An EXAMINATION Of SUNDRY SCRIPTURES alleged by our BRETHREN, In Defence of some Particulars Of their CHURCHWAY. Humbly submitted to the Sight and Censure of any judicious Divine: ESPECIALLY Of such of the Reverend Godly-Learned ASSEMBLY as vouchsafe to read it. By R. Hollingworth, M. A. of Magd. Gol. Camb. IMPRIMATUR, Ja. Cranford. Decemb. 17. 1644. LONDON, Printed by J. R. for Tho. Smith, and are to be sold at his Shop at Manchester. 1645. The PREFACE to the Reader. TRue Propositions and lawful Practices should not (much less untrue and unlawful) be fathered on God by misinterpretation of his Word. Every false Exposition of Scripture is a belying of God, counterfeiting of the King of king's hand, and an addition to his Word. The Way of Independency, pretending to be the Way of God, the scriptural Way, the only Way (as the most rigid Separation, Anabaptism. Familism, also doth) produceth sundry Texts in Preaching, Writing and Conference, (I conceal persons, times and places, for reserved Reasons) to witness the right of her Claim; Which, for the most part, she also in Print produceth, upon the same or like occasion, in Answ. to 32 q. Apol. for Church-covenant. Answ. to 9 Pos. T.W. to W.R. Mr T. & Mr M. to Mr H. I, as the Lord hath enabled me, have conferred with and examined some special Witnesses; they answer (if I understand them aright) that they can witness no such thing as they are produced for. If this be acknowledged, I have my full end: If any will reexamine them, I beseech him not to put them on the Wrack (a) 2 Pet. 3.16. nor to meddle with bystanders or by-matters, but to mind the thing in hand. If he show that their Testimonies are fit and full for the purpose, he doth something: if not (whatsoever else he do) he doth nothing. I publish not all their Deposition, not all that is material; but so much as I conceive at present sufficient. If any of the Brethren (amongst whom M. Cotton is deservedly the chief) seem in my apprehension to come nearer the Truth than others, I willingly take notice of it, both to honour their Ingenuity, and to help Accommodation (if it may be) between us and them. What strength is in this Writing, I confess it is borrowed; the weakness of it is mine own, for which I have only this Excuse, That I am not willingly wilful, but shall be ready, as God shall assist, to give or receive further Satisfaction. An Examination of sundry Scriptures alleged by our Brethren in Defence of some Particulars of their Churchway. See almost the same Argument verbatim, in Answer to 32. q. p. 35. 1. GAthering of Churches in the name of Christ, and setting up of Church-Ordinances cannot be unlawful for want of a Commandment from man, as appears by the Doctrine and Practice of the Apostles, Acts 4.19. and 5.29. The Apostles never taught or practised to gather or separate some Christians from others, one part of this true Church, Answer. and another part of that (especially persons which themselves converted not) to make a purer Church, neither with nor without the Magistrates Authority. The Apostles (being not of men, nor by man, but by Jesus Christ, Gal. 1.1.) (b) This was proper to the Apostles or Apostolic men. Answ. to 9 pas. p. 76. T.W. to W.R. p. 67. did preach not only without, but against the peremptory Command and Laws of the Magistrate, Acts 4.17, 18, 21. & 5.28. But you profess not such a Latitude of opposition against Magistracy; nor do you hold (I suppose) that our godly nonconformable Brethren, suspended by the Bishops, or New-England-Ministers, deposed by their Churches (to say nothing of Ministers deprived by the Parliament for malignancy) are bound, by the Apostles example, to execute their Ministry in the Churches, notwithstanding such Suspension or Deposition: or that Master Ward, deposed by the Church at Rotterdam, was bound to execute his Ministry there, before his Restauration. Had you such an immediate Commission, sealed from heaven, and such infallible direction of the holy Ghost, as the Apostles had, you might more boldly imitate them therein; especially if the case of living under a Christian Magistrate, intending, endeavouring, and consulting with Divines, about the Reformation of the Church; and of living under a heathen Magistrate, and professed public enemy of the Church, were not much different. Would our Brethren in New-England allow a Presbyterian Church, or but a New-Independant Church, to be erected in New-England, against the will and mind of the Magistrates and Churches there (a) T.W. to W.R. p. 31. ? Our Brethren at London (I hear) do hold it (at least) unreasonable, to gather Churches now: how their opinion and yours are reconcileable, I see not. It may be the Brownists, Anabaptists, Antinomians, Familists, and other gross Heretics and Schismatics, in old or new- England, do also pretend the Doctrine and Practice of the Apostles for the setting up of their Churches; yet our godly and conscientious Divines do therein oppose them. 2. Seven, T.W. to W.R. p. 13. & 14. & Answ. to 32. q. p. 43. allegeth the same things. eight, or nine may make a Church. In adam's and Noah's time there was not above seven or eight; will you deny them the being of a Church? What will you make of Christ, and of his family, which were not above twelve, besides himself: and of the first Foundationals of the Church of Ephesus, which were about twelve? The number, in the first beginning, of the greatest Church, was small enough in comparison, Acts 1.15. The case of Adam and Noah was extraordinary; there were no more in the world, and therefore could be no more in the Church. Adam and his wife, and first sons, yea Adam himself was the Church, if then there was any: yet you hold not that two or three, yea one, may make a Church. Cain lawfully married his own sister, May other men now do the like? Twelve are more than seven or eight, and an hundred and twenty a competent number; yet it appears not that they were called or counted a Church, till they were more increased. If there were no more Believers in Ephesus then twelve (as there was, viz. Aquila and Priscilla, which knew more than John's Baptism, Acts 18.26. cum 24.25. if not others) yet there were more in Jerusalem then one hundred and twenty, even five hundred Brethren at once (c) 1 Cor. 15.6. Adam and Noah, with their Families, if they were Churches, they were but Domestical Churches, not congregational. What will you make of Christ and his Disciples? a Church distinct from the Jewish? You know Christ did not make a new Church, or gather men into it; but lived and died a member of the Jewish Church (d) Answ. to 32. q. p. 14. . Had they been called a Church, as some households are in the New Testament, (e) Phile. 2. witness T.W. to W.R. you had some more pretexts; and yet they had been but a Domestical Church, many whereof may be within a congregational, and especially within a Nationall Church. It is an Argument you will not own: Seven, eight, twelve, may make a domestical Church, ergo, they may make a congregational. If seven or eight may make a Church, than two hundred persons in a city may well make twenty distinct Churches, and, by consequence, so many Independent Judicatures. 3. A visible Church in the New Testament consists of no more in number then may meet in one place, in one Congregation, The like you have, Answ. to 32 q. p. 9 1 Cor. 11.20. & 14.23. If you seek for Congregations meeting for Prayer, Answer. hearing the Word, Sacraments, in one place, or that they were called by the name of Church, or that all Believers in some cities and countries, when they might, did meet in one place, I will not contend: many such Churches or Congregations we have in England; and the Believers in every Christian Church, even in the Church of England, and in the Jewish Church also, might and did, at first, meet in one place. To say nothing that all the people of the Jews (being about six hundred thousand) are called one Congregation, and are frequently in the old Testament said to come together; and that * One Myriad is ten thousand. Myriad did come together. Acts 21.22. How will you make out this Inference? The Church of Corinth did meet in one place, and so did Antioch, Jerusalem; therefore no Church in the New Testament must consist of more than can meet in one place. To say there was a Church in Adam's house, and in Noah's, and also in philemon's, Aquila's and Priscilla's houses, therefore the Church in the Old and New Testament must be Domestical, is an inconsequent Illation, contrary to plain Scripture. Is not the Argument as good if it run thus? All the believing Corinthians were of the Church of Corinth, 1 Cor. 1.1. cum 2 Cor. 6.11. The Smyrnaeans and Laodiceans, of the Church of Smyrna and Laodicea, Coloss. 