THE PEOPLES PLEA FOR THE EXERCISE of Prophesie.

Against Mr. Iohn Yates his Monopolie.

By Iohn Robinson.

1. COR. 14.1.

Follow after charity, and desire spirituall gifes, but rather that yee may prophesie.

Printed in the yeare 1618.

TO MY CHRISTIAN FRIENDS IN NOR­wich, and theerabouts, Grace and salvation from the God and giver thereof.

THat loving and thank­full remembrance, in which I alwaies haue you (my Christian friends) provoketh me as continually to commend unto God your welfare, so to re­ioyce greatly when I understand thereof, and specially that your soules doe prosper. And as the prosperity of the soule is princi­pally furthered by the zealous preaching of the Gospell, so hath it been matter of unfained reioy­cing unto me, to heare how God hath of late stirred up amongst [Page]you, divers instruments, whose zea­lous indevours hee hath used that way, and covering in mercy what is evill (of ignorance & infirmity on their parts (I hope) in their ente­rance, & ministrations, doth blesse what is of himselfe, to the good of his chosen. But as it falleth out in nature, that the pure waters draw of the tainture of the soyl through which they run; so with you it seemes, the pure truths of the Gos­pell haue suffered by some, too great mixture with sundry Popish errours about the Church and ministery, in and by which they are propounded: and this more especially by M. Yates, a man of good gifts in himselfe, and note amongst you: pleading the cause of the Whoore of Babylon, the Church of Rome, as Christs wife, and of Antichrists cleargie, as of Christs ministery. And as this clergies exaltation is not a little [Page]furthered by usurpatiō on the peo­ples liberty, which it swalloweth up, and thereby swelleth aboue proportion, so in all his pleading for the one, hee doth necessarily implead the other; and as in other things, so specially in the exercise of Prophesie, or teaching in the church by an ordinary gift; in which every one that is able brin­geth his shot in due time and or­der, for a ioynt feast of that hea­venly repast, the word of God.

The Arguments in his writing (sent unto me by W. E. with his consent, and that before the Ma­gistrate) I haue set down word for word, and answered: and there­with confirmed what I haue else where published in iusti­fication of this exercise against his exceptions and answers: which, In the Iu­stification of Separa­tion. being scattered here and there in his large discourse, and divers of them divers times repeated, I haue [Page]collected, contracted, and set in or­derly oppsition to their contrary Arguments: and that without any the least wrong (to my know­ledge) unto him or his cause; as ha­ving left out nothing in his wri­ting, which might seeme to bring advantage to his purpose.

Now if any shall aske me, why I haue not rather answered M. Hall his large and learned volume a­gainst me, and the generall cause which I professe, my reasons are, First, because it is a large volume so full farced by him, as it seemes, that he might prevent further answer. Secondly, his treatise is as much (and more immediately) against the Reformists, and their cause in the maine, as against us and ours. Thirdly, the truth requireth not that persons, but things be answe­red: and thing in it know I none not answerd in my Defence against M. Bernard. Lastly, I doe put as [Page]great difference between him and M. Yates, as between a word-wise Oratour, both labouring more, and being better able to feed his Reader with the leaues of words, & flowers of Rhetorick, then with the fruits of knowledge, as also striving rather to oppresse the per­son of his adversary with false and proud reproches, then to convince his tenet by sound Arguments: and between a man sincerely zealous for the truth, and by his simple & solid dealing by the Scriptures, as M. Yates doth, giving testimony of his unfained loue thereof. Which truth, my prayer to God is, that he, with my selfe, and all other so see­king it, may find, and therein ac­cord in all things.

And for you (my Christian friends) towards whom for your persons, I am minded even as when I lived with you, be you ad­monished by me (which I also en­treat [Page]at the hands of the Lord on your behalfe) that you carefully beware, lest in any thing you fall from your stedfastnesse; but, on the contrary, grow in grace, and in the knowledge and obedience of the Lord Iesus in his whole revea­led will. And let me the more ear­nestly exhort you hereunto, by how much the contrary evill is the more both dangerous & com­mon. A man may fall forward, and in so doing, endanger his hands and face: but in falling backward, the danger is farre greater, as wee see in old Eli, of whom we read, that he fell backward, and his necke brake, and he died, 1. Sam. 4.18. And how common a thing it is for men amongst you, and the whole land thorough, in their declining age, to decline in grace, wofull experi­ence teacheth: there being few old Disciples to be found, vvho in their age do hold the same temper [Page]of zeale and goodnesse which they had upon them in their yon­ger times: this being one maine reason thereof, That the meanes amongst you are farre more for conversion then preservation: and for birth, then nourishment: Whereas they (by the Lords graci­ous dispensation in the orderly state of things) who are planted in the house of the Lord, in the Courts of our God, shall flourish, yea shall sprout in old age, and are fat and greene, to shew that the Lord is iust, and with him is none unrighteousnesse. Psalm. 92. Of this grace he vvho is the Authour and finisher of our faith, make both you and us partakers alwayes Amen.

Iohn Robinson.

AN ANSWERE TO THE ARGVMENTS laid downe by Mr. Iohn Yates, Preacher in Norwich, to proue ordinary Prophesie in pub­lick, out of office, vnlawfull: answered by Iohn Robinson.

ARG. 1. Mr. I. Yates.

FROM the Commission of Christ Ioh. 20, v. 21, 22, 23 all Prophesie in publick is to remit, & retain sins: & Chr. grants this power to none but such as he sends. v. 21. & ordains thereunto v. 22. But men out of office are neither sent nor or­dayned thereunto, therefore in publick ought not to meddle with the power of the keyes. I know the exception will bee this, that many out of office haue prophesied, the Scripture approving it. I answer, An ordinary rule is never infringed by an extraordinary example, but ever by an ordinary. To marry my sister is incest; yet in Cain it was no incest, be­cause the example was extraordinary. I may not steale, and yet it was lawfull for the [Page 2]Iewes to rob the Egiptians, because that was Gods extraordinary permission. Extraordina­ry examples, as they make no rules; so they breake none: but ordinary examples must ever follow the rule: and if they doe not, they breake it. Christ therefore laying down a perpetuall rule of binding and loosing to all such as are sent and ordained either by himselfe immediatly, or by such as he shall poynt there­unto, it must necessarily follow, that any or­dinary example will breake this rule if it bee not framed accordingly: therefore I constant­ly affirme, that no ordinary prophesie ought to be out of office. As for extraordinary, that cannot oppose this rule, because it is of ano­ther nature, and therefore is not to be limited within the compasse of an ordinary rule. Se­condly, I answer, That all the prophesies out of office, were by the secret motion of the spi­rit, which was warrant for all such as had no calling by office thereunto.

ANSW. I. Robinson.

THat all prophesie in publicke (and in private also) is for the remitting and retaining of sinnes, I acknowledge: but that Christ grants this power to none but to such as he sends and ordaines by the Commission given Iohn. 20.21, &c. I plainly deny, and require his proofe. He should then grant it to none but to Apo­stles; for the commission there given, is peculiar to such, conveyed to them im­mediatly [Page 3]from Christ, confirmed, by the miraculous inbreathing of the H. Ghost, & by them to be exercised & dispensed prin­cipally towards unbeleevers; of all which nothing is common to ordinary officers. As Christ then giues power of binding & loosing sins to the Apostles there, so else where, to ordinary P [...]stors. Ephes. 4.8. Else where to the whole Church gathered to­gether in one, Math. 15.17.18. 1. Cor. 5. 2. Cor. 6.6, 7, 8, 9, 10. And lastly in other places to every faithfull brother confes­sing Iesus Christ, Matth. 16.18.19. &c. & cap. 18.15. Luk. 17.3. And since the power of binding and loosing sinnes is onely by way of manifestation, and declaration of the word of God, the law, and the Gospell look unto whom the word of God is gi­ven, unto him the power of binding and loosing sinnes is given, though to be used by divers states of persons, after a diverse order: vvhich order doth in no sort abo­lish the being of the thing, but onely pre­serues it from confusion.

And where he takes it for granted th [...] that the examples for prophesying out of office in the Scriptures, were extraordina­ry, as Cains marrying of his Sister, and the Iewes (the Israelites he should say) stealing from the Egiptians his comparisons are without compasse, & his affirmation with­out trueth. These their practises were a­gainst the light of nature, and mo­rall [Page 4]law (then vvritten in the tables of mens hearts, and afterwards written in the tables of stone) saue as there was an extraordinary dispensation by the Lord of the Law, and God of nature: But what like is there in this, that a man (out of of­fice) having received a gift of God, whe­ther extraordinary, or ordinary) by which he is inabled to prophesy, that is to speak to edification, exhortation, and comfort of of the Church, should so use the same good gift of God, in his time, and order? VVhat Eclipse is here, of the light of nature, or violation of naturall honesty? If M. Yates had remembred the law vvhich forbad men to plough with an oxe and asse together Deu. 22.10. hee would not thus haue yoked together things of so unlike kinde.

And for the secret motion of the spirit by vvhich in his second answer he affirmeth that all prophesies out of office were, he spea­keth both that wch is true, & against him­selfe. For vvhat vvere these secret moti­ons of the spirit, but the Prophets zeal for Gods glory, and mans good? vvhich also vvere sufficient on their part, for the use of the gift vvhether ordinary, or extraor­dinary; whether in men in office or out, it was not material. So that, for the use evē of an extraordinary gift there vvas required (at least at all times) no extraordinary mo­tion of the spirit, but onely that vvhich vvas, and is ordinary to them, and us. God [Page 5]therefore, for his own glory, & the good of his people, giving the gift, vvhether extraordinarily or ordinarily unto a man; hee hath vvarrant sufficient from his zeale to Gods glory, & mans salvation, to use the same gift in his time, place, and or­der. Of vvhich hereafter.

Mr. Yates. ARG. 2.

FROM the execution of a publick fun­ction in the Church. Prophecy ordinary is by preaching to bring the glad tydings of peace and good things to Gods people: and this the Apostle sayes is not warrantable with­out sending. Rom: 10.15. We must feed the flock because we are set over it. Act. 20.20. to prophesy to Gods people is an honorable caling & none ought to take it upō him, but he that is called of God as was Aaron. Heb. 5.4. The place of Iudas is called a Charge. Act. 1.20. the Ministers are the light of the world. Mat. 5.14. Starres in the right hand of Christ. Rev. 1.20. Iohn was a man sent from God. Iohn. 1.6. Christ sent his Apostles in the midst of Wolues. Math. 10.16. I haue not sent these Prophets, saith the Lord, and yet they ran. Ier. 23.2. as many as found not their Genealogy to be from Levi (from Aa­ron he should say) were put from the Priest­hood. Neh: 7.64. All these places keep us to an ordinary rule, and for all ordinary prophe­cying there can be no exception from it, with­out an open breach thereof: as for all your pla­ces of prophecying out of office, they are all of [Page 6]them to bee understood of the extraordinary: which cannot bee tied to ordinary rules. For so we should abridge God of his liberty: but we must beware of imitation, lest we become licentious.

ANSWER.

