Survey of the Survey of that Sum of Church Discipline by Hooker

LIB. I. CAP. I.

A Survey of the Survey of the Reverend and Godly Servant of GOD, Mr. THOMAS HOOKER.

The company of Believers without Rulers is no Politick Church; having power of Ordination: What Local Habitation doth to make Church-members.

Passing what this Learned and Godly man hath said, Chap. 1 Part 1. (in which some things may be noted as Escapes) I come to Chap. 2.

CHAP. 2. PART 1. c. 11.

M. Hook. T He visible Church is the adequate subject of our Inquirie.

Answ. The principal subject is Mr. Hooker his visible Church, yea it is too narrow: the adequate it is not, for the visible kingdom of Christ in concre •• , as ruled by Christ, includes the elect and true Believers, for whose sake are all, officers, word; seals, 1 Cor. 3. 21. 22. 2 Cor. 〈◊〉 15. Eph. 1. 22.

M. H. The Church in her constitution is considered two ways: 1. as totum essentiale or homogeneum, or as totum integrale.

In the former notion, The Church as a City without a Mayor, hath right to choose its officers, and becomes totum organicum, when officers are in it. Ames. Medu. lib. 1. cap. 33. 18.

Ans. 1. The argument must so run,

What ever a City without a Mayor may do, that may a company of Believers so combined without officers do • .

Ans. Nothing more false: but of this hereaster. A civil free Corporation may appoint this or that Government, 2. May limit the Mayor to one year to so much power, no more: but M Hooker his new Church cannot do any of these. Ames there saith not a company of Believers without Officers is a Politick Church. The Scripture in Old or New Testament never said it.

M. H. As for the manner: Parish precincts, or dwelling within the bounds of a parish cannot make an ecclesiastic right to Church membership: For 1. it is but a Civil right that a man hath to his house; 2. Excommunication cutteth a man off from the Church, as if he were an heathen, but not from his house, which is his by birth or purchase: 3. Yea so Papists, Turks, Dogs, should be Church members, to whom Christ hath denied all right. Revel. 21. 27.

Ans. We grant Parish dwelling simply in a Professor gives not right to be a member of the City of God, but Parish dwelling tali modo is a necessary condition, without which they cannot be fixed members of that congragation, to meet in one house, suppone after supper, as Act 207. 1 Cor. 11. 20, 21, 22. and therefore we condemnn our brethren, who failing on the other extreme, will have persons residing in Old England to be married members to one only Cong •… on v •… ble in New England, and to no other visible Church •… 〈◊〉 , and deny all Church-communion of the Catholic 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to all visible Professors, who are sojourners, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ••• range excommunicating of visible Professors, 2. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 residence; for shall they watch over one another, as they are obliged, by a Church oath, suppose their Church be beyond the Line, and they on this side of it? 3. This full well shall gratify Anabaptists, who will have it no mercy, that infants are born in Zion, or in any Believers house, as the Scripture saith it is, Gen. 17. 12. Psal 87. 5. 1 Cor. 7. 14. Rom. 11. 16. the reasons are not so sure, for birth does it not, but to be born of such Parents at Corinth, makes over to the Infants of Believers, a to be born in Zion, to be born in believing Abraham's house, Gen. 17. 12. Psal. 87. 7. a right to be members of that Church, else upon what right shall they be baptized? As for the place, Rev. 21. 27. Pignetus; Pareus, Piscator, Diodati, English Annotators, Bullinger Nepar, expone the place of the Church in heaven: Marlorat and many others of the invisible Church, and the Text excludes all from that Church but such as are written in the book of life, and so to me it is unpertinent to the purpose, and not concludent.

CHAP. II.

MAster Hooker first states the question, then brings reasons to prove such visible Saints to be the only matter of the visible Church. Saints in charity are such in practice and profession (if we look at them in course, by experience or report) as they savor so much, as they had been with Jesus. From all which so much as rational charity directed by rule from • k • Word, a man cannot but conclude, but there may be some seeds of some spiritual work of God in the soul.

Answ. If any one word of God were given to prove what must be proven, it were good: 1. That Magus, all the three thousand, Act. 2. all the multitude baptized by John, Mat 3. Mark 1. 5. Luk 4. were to Philip, to the Church of Sa • aria, to godly John Bap • ist, to the twelve Apostles, such in practice and profession, as they savoured so much as they had been with Jesus; so heavenly a savourinesse is not, in one jot, holden out in the Word, the Baptist looks on them as v • pers, and was it fit to omit the styles of Saints, justified, sanct • fied? 2. The Triers most have experience of their practice and profession: this shall take days and months to eat (as they say) much salt with them, the Apostles, that same day in few hours time, baptized them, Act. 2. Who can believe that the huge multitude lived on Locusts and Wild Honey in the Wilderness, until John should experimentally find a generation of vipers molded into a new frame to savor of the things of the spirit? 3. There is nothing here of 1. Triers and Judges: 2. Nothing of a Judica • ure: 3. Nothing of Letters, Witnesses, Testimonies from the Churches: 4. Nothing of the rule of the Word compared with their habitual conversation (which must take a tract of days) 5. Nothing of a sentence admitting some for their spiritual savourinesse, rejecting others for that bad smell, and denying them Church-fellowship until they be better tried: all conjectures.

1. The conclusion is not anything but (a may be) and that may bear a (may not be) and if it were proven by the Word, that Professors right to the Covenant of God, to the Word, Promises, Seals, depended upon men's rational judgment of Charity, it might quiet the conscience: But a • shall not the Lord be a God to a people, except the people themselves judge in the judgment of charity, that the people so consederate, savor all of them, as if they had been with Jesus? and except they from experience can conclude, there may be some seeds of some spiritual work of God in the souls of all these people? Ah, the Lord then cannot say to a nation and a society, I am your God, while first he asks the Churches leave.

M H. 1. Reason. The members of Christ's Body are fit alore to be members of a true Church, because that is the body of Christ. 1 Cor. 12. 12. Ephes. 4. 12, 13.

But only visible Saints, who according to the rules of reasonable charity may be conceived to have some special good in them, are only members of Christ's Body:

For to have a member, which neither doth, nor ever did receive any power or virtual impression, in the kind of it, from the head is not only against reason but against that reference and correspondence, which the members have to the head. Now visible Saints only, according to the former explication can be said, by the rules of reasonable charity, to have some virtual influence of some spiritual operation from Christ as a head: therefore such only are members of a Church.

Answ. No man seems more to study to darken the matter, then the reverend arguer. 1. He omits all along the word (visible) which is mainly in question. 2. He himself is forced to distinguish a twofold headship of Christ; for Christ is head to the visible Church, either politick, according to the politick government and guidance he lends to it, or according to the influence of saving grace & life: the members of Christ's body according to the politick external government are fit alone to be members of a true Church visible, or truly visible; such as Magus, Demas, and many gifted men are, the proposition is true and granted. But only visible Saints, who according to the rules of reasonable charity may be conceived to have some special good, or which is all one, to be real believers, are only members of Christ's body, according to politick and external government, the assumption is false, and never proved; a mere begging of the question, for not only such as are conceived in charity to to be real converts, such as Magus, Judas, &c. but also Peter, John, and such as prosess subjection to the Gospel; and withal do really believe, 〈◊〉 members of the true visible Church, and the Lord's visible confederates, whether they be conceived to have some special good of conversion, and saving grace in them; or not; nor does the formality of a visible member, or a visible confederate depend upon the judgment of men: And it is most false (which is said in the probation) that only conceived and so judged visible Saints have the politick influence of some spiritual operation from Christ the head; for godly professors, whether they be conceived and judged, or not conceived or judged godly professors, have both real and internal in foro Dei, and also external and ecclesiastic right to the ord •… ces of Christ, should all the world say the contrary. And by our brethren's nay, workers of iniquity, and these that are never known nor chosen of God, but are exactly g • lded hypocrites, and never receive any power or trial at all in their kind, from their head Christ; as may be proved from Matth. 7. 22, 23. Matth. 22. 11, 1 • . Matth. 13. 47. 48. Matth. 25. 3. 2 Tim. 3. 3. are visible Saints, not because they are so, but because they are falsely so esteemed by men to be such. Hence 1. our brethren's way makes not a whit a cleaner visible Church then our way. 2. The politick influence of Christ the head upon such painted tombs, can be none at all before their membership. How then can they have virtual influence of some spiritual operation from the head? supposed influence is no influence at all. And not any of these tex • s say that the Church, 1 Cor. 12. 12. and Ethes. 4. 12, 13. is not the body of Christ visible, except men conceive it to be his visible body; such new divinity is unknown to Scripture: If the other part of the distinction be applied to the argument, both the propositions shall be false; so the members of Christ's body by the influence of saving grace are fit alone to be members of the true visible Church: nothing is more false, for then the true visible Church should be made up of only true and real converts; glad shall Anabaptists and Familists be of this doctrine, and except the propositions be so taken, M. H. but paints us a false Church.

3. The places, 1 Cor. 12. 12. Eph. 4. 12, 13 speak nothing of Mr Hookers single congregation, but of the Catholic visible Church, which shall meet all in the unity of faith, and in which the Lord hath set Apostles, 1 Cor. 12. 28. and 4. 14, 15. and that is not a single congregation.

4. Though the places speak of the visible Church, yet do not these places say that the visible Church as visible, but as the real mystical body of Christ, which shall be glorified with Christ, is called Christ, Ephes. 4. 13. 〈◊〉 Cor. 12. 12, 13. and the body of Christ, by the influence of saving grace.

CHAP. III.

MAster Hookers two reasons.

These are • is to be members of Christ's Church that are subjects of Christ's kingdom.

The Church is the visible kingdom, in which Christ reigns by the scepter of his word, ordinances and discipine: he is our king, he is our Law-giver; they, who are in professed rebellion, are traitors, not subjects, the members of the body are under the motion and guidance of the head; Wolves are contrary to it. But visible Saints, as formerly described, are only subjects of this kingdom. Christ is the king of Saints, not of D • unkards, Atheists, they alone Saints) proclaim subjection in their practice.

Answ. The term (only) is wanting in the proposition, which is in the assumption and conclusion, contrary to right Logic.

2. These are fit to be members of Christ's Church visible) that are subjects (by an influence of grace, to wit, from their head and king calling effectually, Acts 15. 14, 15. Isai. 55. 4. 5. and giving them repentance and forgiveness of sins, Acts 5. 31.) of the kingdom of Christ, visible or invisible; the proposition is true, but that such visible Saints as Magus and Judas the traitor (which are the visible Saints M. H. defines in terminis, part. 1. cap. 2. pag. 15. conclus. 2.) are subjects and only subjects of this kingdom, as his assumption says in express terms, is most false; now that the argument must mean of the subjects of Christ's kingdom real, and of members by the influence of saving grace from Christ their head and king, I prove from the argument that M. H. brings from Isa • . 33 22. for M. H. his visible Saints Magus and Judas cannot. 〈◊〉 Say, the Lord is our Law-giver, the Lord is our Judge, the Lord is our king and he will save us; if Sorcerers and Traitors should say so they should lie. Isaiah speaks of real converts and the true Zion, whose stakes and cords shall never be removed, so as the gates of hell (saith Marlorat on the place) shall not prevail against them. He speaketh (as yet saith Piscator) to the godly Jews; so that (saith Calvin) God is in the miast of her; therefore she shall not be moved: for (saith Musculus) my sheep shall no man pluck out of my hand. 2. He speaketh of these (not of such as Judas and Magus) who shall be protected and saved by the Lord, verse. 21, 22. he speaks of the true Church which acknowledges God her Law giver and King so Calvin; the Church (saith Bullinger) is so armed with the grace of God, that she yields not to evils, nor is broken, but remains ever sure. 3. He speaks of that kingdom and people, whose inhabitants shall not say, I am sick, the people that dwell therein, their iniquity shall be forgiven them, verse. 24. only the citizens of the Church (saith Calvin) are adorned with this privilege, pardon of sins; and it pertains (saith Gwalther) to the Church only and h •… r citizens; because (saith Luther) the g • dly people hath a God gracious, therefore their sins are forgiven. So Bu • inger, Oecolampadius, Diodati, English Divine, Zwinglius, and the popish interpreters, Carthusianus, Vatablus, Arias, Montanur, Corn. à Lipide, Gasp. San • lius, Lyranus, never man before pious M. Hooker, expoun •… d the place of such visible Saints, as have room in this house, to wit, Witches and Traitors. 2. To Si • n a single congregation, as if the gates of hell could not prevail against such cyp • ers: And 3. he must not be K • ng and Law-giver (by this way) to godly visible believers, when their congregation is broken, dissipated by persecution, death of officers, O poor comfort!

But these are fit to be members in Christ's Church that are subjects in Christ's kingd me, by influence of politick guidance and common gifts; the proposition in that sense is neither proved by Isaiah 33. 22. or any reason, but the just contrary conclusion, to wit, that believing and really pardoned Zion, verse 22. 23, 24. must be the persons that make up the kingdom of Christ: nor does it conclude anything but contrary to M. H. and the way of the congregation, to wit, Ergo only such as are visible Saints, according to the politick influence and common gifts, are fit to be members of the visible Church; which is a most false conclusion, for also true believers sincerely professing the faith, and who are subjects of Christ according to the influence of saving grace, remission and pardon, v. 22, 23, 24. are fi • to be, and really are members of the visible Church, except the argument conclude that only hypocrites appearing to be believers real, are fit to be members of the visible Church, which is most false by the grant of adversaries, and by the truth itself.

3. M. H. suppresseth the conclusion, and proves the proposition, that real believers are fit to be members of the mystical and true Church, which neither we, nor he deny; and the term in rational charity directed by the word, which should be in both propositions, is neither mentioned in the Argument, not in the Scriptures and Proofs, an unknown way of arguing: and for the assumption,

But visible Saints (that is, Saints in the judgment of charity ruled by the word) are only subjects of his kingdom.

M. H. never so much as touches, nor labors to prove, nor is there a Scripture in old or New Testament to prove that men cannot be the subjects of Christ's visible Kingdom, except Apostles, or some visible society declare and pass a judicial sentence that they are subjects of his visible kingdom.

