Private Men No Pulpit Men

To the READER.

KNow the occasion of the first writing, and now Printing this ensuing Discourse. About the beginning of the year 1641. a nameless writing justifying the practice of Lay-men's preaching, was published in Answer to some Reasons written against it by a Minister for a young man's satisfaction. To which I did offer a Reply (if any of those who were thought to be the Authors of it, would have owned it) b • th for the mani • estation of the Truth, to the undeceiving of people; and for the Vindication of a painful Minister, deceased, near in relation to me, from a foul Aspersion and unchristian slander laid upon him in that writing. But none owning it, I was contented for peace sake to let it lie and die: And so had it done for me: but in July 1644. one John Knowls of this City challenged me in the presence of Major General Massy, then our Governor, to Answer i • , which I undertook (when he had first • wned and subscrib • d it) and sent him in August following, this ensuing Examination, hoping either by • nformation • o have removed him and others from this unwarrantable practice, or by an Answer from them to have received Information, if I were in an Error (resolving to be for them, if they ha • the Scripture on their side, wh • ch I then did, and now do conceive to be against them in this Point. But I missed of my expectation in both. I take not John Knowls as a meet Antagon • st in this Controversy; but because he and others to • k the boldness publicly before the Magistrate to d • fend this practice with such co • temptu • us language against the godly and faithful Ministers of this Kingdom, as the five Reverend Apologists abhor the thoughts of; and because many people are deceived, and unsettled in this Point, I was willing in these few lines to give them a taste how little is said for it, how much may be said against it. And herein I have had an eye to what others have said for this practice, that a common understanding may, by that little help, which is h • re l • nt unto him, satisfy himself in whatsoever I have yet found said or written for it. As for Printing; but for a mere accident, this Discourse (as it was first written) had (without my privity) been Printed by others that had Copies; to prevent the same, I am enforced to let this go: wherein I have left out that which concerns the slander, being of more private concernment, and have taken in what I find in learned Mr. Cottons Books, which I had neither seen nor heard of, when I first wrote this Examination. In it I know no worth but the Scripture; and in the publishing, I desire nothing but the furthering of Truth and Order: in the which I shall be glad for thy good to be

Private-men no Pulpit-men. OR, An Examination of Lay-men's Preaching: In Answer to a Writing published by JOHN KNOWLES.

It is needful we premise:

FIrst, that by a Lay-man both of us understand a private man, or a man not in Office, a man not a Preacher by office. The term Layman I find in John Knowles his writing; and take it, as we do, in opposition not to Clergy but Ministry, it is inoffensive; for though we reject the Papists distinction of Clergy and Laity, or people, yet we embrace that of Ministers and people, and a Lay-man is but one ( 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 ) of the people.

2. It is not my purpose to set down, and make good the Ministers Arguments (to which John Knowles his writing is an Answer): we want not matter against it, but proof for it, & affirmantis est probare, they who practice or justify such Preaching, must make it good out of Scripture; and that is our aim and work in this Examination, to see whether they can do so. Nor is it my purpose to answer anymore of John Knowles his writing, then what concerns the point in hand, nor to omit anything of that, as for other things he there scatters, I shall gratify him with the omission of them.

3. This Writer himself grants this to the Minister his Adversary, that Lay-men preaching were guilty of Uzzah's sin, had not God commanded them to preach: therefore let us see where God commands this, and they shall clear themselves, and satisfy us, and we shall have not a word against it, God forbid we should. If any doubt, it is meet we give Reasons to satisfy, as this Minister did; but if any Lay-men will preach, or justify it in others, he must produce his warrant out of God's Word for it or by this Writers confession he is guilty of Uzzah's sin: because as Uzzah without warrant from God, did that, which by God's ordinance belonged to another man's Office, namely, the Priests; so private persons preaching do that, which by God's Ordinance be • ongs to another's office, namely, the Ministers.

The Doctrine defended by J • hn Knowls i • this.

Kno.

That it is lawful for a Lay-man, a 〈◊〉 being met together, to preach the Word, and that not only in p … te, 〈◊〉 also in pub • ique, when the whole Church is met together. And this is God's ordinance, and the Apostle commands it.

And for proof of this, he produces three texts. Rom. • 2. Act. 8. 1 Cor. 14. To these in order.

The first place is Rom. 12. 6. Having then gifts, d • ffering according to the grace that is given unto us, whether p • oph • sie, let us prophesy, &c. What is hence concluded?

Kno.

G • d hath commanded all that have the gift of prophesy to use it.

Answ

This is true, but no proof of his Doctrine; the truth is▪ this Scripture concludes against him. The A … le requires, that they who have these gifts, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 and 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 (i.) Prophesy and Ministry (or Deaconship) exercise them in humility and fidelity. He that hath the gift of Prophesy, must prophesy, and he that hath the gift of Ministry (or Deaconship) must do the duty of a Minister or Deacon. Now who be they who have these gifts? They that are by office Prophets and Ministers (or Deacons)? or they that have abilities only? If you say the former, the sense is, they that are by office Preachers must preach, which is most true, but not to his purpose; If you say the latter, then the sense is, Preach he that can, and it will follow baptize he that can, and rule he that can too. Now to prove that the Apostle doth not take gifts here for abilities only (as you do) these Reasons I propose to consideration.

1. The word Gift is used in Scripture (as I expound) for the Office itself, or gifted calling. So Ephes. 4. 8. He gave gifts unto men: what were those gifts? See ver. 11. He gave some Apostles, and some Prophets, and some Evangelists, and some Pastors and Teachers. The office of an Apostle, that is a gift; the office of a Prophet, that is a gift; and so of the rest. And so Mr. Cotton expounds this place, his words are. That they were gifts we willingly acknowledge, because all the Offices and Officers of the Church were given to the Church, as well as the spiritual gifts and graces, whereby they do execute those offices; for so saith the Ap • stle, when Christ ascended up on high, he gave gifts to men. What gifts? Some to be Apostles, some Prophets, some Evangelists, &c. So • e.