HERE is a long harvest for a small croppe. All that can bee gathered hence either by reaping or gleaning is no more, then that no man may exer­cise a publick function, or office of mini­stery in the Church without a lawfull sen­ding or calling from the Lord, by the means vvhich he hath sanctified. VVhich as it concerneth M. Yates well to consider of especially, reckoning (as hee profes­sedly doth) his Genealogy from the Pope of Rome: so doth it not impeach our Prophets at all, who haue a law­full calling for the use of their gift, though not so solemne (neither need they) as they who are to exercise and ful­fill a constant ministery, and charge. But for the word Sending, which he so much urgeth, it must be known, that, as all that teach lawfully whether in office or not, are sent by Christ in respect of their personall gifts and graces: so ordina­ry officers are not sent by those who ap­point them to minister as were the extra­ordinary Apostles sent by Christ, who ap­poynted them. Sending importeth a pas­sing [Page 7]of the sent from the sender to another, and so the Apostles were sent by Christ to preach the gospell to the Iewes and Gen­tiles: but so are not Pastors sent by the Church (which calleth them) vnto others, but by her appoynted to minister to her selfe. They vvho vvere in their time Apo­stles, vvere first called in their persons by Christ to bee disciples, that as Apostles afterwards they might be sent to minister: they vvho are Pastors, are sent by Christ, first as members, or in their persons and personal gifts, that as Pastors they may afterwards be called to minister. And that M. Yates may haue for the caling of our pro­phets, wheron to insist, thus we practise. Af­ter the exeercise of the publick Ministery ended, the rulers in the Chur. do publikly exhort, and require that such of their own or other Church, as haue a gift to speake to the edificatiō of the hearers, should use the same: & this according to that which is written, Act. 13.14. &c. where Paul and Barnabas comming into the Synagogue, the Rulers, after the work of the ordinary mi­nistery, was ended (considering them not as Apostles which they acknowledged not, but onely as men having gifts) sent unto them, that if they had any word of exhortati­on to the people, they should say on:

M. Yates. ARG. 3.

FRom the true causes of prophesy in the new testament, which are two, either im­mediate revelatiō, or imposition of hands: [Page 8]the first is Act. 2.17. & 10.44. the second Act. 8.17. & 19.6. third cause of publick prophesy cannot be giuen: there­fore ordinary prophesy in publick out of office being neyther by immediate revelation, nor im­position of hands, is vnlawfull. You may say the contrary, but it will be without all warrant of the word.

ANSWER.

IN this Arg. are sundry errors Logicall & Theologicall And first, why doth he not make Christs breathing vpon the Apostles Ioh. 20. and the descending and sitting of the cloven fiery tongues vpon them Act. [...]. causes of prophesy as well as imposition of hands? Secondly imposition of hands is no cause at all of prophesy, to speake properly, as M. yates should doe, (affecting the name of a Logitian) It is no naturall cause, for to imagine that men tooke the holy Ghost in their hands, and reached it to others were ridiculous: ney­ther is it a morall cause, as in which there are propounded no Arguments, and mo­tiues of perswasion. It is ineeed no more then a signe denoteing the person; not a cause effecting the thing. Thirdly, if it were a cause, yet should it not be made the member of a division opposed to revela­tion, but a cause or means subordinate vnto it as vnto the end: since it serued to the conveing of the spirit, by which spirit all reuelation is, and by revelation all pro­phesy: [Page 9]extraordinary by immediate revela­tion, ordinary by mediate: both which thē were in the Church, as is the latter now euen in men out of office, by meanes of their study, and Gods blessing upon the same: else could there never be lawfull of­fice, Pastor or Teacher chosen in the Church to the worlds end. The gift of prophesy comes not by the office, but being found in persons before, makes them capable of the office by due means.

ARG. 4. M. Yates.

FRO Modistinction of spirituall gifts, 1. Cor. 12.4.5.6. verse; gifts, admini­strations and operations. All these are to be referred to that general vers. 1. Gifts there­fore in this place must be but one kinde of spirituall gifts, and be distinguished from the other two. The first then are meerly gifts: the second, gifts & offices together: the third, ra­ther the effect of a gift then the gift it selfe: and therefore the Holy Gost knowing how to speak aptly, gives more to the effect, then the cause: the worke then the worker: for in truth miraculous workes exceede all the ver­tue that possibly can be imagined to be in a mere creature: and therfore it is only a passiue beliefe, or faith whereby man is rather a patient, then an agent in the worke. These 3. generall heads are deuided again, or rather exemplified by many particulars: first, verse 8.9.10. all lay downe a kinde of spirituall gifts [Page 10]first a word of wisdome, 2. a word of know­ledge, 3. of miraclous faith, 4. of healeing. 5. operations of great works 6. prophesying, 7. discerning of spirits, 8. of tongues, 9. of interpretation. That some of these gifts are extraordinary no wise man will deny: yet that I may proue them all extraordinary, cōsider 3 things. First, the cause: secondly, the effect: thirdly, the subiect. The cause without al doubt is the spirit; yet question may be of the maner, & measure For maner, whether the spirit alone or the spirit assisting our industry, and pains. I say alone, because all these effects depend equally vpon the same cause: and I haue no reason to say, that prophesy should be more by my pains and industry, then strange tongues, or any other gift: for then I should magnifie the Holy Ghost in one gift more then ano­ther. That which is geuen by the sole operation of the spirit is more then that which is come by through ordinary paynes. I Blesse God for his ordinary prouidence where my hand goes with the Lord in my ordinary affayres: But wherin I find the Lord do for me where I had no hand, there I ought to magnifie him much more: so in these gifts, if some were ordinary, some extraordinary, then the spirit should not haue equal praise in thē all. The orator prouing Caesar to deserue more prayse for his clemency towards Marcellus then all his famous victo­ries, vseth the maner of the cause to shew it. In thy warrs, O Emperour, thou hadst Captains, and souldiers, vertue and valour; weapons and munition, &c. but sparing Marcellus thou [Page 11]alone didst it, to thee alone it belongs, and all the glory of it: so if prophesy in this place aboue all the rest must come in for an ordinary gift, then may I say, O blessed Spi­rit, Prophesy is thy gift, yet do I acknowledge thy ordinary blessing upon my labours in this: but as for strange tongues, and the rest, I ac­knowledge they are thy meere gift, without all paine, and labour of mine, therefore the grea­ter praise I giue thee. Were not this to diminish prophesy in regard of the rest, which the H. Ghost prefers before them all? and therefore did shew as great power in that gift as in any other. The manner thē being all one in giving, the second question is whether they were given in the same measure. I answer, No, Rom. 12.6. and hereupon the Apostle com­manded, that one Prophet should be subiect to another, & willingly yeeld place to him, that had the greater measure. I leaue the cause & come to the effects, which learned men cannot distinguish. I will shew you my iudgement, & follow it as you please. To the two first gifts is given a word: by words we expresse our mea­nings, therfore the spirit doth not onely giue a gift, but an ability & power to utter that gift for the greatest good of the hearers. Brother, it is the part of a divine, to study for apt, and fit words; and indeed when God hath given us learning by exceeding great paines, yet wee find great imperfection for want of words. Now here I learne that the Spirit of God did extraordinarily supply this want, by giving un­to men excellent utterance of heavenly things. [Page 12]The first two gifts are wisdom & knowledge: wisdom is a holy understanding of heavenly things with a prudent application of them to their severall vses. Knowledge, or science is an insight into divers heavenly truths, yet wāting that prudent application: these two gifts with a fruitful uttrance of them could be no ordinary gifts studied out by their own pains, but such as the H. Ghost did immediately inspire into them. I should be very glad to heare that your Congregations were full of these wise and un­derstanding men, then I doubt not but you would the sooner recall your selues. The three next gifts, of faith, healing, and great workes are undoubtedly extraordinary, and were ne­ver to bee obtained, by any study of ours. For the foure last I doubt not but you will grant three of them extraordinary. Discerning of spirits was not by ordinary means but extra­ordinary, as you may see in Ananias, and Sa­phira, Simon Magus, and others, which were seene by an extraordinary Spirit. For strange tongues, I hope you will not stand in granting it, if you consider but the first ori­ginall of them Act. 2.2. [...]. and for interpretation of these tongues that was as difficult as the o­ther: why should you now stick at prophesy, which I will plainely shew was more difficult then both the rest. For how should either you or I come to be able to prophesy, except there were some skilfull in the originall tongues, as likewise the helpes of commentaries, and in­terpretations? You see God appointed these as means to helpe us to prophesy and where they [Page 13]are wanting, it is simply impossible for any man to become an ordinary Prophet: Indeed the H. Ghost can supply the want of both these: & therefore will you, nill you, it must be granted that this prophesy was extraordinary. For take way the ordinary means of prophesy, and then the thing it selfe will cease. Now you may plainly understād that the Primitiue Chur. had not these means of prophesy, that you see we haue: they had not the originall tongues translated, and therefore God gaue men extra­ordinary gifts in speaking, and interpreting them: see then I entreat you how these two means being extraordinary inforce you to yeeld the other of the same nature. Were it possible for you to become a Prophet wanting the translation of the new, and old Testament as likewise all interpretations, with which now through Gods blessing the whole world is re­plenished? I know you will answer, and say no: then say, Prophesy in the Primitiue Church was extraordinary, because the Gentiles had not ordinary translations and interpretations of them.

ANSWER.

IF I should follow M. Yates in his course I should rather write one Ser­mon against an other then bring an An­swer to an Argument. Briefly then, as I can, omitting other things, to that which concerns directly our present purpose. His affirmation that the gifts mentioned 1. Cor. 12. are onely extraordinary, I doe deny: [Page 14]and answer his reasons as followeth. And first, that (contrary to his unreasonable reason) we both may & ought to magni­fy the H. Ghost more in one gift then ano­ther; since the same H. Ghost worketh more excellently and for our good in one gift, then in another: And secondly (as a further truth and more contrary to his strange assertion) that in some works of the Spirit, though not here expressed, in which the Lord useth our industry & care, he is infinitly more to be magnified, then in any whatsoever the immediate and mi­raculous work of the same spirit, wherein he useth it not. For example, in saving faith and repentance: for the working of which by his spirit, God useth our careful hearing and meditation of his word, the Law and Gospell. Thirdly, compare we even extraordinary gifts with extraordinary; we see, that God used the industry, and paines of the extraordinary Prophets for the reading and meditating in, and of the Dan. 9.13 Law: and of the latter Prophets of the former Prophets v. 2. writings: As also of the Apostles in the Rom. 4.10. & 4.3. &c. reading, knowledg and memory of them both: yea even of the very heathen authors, whose sayings they sometime quote in their prophesies or Act. 17.28 1. Cor. 15.33. Tit. 1.12. 2. Tim. 4.13. sermons: the like industry, or care not being required for the gift, or use of strange tongues: and yet did the Holy Ghost much more excellently utter it [Page 15]selfe in their Prophesies, and sermons, then in ther tongues, as M. Yates oft, and truly affirmeth.

Vpon verse. 8. he rightly describeth wisdome a holy vnderstanding of heauenly things with a prudent application of them to their severall vses: and knowledge, an insight into divers heavenly things, yet wanting that prudent application, with the fruitfull utte­rance of them: but that these could be no or­dinary gifts studyed out by their own payns, but such as the Holy Ghost did immediately inspyre into them, he barely affirmeth; and I thinke, singularly; but am sure, vntruly. I maruailed what he would say to these two gifts of wisdom & knowledge, to proue that they could not be ordinary: and did expect some speciall reasons for his so fin­gular interpretation: but behould a bare bone of affirmation brought by him without marrow, flesh, skin, or colour of proofe. VVherein he is also the more blame-worthy, considering that he can­not be ignorant, how the most iudicious both at home, and abroad, doe vnder­stand these two gifts as meant of the two speciall qualifications of the Pastor, and Teacher; ordinary gifts of ordinary of­fices: of which ministerius amongst the rest ordayned by Christ the one Lord of his Church. the Apostle speaketh verse 5. as verse. 4. of their gifts, by that one spirit. VVhich ordinary gifts all lawfull Pastors, and Teachers (ordinary offices) then had, [Page 16]and besides them, many others not in of­fice? and by the grace of God, some a­mongst vs: and that by the help of nature study and prayer, and the blessing of Gods spirit therevpon. VVhich blessing of God I will not deny to haue then been for de­gree extraordinary vpon mens weaker in­deuoures, for their furnishing with these ordinary gifts: which makes nothing a­gainst our purpose. That the gift of faith is undoubtedly extraordinary is sayd by him, but Doctors haue doubted of it. See for one, Beza in his great Annotations vpō the words, both affirming, and proueing; that by faith is meant an assent vnto the doctrine propounded, which is an ordinary gift of the spirit.

VVhere he makes no doubt but wee will grant, that three of the foure last were extra­ordinary, he but threaps kindnesse upon us, as we use to say. That Peters gift of discerning was extraordinary in the case of Ananias, Act [...] we confesse: but not so in the case of Simon Magus, Acts. 8. of whom he iudgeth by his words (as of the tree by the fruit) in which he did notori­ously bewray himselfe to be in the gall of bitternesse, to the discerning of any ordi­nary Christian. The gift of discerning both of doctrine and manners, is in a measure required of every Christian. Phil. 1.9.10. 1. Ioh. 4.1. Heb. 5.14. but is bestowed by the giver thereof upon some more liberal­ly; sometimes extraordinarily, as then up­on [Page 17]some in some cases: sometimes ordi­narily, as both then and now on all such as had, and haue more Christian discreti­on then other men.

