Anſwer.

IT ſeemeth by this your letter, the ground of this Poſition hath beene the ſeparation of divers from your aſſemblies, becauſe of a ſtinted Liturgie: and we are not ignorant of the rigid ſeparation of divers people, who withdraw themſelves from an able faithfull miniſtry, as no miniſtry of Chriſt, and from their godly congregations as no Churches of Chriſt; becauſe of ſome corruptions from which (through want of light, not love of the truth) they are not throughly cleanſed. Againſt which practiſe we have ever witneſſed.

As for our Judgement concerning the Poſition it ſelfe, we would promiſe two things; Firſt concerning the perſons reading this Liturgie, which may be either an ungodly or unable Miniſter, or an able and a godly.

Secondly, concerning the Liturgie it ſelfe, which may be either of the whole or ſome ſelect prayers, which may be conceived to be the leaſt offenſive.

Now if the queſtion be of joyning in prayer with, and when that whole Liturgie is uſed, or where that which is uſed, is read by an unable and ungodly Miniſter, we then ſee not how it can be lawfull to joyne in prayer in ſuch caſes; For

1 The prayers of the Miniſter are not his private prayers, but the publike prayers of the whole aſſembly, whoſe mouth he is to God. And when the prayers offered up by the Miniſter, as a living holy, and acceptable ſervice to God, are not through humane frailty, but otherwiſe for matter and manner corrupt, wee ſee not what warrant any one hath to joyne with ſuch prayers, Mal. 1. 13, 14.

2 When men ioyne therein with an inſufficient Miniſtry, they doe not only countenance them in their place and office, whom the Lord hath rejected from being his Prieſts. Hoſ. 4. 6. but alſo ſet up thoſe Idolls and means of worſhip to edifie themſelves by, which God never appointed in his holy word Ezeck. 11. 17.

But if the queſtion be of joyning in ſome few ſelect prayers read by an able and painfull Miniſter out of that booke as on the one ſide wee are very tender of imputing ſin to the men that ſo joyne: ſo on the other ſide, we are not without feare, leaſt that ſuch joyning may be found to be unlawfull: unleſſe it may appeare that the Miniſters with whom the people have communion in reading thoſe prayers doe neither give any ſcandall by reading of them nor give unlawfull honour to a thing abuſed to Idolatry, and ſuperſtition, nor doe ſuffer themſelves to be ſinfully limited in the reading of them.

Reply.

SUfficient hath been ſpoken of the meaning of the poſition and the grounds thereof and if we have not miſtaken your judgment & practice both, you have born witneſſe againſt both that you call the rigid ſeperation, and this more moderate alſo; And we humbly wiſh, the moderate doe not degenerate into the rigid ere long. It is very ſtrange, if they take not great incouragement upon your grounds. The truth of our miniſtery, Churches, Ordinances, and calling is queſtioned, and where men will ſtay the Lord knoweth, and what more common then that our Liturgie is unlawfull, becauſe it is the deviſe of man; The Author (or publiſher at leaſt) of a letter againſt our Service booke beginneth with ſuch like diſtinction.

Againſt this Prayer-booke (ſaith he) divers have pleaded in a different manner. Firſt ſome arguments are proper to the Separatiſts qua tales, viz. that it is offered in a falſe Church; 2. By a falſe miniſter; 3. In the behalfe of the ſubjects of the Kingdome of Antichriſt. Theſe are properly theirs, being the grounds whereupon they make a totall ſeparation from all the Churches in this Land, as no Churches of Chriſt. Theſe I approve not, yet note them that yee may ſee upon what different grounds, the ſame Poſition is maintained by ſeverall perſons, and that yee may be delivered from the prejudice, which hinders many from receiving thoſe truths, becauſe they feare the reproach of Browniſme.

Secondly, there are other grounds which are common to all that plead for the the puritie of Chriſts ordinances, and which doe not neceſſarily inferre ſuch ſeparation, but only ſerve to ſhew the unlawfulneſſe of that practiſe, and our communicating therein.

Thus the Epiſtle wherein the ſame diſtinction of ſeparation is noted: but how truly, let the indifferent judge. If none muſt be counted Separatiſts, but ſuch as have pleaded againſt the booke of Common prayer as unlawfull, becauſe offered up in a falſe Church, &c. then are there none ſuch in the world, that we have knowne or heard of: for it is apparent they caſt us off as no Churches of Chriſt, becauſe our Service is a humane deviſe, will-worſhip, Idolatry; And not on the contrary, that our Service is will-worſhip, or Idolatry, becauſe our Churches are falſe Churches. Againſt all Communion with us they plead, becauſe we are a falſe Church, but againſt our ſtinted Liturgie they argue not in that manner.

The grounds on which that Authour builds (which he ſaith are common to all, that plead for the purity of Gods ordinances) are one and the ſame with the grounds of the Separatiſts, ſhafts taken out of the ſame quiver and peculiar to them, ſome few brethren onely excepted, who of late have looked towards that opinion. See how affection will tranſport. Thoſe reaſons ſhall be common to all that plead for the purity of Chriſts Ordinances, which were never taken to be ſound and true, either by the reformed Churches abroad, or by the godly Brethren at home, whether now at reſt with the Lord, or for the preſent living, or yet by the moſt of the brethren among whom they live, and with whom they hold ſocietie, or by any miniſter or Societie which did hold the unitie of the ſpirit in the bond of peace for the ſpace of this 1400 yeares and upwards, by your owne confeſſion, unleſſe within theſe few dayes, and that by a few onely. If this be not to ſtrengthen the hands of the Separatiſts, or at leaſt, to lay blocks of offence in their way, what is? As yet we thinke moſt of them that have ſeparated, are not ſo farre gone, as to condemne all our Aſſemblies as no Churches of Chriſt, but we judge they have proceeded further then Chriſt the Lord and Saviour of his Church hath given them commiſſion or allowance, that the grounds whereon they build are unſound, and ſuch as make way for further danger, if the Lord prevent not. And that the reaſons mentioned in the letters are the proper grounds of Separatiſts, and not common to all them that ſeeke the purity of religion, for they are not approved by your ſelves: and if all this tend not to turne them who halt, out of the right way, wee heartily intreate you to conſider.

Your judgement concerning the Poſition, you deliver in three propoſitions (for ſo many they be for ſubſtance) In reſpect of the perſons reading the Liturgie, or the thing it ſelfe that is read. As if any part of the Liturgie bee read, (put caſe ſome few ſelected prayers onely, by an unable and ungodly miniſter: it is unlawfull (ſay you) for the people to joyne in that caſe. But if it be unlawfull for the people to joyne, when an ungodly miniſter readeth ſome few ſelect prayers, it is either in reſpect of the Miniſter,We may not Communicate at all in that miniſtery, which is exerciſed by an unlawfull perſon or in an unlawful. place Robinſon againſt Bern. Counſell debated p 17 Ibid pag 79. or the prayers themſelves. Not of the prayers themſelves, for they be ſelect and choyce, faultleſſe both in reſpect of matter and manner, as it is taken for granted, unleſſe this diſtribution be to no purpoſe; if in reſpect of the Miniſter, then it is not lawfull to joyne with ſuch a one in any ordinance of God whatſoever. For if the Miniſter make it unlawfull, then all communion in any part of Gods worſhip, with ſuch Miniſters is unlawfull, and ſo the Church in all ages of the world, the Prophets, our Saviour Chriſt, the Apoſtles, and the faithfull in the primitive Churches ſinned, in holding Communion with ſuch, when the Prieſts were dumbe dogges that could not barke,Eſa. 56. 10. Ezech 41. 7, 8. Mic. 3. 11, 12. Ier. 5. 31. Eſa. 9. 15, 6. Ioh. 2. 16. Math 5. 20, 21. & 15. 4, 5. & 23 1— 3▪ 14. and greedy dogges that could never have enough; when the Prophets prophefied lies, and the Prieſts bare rule by their meanes; when the Prieſts bought and ſold Doves in the Temple, and tooke upon them to provide ſuch things for them that were to offer; when the Phariſees corrupted the Law by falſe gloſſes, taught for doctrines mens precepts, made the commandements of God of none effect through their traditions, under pretence of long prayer devoured widowes houſes, taught the Law, but practiſed it not; when they were ſuch, and did ſuch things, they were ungodly Miniſters; But we never find that the Prophets, our Saviour, the Apoſtles, did either forbeare themſelves, or warne the faithfull not to communicate with ſuch in the ordinance of worſhip.Math. 16 6. 12. & 15. 14. We reade our Saviour charged his Diſciples, to beware of the leaven of the Scribes and Phariſees, to let them alone, becauſe they were the blind leaders of the blind, but he never forbade to communicate with them in the ordinance of God. It is not then for private Chriſtians to withdraw themſelves from the ordinance of worſhip, See Whitak de pontif. q. 4. f 10. pag. 557. Phil. 1. 15. and communion of the Church, becauſe ſuch are permitted to deale in the holy things of God, whom they judge or know unfit: when men joyne in the worſhip of God with unworthy Miniſters, they doe not countenance them in their place and office, but obey the commandement of God, who requires their attendance upon his highneſſe in that way and meanes.

To goe no further then the text you quote,H • ſ. 4 6, 7. Becauſe thou haſt deſpiſed knowledge, I will alſo reject thee, &c. Properly the text is ſpoken of the ten tribes called Iſrael, and the Prieſts among them who worſhipped the Calves which Ieroboam had ſet up, whom the Lord threatneth to reject, becauſe they had rejected knowledge being either wilfully ignorant, or withholding the truth in unrighteouſneſſe. Whether they were for the preſent abſolutely rejected, or the Lord threatens only to reject them we will not diſpute.

This may ſuffice that it is not to be found either in this or any other Text of Scripture, that the people joyning in the true Worſhip of God, with unworthy Miniſters, do countenance them in their place thereby. On the contrary, if you will extend this Text to all unworthy Miniſters of what ſort ſoever, whom the word of truth doth condemne as not approved Miniſters of God, the Scripture teacheth evidently not onely that the people by joyning do not countenance them in their place and office, but that they muſt and ought to joyne with them in the worſhip of God,1 Sam. 2. 12, 13, 14, 17, 24. Ier 8. 8, 9. Mic 3. 11, 12. Phil. 1. 15. and in ſeparating from the Ordinance they ſhall ſinne againſt God, much leſſe then do they in ſuch joyning ſet thoſe Idols and meanes of worſhip, which God never appointed in his Word. For the worſhip is of God, and the Miniſtery is of God, the perſon unworthily executing his place, is neither ſet up by ſome few private Chriſtians, nor can by them be removed. And warrant to withdraw themſelves from the worſhip of God, becauſe ſuch as ought not, are ſuffered to entermeddle in the holy things of God, they have none from God. Dumbe Dogs, greedy Dogs, Idol-ſheepheards, falſe Prophets, Strangers, are unworthy Miniſters, but they that communicate with ſuch in the ordinance of worſhip, are never ſaid to ſet up Idols or means of worſhip which God never appointed. The ſheep of Chriſt will not heare ſtrangers in the Lords ſenſe, but outwardly they heard thoſe ſtrangers preach (if the Scribes and Phariſees were ſuch) and by hearing them diſcovered them to be ſtrangers, i. e. falſe Prophets; Some ſtrangers at leaſt, of whom our Saviour ſpeaks, were of the true Church, and of Iſrael, but brought falſe doctrine tending to kill the ſoule, ſuch ſtrangers none ſhould heare, that is, believe and follow: but as they be tolerated in the Church, ſo they may hear them, ſo long as they bring the truth. Unworthy Miniſters are no Miniſters for themſelves, but they are Miniſters for the people of God, that is, ſo long as they be in the place of Miniſters, the acts of their adminiſtrations are of force to the faithfull, if they obſerve the forme of adminiſtration preſcribed by Chriſt; for Chriſts Ordinances have their efficacy from him, not from them that ſerve about them, and evill Miniſters miniſter not in their own name, but in Chriſts and by his Commiſſion.

It hath evermore bin held for a truth in the Church of God, that although ſomtimes the evill have chiefe authority in the miniſtration of the Word and Sacraments,Helv conſ. cap. 18 § 11. & 19 §. 9, Gal. conf. art. 28. Arg. conf. Art. 13 Saxon. conf. Art. 12 Zep de Sa • l. 2. c. 6. Art. of Religion, Hybern. Art. 70 Carlton praelect de Eccleſia, cap. 20. yet for as much as they doe not the ſame in their own name but in Chriſts, and miniſter by his Commiſſion and Authority, wee may uſe their Miniſtery both in hearing the Word, and receiving the Sacraments; neither is the effect of Chriſts Ordinance taken away, by their wickedneſſe, nor the grace of Gods gifts diminiſhed from ſuch as by faith, and rightly doe receive the Sacraments adminiſtred to them which are effectuall; becauſe of Chriſts inſtitution and promiſe, although they be miniſtred by evill men.

The reaſons whereby the ancient Churches condemned the Donatiſts and Cathariſts for their voluntary and ſeditious ſeparation, Beza de Presbyt. et excōmunicat. p. 25 26. Iſta vero, quia nonnulli à ſacris caetib. & ſacrament. uſu propter aliorum vitia ultro abstinent i. e. ſeipſos excommunicant magnam reprehenſionem merentur. and the moderne Churches condemne the Anabaptiſts for their unwarrantable departure from, and ſo renting of the body of Chriſt, will hold againſt ſeparation from the prayers of the congregation, becauſe they are read by an ungodly miniſter.

The ſecond propoſition. Where the whole Liturgie is uſed, though by an able and godly Miniſter, it is not lawfull to joyne in prayer in that caſe. Herein wee cannot be of your judgement; for in the times of the Prophets, and our Saviour Chriſt, as great abuſes, no queſtion, were found in the Church of the Jews in the adminiſtration of holy things of God as can be imagined in our Liturgie or forme of prayer: but the Prophets and our Saviour who taught the people to keepe themſelves pure and undefiled, never taught them to ſeparate from the adminiſtration of the holy things of God. And if the preſence at our forms of prayer be not lawful by reaſon of the corruptions alleaged, there can be no viſible ſociety named throughout the world ſince 200. yeeres after Chriſt or thereabouts, wherein a Chriſtian might lawfully joyne in Prayer, reading the Scripture, hearing the word or participation of the Sacraments. For compare the doctrines, prayers, rites at thoſe times in uſe in the Churches with ours, and in all theſe, (bleſſed be the name of the Lord) wee are more pure then they. But no man will be ſo bold (we hope) as to affirme the ſtate of the Churches within 200. yeeres after Chriſt, to be ſo miſerably decayed that the faithfull could not without ſin hold communion with them in the aforeſaid ordinances. The prayers of the Miniſter, whether conceived or ſtinted in a ſet forme, be not his private prayers, but the publike prayers of the whole aſſembly, whoſe mouth he is to God both in the one and the other. But you will not ſay, the people ought not to joyne with their Paſtor in the publique aſſembly, if ought bee amiſſe in his prayer for matter, or manner, or both. It is all one to the people in this caſe, whether the fault be perſonall (as ſome diſtinguiſh) or otherwiſe knowne beforehand or not knowne: For if ſimple preſence defile, whether it was knowne beforehand or not, all preſence is faulty. And if ſimple preſence defile not, our preſence is not condemned, by reaſon of the corruptions knowne, whereof we ſtand not guilty, whether the corruption, be through humane frailty or not, it is not in us to enquire, but rather whether we be called to come, and the faults ſuch as one Chriſtian cannot or muſt not tolerate in another without breach of charity. For if the errour be ſuch as may be tolerated, and I am called to be preſent; by ſuch fault I am not defiled though knowne before. If the error be ſuch as in conſcience may not be tolerated, though not knowne before hand, I am bound, if preſent ſome way to profeſſe againſt it. This diſtinction of perſonall and miniſteriall faults in this caſe untill it be cleared by ſome Text of Scripture or ſound reaſon from the word, muſt goe for the diviſe of man.

A Church, a Miniſter, or a Chriſtian may be ſtiffe in an error (being miſperſwaded it is a truth) after many meanes long uſed to convince them, with whom yet we muſt hold communion in the ordinances of Religion: and the error may be ſuch as we cannot without hypocriſy or denyall of the truth hold communion, though ſuch meanes of conviction have not gone before. But the corruptions alleadged againſt our forme of prayer for matter or manner, are ſuch as one Chriſtian may and muſt tolerate in another where he hath no power to redreſſe them.

Hath not Chriſtian wiſdome and experience of humane frailties leſſoned you (deere brethren) to beare one with another in matters of greater conſequence then any have or can be objected truly againſt the form of prayer in uſe among us? And why ſuch corruptions ſhould not be aſcribed to humane frailty; we ſee not: For if a godly Miniſter make uſe of a book in things which he judgeth lawfull for matter and manner, the corruption in him that uſeth it according to his judgement, from what cauſe can it ſpring but humane ignorance and frailty? We reſt aſſured you queſtion not the integrity of many, who make much more uſe of the booke then onely in a few ſelect prayers. From the bottome of our hearts we deſire and pray that God would remove out of his Church and worſhip whatſoever offendeth for matter or manner, and that all things may be ſo done, not onely that they may be tolerated but that they might be approved in the conſcience of all men. But we are perſwaded that not onely ſome few ſelect prayers but many prayers & other exhortations may lawfully be uſed,We ſee no warrant why for every particular act, that in a larger ſence is Idolatrous, adjoyned to Gods true worſhip, we ſhould forbeare our preſence at the true worſhip it ſelf. Unreaſon. of ſeperation. anſw to 6. argument. with fruit and edification to Gods people.

To aggravate faults eſpecially when it tends to draw away people from the Ordinances of God, is no leſſe fault then to excuſe them, it may be greater, and therefore we dare not eſteeme the prayers read by a godly and faithfull Miniſter according to the booke in uſe among us, a corrupt ſacrifice whether in ſuch as read them, or them that be preſent. In them that join according to Chriſts command (and liberty of abſence from Chriſt hath not beene ſhewed) notwithſtanding the corruptions, we hold the prayers to be an holy and acceptable ſacrifice to God, and pleaſing to Jeſus Chriſt. The corrupt ſacrifice is that, which the deceiver bringeth voluntarily, and out of neglect, having a male in his flock: but the faithfull bringeth himſelf and his godly deſires according to the will of God, and as for corruptions, whether reſpecting matter or forme, they are none of his, they cleave not to his Sacrifice to ſtaine or pollute it. As for the Text of the Prophet Mal. 1. 13, 14. it is cited by many in this buſineſſe, and to many purpoſes applyed, but we cannot finde that in the Prophet for which it is here brought, The deceiver is accurſed that offereth a corrupt thing to the Lord. This we reade and beleeve, but that a godly man, being preſent at this forme of prayer among us, read by a godly and faithfull Miniſter, is the deceiver, who offereth a corrupt thing unto the Lord, that is not proved. No argument can be brought from this place to the purpoſe, but by analogy, which is a kinde of arguing of all other moſt ready at hand, but lyable to moſt exceptions, and apt to draw aſide, if great care be not had, (which in this place we finde not) to take the proportion in every materiall point juſt and right. And we deſire ſuch as alleadge this paſſage of Scripture againſt ſimple preſence at the prayers of our Liturgy, adviſedly to conſider whether God allow them to make ſuch application of his truth which wee much doubt of, to ſay no more.

Your third propoſition. That as you are very tender of imputing ſinne to thoſe men that joyne in ſome ſelect prayers read by an able and godly Miniſter: ſo on the other ſide you are not without feare, leaſt ſuch joyning may be found unlawfull, unleſſe it may appeare that the Miniſters with whom the people have communion in reading thoſe Prayers, neither give any ſcandall by reading them, nor give unlawfull honour to a thing abuſed to Idolatry and Superſtition, nor doe ſuffer themſelves to be ſinfully limited in the reading of them.

1 We cannot conceive how you ſhould imagine the practice of a godly Miniſter in reading ſome few ſelect prayers to be ſcandalous or offenſive in their congregations when the people generally, not in their aſſemblies onely, but throughout the whole land, were perſwaded of the lawfulneſſe of that courſe till now of late ſome have beene drawne away to ſeparate, who yet by warrant of Scripture produce nothing of weight to countenance that practice.

2 If the booke ſhould be as you take it an idolathite, latent offence doth not oblige. If any man ſay unto thee, this is ſacrificed to Idols, eat it not, ſo that if it doe not manifeſtly appeare that this practice is ſcandalous; it is not lawfull for the people to withdraw themſelves.

3 The book (we ſpeake of the Liturgie ſo far as it is ſound and good) by your confeſſion is no Idolathite, neither was it taken out of the Maſſe-book in ſuch ſenſe as you object, but rather the maſſe & other Idolatrous prayers were added to it, for popery is as a ſcab or leproſie cleaving to the Church; and many truths belonging to the Church as her proper legacie were ſtolen and heaped together in that denne. And why the true man may not challenge his goods where ever he finds thē, or the thiefe plead title to the true mans goods by preſcription, we know not? It is no hard taske to ſhew that our Service-booke was reformed in moſt things according to the pureſt Liturgies which were in uſe in the Church long before the maſſe was heard of in the world. And if that could not be ſhewed, yet formes of ſpeech generally taken (we ſpeak not of this or that ſpeciall word or phraſe) is no more defiled by Idolatry then the light aire, or place where Idolatry is committed. It is not unlawfull to pray, Lord helpe, or Lord have mercy, or to give thankes, praiſed bee God, becauſe the Papiſts ſay, Lady helpe, or, praiſed be God and the Virgin Mary.

Fourthly, Put caſe the Miniſter in reading ſuch prayers gives offence, or attributes unlawfull honour to a thing abuſed to Idolatry and Superſtition, or ſuffer himſelf to be ſinfully limited in the reading of them, what is that to the faithfull? This can be no juſt ground of the peoples not joyning with them in the worſhip of God, for that offence is perſonall onely, and not the ſin of them that be preſent, they joyn in prayer onely, and not in his reading or limiting himſelf. Not to ſay that every particular perſon muſt be herein both accuſer and Judge. If he give offence muſt they ſtumble at the ſtone, and ſeparate from the ordinance of grace? wee ſhould rather think it is their duty to look unto their feet, that they goe not awry. Let it be ſhewed out of the Word of God, that either the Miniſter is guilty of giving unlawfull honour, or that the people may lawfully withdraw themſelves in caſe he ſhould do ſo, and we will then ſay as you do, but untill that be proved, (being preſſed and called to proffer our judgements) we believe that ſeparation is ſcandalous and ſinfull, never taught of God, nor confirmed by the approved example of the godly in any age or time of the Church:Compare what Maſter I. D. hath written in defence or excuſe in reſorting to the Aſſemb. of the Separatiſts, called Browniſts. Apol. Sect. 5. exam. p. 61. & Apol. Sect. 28 exam. pag. 246. yea, againſt the poſitive Law of God, injurious to the Churches diſtracting Chriſtians, bringing contempt upon the Ordinances of God, and defrauding believers of the ſpirituall food of their ſouls, which is indeed to infringe their Chriſtian liberty, and what ever may be thought of it now, in former times it hath been accounted no ſmall offence.

Fiſtly, if this and ſuch like ſcruples make it unlawfull to joyn in the ordenance of worſhip, we muſt hold communion with no ſociety under heaven. For may not the brethren which hold all ſtinted, Liturgies, and ſet forms unlawfull ſay with like ſtrength of reaſon, It is unlawfull to joyn in conceived prayer with others, if either they give too little honour to it, as deeming the other lawfull, or ſinfully limiting, or ſuffering themſelves to be limited to one ſtinted forme, though conceived at firſt by them ſelves? And may not the brethren who hold a ſtinted forme lawfull in like manner object? It is unlawfull to joyn in prayer with them becauſe they attribute too much honour to conceived prayer, as making their device and method the worſhip of God? And may not the Brethren which hold it lawfull to uſe ſome ſelected prayers according to the forms among us, upon the ſame grounds condemne communion with both ſorts? and all of them one with another, becauſe they either limit themſelves too much, or too little? You ſay in the expoſition of the firſt poſition, many Preachers conſtantly uſe a ſet form of prayer of their own making before their Sermons, muſt you not ſay upon this ground, that it is unlawfull to joyn with them, becauſe they ſinfully ſtint themſelves? In probability a Chriſtian may preſume, that in the publike worſhip of God, there will be through humane ignorance & infirmity ſomwhat amiſs for matter, or manner, or both, & that upon this ground, he muſt joyn with no ſociety in any part of Gods worſhipat all.

The advancing of every ſmall difference to this height, is that which will bring all to confuſion, if men walk uniforme to their own principles. It is well obſerved by Maſter I. Da. that unleſſe men will yield ſo much favour each to other in ſome difference of opinions, a diſſolving not onely of Churches, but of humane ſocieties alſo muſt neceſſarily follow, & not onely not two Miniſters, but not two men ſhould live together, which were to put off even humanity it ſelfe.

Sixtly, wee have credibly heard that you hold fellowſhip with profeſſed, rigid Separatiſts without any acknowledgment of their errour, and receive them as members, or communicate with them in the priviledges of the Church, though you profeſſe you approve not their opinion or practice. And if in godly wiſdome, you can ſee grounds to joyn with them, we marvell you ſhould be ſo timorous in this particular.

Seventhly, if you judge the practice of ſuch godly Miniſters, ſcandalous to them that ſeparate from the ordinance, becauſe it is not adminiſtred in this, or that, but in a ſtinted form. It is a ſcandall taken, and not given; and by forbearing, if to confirme men in errour, be to ſcandalize them, they ſhould offend them the more: yea, they ſhould prejudice the truth, and it might be an occaſion to beget needleſſe ſcruples in others, and draw them ignorantly from the fellowſhip of the Saints in the holy ordinances of God, and ſtrengthen them who by your owne confeſſion, are run too far into Schiſme already.

Anſw.

THeſe two Poſitions may be maintained with one and the ſame defence, being ſomewhat coincident, and therfore we joyn them as if they were but one. Therefore to prevent all miſtakes, it may pleaſe you to take notice that we are not of their judgement who refuſe all religious communion with ſuch as are not Church Members, nor doe wee appropriate communion in this priviledge of the ſeals only to the Members of our own Churches, excluding all other Churches of Chriſt from the ſame, though they may be through errour or humane frailty defective in ſome matters of order, provided that the liberty of our Churches be preſerved, of receiving ſuch ſatisfaction as is meet (as well by Letters of recommendation, or otherwiſe if it be requiſite) concerning thoſe whom wee admit unto fellowſhip in the ſeals. For as we account it our duty to keepe the unity of ſpirit inviolate with any, in whom we diſcerne any fruits of the ſpirit, ſo we hold our ſelves bound to diſcharge this duty, according to order. Spirituall cōmunion in prayers, holy conferences & other religious actions of like nature we maintain with al godly perſons, though they be not in Church order: But Church communion we hold onely with Church members admitting to fellowſhip of the ſeals the known and approved, & orderly recommended members of any true Church. But into fellowſhip of the cenſures, admittance of members and choice of Officers, onely the members of that particular Church whereof they and we (any of us) ſtand members. Theſe things being premiſed, the conſiderations whereupon our judgement and practice is ſwayed for adminiſtration of the Seals onely to ſuch as are in order of a true viſible Church are theſe that follow.

Reply.

