The First Part. Wherein the thing in controversie is briefly stated and clearly explained, where­unto also positive arguments are annexed, and certain Interogatories an­swered.

WHen controversies are rightly stated, they are in away to be ended.Acts 19. He that strives about things not wisely stated, beats the Ayer and sights with his shadow, and so brings forth opas mane, a fruitlesse labour. Too ma­ny of our zealous contenders are too like Demetrius his followers, making out-cries and uproares with­out reason and with not a little ignorance. Wherefore that I may not shoot my darts as at randome, and that there may for the build­ing be laid a good foundation, I shall in the first place yeild a briefe proposall of mine Assertion; thus.

That men gifted for Preaching, though out of Office, may lawfully in any company preach the Gospel.

Words may admit of diverse constructions, and some are apt to mistake plainest expressions. Wherefore I shall to the Assertion add a cleare explaination of it: that my meaning in it being cleare discer­vered, and mistakes about it wholly removed, the Christian Reader may be put in a posture rightly to judge of the thing, which is [nunce sub judice] now in controversie amongst us. For the effecting whereof three questions shall be proposed and answered, which may [Page 2] plainly informe the Reader of my minde in the fore-going conclusi­on: As the three errowes, which Jonathan shot, gave notice to David of Sauls intention.

Questi. 1 What is it to preach the Gospel?

Answer Before a direct answer be return'd to this quaere, I shall take li­berty in a word to shew, what the Word of the Gospel is: which will open a way to the Reader, whereby he may the more easily enter in­to the knowledge of the thing demanded. The Gospel is a divine new-Testament doctrine, making a glorious discovery to man of the Al­mighties will concerning man. Now to Preach the Gospel is nothing else, but to publish, make known, or declare the truths and mysteries contained in it.

That this is true may be as clearly perceived: as the Sun at noon­day, by the two following particulars.

First, By considering the proper significations of the principall words, which are commonly used to expresse the worke of Gospel-preaching. These three following I have specially observ'd, whose sig­nifications will give light to the truth of the fore-going difinition. The first is [...] which from the Septuagint and Greek Origi­nall is translated in the Latine as Uer [...]ion proclamare, praedicare, and signifies as much as aper [...]e seu publice dicere vel docere, to divulge, report, publish or noyse abroad. And so 'tis ended. Marke 5.20. Chap: 7.36. The Gospel is a divine doctrine, or Proclamation from Heaven, con­taining in it house-top-discoveries, which concerne all, and are to be published to and apprehended by all. The second is [...] Latine euangelizare, which is often translated to preach the Gospel, and doth properly signifie lata annunciare, to shew or bring glad ti­dings, and so 'tis turned in Luke 1.19. chap. 2.10. He that preacheth the Gospel brings heart-rejoycing tidings to the creature; for the Gospel discovers a sufficient remedy for mans misery and holds out the way to everlasting glory. The third, which speakes the same language with the former is [...], to Prophesie; signifying properly to fore-tell or say any thing, Mat. 15.7. some time to re­veal a secret, Matth. 26.68. sometime to teach, 1 Cor. 13.9. Revel. 11.3.

This word fitly sets out the worke of Gospel-preaching, for the World to come is the sub [...]ect or matter of the Gospel: Ʋnto the Angels (saith the Apostle) God ha [...]h not put into subjection the world to come, where­of [Page 3] of we speake, Heb. 2.5. that is, God hath not made eternall life or e­verlasting death, to be the matter of the Law, or that doctrine, which was ordain'd by Angels, of which world to come we that are Mini­sters of the Gospel speake. All doe Prophesie who preach the Gospel, for they fore-tell what shall be the everlasting estate and condition of every man; that they shall enjoy life, that believe, that they shall meet with death, who have not faith to lay hold on eternall life.

Secondly, By comparing Scriptures where divers words and such that condescend to the weakest capacity, are used to expresse the same worke of Gospel-preaching. Amongst twenty and ten take one or two, which will be sufficient. Compare the first verse of Acts 14. with the second of the same chapter, where you shall find, that to preach the Gospel is, To speake or teach it to the People. Ephes. 3. ver. 8. with the 9. will be alike usefull. Thus being come to the period of the Answer to the first question, I hasten to the second, for through­out I intend to be brief.

Questi. 2 Who are gifted for Gospel-preaching?

Answer. Rom. 10. They are gifted for it, who have necessary and sufficient abilities to discharge it; For no man can preach except he be sent, i. e. except he hath abilities to performe it. Knowledge and utterance are as need­full for this worke, as counsell and strength for the war. And when God puts his words into men, and gives words to them to make discoveries of Gospel mysteries, he then sufficiently fits them to preach the Gospel. He that hath knowledge and wants utterance can­not preach, but he that hath both is put in a posture fit to preach; preaching being nothing else but a promulgation or speaking of our apprehensions unto others.

Questi. 3 Who are men out of Office?

Answer. They, who are neither extraordinary nor ordinary Church-Offi­cers. Apostles were extraordinary, but Pastors and Teachers were ordinary Church-officers. Therefore when we speake in this con­troversie of men out of office, we mean such, who are neither Pastors nor Teachers in visible Churches.

Having thus commented, take a more large and plaine expression of mine assertion, thus. That men who know the Gospel and are a­ble to declare it, may [qua tales] as such (being neither Pastors nor Teachers in visible Churches) make known in any company the mysteries of the Gospel revealed to them.

[Page 4]Having thus done with the explication, I shall advance next to the proofe of the Assertion: mine Antagonist requiring the performance of it by his affirmantis est probare; and method challenging this place as due unto it.

I shall bring forth testimonies of two sorts, viz. divine and hu­mane. The first as infallible, the second only as probable waies to prove it.

The divine testimonies which I shall alledge are reasons drawne from Scripture, that just desider of all controversies, and discoverer of all doctrins.

Before the proposall of the reasons let this one thing (as needfull) be premised; That men gifted for preaching are no where in Scrip­ture restrained in using their guifts, either in respect of place or com­pany.

Reason 1 Because they, who enjoy gifts lie under a divine command to use them, and not to suffer their gifts to rust by them, or to lay them up in the Earth in a Napkin.

Divine commands are to the creature of a binding nature, from the force whereof men cannot, and Saints would not be free. And as nature, so the God of nature gives nothing in vaine. Where he be­stowes gifts there he requires the use of them. The truth of this do­ctrine Christ teacheth us in the Parable (Luke 19.23) where he tels us; That a certain noble man, when he went into a far Country East, called his ten servants and delivered unto them tenne pounds, and said▪ Occupy till I come. Peter is a teacher of the same doctrine,1 Pet. 4.10, 11. where he saith: As every man hath received a gift, so minister one to another; as [...]ood Stewards of the manifold grace of God. Ro. 14.19. 1 Thes. 5.10. Heb. 10.25. If any man speake; let him speake as the oracles of God. Paul also immitates Christ, and joynes hands with Peter, in requiring from Saints the same duty: for he exhorts them to study after peace, and things wherewith they may edify one another. In another place; To comfort and edify one another. Else-wher; To exhort one another. Which du­ties may be performed by the use of gifts, and so the use of gifts re­quired. Now to the Second Reason.

Reason 2 Because they, who have gifts ought to increase them, and not to content themselves with that statute, their gifts whereof, when they first received them.

Acquired gifts, whether common or speciall, are not compleate at first entrance, but doe by degrees grow to perfection. Now men that [Page 5] enjoy gifts ought by increasing them to presse to the marke (i.) the perfection of them. They that received Talents, and increased them were commended, and as therein doing their duty,Matth. 25. were called Good and faithfull servants. But he who added not to his Talent, was con­demned, and as a neglector of his duty, term'd an evill and slothfull servant. And will any, who hath made Scripture, reason and experi­ence of his Counsell, doubt, whether the use of gifts be a direct way to increase them? If any should, the Parable above mentioned will re­solve him; reason also and experience wil contribute to his satisfacti­on. Ʋsus perficit artem, is a received maxime. Now I hasten to the third Reason, which joynes hands with the former in the same testimony.

Because Gods end in bestowing gifts, cannot be answered without Reason 3 the use and exercise of them.

Every manifestation of the Spirit (saith the Apostle) is given for profit; 1 Cor. 12.7. not only of him who doth enjoy it, but of him also who is interest­ed in it. All the enjoyments of Saints as Saints, are common amongst Saints: for they all make up but one body in Christ Jesus, and are members one of another in particular; and so what every one enjoyes as a part of the body, tis enjoyed for the good of the whole. A Be­liever, that hath received gifts,1 Pet. 4.10 that are usefull for the edification of his Brethren, is but Gods Steward for them; and cannot appeare faithfull (a dispensation being commiteed unto him) if he imparts not (when need requires) his gifts to those, for whose good he en­joyes them. Now he that hath knowledge and utterance can no more profit others by them without the use of them,Matth. 5. than a Candle can give light to those in the house, when tis under a Bushell. As James once said in respect of outward things: so may I say of inward gifts; if thou dost not communicate, What do they profit? If the Saints want instruction, exhortation, or comfort, and we have wherewith to supply them; How may wee advantage them with out a communi­cation of our abilities to them?

Thus the third Reason having spoken its mind, hear what evidence the fourth brings with it.