That interpretation of tongues was as dif­ficult as strange tongues immediatly inspired, is not true. They who Acts 2. [...]. heard the Apostles speake in their own tongue, and were able to speake the Iewes language then in use, might interpret these strange tongues unto the Iewes, without any ex­traord. gift: as M. Yates hearing a glorious Formalist speak much Latin in his Sermon, can interpret that strange tongue of his unto the people, without any extraordina­ry gift of interpretation: and so might it well be in the Church of Corinth with some, though the tongue were given ex­traordinarily.

Lastly, it doth not shew plainly, that pro­phesie was more difficult then strange tongues, though all were true which he speakes of the difficulty thereof. For by all reason and experience a man then might, and now may, become an ordinary Prophet for ability by ordinary helpes; but so nei­ther could, nor can hee speake a strange tongue, as there meant, but by extraordi­nary inspiration. That simple necessity of Commentaries and Interpretations which he requireth for a mans becomming an or­dinary Prophet, I dare not acknowledge: of great use they are, but not of simple ne­cessity: that prerogatiue royall of simply [Page 18]necessary, I would challenge as peculiar to the holy Scriptures; which are able to make the man of God perfect, fully furnished to every good worke. 2. Tim. 3.16.17. But where he addes, that the Primitiue Church had not the originall tongues translated, it is something for his, yea and for the Popes purpose also, if it bee true, and that the Church, especially some good space, after her constitution, might be without the Scriptures in a knowne tongue. But how unadvised, and unskilfull is he in so saying? how detracting from Gods graci­ous providence towards his Church: and how partiall on the Clergies part, and a­gainst the Commonalty of Gods inheri­tance? For the thing then. The old Te­stament was wholy translated by the 70. Interpreters, at the instance of Ptolemy Philadelphus King of Egipt, Ioseph Ant. l. 12. c. 2. Iren. l. 3. c. 24.25. into Greeke the mother tongue of the Corinthians; Corinth being in Achaia, and Achaia in Greece: in which the same tongue they had also eve­ry part of the new Testament then writ­ten, as the most was. VVhich language was also so universally known throughout the whole world, by reason partly of the Greeke Monarchy under Alexander, and partly of the Greeke learning at Athens, as that the Apostle could write his Epistle in Greek to the Romans, though in Europe, as understanding the tongue sufficiently. Besides, the Corinthians had had Pauls and other Apostolicall mens preachings, and [Page 19]conferences amongst them a long time, which were uncomparably better then all the commentaries in the world. And for the Corinthians ability for this worke, it is but reason we respect this Apostles te­stimony of them, which is, that they were enriched in all utterance, and in all knowledge, 1. Cor. 1.4. In which two gifts as the abi­lity for ordinary prophesie doth properly consist, so to appropriate them unto extra­ordinary Prophets, considering the gene­rality of the Apostles speech, and drift, with other circumstances else-where ob­served, were to fetter them in uniust bonds of restraint.

And having thus wiped off his colours of reason, that the Apostle, 1. Cor. 12. speakes onely of extraordinary gifts, I will (by the grace of God) plainly shew the contrary, and that he speakes of ordi­nary also.

And first, in teaching, v. 3. that no man can call Iesus the Lord, but by the Holy Ghost, he poynts out a gift and grace of the spirit, ordinary and common to all Christians.

Secondly, v. 5 he speakes of diversities, that is, of all the divers and severall ministeries ordinary and extraordinary in the Church under Christ the Lord, and v. 4. of the severall gifts for the same; and so necessarily of the ordinary gifts for the ordinary ministeries, then and now.

Thirdly, from v. 8. where mention is made of the word of wisedom, and the word of knowledge, ordinary gifts of ordinary persons, both in and out of office, now, and then.

Fourthly, v. 12. he compares the Church of Corinth to a body, having Christ the head, and each of them members for their parts: of whom one had this gift, another that, given of God, for their mutuall good, but by them abused otherwise: whereupon I conclude, except there were in Corinth no ordinary gifts in Pastors, Teachers, or others of God given, and by them abused, that he speakes not of extra­ordinary gifts onely.

Fifthly, v. 28. after Apostles, and Pro­phets, he mentioneth Teachers, which were ordinary officers, and therefore speakes of ordinary gifts and teaching; as also Hel­pers and Governours, who what were they but Deacons and Elders? or take the words as they are, Helpes and Governments: then which, what is now, or vvas then more ordinary, both in respect of ministery and gift? VVhereupon I conclude vvith good assu [...]ance, that the Apostle 1. Cor. 12. treats of the gifts of the spirit, both extraordi­nary and ordinary

Mr. Yates. ARG. 5.

FRom comparison of prophesie & strange tongues which are laid together through all the 1. Cor. 14. Vers. 1. prophesie [Page 21]is preferred before all other spirituall gifts, which cannot be ordinary: for no ordinary and common gift is to be preferred before all extraordinary and spirituall gifts. But you will say, though it be not more excellent, yet it is more profitable: I answer, it is both more excellent and more profitable: for the Apostle intends both, extolling it for the end, which shewes how good and excellent it is, as likewise for the use, making known the profit and benefit of it. That which is the best ob­iect of our desire, must needs be the best: but of spirituall gifts, prophesie is the best obiect of our desire, 1. Cor. 12.31. Desire the best gifts, chap. 14.1. Covet spirituall gifts, but rather that yee may prophesie. Secondly, as it is the best to our selues, so is it the best to o­thers, as may appeare by the whole chapter. Thirdly, all other gifts are given for the good of prophesie, and not prophesie for them. As it is the best gift, so it is the most profitable, as being especially for edification, exhortati­on, and comfort. But it may be you will ob­iect; Is not an ordinary gift of prophesie bet­ter then the extraordinary gift of tongues, or at least more profitable? I answer, No: for the tongues, Actes 2.3.4. were more profi­table to the Church then ever was the ordina­ry gift of any man: but compare ordinary with ordinary, and extraordinary with ex­traordinary, and wee grant prophesie the pri­viledge.

I. Rob. ANSWER.

TO this Argument he himself giues a sufficient answer in our name; onely he sets it down something lamely; where if it came in the full strength, it would easily with stand the force of his Argument. For where hee should say for us, if he spake out, that ordinary prophesy is more excellent then tongues, be­cause more profitable; hee makes us to stammer thus, though it be not more excel­lent, yet it is more profitable: it being most plaine, that the Apostle prefers prophesy before tongues, because it tends more to edification of the Church according to vvhich respect alone vve are to measure the excellency of Church: ordinances, and so to frame the obiect of our desire unto them. But vvhat speake I of more excellent, and more to edification? since the strange tongues as there used, vvithout an interpreter, were so far from being comparable to ordinary prophesie for any good end or use, as they were on the contrary most vaine and ridiculous, as appeares, v. 11.22.23. That then which hee brings for the commendation of tongues from Actes: 2. is nothing for tongues as used in Corinth. The former were, as of simple necessity in themselues unto the Apostles, for the spreading of the Gospell unto all nations, so then, and [Page 23]there profitably vsed: but in Corinth am­bitiously and pr-ofanely abused, which M. Ya. should haue observed, but hath not in his comparison. Lastly I add as a iust answer to whatsoeuer he hath obiected, That tongues confidered in themselues, how rightly soeuer vsed, are not comparable for vse and so for excellency, vnto ordinary prophesying or preaching considered in it self: seing that by it as well as by extra­ordinary saving fayth is wrought Rom. 10. which none can say of strange Tongues in themselues, without a strange Tongue both from truth and sence: no nor of any other spirituall gift.

And as it doth not appear by the Apo­stles preferring of prophesy before ton­gues, that therefore the prophesy was ex­traordinary; so it appeares unto mee by the Corinthians preferring of tongues be­fore it, that it was but ordinary: & there­fore disregarded by them in comparison of the extraordinary, and miraculous gift of tongues: whereas, had it also been ex­traordinary, immediate and miraculous, most like it would haue carried with it the like with the other, or greater regard, in their eyes.

M. Yates. ARGVM. 6.

FROM exemplification vers. 6. if I come unto you &c. I hope you will grant that the Apostle Paul had all [Page 24]those spirituall gifts, and therefore speaking of such prophesy as he had himselfe, hee must needs speak of extraordinary: likewise he had the knowledge of tongues and yet prefers pro­phesy before all his languages, though hee spake more then they all. Now the example in his own person must needs set forth the ge­nerall; and therefore if in the generall hee should speak of ordinary prophecying, & in the particular of extraordinary, it would prove idle; for an example is of the same kind with the generall. Againe in bringing four par­ticulars he puts revelation first, as the cause of all the rest; which shewes plainely he speaks of such prophesy, as came by revelation for reve­lation brings a man to knowledge, and knowledge teacheth wholesome doctrine, and prophesy serveth to utter it.

I. Rob. ANSVVER.

I doe plainely deny the ground upon which he builds the whole weight of his Argument which is, that the ex­ample, and the thing exemplified must be of the same kind. How oft doth Christ exemplify the sufferings of his disciples by his own sufferings, and the sending of his Apostles by his fathers sending of him? were they therfore of the same kind; their sufferings meritorious, and their sending mediatorious, because his was such? But amongst other evidences against him (wherewith all writings divine, and hu­mane [Page 25]are stored) see one, fitly paring with this in hand. The Apostle prouoking the Galathians c. 1:6 unto iust detestation of such as preached another Gospell amongst them, takes an example from his own preaching, vers. 8. But though wee or an Angell, from heaven preach, another Gospell unto you, then that which wee haue preached unto you, let him be accursed. As if he should say, I haue preached unto you formerly iustification by faith without the works of the Law of Moses: they now preach unto you iustification by the works of the law ioyned with Christ, &c. He exemplifi­eth their preaching by his: were they ther­fore of one kind both Apostolical, because Pauls was such? It is sufficient for an exam­ple if it agree with the thing, which it is brought to exemplifie in that for which it is brought. And so the cōming of Christ, to iudgement, is by the Apostle exempli­fied by the comming of a thiefe in the night. 1. Thess. 5.2 Are therfore their commings of the same kind? or is it not sufficient that being most contrary in their kinds, they do yet agree in the adiunct of suddenesse? So is it sufficient, if Pauls extraordinary Prophesy­ing, and the Corinthians ordinary, agree in the adiunct or effect of profitablenesse, or edification, which thing alone the Apo­stle in his exemplification hath respect un­to. His observation about Revelation seems true, and good in it selfe: but shewes not plainely that for which he brings it, no nor [Page 26]hath so much as a plaine shew for it. For what shew hath it of profe that he speaks of extraordinary prophesie, because it comes from revelation, except he takes it for granted, that there is in the Church no revelation of the spirit for teaching but extraordinary, or miraculous: which how can I grant, or hee affirme? Of this more Argum. 8.

M. Yates. ARG. 7.

FROM the fruition of spirituall gifts. 1. Cor. 14.26. hath a Psalm, that is some admirable praise of God, or doc­trine, that is some worthy point of instructi­on; or a tongue, that is, can speak misteries with admiration, or revelation of some secrets either for doctrine or prediction; lastly, or in­terpretation whether of tongues, doctrines, or Scripture: all these must needs bee had either by the ordinary pains of the Church, or by the extraordinary gift of the spirit, you say by the one, and I by the other: and that I agree more with the Scripture then your selfe, consi­der but the distinction of the gifts, and their admirable matter. A Psalm must needs consist of meeter, which required art to compose it. Secondly, it could not for the matter of it, but sound forth some worthy praise of God. Do you thinke the Corinthians did study the art of musick, or likewise read some admi­rable divine bookes to finde out sweet mat­ter to make their songs of? Alas, brother, giue [Page 27]God the glory, it was no doubt some sudden motion of the Spirit, that did inflame the hearts of beleevers with some worthy matter of praising God. Doctrine, that is layd down by our ordinary pains, is that which we usually giue unto Doctors, which after long study, and reading the Scriptures is drawen to some profitable heads pithily proved, and contrary errours refuted by it. I think in Corinth there were none of these Doctours, and yet I doubt not but they were as excellent: for such Doctors as delivered these doctrines had them after a more easie manner, even the imme­diate worke of the spirit. I hope with out any further dispute you will yeeld that the having of a a strange tongue was extraordinary, as likewise the revelation and interpretation.