VVHat is here premiſed to prevent all miſtakes, doth ſeem more to raiſe then to abate ſcruples if we miſtake not your meaning. You refuſe not all religious communion with all that are not Church members, and ſo much they profeſſe, who formerly have gone for, and profeſſed themſelves Separatiſts from our Aſſemblies. You do not appropriate this priviledge of the Seals onely to the members of your own Churches, excluding all other Churches of Chriſt from the ſame; If your meaning be onely this, that you deny not the Sacraments adminiſtred in other Churches to be the true Sacraments of Chriſt for ſubſtance, then you aſcribe little more to the Churches of Chriſt in this, then to the Synagogue of Satan, the Church of Rome. For you will not deny Baptiſme adminiſtred among them to be true for ſubſtance: If you deny not to have fellowſhip with them in the Seals, and to admit them to the Sacrament, and to communicate with them: then either your judgment is contrary to your practice, or you exclude the Churches of England from the number of true viſible Churches of Chriſt, which is to deſtroy what you formerly builded, and here profeſſe. All poſſible care to keep the Ordinances of God from contempt, we allow and commend, provided you go not beyond the Lords warrant, and deny not the priviledges of the Church to them, to whom they are due by divine appointment, nor the name and title of Church to thoſe ſocieties, which God hath plentifully bleſſed with means of grace, have received the Tables and Seals, and have entred into Covenant with his Highneſſe. Your liberty to receive ſuch ſatisfaction as is meet, is not called into queſtion, nor whether you are to keep the bond of the Spirit inviolate according to order. But whether this be to keep the bond of the Spirit inviolate (viz) to exclude from the Sacrament true viſible believers, or knowne recommended Chriſtians, formerly members of viſible Churches among us; and their children; becauſe they are not members (as you ſpeak) in Church Order. And whether God alloweth to put this difference between Church mēbers of your ſocieties & other viſible believers walking in holines, though not admitted members of any ſociety according to your Church order, as to receive the one, though members of another ſociety, unto the Seals, and to debar the other and their children. Theſe are the things to be conſidered in theſe preſent poſitions. And firſt we will examine your Reaſons for your judgment and practice by themſelves, and then ſo far as we judge meet, try your anſwers to the objections you make againſt it.

1 Conſideration.

THe Seals Baptiſm & the Lords Supper are given to the Church, as a priviledge peculiar therto in ordinary diſpenſation. Indeed the preaching of the word is not ſo, being an ordinance given not onely for the edifying of the Church already gathered, but alſo for the gathering of men to the Churches that yet are without: wheras the diſpenſing of the Seals is Gods Ordinance, given onely for the edifying of the Church being gathered, and not for the gathering of it: And becauſe there is now, no univerſall viſible Church on earth wherein the Seals are diſpenced, there being no place, nor time, nor Officers, nor Ordinances appointed in the New Teſtament by Chriſt our Lord, for any ſuch Aſſemblies as the Iewes had under Moſes.

It remains that the Chriſtian Churches, whereunto theſe priviledges were given, are congregationall, conſiſting onely of ſo many as may and do meet together ordinarily in one place for the publike worſhipping of God, and their own edifying.

Hence it is that we read ſo much in the New Teſtament of the Churches in the plurall number, the Churches of Chriſt, the Churches of God, the Churches of the Saints:Rom. 16 16. and not onely when they were of divers Nations,1 Cor. 11 16. & 14. 33. the Churches of the Gentiles, but alſo of the ſame Nation, The Churches of Iudea, Rom 16. 4. and not onely when that Country was of large extent and circuit,Gal • . 22. the Churches of Aſia, but alſo of a ſmall part of the Country.1 Theſſ. 2. 14. The Churches of Galatia: yea, when congregations in ſeverall Cities are ſpoken of.1 Cor 16▪ 19. They are called Churches as the Churches of Ieruſalem, Gal. 5. 2. the Churches at Antioch. To wind up all, ſeeing the Churches in the Goſpell are congregationall, Act 15▪ 2. & 19 37 & 15. 25. 38. and that Baptiſme and the Lords Supper (being Church priviledges) belong onely to the Churches, it will follow, that as City priviledges belong onely to Citizens and their children: ſo baptiſme and the Lords Supper being Church priviledges, belong onely to the members of particular Churches, and their ſeed. And that ſeeing ſigillum ſequitur donum, to apply them to others what is it but to abuſe them? As a ſeal of a corporation is abuſed if added to confirme the grant of priviledges which are peculiar to any Towne corporate to one that being no free-man of that corporation is uncapable thereof.

Reply.

IF by the Church be underſtood the Society of men, profeſſing the entire faith of Chriſt, the ſeales are given unto it as a peculiar priviledge; but if by the Church you underſtand onely a congregationall aſſembly in Church order, the ſeales were never appropriated to it. But to examine every thing in order as it is propounded.

1 The Seales, Baptiſme, and the Lords Supper, are given to the Church as priviledges peculiar thereunto, not onely in ordinary (as you ſay) but alſo in extraordinary diſpenſation.Eph. 4. 4, 5. True baptiſme is not without the Church, but within it; an ordinance given to it, and they that are baptiſed, muſt needes be of a Church. The Sacraments are the ſeales of the Covenant to the faithfull, which is the forme of the Church, and when for ſubſtance rightly uſed, tokens and pledges of our ſpirituall admittance and entertainment into the Lords family,Acts 2. 38. 41. Gen 1. 10. and Symbolls or teſtimonies whereby the people of God are diſtinguiſhed from all other Nations.Math. 28. 14 20. This is moſt certain, Robinſ. againſt Bern. reaſ. diſcuſ. pa. 77. as in the ordinary; ſo in the extraordinary diſpenſation of the Seales, as is confirmed by the Texts of Scripture alleadged in the Margine. For the Apoſtles (as you ſay) diſpenced the ſeales in an extraordinary way, but the ſeales diſpenced by the Apoſtles were Seales of the covenant, priviledges peculiar to the Church, priviledges of ſpirituall admittance and entertainment into the Lords family.

And when you ſay the diſpencing of the Seals is an Ordinance given onely for the edifying of the Church being gathered, and not for the gathering of it, muſt it not be underſtood in extraordinary, diſpenſation as wel as ordinary: To what pupoſe then are thoſe words (in ordinary diſpenſation) added to the propoſition? if thereby you would intimate that the Sacraments be not the peculiar priviledges of the Church, and Seales of the Covenant in extraordinary diſpenſation, it is evidently croſſe to the Text you cite, and to your ſelves afterward. If your meaning be, that in ordinary diſpenſation the Sacraments doe of right belong to them onely, who bee ſet members of a viſible congregation, it is all one with the concluſion, that which is in queſtion and ſhould be proved, and that which this very Scripture doth plentifully diſprove; for they that were baptiſed were not ſet members of a particular congregationall Church whereunto they were baptiſed, nor in a Church way before baptiſme (as is evident and granted by the moſt of your ſelves) but by baptiſme ſolemnly admitted into the Church, and then it is not for your purpoſe, or they were ſet members (as ſome of the brethren ſeeme to contend in anſwer to the objection framed againſt this conſideration) and then the words are more then ſuperfluous. Added, they were to prevent the objection which you foreſaw might be made from the Apoſtles practice and example but ſo as they cut aſunder the ſinews of the conſideration it ſelfe, and make it of no force. For as thoſe beleivers were of the Church: ſo are approved Chriſtians and their ſeed among us: therefore the priviledges of the ſeales belong unto them.

2 And as the ſeales: ſo is the word of ſalvation preached and received a priviledge of the Church. If by the preaching of the word you underſtand nothing but the tender of ſalvation or the publiſhing of the will of God, concerning the ſalvation of man, whether by private or publike perſons; it is not proper to the Church but an ordinance given for the gathering of men to the Church, and not only for the edifying of the Church. For the Apoſtles firſt preached to the Gentiles when Infidels, that they might be converted; And we doubt not but a Miniſter or private Chriſtian comming into a country of Infidells, may as occaſion is offered, and as they ſhall be inabled, inſtruct and perſwade them to receive the faith of Chriſt: but if by the preaching of the word be meant the giving of the word to a people, to abide and continue with them, and conſequently their receiving of it at leaſt in profeſſion then it is proper to the Church of God.

The word makes diſciples to Chriſt,Lev 2. 13. and the word given to a people is Gods covenanting with them,Deut. 29. 12. & 16. 17. 18. and the peoples receiving this word and profeſſing their faith in God through Ieſus Chriſt is the taking of God to bee their God.Rom. 3. 2 Deut. 4. 6. Pſa. 247 19 20 Neh. 9. 13. The lawes and ſtatutes which God gave to Iſraell, was the honour and ornament to that Nation, and a teſtimony that God had ſeparated them from all other people,Act. 7. 38. Luk. 16. 29 2 Cor 5 19 & 114. Deut 33. 3. Io. 8. 30 even the Gentiles themſelves being Iudges. The word of reconciliation is ſent and given to the world reconciled in Ieſus Chriſt, and they that receive the doctrine, law, or word of God are the Diſciples, ſervants and people of God.

In your ſecond conſideration you intimate that there is a two fold preaching, the one by office and authority, the other in Common charity, or how ever elſe it may be called. For thus you write. God hath joyned to preach (viz by office) and to baptize together, therefore we may not ſeparate them. Now to preach unto, that is to inſtruct or counſell in charity is a duty which may be performed to an infidell, but to preach by office is proper to them that are called to that office:Robin againſt Bern P 15. and ſo to be taught and inſtructed by Officers in the Church is proper to the Church.

To have paſtors who ſhall feed with knowledge and underſtanding is a gift of matrimoniall love which God vouchſafeth unto his Church.Act. 14 22. Tit. 1 5. The Apoſtles firſt gathered Churches and then ordained elders in everie Citie or Church;Rob: againſt Bern. ſo that it is proper to the Church to be fed and guided by true ſpirituall paſtors who teach and bleſſe in the name of the Lord. Act 11 26. la the ſame verſe the ſome perſons are called the Church diſciples, and Chriſtians pag. 126. 127. 211 &c. Fo pag. 51 And if the word preached and received bee a certaine note of the true Church, they that have intyrely received the word of ſalvation and have Paſtors godly and faithfull to feede and guide them, they and their ſeed have right and intereſt unto the ſeales in order.

Moreover the true worſhip of God is an inſeparable and infallible marke of the true Church of God, for where Chriſt is, there is his Church. This is the prerogative of the church. The Prince ſhall be in the midſt of them, and he ſhall go in when they goe in,Ezeck. 46. 10 &c. And Chriſt ſaith, where 2. or 3. are met together in my name there am I in the middeſt among them. See Lavater on Ezek Math 18. 20. Ier. 14. 9. And for certain they are gathered in the name of Chriſt that being lawfully called doe aſſemble to worſhip God and call upon his name in the mediation of Ieſus Chriſt. In times paſt, the Church was acknowledged by the feare of God,Ios. 24. 14 and entyre Service of his Majeſtie, by the profeſſing of the true faith and faithfull calling upon Gods name. The ſignes of Apoſtolike Churches are theſe.Rom. 10. 14▪ The continuance in the Apoſtles doctrine and fellowſhip,Act 2. 42 and breaking of bread and prayer. And if faith, true and lively (though mixed with many doubtings and errors) make a man a living member of Ieſus Chriſt, the entyre profeſſion of true faith joyned with holyneſſe of life in ſome meaſure anſwerable thereunto, makes a man a true member of the viſible Church. And if the ſeales belong to the Church in right and orderly diſpenſation, they that joyne together in the true worſhip of God, according to his will, with godly and faithfull paſtors, they have right and title to the Sacraments according to divine inſtitution.

Thirdly, that there is now no viſible Catholike Church in your ſenſe will eaſily bee granted▪ i. e. there is no univerſall ſociety conſiſting of all ſuch as are accounted or to bee eſteemed Chriſtians, ſubjected to one or many vniverſall Paſtors or guides, wherwithall ſubordinates muſt communicate in ſome ſacred things which may make them one Church and which may and can be performed by that vniverſall and head Church only. Such an vniverſall Chriſtian Church Chriſt never ordained, no not in the dayes of the Apoſtles, to whom all the care of all the Churches, was committed. The Churches planted by the Apoſtles had all the ſame ſubſtantiall lawes and cuſtomes, the ſame guides and officers for kinde, the ſame ordinances of worſhip and meanes of Salvation: But one flock or Society in the fore mentioned acceptation they were not, becauſe they were but ſubordinate to one viſible head. Chriſt, with which they were to hold union and communion in ſome worſhip to be performed by them all jointly aſſembled at ſome ſpeciall ſolemnity, nor ſubjected to the government of any ſupreame tribunall conſtantly to be erected and continued among them.

Nevertheleſſe, in ſome reſpects of reaſon,As Chriſt is that one great Paſtor, ſo hath hee generally one fold and flock, Iohn 10. 16. Ezeck. 34 22. 23 which is his Church, as he ſaith. And ye my flock, the flock of my paſture are men, Ezek. 34. 31. Aynſw. Cant 1. 8. Sure it is that hee is none of Chriſts ſheepe viſibly, or in reſpect of men which is without Chriſts ſheepfold, for there is one ſheepfold and one ſheepheard. Iohn 10. 16. Robinſ againſt Bern likelihoods, p. 61. the viſible Church, may be called the Church, ſheepfold or flock of Chriſt; for if the whole ſociety or body myſticall of Chriſt be one, this Church militant in like ſort is one: the unity of which ſociety conſiſts in that uniformity, which all ſeverall perſons thereunto belonging, have by reaſon of that one Lord whoſe ſervants they all are, and profeſſe themſelves, that one Spirit whereby they are animated as the body by one ſoul; whereby they believe in Chriſt, and which they acknowledge and profeſſe, that one Baptiſme inward and outward, whereby they put on Chriſt, and are initiated.

This ſociety is one in the inward fruition and enjoying of the benefits of Chriſts Death and Reſurrection, Hieron. tom. 2. Ep. 85. Nec altera Roma urbis Eccleſia, altera totius orbis exiſtimanda eſt, & Gallia, & Britannia, & Aſia, &c. & omnes barbarae Nationes unum Christum adorant, unam obſervant regulam veritatis. and in outward profeſſion of thoſe things which ſupernaturally appertain to the very eſſence of the Church, and are neceſſarily required in every Chriſtian, this acceptation of the word is not unuſuall in Scripture. As God hath ſet ſome in the Church. His bodies ſake which is the Church. The Church viz. whereof Paul was made a Miniſter, and whereunto the reſt of the Apoſtles were ordained,1 Cor 12 28. which was the Catholike viſible Church, the ſociety of men profeſſing the faith of Chriſt throughout the world,Col. 1. 2 • . divided into many particular Churches whereof ſome are pure,1 Cor. 12, 13. others impure, ſome more, others leſſe ſound. Hereunto it may be added, that every multitude and ſociety of believers are indefinitely called the Church, I perſecuted the Church of God. The houſe of God which is the Church of the living God.1 Cor. 15 9. In which ſenſe all the Churches in the world may truly be called one.Gal. 1. 13. And thus the Apoſtle Peter writing to many diſperſed Churches,Phil. 3. 6. who could not aſſemble in one place nor be fed by one Shepherd,1 Tim. 3. 15. ſpeaketh of them ſingularly as one flock.1 Pet. 5. 2. Feed the flock of God which is among you. But that flock are the ſtrangers diſperſed through Pontus, Galatia, Aſia, Cappadocia, and Bythinia, which could not poſſibly joine together in the Ordinances of Worſhip,Paſtores ſunt omnes, ſed grex unus qui ab Apoſtolis omnibus unanimi conſenſu paſcatur. Cypr. de unitate Eccleſiae. or make one diſtinct congregated aſſembly. And if the Catholike Militant Church be one Society; the Seals that are given as a prerogative to the Church are given unto it, and the true Members of the Catholike Church have right and title to them in due order, though they be not admitted into the Church fellowſhip you ſpeak of.

For as the flock or ſociety is one: ſo is the Miniſtery,Et ſi paſtores multi ſumus, unum tamen gregem paſcimus, Cypr. l. 3. Epiſtola 13. Cum ſit a Christo una Eccleſia per totum mundum in multa membra diviſa item Epiſcopatus unus Epiſcoporum multorum concordi numero diffuſus, &c. Cypr. l. 4. Ep. 7. Faith, Covenant, and Sacraments, which are given as a communion prerogative unto the whole Church, and not appropriated to this or that part or member, as ſeparated from the whole; which is further evidenced hereby, that ſometime it hath, and too often it may fall out, that a Chriſtian may be a true member of the univerſall viſible Church (i. e. he may hold, profeſſe, and maintain that holy Catholike Faith, pure, and undefiled, without which no man can be ſaved) who for the preſent is no actuall member of any particular or viſible ſociety in Church order. As for example, a man may be cut off by Excommunication, from all commerce with the preſent viſible Church wherein hee was bred and born,Iohn 9. 22. 35. & 12. 42 & 16. 2. when hee is not cut off from the Catholike, Orthodox all Church. Hee may be deprived of participation of the Ordinance in every particular ſociety, Athanaſius may be for an example. when his right and title to them is much better then theſe who have moſt injuriouſly caſt him out, or debarred him of the means of ſalvation.

The communion of Saints, whether viſible or inviſible is the effect and property of the Church Catholike, and agreeth to the ſeverall parts and members thereof, as they be members of that body under the head, and if particular Churches have communion together it muſt of neceſſity be, that they bee parts and members of the whole body which is one.

4. Though there be no univerſall congregation or aſſembly nor can be imagined, yet there are and have beene many viſible aſſemblies or ſocieties, true Churches of Chriſt, to whom the Prerogative of the Seals is given, which have not beene united and knit together, in Church-order into one congregationall body or ſociety, For every ſociety in covenant with God is the true Church of God: for what is it to be the flock, people or ſheepe of God, but to be the Church of God? And where there is a Covenant, there is the people of God.Gen. 17. 7. They that are of the faith of Abraham, Lev. 26. 12. are the children and ſeed of Abraham, and within the Covenant of Abraham (though but two or three) and ſo of the ſame Church with him by that covenant.Apo. 1. 11. 13. Heb. 16. 10. The communication on and accepting of the tables of covenant is an undoubted token of a people in convenant or confederate,Rob. againſt Bern. pa. 127. but every ſociety profeſſing the true and entire faith,Rom. 4. 12. 18. joyning in prayer and thankeſgiving,Gen. 12. 3. receiving the truth of God to dwell among them,Gal. 3 6, 7, 8, 15, 16, 17 and in ſome meaſure conforming themſelves to the obedience of Gods Commandements,Rob. againſt Ber. pa. 222. is in covenant with God. It is ſimply neceſſary to the being of a Church that it be laid upon Chriſt the foundation, which being done, the remaining of what is forbidden, or the want of what is commanded, cannot put the ſociety from the title or right of a Church. For Chriſt is the foundation and head corner ſtone of the Church, and a people comming unto Chriſt, united unto him, built upon him, having communion with him and growing up in him, are the true Church of God: and if the ſeals be annexed to the covenant by God himſelfe, as we cannot deny a people in covenant to be the Church, ſo we muſt not deny their right and title to the Sacraments. If therefore the meaning of the propoſition be that the ſeales be given to the Church, that is, to true and ſound Chriſtians, and people in covenant with God, as a priviledge whether in ordinary or extraordinary diſpenſation we accept it as good and ſound, but it makes againſt your judgement and practice in keeping away ſuch as have right and title to the ordinances. If you meane the ſeales are given to the Church, that is, onely to ſet members of ſome particular ſociety combined by covenant (as it is among you) we cannot receive it, becauſe it implieth a diſtinction not taught in Scripture, and croſſe to your ſelves. And for the thing it ſelfe the Scripture hath nothing but many things againſt it as hath beene ſhewed.

5 If it be granted that the ſeales are the prerogative of a particular viſible Church, known and approved Chriſtians among us, and their ſeed are members of true and viſible Churches, and ſo to be eſteemed among you before they be entred into Church memberſhip as you call it. For every ſociety profeſſing the intire and true faith, See Mr. I. D. Apol. 11. Sect. exam p. 117. and joyning together in the right uſe of the Sacraments in matters ſubſtantiall is the true Church of God, and every viſible beleever receiving the word and profeſſing, the true intire faith, admitted to the right and lawfull participation of the Sacraments is a viſible member of the true Church, if he have neither renounced that ſociety, nor deſerved juſtly to be caſt out by excommunication or Church cenſure. For the intire profeſſion of the truth, the dwelling of the truth among men, the right uſe of the Sacraments (which is ever joyned with truth of Doctrine, and to be eſteemed by it) is proper to them that be in covenant with God. And they that truly partake of the Seales muſt needes be of a Church, for the ſeales are not without but within the Church an ordinance given unto it, and if they be true members of the true Churches of Jeſus Chriſt, other Churches, are bound to hold communion with them in the ordinance of worſhip as divine providence ſhall miniſter occaſion.

In anſwer to the ninth poſition you ſay the members of other Churches, well known and approved by vertue of communion with Churches, doe mutually and with good acceptance communicate each of them at others Churches, even ſo often as Gods providence leads them thereunto, and themſelves deſire it. In your preface to this conſideration, you ſay you admit to fellowſhip of the ſeales, the known, approved, and orderly recommended members of any true Church, and if knowne and approved Chriſtians, members of our Churches comming over into New England ſhall deſire either to have their children baptized, or to be admitted themſelves to the Lords Supper before they be ſet members of any ſociety the • e, we deſire to know upon what grounds from God you can deny them, if you acknowledge our Churches Miniſtery, and Sacraments, to be true and of God (as you profeſſe) and the members of the Church be known and approved, orderly recommended unto you.

It is the priviledge of Chriſtians baptiſed themſelves, and walking in the faith, that their children ſhould have right to baptiſme in all true Churches in the world. It is the priviledge of Chriſtians lawfully and juſtly admitted to the Lords Supper in one viſible Church, and walking in covenant with God, that they have right to this priviledge in all Churches profeſſing their intire faith, and you muſt ſhew juſt and ſound reaſons from God of your judgement and practice in debarring their ſeed from baptiſme, and parents themſelves from the Supper, or elſe (to uſe the words of a reverend Elder among you,I. D. Apol. 5. Sect. ex • m. pag. 61, & 18. in a caſe of leſſe importance, and not concerning ſo many) you will be found guilty of adding to the words, and making eleven Commandements, and ſetting up humane cuſtomes, and ſelfewill againſt Gods appointment. For the Sacraments are given to the Church as a priviledge peculiar thereunto, but you deny this priviledge to the true viſible members of the Church, (as your ſelves confeſſe.) For if the Miniſters be the Miniſters of Chriſt, and their congregations the Churches of Chriſt, then knowne and approved Chriſtians are members of the Church. In your opinion the members of the Jewiſh Church might be received unto baptiſme, upon confeſſion of the Chriſtian faith before they were entred into Church fellowſhip, and it is more then ſtrange to us that you ſhould not thinke the true viſible members of the Churches of Chriſt to have as much title and intereſt to the Seales, as the members of the Jewiſh Church to the Sacrament of Baptiſme.

6 The diſtinct Churches mentioned in the New Teſtament, it is not certain that they were congregationall ſocieties conſiſting onely of ſo many as might and did meete together ordinarily in one place at one time for the publike worſhip of God, and their own edification, and if this were granted it would not carry the weight that was laid upon it, But becauſe it may make way for the clearing of ſome other points pertaining to diſcipline and Church order, we intreat leave to ſet downe, and deſire you to examine what may be objected againſt it. We will not inſiſt upon this that the leaſt circuite wherein there is mention of Churches, is ample enough to containe ſome dioceſſes and the leaſt City,Bucer. diff. ep. 3. pa. 43. & ep 48. pa. 226. populous enough to make many numberſome congregations. Nor upon this, that to meete at one time and one place, as one aſſembly is a thing meerely accidentary to the unity of the Church and ſociety Eccleſiaſticall which is ſtill one, when they are diſperſed aſunder, and no particular man of that ſociety at firſt remaining now alive. The number of beleevers was ſo great in ſome Cities as they could not conveniently meete in one place as one aſſembly to worſhip the Lord according to his will and for their edifying. That there was a Church gathered in the City of Samaria by the miniſtery of Phillip will not be denyed, for they received the word and were baptiſed, but that the Church in that City was onely a congregationall aſſembly is more then can probably be concluded out of Scripture. For the whole City or the greateſt part could not ordinarily aſſemble in one place to their edification: But the whole City of Samaria, Act. 8. 6. & 15 4. in a manner, (as it is probable) imbraced the faith. As the whole City from the leaſt to the greateſt had given heede to Simon Magus before,Act. 8. 12. 14. & 18. 12. ſo to Phillip now when he preached Chriſt, And the Text ſaith expreſly that Samaria received the Goſpell.

The Chriſtian Church at Ieruſalem was one and diſtinct,Acts 2. 41. & 4. 4. & 5 14. & 6. 1. & 6. 7 but it grew and increaſed firſt to 3000. then to 5000. afterwards multitudes of men and women were added, and the multitude of Diſciples increaſed; it is alſo noted that a company of the Prieſts received the faith. The Syriacke hath it of the Jews, (ſcil.) inhabiting Judea, but the Greeke, Arabian, vulgar, Chriſoſtoms & Ethiopians approve the former, and the number of the Prieſts was not ſmall:Ezra. 2. 36, 37, 38. there is mention alſo of millions of beleevers. And when all the Apoſtles, or the greateſt part of them remained at Jeruſalem for a time continuing in the miniſtery of the word and prayer,Act. 6. 2 & 8. 1. 15. 2, 4, 6, 22, 23 & 16. 4. & 21. 18. 18. and that they might doe it the more earneſtly and diligently, left the care of the poore to others: how can we thinke but that Church did grow exceedingly, and the number of beleevers there to be more then could fitly meete ordinarily in one congregation. Without queſtion the number of beleevers in Antioch was not ſmall, of which it is ſaid expreſly, that a great number beleeved, turned to the Lord and that a great multitude was added to the Lord by the preaching of Barnabas, and that Paul and Barnabas continued there one whole yeere preaching the word of God,Act. 11. 21. and teaching the multitude, ſo that the Diſciples were firſt called Chriſtians at Antioch. Act. 11 24 25 After that this Church was viſited by Paul and Barnabas, Act. 13 12 et 14 27 et 15. 30. 34, 35. who continued there teaching and preaching the Word of God with many others alſo, and may wee not thinke that this Church did quickly riſe to ſuch bigneſſe that they could not well aſſemble in one congregation as now wee call them?

