s;tood</HI>
<PB N="205" REF="106"> <HI>of a local departure from</HI> Babylon, <HI>when her judgment of de&s;truction from the Kings of the Earth draws nigh.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. And who can hinder Mr. T. from making conjectures? his it may be is no proof that it is. However the ground of the Lord's calling them out of <HI>Rome</HI> (&s;hould it be granted him, that by <HI>Babylon</HI> were meant the City of <HI>Rome)</HI> is plainly intimated to be, <HI>le&s;t they &s;hould par|take of their &s;ins.</HI> Not their dwelling in <HI>Rome,</HI> but their complying with the Antichri&s;tian Mini&s;try, Wor&s;hip&mdash;thereof, their abominable Rites and Ceremonies is that which is loath&s;om to the Lord.</P>
<P>2dly. 'Tis true, God calls not his People to depart from every do|ctrine the Pope teacheth (there is &s;ome truth remaining among&s;t them, which is to be cleaved to, becau&s;e truth) much le&s;s a rejection of the Bible&mdash;The&s;e are but vain words, empty flouri&s;hes, this Animad|verter knows full well that the&s;e things are not affirmed by tho&s;e with whom he hath to do.</P>
<P>3dly. To a departure from her by for&s;aking Communion with her in Wor&s;hip, and leaving &s;ubjection to her Government, he grants this Scripture may be extended: which is all we need contend for. The Wor&s;hip of <HI>Rome</HI> and <HI>England</HI> are much the &s;ame, as we prove. The Church-government in u&s;e among&s;t us by Arch-Bi&s;hops, Bi&s;hops, i&s;&s;ues from the &s;ame &s;our&s;e and &s;pring, as is known. Therefore a &s;eparation from the Wor&s;hip and Mini&s;try of <HI>England</HI> lawful by the Animadver|ter's confe&s;&s;ion.</P>
<P>4thly. When God commands to come out of her, he mu&s;t be inter|preted to come out of every thing of her, <HI>viz.</HI> that which is truly hers; whatever hath not the &s;tamp and authority of God upon it: for the rea|&s;on why the Lord would have his for&s;ake any thing of hers, is, becau&s;e it is hers, and hath not his own Image and Super&s;cription. 'Tis ridi|culous to imagine, that God &s;hould command a &s;eparation from her Wor&s;hip and Government, and not from her Mini&s;try, when this is a main part of her <GAP DESC="foreign">, or Church-Government.</P>
<P>He adds, 2dly. <HI>By the Bea&s;t and his Image,</HI> Rev. 14. 9, 10, 11. <HI>is meant &s;ome Empire or State, which promotes Idolatry, the Roman Papacy, the wor&s;hipping of which is undoubtedly the acknowledging of its power, and &s;ubjection to their Idolatrous Decrees and Edicts; The receiving his mark is a profe&s;&s;ion of our being the &s;ervants of the Pope, to &s;ubject to his authority:</HI> and after the citation of Mr. <HI>Brightman</HI> and Mr. <HI>Mede</HI> &s;peaking to this purpo&s;e, he &s;aith, <HI>which doth evince that the wor&s;hip of the Bea&s;t and his Image&mdash;is not retaining every u&s;age of the Papi&s;ts, though &s;uper&s;titious and corrupt, but acknowledging the univer&s;al Monarchy, of the Popes ado|ring Images, the Ho&s;t, &amp;c.</HI></P>
<PB N="206" REF="107">
<P> <HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. But what doth evince that this is all that is intended by wor&s;hipping the Image of the Bea&s;t? Mr. T. would bear his Reader in hand, as if he had produced &s;omewhat for the confirmation of his A&s;&s;er|tion, when he hath not &s;aid the lea&s;t word tending thereunto.</P>
<P>The very truth is, 2ly. The Bea&s;t mentioned, <HI>Rev.</HI> 14. 9, 10. is the &s;ame with the Bea&s;t mentioned <HI>Rev.</HI> 13. 11. or the fal&s;e Prophet, <HI>Rev.</HI> 19. 21. or Antichri&s;t con&s;ider'd in his Eccle&s;ia&s;tical State, compo&s;ed of head (the Popes) and members, the re&s;t of the Antichri&s;tian Clergy (whether at <HI>Rome,</HI> or el&s;ewhere:) for as the learned <HI>Mede</HI> &s;aith, the Pope alone maketh not up the Bea&s;t, except the Clergy be jo<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">n'd with him: &s;ince the Bea&s;t doth &s;ignifie a company of men compo&s;ed of a cer|tain order of members (like as the Bea&s;t hath) not one man alone: the Image of the Bea&s;t cannot be a dumb Image, 'tis expre&s;ly &s;aid to be a &s;peaking one, <HI>viz.</HI> the Eccle&s;ia&s;tical policy, that in its Cannon-Laws (upon which both that of <HI>Rome</HI> and <HI>England</HI> is founded) breatheth forth nothing but Excommunication again&s;t &s;uch as &s;hall di&s;obey them, upon which they are deliver'd over to the Secular Power here with us, though not to be burned, yet to perpetual Impri&s;onment. The wor&s;hipping the Bea&s;t and receiving the mark, is &s;ubjection to an Antichri&s;tian Mi|ni&s;try, and Church-polity, from which it is the duty of the people of God to &s;eparate; and if we prove not the Mini&s;ters of <HI>England</HI> to be &s;o, we acknowledg this Argument to be <HI>null,</HI> and that notwith&s;tanding any thing in it hitherto a&s;&s;erted, it may be lawful to attend them.</P>
<P>We &s;ay in <HI>S. T.</HI> 4ly. <HI>That there is not a command in the Scripture, enjoyning Saints to take heed of being deceived, to try the spirits&mdash;but is an abundant demon&s;tration of the truth of the fir&s;t Propo&s;ition.</HI></P>
<P>To which Mr. T. &s;ubjoyns; 1. <HI>If by acting in the holy things of God by vertue of an Antichri&s;tian power&mdash;be meant their acknowledging the pow|er, teaching the doctrine, owning the calling of him that is truly Antichri&s;t, 'tis granted.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> To this we have already replyed; 'Tis enough to prove any per&s;on ought to be &s;eparated from, if he act in the holy things of God by vertue of an Antichri&s;tian power, though the doctrine he preach be true.</P>
<P>He adds, 2ly. <HI>The Scriptures mentioned forbid</HI> (command he means) <HI>only to reject Antichri&s;tian Doctrine, and Wor&s;hip, not every thing &s;aid by any without proof to be a thing of Antichri&s;t.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. Very well; If we prove then the Wor&s;hip of the Church of <HI>England</HI> to be Antichri&s;tian, it is to be reiected. Now it being the Wor&s;hip of the Papacy, which is acknowledged by him to be &s;o, I can|not &s;ee how it can be otherwi&s;e.</P>
<PB N="207" REF="107">
<P> 2ly. The Scriptures mentioned, fairly import, not only a command for the rejection of the Doctrine and Wor&s;hip which is Antichri&s;tian, but them al&s;o that pretend to be, but really are not of God. The per&s;ons are to be proved and tryed, <GAP DESC="foreign">, try them as Gold&s;miths try Gold, whether it be pure and right; and if you find them not to be &s;o, reject them. 1 <HI>John.</HI> 4. 1.</P>
<P>We proceed, and in <HI>S. T.</HI> &s;ay further, 5ly. <HI>The in&s;titution of Officers of his own, by Chri&s;t to be continued to the end of the World,</HI> Eph. 4. 11. <HI>evinceth the truth of the Major propo&s;ition.</HI></P>
<P>To this our Animadverter an&s;wers, 1. <HI>'Tis true &s;ome of the Officers mentioned</HI> Ephe&s;. 4. <HI>are to be continued to the end of the World in the way appointed by him, but that there is any particular way of Election&mdash;of ordi|nary <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">a&s;tors, and Teachers, in tho&s;e words appears not.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> Who &s;aith there is? 'Tis &s;ufficient they prove the continua|tion of the Officers in the Church to be an In&s;titution of Chri&s;t. Of the particular way of their election we have mentioned el&s;ewhere, as we have &s;hewed. 2ly. 'Tis well this Animadverter will acknowledg that there is a way appointed by Chri&s;t, in which Church-Officers are to be continued: which as I conceive is a part of Church-Government, which therefore cannot be left to &s;uch an indifferency as he &s;ometimes inti|mates.</P>
<P>He tels us 2ly. <HI>How the Major is proved by it he di&s;cerns not, unle&s;s this be the Argument; Chri&s;t hath appointed the&s;e, therefore no other are to be heard, which overthrowes the hearing of Gifted-Brethren.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> We are contented with the form our words are by him ca&s;t into: only with this alteration, <HI>therefore no other are to be heard as Mi|ni&s;ters, acting by vertue of an Office-Power,</HI> which makes nothing again&s;t the hearing of gifted Brethren. We further add in <HI>S. T.</HI></P>
<P>6ly. <HI>That there is no promi&s;e of a ble&s;&s;ing in the whole Scripture, upon per&s;ons attending upon &s;uch a Mini&s;try&mdash;</HI></P>
<P>Mr. <HI>T.</HI> replies, 1. <HI>Though there be no promi&s;e of a ble&s;&s;ing upon per&s;ons attending on &s;uch a Mini&s;try, yet if they Preach the Go&s;pel truly, there is.</HI> Luk. 11. 28.</P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. 'Tis not probable they &s;hould Preach the Go&s;pel truly; as touching the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters of <HI>England,</HI> they do not &s;o. 1. They preach it from a fal&s;e mi&s;&s;ion. 2ly. They preach it by halves (as is known) 3. They mixt many humane traditions therewith, and thereby ob&s;cure the Go&s;pel, as Mr. <HI>T.</HI> him&s;elf in his <HI>Fermentum Phari&s;aeorum</HI> a&s;&s;erts. 4ly. There is no ble&s;&s;ing promi&s;ed to per&s;ons attending upon &s;uch a Mini&s;try, <HI>Luk.</HI> 11. 28. Chri&s;t &s;peaks not there of any &s;uch Mi|ni&s;try;
<PB N="208" REF="108"> the whole of his intendment is, that no external p<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">iviledge, though it were to bear him in the Womb, <HI>&amp;c.</HI> who was a true <HI>Me&s;&s;iah,</HI> renders a man glorious, ble&s;&s;ed, and excellent, as a conformity to the divine will, which how much it is to his purpo&s;e others will judge.</P>
<P>He &s;aith, 2ly. <HI>If there were no promi&s;e of a ble&s;&s;ing, the Major is not proved, unle&s;s this were true, They are not to be heard, but &s;eparated from, to who&s;e Mini&s;try as &s;uch, a ble&s;&s;ing is not promi&s;ed; which makes unlawful the hearing of gifted Bretheren, unle&s;s they can produce &s;uch a promi&s;e.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> Let me &s;eriou&s;ly ask this Animadverter, whether he doth not when he goes to hear,&mdash;go to meet with God in that duty, and to receive a ble&s;&s;ing from him? This he will not &s;ure deny: now, I would know further, whence it is he expects to meet with God, and be ble&s;&s;ed by him in his &s;o doing? can he or any one in the world, give any other rea&s;on&punc; but this, Becau&s;e God hath promi&s;ed to meet and ble&s;s his peo|ple, while they are waiting on him, in his own wayes? Whether the work be managed by a Mini&s;ter of Chri&s;t, as acting by Office-power, or a private Brother acting by vertue of Talents received, for the pro|fiting and edification of the Body, we are not de&s;titute of a promi&s;e of a ble&s;&s;ing; <HI>Exod.</HI> 20. 24. <HI>I&s;a.</HI> 64. 5. <HI>Mat.</HI> 18. 20. <HI>Eph.</HI> 4. 11 <HI>to</HI> 15. But if we run to a fal&s;e Mini&s;try, to &s;uch as act from an Antichri&s;tian office and calling, I know not any promi&s;e of a ble&s;&s;ing, but rather the con|trary. So that the <HI>Major</HI> Propo&s;ition remains un&s;haken, notwith&s;tand|ing Mr. <HI>T.</HI> his Battery again&s;t it. His next attempt is again&s;t the <HI>Mi|nor,</HI> of which in the next Section.</P>
</DIV3>
<DIV3 N="2" TYPE="section">
<HEAD>Sect. 2.</HEAD>
<ARGUMENT>
<P><HI>The pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters of England, act in the holy things of God by ver|tue of an Antichri&s;tian power, office, or calling, proved. They are not from Chri&s;t. There is a twofold Church, Mini&s;try, Wor&s;hip. Of</HI> Luthers <HI>Mini&s;try. The names, office of the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters, their admi&s;&s;ion thereinto forreign to the Scripture. Of Suffragan Bi&s;hops.</HI></P>
</ARGUMENT>
<P>THat the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters of <HI>England</HI> act in the holy things of God by vertue of an Antichri&s;tian power, office, or calling: (which is the <HI>Minor</HI> Propo&s;ition of the la&s;t mentioned Argument) we &s;ay in <HI>S.</HI> T. wants not &s;ufficient demon&s;tration. 1. <HI>The pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters of England are either from Chri&s;t, or from Antichri&s;t, there is no medium&mdash;That they are not from Chri&s;t, be&s;ides what is already proved, may be further evinced.</HI></P>
<P>To which our Animadverter an&s;wers. 1. <HI>Mr.</HI> Brad&s;haw <HI>a&s;&s;erts, that there is a</HI> medium, <HI>and that a Mini&s;try may be from Chri&s;t in re<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">pect of the</HI>
<PB N="209" REF="108"> <HI>thing mini&s;tred, though from Antichri&s;t in respect of the way of entry into it; yea,</HI> he &s;aith, <HI>it is not nece&s;&s;ary that the mini&s;try of Prie&s;ts and Deacons, though ordained by Antichri&s;t him&s;elf, &s;hould be the mini&s;try of his apo&s;ta&s;ie; but notwith&s;tanding his Ordination, their mini&s;try may be the Mini&s;try of Je&s;us Christ, as was the Mini&s;try of</HI> Luther, Hus, <HI>&amp;c.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. All that Mr. <HI>Brad&s;haw</HI> &s;aith is not Go&s;pel, nor to be be|lieved becau&s;e he &s;aith it.</P>
<P>2dly. That the thing mini&s;tred &s;hould render that Mini&s;try, that with re&s;pect to the way of entry into it is Antichri&s;tian, a Mini&s;try of Chri&s;t, is to me &s;uch a riddle, as needs an <HI>Oedipus</HI> to unravel; I am &s;ure the di&s;tinction is un&s;criptural. We reade therein but of two Churches, 1. The <HI>Woman cloathed with the Sun,</HI> (afterwards in the Wilderne&s;s) <HI>the Bride the Lambs Wife,</HI> with her Mini&s;try, Ordinances, Wor&s;hip, (though in a mean per&s;ecuted &s;tate) called <HI>the Mini&s;ters of Christ, Men of God, Stewards of the My&s;tery of God, Angels, Pa&s;tors, &amp;c.</HI> 2. The fal&s;e An|tichri&s;tian Church, called <HI>Babylon, the Whore, the Mother of Harlots, the Woman in pompous array, outward &s;plendour and glory, drunk with the blood of the Saints,</HI> Rev. 17. 2, 3, 4. her Wor&s;hip called <HI>the Wine of her Fornication, Abominations of the Earth&mdash;</HI>her Mini&s;try called <HI>Fal&s;e-Prophets, Locu&s;ts</HI> (as &s;ome think) Rev. 9. 3. <HI>unclean &s;pirits like Frogs,</HI> Rev. 16. 13. And to one of the&s;e every (called <HI>Chri&s;tian)</HI> Mini&s;ter in the world mu&s;t appertain: if to the fir&s;t, they are of Chri&s;t; if to the &s;econd, of Antichri&s;t.</P>
<P>3dly. That a Mini&s;try of Prie&s;ts&mdash;ordained by Antichri&s;t him&s;elf, is not a Mini&s;try of his Apo&s;ta&s;ie, but a Mini&s;try of Chri&s;t, had need be attended with more evidence than a bare a&s;&s;ertion; it being &s;o evi|dently fal&s;e and untrue. How there &s;hould be any Antichri&s;tian Mi|ni&s;try in the world if that were true, I know not.</P>
<P>4ly. The Mini&s;try of <HI>Luther&mdash;</HI>was the Mini&s;try of Chri&s;t: but he received not his Mini&s;try from <HI>Rome,</HI> but his Friardom.</P>
<P>Mr. <HI>T.</HI> adds of his own. <HI>If by being from Chri&s;t, or Antichri&s;t, be under|&s;tood of outward calling, Mini&s;ters may be neither from Chri&s;t nor Antichri&s;t, and yet true Mini&s;ters</HI> (he &s;hould have &s;aid of Chri&s;t) <HI>as tho&s;e that preach|ed Chri&s;t even of envy,</HI> Phil. 1. 15, 18.</P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. That a man &s;hould be a Mini&s;ter of Chri&s;t, and not from Chri&s;t, or externally called according to his appointment, <HI>i. e.</HI> a Mini&s;ter of Chri&s;t, and not a Mini&s;ter of Chri&s;t, is &s;omewhat a &s;trange A&s;&s;ertion.</P>
<P>2dly. How doth he prove that tho&s;e, mentioned <HI>Phil.</HI> 1. preached Chri&s;t by vertue of an Office-power, as Mini&s;ters and not as gifted Bre|thren.</P>
<PB N="210" REF="109">
<P> 3dly. If Mini&s;ters, how proves he that they were not from Chri&s;t in re&s;pect of outward calling. This he &s;hould have proved if he would have made good his A&s;&s;ertion, his failure wherein expo&s;es it to the con|tempt of the judicious Reader. But our Animadverter delights in di|ctates without proof.</P>
<P>His next advance is to the con&s;ideration of the evidence we bring to prove the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters not to be from Chri&s;t. 1. Their names are foraign to the Scripture; where read we of <HI>Prie&s;ts,</HI> as di&s;tingui&s;hed from Chri&s;tians, in the new Te&s;tament, <HI>Deans, Canons, Petty-Canons&mdash;</HI>the&s;e are only found in the Popes Pontifical, whence they are derived.</P>
<P>To this he an&s;wers, 1. <HI>That the term Prie&s;ts is the &s;ame with Presbyters, and that is &s;ure found in Scripture,</HI> Acts. 11. 30.&mdash;</P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. Thus indeed <HI>Hooker Eccle&s;. Pol. l.</HI> 5. and before him <HI>Whitgift An&s;wer to the Admonit.</HI> &s;ay, but in vain. For, 1. The words are never u&s;ed to &s;ignifie the &s;ame thing, but divers. 2. The fir&s;t A&s;&s;umers of the title (under the times of the Go&s;pel) never intended to &s;ignifie any &s;uch thing thereby. They a&s;&s;umed it not (meerly) to di&s;tingu&s;h them&s;elves from the people, but as a note of di&s;tance among&s;t them|&s;elves.</P>
<P>2dly. <HI>The other names (&s;aith M. T.) note not any Mini&s;try different from the Mini&s;try of Chri&s;t.&mdash;</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. I &s;tand a&s;toni&s;hed to hear Mr. <HI>T.</HI> &s;ay &s;o: if they do not, tho&s;e who bear tho&s;e names are the Mini&s;try of Chri&s;t: <GAP DESC="foreign">? Is this the draught of that hand, which was &s;olemnly lift up to Heaven, when he &s;wore to extirpate them, as none of Chri&s;t's Mini&s;try?</P>
<P>2dly. Where read we of any &s;uch Officers of Chri&s;t in the Scripture (who are not &s;o called, as Lecturers&mdash;with re&s;pect to the manner of their doing the work of the Mini&s;try) but with re&s;pect to &s;ome place in the Church, higher or lower then the re&s;idue of the Clergy?</P>
<P>3dly. The Author of the <HI>S. T.</HI> argues not the names are forraign to Scripture, therefore the things, as this Animadverter fal&s;ly pretends, he a&s;&s;erts, as fa&s;t as he can, that both name and thing is &s;o.</P>
<P>4thly. 'Tis a &s;hrewd &s;ign that tho&s;e Mini&s;ters came out of the Mint of Antichri&s;t, who bear the names wherewith he &s;tamps his Mini&s;ters.</P>
<P>We add, 2dly. <HI>As their names are forraign to the Scripture, &s;o are their Offices. Deacons attending tables we read of; But Deacons praying, preach|ing, admini&s;tring Sacraments by vertue of an Office-power, an order of the fir&s;t &s;tep to the Prie&s;thood, we find not: Prie&s;ts in the old Te&s;tament we read of, in the New, Saints are &s;o called&mdash;but an Office of Prie&s;thood in men for the Mini&s;try of the Go&s;pel, that are to be bounded by men in that their Office,</HI>
<PB N="211" REF="109"> <HI>mu&s;t preach what they would have them, and cea&s;e when they would have them (as in the ca&s;e of the pre&s;ent Mini&s;try of</HI> England) <HI>the Scripture is a &s;tranger to.</HI></P>
<P>To which Mr. <HI>T.</HI> adjoyns, 1. <HI>If they be appointed to pray, preach, and admini&s;ter Sacraments, they have this to &s;ay, that</HI> P<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="3 letters">ip <HI>did &s;o,</HI> Acts. 8.</P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. The Church at Jeru&s;alem, to which he was related as a Dea|con, was fir&s;t &s;catter'd. 2. It appears not that he preached by vertue of an Office-power, as a Deacon, or in any other capacity then as a gifted Brother. 3. 'Tis mo&s;t certain it was no part of his work as Deacon, <HI>Acts.</HI> 6. 2. the attending on the Mini&s;try of the Word is peculiarly di|&s;tingui&s;hed from the attending Tables. 4. His baptizing &s;eems to be by the extraordinary, and immediate call and impul&s;e of the Spirit: none of which can be a&s;&s;erted of the&s;e Deacons.</P>
<P>He adds, 2dly. <HI>The Deacons Office may be well conceived the fir&s;t &s;tep to the Prie&s;thood&mdash;in that</HI> Paul <HI>requires of the Deacons, that they hold the Mini&s;try of Faith, in a pure Con&s;cience, and tells us that they who have u&s;ed the Office of a Deacon well, purcha&s;e to them&s;elves a good degree&mdash;</HI>1 Tim. 3. 9, 13.</P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 'Tis true, <HI>Paul</HI> &s;aith &s;o, but that thence this Animadverter &s;hould be able to inferre, therefore the Deacons Office may be well accounted the fir&s;t &s;tep to the Prie&s;thood, mu&s;t be imputed to that acutene&s;s of his, whereby he is enabled to deduce <HI>quidlibet ex quolibet,</HI> what conclu&s;ion he hath a mind from any premi&s;&s;es. There being not a tittle more or le&s;s &s;poken by <HI>Paul</HI> of any &s;uch thing, nor thought of in tho&s;e dayes.</P>
<P><HI>As for the name Priest,</HI> (he &s;aith) <HI>if the Saints, as Saints, may be termed&punc; Priests, then may the Elders.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 'Tis true, the Elders, as Saints, may be &s;o called, but not as Elders, or in re&s;pect of their Office of drawing nigh to God: nor doth the expre&s;&s;ion u&s;ed by <HI>Paul, Rom.</HI> 15. 16. prove any &s;uch thing.</P>
<P>Mr. <HI>T.</HI> proceeds. <HI>As for that which is added, that the pre&s;ent Ministry of</HI> England <HI>is bounded by men, in their Office; &s;o as that they mu&s;t preach what they would have them, and cea&s;e when they would have them; I think</HI> (&s;aith he) <HI>'tis not without example in the be&s;t ordered Churches.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. I remember Pope <HI>Leo</HI> the 10th, in the <HI>Lateran</HI> Council, Se&s;. 2. decreed, <Q>That none &s;hould preach concerning the coming of Antichri&s;t, but if the Lord &s;hall reveal &s;ome things to others, as by <HI>Amos</HI> he promi&s;eth to do, they ought not to divulge it, before the Sea Apo&s;tolick hath examined it, or if that cannot commodiou&s;ly be, the Bi&s;hop with &s;ome others; he that doth otherwi&s;e let him be ex|communicated.</Q>
<PB N="212" REF="110"> From whence the Reader may ea&s;ily conjecture from what quarter the pre&s;ent practice of the Bi&s;hops in this matter doth arrive.</P>
<P>2dly. 'Tis true, the Apo&s;tle would have <HI>Timothy</HI> to abi<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">e at <HI>Ephe&s;us,</HI> that he charge &s;ome, that they teach no other doctrine, 1 <HI>Tim</HI> 1. 3. and <HI>Titus</HI> to reject an Heretick, <HI>Tit.</HI> 3. 10. and &s;aith, 1 <HI>Cor.</HI> 14. 30. <HI>If any thing be revealed to another that &s;itteth by, the fir&s;t mu&s;t hold his peace&mdash;</HI>But that becau&s;e <HI>Paul</HI> took all the care he could, to hinder the &s;preading of error, and the preventing di&s;orderly prophe&s;yings, (as more than one &s;peaking at once) therefore 'tis lawful for the Bi&s;hops in an Anti|chri&s;tian way, by force and violence, to hinder the free pa&s;&s;age of Go&s;|pel-truths, is like the re&s;t of this <HI>B. D.</HI> Logick, for which I dare &s;ay the lea&s;t Smatterer in that kind of learning, will &s;ay, he needed not to have taken any degree in the Schools.</P>
<P>3dly. That the practice in&s;tanced in, is not without example in the be&s;t ordered Churches (after an unu&s;ual rate of mode&s;ty with him) our Dictator tells us, he doth <HI>think;</HI> but he might ea&s;ily have informed him&s;elf otherwi&s;e. 'Tis &s;uch a piece of tyranny, that <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">ell ordered Churches cannot bear, that per&s;ons &s;anctified, and taught by the Spirit of the Lord, &s;ound in the Faith, called al&s;o according to the appoint|ment, and way of Chri&s;t, to preach the Go&s;pel, &s;hould no<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter"> be &s;uffered &s;o to do without the licence of an <HI>Antichri&s;tian Foundling, a dumb Idol</HI> of the Popes make, call'd a <HI>Lordain</HI> (I &s;hould have &s;aid a <HI>Lord) Bi&s;hop;</HI> Many of the worthies of the Lord have prote&s;ted again&s;t, as the renown|ed <HI>John Hus,</HI> the Churches in <HI>Bohemia,</HI> the mo&s;t eminent in the Council of <HI>Ba&s;il&mdash;</HI>as abominable and Antichri&s;tian.</P>
<P>But Mr. <HI>T.</HI> further tells us, <HI>that if the Prelates &s;ilence per&s;ons when they &s;hould not, they are accountable to Christ, but it is no proof that their Mini&s;try is not from Chri&s;t; who &s;ubmit to the commands of men, who have power over them, forbiding them to preach &s;ome truths&mdash;</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. That the Prelates are accountable to none but Chri&s;t (as this Animadverters expre&s;&s;ions intimates) I am &s;orry to hear from him: the mo&s;t flattring Canoni&s;t would not &s;ay more of the Pope him&s;elf.</P>
<P>2ly. 'Tis a proof that the Mini&s;try is not of Chri&s;t, that is &s;o bound|ed, if <HI>Pauls</HI> words be true, <HI>Gal.</HI> 1. 10.</P>
<P N="3">3. That Lord Bi&s;hops have any power over the Mini&s;ters of Chri&s;t, by vertue of any in&s;titution of his, he cannot prove; the &s;ubmi&s;&s;ion of Mini&s;ters unto them, in things Eccle&s;ia&s;tical, when they are di&s;titute of &s;uch authority, is &s;o far from being an extenuation, that it is an aggrava|tion of their crime.</P>
<PB N="213" REF="110">
<P> We add in <HI>S. T.</HI> 3dly. <HI>That the admi&s;&s;ion of the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters into their Office, by a Lord Bi&s;hop, without the con&s;ent of the Congregation, in which they act as Officers, is al&s;o forraign to the Scripture.</HI></P>
<P>What Mr. <HI>T.</HI> hath before &s;aid in oppo&s;ition hereunto, is already an&s;wered. What he hath further to argue, &s;hall be now con&s;idered. He tells us, 1. <HI>The admi&s;&s;ion of the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters hath not alwayes been by Lord-Bi&s;hops, &s;ome have been made by Suffragan Bi&s;hops&mdash;</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. The mo&s;t of the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters (Mr. <HI>T.</HI> denyes not, nor can he) have their admi&s;&s;ion from a Lord-Bi&s;hop.</P>
<P>2dly. The very truth is, they all have &s;o, the Suffragan Bi&s;hops (he &s;peaks of) is but the Lord Bi&s;hops Deputy, who repre&s;ents his Lord&s;hips per&s;on in that act of Ordination, and therefore what is done by him, is done by the Lord Bi&s;hop.</P>
<P>3dly. Admi&s;&s;ion by a Suffragan, titular Bi&s;hop, is forraign to Scrip|ture, as well as admi&s;&s;ion by a Lord-Bi&s;hop.</P>
<P>He proceeds, 2dly. <HI>Where the Pari&s;hioners are Patrons, there is the ele|ction of the Congregation.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> There are but few Pari&s;hes, that as Patrons, pre&s;ent their own Mini&s;ters, and yet tho&s;e that do, mu&s;t not have any Mini&s;ter, but whom the Lord-Bi&s;hop plea&s;eth; his admi&s;&s;ion is &s;till from him.</P>
<P>He further tells us, 3dly. <HI>In others there is an implioit con&s;ent, in their Ance&s;tors yielding that power to their Patron, to pre&s;ent; and an after-con&s;ent, by receiving him that is in&s;tituted as their Mini&s;ter.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> This is a vanity not worth the minding. 1. He cannot pro|duce any authentick Writing, te&s;tifying &s;uch a reddition by our Ance|&s;tors. 2. If he could, though it may be &s;uppo&s;ed they may alienate what of right belongs to us as men (which yet in many ca&s;es is fal&s;e) 'tis impo&s;&s;ible they &s;hould do &s;o, with re&s;pect of what appertains to us as Chri&s;tians. 3. The after-con&s;ent &s;ignifies nothing, they mu&s;t con|&s;ent whether they will or no; if they do not, but te&s;tifie their di&s;&s;ent, by ab&s;taining from hearing them,&mdash;they are pre&s;ented into their Ec|cle&s;ia&s;tick Courts, excommunicated, impri&s;oned, ruined.</P>
<P>He adds, 4thly. <HI>But whether the&s;e u&s;ages be right, or wrong, notwith|&s;tanding them, yet may the Offices of the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters of</HI> England <HI>be from Chri&s;t.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. This is a dictate without proof, which we reject. 2. That a Mini&s;ter &s;hould in their names, office, and admi&s;&s;ion thereunto, not &s;ymbolize with the Mini&s;ters of Chri&s;t, and yet be his Mini&s;ters, is ab|&s;ur'd and irrational to imagine. This we have proved of the pre&s;ent Mi|ni&s;ters, and add, that in all the&s;e they &s;ymbolize with the Popi&s;h orde<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">
<PB N="214" REF="111"> of Prie&s;ts: which we at large demon&s;trat<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter"> in <HI>S. T.</HI> what Mr. T. excepts again&s;t it, &s;hall be con&s;idered in the next Section.</P>
</DIV3>
<DIV3 N="3" TYPE="section">
<HEAD>Sect. 3.</HEAD>
<ARGUMENT>
<P><HI>The pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters of</HI> England <HI>&s;ymbolize with the Popi&s;h order of Prie&s;ts. Of the name</HI> Prie&s;ts. <HI>The abolition of names once abu&s;ed to idolatry.</HI> Ho&s;. 2. 15. Z<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">ch. 13. 2. <HI>explained.</HI> Baali <HI>what it &s;ignifies.</HI> Exod. 23. 13. P&s;al. 16. 4. <HI>opened. Of Orthodox Antiquity, 'tis no &s;ufficient ju&s;ti|fication of what we do in divine things. The Te&s;timony of the Ancients. M.</HI> T. <HI>his arguing and</HI> Baronius <HI>the Papi&s;t, alike.</HI> Ignatius <HI>his</HI> <GAP DESC="foreign">. <HI>The book of ordering Prie&s;ts and Deacons is &s;tolen out of the Popes Pontifical: as is evident by the parallel drawn betwixt them.</HI></P>
</ARGUMENT>
<P>THat the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters of <HI>England</HI> &s;ymbolize wit<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter"> the Popi&s;h order of Prie&s;ts, we evince in <HI>S. T.</HI> under &s;everal con&s;iderations.</P>
<P N="1">1. They are both called, and own them&s;elves Prie&s;ts; which being a term borrowed either from the Prie&s;ts of the Law, the a&s;&s;ertion of &s;uch a Prie&s;thood, being a denial of Chri&s;t come in the fle&s;h; or from the Prie&s;ts of the Heathen (from whom the word <HI>Orders</HI> is undo<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">btedly bor|rowed) or from the Antichri&s;tian Church of <HI>Rome,</HI> &s;uch idolatrous, &s;u|per&s;titious names, being commanded by the Lord to be aboli&s;hed. <HI>Ho&s;.</HI> 2. 15, <HI>Zech</HI> 13. 2. wants not its &s;ufficient weight&mdash;.</P>
<P>To which Mr. T. 1. <HI>The word Prie&s;t is no more than Presby<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">er, nor u&s;ed in any other &s;en&s;e by the Papi&s;ts, or the Church of</HI> England.</P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. this hath already been replyed to, than which there is no|thing more fal&s;e: The Engli&s;h of <HI>Sacerdos,</HI> is not, (nor ever was) Pre&s;|byter or Elder, but Prie&s;t.</P>
<P>2ly. This is not to his purpo&s;e: The Mini&s;ters of <HI>England</HI> and <HI>Rome</HI> &s;ymbolize in name, if they are both call'd Prie&s;ts, which this Animad|verter cannot deny. Whether there hath not been a willingne&s;s in &s;ome to return to Popery manife&s;tly di&s;covered, let the Nation judge.</P>
<P>He adds, 2dly. <HI>Zach.</HI> 13. 2. <HI>is not a command, but a promi&s;e.</HI> 2ly. <HI>Its the abolition of the names of Idols, not of Priests, that is there promi&s;ed.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. 'Tis true <HI>Zach.</HI> 13. 3. is a promi&s;e, but &s;uch an one as abundantly manife&s;ts the dete&s;tation of the Lord again&s;t them, which implyes a command from God to his people, not to make u&s;e of them. 2dly. The names of Idols are the names u&s;ed (peculiarly) in Idolatrous Wor&s;hip; &s;o that though Mr. T. never found Prie&s;ts to be reckoned among&s;t Idols, (which yet they might too in dayes pa&s;t have been, when too much idolized by the people.) Yet he knows the name <HI>Prie&s;t</HI> hath
<PB N="215" REF="111"> been u&s;ed in idolatrous wor&s;hip, both Heathen and Antichri&s;tian, pecu|liarly appropriated unto their Mini&s;ters therein employed.</P>
<P>3dly. <HI>Ho&s;.</HI> 2. 16, 17. is rather, he tels us, <HI>a prediction then a prohi|bition, God would be called</HI> I&s;hi <HI>not</HI> Baali, <HI>becau&s;e that name &s;ignifies</HI> a kind husband, <HI>this,</HI> one that is cruel and rigorous: or, <HI>le&s;t &s;he &s;hould in thought remember the Idol, or be thought by others to continue that Idolatrous name.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. The words are not meerly a prediction, they are a prohibi|tion al&s;o: <HI>Thou &s;halt call me no more Baali,</HI> we had thought had been an expre&s;s forbidding them &s;o to call him.</P>
<P>2dly. The Que&s;tion is, Whether the&s;e names were &s;uper&s;titious names, commanded by the Lord to be aboli&s;hed, or not? upon what|other accounts they were &s;o commanded: &s;o that till Mr. <HI>T.</HI> proves that this was not abu&s;ed to Idolatry, nor commanded by the Lord to be aboli&s;hed, he doth but <HI>auram vapulare,</HI> &s;peak nothing to the purpo&s;e.</P>
<P>Yet, 3dly. That God would not be called <HI>Baali,</HI> becau&s;e that name &s;ignifies a cruel and rigorous husband, is 1. more then puerile, every &s;matterer in that language knows the word <HI>Bagnal,</HI> or <HI>Baal,</HI> &s;ignifies not an au&s;tere, but a kind husband, (coming of <GAP DESC="foreign">, <HI>exceedingly to love)</HI> it &s;ig|nifies indeed a <HI>Lord,</HI> but that is metaphorically, and not a tyrannous and cruel Lord neither. 2dly. 'Tis wicked, being a charging of the holy God fal&s;ly; He is called <HI>Baali,</HI> their Lord, <HI>I&s;a.</HI> 54. 5. yet no cruel, and rigorous one I hope: I am &s;ure he is there &s;o called upon the ac|count of his love and tenderne&s;s to his people, rolling away their re|proach, and crowning them with dignity &amp; glory. 3. The Spirit of the Lord gives us another rea&s;on of the rejection of the name <HI>v.</HI> 17. <HI>Groti. us</HI> &s;aith well upon the place, <Q>the Church is interdicted the u&s;e of the name, out of horrour of that name which hath been impo&s;ed on an Idol.</Q></P>
<P>We add in <HI>S.</HI> T. <HI>Of the &s;ame mind with us in this matter, is</HI> Hierom, <HI>the Hebrew Docters,</HI> Sanctius, Polanus, Rivet&mdash;.</P>
<P>M. T. replyes, <HI>I do not think any of his Authors &s;ay &s;o.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. But it's evident they do &s;ay &s;o: <HI>viz.</HI> that the names given to the Idols are to be aboli&s;hed, and not given to God, <HI>Hierom</HI> in the words cited by him, affirms as much: <HI>I &s;o hate the names of Idols, that I will not have it &s;aid</HI> Baali, <HI>but</HI> I&s;hi&mdash;Gods hatred to the Idol, he tels you, is the ground why he will not have that Idolatrous name u&s;ed in his &s;ervice. I do not think but &s;acrificing Prie&s;ts are altogether as abominable to the Lord; and by the &s;ame rea&s;on that name that hath been given to them, ought not to be given to his Mini&s;ters. What <HI>Ri|vet</HI> &s;aith, he a&s;&s;ents to, yet that is as much as we affirm, God abhorreth
<PB N="216" REF="112"> the u&s;e of names becau&s;e they have been abu&s;ed to Idolatry, the name Prie&s;ts have been &s;o abu&s;ed, and this Animadverter mu&s;t acknowledge as much, except he will deny the abominable Sacrament of the Ma&s;s, a propitiatory Sacrifice for the quick and dead, (as the Papi&s;ts &s;ay) to be Idolatry; The Sacrificers, or Ma&s;s-Prie&s;ts, being &s;o called.</P>
<P>The te&s;timony of the <HI>Helvetian Churches</HI> he grants is, as we have re|ported: <HI>They give not the name Prie&s;t to their Mini&s;ters, not becau&s;e they think the word as it an&s;wers to Presbyter</HI> (he tels us) <HI>is evil&mdash;but as it is u&s;ed in the Church of</HI> Rome.</P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. They know the word <HI>Sacerdos,</HI> Prie&s;t, an&s;wers not to the word <HI>Presbyter</HI> at all. 2. They reject the word <HI>Prie&s;ts,</HI> becau&s;e it hath been abu&s;ed in the Papacy to Idolatry, and they reade nothing of it as peculiarly applyed to Mini&s;ters, by way of di&s;tinction from other Chri|&s;tians in the New-Te&s;tament.</P>
<P>He tells us further, <HI>If Ho&s;.</HI> 2. 16, 17. (as he will not deny, <HI>ver.</HI> 17. to import) <HI>be a prohibition according to the Law,</HI> Exod. 23. 13. <HI>it onely forbids the u&s;ing &s;uch names with honour, or &s;o, as to trust in them, as P&s;al.</HI> 16. 4.</P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. The Text &s;aith expre&s;ly, <HI>Thou &s;halt call me no more Baali; for I will take away the names of Baalim out of their mouth, and they &s;hall no more be remembred by their name.</HI></P>
<P N="2">2. Should we accept his interpretation, we mu&s;t not u&s;e &s;uch names with honour, liking or approbation, according to <HI>Exod.</HI> 23. 13. <HI>Deut.</HI> 12. 3. <HI>Jo&s;h.</HI> 23. 7. <HI>P&s;a.</HI> 16. 4. it would avail him nothing; for <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">lthough &s;ome ('tis true) do affix the name of <HI>Prie&s;ts</HI> to the Mini&s;ters of <HI>England</HI> in a way of di&s;grace, yet they them&s;elves a&s;&s;ume it, as given to them by the Bi&s;hops, as an En&s;ign of Honour and Renown.</P>
<P>But 3dly, there &s;eems to be &s;omewhat more in tho&s;e prohibitions, they forbid the frequent u&s;e of Idolatrous names, or names abu&s;ed in Idolatrous &s;ervice, and their u&s;e at all, in the Wor&s;hip of God&punc; <HI>The name of other Gods might not be heard</HI> (&s;aith precious <HI>Ain&s;worth) out of their mouths, or imprinted in books, or graven on pillars&mdash;</HI>The <HI>Reu|b<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">nites</HI> therefore changed the names of Cities that carried Idol&punc;names, <HI>Numb.</HI> 32. 38. And by the Hebrew-Canon it was decreed, from this Law; <HI>Who&s;o maketh a Vow in the name of an Idol, or that &s;weareth by it, is to be beaten, whether he &s;weareth thereby for him&s;elf, or for an Infiael.</HI> And it is forbidden to make an Infidel &s;wear by his God, or to mention the name thereof, though not by way of Oath. <HI>Maimonid.</HI> Treat of Ido|l<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">try. <HI>ch.</HI> 5. &s;ect. 10. <HI>That the Prophets who &s;peak as the holy Gho&s;t gave them utterance, did afterwards u&s;e the name</HI> Baal&mdash;is not at all to his purpo&s;e,
<PB N="217" REF="112"> the Spirit of the Lord is not bound, the Law was not made for him, but for us, 'tis not &s;aid <HI>I will not,</HI> but, <HI>you &s;hall &s;hall not.</HI></P>
<P>What he adds is mo&s;t frivolous; 'twere wicked and abominable in our addre&s;&s;es to God to call him <HI>Molech, Milcom, Malcham, Jove,&mdash;</HI>but that therefore, if the names of Idols be to be aboli&s;hed, we may not call him <HI>King, Lord, Jehovah&mdash;</HI>becau&s;e &s;ome of the fore-menti|oned Titles &s;o &s;ignifie, and others as 'tis thought were derived from the&s;e names of God, is mo&s;t ab&s;urd. Chri&s;t is called <HI>Prie&s;t,</HI> he is truly, really &s;o; and upon the account of his once offering up him&s;elf for the &s;ins of the people, before any Ma&s;s-Prie&s;t was thought of in the world, that therefore the name of <HI>Prie&s;ts</HI> may lawfully be applied to a company of per&s;ons, accounted Mini&s;ters of the Go&s;pel (which was a title a&s;|&s;umed by the mo&s;t idolatrous generation of men, profe&s;&s;ing them&s;elves to be of the &s;ame order, when &s;uch as the&s;e pretend to be, are no where in the Scripture &s;o called) will not in ha&s;te be proved.</P>
<P>We manife&s;t in S. T. 1. a further agreement betwixt the Prie&s;ts of <HI>England</HI> and <HI>Rome.</HI> 2. They are both Deacons before they are Prie&s;ts. 3. Ordained to their Office by a Lord-Bi&s;hop, or his Suffragan. 4. Both pre&s;ented by an Archdeacon, or his Deputy, with the&s;e words, <HI>Reverend Father, I pre&s;ent the&s;e men unto thee, to be admitted to the Order of Prie&s;t|hood.</HI></P>
<P>Our Animadverter replies. <HI>The&s;e are granted and avouched as not Popi&s;h, but ju&s;tifiable and agreeable to Orthodox Antiquity.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. That the&s;e things are not Popi&s;h, are avouched without proof: They are exactly extracted out of the Pope's <HI>Portuis,</HI> not re|tained in any one of the Reformed Churches, but ejected as the &s;owr leaven of Popery.</P>
<P>2dly. That they are ju&s;tifiable, is &s;aid, not proved. Mr. T. &s;hould not talk thus confidently of Orthodox Antiquity, when he knows 'tis of all things, the mo&s;t difficult to determine what things are agreeable to Orthodox Antiquity.</P>
<P>3dly. Nothing will ju&s;tifie what we do in matters Divine, but the Scriptures: Orthodox Antiquity is not &s;ufficient. Hear what <HI>Ba&s;il</HI> &s;aith, <Q>If whatever is not of Faith is &s;in (as &s;aith the Apo&s;tle, but <HI>Faith is by hearing, and hearing by the Word of God)</HI> without doubt whatever is without Divine Scripture, &s;ince it is not of Faith, is &s;in.</Q> So <HI>Hi|larie ad Con&s;tant. Augu&s;tine, Tertullian de prae&s;cript. cap.</HI> 15. 8. <HI>Hierom in Mat.</HI> 23. and <HI>Lactantius,</HI> <Q>Humane Precepts have no weight which want Divine Authority; <HI>lib.</HI> 3. <HI>c.</HI> 27. <HI>Theophylact</HI> &s;aith, 'Tis Diabo|lical to account any thing Divine, without the authority of Divine-Scriptures:
<PB N="218" REF="113"> that is Divine which is Apo&s;tolical, nor is it <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">o be &s;ought any where without the Scripture; <HI>lib.</HI> 2. <HI>Pa&s;chal.</HI></Q> The &s;aying of <HI>Ig|natius</HI> is worthy to be written in letters of Gold, <GAP DESC="foreign">, <HI>Christ is our Antiquity.</HI></P>
<P>Yet, 4thly, the Animadverter cannot ju&s;tifie the&s;e things from Or|thodox Antiquity, any better than the Papi&s;ts can ju&s;tifie their Oyl, Spittle, Salt,&mdash;in Bapti&s;m, their orders Ecc<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="2 letters">&s;ia&s;tical of Exorci&s;ts, Acolytes&mdash;And indeed his arguing and <HI>Baronius</HI>'s for the&s;e, &s;eems to be much a like, although there is mention made in Scripture only of <HI>Bi&s;hops, Presbyters,</HI> and <HI>Deacons;</HI> yet (&s;aith he) <HI>Ignatius</HI> (in tho&s;e coun|terfeit Epi&s;tles you mu&s;t under&s;tand that pa&s;s under his name) mentions more, &s;o that it is nece&s;&s;ary that either they were in the Apo&s;tles time, or at lea&s;t were approved of by them. By &s;uch <HI>Orthodox Antiquity,</HI> Mr. <HI>T.</HI> may &s;oon ju&s;tifie, not only the forementioned practices of our Clergy, but all the inventions of the Romi&s;h Bawd: 'Tis a trick of the Devil, &s;aith <HI>Augu&s;tine,</HI> under the pretext of Antiquity, to commend fallacies to us: <HI>de quae&s;t. Vet. &amp; Nov. Te&s;ta. q.</HI> 14. &s;ome things &s;eem'd to be new, that were indeed ancient, as Chri&s;t's Doctrine to the Phari&s;ees, Chri&s;tian Religion to <HI>Cel&s;us</HI> and his Pagans: &s;ome things &s;eem to be ancient, that are but the impo&s;tures, cheats, and fallacies of the later dayes.</P>
<P>We add in <HI>S. T.</HI> 5thly. <HI>The Prie&s;ts of</HI> Rome, <HI>mu&s;t be ordained to their Office, according to their Pontifical; the Prie&s;ts of</HI> England <HI>according to their Book of ordering Prie&s;ts and Deacons, which is taken out of the Popes Pontifical.</HI></P>
<P>To this Mr. <HI>T.</HI> returns the &s;ame an&s;wer that Arch-Bi&s;hop <HI>Whitgift</HI> gave, the &s;umme whereof is: 1. <HI>That what is good in the Popes Pontifi|cal, if in our Pontifical, our Pontifical is never the wor&s;e for having it.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> That nothing but Divine In&s;titution, in the Scripture of the Lord, renders any thing good, con&s;ider'd as it relates to the Wor&s;hip of God, as &s;uch, we have already proved: In &s;uch ca&s;es to talk of things as good, for which no precept in&s;tituting them can be produced, is to talk without book. <HI>'Tis diabolical,</HI> &s;aith <HI>Theophylact.</HI></P>
<P>He proceeds, 2dly. <HI>'Tis mo&s;t fal&s;e, that the book of ordering Mini|&s;ters&mdash;is word for word drawn out of the Popes Pontifical&mdash;Ignorance, and ra&s;hne&s;s drives you into many Errours.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. Why the Book of ordering Mini&s;ters &s;hould be called a <HI>Pontifical,</HI> if not from the chief <HI>Pontifice</HI> of <HI>Rome,</HI> I under&s;tand not. 2. We &s;ay not, that the Engli&s;h Pontifical is taken word for word out of the Popes, but that it is &s;o, <HI>i. e.</HI> for the &s;ub&s;tance there<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">f. 3. I have
<PB N="219" REF="113"> often ob&s;erved that per&s;ons mo&s;t guilty of ignorance and ra&s;hne&s;s, have been mo&s;t free in charging their Antagoni&s;ts therewith. Thus fares it with our Animadverter, as is evident to the eye of an ordinary Reader from the view of the en&s;uing parallel.</P>
<Q><TEXT LANG="eng">
<BODY>
<DIV1 TYPE="parallel">
<HEAD>Romi&s;h Pontifical.</HEAD>
<P N="1">1. <HI>Tempora ordinationum &s;unt, &amp;c.</HI> The times of ordination are the Sabbaths, <HI>in omnibus quatuor temporibus&mdash;Rom. Pontif. de or|dinibus conferendis.</HI></P>
<P N="2">2. <HI>Ordinationes Sacrorum Ordi|num&mdash;</HI>The ordination of holy Orders &s;hall be in the times ap|pointed, and in the Cathedral Church, the Canons of the &s;aid Church being pre&s;ent thereat, &s;hall be publickly celebrated in the time of Divine Service. <HI>ibid.</HI></P>
<P N="3">3. They are taken to the order of Presbytery who have continued in the Office of a Deacon at lea&s;t a whole year except for the profit, and nece&s;&s;ity of the Church it &s;hall otherwi&s;e &s;eem good unto the Bi|&s;hop<HI>&mdash;ibid.</HI></P>
<P N="4">4. <HI>Epi&s;copus autem Sacerdotibus&punc;</HI> but the Bi&s;hop, Prie&s;ts being ad|joyned to him, and other prudent men, skilful in the Divine Law, and exerci&s;ed in Eccle&s;ia&s;tical functions, &s;hall diligently examine the per&s;ons age&mdash;of him that is to be ordained.</P>
<P N="5">5. <HI>Nullus ad ordinem&mdash;</HI>None &s;hall be admitted to the order of a
<PB N="220" REF="114"> Deacon before he be twenty three years old, nor to the order of Pres|bytery before the twenty fifth year of his age.</P>
<P N="6">6. <HI>Archidiaconus offerens&mdash;</HI>The Arch Deacon pre&s;enting tho&s;e who are to be promoted to the order of Deacons, (each of them being de|cently habited) unto the Bi&s;hop, &s;itting in his &s;eat before the Altar, &s;aith, <HI>Reverend Father.&mdash;</HI></P>
<P N="7">7. <HI>Pontifex, &amp;c.</HI> The Bi&s;hop &s;hall ask, <HI>Do you know them to be worthy?</HI> the Arch-Deacon &s;hall an&s;wer, <HI>As much as humane frailty &s;uffers me to know, I know and te&s;tifie that they are worthy.&mdash;</HI></P>
<P N="8">8. <HI>Pontifex&mdash;</HI>The Bi&s;hop &s;hall &s;peak to the Clergy and People, <HI>If any one hath ought again&s;t th<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">&s;e per&s;ons, let him come forth, and with confidence speak for God, and before God.&mdash;</HI></P>
<P N="9">9. <HI>Po&s;tremo&mdash;</HI>La&s;tly, the Bi&s;hop takes and delivers to them all the Book of the Go&s;pel, &s;aying, <HI>Receive power of reading the Go&s;pel in the Church of God.&mdash;</HI></P>
<P N="10">10. <HI>Pontifex&mdash;</HI>The Bi&s;hop &s;hall &s;ay, the Mini&s;ters and Chap|lains an&s;wering, <HI>Lord have mercy upon us&mdash;O God the Father of Hea|ven, have mercy on us. O God the</HI>
<PB N="221" REF="114"> <HI>Son, Redeemer of the world, have mercy on us&mdash;That it may plea&s;e thee to ble&s;&s;e, &s;anctifie and con&s;ecrate the&s;e elect&mdash;</HI>&rindx;. <HI>We be&s;eech thee hear us.</HI></P>
<P N="11">11. They &s;ing one and the &s;ame Hymn, only the one is in Latine the other in Engli&s;h.</P>
<L><HI>Veni Creator Spiritus,</HI></L>
<L><HI>Mentes tuorum vi&s;ita,</HI> &amp;c.</L>
<P N="12">12. <HI>Pontifex&mdash;</HI>The Bi&s;hop &s;hall lay his hands upon the heads of each of them, kneeling upon their knees before him, &s;aying to every one, <HI>Receive the Holy Gho&s;t; who&s;e Sins thou do&s;t forgive, they are forgiven; and who&s;e Sins thou do&s;t retain they are retained.</HI></P>
<P N="13">13. Pax<HI>&mdash;The Peace of God be alwayes with you, the ble&s;&s;ing of God Almighty, the Father, Son and Ho|ly Gho&s;t de&s;cend upon you&mdash;</HI></P>
</DIV1>
</BODY>
</TEXT></Q>
<Q><TEXT LANG="eng">
<BODY>
<DIV1 TYPE="parallel">
<PB N="219" REF="113">
<HEAD>Engli&s;h Pontifical.</HEAD>
<P N="1">1. We decree that no Deacons, or Mini&s;ters, be ordained, but on|ly upon the Sundays (more hea|theni&s;hly &s;poken, then the Pope in his Pontifical) immediatly fol|lowing, <HI>jejunia quatuor Temporum,</HI> commonly cald Ember-weeks<HI>&mdash;Con&s;tit. &amp; Can. Eccl. can.</HI> 31.</P>
<P N="2">2. And this be done in the Ca|thedral, or Pari&s;h Church where the Bi&s;hop re&s;ideth, and in the time of Divine Service, in the pre|&s;ence not only of the Archdeacon, but of the Dean<HI>&mdash;ibid.</HI></P>
<P N="3">3. And here it mu&s;t be declared unto the Deacon that he mu&s;t con|tinue in that office the &s;pace of a whole year (except for rea&s;onable cau&s;es it &s;hall otherwi&s;e &s;eem good unto the Bi&s;hop. <HI>The Book of or|dering Prie&s;ts and Deacons.</HI></P>
<P N="4">4. The Bi&s;hop, before he admit any per&s;on to holy Orders, &s;hall diligently examine him in the pre|&s;ence of tho&s;e Mini&s;ters that &s;hall a&s;&s;i&s;t him at the impo&s;ition of hands<HI>&mdash;Can.</HI> 35.</P>
<P N="5">5. None &s;hall be admitted a Deacon except he be twenty three years
<PB N="220" REF="114"> of age&mdash;and every man which is to be admitted a Prie&s;<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">, &s;hal be full twenty four years old. <HI>The Pre|face to the Form and Manner of making Prie&s;ts and Deacons, &amp;c.</HI></P>
<P N="6">6. The Archdeacon, or his De|puty, &s;hall pre&s;ent unto the Bi&s;hop (&s;itting in his Chair near to the ho|ly Table) &s;uch as de&s;ire to be or|dained Deacons (each of them be|ing decently habited) &s;aying the&s;e words, <HI>Reverend Father&mdash;</HI></P>
<P N="7">7. The Bi&s;hop<HI>&mdash;Take heed that the per&s;ons whom you pre&s;ent un|to us be apt and meet for their learn|ing&mdash;</HI>The Arch Deacon &s;hall an|&s;wer, <HI>I have enquired of them, and al&s;o examined them, and think them &s;o to be.</HI></P>
<P N="8">8. Then the Bi&s;hop &s;hall &s;ay to the people; <HI>Brethren, if there be any of you who knoweth any impedi|ment, or notable crime in any of the&s;e per&s;ons&mdash;let him come forth in the name of God, and &s;hew what it is.</HI></P>
<P N="9">9. Then the Bi&s;hop &s;hall deli|ver to every one of them the New Te&s;tament, &s;aying, <HI>Take thee autho|rity to read the Go&s;pel in the Church of God.&mdash;</HI></P>
<P N="10">10. The Bi&s;hop with the Cler|gy and People, &s;hall &s;ing, or &s;ay, the Litany. <HI>O God the Father of Heaven, have mercy upon us, mi&s;e|rable &s;inners, O God the Son, Re|deemer</HI>
<PB N="221" REF="114"> <HI>of the world, have mercy on us.&mdash;That it may plea&s;e thee to ble&s;s the&s;e they Servants&mdash;</HI>&rindx;. <HI>We be&s;eech thee to hear us good Lord.</HI></P>
<L><HI>Come Holy Gho&s;t our &s;ouls im&s;pire,</HI></L>
<L><HI>And lighten with Cele&s;tial Fire,</HI> &amp;c.</L>
<P N="12">12. The Bi&s;hop&mdash;&s;hall lay their hands &s;everally upon the heads of every one that receive the order of Prie&s;thood, the Re|ceivers humbly kneeling upon their knees, and the Bi&s;hop &s;aying, <HI>Receive the Holy Gho&s;t: who&s;e Sins thou do&s;t forgive, they are forgiven; and who&s;e Sins thou doe&s;t retain, they are retained.</HI></P>
<P N="13">13. <HI>The Peace of God&mdash;and the Ble&s;&s;ing of God Almighty, the Fa|ther, Son, and holy Gho&s;t be amongst you, and remain with you always. Amen.</HI></P>
</DIV1>
</BODY>
</TEXT></Q>
<P>To which it were ea&s;ie to adde other parallel particulars, but the&s;e upon a &s;light view of the <HI>Roman Pontifical,</HI> offering them&s;elves, being &s;ufficient to confute that a&s;&s;ertion of <HI>Whitgift,</HI> and Mr. <HI>T.</HI> that the Book of ordering Mini&s;ters and Deacons is almo&s;t in no point corre&s;pondent to the Roman Pontifical, we content our &s;elves with them. From whence the ingenuous Reader will &s;oon determine, to whom ignorance and ra&s;hne&s;s may ju&s;tly be imputed.</P>
<P>We add, 6thly. The Popi&s;h Prie&s;ts mu&s;t kneel down upon their knees, at the feet of the Lord Bi&s;hop that ordains them; and he mu&s;t &s;ay to them (bla&s;phemou&s;ly enough) <HI>Receive the Holy Gho&s;t; who&s;e Sins ye forgive, they are forgiven; who&s;e Sins ye retain, they are retained:</HI> which exactly accords with the fa&s;hion of ordaining the Prie&s;ts of <HI>Eng|land.</HI></P>
<PB N="222" REF="115">
<P> To which Mr. T. replies in a long harangue, not at all to the purpo&s;e; giving us an account what <HI>Whitgift</HI> and <HI>Hooker</HI> &s;ay to this pr<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">ctice, con|fe&s;&s;es at la&s;t, they offer &s;ome force to the Scripture to which they al|lude, tells us, tho&s;e words may be u&s;ed prayer-wi&s;e.</P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. The Que&s;tion is, Whether in the particular in&s;tanc'd in, there be an exact &s;ymmetry betwixt the Ordination of the pre&s;ent Mi|ni&s;ters of <HI>England,</HI> and the Prie&s;ts of <HI>Rome?</HI> This Mr. T. denies not; but leads the Reader to the con&s;ideration of &s;omewhat el&s;e.</P>
<P N="2">2. The u&s;e of the words, <HI>John</HI> 20. 22, 23. he grants to be an offering force to the Scripture, and if &s;o, it is wicked and abominable; to wre&s;t the Scripture to our private interpretation is undoubtedly &s;o.</P>
<P N="3">3. That they &s;hould be u&s;ed prayer-wi&s;e is a mo&s;t ridiculous eva&s;i|on, the manner of expre&s;&s;ion evinceth the contrary.</P>
<P N="4">4. Mr. <HI>Richard Hooker Eccle&s;. Polit. lib.</HI> 5. <HI>&s;ect.</HI> 77. as c<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">ted by our Animadverter, interprets it of the collation of the gifts of the holy Gho&s;t, which if we &s;hould interpret of the Office of Mini&s;try, it belongs (as we have &s;aid) to the Church, not to &s;uch a thing as a Lord-Bi&s;hop, to collate. We proceed in the Parallel.</P>
<P>7thly. <HI>The Popi&s;h Prie&s;ts are not ordained in, and before the Congregation to whom they are to be Prie&s;ts, but in &s;ome Metropolitan, Cathed<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">al City&mdash;So the Prie&s;ts of</HI> England.</P>
<P>To which Mr. T. replies, 1. <HI>This is not alwayes &s;o.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> I challenge him to give one in&s;tance of the contrary, for the&s;e &s;ix or &s;even years la&s;t pa&s;t.</P>
<P>2dly. <HI>It may be before the Congregation to whom the per&s;on is to be Prie&s;t.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> What <HI>may be</HI> is one thing, <HI>what is,</HI> another. We &s;ay not only that it may be, but that it ought to be, yet we know it is not. 'Tis ad|ded in <HI>S. T.</HI></P>
<P>8thly. <HI>The Popi&s;h Prie&s;ts take the care of Souls, though n<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">t elected by them, from the pre&s;entation of a Patron, by the In&s;titution and Induction of a Lord Bi&s;hop: &s;o the Mini&s;ters of</HI> England.</P>
<P>To which our Animadverter, <HI>This is not always &s;o, nor when &s;o, Popi&s;h.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. The fir&s;t is mo&s;t notoriou&s;ly fal&s;e, and we challenge Mr. <HI>T.</HI> to make it good if he can. 2. the latter remains to be proved by him: to a&s;&s;ert it is not Popi&s;h, is a piece of beggary this Animadverter is much u&s;ed to. What he hath before &s;aid is already an&s;wered. We add,</P>
<P>9thly. <HI>The Popi&s;h Prie&s;ts wait not the Churches call to the Mini&s;try, but make &s;uit to &s;ome Prelate, to be ordained Prie&s;t, and giving money for their Letters of Ordination; &s;o the Prie&s;ts of</HI> England.</P>
<P>Mr. <HI>T.</HI> replies. <HI>To offer a per&s;on's &s;elf for ordination, is in &s;ome ca&s;e a duty,</HI> 1 Tim. 3. 1. I&s;a. 6. 8.</P>
<PB N="223" REF="115">
<P> <HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. The Scriptures produced, prove not his a&s;&s;ertion. <HI>I&s;a.</HI> 6. 8. is &s;ufficiently remote from any &s;uch thing, there's not the lea&s;t menti|on of Ordination therein, its only a te&s;timony of <HI>I&s;aiah's</HI> readine&s;s to obey the voice of the Lord, in going forth to bear a te&s;timony for him again&s;t an untoward rebellious people. 1 <HI>Tim.</HI> 3. 1. only tels us, that <HI>he that de&s;ires the office of a Bi&s;hop, de&s;ires a good work</HI> (i. e. as &s;ay our An|notators, is inwardly moved by the Spirit of the Lord thereunto) which he may do, and yet I hope wait the Churches call thereunto.</P>
<P>Be&s;ides, 2ly. Should this be granted, it &s;ignifies little, till he prove that it's the duty of any, with the neglect of the Churches call to this Office, to &s;eek ordination thereunto from an un&s;criptural Prelate, which is that we charge upon them; which Mr. <HI>T.</HI> knows they do.</P>
<P>He tells us, 2dly. <HI>Giving money for their Letters of Ordination, is only Wages to the Regi&s;ter for writing.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. Be it &s;o, that they give money for their Letters of Ordi|nation, is all that is a&s;&s;erted by us, which Mr. <HI>T.</HI> grants they do. 2. 'Tis well if there be no Simony (as it's call'd) found among&s;t them. 3. If provi&s;ion be made again&s;t the Regi&s;ters exacting over-much, by the Canons of the Church of <HI>England,</HI> he informs us that the &s;ame provi|&s;ion is made by the Popi&s;h Trent-Council. The Parallel in this parti|cular holds good. We &s;ay,</P>
<P>10thly. <HI>The Popi&s;h Prie&s;ts are ordained to their Office, though they have no Flock to attend upon: So the Prie&s;ts of England.</HI></P>
<P>Mr. T. replies. <HI>The Prie&s;ts of England are not to be ordained without &s;ome title, according to</HI> Can. 33. <HI>even the Trent-Council hath made &s;ome provi&s;ion thereabout.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. Mr. T. doth well to con&s;ociate the Canons of the Church of <HI>England,</HI> and the Church of <HI>Rome</HI> in the Trent-Council together, they are (in not a few things) near of kin. 2. However I cannot but &s;tand a&s;toni&s;hed at his confidence, in telling us that the Prie&s;ts of <HI>England</HI> are not to be ordained without &s;ome title, according to <HI>Can.</HI> 33. when that Canon &s;aith expre&s;ly, <Q>That they may, if a Fellow, or in right as a Fellow, or to be a Chaplain in &s;ome Colledge in <HI>Oxford</HI> or <HI>Cambridg;</HI> if a Ma&s;ter of Arts of five years &s;tanding, that liveth of his own charge in either of the <HI>Univer&s;ities,</HI> if to be &s;hortly admitted either to &s;ome Benefice or Curat&s;hip then void; or if the Bi&s;hop do after his admi&s;&s;ion into the &s;aid office, keep and maintain him with all things nece&s;&s;ary till he prefer him to &s;ome Eccle&s;ia&s;tical Living.</Q> 3. But it may be the Animadverter, by <HI>title,</HI> means &s;ome one of tho&s;e things mentioned. To which I &s;hall only &s;ay, that if &s;o, he doth openly pre|varicate;
<PB N="224" REF="116"> pretends to an&s;wer, to what he &s;peaks not one word; &s;uch Titles are &s;uppo&s;ed to be without a Flock to attend upon.</P>
<P>What he adds, of Mini&s;ters being nece&s;&s;ary for Armies, <HI>&amp;c.</HI> is no|thing to the purpo&s;e: This proves not that they may be ordained Mi|ni&s;ters, without a Flock to attend upon, which they may have, and by them be &s;ent forth for the works mentioned for a &s;ea&s;on: We know it hath been the practice of the Churches &s;o to do. 2. Priv<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">te Bre|thren may act for the &s;upply of the &s;ervices mentioned, (and frequently have done &s;o) nor indeed do I conceive how any can act therein in any other capacity. Which is not incongruous to <HI>Acts</HI> 23. 2. (as this Ani|madverter &s;ugge&s;ts) which &s;peaks not a tittle of their ordination to the Office of Mini&s;try which they had before, but only a &s;olemn commen|ding of them, by Fa&s;ting and Prayer, to the Ble&s;&s;ing of the Lord by the Church, in the Service they were now &s;etting upon; in which they te|&s;tified their con&s;ent, by the laying on their hands, as &s;ay our Annota|tors.</P>
<P>To the 11th Parallel, viz. <HI>That the Prie&s;ts of England must &s;wear Canonical Obedience to their Ordinary, as the Prie&s;ts of Rome.</HI> Mr. T. only &s;aith, <HI>That 'tis true at their in&s;titution into Benefices they do &s;o, but it is &s;o bounded that it is not intolerable, 'tis nothing like that which is required of the Papists.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. The Parallel herein betwixt the <HI>Engli&s;h</HI> and the <HI>Popi&s;h</HI> Prie&s;ts is acknowledged, which is all we affirm. 2. That the Oath is tolerable, that 'tis nothing like the Oath of Canonical Obedience, ten|dred to the Popi&s;h Prie&s;ts, is only affirmed by Mr. <HI>T.</HI> without proof: that was the copy and pattern of this, as he cannot be ignorant.</P>
<P>The 12th Parallel (touching their leaving their Benefices for ad|vantage-&s;ake, without con&s;ent of the People; The 13th, touching their &s;pecial Licence to preach (without which they mu&s;t not) from <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">he Pre|lates, though thereunto before ordained. The 14th, (touching their &s;ubjection to be &s;ilenced&mdash;by the Prelates) betwixt the Mini&s;ters of <HI>England</HI> and <HI>Rome,</HI> he grants to be true, nor &s;aith he any thing by way of reply that de&s;erves the taking notice of. To the 15th, <HI>viz.</HI> the Popi&s;h Prie&s;ts are not of like and equal power, degree and authority a|mong&s;t them&s;elves, but are &s;ome of them inferiour to others herein, as Pa&s;tors to Archdeacons, Archdeacons to Lord-Bi&s;hops, Lord-Bi|&s;hops to Arch-Bi&s;hops&mdash;&s;o the Prie&s;ts of <HI>England.</HI></P>
<P>Our Animadverter replies, 1. <HI>Inequality is judged to be in the Elders of the Primitive Churches by the in&s;cription of the &s;even Epi&s;tles to the An|gels of the &s;even Churches of</HI> A&s;ia.</P>
<PB N="225" REF="116">
<P> <HI>An&s;w.</HI> But this rather proves there equality; to each is a &s;everal Epi&s;tle directed; whereas had there been one Arch-Bi&s;hp, or Superin|tendent over them, one Epi&s;tle had been &s;ufficient, and had been, no doubt, directed to him.</P>
<P>He adds, 2dly. <HI>It hath been in &s;ome &s;ort in all well-ordered Churches, and is nece&s;&s;ary to &s;etled order.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> The&s;e are his dictates, which he is not at lea&s;ure to prove. The Church of <HI>Rome</HI> (in the Apo&s;tles dayes) of <HI>Corinth, Ephe&s;us&mdash;</HI>were (as I remember) well-ordered Churches, yet cannot be manife&s;t any inequality among&s;t their Elders. No Superintendent, Lord-Bi|&s;hop, or Arch-Bi&s;hop as I read of.</P>
<P>2dly. What thinks he of the Church of the <HI>Walden&s;es,</HI> were they well-ordered Churches? They were from the beginning without this Supe|riority of Elders, one above the other. The like may be &s;aid of mo&s;t, or all the Reformed-Churches. The Churches of <HI>Helvetia</HI> reckoning up the degrees of Arch-Bi&s;hops, Suffragans, Metropolitans, Deans, Subdeans&mdash;tell us plainly, they are not &s;ollicitous about them. That the Apo&s;tles Doctrine touching Mini&s;ters, is &s;ufficient for them, <HI>cap. Confes. Helvet. po&s;ter. c.</HI> 18. And afterward, there is one, and the &s;ame equal Power, and Function, in all the Mini&s;ters of the Church; and though in proce&s;s of time, one was cho&s;en from among&s;t the re&s;t to pre&s;ide in Synods, yet was he not &s;et over others, nor endowed with greater power, than the re&s;t. <HI>cap. conf. Helvet. prior. Arti:</HI> 15. the <HI>French</HI> Churches &s;ay, <Q>We believe that all true Pa&s;tors where&s;oever they are placed, are endowed with equal authority, under that only head, high, and &s;ole univer&s;al Bi&s;hop, Je&s;us Chri&s;t: and therefore it is lawful for no one Church, to claim authority, and dominion over another. <HI>cap: conf. gal: Confes. Art.</HI> 30.</Q> So &s;ay the <HI>Belgick</HI> Churches. <HI>Bely. conf. Art:</HI> 31. So that Mr. T. out of his great love and dutifulne&s;s to his Mother the Church of <HI>England,</HI> is not &s;paring to ca&s;t dirt in the face of the Churches planted by the Apo&s;tles them&s;elves, and mo&s;t, or all the Reformed Churches at this day, who own no &s;uch inequality as he pleads for: and therefore were, are all of them not well-ordered Churches, in compari&s;on at the lea&s;t, to her, and the Church of <HI>Rome,</HI> where the Hierarchie is e&s;tabli&s;hed.</P>
<P>To the 16th. parallel about holy Ve&s;tments he is able to object on|thing worth the con&s;idering.</P>
<P>The 17th. is, <HI>The Popi&s;h Prie&s;ts are tyed to a book of &s;tinted Prayers and a pre&s;cript Order devi&s;ed by man, for their Wor&s;hip and Mini&s;tration: &s;o are the Mini&s;ters of</HI> England, <HI>and that to &s;uch a one as is taken out of the Popes Portuis&mdash;</HI></P>
<PB N="226" REF="117">
<P> To this Mr. <HI>T.</HI> replies. 1. <HI>The A&s;&s;embly of</HI> We&s;tmin&s;ter <HI>pre&s;cribed a Directory for Wor&s;hip.</HI></P>
<P>An&s;w. 1. <HI>Quid hoc ad Rhombum?</HI> I am not in the lea&s;t concern'd to ju&s;tifie all that was done by that A&s;&s;embly; and am apt to think they might in that matter have &s;pared their pains. 2dly. The &s;ame A&s;|&s;embly abhorred the Common-Prayer-Book Service, as a mo&s;t dete&s;ta|ble, and filthy Idol, preached, printed again&s;t it, procured its Abo|lition. 3dly. Every one that knows any thing, knows that upon va|rious accounts, there is no likene&s;s betwixt the&s;e two. None were compell'd to the u&s;e of this or that form of words, by the Directory, as in the Book of Common-Prayer.</P>
<P>He adds, 2dly. <HI>Tho&s;e prayers, and portions of Scripture, which are holy, and good, are never the wor&s;e becau&s;e they were in the Popes Portuis, no more than the acknowledgement of Je&s;us to be the Son of the mo&s;t High God, is the wor&s;e becau&s;e the Devil u&s;ed it,</HI> Mar. 5. 7.</P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. Of the Scriptures, and that glorious Truth of Chri&s;t's E|ternal Deity, as the Son of the mo&s;t High God, and the Common-Prayer-Book-Service, there is not the &s;ame rea&s;on: They were from the in&s;piration of the Holy Spirit, originally Divine; this of man, de|vi&s;ed upon the prevailing of Apo&s;tacy upon the Churches of Chri&s;t, im|po&s;ed with threatnings, cruelties and &s;laughters upon the Children of Chri&s;t by his profe&s;&s;ed Enemy, abu&s;ed by a confe&s;&s;ed Idolatrous gene|ration of men (if there be any &s;uch in the world:) That becau&s;e the a|bu&s;e of the Scriptures, and the Truths contained in them, doth not ren|der them the wor&s;e, therefore a devi&s;ed Service (that it the be&s;t is wicked and abominable, in its impo&s;ition intolerable) u&s;ed by Idola|ters is not the wor&s;e, I chalenge Mr. <HI>T.</HI> to make good. 2. Though the Scriptures are not the wor&s;e becau&s;e portions of them are read in the <HI>Romi&s;h</HI> Idolatrous Service, yet the following the <HI>Romi&s;h Synagogue</HI> in curtailing the Scriptures, reading one part of a Chapter at one time, an|other at another, and manife&s;tly mi&s;applying them, cau&s;ing them al&s;o to give place to the <HI>Apochryphal</HI> Writings, is abominable.</P>
<P>He goes on, 3dly. <HI>That which is &s;ugge&s;ted as if the Common-Prayer-Book now in u&s;e, were little different from the Popes Mi&s;&s;al</HI> (he tells us) <HI>is untrue.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. The Animadverter is a little mi&s;taken: We affirm in <HI>S. T.</HI> that the Common-Prayer-Book-Service u&s;ed in King <HI>Edward</HI> the 6th's dayes, and the Popes <HI>Mi&s;&s;al</HI> were not much different: And for the proof of that we produced the Te&s;timony of the King and Council: which we thought M. T. would never have que&s;tioned. That the Com|mon-Prayer-Book
<PB N="227" REF="117"> now in u&s;e, and that then u&s;ed is not much diffe|rent, every body knows.</P>
<P>2dly. 'Tis true, all that is in the Pope<HI>'s Mi&s;&s;al</HI> is not in the Com|mon-Prayer-Book (nor did any one ever a&s;&s;ert this) but the mo&s;t that is in the Common-Prayer-Book is &s;tolen out of the Popes <HI>Mi&s;&s;al.</HI> The Epi&s;tles and Go&s;pels, the Prayers (or Collects) the rites and u&s;ages therein joyned are &s;o: and this Mr. <HI>T.</HI> denyes not. I had thought to have repre&s;ented the truth of this, to the eye of the Reader, by exhibiting our <HI>Engli&s;h,</HI> and the Popes <HI>Latine</HI> Ma&s;&s;e at one view to him; which I have by me faithfully collected, and compared toge|ther. But the &s;welling of this Treati&s;e unexpectedly, and the difficulty of printing any thing of this nature that is voluminous, through the tyranny of the Prelates, makes me wholly to lay a&s;ide that intendment to a fitter &s;ea&s;on, if need be.</P>
<P>The &s;umme of what we have been offering in this matter, (we &s;ay in <HI>S. T.)</HI> is this:</P>
<P N="1">1. Tho&s;e Mini&s;ters, that in their names, office, admi&s;&s;ion into their offices, are not to be found in the Scripture, are not Mini&s;ters of Chri&s;t, act not by vertue of an Authority, Office-power, Calling received from him.</P>
<P N="2">2. Tho&s;e Mini&s;ters that in their names, office, admi&s;&s;ion into their office, are at a perfect agreement with the Mini&s;ters of Antichri&s;t, (&s;uch are the Popi&s;h Prie&s;ts acknowledged to be) are not the Mini|&s;ters of Chri&s;t&mdash;But &s;uch, as have been abundantly demon&s;trated, are the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters of <HI>England.</HI> Therefore&mdash;</P>
<P>The <HI>Minor</HI> Mr. <HI>T.</HI> &s;aith is manife&s;tly fal&s;e, he hath &s;aid nothing to prove it in the main.</P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> This is &s;oon &s;aid: had he proved it manife&s;tly fal&s;e, be had done &s;omewhat. Whether any thing con&s;iderable hath been offered by us, for the proof of the <HI>Minor,</HI> others be&s;ides Mr. <HI>T.</HI> and I, will now judge.</P>
</DIV3>
<DIV3 N="4" TYPE="section">
<PB N="228" REF="118">
<HEAD>Sect. 4.</HEAD>
<ARGUMENT>
<P><HI>The pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters of</HI> Engl. <HI>proved Antichri&s;tian. They act from a Power, Office, and Calling received from a Lord-Bi&s;hop, who&s;e Office is Antichri&s;tian. The opinion of the Learned touching them. Their Office is not to be found in the Scripture:</HI> Eph. 4. 11. Rom. 12. 7, 8. 1 Tim. 3. 12. Acts 14. 23. Tit. 1. 5, 7. Acts 20. 28. <HI>know them not. They were not known in the Church for &s;ome hundreds of years after. The Office of Lord-Bi&s;hops wherein it con&s;i&s;ts. Of</HI> Diotrephes <HI>his a&s;&s;erting Supre|macy. Our Bi&s;hops neither Evangeli&s;ts, nor Pa&s;tors, nor Teachers, nor Apo&s;tles, proved.</HI> Mat. 28. 19. <HI>explained. Of the Ri&s;e of Epi&s;copacy. The Te&s;timonies of Dr.</HI> Hammond, Whitaker, Reynolds, Eu&s;ebius, <HI>&amp;c. touching it.</HI></P>
</ARGUMENT>
<P>WE further prove in <HI>S. T.</HI> The pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters of <HI>England</HI> act in the holy things of God by virtue of an Antichr<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">&s;tan Power, Office and Calling. Becau&s;e, 2dly, That they act from a Power, Of|fice, and Calling received from a Lord-Bi&s;hop, who&s;e Office is Anti|chri&s;tian. This the &s;umme.</P>
<P>To which Mr. T. replies, <HI>That neither him&s;elf, nor any &s;ober Writer judged them Antichri&s;tian.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. Whether he once &s;o judged of them, his taking the Cove|nant to extirpate them, wherein they are condemned as Antichri&s;tian, will evince.</P>
<P N="2">2. What he or I judge them is not material; that no &s;ober Writer, or con&s;iderate man (that ever he met with) hath judged them <HI>Antichri&s;ti|an,</HI> mu&s;t be imputed to the &s;hortne&s;s of his memory: He ha<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">h, I &s;uppo&s;e met with <HI>Zuinglius, Keckerman,</HI> who &s;ay little le&s;s. The former, <HI>Art.</HI> 34. <HI>p.</HI> 254, 255, tells us, <HI>That for any to claim any Rule, Power, or Superi|ority over any Church of Christ</HI> (which we know out Bi&s;hops do) <HI>is Devili&s;h, Proud, and Popi&s;h Arrogancy.</HI> And <HI>Aretius</HI> in his <HI>Problems</HI> pro|ducing Chri&s;t's prohibition of Superiour power to his Apo&s;tles, <HI>Mar.</HI> 10. 5. <HI>Luke</HI> 22. 25. &s;aith, <HI>None but Antichrist dare be &s;o fancy as to u&s;urp it.&mdash;Marlorat,</HI> on <HI>Rev.</HI> 17. 3. &s;aith, <HI>That Arch-Bi&s;hops&mdash;are in Office under Antichri&s;t.</HI> And on <HI>Chap.</HI> 19. <HI>The tailes of Antichrist. Bale</HI> on <HI>Rev.</HI> 17 &s;aith, <HI>That</HI> Canterbury <HI>and</HI> York <HI>are the Bea&s;tly Anti|chri&s;ts Metropolitans.</HI> And on <HI>Chap.</HI> 13. <HI>That Arch-Bi&s;hop, Dioce&s;an&mdash;are very Names of Bla&s;phemy.</HI> Of the&s;e we &s;pake <HI>pag.</HI> 28. <HI>S.</HI> T. who I dare &s;ay, were &s;ober Writers, and con&s;iderate men. Mr. T. his an&s;wer to their Te&s;timony, <HI>viz. That they writ thus against the Romi&s;h Hierar|chy,</HI>
<PB N="229" REF="118"> is ridiculous; they writ again&s;t the Offices of Arch-Bi&s;hops as &s;uch, which are not a whit the better becau&s;e they con&s;titute the <HI>Engli&s;h Hie|rarchy.</HI> We mention <HI>Cartwright,</HI> the &s;eekers of <HI>Reformation</HI> in Queen <HI>Elizabeths</HI> dayes, proclaiming them to come out of the bottomle&s;s Pit of Hell, to be Antichri&s;tian, Devili&s;h. The&s;e al&s;o mu&s;t pa&s;s in the Roll of incon&s;iderate fellows; yet others (as wi&s;e as Mr. T.) think otherwi&s;e of them. For the proof of the Antichri&s;tiani&s;m of the Office of Lord-Bi&s;hops, I propo&s;e a few things briefly in the S. T. as,</P>
<P>1&s;t, That Office that is not to be found in the Scripture of the In&s;ti|tution of Chri&s;t, but is contrary to expre&s;s Precepts of his, is Anti|chri&s;tian: But the Office of Lord-Bi&s;hops is not to be found in the Scriptures, is contrary to expre&s;s Precepts: Therefore&mdash;</P>
<P>The <HI>Major</HI> Mr. T. is nibling at, but he doth but think he tells us, <HI>if Univer&s;al, it is not true.</HI> The Office of the Religious Votaries he talks of, is Antichri&s;tian. If there be any Antichri&s;tian Office in the World, that mu&s;t needs be &s;o, that is introduced into the Church of Chri&s;t, though not of his In&s;titution, directly contrary to expre&s;s Pre|cepts. That this A&s;&s;ertion &s;hould nece&s;&s;itate any one to affirm every &s;in to be Antichri&s;tian (though in a large &s;ence, as Antichri&s;tian &s;ignifies, <HI>that which is again&s;t Chri&s;t,</HI> every &s;in, every errour is &s;o) is ab&s;urd to imagine.</P>
<P>The <HI>Minor,</HI> I &s;ay, con&s;i&s;ts of two parts. 1. That the Office of Lord Bi&s;hops is not to be found in Scripture of the In&s;titution of Chri&s;t. This I manife&s;t by con&s;idering the mo&s;t remarkable places, where the Offi|cers and Offices that are of Chri&s;ts appointment are enumerated, in which we have a total &s;ilence of them; <HI>Ephe&s;.</HI> 4. 11. <HI>Rom.</HI> 12. 7, 8. 1 <HI>Tim.</HI> 3. 12. <HI>Acts</HI> 14. 23. <HI>Tit.</HI> 1. 5, 7. <HI>Acts</HI> 20. 28. I add al&s;o, that they were never dreamt of in the world for &s;ome hundreds of years af|ter Chri&s;t: We introduce the Te&s;timony of <HI>Clemens, Lombard,</HI> Dr. <HI>Hamonds</HI> acknowledgment of their Ri&s;e.</P>
<P>To which Mr. T. an&s;wers, <HI>The whole Di&s;cour&s;e is impertinent: the thing to be proved was, that the Office of Lord-Bi&s;hops was not to be found in the Scriptures; and the whole Di&s;cour&s;e is about the Superiority of Order above Presbyters, Primacy,</HI> or <HI>Supremacy of Degrees among Bi&s;hops.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. We have examined the particular places wherein menti|on is made of the Officers of Chri&s;ts In&s;titution, and find no Lord-Bi&s;hops in&s;tituted in any of them, which manife&s;ts that they are not; If this be not taken for proof, I know not what will; If this be not to the purpo&s;e, I am in di&s;pair of producing any thing that he will ac|count &s;o.</P>
<PB N="230" REF="119">
<P> 2dly, The Office of Lord-Bi&s;hops, as &s;uch, con&s;i&s;ts in the Primacy, Superiority, and Supremacy mentioned (as is known.) If Mr. T. grants this not to be found of the In&s;titution of Chri&s;t in the Scripture, he gives away the Cau&s;e.</P>
<P>3dly, They them&s;elves do own and avow a great part of their Office to con&s;i&s;t in the fore&s;aid Primacy, Juri&s;diction.&mdash;And if this be not it, I am &s;ure &s;ome of them are &s;eldom or never minding their Office, the&s;e things are what is mo&s;t attended by them. Of whom we may complain as <HI>Bernard</HI> of old, <HI>Vides omnem Eccle&s;ia&s;ticum Zelum forvere pr<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter"> &s;ola di|gnitate tuenda: honori tantum datur, &s;anctitati nihil aut parum. Si cau&s;&acirc; requirente paulo &s;ubmi&s;&s;ius, agere, aut &s;ocialius to habere tentaveris, ab&s;it in|quiunt, non decet, tempori non congruit, maje&s;tati non convenit; quam ge|ras per&s;onam attendito: De placito Dei ultima mentio e&s;t, pro jactura &s;alutis nulla cunctatio: quod &s;ublime e&s;t hoc &s;alutare putamus, &amp; quod gloriam re|dolet id ju&s;tum. De Con&s;iderat. Lib.</HI> 4.</P>
<P>His following Exceptions are not worth the heeding. I mention <HI>Di|otrephes</HI> in <HI>S.</HI> T. and &s;ay, That &s;ome appearances of a Spirit &s;triving to a&s;cend into this Chair of wickedne&s;s was &s;een in him, and others in the Apo&s;tles dayes.</P>
<P>To this Mr. T. <HI>But this was not the u&s;urping the Superiority of Order, of a Bi&s;hop above a Presbyter.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> Nor do I &s;ay it was, I expre&s;ly affirm the contrary, wh<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">n I &s;ay that &s;uch a Superiority was not in the world, for &s;ome hundred of years after Chri&s;t; we only &s;ay, that &s;ome appearances of that Spirit was &s;een in him, which the Apo&s;tle affirms, <HI>John Epi&s;t.</HI> 3. <HI>Ver&s;.</HI> 9. <GAP DESC="foreign">,<HI>&mdash;He loveth the preheminence among them; attempts the Primacy,</HI> &s;o <HI>Beza.</HI> Which if it be not an appearance of the Spirit mentioned, I know not what is; he endeavoured to rule all him&s;elf, carried it proud|ly, pragmatically, arrogantly over the Church, the Brethren, <HI>John</HI> him&s;elf, who was an Elder, &s;aith Mr. T. He that cannot &s;ee &s;omewhat of our Epi&s;copal Spirit in this, is (I fear) willfully blind, <HI>I</HI> am fure he mu&s;t wink hard.</P>
<P>He takes notice that in reciting <HI>Ephe&s;.</HI> 4. 11. I twice leave out <HI>Evangeli&s;ts,</HI> which he knows not the rea&s;on of.</P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> Nor do I my &s;elf, po&s;&s;ibly it was an over&s;ight, it may be an omi&s;&s;ion of the <HI>Amanuen&s;is:</HI> However it was, it was not I a&s;&s;ure him, any fear I had that he, or any one could ju&s;tly plead, that our Prelates were <HI>Evangeli&s;ts.</HI></P>
<P N="1">1. I know that Title is declined by Pleaders for <HI>Epi&s;copal Jurisdi|ction.</HI></P>
<P N="2"><PB N="231" REF="119"> 2. Our Bi&s;hops do not the works of <HI>Evangeli&s;ts.</HI> They had no &s;etled re&s;idence, but travelled up and down with, or after the Apo&s;tles, to help forward the work of Chri&s;t, that was &s;et on foot in the world by them. We find <HI>Titus</HI> (who was an <HI>Evangeli&s;t)</HI> &s;omtimes at <HI>Crete, Gal.</HI> 2. 3. At <HI>Dalmatia,</HI> 2 <HI>Tim.</HI> 4. 10. appointed to meet <HI>Paul</HI> at <HI>Nicopolis, Tit.</HI> 3. 12. Sent to <HI>Corinth,</HI> 2 <HI>Cor.</HI> 12. 18. At <HI>Macedonia,</HI> 2 <HI>Cor.</HI> 7. 5, 6. Such an itinerant laborious life that our Bi&s;hops are unacquainted with.</P>
<P N="3">3. <HI>Evangeli&s;ts</HI> were &s;uch extraordinary Officers as cea&s;ed with that Age; for we find no directions given touching their future Election in in the Churches.</P>
<P>Mr. T. tells us, <HI>Our Prelates chalenge the term of Pa&s;tors and Teach|ers;</HI> this, I had &s;aid, was too great a deba&s;ement of their Lord&s;hips, he tells us, <HI>This is a Satyrical Sarca&s;m, no proof.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;.</HI> 1. However it is evidently true. Pa&s;tors and Teachers we have already proved are Officers appertaining to one particular Church. 'Tis certainly a deba&s;ement of their Lord&s;hips, who pre&s;ide (as petty Princes) over hundreds of Pa&s;tors, and Churches (&s;o called) to be reduced to a laborious over-&s;ight over one.</P>
<P>2dly, I had &s;aid in <HI>S. T.</HI> That their Parochial Prie&s;ts, over whom they pre&s;ide, are &s;uppo&s;ed to be Officers in that degree.</P>
<P>The Argument is this (which Mr. <HI>T.</HI> may take time to an&s;wer) <HI>If the Parochial Prie&s;ts, over whom the Bi&s;hops of</HI> England <HI>pre&s;ide, be &s;uch Pa&s;tors and Teachers as the Scripture mentions, then the Bi&s;hops of</HI> England <HI>are not, cannot be &s;uch</HI> (for they are an Order and Degree above them, to them as their Superiours they promi&s;e and &s;wear fealty:) <HI>But tho former</HI> (according to the judgment of the Church of <HI>England) is true: Therefore;&mdash;</HI></P>
<P>The Story he after tells us of a <HI>Presbyters having, in ca&s;e of infirmity, A&s;&s;i&s;tants, who notwith&s;tanding may be called a Teacher,</HI> is &s;o remote from the bu&s;ine&s;s in hand, that though &s;ome would cry out,</P>
<Q>Quis temper<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">t a ri&s;u.</Q>
<P>For my part I heartily pitty him.</P>
<P>1&s;t, This is known not to be the rea&s;on of the Bi&s;hops having Paro|chial Prie&s;ts under them; were they never &s;o &s;trong, it were impo&s;&s;ible they &s;hould perform the Office of Pa&s;tors to the &s;everal Congregations in <HI>England.</HI></P>
<P>2dly, The Presbyter is not an Order above his Co-adjutor (as is the
<PB N="232" REF="120"> ca&s;e of the Bi&s;hops) he is a Co-Presbyter; one of the &s;ame degree with him&s;elf. So that of this, we &s;hall I &s;uppo&s;e, hear no mere.</P>
<P>We add in <HI>S. T.</HI> That they pretend to be (and are &s;o accounted by &s;ome) the Apo&s;tles Succe&s;&s;ors: but if they derive their &s;<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">cce&s;&s;ion through the Papacy; 'tis an evident Argument they are Antichri&s;tian, if the Pope be the Antichri&s;tian head over many Countries, as Pro|te&s;tants affirm. In re&s;pect of their Office we prove they are not their Succe&s;&s;ors.</P>
<P>Becau&s;e, 1. The Apo&s;tles were immediately &s;ent by Chri&s;t.</P>
<P N="2">2. Extraordinary Officers &s;ent forth to preach the Go&s;pel through|ont the Nations of the world.</P>
<P N="3">3. We find no Apo&s;tles after them.</P>
<P N="4">4. None appointed by them, to &s;ucceed them.</P>
<P N="5">5. None are qualified with gifts for the di&s;charge of &s;uch an Office; and Chri&s;t &s;ends not forth &s;ervants in any imployment, but he furni&s;h|eth them with gifts &s;uitable thereunto. This the &s;umme.</P>
<P>To which our Animadverter pretends to an&s;wer, <HI>Sect.</HI> 5. <HI>Chap.</HI> 3. 1. Apo&s;tles he grants they may not be reckoned; yet 2. They may be their Succe&s;&s;ors.</P>
<P>1&s;t, Dr. <HI>Owen</HI> (of <HI>Schi&s;m. Cap.</HI> 6. <HI>Sect.</HI> 55.) grants <Q>That per&s;ons adhering to ordination by &s;ucce&s;&s;ion from Popi&s;h Bi&s;hops, may be right worthy Mini&s;ters of the Go&s;pel, but not upon the account of that their Succe&s;&s;ional Ordination, but the eminent gifts God hath vouch|&s;afed them, and the Lords people &s;ubmitting them&s;elves to them in the admini&s;tration of Ordinances.</Q> And the Author of <HI>S. T.</HI> denies not they &s;ucceed them as Chri&s;tians; and if &s;o, they may be heard as gifted brethren, which was denied by him, <HI>Chap.</HI> 2.</P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. How all this proves the Bi&s;hops of <HI>England</HI> to be the Suc|ce&s;&s;ors of the Apo&s;tles, in re&s;pect of their Office, which was what he pretends to attempt the proof of, I know not.</P>
<P N="2">2. I deny indeed that they may be heard as gifted Brethren, <HI>Chap.</HI> 2. and give my rea&s;ons of my &s;o doing, which I have vindicated from this Dictators exceptions. That we are to have communion with all, that we cannot deny to be Chri&s;tians, in that wherein they act not as &s;uch, but by virtue of an Office-power (we know) they have not received from Chri&s;t; Mr. <HI>T.</HI> will not in ha&s;t attempt the proof of.</P>
<P>He asks, <HI>Why may they not &s;ucceed them in Office?</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> I wonder he &s;hould ask &s;uch a Que&s;tion. <HI>En Tabulas!</HI> The rea&s;ons thereof are given in the place he undertakes the confutation of;
<PB N="233" REF="120"> They were (it &s;eems) too weighty for him, &amp; he wi&s;ely lets them alone without burthening him&s;elf &s;o far with them as to attempt their remo|val. The Apo&s;tles Office was indeed no other than that mentioned, <HI>Mat.</HI> 28. 19, 20. <HI>Mar.</HI> 16. 15. but that was,</P>
<P>1&s;t, An Office of Preaching, not of Lording and Loytering.</P>
<P>2dly, Into it they were immediately inve&s;ted by Chri&s;t.</P>
<P>3dly, They were to preach the Go&s;pel through the Nations of the World, (not to &s;tretch them&s;elves upon Beds of Ivory, in a Lordly Pallace) which was as much their Office as Preaching the Go&s;pel; up|on the account whereof, <HI>Paul</HI> &s;aith, <HI>He was a debtor both to the Greeks, and to the Barbarians.&mdash;Rom.</HI> 1. 14. Chri&s;t its true, promi&s;eth his pre&s;ence with them, <GAP DESC="foreign">.</P>
<P>But, 1. I am not &s;atisfied that the <GAP DESC="foreign">, or the <HI>Con&s;um|mation of this world,</HI> is any more than the winding up or perioding of that Age. I am &s;ure the word <GAP DESC="foreign">, &s;ignifies the &s;pace of 70 or 100 <HI>years,</HI> and &s;ometimes not near &s;o many, as <HI>Mark</HI> 13. 30. which came to pa&s;s within 50 years. And <GAP DESC="foreign">, is no more than the <HI>perioding of the Jewi&s;h Paedagogie,</HI> or <HI>Church &s;tate. Heb.</HI> 9. 26.</P>
<P N="2">2. I hope Chri&s;t is with them now, &s;o that there needs not a &s;ucce&s;&s;i|on of per&s;ons in the &s;ame Office (which we have proved there never was) to whom Chri&s;t may make good his promi&s;e.</P>
<P N="3">3. The Lord promi&s;ed <HI>Jo&s;hua never to leave him nor for&s;ake him,</HI> Jo&s;h. 1. 5. This Promi&s;e he will not &s;ay doth nece&s;&s;arily &s;uppo&s;e a &s;ucce&s;&s;ion of Officers in the place of <HI>Jo&s;hua,</HI> which upon all accounts there was not. The Apo&s;tle applies it to the Saints, <HI>Heb</HI> 13. 5. And I am of the mind, Chri&s;t doth as really fulfill that Promi&s;e, <HI>Mat.</HI> 28 20. made originally to the Apo&s;tles, when he vouch&s;afes his pre&s;ence to the Saints, to comfort, quicken, uphold, defend them,&mdash;according as their exigencies do require, as ever he did to the Apo&s;tles them&s;elves. So little rea&s;on is there of a&s;&s;erting the nece&s;&s;ity of Officers, as &s;ucce&s;|&s;ors of the Apo&s;tles in their Office of Apo&s;tle&s;hip, to vindicate the faithfulne&s;s of Chri&s;t in that Promi&s;e of his. The &s;ucce&s;&s;ion we &s;peak of, which the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters pretend to, is a per&s;onal &s;ucce&s;&s;ion through Papacy, <HI>(i. e.</HI> that the Apo&s;tles ordained Bi&s;hops, the&s;e ordained others downwards, to this day; a Catalogue of whom, from time to time &s;ome pretend to.) That when Antichri&s;tiani&s;m over&s;pread the world, and the Pope, as the Head thereof, ordained and &s;ent forth Mini&s;ters, from whom they received their Office-power, the&s;e &s;hould be notwith&s;tand|ing not Antichri&s;tian, is a fond conceit. He could not communicate that he had not; that he had any true power (any other than a fal&s;e
<PB N="234" REF="121"> Antichri&s;tian Office-power) Mr. <HI>T.</HI> will not have the con&s;ide<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">ce to aver. So that the whole fardle of words that en&s;ue, are not at all to the pur|po&s;e; A &s;ucce&s;&s;ion in doing the &s;ame work after them, and preaching the &s;ame Go&s;pel (which yet they do but rarely, if at all) is not the Succe&s;|&s;ion pleaded for by our Prelates. They care not for Preaching (hinder, oppo&s;e it, (many of them) dreading it as the Engine in the hand of the Spirit, that would &s;hake their Kingdom, and utterly overturn and demoli&s;h it) &s;o they may have their Lord&s;hips, Plea&s;ures, and Palla|ces. 'Tis not indeed Antichri&s;tian for me to confe&s;s the Apo&s;tles Creed, becau&s;e it is conveyed to our hands through the Papacy, for however it cannot be &s;o called, becau&s;e the Apo&s;tles were the Formers of it, which they were not; yet the matter thereof, being (except in one Ar|ticle) bottom'd upon the Scriptures, I ought to confe&s;s it. But this is remote from what he is pleading for, <HI>viz.</HI> A per&s;onal &s;ucce&s;&s;ion of Bi|&s;hops through the Papacy, receiving their Power and Authority from the man of Sin,&mdash;which (I &s;ay &s;till) whil&s;t the Bi&s;hops pretend to, they do therein proclaim their &s;hame, and yeeld the matter in contro|ver&s;ie; though their Advocate &s;hamefully prevaricates, that he may with a multitude of words cover their nakedne&s;s; omitting the con&s;i|deration of what was incumbent upon him, e&s;pecially to have removed out of the way, <HI>viz.</HI> The Arguments produced to evince, That the Apo&s;tles, as Apo&s;tles, had no &s;ucce&s;&s;or in that their Office: Which if it remain good, the pre&s;ent Bi&s;hops mo&s;t a&s;&s;uredly cannot be their Suc|ce&s;&s;or<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter"> as Apo&s;tles.</P>
<P>He adds, 5thly. <HI>That Bi&s;hops as a Superior order, or degree above Pres|byters, were not dreamt of in the world for &s;everal hundreds of years after Chri&s;t,</HI> he thinks <HI>can hardly be made good;</HI> but he wi&s;ely re<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">reats with a Prote&s;tation, <HI>that he will not enter the li&s;ts with re&s;pect to that point.</HI></P>
<P>The truth is he knows it hath been proved, and that with that &s;trength of evidence, that he cannot bear up again&s;t. That <HI>Clemens</HI> his not take|ing notice of them, as di&s;tinct from <HI>Presbyters,</HI> is ballanced by the pa&s;&s;ages in <HI>Ignatius</HI> his Epi&s;tles (which I am per&s;waded he rejects as &s;purious, and counterfeit, I am &s;ure it were ea&s;ie to manife&s;t them to be &s;o, it is already done by others) is &s;uch a pitiful covert, that a man would never fly to but in ca&s;e of extreme nece&s;&s;ity, when he knows not what to &s;ay. <HI>Lombards</HI> words import, he grants, that the order of Bi&s;hops above <HI>Presbyters</HI> was not known, till after the Apo&s;tles dayes; and if &s;o, they are no order of divine in&s;titution, in which he once more perfectly yeelds the cau&s;e; they are not of the in&s;titution of Chri&s;t in the Scripture. Though he cannot prove that by the primitive
<PB N="235" REF="121"> Church, <HI>Lombard</HI> means the Churches in the dayes of the Apo&s;tles, his words &s;eem to import &s;omewhat more. And <HI>Bellarmins</HI> him&s;elf ac|knowledgeth, that the name of <HI>Elders</HI> was given in common to Bi&s;hops and Elders. And <HI>Eu&s;ebius, lib.</HI> 5. <HI>c.</HI> 24. calls <HI>Victor, Anicetus, Pius, Telesphorus, Xi&s;tus</HI> (who was almo&s;t three hundred years after Chri&s;t) Bi&s;hops of <HI>Rome, Elders.</HI> And the learned <HI>Whitaker</HI> ingenuou&s;ly con|fe&s;&s;eth, <Q>That betwixt an Elder and a Bi&s;hop, there was of old no difference&mdash;That &s;uch Bi&s;hops, as are now, in the <HI>Roman</HI> Church (in the <HI>Engli&s;h</HI> Church we may as truly &s;ay) were from the beginning, is mo&s;t fal&s;e and can never be proved. There were then more Bi|&s;hops, <HI>i. e.</HI> Pa&s;tors of one Church, <HI>Act.</HI> 20. 17. <HI>contr.</HI> 2. <HI>q.</HI> 5. <HI>c.</HI> 6. <HI>p.</HI> 284.</Q></P>
<P>But Mr. <HI>T.</HI> tells us, <HI>'Tis enough for his purpo&s;e if the office be found in Scripture, though not their Superiority.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> And is this your pleading for your Clients? Seriou&s;ly Sir, you would di&s;courage any per&s;on in the world from entertaining you as his Advocate, when you are expo&s;ing your Client thus to ruin by your own pleadings, at every turn. The que&s;tion is, whether the office of Lord-Bi&s;hops, which as &s;uch, con&s;i&s;ts in there Superiority, juri&s;diction over the Prie&s;ts and Mini&s;ters of <HI>England,</HI> be of the in&s;titution of Chri&s;t? Saith Mr. <HI>T. their Superiority is not.</HI> Very good! what needed &s;o many words to no purpo&s;e; 'tis well however he will be &s;o ingenuous as to confe&s;s at la&s;t that the juridicial office of Lord-Bi&s;hop is not of Chri&s;ts in&s;titution. The words of Dr. <HI>Hammond</HI> he grants to be as we recite them, but thinks we mi&s;apply them, <Q>But certainly if, as the Dr. &s;aith, a Primary &amp; Metropolitical &s;eat was con&s;tituted over Epi&s;copal Seats and Churches <HI>(viz.</HI> &s;uch as are Dioce&s;an) that their &s;tate and frame may be accommodated to the &s;tate and condition of the Go|vernment of the Nations, in the Empire;</Q> he that hath but half an eye will &s;ee, that hence it follows that the Primacy, and Supremacy of the Bi&s;hops over the&s;e Churches, was the re&s;ult of the de&s;igns of men, to accommodate the &s;tate and frame of the Church, to the &s;tate and condi|tion of the Government of the Nations. But the truth of this A&s;&s;ertion depends not upon the Doctors conce&s;&s;ion; its notoriou&s;ly known, and acknowledged by &s;everal others; <Q>The di&s;tribution of Churches ordi|narily followed the de&s;tribution of the Common-wealth: &s;o that when &s;ome Regions were &s;ubjected to the Civil juri&s;diction in any Ci|ty, the &s;ame were ordinarily &s;ubjected al&s;o to the Eccle&s;ia&s;tical; and as they were reckoned to be of the &s;ame Province in re&s;pect of the Ci|vil, &s;o were they of the &s;ame Church or Dioce&s;s, in re&s;pect of the Spi|ritual
<PB N="236" REF="122"> Government, &s;aith <HI>Rainoldes Confer. with Hart.</HI> And the Council of <HI>Con&s;tantinople</HI> decreed, That if any new City, by the Au|thority of the Emperor, was erected, that the order of Eccle&s;ia&s;tical things &s;hould follow the Civil and Publick form. Hence by the &s;ame Council, <HI>Con&s;tantinople</HI> receives the Primacy, becau&s;e it was <HI>New Rome, Can.</HI> 5. which before <HI>Old Rome</HI> enjoyed for that very rea&s;on. But that you may under&s;tand, how the Pope incroached on Bi&s;hops by degrees, untill of an Equal he became a Soveraign, fir&s;t over a few, next over many, at la&s;t over all: I mu&s;t fetch the matter of Bi&s;hops Metropoli|tans, and Arch-Bi&s;hops &s;omewhat higher; and &s;hew how Chri&s;tian Cities, Provinces, and Dioce&s;&s;es, were alotted to them. Fir&s;t there|fore when Elders were ordained by the Apo&s;tles in every Church, <HI>Act.</HI> 14. 23. through every City, <HI>Tit.</HI> 1. 5. to feed the flock of Chri&s;t, whereof the Holy Gho&s;t had made them over&s;eers, <HI>Act.</HI> 20. 28. They, to the intent they might the better do it by common councel and con|&s;ent, did u&s;e to a&s;&s;emble them&s;elves and meet together. In which meetings, for the more orderly handling, and concluding of things pertaining to their charge, they cho&s;e one among&s;t them, to be the Pre&s;ident of their Company, and Moderator of their actions&mdash;(And this is he, whom afterward, in the Primitive Church, the <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">athers cal|led <HI>Bi&s;hop. i. e.</HI> the Pre&s;ident of the Presbyters&mdash;) who was th<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter"> Bi&s;hop of the chiefe&s;t City, whom they called the <HI>Metropolitane.</HI> For a Province, as they termed it, was the &s;ame with them, that a Shire is with us: And the Shire-town, as you would &s;ay of the Province, was called <HI>Metropolis. i. e.</HI> the Mother-City: In which as the Judges and Ju&s;tices with us do hear at certain times the cau&s;es of the whole Shire: So the Ruler of the Province with them did mini&s;ter Ju&s;tice, and made his abode there ordinarily. Whereupon, by rea&s;on that men for their bu&s;ine&s;s, made great concour&s;e thither, the Church was wont to furni&s;h it (of Godly Polity) with the worthie&s;t Bi&s;hop, e<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">dued with gifts above his Brethren. And they repo&s;ed in him &s;uch a&s;&s;iance, that they did not only commit the Pre&s;ident&s;hip of their A&s;&s;emblies to him, <HI>Concil. Antioch. <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">an.</HI> 20. <HI>Chalced. can.</HI> 19. But agreed al&s;o, that none throughout all the Province, &s;hould be made Bi&s;hop without his con&s;ent; nor any weightier matter be done by them, without him. <HI>Concil. Nic. can.</HI> 4 <HI>&amp;</HI> 6. <HI>Concil. Antioc. can</HI> 9. Now the Roman Em|pire was governed in &s;uch &s;ort, that the Circuits of the Lord-Pre&s;idents had many Provinces within them, and were called Dioce&s;&s;es. Through occa&s;ion whereof the Bi&s;hops of tho&s;e Cities, in which the&s;e Lievte|nants of the Emperor were re&s;ident (The &s;tate Eccle&s;ia&s;tical following
<PB N="237" REF="122"> the Civil. <HI>Wolfgang. Luzu. Comment. Reip. Rom. l.</HI> 2. <HI>c.</HI> 2.) did grow in power too. Neither were they only named <HI>Arch-Bi&s;hops,</HI> and <HI>Patri|arks</HI> of the Dioce&s;s, <HI>i. <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">.</HI> the chiefe&s;t Bi&s;hops, and Fathers of that Cir|cuit, which the Lieutenant ruled, but al&s;o obtained that the Metro|politans of the Provinces in their Dioce&s;s, &s;hould be likewi&s;e &s;ubject and obedient to them, as Bi&s;hops were to Metropolitans. So the Arch-Bi&s;hop and Patriarch of <HI>Antioch</HI> had Prerogatives given him through the Dioce&s;s of the Ea&s;t, wherein were &s;even Provinces. <HI>Concil. Con&s;t.</HI> 1. <HI>can.</HI> 2. <HI>Concil. Antio. in exord.</HI> So nothing could be done in the Dioce&s;s of <HI>Egypt,</HI> which under the Bi&s;hop had ten Metropolitans, without the con&s;ent of the Arch-Bi&s;hop and Patriarch of <HI>Alexandria. Conc. Chalc. Act.</HI> 4. &s;o it was granted to the Arch-Bi&s;hop and Patriarch of <HI>Con&s;tanti|nople,</HI> that the Metropolitans of the Dioce&s;&s;es of <HI>Pontus, A&s;ia</HI> &amp; <HI>Thracia</HI> (within which were twenty eight Provinces) &s;hould be ordained by him. Finally &s;o was it decreed, that if a Bi&s;hop had any matter of Controver&s;ies with the Metropolitan of his own Province, the Pa|triark of the Dioce&s;s &s;hould be Judge thereof, <HI>Concil. Chalced. can.</HI> 9. <HI>&amp;</HI> 17. as al&s;o if any man did receive injury of his own Bi&s;hop, or Me|tropolitan. Thus were the Roman Popes (as they are called now) fir&s;t Bi&s;hops over Elder<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter"> within their own City, next Metropolitans over Bi&s;hops within their own Province; Then Arch-Bi&s;hops and Patriarks over Metropolitans within their own Dioce&s;s: And this is the Princely Dioce&s;s which I meant, when I &s;aid that the Pope in the time of <HI>Pelagius</HI> was become Arch-Bi&s;hop of the Princely Dioce&s;s; but he was yet but an Arch-Bi&s;hop: He was not univer&s;al Pope and Patriarch of the whole World. For although the Patriark of <HI>Con&s;tan|tinople,</HI> being puffed up, becau&s;e in his City, the Emperor him&s;elf was re&s;ident, he would be called the Patriark of the whole world, as the Emperor was called the Lord of the world, <HI>Greg. Regi&s;t. l.</HI> 4. <HI>Epi&s;t.</HI> 39. yet the Roman Patriarks, <HI>Pelagius</HI> &amp; <HI>Gregory</HI> did with&s;tand his Pride. <HI>Rainolds Confer. with Hart, c.</HI> 8. <HI>Beza</HI> al&s;o <HI>The&s;. Geneves.</HI> tells us, that the Fathers in the di&s;tribution of Churches (under Bi&s;hops, Arch-Bi&s;hops, <HI>&amp;c.)</HI> followed the type or pattern of the Roman Emperor. And the learned <HI>Brightman</HI> in <HI>Rev.</HI> 13. 4. tells us, that they are the wor&s;hipers of the Dragon in the Bea&s;t, who wonder at the P<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">imacy for the Political Maje&s;ty of the Dragon, granted by the Councel of <HI>Chalcedon, Act.</HI> 16. Indeed in <HI>Clements</HI> Con&s;titutions we find, if po&s;&s;i|ble, a more filthy &s;ource from whence their original is a&s;&s;erted: In the place where they were before fir&s;t-Flamines, <HI>Pet<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">r</HI> commanded Patri|arks to be placed; and in Cities where before were Arch-Flamines,
<PB N="238" REF="123"> Arch-Bi&s;hops, the re&s;t were only Bi&s;hops&mdash;That we had h<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">re in <HI>Eng|land</HI> twenty eight Head-Prie&s;ts, which they called Flamine<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">, and three Arch-Prie&s;ts among them, which were called Arch-Flamines, which had the over&s;ight of their manners, and were as Judges over the re&s;t, is known: hence the pattern of our Arch-Bi&s;hops and Bi&s;hops.</Q></P>
</DIV3>
<DIV3 N="5" TYPE="section">
<HEAD>Sect. 5.</HEAD>
<ARGUMENT>
<P><HI>The office of Lord-Bi&s;hops contrary to expre&s;s precepts of Chri&s;t.</HI> Mat. 20. 25. Mark 10. 42. Luke 22. 25. 1 <HI>Pet.</HI> 5. 3. <HI>con&s;idered. Of the titles of Dr. of Divinity &amp;c. The office of Lord-Bi&s;hops derived from, and only to be found in the Papacy. The Popes of Rome the head of Antichri&s;t. No Lord-Bi&s;hop till after</HI> Con&s;tantine. <HI>Of the fir&s;t Nicene Council: whe|ther there were any Lord-Bi&s;hops before: what difference betwixt Lord-Bi&s;hops then, and now. Of the retention of the &s;ame office in the Greek, Ea&s;tern, Ru&s;&s;ian Churches. The difference betwixt the Superintendency of the Lutheran Churches, and our Bi&s;hops. An Objection an&s;wered. The Bi&s;hops of England act not in the matter of Ordination as Presbyters.</HI></P>
</ARGUMENT>
<P>THat the office of Lord-Bi&s;hops is contrary to expre&s;s precepts of Chri&s;t in the Scripture, is the &s;econd part of our <HI>Minor</HI> Propo&s;i|tion, which in <HI>S. T.</HI> we prove from <HI>Mat.</HI> 20. 25. <HI>Mark</HI> 10. 42. <HI>Luke</HI> 22 25. 1 <HI>Pet.</HI> 5. 3.</P>
<P>To which Mr. <HI>T.</HI> an&s;wers, 1. <HI>That we &s;hoot wide of the mark.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> This we have already replied to. His in&s;tance of the Titles of <HI>Doctor of Divinity</HI> in the Schools, is not at all to the purpo&s;e: They pretend not to any Eccle&s;ia&s;tical juri&s;diction over Elders and Churches, by vertue of their being inve&s;ted into &s;uch titles, as our L-Bi&s;hops do.</P>
<P>2dly. He con&s;iders the particular Scriptures in&s;tanced in, to which what to reply he &s;eems to be much at a lo&s;s. 1. He would have the words of the Evangeli&s;ts not to be a precept &s;hewing their duty, but a prediction manife&s;ting the event of what &s;hould be.</P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. This is expre&s;ly contrary to the letter of the Text.</P>
<P N="2">2. The Lord&s;hip, Supremacy, Superiority (call it what you plea&s;e) is a Lord&s;hip&mdash;<GAP DESC="foreign">, <HI>amongst them&s;elves,</HI> over one another, that is interdicted and forbidden by Chri&s;t; that it was lawful for them to ex|erci&s;e &s;uch a Supremacy, this Animadverter will not &s;ay&punc; now this mu&s;t be &s;uppo&s;ed, if the words be not a precept, but a prediction.</P>
<P>3dly. He expre&s;ly tells us in his <HI>Romani&s;m di&s;cu&s;&s;ed,</HI> Art. 7. <HI>Sect.</HI> 8. p. 174. <HI>l.</HI> 14. <HI>That Superiority is</HI> (in the&s;e words) <HI>plainly forbidden.</HI> 2ly. He is inclined to think, <HI>that if it be a precept, it is a precept to the Apo|&s;tles only, not to others.</HI></P>
<PB N="239" REF="123">
<P> <HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. Then not to the Pope; then Mr. <HI>T.</HI> palpably abu&s;eth this Scripture in his <HI>Roman. di&s;cu&s;&s;ed, Art.</HI> 7. <HI>Sect.</HI> 8. <HI>p.</HI> 173. where from hence he argues and enveighs again&s;t the Pope's Supremacy. But 2ly, as good he may &s;ay that the great Doctrines of Self-denial&mdash;frequently pre&s;&s;ed by Chri&s;t upon the Apo&s;tles, is a precept only to them. 3ly. We find the Apo&s;tle charging the &s;ame thing upon the Elders, 1 <HI>Pet.</HI> 5. 3. who knew the mind of his Lord in this matter it's to be thought as well as Mr. T.</P>
<P>He tells us, 3dly, <HI>If it be a precept to others be&s;ides the Apo&s;tles, whe|ther to all Chri&s;tians, or only to Mini&s;ters of the Gospel? and whether it for|bid &s;imply Dominion at all, or tyranical Dominion&mdash;is doubtful.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> And yet the fir&s;t he po&s;itively affirms within ten or eleven lines afterwards: and here, and in his <HI>Roman. di&s;cu&s;&s;ed</HI> a&s;&s;erts, <HI>that 'tis not tyrannical Dominion, but the Dominion of one Apo&s;tle over another that is interdicted.</HI> So that the &s;ame thing is doubtful, and not doubtful with Mr. <HI>T.</HI> in the writing a few lines. And this he proves by no fewer than ten rea&s;ons in his <HI>Rom. di&s;cu&s;&s;ed.</HI></P>