Because the practice of men out of office, in preaching the Gospel Reason 4 is in Scripture mentioned and not condemned. The practises of men mentioned in Scripture and not condemned there, may be patterns to us. 1 Cor. 10.11. but we have in Scripture a mention not condemnation of the practice of men out of office in using their gifts in Gospel-preaching [Page 6] The Jewes allowed men, who were not their Church-officers, publikely to teach and preach amongst them. Luke 4.16, 17, 18. Acts 13. ver. 14, 15. chap. 28.22, 23. Whence it was, that the Ru­lers of Israel did never (as I remember) condemne the Messengers of Christ Jesus (being none of their Church-Officers) for the worke of preaching, but for the matter or doctrine they taught. The Primative Christians made no scruple to hear those preach, who were none of their Church-Officers, Acts 18.24, 25, 26. And it was the practice of the Saints to publish or preach both to the world and their Bre­thren the mysteries of the Gospel made out to them. Acts 8.4. 1 Cor. 14. 1 Thes. 5.10. Paul tels us (Phil. 1.) That he rejoyced that Christ was preached, though by men out of Office (for so they were in all proba­bility) and that through envy. This fourth Reason leaves the Read­er to make the conclusion, giving way by its silence to the next wit­nesse, which is the fift Reason.

Reason 5 Because good effects do naturally flow from the use of private mens gifts. None make a scruple to believe that which naturally pro­duces good effects to be good in its own nature. But whether private mens preaching may be taken into the number of things producing naturally good effects is the thing in question. If you will hear the Scripture speaking it will informe you, that the bringing forth of private mens gifts, doth bring forth to the Church and World no small commodity. Acts 11.21. 1 Cor. 14.3, 24, 25. Now shall experi­ence, which teacheth much truth, be hearde in giving out her sen­tence? Thus she utters her voice.

I have found by much observation, that as heretofore, so now men gifted for preaching using their guifts though out of office, are very advantagious instruments both to the Church and World. Not­withstanding I must (saith experience) freely confesse, that some have by this practice been instruments of mischiefe, but heerin they differ not from many of our licensed Preachers. Thus far experience. The common opinion hath another byas, and speakes in opposition to the fore-going affirmations. But tis no wonder to see errour and the common opinion companions together. Thus the fift Reason takes leave to be silent. And the last (for present intended) appeares to confirme what its fellowes have endeavoured to prove, and being in­forced to be some-what large in opening it selfe, the rest through courtisie to it have spent the lesse time in uttering their speech.

[Page 7]Because the deniall of the use of private mens gifts in preaching Reason 6 the Gospel, hath an inseparable retinue of ill and bad consequences waiting upon it.

Its is a truth without controversie; that the thing is not nick­nam'd, when cal'd evill, that naturally drawes after it ill and bad consequences: for as wee Gather not Grapes of Thornes, or Figs of Thistles; so we enjoy not salt streames from a fresh Fountain. But that the de­nyall of private mens preaching, doth engender such a generation is a truth to which many (and almost all the Clergie) will not put to their seales. Wherefore I shall a little for the satisfaction of such, open the Book of its generation.

The first born of the deniall of private mens preaching, is the shut­ing Conse{que} 1 up of that way, which the Scripture opens for the only right way into office. Election and ordination (the Churches worke) is the way, which the Scripture hath chalked out by which men may come into office. But the Church must bring none into office without proving their fitnesse for the office. 1 Tim. 3.10. But they cannot know mens sufficiency for the worke of preaching, without hearing them preach. Now if they must preach before they are made Church-officers; then some private persons may preach. But if it be affirmed that none may lawfully preach being out of office, then Gods way is denyed of bringing men into office.Conse{que} 2

The second ill consequence, which cals the former brother is, the shutting up or making narrow the way to hear the Gospel. For if none may lawfully preach but Church-officers; then none may be heard by us but those, who are, or who are known to us to be lawfull Church-officers; and so the way of hearing the Gospell will be ex­ceeding straite and narrow; for,

First, They that preach must first convince the people, that they are lawfull Church-officers, before they lawfully can preach amongst them. For the people wanting conviction of their being lawfull church-officers; cannot be lawfully imployed in hearing. But how must they prove themselves to be lawfull church-officers? Not from abilities, for that's the thing denied; not from habits or garments, which we may not allow to carry with them sufficient power of con­viction; although many looke on black and canonicall Coates as markes of Ministers. By what then most they prove their calling? Without doubt it must be by their election and ordination. But what [Page 8] if any doubt of the lawfulnesse of their electi [...]n and ordination? They may not th [...]n lawfully heare them, although they be lawfull Church-officers; For what's not of faith is sin. And how the World then may be brought lawfully to hear the Word, I wot not: seeing they usually are ignorant of, and enemies to the waies and orders of Ch [...]ist's visible Churches.

Secondly, If none may be heard but Church-officers (as none may, if none but they may preach) then none may be heard that are strang­ers, till they are known by those that heare, to be lawfull Church-officers. But how difficult a thing it would prove, to prove al strangers to be lawfull Church-officers, all, that know any thing may easily judge. Many of the greatest maintainers of the doctrine I oppose, are found to be frequent transgressors of it. For not a few Ministers have admitted such to preach in their pulpits, whom they know not, and who indeed are no Church-officers or none of theirs. Also many of the people of the same opinion, do with their Ministers take hands in the same transgression: in that they heare many preach, of whom they are wholly ignorant.

Thirdly, None may be heard who are suspected (as before) or are known to be false Church-officers; be they never so eminent in parts or godly in life: of which paradventure not a few may be found. For mine own part, were I perswaded, that none are lawfull Preachers but lawfull Church-officers, many who have me now (being of ano­ther opinion) some times in their auditory, should altogether misse of my company. Some imbracing with them the same opinion, have made from their publike meetings a totall seperation; being per­swaded that Parish-preaching Ministers were false Church-officers. For (say they) if their ordination (from which they prove their cal­ling) be sufficient to make lawfull preachers, then there are at Rome lawfull Church-officers: in that both ours and theirs arise from the same fountain, but at a further distance; in that our first ordainers re­ceived from Rome their holy orders, from whom by way of succession ordination, hath descended even to this generation.

Thus you may easily see how obnoxious the doctrine I oppose is to the hearing of the Gospel.

Conse{que} 3 The third consequent, which is of the same discent with those fore-going is, That the Saints, when there is no necessity, must be re­strained from enjoying the preaching of of the Gospel.

[Page 9]As if in case there may be, first some-times in some places (where Saints are) a cessation of visible Churches. Or secondly, If where vi­sible Churches are, some Saints are not convinc'd of their order. Or thirdly, If they are in order and want Church-officers. Or fourthly, If their Officers be (through sicknesse, persecution, &c.) absent from them, in all which cases (though they have amongst them persons of great abilities for Gospel-preaching: yet) they must be exposed (at least) to scarcity of the Word; because none but Church-officers may lawfully preach I shal not farther increase the number of the children of the forementioned Father, but shal leave it to the diligent searcher.

Thus I have done with the first sort of testimonies which are divine, and shall now come to the second, which are probable, being humane testimonies; which are either the speeches or practices of men that are godly.

Of the speeches of men, that professedly speake with me (that I may not overburthen this Booke) I shall instance but in a few.An Apol. of the ex­iles. p. 45.

1. The english Christians, who were Exiles in the low Countries, witnesse to the truth of the doctrine heare pleaded for, their fourth position being this.

That discreet, faithfull and able men (though not yet in office of ministry) may preach the Gospel and whole truth of God, &c.

2. I shall bring in the Elders of the severall Churches of New-England, speaking fully to my mind in this particular, in their an­swer to the twenty seventh question sent over to them from certaine Ministers of Old England: which I have not hear inserted for brevities sake; but it may be found at large, in a Book intituled Church Govern­ment and Church Covenant discussed, (p. 77.) published by Master Peters. De con­scientiâ et ejus jure vel casibus p. 229.

3. You shall have the testimony of that learned man, Doctor Ames, whose workes praise him in the Gate. Thus he speakes.

That for the preaching and teaching of the Gospel a singular calling is not requir­ed. For proofe whereof he brings these Scriptures, Acts 8.4. c. 11.19. & 21. c. 18.24. and adds to them these Reasons.

1. Because, this is the duty of all Christians, that they Promote as much as they can, the Kingdome of God: and therefore that they teach others the doctrine of God.

2. Because tis some time necessary, that men be convinced of errors and in­structed in truth before a calling can be rightly instituted.

3. Because the People being some-times destitute of a Minister, cannot with­out [Page 10] the losse of edification be holpen, unlesse they allow those to instruct them, who as yet are not rightly called to the ministry. Further he affirmes, That not only private but also publike preaching may be exercised without a singular calling, first, in a Church to be constituted. Secondly in a Church already constituted, with the approbation of that Church, if confusion be avoided and order observed. 1 Cor. 14.23. Acts 13.15. For it belongs (saith he) to the Churches edifi­cation, that they who excell others in gifts, exercise those gifts before others to help and stirr them up.

Also (P. 245.) he speakes to the same effect, affirming. 1. That there was in the primative Church a certain propheticall exercise distinct from sermons 1 Cor. 14.31.32. &c. 2. That not only Ministers were permitted to use this exercise, but also among the brethren, the ch [...]efe and most expert, for tho [...]e gifts which they had conferred to them, ibid. 3. That it was also lawfull for other men of the Church for the sake of learning to propose their doubts, that they might be taught of those who were more skilfull▪ ibid. v. 35.

4. That where this exercise may conveniently be brought into Churches, it ought not to be contemned. 1 Thes. 5.20. 1. Because it is most agreeing to the order of the primative Church approved by the Apostles. Secondly. Because it singularly healpeth to stirre up, cherish and increase spirituall gifts in severall Believers. Thirdly, Because it taketh away negligence and envy, and nourisheth charity. Thus far Amesius.