It will eaſily be credited that the number of believers was not ſmall at Epheſus, if we call to minde that when Paul had been there but two yeers, all they that dwelt in Aſia had heard the word of the Lord both Iews and Grecians, Acts 19 10. & 16. 9. & 19. 27. that a great doore and effectuall was opened to him at Epheſus, Acts 19. 19. That the art for making Shrines, and Dianaes Temple was in danger to be ſet at nought, and that thoſe that had uſed curious arts, came and burnt their books in the ſight of all men, which could not be done without great danger unto the Church, unleſſe a great part of the City had believed. Where a Church did comprehend a City with its Suburbs and the Country circumjacent, i. e. the believers who profeſſed the faith within that circuit. It might well be that the number did ſo increaſe through the extraordinary bleſſing of God, which accompanied the preaching of the word in thoſe primitive times, and firſt planting of the heavenly Kingdome, that they could not well meet ordinarily in one place, and yet continued one Society. For when a number is gathered in ſmall Villages, or ſome added to the number already gatherd, it is not meet they ſhould be neglected becauſe ſmall, nor divided from the body, becauſe the number not competent to make an intire and perfect body of it ſelfe. The increaſe of the Churches doth require an increaſe of Elders, and (if they grow to bigneſſe more then ordinary) an increaſe of places for their aſſembling, when the eſſence of the viſible Church is not changed, nor one multiplied or divided into many. And it is more available for the good of the Church, and further removed from all ambition, if the Society ſhall aſſemble occaſionally in divers places as parts and members of the body, then to conſtitute a diſtinct free Society conſiſting of a few Believers, not fit to make up an intire body contrary to the precedent examples of the Apoſtles. In times of grievous and hot perſecution the Churches of God could not aſſemble in any great number in publick places, but have been compelled to meet in Woods, Caves, Dens, and dark corners, as the Lord hath offered opportunity, one and the ſame Society in ſundry places: So that either it is not eſſential to the Church to meet together in one place ordinarily, or their Society is broken off by perſecution, when their meeting together in one place is interrupted. It is ſaid by ſome where the Church grew greater,Robinſon againſt Bern p. 196. ſometimes by the ſuddain and extraordinary converſion of more then could well ſo aſſemble, then was there preſently a diſperſion of the former, and a multiplication of more particular Aſſemblies. But in the Scriptures quoted no ſuch thing doth appeare, but rather the contrary as hath been proved. In aftertimes when the Church was within the Cities as of Rome, Euſeb hiſt l. 6. c. 35. Epheſus, Alexandria, Carthage, Ieruſalem, &c. Lat 43. Graec. 33. Ruff. the number of Believers did greatly exceed the bigneſſe of a convenient and fitting aſſembly which might ordinarily congregate in the place to worſhip God according to his appointment when the Church was but one.

Seventhly. Seeing them both the Seals in ordinary and in extraordinary diſpenſation belong to the Church, id eſt, to the faithfull, and repentant, taught made Diſciples, who have received the word, believe, and profeſſe the faith, have received the holy Ghoſt, and walke in obedience, who are members of other viſible Churches, or to be made members of a viſible Church for the time being, by admittance unto the Sacraments, and not unto ſet members of congregationall aſſemblies only. And ſeeing the godly and faithful Miniſters among us are the true Miniſters of Chriſt, and their godly congregations, true Churches, and knowne, and approved Chriſtians, true members of viſible Churches formerly baptized, and admitted to the Lords Supper. This conſideration is of no weight to juſtifie your opinion and practice in debarring known and approved Chriſtians, profeſſing the faith, members of the true viſible Churches amongſt us from the Lords Supper, or their ſeed from Baptiſme, becauſe they be not yet received as ſet members of ſome particular cōgregation amongſt you: And if ſuch Believers are not to be received to the Seals, we deſire you to conſider if ever the Sacraments of the New Teſtament, were rightly diſpenſed in the Church of the New Teſtament from the firſt Plantation thereof unto this day.

The Seale doth follow the grant, and as the Seale is prophaned, if it be put to a falſe grant or Charter, ſo are the faithfull wronged if the Seale in a lawfull way deſired, be denied to them that have received the grant, i. e. have right unto Jeſus Chriſt, • hit de Sacra contr. de bapt. qu 2 & 3. pag 237, 238. and communion with him. But the faithfull who have received the word with gladneſſe, believe, and profeſſe,Atterſ. of the Sacr: l. 2. c. 6 fol. 211. be members knowne and approved by other viſible Churches, or ſuch as deſire to be admitted members of that viſible Society for the time by communicating in the ordinance, are already partakers of the grant or charter, have right and intereſt in Chriſt, may lawfully deſire the Seals, and may be admitted as members for the time being of that particular Society. Therefore to debar ſuch, from the Lords Supper, and their ſeed from Baptiſme, is againſt the Law of nature, and the poſitive Law of God, an injury to the faithfull and their ſeed, a wrong to the Catholike viſible Church, that particular ſociety, and the Paſtors themſelves that ſo debar them. They ſinned grievouſly who deferred Baptiſme to the end of their life, and the negligence of Paſtors and Teachers who did not inſtruct the ignorant and reprove the ſuperſtitious, was great. 〈◊〉 de Preſbyt. pag. 79. And is not the ſeverity in debarring ſuch as crave and deſire to be admitted to the Seals an injury to be reprehended?

Anſw. 2 Confider the ordinary adminiſtration of the Seales is limited to the miniſtery and the miniſtery to a particular Church; therefore the ſeals alſo muſt neceſſarily be proper to the Church and to the members thereof.

1 That the adminiſtration of the ſeales is limited to their Miniſtery is evident from the firſt inſtitution Math. 28. 19. where God hath joyned (to preach) viz. by office, and (to baptize) together, therefore wee may not ſeparate them. For howſoever: any man may by the appointment of the Lord and Maſter of the family, ſignifie his minde and deliver his meſſage from him to the family, yet the diſpenſing of a fitt portion of food to everie one of the houſhold is a branch of the ſtewards office. Indeed the keies are given to the whole Church yet the exerciſe and diſpenſation of them in this as well as in other particulars is concredited to the Miniſters who are called to bee 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , 1 Cor. 4. 1. And no Church office can be orderly performed by any, but one that is called therunto nor will God vouchſafe his preſence, and bleſſing (wherupon all ſpirituall efficacy depends) in an ordinance diſpenſed, but when it is diſpenſed by thoſe whom he hath ordayned and appointed thereunto.

2 That the miniſtery is limited to the Church appeares as from evident texts of Scripture:Act. 14 23. Col. 4. 17 1 Pet 5. 2 ſo alſo upon this ground. 1 The office is founded in the relation betweene the Church and the officer,Act 20. 28. wherfore take away the relation, and the office and the worke ceaſeth.

For where he hath not power, he may not doe an act of power, and he hath not powerwhere he hath not a relation by office. Herein the proportion holdeth between an officer of a towne corporate, and of a Church that as the power of the former is only within his owne corporation: ſo the power of the latter is confined to his owne congregation.

Reply.

THe propoſition is granted that the diſpenſation of the Sacraments in the New Teſtament both ordinary and extraordinary is limited to the Miniſtery. But in that you alleadge for confirmation, ſomethings may be noted.

1 The firſt inſtitution of Baptiſme is not contained in that paſſage Math. 28. 19. but confirmed; For the ſeales of the New Teſtament were inſtituted by Chriſt before his death, and his diſciples had baptized many which they could not doe before the inſtitution of the Sacrament.Ioh. 4. 2. & 23 23. Secondly we ſee not how you can apply that text to Preaching by office, which according to our expoſition muſt bee a diſpenſing of a fit portion of food to everie one of the houſhould. For it is plaine the Apoſtles were ſent forth to preach to everie Creature or unto the world,Mark. 9. 15. to convert men unto God, to make them diſciples and not to preach unto diſciples only,Act 17 22 23 32. & 19. 8. 9 or members of the houſhold. The Apoſtles certainly had authority, and preached by authority, but they preached not to Infidells and Heathens, as to diſciples or members of the Church, Rob. againſt Bern. p 151 theſe Keyes in d. &c. much leſſe did they give a portion to them as to the houſhold which is the preaching by office, which you acknowledge. Thirdly if under the power of the keyes you comprehend preaching by office, diſpenſing the ſeales, caſting out, and receiving againe into the boſome of the Church wee deny the power of the keyes to belong to the Church or community of the faithfull: we cannot find in Scripture that Chriſt ever granted ſuch power to the faithfull, as faithfull joyned together in Covenant in thoſe paſſages which ſpeake of this power,In the Corporation (the Church) there is alwayes the whole power of Chriſt to reſiding, which you may call officers for the uſe of it ſelfe, to which it is ſufficient that it can without officers uſe this power for things ſimply neceſſary; as for receiving in of members by profeſſion of faith and confeſſion of ſins, for edifying of them by exhortation and comforts in the ordinance of propheſying, and ſo for excommunication. Rob. againſt B. pag. 224. the execution of this authority is given to them to whom the authoritie is committed.

If the power of the keyes be given to the whole Church the Apoſtles themſelves muſt derive their authoritie immediatly from the Church, and not from Chriſt, for the power muſt be derived from them, unto whom it was give; but their power, and authority was not from the Church; but from Chriſt immediatly. And if the diſpenſation, and exerciſe of the keyes, be concredited to the Miniſters; Doth it hold in all things or onely in the diſpenſation of the Sacraments, and preaching by office? Doe they diſpenſe the ſeales as the Stewards of Chriſt, from whom they receive their authority immediately or as the ſervants of the Church, from which they derive their authority? If in the firſt ſenſe; the power of the keys is not in the community of the faithfull. If in the ſecond, the office of a Miniſter is not the immediate gift of Chriſt, nor the Miniſter, ſo much the ſervant of Chriſt, as of the Church, from whom he muſt receive lawes, in whoſe name he muſt doe his office, and to whom he muſt give an account. We could wiſh you had explained in what ſenſe, you hold the diſpenſation, and execution of the power of the keyes is concredited to the Miniſters, and by whom. For if the community of the faithfull have to doe in all matters concerning the body,See Rob. againſt Ber. pag. 130. 131. 132. If you call it conſultation in an aſſembly wherein all have equall power and voyce in determining things ſome one going before the reſt Idem pag. 202 to admit members, and caſt them out, to make and depoſe Miniſters, to bind and looſe by authority derived from Chriſt, wee cannot ſee how in your judgement the diſpenſation, and execution of the power of the keyes is concredited to the Miniſters.

Fourthly That which you add, that God will not vouchſafe his preſence and bleſſing to an ordinance but when it is diſpenced by thoſe, whom hee hath ordayned and appointed thereunto, muſt bee warily underſtood, or it may occaſion errors and diſtractions not a few, You know what corruptions ſoone entred into the Church of God, both in reſpect of Doctrine, Worſhip, Offices, and entrance thereunto, and how ready and apt is the concluſion from your words,Robinſ. againſt Bern. Coun. debated, p. 32. ibid. p. 79. That Chriſt hath not vouchſafed his preſence, and bleſſing in his Ordinances to his Church? But of this before.

And on the contrary, ſeeing God hath vouchſafed his bleſſing in his Ordinances diſpenſed by your ſelves, when you ſtood as viſible Miniſters in the congregation, and Churches of old England, you muſt confeſſe, did approve both your ſtandings and his Ordinances diſpenſed by you.

Secondly, as for the Aſſumption, that Paſtors and Teachers are limited to a particular charge or ſociety; but that flock is not ever one congregationall aſſembly meeting in one place, neither the band ſo ſtreight, whereby they are tied to that one ſociety, that they may not upon occaſion performe ſome Miniſteriall Act or Office in another congregation, or to them that be not ſet members of their proper aſſembly. For firſt to diſpence the Seals of the covenant is a miniſteriall act, an act of Office, and not an exerciſe of gifts onely: But the Paſtors of one Aſſembly may diſpence the Sacrament to the ſet members of another ſociety upon occaſion, as you confeſſe in this and in your anſwer to the ninth poſition.

And if the members of one Church may lawfully upon occaſion receive the Sacrament of the Supper in another ſociety from the Paſtor thereof, then may the Paſtor of one congregation performe a Miniſteriall act to the members of another, and if to the members of another then in another congregation with conſent, and upon occaſion.

Secondly, As the Miniſters are exhorted to feed their flock: ſo is every Chriſtian and Miniſter to try and examine himſelfe whether hee be in the faith, but you will not allow this concluſion.1 Cor. 11 28. I muſt examine my ſelf. Ergo, no man is debarred from the Sacrament for his unworthineſſe,2 Cor. 23. 5. or to be tried or examined by others, to be obſerved, admoniſhed, and brought to repentance for notorious ſin.Beza de Preſbyt. & Excom. pag. 32 No more can it be rightly gathered from the former paſſages of Scripture, that the Miniſter is not upon occaſion to performe any Miniſteriall act to any other people or ſociety,Robinſ. againſt Bern. pag. 252. becauſe ordinarily he is to attend his own flock.

Thirdly, As the Miniſters have peculiar relation to their particular flocks, ſo the people unto their particular Miniſters, unto whom they are tied in ſpeciall manner, as to their Overſeers, who muſt give account for theirſouls. And if this peculiar relation betwixt the people & the Miniſter doth not hinder the people from receiving the Lords Supper at the hands of another Miniſter; nor the miniſter from performing the Miniſteriall act to the members of another congregation. Neither doth his peculiar Relation to his own flock hinder him, from adminiſtring unto others upon juſt occaſion being intreated thereunto. As the combining of the people to their peculiar Miniſter, doth not quite cut off their communion with other Miniſters: ſo neither doth the reſtraining of a Miniſter to a peculiar flock quite cut him off from adminiſtring upon occaſion: unto another people. Paul appointeth the Epheſian Elders unto the care & charg onely of their own particular flock, Acts. 20 28 The Word of God and Cano is of Councels will have Paſtors ſo to care for their own flock, that they forbid them not to care for the whole Church, eſpecially in a time of common combuſtion. The anſwer of ſome Brethren. pag. 1 • . but ſo to attend them ordinarily according to the rules of the Scripture; that as occaſion was offered, might performe ſome Miniſteriall acts in another congregation. The taking heed unto their flocks which Paul requires in this place doth cōprehend under it the adminiſtration of the Word,Publica Dei invocatio non minima pars communis in unâ fide conſenſionis. Beza contra Eraſtum, de Presbyt pap. 13. Prayer, and Sacrament, and if it muſt be reſtrained to their owne particular Churches onely, it is unlawfull for a Paſtor to preach or call upon the name of God in any publike Aſſembly ſave his own, upon any occaſion, as theſe be duties prtaining to common confeſſion or profeſſion of faith. Ordinary Paſtors and Teachers it is true, are not Apoſtles, who are to go from place to place, from Country to Country, to plant and erect Churches, but they are tied ordinarily to one flock, as the Text proveth, and to which purpoſe it is commonly cited. But that a Paſtor is ſo tied to his flock, that he can perform no miniſteriall act to any other upon any occaſion that it proveth not, nor can we find that it was ever ſo underſtood by Divines ancient or modern.Euſeb Hiſt. 5. c. 26. Graec. W. B. telleth us, the learned bring theſe allegations to this purpoſe.Chami •• . Panſt. • om 2. l. 10. c. 8. But the authour in alledging the conſent of the learned was very careleſſe or much abuſed, for there is not one that ſpeaketh to the purpoſe.Sect. 16. I. D. diſclaimeth that poſition; and for the reſt it is a matter notorious,The Churches Plea, pag 44. they were never thought to be of that opinion;Apol. pag. 117 & • 98. and wee doubt not if any could be named to free this allegation from ſuſpition of Novelty, you would have cited one or more as you have done in that which followeth.

Feed the flock of God (ſaith Peter.) But he ſpeaks of all thoſe diſperſed Churches to whom he writes, which he calls a choſen Generation, a Royall Prieſthood▪ a peculiar people: And in ſome reſpect of reaſon, under which we may apprehend them, are one flock, but not really as combined under the ſame Paſtor, or meeting in one place. And as theſe diſperſed believers, or ſocieties make one Flock: ſo the Miniſters attending their flocks or ſocieties, and the Miniſtery exerciſed by them is, or maketh one.

4 A Miniſter choſen and ſet over one ſociety, is to looke unto his people committed to his charge, and feed the flock over which the Lord hath made him overſeer, but he is a Miniſter in the Church Univerſall, Orig. in Iſa. Hom. 6. Qui vocatur ad Epiſcopatum, vocatur ad ſervitutem totius Eccleſiae. Chryſoſt. in 2 Cor. hom. 18. Ʋ niverſae curam gerimus. for as the Church is one, ſo is the Miniſtery one, of which every Miniſter (ſound or Orthodox) doth hold his part, and though he be Miniſter over that flock onely which he is to attend, yet he is a Miniſter in the univerſal Church. See Cham Panſtr. Tom. 2. pag. 10. cap. 12. Sect. 8, 9, 10. &c. Jun. Animadv. in Bellar. contro. 5. lib. 1. c. 3. not. 3. & cap. 7 not. 7. The functiō or power of exerciſing that Function in the abſtract, muſt be diſtinguiſhed from the power of exerciſing it, concretely, according to the divers circumſtances of places. The firſt belongeth to a Miniſter every where in the Church, the latter is proper to the place and people where he doth miniſter. The lawfull uſe of his power is limited to that congregation ordinarily. The power it ſelf is not ſo limited and bounded. In Ordination, Presbyters are not reſtrained to one or other certaine place, as if they were to be deemed Miniſters there onely, though they be set over a certain people. And as the faithfull in reſpect of a community betwixt them, muſt and ought to performe the Offices of love one to another, though of different ſocieties, ſo the Miniſters in reſpect of their communion, muſt and ought upon occaſion to performe miniſteriall Offices towards the faithfull of diſtinct ſocieties.

5 If this be not ſo, what ſhall become of the poore flock when the Paſtor is driven away by perſonall perſecution, ſo that he cannot, if others may not afford them helpe and ſuccour: what when the congregation it ſelfe is diſperſed, muſt no ſheepherd receive them into fold, when they are driven from their own, or neglected by him?

6 If the Paſtor may be abſent from his flock upon neceſſary, juſt, and weighty occaſion, reſpecting his own good, the good of that ſociety, or the common good of Churches conſociate, then may the Paſtor, the ſoaiety, the Churches procure ſome man to ſupply the defect, and doe the office of a Paſtor, preach the Word, pray, and as occaſion is offered, adminiſter the Sacrament in that Congregation unto that Aſſembly untill their Sheepheard ſhall returne. Shall the people be left as ſheepe without a ſheepheard; becauſe for the good of the Churches their owne ſheepheard is called from them for a time, that he might returne with greater joy and comfort?

The Paſtor is appointed to feed his own flock, and yet for the good of the whole Church he may be called to leave, if not the care, yet the over-ſight of his flock fot a while; and by the ſame reaſon a paſtor of another flock or congregation may performe the office, and doe the acts of a Miniſter in his congregation during abſence: Yea if for the good of the Churches he be called away, doe not the Churches ſtand obliged in conſcience to provide that the flock ſuſtain to hurt by his abſence which poſſibly yee cannot doe if one Miniſter may not performe a Miniſteriall act in another Congregation.

7 If the Prophets of one Church may propheſy in another, and apply their doctrines, exhortations and prayers to any of the occaſions of the Churches where they ſpeake,Act. 13. 15. whereof they are not ſet members, what hinders why the Paſtor of one congregation, may not preach and pray, adminiſter the Sacraments in another? The paſtor of one congregation is appointed to his peculiar charge, but he is a Miniſter in the univerſall Church, as well as the Prophets of one Church may bee called Prophets of the univerſall Church by vertue of that Communion which all true Churches have one with another. Without conſent the Prophet may not propheſie by exhortation, and with conſent the Paſtor may adminiſter the Sacraments.

8 In the Primitive Churches when Elders were ordained in every City, they were not onely to looke to their flock but indeavour the converſion of poore Infidels among whom they lived,Rom. 16 3 12. and the inlargement of Chriſts Kingdome,Phil. 2. 15, 16. & 4. • . for the worke of the Lord muſt be done in its ſeaſon, and then was the time of the calling of the Gentiles:

It was not their office proper and eſſentiall to travail from Countrey to Countrey as did the Apoſtles, nor were they paſtors of the Infidels,Iam 5. 19, 20. Act. 4. 16. 40 & 9 38. & 10. 5. & 11 19. 21 1 Cor. 14. 23, 24. Eſay 2. 3. Eza 8. 23. Io. 1. 41. 45. & 42. 9. & 12. 20. Revel. 3. 9 but by private inſtruction and publique teaching (if any of them would bee penitent) they were to labour the comming of them to God. And theſe Infidels converted to the faith were to be baptiſed of the Elders ordinarily in thoſe Cities, though the number might bee ſo great as they could not well meete in one Congregation, nor be ſubject to the ſame Paſtor; for either they muſt bee baptized by the paſtors among whom they lived, (being converted to the faith) or continue unbaptized untill they were a number convenient to make a diſtinct ſociety, or grow together into one body, and to elect and chooſe their own Miniſter by whom they may be baptiſed: But that either they muſt ſtay ſo long without baptiſme, or that a ſociety of unbaptiſed men had power in thoſe times to elect and chooſe their Miniſter, by whom they ſhould be baptiſed is contary to all preſidents in Scripture.

9 And ſo if a Paſtor may not performe a miniſteriall act to any other perſon or people but his own flock onely, then a company newly converted from infidelity, which cannot joyne themſelves as ſet members to another aſſembly, muſt remain unbaptiſed till they have choſen their Miniſter to doe that office. Then muſt the people thus converted want officers til there be among themſelves able men to pray, preach, exhort in the congregation at the ordination of their Miniſter, or (if that may bee omitted) till there be fit men among them to examine the fitneſſe of him that is choſen.

10 If ſubtile Heretikes ariſe, and ſeduce, and draw away many from the faith, and the body of the ſociety be not able to convince them, either they muſt be let alone or caſt out without conviction, for neighbouring Miniſters ſtand in peculiar relation to their flocks onely, and muſt not meddle beyond their calling according to your tenent.

11 There is no precept or example in Scripture more to warrant the admitting of a ſet member of one congregation unto the Supper in another,What example have you but grounds for the baptiſing of infants? or where read you of any officer excommunicated by any Rob. againſt Ber. p. 214. we may not expect examples of any Paſtors in ſcriptures: who did thus. I. D. Apol. 9. Sect. exam. p. 103. or the baptiſing of his child, occaſionally in another aſſembly then there is for receiving of knowne and approved Chriſtians, and their ſeede that are not ſet members. The Paſtor is no more the paſtor of the one then of the other, nor the one more of his flock then the other, neither of them ſet members, and both ſorts may be members for the time being, and they moſt properly who are of longeſt abode among them.See I. D. Apol. texts. exam pa. 288. But as we heare it is frequent among you (as at Dorcheſter, &c.) to baptiſe the children of another Aſſembly, and uſually you admit to the Supper of the Lord, members of other Churches, and therefore the Miniſter is not ſo limited to his particular Church or flock but he may diſpence the ſeales to others, which in this conſideration is denyed.

12 If the want of one Officer in a Congregation for a time, may be ſupplyed by another, as the want of the Doctor, Ruling Elder, or Deacon, by the Paſtor; why may not the defects of ſome Congregation or Chriſtians be ſupplyed by Paſtors or Miniſters of another Congregation, when they are requeſted and deſired? the minde herein is godly, and the means lawfull, and well pleaſing unto God.

13 And if a Synod conſiſting of ſundry members of particular Churches, met together in the name of Chriſt about the common and publike affaires of the Churches ſhall joyn together in prayer and communion of the Supper, wee can ſee no ground to queſtion it as unlawfull, although that Aſſembly be no particular Congregation or Church, hath no Paſtor over them, make not one Eccleſiaſticall body as a particular Congregationall Church, unleſſe it be for the time onely. The Miniſter therefore may do an act of office to them that be not ſet members of his flock as he may ſtand in Relation to them for the time.

14 Your compariſon betwixt an Officer of a Town Corporate, and of a particular Congregation is not alike, unleſſe you will ſay that a member of another Corporation occaſionally comming into the Towne, is thereby a member of that Society, and ſubject to the authority of the Officer. For ſo you profeſſe that the members of one Society may occaſionally communicate with another, and ſo be ſubject to the Paſtor for the time being, which if you grant, it overthrows the whole ſtrength of this conſideration. Howſoever the compariſon it ſelfe is very perilous if it be preſſed. For if the Officer of a Town Corporate, preſume to doe an act of power out of his owne Corporation, it is a meer nullity, but if a Miniſter of the Goſpell diſpence the Sacrament of Baptiſme, or the Lords Supper to believers of another Society (though done without conſent) it was never deemed or judged a nullity in the Church of God. Let the compariſon hold good, and moſt Chriſtians have cauſe to queſtion whether they be truly baptized, or ever lawfully received the Sacrament of the Lords Supper. If it may not be doubted, whether ever the Sacraments of the New Teſtament were truly or by authority diſpenced, eſpecially if we conſider what follows in the other conſiderations. This Argument from compariſon is very uſuall in the Writings of Brethren againſt communion with our Churches, but for the moſt part greatly miſtaken, to ſay no more.

Anſwer 3 Conſideration.

CIrcumciſion and the Paſſoever were to be adminiſtred onely to the members of the Church. Ergo, Baptiſme and the Lords Supper is ſo to be adminiſtred alſo. The conſequence is made good by the parity of theſe Ordinances. For if the Argument hold ſtrong for the proofe of Paedo-Baptiſme which is taken from the circumciſion of Infants, why may we not as well infer a neceſſity of Church memberſhip to Baptiſme, from the neceſſity of it to circumciſion. And that Circumciſion was peculiar to the Church members of the Church, may appeare in that perſons circumciſed, & onely they, might eat the Paſſeover, and they onely might enter into the Temple,Exod 12 48. which were the priviledges of Church members. In our anſwer to the ſecond Objection againſt the firſt conſideration we have ſhewed that Circumciſion was not adminiſtred to all that were under the Covenant of Grace (which all believers were) but onely ſuch of them as joyned themſelves to the Church,Exod. 44 7. at firſt in Abrahams family, whereunto Baptiſme doth ſo far anſwer that the Apoſtle counteth theſe expreſſe equivalent to be circumciſed in Chriſt with circumciſion made without hands,Col 2. 1 1, 12. and to be buried with Chriſt in Baptiſme. Indeed, in ſomethings they differ as onely the Males were circumciſed, whereas with us Females are alſo baptized. The Reaſon is becauſe God hath limited Circumciſion to the Males, but under the Goſpel, that difference is taken away. Againe, Circumciſion was adminiſtred in the private family; but Baptiſme, onely in the publick Aſſemblies of the Church. The Reaſon of this difference is, becauſe they were bound to circumciſe the Males on the eighth day, but that could not ſtand with going to the Temple which was too far off, for the purpoſe, to bring every child thither from all parts of Judaea to be Circumciſed the eighth day. Nor had they alway opportunity of a ſolemne convention in the Synagogue on every eighth day; when ſome child or other might be to be circumciſed. But there is no preciſe day ſet downe for Baptiſme, nor are opportunities of publick Aſſemblies ſo remote where Churches are kept in a congregationall frame, but that every firſt day of the week Baptiſme may be adminiſtred if it be required. Again, for the Aforeſaid Reaſon, Circumciſion required not a peculiar Miniſter (for ought we finde in Scripture) but it is not ſo in Baptiſme, as was ſhewd in the ſecond Conſideration. But no good Reaſon can be given, why, in this they ſhould not both agree viz. that they are both to be diſpenſed onely to members of the viſible Church, as it hath been proved in the firſt Conſideration.

Reply.

THis whole Reaſon as it is propounded makes onely againſt it ſelfe; who ever thought that the Seals of the Covenant were not proper to confederates or the Church of God? But of old all viſible Believers under the Covenant of Grace, walking in holineſſe, were of the viſible Church, and in Church Order according to the diſpenſation of thoſe times, though not joyned in externall ſociety with the Family of Abraham. And to exclude Melchiſedeck or Iob, becauſe they were no members of the viſible Church, when yet they were viſible Believers under the Covenant of Grace, and in Church Order as thoſe times required, is well-nigh a contradiction, And ſo it is to debar known and approved Chriſtians members of our Congregation, and their ſeed from the Seals, becauſe they be not of the viſible Church, for they are members of the Church, and ſo to bee held and eſteemed all true Churches and members of the Church, The true & proper meaning of this Conſideration, is that as Circumciſion and the Paſſeover were not to be diſpenſed to all viſible Believers under the Covenant of Grace, but onely to ſuch as were joyned to Abrahams Family, or to the people of the God of Abraham, no more may Baptiſme and the Lords Supper be adminiſtred to any Believers now, unleſſe they be joyned to ſome particular Congregation in Church Memberſhip, or unleſſe by ſolemne Covenant, they be ſet members of ſome particular Aſſemblies.