I. Rob. ANSVV.

NOT to meddle with his descripti­on of a Psalme, Doctrine, &c. fur­ther then concernes our present oc­casion: The first, 1 a Psalme was not so un­doubtedly, as hee maketh it, some sudden to wit, extraordinary motion of the spirit &c. The scriptures rather insinuate the contrary, and that these Psalmes and spiri­tuall songes were also (besides the Psalmes of Dauid) and those then made by extra­ordinary motion (which I will not deny) euen ordinary and conceaued by ordinary men and motions. Ephe. 5.18.19. Col. [Page 28]3.16. Iam. 5.13. The scriptures are to be extended as largely, and to as common use, as may be, neither is any thing in thē to be accounted extraordinary, saue that which cannot possibly be ordinary, which these might bee. For the findeng out of sweet mater they had admirable divine books to read, even the wonderfull divine scrip­tures; For musicke, as without doubt many in that most rich and delicate City, were expert in it, so what reason he hath to require for the Church singing then in use, such study, and art, I see not, except it be because he dwels too neere a cathedral Church. Hee may see for the plainenesse of singing used in former times (and be­fore the spouse of Christ the Church, in all her ordinances was by Antichrist stripped of her homely but comely attire, and tricked up with his whorish orna­ments) that which Austin hath of this matter, Confess. l. 10. c. 13.

For the second which is doctrine, 2 he but thinks there were no Doctors in Corinth. But he may well change his thoughts, if he both consider how that Church aboun­ded (in the body of it) even to excesse, in all knowledge & utterance, the Doctors two speciall faculties, as also how this Apostle in this Epistle: c, 12. v. 28. affirmeth ex­presly that God had set in the Church, a­mongst other officers, Doctors, or Teachers. Besides that it is enough for my purpose if there were any in Corinth, though not [Page 29]officer able by ordinary gift to deli­liver doctrine; which (considering the fore-signified state of that Church, both in respect of Pauls ministery amongst them and testimony of them, being in that Citty, which was the chiefe of all Greece for governement, Greece also being the fountaine of learning, and eloquence) can not, I think, be reasonably denyed.

To yeeld you without further dispute that Revelation, & Interpretation were (viz. only) the immediate work of the spirit, were in us more courtesy then wisdom. For Interpre­cation, I see not, but that either he himselfe who spake the tongue by an extraordinary gift, or any other man that understood it, having ordinary ability to interpret the matter deliuered) both lawfully might, & in conscience ought so to doe, except he would quench the spirit both in respect of the extraordinary gift of the tongue, & or­dinary gift of interpretation: but that the Pastor or Teacher might not doe this by his ordinary gift (which is yet a fort strong enough to keep us from yeelding) were strange to imagine. Besides, let it be noted how the Apostle v. 13. exhorts to pray for, the gift of Interpretation: Now how a man might pray for an extraordina­ry and miraculous gift, which hee wholy wanted, without an extraordinary moti­on, or promise, and meerely upon the A­postles exhortation generall, I see not, but would learn of him that could teach me.

M. Yates. ARG. 8.

FROM present Revelation v. 30. In the verse going before is laid down in what order they shall prophesie, even as it was before for strange tongues: yet here is a further injunction and that is of silence, if any thing of more weight shal be revealed unto another: why should the other keep silence if it were known before, that this man should speake after him? if it were ordinary prophesying, and such as our pains, and study brought us unto, then were it fit that we should haue our liberty to goe on and not be interrupted by an other: but the Apostle up­on the Revelation to another even sitting by enioyns silence to the present speaker, which if his Revelation had been studied before could not bee any motiue, or perswasion why hee should yeeld to the other, that is now upon the sudden to take his place: this were for one Prophet to disgrace another: but the cleare sence is to any man that will not wrangle, that because it pleaseth the spirit to inspire one sit­ting by with some more excellent matter, ei­ther in regard of the same subiect or some o­ther, the Apostle enioyns silence.

I. Rob. ANSVV.

TO his question why the former speaker should keep silence if it were knowne before that a 2d. should speak after him [Page 31]it is easily answered: that euen therefore he was to keep silence; that is, to take vp himselfe in due time, as being to think in modesty, that the conduits of the spirit of God did not run into his vessell alone, but that others also might receaue of the fulnes of the same spirit to speake something further to the edification of the Church; especially sitting down in som appoynted place which it should seeme vers 30. and Act. 13.14. he that purpo­sed to prophesie vsed to take: and which order I thinke the Iewes yet obserue in their Synagogues. And where he ads, that if it were ordinary prophesie and such as our study brought vs vnto, then were it fit we should haue our liberty to go on and not to be interrupted by another, which he also ac­counts a disgracing of the former; I would know of him whether it vvere not as fit, and much more, that the extraordinary Prophets immediatly inspired by the Ho­ly Ghost, and who could not erre, should haue their liberty to go on uninterrupted? Is not this vvithout all compasse of rea­son, that the extraordinary Prophet im­mediatly inspired, should not haue as much liberty to goe on without being interrupted, as the ordinary, vvho might vvorthily deserue to be interrupted for speaking untruly or impertinently? al­though I do not thinke that the Apostle requires any interrupting of the former by the later (vvhich were rude) if not [Page 32]vvorse) but onely a convenient cession, or place-giving to a second by the first spea­ker, as hath been said. Now the Excep­tion of disgrace to the former, by the lat­ters speaking, is well to be minded, that it may appeare how evill customes do in­fect the mindes of godly men, so as they think it a disgrace that one should giue place to another to speake after him fur­ther, or otherwise then he hath done. But it vvas not so from the beginning: but since they, vvho under Christ should bee servants of the Church, haue been her ma­sters, and haue exercised this magisteriall teaching now in use, vvhere ordinarily one alone in a Church (divers others in divers places better able then he, sitting at his feet continually to learne) must be heard all his life long; thinking it a disgrace to haue another speake any thing further then he hath done: vvhich vvas the very disease in the Church of Corinth: wherein he that spake first vvould take up all the time himselfe; vvhereas he should in mo­desty haue conceived, that a second or third (especially seeming provided to speake, by seating themselues in the same place vvith him) might haue something revealed further, or othervvise then hee had.

VVhich Revelation the Apostle doth not oppose to fore-going study (as M. Yates thinketh) but unto emulation and study of contradiction: teaching that the [Page 33]spirit alone must be heard in the Church, speaking by whose mouth soever. And, that there is in the Church an ordinary spirit of revelation; besides comfortable experience, these places amongst many o­ther, do clearly proue, Math. 11.28. & 16.17. Eph. 1.17. Phil. 3.17.

Mr. Yates. ARG. 9.

FRom vocation, v. 29, 32.37. these spiri­tual men are called Prophets, and to ima­gine a Prophet without a calling, is that which the Scripture will not endure: therefore all these Prophets either had immediate calling from God, or mediate from men; or else they tooke it up themselues: the two first we grant lawfull callings, but this intollerable. Numb. 11.28. The servant of Moses sayes, Forbid Eldad and Medad to prophesie: his reason was, because he thought they had no calling: which had been true, if they had taken it up without immediate inspiration: But Moses knowing that it was from God, wished that the like gift might be upon all Gods people: so that those were true Prophets for the in­stant by an immediate call from God: and the text sayes, They added no further, shewing that as the gift ceased, so did they.

I. Rob. ANSWER.

IT is true, that Spirituall men are called Prophets, or rather, Prophets Spirituall men: what is it then that makes a spi­rituall [Page 34]man, but a gift of the spirit? and what a prophet ordinary or extraordina­ry, but the gift of prophesie ordinary or extraordinary? vvhereupon it followeth undeniably, that so many vvith us, or else­vvhere, as haue the ordinary gift or abili­ty to prophesie, are prophets, though out of office. In this Argument he hath made a snare vvherewith himselfe is taken un­avoydably. Secondly, vve affirme, that our prophets haue a calling, which I haue de­clared formerly, not to make them pro­phets by condition or estate, for that they are by their gift, but for the use or exer­cise of the same gift before bestowed up­pon them by the Lord, through their la­bour and industry. Of Eldads and Medads prophesying we shall speake hereafter: onely note vve in the meane vvhile, how M. Yates, and rightly, apportioneth their prophesying to their gift, as wee doe also ours: according to that of the Apostle, Having then gifts differing, according to the grace that is given to us, whether prophesie, let us prophesie according to the proporti­on of faith: or a ministery, let us wayt on the ministery, Rom. 12.6.7. They then that haue a gift, must prophesie according to their proportion.

M. Yates. ARG. 10.

FRom distinction, v. 37. the Apostle from the whole Church turnes himselfe to their Prophets, and spirituall men, she­wing [Page 35]plainly, that these had some particular place aboue the rest: and he giues them speci­all charge to obserue the things he writes to the Church: therefore those were in some cal­ling aboue others: and to imagine the contra­ry, is to run wide of the current of the whole Scripture: to set men in publike place with­out calling, is the same with confusion and disorder.

I. Rob. ANSVV.

THIS Argument is founded upon the groundlesse presumption with the former: viz. that there is in the Church no lawful calling for men able to prophesy, but by officing them. And for Pauls turning his speach to the Prophets. v. 37. it shewes indeed, that they were a­boue the rest, after a sort: and so they are with us rightly preferred before others, which want that endowment of the spirit, by which they are enabled to speake to the edification of the Church.

The Confirmation of the Scriptures and reasons brought in my book to proue publick prophesying out of office by an ordina­ry gift.

AND before wee come to examine M. Yates his Answers to the Scrip­tures by me produced, I desire the Reader to obserue with mee these two [Page 36]things. First, that I do not affirme in my book, that all the there alleadged Scrip­tures are meant of ordinary prophesy; but that the same is proved by them. Neither will he (I presume) deny, but that many things are sufficiently proved from a scrip­ture by necessary consequence, and iust proportion, besides the particular pro­perly intended in it. 2. That M. Yates so puts the question, as that it is hard to say, whether he do mee, or himselfe the more iniury: namely, whether the places prove an ordinary gift of prophesy out of office. For, as I do not say, that they proue the gift, but the use, and exercise of the gift be­stowed by God whether ordinary, or ex­traordinary, so neither would he haue de­nied (had he not leaped, before hee had lookt) but that others besides ministers, haue an ordinary gift of prophesie. Where the Apostle requires of him that desires the office of a Bishop, that he be apt to teach, 1. Tim. 3.1.2. and able to exhort with sound doctrine Tit. 1.9. doth he not therein most evidently teach, that the gift and ability to teach, preach, and prophesy, not onely may, but must, both be and appeare to be in the person to be called to the office of ministery? He that is not a prophet, or hath not the gift of prophesying or preaching, (for by his gift he is a Prophet, & by the use of it he occupies the place of a Pro­phet) before he be appointed a Pastor, is an Idol sheepheard set up in the temple of [Page 37]God: neither doth the office either giue, of so much indeed as encrease the gift, but onely giues solemne commission, & charge to use it.

The first Scripture by mee brought, is Numb. 11.29. where Moses the man of God wisheth that the whole people of the Lord were Prophets, the Lord putting his spirit up­on them.