4. Hear the judgement of M. Thomas Goodwin, and M. Nye, men of no small eminency, their very enemies being Judges. They in their Epistle to M. Cottons Booke, of the Keyes of the Kingdome of Heaven, thus speake.

Wee humbly conceive Prophesying (as the Scripture tearmes) or speaking to edification of the whole Church may (sometime) be performed by brethren gifted, though not in office as the Elders.

5. I might add to the number dear M. Burrowes, M. Peters, M. John Ellis junior with many others, who affirme; That men out of Office may preach the Gospel; but I forbeare to cite their expressions having spoken enough of this particular. Wherefore I come to the next sort of humane testimonies, to wit, godly mens practices, carrying a kind of testimony with them, what did the Martyrs (of whom our Cro­nicles make a glorious relation) who were not Church-officers, lesse then preach publickly, when they did before multitudes of people open and apply the Scriptures, which men now call preaching? If it may be said, that the congregationall Churches both in Old and New [Page 11] England doe consist of believers, men that are Godly, then it may bee affirmed, that Godly men, out of Office doe preach the Gospel; for private mens Preaching is not a rare practice amongst them. Who is there acquainted with Godlinesse, that dares call those ungodly who in the Army, City and Country do Preach the Gospel though out of Office? What if I should call writing in Divinity Preaching? And so put the stile of Preachers upon those of the Layety, who are writers in matters of Divinity; I might then bring in Mr. Prynne and Doctor Bastwicke (the one a Lawyer, the other a Physitian, both busie writers in matters of Divinity) to justifie the practice of Private mens Prea­ching. But if that liberty may be deny'd me, yet I may boldly affirm, that there is such a neernesse between the writing and Preaching of men out of Office, that the Arguments which justifie the one, will plead for the other.

Thus having dispatch the confirmation of the thing in controver­sie, I shall returne briefe answers to some common Queries, for somes satisfaction.

Quest. 1 Whether men out of Office may be fitted for Gospel Preaching?

Answ. Men may (said Sir Richard Baker) have Sacrae dotes, though they are not, Sacerdotes. Abilities and holy Orders are not alwaies joyn'd and link'd together. What hinders? But that men being not Church Officers, may bee fit and able Preachers? Gods Spirit (from whom gifts for Gospel-Preaching flow) breathes where it will, and is not cloyster'd up amongst the Cleargy. Are Tongues and Arts necessary to fit men for Preaching? If this were granted, some private men might then be found not unfit for Pulpits: for in Learning many of the layety will not come a step behinde the Clergy.

Doth not experience teach us? That many out of Office doe (at least) equalize the best, and farre surmount the greatest part of our Church-Officers. Who thinkes not but that Doctor Bastwicke esteems himselfe of this number, sith in contending about Church-Govern­ment he's not contented to trayle a Pike after the Cleargy, but stiles himselfe Captaine of the Presbyterian Army.

Quest. 2 Whether Preaching Officers will not be uselesse, if all gifted for Preaching may be Preachers?

Ans. There is a mutuall agreement amongst the Ordinances of Christ Jesus, the one not (in the least measure) jarring with, or shouldring out another. The Saints in the Primative Churches did, and they [Page 12] now, who judge themselves to be visible Churches, esteeme Preach­ing-Church-Officers to be needfull, notwithstanding their private Preachers.

Quest. Why are so many Preachers and others so opposite to private mens Preaching?

Answ. There are many and some that are Godly, who are opposite to the Exercise of private mens gifts in Prophesie. And 'tis no wonder to see men, that are Godly to dislike things that are good; sith the well of corruption (in this life) is not dry'd up in them, out of which Satan pumps all evill motions and actions, appropriated to them.

Many doe so behave themselves towards private mens Preaching through ignorance, or want of light only. Which men oppugne truth (Non qua veritatem, sed qua errorem) not as truth but as errour, for so it is in their judgements they mis-judging by mis-apprehending of it. They mistaking it (as Mary did Christ, when she saw him in the garden supposing him to be the gardiner) will not owne it. And mis-apprehending it (as Peter did Christ, when he saw him walke on the water) are afraid of it. If they know it to be truth, they would (as Lydia did (Acts 16.15.) in respect of the Saints) earnestly desire to entertaine it, and out of love to it would contend for it, and that unto bloud. But many there bee, who in their oppositions against private mens Preaching are guided by an evill spirit, and selfe-love that corrupt affection hath predominancy in them. They are so much endeared to their credit, case and profit, that they cannot with delight looke on that practice, because it crosseth (as they appre­hend) each of their darlings. The Spirit of Deotrophes and of Deme­trius appeares to be in too many amongst us.

Quest. Whether private mens Preaching would be inoffensive, if they would not Preach in Ministeriall places, and take up in Preaching Ministeriall Formes?

Answ. I am ignorant, what places are called ministeriall unlesse Pulpits. But why they should be accounted more ministeriall then other pla­ces I wot not: although many looke on the Pulpit as a place so sa­cred, that none unlesse under holy Orders may lawfully enter in it.

And as for Formes and methods in Preaching, I would be inform­ed. First whether Gods Directory doth direct Ministers to this or that Forme or method, as alwaies necessary and peculiar to them.

Secondly if it doth so; what is that Forme (or those Formes) which is alwaies necessary and peculiar to them. Could I bee perswaded, [Page 13] that there are Formes in Preaching peculiar to Ministers, I should willingly vote, that no lay man in Preaching should lay hands on them. But being perswaded to the contrary, I wish that all private Preachers would stand fast in their liberty, and not be intangled in a yoak of bondage. Thus I have done with the Queries, and so with the First part of the Treatise.

The Second Part. Wherein the Author addresseth himselfe to his Antagonist in particular, in answering certaine extravigances observ'd and pick'd out both of the Epistle and Treatise.

SIR, before I present to the Reader mine answers to your exceptions against mine allegations for private mens Preaching, (least he should be troubled and puz­led by many digressions,) I shall impart to him (in speaking to you) some of mine observations, occa­sion'd by your writing, and fit to be noted.

First, Sir I shall make to you this ingenious confession; that your writing hath deceiv'd much mine expectation. I look'd for a Justifi­cation (at least in shew) of Mr. Beales Reasons, which you under­tooke and promised to doe. But behold nothing lesse: for having singled out three Scriptures, which in the discourse I alleadged, you against them (for the end I quoted them) have bent your forces; leaving the Gentlemans engaged Reasons to shift for themselves. So that this your birth was as farre from my thoughts: as that which the Mountaines (in the Fable) brought forth was to those, who long waited for their delivery.

[Page 14] Jacob expected Rachel, but behold Leah was unexpectedly brought to him. But Sir, what were your reasons, that the Gentlemans rea­sons should indeed (though not in shew) be forsaken by you? Shall I guesse? I will shoot my bolt, if I hit not the white: yet (I suppose) I shall not be [...]ar [...] from the marke.

Peradventure you having a better view of the Ministers reasons than himselfe, and seeing them to weake for the condemnation of private mens Preaching, have brought forth against it a new accusa­tion; being unwilling that the thing in controversie should receive the sentence of absolution: leaving the former reasons to stand by as cyphers amongst the witnesses in this present controversie, not con­senting to their election out of the company. Or it may be you [...] that some of his reasons would bee the condemnation of some of your actions: for of this I am sure, that some of his doctrine and your practice will not in amitie shake hands together.

Secondly, I shall present to you some objects of mine admira­tion.

First, I something wonder at the sublimity and highnesse (not of your conceptions or expressions, but) of your stomack (Sit venia ver­bo) discover'd in and by your expressions. I take not John Knowles (say you) as a meet Antagonist in this controversie. I know you would, that some of eminencie should give you a meeting to con­tend with you, that you may if you loose the field, lye under the lesse disgrace. But Sir [Non vacat exiguis rebus adesse jovi] they want leasure (having in their hands waighty imployments) to attend such small matters. And doe thinke, that your unmeete Antagonists are meete enough to grapple with you. And Sir, why doe you contemne me? As I perceive you doe, not only by your Paper, but by a speech also, which I heard from you in Generall Massies Chamber. But where­fore? Is it because of my minority? Why should that make me unfit to deale in the controversie? Shall not the Spirit of God bee suffer'd Spirare ubi vult, to breath where it will? Or must his breathings be contemned, if they are found in Babes and Suckling? Surely if the Doctors in the Temple had been of that judgement, Christ Jesus (whil'st a Child) had not been suffer'd to dispute amongst them. Saul thought David unfit and unable for meeting with, and conquer­ing of that great Goliah, because Puer erat, he was but a Child. Thou art (saith he) not able to fight with this Philistin; for thou art but a youth, [Page 15] and he a man of warre from his youth. Or is it because I am not of the Cleargie? Truly (Sir) though I am not of the Lord Bishops, yet I am of the Lord Jesus his Cleargie, to wit, his heritage. But why doe I act so much folly, as to wipe away disgracefull speeches of this na­ture? Esteeme of me how you will: By the Grace of God I am what I am.

Secondly, I a little marvaile at your liberality and freenesse, in granting that Tongues are not necessary [Ad esse, sed ad bene esse] to the being but to the well being of a Pastor or Preacher. Sir, by this affirmation, you have neither answered mine expectation, nor grati­fied the Minister in supporting his Reasons: whereof one hath recei­ved a deaths wound from it. For his third Reason is this.