The ſtrength of this Conſideration ſtands in the parity which is betwixt the Sacraments of the Old and New Teſtament,Eraſt ſo objects againſt Bern-Sicut a Circumciſione ad Baptiſmum argumentamur ut probemus infantes eſſe baptizandos, ita etiam licet ab agno Paſchatis ad Coenam Domini, &c. whereto hee truly replyeth. Ego vero, non nego licere &c. at non temere & univerſaliter. Beza contra Eraſt. pag. 23. Circumciſion and Baptiſme, for parum par eſt ratio, but this parity is not found in every thing (as is manifeſt by the particulars alleadged in the Conſideration it ſelf.) And wee muſt juſtly require ſome reaſon to prove them like in that particular, but to unfold it more fully, we will conſider three things. Firſt, how far an argument may be drawn ſoundly from one Sacrament to another, or wherein the Sacraments agree, and wherein they differ. Secondly, What wee are to think of the propoſition it ſelf. Thirdly, whether the Reaſon of Circumciſion and Baptiſme be one in that particular.

Firſt the Sacraments of the old Teſtament and the new agree in their Common author, nature and end, and therfore what is ſpoken of one in reſpect of the common author, nature and end that doth hold true of everie one. If Circumciſion be of divine inſtitution a ſeale of the Righteouſneſſe of faith, and of the Covenant of grace, a Sacrament in generall is an ordinance divine, a ſeale of the Covenant proper and peculiar to them that bee confederates. But what is peculiar to one Sacrament that agreeth not to another. What is proper to the ſacraments of the old Teſtament, in reſpect of the manner of diſpenſation that agreeth not to the new, as if the Sacraments of the old Teſtament be with bloud, obſcure in ſignification, painfull for uſe, peculiar to one Nation, and to bee aboliſhed, the Sacraments of the new Teſtament muſt be without bloud, cleere for ſignification, eaſie for uſe, univerſall to all Nations, and perpetuall to continue in the Church for ever.

Circumciſion and Baptiſme are both Sacraments of divine inſtitution, and ſo they agree in the ſubſtance of the things ſignified, the perſons to whom they are to bee adminiſtred, and the order of adminiſtration, if the right proportion bee obſerved. As circumciſion ſealed the entrance into the covenant the righteouſneſſe of faith, and circumciſion of the heart: ſo doth Baptiſme much more clearly: As Abraham and his houſhold, and the infants of beleiving Iews were to be circumciſed, ſo the faithful, their families, and their ſeed are to bee baptized. None muſt eate the paſſeover who was not circumciſed, women excepted, who were circumciſed in the males. Nor may a man unbaptized be admitted to the Lords ſupper. Circumciſion was but once applied by Gods appointment and the ſame holds in baptiſme according to the will and good pleaſure of God: But circumciſion and baptiſme agree not in their ſpeciall forme, and manner of diſpenſation appointed of God. And in theſe things a reaſon cannot be drawn from the one to the other affirmatively. The males onely were to be circumciſed as only capable of that ſigne: but males and ſemales both ought to be baptized. The infants males were to be circumciſed the eighth day becauſe ſeaven dayes they were legally uncleane.Lev. 12. 2. 3. & 22. 27 Exo. 22. 30, But the ſeed of the faithfull are not to bee reputed uncleane. Ergo, no ſet tyme is appointed for baptiſme. Circumciſion as other Ceremonies did diſtinguiſh the Iewes from the Gentiles; but Chriſt now of two hath made one.Eph. 2▪ 15. Circumciſion ſignified Chriſt to come, Baptiſme is the ſeale of the New covenant made in Chriſt already come. And ſo in the degree of grace given, ſome difference may be put: The other differences alleadged in the conſiderations with the reaſons thereof are not ſo cleere and undoubted: for Baptiſme is not tyed to the firſt day of the weeke: and the Jewes might gather an Aſſembly on the eighth day as occaſion required and it might be appropriated to the Prieſts and Levites though done in private: But in whatſoever they agree or differ we muſt looke to the inſtitution and neither ſtretch it wider, nor draw it narrower then the Lord hath made it. For hee is the Inſtitutor of the Sacraments according to his owne good pleaſure. And it is our part to learne of him, both to whom, how, and for what end the Sacraments are to be adminiſtred, how they agree, and wherein they differ. In all which we muſt affirme nothing but what God hath taught us, and as he hath taught us.

Secondly, as for the Propoſition it ſelfe; certaine it is, Circumciſion and the Paſſeover were to be adminiſtred onely to the viſible members of the Church, e. to men in Covenant, profeſſing the true faith; But that in Abrahams time none were viſible members of the Church, which joyned not themſelves in Church orders to the family of Abraham, wee have not learned. In the firſt Inſtitution of Circumciſion, we find that God gave it to Abraham, as the Seale of the Covenant formerly made with him: But of any Church covenant or order whereunto Abrahams family ſhould enter before Circumciſion we read not. Melchizedeck, Lot, Iob, &c. were not onely viſible Beleevers under the Covenant of grace, but viſible members of the Church, according to the order and diſpenſation of thoſe times. Wee read not (you ſay) that Melchizedeck, Lot or Iob were circumciſed, but that is no good reaſon to inferre negatively that they were not Circumciſed. We read not that Iohn the Baptiſt, or the Apoſtles, or the 500. brethren were Baptized,Etiam ſi daremus nullam legi ab Apoſtolis excommunicationem non tamen ſequeretur ita eſſe, quum ſatis conſtet non omnium ſingularia Apoſtolorum geſta perſcripta fuiſſe. Bez. de Presb. p. 7. Et ſi de Melchizedeck & Iobo quae huc adferuntur non ſunt extra controverſiam. Nam foedere cum Abra. inito non excluduntur ij qui ante erant in foedere ſed accenſentur foederi. Ita autem ſe habuit Melchizedeck, &c. omnino enim conſors promiſſionis divinae fuit ante foedus cum eo initum. Gen. 17. Job vero & credens fuit promiſſionibus foederis & de ſententia veterum fuit circumciſus etiam haereditariâ circumciſione a paterno materno que ſanguine. Vt elegantèr ſcribit author libri de verâ Circumciſione qui Hieron. ad ſcribitur. Iun. animadv. in Bellar. contrav. 4. lib. 3. cha. 16. not. 13. wee muſt not forthwith conclude, that they were not initiated by that ſeale. Moreover, if they were not Circumciſed, it may bee the Inſtitution of that Sacrament was not knowne unto them, or the Authour of Circumciſion (upon whoſe will and pleaſure they muſt depend) did not command it unto them, or require that they ſhould joyne themſelves in Covenant with Abrahams family: and in that caſe if they had Circumciſed themſelves they had tranſgreſſed. But then the reaſon why they were not circumciſed was not this, that they were not (as you ſpeake) in Church order: but becauſe Circumciſion was appropriated to Abrahams family by divine Inſtitution in ſome ſpeciall and peculiar reſpects belonging to the manner of Adminiſtration. After the Church of the Jewes was conſtituted (when wee can no more imagine that there was a Church among the Gentiles, then that there are Chriſtians among the Barbarians at this day) we finde none muſt be admitted to the Paſſeover that was not firſt Circumciſed, but nothing was required of a ſtranger to circumciſion, but that he profeſſe the true faith, and avouch the God of Abraham to be his God, which of neceſſitie muſt be done before he could be reputed a viſible Beleever, or under the Covenant of promiſe.

Thus a learned and reverend divine, Circumciſion was a ſeale of the covenant,Io. D. exam of tents p 309. that God made with Abraham concerning Chriſt that ſhould come as concerning the fleſh of Iſaac and ſo of Iacob of whom were the 12 tribes who were the Iſraelites, &c. Rom. 9. 4. 5. So that as in Abrahams time none were bound to be Circumciſed but thoſe that were of his family as being borne there or bought, and ſo brought thither which were not of his ſeed: So afterwards none were bound to be Circumciſed which were not borne in the family of Jacob and Patriarchs, or joyned to them. And after their comming out of Egypt none were bound to be Circumciſed but the children of the Iewes (then the only Church of God,) and thoſe that deſired to joyne unto them. The ſumme is thus much, God gave circumciſion to Abraham as a ſeale of the Covenant but whether it was given to other beleevers in his time it is (at leaſt) a thing uncertaine. And if they were not Circumciſed it was by reaſon of the ſpeciall Inſtitution of God, and peculiar manner of adminiſtration of the Covenant of promiſe which in ſome reſpect was proper, to the family of Abraham, and not common to all the viſible members of the Church at that time in Church fellowſhip and order. Afterwards when there were none in covenant but the ſeed of Iacob or ſtrangers profeſſing the faith of Abraham, circumciſion was not to be adminiſtred to any man who was not in Covenant nor any man to bee admitted to the Paſſeover who was not circumciſed. This is the moſt that can be ſaid with any probability: But hence it will not follow by iuſt analogie or proportion, that the ſeed of the faithfull muſt not bee admitted to Baptiſme, or viſible believers be received to the Lords Supper unleſſe they bee ſet members of ſome particular congregation united in Church order. Thirdly, preſuppoſing therefore that Melchizedeck, Lot and Iob, were not Circumciſed, we ſay there is not the like reaſon of Circumciſion and Baptiſme in this particular. For, firſt if Circumciſion was ever appropriated to the family of Abraham, and might be communicated to other viſible Beleevers, it was in the firſt Inſtitution and adminiſtration; but in the firſt Inſtitution and adminiſtration of Baptiſme, it was not obſerved that beleevers ſhould be firſt gathered into a politicall body or Chriſtian church memberſhip,Mat. 3. 7. and then baptized. Iohn the Baptiſt baptized ſuch as came to him confeſſing their ſins. The Apoſtles baptized Diſciples,Io 4 2. ſuch as gladly received their doctrine, beleeved in Jeſus Chriſt, Act. 2 37. 38. 41. & 8 37. & 10. 47. 48. and received the gifts of the holy Ghoſt, before they were gathered into Chriſtian Church order, or made fit members of a Chriſtian congregationall Aſſembly.

2 If Circumciſion was by ſpeciall Inſtitution given as a priviledge to the Males of Abrahams Familie, Melchizedecke, Iob, Lot, and other viſible Beleevers were not bound to joyne themſelves as members to Abrahams familie, or deſire and ſeek to be circumciſed: But they that have received the doctrine of ſalvation, beleeve Chriſt, and profeſſe the faith, are bound to ſeek, and deſire the priviledge of the ſeals in an holy manner.

3. Melchizedech, Job, and Lot were not onely viſible beleevers, but viſible members of the Church, according to the manner of diſpenſing in thoſe times: but the Seals (as you confeſſe) belong to all beleevers knit together in Church-Covenant.

4. If circumciſion be appropriated to the family of Abraham, it is becauſe the Covenant ſealed by circumciſion is peculiar to Abrahams poſteritie, (ſc.) that Chriſt ſhould come as concerning the fleſh, of Iſaac. But Baptiſme is the ſeal of the Covenant of grace without any peculiar or ſpeciall tye or reſpect.

5. You contend, that Baptiſme did belong to ſuch beleevers as were members of the then Jewiſh Church, which cannot ſtand, if Abrahams familie did anſwer to a Chriſtian ſocietie or congregationall Aſſembly; Juſt reaſon therefore may be given why circumciſion was diſpenſed onely to the males of Abrahams familie, when baptiſme is not to be limited onely to the ſet members of a particular ſocietie; and if this conſideration be applied to the purpoſe, inſtead of ſaying, Circumciſion and the Paſſeover were to be adminiſtred onely to the members of the Church, you muſt ſay Circumciſion was to be deſired of or adminiſtred unto all the true approved viſible members of the Church. And if there be the ſame reaſon of both, then all viſible approved members of the Church muſt not deſire nor be admitted to the ſeals, but this concluſion you will not acknowledge.

Anſw. 4. Conſideration.

THey that are not capable of the Church cenſures, are not capable of the Church priviledges: but they that are not within Church-Covenant are not capable of Church cenſures. Ergo. The propoſition is evident, The Aſſumption may be proved, 1 Corinth. 5. 12. What have I to do to judge them that are without. Now to be without is not onely the caſe of Heathens and Excommunicates, but of ſome beleevers alſo, who though by externall union with Chriſt they are within the Covenant of grace, yet being not joyned externally to the viſible bodie of Chriſt (a particular Church) are in regard of viſible Church communion ſaid to be without. To this purpoſe is this text alledged by other Divines alſo, as Dr. Ames Caſ. of conſci. l. 4. c. 24. q. 1. reſp. 5.

Reply.

FIrſt, men are capable of Church cenſures in two reſpects, either in having the power of the keyes, and authoritie to diſpenſe them according to God, or as ſubject to the cenſures of the Church. In the firſt ſenſe, many are capable of Church priviledges that are not capable of Church cenſures, as the ſeed of Chriſtian parents, children and women. You ſay you admit to the ſeales the knowne and approved, and orderly recommended members of any true Church: but to fellowſhip in the cenſures, admittance of members, and choice of Officers onely, the members of that particular Church whereof they and we (any of us) ſtand members. In the ſecond ſenſe alſo many are capable of Church priviledges who are not ſubject to Church cenſures: as the children of Chriſtian parents are capable of baptiſme, the known and approved members of any true Church are capable of the Seales in other Congregations among you who are not ſubject to the cenſures of that other Society. Spirituall communion in publick prayer is a Church priviledge, which is not denied to viſible beleevers and godly perſons, though not in Church order, and ſo not in ſubjection in your ſenſe to Church cenſures.

Secondly, a perſon baptiſed is not baptiſed in that particular congregation onely, but into all Churches, and every particular Church where he cometh he hath all the priviledges of a baptiſed perſon in reſpect of his baptiſme, and is ſo to be eſteemed by them. Now the priviledge of a baptiſed perſon who is able to examine himſelf, and walketh in the truth, is to be admitted to the Lords Supper. All circumciſed perſons had right thereby to eat the Paſſeover in any ſocietie, in the place which God ſhould chuſe to put his Name there. Exod. 12. 4. 47. Deut. 16. 1, 2. So all baptiſed perſons have true and intire right to the Lords Supper in everie true Church where God hath ſet his Name.

Thirdly, there is not the ſame reaſon of every Church priviledge, for one may have right to ſome, who is not to meddle with others. The members of one ſociety may hear the Word, joyne in Prayer, and receive the Sacraments in another, when they are not to meddle in the election and ordination of their teachers. The Miniſters of the Goſpel may preach the Word, and adminiſter the Sacraments in another congregation, and hereto he needs no other calling but that God offers an opportunitie; there is much need of his help, and he is intreated, or hath leave from them in place or office; but he is not to admit members into the ſocietie, or caſt them out that be admitted. And if the Paſtor of one Church ſhall preach or adminiſter the Sacraments in another, contrary to the liking and approbation of the Society and Governours, though the act be irregular, it was never eſteemed a nullitie; but if he ſhall preſume to excommunicate the members of another ſocietie, without the conſent or the Church, and approbation of Paſtors and Teachers, under whoſe charge and juriſdiction they live, it hath been judged a meer nullity. Therefore the propoſition is not ſo evident as to be taken without proofe, that they have no power to admit a beleever into communion in any Church priviledge who have no power to excommunicate.

Fourthly, that viſible beleevers baptiſed into a true Church profeſſing the true faith, and walking in holy obedience, and godly converſation, that they and their ſeed ſhould be judged ſuch as are without in the Apoſles ſenſe,1. Cor. 5. 12. becauſe they be not externally joyned as ſet members to ſome particular congregation in Church-Covenant is affirmed, not proved.

1. It hath, and may fall out many times through the ignorance, raſhneſſe, or pride of a prevailing faction in the Church, that the true members of the Catholique Church, and the beſt members of the orthodox viſible flock, or congregation of Chriſt may be no members of any diſtinct viſible ſocietie. And ſhall their poſteritie be eſteemed Aliens and Strangers from the Covenant, and debarred from the Sacraments, becauſe their parents are unjuſtly ſeperated from the inheritance of the Lord? Surely as parents unjuſtly excommunicated do continue ſtill not onely true members of the inviſible body, but viſible members of the flock of Chriſt: ſo the right of Baptiſme doth belong to the Infants of ſuch parents, though not actuall and conſtant members of this or that preſent aſſembly in Church order.

2. If they be without, becauſe no members of a politike bodie or ſpirituall fellowſhip: then all members which are of one ſocietie are without to another: For they that be not of the bodie are not capable of Church cenſures, or ſubject to the authoritie one of another. And ſo not being under the judgement of that particular Church to it they are without; whereas in ancient and moderne times diſtinct Societies did communicate together, admit and receive each other as brethren, to teſtifie their fellowſhip in the faith. If the reaſon whereupon the Apoſtle ſaith the Church of Corinth was not to judge them that were without, was becauſe they were not within the Church of Corinth, and ſo not under their cenſure or judgement: this holds true of them that be of another ſociety admitted to the Sacrament, as well as of ſuch as be no ſet members deſiring to be received to the Lords Supper.

3. (The fornicators of this world) do they not explaine whom the Apoſtle pointeth unto by the title of being without, ver. 10. 11. ſuch as had not received the covenant of grace.

4. Church order is neceſſarie we denie not; but this order that a man ſhould be a conſtant and ſet member of a particular ſocietie by covenant, to make him a true member of the viſible Church, or to give him title or intereſt to the publick order, this is not taught of God.

5. Paul divides all men into two ranks, the firſt and greater without; the laſt and leſſer within: but that beleevers who have received the holy Ghoſt, and have been baptiſed into Jeſus Chriſt, that they and their children ſhould be reckoned among them that are without, that we read not in this nor any other Scripture,1. Joh. 2. 19. but in phraſe of Scripture hereticks themſelves are within the Church.1. Cor. 11. 19.

6. The beleevers not yet gathered (as the godly learned think) into a certain diſtinct body are called beleevers, brethren, diſciples; but that they ſhould be comprehended under them that are without, it hath not been beleeved in the Church.

7. Without (faith the Apoſtle whether alluding to this place or not, let others judge) are dogs,Rev. 22. 15. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . 1. Tim. 3. 7. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , & Script. ethnici apud patres audiunt. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . Matth. 8. 1 • . Epheſ. 2. 12. Rob. againſt Ber. p. 101. inchanters, whoremongers, not ſuch as are called faithfull and holy, walking in integritie, beleeving in and profeſſing Jeſus Chriſt to be their Saviour.

8. They that are without in the Apoſtles ſenſe are Aliens from the Commonwealth of Iſrael, ſtrangers from the covenant of promiſe, having no hope, and without God in the world: but we hope you will not paſſe ſuch raſh and unadviſed cenſure upon your brethren, who be not gathered into your ſocietie as ſet members.

9. Let the interpretation ſtand, and he is without, not onely who is no ſet member of ſome congregationall Aſſembly, but he that is not ſubject to the cenſure of the community of that particular combination few or many, with, or without Officers. And ſo all the reformed Churches in the world who aſcribe the power of the keyes to the Presbitry or Claſſes, and not to the community, and ſome amongſt your ſelves (if not the moſt) ſhall be without alſo.

And therefore we cannot think approved Chriſtians deſiring to be received unto the Sacrament, either to be without, or uncapable of Church cenſures for the time being if they ſhould offend, though not ſet members of any particular congregation: for deſiring baptiſme for their children or themſelves to be admitted to the Lords Supper for the time they put themſelves under the ordinance of Jeſus Chriſt there. And as they are members for the time, ſo they might be proceeded againſt according to the rule preſcribed by our Saviour, as they would proceed with an offending member.

10. If upon juſt and good reaſon a paſſage of Scripture can be cleared to prove that for which it was never alledged by any writer, we are not to except againſt any truth of God, becauſe it wanteth mans teſtimonie. Onely if we deſire credit in ſuch caſes, our reaſons muſt be weightie and convincing. But for your expoſition of this text of Scripture, as yet we have not obſerved one ſubſtantiall ground, or approved author to be alledged. Doctor Ames ſhewing the neceſſitie of Chriſtians joyning themſelves to ſome particular Church, giveth this reaſon, Quoniam alias fieri non poteſt quum conturbentur ſigna illa quibus fideles ab infidelibus diſcerni poſſunt. 1. Cor. 5. 12. But herein Dr. Ames manifeſtly ſheweth that by them that are [without] heathens, and unbeleevers muſt be underſtood, and not beleevers and godly men though of no particular ſetled ſocietie for the time, for thus we conceive he argueth. The ſignes and evidences whereby the faithfull are to be diſcerned from unbeleevers, muſt not be confounded: but unleſſe Chriſtians make themſelves actuall members of a Societie or Church, the ſignes whereby the faithfull are diſcerned from unbeleevers, will be obſcured and darkned. And if this be his reaſon how can that text of Scripture be alledged for confirmation, unleſſe by [men without] Infidels be underſtood. Again Doctor Ames in the ſame book, lib. 4. ca. 27. ſpeaking of Infants to be received, it is required (he ſaith) that they be in the covenant of grace in reſpect of outward profeſſion, and eſtimation in reſpect of their parents, and that there is hope they ſhall be inſtructed and brought up in the ſame covenant. 2. That Baptiſme doth moſt properly belong to thoſe infants whoſe parents, at leaſt one of them is in the Church, and not without, becauſe baptiſme is a ſigne and ſeale of the covenant of grace. 3. That children that are caſt forth are in charitie to be eſteemed the children of Chriſtian parents, when there is no juſt cauſe of preſuming the contrary, that in admitting unto baptiſme a difference muſt be put betweene the Infants of thoſe who in ſome ſort belong to the Church, but openly break the covenant of God, and the children of others.

1. Becauſe a diſtinction muſt be obſerved in holy things betweene the cleane and uncleane; ſeeing elſe the ordinance of God cannot be preſerved from all pollution. To ſay nothing of that which he addeth touching the baptiſme of Infants borne in fornication, excommunication, and Papiſts, which is more then ſufficient to cleare his meaning in the former paſſage. To this may be added that he holdeth it not neceſſarie that Chriſtians ſhould gather themſelves into a particular ſociety, but as opportunitie and occaſion ſhould offer it ſelf. So that it was never his mind to cenſure them who be not gathered into Church-Covenant, becauſe they want means or opportunitie as men without in the Apoſtles ſenſe.

His judgement is further manifeſted in his ſecond Manuduction, pa. 33. So many pariſh Aſſemblies of England (ſaith he) as have any competent number of good Chriſtians in them, united to worſhip God ordinarily in one Societie, ſo many have the eſſence and integrall forme of a viſible Church, and all they have intire right to Chriſt, and to all the meanes of injoying him, how ever they are defective in the puritie of their combination, and in the compleat free exerciſing of their power, whereupon a reverend Mr. Io. D. Apol. Sect. 40. exam. p. 182. Elder now among you draws this concluſion, Ergo to diſchurch them wholly, and to ſeparate from them as no Churches of Chriſt, or to denie baptiſme to the Infants of their known members is not warrantable by any rule of Scripture that I know, nor juſtified by any aſſertion or practiſe.

Anſw. 5. Conſideration.

VVE may adde hereunto for a fifth Conſideration, the evill and pernicious conſequences of extending communion in Church priviledges beyond the bounds of Church fellowſhip: for thus, 1. The extraordinarie office of the Apoſtles, and the ordinarie office of Paſtors and Teachers will be much confounded, if the latter be as illimited as the former in the execution of their office beyond the bounds of their own particular Churches. 2. The diſtinction of Church aſſemblies from the confuſed multitude is abroagated, if without memberſhip in a particular Church the parents may communicate with the Churches in the Lords Supper, and their ſeed in baptiſme. 3. The Church ſhall indanger the profaning of the ſeals, and want one ſpeciall meanes whereby the grace and pietie of men may be diſcerned and made known; for if without reſpect to their Church eſtate men of approved pietie (as you ſay) are to be admitted to fellowſhip in the ſeales, how ſhall their pietie be approved to the Church not by their own report of themſelves alone without atteſtation of ſuch as are approved by the Church; and how can ſuch beare witneſſe to their approved pietie, who againſt light refuſe to profeſſe ſubjection to the Goſpel of Chriſt by orderly joyning themſelves in fellowſhip with ſome approved Church of Chriſt as members thereof when they have opportunitie thereunto, ſeeing ſuch fellowſhip is an action of pietie required of all beleevers in the ſecond Commandment; and true pietie frameth mens ſpirits to have reſpect to all Gods Commandments. And we have had much experience of it, that men of approved pietie in the judgement of ſome have been found too light, not onely in the judgement of others, but even of their own conſciences, when they have come to triall in offering themſelves to be members of Churches, with ſuch a bleſſing hath God followed this order of taking hold of Church-Covenant by publick profeſſion of faith and repentance before men be admitted to the ſeales; but this meanes of diſcoverie of mens pietie and ſinceritie would be utterly loſt, if men ſhould be admitted unto the Lords table without entring in Church-fellowſhip.

Reply.

IF it be repugnant to Divine Inſtitution to admit of approved Chriſtians lawfully baptized, walking in the faith, members of the viſible Churches, and partakers of Church priviledges among us to the Lords Supper,What though this inconvenience do ariſe ſometimes through mans corruption it ſhould be otherwiſe; and we muſt ever conſider of the nature of Gods ordinances in their right uſe, &c. Rob. againſt Ber. pa. 213. or their children to baptiſme, becauſe they be not entred into Church fellowſhip according to your order, then it is unlawfull though no ſuch evill conſequences are to be feared.

But if by accident ſome abuſe ſhould fall out, the evill is to be prevented by all lawfull meanes:Reſpondit caam nullam fuiſſe cur Io. Bapt. iſtos accedentes rejiceret ut qui ad ejus bapt. venirent cum peccatorum agnitione nec ipſe poteſtatem haberet eos excommunicandi etiamſi fuiſſent excom. digni. Beza de Presb. p 23. but the faithfull are not utterly to be debarred of the order of God, whereto they have right and title by his free grant and gracious invitation. And no queſtion but the ſeales of the Covenant may be profaned many times when it is not in the power of the diſpenſers to put back or expell ſuch as profane them. If the Congregation ſhall admit of, or tolerate an unworthy member, the Churches priviledges are profaned; and yet we conceive you will ſay the Paſtor is not faulty in receiving him, when the Church doth tolerate unworthily, if he do what pertaineth to his office to keep the holy things of God from contempt. But in the caſe propounded there is no feare or danger of ſuch conſequences neceſſarie to follow: for the queſtion is not of all ſorts at randame,Recte ſane quis illos à ſacris prohibuerat, &c. etſi ſit tam ſceleratus quiſpiam quam eſſe exiſtimatur tum ſi tale judicium ſibi quiſque ſumat quae mox fuerit Eccleſie facies? ſed preterea tenendum eſt istud in hoc negotio inita cujuſpiam conſ. non probabillas rectam alterius conſciam. Id. pa. 26. Id in privatorum arbitrio relinquere ut alibi diximus & periculoſum nimis & toti Eccleſiae valde damnoſum fuiſſet. Id. p. 80. but of Chriſtians profeſſing the faith intirely, lawfully baptiſed, known, and approved to the conſciences of the wiſe and judicious viſible members of the Churches of Chriſt among us often admitted to the Lords Table, whether theſe either ſufficiently knowne unto you, or orderly recommended may upon deſire and ſuite themſelves be admitted to communicate in the Lords Supper, and their children to be baptized, what feare is there now that the extraordinarie office of the Apoſtles, and the ordinarie office of Paſtors and Teachers ſhall be much or little confounded? Is this to take as illimited power as the Apoſtles did in the execution of their office? How ſhal this tend to abrogate the diſtinction of Church Aſſemblies from the confuſed multitude? or how is the profanation of the ſeals thereby indangered?

