DE NON TEMERANDIS ECCLESIIS.  
Whereof, The Name and sacredness of CHURCHES (against those, who in Contempt call them STEEPLE-HOUSES) proposed, by way of Conference.  
By P. Panter, Doctor in Divinity.   printer's or publisher's device 
July .22. LONDON: Printed for Thomas Vere, dwelling at the upper end of the Old-Bayly. 1650.   

DE NON TEMERANDIS ECCLESIIS.  
THE Doctor having formerly maintained a Dispute, concerning Baptism of Infants of Christians, against Master Browne, Preacher to the Anabaptists, lately Printed: Upon another occasion, meeting with one of the same Profession, and using the Name of Churches, according to the common use of speech (which hath authority and arbitrement in the like case, according to that of the Poet; Si volet usus, quem penes arbitrium est, & vis, & norma loquendi:) The other being impatient, said; What? Do you call your Meeting-Houses, and Steeple-Houses, Churches? The user of the word asked; If either the Name of Ecclesia in Greek or Latin, or of Church in the English, was so unfit, or insolent? Was it not an ordinary Metonymy, or transferring of Names, to give to the place the Name of the thing placed, or meeting in the place, and haunting the same? Was not Synagoga properly an Assembly, and yet most usual for the place of Assembling? Hence the Master of the Synagogue, Christ, taught in the Synagogues of Galilee; Paul and Barnabas having entered the Synagogue on the Sabbath day, sat down, Act. 13.14. So Ecclesia, albeit first it signify an Assembly called together, yet fitly is used for the place; as Proseucha properly signifying in the Greek a Prayer, or Petition, is transferred to signify the place of Petitioning: whence Juvenal hath, In quâ te quaero proseucha? In what common place shall I seek you?  
But as to the English Name, Church, there is not so much as a Metonymy, or figure in it, but a proper speech, as the Affirmer offered to prove by this Reason:  
That use of Names, which is according to the Etymon, and native force of them, is most proper;  
But the Name of Church (as it is given to the meeting places of Christians) is used according to the Etymon, and native force and virtue thereof:  
Ergo, The Name of Church, so used, is most proper.  
The Assumption, or Minor, he thus proved: The Etymon of Church, is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Cuirass, that is, a place belonging to the Lord, as Basilica to the King his Palace: now Churches are the Lords Houses, therefore the Name of the Church is according to the Etymon of the word.  
Here the Adversary replied, That no place was peculiarly the Lords, more than another. To whom it was answered, That sure some places were; he granting, that the Temple of Jerusalem was, which God had chosen to put his Name in. It was asked, If none other? What say you (said the Affirmer) of Psal. 83.12. Let us take the Houses of God in possession; there is the Plural number: and of Psal. 74.8. They burned up all the Houses of God throughout the Land. Where the Synagogues are understood, not only many year's later than the Tabernacle, or Temple, but also having no mystery in them, but appointed for use and order allanerly, as ours are; which, why they may not, and ought not to be called the Lords Houses, or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, and Churches, no man can show a reason. Dic aliquem, sedes, hîc Quintiliane colorem; and whosoever either taketh them in possession, or destroyeth the same, committeth Sacrilege, a sin ranked with Idolatry itself, Rom. 2.22. Thou hatest Idols, but committest Sacrilege.  
Here the Adversary of Churches asked; Is there any holiness in places, albeit dedicated to God and his service? The Affirmer answered, by a distinction of holiness: for, saith he, it is Homonymum, and found in two Categories, or kinds of things; in the category of Qualities, and the category of Relations. Holiness in the first sense, is opposed to wickedness, or ungodliness, and is only incident to rational and intellectual things; and it is a quality, disposition, or habit of the mind and affections: in the second sense, it is opposed to Common, Act. 10.15. That which I have purified (or made holy) that call thou not common; where, literally the Vision speaketh of Meats, and mystically only of Men. So the holy City, Matth. 4.5. the Temple, called the holy Place, Heb. 9.1, 2, 3. So the Vessels serving for the Ministry, called sacred, or holy, that is, not common, but holy, by a twofold relation to God, (who as he is holy alone, so things are holy, by reference to him) either as Lord and Possessor in a peculiar manner, or by reference to him, as the end for whose service and glory they are appointed and set apart, and whereto he hath promised his presence; which may be reckoned a third relation. So that they are holy, because His, for Him, and He is in them in a special manner, as to places; for, where two or three are met together, there am I, Matth. 18.20.  