2.1. & 4.16. Revel. 2.8. & 3.14. whether they were more or fewer (hence in every City, and every Church, seem to expound one another, Acts 14.21, 23. cum Tit. 1.5. Acts 16.4, 5.) And it cannot be showed that any Church, how numerous soever it grew, was divided into two or more Churches, or that there were more Churches, than one in any city or town; therefore the Believers in any one city or town may be but one Church, whether they can meet in one place or no. Paul writes not only to them which might and did meet in one place, but to all that in every place (not throughout the world, as appears, 2 Cor. 1.1. written to the same persons, 1 Cor. 5.1, 2. cum 2 Cor. 2.1, 2. neither is this a Catholic Epistle) but in all Achaia, call upon the Name of the Lord; and therefore these words, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 (besides, that being but a Supposition, they put nothing in being, and may fitly be translated, in id ipsum, for the same, or in one, which, though they met in an hundred places, they might do, Acts 4.26. cum Psal. 2.2. 1 Chro. 12.17.) prove no more that those to whom Paul writ were of one Congregation, than James calling the twelve tribes scattered abroad one Assembly, Synagogue, or Church, James 1.1. cum 2.2. & 5.34. or Paul's mentioning the Hebrews assembling themselves together, Heb. 10.25. doth prove that the scattered Hebrews were no more than one particular Congregation, which might and did meet in one place; especially seeing the Apostle writes to the Achaians, 2 Cor. 1.1. 1 Cor. 16.1. cum 2 Cor. 9.2. & 11.10. Now there were other Churches in that Region (f) Cotton Keys, p. 46. at least two, Corinth and Cenchrea, Rom 16.1. which I read was the Port of Corinth, (g) R. M. and W. T. to C. H. p. 32. yea oppidum Corinthiorum navium statione celeberrimum, & ideo frequens valde & populosum (h) Gual●… in Rom. 1. : To say nothing of the Church whereof Gaius the Corinthian was the Host, 1 Cor. 1.18. Rom. 16.23. 3 Joh.) Hence there is mention of Churches to which the women he writes to (for he saith, Your women, not Women, or all women) did resort; or how else could they keep silence in the Churches? 1 Cor. 14.34. yet you hold not that two or three Churches in the New Testament must consist of no more than may meet in one place. 4. The visible Church in the New Testament is not Nationall, as the Jewish was; hence we read of the Churches of Galatia, Macedonia, Judea, not Church of Galatia, 1 Cor. 16.1. etc. 2 Cor. 8.1. etc. We say not that the Christian Church is Nationall, as was the Jewish Church, viz. that it hath a Nationall Tabernacle, Temple or House of God, and solemn Worship peculiar to it, to which all the Members, or all the Males must sometimes resort, towards which the absent are to pray, and in which the Priests in their courses do minister unto God: not say we that the Scriptures do mention a Nationall Church; for the Supreme Magistrate was an enemy to Christian Religion, & Regis ad exemplum, etc. (i) Mto H. teacheth us thus to answer. many of the people were of the same mind, as it is this day in France and Spain, and was in England in Queen Mary's days: Believers (it is like) were not so many as to bear the name of a Land or Nation, nor could they have liberty safely and freely to meet in such great Assemblies as Nationall Synods. Show me a Nation of Magistrates and people converted, and I will show you a Nationall Church; but if there could not then be a Nationall Church, as in Queen Mary's times our Church was not Nationall, it is no wonder if there were none, (Vltra posse, non est esse) whether Nationall Churches be lawful or unlawful. Arguments taken from the naked appellation of the word Church or Churches, are very unsatisfactory, because of the various acceptations of the words Kahal, Gnedah, Ecclesia, Synagoga, which we sometimes translate Church, but should always translate, Convocation or Congregation, a company called out, or gathered together. The English word, Church; Saxon, Cyric, and Scots, Kirk, are derived from 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, as Cambd. Rem. or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as Sir Hen. Spelm. which (as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉) signifies the place of meeting. Hence we read of Robbers of Churches or Temples, Acts 19.37. Kahal (whence our English word call) is sometimes Metanymically understood of the place. The Heathen enter into the Sanctuary, which God had forbidden to enter into the Church, Lam. 1.10. cum Deut. 23.3. Nehem. 13.1. To come together 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, is (if it be rightly translated) to come together in one place, and so Ecclesia is opposed to the buildings or houses in which they did eat and drink, 1 Cor 11.19, 20, 21, 22, ult. Synagoga is evidently taken for the place of meeting, Luke 7.5. Acts 18.7. Nevertheless the words Kahal and Gnedah, do sometimes signify a dispersed multitude or company (that (possibly) never did or could meet together) hence we read of a church of Nations, Gen. 35.11. church of evil-doers, Psal. 26.5. church of the dead, Prov. 21.16. church of the Righteous, Psal. 1.5. And the people of Israel, though divided into several domestical Assemblies to keep the Passeover, are called one Church, Exod. 12.46.47. But usually an Assembly or Concio, is all one with Kahal or Ecclesia, whether that Assembly was orderly or disorderly, good or bad, less or greater, Jer. 50.9. a church of the Nations, Ezek. 32.22. Asshur and his church, Acts 19.39, 40. lawful church dismissed the church. When all the Israelitish men, women and children were together, they were but one congregation, which, in the Dialect of the Translatours of the New Testament, is all one with one church, Acts 7.38. When all the Israelites did not meet (for all the members of the Jewish Church did never meet after their settling in the Land of Canaan, nor all the males, save thrice every year) they that met, though scarce the half or third part of them that were of the Jewish Faith and Communion, were notwithstanding called all the church, the whole church, Josh. 9.18, 19 & 22.12. Ezra 2.64. And when there was a great Assembly, than the Scripture tells us, There was a great church. I set a great church, a very great church. Nehem. 5.7. 2 Chron. 7.8. & 30.13. Ezra 10.1. accounting no more persons of the Church, but those that were then assembled, yea Simeon and Levies assembly is called a Church unto which jacob's honour should not be united, Gen. 49.6. and those many that were gathered together, praying in the house of Mary, are called the Church (though James and his Brethren were not there, not (it may be) the tenth part of those, which (in our sense) were of the Jewish Church.) Acts 12.12. cum 5; Yea 4 or 5. in a family, joining in the worship of God, are called a Church, Rom. 16.5. 1 Cor. 16.19. Philem. v. 2. In this sense there were many Churches among the Jews. The Scripture calls them Church, or congregation often, and sometimes in respect of their several Synagogues, Tribes, and Families, Congregations, Psal. 74.4.8. The phrase, Churches of Judaea which were in Christ, seems to imply that some Churches in Judaea were not in Christ, 1 Thess. 