Private men (saith he) may not Preach because they are not fit for the worke, so [...]ugh Lay-persons have a good measure of the knowledge of Divinity: yet they are not presently fit to Preach the Word; for a Preacher there is required the knowledge of the Arts and Tongues, of which lay men are most commonly ig­norant. Thus have you befriended your friend; (though paradven­ture unwittingly;) and fairely vindicated his third Reason. For hereby you (although mine Antagonist) have holpen me against him, who you call mine adversary, and have joyned hands with me to pull downe his building. For Te ipso judice his third Reason will proove uselesse, to harme the opinion of those, who hold it lawfull for men out of Office to Preach the Gospel.

Thirdly, another object of mine admiration is your great par­tiality; in that you deny that liberty to others, which you so fre­quently make use of, and that in a lavishing manner. Your wholl Booke is little else than an heap of inconsequentiall consequences, Notwithstanding (in p. 23.) the weapon of consequences must not by me and some others be handled, if you might have the ordering of us. But why must we not enjoy this liberty with you? Seeing (as you say) arguing by consequences is good and to be allowed. What must we have no liberty to use that, which may harme you? But you would informe us, what the reason why you deny us consequenciall reasoning is, because it is denyed (say you) to us by many amongst us in point of Paedobaptisme and some higher matters.

Sir (by your favour) I cannot believe, that any amongst us either have or will deny in Paedobaptisme, &c. consequentiall Arguments, because consequentiall: though they cannot allow (and that perad­venture [Page 16] on ground sufficient) your consequentiall Arguments; because they (at least) conceive that they are inconsequentiall. But if there be any, who with their wits keep so little company; as to de­ny arguing from consequences: may it by consequence be gath'red in reason, that I am of the same opinion: And If I am not guilty (as indeed I am not) of the same transgression; what equity is there, that I should suffer with them the punishment of it? As for other things you have in the page forementioned, I rather smile at, than answer to them.

Fourthly, But the greatest object of my wonder, and that which mainly mov'd me to put pen to Paper, is your fained charity and un­charitable curtesie. You tel your Reader (in the end of your Epistle) that you have (as if you were made up of Charrity) left out of your Booke the slander (whereof I was (as you suppose) guilty) being of more private concernment. Sir, 'tis true the accusa­tion hath not enter'd within the Treatise, 'twas your pleasure to leave it at the portall; that the very passers by might behold me guil­ty. For in the Epistle by Capital and bloudy Letters you give notice to your Read [...]r, that I was guilty of laying a fowle aspertion and unchristian slander upon a Minister neare in relation to you. Your owne words are these, (shewing one end of your writing) and for the Vindication of a painfull Minister, neare in relation to me, from a fowle asper­sion and unchristian slander laid upon him in that writing. Sir, if I heer Apo­logize for my selfe, I hope I shall not be blam'd for it; sith there is no man so carelesse but hath some care of his credit; and nothing more lawfull, than for a man, when his good name is unjustly taken from him, to endeavour by just meanes to regaine it to him. The wise man tells us, That a good name is more desirable than ample riches, and better than the best ointment. The expression in my writing on which the accusation laies it's foundation is this, What shall we then say to our English Priests, who at a Prelates pro [...]ibition, will cease to be Preachers and turn Physitians? Sir by your owne confession, this is the only speech, whence you gather, that I am guilty of a fowle aspersion and unchri­stian slander. Where you have learn'd this art of Deduction, to draw that out of mine interrogation which was not in it, I could informe you. But that the Reader and you (if you please) may understand, how unjustly you have drawne such an accusation from that expressi­on, I shall [...]ate the occasion of it; by setting downe the Ministers first Reason, and part of mine answer to it: wherein the expression [Page 17] so offensive and sinfull (in your conceit) is contained.

The Ministers First Reason against private mens preaching is word for word this.

The reason (saith he) is the saying of the Apostle Paul, 2 Cor. 7.20. Let every man abide in the same calling, wherein he was called. Now when a lay man doth take upon him the preaching of the Word, he doth not abide in the same calling, wherein he was called; he doth not keepe himselfe within the compasse of his owne calling, but he doth passe the bounds and limits of it. And doth not the same Apostle will the Thessalonians (1 Thes. 4.11.) To studdy to be quiet and to doe their owne businesse, to worke with their owne hands, as he commanded them? Now when a Lay-person doth undertake the preaching of the Word, he doth not doe his owne businesse, his proper worke, but doth meddle with a businesse that concernes him not.

Thus far the Ministers Reason; mine answers followes.

The Answer.

That we may the better give an answer to this reason, wee will draw it up into two Sillogismes.

The First whereof is this.

Every one ought to continue in that calling wherein he was called. 1 Cor. 7.2 [...].

But a Lay-person, that takes upon him the Preaching of the Word doth not continue in the same calling wherein he was called. Therefore a Lay person ought not to preach the Word.

To the First we Answer, That the Authors bare literall expression of those words, though not his intention in the expressing of them is good and Lawfull. His expression's good; because 'tis the Apostles: his intention evill; because not consonant but repugnant to the meaning of the Holy Ghost in that place. Wherein it seemes that hee laid it down either from grosse ignorance, or with purpose to deceive and beguile unstable Souls. His drift in the allegation of that Text was to prove; that Lay men (as they call them) having trades &c. ought to continue in them, and not to depart from them. But how contrary this is to the meaning of the Apostle these considerations will plainely shew.

First, consider to whom the Apostle directs the words, to wit, to believing Husbands, Wives and Servants.

Secondly, consider the end for which they were spoken, which was [Page 18] the satisfaction of the Corinthians in this scruple, whether (to instance in an Husband) the believing Husband should continue with his un­believing Wife, and not leave her he being called to the Faith. The Apostle denyes it, and commands him to continue in that calling (to wit of an Husband) in which he was, when called to the Faith.

Thirdly, If that be the meaning, then the Apostle (as I suppose) must needs be contrary to himselfe. For in vers. the 21. he exhorts Servants (the persons to whom the exortation in verse the 20. was directed▪) that if they be called being Servants, that they should not care: but if they might be free, that they should use it rather. Now according to the Authors exposition, I cannot see how these two pla­ces can agree together.

Fourthly, consider the ill consequence of that exposition. Then Christs Disciples did sin in departing from their first callings and in setting upon another. And if they did sin in it, then Christ was the causer of it, for he commanded them so to doe: which to affirme is no lesse then blasphemy.

Now you may see, that the proposition for the end which he useth it is vaine and idle. But suppose it were granted, that it is unlawfull to leave one calling for another. What should wee then say to those English Priests, who at a Prelates prohibition, will c [...]ase to be preach­ers and will become Physitians? And what will it make against pri­vate mens preaching? Nothing surely, as we shall presently by our Answer to the Minor proposition clearly prove.

Now for the Assumption, where the Author t [...]lls us; that a Lay man, that takes upon him the preaching of the Word departs from that calling, wherein he was called.

To which I Answer. First, That if his words be rightly understood (as being the words of the Apostle) he speaketh non-sence. For this is the meaning of the Apostles words. That every one ought to con­tinue in his calling (as that of an Husband, &c.) wherein hee was when called to the Faith; although as being an Husband he hath an unbelieving Wife. This being the Apostles minde, the Assumption will thus runne.

Every Lay person that preacheth the Word, being called to bee an Husband or Servant departs from being an Husband or Servant.

Secondly, Although we should take his meaning and leave his words: yet here is nothing but bare affirmations, without any [Page 19] probation, and therefore of Christians it deserves no better then re­jection. The man had said something to purpose, if he had proved, that every lay man departs from his calling by taking on him the preaching of the Word: as heer he hath affirmed.

Thirdly, I Answer, That his assumption is most false and untrue.

1. Because, they doe not depart from their callings, who use them. But those who preach as lay persons use their callings: therfore, &c.

Secondly, Because they depart not from their callings, who live by them. But they who preach as Lay persons, live not by their prea­ching, but by their callings.

Fourthly, I Answer, That dangerous consequences doe follow from it. As,

First, That all those Christians in the Primative time who were scattered abroad, by reason of the persecution, that arose about Ste­ven, departed from their callings, for it is written, that they went about preaching. Acts 8.4.

Secondly, That Paul departed from his preaching, because hee used the occupation of Tent-making, Acts 18.3.

Thirdly, That God commands all, who have the gift of prophe­sie to depart from their lawfull callings. For he hath commanded all that have the gift to use it, according to the proportion of Faith. Rom. 12.6. Thus farre the Answer.

Sir, if you would judge with impartiality, you would (notwith­standing your high accusation) bee inforc'd to pronounce me non-guilty. If you will not; yet I hope the reader will, who is ingenious and impartiall. Wherefore I might in equity draw my selfe as inno­cent out of the accusation, and bring you in, as being guilty of (to use your owne words) a fowle aspertion and unchristian slander against me.

Before I passe over the accusation have patience to heare a few of mine observations from it.

First, I observe (but this by the bye) your great oversight in your very Grammaticals. 1. In mis-understanding common plaine Eng­lish, which a man below the degree of a Master of Arts might have easily perceived▪. 2. In taking Priests, Preachers and Physitians to be words of the singular number.

Fourthly, I cannot but note (I wish you may seriously take notice of it) your willingnesse to expose me to publike disgrace. My name [Page 20] hath heretofore amongst some been somewhat infamous in the Citie by your occasion. But as therewith being unsatisfied, you have rai­sed a rumour throughout the Country by your printed papers; that I am guilty of a fowle aspersion and unchristian slander. And all this notwithstanding I was publiquely cleared before the Magistrate. For I was (being at the Tolsy) accused by one of your party, and clear'd by a Minister of your owne, after I had made for my selfe a briefe A­pologie in the audience of the whole Assembly, hee professing that I was only faulty in calling them Priests, a disgraceful title. To whom I replyed after this manner. That the name in it selfe is not disgrace­full. And although it belongs not now to men as Church-Officers: yet 'twas a wonder that men retaining Episcopall Ordination should be offended with it; [...]th by that name they were Ordained Ministers, and frequently so call'd by their Book of Common Prayers.