Here the Adversary did object, That these differences and relations were taken away by our Saviour, John 4.21. The hour cometh, and now is, that neither in this Mountain, nor at Jerusalem, shall ye worship the Father; but the true worshippers shall worship in spirit and truth. For answer whereto, take this first, That our Saviour there taketh the privilege of place of worship from none, but the two places there mentioned, of whom the question than was, to wit, that Mountain of Garizim, (pointed at by the Samaritan woman, vers. 20.) and Jerusalem. Secondly, our Saviour taketh the privilege no other ways from them, then as it was arrogated and challenged by them, that is, to be the only place of worship in the world, whither they must either resort, or direct their faces and prayers, 1 Kings 8. 29, 30. and Daniel 6.10. Our Saviour declareth to her therefore, That henceforth not these places alone should have the privilege of God's presence, but also whatsoever places of meeting throughout the world, according to that of Malachy 1.11. and 1 Tim. 2.8. Where, albeit there be an Universal, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, in every place, yet it is to be extended according to the intention of the place, which is in the general, concerning Church, or public Service, vers. 1 & 2. and the behaviour of persons thereabout; men, vers. 8. women, 8, 9, 10, 11, etc. Where, as praying publicly is permitted to men in every public place of Worship, providing they lift up pure hands, (howsoever the place before had been impure) so he restraineth the women to silence; which cannot be understood of private places of Worship, (for there women are licenced both to pray, and ask questions, 1 Cor. 14.35.) but of the Church, or public places, as it is expounded by the words of the same Apostle, 1 Cor. 14.34. The command then, or licensing of men to pray in every place, is to be taken also of these public places of Prayer; so that they are not put down under the Gospel, but established. Neither do the words of our Saviour, Joh. 4.23. of the true worshipping in spirit and truth, make against it: for if all worship performed by and with the body, or in bodily places, thereby were forbidden, not only public but private devotions, and Family-Service should cease, and we must go out of the body & world too. And what should become of Malachies pure Oblation, offered now under the Gospel among the Gentiles, from the rising of the Sun to the going down of the same? And what of the lifting up of pure hands in every place by men, mentioned 1 Tim. 2.8? And what of Psalms, Hymns, and Spiritual Songs, recommended Eph. 5.19?  
O but (say some) their melody to God in the heart is recommended. But I answer: In the heart, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, is with the heart, or from the heart; as Psal. 15.2. who speaketh the truth in his heart: not that the truth is not to be spoken with the mouth, but insinuating the fountain and beginning of truth; from the heart, or with the heart; so that the tongue and heart agree together: and so Eph. 5.19. making melody to the Lord in your heart, that is, from the heart; and Job. 4.23. in spirit, that is, from the spirit, or with the spirit; yet not excluding the body.  
But the words of our Saviour are in opposition to the Jewish and Samaritan worship (of which the woman there did speak) which was in carnal ordinances of eating, and abstinence from certain meats & drinks, and divers baptisms and purifyings of the flesh, not reaching the conscience, Heb. 9 v. 10. & 13. which, as it was opposite to spiritual worship, or worship in spirit; so being typical, and consisting in figures and shadows, was opposite to the truth, or true worship under the Gospel.  
Others oppose the worship in Spirit to the Jewish, and worship in Truth to the Samaritan, which was false, and of the false gods, for they worshipped what they knew not, joh. 4.22. But no man of understanding will oppose it to all service of God, to be performed by or with the body, except it end in the body, and do not edify or elevate the spirit; as the Jewish abstinences and ordinances, more burdened the spirit then edifying them.  
Let them talk then as much as they will, of the Church of God in ones house; yet it maketh nothing against the Church of God in Congregations, and Parish s: For the Church being totum homo geneum, a whole made up of parts of the same kind, there are smaller and greater parts therein, and all bearing the name of the whole, yet so, as neigher prejudgeth other; so that every one keep its own order and place, and the lesser and subordinate parts do not lift themselves up against the bigger and superior, and put them down.  
Neither is it marvel, that their Meetings were in private houses at the beginning; (when they neither had nor could have other places) but now (having plenty and conveniency of such places of assembling, and liberty and peace to assemble as publicly as we will) to sorsake the same, and get us to private places and wildernesses, it is not so much wantonness, as insolent and unheard of madness: As S. Austin speaketh in the like case of these, who leaving the custom of the whole Church, follow (I know not what) private conceits of their own, insolentissimae est insaniae.  
FINIS.