<P>2dly. Here he tels us, <HI>that 'tis an affectation of the Rule which a per&s;on may have, and lawfully exerci&s;e, that is forbidden there, that the Dominion or Rule it &s;elf is interdicted:</HI> which he would do well to reconcile, and an&s;wer his Arguments he there produceth for its confirmation. The &s;um whereof is, Chri&s;t would have none among&s;t them &s;uperiour, but all equal; he forbids not only tyrannical Dominion, but al&s;o any Domi|nion at all over one another: which is (&s;aith he) apparent, 1. From the occa&s;ion of the words: Chri&s;t forbids what they &s;ought for,&mdash;but they &s;ought for chief Dignity, Seniority and priority of Order (as do the Bi&s;hops of <HI>England.)</HI> 2dly&punc; From the Subjects who&s;e Do|minion is forbidden, <HI>viz.</HI> Kings, that had lawfull Authority, and therefore &s;uch Rule, is forbidden as the be&s;t Rulers, u&s;ed among&s;t the Nations. 3dly. The word <GAP DESC="foreign">, although &s;ometimes meant of meer lordly, forcible Rule, again&s;t the will and good of the per&s;on ruled; yet here it cannot be &s;o meant, &s;ith <GAP DESC="foreign"> to u&s;e Dominion at all, and to have power at all over one another, is for|bidden <HI>Luke</HI> 22. 25. 4thly. <GAP DESC="foreign">, and the &s;imple <GAP DESC="foreign">, which is u&s;ed &s;till of Rule without abu&s;e, is forbidden. 5thly. It is forbidden to be called <GAP DESC="foreign">, <HI>i. e.</HI> to affect that title which implies one to be under another, and to be beholden one to another, as per&s;ons that could gratifie one another&mdash;which doth imply &s;uperiority in &s;ome &s;ort. 6thly. The additional &s;peech of Chri&s;t commanding in the &s;tead
<PB N="240" REF="124"> of Dominion, <HI>Mat.</HI> 20. 26, 27. rather Mini&s;try and Service, &s;hews he would have none among them &s;uperiour, but all equal. 7ly. Chri&s;t's propounding him&s;elf as their example, only in &s;ervice. 8<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">y. He re|quires &s;uch a mutual deba&s;ement&mdash;as takes away the taking to them|&s;elves priority of order, or place&mdash;or rule over one anothe<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">, <HI>Mat.</HI> 20. 26, 27. <HI>Mark</HI> 10. 43, 44. <HI>Luke</HI> 22. 26. 9ly. This is confirmed by other places upon a like occa&s;ion, <HI>Mat.</HI> 18. 1, 2, 3, 4. <HI>Mark</HI> 9. 33.<HI>&mdash;Luke</HI> 9. 46. In which Chri&s;t re&s;olves them that they &s;hould be as a little child, that a&s;&s;umes not Empire, but is humble, and accounts others as equal to him. 10ly. From <HI>Luke</HI> 22. 28.&mdash;that Chri&s;t having for|bidden &s;uperiority in any of them, among them&s;elves, promi&s;es them a Kingdom, afterward, in recompence of their abiding with him in his temptations.</P>
<P>All which manife&s;t, 1. a Superiority interdicted. 2. That the Superiority interdicted is not interdicted to all Chri&s;tians (as he would in his <HI>Theodulia</HI> bear us in hand) for then Chri&s;tians &s;hould be forbid|den to exerci&s;e Civil Dominion and Power, as Mr. T. his ten Argu|ments manife&s;t. But, 3. a Superiority of order over one another, as the Bi&s;hops of <HI>England</HI> exerci&s;e over their fellow-Mini&s;ters. That the Apo&s;tles exerci&s;ed any &s;uch Superiority over the Church of God, or Mini&s;ters of a lower order, as the Bi&s;hops of <HI>England</HI> exe<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">ci&s;e over them, this Animadverter will never prove; And if he were able &s;o to do, this would not ju&s;tifie the Bi&s;hops in their exerci&s;e of &s;uch Supe|riority, who are inve&s;ted with no Apo&s;tolical Power that I know of. 'Tis true, a rule over the Faith of Saints is di&s;claimed by the Apo&s;tle, 2 <HI>Cor.</HI> 1. 24. but that this is not the whole of what is interdicted in the places before-cited, he hath him&s;elf proved by ten Arguments, but now repeated by us.</P>
<P>As for 1 <HI>Pet.</HI> 5. 3. he tells us what the A&s;&s;embly in their Annotations &s;ay on the place, <HI>viz.</HI> that is, <HI>not imperiou&s;ly commanding your own in|ventions, in the &s;tead of the Doctrine of the Gospel; not carrying hem&s;elves in&s;olently and magi&s;teriou&s;ly towards Gods People,</HI> 3 Joh. 9.</P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. All this is known to be practi&s;ed by the pre&s;ent Bi&s;hops. They command imperiou&s;ly their own inventions, to which the preach|ing of the Go&s;pel mu&s;t give place, when there is not time for both, as in the ca&s;e of Liturgy-wor&s;hip is known to be true: How in&s;olently and magi&s;terially they carry it towards the people of the Lord, the whole Nation is witne&s;s. 2. The Elders being interdicted, <GAP DESC="foreign">, <HI>to exerci&s;e Lordly Rule over the Heritage of God,</HI> is certainly an inter|diction of the introduction of any &s;uch Officer into the Churc<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter"> of God,
<PB N="241" REF="124"> as again&s;t the will of the Lord's People, &s;hould by vertue of an Office-power, exerci&s;e a Lordly juri&s;diction over them and their Mini&s;ters, (as a &s;uperiour order of Prie&s;thood) and certainly more forbidden than the office of an Elder. Juri&s;diction is not an abu&s;e of our Prelates Of|fice, as is known, though they too often abu&s;e it, by exerci&s;ing it exor|bitantly, even contrary to their own Canons, but a great, a chief part of it, wherein they do <GAP DESC="foreign"> &amp; <GAP DESC="foreign">, exerci&s;e dominion over the People of God, and that again&s;t their will by fore and violence, to their utter undoing, and that in execution of that office they have re|ceived, and exerci&s;e according to their Canon Laws, in their Courts Eccle&s;ia&s;tical.</P>
<P>We further prove in <HI>S. T.</HI> That the office of Lord-Bi&s;hops is Anti|chri&s;tian, becau&s;e derived from, and only to be found in the Papacy: none of the Reformed Churches have retained it; the Woman in her flight into the Wilderne&s;s carried it not along with her: it's rejected by the true Spou&s;e and Witne&s;&s;es of Chri&s;t, in all ages. We in&s;tance in &s;everal, as <HI>Hierom,</HI> the Churches of <HI>Helvetia, &amp;c.</HI></P>
<P>To this Mr. <HI>T.</HI> replies, 1. <HI>Though the latter Popes,</HI> viz. <HI>from the time of</HI> Boniface <HI>the third (about the year</HI> 606.) <HI>be the head of Antichri&s;t, yet it doth not follow, that the office that is derived from, and is only to be found in the Papacy, is &s;urely Antichri&s;tian; there having been bad Officers perhaps derived from good Popes, and continued only in the Church of Rome.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. That the Popes of <HI>Rome</HI> were not the head of Antichri&s;t, till the time of <HI>Boniface</HI> the third, this Animadverter will never prove.</P>
<P>2dly. Should it be granted him, what good Popes he will find from the time of <HI>Sylve&s;ter</HI> about the year 320 I know not, nor what Officers were derived from them. Lord-Bi&s;hops there were none till after|wards. When <HI>Con&s;tantine</HI> coming to the Throne, the Man of Sin began by little and little, according to the prophe&s;ie of <HI>Paul</HI> touching him, 2 <HI>The&s;&s;.</HI> 2. 7. to &s;hew him&s;elf in the following Popes. The <GAP DESC="foreign">, or the <HI>Letter, viz.</HI> the Roman Pagan Emperours, being removed out of the way (about which time many report a Voice was heard, <HI>Hodie Ve|nenum, &amp;c.</HI> This day Poy&s;on is poured forth into the Church of Chri&s;t) And from this time, the noble and renowned Witne&s;&s;es of Chri&s;t, the <HI>Walden&s;es</HI> &s;tate the Defection of the Church; <HI>Catal. Te&s;t.</HI> 1509. From which time at lea&s;t, whatever Offices or Rites were introduced, being introduced by the Antichri&s;t, that was now gradually revealing him|&s;elf, are ju&s;tly to be accounted Antichri&s;tian.</P>
<P>3dly. Would Mr. <HI>T.</HI> had told us what Officers they are that are only continued in the Church of <HI>Rome</HI> that are of divine appointment, that
<PB N="242" REF="125"> we might have con&s;idered the truth of his &s;ugge&s;tion. Lord-Bi&s;hops we prove are not &s;uch.</P>
<P>He further tells us, 2dly, <HI>That it is not true, that the office of Lord-Bi&s;hops is derived from, and is only to be found in the Papacy.</HI> 1. <HI>It is ma|nife&s;t in the fir&s;t Nicene Council,</HI> can. 6. <HI>that then and before were Patri|archs, Metropolitan Bi&s;hops, and Lord-Bi&s;hops with their Office.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. That they were before is not &s;o ea&s;ily proved: Hither, as to their &s;ource and &s;pring, are they u&s;ually referred. The learned <HI>Hooper</HI> tells us; <HI>A Bi&s;hop ought to be a Bi&s;hop only of one City: it is to be lamented that the Epi&s;copal Office is &s;o greatly degenerated: I<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter"> was not &s;o from the beginning, when</HI> Paul <HI>commanded</HI> Titus <HI>to con&s;titute Bi&s;hops through every City. And certainly if the ancient love toward the people did flouri&s;h (in us) we &s;hould confe&s;s that there is more to be done in one City, than can ea&s;ily be performed by the be&s;t. 'Tis &s;ufficiently known that the Primitive-Church had no &s;uch Bi&s;hops (as were over more Cities or Congregations than one) before the time of</HI> Sylve&s;ter <HI>the first; In who&s;e time was the first Ni|cene Council.</HI></P>
<P>2dly. That becau&s;e the fir&s;t <HI>Nicene</HI> Council acknowledged Metropo|litane and Lord-Bi&s;hops, therefore they are not derived from the Pa|pacy, is not &s;o ea&s;ily demon&s;trated. This Council was in o<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter"> about the year 315. Long before the Spirit, by which the body Antichri&s;tian is animated, vi&s;ibly manife&s;ted it &s;elf, not once, nor twice, a<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter"> is known. What other &s;pirit &s;hewed it &s;elf in <HI>Victor,</HI> who excommunicated the Ea&s;tern Bi&s;hops, for not keeping <HI>Ea&s;ter</HI> with him at the &s;ame time: which brawl continued till the fir&s;t Council of <HI>Nice;</HI> which &s;ides with <HI>Victor</HI> (an Argument that they were acted by the &s;ame &s;pirit).</P>
<P>3dly. What a&s;&s;urance will our Animadverter give us, that this Ca|non (as well as &s;ome others, which confe&s;&s;edly are) is not foi&s;ted into the Acts of that Council by per&s;ons of after-ages? He is not ignorant that <HI>Prote&s;tants</HI> plead this again&s;t the <HI>Papi&s;ts,</HI> who for the e&s;tabli&s;hment of the Tyranny of the <HI>Roman</HI> Primacy, produce a fictitious Canon of the Nicene Council.</P>
<P>4thly. 'Tis incumbent upon him to prove that &s;uch Metropolitane Bi&s;hops and Lord-Bi&s;hops as are now in <HI>England,</HI> were in and before the fir&s;t <HI>Nicene</HI> Council; which he knows to be fal&s;e and untrue.</P>
<P N="1">1. The <HI>Engli&s;h</HI> Epi&s;copacy is an order above the order of <HI>Presbyters;</HI> then <HI>Epi&s;copacy</HI> and <HI>Presbytery</HI> was accounted one and the &s;ame order.</P>
<P N="2">2. Ruledom and Juri&s;diction is the peculiar flower of the Garland of our <HI>Engli&s;h Epi&s;copacy;</HI> of that it was not &s;o. As the Pres<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">yters were to do nothing without the Bi&s;hop, &s;o neither was the Bi&s;hop to do any thing without the Presbyters.</P>
<PB N="243" REF="125">
<P> He adds, 2. <HI>That in the Greek, Ea&s;tern, Ru&s;&s;ian Churches, the &s;ame Office is continued.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. Nor do we affirm the contrary: that we &s;hould do &s;o, is not nece&s;&s;ary. The Greek-Churches were at the fir&s;t involved in the &s;ame Apo&s;ta&s;ie with the Roman, at lea&s;t with re&s;pect to the matter in debate betwixt us. 2. We only &s;ay, that 'tis only found in the Pa|pacy; with re&s;pect to the Reformed-Churches, none of them have continued it.</P>
<P>He therefore adds, 3. <HI>That it is al&s;o pleaded, that the Lutheran Chur|ches Reformed, that have &s;eparated from the Papacy in</HI> Germany, Den|mark, Swethland, <HI>have retained the &s;ame Office under the name of</HI> Super|intendents.</P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 'Tis indeed thus pleaded by <HI>Downham, &amp;c.</HI> who 'tis like took up the &s;tory of <HI>Hadrianus Saravia,</HI> a known Patron of the Popi&s;h Hie|rarchy, who a&s;&s;erts it in a way of reproach to the <HI>Lutheran</HI> Reforma|tion; whether it be truly pleaded, or otherwi&s;e, Mr. <HI>T.</HI> tells us not; though he cannot be ignorant of the contrary. The Superintendency of the <HI>Lutheran</HI> Churches is exceeding different from the Office of our Bi&s;hops. 1. Their Superintendent is only as a Pre&s;ident or Chairman, for the pre&s;ervation of order in an A&s;&s;embly. 2. He is only &s;o during the Se&s;&s;ion, out of it he exerci&s;eth no authority at all (more than the re&s;t of his <HI>Co-Presbyters)</HI> as do the Bi&s;hops of <HI>England.</HI> 3. He is &s;ub|ject to the <HI>Presbytery;</HI> our <HI>Bi&s;hops</HI> Lords over them. 4. He differs not in order and degree from the re&s;t of the Mini&s;te<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="2 letters">; as do the Bi|&s;hops of <HI>England.</HI> 5. He is but a Pa&s;tor of one particular Church; our Bi&s;hops are of &s;cores, hundreds.</P>
<P>He proceeds after the &s;ame rate of confidence and verity, 4. <HI>That it is fal&s;e, that the true Spou&s;e and Witne&s;&s;es of Chri&s;t have in all ages utter|ly rejected the Office of Lord-Bi&s;hops, and that it hath its entertainment only by the fal&s;e Antichri&s;tian Church.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. 'Tis much he doth not produce one in&s;tance of this A&s;|&s;ertion, and yet &s;o confidently avers it; which could he have done, he would as well have proved it fal&s;e, as &s;aid it was &s;o.</P>
<P>2dly. For the confirmation of the truth of what he &s;aith is fal&s;e, we have produced &s;everal Te&s;timonies; his An&s;wer thereunto, &s;uch as it is, we have already taken notice of it, and manife&s;ted its lightne&s;s and vanity.</P>
<P>He adds, <HI>This is manife&s;t by the many Epi&s;tles written to the Engli&s;h Prelates by their reception at the Synod of</HI> Dort.&mdash;</P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. What the Epi&s;tles are he intends, what the Reception
<PB N="244" REF="126"> mentioned, is not of &s;uch import, as to &s;pend our time in enquiring thereabout.</P>
<P>2dly. That they have rejected the Office of Lord-Bi&s;hops is known; they have publi&s;hed their di&s;like and dete&s;tation of it, in their <HI>Confe&s;&s;ion</HI> to the world. What re&s;pect any of them give them (either in point of civility, or as Me&s;&s;engers, or per&s;ons &s;ent from the King, or perhaps not being truly informed what the Juri&s;diction and Office is they exerci&s;e) in their private Letters, or otherwi&s;e, is not con&s;iderable in the matter in hand. The Office of Lord-Bi&s;hops, or a &s;uperiority of Order above Presbyters or Elders, they ab&s;olutely condemn, as we have proved.</P>
<P>We add in S. T. <HI>One Stone of Offence mu&s;t be removed out of our way&mdash;It is &s;aid, that though Lord-Bi&s;hops are Antichri&s;tian, yet it doth not follow that the Office and Mini&s;try derived from them is &s;o: for they are al&s;o Pres|byters, and ordained as Presbyters.</HI></P>
<P>To which Mr. <HI>T.</HI> &s;ubjoyns, 1. <HI>There is nothing replied to the allegati|on that Bi&s;hops ordain with Presbyters.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. Nor is there any &s;uch allegation in the objection propo&s;ed. 2ly. If there were, its not &s;o con&s;iderable as to de&s;erve to be taken no|tice of: They are only a&s;&s;i&s;tants to the Bi&s;hop: 'tis he (not they) that &s;ets them apart, admits them into <HI>Sacred Orders,</HI> as they heatheni&s;hly call them.</P>
<P>He adds, 2dly. <HI>Nor to this, that &s;ome of the Bi&s;hops have acknowledged Epi&s;copacy, not to be an order above Presbytery.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. Who they are that have thus acknowledged I know not.</P>
<P N="2">2. Mr. T. &s;aith not that any of the pre&s;ent Bi&s;hops do &s;o. 3. If they did in words, their practice contradicts it, exerci&s;ing juri&s;dictions over the Presbyters, or Elders.</P>
<P>3dly. <HI>Nor to this</HI> (&s;aith he) <HI>that though the Bi&s;hop impo&s;ing hands do act as of &s;uperior order, yet being a Presbyter his act is valid; as he that convey's a thing, as conceiving him&s;elf as Heir and Executor, if he be not Heir, yet if he be only Executor &amp; by that hath power to convey i<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">, the Grant is good.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. But this is Mr. <HI>T.</HI> his mi&s;take; I &s;ay expre&s;ly, though it &s;hould be granted that they act as <HI>Presbyters,</HI> yet their act is not valid, becau&s;e they act not <HI>as Presbyters</HI> of the in&s;titution of Chri&s;t<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter"> of which he afterwards takes notice.</P>
<P>Though 2dly, Mr. <HI>T.</HI> will never be able to prove, that the Bi&s;hop impo&s;ing hands, as a Bi&s;hop, and acting under that capacity, yet being a Presbyter, his act is valid. For. 1. when a Bi&s;hop, he is no longer a Presbyter, but one of an higher order and degree; as a Presbyter, is no
<PB N="245" REF="126"> longer a Deacon, when once made a Presbyter. 2. As a Bi&s;hop he hath no authority from Chri&s;t at all, to act in the bu&s;ine&s;s of impo&s;ition of hands; therefore acting as &s;uch, his act is invalid, which his once be|ing a Presbyter cannot make otherwi&s;e, becau&s;e he is not now &s;o, nor acts as &s;uch but avowedly the contrary. 3. His in&s;tance of a per&s;ons conveying a thing, as conceiving him&s;elf as Heir and Executor&mdash;is not pertinent. For. 1. He hath originally and legally the &s;ame right if he be one, as if both, and pretends to a right to both in his conveyance. 2ly. Should he refu&s;e his Executor&s;hip, and make a Conveyance as Heir, and he prove not to be &s;o, his Conveyance is naught. Nay, 3. if he make a Conveyance of what neither as Heir or Executor, he hath any right to, the Grant is undoubtedly not good. This is evidently the ca&s;e of our Lord-Bi&s;hops.</P>
<P>To the objection as propo&s;ed by us, we an&s;wer. 1. That they act in the capacity of Presbyters in the matter of ordination, is fal&s;e: 2. Con|trary to their avowed principles.</P>
<P>Mr. <HI>T.</HI> replies, <HI>This is uncertain&mdash;</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> And he may as well &s;ay it is uncertain that the Sun &s;hines at noon-day: The lea&s;t &s;matterer in the u&s;ages of the Church of <HI>England,</HI> and principles of the&s;e Doctors thereof, &s;ee, and know it to be certainly true. 2. Contrary to the known Law of the Land, by which they re|ceive power to act therein, in which they are known, and owned only in the capacity of Lord-Bi&s;hop.</P>
<P>Mr. <HI>T.</HI> replies, <HI>This is not true, for the ordination of Suffragan-Bi&s;hops who are not Lords, is valid by Law.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> A weak proof of &s;uch a crimination. A Suffragan-Bi&s;hop is a Titular-Bi&s;hop when he acts: in the matter of ordination, he repre|&s;ents the Lord-Bi&s;hop who&s;e Suffragan he is. And the Law accounts his act, not his own, but the act of the Lord-Bi&s;hop, who&s;e <HI>Repre&s;entee</HI> hee is. And this Mr. <HI>T.</HI> could not be ignorant of.</P>
<P>We &s;ay, 3dly. 'Tis contrary to their late practice, whereby they have &s;ufficiently declared, the nullity of a Mini&s;terial Office, received from the hands of a Presbytery, in thru&s;ting out of doors &s;everal hun|dreds of Mini&s;ters, &s;o ordained. Strange! that it &s;hould be pleaded they act as Presbyters in the matter of ordination, and yet they them|&s;elves judge a Presbyterian ordination invalid.</P>
<P>What &s;aith Mr. <HI>T.?</HI> Why, 1. <HI>They do not nullify ordination by a Pres|bytery in forrain Churches.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> But this is not at all to the purpo&s;e; have they not done &s;o at home? To attempt to do &s;o in forraign Churches, where they have
<PB N="246" REF="127"> no power; were but to expo&s;e them&s;elves to greater contempt, as bu&s;y Bi&s;hops indeed.</P>
<P>2dly. <HI>In</HI> England <HI>they do it, becau&s;e the Laws</HI> (&s;aith he) <HI>require Epi&s;|copal Ordination&mdash;</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> But Sir, the que&s;tion is not upon what accounts they have &s;o done in <HI>England,</HI> but whether their &s;o doing, be not a manife&s;tation, that they act not in the capacity of Presbyters in the bu&s;ine&s;s of Ordina|tion; for if they did, they fore-condemn their own act, in condem|ning Presbyterian ordination; their ordination being upon this &s;uppo|&s;ition onely &s;uch.</P>
<P>2dly. He grants <HI>The Law requires Epi&s;copal ordination;</HI> if &s;o, it doth &s;ure tie them that act in it, to think them&s;elves Bi&s;hops, to act with &s;uch an intention, and under that notion, which not many lines before he denyed.</P>
<P>We further an&s;wer in <HI>S. T.</HI> What if this &s;hould be granted; it would avail nothing, except it can be proved, that they are, and act as Presbyters of the in&s;titution of Chri&s;t, which (the&s;e being only in a particular in&s;tituted Church of Chri&s;t) will never be to the worlds end,</P>
<P>To which our Animadverter replies, <HI>If this be held, then all the Pres|byters of the</HI> French, Dutch, <HI>and other Churches under Presbyterial gover|ment, are not of Chri&s;ts in&s;titution, and &s;o a &s;eparation avowed from all Pro|te&s;tant Churches, except their own.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. But this is no proof, that the Bi&s;hops of <HI>England</HI> act in the matter of ordination, as Presbyters of the in&s;titution of Chri&s;t: which is the one and onely thing he &s;hould have heeded in his reply, but of that he is wholly &s;ilent.</P>
<P>2dly. No doubt he thinks he hath &s;ufficiently be&s;patter'd u<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">; but if he account it a di&s;credit to &s;peak palpable untruths, it will be his own.</P>
<P N="1">1. 'Tis fal&s;e that we avow &s;eparation from all Churches, but tho&s;e of our own way: that our A&s;&s;ertion tends to &s;uch an end, I challenge our Dictator to make good. 2. The Presbyterians own particular Churches of the in&s;titution of Chri&s;t, have their Presbyters, fixed officers, in and among&s;t them, and that both in <HI>England</HI> and beyond the Seas. What &s;atisfaction he will think meet to make us, for &s;o foul an a&s;per&s;ion, whereby he labours to render us odious to the Godly, at home &amp; abroad, we &s;hall know by the next. In the mean while we are ready to attend his motions in the next Chapter.</P>
</DIV3>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="5" TYPE="chapter">
<PB N="247" REF="127">
<HEAD>CHAP. V.</HEAD>
<DIV3 N="1" TYPE="section">
<HEAD>Sect. 1.</HEAD>
<ARGUMENT>
<P><HI>The fourth Argument in</HI> S. T. <HI>again&s;t hearing the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters, vindi|cated. A twofold denial of the Offices of Chri&s;t. Whether the Papi&s;ts are guilty of a verbal, profe&s;&s;ional denial of Chri&s;ts Offices. 'Tis not lawful to hear &s;uch as are guilty of a verbal or real denial of Chri&s;ts Offices. The pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters oppo&s;e the Kingly and Prophetical Offices of Chri&s;t. They do &s;o who hearken not to that revelation Chri&s;t hath made touching the Or|ders of his Hou&s;e.</HI> Deut. 18. 18, 19. Act. 3. 23. Mat. 3. 17. I&s;a. 9. 6. <HI>explained. The vanity of Mr. T. his dictates to the contrary, evinced.</HI></P>
</ARGUMENT>
<P>IN Chap. 4th of <HI>S. T.</HI> we advance a fourth Argument again&s;t hear|ing the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters, which is this.</P>
<P><HI>Tho&s;e that deny any of the Offices of Chri&s;t, are not to be heard but &s;e|parated from: But the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters deny &s;ome of the Offices of Chri&s;t: Therefore&mdash;</HI></P>
<P>Before we come to clear the &s;everal parts of the Argument, we pre|mi&s;e, 1. That there is a twofold denial of the Offices of Chri&s;t. 1. Verbal, and profe&s;&s;ional, (of this the <HI>Jews,</HI> not the <HI>Papi&s;ts,</HI> no<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter"> the Mi|ni&s;ters of <HI>England</HI> are guilty.) 2. Real, and actual, when per&s;ons do that which enwraps in the bowels of it a denial of the Offices of Chri&s;t. Thus the Papi&s;ts, the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters are guilty.</P>
<P>To this Mr. T. replies, <HI>I allow the di&s;tinction; but it is fal&s;e, that the Papi&s;ts are not guilty of the verbal profe&s;&s;ional denying of the Offices of Chri&s;t: for though they acknowledge Chri&s;t to be King&mdash;yet their doctrine over|throws all the Offices of Chri&s;t; as he that a&s;cribes Kingly power to a Subject, doth make another King, and &s;o doth unking him&mdash;Thus the Papi&s;ts do while they will have unwritten traditions to be received&mdash;</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1&s;t. To di&s;pute about words with any man living, I &s;hall not: by a verbal profe&s;&s;ional denying of Chri&s;ts Offices, I mean, ex|pre&s;s, and down-right a&s;&s;erting, that he is not King&mdash;of his Church; this I &s;ay the Papi&s;ts do not, they own, preach up all the Offices of Chri&s;t, <HI>i. e.</HI> they acknowledge him in their di&s;cour&s;es of his Offices to be King&mdash;to his Church, which Mr. T. knows they do. Their a&s;crip|tion
<PB N="248" REF="128"> of Kingly power to any but Chri&s;t, in a&s;&s;ertions mentioned, I make a real and actual denyal and oppugning the Offices of Chri&s;t. It being a doing what enwraps in the bowels of it &s;uch a denial of them.</P>
<P>2dly. This Animadverter hath already a&s;&s;erted, what will in part at lea&s;t make good our charge in this matter again&s;t the Mini&s;ters of <HI>Eng|land.</HI> The a&s;cription of Kingly power to any but Chri&s;t, is a denying his Kingly authority; the Papi&s;ts [Prelats and Mini&s;ters of <HI>England]</HI> do &s;o, in a&s;&s;erting, that traditions unwritten are to be received&mdash;That the Pope [a Convocation, or A&s;&s;embly of Prelates and Prie&s;ts] can make Laws to bind the Con&s;cience by vertue of his [their] authority, can di&s;pen&s;e with Gods Laws, ince&s;tuous Marriages (by granting a Li|cen&s;e for a good Spill) prohibited by God&mdash;therefore the Papi&s;ts [the Mini&s;ters of <HI>England]</HI> do deny the Kingly authority of Chri&s;t.</P>
<P>We premi&s;e in <HI>S.</HI> T. 2dly. <HI>That a verbal profe&s;&s;ional acknowledgement of Chri&s;t, is nothing when contradicted in practice:</HI> To which we &s;ubjoyn, <HI>that &s;uch as really oppo&s;e, or deny any of the Offices of Chri&s;t, are not to be heard, but &s;eparated from:</HI> which we prove, 1. <HI>Becau&s;e &s;uch a<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter"> do &s;o, are the Antichri&s;ts,</HI> 1 Joh. 2. 22. and 4. 2, 3. 2 Joh. 7. 2dly. <HI>To hear &s;uch, is to &s;trengthen and encourage them in that their denial of, and oppo&s;ition to the Offices of Chri&s;t, and thereby to become partakers with them in their &s;in.</HI> Of which we treat more at large in <HI>S. T.</HI> chap. 4. p. 29, 30.</P>
<P>Whereunto Mr. T. replies; 1. <HI>That a verbal profe&s;&s;ional acknow|ledgement of the Offices of Chri&s;t, when contradicted by practice, is nothing to the &s;alvation of the per&s;on &s;o profe&s;&s;ing; his plea &s;hall not be admitted before God, or mans Eccle&s;ia&s;tcal cen&s;ure</HI> (i. e. <HI>he may be &s;u&s;pended, excommuni|cated for his &s;o acting notwith&s;tanding his profe&s;&s;ion,) yet all this doth not prove&mdash;that his doctrine may not be heard&mdash;</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. It &s;eems then its lawful to hear per&s;ons, not wa<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">king ex|orbitantly, but under Church cen&s;ure for &s;o doing, which pours forth mo&s;t fearful contempt upon that in&s;titution of Chri&s;t, Excommunicati|on. To what purpo&s;e is it that any one is ca&s;t out of the Church, if it may be lawful to hear them notwith&s;tanding<HI>&mdash;i. e.</HI> own them as the mouth of God to me, and my mouth to God, whom the Church thought not meet to be continued as a member in the body.</P>
<P>2dly. In vain (then) are all the exhortations of the Apo&s;tle to the Saints with relation to their withdrawment from &s;uch as the&s;e, 1 <HI>Cor.</HI> 5. 9, 10, 11. <HI>Ephe&s;.</HI> 5. 11.</P>
<P>3dly. To no purpo&s;e did <HI>Paul</HI> write to the <HI>Corinthians</HI> to receive the ince&s;tuous per&s;on, had they but known their liberty, they might have done &s;o before: for if his doctrine did not oppugn the Offices of Chri&s;t,
<PB N="249" REF="128"> it might have been heard, to their profit (according to our Dictators dictates) they might not only have received him, but as a Preache<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter"> among&s;t them.</P>
<P>Nay, 4thly, In vain is the charge of the Apo&s;tle, 2 <HI>Cor.</HI> 3. 5. for if they profe&s;s to own the Offices of Chri&s;t <HI>(i. e. Have a Form of God|line&s;s)</HI> though they contradict it in their walk <HI>(i. e. deny the Power thereof)</HI> they may be joyned with. Poor <HI>Paul</HI> under&s;tood not &s;o much of our Chri&s;tian Liberty, as rich, confident Mr <HI>T.</HI> who is driven to &s;uch pittiful &s;hifts, and gro&s;s ab&s;urdities in the management of this Contro|ver&s;ie, that <HI>I</HI> really pitty him.</P>
<P>He adds, <HI>'Tis not true, that Chri&s;t &s;aith, the fal&s;e Prophets are to be de&s;cried by their vitious Life only.</HI> Nor do I &s;ay (in this place) he doth; I &s;ay, he &s;aith, <HI>they are to be known by their fruits.</HI> Preaching, and pra|cti&s;ing what invelops in it a denial of the Offices of Chri&s;t, though at|tended with a vi&s;ible holy Conver&s;ation I am contented that he make the fruits mentioned to be. His di&s;cour&s;e of <HI>Judas,</HI> and fal&s;e Prophets being &s;o called, not in re&s;pect of their outward Calling, or vitious Lives, but of their Doctrine, that upon the lea&s;t occa&s;ion he runs frequently forth into, we have already an&s;wered. Nor &s;ay we, that teaching &s;ome|thing (through ignorance, and inadvertency) as is appointed by Chri&s;t, which is not, or denying &s;omething to be in&s;tituted which was &s;o ap|pointed, is what doth denominate a man a fal&s;e Prophet.</P>
<P>The <HI>Animadverter</HI> forgets what it is he attempts to an&s;wer; we are not talking of fal&s;e Prophets, but of &s;uch as deny the Offices of Chri&s;t, nor do we &s;ay that this (as thus propo&s;ed by him) doth render a man guilty of real denying the Offices of Chri&s;t (or is a &s;ufficient ground of &s;eparation from him, much le&s;s then an oppo&s;ing in heart any of the Offices of Chri&s;t is &s;o, as he &s;ugge&s;ts afterwards we do) but that tho&s;e that do really oppo&s;e any of the Offices of Chri&s;t, <HI>viz.</HI> by &s;etting them|&s;elves again&s;t the mo&s;t, if not the whole of Go&s;pel-In&s;titutions, by own|ing a power in others, to con&s;titute Laws for the Family and Hou&s;hold of Chri&s;t, even contrary to his In&s;titutions, and acknowledging another Head be&s;ide him, of his Church, is &s;uch a real denial of the Offices of Chri&s;t, that upon whom&s;oever it is found, 'tis the duty of Saints to &s;e|parate from them, and that for the rea&s;ons before mentioned; which Mr. <HI>T.</HI> may di&s;prove when he can.</P>
<P>The re&s;t of this <HI>Section</HI> being &s;pent in railing, and &s;orry impertinen|cies: I come to his &s;econd <HI>Section,</HI> were he &s;ets him&s;elf to con&s;ider our <HI>Minor</HI> Propo&s;ition, <HI>viz. That the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters of</HI> England <HI>do op|po&s;e and deny the Prophetical and Kingly Offices of Chri&s;t;</HI> Which we prove thus.</P>
<PB N="250" REF="129">
<P> Tho&s;e that hearken not to the Revelation Chri&s;t hath made, and as Supream Lord and Lawgiver hath enjoyned to be ob&s;erved, touching the Orders and Ordinances of his Hou&s;e, deny the Prophetical and Kingly Office of Chri&s;t, <HI>Deut.</HI> 18. 18. <HI>Acts</HI> 3. 22. <HI>I&s;a.</HI> 9. 6. But the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters of <HI>England</HI> hearken, and conform not to, the Revela|tion Chri&s;t hath made, touching the Orders and Ordinances of his Hou&s;e; Therefore.&mdash;</P>
<P>To which Mr. <HI>T.</HI> replies by denying the <HI>Major,</HI> (or fir&s;t Propo&s;ition) But he wi&s;ely takes no notice of the Scriptures produced for the Proof hereof, as <HI>Deut.</HI> 18. 18, 19. where the Lord promi&s;eth <HI>to rai&s;e up Chri&s;t from among his Brethren, in who&s;e mouth he would put his words, by whom he would &s;peak to them, to whom who&s;oever will not hearken,</HI> God &s;aith, <HI>he will require it of him; (i. e. take vengeance on him,</HI> as the <HI>Greek</HI> renders it, or as the Apo&s;tle, <HI>Acts</HI> 3. 23. <GAP DESC="foreign">, <HI>He &s;hall be ex|terminated from among&s;t the People;</HI> rejected by the Saints, as a De&s;pi|&s;er, oppugner of the Offices of Chri&s;t, into which he was &s;o &s;olemnly inve&s;ted by the Father, <HI>Mat.</HI> 3. 17.) In <HI>I&s;a.</HI> 9. 6. It is Prophe&s;ied of Chri&s;t, <HI>That the Government &s;hould be laid upon his &s;houlders, he &s;hould be King in Sion, give forth (as &s;uch) Laws and Con&s;titutions, for the Govern|ment of his People;</HI> which accordingly he doth, and &s;olemnly promul|gates them by his Heralds, and Me&s;&s;engers, fixeth them as upon pub|lick Pillars, in the Scriptures of Truth, to be &s;een and read of all men. That after all this; per&s;ons &s;hould refu&s;e, &s;light, neglect to hearken to the&s;e In&s;titutions of Chri&s;t, violate, oppo&s;e preach again&s;t them, and yet not be guilty of denying his Prophetical and Kingly Offices, is the fir&s;t|born of ab&s;urdities. Go, and offer it to thy Prince; deal &s;o by the con|&s;titutions of thy Rulers, and &s;ee what they will &s;ay to thee, what inter|pretation will be by them put upon thy &s;o dealing with them. But he gives the rea&s;ons of his denial; and tells us,</P>
<P N="1">1. <HI>Denial is more than not hearkening to.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> There is a denial its true, that is more than a not hearkening to, but there is a not hearkening to, that is a real denial, rejection of the Authority of him to whom we refu&s;e to hearken. The Scripture expre&s;ly affirms it, <HI>P&s;al.</HI> 81. 11. <HI>But my People would not hearken to my voice: I&s;rael would none of me.</HI> Ezek. 20. 8. <HI>but they rebelled again&s;t me, (i. e.</HI> oppo&s;ed, rejected my Authority) and would not hearken unto me. Nor can I tell how tho&s;e <HI>Luke</HI> 19. 14. are &s;aid to &s;end a me&s;&s;age after Chri&s;t &s;aying, <HI>We will not have this man</HI> [<GAP DESC="foreign">] <HI>to King it over us</HI> (which is &s;ure a denial of his Kingly Authority) but by refu&s;ing to hearken, and conform to his Royal Appointments.</P>
<PB N="251" REF="129">
<P> He adds, 2dly, <HI>The not hearkning may be out of ignorance, incapacity to under&s;tand, fearfulne&s;s,</HI> &amp;c. <HI>without any enmity of heart, habitual &s;tubborn|ne&s;s,&mdash;which are requi&s;ite to a plain denial of the Offices of Chri&s;t.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. It may be &s;o indeed, but whether this be the rea&s;on of the Mini&s;ters of <HI>England,</HI> not hearkening thereunto, he acquaints us not. Certainly they are not fit to be Mini&s;ters of the Go&s;pel, or to be ac|counted Over&s;eers of the flock of Chri&s;t, who are ignorant of his In&s;ti|tutions, and incapable of under&s;tanding them.</P>
<P N="2">2. Though it be out of fearfulne&s;s, prevalency of temptation, that they hearken not, yet may their not &s;o doing be a denial of the Offices of Chri&s;t. It was out of fearfulne&s;s, the prevalency of temptation, that <HI>Peter</HI> denied his Lord, without any enmity of heart, yet his denial was a plain denial. So fal&s;e is that which Mr. <HI>T.</HI> &s;aith, <HI>That enmity of heart, habitual &s;tubbornne&s;s, or wilful gain&s;aying are requi&s;ite hereunto.</HI></P>
<P>He tells us, 3dly, <HI>There may be &s;undry Orders of his Hou&s;e controvert|ed, if acknowledged &s;uch, not thought to be of that moment, as to break the Peace of the Church, by contending for them, or not judg'd perpetual or not binding the Mini&s;ters to ob&s;erve till the Magi&s;trates reform.&mdash;</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. But upon &s;uch Principles as the&s;e, I know not but Chri&s;t may be dive&s;ted of the Scepter of his Kingdom, all his bonds and cords broken a&s;under, and ca&s;t away; and yet no one would be nocent. It is evident that this is the lot of many, mo&s;t of them already.</P>
<P>2dly, There are but few of the Orders of Chri&s;ts Hou&s;e, but are con|troverted among&s;t the Children of men; will this excu&s;e any from &s;ub|jection to them? May not the Papi&s;ts plead thus for their rejection of the In&s;titutions of Chri&s;t? Mu&s;t Chri&s;t lo&s;e his obedience, till the par|ties <HI>Litigant</HI> are at an agreement? <HI>Nugae, &amp; tricae &s;ic<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">lae!</HI> what more frivolous could have been invented!</P>
<P>3dly, This <HI>Animadverter</HI> will one day find, that there are no In&s;ti|tutions of Chri&s;t, but what are of moment, how derogatory to the glory of Chri&s;t, the <HI>Oeconomie</HI> and Admini&s;tration of the Go&s;pel, &s;uch a&s;&s;er|tions as the&s;e are, others will judge.</P>
<P>4thly, That any of the In&s;titutions of Chri&s;t remarked by us were temporary, I challenge Mr. T. to make good, <HI>i. e.</HI> &s;uch as were not to endure till his coming. Such Principles as the&s;e would &s;oon evert all Go&s;pel-In&s;titutions, and make way for the Introduction of unwritten Vanities, and humane Traditions, which the &s;oul of our Lord abhors.</P>
<P>5thly, I de&s;ire to be informed, what Appointments of Chri&s;t tho&s;e are, that are not binding to the Mini&s;ters, till the Magi&s;trate reform; I know not any &s;uch, and conceive the a&s;&s;ertion to be foreign to Truth.</P>
<P N="1"><PB N="252" REF="130"> 1. The Primitive Believers were obliged to conform to <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">hem all, though the Magi&s;trate bla&s;phemed, and oppo&s;ed.</P>
<P N="2">2. 'Tis wonderous derogatory to Chri&s;ts honour to ask the Magi&s;trate leave whether his In&s;titutions &s;hall be binding or not <HI>(i. e.</HI> <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">f he will reform, they &s;hall, otherwi&s;e not) &s;uch tra&s;h as this, will nev<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">r pa&s;s for &s;ound rea&s;on: ab&s;urd dictates, without proof, though never <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">o impor|tunely impo&s;ed, Mr. <HI>T.</HI> mu&s;t not imagine will meet with reception among&s;t judicious Chri&s;tians.</P>
<P>6thly, That it &s;hould be &s;candalous to hearken to the In&s;titutions of Chri&s;t (as he &s;ugge&s;ts) is &s;uch a mon&s;trous a&s;&s;ertion, that I a<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter"> amazed to think it &s;hould drop from &s;uch a per&s;on. The reciting it i<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter"> refuta|tion &s;ufficient. So that the <HI>Major</HI> Propo&s;ition I &s;till take for mani|fe&s;t truth, notwith&s;tanding his three dictates to the contrary, which are now abundantly refuted.</P>
</DIV3>
<DIV3 N="2" TYPE="section">
<HEAD>Sect. 2.</HEAD>
<ARGUMENT>
<P><HI>The pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters of</HI> England <HI>do not hearken and conform to the Reve|lation Chri&s;t hath made touching the Orders and Ordinances of his Hou&s;e, proved by the induction of &s;even particulars. All power for the Calling, In&s;titution, Order, and Government of his Church, is inve&s;ted &s;olely in Chri&s;t.</HI> Mat. 28. 19. 1 Tim. 6. 14, 15. John 3. 35. Acts 3. 22. <HI>and</HI> 5. 31. Mat. 23. 8, 9, 10. 1 Cor. 11. 23. <HI>and</HI> 14. 37. Gal. 1. 8. 2 John 10. Rev. 22. 18. Acts 15. 25, 28. <HI>con&s;idered. The pre|&s;ent Mini&s;ters own other Lords (that have a Law-making-Power) over his Churches, be&s;ides Chri&s;t; which Mr.</HI> T. <HI>grants is a denyal of his Kingly Authority. Separation from the World, and Saints walking to|gether in particular Societies an In&s;titution of Chri&s;t, proved. This is op|po&s;ed by the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters.</HI> 1 Cor. 1. 2. Phil. 1. 1, 5. 2 Cor. 8. 5. John 15. 19 <HI>and</HI> 17. 6. 1 Cor. 5. 12. Acts 2. 40. 2 Cor. 6. 17. <HI>Acts</HI> 19. 9. <HI>Rev.</HI> 18. 4. <HI>con&s;idered. Of the acception of the word</HI> World. <HI>Characters of per&s;ons that are not of the World. A third In|&s;titution of Chri&s;t remarked. Of the power Chri&s;t hath intru&s;ted his Church with.</HI> Acts 1. 23. 1 Cor. 5. 5. <HI>explained. Of the Officers of Chri&s;t's appointment. Their Election by the Church. Of the Liberty of Prophe&s;ying. Nothing mu&s;t be offered up to God in Wor&s;hi<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter"> but what is of his own pre&s;cription. The pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters of</HI> England <HI>refu&s;e to &s;ubject to the&s;e Ordinances of Chri&s;t. An Objection an&s;wered. Mr.</HI> T. <HI>his Exceptions con&s;idered, and removed out of the way.</HI></P>
</ARGUMENT>
<P>2dly. THat the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters of <HI>England</HI> do not hearken and conform to the Revelation Chri&s;t hath made touching the
<PB N="253" REF="130"> Orders and Ordinances of his Hou&s;e; we prove in <HI>S. T.</HI> by the in|duction of &s;even particulars.</P>
<P>To this Mr. <HI>T.</HI> replies, in <HI>Sect.</HI> 3. <HI>Chap.</HI> 4. 1&s;t, <HI>In the &s;tead of Ar|gument, he proves all with Interrogations.&mdash;</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> Fal&s;e and untrue; <HI>I</HI> wonder at the con&s;cience and confidence of the man in a&s;&s;erting it. He knows <HI>I</HI> prove it by the induction of the mo&s;t remarkable Orders of the Hou&s;e of Chri&s;t, which they hearken not to.</P>
<P>2dly, He askes, <HI>Which of the Ordinances of Chri&s;t have they made void?</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> They were under his view while&s;t he wrote the&s;e words; &s;o that his que&s;tion is frivolous. I enumerate &s;even of the Orders and In|&s;titutions of Chri&s;t they have &s;o dealt with.</P>
<P>He adds, 3dly, <HI>He &s;hould have reckoned up &s;even times &s;even.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. And why &s;o? If guilty of a rejection of the&s;e, which are the principal; they oppo&s;e his Kingly and Prophetical Office, though they embrace &s;ome others that are of his appointment. The <HI>Romani&s;ts</HI> do &s;o, yet this <HI>Animadverter</HI> grants they are guilty of the crime in&s;tan|ced in.</P>
<P N="2">2. Mr. <HI>T.</HI> cannot reckon up &s;even times &s;even In&s;titutions of Chri&s;t that are of the peculiar In&s;titutions of his Hou&s;e, to be performed by Saints embodied, and united together in the fellow&s;hip of the Go&s;pel, nor many more than the&s;e &s;even mentioned by us. He in&s;tanceth in <HI>hearing the Word, praying to the Father in the Name of Chri&s;t,&mdash;which he tells us they have not made void by their Traditions.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. The fir&s;t of the&s;e is in a great mea&s;ure (if not totally) made void by them. 1. They oppo&s;e and deny the management of this duty, in the way of Chri&s;t's appointment, while&s;t they debar Chri|&s;tians from electing their own Officers, or attending upon the Mini&s;try of &s;uch as are according to the mind of Chri&s;t elected by them. 2. The Preaching of the Word mu&s;t give way to their <HI>Service-Book-Wor&s;hip;</HI> or Forms of humane devi&s;ing; which I am much mi&s;taken, if it be not, in a great mea&s;ure, a making void of that In&s;titution of Chri&s;t (he &s;peaks of) by their Traditions.</P>
<P N="2">2. I wi&s;h the &s;ame may not be &s;aid (with re&s;pect to the mo&s;t of them at lea&s;t) of praying to the Father in the Name of Chri&s;t, which none can do but by the Spirit, whom they de&s;pi&s;e, reproach, &s;et up their &s;tinted Form<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter"> in oppo&s;ition to him and his breathings.</P>
<P>The fir&s;t of the Orders of Chri&s;t's Hou&s;e in&s;tanced in, is, <HI>That all Power for the Calling, In&s;titution, Order and Government of his Church, is</HI>
<PB N="254" REF="131"> <HI>inve&s;ted &s;olely in him, as the alone Lord, Soveraign Ruler, and Head there|of,</HI> Mat. 28. 19. 1 Tim. 6. 14, 15. John 3. 35. Acts 3. 22. <HI>and</HI> 5. 31. Hence Chri&s;t chargeth his Di&s;ciples, <HI>not to be called of men Rabbi; nor to call any Father; (viz.</HI> not to impo&s;e their authority upon any, or &s;uffer them&s;elves to be impo&s;ed upon by any in the matters of their God.) <HI>Mat.</HI> 23. 8, 9, 10, becau&s;e one is their <HI>Ma&s;ter</HI> and <HI>Lord, viz. Christ.</HI> Hence al&s;o the Apo&s;tles lay the weight of their exhortations upon the Commandment of Chri&s;t, 1 <HI>Cor.</HI> 11. 23. <HI>and</HI> 14. 37. proclaim <HI>all to be accur&s;ed that preach any other Go&s;pel, Gal.</HI> 1. 8. Charge Chr<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">&s;tians not to receive &s;uch as bring any other <HI>Doctrine,</HI> 2 John 10. The Spirit ter|ribly threatens &s;uch as &s;hall <HI>add to the Revelation of God, Rev.</HI> 22. 18. This In&s;titution, we &s;ay, they conform hot really unto, they own other Lords, Heads and Governours (that have a Law-making Power, over his Churches) be&s;ide him.</P>
<P>To this Mr. <HI>T.</HI> 1. <HI>That all power for the Calling, In&s;titution, Order and Government of his Church is inve&s;ted &s;olely in Christ, as the alone Lord, Soveraign Ruler, and Head thereof,</HI> he grants as a Truth.</P>
<P>Though, 2dly, He a&s;&s;ents not to our <HI>Paraphra&s;e</HI> on <HI>Mat.</HI> 23. 8.&mdash;As if Chri&s;t did forbid the Apo&s;tles to impo&s;e their Authority upon any in the matters of their God; which they did, <HI>Acts</HI> 15. 25, 28.</P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. By impo&s;ing their Authority,&mdash;is meant giving forth Commands, Doctrines in their own Names, as from them&s;elves, with|out the Authority of Chri&s;t. <HI>Where did they &s;o?</HI> Do they not every where di&s;avow it, 1 <HI>Cor.</HI> 1. 15. 2 <HI>Cor.</HI> 4. 5. 1 <HI>Cor.</HI> 11. 1. Divine Revelation, not the Dictates of men, one or other of them, is the Foun|dation of a Chri&s;tians Faith.</P>
<P N="2">2. Mr. <HI>T.</HI> mi&s;takes when he &s;aith, <HI>they did this, Acts</HI> 15. 25, 28. For, 1&s;t. They enjoyned nothing but what was before enjoyned by the Lord, (only acquainted the <HI>Gentile</HI> Believers therewith) as is, 1. Ab&s;tinence from Fornication, <HI>Exod.</HI> 20. 14. <HI>Ezek.</HI> 16. 26, 29. <HI>Mat.</HI> 5. 32. 2. From things Strangled, <HI>Deut.</HI> 12. 24. 3. From Blood, <HI>Gen.</HI> 9. 4. 5. <HI>(i. e.</HI> the <HI>Life-Blood,</HI> or any member of the crea|ture pulled from it while&s;t it is yet alive, as the <HI>Jewi&s;h Rabbins</HI> expound it, and that truly.)</P>
<P>2dly, He &s;peaks again&s;t the expre&s;s Letter of the Scripture, <HI>ver&s;.</HI> 28. <HI>It &s;eemed good to the holy Gho&s;t and to us;</HI> Expre&s;&s;ions very remote from the countenancing &s;uch an authoritative impo&s;ition, as he &s;peaks of.</P>
<P N="2">2. He askes, <HI>How comes this to be an Order,&mdash;of the Hou&s;e of Chri&s;t, he took &s;uch Orders to be Precepts of Chri&s;t to us, but this &s;eems to be Gods gift to him.</HI></P>
<PB N="255" REF="131">
<P> <HI>An&s;w.</HI> That Chri&s;ts Ruledom and Soveraignty over his Hou&s;e is a gift of God to him, we grant; but &s;uch a gift as doth nece&s;&s;arily imply a duty, on the part of his Hou&s;hold, <HI>viz.</HI> That they own, obey, &s;ubject to none, in the matters of Wor&s;hip, but only him, admit no Laws or In&s;titutions among&s;t them but his. And this is expre&s;ly a&s;&s;erted in <HI>S. T.</HI> which we took then, and &s;till do, for an Order of Chri&s;t's Hou&s;e.</P>
<P N="3">3. He tells us further, <HI>That to a&s;&s;ert, the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters of</HI> England <HI>own other Lords (that have a Law-making Power over his Churches) be|&s;ides him, is to unchri&s;ten them.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. And however Mr. <HI>T.</HI> his Book came to be licen&s;ed, with an intimation from the reverend Licen&s;er, <HI>That he finds nothing in it contrary to the Doctrine of the Church of</HI> England. Some of them think (though I a&s;&s;ure him I do not) he hath a&s;&s;erted that, <HI>pag.</HI> 123, that doth indeed unchri&s;ten them.</P>
<P N="2">2. However, if the a&s;&s;ertion mentioned unchri&s;tens them, they un|chri&s;ten them&s;elves. The per&s;ons, I mean, that they own as Lords and Governours, that have a Law-making power, are the Prelates&mdash;in the <HI>Convocation-Hou&s;e&mdash;</HI>That they own the&s;e, as &s;uch (to them and their Canons they promi&s;e obedience and &s;ubjection) needs no more proof, than the Sun at noon-dayes that it &s;hineth. Whether this be a denial of Chri&s;ts authority, rebellion again&s;t him, let the Reader inform him&s;elf from Mr. <HI>T. Chap.</HI> 4. <HI>Pag.</HI> 119. of his <HI>Theodulia. He that a&s;cribes Kingly power to a &s;ubject, doth make another King than the right King, and &s;o doth, unking him: this he tells us the Papi&s;ts do, when they a&s;&s;ert the Pope can make Laws to bind the Con&s;cience, by virtue of his authority; and I know no more power our Convocation of Bi&s;hops&mdash;have to do &s;o then the Pope.</HI> Till that be &s;hewed, the Animadverter grants our Mini&s;ters a&s;&s;erting the &s;ame of them in this matter (as the Papi&s;ts of the Pope) they really unking Chri&s;t.</P>
<P>Nor, 3dly, Let him think, that he is to deal with &s;uch Children, that with his drollery, will be per&s;waded that they &s;ee, and know not, what they both &s;ee and know. 'Tis not the calling per&s;ons (as he doth, by what &s;pirit let him judge) <HI>Diabolical Calumniators, Railers</HI> and <HI>Scolds</HI> (in <HI>Latine</HI> and <HI>Engli&s;h)</HI> that now a dayes will be taken for an an&s;wer or confutation of what the whole Nation know to be true. And they them&s;elves will acknowledge and plead for it.</P>
<P>A 2d Order and In&s;titution of Chri&s;t we mention in <HI>S. T. viz.</HI> That 'tis his will, that tho&s;e whom he hath called by his Word, &s;hould &s;epa|rate from the World, walk together in particular Societies, and Chur|ches,&mdash;1 <HI>Cor.</HI> 1. 2. <HI>and</HI> 5. 12. 2 <HI>Cor.</HI> 6. 17. <HI>Rev.</HI> 18. 4. <HI>John</HI> 15. 19.
<PB N="256" REF="132"> <HI>and</HI> 17. 6. <HI>Acts</HI> 2. 40. <HI>and</HI> 19. 9. <HI>Phil.</HI> 1. 5. <HI>Acts</HI> 2. 41. <HI>and</HI> 17. 4. 2 <HI>Cor.</HI> 8. 5.&mdash;This In&s;titution we &s;ay the Mini&s;ters of <HI>England</HI> are at open defiance with; admitting per&s;ons vi&s;ibly wicked and prophane, into their Communion.</P>
<P>To this Mr. <HI>T.</HI> replies, <HI>Sect.</HI> 4. 1&s;t. <HI>He hath read &s;omewhat in</HI> Ain&s;|worth, Cottons <HI>Writings</HI> (for to them we refer the Reader for further &s;atisfaction) <HI>But he doth not find in them, nor the Scriptures mentioned, any &s;uch &s;eparation as the&s;e Authors pre&s;s.&mdash;</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> The Separation we pre&s;s is a &s;eparation from the vi&s;ible wick|ed and prophane; cannot the Animadverter find this in the Scriptures, nor in the Authors in&s;tanced in? Let me prevail with him in a &s;edate frame without pa&s;&s;ion or prejudice, once more to review them, and beg of the Lord to open the eyes of his under&s;tanding, that he may &s;ee his mind therein. 1 <HI>Cor.</HI> 1. 2. <HI>Phil.</HI> 1. 1, 5. 2 <HI>Cor.</HI> 8. 5. Give us an ac|count that tho&s;e who con&s;tituted and made up tho&s;e particular Chur|ches, were vi&s;ible Saints, &s;anctified in Chri&s;t Je&s;us. (The like in&s;tance might be given of the re&s;t of the Churches mentioned in the Scripture.) The Di&s;ciples of Chri&s;t are &s;aid to be cho&s;en out of the World, <HI>John</HI> 15. 19. <HI>and</HI> 17. 6. The Saints in a Church-&s;tate are commanded not to &s;uffer a Fornicator, Covetous per&s;on, an Idolater, or a Railer, or a Drunkard, or an Extortioner, in their Communion (though allowed civil commerce with them in the world) 1 <HI>Cor.</HI> 5. 12. In <HI>Acts</HI> 2. 40. 2 <HI>Cor.</HI> 6. 17. we find the Apo&s;tles pre&s;&s;ing, and <HI>Chap.</HI> 19. 9. practi&s;ing Separation from the wicked World; which is al&s;o commanded with re|&s;pect to Antichri&s;tian wor&s;hip, <HI>Rev.</HI> 18. 4. If Mr. T. cannot &s;ee &s;uch a Separation as we pre&s;s, contained in the&s;e Scriptures, I cannot but pitty him. 'Tis &s;aid that when this way was more countenanced, he practi&s;ed &s;omewhat not much unlike thereunto.</P>
<P>2dly, He grants, <HI>That Separation from the World, in re&s;pect of Wor&s;hip, is the duty of Saints,&mdash;</HI>2 Cor. 6. 17. <HI>but then by the World is meant pro|fe&s;&s;ed Infidels,&mdash;or at lea&s;t &s;uch as were profe&s;&s;ed unbelievers, as</HI> John 15. 19. <HI>and</HI> 17. 6. <HI>Acts</HI> 2. 40. <HI>and</HI> 19. 9.</P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. That the word <HI>World</HI> is <GAP DESC="foreign">, a word of various accep|tions in the Scripture is known, with which we &s;hall not trouble the Reader. The Animadverter grants, <HI>That it is taken for per&s;ons living in the World:</HI> Now the&s;e are but of two &s;orts, that I know of, <HI>regenerate,</HI> or <HI>unregenerate;</HI> &s;uch as walk after the <HI>Fle&s;h,</HI> or &s;uch as walk after the <HI>Spirit; Believers,</HI> or <HI>Unbelievers.</HI> And when the word <HI>World</HI> is put in oppo&s;ition to the Saints, its alwayes taken for the World of unregene|rate per&s;ons that lies in wickedne&s;s, or <GAP DESC="foreign">, is in &s;ubjection to
<PB N="257" REF="132"> the wicked one, 1 <HI>John</HI> 5. 19. That men are not of the World, be|cau&s;e from Tradition, Education, Compul&s;ion, Intere&s;t, or the like, they profe&s;s the Name of Chri&s;t, though they never knew a work of Grace, or change upon their &s;pirits is a fiction of this Animad|verter that he will never make good. If &s;uch as the&s;e are not of the world, they are cho&s;en, called out of it, let us a little con&s;ider whether the Characters of the&s;e be found upon them.</P>
<P N="1">1. They are &s;aid to be Branches in Chri&s;t, that abide in him, and bring forth fruit, <HI>John</HI> 15. 2, 4, 5.</P>
<P>2dly, They are clean through the word that he hath &s;poken to them, <HI>ver&s;.</HI> 3.</P>
<P>3dly, They have a mighty power and prevalency with God, <HI>ver&s;.</HI> 7, 16.</P>
<P>4thly, They have the words of Chri&s;t abiding in them, <HI>ver&s;.</HI> 7.</P>
<P>5thly, Are &s;uch whom Chri&s;t loves, <HI>ver&s;.</HI> 9.</P>
<P>6thly, His Lovers and Friends, ready pre~&s;t to do whatever he com|mands them, <HI>ver&s;.</HI> 14, 15.</P>
<P>7thly, To whom he hath revealed the My&s;teries of God, <HI>ver&s;.</HI> 15. <HI>Chap.</HI> 17. 6, 14.</P>
<P>8thly, They are hated of the world, <HI>ver&s;.</HI> 18, 19, 20, 21. <HI>and Chap.</HI> 16. 2, 3, 33. <HI>and</HI> 17. 14.</P>
<P>9thly, Keep Gods Word, <HI>Chap.</HI> 17. 6.</P>
<P>10thly, To them Chri&s;t gives the glory that the Father hath given to him, <HI>Chap.</HI> 17. 22. will have them to be with him where he is, to be|hold his glory, <HI>ver&s;.</HI> 24. with much more that might be in&s;tanced. El&s;e|where they are called &s;uch as are delivered from the power of dark|ne&s;s, <HI>Col.</HI> 1. 13. Quickened, who were dead in tre&s;pa&s;&s;es, and &s;ins, <HI>Ephe&s;.</HI> 2. 1. Called to be Saints, <HI>Rom.</HI> 1. 7. 1. <HI>Cor.</HI> 1. 2. Are Light in the Lord, <HI>Ephe&s;.</HI> 5. 8. have received the Spirit, which the World, or Men of the world cannot receive (and abide &s;uch) <HI>John</HI> 14. 17. The&s;e are the Characters of tho&s;e that are not of the world. Do we re|fu&s;e to hold communion with, do we &s;eparate from per&s;ons of this com|plexion? What more fal&s;e? We cry aloud to them, woe, be&s;eech, in|treat them, as many of them, as are yet, too much holding fellow&s;hip with the carnal wicked world in Wor&s;hip, to come out from them: which was one, and no &s;mall part of our de&s;ign in <HI>S. T.</HI> As for others, that know nothing of the things mentioned, they are yet in their &s;ins, though they profe&s;s the Name of Chri&s;t, under the regiment of the wicked one, and of the world; and therefore to be &s;e|parated
<PB N="258" REF="133"> from as this Animadverter grants. Of the Apo&s;tles going into the Jewi&s;h Synagogues, <HI>&amp;c.</HI> we &s;hall &s;peak in its proper place. Though we have no command to &s;eparate from the true Wor&s;hip of God, and the profe&s;&s;ors of the true Faith, walking &s;uitable thereunto, yet we have expre&s;s precepts, to have no communion in Wor&s;hip, that is of the devi&s;ing of man, the Pope, Antichri&s;t, with per&s;ons as members of the &s;ame Body, and that have the very Lineaments of Satan, the portrai|ture of Hell upon them, with whom Chri&s;t doth not, will not walk. The Scriptures but now in&s;tanced in, evince as much. <HI>Rev.</HI> 18. 4. com|mands &s;eparation from a fal&s;e Church; fal&s;e either in con&s;titution or by apo&s;tacy: The Church of <HI>England (Rome)</HI> is &s;o, as we have pro|ved, and the fal&s;e Wor&s;hip thereof, of this we have already &s;poken. Let the Reader &s;eriou&s;ly con&s;ider the Scriptures, he will find it to be &s;o. In a word, the <HI>Babylon</HI> mentioned, our Animadverter will grant, is the <HI>Roman</HI> Church, <HI>Chap.</HI> 17. 1, 2, 3. The &s;carlet coloured Bea&s;t is th Ci|vil Power (not once repre&s;ented under the notion of Bea&s;ts, <HI>Dan.</HI> 7. 3, 17.) by which &s;he hath ever been &s;upported from the beginning. The &s;even Heads are the &s;even &s;orts of Governments, <HI>viz.</HI> Kings, Con&s;uls, Dictators; Decemvirs, Tribunes, Cae&s;ars, Chri&s;tian Emperors, (and the &s;even Mountains upon which <HI>Rome</HI> was built, <HI>Rev.</HI> 17. 9, 10.) The ten Horns, are the ten Kingdoms, which her abominations, and filthi|ne&s;s of her fornications did overflow (of which <HI>England</HI> was one (as is known, and generally granted) <HI>ver&s;.</HI> 12, 13. The coming out of her is a &s;eparation from the whole of her Abominations, Mini&s;try, Rites, In|ventions (which if we do not, we come not out of her) &s;he hath in the ten Kingdoms, by the power of the Civil Magi&s;trate, that &s;upported her, erected, and by external force and violence, compelled per&s;ons to bow down to; with re&s;pect hereunto &s;he is repre&s;ented as drunk with the blood of the Saints and Martyrs of Je&s;us. This is all we plead for from this Scripture. We would not have the In&s;titutions, Inventions of this old Bawd and bloody Strumpet, impo&s;ed upon us, and &s;ubject|ed to, as if from Chri&s;t.</P>
<P>Let the <HI>Animadverter</HI> or any one for him prove the <HI>Hierarchy</HI> of Arch-Bi&s;hops, Bi&s;hops, Deans, Chapters, <HI>&amp;c.</HI> their Pari&s;h-Churches, as &s;uch, Organs, Singing-Service, bowing before Altars, Candles, (there pla|ced) Copes, holy Ve&s;tments, Service-Book,&mdash;to be of the In&s;ti|tution of Chri&s;t, and we are ready to &s;toop to them, and own tho&s;e that practi&s;e them: but if they have no other foundation but what <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">he Mo|ther of Harlots, compelled the Civil Powers to give them, when &s;he rid them at her plea&s;ure, and made them &s;erve her Lu&s;ts, to the mu<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">thering
<PB N="259" REF="133"> of millions of the Servants of Chri&s;t, in the Nations, as mo&s;t certain it is they have not; as it would be the honour of the chief Rulers of the Nations, to eradicate them, they remaining as a badge of their old &s;la|very, to the wor&s;t of Strumpets: So its eminently the duty of the Chil|dren of God, by virtue of expre&s;s precept from this Scripture, in the mean while (whatever they may &s;uffer) to &s;eparate from them. The Church of <HI>England (i. e.</HI> the be&s;t, and mo&s;t enlightned among&s;t the chief of the Nation) thought it their duty in dayes pa&s;t to &s;eparate from the Doctrine of the Papacy, and &s;ome of her Trinkets to ca&s;t over|board: we plead but for &s;eparation from her Di&s;cipline, and Mini&s;try, and the rejection of the re&s;t of her fopperies; that as we profe&s;s our &s;elves Chri&s;tians, we may have (not the Canons of <HI>Rome,</HI> but) the Laws of our dear Lord for our Rule and &s;ole guide in this matter, which one would think above many, Mr. <HI>T.</HI> might permit one peaceably to do, 1 <HI>Cor.</HI> 5. 12, 13. <HI>Phil.</HI> 1. 5. <HI>Act.</HI> 2. 41. <HI>and</HI> 17. 4. were brought to prove it the duty of Saints as &s;uch to walk together di&s;tinct, and apart from the world; not to di&s;tingui&s;h of the duties of Pa&s;tors and People, nor to prove any written Church-Covenant, which we were not treat|ing of. So that in what follows in this <HI>Sect.</HI> we are not at all concerned. We have thrown no dirt upon the face of the Church of <HI>England</HI> (as he is plea&s;ed to talk) we only tell her what di<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">t and filth is there, that eve|ty body &s;ees, but her Admirers. Nor are we &s;olicitous touching his throwing dirt in the face of the &s;eparated Churches, from the Writings of any railing fal&s;e accu&s;ers; God will plead their Cau&s;e, and bring forth their Righteou&s;ne&s;s in the fit &s;ea&s;on.</P>
<P>The third In&s;titution of Chri&s;t mentioned in <HI>S. T.</HI> is this, <HI>That he hath intru&s;ted his particular Churches with power for the carrying on the Wor&s;hip of his Hou&s;e, to choo&s;e Officers, admit Members, excommunicate Offenders&mdash;</HI>Acts 1. 23. <HI>and</HI> 6. 3, 5. <HI>and</HI> 14. 23. 2 <HI>Cor.</HI> 8. 19. <HI>Mat.</HI> 18. 17. 1 <HI>Cor.</HI> 5. 4. The Mini&s;ters of the Church of <HI>England</HI> own not, conform not to this In&s;titution of Chri&s;t, we manife&s;t in the &s;aid Trea|ti&s;e.</P>
<P>Mr. <HI>T.</HI> his Reply hereunto is, 1. <HI>The Election,</HI> Acts 1. 23. <HI>was of an Apo&s;tle, and that by Lot, and contains no In&s;titution of Chri&s;t we are bound to follow.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. This la&s;t is Mr. <HI>T.</HI> his dictate, which 'tis fit &s;hould be rejected, till he proves it; e&s;pecially con&s;idering, that the Churches for &s;ome hundreds of years, afterwards, cho&s;e their own Officers.</P>
<P N="2">2. Though it was the Election of the Apo&s;tle, yet he was I hope an Officer of Chri&s;t, and that to the Churches.</P>
<P N="3"><PB N="260" REF="134"> 3. His being cho&s;en by Lots, doth not evince that he was not cho&s;en by the Church; they gave forth the Lots, &s;eems to be expre&s;&s;ive of the way they took, to manife&s;t the per&s;on whom they cho&s;e. What he hath &s;aid of <HI>Acts</HI> 6. 3, 5. <HI>and</HI> 14. 23. is already an&s;wered. The <HI>Election,</HI> 2 <HI>Cor.</HI> 8. 19. being of a per&s;on imployed in &s;ervice by them, manife&s;ts that none are to do &s;ervices for the Church, but by their appointment. Of <HI>Mat.</HI> 18. 17. we have at large &s;poken already, and vindicated it from Mr. <HI>T.</HI> his Exceptions. That 1 <HI>Cor.</HI> 5. 5. is more than Excom|munication practi&s;ed by the Churches of the Saints, he cannot prove: his turning <HI>Mat.</HI> 18. 17. al&s;o to another &s;ence, is an argument of his denial of any &s;uch In&s;titution of Chri&s;t to be practi&s;ed by the Churches in the World.</P>
<P>1&s;t, That 'Tis a Church-Act is evident from the words, <HI>ver&s;.</HI> 4, 5. The Church is to be gathered together for this end, <HI>to deliver the Ince&s;tu|ous per&s;on over to Satan; But no Church</HI> (&s;aith Mr. <HI>T.) had power over unclean Spirits, to command them to cruciat the Bodies of per&s;ons:</HI> There|fore (&s;ay we) that cannot be here intended.</P>
<P>2dly, The Church comes together to do that which <HI>Paul</HI> condemns them, that they had not done before, &s;tirrs them up to &s;et about <HI>ver&s;.</HI> 2. Now it had been ab&s;urd to have condemned them for not doing that which they had no power or Authority to do.</P>
<P>3dly, That which he calls here a delivering to Satan, he calls a <HI>purging out from among them the old leaven, ver&s;.</HI> 7.</P>
<P>4thly, To the working of Miracles by the Apo&s;tle, there had been no need to have a&s;&s;embled the Church, but it was nece&s;&s;ary, that to the do|ing of this act the Church be a&s;&s;embled, <HI>ver&s;.</HI> 4, 5.</P>
<P>5thly, He is to be delivered to Satan, for the de&s;truction of the fle&s;h, that the &s;pirit may be &s;aved; which is not likely to be effected by Sa|tans Mini&s;try.</P>
<P>6thly, 'Tis more than probable, the Church did what the Apo&s;tle commanded them to do. Now this is called, <GAP DESC="foreign">, the <HI>publick rebuke inflicted by many</HI> (which <HI>many</HI> cannot &s;ignifie the Apo|&s;tle, but the Church of <HI>Corinth)</HI> all which evince, that it was a Church-act, and no more than what is practi&s;ed by the Churches of Chri&s;t at this day. Though 'tis true, it is more than the ordinary Excommunication of the Church of <HI>England;</HI> by a Chancellour or Proctor, &s;everal miles from the Pari&s;h-Church to which the per&s;on is related, and (it may be) unknown to them; an argument they own not this In&s;titution of Chri&s;t. We add in <HI>S. T.</HI> as another In&s;titution of Chri&s;t,</P>
<P N="4">4. That the Officers of his appointment are only &s;uch as the&s;e, <HI>Pa|&s;tors,</HI>
<PB N="261" REF="134"> <HI>Teachers, Elders, Deacons, Widows,</HI> or <HI>Helpers;</HI> who as they are in one particular Congregation, &s;o they have not any Lordly authority over each other,<HI>&mdash;Ephe&s;.</HI> 4. 11. <HI>Rom.</HI> 12. 7. <HI>and</HI> 16. 1. 1 <HI>Cor.</HI> 12. 28. <HI>Phil.</HI> 1. 1. 1 <HI>Pet.</HI> 5. 1, 2, 3. <HI>Acts</HI> 6. 5. <HI>and</HI> 15. 2. <HI>and</HI> 20. 17. <HI>and</HI> 28. 21, 28. 1 <HI>Tim.</HI> 3. <HI>chapt. and</HI> 5. 9, 10, 17. This Law of Chri&s;t they &s;ubject not (we &s;ay) unto; &s;et up other Officers and Offices.&mdash;</P>
<P>To which Mr. <HI>T.</HI> 1&s;t, <HI>There were other Officers given by Chr&s;t, be|&s;ides the&s;e mentioned,</HI> viz. <HI>Apo&s;tles, therefore the&s;e are not the only Officers of his appointment.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. Had he &s;aid therefore, The&s;e were not the only Officers of his appointment, he had &s;poken more properly; Apo&s;tles were of his appointment, are not now, as we have proved.</P>
<P N="2">2. We are &s;peaking of ordinary fixed Officers, in the particular Churches of Chri&s;t, which the Apo&s;tles were not; &s;o that his in&s;tancing the&s;e, and inference thereupon, is frivo<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">ous and impertinent. If the&s;e had Superiority over others, it will not advantage the <HI>Animadverter,</HI> except he can prove the Bi&s;hops in re&s;pect of Office, to be their Suc|ce&s;&s;ors, which he will never be able to do. That becau&s;e the Elders mentioned, 1 <HI>Tim.</HI> 5. 17. mu&s;t be accounted <HI>worthy of double honour,</HI> therefore they were of a Superiour order of Mini&s;try, to lord it over the re&s;t, is one of Mr. <HI>T.</HI> his Con&s;equences, that a youth of half a years &s;t<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">nding in the Univer&s;ity would be a&s;hamed of. Be&s;ides Sir, the <HI>double honour</HI> is due to the <HI>working Presbyter,</HI> not the <HI>lording loytering Bi&s;hop,</HI> as is the cu&s;tom of <HI>England.</HI> The per&s;on mentioned, 2 <HI>Cor.</HI> 8. 19. was cho&s;en by the Churches for the pre&s;ent expedition, was no &s;tanding fix|ed Officer among&s;t them, therefore appertains not to our pre&s;ent di&s;|qui&s;ition.</P>
<P>He adds, <HI>Whether all the Officers and Offices, be rightly ordered in the Church of</HI> England, <HI>is not our pre&s;ent inquiry.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> But this is no &s;mall part of our pre&s;ent enquiry: for if they are not rightly ordered, they are not Officers of Chri&s;t; if they are not &s;uch, 'tis evident they reject this In&s;titution of his, &s;et up other Officers and Offices.&mdash;</P>
<P>What he tells us <HI>is notoriou&s;ly fal&s;e,</HI> viz. <HI>That the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters of</HI> England, <HI>have neither Name, nor thing required by Chri&s;t in this Law,</HI> is manife&s;tly true; Their Pari&s;h Mini&s;ters, are called <HI>Prie&s;ts,</HI> not <HI>Pa&s;tors,</HI> or <HI>Teachers.</HI> 'Tis true they have tho&s;e are called <HI>Doctors,</HI> which &s;ignifies <HI>Teachers,</HI> but that is a School, not a Church-Title; they are call'd &s;o, with re&s;pect to an <HI>Academick</HI> degree, not with relation to any particu|lar Church or Churches in whom they are placed. They have tho&s;e tha<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">
<PB N="262" REF="135"> are called <HI>Deacons,</HI> but they are not &s;uch Officers as Chri&s;t calls &s;o; tho&s;e that come neare&s;t to the&s;e, are tho&s;e they call <HI>Church-wardens,</HI> o<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter"> <HI>Over|&s;eers of the Poor.</HI> But they have the thing, the Office of preach<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">ng the Go&s;pel continues with them.</P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. 'Twere well if it could be &s;aid of many of them, that they preached the Go&s;pel. Alas! they under&s;tand it not.</P>
<P>2dly. However, they have not the Office, as we prove: while&s;t he &s;ugge&s;ts the contrary, he doth but beg the Que&s;tion. Whether the A&s;|&s;ertion, That they &s;et up other Officers and Offices, as if in open con|tempt and defiance of Chri&s;ts Authority, be very unrighteou&s;ly &s;aid, others will judge, I am &s;ure as was &s;aid in <HI>S. T. They are &s;uch, of which it may righteou&s;ly be &s;aid, he did at no time command them, neither did it e|ver enter into his heart &s;o to do.</HI> And I challenge Mr. <HI>T.</HI> to give an in|&s;tance of the contrary.</P>
<P>We remark a 5th In&s;titution of Chri&s;t in <HI>S. T.</HI> viz. <HI>That the&s;e Of|ficers be cho&s;en by the common Suffrage of the Church of Chri&s;t,&mdash;</HI>accord|ing to <HI>Acts</HI> 1. 15, 23, 26. <HI>and</HI> 6. 1, 2, 3, 5. <HI>and</HI> 14. 23. <HI>and</HI> 9. 26. <HI>which we find the Church in the practi&s;e of for &s;ome Centuries of Years. As the Epi&s;tle of</HI> Clemens <HI>to the Church of</HI> Corinth, Martin Luther, Cypri|an, Lambard, Peter Martyr, Bullinger, Gualter, Zanchy, Calvin, Be|za, <HI>the united Brethren of</HI> Bohemia, <HI>manife&s;t.</HI> Of which at large we there treat. This In&s;titution of Chri&s;t, we &s;ay, the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters conform not to.</P>
<P>Mr. <HI>T.</HI> replies. 1. <HI>He finds not this to be an Appointment of Chri&s;t, in the Scriptures mentioned.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> Whether it be or not, let the Reader judge; the impertinency of his An&s;wer to the three fir&s;t, we have already &s;hewed. <HI>Acts</HI> 9. 26, 27. proves thus much, That 'tis in the Churches power to reject any one, or refu&s;e to receive him as a Preacher among&s;t them, till they have received &s;atisfaction touching him; which doth not a little demon&s;trate the power of Election of their own Officers, to be &s;eated in them. <HI>For he a&s;&s;ayed,</HI> <GAP DESC="foreign">, <HI>to joyn him&s;elf to the Di&s;ciples,</HI> as a Brother in the fellow&s;hip of the Go&s;pel, (as the word &s;ignifies, <HI>Acts</HI> 5. 13. 1 <HI>Cor.</HI> 6. 16, 17.) but they would not &s;uffer him &s;o to do, till better informed of him, and then he comes in, and goes out at <HI>Jeru&s;alem, ver.</HI> 28. <HI>i. e.</HI> is owned, received by them. What follows is a repetition of what he had before &s;aid, <HI>Sect.</HI> 22. in an&s;wer to the Preface, to which we have there &s;poken. <HI>Clemens</HI> &s;peaks fully to our purpo&s;e, <HI>Mini&s;ters mu&s;t be appoint|ed by famous and di&s;creet men, with the good liking and con&s;ent of ALL the Church,</HI> (without which it &s;eems they could not be con&s;tituted) In
<PB N="263" REF="135"> that which follows in <HI>Clemens</HI> his Epi&s;tle, touching a readine&s;s in the Elder or Pa&s;tor to depart, or return, according as the multitude of Believers &s;hould determine. We have &s;ure a proof that the choice or rejection of a Pa&s;tor is &s;eated in them. That <HI>Luther, Bullinger,</HI> meant no more, than the not obtruding unable Mini&s;ters on the Churches of Chri&s;t, is Mr. <HI>T.</HI> his mi&s;take. They both a&s;&s;ert the Churches priviledge in the choice of their own Pa&s;tors. <HI>Their voice</HI> (&s;aith <HI>Luther) ought not to be &s;evered from the choo&s;ing Eccle&s;ia&s;tical Per&s;ons: 'Tis tyranny to do &s;o,</HI> &s;aith <HI>Bullinger.</HI> Let the judicious Reader peru&s;e the words of the re&s;t recited in <HI>S. T.</HI> and he will be convinced that they &s;peak home to the matter in hand, and that Mr. <HI>T.</HI> doth but trifle while&s;t he labours to avoid their Te&s;timony. That there is nothing like this In&s;titution of Chri&s;t, practi&s;ed among&s;t the Mini&s;ters of the Church of <HI>England,</HI> is known. And Mr. T. acknowledgeth, <HI>That by rea&s;on of the continuance in force, of &s;o much of the Popes Canon Law, things are far otherwi&s;e than they &s;hould be.</HI> Now this is that we &s;ay, A non-hearkening to the In&s;titu|tions and Laws of Chri&s;t, with an imbracement and &s;ubjection to the Cannon-Law of Antichri&s;t, is a real denial of Chri&s;ts Kingly Authority. This the Mini&s;ters of <HI>England</HI> are guilty of. The latter our Animadver|ter hath the ingenuity to confe&s;s; the former we have proved. What difficulties Congregational men have found in the rectifying the&s;e things, be&s;ides what they have ground to expect, in any work of God, (in which 'tis no new thing to find Satan at our right hand to re&s;i&s;t us) I know not.</P>
<P>That Separation and Election by the Churches makes things wor&s;e than they are, is a plain calumny again&s;t the known experience of them all.</P>
<P>We proceed, and in <HI>S.</HI> T. in&s;tance a &s;ixth In&s;titution of Chri&s;t, <HI>viz.</HI> 6thly, <HI>That Saints may Prophe&s;ie one by one, and ought to admoni&s;y, exhort and build up one another in their mo&s;t holy Faith,</HI> 1 <HI>Cor.</HI> 14. 40. <HI>Rom.</HI> 8. 26. <HI>and</HI> 12. 6. 1 <HI>Cor.</HI> 4. 17. <HI>and</HI> 5. 4. <HI>and</HI> 11. 23. <HI>Ephe&s;.</HI> 4. 7, 11, 12. 1 <HI>Tim.</HI> 2. 1. <HI>and</HI> 3. 15. <HI>Jude</HI> 20. 1 <HI>Cor.</HI> 12. 7, 11. <HI>Mat.</HI> 25. 24. 1 <HI>Pet.</HI> 4. 10, 11. 1 <HI>Cor.</HI> 12. 15. <HI>and</HI> 14. 12, 24. <HI>Ephe&s;.</HI> 4. 3, 7, 15, 16. <HI>Acts</HI> 2. 42. <HI>Rom.</HI> 15. 14. <HI>Ephe&s;.</HI> 5. 19. <HI>Col.</HI> 3. 16. 1 <HI>The&s;.</HI> 5. 14. 2 <HI>The&s;.</HI> 3. 15. <HI>Heb.</HI> 3. 13. to which might be added the frequent Examples of the Saints in the Old and New Te&s;tament, 2 <HI>Chr.</HI> 17. 7, 8, 9. <HI>John</HI> 2. 11. <HI>Mal.</HI> 3. 16. <HI>Luke</HI> 4. 16. <HI>Acts</HI> 13. 15. 1 <HI>Cor.</HI> 14. 24, <HI>to</HI> 34. and the practice of the Primitive Church, as witne&s;s <HI>Origen,</HI> (in his Epi&s;tle to <HI>Cel&s;um.) Tertullian</HI> (in his <HI>Apol.) Ju&s;tin Martyr</HI> (in his <HI>Apol.)</HI> and many others. This In&s;titution of Chri&s;t, the pre&s;ent Mini|&s;ters
<PB N="264" REF="136"> trample under foot, rail again&s;t, oppo&s;e, reproach, do all they can to cau&s;e to peri&s;h from among&s;t the people of Chri&s;t.</P>
<P>To which Mr. <HI>T. Sect.</HI> 8. upon the matter &s;peaks not one wo<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">d, in a way of contradiction, tells us, <HI>Prophe&s;ying was an extraordinary gift, by an immediate Revelation of the Spirit, whereby &s;ome hidden thing is di&s;co|vered, and this prophe&s;ying the Mini&s;ters of</HI> England <HI>neither do nor can hin|der; none that he knows of have this gift.&mdash;</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. Were all this granted, it would not at all advantage him. There is a Prophe&s;ying that was (as he &s;aith) an extraordinary gift.&mdash;But that is not the Prophe&s;ying (as he knows) we are treating of, but a &s;peaking to men to edification, exhortation, and comfort: This we &s;ay is an In&s;titution of Chri&s;t, bottom'd upon the forecited Scri|ptures, which notwith&s;tanding the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters of <HI>England</HI> oppo&s;e and deny.</P>
<P>Are not the&s;e things &s;o? Is Mr. <HI>T.</HI> able to di&s;prove them? Doth he attempt to do &s;o? nothing le&s;s. A very fardle of Contradictions, not worth the mentioning, is the whole of what he is plea&s;ed to return in An&s;wer hereunto; one while the re&s;traint of &s;uch exerci&s;es, is no tran&s;|gre&s;&s;ion of Chri&s;t's Command, and yet immediately adds, that the du|ties in the Texts, ought to be cheri&s;hed, furthered, and &s;uch meetings countenanced.</P>
<Q>Quo teneam vultus mutantem Protea nodo.</Q>
<P>An In&s;titution of Chri&s;t he denies not this to be, nor that it is not hearkened to, but rejected, oppo&s;ed by the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters. His im|puting practi&s;es to us, tending to Sedition and Di&s;turbance very ill be|comes him. The whole Nation is under the conviction of the contrary. 'Tis no more than what of old was charged upon the Saints. A very fal&s;e crimination, for which I advi&s;e him, that he pray to God to give him repentance unto Life.</P>
<P>A 7th In&s;titution of Chri&s;t remarked in <HI>S. T.</HI> is this, <HI>That nothing be offered up to God, but what is of his own pre&s;cription, divine and &s;piritual, without affectation of Legal Shadows,</HI> John 4. 24. <HI>Of worldly Pomp, or carnal Excellency,</HI> 2 Cor. 1. 12. and 2. 17. 1 Cor. 2. 12. and 6. 13. 1 Cor. 12. 28. I&s;a. 33. 22. Jam. 4. 12. Mat. 15. 6, 9. Heb. 8. 5. 1 King. 13. 33. and 12. 13. Jer. 7. 31. Numb. 15. 39. Deut. 12. 1. &amp; 4. 31. This the Mini&s;ters of <HI>England</HI> conform not to, they act what is contrary thereunto, whil&s;t they offer up a Service not of his pre&s;cription, affect Legal Shadows, worldly Pomp, and carnal Excellency.</P>
<P>M<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">. <HI>T.</HI> replies, <HI>Sect.</HI> 9. <HI>Where God hath left us free, not forbidding us to u&s;e a pre&s;cript form of words; Mu&s;ick in the prai&s;ing of God, there we may &s;o do.</HI></P>
<PB N="265" REF="136">
<P> <HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. This is &s;uch a &s;hameful <HI>petitio principii,</HI> or begging the thing in que&s;tion, that he could not &s;ure write without blu&s;hing.</P>
<P>2dly. Contrary to what he hath in other Treati&s;es formerly a&s;&s;erted.</P>
<P>3dly. Directly oppo&s;ite to &s;ome of the Scriptures in&s;tanced in, which he takes no notice of.</P>
<P>4thly, An open door for the Introduction of all the Popi&s;h trinkets, and fopperies.</P>
<P>5thly, A mo&s;t Papi&s;tical a&s;&s;ertion, generally exploded by Prote&s;tant Writers, when they di&s;pute again&s;t the Papi&s;ts, who affirm that an Ar|gument from the authority of the Scripture negatively, is valid, <HI>i. e.</HI> 'tis not commanded in Scripture, not to be proved thence, therefore not to be believed nor practi&s;ed, as <HI>Sutcliffe</HI> argues again&s;t <HI>Bellarmine, de Pontif. l.</HI> 2. <HI>c.</HI> 9. <HI>p.</HI> 134, 135, and others. So that notwith&s;tanding what Mr. <HI>T.</HI> is able to &s;ay to the contrary, the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters of <HI>Engl.</HI> refu&s;e to &s;ubject to, de&s;pi&s;e, oppo&s;e, per&s;ecute the Orders and In&s;tituti|ons of Chri&s;t in his Hou&s;e, and therefore deny his Prophetical and Kingly Office.</P>
<P>We proceed in <HI>S. T.</HI> to the removing an Objection, which is thus propo&s;ed.</P>
<P><HI>But perhaps to the&s;e things &s;ome may &s;ay, The&s;e are but &s;mall matters, good men differ among them&s;elves herein.</HI></P>
<P>To which we An&s;wer, 1. That they are part of the In&s;tituted Wor|&s;hip of God,&mdash;hath already been proved: To &s;ay that any part there|of is a &s;mall matter, is no &s;mall derogation to the wi&s;dom of him who in&s;tituted it.</P>
<P>To this Mr. <HI>T. Sect.</HI> 10. Replies, 1&s;t, <HI>Though nothing commanded by God is &s;mall, yet &s;ome things are comparatively &s;mall,</HI> Mat. 23. 23.</P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. Chri&s;t &s;peaks not of Go&s;pel-In&s;titutions, of which we are treating.</P>
<P>But, 2. Of Commandments, and Ceremonies, that were then draw|ing apace to their period, and full point.</P>
<P N="3">3. He &s;ai<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">h not that they were &s;o &s;mall that they ought not to be ob|&s;erved, but the contrary.</P>
<P N="4">4. The Appointments in&s;tanced in by us are of &s;uch import, as that in them, the vi&s;ible King&s;hip of Chri&s;t, in and over his Churches, doth con&s;i&s;t; the taking away, rejection of which, is to take away, and reject the vi&s;ible Scepter of his Kingdom; So that betwixt the&s;e two there is no compare.</P>
<P>He adds 2dly, <HI>That they are part of Gods in&s;tituted Wor&s;hip needs better proof.</HI></P>
<PB N="266" REF="137">
<P> <HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. This is but Mr. <HI>T.</HI> his opinion, he hath not manife&s;ted the weakne&s;s of the proof exhibited.</P>
<P N="2">2. He acknowledgeth &s;ome of the In&s;titutions mentioned to be the Appointments of Chri&s;t. We &s;ay,</P>
<P>2dly, What if it &s;hould appear, that as &s;mall as the&s;e things &s;eem to be, they are the grounds of the late Controver&s;ies of God, pleaded with fire and &s;word in mo&s;t of the <HI>European</HI> Kingdoms? This may perhaps a little &s;tay &s;ober per&s;ons from &s;o ra&s;h a Conclu&s;ion, <HI>That the&s;e are &s;mall matters.</HI></P>
<P>To which our <HI>Animadverter</HI> &s;aith, <HI>This is not demon&s;trated.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> I am upon &s;ome accounts unwilling to review things; he cannot be ignorant of the truth of the &s;ugge&s;tion. What was the ground of the fir&s;t conte&s;t in <HI>Scotland,</HI> was it not the impo&s;ition of the <HI>Liturgy?</HI> What begat the bad blood in <HI>England?</HI> was it not the <HI>Prelates Pride,</HI> impo&s;ition of their Inventions upon the Saints? What the Covenant was again&s;t, this <HI>Animadverter</HI> hath not yet forgot; But enough of this.</P>
<P>I add, 3dly, As &s;mall matters as the&s;e have been &s;everely puni&s;h|ed by the Lord, as 2 <HI>Chr.</HI> 26. 16. <HI>Num.</HI> 16. 1 <HI>Chr.</HI> 15. 13. with <HI>Num.</HI> 4. 11, 15. 1 <HI>Sam.</HI> 8. 7. which we more at large &s;peak to in <HI>S. T.</HI></P>
<P>Mr. <HI>T.</HI> Replies, <HI>'Tis not demon&s;trated that in the rejection of the&s;e In|&s;titutions that the Min&s;ters &s;in, as</HI> Uzziah, <HI>&amp;c.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> But that herein they do &s;o, and that at an higher rate, is evi|dent. 1. <HI>Uzziah, &amp;c.</HI> &s;inn'd but again&s;t one In&s;titution of the Lord, the&s;e again&s;t many.</P>
<P N="2">2. They &s;inn'd under the Law, again&s;t the carnal admini&s;trations thereof, the&s;e under the Go&s;pel.</P>
<P N="3">3. They &s;inn'd of ignorance and weakne&s;s, (as may charitably be deemed, at lea&s;t &s;ome of them;) which ('tis to be fear'd) cannot be &s;aid of many of the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters; who have preached, printed, &s;worn again&s;t, what they now own and practi&s;e.</P>
<P>We add, 4. As &s;mall matters as the&s;e, when once commanded by the Lord, are of that force, as not only to deface the well-being, but to overturn the true being of the Wor&s;hip of God. We in&s;tance in the ca&s;e of Sacrifices, which being appointed to be offered at a certain place, if offered el&s;ewhere (which was but a failure in a circum&s;tance of place) they were a &s;tink in the No&s;trils of God, and not accounted by him as any Wor&s;hip performed to him. Doth Mr. <HI>T.</HI> deny the&s;e things to be &s;o? Not at all. He only tells us, <HI>That the Mini&s;ters of</HI> England <HI>in their oppo&s;ing the In&s;titutions mentioned, overturn the true Wor&s;hip of God,</HI>
<PB N="267" REF="137"> <HI>is not demon&s;trated.</HI> Which how much it is to the purpo&s;e others will judge. The judicious Reader knows, we were not upon the proof of any &s;uch thing, the utmo&s;t of our intendment, being only to demon&s;trate, that the particular In&s;titutions remarked, were not &s;uch &s;mall matters as &s;ome made them, &s;ince as &s;mall matters <HI>(viz.</HI> a circum&s;tance of place commanded) neglected, have been of that force, as to overturn the true being of the Wor&s;hip of God, which we are apt to think abun|dantly demon&s;trated; and de&s;ire Mr. <HI>T.</HI> to leave dictating, and mani|fe&s;t by Argument and Rea&s;on our mi&s;take. Though we did not, yet may we righteou&s;ly argue, non-&s;ubjection to circum&s;tances of Wor&s;hip in|joyned, is of that force as to overturn the true being of the Wor&s;hip of God (&s;acrificing any where but at the place appointed was &s;o) There|fore the non-&s;ubjection of the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters of <HI>England</HI> to the fore|mentioned In&s;titutions (&s;hould we a&s;&s;ert them to be only Circum&s;tan|ces of Wor&s;hip determined) doth &s;o. Their Mini&s;try is no Mini&s;try of Chri&s;t, their Excommunication no In&s;titution of Chri&s;t, becau&s;e not ac|cording to divine appointment.</P>
<P>We &s;ay further in <HI>S. T. As for what is added, that good men differ a|mong them&s;elves in this matter, its of no more weight than what went before.</HI></P>
<P N="1">1. 'Tis not at all to the bu&s;ine&s;s in hand.</P>
<P N="2">2. 'Tis po&s;&s;ible good men may for a while do that which really en|wraps in the bowels of it a denial of the Offices of Chri&s;t.&mdash;</P>
<P>The <HI>Animadverter</HI> adjoyns, 1. <HI>That good men may do that which by con&s;equence may be a denial of Chri&s;ts Office is granted, it being no more than that they may erre, or &s;in.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. We &s;ay more; Good men may under the power of Temp|tation, plainly, directly, with cur&s;ing and banning them&s;elves, deny Chri&s;t. <HI>Peter</HI> did &s;o, <HI>Mat.</HI> 26. 74. (&s;ome &s;ay that he cur&s;<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter"> Chri&s;t)&punc; yet a good man. 'Tis true this is no more than that they may e<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">re or &s;in; the greate&s;t mi&s;carriage any of the Children of the Lord, ever were, or can be guilty of; <HI>Davids Murder</HI> and <HI>Adultery,</HI> the <HI>Corinthians Ince&s;t,</HI> was no more.</P>
<P>He adds, 2dly, <HI>If the Mini&s;ters of</HI> England <HI>are in the account of God good men, we &s;hould not have cen&s;ured them &s;o deeply, as walking di&s;orderly, &s;ymbolizing with Antichri&s;t,&mdash;nor have di&s;&s;waded men from hearing them, or joyning with them in Gods Wor&s;hip.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. Good men (in the main) may be guilty of great mi&s;car|riages, may be told of, cen&s;ured for them, and that publickly, if they are publick and notorious.</P>
<P N="2">2. When Mr. <HI>T.</HI> proves that I have &s;aid any thing of them that is
<PB N="268" REF="138"> fal&s;e and untrue, or that by mentioning the&s;e I have made any breach upon any rule of Chri&s;t, I do a&s;&s;ure him in the word of a Chri&s;tian, to make a publick acknowledgment and recantation thereof: till then I have &s;o little cau&s;e of being afraid or a&s;hamed, that I have boldn<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">&s;s, and confidence through the grace of God in the Te&s;timony I bear (though unworthy) again&s;t their enormities, and cau&s;e of rejoycing in Chri&s;t, whatever I may &s;uffer.</P>
<P>3dly, <HI>That good men, (that in the account of God may be &s;o) ought not to be &s;eparated from, when under the guilt of &s;candalous offences,</HI> this <HI>Ani|madverter</HI> cannot prove; many Scriptures have already in this Treati&s;e been produced for the confirmation of the contrary.</P>
<P>We add in <HI>S. T.</HI> 3. That good men differ is an Argument of their ignorance and darkne&s;s, which though in &s;ome ca&s;es it excu&s;es <HI>a tanto,</HI> yet not <HI>a toto;</HI> it may alter the degree, never the nature of the &s;in.</P>
<P>To this our <HI>Animadverter</HI> replies, <HI>There may be darkne&s;s in this Au|thor.&mdash;</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. And this Author &s;aith &s;o to; 'tis what he is daily bemoan|ing before the Lord.</P>
<P>But 2dly, In the matters he is treating of, he knows, and is per&s;wa|ded by the Lord Je&s;us, that the truth is with him, and he dares not call <HI>Light, Darkne&s;s,</HI> for fear of man, or advantage in the world.</P>
<P>3dly, He conceives the&s;e words might have been &s;pared, ina&s;much as they are greatly impertinent, whether <HI>Darkne&s;s</HI> be with them or me; If we &s;in, though our &s;in be not a &s;in of that magnitude, as if it had been committed again&s;t <HI>Light,</HI> yet 'tis a &s;in &s;till, and &s;o to be cen&s;ured; and if &s;candalous in &s;ome ca&s;es, the per&s;ons guilty of it to be &s;eparated from.</P>
<P>We &s;ay moreover in <HI>S. T.</HI> 4thly, 'Tis fal&s;e, that good men pre&s;&s;ing after Reformation&mdash;according to the primitive pattern, do differ touching the &s;ub&s;tance of the things in&s;tanced in.&mdash;</P>
<P>To which Mr. <HI>T.</HI> adjoyns, <HI>The more to blam<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter"> is this Author to widen the Breach.&mdash;</HI></P>
<P><HI>A.</HI> But this Author doth no &s;uch thing, he widens not the Breach, ur|ges not Separation from good men, who pre&s;s after Reformation accord|ing to the primitive pattern: But &s;uch as have renounced the pur&s;uing &s;uch a Reformation (though they were once &s;worn (&s;ome of them) to pro&s;ecute it to the uttermo&s;t of their power) per&s;ecute, oppo&s;e it in them that are pre&s;&s;ing after it. As is the known ca&s;e of the pre&s;e<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">t Mi|ni&s;ters of <HI>England.</HI></P>
<P>What is added by us, in the 5th place, <HI>viz. That the particulars in|&s;tanced</HI>
<PB N="269" REF="138"> <HI>in, being commanded by Chri&s;t, they are not di&s;charged from the im|peachment drawn up again&s;t them (who conform not to them) of Noncon|formity to the Laws of Christ by this Plea,</HI> That good men differ in the&s;e matters, <HI>(i. e.</HI> &s;ome good men tran&s;gre&s;s the Laws of Chri&s;t&mdash;) he grants to be true: Nor doth he offer any thing further in this Chapter that de&s;erves our attendment.</P>
</DIV3>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="6" TYPE="chapter">
<HEAD>CHAP. VI.</HEAD>
<DIV3 N="1" TYPE="section">
<HEAD>Sect. 1.</HEAD>
<ARGUMENT>
<P><HI>The pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters own Laws not of Chri&s;ts revealing, contrary thereunto, therefore deny his Offices. The fir&s;t proved by the induction of fourteen particulars. Mr.</HI> T. <HI>yeelds the matter in controver&s;ie.</HI> Ezek. 43. 8. <HI>explained An Objection an&s;wered. Of the Authority of Rulers touching Laws and Con&s;titutions Eccle&s;ia&s;tical. Of Synods.&mdash;</HI></P>
</ARGUMENT>
<P>THE &s;econd Argument whereby in <HI>S. T.</HI> we prove the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters deny the Kingly, and Prophetical Office of Chri&s;t, is this:</P>
<P><HI>Tho&s;e who own, &s;ubmit, and &s;ub&s;cribe to Orders and Ordinances, which not only are not of Chri&s;ts revealing, but contrary thereunto, do really deny, and oppo&s;e the Prophetical and Kingly Office of Christ: But the pre|&s;ent Mini&s;ters of</HI> England <HI>do own, &s;ubmit and &s;ub&s;cribe to Orders and Ordi|nances that are not only not of Chri&s;ts revealing, but contrary thereunto: Therefore.&mdash;</HI></P>
<P>The <HI>Major</HI> (or fir&s;t Propo&s;ition) is beyond exception. Per&s;ons non|conformity to the Laws of Magi&s;trates (if in what they have power to command) their giving forth Laws of their own, without the con&s;ent of their Rulers, directly contrary to their Laws, is a vi&s;ible, notorious oppo&s;ition, denyal, and rejection of their Authority, in them that give forth &s;uch Laws, and in them that conform and &s;ubject to them. This we manife&s;tly prove to be true of the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters of <HI>England,</HI> with re&s;pect to Chri&s;t, the alone <HI>Independant Lord, King</HI> and <HI>Soveraign</HI> of his Church and People.</P>
<P>That which Mr. <HI>T.</HI> oppo&s;eth hereunto <HI>Chap.</HI> 5. <HI>Sect.</HI> 1. will receive <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter"> &s;<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">eed<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter"> di&s;patch.</P>
<P N="1"><PB N="270" REF="139"> 1. His di&s;tinctions about the Orders and Ordinances of Chri&s;t are needle&s;s, they are but a clouding and darkning of Truth, by words without knowledge: The Orders we &s;peak of, are the Appointments of Chri&s;t to his Church, with re&s;pect to Wor&s;hip, wherein their practice is more or le&s;s concerned; to deny and reject the&s;e, and in the place of them to &s;ub&s;titute others, of their own, of Antichri&s;t, and &s;ubject there|unto, is a denial of the Offices of Chri&s;t mentioned, or it is not: If Mr. <HI>T.</HI> his con&s;cience tells him, that it is, he doth ill to equivocate. This he grants to be true of the Pope of <HI>Rome, Chap.</HI> 4. <HI>pag.</HI> 119, 120. Why it &s;hould not be &s;o of the Pope of <HI>Canterbury</HI> and his Prelates,&mdash;I yet under&s;tand not. That the giving forth and &s;ubjection to the Can|non-Law in the Papacy, &s;hould be Antichri&s;tian and a denial of the Of|fices of Chri&s;t, and the &s;ame thing in the Church of <HI>England</HI> not &s;o, is a Riddle to me.</P>
<P><HI>Henry</HI> the 8^t^h rejected the Popes Supremacy; an Act of Parliament is in&s;tituted 25. <HI>H.</HI> 8. <HI>c.</HI> 9. for the retention of the whole of his Ca|non-Law in its wonted vigour, that is not contrary to the Laws and Statutes of the Kingdom, nor prejudicial to the Royal Prerogative; by virtue whereof, how great a part of his Law, whereby he ruled his Kingdom of darkne&s;s (and &s;till rules it) received its e&s;tabli&s;hment, Mr. <HI>T.</HI> knows and in part confe&s;&s;eth, <HI>Chap.</HI> 4. Of which the In&s;tituti|ons and Orders mentioned are a part, by which the Pope yet &s;peaks as a King among&s;t us (though his Supremacy be ju&s;tly by Law rejected) for the Law of a King is his mouth. That very Law (that is, the Canon-Law of the Papacy) by which the Saints were burned in <HI>Smithfield</HI> (and other places) is that Law, by which in the &s;tead of the In&s;titut<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">ons of Chri&s;t, the Church of <HI>England</HI> is governed, the Saints are excommuni|cated, delivered over to the Secular Power, impri&s;oned, ruined at this day. This Law the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters of <HI>England</HI> &s;ubject to, which is the Canonical obedience they promi&s;e to their Ordinary. And though this <HI>Animadverter</HI> multiply millions of words, he will never make per|&s;ons of judgement and &s;obriety believe that this is not a real denial, and rejection of the Authority of Chri&s;t. They tell him in their pra|ctice, that they will have none of his In&s;titutions; they prefer Anti|chri&s;ts Canon-Law before them, which is &s;tufft with &s;uch filthy Abo|minations, that <HI>Luther</HI> was wont to call the <HI>Decretals, Excretal<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">,</HI> and had them publickly burned at <HI>Wittemburge.</HI> And <HI>Whitaker</HI> (one of their own) &s;aith, <HI>The Canonical, Decretal, and Pontifical Law, ought to have no place amongst us becau&s;e it is Antichri&s;tian and altogether a &s;tranger to all Piety and Religion,</HI> Lib. de Concil. 9.</P>
<P N="2"><PB N="271" REF="139"> 2. If the <HI>Animadverter</HI> will &s;peak to the purpo&s;e, and evert what hath been offered in this matter, he mu&s;t, I conceive, either manife&s;t that the Popes Canon-Law, is not the Law of Government to the Church of <HI>England,</HI> or that a retention thereof (with a rejection of the In&s;titutions of Chri&s;t) is not a denial of his Offices.</P>
<P>To tell &s;tories of things done of ignorance&mdash;(which we have over and over, and in this matter cannot have place, they them&s;elves know that things are with them as we have reported them) the &s;etting up open Antichri&s;ts, and Univer&s;al Monarchs, is the ready way to expo&s;e him&s;elf to conte<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">pt for his impertinencies, no probable one to carry the Cau&s;e he undertakes the defence of.</P>
<P>There being nothing further worth the con&s;idering in this fir&s;t <HI>Sect.</HI> we ha&s;ten to the 2^d^.</P>
<P>In order to the confirmation of the <HI>Minor</HI> Propo&s;ition of the fore|mentioned Argument, two things, we &s;ay in <HI>S. T.</HI> are incumbent upon us to prove.</P>
<P N="1">1. That the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters of <HI>England</HI> do own, &s;ubmit, and &s;ub|&s;cribe to Orders and Ordinances that are not of Chri&s;ts revealing, which we manife&s;t by the Induction of 14 particular In&s;tances.</P>
<P>As <HI>Fir&s;t,</HI> They own the Orders and Offices of Arch-Bi&s;hops, Bi|&s;hops, <HI>&amp;c.</HI> and promi&s;e &s;ubjection and obedience to them, <HI>Eccle&s;. Can. can.</HI> 7.</P>
<P>To which Mr. <HI>T.</HI> 1. <HI>He will not undertake to ju&s;tifie all that is in the Eccle&s;ia&s;tical Canons, nor need he, nor perhaps will the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters or Bi&s;hops.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. But he having undertaken to be their Advocate, he mu&s;t either ju&s;tifie their Canons, or manife&s;t that they them&s;elves do not.</P>
<P><HI>Secondly,</HI> 'Tis notoriou&s;ly known that that the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters ju|&s;tifie the afore&s;aid Canons Eccle&s;ia&s;tical, and dare not but do &s;o.</P>
<P>He adds 2dly, <HI>'Tis not &s;aid</HI> Ca<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">. 7. <HI>That the Orders and Offices of Arch-Bi&s;hops, Bi&s;hops, &amp;c. are Orders needful and nece&s;&s;ary in the Church of Chri&s;t, nor is it required therein that Mini&s;ters promi&s;e &s;ubjection and obe|dience to them.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. But the former of the&s;e is fairly implied, in the fore&s;aid Canon, which &s;aith, <HI>Tis a wicked Error to a&s;&s;ert them to be Antichri&s;tian or repugnant to the Word of God; for which per&s;ons are</HI> ip&s;o facto <HI>to be ex|communicated.</HI></P>
<P N="2">2. The latter they actually do when they are Ordained Mini&s;ters. And in <HI>Artic.</HI> 36. They are to &s;ub&s;cribe to this, <HI>That the Book of Com|mon-Prayer, and of Ordering Bi&s;hops, Prie&s;ts, and Deacons, contains nothing</HI>
<PB N="272" REF="140"> <HI>contrary to the Word of God, and that it may lawfully be u&s;ed, and that they them&s;elves will u&s;e the Form in the &s;aid Book pre&s;cribed, in publick Prayers and admini&s;tration of the Sacraments, and none other.</HI> Whence it follows, that they own, &s;ubmit to whatever is contained in the Canons Eccle&s;i|a&s;tical (though in every particular Canon it is not &s;aid they do) and the Common-Prayer-Book-Service, the Orders and Rites thereof, with the Orders and Rites of the Book of <HI>Ordering Bi&s;hops, Prie&s;ts and Deacons.</HI> So that when we prove this, or that, to be contained it this or that Canon, we prove their &s;ubmi&s;&s;ion thereunto, <HI>Canonical Obedience</HI> (or <HI>Obedience</HI> to the&s;e <HI>Canons)</HI> being what at the time of their Ordina|tion (as was &s;aid) they promi&s;e to the Bi&s;hop, which is a &s;ufficient an|&s;wer to all that Mr. <HI>T.</HI> a&s;&s;erts in this <HI>Sect.</HI> In <HI>Can.</HI> 4. The <HI>Liturgy-Wor&s;hip</HI> is a&s;&s;erted to be the <HI>Wor&s;hip of God,</HI> whoever affirms, <HI>It is a cor|rupt, &s;uper&s;titious, and unlawfull Wor&s;hip of God, is to be excommunicated.</HI> They promi&s;e at the time of their Ordination (as was &s;aid) <HI>To u&s;e the Form in the Common-Prayer-Book, pre&s;cribed, in Publick Prayers&mdash;and none other;</HI> which if it be not a &s;ufficient proof, that they own and &s;ub|mit to it, I mu&s;t profe&s;s I &s;hall for ever de&s;pair of ability to prove any thing.</P>
<P>His exceptions to the <HI>Third</HI> Particular, touching their engaging to conform to the <HI>Rites</HI> of the <HI>Common-Prayer Book,</HI> are not worth the men|tioning.</P>
<P>They own <HI>Fourthly, The Office of a Deacon to be the fir&s;t &s;tep to the Or|der of Prie&s;thood,</HI> ina&s;much as this is a&s;&s;erted &s;o to be in the Book of <HI>Ordering Prie&s;ts and Deacons,</HI> to which they are to &s;ub&s;cribe by <HI>Can.</HI> 36. and <HI>Can.</HI> 32.</P>
<P>It's fairly intimated al&s;o, <HI>Fifthly, That no per&s;on be admitte<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter"> to ex|pound the Scriptures, though judged worthy of the Cure of Souls, with<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">ut Li|cen&s;e from the Bi&s;hop thereunto,</HI> is plainly a&s;&s;erted, <HI>Can.</HI> 49. Though the words, <HI>judged worthy of the cure of Souls,</HI> be not expre&s;&s;ed, they are evi|dently implied; the Cure they there &s;peak of, can be no other th<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">n that they &s;o call.</P>
<P><HI>Sixthly,</HI> That there be &s;ome lawful Mini&s;ters, which are no Preach|ers. And,</P>
<P><HI>Seventhly,</HI> That the&s;e unpreaching Mini&s;ters, <HI>may lawfully admini&s;ter the Ordinances of Bapti&s;m, and the Lords Supper,</HI> is fully a&s;&s;erted, <HI>Can.</HI> 49, 57.</P>
<P>So is the <HI>Eighth</HI> particular, touching the &s;entence of <HI>Excommunica|tion</HI> to be pa&s;&s;ed upon &s;uch as refu&s;e to have their <HI>Children Baptized,</HI> or to receive the <HI>Sacrament</HI> from &s;uch <HI>dumb Mini&s;ters.</HI></P>
<PB N="273" REF="140">
<P> <HI>Ninthly,</HI> Though it be not &s;aid in &s;o many words, <HI>That Confirmation by Dioce&s;an Bi&s;hops, is an Ordinance of God,</HI> Can. 6. yet it is fairely im|plied, and in the <HI>Common-Prayer-Book</HI> they bottom it upon the Apo|&s;tles practice, which fully evinceth; they e&s;teem it as &s;uch.</P>
<P>That it <HI>(Tenthly)</HI> appertains to the Office of Mini&s;ters <HI>to Marry,</HI> the regulation of the Mini&s;ters therein by <HI>Can.</HI> 62. clearly manife&s;ts.</P>
<P><HI>Eleven.</HI> That the Bi&s;hop of the <HI>Dioce&s;&s;e</HI> may lawfully &s;u&s;pend a Mi|ni&s;ter from his Mini&s;try, for refu&s;ing to bury the Dead, Mr. <HI>T.</HI> grants is pre&s;uppo&s;ed, <HI>Can.</HI> 68.</P>
<P>So is, <HI>12thly,</HI> The unlawfulne&s;s of Mini&s;ters Preaching, and admi|ni&s;tring the Communion in private Hou&s;es, except in time of nece&s;&s;i|ty.</P>
<P>And <HI>13thly,</HI> The unlawfulne&s;s of appointing <HI>Fa&s;ts, holding Meet|ings for Sermons,</HI> Can. 71, 72. I wonder he dare aver the contrary.</P>
<P>Whether, <HI>14thly,</HI> It be not &s;aid, <HI>Can.</HI> 74. <HI>That Mini&s;ters ought to be di&s;tingui&s;hed by their Ve&s;tments and Apparrel, as Gowns, Hoods,</HI> &amp;c. Let the Reader &s;atisfie him&s;elf by the peru&s;al of the &s;aid Canon, to which their practice is known to be corre&s;pondent.</P>
<P>Having in&s;tanced in the&s;e 14 particulars, we add in <HI>S. T. Are any of the&s;e Ordinances of the appointment of Chri&s;t? when, and where were they in|&s;tituted by him?</HI> To which this <HI>Animadverter</HI> replies,</P>
<P N="1">1. <HI>That he might an&s;wer by cro&s;s interrogations, Are the Church Cove|nant-gathering-Churches in the Congregational way, election of Mini&s;ters by the Church,</HI> &amp;c. <HI>Ordinances of Chri&s;t? when and where were they in&s;ti|tuted?</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. He may &s;o indeed, but he mu&s;t not imagine that any one be&s;ides him&s;elf will take this for an An&s;wer to what is propo&s;ed and ar|gued in this matter by us.</P>
<P N="2">2. Of the particulars in&s;tanced by him, we have hinted &s;omewhat in <HI>S. T.</HI> and more largely in this Treati&s;e, proving them to be <HI>Ordinances of Chri&s;t. Cotton, Ain&s;worth, Bartlet, Robbin&s;on, Canne, &amp;c.</HI> have di&s;tinct|ly proved the&s;e matters at large.</P>
<P>When Mr. <HI>T.</HI> (or any one el&s;e) is able to &s;ay half &s;o much for the particulars in&s;tanced in, we will openly acknowledge our errour and mi&s;take.</P>
<P>But 2dly, He grants, <HI>They are not Ordinances and Institutions of Christ.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> Ingeniou&s;ly &s;aid: Church-Government by <HI>Arch-Bi&s;hops, Bi|&s;hops,</HI> and the re&s;t of that <HI>Hierarchy,</HI> is no <HI>Ordinance of Chri&s;t</HI> (then are they not Mini&s;ters of Chri&s;t, for none are &s;uch but by his In&s;titution.)