This place, saith M. Yates in his Ans. speaks of the powring out of the Spirit in an extraor­dinary manner, as may apear by the occasion of the speech v. 24. &c. Where also in a te­dious manner (as his manner is) hee pro­veth the gift of prophesying given to the 70. Elders to haue been extraordinary: which as I deny not, so neither needed he to haue proved. But this I affirm, that hence is proved the lawfulnesse of ordi­nary prophesying out of office by men en­abled thereunto. And first, as Moyses wi­sheth that all the Lords people were Prophets, the Lord giving his spirit unto them; so the minister may and ought to wish that the Lord would so blesse the ordina­ry endeavours of his people now, by his spirit, as that they all might bee Pro­phets, that is, able for gifts to speak to e­dification. The minister which desireth not this, envieth for his own, and the Clergies sake, which Moses would not that Ioshua should do for his. Secondly Moses makes it all one to be a Prophet, and to haue the Lord putting his Spirit upon a [Page 38]man. Now if the Lords so giving his spi­rit unto a man, as that he be thereby in­abled extraordinarily to prophesy, make him an exrraordinary prophet, why should not by due proportion, such a gift of the Spirit given by the Lord to a man, as by which hee is enabled to prophesy or­dinarily, serue also to make him an ordi­nary Prophet? and so by consequence, if there be amongst us any though out of of­fice so enabled to prophesy, or preach, what hindreth them from being Prophets even of the Lords own making by his spirits gift, and work upon their study, & endevours? And if they be Prophets then may they Prophesie; which Moses also in that place insinuates: for in wishing that they were all Prophets, he wisheth as wel the use, as the possession of the gift. M. Yates may see a very leraned man Io. Wol­phius in his Com. upon 2. King. 23. shewing by this place the liberty of private Chri­stians that are able to speak, and teach not onely in ordinary congregations, but e­ven in most solemne Councels.

The next place is 2. Chron. 17.7. where King Iehosophat sent his Princes to teach in the Cities of Iudah, and with them the Levites &c.

M Yates accounts it a monstrous conceit that the princes should be publique teachers, which saith he were onely by theyr presence and authority to back the Levites: adding that the translation is mended by Iunius and [Page 39]Tremelius &c. but if the Iewes heard him (professing the knowledge of Moses & the Prophets) so speak, they would marvayle at his ignorance of a thing so frequent and euident in theyr writings: with whom it is and ever hath been a receiued truth, that any of theyr ( [...]) wise men; as they after the scriptures, math. 23.34. 1 cor. 1.20. Ier. 18.18. call them, may and ought to teach in theyr synagogues with­out respect had to office: neither doth the translation of Iunius and Tremelius by any necessity make for him: neyther can it be set agaynst me without violence to the originall: from the simplicity where of they do (with due reuerence vnto them be it spoken) seeme vnto me something to turne aside in the 8 vers. Pagnine, the 70 Interpreters, Ierom, and all our English Bi­bles carry it directly to our sense. And if the conceite be monstrous that these princes preached publickly, it is not bred onely in my brain: the very same Scripture ha­ving been alledged very lately by the pub­lick Professor in the Vniversitie of Ley­den in a solemne assembly, as expresly proving it lawful for others then ministers to teach publickly. And because much weight lieth upon this ground, which yet hee thinketh very sandy and light, I will make it cleare to all indifferent mens iudgments, that these Princes, & so others in Israel, and Iudah (though no Levites, nor Church officers) might lawfully teach [Page 40]and preach publickly in the Temple, Sy­nagogues, and Cities.

First then, all Princes, Magistrates, Iud­ges, and Governours were bound to open expound, and apply the Lawes by which they governed, according to the severall occasions offered; otherwise they ruled by tiranny, and appetite: which lawes for all the administrations even of the common­wealth were onely the written word of God: wherupon I cōclude, that if to open, expound, & apply the word of God, be to preach, and teach, they then had not one­ly power, but charge so to doe.

2. It may appeare what these Princes of Ichosaphat (partaking of his power) were to do in this case, by that which he himselfe, and other godly Kings haue done. The summe of his most pithy sermon wee haue recorded. 2. Chron. 19. unto the Iudges. v. 6.7. and unto the Le­vites v. 9.10.11. as also his divine prayer unto God in the publick Congregation. c. 20.5.6. &c. Likewise the excellent sermon of King Hezekiah unto the Priests, and Le­vites, in the very temple, 2. Chron. 29.4.5 &c. also of Nehemiah with others, teaching the people the Law of the Lord. Neh. 8.10: the Kings, and Princes being as shepheards to feed the people, as by government, so by instruction in the Law of their God. Descend wee down lower to the time of Christ, and we shall see this matter put out of all question. Doe wee not read every where how that the Scribes, Pharisees, [Page 41]and Lawyers did teach publickly amongst the Iewes; of whom yet many were no Levits or Church officers, but indifferent­ly of any tribe, Phil. 3.5. And if it were not the received order in Israell of old, for men out of office to speake, and teach in publick, how was Iesus the sonne of Mary admitted to dispute in the Temple with the Doctors? Luk. 2.46. and to teach, and preach in the Synagogues so commonly as he did? Mat. 9.35. Luk. 4.16.17. & how were Paul, and Barnabas, sitting down in the Synagogue, sent unto, after the lecture of the Law by the ruler, that if they had any word of exhortation unto the people, they should say on? Act. 13.14.15.

But if any manshall answer, that these were extraordinary persons, & so taught by an extraordinary gift, he speaks the truth, but to no purpose. For what was that to the order received in the Temple, and Sy­nagogues, and to the Rulers thereof, who did not beleeue in Christ, nor acknow­ledge either his, or his Apostles authority; but onely admitted them unto the use of their gift, as they would haue done, and did ordinarily, any other men able to teach: as also the rulers of the Synagogues of the Iewes do at this day.

The third place is mistaken by the Prin­ter, in omitting only one prick, which was corrected in many Coppies, & might, easily haue been observed by the Reader, For Ier. 50.45. it should be Ier, 50.4.5. [Page 42] M. Yates therefore upon that Scripture refutes his own guesse, and not my proofe.

The fourth place is Math. 10.1.5.6. where Christ calling unto him his twelue Disciples sends them to preach the Kingdom of heauen to the lost sheep of Israel.

His answer is, that the twelue Apostles were called into office, and had their calling from the first election of Christ, but had a further confirmation after, and greater mea­sure of Gods Spirit to lead them into al truth, as a Iustice of peace may bee put in office and yet receiue a further Confirmation, yea and greater means to performe his place. I affirme on the other side, (and shall evidently proue it God assisting mee) that these twelue were not actually possessed of their Apostleship, till after Christs Resurrection but were onely Apostles elect, as you call him the Major elect, who hath not the office of Major committēd to him of a good space after. Neither am I herein of the minde with the Papists (to put M. Yates out of feare) that Peter was not in office until Christ gaue him charge to feed his sheep. Ioh. 21. (which yet I am perswaded never Pa­pist held of his Apostleship, but of his primacy, and universall headship, or Bishoprick) but of the same mind, wherof himself is in his first argument, to wit, that his cōmission Apostolick was actually con­ferred upon him ioyntly with the rest. Iohn, 20.22.23.

1. Now if the Commission Apostolike [Page 43]were but then given, they were but then, and not before actually Apostles, except he will say they were Apostles, before they had commission, that is calling frō Christ so to bee. I would now see how hee can salue the wound, which he hath giuen himselfe.

2. After that the Lord Iesus had Mat. 11.11. preferred Iohn Baptist aboue all the Prophets which were before him, he yet ads in the same place, that the least in the Kingdom of heauen is greater then hee. The least. i. the least Minister; In the kingdom of heauen. i. in the Church of the new testa­ment properly called, which began not till after the death of Christ who liued and dyed a member of the Iewish Church. The Apostles then being officers of the Church of the new testament, and King­dome of heauen, and not of the old or Ie­wish Church, it cannot bee that they were Apostles in act, before Christs death; except an adiunct can be before the sub­iect, and an officer before the corporation in and of which he is an officer.

3. Considering the ignorance of these disciples at that time in the main misteries of Christ: of the nature of his kingdom, his death and resurrection, Math, 20.21. Luke. 24.20.21. &c. Iohn. 20.9. Mark. 16.14. as also, how vtterly vnfurnished they were of gifts befitting Apostolicall teaching (for which (as being an extraor­dinary dispensation, & that in the highest [Page 44]degree) extraordinary, and infallible reuelation and direction of the spirit was requisite, wherewith they were but first, (as it seemeth) sprinckled Iohn. 20.22. and afterwards more plentifully filled at the day of Pentecost) they were as fit for an Apostleship as Dauid was for Sauls armour which he could not weild nor go with.

4. Besides, if they had the office of Apostleship committed to them Math. 10. how was it that they continued not their ministration in that office; but re­turneing after a few dayes to their ma­ster Christ, continued with him as his dis­ciples till his death. Christ Iesus did not keepe a company of non-residents about him for his Chaplins, as M. Yates insinu­ates against him.

Lastly, we are expresly taught, Eph. 4.8 11. When Christ ascended on high, hee gaue gifts unto men, Apostles, Prophets, &c. The Apostles then were first given actually at the Lords ascension, and vvere before onely designed to become Apostles, or A­postles elect, but not ordained, nor posses­sed of any office: and therefore preached, and that vvith warrant from Christ, with­out office.

The next Scripture is, Luk. 8.39. by M. Yates thus opened: Christ having delivered the man possessed, bids him go, and shew what great things God had done for him: and it is sayd he went and preached (that is, if it be to their purpose) by ordinary pains and study, he [Page 45]preached the Gospel. And with pitty upon us poore soules that cannot distinguish the publi­shing of a miracle, and the gift (hee should say the worke, if hee distinguished as he ought) of preaching; he addeth, that if Christ had minded to haue made him a pub­like preacher, hee would first haue taken him with him, and instructed him, and then haue sent him abroad.

First, let it be obserued, that the word used by Mark for his preaching, [...]. is the same word which is commonly used for the most solemne preaching, that is, by the Apostles and Evangelists. Secondly, Christ bids him, Mark. 5.19. Goe home and de­clare how great things the Lord had done for him, and had had compassion on him, and v. 20. he is said to haue published in Decapo­lis (Luke hath it, throughout the whole Cit­ty) how great things Iesus had done for him. VVhich he doing, what else did hee, but preach, publish, and declare the great loue and mercy of God, in and by Iesus Christ towards miserable sinners for the curing of their bodily and spiritual mala­dies? Thirdly, where he makes the pub­lishing of this miracle and the preaching of the Gospell divers things, and pitties us poore soules that we cannot distinguish be­tween them: as Christ bad the women of Ierusalem, not to weep for him, but for them­selues; so surely had he need to pitty not us herein, but himselfe in his so great mis­taking. Are not the miracles of Christ [Page 46]storied in the Scriptures a maine part of the Gospell? and the publishing of them a part of the preaching of the Gospell? And when M. Yates opens and publishes a mi­racle of Christs (as this man did) doth he not as well and as truely preach the Gos­pell as at any other time? Let the wise iudge, who is to be pittied. To shut up this poynt, it is sayd Ioh. 20.30. that Iesus did many other signes, &c. and v. 31. But these are written that yee might beleeue that Iesus is the Christ, the Sonne of God, and that beleeving, yee might haue life through his name. The publishing then of the signes and miracles which Christ did, is the preaching of faith in his name, to salvati­on: which this man therefore did, espe­cially amongst them which were not ig­norant of the Law of Moses, and promise of the Messiah to come: which, by his glorious miracles done by his own pow­er, and in his owne name, he both declared and proved himselfe to be. Ioh. 5.36. & 10.37.38. And where he ads, that Christ gaue this man commission to doe that which he did, but he admires who gaue ours any such authority, I answer, even the same Christ, as then immediatly, so now me­diatly by those unto whom he hath given authority under himselfe, for the ordering of the gifts of his spirit in his Church. And sufficient it is for the question be­tween him and me, if it appeare (as in this person) that Christ hath given commissi­on [Page 47]to men out of office by an ordinary gift, to publish, and preach in publick the the Gospel of salvation.

I doe quote next in my booke, Luk. 10.1.—9. which for that W.E. omitteth, and leaues out, M. Yates thanketh God; but in truth hee hath more cause to thanke him, for sparing him in a place which so pregnantly proveth the preaching of the kingdom of God by men out of of­fice: except hee can assigne some new found office, and the same but of two or three dayes lasting, as v. 17. to those 70 there sent.