You aske if without reſpect to their Church eſtate men of approved pietie (as we ſay) are to be admitted into fellowſhip in the ſeals, how ſhall their pietie be approved to the Church, not by their own report of themſelves alone, &c. Do not you ſay the ſame, That there be many godly perſons, and of approved pietie among us, who are not approved by their own report of themſelves (unleſſe ye will take their wiſedome, faith, patience, courage, conſtancie, and holineſſe of life for their report) approved, we ſay by as ample and ſufficient teſtimonie as the Apoſtles exacted of them whom they received into Church fellowſhip, or can be required of members admitted unto the priviledges of the Church, if men will follow the Lords direction, or as you can give to ordinances members of your ſocieties. You profeſſe high reſpect of your brethren in old England, but it ſeemes you judge them inſufficient to give orderly teſtimonie of the ſinceritie and uprightneſſe of approved Chriſtians, well known unto them, and living among them, which two cannot well agree. We ſpeake not of ſuch who againſt light refuſe to profeſſe ſubjection to the Goſpel of Chriſt to joyne themſelves orderly in fellowſhip with ſome approved Church: But of ſuch as do with all readineſſe profeſſe ſubjection, and walk accordingly, and heartily deſire to joyn themſelves to the moſt pure and compleat Churches ſo farre as they are taught of God, or have opportunitie thereunto. And if exception be taken againſt them onely, who refuſe againſt light to ſubmit themſelves to the Goſpel; by what rule do you proceed when you judge men to refuſe againſt light, or debarre them who do not refuſe againſt conſcience, but for lacke of opportunitie. No doubt (as you ſay) but now and then a man of approved pietie in the judgement of ſome may be found too light, yea and in the judgement of his owne conſcience when he hath come to triall. And no queſtion but many have been admitted by the Church, who indeed and truth are much too light; and ſome refuſed who deſerved better then they that caſt them off, we will not diſpute what errours have been committed, nor what bleſſing ye have found upon your proceedings; we heartily beſeech the Lord to keep your congregation pure, make his ordinances more and more effectuall, go before you in the way wherein you ſhould walk, and multiply his mercies upon you in the ſame. But this we are perſwaded, and therefore we ſpeak, that in debarring godly Chriſtians from the Lords Supper, and much more the children of thoſe parents who are in covenant with God, from holy baptiſme you exceed your commiſſion you have received from God, and go beyond your due bounds. And notwithſtanding your circumſpection more worthy and faithfull Chriſtians have been denied when of leſſe worth, and meaner ſufficiencies have paſſed, and been by you received.

Anſw. 6. Conſid.

NOne have power to diſpence the Seales but they that are called to the office of Miniſtery; and no man can be ſo called till firſt there be a Church to call him,Demonſtr. of Diſc. ca. 4. ſeeing the power of calling Miniſters is given by Chriſt unto the Church; and thence it follows, that all thoſe that deſire to partake of the Seales, are bound to joyne themſelves in Church ſtate, that ſo they may call a Miniſter to diſpenſe the Seales unto them. And this dutie by the appointment of God lieth not onely upon ſome Chriſtians, but equally upon all: ergo no Chriſtian can expect by the appointment of God to partake in the Seals till he have joyned himſelfe in Church fellowſhip, and in the call of the Miniſter. And indeed ſeeing a Church, and a Miniſter called by the Church, is of ſuch neceſſitie for the diſpenſing of the ſeales, it may ſeeme unreaſonable that ſome Chriſtians ſhould be bound to become a Church, and to call a Miniſter that ſo the ſeales may be diſpenſed, and other men (when this is done) have equall libertie to the ſeals who refuſe to joyne unto the Church.

Reply.

THis concluſion is not to the queſtion propounded, for we ſpeake of ſuch as cannot, not of ſuch as refuſe to joyne themſelves unto the Church; or if they do not joyne, it is not out of contempt or wilfull neglect of Gods ordinance, or deſire of carnall libertie, and not to be in ſubjection to Chriſt, but for lacke of opportunitie, or through their fault that ſhould admit them but do not. For if in any of your Churches you ſhall require more of members to be admitted then Chriſt the chiefe Shepherd of the flock doth, or preſſe that upon their conſciences which they cannot conſent unto, if they ſhall fit downe quietly for the time and ſerve God in private, when they cannot injoy Church priviledges, it is your fault and not theirs. And they may more juſtly challenge the Aſſemblie as injurious and tyrannicall, then you them as wilfull deſpiſers of Gods ordinance. We accuſe not the wiſedome and diſcretion of your Chuches, but we know the zealous multitude may ſometimes be raſh; And when a reaſon is craved of your judgement, why you do debarre the moſt knowne and approved Chriſtians which come over, and their children from the ſeals of the covenant, we diſlike you ſhould put this note upon them, as if againſt light they refuſed orderly to ſubject themſelves to the Goſpel of Jeſus Chriſt: What warrant you have thus to cenſure, what uſe of this manner of diſpute we leave it to your godly wiſedome to judge. In the Conſideration it ſelf there are many Propoſitions couched together, which we muſt examine ſeverally as they have reference to the concluſion intended, and then try whether it can be raiſed from them.

The firſt Propoſition, That none have power to diſpence the Seales, but they that are called to the office of Miniſtery, is freely granted.

The ſecond, That no man can be ſo called till firſt there be a Church to call him, needeth explication. For by the Church you muſt underſtand the community of the faithfull, as they are one bodie, without officers or guides. And ſuch a Church there cannot be without a Miniſtery to call and admit them into Church-fellowſhip. The Apoſtles baptiſed not themſelves, but by the help of others, & thoſe not called of the people to be baptiſed, 1 Cor. 1. 17. The Apoſtles appointed by electiō, Elders in every city or Church. And ſo there was a Church before Elders were ſet over it, but this Church was a ſocietie of beleevers by baptiſme admitted into Church-fellowſhip. There can be no Church to call a Miniſter to feed the flock, and diſpence the ſeals, till they have received the doctrine of ſalvation intirely, and by the ſeale of initiation be ſolemnly received into the ſocietie of men profeſſing Chriſt. A company of men converted to the faith being unbaptized, may and ought to deſire baptiſme, but they have not power to elect and chuſe one among themſelves to diſpence the ſeales unto the reſt for ought is to be found in Scripture:Rob. againſt Bern. likely veiwed. p. 40. The Churches conſtitution into which Chriſtians are to gather themſelves muſt be Apoſtolicall, and not one day or houre younger in nature and forme of it, thus the firſt Church of the New Teſtament. But it can never be ſhewed in Scripture that any ſocietie of unbaptiſed perſons did firſt chuſe from among them a Paſtor or Teacher by whom they might be baptiſed: you cannot produce one example or other proofe in the Scripture, of one man teaching the Goſpel miniſterially but he was baptiſed, and a member of a true Church, or of a ſocietie who made choice of a Paſtor and teacher, but they were baptiſed perſons.

The third Propoſition, That the power of calling Miniſters is given by Chriſt unto the Church, muſt alſo be rightly underſtood: For by the Church muſt be meant the ſocietie of the faithfull, not onely ingrafted into Chriſt, ſet into the ſtate of ſalvation, and made heires apparent of everlaſting bleſſedneſſe, but ſolemnly entred and inrolled into the ſocietie of Chriſts flock, and acknowledged members by free admiſſion into the Seales of the Covenant. Againe, by the Church if we ſpeake of ordinary calling, muſt not be underſtood of the faithfull alone, but their guides and officers together with them, who are to goe before the reſt, and to direct and governe them in their choice. Neither can we ſay, that any two or three beleevers linked together in ſocietie doe make ſuch a Church, as to whom the calling of the Miniſter doth belong: but that right was given by Chriſt to ſuch Churches as were gathered and eſtabliſhed by the Apoſtles. The Church hath a Miniſtery of calling one whom Chriſt hath deſcribed, that from Chriſt he may have power of Office given him in the vacant place. But the office, gift, and power of the Miniſtery, is immediately from Chriſt and not from the Church. The Church doth neither virtually nor formally give power to her Officers but miniſterially onely, as miniſtring to him who hath power and vertue to conferre it. And this right of election is ſo given to the communitie and body of the people, that if they have conſented to give away their right, or if it be taken injuriouſly from them, the calling of the Miniſter notwithſtanding may be true, and miniſteriall acts done by him that is thruſt upon the people without their conſent may be effectuall to their ſalvation. A wrong it is altogether to debarre the godly of their conſent in the calling of ſuch as muſt watch for their ſoules; but it makes not the calling it ſelfe a meere nullitie; for then many Churches in the world within a few hundred yeares after Chriſt ſhould have wanted both miniſtery and Sacraments, and they would have been altogether deſtitute of both miniſtery and Sacraments for many hundred yeares.

The fourth, That all thoſe who deſire to partake in the Seales, are bound to joyne themſelves together in Church-ſtate, that ſo they may call a Miniſter to diſpence the Seales unto them, will not follow from the former rightly underſtood. We deny not but Chriſtians are bound to joyne themſelves together in holy fellowſhip, if God give them opportunitie: but they muſt partake in the Seales before they can joyne themſelves together in Church-ſtate. And ſuch as for lack of meanes and opportunitie cannot joyne themſelves into ſuch an eſtate, or be diſperſed by perſecution, or be deſtitute of Paſtors and Teachers, may for a time deſire and ſeek to have the ſeales diſpenced unto them by the Paſtors and Teachers of other Societies, with whom they hold communion in the faith. The people alſo who are deprived of right and libertie to chooſe their Paſtor, may deſire and ſeek to have the Seales diſpenced unto them by him who is ſet over them. If a company of Infidells ſhould be converted to the faith, they muſt deſire to partake in the ordinances of grace before they could joyne together in a Church-way to call a Miniſter of their own, who might adminiſter the Sacraments unto them. To make Diſciples and baptize are joyned together. And if theſe Propoſitions be allowed for current,John 4. 2. a nation or people plunged into Idolatry or Infidelitie,Math. 28. 19. or otherwiſe diſchurched, cannot by ordinary meanes recover into a Church-eſtate, wherein they may lawfully and according to Gods appointment deſire or expect that the Seales of the Covenant ſhould be diſpenced to them.

The fifth Propoſition riſeth beyond meaſure, that no Chriſtian can expect by the appointment of God to partake in the Seales till he have joyned himſelfe in Church-fellowſhip and the calling of the Miniſter. Wee conceive you will not ſay that children and women have to doe in the call of the Miniſter (for women they are debarred by their ſex as from ordinary Propheſying,1 Cor. 14. 34, 35. ſo from any other dealing wherein they take authority over the man) If ſome part of the Congregation doe not conſent in the election of Paſtors or Teachers,Tit. 2. 11, 12. have they not right to expect to have the Seales of the Covenant diſpenced to themſelves or their ſeede?Rob. ag. Ber. pa. 206. If the people be deprived of that libertie to chooſe or call their Miniſter, muſt they ſeperate from the ordinances of worſhip there diſpenced, and from the Congregations as no true Churches? If ſome perſons by the providence of God live in ſuch places where they cannot joyne in Church-fellowſhip and call of the Miniſter (as ſuppoſe the Chriſtian wife, childe, or ſervant) nor lawfully remove to any ſuch Societie, muſt they and their children live as ſtrangers and aliens from the Covenant of grace, wherein they may not expect to partake of the Seales▪ In Infidels be converted to the faith, muſt they not partake in the Seales, becauſe they cannot joyne in Church-fellowſhip and call of the Miniſter, before they be admitted to Baptiſme?

Here you ſay the people muſt joyne together in the call of the Miniſter, before they can lawfully deſire to be admitted to the Seales.Rob. ag. Bern. pa. 239. And another hath zealouſly affirmed (It is a preſumptuous ſin in any to chooſe an Officer not trained up and tryed (ſcil.) in the debating, diſcuſſing, carrying, and contriving of Church-affaires, as alſo in admonition, exhortation, and comfort, publickly occaſioned and ſo manifeſted) Lay theſe two together, and let it be conſidered how long many a poore ſoule converted to the faith muſt be compelled to want the comfort of Gods ordinances. Beſides, if a people be joyned together in Church-fellowſhip, and have called a Paſtor to feed and watch over them, wee deſire (not words but) proofe why the poore diſperſed Chriſtians wanting means or opportunitie to joyn themſelves together into ſocietie, ought not to deſire, and that others be not bound in conſcience to afford them the comfort of Gods ordinances.

If the Propoſitions may ſtand for good, I feare we ſhall ſcarce finde that ever in ordinary way, the Sacraments were lawfully diſpenced or received in the Chriſtian Churches of God ſince the firſt foundation of them. Now the premiſes being liable to ſo many exceptions, the concluſion to be laid upon them, will fall of it ſelfe. And thereunto wee oppoſe the direct contrary. That Infidels converted to the faith, or godly Chriſtians, formerly viſible beleevers, knowne and approved members of Congregations profeſſing the intire faith, and joyning together in the lawfull uſe of the Sacraments for ſubſtance according to the Inſtitution, may and ought to deſire and expect the Seales of the Covenant to be diſpenced to them, and to their ſeede, though for the preſent they be not joyned into ſuch Church-ſtate and call of Miniſters as you require.

Anſwer 7. Conſideration.

THat our practiſe may not be cenſured as novell and ſingular, give us leave to produce a Preſident of the like care obſerved and approved by publick countenance of State in the dayes of Edward 6. of bleſſed and famous memory, who in the yeare 1550. granted Johannes Alaſco a learned Noble man of Poland under the great Seale of England, libertie to gather a Church of ſtrangers in London, and to order themſelves according as they ſhould finde to be moſt agreeable to the Scriptures. Among other godly orders eſtabliſhed in that Church, that which concerned the Adminiſtration of Baptiſme to prevent the prophanation of it we will repeate in Alaſcoes owne words. Baptiſme in our Church (ſaith he) is adminiſtred in the publique Aſſembly of the Church after the publique Sermon: for ſeeing Baptiſme doth ſo belong to the whole Church that none ought to be driven thence, which is a member of the Church, nor to be admitted to it who is not a member of it, truely it is equall that that ſhould be performed publiquely in the Aſſembly of the whole Church, which belongs to the whole Church in common. Againe, he addeth; Now ſeeing our Churches are by Gods bleſſing ſo eſtabliſhed by the Kings Majeſtie, that they may be as it were one pariſh of ſtrangers diſperſed throughout the whole Citie, or one body corporate (as it is called in the Kings grant) and yet all ſtrangers doe not joyne themſelves to our Church, yea there are thoſe who while they avoyde all Churches, will pretend to the Engliſh Churches that they are joyned with us, and to us that they are joyned to the Engliſh Churches, and ſo doe abuſe both them and us, leſt the Engliſh Churches and the Miniſters thereof ſhould be deceived by the impoſtures of ſuch men (and that under colour of our Churches) wee doe baptize their Infants alone who have adjoyned themſelves to our Churches by publique confeſſion of their faith, and obſervation of Eccleſiaſticall diſcipline. And that our Churches may be certaine that the Infants that are to be baptized are their ſeede, who have joyned themſelves thereto in manner aforeſaid, the father of the Infant to be baptized (if poſſible he can) or other men and women of notable credit in the Church, doe offer the Infant to Baptiſme, and doe publickly profeſſe that it is the ſeede of the Church, yet wee ſuffer no ſtranger to offer Infants to Baptiſme in our Churches, who hath not made publique profeſſion of his faith, and willingly ſubmitted himſelfe to the Diſcipline of the Church, leſt otherwiſe they who preſent their children to Baptiſme, might in time plead that they belong to our Churches, and ſo ſhould deceive the Engliſh Churches and their Miniſters. To thoſe which preſented Infants to Baptiſme, they propounded three queſtions, the firſt was; Are theſe Infants which yee offer the ſeed of this Church, that they may lawfully be here baptized by our Miniſtery? &c. Anſwer, Yea. This Inſtance is the more to be regarded, becauſe Alaſco affirmeth in the preface of that Book, that this libertie was by the King granted to them out of his deſire to ſettle alike reformation in the Engliſh Churches, which in effect you ſee the ſame with out practiſe in this particular.

Reply.

THe practiſe of the Church of ſtrangers in London, recorded by John Alaſco, is farre different from your judgement and practiſe, not in ſome by-circumſtances, but in the maine point in queſtion; for your judgement is that true viſible beleevers, baptized and partakers of the Lords Supper in other Churches not yet gathered into Church-eſtate or fellowſhip, have no right or intereſt in the Seales, (they nor their ſeede.) But this Church of ſtrangers held no ſuch opinion as their own words (which you have omitted) doe plainly ſpeake. And Paul teſtifyeth (ſay they) that by Chriſts Ordinance the Church it ſelfe without exception of any member of it, is to be accounted cleane or holy by the miniſtery of Baptiſme. Whence we may eaſily ſee, that Baptiſme doth neither belong to thoſe who are altogether without the Church, nor to be denyed to any member of the Church. Secondly, They held communion with the Church of England as one and the ſame with theirs. For ſo they profeſſe: Yet nevertheleſſe, that we may openly ſhew that the Engliſh Churches and ours are one and the ſame Church (though we differ ſomewhat from them both in language and Ceremonies) We doe not refuſe that the Engliſh may as publick witneſſes of the Church offer the Infants of our members to Baptiſme in our Churches, if they have both the uſe of our language and a certain teſtimony of their piety. As in like manner our members are accuſtomed to offer the Infants of the Engliſh to Baptiſme in the Engliſh Churches. If your judgement be this of the Engliſh Churches, your judgement in acknowledging us members of true Churches, and practiſe in debarring viſible beleevers and their ſeede from the Seales, are oppoſite the one to the other. Thirdly, This order was obſerved by them to prevent the impoſtures of ſome, who whilſt they avoyded all Churches, pretended to the Engliſh, that they were joyned to the ſtrangers, and to the ſtrangers that they were joyned to the Engliſh. But you debarre knowne Chriſtians who deſire to joyne themſelves with you, not to prevent impoſtures of them who avoyde all Churches: yea, you debarre them as men having no right to the Sacraments, becauſe they be not in Church-fellowſhip: and herein you can ſhew no preſident ancient or moderne, either from Scripture or Monuments of the Church: And as your practiſe is without example, ſo without warrant from the word of God. And this is the maine reaſon why we cannot conſent unto you in this particular which we thus propound.

1 Reaſon.

THat ſacred order which God hath ſet in his viſible Church for all his Saints to keep and walk by, that is religiouſly to be obſerved. But for men to ſet up that as a neceſſarie order which God never allowed, approved, or commanded, is great preſumption. Now the Lord hath not ordained that a man ſhould be a ſet member of a particular Societie, or body politique of faithfull people joyned together in ſpirituall Church-fellowſhip by Covenant, before he be admitted unto the Lords Supper, or that the parents ſhould be actuall viſible ſet members of ſome particular diſtinct body before their children be baptiſed. They that beleeve in Jeſus Chriſt have received the word of promiſe and walk therein, they and their children are within the Covenant, and have right and title to the Seales of the Covenant, but in their order, the infants to baptiſme, parents baptiſed, to the Lords Supper. And if in that ſtate by divine grant they have intereſt to the Sacraments, the Church in debarring them becauſe they be not yet grown into one diſtinct ſeparate ſocietie of mutuall covenant, doth exceed the bounds of her commiſſion. For a miniſteriall power onely is committed to the Church to admit or refuſe them who are to be admitted or refuſed by authoritie from God: But the Church if ſhe thruſt beleeving parents from the Supper of the Lord, and their ſeed from baptiſme; ſhe denieth theſe benefits to them who by the grace and gift of God have lawfull right and title thereto.

1. For firſt, the baptiſme of John was true baptiſme, and truly adminiſtred by him: And they that were baptized by him received the ſeales of the Covenant, and were eſteemed members of the viſible Church: But John never demanded of them who came to his baptiſme whether they were entred into ſpirituall fellowſhip by mutuall covenant one with another.Matth. 3. 6, 7. This was not then knowne to be a neceſſarie and eſſentiall point in the lawfull, due, and orderly adminiſtration of the Sacrament. The diſciples of our Saviour made and baptiſed diſciples profeſſing the faith, but not combined into Church-ſtate or fellowſhip. Ioh. 4. 2. and 3. 22. The Apoſtles commiſſion was firſt to teach the Gentiles,Matt. 28. 19. 20. and then to baptiſe them having received their doctrine. And this they carefully obſerved in the execution of their miniſtery upon grounds and reaſons common to them and us: for as ſoone as any man or number of men gladly received the doctrine of ſalvation, and gave their names to Jeſus Chriſt, if they deſired to be baptiſed forthwith they accepted them, never excepting, that they were no ſet members of a diſtinct viſible congregation. When the firſt 3000. converts, being pricked in their conſciences, came to Peter, Act. 2. 37, 38. and the reſt of the Apoſtles, ſaying, Men and brethren, what ſhall we do? Peter returns this anſwer, Repent and be baptiſed every one of you in the Name of Jeſus, &c. For to you is the promiſe made, and to your children, and to all that are afar off, &c. As ſoon as the Samaritanes beleeved, Philip who preached the things that concerned the kingdom of God, Act. 8. 12. they were baptiſed both men and women. Act. 8. 47. & 11. 16. 17. When the Eunuch asked of Philip, See here is water, what doth let me to be baptiſed? he anſwereth not if thou beeſt firſt received as a ſet member into a viſible congregation thou mayeſt: Act. 8. 37. but if thou beleeveſt with all thy heart, thou mayeſt. Can any man forbid water (ſaith Peter, ſpeaking of the Gentiles upon whom was powred the gift of the holy Ghoſt) that theſe ſhould not be baptiſed who have received the gift of the holy Ghoſt as well as we? At that time it was not held a bar ſufficient to keep them from the Sacrament of baptiſme,Act. 10. 47. and 11. 16. 17. becauſe they were not ſet members of a diſtinct ſocietie, which had it been eſſentiall to the lawfull and orderly adminiſtration of the Sacraments, queſtionleſſe it had been obſerved in the firſt Inſtitution and adminiſtration of them. Annanias baptiſed Paul before he was any ſet member of a congregationall Aſſembly. Lydia and her houſhold,Act. 9. 18. the Jaylor and his houſe were baptiſed without regard to their Church-eſtate.Act. 16, 14. 33. For in the ſame night which he was converted, he was baptized with all his houſhold. And this was done not by the Apoſtles onely upon ſpeciall diſpenſation,1. Cor. 1. 17. but by others upon grounds and reaſons common to them,Matth. 28. 19. and all ages, viz. becauſe they were diſciples,Act. 2. 41. and 8. 12, 13, 37. beleeved, gladly received the Word, had received the holy Ghoſt, were called,Helv. conf. c. 20. Gallic. Sect. 35. Anglic. & ab eo neminem qui velit profiteri nomen Chriſti ne infantes quidem Chriſtianorum hominum, &c. Scot. conf. c. 23. and the promiſe was made to them, and to their ſeed, even to all them that were afarre off.

Now if the Apoſtles diſpenſed the ſeales to them that were not in Church-fellowſhip upon common grounds,Belgic. act. 34 Zengerm. conf. de Bapt. infant. pro. 44. Argent. conf. ca. 17. Saxon. confeſ. ca. 14. Palab. conf. Sect. ad uſum vero ipſum, &c. it is not eſſentiall to the lawfull diſpenſation of the ſeales, that all partakers ſhould be under ſuch a covenant. If the baptiſed diſciples, beleevers, ſuch as gladly received the Word, and had received the gift of the holy Ghoſt, then the ſeals of the Covenant belong unto ſuch, and by the grace of God they have right and title unto thoſe priviledges.

2. As we received the Sacraments from God by divine Inſtitution; ſo muſt we learne from him, how and to whom the ſame are to be adminiſtred, obſerving what he hath commanded without addition or diminution. But we have learned from Chriſt the Author of Baptiſme, and the conſtant practiſe of the Apoſtles (the firſt diſpenſers of theſe holy ſeales who beſt underſtood the mind and pleaſure of the Lord herein) that ſuch as be called of God to whom the promiſe is made, who have received the gifts of the holy Ghoſt, beleeved in the Lord Jeſus, profeſſed their faith in him, and repentance for ſins paſt with purpoſe of amendment for the time to come, that ſuch have right unto, and deſiring it ought to be received unto Baptiſme, and are greatly wronged if they be deprived of that unſpeakable benefit.

3. By a lively faith a man is made a living member of Jeſus Chriſt, and hath internall communion with him by the intire profeſſion of Chriſtian faith joyned with conformity of life in righteouſneſſe, and holineſſe, and fellowſhip of love, he is a member of the viſible congregation or flock of Chriſt, though no ſet member of a free diſtinct independant Societie. And Baptiſme is the ſeale of our admiſſion into the congregation or flock of Chriſt; but not evermore of our receiving into this or that particular ſocietie as ſet members thereof. This latter is accidentall to baptiſme, not eſſentiall. It may fall out to be ſo, but it is not ever neceſſarie; nor is the Sacrament to be denyed, nor can we ſay it is imperfectly adminiſtred where it cannot be attained. For the Catholique Church is one intire bodie, made up by the collection and agregation of all the faithfull unto the unity thereof; from which union there ariſeth unto every one of them ſuch a relation to, dependance upon that Church Catholique as parts uſe to have in reſpect of the whole. And this holds true, not onely of ſound beleevers in reſpect of internall fellowſhip with Chriſt their head, and ſo one with another; but of all men profeſſing the true and intire doctrine of faith and ſalvation in reſpect of them that hold and profeſſe the ſame faith of Chriſt, and worſhip God according to his will; whereupon it followeth that neither particular perſons, nor particular guides, nor particular Churches are to worke as ſeverall divided bodies by themſelves, but are to teach, and be taught; and to do all other duties as parts conjoyned to the whole, and members of the ſame flock or ſocietie in generall: And ſo beleevers profeſſing the faith, and walking in holineſſe, may and ought to be admitted to the Seales as actuall members of the Church of Chriſt, and ſheep of his paſture, though not ſet members of one congregationall Church.

4. Not to inſiſt upon this here, that it hath and may fall out many times through ignorance, raſhneſſe, or pride, of a prevailing faction in the Church, that the true members of the Catholique Church, and the beſt members of the Orthodox viſible flock, or Church of Chriſt, may be no actuall members of any diſtinct Societie, and ſhall they for this be accounted men out of Covenant, and their poſteritie be eſteemed aliens and ſtrangers: but if they be in Covenant, then are they holy in reſpect of the Covenant, and their children holy as pertaining to the Covenant,Rob. againſt Ber. pa. 92. and have right to the Sacrament of initiation. Thus Mr. Rob. frameth the argument. The Sacrament of Baptiſme is to be adminiſtred by Chriſts appointment,Matth. 28. 19. and the Apoſtles example onely to ſuch as are (externally,Act. 2. 41. & 8. 12 13. 37. and 10. 47. and 2. 39. and ſo far as men can judge) taught and made diſciples, do receive the Word gladly, do beleeve, and ſo profeſſe, have received the holy Ghoſt, and to their ſeed.1 Cor. 7. 19. And thus the Church of God ever ſince the Apoſtles dayes underſtood the covenant and promiſe, and their practiſe in receiving beleevers and their ſeed to the Seales of the Covenant was anſwerable, as might be ſhewed at large, if it was not a thing confeſſed. Hereunto you anſwer.