<PB N="274" REF="141"> The <HI>Lyturgie-Wor&s;hip, Rites,</HI> enjoyned in the <HI>Common-Prayer-Book,</HI> the <HI>Office of a Deacon, as the fir&s;t &s;tep to the Priesthood, denial to expound the Scripture without the Bi&s;hops Licen&s;e, unpreaching Mini&s;ters, or bare Readers, admini&s;tration of Sacraments by &s;uch, Confirmation by Dioce&s;an Bi&s;hops, the Marrying of per&s;ons, burying the dead by the Prie&s;t,</HI> are no <HI>Or|dinances of Je&s;us Chri&s;t,</HI> is acknowledged by Mr. <HI>T.</HI> Yet all the&s;e, and much more, as a National Church,&mdash;are owned, and &s;ubm<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">tted to by the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters; Therefore they do own, and &s;ubmit to Or|dinances that are not of the appointment of Chri&s;t; their own Advo|cate being judge.</P>
<P>We add in <HI>S. T. That the&s;e are Po&s;ts &s;et by the Lords Po&s;ts,&mdash;</HI>of which he complains, <HI>Ezek.</HI> 43. 8. who &s;ees not?</P>
<P>To which Mr. <HI>T.</HI> replies, <HI>I &s;ee not; I think him in a dream or phren&s;ie that &s;aith he &s;ees it; no Interpreters that I have met with &s;o exp<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">und the place.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. 'Tis no di&s;paragement to Mr. <HI>T.</HI> that he &s;ees not every thing; though &s;ome think he &s;ees further than he is plea&s;ed to own, in his <HI>Theodulia,</HI> or at lea&s;t hath done &s;o, and are &s;orry to find him at that toil&s;om work, <HI>of building again the things he once de&s;troyed.</HI></P>
<P>Nor am I, 2dly, concerned with his thoughts touching this matter; If I am in a phren&s;ie, 'tis (through grace) an holy one, and I would be more phrenetical for the Intere&s;t of my dear Lord, Sorne think the&s;e expre&s;&s;ions might have been &s;pared, though for our parts</P>
<Q>Contenti &s;umus hoc Caton<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">.</Q>
<P>3dly, What Interpreters he hath met with I know not. The A&s;&s;em|bly, in their Annotations upon the place, are of our mind, <HI>Their &s;etting of their thre&s;holds by my thre&s;holds,</HI> i. e. <HI>adding their Traditions to my Pre|cepts,</HI> I&s;a. 29. 13.) So is Mr. <HI>Greenhill, &amp;c.</HI></P>
<P>We further propo&s;e (in <HI>S. T.)</HI> an Objection to con&s;ideration, <HI>viz. That though the&s;e Canons, and Con&s;titutions, owned by the Mini&s;ters of</HI> Eng|land <HI>be not</HI> <GAP DESC="foreign">, <HI>to be found in the Scripture of the In&s;titution of Chri&s;t, in &s;o many words, yet by con&s;equence they may rationally be deduced from thence.</HI> As where it is commanded, <HI>that all things be done decently, and in order,</HI> 1 Cor. 14. 40. which 'tis the duty of the Church to make Rules and Con&s;titutions about; which when it hath done, it is the duty of every Son thereof, to own, or &s;ubject to them without que&s;tioning its Autho|rity.</P>
<P>To this Mr. <HI>T. Sect.</HI> 3. &s;ubjoyns. 1. He a&s;&s;erts not, <HI>that the Canons and Con&s;titutions of the Church of</HI> England, <HI>may rationally be deduced from Scripture.</HI></P>
<PB N="275" REF="141">
<P> <HI>An&s;w.</HI> Goodly Con&s;titutions &s;urely, that cannot rationally be de|duced from Scripture, but have their Original &s;ingly from the bloody Canon-Law of the Papacy, and worthy to be &s;ubmitted to by &s;uch as profe&s;s them&s;elves Mini&s;ters of the Go&s;pel! what greater contempt any one could pour forth upon them I know not!</P>
<P>But 2dly, Whil&s;t Mr. <HI>T.</HI> refu&s;eth to a&s;&s;ert this, he plainly relin|qui&s;heth his concern in the Objection propo&s;ed by us, and tells us, <HI>He will not &s;tand up in its defence.</HI> However, 2. This he a&s;&s;erts in the room thereof, <HI>That Canons and Con&s;titutions Eccle&s;ia&s;tical, concerning Divine Wor&s;hip, and Church-Government, may be made by Governours, if not oppo|&s;ite to &s;uch Rules as are in Scripture about Gods Wor&s;hip, and the Rule of his Church, and be indeed &s;ub&s;ervient and conducible to the well-ordering of &s;uch Wor&s;hip and Rule; which 'tis the duty of the Members of &s;uch a Church to obey.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. But I would be informed, whether by <HI>Canons</HI> and <HI>Con&s;titu|tions Eccle&s;iastical,</HI> concerning <HI>Divine Wor&s;hip,</HI> he means only <HI>Canons</HI> touching the &s;preading the Table at the Communion, with a linnen Cloth; the Sermons beginning at the Reading of the Text&mdash;at which rate he &s;peaks in <HI>Sect.</HI> 4. Or whether he means <HI>Canons</HI> and <HI>Laws</HI> for the In&s;titution of con&s;iderable parts of Wor&s;hip, together with &s;uch ac|cidentals (as he calls them) that mu&s;t be &s;ubmitted to, by &s;uch as are admitted to the publick managery of Wor&s;hip, without which they &s;hall not be permitted &s;o to do. If the fir&s;t, he doth but trifle, we have not been taking notice of things of &s;uch an inferiour allay. If the latter, I de&s;ire to be &s;atisfied by what Law any Rulers or Governours do a&s;&s;ume to them&s;elves &s;uch an Authority, which when Mr. <HI>T.</HI> &s;hall be plea&s;ed to &s;hew us, we &s;hall further con&s;ider it. <HI>Heb.</HI> 13. 17. &s;peaks not a tittle thereunto. Of the vanity of its Application to the Governours of the Church of <HI>England</HI> we have already &s;poken. The Rea&s;ons of his A&s;&s;er|tion are the&s;e.</P>
<P N="1">1. <HI>Without &s;uch Regulations Church-Societies cannot be continued by rea&s;on of the difference of mi<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">ds.&mdash;</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. The contrary is manife&s;t, before ever &s;uch con&s;titutions as tho&s;e he &s;peaks of were in the World, Church-Societies were conti|nued. One of the fir&s;t open breaches among&s;t them, was becau&s;e of them: as he knows fell out, betwixt <HI>Victor</HI> Bi&s;hop of <HI>Rome,</HI> and the Eastern-Churches, about the ob&s;ervation of <HI>Easter.</HI> All the confu&s;ion, differences, breaches, that have been in the Churches (&s;o called) is for the mo&s;t part to be charged upon their Impo&s;itions.</P>
<P>2dly, The <HI>Animadverter</HI> &s;uppo&s;eth, <HI>That without &s;uch Constitutions,</HI>
<PB N="276" REF="142"> <HI>the Churches &s;hould be wholly destitute of Regulation,</HI> but fal&s;ly; 'Tis de|rogatory to Chri&s;t, the Scriptures perfection, a pitiful begging the thing in que&s;tion. As Chri&s;t hath a Church in the world, he hath Laws (with re&s;pect to external politie) by which he rules it; needs not be be|holding to Antichri&s;t for his. 'Tis impious, &s;candalous, to conceive, en|dite &s;uch dictates.</P>
<P>He further adds, 2dly, <HI>All &s;orts of Churches have had their Synods to this end.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. To what end? To make Laws and Con&s;titutions for an Order of Mini&s;try that Chri&s;t never e&s;tabli&s;hed, to impo&s;e a <HI>Ly<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">urgical Wor&s;hip</HI> upon his Churches, to &s;et up an unpreaching Mini&s;try, in his Hou&s;e&mdash;Mr. <HI>T.</HI> knows that the&s;e things are fal&s;e, and untrue. If he mean not the&s;e, I would advi&s;e him to &s;peak pertinently in h<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">s next. The&s;e are the In&s;titutions we charge the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters w<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">th &s;ub|mitting to.</P>
<P N="2">2. <HI>That all &s;orts of Churches have found it nece&s;&s;ary to have Synods,</HI> is more than Mr. <HI>T.</HI> can prove. The Learned <HI>Whitaker</HI> tells us, <HI>That they are not &s;imply and ab&s;olutely nece&s;&s;ary, De Concil. q.</HI> 1. <HI>p.</HI> 22. and I am &s;ure they may be well enough without them. <HI>Licinius</HI> interdicts them, <HI>Eu&s;eb. de Vit. Con&s;tant. l.</HI> 1. <HI>c.</HI> 44. yet the C<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">urches continued, a<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">d in a flouri&s;hing &s;ttate.</P>
<P>3dly, That few or no Synods that ever were yet in the World, have had a right Con&s;titution, were a <HI>facile</HI> undertaking to demon&s;trate. The Synod (&s;o called) of the C<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">urch of <HI>England,</HI> (by which the Laws we mention were out of the Popes Canon-Law collected) was not &s;o. A right Synod is con&s;tituted of the Me&s;&s;engers of the Churches (upon the account whereof they are &s;aid to be <HI>the Churches Repre&s;entatives)</HI> &s;ent by them with In&s;tructions from them, touching matters to be debated in that Convention. This cannot be affirmed of the afore&s;aid Synod, nor of any Synod that ever was in the World, &s;ince the Apo&s;tles fell a|&s;leep. So that whil&s;t our <HI>Animadverter</HI> is di&s;cour&s;ing of them as nece&s;|&s;ary, he is talking of the nece&s;&s;ity of <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter"> <HI>Non-ens,</HI> a meer <HI>Chimaera.</HI></P>
<P>4thly, The Churches of Chri&s;t had a perfect Di&s;cipline, before ever the Synods he &s;peaks of had a being in the World.</P>
<P>Nor, 5thly, had the&s;e ever from Je&s;us Chri&s;t any Authority (and what they have not from him, is not Obligatory) to impo&s;e any thing upon the Churches, to be ob&s;erved by them by virtue of an Authorita|tive power &s;eated in them&s;elves. 'Tis a Yoke not to be endured by the free-born Subjects of Chri&s;t, that any of the Children of men &s;hould impo&s;e upon them in the matters of their God. The Synod of <HI>Jeru&s;a|lem</HI>
<PB N="277" REF="142"> did not do &s;o, as we have proved. His <HI>third</HI> Rea&s;on is down-right begging the thing in que&s;tion: <HI>Chri&s;t hath left nothing relating to the Wor&s;hip and Government of his Hou&s;e, as &s;uch, undetermined;</HI> again&s;t which I advi&s;e him not to talk &s;o confidently in his next, till he hath proved the contrary. The Texts mentioned by him, 1 <HI>Cor.</HI> 14. 40. <HI>Heb.</HI> 13. 17. prove no &s;uch thing, as the lawfulne&s;s of additional In&s;titutions, in matters of Church-Polity, as a part thereof to the In&s;titutions of Chri&s;t. 1 <HI>Cor.</HI> 14. 40. is afterward in <HI>S. T. (Heb.</HI> 13. 17. hath alrea|dy been) con&s;idered. That becau&s;e <HI>Paul</HI> gives direction, in &s;ome ca|&s;es, to the Church of <HI>Corinth,</HI> 1 <HI>Cor.</HI> 11. 34. and tells them, <HI>the re&s;t he will &s;et in order when he comes to them,</HI> therefore 'tis left to Church-Go|vernours to in&s;titute, <HI>de novo,</HI> Ordinances and In&s;titutions of their own, and impo&s;e them upon the Churches, is &s;uch a Con&s;eq<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">ence, that would put a mode&s;t (concern'd) per&s;on to a blu&s;h, to review: we have no Apo&s;tles, none acted by an infallible Spirit as they.</P>
<P>In an&s;wer to the Objection, as propo&s;ed by us, we &s;ay, that the whole of it is built upon &s;uch fal&s;e &s;uppo&s;itions as the&s;e. That Chri&s;t hath not determined in the Scripture, how the affairs of his Hou&s;e &s;hould be ma|naged with decency and order, as well as commanded that they be &s;o; which is derogatory to the Scriptures perfection; to the Wi&s;dom and Faithfulne&s;s of Chri&s;t; diametrically oppo&s;ite to the Scripture (1 <HI>Cor.</HI> 14. 40.) in&s;tanc'd it; of which we give this brief account. The Apo|&s;tle having condemned them for their irregularity in the matter of <HI>Pro|phe&s;ying, ver&s;.</HI> 26. He gives direction touching its regular performance: And that, 1. <HI>Generally,</HI> ver&s;. 26. 40. 2. <HI>Particularly,</HI> by telling them how they ought to manage this affair in a way of decency and edifica|tion, <HI>ver&s;.</HI> 27, 28, 29, 30, 34, 35. That from hence a power inve&s;t|ed in the Church, for the binding the Con&s;ciences of men touching Ceremonies in Wor&s;hip, &s;hould be regularly deduced, is the fir&s;t-born of improbabilities.&mdash;</P>
<P N="1">1. <HI>Paul</HI> &s;peaking by an infallible Spirit, advi&s;eth the Church of <HI>Co|rinth, That all things be done decently and in order.</HI></P>
<P N="2">2. Tells them wherein that decency and order lies; therefore &s;uch as pretend not to &s;uch a Spirit, may, of their own heads, bind our Con&s;cien|ces by Laws of their own, in the Service of God, is &s;uch a <HI>non-&s;equitur,</HI> as will not in ha&s;t be made good.</P>
<P>To this Mr. <HI>T.</HI> pretends to an&s;wer, <HI>Sect.</HI> 4. The &s;um is, <HI>Chri&s;t hath left many particularities undetermined in his Wor&s;hip, and the Rule of his Church to be determined by Governours.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. If by <HI>particularities of VVor&s;hip,</HI> he mean &s;uch as relate to
<PB N="278" REF="143"> it, as &s;uch; of Church-government, &s;uch as are &s;pecial parts thereof, as the things mentioned by us are made to be, this hath been often denied and di&s;proved by us.</P>
<P N="2">2. He egregiou&s;ly trifles in the matters in&s;tanc'd in by him: though I think it horrible wickedne&s;s, not to be born, for Eccle&s;ia&s;tical Go|vernours by penal Laws and Statutes, to impo&s;e even tho&s;e things up|on the Churches; <HI>That it &s;hould be criminal at the Communion, not to have the Table &s;pread with a Cloth. That the Service begin with the recital of the In&s;titution, or otherwi&s;e;</HI> (as he &s;peaks) and be|&s;eech this <HI>Animadverter,</HI> if he re&s;olves again to draw the Saw of this Controver&s;ie, that we may agree in this, not to multiply impertinen|cies, and &s;o prove what we &s;ay. I know not any of the Sons of men that have power to bind my Con&s;cience, where Chri&s;t hath not. But this Mr. <HI>T.</HI> proves, becau&s;e, 1. Parents are charged to bring up their Children <HI>in the nurture and admonition of the Lord,</HI> Ephe&s;. 6. 4. 2. We are <HI>to pray for Kings,&mdash;that we may lead a quiet and peaceable Life under them. Ergo,</HI> (Antichri&s;tian Church-Officers, or) Governours Eccle&s;ia&s;tical have power to make and impo&s;e Con&s;titutions for Church-Govern|ment upon the Saints. <HI>Apage ineptias!</HI> That the Reader &s;hould &s;uppo&s;e &s;uch arguings as the&s;e worth the con&s;idering, I cannot be &s;o injurious to him as to imagine, whil&s;t I conceive him to be one not bereaved of his under&s;tanding. Much after the &s;ame rate that &s;ome admirers of the Gentleman at <HI>Rome</HI> are wont to argue for his Supremacy above Prin|ces; becau&s;e 'tis &s;aid, <HI>God made two great Lights, the Sun to rule the Day, and the Moon to rule the Night:</HI> Doth Mr. <HI>T.</HI> at pre&s;ent argue for the power of the Rulers, of the Church of <HI>England,</HI> in matters of Wor|&s;hip and Government, without authority from Chri&s;t.</P>
<P>Yea, but 3dly, <HI>The Bi&s;hop mu&s;t take care of the Church of God,</HI> 1 Tim. 3. 5.</P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. But this is a Chri&s;tian-Go&s;pel-Bi&s;hop, a Pa&s;tor of a parti|cular Church, which our Bi&s;hops are not.</P>
<P N="2">2. It remains to be proved, that his taking care of the Church of God, is his impo&s;ing in&s;titutions of his own upon them. A forced Inter|pretation; to &s;ay no more. We read <HI>Luke</HI> 10. 34. that the <HI>Samaritan</HI> took care of the wounded man, and <HI>v.</HI> 35, bid his Ho&s;t take care of him; yet I am per&s;waded neither the one nor the other, called Synods to e&s;ta|bli&s;h Canons and Con&s;titutions Eccle&s;ia&s;tical to impo&s;e upon him. The whole work of a Bi&s;hop is not &s;urely to Rule and Govern, he is to in|&s;truct, exhort, admoni&s;h, rebuke, with all long&s;uffering and mee<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">ne&s;s, to &s;trengthen the weak, comfort the comfortle&s;s, and in all to have re|&s;pect
<PB N="279" REF="143"> to the will and appointments of his Soveraign Lord and King, not to act exorbitantly, according to his own will and plea&s;ure.</P>
<P>What he adds by way of An&s;wer to what we a&s;&s;ert, that the conceit that Chri&s;t hath not determined in the Scripture how the affairs of his Hou&s;e &s;hould be managed, is a derogation to the perfection of the Scripture and the faithfulne&s;s of Chri&s;t, is already fully replied to, and removed out of the way. Only whereas he cites, 2 <HI>Tim.</HI> 3. 15. and intimates that the &s;ufficiency there a&s;cribed to the Scripture, con&s;i&s;ts in affording Doctrines of Faith, and Rules of Life, we crave leave to tell him, That his A&s;&s;ertion is, 1. <HI>Papi&s;tical;</HI> exploded by our Prote&s;tant Divines. 2. Fal&s;e and untrue; the Apo&s;tle expre&s;ly a&s;&s;erts their &s;uf|ficiency with re&s;pect to Church-Politie, to in&s;truct <HI>Timothy</HI> wherein, is no &s;mall part of his de&s;ign in this Epi&s;tle.</P>
<P>He goes on and tells us, <HI>That we give not a true account of the Apo|&s;tles di&s;&s;ertation,</HI> 1 Cor. 14. 1. <HI>He a&s;&s;erts not the Liberty of Saints in Prophe&s;ying.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> Of the truth of this let the Reader inform him&s;elf from <HI>ver&s;.</HI> 31. 'Tis not material as to our pre&s;ent purpo&s;e, whether by <HI>Prophe&s;ying</HI> he meant a particular gift of fore-telling things to come, or an Expo&s;iti|on of Scripture for the edification of the Saints, whether it were the one or the other, tho&s;e to whom the gift was given were to improve it, and this the Apo&s;tle expre&s;ly a&s;&s;erts to be their Liberty and duty.</P>
<P>He tells us, 2dly, <HI>It is not right that the Apo&s;tle,</HI> ver&s;. 40. <HI>repre&s;&s;eth his direction,</HI> ver&s;. 26.</P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> The &s;erious peru&s;al of the Chapter will evince the contrary to this dictate of his.</P>
<P>Yea, but 3dly, &s;aith he, <HI>If it were &s;o, there is nothing to prove that no particular wayes of decency and order, are permitted to the care of after-Rulers.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. We are an&s;wering an <HI>Objection,</HI> not proving a <HI>Po&s;ition</HI> or <HI>Doctrine.</HI> 'Tis enough that we manife&s;t that the Scripture produced warrants not Governours to introduce New Orders and In&s;titutions, an endle&s;s company of ridiculous Ceremonies, under the notion of <HI>Decen|cy</HI> and <HI>Order;</HI> which whether we have evinced or not, let the Reader judge.</P>
<P N="2">2. That he waves the Controver&s;ie about <HI>Ceremonies,</HI> as <HI>Cro&s;s, Sur|plice, Kneeling at the Sacrament,</HI> is wi&s;ely done, and had he wav'd the whole Controver&s;ie &s;ome think it had been no argument of his indi&s;|cretion, but his &s;o doing is no An&s;wer: He that will ju&s;tifie the pre|&s;ent Mini&s;try and Wor&s;hip of the Church of <HI>England,</HI> per&s;ons of &s;uch
<PB N="280" REF="144"> dull capacities as our &s;elves conceive, mu&s;t ju&s;tifie the&s;e too; They be|ing made &s;o nece&s;&s;ary a part of their Wor&s;hip, that the Wor&s;hip it &s;elf mu&s;t rather be omitted, than the&s;e devices of their Prelates (or rather the Arch-Prie&s;t of <HI>Rome:)</HI> a Mini&s;ter, though never &s;o able, mu&s;t not Preach, if he will not wear the Surplice; nor Baptize, if he will not Cro&s;s; nor may any either admini&s;ter the Communion, or receive it, without Kneeling: In which things, if they tran&s;gre&s;s, they are liable to be pre&s;ented, &s;u&s;pended, excommunicated.&mdash;I have no power to compel Mr. <HI>T.</HI> to plead for any thing that he hath no mind to plead for. In due time, for ought I know, he may as fa&s;t draw off from the tents of the&s;e men, as he hath of late been advancing towards them. He will not plead for their Canons, nor for their Ceremonies (at lea&s;t &s;ome of them) he tells us, <HI>p.</HI> 54. It may be the next &s;tep may be, nor for their Mini&s;try. To what purpo&s;e Mr. <HI>T.</HI> di&s;putes for the power of Gover|nors to In&s;titute Rules for Church-Polity, when he will not plead for tho&s;e they In&s;titute, I know not.</P>
<P>We manife&s;ted in <HI>S. T.</HI> the invalidity of this Argument; The Apo|&s;tle by an infallible Spirit advi&s;eth the Church of <HI>Corinth, That all things de done decently and in order;</HI> and di&s;covers to them wherein that <HI>Decen|cy</HI> and <HI>Order</HI> lay; therefore per&s;ons that pretend not to &s;uch a Spirit, may of their own head bind our Con&s;ciences by Laws and Rules of their own in the Service of God.</P>
<P>To this Mr. <HI>T.</HI> replies, <HI>He conceives none would thus unadvi&s;edly con|clude.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> And I believe &s;o too; but if they will argue rightly from this Scripture, thus mu&s;t they argue, as we have demon&s;trated. But he will yet prove the power of Governours in this matter, from 1 <HI>Cor.</HI> 14 40. thus.</P>
<P><HI>That which belonging to Decency and Order, is commanded in general, but not in the particularities determined, is in re&s;pect of Communities left to be determined by their Rulers. But &s;o is the Apo&s;tles command,</HI> 1 Cor. 14. 40. <HI>Therefore.&mdash;</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. Both Propo&s;itions are liable to exception. 1. Upon &s;up|po&s;ition that what in the Wor&s;hip of Chri&s;t belongs to Decency and Or|der is left undetermined, it doth not follow that it belongs to the Rules of the Church to determine thereof, which is to make the Rulers <HI>Lords over Gods Heritage,</HI> to introduce in&s;upportable Tyranny into the Churches of Chri&s;t.&mdash;They are the Churches Servants, not Lords, that are her Mini&s;ters.</P>
<P>2dly, The <HI>Minor</HI> Propo&s;ition is notoriou&s;ly fal&s;e and untrue, the
<PB N="281" REF="144"> Apo&s;tle is debating the bu&s;ine&s;s of Prophe&s;ying, touching this he lays down particular rules for <HI>Decency</HI> and <HI>Order,</HI> which he requires them to conform to. Let any &s;ober Chri&s;tian peru&s;e the <HI>Chapter,</HI> he will &s;ee this &s;hining therein in brightne&s;s; So <HI>Ambro&s;e, Aquinas, &amp;c.</HI> inform us. <HI>Decently and in Order, that no un&s;eemline&s;s or tumult ari&s;e. But this pre|&s;cription of the Apo&s;tle is not to be applied to any Epi&s;copal Traditions, but the Apo&s;tles own,</HI> viz. <HI>&s;uch as he had delivered to the Churches,</HI> &s;aith a learn|ed man. Thus the heat of this conte&s;t is allayed.</P>
<Q>Pulveris exigui jactu.</Q>
<P>We further reply in <HI>S. T.</HI> But let this be granted, &s;uppo&s;e that 'tis the Priviledge and Duty of the Church to make Laws and Con&s;tituti|ons for the binding of the Con&s;ciences of men in matters of <HI>Decency</HI> and <HI>Order;</HI> this Church herein is bounded by the Scripture, or 'tis not; If it be, then when it hath no pre&s;cription therein for its commands, it's not to be obeyed, and &s;o we are where we were before, That <HI>Decency</HI> and <HI>Order</HI> is to be determined by the Scripture. If it be not bounded thereby, then whatever Ceremonies it introduceth, not directly con|trary thereunto, they mu&s;t be &s;ubjected to; which how fair an inlet it is to the whole <HI>Farrago</HI> of <HI>Popi&s;h Inventions,</HI> who &s;ees not?</P>
<P>To this Mr. T. adjoyns, <HI>That he doth not plead, that it is the Priviledge and Duty of the Church to make Laws and Con&s;titutions for the binding of the Con&s;ciences of men in matters of Decency and Order.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> Very good! The Church of <HI>England</HI> Mr. <HI>T.</HI> thinks hath no &s;uch Power, Priviledge or Authority granted unto them, by the Lord Je&s;us; Then have they, whil&s;t they have &s;o done, invaded his Throne and Kingly Authority. The Pari&s;h Prie&s;ts whil&s;t they own, abet and &s;ub&s;cribe to what they have done in this matter are Co-partners with them in their iniquity, are really guilty of oppo&s;ing the <HI>King-&s;hip of Chri&s;t,</HI> which was the matter we have been all this while conte&s;ting about, and is now, in effect, granted by our wary <HI>Antagoni&s;t.</HI> We argue thus.</P>
<P><HI>Tho&s;e that a&s;&s;ume power to make Laws and impo&s;e the reception of them, upon the People of a Nation, be&s;ide tho&s;e (and without any Priviledge or grant to them by &s;uch given) in whom the Soveraign Power of Ruledom re&s;ides, are guilty of Rebellion again&s;t &s;uch their Rulers and Governours: Tho&s;e that abet them herein are guilty of the &s;ame Rebellion: But this the Church of</HI> England, <HI>with re&s;pect to Je&s;us Chri&s;t the onely Soveraign Lord and Ruler of his Churches, hath done, her Mini&s;ters have abetted her herein. Therefore.&mdash;</HI></P>
<PB N="282" REF="145">
<P> The <HI>Major</HI> cannot be denied. The <HI>Minor</HI> is evident. 1. That the Church of <HI>England</HI> hath made Con&s;titutions for the binding th<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter"> Con&s;ci|ences of men in the maters of Decency and Order; their Book of <HI>Ca|nons</HI> and <HI>Con&s;titutions Eccle&s;ia&s;tical</HI> evince; that they have no authority from Chri&s;t &s;o to do, Mr. <HI>T.</HI> grants: So that in what follows we are little concerned, partly becau&s;e he hath already yeelded the cau&s;e, and partly becau&s;e the particularities he &s;peaks of, be they what they will, are on|ly, he tells us, of <HI>Decency and Order, not determined in the Scripture.</HI> Now we deny any &s;uch particularities undetermined, we think it a mo&s;t fearful undervaluing of the Wi&s;dom of Chri&s;t, to a&s;&s;ert, <HI>That mans' De|vices can add Beauty, Order, or Decency to Chri&s;t's In&s;titutions,</HI> i. e. <HI>They are not Orderly or Decent without Humane Impo&s;itions.</HI> Nor &s;ee we how the&s;e can be pre&s;cribed by <HI>Canons Eccle&s;ia&s;tical</HI> to be obeyed, becau&s;e en|joyned by the Rulers of the Church, <HI>to whom we are,</HI> &s;aith Mr. <HI>T. in Con|&s;cience bound to &s;ubmit;</HI> if it be not the Priviledge nor Duty of the Church to make Laws and Con&s;titutions for the binding the Con&s;cien|ces of men in matters of this nature, and think that the latter part of his An&s;wer is in contention with the former. Be&s;ides we are yet <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">o &s;eek for a proof of this matter; That we are obliged to obey Rulers Eccle&s;ia&s;ti|cal, commanding us any thing in the Wor&s;hip of God, as &s;uch, under the notion of <HI>Decency</HI> and <HI>Order;</HI> and believe this very a&s;&s;ertion is con|trary to the Law of Nature and right Rea&s;on, which teacheth us, <HI>That God is to be &s;erved after that way that plea&s;eth him be&s;t: That <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">he Will of God</HI> (who is the alone Ma&s;ter of the Hou&s;e) <HI>not man is &s;olely to be heed|ed in the Ordering of his Family and Hou&s;hold.</HI></P>
<P>Mr. <HI>T.</HI> would take it ill &s;hould I pre&s;cribe Rules to him for the well-ordering of his Family, and that without his Licence, and that after I know he hath Con&s;tituted and appointed Laws him&s;elf for that very end. And yet I conceive he is not &s;o far above me, as the great and only wi&s;e God is above the mightie&s;t and wi&s;e&s;t of mortals. So that while&s;t he would avoid the horns of the <HI>Dilemma,</HI> that of the Poet is verified of him,</P>
<Q>Incidit in Scyllam qui vult vitare Carybdim.</Q>
<P>Nor do I &s;ee how he avoids the horns of the <HI>Dilemma</HI> by what he re|plies in this matter: The Rulers Eccle&s;i<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">&s;tical are either when they make Laws binding the Con&s;cience, indirectly bounded in their &s;o do|ing by Scripture, or they are not, <HI>i. <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">.</HI> they mu&s;t impo&s;e no Laws upon us without Scripture Precept, or they may. If the fir&s;t, we are bound to
<PB N="283" REF="145"> obey them no further than they are able to evince the ju&s;tne&s;s and righ|teou&s;ne&s;s of their Commands, upon the account of their being bottom|ed upon the Scripture. Then no Obligation lies upon us to ob&s;erve the <HI>Canons, Ceremonies</HI> of the Church of <HI>England</HI> any further than they can manife&s;t their Ob&s;ervation commanded therein; then &s;he and her Mi|ni&s;ters do wickedly to Excommunicate, Impri&s;on, Ruine us, for not yeelding &s;ubjection, when and where none is due. If the &s;econd, then whatever <HI>Ceremonies</HI> they introduce, under the notion of <HI>Decency</HI> and <HI>Order,</HI> that are not contrary to the Scripture, mu&s;t be &s;ubjected to, which is an open in-let to the whole <HI>Farrago</HI> of <HI>Popi&s;h Inventions.</HI> We fear the <HI>General Rules in Scripture, the Laws of Nature, right Rea&s;on, other laudable Cu&s;toms,&mdash;</HI>that Mr. <HI>T.</HI> tells us, <HI>mu&s;t be ob&s;erved in this matter,</HI> will be but a weak defence again&s;t them. For who &s;hall be judge of their con&s;onancy to the&s;e Principles? Shall every man be judge for him&s;elf? This our Rulers think to be ab&s;urd, and contrary to the Prin|ciples a&s;&s;erted by our <HI>Animadverter</HI> to be ob&s;erved. If our Governours, they will tell us, whatever they impo&s;e, 'tis con&s;onant to all the fore|mentioned Principles, that we &s;ubject to them therein. Ask our Bi|&s;hops they will tell you &s;o with re&s;pect to the whole of their <HI>Popi&s;h-Eng|li&s;h-Canon-Laws</HI> and <HI>Ceremonies.</HI></P>
<P>Ask Mr. <HI>T.</HI> and he will tell you little le&s;s, than <HI>That a blind obedience &s;hould be yeelded to them in undetermined particularities.</HI> Chap. 1. Sect. 1. Ask the Pope and his Concl<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">ve, they will tell you, <HI>'Tis con&s;onant to the fore-mentioned Principles, that we &s;ubject to all his Ceremonies:</HI> Nor indeed can we &s;ay of mo&s;t of them, that they are more di&s;&s;onant to right rea&s;on,&mdash;than &s;ome that are retained among&s;t us. So that the horns of the <HI>Dilemma</HI> are piercing the heart of the Cau&s;e, who&s;e defence Mr. <HI>T.</HI> hath undertaken.</P>
<P>We further argue in <HI>S. T.</HI> Yet were this al&s;o yeelded them, they were never a jot nearer the mark aimed at, except it can be proved that &s;uppo&s;ing a power of introducing <HI>Ceremonies,</HI> to be inve&s;ted in the Church, thence a power for the In&s;titution of new <HI>Orders</HI> and <HI>Ordinan|ces,</HI> the introducing of <HI>Heatheni&s;h, Jewi&s;h,</HI> and <HI>Super&s;titious practices</HI> in the <HI>Wor&s;hip of God</HI> may be evinced. And yet &s;hould all this be yeelded them, how will they prove the Con&s;titutions mentioned, to be the Con&s;titution of a right con&s;tituted Church, a National Church? the Church of <HI>England</HI> is not &s;o. Yet if all this were granted, where are the Con&s;titutions of this Church, that we may pay the homage to them that is meet? When was it a&s;&s;embled in the &s;ame place together, in its &s;e|veral
<PB N="284" REF="146"> Members, freely to debate and determine what Laws and Con&s;ti|tutions were fit to be ob&s;erved by them?</P>
<P>If it be &s;aid, <HI>That it is enough that it be a&s;&s;embled in its &s;everal Officers, or &s;uch as &s;hall be cho&s;en by their Officers, who&s;e Laws every Member is bound to be obedient to.</HI></P>
<P>We <HI>An&s;wer,</HI> But the&s;e Officers being not the Church (nor are true Officers of a right con&s;tituted Church, any where &s;o called in the Scrip|ture) I owe no &s;ubjection to their Laws or Con&s;titutions, it being pleaded that 'tis the Church that hath only power in this matter. It re|maineth therefore, (notwith&s;tanding what is pleaded in this Objecti|on) That the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters of <HI>England</HI> own&mdash;Laws and Con&s;ti|tutions that are not in any &s;ence of Chri&s;t's revealing, and therefore op|po&s;e the Kingly and Prophetical Office of Chri&s;t.</P>
<P>To which Mr <HI>T.</HI> 1. <HI>I do not plead for the Con&s;titutions of the Church of</HI> England.&mdash;</P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> But the framers of the <HI>Objection</HI> propo&s;ed do; Which if Mr. <HI>T.</HI> will ju&s;tifie, he mu&s;t al&s;o plead for them; but I &s;hall not co<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">pel him to a warfare he is not willing to engage in, he may take his liberty to &s;tand by and look on, but then he had done fairly not to have pretended to ju&s;tifie what he &s;carce &s;peaks a word to. The impertinent Que&s;ti|ons he &s;peaks of, are pertinent to the Objection and Objectors we have to deal with.</P>
<P>What he hath &s;poken of a National Church in an&s;wer to the <HI>Preface Sect.</HI> 15. we have removed out of the way by our Reply thereunto.</P>
<P>He tells us, 2dly, <HI>That the Church of England was A&s;&s;embled at</HI> Lon|don <HI>in its &s;everal Members, by Deputation freely to debate things, at was the u&s;age of the Synods in the antient times,&mdash;as the Kingdom is &s;aid to meet in the Parliament, &s;o the whole Church may be &s;aid to meet in their Synod.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. No doubt Mr. <HI>T.</HI> (and his Abettors) thinks he hath now &s;poken to the purpo&s;e indeed, but the emptine&s;s of the whole is &s;oon manife&s;ted. No Synods whether antient or new, can be &s;uppo&s;ed to repre&s;ent the Church, but upon the account of the free Election of the per&s;ons con&s;tituting them, and deputation by the Members of that Church which they repre&s;ent. <Q>Who&s;oever is &s;ent by the Church, re|pre&s;ents the per&s;on of the Church, &s;aith the Learned <HI>Whittaker, De Concil. q.</HI> 3. <HI>c.</HI> 3. <HI>p.</HI> 103.</Q> Yea <HI>Bil&s;on</HI> him&s;elf tells us, <HI>None are bound to the Council, but tho&s;e who &s;end to the Council. No Council doth bind the whole Church except the con&s;ent be general.</HI> Con. Ap. p. 49, 51. And <HI>Sa|ravia</HI>
<PB N="285" REF="146"> tells us, <HI>The Council repre&s;ents no Churches except tho&s;e who &s;end their Me&s;&s;engers to the Churches,</HI> Con. Gretz. p. 379. Yea in every rightly con&s;tituted Synod, the <HI>Laity</HI> (as they are called) are not to be excluded. 'Tis a Rule founded in Nature and Rea&s;on, <HI>Quod omnes tangit, ab omnibus tractari debet.</HI> That which concerns all, ought to be handled by all. Although the Prie&s;ts and Clerks do alone exerci&s;e Judgements Eccle&s;ia&s;tical, yet where a matter is agitated that pertains to the Church Univer&s;al, which con&s;i&s;ts not only of Clerks, but al&s;o of <HI>Laicks;</HI> it is not equal that the <HI>Laicks</HI> (or <HI>Lay-People)</HI> &s;hould be remo|ved from the&s;e deliberations; but all Decrees ought rather to be con|firmed by common con&s;ent: Which that it was ob&s;erved by the Apo|po&s;tles of Chri&s;t, the &s;acred Hi&s;tory te&s;tifies, <HI>Acts</HI> 15. And this is the Opinion of the mo&s;t famous Doctors of the <HI>Canon-Law,</HI> &s;aith <HI>Durandus De Sanct. Mini&s;t. Lib.</HI> 1. <HI>c.</HI> 11. He &s;aith more truly perhaps than he was aware, That as the whole Kingdom is &s;aid to meet in the Parliament, &s;o the whole Church may be &s;aid to meet in their Synod, and no other|wi&s;e. Now we know that the meeting of a company of Knights, &amp; Gen|tlemen at <HI>Westmin&s;ter</HI> is not the Parliament, the Repre&s;entative of the Kingdom; Their free Election by the Body of the People of the Nation renders them &s;o. In like manner the Convention of a company of Pre|lates and Prie&s;ts make not a Synod (by our <HI>Animadverters</HI> own Argu|ment) but their Election by the People, to meet and &s;it in Council to|gether as their Repre&s;entees, which the <HI>Synod,</HI> &s;o called at <HI>London, One thou&s;and &s;ix hundred and three</HI> (nor any National Synod ever &s;ince) had not; the Choice of the People was never minded, never was their con&s;ent required: So that in the &s;ence he takes the word <HI>Church,</HI> (which yet is forreign to the Scripture, as we &s;ay in <HI>S. T.)</HI> the Church of <HI>England</HI> was never yet concerned.</P>
<P>In what follows in this <HI>Section,</HI> Mr. <HI>T.</HI> him&s;elf will acknowledge I am not further concerned.</P>
</DIV3>
<DIV3 N="2" TYPE="section">
<PB N="286" REF="147">
<HEAD><HI>Sect.</HI> 2.</HEAD>
<ARGUMENT>
<P><HI>The pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters oppo&s;e the Kingly and Prophetical Office of Chri&s;t, whil&s;t they own Laws contrary to the Revelation of Chri&s;t. That they do thus, evinced by the induction of particular in&s;tances,</HI> Acts 8. 27. <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter"> Tim. 6. 15. Jer. 51. 26. Luke 11. 2. Mat. 6. 7, 8, 9. <HI>Whether Chri&s;t there in&s;tituted a form of Prayer.</HI> Rom. 8. 26. 1 Cor. 14. 15. Mark 14. 18, 22, 23. <HI>opened. That Chri&s;t &s;ate with his Di&s;ciples in the cele|bration of the Ordinance of breaking Bread, evinced. Of Kneeling. The rea&s;on of its fir&s;t in&s;titution. Its oppo&s;ition to</HI> 1 The&s;. 5. 22. <HI>mani|fe&s;ted. Of forbidding to Marry, and commanding to ab&s;tain from Meats.</HI></P>
</ARGUMENT>
<P>IN Sect. 6. Mr. <HI>T.</HI> proceeds to the examination of what is further pro|duced in <HI>S. T.</HI> for the manife&s;tation of the guilt of the pre&s;ent Mi|ni&s;ters, in their oppo&s;ing the Kingly and Prophetical Office of Chri&s;t, which we further prove, becau&s;e they own, &s;ubmit, and &s;ub&s;cribe to Laws, Con&s;titutions and Ordinances that are contrary to the Revela|tion of Chri&s;t. This we prove by particular in&s;tances.</P>
<P>They own and acknowledge, 1. <HI>That there may be other Arch-Bi&s;hops, and Lord-Bi&s;hops in the Church of Chri&s;t, be&s;ides him&s;elf.</HI> Which is con|trary to 1 <HI>Pet.</HI> 5. 3. 1 <HI>Cor.</HI> 12. 5. <HI>Ephe&s;.</HI> 4. 5. <HI>Heb.</HI> 3. 1. <HI>Luke</HI> 22. 22, 25. 26.</P>
<P>To which our Animadverter replies, 1. <HI>They do not acknowledge them in oppo&s;ition to the&s;e Scriptures.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> But that is the <GAP DESC="foreign">; Mr. <HI>T.</HI> may be a&s;hamed of &s;uch pitiful beggery.</P>
<P>He adds 2ly, <HI>They do not acknowledge Arch-Bi&s;hops over the whole Church, as the Pope, but in their own Province.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> This is not at all material, the authority of Arch-Bi&s;hops&mdash;over a Province&mdash;is as much again&s;t the Texts mentioned, as over the whole Church. 'Tis not the extent of Authority, Lord&s;hip,&mdash;that is therein condemned, but the thing it &s;elf.</P>
<P>3ly. He further tells us, <HI>They have no &s;uch dominion a&s;cribed to them over the Church they over&s;ee, as is forbidden,</HI> 1 Pet. 5. 3. Luke 22. 25, 26.</P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. This is again to beg the thing in que&s;tion. 2ly, We have proved the contrary.</P>
<P>He adds 4ly, <HI>They are not Lords in the Church&mdash;but in the Kingdom and Parliament.</HI></P>
<PB N="287" REF="147">
<P> <HI>An&s;w.</HI> Fal&s;e and untrue, I wi&s;h he &s;peak not again&s;t knowledge in this matter. 1. When inve&s;ted into their Epi&s;copal Sees, they are &s;tiled Arch-Bi&s;hops of &s;uch a place or Province, Lord-Bi&s;hop of &s;uch a See. 2. The Prie&s;ts &s;ubmit to them, pray for them as their good Lords. 3. They have Power, Authority, Precedency as &s;uch over the re&s;t of the Clergy, give forth Laws and Canons to rule and guide them, to whom they promi&s;e obedience at their Ordination. 4. They exerci&s;e juri&s;diction, authority over their re&s;pective Dioce&s;&s;es in their Eccle&s;ia&s;tical Courts, and Con&s;i&s;tories as &s;uch, all evident En&s;igns and Demon&s;trations of Lordly Dignities, even in and over that which they call the <HI>Church.</HI></P>
<P>That which he 5ly adds of the Eunuchs being called <GAP DESC="foreign">, <HI>Acts</HI> 8. 27. without contradiction to 1 <HI>Tim.</HI> 6. 15. where Chri&s;t is &s;aid to be <GAP DESC="foreign">, is frivolous.</P>
<P N="1">1. The Eunuch is not &s;aid to be <GAP DESC="foreign">, a Potentate with re&s;pect to the Church of God, over it he was not &s;uch, but with re&s;pect to the Kingdom of <HI>Aethiopia,</HI> where he was a Noble Man, a Governor under <HI>Candace</HI> the Queen: Our Bi&s;hops are Potentates in and over that which they call the Church of Chri&s;t.</P>
<P N="2">2. That any other be&s;ides Chri&s;t &s;hould exerci&s;e Lord&s;hip and Au|thority in the World, is not interdicted, as is their &s;o doing in the Churches of Chri&s;t, in the Scriptures mentioned.</P>
<P>He &s;aith 5ly, <HI>He hath not &s;hewed that what is acknowledged is a Law, Con&s;titution, or Ordinance, nor the Mini&s;ters own it by &s;ub&s;cription.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> True indeed, I did not do &s;o, for I thought it needle&s;s to de|mon&s;trate that the Sun &s;hines at noon-dayes. Are not the Offices of Arch-Bi&s;hops, Lord-Bi&s;hops Con&s;titutions and Ordinances? Have they not their Foundation and E&s;tabli&s;hment by Law? Doth not Mr. <HI>T.</HI> know it? Is he onely a &s;tranger in our <HI>I&s;rael?</HI> Of the Truth of this there are not many in the Nation that are or can be ignorant. That the Mini&s;ters own the&s;e (whether by &s;ub&s;cription, or otherwi&s;e, is not con&s;iderable, Mr. <HI>T.</HI> deals injuriou&s;ly whil&s;t he &s;ugge&s;ts, I &s;ay, they own the&s;e, with the re&s;t of the particulars mentioned by &s;ub&s;cription, when I a&s;&s;ert onely, That they own, &s;ubmit, and &s;ub&s;cribe to, <HI>i.</HI> &s;ome of them they manife&s;t they own by Sub&s;cription, others other wayes, but they own &s;ubmi&s;&s;ion to them all) is too notorious to admit of a denyal; They do &s;o in their Ordination, when they promi&s;e Canonical Obedi|ence to them, in their prayers for them, &s;ubjection to their precepts from time to time, tran&s;mitted to them, which they dare not tran&s;|gre&s;s. 2ly, That men may and ought to be made Mini&s;ters, onely by
<PB N="288" REF="148"> the&s;e Lord-Bi&s;hops, is we &s;ay in <HI>S. T.</HI> owned by the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters: which is contrary to <HI>Heb.</HI> 5. 4. <HI>John</HI> 10. 1, 7. <HI>&amp;</HI> 13. 20. <HI>Acts</HI> 14. 23. with 6. 3, 5. What Mr. <HI>T.</HI> adjoyns hereunto touching Ordination by Suff<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">agan Bi&s;hops, hath already been removed out of the way. How much they own a <HI>Presbyterian</HI> Ordination, (of which he &s;peaks) many good men in the Nation feel and find. Of the&s;e things we have al|ready &s;poken. That Ordination by Lord-Bi&s;hops is e&s;tabli&s;hed by Law, is known, and that exclu&s;ively to any other without them. Hereunto the Mini&s;ters &s;ub&s;cribe, <HI>Can.</HI> 36. The Scriptures in&s;tanc'd in prove this to be contrary to the Revelation of Chri&s;t, <HI>Heb.</HI> 5. 4. <HI>John</HI> 10. 1, 7. &amp; 13. 20. manife&s;tly evince; That who-ever undertakes to be a Mini|&s;ter of the Lord in his Church, mu&s;t be called of, &s;ent by him. (So was <HI>Aaron&mdash;) Acts</HI> 14. 23. &amp; 6. 3, 5. manife&s;t that the Way of the Lord's mi&s;&s;ion is not by Lord-Bi&s;hops, but by his Churches and People. What he tells us he hath &s;aid in an&s;wer to any of the&s;e Scriptures, we have re|plyed to Chap. 2.</P>
<P>We add in <HI>S. T.</HI> 3ly, <HI>That Prelates, their Chancellors and Officers have power from Chri&s;t to ca&s;t out of the Church of God, is owned by them, contrary to</HI> Mat. 18. 16, 17. 1 Cor. 5. 4.</P>
<P>To which our Animadverter &s;ubjoyns, <HI>He finds no &s;uch Law.&mdash;</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> It may be he is willingly ignorant hereof. This he cannot but know, that in the Name of Chri&s;t the Officers mentione<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter"> do ex|communicate out of the Church (&s;o call'd) of Chri&s;t. Do they do this without Law? Is it not one of their Church-con&s;titutions, that they may do &s;o? Do not the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters own them herein? Whil&s;t they cite, pre&s;ent, per&s;ecute their Neighbours for not coming to Divine Service, (as they call it) it may be for refu&s;ing to pay them a four-penny-due, in the Eccle&s;ia&s;tical Courts, even to an Excommuni|cation, who&s;e Act therein they afterwards publickly denounce and de|clare, once and again in obedience to them? What more evident&punc; The weakne&s;s of his an&s;wer to <HI>Mat.</HI> 18. 1 <HI>Cor.</HI> 5. we have already manife&s;ted.</P>
<P>We &s;ay further in <HI>S. T.</HI> That they own 4ly, that the Office of the Suffragans, Deans, Canons,&mdash;are lawful and nece&s;&s;ary to be had in the Church, contrary to 1 <HI>Cor.</HI> 12. 18, 28. <HI>Rom.</HI> 12. 7. <HI>Ephe&s;.</HI> 4. 11. The Officers in&s;tituted by Chri&s;t are &s;ufficient for the edification and perfecting of the Saints, till they all come unto a perfect man,<HI>&mdash;v.</HI> 12, 13. In what &s;en&s;e the forementioned, being not one of them of the In&s;titution of Chri&s;t, may be owned as lawful and nece&s;&s;ary, with|out an high contempt of the Wi&s;dom and Sovereignty of Chri&s;t, I am not able to conceive;&mdash;this is the &s;um.</P>
<PB N="289" REF="148">
<P> Mr. <HI>T.</HI> replies, 1. <HI>He knows not where this imagined Ordinance is.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> That there are &s;uch Officers and Offices in the Church of <HI>Eng|land</HI> e&s;tabli&s;hed by the Laws thereof, he cannot be ignorant: To &s;ay, They are Antichri&s;tian, or repugnant to the Word of God, is cen&s;ured by the Canons thereof, <HI>Can.</HI> 7. That the Mini&s;ters own, &s;ubmit to &s;ome of them, is known. The vanity and impertinency of Mr. <HI>T.</HI> his pleading for them (not to mention his perjury therein) is di&s;covered in our pre&s;ent Vindication of <HI>Chap.</HI> 3. from his exceptions again&s;t what is by us therein argued.</P>
<P>We &s;ay they own&mdash;5thly, <HI>That the Office of Deacons in the Church is to be imployed in publick Praying, admini&s;tration of Bapti&s;m, and Preach|ing, if licen&s;ed by the Bi&s;hop thereunto, contrary to</HI> Act. 6. 2. Ephe&s;. 4. 11.</P>
<P>Mr. <HI>T.</HI> replies, <HI>'Tis not contrary to Chri&s;t's Revelation&mdash;that they &s;hould be imployed in tho&s;e works.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;.</HI> 1. But when Chri&s;t hath in&s;tituted the office of Deacons for this end, to attend Tables, or look after the provi&s;ion, and nece&s;&s;ities of the Saints; That any per&s;ons may own an Office of Deacons in the Church, to be imploy'd by virtue of Office-power in any other work than that for which they are intru&s;ted by Chri&s;t, and called unto Office, without an advance again&s;t that In&s;titution of Chri&s;t, is ab&s;urd to imagine.</P>
<P N="2">2. That the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters own &s;uch an Office he doth not deny.</P>
<P N="3">3. What he &s;peaks of <HI>Stephen</HI> and <HI>Philip,</HI> he had &s;aid before, and to it we have replied already, and need no<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter"> add more.</P>
<P>A &s;ixth Law or Ordinance that we &s;ay they own&mdash;is this, <HI>That the Ordinance of Breaking Bread, or the Sacrament of the Lords Supper, may be admini&s;tred to one alone, as to a &s;ick man ready to die:</HI> Which is diame|trically oppo&s;ite to the Nature and In&s;titution of that Ordinance, 1 <HI>Cor.</HI> 10. 16. <HI>and</HI> 11. 33. <HI>Mat.</HI> 26. 26. <HI>Acts</HI> 2. 42. <HI>and</HI> 20. 7.</P>
<P>To which Mr. <HI>T. This is not ea&s;ily proved from the Scrip<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">ures in&s;tan|ced in.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> Whether it be or not, is left to the judgment of the judicious Reader to determine. I am weary in pur&s;u<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="2 letters">g him in his impertinen|cies. He grants a Communion is proved in that Sacrament, 1 <HI>Cor.</HI> 10. 16. but <HI>ver&s;.</HI> 17. and 1 <HI>Cor.</HI> 12. 13. prove the Communion to be rather with all Chri&s;tians; Of which yet there is not one word in either of the places. In <HI>ver&s;.</HI> 17. He &s;peaks of the Church of <HI>Corinth,</HI> that was <HI>one bread, one body.</HI> The other Scripture &s;peaks nothing of Saints Com|munion one with another in this Ordinance, 1 <HI>Cor.</HI> 11. 33. <HI>Acts</HI> 20. 7. he confe&s;&s;eth prove, <HI>That it &s;hould be admini&s;tred when all the Communi|cants</HI> (Church or Brethren, he &s;hould &s;ay) <HI>are come together.</HI> Whe|ther
<PB N="290" REF="149"> its admini&s;tration to one alone, be not diametrically oppo&s;ite hereunto, as al&s;o to the very fir&s;t In&s;titution of this Ordinance, <HI>Mat.</HI> 26. 26. let the Judicious judge. Though it be &s;aid, <HI>Act.</HI> 2. 46. <HI>that they brake bread from hou&s;e to hou&s;e;</HI> it doth not follow there was none be&s;ide the Mini&s;ter and the &s;ick man; the words import the contrary.</P>
<P>We manife&s;t further in <HI>S. T. That they own,</HI> 7thly, <HI>a pre&s;cript form of Words in Prayer; that a ceremonious pompous Wor&s;hip devi&s;ed <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">y man, and abu&s;ed to Idolatry, is according to the will of God, and may lawfully be u&s;ed under the New Te&s;tament Di&s;pen&s;ation;</HI> contrary to <HI>Mat.</HI> 15. 9. <HI>and</HI> 28. 20. <HI>John</HI> 4. 23. <HI>Deut.</HI> 12. 32. <HI>Jer.</HI> 51. 26. <HI>Rom.</HI> 8. 26. 1 <HI>Cor.</HI> 14. 15. By this pre&s;cript form of Words,&mdash;this ceremonious pompous Wor|&s;hip&mdash;the Common-Prayer-Book, <HI>Collegiat-Wor&s;hip</HI> and <HI>Service</HI> is in|tended. This I &s;ay is devi&s;ed by man, the owning whereof is contrary to <HI>Mat.</HI> 15. 9. <HI>and</HI> 28. 20. <HI>Deut.</HI> 12. 22. abu&s;ed to Idolatry: The owning hereof is oppo&s;ite to <HI>Jer.</HI> 51. 26. It is Ceremonious and Pom|pous, the abetting whereof is adver&s;e to <HI>Joh.</HI> 4. 23. as is the owning of a pre&s;cript Form of Words, to <HI>Rom.</HI> 8. 26. 1 <HI>Cor.</HI> 14. 15.</P>
<P>To which our <HI>Animadverter</HI> replies. 1. <HI>He &s;hould have told us what part of the Common-Prayer-Book was abu&s;ed to Idolatry.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> The whole of it is &s;o, being Wor&s;hip not appointed by the Lord, and u&s;ed in that Church, that is the mo&s;t Idolatrous Church in the world.</P>
<P>What he hath &s;aid in this <HI>Chap. Sect.</HI> 3. or in <HI>Chap.</HI> 3. <HI>Sect.</HI> 4. We have already an&s;wered. His great out-cry of our abu&s;e of <HI>Jer.</HI> 51. 26. produced to prove it unlawful to u&s;e any thing in the Wor&s;hip of God abu&s;ed to Idolatry, will &s;oon be evinced to be an empty &s;ound.</P>
<Q><HI>&mdash;Vox &amp; praeterea nihil.</HI></Q>
<P N="1">1. We have for our Companions in this Expo&s;ition, per&s;o<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">s not con|temptible for wi&s;dom and holine&s;s, who make con&s;cience of applying Scriptures, and abu&s;ing the Reader.</P>
<P N="2">2. Of all men Mr. <HI>T.</HI> i<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter"> the mo&s;t incompetent for the management of this charge, who mo&s;t egregiou&s;ly perverts Scriptures in this Trea|ti&s;e, contrary to former Interpretations given by him&s;elf to them, and to the plain intendment of the Spirit therein: As we have in part ma|nife&s;ted, and may do further in our <HI>Appendix.</HI></P>
<P N="3">3. He egregiou&s;ly abu&s;eth the Reader in this very pa&s;&s;age, whil&s;t he bears him in hand, that we expound the words of a prohibition to the <HI>Jews,</HI> That they &s;hould not u&s;e the &s;tones of <HI>Babylon</HI> to build a Temple to God at <HI>Jeru&s;alem,</HI> becau&s;e abu&s;ed to Idolatry, which we do not. Nor
<PB N="291" REF="149"> was it likely they would ever have gone about to do &s;o. <HI>Babylon</HI> was too remote for them, &s;uch a prohibition had been altogether needle&s;s and vain.</P>
<P>But 4. That <HI>Chap.</HI> 50, <HI>and</HI> 51.&mdash;are one entire Prophe&s;ie, that reacheth farther than the De&s;truction of Literal <HI>Babylon,</HI> even to the ru|ine of all the Scripture calls &s;o, is evident.</P>
<P>For 1&s;t, This Prophe&s;ie relates to the re&s;tauration of all the Tribes; <HI>I&s;rael</HI> as well as <HI>Judah, ver&s;.</HI> 4. 5. which to this day hath not been ful|filled. The ten <HI>Tribes</HI> (repre&s;ented by <HI>I&s;rael)</HI> being in a di&s;per&s;ed &s;tate, ever &s;ince they were carried away Captive by <HI>Salmana&s;&s;er.</HI> 'Tis true <HI>Judah</HI> after the 70 years Captivity did return; but what is that to <HI>I&s;rael?</HI> when this Prophe&s;ie is accompli&s;hed, they mu&s;t al&s;o be brought to their habitation, which is again repeated <HI>ver&s;.</HI> 19. <HI>And I will bring I&s;rael again to his habitation, and he &s;hall feed on Carmel.&mdash;</HI>This <HI>Carmel</HI> was the portion of the half Tribe of <HI>Mana&s;&s;eh,</HI> belonging to the ten Tribes, <HI>Jo&s;.</HI> 19.</P>
<P>2dly, <HI>When God doth this, the iniquity of Jacob &s;hall be &s;ought for, and there &s;hall be none.&mdash;</HI>ver&s;. 20.</P>
<P>3dly, <HI>He will then make u&s;e of I&s;rael as his Battle-Axe and weapon of War, to de&s;troy and break in pieces Kingdoms and Nations,</HI> ver&s;. 20, 21.</P>
<P>4thly, The <HI>Deliverance</HI> and <HI>Vengeance here prophe&s;ied of,</HI> is the i&s;&s;ue of the <HI>groans</HI> and <HI>cries</HI> of the Inhabitants of <HI>Sion</HI> again&s;t <HI>Babylon,</HI> ver&s;. 35, 36. But again&s;t Literal <HI>Babylon</HI> the Children of <HI>I&s;rael</HI> were not to cry, but the contrary, <HI>Jer.</HI> 29. 7.</P>
<P>5thly, Many material pa&s;&s;ages in this Prophe&s;ie are applied by the Spirit of the Lord to My&s;tical <HI>Babylon,</HI> as <HI>Chap.</HI> 50. 8. <HI>Rev.</HI> 18. 4. <HI>ver&s;.</HI> 29. <HI>Rev.</HI> 18. 6. <HI>Chap.</HI> 51. 6. <HI>Rev.</HI> 18. 4.&mdash;</P>
<P>6thly, The <HI>Babylon</HI> mentioned in this Prophe&s;ie, and the <HI>Babylon</HI> &s;poken of in the <HI>Revelation,</HI> is one and the &s;ame <HI>Babylon,</HI> differing at mo&s;t but as <HI>Type</HI> and <HI>Antitype. Babylon</HI> is a Type of the City and Seat of <HI>Antichri&s;t,</HI> &s;aith the Learned <HI>Ain&s;worth</HI> on <HI>P&s;al.</HI> 137. <HI>v.</HI> 1. This is evident to the eye of the under&s;tanding Reader from the en&s;uing Scheme.</P>
<Q><TEXT LANG="eng">
<BODY>
<DIV1 TYPE="parallel">
<HEAD>Jeremiah's Babylon.</HEAD>
<P><HI>Jer.</HI> 50. 8. Remove out of the mid&s;t of <HI>Babylon. And</HI> 51. 6. Flee out of the mid&s;t of <HI>Babylon,</HI> and deliver every man his &s;oul, be not cut
<PB N="292" REF="150"> off in her iniquity, for this is the time of the Lords vengeance, he will ren|der unto her a recompence.</P>
<P><HI>Jer.</HI> 50. 29. Recompence her ac|cording to her work; according to all that &s;he hath done, do unto her: for &s;he hath been proud again&s;t the Lord, again&s;t the Holy One of I&s;rael.</P>
<P><HI>Jer.</HI> 50. 39. The wild bea&s;ts of the de&s;art &s;hall dwell there, and the owls &s;hall dwell therein, and it &s;hall be no more inhabited for ever: neither &s;hall it be dwelt in from generation to generation; as God overthrew Sodom and Gomorrah.&mdash;</P>
<P><HI>Jer.</HI> 51. 7. Babylon hath been a golden cup in the Lords hand, that made all the earth drunken: the na|tions have drunk of her wine, there|fore the nations are mad.</P>
<P><HI>Jer.</HI> 51. 8. Babylon is &s;uddenly fallen and de&s;troyed, howl for her.</P>
</DIV1>
</BODY>
</TEXT></Q>
<Q><TEXT LANG="eng">
<BODY>
<DIV1 TYPE="parallel">
<PB N="291" REF="149">
<HEAD>John's Babylon.</HEAD>
<P>Rev. 18. 4. <HI>Come out of her my People, that ye be not partakers of her Sins, and that ye receive not of her Plagues: for her &s;ins have reached</HI>
<PB N="292" REF="150"> <HI>unto heaven, and God hath remem|bred her iniquities.</HI></P>
<P>Rev. 18. 6, 7. <HI>Reward her even as &s;he hath rewarded you, double unto her double, according to her works: in the cup which &s;he hath filled, fill to her again. How much &s;he hath glo|rified her &s;elf, and lived deliciou&s;ly, &s;o much &s;orrow give her.</HI></P>
<P>Rev. 18. 2. <HI>Babylon the Great is fallen, is fallen, and is become the ha|bitation of devils, and the hold of every foul &s;pirit, a cage of every unclean and hateful bird.</HI> Rev. 18. 22. <HI>The voice of harpers and mu&s;ici|ans&mdash;&s;hall be heard no more at all in thee: and no crafts man &s;hall be found any more in thee.&mdash;ver&s;.</HI> 8. <HI>&s;he &s;hall be utterly burnt with fire.</HI></P>
<P>Rev. 17. 2. <HI>With whom the Kings of the earth have committed fornica|tion, and the inhabitants of the earth have been made drunk with the wine of her fornication.</HI> And 18. 3. <HI>For all nations have drunk of the wine of the wrath of her fornications.</HI></P>
<P>Rev. 14. 8. <HI>Babylon is fallen, is fallen,&mdash;</HI>Rev. 18. 2. <HI>Babylon the Great is fallen, is fallen,</HI> ver&s;. 9. <HI>And the Kings of the earth who commit|ted fornication, and lived deliciou&s;ly with her, &s;hall bewail her,&mdash;&s;ay|ing, alas, alas,&mdash;for in one hour is thy judgement come,</HI> ver&s;. 11, 15, 19.</P>
</DIV1>
</BODY>
</TEXT></Q>
<P>The &s;um is; the Prophe&s;ie not being confined to Literal <HI>Babylon,</HI> but eminently relating to My&s;tical <HI>Babylon,</HI> or the fal&s;e who<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">i&s;h Church, in the <HI>Revelation,</HI> the not taking a &s;tone of her for a foundation,&mdash;
<PB N="293" REF="150"> (having no re&s;pect to the <HI>Jews</HI> not u&s;ing the &s;tones of <HI>Babylon</HI> in build|ing the Temple, which it is not like they had the lea&s;t intendment to do) points out the duty of the &s;piritual <HI>Jew,</HI> or <HI>Chri&s;tian Believer</HI> in his de|parture from the <HI>Antichri&s;tian</HI> Church, not to introduce any of her things, once abu&s;ed to Idolatry, into the Wor&s;hip of the Hou&s;e of God: which we cited this Scripture to prove.</P>
<P>Mr. <HI>T.</HI> proceeds and tells us, 2dly. <HI>That external words and ge&s;tures, are not contrary to</HI> John 4. 23.</P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> Nor do we &s;ay they are: this we affirm, That a form of words enjoyned, the Ceremonious pompous Wor&s;hip of <HI>England,</HI> managed and carried on in our <HI>Collegiat</HI> Churches and Chappels with outward pomp and &s;tate is &s;o. That which he &s;aith in an&s;wer hereunto, <HI>viz. That this Text excludes the Legal &s;hadowy-Wor&s;hip of the Law,</HI> e&s;tabli&s;heth what we &s;ay: For if a pompous, &s;hadowy-Wor&s;hip, once of the In&s;ti|tution of the Lord, be excluded by this Scripture, much more that which is &s;o, and of the devi&s;ing and e&s;tabli&s;hment of <HI>Antichrist.&mdash;</HI></P>
<P>In what he &s;aith, 3dly, <HI>That we conceive a form of Words pre&s;cribed and devi&s;ed by man, to be contrary to</HI> Mat. 15. 9. and 28. 20. <HI>Deut.</HI> 12. 31. he openly prevaricates; For though, as commanded in the Wor|&s;hip of God, it be &s;o; yet we rather refer tho&s;e Scriptures to the whole of their humane devices, in their Wor&s;hip and Service, <HI>viz. Surplice, Organs, Cro&s;s in Bapti&s;m, &amp;c.</HI> that have not the lea&s;t foundation in Scri|pture, and are therefore contrary to them. What Mr. T. dictates, <HI>That if no pre&s;cript form of Prayer, devi&s;ed and impo&s;ed by penal Laws, to be u&s;ed by man</HI> (for thus he mu&s;t &s;peak if he &s;peak pertinently) <HI>may be u&s;ed, then conceived forms of Prayer may not be u&s;ed:</HI> I de&s;ire him not to attempt the proof of, becau&s;e tis &s;uch an impo&s;ible task that he will never be a|ble to make good. That Chri&s;t hath commanded a &s;et form of Prayer, <HI>Luke</HI> 11. 2. <HI>Mat.</HI> 6. 7, 8. is fir&s;t fal&s;e.</P>
<P>For, 1&s;t, If he had done &s;o, it were utterly unlawful to u&s;e any other than the words therein contained, becau&s;e he &s;aith, <HI>When ye pray &s;ay, Our Father.&mdash;</HI></P>
<P>2dly, That which is in <HI>Mat.</HI> 6. is a full Interpretation of <HI>Luke's</HI> ex|pre&s;&s;ion, and Chri&s;t's intendment, <HI>viz. ver&s;.</HI> 9. <HI>After this manner pray ye, &amp;c. (Gr.</HI> <GAP DESC="foreign">, <HI>to this purpo&s;e.)</HI></P>
<P>3dly, We no where find the Di&s;ciples, either them&s;elves u&s;ing the form of words here mentioned, nor in all their directions given to the Churches, touching this important duty, is there the lea&s;t recommen|dation of the u&s;e of the&s;e words to them, nor are they pre&s;cribed as a matter of duty upon any of them.</P>
<PB N="294" REF="151">
<P> 4thly, There are not the &s;ame words, nor the &s;ame number of words in <HI>Mat.</HI> 6. 9. as in <HI>Luke</HI> 11. 2.&mdash;So that if Chri&s;t enjoyns us to the u&s;e of the words, he enjoyns us to &s;in; for if I u&s;e the words recited by <HI>Matthew,</HI> I &s;in again&s;t the injunction in <HI>Luke,</HI> and &s;o contra<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">ily.</P>
<P>5thly, <HI>Paul</HI> expre&s;ly &s;aith, <HI>We know not what to pray for as we ought,</HI> Rom. 8. 26. which were &s;carce con&s;i&s;tant with truth, if Chri&s;t had ti|ed us to the u&s;e of tho&s;e words in Prayer. 2. Impertinent, <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">e&s;tructive of the cau&s;e he hath undertaken the defence of, upon &s;uppo&s;ition that Chri&s;t hath pre&s;cribed a Form of Prayer to be u&s;ed, it follows not that others may &s;o pre&s;cribe and ordain, but rather the contrary. The pre|&s;cription of another form by them, ca&s;ts on his the reproach of <HI>imper|fection</HI> and <HI>in&s;ufficiency.</HI> Our Saviour hath pre&s;cribed us a form of Pray|er to be u&s;ed as a form, by the repetition of the &s;ame words, therefore we may u&s;e it, yea we mu&s;t, is an invincible Argument, on &s;uppo&s;ition of the truth of the Propo&s;ition: But our Saviour hath pre&s;cribed us &s;uch a form,&mdash;Therefore we may u&s;e another which he hath not pre|&s;cribed, hath (&s;aith a learned man) <HI>neither &s;hew, nor colour of Rea&s;on in it.</HI></P>
<P>But Mr. <HI>T.</HI> will prove, <HI>That a form of Prayer pre&s;cribed and impo&s;ed is not contrary to</HI> Rom. 8. 26. 1 Cor. 14. 15. For,</P>
<P>1&s;t, <HI>'Tis not &s;aid, the Spirit helps our infirmities by &s;ugge&s;ting the form of words, but by making known what things we &s;hall ask, and by exciting in us groans and &s;ighs that are unutterable.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. The words are, <GAP DESC="foreign">, <HI>The Spirit helpeth</HI> (as the Nur&s;e the Child, or as a &s;trong man him that is fainting under his burden) <HI>our &s;ickne&s;&s;es, weakne&s;&s;es, infirmi|ties.</HI> Whatever the inabilities and infirmities of the Saints are, he helps them in and under them, which Mr. <HI>T.</HI> doth ill to apply &s;olely to our inward weakne&s;&s;es, when the Lord doth not do &s;o.</P>
<P N="2">2. Hath he never known an unap<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">ne&s;s of expre&s;&s;ion to be upon him, in this and other duties in which he hath been holpen by the Spirit of the Lord?</P>
<P N="3">3. Is not &s;uch an unaptne&s;s one of our weakne&s;&s;es (to prevent which i<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter"> is pleaded, forms of Prayer are pre&s;cribed; which is directly to ju&s;tle out the Spirit and put the&s;e forms in his place) this the Spirit &s;hall help &s;aith the Apo&s;tle.</P>
<P N="4">4. Have not many of the Saints, under the &s;en&s;e of their ina|bilitie, &s;uitably to expre&s;s them&s;elves lived in a dependance up|on this promi&s;e, and found the Spirit helping their infirmities in|deed?</P>
<P N="5"><PB N="295" REF="151"> 5. Is it not as much our duty to wait for the Spirit to give us a Mouth and Wi&s;dom to &s;peak to God, a door of utterance when before him, as when we are &s;peaking to men.</P>
<P N="6">6. The A&s;&s;embly in their Annotations interpret it of the a&s;&s;i&s;tance of the Spirit, in re&s;pect of words, as otherwi&s;e.</P>
<P>But Mr. <HI>T.</HI> will prove the contrary; becau&s;e, 1. <HI>It's &s;aid the Spi|rit maketh interce&s;&s;ion for us with groans unutterable.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. Groans unutterable are either, 1. &s;uch as my words and expre&s;&s;ions cannot fully reach; or, 2. &s;uch who&s;e vertue and excellency doth not con&s;i&s;t in the number and flouri&s;h of words, as the prayers of Hypocrites, <HI>Mat.</HI> 6. 7. but in mo&s;t lively feelings and pangs of the Spirit; but that therefore we mu&s;t not u&s;e words in prayer, or that in &s;o doing we may not expect the help and a&s;&s;i&s;tance of the Spirit, is yet to be proved.</P>
<P>He adds 2dly, <HI>That</HI> 1 Cor. 14. 15. <HI>is &s;uch a praying in the Spirit as may be,</HI> 1. <HI>without the under&s;tanding of him that prayes; or</HI> 2. <HI>others, even &s;uch as he that occupieth the room of the unlearned, cannot &s;ay,</HI> Amen.</P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. The fir&s;t is not &s;aid; Mr. <HI>T.</HI> doth ill to impo&s;e his own crude conceptions upon the Spirit of the Lord: 'Tis &s;aid indeed, That his under&s;tanding is unfruitful, <HI>viz.</HI> to others, what he conceives they are not better'd by, becau&s;e brought forth in an unknown tongue.</P>
<P N="2">2. The words they &s;peak in an unknown Tongue, were from the a&s;|&s;i&s;tance of the Spirit, therefore call'd a praying in, or by the Spirit; &s;o that this is &s;o far from abetting what he produceth it for, <HI>viz.</HI> that the Spirit doth not &s;ugge&s;t words, that it proves the contrary.</P>
<P N="3">3. A manife&s;t evidence al&s;o, that a form of prayer impo&s;ed is con|trary to this gift of praying in the Spirit; for had they been tied to the former, the exerci&s;e hereof had been altogether &s;hut out; which being a Spiritual gift, was to be coveted by the Saints, <HI>chap.</HI> 14.</P>
<P N="1">1. As for what he adds, 1. That the a&s;&s;i&s;tance of the Spirit, <HI>Rom.</HI> 8. is meant of &s;ecret, private prayers, not of publick, is frivolous. 'Tis not to be imagined that God &s;hould promi&s;e his help in the managerie of private duties, and not afford it in &s;uch as are more publick, in the honourable performance whereof his glory is more eminently con|cerned. 'Tis, 2. fond to imagine that it &s;hould be meant of raptures and exta&s;ies in Prayer. 'Tis a promi&s;e made to the Saints in general, which they reap the daily fruit of, to their own Souls, and cannot be per&s;waded upon &s;uch ea&s;ie tearms to let go their intere&s;t therein. The&s;e Texts &s;tand diametrically oppo&s;ite to a form of Prayer, which renders the a&s;&s;i&s;tance of the Spirit, both as to matter and words, u&s;ele&s;s; both which are ready prepared therein.</P>
<PB N="296" REF="152">
<P> We &s;ay in <HI>S. T. That the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters own,</HI> 8thly, <HI>That wicked and ungodly per&s;ons, and their Seed are lawful Members of <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">he Church, and if they con&s;ent not willingly to be &s;o, they may be compelled thereunto, contrary to</HI> P&s;alm 110. 3. Acts 2. 40, 41, 47. &amp; 19. 9. 2 Cor. 6. 14, 17. &amp; 9. 13. Which is &s;o notoriou&s;ly known to be according to the Canons of their Church, (and con&s;onant to their daily practice) that I wonder Mr. <HI>T.</HI> &s;hould enquire after the Law or Con&s;titution of this in|&s;tance; and much more that he &s;hould &s;ay, <HI>He knows not where to find it,</HI> (as he doth <HI>Sect.</HI> 8.) He hath &s;ure read <HI>Can.</HI> 112. 22, 57. where he will find an abundant demon&s;tration of the truth of what we have a&s;|&s;erted.</P>
<P>He adds, <HI>None of the Scriptures produced prove that per&s;ons may not be compel'd by pecuniary mulcts to come to Common-Prayer, or the Com|munion.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. And why pleads he onely for the lawfulne&s;s of Pecuniary Mulcts? Do<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">h the Canon-Law extend no further? Doth the Bi&s;hops cruelty ari&s;e no higher? What means the &s;ighs of the poor and needy, who to the ruine of their Families have for many years lain in noy&s;ome Pri&s;ons for their non-conformity?</P>
<P N="2">2. Why pleads he not for the <HI>Spani&s;h Inqui&s;ition,</HI> the Stake and Faggots in the <HI>Marian</HI> dayes? he knows they have all the &s;ame bottom and foundation.</P>
<P N="3">3. Several of the Scriptures produced, prove that none but &s;uch as of their free will (being under no con&s;traint but that of the Spirit there|unto) de&s;ire to be &s;o, were Members of the Churches of Chri&s;t, (com|pul&s;ion whereunto we are &s;o fooli&s;h as to think to be hereunto contrary) as <HI>P&s;al.</HI> 110. 3. (a Prophe&s;ie of <HI>Go&s;pel-times,</HI> as he grants) <HI>Acts</HI> 2. 41, 47. 2 <HI>Cor.</HI> 9. 13.</P>
<P>From whence we argue; If it be prophe&s;ied of &s;uch as are to con&s;ti|tute the Go&s;pel-Church-State, that they &s;hall be a willing people, and we find only &s;uch in the time of the Go&s;pel taken thereinto, their &s;ub|jection of con&s;ent or willingne&s;s to the Go&s;pel of Chri&s;t, both with re|&s;pect to Doctrine and Di&s;cipline, being what the Saints rejoyced to behold, then compelling any by Pecuniary mulcts, or ot<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">erwi&s;e, to be Church members, is wicked and unlawful, contrary to the forecited Scriptures. But the fir&s;t is manife&s;tly proved by them. Therefore&mdash;</P>
<P>'Twere ea&s;ie to manife&s;t that this is a Principle decried by the Primi|tive Believers, with the Witne&s;&s;es of Chri&s;t in all Ages; A<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter"> <HI>Tertullian, Clemens Alexand. Lactantius,</HI> the Council of <HI>Sardis,</HI> of <HI>Toledo, Chry|&s;o&s;tome, Epiphanius, Ignatius. Con&s;tantine</HI> at fir&s;t made a Decree, That
<PB N="297" REF="152"> Liberty of Wor&s;hip ought not to be denied.<HI>&mdash;Eu&s;eb. Eccle&s;. Hi&s;t. lib.</HI> 10. <HI>c.</HI> 5.</P>
<P>The noble Lord <HI>Cobham,</HI> in an&s;wer to Dr. <HI>Walden's</HI> &s;peaking con|temptuou&s;ly of <HI>Wickliff,</HI> &s;aith, <Q>Where do you find in all God's Law, That you &s;hould thus &s;it in judgment of any Chri&s;tian man, or yet give &s;entence upon any other man unto death, as ye do here daily: no ground have you in all the Scriptures &s;o lordly to take it upon you, but in <HI>Annas</HI> and <HI>Caiphas,</HI> which &s;at thus upon Chri&s;t and his Apo&s;tles,&mdash;of them only have you taken it, to judge Chri&s;t's Members as you do; and neither of <HI>Peter</HI> nor <HI>John.</HI> 'Tis &s;ome of the &s;owr leaven of the Papacy yet left among&s;t us, the only prop by which Antichri&s;t's King|dom hath from the beginning been &s;upported and propagated in the World; the &s;ame Spirit animating it, that breathed in the Roman Pagan Empire, to the ruine and de&s;truction of multitudes of Chri&s;ti|an Souls. Whether, <HI>Acts</HI> 2. 40. &amp; 19. 9. 2 <HI>Cor.</HI> 6. 14, 17. prove that wicked and ungodly men are not fit matter for Church-Commu|nion, we will leave to the Judicious Reader to determine.</Q></P>
<P>We add in <HI>S. T.</HI> 9thly. <HI>That Women may admini&s;ter the Sacrament of Bapti&s;m, is owned by them;</HI> which is contrary to 1 <HI>Cor.</HI> 14. 34. 1 <HI>Tim.</HI> 2. 12. <HI>Mat.</HI> 28. 18, 19, 20. <HI>Ephe&s;.</HI> 4. 11.</P>
<P>Mr. <HI>T.</HI> replies, <HI>This was allowed in the Engli&s;h Church before the Confe|rence at</HI> Hampton Court, <HI>in the Reign of King</HI> James, <HI>but not &s;ince.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. Yet the Learned <HI>Hooker,</HI> (who is &s;uppo&s;ed to &s;peak the mind of the Church, and Mini&s;ters of <HI>England,</HI> as much as another man) after the afore&s;aid Conference, pleads for the lawfulne&s;s thereof, <HI>Eccle&s;. Pol. Sect.</HI> 62.</P>
<P>Yea, 2. I find no publick renunciation of the fore&s;aid erroneous Principle, nor is it any where (as I know of) expre&s;ly and avowedly condemned by them. And am per&s;waded, that upon enquiry it will be found, that it's generally owned by them to this very day. What he &s;eems to urge for the ju&s;tification of this practice, is trivial, <HI>viz. Philip</HI> had four Daughters that did Prophe&s;ie, <HI>Acts</HI> 21. 9. Mention is made of the Woman Praying or Prophe&s;ying, 1 <HI>Cor.</HI> 11. 5. <HI>Pri&s;cilla</HI> in&s;tructed <HI>Apollos,</HI> Therefore we cannot exclude them from private Teaching of the mo&s;t able, if they be fitted thereunto: Which no body that I know of denies, but that therefore they may Baptize, which &s;hould have been his inference, is &s;uch a <HI>non-&s;equitur,</HI> that de&s;erves no other an&s;wer t<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">an contempt.</P>
<P>We proceed, and in <HI>S. T.</HI> &s;ay, 10thly, <HI>That the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters</HI>
<PB N="298" REF="153"> <HI>own that the Lords Supper is to be received kneeling.</HI> Touching which we affirm three things.</P>
<P N="1">1. That the po&s;ture of kneeling is oppo&s;ite to the practice of Chri&s;t in his fir&s;t in&s;titution of that Ordinance, and &s;o it is if kneeling be di|rectly oppo&s;ite to &s;itting, which 'tis expre&s;ly &s;aid he did, <HI>Mark</HI> 14: 18, 22, 23.</P>
<P>To which Mr. <HI>T. Sect.</HI> 9. replies, <HI>The word</HI> <GAP DESC="foreign">, <HI>u&s;ed</HI> Mark 14. 18. <HI>&s;ignifies lying along on Beds.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. <HI>Dato non conce&s;&s;o,</HI> Yet Kneeling is directly oppo&s;ite to that po&s;ture; &s;o that that ob&s;ervation (were it true) adv<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">ntageth not his cau&s;e at all.</P>
<P N="2">2. The word (as it's known) &s;ignifies, to &s;it down, or to &s;it down together at Meat, <HI>Mark</HI> 16. 14. <HI>Luke</HI> 17. 37.</P>
<P N="3">3. 'Tis mo&s;t evident Chri&s;t &s;at with his Di&s;ciples in the Admini&s;tra|tion of this Ordinance.</P>
<P N="1">1. So &s;ay all the <HI>Evangeli&s;ts,</HI> Mat. 26. 20. Mark 14. 18. Luke 14. 22. John 13. 12.</P>
<P N="2">2. The <HI>Papi&s;ts</HI> them&s;elves confe&s;s as much,</P>
<Q>Rex &s;edet in caen&acirc;, turb&acirc; cinctus duoden&acirc;,&mdash;Alex. Alens.</Q>
<P N="3">3. Mo&s;t forreign Mini&s;ters and Commentators, (as <HI>Aretius, Brenti|us, Calvin, Beza, Deodat, Zuinglius, Pi&s;ca<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">or, Danaeus,&mdash;)</HI> together with our Countreymen, affirm as much.</P>
<P N="4">4. Till above 1460 years after Chri&s;t, we meet with no Council or Synod, no Rubrick in all the Lyturgies, that enjoyn people to kneel in the act of Receiving.</P>
<P N="5">5. Our fir&s;t Reformers in the time of <HI>H.</HI> 8. in their Treati&s;e touch|ing the <HI>Lord's Supper,</HI> de&s;ire that Chri&s;tian Princes would command and e&s;tabli&s;h a form of admini&s;tring the <HI>Lord's Supper,</HI> wherein all the Congregation may be ordered to &s;it round about the Lord's Table, as Chri&s;t, his Apo&s;tles, the Primitive Chri&s;tians did.</P>
<P>Nor is, 6. one main end of this In&s;titution, <HI>viz.</HI> our communion with Chri&s;t, and one with another, &s;o fitly repre&s;ented by the po&s;ture of Kneeling, as &s;itting. What el&s;e he mentions, is not worth the re|minding. Chri&s;t &s;at out of choice in the celebration of this appointment, for there was no con&s;traint upon him &s;o to do, he might <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">ave &s;tood, or kneeled, if he had plea&s;ed.</P>
<P>That we are rather to &s;ubject to Antichri&s;t's Canons, <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">nd Cu&s;tom in kneeling, than follow Chri&s;ts Example, &s;ober Chri&s;tians will not be over forwardly to be<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">ieve.</P>
<P N="1"><PB N="299" REF="153"> 1. <HI>Paul.</HI> 1 Cor. 11. 23. omits the ge&s;ture, becau&s;e then it had not been in the lea&s;t controverted.</P>
<P>2dly, That the po&s;ture of Kneeling is oppo&s;ite to the practice of the Churches of Chri&s;t for &s;everal hundred years after, to the time of the invention and introduction of the Popi&s;h <HI>breaden God,</HI> to the judgment and practice of mo&s;t of the Reformed Churches to this very day. The truth of this Mr. <HI>T.</HI> denies not. The &s;ayings of Dr. <HI>Burge&s;s</HI> the Bi&s;hop of <HI>Roche&s;ter, Paybody,</HI> &amp;c. in oppo&s;ition to the former of the&s;e, being without the lea&s;t tender of proof, and they them&s;elves &s;ticklers, for kneeling is not to be heeded. The contrary hath in part already, and may be anon more fully evinced.</P>
<P>We &s;ay further in <HI>S. T.</HI> 3dly, <HI>That the po&s;ture of kneeling, is contrary to</HI> 1 The&s;. 5. 22. <HI>It hath an appearance of evil in it, being a ge&s;ture u&s;ed by the Papi&s;ts, in the adoration of their breaden God.</HI></P>
<P>To this Mr. <HI>T.</HI> replies at large. Having acquainted us with &s;everal interpretations that may be given of the words, (too large to be here repeated); he tells us, <HI>That Interpreters of all &s;orts, apply it to the ap|pearance of evil, in practice; but whether the Apo&s;tle means it of that which appears evil to another, or to a mans &s;elf, may be doubted.</HI> To this latter he inclines, and gives his rea&s;ons.</P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> But what if a man &s;hould &s;ay, That what hath in it &s;elf really an appearance of evil, is to be ab&s;tained from, and that by this Apo&s;to|lical precept, and that the tryal and probation mentioned, is in order to the finding out of this? This renders all that Mr. <HI>T.</HI> hath a&s;&s;erted and laid down, impertinent and invalid.</P>
<P N="1">1. This be&s;t &s;uits with the context.</P>
<P N="2">2. None of the ab&s;urdities mentioned would follow hereupon.</P>
<P>Kneeling at the Sacrament hath a real appearance of evil in it &s;elf, were not mens eyes blinded with pa&s;&s;ion, cu&s;tom, &s;elf-intere&s;t, preju|dice, <HI>&amp;c.</HI> they could not but &s;ee it.</P>
<P>Whatever, not of the in&s;titution of the Lord, hath been abu&s;ed to Idolatry, the greate&s;t Idolatry in the World, hath a real appearance of evil in it. Kneeling in receiving the Sacrament hath been &s;o abu&s;ed. Therefore,&mdash;</P>
<P>That which Dr. <HI>Burge&s;s</HI> (afterwards cited by this Animadv.) &s;aith, is rather a confirmation of the truth of the <HI>minor</HI> Propo&s;ition, than other|wi&s;e. The <HI>Papi&s;ts</HI> he confe&s;&s;es receive it kneeling as we do; he de|nies indeed that in that very moment of time they intend to adore it. But this is the Doctors mi&s;take; they them&s;elves acknowledge they do &s;o, and prote&s;t that did they not believe, that the very Body and Blood
<PB N="300" REF="154"> of Chri&s;t, were really and carnally in that Sacrament, they would ab|hor to kneel at the reception thereof, as do the Prote&s;tants.</P>
<P N="3">3. We conceive that &s;hould it not be the duty of men to ab&s;tain from evil, till it appear to them to be &s;o, they might commit many evils without being ju&s;tly charged as Tran&s;gre&s;&s;ors, many practi&s;ing what is really evil (hath a real appearance of evil) under the notion, and ap|prehen&s;ion of an appearance of good.</P>
<P>Though, 4thly, An appearance of evil in any thing (that is indifferent) to a tender con&s;cience (anothers con&s;cience) is what obligeth Saints to ab&s;tain from it, as the Apo&s;tle argues in the ca&s;e of the <HI>Idolothyte:</HI> afterward reviewed by us, <HI>Chap.</HI> 9.</P>
<P>None of the ab&s;urdities mentioned follow hereupon. Not the fir&s;t, becau&s;e till I know the thoughts of the Brother, to whom it appears to be evil (upon &s;uppo&s;ition that 'tis in it &s;elf indifferent) I am not ob|liged to ab&s;tain from it: nor the &s;econd or third; for there are many things, the mo&s;t, all, that I am by po&s;itive Precept engaged to conform to, that either appear not to be evil to the Saints I conver&s;e with, or if they do, they being my duty, I am obliged to do it; b<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">t this is not our pre&s;ent ca&s;e.</P>
<P>Kneeling in receiving the Sacrament will not be pleaded to be my duty, by virtue of any po&s;itive Law, or Precept from Chri&s;t, which is al&s;o a &s;ufficient an&s;wer to his 4th rea&s;on. I &s;hall only add what I find delivered by one of their own, <HI>viz. Tho. Bacon, Prebend</HI> of <HI>Canterbury,</HI> in his Catechi&s;m printed <HI>Cum privilegio;</HI> Who writes thus, <Q>I could wi&s;h all &s;uch ge&s;tures were avoided, as have outwardly any appear|ance of evil; according to this &s;aying of St. <HI>Paul, Ab&s;tain from all evil appearance.</HI> He in&s;tanceth in the ge&s;ture of Kneeling at the re|ceiving the Sacrament, tells us 'twas introduced by the Doctrine of the Papi&s;ts, wi&s;heth it were taken away; for, &s;aith he, i<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter"> hath an ap|pearance of evil. When the Papi&s;ts had made, of the Sacramental Bread and Wine a god, and hath taught and commanded the People to wor&s;hip it as God, then gave they commandment, That all the People &s;hould with all reverence kneel unto it.&mdash;And b<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter"> this means the ge&s;ture of kneeling crept in, and is yet u&s;ed in the Church of the Papi&s;ts, to declare that they wor&s;hip the Sacrament as their Lord God.&mdash;Kneeling with the knowledge of Godly honour is due unto none but God. Sitting at the Lord's Table, he tells us is the mo&s;t comely ge&s;ture. 'Tis not to be doubted but Chri&s;t and h<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">s Di&s;ciples, and the Primitive Church a long time after u&s;ed that ge&s;ture.&mdash;</Q></P>
<P>It is added in <HI>S. T.</HI> Ioly, <HI>What &s;hould I mention the Con&s;titutions and</HI>
<PB N="301" REF="154"> <HI>Canons before pointed to, wherein 'tis forbidden to any to preach, not Licen|&s;ed by the Bi&s;hops thereunto, to marry or eat fle&s;h at certaine times,&mdash;directly contrary to the &s;overaign Edicts of Chri&s;t, and &s;ome of them evident Chara|cters of the la&s;t days Apo&s;tates,</HI> 1 Tim. 4. 3. <HI>from whom Saints are warned to turn away.</HI> 2 Tim. 3. 5.</P>
<P>To which Mr. <HI>T.</HI> replies, <HI>Sect.</HI> 10. 1. <HI>Of forbidding to preach, an|&s;wer is made,</HI> Sect. 2.</P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> And to that we have already replied.</P>
<P>2. <HI>Forbidding to Marry, and to ab&s;tain from Fle&s;h upon Politick con&s;ide|rations, or for the better ob&s;erving a religious Fa&s;t, may be ju&s;tified by</HI> Jon. 3. 7. Joel 2. 16. 1 Cor. 7. 5. Dan. 10. 3.</P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. Of ab&s;taining from Marriage, there is not the lea&s;t tittle &s;poken in the Scriptures produced.</P>
<P N="2">2. They are wholly &s;ilent of a &s;et, involuntary, compul&s;ive fa&s;t; and from fle&s;h only.</P>
<P N="3">3. Interdiction of Marriage, and ab&s;tinence from Fle&s;h, is bottom'd upon the <HI>Canon-Laws;</HI> per&s;ons are liable to be pre&s;ented into the <HI>Eccle|&s;ia&s;tical Courts</HI> for their contrariety thereunto: Di&s;pen&s;ations from thence may be obtained for money; a &s;ufficient evidence, that whatever per&s;ons pretend, the&s;e things are of an <HI>Eccle&s;ia&s;tical</HI> con&s;ideration.</P>
<P>4. Eating Fle&s;h is not ab&s;olutely forbidden, by the Papi&s;ts them|&s;elves, but on certain dayes; nor Marriage, but to certain Per&s;ons; yet to the&s;e the Character of the la&s;t dayes Apo&s;tates Mr. <HI>T.</HI> grants doth appertain; and why not as much to the Daughter as to the Mother, to <HI>England</HI> as to <HI>Rome,</HI> I am not able to divine? I am &s;ure the &s;ame times of ab&s;tinence both from Meats and Marriage, is enjoyned in both. The &s;erious peru&s;al of 2 <HI>Tim.</HI> 3. 5. will abundantly &s;atisfie the unpre|judiced Reader, that the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters of <HI>England</HI> are &s;uch, as are there &s;poken of. So then it being undeniably evident that the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters of <HI>England</HI> do own, &s;ubmit and &s;ub&s;cribe to Orders and Ordi|nances that are contrary to the Revelation of Chri&s;t, they do really de|ny his Prophetical and Kingly Office.</P>
</DIV3>
<DIV3 N="3" TYPE="section">
<PB N="302" REF="155">
<HEAD><HI>Sect.</HI> 3.</HEAD>
<ARGUMENT>
<P><HI>The pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters deny the Kingly and Prophetical Offices of Chri&s;t, whil&s;t they acknowledge another Head of the Church be&s;ide him. There is no other Head of the Church but Chri&s;t, proved. Of the Head-&s;hip of the Pope.</HI> H. 8. <HI>a&s;&s;umes the &s;ame, within his own Dominions. The te&s;timo|ny of the learned</HI> Fuller, Rivet, Calvin. <HI>Of Chri&s;t's Head&s;hip of in|fluence and Government. Whether particular Churches may be &s;aid to be the Bodies of their Governours? Whether the Apo&s;tles were the Heads of the Church? Ojections an&s;wered.</HI> Mr. T. <HI>his Exceptions thereunto con|&s;idered.</HI> 1 Tim. 2. 2. 1 Pet. 2. 13. <HI>expounded. Whether the Kings of I&s;rael were Heads of the Church?</HI> I&s;a. 44. 28. <HI>explained. The Govern|ment of the Church and State proved di&s;tinct.&mdash;</HI></P>
</ARGUMENT>
<P>WE further manife&s;t in <HI>S. T. That the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters deny the Prophetical and Kingly Office of Chri&s;t,</HI> thus.</P>
<P>3dly, Tho&s;e that acknowledge another Head over the Church be&s;ide Chri&s;t, deny his Prophetical and Kingly Office: But the pre&s;ent Mini|&s;ters of <HI>Engl.</HI> do own and acknowledge another Head over the Church be&s;ide Chri&s;t. Therefore.&mdash;</P>
<P>To which Mr. <HI>T. Sect.</HI> 11. <HI>The Author of</HI> S. T. <HI>&s;peaks darkly, and thence falls to conjecturing what I mean by the Head of the Church.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> To &s;atisfie this <HI>Animadverter</HI> once for all, By the <HI>Head of the Church,</HI> I mean the King and Bi&s;hops, that as Heads and Law-givers thereunto a&s;&s;ume unto them&s;elves a power to in&s;titute Laws and Ordi|nances of their own, and create Officers in the Church which were ne|ver of the appointment of Chri&s;t; (which <HI>Danaeus</HI> and others make to be &s;ome of the e&s;&s;ential parts of Church-Government, and they are in|deed &s;o) And if the owning &s;uch an Head-&s;hip be not a denial of his Kingly Authority, I mu&s;t profe&s;s I know not what is.</P>
<P>This Mr. <HI>T.</HI> denies. But 1. without giving us the lea&s;t rea&s;on of his &s;o doing. 2. In contradiction to what is affirmed by him&s;elf, <HI>p.</HI> 119. <HI>chap.</HI> 4. of his <HI>Theodulia.</HI> 3. 'Tis avowedly condemned by many &s;ober judicious Prote&s;tant Writers and Churches, as <HI>Rivet, Calvin, &amp;c.</HI></P>
<P>He tells us, 2dly, <HI>That no &s;uch Head&s;hip is owned by the pre&s;ent Mini|&s;ters, as the Pope claims.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. The que&s;tion is not whether &s;uch an Head&s;hip be owned by them as the <HI>Pope</HI> a&s;&s;umes; but whether &s;uch an one as is not a denial of the Soveraignty of Chri&s;t.</P>
<P N="2">2. With re&s;pect to the extent thereof it is acknowledged there is no
<PB N="303" REF="155"> &s;uch Head&s;hip owned by them: The King is not Univer&s;al Monarch of the Church.</P>
<P>Yet 3. For the kind of it, it is the &s;ame, <HI>i. e. Henry</HI> the 8^t^h having ca&s;t off the Popes &s;upremacy, re&s;ts him&s;elf with it in his own Domini|ons. Hence the learned <HI>Fuller</HI> in his Hi&s;tory of the Church of <HI>England,</HI> tells us, <HI>That the King became the Popes heir at Law.</HI> And it was indeed evidently &s;o.</P>
<P N="1">1. Did the Pope claim a right to that Title, <HI>Summum Caput Eccle&s;iae &s;ub Chri&s;to,</HI> The Supream Head of the Church under Chri&s;t?</P>
<P N="2">2. Did he account him&s;elf the Fountain of all Eccle&s;ia&s;tical Power?</P>
<P N="3">3. Did he undertake to make and di&s;pen&s;e Laws <HI>pro libitu,</HI> according as he &s;aw meet? So did <HI>H.</HI> 8. and his Succe&s;&s;ors the Kings of <HI>England,</HI> with re&s;pect to the Church of <HI>England.</HI> The Title of <HI>Supream Head or Governour under Chri&s;t</HI> is given to them. They are the Fountain of all Eccle&s;ia&s;tical Juri&s;diction, it being by Statute Law annexed to the Crown. The Bi&s;hops Courts ought to be held, all Proce&s;&s;es to go out in their Name: With a Synod of Prie&s;ts (or without &s;ometimes) they can make and di&s;pen&s;e with Laws for the binding or loo&s;ing of the Members of the Church thereof.</P>
<P>Hear what the learned <HI>Rivet</HI> &s;aith, <HI>Explic. Decal. Edit.</HI> 2. <HI>p.</HI> 203. touching this matter (taxing Bi&s;hop <HI>Gardener</HI> for extolling the Kings Primacy&mdash;) <HI>For he that did as yet nouri&s;h the Doctrine of the Pa|pacy, as after it appeared, did erect a new Papacy in the per&s;on of the King.</HI> And reverend Mr. <HI>Calvin; And at this day</HI> (&s;aith he) <HI>how many are there in the Papacy that heap upon Kings what&s;oever right and power they can po&s;&s;ible; &s;o that there may not be any Di&s;pute of Religion, but this pow|er &s;hould be in one King to Decree according to his own plea&s;ure, what&s;oever he li&s;t, and that &s;hould remain fixed without controver&s;ie? They that at fir&s;t &s;o much extolled</HI> H. <HI>King of</HI> England <HI>(certainly they were incon&s;iderate men) gave unto him Supream power of all things: and this grievou&s;ly wounded me alwayes, for they were Bla&s;phemers (and yet the pre&s;ent Mini|&s;ters avow the &s;ame) when they called him,</HI> The Supream Head of the Church under Chri&s;t.&mdash;Thus he, <HI>in Amos</HI> 7. 13.</P>
<P>What this <HI>Animadverter</HI> &s;aith, <HI>Hart</HI> the Je&s;uite acknowledgeth of the <HI>Pope,</HI> with re&s;pect to the whole Church, is for the mo&s;t part acknow|ledged by the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters of the King,&mdash;with re&s;pect to the Church of <HI>England.</HI> The Power which we mean to the Pope <HI>(the King and Arch-Bi&s;hop)</HI> by this Title of the <HI>Supream Head,</HI> is that the Govern|ment of the whole Church of Chri&s;t throughout the World <HI>(of the Church of</HI> England) doth depend of him. In him doth lie the power of judg|ing
<PB N="304" REF="156"> and determining cau&s;es of Faith, of ruling Councils, <HI>(or National Synods)</HI> as Pre&s;ident, and ratifying their Decrees; of Ordering and Confirming Bi&s;hops and Pa&s;tors, of deciding Cau&s;es brought him by Appeals from all the Coa&s;ts of the Earth; <HI>(all the parts of the Nation)</HI> Of reconciling any that are Excommunicate, of Excommunica<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">ing, Su|&s;pending, or inflicting other Cen&s;ures and Penalties on any that offend.&mdash;Finally all things of the like &s;ort, for governing of the Church; even what&s;oever toucheth either preaching of Doctrine, or practi&s;ing of Di|&s;cipline in the Church of Chri&s;t, <HI>(of England)</HI> which whil&s;t the <HI>Ani|madverter</HI> goes about to in&s;inuate as not appertaining to the King,&mdash;he advanceth him&s;elf again&s;t the Royal Prerogatives of his Crown and Dignity.&mdash;</P>
<P>Nor doth the Explanation mentioned <HI>Artic.</HI> 34. and 37.&mdash;contra|dict what we have a&s;&s;erted, Juri&s;diction and Power of exteriour Govern|ment is acknowledged to belong to him; which comprehends the &s;ub|&s;tance of what we are contending for.</P>
<P>In what follows we are not in the lea&s;t concerned; we abhor the <HI>Pri|macy</HI> of the <HI>Papal Antichrist;</HI> we deny not the Kings Head&s;hip and Supremacy over the Church of <HI>England,</HI> by the fundamental Laws of the Nation it appertains to him. We only infer from hence,</P>
<P>1&s;t, That the Church of <HI>England</HI> is no true Church, becau&s;e Headed by &s;ome one el&s;e be&s;ides Chri&s;t.</P>
<P>2dly, That whil&s;t the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters account it Chri&s;t's Church, and own another Head over it be&s;ides him&s;elf, they deny his Soveraign|ty and King&s;hip; they make another King over it, and there<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">y really unking him.</P>
<P>We add in <HI>S. T.</HI> as a proof of the <HI>Major</HI> Propo&s;ition, <HI>If the a&s;&s;erti|on of another King in</HI> Engl. <HI>that as the Head thereof hath power of making and giving forth Laws to the free born Subjects therein, be a denial of his Kingly authority (as no doubt it is) the</HI> Major <HI>cannot be denied.</HI> If Chri&s;t be the alone King of his Church (as &s;uch) he is its alone Head and Lawgiver; If he hath not by any Statute-Law e&s;tabli&s;hed any other Head&s;hip in and over his Church, to act in the holy things of God from and under him, be&s;ides him&s;elf, the a&s;&s;ertion of &s;uch a Head&s;hip carries with it a contempt and denial of his Authority; If there be any &s;uch Head&s;hip of the In&s;titution of Chri&s;t, let us know when and were it was In&s;tituted? Whether &s;uch a Dominion and Soveraignty over the Sub|jects of his Kingdom with re&s;pect to Wor&s;hip be granted by him to any of the &s;ons of men, ab&s;olutely or conditionally? If the fir&s;t, t<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">en mu&s;t the Church be governed by per&s;ons ca&s;ting off the yoke of Chri&s;t, tram|pling
<PB N="305" REF="156"> upon his Royal Commands and Edicts; for &s;o its po&s;&s;ible it may fall out, tho&s;e that attain this Head&s;hip, may do, as its evident many Popes of <HI>Rome</HI> (the great pretenders hereunto) have done. If the &s;e|cond, let one <HI>iota</HI> be produced from the Scripture of the In&s;titution of &s;uch an Head&s;hip, with the conditions annexed thereunto; and we &s;hall be &s;o far from denying it, that we &s;hall chearfully pay whatever re&s;pect, homage or duty, by the Laws of God or man, may righteou&s;ly be expected from us. But this we conceive will not in ha&s;t be perfor|med, and that for the&s;e Rea&s;ons.</P>
<P N="1">1. The Scripture makes mention of no other Head in and over the Church, but Chri&s;t, <HI>Ephe&s;.</HI> 1. 22. &amp; 5. 23, 29. 2 <HI>Cor.</HI> 11. 2.</P>
<P>To this Mr. <HI>T.</HI> an&s;wers, 1. <HI>We u&s;e not the title of Head, but of Su|pream Governour; yet that title being given to</HI> Saul, 1 <HI>Sam.</HI> 15. 17. <HI>and others,</HI> 1 Cor. 11. 3. Ephe&s;. 5. 23. Exod. 6. 14.<HI>&mdash;and may be u&s;ed.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. What <HI>We</HI> Mr. <HI>T.</HI> means, when he &s;aith, <HI>We u&s;e not the ti|tle of Head,</HI> I know not; 'tis the u&s;ual form of the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters to &s;tile the King in their prayers, <HI>Under Thee, and Thy Chri&s;t, Supream Head and Governor.</HI></P>
<P>But 2dly; <HI>Head of the Church,</HI> is a title nor to be given to any in that &s;ence in which it is given to Chri&s;t, this <HI>Animadverter</HI> grants.</P>
<P>I ask, Hath Chri&s;t onely an Head&s;hip of influence to his Church, (communicating vital Spirits unto the true Members thereof;) Hath he not al&s;o an Head&s;hip of Government over it? If he a&s;&s;ert the fir&s;t, he knows he is departed into the Tents of the Antichri&s;tian Papal Shep|herds, who allow indeed &s;uch an Head&s;hip to Chri&s;t alone. The &s;e|cond they divide betwixt him and the Pope, as Mr. <HI>T.</HI> &s;eems to do be|twixt him and the King.&mdash;If the &s;econd be owned by him, than none of the Children of men have an Head&s;hip of Government over the Churches of Chri&s;t, they are not &s;o the Supream Governors thereof, as to give forth Laws and In&s;titutions of their own, for the Saints to con|form to, <HI>For this title of Head is not to be appropriated to any, in that &s;en&s;e in which it is given to Chri&s;t,</HI> as &s;aith our <HI>Animadverter.</HI></P>
<P>Be&s;ides, 2dly, If the Kings of the Earth are the Supream Governors of the Churches of Chri&s;t, they have this Supremacy over them by grant from Chri&s;t, and that either ab&s;olutely, or conditionally; if the fir&s;t, then whoever a&s;cends the Throne of worldly Ruledom, hath a right of &s;upremacy over them, though they them&s;elves be &s;uch as have ca&s;t off the Yoak of Chri&s;t, are trampling upon his Royal Laws and Edicts; If the &s;econd, let us &s;ee the proof thereof from Scripture, with
<PB N="306" REF="157"> the conditions annexed to this their &s;upremacy, and we are &s;atisfied.</P>
<P>This we told Mr. <HI>T.</HI> before, but he was not plea&s;ed to take notice of it, That becau&s;e the Scriptures mentioned by him, attribute <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">he title of <HI>Head of the Tribes</HI> to <HI>Saul,</HI> and the Man is called <HI>the Head of the Woman,&mdash;</HI>Therefore the Governors of the World may be called the Head of the Churches of Chri&s;t, when that title of Head of the Church is given to none but Chri&s;t in the Scripture, is &s;uch a pi<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">iful <HI>non-&s;equi|tur,</HI> as Mr. <HI>T.</HI> will not (&s;urely) without blu&s;hing review.</P>
<P>Sir, <HI>Saul</HI> was con&s;tituted by the Lord King over <HI>I&s;rael:</HI> a Man to have &s;uperiority over the Woman, with allu&s;ion hereunto, they are called their Head by the Spirit of the Lord: But where is the Scripture con&s;titution of the Superiority, King&s;hip of any over the Church be&s;ide Chri&s;t? Among&s;t whom he &s;aith, <HI>He will have no &s;uch thing.</HI></P>
<P>Where is it that any have this title of Head of the Church a&s;cribed to them by the Holy Gho&s;t? This mu&s;t be proved, or you mu&s;t acknow|ledge the impertinency and invalidity of their pre&s;ent arguing; the be&s;t of it is, whether you will be &s;o ingenuous or no, 'tis but a Fig-leaf covering, that every eye can di&s;cern your nakedne&s;s through it.</P>
<P>We &s;ay in <HI>S. T.</HI> 2dly, <HI>If there be any other Head of the Church be&s;ides Chri&s;t, he mu&s;t be either within or without the Church.</HI></P>
<P>The latter will not be affirmed; Chri&s;t had not &s;ure &s;o little re&s;pect to his Flock as to appoint Wolves and Lyons to their Governors and Guides in matters Eccle&s;ia&s;tical: nor can the former, for all in the Church are Brethren, have no Dominion or Authority over each others Faith or Con&s;cience, <HI>Luke</HI> 22. 25.</P>
<P>Mr. <HI>T.</HI> replies, <HI>Though all in the Church are Brethren, yet all are not equal, nor doth</HI> Luke 22. 25. <HI>prove it.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 'Tis enough for our pre&s;ent purpo&s;e, that all in the Church are thus far equal, that being all brethren, none may exerci&s;e any Rule|dom or Authority over the re&s;t, without their con&s;ent, nor any &s;uch Ruledom as to command in ca&s;e of Wor&s;hip where Chri&s;t is &s;ilent, which is at lea&s;t a&s;&s;erted, <HI>Luke</HI> 22. 25. and Mr. <HI>T.</HI> may confute it when he is able. Of this Scripture we have &s;poken at large, <HI>Chap.</HI> 4. and of <HI>Rom.</HI> 13. 1. <HI>Heb.</HI> 13. 17. frequently; and have fully removed out of the way what is here repeated touching the Laws of Rulers, and their obligation upon Con&s;cience&mdash;nor need we add more.</P>
<P>We &s;ay further in <HI>S. T.</HI> 3dly, <HI>If any other be Head of the Church, but Chri&s;t, then is the Church the body of &s;ome others be&s;ide Chri&s;t; but this is ab&s;urd and fal&s;e, not to &s;ay impious and bla&s;phemous.</HI></P>
<PB N="307" REF="157">
<P> To which Mr. <HI>T. Particular Churches, in re&s;pect of that mini&s;tration and government which their Governors afford them, may be &s;aid to be the bodies of their Governors.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> Boldly ventured however! 1. The Church is frequently &s;aid to be the Body of Chri&s;t, 1 <HI>Cor.</HI> 12. 12, 27. <HI>Ephe&s;.</HI> 5. 30, 32. <HI>Col.</HI> 1. 18.</P>
<P>2dly, Is no where &s;aid to be the body of any other, not of <HI>Peter, Paul,&mdash;</HI>much le&s;s of <HI>Nero, Domitian,</HI> (the Supream Governours of the Empire at that day.) By what Authority Mr. <HI>T.</HI> takes the body of Chri&s;t and joyns it to another Head be&s;ides him&s;elf, I am yet to learn.</P>
<P>3dly, The Church is call'd his <HI>Body,</HI> upon the account of that glori|ous nearne&s;s and union is betwixt Chri&s;t and them; the reception of Spirits, life from him, their ab&s;olute indi&s;putable &s;ubjection to him. Is the Church the body of any other with re&s;pect hereunto be&s;ide Chri&s;t? Where is it &s;o called? Is it united, or in &s;ubjection to any other be&s;ides Chri&s;t, as the Woman is to the Man, upon the account whereof &s;he is call'd his body, <HI>Ephe&s;.</HI> 5. 28. (his, I &s;ay not anothers) That Mr. <HI>T.</HI> &s;hould a&s;&s;ert, <HI>That upon the &s;ame account the Church may be called the body of &s;ome other be&s;ide Chri&s;t?</HI></P>
<P>We add, 4thly, There was no Head of the Church in the Apo&s;tles dayes but Chri&s;t. That upon any account the Apo&s;tles or Elders were Heads of the Church; that in re&s;pect of mini&s;tration and government they were &s;o, as our Dictator &s;peaks, is notoriou&s;ly fal&s;e.</P>
<P N="1">1. There is not the lea&s;t intimation of any &s;uch thing in the N. T. Nor, 2. any Language or Speech of any Head&s;hip over the Church, but Chri&s;ts, till the ri&s;e of that man of &s;in, who prophaned the Crown of our Lord, by ca&s;ting it to the ground.</P>
<P N="3">3. We find not the Apo&s;tles talking of them&s;elves at this lofty rate; they confe&s;s them&s;elves to be the Brethren of the Saints, their Ser|vants for Chri&s;ts &s;ake.</P>
<P N="4">4. Why talks he of Heads of the Church? Doth the Scripture men|tion any more than one? Is this the Language of Chri&s;t or Antichri&s;t? Will he make the Church a two-headed Mon&s;ter; but</P>
<Q>Qu&ocirc; pa&s;&s;im &s;equerer corvum?</Q>
<P>I am &s;orry, and a&s;hamed, that &s;o learned a Per&s;on as Mr. <HI>T.</HI> &s;hould &s;uffer &s;uch trifles to drop from his Pen.</P>
<P>We proceed in <HI>S. T.</HI> and &s;ay, 5thly, <HI>If any be Head of the Church be&s;ide Chri&s;t, they either have their Head&s;hip from an original right &s;eated</HI>
<PB N="308" REF="158"> <HI>in them&s;elves, or by donation from Chri&s;t.</HI> To a&s;&s;ert the fir&s;t, were no le&s;s than bla&s;phemy: if the &s;econd, let them &s;hew when and where, and how they came to be inve&s;ted in &s;uch a right, and this controver&s;ie will be at an end.</P>
<P>To which our <HI>Animadverter</HI> an&s;wers, <HI>Their Head&s;hip is by donation from Chri&s;t, in the places often alleadged.</HI> He means, <HI>Rom.</HI> 13. 1. <HI>Heb.</HI> 13. 17. That they refu&s;e to afford &s;helter to this dying Cau&s;e, we have already manife&s;ted.</P>
<P>We add 6thly, <HI>He that is a&s;&s;erted in Scripture to be Head of the Church, is &s;aid to govern, feed, and nouri&s;h it to eternal Life, is he<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter"> Husband,</HI> 2 Cor. 11. 2. In which &s;en&s;e none of the Sons of men can be the Head thereof, and yet of any other Head, the Scripture is wholly &s;ilent. But of this matter thus far. It cannot by any &s;ober per&s;on be denied, but an owning a vi&s;ible Head over the Church, having power of making Laws, with re&s;pect to Wor&s;hip, (&s;uch an Head&s;hip not being of the in&s;titution of Chri&s;t) mu&s;t needs be a denyal of his Sovereign Authori|ty and Power.</P>
<P>To which Mr. <HI>T.</HI> replies, <HI>None can be &s;aid to be the Husband of the Church as Chri&s;t is, or to govern, feed, and nouri&s;h as he, by the influence of his Spirit, yet the Apo&s;tles, and &s;uch as convert and build up Souls, may in a qualified &s;en&s;e be &s;aid &s;o to do, as,</HI> 1 The&s;. 2. 7, 11. <HI>the Apo&s;tle &s;aith of him&s;elf.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. This is a meer Dictate without proof, and &s;o fit to be re|jected; the Apo&s;tle &s;aith not any &s;uch thing, 1 <HI>The&s;.</HI> 2. 7, 11.</P>
<P N="2">2. He tells us not in what qualified &s;en&s;e they may be &s;aid &s;o to do. Nor, 3. doth he &s;hew us where any one is &s;aid to be the Husband of the Church be&s;ide Chri&s;t, nor indeed can he; &s;o that the Argument a|bides firm. He that is in the Scripture. &s;aid to be the Head of the Church, is al&s;o &s;aid to be her Husband, to govern, feed and nouri&s;h her to eternal Life; but Chri&s;t alone is, and doth &s;o. Therefore,&mdash;</P>
<P>We add, That the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters do own &s;uch an Head&s;hip, is un|deniable, witne&s;s their Sub&s;cription, Oath, Conformity in Wor&s;hip to Laws and Edicts made and given forth by the &s;ons of men as Heads-of the Church, which are not onely forreign to, but lift up them&s;elves a|gain&s;t the Royal In&s;titutions of Chri&s;t. This being matter of fact, the individuals charged herewith mu&s;t prove them&s;elves not guilty, or ma|nife&s;t that what they do is lawful. The former being notoriou&s;ly known to be true, the latter mu&s;t be in&s;i&s;ted on.</P>
<P>Mr. <HI>T.</HI> an&s;wers, <HI>Sect.</HI> 12. 1. <HI>He cannot ju&s;tifie all the pre&s;ent Mini|&s;ters do in their &s;ub&s;cription and conformity.</HI></P>
<PB N="309" REF="158">
<P> <HI>An&s;w.</HI> 'Tis good to be ingenuous, we know he cannot,</P>
<Q><L>Longa dies citior brumali tempore, noxque</L>
<L>Tardior Hyberna &s;ol&s;titialis erit.</L></Q>
<P>Nor is there any one will compel him to more than he hath a will to.</P>
<P>He adds, 2. <HI>The Mini&s;ters may own Laws&mdash;given forth by men (as the Governors and Heads of the Church) that lift up them&s;elves in oppo&s;iti|on again&s;t the In&s;titutions of Chri&s;t, and yet not deny his Kingly Office. Be|cau&s;e</HI> 1. <HI>this may be done out of weakne&s;s or error.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> This is already removed out of the way. 2dly, A man may &s;ub&s;cribe, yeeld &s;ubjection to the commands of a U&s;urper, (as &s;ome did to <HI>Richard</HI> the Third, who acknowledged him not to be King of right, and &s;ome do to the Decrees of the <HI>Trent</HI> Council, or the Popes Edicts) and yet not own his power.</P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. This is &s;uch a legerdemain, &s;o like to tho&s;e Je&s;uitical equivocations condemned by our <HI>Prote&s;tant</HI> Writers, that I under&s;tand not, nor de&s;ire to be acquainted with.</P>
<P N="2">2. By my &s;ub&s;cription to the Laws mentioned, and promi&s;ing obe|dience to &s;ome of the formers of them, as my Reverend Fathers in God, I avowedly own their power, except I have learned
<Q>Fallere mille modis, nec non intexere fraudes.</Q> to u&s;e &s;uch hard di&s;&s;imulation and treachery as an Heathen would abhor.</P>
<P N="3">3. Will Mr. <HI>T.</HI> &s;tand by this plea, will he undertake the Mini&s;ters of <HI>England</HI> &s;hall do &s;o? If not, Why doth he multiply words to de|ceive the Reader; if he will, he egregiou&s;ly &s;candalizeth the King and Bi&s;hops, &s;uppo&s;ing them to be U&s;urpers. Though he hath taken the Oaths of Allegiance and Supremacy, he hath not thereby manife&s;ted his loyalty in acknowledging him to be King of right, but onely hath &s;ubmitted for peace-&s;ake; to what, though he owns not to be ju&s;t or right, he cannot remedy. If the Laws of <HI>Trent</HI> Council, or the Popes Edicts &s;hould be e&s;tabli&s;hed among&s;t us, (which God forbid) Mr. <HI>T.</HI> can it &s;eems &s;ub&s;cribe to them, without owning them as ju&s;t, or the power impo&s;ing them; he &s;eems well acquainted with the cur&s;ed carnal Machiavellian principle of &s;elf-intere&s;t and pre&s;ervation,</P>
<Q>Cum fueris Romae Romano vivito more.</Q>
<P>No need of taking up the Cro&s;s daily to follow Chri&s;t, to &s;ub&s;cribe
<PB N="310" REF="159"> to what is uppermo&s;t (which we may do without owning it, or the Autho|rity by which it is e&s;tabli&s;hed) is better and &s;afer.</P>
<P>We proceed in <HI>S. T.</HI> to the an&s;wering of &s;ome Objections that lay in our way; as, 1. <HI>That the Head&s;hip owned by them, is an Head&s;hip under Chri&s;t.</HI></P>
<P>To which we An&s;wer, 1. But this Head&s;hip is either of Chri&s;ts ap|pointment, or 'tis not; if it be, let it be &s;hewen where it was in&s;titu|ted by him.&mdash;If it be not the a&s;&s;ertion and owning of &s;uch an Head|&s;hip, is a denyal of Chri&s;t's Authority.</P>
<P>To this Mr. <HI>T.</HI> replies, <HI>Sect.</HI> 13. <HI>The tearm, Head of the Church, is not u&s;ed in the Oath of Supremacy,</HI> (this we have already an&s;wered in this <HI>Sect.</HI> and need not &s;ay more) <HI>but Supream Governour: And this is agreeable to</HI> Rom. 13. 1. 2 Tim. 2. 2. 1 Pet. 2. 13.</P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> By Supream Governour over the Church of Chri&s;t, is meant one that hath power &s;eated in him for the pre&s;cribing Rules in things undetermined (as Mr. <HI>T.</HI> grants) the e&s;tabli&s;hing of Laws, In&s;tituti|ons not of the appointment of Chri&s;t (contrary thereunto) who is the Fountain of all Eccle&s;ia&s;tical Juri&s;diction and Church-Politie. That Mr. <HI>T.</HI> &s;ees &s;uch a Supream Governour to be agreeable to the Scrip|tures produced by him, mu&s;t be imputed to that acutene&s;s of his where|by he may be &s;uppo&s;ed to t<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">an&s;cend the re&s;t of his Neighbours.</P>
<Q>Ille &s;olus &s;apiens, reliqui velut umbra vagantur.</Q>
<P>Of <HI>Rom.</HI> 13. 1. we have already &s;poken. Though the Church be com|prized under every &s;oul, yet it doth not follow that Magi&s;trates are the Heads, or &s;uch Supream Governours of the Church as are inve&s;ted with power for the e&s;tabli&s;hing and in&s;tituting of parts of Wor&s;hip, or com|manding them in any thing relating to Wor&s;hip, as &s;uch; of which the Apo&s;tle &s;peaks not a tittle in that place. Civil &s;ubjection as &s;ubjects of the Empire, is the utmo&s;t can rationally from thence be argued for. Tho&s;e that were then Rulers and Governours, were &s;uch as <HI>Nero, Do|mitian,&mdash;</HI>who per&s;ecuted the Church, de&s;ign'd to root the Wor|&s;hip of Chri&s;t out of the world; were Idolaters, e&s;tabli&s;he<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter"> by force and violence an Heatheni&s;h Idolatrous Wor&s;hip, whom Chri&s;t never in|tended to intru&s;t with any &s;uch power: which is a &s;ufficient an&s;wer to 1 <HI>Pet.</HI> 2. 13. which is exponed by our <HI>Annotat. Of Civil Government.</HI> 1 <HI>Tim.</HI> 2. 2. is impertinently cited, That becau&s;e the Apo&s;tle there ex|horts that <HI>Prayers be made for Kings,&mdash;</HI>therefore they have Eccle&s;i|a&s;tical Power and Soveraignty committed to them over the Churches of Chri&s;t, is a con&s;equence that the very reciting of is confutation &s;uffici|ent.