His Testimony I gladly use, not only as he is a learned and godly man, but because in this and all other particulars, wherein I shall use him as a witness, he (is not singularis testis, but carries with him the voice of the Churches of Christ in New England, and of many in Old-England too, as we shall see anon

So again, Ephes. 3. 8. Unto me is this grace given, that I should preach among the Gentiles, &c. q. d. God of his grace without any merit in me hath given me the gift to preach to the Gentiles. And what was this gift? See Rom. 11. 13. I am the Apostle of the Gentiles, I magnify mine office. His office of Apostleship to the Gentiles (with answerable abilities, that's implied) was his gift to preach to the Gentiles. So you see Gift is taken in Scripture as well for the office, as abilities. And so Mr. Cotton doth expound this place, Rom. 12. 6. which John Knowles urges, his words are (citing this Text) Having then different gifts, &c. gifts, saith he, comprehending both offices and grace. Now John Knowles must prove 'tis not so taken here, or he proves nothing hence.

2. If we take gift in his sense for abilities only, then these absurdities will follow.

1. We may then proceed from abilities to the exercise of other callings, for if ability to preach be sufficient to authorize one to preach without anymore adoo, then also ability to baptize, and to rule, and govern, is sufficient to authorize any to baptize, and to take on them to rule, govern, and judge, as Rulers, Magistrates and Judges do. For there is the same reason for this in other Callings, as in Preaching. And the Apostle in this place speaks generally of other Callings, as well as of Preaching. Whether prophesy, let us prophesy, &c. ver. 6. He that ruleth, let him do it with diligence. v. 8. So then he that concludes hence, That whosoever hath ability to preach, may preach; must conclude also, that he that hath ability to rule, may rule: of which, the former is usurpation; the latter, Sedition. We say gifts are but the foundation of a Calling, they do not warrant any to do the works of that Calling without anymore ado. To a Calling two things are required. 1. Gifts, or endowments. 2. Authority. This is plain, in Joh. 20. 21. As my Father hath sent me, so send I you. There Christ gives his Apostles Authority. v. 22. He breathed on them, and saith unto them, Receive ye the holy Ghost. There he gives them their gifts (as we commonly call them) viz. abilities for their Calling. So Jesus before his Ascension gives the Apostles their Authority, Matth. 28, 19, 20. Go ye therefore, &c. But for the plenitude of Apostolical gifts, they must wait at Jerusalem till after his Ascension. Act. 1. 4. Wait for the promise from the Father which ye have heard of me. Where? Luk. 24. 49. where this promise is expounded, to be endued with power from on high. And that was when they were all filled with the holy Ghost, Act. 2. 4. Now gifts and abilities are not enough without Authority. Christ we see gives these distinctly, and the Apostles went not with one without the other. If gifts without Authority or Calling were sufficient, Uzzah might have carried the Ark as well as the Priests, he and others had as able bodies, and as good shoulders, as the Priests, if abilities were enough. And there had been more Apostles then ever Christ made: there were Preachers at Corinth who thought themselves, (and others thought them too) in abilities before Paul, whom they looked on, and bade others look on him as one in respect of them base in presence, and in speech contemptible. And have not private persons Gifts to baptize, as well as to Preach, since Scripture and Reason show that Baptism is also in respect of Gifts a business inferior to Preaching?

And have not Lawyers and some other private men Gifts to do those things that belong to the Judges and Magistrates office? And by this Doctrine every such one may, ay and must step up into the Judges and Magistrates seats of Justice: Must I say, because they teach, that Gifts are their warrant sufficient, and that • od requires the exercise of them. All then who have gifts to be Judges, and Magistrates are sent of God to the Bench and Sword. What bloody confusions would this breed? 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , such a confusion as is inconsistent with, and would soon subvert the Offices. And will it not be the same in Ecclesiastical Offices? Yes, 'tis of Church matters Paul there speaks and saith, God is not the Author of confusion, but of peace, as in all the Churches of the Saints. Yet extraordinary gifts (that is miraculous) we will grant bring authority with them; therefore as these men take on them to prophesy (which was an extraordinary and Temporary office (of which anon) as appears, Ephes. 4. 11.) so could they speak with Tongues too, we would not question their Authority, but hear and defend their Preaching.

2. If all that can, may and must preach, the Ministers office were needless. What need of Authority by office to do that, which everyone may and must do without it? For Jo: Knowls saith, 'tis God's ordinance, and the Apostle commands it, and then, I hope, everyone must do it. In this City what use was there of Justices of Peace, if everyone here that hath any knowledge in such things (and who would be found ignorant?) might do the Justices work in determining Causes, and punishing offenders? Preaching is the chief part of the Ministers office: 'tis the first and principal act of the Key of Authority or Rule. And if it were the will of the Lord Jesus, that this first and principal part of the Ministers office should be done promiscuously by any as well as by officers, why then may not other less principal Acts be done by them too, and what need then any office for this purpose?