2.14. Gal. 1.22. No wonder therefore if that Christians of one Country meeting in several Synagogues, Jam 2.2. Heb. 10.25. Acts 19.8, 9 & 22.19. Acts 13.15, 16, 43. and Houses, Acts 12.12. Rom. 16.5. do receive the denomination of Churches which in Scripture phrase is all one with assemblies, See Answ. to 2. many whereof we confess were in Galatia, Macedonia, etc. But more particularly, you say there were Churches in Galatia, Ergo, they were congregational. Answ. Galatia was a large Country, as is intimated Acts 18.23. The Galaetians in Saint Paul's time, held all Paphlagonia, a part of Phrygia, Cappadocia, and of all the neighbouring Countries round about, which after their names were called Gallograetia, or Gallatia, containing in them the Cities and Churches of Antioch and Laodicea, (as Macedonia also did include Philippi, Thessalonica, Berhaea &c.) In England (a far less Country then either of them) in former times have been several Churches at once, and yet those Churches not merely congregational, but Nationall rather. The Churches of Galatia might (for aught you allege to the contrary) be combined one to another, as the Churches of England, Scotland, Holland, France, are respectively combined: For the Apostle speaks of them as one lump, 1 Cor. 5.6. cum Gal. 5.9. and wisheth the anathematising or excommunicating of him that troubleth them, Gal. 1.8, 9 & 5.10.12. and the restoring with the spirit of meekness (both which I take to be Acts of Discipline) (k) Cott. keys v 8.9. doth so take them. of a fallen brother, Gal. 6.1. And the Churches of Macedonia were not so several, but they joined in one to choose a brother (which I conceive was an Authoritive act) to go with Paul for the managing of the Church's contributions, 2 Cor. 8.18, 19 and the Churches of Judaea, consisting of Myriad of people, did come together, Acts 21.20, 21, 22. to be satisfied of Paul concerning an accusation they had received against him; and are called a Church, Gal. 1.13. Acts 12.1. and an house, Heb. 3.4. which title you say is not given to lose stones and timber, but imports knitting and jointing one to another. 5. When a Visible Church is to be erected the matter of it should be visible Saints and believers, This is not unlike the Answ. to 32. Q p. 8 9 1 Cor. 1.2. True, so it should; when an Army is to be raised, a city begun, a family set up, much more when a Church is to be erected or continued, the matter of them should be visible, yea real Saints, Beloved of God, elect, blessed, etc. Deut. 83.14. Isa. 1.21.26. Acts 16.34. Rom. 1.7. Eph. 1.1, 2, 3, 4. and we hearty wish thy were all such, yet we dare not use unscriptural ways, and means for the procuring or preserving of Church-members-sanctity: To be wise or holy above the rule, is to be foolish, profane, presumptuous, superstitious; could you show us out of Scripture that the Church should examine persons that come to be admitted, whether the work of Grace be wrought in their hearts or no; and that they must make any other Declaration (than profession of faith and repentance) and that the congregation ought to reject such of whose sincerity and sanctity they are not satisfied, and that the want of this care in the first constitution of a Church, doth nullify it, or make it unlawful for men to join to it, or continue in it, and that it is necessary to know that a Church was constituted of visible Saints (which none but they that were present can know) before he can in faith join to it, or continue in it, we should not differ about the sanctity of the Members. If the Gospel and Christian Religion was brought into England in the Apostles times, Church cov. p. 37. than it was like it was constituted of Saints, as well as the Church of Corinth. If we look upon the latter constitution in Queen Elizabeth's time, many congregations of London and M: for example) had visible, yea doubtless real Saints, which were sufferers all Queen Maries time, to be the foundationals thereof. The Text in the 1 Cor. 1. shows rather what the members of the Church of Corinth were, at the time of Paul's writing to them, then that they were or aught to have been visible Saints, at the first erection of that Church; yet it shows not that all the Church-members he writes to, were visible Saints; for many known evil livers, as the Incestuous person, Drunken communicants, Heretics, schismatics, Fornicators, were known members; but the denomination of Saints, is a part meliore, as we call a wheat-field a cornfield, though we see weeds and tares in it: much less doth it prove, that all they to whom he writes, and the others also, were visible Saints at the first constitution of that Church, and that it was necessary they should be such: He writes to the Church called to be Saints, or called Saints, (not to the Saints called to be a Church, or to the Church constituted of Saints) which expression rather of the two, proves there was a Church before they were Saints, (See v. 1. Paul called to be an Apostle) then that they were Saints before they were a Church, though I maintain not the validity of either inference. But how appears it that all the Honourable titles and Epithets given by Paul, are given with relation to Church membership? The Corinthians were enriched by God in all utterance and all knowledge, and did come behind in no gift, will you thence conclude that all Church-members are or aught to be enriched by God, & c? So when he called others Saints, beloved of God, elect, blessed, etc. or saith, their life is hid with Christ in God; if these things be spoken of them as Church-members, than they are true of all Church-members, which you know they are not. See for this the Answ. to 32 Q. p. 9 & Church Covenant, p. 5.6.7. 6. The form of a Church is the gathering together of these visible Saints, and combining and uniting them into one body by the for me of an holy Covenant, Deut. 29.1, 10, 11, 12. By which is plainly showed that a company of people, become God's people, that is, a Church, by entering into Covenant with God. If it be said they were a Church before; yet that was when the Church of the Jews was constituted in Abraham's family by Covenant. Answ. You intent not that this Covenant doth make a true Church, but a pure congregational Church, as it is refined according to the platform of the Gospel. (b) T.W. to W.R. p. 24. so interprets you. A Church Covenant is of such duties as the Gospel requires of every Church, and the members thereof: Apol. for Church cov. p. 3. & p. 25. The substance of this is agreed to by Answ. to 32. Q. p. 15. A Church Covenant is especially in relation to Church estate, and Church duties; (as a marriage Covenant is with relation to the married state and marriage duties.) But the Covenant here mentioned was not entered into in reference to Church estate and Church duties, rather than to other duties of the moral Law; and may be taken by two or three, though they be too few to make a Church, or by persons of several Churches, in a Ship or a Journey, and yet let leave them in the same Church-state they were before, and not make them members of a distinct Church. A Covenant in General doth not make a Church (nor a marriage, a Covenant between this man and that woman makes it) but a Covenant with appropriation and application to this or that Pastor or people. But the Scripture Covenants are not with appropriation and application to this Pastor or people, (viz.) that they would serve God with this people or Pastor rather than with that; therefore they are not Church Covenants. To be God's people, and God's Church, is not alone in your sense. To be the King's Subjects, and to be of a Corporation, is not all one; 40 Believers of no Church, or if 40. several Churches are the Lords people, but they are not an instituted Church: no Covenant in Scripture was at the founding of the Jewish Church, nor of the Christian Churches, though many be mentioned in the New Testament, to be founded, nor at the adding of any members to them, neither did they make a Church, more truly a Church, or politic society, or more truly members, but did make them or show them to be more pure and holy servants of God, even as when single persons or families do Covenant with God. The Covenant in Gen. 17. is taken only for God's part of the Covenant, or his promise to Abraham, Gal. 3.16, 17. not for man's part to God, whereof we now speak: Gods Covenanting with Abraham did not impose nor suppose an express vocal Covenant on Abraham's part (although when God appeared visibly and spoke vocally, there was more colour for an express Covenant, than now he doth not) not always an implicit Covenant, Gen. 9.9, 10. The Birds, the Beasts, the children not then born, could not give so much as an implicit assent. Indeed receiving of circumcision doth import a Covenant on Abraham's part, or consent to the Covenant, as Baptism also doth; but it is held they were in Church-state before they had right to circumcision; therefore you should show they made a Covenant before circumcision, but how prove you that Abraham was not in Church-state before? Gen. 17. That Melchizedeck a Priest, and Lot, which were not of his seed nor of his family? were out of Church-state, That a Beliver is not a son of Abraham, nor an heir of the promise and covenant made to Abraham, if he be not in Church-state by Covenant? All which you seem to imply, when you say that Jewish Church was constituted in Abraham's family by Church-covenant. The family of Sem was the Church of God long before this, Gen. 9.25, 26, 27. See the like Allegation in Answ. to 9 pos. p. 73. 