4. The probation is fan toto coelo from the conclusion to be proven. They (saith he) who carry themselves in professed rebellion, they are traitors, not subjects—and Christ is the King of Saints, not of drunkards, Atheists, &c. Its true, he is no visible king to visible Pagans, nor are they as visible professed Atheists, subjects of his visible kingdom. And who teaches any such thing, and against whom doth M. Hooker dispute? if there be any such members in our Church, not censured, and if obstinate, not casten out, it is the sinful and abused practice of men, and we profess we desire to be humbled before the Lord that our Ministers and assemblies received into our Church, men guilty of perjury drunkenness, shedding of the blood of the people of God in the defense of the cause and sworn reformation, and that our Ministers and Elders, (ah to many of them) are scandalous, baters and mockers of piety, though our Church was in as fair way of purging the house of God, but now by the present stroke, we are deprived of liberty so to do, but that is nothing concludent against the right government of Christ, Christ is not the head and king of professed rebels; true, nor is he head and king, in a saving way, of latent rebels, or of your visible Saints, such as Magus and Judas, ergo he is head and king to none as visible members, but to men only judged in charity, led by the word to be real converts, no logic can prove the consequence. But our mind is that Christ is visible head by influence of gifts, ordinances, and external guidance to all to whom he says, I will be your God, and who profess subjection to him, whether the Church shall judge them real converts, or not judge them so. M. H. arg. 3. pag. 17.

The latter is absurd, then these who in the judgment of charity are members of the devil, may be conceived members of Christ in the same judgment of charity: charity then must pluck out her eyes. Answ. 1. here is as good a contradiction, if any goodness there be in these.

Let M. H. choose him, by his own contradiction which (he saith) divides the breadth of being (though this phancied contradiction divide neither the breadth nor the sixteenth part thereof)

If only visibly justified and chosen Saints, who are such really, are not visible members:

Then none visibly justified and chosen Saints are fit members visible.

The antecedent is true, and Simon Magus is not a visible member to M. Hooker, by this account; and the latter is contradicent to M. Hookers way: for then one who is to the eye of charity visibly justified and chosen, and that really by M. H. metaphysick, which so divides the breadth of being, as Peter visibly believing, and thereby really blessed, Matth. 16. 16, 17. shall be to the same eye of charity not visibly justified and chosen, but in the miscarrying judgment of charity, shall be no visible member, according to the reality thereof, as Simon Magus; and therefore the definition of a visible member cannot agree both to Peter visibly believing, and to Magus visibly believing; for there is a real contradiction between Peter his believing real, and Magus his believing real, as good Logic demonstrates: but the latter is absurd, for both Peter and Magus are visible Saints. Let any man help M. H. in his metaphysick here.

2. Aristotle long ago taught us that there is no contradiction, when the contradiction is not 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 : now there is a mids betwixt a visible Saint, as M. Hooker means, and a no visible Saint; for his visible Saint is, one who by the Church is judged a real convert and his no visible Saint is one who is judged no real convert, example of the former is Peter, or Magus, an example of the latter is an unbaptized Pagan so judged: now the mids to us Simon Magus when he is baptized, and we teach that Philip and the Church of Samaria neither passed any judicial sentence of Magus as a real convert, nor yet as any non-real convert, and therefore to the eyes of reason and charity (which need not to be plucked out, but have their own use) Magus, when he is admitted a visible member, is neither a real member of the devil, nor a real member of Christ, but a professor, and the judgment of the Church is abstracted both from the eternal election and the eternal reprobation of Magus, and from the real conversion or the real nonconversion of Magus. And we desire one jot or word of Scripture where the servants Matth. 22. are thus limited as M. H. supposeth, invite none to come to the wedding of the Kings son but such only as you judge to be really converted and clothed with the wedding garment: the parable saith no such thing, but the contrary, verse 9. as many as ye find bid to the marriage; yea v. 14. saith, the inviters have nothing to do to judge whether they be chosen or effectually called, or not chosen or non-effectually called, though one of them in themselves they must be. And when the Maids of wisdom Prov. 9. are sent out, reads M. H. of such a limited commission, see you call in and admit none within the doors of wisdoms house but only such as you judge to be the spiritual new born children of wisdom: yea the Maids expressly call in the fools and the simple ones to be made wise, v. 4 whereas M. H sup •… oses, they have eaten the dainties of wisdom, before ever they come in a • wisdoms door. And so against common sense in lieu of an argument, he begs the question; so

If M. Hookers visible Saints only be not members, prove that there are such visible Saints first: otherwise the Papists may say,

If our visible Bishop be not the visible head of the Church, Then our non-visible Bishop may be head.

We grant all, and then M. H. bids us yield to what he saith without probation, and tells us it is absurd that his non-visible Saints be members, and so his visible Saints are men in the moon to us, and in reality of truth no such thing.

CHAP. IIII.

MAster Hooker his fourth reason.

These who are excluded from his covenant, and meddling with that as unfit, they are not fit to have Communion with the Church; for to that all the holy things of God do in a special manner appertain. Its God's house, and there all his treasure lies, the keys of the kingdom are given to them, to them all the oracles, ordinances, and privileges • o belong.

But these who hate to be reformed, and cast away his command, they have nothing to do to take his covenant in their mouth. Psal. 50. 16.

Answer,

It is to be observed, 1. that M. H. leaves the conclusion to the reader, and sets down a proposition and an assumption all along, such as they are: 2. he never concludes what is denied, ergo, only such visible Saints are members of the visible Church: 3. he speaks most ambiguously, such hypocrites are not fit to have communion with the Church. What Church? he knows the question is of the visible Church only, for he grants part. 1. c. 2. conclus • 3. pag. 27. 28. that such as are found to be corrupted and gross hypocrites being now received members, though they were not so when first admitted, are so far fit to have communion with the Church visible, as they must be tolerated and remain members, until they be judicially examined, convinced, and censunes applied for reformation: 4, it is one thing to prove that open hypocrites should not be admitted members of the visible Church, but it is the sin of the so knowing admitters, for which M. R. now disputes; and a far other thing which M. H. proveth, to wit, it is not fit that hypocrites have communion with the Church: what a lax disputing is this? they that eat and drink unworthily, 1 Cor. 11. 28. 29. and eat things sacrificed to idols, 1 Cor. 10. 21. should not have communion with the Church in the holy ordinances, would Paul therefore infer such, though converts, are not to be admitted members of the visible Church? it is not fit, yea it is sin, that either professed non-converts, or latent non-converts have communion with the Church, for their very profession of the name of Christ, when there is no reality in the thing, is a most sinful unfitness in Magus, in Judas, will it follow Ergo the Church sins in admitting Magus and Judas? 5. the state of the question is overturned, for the scope of Psal. 50. 16, 17. as Calvin, Musculus, Marlorat, Diodati, English Divines observe well, is to press a sincere reality in profession, and to condemn outward sacrificing and crying, we are in covenant with God, not only without repentance and praying and praising in faith, 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. but when the so professing hypocrites were compartners with thieves, adulterers, &c. v. 18. 19. 20. but the place speaketh not one jot that the Church ought not to have admitted such to be members of the visible Church: 6. Let it be remembered that M. H. here makes the Jewish Church a sampler of the visible single congregations under the New Testament: 7. and since all the holy things of God were committed to the Church of the Jews, Rom. 31. 2. Rom. 9. 4, 15 Psal. 147. 19, 20. Deut. 29. 10, 11. If the Lord called them not, nor planted them into a Church-frame, nor admitted them members, until first they were contrary to these hypocrites Psal. 50 16. 17. and until there was not only a professed willingness to receive the gospel, (I speak the language of M. H. 16 pag. 28.) but a practical reformation in their profession (Survey part. 1. cap. pag. 14. 15.) that they savoured so much, as they had been with Jesus, and if so be they must have been the true Israel in men's esteem, before the Lord called and chose them to be his people, it must follow that God chose not Israel to be his Church of free grace and love, but when they were now professors and practically reformed, and a people calling upon God in the day of trouble, offering thanksgiving, paying vows, loving instruction, contrary to these hypocrites Psal. 50, 14, 15 16, 17, 18. which is gross Pelagianism, and contrary to the word of God, 2 Chron. 2. 11. Deut. 7, 6, 7, 8. Psal, 47 4. Psal. 78, 68.

8. Nor is it true that all oracles, ordinances, and privileges de belong to the visible Church, as visible in M. H. sense, i. e. to every single congregation: for there is, there may be a single congregation which there is not one chosen of God, but all made up of such stuff as Magus and Judas, yea and the promises of an everlasting covenant, and the privileges of election, effectual calling, perseverance, glorification, are not made to single Churches or kingdoms, provinces, since the famous Churches of Rome, Ephesus, Thessalonica, of Asia are horribly fallen, these previledges belong firstly and principally to the Catholic visible Church as Mystical and invisible both subjective and finaliter, or objectively, especially as they are God's treasures.

M. H. pag. 18. M. R. yields the causes while he granteth the wicked are forbidden, what to be Church members? no, but to take the covenant of God in their mouth, for if they come to see their sin, reform their evil ways, they are non-visible Saints, therefore while they remain haters of reformation, they are not visible Saints, and have no title to be Church-members.

Answ. The cause is never a whit the more yielded, because of M. H. his mistake in proving one thing for another: the Lord, Psal. 50. 16, forbids hypocrites remaining hypocrites to take the Lord's covenant in their mouth, but I said not, therefore he forbids the Church to take in any as members but these only to come to see th • ir sin and to reform their evil way, as M H. saith (which is indeed to yield the cause) for if they who leave the ways of P • ganisme, Judaism, Popery, and the ways of sin, profess they are willing to be the disciples of Christ if the profession be not grossly and knownly hypocritical, and their coming in be not for by-ends and to betray the cause, but morally ingenuous and negatively sincere, the Church is to receive such, and is not forbidden to admit them as members, whether to the knowledge of the Church they be real converts or not real converts. I grant it is another thing, if they refuse to come and to be baptized, Luk. 7. 29, 30. Luk. 14. 17, 18. sure no man can be a Church-member against his will. 2. The Lord may well rebuke Magus and Judas while they are Church-members, the same way that he rebukes the hypocrites, Psal. 50. 16, 17. and say what have you to do to declare my statutes, &c. for I know your hearts, how you hate instruction, &c. and yet the Church sins not in admitting them.

3. M. H. confounds these two, to wit, the seeing of sin, and reforming of their evil way, which is real and sincere repentance, if it be a saving sight of sin, they sincerely repent, if it be counterfeit, to wit, the giving evidence of godly sorrow and repentance, the Church may see the latter, and yet Magus and Judas remain under the same reproof, for they may in their heart hate instruction, and act these sins of partaking with thieves secretly, and be secret adulterers, and the word may reprove them, and yet there is no blame in the Church in either admitting them, or in bestowing Churchpriviledges upon them.

CHAP. V.

MAster Hooker pag 18.

M. Rutherford: such as internally hate to be reformed may be ordinary hearers and so members.

M. H. if ordinary hearing made a member, then excommunicate persons should be members for they are ordinary hearers. Ans. If M. R. make every ordinary hearing to make a member of the Church ordinary and entire, he saith something. 2. This twitcheth the question whether the preaching of the Gospel be an essential note and mark of the visible Church. Before I speak how far persons excommunicate are members or not members of the visible Church, hence 1. Any sort of profession, whether by an avowing of that Gospel to one another, or suffering for it, even when the shepherds are smitten and the flock scattered is a practical and very speaking mark, that such a company is a true Church. 2. A pastoral publishing of the word is a special mark and an great-half of a note of a Ministerial, Politick, Church. Though the administration of the seals to those capable of them added thereunto make a more complete mark of a more complete Ministerial Church. 3. The active call of God by the preached word may be transient and occasional to mocking Athenians, Act. 17. and yet intended to save some, and to be a seed to some Church, v. 34. certain be leed, this is the seed of some Church, like some corns of wheat scatteredly fallen in a field that may have an harvest, 4. This active call may be refused, and the refusers never be the Church, Luk. 14 16, 17. not visible members, they visibly refusing the call and counsel of God and neglecting obstinately to be baptized, Luk. 7 • 30. 5. But we mean, beside this active call some passive professing and receiving of, and yiel •… g to the offered Gospel. So as they came to the marriage-supper, whether they have, or want a wedding garment. Mat. 22. and receive the seed, whether they be thorny, rocky, or a way-side ground, or they be good soil, and may yield some external obedience; in this consideration, Pagans and Turks are not passively the called of God, nor members of the visible Church, though they be hearers; but that they be ordinary fixed hearers, and yet in no sort external professors, but remain without, and be Pagans, is not conceiveable, except they professedly hear for curiosity, or to mock, or to undermine the Gospel and Church, and so they are not to be admitted to be hearers or Church members, except by violence they thrust themselves in among hearers. 1. Abraham called with his house to leave idolatry obeyeth the calling, buildeth an altar to the Lord, Gen. 12. 1, 2, &c. 18. Professeth and teacheth as a Prophet, the doctrine of the covenant, and God appearing revealeth the Gospel to him, Genes. 12. v. 2, 3 Genis. 15. 4, 5, 6, 7. and he believeth, and so he, and his house is a visible Church, when, not while many years after, and until he was ninety years and nine, the seal of circumcision was ordained, and given to him and his house. Genes. 17. 1, 2, 3. and the Church is a true visible Church in the wilderness, in which was the Angel, of the covenant who spake to Moses in mount Sina. Act. 7. 38. (which is a note and mark of a true visible Church. Revel. 1. 20. Rev. 2. 1.) which yet wanted circumcision and the passover, forty years in the wilderness. Josh. 5. 5, 6, 7. this proves that there is a true visible Church, where Christ is, and yet wanteth the ordinary seals, Baptism and the Lord's supper. 2. When the Apostles first planted Churches, we have no ground, that they preached to Ephesus, to Galathia, to Philippi, to Corinth, where God had much people (as the Lord before had told Paul) Act. 16. 6, 7, 10, 11, 12, 13. Act. 18. 7, 8, 9, 10. and that they framed them not into Churches, until, to the satisfaction of the judgment of charity of the Apostles, they were converts, and so to them all chosen to eternal life, and until they did, first, being a number of visible converts, choose Paul and other planters of the Churches, for their Pastors, whereas they preached to them for their conversion, as no pastors at all; before that choosing, but as gifted men, for that hath not the least shadow of truth in the word: so also they did first hear the Gospel as Disciples and visible Professors, before they could be baptized or received to the other seal, as is evident, by the Eunuchs professed reading and asking the meaning of that which he read. Isai. 53. Act. 8. 29, 30, 31. and his professed seeking to be baptized, and the Jailor's professed hearing, and asking what he should do to be saved. A •• . 16. 30, 31, 32. and by the hearing and pofessing of all his house, before they were baptized, and the Corinthians, hearing and believing. Act. 18. 8. And Lydia, and her houses hearing. Act. 16 14, 15. and the Gentiles reverent professed hearing the word. Act. 10. 33, 44, 45, 46. and the three thousand, Act. 52. hearing and saying, (which was a fair visible profession) men and brethren, what shall we do? before any of them were baptized. Act. 2. v. 37, 41, 42, 43. which proveth, that both active preaching of the Gospel, and a professed receiving thereof go before men be enchurched. And yet if these may be, to wit, hearing and professed receiving, here is an essential mark by which persons, before they receive the seals, are made members visible and disciples, and societies visible, and Churches essentially differenced, 1. From all the false Churches visible on earth, who have not the sound of the word preached, and professedly heard, and visibly received, and 2. from all civil societies, 3. from all Pagan, and Heathen societies on earth. Ergo they were a distinct Christian society, differenced essentially, and if they should all die before they had been baptized, or had received the seals, they had been true visible Church-members; and if killed for the truth, they had died visible professing Martyrs, and the called Church of Christ.