<PB N="311" REF="159"> When I a&s;cribe (as he talks) as much power to the Church as he doth to the King and Bi&s;hops, I know not. That I &s;hould make the Church the Head of the Church (which is downright non&s;en&s;e) is not probable. For the pre&s;ent I mu&s;t crave leave to tell him he is utterly mi&s;taken. I a&s;cribe no power of inventing Rites and Ceremonies, devi|&s;ing Laws and Con&s;titutions of their own, relating to Wor&s;hip, as &s;uch, to any one Church or Churches in the World. I challenge him to make good his a&s;&s;ertion. I di&s;pute again&s;t it as well as I can in <HI>S. T. Chap.</HI> 5. <HI>pag.</HI> 41, 42. Whatever power I a&s;cribe to the Church, 'tis only &s;uch as Chri&s;t hath entru&s;ted her with; that this &s;hould be as much a denial of Chri&s;t's Kingly Office, as the a&s;cription of a power over the Churches of Chri&s;t, to any to whom he hath not committed &s;uch a power, Mr. <HI>T.</HI> will not in ha&s;t be able to prove.</P>
<P>We further reply in <HI>S. T.</HI> 2dly. <HI>The Head&s;hip pleaded for by the Church of Rome is no other,</HI> viz. <HI>than a Head-&s;hip under Chri&s;t.</HI></P>
<P>To this Mr. <HI>T.</HI> 1. <HI>I grant the Church of Rome pleads for no other Head|&s;hip.</HI> But 2. <HI>They u&s;urpe a power in &s;ome re&s;pects &s;uperiour to Chri&s;t, in their di&s;pen&s;ing with the keeping of lawful Oaths, allowing of Ince&s;tuous Marriages.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> And the &s;ame may be &s;aid of the Heads of the Church of <HI>Eng|land.</HI> I &s;uppo&s;e this <HI>Animadverter</HI> may be yet of the mind that the Oath of the <HI>Solemn League and Covenant</HI> was a lawful Oath; yet that can be di&s;pen&s;ed with. Marriages prohibited&mdash;are not &s;eldom allowed of by their Eccle&s;ia&s;tical juri&s;diction.</P>
<P>We add 3dly, <HI>'Tis not &s;o as is pretended; they own an Head&s;hip that is not in all things &s;ubordinate to Chri&s;t, having a Law-making and a Law-giving Power touching In&s;titutions of Wor&s;hip, that never came into his heart, are flatly again&s;t his appointments, as hath been proved.</HI></P>
<P>We add in <HI>S. T.</HI> 4thly, <HI>One Head in &s;ubordination to another, doth as really make the Body a Mon&s;ter, as two Heads conjoyned.</HI></P>
<P>To this Mr. <HI>T. The terms Head and Body, being u&s;ed only Metaphori|cally, there's no more Mon&s;tro&s;ity in making a Head under a Head, than in making a Governour under a Governour.&mdash;</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. Should it be granted there were no <HI>Mon&s;tro&s;ity in the thing it &s;elf,</HI> yet there is in the expre&s;&s;ion in the Title; an argument it was never from the Spirit of the Lord.</P>
<P N="2">2. <HI>Bernard</HI> is of another mind; <HI>Thou make&s;t a Mon&s;ter,</HI> &s;aith he, <HI>if removing the hand, thou make&s;t the Finger to hang on the Head.&mdash;Thou make&s;t the Body of Chri&s;t a Mon&s;ter, if thou place&s;t the Members of his Bo|dy otherwi&s;e than he hath placed them in the Church.&mdash;</HI>Lib. 3. cap.
<PB N="312" REF="160"> 10. Con. ad Eugen. Much more to take a Bea&s;t, a Lion, or Bear, as wicked and gracele&s;s men are (whom yet Mr. <HI>T.</HI> &s;ee<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">s to allow for Heads in the Churches of Chri&s;t) and place them not only as Mem|bers in, but as Heads over (though under Chri&s;t) the Church of God.</P>
<P N="3">3. The making of a Governour under a Governour in the <HI>Common|weale,</HI> hath no <HI>Mon&s;tro&s;ity</HI> in it, becau&s;e agreeable to the Will of God, Principles of State-polity, which a Head under a Head in the Church hath; becau&s;e di&s;&s;onant, contrary to the Law and Soveraignty of Chri&s;t its Supream Independant and alone Head.</P>
<P>A &s;econd <HI>Objection</HI> is in <HI>S. T.</HI> thus propo&s;ed by us. <HI>That the Kings of</HI> I&s;rael <HI>were the Heads &s;ucce&s;ively of the then Church, and therefore a vi&s;ible Head&s;hip over the Churches of Chri&s;t in the New Te&s;tament is lawful.</HI></P>
<P>To which we <HI>An&s;wer,</HI> 1. That betwixt the <HI>Oeconomy</HI> of the Law and Go&s;pel, there is a va&s;t di&s;proportion; many things were of old lawful, which now to practice were no le&s;s than a denial of Chri&s;t come in the fle&s;h.</P>
<P N="2">2. The Kings of <HI>I&s;rael</HI> were Types of Chri&s;t; which (notwith&s;tand|ing Mr. <HI>T.</HI> dictates that it is fal&s;ly and vainly a&s;&s;erted, <HI>Sect.</HI> 14.) till he prove the contrary, we take for truths. What he &s;peaks with refe|rence to the Kings of <HI>I&s;rael</HI> and <HI>England,</HI> we are unconcerned in. That the Rulers of the <HI>Jews</HI> or any other Nations had, <HI>de jure,</HI> any &s;uch Do|minion or Power over their Subjects as to make Laws, introduce Con|&s;titutions of their own framing, in matters relating to Wor&s;hip, and compel them by force and violence to &s;ubject thereunto, Mr. <HI>T.</HI> hath not proved. <HI>I&s;a.</HI> 44. 28. Is a Prophe&s;ie of the Liberty the <HI>Jews</HI> &s;hould ob|tain under <HI>Cyrus</HI> to go up to <HI>Jeru&s;alem</HI> to build the Temple; of the ful|filling whereof you have an account, <HI>Ezra.</HI> 1. 1, 2, 3. But not a tittle of his Dominion about things &s;acred, or introducing Con&s;titutions re|lating to their Wor&s;hip as &s;uch; or compelling any to go up to <HI>Jeru&s;a|lem,</HI> is there mentioned. He only removes the <HI>Babylonian</HI> yoke that was upon them, and &s;ets them at liberty to build the Temple of the Lord&mdash;(which the Kings before him would not grant them to do) and Wor|&s;hip him according to his own appointments, <HI>I&s;a.</HI> 45. 1. is imperti|nently alledged, relating only to the Victories and Conque&s;ts the Lord would afford unto <HI>Cyrus</HI> over the Cities and Nations of the World. <HI>Jonah</HI> 3. 7, 8. gives us an account of a Decree publi&s;hed by order of the King, for a &s;olemnization of a Fa&s;t, and to turn from <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">mpiety; but this comes &s;hort of the proof of the Head&s;hip argued for, which is an Head&s;hip, having power of making and giving forth Laws touching In|&s;titutions
<PB N="313" REF="160"> of Wor&s;hip, Orders, Rites, <HI>&amp;c.</HI> that never entred into the heart of Chri&s;t; the judicious Reader will ea&s;ily, from what we have al|ready offered, di&s;cern the impertinency of <HI>Ezra</HI> 6. 7. <HI>and</HI> 7. 13. <HI>Dan.</HI> 3. 29. <HI>and</HI> 6. 26. to the pre&s;ent de&s;ign.</P>
<P>'Tis true, as he &s;aith, <HI>Chri&s;tianity alters not civil Relations or E&s;tates,</HI> 1 <HI>Cor.</HI> 7. 24. And 'tis as true, that if in the time of my infidelity, I have been the &s;ervant of men that are my Political Ma&s;ters, with re&s;pect to Wor&s;hip, though I am, whil&s;t I continue their &s;ervant, to perform faith|ful &s;ervice to them, with re&s;pect to things Civil, yet am I not to own them or &s;ubject to them as my Lords &amp; Governours, with re&s;pect to the Ser|vice of God; therein one only being my Lord and Ma&s;ter, <HI>viz.</HI> Chri&s;t.</P>
<P N="2">2. I &s;ay not that all the Kings of <HI>I&s;rael</HI> were Types of Chri&s;t, but that the Kings of <HI>I&s;rael</HI> were &s;o, <HI>i. e.</HI> &s;ome of them; nor do I re&s;train the word <HI>I&s;rael</HI> to the ten Tribes, but to the twelve, headed by <HI>David, So|lomon,</HI> a pair of eminent Types of the Me&s;&s;iah.</P>
<P>That Chri&s;t and the Apo&s;tles yeelded &s;ubjection to Civil Powers with re&s;pect to things &s;acred (of which this <HI>Animadverter</HI> mu&s;t &s;peak, or he &s;peaks impertinently) is a gro&s;s mi&s;take unworthy &s;o learned a per&s;on.</P>
<P>We &s;ay in <HI>S. T.</HI> 3dly, <HI>That the Kings of</HI> I&s;rael <HI>were Heads of the Church is fal&s;e, God was its alone Head and King.</HI> Hence their Hi&s;torian &s;aith, Their Government was <GAP DESC="foreign">. And when they would needs choo&s;e a King, God &s;aid, <HI>They rejected him;</HI> to whom even as to their Political Head, a <HI>Shekel</HI> was paid yearly as a Tribute, called <HI>the Shekel of the Sanctuary.</HI> True indeed as they were a Political Body, they had vi&s;ible Political Governours,&mdash;but that the&s;e had any Head&s;hip over them, to make any Laws, introduce Con&s;titutions of their own framing, in matter relating to Wor&s;hip, will never be proved.</P>
<P>To which Mr. <HI>T.</HI> replies, 1. <HI>That the Church of</HI> I&s;rael <HI>was different from the Kingdom of I&s;rael is one of the proper opinions of tho&s;e who would e&s;tabli&s;h from that example an Eccle&s;ia&s;tical Independent Government in the Church, di&s;tinct from the Civil Government of the State.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. 'Tis no matter who&s;e opinion 'tis; if Truth, it ought to be imbraced.</P>
<P N="2">2. That there is a real and formal di&s;tinction betwixt the two Socie|ties, Church and Common-wealth, is at large proved by &s;everal. As Mr. <HI>Gille&s;py</HI> in his <HI>Aarons Rod Blo&s;&s;oming, b.</HI> 1. <HI>c.</HI> 3. The <HI>A&s;&s;embly</HI> in their <HI>Jus Divinum.</HI> Hear their Rea&s;ons, <HI>p.</HI> 88, 89.</P>
<P>1&s;t, <HI>The Society of the Church is only Chri&s;t's and not the Civil Magi|&s;trates, its his Hou&s;e,&mdash;and he hath no Vicar under him (as is abun|dantly proved by Mr.</HI> Rutherford, <HI>in his</HI> Divine Right of Church-Go|vernment,
<PB N="314" REF="161"> <HI>Chap.</HI> 27. <HI>Q.</HI> 23. <HI>Pag.</HI> 595, <HI>to</HI> 647.)</P>
<P>2dly, The Officers Eccle&s;ia&s;tical are Chri&s;t's Officers, not the Ma|gi&s;trates, 1 <HI>Cor.</HI> 4. 1. <HI>Ephe&s;.</HI> 4. 8, 10, 11. 1 <HI>Cor.</HI> 12. 28.</P>
<P>3dly, The&s;e Officers are elected and ordained by the Church with|out Commi&s;&s;ion from the Civil Magi&s;trate, by virtue of Chri&s;ts Ordi|nance; and in his Name, <HI>Acts</HI> 6. 3, 4. <HI>with</HI> 14. 23. 1 <HI>Tim.</HI> 4. 14. <HI>with Acts</HI> 13. 1, 2, 3, 4.</P>
<P>4thly, The Church meets not as Civil Judicatories, for Civil Acts of Government,&mdash;but as Spiritual A&s;&s;embles, for &s;uch as are &s;piritu|al, <HI>viz.</HI> Preaching.&mdash;</P>
<P>5thly, Should not the&s;e two Societies be acknowledged to be really and e&s;&s;entially di&s;tinct from one another, &s;everal gro&s;s ab&s;<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">rdities would follow: As, 1. Then there can be no Common-wealth where there is not a Church; but this is contrary to all experience: Heathens have Common-wealths, yet no Church. 2. Then there may be Church-Officers elected where there is no Church, &s;eeing there are Magi&s;trates where there is no Church. 3. Then tho&s;e Magi&s;trates where there is no Church are no Magi&s;trates.&mdash;And if &s;o then the Church is the for|mal con&s;tituting Cau&s;e of Magi&s;trates. 4. Then the Common-wealth as the Common-wealth, is the Church; and the Church as the Church, is the Common-wealth.&mdash;5. Then all that are Members of the Common-wealth, are, becau&s;e &s;o, Members of the Church. 6. Then the Common-wealth being formally the &s;ame with the Church, is, as Common-wealth, the My&s;tical Body of Chri&s;t. 7. Then the Officers of the Church are the Officers of the Common-wealth, the power of the Keys gives them right to the Civil Sword, and con&s;equently the Mini&s;ters of the Go&s;pel, as &s;uch, are Ju&s;tices of the peace.&mdash;All which how ab&s;urd let the world judge.</P>
<P>He adds, 2dly, <HI>That</HI> Solomon <HI>and other Kings did exerci&s;e power over Eccle&s;ia&s;tical per&s;ons is evident, becau&s;e he depo&s;ed</HI> Abiathar.</P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. Who denies it? How this proves the power of the Kings of <HI>I&s;rael,</HI> as Heads of the Church, to innovate in Wor&s;hip (which is the thing to be proved) I know not.</P>
<Q>Hic labor, hoc opus est.</Q>
<P>And Mr. <HI>T.</HI> hath more wit than &s;eriou&s;ly to attempt it. 2. <HI>Solomon</HI> depo&s;ed <HI>Abiathar</HI> not as <HI>High Pontifee,</HI> or Head of the Church, for male admini&s;tration in Church-affairs, but as King of <HI>I&s;rael</HI> for trea&s;on a|gain&s;t the Common-wealth, in the bu&s;ine&s;s of <HI>Adonijah. Ergo Solomon</HI> was the Head of the Church of <HI>I&s;rael.</HI></P>
<Q><HI>&mdash;ri&s;um teneatis amici.</HI></Q>
<PB N="315" REF="161">
<P> Of 2 <HI>Chr.</HI> 29. 30, <HI>and</HI> 30. 2. which he produceth to prove <HI>That the Kings of</HI> I&s;rael <HI>had power in Eccle&s;ia&s;tical things,</HI> we have already &s;poken.</P>
<P>What follows in this 14^t^h <HI>Sect.</HI> is not worthy our &s;potting paper with the repetition of.</P>
<P N="1">1. He grants, <HI>That God was the alone Head and King of the Church of</HI> I&s;rael, <HI>with re&s;pect to power Legi&s;lative, to a&s;&s;ign what Faith, Wor&s;hip, Ju|dicatories, and what other things were nece&s;&s;ary for that Congregation; all which &s;olely appertained to him:</HI> which is all we need contend for. The Kings of <HI>I&s;rael</HI> had not any Legi&s;lative power with re&s;pect to the&s;e, he grants; from the power of the&s;e Kings then it cannot be argued, that any have power now to innovate in matters of Faith and Wor&s;hip, they are not Heads of the Church inve&s;ted with authority to introduce Con|&s;titutions of their own framing, in matters relating to Wor&s;hip, as &s;uch; nor had the Kings of <HI>I&s;rael</HI> any &s;uch Authority.</P>
<Q>Jam &s;umus ergo pares nec ab uno di&s;&s;idet alter.</Q>
<P N="2">2. What he talks of Kingly Government, we are not at all concern|ed in. All that we a&s;&s;ert in <HI>S. T.</HI> is that <HI>Jo&s;ephus</HI> &s;aith, <HI>Their Government was</HI> <GAP DESC="foreign">, <HI>a Theocracie, that when they choo&s;e a King, they rejected God,</HI> 1 Kings 8. 17. which when he attempts the confutation of, we may attend him.</P>
<P N="3">3. That a <HI>Shekel</HI> was yearly paid to the Lord, <HI>Ex.</HI> 30. 13.-(which con|tinued to the de&s;truction of <HI>Jeru&s;alem, Jo&s;ep. l.</HI> 7. <HI>c.</HI> 28. of the <HI>Jewi&s;h Wars)</HI> he grants, that it was paid to him as their Political Head, he denies. Now though this be not of any moment, as to our pre&s;ent concern there|in, yet the truth thereof is ea&s;ily demon&s;trated. 1. It was paid to the Lord in token of their thankfulne&s;s for his delivering them from the <HI>Egypti|an</HI> yoke, which he did as their Political Head. 2. None were to pay it under 20 years of age; becau&s;e till then they were not &s;o fit for the &s;er|vice of the Common-wealth, though at 8 days old they were reckoned as Church-members. That becau&s;e it was converted to the &s;ervice of the Temple, therefore it was not paid to God as their Political Head, is a con&s;equence Mr. <HI>T.</HI> will never make good, &s;ince it belongs (as he will &s;ay) to Political Heads and Governours to take care for the furtherance and maintenance of the Wor&s;hip of God. 4. The &s;ayings of the Author of <HI>S. T.</HI> interfere not, ina&s;much as he owns God to be both their Politi|cal and Eccle&s;ia&s;tical Head, which the having vi&s;ible, Political Go|vernors doth not in the lea&s;t enervate. 5. That the Kings of <HI>I&s;rael</HI> had an Head&s;hip over the Church of <HI>I&s;rael,</HI> to make Laws relating to Wor|&s;hip, as &s;uch, is not proved by the Scriptures cited by him. <HI>Hezekiah</HI> 2 <HI>Chr.</HI> 29. 27. commands no more than what was long before command|ed
<PB N="316" REF="162"> by the Lord. <HI>Jeho&s;haphats</HI> act <HI>oh.</HI> 20. 3. is warranted by divine precept, <HI>Joel</HI> 1. 14. <HI>&amp;</HI> 2. 15. in appointing &s;ingers, <HI>v.</HI> 21. he only revives what was by <HI>David</HI> from divine Revelation in&s;tituted. Of <HI>c.</HI> 30. 1, 2. we have alrea|dy &s;poken. What is mentioned <HI>ch.</HI> 31. 2, 3. makes again&s;t our <HI>Animad.</HI> It was no con&s;titution of his own framing, but a revival of what was written in the Law of the Lord, <HI>ver&s;.</HI> 3.</P>
</DIV3>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="7" TYPE="chapter">
<HEAD>CHAP. VII.</HEAD>
<DIV3 N="1" TYPE="section">
<HEAD>Sect. 1.</HEAD>
<ARGUMENT>
<P><HI>A 5th Argument again&s;t hearing the pre&s;ent Ministers. That they have the Characters of fal&s;e Prophets&mdash;upon them, proved.</HI> Jer. 23. 21. Rom. 10. 15. <HI>reviewed and expounded. Of Chri&s;t's Mi&s;&s;ion. Whether &s;uch a Mi&s;&s;ion be of the E&s;&s;ence of a lawful Mini&s;try. Of Spiritual Adul|tery.</HI> Jer. 23. 14. <HI>opened.</HI></P>
</ARGUMENT>
<P>THE 6^t^h <HI>Chap.</HI> of <HI>S. T.</HI> contains a fifth Argument again&s;t hearing the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters, which is thus formed.</P>
<P><HI>Tho&s;e who have the Characters and Properties of fal&s;e Prophets and Prie&s;ts upon them, are not to be heard but &s;eparated from: But the pre&s;ent Mini|&s;ters of</HI> England <HI>have the Characters and Properties of fal&s;<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter"> Prophets and Prie&s;ts upon them: Therefore.&mdash;</HI></P>
<P>The <HI>Major</HI> or fir&s;t <HI>Propo&s;ition</HI> is proved from the Injunctions and Cau|tions of Chri&s;t, <HI>Mat.</HI> 7. 15. <HI>and</HI> 24. 4, 5, 23. 1 <HI>John</HI> 4. 1. 2 <HI>John</HI> 10. 11. <HI>Acts</HI> 20. 29.&mdash;To which Mr. <HI>T.</HI> faith nothing but what we have already replied to.</P>
<P>The <HI>Minor</HI> we prove by the introduction of the &s;ignal Characters of fal&s;e Prophets, which are vi&s;ibly upon the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters.&mdash;The whole Nation knows they are truly affirmed of them.</P>
<P>Mr. <HI>T.</HI> hath a&s;&s;umed a forehead of bra&s;s whil&s;t he de<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">ies it. 2 <HI>Pet.</HI> 2. 1. is manife&s;tly true of them, as we prove <HI>Chap.</HI> 1. <HI>Sect.</HI> 10.</P>
<P>The 1&s;t Character we mention is, <HI>That they run before they are &s;ent,</HI> Jer. 23. 21. <HI>That a Mi&s;&s;ion from the Lord is of the E&s;&s;ence of a lawful Mini&s;try. That whoever wants &s;uch a Mi&s;&s;ion is no Officer of Christ, but a fal&s;e Pro|phet and Minister of Antichri&s;t, may hence by way of Analogy be deduced is evident:</HI> Which al&s;o exactly accords with what is a&s;&s;erted by the Apo|&s;tle, <HI>Rom.</HI> 10. 15. That the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters of <HI>England</HI> want &s;uch a Mi&s;&s;ion hath already been demon&s;trated, and we &s;hall not <HI>actum agere.&mdash;</HI>from whence it follows, that they have this Character of <HI>Fal&s;e Prophets</HI> upon them.</P>
<PB N="317" REF="162">
<P> To which Mr. <HI>T. Chap.</HI> 6. <HI>Sect.</HI> 2. 1&s;t&punc; <HI>The &s;ending mentioned</HI> Jer. 23. Rom. 10. <HI>is not meant the mediate, regular, outward calling.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> Nor did we &s;ay it was, but a Mi&s;&s;ion or &s;ending from God, ei|ther immediately or mediately, which whoever wants, and goes &s;orth notwith&s;tanding to preach the Go&s;pel <HI>authoritativ&egrave;,</HI> or by way of Of|fice, hath the Character of a fal&s;e Prophet upon him. The former of the&s;e the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters pretend not to; the latter, we have already demon&s;trated they have not.</P>
<P>He dictates, 2dly, <HI>That a regular outward mediate Calling is not from a rightly constituted Church of Christ.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> But we have proved the contrary by &s;uch evident Te&s;timonies as Mr. <HI>T.</HI> will not in ha&s;t be able to refell.</P>
<P>He adds, 3dly, <HI>That either an immediate or mediate Mi&s;&s;ion, are of the e&s;&s;ence of a lawful Minister, I deny.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. If neither of the&s;e be of the e&s;&s;ence of a Mini&s;ter, then a Mini&s;ter may be a Mini&s;ter without either of them; then an outward calling is not nece&s;&s;ary for him that takes on him the publick function of Preaching; but this Mr. <HI>T.</HI> in the very next <HI>Page,</HI> in contradiction to what he here a&s;&s;erts, affirms to be nece&s;&s;ary.</P>
<P>Then 2. The In&s;titution of Officers by Chri&s;t, to be &s;ent forth in the way appointed by him is needle&s;s; men may be Officers in his Hou&s;e without any &s;uch Mi&s;&s;ion from him, which mu&s;t be either mediate or im|mediate; a third way of &s;ending I believe he cannot ea&s;ily coyn, and both the&s;e he hath exploded.</P>
<P N="3">3. The directions given by <HI>Paul,</HI> 1 <HI>Tim.</HI> 3. <HI>Tit.</HI> 1. with re&s;pect to the right management of this affair, are vain and frivolous. If a man &s;pend a few years in <HI>Oxford</HI> or <HI>Cambridge,</HI> read a little of <HI>Ari&s;totle, Lo|gick, Phy&s;icks</HI> and <HI>Metaphi&s;icks,</HI> get a few <HI>Notions of Divinity</HI> from &s;ome <HI>Common-place-Book,</HI> though he have never read the Bible over in his life, and is Ordained by a Prelate, with a black Ca&s;&s;ock and Girdle, a Pre&s;entation, In&s;titution, and Induction, he is, if Mr. <HI>T.</HI> may be be|lieved (becau&s;e he can Preach &s;ome Truths) a Mini&s;ter of Chri&s;t without any more a-doe.<HI>&mdash;nobis non licet e&s;&s;e tam de&s;ertis.</HI> The Churches of Chri&s;t have other thoughts (and ever had from the beginning) of this matter. That becau&s;e it is &s;aid, <HI>They &s;tood not in the coun&s;el of God, they prophe&s;ied lies in his Name,&mdash;</HI>therefore their run|ning without a Mi&s;&s;ion from God is not condemned in them, and made a Character of a fal&s;e Prophet, is &s;uch a perverting of the Scripture as cannot be ju&s;tified.</P>
<P>He tells us, 5thly, <HI>To make an outward Mi&s;&s;ion of the E&s;&s;ence of alaw|ful</HI>
<PB N="318" REF="163"> <HI>Minister, is contrary to the Authors grant,</HI> chap. 2. <HI>where he allows gifted Brethren to preach without &s;uch a Mi&s;&s;ion.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> He doth &s;o indeed, but who allows this <HI>Animadverter</HI> thus &s;o|phi&s;tically and openly to prevaricate, I know not? I a<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">low them to Preach but not by virtue of an Office-Power, as Mini&s;ters of the Go&s;pel, which I expre&s;ly deny in the fore-cited place they may do. Of the Preaching of the Brethren, <HI>Acts</HI> 8. we have already &s;poken.</P>
<P>It is added in <HI>S. T.</HI> as a &s;econd Character of fal&s;e Prophets, 2. <HI>That they commit adultery, (i. e.</HI> &s;piritual adultery, a departure from the In|&s;titutions of the Lord in Wor&s;hip to the Inventions of me<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">, is u&s;ually in Scripture expre&s;&s;ed under that Notion, <HI>Jer.</HI> 3. 8. <HI>Ezek.</HI> 23. 37. <HI>Rev.</HI> 2. 22. All Interpreters that I have met with &s;o expone it) and walk in lies (a wor&s;hip of humane devi&s;ing, called a lie, <HI>I&s;a.</HI> 28. 15. <HI>Am.</HI> 2. 4. <HI>Joh.</HI> 8 44. 2 <HI>The&s;.</HI> 2. 11.) <HI>Jer.</HI> 23. 14. This Character, we &s;ay, apper|tains to the Mini&s;ters of <HI>England,</HI> and ask, which of the In&s;titutions of Chri&s;t have they not mixed with their own inventions?&mdash;</P>
<P>To which Mr. <HI>T. Sect.</HI> 3. 1. Mr. <HI>Gataker interprets the Words of Cor|poral Adultery.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. It may be &s;o; I have not that Author to conver&s;e with.</P>
<P N="2">2. He is no Oracle, that his Dictates mu&s;t be &s;ub&s;cribed to.</P>
<P N="3">3. The Adultery mentioned in the Text, is made a Character of a fal&s;e Prophet, which corporal Adultery Mr. <HI>T.</HI> &s;aith is no<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">.</P>
<P>He &s;aith, 2dly, <HI>Every departure from the In&s;titutions of the Lord in Wor&s;hip to the inventions of men, is not any where committing Adultery.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> Of this matter we have treated, <HI>chap.</HI> 1. <HI>&s;ect.</HI> 12. whither we refer the Reader.</P>
<P>3dly, <HI>Walking in lies,</HI> he tells us, <HI>is a character of a fal&s;e Prophet but they are lies in Doctrine, not Wor&s;hip that is intended in the places cited.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. Of the Annotators he cites, not one of them is of his mind. <HI>Diodati</HI> interprets the Phra&s;e of fal&s;e wor&s;hips and &s;uper&s;titi|ons, as do the A&s;&s;embly in their Annotations on <HI>Am.</HI> 2. 4.</P>
<P>2dly, We have manife&s;ted from other Scriptures, that the expre&s;|&s;ion is u&s;ed by the Spirit of the Lord in this &s;en&s;e, both he<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">e, and <HI>Sect.</HI> 10. <HI>p.</HI> 96. to refute which he offers nothing, and his own Dictates will ne|ver pa&s;s for proof.</P>
<P>3dly, We demon&s;trate the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters walk in lies in the &s;en&s;e contended for by this Animadverter, <HI>chap.</HI> 10. of S. T.</P>
<P>4thly, To the Q<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">eries he an&s;wers, <HI>The In&s;titution of Preaching the Go&s;pel they have not mixed with their own inventions.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> But this they evidently do, whil&s;t none mu&s;t be allowed to
<PB N="319" REF="163"> Preach the Go&s;pel, but &s;uch as &s;ubject to Epi&s;copal Ordination, pro|mi&s;e Canonical Obedience to their Ordinaries, ob&s;erve the Regulati|ons for Preaching given forth by the Pope of <HI>Canterbury,</HI> they are bound to omit the preaching of the Go&s;pel when they have not time to Preach, and read Service too. Wherein Divine In&s;titution mu&s;t give place to humane inventions: In Bapti&s;m, he will tell you, they mix an In&s;titution of Chri&s;t's with the inventions of man, in re&s;pect of the wrong Subject, and they evidently do &s;o whil&s;t they <HI>&s;ign with the &s;ign of the Cro&s;s,</HI> and make it &s;uch an e&s;&s;ential part of Bapti&s;m, that it is not lawful to be omitted. The In&s;titution of the Lord's Supper they mix with that Popi&s;h humane invention of <HI>kneeling</HI> in the Act of re|ceiving, which they con&s;titute &s;uch a nece&s;&s;ary part thereof, that they will not admit any to receive in any other po&s;ture.&mdash;</P>
<P>To the &s;econd, viz. <HI>From how many have they gone a whoring?</HI> He an&s;wers, it concerns him that accu&s;eth, to &s;hew.</P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> And that concern I di&s;patched, <HI>chap.</HI> 4. of S. T.</P>
<P>To the third, viz. <HI>Is not a great part of their Wor&s;hip, drops of the Whores cup of Fornication?&mdash;</HI></P>
<P>Mr. <HI>T.</HI> though he multiply many words, an&s;wers not at all, not un|der&s;tanding, or being willingly ignorant of my intendment in tho&s;e expre&s;&s;ions, which was &s;olely this, that their Divine Service, wherein a great part of their Wor&s;hip doth con&s;i&s;t, is for the mo&s;t part taken out of the Service-Book of <HI>Rome,</HI> which Mr. <HI>T.</HI> may di&s;prove if he can.</P>
</DIV3>
<DIV3 N="2" TYPE="section">
<HEAD><HI>Sect.</HI> 2.</HEAD>
<ARGUMENT>
<P><HI>A third Character of fal&s;e Prophets, mentioned</HI> Jer. 23. 13. A <HI>fourth,</HI> Jer. 6. 14. &amp;c. A <HI>fifth,</HI> I&s;a. 56. 11. &amp;c. <HI>Which exactly agree to the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters.</HI></P>
</ARGUMENT>
<P>THE third Character of a fal&s;e prophet, mentioned in S. T. is this, <HI>That they &s;trengthen the hands of evil doers, that none doth return from his wickedne&s;s,</HI> Jer. 23. 13. This it's &s;aid the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters do, whil&s;t though in the general they denounce the Judgments of God again&s;t &s;inners, they Saint them in the Chancel, tell them that the bo|dy of Chri&s;t was broken for them.&mdash;</P>
<P>To which our Animadverter <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">ubjoyns, <HI>Sect.</HI> 4. 1. Mr. <HI>Gatakers</HI> Pa|raphra&s;e upon the Text is, <HI>That they confirmed them in their wickedne&s;s, by bearing them in hand that they &s;hould do well enough what&s;oever Gods Me&s;&s;engers tell them, though they continue in their &s;ins.</HI></P>
<PB N="320" REF="164">
<P> <HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. The &s;in laid to their charge, is &s;trengthening the hands of evil doers, whether they did this practically or doctrinally, is not ex|pre&s;&s;ed, 'tis all one. Probably they told them, they were the holy People, the true Church, had his Temple and Ordinances with and among&s;t them, and therefore God could not reject, de&s;troy them, not|with&s;tanding the Prophe&s;ie of <HI>Jeremiah</HI> to the contrary, whom they re|viled as a made &s;editious fellow, thereby labouring to take off the peo|ple from an attendance on the Prophe&s;ie, and threatnings given forth by him. This we charge the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters to be guilty of, as the holy People, and Church of God, they admit the vi&s;ibly prophane and wicked to the Lords Table, and their Children to Bapti&s;m; bury them as holy Brethren (whom they call &s;o, not upon the acco<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">nt of Creati|on, but Chri&s;tianity (which their conver&s;ations contradict) and Church-member&s;hip with them) though they die in the very act of drunken|ne&s;s&mdash;of who&s;e <HI>joyful re&s;urrection to eternal Life,</HI> they profe&s;s they have <HI>a &s;ure and certain hope,</HI> (which can be referred to no other but the per|&s;on interred) they a&s;per&s;e, reproach tho&s;e who would deal truly and roundly with them, as &s;editious mad per&s;ons that are fit for the Stocks, Pri&s;ons, Dungeons, whereby they evidently &s;trengthen their hands in their wickedne&s;s.</P>
<P N="2">2. It is not true, that the fal&s;e Prophets told them expre&s;ly that they &s;hould do well enough, though they continued in their &s;i<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">s; they flat|tered them with the mercy and patience of God, the priviledges and immunities he had crowned them with, by which they lead them into the belief of this, that God would not reject them.</P>
<P N="3">3. The A&s;&s;embly in their <HI>Annotations,</HI> explain the Phra&s;e of <HI>&s;trength|ening the hands of evil doers,</HI> with this, <HI>they confirm them in their wicked|ne&s;s,</HI> and &s;o <HI>keep them from Repentance,</HI> Ezek. 13. 22. Which by the wayes and means in&s;tanced in, 'tis known the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters do.</P>
<P N="4">4. 'Tis not <HI>charity,</HI> as he intimates, to &s;ay to a known Drunkard, Swearer, that the body of Chri&s;t was broken, the blood of Chri&s;t &s;hed for him, that he &s;hould take, and eat, and drink the Bread and Wine in <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter"> membrance that Chri&s;t died for him; but <HI>cruelty,</HI> tending to the nou|ri&s;hment of fal&s;e peace and confidence, to the ruine of millions of Souls. If <HI>Judas</HI> was at the Sacrament, he was a vi&s;ible Saint, is no War|rant to admini&s;ter it to per&s;ons of the complexion intimated. The ex|pre&s;&s;ions above mentioned; are not at all like tho&s;e u&s;ed by the Apo|&s;tle, 1 <HI>Cor.</HI> 8. 11. <HI>Heb.</HI> 10. 29. He &s;peaks of vi&s;ibly Saints the&s;e are &s;poken of, and to the vi&s;ible wicked and prophane.</P>
<P N="5">5. That the&s;e things do not confirm and &s;trengthen the hands of evil
<PB N="321" REF="164"> doers, was the alone thing to have been proved by our Animadverter, but to that he &s;peaks not at all.</P>
<P>What he further mentions, is a pretended reply to what is remarked touching the Mini&s;ters of <HI>England,</HI> that it is a rare thing to hear of one Soul that is brought over to God by all their Preaching; &s;o that vi&s;ibly that Judgment of God &s;eems to be upon them, <HI>Jer.</HI> 23. 32. <HI>Therefore they &s;hall not at all profit this people.</HI></P>
<P>He tells us, That <HI>the Prophets,</HI> I&s;a. 49. 4. (he &s;hould have &s;aid <HI>Chri&s;t,</HI> for the Prophet there per&s;onates Chri&s;t) &amp; 53. 1. <HI>and Chri&s;t John</HI> 12. 37, 38. <HI>had the &s;ame &s;ucce&s;s.</HI></P>
<P><HI>A&s;nw.</HI> Fal&s;e and untrue: that they had not that &s;ucce&s;s as was de&s;i|rable is true; that it was rare to hear of one &s;oul converted by them, our Animadverter cannot prove.</P>
<P>What he cites from Mr. <HI>Robbin&s;on,</HI> is directly again&s;t what it is the good plea&s;ure of Mr. <HI>T.</HI> to plead for, he &s;aith, <HI>The Mini&s;ters that con|vert Souls may be &s;aid to be &s;ent of God.</HI></P>
<P>We affirm that this is rarely (if at all) found to be the attendment of the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters preaching, and all that know any thing, know it to be true. Nor indeed do I know how upon their Principles they can preach the Doctrine of Conver&s;ion, when they reckon and ac|count all tho&s;e to whom they preach to be Church-Members, <HI>i. e.</HI> &s;uch as are converted already, for of &s;uch only is the Kingdom of Heaven, or Go&s;pel-Church-State, <HI>John</HI> 3.</P>
<P>A fourth Character of fal&s;e Prophets in&s;tanced in is, That they pro|phe&s;ie <HI>placentia,</HI> &s;mooth things, according to the de&s;ires, tempers, and lu&s;ts of men, to the plea&s;ing of whom they addict them&s;elves, <HI>Jer.</HI> 6. 14. &amp; 27. 9. <HI>Ezek.</HI> 13. 10, 11. This it's &s;aid the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters have been, are guilty of; which whil&s;t they do, they cannot be the Ser|vants of Chri&s;t, <HI>Gal.</HI> 1. 10.</P>
<P>In an&s;wer to which, Mr. <HI>T.</HI> tells us, <HI>Sect.</HI> 5. what Mr. <HI>Gataker</HI> &s;aith upon <HI>Jer.</HI> 6. 14. which is not at all oppo&s;ite to what is affirmed by us, nor is that which is afterward added by him&s;elf: let it be granted that the fal&s;e prophets told them that they &s;hould not &s;erve the King of <HI>Ba|bylon,</HI> that all &s;hould be well, notwith&s;tanding what Gods Prophets told them, the fal&s;e prophets knew the&s;e things would plea&s;e the people, and therefore they gave them forth. And this is called, <HI>Ezek</HI> 13. 10, 11. <HI>Daubing with untempered morter.</HI> Upon which Scripture Mr. <HI>Green|hil</HI> ob&s;erves, that it's a clear Argument of a blind and fal&s;e Teacher, to &s;peak things an&s;werable to the humours and corruptions of men. This
<PB N="322" REF="165"> Mr. <HI>T.</HI> attempts not to di&s;prove. That the Mini&s;ters of <HI>England</HI> are guilty hereof he grants.</P>
<P>A fifth Character of a fal&s;e prophet mentioned in <HI>S. T.</HI> is, <HI>That they are greedy dogs that can never have enough, and look every man for his gain from his quarter,</HI> I&s;a. 56. 11. <HI>&s;eeking and &s;erving them&s;elves in their mi|ni&s;tration,</HI> Ezek. 13. 19. <HI>Mic.</HI> 3. 5, 11. The pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters of <HI>Eng|land</HI> do &s;o. Their gaping after preferment&mdash;manife&s;ts as much.</P>
<P>To which Mr. <HI>T. Sect.</HI> 6. replies; 1&s;t. <HI>I&s;a.</HI> 56. 11. <HI>may be under|&s;tood as well of the Civil Magi&s;trate as the Mini&s;ter; 'tis not a character of a fal&s;e Prophet.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. Of this you have only his &s;ay-&s;o for proof. 2. It apper|tains to the Prophets to admoni&s;h the people of their &s;ins, <HI>I&s;a.</HI> 58. 1. and forewarn them of evils approaching, <HI>Ezek.</HI> 3. 18, 19. the neglect whereof is charged upon the Watchmen in the Text, under the notion of dumb dogs that cannot bark, <HI>v.</HI> 10. an evident demon&s;tration that they are Prophets that are &s;poken of, <HI>v.</HI> 11. 3. The generality of Ex|po&s;itors interpret the words of them. 4. That they &s;hould be Pro|phets that are there characterized, and not fal&s;e prophets, is a vanity once to imagine: They are &s;ure no character of true Prophets; the&s;e were men of another complection, and therefore mu&s;t be a de&s;cription of them that are fal&s;e.</P>
<P N="2">2. He grants that <HI>Ezek.</HI> 13. 19. &amp; <HI>Mich.</HI> 3. 5, 11. characterize fal&s;e prophets; <HI>But the proper character of them, as &s;uch, is not their prophe|&s;ying for handfuls of Barley,&mdash;or preparing War again&s;t them that put not into their mouths, but that they polluted God among his people; by lying to them, that they make them to err.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> Seriou&s;ly Mr. <HI>T.</HI> is a bold man, who dares to &s;eparate what God hath joyned together, and out-face the Spirit of the Highe&s;t, when he bears te&s;timony again&s;t him. Let the Reader &s;eriou&s;ly peru&s;e the Scriptures, and he will be led captive to the belief of the truth of the Sugge&s;tion; <HI>Will ye pollute me among my people for handfuls of Barley?</HI> q. d. pollute me ye do by your ceremonies, inventions, prophe&s;ies of your own heart, and ye do it for reward; and ye &s;lay the Souls that &s;hould not die, by rai&s;ing per&s;ecution again&s;t them, who will not re|ceive your lies, &s;ubmit to your ceremonies, inventions, looking after gain, and per&s;ecuting &s;uch as put not into their mouths, he will plainly &s;ee is made equally, <HI>(Mich.</HI> 3. 5, 11.) the character of the Prophets &s;poken of, as their cau&s;ing the people to erx. <HI>Ribera</HI> (though a Je&s;u|ite) is forced to acknowledge as much in his Comment on the place, In what follows we are but little concerned.</P>
<PB N="323" REF="165">
<P> We manife&s;t in S. T. That the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters have this character of fal&s;e prophets upon them. 1. <HI>From their removing from places of le&s;s, to places of greater value.</HI></P>
<P>Mr. <HI>T.</HI> replies, 1. <HI>This may be objected to the Pa&s;tors&mdash;of the Con|gregational Churches.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. This is but a recrimination, no an&s;wer. 2. This hath been but rarely (if at all) practi&s;ed by them. 3. Never without the con&s;ent of the Churches, (as I know of) to which they were related, upon the account of greater opportunity of Service for God as they judged: If otherwi&s;e, 4. let the individulas plead for them&s;elves, I &s;hall never be their Advocate.</P>
<P N="2">2. <HI>This may be upon ju&s;t cau&s;e, of it &s;elf, it proves not a covetous mind.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. We grant it, but outward advantages and emoluments are no ju&s;t cau&s;e. 2. Their removal from places of le&s;s to greater profits, (&s;eldom or) never from greater to le&s;s, is no &s;mall Argument of &s;uch a frame of Spirit, which being their con&s;tant practice, men may righteou&s;ly judge of. 3. From their per&s;ecuting per&s;ons that can|not in Con&s;cience put into their mouths, by impri&s;oning, ruining them and their Families, which 'tis known they do. What Mr. <HI>T.</HI> di&s;cour&s;|eth in a way of ju&s;tifying them in their &s;o doing, till he produce a Scrip|ture Warrant for what he undertakes the defence of, we are not oblig|ed to take notice of it. I am &s;orry to find him an Advocate of &s;uch cruelties.</P>
</DIV3>
<DIV3 N="3" TYPE="section">
<HEAD><HI>Sect.</HI> 3.</HEAD>
<ARGUMENT>
<P><HI>A 6th, 7th, 8th Character of fal&s;e Prophets found upon the pre&s;ent Mi|ni&s;ters.</HI> Mat. 7. 15. Rev. 13. 11. <HI>opened and explained. The &s;econd Bea&s;t,</HI> Rev. 13. <HI>and fal&s;e prophet,</HI> Rev. 19. <HI>are the &s;ame, proved.</HI></P>
</ARGUMENT>
<P>THE &s;ixth Character of fal&s;e Prophets in&s;tanced in, is this, <HI>That they &s;adden the hearts of the Righteous,</HI> Ezek. 13. 22. This we &s;ay they do by prophaning the Name and Ordinances of God, by their &s;ubjecting to the ceremonies and inventions of men.&mdash;</P>
<P>To which Mr. <HI>T.</HI> adjoyns, <HI>'Tis granted, that &s;adning the hearts of the Righteous by lies, is a Character of a fal&s;e prophet, but the Author omits by lies.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> That by lies is meant the inventions of men introduced into the Wor&s;hip of God, we have already manife&s;ted; that by their &s;up|porting
<PB N="324" REF="166"> of, &s;ubjection hereunto, they make the hearts of the Righteous &s;ad, we affirm, (and 'tis generally known and felt among&s;t &s;uch who&s;e hearts the Lord hath made tender); So that till Mr. <HI>T.</HI> proves that by <HI>lies</HI> is not meant devices of their own, they have by his co<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">fe&s;&s;ion the character of fal&s;e prophets upon them: Which renders his heap of per|hap&s;es and conjectures, frivolous. The dirt he ca&s;ts upon the Churches of Chri&s;t, he will one day find will rather tend to his own di&s;parage|ment than theirs, and that herein he hath reproached the Tabernacles of God. Till he prove that the Pa&s;tors of the Congregational Churches have by introducing, practi&s;ing humane devices (and &s;uch as have been abu&s;ed in the Papacy) in the Wor&s;hip of God made the hearts of the Righteous &s;ad, which 'tis univer&s;ally known they have not done, he will acknowledge that his reflection upon them is impertinent, and not at all to his purpo&s;e. All that he hath as yet &s;aid, amounts not to the lea&s;t mite of proof, cannot at all be called &s;o.</P>
<P>That the in&s;inuations of the Author of <HI>S. T.</HI> again&s;t the Mini&s;ters of <HI>England,</HI> would have proved the Teachers of the be&s;t Churches in the Primitive times to have been fal&s;e Prophets, is untruly &s;aid. The&s;e made not the hearts of the Righteous &s;ad, by prophaning the Ordinan|ces of Chri&s;t, introducing &s;ubjection to the inventions of men; which is known to be true of the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters.</P>
<P>The &s;eventh Character mentioned, is, <HI>That they mix the Word of God with their Dreams,</HI> Jer. 23. 25, 29.</P>
<P>The an&s;wer Mr. <HI>T.</HI> intimates, <HI>Sect.</HI> 7. that he hath given to this be|fore, is already replied to.</P>
<P>We add 8thly, as an eighth Character of fal&s;e prophets, <HI>That they come in Sheeps clothing, having the Horns of a Lamb, but are inwardly ravening Wolves, and &s;peak like Dragons, (i. e.</HI> pretend to the holine&s;s and meekne&s;s of Chri&s;t, and Saints, but are inwardly full of raven and cruelty, yea, terrible in their Edicts and Laws, &s;tirring up, and ma|king u&s;e of the powers of the World to per&s;ecute, kill, and de&s;troy the Saints) <HI>Mat.</HI> 7. 15. <HI>Rev.</HI> 13. 11. (which &s;econd Bea&s;t is no other than the fal&s;e prophet mentioned <HI>Rev.</HI> 19. 20.) This Character, we &s;ay, is upon the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters; Upon this Generation of men, all the cruelties that the fir&s;t Bea&s;t hath exerci&s;ed upon the Saints for the&s;e 1260. years, is to be charged: They now pre&s;s a rigid conformity to the infringing the liberty of the Saints.</P>
<P>Mr. <HI>T.</HI> replies. 1. <HI>Outward holine&s;s and meekne&s;s, inward raveno&s;ity and cruelty, is not a &s;ignal Character of fal&s;e prophets.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> Chri&s;t &s;aith it is; and 'tis fit we believe him before <HI>Mr. T.</HI>
<PB N="325" REF="166"> for having cautioned his Di&s;ciples to beware of them, he tells them in what manner they will come to them; what is their &s;ignal character and property: <HI>They will come to you in Sheeps-clothing,</HI> (which the Apo|&s;tle phra&s;eth they &s;hall be transformed as the Mini&s;ters of Righte|ou&s;ne&s;s, 2 <HI>Cor.</HI> 11. 15.) <HI>but inwardly they are ravening Wolves;</HI> which if not their character and property, had in vain and to no purpo&s;e been mentioned by Chri&s;t.</P>
<P>The &s;econd Bea&s;t, and the fal&s;e prophet, <HI>Rev.</HI> 19. 20. we &s;ay, are the &s;ame; by it is under&s;tood Antichri&s;t in his Eccle&s;ia&s;tical State, or the Antichri&s;tian Clergy; their character is, <HI>Rev.</HI> 13. 11. That <HI>they have the Horns of a Lamb,</HI> (and outward &s;emblance to the meeke&s;t of Lambs, the Lord Je&s;us) <HI>but &s;peak like Dragons;</HI> are cruel in their E|dicts and Laws. Doth Mr. <HI>T.</HI> di&s;prove what is herein affirmed by us? doth he attempt it? nothing le&s;s!</P>
<P>He confidently tells us, <HI>That this did not &s;hew them fal&s;e prophets.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> But this is made the character of the &s;econd Bea&s;t, which is no other than the fal&s;e prophet, as &s;ay <HI>Mede, Brightman.&mdash;</HI>And there|fore what &s;hews them to be the &s;econd Bea&s;t, &s;hews them to be fal&s;e prophets. Which if Mr. <HI>T.</HI> will confute, he mu&s;t prove the &s;econd Bea&s;t, <HI>Rev.</HI> 13. and fal&s;e Prophet, <HI>Rev.</HI> 19. not to be one and the &s;ame. Which it's manife&s;t they are, by a &s;erious comparing what is &s;aid of the &s;econd Bea&s;t, <HI>Rev.</HI> 13. 13, 14, 15, 16. with what is &s;aid of the fal&s;e Prophet, <HI>Rev.</HI> 19. 20.</P>
<P N="1">1. The &s;econd Bea&s;t is a worker of miracles, <HI>Rev.</HI> 13. 17. &s;o is the fal&s;e Prophet, <HI>Rev.</HI> 19. 20.</P>
<P>2dly, The &s;econd Bea&s;t deceives them that dwell on the Earth, <HI>Rev.</HI> 13. 14. &s;o doth the fal&s;e Prophet, <HI>Rev.</HI> 19. 20.</P>
<P>3dly, The fir&s;t and &s;econd Bea&s;t are helpful one to the other, <HI>Rev.</HI> 13. &s;o are the Bea&s;t and fal&s;e Prophet, <HI>Rev.</HI> 19. 19, 20.</P>
<P>As to what follows, 1. I &s;ay not that all the per&s;ecutions&mdash;of the Children of God, that the Antichri&s;tian Civil State, or powers of the World hath exerci&s;ed, is to be charged upon the pre&s;ent Hierarchy and Mini&s;try of <HI>England,</HI> but upon this Generation; <HI>i. e.</HI> Per&s;ons that have appertained to the &s;ame Hierarchy. Yet, 2. whil&s;t the pre&s;ent Hie|rarchy and Prie&s;ts of <HI>England</HI> are (as 'tis known they are pre&s;&s;ing rigid Conformity to the ruining (as to the outward man) of the Saints, are walking in the &s;teps of their Progenitors, they entitle them&s;elves to all the blood of the Martyrs of Je&s;us, that by the per&s;wa&s;ions of tho&s;e that po&s;&s;e&s;&s;ed the &s;ame Seats before them, was poured forth by the Civil Powers of the World, that upon them may come (as it will undoubtedly
<PB N="326" REF="167"> do, if they repent not) all the blood that was &s;hed from the beginning to this very day. A manife&s;t demon&s;tration that the Lineaments of the &s;econd Bea&s;t, or fal&s;e Prophet, is vi&s;ibly to be read and found upon them.</P>
</DIV3>
<DIV3 N="4" TYPE="section">
<HEAD><HI>Sect.</HI> 4.</HEAD>
<ARGUMENT>
<P><HI>A 9th, 10th, 11th, 12th, 13th, 14th, 15th Character of fal&s;e Prophets, each applicable to the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters.</HI> Ezek. 22. 26. 8&punc; 34. 4. <HI>ex|plained. Eccle&s;ia&s;tical Shepherds ther<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter"> meant.</HI> Rev. 13. 11. <HI>ex|plained. Of the ob&s;curity of the Revelation.</HI> Rev. 13. 13, 14, 15. <HI>opened.</HI></P>
</ARGUMENT>
<P>THE ninth Character of fal&s;e Prophets mentioned, is, <HI>That they put no difference betwixt the holy and prophane,</HI> Ezek. 22. 26. Of this the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters (we &s;ay) are deeply guilty. Drunkards, Swearers,&mdash;(living and dead) are their dear Brethren and Si&s;ters; <HI>i. e.</HI> the children of them all are admitted to the Font, and they them|&s;elves to the Lord's Table.&mdash;</P>
<P>Our Animadverter replies, 1. <HI>This is a charge again&s;t the Prie&s;ts of the Law, accu&s;ing them of neglecting to di&s;cern between clean and unclean per&s;ons, or offerings, but is no character di&s;tingui&s;hing a fal&s;e Prie&s;t from a true.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> Whether it be, or not, let the Reader &s;atisfie him&s;elf from the &s;erious review of the words, compared with <HI>Jer.</HI> 15. 19. <HI>Ezek.</HI> 44. 23.</P>
<P>However, 2. <HI>This is nothing</HI> (&s;aith he) <HI>to our Mini&s;ters, who are not now to count any wan or creature, common or unclean,</HI> Acts 10. 15. 28.</P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. That the Lord hath not as great care that his New-Te|&s;tament Churches be not polluted by the admi&s;&s;ion into them of per|&s;ons morally unclean, as that the Sanctuary and Congregation of <HI>I&s;rael</HI> of old was not by the entrance thereinto of per&s;ons legally &s;o, is this Animadverters dictate, of which we expect his proof at his lei&s;ure. In allu&s;ion to the Prie&s;ts of old, the Porters, or New-Te&s;tament Offi|cers, are commanded to watch, <HI>Mark</HI> 13. 34. <HI>(viz.</HI> that as much as in them lies, they hinder per&s;ons morally unclean from entring into Go&s;pel-Churches.)</P>
<P N="2">2. He tells us, That none but Saints are to be admitted there|into.</P>
<P N="3"><PB N="327" REF="167"> 3. Threatens tho&s;e Mini&s;ters that &s;hall be carele&s;s, and negligent in this matter, with a depo&s;ition from their Office, <HI>Ezek.</HI> 44. A Prophe|&s;ie, though in Old Te&s;tament-clothing, expre&s;ly relating to New Te&s;ta|ment dayes; as is acknowledged by mo&s;t. And to any that &s;hall com|pare what is there &s;poken, with what is recorded of the New <HI>Jeru&s;alem, Rev.</HI> 20, 21, 22. <HI>Chap.</HI> 'twill manife&s;tly appear &s;o to do.</P>
<P N="4">4. <HI>Acts</HI> 20. 28. is mo&s;t impertinently alledged, and wretchedly a|bu&s;ed by the <HI>Animadverter.</HI> It only preacheth forth thus much, That the <HI>Gentile Nations</HI> were not &s;o unclean (as the <HI>Jews</HI> fondly imagined) but that per&s;ons might go unto them, and preach the Go&s;pel among&s;t them, as <HI>ver&s;.</HI> 28, 29, 34, evince. But that <HI>Adulterers, Drunkards,&mdash;</HI>&s;hould not be accounted unclean and common, &s;o as not to admit them into Church-Communion, or if admitted, that they ought not legally to be ejected, Mr. <HI>T.</HI> attempts not the proof of. The Scriptures fully ma|nife&s;t that they ought &s;o to be. Whether every &s;ingle Mini&s;ter hath power to keep any profe&s;&s;ing the Faith, from the Lords Supper, is not of our pre&s;ent di&s;qui&s;ition; if Mini&s;ters of Chri&s;t, they with the particu|lar Church to which they relate have power &s;o to do. The con&s;tant pra|ctice of the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters in admitting the vi&s;ibly wicked and pro|phane to the participation of Church-Ordinances and Priviledges, is a manife&s;t di&s;covery, that they &s;ymbolize with the Prie&s;ts of Old, of whom the complaint of the Lord is, <HI>That they put no difference betwixt the holy and prophane.</HI></P>
<P>The 10^t^h Character of fal&s;e Prophets in&s;tanc't in, is this, that they do not exerci&s;e pity to the weak, broken, &s;cattered &s;heep of Chri&s;t, nor &s;hew bowels in their recovery, but with force and cruelty rule over them, <HI>Ezek.</HI> 34. 4. This we &s;ay is evidently true of the pre&s;ent Mini|&s;ters, with force and cruelty they rule over us, (in &s;tead of exerci&s;ing pity towards us) threaten us with Excommunications, Impri&s;onment, di&s;poi<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">ing us of our Goods, yea condemning us to Death, if we &s;toop not to their lure.</P>
<P>All that can be called an An&s;wer hereunto <HI>Sect.</HI> 9. is this. 1. <HI>The Shepherds mentioned in</HI> Ezek. 34. <HI>are Civil Rulers, for the Prophets did not rule over the People with force and cruelty, but with lies and deceit.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. <HI>Junius,</HI> the Marginal Notes of the <HI>Geneva</HI> Tran&s;lation, <HI>Diodati,</HI> the <HI>A&s;&s;embly</HI> in their <HI>Annotations</HI> on the place, the mo&s;t of In|terpreters expound it of fal&s;e Eccle&s;ia&s;tical Shepherds or Mini&s;ters. That this is the intendment of the Spirit of the Lord is evident.</P>
<P>1&s;t, He &s;peaks of &s;uch Shepherds who&s;e &s;pecial duty it is to feed the flock, the neglect whereof he condemns them for, <HI>v.</HI> 2, 3. But this is the
<PB N="328" REF="168"> duty of Eccle&s;ia&s;tical Shepherds, <HI>Cant.</HI> 1. 8 <HI>John</HI> 21. 15, 16, 17, 1 <HI>Cor.</HI> 9. 7. 1 <HI>Pet.</HI> 5. 2.</P>
<P>2dly, They are condemned for ruling over them with force and cruelty, <HI>ver&s;.</HI> 4. The like condemned in Eccle&s;ia&s;tical Rulers, 1 <HI>Pet.</HI> 5. 3.</P>
<P>3dly, Its a Prophe&s;ie that runs down to the times of the Go&s;pel, and &s;peaks of &s;uch Shepherds, in oppo&s;ition to whom Chri&s;t is &s;aid to be the true Shepherd, <HI>ver&s;.</HI> 23, 24. <HI>John</HI> 10. 11, 12, 14.</P>
<P>The Rea&s;on alledged by Mr. <HI>T.</HI> to prove Civil Rulers are here meant, being weighed in the Ballance, is found wanting. They may righteou&s;ly be &s;aid to rule over the flock of God with force and cruelty, when they provoke the Magi&s;trate to do &s;o: as the Woman or Antichri&s;tian Church is &s;aid to be drunk with the blood of the Saints, <HI>Rev.</HI> 17. 6. <HI>And in her,</HI> 'tis &s;aid, <HI>was found the blood of&mdash;all that were &s;lain upon the earth,</HI> Rev. 18. 24. becau&s;e &s;he prompted and provoked the Civil Ma|gi&s;trate to pour it forth.</P>
<P><HI>That the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters of</HI> England <HI>are not righteou&s;ly charged with ruling over us with force and cruelty&mdash;</HI>he &s;aith not, <HI>thinks there are &s;ome to whom this evil may be imputed.&mdash;</HI></P>
<P>'Tis added in <HI>S.</HI> T. <HI>What &s;hould I mention,</HI> 13thly, <HI>that <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">hey come u out of the Earth,</HI> Rev. 13. 11. <HI>i. e.</HI> are rai&s;ed up by men of earthly &s;pi|rits and principles.</P>
<P>To this, after an <HI>harangue</HI> of words, <HI>Sect.</HI> 10. that I might leave him upon &s;econd thoughts to correct him&s;elf for. As 1&s;t. <HI>Tha<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter"> the Book of the Revelation is ob&s;cure;</HI> which in it &s;elf is not, but a Lanthorn, a Light. 'Tis a horrid di&s;paragement to any part of the Scripture &s;o to &s;peak of it. The Sun is not dark, though blind men di&s;cern not the ligh<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter"> and bright|ne&s;s of it: The ob&s;curity is in us, not in the Scripture.</P>
<P>2. <HI>That &s;ober men have wi&s;hed it were le&s;s read.</HI> Which wi&s;h (what|ever the men are) I am &s;ure is not over &s;ober, being directly oppo&s;ite to the advice of the Spirit, for the reading of it with an encouragement thereun<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">o, <HI>Rev.</HI> 1. 3.</P>
<P>He an&s;wers, 1. <HI>That the fir&s;t and &s;econd Bea&s;t,</HI> Rev. 19. <HI>are differently conceived.&mdash;</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> Who the fir&s;t and &s;econd Bea&s;t are, we have already explain|ed, which Mr. T. may confute when he is able. That the &s;econd Bea&s;t and the fal&s;e Prophet, <HI>Rev.</HI> 19. are the &s;ame, we have but now demon|&s;trated. The Hierarchy of <HI>England,</HI> and <HI>Rome</HI> are the &s;ame Antichri&s;ti|an Hierarchy, their Original the &s;ame; the Canon Laws, by which their Juri&s;diction is &s;upported, their Courts, Officers, <HI>&amp;c.</HI> the &s;ame.</P>
<PB N="329" REF="168">
<P> He further acquaints us, 2dly, <HI>With horrid con&s;equences that attend this Principle, that the &s;econd Bea&s;t is to be interpreted the Hierarchy and Mini&s;try of</HI> England.</P>
<P N="1">1. The fir&s;t we own with this limitation; The fir&s;t Bea&s;t is the An|tichri&s;tian Civil Powers, who if at the coming of Chri&s;t are found &s;uch, and in actual rebellion again&s;t him, <HI>&s;hall be ca&s;t into the Lake burning with fire.</HI></P>
<P N="2">2. The &s;econd, about wor&s;hiping the fir&s;t Bea&s;t (if under&s;tood of the <HI>Pope,</HI> as he &s;aith) may be truly affirmed of the pre&s;ent Hierarchy, who cau&s;e the Earth and them that dwell therein &s;o to do, whil&s;t they cau&s;e them to own, bow down, &s;ubject to his Canon-Laws in their Con&s;i&s;to|ries, Eccle&s;ia&s;tical Courts.&mdash;</P>
<P>3dly, That all who &s;ubject to the Image of the Bea&s;t, or Eccle&s;ia&s;ti|cal Government, <HI>&s;hall drink of the Wine of the wrath of God.&mdash;</HI>Without general or particular repentance, being no more than this, That tho&s;e that die in any one &s;in unrepented of &s;hall do &s;o (as Mr. T. will grant) we affirm, and challenge Mr. T. to prove the&s;e things to be horrid con|&s;equences, mon&s;trou&s;ly uncharitable, an argument of dotage, the &s;peech of a furious Bedlam.</P>
<P>Sir, you will one day know that your tongue is not &s;o your own, but you mu&s;t give an account of the&s;e hard &s;peeches with which you are beating your fellow-&s;ervants; I pray may not be laid to your charge.</P>
<P>He asks, 3dly, <HI>How doth it appear that to come out of the Earth, is to be rai&s;ed by men of earthly Spirits and Principles?</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. That the word <HI>Earth,</HI> is to be taken Metaphorically, and points out the <HI>men of the earth,</HI> or <HI>men of an earthy &s;pirit</HI> or <HI>principle,</HI> he will not deny.</P>
<P N="2">2. Precious <HI>Brightman</HI> expounds the expre&s;&s;ion much after the &s;ame rate: His words are (on <HI>Rev.</HI> 13. 11.) <HI>He a&s;cends out of the Earth, as being both made more ample and great by the authority of earthly men, and tho&s;e of the Laity</HI> (as they call them) <HI>whom the earth doth chiefly &s;ig|nifie.</HI></P>
<P N="3">3. The be&s;t Interpretation of Prophetical Expre&s;&s;ions is from their actual fulfilling; now take this &s;econd Bea&s;t for the <HI>Pope</HI> and his Cler|ly, or his Hierarchy of <HI>England,</HI> 'tis notoriou&s;ly known, that men of &s;uch Spirits and Principles have elevated them to the &s;tate and dignity to which they are a&s;cended. Which is a full an&s;wer to his &s;econd Query.</P>
<P>The 12th Character minded is, <HI>That they exerci&s;e the power of the fir&s;t Bea&s;t, or make u&s;e of the Civil Power for their &s;upportment,</HI> ver&s;. 13.</P>
<PB N="330" REF="169">
<P>M. T. replies, <HI>To exerci&s;e the power of the Bea&s;t is not to make u&s;e of the Civil Power for its &s;upport, but to act with the &s;ame Power the fir&s;t Bea&s;t u&s;ed in making war with the Saints.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. The Power the fir&s;t Bea&s;t u&s;ed is the Civil Power, it was the &s;ame Power the <HI>Dragon,</HI> or <HI>Devil</HI> made u&s;e of in the <HI>Romane, Pagan</HI> Emperors, <HI>Rev.</HI> 13. 2. which was &s;uch. This Mr. <HI>T.</HI> grants the &s;econd Bea&s;t acted with, <HI>i. e.</HI> made u&s;e in per&s;ecuting the Saints, which was done in order as he thought for his &s;upport; &s;o that Mr. <HI>T.</HI> acknowledg|eth what he &s;ets him&s;elf to oppo&s;e.</P>
<P>2dly, The mind of the Spirit in Prophetical expre&s;&s;ions, is be&s;t un|der&s;tood when the Prophe&s;ies are accompli&s;hed. (or in accompli&s;hing) Grant this &s;econd Bea&s;t is the Pope and his Hierarchy (as our <HI>Animad|verter</HI> is apt to think) Have not they exerci&s;ed the Power of the fir&s;t Bea&s;t, or made u&s;e of the Civil Power for their &s;upportment in per&s;e|cuting the Saints? they have made u&s;e of no other. They deliver the Saints over to the Secular Power to be burnt by it, they <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">ever did it them&s;elves. This from the beginning hath been the &s;upport of their Grandure and Empire, as is known. The &s;ame may be &s;aid of the <HI>Popi&s;h Engli&s;h-Hierarchy.</HI></P>
<P>He adds, 2dly, <HI>But this is no evil, to make u&s;e of the Civil Power for their &s;upport.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. To have no other Ba&s;is or Foundation of their Hierarchy and Government but that, is an argument 'tis not of the In&s;titution of Chri&s;t.</P>
<P N="2">2. To make u&s;e of the Civil Power in order to their own &s;upport and &s;ecurity, in the Bani&s;hing, Impri&s;oning the People of God, is an Argu|ment of per&s;ons being acted and influenced by an Antichri&s;tian bea&s;tly-&s;pirit; that they are members of that Bea&s;t or fal&s;e Prophet, who&s;e pro|per Character it is &s;o to do.</P>
<P>The 13^t^h Character remarked is, <HI>That they make an Image to the Bea&s;t,</HI> ver&s;. 14, 15. <HI>(i. e.</HI> erect an Eccle&s;ia&s;tical State of Government, in <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter"> proportionablene&s;s unto, and re&s;emblance of the Civil State.)</P>
<P>Mr. <HI>T.</HI> adjoyns, <HI>If the Eccle&s;ia&s;tical State, as it re&s;embles the Civil, be the Image of the Bea&s;t, and to erect it be the Character of a fal&s;e Prophet, and this be &s;o evil: Then it is much more evil to erect the Civil State. The Ec|cle&s;ia&s;tical State is rather the better and more de&s;irable for this.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> Neither the one nor the other follows hereupon. Not the fir&s;t, becau&s;e the evil of the re&s;emblance, and proportionablene&s;s of the Eccle&s;ia&s;tical State to the Civil lies not in this, That it is the re|&s;emblance of a Civil State that is evil, but that Chri&s;t hath no where
<PB N="331" REF="169"> &s;aid it &s;hould re&s;emble or bear a proportionablene&s;s unto the Civil State, but the contrary. No Civil State that ever was in the world, though never &s;o ju&s;t and righteous, was in&s;tituted as a Prototype and ex|emplar, according to which the Churches of Chri&s;t were to be conform|ed. To make any Civil State &s;uch, is evil, be the State never &s;o righte|ous. Not the &s;econd, becau&s;e the conformity and proportionablene&s;s of the Eccle&s;ia&s;tical Church-State, to the Plat-form of Chri&s;t, or the Rules given forth by him, is that wherein its beauty and excellency lies. Its being laid in a &s;ub&s;erviency to the intere&s;t of Men or States renders it not &s;o.</P>
<P>We add 14, <HI>That they compel all under the penalty of Death to wor&s;hip or bow down to the Image of the Bea&s;t (or Eccle&s;ia&s;tical Government, in its Courts, Canons, Laws and Ceremonies devi&s;ed by it)</HI> ver&s;. 15.</P>
<P>To this Mr. <HI>T. When did they thus compel them?</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. <HI>I</HI> am &s;orry Mr. <HI>T.</HI> his memory &s;o much fails him, as that he asks &s;uch a que&s;tion. He cannot &s;ure forget what was done in Queen <HI>Elizabeths</HI> dayes to <HI>Barrow, Greenwood, &amp;c.</HI> and who were the cau&s;e of pouring forth of that blood.</P>
<P N="2">2. He knows that all are civily &s;lain with re&s;pect to any Eccle&s;ia&s;ti|cal promotion (as they &s;peak) who cannot &s;ubject hereunto: and who promoted that bu&s;ine&s;s?</P>
<P N="3">3. He cannot forget Mr. <HI>Prin,</HI> Mr. <HI>Burton,</HI> Dr. <HI>Ba&s;twick,</HI> and what they &s;uffered in the Pallace-Yard and el&s;e-where, for &s;tanding out a|gain&s;t the Pope of <HI>Canterbury,</HI> and oppo&s;ing the Church-Ceremonies, and how &s;hort it came of Death&punc; if upon &s;ome accounts it were not in it &s;elf more grievous.</P>
<P>Be&s;ides 4. Tho&s;e poor men that by Writs of Excommunication have been ca&s;t into &s;tinking Goals, and there kept many years to the utter undoing of them&s;elves and families, as to the world, (&s;ome of them choaked to death there) becau&s;e they dare not &s;toop to their Hierar|chical juri&s;diction and &s;opperies. All which with much more that might be mentioned, are an abundant an&s;wer to his que&s;tion.</P>
<P>The 15^t^h Character in&s;tanced in is, <HI>That they compel all to receive a mark either in their right-hand, or fore-heads: i. e.</HI> &s;ecretly or openly, one way or other to acknowledge &s;ubjection unto this Bea&s;t, without which they may neither buy nor fell; being cut off from the Church by their Excommunications for their &s;tubbornne&s;s, <HI>ver&s;.</HI> 16, 17.</P>
<P>Mr. <HI>T.</HI> replies; <HI>Do all great as well as &s;mall,&mdash;receive &s;uch a mark?</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. No, th<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">ugh the g<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">ace of the Lord there are a Remnant
<PB N="332" REF="170"> <HI>that have not bowed their knees to this</HI> Baal: But no thanks to the Hie|rarchy, who (as I &s;aid) compel all, <HI>i. e.</HI> &s;ome of all &s;orts; as the par|ticle frequently &s;ignifies, and &s;o our Annotators, <HI>Brightman, Mede,</HI> expound the place.</P>
<P N="2">2. Tho&s;e that do not, when they are called thereunto, are cut off from the Church by their Excommunications, and no man by their Canon-Law is permitted to eat or drink, buy or &s;ell with them. I<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter"> which they &s;peak like the <HI>Dragon</HI> indeed. For the Bloody <HI>Diocle&s;ian</HI> &s;et forth the like Edict again&s;t the Chri&s;tians, <HI>That no man &s;hould &s;ell, or &s;ecretly give any thing to them, except fir&s;t they would burn Incen&s;e to the Godds.</HI> Of whom venerable <HI>Beda</HI> thus &s;ingeth, in the <HI>Hymn</HI> of <HI>Julian</HI> the Martyr.</P>
<Q><L>Non illis emendi quidquam aut vendendi copia:</L>
<L>Nec ip&s;am haurire aquam dabatur licentia,</L>
<L>Antequam thurificarent dete&s;tandis Idolis.</L></Q>
<P>The truth of the&s;e things is &s;o generally known throughout the Na|tion, that as I am &s;orry the mention thereof &s;hould drive Mr. <HI>T.</HI> into &s;uch a &s;wea<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">ing pa&s;&s;ion, as it &s;eems to do; &s;o can I not but wonder at his confidence, in calling tho&s;e things palpable gro&s;s untruths, when the whole Nation knows the contrary. His Satyrical expre&s;&s;ions I omit. The vi&s;ible Lineaments and Characters of fal&s;e Prophets being in&s;tamp|ed upon the fore-heads of the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters, they are not to be heard but &s;eparated from.</P>
</DIV3>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="8" TYPE="chapter">
<PB N="333" REF="170">
<HEAD>CHAP. VIII.</HEAD>
<DIV3 N="1" TYPE="section">
<HEAD><HI>Arg.</HI> 6. <HI>Sect.</HI> 1.</HEAD>
<ARGUMENT>
<P><HI>A &s;ixth Argument again&s;t hearing the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters. Saints mu&s;t not have Communion with Idolaters. The vanity of</HI> Mr. T. <HI>his arguings to the contrary, evinced.</HI> 1 Cor. 10. 14. 2 <HI>Cor.</HI> 6. 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, <HI>opened. A threefold Idolatry. Whether the Idolaters of old wor&s;hipped the creature terminatively. Of the golden Calf. Baal. Molech. That the Wor&s;hippers of them wor&s;hipped them not terminatively; proved. Of Devil-Wor&s;hip.</HI> P&s;al. 106. 37, 38, <HI>explained. The Heathen Images dedica|ted to the true God. The Te&s;timony of the Heathens in this matter. Of re|fined Idolatry. Wor&s;hiping of God in a way not of his appointment, is Ido|latry. The Te&s;timony of</HI> Calvin, Perkins, Ames, Pareus, Willet, Pe|ter Martyr, <HI>&amp;c. to the truth of the A&s;&s;ertion. The</HI> Romans <HI>wor&s;hipped the Godds, an hundred and &s;eventy years and more, without Images.</HI></P>
</ARGUMENT>
<P>A <HI>Sixth</HI> Argument advanced in <HI>S. T.</HI> again&s;t hearing the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters is this.</P>
<P><HI>Tho&s;e that are guilty of Idolatry, Saints may not have communion with, much le&s;s own them as their Teachers, but ought to &s;eparate from them: But the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters of</HI> England <HI>are guilty of Idolatry: Therefore.&mdash;</HI></P>
<P>The <HI>Major</HI> is bottomed upon expre&s;s Commands from Chri&s;t, 1 <HI>Cor.</HI> 5. 11. <HI>&amp;</HI> 10. 14. 2 <HI>Cor.</HI> 6. 14, 18.</P>
<P>To which Mr. <HI>T.</HI> replies, 1. <HI>The Conclu&s;ion is not the &s;ame with that which</HI> Chap. 1. <HI>was undertaken to be defended: That it is not lawful for Saints to hear the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters, which we may do though Communion with them be unlawful, though we are bound not to own them as our Teachers, but &s;eparate from them.&mdash;</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> Now this I confe&s;s I under&s;tand not; Communion con&s;i&s;ts in giving and receiving, a con&s;tant or frequent attending upon any ones teaching (e&s;pecially when by the Prelates in&s;tituted and inducted to &s;uch a Pari&s;h as a Teacher, whereof I am a Member) is an Argument
<PB N="334" REF="171"> of my owning him for my Teacher. Separation from any one con&s;i&s;ts in this, that I have no Communion with him in that, in re&s;pect of which I am bound to &s;eparate from him. That I &s;hould with frequency hear a man preach as a Mini&s;ter of the Go&s;pel, and yet be &s;aid to have no Communion with him, to &s;eparate from him,&mdash;is an <HI>Aenigma</HI> that needs &s;ome <HI>Oedipus</HI> to unravel.</P>
<P>He tells us, 2dly, <HI>The Major is not true; if the Idolatry be in wor&s;hip|ing in any other way than what he hath pre&s;cribed; or if the Idolatry be &s;e|cret or if open, if by infirmity a man falls into it and repents, or be not cen&s;ured as &s;uch, or teacheth not &s;uch Idolatry, nor requires any communion with him in his Idolatry.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. If the <HI>Major</HI> be not true, it follows that its lawful to have Communion with Idolaters, for with per&s;ons guilty of Idolatry the <HI>Major</HI> &s;aith <HI>we mu&s;t not have Communion.</HI> Mr. <HI>T.</HI> is drive<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter"> to his &s;hifts indeed, when to defend the cau&s;e he hath undertaken, he is forced to plead for &s;uch gro&s;s ab&s;urdities, &s;o contradictory to the Scriptures, and the judgment of all &s;ober Chri&s;tians that ever were in the world.</P>
<P N="2">2. If wor&s;hipping God in another way than he hath appointed, be in Scripture, Idolatry, and in it we are commanded to ab&s;tain from &s;uch Wor&s;hip and Wor&s;hippers; then though the Idolatry con&s;i&s;t therein, the <HI>Major</HI> is true. When the Scripture commands us to flee from Idolatry, it means that which is &s;o in its own &s;en&s;e, not Mr. <HI>T's.</HI></P>
<P N="3">3. 'Tis true <HI>I</HI> am not to &s;eparate from a per&s;on I know not to be guil|ty of Idolatry till I know he is &s;o; but this reacheth not the ca&s;e of the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters, whom we prove manife&s;tly guilty hereof. When <HI>Ezekiel</HI> once came to under&s;tand <HI>that the Antients of the Hou&s;e of</HI> I&s;rael <HI>committed Idolatry in the Chambers of their Imagery,</HI> Ezek. 8. 7, to 13. he might not have Communion with them, though they committed it in the dark.</P>
<P N="4">4. Repentance re&s;tores a man fallen into the &s;ame place among&s;t the Saints he was in before he fell; but this is not at all to the purpo&s;e; the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters ju&s;tifie their actings, would compel a<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">l to do as they do.</P>
<P N="5">5. That 'tis not our duty to &s;eparate from Idolaters till they are un|der Church-cen&s;ure, is a meer fancy.</P>
<P>1&s;t, What if they are &s;uch as are in no Church-&s;tate, per&s;ons without, with whom the Church hath nothing to do?</P>
<P>2dly, What if the &s;o called Church be generally over&s;pread with Ido|latry, as our <HI>Animadverter</HI> will confe&s;s the Church of <HI>Rome</HI> is? mu&s;t I wait the Churches cen&s;ure till I refu&s;e to hold communion with Idola|ters?