7. Every member at his admission doth promise to give himself as to the Lord, to be guided by him, so to the Church to be guided by them, which is no more than the members of the Church of Macedonia did in a Parallel case, 2 Cor. 8.5. Answ. The givers are not the members of the Church of Macedonia, (as you for your advantage phrase it) but the Churches of Macedonia, (a) Apol. for Ch. Covenant, v. 12. and therefore if this do prove Union or Covenant, it is of the members of several Churches, and not of one only: It is not said that they gave themselves to the Church or Churches, but to us, viz. to Paul and Timothy, (which were not so much as set members of any particular Church) 2 Cor. 1.1, 19 which as they joined in the Epistles extant to the Macedonian Churches, Phil. 1.1. 1. Thess. 1.1. 2. Thess. 1.1. so they commend those Churches for being guided by them, Phil. 2.12, 19 & 4.9, 15. 1 Thess. 1.5, 6, 7. & 3.6. But how the case of the Churches of Macedonia is parallel with your Church-covenant, to abide in that particular congregation you show not. 8. This particular congregation is a Church before it have Officers, Acts 2.47. Answer. In a general sense a few private men without Officers, yea a few women without men, yea 20. members of several Churches, may be called a Church; but a governing Church they are not. The Church hath not received an Office of rule without her Officers. (b) Cotton Keyes p. 16. The Church in Acts 2. had Officers, and better Officers than any Church now hath, even the Apostles (if the Commission of the 70. was expired) which were the Elders of all Churches. (d) The Apostles were as the Elders and Rulers of all Churches, Cotton Keyes p. 48. 1 Pet. 5.1. 2. Cor. 11.28. and particularly of the Church of Jerusalem, and did act therein as Elders; It is not all one to want Elders now they are instituted as before, ordinary Elders were not appointed at that time. 9 She hath also full and free power to choose her own Officers, without the help of Synod, This (though not so fully) is asserted by R. M. and W. T. to C. H. Classis, or Presbytery, Acts. 1.15. Acts 6.3. Acts 14.23. In Church affairs of weighty and difficult common concernment, as Election and Ordination of Elders, excommunication of an Elder, it is safe and wholesome, and an holy Ordinance to proceed with consultation and consent of the Churches, Prov. 11.14. (p) Cottons Keys, p. 55. You will not take upon you hastily to censure the many notable Precedents of ancient and later Synods, who have put forth Acts of power in Ordination and Excommunication. (q) Cot. Keys p. 28. We hold it a privilege of the people, (especially if they proceed wisely and piously) to Elect their Officers; and an injury to obtrude any on them, without their consent; but let us view your Scripture, The assembly, Acts 1. it is likely was not a body politic, but occasional only, no part of Church Government being as yet set on foot; here were not all but some of the sounder Members of the Jewish Church, and they had no Commission to separate from the Jews before Acts 2.44. The company was not without Elders, the Apostles if not the 70.) were present; all the Churches and Elders that were at that time in the world, were present, in respect whereof it may be called an Aeconienicall counsel, (the Apostles being Elders of all Churches) rather then a particular Congregation. If there had been any more Elders and Churches, they must have convened upon that occasion to choose an Apostle who is a Pastor of all Churches. The choice was limited by the Apostle Peter: First, to the persons present; secondly, to those that had accompanied the Apostles, all the time that the Lord Jesus went in and out amongst them, and by God the director of the lot (to whom properly the Election of an Apostle doth belong) to Mathias; As for the Deacons and Overseers for the poor (though people may better discern of men's fitness and ability for that Office, then for the Ministry; and their liberty of choosing was a good means at that time, to abate their discontentments because of former neglect; yet at their Election, there were all the Churches and Elders in the world, and more there could not have been in any case; such necessity hath not Law. Yourselves acknowledge Synods an Ordinance of Christ, useful in sundry cases, (as in case a Church being leavened with Popery, Arminianism, Antinomianisme, Libertinisme, Anabaptism, etc. should choose a Minister like themselves: If such a case had happened, they could have had no more of a Synod at that time than they had; the company did nominate two, but they that prayed (which is likely was the Apostles) did appoint them, ver. 23, 24. The people chose seven, such as they were directed to choose, set them before the Apostles, which did appoint them over the business, prayed and imposed hands: In Acts 14.23. Paul and Barnabas ordained Elders by Suffrages given by lifting up or stretching out of hands, (for so the Greek Word usually signifies, though not always, Acts 10.41. but that the people did ordain Elders by Election, without the Apostles, it saith not, but rather the contrary (viz.) that they stayed from Election and Ordination of Elders, till the Apostles came to advise and assist them therein. The word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifieth rather to give, then to gather suffrages: As [〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉] doth imply the election of more Churches than one, Churches do join in 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. and yet it imports the election of no more Churches than those there spoken of: so the phrase, [Paul and Barnabas 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉] doth not imply that any Church, or other person besides Paul and Barnabas did elect those Presbyters. 10. The particular Congregation, This Scripture is alleged by R. M. and W. T. to C. H. and Answ. to 32. q. p. 69. though it want Church-Officers, hath power and authority to ordain Officers, as the children of Israel did put their hands upon the Levites, Numb. 8.9, 10. Answer. That Congregation had Officers, Aaron the high-Priest, and many other Priests, Numb. 3.4. But you hold not that people may ordain in the presence and plenty of Officers. R. M. and W. T. to C. H. p. 52. 45. All the children of Israel, being about 600000, and many women and children, did not (probably) lay hands on the Levites, but some, in stead of the rest, which were more likely to be the Elders than any other. (All the congregation, and, All the Elders of the congregation, are all one, Exod. 12.3. cum 21) The Levites were separated to their work, and taken from amongst the children of Israel, cleansed and offered before the Lord by Moses and Aaron respectively, according to God's express appointment, v. 6 7, 8, 11, 13, 14 therefore this laying on of hands was either only obediential for approbation of God's election, or for oblation of the Levites to God, in stead of their firstborn, v. 16 17, 18. as they laid hands on sacrifices, v. 12. which was a special reason, and peculiar to those times. If the people did ordain the Levites, I am sure they did not choose them: If this be a binding pattern, you will lose Election, while you contend for popular Ordination. You tell us, that it is a main pillar of Popery, to proportion the Church now, to the outward policy in Israel; and that Christ's faithfulness above Moses, consists in as full determination of God's Worship in the New Testament, as in the Old; and that we are as strictly tied to the Gospel-patern, as the