What Sir, is this a carriage fit for a Christian to a Christian? Or am I not a Christian, because not a dependant but Independant Pres­by [...]erian? Were I a Turk, you might not wrong me: for the Gospel doth not allow a Saint to hate, of un [...]ustly to disgrace his enemy: Well Sir, take heed, least the same bread by some other be broken to you; and the same measure rendred, which you have meted out to me in fall measure, pressed downe and running over.

Thirdly, I have observed your straying from the rules of common equity; in that you have accus'd me in the worlds eye as a person fowly criminous, without shewing wherein, or proving, that I was guilty. Phylosophy (wherewith that you are acquainted, you would by your title master of Arts informe your readers) it would have taught you a better lesson, had you but consulted with its Oracles, although you had in the doctrine of Theologie been wholly ignorant. Thus much of that accusation.

Now further you have discover'd your Charity towards me to bee but fained, by accusing me (in your Epistle to the Reader) of a crime as great, if not greater then the former: to wit, that I took the bold­nesse publiquely before the Magistrate to defend the practice of pri­vate mens Preaching, with such contemptuous language against the godly and faithfull Ministers of this Kingdome, as the five Reverend Apologists abhorre the thoughts of. 'Tis true, I tooke the boldnesse to defend that practice, but with no contemptuous language against the godly, my Soul abhorr'd it. But [...]ir, what were the contemptuous [Page 21] speeches I then used? Or how came you to know them, being not then present, if my memorie proves faithfull to me? You were per­adventure so inform'd. But they (if any) who did so informe you, will not dare (I am confident) before my face to affirme it; for I shall disprove them. Sir, shall I take the boldnesse to informe you, being ignorant of the truth in that particular, if not worse. The truth is, I was so farre from being guilty of contemptuous language against any (much lesse the godly) that so much as an accusation was not carryed on against me. Yea further I was (at my second appear­ing) by an Alderman publikely freed from being guilty of any such language. And I appeale to all of that Assembly, but especially to the Right Worshipfull Major * (that then was) and Aldermen (whose curteous carriage at that time towards me I remember with all grate­fulnesse) to sentence for or against me. What Sir,Mr. Luke Nurse. do you thinke your bare accusation sufficient to condemne me? At that rate who shall be guiltlesse? Ecquis insons erit, si accusatori crimine non probato, fides habea­tur? Said Julian the Emperour. Or doe you thinke it not an evill to take up and divulge false reports of others? Or is it from your cha­ritable credulity that you have followed Mr. Edwards in telling Sto­ries? Thus much for your feigned charity, now for your uncharitable curtesie.

You have (pag. 1.) inform'd your Reader, that in answering my writing you have gratified me with the omission of things scattered in it. Surely Sir I hold not my self bound in duty to give you thanks for this your curtesie, it being but a crafty way of disgracing, or at the best but Court-like, meerly Complementall. For I suppose had it been reall, much of your paines in page 21. had been spared, and such an answer to my Querie had not been rendred. But I must (say you) returne an answer to his demand. Peradventure 'twas because you could (within the compasse of that writing) finde nothing else, from which colourably you might disgrace me. But what is the de­mand you must needs answer? The Minister having affirmed, that the knowledge of the Arts and Tongues is required to make a Preacher, I therefore demanded; Whither by Arts he did understand the art of Geometry, Astronomy, or the like? And for Tongues, Whither it be the Welch, Irish, Latine, Greek, or Hebrew? Or whither all Tongues be required to make a man fit for Pro­phesying? For this Querie I am to be blamed, if your observations on it be observable. What is it? Say you. A scoffe. That's your conceit. [Page 22] But what doe you gather from it as imply'd in it? First that I am ig­norant, Secondly impudent. But by what Logick? Not by that, which Aristotle but Mrs Invid [...]a taught you. But let us see how in your judgement mine ignorance and impudence shines forth by that Querie. Mine ignorance of the Arts appeares by my scoffing at them; for thus you say. Our writer scoffing at them is only a proclaming his igno­rance of them. Sir you have there gather'd up, what I never strew'd, and have builded on a foundation never laid by me. If you could prove, that I scoffed at the Arts, your inference would be good, that I was ignorant of them. But I was so farre from scoffing at them, that I alwaies have highly esteem'd them, since I enjoy'd the least insight in the least of them. Now for mine impudency in regard of the Tongues, which you observe and wonder at also. For thus you say. For the Tongues; First I wonder at this youths impudency, &c. What, no lesse than impudency? But let us see, whether you have without im­pudency accus'd me for it. How have you made good your charge against me? By two Reasons, alike weighty. First in that I jumble the Greeke and Hebrew Tongues in a scoffe amongst the Welch and Irish. Sir, it seemes that I am (in your judgement) impudent, not because I made a mention of those Tongues together, but because I did it in a scoffing manner. But how doe you prove it? so you sup­pose. But suppositions are insufficient to justifie accusations. Now what's your Second Reason? This, because I parallel'd in a jeering manner the originall Languages with the Welch and Irish, Tongues of least use and repute. If this were true, then might you argue impu­dency truly from it. But how may it in equity be gathered from my Querie, that I did parallel or equall the Welch and Irish Tongues to the Greeke and Hebrew, because I did there name them together? If I were guilty of impudency and did see it, I should not bee so impu­dent as not to be asham'd of it. Notwithstanding what here you have said I see no cause why I should blush. Thus ends the Second Part of the Treatise.

The Third Part. Wherein the examination of Private mens Preaching is examined.

ALl is not (saith the Proverb) Gold, that glisters. Ther­fore let us (according to the old Motto) first try be­fore we trust: or rather (as the Apostle speaketh) Try all things and hold fast that which is good. Wherefore I shal here bring the Examination of private mens preach­ing unto the touch-stone of Examination, affording a lust and Legall tryall to it; that we may know how justly to passe sentence on it. In page 1. mine Antagonist hath exprest my grant to the Minister, mine Adversary, as he calls him. I am still in the same minde. What I then granted, I shall not now deny. If private men, gifted for preaching, have no more authority to preach; than Ʋzzah had to put his hand to the Arke, which was contrary to command; they shall be (as Ʋzzah was) guilty of sinne, if they doe it.

Next having laid downe the Doctrine, I maintain'd against the Minister, he drawes forth three Scriptures, which I alleadged to justi­fie private mens Exercise of the gift of prophesie; and endeavours to make them to speake to his owne heart, and not so much, as to cast a favourable countenance on mine opinion.

The first place mentioned is Rom. 12.6. Having therefore gifts, &c. whether Prophesie, let us prophesie according to the proportion of Faith.

In replying to mine Antagonist, I shall present you first with a brief Exposition of that Scripture, then with a short (yet full) confutati­on of his Answer. For the first of these thus. From the beginning of the third to the ninth verse of this Chapter, the Apostle gives exhor­tations concerning those, who have gifts for, or Offices in the Church. In which we may in generall take notice of those particulars, as, the manner, ground and matter of them. How he exhorts them you have laid downe in these words; I say to [or charge] every man, that is a­mongst you; Wherein you may observe the extent and authority, that his exhortations carry with them. Now the ground on which hee builds his charge is exprest in these words, By the Grace given to me, i. e. [Page 24] By that ability and authority, which God through his Grace towards me hath bestow'd on me, to instruct and exhort you. Now the matter of the exhortation is laid downe, more generally in the 3, 4, & 5. verses, and more particularly in the ensuing verses.

In the generall he discovereth their duty with the reason of it. The duty is both negatively and affirmatively laid before them, thus; Not to thinke of himselfe more highly than he ought to thinke, but to thinke soberly, ac­cording as God hath dealt to every man the measure of Faith. Which with the words foregoing is as much as if he had said. I charge every one that amongst you, by reason of that ability and authority bestow'd on me for exhortation, not to desire in regard of gifts, to seeme to have more gifts, or more of any gift than he hath: and in regard of Offi­ces, not to desire to doe more in his Office or Ministry than what be­longs to it; nor to go beyond his own calling into anothers. Where­in the Apostle specially condemnes two evils, first pride, whereby men desire to seeme to have what they have not, and to be what they are not, lifting up themselves and despising others as uselesse in their gifts or Ministry: Secondly, discontentednesse, whereby men are not contented with Gods distribution towards them and disposition of them in the body. In like manner he commends to them the contra­ry vertues.

Now I come to the reason of the exhortation, set downe in the 4. and 5. verses, and drawne from the relation that is amongst Saints. They (though many) being but one body in Christ Jesus and so mem­bers one of another, have divers actions, and therefore ought not to desire to doe the action of every member, but to bee contented doing that, for which God hath plac'd them in the body: And also ought to looke upon others gifts and places as appointed by God for, and tending to their profit and commodity. This Reason is also illustra­ted by a similitude vers. the 4. Now the Apostle goes on, and makes application in particular of the exhortation, he had in generall pro­pos'd to them. First, he laies a ground to the thing intended, in these words; Having then gifts differing according to the Grace given to us; that is, seeing we have (being one body) divers actions, and so divers gifts for the performance of them, according to Gods gracious dispensati­on to us. Next he sets the Exhortation on particular persons, by di­viding the praxin or action of the severall members of the body, into Prophesie and Ministery. I shall speake only of the first, to wit, [Page 25] Prophesie. Whether Prophesie [let us prophesie] according to the proportion of Faith. Instead of the words, let us prophesie, we are to understand the whole 3. vers. and so the Apostles minde seemes to be this. I charge every one, that is amongst you having the gift of Prophesie, (whereby hee's able to speake to others edification, exhortation and comfort) to behave himself humbly and contentedly in the exercise of that gift, in the discovery of that measure of knowledge injoy'd by him. So much by way of Exposition.