Anſwer.

VVHere the holy Ghoſt is given and received (which was the caſe of the Centurion) and where faith is profeſſed according to Gods ordinance (which was the caſe of the reſt) there none may hinder them from being baptiſed, viz. by ſuch as have power to baptiſe them. In the Inſtances given baptiſme was adminiſtred either by Apoſtles or Evangeliſts, not ordinary Paſtors: the perſons baptiſed, if they were members of Churches, had a right to baptiſme in their ſtate, and the Apoſtles being Officers of all Churches might diſpenſe the ſeales to them where ever they came, which yet will not warrant ordinary Officers to do the ſame. Nor is it improbable but that all theſe were in Church-order, Aret. on Act. 18. 1. is of opinion, that the Centurion had a conſtituted Church in his houſe;Act. 8. 27. the Eunuches coming to Jeruſalem to worſhip, argueth him to be a Proſelyte, and member of the Jewiſh Church not yet diſſolved: and therefore upon the profeſſion of the Chriſtian faith capable of Church priviledges at that time. As for Lydia and the Gaylor it appeareth that in the beginning of the Goſpel there was a Church at Philippi which communicated with Paul as concerning giving and receiving:Act. 4. 15. As he expreſly ſaith, before his departure was from Macedonia, which departure was immediately upon the Gaylors converſion. In which reſpect what ſhould hinder that Lydia and the Gaylor ſhould firſt be joyned to the Church, and then to be baptiſed though it be not mentioned in that ſtory? As neither there is mention of a Chriſtian Church, which Paul mentioneth in his Epiſtle to the Philippians. At leaſt it is probable that Lydia was a member of the Jewiſh Church, becauſe ſhe is ſaid to be one that worſhipped God. But if any man think they were not members of any Church yet baptiſed, though we ſee not how it will be proved, yet if it were ſo, the object doth no whit weaken the argument, which ſpeaketh of the ordinary diſpenſation of the ſeales, and not of what was done in an extraordinary way. So that ſuppoſe that in the caſes alledged, baptiſme diſpenſed to ſome that were not in Church-fellowſhip, yet the examples of the Apoſtles and Evangeliſts in ſo doing will not warrant ordinary Paſtors to do the like. The reaſon of the difference why Apoſtles and Evangeliſts might adminiſter Baptiſme out of Church-order, whereas Paſtors and Teachers may not, is double. 1. Becauſe their calling gave them illimited power over all men, eſpecially Chriſtians whereſoever they came. But we do not find that ordinarie Paſtors and Teachers can do an act of power, but onely over their own Church, which hath called them to watch over them in the Lord. 2. Becauſe they were aſſiſted with an immediate direction and guidance of the holy Ghoſt, in the places of their adminiſtration in the caſes alledged. But ordinary Church-Officers are to walke according to ordinary rules of the Scripture in the diſpenſation of the Seales, and not to expect immediate inſpirations and extraordinary revelations for their helpe in ſuch caſes. This difference between Apoſtles and ordinary Church-Officers muſt needs be acknowledged, or otherwiſe a man might from their example juſtifie Baptiſme in private houſes.

Reply.

THis Anſwer ſtands of many parts, wherein things doubtfull are affirmed, and that which more weakeneth the force of the conſideration before alledged, and the Anſwer it ſelfe, then of the reaſon whereunto it is applyed. For

Firſt, If where the holy Ghoſt is given and received, and where faith is profeſſed according to Gods ordinance, there none may hinder them from being baptized, viz. by ſuch as have power to baptize them: Then either men that have received the holy Ghoſt, and profeſſe the faith, be members of the Church, or Baptiſme is not a priviledge of the Church, then it is not eſſentiall to the firſt Inſtitution of Baptiſme, that it ſhould be diſpenced to none but ſuch as were entered into Church-fellowſhip, or were ſet members of a congregationall Aſſembly. Then the Apoſtles in diſpenſing the Seales unto ſuch, or commanding them to be diſpenced, did walk according to the rules of Scripture, and upon grounds common to them and us, viz. they admitted them unto the Sacraments who had right and intereſt to them, according to the minde and pleaſure of the Inſtitutor, not extraordinarily revealed, beſides the common rules, or by ſpeciall diſpenſation and prerogative excepted from the common rule, but made knowne in the Inſtitution it ſelfe. And then the difficultie remaining is onely this, whether a Paſtor or Teacher hath authority from Chriſt to diſpence the Seales of the Covenant to one who hath right and title to them, and doth orderly deſire that benefit becauſe he is not as yet received as a ſet member of that particular ſocietie which your practiſe in admitting of ſet members of other Congregations unto the Seales doth manifeſtly convince. For if both have equall intereſt unto the Seales, the Paſtor upon lawfull ſuite and requeſt hath equall authoritie to receive the one as well as the other.

Secondly, In the particular Inſtances given, it is not probable that Baptiſme was evermore adminiſtred by Apoſtles or Evangeliſts; For before the death of Chriſt, the Diſciples baptized when they were properly neither Apoſtles nor Evangeliſts:Joh 4, 2, 3. & 3. 27. After the death of Chriſt (not to inſiſt upon conjectures whether any aſſiſted the Apoſtles in the baptizing of the firſt three thouſand converted) it is not certaine, whether Peter baptized Cornelius and his family,Act. 10. 48. or commanded others then preſent with him to baptize them:Whit. de Sacra. q. 3. de Bap. cap. 2. pa 260. the words may be read: Et juſſit eos baptizari in nomine Domini. Syr. & Arab. Praecepit eis ut baptizarentur. The Interlineary gloſſe leaveth it doubtfull, Aſſociis ſuis vel a ſeipſo. Others are of opinion that Peter did baptize them himſelfe. It cannot be proved that Philip and Ananias were both Evangeliſts,Act. 8. 12. & 9. 18. when the one baptized the Samaritans and the Eunuch, 1 Cor. 1. 17. the other Paul. Paul himſelfe baptized but a few as he teſtifieth of himſelfe, and reaſon to convince that others converted by his preaching were baptized by Evangeliſts, we know not any. And if Philip, Ananias, and others might baptize ſuch as had right and title to the Seales, being as yet no ſet members of any particular Congregation: and a Congregation deſtitute of their proper Paſtor, may deſire another to baptize their Infants, and diſpence the Sacrament of the Supper to them in that their neceſſitie. And if the members of one Congregation may lawfully communicate in another, then may the Paſtors of particular Congregations upon occaſion admit to the Seales of the Covenant ſuch known and approved Chriſtians, as have right and title thereunto, and duely and orderly require the ſame; for of all theſe the reaſon is like and perpetuall.

Thirdly, It is very improbable that the perſons baptized, were in Church-ſtate or order. If they were members of the Jewiſh Church not yet diſſolved, this is not to the purpoſe; for men have not right to Baptiſme, becauſe they were members of the Jewiſh Church, but becauſe Diſciples and (as you ſay) joyned together in Covenant, and have fellowſhip and calling of their Miniſter, who is to diſpence the Seales unto them. And Baptiſme is the Sacrament of initiation, not into the Jewiſh but the Chriſtian Churches. Secondly, when you ſay, the Seales in ordinary diſpenſation are the priviledges of the Churches. There are no Miniſters but of particular Churches. Baptiſme and the Lords Supper are to be adminiſtred onely to the members of the Church. No ſocietie may lawfully deſire the Seales, unleſſe they have joyned in the choice and calling of their Minister. Beleevers not yet joyned in Church-order are without. Doe yee not in all theſe underſtand a Chriſtian ſocietie, Againſt B. pa. 88. united in a Church-way, &c. which cannot agree to the members of the Jewiſh Church, not yet diſſolved. Thirdly, The conſtitution of the Church (ſaith Mr. Robin.) is the orderly collection and conjunction of the Saints into and in the Covenant of the New Teſtament; but the members of Jewiſh Churches not yet diſſolved, were not in ſuch conſtitution. If the Eunuch and Centurion were proſelytes and members of the Church of the Jewes; The Samaritanes whom Philip baptized were not ſo. And that any Gentiles, or the Gailor whom Paul baptized in the Apoſtles times, were ſet members of a Chriſtian Aſſembly before baptized, is very ſtrange. If there was a Church at Philippi, yet the Gailor who was baptized and converted the ſame night, could not be a ſet member by ſolemne admiſſion before Baptiſme. It is ſaid the Apoſtles baptized theſe perſons in an extraordinary way. But in this practiſe of the Apoſtles two things are to be conſidered. 1. The circumſtance of the action. 2. The qualitie or ſubſtance of the act. In ſome circumſtances the baptizing of ſome of theſe perſons might be extraordinary, but the ſubſtance and qualitie of the action was grounded upon rules perpetuall and common to us with them.

1. That is done in an extraordinary way, which by peculiar priviledge of diſpenſation is made lawfull to ſome one or few men, which is unlawfull to all others, not having the ſame diſpenſation, but where the ground and reaſon of the action is common: we muſt not conceive the thing to be done in an extraordinary way by ſpeciall diſpenſation. What was done by the Apoſtles upon ſpeciall revelation and immediate direction, beſides the ordinary and common rule, in that wee are not to immitate or follow them, becauſe we have not their warrant. But what they did upon reaſons and grounds reaching unto us no leſſe then unto them, in that we have the ſame libertie, allowance, or commandement that they did walk by. In one and the ſame action there may be and oft is ſomething ordinary, ſomething extraordinary or peculiar to ſpeciall times or perſons. So it was in the Apoſtles adminiſtration of the Seales: but in every place where they came by illimited power (as you ſpeake) they did baptize Diſciples, if they did baptize; this was proper to them, and could not be communicated to any others by them; For there is no paſſage of Scripture which teacheth this, that one Officer may communicate his power to another, or doe that which particularly belongeth to his office by a Deputie: But that they baptized beleevers profeſſing their faith in the Lord Jeſus, and repentance towards God, ſuch as had gladly imbraced the Word, and received the gifts of the holy Ghoſt: this was common to them with all Paſtors and Teachers, becauſe they did it, not by power illimited or ſpeciall diſpenſation, but upon this ſtanding perpetuall reaſon, that the promiſe was made to them and to their ſeede, and to as many as the Lord ſhall call, that they had received the holy Ghost, and the kingdome of heaven belonged to them. And if the grounds and reaſons of their practiſe be common reaching to us, no leſſe then unto them, the practiſe it ſelfe was not extraordinary. To ſay nothing that this Anſwer will not ſtand with the former; for if the parties baptized were ſet members of particular Societies, the Apoſtles did not baptize them in an extraordinary way, they did it by the guidance and direction of the Spirit, that is true, but not by guidance of diſpenſation, or prerogative, whereby that was made lawfull without ſuch inſpiration had been unlawfull. But they were infallibly guided to doe that which was according to the word of God, and might ſtand for our direction: that in caſe it be orderly deſired a Paſtor hath authoritie in his owne Congregation, to receive knowne and approved Chriſtians to the ſeales of the Covenant, hath been proved before. If the Apoſtles diſpenced the ſeales onely to the Church, Diſciples, faithfull, who received the doctrine of ſalvation with gladneſſe of heart, and were partakers of the holy Ghoſt, then they diſpenced the ſeales in an ordinary way, for ſuch have title and intereſt to the ſeales by the Inſtitution and appointment of God. And every Paſtor by his Office may and ought to diſpence the ſeales unto ſuch, within the bounds and limits of his calling: But the Apoſtles diſpenced the ſeales onely to the Church, Diſciples, faithfull, &c.

2. An Argument followeth neceſſarily from particular example to a generall; when one particular is proved by another particular, by force of the ſimilitude common to the whole kinde, under which thoſe particulars are contained: But the practiſe of the Apoſtles in baptizing Diſciples and faithfull, by force of ſimilitude common to the whole kinde, agreeth with the practiſe of Miniſters receiving to Baptiſme the ſeed of the faithfull, though as yet not ſet members of any particular ſocietie, In ſome circumſtances there may be difference when yet the reaſon is ſtrong, if the difference be not in the very likeneſſe it ſelfe whereupon the reaſon is grounded. One circumſtance that is materiall to the point may overthrow the likeneſſe pretended, and twenty different circumſtances, if they be not to the point in hand make no diſſimilitude. Now in this matter wee ſpeake of, no circumſtance is or can be named why we ſhould thinke it lawfull for the Apoſtles to baptize Diſciples as yet being no ſet members of particular ſocieties, and the ſame ſhould be unlawfull in all caſes for ordinary Paſtors in their particular Congregations, though it be deſired.

3. What is done by extraordinary diſpenſation, that is lawfull for them onely who have received ſuch diſpenſation, and by them cannot be communicated to others. But the Apoſtles baptized by others ſeldome by themſelves, as hath been ſhewed.

4. We might urge the rule which a reverend Elder among you, giveth in another matter, See J. D. Ap. (ſcil.) Thoſe examples which are backed with ſome divine precept,Sect. 12. pa. 152, 153, 154. or which are held forth in the firſt Inſtitution of an ordinance, being part of the inſtitution, or which were the conſtant lawfull actions of holy men in Scripture, not civill but ſacred ſo binde us to imitation, as that not to conforme thereunto is ſinne. For the Aſſumption to this Propoſition, it is plaine and naturall: But the practiſe of the Apoſtles in receiving the faithfull, Diſciples, &c. is backed with divine precept, held forth in the firſt Inſtitution, and was their conſtant lawfull practiſe, agreeable to the practiſe of all others who were imployed in that ſervice; Ergo, &c.

5. In the firſt conſideration, you prove the Seales to be the priviledge of the Church in ordinary diſpenſation, by this paſſage of Scripture, Then they that gladly received the Word were baptized: but if Apoſtles baptize by extraordinary diſpenſation in your ſenſe this teſtimony is inſufficient for that purpoſe.

2 Reaſon.

OUr ſecond reaſon. In due order, the Seales belong to them to whom the grant is given, viz. Baptiſme to the ſeed of the faithfull, and the Lords Supper to beleevers, able to try and examine themſelves: But the grant is vouchſafed to the faithfull and their ſeed, forgiveneſſe of ſinnes, ſanctification, adoption, and what other good things are promiſed in the covenant of grace are the grant or good things ſealed in the Sacrament. But thoſe are granted to beleevers according to the covenant; and they are ſo linked together, that under one promiſed all are underſtood; and if one be vouchſafed, none is denied. When God promiſeth to circumciſe the heart, the forgiveneſſe of ſinnes is implyed. And when Circumciſion is ſaid to be the Seale of the righteouſneſſe of faith,Deut. 30. 6. the circumciſion of the heart by ſpirituall regeneration is included.Rom. 10. 6, 7, 8, 9. To whomſoever then the ſpirituall gift, or inward grace of the covenant is given and granted,Rom. 4. 11. to them the Seales of that gift and grant doth belong in their due order.Gen. 17. 11, 12 and 26. 4. But the ſpirituall gift or grace which is the thing ſignified in the Sacrament, is freely granted to true beleevers, who have received the doctrine of ſalvation, and walk in the wayes of truth and righteouſneſſe, therefore the priviledges of the Seales belong unto them. To this you anſwer.

The ſcope of the Apoſtle in the place, Rom. 4. 11. is not to define a Sacrament, nor to ſhew what is the proper and adequate ſubject of the Sacrament; but to prove by the example of Abraham that a ſinner is juſtified before God, not by works but by faith. Thus as Abraham the Father of the faithfull was juſtified before God, ſo muſt his ſeed be (that is, all beleevers whether Jews or Gentiles, circumciſed or uncircumciſed) for therefore Abraham received circumciſion which belonged to the Jews to confirm the righteouſneſſe which he had before, while he was uncircumciſed, that he might be the Father of both: but leſt any one ſhould think his circumciſion was needleſſe if he was juſtified by faith before circumciſion; he addeth that his circumciſion was of no uſe as a ſeale to confirme to him his faith, and the righteouſneſſe which is by faith: yet as Juſtification is not the onely thing that Circumciſion ſealed, but the whole Covenant alſo made with Abraham and his ſeed was ſealed thereby; ſo Abraham is to be conſidered in uſing circumciſion not ſimply, or onely as a beleever without Church relation, but as a confederate beleever, and ſo in the ſtate and order of a viſible Church. Though the Apoſtle maketh mention of the righteouſneſſe of faith as ſealed thereby, which was not that which ſerved for his purpoſe.

Now that Circumciſion alſo ſealed the Church-Covenant, may appear from Gen. 17. 9. 10, 11. where you may find that Abraham and his ſeed, though beleevers, were not circumciſed till God called them into Church-Covenant; and there is the ſame reaſon & uſe of Baptiſme to us which ſerveth to ſeal our juſtification as circumciſion did,Act 2. 38. yet not that alone, but alſo the whole covenant with all the priviledges of it,Gal. 3. 26. 27. as Adoption, Sanctification, and fellowſhip with Chriſt in affections,Tit. 3. 5. and the ſalvation of our ſouls,Mat. 20. 23. and the reſurrection of our bodies. And not onely the covenant of grace which is common to all beleevers:1 Pet. 3. 21. but Church-Covenant alſo which is peculiar to confederates.1 Cor. 15. 19. According to that of the Apoſtle, By one Spirit we are baptized into one body, 1 Cor. 12. 13. And by one bodie he meaneth that particular Church of Corinth whereunto he writeth and ſaith, Now ye are the body of Chriſt, and members in particular, ver. 27. And ergo Church-memberſhip is required as well to the orderly partaking of Baptiſme as it was of Circumciſion. Nor do we find that circumciſion was adminiſtred to all that were in the Covenant of grace (as all beleevers were) but onely to ſuch of them as were joyned to the people of the God of Abraham. Melchizedech was under the covenant of grace, ſo was Lot, ſo was Job and his foure friends; yet we no where read that they were circumciſed, nor do beleeve they were. So that if Circumciſion was adminiſtred to none but thoſe that were joyned together in Abrahams familie, and to the Church of God in his ſeed, then may not baptiſme in ordinarie courſe be adminiſtred to any beleevers now, unleſſe they be joyned to the Church of Chriſt, for parum par eſt ratio. But the firſt is true, Ergo, the ſecond alſo.

Reply.

THe particulars in this Anſwer hath been examined alreadie, and might have well been paſſed over, becauſe it is tedious to repeat the ſame things againe and againe. Two things are affirmed by you.

1. That the ſcope of the Apoſtle, Rom. 4. 11. was not to define a Sacrament, nor to ſhew what was the proper and adequate ſubject of a Sacrament. But this weakneth no part of the argument, for if the Apoſtle do not fully define a Sacrament, nor mention every particular benefit or prerogative ſealed in the Sacrament; yet he ſheweth ſufficiently to whom the Sacraments in due order do appertaine, even to the heires of ſalvation, to them that are juſtified by faith, and walk in the ſteps of our Father Abraham. And thus we argue from the text of the Apoſtle. They that are partakers of the good things ſealed in the Sacrament, to them belong the Seales of the Covenant, according to Gods Inſtitution. But they that are juſtified by faith are partakers of the good things ſealed in the Sacrament, to them belong the Seales of the Covenant according to Gods inſtitution. If Juſtification be not the onely thing that Circumciſion ſealed, this is nothing to the point in hand. For the gifts of the holy Ghoſt is not the onely thing that is ſealed in Baptiſme: But you confeſſe in your Anſwer immediately going before, that they have right to baptiſme who have received the holy Ghoſt; and the reaſon is the ſame of Juſtification. Beſides if Juſtification be not the onely thing that is ſealed in the Sacrament, it is one principall thing which doth inferre the reſt. For the bleſſings of the covenant of grace in Chriſt are inſeparable; where one is named, others are implyed: and where one is given, no one is abſolutely wanting.1 Cor. 1. 30. Chriſt is made of God wiſedome, righteouſneſſe, ſanctification, and redemption: whom God doth juſtifie, them he doth ſanctifie, and them he will glorifie.

2. The ſecond thing you affirme is, that not onely the covenant of grace which is common to all beleevers; but Church-Covenant alſo which is peculiar to confederates is neceſſarie to the participation of the Seales. This ſenſe your words muſt beare, or elſe they reach not the point in hand: but this is that which ſhould be proved ſubſtantially, and not barely affirmed; and which (as we conceive) is contrary to the firſt Inſtitution of the Sacrament, and the lawfull practiſe of John the Baptiſt, our Saviour Chriſt, his Apoſtles, and all others who are recorded lawfully to adminiſter the Seales. In Gen. 17. we find the firſt Inſtitution of circumciſion recorded, and that it was the ſeale of the Covenant to Abraham and his ſeed, to them that were borne in his houſe, or bought with his money: but we find no mention of any Church Covenant beſides the covenant of promiſe which God made with Abraham. There is no mention of any Church-order into which Abrahams family was now gathered more then formerly. God gave circumciſion to Abraham and his ſeed as a ſeale of the righteouſneſſe of faith; but that this family was firſt gathered into Church-order as you ſpeak we cannot beleeve, becauſe the Scripture ſaith it not whether Lot, Job, Melchizedech were circumciſed or not, we will not diſpute; but if they received not the ſeale, we cannot think the reaſon to be becauſe they were not in Church-order as thoſe times required, if any ſuch thing had been required, we cannot think that either they were ignorant of it, or that they walked againſt their light: But according to the diſpenſing of thoſe times we judge as they were viſible beleevers, ſo they walked in that Church-fellowſhip which God preſcribed; and therefore if circumciſion had been the ſeale of ſuch Church-Covenant as you conceive, it ſhould have been given to them no leſſe then to Abrahams family. But of this ſufficient is ſaid before. As for Baptiſme it is the ſeal of the whole Covenant, which the paſſages quoted prove it to be. Whether it be the ſeale of our fellowſhip which Chriſt in affliction, and the reſurrection of our bodies, we leave it to your conſideration: but that it ſhould be a Seal of a Church-Covenant which is peculiar to confederates, that to us is very ſtrange. That it is a ſolemne admiſſion into the Church of Chriſt, and that of neceſſitie it muſt be adminiſtred in a particular ſocietie (though in the paſſage to the Corinthians the myſticall bodie of Chriſt be underſtood) will eaſily be granted. But that it is the ſeale of any other covenant but the covenant of grace we cannot digeſt.

The Sacraments are of God, and we muſt learne of God for what end and uſe they were ordained. But by the Inſtitution or Baptiſme recorded in Scripture we have learned it belongeth to the faithfull, to diſciples, to them that are called of God: and as for any other covenant neceſſarie to the right participation of the Seales, there is deep ſilence of it in the Inſtitution, in the lawfull and approved practiſe of the firſt diſpenſers of theſe ſacred myſteries. Enough hath been ſaid to this matter alreadie, but we will conclude it with the words of that reverend Author whom we have cited many times before upon occaſion. Afterwards (ſaith he) John the Baptiſt walked in the ſame ſteps, and by the ſame rule adminiſtred baptiſme in the Church whereof he was a member, Matth. 3. 6. 7. required of all that came to his baptiſme a profeſſion of repentance, Mark 1. 4. 5. and amendment of life for remiſſion of ſinnes whereof baptiſme was a ſeale, Luk. 13. 3 16. and preached Chriſt to them. This order our Lord Jeſus Chriſt after his reſurrection eſtabliſhed to continue in the Chriſtian Churches,Matth. 28. 19, 20. giving a commiſſion to his Diſciples to preach the Goſpel to the Gentiles,Mar. 16. 15, 16. and to gather all ſuch as ſhould beleeve through the world, as a teſtimonie to them, that the righteouſneſſe of faith did belong to them alſo, and not to the Church of the Jews onely. Accordingly the Apoſtles and ſervants of Chriſt were carefull to obſerve this rule in their adminiſtring baptiſme. Thus Peter when he ſaw thoſe three thouſand ſouls pricked in their hearts, preached unto them concerning repentance,Act. 2. 37. 47. remiſſion of ſin, Chriſt, the promiſe, baptiſme, faith, amendment of life, baptiſed thoſe that gladly received his word, and teſtified the ſame by joyning together in the profeſſion thereof.Act. 8. 12. 14. The ſame courſe Philip took with the Church that was gathered in Samaria, where many were baptized, but none till they profeſſed their beliefe of the Goſpel, and their receiving of the Word of God. And therefore it is ſaid expreſly, When they beleeved Philip preaching the things concerning the kingdome of God, and the name of Jeſus Chriſt, they were baptiſed both men and women. Act 9. 11-17. When Ananias was commanded to go and baptiſe Paul, he objected againſt it at firſt, till the Lord aſſured him that he was one to whom the Seale of the Covenant belonged, and then he went and did it.

When Peter and thoſe that came with him ſaw that the holy Ghoſt fell on Cornelius, Act. 10. 43-48. and thoſe that were aſſembled at that time in his houſe, whileſt he ſpake theſe words, To him give all the Prophets witneſſe, that through the Name of Jeſus whoſoever beleeveth on him ſhall receive remiſſion of ſinnes. Peter demanded, Can any man forbid water that theſe ſhould not be baptiſed, which have received the holy Ghoſt as well as we? In this catalogue we ſee profeſſion of faith and repentance required in them that were admitted to partake in the ſeals; but there is not a word of Church-Covenant, either in the Inſtitution or adminiſtration of the Seales before they were admitted to them. That Chriſtians are ſolemnly ingrafted into the body of Chriſt, and into particular Societies by the Seales, is a truth acknowledged on all ſides: but that ever it was deemed neceſſarie, that a Chriſtian ſhould be a ſet member of a particular Congregationall Church before he were admitted to the Seales, or that by divine inſtitution any ſuch thing is ordained as neceſſarie thereunto, that upon the grounds before mentioned we denie, and cannot account it leſſe then an addition to the inſtitution. For if the Sacraments be ſeales of the Covenant of grace, and baptiſme by divine Inſtitution belong to Diſciples, faithfull, Saints, who have gladly received the Word of grace, are juſtified by faith, ſanctified by the Spirit, adopted to be the children of God by grace, and heires apparent to the kingdom of heaven; then to debarre ſuch from the Seales, and their ſeed from Baptiſme, becauſe they be not in Church-Covenant (as you ſpeake) is an addition to the ordinance of grace, and many wayes injurious to the people of God.

Anſwer.

IF the Queſtion had been,V • d. Park. Pol. Eccleſiaſtica. l. 3. c. 1, 2 &c. Whether the power of Excommunication lies in the body of the Congregation, conſiſting of officers and members; our Anſwer ſhould be Affirmative, and according hereunto is alſo our practiſe, and wee hope your judgement and ours are not different herein: But ſeeing the Queſtion is, Whether it is ſo in the body of the Congregation, that what the Major part doth allow that muſt be done, though the Paſtors and Governors, and the reſt of the Aſſembly, doe diſſent upon more ſubſtantiall reaſons. Our Anſwer is Negative, viz. that the power of Excommunication is not ſealed in the Congregation, neither ought it to be ſo in any of the Churches of the Lord Jeſus, who ought not to carry matters by number of votes againſt God, as this Poſition implyeth, but by ſtrength of rule and reaſon according to God. The power of the Apoſtles was not to doe things againſt the truth but for the truth, 2 Cor. 13. 8 and not for deſtruction, but for edification, 2 Cor. 10. 8. And the ſame may be ſaid concerning the power which God hath given to the Church, and if any Church among us have ſwerved from the rule (which is more then we know) we doe not allow them in ſuch a practiſe, but ſhould be ready as the Lord ſhould helpe to convince them of their ſin therein.

Reply.