<PB N="335" REF="171"> Is it ever likely that an Apo&s;tate, Idolatrous Church will pa&s;s &s;entence upon it &s;elf? or rational, that I hold communion with them till they do?</P>
<P>So is, 6. That 'tis not our duty &s;o to do, except they teach it, and re|quire my communion with them in it.</P>
<P>For, 1. he that practi&s;eth it, teacheth it by his practice. 2. As it re|lates to the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters, 'tis vain and frivolous, they both pra|cti&s;e and preach it, and require my communion with them in it.&mdash;</P>
<P>He &s;aith 3dly, <HI>The Texts do not prove the Major.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> Let the judicious Reader judge for him&s;elf whether they do or no, 1 <HI>Cor.</HI> 5. 11. we have already vindicated from his exceptions.</P>
<P>That 1 <HI>Cor.</HI> 10. 14. is not to our purpo&s;e, becau&s;e the Apo&s;tle onely &s;aith, <HI>Flee from Idolatry,</HI> not from teachers that are Idolaters, is a fond conceit. The intendment of the Apo&s;tle is to provoke to the greate&s;t circum&s;pection, not onely to avoid the thing it &s;elf, (which &s;aith <HI>Pa|reus, Was not only the gro&s;s Idolatry of the Gentiles, but every kind of Ido|latry)</HI> but all the occa&s;ions thereof. And certainly the hearing or at|tending on the mini&s;try of per&s;ons, guilty of Idolatry, is no mean oc|ca&s;ion thereof. 2 <HI>Cor.</HI> 6. 14, 15, 16, 17, 18. commands &s;eparation from the Idol, Mr. <HI>T.</HI> grants: Now I mu&s;t profe&s;s, I know not by what Logick he will prove, that though it be my duty to &s;eparate from Idols, I may &s;o far retain communion with the Idolater, as to own him for my Teacher; the very repeating the&s;e ab&s;urdities is confutation &s;ufficient.</P>
<P>Before we attempt the proof of the <HI>minor</HI> Propo&s;ition, we premi&s;e in S. T. <HI>That Idolatry may be con&s;idered under a threefold Notion.</HI> 1. <HI>Mo&s;t gro&s;s and ab&s;urd Idolatry, when the creature is wor&s;hiped terminatively. This we &s;ay few are guilty of. In the matter of the golden Calf</HI> I&s;rael <HI>was not, they wor&s;hipped God in it,</HI> Exod. 32. 5.</P>
<P><HI>Maimonides de Idolat.</HI> 8. 2, 3. tells us, <HI>That through the Idols, Ido|laters wor&s;hipped the God that made the Heaven and the Earth.</HI></P>
<P>Mr. <HI>T.</HI> replies, 1. <HI>To wor&s;hip the Creatures terminatively is mo&s;t gro&s;s-Idolatry, the I&s;raelites,</HI> Exod. 32. <HI>and many Heathen Idolaters did not do &s;o.</HI> 2. <HI>'Tis not true that few or none wor&s;hip the Creature terminatively, for the mo&s;t of the Idolaters of old wor&s;hipped the Ho&s;t of Heaven, and at this day the Devil him&s;elf is wor&s;hipped in the Ea&s;t and We&s;t Indies.&mdash;</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. That mo&s;t of the Idolaters of old wor&s;hipped the Ho&s;t of Heaven, is granted; that they wor&s;hipped the&s;e or any other Idols ter|minatively, our Dictator attempts not the proof of. What is &s;aid of <HI>Baal,</HI> 1 Kings 16. 31. or <HI>Molech,</HI> P&s;al. 106. 37, 38. who is al&s;o call'd <HI>Moloch,</HI> Amos 5. 26. and <HI>Milcom,</HI> 1 Kings 11. 33. and <HI>Malcham,</HI>
<PB N="336" REF="172"> Zeph. 1. 5. <HI>(i. e.</HI> the Sun) proves not that they &s;o wor&s;hipped the Sun, (in commemoration of which the&s;e Images were erected) 'Tis true, <HI>P&s;al.</HI> 106. 37, 38. 'tis &s;aid, <HI>They &s;acrificed&mdash;to Devils,</HI> but that there|fore they wor&s;hipped the Devil as the utmo&s;t <HI>terminus,</HI> cannot be con|ceived. 'Tis call'd <HI>Devil-wor&s;hip,</HI> becau&s;e it was not from God, but of the invention and in&s;tigation of the Devil, as all the fal&s;e wor&s;hip in the World is. Of their wor&s;hipping <HI>Molech,</HI> or <HI>Milcham,</HI> 'tis ex|pre&s;ly &s;aid, that they wor&s;hipped the Lord too, when they wor&s;hipped him, <HI>Zeph.</HI> 1. 5. (Heb. to the Lord, and in <HI>Malcam,</HI> as the Papi&s;ts &s;ay, they direct their wor&s;hip to God only, in, or through their Ima|ges) which fully an&s;wers what can be pleaded from <HI>Acts</HI> 7. 41, 42, 43.</P>
<P N="2">2. The mo&s;t learned of the Heathens do affirm, That <HI>their Images were dedicated to the true God, whom in them they wor&s;hipped, reputing the Images them&s;elves but Stooks and Stones, and that in them they wor&s;hipped but one God. Seneca</HI> &s;aith, <HI>By</HI> Jupiter <HI>&s;tanding in the Capitol with Light|ning in his hand, they under&s;tand the Pre&s;erver and Governor of all things,&mdash;the Maker of all the World,</HI> Qu. natur. l. 2. c. 45. Who it was that &s;ang,</P>
<Q><L><GAP DESC="foreign">,</L>
<L><GAP DESC="foreign">&mdash;</L></Q>
<P>Mr. <HI>T.</HI> is not ignorant. See <HI>Arnobius, l.</HI> 6. <HI>contra. Gent.</HI></P>
<P>We premi&s;e 2dly, That there is a &s;omewhat more refi<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">ed Idolatry,&mdash;and to this Head we refer,</P>
<LIST>
<ITEM>1. The a&s;cription of a God-head to any creature, as to <HI>Herod,</HI> Acts 12. 22.</ITEM>
<ITEM>2. The a&s;cription of the properties of the God-head to any Creature.</ITEM>
<ITEM>3. The wor&s;hipping God in any other way than what he hath pre|&s;cribed, which is the Idolatry forbidden in the &s;econd Commandment.</ITEM>
<ITEM>4. The Oblation of Wor&s;hip, and Service to God that hath been offered up to Idols, for which there is no pre&s;cription in the Scrip|tures.</ITEM>
</LIST>
<P>'Tis this &s;econd &s;ort of Idolatry, we &s;ay, the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters of <HI>Eng|land</HI> are guilty of.</P>
<P>Mr. <HI>T.</HI> an&s;wers, 1. <HI>The definition of Idolatry by Dr.</HI> Rainold, <HI><GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">ath hi|therto been received by all</HI> Prote&s;tants <HI>that he knows of, that it is exhibiting Divine Wor&s;hip to a Creature, proved from</HI> Rom. 1. 15.</P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. That this is Idolatry, I grant, that nothing el&s;e is &s;o,
<PB N="337" REF="172"> will not be proved. <HI>Prote&s;tants</HI> affirm otherwi&s;e, as <HI>Calvin, Perkins, Ames, Paraeus.</HI></P>
<P>Though, 2. the very truth is, when we &s;ubmit to a Wor&s;hip of hu|mane devi&s;ing, we exhibit Divine Wor&s;hip to a Creature, <HI>viz.</HI> the devi&s;er, impo&s;er thereof, we wor&s;hip him <GAP DESC="foreign">, be&s;ides the Creator, as <HI>Hilarius, Beza,</HI> expound the Phra&s;e, <HI>Rom.</HI> 1. 25.</P>
<P>And <HI>Paraeus, Explicat. cate. p.</HI> 3. <HI>Q.</HI> 9. <HI>p.</HI> 528. &s;aith, <Q>What is re|quired in the &s;econd Commandment? <HI>An&s;w.</HI> That we expre&s;s not God by any Figure, and that we wor&s;hip him not in any other way or manner than he hath in his Word commanded us to wor&s;hip him, 1 <HI>Sam.</HI> 15. 23. <HI>Deut.</HI> 12. 30. <HI>Mat.</HI> 15. 9.&mdash;Idolatry is contrary to this Commandment, which is a fal&s;e and &s;uper&s;titious wor&s;hip of the Deity, of which there are two chief kinds; one more gro&s;s, <NOTE PLACE="marg">&lindx;</NOTE> as when a fal&s;e Deity is wor&s;hipped; this is forbidden in the fir&s;t Commandment&mdash;another more refined, when the true God is pre|tended to be wor&s;hipped; but there is a mi&s;take in the kind of Wor|&s;hip, <HI>i. e.</HI> when Wor&s;hip is pretended to be performed to God in &s;ome work which he hath not required; this is condemned in this &s;e|cond Commandment.&mdash;&amp; <HI>p.</HI> 529. Tho&s;e who &s;in again&s;t the &s;e|cond Commandment, &s;in al&s;o again&s;t the fir&s;t, becau&s;e they who wor|&s;hip God otherwi&s;e than he will be wor&s;hipped, they feign to them|&s;elves another God, and indeed wor&s;hip not God, but the figment of their own brain.&mdash;To feign another Wor&s;hip of God, is to feign a|nother will of God, and by con&s;equence another God.&mdash;</Q></P>
<P>Mr. <HI>Perkins,</HI> Vol. 1. p. 659. &s;aith, <HI>When God is wor&s;hipped otherwi&s;e, and by other means than he hath revealed in his Word, that is Idolatry. Ido|latrous Wor&s;hips are all they which are appointed without the Command of God,</HI> Mel. Tom. 2. p. 107.</P>
<P>We &s;hall onely add what we find mentioned by the Learned <HI>Peter Martyr,</HI> in his Comment on the fir&s;t of <HI>Sam. ch.</HI> 7. <HI>p.</HI> 40. <Q>Men are wont &s;ometimes to feign to them&s;elves Commentitious gods, as <HI>Jupi|ter, Neptune, Mercury:</HI> Sometimes to wor&s;hip the one and true God, but with a Wor&s;hip that is forbidden, or &s;trange, <HI>(i. e.</HI> not com|manded) as if any one &s;hould &s;lay his Son, or do what King <HI>Ahaz</HI> did, who con&s;tituted a <HI>Dama&s;cene</HI> Altar in the Temple of God.&mdash;To do thus, is nothing el&s;e than to wor&s;hip an Idol. For men do here|by feign a God who will &s;o be wor&s;hipped, who is in truth no God.&mdash;</Q></P>
<P>Therefore <HI>Augu&s;t. Que&s;t.</HI> 29. <HI>in lib. Jo&s;.</HI> in which place the &s;ame thing is propo&s;ed to the people by <HI>Jo&s;hua</HI> that is here by <HI>Samuel,</HI> <Q>He that feigns to him&s;elf God to be other than he is, doth carry in his
<PB N="338" REF="173"> heart another God. Wherefore not only <HI>Jupiter,</HI> and the vain Dei|ties, but al&s;o tho&s;e Idols and Phanta&s;ms are altogether to be ca&s;t out of our mind. This will be done if we con&s;titute to our &s;elves God to be &s;uch as he is de&s;cribed to us to be in the Holy Scriptures.</Q></P>
<P><HI>Tertul. in lib. de idololat.</HI> &s;aith, <Q>Not only the Cro&s;s and made Wor|&s;hip of Images is Idolatrous, (for the Antients of old had Temples <NOTE N="&dagger;" PLACE="marg"><HI>The</HI> Romans <HI>for above</HI> 170. <HI>years, wor&s;hipped the Godds without Images,</HI> &s;ay Vario, Plutarch.</NOTE> without Images, who were neverthele&s;s Idolaters. It matters not whether thou make to thy &s;elf a God of Plai&s;cering, or Marble, or of a Trunk of a Tree, (I add, &s;aith <HI>P. Martyr,</HI> or of thy own Phanta&s;m)&mdash;an Idol is &s;o call'd of <GAP DESC="foreign">, which is a Form, an Idol therefore is a little Form.</Q></P>
<P><HI>Samuel</HI> therefore exhorts <HI>(chap.</HI> 7. 3.) that they ca&s;t away commen|titious Godds, and vain Wor&s;hip, and evil Opinions of God out of their minds.</P>
<P>What this <HI>Animadverter</HI> mentions out of <HI>Tertullian</HI> in his Book of Idolatry, <HI>c.</HI> 15. makes for us. If Idolatry be when any thing that is not God, is extolled beyond the mea&s;ure of humane honour, then when the Pre&s;cribers of Divine Service are &s;o extolled (as they are when the Service pre&s;cribed by them is &s;ubjected to, it being the peculiar ho|nour and prerogative of God to pre&s;cribe his own Wor&s;hip, (as &s;ay the Heathens them&s;elves from the Light and Dictates of Nature) there is Idolatry.</P>
<P>2dly, Mr. <HI>T.</HI> tells us, <HI>That the wor&s;hipping God in any other way than he hath pre&s;cribed, is not the Idolatry forbidden in the &s;econd Commandment, that all who write upon it &s;ay not &s;o, that wor&s;hip (not of Divine pre&s;crip|tion) abu&s;ed to Idolatry, is not Idolatry.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. If the fir&s;t be true, this la&s;t is undoubtedly &s;o, <HI>i. e.</HI> if wor|&s;hipping God in any other way than he hath pre&s;cribed be the Idolatry forbidden in the &s;econd Commandment, that Wor&s;hip that hath been abu&s;ed to Idolatry, and was never of Divine pre&s;cription, is undoubt|edly &s;o.</P>
<P N="2">2. Mr. <HI>T.</HI> grants that there is &s;ome kind of Idolatry forbidden in the &s;econd Commandment, and I de&s;ire to he informed what it is; If he &s;ay the wor&s;hipping fal&s;e Godds, that Idolatry is forbidden in the fir&s;t Commandment; If he &s;ay the making of Images, I ask, 1. Whether the making of Images for civil u&s;es, or Divine Service? The fir&s;t he will not a&s;&s;ert; if the &s;econd, their forming for that u&s;e and purpo&s;e, is condemned, becau&s;e a <HI>medium</HI> of Wor&s;hip not in&s;tituted by the Lord;
<PB N="339" REF="173"> for had it been &s;o, it had not been Idolatry, but our duty to have form|ed them.</P>
<P N="2">2. Wether by Images he mean corporeal Images, or incorporeal <HI>Idea's,</HI> or fal&s;e Conceptions of things in the mind of man? and whether this later, in the Judgment of mo&s;t eminent Divines, be not as really Idolatry as the former? and if &s;o (as undoubtedly it is) the wor&s;hip|ping God in any other way then he hath pre&s;cribed, is evidently Ido|latry, and that forbidden in the &s;econd Commandment; and &s;o &s;ay all that I have yet met with that write thereupon.</P>
<P>What he adds the <HI>Phari&s;ees wa&s;hing their hands, and that Christ doth not accu&s;e them as Idolaters,</HI> is frivolous.</P>
<P N="1">1. That Cu&s;tom did not &s;o immediately border upon the Wor&s;hip of God, was not made &s;uch a part of it as our <HI>Common-Prayer-Book-Service.</HI></P>
<P>Yet 2, They placing too much of their Religion and Devotion there|in, Chri&s;t doth little le&s;s than call them &s;o, in the place in&s;tanced in by Mr. <HI>T. Mat.</HI> 15. 9. <HI>In vain do they wor&s;hip me; Gr.</HI> <GAP DESC="foreign">, <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">. 1. <HI>They &s;hall reap no fruit by it.</HI></P>
<P N="2">2. Their Wor&s;hip is vain, frivolous, vanity, as the Lord calls Idols and Idolatrous Wor&s;hip, <HI>Lev.</HI> 26. 1. <HI>Ezek.</HI> 30. 13. <HI>P&s;al.</HI> 97. 7. <HI>I&s;a.</HI> 19. 3. <HI>Jer.</HI> 14. 14. <HI>Zach.</HI> 11. 17. <HI>Hebr.</HI> <GAP DESC="foreign"> which the 70 render (and that truly) <GAP DESC="foreign">, <HI>vain things,</HI> and &s;o the Apo&s;tle calls all the Godds of the <HI>Gentiles, Act.</HI> 14. 15.</P>
<P N="3">3. That becau&s;e Chri&s;t doth not expre&s;ly call them &s;o, therefore they were not &s;uch, Mr. <HI>T.</HI> will not prove. Chri&s;t calls not <HI>Pilate</HI> an <HI>un|ju&s;t Judge,</HI> yet he was &s;o.&mdash;</P>
<P>We add in <HI>S. T.</HI> 3dly, That there is a mo&s;t refined &s;ort of Idolatry, when the heart goes forth in de&s;ires after any thing beyond what is limited by the Lord, and tru&s;ts in any thing on this &s;ide God, which Mr. <HI>T.</HI> gives no occa&s;ion of debate about.</P>
</DIV3>
<DIV3 N="2" TYPE="section">
<PB N="340" REF="174">
<HEAD>Sect. 2. Arg. 1.</HEAD>
<ARGUMENT>
<P><HI>The pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters of</HI> England <HI>are Idolaters, proved. Of Wor&s;hipping God in a fal&s;e way. That to do &s;o is Idolatry; proved.</HI> Acts 17. 23, 24. <HI>explained.</HI> <GAP DESC="foreign">, <HI>what it &s;ignifies. Why the</HI> Athenians are <HI>&s;o called. The pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters wor&s;hip God in a fal&s;e way. The Com|mon-Prayer-Book Wor&s;hip, a fal&s;e way of Wor&s;hip, evinced.</HI> Mat. 6. 9. Luke 11. 2. &amp; 10. 5. <HI>The judgment of</HI> Grotius, Tertullian, Cor|nelius a Lapide, Mu&s;culus, <HI>on Mat.</HI> 6. 9.</P>
</ARGUMENT>
<P>THat the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters of <HI>England</HI> are Idolaters, (which is the <HI>Minor</HI> Propo&s;ition of the forecited Argument) we manife&s;t in <HI>S. T.</HI> by &s;everal Arguments. As,</P>
<P><HI>Arg.</HI> 1. Tho&s;e that wor&s;hip the true God in any other way then he hath &s;aid he will be wor&s;hipped in, and is pre&s;cribed by him, are Ido|laters. But the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters wor&s;hip God in another way than he hath &s;aid he will be wor&s;hipped in, and is pre&s;cribed by him. There|fore.&mdash;</P>
<P>The <HI>Major</HI> we &s;ay is evident from this &s;ingle con&s;ideration: To Wor&s;hip the true God through fal&s;e <HI>Mediums</HI> is Idolatry. Such as &s;o wor&s;hip him are Idolaters. But to wor&s;hip God in any other way than what is of his own pre&s;cription, is to wor&s;hip him through a fal&s;e <HI>Me|dium.</HI> Therefore &s;o to wor&s;hip him is Idolatry, tho&s;e that &s;o wor&s;hip him are Idolaters.</P>
<P>To which Mr. <HI>T.</HI> replies, <HI>Sect.</HI> 2. 1&s;t, By de&s;canting upon the ex|pre&s;&s;ion <HI>[any other way]</HI> which what I meant thereby, he might ea&s;ily have informed him&s;elf from the Treati&s;e he attempts to confute I mean away of drawing nigh to God, invented and &s;o e&s;tabli&s;hed by man, as to be made &s;uch a nece&s;&s;ary part of Wor&s;hip, as that without it I tru&s;t not publickly draw nigh to God in wor&s;hip at all, which is to wor&s;hip him through a fal&s;e <HI>Medium;</HI> and this I &s;ay is Idolatry, or el&s;e there is little or no Idolatry in the World. (The <HI>Achenians</HI> were <HI>Idolaters</HI> upon this very account and no other, for they wor&s;hipped the true God, <HI>Acts</HI> 17. 23, 24.) What he adds touching their wor&s;hipping by an Image is of an ea&s;ie di&s;patch.</P>
<P N="1">1. That Image through which they wor&s;hipped the <HI>unknown God,</HI> was a fal&s;e <HI>Medium,</HI> and upon this foot of account &s;ingly are they char|ged with Idolatry. No doubt but they had a multitude of Images, and that in re&s;pect of the&s;e their City is &s;aid to be <GAP DESC="foreign">, <HI>full of Idols,</HI>
<PB N="341" REF="174"> or <HI>wholly given to Idolatry;</HI> which it was, in as much as through the&s;e Images, as fal&s;e <HI>Medium's,</HI> they wor&s;hipped God; and &s;o it had been if through any other fal&s;e <HI>Medium's</HI> they had drawn nigh to him, though there had not bee<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter"> one of the&s;e <HI>Statuae,</HI> or pillars abiding among&s;t them.</P>
<P N="2">2. That the <HI>unknown God</HI> to whom their Altar was dedicated, was as a <HI>Daemon,</HI> is, to &s;ay no more, a very incon&s;iderate a&s;&s;ertion: When <HI>Paul</HI> tells them, in <HI>ver&s;.</HI> 23. <HI>It was God that made the world, whom they igno|rantly wor&s;hiped.</HI> Nor is there the lea&s;t footing for &s;uch an a&s;&s;ertion from the word <GAP DESC="foreign">, 'tis true Mr. <HI>Mede</HI> renders it a <HI>Wor&s;hip|per of Daemon-Gods,</HI> but our Tran&s;lators better, <HI>too &s;uper&s;titious.</HI> They are &s;aid to be <GAP DESC="foreign">, with re&s;pect unto their <GAP DESC="foreign">, which <HI>Budaeus</HI> demon&s;trates, &s;ignifies <HI>Religion; Plutarch</HI> explains it of <HI>the overmuch, and importune wor&s;hip of the Godds,</HI> whence aro&s;e mul|titudes of &s;uper&s;titious Ceremonies. No doubt they were great devoti|oni&s;ts who mi&s;carried not in this, that they directed not their Wor|&s;hip to the true God (which the Apo&s;tle &s;aith they did) but in their wor&s;hipping him&punc; <GAP DESC="foreign">, <HI>with many Ceremonies of hu|mane Invention:</HI> upon the account whereof they are &s;aid to be <GAP DESC="foreign">, or <HI>too Ceremonious,</HI> or <HI>Super&s;titious,</HI> and <HI>ver&s;.</HI> 16. <HI>to be given to Idolatry;</HI> which is what we charge upon, and prove again&s;t the Mini|&s;ters of <HI>England.</HI></P>
<P>The <HI>Minor</HI> Propo&s;ition, <HI>viz.</HI> That the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters wor&s;hip the true God in another way than he hath &s;aid he will be wor&s;hipped, and is pre&s;cribed by him, is in <HI>S. T.</HI> thus demon&s;trated.</P>
<P><HI>Tho&s;e that wor&s;hip God after the way of the</HI> Common-Prayer-Book, <HI>wor|&s;hip him in another way than he hath &s;aid he will be wor&s;hiped in, and is pr<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">|&s;cribed by him: But the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters of</HI> England <HI>wor&s;hip God after the way of the</HI> Common-Prayer-Book: <HI>Therefore.&mdash;</HI></P>
<P>The <HI>Minor</HI> cannot be denied; their &s;ub&s;cription before they are ad|mitted into the Mini&s;try, with their daily and con&s;tant practice, are &s;uf|ficient evidences thereof.</P>
<P>To this Mr. <HI>T.</HI> replies <HI>Sect:</HI> 3. 1. <HI>Way of Wor&s;hip not pre&s;cribed by God, he tells us may be,</HI> 1&s;t, <HI>When the Wor&s;hip is to another thing be&s;ides or with God, in which &s;en&s;e the Minor was denied and &s;hould have been pro|ved.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. But in this &s;en&s;e we di&s;charged the Mini&s;ters of <HI>England</HI> of the guilt of Idolatry: What obligation lies upon us to prove a charge again&s;t them, we never impleaded them as guilty, I know not.</P>
<P N="2">2. If this be all Mr. <HI>T.</HI> contends about, That they wor&s;hip not ano|ther
<PB N="342" REF="175"> thing be&s;ides, or with the true God, he fights with a man of &s;traw of his own making.</P>
<P N="3">3. When he demon&s;trates (as he how dictates) that this alone proves Idolatry, <HI>i. e.</HI> there is no other Idolatry but the wor&s;hipping that which is not God by Nature, I will acknowledge my mi&s;take; we have proved the contrary, in which we have the concurrent te&s;timony of the mo&s;t (all) Expo&s;itors and Ca&s;ui&s;ts that have written about Idolatry, who make wor&s;hipping the true God in a way not of his per&s;cription, to be the Idolatry forbidden in the &s;econd Commandment; Dr. <HI>Willet</HI> (one of their own) tells us as much, <HI>Com.</HI> on <HI>Exod. p.</HI> 338. So doth the learned <HI>U&s;her, Ball, Ur&s;in, Calvin, Wendeline, Altingius, Ravanellus, Maccovius,</HI> &amp;c. be&s;ides tho&s;e we have already mentioned.</P>
<P>He adds 2dly, <HI>By another way may be meant, another Ceremony or Rite in which the Wor&s;hip of God is placed;</HI> but this Author goes not about to prove the <HI>minor</HI> in this &s;en&s;e.</P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. By wor&s;hipping God in another way,&mdash;I under&s;tand the tendring to God a Wor&s;hip and Service of humane devi&s;ing, that he no where calls for. This I prove the Mini&s;ters of <HI>England</HI> do, when they draw nigh to God with their Common-Prayer-Book-Service in their hands: And Mr. <HI>T.</HI> talks idely, when he &s;aith, <HI>The Wor&s;hip of God is not placed therein.</HI> If it be not, they have in many places of the Land no Wor&s;hip of God at all; 'tis frequently by them call'd <HI>Divi<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">e Service,</HI> and the <HI>Service of the Church.</HI> 'Tis made &s;uch a nece&s;&s;ary part of Wor&s;hip, that Preaching mu&s;t give place to it.</P>
<P>As to what he adds, 1. <HI>That I &s;uppo&s;e that God hath appointed the particularities of the way of his Wor&s;hip.&mdash;</HI></P>
<P>We an&s;wer, 'That particularities of Wor&s;hip, as &s;uch, are determi|ned by the Lord, we have a&s;&s;erted and proved; what Mr. <HI>T.</HI> hath of|fered to the contrary in an&s;wer to the Preface, <HI>Sect.</HI> 20. <HI>chap.</HI> 1. <HI>Sect.</HI> 3. <HI>chap.</HI> 4. <HI>Sect.</HI> 9. <HI>chap.</HI> 5. <HI>Sect.</HI> 3, 4, 5, 7. is fully an&s;wered in our Re|ply thereunto.</P>
<P N="2">2. That the Argument may be retorted upon my &s;elf, is a vanity of the <HI>Animadverter;</HI> becau&s;e, 1. our di&s;pute is not (as he would bear the Reader in hand) about every form of expre&s;&s;ion, but of &s;uch a form wherein the Wor&s;hip of God is placed, which is <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">mpo&s;ed upon the Churches of Chri&s;t, without &s;ubjection to which it is denied them to wor&s;hip God at all as &s;uch, for refu&s;ing whereof they are expo&s;ed to Ex|communications, and total ruine in this World. 2. We have already proved that forms of prayer enjoyned, are condemned by the Lord, and praying in the Spirit, commended and commanded.</P>
<PB N="343" REF="175">
<P> We proceed in <HI>S. T.</HI> and prove, <HI>That to wor&s;hip God after the way of the Common-Prayer-Book, is to wor&s;hip him in a way that is not of his ap|pointment,</HI> (which is the <HI>major</HI> propo&s;ition) <HI>becau&s;e the lea&s;t foot&s;teps of &s;uch a way of Wor&s;hip is not to be found in the Old or New Te&s;tament, en|joyned by Chri&s;t or his Apo&s;tles; nor for &s;everal centuries of years after|wards;</HI> of which we treat at large in <HI>S. T.</HI></P>
<P>What Mr. <HI>T.</HI> is plea&s;ed, <HI>Sect.</HI> 4. in the fir&s;t and &s;econd place to an|&s;wer hereunto we have already replied to.</P>
<P>He adds, 3dly, <HI>He &s;till acknowledgeth that the Common-Prayer-Book-Wor&s;hip is the Wor&s;hip of the true God.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. I do &s;o indeed, and &s;o was the <HI>Athenian</HI> Wor&s;hip, <HI>Acts</HI> 17. 23. yet an Idolatrous Wor&s;hip, and they them&s;elves Idolaters.</P>
<P>2dly, Though I grant it to be the Wor&s;hip of the true God, yet I prove it not to be the true Wor&s;hip of God, and therefore Idolatrous.</P>
<P>He adds, 4thly, <HI>That he doth not except again&s;t the matter of the pray|ers in the Common-Prayer-Book.&mdash;</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> True, in the place under con&s;ideration, I do not, but it doth not therefore follow that it's not liable to exception. Somewhat was hinted in S. T. touching this matter, and more may be added in its proper place.</P>
<P>He adds, <HI>That the&s;e three things are affirmed by me;</HI> 1. <HI>That all Li|turgies, or &s;tinted forms of prayer, are not of Gods appointment, but of humane invention.</HI></P>
<P N="2">2. <HI>That they are unduly impo&s;ed on Mini&s;ters.</HI></P>
<P N="3">3. <HI>That Mini&s;ters do &s;infully, yea, idolatrou&s;ly u&s;e them, becau&s;e it's <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter"> way of Wor&s;hip not appointed of God.</HI> With re&s;pect to which he affirms;</P>
<P N="1">1. <HI>That &s;tinted forms of Prayer, and Service of God, which are not otherwi&s;e faulty, then in that they are &s;tinted, may be lawfully u&s;ed by a Mini&s;ter of the Go&s;pel in his publick Admini&s;tration.</HI></P>
<P N="2">2. <HI>That &s;uch Prayers and Service are a Wor&s;hip of God in a way of his appointment.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. And both the&s;e might be granted him without the lea&s;t de|triment to the Cau&s;e undertaken by us. For the Common-Prayer-Book-Service is otherwi&s;e faulty than in that it is &s;tinted, <HI>viz.</HI> becau&s;e abu|&s;ed to Idolatry; the matter of it is in not a few things liable to excep|tions, the Rites and Modes enjoyned therein abominable.</P>
<P N="2">2. He &s;hould have proved one thing more, <HI>viz,</HI> That a Service de|vi&s;ed by man, (as the Common-Prayer-Book is) may lawfully be im|po&s;ed, and as &s;o &s;ubmitted to, and that this is ju&s;tifiable. A failure wherein renders us unconcern'd in what is nextly offered by him.</P>
<PB N="344" REF="176">
<P> This he expre&s;ly tells us, p. 222. <HI>He will not ju&s;tifie.</HI></P>
<P>So brave a Champion is he for the Clergy, that when he &s;hould come to a clo&s;e encounter, he fairly takes his heels and quits the Field, leav|ing them, poor men, to &s;hift for them&s;elves as well as they can.</P>
<P>However we attend the proof of his A&s;&s;ertions, 1. <HI>Chri&s;t appointed the Lords Prayer to be u&s;ed by the Apo&s;tles, (as a &s;tinted form, tying them to the u&s;e of &s;o many words and no more)</HI> Mat. 6. 9. Luke 11. 2.</P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. Notoriou&s;ly fal&s;e, as we have manife&s;ted, together with the invalidity of mens arguings from hence, for a &s;tinted impo&s;ed Li|turgie, <HI>cap.</HI> 6. of this Treati&s;e.</P>
<P N="2">2. Nor is this one of the <HI>Placita</HI> of the Separati&s;ts, <HI>Grotius</HI> is of the &s;ame mind, (on Luke 11. 1. <HI>Teach us a compendium of tho&s;e things we are to pray for; for at that time they were not bound to the u&s;e of &s;o many words and &s;yllables.&mdash;)</HI> as are <HI>Tertullian, Cyprian, Cornelius a Lapide, Mu&s;culus,</HI> &amp;c.</P>
<P>But, 3dly, &s;hould it be granted that Chri&s;t enjoyned the u&s;e of that form of Prayer as a form, this will not prove that &s;tinted forms of Prayer are lawful, and as &s;uch may lawfully be impo&s;ed and u&s;ed; which can have no other ba&s;is then this; 'tis as lawful for Civil or Ec|cle&s;ia&s;tical Rulers to devi&s;e and impo&s;e forms of Prayer upon the Churches as for Chri&s;t, a mo&s;t ab&s;urd and bla&s;phemous a&s;&s;ertion.</P>
<P>As touching what he adds, 2. <HI>Chri&s;t ju&s;tifies the Childrens crying of</HI> Ho&s;anna, <HI>u&s;es him&s;elf the forms which</HI> David <HI>u&s;ed before in the P&s;alms,</HI> &amp;c.</P>
<P>We an&s;wer, That in all this he doth but beat the Air, and &s;peaks not one word to the purpo&s;e: We find no foot&s;teps of any enjoyned Litur|gie, or &s;tinted forths of Prayer impo&s;ed either in the old Te&s;tament or the New; though we find the &s;ame words u&s;ed &s;ometimes by them, yet that they might never u&s;e any other in their publick devotions, which is the condition of &s;tinted enjoyned forms, &amp; the known ca&s;e of the Mini|&s;ters of <HI>Engl.</HI> with re&s;pect to their Church-Service, we find not, (which is al&s;o a full an&s;wer to what he cites out of <HI>Cyprian,</HI> touching their u&s;e of the Lord's Prayers, and other Forms,&mdash;if they u&s;ed any, they were not bound to u&s;e them and no other&mdash;)When he proves this con&s;e|quence, the Saints of old u&s;ed the &s;ame words in prayer &s;ometimes, and Chri&s;t u&s;ed words before u&s;ed by them&mdash;Therefore a &s;et and &s;tin|ted Liturgy was in u&s;e among&s;t them, and &s;uch an one as our Common-Prayer-Book-Wor&s;hip, I will be his Convert. He knows the contra|ry: His an&s;wers to <HI>Ju&s;tin Martyr</HI> and <HI>Tertullian,</HI> are impertinent, and not worth the reciting. The words of the former are, <GAP DESC="foreign">, <HI>&amp;c.</HI>
<PB N="345" REF="176">
<Q>Athei&s;ts we are not, &s;eeing we wor&s;hip the Maker of the World.&mdash;And in all our Oblations we prai&s;e him according to our abilities, in the way of prayer and thank&s;giving. And afterwards tells us, that the Pre&s;ident of the A&s;&s;embly poureth our prayers&mdash;according to his abi|lity, and continues long in this work.<HI>&mdash;Tertullian</HI> tells us, The Chri|&s;tians looking towards Heaven, (not on their Common-Prayer-Book) with their hands &s;pread abroad, prayed without a <HI>Moniter,</HI> becau&s;e from their hearts, expre&s;&s;ions wholly exclu&s;ive of, incon&s;i&s;tant with, the formes of prayer contended for. The &s;ayings of <HI>Socrates</HI> in his <HI>Eccl.</HI></Q> <HI>Hi&s;t. l.</HI> 5. <HI>c.</HI> 21. who lived about the year 430. tells us, <HI>That among all the Chri&s;tians in that Age, &s;carce two were to be found that u&s;ed the &s;ame words in prayer:</HI> He pa&s;&s;eth over in &s;ilence, as he doth the account I give of the u&s;e of them, not till about the year 600. and the impo&s;ition by <HI>Charles</HI> the Great of <HI>Gregories</HI> Liturgy, as is thought, and the &s;up|port thereof by threats and puni&s;hments ever &s;ince. The&s;e things h<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter"> knows to be true, and yet they are &s;uch as the Dragon he labours to &s;upport, cannot po&s;&s;ibly &s;tand before.</P>
</DIV3>
<DIV3 N="3" TYPE="section">
<HEAD><HI>Sect.</HI> 3.</HEAD>
<ARGUMENT>
<P><HI>Common-Prayer-Book-Wor&s;hip not of the appointment of Chri&s;t, becau&s;e an ob&s;truction of &s;ome po&s;itive Duty charged by Chri&s;t upon the Saints. Mr.</HI> T. <HI>his Exceptions refuted. Of re&s;ting on the Sabbath Day. Whether Sacrificing was an ob&s;truction of that Duty.</HI> Mat. 5. 12. <HI>explained. Fol|lowing Chri&s;t no ob&s;truction of po&s;itive Duties to Parents. Of the gift and grace of Prayer.</HI> Rom. 8. 26. <HI>opened. 'Tis the duty of Saints to im|prove Gifts received. Common-Prayer-Book-Wor&s;hip contrary to Scrip|ture. 'Tis not nece&s;&s;ary to the edification&mdash;of the Saints. The Judgment of the Reformed Churches.</HI></P>
</ARGUMENT>
<P>A Second Argument advanced in S. T. to prove that Common-Pray|er-Book-Wor&s;hip is not of the appointment of Chri&s;t, is thus for|med. That Wor&s;hip which is an ob&s;truction of any po&s;itive Duty charged by Chri&s;t to be performed by the Saints, is not a Wor&s;hip that is of his appointment. But this is undeniably true of the Common-Prayer-Book-Wor&s;hip. Therefore.&mdash;Chri&s;t hath given Officers to his Church, <HI>Ephe&s;.</HI> 4. 11. to them he hath given gifts every way &s;uiting the imployment he calls them forth unto, the improvement whereof he expects and charges upon them, 2 <HI>Tim.</HI> 1. 6. 1 <HI>Cor.</HI> 12. 7. <HI>Ephe&s;.</HI> 4. 11. <HI>Prov.</HI> 17. 16. <HI>Luke</HI> 19. 20. To think after all this that any
<PB N="346" REF="177"> Wor&s;hip &s;hould be of the in&s;titution of Chri&s;t, that &s;huts ou<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter"> as un|nece&s;&s;ary the exerci&s;e of the gifts given, is ab&s;urd, and injurious to Chri&s;t.&mdash;</P>
<P>To which Mr. <HI>T.</HI> an&s;wers, <HI>Sect.</HI> 5. 1. <HI>The</HI> major <HI>is not in all ca&s;es true; re&s;ting on the Sabbath Day was a po&s;itive Duty; yet &s;acrificing, which was an ob&s;truction of that Duty, called prophaning the Sabbath,</HI> Mat. 12. 5. <HI>was Wor&s;hip of Gods appointment; following Chri&s;t preaching of the Go&s;pel, were Wor&s;hip of Chri&s;ts appointment, yet they were ob&s;tructions to po&s;itive duties to be done to Parents.&mdash;</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. Re&s;ting from our own works on the Sabbath Day, was a po&s;itive Duty, not from the works of Religion, and the Wor&s;hip of God, as was Sacrificing. 'Tis true, Chri&s;t &s;aith, <HI>Mat.</HI> 12. 5. That <HI>the Prie&s;ts in the Temple prophaned the Sabbath;</HI> but this is &s;poken in re&s;pect of the vulgar Opinion, that thought the Sabbath violated if any nece&s;|<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="2 letters">ry work were done therein, not that indeed the Sabbath day was bro|ken by them. So Dr. <HI>Willet,</HI> on <HI>Exod.</HI> 20. 9. and our Annota<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">ors upon the place expound it.</P>
<P N="2">2. That following Chri&s;t,&mdash;is an ob&s;truction of any po&s;&s;tive duty we owe to Parents, Mr. <HI>T.</HI> will prove,</P>
<Q>Quum durae quercus &s;udabunt ro&s;cida mella,</Q>
<P><HI>i. e.</HI> never. 'Tis true, Chri&s;t &s;ometimes calls us to leave Father and Mother&mdash;for his Name and Go&s;pel-&s;ake, but then our abiding with them is no longer any po&s;itive duty enjoyned us by him, but the contra|ty; &s;o that the <HI>major</HI> Propo&s;ition abides firm.</P>
<P>To the <HI>minor, viz.</HI> That the Common-Prayer-Book-Wor&s;hip is an ob&s;truction of a po&s;itive duty, <HI>viz.</HI> the exerci&s;e of the gift of Prayer, which is excluded hereby. He an&s;wers,</P>
<P N="1">1. <HI>'Tis &s;uppo&s;ed that the Common-Prayer-Book-Wor&s;hip is a different &s;ort of Wor&s;hip, from &s;uch as is u&s;ed by tho&s;e who exerci&s;e the gift of Prayer.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> And &s;o it is, the one being of the Earth, earthy, carnal, de|vili&s;h, the other from Heaven; as good he may &s;ay the Ark and <HI>Da|gon</HI> are the &s;ame, as that the Common-Prayer-Book-Wor&s;hip, and the Wor&s;hip of Je&s;us Chri&s;t is &s;o. When he proves the ab&s;urdities men|tioned are the proper i&s;&s;ue of this a&s;&s;ertion, we &s;hall think our &s;elves concern'd to take notice of them, but till then we reject them as the &s;purious off-&s;pring of his own begetting.</P>
<P>He adds, 2dly. <HI>The Author intimates, that ability to conce<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">ve, compo&s;e, and utter in variety of Expre&s;&s;ions, Petitions to God, is the gift of Prayer;</HI>
<PB N="347" REF="177"> <HI>and the exerci&s;e of it, is the exerci&s;e of that gift.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> I do &s;o indeed. That there are &s;ome that have ability &s;o to do, Mr. T. will not, cannot deny, nor that this ability may be where there is not true Grace; what will Mr. T. call this? Ability to expre&s;s ones &s;elf in variety and &s;uitablene&s;s of expre&s;&s;ions to the Children of men, is a gift given by the Lord, and that not to every one; that to be able &s;o to do to God &s;hould not be a gift of his, is ab&s;urd. <HI>Rom.</HI> 8. 26. &s;peaks not &s;olely of the gift, but of the grace Prayer, which &s;ometimes meet in the &s;ame &s;ubject, but are di&s;tinct. There may be the gift, where there is not the grace of Prayer; and on the contrary. I &s;ay not, <HI>p.</HI> 62. That the gift of prayer is the donation of the Spirit, as if I thought this could not be, where the Spirit did not indwell, though indeed none but &s;uch can be in the acceptable exerci&s;e of that gift. I account not the gift of Prayer to be a gift proper to Mini&s;ters, <HI>i. e.</HI> exclu&s;ively to others, but affirm that all Chri&s;ts Mini&s;ters have the gift of Prayer, and ought to u&s;e it; which the Common-Prayer-Book-Wor&s;hip &s;huts out of doors as unnece&s;&s;ary, and therefore is not of Chri&s;ts appointment.</P>
<P>To this our <HI>Animadverter</HI> replies, 1. <HI>That</HI> Ephe&s;. 4. <HI>expre&s;&s;es not Mi|ni&s;terial gifts.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> This is evidently his mi&s;take; they are expre&s;ly mention|ed, <HI>v.</HI> 7, 8.</P>
<P>He adds, 2dly, <HI>If they are implied, it's que&s;tionable whether they are ordinary or extraordinary.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> They are ordinary, for they are &s;uch as are to continue with the Mini&s;try to the perfecting the Body of Chri&s;t.</P>
<P>3dly, <HI>If ordinary, whether the gift of Prayer, as he means, were one?&mdash;</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> This mu&s;t be one, if the exerci&s;e of the duty be for the edifi|cation of the Body of <HI>Chri&s;t,</HI> v. <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">, 11, 12. To imagine that Chri&s;t doth not continue to di&s;pen&s;e this gift unto his Go&s;pel-Mini&s;ters, for the fore&s;aid end, is injurious to his faithfulne&s;s to, love, and care of, his Chil|dren, to conceit that better provi&s;ion can be made, than he makes by the be&s;towment of his gifts for that end; and &s;uch as &s;hall exclude the exerci&s;e of them, is derogatory to his Wi&s;dom, and bla&s;phemous.</P>
<P>He adds, 4thly, <HI>That though the Apo&s;tles &s;aid,</HI> Acts 6. 4. We will give our &s;elves continually to prayer,<HI>&mdash;and</HI> Paul, 1 <HI>Tim.</HI> 2. 1. Ex|horts, that prayers be made for all men; <HI>yet we read not that it's made the Mini&s;ters work to expre&s;s the nece&s;&s;ities of the Church in the publick Au|ditory.&mdash;</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. But this is not to the que&s;tion; whoever they are that are called forth to this work, they are to do it according to the abilities the <HI>Lord</HI> hath given them.</P>
<PB N="348" REF="178">
<P> But, 2dly, if it be not the Mini&s;ters work, who&s;e is it? whence is it that they who repute them&s;elves &s;uch, exclude all others, and monopo|lize this work unto them&s;elves?</P>
<P>3ly2, Chri&s;t and his Apo&s;tles u&s;ed no forms of prayer before or after their preaching, he grants; and I am &s;ure there is not the lea&s;t tittle of direction touching the compo&s;ing and impo&s;ing any for the future; hence it follows not that either way of praying (I conceive he means by &s;tinted pre&s;cribed forms, or otherwi&s;e) is lawful, but that dev<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">&s;ed, and impo&s;ed forms of prayer are utterly unlawful; for who &s;hall dare to pre&s;cribe where Chri&s;t is &s;ilent, upon his free-born Subjects?</P>
<P>What he further adds, <HI>That the one way of Wor&s;hip,</HI> (he mu&s;t mean that of impo&s;ed &s;tinted Liturgies, if he &s;peak pertinently) <HI>&s;huts not out of doors the other, is notoriou&s;ly fal&s;e.</HI></P>
<P>But, 4ly, Chri&s;t hath given to his Mini&s;ters gifts for the edification of his Body, among&s;t the re&s;t the gift of Prayer, which they are bound to improve when ever call'd to the di&s;charge of that duty, as we prove from 2 <HI>Tim.</HI> 1. 6. 1 <HI>Cor.</HI> 12. 7. <HI>Ephe&s;.</HI> 4. 11. <HI>Prov.</HI> 17. 16. <HI>Luke</HI> 19. 20. The exerci&s;e whereof is &s;hut out by the Common-Prayer-Book-Service. This Mr. T. &s;hould have di&s;proved. The reading of a Prayer cannot po&s;&s;ibly by a man of the lea&s;t under&s;tanding in the things of God, be &s;uppo&s;ed to be the exerci&s;e of this gift. Reading is not pray|ing, nor any where &s;o called in the Scripture. As for Women, we a&s;|&s;ert, if they have the gift of Prayer, when ever call'd forth to the per|formance of that duty, they are bound to the exerci&s;e of that gift, which is a &s;ufficient An&s;wer to what follows: though per&s;ons are not bound to be alway in the actual exerci&s;e of this gift, yet when call'd to the perfor|mance of the duty of prayer, for which it is eminently given of God, they are obliged to be improving it; their not being &s;o, is a napkening up of their Talent; and Mr. <HI>T.</HI> may prove the contrary when he is able.</P>
<P>'Tis added in S. T. That it will not in the lea&s;t take off the weight of the Argument, to &s;ay, That liberty is granted for the exerci&s;e of this gift before and after Sermon.</P>
<P>For, 1. the whole Wor&s;hip of God may according to the&s;e mens Principles be di&s;charged without any Sermon at all, and is requently in mo&s;t of the A&s;&s;emblies of <HI>England.</HI></P>
<P N="2">2. Tho&s;e their prayers are al&s;o bounded and limited by the 55. Ca|non, and that both in words and matter, for they are enjoyn'd to pray in that form, or to that effect, as briefly as conveniently they may, which will by all &s;ober per&s;ons be accounted a boundary, notwith&s;tand|ing Mr. T. his confident Dictate to the contrary.</P>
<P N="3"><PB N="349" REF="178"> 3. We had alwayes thought that Chri&s;t having given <HI>gifts unto Men,</HI> did require the u&s;e of tho&s;e gifts whenever per&s;ons were called to the performance of that &s;ervice, to which they were de&s;ignedly given by him by virtue of the forementioned precepts. When Chri&s;t hath given a gift of Prayer unto his Children, and charged them to &s;tirr up the gift given them, and not to napkin their Talent, we had verily thought that whenever they had been called forth to the performance of that duty he did really intend, and expect that they &s;hould be found in the exerci&s;e of the Gift given.&mdash;</P>
<P>To the fir&s;t and la&s;t of the&s;e Mr. <HI>T.</HI> is wholly &s;ilent, what he &s;aith to the &s;econd we have already removed but of the way.</P>
<P>Mr. <HI>T.</HI> adds yet further, <HI>The Common-Prayer-Book-Wor&s;hip may fur|ther the duty of exerci&s;ing the gift of Prayer; and therefore may lawfully be u&s;ed.</HI> Which he proves thus,</P>
<P><HI>That form may be lawfully u&s;ed for Wor&s;hip which may be a means to fur|ther any po&s;itive Duty charged by Chri&s;t to be performed by the Saints: But &s;uch may be the Forms of Prayer in the Liturgy of the Church of</HI> Eng|land: <HI>Therefore.&mdash;</HI></P>
<P>The <HI>Major</HI> he proves thus. <HI>That which requires a Duty, requires the Means conducing thereto.</HI></P>
<P>The <HI>Minor</HI> thus; <HI>The</HI> Common-Prayer-Book <HI>directs what things are to be prayed for, by rea&s;on of the brevity of the Colects, the Re&s;ponds, the fre|quent u&s;e, the plain expre&s;&s;ions, help the memory and cloqution, wherein the gift of Prayer con&s;i&s;ts.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. A Papi&s;t may &s;ay as much and as truly for their Books of Devotion, their Whippings, Pilgrimages,&mdash;Mr. <HI>T.</HI> knows they do &s;o. They are means, they tell us, tending to the furtherance of po&s;itive duties.</P>
<P>To which our Divines an&s;wer (as we do Mr. <HI>T.) That only tho&s;e things are to be accounted a means of furthering any po&s;itive duty, that God, not man, hath appointed as &s;uch thereunto.</HI> And in this &s;en&s;e is the Rule gi|ven by them about the <HI>Decalogue. That which requires the duty, requires the means conducing thereunto.</HI> And except <HI>means</HI> be taken by him in this &s;en&s;e we deny his <HI>Major, No Form may lawfully be u&s;ed in Wor&s;hip but that which is a means of the appointment of God to further a po&s;itive Duty.</HI> If he prove his <HI>Common-Prayer-Book-Service</HI> to be &s;uch a Form, he doth &s;omewhat, but till then,</P>
<Q><HI>&mdash;Rapiunt conamina Venti.</HI></Q>
<P>Hebeats the air.</P>
<P>2ly. Why &s;peaks he &s;o faintly in his <HI>Minor? Such May be the Forms&mdash;</HI>
<PB N="350" REF="179"> Why &s;peaks he not out, and plainly, as one that believes he &s;peaks Truth? <HI>Such Are the Forms of Prayer in the</HI> Common-Prayer-Book.</P>
<P>Now this we al&s;o deny; not only, 1. Becau&s;e they are not means appointed by the Lord for that end: But al&s;o becau&s;e, 2. The gift of Prayer con&s;i&s;ts in &s;omwhat el&s;e than memory and eloqution, <HI>viz.</HI> In an ability of mind to form words expre&s;&s;ive of the de&s;ires of our hearts, wherein the&s;e Forms are not pleaded to be helpful. And yet 3. How|ever it comes to pa&s;s we find not the mo&s;t devout <HI>Liturgi&s;ts</HI> to excel ei|ther in memory or eloqution. And 4. Our own experience, and the ex|perience of the whole Nation tells us the contrary to what Mr. <HI>T.</HI> af|firms. The <HI>Common-Prayer-Book-Prie&s;ts</HI> are of all per&s;ons the mo&s;t dull, unapt, and heavy in that duty of Prayer; who mu&s;t have a praye<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter"> penn'd for them for every occa&s;ion, or they can &s;ay nothing. Now Mr. <HI>T.</HI> hath not produced one convincing Argument to prove that a man mu&s;t be|lieve contrary to what he &s;ees and knows.</P>
<P>We add in <HI>S. T.</HI> 3dly, The <HI>Common-Prayer-Book-Wor&s;hip</HI> is a Wor&s;hip of which we find no foot-&s;teps in the Scripture, as hath already been de|mon&s;trated: Whence it follows that 'tis a Wor&s;hip of pure humane in|vention, which is not only not of Chri&s;ts appointment, but contrary to the very nature of in&s;tituted Wor&s;hip (as is proved in our fir&s;t Argu|ment) and to very many precepts of the Lord in the Scripture, <HI>Exod.</HI> 20. 4, 5. <HI>Deut.</HI> 4. 2. &amp; 13. 32. <HI>Prov.</HI> 30. 16. <HI>Jer.</HI> 7. 31. <HI>Mat.</HI> 15. 9, 13. <HI>Mar.</HI> 7. 7, 8. <HI>Rev.</HI> 22. 18. The mind of God in which Scrip|tures we have exemplified, <HI>Lev.</HI> 10. 1, 2, 3, 4. <HI>Jo&s;.</HI> 22. 10. <HI>Judg.</HI> 8. 2. 2 <HI>Kings,</HI> 16. 11. 1 <HI>Chr.</HI> 15. 3.</P>
<P>What Mr. <HI>T.</HI> an&s;wers hereunto <HI>Sect.</HI> 6. is, 1&s;t, No more than what he hath often &s;aid, and hath been as often an&s;wered.</P>
<P>2dly, He hath culd out five or &s;ix Scriptures from the re&s;t, <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">hich he yet wre&s;ts to another purpo&s;e than they were produced for. We do not introduce them to prove the <HI>Common-Prayer-Book-Wor&s;hip</HI> is an Humane Invention (which we demon&s;trate it to be, becau&s;e not founded upon the Scriptures) but that the Introduction of Humane Inventions into the Wor&s;hip of God is interdicted in them: The verity whe<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">eof the Reader will evidently &s;ee proved by a &s;ober peru&s;al of them.</P>
<P>3dly, He ab&s;urdly a&s;&s;erts that a Wor&s;hip not founded in the Scrip|tures is not of pure Humane Invention; I confe&s;s it may be Diaboli|cal, and is call'd <HI>Devilli&s;m,</HI> or <HI>wor&s;hiping the Devil,</HI> P&s;al. 106. 37. But Divine it is not whil&s;t not built upon that <HI>Ba&s;is.</HI></P>
<P N="4">4. He yeelds the whole cau&s;e whil&s;t he grants that all Inve<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">tions of Men whereby our Wor&s;hip of God is &s;ignified are unlawful, if made
<PB N="351" REF="179"> nece&s;&s;ary, when the Wor&s;hip of God is placed in them, or their u&s;e, which all know to be the ca&s;e of our Liturgical forms. Of <HI>Jo&s;.</HI> 22. 10. we have at large treated, <HI>chap.</HI> 2.</P>
<P>We &s;ay further in S. T. 4thly, <HI>That Wor&s;hip which is not nece&s;&s;ary for the edification, comfort, or pre&s;ervation of the Saints in the Faith and Uni|ty of the Go&s;pel, is not of the in&s;titution of Chri&s;t; but &s;uch is the Wor&s;hip of the Common-Prayer-Book.</HI> Therefore. The <HI>major</HI> is evident, the parti|culars in&s;tanced in, were the great aim and end of Chri&s;t in all Go&s;pel-Admini&s;trations, <HI>Ephe&s;.</HI> 4. 7, 10, 15. <HI>Col.</HI> 2. 19. <HI>Acts</HI> 9. 31. <HI>Rom.</HI> 14. 14, 15. 1 <HI>Cor.</HI> 10. 23. &amp; 14. 3, 4, 5, 12, 26. 2 <HI>Cor.</HI> 12. 10. 1 <HI>Tim.</HI> 1. 4. The <HI>minor</HI> is proved by this, that the Churches of Chri&s;t, for the fir&s;t four Centuries of years and more, knew not any thing of &s;uch a Wor|&s;hip, yet they enjoyed the ends of Go&s;pel-Admini&s;trations menti|oned.</P>
<P>To which Mr. <HI>T.</HI> Sect. 7. 1. <HI>In&s;inuates that the Scriptures produced, are abu&s;ively wre&s;ted, as proving nothing of Chri&s;ts aim in his Institu|tions.&mdash;</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. Let this be con&s;idered, <HI>Ephe&s;.</HI> 4. 7, 8. Ye have an ac|count of the a&s;cention of Chri&s;t, and his giving gifts unto men, as Apo&s;tles,<HI>&mdash;v.</HI> 11. For what end and purpo&s;e? <HI>v.</HI> 12. <HI>For the perfecting of the Saints&mdash;for the edifying of the Body of Chri&s;t.</HI> Col. 2. 19. &s;peaks of the Churches increa&s;e as a Body, through the nouri&s;hment mini&s;tred (in the Admini&s;tration of the Go&s;pel, or through the Golden Pipes of Go&s;pel-In&s;titutions, by which) <HI>Acts</HI> 9. 31. it's &s;aid, <HI>The Churches were edified.</HI> Rom. 14. 19, 20. It's pre&s;&s;ed as the duty of Saints in Go&s;pel-fellow&s;hip, to follow after things wherewith one may edifie another; and 1 <HI>Cor.</HI> 10. 23, 24. tells us, That &s;ome things in them&s;elves lawful, are to be forborn among&s;t Saints in Church-Communion, becau&s;e they edifie not. <HI>Ch.</HI> 14. 3, 4. &amp;c. 26. tells us, That the end for which the gift of prophe&s;ying was given, was the edification of the Saints, which <HI>Paul</HI> profe&s;&s;eth, 2 <HI>Cor.</HI> 12. 19. to be the aim of his Soul, and charges <HI>Timothy,</HI> 1 Tim. 1. 4. to mind this as the great thing in his Mini&s;try. An evident demon&s;tration that this was the main end of Chri&s;t in the&s;e Go&s;pel-In&s;titutions; and that the <HI>Separati&s;ts</HI> (as Mr. T. talks) multi|ply not Texts impertinently, b<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">t he needle&s;ly cavils again&s;t what is from Scripture-evidence a&s;&s;erted, and egregiou&s;ly abu&s;eth the unwary Reader.</P>
<P N="2">2. Doth he denie the things mentioned to be the aim and end of Chri&s;t in Go&s;pel-Admini&s;trations? Doth he prove that the Common-Prayer-Book-Service is nece&s;&s;ary for the obtainment of the&s;e ends? nor at all.</P>
<PB N="352" REF="180">
<P> He tells us indeed, <HI>That Prayers, Prai&s;<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">s, &amp;c. are &s;o.</HI></P>
<P>Which if meant of &s;uch as are of his appointment, managed accor|ding to his will, in his own way, by his own Spirit, we grant to be true; but he forgets to prove that the Common-Prayer-Book-Wor&s;hip is &s;o. That we confound the form or mode of the Wor&s;hip with the Wor&s;hip, is not true; they them&s;elves make the&s;e forms &s;uch a ne|ce&s;&s;ary part of Wor&s;hip by their impo&s;ition, that without them we may not pray to, or prai&s;e God at all. Whil&s;t he grants Liturgical forms are not nece&s;&s;ary for the ends mentioned, he throws down the ma&s;ter Pil|lar upon which it &s;tands upright in the thoughts of &s;ome; the pre&s;ervati|on of union among&s;t the people, nece&s;&s;arily requires &s;uch an uniformity, &s;ay the Ma&s;ters of Ceremonies. His retortion of the Argument is ridi|culous.</P>
<P>We &s;ay not, That that Wor&s;hip which in re&s;pect of the mode or form of performing it, is not nece&s;&s;ary for the edification&mdash;of the Saints in the Faith and Unity of the Go&s;pel, is not of the in&s;titution of Chri&s;t; but that tho&s;e modes and forms that are made an e&s;&s;ential part of Wor&s;hip, (which the Common-Prayer-Book forms are (though u&s;ing Notes in the Pulpit&mdash;are not, which are therefore impertinent|ly and ineptly produced by our <HI>Animadverter)</HI> not being nece&s;&s;ary to the forementioned ends, are not of the in&s;titution of Chri&s;t, becau&s;e in all Go&s;pel-In&s;titutions tho&s;e ends were aimed at by him; by which the Judicious Reader will ea&s;ily perceive how little we are concern'd with his Argument.</P>
<P>That the Common-Prayer-Book-Service is as a polluted, accur&s;ed, abominable thing to the Reformed Churches, is from hence evident, that they will not touch nor meddle with it, no more than with any thing that is mo&s;t notoriou&s;ly &s;o. Their expre&s;&s;ions touching Popi&s;h Rites and Ceremonies (of which not a few are retained in our Common Prayer-Book) manife&s;t as much. <HI>Calvin</HI> cals them, <HI>Filthy Dunghils, Conrad. Schlu&s;|&s;elburg, l.</HI> 13. <HI>p.</HI> 593. &s;aith, <HI>That the Adiaphori&s;m of Rites Popi&s;h re|tained, is the very Image of the Bea&s;t, who&s;e Mark, Character, and Name, tho&s;e Adiaphorous Rites are.</HI></P>
<P>The third Angel, who preacheth again&s;t the Image of the Bea&s;t, and the receiving his Mark, repre&s;enteth the Preachers that with&s;tand the rayl of Antichri&s;t left behind in the Church of God.</P>
<P>The <HI>German</HI> Divines, <HI>The&s;. de Adiaph. Theol. Sax. p.</HI> 193. tell us, <Q>That the retention of Popi&s;h Ceremonies, under pretence that they be <HI>Adiaphora,</HI> is a countermand to that precept, <HI>Go out of her my Peo|ple,</HI> &s;eeing hereby men do even return, yea enter into Antichri&s;t.</Q></P>
<PB N="353" REF="180">
<P>And <HI>Buc<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">r</HI> expre&s;ly avers, <Q>That all things that are of the <HI>Romane</HI> Antichri&s;t, are abominated,<HI>&mdash;in Cen&s;ur. cap.</HI> 3. <HI>p.</HI> 460.</Q></P>
<P>What this <HI>Animadverter</HI> &s;peaks further in this Section, will receive a &s;peedy di&s;patch.</P>
<P><HI>Calvin</HI> &s;peaks of the Prayers and Rites, not their Impo&s;ition (when he &s;peaks favourably of them in <HI>Epi&s;t.</HI> 87.) which he abhorrd.</P>
<P><HI>Mare&s;ius</HI> his A&s;&s;ertion amounts onely to a ju&s;tification of forms of Prayer, not our Engli&s;h forms, much le&s;s their impo&s;ition.&mdash;</P>
<P>So that, notwith&s;tanding what Mr. <HI>T.</HI> is able to &s;ay to the contrary, The Common-Prayer-Book-Wor&s;hip is not of the appointment of Chri&s;t; and therefore tho&s;e that Wor&s;hip him in the way thereof, wor|&s;hip him in a way that is not of his appointment.</P>
</DIV3>
<DIV3 N="4" TYPE="section">
<HEAD><HI>Sect.</HI> 4.</HEAD>
<ARGUMENT>
<P><HI>An Objection an&s;wered. Nothing in the In&s;tituted Wor&s;hip of Chri&s;t that is a Circum&s;tance thereof as &s;uch. Of praying in a Form. The un|lawfulne&s;s thereof evinced. Mr.</HI> T. <HI>his Arguments to the contrary an|&s;wered. Praying in the Spirit, what it is. What is meant by quenching the Spirit,</HI> 1 The&s;. 5. 19. <HI>Forms of prayer impo&s;ed, are nece&s;&s;ary parts of Wor&s;hip. The Opinion of the</HI> Papi&s;ts <HI>and pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters touching this matter.</HI></P>
</ARGUMENT>
<P>THere is one &s;tone of offence, that lying in the way of our former di&s;cour&s;e, we endeavour in S. T. to remove; 'Tis this,</P>
<P>Object. <HI>That the Liturgie, or Common-Prayer-Book-Wor&s;hip is no e&s;&s;en|tial part of Wor&s;hip, but meerly circum&s;tantial: Praying, 'tis true, is part of Wor&s;hip, but praying in this or that form is not &s;o, but meerly a circum&s;tance thereof; and therefore though it be true, that the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters of</HI> Eng|land <HI>wor&s;hip God after the way of the Common-Prayer-Book, yet it follows not that they wor&s;hip him after away that is not of his appointment.</HI></P>
<P>To this we an&s;wer, That many things are &s;uppo&s;ed as the Ba&s;is upon which the weight of this Objection is laid, which we cannot grant, as,</P>
<P N="1">1. That there are &s;ome things in the in&s;tituted Wor&s;hip of Chri&s;t, that are meerly circum&s;tances thereof as &s;uch, which we deny. Circum|&s;tances in the Wor&s;hip of Chri&s;t attending Religious Actions, as Acti|ons, we grant; but Circum&s;tances of Wor&s;hip, as &s;uch, will never be proved: To infer, that becau&s;e time and place, with &s;undry things of the like nature, are Circum&s;tances in Wor&s;hip, therefore there are Circum&s;tances of Wor&s;hip, as &s;uch, is frivolous: the&s;e things being the
<PB N="354" REF="181"> attendment of Religious Actions common to any civil actions of the like nature, to be performed by the Sons of Men: no action to be ma|naged by a community can be orderly performed by them without &s;uch an a&s;&s;ignment of time and place; publick prayer being &s;o to be mana|ged, as a Religious Action, hath the circum&s;tances before mentioned at|tending it, and &s;o it would, were it a meer civil action to be perfor|med by a community, though it related not at all to the Wor&s;hip of God.</P>
<P>To which Mr. <HI>T.</HI> Sect. 8. 1. <HI>'Tis not true that the Objection &s;uppo&s;eth that &s;ome things in the In&s;tituted Wor&s;hip of Chri&s;t are but meer circum&s;tances thereof as &s;uch.&mdash;</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> The naked meaning of the Author of S. T. in that expre&s;&s;ion, is this, That whereas the Liturgical forms of prayer are by their impo|&s;ition made parts of the In&s;tituted Wor&s;hip of Chri&s;t, the Objection &s;uppo&s;eth that they are but meer circum&s;tances thereof as &s;uch. This was &s;o obvious to any ordinary under&s;tanding, that I cannot but fear our <HI>Animadverter</HI> did wilfully mi&s;take our meaning, whil&s;t he makes it to be this, that that particularity of action that is in&s;tituted by Chri&s;t, is a meer Arbitrary circum&s;tance&mdash;which no Chri&s;tian in his wits will affirm.</P>
<P>2dly, He tells us, <HI>The di&s;tinction of circum&s;tances in the Wor&s;hip of Chri&s;t attending Religious Actions as actions, and circum&s;tances of Wor&s;hip, as &s;uch, is an unnece&s;&s;ary nicety&mdash;and intimates as if we were agreed in the thing.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. If it be a nicety, 'tis &s;uch a one as cuts the thro<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">t of his cau&s;e; nothing is then to be &s;ubjected to, or u&s;ed in the Wor&s;hip of God or Chri&s;t, as a circum&s;tance thereof, there are no circum&s;tantial, accidental parts of Wor&s;hip, (for which he hath hitherto pleaded) no|thing to be practi&s;ed relating to it, as &s;uch, of an indifferent nature. The whole of it being either commanded by Chri&s;t, and &s;o to be indi&s;|putably &s;ubjected to, or el&s;e not of his In&s;titution, and &s;o to be reject|ed; how great a part of his tottering Fabrick he hath by this one con|ce&s;&s;ion &s;haken about his ears, the Judicious Reader is able to di&s;cern.</P>
<P>We add in S. T. the Objection &s;uppo&s;eth, 2ly, <HI>That it is lawful for Saints to tie them&s;elves to a written &s;tinted form of words in prayer.</HI> This we &s;ay is not yet proved, nor like to be. That it is not needful that we enter into the debate thereof, till it be proved, that to pray in the form of the Common-Prayer-Book, or impo&s;ed devi&s;ed Liturgies is &s;o. We only briefly offer a few things that evince the unlawfulne&s;s of Saints, tying them&s;elves to a written &s;tinted form of words in prayer.</P>
<P>Becau&s;e, 1&s;t, 'tis a quenching of the Spirit in prayer,</P>
<PB N="355" REF="181">
<P> 2dly. A rendring u&s;ele&s;s the donation of the Spirit, as a Spirit of Prayer unto the Children of God.</P>
<P>3dly, Directly oppo&s;ite unto the many po&s;itive Precepts of Chri&s;t before in&s;tanc'd in, of &s;tirring up the gifts given to us of God.</P>
<P>4dly, If it be lawful for Saints to pray in a form, 'tis lawful, <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 word"> becau&s;e they have not the Spirit, or that having the Spirit, he is not a &s;ufficient help to them in their approaches to God: If the fir&s;t, they are not Saints, <HI>Rom.</HI> 8. 9. to a&s;&s;ert the &s;econd is little le&s;s than bla&s;phemy; be&s;ides its direct oppo&s;ition to <HI>Rom.</HI> 8. 26.</P>
<P>To which Mr. <HI>T.</HI> pretends to an&s;wer, <HI>Sect.</HI> 9. 1. <HI>'Tis no hard thing to prove it lawful to pray in the form of the Common-Prayer-Book, if we &s;up|po&s;e the Mini&s;ters, and Common-Prayer-Book-Wor&s;hippers not to have the Spirit, for then they do not quench the Spirit.&mdash;</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. But upon this &s;uppo&s;ition, they are not Chri&s;tians, (for if any man hath not the Spirit of Chri&s;t, he is none of his) are not Mini|&s;ters, and &s;o to be &s;eparated from.</P>
<P>2dly, Our pre&s;ent enquiry is of the duty of Saints, with re&s;pect to forms of prayer, of others we are not now &s;peaking; which what Mr. <HI>T.</HI> &s;aith, <HI>Is wholly forreign to, and greatly impertinent, as he knows.</HI></P>
<P>He adds 2dly, <HI>We mu&s;t prove it lawful for the Saints&mdash;to u&s;e once a &s;tinted form of words,&mdash;which will be done by this Argument. That Prayer may be lawful to Saints, in which neither is any thing done forbid|den by God, nor any thing omitted which God requires thereto. But &s;uch may be praying in a form. Therefore&mdash;.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. Were he able to prove a &s;tinted form of Prayer lawful, he will not carry the cau&s;e, except he manife&s;t that Liturgical forms are &s;o.</P>
<P N="2">2. We deny his <HI>minor,</HI> with which he deals very unkindly to leave it to &s;hift for it &s;elf, &s;o &s;oon as he hath brought it forth into the World. And retort his Argument thus, <HI>That Prayer is utterly unlawful to the Saints, in which &s;omething is done forbidden by God, and &s;omething omit|ted which God requires thereunto. But in a &s;tinted form &s;omething is done that is forbidden, (the Spirit is quenched, undervalued, grieved, the form is re&s;ted, tru&s;ted in rather than the Spirit) &s;omething is omitted which God requires,</HI> viz. <HI>the exerci&s;e &s;tirring up, and improvement of the gift given.</HI></P>
<P>To what we briefly offer touching the unlawfulne&s;s of &s;tinted forms of prayer.</P>
<P>Mr. <HI>T.</HI> an&s;wers, 1. <HI>That the things offered, are bottomed upon mi&s;takes. As,</HI> 1. <HI>that praying in the Spirit,</HI> Ephe&s;. 6. 18. Jude 20. <HI>is meant of extemporal unpre&s;cribed forms of words; whereas it's meant of praying by</HI>
<PB N="356" REF="182"> <HI>operation of the Spirit within, not of prayer, in re&s;pect of the form of words wherein it's expre&s;&s;ed.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. To pray in the Spirit, is to pray from the power and a&s;&s;i|&s;tance of the Spirit, who not onely forms reque&s;ts in the hea<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">s of the S<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="3 letters">ts, but al&s;o gives in apt words for the expre&s;&s;ing tho&s;e inward groans in a way of edification, and comfort to the hou&s;hould of Faith, and the a&s;&s;i&s;tance of the Spirit in both the&s;e they experience. The expre&s;&s;ions of praying <HI>allway with all prayer&mdash;</HI>do not in the lea&s;t intimate that the Apo&s;tle &s;peaks of &s;olitary prayers, and if he did, Saints are wont to u&s;e words when they draw nigh to God in their &s;ecret Chambers. <HI>Ephe&s;.</HI> 5. 19. is &s;o far from proving that <HI>Ephe&s;.</HI> 6. 18. is meant of &s;oli|tary prayers, that it totally enervates it. Their &s;peaking to them&s;elves in P&s;alms,&mdash;is their &s;peaking one to another for their mutual edifica|tion.</P>
<P>2dly, We &s;ay not that meditation and preparation to this important duty of Prayer is unlawful, or that he who beforehand gives him&s;elf hereunto, prayes not in the Spirit, as Mr. <HI>T.</HI> intimates; yet this we a&s;|&s;ert, that no awakened enlivened Saint under the highe&s;t preparation for this duty, dares &s;ay, the&s;e words will I &s;peak and no more, nor can he do it, without an high undervaluation and contempt of the love, care, and faithfulne&s;s of the good Spirit of the Lord to him, who is often enabling him in a way of enlargement beyond the utmo&s;t thoughts of his heart.</P>
<P>3dly, Suppo&s;e it lawful to u&s;e a form of words in prayer, the Spirit a&s;&s;i&s;ts in the forming of groans within an&s;werable to that form of words without; I ask, What if the Spirit &s;hould form in us reque&s;ts beyond what are in words expre&s;&s;ed in the form, (which &s;ure he may do, for however it be pleaded that 'tis lawful to bind us to the form, it will not be &s;uppo&s;ed that the Spirit is bound) Mu&s;t I pour them forth in words he helps me to, or mu&s;t I not? if he &s;ay the fir&s;t, <HI>actum e&s;t, perli&s;ti,</HI> there is an end of his &s;tinted forms of prayer; if the &s;econd, there is an apparent &s;lighting, quenching of the Spirit in his motions and a&s;&s;i|&s;tance he is ready to afford us.</P>
<P>A &s;econd mi&s;take, upon which he &s;aith, <HI>The things offer'd proceed, is, That the ability to expre&s;s petitions in words extemporary, is tearmed the Spirit of Prayer, as if it were in every one that hath the &s;anctifying Spirit of God, and they only; for &s;o the alleadging</HI> Rom. 8. 9, 26. <HI>for it, in the fourth Argument; mu&s;t infer: now a man may have the Spirit, and yet not have this ability; he may have this ability, and yet not have the Spirit.</HI></P>
<PB N="357" REF="182">
<P> <HI>An&s;w. Crimen inauditum Caie Cae&s;ar.</HI></P>
<P>Doth Mr. <HI>T.</HI> con&s;ider what he writes? 1. We no where &s;ay that this ability to expre&s;s our inward de&s;ires in prompt and &s;ignificant expre&s;&s;i|ons to the Lord, as &s;eparated from the grace of Prayer, or the &s;anctify|ing pre&s;ence of the Spirit of God, is the Spirit of Prayer: <HI>En tabulas!</HI> Let him direct us to the place where we &s;o do.</P>
<P N="2">2. We grant there may be the grace of Prayer without the gift, and the gift without the grace; but &s;ay, that when God calls forth his Chil|dren to the publick di&s;charge of this duty, he be&s;tows the gift of Prayer upon them; which if they have not, they are not called forth thereun|to: When otherwi&s;e the Spirit of Adoption in them is abundantly &s;uf|ficient to enable them to pour forth their &s;ouls to God, &s;o as that they need not the help of the Crutches of Forms, as &s;ome &s;peak.</P>
<P N="3">3. The Que&s;tion is whether it be lawful for Saints to u&s;e a &s;tinted Form of words in Prayer? Of others we are not &s;peaking. <HI>Rom.</HI> 8. is produced to prove it is not lawful for them &s;o to do.</P>
<P>The particular An&s;wers he gives to the Arguments produced again&s;t &s;uch Forms of Prayer, are of an ea&s;ie di&s;patch.</P>
<P>To the fir&s;t he an&s;wers. 1. <HI>The quenching of the Spirit is not meant of the Spirit of Prayer more than any other exerci&s;e.&mdash;</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> Grant it, its meant as much of the Spirit of Prayer as any o|ther exerci&s;e. The expre&s;&s;ion is wholly Metaphorical. The Spirit in his operations and motions is frequently called and compared to fire (as is known) the quenching of him is our re&s;i&s;ting, not giving up our &s;elves to the obedience of tho&s;e motions; how we do this by &s;tinted Forms of Prayer was but now &s;hewed.</P>
<P>He adds, 2dly, <HI>The quenching of the Spirit is the act of him in whom the Spirit is quenched.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> Very true, the tying of our &s;elves to a pre&s;cript form of words in Prayer is our own act, none can actually compel us thereunto; here|by we quench the Spirit.</P>
<P>Yea but 3dly, <HI>The hearer is &s;tinted in all joynt Prayer.&mdash;</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. Not as he is when he ties him&s;elf to a Form of Words in Prayer.</P>
<P N="2">2. Not &s;o, but if the Spirit (who&s;e motions are regular, and leads not to &s;uch confu&s;ions as Mr. <HI>T.</HI> talks of, of all &s;peaking together) moves powerfully upon the heart of the hearer, he ought after the other hath done to proceed further in that work according to the ability &s;hall be
<PB N="358" REF="183"> given him, and not to do &s;o were his &s;in. So that of the&s;e things there is not the &s;ame rea&s;on. How the true motions of the Spirit of God are to be di&s;cerned, from the &s;tirrings of our natural affections, is of greater import than in this ha&s;te to be &s;poken to: caution and careful|ne&s;s is herein to be u&s;ed.</P>
<P>To the &s;econd he an&s;wers, <HI>In &s;ome ca&s;es a &s;tinted Form is helpful to the under&s;tanding, memory, affections, utterance in Prayer.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. To this we have already replied.</P>
<P>2ddly, The experience of many Saints is far otherwi&s;e.</P>
<P>3dly, The Spirit is given to help our infirmities in Prayer, <HI>Rom.</HI> 8. 26. both as to matter and manner of expre&s;&s;ion; the donation of the Spirit as to both the&s;e ends is by a Form of Prayer rendred u&s;ele&s;s; di|rect me as to matter he mu&s;t not, for what I am to pray for is in my <HI>Prayer-book</HI> under my eye; nor as to words, for I am ab&s;olutely tied up to the u&s;e of tho&s;e verbal expre&s;&s;ions, are in the Prayer before me.</P>
<P>To the third he tells us, 1&s;t, <HI>That that of</HI> 2 Tim. 1. 6. <HI>is to be under|&s;tood of his ability to preach the Go&s;pel, &s;o is the improving the Talent<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">,</HI> Mat. 25. 15, 27. <HI>Luke</HI> 19. 13, 23.</P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> By the Gift given and the Talents, we are to under&s;tand eve|ry gift and ability given to us of the Lord, which we are bound to im|prove by virtue of the forecited Scriptures; for to that end was it gi|ven us. If God hath given the gift of Prayer, for the edification of the Body of Chri&s;t to any one, wo be to that man that &s;hall neglect to im|prove it.</P>
<P>Mr. <HI>T.</HI> talks carnally whil&s;t he calls the gift of Prayer <HI>a mean thing;</HI> Spiritual Saints know it to be &s;ublime, excellent and glorious, being <HI>in them,</HI> the fruit of the Spirit of Adoption.</P>
<P>He adds, 2dly <HI>He may &s;tir up the gift of expre&s;&s;ion at another time, who is tied to a Lyturgical Form.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. The gift of Prayer is more than the gift of Expre&s;&s;ion, as we have &s;hewed.</P>
<P N="2">2. Gifts received are alwayes to be exerci&s;ed when called to the work for which they are received: We mu&s;t offer of our own that God hath graciou&s;ly given us, when we offer to him, not another mans.</P>
<P N="3">3. We are alwayes obliged to tho&s;e Lyturgical Forms in every Church-admini&s;tration, except before and after Sermon, and then we are not without a boundary, as was &s;hewed.</P>
<P>To the fourth he an&s;wers, <HI>The lawfulne&s;s of Saints praying in a Form is neither becau&s;e they have not the Spirit, nor becau&s;e he is not &s;ufficient to help them in their approaches to God, but becau&s;e there is nothing in &s;uch</HI>
<PB N="359" REF="183"> <HI>praying done that is forbidden, nor any thing that is required omitted.&mdash;</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> The fal&s;ity and vanity of this we have evinced but even now; nor is there any thing further offered touching this matter that is worth the con&s;idering, but what is already replied to.</P>
<P>What he hath &s;poken <HI>Chap.</HI> 5. <HI>Sect.</HI> 7. we have an&s;wered in our Re|ply thereunto.</P>
<P>'Twere ea&s;ie to multiply Arguments to prove the unlawfulne&s;s of &s;tin|ted Forms of Prayer, were it needful; As fifthly, <HI>They are no where commanded by Chri&s;t, or permitted.</HI></P>
<P>Sixthly, <HI>They are neither lawful for unregenerate or regenerate per&s;ons.</HI> Not for the fir&s;t, becau&s;e 1. They teach them to bla&s;pheme, belie, and mi&s;report God, <HI>viz.</HI> to call him Father when they are not begotten a|gain of him. 2. They harden them in a way of &s;in, and &s;trengthen their vain confidences that they are in a &s;aved &s;tate. 3. They lead them forth to a plain mocking of God, <HI>viz.</HI> In prai&s;ing him for that he never be&s;towed upon them; as regeneration, the holy Spirit, peace, joy through believing, <HI>&amp;c.</HI> Nor for the regenerate are they lawful for the rea&s;ons but now mentioned, as al&s;o becau&s;e the mo&s;t exact Forms are not expre&s;&s;ive of what they want. They bound them where God hath not bound them: <HI>Ask what ye will,</HI> &s;aith God: <HI>Ask only what is in the Form,</HI> &s;aith the Formali&s;t. They hinder their &s;piritual growth, divert the intention of the mind, cool the fervency of the Spirit in the per|formance of the duty of Prayer; with much more that might be offer|ed were it needful.</P>
<P>We add in <HI>S. T.</HI> 3dly, <HI>That the Objection &s;uppo&s;eth that Forms of Prayer impo&s;ed, are but meer circum&s;tances of Wor&s;hip, and not parts thereof: The contrary hereunto we &s;ay is evident.</HI></P>
<P>That which is made &s;o the condition of an action that without it the action is not to be done, is not a circum&s;tance of it, but &s;uch an adjunct as is a nece&s;&s;ary part thereof: But Forms of Prayer impo&s;ed are &s;o made by that their impo&s;ition: Therefore.&mdash;</P>
<P>Sacrificing of old on the Altar at the Tabernacle and Temple, was part of the Wor&s;hip of God that they were to perform; this Wor&s;hip only at tho&s;e places being once commanded, was not a circum&s;tance of that Wor&s;hip, but as real an e&s;&s;ential part thereof as &s;acrificing was. The ca&s;e is the &s;ame here; Prayer is commanded, &s;o is the u&s;e of the&s;e Prayers, which are as really by that command made alike parts of Wor|&s;hip.</P>
<P>To this Mr. <HI>T.</HI> replies. <HI>That what is made &s;o the condition of an action by virtue of Gods appointment, as that without it the action is not to be done,</HI>
<PB N="360" REF="184"> <HI>is thereby made a nece&s;&s;ary part of Wor&s;hip: Not &s;o when made &s;uch a con|dition of an action by virtue of mans precept (as is the ca&s;e of Lyturgical Forms, which are therefore notwith&s;tanding that impo&s;ition but meer circum|&s;tances of Wor&s;hip.)</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. What &s;trange Circum&s;tances and Adiaphori&s;ms doth Mr. T. make, which are &s;o e&s;&s;ential to Wor&s;hip, as that without them it may not be performed? <HI>Andr. Fri&s;ias</HI> (though a Papi&s;t) &s;pea<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">s better. <HI>If it be Adiaphorus, why is it not left to the Liberty of every one to u&s;e or not to u&s;e as he plea&s;eth? for that is the nature of tho&s;e things that are Adi|aphorus,&mdash;De Eccle&s;. Lib.</HI> 2. <HI>Tract.</HI> 13. <HI>in Epi&s;t. ad Paul.</HI> 4. <HI>fol.</HI> 542.</P>
<P N="2">2. How bloodily cruel and &s;anguinary doth he make our Spiritual Fathers! who deliver their own Children over to Satan, yea impri&s;on if not bani&s;h or hang them for trivial circum&s;tances. Strange paternal affections!</P>
<P>Yet 3dly, There is indeed &s;omewhat of Truth in what is a&s;&s;erted by our Dictator; 'Tis the Authority of God alone that can make any thing a part of his own Wor&s;hip, the impo&s;ition and commands of men make it a part of theirs. Bowing the knee, falling down, is no e&s;&s;ential part of Gods Wor&s;hip, but it was of <HI>Nebuchadnezzars,</HI> when the Decree was once publi&s;hed, neglect of Conformity to which had nea<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter"> co&s;t the Three Children their Lives. Wor&s;hipping at <HI>Dan</HI> and <HI>Bethel</HI> was no nece&s;&s;ary part of Gods Wor&s;hip for the &s;ame rea&s;on, but it was of <HI>Jero|boams,</HI> when once e&s;tabli&s;hed and commanded by him. The ca&s;e is the &s;ame here, <HI>Liturgical</HI> Forms are no nece&s;&s;ary parts of Gods Wor&s;hip, becau&s;e no where commanded by him; but are of the <HI>Lyturgi&s;ts</HI> Wor|&s;hip becau&s;e e&s;tabli&s;hed by Law. And this is all we affirm, they are the nece&s;&s;ary parts of that Wor&s;hip which is managed and carr<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">ed on by them, which they &s;uppo&s;e is the Wor&s;hip of God.</P>
<P>What he adds from the Preface of the <HI>Common-Prayer-Book, That par|ticular Forms of Divine Wor&s;hip, and the Rites and Ceremonies appointed to be u&s;ed therein, are things in their own nature indifferent, and altera<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">le, makes not void what we have a&s;&s;erted, it rather e&s;tabli&s;heth it.</HI> For, 1&s;t, The &s;ame may be &s;aid of many acknowledged e&s;&s;ential parts of Divine Wor|&s;hip, Circumci&s;ion, Sacrificing,&mdash;yet alterable and aboli&s;hed. If it be &s;aid that none could aboli&s;h them but God; the an&s;wer is ea&s;ie, nor can any aboli&s;h the Lyturgical Forms and Rites, but only tho&s;e who have &s;uch Authority as that by which they were impo&s;ed, who are to the Lyturgi&s;ts as Vice-Godds.</P>
<P>We add in <HI>S.</HI> T. 2dly, <HI>That the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters of</HI> England <HI>make</HI>
<PB N="361" REF="184"> <HI>the</HI> Liturgy, <HI>or</HI> Common-Prayer-Book-Wor&s;hip <HI>a principal part, yea the whole Wor&s;hip of God.</HI> Whence we conclude, That the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters of <HI>England</HI> wor&s;hipping God in the way thereof, which he hath not pre|&s;cribed, they are Idolaters.</P>
<P>To which Mr. <HI>T.</HI> 1. <HI>He doth not think its true that any Mini&s;ter of</HI> England <HI>would affirm the</HI> Common-Prayer-Book <HI>to be an e&s;&s;ential part of Wor&s;hip.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> But what Mr. <HI>T.</HI> thinks in this matter is not con&s;iderable, the truth of the a&s;&s;ertion is notoriou&s;ly known, and he may as well tell us they di&s;own the Cro&s;s in Bapti&s;m,&mdash;which they are daily in the pra|ctice of.</P>
<P>He adds, 2dly, <HI>If it were, they do not think it an e&s;&s;ential part of Wor|&s;hip by virtue of Gods Command, but they conceive they ought to obey their Governours Laws, not judging others who u&s;e it not.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. This is not at all <HI>ad Rhombum. Jeroboam's</HI> Prie&s;ts and tho&s;e Apo&s;tatick Wor&s;hippers that &s;truck in with him, did not account &s;acrificing at <HI>Dan</HI> and <HI>Bethel,</HI> an e&s;&s;ential part of Wor&s;hip by virtue of Gods Command, but the Kings.</P>
<P N="2">2. To obey their Governours in &s;uch things as the&s;e, Mr. T. &s;aith, is <HI>bottomed upon Chri&s;t's Command:</HI> and if &s;o, whil&s;t they account it their duty from divine Precept, to &s;ubject to their Governours impo&s;ing it upon them as an e&s;&s;ential part of Wor&s;hip, they do little le&s;s than ac|count it to be &s;o by virtue of Divine Command.</P>
<P N="3">3. I wonder with what forehead Mr. T. could &s;ay, <HI>They judge not others who u&s;e it not,</HI> when their Pulpits ring with invectives again&s;t them, and they will not &s;uffer them to preach, but Excommunicate, and Im|pri&s;on them for no other rea&s;on but becau&s;e they will not conform to it.</P>
</DIV3>
<DIV3 N="5" TYPE="section">
<PB N="362" REF="185">
<HEAD><HI>Sect.</HI> 5.</HEAD>
<ARGUMENT>
<P><HI>A &s;econd Argument proving the Mini&s;ters of</HI> England <HI>Idolaters. They act in holy things by virtue of an Office-power received from Idolaters, and offer up to him a Wor&s;hip abu&s;ed to Idolatry with the Modes and Rites of Idolaters. All will-wor&s;hip Idolatry. The te&s;timony of the Antients,</HI> &amp;c. <HI>The Romi&s;h Church Idolaters: their wor&s;hip Idolatry. The pre&s;ent Mini|&s;ters act by virtue of an Office-power received from that Idolatrous Church. Com.-Prayer-Book-Wor&s;hip Idolatry. The Rites u&s;ed by the Mini&s;ters Ido|trous. Rites in them&s;elves indifferent, when once abu&s;ed to Idolatry, not to be u&s;ed, proved. The Te&s;timony of the Learned touching this matter.</HI></P>
</ARGUMENT>
<P>A Second Argument proving the Mini&s;ters of <HI>England</HI> Idolaters, is in <HI>S. T.</HI> thus formed.</P>
<P>Tho&s;e who act in the holy things of God by virtue of an Office-power received from-Idolaters, and offer up to him a Wor&s;hip neerly of Humane compo&s;ition, once abu&s;ed to Idolatry with the Modes and Rites of Idolaters, are them&s;elves &s;uch: But the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters of <HI>England</HI> do &s;o: Therefore.&mdash;</P>
<P>In the <HI>Major</HI> two things are a&s;&s;erted.</P>
<P>1&s;t, That &s;uch as act in the holy things of God by virtue of an Office-power received from Idolaters, are them&s;elves &s;uch, at lea&s;t in re&s;pect of that their Office-power. <HI>Jeroboams</HI> Prie&s;ts being Idolaters, tho&s;e that acted by virtue of an Office-power from them mu&s;t needs be &s;o: as tho&s;e who act by virtue of authority to them committed from Rebels in matters civil, are equally guilty of Rebellion, as tho&s;e from whom they derive that their authority.&mdash;</P>
<P>This Mr. <HI>T.</HI> denies: But, 1. for the ground of his denial no<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">hing is of|fered but Dictates built upon this mi&s;take, That none can be accounted Idolaters but &s;uch as exhibit Divine Wor&s;hip to the Creature: The va|nity of which is before evinced.</P>
<P>2dly, I de&s;ire at his lei&s;ure to be informed whether there be any truth in that Maxime, <HI>One cannot give that to another that he hath not him&s;elf.</HI> If the Idolater communicate an Office-power to another, and he have none him&s;elf but that which is Idolatrous, he doth mo&s;t a&s;&s;u|redly communicate an Idolatrous Office-power to him. That per&s;ons acting from authority received from Rebels, if under hand they de&s;ign the re&s;titution of their Prince, are not to be accounted Rebels (as he &s;aith) is an a&s;&s;ertion, 1. That will &s;carce pa&s;s for truth among&s;t the learned of the Law. 2. Impertinent. For, 1. The pre&s;ent Mini|&s;ters
<PB N="363" REF="185"> act from &s;uch an authority for the &s;upport of Antichri&s;tian Courts, oppre&s;&s;ive diabollical U&s;urpations and Prerogatives, for the keeping out their lawful Prince, Chri&s;t Je&s;us. 2. They ju&s;tify their acting from the authority afore&s;aid, refu&s;e to act from any other, contemn and de|&s;pi&s;e it.</P>
<P>2dly, That wor&s;hipping God by a Form meerly of humane compo|&s;ition with the Rites and Modes of Idolaters is Idolatry; tho&s;e that &s;o wor&s;hip him are Idolaters.</P>
<P>Mr. <HI>T.</HI> replies, <HI>That this makes not Idolaters, unle&s;s there be Idolatry in the Form, and the Rites be Idolatrous in the U&s;e.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. This he &s;peaks without proof.</P>
<P N="2">2. Upon this mi&s;take, that there is no other Idolatry but the giving of Divine honour to the Creature.</P>
<P N="3">3. All will-wor&s;hip is Idolatry, &s;o &s;aith <HI>Augu&s;t. de Con&s;en&s;. Evang. Lib.</HI> 1. <HI>Cap.</HI> 18. <HI>Vazq. de Adorat. Lib.</HI> 2. <HI>Di&s;put.</HI> 1. <HI>Cap.</HI> 3. Dr. <HI>Bils ag. Apol. p.</HI> 4. <HI>p.</HI> 344. and Mr. <HI>T.</HI> denies not &s;uch a wor&s;hipping God, as that mentioned to be will-wor&s;hip.</P>
<P>What he adds, <HI>That it is not true, that they are Idolaters who u&s;e that which is of divine appointment to the right u&s;e, becau&s;e Idolaters abu&s;ed it to Idolatry.</HI> Tho&s;e may do well to take notice, of that are concerned in it: For our parts we &s;ay no &s;uch thing; the allegation is impertinent to the matter in hand, the Form u&s;ed in the <HI>Engli&s;h Liturgy</HI> is not of Divine appointment, nor the Rites thereof; neither will Mr. <HI>T.</HI> have the confi|dence to a&s;&s;ert they are. That I any where revoke that a&s;&s;ertion of mine, <HI>That few or none wor&s;hip the Creature terminativ&egrave;,</HI> is Mr. T. his mi&s;take. 'Tis true <HI>pag.</HI> 65. I &s;ay, <HI>That Bellarmine affirms, that the Images them&s;elves terminate the veneration given to them, as they are in them&s;elves con&s;idered.&mdash;</HI>But this is but one Doctors opinion (re|tracted by him, <HI>de Sac. Euch. l.</HI> 4. <HI>c.</HI> 29. where he a&s;&s;erts that which is contrary thereunto) &s;hould two or three more be remarked of the &s;ame mind with him, they amount but to a few in compari&s;on of the genera|lity of mankind, otherwi&s;e minded.</P>
<P>The <HI>Minor</HI> Propo&s;ition, <HI>viz.</HI> That the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters of <HI>England</HI> act in the holy things of God by virtue of an Office-power received from Idolaters, and offer up to him a Wor&s;hip meerly of humane com|po&s;ition, once abu&s;ed to Idolatry, with the Modes and Rites of Idola|ters, we do in <HI>S. T.</HI> demon&s;trate. Three things are in this matter ar|gued and evinced.</P>
<P>1&s;t, That the <HI>Romi&s;h Church</HI> are Idolaters, their Wor&s;hip in the com|plexion thereof Idolatry. This we prove at large, and our <HI>Animadver|ter</HI> grants it to be true.</P>
<PB N="364" REF="186">
<P> 2dly, That the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters of <HI>England</HI> act by virtue of an Of|fice-power from this combination and A&s;&s;embly of Idolaters. This they them&s;elves will not deny. Succe&s;&s;ion from hence being one of the be&s;t pleas they have for the ju&s;tification of their Mini&s;try. This we argue at large in <HI>S. T.</HI> and Mr. <HI>T.</HI> after a great many words, grants their &s;ucce&s;&s;ion from <HI>Rome.</HI></P>
<P>But adds, 2dly, <HI>That this is not one of their be&s;t pleas they have for the ju&s;tification of their Mini&s;try.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. When they (or he for them) produce a better, it &s;hall be con&s;idered; this is what they e&s;pecially plead: an Argument 'tis one of their be&s;t pleas in their account, however our <HI>Animadvert<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">r</HI> thinks otherwi&s;e.</P>
<P>Nor indeed, 2dly, Do I &s;ee how their Epi&s;copal Ordination can be ju&s;tified without it.</P>
<P>He conceives, 3dly, <HI>That they will deny that they act by virtue of an Office-power received by &s;ucce&s;&s;ion from the combination of Idolaters in the Church of</HI> Rome.&mdash;</P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. The derivation of their &s;ucce&s;&s;ion from the Papacy they deny not: This their &s;ucce&s;&s;ion pleaded for is a &s;ucce&s;&s;ion of Mini&s;try; That they &s;hould be &s;o ab&s;urd as to acknowledge a &s;ucce&s;&s;ion in re&s;pect of their Mini&s;try, from them, and deny the reception of their Office-power from them, (which is nothing more or le&s;s than their Office of Mini&s;try) I cannot imagine.</P>
<P>What follows in this <HI>Sect.</HI> hath already been replied to, and there|fore we &s;hall not further trouble the Reader therewith.</P>
<P>We &s;ay in <HI>S. T.</HI> 3dly, <HI>That the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters offer up to God a Wor&s;hip meerly of Humane compo&s;ition</HI> (as the <HI>Common-Prayer-Book-Wor|&s;hip</HI> hath been proved to be) <HI>once abu&s;ed to Idolatry</HI> (being the Wor&s;hip of that Church, who&s;e wor&s;hip is &s;o; the whole of it being taken out of the Popes <HI>Portuis) with the Rites and Modes of Idolaters (viz.</HI> their Holy Ve&s;tments, Bowings, Candles, Altars,&mdash;which are the Rites of the Idolatrous Church of <HI>Rome,</HI> and were introduced from thence by <HI>Au&s;tin</HI> the Monk) <HI>cannot be denied.</HI> And hence conclude, That the pre|&s;ent Mini&s;ters acting in the holy things of God, by virtue of an Office-power received from Idolaters, and offering up to him a Wor&s;hip meer|ly of Humane compo&s;ition, once abu&s;ed to Idolatry, with the Rites and Modes of Idolaters, are deeply guilty of Idolatry.</P>
<P>What Mr. <HI>T.</HI> replies hereunto <HI>Sect.</HI> 14. hath for the mo&s;t part already been removed out of the way.</P>
<P N="1">1. The Forms of Prayer in the Service-Book, by their Impo&s;ition are
<PB N="365" REF="186"> made an e&s;&s;ential part of Wor&s;hip (as we have proved) as &s;uch, they are not agreeable to Gods Word, not of Divine (but meerly humane) compo&s;ition.</P>
<P N="2">2. Had the&s;e Forms never been in the <HI>Ma&s;s-Book,</HI> being made by their impo&s;ition a part of Wor&s;hip, they had been &s;uper&s;titious, Idola|trous, being an open violation of the &s;econd Commandment.</P>
<P N="3">3. I wonder at the forehead with which 'tis affirmed that the Rites and Modes u&s;ed in the Church of <HI>Rome,</HI> that are Idolatrous, are not ob|&s;erved and u&s;ed. What thinks he of bowing at the Altar, the Name of Je&s;us (which Dr. <HI>Willet</HI> acknowledgeth to be &s;uper&s;titious, Idolatrous, <HI>Synop&s;. Papi&s;m.</HI> the 9^t^h <HI>gener. Contro. p.</HI> 492, 493. as do our Prote|&s;tants generally) kneeling at the receiving of the Sacrament, the Cro&s;s in Bapti&s;m? The&s;e are &s;ome of the Rites u&s;ed in the Papacy, and as &s;o u&s;ed, Mr. <HI>T.</HI> will not, I pre&s;ume, deny them to be Idolatrous.</P>
<P N="4">4. The learned <HI>Muccovius</HI> proves what he a&s;&s;erts <HI>(That the &s;acred Rites of Idolaters (though they be things in them&s;elves indifferent) are</HI> <NOTE N="&dagger;" PLACE="marg"><HI>So &s;ay our Divines gene|rally, to whom</HI> Z<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">nchie, Juni|us, Pelican Calvin, Beza, Far|rel, <HI>(yea</HI> Lyra, <HI>though a Pa|pi&s;t)</HI> Pezelius, Mollerus, Ze|gedinus, Danaeus, Zepperus, Sadael.</NOTE> <HI>not to be retained, becau&s;e all conformity with Ido|laters is to be avoided)</HI> from <HI>Lev.</HI> 19. 19, 27, 28. <HI>&amp;</HI> 21. 5. <HI>&amp; Deut.</HI> 14. 1. The things there interdicted were in them&s;elves indifferent; the ground of their interdiction was, becau&s;e they were the &s;acred Rites of Idolaters, as &s;ay <HI>Salma&s;ius, Herodotus, l.</HI> 3. <HI>Maimonides, Treat. of Idolatry, chap.</HI> 12. <HI>Sect.</HI> 7, 11. <HI>Vatablus, Fagius,</HI> &amp;c. I cannot upon this occa&s;ion but re|mind the judicious Reader of what the learned <HI>Zanchy</HI> writes touching this matter to Q. <HI>Eliz. l.</HI> 1. <HI>Epi&s;t. p.</HI> 431. <HI>'Tis not hone&s;t</HI> (&s;aith he) <HI>that tho&s;e things which have a long time been u&s;ed in idolatrous Wor&s;hip, if they are things in them&s;elves indifferent, &s;hould be retained in the Church, with the hazard of the Salvation of the Godly.</HI> The brazen Serpent which was appointed by the Lord, and indeed for the Salvation of <HI>I&s;rael,</HI> be|cau&s;e the <HI>I&s;ruelites</HI> ab<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">&s;ed it contrary to the Word of God, was by the good King <HI>Hezekiah</HI> taken away, who is greatly prai&s;ed for it,&mdash;how much more &s;hould things and Rites indifferent, in&s;tituted by men, when they decline to Super&s;tition and other abu&s;es, be removed; which Mr. T. may an&s;wer at his lei&s;ure.</P>
</DIV3>
<DIV3 N="6" TYPE="section">
<PB N="366" REF="187">
<HEAD><HI>Sect.</HI> 6.</HEAD>
<ARGUMENT>
<P><HI>A third Argument proving the Mini&s;ters of</HI> England <HI>Idolat<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">rs. That wor&s;hipping God in, by, or before the creature</HI> re&s;pectiv&egrave;, <HI>or with relation to the creature, is Idolatry.</HI></P>
</ARGUMENT>
<P>WE advance in <HI>S. T.</HI> a third Argument to prove the Mini&s;ters of <HI>England</HI> Idolaters, which is thus formed; <HI>Adoration in, by, or before a creature</HI> re&s;pectiv&egrave;, <HI>or with relation to the creature, is idolatrou<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">, &s;uch as &s;o adore or wor&s;hip God are Idolaters: But the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters of</HI> England <HI>do adore or wor&s;hip God in, by, or before a creature</HI> re&s;pectiv&egrave;, <HI>or with relation to the creature. Therefore,&mdash;</HI></P>
<P>The <HI>major</HI> propo&s;ition, we &s;ay, is generally owned by <HI>Prote&s;tants,</HI> it being the very &s;ame Maxime they make u&s;e of, and &s;top the mouths of the Papi&s;ts with, in the point of adoring God mediately by the Crea|ture. The truth of the <HI>minor</HI> propo&s;ition, their bowing and cringing at the Altar, their kneeling at the receiving the Sacrament do evince. That their kneeling is an adoration or wor&s;hipping God before the creature <HI>re&s;pectiv&egrave;,</HI> or with relation to the creature, is manife&s;t: Nothing being more certain than that the Elements are, <HI>objectum a quo,</HI> or the motive of their kneeling, which if they were not there, they would not do. <HI>Didoclavius,</HI> p. 755. tells us, <HI>That Genuflexion is Idola|try;</HI> which <HI>Maccovius</HI> a&s;&s;ents to, <HI>Loc. Com. p.</HI> 861.</P>
<P>To which Mr. <HI>T.</HI> Sect. 15. 1. <HI>The Author of</HI> S. T. <HI>contradists him|&s;elf, for in</HI> chap. 5. p. 40. <HI>he hath &s;aid, That kneeling at the Lords Supper, is one peg beneath the adoration of the Breaden God, he will not affirm, but here he &s;aith, 'tis an adoration, in, by, or before the Creature</HI> re&s;pectiv&egrave;, <HI>or with relation to the Creature.&mdash;</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. Very good, and I &s;ay &s;o &s;till, nor am I able to di&s;cern the lea&s;t contradiction betwixt the&s;e two a&s;&s;ertions. The pre&s;ent Mi|ni&s;ters may not wor&s;hip the <HI>Popi&s;h</HI> Breaden God, (as the <HI>Papi&s;ts</HI> do) and yet wor&s;hip the true God, in, by, or before the creature, <HI>re&s;pectiv&egrave;,</HI> or with relation to the creature. His pittiful <HI>jibes</HI> are beneath <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">e to take notice of. The Idolatry in kneeling at the Sacrament, is to be refer|red to the &s;econd kind of Idolatry we at the beginning mentioned, it being a way of adoration enjoyned by man, not commanded by the Lord; and every thing be&s;ide the Commandment is an Idol, hath been an hitherto received Maxime.</P>
<P><HI>But it cannot be this kind of Idolatry,</HI> (&s;aith Mr. <HI>T.) for kneeling in prayer&mdash;to God is appointed by him.</HI></P>
<PB N="367" REF="187">
<P> <HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. This is fal&s;e; I no where find any &s;uch appointment ex|clu&s;ive of any other po&s;ture.</P>
<P N="2">2. Impertinent; We are not treating of kneeling in prayer, but in receiving the Sacrament. Where hath God &s;aid he will have this Ge|&s;ture and no other u&s;ed in this part of his Wor&s;hip? 'Tis true, man hath of late &s;o determined it, and written the cruelty of their determi|nation in bloody Characters. Worthy Mr. <HI>Dyton</HI> and Mr. <HI>Porter</HI> of <HI>Ware,</HI> being &s;tifled by their Impri&s;onment, the one in the <HI>Gate-hou&s;e,</HI> the other in the <HI>New-Pri&s;on,</HI> for not conforming thereunto, not to men|tion others then, nor late &s;ufferers for the &s;ame cau&s;e.</P>
<P N="3">3. Even in prayer to God, the po&s;ture of &s;tanding &s;eems to be more u&s;ed throughout the Scriptures, <HI>Gen.</HI> 19. 27. <HI>Levit.</HI> 9. 5. <HI>Deut.</HI> 10. 8. &amp; 29. 10. 1 <HI>Kings</HI> 8. 14, 15. 2 <HI>Chron.</HI> 20. 5, 19. &amp; 29. 11. <HI>Jer.</HI> 15. 1. &amp; 18. 20. <HI>Ezek.</HI> 44. 11, 15. <HI>Luke</HI> 18. 11, 13. <HI>Mark</HI> 11. 25. an Argu|ment kneeling in that duty was no appointment of the Lord. That the Primitive Chri&s;tians, for above 800. years after Chri&s;t, on all Lords Dayes throughout the year, and from <HI>Ea&s;ter</HI> till <HI>Whit&s;untide,</HI> con&s;tant|ly prayed &s;tanding, Mr. <HI>T.</HI> knows is upon good Authority affirmed.</P>
<P>What he nextly adds, we have already an&s;wered, (That I &s;peak am|biguou&s;ly, and indi&s;tinctly, I cannot help, 'tis not given to every one to be a <HI>B. D.</HI> nor to &s;peak with that eloquence and clearne&s;s as Mr. <HI>T.</HI> I did what I could to be under&s;tood.</P>
<P>However to make &s;ure work on't, he denies both <HI>major</HI> and <HI>minor,</HI></P>
<P N="1">1. <HI>Adoration in, by, or before a creature</HI> re&s;pectiv&egrave;, <HI>or with relation to the creature, is not Idolatry; &s;uch as &s;o wor&s;hip God are not Idolaters; for the Holy Gho&s;t invites the Jews to wor&s;hip at God's Foot-&s;tool, his Holy Hill,</HI> P&s;al. 99. 5, 9. <HI>which were creatures in, by, or before whom</HI> re&s;pectiv&egrave;, <HI>or with relation to them, as the</HI> objectum &s;ignificativ&egrave; a quo, <HI>or the motive of their Wor&s;hip, they were to bow down to God.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. From God's Commands, to mans Inventions, is but lame arguing; God commanded <HI>I&s;rael</HI> to wor&s;hip at <HI>Jeru&s;alem</HI> before the Ark, Altar there, which they did, without being guilty of the &s;in of Ido|latry; therefore when men command us to bow down, and wor&s;hip be|fore the creature, we may do &s;o without the contraction of any &s;uch guilt, is a &s;ort of rea&s;oning that Mr. <HI>T.</HI> upon &s;econd thoughts will be a&s;hamed to defend. As good he may argue, 'Tis lawful for men to rob and &s;poyl their Neighbours, for the <HI>I&s;raelites,</HI> by the command of God, &s;poiled the <HI>Egyptians,</HI> without being guilty of Theft.</P>
<P>But, 2dly, that the Temple, Altar&mdash;was the <HI>objectum &s;ignificativ&egrave; a quo,</HI> or the motive of their Wor&s;hip is not true; it was &s;olely the
<PB N="368" REF="188"> command of God that was the motive thereof; and had neither Temple, nor Altar&mdash;been there, had God bid them wor&s;hip there, they would have done it.</P>
<P>3dly, <Q>To wor&s;hip at his Foot-&s;tool, is no more than to wor&s;hip in the Temple, to wor&s;hip in the Hou&s;e of his Sanctuary, &s;aith the <HI>Chald.</HI></Q> <HI>Paraph.</HI> which is as remote from Mr. <HI>T.</HI> his purpo&s;e to prove it lawful to wor&s;hip God in, by, or before the creature <HI>re&s;pectiv&egrave;,</HI> as 'tis from <HI>Bel|larmines</HI> who introduce it, to prove the lawfulne&s;s of Image Wor&s;hip.</P>
<P>What follows, 2dly, is of an ea&s;ier di&s;patch. 'Tis true, the u&s;e of the Bread and Wine in the Lords Supper, is of the In&s;titution of Chri&s;t, but bowing down before it is not &s;o, as wor&s;hipping at the Temple, be|fore the Altar&mdash;was.</P>
<P>So is 3dly, the in&s;tance he gives of the <HI>I&s;raelites</HI> falling down upon their faces and wor&s;hipping God, when the fire came down, and the Glory of the Lord was &s;een, 1 <HI>Kings</HI> 18. 38. 2 <HI>Chron.</HI> 7. 3.</P>
<P>For, 1&s;t, &s;hould we grant that the people bowed and wor&s;hipped God, by occa&s;ion of the coming down of the fire, it would not follow that they wor&s;hipped before it, which is &s;omewhat more.</P>
<P>2dly, The Plea is Papi&s;tical, and may as righteou&s;ly be u&s;ed for the wor&s;hipping God before Images.</P>
<P N="3">3. The &s;ight and pre&s;ence of the fire was not the motive of their wor&s;hipping, but the conviction of the Glorious Maje&s;ty of God, that from that Vi&s;ion fell upon them.</P>
<P N="4">4. Their bowing was as to man a voluntary act, from the extraordi|nary compul&s;ion of the Spirit, and by &s;ingular occa&s;ion: ours a forced act frequently performed in imitation of the mo&s;t horrid Idolaters in the World, by the compul&s;ion of the &s;pirit of Antichri&s;t, and Satan: Their Act hath therefore no place in our pre&s;ent ca&s;e, wherein neither &s;uch a compul&s;ion nor occa&s;ion can be pleaded.</P>
<P>Dr. <HI>Jackson</HI> tells us, <Q>That &s;uch actions as have been managed by Gods Spirit, &s;ugge&s;ted by &s;ecret in&s;tinct, or extracted by extraordina|ry and &s;pecial occa&s;ions, are then only lawful in others, when they are begotten by like occa&s;ions, or brought forth by like impul&s;ions.</Q> Which is indeed what is u&s;ually a&s;&s;erted by our <HI>Prote&s;tants,</HI> in an&s;wer to &s;uch Papi&s;tical Arguments, as our <HI>Animadverter,</HI> for want of better, is forced to make u&s;e of.</P>
<P>He adds, 2dly, <HI>The</HI> minor <HI>may be denied, the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters do not wor&s;hip God, in, by, or before the creature</HI> re&s;pectiv&egrave;, <HI>or with relation to the creature, as the</HI> objectum &s;ignificativ&egrave; a quo, <HI>or the motive thereunto, for the Common-Prayer-Book &s;aith, That kneeling is not for adoration of</HI>
<PB N="369" REF="188"> <HI>the Elements, but for a &s;ignification of our humble and grateful acknow|ledgment of the benefits of Chri&s;t.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. But it &s;aith not the Elements are not the motive of their kneeling, which they are, el&s;e why is not this po&s;ture enjoyn'd in other parts and acts of wor&s;hip, wherein 'tis our duty to &s;ignifie our humble and grateful acknowledgment of the benefits of Chri&s;t.</P>
<P>Nay, 2dly, whence is it that in that very Ordinance another po&s;ture is after the receiving the Bread and Wine permitted? Yea, do not our kneelers teach us that we ought to &s;tand up at <HI>Gloria Patri,</HI> (which is as &s;olemn a thank&s;giving as any they have in their Common-Prayer-Book) ri&s;ing from our knees and &s;eats to repeat it.</P>
<P>Nor, 3dly, do <HI>I</HI> under&s;tand the bleating of that expre&s;&s;ion in the place cited by Mr. T. <HI>That genuflexion is enjoyn'd for the avoiding &s;uch prophanation in the Holy Communion as might en&s;ue:</HI> Except they give honour more than enough to the Elements, it being much like what was pleaded by the <HI>Papi&s;ts</HI> for the &s;ame practice, <HI>viz.</HI> that the Prie&s;ts may put it more ea&s;ily into the mouth of the Receiver, without danger of &s;pilling it.</P>
<P>Nor, 4thly, know I a greater prophanation of any Ordinance, than the adding &s;omething of our own devi&s;ing thereunto, as a part thereof, and kneeling in the Act of receiving by their impo&s;ition being &s;o added, that which they pretend to do for the avoiding of prophanation in the Communion, is the greate&s;t prophanation thereof imaginable. I crave leave to add that it is to be feared that there are hundreds of ignorant people in the Countrey, who upon &s;trict enquiry, would be found to make the Bread and Wine, not only the motive, (which all know it is) but the object of their Wor&s;hip. Touching the Mini&s;ters bowing and cringing at the Altar, he leaves them that are concern'd to plead for them&s;elves, he will be no Advocate for them; only this he will &s;ay, <HI>That tho&s;e who u&s;e it, avouch they do it not to any other but God, and therefore are not to be charged with Idolatry.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. The vanity of this con&s;equence we have over and overconfu|ted. 2dly, Many of the Heathens, the <HI>Romani&s;ts</HI> avouch as much touch|ing bowing to their Images, they do it not to any other than God; yet he will not &s;ure &s;ay, therefore they are not guilty of Idolatry. The&s;e coverings are quite too &s;hort to cover the nakedne&s;s of the Mini&s;ters of <HI>England,</HI> which may be ea&s;ily di&s;cern'd through them.</P>
<P>Our next attempt in S. T. is, The removal of Objections; the fir&s;t whereof is thus propo&s;ed.</P>
<P>Object. 1. <HI>The charging the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters of</HI> England <HI>with Idola|try,</HI>
<PB N="370" REF="189"> <HI>is exceeding har&s;h, and that which is an Argument of a very unchri&s;ti|an and cen&s;orious Spirit.</HI></P>
<P>To which we an&s;wer, 1&s;t, That many words of Chri&s;t him&s;elf were accounted hard &s;ayings, and not to be born.&mdash;</P>
<P>To which Mr. T. <HI>Chri&s;t's &s;ayings were unju&s;tly counted hard, becau&s;e they were true, yours ju&s;tly becau&s;e not &s;o.&mdash;</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. Whether ours are true or fal&s;e, is left to the Impartial Reader to determine.</P>
<P>2dly, That they are unchri&s;tian and cen&s;orious, is an uncharitable Dictate of this <HI>Animadverter,</HI> they tend not to divi&s;ion among&s;t the Saints, but Union.</P>
<P>We add, &s;econdly, That in this matter we have &s;aid nothing but what is a&s;&s;erted by mo&s;t, or all, <HI>Prote&s;tant</HI> Writers upon the &s;econd Commandment, who tell us, That the wor&s;hipping God in a way not pre&s;cribed by him, is Idolatry, &s;uch as do &s;o are Idolaters; Our Ap|plication hereof to the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters, whom we have proved guilty of &s;o wor&s;hipping God, we &s;ee no rea&s;on why any &s;hould account un|chri&s;tian or cen&s;orious.</P>
<P>Mr. T. replies, <HI>That which by the</HI> Prote&s;tant <HI>Writers is &s;aid, is not all true.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> Nor do I &s;ay it is; but when the &s;ame thing is a&s;&s;erted by them in <HI>The&s;i,</HI> that we in this matter affirmed, 'twas &s;uppo&s;ed that we might no more ju&s;tly be charged with cen&s;oriou&s;ne&s;s and uncharitable|ne&s;s than they; the truth whereof Mr. <HI>T.</HI> doth not deny.</P>
<P>We &s;ay, 3dly, What would the&s;e Objectors have &s;aid to <HI>Tertullian,</HI> who is by far more nice in this point of Idolatry than we have declared our &s;elves to be,&mdash;yet could he not ju&s;tly be charged wi<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">h an un|chri&s;tian and cen&s;orious Spirit.</P>
<P>To which our <HI>Animadverter</HI> adjoyns, 1. Tertullian <HI>in the clo&s;e of his life was a man that a&s;cribed too much to private revelations.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. And what if he did? Is what he &s;aith touching Idolatry, bottom'd upon tho&s;e private revelations? Nothing le&s;s. Was he in his declamations again&s;t Idolaters uncharitable and cen&s;orious? Who be&s;ides him&s;elf will affirm it? What rule of charity have we broken in what we have argued and offered in this matter? What one particular have I laid to the charge of the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters that is not evidently proved? Let him manife&s;t the one or the other to be done by us, and we will acknowledge our evil; till then declamations and o<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">tcries of uncharitablene&s;s and cen&s;oriou&s;ne&s;s are but empty &s;ounds.</P>
<P N="2"><PB N="371" REF="189"> 2. His reflection, as if we were guilty of a&s;cribing too much to pri|vate revelations, we can bear with contentment,</P>
<Q>Non hoc primum pectora vulnus mea &s;en&s;erunt graviora tuli.</Q>
<P>with this intimation, that through Grace we are not. Nor dare we em|brace any thing (&s;hould an Angel from Heaven preach it) which is not con&s;onant to the Law and Te&s;timony of God contained in the Scrip|tures.</P>
<P N="3">3. That <HI>Tertullian</HI> had more rea&s;on (as he &s;aith) to be nice about the point of Idolatry than we, he proves not; the contrary is evident: Did he live among&s;t Pagans? do not we live among&s;t Romi&s;h Idolaters? who have been not a little indu&s;trious to introduce and impo&s;e upon us the whole of their Idolatrous Wor&s;hip and Service. Chri&s;tians were then ha&s;tening from the &s;uper&s;titions of the Heathens; many are now po&s;ting toward Antichri&s;tian Idolatry. Who could have thought that &s;o much of the Wor&s;hip of <HI>Rome,</HI> their Prayers, Anthems, Rites, and In&s;truments of their Idolatry, as Surplice, Altar, Candles, Or|gans&mdash;&s;hluld in &s;o little time have taken root in <HI>England,</HI> as in five or &s;ix years they have done?&mdash;</P>
<P>The &s;econd Objection propo&s;ed in S. T. is, <HI>What &s;hall we judge of</HI> Latimer, Ridley, Hooper,<HI>&mdash;who wor&s;hipped God after the &s;ame way of wor&s;hip that the&s;e do now, were they al&s;o Idolaters?&mdash;</HI></P>
<P>To which we an&s;wer, 1. That they were eminent Witne&s;&s;es of Je|&s;us Chri&s;t in their day.&mdash;</P>
<P>2dly, That they are now with Chri&s;t, and &s;hall come with him to judge their unju&s;t judges we believe.</P>
<P>But, 3dly, they were but men encompa&s;&s;ed about with many infir|mities; that they were guilty of the &s;in of Idolatry cannot be denyed. Yet, 1. They were in that day but ju&s;t peeping out of the Gates of <HI>Ba|bylon;</HI> and 'tis no wonder if &s;ome of the filth of her Fornications did cleave to them.</P>
<P>To which Mr. <HI>T. How is it that they are now with Chri&s;t, where no un|clean thing enters?</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. How is it that <HI>Jo&s;hua</HI> is now with Chri&s;t, who comes out of <HI>Babylon</HI> with filthy Garments, <HI>Zach.</HI> 3. 3.</P>
<P>But, 2dly, his que&s;tion is an&s;wered in what follows in S. T. 2. <HI>God (of pure Grace) accepted them in Chri&s;t, granting them a general repen|tance for tho&s;e iniquities they &s;aw not to be &s;o.&mdash;</HI></P>
<PB N="372" REF="190">
<P> Mr. <HI>T.</HI> adjoyns, <HI>That they &s;hould repent of that they offered to <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">u&s;tifie a little before they died, is not likely.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. But that they had a general repentance for what they &s;ee|ing not to be evil, did not particularly bewail, he attempts not the proof of. The Patriarks manife&s;ted no particular repentance for their poligamy, they ju&s;tified it by their practice to the la&s;t. <HI>Abraham</HI> took him Concubines when very old. <HI>David</HI> added to tho&s;e he had, <HI>Abi|&s;hag,</HI> when ready to leave the World. I ask, Was this their &s;in i<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter"> Mr. <HI>T.</HI> will not deny it, nor that they were defiled with it; every <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">niquity leaving defilement behind it. How is it that they are now wi<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="2 letters"> Chri&s;t where no unclean thing enters? That they &s;hould repent of that which they ju&s;tified a little before they died is not likely; what will Mr. <HI>T.</HI> an|&s;wer? If I mi&s;take not, the &s;ame an&s;wer will &s;erve to &s;top his own mouth with re&s;pect to his pre&s;ent arguings. Nor know I a better than this; 'tis true, we find not that they particularly repented hereof, but a gene|ral repentance we in charity believe they had, which God accepted in Chri&s;t.</P>
<P>2dly, What is that they offered to ju&s;tifie a little before they died? Did they offer to ju&s;tifie kneeling in the act of receiving? Nothing le&s;s! the wearing of the Surplice? But &s;ome of them, as <HI>Ridley&mdash;</HI>ab|hord it, and were troubled at the very heart that they impo&s;ed it upon others, as he knows.</P>
<P>We conclude in S. T. <HI>The Intelligent Reader knows that the&s;e things are not of any moment for the invalidating what hath been offered upon this Subject.</HI></P>
<P>Our Animadverter replies, 1. <HI>Though this be not a direct an&s;wer to their Argument, yet 'tis a very great prejudice again&s;t it, that by &s;triking at the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters you wound the Holy Martyrs, and make them Ido|laters for that very thing for which they died, that they might not be Idola|ters.&mdash;</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. 'Tis true, in the thoughts of &s;ome this might be a great prejudice again&s;t the Argument, again&s;t the Truth. 'Tis no new thing for the Truths of God to be attended with as great prejudices as this.</P>
<P>2dly, That this &s;hould be accounted any prejudice at all by per&s;ons that de&s;ire to weigh things uprightly in the Ballance of the Scriptures; &s;etting a&s;ide the con&s;ideration of per&s;ons, cannot be imagined.</P>
<P>Nor is it, 3dly, any greater prejudice again&s;t our Argument, than lies again&s;t the Arguments of the <HI>Prote&s;tants</HI> again&s;t the <HI>Papi&s;ts</HI> Idolatries and Super&s;titions; who yet (&s;ome of them that have been guilty there|of) have been true Chri&s;tians, and in &s;ome things witne&s;&s;es of Chri&s;t
<PB N="373" REF="190"> again&s;t Papal pride and abominations, and have &s;ealed their Te&s;timony with their blood.</P>
<P>He adds, 2dly, <HI>That I &s;hould when I wrote this Chapter, have thought of</HI> P&s;al. 73. 15.</P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. But to what purpo&s;e I know not; that mentioning the in|firmities and weakne&s;&s;es of the Children of the Lord, (with that ten|derne&s;s, regard to their due honour, and e&s;teem among&s;t the Saints as I did) for the removing of prejudice that might ari&s;e in the minds of any again&s;t what I was pleading for, under this a&s;&s;urance, that it is Truth, &s;hould be a &s;inning again&s;t the Generation of the Righteous. Mr. <HI>T.</HI> is the fir&s;t that I believe did ever &s;ugge&s;t it; and 'tis pitty but he &s;hould be the la&s;t, it being a mo&s;t mon&s;trous and ab&s;urd figment. The Patriarks Poligamy, <HI>Aaron</HI>'s, <HI>Mo&s;es, Davids, Peters,&mdash;</HI>weak|ne&s;&s;es are in Scripture (and may be by any one upon ju&s;t occa&s;ion) men|tioned, I hope without &s;inning again&s;t the Generation of the Righte|ous; and why not the Idolatry of the&s;e la&s;t Worthies? The <HI>Animad|verter</HI> &s;ees I have (according to his advice) reviewed this Argument, and do a&s;&s;ure him, I &s;ee not the lea&s;t cau&s;e from what he offers to re|tract what was offer'd in S. T. touching it; but conclude that the pre|&s;ent Mini&s;ters of <HI>England</HI> are guilty of Idolatry, and therefore 'tis the duty of Saints not to hear, but &s;eparate from them. And if this be in Mr. <HI>T.</HI> his account an extream of <HI>Fanatici&s;m,</HI> (as he &s;peaks) I de&s;ire for ever to be found in this extream.</P>
</DIV3>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="9" TYPE="chapter">
<PB N="374" REF="191">
<HEAD>CHAP. IX.</HEAD>
<DIV3 N="1" TYPE="section">
<HEAD><HI>Arg.</HI> 7. <HI>Sect.</HI> 1.</HEAD>
<ARGUMENT>
<P><HI>A &s;eventh Argument again&s;t hearing the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters. 'Tis an of|fence, grief, &s;candal, and cau&s;e of &s;tumbling to their Breathren, for|bidden,</HI> Mat. 18. 6. Luke 17. 1, 2. Rom. 14. 13, 15, 20. 1 Cor. 8. 8, 9, 13. <HI>&amp;</HI> 10. 24. <HI>Mr.</HI> T. <HI>his eight Arguments to the contra|ry, refuted.</HI></P>
</ARGUMENT>
<P>THE eighth Chapter of <HI>S. T.</HI> contains a &s;eventh and eighth Ar|gument again&s;t hearing the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters; The &s;eventh is thus formed; <HI>'Tis not lawful for Saints to do any thing (for the doing whereof there is no po&s;itive precept in the Scripture) that is an offence, grief, &s;candal, and cau&s;e of &s;tumbling to their Breathren.</HI> But the hearing the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters of <HI>England</HI> (as there is no po&s;itive pre|cept in the Scripture for it, &s;o it) is an offence, grief, &s;candal, and cau&s;e of &s;tumbling to the Brethren.&mdash;Therefore&mdash;</P>
<P>The <HI>major,</HI> or fir&s;t Propo&s;ition we prove from <HI>Rom.</HI> 14. 13, 15, 20. 1 <HI>Cor.</HI> 8. 9, 13. &amp; 10. 24. The <HI>minor,</HI> we &s;ay, con&s;i&s;ts of two parts.</P>
<P N="1">1. That for hearing the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters, there is no po&s;itive war|rant in the Scripture; if there be, let it be produced, and this Contro|ver&s;ie is at an end.&mdash;</P>
<P>Now con&s;idering Mr. <HI>T.</HI> his brag, <HI>p.</HI> 61. of the facility of producing Scripture-Warrant for hearing the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters, one might ju&s;tly have expected he &s;hould here produce it. But in the &s;tead thereof, <HI>Ch.</HI> 8. <HI>S.</HI> 2. you have only an intimation of what he hath already &s;hewed in this matter, which hath already been refuted by us.</P>
<P>We add in <HI>S. T.</HI> 2ly. <HI>That the Saints hearing the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters of</HI> Engl. <HI>is an offence, grief, &s;candal, and occa&s;ion of &s;tumbling to their Brethren,&mdash;to many thou&s;ands it is &s;o, as their groans and tears alone, and together up|on this foot of account demon&s;trate; many have been drawn (as is known) by the practice of &s;ome leading Brethren in this matter again&s;t the checks of their own Con&s;ciences to a conformity herein to their after grief &amp; wounding.</HI></P>
<PB N="375" REF="191">
<P> To which, <HI>Sect.</HI> 3. Mr. <HI>T.</HI> replies, (after he hath talked of mens appropriating the tearm <HI>vi&s;ible Saints,</HI> to tho&s;e of the Congregational way, or Presbyterial (which we do not) that this Argument is un|nece&s;&s;ary if the other be good, that it &s;uppo&s;eth all that is formerly di&s;|puted to be weak (which is one of his empty flouri&s;hes) that we affright per&s;ons by &s;uch Arguments to keep them to our &s;elves (in which he &s;peaks fal&s;ly, wickedly&mdash;) That hearing the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters is not &s;uch an offence, grief, &s;candal, as that which is forbidden, <HI>Mat.</HI> 18. 6. <HI>Luke</HI> 17. 1, 2. <HI>Rom.</HI> 14. 13, 15, 20. 1 <HI>Cor.</HI> 8. 8, 9, 13. &amp; 10. 24. and this he will prove thus.</P>
<P>Arg. 1. <HI>That is not &s;candalizing forbidden in the&s;e texts which is nei|ther by giving evil example in doing that which is intrin&s;ecally evil, nor by enticing practices, or per&s;ecution impelling to evil, nor by abu&s;e of liberty in things lawful to the harm of another: But the Saints hearing the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters, is not &s;candalizing either of the&s;e wayes: Therefore.&mdash;</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. We deny his <HI>Minor,</HI> for which he brings no proof. We &s;ay with him, That hearing the Mini&s;ters of <HI>England</HI> is not a matter of in|differency; 'tis not the duty of the Saints, but their &s;in; yet &s;ome others accounting it neither matter of duty nor &s;in, but liberty, we were willing to debate the ca&s;e of &s;candal with them, upon that their avowed principle, as we afterward do. So that we are wholly uncon|cerned in what follows in this Argument, which yet we have already fully an&s;wered to.</P>
<P>2dly, His Argument is ju&s;tly retorted upon him&s;elf, thus; <HI>The &s;candalizing of Brethren by giving of evil example, in doing that which is of it &s;elf evil</HI> (as joyning with an Antichri&s;tian Mini&s;try and Wor&s;hip is) <HI>by enticing practices, or per&s;ecution, impelling to evil</HI> (as tho&s;e do who by their practices in hearing&mdash;allure, or by pre&s;enting (or abetting tho&s;e that do &s;o by holding Communion with them&mdash;) impel &s;uch as are weak thereunto) <HI>or by abu&s;e of liberty in things lawful</HI> (as &s;ome hearer<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter"> judge their hearing to be) <HI>to the harm of another (viz.</HI> the wounding grieving the con&s;ciences of the weak, it may be &s;triking them off the wayes of In&s;tituted Wor&s;hip, when they behold the turning to and fro of a zealous forwardly profe&s;&s;ing people) <HI>is &s;candalizing forbidden in the fore-cited Scriptures.</HI> (This Mr. <HI>T.</HI> grants) <HI>But the Saints hearing the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters, is a &s;candalizing with re&s;pect to each of the&s;e particu|lars:</HI> (as we have &s;hewed) <HI>Therefore.&mdash;</HI></P>
<P><HI>Arg.</HI> 2. His &s;econd Argument is, <HI>That is not &s;candalizing forbidden in tho&s;e Texts which doth not tend to one of tho&s;e evils, for preventing of which tho&s;e precepts of non-&s;candalizing were given: But the hearing the</HI>
<PB N="376" REF="192"> <HI>pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters tends not to any of tho&s;e evils:</HI><HI>&mdash;Therefore.&mdash;</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. It tends to &s;ome or all of tho&s;e evils mentioned in the Texts; it tends to &s;in, 'tis a joyning with a fal&s;e Antichri&s;t an Mini|&s;try, to the ju&s;tification, encouraging of them in the exerci&s;e of a fal&s;e Mini&s;terial power; it tends to the &s;orrow, or godly vexation of the Saints, whil&s;t they &s;ee their Brethren in the con&s;tant di&s;obedience of the Calls of God to come out of <HI>Babylon;</HI> for&s;aking tho&s;e wayes in which they have found re&s;t and peace, and returning to tho&s;e their &s;ouls late|ly loathed and abhorred. His following <HI>Sarca&s;ms</HI> he will one day know had been better omitted; the repre&s;enting hearing the pre&s;ent Mini|&s;ters as dangerous and &s;inful, occa&s;ions not any to fall to erroneous Principles and Practices. The compliance of Profe&s;&s;ors together with the debauchery of the Prie&s;ts, is for the mo&s;t part the &s;ource and &s;pring hereof; &s;o that we may better argue,</P>