3. The visible Church is a thing, whose being is in succession and daily growing, and is a society daily more stated (as it were) in a Church-way, according as the active calling on the Lord's part, and his people's yielding thereunto in a daily profession go on, as Isai 65. 2. the Lord all the day long calleth, and (to speak so) inchurcheth daily people by the preached word. Math. 23. 37. How often would I have gathered you? Jer. 7. 25. he sendeth his Prophets, early in the morning, and late at night to call. Hence if that which is the essential mark of the Church visible, to wit, the preaching of the Gospel, be the only instrument, and the draw-net of pulling out and calling of men into fellowship with Christ, by the word preached: And if the seal do only confirm converts, as discipline keepeth the visible kingdom clean from visible scandals, then are these who professedly in that society partake and receive that essential mark, and yield externally thereunto, members of the visible Church, and a society made up of such a true visible Church, though they receive not yet all the ordinances, and are as the outer court, which is a part of the temple. But the active calling of God by the preached word, and the people's professed yielding thereunto, and their ordinary professed hearing, is such a mark, both by the word of God, and all our Protestant Divines, Calvin, Beza. B • l. P. Martyr, Bucanus, Tilenus, Piscator, Musculus, Gwalther, Junius, Pareus, Zanchius, Professors of Leideu, Willet, Jewel, Reynald, Trelcatius, Sadeel, Polanus, &c. Fathers, Councils old and late, and our brethren cannot build their new Churches, but by loosing the foundation-stones laid by these worthy builders, and the Scripture maketh feeding of the flocks & setting up the shepherds tents. Cant. 1. 7, 8. Ier. 3. 15. Feeding of the flock, and the feed flock. Act. 20. 28. 1 Pet. 6. 1. The golden candlestick in the preached word, and these in the house to whom it giveth light, the only mark of a true visible Church, so is it prophesied it shall be under the New Testament. Isai. 2. 3. Many people and nations shall go, and say, Come, and let us go up to the mountain of the Lord's house: how shall the visible mountain be known? and he will teach us his ways, and we will walk in his paths, for out of Zion (the visible Church) shall go forth the Law, and the word of the Lord from Jerusalem, so Isai. 62. 6. The visible city is known. I have set watchmen upon thy walls, O Jerusalem, which shall never hold their peace, (but preach and pray) day nor night, Psal. 147. 19. He showeth his word unto Jacob, his statutes and his judgments to Israel. And that proveth them to be a Church differenced from other societies, v. 20. He hath not dealt so with any nation. I grant statutes and judgments include seals, sacrifices as all the privileges. Rom. 6. 4, 5. to whom pertained the adoption and the glory, and the covenants and the giving of the Law. Yet by the word soundly preached is faith begotten, Rom. 10. 14, 15 And the flock fed, and the disciples made. Matthew 28. 19, 20 It is taught, that sacraments do but confirm faith, now a Ministerial begetting of children is (to speak so) more essential to the visible Church, then to confirm them. 2. that doctrine is not to be holden, which teacheth us no way of certain knowing by faith what is the true visible Church to which we may adjoin ourselves, and what not, but teacheth us a conjectural way only of finding the true visible Church, as Socinians, and Arminians, who tell us the notes of the true Church are not necessary to be known. 2. There is no certain way of knowing the true visible Church, now our way that maketh the profession of the sound doctrine of the Gospel a note of the true Church, holdeth out a way of knowing by certainty, by faith which is the true Church; as we know which is the true doctrine. But Sociniant say two or three fundamentals are all, and they give us a Church so wide as taketh in all Churches, Papists, Socinians, Libertines, &c. and Anabaptists, and those that are for toleration of all religions, yea, and for all errors not fundamentals (since they know not well, what be fundamentals, what not) shall give but conjectures, for the knowledge of the sound Church. And M H. refers all to the judgment of charity, which is a mere doubting uncertain way of finding the true Church.

As to the argument, if preaching of the word were a true mark of the Church, then were excommunicate persons members of the Church, for they hear the word. I answer, 1. such as are excommunicate for apostasy from the truth▪ 2. such as are stricken with the great excommunication, Anothema Maranatha 1 Cor. 16. 22. are not to be ordinary hearers of the word, and so the argument holdeth not of them, for they are simply rotten members.

But for such as are excommunicated, because of some particular scandal, as incest, or a particular heresy, and yet profess the truth, as to all other points, they are members cut off, and yet not cut off, in so far as they retain a profession, yea and to the knowledge of the Church, are visible converts, though in one particular scandal, they lie without and give, not such evidences of repentance, as the Church can pardon them, as may be proven from the 2 Cor. 2. 6, 7, 8, 9. they are ordinary hearers of the word, as such as must be reclaimed by the preached word, as sick children, under the medicinal cure of excommunication, and the preached word that the spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord, 1 Cor. 5. but they are not ordinary hearers as visible professors, nor are they members complete of the Church in the inner court; admitted to the seals, 2. 2 Th • ss 3. 14, 15. They are cut off members, yet not counted as enemies, but to be admonish • d as breth • en. Ergo though they be 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , as heathens and Publicans, Matth. 18. Yet are they not simply to be counted Pagans, nor occasional hearers, as Pagans, but brethren: and though Mr. Robinson, and some say the place 2 Thess. 3. is not meant of excommunicated persons, beside that it is against the text, against the current of sound interpreters, yet it proveth our point, that even such as walk disorderly, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , verse 11. and obey not the doctrine of the Gospel, and with whom we should not keep company, v. 14. and so ought to be excommunicate, by M. Hookers doctrine, yet remain brethren, and are to be counted so by members of the Church, and are to hear the word of admonition, and so are visible professors, and so not utterly cast out of the visible Church, and M. H doth no more refute our Protestants, then the Scripture who calleth such as are fed, and the hearers of the Lord's testimonies, the Israel of God, and the sheep of his pasture, his flock, inheritance, his vineyard his garath of red vine, his spouse, and what is this but the Church visible, Psal. 147. 19, 20. Hosh. 8 11. What? because the excommunicated who thus hear ordinarily are not members of the Church, because they are not whole & entire members, it is no more consequently spoken, then if he would say a wounded soldier, because he is wounded, and under cure, is not a member of the army and sworn to the colors, because he cannot march and fight as other soldiers. M. H. c. 2. part. 1. pag. 18. 19. and pag. 33. 34. Suppose a minister should preach many years to a company of Infidels in one place, and a Lecturer to many people of diverse congregations in the same auditory, shall it follow that I • fidels are members of the visible Church and that these make a visible Church? though there be here settled preaching, yet it is not an essential and differencing property of the visible Church, but a commune adjunct or separable accident, as the sensitive faculty is not a proper mark of a man, though it be in man, for so might one and the same man be a member of four such visible Churches, if they meet ordinarily, at several hours, to their several lectures.

Answ. We mean by settled preaching preaching as opposed to transient and occasional preaching, as when Paul in passing on a journey preacheth to mocking Athenians we grant that will not conclude that the sc •… who occasionally so hear, are members of the visible Church, not think our divines preaching so to be an essential mark of the visible Church, but by settled preaching, which we make such a mark, we mean 1. the active calling of God, by God's warrant and command to preach to such, for Ministers may not at random set up a light among Infidels upon their own private choice and spirit, but if God so dispose that they have a faculty of speaking in their own tongue to Pagans, 2. if providence open a door for a call, that there be any passive call or accepting of him for these diverse years upon the part of these Infidels, and 3. if the Lord gift the man and stir up his spirit to preach diverse years to these Infidels in one place. I shall say there the Lord hath said to that man, go and bid these Infidels and fools come to the wedding, as Mat. 12. 9. and come to wisdoms table, as Prov. 9. 4. and there is a visible Church there: if these heathen hear and mock, and lyingl •… are, and still profess and practice the worshipping of their dumb Idols, we shall say preachers have no warrant one year, let alone many years so to preach, and the man preacheth to them without warrant from God, and where there is no professed yielding in some measure, the supposition is without the state of our question. 2. the contret of a lecturer that preacheth the word to diverse professors from sundry Churches, if 1. he have no warrant to administer the seals, or to exercise discipline over them; he seemeth to me some Catholic Doctor I read not of in scripture, not unlike the Popish and Prelatical Deacon, who may preach and baptize (as a midwife to them in case of necessity may baptize) but not to administer the other seal. 2. if he be a lawfully called Pastor, I shall say, the meeting is a true visible Church of visible members met from sundry Churches, and is not a fixed, but a transient Church, and it is no more absur • d to say these are members of four visible Churches, to wit, transient members, then to say they are members of the whole Catholic visible Church, and baptized. Whether Jews or Gentiles, all, by one spirit, unto one body, 1 Cor. 12. 13. being all one body, having one spirit, one faith, one Lord, one baptism. Ephes. 4. 4, 5. though they belong to diverse particular Churches: and this argument beggeth what is in question, that all sound professors are not members of the Catholic visible Church.

3 This way settled preaching is no commune adjunct or separable accident of a visible Church, but an essential note thereof.

CHAP. VI.

MAster Hooker addeth, par. 1. chap. 2. pag. 34.

If you say that settled preaching as established and remaining in the Church is a mark of the Church, so you make the Church a mark of itself, this plea is too narrow.

Answ. It is not narrow, nor a plea either to say, that seeing eyes as fixed in a living creature we call animal, and hearing ears, &c. are an essential note of a living creature, whereas the eyes and ears not fixed in a living creature, but separated from it; should be a narrow plea indeed, to be called the essential mark of a living creature; and yet none can say that a living creature is made a mark of itself. They speak not feebly, but rationally, who say that rational discoursing as fixed in a man is an essential mark of a man.

M. H. par. 1. c. 2. pag. 19.

M. Rutherford said, the argument is nothing against us, such adulterers. Psal. 50. as are not to take the Law in their mouth, are to be cast out, but the question is whether, if they be not cast out, the Church for that be no true Church. M. H. Answer, the first part yieldeth the cause again, for if they should be cast out, there is no reason they should be received, or taken in, nor have they any right thereunto, nor be they fit matter.

Answ. M. Rutherford is not such a yielder of truth as so; for M. Hookers argument yieldeth more thus, these who are worthy to be casten out, had never right to be received in, as Church members, so M. H. But adulterers who take the law in their mouth, known adulterers (so M. Rutherford yieldeth and no other ways) are worthy to be casten out: ergo adulterers; who take the law in their mouth, had never right to be received in as Church-members. 1. M. Hookers proposition is most false, for thousands, as Magus, and others worthy to be casten out, had right (Church right, of that only we speak) such as pastors can give them, to be admitted members, so the Scripture, so M. H. part 1. chap. 2. conclus. 3. pag. 27 When then both the proposition and assumption are taught in Scripture, granted by M H see now who yieldeth the cause. 2. to say if they should be casten out, ergo they had never right to come in; is, as if he wou • d say, such a woman hath committed harlotry with many men beside her husband, ergo she had never right to be a married wife, and was never lawfully married; and so hath neither committed adultery, nor deserveth a bill of divorce.

3 No more can follow from this, that adulterers once admitted to membership, falling into scandals ought to be casten out, ergo if they had been under the same scandal visibly, they ought not to have been taken in, but this supposeth a begging of the question, that there is in Scripture a gathering of Churches of visible converts out of Churches of men and women born and baptized in their infancy within the visible Church, which yet I say was never dreamed of by the Apostles, and though it were so, whether we speak of such a gathering, or of gathering of Churches out of Pagans, persons not capable of Gospelscandals, before their admission, which may hold them out, as they are guilty of Gospel-scandals, after they profess the Gospel. For then an unmarried woman might be capable of adultery with her own husband, before she be married upon him. 2. as to that which M. Rutherford said, that supposed they were not cast out, the question is whether the Church for that be no Church. M. H. saith, that wholly misseth the mark again, for the question is twitching the constitution of the Church, of what matter it should be made, it is not twitching separation from the Church. To which I answer, because I dispute against both these of the congregation, and the Separatists our brethren, having no arguments but such as Separatists and Anabaptists have, and with more vigor prosecuted then they, because I conclude against separation as well as against them, having to do with two adversaries, and giving one answer to the one, (which yet is not taken off) and another answer to the other, it is not equal dealing to say the answer to the Separatists wholly misseth the mark, because it is not the same with the answer to the congregational way.

2. M. H. declineth an answer to that which I said against the separation, that if any were not casten out, it followeth not that the Church leaveth off to be a Church, and must be separated from. But our brethren's practice in New England is, if any Church do not cast out such as deserved to be cast out, to noncommunion them, and declare them to be no Churches of Christ, and so they must be separated from; which can be upon no ground, but because they maintain a Church to be no true Church consisting of false matter, and visibly unregenerate; and would M. H. have Church-Communion kept with such? yea his arguments first and second, which are both but one, (though he find out four, where there are scarce three) prove them to be no visible Church, for he must stand by this as his own.

These to whom Christ is head and king by the influence of politick guidance, and motion of the head as leige subjects, are the only fit matter of the visible Church, and the only true visible Church.