To conclude about this place. Doth St. Paul here speak of prophesying by the Spirit (i.) by Revelation, as some do interpret his meaning? or of ordinary Preaching? as others. If of the former, then Revelation is the gift, and the sense is, he that hath Revelations must prophesy, which we grant. If he speaketh of ordinary preaching, as I think he doth, then we say, either prophesying here is a general word containing under it the two Offices or Faculties immediately following, viz. Teaching and Exhortation, which answer to Pastors and Doctons, Ephes. 4. 11. And then the meaning is, He that hath received the Gift (i.) the Office of Pastor or Doctor, must wait on Exhortation or Teaching. Or if with others, we make not so many offices in this place, as Pastors and Teachers to be two several officers, but say Exhortation and Teaching to be but two several gifts in the same office: yet none of them say, that Paul speaks here of any other Exhorters and Teachers, but such as are by office Ministers. Nor that St. Paul speaks here of any other Prophets, but such as were by office Prophets. Prophets were set in the Church, 1 Cor. 12. 29. set as officers, even as Apostles, and Governors, and Teachers, who are officers. And you have as good warrant to say there were Lay-Apostles, Lay-Teachers, Lay-Governors, who were gifted men not in office, as you have to say there were Lay-Prophets, or Prophets not in office.

Thus Divines expound this place, either sense serves our turn, and crosseth our Writers. If this Exposition be not liked, let this Writer, or any other for him, prove that there are in Scripture any other ordinary Prophets besides Pastors and Teachers: or if he cannot prove that, which will be hard to do, let that be proved, which he afterwards affirms, that prophesy is here di •• inguished from offices, as one particular differs from another, else he saith nothing to the purpose; nor can he conclude anything certain, or probable hence. For we say Pastors and Teachers are the ordinary Prophets, and none besides them.

Kno.

It is the business of a Servant of God to use those Gifts for the edifying of the Church, which God doth bestow on them for that same end.

Answ.

This is true, but not as he applies it, That private persons gifts are bestowed on them for this end, that they should be preachers of God's Word we deny, it must be proved. And to what end then are women's gifts given them, who must not preach? He can no more hence conclude that private persons may preach, then that every Lawyer gifted in the Law may step into the Judges Seats at Westminster, and do their work. For a Lawyer is bound to use those gifts God hath given him in the Law for the good of his brothers estate, as well as a Christian is bound to use his gifts of grace for the good of his brothers soul. Must every Lawyer therefore say, 'tis his business to do the Judges and Magistrates functions? He would soon be taught to his cost, that it was his usurpation, if any should be so mad to enterprise it. For satisfaction we answer.

1. There are other ways of using gifts for the edifying of the Church besides preaching. Family-governors, and Parents must edify their children and family, and God gives them gifts in prayer and knowledge, and for that purpose. And Christians must exhort and comfort, and so edify one another in Christian Conference and discourse, and God gives them gifts for it, ay to women many times no mean gifts this way, as Scripture shows us in Priscilla, and others, and experience in many; and yet no woman must preach: yet hath she a large field to exercise her edifying gifts in.

2. Sometimes Gifts are only pretended. In St. Paul 's time some desired to be teachers (or would be teachers) who were not qualified for such a business. Wherefore the Apostle in that Epistle gives Timothy order, that a Novice should not be admitted into the Ministry; such having an eye to the (honos) credit, but weigh not the (onus) burden of the work. And as his persuasion of his own gifts will make him aspire, so the tickling of applause in the exercise of his gifts would swell him with pride, and endanger him. And St. James hath an eye to this (I think) when he saith, speaking of censures, My bretbren, be not many masters, 'tis ( 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 ) teachers (indeed a Teacher hath a mastership,) and therefore a woman is forbidden to teach, for that were to usurp authority over the man. 1 Tim. 2. 12. 1 Cor. 14. 34. Let there not be many amongst you that attribute to themselves the authority of teaching, reproving, and censuring of others, as thinking themselves more wise, more holy, and more sufficient. Diodat. in loc.

Beza's note on this place is. Agit de eo morbo, qui pervulgatus est in corporis etiam morbis, quo fit, ut plures sint medici quam aegroti. Sic solet quivis existimare se ad docendum, quàm ad discendum, aptiorem. (i.) St. James treats of that disease, which is common also in the diseases of the body, by which it comes to pass that there are more Physicians, then Patients. So everyone is wont to think himself fitter to teach, then to learn. So he.

3. Where be gifts indeed fit for the Ministry, such must desire the office, and the exercise thereof. Hear the Apostle to all such. This is a true saying, if a man desire the office of a Bishop, he desireth a good work. God doth, and the Church must, encourage, and receive such into the Ministry, as are fit for it, and encourage them to desire and undertake it. For the charge is so great (as the great Apostle felt) that some (sensible of it) need encouragement and drawing, a spurr; as much as some others do a bit, a bar. What means e • se that phrase of our Savior, Pray ye therefore the Lord of the Harvest, that he will ( 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 ) thrust or cast out Laborers into his Vineyard. We in our days may with compassion look upon as great a Harvest in the three Kingdoms; as our Lord Jesus did in Judea: As He commands, we must pray the Lord of the Harvest to Gift and send more out, where they are wanting. The Church (and such as are entrusted in this business) must call, and they must enter into office, and then be Preachers. This is Christ's order, to be called to the office of the Ministry, then preach; they that do not this, do (for ought I know) cross Christ's order, preach unwarrantably, and walk disorderly in this particular.

We come to the second place alleged for Lay-men's preaching, and that is,

Act. 8. 1. At that time there was a great persecution against the Church which was at Jerusalem, and they were all scattered abroad throughout the regions of Judea, and Samaria, except the Apostles.

4. Therefore, they that were scattered abroad, went everywhere preaching the word.

Here he supposes, that these who preached here were private persons, in the same condition as Lay-men with us. And therefore our Lay-men may preach, so as they do; even as these Primitive Christians did

1. We will examine his proof, that these Preachers were private men; and if he makes not this good, he proves nothing.

2. We will show, that if it could be proved, that these were private men, this example will no way help to prove the lawfulness of that practice which our Lay-preachers use, and plead for.