<P>2dly, That is the &s;candalizing forbidden in tho&s;e Texts, which tends to any of tho&s;e evils, for preventing of which tho&s;e Precepts of not &s;candalizing were given; (this Mr. <HI>T.</HI> grants) But the hearing the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters tends to &s;ome of tho&s;e evils: (as we but now &s;hew|ed) Therefore.&mdash;</P>
<P><HI>Arg.</HI> 3. His third Argument follows thus; <HI>That is not &s;candalizing forbidden in tho&s;e Texts, which doth not ari&s;e from any defect of Charity, or undue behaviour of the per&s;on offending, but from the di&s;temper of the per|&s;on offended: But the &s;candalizing by hearing doth not ari&s;e from the defect of either of the&s;e, but from the di&s;temper intimated: Therefore.&mdash;</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. We deny his <HI>Minor,</HI> and expect is proof thereof by the next; till when we crave leave,</P>
<P N="2">2. To retort this Argument upon him&s;elf; <HI>That is &s;candalizing forbidden in the Text which doth ari&s;e from the defects intimated, and not from the di&s;temper of the per&s;on offended: But this is the &s;candalizing by hearing.</HI></P>
<P N="1">1. 'Tis a defect of Charity to the &s;ouls of their weak brethren, whom they wound, grieve, before whom they are continually laying a temp|tation of apo&s;ta&s;ie from Profe&s;&s;ion, Religion, whil&s;t they behold noted Profe&s;&s;ors to cleave to tho&s;e wayes, per&s;ons and things, that they once could have no communion with, with hands lifted up to Heaven, cove|nanted again&s;t.</P>
<P N="2">2. 'Tis a defect of Charity to poor &s;inners, who are hereby encou|raged to &s;it under a dead, formal, &s;aple&s;s Mini&s;try, to abide in a lazy formal way of wor&s;hipping God.&mdash;</P>
<P>And. 3. In both the&s;e re&s;pects 'tis an undue behaviour.</P>
<P N="4"><PB N="377" REF="192"> 4. That it ari&s;eth not from di&s;temper we &s;hall evince when we come to con&s;ider what Mr. T. hath offered to prove that to be the &s;our&s;e and &s;pring from whence it doth ari&s;e.</P>
<P>We attend his fourth Argument, which is thus formed.</P>
<P><HI>Arg.</HI> 4. <HI>That is not the &s;candalizing forbidden in tho&s;e Texts which is not offending per&s;ons weak in the Faith, and of doubting Con&s;ciences, yet peace|ably minded, but of per&s;ons conceiving them&s;elves &s;trong.&mdash;But &s;uch is the di&s;po&s;ition and carriage of tho&s;e that pretend to be offended at hearing the pre|&s;ent Mini&s;ters: Therefore.&mdash;</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;.</HI> 1. This Argument interferes with his fir&s;t, where he makes the giving an evil example, by doing that which is in it &s;elf evil, to be the &s;candal condemned: Now I conceive not only per&s;ons weak in the Faith, but &s;trong Chri&s;tians, will be, cannot but be &s;candalized at pro|fe&s;&s;ors &s;o doing.</P>
<P>But to wave that; 2. We deny his <HI>Minor,</HI> for the confirmation of which he offers nothing that may de&s;erve the Name of proof; (For what if the per&s;ons offended think them&s;elves &s;trong, able to argue a|gain&s;t the practice of hearing the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters, oppo&s;e it with vio|lence,&mdash;they may be weak in the Faith notwith&s;tanding. The weak brother thought him&s;elf able to di&s;pute again&s;t the practice of him that ate the <HI>Idolothyte</HI> as &s;inful, and yet a weak brother.&mdash;)</P>
<P>However, 3. We are engaged to him for affording us a fourth Ar|gument, to prove the &s;candalizing by hearing to be the &s;candalizing in the Texts.</P>
<P><HI>That is &s;candalizing forbidden in tho&s;e Texts which is offending per&s;ons weak in the Faith, and of doubting con&s;ciences, yet peaceably minded: But &s;uch is the &s;candalizing by hearing the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters: Hundreds of weak Saints, tender, young Converts are hereby offended. Therefore.&mdash;</HI></P>
<P><HI>Arg.</HI> 5. His fifth Argument is this, <HI>That is not &s;candalizing forbid|den in tho&s;e texts which is by u&s;ing our liberty, where we know not any pre&s;ent that will be offended at the u&s;e of it, or that &s;ignifies the offence at our action when we do it. In which ca&s;e the Apo&s;tle allowes the eating of things offered to Idols,</HI> 1 Cor. 10. 27, 28, 29. <HI>and con&s;equently the u&s;e of our liberty in other things lawful; and if any ab&s;ent be offended, we are ready to give a ju&s;t rea&s;on of our doing&mdash;: But &s;o it is at the offence of per&s;ons in hearing the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters.&mdash;Therefore.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. We deny his <HI>Major,</HI> partly becau&s;e that &s;candalizing is forbidden in the texts, which tends to the grieving the Saints; now this they may be, are, as much by the report and information of their brethrens action, that they conceive evil, though the&s;e judge it their
<PB N="378" REF="193"> liberty, as if they were pre&s;ent; of which a ju&s;t rea&s;on can never be given; for if the thing I do be matter of liberty, I can never give any ju&s;t rea&s;on of my doing it to the grief and wounding of my weak b<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">other; for my &s;o doing is an expre&s;s violation of the commandment of Chri&s;t in the Scriptures mentioned; partly becau&s;e the &s;candalizing in hear|ing is by giving evil example in doing that which is intrin&s;ecally evil; which whether the per&s;on offended be pre&s;ent or ab&s;ent is condemned, and no ju&s;t rea&s;on thereof can be given.</P>
<P>Nor 2. Is the <HI>Minor</HI> alway true, but rarely (if at all) there are per&s;ons pre&s;ent that will be, are offended at it; it may be weak Saints that by their example (it may be) with a doubting Con&s;cience are brought thither.</P>
<P><HI>Arg.</HI> 6. His &s;ixth Argument is, <HI>That is not the &s;candalizing in the texts, in which if the offence be regarded, the per&s;on &s;uppo&s;ed to offen<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter"> &s;hall be alwayes deprived of the u&s;e and ben<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">fit of his liberty, contrary to</HI> 1 Cor. 10. 29, 30. <HI>and that is a matter of the greate&s;t moment for his &s;ouls welfare, the hearing the Word of God; whereby his liberty will be lo&s;t, and a yoke of bondage received, contrary to</HI> Gal. 2. 5. <HI>&amp;</HI> 6. 1. <HI>But &s;o it is in th<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter"> offence for hearing the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters. Therefore.&mdash;</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> The di&s;covery of the un&s;oundne&s;s and rottenne&s;s of the foun|dation upon which this Argument is built, will totally enervate and render it u&s;ele&s;s, with re&s;pect to the end for which it is produced.</P>
<P N="1">1. 'Tis &s;uppo&s;ed that we ought not alway to deprive our &s;elves of that which is the matter of our Liberty, if a weak brother be alway offended with our u&s;e of it. But this is notoriou&s;ly fal&s;e. <HI>Fir&s;t,</HI> The ground or rea&s;on of my fir&s;t forbearance to exerci&s;e my Liberty rem<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">ining, Rea|&s;on will dictate that I mu&s;t forbear the exerci&s;e thereof &s;till. <HI>Secondly,</HI> Directly contrary to what is a&s;&s;erted by the Apo&s;tle, 1 <HI>Cor.</HI> 8. 13. <HI>Thirdly,</HI> Oppo&s;ite to his intendment in the place cited by the <HI>Animad|verter, viz.</HI> 1 Cor. 10. 29. For <HI>why is my Liberty judged of ano|ther mans Con&s;cience,</HI> i. e. why &s;hould I give occa&s;ion to another of judging my Liberty? The Interrogation is of one denying (&s;aith <HI>Pa|raeus) q. d.</HI> I will by no means do it, <HI>I will rather ab&s;tain from eating fle&s;h for Eternity,</HI> as he &s;peaks, 1 Cor. 8. 13.</P>
<P N="2">2. 'Tis &s;uppo&s;ed that except a man hear the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters, he cannot hear the Word of God at all, which ble&s;&s;ed be the Lord is far otherwi&s;e.</P>
<P N="3">3. The Liberty mentioned, <HI>Gal.</HI> 2. 5. <HI>&amp;</HI> 5. 1. Is a Liberty from <HI>Jewi&s;h Ceremonies,</HI> the Bondage is owning, &s;ubjecting to them. which what it makes to his purpo&s;e, I cannot tell. Sure his Liberty from the&s;e
<PB N="379" REF="193"> will not be lo&s;t by his not hearing the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters; Liberty from &s;ome of them, together with Ceremonies of Humane Invention will hereby be e&s;tabli&s;hed and obtained, in which it is the duty of Saints to &s;tand fa&s;t.</P>
<P N="4">4. 'Tis &s;uppo&s;ed that 'tis my Liberty to hear the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters, or otherwi&s;e; but that Mr. <HI>T.</HI> cannot plead, who hath denied hearing them to be a matter of Liberty.</P>
<P><HI>Arg.</HI> 7. His 7^t^h Argument is this, <HI>That is not &s;candalizing forbidden in tho&s;e texts, the avoiding of which draws after it a greater &s;candal: But in &s;hunning to hear the pr<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">&s;ent Mini&s;ters there is a greater &s;candal than in hearing them.&mdash;Therefore.&mdash;</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> We deny his <HI>Minor,</HI> his proofs whereof are a meer <HI>petitia principli,</HI> fal&s;e and ludicrous.</P>
<P>1&s;t, The per&s;on refu&s;ing to hear &s;candalizeth not him&s;elf, by con|firming him&s;elf in his &s;uper&s;titious error, hindring his &s;piritual growth, and en&s;naring him&s;elf in an unju&s;tifiable &s;eparation. Nor doth he &s;can|dalize others by his example, confirming tho&s;e that refu&s;e to hear in their error and &s;chi&s;m, whom he ought to oppo&s;e as <HI>Paul</HI> did <HI>Peter, Gal.</HI> 2. 11. For, 1. Refu&s;ing to hear the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters is no er|ror; Nor, 2. Super&s;titious; Nor, 3. An hinderance of &s;piritual good and growth. (Saints experience, through the grace of the Lord, the contrary) Nor is, 4. Separation from them unju&s;tifiable; Or, 5. Schi&s;matical; nor cannot be: for Schi&s;m, according to the Scripture notion of it, as a worthy learned per&s;on hath lately proved, is in one particular Church among&s;t the members thereof; which of the Church of <HI>England</HI> we are not. Nor, 6. is <HI>Gal.</HI> 2. 11. a ground &s;ufficient for any one to reprove or oppo&s;e per&s;ons in their non-conformity to the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters.</P>
<P>1&s;t, <HI>Paul</HI> reproves <HI>Peter</HI> for non-communion with the Saints upon Principles purely <HI>Judaical;</HI> tho&s;e that refu&s;e to hear, refu&s;e communi|on with vi&s;ibly debauch't and wicked per&s;ons upon Go&s;pel-Princi+ples.</P>
<P>2dly, 'Twas <HI>Peters</HI> di&s;&s;embling that <HI>Paul</HI> reproved, <HI>ver&s;.</HI> 11, 12. One while he would eat with the <HI>Gentiles;</HI> other-while for fear of the <HI>Jews</HI> he will not; which will rather countenance a per&s;ons reproving &s;uch as hear tho&s;e whom not long &s;ince they refu&s;ed to have communion with, and &s;wore to extirpate.</P>
<P>He adds, 2dly, <HI>By refu&s;ing to hear the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters,</HI> 1. <HI>The &s;heep of Chri&s;t are &s;cattered.&mdash;</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> They are rather united in one. That there is &s;uch bitterne&s;s
<PB N="380" REF="194"> and enmity in the be&s;t of the Separati&s;ts (as Mr. <HI>T.</HI> mentions) to|wards di&s;&s;enters from them, that breaks the bond of Charity, is fal&s;e and untrue. I wi&s;h that he &s;peak not again&s;t his knowledge and co<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">&s;cience in this matter. The bond of love and charity among&s;t the true di&s;ciples of Chri&s;t, they are &s;o far from going about to break, that they labour to &s;trengthen, encrea&s;e it. And could wi&s;h that all tho&s;e names and ti|tles of di&s;tinction, which either &s;ome have a&s;&s;umed to them&s;elves, or others have reproachfully applied to them that love Chri&s;t in upright|ne&s;s, were removed; that we might know one another as Chri&s;tians, and &s;tudy the exaltment of truth and peace among&s;t each other, and the Na|tions where our lot is ca&s;t.</P>
<P>He tells us, 3dly, <HI>The refu&s;er to go to hear, &s;candalizeth tho&s;e that do &s;o, who are cen&s;ured and &s;hunned as lap&s;ed Brethren, and meer Fo<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">mali&s;ts, and thereby are grieved:&mdash;He &s;candalizeth the conforming. Mini|&s;ters, who are much hindred in their performance of their Mini&s;try&mdash;</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. It may be tho&s;e who are cen&s;ured as lap&s;ed Brethren, are ju&s;tly &s;o cen&s;ured, being &s;uch as have departed from the truth <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">nd way of the Go&s;pel they once embraced and walked in, and if &s;o the cen&s;ure is not unju&s;t, but righteous; and, if managed in a Go&s;pel-&s;piri<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter"> of love and meekne&s;s, there is no ju&s;t cau&s;e of grief admini&s;tred: The cen|&s;ure (if the Lord ble&s;s it for their awakening and recovery) may be a foundation of future joy and rejoycing.</P>
<P N="2">2. That the Conforming Mini&s;ters &s;hould hereby be much hindred in the performance of their Mini&s;try, is not likely, &s;ince what they do therein they have ready prepared in their hands; and if it were true, their Mini&s;try being a fal&s;e Mini&s;try, 'tis our duty in the way of the Go&s;|pel to hinder them therein.</P>
<P><HI>Arg.</HI> 8. His 8^t^h Argument follows: <HI>That &s;candalizing is not forbid|den in the&s;e texts, by avoiding of which the Magi&s;trate is &s;candalized, his Government di&s;turbed, his Power excited again&s;t others as di&s;obedient to his Laws; whereby many per&s;ons with their Families are undone: But &s;o it is when the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters are not heard as the &s;tate of things now is There|fore.&mdash;</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. The <HI>Major</HI> Propo&s;ition under&s;tood of &s;candalizing, by giving evil example, in doing that which is in it &s;elf evil (which is our pre&s;ent ca&s;e) is notoriou&s;ly fal&s;e and untrue. The not coming to the Service and Sacrifices of the <HI>Gentiles,</HI> in the dayes of the Apo&s;tles; The not owning the Pope, the Sacrament of the Altar, coming to their Pari&s;h-Churches in the <HI>Marian</HI> dayes, was that which &s;candalized the Magi&s;trate, di&s;turbed (as was &s;aid) the Government, excited the Ma|gi&s;trate
<PB N="381" REF="194"> again&s;t others as di&s;obedient to his Laws, whereby many per|&s;ons were, as to their Families and E&s;tates, undone, they them&s;elves lo&s;t their lives, yet were they not to &s;candalize the Saints, by adhering to the fore&s;aid abominations.</P>
<P N="2">2. The <HI>Minor</HI> under&s;tood of a ju&s;t ground of &s;candal, is not true, <HI>i. e.</HI> the Magi&s;trate hath no real or ju&s;t ground to be &s;candalized by per&s;ons not coming to hear the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters, nor is the Government di|&s;turbed thereby, nor hath he, as we know of, any Scripture-Warrant to exert his power again&s;t the <HI>Non-conformi&s;ts,</HI> to their and their Fami|lies ruine; and if he do &s;o, 'tis better to &s;uffer than &s;in, to hazard the lo&s;s of all, than debauch our Con&s;ciences, and &s;in again&s;t God.</P>
</DIV3>
<DIV3 N="2" TYPE="section">
<HEAD><HI>Sect.</HI> 2.</HEAD>
<ARGUMENT>
<P><HI>Of Scandal taken and given, Wherein the nature of it con&s;ists. Of offen|ing the World. Hearing the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters, a &s;candal given.</HI> 1 Cor. 8. 10. <HI>explained. Of &s;itting in the Idols Temple. Some of the</HI> Corin|thians <HI>thought they might be pre&s;ent at the Sacrifice of Idols. Of having fellow&s;hip with Devils.</HI> 1 Cor. 10. 20. <HI>exponed. The Judgment of the Learned</HI> Paraeus <HI>thereupon. The offended Brother had not greater rea&s;on to be offended at per&s;ons eating the Idolothyte, nor &s;o great, as we have at per&s;ons hearing the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters. Of the Scandalizing.</HI> Mat. 18. 6. Rom. 14. 3. <HI>explained. Of offence by forbearing to go to hear.</HI> Mat. 17. 27. 1 The&s;. 5. 12. Heb. 13. 17. John 10. 27. Mark 4. 23. <HI>opened.</HI></P>
</ARGUMENT>
<P>THE next attempt in S. T. is to an&s;wer Objections that might be made again&s;t what was in the foregoing Di&s;cour&s;e, in the matter of &s;candal argued by us. The fir&s;t is this;</P>
<P>Object. 1. <HI>There is a two-fold &s;candal;</HI> 1. <HI>A &s;candal or offence ta|ken.</HI> 2. <HI>A &s;candal or offence given. In re&s;pect of the former, po&s;&s;ibly many may be offended at per&s;ons hearing the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters&mdash;that there is any ju&s;t offence given by them herein is denied.</HI></P>
<P>To this we an&s;wer, 1. That as we admit of the di&s;tinction, &s;o no doubt there is a truth in what is &s;ugge&s;ted thereupon, That whatever I do, &s;ome one or other will be offended at it; there are a Generation of men, whom the doing my duty will offend, and cau&s;e to bla&s;pheme, the&s;e are not to be minded, but to be pittied.</P>
<P>To which Mr. <HI>T.</HI> replies, <HI>Sect.</HI> 4. <HI>That there is any Generation of men,</HI>
<PB N="382" REF="195"> <HI>who&s;e offence is not to be minded, is not the Doctrine of the Apo&s;ile, but con|trary to it,</HI> 1 Cor. 10. 32, 33. <HI>&amp;</HI> 9. 19, 20, 21, 22, 23.</P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> Nor is it any doctrine delivered by us. We &s;ay not, That in matters of liberty we are not bound to heed giving offence to the World, we believe the contrary. But this we affirm, tha<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter"> &s;uch per|&s;ons as will be offended at me, and bla&s;pheme becau&s;e I do my duty, (for &s;o are the words) are not to be heeded, <HI>i. e.</HI> I am not to &s;urcea&s;e what God requires me to do, becau&s;e they are offended, and bla&s;pheme, which what is cited by Mr. <HI>T.</HI> doth not contradict.</P>
<P>That which follows touching hearing the Mini&s;ters of <HI>England,</HI> be|ing avowedly a&s;&s;erted upon this Foundation, that it is lawful &s;o to do, we pa&s;s by, as what we are not in the lea&s;t concern'd to take notice of; though there is indeed upon that &s;uppo&s;ition nothing of Argument in it.</P>
<P>We add in S. T. 2dly, But 'tis not yet proved, nor like to be, that the &s;candal treated of is a &s;candal taken and not given; the very nature of &s;candal given, (as is confe&s;t by all) and evident beyond exception, from the Apo&s;tle<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter"> di&s;cour&s;e, 1 <HI>Cor.</HI> 8. 10. lying in the doing of what is judged by me to be my liberty, but other Saints account my &s;in, and from thence have occa&s;ion of grief and &s;tumbling admini&s;tred to them. This was the very ca&s;e of the Church of <HI>Corinth,</HI> (upon the occa&s;ion whereof <HI>Paul</HI> writes to them) &s;ome of them judged it their liberty to &s;it at Meat in the Idols Temple, others not being fully per&s;waded here|of, were &s;candalized many wayes at this their practice, which the Apo|&s;tle therefore condemns as unlawful.</P>
<P>To which Mr. <HI>T.</HI> 1. <HI>'Tis not confe&s;t by all that the nature of &s;candal given, lies in the doing what is judged by me to be my liberty, which other Saints are ready to conclude to be my &s;in, and from thence have occa&s;ion of grief and &s;tumbling admini&s;tred unto them, Dr.</HI> Hammond, <HI>M<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">.</HI> Jeans,<HI>&mdash;are otherwi&s;e minded.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> But Mr. <HI>T.</HI> abu&s;eth us and his Reader; we &s;ay not that &s;can|dal given lies in angring&mdash;our Brother; but evidently a&s;&s;ert that there are two things that con&s;titute it.</P>
<P N="1">1. It mu&s;t be a matter that the giver of it judgeth to be his liberty, and the receiver accounts his &s;in.</P>
<P N="2">2. It mu&s;t admini&s;ter occa&s;ion of &s;tumbling, grief, and &s;orrow unto the &s;candalized, <HI>i. e.</HI> he is either grieved, troubled at it, or by it in|fluenced to &s;in again&s;t God. And this I &s;ay is confe&s;t by all. Nor do the Authors cited by him, or he him&s;elf contradict this notion of &s;candal given&mdash;&s;o that the heat of this velication is allayed.</P>
<Q><PB N="383" REF="195"> Pulveris exigni jactu.</Q>
<P>He adds, 2dly, <HI>This Authors notion about the nature of &s;candal gi|ven, is not evident beyond exceptions from the Apo&s;tles di&s;cour&s;e,</HI> 1 Cor. 8. 10.</P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. That the Apo&s;tle &s;peaks there of &s;candal given, Mr. <HI>T.</HI> will not deny.</P>
<P N="2">2. That the nature of the &s;candal lay in this, the <HI>Corinthians</HI> eating the Idolothyte, or &s;itting at meat in the Idols Temple, wherewith o|thers were &s;candalized many wayes; 'twas an occa&s;ion of cau&s;ing them to eat the Idolothyte with a doubting Con&s;cience, or being wounded, grieved, di&s;couraged in the way of Chri&s;tianity, 1 <HI>Cor.</HI> 8. 9. which he more plainly, if po&s;&s;ible, expre&s;&s;eth, <HI>Rom.</HI> 14. 13, 15, 20, 21. which if it con&s;ort not with our notion of &s;candal given, I know not what doth. As for what follows, we are little concern'd, whil&s;t he attempts not the confutation of what is a&s;&s;erted by us touching the nature of &s;candal given.</P>
<P>He tells us, <HI>We are mi&s;taken in the&s;e things,</HI> 1. <HI>That the offending per|&s;on judg'd it his liberty to &s;it at meat in the Idols Temple.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> But this is Mr. <HI>T.</HI> his mi&s;take, not mine, 1 <HI>Cor.</HI> 8. 10. <HI>[In the hou&s;e of Idols,</HI> &s;aith the <HI>Arabick,]</HI></P>
<P>And the Learned <HI>Paraeus,</HI> in 1 <HI>Cor.</HI> 10. 21. tells us, <Q>That &s;ome of the <HI>Corinthians</HI> were of this Opinion, That they might be pre&s;ent at the Sacrifices of the Idols.</Q></P>
<P><HI>Yea but</HI> (&s;aith our Animadverter) <HI>this is ill applied however to the ca&s;e of hearing; for the &s;itting at meat in the Idols Temple, was having fellow|&s;hip with Devils,</HI> 1 Cor. 10. 20. <HI>But this is the Service of the living God; the hearers of the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters judge it not only their liberty, but their duty &s;o to do.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. If they judge it to be their duty, they are able to produce &s;ome Scripture to evince it &s;o to be; let them do that, and take the Cau&s;e.</P>
<P N="2">2. Many of the hearers do not judge it their duty, but matter of liberty.</P>
<P N="3">3. He begs the que&s;tion, whil&s;t he &s;uppo&s;eth hearing the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters to be the &s;ervice of the living God; were it &s;o, it were un|que&s;tionably our duty to hear them; but that is the <GAP DESC="foreign">.</P>
<P N="4">4. For the re&s;t, the Learned <HI>Paraeus</HI> &s;hall an&s;wer for me, who in 1 <HI>Cor.</HI> 10. 20. &s;aith, God doth forbid the Jews, <HI>Levit.</HI> 17. 7. to &s;a|crifice
<PB N="384" REF="196"> after the manner of the Gentiles, <GAP DESC="foreign">, <HI>to hairy Devils. Numb.</HI> 25. 3. He complains that they had joyned them&s;elves to the Devil of the <HI>Moabites,</HI> <GAP DESC="foreign">, which is, <HI>the Lord of opening, i. e.</HI> Fornication. THIS IS THE JUDGMENT OF GOD OF EVE|RY WORSHIP.&mdash;WHICH IS NOT PERFORMED ACCORD|ING TO HIS WORD; 'TIS NOT PERFORMED TO GOD, BUT TO THE DEVILS. But Idolaters, neither in the Pagan State of old, nor now in the Papacy, do intend to offer to Devils, but to God. What then? The Apo&s;tle pronounceth the contrary, whatever they intend. For God is wor&s;hipped not by humane inventions, but by his own precepts.&mdash;</P>
<P>The &s;econd mi&s;take Mr. <HI>T.</HI> mentions, is his own, not mine; I &s;ay, the &s;candal lay in grieving the offended Brother, and occa&s;ioning him by the evil example of the offender to act with a doubting Con&s;cience, <HI>i. e.</HI> Some Brethren were grieved at the liberty the Offender took, o|thers &s;tumbled to act doubtingly by his example, and &s;o to &s;in: The latter he grants, the former <HI>Paul</HI> a&s;&s;erts, <HI>Rom.</HI> 14. 15.</P>
<P>He adds, 3dly, <HI>That I do not &s;et down that the</HI> Corinthians <HI>might have rea&s;on to be &s;candalized at the eating the Idolothyte, becau&s;e again&s;t the</HI> Mo&s;aical <HI>Law, and the Apo&s;tles Decree,</HI> Acts 15. 25.</P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> Was I obliged &s;o to do, the Saints have greater rea&s;on to be offe<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">d<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">d at per&s;ons hearing the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters, becau&s;e again&s;t the Oeconomie of the Go&s;pel.</P>
<P>He tells us, 4thly, <HI>This Author doth not mention that the &s;candal in the</HI> Corinthians <HI>ca&s;e, was fore&s;een as future,</HI> 1 Cor. 10. 27, 28.</P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> Nor need he do &s;o, when the &s;candal in hearing the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters is al&s;o fore&s;een as future.</P>
<P>He adds, 5thly, <HI>This Author takes no notice, that &s;candal given in the u&s;e of our liberty, is not to be made perpetual.&mdash;</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. This hath been already an&s;wered. 2. It follows not that we mu&s;t never hear the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters of <HI>England,</HI> if we mu&s;t not hear them for the rea&s;ons given. I would hope that God may convince and convert &s;ome of them from the evil and error of their way, make them to acknowledge their &s;ins,&mdash;bring them out of their Antichri&s;tian &s;tanding and office, and then the rea&s;on of the pre&s;ent &s;candal cea&s;ing, the &s;candal it &s;elf will be removed al&s;o.</P>
<P>He tells us, 5thly, <HI>That the ca&s;e of the offended among the</HI> Corinthi|ans, <HI>by eating Idolothytes, and the Brethren now in</HI> England <HI>cannot be pa|ralleld rightly, becau&s;e the</HI> Corinthians <HI>offence was at the time when the Do|ctrine of Go&s;pel-liberty was not fully cleared; Profe&s;&s;ors in</HI> England <HI>have been fully in&s;tructed therein.</HI></P>
<PB N="385" REF="196">
<P> <HI>An&s;w.</HI> Mr. <HI>T.</HI> &s;uppo&s;e<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="2 letters"> that we &s;hall not yeeld him, 1. That the hearing or not hearing the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters is our liberty: we prove the fir&s;t our &s;in, the la&s;t our duty.</P>
<P N="2">2. That the ca&s;e of &s;candal cea&s;eth when per&s;ons have been doctri|nally in&s;tructed in their Chri&s;tian Liberty. Now this is mo&s;t evidently fal&s;e, contrary to the Doctrine of the Apo&s;tle in the fore-cited places, <HI>Rom.</HI> 14. 1, 2, 6, 14, 17. What could be more plainly doctrinally deli|vered touching the Chri&s;tians liberty of eating or not eating? yet there remaining &s;cruples upon the Con&s;ciences of the weak touching this matter, <HI>Paul</HI> commands the &s;trong not to eat to their offence and &s;can|dal, <HI>v.</HI> 20, 21. So 1 <HI>Cor.</HI> 8. 4, 8. the Chri&s;tians liberty is fully a&s;&s;erted, yet <HI>v.</HI> 9, 10, 11, 12, 13. the u&s;e of it is interdicted for fear of offending the weak.&mdash;So that evidently in this matter the ca&s;e betwixt the <HI>Co|rinthians</HI> and Profe&s;&s;ors of <HI>England</HI> (who &s;uppo&s;e it to be their liberty to hear the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters) runs parallel. I confe&s;s there are &s;ome things that may be argued on the behalf of the offended Brethren now, that the offended <HI>Corinthian</HI> could not plead; God had &s;pewed out this Generation of men with loathing and contempt, with the whole fardel of their Liturgical Rites and Ceremonies, wounded them in the head, removed their Lords the Bi&s;hops, from whom they derive their Autho|rity; the pre&s;ent &s;candalizers (many of them) rejoyced in what was done; &s;wore before it was done, to do their uttermo&s;t to effect it; that after all this they &s;hould &s;trike in with them, attend on their Mini&s;try, is an aggravation of their &s;candal. The Offenders have no Apo&s;tolical word to warrant the lawfulne&s;s of hearing them, as the <HI>Corinthian</HI> Of|fenders had to warrantize the eating the Idolothyte out of the ca&s;e of &s;candal. So that they that hear them, are ju&s;tly charged with &s;candal given; notwith&s;tanding the empty flouri&s;h, and wordie di&s;pute of Mr. <HI>T.</HI> to the contrary.</P>
<P>We add in <HI>S. T.</HI> Should it be granted for Arguments &s;ake, (though in truth it is not &s;o) that 'tis the liberty of Saints to hear the pre&s;ent Mi|ni&s;ters, yet many &s;incere Lambs of Chri&s;t being (groundedly) &s;tum|bled and &s;candalized hereat; for that very rea&s;on, if no more could be &s;aid, it becomes our &s;in: to be guilty whereof, who can chu&s;e but be fill'd with trembling, that hath ever with &s;eriou&s;ne&s;s read that terrible commination of Chri&s;t? <HI>Mat.</HI> 18. 6.&mdash;</P>
<P>Mr. <HI>T.</HI> replies, 1. <HI>This were to make every hone&s;t hearted Chri&s;tian a Pope, a Lord over my Con&s;cience.&mdash;</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> No in no wi&s;e: 'Tis touching (&s;uppo&s;ed) matters of Liber|ty that we are treating, in my acting, wherein to the &s;candalizing of
<PB N="386" REF="197"> the weak Chri&s;tian, I &s;in, and this <HI>Paul</HI> affirms, 1 <HI>Cor.</HI> 8. 9, 10, 11, 12, 13. and &s;o do all that write about &s;candal. Yet 'tis not to be thought they hereby make the weak Chri&s;tian a Pope, infallible Judge, Lord, or Law-give<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter"> to them; This is &s;o far from dive&s;ting Chri&s;t of his King|ly Authority (as he &s;peaks) that it rather e&s;tabli&s;heth it; he is exalted as King, whil&s;t in obedience to his command I am forbearing the exer|ci&s;e of my Liberty, becau&s;e offen&s;ive to my Brother, though upon every other account it were lawful for me to be found in the practice of it.</P>
<P>He tells us, 2dly, <HI>That his Treati&s;e of &s;candal &s;h<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">ws</HI> Ma<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">. 18. 6. <HI>to be meant of other &s;candalizing than &s;uch as this Author means.&mdash;</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> But if it be a &s;candalizing to make them to halt or turn away from God, <HI>Luke</HI> 17. 2. <HI>i. e.</HI> from his Wayes and Divine Appoint|ments; if it be with de&s;pi&s;ing them, promoting their per&s;ecution, cau|&s;ing their perdition, that is meant, <HI>Mat.</HI> 18. as Mr. <HI>T.</HI> &s;aith it is, 'tis &s;uch a &s;candalizing as we mean. The profe&s;&s;ing People of God that are in the practice of hearing, are &s;tumbling-blocks in the way of the weak, occa&s;ioning them to turn off from God to the in&s;titutions and inventi|ons of men, whereby they are made wor&s;e and more languid in true godline&s;s, (as &s;ome &s;ay the word <GAP DESC="foreign"> &s;ignifies, <HI>Polyc. Ly&s;er.)</HI> And as by experience we find them to be, who for&s;aking the A&s;&s;embling them&s;elves together, attend upon the Mini&s;try of <HI>England;</HI> they de|&s;pi&s;e, di&s;dain, vilifi<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">, &s;et at naught, ba&s;ely e&s;teem them (as <HI>Paul</HI> &s;peaks, <HI>Rom.</HI> 14. 3. <GAP DESC="foreign">) as &s;uch who&s;e grief and offence is not to be heeded and regarded, by preferring the matter of their own liberty above their Brothers &s;candalizing; they promote their per&s;ecution, by &s;trength|ening the hands of Per&s;ecutors, and incen&s;ing them &s;o much the more again&s;t them, to force them to a complyance, becau&s;e others of the &s;ame way and per&s;wa&s;ion in dayes pa&s;t with them, are wrought over thereunto.&mdash;</P>
<P>Mr. <HI>T.</HI> his Application of the &s;ayings of <HI>Paybody,</HI> (an enemy to the <HI>Non-conformi&s;ts</HI> in dayes pa&s;t, and a bitter one, who would &s;peak the wor&s;t of them, and more than is true) to &s;uch as are again&s;t hearing the Mini&s;ters, is wicked and &s;candalous; <Q>Do the&s;e meerly profe&s;s in imitation&mdash;out of humour&mdash;are they &s;uch as cannot abide to be in|&s;tructed by them of contrary judgments, de&s;pi&s;ing what they &s;ay before they know it, that never &s;eek to have their doubts re&s;olved, who avow the nece&s;&s;ity of confe&s;&s;ing again&s;t kneeling, and yet upon &s;ome other mans Declaration of the lawful liber<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">y of it, profe&s;s they never &s;tudi|ed the Point; that make no Con&s;cience of &s;landering, <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">ackbiting,
<PB N="387" REF="197"> conformity to the World in apparel, plea&s;ures, &s;candalous, cove|tou&s;ne&s;s, unfaithfulne&s;s in their Callings, unju&s;tice in their Dealings, who have confe&s;&s;ed them&s;elves to be convinced of the lawfulne&s;s of Conforming, and yet will not, or would, but for their di&s;credit in the World, e&s;pecially among the per&s;ons of that &s;ide.</Q></P>
<Q>E&s;tn<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter"> haec tua tunlca mi pater!</Q>
<P>Is this the voice of Mr. <HI>T.</HI> (a once zealous and forward Profe&s;&s;or) again&s;t tho&s;e who dare not attend on the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters? Are the&s;e per&s;ons of the complexion intimated? How dur&s;t he affirm it? Will not the wor&s;t of their Neighbours where they live give them a better character, and tell Mr. <HI>T.</HI> to his face, that he hath a&s;per&s;ed and belied them?</P>
<P>We propo&s;e in S. T. a &s;econd Objection to be con&s;idered, <HI>viz. But if I do not go to hear the Mini&s;ters of this day, many godly and &s;ober Chri|&s;tians will be offended at my forbearance; &s;o that whether I hear, or whether I forbear, I &s;hall offend.</HI></P>
<P>To which we An&s;wer, 1. That granting the Ca&s;e to be as is &s;ugge&s;t|ed, (though perhaps &s;omewhat el&s;e upon a &s;erious and &s;trict &s;earch may be found to lie at the bottom of mens Conformity<HI>&mdash;I</HI> am apt to be|lieve were a tolleration granted, they would not &s;o do.) We ask, 1. Do you look upon your going to hear as your duty, or liberty? If the fir&s;t, let the proof thereof be produced, and we are &s;atisfied; if the &s;e|cond, you are bound by many &s;olemn Precepts not to u&s;e your liberty to &s;candalize your Brethren.</P>
<P>To which Mr. <HI>T.</HI> Sect. 6. 1. <HI>If the Ca&s;e be granted, as is &s;ugge&s;ted, the &s;ame Argument which proves it unlawful to hear the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters, proves it unlawful not to hear them.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. Granting the Ca&s;e to be as is &s;ugge&s;ted, is no more than <HI>dato non conce&s;&s;o,</HI> granting it for Arguments &s;ake, not yeelding what is &s;ugge&s;ted to be true; from whence 'tis not granted by any rules of Di&s;|putation that I know of, for Mr. <HI>T.</HI> to draw conclu&s;ions, 'twere irratio|nal &s;o to do.</P>
<P>Though, 2dly, were the ca&s;e granted in <HI>Mr.</HI> T. his &s;ence, yet what he infers from thence, he hath not, will not be able to demon&s;trate. 'Tis granted, <HI>Mat.</HI> 17. 27. &s;peaks of &s;candalizing by omi&s;&s;ion.</P>
<P>But, 1. there were none on the other &s;ide who would have been of|fended at the doing thereof, as is our ca&s;e.</P>
<P N="2">2. <HI>Peter</HI> had but now &s;aid that his Ma&s;ter did pay tribute, and for him
<PB N="388" REF="198"> to have refu&s;ed, it had been upon that account a &s;candal w<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">th a wit|ne&s;s.</P>
<P>As for what follows, we &s;aid not in <HI>S. T.</HI> that &s;omewhat el&s;e lay at the bottom of per&s;ons Conformity, but intimated our jealou&s;<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">es, de&s;i|red the <HI>Conformi&s;ts</HI> to make a &s;trict &s;earch thereabout; which when <HI>Mr.</HI> T. manife&s;ts to be untrue, we &s;hall be far from ju&s;tifying it.</P>
<P>He tells us, 2dly, <HI>If a tolleration were imbraced by them, this would only &s;hew they did not tie them&s;elves to the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters.&mdash;</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 'Twould &s;ure do &s;omewhat more, 1. Manife&s;t that they judge it not matter of duty, but liberty, to hear them: for, if their duty, the giving toleration would not di&s;charge them thereof, they were as much bound to attend them afterward as before.</P>
<P N="2">2. Di&s;cover that it was not the fear of offending any that cau&s;ed them to attend on the Mini&s;try of <HI>England,</HI> for that offence co<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">tinuing, (as it would, notwith&s;tanding a to~leration granted) they would hear them &s;till.</P>
<P>His reflections upon the grounds of our &s;eparation we can bear; <HI>'Twas indeed</HI> (as he &s;aith) <HI>&s;omewhat el&s;e that did heretofore engage here|unto, be&s;ides offending the Lambs of Chri&s;t,</HI> viz. <HI>his Command</HI> (of which we have given an account in this Treati&s;e) <HI>which yet</HI> (together with the &s;prings of Love, and Life, Peace and Plea&s;antne&s;s in Communion with him&s;elf he is plea&s;ed to dig up for us) <HI>keeps us therein.</HI> His &s;tories of preferment, power, adherence to a party, I am, through grace, a &s;tranger to, and do from my Soul abhor. Po&s;&s;ibly he may better un|der&s;tand the&s;e things.</P>
<P>To the que&s;tion, <HI>Do you look upon your going to hear as your duty?</HI></P>
<P>He an&s;wers, <HI>That it is the duty of Saints to hear the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters, thoug<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter"> not cho&s;en by them to be their Pa&s;tors, I think may be proved from</HI> 1 The&s;. 5. 12. Heb. 13. 17. John 10. 27. M<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">rk 4. 23.</P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> The impertinency of the&s;e citations to his purpo&s;e will &s;oon be di&s;covered, 1 <HI>The&s;.</HI> 5. 12. Paul <HI>be&s;eeches them, to know them that la|bour among them, and are over them in the Lord, i. e.</HI> by his appointment, according to the Orders and Ordinances of his Hou&s;e are deputed Pa|&s;tors&mdash;over them; But what is this to the Mini&s;ters of <HI>England,</HI> who (we prove) are not &s;et over us according to any in&s;titution of Chri&s;t, but according to Antichri&s;tian Canons are obtruded, and thru&s;t upon us whether we will or no? The impertinency of <HI>Heb.</HI> 13. 17. to his pre&s;ent purpo&s;e we have already di&s;covered. <HI>John</HI> 10. 27. &s;peaks of Chri&s;ts Sheep hearing his Voice, but in the way he hath appointed.<HI>&mdash;Mark</HI> 4. 23. is a proverbial expre&s;&s;ion, in u&s;e at that day, exciting the Auditors
<PB N="389" REF="198"> to a &s;olemn attendment unto what was &s;poken to them; Chri&s;t u&s;eth it to pre&s;s them to a &s;erious attention to what he &s;pake; which that it hath the lea&s;t tendency towards the proof of attending upon an Anti|chri&s;tian Mini&s;try, or the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters of <HI>England,</HI> &s;uch dull per|&s;ons as we, are not able to di&s;cern.</P>
<P>Seriou&s;ly Sir, you do but expo&s;e the cau&s;e you undertake to defend, to contempt, and your &s;elf to the &s;corn of &s;ome, and pitty of the more &s;ober, whil&s;t you are able to make no better defence for it.</P>
<P>'Tis added in <HI>S. T.</HI> 2dly, <HI>Let both parties be weighed in an upright ballance, &s;uch as you judge to be offended with you for not hearing, and &s;uch as are offended thereat; I am bold to &s;ay the la&s;t mentioned, for number, ho|line&s;s, &s;pirituality and tenderne&s;s, do far &s;urmount the former.&mdash;</HI></P>
<P>Mr. <HI>T.</HI> his An&s;wer herento, 1&s;t, is <HI>A compo&s;ure of pa&s;&s;ionate expre&s;&s;i|ons, and reflections upon the Brethren of the Congregational way, even the prime Leaders of them, of &s;tories of the piety of</HI> Hilder&s;ham, Ball, Brad|&s;haw, Gataker; <HI>of the rottenne&s;s and &s;tinkingne&s;s of puffing up my own par|ty, and di&s;paraging di&s;&s;enters.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. But what needs all this wrath? I own my &s;elf of no party, love all that love Chri&s;t, di&s;parage not &s;uch as di&s;&s;ent from me, have a reverend e&s;teem of many of them; only &s;ay, That &s;uch as attend not on the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters, for number, holine&s;s, &s;pirituality and tenderne&s;s, &s;urmount tho&s;e that do; which I &s;hould not &s;ay, but that this is gene|rally known to be true. The generality of their hearers being a de|bauch't, formal, covetous generation of men, but few, very few, &s;eri|ous, enlightned &s;ouls to be found in their A&s;&s;emblies, they wor&s;hip el&s;e-where.</P>
<P N="2">2. That which he &s;aith, <HI>That by the Authors Rule if we would know our duty, we mu&s;t leave &s;tudying of the Scriptures, and &s;tudy men,</HI> is fal&s;e and &s;candalous. I am fully of <HI>Tertullian</HI>'s mind, <HI>Non ex per&s;onis fides ae&s;ti|manda, &s;ed ex fide per&s;ona:</HI> and crave leave to tell him, that had he &s;tu|died men le&s;s, and the Scriptures more, we &s;hould have met with few|er <HI>Anti&s;criptural Notions</HI> than we do in his <HI>Theodulia.</HI></P>
<P>I conceive the Rule, mentioned by the Author of <HI>S. T.</HI> is bottom'd upon Scripture.</P>
<P>1&s;t, Let it be remembred that the matter of our debate is touching what is at the lea&s;t conceived to be the Chri&s;tians Liberty, not Duty.</P>
<P>2dly, That the ca&s;e as propo&s;ed is of &s;candal by the u&s;e of my Liber|ty, whether it be this way or that. The eating the Idolothyte is my li|berty, I may do it or not do it without &s;in. If I do it not, my Heathen Neighbour will be offended, and &s;ay I am proud and un&s;ociable.&mdash;If I
<PB N="390" REF="199"> do it, my Chri&s;tian Brother will be &s;candalized. What &s;hall I do? <HI>Of|fend not thy weak Brother,</HI> &s;aith <HI>Paul:</HI> He bears the Image of Chri&s;t, the other doth not. But what if &s;ome Brethren be offended at my going, others at my forbearing, What &s;hall I do now? Why truly I know no better way to determine the doubt by a parity of Rea&s;on, than by the An&s;wer before given: Con&s;ider who they are that will be offended, that exceed in number.&mdash;For certainly if it be not my duty to of|fend one Saint becau&s;e a Saint, then when the ca&s;e is brought to that pa&s;s, that I mu&s;t nece&s;&s;arily offend &s;ome Saints, my duty l<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">es in doing that whereby I &s;hall offend the &s;malle&s;t number of Saints; which Mr. <HI>T.</HI> may confute at his lei&s;ure.</P>
<P>We add 3dly, <HI>Let al&s;o the grounds of the offence on both &s;ides b<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter"> weigh|ed: the one are offended at you that you build not up in practice in a day of trouble, and cau&s;e thereby the enemies of the Lord to bla&s;pheme and triumph, what in a day of liberty you did in your preaching and practice pull down and de&s;troy: The other, becau&s;e of your di&s;obedience to what they are &s;atisfied, and you your &s;elves once were, God is calling you to</HI> (viz. <HI>to have nothing to do with, &s;eparate from this generation of men.)</HI></P>
<P>To which Mr. <HI>T.</HI> 1&s;t, <HI>The&s;e words are Aenigmatical, and require an</HI> Oedipus <HI>to unriddle them.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. It may be Sir, you your &s;elf &s;tood &s;o in your own light, that you could not &s;ee to unriddle them. 2. It may be you were not willing to have them unridled. 3. If they need an <HI>Oedipus,</HI> you your &s;elf &s;hall be the man. Sir, you were he that in your <HI>Fermentum Phari|&s;aeorum,</HI> call'd the People from attending upon the Mini&s;ters of <HI>England,</HI> as Preachers of Super&s;tition; though for the generality of them (in &s;ome things) much better then than now: 'tis an offence, and ju&s;t ground of offence, to your Brethren, to &s;ee you in this day of their di|&s;tre&s;s, to plead for what in the dawnings of Liberty you preached down. You are the man that, with hands lift up to Heaven, &s;wore to extirpate the Hierarchy, with its Appurtenances, Traditions,&mdash;who re|joyced, and were glad at the pro&s;perity of tho&s;e who carried on that work, re&s;i&s;ting unto blood: You are he who &s;ate at <HI>White Hall</HI> as a Commi&s;&s;ioner for the approbation of Mini&s;ters, and rejection of &s;uch as were &s;candalous (gloried in Print, that the then <HI>Protector</HI> had &s;o good an opinion of you, as to con&s;titute you one of that number) and 'twas one part of &s;candal to u&s;e the <HI>Service-Book:</HI> Now after all this, for you to write a Book for the defence of this very Hierarcy and Wor&s;hip, your Brethren think it a ju&s;t ground of Scandal, and at their refu&s;ing to hear, you have (and &s;uch as you at lea&s;t) no real ground at all, &s;ince 'tis no
<PB N="391" REF="199"> more than what they practi&s;ed in dayes pa&s;t, and that without your of|fence, by your leave, or at lea&s;t connivance, as the People you particu|larly walk't with at <HI>Lemp&s;ter</HI> did. Hereby you have given occa&s;ion to Saints to mourn, wicked prophane per&s;ons to rejoy;: So that the grounds of offence on your &s;ide are not in the lea&s;t con&s;iderable in compari&s;on of theirs. What follows is a heap of impertinencies that I am not concerned in.</P>
<P N="1">1. I count not any the enemies of the Lord, but &s;uch as are evident|ly &s;uch; a generation of Swearers, Drunkards, Adulterers and Adulte|re&s;&s;es; the&s;e, the turnings about of Profe&s;&s;ors cau&s;e to bla&s;pheme, thereat they rejoyce.</P>
<P N="2">2. He is mi&s;taken whil&s;t he thinks the Author of <HI>S. T.</HI> was for violent practices in dayes of Liberty, who more or le&s;s was not concerned with tho&s;e publick tran&s;actions, nor ever was the pro&s;ecutor of one per&s;on in any kind, who by the then Law might be obnoxious to ejection out of their places of &s;piritual or temporal promotion, or otherwi&s;e.</P>
<P N="3">3. Of &s;ome of the things he mentions, he him&s;elf was once guilty, particularly of &s;etting up private Brethren to preach; which I account not his fault, but wi&s;h he had had a little more re&s;pect to his own repute, (if regard to the wayes of truth and peace had not been prevalent upon him) than to condemn others for practi&s;ing the very things he him&s;elf hath been found in the practice of. That we gather Churches out of Churches, that particular Churches of Chri&s;t have not the power of government within them&s;elves,&mdash;he &s;hould have proved before he had given liberty to his Pen to wander at this wild rate. That eminent <HI>Independent</HI> (as he calls him) who would not have the Lords Prayer u&s;ed in a pre&s;cript form of words, is of age to an&s;wer for him&s;elf; that he hath given any one ju&s;t cau&s;e of offence by that a&s;&s;ertion, Mr. T. may evince by di&s;proving what he hath written thereabout in his, <HI>Vindiciae Evangelicae. pag.</HI> 667.&mdash;when he is able.</P>
<P>The ground of the offence on the <HI>Non-hearers</HI> &s;ide, is &s;o vi&s;ibly ju&s;t and righteous, the others &s;o notoriou&s;ly groundle&s;s, that his imperti|nent and fal&s;e &s;tories (&s;ome of them contrary to his own knowledge and Con&s;cience) are in&s;ignificant to remove the one, or ju&s;tifie the other.</P>
<P>We add, 4thly, <HI>That 'tis the duty of Saints, e&s;pecially if in a Church|relation, to meet together as a people called and picked by the Lord out of the Nations of the World, cannot be denyed; The neglect of which is charged by the Lord as the fir&s;t &s;tep to Apo&s;tacy,</HI> Heb. 10. 25. <HI>Be you in the practice</HI>
<PB N="392" REF="200"> <HI>of this duty, and &s;ee what Spiritual Saint will be offended at you: If any &s;hould, you might have peace therein; you doing your duty, no ju&s;t cau&s;e of &s;candal is given.</HI></P>
<P>Mr. <HI>T.</HI> replies, <HI>They do not think it their duty to meet together as a &s;epa|rated Church.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. Who do not &s;o think? Do not they that are for Seperate Churches &s;o think? To the&s;e we are &s;peaking.</P>
<P N="2">2. That 'tis the duty of Saints &s;o to do, we evince <HI>Ch.</HI> 9. of <HI>S. T. Heb.</HI> 10. 25. is again taken notice of by him, <HI>Chap.</HI> 9. <HI>S.</HI> 2. where we &s;hall con&s;ider it.</P>
<P>We yet add in <HI>S. T.</HI> 5thly, <HI>Con&s;ider on which &s;ide the Cro&s;s lies, which the fl<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">&s;h and fle&s;hly intere&s;t is mo&s;t oppo&s;ite to, whether in going, or forbearing to go to hear the&s;e men:</HI> U&s;ually that is the way of God that hath mo&s;t of the Cro&s;s in it, and the fl<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">&s;h is mo&s;t &s;trugling and conte&s;ting again&s;t. In which I only a&s;&s;ert, That the way of God hath u&s;ually mo&s;t of the Cro&s;s in it, and is mo&s;tly oppo&s;ed by fle&s;h and blood; which Mr. <HI>T.</HI> knows is true, and therefore though of it &s;elf this be no certain &s;ufficient Rule to judge by, yet is it not, together with others, incon&s;iderable: which Mr. <HI>T.</HI> doth not oppo&s;e.</P>
</DIV3>
<DIV3 N="3" TYPE="section">
<HEAD><HI>Sect.</HI> 3.</HEAD>
<ARGUMENT>
<P><HI>An eighth Argument against hearing the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters. We cannot do &s;o without being guilty of partaking with them in their &s;in. The &s;everal wayes of partaking with others in their &s;in.</HI> Rom. 16. 17. 2 The&s;. 3. 14, 15. <HI>explained.</HI></P>
</ARGUMENT>
<P>THE 8^t^h Argument again&s;t hearing the per&s;enr Mini&s;ters is in <HI>S. T.</HI> thus formed.</P>
<P><HI>That which Saints cannot do without being guilty with others in their &s;ins, is utterly unlawful for them to do: But the Saints cannot attend upon the Mini&s;ters of</HI> England, <HI>without being guilty of partaking with them in their &s;ins. Therefore.&mdash;</HI></P>
<P>The <HI>Major</HI> Propo&s;ition is bottomed upon <HI>P&s;al.</HI> 50. 18. <HI>Ephe&s;.</HI> 5. 7. 1 <HI>Tim.</HI> 5. 22. 2 <HI>John.</HI> 11. <HI>Rev.</HI> 18. 4. 1 <HI>The&s;.</HI> 5. 22. This he grants is true.</P>
<P>In order to the confirmation of the <HI>Minor</HI> two things are briefly en|quired into.</P>
<P>1&s;t, What that or tho&s;e &s;ins are the Mini&s;ters of <HI>England</HI> are guilty of. The&s;e we &s;ay are wor&s;hipping God in a fal&s;e way, acting from an
<PB N="393" REF="200"> Antichri&s;tian Office-power therein, oppo&s;ing the Offices of Chri&s;t,&mdash;doing what &s;uch as go to hear them account to be &s;inful, who therefore cannot do the &s;ame, nor joyn with them whil&s;t they do it.</P>
<P>We in&s;tance in the ca&s;e of Reordination, u&s;ing the Service-Book, ad|mini&s;tring the Sacrament to all.&mdash;To which, when Mr. <HI>T.</HI> (or any one for him) &s;hall inform us of any thing that is offered by him, by way of An&s;wer that de&s;erves a Reply, we &s;hall con&s;ider it. What he &s;aith requires proof, we have already proved.</P>
<P>We enquire in <HI>S. T.</HI> 2dly, <HI>How it will appear that any per&s;on attend|ing on their Mini&s;try, renders him guilty of partaking with them in their &s;ins.</HI> This we &s;ay, the con&s;ideration of the &s;everal wayes per&s;ons may be ju&s;t|ly charged with being guilty of partaking with others in their &s;in will demon&s;trate. We in&s;tance in the&s;e particulars. 1. Then may per|&s;ons be ju&s;tly charged as guilty hereof.</P>
<P>1&s;t, <HI>When they are found any way con&s;enting with them in their &s;in,</HI> P&s;al. 50. 18.</P>
<P>2dly, <HI>When they do that which hath a real tendency to encourage per&s;ons in their &s;in,</HI> 2 John 11.</P>
<P>3dly, <HI>When they neglect the doing tho&s;e duties which the Lord requires at their hands for the reclaiming of them from their &s;ins, &s;uch as watching over, rebuking, admoni&s;hing, fir&s;t privately, then by two; and in ca&s;e of ob&s;tinacy and per&s;everance therein, telling it to the Church, according to</HI> 1 The&s;. 5, 14. Heb. 3. 12, 13. and 10. 24, 25. Lev. 19. 17. Mat. 18. 15, 16, 17. (all this Mr. <HI>T.</HI> tells us he grants; nor doth he except again&s;t the Texts brought to prove them, except that <HI>Mat.</HI> 18. 15, 16, 17. the vanity of his exceptions whereunto we have demon&s;trated, <HI>pag.</HI> 87. of this <HI>Treati&s;e.)</HI></P>
<P>4thly, <HI>When they</HI> (notwith&s;tanding all that they can do) <HI>perceive them to per&s;evere in their &s;in, &s;hall &s;till continue to hold Communion with them and not &s;eparate from them,</HI> Rev. 18. 4. <HI>The abiding with ob&s;tinate offen|ders, as it is again&s;t po&s;itive injunctions of the mo&s;t high,</HI> Rom. 16. 17. 2 Cor. 6. 14, 15, 16, 17. 1 Tim. 6. 5. Eph&s;. 5. 8. 11. <HI>Rev.</HI> 18. 4. <HI>&s;o in the la&s;t place in&s;tanced in, 'tis a&s;&s;igned by the Spirit to be one way of per|taking with others in their &s;ins.</HI> So &s;aith learned <HI>Brightman</HI> upon the place.</P>
<P>To which Mr. <HI>T. Sect.</HI> 7. <HI>This is not true, we may hear the Word of God, pray with, receive the Lords Supper from a Mini&s;ter that is an ob&s;tinate offender, and yet not be partaker with him in his &s;in. The texts alledged prove not &s;eparation from &s;uch.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> Whether they do or not we leave to the judgment of the di&s;|creet and pious Reader to determine; yea to Mr. <HI>T.</HI> him&s;elf (the texts
<PB N="394" REF="201"> are &s;o marvelou&s;ly plain for the proof of &s;uch a &s;eparation) when he is able, in an undi&s;tempered unprejudiced &s;pirit to review t<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">em. What he here offers to the contrary is not worth the &s;potting Paper with.</P>
<P N="1">1. A man may cau&s;e divi&s;ions and offences, contrary to the Apo&s;tles Doctrine, <HI>Rom.</HI> 14, and 15. touching the u&s;e of Liberty in matters in|different to the offence and &s;candal of the Saints; as the Mini&s;ters of <HI>England</HI> do, (if Mr. T. his notion about the indifferency of their Cere|monies be true) whil&s;t they practi&s;e them to the offence of the Saints, and yet preach the &s;ame Doctrine in other things the Apo&s;tles preach|ed, which yet the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters do not.</P>
<P>2dly, When Mr. <HI>T.</HI> is at lei&s;ure, he may prove that &s;ep<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">ration from the wicked and prophane, or from a fal&s;e Church, is contrary to <HI>Rom.</HI> 16. 17. Becau&s;e the Apo&s;tle charges them to note and avoid tho&s;e that cau&s;e devi&s;ions in a true Church. By the u&s;e of things indifferent, con|trary to his Doctrine thereabout of 2 <HI>Cor.</HI> 6. 14, 15, 16, 17. <HI>&amp; Rev.</HI> 18. 4. we have already &s;poken and vindicated it from Mr. <HI>T.</HI> his exceptions.</P>
<P>We add in <HI>S. T. Not to multiply more particulars, let us in a few words make application of the&s;e remarked to the bu&s;ine&s;s in hand. Is there any thing in the world that carries a greater brightne&s;s, and evidence with it than this, that the hearing the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters is to be partak<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">rs with them in their &s;in?</HI></P>
<P>To which Mr. <HI>T. Ju&s;t as if one &s;hould &s;ay, he that heard Juda<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter"> preach the Go&s;pel, was partaker with him in his theft; which is like the inference of a man crazed in his intellectuals.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. With thanks to him for the civility of his expre&s;&s;ion I an|&s;wer, the ca&s;e is not at all the &s;ame; <HI>Judas</HI> acted from a t<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">ue Commi&s;|&s;ion, was not a known Thief, nor guilty of any notorious vi&s;ible wicked|ne&s;s till he betrayed his Lord: The Mini&s;ters of <HI>England</HI> act from a fal&s;e Antichri&s;tian Authority, and &s;ome of them are vi&s;ibly &s;candalous and prophane.</P>
<P N="2">2. Had <HI>Judas</HI> acted from a fal&s;e Commi&s;&s;ion, as the&s;e do, &s;uch as had attended on his fal&s;e Mini&s;try had been guilty of the &s;in thereof, whil&s;t by their &s;o doing they had encouraged him in the exerci&s;e of it.</P>
<P N="3">3. <HI>Paul</HI> was &s;ure &s;ound in his Intellectuals, yet he tells the <HI>Corinthi|ans, That their not ca&s;ting the ince&s;tuous per&s;on out of their Communion was a partaking with him in his &s;in.&mdash;</HI></P>
<P>We add in <HI>S. T. Our hearing them is a &s;ecret con&s;enting with them, and encouraging them in their evil deeds.</HI></P>
<P>Our <HI>Animadverter</HI> replies. <HI>'Tis not &s;o, but a con&s;enting with them and encouraging them in preaching the Go&s;pel, which is well-doing.</HI></P>
<PB N="395" REF="201">
<P> <HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. Many of them preach not at all.</P>
<P N="2">2. Many of them that do, preach not the Go&s;pel.</P>
<P N="3">3. Few or none preach it without the mixture of humane Inventions.</P>
<P N="4">4. They all preach it from an Antichri&s;tian call.</P>
<P N="5">5. They read the <HI>Service-Book,</HI> and conform to the Rites thereof, which is evil doing; and our attendment upon their preaching encou|rageth them herein.</P>
<P>In what nextly follows we are little concerned till he prove, That becau&s;e mens withdrawment from a godly lawful Chri&s;tian Mini&s;try, was to them ground of di&s;couragement and complaint, therefore we mu&s;t hear &s;uch as act from an Antichri&s;tian calling in their Office of Mini&s;try, and for the mo&s;t part are vicious and deboy&s;t.</P>
<P>Of <HI>Phil.</HI> 1. 18. we &s;peak afterwards. We righteou&s;ly blame them that attempt to &s;ilence good Preachers, for non-a&s;&s;enting to the <HI>Litur|gie</HI> becau&s;e it<HI>'s</HI> a &s;etting up an Idol of Man in oppo&s;ition to the Com|mand and Work of God.</P>
<P>He tells us, <HI>The Prelatists may as well argue, If we &s;hould permit the Separati&s;ts to preach, we &s;hould con&s;ent &s;ecretly with them, and encourage them in their evil deeds, &s;uch as gathering a &s;eparate Congregation, and ta|king a Commi&s;&s;ion from it.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. But they mu&s;t prove the&s;e things to be evil deeds; they are (as we have proved) the In&s;titutions of Chri&s;t.</P>
<P N="2">2. Betwixt hearing men preach, and permitting them &s;o to do, we conceive there is a va&s;t difference. For our parts, were it in our power, we &s;hould not by outward force and violence hinder a Prelati&s;t from preaching. We know Chri&s;ts Kingdom admits of no &s;uch weapons for its propagation in the world.</P>
<P>We add in <HI>S. T. That hearing the pre&s;ent Ministers is very remote from the di&s;charge of tho&s;e duties are incumbent upon us (if we account them as Brethren) for their reclaiming; 'tis not &s;eparating from them, 'tis in re|&s;pect of &s;ome or all the particulars remarked, a participation with them in their &s;in.</HI></P>
<P>To which our <HI>Animadverter</HI> adjoyns; <HI>If it be not the di&s;charging their duty for their reclaiming them, (which, as it's &s;tated, would perhaps be ra|ther their &s;in) yet it is to di&s;charge their duty in hearing Gods Word.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. But that 'tis our duty to hear the Word of God from An|tichri&s;tian Officers, when Chri&s;t hath appointed &s;ome of his own to di&s;|pen&s;e it, &s;hould have been proved and not beg'd.</P>
<P N="2">2. That it &s;hould be the &s;in of any Brother to reprove his Mini&s;ter for what he &s;ees evil upon him in the way of the Go&s;pel, is &s;omething
<PB N="396" REF="202"> &s;trange Doctrine, which we know not what to make of; that when he hath done &s;o, and no Reformation follows, and he hath proceeded as far as he is able for his amendment, that he ought to attend &s;till on his Mini&s;try, to his grief and wounding, and not &s;eparate from him, is con|trary to the many Scriptures produced by us in this Argumen<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">.</P>
<P N="3">3. Not to reprove, rebuke, admoni&s;h a guilty &s;inner (being a Bro|ther) of his &s;in, I have but now proved to be a partaker with him in his &s;in; to which Mr. <HI>T.</HI> &s;ets his <HI>probatum est, p.</HI> 295. That the &s;ame act neglected and done &s;hould be a &s;in, &s;eems to me to be incon&s;i&s;<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">ent: That I &s;hould be guilty of &s;in in not reproving an offender, and g<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">ilty when I reprove him, &s;eems to me a contradiction.</P>
<P>He adds, <HI>Hearing them fits them for the reclaiming of Mini&s;ters from any &s;in they are to reprove in them; for this &s;hews they account them not as their or the Lords enemies; which is agreeable to the Apo&s;tles Rule,</HI> 2 The&s;. 3. 15.</P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. In hearing them I joyn with them in (am pa<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">taker of) their &s;in, <HI>viz.</HI> the &s;in of their fal&s;e mini&s;try: That part<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">king with others in their &s;ins &s;hould fit me for the reclaiming them from them, is an ab&s;urd dictate.</P>
<P N="2">2. Th<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter"> Apo&s;tle intends not in that Rule 2 <HI>The&s;.</HI> 3. 15. That we &s;till hold Communion with the Brother there &s;poken off, nor, &s;aith he, that our &s;o doing is the be&s;t way to reclaim him but the contrary, <HI>v.</HI> 14. <GAP DESC="foreign">, <HI>Note him with a brand of infamy, that all may avoid him,</HI> <GAP DESC="foreign">, <HI>and be not mingled with him, have no &s;uch famili|arity with him as a man with his friend:</HI> But that in tenderne&s;s and love as I have opportunity I am &s;till &s;eeking to reclaim him from the evil of his wayes. Mr. <HI>T.</HI> doth ill (though we take liberty to weary men with his unproved dictates, by them) to oppo&s;e the Spirit of the Lord.</P>
<P>What follows being a very dunghil of un&s;avoury words, and unhand|&s;ome reflections upon the men of his di&s;like, not having the lea&s;t of Argument or An&s;wer in them, I pa&s;s over, and attend his dictates in the following Chapter.</P>
</DIV3>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="10" TYPE="chapter">
<PB N="397" REF="202">
<HEAD>CHAP. X.</HEAD>
<DIV3 N="1" TYPE="section">
<HEAD><HI>Sect.</HI> 1.</HEAD>
<ARGUMENT>
<P><HI>The</HI> 9^t^h <HI>Argument again&s;t hearing the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters. 'Tis a ca&s;ting contempt upon the wayes and In&s;titutions of Chri&s;t; a hardning per&s;ons in a fal&s;e way of Wor&s;hip and rebellion again&s;t him. Separation from the World and ways of fal&s;e Wor&s;hip an In&s;titution of Chri&s;t, proved. Who meant by World.</HI> Numb. 23. 9. <HI>explained. The Children of</HI> I&s;ra|el <HI>in what re&s;pects Typical of the People of God.</HI> John 15. 19. 2 Tim. 3. 5. Ho&s;. 4. 15. Prov. 14. 7. Mat. 13. 30, 39, 40, 49, <HI>expound|ed. The di&s;tinct Meetings of the Saints for their mutual edification, an appointment of Chri&s;t, proved. Particular Congregations of Believers for the celebration of the Wor&s;hip of God, in oppo&s;ition to National Churches an Ordinance of Chri&s;t, manife&s;ted. Chri&s;t hath in&s;tituted Officers of his own, for his Churches, given them abilities for the di&s;charge of the &s;ervi|ces he calls them to, evinced. Whether Mini&s;ters belong to the C<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">tholick Church, or particular Churches, di&s;cu&s;&s;ed.</HI></P>
</ARGUMENT>
<P>IN <HI>Chap.</HI> 9^t^h, of <HI>S. T.</HI> We propo&s;e &s;everal Arguments for the De|mon&s;tration of the truth enquired after, of which the 9^t^h is thus for|med.</P>
<P><HI>That the doing whereof doth ca&s;t contempt upon the wayes and In&s;titutions of our Lord Je&s;us, and hardens per&s;ons in a fal&s;e way of Wor&s;hip and Rebellion again&s;t him, is utterly unlawful for the Saints to do: But the hearing the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters of</HI> England <HI>is that, the doing whereof doth ca&s;t contempt up|on the wayes and In&s;titutions of our Lord Je&s;us, and hardens per&s;ons in a fal&s;e way of Wor&s;hip and Rebellion again&s;t him. Therefore.&mdash;</HI></P>
<P>The <HI>Major</HI> we under&s;tand of real contempt and hardening;&mdash;in which &s;en&s;e Mr. <HI>T.</HI> acknowledgeth the truth of it, <HI>Chap.</HI> 9. <HI>Sect.</HI> 1.</P>
<P>In the <HI>Minor</HI> we &s;ay three things are a&s;&s;erted.</P>
<P>1&s;t, That hearing the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters ca&s;ts contempt upon the ways and In&s;titutions of Chri&s;t. The truth whereof we evince by the review of &s;everal In&s;titutions of Chri&s;t which they pour forth co<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">tempt upon.</P>
<PB N="398" REF="203">
<P> As, 1. That &s;eparation from the World, and all wayes of fal&s;e wor&s;hip, and the inventions of men thereabout, until the Saints of the mo&s;t High, be apparently a people dwelling alone, and not reckoned among&s;t the Nations, is one grand In&s;titution of Chri&s;t, <HI>Numb.</HI> 23. 9. <HI>John</HI> 15. 19. 2 <HI>Cor.</HI> 6. 14, 15, 17, 19. <HI>Ephe&s;.</HI> 5. 8, 11. 2 <HI>Tim.</HI> 3. 5. <HI>Ho&s;.</HI> 4. 15. <HI>Rev.</HI> 18. 4. <HI>Prov.</HI> 14. 7. Which we &s;ay is not denyed by &s;ome of our conforming Brethren. By the World we under&s;tand per&s;ons in an un|regenerate &s;tate, in their enmity, rebellion again&s;t God, who though accounted Chri&s;tians, are really vi&s;ibly enemies to the Cro&s;s of Chri&s;t. By the Saints dwelling alone, we mean their di&s;tance from the wor&s;hip of the World, and worldly, carnal, anti-evangelical Church, as <HI>I&s;rael</HI> was from the wayes and wor&s;hip of the Nations.&mdash;</P>
<P><HI>This,</HI> &s;aith Mr. <HI>T. is fal&s;e and dangerous, not proved by the Texts.</HI> Numb. 23. 9. <HI>Is a proph<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">&s;ie of</HI> Balaam <HI>concerning the people of</HI> I&s;rael <HI>after the fle&s;h, that they &s;hould dwell alone, and not be reckoned among the Nati|ons, which yeelds a better proof for a Nations-Church-Chri&s;tian,&mdash;than for &s;eparation.</HI></P>
<P>This mu&s;t be a little farther con&s;idered. Fir&s;t then, that the people of <HI>I&s;rael</HI> were Typical of the Church, and people of God, hath hitherto for the mo&s;t part been taken for granted. The&s;e upon this bottom are call'd his <HI>I&s;rael, I&s;raelites</HI> indeed, Jews, the Circumci&s;ion, the Seed of <HI>Abraham,</HI> who is &s;aid to be their Father, an holy Nation, a Royal Prie&s;thood, a peculiar People, (as I&s;rael of old was called) <HI>Heb.</HI> 8. 8. <HI>John</HI> 1. 47. <HI>Rom.</HI> 2. 29. <HI>Phil.</HI> 3. 3. <HI>Gal.</HI> 3. 29. <HI>Rom.</HI> 4. 16. 1 <HI>Pet.</HI> 2. 5, 9. They are the cho&s;en; called of God, taken by Covenant near to him, above the re&s;t of the World, &s;en&s;ible, and &s;ighing under a wor&s;e than <HI>Egyptian</HI> bondage, from whence God brings, redeems them by an out-&s;tretched Arm: Their Enemies pur&s;ue, overtake them, they are &s;urrounded with Red-Sea difficulties, ruine, de&s;truction inavoidable, (in the eye of rea&s;on) yet God lifts up his hand wonderfully for them, and makes a way for e&s;cape, they then magnifie him, and &s;ing his Prai&s;es. They are brought into a Wilderne&s;s, yet not without the Pillar and Cloud, the directing, protecting, pre&s;ence of God with them, Lions, Bears, Bea&s;ts of prey continually ready to devour them, ye<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter"> upon them as his glory, <HI>Jehovah</HI> hath a defence, provides plenteou&s;ly for them, and at la&s;t brings them into the re&s;t remaining for them, as <HI>I&s;rael</HI> in the Let|ter and Type.</P>
<P>2dly, Of this the Apo&s;tle di&s;cour&s;eth at large, 1 <HI>Cor.</HI> 10. 11. their In&s;titutions and Ordinances were all Typical of the Spiritual things of the Go&s;pel: Their Laws and Statutes touching the Non-admi&s;&s;ion of
<PB N="399" REF="203"> per&s;ons legally unclean into the Camp, Sanctuary, Temple, <HI>Numb.</HI> 5. 2. &amp; 19. 20. for which end Porters were &s;et at the Gates, 2 <HI>Chron.</HI> 23. 19. were Types of the exclu&s;ion of per&s;ons morally &s;o from the New-Te&s;tament Churches; their <HI>Canaan</HI> was a Type of the Re&s;t that remain|eth for the People of God, into which <HI>Jo&s;hua</HI> will lead them, <HI>Heb.</HI> 4. 1, 2, 3, 9. There dwelling alone not being reckoned among&s;t the Nations, <HI>i. e.</HI> their &s;eparation from the Nations of the World, with re&s;pect to Faith and Wor&s;hip, as <HI>Exod.</HI> 19. 5. <HI>Levit.</HI> 20. 24, 26. <HI>Ezra.</HI> 9. 2. was Typical of the &s;eparation of the New-Te&s;tament Saints from the Wicked of the World in their Communion, Wor&s;hip, and Service of God.</P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. That <HI>I&s;rael</HI> &s;hould in mo&s;t remarkable pa&s;&s;ages be Typical of New-Te&s;tament Saints, and not in this, as remarkable as any, upon &s;ome accounts the mo&s;t remarkable of them all, is not probable.</P>
<P N="2">2. With re&s;pect to their Separation from the World, they are called, <HI>Exod.</HI> 19. 5, 6. A peculiar Trea&s;ure to God, a Kingdom of Prie&s;ts, an Holy Nation. In an&s;wer whereunto <HI>Peter</HI> &s;o calls New-Te&s;tament-Be|lievers, 1 <HI>Pet.</HI> 2. 9. The <HI>Chaldee</HI> &s;aith, <HI>Ye &s;hall be before me Kings, Prie&s;ts, and an holy People, &s;uch hath Chri&s;t made the Saints unto God,</HI> Rev. 1. 6. &amp; 5. 10. 1 Pet. 2. 5. <HI>Rom.</HI> 12. 1.</P>
<P N="3">3. Accordingly the Church of Chri&s;t is &s;aid to be cho&s;en out of the World, <HI>John</HI> 15. 19. 1 <HI>Pet.</HI> 2. 9. They are &s;aid to be of God, in oppo|&s;ition to the whole World be&s;ide, which is &s;aid to lie in wickedne&s;s, 1 <HI>John</HI> 5. 19. So that evidently the duty of the New-Te&s;tament-Be|lievers, with re&s;pect to &s;eparation from the World, and its Wor&s;hip, is typed out in what is &s;poken of <HI>I&s;rael</HI> according to the fle&s;h, the great Type of them, <HI>Numb.</HI> 23. 9. The weakne&s;s of Mr. <HI>T.</HI> his A&s;&s;ertion, that from this Scripture a National-Church-Chri&s;tian may better be proved, than &s;eparation is from what hath been &s;aid, abundantly evinced. <HI>I&s;rael</HI> was to the Nations of the World, what the Churches of Chri&s;t now in the Nations thereof are, di&s;tinct from them in their Mini&s;tration, Wor&s;hip, and Service. Herein they were Types not of National Churches, which are not of the in&s;titution of the Lord in the New-Te|&s;tament, but of particular Churches, as we have proved.</P>
<P>His exceptions to the other Scriptures, will receive a &s;peedy di&s;patch. In his an&s;wer to <HI>John</HI> 5. 19. He <HI>&s;uppo&s;eth, that per&s;ons profe&s;&s;ing Chri&s;t from education or compul&s;ion, being formed up by Penal Laws into a Natio|nal Church, under Eccle&s;ia&s;tical Heads and Governors that are forreign to the Scripture, though they live in a cour&s;e of debauchery, and actual Rebel|lion</HI>
<PB N="400" REF="204"> <HI>again&s;t him, are not the World, nor &s;o call'd by Chri&s;t;</HI> Of which we expect his proof.</P>
<P>Of this matter we have di&s;cour&s;ed at large in this Treati&s;e: What he hath before &s;aid of 2 <HI>Cor.</HI> 6. 14. <HI>Ephe&s;.</HI> 5. 8, 11. <HI>Rev.</HI> 18, 4. we have already con&s;idered. What <HI>Paul</HI> writes to <HI>Timothy,</HI> 2 Tim. 3. 5. he writes,</P>
<P N="1">1. For our In&s;truction.</P>
<P N="2">2. It being a prophe&s;ie of the la&s;t dayes Apo&s;tacy, under the Conduct and Regiment of Antichri&s;t, it was more directly and immediately in|tended for us than him.</P>
<P N="3">3. 'Tis not a &s;eparation in re&s;pect of Arbitrary &s;ociety in the World (the Apo&s;tle is giving directions how we &s;hould behave our &s;elves with re&s;pect to In&s;tituted Wor&s;hip&mdash;) that is enjoyned, and yet if it were, certainly tho&s;e with whom we may not have &s;uch &s;ociety, we may not walk with in the fellow&s;hip of the Go&s;pel, <HI>Ho&s;.</HI> 4. 15. is a Pre|cept to <HI>Judah</HI> not to have communion with <HI>Idolatrous I&s;rael</HI> in matter of Wor&s;hip; thence &s;eparation from &s;uch as wor&s;hip God in a fal&s;e way, is evidently demon&s;trated to be our duty. That 'tis our duty (as the Spi|rit tells us 'tis <HI>Prov.</HI> 14. 7.) to flie from the pre&s;ence and &s;ight of fooli&s;h men, and yet have communion with them in Wor&s;hip, is a mo&s;t ab&s;urd Dictate.</P>
<P>But <HI>he will prove the Po&s;ition fal&s;e,</HI> 1. <HI>It &s;uppo&s;eth Chri&s;t to have in&s;ti|tuted &s;uch a &s;eparation as he hath told us &s;hall not be to the end of the World,</HI> Mat. 13. 30, 39. 40.</P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> This is the <HI>Animadverters</HI> mi&s;take, the &s;eparation Chri&s;t tells us &s;hall not be till the end of the World, is a &s;eparation in re&s;pect of Civil Societies and Cohabitations in the World, which we plead not for. And this he plainly tells us, <HI>v.</HI> 38. <HI>The Field is the World,</HI> where|in both the godly and the wicked do and may grow together undi&s;turbed by us, notwith&s;tanding the &s;eparation pleaded for. And that this is the whole of Chri&s;ts intendment is evident.</P>
<P N="1">1. The Tares, when di&s;covered, are not to be pull'd up out of the field, <HI>v.</HI> 15. But when per&s;ons are di&s;covered to be (Tares) wicked ones, they mu&s;t be ca&s;t out of the Church, 1 <HI>Cor.</HI> 5. 2.<HI>&mdash;Rev.</HI> 2. 14, 15, 16, 20.</P>
<P N="2">2. The plucking up of the Tares is forbidden, le&s;t thereby &s;ome de|triment &s;hould happen to the Wheat, <HI>v.</HI> 29. but the excommunicating, &s;eparating from &s;candalous Offenders, is not to the prejudice, 'tis to the good and advantage of tho&s;e that are truly Righteous, as the Apo&s;tle intimates, 2 <HI>Cor.</HI> 5. 6, 7, 8. <HI>Ver.</HI> 39. is the Key of the Parable of the Draw-Net.</P>
<PB N="401" REF="204">
<P> Which, 1. fairly intimates to us that the &s;ame line of Interpretation is to be &s;tretched over it, as over the Parable of the Tares.</P>
<P>But, 2. grant it to be meant of a Go&s;pel-Church-State, it oppo|&s;eth not the Separation pleaded for; there's no doubt there may be fooli&s;h Virgins as well as wi&s;e, <HI>Juda&s;&s;es</HI> as well as <HI>Peters</HI> in the be&s;t con|&s;tituted Churches, and are like to be to the end of the World; but though they are known to God to be Devils, they are not upon their admi&s;&s;ion into the Churches for other than real Saints, and when they are found to be otherwi&s;e, they are to be cut off from them as u&s;ele&s;s Members. The &s;eparation pleaded for, is not a &s;eparation from &s;uch refined Hypocrites, as can act the part of Saints &s;o well, as that none but God is able to di&s;cern them from &s;uch; but from tho&s;e who have the vi&s;ible Lineaments of men of the World, and Children of Di&s;o|bedience upon them, which is not in the lea&s;t oppo&s;ite to either of the&s;e Parables. The Fi&s;h in the Draw-Net were &s;uppo&s;ed to be good whil&s;t in the Draw-Net, till brought to Land, and taken out from thence&punc; The account is given of the Churches of <HI>A&s;ia, Corinth&mdash;</HI>manife&s;ts that they were con&s;tituted of vi&s;ible Saints, <HI>Rev.</HI> 2. 1, 2, 3, 9, 13, 19. 1 <HI>Cor.</HI> 1. 2. They are blamed for &s;uffering tho&s;e that had di&s;covered the rottenne&s;s of their hearts by works of unrighteou&s;ne&s;s, (though when admitted they &s;eemed to be Saints) to continue in their Communion, <HI>Rev.</HI> 2. 14. 20.&mdash;</P>
<P>What he adds, <HI>That the Separation pleaded for, was ever judged Schi&s;matical, and proved unhappy in the conclu&s;ion.</HI></P>
<P>Is, 1. an Arrow drawn out of the <HI>Popi&s;h</HI> Quiver: What the <HI>Papi&s;ts</HI> u&s;ually object again&s;t the Separation of the <HI>Prote&s;tants</HI> from the Church of <HI>Rome;</HI> as indeed many of his Arguments and An&s;wers in this Treati&s;e are, which I had thought to have manife&s;ted at the clo&s;e, by the induction of particular in&s;tances, but that this Treati&s;e &s;o un|expectedly &s;wells under our hands.</P>
<P N="2">2. All that is accounted Schi&s;matical, is not pre&s;ently &s;o becau&s;e &s;o accounted.</P>
<P N="3">3. Schi&s;m being a breach of &s;ome Union of the In&s;titutio<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter"> of Chri&s;t, he mu&s;t prove our Separation to be a breach of &s;ome &s;uch Uni|on before he proves it &s;chi&s;matical.</P>
<P>What unhappine&s;s the <HI>Animadverter</HI> means that hath attended &s;epa|ration from the vi&s;ibly wicked and prophane, I know not; all things are not unhappy that men account &s;o. That which is of God in the Premi&s;&s;es (as we have proved Separation to be) cannot have unhap|pine&s;s in the conclu&s;ion.</P>
<PB N="402" REF="205">
<P> He adds, <HI>The &s;eparation pleaded for is dangerous, &s;ith it puts per&s;ons upon withdrawing their &s;ubjection from Eccle&s;ia&s;tical, Civil, Hou&s;hold-Ru|lers and Governors, it would overthrow all States, Bodies Politick, and Hou&s;|hold-Government.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. If by Eccle&s;ia&s;tical Rulers and Governors, he <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">ean &s;uch as are of the In&s;titution of Chri&s;t, (and to others we owe no &s;ubjection as &s;uch) the whole (and every part) of what is affirmed by him in this matter, is mo&s;t &s;candalou&s;ly, fal&s;ly, and wickedly &s;poken; <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter"> que&s;tion whether not contrary to his own knowledge and Con&s;cience; if not, he undertook to an&s;wer a matter before he under&s;tood it, which i<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter"> not much to his honour.</P>
<P N="2">2. The &s;eparation pleaded for, is no other than what was pleaded for by the Apo&s;tles of old, and Primitive Believers; So that if it over|throws Government, theirs did al&s;o; and indeed this was laid to their charge, as 'tis to ours, how truly let the whole Nation judge: of this we have already &s;poken.</P>
<P>A &s;econd in&s;titution of Chri&s;t in&s;tanced in, in <HI>S. T.</HI> is this, <HI>That Saints &s;eparate from the World, &s;hould frequently meet together as a di&s;tinct Body therefrom, for the edification and building up of each other in the way and will of God, according to the gifts be&s;towed,</HI> Mal. 3. 16. 1 The&s;. 5. 11. Heb. 3. 12, Jude 20. Heb. 10. 24, 25. 1 Cor. 12. 9. Acts 12. 12. &amp; 18. 23. Ephe&s;. 5. 19. James 5. 16. 1 The&s;. 5. 14.</P>
<P>To which Mr. <HI>T.</HI> Sect. 2. <HI>Saints &s;eparated from the World,</HI> i. e. <HI>un|believers, &s;hould frequently meet for the ends afore&s;aid: But,</HI> 1. <HI>one party of Chri&s;tians &s;hould not call another party of Chri&s;tians, the World, who own the true Faith of God, and wor&s;hip him, becau&s;e they are not of the &s;ame way of Church-Government and Wor&s;hip.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> Right, but with Mr. <HI>T.</HI> his good leave, Chri&s;tians may call &s;uch, as (though they outwardly profe&s;s the Name of Chri&s;t) drive a trade of &s;inning again&s;t God, are &s;trangers to the Work of Grace upon their Spirits, who are <GAP DESC="foreign">, in &s;ubjection to the wicked one, the World, they being really, <GAP DESC="foreign">, unbelievers, if any in the Wo<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="2 letters">d be &s;o; which is all we contend for. And if this b: granted, (which yet I &s;ee not how it can be denied) farewel a National-Church; the mo&s;t of who&s;e Members are of the Complexion intimated. That which follows in this Section we are not at all concerned in. The Scrip|tures produced &s;ufficiently evince that what we affirm to be the In&s;ti|tution of Chri&s;t is indeed &s;o; nor is Mr. <HI>T.</HI> able to gain-&s;ay the truth thereof.</P>
<P>A third In&s;titution of Chri&s;t mentioned in <HI>S. T.</HI> is, <HI>That particular</HI>
<PB N="403" REF="205"> <HI>Congregations and A&s;&s;emblies of Believers, gathered into one Body for the Celebration of the Wor&s;hip of God, (in oppo&s;ition to any National-Church or Churches what&s;oever) are of the appointment of Chri&s;t,</HI> Acts 1. 13. &amp; 12. 1. &amp; 13. 14. &amp; 15. 22. &amp; 18. 22. &amp; 20. 14, 28. 1 Cor. 1. 2. &amp; 6. 4. Acts 9. 1. 1 Cor. 16. 19: Rom. 16. 4. 2 Cor. 8. 1. Gal. 1. 2. Acts 16. 4, 5. &amp; 14. 23. 1 Cor. 11. 16. &amp; 14. 4, 5, 12, 19. 2 Cor. 1. 1. Rev. 1. 2, 3, 11.</P>
<P>To which Mr. <HI>T.</HI> Sect. 3. <HI>'Tis que&s;tionable whether</HI> Acts 15. 22. &amp; 18. 17. <HI>be not a Provincial Church.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. Of this we have formerly &s;poken. 2. That it was the particular Church of <HI>Corinth,</HI> v. 2, 4, 12, 22, 23, 25. evince. 3. That a Provincial Church had not as yet a being in the World Mr. <HI>T.</HI> knows, and we have proved, <HI>Chap.</HI> 1. <HI>Sect.</HI> 13. The &s;ame line of Interpreta|tion is to be drawn over <HI>Acts</HI> 18. 22. (for that he intends in&s;tead of <HI>v.</HI> 17.)</P>
<P>The Texts he grants, mention Churches in &s;everal Cities and Pro|vinces, but he que&s;tions, <HI>Whether they were by their voluntary agreement under Pa&s;tors of their own choice, gathered into one Body, for the celebration of the Wor&s;hip of God. They are call'd the Church of &s;uch a City, as of</HI> Je|ru&s;alem,<HI>&mdash;from their Habitation, where they had many meetings from Hou&s;e to Hou&s;e for celebration of Wor&s;hip, as</HI> Acts 2. 46, 47.</P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> That there is any thing of weight in this An&s;wer, none will imagine but Mr. <HI>T.</HI></P>
<P N="1">1. 'Tis built upon this rotten Foundation, that the particular form of Churches is not of the In&s;titution of Chri&s;t; of which we have at large treated, <HI>Chap.</HI> 1. of this Treati&s;e.</P>
<P>2. It plainly contradicts the Spirit of the Lord, &s;peaking in &s;ome of the Scriptures mentioned, <HI>He que&s;tions,</HI> he &s;aith, <HI>whether they were by volunta|ry agreement gathered together into one Body;</HI> But this the Spirit of the Lord affirms, <HI>Acts</HI> 2. 41. 2 <HI>Cor.</HI> 8. 5. Nor can it be otherwi&s;e; there was no external force or Law to compel them thereunto. Whether they were under particular Officers of their own, &s;ee <HI>Acts</HI> 20. 28. &amp; 15. 4. 23. &amp; 21. 18. that the&s;e were cho&s;en by them&s;elves, that the Church con&s;i&s;ted of no greater a number than could meet together, <GAP DESC="foreign">, in the &s;ame place, to wor&s;hip God in the &s;ame numerical Ordinances, we have before demon&s;trated.</P>
<P>The rea&s;on why there were not more Congregations than one in a City, was, becau&s;e that the multitude of Di&s;ciples was not &s;o great but that they might &s;o do. No wonder that we read onely of the Elders of the Church, <HI>Acts</HI> 15. 4, 23.&mdash;when there was but one Church at <HI>Je|ru&s;alem;</HI>
<PB N="404" REF="206"> none ever pleaded for one's being an Elder of one part of the Church, another of another; but &s;uch as a&s;&s;ert Provincial-National-Churches; with us, he that is an Elder to a part, is an Elder to the whole. That the Churches mentioned in the Scriptures in&s;t<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">nced in, were not particular Independent Churches, Mr. <HI>T.</HI> attempts not the proof of.</P>
<P>What he adds from 1 <HI>Cor.</HI> 12. 28. is already an&s;wered, nor is there any thing more in this matter replied by him, that requires our &s;tay.</P>
<P>'Tis added in <HI>S. T.</HI> 4thly, <HI>That Chri&s;t hath appointed Officers of his own to act in the holy things of God, in and over the&s;e A&s;&s;emblies, whom he furni&s;heth with gifts every way &s;uiting their imployment, to whom, without turning a&s;ide to the voice of &s;trangers, or attending upon the Mini&s;try of &s;uch as are not of his appointment, 'its the duty of Saints to hear<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">en, is very evident from</HI> Ephe&s;. 4. 11. Heb. 13. 7, 13. Mat. 24. 4, 5, 23, 24. 1 John 2. 18. &amp; 4. 1. 2 John 10. Acts 20. 29, 30, 31. Rev. 2. 14, 15, 16. <HI>Which exactly agrees with what was practi&s;ed by Primitive Believers, who, it &s;eems, received none without the te&s;timony of &s;ome Brethren of known Integrity in the Churches,</HI> 1 Cor. 16. 3. Acts 9. 26.</P>
<P>To which Mr. <HI>T.</HI> 1. <HI>That Chri&s;t hath appointed Officers of his own, and furni&s;hed them with gifts whom we are to follow and obey in oppo&s;ition to the Mini&s;try of &s;trangers,</HI> viz. Such as are <HI>deceivers, fal&s;e-teachers, An|tichri&s;ts,</HI> he grants, which being the &s;ub&s;tance of what is pleaded for (at pre&s;ent) with his &s;ub&s;equent Di&s;cour&s;e we are little concern'd.</P>
<P>Whether we have proved the Mini&s;ters of <HI>England</HI> to be deceivers,&mdash;the judicious Reader will determine; and if &s;uch, <HI>Mr. T.</HI> grants we have proved they are not to be heard. Whether Chri&s;t hath appointed Officers to the Univer&s;al Church, or appropriated them to particular Congregations, is not of our pre&s;ent di&s;qui&s;ition. The for<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">er Mr. <HI>T.</HI> hath not demon&s;trated. The latter we have in part evinced, <HI>Chap.</HI> 1. <HI>Sect.</HI> 15.</P>
<P>To which may be added, If by virtue of Chri&s;ts appointment Mini|&s;ters are not fixed to particular Congregations, then Mini&s;ters are no more by virtue of Chri&s;ts appointment Mini&s;ters of this Company or Flock of Chri&s;tians, than of another, which is expre&s;ly contrary to <HI>Acts</HI> 20. 28.</P>
<P N="2">2. Then either Mini&s;ters have no Authority over this or that particu|lar Flock, to which, as &s;uch, they mini&s;ter; or if &s;o they have as much authority over every particular &s;ociety of Chri&s;tians to whom they providentially preach, and this without their actual con&s;ent, which is ab&s;urd and tyrannical.</P>
<P N="3"><PB N="405" REF="206"> 3. Then no Church can claim by virtue of Divine appointment a greater right and Intere&s;t in one Mini&s;ter than in another, nor is any by virtue of &s;uch an appointment, more obliged to mini&s;ter to them then to others; though we deny not but the gifts given to Mini&s;ters (to Brethren) are given for the Edification of all Chri&s;tians, among&s;t whom by the Providence of God they are ca&s;t, which they are bound for that end to improve; nor that its unlawful to hear others be&s;ides Pa|&s;tors of Congregational Churches, we a&s;&s;ert the contrary in the Treati&s;e he undertakes to confute. Yet doth it not hence in the lea&s;t follow, that we may lawfully hear the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters, we have proved the contra|ry; the non-attendment upon whom tends not to the decay of Spiritual Life, it promotes it rather.&mdash;</P>
<P>We &s;ay in <HI>S. T. That the hearing the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters pours forth con|tempt upon each of the&s;e In&s;titutions of Chri&s;t.</HI></P>
<P>It &s;uppo&s;eth, 1&s;t, That &s;eparation from the A&s;&s;emblies of <HI>England,</HI> though in their Con&s;titution carnal and worldly, and the Wor&s;hip there|of (although fal&s;e, and meerly of Humane Invention) was and is our &s;in and evil.</P>
<P>2dly, That it's not by virtue of any In&s;titution of Chri&s;t, the duty of Saints to meet together as a Body di&s;tinct (without going out to other A&s;&s;emblies to wor&s;hip with them) for their mutual edificati|on.&mdash;</P>
<P>3dly, That particular A&s;&s;emblies are not &s;olely of the In&s;titution of Chri&s;t, but that National Churches are al&s;o to be accounted true Chur|ches of Chri&s;t.</P>
<P N="4">4. That the Officers of Chri&s;ts appointment are not &s;ufficient for the Saints, but together with them, the help of fal&s;e and Idol Shepherds is to be &s;ought after. Than which, what greater contempt can be pour|ed forth upon the forementioned In&s;titutions of our dear Lord.</P>
<P>The truth of the a&s;&s;ertion we fully manife&s;t in <HI>S.</HI> T. nor doth Mr. <HI>T.</HI> deny, but that the hearing the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters doth pour out con|tempt upon the In&s;titutions mentioned, he denies them to be the In&s;ti|tutions of Chri&s;t. <HI>Sect.</HI> 5. tells us, <HI>That 'tis a gro&s;s error which is oft in the mouthes of the Seperati&s;ts, that they may not hear with the world, nor pray with the world, whence it hath come to pa&s;s, that &s;ome have left off praying in their Families,&mdash;unle&s;s Members of their Church.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> The fir&s;t and &s;econd we have proved, beyond what Mr. <HI>T.</HI> hath as yet been able to reply to.</P>
<P>2dly, The la&s;t I hope is not true; God forbid that any that pretend to Chri&s;tianity, much more &s;uch as are &s;o in truth, &s;hould &s;o far dege|generate
<PB N="406" REF="207"> into the Spirit of <HI>Heatheni&s;m,</HI> as not to call upon God in their Families, or cea&s;e to do their uttermo&s;t to convert their Children and Servants to the Lord, and in&s;truct them in his fear.</P>
<P N="3">3. That this is the con&s;equence of the principle of Seperation, or that 'tis in it &s;elf a gro&s;s Error, that 'tis unlawful for me to hear with the world, or pray with the world, <HI>i. e.</HI> joyn with them in their Wor&s;hip, he may prove when he is able.</P>
<P>What follows hath either already been replied to, or will be in its pro|per place; &s;o that we need not attend it here.</P>
<P>The &s;econd thing in the <HI>Minor</HI> Propo&s;ition incumbent upon us to prove, we &s;ay in S. T. is, 2dly, That hereby poor &s;ouls are hardned in a fal&s;e way of Wor&s;hip, what can be thought le&s;s (&s;uppo&s;ing the wor|&s;hip in the Pari&s;h-A&s;&s;emblies of <HI>England</HI> to be &s;o, as hath been proved) when they &s;hall &s;ee Profe&s;&s;ors that were wont to pray and preach toge|ther, to pro&s;e&s;s and prote&s;t again&s;t <HI>Common-Prayer-Book Wor&s;hip,</HI> and Prie&s;ts, to cry up, or at lea&s;t approve of (as Mr. T. 'tis tho<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">ght, did) Laws made for their ejection, if guilty of no other crime than conformi|ty to the Wor&s;hip they now conform to and practi&s;e, now flock to their A&s;&s;emblies, and hear their Prie&s;ts. What can they imagine le&s;s than that the&s;e per&s;ons thus acting in a direct contrariety to their former judgment and practice, do now &s;ee they were mi&s;taken; and are begin|ing at lea&s;t to return unto tho&s;e pathes from whence they departed; and that the&s;e wayes in which they and their forefathers have walked, are the good Old Way in which re&s;t is to be found? To which Mr. T. An&s;wers nothing but what hath already been con&s;idered, no<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter"> any thing that de&s;erves our &s;tay.</P>
<P>The 3d, Particular a&s;&s;erted in the <HI>Minor</HI> Propo&s;ition, its &s;aid in S. T. is, That hereby poor &s;ouls are hardned in their rebellion and bla&s;phe|my again&s;t God, his Spirit, and Tabernacle, and them that dwell there|in. This is not to be que&s;tioned, we every day hear &s;tout words &s;poken again&s;t the Lord becau&s;e of the practice of &s;ome in this thing; what &s;ay the wicked le&s;s, <HI>thanthat Religion is but a fancy; that the profe&s;&s;ors thereof are but a generation of Hypocrites, that will turn to any thing to &s;ave them|&s;elves; that the Spirit by which they are acted, is but a Spirit of Phanati|ci&s;m and delu&s;ion?</HI> Yea how do they ble&s;s them&s;elves, that they are not nor ever were of the number of &s;uch Profe&s;&s;ors! and that becau&s;e they &s;ee the&s;e for fear of Per&s;ecution de&s;ert their former principles, &s;trike in with their A&s;&s;embly and Mini&s;ters.&mdash;</P>
<P>To which Mr. T. adjoyns, 1&s;t, <HI>Papi&s;ts have thus in&s;ulte<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter"> over Pro|te&s;tants upon the return of any &s;eeming zealous Prote&s;tant into the Romane</HI>
<PB N="407" REF="207"> <HI>Church, yet the An&s;werer knows how to reply to &s;uch, that mens in&s;tabili|ty &s;hews their own weakne&s;s, not the thing in which they have been zealous to have been good or bad.&mdash;</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> Very right, and we know how to reply to the in&s;ulting of the Conformi&s;ts upon the account of the return of any &s;eeming zealous Pro|fe&s;&s;ors to them; but &s;till we &s;ay, that their return to them gives them too ju&s;t occa&s;ion of in&s;ulting. The contrary to which Mr. <HI>T.</HI> &s;hould have proved, of which he &s;peaks not one word.</P>
<P>He adds, 2dly, <HI>This Author doth not do well to call the Obloquies again&s;t his party, &s;peaking again&s;t Religion, bla&s;pheming God, the Spirit, Ta|bernacle and them that dwell therein.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> Sir, the party I am through grace of, are not mine but Chri&s;ts, the followers of the Lamb in oppo&s;ition to the wicked profane world, of no other party do I own my &s;elf to be.</P>
<P N="2">2. The <HI>Obloquies, Bla&s;phemies</HI> mentioned, being &s;uch as are vented a|gain&s;t the In&s;titutions of Chri&s;t (as we have proved them to be) and &s;uch as conform to them, by the Bea&s;t and his party, may well be called <HI>Bla&s;pheming God, his Temple, Tabernacle, and them that dwell therein:</HI> They are &s;o called by the Spirit, <HI>Rev.</HI> 13. 5, 6.</P>
<P>He adds, 3dly, <HI>It were very &s;ad &s;hould we be afraid to do a thing be|cau&s;e of Clamours (An&s;w.</HI> True, if the thing done be our duty which if he &s;uppo&s;eth in the pre&s;ent ca&s;e, he begs the que&s;tion) <HI>or continue in that which we cannot ju&s;tifie, becau&s;e men will be hardened in their own way.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> Very right, but if a man depart from that way which he once owned to be the way of God, which he ju&s;tifies in the Scriptures to be &s;uch, and in &s;o doing hardens per&s;ons to cleave to a way of Super&s;tition, Formality to their utter undoing, and gives them ju&s;t occa&s;ion to open their mouthes again&s;t the In&s;titutions of Chri&s;t, reviling, bla&s;pheming them, and tho&s;e that walk in them; this is not ju&s;tifiable, nor will it be found matter of joy to us at the end of our dayes, that we have admi|ni&s;tred &s;uch occa&s;ions to them.&mdash;</P>
<P>It remaineth then that ina&s;much as the hearing the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters pours out contempt upon the wayes and In&s;titutions of Chri&s;t, hardens per&s;ons in a fal&s;e way of Wor&s;hip, Rebellion, and Bla&s;phemy again&s;t God, its utterly unlawful for Saints to be found in the p<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="2 letters">cti&s;e thereof.</P>
</DIV3>
<DIV3 N="2" TYPE="section">
<PB N="408" REF="208">
<HEAD><HI>Sect.</HI> 2.</HEAD>
<ARGUMENT>
<P><HI>A</HI> 10^t^h <HI>Argument proving the unlawfulne&s;s of hearing the pre&s;ent Mini|&s;ters. 'Tis not lawful to go to the places of fal&s;e Wor&s;hip. All Monuments of Idolatry to be aboli&s;hed, proved. The judgment of the learned</HI> Mede, Cotton, Ain&s;worth, Robbin&s;on. 2 <HI>Cor.</HI> 6. 17. 1 <HI>John</HI> 5. 21. <HI>Jude</HI> 23. 1 <HI>Sam.</HI> 2. 17. 1 <HI>Cor.</HI> 11. 20. &amp; 14. 26. <HI>explained.</HI></P>
</ARGUMENT>
<P>THE 10^t^h Argument again&s;t hearing the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters, is in <HI>S. T.</HI> thus formed.</P>
<P><HI>God calls his People out of, and &s;trictly chargeth them not to go ro the place of Fal&s;e Wor&s;hip,</HI> Ho&s;. 4. 5. Amos 4. 4. <HI>Therefore 'tis unlawful for the Saints to attend upon the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters of</HI> England. The Rea&s;on of the Con&s;equence is, becau&s;e we cannot go to hear them, without we go to the Places and A&s;&s;emblies of fal&s;e Wor&s;hip, (as the <HI>Common-Prayer-Book-Wor&s;hip</HI> hath been proved to be.)</P>
<P>To which Mr. <HI>T.</HI> replies, <HI>Sect.</HI> 7. 1&s;t, <HI>This Argument is bottom'd upon this Opinion, That all Monuments of Idolatry, all Temples, Altars, Chappels&mdash;dedicated by the Heathens or Antichri&s;tians, to their fal&s;e Wor|&s;hip, ought by lawful Authority to be ra&s;ed and aboli&s;hed, not &s;uffered to re|main for nouri&s;hing Super&s;tition, much le&s;s imployed in the true Wor&s;hip of God.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. That the <HI>Animadverter</HI> can &s;ee any &s;uch Principle at the bottom of our Argument mu&s;t be imputed to that wonderful quick&s;ight|edne&s;s that is predominant &s;ometimes in him; we only &s;ay, that God calls his people out of&mdash;places of fal&s;e-wor&s;hip, <HI>i. e. not &s;uch as have been, but &s;uch as are at pre&s;ent &s;uch;</HI> which is the utmo&s;t of what Mr. <HI>T.</HI> can compel us to own, from any thing we have a&s;&s;erted in this Argu|ment.</P>
<P>But,. 2dly, Having &s;uch good company, as the learned <HI>Ain&s;worth, Robin&s;on,</HI> and other Worthies and Witne&s;&s;es of Chri&s;t in their day, and being &s;atisfied, (which is the all in all to us) that they have in this matter the Spirit for their Guide and Leader, we are contented to ad|vance a &s;tep or two farther with them.</P>
<P>The Propo&s;ition but now laid down by Mr. <HI>T.</HI> we &s;ub&s;cribe to, and judge its clearly proved by <HI>Exod.</HI> 20. 4. 5, 6. <HI>&amp;</HI> 23. 13. <HI>I&s;a.</HI> 30. 22. <HI>Gen.</HI> 35. 2, 3, 4. <HI>Deut.</HI> 12. 2, 3, 30, 32. <HI>&amp;</HI> 17. 18, 19, 20. 2 <HI>King.</HI> 10. 26, 27, 28. <HI>&amp;</HI> 18. 4. <HI>&amp;</HI> 23. 12, 13, 14, 15. 2 <HI>Chr.</HI> <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">7. 6. <HI>Acts</HI>
<PB N="409" REF="208"> 17. 23. <HI>&amp;</HI> 19. 26, 27. <HI>Jude</HI> 23. with <HI>Lev.</HI> 13. 47, 51, 52. <HI>Rev.</HI> 17. 16. <HI>&amp;</HI> 18. 11, 12. The Scriptures cited by the Separati&s;ts of old. We are not willing to debate this matter at large. That the things menti|oned &s;hould be aboli&s;hed they give their Rea&s;ons in their Apologie, <HI>pag.</HI> 76. The &s;um whereof is,</P>
<P N="1">1. The retaining of them is a breach of the &s;econd Commandment, <HI>Exod.</HI> 20. 4, 5, 6, with <HI>Deut.</HI> 12. 2, 3. <HI>I&s;a.</HI> 30. 22.</P>
<P N="2">2. So long as they are continued Antichri&s;t is not fully aboli&s;hed, ac|cording to <HI>Rev.</HI> 17. 16. <HI>&amp;</HI> 18. 11, 12, 13.&mdash;2 <HI>The&s;.</HI> 2. 8. with 2 <HI>King.</HI> 10. 26, 27, 28.</P>
<P N="3">3. The con&s;ecrating of any Garments, Places, or the like, peculi|arly to the Wor&s;hip of God now in the time of the Go&s;pel, hath no Warrant in the Word.</P>
<P N="4">4. The wor&s;hipping God in the places, and by the things appoint|ed, and hallowed of God him&s;elf, was under the Law a part of honour done to him, and plea&s;ing him, <HI>Deut.</HI> 12. 5, 6. <HI>Lev.</HI> 17. 3, 4. The de&s;troying them tended to his di&s;honour, <HI>P&s;al.</HI> 79. 1. <HI>&amp;</HI> 74. 6, 7, 8. The building and repairing them pertained to the e&s;tabli&s;hing and re|&s;toring his true Wor&s;hip, <HI>Hag.</HI> 1. 4, 8. So on the contrary, the wor|&s;hipping God now in the places and by the things dedicated, and hallow|ed by Antichri&s;t, is a &s;pecial part of Popi&s;h Devotion; &s;uch is the build|ing, repairing them, as the razing them will be to their di&s;honour and greater confu&s;ion: The like may be &s;aid of the Heathen Places, touch|ing which, &s;ee <HI>Deut.</HI> 12. 2, 3, 4. with 2 <HI>King.</HI> 10. 26, 27, 28. <HI>&amp;</HI> 14. 3, 4. <HI>&amp;</HI> 23. 8, 13, 15, 19.</P>
<P N="5">5. Godly Princes are commended for aboli&s;hing the Monuments of fal&s;e Wor&s;hip, 2 <HI>Chr.</HI> 17. 6. 2 <HI>King</HI> 18. 4. <HI>&amp;</HI> 23. 12, 13, 14, 15.</P>
<P N="6">6. This being done the People are more ea&s;ily per&s;waded to the true wor&s;hip of God in Spirit and Truth; whereas otherwi&s;e they are &s;till nouri&s;hed in Super&s;tition,<HI>&mdash;Gen.</HI> 35. 2, 3, 4. 2 <HI>King.</HI> 18. 4. 2 <HI>Chr.</HI> 11. 34. <HI>Acts</HI> 17. 23. <HI>&amp;</HI> 19. 26, 27. <HI>Lev.</HI> 13, <HI>&amp;</HI> 14, <HI>Chap.</HI> with <HI>Jude</HI> 23.</P>
<P N="7">7. The Lord hath promi&s;ed a ble&s;&s;ing to them which do reject and aboli&s;h them, and threatned a cur&s;e to the contrary, and &s;o al&s;o hath done, <HI>I&s;a.</HI> 30. 22, 23. <HI>Exod.</HI> 20. 5, 6, 2 <HI>Chr.</HI> 17. <HI>chap. &amp;</HI> 31. 20, 21. with 2 <HI>Chr.</HI> 21. 13, 14. <HI>&amp;</HI> 24. 17, 25. <HI>&amp;</HI> 28. <HI>chap.</HI></P>
<P>We &s;hall only add, 8. That the &s;oul of the Lord did dete&s;t and ab|hor whatever was u&s;ed to Idolatry, whether Ve&s;tments, or Places,&mdash;under the Law, is evident from the fore-cited Scriptures; that he is as jealous a God now as ever, the <HI>Animadverter</HI> will not deny, nor can he, That the <HI>Idolatrous High&punc;Places,</HI> dedicated to the <HI>Popi&s;h Mahuzzims,</HI> or
<PB N="410" REF="209"> <HI>Saints-Idol Godds</HI> (as the mo&s;t of the High-places of <HI>England</HI> the Image of the Saint to which each was dedicated, being &s;et up in the <HI>Rood-Loft</HI> betwixt the Church and Chancel, where in many places the <HI>Rood-Loft</HI> yet remains) are as Idolatrous, and upon that bottom as much abhor|red by the Lord, as tho&s;e of old were; and therefore are to be &s;eparated from, de&s;troyed as tho&s;e of old.</P>
<P N="9">9. They are &s;ome of the things of Antichri&s;t; they were con&s;ecrated by him, dedicated (as is known) to his <HI>He-Saints,</HI> and <HI>She-Saints,</HI> and therefore mu&s;t peri&s;h with him.</P>
<P N="10">10. The People generaly Idolize them, bow down when they come in to them, honour them with Cap and Knee, think there is holine&s;s in them, and that God is more acceptably &s;erved there than el&s;e where; which if nothing el&s;e could be &s;aid, they being dete&s;table Idols, are therefore to be abhorred by the Saints.</P>
<P>We &s;hall only add the &s;ayings of two Learned men of late dayes, who give their judgment touching this matter. The one is Mr. <HI>Mede,</HI> who expounds the 39^t^h <HI>ver&s;.</HI> of <HI>Dan.</HI> 11. as a part of the de&s;cription of An|tichri&s;t. He renders the Text thus; <HI>He &s;hall make the holds of</HI> Mahuz|zims, <HI>with all, or joyntly to the forreign Godd.</HI> And paraphra&s;eth t<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">us, <HI>And though the Chri&s;tian God whom he &s;hall profe&s;s to acknowledge and wor&s;hip can endure no compeers, yet he &s;hall con&s;ecrate his Temples (Eccle&s;ia&s;tical holds) joyntly to the Chri&s;tian God, and his</HI> Mahuzzims <HI>to God and the Saints.</HI> The other is precious <HI>Cotton,</HI> on the <HI>Vials,</HI> who, <HI>pag.</HI> 14. on <HI>Vial.</HI> 7^t^h. &s;aith thus, <HI>When the zeal of God lifts up the hearts of people, then they will not en|dure a con&s;ecrated place in all the World where they come: and when this Vial is poured out, the earth &s;hall be full of the knowledge of God, and then all the Chappels of ea&s;e, and Churches of &s;tate, and Temples of glo|ry,</HI> <NOTE PLACE="marg">&rindx;</NOTE> <HI>wherewith the world hath been deluded, &s;hall be thrown down; they will not leave them a &s;tone upon a &s;tone that &s;hall not be thrown down.</HI></P>
<P>Our <HI>Animadverter</HI> cites Mr. <HI>Robin&s;on</HI> touching this matter, who <HI>pag.</HI> 354, 356, <HI>in his Ju&s;tification of the Separation from the Church of</HI> England, <HI>there pleads again&s;t going to wor&s;hip in the&s;e Eccle&s;ia&s;tical holds, and tells us,</HI></P>
<P N="1">1. <HI>That his Arguments are fully an&s;wered by Mr.</HI> Paget.</P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> How much to the purpo&s;e Mr. <HI>Pagets</HI> An&s;wers are to the Ar|guments produced, others will judge.</P>
<P N="2">2. Mr. <HI>Robin&s;ons</HI> Texts he tells us, <HI>are impertinent. The unclean thing</HI> 2 Cor. 6. 17. <HI>not to be touched, is the Idol it &s;elf, not the place abu&s;ed to Ido|latry, which is touched when adored or wor&s;hipped.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. This is more than the <HI>Animadverter</HI> proves, no<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter"> i<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter"> it likely that any in the Church of <HI>Corinth,</HI> did, or were about to wor&s;hip the
<PB N="411" REF="209"> Idol, that he &s;hould caution and charge them not to do &s;o. Being con|verted from dumb-Idols to the living God, 'tis not to be thought they &s;hould return to wor&s;hip them again; that they were guilty of &s;o do|ing is not in the lea&s;t intimated, as is their going to the Idols-Temple, and &s;itting at meat there, which the Apo&s;tle would have them ab&s;tain from. 2. Mr. <HI>T.</HI> him&s;elf &s;aith, <HI>pag.</HI> 279, <HI>That it was unlawful for them to touch, or go to the Idols Temple, and &s;it at meat there.</HI> 3. The place it &s;elf in our ca&s;e is the Idol, its wor&s;hipped, adored, idolized, by the People of the Nation, as its known, therefore not to be touched.</P>
<P>He &s;aith further, 2. <HI>They which joyn not in any Idol-Service or Honour, keep them&s;elves from Idols, as is required,</HI> 1 John 5. 21.</P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> All &s;elf-devi&s;ed Wor&s;hip, as is the Wor&s;hip carried on in tho&s;e places at this day, is Idol-wor&s;hip, the devi&s;er thereof being in a conformity thereunto idolized, the &s;econd Precept touching Idolatry thereby violated: tho&s;e that would keep them&s;elves from Idols, mu&s;t upon Mr. <HI>T.</HI> his own grounds keep them&s;elves from that Wor&s;hip, and con&s;equently from tho&s;e places where it is &s;olemnized and carried on.</P>
<P N="2">2. The place it &s;elf, as was &s;aid, is the great Idol of the Nation; if we mu&s;t keep our &s;elves from Idols we mu&s;t keep our &s;elves from it. <HI>Jude</HI> 23. enjoynes us <HI>to avoid the very appearances and occa&s;ions of evil,</HI> and is therefore righteou&s;ly urged by Mr. <HI>Robin&s;on</HI> for Separation from the places of fal&s;e Wor&s;hip. <HI>Rev.</HI> 14. 9. <HI>&amp;</HI> 18. 4. enjoyn a total relin|qui&s;hment of all the things of Antichri&s;t, whereof his <HI>Eccle&s;ia&s;tical Holds,</HI> (as Mr. <HI>Mede</HI> calls them) are a part. What he talks with re&s;pect to the <HI>Common-Prayer-Book-Wor&s;hip</HI> hath been &s;hewed, we have already replied to, and proved it to be fal&s;e-wor&s;hip, notwith&s;t<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">nding all our Dictator is able to &s;ay to the contrary.</P>
<P>He adds, <HI>Were there &s;ome &s;uper&s;tition in the Wor&s;hip, it were not &s;uffici|ent to make the places, places of fal&s;e-Wor&s;hip, as is evident from</HI> 1 Sam. 2. 17. 1 Cor. 11. 20, 21, 22. <HI>&amp;</HI> 14. 26. <HI>nor were it nece&s;&s;ary to go out of them, except Idolatrous.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> But if fal&s;e-wor&s;hip be managed and carried on in the pla|ces, they mu&s;t undoubtedly be places of fal&s;e-wor&s;hip, <HI>i. e.</HI> places where fal&s;e-wor&s;hip is managed and carried on; to a&s;&s;ert the contrary were ab&s;urd and ridiculous. Nor is there any thing in either of the Scri|ptures produced by our <HI>Animadverter,</HI> that &s;peaks the lea&s;t &s;yllable to what <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 word"> produced by him for. The fir&s;t gives us an account of the wicke<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="4 letters">s of <HI>Samuels</HI> Sons, but that they offered not the Sacrifices commanded by the Lord, upon the Altar of the Lord, at the place ap|pointed by him, it &s;aith not. The latter condemns &s;ome di&s;order about
<PB N="412" REF="210"> &s;ome acts of Wor&s;hip in &s;ome Members of the Church, but th<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">t there was any &s;uper&s;tition in the Wor&s;hip it &s;aith not; much le&s;s was there (as in our ca&s;e) the introducing a new, formal, &s;aple&s;s Service, cut out, dre&s;&s;ed and &s;erved in for the nouri&s;hment of an Idol, and idle dumb Prie&s;thood, of which the Scriptures &s;peak not a tittle. 3. The places them&s;elves are &s;uper&s;titious and Idolatrous, as we have &s;hewed, and therefore <HI>Ho&s;.</HI> 4. 15. <HI>Am.</HI> 4. 4. are rightly cited by us, as our <HI>Animadverter</HI> hi<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">&s;elf ac|knowledgeth. What he adds, That Gods People were required to go up to <HI>Jeru&s;alem</HI> to wor&s;hip, after it had been defiled with Idolatry, and the Idol removed, and that Chri&s;t him&s;elf went up thither, he <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">ill up|on the review, I &s;uppo&s;e, raze out upon the account of its egregious impertinency. That place was built by the appointment of the Lord, his Name placed there, there was the Ark, Altar, <HI>&amp;c.</HI> there he was &s;o|lemnly to be wor&s;hipped, and would be no where el&s;e, none of which can be &s;aid of the Temples of <HI>England.</HI></P>
<P>He further tells us, <HI>That its fal&s;e, that we cannot go to hear the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters, without we go to their places and A&s;&s;emblies of fal&s;e Wor&s;hip;</HI> Which if under&s;tood of the publick Meeting-places allowed by Law, (as he mu&s;t mean if he &s;peaks pertinently, for of &s;uch is the rea&s;on of the con&s;equence meant) I &s;uppo&s;e he cannot prove. That they fre|quent private Meetings, &s;et up Conventicles, (as they are call'd) is not likely, it being expre&s;ly again&s;t the Canons of their Church.</P>
<P>To which he adds, <HI>That we are guilty of Judaizing, in tying people to wor&s;hip only in the place of the &s;eparated Churches, contrary to</HI> John 4. 21. 1 Tim. 2. 8.</P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. This is notoriou&s;ly fal&s;e, we tie per&s;ons to wor&s;hip in no place upon the account of its holine&s;s, but an Hou&s;e, a Mou<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">tain, a Ship, any place, if not polluted with Idolatry, is equal and alike e&s;teem|ed by us.</P>
<P N="2">2. This may righteou&s;ly be retorted upon the Clergy of <HI>England,</HI> who judaize in their going about to compel us to wor&s;hip in their Temples dedicated to Antichri&s;tian <HI>Mahuzzims,</HI> and con&s;ecrated with Popi&s;h Holy Water, and Prayers, and accounted more holy than other places in the Nation, of which they are notoriou&s;ly guilty, contrary to <HI>John</HI> 4. 21.&mdash;1 Tim. 2. 8.</P>
</DIV3>
<DIV3 N="3" TYPE="section">
<PB N="413" REF="210">
<HEAD>Sect. 3.</HEAD>
<ARGUMENT>
<P><HI>There is no promi&s;e of a ble&s;&s;ing upon hearing the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters, therefore 'tis not lawful to hear them.</HI> I&s;a. 55. 3. Luke 11. 28. <HI>explained.</HI> Sion <HI>typical of the New-Te&s;tament-Churches;</HI> Babylon <HI>of the Antichri&s;tian Herd. National Churches bear a re&s;emblance, not to</HI> Sion, <HI>but old</HI> Babel.</P>
</ARGUMENT>
<P>THE 11^t^h Argument produced in <HI>S. T.</HI> again&s;t hearing the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters, is, <HI>That, upon the doing whereof, Saints have no promi&s;e of a ble&s;&s;ing, nor ground to expect it, is not lawful for them to do: But in the hearing the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters, there is no promi&s;e of a ble&s;&s;ing, nor ground to expect it. Therefore&mdash;</HI></P>
<P>The <HI>Major,</HI> or fir&s;t Propo&s;ition we took for granted: But Mr. <HI>T.</HI> is plea&s;ed to enter his demurrer again&s;t it.</P>
<P><HI>Sect.</HI> 8. He tells us, <HI>Ble&s;&s;ings are of many &s;orts;</HI> 1. <HI>Immunity from evil, or puni&s;hment, in this &s;en&s;e the</HI> Major <HI>is true.</HI> 2. <HI>Collation of &s;ome &s;pecial good; in this &s;en&s;e it is not true; there are many things lawful to be done, as eating, drinking, buying, &s;elling, in re&s;pect of which men have no ground to expect any &s;uch ble&s;&s;ing.</HI> Ezekiel <HI>preached lawfully when he was told</HI> I&s;rael <HI>would not hearken.</HI> Ezek. 3. 2, 7. <HI>And</HI> Jonah <HI>when he thought</HI> Niniveh <HI>would not repent,</HI> Jonah 4. 2.</P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. Not to make many words, the things done by the Saints are either &s;uch as appertain to the &s;u&s;tenance of their life and being, the management and carrying on the concerns of their particular Callings in the World, in re&s;pect unto which they have ground to expect, not only a general but a &s;pecial Ble&s;&s;ing, <HI>P&s;alm.</HI> 1. 3. 1 <HI>Tim.</HI> 4. 8.</P>
<P N="2">2. The things relating to the Wor&s;hip and Service of God, in which &s;en&s;e the <HI>Major</HI> is to be under&s;tood, his in&s;tances of eating, drinking,&mdash;are impertinent hereunto; that I am to do nothing in the Wor&s;hip of God, in the doing of which I have no promi&s;e of a ble&s;&s;ing, nor ground to expect it; <HI>viz.</HI> a &s;pecial Spiritual Ble&s;&s;ing, God having &s;aid, <HI>Where he records his Name, he will meet with his People, and ble&s;s them,</HI> Exod. 20. 24. That <HI>where two or three are met together in his Name, he will be in the mid&s;t of them,</HI> Mat. 18. 20. <HI>viz.</HI> In re&s;pect of his gracious pr<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">|&s;ence, or communication of &s;pecial Grace; I had thought we might rationally have inferred from hence, That that, upon the doing where|of
<PB N="414" REF="211"> (relating to the Wor&s;hip and Service of God, of which we were treating) Saints have no promi&s;e of a Ble&s;&s;ing, nor ground to expect it, is not lawful for them to do; for when they are attending <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">pon God in his own way, he hath promi&s;ed to meet them and ble&s;s them, <HI>I&s;a.</HI> 64. 5.</P>
<P N="3">3. What he writes of <HI>Ezekiel</HI>'s being told that <HI>I&s;rael</HI> <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">ould not hearken, is very frivolous and impertinent.</P>
<P N="1">1. He had in his going forth to act for God in that Work, a pro|mi&s;e of his pre&s;ence, and Ble&s;&s;ing, though <HI>I&s;rael</HI> abode ob&s;tinate, <HI>Ezek.</HI> 3. 8, 9, 19.&mdash;</P>
<P N="2">2. There were a Remnant that attended upon the Word of the Lord from his Mouth, to whom God made it a ble&s;&s;ing.</P>
<P>But he is upon &s;econd thoughts willing to wave this, and denies the <HI>Minor.</HI></P>
<P>He tells us, <HI>That the Saints have a promi&s;e of a Spiritual Ble&s;&s;ing by hearing the&s;e men, while they preach the Go&s;pel;</HI> which he proves from <HI>I&s;a.</HI> 55. 3. <HI>Luke</HI> 11. 28.</P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. The former place relates not at all to a meer external hearing, or an outward attendment upon that Ordinance; nor doth the latter, but an obediential giving up our &s;elves unto the Word of God.</P>
<P>Yet, 2. they both imply an hearing according to the appointment of the Lord, which if we do not, but go out of his way, at<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">ending up|on a fal&s;e Mini&s;try, (as we have proved the pre&s;ent Mini&s;tery of <HI>England</HI> to be) the&s;e words import not the lea&s;t promi&s;e of a ble&s;&s;ing.</P>
<P>3. They may be as well urged to prove an attendment upon the Mi|ni&s;try of <HI>Rome;</HI> and that upon our &s;o doing we had ground <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">o expect it.</P>
<P>He adds, 2dly, <HI>The experience of former times tells us, that more have been converted, &s;trengthened&mdash;by Conformi&s;ts, yea Bi&s;hops them&s;elves, than by the be&s;t of Separati&s;ts.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;.</HI> 1. Of this the <HI>Animadverter</HI> is no competent Judge; Refor|mation to civility, is not Regeneration, Conver&s;ion to Chri&s;t and Ho|line&s;s. 2. Should it be granted, all that could be inferred from hence were this, that God did of meer Grace honour his own Word for the conver&s;ion of &s;inners,&mdash;not that we have any ground to expect a ble&s;|&s;ing upon our attendment on that fal&s;e Mini&s;try, by wh<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">m 'tis di&s;|pen&s;ed.</P>
<P>We &s;ay in S. T. <HI>To prove a promi&s;e of a ble&s;&s;ing&mdash;upon our attendment on the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters, we conceive is no ea&s;ie task for any to do; for the&s;e Rea&s;ons.</HI></P>
<P N="1"><PB N="415" REF="211"> 1. <HI>The ble&s;&s;ing of the Lord is upon Sion,</HI> P&s;al. 87. 2. <HI>&amp;</HI> 78. 68. <HI>There he dwells,</HI> P&s;al. 9. 11. &amp; 74. 2. Jer. 8. 19. I&s;a. 8. 18. Joel 3. 17, 21. <HI>The pre&s;ence of Chri&s;t is in the mid&s;t of his Golden Candle&s;ticks,</HI> Rev. 1. 12, 13. &amp; 2. 1. <HI>'Tis his Garden in which he feedeth and dwells,</HI> Cant. 6. 2. <HI>&amp;</HI> 8. 13. And we are not &s;urer of any thing than we are of this, that the A&s;&s;emblies of <HI>England,</HI> in their pre&s;ent con&s;titution are not the <HI>Si|on</HI> of God, his Candle&s;tick, his Garden, but a very wilderne&s;s, and that <HI>Babel,</HI> out of which the Lord commands his People to ha&s;ten their e&s;cape, <HI>Rev.</HI> 18. 4.</P>
<P N="2">2. <HI>God never promi&s;eth a Ble&s;&s;ing to a people waiting upon him in that way which is polluted, and not of his appointment,</HI> (as we have proved the Wor&s;hip of <HI>England</HI> to be.)</P>
<P N="3">3. <HI>The Lord hath expre&s;ly &s;aid,</HI> concerning &s;uch as run before they are &s;ent, <HI>that they &s;hall not profit the people,</HI> Jer. 23. 32.</P>
<P N="4">4. He profe&s;&s;eth, <HI>that &s;uch as refu&s;e to obey his calls, to come out of</HI> Ba|bylon, <HI>&s;hall partake of her plagues,</HI> Rev. 18. 4.</P>
<P N="5">5. <HI>Where the Lord is not in re&s;pect of his &s;pecial pre&s;ence and Grace, there is no ground to expect any ble&s;&s;ing: But God is not &s;o in the mid&s;t of the Parochial A&s;&s;emblies of</HI> England: Where are the Souls that are converted, comforted, &s;trengthened, &s;tabli&s;hed by their Mini&s;try?&mdash;</P>
<P>To which Mr. <HI>T.</HI> an&s;wers, 1. <HI>The fir&s;t rea&s;on is a fond application of what is &s;aid of Gods dwelling in</HI> Sion, <HI>(meant of his &s;pecial pre&s;ence there, in that his Temple and Service was upon that Hill, in the time of the Old Te&s;tament) to the Congregational Churches, exclu&s;ively to the A&s;&s;emblies of</HI> England, <HI>who in their pre&s;ent con&s;titution are not the</HI> Sion <HI>of God.&mdash;</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. Will Mr. <HI>T.</HI> &s;tand to this, that by the Lords dwelling in <HI>Sion,</HI> we are to under&s;tand nothing more than his pre&s;ence in the Tem|ple with his people of old wor&s;hipping there? This he &s;eems immedi|ately to retract, whil&s;t he cites the A&s;&s;embly in their Annotations on <HI>Heb.</HI> 12. 22. making Mount <HI>Sion</HI> a Type of the Go&s;pel-Church, with approbation.</P>
<P N="2">2. That the People of <HI>I&s;rael</HI> were Typical of the Saints in Go&s;pel-dayes, we have already demon&s;trated; <HI>Sion</HI> was &s;o.</P>
<P>1&s;t. Their A&s;&s;emblies are call'd, the <HI>A&s;&s;emblies of Mount</HI> Sion, I&s;a. 4. 5.</P>
<P>2dly, The &s;olemn inve&s;tment of Chri&s;t into the exerci&s;e of King|&s;hip, and regal Authority over them, is call'd, <HI>The Lords &s;etting his King upon Sion,</HI> or <HI>over Sion, the Mountain of his Holine&s;s,</HI> P&s;al. 2. 6.</P>
<P>3dly, Saints, Believers, are call'd <HI>Sion&mdash;</HI>P&s;al. 146. 10. &amp; 147. 12. &amp; 149. 2.</P>
<PB N="416" REF="212">
<P> 4thly, The New-Te&s;tament Churches are call'd <HI>his Temple,</HI> 2 Cor. 6. 16.&mdash;with allu&s;ion to the Temple that was built upon M<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">unt <HI>Mori|ah,</HI> one of the Mountains of <HI>Sion;</HI> to which the true Wor&s;hip of God was affixed, not only in oppo&s;ition to the Heathen Wor&s;hip of the Na|tions, but the Wor&s;hip of the Apo&s;tatick ten Tribes under <HI>Jeroboam,</HI> the infamous head of their Apo&s;tacy; as to the&s;e the true Wor&s;hip of God is fixed, in oppo&s;ition to the Antichri&s;tian wor&s;hip of the Mother-Church of <HI>Rome</HI> and her Daughters.</P>