But such as deserve to be casten out, and are not casten out, yea are owned still as Church-members, are not such to whom Christ is head and king. Ergo such leave off to be members and are not a visible Church; the proposition and assumption both are M. Hookers. I confess when an answer cannot be taken away, it is a compendious way, to say not one word to it, but simply, the answer doth wholly miss the mark. M. H. must say a Church of false matter is no Church, or then with us, a society professing the pure doctrine of Christ, though the members be wicked, is a true Church.

CHAP. VII.

MAster Hooker part. 1. ch. 2. pag. 19. passeth in silence the arguments of the way of the Churches of New England, except a gentle hint he hath at the first, but he omitteth the nerves thereof, only he bringeth four arguments of his own, in my apprehension, inferior, not a little, to the arguments of learned M. Cotton, it was wisdom so to do; only in the place pag. 15. he giveth us a short list of his visible Saints, we are (saith he) from rational charity, to say and hope, and so are bound to conceive they are Saints, (converts and internally justified) so Judas, Magus, Ananias, &c. (though hidden hypocrites) were such; and therefore our Savior proceedeth with such, not as God who knoweth the heart, but in a Church way as these who Judge the tree by the fruit; the Church cannot judge of bid things, nor censure them.

Answ. 1. Then the Saints, faithful, brethren, temples of the holy Ghost, at Rome, Ephesus must be proven to be visible Saints from the Scripture, from such a visible Saintship, as our Savior and the Apostles saw in these goodly ungodly Saints, Judas, Magus, &c. for if these titles conclude that they were internally converted, and chosen to grace and glory, &c. as Ephs. 1. 3. 1 Thess. 5. 10. 2 Thess. 13. 14. 1 Cor. 3. 16. as they do, then must all and every visible member of these Churches be visible elects, and predestinate to glory, which if our brethren say of all the members of all these visible Churches, suppose Magus and Judas had been among them, it is easy for any to prove the contrary. 2. but if so be that these titles prove they were all internally converted, and that our visible Church must be such, or else they are falsely constituted, then how shall Demas, Magus, find room in the visible Church, as true members since they were not such? if it be said that the argument which proveth that they weremore, may well prove the less, and that they had all the visible Saintship that Magus, Judas had, we shall grant that; but then you must stand by this argument.

Such as were the members of the Churches of Corinth, Rome, Ephesus, Thessalonica, &c. by these places cited by the discipline-book of new England, chap. 3. sect. 3. pag. 56. 57. 1 Cor. 12. 27. Ephs. 2. 22. 1 Cor. 3. 16, 17. 2 Cor. 11. 2. 1 Cor. 1. 2. Galat. 1. 2. Math. 16. 16. to 19. such ought the members of our Church visible to be, or then they are constituted of false matter.

But the members of these Churches by these places were really and internally converted and justified. Ergo our Churches visible must also consist of these that are really and internally converted and justified, or then they are constituted of false matter; but the conclusion is false and absurd, for so Christ and the Apostles erred even proceeding in a Church way in admitting Judas, Magus, to be members; for sure they were not internally and really converted and justified: and yet M H. maketh them true members, and his visible Saints, it was wisdom therefore to M. H. to bury these arguments, and to contradict his own book of discipline, which page 57 saith, that Christ taxeth the pastors, by whose connivencei the man wanting the wedling garment came in, friend how camest thou hither? M. H. saith, nay they were not taxed, that man conveyed it so cunningly that only the master of the feast pe •• ived it, others did not discover it, page 29. but all dependeth on the making good the assumption, that these places prove that they were inwardly and really converted, which I make good by these reasons, 1. the Holy Ghost expressly saith, they were the habitation of God through the spirit. temples of the holy Ghost, espoused to Christ as a chaste virgin; ergo they were really such: to say that Paul speaketh according to the judgment of charity only, and in a Church way, is to beg the question, there is not a word of any such judgment of charity in the Scripture and our brethren have no law to add to the Scripture, to help their own cause. 2. If you adhere to this argument, you must say with M. H. that Christ hoped and was bound to conceive by the fruits of Judas his life, that Judas was a Saint, and might have some seeds of some spiritual, work of God in his soul, and yet Christ saith, have not I chosen you twelve, and one of you hath a devil? and this he knew from the beginning, John 13. 11, 18. because Jesus not as God, but in a Church-way dealt with Judas and such: I remit it to any man, if Christ failed against charity, except he believed Judas to be a convert, before he betrayed his hypocrisy; what warrant in the Scripture for this? 3. What ground that the Apostles in charity believed and said that Demas, Magus, were converts, temples of the holy Ghost, chosen to life, as the Ephesians? 1. 3. and Thessalonians 2 Th • s. 2. 13. or then they had sinned in admitting them to the visible Church, and baptizing them. 4. Whereas he saith the Church judgeth not of things hid; whether the Churches of New England do not judge and heavily censure (though they will not give it that name) all the baptized in their Church, whom they exclude from Church-membership and the Lord's supper, all their life, as if they were Pagans, because they have not so much charity as to believe them to be visible converts; judge reader. But (say they) this will not prove that they were internally and really converted, because Paul saith so of them; to which I say, then upon the same account must we expone these places Ephes. 2. 4. God rich in mercy hath loved us, and when we (Paul and converted Jews and Gentiles) were dead in sins hath quickened us together in Christ, in the judgment of charity and in a Church way only. 6. and hath raised us up together, and hath made us fit together in heavenly places in a Church-way. verse 10 we are his workmanship created unto good works, and we who verse 12. were sometimes without Christ, strangers to the Common-wealth of Israel, 13. are now made near in the blood of Christ: and verse 18. we who were strangers, have access, by Christ, through one spirit unto the Father, only in a Church-way, by politick guidance of our head Christ: and the like must be said of all the real internal work of the spirit upon the hearts of all the Saints at Ephesus, Colossae, Corinth, Thessalonica, &c. so they were by this reason light in the Lord quickened, had Christ dwelling in them by faith, were sealed, translated from death to life, &c. in a Church way, and from none of these places can we conclude that they were really and internally converted, for all these places and real works of grace must agree to Judas, Magus, and to all such visible Saints, because all Churches visible rightly constitute must be made up, by this argument, of such visible Saints, else they are false in the matter, and not according to the pattern of Apostolic Churches.

3. The assumption is made out also thus, as the Apostle calleth them the body of Christ, the habitation of God, temples of the holy ghost, so also he blesseth God and rendereth thanks to him, that had chosen to life the Ephesians, blessed them with all spiritual blessings in Christ, bestowed on them adoption, redemption, forgiyenesse of sins, the inheritance of glory, Ephes. 2. 13, 4. &c. ordained the Thessalonians not to wrath, but to obtain salvation by our Lord Jesus Christ, 1 Thess. 5. 9. 4. had chosen them to salvation through Sanctification of the spirit and belief of the truth, 2 Thess. 2. 13. and upon this buildeth their comfort and faith, I Thes. 54. 9, 10. 11. so Coloss. 1. 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14. now what joy, comfort, faith, thanksgiving can have place, if these places be not understood of such real internal graces, as election, conversion, &c. as Judas and Magus neither have nor can have? other ways all the hypocrites, as Magus and Judas, have a like lively consolation with all the chosen of God; and Paul must bless God, because he had chosen, called, justified, &c. such as Magus and Judas. 4. I wonder the way of the Churches should cite 1 Cor. 3. 16. for visible Saintship which dependeth on the judgment of charity, for the place is evidently of real converts, know ye not, that ye are the temple of God, and that the spirir of God dwelleth in you? is this I pray you, the knowledge of charity, which is fallible, and may mistake? nay this, and the like places 2 Cor. 13. 5. and the 1 John 2. 3. 1 John 3. 14. know ye not that Christ dwelleth in you &c. by this we know that we know him, &c. are brought by our Divines to prove against Papists, that we may be infallibly persuaded that we are in the state of grace, and know ourselves to be temples of the Holy Ghost, not by the fallible and erring judgment of charity; which we never extend, but to other then ourselves, but by an infallible certainty, though not of faith, yet of supernatural sense and divine persuasion by which we know infallibly ourselves to be in Christ, 2. as to that argument, such should our Churches be in their members constituent, as the Church of Rome, Corinth, Ephesus, were, when Paul writ to them, and after they were now constituted and grown, it is most false. It is just as if Aristotle would say and write to some of his disciples that had studied some years under him, you are excellently skilled in the knowledge of the first matter, of motion and time; and another should infer, ergo there be no Academies on earth rightly constituted, where the Scholars are not excellently skilled in the knowledge of the first matter, of motion, of t • me, before they be admitted members of the Academie • now the argument should be thus;

Such as were the Churches of Rome, Corinth, Ephesus, &c. as to their members constituent, before they were admitted to Church membership, such should our visible Churches be according to their members constituent before the members be admitted to Church membership; true, but the Churches of Rome, Corinth, Ephesus, &c. as to their members constituent, were before they were admitted to Church membership, visible converts in the judgment of charity to the Apostles, and planters, it is most false and can never be proven.

And to argue from grown and planted Churches, after Paul had begotten the Corinthians as a father, 1 Cor. 4. 15. to prove that our Churches should be such in their constitution, is to say, such is a tall-tree now, ergo also before it was sown it was not a seed, but a tall-tree: so the adversaries would not be content we should argue thus, such as was the Church of Sardis in its constitution, after it is now falling, such should ours be in its members constituent, before they be admitted members of the visible Church: but the Church of Sardis, for the most part, consisted of such members as had a name they lived, and were dead, and had visibly defiled their garments, a few only remaining visible converts, as verse 1. compared with verse 4. ergo our Churches should be such, as to the members constituent. Such arguing is as good as that of New England's, and yet Christ had a golden candlestick in Sardis, and walked among them, and held them as stars in his right hand, Rev. 1. 20. Now the conclusion should be against them, and the chief basis of all is, that the keys are given to such, Mat. 16. 16. to 19. as are blessed and enlightened, as believing Peter was, who was not blessed for the profession that Christ was the Son of the living God; for Judas was that way blessed who held out but a verbal profession.

CHAP. VIII.

THat men are first converted visibly before they be Church members is a gross mistake, it leaneth on this, That the Church which Christ hath in his Gospel instituted, to which he hath committed the keys of his Kingdom, the power of binding and loosing, the tables and seals, is a company of Saints, a combination of godly faithful men. So the Church of N. England. From this it must follow that there is an instituted visible Church void of Pastors, which converteth souls before there be pastors, and so there must be Sons and daughters before there be Fathers and Pastors to beget them to God, as Ministerial Fathers; and they must be fed before they have Pastors to feed them, and if they be converted before they be in Church-fellowship, and Pastors must be nurse-Fathers to feed and confirm these who were born before their father had being. The contrary whereof Paul of the formed Church of the Galatians, that he did travel in birth till Christ be formed in them, Gal. 4. 15. and when he wrote the Epistle to the Corinthians, they were framed a visible Church, and many not yet reconciled to God; and yet in that case he saith, 1 Cor. 4. 15. Though ye have ten thousand instructors in Christ, y •• have ye not many fathers, for in Christ Jesus have I begotten you through the Gospel. Now that he begat them all and everyone, and made, them visible converts, before he was their Church-Father, or they in Churchfellowship, where is it said or dreamed, by any color of truth? yea 2 Cor. 5. 20, now then we are ambassadors for Christ, at though God did beseech you by us, we pray you be reconciled to God, ergo this supposeth some state of non-reconciliation in many Church members, Rom. 12. 2. be not conform to this world, but be ye transformed by the renewing of your mind. Ephes. 4. 22. that ye put off concerning the former conversation, the old man, which is corrupt according to the deceitful lusts, and be renewed in the spirit of your mind, Coloss. 3. 8. now lay you aside all these. 16. putting on the new man: all which and the like places directed to visible converts, must all be exponed without exception, of second conversion and of reiterating of conversion and reconciliation of these that are already converted and reconciled, which no Scripture can persuade; and by the like order, the children must be born and vsibly converted, before they were in the womb of their visible mother who conceived and bare them, contrary to 1 Cor. 3. 15. nor can the mother be anything but a nurse, nor any other in regard of bringing forth, but a barren mother, which bringeth not forth twins, contrary to Cant. 4. 2. Isai. 54. 1, 2, 3.

2. The Scripture holdeth forth their pastors as pastors are sent to open the eyes of the blind, to turn them from darkness to light, and from the power of Satan unto God, that they may receive forgiveness of sins, Act. 26. 18. yea and the Scripture teacheth that we receive the spirit by the hearing of faith from pastors, as sent and in office, such as were the officed prophets, whose feet were pleasant upon the mountains, as is clear, Rom, 10. 14, 15. compared with Isai. 52. 7. Nah. 1. 15.

3. If many be brought in to the visible Church and the house of wisdom, who are fools and serving the world, as Math. 22. 8, 9. Prov. 9. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5. upon God's revealed intention and the aim and design of pastors, that they may be converted, and perfected by the work of the ministry, then are they not supposed to be converted before they be brought in to the visible Church; for God cannot intend that they be converted and regenerate of new, if their conversion and regeneration go before any such intention; but the former is true 1. from the nature of the visible Church, the office-house of wisdom, in which God intendeth to make fools wise unto salvation. 2. From the preaching of the Law and Gospel, the only means of conversion, whereas if all be presupposed to be converted, before they come into the house of Wisdom, and the supper of the King, they should from pastors hear no doctrine of Law humiliation to fit them for Christ, but pastors should speak to them all as to converts, as to broken reeds, and to sheep that discernt the voice of Christ, as to temples of the Holy Ghost, as to persons regenerated, justified, predestinated to life and to glo •… ry; yea, and if a pastor preach to any of the flock as known now to be yet in th • state of nature; that preaching is not by any command of God given to him as a pastor. Nor. 3. from the revealed intention and command of God laid upon the Pastors and Ministers, whose aim is to endeavor the conversion of all, to espouse them to Christ, to have them put off the old man, to have them rise from the dead, and that the Gospel be not hid to them, nor the savor of death unto death, as it is to many in the visible Church, 2 Cor. 4. 3, 4. 2 Cor. 2. 14, 15, 16. John. 12. 37, 38, 39. by M. H. his way.

M. Hookeer par. 1. c. 2, p. 31. Answer the proposition faileth. These who are converts in the Judgment of charity, may yet, in God's intention, be brought in to the Church, that they may be truly converted.