Now I shall (according to promise) fall upon the second thing, the consultation of mine Antagonist's Answer. He endeavours to make Rom. 12.6. to be an unfit foundation, to beare up the opinion of the lawfulnesse of private mens preaching; and not only so, but also to speake against it: And so it doth, if he mistake not; for thus he saith, The truth is, this Scripture concludes against him. But what course doth he take to bring his purpose to passe? Truly thus hee thought to effect it, by putting on that Scripture an Exposition of his owne, and by crossing that, which I gave to it.

In replying to both, I shall not spend time to gather up or Answer all, that he there scatters; knowing how to imploy my time better: but shall only strike at the body, which being downe, will be suffici­ent. His Exposition you have page the second, the summe whereof is this. The Apostle (saith he) requires; that they who have these gifts [...] and [...] (ibid.) Prophesie and Ministery, or (as he translates it) Deaconship, exercise then in humility and fidelity. Where by Prophesie hee would understand the gifted callings both of the Pastor and Teacher: and by Ministery, the Office of the Deacon only.

Answ. Mine Antagonist by his Exposition doth (as I suppose) not a little straine that Scripture. That you may perceive my supposall not to be groundlesse, I shall put that Exposition in the ballance of the Sanctu­ary, placing Truth in the scale opposite to it, whereby you may easily discerne the lightnesse of it. Although I cannot deny, but that the Apostle doth in this Chapter require those to preach (as mine Anta­gonist saith) who are by Office Pastors and Teachers; and those who have lying on them the Deacons Office, to behave themselves in sim­plicity: yet I cannot believe, that we are by the word Prophesie to un­derstand both the Pastors and Teachers Office; or that by the word Ministery is signified the Office of those only, who are intrusted with the Churches money, for the supply of the poor's necessity, whom we commonly call Deacons.

[Page 26]First I cannot be perswaded, that the word Prophesie doth in Rom. 12.6. signifie the Offices or gifted callings of Pastors and Teachers. 1. Because a contrary interpretation of that word Prophesie would agree with the Scripture. If I should affirme, that Prophesie doth there signifie gifts or abilities, whereby men are fitted to be instruments for the World's and Churches commodity; I should not stray from it's common acceptation in the Scripture, neither should I crosse Pauls in­tention in that Scripture. 2. Because that interpretation, which makes the word Prophesie to denote the Offices of Pastors and Teach­ers is contrary to the Scripture. 1. Because 'tis contrary to common speaking (from which Scripture is not wont to vary) by gifts to ex­presse Offices. 2. In that, Prophesie (in Scripture phrase) is a gift, and commonly doth signifie abilities; 1 Cor. 14. But where the Offices of Pastors and Teachers are expressed by it I yet finde not. It is so far from signifying the Offices of both, that I finde it to denote the Office of neither Pastor nor Teacher. And it is so farre from denoting the Office of either, that it signifies the gift of neither. 1 Cor. 12.8. com­pared with the 12. of the same Chapter.

Secondly, Because that Exposition doth (if I mistake not) repre­sent Paul as one guilty of using tautology & battology in his speak­ing, which to affirme is not agreeing to Scripture.

Secondly, I cannot be induc'd to believe, that the word [ [...]] Ministery doth in Rom. 12.7. hold forth the Office of Deacons only, whose worke is to make distribution to the poore of the Churches contribution for them. 1. Because there is no necessity that it should here be so expounded. If the word Ministery were in Scripture no where used but to expresse the Office of Deacons only, peradventure it would necessarily follow, that it ought in Rom. 12. to be so expoun­ded. But it doth in generall signifie any Ministery; and in particular that of Teaching Elders: as in Acts 6.4. and Eph. 4.12. Wherefore the Dispensers of the Word are called [ [...]] Ministers or Dea­cons. 1 Cor. 3.5. Therefore there is no necessity, that it must in Rom. 12. be taken for the Office of the Deacon only. 2. Because there is a probability at least, that it ought not here to be so interpreted. 1. Be­cause we have immediately a recitall of the several Officers or Mini­sters of the Church, as an amplification or explication of the Apostles minde in that expression, vers. 7. 2. Because in verse the 8. (where the Deacon is spoken of) he is not called [...] a Minister, [Page 27] but [...] (Qui distribuit) he that distributeth. Whereby Paul seemes (at least) to give us notice, that by Ministery he did not intend the Office of the Deacon only. 3. Because from that interpretation (if not many, yet) some absurdities will be produced. As, 1. There­by Paul appears as using needlesse repetitions in speaking; which may (as I conceive) be easily perceiv'd, by comparing verse 7. with the 8. 2. Thereby Ruling Elders (mentioned verse 8.) are excluded as none of those gifts (verse 6.) given for the Churches good. The gifts are (saith mine Antagonist) Prophesie and Ministery, i. e. the Offices (as hee would have it) of Pastors, Teachers and Deacons; and so Ruling El­ders are excluded. So much in answer to his exposition. I shall now come to make a Reply to his Exceptions against mine Exposition. He endeavours (page 3.) to make invalid mine Interpretation of that Scripture; and so to shoulder out my deduction from it. But how doth hee endeavour it? Surely by labouring to prove that the word Gifts is not to be taken for abilities only; but for Offices or gifted callings. But how doth he prove it? By two Reasons, too weake to bolster up his opinion. The first whereof is this. 1. Because the word Gift (saith he) is used in Scripture (as I expound it) for the Office it selfe or gifted calling, Mr. W. &c.

Answ. To this reason in way of reply, I shall make this answer.

1. That he hath not shewed, where in Scripture the word transla­lated Gifts, in Rom. 12.6. is used for Offices themselves, or gifted callings. What meanes then those Scriptures, Eph. 4.8. & chap. 3.8. which he hath quoted? Surely they meane not, what hee meant in quoting of them; the first being in sound not in substance for him, the other neither in sound nor substance helping of him. Wherefore I shall only reply to the first of them, to wit, that in Eph. 4.8. where the word Gift is used, but notwithstanding it makes nothing for his purpose. 1. Because the word Gift is there not to be taken for Offi­ces or gifted callings, but for those new Covenant-mercies, which God, by the hand of Christ, gives to al those, to whom he gives him­selfe to be a God by way of Covenant. Which Mercies are mention­ed, Hebr. 8.10. For this is the Covenant, that I will make with the house of Israel after those daies, saith the Lord, I will put my Lawes into their minde, and write them in their hearts: (or according to the Greeke) giving my Lawes into their minde, I will write them on their hearts, &c. i. e. I will, by giving a powerfull light into their understandings, cause them to bee like [Page 28] me and to give up themselves to me, and so I will appeare to be their God, and they shall appeare to be my people. That the word Gifts there ought to be so expounded, and not as mine Antagonist would have it, is very cleare, both from the context, and also from the place, whence it was drawn.

2. If it were granted, that the word Gifts in that place doth signi­fie Offices or gifted callings: Yet it doth not follow that in Rom. 8.6. it ought so to be taken: for although in our English Bibles the words doe not differ: yet in the Originall they are not the same. The word translated Gifts in Rom. 12. is [...], (gratiae) graces; but in Ephes. 4. [...], dona, gifts, many of the Clergy cry out against some of the Lay­ty, as unfit to open or apply the Scriptures, because they are unac­quainted with the original languages. I suppose many of them talk of Originals more than use them: It seems mine Antagonist had the Eng­lish not Greek Testament in his hand, when he quoted this Scripture.

Secondly, although it were quoted, that the word ( [...],) Gifts is in Scripture somewhere used for gifted callings: yet it doth not follow, that in Rom. 12.6. it must be so understood, first, because one and the same word may in divers places be of different significati­ons: yea, in one and the same place it may signifie divers things.

2. Because that word in Rom. 12. translated Gifts, is often in the Scripture used for abilities only, as in Rom. 1.11. 1 Cor. 12.4. and so his reason will make rather against him, than for him. For thus one might argue from his Reason. If the word Gifts be somewhere in Scripture used for abilities only; then it may be so taken in Rom. 12. But in Scripture the word so signifies: Therefore in Rom. 12. it may be so expounded.

So much for his first Reason. Now to the second, which is drawn from the absurdities that will follow; if we take the word Gifts to signify their abilities only. That I may the better try its strength, I shall draw it up into this one Syllogisme.

That exposition of Scripture is not to be followed, from which ab­surdities do naturally flow. But if the word Gifts in Rom. 12.6. be expounded abilities only, thence absurdities will follow naturally: Therefore, &c.

The first I shall grant to be an orthodox truth; but let us see whi­ther we may lawfully passe the same sentence upon the Assumption. False accusing both of opinions and persons is a crime too common. [Page 29] Many things, which are not absurd, are branded for absurdities. Ma­ny opinions and practises are accused with the bringing forth of monstrous births of absurdities, which are as free from them, as Christ was from iniquities. But doth not the expounding of the word Gifts, in Rom. 12. for abilities, produce and bring forth many absurdities? Surely there had been no need to wander farre for resolution in this particular; if the Author of the Reason had been as good in proving as bold in affirming: For absurdities (saith he) will follow such an Exposition, which are in number two, according to his reckoning. The first is this following.