1. How doth he prove them private men? this is all this proof, which is nothing satisfactory.

Kno.

They were not the Apostles, as it is apparent, v. 1. and at this time there were no Offi • ers in the Church save the Apostles and Deacons, as we read of.

Answ.

We grant they were not the Apostles, for they stayed at Jerusalem, v. 1. and he grants there were Deacons, and they were more then Lay-men, for he calls them Officers; and the Scripture shows, that they had imposition of hands. Act. 6. 6. so they were not all private persons. But grant it was not a Deacons office to preach, how doth he prove there were no other officers at this time?

He must prove out of God's Word, that before this persecution, there were no other Officers; and if these were all private persons at Jerusalem, he must prove that the Apostles gave them no Commission to preach, when they went thence; and supposing this, then, that God did not give them commission by immediate Revelation; till he prove this, there is nothing hence to satisfy them, that seek Scripture-warrant, but only to beguile inconfiderate people.

All that is said for this is, there were none as we read of. He may read of them, if he will, as others do.

But by [this time] doth he mean before this scattering by this persecution, or after? If before, I answer two things.

1. A very learned man saith, that the seventy Disciples were Pastors in office, v. 1. The Lord appointed other seventy also, and sent them, not only to preach, but to work miracles, and this makes them more then private persons. And the same man tells us, that learned Divines think that these of the scattered Church, who preached, were the seventy Disciples.

2. Grant that the first commission of these seventy Disciples was but temporary, and that all these before this dispersion were at Jerusalem but private persons. No need of other Preachers at Jerusalem whilst all the Apostles were there, and Deacons were not made till need required them. Act. 6.

But after this dispersion, he may read of others if he will, Prophets, and Evangelists, the Apostles fellow-laborers in the work of the Ministry. That there were such, see Act. 13. 1. chap. 15. 32. and often. And Act. 21. 8. we shall find that Philip (one of the seven Deacons, and one of these that were scattered abroad) is now an Evangelist. And that these Prophets, and Evangelists, were Officers is plain, Ephes. 4. 11. Now can this Writer find the time when they were put into office? He will have Philip, and all the rest of the scattered Christians to go from Jerusalem private persons: (Philip but a Deacon at most) afterwards we find some of them Prophets, some Evangelists; can it be proved, they were not appointed to these Functions when they left Jerusalem? It will be hard to prove it; yet that, and more then that, must be proved (as we shall see anon) or his Argument and Cause falls, for any help it can have from this place. Wherefore I oppose these three considerations against what is said to prove, that these Preachers were private persons.

1. The Apostles had a charge from the Lord Jesus to preach the Gospel to every creature, and herewith they had power as to preach themselves, so to authorize and send forth other men to that work. And this they did practice everywhere as opportunity offered, and necessity required (witness the Acts and Epistles of the Apostles) sending forth Prophets and Evangelists (the Apostles Assistants in their extraordinary work) to plant and gather Churches, or to confirm them that were planted: and to ordain Pastors and Teachers in settled Churches. And how will it be proved, that the Apostles did not give Authority to these men, to preach the Gospel as they went? Was there not need, when the Apostles themselves must stay at Jerusalem, v. 1. and the Gospel must be preached abroad at the sametime? And is it probable (nay is it not to question the Apostles care) that they, being trusted with the spreading of the Gospel, should let these men go, and give them no order to preach it? (which if they did it's enough) especially since this persecution came by God's Providence for this very end, that they (whom peace held together in comfortable fellowship at Jerusalem, being dispersed) might spread the Gospel as they went? Is there any Scripture, Reason or sense to the contrary? And if the Apostles gave them order to preach, then they were no longer private persons, but authorized for the work, and so no president for Lay-men to preach.

2. Grant, that these preaching Christians had no Commission from the Apostles to preach, yet might they be put out of the condition of private persons by an Immediate Call from Jesus Christ, such as the Apostles had. Evangelists and Prophets, as they were extraordinary Officers, as the Apostles themselves, and had extraordinary gifts, so might their Call to the work be either in part, or whole, as the Apostles was, not by man, but by Jesus Christ, though they were moved in an inferior Orbe to, and by the Apostles; for they did go and come as the Apostles did send them. And it is apparent that some men were thus called by the immediate voice of Christ from heaven. Saul (afterwards Paul) was called to preach the faith, when he was going to destroy the faith, and this Call he had by the immediate voice of Christ from heaven, when he was going on the high Priests cursed Arrand to bring bound to Jerusalem the Disciples of the Lord. And this Paul often mentions as to exalt the grace of God towards him, so to make good his Calling of Apostle-ship against those who questioned his Calling to preach, that so they might work in people a light esteem of that Doctrine he did preach. His calling to preach was by Revelation; The Gospel which he preached he had by Revelation; he went to Jerusalem by Revelation; Thus was his Calling by Revelation from heaven.

And it is as apparent that some of these men in this very Chapter, as Philip by name was ordered what to do by the immediate direction of the Lord himself by his Spirit and Angels, who did speak to him, and in a miraculous way carry him from place to place. And can it be proved that the rest did not preach by the like direction? And if so, then none can argue for Lay-men's preaching from this place, unless they have the like Call by immediate inspiration, and by the voice of the holy Spirit and Angels as Philip had.

Simile.