Ans. M. Hooker leaveth out the chief word, wherein standeth the force of my argument, he speaketh nothing of God's revealed intention and command to call in fools that they may be made wise, and he frameth his answer, as if I had argued from the bare intention and hidden decree of God. But I find that M. Hooker utterly mistaketh the distinction of God's decree, and of his approving will, and therefore he taketh for one and the same, the decree or intention of God (from which I bring not my argument) and the revealed intention of God, or his commanding will: the ignorance of which is a stumbling to Arminians, and Socinians, and to M. Hooker, who, as we shall h • ar, goeth on with them, but I judge it one mistake in judgment in that godly man, but no heretical spirit, and therefore his defenders and followers would take heed to it. For I grant all that M. Hooker answereth, but it is to no purpose, and quite beside the mark, and leaveth the argument untuitched (which is too ordinary to that pious man) for no doubt God in his decree and secret intention may intend, by the Ministry of his servants, the true and real conversion of many hypocrites, such as are no less unconverted, then Magus and Demas; for he hath mercy, on whom he will, Rom. 9. 17. but according to this way, these who are converts in the judgment of charity (he should say only converts in that judgment) are not according to God's revealed inten • ion and approving will or command taken in by Pastors, that they may be really converted: for God giveth, in no sort, this command to pastors in his revealed intention. See that ye admit no fools to wisdoms table or within wisdoms house, but such only as you believe in charity are real converts, and both called and chosen, contrary to Prov. 9. 1, 2, 3, 4. Math. 22. 8, 9, 14. Ergo by my revealed intention and command you are not to intend their conversion, but to presuppose that they were already converted: other ways, if the Lord by his revealed intention and command will have such hypocrites who are but nominal saints, brought in that they may be truly converted, there must follow two contradictory intentions revealed in God: for the Lord's command to Pastors is (I command you to preach to these who are converts in the judgment of charity, that upon my intention, they may be truly converted: And also I command you, my pastors, preach to no Church members, that upon my intention, they may be converted, because you are not to preach to any as pastors, but to such as ye know are already converted, according to my revealed intention and will. M. Hooker seeing this addeth.

But if M. Rutherford mean that the Church doeth of purpose receive them into the Church to be converted, then it is cross to his own tenet, and a person may be received to the seals of the covenant, who doeth not notify that he hath faith, nay the Church may receive them to the seals, whom she knoweth hath no right to the seals, for she knoweth they are not invisible members, which in M. Rutherfurds judgment only giveth them right.

Ans. It is not cross to my tenet, that a person, such as Demas and Magus may be received to the seals, and yet they do not notify they have saving faith and internal conversion, for my tenet is that the Church can only judge of visible walking and profession in point of admission or not admission to seals, and in that point the Church hath nothing to do to judge whether they have faith saving or not, none can partake savingly of the seals for their own personal salvation and without sin, but these only who have saving faith, but the Church may admit without sin multitudes, who eat and drink their own damnation, 1 Cor. 11. 26, 27. and yet pass no sentence of signs notifyng faith or no faith, internal conversion or no internal conversion upon them.

2 M. Hooker knoweth that M. R. differenceth between being admitted to the visible Church, and to the seals, and yet be repeateth my tenet, as if I confounded these, because he confoundeth them himself. Whereas M. H. saith ergo.

3 The Church may receive to the seals whom she knoweth hath no right Ecclesiastical to them: it followeth not; for upon the Churches part, the right is good to confer the seals, upon the knowledge of notifying signs, but of signs in order to conversion or not conversion, that is the place of the master Christ to Judge, not of servants, in this case before they be admitted members. But that the Church may admit to the seals whom she knoweth not whether they have right internal for their own personal salvation, that I teach, and can make good from Scripture, Act. 8. 13 Math. 22. 12. 1 Cor. 11. 26, 27, 30. now I say, that its the place of Christ, not of servants to judge of the conversion or not conversion of members, not because men may, in no sort, judge of the conversion of or non conversion of others; for in these cases we may judge of the conversion of others. 1. in order to speak to their spiritual state, as converts, or not, Act. 17. 22. 1 Cor. 3. 1. (2) in the cases of duties of love, suppose we err upon the matter, as Math. 10. 42. 1 Joh. 3. 14. (3) these that try intrants to the Ministry are to judge authoritatively whether they be converts to them or not, 1 Tim. 3. 10. 2 Tim. 2. 2. but to judge so before their admission wants warrant of Scripture: Pastors as pastors converted none, yea according to the command of Christ are to intend to convert none at all, by M. H. his way.

4. Where M. R. teacheth, that to be invisible members giveth only right to the seals, I know not.

5. I teach indeed that the Church may of purpose receive in to the visible Church, who are known members of the Catholic visible Church, and manifestly gracious, upon a purpose, that they may, in a particular congregation, be confirmed not converted. But that is nothing to our point, but M. Hooker holdeth that pastors as pastors are called of God to convert no Church-members, for they presuppose they were before converted: hence I say.

• 1. Pastors do either as pastors called of God preach to Church-members, to convert them?
• 2. Or then as pastors called of God, they do not preach to Church-members, to convert them. This contradiction is inevitable.

If the former be said. I gain the point, and M. Hooker must yield the cause.

If the latter be said.

Then must pastors as pastors called of God preach to Church-members, as some other officers, either as ruling Elders, which confoundeth the preaching Elder, and the not preaching Elder, contrary to the 1 Cor. 12. 28. 1 Tim. 5. 17. or (2) as Doctors, which again confoundeth the teaching, and the exhorting Elder; contrary to Rom. 12. 7, 8. Ephes. 4. 11. or (3) as Deacons, which is popish: for deacons serve tables, but attend not to word and prayer, Act. 6. 2, 3, 4. or they preach to them, as private Christians, and unofficed persons, upon an intention to convert Church-members: for if only they preach as pastors to confirm them, not to convert them, they do not fulfill their Ministry which they have received of the Lord, in all poi • ts, as they should, Colos. 4 17. then they use not the word as pastors, for all uses, for reproof, for correction, for instruction, for righteousness, 2 Tim. 3. 16. nor do they as pastors, preach in season and out of season, by reproving, rebuking, exhorting. (2) Then must all pastoral feeding formally be in confirming only, not in feeding, nor begetting to Christ, nor in restoring the lost, nor in bringing again the driven away, nor in all these five points, Ezek. 35. 4. which are ascribed to Christ, who feedeth in his sent pastors, ver. 15. 16. Micah 5. ver. 4. nor in delivering the sheep from the Lion and the wild beasts. Now this distinctions should be proved from the word of truth. 2. Then Pastors as watchmen give not warning of the sword, and of dying in sin, as Ezech. 3. 16, 17, 18, 19 20. Ezech. 33. 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, &c. but as unofficed men, and private Christians. But that, way all the citizens of the city shall be made watchmen, which the Prophet Ezekiel and Jeremiah condemn, Ierem. 23. Ezech. 33. But it may be said, if Pastors as Pastors must instruct gain-sayers of the truth, as 2 Tim. 2. 25. then may gain-sayers of the truth be Church-members; but the latter is absurd.

Answ. It followeth not, this only followeth, Pastors may instruct gain-sayers and unconverted men, and intend their conversion in a Church-way, by preaching and other ways, viz. as pastors, but if these gain-sayers were Pagans and visible opposing Jews, they are not Church-members, nor can they be admitted while they remain such.

CHAP. IX.

MIstakes in judgment and practice do not hinder men from being visible saints.

Answ. It is too loosely spoken, without further explanation. All heresies that are works of the flesh, as Socinianisms, &c. are called mistakes in judgment; and this may infer toleration of all Religions, and that men corrupt in their judgment may be truly godly; whereas soundness in the faith is a special part of godliness, nor can a good conscience and a sound faith be separated; see Mr Gillespie, Miscellanie quest. chap. 12. pag. 142, 143. and consider whether then most of the Sectaries of our time may not be members of visible Churches at least; such a weighty point in one word, should not have been determined, nor can it be a sound inference.

Third Inference.

The holding of the visible Churches in England to be true Churches (suppose it were an error, as it is not) doth not hinder men from being fit matter for a visible Church.

Answ. If it be no error, to say that the Churches of England are true Churches, then is it true; and why is it then unlawful to enter in Church-fellowship with them; the contrary of which Mr H. proveth par. 1. ch. 12. pag. 32, 33. 2. Why doth Mr H. teach that the seals ought not to be gven to Church-members of old England of approved piety, except they be enchurched their way: this saith that Mr H. holdeth that all that are not enchurched their way are no Church-members.

Whether Mr Rutherford doth unjustly • mpute to Separatists that they hold that only such as are effectually called, justified and sanctified, to be the only matter of a rightly constituted Church.

Mr Hooker par. 1. ch. 2. pag. 20, 21, 22, &c. complaineth of Mr Rutherford that he dealeth not fairly and candidly with the brethren of the separation and others, and saith that they teach that only internally justified ones are the matter of the true visible Church; and he alledgeth passages out of Mr Ainsworth and Mr Robinson, who though they speak in too narrow expressions, yet mind no such thing; for then they should be all chosen and elected that are members of the visible Church; which in words they openly deny.

Answ. I am conscious to myself of nothing, but a fair and Christian dealing with these godly men against whom I writ, and all that Mr H. bringeth, citations from Mr Ainsworth and Mr Robinson, I acknowledge in words saith the contrary of what I allege, and I know it to be so; but is it anything against pious moderation, that I prove that their arguments contradict their conclusion? and that one place of M. Robinson contradicteth another; is it against pious moderation that Chamier, Pareus, Junius, Ames, object to Bellarmine and to Papists (though I judge there be some difference in the matter) contradictions, that they writ things contrary to their own grounds, and to things which they in open words peremp • orily deny, as Mr Hooker speaketh, pag. 21, I confess if I make these contradictions not to appear, I wrong them either willfully, which were in me wickedness; or if of ignorance, it is much weakness and more.

But 1. as Mr Hooker bringeth citations from Mr Answorth, Mr Robinson, why doth he not from his own writings bring the like? for I allege the same against his own way; for the way of the Churches of New England S • ct. 3. ch. 3. pag. 56, 57. faith more then the brethren of the separation eve • did say. The Lord Jesus is the head of the Church ev • n the visible Church, and the visible Church is the body of Christ Jesus, 1 Cor. 12. 12. the habitation of God by the Spirit; Ephes. 2. 22. the members of the visible. Church are said to be the temples of the holy Ghost, 1 Cor. 3. 16. espoused to Christ, as a chaste virgin, 2 Cor. 11. 2. Sons and daughters of the Lord God almighty, 2 Cor. 6. 18. how can they be members of the body, or the spouse of Christ, &c. ex cept they in charitable disor • tion be ( 〈◊〉 indeed the holy Ghost describeth them to be) Saints by calling? 1 Cor. 1. 2. and faithful brethren, Gal. 1. 2. and that not by external profession, for these are too high styles for hypocrites, but in some measure of sincerity and truth.

Let that be answered; These who not only in point of charity, and not only in external profession, but in some measure of sincerity and truth must be the habitation of God by the Spirit, the temple of the holy Ghost &c. or then they cannot be admitted members of the visible Church, must be internally justified, sanctified, and chosen, before they can be members of the Church visible; but such must all admitted members be, by these places cited by the Churches of N. England. M. H. or his defendants choose what they please, and answer, and I shall be cleared.

2. From this passage, by the way, observe another argument of the Church of N. England. ibid.

Such should be members admitted to the visible Church, as are exhorted to be followers of Paul as dear children, Ephes. 4. 1. so must the arguments be.

I assume; but all visible converts or non converts, all known drunkards, harlots, Atheists, &c. are exhorted to be followers of Paul, yea that exhortation obligeth all the known enemies of God in the visible Church, to be renewed in the spirit of their mind, to be converted from dumb idols to serve the living God, for all are exhorted to obey the whole Gospel, hear it, even the scoffing Athenians, Act. 17.

2. I argue from the fifth argument These cannot be judged fit matter for the visible Church, and con •• i • uting and edifying thereof, who are more fit for the ruin and destruction thereof; such as all hypocrites who will leave their first love, and destroy the Church.

I assume, but all latent hyp • crites, such as Judas and Magus, as well as open hypocrites, are more fit for the ruin and destruction of the Church, and will leave their first love.

If it be said that latent hypocrites appearing to us to be Godly and converts, may be judged (mistakingly and erroneously) to be fit materials for the constituting and edifying of the Church, are men (1) made members of Christ's body, and Christ made the head of Magus Iu as, not by Christ's command so much as by men's erroneous judgment. (2 Then the visible Church hath all its ess •… nce and nature founded upon judgment that may err, and upon no certain▪ rule of the word. (3) Then should the Apostles have taken more time, and advised more maturely, before they made Magus, Ananias members of the visible Church.

3. All the arguments brought by M. Hooker and the way of the Churches of N. England and Separatists, do conclude they must be really and internally sanctified, before they can be such members as are in the Church of Rome, Ephesus, &c. and M. Hooker putteth not a finger to them to answer these that I alleged.

4. Let him answer that which M. Robinson hath pag. 97. all the Churches that ever the Lord planted consisted of only good, as the Church of the Angels in heaven, and of mankind in paradise. God hath also the same ends in creating and restoring his Churches; and if it were the will of God that persons notoriously wicked should be admitted into the Church, God should directly cross himself and his own ends, and should receive into the visible covenant of grace, such as were out of the visible state of grace, and should plant such in his Church, for the glory of his name, as served for no other use then to cause his name to be blasphemed, pag. 98. In planting of the first Church in the seed of the woman, there were only Saints without any mixture; now all Churches are of one nature and essential constitution, and the first is the rule of the rest.

Ans. I now perceive that M. Hooker and his followers in this point defend M. Robinsin and the Separatists, as M. Hooker chap. 2. pag. 20, 21. but I must say these words (thus we have cleared the expressions of our brethren of the separation) must be an owning of their cause.

Ans. But M. Hooker should also clear M. Hooker and his own from contradictions, as well as M. Robinson: for M. Robinson's argument must be thus, or nothing.

Such as is the essential constitution of the first Church in paradise, in Adam and Eve not yet fallen in sin, and the Church of the Angels in heaven, before their fall, such must be the constitution of all our visible Churches now, for all Churches are of one nature and essential constitution, saith he. I assume.