Jews were to the Old Testament: Why then should we in Ordination of Officers be guided by the Old Testament, and not by the New? And why should we follow the Ordination of Levites, rather than of Priests, for a pattern for the Ordination of Elders, except to gratify you? 11. When the Apostles were sent out by Christ, The words of the Answer to 32. q. p. 71. there was no mention of Ordination in the Commission of theirs, but only of teaching and baptising, Mar. 16.15, 16. and 28.19, 20. If Ordination of Ministers had been such a special work, there would (belike) have been some mention of it in their Commission. Answer. Neither is there mention of celebration of the Eucharist. Preaching and Baptising were first to be done to the Nations, therefore they are there mentioned. We find the Apostles did practise Ordination, and yet we suppose not that they went beyond their Commission, Acts 6. & c. 13. & 14. And a Commission to Elders we read, 1 Tim. 5. as well as practice, 2 Tim. 4. You intimate, that special works, which the people might not do, are mentioned in that Commission; which if you stand to, you must deny the people power either to Baptise or to Preach. If these words be not a Commission to the Apostles and Elders to ordain, I am sure they are no Commission to unoffic'd-men either to Preach or to Ordain. If that need so require, she may admonish her Officers, and excommunicate, etc. T.W. to W.R. p. 39 12. The Church hath power to censure her Officers, if she see just occasion, Col. 4.17. The Church of Colosse had other Elders besides Archippus, which might join with the people in the Admonition. Paul bids Timothy fulfil his Ministry, 2 Tim. 4 5. Answer. This doth not suppose Timothy to be faulty, or to be under censure: and it may be Archippus, Paul's fellow-labourer, Philem. v. 2. was not faulty, and then this Admonition was no censure; and therefore it is alleged to no purpose. Neither doth admonition always suppose Authority; for this may be an act of charity, as well as of authority. Paul might admonish Peter; and one Brother another of the same Church, though Paul had no authority over Peter, nor fellow-members one over another, Gal. 2.11. Matth. 18.15, 16. (r) Cot. Keys, p. 19 Private members cannot censure judicially, or unchurch the Congregation, though they be bidden, Plead with their mother, plead, Hos. 2.2 The Colossians were as well to cause that Epistle to be read in the Church of Laodicea, as to say to Archippus, etc. yea, the word cause, seems more authoritative than say ye: yet our Brethren hold not, that one Church hath power to cause any thing to be done in another Church. If it had been said, Cause Archippus, etc. and, Say to Laodicea, you could have made notable use of it. Finally, the Church cannot excommunicate their whole Presbytery, no more than the Presbytery excommunicate the whole Church; only she may withdraw from them (s) Cot. Keys, p. 16. : the Church hath not received from Christ an Office of rule without her Officers (t) Ibid. This Text is much insisted on, and weekly contributions for the Minister grounded on it. . 13. These Officers are to be maintained by contribution every Lordsday, 1 Cor. 16.1. You do not maintain all your Officers, not your Ruling-Elders, though the Text. 1 Tim. 5.17. doth as clearly hold out the maintenance as the lawfulness of Ruling-Elders. Answer. The Apostles Rule was not general, but only (for aught there appears) in the Churches of Galatia and Achaia, v. 1. nor perpetual; for those Gatherings were to cease when Paul came, v. 2. (though Ministers maintenance did not cease when Paul came) not for any Officers, at least not quâ Officers, but for the poor, not of their own Church neither, but of the Church of Jerusalem, many miles distant; which was a singular and extraordinary case. You might much better allege, Matth. 23.23. These you ought to have done, etc. yea, Acts 2.45. & 4.34. (as the Anabaptists) for the manner of maintaining the Ministry, and relief of the poor, then to say, that the temporary way of the Churches extraordinary charity to the poor of another Church, is a perpetual binding Rule to direct how Church-Officers should constantly be maintained. 14. The great mountain burning with fire cast into the Sea upon the sounding of the second Trumpet, See more of this in Answ. to 32 q. p. 77. Revel. 8.8.9. is applied by some good Writers to those times in which Constantine brought settled endowments into the Church. If it be so applied by some good Writers who possibly had in their eyes the Lordly and almost Regal riches and pomp of Prelates, Answer. it is by as many and as good Writers applied otherwise. For my part, as I find that Constantine's Donation, the foundation of this Exposition is but a Fiction, accounted by Gratian himself to be but Palea, (and what is the chaff to the wheat?) so I find in the Prophecies, that Kings and States are called mountains, Zech. 4.7. casting of mountains into the Sea implieth great commotions and troubles, Psal. 46.2. their burning with fire, signifieth their opposition and fierceness, whereby they become destroying mountains: or, as the Septuagint (whom the Penmen of the New Testament much follow) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉— a mountain on fire, Jer. 51.25. but I find not that settled and stinted maintenance is in any Prophecy understood by a mountain burning with fire cast into the Sea, nor that it is unlawful either from year to year, as in New-England (u) T.W. to W.R. p. 59 or for certain years, or for term of life; much less do I find that it is unlawful for one year, and not for a year and a quarter, or two, three, or four years. 15. Thereimust be in the Church Teachers distinct from Pastors, This (for substance) is alleged by Answ. to 32 q. p. 75. and many others. as Apostles are distinct from Evangelists, Eph. 4.11. That Text proves not the same distinction between them; for he saith, Some Apostles, and some Prophets, etc. but not some Pastors, and some Teachers; but, Answer. but some Pastors and Teachers; or rather, These Apostles, these Prophets, these Evangelists, these Shepherds and Teachers; which words seem but to explicate one another, as Shepherd and Bishop do, 1 Pet. 2.25. 16. This particular Congregation is Zion which God loveth, This Text is frequently alleged, in Answ. to 32 q. and others. and here he hath promised to be present, Matth. 18.20. No Sir, it is not Zion, but one of the Assemblies of Zion, Isa. 4.5. The Hebrews, Answ. which were divided into many Congregations, are not said to be come into many Mount Zions, but to Mount Zion, Heb. 12. The Scripture warrants not the expression of an hundred or a thousand Zion. Have not you found God present in our Assemblies? have not you by faith closed with the promises in the use of Ordinances, amongst us? Speak out, I know you dare not belie yourselves, us, and God himself. Christ, in Matth. 18. promiseth his presence to those that are not a Church, for two or three will not make a Church: they (v. 17.) were to give the second Admonition, the Church the third. If any faithful people, though women, or not in Church-fellowship, or members of several Churches, meet together, you dare not exclude them out of his promise, though they do not make a congregational Church. Christ's presence is promised to the Apostles and their Successors, the Elders, Matth. 28.20. and to the Assemblies of Zion, or Churches jointly, as well as severally, Isai. 4.5. Rev. 2.1. & 21.22, 23. & 22.3, 4, 5. (x) The new Jerusalem, Rev. 21. is many particular Churches combined, Cot. Keys, p. 56. Answ. to 32 q. p. 38. 17. So long as a Believer doth not join himself to some particular Congregation, he is without, in the Apostles sense, 1 Cor. 5.12. Those without, Answ. of whom the Apostle speaketh, were unbelievers, Pagans and Heathen, Answ. to 32 q. p. 11. without Christ, as well as without the visible Church. The Apostle opposeth Fornicators of the world, to Fornicators that are Brethren. Without are dogs, Sorcerers, Rev. 12.15. such as Paul had not to do with, What have I to do etc. v. 12. (and yet he had to do with all Christians, by his illimited Apostolic power, (y) Answ. to 9 Pos. p. 64. whether they belong to that or any other Congregation or no) such as God judgeth, or are left to the immediate judgement of God: But this is not the case of Believers not joined (especially in your sense of joining) to a particular Congregation; nor do you (I hope) judge it to be the case of Believers in the Churches of England and Scotland. 