<P>5thly, Mount Sion is call'd the <HI>Holy Hill,&mdash;</HI>the people that Wor&s;hip there, <HI>an holy People;&mdash;</HI>evidently expre&s;&s;ive of the quali|fications of the Church-Members in the times of the Go&s;pel, as we have proved.</P>
<P>6thly, As <HI>Sion</HI> was typical of Go&s;pel-Churches, &s;o was <HI>Babylon</HI> of fal&s;e Antichri&s;tian-Churches, who are her very Picture, (the Church of <HI>England</HI> is &s;o) as 'twere ea&s;ie to demon&s;trate. That Old <HI>Babylon</HI> was given to &s;uper&s;tiaion, and &s;elf-invented-wor&s;hip, <HI>Jer.</HI> 50. 38. &amp; 51. 44. <HI>I&s;a.</HI> 46. 1. (bottom'd upon no better Authority than traditi|on and antiquity) compell'd others to Uniformity in her fal&s;e wor&s;hip under Penal Laws and Statutes, <HI>Dan.</HI> 3. 3, 6. was cruel and tyrannical again&s;t the People of God, <HI>Jer.</HI> 51. 25. <HI>I&s;a.</HI> 14. 17. &amp; 47. 6. <HI>Jer.</HI> 50. 33. and would not permit them to build the Temple at <HI>Jeru&s;alem,</HI> and wor&s;hip God there according to his appointment; that in an<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">wer here|unto the fal&s;e Antichri&s;tian Church, or <HI>New-Babel</HI> is de&s;cribed, as given to &s;uper&s;tition, and &s;elf-invented-wor&s;hip, <HI>Rev.</HI> 13. 14. &amp; 17. 5. com|pelling others to uniformity thereunto under Penal Laws and Statutes, <HI>Rev.</HI> 13. 15, 16, 17. &amp; 17. 2. &amp; 18. 3, 9. mo&s;t cruel and tyrannical again&s;t the Saints, who cannot conform to her Inventions, <HI>Rev.</HI> 13. 7, 10, 15. &amp; 16. 6. &amp; 17. 6. &amp; 18. 24. is &s;o evident, that none can deny it.</P>
<P>So that, 7thly, except Mr. <HI>T.</HI> can prove the A&s;&s;emblies of <HI>England,</HI> in their pre&s;ent con&s;titution, to be Go&s;pel-Churches, they are not the <HI>Sion</HI> of God, nor to be accounted &s;o.</P>
<P>Of this we have already &s;poken, and &s;hall only add, <HI>Tho&s;e Churches that have no an&s;werablene&s;s to Mount Sion, the Type of the true Go&s;pel-Churches, but are the very Picture of old Babylon, the Type of Antichri&s;ti|an Churches, are not the Go&s;pel-Churches typed out by Mount Sion, but the Babel, out of which 'tis the duty of the Lords People to flie, in whom God dwels not. But National-Churches are not an&s;werable to Mount Sion, but old Babel. Therefore.&mdash;</HI></P>
<P>Look upon <HI>Sion,</HI> con&s;ider her diligently; 1. She was an Holy Moun|tain or Hill, <HI>P&s;al.</HI> 2. 6. &amp; 15. 1. where the holy People dwelt.</P>
<PB N="417" REF="212">
<P> 2dly, There was the Temple of God built according to his appoint|ment, of hewen &s;tone ready fitted and prepared,&mdash;precious co&s;tly &s;tones, 2 <HI>Chron.</HI> 3. 6.</P>
<P>3dly, There was the Wor&s;hip of God managed by Officers of his own, according to his own direction and appointment. What more evident then that National Churches, the Church of <HI>England,</HI> is mo&s;t unlike hereunto? May it be call'd an Holy Hill? rather a Mountain of Corruption. Are its Members an Holy People? What le&s;s? A Gene|ration of Athei&s;ts, Drunkards, Swearers, Adulterers and Adultere&s;&s;es cannot be &s;o accounted. If God's Wor&s;hip managed according to his own appointment, by Officers of his own in their A&s;&s;emblies, we have proved the contrary. Are not they the very Picture of old <HI>Babylon</HI> in their &s;elf-invented Wor&s;hip, rigid pre&s;&s;ing of Uniformity under Penal Laws, the onely &s;upport of their Service, and murdering the Children of the Lord who di&s;&s;ent from them? All that know any thing, know the&s;e things to be &s;o. Nor can they be called his Candle&s;ticks, who are not of pure Gold, fa&s;hioned in all re&s;pects (&s;o near as humane frailty will admit) according to the Idea and platform given forth in the Scriptures of Truth, upon which account the New-Te&s;tament-Churches are &s;o called, with allu&s;ion to <HI>Exod.</HI> 25. 31. but the contra|ry: Their matter for the mo&s;t part is Reprobate Silver, the very dro&s;s of the Earth, and &s;cum of the World, in&s;tead of pure Gold. They are formed according to the devices of men, laid in a &s;ub&s;ervency to their pride, arrogancy, and lu&s;ts; of them we have not the lea&s;t print in the Scriptures, nor for &s;ome Ages after, as we have proved. Nor can they be called his Garden, being con&s;tituted of &s;uch as were never cho&s;en, and &s;eparated by him from the re&s;t of the World, in who&s;e hearts the Fruits of Paradi&s;e are not planted, as their outward deportment &s;hews, who are not dre&s;&s;ed by him, nor bring forth fruit to him, who are not inclo&s;ed by his own Rules, but the Canon-Law of Antichri&s;t his profe&s;&s;ed Ene|my. His an&s;wer to the following Rea&s;ons hath nothing in it but what we have already con&s;idered.</P>
<P>To the Que&s;tion, <HI>Where are the Souls that are converted, comforted, &s;trengthened, &s;tabli&s;hed, that are waiting at the doors of their Hou&s;e?</HI></P>
<P>He An&s;wers, 1. <HI>That though there were none &s;uch, yet this proves not God not to be pre&s;ent in them (in re&s;pect of his &s;pecial pre&s;ence and Grace.)</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. This I confe&s;s is to me a mo&s;t &s;trange Paradox, that no Souls &s;hould be converted, comforted, &s;trengthened, &s;tabli&s;hed in the Parochial A&s;&s;emblies of <HI>England,</HI> and yet God be pre&s;ent there in re|&s;pect of his &s;pecial Pre&s;ence and Grace; when the&s;e things are as much
<PB N="418" REF="213"> the proper i&s;&s;ues of &s;uch a pre&s;ence, as light and heat are of the &s;hin|ing of the Sun in its brightne&s;s.</P>
<P N="2">2. The Scriptures cited by him are impertinent; 1. Becau&s;e they expre&s;ly relate to the people of the Jews, to whom (I &s;peak with re&s;pect to the body and bulk of them as a Church National) God gave not of his &s;pecial Pre&s;ence and Grace; at that day he had blinded them, <HI>I&s;a.</HI> 6. 9, 10. <HI>John</HI> 12. 40. 2. Becau&s;e notwith&s;tanding tho&s;e complaints, there were &s;ome, yea many, converted, comforted, &s;trengthened, &s;ta|bli&s;hed. <HI>I&s;a.</HI> 49. 4. is a Prophe&s;ie of Chri&s;t. Were none converted by him? <HI>I&s;a.</HI> 53. 1. <HI>John</HI> 12. 38. <HI>Rom.</HI> 10. 16. <HI>I&s;a.</HI> 65. 2. <HI>Rom.</HI> 10. 21. <HI>Mich.</HI> 7. 1. <HI>Luke</HI> 7. 31.<HI>&mdash;Mat.</HI> 23. 37. are the complaints of the Lord, and his Me&s;&s;engers again&s;t the Church of the Jews for their ob&s;tinacy again&s;t Go&s;pel tenders of Grace and Love; but &s;ay not that God was with that Church in re&s;pect of his &s;pecial Pre&s;ence and Grace, which had he been, they had mo&s;t a&s;&s;uredly believed and obeyed the Go&s;pel, nor do they intimate that there were none converted.&mdash;We read of many, yea of &s;ome thou&s;ands converted&mdash;by Chri&s;t and his Apo&s;tles, notwith&s;tanding the&s;e complaints.</P>
<P>What follows, being an heap of impertinencies, we might omit. 1. We de&s;ign not to beget enmity and prejudices in the minds of men again&s;t the pre&s;ent Mini&s;try, they them&s;elves for the mo&s;t part are the occa&s;ion hereof, by their covetou&s;ne&s;s and debauchery. 2. We know not any of the Churches of whom they may &s;ay you are the Seal of our Mini&s;try.&mdash;3. Our groans to the Lord are for poor <HI>England,</HI> that God would &s;hew mercy to it, and give them hearts to receive the Truth in the love of it: We hope he hath a great Harve&s;t yet to reap in the mid&s;t of us, and we are ince&s;&s;antly praying him to &s;end forth La|bourers into his Harve&s;t. Though to be plain, we think not that God will u&s;e any in this work of gathering Souls to Chri&s;t, who come with an Antichri&s;tian Call, and the Wooden Sword of a Common-Prayer-Book and Homilie under their Arms, which will never pierce &s;o much as skin deep; but &s;uch as come with a glorious Go&s;pel-Unction upon them, the great Character of Go&s;pel-Mini&s;ters. 4. He grants, That a &s;ad Spirit of withering and vi&s;ible decaies are to be found upon the Auditors of the Mini&s;ters; but reflects upon the Congregational Churches. To which I &s;hall only &s;ay, That through the good pre&s;ence of God with them, things are far otherwi&s;e with them than this <HI>Ani|madverters</HI> words import. They meet with choice Springs of Life, and Royal e&s;tabli&s;hments from the God of Glory; the &s;<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">out of the
<PB N="419" REF="213"> King, the Lord of Ho&s;ts, is many times heard in the mid&s;t of them, and they tryumph gloriou&s;ly in him.</P>
</DIV3>
<DIV3 N="4" TYPE="section">
<HEAD><HI>Sect.</HI> 4.</HEAD>
<ARGUMENT>
<P><HI>The</HI> 12^t^h <HI>Argument again&s;t hearing the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters, vindicated. 'Tis one &s;tep to Apo&s;tacy, proved.</HI> Heb. 10. 25. <HI>con&s;idered. Some Rea&s;ons why per&s;ons may not hear Parochial Mini&s;ters as formerly. Mr.</HI> T. <HI>his An&s;wers to the Queries in</HI> S. T. <HI>con&s;idered. His agreement with</HI> Bellar|mine <HI>in the qualification of Church-Members, evinced.</HI></P>
</ARGUMENT>
<P>THE 12^t^h Argument produced in <HI>S. T.</HI> for the proof of the unlaw|fulne&s;s of hearing the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters of <HI>England,</HI> is this, <HI>That, the doing whereof is one &s;tep to Apo&s;tacy, is not lawful to be done. But the hearing the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters of</HI> England, <HI>is one &s;tep to Apo&s;tacy. There|fore&mdash;</HI></P>
<P>To which Mr. <HI>T.</HI> adjoyns, <HI>Sect.</HI> 9. 1. <HI>If the</HI> Major <HI>be under&s;tood of Apo&s;tacy from the living God, and the Chri&s;tian Faith, it's true; if of the Congregational Principles and Practices, it's fal&s;e.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. The Congregational Principles and Practices we have in this Treati&s;e, in part proved to be from God, others have done it more largely; that 'tis lawful to do that which is a &s;tep to Apo&s;tacy from the In&s;titutions of God or Chri&s;t, Mr. <HI>T.</HI> will not, out of the heat of di&s;|pute, a&s;&s;ert.</P>
<P N="2">2. Apo&s;tacy from one In&s;titution of Chri&s;t, to the imbracement of the traditions of men, is one &s;tep to Apo&s;tacy from God, and the Chri&s;tian Faith, tending indeed to Super&s;tition and down-right Athe|i&s;m. 'Tis no le&s;s than a rejection of the Authority of Chri&s;t, and e&s;pou|&s;ing to our &s;elves other Lords. The rejection of this one Principle founded in the Law of Nature and Grace, that God is to be wor&s;hip|ped &s;olely according to that Revelation he is plea&s;ed to make of his mind and will, touching his Wor&s;hip in the World, was what lay at the bottom of all that Apo&s;tacy, that from the beginning hath been in the World, as is known. And inded that Spirit which leads me to a depar|ture from any one In&s;titution of Chri&s;t, will lead me (if Grace pre|vent not) to a rejection or corrupting of all the re&s;t. Tho&s;e who laid the fir&s;t &s;tone of the Antichri&s;tian Fab<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="3 letters">k, never thought it would have grown to &s;uch a <HI>Babel</HI> of horrible Abominations as its grown to. The beginning of great evils are certainly to be re&s;i&s;ted, a departure from any one In&s;titution of Chri&s;t is a great evil. So that the <HI>Major</HI> cannot be denied.</P>
<PB N="420" REF="214">
<P> The <HI>Minor,</HI> or &s;econd Propo&s;ition, <HI>That the hearing the pre&s;<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">nt Mini|&s;ters is one &s;tep to Apo&s;tacy,</HI> we manife&s;t in <HI>S. T.</HI> becau&s;e, 1. it cannot be done (e&s;pecially by per&s;ons of Congregational Principles) without a relinqui&s;hment of Principles owned by them, as received from God: That the Church of <HI>England,</HI> as National, is a Church of the In&s;tituti|on of Chri&s;t, that per&s;ons not call'd to the Office of the M<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">ni&s;try by the Saints, are rightful Mini&s;ters of Chri&s;t, mu&s;t be owned, and taken for granted, ere the Con&s;cience can acquie&s;ce in hearing the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters (for we &s;uppo&s;e it will not be a&s;&s;erted by tho&s;e with whom we have to do, that there can be a true Mini&s;try in a <HI>fal&s;e Church,</HI> o<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter"> that fal&s;e Mini&s;ters may be heard, &amp; yet the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters are <HI>Mini&s;<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">ers</HI> in, and of the National Church of <HI>England,</HI> and were never &s;olemnly deputed to that Office by the Suffrage of the Lord's People, (to which Mr. <HI>T.</HI> faith nothing that de&s;erves our &s;tay,) 2. Nor can it be done without the neg|lect of that duty, which with others is of the appointment of Chri&s;t, to &s;ecure from Apo&s;tacy, <HI>Heb.</HI> 10. 25. <HI>viz.</HI> the Saints a&s;&s;embling them|&s;elves together as a people dictinct from the World and its A&s;&s;emblies, to exhort and edifie one another.&mdash;</P>
<P>To which our <HI>Animadverter</HI> replies, 1. <HI>They may hear the Mini&s;ters, and do the duty enjoyned,</HI> Heb. 10. 25. <HI>they may do the one &s;ome hours, and the other &s;ome other.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. But the Scripture in&s;tanc'd in, requires as freq<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">ent an at|tendment upon this duty as may be, which whil&s;t they are hearing the Mini&s;ters they mu&s;t neglect. 2. It commands that they go not forth to meet with any other than them&s;elves, <HI>not for&s;aking the a&s;&s;embling of your &s;elves together.&mdash;</HI></P>
<P><HI>Yea,</HI> but 2dly, <HI>they were Hebrew Infidels, from whom the Apo&s;tle would have them meet as a body di&s;tinct.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> And they are Chri&s;tian Infidels, (for the vi&s;ibly wicked, and prophane, are notwith&s;tanding their a&s;&s;umed Chri&s;tianity, <GAP DESC="foreign">, un|believers, or Infidels) from whom we would have Saints now to meet as a body di&s;tinct; for as to any that fear God in the A&s;&s;emblies of <HI>England,</HI> it would be the joy and rejoycing of our Souls to &s;ee them for|&s;aking them, we &s;hould gladly receive them into our Communion, and in the mean while we love and tender them; nor do we &s;eparate any more from them than they do f<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="2 letters">m us. If tho&s;e that &s;eparated them|&s;elves, <HI>Heb.</HI> 10. 25. departed to <HI>Judai&s;m,</HI> the people of <HI>England</HI> are de|parted to <HI>Antichri&s;tiani&s;m,</HI> (a mixture of Judai&s;m and Heat<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">eni&s;m) in|a&s;much as they embrace the very Wor&s;hip, Modes, and Rites of Anti|chri&s;t.</P>
<PB N="421" REF="214">
<P> To what he adds, <HI>That he &s;ees no rea&s;on why per&s;ons of Congregational Principles may not hear Parochial Mini&s;ters as formerly.</HI></P>
<P>We An&s;wer, 1. They are not the &s;ame per&s;ons, have not the &s;ame gifts, qualifications. 2. They pretend to pre&s;s after the work of Re|formation, the&s;e have prote&s;ted again&s;t it. 3. They came with the Word of God, the&s;e with the In&s;truments of fooli&s;h Shepherds, the Common-Prayer-Book and Surplice. 4. They abhorred the Inventi|ons of men in Wor&s;hip; the&s;e plead for, imbrace, promi&s;e obedience to them; which are &s;ome of tho&s;e many Rea&s;ons may be given of per&s;ons refu&s;ing to hear in Parochial A&s;&s;emblies as formerly.</P>
<P>To the Queries propo&s;ed in <HI>S. T.</HI> he an&s;wers, <HI>Sect.</HI> 10. 1. <HI>Whether the Lord Je&s;us be not the alone Head, King and Law-giver to his Church?</HI> To which he replies, meaning it of the &s;upream ab&s;olute Independent Head,<HI>&mdash;He is.</HI> Which is no more than what <HI>Bellarmine</HI> him&s;elf grants; a very Papi&s;tical An&s;wer. There are other Heads of the Church, (it &s;eems) though Chri&s;t be the alone Supream&mdash;Of this matter we have al|ready &s;poken.</P>
<P>The &s;econd, <HI>Whether the Laws,&mdash;Orders, and Ordinances of Chri&s;t be not faithfully to be kept, though all the Princes in the World &s;hould inter|dict and forbid it?</HI></P>
<P>He An&s;wers, <HI>They are.</HI> Whereby he ju&s;tifies the men of his indig|nation, in their Non-conformity, &s;eparation from the pre&s;ent Mini|&s;ters, and Wor&s;hip&mdash;notwith&s;tanding the Edicts of men to the contra|ry, till he be able to remove out of the way what they produce to prove their practice herein to be according to the Orders and In&s;titutions of Chri&s;t.</P>
<P>To the third, <HI>Whether to introduce other Laws for the Government of the Church of Chri&s;t, and the Wor&s;hip of his Hou&s;e, be not an high advance again&s;t, and intru&s;ion into his King&s;hip and Head&s;hip?</HI></P>
<P>He replies, <HI>No; If they be no other than &s;uch as are &s;hewed to be war|ranted in this an&s;wer to the Preface,</HI> Sect. 8. 20. <HI>to</HI> Chap. 1. Sect. 3. <HI>to</HI> Chap. 5. <HI>Sect.</HI> 11, 12.&mdash;</P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> The unwarrantablene&s;s of his Warrant we have di&s;covered in our An&s;wer to the places quoted by him.</P>
<P>To the fourth, <HI>Whether the Lord Je&s;us, as King and Head over his Church, hath not in&s;tituted &s;ufficient Officers and Offices for the admini|&s;tration of holy things in his Hou&s;e, to whom no more can be added, without a de&s;perate undervaluation and contempt of his Wi&s;dom, Head&s;hip, and So|vereignty over it?</HI></P>
<PB N="422" REF="215">
<P> He An&s;wers, <HI>Some &s;ervants and &s;ervices may be appointed by Rulers with|out &s;uch an undervaluation.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> If by <HI>Servants&mdash;</HI>he under&s;tand Church-Officers, (as he mu&s;t if he &s;peak pertinently, the enquiry being of them) he would have done well to have proved his dictate; we can &s;ee no foundation for it in Scripture or Rea&s;on; but believe had he &s;etled his Family, and ap|pointed every one their Place and Office in it, he would account others appointing new Officers, and Offices, that he thought no<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter"> of, and in|troducing them without his con&s;ent as nece&s;&s;ary to the well-being of his Family, &s;uch a di&s;valuation as that intimated. Of this we <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">ave already treated.</P>
<P>To the 5^t^h. Whether <HI>Officers</HI> in&s;tituted by Chri&s;t are not only <HI>Pa&s;tors, Teachers, Deacons</HI> and <HI>Helpers,</HI> he replies; <HI>I find not Helper<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter"> Officers in|&s;tituted by Chri&s;t, but others I find here mentioned,</HI> 1 Cor. 12. 28. Eph. 4. 11.</P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. Of helpers you may read, <HI>Rom.</HI> 16. 3, 9. 2. There are indeed other Officers mentioned of Chri&s;t's In&s;titution in the places cited by him, but they being &s;uch as are confe&s;&s;edly gone off the Stage, we purpo&s;ely omitted them. Tho&s;e mention'd, are the alone known&s;tand|ing Officers in the Churches of Chri&s;t; directions touching who&s;e qua|lifications, Election, Office, Work, are laid down in the Scriptures.</P>
<P>To the 6^t^h, Whether the Offices of <HI>Arch-Bi&s;hops, Lord-Bi&s;hops, Deans, Subdeans, Prebendaries, Chancellors, Prie&s;ts, Deacons,</HI> (as the fir&s;t &s;tep to a Prie&s;thood) <HI>Arch-Deacons, Subdeacons, Commi&s;&s;aries, Offi|cials, Proctors, Regi&s;ters, Apparitors, Par&s;ons, Vicars, Curats, Canons, Petty-Canons, Go&s;pellers, Epi&s;tolers, Chanters, Virgers, Organ-players, Que|ri&s;ters,</HI> be Officers any where in&s;tituted by the Lord Je&s;us in the Scrip|ture? He An&s;wers, <HI>Some are, &s;ome are not.</HI> See the An&s;wer to <HI>Chap.</HI> 3.</P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> To our Reply thereunto, we refer the Reader for &s;atisfaction in this matter.</P>
<P>To the 7th, Whether the Calling and admi&s;&s;ion into the<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">e la&s;t men|tioned Offices, their Admini&s;tration and Maintenance, now had and re|ceived in <HI>England,</HI> be according to the Word of God; he replies, <HI>This is an&s;wered before in &s;undry places.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> The vanity of his An&s;wers we have already di&s;covered.</P>
<P>To the 8th, Whether every true vi&s;ible, particular Church of Chri&s;t be not a &s;elect company of People, called and &s;eparated from the world and the fal&s;e wor&s;hip thereof, by the Spirit and Word of God, and joyn|ed together in the fellow&s;hip of the Go&s;pel, by their own free and vo|luntary con&s;ent, giving up them&s;elves to Chri&s;t, and one another, ac|cording
<PB N="423" REF="215"> to the will of God; He an&s;wers, <HI>The terms are &s;o ambiguou&s;ly u&s;ed, that in &s;ome &s;ence it may be an&s;wered Affirmatively, in &s;ome Nega|tively.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> We have already explained the terms, and demon&s;trated the truth of the Que&s;tion in the Affirmative, in all the branches thereof.</P>
<P>To the 9th, Whether a company of People living in a Pari&s;h, though the mo&s;t of them, be vi&s;ible Drunkards and Swearers,&mdash;or at lea&s;t &s;trangers to the work of Regeneration upon their &s;ouls, coming by com|pul&s;ion or otherwi&s;e to the hearing of publick Prayers or Preaching, are in the Scripture account Saints, and the Church of Chri&s;t according to the pattern given forth by him,&mdash;He an&s;wers, <HI>If their Faith be right, they are: i. e.</HI> if I mi&s;take not, <HI>If they a&s;&s;ent to the Doctrine of the Church of</HI> England, <HI>if they own no other Doctrinals but what are right</HI> (for as to true &s;aving Faith, the per&s;ons de&s;cribed are undoubtedly &s;trangers to it, 'tis impo&s;&s;ible but they &s;hould be &s;o whil&s;t they abide &s;uch.) Now I be|lieve never man in the world gave &s;uch an account of Saints; Saint Drunkard, and St. Swearer, and St. Whorema&s;ter, &s;ounds but har&s;h in the ears of men of under&s;tanding, they them&s;elves will &s;wear they are no Saints. That external profe&s;&s;ion of Faith is &s;ufficient to con&s;titute a per&s;on a Church-Member, <HI>Bellarmine</HI> indeed affirms (it may be Mr. <HI>T.</HI> received his notion from him) and is therein oppo&s;ed by the learn|ed <HI>Whitaker,</HI> who cites that &s;aying of <HI>Augu&s;t. Collat.</HI> 3. <HI>cum Donat. The Church is one Body, in which is both a Soul and Body; the Soul is the inter|nal gifts of the Holy Gho&s;t,</HI> i. e. <HI>the internal graces: The Body is the exter|nal profe&s;&s;ion of Faith, and Communion of Sacraments.</HI> And <HI>Sutliffe,</HI> one of their own, &s;aith better. <HI>To the Church not only profe&s;&s;ion of Faith, but al&s;o holine&s;s is required.</HI> If the per&s;ons characterized by us, are not the Church of Chri&s;t, the Bride the Lambs Wife, (as we have proved they are not) they mu&s;t be accounted Daughters of the old Whore, and <HI>Ba|bel,</HI> &s;poken of in the Scripture.</P>
<P>To the 10th, Whether in &s;uch a Church there is (or can rationally be &s;uppo&s;ed to be) a true Mini&s;try of the In&s;titution of Chri&s;t? He replies, <HI>It may:</HI> But we have proved the contrary:</P>
<P>To the 11th, Whether the Book of <HI>Common-Prayer,</HI> or &s;tinted <HI>Litur|gies</HI> be of the pre&s;cription of Chri&s;t, and not of mans devi&s;ing and in|vention? he &s;aith, <HI>The Wor&s;hip or matter for the greatest part of the Com|mon-Prayer-Book is of Chri&s;t, though the method and Form of Words be of men.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. Mode&s;tly &s;poken however; The whole of the matter of the <HI>Common-Prayer-Book</HI> he &s;eems to grant is not of God, though the
<PB N="424" REF="216"> greate&s;t part he thinks is. 2. Sufficiently impertinent! 'tis the method and Form of words that is the <HI>Liturgie</HI> or &s;tinted Service, to the&s;e men are tied; If the&s;e are not of Chri&s;t, as he grants, their <HI>Liturgie</HI> is not.</P>
<P>To the 12th, Whether &s;ome part of the Wor&s;hip u&s;ed by a People be polluted, the whole of the Wor&s;hip be not to be look'd upon in a Scripture account as polluted and abominable, according to 1 <HI>King.</HI> 18. 21. 2 <HI>King.</HI> 17. 33. <HI>I&s;a.</HI> 66. 3. <HI>Ho&s;.</HI> 4. 15. <HI>Ezek</HI> 43. 8. <HI>Zeph.</HI> 1. 5. So that if their Prayers be nought and polluted, their Preaching be not &s;o to? He an&s;wers; <HI>No, nor is any &s;uch thing &s;aid in the&s;e Texts.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> Let the Reader con&s;ult them, and he will find that they con|demn the whole of the Wor&s;hip (though they did &s;omwhat that was, for the matter of it, right and of the appointment of the Lord) as pollu|ted and accur&s;ed, becau&s;e &s;ome part of it was &s;o. His talk of the Imper|fections of Mini&s;ters in prayer is impertinent; every imperfection in Prayer, renders not the Prayer naught and polluted, in that &s;ence in which we affirm the prayers of the Church of <HI>England,</HI> or their devi&s;ed <HI>Liturgie</HI> to be &s;o, upon the account of its non-in&s;titution by the Lord, and oblation to an Idol.</P>
<P>To the 13th, Whether a Mini&s;try &s;et up in direct oppo&s;ition to a Mi|ni&s;try of Chri&s;t, which ri&s;eth upon its fall, and falls by its ri&s;e, can by &s;uch as &s;o account of it, be lawfully joyned unto? He replies, <HI>No; but they are bound to leave this account, if it be erroneous. An&s;w.</HI> 1. But they think it not to be erroneous: And, 2. Mr. <HI>T.</HI> was lately of their mind, when he &s;wore to extirpate the Hierarchy.</P>
<P>To the 14th, Whether &s;uch as have for&s;worn a Covenant-Reforma|tion according to the Word of God, and &s;wear to a Wor&s;hip that is meerly of humane devi&s;ing, that have nothing of the e&s;&s;entials of a Mi|ni&s;try of Chri&s;t to be found upon them, may be accounted of, as his Mi|ni&s;ters, and be adhered to? He replies, <HI>No.</HI> Wherein he hath given away the Cau&s;e pleaded for by him. The Mini&s;ters of <HI>England</HI> are known (and we have evinced it in this Treati&s;e) to be per&s;ons of the Complexion intimated.</P>
<P>To the 15th, VVhether &s;uch as &s;hall do &s;o be not guilty of ca&s;ting contempt upon the In&s;titutions of Chri&s;t, and di&s;obedience again&s;t his Ro<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">al Edicts, commanding them to &s;eparate from per&s;ons of the com|plexion intimated? He &s;aith, <HI>They would be if they &s;hould do &s;o wittingly and willingly.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> But if they do it ignorantly, (though their &s;in be not &s;o great) the action it &s;elf ca&s;ting contempt upon the In&s;titutions of Chri&s;t, they are guilty hereof.</P>
<PB N="425" REF="216">
<P> And thus far in Reply to Mr. <HI>T.</HI> his An&s;wers to Arguments and Que|&s;tions propo&s;ed.</P>
<P>His next attempt is to make good the <HI>Cata&s;ceua&s;tick</HI> part of this Di&s;|pute; how well he di&s;chargeth that Province, &s;hall be con&s;idered in the next Chapter.</P>
</DIV3>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="11" TYPE="chapter">
<HEAD>CHAP. XI.</HEAD>
<DIV3 N="1" TYPE="section">
<HEAD><HI>Sect.</HI> 1.</HEAD>
<ARGUMENT>
<P>Mat. 23. 1, 2. <HI>explained</HI> Mr. <HI>T. his two Arguments drawn from thence to prove the lawfulne&s;s of hearing the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters, refuted. Whe|ther the Scribes and Phari&s;ees were Teachers and Expounders of the Law.</HI> Mr. <HI>T. his proofs thereof examined. The Titles of Rabbi, Doctor, Ma|&s;ter, Father,</HI> <GAP DESC="foreign"> <HI>not peculiar to Eccle&s;ia&s;tical Officers. Of their paying Tythes,</HI> Mat. 12. 18. <HI>If they were Mini&s;ters, they were lawful Mini&s;ters, proved. Chri&s;t doth not command or permit his Di&s;ciples to hear them, demon&s;trated. Of the true reading of the words.</HI> Mr. <HI>T. his mi&s;takes manife&s;ted.</HI></P>
</ARGUMENT>
<P>THE fir&s;t attempt of Mr. <HI>T.</HI> in his 10th <HI>Chap.</HI> is to vindicate the Arguments produced by others, mentioned in <HI>S. T.</HI> as Objecti|ons again&s;t the Truth contended for therein from the An&s;wers we have given thereunto. The fir&s;t whereof is thus propo&s;ed.</P>
<P>Object. 1. <HI>Chri&s;t commands, (or at lea&s;t permits) his Di&s;ciples to hear the Scribes and Phari&s;ees, who were men as corrupt in their Doctrine as viti|ous in their Lives, as the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters of</HI> England <HI>can be &s;uppo&s;ed to be,</HI> Mat. 23. 1, 2. <HI>Therefore its lawful to hear the&s;e.</HI></P>
<P>The <HI>Animadverter,</HI> after many words, which our pre&s;ent ha&s;t admits not our &s;tay to con&s;ider of, (nor is it at all nece&s;&s;ary that we &s;hould do &s;o) draws up a twofold Argument from this Scripture.</P>
<P>Arg. 1. <HI>That hearing of Mini&s;ters again&s;t which there is no more ju&s;t exception than was again&s;t the hearing the Scribes and Phari&s;ees,&mdash;is law|full for Chri&s;tian Saints now: But there is no more ju&s;t exception again&s;t</HI>
<PB N="426" REF="217"> <HI>hearing the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters of</HI> England <HI>than was again&s;t hearing the Scribes and Phari&s;ees: Therefore.&mdash;</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. We deny the <HI>Major</HI> Propo&s;ition, to the proof whereof we &s;ay, That Chri&s;t allowed not his Di&s;ciples to hear the Scribes and Pha|ri&s;ees, as we prove in <HI>S. T.</HI> 2. The <HI>Minor</HI> al&s;o is &s;hort of Truth; to the proof where of we &s;ay, That the Exceptions again&s;t the pre&s;ent Mi|ni&s;ters are upon &s;ome accounts greater and more ju&s;t than again&s;t the Scribes and Phari&s;ees. Neither of which he attempts the proof of, but prays it may be granted him; which upon the&s;e terms will never be; the contrary we afterwards manife&s;t.</P>
<P>Arg. 2. <HI>That which warranted Chri&s;ts Di&s;ciples hearing the Scribes and Phari&s;ees,&mdash;notwith&s;tanding other defects, warrants the Saints hearing the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters of</HI> England <HI>notwith&s;tanding other defects: But the Scribes and Phari&s;ees preaching the will of God, warranted Chri&s;ts Di&s;ciples hearing the Scribes and Phari&s;ees notwithstanding other defects: There|fore.&mdash;</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. By the very &s;ame Argument the lawfulne&s;s of hearing the Prie&s;ts of <HI>Rome,</HI> the Friars&mdash;may be evinced, for they preach &s;ome &s;ome Truth. 2. We deny his <HI>Minor,</HI> and to the proof thereof &s;ay. 1&s;t, That &s;itting in <HI>Mo&s;es</HI> Chair, is their teaching the ob&s;ervation of Gods Laws, is begg'd by him without the lea&s;t tender of proof. So is, 2dly, That Chri&s;t therefore permitts the Di&s;ciples to hear them becau&s;e they &s;o taught. And, 3dly, That he allowed the hearing them a<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter"> all. Each of which is denied by us: and fail he in the proof thereof, his Argument &s;inks of it &s;elf, as he him&s;elf knows.</P>
<P>To the Objection as propo&s;ed by us, which contains the &s;um of Mr. <HI>T.</HI> his two Arguments, we an&s;wer in <HI>S. T.</HI> That there are &s;ome things which the Objectors take for granted, which are the very Ba&s;is upon which the &s;tre&s;s of the Objection lies, that will never be proved.</P>
<P>As, 1&s;t, 'Tis &s;uppo&s;ed that the Scribes and Phari&s;ees here &s;poken of, were in the Mini&s;terial Seat Teachers and Expounders of the Law. Some of them 'tis granted were, the&s;e here mentioned, are &s;aid to <HI>&s;it in Mo&s;es Seat,</HI> which was the Magi&s;tratical Seat (to the Po&s;terity of <HI>A|aron</HI> the Office of Prie&s;thood did appertain) and are condemned for <HI>neglecting Judgment and Mercy,</HI> things mo&s;t nearly relating to the Of|fice of Magi&s;tracy. Now 'twill not in the lea&s;t follow, that &s;uppo&s;ing Chri&s;t enjoyned his Di&s;ciples to attend upon the Scribes and Phari&s;ees, acting as Magi&s;trates, and conform to what is ju&s;tly and righteou&s;ly pre|&s;cribed by them, as &s;uch; that therefore 'tis lawful to attend upon the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters.</P>
<PB N="427" REF="217">
<P> To which Mr. <HI>T. Sect.</HI> 2. <HI>'Tis &s;uppo&s;ed that the Scribes and Phari&s;ees here &s;poken of, were Teachers and Expounders of the Law:</HI> which he at|tempts the proof of, 1. <HI>Becau&s;e,</HI> ver&s;. 4. 'tis &s;aid, <HI>They bind heavy burdens, and lay them on mens &s;houlders.&mdash;</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> But Mr. <HI>T.</HI> &s;hould have proved, that they did this as expoun|ders of the Law, and not as Magi&s;trates by civil &s;anctions; till when he &s;aith nothing.</P>
<P N="2">2. <HI>They affected to be called of men Rabbi, Ma&s;ters, Fathers, Leaders,</HI> ver&s;. 8, 9, 10.&mdash;</P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> What then? This is no proof that they were Eccle&s;ia&s;tical Officers. 1. They might affect the&s;e Titles and not have them. 2. O|thers be&s;ides &s;uch who were Expounders of the Law had them given to them. 1&s;t, The very words that were &s;poken at the time of the In|ve&s;tment of any into the Title of <HI>Rabbi, viz.</HI> <GAP DESC="foreign">, <HI>Behold thou art promoted, and there is pow|er given to thee of exerci&s;ing capital Judgments;</HI> (which I am &s;ure apper|tained not to them as Expounders of the Law) abundantly evince, that that Title was given to tho&s;e that had authority in things Civil. As is the Title. 2dly, Of <HI>Master, Exod.</HI> 1. 11. 1 <HI>Sam.</HI> 26. 16. 2 <HI>Sam.</HI> 2. 7. 2 <HI>King.</HI> 10. 2, 3, 6. 1 <HI>Sam.</HI> 29. 4. 2 <HI>King.</HI> 9. 31. <HI>&amp;</HI> 19. 4. 1 <HI>Chr.</HI> 12. 19. 3dly, Of <HI>Father,</HI> 1 <HI>Sam.</HI> 24. 12. 1 <HI>King.</HI> 5. 13. <HI>&amp;</HI> 16. 7. In which &s;en&s;e <HI>Machir</HI> is &s;aid to be the Father of <HI>Gilhad, i. e.</HI> the Prince of that Country, 1 <HI>Chr.</HI> 2. 21, 23. And <HI>David</HI> is called the <HI>Father</HI> of the <HI>Jews, Mark</HI> 11. 10. Nor, 4thly, Is it nece&s;&s;ary that we re&s;train the word <GAP DESC="foreign">, <HI>Leaders,</HI> to Eccle&s;ia&s;tical <HI>Leaders</HI> or <HI>Guides,</HI> when it may as propperly be referred to Civil Rulers. 5thly, The Title <GAP DESC="foreign">, <HI>Doctors</HI> or <HI>Teachers,</HI> he tells us, is tran&s;lated, <HI>Ma&s;ter in I&s;rael,</HI> Joh. 3. being applied there to <HI>Nichodemus, who was a Ruler of the Jews, (i. e.</HI> a Civil Ruler among&s;t them.) The other Title, 6thly, <GAP DESC="foreign">, <HI>Blind Guides</HI> (or <HI>Captains)</HI> there is no nece&s;&s;ity that we refer to Ec|cle&s;ia&s;tical Rulers, &s;o that hitherto he fails of the proof of his A&s;&s;er|tion.</P>
<P>He adds, 2dly, <HI>They were not Prie&s;ts, for they paid Tythes,</HI> ver&s;. 23.</P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. This upon the pre&s;ent &s;uppo&s;ition makes rather for, than again&s;t us. If they were not Prie&s;ts, 'tis the more probable they were not Teachers of the People, <HI>who were to &s;eek the Law at their mouthes,</HI> Mal. 2. 7. And if his Argument be good, they were not Prie&s;ts becau&s;e they paid Tythes (whereas the Prie&s;ts were wont to receive Tythes) they were not Levites neither, for to them were Tythes paid, <HI>Neh.</HI> 10. 37. <HI>&amp;</HI> 13. 12. <HI>Heb.</HI> 7. 5. <HI>Numb.</HI> 18. 31. And if neither Prie&s;ts nor
<PB N="428" REF="218"> Levites, lawful Officers, or Expounders of the Law, by virtue of Office|power committed to them by the Lord, they could not be; for to the&s;e only, by virtue thereof, did the Expo&s;ition of the Lay appertain (as is known.)</P>
<P N="2">2. He &s;eems to grant that they were &s;uch ordinary Magi&s;trates as were in the <HI>Jewi&s;h Synedrion,</HI> which is as much as we need plead for. From an attendment upon the <HI>Synedrion</HI> of the <HI>Jews</HI> determining in ca&s;es of Judgment and Ju&s;tice, a lawful attendment on the pre&s;e<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">t Mini&s;ters will never be proved. He him&s;elf afterwards grants, <HI>Tha<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter"> the Scribes and Phari&s;ees were, many of them, Rulers of the Jews;</HI> but, very learnedly tells us, <HI>not as Scribes and Phari&s;ees;</HI> which none ever thought they were, being as he acknowledgeth <HI>particular Sects among the Jews:</HI> That the&s;e here mentioned were not &s;uch, he is not able to demon&s;trate. <HI>They &s;ate in Mo&s;es Seat</HI> as Magi&s;trates, though their juri&s;diction or power was not &s;o great as his.</P>
<P>He adds, <HI>That what we &s;ay &s;ome ob&s;erve, that the&s;e Scribes and Phari|&s;ees are e&s;pecially charged with the omi&s;&s;ion of Judgement and Mercy, things mo&s;t nearly relating to the Office of Magi&s;tracy, to whom it doth e&s;pecially appertain to look thereunto, is frivolous.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> But others think not &s;o, nor hath Mr. <HI>T.</HI> &s;aid any thing to en|cline them to think &s;o. That <GAP DESC="foreign">, <HI>Judgment,</HI> is any where taken for <HI>right ordering the conver&s;ation towards God and man,</HI> he cannot prove; in <HI>Mat.</HI> 12. 18. 'tis not &s;o taken: 'Tis rather taken for the Ruledom and Government of God. Chri&s;t was to publi&s;h true Religion among the Gentiles, and to ca&s;t out Super&s;tition; which thing, where ever it is done, the Lord is &s;aid to Reign and Judge there. And Mr. <HI>T.</HI> can|not be ignorant, that <GAP DESC="foreign">, <HI>Judgment,</HI> is the act, <GAP DESC="foreign">, o<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter"> the <HI>Judge,</HI> or <HI>Magistrate,</HI> <GAP DESC="foreign">, which <HI>pa&s;&s;eth &s;entence,</HI> or <HI>judgeth,</HI> and that this is the proper notation of the word, which its being joyned with Mercy and Faith, <HI>Luke</HI> 11. 42 doth not di&s;prove, except he will &s;uppo&s;e that the&s;e are not to be regarded by Governours in the Admini&s;tration of Ju&s;tice, which they eminently are: Faith or faithfulne&s;s in the di&s;|charge of the tru&s;t committed to them by the Lord, with the exerci&s;e of Mercy and bowels towards the Body and Souls of men, is what e&s;peci|ally becomes a Ruler; &s;o that the ob&s;ervation wants not i<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">s weight.&mdash;</P>
<P>For di&s;putations &s;ake we &s;uppo&s;e in <HI>S. T.</HI> 2. The Scribes and Pha|ri&s;ees to be Teachers and Expounders of the Law at that day; But if &s;uch, they were lawful Church-Officers, of the appointment of the Lord, which we have proved the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters of <HI>England</HI> are not; and therefore a lawfulne&s;s to hear the&s;e, from a lawfulne&s;s to hear them,
<PB N="429" REF="218"> cannot be pleaded; except we grant they were meer intruders into the Mini&s;try, which (upon &s;uppo&s;ition, that they were Mini&s;ters) we can|not yeeld, for the&s;e Rea&s;ons. 1. The Phari&s;ees are expre&s;ly &s;aid to be Prie&s;ts and Levites, <HI>John</HI> 1. 19, 24. which were the ordinary lawful Mini&s;ters of that day.</P>
<P>To which Mr. <HI>T.</HI> Sect. 3. <HI>This onely proves that &s;ome of the Phari&s;ees were Prie&s;ts and Levites, not that all were &s;o.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> True! but the Scripture te&s;tifying there were &s;ome Phari&s;ees that were Prie&s;ts and Levites, when it &s;peaketh of their doing what pe|culiarly, and by way of office, did belong to the Prie&s;ts and Levites; 'tis but rational to interpret it of them, and not of any others.</P>
<P>He adds 2dly, <HI>But if they were Prie&s;ts, it doth not follow that they were the lawful Mini&s;ters of that day.</HI> 1. <HI>Chri&s;ts Apo&s;tles were the lawful Mini&s;ters of that day.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. 'Tis true, they were &s;o, but not of the Jewi&s;h Church, ex|clu&s;ively to others, &s;o that this Allegation is impertinent.</P>
<P>2dly, <HI>It's certain, that the Prie&s;ts of tho&s;e times got their places by bri|bing the Roman Deputy, as</HI> Jo&s;ephus <HI>reports the high Prie&s;t did.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> Grant the high Prie&s;t did &s;o, it doth not follow that the infe|rior Prie&s;ts &s;hould &s;o do, nor doth any Hi&s;torian report &s;o of them.</P>
<P>We add in <HI>S. T.</HI> 2. <HI>The&s;e of all others were mo&s;t apt to que&s;tion the Au|thority of &s;uch as taught the People: So when</HI> John <HI>appears Preaching and Baptizing, and profe&s;&s;es to them that he was not the Chri&s;t,&mdash;they immedi|ately que&s;tion his Authority,</HI> John 1. 25. <HI>which they could not be &s;uppo&s;ed to have the face to do, if they them&s;elves, of all others, had been the greate&s;t intruders.</HI></P>
<P>To which our <HI>Animadverter</HI> &s;aith, <HI>That they did &s;o, is no wonder, for they were puft off with conceits of their Authority and Righteou&s;ne&s;s.&mdash;</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> This is no rea&s;on of his A&s;&s;ertion, they had great Authority among&s;t the people, their outward conver&s;ation was Righteous and blamele&s;s, as &s;aith <HI>Jo&s;ephus, Jewi&s;h Antiq. l.</HI> 18. <HI>c.</HI> 2. &s;o that in this matter they had whereof to glory.</P>
<P>We add, 3dly, <HI>When they que&s;tion Chri&s;t him&s;elf about his Authority, he asks not them from whence they had theirs, which doubtle&s;s upon that occa&s;ion he would have done, had they not been lawfully &s;eated in the Seat they did po&s;&s;e&s;s, but from whence</HI> John <HI>had his, who was e&s;teemed as a Prophet.</HI></P>
<P>To which our Animadverter, <HI>Though Chri&s;t did not then, yet he doth afterwards, calling them a Generation of Vipers, blind Guids; and his charging them with affectation, and ambitious &s;eeking the chief Seats, and</HI>
<PB N="430" REF="219"> <HI>to be called</HI> Rabbi; <HI>What is it but an evidence that they did unlawfully climb into</HI> Mo&s;es <HI>his Seat?</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> A marvelous evidence indeed, which no one in the World would have ('tis likely) lighted on, if it had not been Mr. <HI>T.</HI> his hap to have &s;tumbled on it, nor he him&s;elf if he could el&s;e have told how hand&s;omly to have &s;alved up the matter. 2. Chri&s;t calls them, <HI>Gene|ration of Vipers,&mdash;</HI>therefore he &s;eems to charge them, that they did unlawfully climb into <HI>Mo&s;es</HI> his Seat, (of which he &s;peak<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter"> not one word) is &s;uch an ab&s;urd con&s;equence, as he will not be able ea&s;ily to make good. As if a man &s;hould &s;ay, &s;uch a one is a Drunkard, there|fore he &s;aith he is a Thief; or &s;uch a one affects the title of Batchelor of Divinity, therefore he u&s;urps it; which every one wou<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">d &s;mile at as inconclu&s;ive.</P>
<P>We &s;ay further in <HI>S. T.</HI> 4thly, <HI>We have the Lord Je&s;us many times crying out above all others again&s;t the Phari&s;ees, condemning them of pride, hypocri&s;ie, avarice,&mdash;but not the lea&s;t tittle of the u&s;urpation of</HI> Mo&s;es <HI>his Seat, is by him charged upon them, or in the lea&s;t intimated, which doubt|le&s;s would have been, had they been guilty thereof.</HI></P>
<P>Mr. <HI>T.</HI> replies, 1. <HI>'Tis no wonder that Chri&s;ts charging them herewith is not in expre&s;s tearms related, &s;ith their in&s;tigation of</HI> Herod <HI>to take away</HI> John Bapti&s;ts <HI>life, (related by</HI> Jo&s;ephus) <HI>is not related as impu<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">ed to them by him.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. 'Tis very uncertain whether they were guilty of any &s;uch crime. 2. If they were, it might might not be known. 3. The Scrip|ture gives us another account of <HI>Herod</HI>'s taking away his life, <HI>Mark</HI> 14. 3.&mdash;Therefore probably <HI>Jo&s;ephus</HI> was mi&s;taken.</P>
<P>He adds, 2dly, <HI>How irrational this Argument is, We read not that Chri&s;t charged them with u&s;urpation of</HI> Mo&s;es <HI>Seat, therefore he did it not. every Pung in the Schools knows it, who have learned that rule of Logick, an Argument from Te&s;timony negatively is not of force, e&s;pecially in matters of fact, it is not related, therefore it was not done.&mdash;</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. As irrational as this way of arguing is, it is what is made u&s;e of by as learned <HI>Prote&s;tant</HI> Writers as Mr. <HI>T.</HI> who to prove that the Original Copies of the Scriptures of the Old Te&s;tament were not cor|rupted in Chri&s;ts time, make u&s;e of the &s;ame medium, <HI>viz.</HI> Chri&s;t no where condemns the people of the Jews for corrupting the Original Text, therefore they kept it intire, towards whom he will &s;ure exer|ci&s;e more mode&s;ty than to tell them its an irrational Argument, though perhaps his good Friends the Je&s;uites may a&s;&s;ume the confidence &s;o to do.</P>
<P N="2"><PB N="431" REF="219"> 2. An Argument from te&s;tomony negatively is not of force in mat|ters done, whereof nothing at all is mentioned, nor any ju&s;t occa&s;ion &s;o to do offered, we grant is true; but when any per&s;ons are frequently charged with evils by the Spirit of the Lord, that their putridity, rot|tenne&s;s and corruption might be &s;een &amp; read of all men; and that in par|ticulars in&s;tanced in; to imagine that any particular Crime whereof they were guilty, and that of &s;o great moment as that whereof we are &s;peak|ing, &s;hould be omitted, men of rea&s;on, (with the leave of our <HI>Animad|verter</HI> be it &s;poken) will be apt to conclude irrational to imagine.</P>
<P>We add in <HI>S. T. That if this al&s;o be granted except it be granted,</HI> 3dly, <HI>that when Chri&s;t &s;aith,</HI> What they &s;ay unto you, do; <HI>he is to be inter|preted to command, or at lea&s;t to permit an attendance upon their mini&s;try, it will advantage the Objectors nothing. Now this we deny, for the&s;e rea&s;ons,</HI> 1. <HI>The words are in the Original,</HI> <GAP DESC="foreign">,<HI>&mdash;Which may more &s;trictly be rendred, the Scribes and Phari&s;ees have &s;at in</HI> Mo&s;es <HI>Seat, all things therefore what&s;oever they have &s;aid unto you,&mdash;</HI>(i. e. <HI>whatever in times past you have heard delivered by the&s;e men, according to the Mind of God, do you not now reject, becau&s;e of that hypocri&s;ie, pride, covetou&s;|ne&s;s&mdash;you are made to &s;ee is predominant in them.)</HI></P>
<P>To which Mr. <HI>T.</HI> <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">. <HI>The command to do what they bid, implies a per|mi&s;&s;ion to hear.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> Not &s;o, they might hear what they bid in times pa&s;t, to which &s;o far as it was con&s;onant to Truth, they were to conform without any command for the future attendance on their Mini&s;try.</P>
<P N="2">2. Though the words, <HI>v.</HI> 2. may be rendred, <HI>have &s;at in Mo&s;es Seat,</HI> yet the word <HI>&s;it,</HI> being in the fir&s;t Aori&s;t, is be&s;t rendred, <HI>&s;it,</HI> noting an indefi|nite time, and &s;o is to be conceived, &s;ignifying a continued time, pa&s;t and pre&s;ent, they have, and do &s;till &s;it; and the words, <HI>v.</HI> 3. according to the Greek Language, mu&s;t be rendred, <HI>what&s;oever they &s;hall &s;ay unto you.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. That the former part of the words may be rendred as we have rendred them, Mr. <HI>T.</HI> grants. 2. That the fir&s;t Aori&s;t of the <HI>In|dicative Mood,</HI> is mo&s;t fitly and properly &s;o rendred, every one that hath but read his Grammar knows. 3. Why it &s;hould not here be &s;o ren|dred, he gives no rea&s;on, and we know not any Law compelling us, <HI>jurare in verba Magi&s;tri.</HI> 4. That the words, <GAP DESC="foreign">,&mdash;mu&s;t be rendred, <HI>what&s;oever they &s;hall &s;ay unto you.&mdash;</HI>He &s;peaks after the &s;ame rate with the former. 'Tis true, the fir&s;t and &s;econd Aori&s;t of the <HI>Subjunctive Mood,</HI> is u&s;ually rendred in the <HI>Future Ten&s;e,</HI> but that it is alway &s;o, or mu&s;t be &s;o rendred, he will not upon &s;econd thoughts a&s;|&s;ert;
<PB N="432" REF="220"> Since in&s;tances not a few, lie near at hand to be produced, that evince the contrary. 1. 'Tis &s;ometimes rendred in the <HI>Pre&s;ent Ten&s;e,</HI> Mat. 7. 9. <GAP DESC="foreign">,<HI>&mdash;whom if his Son ask Bread.&mdash;</HI>&amp; 3, 9. <GAP DESC="foreign">,<HI>&mdash;and think not to &s;ay.&mdash;</HI>2. 'Tis &s;ometimes ren|dred in the <HI>Future Ten&s;e,</HI> Mark 4. 15. <GAP DESC="foreign">,<HI>&mdash;but when they have heard.&mdash;</HI>John 16. 21. <GAP DESC="foreign">,<HI>&mdash;as &s;oon as &s;he is deli|vered, after &s;he hath brought forth.</HI> So <HI>Beza,</HI> Jud. 9. 43. <GAP DESC="foreign">,<HI>&mdash;and laid wait for him.</HI> To which many more migh<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter"> be added.</P>
<P>He proceeds, and &s;aith, <HI>Were it granted, that the bidding were meant of the time pa&s;t, the Argument were of force; they heard, therefore they may hear, for Chri&s;t doth not di&s;prove their former practice, but gives a rea&s;on, which infers a continued permi&s;&s;ion to hear them, becau&s;e they &s;at in</HI> Mo&s;es <HI>Chair,</HI> (i. e.) <HI>taught the Law of</HI> Mo&s;es, <HI>which while they did, they were to hear them, notwith&s;tanding other corruptions.&mdash;)</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. That becau&s;e the Di&s;ciples had heard the Scribes and Pha|ri&s;ees, therefore they might hear them, our Dictator will never be able to make good, it being no better an Argument than this; <HI>Paul</HI> &s;at at the feet of <HI>Gamaliel</HI> before his Conver&s;ion, therefore he might do &s;o &s;till. The <HI>Corinthian</HI> Believers had communion with Idolaters, there|fore they might &s;till. Tho&s;e that have gone to Ma&s;s may do &s;o &s;till. That what they did in an uncovered &s;tate, when they were in darkne&s;s, blindne&s;s, &s;in, and Hell, they might do when converted to Chri&s;t, &s;an|ctified, enlightned, is &s;uch an ab&s;urd a&s;&s;ertion, that the very naming it is confutation &s;ufficient.&mdash;Yet this is one of tho&s;e &s;olid Foundati|ons upon which this An&s;wer is built.</P>
<P N="2">2. That Chri&s;t doth not di&s;prove their practice of hearing them, is no better rea&s;on that they might do &s;o than the former. 1. 'Twas needle&s;s that he &s;hould do &s;o, when they them&s;elves were already ta|ken off their attendment on their Mini&s;try, &s;aw its emptine&s;s, di&s;cern|ed the wickedne&s;s, blindne&s;s, hypocri&s;ie of the guides they once fol|lowed. Yet, 2. the very di&s;cour&s;e of Chri&s;t in this Chapter, and el&s;e|where touching them, is a &s;ufficient di&s;approbation of, and di&s;&s;wa&s;ive from the hearing of them. 3. Mr. <HI>T.</HI> takes for granted, that which we deny, and he &s;hould have proved, that their &s;itting in <HI>Mo&s;es</HI> &s;eat was their teaching the Law of <HI>Mo&s;es,</HI> which for the mo&s;t part they did not do. They <HI>taught for Doctrines the Commandments of men,</HI> Mat. 15. 9. <HI>They made void the Law by their Traditions,</HI> Mat. 15. 6. <HI>Corrupted it with their fal&s;e glo&s;&s;es,</HI> Mat. 5. So that their teaching the Law of <HI>Mo&s;es,</HI> could not be any rea&s;on at all why they &s;hould hear them.</P>
<P>We add in <HI>S. T.</HI> 2. <HI>Let the words be as they are rendred; the Di&s;ciples</HI>
<PB N="433" REF="220"> <HI>might ob&s;erve, and do what they &s;aid from the knowledge thereof, through their particular occa&s;ional meeting and di&s;cour&s;e with them, (as otherwi&s;e) though they had never &s;pent one hour in attending upon their Mini&s;try; which that our Saviour did not enjoyn, no not &s;o much as permit,&mdash;we &s;uppo&s;e may be clearly demon&s;trated from the en&s;uing con&s;iderations.</HI></P>
<P>To which Mr. <HI>T. Sect.</HI> 5. 1. <HI>If by attendance on their Mini&s;try be meant a con&s;tant and ordinary hearing of them, as their ordinary Shepherds, doubt|le&s;s neither Christ did command nor permit his Di&s;ciples &s;uch an atten|dance.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. Very good! a con&s;tant attendment upon the pre&s;ent Mi|ni&s;ters of <HI>England,</HI> cannot be proved from this Scripture: Chri&s;t did not permit his Di&s;ciples &s;o to attend on the teaching of the Scribes and Phari&s;ees. 2. Own them as our ordinary Shepherds we may not, for &s;o the Scribes and Phari&s;ees were not to be own'd by the Di&s;ciples of Chri&s;t, as Mr. <HI>T.</HI> grants. Wherein how much the greatne&s;s of Truth hath prevailed upon him, others will judge. But, 3. hearing being an in&s;titution of Chri&s;t, to be conformed to according to the directions given forth by him thereabout, I am not able to divine by what Law or Rule I may hear a man rarely, upon who&s;e mini&s;try (if by provi|dence I have an opportunity afforded &s;o to do) I may not more fre|quently, con&s;tantly attend. Nay, 4. I am apt to think that Mr. <HI>T.</HI> by this one conce&s;&s;ion hath given away the whole of his concern in this Ar|gument. The Scribes and Phari&s;ees might not be heard as their ordina|ry Shepherds by the Di&s;ciples; the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters of <HI>England</HI> (&s;hould it be granted, it were proved by this Argument lawful to hear them) are not then to be heard as our ordinary Shepherds or Mini&s;ters, becau&s;e of any thing that is contained in this Scripture, or can be deduced from it. Now as &s;uch for the mo&s;t part we mu&s;t hear them, or not at all; they being impo&s;ed on us as our Pari&s;h&mdash;Mini&s;ters, our hearing required of us by Law, is hearing them as &s;uch. This, by this Argument, Mr. T. grants cannot be proved.</P>
<P>We produce &s;everal rea&s;ons in S. T. why we &s;uppo&s;e Chri&s;t neither commanded nor permitted his Di&s;ciples to hear the Scribes and Pha|ri&s;ees. 1. There are not a generation of men of whom he &s;peaks more contemptuou&s;ly, and chargeth with greater enormities than he doth that generation of Scribes and Phari&s;ees, and that in this very Chapter, &s;ee, <HI>v.</HI> 5, 23, 25, 27, 28, 29. and <HI>v.</HI> 6, 7. and <HI>v.</HI> 13, 15, 16, 19, 24, 26. and <HI>v.</HI> 16, 17, 18, 33&punc; 34. And can it be imagined that Chri&s;t &s;hould have no more tenderne&s;s to poor Souls than to direct them to an attendance upon &s;uch per&s;ons as the&s;e for teachings? are they likely motives to per|&s;wade
<PB N="434" REF="221"> or enforce any thereunto? 2. Yet this is what he immediately &s;ubjoyns, having &s;aid, Whatever they bid you ob&s;erve, that ob&s;erve and do.</P>
<P>To which Mr. T. <HI>The&s;e per&s;onal evils were not &s;ufficient motives to keep them back from hearing Gods Law expounded by them.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. But their expo&s;ition of Gods Law was abominable, in|tollerable; had they been guilty of no per&s;onal evils not to have been born, a &s;ufficient ground of it &s;elf to have forborn hearing them; they corrupted, perverted it by their expo&s;itions.</P>
<P N="2">2. We are in the mind Mr. <HI>T.</HI> hath not his &s;econd in the World of &s;ober-minded men, who will aver that &s;uch per&s;onal evils as tho&s;e men|tioned, are not a &s;ufficient Bar to hinder the attendment of Saints up|on preaching, (or expounding of the Law) by tho&s;e upon whom they are to be found.</P>
<P N="3">3. 'Tis &s;ure, a bad cau&s;e he hath undertaken the defence of, that in the pur&s;uit thereof he is forced to a&s;&s;ert the lawfulne&s;s of he<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">ring per|&s;ons that we infallibly know to be Hypocrites, (for Chri&s;t having told them &s;o, they knew it to be infallibly true) proud men (whom the Lord abhors) &s;uch as &s;hut up the Kingdom of Heaven again&s;t men; will not go in them&s;elves, nor &s;uffer others; &s;uch as make their Pro&s;e|lites wor&s;e than them&s;elves, either by their evil example, or by making them more zealous for their Traditions, and more bitter again&s;t the Preachers and preaching the Go&s;pel than them&s;elves; who are blind guides, preverters of Scripture, &s;uch as make void the Commandments of God by their Traditions; that are Serpents, a Generat<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">on of Vi|pers, that cannot e&s;cape the damnation of Hell; that kill, crucifie, &s;courge, per&s;ecute the Me&s;&s;engers of the Lord. To repeat <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">o ab&s;urd a Po&s;ition, is confutation &s;ufficient, and honour more than enough. I wonder if our <HI>Animadverter</HI> could write it without blu&s;hing. <HI>Jeroboam</HI> was not to be blamed, who made Prie&s;ts of the lowermo&s;t of the peo|ple. Our Animadverter thinks, if the &s;cum of the World, and Hell get into a Pulpit with a Bible and Common-Prayer-Book in their hand, and a Surplice on their back, they may lawfully be attended. Tu&s;h! <HI>Paul</HI> was too &s;crupulous, (and almo&s;t a Phanatick) who talks of quali|fications in Bi&s;hops, 1 <HI>Tim.</HI> 3. 2 <HI>Tim.</HI> 2. <HI>Tit.</HI> 1. 'Tis no great mat|ter what they are, &s;o they read &s;ome Scripture, and interl<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">ce it with the traditions of men, per&s;ons may lawfully hear them wit<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter"> out more adoe. This is &s;ome of that Hay and Stubble that Mr. <HI>T.</HI> his <HI>Theodulia</HI> is &s;tuft with, that will one day be burnt up.</P>
<P>We add, 2. <HI>'Tis not likely that Chri&s;t would command or permit his</HI>
<PB N="435" REF="221"> <HI>Di&s;ciples to attend upon the preaching of the Scrib<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">s and Phari&s;ees; becau&s;e they preached fal&s;e Doctrine,</HI> viz. <HI>ju&s;tification by the works of the Law, which was diametrically oppo&s;ite to the Doctrine he preached, and the work he was upon.</HI></P>
<P>To which our Animadverter replies, <HI>Chri&s;t doth not permit them to hear the Phari&s;ees teach all the Doctrines of their Sect, touching &s;ome of which he forewarns them,</HI> Mat. 15. 14. &amp;. 16. 12. <HI>but as they taught them the duties of</HI> Mo&s;es <HI>Law.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. But if Mr. <HI>T.</HI> calls this an an&s;wer, I am afraid he will not find a &s;econd in his A&s;&s;ertion; it being indeed nothing like one: The Que&s;tion is, <HI>Whether Chri&s;t commanded or permitted his Di&s;ciples to hear the Scribes and Phari&s;ees?</HI> We prove he did not, becau&s;e they preached fal&s;e Doctrine, another Go&s;pel to what was preached by Chri&s;t. Mr. T. an&s;wers, <HI>He did not permit them to hear all the Doctrines of their Sect.</HI> But Sir, the Que&s;tion is, Whether he permitted them to hear any at all, to attend upon their preaching, who were every way &s;uch Anti-Go&s;pel|larians; that he &s;hould do &s;o, we conceive is not rational to imagine, when the very &s;cope of their preaching tended to the overthrow of that he came to promulgate.</P>
<P>But, 2. if they were to attend them, only as they taught the duties of <HI>Mo&s;es</HI> Law, (as he &s;aith) they were &s;o &s;eldom to attend them, that upon &s;earch it will be found they were not to do &s;o at all, &s;ince they had &s;o foully perverted it, that upon the matter they made it another thing.</P>
<P N="3">3. By Mr. <HI>T.</HI> his Argument, 'tis lawful for per&s;ons to hear &s;uch as preach another Go&s;pel; for &s;o did the Scribes and Phari&s;ees. <HI>Paul</HI> was out when he wi&s;heth &s;uch <HI>accur&s;ed,</HI> calls them <HI>Dogs,</HI> Gal. 1. 8.&mdash;Phil. 3. 2. and bids them <HI>beware of them, i. e.</HI> not attending upon their preaching.</P>
<P>We add, as a third Rea&s;on of our A&s;&s;ertion, that they denied Chri&s;t to be the Me&s;&s;iah, bla&s;phemed him in his Doctrine, (as the <HI>deceiver</HI> of the people;) in his Life, as a <HI>Wine-bibber</HI> and <HI>gluttonous per&s;on;</HI> in his Mi|racles, as one that <HI>wrought them by the Devil,</HI> who are therefore con|demned by Chri&s;t as guilty of the very &s;in of bla&s;pheming again&s;t the Holy Gho&s;t, <HI>Mat.</HI> 12. 31. And we cannot imagine that Chri&s;t would permit his Di&s;ciples to hear &s;uch as thus bla&s;phemed him.</P>
<P>Our Animadverter replies, <HI>The third Rea&s;on hath the &s;ame an&s;wer, with this overplus, that to prevent any conceit of allowing the hearing of them in their bla&s;phemy, he avoucheth him&s;elf to be their Ma&s;ter and Teach|er,</HI> v. 8, 10.</P>
<PB N="436" REF="222">
<P> <HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. They took all occa&s;ions to bla&s;pheme him, and if they at|tended their Mini&s;try with any con&s;tancy, 'twas impo&s;&s;ible <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">ut at one time or other they mu&s;t hear them &s;o doing. But, 2dly, What is this to the purpo&s;e? Is it lawful to hear &s;uch as bla&s;pheme Ch<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">i&s;t? Is it likely that Chri&s;t would permit his Di&s;ciples to do &s;o? That the Scribes and Phari&s;ees were per&s;ons of &s;uch a complection is known. 3dly, The &s;ame An&s;wer he talks of is already replied to.</P>
<P>We add, 4thly, We no where find the Di&s;ciples attending upon the Mini&s;try of the Scribes and Phari&s;ees, notwith&s;tanding this &s;uppo|&s;ed command or permi&s;&s;ion of Chri&s;t.&mdash;</P>
<P>Mr. <HI>T.</HI> replies, <HI>This is but from a te&s;timony negatively, <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">nd &s;o of no force; we read not that they u&s;ed the Lords Prayer, yet none will &s;ay they did not, le&s;s that they might not.&mdash;</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. But if Chri&s;t had commanded or permitted them &s;o to do, and that with an intendment to make it a pre&s;ident to walk by, with re|&s;pect to per&s;ons of the &s;ame or like qualifications with the&s;e who &s;hould in the la&s;t dayes &s;tand up to &s;peak in his Name to his Child<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">en: 'Tis more than probable that the practice of the Apo&s;tles herein would have been regi&s;tred, as well as in matters of le&s;&s;er concern. 2dly, We find expre&s;&s;ions touching the practice and deportment of the Di&s;ciples that utterly evert this figment, <HI>Acts</HI> 1. 23. <HI>&amp;</HI> 10. 41. 3dly, That we no where read of the Di&s;ciples u&s;ing the Lords Prayer (when we have an account of other of their Prayers) its an Argument they did not u&s;e it, that they might not &s;o do. Of which before at large. 4thly, Of their Almes, we have mention <HI>Acts</HI> 11. 29. Although they havi<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">g little in the world, it was not po&s;&s;ible they &s;hould be over-liberal o<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter"> over-fre|quent in almes-giving. 5thly, 'Tis more than probable they did not fa&s;t while Chri&s;t was with them, <HI>Mat.</HI> 9. 15. No wonder we have no account of their doing &s;o during that &s;ea&s;on. Afterwards we have men|tion made hereof, <HI>Acts</HI> 13. 2, 3. <HI>&amp;</HI> 10. 30. <HI>&amp;</HI> 14. 23. 2 <HI>Cor.</HI> 6. 5.</P>
<P>We &s;ay in <HI>S. T.</HI> 5thly, <HI>We cannot but think the &s;uppo&s;ition of Chri&s;t's permitting his Di&s;ciples to hear the Scribes and Phari&s;ees, not only incon&s;i&s;tent with, and oppo&s;ite to that expre&s;&s;ion concerning Chri&s;t,</HI> Mar. 6. 31. <HI>but al&s;o to that command,</HI> Acts 2. 40. <HI>and the practice of the Di&s;ciples,</HI> ver&s;. 42.</P>
<P>To which our Animadverter, 1&s;t, <HI>Chri&s;t did conceive the People to be without a Shepherd, notwith&s;tanding the Phari&s;ees teaching the duties of the Law; becau&s;e though that doctrine were right, and to be ob&s;erved, yet it was not &s;ufficient to feed them to Eternal Life.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> Here are &s;everal mi&s;takes in the&s;e few words. 1&s;t&punc; That the Phari&s;ees teaching the duties of the Law was right Doctrine, which is
<PB N="437" REF="222"> mo&s;t notoriou&s;ly untrue: 'Tis true, the Doctrine of the Law was right Doctrine; but the Phari&s;ees teaching the duties of the Law, was not &s;o. For, 1. they taught duties of the Law that were not contained in the Law, <HI>Mat.</HI> 5. 43.&mdash;2. They corrupted, perverted the duties of the Law by their traditions, <HI>Mat.</HI> 15. 3. They pre&s;t the duties of the Law for ju&s;tification of life, which was not right Doctrine. 2dly, 'Tis fal&s;e, and not to be &s;uppo&s;ed without great reproach to Chri&s;t, that he &s;hould &s;end his Di&s;ciples to attend upon &s;uch a Mini&s;try as break not the Bread of life, preached not the Doctrine which was &s;ufficient to feed them to eternal life.&mdash;</P>
<P>He &s;aith further, 2. Peter <HI>did well to exhort his Auditors to &s;ave them|&s;elves from that untoward Generation,</HI> viz. <HI>in not doing their works, nor following their perver&s;e Doctrine; and the Church did rightly practi&s;e&punc; in con|tinuing in the Apo&s;tles Doctrine,&mdash;</HI>v. 42. <HI>Yet he was not to di&s;&s;wade them from hearing or practi&s;ing the Phari&s;ees Doctrine of ob&s;erving the duties of</HI> Mo&s;es<HI>'s Law.&mdash;</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. The Phari&s;ees Doctrine of the ob&s;erving the duties of <HI>Mo&s;es</HI> his Law, was, that men ob&s;erve them for life; this as I remem|ber the Apo&s;tles oppo&s;ed, and it was their duty to do &s;o. 2. Our <HI>Ani|madverter</HI> &s;uppo&s;eth, <HI>That the exhortation of</HI> Peter, <HI>Acts</HI> 2. 40. <HI>was only meant of their not doing their works, non-embracement of their perver&s;e Doctrine;</HI> but 'tis evident from <HI>v.</HI> 42. that <HI>Peter</HI> meant it of non-com|munion with them in acts of Wor&s;hip. And I cannot di&s;cern how I can hear a man preach, but I mu&s;t have Communion with him in that act, which is an act of Wor&s;hip.</P>
<P>We add, 6. Were that the intendment of Chri&s;t, as is &s;ugge&s;ted, (and the Argument of our Brethren valid) a lawfulne&s;s to hear the verie&s;t bla&s;phemer in the World, that denies Chri&s;t is the Me&s;&s;iah, affirms that he was a deluder of the people, a gluttonous per&s;on, a Wine-bibber, one that did Miracles by <HI>Belzebub</HI> the Prince of Devils, that per&s;ecutes even to death Chri&s;t in his people, might by a like parity of rea&s;on be deduced. Chri&s;t commanded, or at lea&s;t permitted his Di&s;ciples to hear the Phari&s;ees, who were &s;uch, as hath been proved; therefore its lawful to hear per&s;ons with the &s;ame Character upon them. But God forbid any &s;uch injurious dealing &s;hould be offered to Chri&s;t, or that any who pretend to fear God, and I hope do &s;o in reality, &s;hould &s;tand by a cau&s;e that hath no better Arguments to defend it, than what may be as righteou&s;ly every way made u&s;e of for their attending upon the Mini&s;try of the greate&s;t bla&s;phemer, and oppo&s;er of Chri&s;t in the World.</P>
<PB N="438" REF="223">
<P> To which Mr. <HI>T. I grant it lawfull to hear any man preach Truth with whom God allows us conver&s;e and communion, as we are m<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">n.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. Would he had given us his rea&s;ons of his mon&s;trous a&s;|&s;ertion. 2. Thought it incumbent upon him to have reconciled it with former printed pa&s;&s;ages of his own. 3. I am allowed conver&s;e and communion (if my occa&s;ions, and calling in the world compel me there|unto) with the wor&s;t of men, as men, a Turk, a Jew, th<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter"> Pope him|&s;elf, a Drunkard, Swearer, Adulterer or Adultere&s;s,&mdash;but that I may have Communion with the&s;e in in&s;tituted Wor&s;hip, as I have when I hear them, is &s;uch a mon&s;trous Figment, &s;o devoid of Scripture evi|dence, &s;o oppo&s;ite thereunto, &s;o abhorred, and abominable to the Spi|rit of God breathing in his Children, that I &s;tand amazed he &s;hould a&s;|&s;ert it:</P>
<P>But enough of this; 'tis evident that <HI>Mat.</HI> 23. 1, 2. refu&s;eth to afford the lea&s;t &s;anctuary to the opinion of hearing the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters.</P>
</DIV3>
<DIV3 N="2" TYPE="section">
<HEAD><HI>Sect.</HI> 2.</HEAD>
<ARGUMENT>
<P><HI>The An&s;wer to the &s;econd Objection vindicated from</HI> Mr. <HI>T. his Exceptions. Of Chri&s;t, and the Apo&s;tles going into the Synagogues. The ends of their &s;o doing. The 3d Objection vindicated.</HI> Phil. 1. 15, 16, <HI>opened. All preaching of Chri&s;t not to be rejoyced in, proved.</HI></P>
</ARGUMENT>
<P>A Second Objection propo&s;ed in <HI>S. T.</HI> to be con&s;idered, is this; <HI>We find Christ and his Apo&s;tles going frequently into the Synagognes where the Scribes and Phari&s;ees preached.</HI></P>
<P>Which Mr. <HI>T.</HI> proves they did from <HI>Luke</HI> 2. 46. <HI>&amp;</HI> 4. 16. <HI>Acts</HI> 3. 1. <HI>&amp;</HI> 13. 14, 15. <HI>&amp;</HI> 16. 13. <HI>&amp;</HI> 17. 2. And further add<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">, <HI>That the Synagogues, nor their Rulers, nor their order of the reading of the Law, nor their Teachers were of the appointment of God; yet our Lord and his Di&s;ciples were pre&s;ent at them, and joyned with them in hearing them read, and &s;uch other &s;ervices of Religion, as were done to God, which i<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter"> a good rea|&s;on wherefore it &s;hould not be accounted nece&s;&s;ary to &s;eparate from the pre&s;ent A&s;&s;emblies of</HI> England, <HI>and the publick Mini&s;ters, notwith&s;tanding corrupti|on in Wor&s;hip, defect in calling,&mdash;</HI></P>
<P>To which we An&s;wer in <HI>S. T.</HI> 1. That all that Chri&s;t and the Apo|&s;tles did, is not lawful for Saints to practi&s;e.</P>
<P>To which Mr. T. <HI>Sect.</HI> 6. <HI>What they did out of peculiar power, commi&s;|&s;ion or in&s;tinct, is not lawful for us to do; but what they did as m<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">n, or part of the Jewi&s;h People in the Wor&s;hip and Church of the Jews, is a warrant for us</HI>
<PB N="439" REF="223"> <HI>in the like ca&s;e to do in the a&s;&s;emblies of the Chri&s;tians.&mdash;</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. But he proves not, that they did not this out of peculiar in&s;tinct; which if they did, by his own confe&s;&s;ion, the Argument de|duced from hence for the lawfulne&s;s of hearing the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters is not valid. 2. If they did it in di&s;charge of their duties as members of the <HI>Jewi&s;h</HI> Church, as he intimates, their example binds us, as he &s;aith, only in the like ca&s;e, <HI>i. e.</HI> Members of a rightly con&s;tituted Church, (for &s;o was the Church of the <HI>Jews)</HI> are to wor&s;hip in the Church-A&s;|&s;emblies with them, notwith&s;tanding &s;ome corruptions: But the Church of <HI>England,</HI> we have proved, is no rightly con&s;tituted Church, we were never Members thereof. So that hitherto he hath &s;aid nothing that is pertinent.</P>
<P>We further an&s;wer in <HI>S. T.</HI> 2dly, <HI>That 'tis one thing to go into the Synagogues, and another thing to go thither to attend upon the Mini&s;try of &s;uch a<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter"> taught there.</HI> This the pre&s;ent ca&s;e, which that Chri&s;t or his Apo|&s;tles ever did, cannot be proved.</P>
<P>Our <HI>Animadverter</HI> replies, <HI>Though Chri&s;t and his Apo&s;tles did not go to attend on the Mini&s;try of &s;uch as taught there, yet they did there hear the Law and the Prophets read, and joyn in Prayers.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. If they went not to attend on the Mini&s;try of &s;uch as taught there, an attendment upon the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters of <HI>England</HI> cannot be proved from their example. In which a&s;&s;ertion, that Mr. <HI>T.</HI> hath given away the cau&s;e he hath all this while been pleading for, is in it &s;elf evi|dent. If we may not attend on their Mini&s;try, we may not hear them as Mini&s;ters. Nor indeed 2dly, can we hear them at all, for in that their Mini&s;try they act as Mini&s;ters. 'Tis true Chri&s;t and the Apo&s;tles went to the Synagogues whither the People were gathered together, and &s;omtimes they heard the Law, and the Prophets read (that they joyned in Prayer with them is no where affirmed.) <HI>Acts</HI> 3. 1. 'tis &s;aid, <HI>They went up to the Temple at the hour of Prayer;</HI> but 'tis evident they went not in to pray with them, for <HI>Peter</HI> having wrought that miracle in cure|ing the Cripple, they flock to him, and he preacheth to them. And <HI>Act.</HI> 16. 13. 'tis &s;aid, <HI>Paul went to the Rivers &s;ide where Prayer was wont to be made,</HI> but that he prayed with them there, is not intimated (nor pro|bable) but their end in going thither, as is evident by their practice, was to take an opportunity to teach and in&s;truct the People who were convened together, which is no warrant for our going to the pre&s;ent A&s;&s;emblies, where liberty &s;o to do is not afforded us; nor do we or can we propo&s;e &s;uch an end to our &s;elves in going thither.</P>
<P>We add in <HI>S. T.</HI> 3dly, <HI>They went thither to oppo&s;e them in and confute</HI>
<PB N="440" REF="224"> <HI>their Innovations and Traditions in the Wor&s;hip of God, to take an opportunity to teach and in&s;truct the People,&mdash;</HI>Which when any have a &s;pirit to do, and are &s;atisfied they are thereunto called by the Lord, in re&s;pect of the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters and Wor&s;hip of <HI>England,</HI> we &s;hall be &s;o far from condemning them therein, that we &s;hall ble&s;s God for them. But this is not to the purpo&s;e in hand.</P>
<P>The attendance of our Brethren upon the Mini&s;ters of <HI>England</HI> is quite another thing, that requires other Arguments for its &s;upport than we have hitherto met with. What &s;aith Mr. <HI>T.</HI> hereunto? Doth he mani|fe&s;t that the&s;e were not the ends of their going to the Temple and Sy|nagogues? Doth he manife&s;t that upon &s;uppo&s;ition they <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">ere, the Ar|gument from their example is valid.&mdash;He attempts not the one or the other; which yet if he will not give up his concern in the pre&s;ent Argument, he could not but &s;ee was incumbent upon him <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">o prove.</P>
<P>He only tells us, <HI>That Chri&s;t or his Apo&s;tles went into their Synagogues: to oppo&s;e them in, or confute their Innovations, Traditions in the Wor&s;hip of God, he doth not remember to have read.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. That they came thither to take an opport<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">nity to teach the People, Mr. <HI>T.</HI> denies not, which were enough to enervate what can be argued, for the hearing the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters from their example, as was &s;aid before. But 2dly, The &s;hortne&s;s of his memory I am not able to mend; would he conver&s;e with the Scriptures of the Lord more, po&s;&s;ibly that might make him more ready than he &s;eems to be in them: 'Tis evident they did oppo&s;e them in, and confute their Innova|tions.&mdash;Chri&s;t did &s;o in the Temple, <HI>Matth.</HI> 21. 12, 13. and <HI>Chap.</HI> 23. For that Di&s;cour&s;e of his was in the Temple, as is evident from <HI>Chap.</HI> 24&punc; 1. In the <HI>Synagogue, Mark</HI> 3. 1. where he confutes their Innovation touching the Sabbath, by manife&s;ting that works of mercy might be done on that day. <HI>ver&s;.</HI> 4, 5. (&s;ee <HI>Mat.</HI> 12. 9, 10, 11, 12, 13. <HI>Luke</HI> 6. 6, 7, 8, 9, 10. <HI>and</HI> 13. 10.&mdash;) contrary to the Tradition of the Elders. The Apo&s;tles, <HI>Acts</HI> 17. 1, 2, 17. <HI>&amp;</HI> 18. 4, 19. <HI>&amp;</HI> 19. 8. How little Mr. <HI>T.</HI> hath &s;aid to rein|force the Argument, the Reader will judge.</P>
<P>We proceed in <HI>S. T.</HI> and propo&s;e a 3d Objection. <HI>Object.</HI> 3. Paul <HI>rejoyceth at the preaching of the Go&s;pel, though it was preached out of envy,</HI> Phil. 1. 15, 16.</P>
<P>From whence our <HI>Animadverter</HI> argues; <HI>Arg.</HI> 1. <HI>They in who&s;e preaching of Chri&s;t we may rejoyce, though they &s;hould not preach Chri&s;t &s;in|cerely, but in pretence, out of envy,&mdash;may be heard by the Saints law|fully: But the Saints may rejoyce in the pre&s;ent Ministers of</HI> England
<PB N="441" REF="224" MS="y"> <HI>preaching Chri&s;t, though they &s;hould not preach him &s;incerely but in pretence:&mdash;Therefore.&mdash;</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. We deny his <HI>Major.</HI> I may rejoyce and that lawfully in tho&s;e mens preaching Chri&s;t, whom I have no warrant to hear. There may be cau&s;e of rejoycing, as we told Mr. <HI>T.</HI> in <HI>S. T.</HI> in re&s;pect of the i&s;&s;ue and event of things, by the wi&s;e Providence of God, though the means u&s;ed for their production be evil, and not to be complied with. In what have Chri&s;tians greater cau&s;e of rejoycing than in the death of Chri&s;t? Yet had it been utterly unlawful to have joyn'd in Coun&s;el with, or any wayes abetted or encouraged tho&s;e wicked per&s;ons that cru|cified or &s;lew him. Should the Pope &s;end &s;ome Je&s;uites into any re|mote parts of <HI>A&s;ia</HI> to preach the Go&s;pel to the poor <HI>Indians</HI> there, here were upon &s;ome accounts ground of rejoycing, yet no ground to attend upon a Je&s;uitical Mini&s;try. Nor do his Scriptures in the lea&s;t prove his <HI>Major, I&s;a.</HI> 52. 7. <HI><GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 word"></HI> 1. 15. being applied by the Apo&s;tle to Go&s;pel-Preachers: <HI>Rom.</HI> 10. 15. evince onely thus much, That &s;uch as act from Go&s;pel-Authority in that work, are to be welcomed and heard. What Mr. <HI>T.</HI> replies is not con&s;iderable. 1&s;t, 'Tis true preaching Chri&s;t is a good thing and to be rejoyced in, but preaching Chri&s;t by virtue of an Antichri&s;tian Call and Office-power is not &s;o, nor to be rejoyced in, or complied with. 2dly, That he knows no rea&s;on why the Saints may not attend on the Mini&s;try of the Je&s;uites &s;ent from the Pope to preach the Go&s;pel, if they do &s;o, is no Argument that there is no rea&s;on. That they act from an Antichri&s;tian Call and Commi&s;&s;ion, is to Chri&s;t-loving Saints rea&s;on &s;ufficient.</P>
<P>2dly, We deny his <HI>Minor</HI> Propo&s;ition; Saints may not rejoyce in the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters of <HI>England</HI> preaching Chri&s;t. Becau&s;e, 1&s;t, All preaching of Chri&s;t is not to be rejoyced in; as the Devils, <HI>Mar.</HI> 1. 24. <HI>Luke</HI> 4. 34, 41. <HI>Acts</HI> 16. 17, 18. The <HI>Judaical</HI> Preachers preaching Chri&s;t with the Ceremonies of the Law, <HI>Gal.</HI> 5. 12. <HI>Phil.</HI> 3. 2, 3. Grie|vous Wolves, <HI>Acts</HI> 20. 29. Such as hate to be reformed, <HI>P&s;al.</HI> 50. 16, 18. (as the Author of <HI>Prelatical Preachers none of Chri&s;t Teachers</HI> Ar|gues.) Which though Mr. <HI>T.</HI> thinks to put off with this, <HI>All the&s;e Texts are impertinent, for as much as the&s;e do not preach Chri&s;t</HI> (in which I wi&s;h he &s;peak not again&s;t his own Con&s;cience) yet others will not take this for an an&s;wer. They all preached Chri&s;t, and upon other accounts are not to be heard but turned from, as the intelligent Reader may inform him&s;elf by the peru&s;al of the Scriptures in&s;tanced in. We &s;hall only infer, If the <HI>Judaical</HI> Teachers were not to be rejoyced in though they preached Chri&s;t, becau&s;e they mixed therewith the Doctrine of <HI>Mo&s;aical</HI>
<PB N="442" REF="225"> <HI>Ceremonies,</HI> much le&s;s is their preaching to be rejoyced in; who mix therewith the Doctrine of Antichri&s;tian fopperies, and manife&s;t them|&s;elves to be grievous Wolves in their per&s;ecuting the flock of Chri&s;t, who cannot conform thereunto. Becau&s;e, 2dly, In propriety and &s;trictne&s;s of &s;peech (as &s;aith the Author of the forementioned Treati&s;e) Chri&s;t cannot be &s;aid to be preached by a Prelatical Mini&s;try they ju&s;ti|fie them who deny Chri&s;t to be the &s;ole Lawgiver of his Church, and &s;o make him an Idol. (What the <HI>Animadverter</HI> hath dictated <HI>Chap.</HI> 5. in oppo&s;ition hereunto, is there an&s;wered by us.) Nay, 3dly, In ca&s;e &s;uch a Mini&s;ter as this, that preacheth by the Bi&s;hops Licen&s;e, &s;hould in his Doctrine affirm Je&s;us Chri&s;t to be the &s;ole Law-giver to his Churches, yet in and by his very act of Preaching he &s;hould deny it. Which though Mr. <HI>T.</HI> makes a dreadful out-cry again&s;t, &s;pitting the fire of his pa&s;&s;ion on the face of his Antagoni&s;t, an Argument that he hath nothing &s;oberly to reply, is evidently true. For, 1&s;t, Thereby he doth own an Officer no where of the In&s;titution of Chri&s;t in the Scripture. 2dly, He makes the Bi&s;hip a Law-giver to him&s;elf, by who&s;e Licen&s;e he preacheth, and not otherwi&s;e. What Mr. <HI>T.</HI> would rejoyce in I am not concerned to take notice of, there are &s;ome men who dare re|joyce in a thing of naught.</P>
<P><HI>Arg.</HI> 2. He adds, <HI>That preaching of Chri&s;t that is no other than</HI> Paul <HI>rejoyced in,&mdash;the Saints now may rejoyce in:&mdash;But &s;uch is the preach|ing of the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters: Therefore.&mdash;</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. To wave the general exception we have again&s;t the Argu|ment, which proves not what it is produced to prove, <HI>viz. The law|fulne&s;s of hearing the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters,</HI> which we find not in the Con|clu&s;ion, nor is it deducible from the Premi&s;es. We an&s;wer, 2dly, The <HI>Minor</HI> is mo&s;t notoriou&s;ly fal&s;e and untrue: There is other exception taken again&s;t hearing the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters, than again&s;t the per&s;ons mentioned by <HI>Paul:</HI> And we told this Animadverter &s;o in <HI>S. T.</HI> 1. It cannot be proved, (as it hath been, with re&s;pect to the Mini&s;ters of <HI>England)</HI> that tho&s;e mentioned by <HI>Paul</HI> were not true Go&s;pel-Mini&s;ters. 2. Their preaching Chri&s;t out of envy doth not evince it; the Object whereof was, not Chri&s;t but <HI>Paul;</HI> notwith&s;tanding which, they might be real Saints and true Go&s;pel-Mini&s;ters. To which he only oppo&s;eth his Dictates without proof, which we are not concern'd to take notice of. There might be in them at the root Brotherly-love to <HI>Paul,</HI> though under the power of temptation they preached Chri&s;t out of envy to him.</P>
<P>We &s;ay in <HI>S. T.</HI> 4thly, Here is not in this Scripture the lea&s;t word re|quiring
<PB N="443" REF="225"> Chri&s;tians to hear them. That becau&s;e <HI>Paul</HI> rejoyceth at their Preaching, therefore 'tis the duty of Saints to attend upon their Mini|&s;try, is &s;uch a <HI>non-&s;equitur</HI> as will never be made good. To which he &s;peaks not the lea&s;t word that may be called a Reply, he attempts not at all to manife&s;t the validity of the con&s;equence, which he &s;hould have done, if he would have reinforced this Argument.</P>
<P>What he cites out of Mr. <HI>Robin&s;on,</HI> in his <HI>Ju&s;tification of the Separati|on,</HI> p. 307. we are not concerned to take notice of it. Had he not cited it by halves, the Reader would &s;oon have perceived his cau&s;e &s;mit|ten by it through the fifth Rib.</P>
</DIV3>
<DIV3 N="3" TYPE="section">
<HEAD>Sect. 3.</HEAD>
<ARGUMENT>
<P><HI>The an&s;wer to the fourth Objection vindicated. All that preach truth are not to be heard, proved. The Mini&s;ters of</HI> England <HI>preach truth but by halves, as the Bi&s;hop is plea&s;ed to allow them. Many of the truths they preach, they contradict in their practice. With them they mingle many errors. Particular In&s;tances (in the mo&s;t remarkable Heads of Divini|ty) hereof produced.</HI></P>
</ARGUMENT>
<P>THE fourth Objection propo&s;ed in <HI>S. T.</HI> is, The Mini&s;ters of <HI>Eng|land</HI> preach Truth, and is it not lawful to hear Truth preached?</P>
<P>To which we an&s;wer, 1. That 'tis lawful to hear Truth preached, but this mu&s;t be done lawfully, and in the way of Chri&s;ts appointment: Which the hearing the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters we have proved is not. 2. All that preach Truth are not to be heard, nor will our di&s;&s;enting Brethren &s;ay they are. For, 1. there was never yet any heretical Preacher in the World, but he preached &s;ome truth. 2. The Devil him&s;elf. 3. The Popi&s;h Prie&s;ts did, do &s;o; yet who will &s;ay 'tis lawful to attend upon their Mini&s;try.</P>
<P>To which Mr. <HI>T.</HI> 1. <HI>All that preach &s;ome truth are not to be heard; yet all that preach the great truths of the Go&s;pel, notwith&s;tanding &s;ome er|rors non-fundamental, may be heard.</HI> 2. <HI>'Tis no &s;in to hear either Here|tical Preachers, or Popi&s;h Prie&s;ts, (who preach errors which overthrow the Foundation) preach truth.</HI> 3. <HI>The Devils we are to have no communion with, God having put an enmity between the Serpent and the Seed of the Woman.</HI></P>
<P>To which briefly, 1. The two fir&s;t a&s;&s;ertions are meer Dictates, without &s;hew of proof, and therefore fit to be rejected. So abhorred by the Saints, and contrary to all the &s;olemn cautions given by our Ble&s;|&s;ed
<PB N="444" REF="226"> Lord, with re&s;pect to this duty of hearing, touching which we have already &s;poken, that it were frivolous to take further notice thereof. 2. To the third we an&s;wer, If we may not hear the Devil, becau&s;e we are to have no communion with him, God having put an enmity be|tween him and the Seed of the Woman; then may we not hear a wick|ed Prie&s;t, the Lord having &s;aid, <HI>We mu&s;t not have communion with the wicked, who are the Seed and Children of the Devil,</HI> Mat. 23. 33. 1 John 3. 10. John 8. 44. betwixt the Righteous and whom God hath put an enmity, <HI>Gen.</HI> 3. 15.</P>
<P>'Tis added in <HI>S. T.</HI> 3. <HI>That the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters preach truths but by halves, and dare not preach any thing they are inhibited by the Bi&s;hop to meddle with, though never &s;o clearly revealed in the Scripture.</HI></P>
<P>To which our <HI>Animadverter, The Bi&s;hops allow them to preach truths ne|ce&s;&s;ary to Salvation, and if they forbid them to preach things di&s;putable, as Church-Con&s;titution,&mdash;they have the &s;ame rea&s;on as Chri&s;t had for not acquainting his Di&s;ciples with many things he had to &s;ay to them, and is agreeable to the Apo&s;tles rule,</HI> Rom. 14. 1. <HI>and practice,</HI> Acts 15. 28. <HI>If they preach tho&s;e truths by halves, it's lawful to hear tho&s;e halves.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. That it is lawful to hear &s;uch as are &s;uch perfect Servants and &s;laves of men, (upon the account whereof they cannot be the Ser|vants of Chri&s;t) that they dare not for fear of a Lord-Bi&s;hops Inhibi|tion, communicate what of the mind of God they have received from him, is intollerable confidence to impo&s;e on us without proof. 2. Their &s;o doing is direct rebellion again&s;t Chri&s;t, in who&s;e Name they pretend to act, who hath charged all that &s;o act, to publi&s;h and declare what|ever he reveals to them. 3. There is no truth that Chri&s;t hath reveal|ed, but is for the comfort, &s;tabli&s;hment, peace, edification, or di|rection of the Saints, that he is to be heard as a Mini&s;ter of Chri&s;t, who will &s;uffer his mouth to be muzzled by a &s;orry thing, called an Arch-Bi|&s;hops Prohibition, is the fir&s;t-born of ab&s;urdities to imagine. 4. The Scriptures cited, are mo&s;t impertinently alleadged by him. <HI>John</HI> 16. 12. Chri&s;t tells his Di&s;ciples, <HI>He hath many things to &s;ay which they are not able to bear.</HI> Rom. 14. 1. <HI>Paul</HI> advi&s;eth, <HI>That the weak Chri&s;tian be re|ceived, but not to doubtful di&s;putations. It &s;eems good,</HI> Acts 19. 28. <HI>to the Holy Gho&s;t, and to the Apo&s;tles, to lay upon the Gentiles no greater bur|den than tho&s;e nece&s;&s;ary things.&mdash;</HI>Therefore an Arch-Bi&s;hop may in|terdict per&s;ons to preach any other truth than he hath a mind they &s;hould, is &s;ome of Mr. <HI>T.</HI> his <HI>Lemp&s;ter</HI> Logick, which a young Sophi|&s;ter would laugh to &s;corn. What follows is already an&s;wered.</P>
<P>'Tis added in <HI>S. T.</HI> 2. <HI>The main truths they preach (at lea&s;t many of</HI>
<PB N="445" REF="226"> <HI>them) are contradicted in their practice, conforming to In&s;titutions, and Laws that are not of his pre&s;cription.</HI> This we have abundantly demon|&s;trated.</P>
<P>What Mr. <HI>T.</HI> tells us he hath replied hereunto, we have already re|moved out of the way.</P>
<P>We &s;ay, 3. <HI>With the truth they preach, they mix many errors.&mdash;</HI>In|&s;tances of this kind have been already exhibited, to which may be ad|ded many more. We name &s;everal in <HI>S. T.</HI> the very truth is, they are gro&s;ly erroneous in mo&s;t of the chief heads of Divinity, as a man may run and read in the following Particulars.</P>
<P N="1">1. <HI>Concerning the Scriptures; they hold,</HI> 1. That they are not the certain, exact, and alone rule of all things which appertain to Religion and Wor&s;hip; but that humane additaments make it more decent and amiable. 2. That traditions that have no foundation in the Scripture, are to be believed, received, practi&s;ed. 3. That Apocryphal Books which have in them Errors, 2 <HI>Mac.</HI> 12. 44, 45. &amp; 14. 41, 42. <HI>Eccle&s;.</HI> 46. 20. <HI>Wi&s;d.</HI> 19. 11.) Untruths, (2 <HI>E&s;d.</HI> 14. 21, 22, 23. 2 <HI>Mac.</HI> 2. 4, 8. <HI>Tob.</HI> 5. 11, 12, 13. with 12. 15. <HI>Judith</HI> 8. 33. &amp; 10. 9. with <HI>v.</HI> 12. &amp; 11. 6, 12, 13, 14, 15. 2 <HI>Mac.</HI> 1. 13, to 17. &amp; 9. 1, 5, 7, 9, 28, 29.) Bla&s;phemy <HI>(Tob.</HI> 12. 12, 15. with <HI>Rom.</HI> 8. 34. 1 <HI>Tim.</HI> 2. 5. <HI>Rev.</HI> 8. 3, 4.) Magick <HI>(Tob.</HI> 6. 6, 7, 8. &amp; 9. 2, 3. with 3. 7, 8. &amp; 11. 10, 11, 13. with 2. 9, 10.) and con|tradiction to the Canonical Scriptures, <HI>Judith</HI> 9. 2, 3, 4. with <HI>Gen.</HI> 49. 5, 6, 7. <HI>E&s;ther</HI> in the <HI>Apochrypha,</HI> Chap. 12. 5. &amp; 15. 9, 10. with <HI>E&s;ther</HI> Ca|nonical, <HI>Chap.</HI> 6. 3. &amp; 5. 2. <HI>Eccle&s;.</HI> 46. 20. with <HI>I&s;a.</HI> 57. 2.) may be u&s;ed in the publick Wor&s;hip of God.</P>
<P>Mr. <HI>T.</HI> replies, <HI>This is not preached, as I know of, by any of them.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. Their pactice in readi<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">g them (according to their Calen|der-directions) in their publick Wor&s;hip, is a loud preaching, that they may be &s;o u&s;ed. What the <HI>Animadverter</HI> adds in this matter, is incon&s;ideroble. 1. We charge them not with owning them as part of the Canonical Scripture; 2. Nor &s;ay we that they are all read: but this we crave leave to add, That it is mo&s;t wretched and accur&s;ed dealing to have &s;uch Writings as the&s;e &s;o full of abomination to be u&s;ed in the Wor&s;hip of God, to the ju&s;tling out of a great portion of the Canoni|cal Scriptures, which are not read at all, which we are apt to think is a fearful contempt and undervaluation of God and his Laws. 3. What was once re&s;olved by Arch-Bi&s;hop <HI>Abbot,</HI> I am not at all concerned with, notwith&s;tanding which they are &s;till appointed to be read. 4. That any of the places in&s;tanced in, are capable of an ea&s;ier cen&s;ure than I put upon them, he may demon&s;trate when he is able &s;o to do. 5. That
<PB N="446" REF="227"> they are read, when and where we need not be pre&s;ent, &s;ignifies little, they are read in their Wor&s;hip, to the &s;hutting out the Canonical Scrip|ture, which we account a notorious error.</P>
<P N="2">2. <HI>Touching God and Chri&s;t; they own;</HI> 1. That it's lawful to bow down before that which is not God in Religious Wor&s;hip, as the Altar, the repetition of the Name of Je&s;us, the Bread and Wine in the Sacra|ment, (of which one of their Reverend Prelates hath been mo<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">e than once heard to &s;ay, That <HI>the pre&s;ence of Chri&s;t in the Sacramen<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter"> is not Symbolical, but Realiter, and upon that account we give adoration;</HI> 'tis like more are of his mind) as horrible Idolatry, as bowing before a Cruci|fix or Image. 2. That Chri&s;t is not alone the Head of the Church. 3. They &s;eem to attribute greater efficacy to the Blood, than the Body of Chri&s;t, whil&s;t they pray, That <HI>their bodies may be made clean by his Body, and their &s;ouls by his mo&s;t precious Blood.</HI> (as they do in the prayer be|fore that which is u&s;ed at the Con&s;ecration.) 4. That <HI>Chri&s;t de&s;cended into Hell,</HI> (as if he de&s;cended into the place of the Damned, as <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">he Pa|pi&s;ts hold.)</P>
<P>To which Mr. <HI>T.</HI> 1. <HI>'Tis in the Creed, call'd the Apo&s;tles.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. This is no part of Scripture. Nor, 2. ever compo&s;ed by them who&s;e name it bears. Nor, 3. is it certain when or by whom it was &s;o done. 4. To this very day it was never in any full and gene|ral Council confirmed and e&s;tabli&s;hed. So that its being in the Creed proves it not &s;o authentick as that we are bound to believe it. 5. What is &s;aid by Bi&s;hop <HI>U&s;her&mdash;</HI>touching this matter, I have not lei&s;ure to enquire: &s;ince it's put after his burial, it can &s;ignifie no other de&s;cent but into the place of the damned, which is as rotten a figment as ever was invented.</P>
<P N="3">3. <HI>Touching Man.</HI> 1. They generally own (I &s;peak, e&s;pecially of them who are called the Church) free-will. And, 2. an implicite Faith, not in words, but really and indeed, whil&s;t they &s;ay, <HI>We mu&s;t practi&s;e in Wor&s;hip the determinations of the Church;</HI> though we our &s;elves &s;ee no rea&s;on for them, becau&s;e &s;he hath determined them, and that this is rea&s;on &s;ufficient for our &s;o doing, <HI>i. e. We mu&s;t</HI> (in the&s;e things) <HI>believe</HI> (<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">or Faith mu&s;t preceed practice in the Wor&s;hip of God) <HI>as the Church believes.</HI></P>
<P N="4">4. <HI>Touching Wor&s;hip.</HI> They hold, 1. That Wor&s;hip dev<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">&s;ed by man, (though abu&s;ed to Idolatry) is the Wor&s;hip of God, with which he is well-plea&s;ed. 2. That God is more particularly to be wor&s;hip'd in one place than in another; and that the&s;e places being Con&s;ecrated, are the Hou&s;es and Churches of God, and upon that account holy, and
<PB N="447" REF="227"> to be reverenced. 3. That reading an Homilie, or a few Prayers out of the Liturgie, is a more excellent wor&s;hip of God (though no where commanded in the Scriptures) than Preaching, which mu&s;t therefore give way to it. 4. That none mu&s;t be &s;uffered publickly to wor&s;hip God, or privately (except in their own Families) but according to Forms of mans devi&s;ing. Which, 5. they &s;ay, <HI>Is the Wor&s;hip of God.</HI></P>
<P N="5">5. <HI>Touching the Sacraments.</HI> 1. They &s;eem to intimate that there are more than two, when they &s;ay there are two only generally nece&s;|&s;ary to &s;alvation. 2. That Women may Baptize <HI>in ca&s;u nece&s;&s;itatis</HI> (as the <HI>Papi&s;ts</HI> hold) and that &s;uch Bapti&s;m is valid. 3. That Bapti&s;m is to be admini&s;tred with a Cro&s;s in the fore-head. 4. That all Chil|dren when baptized, are regenerate, and received by the Lord for his own Children by adoption. <HI>(Common-Prayer-Book</HI> of <HI>Publick Bapti&s;m)</HI> 5. That Children being baptized have all things nece&s;&s;ary for their &s;al|vation, and &s;hall undoubtedly be &s;aved. 6. That all that are bapti|zed have received remi&s;&s;ion of &s;ins. Confirmation before the impo&s;iti|on of hands. 7. They &s;eem to make the impo&s;ition of hands a Sacra|ment, when they &s;ay, <HI>'Tis a &s;ign to certifie Children of Gods grace and fa|vour towards them. (Ibid.</HI> in the Prayer after the impo&s;ition of hands) Yea they really do &s;o; if the definition they them&s;elves give of a Sacrament be right, <HI>viz. That it is an outward and vi&s;ible Sign of an inward and &s;pi|ritual Grace.</HI> 8. So they; to make Matrimony, by that expre&s;&s;ion u&s;ed by them, con&s;ecrated the &s;tate of Matrimony to &s;uch an excellent my&s;tery&mdash;in one of the Collects in the form of the &s;olemnization of Matrimony. 9. They adore before the Elements of Bread and Wine. 10. That the wicked and ungodly may receive it. 11. That though the mo&s;t notorious offenders be partakers of it, yet the People that joyn with them are not defiled thereby. 12. That the Body of Chri&s;t was broken, the blood of Chri&s;t was &s;hed (particularly) for them.</P>
<P N="6">6. <HI>Touching the Church.</HI> 1. That under the time of the Go&s;pel there is a National Church. 2. That the mo&s;t wicked and their &s;eed may be compelled and received to be members of the Church, which is notoriou&s;ly known (nor have they the face to deny it, though Mr. <HI>T.</HI> talkes as if they would) to be con&s;onant to their principles and pra|ctice. 3. That 'tis not lawful to &s;eparate from this Church; whoever do &s;o are Sectaries, Schi&s;maticks, to be excommunicated, impri&s;oned,&mdash;a bloody error. 4. That the Clergie is the Church (as is the <HI>Pope</HI> and his Conclave to the <HI>Romani&s;ts.)</HI> 5. That the&s;e is another Head of the Church be&s;ides Chri&s;t. 6. That 'tis not in the power of the Church to choo&s;e their own Officers. 7. That 'tis in the power of Kings to
<PB N="448" REF="228"> appoint the highe&s;t Church-Officers. 8. That Lord-Bi&s;hops are Of|ficers of the Church of Chri&s;t. (though no where of his appointment) 9. That Lord-Bi&s;hops can give the Holy Gho&s;t, and power to forgive and retain &s;ins&punc; 10. That 'tis in the power of a Prie&s;t to ab&s;olve from &s;ins <HI>[In the Vi&s;itat. of the Sick.]</HI> 11. That 'tis not in the power of the Church to excommunicate, but the Bi&s;hop.&mdash;12. That Pa&s;tors and Teachers are to be ordained by Lord-Bi&s;hops. 13. That dumb Mini|&s;ters are lawful Mini&s;ters of Chri&s;t. 14. That the Mini&s;try, Wor&s;hip, and Government which Chri&s;t hath appointed to his Church, is not to be received or joyned unto, unle&s;s the Magi&s;trates where they are re|puted Chri&s;tians, do allow it. And this their practice preacheth forth.</P>
<P N="7">7. <HI>Touching things &s;uppo&s;ed indifferent.</HI> 1. That 'tis in the power of the Church <HI>(i. e.</HI> the Bi&s;hops in their Convocation&mdash;) to make that which is in it &s;elf indifferent, a nece&s;&s;ary part of Wor&s;hip. 2. To devi&s;e what Rites it plea&s;eth, and add to the Wor&s;hip of Chri&s;t. 3. That Marriage may be forbidden at certain (Popi&s;h) &s;ea&s;ons, as in <HI>Lent, Advent, Rogation week.&mdash;</HI>4. That the Cope; Surplice, Tippet, Rochet,&mdash;are meet and decent Ornaments for the Wor&s;hip of God, and mini&s;try of the Go&s;pel. 5. That Altars, Candles, Organs,&mdash;are nece&s;&s;ary and u&s;eful in the Church of God. Mr. <HI>T.</HI> his thoughts are vain, when he thinks that they will not a&s;&s;ert this. Certainly they will not be &s;o imprudent as to aver that they lavi&s;h the Gold out of the Bag for the erection of that in the Service of God, which is neither nece&s;&s;a|ry nor u&s;eful. 6. That there may be Holy Dayes appointed to the Virgin <HI>Mary, John Bapti&s;t,</HI> the Apo&s;tles, all Saints and Angels, toge|ther al&s;o with Fa&s;ts on their Eves, on <HI>Ember dayes, Fridayes, Satur|dayes,</HI> (&s;o called, heatheni&s;hly enough.)</P>
<P>Mr. <HI>T.</HI> an&s;wers, <HI>They will deny this to be their Tenent,</HI> and c<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">tes <HI>Whit|gift, &amp;c.</HI> telling us, <HI>That they mean not that on the&s;e <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">ayes the Saints &s;hould be honoured.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. To the&s;e Saints, for their Wor&s;hip and Service dayes were in&s;tituted by the Popes of <HI>Rome&mdash;</HI>to be ob&s;erved; Le&s;&s;ons peculiar and proper thereunto, appointed to be read in their Service-Books: If no intendment of honour to the Saints were in their pre&s;ent ob&s;ervation, whence is it that the very &s;ame dayes, the very &s;ame Le&s;&s;ons&punc; the very &s;ame Collects and Prayers are appointed to be u&s;ed in the Church of <HI>England,</HI> on many of the Saints dayes that are appointed in the Church of <HI>Rome</HI> on the &s;ame dayes? 'Twere ea&s;ie to demon&s;trate the truth of this by particular in&s;tances, but that would be too <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">edious. 2. They are called &s;till (in their Common-Prayer-Book) by the names of the
<PB N="449" REF="228"> Saints, as S^t. <HI>John</HI>'s day,&mdash;and are accounted Holy, (for not re&s;ting on them, per&s;ons are more liable to be excommunicated by their Church, than for Swearing and Drunkenne&s;s) which as it is an imitati|on of Heatheni&s;h and Antichri&s;tian Super&s;tition, &s;o it is an occa&s;ion of nouri&s;hing a mo&s;t horrid error, if not Idolatry in the hearts of the &s;im|ple and ignorant, who think that day to be &s;et apart in honour of the Saint who&s;e name it bears. Which, 3. if it be not, I &s;ee no ground why it &s;hould be called by his name; as the &s;ame day is in the Pa|pacy, from whence the ri&s;e and &s;pring of our ob&s;ervation thereof.</P>
<P>Now although we &s;ay not that 'tis unlawful to hold communion with per&s;ons that hold &s;ome errors, yet this we are bold to affirm. 1. That the ground or foundation is laid by Mr. <HI>T.</HI> upon which we may hear the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters, <HI>viz.</HI> Their preaching truth is hereby di&s;covered to be &s;andy and rotten, they being guilty of &s;o many errors. Which, 2. being of &s;uch a nature as enwrap in them (&s;ome of them) a denyal of the Offices of Chri&s;t. 3. Such as lie at the bottom of that &s;uper&s;titious corrupt, idolatrous Wor&s;hip and Service, that is directly contrary to the &s;implicity of the Go&s;pel, Clouds, and obfu&s;cates the &s;plendor and glory thereof, (as this <HI>Animadverter</HI> el&s;ewhere acquaints us.) Yea, 4. Such as they have frequently, &s;acrificed, the Liberty, E&s;tates, and precious blood of the Children of the Lord for the &s;upport of, they may well cau&s;e a Saint to enter his demurrer again&s;t hearing them; yea, if they ob&s;tinately hold and maintain them as they do. Though many of the Witne&s;&s;es of Chri&s;t have born a te&s;timony again&s;t them, whom they have no otherwi&s;e been able to re&s;i&s;t, but by force and violence utterly to &s;eparate from them, and have nothing to do with &s;uch an hardned and bloody Generation.</P>
</DIV3>
<DIV3 N="4" TYPE="section">
<HEAD><HI>Sect.</HI> 4.</HEAD>
<ARGUMENT>
<P><HI>The An&s;wer to the</HI> 5^t^h, 6^t^h, 7^t^h, 8^t^h, 9^t^h, 10^t^h <HI>Objection, vindicated. Of the ca&s;e of</HI> Judas <HI>his preaching. Of hearing good men. Of the practice of Learned, and good men in this matter. Of the Magi&s;trates command; how far obligatory. Of mens converting Souls, whether an Argument of true Go&s;pel-Mini&s;ters. Of &s;pending the Lords Day. Where|in the &s;anctification of it con&s;i&s;ts.</HI></P>
</ARGUMENT>
<P>THE fifth Objection in <HI>S. T.</HI> is, Judas <HI>preached, though a wicked man, and no doubt it was lawful; yea, the duty of Saints to hear him.</HI> To this we &s;ay, no doubt it was &s;o. But, 1. <HI>Judas</HI> was not a vi&s;ible wicked man at the time of his preaching, (that Chri&s;t, as God, knew
<PB N="450" REF="229"> him to be &s;o, is not in our ca&s;e con&s;iderable) but &s;o clo&s;e an Hypocrite, that he was not known, no not to the Di&s;ciples to be &s;o; but &s;ome of the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters are vi&s;ibly wicked and prophane. What Mr. T. an&s;wers hereunto hath already been con&s;idered. There was a &s;pecial rea&s;on in the ca&s;e of <HI>Juda<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter"></HI> his preaching to an&s;wer the Prophe&s;ie, <HI>P&s;al.</HI> 41. 8. of which <HI>Acts</HI> 1. 16.&mdash;Nor can any thing rationally from hence be deduced more than this; that 'tis lawful to hear vi&s;ible Saints known only to God to be Hypocrites; for &s;o was <HI>Judas.</HI></P>
<P>We add, 2. <HI>Judas</HI> was cho&s;en and called by Chri&s;t to be an Apo&s;tle, commi&s;&s;ioned by him to preach: but the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters of <HI>England</HI> are not &s;o, as hath been proved.</P>
<P>To which when Mr. T. &s;hall be plea&s;ed to offer any thing that de|&s;erves con&s;ideration, it &s;hall be con&s;idered. His reflection upon the Congrational Mini&s;ters (as 'tis fal&s;e) is no an&s;wer. That becau&s;e <HI>Ju|das,</HI> a commi&s;&s;ionated Officer, by Chri&s;t was to be heard, though an Hy|pocrite, therefore 'tis lawful to hear &s;uch as are not commi&s;&s;iona<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">ed by him, (though vi&s;ibly prophane) will be an hard task for any to prove. We proceed in S. T.</P>
<P>Object. 6. <HI>But there are &s;ome good men amongst them, and &s;uch as belong to God, may we not hear &s;uch?</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. That there are &s;ome good men among&s;t them we deny not.</P>
<P>Mr. T. adjoyns, <HI>With what face can he acknowledge them good men, who hath repre&s;ented them as walking di&s;orderly, deniers of Chri&s;ts Offi|ces?&mdash;</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. Mr. <HI>T.</HI> thinks there are good men in the Papacy, yet I pre&s;ume he will thus repre&s;ent them, and that with a better face <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">e may do &s;o than build again the things he hath de&s;troyed. 2. Good men may be guilty of the greate&s;t enormities, the &s;in unto death excepted. 3. <HI>No|ah, David, Solomon, Peter,&mdash;</HI>were good men, yet repre&s;ented by the Spirit of the Lord as guilty of hainous iniquities.</P>
<P>We add in S. T. <HI>Yet we crave leave to &s;ay, That they are all of them &s;uch as are &s;adly polluted by their compliance, in re&s;pect of their &s;tanding in the Mini&s;try, Antichri&s;tian, who&s;e teachings Saints have no warrant to at|tend upon.</HI></P>
<P>Mr. T. &s;ubjoyns, 1. <HI>That their Mini&s;try is Antichri&s;tian, when they mini|&s;ter the Word of God, is a contradiction.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. This is meerly his dictate without proof. 2. The Mini|&s;try of <HI>Rome,</HI> (he grants is Antichri&s;tian) yet they mini&s;ter the Word of God.</P>
<PB N="451" REF="229">
<P> He adds, 2dly, <HI>That they &s;tand in that Mini&s;try which they received by Epi&s;copal Ordination, is their virtue, which for any to di&s;claim, is to go back from the &s;ervice of God; for that Mini&s;try is no other than of the Do|ctrine, and Sacraments, and Di&s;cipline of Christ, as the Lord hath com|manded, and a<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter"> this Church and Realm hath received the &s;ame.&mdash;</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. 'Tis true, thus they &s;peak in their Book of Ordination, but the&s;e words imply a contradiction; Chri&s;ts Mini&s;try, Admini&s;tration of Sacraments and Di&s;cipline, and the Church of <HI>England</HI> are &s;uffici|ently remote; hers being received not from Chri&s;t, but <HI>Au&s;tin</HI> the Monk, and the Apo&s;tatick Church of <HI>Rome.</HI> 2. Their Prie&s;ts have no Mini&s;try of Di&s;cipline, 'tis re&s;erved in other hands. 3. That Lord-Bi&s;hops are no Officers of the In&s;titution of Chri&s;t, but Antichri&s;tian, we have proved; that any &s;hould receive from them any Mini&s;try but what is Antichri&s;tian, is the fir&s;t born of ab&s;urdities to imagine. 4. That to &s;tand in &s;uch a Mini&s;try, is to &s;tand in a Mini&s;try of Chri&s;t, is, <HI>op|po&s;itum in oppo&s;ito,</HI> a contradiction indeed.</P>
<P>We add, 3dly, <HI>The greater hopes we have of their goodne&s;s, the more ca<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">|telou<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter"> we &s;hould be of incouraging them in a fal&s;e way.&mdash;</HI></P>
<P>What Mr. T. an&s;wers hereunto, being a meer begging the thing in que&s;tion, <HI>viz.</HI> that their way is the true way of Chri&s;t, (the contrary to which we have proved in the former part of this Di&s;cour&s;e) requires not our &s;tay further to con&s;ider.</P>
<P>We &s;ay further in S. T. 4thly, <HI>The goodne&s;s of any, as to the main, is no warrant for any to hold communion with them, or attend upon their teach|ings; there are Brethren that walk di&s;orderly, whom 'tis the duty of Saints to &s;eparate from: that the very be&s;t of the Mini&s;ters of</HI> England <HI>do &s;o, will not be denied,</HI> (to all which Mr. T. &s;aith nothing.) The ince&s;tuous per&s;on, 1 <HI>Cor.</HI> 5. was as to the main, for ought I know, a good man, yet the <HI>Corinthians</HI> were not to hold communion with him, till upon his repentance he was again received, 2 <HI>Cor.</HI> 2. 6.</P>
<P>To which our <HI>Animadverter, It cannot well be conceived that he was a good man, &s;ince he committed &s;uch a &s;in as was not named amongst the Gentiles.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. Before his admi&s;&s;ion into the Church of <HI>Corinth,</HI> he was by them thought to be &s;o, el&s;e they had not received him. 2. When they excommunicated him, they well hoped he might be &s;o, for they did it that the Spirit (through the de&s;truction of the fle&s;h) might be &s;ayed in the Day of the Lord. 3. The kind and ble&s;&s;ed effect that Sentence had upon him, doth not a little demon&s;trate as much; for had he not had the Seed of God in him, more probably he would as others, have
<PB N="452" REF="230"> been hardened thereby, gone on oppo&s;ing, bla&s;pheming God and his Church. 4. The <HI>Animadverters</HI> rea&s;on hath no rea&s;on in it, for I know not any &s;ecurity a Child of God hath from any particular word of pro|mi&s;e, that he may not fall into the wor&s;t of &s;ins, except the &s;in unto death. 5. That it would be now the &s;in of any to mourn, that an An|tichri&s;tian, drunken ignorant Mini&s;ter, from whom (for the mo&s;t part) prophanene&s;s is gone forth into the Land, are not removed,&mdash;more than it was twenty or thirty years agoe. When Mr. T. and the whole Generation of the People of God almo&s;t &s;ought their removal with Prayers and Tears, I am not able to under&s;tand. He cannot be igno|rant that they are the burden and plague of the Nation, the great ob|&s;tacles of the work of Reformation in it.</P>
<P>We yet add, 5thly, <HI>'Tis utterly unlawful to communicate with a devi|&s;ed Mini&s;try, upon what pretext &s;oever.</HI> 6thly, <HI>So is it for any to partake in other mens &s;ins, (as hath been proved) but every u&s;urped Mini&s;try is the &s;in of him (though never &s;o holy a Per&s;on) that exerci&s;eth it.</HI></P>
<P>In an&s;wer to which Mr. T. dictates nothing, but what is noto<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">iou&s;ly fal&s;e, and hath already been replied to. We proceed to the &s;eventh Objection.</P>
<P>Object. 7. <HI>But many learned and good men have in dayes pa&s;t, and do now hear the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters.</HI></P>
<P>To which we an&s;wer, 1. That the greate&s;t Scholars, and mo&s;t ac|compli&s;hed for humane Wi&s;dom, yea vi&s;ible Holine&s;s, have &s;ometimes been the greate&s;t oppo&s;ers of Chri&s;t, ignorant of the Will of God, in re&s;pect of the truth, and work of their Generation,&mdash;as the Scribes and Phari&s;ees,&mdash;who oppo&s;ed Chri&s;t, and the Doctrine of the Go&s;pel preached by him.</P>
<P>Mr. T. an&s;wers, 1. <HI>Learned and good men amongst Chri&s;tians are ne|ver found the greate&s;t per&s;ecutors and oppo&s;ers of Chri&s;t.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> Nor do we &s;ay they are, but that men of Learning an<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter"> vi&s;ible Holine&s;s are &s;o. Which Mr. T. knows to be true; many of that com|plexion have been found among&s;t the Papacy (and are) that have pour|ed forth the blood of many millions of Saints, and oppo&s;ed the Wayes of Chri&s;t to the death, and that out of Con&s;cience (as they thought) to God. So <HI>Paul</HI> before his Conver&s;ion. 2. That the greate&s;t Scholars have not alwayes been on the Lords &s;ide, have been &s;tupendou&s;ly igno|rant of his Will, he grants. With the re&s;t we are not concer<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">ed.</P>
<P>We add, 2dly, That per&s;ons of as great holine&s;s and renown for learning, and all manner of accompli&s;hments, as learned <HI>Ain&s;worth&mdash;</HI>have been, and are of the &s;ame apprehen&s;ion with us in this matter, not
<PB N="453" REF="230"> to mention the Reformed Churches who generally renounce the Mini|&s;try of the Church of <HI>England,</HI> not admitting any by virtue of it, to the charge of &s;ouls. What our <HI>Animadverter</HI> &s;peakes by way of di&s;valuati|on of <HI>Cotton-, Ain&s;worth,</HI> redounds to his own di&s;paragement, their prai&s;e is in the Churches. 2. That Mr. <HI>Cotton</HI> was (at lea&s;t in part) of our per&s;wa&s;ion in this matter, let the Reader inform him&s;elf from <HI>pag.</HI> 111. to the end of his <HI>Way of the Churches in New England.</HI> 3. Of the judgment of the Reformed Churches, and Mr. <HI>T.</HI> his mi&s;take there|abouts we have already &s;poken.</P>
<P>We &s;ay in <HI>S. T.</HI> 3dly, <HI>To the Law and to the Te&s;timony,</HI> I&s;a. 8. 20. <HI>If they &s;peak not according to this Rule, though Angels for knowledge, or ho|line&s;s, they are not to be received or heeded:</HI> One word from the Lord is of more weight to hearts made truly tender, than the example of an hun|dred profe&s;&s;ors can be.&mdash;4. The Apo&s;tle hath long &s;ince determined this ca&s;e, 1 <HI>Cor.</HI> 11. 1. <HI>Be ye followers of me as I am of Chri&s;t.</HI> So far as Saints follow Chri&s;t, I may and ought to follow them, but no further. So that the learning, parts, o<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter"> holine&s;s of any that attend upon the pre|&s;ent Mini&s;ters of <HI>England,</HI> is no warrant for me &s;o to do.<HI>&mdash;All this,</HI> he tells us, <HI>he likes well:</HI> So that he grants this <HI>Objection</HI> to be of no value. What he afterwards adds, <HI>Of re&s;ting in &s;ome ca&s;es on learned Guides,</HI> we have already an&s;wered. We proceed to the review of the 8^t^h <HI>Objection.</HI></P>
<P>Object. 8. <HI>But the Magi&s;trate commands us, and ought we not to obey Magi&s;trates?</HI></P>
<P>To which we an&s;wer, 1. That Magi&s;trates have no power to com|mand in matters of In&s;tituted Wor&s;hip where Chri&s;t is &s;ilent, or to go|vern in his Church, is affirmed by many.</P>
<P>What Mr. <HI>T. Sect.</HI> 12. &s;aith of the confe&s;&s;ion of the <HI>Browni&s;ts, Art.</HI> 39.&mdash;is altogether impertinent; they &s;peak nothing th<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">t is contrary to what is affirmed by us. What he hath &s;aid, <HI>Chap.</HI> 5. is already re|futed; &s;hould it be granted that Magi&s;trates may command men&punc; (and, ought therein to be obeyed) to be pre&s;ent at the true Wor&s;hip of God, yet till he hath di&s;proved wh<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">t we have offered to prove the <HI>Common-Prayer-Book-Wor&s;hip</HI> to be fal&s;e and Idolatrous Wor&s;hip, the Mini&s;ters of the Church of <HI>England</HI> fal&s;e and Antichri&s;tian, we are not conce<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">ned in it. 2. The conformity of the Di&s;ciples to the ju&s;t and righteous Decrees of Magi&s;trates we &s;aid was permitted them, was a meer &s;uppo|&s;ition for Arguments &s;ake, relating only to things Civil, and therefore is not at all of our pre&s;ent concern. 3. What he talks of <HI>Popi&s;h Recu|&s;ants,</HI> and the <HI>Laws of the Land,</HI> I am not at all concerned in. Better all
<PB N="454" REF="231"> the Laws (of that nature in the world) were evacuated, that one Com|mand of Chri&s;t &s;hould be violated.</P>
<P>We add, 2dly, <HI>The Commands of Magi&s;trates when contrary to th<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter"> will and way of Christ,</HI> (as we have proved the hearing the pre&s;ent Mini|&s;ters to be) <HI>are not to be &s;ubjected to,</HI> Acts 4. 19, 20. &amp; 5. 29. Dan. 3. 16, 17. &amp; 6. 10. We remark the Te&s;timony of <HI>Augu&s;t. de Ver<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">. Dom. Ser.</HI> 6. in this matter, who was fully of the &s;ame mind with us. <HI>Sed ti|meo inquies&mdash;</HI>He tells us plainly, <HI>That &s;uch as fear to offend <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">heir &s;u|periours, &s;hould much more fear to offend God who is greater than all.</HI> The Emperors and Monarchs of the World threaten us with a Pri&s;on if we di&s;obey them; The Lord threatens us with Hell upon our di&s;ob<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">dience to him. To which Mr. <HI>T.</HI> an&s;wers not at all.</P>
<P>The 9^t^h <HI>Objection</HI> in <HI>S. T.</HI> is, <HI>The Mini&s;ters of</HI> England <HI>are true Go&s;|pel Mini&s;ters, for they convert &s;ouls; which the Apo&s;tle makes the S<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">al of his Mini&s;try or Apo&s;tle&s;hip: Therefore its lawful to hear them.</HI></P>
<P>To which we &s;ay, That the conver&s;ion of Souls proves not <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter"> lawful Mini&s;try. 1. <HI>Paul</HI> makes it not, 1 <HI>Cor&punc;</HI> 9. 2. &s;ingly a &s;ufficient de|mon&s;tration of his Apo&s;tle&s;hip.&mdash;2. Many have converted &s;ouls that were not Apo&s;tles, as ordinary Mini&s;ters, yea Brethren, Women, re|markable Providences; yet who will &s;ay that the&s;e la&s;t are Apo&s;tles or Mini&s;ters of the Lord Je&s;us? 3. Should it be granted, that Conver&s;ion of &s;ouls is an Argument of a lawful Mini&s;try, Where are the Church|es, nay where are the particular per&s;ons converted by them?&mdash;In an&s;wer to which Mr. T. grants, <HI>That Conver&s;ion of &s;ouls is no certain &s;ign of a true Go&s;pel Mini&s;ter;</HI> whereby he hath di&s;charged this Argument (as in&s;ufficient) from further attendance upon this &s;ervice. In what follows there is nothing (but what hath already been replied to) in this <HI>Sect.</HI> that requires our &s;tay.</P>
<P>The la&s;t <HI>Objection</HI> propo&s;ed and an&s;wered in <HI>S. T.</HI> is, <HI>Our Mini&s;ters are removed, and we know not where to go to hear; would you hav<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter"> us &s;it at home idle?</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. Though we are not again&s;t any Ordinance of Chri&s;t, yet we are afraid that tho&s;e that know not how to &s;pend the Lords <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">ay with|out hearing, do too much Idolize that Ordinance, and never knew what 'twas to &s;pend that day with him.</P>
<P>Mr. <HI>T.</HI> adjoyns, <HI>That &s;uch per&s;ons conceive they cannot &s;pend <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">he Lords day without hearing, is not out of any Idolizing that Ordinance of God; but becau&s;e it is one duty of &s;anctifying the Lords day; not only to exerci&s;e them|&s;elves in Reading and Prayer at home, for that is every days duty, but al|&s;o to frequent the publick A&s;&s;emblies where God is wor&s;hipped,&mdash;</HI>Heb. 10.