But the Church in paradise, and of Angels before either of them fell, consisted of only such as were inwardly and effectually sanctified.

Ergo such must be the constitution of all our visible Churches now, to wit, they must consist of only inwardly and effectually sanctified, and free of all sin.

But the conclusion is absurd, for if so, our visible Churches must be as clean from sin, as the Church of Angels and of our first parents were, when they were first created, and yet M. Robinson saith pag. 112. for we doubt not but the purest Church upon earth may consist of good and bad in God's eye, of such as are truly sanctified and faithful, and of such who only for a time, put on the outside and vizard of sanctity; so M. Robinson: the wit of man shall not clear these expressions from contradictions.

2. If it be not the approving and commanding will of God (for of that will given to men who planteth Churches, he must speak, or he speaketh nothing) that the wicked be admitted into the Church, then it is not God's will that Magus, Demas be admitted into the Church: but this latter is absurd, and contrary to both Mr. Robinson Iustif. of Separat. pag. 12. and to Mr. Hookers Survey, par. 1. ch. 2. pag. 23, 24. and contrary to the Scripture, Act. 2. 38, 39, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46. compared with Act. 5. 1, 2. Act. 8. 12, 13, 14. Mat. 22. 8, 9, 10, 12. How is Mr. Robinson now cleared if it be said ay? but Mr. Robinson said, it is not God's will that persons notoriously (or visibly wicked, should be admitted into the Church. He said not as you repeat his words, leaving out notoriously) It is not God's will that persons wicked should be admitted into the Church. I answer it, but this he must say, or he saith nothing at all. For 1. if it were God's will that wicked persons should be admitted to the Church, then should he cross himself and his own end, because wicked persons do no less cross God and his end, the glory of his name, then the notoriously (and visibly) wicked; for both cause his name to be blasphemed, and the force of his argument cannot lie in the notoriety or visibility of crossing of God's end, but in the very crossing of it in itself, see Mr. Ball.

3 God's creating of the first visible Church of Angels and men without sin, is not a binding and commanding rule to pastors and to the Church to admit none to the visible Church, but such as God created members of the first visible Church free of all sin, or because there is a standing obliging rule to Pastors and the Church, such as this (admit not in the Church of Christ professed Pagans as members thereof) but to God there was no rule but his free will by which he created the first visible Church of only saints, without any mixture.

Mr. Robinson and Mr. Hooker both do wildly misconceive (to say no more) the distinction of the Lord his discerning will or his eternal purpose, and his commanding and revealed will, if they suppose (as their reasoning doth necessarily argue their mind to the judicious Reader) with Socinians and Arminians that every sin is a crossing of the Lord's end and purpose; and that; 2. God decrceth and intendeth many things that shall never be; 3. that God may be frustrated of his ends and purposes, and miss the mark in his decrees, though they, I judge, be innocent of any such heresy.

4. If by the will of God be here understood, the commanding will of God which forbiddeth sin, and enjoineth what is right, as Mr. Hooker and his, who approve of this constitution of the Separatists with Mr. Robinson, must do, then must the Lord in commanding his pastors and Church to receive Judas, Magus, as fit materials of the visible Church, as Mr. Hocker teacheth pag. 23. expressly command sin, which is blasphemy, because the holy Lord must command to receive into the visible covenant of grace, such as were out of the visible-state of grace; and such to be planted in his Church, for the glory of his name, as served for no other use then to cause his name to be blasphemed.

CHAP. X.

MAster Hooker, pag. 20. The pinch of the difference lieth in this, whether such as walk in a way of profaneness, or remain pertinaciously obstinate in some wickedness, though otherways professing and practicing the things of the Gospel, have any allowance from Christ, or may be accounted fit matter according to the terms of the Gospel to constitute a Church, this is that which is controverted.

Answ: This is a disorderly stating the Question after battl given. 2. This pinch of a difference of men walking in pagan profaneness (for of such the question must be) whether they should be counted fit matter to constitute a visible Church, though otherwise they profess and practice the things of the Gospel, cometh to this, whether walkers professedly after their Idol-God's, and yet professing and practicing the Gospel, should be counted fit matter of the visible Church: We answer; Such are not the fit matter of the visible Church; and yet are not to be suddenly and wholly debarred from being ordinary hearers, so they profess their willingness to hear. 2. If the question be of such as are baptized and live within the Church as ordinary hearers, who practice and profess the things of the Gospel, we say these are already within the Church by their baptism and profession, and in regard they remain pertinaciously wicked, though baptized and so professing, they should be unchurched and cast out.

3. That any such as obstinately remain wicked have allowance from Christ, that is, a command to constitute a visible Church as members, is all one as to say, whether commandeth Christ men to be members of the Church, and to be also pertinaciously wicked: which is no plous question, for it is whether doth Christ allow men to be hypocrites? Or if by allowance from Christ Mr Hooker mean, whether doth Christ allow and command the Pastors to own obstinate wicked men, as members, because they profess and practice the things of the Gospel? We answer, they ought not to admit or baptize Pagans of that sort, and if they be baptized, and so wickedly they profess, they ought to cast them out.

CHAP. XI.

MAster Hooker, par. 1. ch. 2. pag. 25, 26. Q. What is required of a man of years to fit him in the judgment of the Church, for baptism, that and so much is required to make him a member.

But visible holiness is required to fit a man of years to be baptized.

The consequence admitteth no denial, because to be baptized, and to be admitted a member, infer each other.

The assumption is proved by the constant practice of John the Baptist, Matth. 3. 5, 6. where Jerusalem, Judea, Scribes, people and soldiers came to be baptized of him, they confessed their sins, it was a confession that amounted to repentance; so John verse 7. bring forth fruits worthy of repentance and amendment of life.

Luke 3. 6. What shall we do? the Apostle answers, Acts 2. 38. repent and be baptized; the works of repentance and the aim of baptism do import as much; remission of sins calleth for such competent knowledge of Christ, as may make way for the sight of the need of a Savior, and also of a going to him.

Answ. This argument may pass current with these that deny Infant-baptism, which Mr H. and his do not; but if to be baptized say that the baptized is a member of the Church, must not either the infants of Church-members be not baptized with them, and so no members of the Church, which is strange? or may I not argue thus with Anabaptists against Mr Hooker? What is required of a man of years to fit him for baptism in the judgment of the Church, is also required to make him one within the covenant of grace. But only to be born of believing parents maketh a man of years in the judgment of the Church, to be within the covenant of grace.

Ergo, only to be born of visible parents maketh a man of years fit to be baptized.

The assumption is clear, because that God be our God and the God of our seed, Gen. 17. maketh both parents and children within the covenant, yea also within the visible Church, as the Church of New England truly teacheth, and giveth them right to baptism; and when Egypt shall be the people of God, as is foretold, Isai. 19. 25. Egypt is the Church visible, and all their seed, when they so profess, except these two be different, to be professedly God's people, and to be a visible Church, which cannot be said; and therefore the argument presupposeth a falsehood, and beggeth the question: that there is one thing required of a man of years born within the visible Church, to fit him in the judgment of the Church for baptism and Church-membership, and another to fit an infant for baptism and Church-member-ship, when an infant born within the visible Church, by his birth is fitted both for Church-membership in the judgment of charity, and for baptism; and so the argument proveth that the children of believing parents must have some new qualification before they can be received members of the Church visible; and yet it is granted their birth made them members of the Church visible; so they are members and not members.

2. If to be baptized and to be admitteed members, infer each other, to Mr Hooker saith, ergo, all that are baptized are members of the visible Church, and all members of the visible Church must be baptized. How then doth the Churches of New England refuse multitudes whom they know to be baptized, and came from England to be Church-members? 3. See how Mr Hooker maketh out the assumption; to wit, from the constant course and practice of John the Baptist, Math. 3. 5, 6. in which he layeth this as a ground, that in all Judea and Jerusalem (for John baptized them all, Mark 10. 5.) there was no visible Church, no visible Saints, no converts till John made them such by baptism. I hold that Christ was born in the visible Church, and that Simon, Anna, Zachariah, Elizabeth, and many others were visible Church-members before John baptized them, and that the Church of the Jews and of baptized Christians were both the same visible Church, the one believing professedly in him who was to come, the other in him who was already come.

2. He presumeth that by John's baptizing these were framed up in particular Independent congregations, by a Churchcovenant, for this is brought to prove the frame of visible Churches of New England by Mr Hooker: but how the text speaketh this, who can see, except Mr Hooker himself? for all Judea and Jerusalem were baptized, Mark 1. 5.

4: How proveth he that all the baptized were visible converts that came to John?

Those that confessed their sins, by such a confession as John required, to wit, which amounted to repentance, and bringing forth fruits worthy of amendment, these were visible converts, before they were baptized.

Yea say I, if the confession amounted so high in the practice of all Judea, as the precept and command of John required, then all the land of Judea, Jerusalem, and all the region round about Jerusalem, who were all baptized, Matth. 3. 5, 6. Mark 1. 4, 5. all the people, Luke 4. 21. were not only visible saints, but did all really repent and bring forth fruits worthy amendment of life: for Mr. Hooker his argument is not from the people's practice, but from John's command. Bring forth fruits &c. so Mr. Hooker. They confessed their sins, v. 6. it was such a confession as amounted to repentance; that I confess is a sea of Charity to all the visible saints. Now hear how M. Hooker exponeth their practiced confession, The Baptist so interprets is, bring forth fruits worthy of repentance and amendment of life. Now sure John commanded never such a confession, as Magus the witch made Act. 8. nor a visible repentance such as maketh a visible saint, but he commanded a real internal repentance, otherwise saith he, if ye bring not forth good fruit, Matth. 3. ver. 10. see your doom, every tree that bringeth not forth good fruit is hewn down and cast into the fire.

And therefore if the argument stand thus, such a confession 〈◊〉 John the Baptist commandeth Matth. 3. 6, 7. such must be in all before John the Baptist and the Church can lawfully baptize them, or admit them to the visible Church, otherwise they sin who baptize and receive into the visible Church visible hypocrites.

But John the Baptist requireth real and internal repentance, without which the baptized should be cast into hell fire, Mat. 3. 10.

But the conclusion is so gross, that Mr. Hooker could not dream of it.

But the truth is, the precept of Repentance is not given to the Jews, so as obedience thereunto must be necessarily required before John the Baptist can lawfully and without sin admit them to baptism, and into the Christian visible Church, but for their either more personal and fruitful receiving of the Sacrament, or far rather, that they may be saved from the wrath to come, Matth. 3. 10. Luk. 3. 7, 8.

5. And as to that Act. 2. 38. what shall we do? if it conclude anything it must have this meaning, men and Brethren what shall we do, before ye can own us as visible saints, and baptize us without your hazard of casting pearls before swine? This is to do violence to the word of God.

But these words (what shall we do?) must be all one with the like of Saul, Act. 9. 6. and of the Jailor, Act. 16. 30. what shall we do to be saved and to obtain life everlasting, and a due room in the visible Church of grace here, and at length of glory? and it is clear that repentance which the Apostles command is the course of repentance all their life to be performed, both before and after baptism, ver. 40. and with many other words did he testify and exhort, saying, save yourselves from this untoward generation, which is, walk not in the way of this people: and doth Peter advise no repentance, but such visible repentance as was to go before their baptism? certain he adviseth repentance, new obedience and perseverance therein to their lives end after they should be baptized.

6. As to the aim of baptism, which is for remission of sins, it importeth a confession such as amounteth to repentance real and true, yea constant and enduring to the end, Ergo they were justified and effectually redeemed in Christ, and persevered therein to the end, before John could baptize them without sin: how weak are these? and so these huge multitudes were never baptized until they all died real converts, and that was never at all; for the Baptist so requires, before they were baptized.

7. Who shall believe that when John baptized, Mark 5. all the land of Judea, and all Jerusalem and Matth. 3 5. all Judea, and all the region round about Jordan: and Luk. 4. 21. and all the people; that they were all in John the Baptist his judgment of charity, sound believers, and that all these brought forth fruits worthy of amendment of life? and that all these were pardoned and justified in Christ, and that they were the habitation of God through the spirit, as Ephes. 2. 22. when John preacheth to them, even to the multitude that came forth to be baptized, Luk. 3. 7. and to many of the Pharisees and Sadducees as to a generation of vipers, Matth. 3. 7. 2. as to hypocrites that gloried they were Abraham's sons, and would think they were more then God's sons, when they were now washen by baptism, the new seal of the New Testament? 3. as to fruitless trees ready to be burnt in hell fire, ver. 10. 4. as to these washen with water by a man, not inwardly baptized by Christ ver. 11. 5. to a visible company in which there were wheat and chaff? certainly John should break the bruised reed, if he preached not to them as to real sons of Abraham, inwardly baptized, fruitful trees, and wheat into the Lord's barn. 8. Nor is there any warrant to think that they all asked, what shall we do? and did all bring forth fruit worthy amendment, and that the Pharisees and Sadducees who came to be baptized, Matth. 3. 7. did bring forth such fruits, before John could baptize them, Act. 2. they were baptized the same day: neither must that pass, which our brethren say, that John repelled not only the Scribes and Pharisees, Matth. 3. 7. but also the profane people from baptism, as those who were a generation of vipers, and had not yet brought forth fruits meet for repentance, ver. 7, 8.

Ans. Let the Text speak, Mark 1. 5. And there went out unto him all the land of Judea, and they of Jerusalem, and they 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 were all baptized. Matthew saith chap. 3. v. 7. And seeing many of the Pharisees and Sadduoes come to his baptism, he said, Generation of vipers, who hath forewarned you to flee from the wrath to come? which argueth rather that he admitted them; but as Calvin well saith, he citeth them before the inner tribunal of their consci nce, that they may severely examine themselves, Luk. 3. 7. he said the same to all the multitude that came to be baptized, but especially to he Pharisees, but that John refused to baptize them, there is not one word in the Text, but the contrary, Mark 1. 5. Luk 3. 2. Matth. 3. 3. I deny not, but Beza, Pareus, Piscator, on Matth. 4. say that John admitted none to baptism but such as they judged worthy; but that such worthiness was real regeneration in the judgment of John, no Divine saith. But withal Piscator saith on Mark, That Bellarmine hath no ground for auricular confession. It is not probable that John sought a public confession of secret sins. Now it is known, Mr. Hooker the book of Discipline of N. England requires far beyond auricular confession. The Rhemists speak just almost in the language of M. H. confessing their sins, not acknowledging themselves in general to be sinners, but also uttering every man his sins, M. H. They confessed their sins. ver. 6. it was such a confession as amounted to repentance. And their own words evidence as much. Luk. 3. 5, 6. What shall we do? if it was such a repentance as John commanded; and such it was (saith M. H.) Then it was real and constant, enduring to the end. And this is more charity bestowed upon Judea, then the Jesuits of Reims give them; for they are content to stay within a precept (M. H. saith all Judea repented) He preacheth repentance (say they) by doing worthy fruits or works of penance. Now M. H. must make this confession, if it amounted to repentance, most particular of all and everyone of them, which D. Fulke saith was impossible; and Cartwright, that it was common not full, and proveth it by many arguments: and sure, that multitude must have lived upon locusts and wild honey, that John might have been satisfied with their spiritual good estate as lively stones, as our brethren speak, our brethren's confession must have as long a space, to wit, seven years, as D. Fulke saith anricular confession would have taken.