VVe are in the next place to come un­to Ioh. 4.28.29.39. which hee openeth and answereth with admiration, as the former place, withpitty and compassion, on this manner, O simplicity, with contra­diction to his own writing. Simplicity that cannot see bttween preaching of the Gospell, and carrying tydings of a man that told her (to wit, the woman of Samaria) of al things that ever she did, is not this (sayth she) the Christ? But besides simplicity, here is con­tradiction: for sayes M. Robinson, and that truely, a woman is not suffered to exercise an ordinary gift of prophesie in the Church; and shall the woman of Samaria serue your turne that it is lawfull for men to exercise such a gift?

It is indeed my simplicitte to think that the Gospell (as the word importeth) is no­thing else but glad tydings: and that to [Page 48]preach the Gospell is nothing else but to carry or bring glad tydings of Christ be­fore promised, then come into the world. It is also my simplicity to think, since by the tydings which this woman brought, many of the Samaritans beleeved on Christ in a measure, v. 39. and that without preaching of the word of God, none can beleeue, Rom. 10 14.17, that therfore she preached unto the Samaritans the same word of God in a measure also, and that as truly and effectu­ally as ever M. Yates did to his parishio­ners, though she went not up into a pulpit as he doth. And that he may iudge aright of this matter, let him call to minde, that those Samaritans received the bookes of Moses, as did the Iewes: and as they, loo­ked for the Messias, or Christ promised to, and of Abraham: bearing themselues for the children of the Patriarks, and true worshippers of God, as they had been, v. 20.28. and being so prepared, were easily made as regions, or corne fields white unto the Harvest, v. 35. And so this woman, by declaring unto them that, by which this Iesus, the sonne of Mary, proved himselfe to be the Christ, or Messias promised, preached faith unto them most properly and effectually, even that main poynt of faith then in controversie both in Iudaea and Samaria, and Galilee, and the Coun­tries thereunto adioyning; which was, that Iesus was the Christ. I suppose M. Yates hath not sufficiently thought of [Page 49]these things, and do hope, that in godly modesty he will suffer himselfe to be bet­ter informed.

And for contradiction, between these two propositions: A woman may not teach in the Church, and A woman may teach out of the Church, or where no Church is (as it was in Samaria) it must be by other Lo­gicke, then I haue learnt: But hee will then demand as he doth, how this Wo­mans preaching can serue my turn? I answer, very well, by good consequence of Rea­son, thus: If a woman may lawfully teach out of the Church to the begetting of faith, as this woman did, but not in the Church, because she is a woman by sex: then a man, against whom that reason of restraint of Sex lieth not, may lawfully teach both without and within the Church. Of which consequence more hereafter.

Another Scripture is, Act. 8.1.4. with chap. 11.19.20.21. where it is recorded, how all the Church at Ierusalem was scatte­red abroad, except the Apostles, and that they which were scattered abroad, went every where preaching the word, &c.

M. Yates answereth, that besides the A­postles which were in office, there were seventy disciples, which Christ before his death had made labourers in his harvest: and therefore these might preach, or any other that had an extraordinary gist of prophesie: the one by vertue of his office and gift together, the other [Page 50]by commission from the Holy Ghost to exer­cise that gift which they had received in the day of Pentecost, or any other. But sayes your Authour, compare this place with Acts 11.19.20.21. and the truth will fully ap­peare. I answer, it will fully appeare against you: for Christ charged both his Apostles, and likewise the 70. Disciples, that they should preach to none but the Iewes: and therefore it is sufficient that they had so many preachers in office already by the commission of Christ, to goe through all those places: neither will I deny, that there might bee others whom the Holy Ghost immediatly raised up to manifest the excellent gifts that were to be powred down upon the Church in the primitiue times.

His answer is very dark & ambiguous, but in which are contained sundry errors evi­dent enough. First, he makes those of the dispersiō wch went about preaching the word, to be of the 70 disciples. Luk. 10. and others the like furnished with an extraordinary gift of prophesie: but seems to allow them for no officers, in the beginning of his answer, when he thus speaketh, Besides the Apostles which were in office, there were 70. Disciples &c. yet afterwards in these words, and therefore it is sufficient, that they had so many preachers in office already by the com­mission of Christ to goe thorough all these places, &c, he bestowes some office or o­ther, upon them. Secondly, hee misseth in two Scriptures which in his answere, hee pointeth at: the former is Act. 2.4 [Page 51]where he gathereth, that others besides, the twelue, received the gift of prophesie extraordinary at the day of Pentecost: the second (if I mistake not) is Math. 10.5.6. where he racks the edict or prohibition of Christ layed upon the Apostles, and (as he saith) upon the 70. Disciples, of preaching to any but Iewes, far aboue the reach therof; even unto this time of the dispersiō, wher­as it reached onely to the death of Christ, when the wall of partition between Iewes and Gentiles was broken downe: after which they were by the expresse words of their Commission to preach to all peo­ple, beginning indeed at Ierusalem and tar­rying there, till they were indued with power from on high, and so proceeding unto all nations. Luk. 24.47.49. as it is also recor­ded Act. 11.20. that some of this disper­sion preached the L. Iesus to the Grecians in Antioch. Thirdly, it is plain by that which I haue formerly said, that neither these 70 disciples (no nor the 12.) were by Christ possessed of any office before his death; no nor yet furnished with any extraordinary gifts of prophesie: the Evangelist (who knew well, and is worthy to be beleeved) bearing also witnesse with mee, that the Holy Ghost was not yet given, because that Iesus was not yet glorified, Iohn. 7.39.

Lastly it is altogether unreasonable to imagine that they who were scattered, & preached abroad, being the body of the Church at Ierusalem (excepting the Apo­stles) [Page 52]were all officers: and little more rea­sonable to think that they were all extra­ordinarily indued with the spirit of Pro­phesie. For first, there is no circumstance in the text leading that way: and to ima­gine extraordinary, and miraculous things without good evidence, is extraordinary licentiousnesse, and presumption. 2. the onely titles giuen unto them are; all the Church which was at Ierusalem, they that were scattered abroad: and againe c. 11. they which were scattered abroad, some of thē were mē of Cyprus, & Cyrene, &c. nothing insinu­ating any office of ministry. 3. Their prea­ching here & there is onely noted to be by reason of their scattering hither & thither through persecution, and not of any ex­traordinary gift, and dispensation commit­ted unto them. Fourthly, if they had been extraordinary Prophets immediately, and extraordinarily inspired, there had been no need of so speedy sending of Barnabas from Ierusalem to Antioch with supply, though hee were a man full of the Holy Ghost, for so were such Prophets as well as he Eph. 2.20. & 3.5. I conclude there­fore as before that these mens preaching was by a gift, and liberty, common unto them and us.

The next Scripture is 1. Pet. 4.10, 11. As every man hath receiud the gift so minister the same one to another as good stewards of the manifold grace of God; If any man speak, let him speak as the oracles of God. If any [Page 53]man minister let him do it, as of the abilitie which God giveth, that God in all things may bee glorified, &c.

This (saith M. Yates) is little to he pur­pose, onely thus much: would the Apostle per­swade, that wee ought to be harberous one of another, and that without grudging, because all that we haue is given us of God, who hath left us not as ingrossers of his benefits, but as good disposers to his glory and our brothers good.

He that but veiweth the place without preiudice, cannot but see, that the Apo­stle would perswade more then so much: and that M. Yates doth iniuriously enclose the Apostles words, v. 10. to verse 9. which though they ly in common to both, yet belong much more to the verse fol­lowing. Verse 9. Hee exhorteth to hos­pitality, and verse 10. riseth from that particular to the more generall use of all gifts, or graces, and so verse. 11. brin­geth, for example, two specialties: 1. the gift of prophesie in speaking: 2. the mi­nistering of the ability which God giveth bodily or otherwise in the Church. Nei­ther can the Apostles meaning without extreame violence bee restrained to v. 9. which speaks onely of hospitality: which is but the use or ministering of that one gift or grace of liberality. Hee saith in the tenth vers. As every man hath received the gift; that is as one hath received this gift, another that, and every one some: [Page 54] so minister the same one to another: that is, so let every such person mutually in the bond of loue, as verse 8. communicate his gift: as good disposers of the manifold grace of God: that is, knowing that every one what gift soever he hath received, is but as the Lords Steward therein. Is Liberality alone a manifold grace? and Hospitality a­lone the ministring of a manifold grace of God? To the ministring of a manifold grace, the Apostle perswades, and therefore not onely that we ought to be harborous one to another, which is but the ministring of one grace.

Two other Scriptures from the Revela­tion follow. The former is chap. 11. v. 3. I will giue to my two witnesses, and they shall prophesie a thousand two hundred sixty dayes, cloathed in sackcloath.

This is meant (sayth M. Yates) of the two Testaments, and the instruments that God should raise up to use as faithfull witnesses a­gainst Antichrist: but what is this for an ordinary gift of prophesie? Surely in this there is some extraordinary thing, because it is sayd God will giue power, that is, giue them life a­gaine: for Antichrist did kill these witnesses when he stopped the current of the holy word of God, and shut the mouthes of the Mini­sters, &c.

His exposition I will not deny (nor need to feare) saue as with great partiali­ty on the clergies part, he makes the mi­nisters of the word of God, that is, men in [Page 55]office, the onely faithfull witnesses against Antichrist. VVhereas the contrary is most true; and that in Antichrists reigne no Church-officer, as an officer, witnessed a­gainst him, but all for him: as both ha­ving their authority by him, and binding themselues to submit their doctrine to his censure. The persons indeed, that were also officers, even Masse-priests, Monkes and Friers, witnessed some of them against him, but so did not their offices, or they in respect of them, (which is all one) but rather with him, as advantaging his state and Hierarchy. Something extraordinary I do vvith him acknowledge to haue been in them, in respect of the order then pre­vailing, and of the bondage spirituall un­der which all both things and persons were: as also of the degree of their ordi­nary both gifts and graces to put them forth in service of the truth: but that these witnesses against Antichrist had any extraordinary, or miraculous gift of pro­phesie (which he insinuateth, and must af­firme, if [...] he will draw them from our part) is meerely imagined both against experience and their owne plea. But for the opening of this place, I referre the rea­der to our learned Countrey-man M. Brightman, where he shall finde affirmed, and proved, that these two prophets were the holy Scriptures, and Assemblies of the faithfull.

The other scripture is Reu. 14.6. [Page 56]where the Angell flieth in the midst of hea­ven having the euerlasting gospell to preach vnto them that dwell on the earth, and to every nation, and kindred, and tongue, and people.

By heauen (saith M. Yates) is to be vnder­stood the visible Church, and by the Angell the learned men that God hath euer raised vp in the midst of popery to carry the blessed word of God in the midst of heauen, that is, raised from the earthly corruption of Anti­christ, but not as yet at the height of purity, &c.

As I doe not conceiue of any such mistery in these words, (flying in the midst of heauen) but onely that these Angels should roundly and clearly (specially in respect of former times) publish the gos­pell far, and neere, as is the flying of a bird in the airy heauen, or firmament, speedy and euident; so (that signified) I assent to his exposition, as being also no way preiudiciall, but much aduantageable to my purpose. For if those learned, and Angel-like men were to publish the gospel in the midst of popery; and that neither by any extraordinary, or miraculous gift, nor by vertue of their office, then is pub­lick prophesying out of office by an ordi­nary gift approuable. The first part I hope he will easily grant; if not, let him name the man miraculously inspired in the midst of popery. For the latter, the office it self or function was no ministery of Christs appoyntment, as being the office [Page 57]of a Frier, Monk, or Masse-priest, so their power to administer it was from or by the pope, as vniversall Bishop: that is, as Antichrist. In respect then of the Gos­pell which they preached, and of their gifts and graces personall, by which they were both enabled and prouoked thereun­to, they were Angels of God; but in re­gard of their office, and power Ecclesias­ticall, and Hierarchicall, Angels of Anti­christ. Besides that when they gaue their clearest testimony against Antichrist, they were, for the most part, all excom­municated out of the Church of Rome: and so being no members, could not be officers of any Church. Whereupon I con­clude, that the witnesse which they gaue to the truth, was but personall, and not ministeriall, so far forth as it was of God, or by him approued. And thus it appea­reth how in the quoting of those scrip­tures, we haue not offered abuse to Gods word (as he abuseth vs) but haue with good conscience, as in the sight of God, no­ted them as seruing to proue lawfull, publique prophesie by an ordinary gift out of office.