THis Queſtion is much miſtaken, for the demand is not whether in the Congregation matters ſhould be carryed by number of votes againſt God, as you interpret the Poſition, but whether the power of Excommunication ſo lye in the body of the Congregation as that ſentence muſt proceed in externo foro, according to the vote and determination of the Major part, and ſo whether power of admiſſion of members doe ſo reſide in the communitie, as that they muſt be refuſed whom the Major part refuſe, though the Paſtors and Governors and part of the Congregation be of another judgement, and he admitted whom the Major part doth approve. And though the Church hath received no power againſt God, but for God, yet in the execution of the power no doubt the members of that Church may be of different judgements and affections, wherein the one ſide or other doth erre, and is deceived. Now the Queſtion hereupon moved is, whether the power of the keyes be ſo given and committed to the ſociety of the faithfull, as that in externall Court that act or ſentence muſt ſtand and be in force which the greater part ſhall determine amongſt them which hold the power of the keyes to be given to the Church. SomeFen. Theol. lib. 7. Park. de Pol. lib. 3. c. 1. J. D. Apol. 27. Sect. exam. pa. 238, 239, 240. diſtinguiſh betwixt the power it ſelf wch they give to the Church, and the execution and exerciſe of it, which they confine to the Presbytery: Rob. againſt Ber. pa. 182. By two or three are meant the meaneſt communion or ſocietie of Saints, with or without Officers. Rob. againſt Ber. Certaine obſervations, p. 4. Onely he that is of the true viſible Church and furniſhed with the power of Chriſt, the keyes of the kingdome for the Cenſure can admoniſh his brother in order, and thoſe degrees which the word preſcribeth Mat. 28. 15. 17. Id pa 99. The power as to receive in, ſo to cut off any member is given to the whole body together of every Chriſtian Congregation, and not to any one member apart, or to more members ſeque • tred from the whole, uſing the meeteſt number for pronouncing the Cenſures, Id. pa. 124-126. Others give the power of the keyes with the exerciſe thereof to the whole body of the Church, or if in the diſpenſation they attribute any thing to the Officers, it is but as ſervants of the Church, from whom they derive their authoritie. By Church alſo ſome underſtand the communitie of the faithfull, together with their officers and guides. And here lyeth the ſtone at which they of the Seperation ſtumble, and which we conceive to be your judgement and practiſe, wherein we required your plaine anſwer, with your reaſons, but have received no ſatisfaction. You referre us to Mr. Parkers reaſons to prove the power of the keyes to belong to the whole Church, who are of farre different judgement from Mr. Parker in the point it ſelfe. And if your judgement and practiſe be according to that of the Seperation (which we feare) you diſſent from him, and we cannot but diſſent from you upon theſe conſiderations.

1. No power agreeth to the multitude or communitie of the faithfull, but that which is given them of the Lord by his poſitive Law; For the whole ſpirituall power for the gathering and government of his Church is given to Chriſt as Mediator. And if the power of the keyes be derived from,If the brethren have libertie in the ordinance of Propheſying, they have alſo libertie in the other ordinance of Excommunication, for they are both of the ſame nature; Looke to whom Chriſt gave the one key of Knowledge, to them he gave the other key of Diſcipline, Rob. againſt B • rn. pa, 238, 239. and communicated by Chriſt unto his Church, of neceſſitie it muſt draw its originall from divine poſitive Law, and can agree to none but as it is communicated. But the communicated power of the keyes with the execution thereof, Chriſt hath not given immediately to the whole multitude, but to ſome perſons and Officers deſigned and appointed thereunto. Peruſe the ſeverall paſſages of Scripture, wherein power and authoritie of preaching the Goſpel, adminiſtring the Sacraments, binding and looſing is given to the Church: and it is apparent that diſtinct ſeverall perſons are ſpoken of, and not the whole communitie; Goe teach all Nations, Mat. 28. 19 28. and baptize them, &c. Whoſe ſinnes yee remit, they are remitted, &c. Joh. 20. 21, 22. & 21. 15, • 6. Feed my Lambes, feed my ſheepe, &c. Were theſe things ſpoken to the whole communitie, or to ſpeciall perſons?

2. If Chriſt gave this power to the communitie, was it from the beginning of the Church, or tooke it effect after the Churches were planted and eſtabliſhed by the Apoſtles. Not the firſt, for then the Apoſtles themſelves ſhould derive their power from the communitie and ſocietie of the faithfull,Gal. 1. 1. which they did not,Ioh 21. 22. but from Chriſt immediately, both in reſpect of gifts and graces,Whit. de pont. q. 8. c. 2. 3. their calling it ſelfe, and the deſignation of their perſons.

It is ſaid the power of the keyes given to the Apoſtles was given to the Church, In tuitu ejuſdem tanquam finis & totius. And it is true the Apoſtles were given to the Church, and the power they received was for the good of the whole; but this is not enough. That power may be ſaid to be received immediately by the Church, as the firſt receptacle of it, and from it derived to others. But this power muſt be in the communitie as the firſt ſubject, from whom it commeth to the Officers. As the power of ſeeing is not onely given in tuitu hominis, as the end of it, and the totum to whom it agreeth, but is in homine as the firſt ſubject from which it commeth to the eyes1 Cor. 3. 22. & 4. 1. The Apoſtles and other Governors were given of Chriſt for the Church as for their end, 1 Tim. 3. 15. Authoritas rectorum pro dono quidem eccleſiae à Chriſto data eſt, ſed non pro dono abſoluto, ut penes totam Eccleſiam reſideat cui datur, ſed pro dono conditionali, ut rectoribus ipſis communicetur ad totius aedificationem, Park. de Polit. lib. 3. cap. 8. and all their authoritie was given unto them for the Church as for the whole: but the authoritie it ſelfe was immediately derived from Chriſt, and is not in the Church as the immediate ſubject, nor derived from the Church, but from Chriſt the King of the Church. The authoritie of Governors is given of Chriſt for a gift to the Church, but not for a gift abſolute, that it may reſide in the power of the whole Church, to whom it is given, but for a conditionall gift communicated to the Governors themſelves for the good of the whole. It is one thing then to aske for what end or uſe the keyes are given,1 Cor. 12. 7. another to whom. To every one is given the declaration of the Spirit for profit,1 Cor 3. 12. i. e. for the good of the Church.1 Tim 3. 15. But was this gift given to the communitie of the faithfull firſt and immediately?1 Cor. 4. 1. No; By gift and poſſeſſion it was given • o ſome, but for uſe and profit it was publick.

After the Churches were eſtabliſhed it tooke not effect; for then it muſt be ſhewed where Chriſt committed the power of God, firſt to the Apoſtles, and after to the communitie of the faithfull. But that is no where to be found in holy ſcripture.Act. 20. 28. The Miniſters and guides of the Church were immediately of Jeſus Chriſt,Eph. 4. 8. 11. from whom immediately they derive their power and authoritie,1 Co. 12. 28, 29 by whom they are ſet over their charge, in whoſe Name they muſt execute their office,2 Co 5. 19, 20. whoſe Stewards, Legates and Ambaſſadors they are,Tit. 1. 7. and unto whom they muſt give an account. Yea, Paſtorſhip is the gift of Chriſt no leſſe then Apoſtleſhip, and that the more becauſe it is perpetuall in the Church; every Paſtor is not immediately called, but the Office and order of Paſtors, the calling, authoritie and juriſdiction is immediately from Chriſt,Succeſſor habet juriſdictionē ab eo a quo praedeceſſor, alioqui non verè ſuccedit. But Paſtors and Teachers are the Succeſſors of the Apoſtles. Whit. de pont. q. 8. c. 3. and not from the Church: The Steward is appointed of the Maſter of the family alone, and hath all his authoritie and juriſdiction from him: Every Ambaſſador in the cauſe of his ambaſſage doth immediately depend upon him from whom he is ſent. But if the function, order and authoritie of Paſtors and Teachers, be immediately from Chriſt, then it is not received from the Church as the immediate receptacle. Thus Proteſtant Divines diſpute againſt Papiſts.Fr: Victor rel. 2. de poteſt Eccleſiae q. 2. Alphonſ. de Caſtr. li. 2. c. 24. de inſta. haeret. Whit. de pont. q. 8. c. 1. If Biſhops receive their power and authority of exerciſing immediately from Chriſt, by mandate, miſſion, and commiſſion from him, then they derive it not from the Pope. And if Presbyters receive their order juriſdiction and power of execution from Chriſt by his mandate and Commiſſion, then they receive it not from the Biſhop. And by the ſame reaſon, if the power of the keyes be the immediate gift of Chriſt to his Miniſters, then they derive not their power and authoritie from the people. It is uſually objected that the Church cannot convey what ſhe never had, but the people may Elect their Paſtor. Whereunto the anſwer is direct and plaine. Nothing can give that which it had not formally or virtually, unleſſe it give it as an inſtrument miniſtring to one who hath it, but ſo it may give what it never had, nor is capable of. A Steward may give all the offices in his Maſters houſe, as miniſterially executing his Maſters pleaſure. Electors have not evermore authoritie over him whom they elect: but power and authoritie onely to apply that power to him whom they chooſe. The power and authoritie whereunto a Miniſter is elected, is not in the people that elect him, but from Chriſt the King and head of his Church, who out of power doth conferre that office upon him. If we conſider what men give, or give 〈◊〉 univerſally, it muſt be deemed that any men can make Miniſters,Cham. panſtr. • om. 2. lib. 11. c. 18. ſect. 11. becauſe they give not the office, gifts, or authoritie, which are from Chriſt •• ene.

3. If Eccleſiaſticall and ſpirituall power be in the multitude and community of the faithfull, the Church doth not onely call, but make Officers out of power and vertue received into her ſelfe, and then ſhould the Church have a true lordlike power in regard of her Miniſters.

In the Church the Officers are the Miniſters of the people, whoſe ſervice the people is to uſe for adminiſtration and executing their judgements, that is, pronouncing the judgement of the Church (and of God firſt) againſt the obſtinate. Rob. againſt Ber. p. 136. The Officers in the Church are both Chriſts and the peoples Servants and Miniſters. Id. p. 165.

For as he that will derive authority to the Church maketh himſelfe Lord of the Church: ſo if the Church derive authoritie to the Miniſters of Chriſt, ſhe maketh herſelf Lady and Miſtris over them in the exerciſe of that authoritie over them. For all men know it is the property of the Lord and Maſter to impart authoritie. Did the Church give power and authoritie to the Paſtors and Teachers, ſhe might make the Sacraments and preaching which one doth in order no Sacraments, no preaching. For it is the order inſtituted of God that gives being and efficacie to theſe ordinances. And if the power of ruling, feeding, and diſpenſing the holy things of God, do reſide in the faithfull, the Word and Sacraments in reſpect of diſpenſation and efficacie ſhall depend upon the order and inſtitution of the Societie. If the power of the keyes be derived from the community of the faithfull, then are Officers immediately and formally ſervants to the Church, and muſt do every thing in the name of the Church, Rule, feed, bind, looſe, remit and retaine ſinnes, preach and adminiſter the Sacraments, then they muſt performe their Office according to the direction of the Church more or leſſe,Ames Bel-enerv. tom. 2. l. 3. c. 1. Miniſtri Eccleſiaſtici ſunt Eccleſiae tanquam objecti circa quod verſantur miniſtri ſunt Chriſti tanquam principalis cauſae & Domini à quo pendent miniſtri ſed nullo modo epiſcoporum. ſeldome or frequent, remiſſe or diligent. For from whom are they to receive direction how to carry themſelves in their Office but from him or them from whom they receive their Office, whoſe works they do, and from whom they expect their reward? If their power and office be of God immediately, they muſt do the duties of their place according to his deſignement, and to be accountable unto God: But if their power and function be from the Church, the Church muſt give account unto God, and the Officers unto the Church whom ſhe doth take to be her helpers.

If it be ſaid that God will have the Church to chuſe Officers to execute the power committed unto her. The anſwer is, either God will have her elect officers of his deſignement to do his work according to that power which he ſhall give them, and by his direction, and then they are Gods ſervants, and not the Churches, and receive their charge and function immediately from God, and not from the people: or he leaveth it to the arbitriment of the Church, to chuſe according to their pleaſure ſuch as muſt receive charge and authoritie from her. And then they muſt execute their office in her name ſo as ſhall ſeeme good unto the Church, and neither longer nor otherwiſe. For if the Miniſters of the Church be ſubject to God and Chriſt by the intervention of the people onely, they have it from them, and not from God: but they preach or adminiſter the Sacraments, rule, or feed, and if they depend immediately upon the faithfull, viz. two or three gathered together in covenant, they muſt draw what in order they are to preach unto them in the name of the Lord;Omnis legatus in causâ legationis ſuae immediatè pendet ab eo à quo mittitur, & inſtrumento mandatorum in corrupto eſt indelebilis. For from him muſt the Ambaſſadour learne his arrand from whom he receiveth his Commiſſion. We forbeare to preſſe theWe denie the order of Elders to be ſuperiour to the order of Saints, ſince it is not an order of maſterſhip but of ſervice. Rob. againſt Bern. pa. 201. It were a ſtrange thing that men could have no command over their ſervants, as I have oft ſhewed the Church-officers to be her ſervants. Id. p. 214. The order of ſervants is inferiour to the order of them whoſe ſervants they are: but the order of Church-officers is an order of ſervants, and they by office to ſerve the people, Id. p. 215. 227. confeſſions and reaſons of ſuch as maintaine this opinion, that the officers of Chriſt be both of and for the people, and that in relation as the officers are called ſervants, the Church may be called Lord.

4. Moreover if the power of the keyes be given firſt and immediately to the community of the faithfull, what reaſon can be alledged why in defect of Officers the Church might not rule, governe, feed, bind, looſe, preach and adminiſter the Sacraments, or if any faile in any office, why ſhe might not ſupply that want by her power. For the power of the keyes doth containe, both authority and exerciſe, power being given to this end, that it might be exerciſed as it is vouchſafed. But the Church when ſhe is deſtitute of Officers, cannot exerciſe thoſe acts of rule, nor by her power ſupply the want of any Officer. Onely ſhe hath a miniſtery of calling one whom Chriſt hath deſcribed, that from Chriſt he may have power of office given him in the vacant place. For theſe reaſons (not to inſiſt on any more) we judge the multitude or community of the faithfull not to be the immediate receptacle of Eccleſiaſticall authoritie, and ſo the power of excommunication not to belong to them. If conſent of the Churches of God be asked in this point (to omit others) the Churches of Scotland ſpeake fully and expreſly for us, in the ſecond book of Diſci. cap. 1. The Church as it is taken for them that exerciſe ſpirituall functions in the congregation of them that profeſſe the truth, hath a certain power granted by God according to which, it uſeth a proper Juriſdiction and government exerciſed to the comfort of the whole flocke. Power is an Eccleſiaſticall authority granted by God the Father through the Mediator Jeſus Chriſt unto his Kirke, gathered, and having its ground in the word of God, and to be put in execution by them unto whom the ſpirituall government of the Church by lawfull calling is committed. The policie of the Kirke flowing from this power is an order or ſpirituall forme of government which is exerciſed by the members appointed thereto by the Word of God, and therefore is given immediately to the office-bearers by whom it is exerciſed to the weale of the whole body.

Ʋt univerſam ſcripturam evolvat D. Erastus, nunquam tamen inventurum verba Ligandi, & Solvendi aliis quam publico ministerio fungentibus, & quidem metaphoricè, divine videlicet & ſpiritualis poteſtatis reſpectu, tribui. Sunt enim judi • ialia haec verba. &c. Beza de Presb▪ p 60. See Helvet. conf. ca. 18. Sect. Nunc ergo, &c. Belgic. confeſſ. art. 3. Argentinenſ. conf. art. 13. Bohem. confeſ. art. 14.

Anſwer.

OUr Anſwer hereto is briefly this. We judge it expedient and moſt according to rule, that ſuch brethren as are in covenant with the Church, and ours as fellow-members, and have committed their ſoules to our charge as Miniſters, ſhould not forſake our fellowſhip, nor obruptly breake away from us when and whither they pleaſe; but firſt approve themſelves therein to their brethrens conſciences, and take their counſell in ſo weightie a matter. For which we propound to conſider theſe two reaſons following. The former is drawne from the nature of the Church-Covenant, which conſiſts in theſe foure particulars.

1. Every member at his admiſſion doth openly profeſſe, and ſolemnly promiſe, that by Chriſts helpe aſſiſting, he will not onely in generall give up himſelfe (as to the Lord to be guided by him, ſo) to the Church according to God to be directed by it, which is no more then the members of the Church of Macedonia, did in a parallel caſe, 2 Cor. 8. 5. but alſo in particular, that he will performe all duties of brotherly love and faithfulneſſe to all the members of the body, as of diligent watchfulneſſe over all his brethren, thereby to prevent ſin, ſo of faithfull admonition after their falls to regaine them to the Lord, from their ſinne, the former being injoyned, Hebr. 3. 13. And the want thereof deeply condemned in Cain, that would not acknowledge that duty of being his brothers keeper, Gen. 4. 9. the latter given in charge to the Church-members of Iſrael by the hand of Moſes, Levit. 19. 17. and ſo by Chriſt himſelf, Matth. 18 15 And by Paul alſo to the Galat. c. 6. 1, 2.

Secondly, the ingagements are not made onely by the members admitted into the Church, but by the Church back again to the member. So that thereby the whole Church in generall, and every member thereof in particular, ſtand as well in conſcience bound to performe all duties of love and watchfulneſſe to him, as he doth to them; And this we do according to the golden rule of love and equitie injoyned by our Saviour, Matth. 7. 12. fearing that contrary practiſe of Scribes and Phariſees ſo much condemned by Chriſt, of laying greater burthens upon others, then we our ſelves are willing to undergo. Matth. 23. 4.

3. Theſe promiſes thus lawfully and mutually made, that member, as alſo the whole Church, are bound not onely every one for himſelfe, actively to performe them, but paſſively alſo to ſuffer his brethren to do thoſe offices upon and towards himſelf: If he neglect the former, he ſhall falſifie his covenant ſo ſolemnly before God, Angels, and men made, and ſo not onely breake promiſe to his brother, contrary to Pſal. 15. 4. but alſo in ſome ſort commit the ſinne of Ananias and Saphira in lying againſt the holy Ghoſt, condemned and puniſhed ſeverely by Gods own hand, Act. 5. 3. 5. 10. If he faile in the latter, he ſhall not onely be guiltie of the ſame ſinne of breach of Covenant with God and man as in the former; but ſhall alſo be guilty of this folly of deſpiſing counſell ſo much condemned, Prov. 12. 15. and 1. 7. and ſhall alſo proclaime this his folly and pride by ſhewing to all the Church that he is wiſe in his own eyes, and leanes to his own wiſedome both reproved, Prov. 3. 7. and 23. 4. Seeing need of no further light to be held forth by his brethren, then what he apprehends himſelfe, which is one of the greateſt properties of folly.

4. From all theſe things premiſed, it appears that we can do no leſſe (and yet we do no more) then require a member before he depart according to our covenant thus lawfully, deliberately, and mutually made, to expreſſe to his brethren his deſire of departing, and the place and ſocietie to which he tends, whether to a godly Church where he may be edified; or to ſome corrupt Aſſembly where he may be deſtroyed. And 2. his grounds and reaſons which move him ſo to do, which if they hold good being ſcanned by the Word, he may be not onely confirmed in his way by the conſent and adviſe of many, but counſelled alſo how to manage his departure for his beſt comfort. And ſo after all, ſolemnly with the whole Churches prayers, and bleſſings in the name of Chriſt diſmiſſed: But if his grounds either be none at all, or weake and ſinfull, and that his deſire of departing ſavours of ſelf-will, inordinate love of gaine, raſh precipitancie, or a ſpirit of ſchiſme, more ſtrongly then of ſound reaſon, then what can we do leſſe without breach of Covenant, then in love and tenderneſſe ſhew him his weakneſſe, diſſwade him from his purpoſe, and refuſe to conſent. Yet if after all this we ſee his ſpirit ſtedfaſtly and ſtiffely bent for a departure, then though we dare not act againſt our light by conſenting or counſelling, yet if his ſinne be not apparent, and danger eminent, we uſe rather (through indulgence in caſes of like nature) to ſuſpend our vote againſt him, as not willing againſt his will to detain him, abhorring to make our Churches places of reſtraint and impriſonment. But if any ſhould object that this argument holds firme where this Church-Covenant is allowed to be lawfull, but with ſome it is queſtioned, and with them it avails not. Anſ. Some indeed have queſtioned the neceſſitie of our Church-Covenant, but none (we hope) of theſe our reverend brethren that we write unto do queſtion the lawfulneſſe of ſuch a Covenant being nothing elſe for the matter of it, but a promiſe of doing ſuch Chriſtian duties as the Goſpel of Chriſt requires of all Saints in Church eſtate; for we doe not herein promiſe to performe any new dutie to our brethren which was not before commanded us of the Lord, but onely revive and renew our purpoſes afreſh of performing ſuch duties unto that particular body into which we are then incorporated as were before injoyned in the Word, as to love each other, and to watch over each other out of love for their good, to be ready to give counſell to, and to take counſell from each other,Heb. 13. 1. to prevent ſinne in them, or to gaine them from ſinne.Pro. 12. 19. & 1. 7. 23. All which are plentifully and frequently held forth in the Scriptures; for the defect of which care and watchfulneſſe, all the body ſhall be wrapt in the ſame guilt & puniſhment with the member that commits the ſinne,Gen 4. 4. 9. as the whole Church of Iſrael was in Achans ſinne and puniſhment.Levit. 19. 17. Mat. 18. 15. Gal. 6. 1.

Secondly, Its a thing very reaſonable, and a knowne fundamentall rule in all ſocieties, that he that is incorporate thereto, and ſo participates of the priviledges thereof, ſhould ingage himſelfe to conforme to all ſuch lawfull rites and orders as are expedient for the well-being of that ſocietie, the contrary whereto will be a thing injurious in him to offer, and confuſion to themſelves to accept.

The ſecond ground is drawne from the neceſſitie that may fall upon the body if every particular member ſhould depart at his owne pleaſure. For as every ſocietie, ſo much more a Church of Saints, both from principles of nature and Chriſtianitie alſo, not onely lawfully may, but in dutie are bound to endeavour the preſervation of it ſelfe, and Ergo timely to foreſee and wiſely to prevent all ſuch things as would bring deſtruction to it ſelfe. Now if any member might, when, whither, and wherefore he pleaſe without conſent of the Church depart away from it, this may by unavoydable conſequence diſſipate the whole; for if one man may ſo depart, why may not another alſo, though never ſo uſefull in that body, and whoſe abſence might much ſhake the well-being of it: and if one why not two, ſix, ten, twentie as well? For where will yee ſtop ſeeing any may plead the ſame libertie, and if members may ſo doe why not the Paſtor and Teacher alſo? Seeing they are tyed to him by the ſame relation that he is to them, and ſo the principalls falling, the whole building muſt downe: and if this may be ſo in one Church, why not in all, and ſo Chriſt ſhould have no ſetled Church on earth.

Reply.

IT is one thing abruptly to breake away when and whither they pleaſe, and forſake fellowſhip, another thing not to depart or remove habitation, unleſſe the Congregation will give leave. Alſo it is one thing mutually to compound and agree not to depart from each other without conſent and approbation, another to require a promiſe of all that be admitted into ſocietie, that they ſhall not depart without the Churches allowance. If ſuch a promiſe be required of all members to be admitted, we cannot diſcerne upon what grounds your practiſe is warranted. Firſt, you exclude all ſuch as be not ſet members from the Sacrament of the Supper, and their children from Baptiſme, and yet hinder them from entrance into Church ſocietie, becauſe they cannot promiſe continuance in the place where they are reſident for the preſent. Here we deſire to be ſatiſfied from the word of God by what you require it. Did the Apoſtles ever ſtipulate with ſuch as deſired to be baptized, that they muſt abide in particular ſocietie, and not remove thence without approbation from the Church? or did they deny the ſeales unto them, becauſe they could not make any ſuch promiſe? Was it ever heard of in the Church of God from the beginning thereof unto this day, that any ſuch thing was propounded unto, or required of, members to be admitted into Church-fellowſhip? That Church Covenant which is neceſſary was not in uſe in the Apoſtles times, but the Covenant they entred into bound no man to this condition for ought we reade. They did not preſcribe it, no Church ever yet covenanted it as neceſſary to the preſervation of the body.

Secondly, It pertaines not to the whole Congregation to take notice of, be acquainted with, or judge of the cauſe of every particular members removall. May not a ſervant remove from his Maſter to another Congregation? or the father beſtow his ſonne or daughter in marriage to one of another Congregation, but the whole Church muſt be called to counſell in this matter? If the Aſſembly once grow to be populous, of neceſſitie they muſt be negligent in, or weary of ſuch an heavy taske; and for the preſent, for every one to challenge ſo much authoritie over other is uſurpation. Let it be ſhewed that ever by divine right this power was committed to the Church, and then we will confeſſe it to be expedient and neceſſary. But till then we thinke the Church is over ridged in exacting ſuch a condition of the members, and the members themſelves goe beyond their meaſure as buſi-bodies in other mens matters, and things whereof they are not well able to judge many times, if they arrogate ſuch power unto themſelves wee allow not raſhneſſe, or precipitancy, pride or ſelf-conceitedneſſe, we know it is meete that weightie matters ſhould be mannaged by Councell, but it is not neceſſary to bring every particular thing to the whole Church. In the multitude of Councellors there is peace, but over many Councellors oft cauſeth diſtraction, and different apprehenſions breed delayes. The nature of your Church-Covenant, as you deſcribe it, inferreth not a neceſſitie of bringing every ſuch buſineſſe unto the Church; for you binde your ſelves mutually to watch over one another, and in love to admoniſh one another in the Lord, to prevent ſinne and to encourage in well-doing, as it concerneth every man within the limits of his place and calling. But this eſſentially tyeth not any man to a perpetuall reſidence in one place, for then even occaſionall abſence ſhould be a breach of Covenant, unleſſe it be by conſent and approbation of the Church.

You ſay in your Covenant you promiſe to performe no new dutie to your brethren which was not before commanded of the Lord, but onely revive and renew your purpoſes afreſh of performing ſuch duties to that particular body into which you are then to be incorporated, as were before injoyned in the Word. But in the word of truth, it is not commanded either expreſly or by conſequent, that no member of a Congregation ſhould remove, or occaſionally be abſent from the place of his habitation, before he have acquainted the Church whither he goeth, and upon what occaſions, and whether the place be dangerous, where he is likely to be infected; or ſafe, where he may be edified. Theſe things are matters of weight and to be undertaken with advice, but the knowledge thereof belongeth not to every particular member of the ſocietie. And the Church ſhall burden her ſelfe above meaſure if ſhe take upon her to intermeddle in all ſuch occaſions. Neither is it ſafe to commit the determination of ſuch matters ever to the vote of the multitude, or weight of reaſons, as they ſhall apprehend the matter. And if ſuch buſineſſe muſt be determined on the Lords day, and to goe before the adminiſtration of the Word,Rob. ag. Bern. pa. 230. Sacraments, and almes, leaſt the holy things be polluted by notorious obſtinate offenders, wee feare the time appointed for the exerciſe of Religion ſhall be prophaned with unſeaſonable diſputes. Inſtances might be alledged, if it were a matter to be inſiſted upon.