We may then proceed from abilities to the Exercise of other callings, G. W. Pag. 3. for if a­bility to preach be sufficient to Authorize one to Preach without any more adoe, then also ability to Baptize, and to Rule, and Governe, is sufficient to Authorize any to Baptize, and to take on them to Rule, Governe and Judge, as Rulers, Magistrates and Judges doe, &c.

Answ. Three things are here affirmed, which are clearly expressed, or ne­cessarily implyed. I shall here declare them, and declare something in Answer to each of them.

First, He affirmes, that it is unlawfull to proceed from abilities to the exercise of callings.

Secondly, That he that Preacheth, doth by Preaching enter into the calling of him, who by Office is a preacher.

Thirdly, That if it be lawfull, from abilities (without any more adoe) to proceed to the Ministers calling: then 'tis lawfull, from abilities to proceed to other callings, as that of the Magistrate to Rule, &c.

To the First of these I shall thus Answer.

First, I dare not allow that speech to bee true without exception. For there are some callings as the Husband-mans calling with some other, into which a man, having ability, may lawfully enter, and in them exercise himselfe from abilities only.

Secondly, That if it be spoken with limitation, it may be receiv'd for a truth without contradiction. If it bee restrained to callings in the Church, then I affirme; that it is unlawfull for any man to pro­ceed into the exercise of callings meerly from abilities: because the Lord in his Word requires, that unto qualifications for Offices, Election and Ordination be annexed, before the exercise of them (in way of Office) be un­dertaken.

[Page 30]Now to the Second of his affirmations, which is this, That hee that Preacheth doth enter into the calling of him, who by Office is a Preacher.

This affirmation is false and absurd, which may appeare by these two Reasons.

First, Because a man may doe, in some way, some actions that be­long to anothers calling, and yet not intrench upon, or enter into his calling. Praising of God (under the Law) upon Musicall Instru­ments was the calling of some of the Levites; Now did all (not being Levites) intrench upon their calling, who did (in the presence of others) praise God upon Musicall Instruments? Prayer is a worke that belongs to a Ministers calling, Acts 6.4. Now doe all those, that pray (when a company is met together) as their mouth unto God, enter into the Ministers calling? Is it not a worke of the Magistrate to judge betwixt persons in matters of civill difference? Notwith­standing the Apostle bids the Corinthians to set those to judge, who were not judges by Office. 1 Cor. 6. But I hope the Apostle would not have them to intrench on the Magistrates calling. Preaching of the Gospel is an Apostles worke, Rom. 1.1. Doe all then, that take upon them to be Preachers, enter into the Apostles Office? &c. Every cal­ling hath not all it's workes peculiar to it selfe.

Secondly, Because Preaching is not a worke peculiar to a Minister; that is, 'tis not a worke, which none may lawfully doe, save those who are in Office for to doe it. I shall here propose some questions only; The first part of this Treatise being a proof of this Reason, to which I shall refer thee (Christian Reader) for thy further satisfacti­on.

Quest. 1 Where in the Scripture hath God called Church Officers to preach, and restrained others from the work?

Quest. 2 Whether there be not (at least) a probability, that preaching is not peculiar to a Minister; seeing that many both godly and learned have affirm'd it. Amongst many others here, what one (and in a Preface to a Sermon, preached before the Parliament) said. The peculiar workes (said he) of the Ministery, were the administration of the Sacraments and Discipline; but as for preaching it is a more common worke, &c. Mr. John Ellis junior. Epist. The sole path to a sound peace.

The Elders of the Churches of New-England tels us. That the Act of praying and preaching is improperly called a Ministeriall worke, &c. Church-Government and Church-Covenant discussed. pag. 78.76. I re­member [Page 31] a saying, that another hath to this purpose. The Papists (saith he) and some ignorant Protestants, would have no word of God sounded out by any, but by their selected Clergie.

Whither they, who doe affirme preaching to be a worke peculiar to Quest. 3 Church-Officers,2 Chron. 19.20. doe not sin against the Generation of the Righte­ous? Doe they not condemne Jehosaphat (and others) who taught and exhorted the People (publiquely) to believe God; he being nei­ther Priest nor Prophet. If preaching be a worke peculiar to the Mi­nistery; who will justifie the Martyrs? Nay, who will not blame them rather? May we not say to them, O Martyres culpandi estis, ye are blame-worthy, for intrenching on the Ministers calling, in that you (being not Church-Officers) did preach the Word a Company being met together; for did you not Expound and apply the Scriptures, informe and exhort the people? Why suffered ye so many things in vaine? Why was the enemy constrained to cut your Tongues, to gagge and with balls of Iron to stop your mouthes, to hinder you from preaching; seeing God did not command you to it?

How may the Saints make use of their Gifts, knowledge and Ut­terance Quest. 4 for the building up of the Church and yet not preach?Hebr. 4.12. c. 10.25. Or how may they be said to be Teachers of others; and to exhort one a­nother, when they meet together, and yet not preach? To this Question, mine Antagonist hath framed an answer, (pag. 6.) but how far from the purpose, let us a little consider. He answers to a saying of mine, which was this, It is the duty of a Servant of God to use those gifts for the edifying of the Church, which God hath given him for that end. Which he grants to be true, but not to my purpose: but let us see how men may without preaching, use their gifts of knowledge and utterance. He will informe you (pag. 7.) that there are otherwaies of using gifts for the edifying of the Church besides preaching. He tels us, that Fa­mily governors and Parents must edifie their Children and Family, and God gives them Gifts in Prayer and knowledge, and for that purpose. But I pray, what's this to the purpose? The speech was not of Families, but of Churches. But what if there bee none in the Fa­mily sit to be edified, being not begotten; how then may hee use his gifts of edifying? He further tels us of another way, more likely to be the way, thus. And Christians (saith he) must exhort, and comfort, G. W. Answ. 4. and [...]difie one another in Christian conference and discourse, &c. This is true, that the Saints may and ought to doe so. But to me 'tis strange, and [Page 32] no lesse than a riddle, to affirme it lawfull for private persons to do so, and yet unlawfull for them to preach; as if there were such a vast difference between it and preaching. Tis my desire to plow with the Authors heifer, that I may understand that his a [...]nigmatical affirma­tion What may they exhort, comfort and edify one another, when they are met together, and yet not preach? Oh strange expression!

Now to the third thing affirmed by mine Antagonist, which is this.

Mr. W. That if it be lawfull from abilities to proceed to the Ministers calling, then 'tis lawfull from abilities to proceed to other mens callings; as the Magi­strate, &c.

Answ. First, This is a strange kinde of reasoning; if 'tis lawful from abi­lities to proceed to one calling, then 'tis lawfull from abilities to proceed to any calling. What rule is there delivered by either Aristotle, Ramus, or any other in their Logick, to iustifie this kinde of arguing generals from particulars not of the same kinde? What Reason may there be found to plead for that Assertion? Let him, that can shew.

Secondly, If it were granted, 'twere not for his purpose: for I have proved, that he, that preacheth doth not by preaching enter into the Ministers calling. Thus the Answer to the first absurdity; let us now cast our eies on the second.

G. W. If all that can may and must preach, the Ministers Office were needlesse. What need of Authority by Office to doe that, which every one may and must doe with­out, it, &c.

Answ. First, That such an absurdity will follow, so saith mine Antago­nist. But doth not the Scripture say so also? Surely from his writ­ing I cannot informe you; for not so much as one Sic Dominus dixit may be found in it. Wherefore if I should but barely deny, what hee barely affirmes; why might it not be sufficient? Seeing that my Nay hath as much authority as his Yea, in matters of this Nature.

Eph. 4.11.Secondly, 'Tis false, else Paul will be found a man making opposi­tion against Christs Institutions. Hath not Christ ordained Pastors and Teachers,1 Cor. 14. men in Office, for the Churches edification? And did not Paul allow those to prophesie in the Church of Corinth, who had the Gift, but were not by Office Pastors or Teachers? And so did not he approve of that, which made the Office of Ministers uselesse? For they publikely preach't in the Church for it's edification. But if the preaching of men, who are neither Pastors nor Teachers doe now [Page 33] make uselesse the Ministers calling; then it could at that time have no better effects; And so Paul must needs be an enemy to Christs or­dinary Ministery.

Thirdly, Private mens preaching is so far from making uselesse the Ministers calling; that it doth not a little help it.Heb. 5.11. For hereby their mouthes are opened to speake wisdome (the deep things of Christ Jesus) to the people. The truths of God taught by the Officers are the more confirmed, when others also beare witnesse to them. Also the truths taught by the Officers are the better preserved; for by the use of private mens gifts they are often occasionally mentioned. The Officers are moreover comforted and incouraged; by beholding Gods blessing upon their Ministery, in that some grow so much, that they grow up to bee Teachers of others. The truth of this those know, who are Officers in Congregationall Churches, where there are such private preachers. Thus much in answer to the Assumption, which hath denyed liberty to the conclusion (therefore the Exposi­tion of the word Gifts in Rom. 12. for abilities only is not to be fol­lowed) to passe as an Orthodox Truth.

Now I shall lead you on to the Second Scripture, which as mine An­tagonist conceives, will not plead for private mens preaching.

The place afore mentioned is Acts 8.1. and 4.

And at that time there was a great persecution against the Church, which was at Jerusalem,Vers. 1. and they were all scattered abroad throughout the Regions of Ju­dea and Samaria, except the Apostles.

Therefore they that were scattered abroad went everywhere preaching the Word. Vers. 4.

I shall here in speaking observe this method.

First, I shall discover my deduction from it.

Secondly, I shall answer to the reply of mine Antagonist.