Lastly, 1. Cor. 14. comes into handle­ing, with the proofes thence taken: which what weight they haue, shall appeare af­ter rehearsall of some more generall considerations premised in my book, in the same place, for the better vnderstan­ding of the poynt. as. 1. that the Church of [Page 58]Corinth aboue all other Churches, did abound with spirituall gifts both ordinary, and extra­ordinary. 2. that they abused these giftes too much vnto faction and ambition. 3. that there­vppon the Apostle takes occasion in the begin­ning of the 12. Chap. and so forward, to draw them to the right vse of these gifts of God, which was the imployment of thē to the edifiing of the body in loue. 4. and lastly, that hauing layd down ch. 13. a full description & large cōmendation of that grace of loue, ch. 14 & the beginning of it, he exhorts to prophesy­ing, and to the study and vse of that gift; which though it were not so strange a thing as was the sudden gift of tongues, nor which drew with it such wonder and admiration, yet was it more profitable for the Church: and though a matter of lesse note, yet of greater charity, which must beare sway in all our actions. VVhereupon I lay downe the first reason for brethrens (though no officers) liberty in these words: Because the Apostle speakes of the manifestation of a gift, or grace com­mon to all persons, as well brethren as mini­sters, ordinary as extraordinary, and that at all times, which is loue: as also of such fruits and effects of that grace, as are no lesse com­mon to all, then the grace it selfe, nor of lesse continuuance in the Churches of Christ, to wit, of edification, exhortion, and comfort, v. 3. compared with 1. Thess. 5.11.14.

In answering the former part of the Reason hee is very large but more negli­gent, as appears in his denying, that the A­postle [Page 59]speaks of a gift common to all persons) and in more then denying, (for his rude terme I will conceale for his credits sake) that it was common to all persons at all times admiring how I dare affirme any such thing: adding: that loue was enioyned to all but this gift onely of such, as did excell amongst them: whereas the very gift, which I speak of in that place, or grace rather, as I there call it, was none other, but the grace of loue; as any that will may see in the reason: which generall grace ought to manifest, and expresse it selfe in the edify­ing use of all the special gifts of the spirit: which by it are set a work & moued, as the lesser wheels of a clock by the greater: & from which grace the Apostle provoketh the Church to the stirring up of the gift of prophesy, unto edification, as well now as then. And whereas, to my ground, (as he puts it, & as after a sort I intended, frō v. 3. compared with 1. Thes. 5.11.14. viz. that since the end which is edification exhortation, & comfort continueth, ther­fore the gift of prophesy also continueth) he answereth; that there are many means to effect one end, & yet some of them may cease yea all of them, & other come in their roomes, as, for extraordinary gifts, ordinary; and so for Apostles, ordinary ministers: instancing further in tongues, which v. 26. are for edi­fication; he neither speaks so properly, as is meet, nor (all admitted which he saith) takes away the force of the Argument. [Page 60]Strange tongues, (to speak properly, and pressely, as in disputing) are no means of edifying the Church; but the interpreta­tion, and application of the matter of the tongues: neither doth the office of the ministery in it selfe edifie, but the use and exercise of it in teaching, and exhorting; no nor yet the gift of prophesying, but as it is used in speaking, as v. 3. hee that prophesieth, that is useth the gift of prophesie, speaketh unto men, to exhortation edification, and comfort. There being then no other means to edify, exhort, and comfort in the Church but prophesying, the Apostle (as appeareth by the two pla­ces set together) laying these dueties from the common grace of loue as well upon brethren, as officers, ordinary as ex­traordinary, & at all times, in the Church, therein giues warrant to an ordinary exer­cise of prophesie in the Church by mē out of office (to wit having gifts & abilities answerable) to the end of the world.

The second Argument is from v. 21. where the Apostle saith, ye may all prophe­sie one by one, that all may learne, & all may be comforted, he speaks of alls prophesying as largely as of alls learning.

This (saith hee) is absurd: are all the Church Prophets? if all may prophesie who shall learn? the H. Gh. sayes all, but that is to be understood of such as haue gifts; all ought to haue the gift of hearing, but the like is not of prophesying: & I say this gift was extraor­dinary, [Page 61]for how could all men study the Scrip­tures when they had them not in their natiue tongues?

It were absurd indeed, if I thought, that every person in the Church were to prophesie: but why should hee chalendge mee, or I purge my selfe of this absurdity? whereas the contrary is most evident, both in the words of the question, which are, that others having receiued a gif [...] thereunto, may and ought to stir up the same, and to use it in the Church; and every where in the handling of it. By all then I meane all that haue gifts: and so take all for prophesying as largely (yet in the subiect, according to the received rule of expounding the notes of universality,) as the other all for learning. His question, if all may prophesie who shall learne? is easily answered. For they who prophesie at one time may learn at another: It is the disease of the exalted Clergy to skorn to learne any thing of others then themselues, and almost one of another. Where he further saith, that all ought to haue the gift of hearing, but the like is not prophesying, it is true, and that every particular person in the Church is not bound to haue yt gift; but if he speak any thing to the purpose in hand, he must go further, and say that no ordinary brethren out of office ought to haue the gift of prophesie: which if it were true, then ought none to striue for fitnesse to become officers: neither were the reproofe iust [Page 62]which the Apostle layes, not onely, nor so much, if at all, upon the officers, as up­on the brethren, Heb. 5.12. that for the time they ought to be teachers. Of his un­worthy mistaking about the Scriptures not being in the Corinths natiue tongue, which hee makes the onely ground of his Answer, else where. To conclude this Argument. The Apostle writing to the Church of Corinth, ye may all prophesie one by one, cannot be understood of extraordi­nary Prophets, except we cōceiue that the body of that Church was or might be pro­phets extrarodinary, & miraculously inspi­red: which, cōsidering the superexcellency of that state by me elswhere laid down, is a presumption aboue my reach, and least of all agreeing with M. Yates his iudgment in his answer to the next Argument, which is, that extraordinary prophesie did then begin to cease in the Church.

The third Argument is from v. 34. where the Apostle restrains womē frō prophesying, or other speaking in the Church with autho­rity, as also 1 Tim. 2.11.12. and in forbidding women, giues liberty to all men gifted accor­dingly, opposing women to men, sex to sex, and not women to officers: and againe, in re­straining women shewes his meaning to be of ordinary not extraordinary prophesying: for women immediately, extraordinarily, and mi­raculously inspired might speake without re­straint, Exod, 15.20. Iudg. 4.24. Luk. 2.36. Act. 2.17.19▪ & 21.9.

It is a pitteous thing to see how M. Yates intangles himselfe about this Argument, straining all the veyns of his wit, if not of a more tender part (his conscience) to draw some face of answer upon it: That which hath any shew of answer either in that place, or any other throughout his tedious and perplexed discourse, I will relate and refute: confirming the Argument cleerly, as I am perswaded, to any indifferent iudgement.

His first Answer, or Exception is, that it is most absurd to imagine that the Corin­thian women, did follow their study, and took orcinary pains to make sermons. Secondly that extraordinary prophesie did cease, and that not all at once, but first in womē, & that the Apostle therefore especially aims at them, as though (to wit in their own iudgement the same measure were still upon them, as well as in former times; when Christ that saues both man and woman, would extra­ordinarily manifest himselfe in both, yet first after a sufficient manifestation of his grace and goodnesse, he withdrew those extra­ordinary gifts from that sex then afterward from the other. His third answer, upon which he doth most insist, is, that the A­postle forbids two generall faults in the wo­men; the one that they would pray, and pro­phesie uncovered. 1. Cor. 11.5. imitating the Pythonisses and Sibilles of the Gentiles in laying aside their vaile, and spreading their haire against decency, and comelinesse: the se­cond [Page 64]is that in their husbands presence, they would be as ready to speak as they: and there­fore the Apostle finding the women to abuse this gift, prohibits the use of it, whether simply or no, he cannot iudge. Fourthly, hee admires by what Logick this will follow; wo­men are forbidden to prophesie, therefore men haue liberty: which (sayes he) is an ill conse­qnence.

In his first Answer or rather exception, he mistakes both the state of the questi­on, and also the nature of the ordi­nance. The question is not of the study, or ability of these women (which yet I think was greater then hee maketh ac­count of) but of their forewardnesse to teach [...], which was certainely too great. And what consequence is this? The Co­rinthian women were not sufficiently furnished to teach by an ordinary gift, therefore they needed not to bee reltrai­ned from teaching. Nay, therefore they needed much more such bridle of restraint to be cast upon them; especially confide­ring their mannish bouldnesse, and immo­desty, insinuated against them here by the Apostle, in part, but much more c. 11.

Neither (for the second point) are they that speak in the exercise of prophesie, to make a sermon by an houre glasse, as M. Yates gathers; that were to abuse the time, and wrong the gifts of others (but briefly to speak a word of exhortation, as God enableth, and that, after the ministeriall [Page 65]teaching bee ended, as Act. 13. questions also about things delivered, & with them even disputations, as there is occasion, be­ing part or apurtenances of that exercise, 1. Cor. 14.35. Act. 17.2. and 18.4.

For the Prophets gifts & abilities then, as under the Law a bullock or lambe, that had any thing saperfluous, or lacking in his parts might yet bee offered for a freewill offering: but for a vow it was not to be accepted. Leu. 22.23, so in this exercise of prophesie, as in a freewill offering, according to the gift of God, that which is lesse perfit, and exact, may far better be excepted, then if the same were presented in the Pastors vowed service, and ministration.

For his second Answer: As it is true, that extraordinary prophesie did cease by de­grees, so is it not certain, but a meere pre­sumption, that it ceased first in women: but most untrue it is, that the Apostle there aims at all at the ceasing of that gift in women. Ecclesiasticall Histories worthy of credit in this kind, doe testifie, that the streame of the spirit was so far from being neare dry at this time, as that it ran a strong cur­rent wel-nigh a hundred years after, for all the extraordinary gifts thereof, as for the casting out of divels, foreseing and foretelling of things to come, healing the sick, and raising of the dead, of whō diuers so raysed liued many yeares after; witnesse amongst others Iraeneus adv. Her. lib. 2. c. [...]7. whom also for the same purpose Eus-Hist. [Page 66]Eccl. l. 5. c. 7. alledgeth: And ever for women. Evident it is by the Scriptures that extraordinary Prophesie in a very plenteous manner by them, and that in the presence of men continued in the Church many years after Pauls writing of this Epistle. Phillip the Evangelist had foure daughters virgins which did prophesie, Act. 21.9. & that in the presence of the Apostle. Lo, foure extraordinary prophetesses in one house, and the daughters of one man: so that hi­therto the conduit of the spirit of Pro­phesie kept his course as well upon their daughters as sonnes. Ioel. 2. Act. [...]. So Revel. 2.20. we read how the woman Ie­sabell (calling her selfe a prophetesse) taught and by teaching, seduced the Lords ser­vants in the Church of Thyatyra. In which place, as the errors and evils of the person is condemned, so is the formall order of the Church manifested to be, that vvomen (prophetesses extraordinary) might teach. Lastly, the prohibition of vvomen by the Apostle is perpetuall, and not vvith respect to this, or that time, as appeares by the reasons thereof, both in this place, and in the Epistle to Timothy, and such as equally belong to former times, and lattter: and no more to the latter end then to the be­ginning, or middle time of the manifesta­tion of the grace and goodnesse of Ghrist.

VVhat can be more absurd then to say that these reasons, The woman must be un­der obedience, 1. Cor. 14.34. and not usurpe authority over the man, but be in silence, be­cause [Page 67]Adam was first formed, then Eue. And Adam was not seduced, but the woman, &c. 1. Tim. 2.12.13.14. were not morall and perpetuall? VVere not those reasons and grounds for vvomens silence in the Church (vvithout extraordinary dispen­sation by miraculous inspiration) of as great force seven yeares before, as vvhen Paul wrote this Epistle? It is therfore most cleare, that the Apostle aimes not at all, at any ceasing of the gift of extraordinary prophesie now growing on, but at the uni­versall, and absolute restraint and prohi­bition of vvomens prophesying, not ex­traordinary, but ordinary.