18. The Elders are not Lords over God's Heritage, 1 Pet. 5.3. nor do exercise authority, as the Kings and Princes of the earth do, remembering our Saviour's lesson, Matth. 20.25, 26. Luke 22.25, 26. They are not so many Bishops (z) A Classical Presbytery sets up many Bishops for one M. D. striving for preeminence, as Diotrephes did, 3 Joh. v. 9, 10 (a) These Scriptures are alleged, Answer to 32 q. p. 59 & 76. though not with such tartness against Presbyterial Government. To say nothing that the title 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Dominus, sometimes translated Sir, and sometimes Lord, Job. 12.21. 1 Pet. 3.6. is given to Christ, to Elders, and meaner persons, 3 Job. v. 4.40. & 5.7. & 12.21. Kev. 7.14. Though Elders be not Lords over God's heritage, yet they are Leaders and Guides, yea Shepherds, Rulers, Overseers, Bishops and Governors, and not only Precedents of the Congregation, Answer. Moderatours of her actions, or as the foremen of the Jury. The other Text forbids Kingly or Lordly power in the Ministers of the Gospel; for the two Apostles still dreaming of a Temporal kingdom, and being kinsmen to Christ, did expect some Temporal honour and advancement. Christ saith not, there was inequality amongst the Priests of the Jews, or amongst the Priests of the Gentiles, or between the Priests and People, but it shall not be so among you; but, very aptly and pertinently to their Petition, answereth, The Princes of the Gentiles, etc. propounding himself, v. 28. whose Kingdom is not of this world, for an example to them; yet he had no intent to equal them to himself in Church-power, or other Ministers to the Apostles, or the People to the Presbyters. We make not all Church Ministers Bishops, but the Elders only, as we are warranted by Acts 20.17, 28. Tit. 1.5, 7. Diotrephes, being but one, was liker to a Prelate, then to a Presbytery: yet Saint John doth not blame him simply for accepting or having preeminence, or for taking upon him to answer in behalf of the Church to which S. John writ, or for taking to him the power of commanding, forbidding, excommunicating; but for loving preeminence, (as Mat. 23.6, 7.) for not receiving the Apostles and Brethren, and prohibiting what he should have required and encouraged, and excommunicating such as were the best members of the Church. I will not tell you who said, All the Church is holy; ye take too much upon you, etc. 19 The power of Government is expressly given to the Church, when we are bidden hear the Church, which is a particular congregation, Mat. 18. Answer. The Church, in the first and primary intent of these words, was a Church then in being, which did abominate the Gentiles (for Heathens and Gentiles are all one) viz. the Jewish Church, which was not a particular congregation, but a Nationall Church, having gradual judicatories and appeals, of which the Apostles were at that time, and Christ lived & died an actual member, (b) Answ. to 32. Q. p. 14. They who presume that Christ did no more respect the Jewish Church, than they do the Church of England, do over-skip it, and understand this only of the Christian Church, and bring Christ in, speaking on this manner; Peter, if thy Brother offend thee to day or to morrow, and will not be gained, keep it in thy mind two or three years, and thou shalt have a Church to which thou mayst complain; tell the Church when there is one. This Gospel was writ principally to and for the Jews (some say in Hebrew) in it the Spirit of God useth much the language and dialect of the old Testament, in which Kahal (and Ecclesia with the 70.) do sometimes signify the company of Elders, (c) A subordination of the Jewish Synagogues and courts is acknowledged by Cot. Keys, p. 24. aswell as the body of the people; and a Nationall Church with gradual Judicatories and appeals, as well as a particular assembly. Now there is not a Word in the Text to show either that Church is not here taken for the Presbitary, but for the people (seeing when Christ saith, Whatsoever ye shall bind, etc. he speaks to the Disciples, v. 1. or Apostles, which are elsewhere said to have the power of binding and losing, Mat. 16.19. Jo. 20.23. and were not ordinary believers but Elders, 1 Pet. 5.1.) or that it is meant only of a parutilar congregation without gradual Judicatories or appeals, (a Notion not agreeable to the Jewish Church here in the first place spoken of. I read that the promise of binding and losing is not given to a particular congregation, when it is leavened with error and variance, Ecclesia litigans non ligat, clavis errans non ligat, but then a Synod of Churches or of their messengers may Judicially convince and condemn error, search out truth, determine, declare, and impose the way of truth and peace upon the Church. (d) Cot. Keys p. 47. 20. Mat. 16.19. Christ directeth his speech not to Peter alone, but to all the Disciples also: This seems to be taken out of the Answ. to 32. Q. p. 44. for to them all was the Question propounded by Christ, v. 15. Nor to them as General Officers of all-Churches, for that commission was not yet given them, but as Disciples and Believers. Peter was an Apostle in Office and Commission, Answ. though not yet sent out into all the world, and an Elder, Mat. 10. 1, 2, etc. and doubtless the key of Authority and Rule, when it was promised to Peter, and given to him with the rest of the Apostles, John 20.23. is the same authority which is given to their successors the Elders, See Cot. Keyes p. 4. & p. 10. whereby they are called to feed and rule the Church of God, as the Apostles had done before, Acts 20.28. If the Keys were not given to Peter as an Elder or Apostle, but as a Believer, than it will follow; First, that the Keys are not given to a congregational Church, or any visible Church, or the Members, thereof against whom the Gates of hell may prevail; but to true believers or members of the Catholic Invisible Church, which only are built on the rock, and the gates of Hell, etc. So that Hypocrites (as Judas) have not to do with them: Secondly, that they are given to all believers, making Peter's confession, whether in Church-covenant or no, whether Church-members or no, whether males or females, for a quatenus ad omne valet consequentia: Thirdly, that Peter as an Apostle, and Pastors as Pastors, have no more power of the Keys, given to them hereby, than other ordinary Believers; a groundless and senseless tenant, which makes Church-government merely democratical and popular. 21. 1 Cor. 5. Paul himself, though an extraordinary Officer, yet would not take upon him to excommunicate the Incestuous person without the Church, but sends to them, exhorting them to do it. (a) See also Answ. to 32. Q. p. 49. and reproves the brethren of the Church of Corinth, as well as the Elders, that they did no sooner put him away. (b) Cot. Keys p. 13. Answer. He blames them all, womans as well as men, that notwithstanding the notorious fornication which was amongst them, were puffed up and gloried, and did not rather mourn, that he might be put away, ver. 1.2.6. Paul himself did excommunicate Alexander and Hymaencus, 1 Tim. 1.20. and it is not mentioned that he took the consent of any Church or Presbytery in it. (b) Cot. Keys p. 30. . The Apostle saith, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. I have judged or decreed already, as if I were present to deliver, etc. which imports rather that Paul himself would deliver him to Satan, then that he exhorted them to do it: indeed he commands them to put him away, as he writes to them to restore him again, to see whether they would be obedient in all things, 2 Cor. 2.9. and he would have it done when they were gathered together, that the people might behold, approve, and execute what was decreed. Paul bids the Colossians to cause an Epistle to be read id Laodicea, they (it is like) did it in obedience to Apostolic Authority; yet it will not hence follow, that a Church hath ordinarily the same power over another Church: he bids them purge out the leaven, and put away from them that wicked person, etc. which must not be understood as if Elders and people were equally authorized thereunto, but Quilibet in suo gradu, every man in his place, So Numb. 5.2. The children of Israel are commanded to put out of the camp every Leper; yet the Elders did judicially make clean or unclean, Levit. 