<PB N="455" REF="231"> 25. Exod. 20. 8. Acts 20. 7. Rev. 1. 10. 1 Cor. 16. 1, 2. Joh. 20. 26, 29.</P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. If by <HI>Publick A&s;&s;emblies</HI> he mean the A&s;&s;emblies of Swear|ers, Drunkards, Adulterers, Idolaters,&mdash;called Chri&s;tians, where God is wor&s;hipped in a way of mans devi&s;ing, by an Antichri&s;tian, Formal, Super&s;titious (and it may be) Drunken Prie&s;t, in oppo&s;ition to the <HI>Pri|vate Meetings</HI> and <HI>A&s;&s;emblies</HI> of the Saints; The frequenting &s;uch A&s;|&s;emblies is &s;o far from being that wherein the &s;anctifying the Lords Day doth con&s;i&s;t, that it is a profanation thereof, being rebellion again&s;t that &s;olemn In&s;titution of our Lord Je&s;us, enjoyning per&s;ons to &s;eparate from &s;uch A&s;&s;emblies. The Scriptures produced by him totally evert his Figment; the mo&s;t of them preaching forth the duty and practice of the Saints in oppo&s;ition to &s;uch A&s;&s;emblies. And <HI>Rev.</HI> 1. 10. <HI>John was alone on the Lords Day,</HI> and yet I hope &s;anctified it according to the will of God. 2. I cannot but wonder that People (e&s;pecially men of learning &amp; read|ing) &s;hould talk &s;o much of Publick A&s;&s;emblies, and Publick Ordinan|ces, when they cannot but know that ever &s;ince Chri&s;tianity had a be|ing in the world, for the mo&s;t part, the A&s;&s;emblies of <HI>Pagans,</HI> and <HI>Anti|chri&s;tians</HI> with their Ordinances and Wor&s;hip, were publick, and the A&s;&s;emblies of the true Church and Wor&s;hip of Chri&s;t retired and pri|vate. Whence in <HI>Rev.</HI> 12. 6. (when you have the <HI>Bea&s;t</HI> and <HI>Whore</HI> in their Ruffe and Gallantry, the whole World wondering after them, <HI>Rev.</HI> 13. 3. you have the poor <HI>Witne&s;&s;es</HI> of Chri&s;t prophe&s;ying in &s;ack|cloth, <HI>Rev.</HI> 11. and the <HI>Church</HI> flying into the Wilderne&s;s, a &s;tate of &s;olitarine&s;s and retirement, <HI>Rev.</HI> 12. 6, 14. Might not the Papi&s;ts in the <HI>Marian</HI> dayes have pleaded thus again&s;t the Prote&s;tants? Such <HI>Publick A&s;&s;emblies</HI> as Mr. <HI>Cotton&mdash;</HI>&s;pake of, <HI>viz. The A&s;&s;emblies of Be|lievers in a particular Church-State,</HI> we &s;ay are not carele&s;ly or willful|ly to be neglected or for&s;aken. But what's this to the <HI>Parochial A&s;&s;em|blies</HI> of <HI>England,</HI> who are not &s;uch?</P>
<P>Mr. <HI>Crofton's</HI> Argument cited by him is ea&s;ily an&s;wered; 'Tis this, <HI>Communion with the Church-vi&s;ible in Gods &s;olemn Wor&s;hip, is an e&s;&s;ential part of the &s;anctification of the Sabbath, an indi&s;pen&s;ible duty: But Com|munion with the</HI> Engli&s;h <HI>Church, in the Wor&s;hip by her celebrated, is Com|munion with the Church-vi&s;ible in Gods &s;olemn Wor&s;hip: Therefore.&mdash;</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. By the Church-vi&s;ible he mu&s;t under&s;tand a particular in|&s;tituted Church (for with the Univer&s;al-Church-Vi&s;ible, of which &s;ome talk, as &s;uch, I cannot have Communion in the celebration of Ordinances) of the appointment of Chri&s;t, by Go<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">'s &s;olemn Wor&s;hip, Wor&s;hip appointed, in&s;tituted by him, to be managed and performed
<PB N="456" REF="232"> according to his will, for otherwi&s;e it is not his Wor&s;hip: I<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter"> which &s;en&s;e we grant his <HI>Major,</HI> Communion with the Church-vi&s;ible <HI>(i. e.</HI> a particular in&s;tituted Church of Chri&s;t) in Gods &s;olemn Wor&s;hip, <HI>(i. e.</HI> Wor&s;hip of his own appointment, celebrated in his own way) is an e&s;&s;ential part of the &s;anctification of the Sabbath, an indi&s;pen&s;ible duty, (with this limitation, when and where there is any &s;uch Church with whom I may meet.) But then the <HI>Minor</HI> is mo&s;t notoriou&s;ly fal&s;e and untrue, becau&s;e the Church of <HI>England</HI> is no &s;uch particular in&s;tituted Church, as we have proved; the Wor&s;hip celebrated by her is not Wor&s;hip of the appointment of God, managed in his own way, but of mans devi&s;ing, performed by Antichri&s;tian Officers, as we have demon&s;trated.</P>
<P>We &s;ay further in <HI>S. T.</HI> 2dly, <HI>You need not &s;it at home idle,&mdash;you may &s;oon hear of &s;ome or other of the A&s;&s;emblies of the Saints, whither you may repair to wait upon the Lord with them.</HI> Mr. T. is mi&s;taken that &s;uch A&s;&s;emblies as the&s;e are not in many places to be found. Through the grace of the Lord, 'tis for the mo&s;t part far otherwi&s;e than he intimates.</P>
<P>We add, 3dly, <HI>Were it, or &s;hould it be otherwi&s;e, yet better be idle than do wor&s;e, better do nothing than &s;in again&s;t God, encourage others in their evil deeds.&mdash;</HI>Which he confe&s;&s;eth to be true upon &s;uppo&s;ition that publick hearing is a &s;in, 'twere better be idle than do that. Whether we have manife&s;ted it to be &s;o, let the indifferent Reader judge.&mdash;</P>
<P>We add, 4thly, <HI>There is no nece&s;&s;ity of being idle, if thou knowe&s;t not where to hear on that day.&mdash;If thou ha&s;t a &s;ight of thy intere&s;t in God, thou may&s;t &s;pend thy time in admiring, magnifying the rich love of the Lord to thee, if not in getting thy intere&s;t cleared up unto thee; in &s;tudying thine own heart, getting &s;in mortified, grace quickened, &s;trengthened, reaching af|ter communion with God, getting ready trim'd for the coming of Je&s;us.&mdash;</HI>That any of the&s;e directions are &s;uch as weak Chri&s;tians are not able to make u&s;e of, that they would be dangerous to them, (as Mr. <HI>T.</HI> &s;peaks) cau&s;ing them to decay in the exerci&s;e of Godline&s;s, grow barren and lifele&s;s in Prayer, occa&s;ioning them to fall into errors, enthu&s;ia&s;tick conceits, to turn <HI>Seekers,&mdash;</HI>is ab&s;urd to imagine. How far publick hearing is required for hallowing the Lords Day, when, and how, not, we have but now declared, and need not add more.</P>
</DIV3>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="12" TYPE="chapter">
<PB N="457" REF="232">
<HEAD>CHAP. XII.</HEAD>
<DIV3 N="1" TYPE="section">
<HEAD><HI>Sect.</HI> 1.</HEAD>
<ARGUMENT>
<P>Mr. <HI>T. his Arguments for hearing the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters, an&s;wered. Some things are unlawful in which is no &s;in. There is &s;in in hearing the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters. (Nothing relating to in&s;tituted Wor&s;hip, as &s;uch, but is nece&s;&s;ary.) Again&s;t hearing them lie Exceptions that are not meerly extrin&s;ecal but e&s;&s;ential to the duty of hearing. Gods cautions re&s;train us from hearing them. 'Tis no characteri&s;tical property of Chri&s;t's Sheep &s;o to do, but the contrary.</HI> John 8. 27. &amp; 10. 27. <HI>con&s;idered. Not to hear them is no &s;ign of one that is not of God. No &s;uch prophanne&s;s that is condemned in</HI> E&s;au. <HI>No refu&s;ing the</HI> Pearl of great price. <HI>Of the efficaciou&s;ne&s;s of the Word. We have no ground to expect the pre&s;ent Mi|ni&s;ters preaching &s;hould be made effectual to us. The neglect of which is no occa&s;ion or rea&s;on of mens condemnation.</HI> John 3. 20. <HI>opened. They have not the words of eternal life.</HI> John 6. 68. <HI>explained. The words of eter|nal life, what they import.</HI></P>
</ARGUMENT>
<P>MR. <HI>T.</HI> clo&s;eth his <HI>Theodulia</HI> with no fewer than 40 <HI>Arguments, Sect.</HI> 15. whereby he endeavours to prove the lawfulne&s;s of hearing the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters, which are briefly to be con&s;idered.</P>
<P>Arg. 1. <HI>That is lawful in which is no &s;in. In hearing the pre&s;ent Mini|&s;ters preach the Doctrine of the Go&s;pel&mdash;is no &s;in. Becau&s;e its no breach of any Law of Nature, or of the Scriptures,&mdash;and &s;in is a tran&s;gre&s;&s;ion of the Law; and where there is no Law there is no tran&s;gre&s;&s;ion,</HI> 1 John 3. 4. Rom. 4. 13.</P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> Both Propo&s;itions are liable to exception. The <HI>Major</HI> is not univer&s;ally true: There are &s;ome things unlawful in which there is no &s;in <HI>per &s;e,</HI> as the eating the <HI>Idolothite,</HI> which was only <HI>per accidens</HI> &s;o, in re&s;pect of the offence of the weak brother; and yet utterly unlawful to be done, how much this concerns the pre&s;ent ca&s;e we have &s;hewed al|ready. 2. The <HI>Minor</HI> is notoriou&s;ly fal&s;e. 1&s;t, In hearing the pre|&s;ent Mini&s;ters is &s;in; 'tis a violation and tran&s;gre&s;&s;ion of the Law of
<PB N="458" REF="233"> Nature, the voice whereof is, <HI>That God mu&s;t be &s;erved and wor&s;h<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">pped ac|cording to the revelation of his will.&mdash;That nothing be done herein but what he gives direction and commandment about:</HI> &s;o &s;ay the Scriptures, as we have proved <HI>Chap.</HI> 2. Now Mr. <HI>T.</HI> is not able to produce one Scripture wherein God commands us to hear them. VVhat he replies hereunto is frivolous.</P>
<P>He &s;aith, 1. <HI>That a command is not nece&s;&s;ary to prove a thing lawful, but to prove it a nece&s;&s;ary duty.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> But there is nothing relating to In&s;tituted VVor&s;hip&punc; as &s;uch, (of which we have proved hearing to be a part) that is lawful, but is our nece&s;&s;ary duty, <HI>viz.</HI> nece&s;&s;ary, <HI>nece&s;&s;itate praecepti</HI> in&s;tituting it.</P>
<P N="2">2. That <HI>as expre&s;s command may be &s;hewed for hearing them,</HI> (as he &s;aith) <HI>as for hearing the Congregational Mini&s;ters,&mdash;</HI>is his mi&s;take. The hearing the&s;e is &s;hewed to be a po&s;itive duty by command from Chri&s;t;&mdash;The other, contrary to many &s;olemn commands given forth by him, all along this Treati&s;e. So that</P>
<P>His <HI>Argument</HI> may be Retorted upon him&s;elf.<HI>&mdash;That which is a breach of the Law of Nature, and Scripture, moral or po&s;itive, in expre&s;s tearms, or by good con&s;equence, is &s;inful and unlawful to be practi&s;ed.</HI> (This Mr. <HI>T.</HI> grants.) <HI>But &s;uch is the hearing the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters</HI> (this we have already proved) <HI>Therefore.&mdash;</HI>He adds,</P>
<P>Arg. 2. <HI>Tho&s;e Mini&s;ters may lawfully be heard, again&s;t the hearing of whom lie no exceptions; but &s;uch as are extrin&s;ecal to the duty of hearing, as it is a part of Gods Wor&s;hip: But &s;o it is concerning the hearing the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters. Therefore.&mdash;</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. We deny his <HI>Minor,</HI> and to the proof thereof we &s;ay, that the duty of hearing con&s;i&s;ts not only in this, that we apply our &s;elves to learn the mind of God, but that we do this lawfully and according to the mind of God: when he hath appointed Officers of his own, and gi|ven his Spirit unto his Children to inable them to communicate his mind and will to the Sons of Men, to imagine that an attendment upon tho&s;e to learn the mind of God, whom he hath not deputed to di&s;pen&s;e it, (charged us as Antichri&s;tian-Officers, per&s;ons that walk di&s;order|ly,&mdash;to have nothing to do with, but &s;eparate from) is extrin&s;ecal to the duty of hearing, is a fearful contempt and di&s;valuation of the &s;o|veraignty and authority of Chri&s;t.</P>
<P>His 2d <HI>Argument</HI> may ea&s;ily be Retorted upon him&s;elf, thus. <HI>Tho&s;e Mini&s;ters may not lawfully be heard, again&s;t the hearing of whom <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">e excepti|ons that are not meerly extrin&s;ecal (but e&s;&s;ential) to the duty of hearing as it is a part of Gods Wor&s;hip: But &s;o it is concerning the hearing the pre|&s;ent Mini&s;ters. 'Tis not extrin&s;ecal, but e&s;&s;ential, to the duty of hearing Mi|ni&s;ters,</HI>
<PB N="459" REF="233"> <HI>that I hear the mind of God, not from &s;uch as act from an Antichri|&s;tian Call, that walk di&s;orderly, oppo&s;e Chri&s;t in his Offices,&mdash;but &s;uch as are deputed by him to di&s;pen&s;e it.&mdash;Therefore.</HI></P>
<P>His 3d, <HI>Argument</HI> is thus formed. <HI>That is not unlawful from which Gods cautions re&s;train us not: But from hearing the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters Gods cautions re&s;train us not, for they only re&s;train us from hearing &s;uch as teach fal&s;e Doctrine,</HI> Deut. 13. 3. Mat. 7. 15. Mar. 4. 24.</P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. We deny his <HI>Minor.</HI> 1. Every command enjoyning us not to attend upon, have communion with Antichri&s;tian Mini&s;ters, &s;uch as walk di&s;orderly,&mdash;are cautions again&s;t hearing them. As are 2dly, the Scriptures produced by him, &s;ince we prove that they are fal&s;e Pro|phets who labour to draw the People off the pure In&s;titutions of Chri&s;t to the putrid Inventions of men.</P>
<P>Whence we argue, 3dly, <HI>That is unlawful for us from which Gods cautions re&s;train us: But Gods cautions re&s;train us from hearing the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters, for they re&s;train us from having to do with a fal&s;e Mini&s;try, fal&s;e Prophets, who mingle their own Dreams and Humane Inventions with the Word and Truths of the Lord; which we have proved true of the pre&s;ent Mi|ni&s;ters. Therefore.&mdash;</HI>He adds,</P>
<P>Arg. 4. <HI>That is not unlawful which may be a duty and characteri&s;tical property of one that is of God, or Chri&s;ts Sheep. But to hear the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters, being &s;uppo&s;ed to teach the Word of God, and the Voice of Chri&s;t, may be a duty and characteri&s;tical property of one that is of God, or Chri&s;ts Sheep,</HI> John 8. 47. &amp; 10. 27. <HI>Therefore.&mdash;.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> We deny the <HI>minor;</HI> the Scriptures produced prove not that it is the duty&mdash;of one that is of God,&mdash;to hear every one that teacheth &s;omewhat of the Word of God, but onely &s;uch as teach it according to Chri&s;ts appointment, (nor will Mr. <HI>T.</HI> &s;ay it is, the Devil did &s;o, Wo|men may do &s;o, yet he &s;aith they are not to be heard) much le&s;s, that it is the duty of one that is of God to hear the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters of <HI>England</HI> who preach Chri&s;ts Word from Authority humane, Antichri&s;tian, and that mixed with a multitude of humane Inventions. We may better ar|gue, that is unlawful which is not a duty and characteri&s;tical property of one that is of God, or Chri&s;ts Sheep, but to hear the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters of <HI>England,</HI> is not a duty and characteri&s;tical property of Chri&s;ts Sheep, (as we have proved:) And have yet to add, 1. They preach not the Word of God lawfully from Authority in his Name, of which the Scri|ptures mentioned are to be under&s;tood. 2. They preach the Com|mandments, traditions of men in the &s;tead of Gods Word. 3. They hinder, oppo&s;e, per&s;ecute &s;uch as have authority to preach it. 4. They
<PB N="460" REF="234"> are the &s;tangers mentioned, <HI>John</HI> 10. from whom 'tis the property of Chri&s;ts Sheep to flee. 5. Many of them preach not the Word at all, nor can they &s;o do. Therefore.&mdash;He adds.</P>
<P>Arg. 5. <HI>That may be unlawful which may be a &s;ign of one tha<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter"> is not of God, nor of Chri&s;ts Sheep: But not to hear the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters when they teach the Word of God,&mdash;may be a &s;ign of one that is not of God,</HI> John 8. 47. &amp; 10. 26.</P>
<P><HI>A.</HI> This is an&s;wered in what was replied to the former <HI>Argument.</HI> i. The <HI>minor</HI> is denied, for the &s;ame rea&s;ons of our denial of the <HI>mi<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">or</HI> in the precedent Argument. 2. This Patron of charity at once rejects the many thou&s;ands of <HI>England,</HI> precious in the &s;ight of the Lord, and beloved of him, as per&s;ons not of God, not of Chri&s;ts Sheep, becau&s;e they hear not the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters. 3. We may more righteou&s;ly argue; To hear tho&s;e that pretend to teach the Word of God, as Mini&s;ters, (intermixed with the traditions of men) but are not commi&s;&s;ionated by him, &s;o to do is unlawful, for 'tis a rejection, and contempt of Chri&s;ts Authority, (who alone hath power to appoint his own Officers, by whom he will communicate his mind and will.) But to hear the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters, is to hear &s;uch as pretend to <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">each the Word of God, (intermixed with the traditions of men) bu<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter"> are not commi&s;&s;ionated by him &s;o to do, (as we have before demon&s;trated.) Therefore.</P>
<P>Arg. 6. His &s;ixth Argument is thus formed, <HI>To refu&s;e to hear the Word of God, though delivered by the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters, is &s;uch pr<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">phanene&s;s as is condemned in</HI> E&s;au, <HI>Heb.</HI> 12. 16. <HI>for it is the rejecting or neglecting of an holy thing,</HI> Matth. 7. 6. <HI>therefore it may be unlawful to &s;hun hearing them, and con&s;equently lawful to hear them.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. Very good! It &s;eems then that all that refu&s;e to hear the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters, are prophane <HI>E&s;aus:</HI> this he will have &s;o much in|genuity as to retract in his next. 2. He &s;uppo&s;eth that the non-hear|ing of the Mini&s;ters is a refu&s;ing to hear the Word of God, which is a mo&s;t nefarious and diabolical accu&s;ation. We refu&s;e not to hear the Word of God in the way of his own appointment, but to comply with and abet a fal&s;e Antichri&s;tian-Mini&s;try. 3. The People of God con|ceive it to be one part of their birth-right as Men and Chri&s;tians, not to be compelled to hear tho&s;e who come in their own names, in the name of Antichri&s;t, which they refu&s;e to &s;ell for advantage, in the World, with prophane <HI>E&s;au,</HI> and therefore judge it irrational, a con|tradiction, to be accu&s;ed, as if prophane, like him, for not d<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">ing that, upon the account of his doing whereof, he was branded by the Spirit of
<PB N="461" REF="234"> the Lord as &s;uch.&mdash;4. They judge they may more ratio|nally argue, To hear the Word of God as delivered by the pre&s;ent Mi|ni&s;ters is an <HI>E&s;au</HI>-like prophanene&s;s, (becau&s;e, 1. 'tis a rejection of their birth-right, as Men and Chri&s;tians. 2. 'Tis a compliance with, encouragement of tho&s;e who trample upon the Sovereignty, Authority of Chri&s;t. 3. 'Tis a departing from the appointments of Chri&s;t, to the Ordinances of Antichri&s;t, which is no &s;mall undervaluing of the Grace of Chri&s;t, of the Go&s;pel, whereof <HI>E&s;au</HI>'s prophanene&s;s was a Type.) Therefore 'tis unlawful to hear them.</P>
<P><HI>Arg.</HI> 7. The &s;eventh Argument advanced by him for this good &s;er|vice, is, <HI>The Word of God is a Pearl of great price,</HI> Mat. 7. 6. <HI>&amp;</HI> 13. 44, 46. <HI>Therefore to be heard and received by whom&s;oever held forth; and con&s;equently it's folly and &s;in to refu&s;e hearing it, becau&s;e of per&s;onal ex|ceptions again&s;t the bringer.&mdash;</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. We deny the con&s;equence, nor will Mr. T. affirm it, out of the heat of di&s;pute, to be true; he hath a&s;&s;erted the contrary in his <HI>Theod.</HI> 2. 'Tis wi&s;dom, not folly, to refu&s;e to meddle with the Pearl of the Prince, when brought us by the hands of tho&s;e from whom he hath charged us not to receive it, who were never authorized by him to bring it to us, e&s;pecially when it is to be had from per&s;ons of his own authori&s;ement. 3. We have found the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters &s;uch merchan|dizers for their own profit in the World, that they put off dro&s;s for Gold, and &s;tones for Pearls; at the be&s;t, mix it with the dirt and gravel of the Antichri&s;tian City, the traditions of the great Whore, which they al&s;o impo&s;e upon us.&mdash;4. We think we may more ju&s;tly argue; The Word of God is a precious Pearl, <HI>(Mat.</HI> 7. 6. <HI>&amp;</HI> 13. 44, 46.) therefore they ought not to hear the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters, who &s;poil, corrupt it with their traditions, and thereby offer violence to it; who contemn, de&s;pi&s;e, tread underfoot much of the Contents thereof; who huck&s;ter, and make merchandize of it; who prefer the Canon-Law of Antichri&s;t before it, &s;o deba&s;eing it to their lu&s;ts, and wills of their Lords and Ma&s;ters, le&s;t they &s;hould partake of the guilt of tho&s;e injuries they offer thereunto, whom they &s;ee (many of them) more zea|lous and nice in the punctual ob&s;ervance of an Edict, or In&s;titution, given forth by their Ma&s;ters the Bi&s;hops, as bowing the knee, uncover|ing the head, or the like, than the In&s;titutions of their Lord Chri&s;t. So that we may too truly &s;ay of them as <HI>Theodoricus Niemen&s;is</HI> once &s;aid; As the Prie&s;ts of the Jews were at la&s;t po&s;&s;e&s;&s;ed with that madne&s;s, that they cried out, <HI>We have no King but Cae&s;ar;</HI> So I have a long time feared, and do fear, that our Prie&s;ts may &s;ay, We have no other King but the Pre|late. He adds,</P>
<PB N="462" REF="235">
<P> Arg. 8. <HI>If the Word of God preached by the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters may be effectual for that good, which is the end wherefore it is preached, then it ought to be heard from them, according to</HI> James 1. 21. 1 Pet. 2. 1. <HI>But the Word of God preached by the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters may be thus effectual. Therefore.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. If he under&s;tand the <HI>Major</HI> of a <HI>may be</HI> of <HI>po&s;&s;ibility,</HI> with re&s;pect to the power of God, we deny the con&s;equence of the <HI>Major</HI> Propo&s;ition. God can, if he plea&s;e, by the mini&s;tration of Angels, good or bad, effect that for which the Word is preached; but it doth not therefore follow that we may attend the Mini&s;try of the&s;e, e&s;pecially the latter of them. 2. If of a <HI>may be</HI> of <HI>credibility,</HI> with re&s;pect to In&s;titution, <HI>i. e.</HI> I have ground to expect it will be, by virtue of the pro|mi&s;e of God, for the ble&s;&s;ing of his own In&s;titution, and making it ef|fectual for the end intended, we deny his <HI>Minor;</HI> which he will be a|ble to make good, when he proves that the preaching the Word of God by the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters, is a Divine In&s;titution, upon which the Lord hath promi&s;ed his ble&s;&s;ing for the making it effectual for the ends for which he hath in&s;tituted the preaching of the Go&s;pel; which we have already di&s;proved. 3. This Argument may be righte|ou&s;ly retorted again&s;t him&s;elf, That preaching the Word of God, in which (by virtue of any In&s;titution of the Lord, or promi&s;e of his Ble&s;&s;ing and Pre&s;ence thereupon) I may not expect &s;hould be effectual for that good for which preaching the Word was in&s;tituted by him, is not to be attended. But this is true, with re&s;pect to the preaching the Word of God by the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters. Which will be taken for gran|ted, till what is offered in this Treati&s;e to prove it, be enervated, and the promi&s;e of the Pre&s;ence and Ble&s;&s;ing of God upon their &s;o doing, as his own In&s;titution be produced. Which as yet we have not met with. Therefore.&mdash;He goes on,</P>
<P>Arg. 9. <HI>That is not unlawful, (lawful</HI> he means) <HI>the neglect of which may be the occa&s;ion and rea&s;on of a mans condemnation. But the neglect of hearing the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters may be the occa&s;ion and rea&s;on of a mans con|demnation. Therefore.&mdash;</HI>The <HI>minor</HI> he proves thus; <HI>The neglect of coming to the Light, may be the rea&s;on of mens condemnation,</HI> John 3. 20. <HI>But the neglect of hearing the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters, is a neglect of coming to the Light, for they hold forth the Light. Therefore.&mdash;</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. We deny the <HI>minor</HI> of both Propo&s;itions. The coming to the Light, <HI>John</HI> 3. 20. is believing in Chri&s;t (the true Light, <HI>John</HI> 1.) of their not &s;o doing Chri&s;t complains, <HI>John</HI> 5. 40. That the neglect of hearing the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters &s;hould be a refu&s;ing to believe in <HI>Chri&s;t,</HI>
<PB N="463" REF="235"> is not ea&s;ily demon&s;trated. 2. There are others that hold forth the Light (in the <HI>Animadverters</HI> &s;en&s;e) <HI>i. e.</HI> preach the Go&s;pel be&s;ide (and at another rate than) the Prelati&s;ts and their Dependan<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">s, whom if we hear, (by his own Argument) we neglect not to come to the Light. 3. The pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters hold not forth the pure Light of the Go|&s;pel, they obfu&s;cate, darken it by humane Traditions and Ceremo|nies.&mdash;4. We may more ju&s;tly argue, tho&s;e Teachers that oppo&s;e and hinder the holding forth the Light, or the fruitful faithful preaching of Gods Word, may be the occa&s;ion and rea&s;on of mens con|demnation, and &s;o not to be owned and joyned with. But the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters of <HI>England</HI> do &s;o. Therefore. The <HI>Major</HI> will not be denied; the <HI>Minor</HI> is (for the mo&s;t part) Mr. T. his own, in his <HI>Fermentum Pha|ri&s;aeorum,</HI> p. 7. and is generally known to be true. I would gladly be informed how tho&s;e that are di&s;affected, adver&s;aries to, and do oppo&s;e fruitful, faithful, and godly preaching, (which Mr. <HI>T.</HI> affirms the Teach|ers of <HI>England</HI> do) can be &s;aid to hold forth the Light. His tenth Ar|gument follows.</P>
<P>Arg. 10. <HI>We may go to them as Teachers of us who have the words of eter|nal Life,</HI> John 6. 68. <HI>But the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters, who teach the Go&s;pel of Chri&s;t, have the words of eternal Life, for it contains his words, and is the power of God to Salvation from the matter of it,</HI> Rom. 1. 16. 2 Cor. 10. 4, 5.</P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. By the words of <HI>Eternal Life</HI> he means, the Doctrine or Matter of the Go&s;pel, in which &s;en&s;e we deny his <HI>Major.</HI> That becau&s;e a man hath read the Scripture<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">, and got a Sy&s;teme of Divinity into his head, (without one drop of the Spirit, or inward experience of the things he notionally under&s;tands) therefore he is fit to be a Teacher of the Go&s;pel, and mu&s;t be attended, will not in ha&s;t be believed by &s;uch as have acquaintance with the My&s;teries thereof. <HI>John</HI> 6. 68. proves it not, being &s;poken of Chri&s;t, who was in the bo&s;om of the Father, &s;ent into the World, commi&s;&s;ionated by him to preach the words of eternal Life. 2. That the Go&s;pel, from the matter of it, is the Power of God to Salvation, I mu&s;t crave leave to enter my demurrer again&s;t; 'tis the energie, or powerful working of the Spirit of the Lord with it, which makes it to be &s;o, (upon the account whereof, the words of Chri&s;t are by <HI>Peter</HI> &s;aid to be <GAP DESC="foreign">, <HI>the words of eternal Life,</HI> which to affirm, that any of the Sons of Men have as Chri&s;t had, to whom the Spirit was given without mea&s;ure, is little le&s;s than bla&s;phemy) with|out which the matter of the Go&s;pel, or the Glorious-Truths contained therein operate not to the &s;alvation of any, for want whereof 'tis to
<PB N="464" REF="236"> &s;ome <HI>the &s;avour of death unto death, a &s;tumbling-block, fooli&s;hne&s;s, not profiting them at all.</HI> In it lies the whole of its energie and power, its mightine&s;s to bring into captivity <HI>every thought to the obedience of Chri&s;t,</HI> is &s;aid to be through God, 2 <HI>Cor.</HI> 10. 4, 5.</P>
</DIV3>
<DIV3 N="2" TYPE="section">
<HEAD><HI>Sect.</HI> 2.</HEAD>
<ARGUMENT>
<P><HI>Arguments for hearing the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters, refuted. Per&s;onal qu<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">lificati|ons to be heeded in hearing. The ca&s;e of the</HI> Beraeans, <HI>Acts</HI> 17. 11, 12. <HI>examined. Its impertinency to the matter in hand, manife&s;te<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">. The Mi|ni&s;ters of</HI> England <HI>forbidden to preach in Chri&s;ts Name. The weakne&s;s of Mr.</HI> T. <HI>his rea&s;oning from</HI> Luke 9. 49, 50. Mat. 7. 22, 23. <HI>di&s;|covered. In hearing the Mini&s;ters, we hear not Chri&s;t,</HI> Luke 10. 16. <HI>con&s;idered. Of their preaching the Go&s;pel of Peace. The reception of gifts how to be improved. Of the intere&s;t of Saints in Go&s;pel-Mini&s;ters. Forbidding men to hear the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters, no glorying in men: The&s;e are no Stewards of the My&s;teries of God.&mdash;</HI></P>
</ARGUMENT>
<P>THE eleventh Argument Mr. <HI>T.</HI> advanceth to prove the lawfulne&s;s of hearing the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters is thus formed, <HI>If we ought to hear the Word of God as Gods Word, we ought to hear it at any time from any per&s;on, without con&s;ideration of the per&s;onal qualifications of them that deliver it. But the Word of God is to be heard as Gods Word, and not as the words of men,</HI> 1 The&s;. 2. 13. <HI>Therefore.&mdash;</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> We deny the con&s;equence of the fir&s;t Propo&s;ition, That we hear the Word of God as Gods Word, <HI>i. e.</HI> with reverence and godly attention, is our duty; of which the Apo&s;tle, 1 <HI>The&s;.</HI> 2. 13. that in hear|ing, we ought to have re&s;pect to per&s;onal qualifications, we have proved abundantly in this Treati&s;e. He adds,</P>
<P>Arg. 12. <HI>They may be right hearers of the Word, who may hear them as the</HI> Beraeans <HI>did,</HI> Acts 17. 11, 12. <HI>But the</HI> Beraeans <HI>heard the Word of God without re&s;pect to per&s;onal qualifications, as examining his Commi&s;&s;ion to preach, or the like. Therefore.&mdash;</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> The <HI>Major</HI> is denied. 1. Tho&s;e whom the <HI>Beraeans</HI> heard were extraordinary Officers, who confirmed their Calling by Miracles, ours not &s;o, who give no &s;uch evident proof thereof; therefore there is more rea&s;on to have re&s;pect to per&s;onal qualifications. 2. They were not converted to Chri&s;tianity, knew nothing of any per&s;onal qualifications was required by the rules thereof, that they ought to have re&s;pect un|to; 'tis otherwi&s;e with us: there are per&s;onal qualifications required in
<PB N="465" REF="236"> the Go&s;pel in per&s;ons that go forth authoritatively to preach it. Which we are to have regard to. 3. They had no ju&s;t ground of per&s;onal ex|ceptions again&s;t the Apo&s;tles, as we have again&s;t the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters. 4. There was no Scripture-Law interdicting their hearing the Apo&s;tles, we have produced &s;everal Statute-Laws given forth by our Lord and King, forbidding our hearing the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters. 5. They preach'd onely the Word of God, the&s;e the Traditions of men; of this matter we have already treated, <HI>Chap.</HI> 3. <HI>Sect.</HI> 1. His thirteenth Argument follows.</P>
<P>Arg. 13. <HI>They may be heard preach in Chri&s;ts Name, who are not to be forbidden to preach in Chri&s;ts Name; but the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters are not to be forbidden to preach in Chri&s;ts Name. Therefore.&mdash;</HI>The <HI>Minor</HI> he proves by a parity of rea&s;on thus, <HI>Christ forbad not tho&s;e who ca&s;t out De|vils in his Name, yet joyned not with his Di&s;ciples, &s;ith &s;o doing they did not &s;peak evil of Chri&s;t, nor were again&s;t him, but for him,</HI> Luke 9. 49, 50. <HI>Therefore he would not have the other forbidden to preach in his Name.&mdash;</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> We deny his <HI>Minor;</HI> we have proved the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters are forbidden to preach in his Name. To the proof thereof we an&s;wer. That it doth not follow, that becau&s;e Chri&s;t would not have the per&s;on forbid that ca&s;t out Devils in his Name, &s;o to do that, therefore he would not have the Mini&s;ters of <HI>England</HI> forbid to preach.&mdash;For, 1. there was no previous Election or Call required to that work, as there is to the authoritative preaching of the Go&s;pel. 2. He ca&s;t out Devils in the Name and Authority of Chri&s;t; The&s;e men act from the authority of Antichri&s;t. 3. He was not again&s;t Chri&s;t; the&s;e &s;peak evil of, op|po&s;e, per&s;ecute him in his wayes and people. 4. By this Argument, for ought I know, he may as well prove it lawful to hear an unconver|ted <HI>Pagan,</HI> if he get &s;ome Sriptures to read to us, for I find not that the per&s;on that ca&s;t out Devils was converted to Chri&s;tianity.</P>
<P>Arg. 14. His fourteenth Argument is thus formed, <HI>Their prophe&s;y|ing in Chri&s;ts Name, who were workers of iniquity, is not condemned, but allowed by Chri&s;t as good,</HI> Mat. 7. 22, 23. <HI>Therefore their teaching in Chri&s;ts Name, who are onely &s;uppo&s;ed to be defective in outward Calling, or faulty in &s;ome actions con&s;i&s;tent with Chri&s;tianity, is to be allowed, and &s;o by con&s;equence the hearing of them.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. The <HI>Major</HI> is not proved in the Scripture cited by him; their prophe&s;ying in Chri&s;ts Name &s;eems rather to be condemned: They plead this with Chri&s;t for ownings and acceptance; Away, &s;aith Chri&s;t, I am &s;o far from thinking that you de&s;erve any thing for that,
<PB N="466" REF="237"> that I account their very prophe&s;ying in my Name to be a work of <HI>ini|quity,</HI> and you upon the account thereof <HI>workers of iniquity.</HI> But, 2. we deny the con&s;equence; it follows not that though Chri&s;t did allow (if he did) their prophe&s;ying in his Name, that therefore the teaching and hearing the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters of <HI>England</HI> is allowable. For, 1. though Chri&s;t tells them that they are <HI>workers of iniquity,</HI> yet they &s;eem to be &s;uch clo&s;e Hypocrites that no body el&s;e knew them to be &s;o, no it &s;eems not they them&s;elves, for they come at the very la&s;t to Chri&s;t for own|ings and admi&s;&s;ion. They &s;eem much like to the fooli&s;h Virgins, <HI>Mat.</HI> 25. Many of the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters are vi&s;ibly wicked and pro|phane. 2. They prophe&s;ied in Chri&s;ts Name from a vi&s;ible authority committed to them by him; the&s;e not &s;o, as we have proved. 3. They vi&s;ibly owned the King&s;hip and Lordly Authority of Chri&s;t, the&s;e deny it, as we have proved. He adds,</P>
<P>Arg. 15. <HI>They may be lawfully heard, in hearing whom we may hear Chri&s;t; but by hearing the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters, who preach the Doctrine of Christ, we hear Christ. Therefore.&mdash;The rea&s;on of the</HI> Minor <HI>is from the Speech of Christ,</HI> John 7. 16. My Doctrine is not mine, but him that &s;ent me; <HI>&s;o the Preachers Doctrine which he preacheth, after Christ, is not his own, but Chri&s;ts, who &s;ent him; as an Amba&s;&s;adors Me&s;&s;age is his Kings, not his own, and by hearing him deliver it according <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">o his Com|mi&s;&s;ion, his Ma&s;ter is heard.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> We deny his <HI>Minor;</HI> which <HI>John</HI> 7. 16. proves not. He vain|ly &s;urmizeth, 1. That every one that preacheth the Doctrine of Chri&s;t, is &s;ent by Chri&s;t, which we have over and over confuted. 2. That the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters are the Amba&s;&s;adors of Chri&s;t, Act by virtue of Commi&s;&s;ion from him, which he &s;hould have proved, not begg'd, we have evinced the contrary. 3. We may more ju&s;tly argue, They on|ly are lawfully to be heard, by hearing whom we hear Chri&s;t, (for he is the great Prophet of the Church, whom we are to hear in all things) but in hearing the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters, we hear not Chri&s;t. Therefore.&mdash;The <HI>Major</HI> will be denied; the <HI>Minor</HI> is evident, partly from the rea&s;on given by the <HI>Animadverter,</HI> their Doctrine for a great part of it is not Chri&s;ts, but their own; but chiefly, becau&s;e they are not &s;ent by Chri&s;t, upon the account whereof 'tis that Chri&s;t &s;aith, <HI>Luke</HI> 10. 16. <HI>He that heareth you, heareth me;</HI> as is evident from, <HI>v.</HI> 1, 2, 3. He proceeds, and &s;aith.</P>
<P>Arg. 16. <HI>Tho&s;e that preach the Go&s;pel of Peace, that bring the glad tydings of good things, are &s;ent to preach, their feet are beautiful, and they</HI>
<PB N="467" REF="237"> <HI>are to be heard,&mdash;</HI>Rom. 10. 15. <HI>But the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters preach the Go&s;pel of Peace.&mdash;Therefore.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. The <HI>Major</HI> under&s;tood univer&s;ally, is not true, nor will Mr. <HI>T.</HI> affirm it to be &s;o. All that preach the Go&s;pel of Peace&mdash;are not &s;ent <HI>(i. e.</HI> as Officers are Commi&s;&s;ionated by Chri&s;t) to preach, nor doth the Scripture produced evince any &s;uch thing, but the contrary, <HI>viz.</HI> that a man cannot <HI>(i. e. authoritativ&egrave;,</HI> and by virtue of an Office, Power, lawfully) preach the Go&s;pel of glad Tydings except he be &s;ent. And how &s;hall they preach except they be &s;ent, <HI>i. e.</HI> they can|not <HI>authoritativ&egrave;,</HI> and lawfully do &s;o. So that, 2. we may better ar|gue, Tho&s;e that have no Go&s;pel Mi&s;&s;ion for the preaching of the Go|&s;pel, and in the &s;tead of preaching thereof, preach the Traditions of men, are not to be heard as Mini&s;ters of the Go&s;pel; But this is true of the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters. Therefore.</P>
<P>We proceed to the con&s;ideration of his &s;eventeenth Argument, the &s;ub&s;tance whereof is, <HI>Tho&s;e who have received abilities from Christ to preach the Go&s;pel, ought to improve tho&s;e abilities in their &s;o doing, and are therein to be attended,</HI> Mat. 25. 15. Luke 19. 13. 1 Cor. 12. 7, 8, 28, 29. Ephe&s;. 4. 11. <HI>But the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters have received abilities to preach the Go&s;pel, and ought to improve their abilities in that work. There|fore.&mdash;</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. The <HI>Major</HI> is not ab&s;olutely true, 'Tis the duty of tho&s;e who have received gifts from God to improve them, and to be attend|ed in their &s;o doing; but both the one and the other is to be done law|fully. Becau&s;e a Friar hath received gifts from God, a Drunkard, Ido|later, it doth not therefore follow that he is bound to exerci&s;e the&s;e gifts in a fal&s;e Mini&s;try, or that I am bound to attend upon per&s;ons of &s;uch a Character in the exerci&s;e thereof. 2. Nor do the Scriptures pro|duced in this Argument, or 1 <HI>Pet.</HI> 4. 10, 11. (in the following Argu|ment, which is comprehended in this, and requires no other an&s;wer) &s;peak any &s;uch thing. They relate to per&s;ons in, and of the Kingdom of Heaven, in a regular Go&s;pel-Church-State, and the improvement of gifts in a regular, orderly way, according to the appointment of Chri&s;t. 3. This Principle lies at the bottom of this Argument, That gifts received make a lawful Mini&s;ter, and we are bound to attend up|on &s;uch, as &s;uch who have received gifts from God, be they never &s;o wicked and &s;candalous in their Conver&s;ation; which Mr. <HI>T.</HI> upon &s;e|cond thoughts will not a&s;&s;ert. 4. As to the mo&s;t of the pre&s;ent Mini|&s;try, the <HI>Minor</HI> may be righteou&s;ly denyed. They preach not the Go&s;pel, nor have they received gifts &s;o to do.</P>
<PB N="468" REF="238">
<P> His 18^t^h <HI>Argument</HI> is for &s;ub&s;tance the &s;ame with this, and hath re|ceived its An&s;wer. We proceed to his 19th.</P>
<P>Arg. 19. <HI>Every Chri&s;tian hath an intere&s;t in every Preacher of the Go|&s;pel, &s;o that no Mini&s;ter is to be accounted as peculiar to any party of Chri&s;ti|ans, &s;o as to be impropriated by them, that the ability of every one may be u&s;ed by any, though not their proper Mini&s;ter, nor per&s;ons regularly ordained, as is evident from,</HI> 1 Cor. 3. 22. Acts 18. 24, 25, 26. <HI>Therefore <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">he pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters may be heard by any Saints while they teach the Go&s;pel, though &s;uch irregularities as are objected again&s;t them, were granted to be in them, or their Mini&s;try.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. Every Chri&s;tian hath an Intere&s;t in every Go&s;pel Mini|&s;ter, and may lawfully hear him, is true: But Mr. <HI>T.</HI> mu&s;t prove the pre|&s;ent Mini&s;ters to be &s;uch, el&s;e he him&s;elf will acknowledge the <HI>Argu|ment</HI> is invalid. 2. Grant <HI>Apollos</HI> was not &s;ent forth to peac<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter"> the Go|&s;pel by virtue of Office; he might be heard as a gifted Brother, which we have proved the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters cannot. 3. It doth not follow that becau&s;e the Saints at <HI>Corinth</HI> had an Intere&s;t in every Mini&s;ter:&mdash;Therefore 'tis lawful for Saints to hear the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters.</P>
<P>Arg. 20. The &s;um of his 20^t^h <HI>Argument</HI> is, <HI>Preferring one Mini&s;ter of the Go&s;pel&mdash;before another, becau&s;e of our party and way, is glorying in men, forbidden by the Apo&s;tle</HI> 1 Cor. 3. 21. &amp; 4. 6. <HI>But to forbid hearing the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters of</HI> England, <HI>though Mini&s;ters of the Go&s;pel,&mdash;and <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">ying&punc;men to hear tho&s;e only who are their elected Mini&s;ters, is a preferring one Mini&s;ter of the Go&s;pel before another. Therefore.&mdash;</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> We deny his <HI>Minor;</HI> Becau&s;e, 1. The Mini&s;ters of <HI>England</HI> are not Mini&s;ters of the Go&s;pel. 2. We tie not per&s;ons to hear only tho&s;e of our own way, as he calls it. Such as fear God, act not as Mini|&s;ters of the Go&s;pel from an Antichri&s;tian Call, walk orderly,&mdash;let Saints hear: None as I know of will interdict them &s;o to do. I am &s;orry Mr. <HI>T.</HI> &s;hould di&s;cover his nakedne&s;s &s;o much, that every <HI>Argu|ment</HI> almo&s;t &s;hould be a meer <HI>petitio principii,</HI> a &s;orry begging the thing in que&s;tion, or build upon &s;ome mon&s;trous notorious mi&s;ta<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">e, in the review whereof he will &s;urely be a&s;hamed. Thus fares it with him in his 21^t^h <HI>Argument.</HI></P>
<P>Arg. 21. <HI>Tho&s;e Mini&s;ters who are the Mini&s;ters of Chri&s;t,&mdash;who la|bour among the Saints and are over them in the Lord, and admoni&s;h them that are Elders that rule well, e&s;pecially tho&s;e who labour in the Word and Doctrine, who are their Rulers or Guides, who &s;peak to them the Word of God, are to be e&s;teemed, honoured, remembred for their works &s;ake,</HI> 1 Cor. 4. 1. 1 The&s;. 5. 12, 13. 1 Tim. 5. 13. <HI>Heb.</HI> 13. 7. <HI>and therefore much more</HI>
<PB N="469" REF="238"> <HI>are to be heard: But the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters of</HI> England <HI>are the Mini&s;ters of Chri&s;t:&mdash;Therefore.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> The <HI>Minor</HI> is denied, wherein the <HI>Animadverter</HI> pittifully beggs u<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter"> to grant what he &s;hould have proved; That the Mini&s;ters of <HI>England</HI> are the Mini&s;ters of Chri&s;t, which no one in their right wits will &s;uppo&s;e he proves by this Argument. The Mini&s;ters of Chri&s;t are Stewards <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 word"> <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">he my&s;teries of God, who labour in the Word and Do|ctrine, who <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">peak unto us the Word of God: But the Mini&s;ters of <HI>Eng|land</HI> are Stewards of the my&s;teries of God,&mdash;for be&s;ides the begging of what we &s;hall not grant him; <HI>viz. That the Mini&s;ters of</HI> England <HI>are Stewards of the my&s;teries of God,</HI> which none can be but tho&s;e who are put into the Office of Steward&s;hip by the Lord of the Family, which we challenge Mr. <HI>T.</HI> or any one for him, to make good with relation to the Mini&s;ters of <HI>England.</HI> It invelops and wraps up in it this ab&s;urdity, <HI>That whoever labours in the Word and Doctrine&mdash;is a Mini&s;ter of Chri&s;t.</HI> Of which we have frequently &s;poken, and beg Mr. <HI>T.</HI> for the future not to impo&s;e thus crudely upon us without proof. 2. That they are over the People of God in the Lord, <HI>i. e.</HI> by virtue of Divine appointment, which we have di&s;proved. 3. That they are Elders, who being only in and over a particular Church of Chri&s;t (as we have proved) they cannot be. 4. That they are Elders who rule well, whereas they have no authority to rule at all, that is a flower that grows only in their Lord-Bi&s;hops Garden, intru&s;ted mo&s;tly in the hands of an Antichri&s;tian Officer call'd a <HI>Chancellour.</HI> 5. That they labour in the Word and Doctrine, which as touching the generallity of them is fal&s;e, who labour only in their Ceremonies and Service-book. 6. That they are their Rulers and Guides, which they cannot be but by their free con&s;ent (as hath been &s;hewed) which they never had nor &s;ought after.</P>
<P><HI>Arg.</HI> 21. Retorted; It may more ju&s;tly be Argued, <HI>Tho&s;e Mini|&s;ters who are not the Mini&s;ters of Christ, nor Stewards of the My&s;teries of God, who labour not among the Saints, nor are over them in the Lord, nor admoni&s;h them, who are not Elders that Rule well, nor labour in the Word and Doctrine, who are not legally their Rulers and Guides, who &s;peak not to them the pure Word of God, but the Traditions of men, 'tis unlawful for Saints to hear: But this is all true concerning &s;ome of the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters, and &s;ome what of it concerning all of them. Therefore.&mdash;</HI></P>
<P>What he &s;aith of denying the Saints Liberty,<HI>&mdash;That 'tis a &s;in again&s;t the 5th Commandment,</HI> is ridiculous, till he hath proved them our &s;piri|tual Parents.</P>
</DIV3>
<DIV3 N="3" TYPE="section">
<PB N="470" REF="239">
<HEAD>Sect. 3.</HEAD>
<ARGUMENT>
<P><HI>Non-hearing the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters tends not to Schi&s;m. (The nature of Schi&s;m. The Schi&s;m condemned in the Church of Corinth, what?) 'Tis not to have the Faith of our Lord Je&s;us Chri&s;t with re&s;pect of per&s;ons. (The</HI> <GAP DESC="foreign">, <HI>or accepting per&s;ons condemned,</HI> Jam. 2. 1. <HI>what it is.) 'Tis not to cau&s;e offences and divi&s;ions, contrary to</HI> Rom. 12. 4, 5. &amp; 14. 1. &amp; 15. 1. &amp; 16. 17. <HI>Nor making inclo&s;ures, co<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="4 letters"> to</HI> 1 Cor. 14. 36. Phil. 3. 15, 16. <HI>explained. The vanity of</HI> Mr. T. <HI>his arguings from thence, manife&s;ted. The Holy Gho&s;ts recording the Prophe&s;i<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter"> of</HI> Ba|laam. <HI>Of</HI> Caiphas, <HI>of Infidel Idolatrous Poets, no grounds for the Saints to hear the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters. The impertinency of</HI> 1 The&s;. 5. 20, 21. <HI>to his purpo&s;e. Nothing can be argued to prove the lawfulne&s;s of hearing them from the Authors conce&s;&s;ion</HI> Chap. 2. <HI>Our Rea&s;ons against hearing them, cannot righteou&s;ly be retorted again&s;t our &s;elves. The grounds of our denying the lawfulne&s;s thereof, neither fal&s;e nor doubtful. The Ministers of</HI> England <HI>have not &s;ufficiently proved the truth of their Mini&s;try. Of the duty of Chri&s;tians with re&s;pect to hearing. The power of the Church over Mini&s;ters. Non-hearing the pre&s;ent Ministers, takes not away the the Chri&s;tians Liberty. Is no negative Superstition. Our denial of the lawfulne&s;s of hearing them, no denial of the King&s;hip of Chri&s;t, or u&s;urpa|tion thereof. No hindrance of the knowledge of Gods Word. No evil con|&s;equences or ab&s;urdities follow hereupon.</HI></P>
</ARGUMENT>
<P>FOR the lawfulne&s;s of hearing the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters, Mr. <HI>T.</HI> further argues thus.</P>
<P>Arg. 22. <HI>That which tends to Schi&s;m among&s;t Chri&s;tians, or to a breach of that peace, unity and love, &s;hould be among them who have the &s;ame God, Lord, Spirit, Faith,&mdash;that is the &s;ame, or very like Schi&s;m among the</HI> Co|rinthians, <HI>or tends to it, and hath begotten, or is like to beget the &s;ame if not wor&s;e effects among the Christians in</HI> England, <HI>is to be avoided as a great evil; and that which tends to peace among them, is a great good to be imbraced,</HI> 1 The&s;. 5. 13. 1 Cor. 12. 25, 26, 27. <HI>But the non-hearing the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters of</HI> England <HI>tends to Schi&s;m amongst Chri&s;tians. Therefore.&mdash;</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> We deny his <HI>Minor.</HI> Non-hearing the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters is not Schi&s;m, tends not to it; is nothing like the Schi&s;m among&s;t the <HI>Corinthians.</HI> For, 1&s;t, We were never by our free con&s;ent Members of the Church of <HI>England.</HI> 2dly, It's no particular in&s;tituted Church of Chri&s;t. 3dly, We meet not with them, and there di&s;pute, &s;ide, quar|rel, contend when met together for the celebration of the &s;am<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter"> nume|rical Ordinances, as was the ca&s;e of the Church of <HI>Corinth.</HI> The matter
<PB N="471" REF="239"> of Schi&s;m is &s;o clearly &s;tated, our non-concern therein with re&s;pect to our departure from the Church of <HI>England,</HI> by Dr. <HI>Owen</HI> in his Trea|ti&s;e of <HI>Schi&s;m,</HI> that (as Mr. <HI>Cawdrey</HI> hath not) Mr. <HI>T.</HI> will never be able &s;olidly to reply thereunto. 4thly, We do nothing in our &s;epa|rating from them, than what God calls us to, as we have proved. If the di&s;turbance of peace, envyings,&mdash;en&s;ue hereupon, we cannot help it; the&s;e things were the frequent attendments of the Go&s;pel in the fir&s;t promulgation thereof as is known, whil&s;t we make it our care to keep the guilt of the&s;e things from off us, we are innocent, and not concern'd with the bitter and pa&s;&s;ionate declamations of per&s;ons hereabout. We may with more evidence of truth argue, That which tends to Schi&s;m among&s;t the Churches of Chri&s;t, or to a breach of the peace, unity and love which &s;hould be among them, which is the &s;ame, or much like the Schi&s;m that was among&s;t the Members of the Church of <HI>Corinth,</HI> is to be avoided as a great evil: But the hearing the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters tends to Schi&s;m.&mdash;Therefore.&mdash;He further Argues;</P>
<P>Arg. 23. <HI>That which is to have the Faith of our Lord Je&s;us Chri&s;t with re&s;pect of per&s;ons, for other rea&s;ons than their faith, is &s;inful and unlawful,</HI> Jam. 2. 1. <HI>But to hear one that preacheth the Faith of Chri&s;t, becau&s;e he is of our particular Society, or by rea&s;on of particular interest, or agreement in opinion, or any other than the unity of Faith in the Lord Je&s;us; and to declaim hearing another that hath the &s;ame Faith, preacheth it, and holds communi|on with them that imbrace it, or to &s;eparate from &s;uch.&mdash;</HI>(He &s;hould have added, becau&s;e he is not of our particular Society, or by rea&s;on of particular intere&s;t, or non-agreement in opinion) <HI>is to have the Faith of our Lord Je&s;us with re&s;pect of per&s;ons.&mdash;Therefore.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> We may grant the whole without the lea&s;t di&s;advantage to the cau&s;e we have undertaken the defence of; we refu&s;e not the hearing the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters becau&s;e not of our particular Society,&mdash;but for other Rea&s;ons, of which before. 2. The <GAP DESC="foreign">, or <HI>accepting per&s;ons,</HI> that is condemned, <HI>Jam.</HI> 2. 1. is a re&s;pecting per&s;ons for their out|ward condition in the world, as their riches, honour,&mdash;with the neg|lect or contempt of others, though equal or better de&s;erving, for their poverty, or the like; which cannot be charged upon us with re&s;pect to the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters; &s;o that this in&s;tance of the Apo&s;tle is not at all to his purpo&s;e. He adds;</P>
<P>Arg. 24. <HI>To cau&s;e offences and divi&s;ions contrary to the Doctrine taught us in the Scriptures, is &s;inful and unlawful,</HI> Rom. 16. 17. <HI>But tho&s;e who teach men not to hear their Ministers, which preach to them the truth of Gods VVord, becau&s;e they are not in a Congregational Church, or not Elected, and</HI>
<PB N="472" REF="240"> <HI>Ordained, according to the Rules of &s;uch Churches, or becau&s;e they conform to &s;ome things conceived unwarrantable, which are made the rea&s;on<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter"> of un|lawfulne&s;s to hear the pre&s;ent Ministers, do cau&s;e offences and divi&s;io<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">s, con|trary to the Doctrine,</HI> Rom. 12. 4. 5. &amp; 14. 1. &amp; 15. 1. <HI>Therefore.&mdash;</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> This Argument is bottom'd upon many mi&s;erable mi&s;takes, the di&s;covery whereof will expo&s;e it to the contempt of all that pa&s;s by, for its in&s;ufficiency and weakne&s;s, in re&s;pect of the end aimed at by it. 1&s;t, We teach not men, not to hear their own Mini&s;ters, but &s;uch, as <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">ccord|ing to the appointment of Chri&s;t, were never &s;uch. 2dly, VVe teach them not to avoid &s;uch as preach the pure Word of God, but &s;uct as cor|rupt it, intermixing therewith the leaven of Antichri&s;tiani&s;m and Su|per&s;tition, which Mr. <HI>T.</HI> tells us, in his <HI>Fermentum Phari&s;ae<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="2 letters">um,</HI> is a good ground to avoid hearing them. 3dly, We &s;ay not that they are not to be heard meerly becau&s;e not in a Congregational Church,&mdash;but becau&s;e we are de&s;titute of any Scripture-Warrant for our &s;o doing, becau&s;e they walk di&s;orderly, act from an Antichri&s;tian Call.&mdash;That this is to cau&s;e offences contrary to the Doctrine, <HI>Rom.</HI> 12. 4. &amp; 14. 1. &amp; 15. 1. which forbids the giving offence to weak Believers, by the intempe&s;tive u&s;ing of our Liberty in things indifferent, is &s;uch a frivo|lous conceit, as per&s;ons may put Mr. <HI>T.</HI> to the blu&s;h upon the review thereof. He argues further;</P>
<P>Arg. 25. <HI>Schi&s;matical and arrogant conceits, that the VVord of God is from them as the only right Teachers, or confined to them, as the only per&s;ons to whom it was communicated, and from whom it might be received, is con|demned by the Apo&s;tle,</HI> 1 Cor. 14. 36. <HI>But &s;uch conceits and inclo&s;ures they have and make, who deny the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters to be heard, conceiving the &s;eparated Churches and Mini&s;ters the only right Churches and Mini&s;ters to be heard. Therefore.&mdash;</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. We deny the <HI>Minor;</HI> we make no &s;uch inclo&s;ures as the Apo&s;tle condemns, which are not what are mentioned by this <HI>Animad|verter;</HI> There were no Churches of Chri&s;t in the world at that day, &s;o much as in Name and pretence, but &s;uch as were &s;eparated, the&s;e were the right Churches and no other, no ordinary Mini&s;ters but &s;uch as were related to, and Mini&s;ters of &s;uch &s;eparated Churches. This the Apo&s;tle cannot be &s;uppo&s;ed to condemn. But if this be not that he condemns, What is it? Briefly, 2. The Church of <HI>Corinth</HI> was one of the mo&s;t famous Churches of Chri&s;t (upon the account of what is mentioned by the Apo&s;tle, <HI>Chap.</HI> 12.) at that day in the world, by rea&s;o<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter"> whereof they were apt enough to be &s;weld, puft up again&s;t other Churches (that were as equally the Churches of Chri&s;t as they) who had not the ex|cellency
<PB N="473" REF="240"> of gifts they had. This the Apo&s;tle condemnes in them, and gives them to under&s;tand that the Word of God came not out from them, they were not the fir&s;t Church to whom it was communicated, and from whom it was tran&s;mitted unto others; nor came it unto them only, <HI>i. e.</HI> other Churches had received, embraced it as well as they, therefore they ought not to carry it proudly towards them; which what it makes again&s;t the inclo&s;ure our <HI>Animadverter</HI> mentions, I know not. The Apo&s;tle condemns one Congregational Church for being puft up again&s;t another; therefore to a&s;&s;ert Congregational Churches and Mini|&s;ters to be the only right Churches and Mini&s;ters, is condemn'd by him, is &s;uch a &s;trange con&s;equence as will never readily be imbraced. But 3. we make not &s;uch inclo&s;ures; I believe there are hundreds in <HI>England</HI> that are not of that way, who have the Spirit of God, and are de&s;erved|ly to be attended in their Mini&s;tration of the Word of Truth. That be|cau&s;e we deny it lawful to hear the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters we mu&s;t be nece&s;|&s;itated to deny the hearing of all others, but men of Congregational Principles, is a &s;uppo&s;ition as mon&s;trou&s;ly fal&s;e and ab&s;urd as the former. We give &s;ome &s;pecial and peculiar grounds of our not hearing tho&s;e, that can be applied to no other. He adds.</P>
<P>Arg. 26. <HI>The Apo&s;tle,</HI> Phil. 3. 15, 16. <HI>pre&s;&s;eth &s;uch as were perfect or well in&s;tructed in the Chri&s;tian Doctrine (of liberty from the</HI> Mo&s;aical <HI>Laws) not to &s;eparate from, but hold Communion with &s;uch as were weak in the Faith, and otherwi&s;e minded, that thought</HI> Mo&s;aical <HI>Laws were yet obligatory. Therefore we may not &s;eparate from Chri&s;tians and Ministers by rea&s;on of di|ver&s;ity of judgement about Church-Government; and Liturgy, and different practice about Conformity, and Non-conformity to them, which are of le&s;s mo|ment than tho&s;e differences about Meats and Dayes.&mdash;</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. We deny his <HI>Con&s;equence;</HI> That becau&s;e it was the duty of Saints to hold Communion in a true Church-State, without altercati|ons about Meats or Drinks, therefore 'tis our duty to hold Communion with a fal&s;e Church and a fal&s;e Mini&s;try, our <HI>Animadverter</HI> can never prove. 2. That the bu&s;ine&s;s of Church-Government (wherein the King&s;hip of Chri&s;t in a great mea&s;ure lies) is of no more moment than the eating or not eating, about which the conte&s;ts among the primitive Believers in the dawning of the Day of the Go&s;pel did in a great mea&s;ure lie, he will not ea&s;ily demon&s;trate. 3. That the retenti|on for a while of <HI>Mo&s;aical</HI> Ceremonies, whil&s;t the Temple was yet &s;tanding, to which they were affixed, &s;hould be a greater ground of &s;epa|ration from a true Church of Chri&s;t, then the reception, imbracement of the <HI>Liturgy</HI> and <HI>Ceremonies</HI> of Antichri&s;t, in and by a fal&s;e Church,
<PB N="474" REF="241"> and Mini&s;try from it, is as ab&s;urd an a&s;&s;ertion as ever dropped from the mouth or pen of &s;o learned a per&s;on. And yet fail he in the proof hereof, this Argument is of no moment. We attend his next.</P>
<P>Arg. 27. <HI>The holy Ghost hath recorded the prophe&s;ie of</HI> Balaam, Num. 24. 3, 4. <HI>Of</HI> Caiaphas, <HI>Joh.</HI> 11. 51, 52. <HI>Yea the &s;ayings of Infidel. I<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">olatrous Poets,</HI> Acts 17. 28. 1 Cor. 15. 33. Tit. 3. 12. <HI>Therefore it's lawful to hear the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> Now I confe&s;s if he be able to make good this Argument, it will follow, that we may not attend the Mini&s;try of the pre&s;ent Mini|&s;ters of <HI>England</HI> only, but the very vile&s;t and wor&s;t of men. Ye<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter"> I think we may righteou&s;ly deny his Con&s;equence, and expect his proof there|of, before we credit it. The reading of Poets, or citation of them is no part of in&s;tituted Wor&s;hip as I remember, which we have proved hear|ing the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters to be. He proceeds,</P>
<P>Arg. 28. <HI>The Apo&s;tle,</HI> 1 The&s;. 5. 20, 21. <HI>requires Chri&s;tians not to de&s;pi&s;e prophe&s;yings, but to prove all things, and hold fa&s;t that which is good. And the Apo&s;tle,</HI> 1 John 4. <HI>Believe not every Spirit, but try the Spirits whether they are of God. They make it not &s;in meerly to hear them that are erroneous, if they try them; they may hear pretenders prophe&s;ying if they prove it, much more tho&s;e Mini&s;ters who preach truth.&mdash;</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. Prophe&s;yings are not to be de&s;pi&s;ed, all things are to be proved, the Spirits to be tried, whether they are of God; bu<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter"> all this mu&s;t be done in his own way. For per&s;ons from hence to take liberty to go to Ma&s;s, hear the Je&s;uites, frequent the meetings of Ranters, is dangerous and a plain tempting of God. 2. Why he &s;hould accom|modate, 1 <HI>The&s;.</HI> 5. 20. to the preaching of the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters, and impo&s;e it upon us as our duty not to de&s;pi&s;e prophe&s;yings, who tells us, <HI>pag.</HI> 136. <HI>l.</HI> 30. <HI>That he knows not of any at this day that have the gift of prophe&s;ie,</HI> I under&s;tand not. 3. 'Tis abominable wickedne&s;s to violate other commands of Chri&s;t, upon the pretext of the&s;e Scriptures, and a plain irri&s;ion of Chri&s;t; when he hath charged us, as we have p<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">oved, to have nothing to do with &s;uch a generation, for us, upon pretence of trying all things, to attend their Mini&s;try and Wor&s;hip, is abominable propha|ne&s;s, not to be ju&s;tified. 4. There are &s;ome things &s;o vi&s;ibly oppo&s;ite to Chri&s;t and his wayes, that they need no trial in order to a di&s;covery. Whether drunken ignorant Prie&s;ts, the &s;hame and contempt of the Na|tion, be Mini&s;ters of the Go&s;pel? Whether a formal, &s;aple&s;s, &s;elf-de|vi&s;ed Wor&s;hip and Mini&s;try from the Pope and Bawd of <HI>Rome</HI> be the Wor&s;hip and Mini&s;try of Chri&s;t?&mdash;are things &s;o palpably and no<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">ori|ou&s;ly foreign to the Scriptures, that a man need not put them to the trial for &s;atisfaction. He further argues.</P>
<PB N="475" REF="241">
<P> Arg. 29. This Author, <HI>Chap.</HI> 2. allows the hearing gifted Brethren,<HI>&mdash;He would not think it unlawful to hear Parents or Ma&s;ters catechize, or Readers in the Univer&s;ity, when they read Divinity Lectures.&mdash;Therefore by a like rea&s;on mu&s;t allow hearing the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> This con&s;equence we deny; there is no parity or likene&s;s of Rea&s;on in it; why we cannot hear them as gifted Brethren, we have manife&s;ted, <HI>Chap.</HI> 2. There are more rea&s;ons again&s;t hearing them, than again&s;t hearing Parents catechize, (as their acting from an Anti|chri&s;tian Call&mdash;) or Readers in the Univer&s;ity, to which I go not as to a part of in&s;tituted Wor&s;hip, but School-Exerci&s;e. That they are or|dain'd according to the Di&s;cipline of the Church in which they live, is nothing at all for their commendation, except that Church were a true Church, or the Di&s;cipline thereof more different from the Di&s;cipline of <HI>Rome</HI> than it is.</P>
<P>His thirtieth Argument is not worth the mentioning; That our Ar|guments may be retorted upon our &s;elves, is not improbable; any mans Arguments may be &s;o. The difficulty lies in proving the ju&s;tne&s;s of their retortion; which when he &s;hall be able to effect,</P>
<Q>Erit mihi Magnus Apollo.</Q>
<P>To dict<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">te that Ordination by other Mini&s;ters, be&s;ides the Elders of their own Congregation, is nece&s;&s;ary for the con&s;titution of a Go&s;pel-Mini&s;try; that the Church of <HI>England</HI> is a true Church, or that &s;epara|tion from a company of wicked and ungodly per&s;ons, is not warranta|ble by Scripture, (when we have proved the contrary) is to expo&s;e him&s;elf to the pitie, or contempt of the judicious.</P>
<P>Arg. 31. <HI>The grounds upon which the Author of</HI> S. T. <HI>and other Sepa|rati&s;ts, deny the unlawfulne&s;s of hearing the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters, are neither fal&s;e nor doubtful. That nothing is to be done in the Wor&s;hip of God, and Church-Di&s;cipline, (relating to it as the Wor&s;hip of God) without a parti|cular In&s;titution;</HI> we have abundantly before proved.</P>
<P>Arg. 32. <HI>That the Mini&s;ters of</HI> England <HI>have proved the truth of their Mini&s;try again&s;t</HI> Papi&s;ts <HI>and</HI> Separati&s;ts; <HI>That the Prelates have &s;o oppo&s;|ed Popery, that were not men re&s;olved never to lay down a calumny they have once taken up, they would not cry them down as Antichri&s;tian, Popi&s;h,&mdash;</HI>is but what he at pre&s;ent thinks: They have oppo&s;ed the per&s;on of the Pope, and retained his Laws and Canons. They oppo&s;e the Pope of <HI>Rome,</HI> and his Conclave, and &s;et up and maintain the Pope of <HI>Canter|bury,&mdash;</HI>and his Hierarchy, again&s;t whom the very Arguments they u&s;e again&s;t the Pope <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">f <HI>Rome</HI> directly point.</P>
<P>Arg. 33. <HI>The ab&s;urdities will follow upon denying to hear the pre&s;ent</HI>
<PB N="476" REF="242"> <HI>Mini&s;ters, becau&s;e not rightly elected,&mdash;or becau&s;e they u&s;e the Common-Prayer-Book, or are faulty in their lives,&mdash;are either not &s;uch, or really follow not thereupon.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. Every Chri&s;tian Reader is able to judge of (at le<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">&s;t &s;ome of) the Rea&s;ons in the <HI>S. T.</HI> whether they can warrant his not-hearing. 2. He mu&s;t be able to judge every <HI>Mini&s;ter</HI> he hears, whether he be rightly elected; but this his judgment may proceed from the informa|tion of the Church to which the Mini&s;ter is related; or if his Mini&s;ter, he tries, and judgeth with the Church as a Member thereof, which gives not Authority to individual Hearers, (but to the Church, or ra|ther Chri&s;t Je&s;us, who hath entru&s;ted the Keys of the Kingdom of Hea|ven with them) over their Mini&s;ters. Much le&s;s, 3. mu&s;t every in|dividual hearer have power to &s;ilence or withdraw from his Min<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">&s;ter.&mdash;This he hath power to do, and this he ought to do, with re&s;pect to the Pa&s;tor of that Church to which he is related, if he knows any &s;in or evil upon him to admoni&s;h him, and in ca&s;e of per&s;everance therein, to take two or three with him, and again admoni&s;h him; and if he remain ob|&s;tinate, to bring it before the Church, who have power (if he will not hear them) to depo&s;e him: If he be a Pa&s;tor of &s;ome other Church, to which he is not as a particular Member related, to bring i<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter"> to the Elders of that Church, or &s;ome Brother of known integrity appertain|ing thereunto, who is to ob&s;erve the &s;ame Rules already minded: which would not introduce oppre&s;&s;ion upon Mini&s;ters, nor will they, if truly Chri&s;tian, account the execution of the Righteous Laws of Chri&s;t to be &s;o. The Scepter of his Kingdom is a right Scepter. To compare the corrupt bloody Popi&s;h Canons herewith, is little le&s;s than bla&s;phe|my. 4. That hereby there &s;hould be any danger of Go&s;pel-M<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">ni&s;ters being expo&s;ed to penury, de&s;erted of their Members, is not likely. 5. That there can be no &s;etled Government in Church or State, if the &s;ta|ted Mini&s;ters,&mdash;according to the pre&s;ent Laws &s;hould be de&s;erted or di&s;obeyed,&mdash;is a fal&s;e and bloody a&s;&s;ertion.</P>
<P>Arg. 34. <HI>That &s;uch a Plea, as this is made by the Papi&s;ts for their Re|cu&s;ancy,</HI> we have already an&s;wered.</P>
<P>Arg. 35. To this we &s;ay, 1. Chri&s;t hath debar'd us from hearing the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters, (as we have at large proved.) 2. Whil&s;t we pre&s;s men to an obedience to the Voice of Chri&s;t, we make not men <HI>Rab|bies,</HI> (it hath not the lea&s;t tendency thereunto) but Chri&s;t. Nor are we again&s;t hearing any whom Chri&s;t in his Royal Law forbids us not to hear.</P>
<P>Arg. 36. To this we &s;ay, Not to hear the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters is no
<PB N="477" REF="242"> Negative Super&s;tition, 'tis built upon Divine Precept, (as we have proved) it occa&s;ions not the neglect of Gods Command, (he beggs the Que&s;tion whil&s;t he &s;uppo&s;eth it) or any duty of love incumbent upon the Saints. It begets not unnece&s;&s;ary perplexities in mens Spirits, nor puffs them up with conceit of more holine&s;s than others; nor cau&s;|eth them to be cen&s;orious of others. Nor hath Mr. <HI>T.</HI> proved the&s;e things to be &s;o, or the con&s;equent of the Opinion contended for.</P>
<P>The whole of his 37^t^h Argument, <HI>That the denying the hearing the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters is a u&s;urpation of Chri&s;ts Regal Office, in putting a Law on the Con&s;ciences of men, arrogating that power which is proper to Chri&s;t,</HI> James 4. 12. Mat. 23. 4. is a meer calumnie; Nor is the <HI>Animadverter</HI> able to prove what he &s;aith, nor hath he &s;o much as attempted &s;o to do. We have demon&s;trated, that the non-hearing the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters is no impo&s;ition of our own, but a Yoke of Chri&s;t. We forbid not any to hear Preachers of the Go&s;pel, but &s;uch as pretend to be &s;o, and are not.</P>
<P>To his 38^t^h Argument, we an&s;wer, By this means the knowledge of the Word of God is not at all hindred, nor the furthering his Kingdom neglected, but the contrary. 'Tis not true, that tho&s;e who hold the Opinion of not hearing the pre&s;ent <HI>Mini&s;ters</HI> in publick, think it enough if they can teach tho&s;e of their own Society, they are willing to in&s;truct others al&s;o; which they do as they have opportunity. That 'tis &s;el|dom by conference that we in&s;<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">ill any truths into others, without &s;ome|what that alienates them from others, and engageth them to our own Society, with diminution of love to others,&mdash;is a mo&s;t fal&s;e &s;ugge&s;tion.</P>
<P>His 39^t^h Argument is compo&s;ed of unproved Dictates; to which we have over and over an&s;wered in this Treati&s;e.</P>
<P>Touching his la&s;t Argument, we &s;ay in the general, 1. There is not one of the ab&s;urdities, he &s;aith, are con&s;equent on the Opinion of non-hearing of the pre&s;ent Mini&s;ters, but is as much the con&s;equent of the Opinion of the unlawfulne&s;s of going to <HI>Ma&s;s,</HI> or hearing a Popi&s;h Mi|ni&s;try, were it e&s;tabli&s;hed by Law.</P>
<P N="2">2. Particularly; 1. We cannot (con&s;ider'd in their pre&s;ent &s;tate, as an Antichri&s;tian Mini&s;try, &s;et up in oppo&s;ition to the Mini&s;try of Chri&s;t) rejoyce in, or pray to God that they may, or prai&s;e God for their preaching. 2. It follows not that 'tis then better that Barbari&s;m&mdash;&s;pread among the people.&mdash;There is no nece&s;&s;ity of the one or the other. Barbari&s;m and rudene&s;s may call them, their Fathers, or fo&s;ter-Fathers, &s;ince who&s;e return barbarity and rudene&s;s is broken in like a mighty torrent upon us. Who were the promoters the Book of Sports, (in dayes pa&s;t) a great piece of barbari&s;m and rudene&s;s, Mr. <HI>T.</HI> knows.
<PB N="478" REF="243"> Who are more the encuragers of per&s;ons lying at an Ale-hou&s;e, than their fudling Prie&s;ts? who by their practice &s;trengthen the hands of their drunken Pari&s;hioners therein. There are other meetings in mo&s;t places within a &s;mall compa&s;s, whither they may go to hear, &s;o that they need not lie at an Alehou&s;e, nor &s;it at home idle. 3. We think the Magi&s;trates do evil to compel people to hear them. 4. In re&s;pect of their Antichri|&s;tian calling, non-preaching Readers, and their preaching Mini&s;ters are alike tolerable. Their Pedigree is the &s;ame, their oppo&s;ition to Chri&s;t and his People the &s;ame. 5. The le&s;s they preach, in re&s;pect of their Antichri&s;tian &s;tanding and Office, the le&s;s they &s;in. Though, 6. they, accounting them&s;elves Mini&s;ters of Chri&s;t, and receiving wages from the people to preach to them,&mdash;'tis open inju&s;tice, and unrighteou&s;ne&s;s for them rarely or not at all &s;o to do; as it is Lordly Papal pride, and arro|gancy in the Prelates to u&s;urp Authority over tho&s;e they acco<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">nt Mini|&s;ters of the Go&s;pel, and hinder them from preaching, who, they &s;ay, are rightly ordained thereunto. Of the &s;eeming contradictions Mr. <HI>T.</HI> hath found in &s;ome Writings of <HI>J. G.</HI> to the Book Intituled, <HI>Prelatical Preachers none of Chri&s;ts Teachers,</HI> I am not concerned to take notice. Though they might ea&s;ily be reconciled. And the Judicious Reader can do it him&s;elf. 'Tis &s;eparation from a true Church, and Go&s;pel-Mi|ni&s;try, (not a fal&s;e Antichri&s;tian-Church and Mini&s;try) upon the ac|count meerly of &s;ome difference about the &s;ubject of Bapti&s;m, that he condemns, which that it ri&s;eth up in oppo&s;ition to what is a&s;&s;erted in the forementioned Treati&s;e, I am not able to di&s;cern. If Mr. <HI>T.</HI> dreams that a man cannot &s;peak again&s;t &s;eparation from a true Church, without condemning &s;eparation from a fal&s;e, he will &s;carce find his Ri|val among&s;t per&s;ons of Learning and Judgment.</P>
</DIV3>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="13" TYPE="chapter">
<PB N="479" REF="243">
<HEAD>CHAP. XIII.</HEAD>
<DIV3 N="1" TYPE="section">
<HEAD><HI>Sect.</HI> 1.</HEAD>
<ARGUMENT>
<P><HI>Serious advice to Saints that wor&s;hip with the Nation, and cleave to the Mi|ni&s;try thereof. The ground of their pre&s;ent practice to be con&s;idered. The thoughts of their hearts in dayes past. For what Saints then and now &s;uf|fer hard things. Their aims and ends in this matter to be pondered, with the pre&s;ent temper of their Spirit. A &s;olemn Call out of the Parochial A&s;&s;emblies. The Renowned</HI> Hu&s;&s;e <HI>his Prophe&s;ie touching Reformation.</HI></P>
</ARGUMENT>
<P>HAving through Divine A&s;&s;i&s;tance examined, and fully an&s;wered what Mr. <HI>T.</HI> was plea&s;ed to object in his <HI>Theodulia</HI> again&s;t the <HI>S. T.</HI> I de&s;ire the patience of the Chri&s;tian Reader for one mo|ment longer, whil&s;t I open my heart in a few words.</P>
<P N="1">1. To the precious Children of God, who are yet wor&s;hipping with the Nation, and cleaving to the Mini&s;try thereof, would I humbly offer the&s;e &s;even things.</P>
<P N="1">1. Seriou&s;ly weigh without prejudice, in the ballance of the Sanctua|ry, what we have been tendring to you in this Treati&s;e, and think not what you read to be the words of an Enemy; they are the coun&s;els of a Friend, of one who hath through wonderful grace &s;o far learned Chri&s;t, that he cannot but love you, pray for you, &s;hould you account him, and u&s;e him as an Enemy.</P>
<P N="2">2. Strictly examine by the Scriptures of Truth, the bottom and ground of your pre&s;ent practice. Where is the word of In&s;titution by Je&s;us Chri&s;t, that warrants your attending on the pre&s;ent Mini&s;try. Mr. <HI>T.</HI> hath written a large Treati&s;e thereabout, but is not able to produce one Scripture to warrant your practice in this matter.</P>
<P N="3">3. Recollect the thoughts of your heart in dayes pa&s;t; Should any one have told you, when you were for a godly, preaching, praying Mi|ni&s;try, for Go&s;pel-Reformation, that there would a day come when an Epi&s;copal, drunken, Common-Prayer-Book, dumb ignorant Clergy &s;hould be &s;et over you, to the ca&s;ting out of the godly, &s;ober, and judi|cious, and that you would &s;ide with them, attend their Mini&s;try? would your an&s;wer have been other then that of <HI>Hazael, But are we dead Dogs that we &s;hould do thus?</HI></P>
<P N="4"><PB N="480" REF="244"> 4. Remember what it was you<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter"> Brethren lo&s;t their Ears, Libertys, Lives in days pa&s;t for, what they and you covenanted again&s;t, was it not for witne&s;&s;ing again&s;t, utterly to extirpate this pre&s;ent Hierarchie and Wor&s;hip? Did you not rejoyce in its extirpation? and will you again encourage, or comply with the building of that you once endea|voured to evert and demoli&s;h.</P>
<P N="5">5. Con&s;ider &s;oberly of your aims and ends in your pre&s;ent attend|ment upon the Mini&s;try and Wor&s;hip of the Nation? Whet<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">er they are &s;uch as you can comfortably own in the great Day of A&s;&s;ize, that is now ready to &s;pring in upon the World?</P>
<P N="6">6. Ob&s;erve the pre&s;ent temper of &s;pirit, whil&s;t attending upon the pre&s;ent Mini&s;try and Wor&s;hip; Have you grown in grace? is there not rather a &s;pirit of declen&s;ion, formality, deadne&s;s, earthine&s;s, &s;ei&s;ing you? do you meet with Chri&s;t in the Publick A&s;&s;emblies? Are you not rather with re&s;pect to them forced to &s;ay, <HI>He is not here, he is ri&s;en.</HI></P>
<P N="7">7. Ha&s;ten your e&s;cape from Parochial National Churches an<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter"> A&s;&s;em|blies, and get into the A&s;&s;emblies of his Children, where he hat<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter"> record|ed his Name, will meet with you and ble&s;s you. The Vials of written vengeance are ready to be poured forth upon fal&s;e Wor&s;hip and Wor|&s;hippers. And ere long the &s;ubject of our pre&s;ent conte&s;t will be remo|ved. Not an Arch-Bi&s;hop, or Lord-Bi&s;hop, nor any of their Hierarchy &s;hall be known in the Nation, or Nations of the World; none &s;poken of but with loathing and abhorrency. Their nakedne&s;s, in&s;olency, pride and contrariety to the true intere&s;t of Chri&s;t, and Nations, &s;hall be &s;o di&s;covered, that they &s;hall be the hi&s;&s;ing and reproach of the People; in|&s;omuch that they &s;hall be a&s;hamed to own their function. I have many times thought of that Prophe&s;ie of <HI>John Hu&s;s,</HI> cited in <HI>Foxes Martyrolo|gie, Vol.</HI> 1. <HI>pag.</HI> 830. <HI>Moreover,</HI> &s;aith he, <HI>hereupon note and mark by the way, That the Church of God cannot be reduced to her former dignity, or be reformed, before all things fir&s;t be made new: The truth whereof is plain by the Temple of</HI> Solomon. <HI>Like as the Clergie and Prie&s;ts, &s;o al&s;o <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">he People and Laity; or el&s;e, unle&s;s all &s;uch as be now addict unto avarice, from the lea&s;t to the mo&s;t be fir&s;t reclaimed, as well the People as the Clergie and Prie&s;ts. Al|beit, as my mind now giveth me, I believe rather the fir&s;t; that th<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">n &s;hall a|ri&s;e a new People, formed after the new man, which is created after God, of the which People, new Clerks and Prie&s;ts &s;hall come and be taken, tha<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter"> &s;hall hate covetou&s;ne&s;s, and the glory of this Life, ha&s;tening to a heavenly conver&s;ation; notwith&s;tanding all the&s;e things &s;hall come to pa&s;s, and be brought by little and little, in order of times, di&s;pen&s;ed of God for the &s;ame purpo&s;e. And this God doth and will do for his own goodne&s;s, and the riches of his great lo<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">ganimity</HI>
<PB N="481" REF="244"> <HI>and patience, giving time and &s;pace of repentance to them that have long lien in their &s;ins, to amend &amp; flee from the face of the Lords fury whil&s;t that in like ma<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">ner, the carnal People and Prie&s;ts, &s;ucce&s;&s;ively and in time &s;hall fall away, <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">e con&s;umed with the Moth.</HI> But we have a more &s;ure Word of Prophe|&s;ie, that the pompous carnal Church and Mini&s;try, the Whore and fal&s;e Prophet, with all their retinue, &s;hall be dethroned, and for ever cea&s;e to be: And then &s;hall piety flouri&s;h, and the knowledge of the Lord &s;hall cover the Earth as the waters do the Seas. Then what &s;hame will cover you that have not hearkened to Chri&s;ts voice, though he loudly calls you to come with him from <HI>Lebanon,</HI> to look from the top of <HI>Amana</HI> and <HI>Shenir,</HI> from the <HI>Lyons Dens,</HI> and <HI>Mountains of the Leo|pards,</HI> that you have not for&s;aken the Tents of fal&s;e Wor&s;hippers.&mdash;</P>
</DIV3>
<DIV3 N="2" TYPE="section">
<HEAD>Sect. 2.</HEAD>
<ARGUMENT>
<P>Coun&s;el and advice to Saints &s;eparated from the carnal worldly Church&punc;</P>
</ARGUMENT>
<P N="2">2. TO you that have heard, and obeyed the voice of your Beloved, in &s;eparating from the pre&s;ent Wor&s;hip and Wor&s;hippers, would I al&s;o &s;peak a few words.</P>
<P N="1">1. Pray hard for the making the vi&s;ion p<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">ain; that you may under|&s;tand how long it is to the end of the&s;e wonders. The wi&s;e &s;hall under|&s;tand.</P>
<P N="2">2. Wait, watch, and pray for the glorious effu&s;ion of the Spirit, according to the promi&s;e of the Father. Antichri&s;t's day is now even run out; not the fir&s;t fruits only, but the full harve&s;t of New-Covenant glories &s;hall &s;hortly be upon you.</P>
<P N="3">3. Get on the whole Armour of God, that you may be fitted and fixed to acco&s;t the Prince of darkne&s;s, and his Helli&s;h Armado in their next and la&s;t attempt again&s;t the Saints, when the <HI>Dragon will be wroth, and go about to make war with the remnant of the Womans Seed, that keep the Commandments of God, and have the Te&s;timony of Je&s;us.</HI></P>
<P N="4">4. Condemn the world and worldly Church by tho&s;e &s;hines of holy|ne&s;s, and that heavenly conver&s;ation &s;hall be found among&s;t you.</P>
<P N="5">5. Take heed of degenerating into the Form, mind the power of Chri&s;tianity and Godline&s;s: Be not contented to have <HI>a Name to Live</HI> when <HI>Dead.</HI> Take heed of the Temptation of the Day; a Temptation to &s;lumbring, e&s;pecially con&s;idering the Cry at Midnight (which is a Mini&s;terial voice or out-cry) <HI>The Bridegroom cometh go ye out to meet him.</HI></P>
<P N="6">6. Pre&s;s after a Go&s;pel-Spirit of Love and Union one with another. Study to be of one Spirit, of one Mind. Wherein you differ (for want of the &s;ame mea&s;ure of Light) bear one with another as becometh Bre|thren
<PB N="482" REF="245"> of the &s;ame Father, Members of the &s;ame Body, pray one for ano|ther, and if any one be otherwi&s;e minded, God will reveal this al&s;o unto him in due time. Know not one another as Men only, but as Chr<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">&s;ti<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">ns. Let the bottom of your Communion each with other be not the found<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">|tion of agreement in extrafundamental Principles (which the Spirit of Antichri&s;t leads to) but ble&s;&s;ed &s;atisfaction that you are received, be|loved, begotten again of God, and bear his Image. Study to forget the names of di&s;tinction that have been too much u&s;ed in dayes pa&s;t. Nei|ther <HI>Presbyterian,</HI> nor <HI>Independant,</HI> nor <HI>Anabapti&s;t</HI> is any thing, but if re|al Saints, we are all one in Chri&s;t. Remember the <HI>Di&s;ciples were fir&s;t cal|led Chri&s;tians at Antioch.</HI> The departure from Scripture words and ap|pellations, hath had no &s;mall influence into that Antichri&s;tian Apo&s;ta|&s;ie that hath over&s;pread the Nations. Take heed of animo&s;ities and di|vi&s;ions one among&s;t another. 'Tis the Devils grand Maxime, <HI>Divide &amp; Impera, Divide and Rule.</HI> Bear with and forbear one another in love. Prefer your peace and edification before private intere&s;t. Methinks &s;uch Di&s;cour&s;es, with a Pen dipt in Gall, as drop from this <HI>A<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">imadv.</HI> &s;hould engage us to make it our &s;tudy to be of one heart, and one &s;oul, if we cannot in all things be of one Judgement and Opinion. But whi|ther &s;ail I? 'Tis a plea&s;ant Sea, a &s;weet Theam, the Lord bow the hearts of his People every one of them to an imbracement of it. I mu&s;t not ex|patiate.</P>
<P N="7">7. <HI>Hold fa&s;t that you have, that no one take your Crown. Yet a little while and he that &s;hall come will come, and will not tarry.</HI></P>
</DIV3>
<DIV3 N="3" TYPE="section">
<HEAD><HI>Sect.</HI> 3.</HEAD>
<ARGUMENT>
<P><HI>An</HI> Appendix, <HI>or</HI> Felo de &s;e; <HI>being a brief but faithful Collection of &s;e|veral pa&s;&s;ages in his former Writings, oppo&s;ite to what is a&s;&s;erted by him in his</HI> Theodulia.</P>
</ARGUMENT>
<P>LA&s;tly, to Mr. <HI>T.</HI> our pre&s;ent <HI>Antagoni&s;t</HI> would I &s;peak a few words by way of Coun&s;el and advice. I be&s;eech you Sir in the bowels of Chri&s;t,</P>
<P N="1">1. With a &s;ober &s;pirit to review your <HI>Theodulia,</HI> and con&s;ider whe|ther you will be able to ju&s;tifie your undertaking therein. What have you been doing but &s;adning the hearts of the righteous, and gladding the hearts of the wicked? Had it not been better you had let <HI>Baal</HI> have pleaded for him&s;elf, &s;ince one had thrown down his Altar? It may be in your retired thoughts, you now begin to think &s;o. The de&s;ign it &s;elf was bad; but Sir, how can you review the frame of &s;pirit, the gall and bitterne<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">s, the reviling and reproachful language with which your Book
<PB N="483" REF="245"> is &s;tuft from the one end thereof to the other, again&s;t the VVayes and People of Chri&s;t, whom you in your Con&s;cience think to be &s;o, and hold up your face with confidence before God and his People. I had once thought to have gathered into one heap the &s;everal parcels of &s;cur|rilous, un&s;avoury, &s;candalous and fal&s;e expre&s;&s;ions you were plea&s;ed to make u&s;e of, but I found the dunghill would &s;well &s;o big, and the &s;mell of it might be &s;o offen&s;ive, that after I had made &s;ome progre&s;s therein, I forbore.</P>
<P N="2">2. Read with &s;eriou&s;ne&s;s the Reply we have made to the Treati&s;e mentioned: You &s;ee Sir, we have not writ after your Copy, nor ren|dred reviling for reviling into your bo&s;om; we have otherwi&s;e learned Chri&s;t, and commit our Cau&s;e to him that judgeth righteou&s;ly. The Lord, the Lord God, his Spirit, Scriptures and People be judge be|twixt us.</P>
<P N="3">3. Read twice ere you Reply once; You know, Sir, who&s;e <HI>Motto</HI> it was, <HI>Fe&s;tina lente; &s;at cit&ograve; &s;i &s;at bene.</HI> Too much ha&s;te to oppo&s;e Truth, never brings with it a return of &s;weetne&s;s; every motion and advance again&s;t it, though of the &s;lowe&s;t, is too great ha&s;te.</P>
<P N="4">4. Pray much for Divine Leadings and Direction before you &s;et up|on the work of making your Reply hereunto, and every &s;tep you take in it. And let's di&s;cern you have been much in this duty, by that meek, and Go&s;pel-Spirit with which your next &s;hall be leavened.</P>
<P N="5">5. If you think it of concern, &s;eriou&s;ly weigh whether this writing of yours tend to the extirpation of Popery and Prelacy, with its Hierarchy, and the promoting Reformation according to the VVord of God, and the be&s;t Reformed Churches. For Oaths the Land mourns. The Lord grant we may do &s;o too.</P>
<P>La&s;tly, Review, if you plea&s;e, the en&s;uing Collections we have ga|thered out of your own Writings, from a cur&s;ory view of &s;ome of them; which are, if we mi&s;take not, oppo&s;ite to what you at pre&s;ent plead for. And if you think meet, reconcile your &s;elf unto your &s;elf; and blame not me, Sir, that I thus deal with you, I do but follow the pattern you have given me, in your dealing with Mr <HI>Baxter</HI> formerly, and Mr. <HI>John Goodwin</HI> of late, after this manner.</P>
<DIV4 TYPE="subsection">
<HEAD><HI>Collections out of Mr.</HI> T. <HI>his Writings.</HI></HEAD>
<P>If this Argument proceed, it will follow there is &s;ome National Church among&s;t the Gentiles as of old among&s;t the Jews, which is not to be granted.<HI>&mdash;In his exercitation concerning Infant Bapti&s;m,</HI> pag. 21. In&s;titution is the Rule of exhibiting Wor&s;hip to God. <HI>ibid. pag.</HI> 23. If In&s;titution be the
<PB N="484" REF="246"> Rule of Wor&s;hip, it is nece&s;&s;ary that he that &s;hall admini&s;ter the Wor&s;hip bind him&s;elf to the Rule, otherwi&s;e he will devi&s;e Will-wor&s;hip, and arrogate the Lords Authority to him&s;elf. Surely the Apostle in the bu&s;ine&s;s of the Lords Supper in&s;inuates this; when being about to correct the aberrations of the <HI>Corinthians</HI> concerning the Lords Supper, he brings forth the&s;e words, 1 <HI>Cor.</HI> 11. 23. <HI>For I have received of the Lord,&mdash;</HI>ibid. pag. 24.</P>
<P>The u&s;e of Sureties in Bapti&s;m, and Epi&s;copal Ordination, <HI>he a&s;&s;erts to be</HI> Humane Inventions. <HI>Ibid. p.</HI> 29.</P>
<P>The Common-Prayer-Book and Hierarchy have no true ground from Chri&s;ts Institution, which alone can acquit it from Will-wor&s;pip, <HI>Examer. p.</HI> 3. Epi&s;copacy is now found an abu&s;e, <HI>ibid. p.</HI> 24. I have entred into Covenant to endeavour a Reformation as well as you, and though I have not had the happine&s;s, as indeed wanting ability to be imployed in that eminent manner you have been in the promoting of it (in which I rejoyce) yet have I in my af|fections &s;incerely de&s;ired it, in my intentions truly aim'd at it, in my Prayers heartily &s;ought it, in my Studies con&s;tantly minded it, in my endea|vours &s;eriou&s;ly pro&s;ecuted it, for the promoting of it greatly &s;uffered, a<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter"> having as deep an Interest in it as other men, <HI>ibid. pag.</HI> 26. When I con&s;ider how ex|act a Reformation our <HI>Solemn Covenant</HI> binds us to endeavour, <HI>ibid. p.</HI> 27. 'Tis a dangerous principle, That in meer po&s;itive things we may frame an addition to Gods Wor&s;hip.&mdash;They that read the Popi&s;h Exp<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">&s;itors of their Rituals do know that this very Principle hath brought in Surpli<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">e, Puri|fication of Women,<HI>&mdash;ibid. p.</HI> 29.</P>
<P>If any take upon them to appoint to mens con&s;ciences any rite, in whole or in part,&mdash;it is an high pre&s;umption in &s;uch again&s;t Chri&s;t, and against the Apo&s;tles commands to yeeld to it, <HI>Col.</HI> 2. 20. Though it hath a &s;hew of wi&s;|dom, <HI>ver&s;.</HI> 23. And the Apo&s;tles example, <HI>Gal.</HI> 2. 3, 4, 5. binds us to oppo&s;e it, <HI>ibid. pag.</HI> 30. <HI>And p.</HI> 31. <HI>He commends a pa&s;&s;age in a Sermon of Mr.</HI> Mar&s;hals <HI>on</HI> 2 Chr. 15. 2. Who admires that ever mortal man &s;hould dare in Gods Wor&s;hip, to meddle any further than the Lord him&s;elf hath commanded.</P>
<P>For had it been a will-Wor&s;hip, it had been a &s;in if they had received it, (&s;peaking of the Circumci&s;ion of the Females) there being no command to do it. As it had been a &s;in for a Child to be circumci&s;ed afore or after the eighth day, in them that altered or &s;werved from the appointment of God, <HI>ibid. p.</HI> 37. No rea&s;on of ours in po&s;itive Wor&s;hip can acquit an action that is performed from will-Wor&s;hip, nothing but Gods Will manife&s;t in his In&s;ti|tution&mdash;can do it, <HI>ibid. p.</HI> 38. &s;ee <HI>p.</HI> 111, 132. <HI>Full Review of the Di&s;|pute concerning Infant Bapti&s;m,</HI> Sect. 1. P. 2.</P>
<P>Again&s;t Prelacy, Holy-dayes, Surplice, there have been many and just declamations, Ibid. P. 110. <HI>The Super&s;titious cu&s;tom of keeping Ea&s;ter,</HI>
<PB N="485" REF="246"> <HI>and receiving the Communion once a Year on that Day, which I think you will be a&s;hamed of, p.</HI> 119.</P>
<P>Unle&s;s you will altar the definition of Will-wor&s;hip, according to <HI>Mat.</HI> 15. 9. in point of Wor&s;hip, that is excluded which is not expre&s;&s;ed. <HI>p.</HI> 132.</P>
<P>And though all do not joyn in breaking of bread <HI>(&s;peaking concerning the Godly in</HI> Bewdly) &s;ome going to that Par&s;on, others declining him as a &s;tran|ger to the private Meetings of the Godly, and an adver&s;ary to &s;uch godly Preachers as they had gotten for the Chappel,&mdash;went to Mr. <HI>B.</HI> others be|ing baptized have joyned with me.<HI>&mdash;He afterwards &s;peaks of Mr.</HI> B<HI>'s. Book,</HI> charging them with Schi&s;m, for Reforming them&s;elves, and afright|ing people from their Society, <HI>Praecur&s;. Sect.</HI> 5. <HI>p.</HI> 10, 11. The Baptized Chri&s;tians with whom I hold Communion. <HI>Full review of the di&s;pute con|cerning Bapti&s;m, Epi&s;t. to the Reader.</HI> The Chri&s;tian Church con&s;i&s;ts not of a whole Nation,&mdash;but of &s;o many per&s;ons as are called out of the world by the preaching of the Word, to profe&s;s the Faith of Chri&s;t, <HI>ibid. p.</HI> 221. I think my actions ju&s;tifiable in celebrating the Lords Supper at Night as Chri&s;t did, and admitting none but Baptized per&s;ons after profe&s;&s;ion of Faith, <HI>ibid. pag.</HI> 239.</P>
<P>Frequenting Church-meetings he makes to be one way of vi&s;ible owning God, <HI>ibid. p.</HI> 268.</P>
<P>That there were &s;ome particular vi&s;ible Churches in which were no Hypo|crites, may be true notwith&s;tanding the Parables, <HI>Mat.</HI> 13. <HI>&amp;</HI> 25. <HI>or</HI> 1 <HI>Tim.</HI> 3. 15. <HI>compared with</HI> 2 <HI>Tim.</HI> 2. 20. <HI>p.</HI> 284.</P>
<P>There is not any likelyhood that a bare di&s;&s;embled profe&s;&s;ion &s;hould make &s;uch an external relation to God and his Church, <HI>ibid. p.</HI> 298.</P>
<P>To confine the tearm Heathens onely to them that are not Chri&s;tians in Name, is indeed according to the vulgar &s;peech, but be&s;ide the Scripture u&s;e, <HI>ibid. p.</HI> 261.</P>
<P>We do neither in practice nor opinion maintain &s;uch impure Churches of ig|norant and vicious per&s;ons as Mr. <HI>Bl.</HI> and the <HI>Presbyterians</HI> commonly do, <HI>ibid. p.</HI> 262.</P>
<P>The e&s;&s;ence of the Church con&s;i&s;ts in the a&s;&s;ociation, or union of the Mem|bers,&mdash;&punc;which is given by &s;uch tran&s;eunt fact as whereby God &s;eparates them from others, and unites and incorportes them together, which I call the <HI>Church-call,</HI> agreeably to the Scripture, <HI>Rom.</HI> 9. 24, 25, 26. 1 <HI>Cor.</HI> <NOTE PLACE="marg">&rindx;</NOTE> 2. 24.&mdash;which <HI>Church-call</HI> now is not by any coercive power of Rulers, but by the Spirit and preaching the Go&s;pel, <HI>ibid. p.</HI> 320.</P>
<P>Nor did I joyn any in Communion, till I &s;aw that tho&s;e that did their duty in being Baptized, were rejected, and made odious with Mini&s;ters and People, whereby they were nece&s;&s;itated to joyn in Communion by them&s;elves, <HI>Praecur&s;.</HI>
<PB N="486" REF="247"> <HI>Sect.</HI> 12. <HI>p.</HI> 48. Becau&s;e it is manife&s;t, from <HI>Acts</HI> 2. 41. 46. 1 <HI>Cor.</HI> 10. 1, 2, 3. <HI>&amp;</HI> 12. 13. Per&s;ons were Baptized before they brake bread together, therefore the taking any without Bapti&s;m to the Lords Supper will but &s;trengthen men in their opinion, that their Infant Sprinkling is &s;ufficient.<HI>&mdash;Therefore he &s;ees a necece&s;&s;ity of de&s;i&s;ting from that enterpr<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">&s;e of ad|mitting per&s;ons of different per&s;wa&s;ions touching Bapti&s;m into their communion,</HI> ibid. <HI>p.</HI> 49.</P>
<P>The Chri&s;tian-Church-con&s;titution of Volunteers is better, <HI>ibid. Sect.</HI> 11. <HI>pag.</HI> 431.</P>
<P>In the Wor&s;hip of God it was wont to be accounted a certain Rule that Gods Wor&s;hip &s;hould be ob&s;erved according to his appointment, and no otherwi&s;e, <HI>ib. Sect.</HI> 16. <HI>p.</HI> 66.</P>
<P>My oppo&s;ing the Bi&s;hops began with the &s;oone&s;t.&mdash;And for my non&punc;con|formity, Rea&s;ons were given with &s;ome of the fir&s;t.<HI>&mdash;I</HI> ju&s;tifie not the Cere|monies, <HI>ibid. Sect.</HI> 21. <HI>p.</HI> 89.</P>
<P>It is true our Engli&s;h Prelatical Divines do account Bapti&s;m &s;ufficiently ad|mini&s;tred that is &s;o done, yea though it were by a Popi&s;h Prie&s;t, or a Midwife, <HI>ibid. p.</HI> 91.</P>
<P>However, for the Tenet, of the Peoples governing by Vote, I know no rea|&s;on why they <HI>(he &s;peaks of tho&s;e called</HI> Independants) &s;hould be called a Sect, rather than their oppo&s;ites. The Excommunication which <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">he Scrip|ture &s;peaks of,&mdash;is no where made a part of Government or of the Elders Office, any more than the Peoples. In Antiquity its apparent out of <HI>Cyprian&mdash;</HI>That the People had a great hand in Elections, Excommunications, Ab&s;o|lutions, <HI>ibid. p.</HI> 93.</P>
<P>No one Country, City, or Tribe together, were gathered by the Apo&s;tles or other Preachers, into the Chri&s;tian vi&s;ible Church, but &s;o many of all as the Lord vouch&s;afed to call by his Word and Spirit. 1 <HI>Cor.</HI> 1. 26.<HI>&mdash;Not many wi&s;e men,&mdash;</HI>Ergo, Not the whole Nation. <HI>And afterward to Mr.</HI> B. <HI>Que&s;tion,</HI> Hath he not commanded to di&s;ciple Nations? <HI>He an&s;wers,</HI> Yes, to make Di&s;ciples of all Nations, by preaching the Go&s;pel to every creature, but no where by Civil Authority to gather a whole City, Country or Tribe, and to draw them into a National, and City-Covenant together,<HI>&mdash;<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">bid. Sect.</HI> 22. <HI>p.</HI> 97.</P>
<P><HI>Jeroboams</HI> Sacrificing and keeping a Fea&s;t at another time th<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">n God ap|pointed. <HI>Ahaz</HI> his forming an Altar after the pattern of that of <HI>Dama&s;cus, Nadab</HI> and <HI>Abihu</HI> their offering &s;trange fire, keeping Holy Dayes to Saints, <HI>he condemns as</HI> Will-wor&s;hip; <HI>Full Review of the Di&s;pute conce<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">. Infant-Bapti&s;m, p.</HI> 3.</P>
<P>1 <HI>Pet.</HI> 2. 9.&mdash;Which are meant only of the Elect and true Believers of
<PB N="487" REF="247"> every Nation, are applied to a National Church,&mdash;con&s;i&s;ting of a great part of either ignorant per&s;ons, that know little or nothing of Chri&s;tianity, or per|&s;ecutors of Godline&s;s, profanely de&s;pi&s;ing the Word, and hating the Godly, <HI>ibid. pag.</HI> 27.</P>
<P>God forbad Infants under eight dayes old to be circumci&s;ed, in that he ap|pointed the eighth day to be Circumci&s;ed. Now if this be a forbidding to Cir|cumci&s;e before (as I acknowledge it is, and &s;o do many Prote&s;tant Divines, as <HI>Paraeus, Com. in Gen.</HI> 17. 11.) then that is forbidden which is other|wi&s;e than God appointed, <HI>ibid. p.</HI> 81. <HI>And p.</HI> 180. <HI>He reckons the Cro&s;s in Bapti&s;m, among&s;t Popi&s;h u&s;uages, &s;uch as</HI> Bell&punc;Bapti&s;m, Baptizing of Dead per&s;ons.&mdash;</P>
<P>I &s;aid it is a carnal imagination, that the Church of God is like to civil Corporations, if per&s;ons were admitted to it by birth&mdash;nor is it to the pur|po&s;e to prove the contrary, that Mr. <HI>M. tells me,</HI> the Jewi&s;h Church was in the like civil Corporations: for I grant it was the whole Nation&mdash;whereas the Chri&s;tian Church hath another con&s;titution<HI>&mdash;ibid p.</HI> 265, 266.</P>
<P>If Chri&s;t did &s;ay to <HI>Judas,</HI> that his Body was broken for him, and his Blood &s;hed, it will be hard to avoid thence the proof of Univer&s;al Redemption; I think it the &s;afe &s;tand mo&s;t likely tenent that, <HI>Judas</HI> went out afore the Lords Supper <HI>p.</HI> 291. <HI>ibid.</HI> Chri&s;t is the Head of the vi&s;ible Church, in giving them Offi|cers, outward order, direction<HI>&mdash;ibid. p.</HI> 294.</P>
<P>But all the&s;e are alterd now, the Church is not National, no one High-Prie&s;t, Temple, Sanhedrim<HI>&mdash;ibid p.</HI> 334.</P>
<P>I know that our Army hath done &s;o much for the &s;etling the Church as that the Anti-Prelati&s;ts Congregations had been either none, or much oppre&s;&s;ed if they had not broken the force of the oppo&s;ite party. Nor dare I be &s;o unthank|ful to God or them, as not to acknowledge the great Mercy and benefit we at this day enjoy thereby, however Mr. <HI>B.</HI> fret at our Liberty and jibe at the In&s;truments, <HI>ibid. p.</HI> 383.</P>
<P>A not commanding is a plain forbidding; <HI>Mr. Collings provoc. pro. ch.</HI> 5. Nothing is lawful in the Wor&s;hip of God, but what we have precept or pre|&s;ident for; which who&s;o denies, opens a door to all Idolatry, and Super&s;tition, and Wil-wor&s;hip in the world, which Mr. <HI>T.</HI> approves of, <HI>ibid p.</HI> 408.</P>
<P>Of divine In&s;titution there is no rea&s;on can be right, but what is from Gods own appointment, though it may &s;eem right to us it &s;hould be &s;o. In things po|&s;itive our rea&s;on is deceivable, and Gods appointment is only to be attended, <HI>ibid p.</HI> 461.</P>
<P><HI>And now Sir, though I might to the&s;e Collections (which are diame|trically oppo&s;ite to the main principles of your</HI> Theodulia, <HI>the very</HI> ba&s;is <HI>upon which that Fabrick &s;tands) have added many more, as you well</HI>
<PB N="488" REF="248"> <HI>know, yet am I willing to &s;pare you; not knowing but the Lord may give you to &s;ee and bemoan your evill, in gladding the hearts of the Wicked, &amp; &s;adning the Righteous, or confirming them in crooked paths who have turn'd a&s;ide thereunto; which notwith&s;tanding your natural temper and he<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">ght of &s;pirit (with which we are &s;ufficiently acquainted) that will p<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">o<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">pt you to &s;ay &s;omething in a way of &s;elf-ju&s;tification&mdash;is not impo&s;&s;ible for God to do. If you write in An&s;wer to our Reply, and to the purpo&s;e, you &s;hall receive a Return</HI> (<GAP DESC="foreign">) <HI>in a &s;pirit of meekne&s;s and chri&s;tianity; If we meet therein wi<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">h meer dictates, without tender of proof; impertinent citations of Scriptures, without the lea&s;t attempt to minife&s;t their congruity with the a&s;&s;ertion they are introduced to prove; and a parcel of pa&s;&s;ionate railing ex|pre&s;&s;ions, in the &s;tead of the words which the Wi&s;dom that is from a|bove, and the Spirit of our dear Lord teacheth (which we too often meet with in your</HI> Theodulia) <HI>you have your An&s;wer. Farewell.</HI></P>
</DIV4>
</DIV3>
</DIV2>
<TRAILER>FINIS.</TRAILER>
<PB REF="248">
</DIV1>
</BODY>
</TEXT>
</EEBO>
</ETS>