In his third answer he dealeth vvorse then in any of the other, in labouring to smother one truth under another. For al­beit the women of Corinth were become so mannish, as that they would prophesie uncovered, and without their veile, (the ensigne of their subjection) yet doth not the Apostle meddle at all with that ma­lady in this place, but in the 11. chapter of the Epistle, as himselfe noteth. Here and in Tim. he simply forbids the thing: there the manner of doing it. Likewise, for their being as forward to speake, as their husbands, and in their presence, it may be true in part, and in some. But what then? Doth the Apostle in these pla­ces onely forbid their speaking uncove­red, and permit them to teach so it be vei­led? or forbids he onely their being as [Page 68]forward as their husbands, but giues them leaue to speake in the Church, so it bee with good maners, and after them, which his answer insinuates? Or is it not evident to all that will not shut their eyes, that he simply, and that severely, inhibits them all speaking whatsoever in this exercise? Are not the words plain enough? Let the women keep silence in the Church, for it is not permitted to them to speak, but to be under obedience, as the Law sayth. And againe, It is a shame for them to speake in the Church. And in 1. Tim. Let the women learne in si­lence with all subiection. And, I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurpe authority ouer the man, but to be in subjection. For Adam was first formed, &c. Do not all and every one of the Reasons binde women to all peace and deepe silence in the Church, yea to such and so absolute, as that they may not so much as aske a question for learning any thing themselues, vers. 35. much lesse teach others any thing? I there­fore conclude this as a most certain and undeniable truth, that the Apostle speaks here of such a gift and exercise as women are simply forbidden to use in the Church; and therefore not of an extraordinary gift or exercise, which they might use lawful­ly, and did both before, and a long time after the writing of this Epistle.

His last answer now comes in conside­ration, which is, that the consequence is ill, women are forbidden, and therefore men are [Page 69]permitted to prophesie in the Church by an ordinary gift.

If the consequence seem not good, why doth he so strugle as before otherwise to make an escape from the Argument? let us cōsider of the force of it, which appea­reth to me irresistable in these 3. things. First, the Apostle in, and for this work op­poseth the men to the women, sex to sex, & so in prohibiting women, he permits men. VVhen the H. Ghost opposing faith and workes in the case of iustification, denies that we are iustified by works, is not the consequence good, that therfore we are iustified by faith. VVhere hee opposeth belevers & vnbeleevers in the case of Sal­vation, and teacheth that beleevers shall be saued, doth he not teach consequently, that vnbeleevers shall perish? If these con­sequences be not good I must confesse my selfe farre to seeke both in logick and Di­vinity.

Secondly, the reasons of the prohibition of women prove the consequēce, which are all such as prefer the men before the wo­men, & subiect the womē to the men in the Church, & in this very work of prophesy, of which he treateth. But now if in pro­hibiting women, he gaue not liberty vnto men, where were the prerogatiue of men aboue women, which is the onely ground, vpon which he buildeth his prohibition?

Thirdly, where verse 34.35. It is not permitted for women to speak but if they will [Page 70]learn any thing to ask their husbands at home, if their husbands might not speak neither, nor any more then they, what reason can be rendred of the Apostles so speaking?

Lastly M. Yates in denying this conse­quence, sheweth, that so he might deny something, he tooke no great heed what it were. The Apostle in this whole Chap. takes order for some to prophesy? and de­barring women therefrom, either admits men to the vse of that liberty, or els wee must haue some third kinde of persons thought of, which are neither male nor female.

My fourth Argument is from v. 29. and 32. Let the prophets speak two or three, and let the rest iudg: and the spirit of the prophets are subiect to the prophets. VVhence I af­firm, that the Apostle speaks not of extra­ordinary prophets, or prophesying, since they in their doctrines could not erre, and so were not subiect to any such iudgment, or censure of others. He answereth round­ly, though breifly in this place, that these prophets were not infallibly assisted: and more largely in another place, that such pro­phets as haue an infallible assistance are not subiect to this Rule: but others that had but, as the Apostle said, Rom. 12.6. meaner gifts were to be examined according to the [...] portion of faith, so that extraordinary prophets might mix some of their own with the extra­ordinary gifts of Gods spirit, which was to be censured by such as had a greater measure: [Page 71]for none are to think that all that had these extraordinary gifts were free from errour in their very doctrine. We see the strange gift of tongues was abused, and so might the rest be.

That one extraordinary Prophet had a greater measure, and proportion of gifts then another, I acknowledge; but that a­ny one of them could erre in doctrine, or was not infallibly assisted therein by the spirit, I deny, as a most pernici­ous errour, weakning the foundation of faith, and truth of the word of God: nei­ther hath M. Yates so much as exterprized an Answ. unto the Scriptures brought by me to prooue the contrary: which were Eph. 2.20. where the Ephesians as the hou­shold, or Church of God are said to bee built upon the foundation of the Apostles and Prophets, &c. &c. 3.5. where he speaks of the mistery of Christ, which in other a­ges was not made known unto the sonnes of men, as it is now revealed unto his holy Apo­stles and Prophets by the spirit. VVhence it apeares, that the Church is as well built upō the foundatiō of the Prophets, to wit extraordinary, which then were (for of them he speaketh) as upon the doctrine of the Apostles, and they as infalliby (e­ven for the very foundation) inspired by the H. Ghost, as the other. So that, if the Prophets could erre in doctrine, then the Apostles, & if in doctrine taught why not written? and if one alone, why not more, or all? and if they might erre, how [Page 72]know we that they did not erre? If he say the meaner in gifts might erre, but not the greater; first the same followeth also tou­ching the Apostles, how much more touching the Prophets before Christ (not comparable to those after him:) why then may there not be errors in the writings es­pecialy of those of meaner gifts, as without doubt some were in comparison of the rest? what wether this wind will bring who seeth not? Moreouer, whereas vvee propound such interpretations and doc­trines, as we gather from the Scriptures, by discourse of reason, and so may erre: they, on the contrary every one of them delivered doctrine by immediate inspira­tion of the spirit, in which by reason of the divine impression which it made in their hearts (differencing it from all both humane collection and Diabolicall sugge­stion) they could not erre, or be mistaken, but knew infallibly when, and wherein they were moved by the H. Ghost. Befides there is not like reason of strange ton­gues, and prophesie, for the consideration in hand, since the Church is not built up­on the foundation of strange tongues, as upon the foundation of prophesie; neither was the matter of the speech inspired, but the language onely, except the same per­sons were Prophets also.

Lastly, if there were the like reason of tongues, and prophesie, yet except men might erre in a tongue, and deem them­selues [Page 73]inspired extraordinarily when they were not (which were absurd to affirme) it could not evince any possibility of er­ring in doctrine, by extraordinary Pro­phets.

The last Argument in my booke I take from v. 37. 38. If any man think himself to be a prophet, or spirituall, let him acknow­ledg that the things that I write unto you are the commandements of the Lord: But if any be ignorant, let him be ignorant.

M. Yates taxeth mee for making a Pro­phet, and spirituall man all one, since by a spirituall man is meant such as excelled in any spirituall gift, prophesie, or other. But without cause, since I neither mean more nor need more for my purpose, then that a Prophet bee included in the generall of a spirituall man. But wherefore doth he not answer the Argument or minde where the force thereof lieth? which is in the words following; let him acknowledge that the things that I write are the commande­ments of the Lord. But if any man be igno­rant, let him be ignorant. The extraordi­nary prophets, were guided as immediately & infallibly by the revelation of Gods spi­rit, as Paul himself, & might as wel haue re­quired of him to acknowledg that the things which they speak were the commandements of the Lord, a [...] hee of them: neither was it possible that they or any of them should bee ignorant, that the things which hee spake were the commandements of the [Page 74]Lord. Which Argument is also much strengthened, and made, in my iudgement, unanswerable, by that which we finde v. 36. Came the word of God out from you, or came it unto you onely? which words the Apostle doth not direct unto the women (as M. Yates misconceaveth with great errour, and contrary both unto reason, and to the expresse Greek text which will not beare it) but to the Prophets; with whom hee dealeth, and that by way of comparison with himself, frō whom, to wit, by immedi­ate revelation, the word of God came after a sort to the Corinthians. VVhich plainly proues that they could not bee extraordi­nary Prophets, from whom the word of God came unto the Church as well as frō himselfe: they being inspired immediate­ly by the Holy Ghost as well as he.

The Christian Reader may finde, besides these, other reasons from this Scripture laid down by our worthy countryman M. Cartwright in his Confutation of the Rhe­mists, Sect. 5. for the iustification of this ex­ercise as ordinary and continuall.

The other Arguments in the same place of my booke to the same purpose, though M. Yates could not but take knowledge of, yet hath he not thought good to med­dle vvith, One of them only I will annex in this place word for word, as there I haue set it downe.

It is the commandement of the Lord by the Apostle, that a Bishop must be apt to [Page 75]teach, and that such Elders or Bishops bee called as are able to exhort with sound do­ctrine, and to conuince the gain-sayers, 1. Tim. 3.2. Tit. 1.9. Now except men, before they bee in office may bee permitted to manifest their gifts in doctrine, and so in prayer, which are the two maine works requiring speciall qualifications in the teaching Elders, Acts 6.4, how shall the Church (which is to choose them) take knowledge of their sufficiency, that with faith and good conscience they may call them, and submit unto them for their guides? If it be sayd, that upon such occa­sion, triall may be taken of mens gifts: he that so saith, grants the question; but must know besides, first that mens gifts and abilities should be knowne in some measure, before they be once thought on for officers: and secondly, that there is none other use or triall of gifts (to wit in and by the Church) but in prophesying: for every thing in the Lords house is to bee performed in some ordinance, there is no­thing thrown about the house, or out of order in it: and other ordinance in the Church saue this of prophesie is there none, wherein men out of office are to pray, and teach, &c. Lastly, M. Yates in denying this liberty, besides other evils, reproveth the practise of all reformed Churches, and of the Church of England with them. It is not onely permitted as lawfull, but required as necessary where, [Page 76]liue, that such as haue bent their thoughts towards the ministery, should before hand use their gifts publickly in the Church: and intollerable bondage it would bee thought by them to haue pastors ordai­ned for them (as all there are unto the places in which they are to minister) of whose ability in teaching they had not taken former experience. And not onely so, but it hath been further de­creed in solemne Synod, that in all Chur­ches whether springing up, or grown to perfe­ction, the order of prophesie should be obser­ved, according to Pauls institution; and that into that fellowship (to wit of Prophets) should be admitted not onely the ministers, but also the Teachers, and of the Elders and Dea­cons, and even of the very common people (exipsa plebe) if there were any which would confer their gifts received of the Lord to the common benefit of the Church, &c. Harmon. Synod. Belg. de prophetica. Ex Synodo Emb­dana, Can. 1.2. And for England it selfe; what will M. Yates say to the Common Places, as they are called; or Sermons, as indeed they are, in the Colledges, not onely permitted unto, but imposed upon divers, who never receved order of Priest­hood? VVhat to such as Preach by the Bishops licence, without any such order? yea to all such as are ordained and called ministers, but haue not actuall charge, and so are like the Popish accidents in the Sacrament, without a subiect? Lastly, [Page 77]it might be shewed, if need were, that greater liberty then he alloweth, is used by divers in the Romish Church, the Spi­rituall Egipt, and house of bondage for Gods people: so as the bondage of the very Hagar of Rome is not so great in this case, as he would bring upon Sarah her selfe.

The Lord giue unto his people courage to stand for this liberty amongst the rest, wherewith Christ hath made them free; and unto us who enioy it, grace to use the same unto his glory, in our mutuall edifi­cation. Amen,

FINIS.

This keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above is co-owned by the institutions providing financial support to the Text Creation Partnership. Searching, reading, printing, or downloading EEBO-TCP texts is reserved for the authorized users of these project partner institutions. Permission must be granted for subsequent distribution, in print or electronically, of this EEBO-TCP Phase II text, in whole or in part.