Some bring the place Luk. 7. 29. to prove that John refused to admit the Pharisees to baptism.

But that place saith it was their sin who would not be baptized, and so despised the counsel of God, whereas the Publicans glorified God, being baptized with the baptism of John, ver. 29, 30. as Calvin well observeth, comparing the Publicans and Pharisees together. See Diod • ti and the English Divines; for it is not holden forth as their punishment, that John debarred them as unworthy. Yea all that came to be baptized, Mat. 3. Mark 1. Luk. 3. were baptized. Nor is it of weight, that Philip saith, Act. 8. Thou mayest be, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , be baptized, if thou wilt, so the word noteth, Matth. 12. 24. ver. 10. 12. Matth. 14. 4. Matth. 19. Matth. 20. 15. Matth. 22. 17. Matth. 27. 6. Mark. 2. 24. ver. 26. Luk. 6. 2. John. 6. 9. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . John. 5. 10. John. 18 31. There is no shadow, in the Text, that the lawfulness is referred to Philip his act of baptizing, as if Philip might without sin baptize; as if I should say, I Philip cannot lawfully baptize thee except them believe with all the heart; but it is clearly referred to the Eunuchs believing. For 1. Philip had more ground of the soundness of the Eunuchs profession so as he might lawfully have baptized him, then he had to baptize Magus; finding the holy Ghost had directed Philip to go to him, Act. 8. 29, 30. 2. He found him reading Scripture, and desirous to know the meaning of it, 36. and destrous to be baptized (3.) There is no shadow of reason in the Text, that it was a case of conscience to the Ennuch, whether it was Philip's sin to baptize him, except he knew he had true faith; but clearly he himself doubted whether he might be baptized, or not, 3. Philip requireth of the Eunuch real believing with all the heart; but visible believing as Magus had, was sufficient for Philip to baptize without sin in the baptizer.

Quest. What ignorance exoludeth from Church membership?

M. H. That ignorance which maketh persons to be no Church, that will hinder a person from being a member. But there is a simple ignorance of points fundamental, that maketh Papists that never heard the Gospel, and so have not willfully rejected it (saith M. R.) to be no members of the Church.

A • s • , M. H. To be admitted a member and to be baptized (saith he pag. 20.) inferreth each one another. But all the members of the Church of Rome (saith he par. 1. c. 5. pag. 59) have received true Baptism. Let M. H. answer M. H. 2. That ignorance that hindereth persons to be no Church visibly professing, will hinder persons to be true members of the visible professing Church. The proposition is denied; for infants (saith Calvin) baptized are so ignorant, and they are admitted members (say our brethren) in and with their parents, 3. M. R. speaketh of the visible Church, of which Papists ignorant of fundamentals, are not members.

CHAP. XII.

Mr. H. That profession which must notify to the Church, that a person is a true believer, that must notify that he hath true grace. But the profession that M. R requireth, must notify to the Church that he is a true believer, pag. 196. Faith giveth right to the seals; profession, to speak acu • ately, doth only notify to the Church that the man hath right to the seals. So M. R.

Ans. What is in question to M. R. it is one thing to be a Church-member, as infants and fixed hearers are; and another thing to be by profession, capable of both the seals: the latter are such determinate Church-members, or Church-members in special, but all members are not capable of both seals.

2. The profession that M. R. requireth doth notify, M. R. said not, Faith must notify to the Church that a person is a true believer, before he can be admitted a member of the Church by the Church. And that is the question now. Not what profession doth notify simply; but what it must notify to the Church before the Church can lawfully admit them to be members. M. R. never said that; nor saith M. R. That not every profession, but that which is apparently true doth notify so much, and that which is only savoury to the godly. 2. As also M. H. addeth to my words, the adjective, True, which is not in my words; yea I teach that the profession of Demas, Magus, doth not notify that they are true believers: And though visible profession should notify true faith, it is not necessary that it must offer to judicious charity such overweighing evidences as the Church cannot lawfully admit Magus a member, but they must first positively judge him a real convert; and the like John must judge of all Jury whom he baptized. 3. Since M. H speaketh of admission to the seals in the plural number, he must mean both the seals; Hence let this quaere be answered by our brethren, whether they think that profession doth notify to a charitable judgment that all infants of Church-members, because born of Church-members, are real converts. If so, birth must give conversion, and David must give to Absalom conversion by birth. 2. All infants so born must be regenerate; but experience and Scriptures teach that many so born turn Apostates, and prove sons of perdition. How our brethren shall free themselves of some baptismall regeneration, and of the apostasy of the justified and truly sanctified, let them consider, and the sound Reader judge; for our brethren tell us, it is not lawful to put the seal upon a blank.

CHAP. XIII.

A Church constituted of fit matter may be corrupted by their breaking forth into scandals, as is clear in Corinth, Galatia, Sardis, and the Church of the Jews, to whom the Lord threateneth a bill of divorce, Hos. 22. and there is a necessity of toleration until by a judicial proceeding the evil be tried, the party convinced, or out off.

Ergo the corrupting of a Church constitute gives no allowance to bring in corrupt members: but by the contrary, if a pentinaclo •• member should be removed, then such a member should not be admitted.

Ans. 1. This is the argument of Mr. Robinson, and most are borrowed from Separatists and Anabaptists in this theme, if such as are known to be no visible members must be tolerated, until censures be applied and they convinced or cut off, in that interval the Church must either give the seals to them, and their seed, or not. If the former be said, then must the Church knowingly profane the holy things of God. And so visible members as visible saints, and under that formal reduplication as visible converts, are not admitted to the Church, but as tolerated scandalous persons, upon whom the Church bestows Church-admission and seals, until it be seen they are converts visible, which destroyeth a principal pillar of the brethren's way. If the latter be said, that the seals are to be denied to them and to their seed, in the interval, then the visible Saintship so judged is not the formal reason of membership and Church-privileges, to wit, of seals; for hence seals are denied to such members as are seen to be scandalous, but not casten out, which again destroyeth the same principle. 2. The argument presupposeth that none are excommunicate, but under the formal reason of visible non-converts. Ergo David, Peter, and such are undoubtedly visible converts, cannot be excommunicate for adultery or murder, though visible they remain as to all other things (save in the matter of Uriah, and the one particular scandal for which they are excommunicate, sound and savoury saints) but the Church must judge David, Peter, and all such whom they excommunicate, non-converts and unchosen to glory; which is against the brethren's way also: for if none be admitted Church-members, but such as according to the command and revealed will of God are judged converts visible; Ergo all casten out are no members, and so non-converts, and should not have been admitted but holden out, though in other things they be visible converts. 3. M. H. cannot produce any argument of M. R. wherein he argueth simply from corrupted and degenerate members, such as the Jews were, Act. 13. who blaspheme, contradict and openly put away the Gospel, that such may be admitted and planted in Churches. But Sardis, for the few names therein, is one of the seven visible Churches and golden Candlesticks among which Christ walks, Rev. 3. and M. Hooker yields the seals were due to these members and their feed, though they had a name of living members and were dead, so they were not visibly scandalous; but M. R. his argument is not brought, but a new one, for M. R. saith that God made a covenant, Deu. 29. with the body of the people for the elects sake, said to be hard, blind, D •• . 29. 3. stiff-necked, Deu. 31. 27. a • that time but professed repentance, Deu. 29.

3. Our Savior's aim and decree or intention of saving (which is hidden from us) and the Lord's deep dispensation in long bearing with the Church of the Jews, and calling them Lo-ammi, not my people, Hos. 2. (for that he cites) is no rule to us, but the revealed will; nor is the Church to forbear to censure so long as God punisheth not; yea then should the Priests have admitted into the Temple the worshippers of Baal, such as offered in the high places to other strange God's; for God cast not the people of the Jews nor such Idolaters utterly off at that time, but he sent Prophets to them. And there is a far other consideration of a whole Church, and of Jezebel a single person. He will not remove his candlestick from Sardis, but he offends that Jezebel is not casten out.

CHAP. XIIII.

FIrst Argument. In the first receiving of members by the Apostles, there was but a professed willingness to receive the Gospel howbeit seme received it not from the heart.

M. H. answereth; There was not only a professed willingness, but a practical reformation, that in the judgment of charity giveth grounds of hope that there is something real, before the contrary appear; Therefore Peter who received Magus upon his approbation of the truth, and outward conformity thereunto in the course of his life, rejected him as one in the gall of bitterness, who had no share in Christ, and therefore certainly would not suffer him in the privileges of communion, so persisting without repentance.

Ans. 1. Not professed willingness, but also practical reformation is required. But is not professed willingness in murderers of Christ, who said, What shall we do to be saved, some practical reformation? There is nothing but conjectures, that the Apostles did not admit all and everyone of the three thousand, until they had experience of their state of grace. and judicially determined so of them all. 2. This practical reformation was not an experience of their practice of savoury walking, required by M. H. p. 1. cap. 2. pag. 14, 15. in visible saints before admission, except some four or five hours time may create an habitual experience, for the same very day they were baptized, Acts 2. 41. (3) M. H. should prove that the Apostles found this practical reformation in all, Ananias, Sapphira, and the whole 3000; and that the Apostles tried and smelled the savourinesse of saving grace in all; in Sapphira, the Text giveth not the least jot of this, we mu • take it upon the naked assertion of M. H. 4) That this practical reformation gave to the Apostles judgment of charity ground of hope, that there was something real, that is, the whole number about three thousand (none excepted, for all were made Church-saints visible) gave grounds of hope that they were all really (otherwise their speaking and hearing the word was real, that is, not imaginary) internally and effectually called, and born over again of the spirit, and so chosen to life eternal from eternity, before the Apostles durst without the offending of God admit them to Church-fellowship and visible communion; those (I say) must be proven. If I durst, I am not far from judging the godly and judicious in cold blood, free of heat of dispute, dare not so judge of the Text, Acts 2. or Acts 8. (5) There is no shadow Acts 8. that Peter (M. H. should say Philip) admitted not Magus while he saw such grounds of the sorcerers real conversion and real predestination to glory (6) Peter said that Magus had no share in Christ. True, but said he that he was an unbaptized man who had no share in the visible Church? No. (7) But he would not suffer Magus to share in the privileges of communion, he persisting without repentance.

True, but it is no answer to the argument from the manner of receiving in, this is something to the casting out, (8) that Peter reproveth him in the gall of bitterness. 2. Exhorts him to repent, to pray for pardon, were great privileges of Church-communion bestowed upon Magus.

The practice of the Apostolic Church is to be considered in three cases. The 1. Case is.

1. When Churches are gathered out of Churches, for example, out of Galatia, Ephesus, where infants are born and baptized Church-members within the visible Church, hence we seek a warrant, why these who were once members of the visible Church and baptized, as the answer to the 32 saith, and so clean and holy, 1 Cor. 7. 14. Rom. 11. 16. (2) In covenant with God, Acts 2. 38, 39. Act. 15. 14, 15. Gen. 17. 7. 2 Cor. 6. 16, 17, 18. &c. (3) And so redeemed by the blood of Christ and baptized into his body, 1 Cor. 12. 13. even unto Christ, Gal. 3. 17. Act. 2. 38, 39. when they come to age, are for no scandal unchurched, and because they cannot give evidence of real conversion, yet for 60. or 80. years, and to their dying day, are no more Church-members then Pagans?

2. How could ye baptize Pagans? They are so straited with this, that many among them call for Bishopping or confirmation again. 3. How is it that you once baptized them Church-members and within the Covenant, and so baptized them but for the foresaid want? How is it now (1) You teach, exhort, rebuke, comfort them, and you have no Pastoral call to them more then to Pagans? (2) How, or what calling, or what sort of officers are your Pastors to them? or who called you to take care and watch for their souls who are without, and to you as Pagans? (3) How can you offer Christ all the day long to Pagans? 4. If they refuse to hear the Gospel, you cannot judge them, for they are without, 1 Cor. 5. 12. to you; and Christian Magistrates cannot compel them that are without to the means of grace by your way.

The second Case is.

When the Apostles came with the Gospel to the Gentiles, Act. 14. 47, 48. to Lystra and Derbe, Act. 14. 6, 7. to Philippi, Act. 16. 12. to Corinth, Act. 18. 6, 7, 8, 9. to Ephesus, Act. 19. 9, 10. &c. our brethren must prove, 1. That the Apostles first teached to them as no officers, having no Pastoral care of their souls, until they were in the judgment of charity real converts, and then they preached to them as Church-members: (2) And until they were satisfied in conscience of the good spiritual estate one of another, as lively stones to be laid upon the spiritual building, as their way teacheth; And until they in their practice and profession (if we look saith M. Hooker) in their course according to what we see by experience, or receive by report and testimony from others. Or lastly, look we at their expressions, favor so much as though they had been with Jesus. And 3. The Apostles knew not any such thing in visible • converts, as that they should form themselves from an intrinsical power in themselves into an organical body and ordain their own Elders; for to draw this out of anything we find in Scripture is done with as great difficulty, as to extract water out of a stone; all we find the Apostles did was to preach Christ to them, and an interval of time, as is clear after Act. 13. 14 they had preached the Gospel, Act. 14. 6. ver. 21. they returned to Lystra, and to Iconium, and to Antioch; and ver. 23. and ordained Elders in every Church: all which times it appeareth they were visible Churches without seals, and when they preached the Gospel to the aged, and it was received by a profession of faith sincere, whether really or supposed only, presently without delay (as is well observed by M. R. Baxter in his accurate treatise) they baptize Magus, Act. 8. 12. 13. such as hear the word, among whom were Ananias and Sapphira, who were baptized members, Act. 2. 41, 45. compared with Act. 4. 33, 34. and Act. 5. 1, 2, 3, 4. &c. they baptize Cornilius and his house, Act. 10. 44, 47, 48. When the Corinthians and Crispus and his house believed, they were baptized, and the Jailor and his house, Act. 16. 30, 31, 32, 33. Lydia and her house, ver. 14. 15. And the Eunuch having heard the word and believing was baptized, Act. 8. 35, 37, 38. when the multitude hear John and confess their sins they are baptized, Mark 1. 5. and that without any such conjectures of the congregational way of trying members, as is above said.