For the First thus. The thing thence concluded was, that private persons (having abilities) may lawfully when a company is met together) preach the Word; in that those there mentioned did so preach, they being (for the generality) private persons or no Church-Officers: sith their practice being approved may be to us for a paterne. That they were (for the greatest part) private persons is the thing in Question. That they were, so is mine opinion; wherein I am neither alone, nor without reason.

I am not alone, for others thinke so with me. The Elders of [Page 34] the Churches of New-England were of the same minde, this being their saying: They that were scattered abroad by reason of the persecution, that arose about Ste­ven, were not Church-Officers, at least all of them (for the Apostles who were their [...]e, if not their only preaching Officers, were not scattered abroad but re­mained still at Jerusalem, c. 8. v. 1.) and yet th [...]se men did so preach the word of the Lord Jesus, &c. so Dr. Ames, with divers others.

Now the reasons, that make me so to believe (amongst other) may be these fol­lowing.

First, Because it plainely tells us, that the generality of the Church were scatter­ed, v. 1. Now the Scripture will not informe us, that there were (at that time) any Teaching Officers, save the Apostles: and Reason will teach us, that the greatest part could not be Officers. Which scattered Christians (without any exception) are said Ans. 4. to preach the word. Secondly, Because [...] in such an Exposition, no Scrip­ture will be crossed; neither will any bad consequence be thence produced, &c.

I shall draw you now forwards to consider mine Antagonists answer; wherein two things especially are endeavour'd by him: First, that they who preached were not private persons; Secondly, that if they were such, yet we might not gather thence a Warrant for the preaching of private persons now. To his Reply I shall Answer; First more generally; Secondly in a more particular manner. For the generall thus.

First, There is scarce a Scripture, which lyes not under divers Interpretations. And there may appear a probability of Truth in crosse Expositions. Whence wee gather the needfulnesse of the Spirit for our direction. There is not a little difference be­twixt my selfe and mine Antagonist about this Scripture. That you may see who is in the truth, learne to deny your selves, and seeke the Spirit to be your teacher.

Secondly, Mine Antagonist hath laid down in his Answer nothing as certaine. By which he endeavours, that this Scripture may be rather wholly uselesse, than usefull for us.

Thirdly, Those whom we commonly call Seekers may take up mine Antagonists Answer, as usefull for them, and against him and his brethren. Were I a professed Seeker I should shew my skill, in arguing against mine Antagonist (he being now a Minister) with his owne arguments. Now to a more particular Answer.

M [...]ne Antagonist hath proposed three consideration to convince his Reader, that those scattered (but preaching) Christians were not private persons.

Mine opposers first opposing consideration you have (pag. 10.) at large expressed: The summe is this.

Mr. W.It is probable if not certaine, that the Apostles gave them Authority to preach, and so they were not (as Lay men with u [...] private persons.

Answ. What he by Authority meanes, I know not. If he would have us by his words un­derstand, that the Apostles did shew to the scattered Christians before their departure that it was not only lawfull but also needfull for them (as they went) to preach the Gospel, that the Kingdome of Jesus Christ might be promoted and inlarged? I answer.

First, It is (I doe not say, must be) supposed; that the Apostles gave to the scat­tered Christians such direction. Sith the Scripture doth not so much as hint at it, wee are not bound to believe it. From meerly supposed suppositions, we cannot draw for faith sound conclusions.

Secondly, If it were allowed, yet the preaching of private men now, might not thence be denyed. For the Apostle were in those daies to believers, instead of New Testament Scriptures. And therefore if it may bee proved from their writings (as I [Page 35] have in the First Part of this Treatise) that private men injoying ability have Autho­rity to preach the Gospel, it is all one, as if they had Authority from their persons immediately. The second consideration, which mine Antagonist gives, you have page 10. and 11. The summe whereof is this.

That if those scattered Christians had not Authority from the Apostles:G. W. yet they might be put out of the condition of private persons by immediate Revelation.

Answ. The same Answer will serve for this as for the former, for Revelation was to them instead of the Apostles; and so instead of written Scriptures. Wherefore if the Saints now by Revelation from the Scripture doe understand, that they may from ability proceed to preach the Gospel, 'tis all one as if they did so understand by Revelation without the Scripture.

The third consideration appears page 12. which is in briefe this.

All that were scattered were not private persons.G. W. Wherefore 'tis probable that none did preach, but those that were publick: for if those that are private may preach, then they may Baptize also.

Answ. I shall not affirme, that all, who were scattered, were private persons; for wee reade, that Philip the Deacon was amongst them: but that (as they call them) Teaching Church-Officers were with them cannot be proved; for the Apostles re­main'd at Jerusalem. There is therefore no need to prove, that others besides pub­licke persons did preach. When they did preach, they were (in a sence) publicke enough, but in another sence not publick. The Scripture tels us, that they, who were scattered went about preaching, without making the least exception. But if they may preach, they may Baptize also; saith mine Antagonist. He hath said it indeed, and said it, and double said it; as if it were of no small force to convince us of the unlaw­fulnesse of private mens preaching. Who may Baptize (as well as who may bee Bap­tiz'd) is a thing in question. What my judgement therein is I am not bound here to discover. But let me a little reason with mine Antagonist. Sir, by what good conse­quence will it follow, that if private persons may preach, they may Baptize also? What is there no worke peculiar to Church-Officers, if preaching be not? If a private per­son may judge between others in matters of civill difference,1 Cor. 6. which is a Magistrates Worke, then a private person may lay fines and taxes on the people, which is another Worke belonging to the Magistrate. Is this not as good consequence, as that of mine Antagonist? But we say, that Officers have some worke peculiar to them; other worke common to them with others. And is not this as good consequenciall arguing; If private persons may pray, then they may Baptize also; seeing prayer is a work that belongs to the Ministers Office. Wherefore (by mine Antagonists favour) his conse­quence (if 'twill follow) will not be dangerous, unlesse he can prove, that Baptizing is peculiar to Church Officers▪ nor consequentiall; unlesse he can prove, that preach­ing is peculiar to them in Office, So much for the considerations.page 14. Mr. W.

Answ. Now mine Antagonist conceives further; that if it were supposed, that they, who being scattered did preach, were private persons, yet that will not justifie our lay mens preaching: because it cannot he prov'd, that they preach'd at Jerusalem; but amongst a people, who had never the sound of the Gospel amongst them: but our lay preachers, teach where a true Ministery is, or may be had, &c.

Mine Antagonist hath here much mistaken the question, for the question to which the Minister made an answer, to which (through intreaty) I made a reply, was; Whi­ther lay persons a company being met together may preach the Word?

2. He hath also grosly mistaken in his expressions. First, In telling us; that they ex­ercised themselves in preaching, only where the sound of Christ was not heard; for [Page 36] the Scripture tels us, That they were scattered abroad throughout the regions of Ju­dea and Samaria, which were places wherein they preached. Act. 8. But was not Christ preached in Judea? Reade the Gospel and they will informe you. 2. In that he makes such a difference betwixt Judea, Samaria, and some places amongst us, in respect of Ministery. I am sure some places amongst us have no Ministers, and some other have false Ministers. How Judea could be (for Ministers) in a worse case I know not.

3. He reasons from what he laid down, but without reason. For their preaching proves the lawfulnesse of private mens preaching, a company being met together.

So much for the second Scripture.

The fourth and last Scripture is the 1 Cor. 14. This Chapter is full of difficulty, and exceeding hard to be understood. Men vary much in the expositions, they give of it. I shall therefore (at this time) onely lay down one argument, to prove the lawful­nesse of private mens preaching, from that Chapter.

They who have the gifts of prophesie, may prophesie.

But some private persons may now have the gifts of prophesie.

Therefore some private persons may now prophesie.

The First (I suppose) none will deny. The Second (that private persons may now have the gift of prophesie) is to be proved, which being confirmed, the conclusion (that therefore they may prophesie) will of necessity follow. That some private per­sons may now have the gift of prophesie doth appear, both from the matter, promise and end of it. First it is manifest from the matter of it. Knowledge and utterance, whereby men are inabled to speak to others edification, exhortation and comfort, i.e. matter whereby others may be edified, exhorted and comforted, is the matter of pro­phesie, 1 Cor. 14.3. Now 'tis apparent by experience, that some private persons are a­ble to speake to others for their edification, &c. Therefore some private persons now have the gift of prophesie. They who enjoyed the gift in the primitive times were called Prophets or spirituall, that is, not carnall, not babes in Christ. There is some difference between those,1 Cor. 14. [...]7. 1 Cor. 3.1. who now enjoy the gift; and some of those, who in the pri­mitive times did enjoy it; in regard of the manner of receiving it, their measure of enjoying it, and in respect of the enjoyment of some extraordinary and temporary gifts with it.

Secondly, It appeares from the promise of it, Joel 2.28. Your sons and your daugh­ters shall prophesie. Which prophesie was in the Apostles times in part fulfilled. Act. 2. The greatest part is yet behinde, in respect of the number of persons enjoying it, though not in respect of the measure enjoyed by particular persons; which prophesie will be gloriously manifested when the fulnesse of the Gentiles be come in, and the Jewes called; now the spirit is powred out, but (as it were) by drops: then, 'twill be powred out as a mighty flood.

3. It shines forth also from the end of it, which is the Churches edification, 1 Cor. 1 [...]. [...].22. What was needfull for the Churches edification in the primitive times is now needfull: Eph. 4. Apostles were then needfull, so now, whom we enjoy in their writings, but how do we enjoy Prophets even Evangelists, unless in the use of the gifts of men fitted to speake to the Churches edification? Thus in hast I rest till I enjoy more light and leasure. Farewell.