Suppose all the Officers of this Garrison were to stay in, and the common Soldiers to depart out of the Town, and these we find in the Country gathering Companies, and doing those things that belong to a Captains or Colonels office, and that in so doing they do well (this we must suppose too, for neither of us question, but these primitive Christians did well, and their duty in preaching) what could hence be concluded? one of these two things. Either that these common Soldiers had Commission from the Governor at, or from the Lord General after their leaving the Town, to do what they did. Or else that it is lawful for common soldiers without any Commission (of their own authority) to raise Companies, and do the offices of Captains and Colonels. Would any conclude thus? Yet thus our Writer concludes. We find these primitive Christians preaching, therefore, say we, they had authority from the Apostles, or from God himself by immediate Revelation (because preaching belongs to Officers which have their commission from Christ for this work. Epbes. 4. 11.) But because we find these Christians preaching, and they were not the Apostles, therefore it is lawful for private persons, without any other authority than their own gifts, to preach: thus our Writer concludes. And thus he produceth a new way of authorizing Preachers. The old ways the Apostle acquaints us with. Gal. 1. 1. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , by Jesus Christ (viz. immediately, so the Apostles) and 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , by man, so ordinary Preachers are called. This Writer adds a third way of making a Preacher, and that is ( 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 ) by himself. A way that Christ himself, nor no man else may be called by, as St. Paul saith. Heb. 5. 4, 5.

Thirdly and lastly. Tell me: were all these dispersed Christians private persons, or only some? If only some, then other some of them were out of the Condition of private persons, and how then prove you, that any did preach besides those that were out of the Condition of private persons? He saith, All of them did preach, but the text saith not so. And if all of them did preach, and were all private persons, then private persons may baptize too. For some of these in this Chap. v. 12. 13. (Philip by name) did baptize the Samaritans, men and women, and Simon Magus too. And what here Philip did, the rest did, unless you will say (that which I think you will not, having taken notice what the Scripture saith of them, that the hand of the Lord was with them, and a great number believed, and turned to the Lord, viz: by their Ministry) that they which had such power to preach and convert, had not power to baptize believers converted. And if they had power to baptize also, then hence you may as well conclude, that private persons may baptize, as that they may preach. One conclusion is as good as the other. If you be of that opinion, let us know. And then by good consequence it will follow, that women also (Midwives) if need be, may baptize. And here Bellarmine will help in the proof. For you hold Gifts a sufficient Call to preach, yet deny a woman, whatsoever gifts she hath, to exercise them in preaching, because she is forbidden; but where is she forbidden to baptize?

And if you say, a woman may not speak in the Church, we may expound that as you do, she may not preach, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , not speak as Doctors. Thus you had need (you see) take heed how you break the bounds Christ hath set, otherwise no stay till you come on the shelves.

In this Point also hear Mr. Cotton. We do believe, that they to whom the preaching or dispensing of the Gospet (or Covenant of Grace) unto the Church is committed, to them also is committed the dispensing of the Seals of the Covenant. He brings this as an argument to prove that Teachers may administer the Sacraments as well as Pastors, because they have power to preach, as well as the Pastors have. So you say Lay-men have power to preach as well as Ministers, therefore (if Mr. Cottons argument be good) they may baptize as well as Ministers. In his judgment they may do one as well as the other, that is neither. And (saith he) that the administration of the Seals is annexed to the preaching of the Word, is plain from Matth. 28. 19, 20. Go make Disciples, and baptize them. Reys of the King. cap. 5. p. 20.

Obj.

If you distinguish between Pastoral preaching, and preaching by virtue of a Gift, and say, Lay-men may not administer the Sacraments, because they do not preach Pastorally.

Sol. A learned Divine hath shaped a good Answer to this, The same distinction, saith he, may as well hold, that there is a pastoral administration of the Sacraments, and a common administration of them by virtue of a gift. The former way Pastors and Teachers only may baptize, the latter way Lay-men may baptize too. And why may we not lead on the distinction farther, and say, there is a ruling by office, and so Rulers and Magistrates do lay censures, taxes and punishments on offenders; and there is a ruling by Gift, and so private men may lay censures, taxes, and punishments on others. Apage ••… gas; away with such fooleries. But let us suppose, that these of the scatrered Church, who preached were private persons, this will nothing at all help our Writer to justify that practice of preaching, which he defends, unless he could prove, that these private men did preach at Jerusalem too, where all the Apostles were. For this his proof, these private men, being scattered among those, who had no Ministry, nor ever heard of Christ, did preach, therefore there a private man may preach, and that ordinarily (for that is the practice) where a Ministry, a faithful Ministry is or may be had, Doth this follow? Yet thus our whole Discourse is to be understood. Whether a private person, coming into such a Country, among such a people, who never had the sound of the Gospel among them, may preach, is quite without the bounds of our Question? Let our Writer therefore prove, that these Christians did preach at Jerusalem, where the Apostles were, and then there is some consequence, that private men may preach, where Preachers by Office are; else not.

Now of the last place alleged by John Knowls to prove Lay-men may preach, it is, 1 Cor. 14. the only place, and yet he slips over it with slender proof, and as slight answer to that, which was laid in his way in the Ministers Reasons, the sound of the words being more for him than the sense.

This whole Chapter runs upon extraordinary gifts. And I take prophesying here to be prophesying by the Spirit, by Revelation; and good Reasons may be produced (I think) to prove it, if John Knowls will deny it. See his proof.

Kno.

It is God's Ordinance (viz. that Lay-men do preach) this doth appear in that the Apostle commands the Church to desire it, and he exhorts all to desire to prophesy, and tells them, that they may all prophesy.

Answ.

To this he shall have my Answer after Mr. Cottons, who makes this Objection.

Obj.

If (saith he) it be objected: Private members may all of them prophesy publicly, 1 Cor. 14. 31. and therefore also baptize: and so this act of authority (viz. to preach and baptize) is not peculiar to Preaching Elders. To this objection he returns this Answer.