13.3. Deut. 17.13. yea sometime they alone did put the Leper (as Vzzials 2 Chro. 26.20.) from amongst them: The allusion to the Leaven is not to be too far strained: for every woman or child in their private house, without the consent of the Church might cast out Leaven, but yet they cannot excommunicate. The Apostle, 1 Cor. 14 31. bids them all prophesy one by one, yet our Brethren do not hold that all sanctified persons which in any place call upon the Name of the Lord Jesus, 1 Cor. 1.1, 2. were by this Precept bound to prophesy. Also, in 1 Thess. 5.12. he beseecheth the Thessalonians to know them that are over them, etc. which he speaketh to the Believers, and not to the Elders. So when he speaks of acts of governing power, it is to be understood of Elders, and not of Believers. 22. The Lord Jesus, reproving the Angel of Pergamus for suffering Balaamites, sends his Epistle not only to the Angel, This is alleged by Answ. to 32. Q 45. & 49. but to the Church. The Spirit saith not only to the Angels, but to the Churches, Revel. 2.11. And the Church-members are seen by John in a Vision, sitting on Thrones, clothed with white raiment having on their heads crowns of gold, Revel. 4.14. Now thrones and crowns are ensigns of Authority and governing power. The Lord Jesus, reproving the Angel of Pergamus, Answer. sends his Epistle (say you) not to the Angel, but to the Church: I add, Not to the Church, but to Churches. As you gather, that the suffering of corrupt persons and practice was the sin of the Church, and not of the Angel only: so I may gather, that it was the sin not of one Church only, but the neighbouring Churches also: But this you deny. I read in Revel. 4. that four and twenty Elders (distinguished from Believers, c. 7.8. 11.13.14.) not four and twenty Saints or Members) were so clothed and crowned, by which I understand the Officers of the Church, alluding to the four and twenty Orders of the Priests, and the four Beasts represent the Christian Churches thorough the four quarters of the world, alluding to the four Camps of Israel, bearing in their Standards the same Beasts. (h) Cot. Keys p. 16. By your Exposition, the Elders, which (you say) are signified by the four Beasts, are excluded from governing power; for they sit not on Thrones, nor have Crowns on their heads. Their Crowns and Thrones are no more Ensigns of Power and Authority, than their white Raiments of Priesthood: (h) Cot. Keys, p. 16. But they are not Priests by Office, they cannot do Pastoral acts, as Baptise, etc. neither have they authority to govern. Every Christian man or woman, Church-members or other, hath a Crown, and sitteth on a Throne, viz. is Spiritually a King and Priest to God, Revel. 5.10. Finally, governing power, properly so called, you (i) M. & T. to C.H. Cot. Keys, and G. and N. Epistle. acknowledge none, but in the Elders alone, 1 Cor. 12.28. Rom. 12.8. Heb. 13.17. The people's power is more fitly called Liberty and Privilege, too mean a thing to be represented by Crowns and Thrones. 23. The particular Congregation takes Christ for her only Spiritual Prophet, Priest and King, Deut. 18.15. Acts 7.37. Psal. 110.4. Hebr. 5.4. Isai. 9.6, 7. Revel. 15.3. Seven or eight (you say) are the fewest that will make a Church; Answer. but five or six, yea any one particular Saint, though out of Church-fellowship by Excommunication, etc. may take Christ to be his only Spiritual Priest, Prophet and King; yea a Presbyterial, Classical, Nationall Church may do it; the Jewish Church did it, the Hebrews did it, Heb. 5.4. and 4.15. yea, the Churches of the Gentiles, which at that time were not merely congregational, did acknowledge Christ their King, Revel. 15.3. What Scripture witnesseth that a congregational Church, rather than a Presbyterial Church, doth acknowledge Christ to be the only absolute King, Priest and Prophet? Do yourselves believe what you would have us believe, that Christ doth exercise his Kingly, Priestly, Prophetical Office only in Churches merely congregational? did Christ offer up himself a Sacrifice for all the Members of a congregational Church, and only for such? If you believe it not, why do you so clearly hint it? 24. Christ hath left but one Way of Discipline for all Churches, This is found in Answ. to 32 q. p. 82, 83. and the like in R. M. and W. T. to C. H. p. 8. which, in the essentials of it, is unchangeable, and to be kept till the appearing of the Lord Christ, 1 Tim. 6.13, 14. It seems by the words, Thou, O man of God, I give thee charge that thou keep this Commandment, Answer. (viz. which immediately precedes) concerning faith and holiness, in the ministry of the Word, to be directed to Timothy himself: or if to his successors, than it it must be to the ordinary Elders (for evangelists which succeeded him we know none) not to the Churches; for example, not to the Church of Ephesus, to whom Paul writes nothing of Government, though in his Epistles to Timothy he writes almost of nothing else, and chargeth the Elders to take heed to the Flock, and look to the Wolves, Act. 20.28. But if you will needs have the words, this commandment, extended to this whole Epistle, yea to every Precept and Example of Discipline in God's Book, you had need of good warrant for this exposition. That the essentials of Discipline set down in Scripture are unchangeable, I grant: but whether any essentials be in controversy, or how many, and which they are, you tell us not: I am sure those things that some (possibly) do make essential, are not such; as, holy kiss, anointing with Oil, washing of feet, etc. The differences between the Apostolic Churches and ours are observable, because they justly occasion some alteration, at least in externals, of Discipline or Worship. As first, the Jewish ceremonies were then scarce dead, at least, not buried: hence we are not bound to use unleavened bread at the Sacrament, to abstain from things strangled and from blood, to circumcise, to purify ourselves, and to shave our heads, etc. Matth. 26. Acts 15.20. & 16.3. & 21.21, 22, 23, 26. & 23.2, 5. Secondly, the civil customs of these countries differ much from ours: Hence we are not bound to lie or lean on a bed at the Sacrament, Joh. 13.23, 25. & 21.20. to wash one another's feet, Joh. 13.5, 14, 15. Luke 7.38. 1 Tim. 5 10. to kiss one another, Acts 20.37. Mark 14.4, 5. Rom. 16.6. 1 Cor. 16.20. 1 Thess. 5.26. or to make covering of the man's head a token of dishonour, 1 Cor. 11.11.4.5.7.10. Thirdly, the Churches were then but in gathering from amongst Heathens and Jews: Hence we want examples (to convince refractory Anabaptists or Socinians) of the Baptising of Christian Infants, or of any other, though of riper years, that was born of Christian parents, and educated in a Christian way, and was not in person a Jew or an Heathen. Fourthly, the Church was then under Heathenish persecuting Magistrates: Hence they had no houses built for, or appropriated to holy Worship, they met in the night to pray, preach, and celebrate the Supper; Ministers had no settled maintenance; no Laws did compel men to keep the Sabbaths, to frequent the Assemblies, to submit to the Church's Discipline; Christians bore no civil Offices; the Magistrate did not meddle with, nor protect, but persecute the Church. Fifthly, there was then an extraordinary effusion of the holy Ghost upon the Apostles, Evangelists, and sundry of the Elders and people: Hence there was no need of Universities nor Schools to teach Tongues and Arts, Acts 2. nor of studying for Sermons, nor using set Prayers or Psalms; for by the Spirit they then composed both, 1 Cor. 14. not looking on Bibles (Printing being not then in use) when the Pastor read or preached; no writing Sermons, etc. Sixthly, The Apostles had the care of all the Churches, and without difference taught and baptised, and ordered matters in all Churches where they came, 1 Cor. 11.28. & 4.17. & 16.1. & 7.11. (to say nothing of the Evangelists and Prophets) Now we may not, without presumptuous tempting of God, expect such Officers, but must be contented with ordinary Elders, amongst whom so much of their power as God intended to be perpetual, is divided. Seventhly, there were then some extraordinary occasional Precepts and Practices, which bind not in ordinary; as, selling all to give to the poor, Matth. 