As for the Covenant it ſelfe which you mutually enter into, if therein you exact nothing but what God requires both for tryall and ſtipulation, far be it that we ſhould diſallow it, but if yee conſtraine men to meddle with things that belong not to them, and winde them up higher then God would, and ſtraine every thing to the pitch that you ſeeme here to doe in this branch a godly and ſober minde may well pauſe before he make ſuch promiſe. All members of the Church are not equally neceſſary to the preſervatiō of the whole body; & if to the removall of ſome, it were expedient to have the cōſent, not only of the whole ſociety, but of neighbouring ſocieties, Miniſters eſpecially, it is very much to draw this to the removall or abode of every particular member. And if any man ſhall not intermeddle with every buſineſſe of this kinde, as queſtioning whether it doth belong to him or no, or not aske the advice of the whole ſocietie, as knowing the moſt to be unfit to counſell in ſuch a caſe, doth he break his Covenant therein, and ſo commit a ſinne in a ſort like the ſinne of Ananias and Saphira? Judge your ſelves if in other caſes you would not cenſure this to be an high incroachment upon Chriſtian libertie, and a ſtrict binding of mens conſciences by humane conſtitutions. May you not expect to heare from your own grounds that herein you have deviſed an expedient, or neceſſary rite or cuſtome to preſerve the unitie, and prevent the diſſolution of the body, which never came into the minde of the Lord Jeſus, the Saviour of the Church, and that in ſo doing (if your expoſition will hold good) you breake the ſecond Commandement. Rites and cuſtomes expedient to prevent confuſion for the time, let them be obſerved as cuſtomes expedient, and what God requires in the examination or admiſſion of members, let that take place according to the preſidents given in the Scriptures, and the conſtant practiſe of the univerſall Church in the pureſt times. But to preſſe cuſtomes onely expedient for the time, as ſtanding rules neceſſary at all times, and for all perſons, to put that authoritie into the hands of men which God never put upon them, to oblige men to intermeddle further in the affaires of men, then the Word doth warrant, to binde the conſcience, and that under ſo heavy a penalty as the ſinne of Ananias and Saphira, where God hath not bound it, and to debarre known and approved Chriſtians from the Seales of the Covenant, becauſe they cannot promiſe as ſetled members to abide and ſtay in the ſocietie, unleſſe they ſhall obtaine leave of the Congregation to depart, and to charge them in the meane ſeaſon to be men, who againſt light refuſe ſubjection to the Goſpel; this is that which we cannot approve, which yet wee ſuſpect will follow from your judgement, and deſire to be reſolved of in your practiſe. And here we intreat leave to put you in minde of that which you have conſidered already, ſchil. That the Church and every member thereof hath entred into Covenant, either expreſly or implicitely to take God for their God, and to keepe the words of the Covenant and doe them,Exod. 24. 37. to ſeeke the Lord with all their hearts,Deut. 2. 14. & 4. 3. 4. & 9. 7. and to walke before him in truth and uprightneſſe: but we never finde that they were called to give account of the worke of grace wrought in their ſoules, or that the whole Congregation were appointed to be Judge thereof.Ezek. 16. 6. 8. You ſtand all of you this day (ſaith Moſes) before the Lord your God, Nū. 23. 48. 50. &c. that thou ſhouldſt enter into Covenant with the Lord thy God. Deut. 29. 10. 11, 12. All the people that were borne in the Wilderneſſe Joſhua circumciſed, but it is incredible to thinke that among that great multitude, there was not one who did not give good teſtimony of the worke of grace in his ſoule: We reade often times that Iſrael after ſome grievous fall and revolt,Joſh 24. 1. 14. 23, 24, 25. renewed their Covenant, to walke with God, to ſerve him onely, and to obey his voyce,Iudg. 2. 8. 11. & 3. 9. 15. & 6. 7. & 10. 10-17. as in the dayes of Joſhua, the Judges, David, Samuel: Alſo Joaſh, Joſiah, and Nehemiah, &c. But no particular enquiry was made, what worke of grace God had wrought in the hearts of every ſingular perſon.2 Chr. 15. 12. But the confeſſion and profeſſion of obedience was taken.2 Kin. 11. 17. & 23. 3. When John Baptiſt began to preach the Goſpel, and gather a new people for Chriſt,2 Chr. 34. 31. he admitted none to Baptiſme but upon confeſſion of their ſinnes;Heb. 10. 29. 30. but we reade of no queſtion that he put forth unto them to diſcover the worke of grace in their ſoules, or repelled any that voluntarily ſubmitted themſelves upon that pretence.Act. 2. 38. & 8. 37. & 19. 17, 18, 19. It appeareth many wayes that when the Apoſtles planted Churches, they made a Covenant between God and the people whom they received. But they received men upon the profeſſion of faith, and promiſe of amendment of life, without ſtrict inquirie what ſound work of grace was wrought in the ſoul. In after ages, ſtrangers from the covenant were firſt inſtructed in the faith, and then baptiſed upon the profeſſion of faith, and promiſe to walk according to the covenant of grace. Now the profeſſion at firſt required of all that were received to baptiſme was that they beleeved in the Father,Act. 8. 37. Sonne, and holy Ghoſt. This was the confeſſion of the Eunuch when he was baptiſed, I beleeve that Jeſus Chriſt is the Sonne of God. The Creed is honoured of the ancients with glorious titles, as the rule of faith, the ſumme of faith, the body of faith, the perſwaſions of faith: but by the Creed they underſtand that rule of faith, and law of faith, and inſtitution of Chriſt which was then given when he was about to aſcend into heaven, and commanded his diſciples, ſaying, Go teach all Nations, &c. It is true, that in after times as occaſion required ſome other Articles were added as explanations of the former, to meet with the hereſies of the times which began to trouble the Church. But for ſubſtance of matter in things to be beleeved, the Church never required other acknowledgement of them that were to be received into the congregation of Chriſts flock, and admitted into her communion. And for things to be done, or the practicall part, ſhe requireth of them that were to be received to baptiſme an abrenuntiation of the devill, the world, and the fleſh, with all their ſinfull works and luſts.

The firſt principles then of the doctrine of Chriſt being received, and the foreſaid profeſſion being made, the Apoſtles, and the Church following the example of the Apoſtles, never denied baptiſme unto ſuch as ſought or deſired it. If this be the Covenant that members admitted into Church-fellowſhip do enter into, and this be all you require of them whom you receive, you have the practiſe of the Apoſtles, and the whole Church in after ages for your preſident. But if you proceed further then thus, and put men to declare what worke of grace God hath wrought in their ſoul, in this or that way, which perhaps is not determined by the word of grace, at leaſt not agreed upon among your ſelves, we beſeech you conſider by what authority you do it, and upon what grounds you ſtand. But we will enter no further upon this matter, becauſe it comes not within the compaſſe of theſe Poſitions, and to attribute ſo much to private letters, as to make them the ground of another diſpute we may not.

Anſwer.

OUr Anſwer to this conſiſts in two branches. 1. In caſe a Miniſter be ſet aſide by the Church meerly through his own default. 2. By the Churches default without any deſert of his. In the former caſe it is evident he ceaſeth to be a Miniſter to them any longer, as appears in foure concluſions.

1. It is cleare from the Word, that a Paſtor or Teacher in theſe dayes hath no Apoſtolicall power over all Churches, but onely limited to that one Church where God hath ſet him. Paul gives not the Elders at Epheſus a generall Commiſſion to go teach all Churches, but to go feed that one flock over which the holy Ghoſt hath made them over-ſeers. Act. 20. 28. So Peter gives direction to Elders to feed that flock of God onely which was among them, and take the over-ſight thereof. 1 Pet. 5. 2.

2. It is as cleare that all this power of feeding which the Miniſter hath in that Church is nextly derived to him from Chriſt by the Church, who hath ſolemnly called him to the work, and promiſed to obey him therein: for if he have it elſewhere, it muſt be either from Chriſt immediately, or from ſome other men deputed by Chriſt to conferre it on him, or he muſt take it up of himſelfe. Not the firſt, for that was proper to the Apoſtles or Apoſtolicall men, therefore Paul proving his Apoſtleſhip, ſaith he was called not of men, nor by men, but by Jeſus Chriſt himſelf. Gal. 1. 1. Not the ſecond, for we never read in Gods Word that any ordinary Officers, or other beſides the Church, that had any Commiſſion given them from Chriſt to call Miniſters unto Churches. Not the third, for no man taketh this honour, viz. of a Prieſt under the Law, or of a Miniſter under the Goſpel, but he that is called of God, Hebr. 5. 4. Therefore it muſt needs be from Chriſt by the Church.

3. As the Church in the name of Chriſt gave this power to a Miniſter to be what he is, and do what he doth amongſt them: when ſuch a Miniſter ſhall make and manifeſt himſelf apparently, unworthy, and unfit to diſcharge the place, which they thus called him unto, ſo that they may diſcerne that Chriſt the head of the Church hath refuſed him, from being a Miniſter unto him. they may then upon as good grounds depoſe him from it, as they called him to it.

4. When a Church hath thus in Chriſts name put forth this power of ſhutting, as before it did of opening to a Miniſter, then he muſt ceaſe to be a Miniſter unto them any more, for we know no ſuch indelible character imprinted upon a Miniſter, that the Miniſtery ceaſing, the Miniſter ceaſeth alſo.

2. In caſe the Church ſhall without cauſe, or ſufficient weightie cauſe, raſhly or wilfully ſet him aſide whom Chriſt hath ſet over them, and whom they ſo ſolemnly called, and promiſed before the Lord to ſubmit unto, and ſo abuſe their power given them by Chriſt; it is deubtleſſe a very great wrong unto the Miniſter, and ſinne againſt Chriſt himſelfe before whom it was done; and not onely Chriſt himſelf will take it ill at their hands, for ſuch contempt done to him in his Miniſters according to Chriſts ſpeech, Luke 10. 16. He that rejecteth you, rejecteth me. And Gods ſpeech, 1 Sam. 8. 7. They have not caſt off thee but me. But even other Churches alſo may admoniſh them. And if they prove obſtinate therein, withdraw the right hand of fellowſhip from them; and concerning the Miniſter himſelf thus depoſed, ſeeing it is done not by Chriſt, but by the Church without Chriſt, yea againſt the mind of Chriſt, we conceive though he be by them deprived of the execution of his miniſtery among them, yet untill he accepts of a call to another people, he doth yet ſtill remain a Miniſter of Chriſt, in whoſe account (notwithſtanding ſuch depoſition) he hath true right of adminiſtration among that people.

Reply.

THe queſtion is of Miniſters unjuſtly forſaken, or driven from the Church or congregation: and your anſwer is for the moſt part of Miniſters ſet aſide or deprived through their own default. We never purpoſed to ſpeak one word for any unworthy Miniſter whom Chriſt hath put out of office, and therefore your labour to prove that ſuch juſtly rejected by the Church are no longer Miniſters might well have been ſaved. But ſetting them aſide, we will in few words examine your concluſions upon which you bind the certainty of that ſentence you paſſe againſt them.

Firſt, it is certain and clear from the Word, that a Paſtor or Teacher neither in theſe dayes hath, nor in any other age of the Church, ought to have Apoſtolicall power over all Churches. The Apoſtles had onely power to ſerve the Church with the perſonall ſervice of their Apoſtleſhip. But paſtorall power of ordinarie Miniſters or Teachers they never had: and if the Apoſtles had not the power of ordinarie Miniſters, much leſſe can Paſtors receive the power of Apoſtles, for Chriſt gave both the one and the other order. But as the Apoſtles were not Paſtors of that Church to which they preached, and among whom they continued for ſome ſpace; no more do Paſtors become Apoſtles if they preach the Word, or diſpence the Sacraments to another flock or people beſide their own, whereof they have the ſpeciall overſight. But of this matter we have ſpoken before, and of the texts of Scripture here alledged, therefore we will not repeat what hath been ſaid alreadie: onely it ſeemeth ſomewhat ſtrange, that you ſhould cited thoſe texts of Scripture, as if the Apoſtle had ſaid, feed one flock, or feed that flock of God onely. For we find the word (one) or (onely) neither in the text expreſly, nor in the ſenſe for which it is here alledged, viz. as if he might not perform any miniſteriall act in another Congregation upon any occaſion whatſoever.

Secondly, the power of feeding which the Miniſter hath is neither confined to one ſocietie onely, nor nextly derived to him from Chriſt by the Church. The office and authoritie of a Paſtor is immediately from Chriſt. The deputation of the perſon which Chriſt hath deſigned is from the Church miniſterially, but neither virtually nor formally. The conſent of the people is requiſite in the election of Paſtors and Teachers we grant, the direction of the Elders going before or along with them;Whit. de pont. q. 1. ca. 1. p. 14. but the authoritie, office, and gift of a Paſtor is not from the people or Elders, but from Chriſt alone. When an Apoſtle was to be choſen in the place of Judas, Act. 1. 22, 23. no one had the handling of that buſineſſe, but Peter declared unto the brethren preſent, what an one ought to be taken, and they preſent two, whereof one was elected by lot. In this example ſomethings are extraordinarie, for one onely was to be choſen, and that immediately by God himſelfe: and ſomethings ordinarie for our imitation. For if Peter would do nothing without conſent of the diſciples, then may not ordinarie elections be paſſed without conſent and approbation of the Church, but it is not a popular election, not governed by the fore-direction of Elders, which is concluded from this paſſage of Scripture: but a Church election by the free conſent, and judgement of the faithfull with the fore-leading of the Presbyterie. When Deacons were to be choſen, Act. 6. 1. 6. in the Church of Jeruſalem, it was done by the conſent of the Church. The mutinie of the Helleniſts againſt the Hebrews occaſioned that election, but was no cauſe why it was made by free conſent. The Apoſtles ſhew what perſons muſt be choſen, and who ever thought the Church was left at libertie to chuſe as ſhe pleaſe without direction. But in this election the people did firſt chuſe, the Apoſtles onely directing whom the people ought to make choice of: when moſt commonly the Apoſtles inſtructed the people, and went before them in the election, and they conſented. Act. 14. 23. The Apoſtles by conſent choſe Elders, and ſo in every matter of great importance belonging directly to the whole bodie of the Church, whether ſeverally in one congregation, or joyntly in many, the conſent of the faithfull by obſervation of the Apoſtles was required. Act. 11. 22. and 15. 22. and 16. 4. 1. Cor. 8. 19. But in the primitive times after the Apoſtles, one Church might elect and chuſe a Paſtor for another. As Ignatius exhorts the Phyladelphians, that they would elect a Paſtor for the Church of Antioch. And ſo when the Eaſt Church was infected with Arrianiſme, Baſil, epiſt. 69. 70. 74. though it a fit meanes to remove the hereſie, if the Biſhops of Italie being ſent thither did condemne the hereſie,Ep 13. li. 3. and he imploreth the aid of the Biſhops of Italy, France, and all the Eaſt. Cyprian ſaith, all Biſhops ſunt mutuae concordiae glutine copulati: that if any hold hereſie the reſt ſhould help. It would be too long to reckon up examples which in this caſe might be produced. If here it be queſtioned whether your election of the people be eſſentiall to the calling of a Miniſter: We anſwer. 1. A thing is eſſentiall two wayes. Firſt, as abſolutely neceſſarie, ſo that the thing can have no exiſtence without it. Secondly, as neceſſarie to the integritie of the thing, ſo that it is maimed without it.

Againe, either the people be few in number, and ſimple apt to be led aſide, unable to judge of the ſufficiencie of their Miniſter, or they be more in number, increaſed in wiſdome, ſound in faith, and able to diſcern betwixt things that differ. In the firſt ſenſe the election of the people is not neceſſary or eſſentiall; But in the ſecond we cannot ſay he is no Miniſter that is not choſen by the people, but his calling in that reſpect is maimed. If the people be few and ſimple, apt to be deceived, they ſtand in more need of guidance and direction, both from their own Elders, and other Churches. If the people be many in number, full of wiſdome and underſtanding, their libertie to chooſe is the greater; and it is the greater wrong to be deprived of it. The practiſe of the Apoſtles and the primitive Churches for many ages will confirme this; for ſometimes men were propounded to the Church to be choſen: Sometimes the choice was wholly left to them: and was not that for our direction, that more libertie is given where the danger is leſſe, and more reſtraint and caution uſed where the danger is more apparent, that if they be left to themſelves, either an ill or unfit choice will be made? In reaſon this is evident, for the childs conſent is required in marriage, but the more able he is to chooſe for himſelfe, the more libertie may parents grant, the leſſe able, the more watchfull muſt they be; and ſo in this buſineſſe. Brotherly ſocietie requires that we mutually exhort, admoniſh, reprove and comfort each other as occaſion requires, and as need requires. It is a dutie of Neighbour-Churches to lend their helpe to their brethren in the choice and election of their Miniſter.Rom 15. 14. When the Scripture willeth that one ſhould admoniſh another,Heb. 3. 13. it is not onely a command to every ſingular man towards his fellow, but alſo to any whole company too: another ſocietie Bellarmine asketh,Bel. de Cler. li. 1. c. 7. quo jure unus populus Epiſcopum alterius populi elegere poteſt? Junius anſwereth; Certe charitatis jure & communione ſanctorum. Jun. animad. contr. 5. l. c 7. not. 13. And Paul when he teacheth that all the faithfull are members of one myſticall body of Chriſt, who ought to have a mutuall care one of another,Rom. 12. 12. laid the foundation of this policie.

It is a blemiſh in the calling of a Miniſter, if either the people be not fit to chooſe, or being fit they be ſhut forth from the choice, but this maime doth not make a nullicie in his calling; for in every true Church where the word is preached and received, and the Sacraments for ſubſtance rightly adminiſtred, there is a true and lawfull Miniſtery, and a true and lawfull calling of that Miniſtery, though in ſome things defective. In the Church of God all ſound and ſaving truth is to be found, for it is the pillar and ground of truth, and where the true profeſſion of all ſaving truth, with the right uſe of the Sacraments for ſubſtance is to be found, there is the Church, which ordinarily cannot be had, maintained and continued without a lawfull Miniſtery, nor that without a calling. The ſaving truth of God & a lawfull Miniſtery, are both eſſentiall to a true Church. Something of this remaines in every compleat ſocietie that hath any thing of the Church; and for eſſence and ſubſtance they are true in every true, lawfull, compleat ſocietie. The profeſſion of the truth may be true and ſound in all neceſſary and fundamentall points, though mixed with diverſe errors, and the Miniſtery for truth and ſubſtance lawfull, though many wayes deficient. In the true Church there is a true Miniſtery, but the true Church hath continued there by the bleſſing of God, where the election of Miniſters hath been given away by the people, or taken from them. In the primitive Church, when the people had a voyce in the choice of their Paſtor, oftentimes there were factions in the Church, the people ſtood againſt their guides and challenged the whole power of election to themſelves.Theod. hiſt. l. 4. c. 6. Aug Epiſt. 110. & 225. Socrat. hiſt. l 7. c. 34, 35. 39. Zozom. hiſt. l. 2. c. 18, 19. Nazian. in Epitaphium patris Evagr. l. 2. c. 5. 8. Theod. hiſt. l. 5. c. 23. Jun. animadver in Bel. cont. 5. l. 1. c. 7. not. 16, 17. Cartur. reply 2d. part 1. pa. 211. Illiric. catal. teſt. li. 2. tit. Eccleſiae gubern. Sometimes they were divided among themſelves. Sometimes they gave away their power, at leaſt in part, and ſometimes Miniſters were ſet over them without their councell and advice, whoſe Miniſtery notwithſtanding was not reputed voyde and of none effect. If it be objected that many things were amiſſe in thoſe primitive elections, what will follow thence, but that the Miniſtery may be lawfull and good, where there be many wants in the manner of calling. If this be not granted, what ſhall be done when the people and their Elders be divided in the choice of a fit Officer. If the people prevaile againſt their Elders, he whom they chooſe is no Miniſter to them, becauſe not choſen by their ſuffrages: if the Elders againſt the people, he whom they approve is no Miniſter unto them, becauſe not choſen by their ſuffrage; And ſo if there be diſſention they muſt ſeperate from, or excommunicate one another, becauſe he is no Miniſter to the one whom the other approve. The Orthodox Paſtors did profeſſe, ſo that the Donatists would returne to the true and Apoſtolicall doctrine, they would not diſallow their Biſhops, that they might underſtand that Catholiques did not deteſt Chriſtian conſecration (as Auguſtine ſpeakes) by humane error. The high Prieſthood was bought and ſold for money, and ſometimes made annuall, and every yeare new high Prieſts created, Sicut iſti praefecti quos ſingulis annis promutant reges, as Sol: Jarchi ſaith. That as every man would lay out more or leſſe money, he ſhould get or loſe the Prieſthood, which may be ſeene in the examples of Jaſon or Menelaus.

Nevertheleſſe, ſo long as the Jewes continued the true Church of God,Joſ. Antiq. l. 20. c. 18. c. 4. See Ambroſ. de officijs. l. 1. c. 50. Hieron. ad Ocean & Epist. ad Nepotian. T. C. Reply 1. pa. 41. a Revet. Cathol. orth. tract. 2. q. 8. Sect. 3. Cartw. Reply 2. par. 1. pa. 273. the Prieſthood was true alſo. The reformed Churches who have ſeperated from the abhominations of Rome, profeſſe the firſt reformers among them received ſome ordinary calling in the Romane Synagogue. They that thinke the baſeſt of Rome, will acknowledge Baptiſme unduely adminiſtred by Prieſts or Jeſuites, to be for ſubſtance the holy Sacrament of Chriſt. And if the Baptiſme of God may be derived from the Miniſtery, it is no abſurditie to thinke that the firſt ſeekers of reformation derived authoritie from Chriſt to preach the Word and adminiſter the Sacraments by them, as Stewards uſed of God to ſet them in that office: for the ſeekers of reformation derived their authoritie from God, and that which is inſtituted by Chriſt, is not made voyde by the corruptions of men.

The third and fourth conſideration we will paſſe over, becauſe from what hath been ſpoken, it is eaſie to underſtand in what ſenſe they may be admitted, and in what denyed, and we have no deſire to trouble you with the examination of that which falleth not into queſtion.

As for the ſecond branch of your Anſwer, that in caſe the Church ſhall without cauſe, or without ſufficient weightie cauſe, raſhly or wilfully ſet him aſide whom Chriſt hath ſet over them, yet he ſtill remaines a Miniſter of Chriſt (untill he accepts of a call from another people) in whoſe account, notwithſtanding ſuch Depoſitions, he hath true right of adminiſtring among that people. We know not well your meaning; if this be your minde that a Miniſter lawfully called and ſet over one Congregation, is to be eſteemed a Miniſter in the uſuall Church, as the particular Church hath unitie with, and is part of the univerſall or Catholique: and as a partie baptized is not baptized into that particular Congregation onely, but into all Churches; and that the Miniſtery is one, Cujus à ſingulis in ſoliaum pars tenetur, as Cyprian ſpeakes; and therefore though the Miniſter be unjuſtly caſt off by one Congregation, yet he is not to be eſteemed as no Miniſter, we freely conſent. But if your meaning be that he is onely by right a Miniſter of that particular Congregation, becauſe unjuſtly depoſed, as formerly in the execution of his office he was a Miniſter to them onely, and to none other ſocietie whatſoever, or in what reſpect ſoever; your opinion is contrary to the judgement and practiſe of the univerſall Church, and tendeth to deſtroy the unitie of the Church, and that communion which the Churches of God may and ought to have one with another; for if he be not a Miniſter in other Churches, then are not the Churches of God one, nor the Miniſters one, nor the flocke which they feed one, nor the Communion one which they have each with other. And if the Paſtor derive all his authoritie to feede from the Church, when the Church hath ſet him aſide, what right hath he to adminiſter among that people. If they erre in their depoſition, it is true they ſinne againſt Chriſt. But as they give right to an unworthy man to adminiſter among them, if they call him unjuſtly, ſo they take right from the worthy if wrongfully they depoſe him. The Miniſter is for his Miniſtery the office for the execution, and ſo the Paſtor and the flocke are relatives: And therefore if their Election gave him authoritie among them to feed, their caſting him off hath ſtripped him of the ſame power which formerly they gave him. And his miniſtery ceaſing, he ſhould ceaſe to be their Miniſter, if he ſtood as Miniſter onely to that Congregation in every reſpect.

Whit. de pont. q. 4. Sec. 10. pa. 559. Certe lex naturae & ratio clamitat cujus est inſtituere ejus eſt deſtruere, ſive deſtituere, ad quem institutio pertinet ad eundem deſtitutionem, ſeu deſtructionem pertinere. Rob. aga. B. P. 214. If the Congregation may chuſe and elect their Governours, then they may refuſe and reprobate them.

Anſwer.

IF you take miniſteriall act improperly as ſometimes it is taken by ſome, onely when the Miniſter of one Church doth exerciſe his gifts of praying and preaching in another Church, being by themſelves ſo deſired. Then we anſwer, in this ſenſe a Miniſter of one Church may do a miniſteriall act in another, which he doth not perform by vertue of any calling, but onely by his gifts; and thus upon any occaſion we mutually perform thoſe acts one in anothers Churches: But if you meane by miniſteriall act, ſuch an act of authoritie and power in diſpenſing of Gods ordinance as a Miniſter doth perform to the Church, whereunto he is called to be a Miniſter; then we deny that he can ſo perform any miniſteriall act to any other Church but his own, becauſe his office extends no further then his call. For that ſolemne charge, Act. 20. 28. is not to feed all flocks, but that one flock onely, over which the holy Ghoſt hath made them over-ſeers. If the queſtion were propounded to any Miniſter ſo exerciſing in an others Church, which was once to our Saviour by the chief Prieſts and Elders: By what power doeſt thou theſe things, and who gave thee this authoritie? let that Miniſter whoſoever he be, ſtudy how to make an anſwer.

Reply.

THe preaching of the Word, publick prayer in the congregation met together ſolemnly to worſhip God, and the adminiſtration of the Sacraments, are acts properly miniſteriall (if any other) to be performed by power and authoritie from Chriſt,To baptiſe is a duty of the Paſtors paſtoriall office. I. D. Apol. Ser. exam. pa. 287. as you acknowledge, for the preaching of the Word, and diſpenſation of the Seales in your ſecond Conſideration. But theſe acts one Miniſter may performe in another Congregation, or towards the members of another Church. You know by whom your queſtion hath been propounded touching one Miniſters exerciſing in another Miniſters Church, and how it hath been anſwered; and if you ſee more light and truth then formerly, we would deſire you ſubſtantially to confute what anſwers ſome of you have returned to that demand.Exam. of texts, pa. 290. To admit (ſaith Mr. J. D.) thoſe that are known members of another Church to Communion in the Sacraments upon fitting occaſions I hold lawfull, and do profeſſe my readineſſe to practiſe accordingly. Apol. exam. of texts. p. 288. Again, I conceive that (beſides my memberſhip elſe where, and the right which thoſe Churches give to known paſſants of being admitted to the Communion for a ſhort time) both himſelf and the whole Church acknowledge me for a member with them for the time of my abode in that ſervice, which they teſtified by deſiring the help of my publick labours, and their cheerfull admittance of me to that ordinance during that time without the leaſt ſcruple. And if a Miniſter may pray, preach, bleſſe the congregation in the name of the Lord, and receive the Sacrament with them, being thereunto requeſted; we doubt not but by conſent of the Paſtor and the Congregation he may lawfully diſpenſe the Seals amongſt them alſo as need and occaſion requires.

That diſtinction of preaching by office, and exerciſing his gifts onely, when it is done by a Miniſter, and deſired of none but Miniſters, and that in ſolemne, ſet, conſtant Church-aſſemblies, we cannot find warranted in the Word of truth, and therefore we dare not receive it.