Answ.

This is Mr. Cottons Answer, and 'tis so full, that for brevities sake I will spare mine here which I gave to the same purpose formerly.

He tells us, these were not ordinary private men, but such as had extraordinary gifts, the gift of Tongues, and the like liberty of Preaching is not allowed them that want the like gifts, &c.

Therefore, it is not God's ordinance, but crosseth God's ordinance, that private men should preach the Word, if Mr. Cottons judgment be right, who tells us, that the preaching of the Word is the first and principal part of the Key of Authority or Rule, which Christ hath given to the Officers of the Church, and not to all Officers neither, but tis peculiar to preaching Elders.

Who are they then that the Apostle commands and exhorts to prophesy? Those that were desirers of spiritual gifts. What gifts did they desire? and what gifts did they most use? Tongues; as it is evident, for the Apostles scope is in this chap. to take them off from their frequent speaking with Tongues, as Mr. Cotton. And the Apostle exhorts and commands these to desire and use these gifts, Tongues, but rather to prophesy: Well then our Lay-men are exhorted and commanded by the Apostle in this place to preach, so are they then exhorted and commanded to speak with Tongues, for beside v. 1. 12. see what he saith, v. 5. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , I will that ye all speak with Tongues. So I read it as it is in the original. Hence then we will argue as he doth, as we must argue thus, that it is God's ordinance and the Apostles will, that all Lay-men (or all private persons) do speak with Tongues. And what is the gift of Tongues? and to speak with Tongues in the Scripture sense, what is it? Not to speak Tongues as we learn by study and pains-taking, as by study we learn the Latin, Greek, Hebrew, Chaldee, &c. This indeed is a Gift of Tongues, but not in the Scripture sense, but such Tongues as are given by God without man's pains, for Tongues are a sign to unbelievers. 1 Cor. 14. 22. It is when men do by the Spirit of God speak those Tongues which they never learned, and which the hearers know they are ignorant of, otherwise they cannot be a sign to them being unbelievers. So the Apostles, known to be unlearned men, on the sudden, the holy Ghost descending on them, spake many several sorts of languages, at which the hearers were amazed. Now how will John Knowls avoid this, but that he and all Lay-preachers are commanded here thus to speak with Tongues? See what absurdities follow wresting Scripture, which wresters have for their pains.

Kno.

He (Paul) would, that they all did speak with tongues, but rather that they prophesy, &c. from whence we gather, that a man may prophesy, though he cannot speak with tongues.

Answ.

You gather that which is not there sown. In my Logic all that you can gather hence is, that the Apostle here prefers prophesying (which was most edifying) before speaking with tongues which they most affected, because it served most (ad pompam) for applause and admiration. That this is all you can gather hence, you shall see in an instance; Let me thus argue, I would that you should love your brother, but rather that you love God; whence I gather, that a man may love God, though he do not love his brother; this is false as the Apostle teaches us; and so is your collection, unless you can prove by Scripture, that it is contingent that prophesy and tongues should be in the same person. As indeed thus I may argue, I would have you a good Artist, but rather a good Christian; hence I gather, a man may be a good Christian, though no good Artist. But, that it is thus contingent, that tongues and prophesy be in the same person, you are to prove. Mr. Cotton you see is against you. The same persons (saith he) that had the gift of prophesy in the Church of Corinth, had also the gift of tongues, which put on the Apostle a necessity to take them off from their frequent speaking with tongues by preferring prophesy before it. And we shall find the twelve first Disciples at Ephesus receiving the Spirit by Paul's laying on of hands, spake with tongues, and prophesied. They who spake with tongues, prophesied. But grant him, that one man may have the gift of prophesy, and not of tongues, yet one Church hath not; the gift of prophesy is in no Church, but the gift of tongues is in the same. If one man hath the one gift, another hath the other in the same Church. They spake with tongues, and prophesied go together, if not in the same person, yet in the same Church.

Kno.

All may prophesy, v. 31.

Answ

The Minister had told him that these all were not Lay-men but Prophets. v. 29. 32.

Kno.

Herein He (the Minister) hath put his Reader in as great doubt as before, to know who these Prophets are, which the Author hath not here expressed, either because he was ignorant of it, on else because he feared, that if he should rightly define them, it would make little to his purpose, and therefore glosseth it over as well as he could.

Answ.

No such ignorance, nor cause of fear, we shall define them, and then let the Reader judge whether our definition of them be not as much to our purpose, as his definition, he gives by and by, is little to his purpose.

To answer therefore. The Scripture here saith, they were Prophets, and Prophets were set in the Church as Officers, even as Apostles, and Evangelists, and Teachers and Pastors who are Officers, as a learned man observes. But to help John Knowls and his Reader in this great doubt, I will tell him who these Prophets were, by the help, and in the words, of two men (too mighty in the Scriptures for him to slight so easily) Dr: Rainolds, and Mr. Beza. Hear the first.

Illi sine controversia Prophetae sunt Paulo qui extraordinariis quibusdam donis ornati erant—. Ex ii • etiam quae illis attribuuntur, manifestum est, superiores eos fuisse Pastoribus & Doctoribus, &c. (i.) They without controversy are Prophets in Paul's sense, who were endued with extraordinary gifts—. And it is manifest by those things which are attributed to them, that they were superior to Pastors and Doctors. So He. Hear the other.