19.21. having all things common, Acts 2.44.45. & 4.32, 34, 35. anointing the sick will Oil, James 5.14. which are Apishly imitated by the Papists, if not by others. Finally, do but publish a full Narrative of your Church-courses and practices, and especially of all which you count Essentials, and prove them by Scripture; and I shall freely, by the grace of God, either consent with you, or show reason of dissenting. 25. The Church, or the Ministers thereof, The like words are found, Answ. to 32 q. p. 11, 15. Answ to 9 Pos. p. 76, 77, 78. must not be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, 1 Pet. 4. and therefore the Minister must not perform a Ministerial act to another Congregation. Acts 10.28. 1 Pet. 5.1, 2. The Text in Peter speaketh not of the Church, or of Elders, more than any other man; Answ. nor of meddling with the affairs of other Churches, but, with other men's matters, or rather (as the word implieth) other men's riches or possessions, whether Christians or Heathens, Church-members or no: and not every meddling with them, but such a meddling as for which they suffered from the Heathens in those days; Let no man suffer as a busybody in other men's matters: and therefore it is of no more strength against the power of a Presbytery over particular Congregations, then against the power of Parliament over other Courts of Judicature. The Inference supposeth, that the Flocks mentioned in those two Texts were two particular Congregations, which is impossible to be proved. Peter bids the Elders of Pontus, Galatia, etc. to feed the flock of God that is amongst them: therefore, say you, the Elders of one Church of Galatia, must not feed the people of another Church of Galatia. A communicant must examine himself; Will you thence infer that none else must examine him? The Thessalonians were to know them that were over them, and laboured amongst them, and esteem them very highly, in love, for their works sake; therefore they must not hear, or at least not esteem highly for their works sake, the Pastors of other Congregations, 1 Thess. 5.12, 13. Taking heed to the Flock and feeding it, doth include Administration of the Word, and prayer, as well as of Sacraments; yet you hold he may, notwithstanding this Text, preach and pray in another Congregation. The relation of Ministers and people is mutual: If the people may receive the Sacrament from one that is not their Minister, than the Minister may administer it to them that are not of his Flock. By virtue of Communion of Churches, you may (you say) and you do receive known approved recommended members of another Church, to the holy Communion. If you may receive one, why not two, three, four, five, six, seven, eight, which, it may be, are the whole Congregation? Where doth the Scripture allow the one, and not the other? You grant, that Elders have a calling to ordain Elders in other Churches, whereof themselves are neither Elders nor members, by request of that Church where the Elders are to be ordained (k) R. M. and W.T. to C.H. p 48. . 26. Gifted men not called unto the Ministry, This is but a little altered from Answ. to 3● q. p. 80. & 73. and T.W. to W.R. p 44. & 56. nor intended for it, may preach. They that were scattered abroad upon the persecution which arose about Steven, were not Church-Officers, at least not all of them, yet these men did preach the Word;— and Philip, which was but a Deacon, preached, without the calling or privity of the Apostles, Acts 11.19. & 8.14. This Text cannot be understood generally of all that were scattered: Answer. yourselves explain it of men, not of women, 1 Cor. 14. of gifted men, and called to that work by the Church, and not of ungifted and uncalled men: yet the words, in their indefinite latitude, will prove as well the preaching of ungifted and uncalled men, as others. Questionless there were Elders amongst them; it may be the seventy Disciples were not quite out of Commission: certainly Philip was amongst them, who was an Evangelist (which Office began upon that dispersion) as well as a Deacon, Acts 21.8. and did baptise (which yourselves confess unofficed men cannot do) as well as preach. They were all filled with the holy Ghost, Acts 2.4, 10. & 4.31. (l) And the hand of the Lord was with them, Acts. 11.21. cum Ezek. 3.14. which made them Doctors the first day, and gave them both ability and a call to speak the Word (which the Apostles counted their principal work, and after it, Prayer and Administration of the Sacraments, 1 Cor. 1.17. Acts 6.4. (m) Answ. to 32 q. p. 71. this therefore was an extraordinary Case: Yet that these did preach ordinarily and usually to the Churches, like to Pastors, and received maintenance for the same, as some do in London and elsewhere, is impossible to be proved. 27. Jehoshaphat sent Princes, who were neither Ministers, See Answ. to 32 q. nor intended so to be, to teach with the Priests and Levites; to wit, at least to encourage the people to hearken to the Priests and Levites, 2 Chron. 17.7, 8, 9 as Jehoshaphat did, 2 Chro. 20.20. yea, and was their mouth to God in Prayer, verse 25. to 13. As we conceive something in that Prophesying, 1 Cor. 14. to be extraordinary: so we conceive it to be Ordinary, that some private men, grown Christians of able gifts, who may have received a gift of Prophecy, need no more extraordinary Calling for them to prophesy in the Churches, then for Jehoshaphat and his Princes to prophesy in the Church of Israel. In the Church of Israel, Answer. none besides the Priests and Levites did ordinarily prophesy, either in the Temple, or in the Synagogues, unless they were either furnished with extraorpinary gifts of Prophecy, as the Prophets of Israel; or were set apart and trained up to prepare for such a Calling, as the sons of the Prophets: (n) Cot. Keys, p. 20. but Jehoshaphat and his Princes were neither Prophets, nor sons of the Prophets. There is a vast difference between prophesying, and encouraging the people to hear the Priests and Levites. Had Jehoshaphat a Warrant for what he did, or no? if he had, was it ordinary, or extraordinary? If either he had no Warrant, or an extraordinary one, he is not to be imitated: if an ordinary Warrant, you may produce it; for all the Books of Scripture that were writ in his time, are extant, and many more. Jehoshaphat knew well the difference between matters of God, and the King's matters, 2 Chron. 19.11. matters concerning the King and Commonwealth: The Princes might (as Judges, Justices, etc. now do) teach in the Cities. Do you indeed hold, that the King may not only preach himself, but also appoint others to preach and teach, though the Church do not call them? If so, tell us (I pray you) whether he may preach in the whole Nation, or only in one particular Congregation. You tell us that the Kings of Judah (being Types of Christ; and not only their people, but their very Land being typical, etc.) might be invested by God With a larger power in matters of Religion, than Kings and Magistrates under the Gospel, [may not I add, or Subjects?] have any ground or warrant to claim from (o) Two Brethren to A.S. p. 54. . Those in 1 Cor. 14. had not an ordinary, but an extraordinary gift of Prophecy, and the gift of Tongues also; yea, they composed Songs and Psalms as the Spirit did thereunto move, enable and authorise them; yet you hold not that a man, having attained variety of Tongues, See Cot. Keys, p. 20. and M. Goodwin and M. Eyes Epistle. or a Poetical vein, might then, or now may in Churches exercise the gift of Tongues, and sing self-composed Songs or Psalms; nor can you from hence show, that it is lawful for unofficed men to preach in an ordinary course, and to receive maintenance for the same. Reader, other Witnesses are come in, and more may come in: while thou art reading these, I shall hear them. Their testimonies (as Scouts shall bring tidings) shall be concealed or published. FINIS.