Revelationem conjungo prophetiae—: ut plane hic opus sit caelesti quodam dono peculiari, quod homines suo marte consequi non possint.—Prophetia est effectum Revelationis. (i.) I join revelation to prophesy—: that to prophesying there is need of a peculiar heavenly gift, which men cannot attain unto by their own industry and endeavor; and prophesy is the effect of revelation. So He. These men no children in Scripture-knowledge tell us, these Prophets were without controversy men of extraordinary gifts, that it is manifest they were superior to Pastors and Teachers, that prophesy is an effect of revelation, joined with Revelation. And saith not the Scripture the same? Observe. 1. They were Officers. Ephes. 4. 11. and 1 Cor. 12. 28. All there mentioned are spiritual gifts. So Mr. Cotton.

2. They were extraordinary Officers, such as the Apostles and Evangelists were. This is evident in the last cited places. Ephe. 4. 11. 1 Cor. 12. 28. Mr. Cotton on those places saith, The Apostle reckoneth up here ministries or offices, which God hath set in his Church, first Apostles, secondarily Prophets, under whom your Evangelists are comprehended, as being of equal rank with them. So He; and speaking of Evangelists, saith, Whose office was alike extraordinary as that of Apostles and Prophets.

3. They were in order and place above Pastors and Teachers, the ordinary Ministers: so they are placed, Ephes. 4. 11. Some Apostles, some Prophets, some Evangelists: not only before Pastors and Teachers, but before Evangelists. And the Apostle is more curious in enumerating. 1 Cor. 12. 28. First Apostles, secondarily Prophets, thirdly Teachers. It is evident by the words of order, that he intendeth to reckon the first sorts in their due order. As Apostles are before Prophets, so are Prophets before ordinary Teachers. So Mr. Cotton.

4. Their gifts must be extraordinary, because they were extraordinary Officers, and the Scripture witnesseth the same. Agabus one of the Prophets signified by the Spirit, that there should be great dearth throughout the world. Barnabas another, Act. 13. 1. His gifts, see Act. 14. 3. And this Chapter, 1 Cor. 14. may evince this, if it be denied, for v. 6. speaking by Revelation and by Prophesying are the same, as speaking by Knowledge and Doctrine are the same. He that prophesieth doth it by revelation; He that speaketh Doctrine doth it by knowledge. Itaque haec non sunt quatuor, sed duo; siquidem prophetia est effectum Revelationis, Doctrina vero notitiae. i. e. Therefore these are not four, but two; for prophesy is the effect of Revelation; doctrine, of knowledge. But I have some reason to think, that our Writer will not deny Revelations to Prophets, and I will spare my proof, till it be denied.

Lastly, the use of these Prophets in the primitive times seems to be for the work of the Ministry in primordiis Ecclesiarum, in Churches newly planted, before an ordinary Ministry was settled, which could not be suddenly. Something of this we may see in the Ephesian Church, which began with twelve men, which twelve by Paul's hands received the gifts of tongues and prophesy. And doubtless these (and such others to whom the Lord did impart the like gifts, if anymore such were in Ephesus afterward) did prophesy (or preach) there, until Bishops were settled in that Church, which we find to be done in the next Chapter. And in this Church at Corinth, we find now many Prophets, but I read not of any Bishops or Pastors among them, perhaps they were not yet ordained there.

Out of all this we may thus describe the Prophets which the Apostle exhorts and commands to preach in this 1 Cor. 14.

They were extraordinary Officers in the Church, endued with extraordinary gifts, superior to Pastors & Teachers (the ordinary Ministers of the Church) ordained by God for the work of the Ministry in those primitive times, so long as extraordinary & miraculous gifts continued in the Churches. For to continue extraordinary Officers in the Churches as Prophets, &c. in these times, in which God granteth not extraordinary gifts, is to do as wisely as the Papists who continue Unction, when they have not the gift of healings. Quorsum nunc symbolum, si nusquam extat donum?

Mr. Cotton speaking of these Prophets at Corinth, and saying, they were not private members, but men of extraordinary gifts, saith, As Kings at the time of their Coronation give many extraordinary large gifts, which they do not daily in their ordinary government; so Christ soon after his ascension poured out a larger measure of his Spirit then in times succeeding. So that in his opinion private men may not practice these Corinthian-Prophets preaching, because they have not their gifts, which were a largesse at Christ's Coronation for those, but not for succeeding times. Let the Reader now judge, whether this description of Prophets be not to our purpose, and whether we need be afraid to produce it.

Let us now see whether his definition of Prophets be to his purpose.

Kno.

They are those that use their gifts to the edification and consolation of the Church.

Answ.

This offends in one main, it doth not convenire soli, for Pastors and Teachers do the same. 'It is true, Prophets by revelation did use their gifts for that end, and the ordinary Prophets, Pastors and Teachers do so too. For the end of the labors of all officers (preaching) both ordinary and extraordinary is the edification of the body of Christ.

Kno.

Prophets are Lay-men, this we say for these Reasons. 1. Because the Apostle makes a difference betwixt them, and men in office. Rom. 12. 6, 7.

Answ.

We have already answered this, that in two places of Scripture we find Prophets (not differenced from, but) reckoned among Officers. And that in this place, Rom. 12. the Apostle speaks of them as Officers, Having different gifts, saith Paul, whether prophesic, &c. Gifts comprehending both offices and grace. So Mr. Cotton.

Kno.

2. Because he exhorts all to desire to prophesy, and all that can may use it, and yet not all in office. Neither will any one (as I suppose) say that the Apostle would have all officers, fo • if they were all eyes, where were the body?

Answ.

His Reason out of the Corinthians is already answered. That the Apostle would have all Preachers officers, is that I in this whole Discourse defend. That the Apostle would not have all men to be officers I agree with John Knowls, and his reason is good (tis the Apostles) but not for him. For is it not all one for the body to be all eyes, and to have all the members do the office of the eyes? And if the feet and hands can see their own way, and direct the body too, may not the eyes be well spared out of the head, and no want of them? especially if they might be otherwise usefully employed for the good of the body?

But the eyes must see, and the hands and feet do other work. And Christ hath appointed in the Churches, Officers to preach, and do the work of the Ministry, and private members to do other work, their own work.

Beza makes another use of this Reason, Ye may all prophesy, 1 Cor. 14. 31. Omnes, nimirùm prophetae, ergo non quivis ex coetu, imo non nisi ad prophetandi munus legitime ordinati. Num enim, ut, idem ait alibi omnes sunt prophetae? i. e. All, namely, Prophets, therefore not everyone of the congregation, nay none, but such as are lawfully ordained to the office of prophesying. For, as saith the same Apostle elsewhere, are all Prophets? So He.

There remains now not any one thing, that I observe, pertinent to the question in hand, in Jo: Knowls his writing, unanswered. Other things impertinent I shall do him, and the Reader, the courtesy to pass by. Only I must return answer to one demand. The Minister speaking how needful the knowledge of Arts and Tongues were in a Preacher, John Knowls demands.

Kno.

Whether by Arts he doth understand the Art of Geometry, Astronomy, or the like, or whether all Arts; and for tongues, whether it be the Welsh, Irish, Latin, Greek, or Hebrew, or whether all tongues be required to make a man fit for prophesying?

Answ.

Somewhat to this scoff. Should a man come to an Artificers shop, and scoff at all his hammers, files, and tools, the Artificer would but smile at his ignorance, because he knows they are all useful in their time, and for some business or other, though perhaps he useth not some of them in a year together. Our Writers scoffing at them is only a proclaiming his ignorance of them.

For tongues.

1. I wonder at this youths impudency to jumble the Greek and Hebrew tongues in a scoff amongst the Welsh and Irish: in a jeering manner to parallel the original Languages (in which the holy Ghost was pleased the Scriptures should be first written, and in which for that cause no Preacher can be unskilled, but he is (ea parte claudus) sensible thereof as a great defect) with the Welsh and Irish tongues of least use and repute.

2. Extraordinary Prophets (such as they, 1. Cor. 14. and such our Writer pleads for) must have all tongues, Welsh, Irish, Italian, French, Spanish, Dutch, S • lavonian, Indian, Latin, Greek, Hebrew, all tongues, which people understand amongst whom they come, otherwise the Prophet shall be unto him that heareth a Barbarian, if he know not the meaning of the voice, saith Paul, i. understandeth not his language. Wherefore the Lord furnished the Apostles and Prophets with the gift of tongues, that they were able to speak to every Nation in their own language.

3. Ordinary Prophets, Pastors, and Doctors have need of the Original tongues especially, and the Latin, for the many books sake which that language is privileged with.

Kno.

We see men to excel this way (in preaching) though not endued with the knowledge of the tongues.

Answ.

And we reverence those Preachers which excel in preaching, though defective in the tongues; and as much distaste those, that despise thus the knowledge of the tongues, speaking evil of those things they know not, nor the use and worth of them. And albeit I will not say as one (Impudentes esse Theologos qui Graecarum & Hebraicarum literarum imperiti, &c.) i. They are impudent Divines, who being ignorant of the Greek and Hebrew tongues, &c. Though I will not say thus, unless we apply it only to professed Doctors or Teachers (of whom we may boldly say with him, they are impudent, if, ignorant of those tongues, they undertake that function) because tongues are necessary (ad been esse) to the well being of a Pastor or Preacher: yet we say, they are impudent who speak thus slightly of tongues in a Preacher. And they that are friends (not to Barbarism, errors, heresies, and irreligion, but) to the truth of God, must keep up in the Ministers of the Gospel, the knowledge of the tongues, and all good learning with all conscionable care. Quantumcun{que} cedendum est necessitati temporum & populi— Whatsoever Dispensation the necessity of the times and people may plead for unto the judgment of the State and Church, I submit therein.

I shall now dismiss John Knowls with this advise out of the Apostle 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . And shall desire the Reader to take notice of the kind of proof he useth, which is not by express words of Scripture, but all by consequence; which kind of arguing we grant, and maintain to be good, but for as much as it is denied to us by many among us in point of Paedobaptism, and some higher matters, we will in like manner deny them the use of that weapon, which they except against in us. And so by their own tenent all John Knowls his arguments are nothing, because only consequential. Therefore as such ask us, where we read in Scripture, that Infants were baptized? So we ask them, where they read in the Bible, that a Lay-man, a private person, one out of Office did preach, or is commanded so to do? 'It is not ingenuous, nor fair, to deny Infants Baptism, and to question and deny far greater matters, saying, we have not express words of Scripture for the same; and they themselves in the mean time set up Lay-men's preaching (and other things) for which they have no express words in Scripture. Therefore they must either grant Infants Baptism, and such other points, contained in the Scripture by good consequence, or they must lay down Lay-men's preaching, and they must keep all women from the Sacrament of the Lord's Supper, until they can find express words for it in the Bible; and greater stones must they pull out of the building of faith. But I dare not argue with these men (ab absurdo) with arguments taken from Absurdities that will and must follow; because they are so ready to swallow the greatest absurdities (as some have done already) rather then by them to be driven to the truth. Yet the holy Apostle useth this argument against the deniers of the Resurrection, If (saith he) there be no resurrection rection of the dead, then Christ is not risen, then is our preaching vain, then your faith vain. These were horrid consequences to drive them from that heretical opinion, to which those consequences were linked. And it is said, that any now should (as they do) swallow as horrid con • equences, rather then vomit up again such morsels, as they have taken, to which these consequences are necssarily tied.