The third Case is,

When the Christian Church is framed out of the visible Church; and in this I propound these considerations (1) Act. 2. There is no such process as M. H. talks of, pag. 14. 15. (2) No hint of a covenant to a single Congregation, except ye speak of a baptismall Covenant. (3) The Apostles shall not act as Apostles, but in an erring way, choosing Ananias and Sapphira reprobate metal in this first Temple, and say, that they acted as Pastors ordinary in a Church way and fallibly, it is not to be supposed, that they more de fact actually erred, and that they thrust in chalk stone, and rotten timber, apt to destroy the whole building, such as were Ananias and Sapphira, in the first samplar, then they erred in making heterodox and erroneous acts, Act. 15. in their first samplar of Synods, and yet we prove they acted not as infallible Apostles in that Synod, but by a fallible and ordinary gift, yet so that de facto actually they erred not. (4) Any man judge of M. Hookers words pag. 30. that Peter required of these 3000. to repent and be baptized, according to the like call of Christ, and that Philip saw the like in Magus, ere he baptized him, and that the Apostles had a large measure of spiritual discerning; But if their discerning was put out in admitting none but such as they judged to be real converts, it failed in this, and they laid hands suddenly in few hours space upon Ananias and Sapphira: and so did John the Baptist upon an huge multitude, Matth. 3 Mark. 1. Luk. 4. nay their admitting of such, whereas their eminency of discerning could have framed the first samplar of Church-constitution without one hypocrite, saith to me. That it is the revealed will and intent of the Lord, that men usurp not the chairs of Christ to pass a sentence upon the inward state of Church-members, before they be admitted into his work-house of conversion. Yea it is destructive to the Lord's end to close the gates upon many heirs of glory, and lock fast the doors of Christ's office-house, his vineyard, his kingdom, his house, upon multitudes to be saved and wrought upon and espoused to Christ, after they are unchurched, until they be visible converts, 2 Cor. 11. 1, 2, 3, 4. Gal. 4. 19. (5) The Apostles are accurate in trying of some Church-members, to wit, of Elders and Deacons, and bid receive some, and reject others, Act. 6. 13. Act. 13. 2, 3. 1 Tim. 3. 1, 2, 3, 4. &c. 10, 11, 12. Tit. 1. 9, 10, 11. 2 Tim. 2. 2. 1 Tim. 5. 17, 22. But show us rule, Canon, precept, practice of Apostles, for judicial electing of Church-members; yea to me it is one act of the Lord's deep providence in the execution of his decrees of election and reprobation; for when the Lord sends the word of his kingdom to a Nation, and calls them, and they profess to hear, there hath the Lord a visible kingdom, and the Lord builds his house, not Moses, not Paul. (6) The place Act. 2. pleads more for a real and internal repentance, and continued and prorogated all their life, ver. 46, 47. they abiding in the Apostles doctrine and fellowship steadfastly, 42. then for a visible repentance in the judgment of charity, though we exclude not visible repenting of some, but in our brethren's sense, visible repenting, i. e. real and sincere, so far as the judgment of charity can reach. 2. Real and sincere repenting of all and everyone. 3. Antecedently and before admission to Church membership, we ever exclude, and we say there is not one Jot • in the word, that the Apostles had such a judgment of Ananias, Magus; and our brethren cannot prove it. The believing of Magus and his a • dent continuing with Philip, Act. 8. 13. with eagerness, as dogs in hunting to follow the prey, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Beza cites Mar. 3. 9. Budaeus to stick to any as an assiduous convey, proveth not what M. Lock • r saith; for Luke inspired by the holy Ghost, who needeth not borrow the judgment of charity, but seeth the heart, testifieth of Magus that he believed in his way. All our Divines, Calvin, Gualther, Piscator, Marlorat, Beza, Brenz, Bullingerus, Pomeranus, Sarc • rius, Diodati, English Divines, say, it was but an historical and temporary faith; if the holy Ghosts meaning were that Magus did savingly believe, we shall not eschew the Apostasy of true believers. The Text saith not that Magus savingly believed to the judgment of Philip, and the Church of Samaria; they saw his faith as they saw his wondering in his cleaving to Philip, and yet this our brethren must prove. Now they saw only such a faith, in the effects, as the Text speaks of; but the Text speaks of a temporary faith: but that they believed the sorcerers temporary faith to be saving faith, and would not other ways have baptized him, that M. Hooker and M. Lockyer conjecture; but in the Text, there is no shadow of such a thing; had there been praying with liberty, and in the holy Ghosts strong persuasion, much labor of glorying in tribulation, rejoicing with joy unspeakable, by selling all and following the Gospel, something had been said, and if the Church had refused without these to baptize him. (7) I retort the argument thus.

Such should be the members of the visible Church before they be admitted, as Peter requireth the thousands to be before they were admitted members: But Peter requireth of the 3000. real repentance; Repent and be baptized, &c. Yea such repentance as thereby their anxious conscience might be satisfied, who asked, Men and brethren what shall we do? Ah, we slew the Lord of glory. Ergo, The members of our Church must have real, not visible repentance only, before the Church can admit them. But the conclusion is absurd even to the Anabaptists. The proposition is M. Hookers and our brethren's in terminis; the assumption is the holy Ghosts, Act. 2. Yea and the characters of real conversion, Act. 2. are spoken by Luke inspired of God, not in relation to the fallible discerning of Apostles. There are not only visible signs, but 1. hearing, 2. saying, Men and brethren what shall we do? 3. joining in ordinances with the Apostles, 4. Some expressing of joy in hearing the word, possibly in their countenance. The rest were real, 1. They were pricked in heart, not visibly, but really, so Calvin, Bez • , Gualther, Sarcerius, Brenz, Bullingerus; as also before them, Chrysostom, Hieronymus, Cyrillus, Hierosolomytanus; this cannot but be real.

(2) They were added unto the Church. M. H. granteth, that the holy Ghost in Luke spoke this. Now the Apostles acting as ordinary Pastors in a fallible way (as our brethren say they acted here) could not see this internal adding made by the Lord, ver. 47. The Lord added to the Church, &c. he added not Ananias and Sapphira thus; and their receiving the word with gladness of heart, ver. 47. must be real and internal gladness of heart, as their eating of bread with gladness and singleness of heart; all which as they were not visible to the Apostles, so being real must be ascribed by an ordinary figure, to the greatest part. Now that Ananias and Sapphira were such real members pricked in heart, or received the word with joy, Luke saith not. But M. H saith it without warrant of the word.

CHAP. XV.

Mr. H. pag. 28, 29. to arg. 2. If the visible Church be a draw-net, where are fish and filth; a house where are vessels of gold, and baser vessels of wood and brass; then a rightly constituted Church there may be where are believers and hypocrites.

Ans. The argument is wholly yielded, and the cause not touched, much less concluded, as may appear by the state of the question in a right meaning.

Ans. 1. This argument may be wholly yielded, but is not my argument; I refer the Reader to the place of my book where this is first propounded. The argument is much mistaken, and is not drawn from visible Churches, as they are de facto, and through abuse, though I speak to that also, which I am willing to dispute with any who will defend M. H. in his survey. My argument is from visible Churches as they were at first planted and constituted lawfully, and to all that read with any considerable attention, planted according, not to the permissive decree of God, according to which I tell M. Barrow, many hypocrites are de facto in the visible Church lawfully constitute; but according to the revealed will of precept. Hence take the argument according to my mind; if the visible kingdom and Church of Christ at both its first planting in fieri, and its after constitution in facto esse, consist not according to the decree, but even according to the revealed and approving and commanding will of God, of good fish and of bad, and filth; and of vessels of honor and of dishonor: then the visible Church consisteth not of such Saints only as must be real converts in the judgment of charity. But the former is true, M. H. might have known that I of purpose closed up this mouse-hole, non semel, not once, but twenty times; the proposition is from the scope of the Parable, which, as worthy Calvin saith, that nikil novum &c. that our Savior teacheth no new thing, but by a new similitude, the same which he taught in the parable of the tares, only as Mr. Dickson hath judiciously observed. That hence the visible Church in the way of gathering members, and manner of constitution thereof is like a draw-net, taking in a I who profess subjection to Christ in his ordinances good and bad. To which as for the purpose, it is also most false, that the Lord tacitly commands such Pastors as cast out the net of the preached Gospel, to fish no souls in a Pastoral Church-way, but these who in their judgment of charity, savor of being with Jesus (as saith M. H. survey par. 1. c. 2. pag. 14, 15) and so are good fish and real converts. Whereas the Lord commands Pastors not to look whether they be converted or not in their judgment; leave that to God, and call in as many as ye find, Matth. 22. 9. Luk. 14. 17, 18, 23. Call in fools and simple ones, Prov. 9. 4. which indeed to M. Hooker is a sin and a profaning of the holy things of God. O saith M. H. Beware ye Pastorally call any, or preach to any Pastorally but such as in charity you judge converts; and these only and none other, saith M. L • ckyer. As for the Parable of the tares, Let them grow until harvest. Par • us (most judiciously) he forbids not to use discipline simply, but use it not so, with such rigor, or imprudently, when the wheat is in hazard to be plucked up, but use it not when the wheat may be hurted and rooted out. 2. The conceit of degenerated members to be tolerated for a while, will not help the matter; for the draw-net of the preached Gospel is to be cast out at the first admission of members, before the members be degenerated. 3. How shall our brethren make it out that the bad noteth the latent hypocrites only, that are not seen, because they are under the water? but the bad noteth as well the open hypocrites: and so did the Donatists answer Augustine, as our brethren do; but Augustine replied that the Church is the barn-floor where the wheat is hid and the chaff seen. But, sure, the preachers are not to be led by their own judgment, who are really good, or really non converts and bad: for it is the command of Christ, that the bad, that is the non-converted be brought in, that they may be converted and keeped in (except the whole lump be in danger to be infected) that they may be made good.

Mr. H. p. 29. The like may be said to the man who came without the wedding garment, he carried it so cunningly that none perceived it but the Master.

Ans. Mr. H. must say, The servants judged him once to have a wedding garment, else they should not have invited him to come. Saith the Text that, or Mr. H. only? If the former, then they sin who invite, and call externally any but such as have a wedding garment: So the Donatists said. 2. Mr. H. contradicts his own Book of Discipline expressly. The rest of my arguments are above vindicated.

Mr. H. p. 31. The examples of Solomon tolerating Idolatry, of Asa breaking out into persecution, hurt Mr. R. cause, for then the openly scandalous may be received in.

Ans. These Kings obstinately persisting in such evils, are neither to be admitted, nor kept in: how far Solomon strayed is hard to determine. Ames, after P. Martyr, teacheth, That he neither worshipped Images, nor believed them to be God, nor brought them to the Temple. Augustine excuseth him, that he fell as Adam, to please his wives. Asa at his worst was fitter to be admitted a Member, than Magus at his best; nor can the time of Asa his continuing obstinately in these evils, be well known.

M. H. M. Ruthurfurd maintain • , That such as are admitted must 1. Not be scandalous: 2. Must be baptized after the order of Christ: 3. They must, by their profession, notify that they are true believers.

Ans. How they are not scandalous, how baptized in Christ's order, and so must repent for their own personal comfort and salvation, is to be tried: Ergo, They must be to us real converts before they be admitted, is a feeble consequence. The third I never require before they be admitted Members: M. cannot read that in my writings, but forged it of his own, as is answered by me.

Mr. H. p. 32, 33. If I must not enter willingly into any unnecessary civil society, with such as have a show of godliness, and deny the power thereof, and such as are named brethren, but are idolatrous; far less should I enter into a spiritual society of faith with them.

Ans. What this reasoning meaneth, I know not. But 1. it is unlawful to you to enter yourself a visible married Member of that Church, where one is to be admitted who is known to be a scandalous hypocrite, as he is described 2 Tim. 3 1, 2, 3. Yea, suppose in all Churches you find some scandalous, you are to join to some visible Church on earth.

But this is 1. Unlawful: for say that one would refuse to marry any at all, because no woman on earth could satisfy his mind, hardly could that single life be lawful, if God give not the gift of continency. But say it were lawful to live single, and to marry none, because of such humorous impediments, yet it cannot be lawful to live out of all Church-fellowship, without all Church-ordinances, suppose you were in an Island where one only Church is. 2. Suppose one be married, and fixedly joined to such a Congregation, and divers Members turn like the Members of the Church of Sardis, divers become such as are 2 Tim. 3. 2. Lovers of their own selves, covetous, boasters, proud, blasphemers, disobedient to parents, &c. the Apostle saith, We are to turn away from such: now the Elders and Flock refuse to c •… them out. If that turning away 2 Tim. 3. be meant of separating from the Church, we must not turn away from them, except the Church to which we were married give us leave, which were strange. And it is like this is not Mr. Hookers sense; for he maketh it less free to turn away from a Church to which you are married, than not to join to it; as it is less free to the man to leave the wise to whom he is once married, than not to marry: and so he makes the Church a Prison.

As for the place 1 Cor. 5. he forbids entire conversing with the Excommunicate; Bullinger, he forbiddeth intimate fellowship with them. Mayer saith, it is the arguing of Anabaptists (which yet pious Mr. H. here followeth) We should not eat with them: Ergo, we should not join in Church duties with them. But Augustine citeth Cyprian, Because we see tares in the Church, yet let us not separate from the Church; for, saith Augustine, When the godly and the wicked partake of the same Sacrament, neither the cause nor the person is hurt. Entring in Church-fellowship, someone or other, though there be some scandalous persons tolerated and desended in all the Churches, is not voluntary, as to marry or not to marry, but a necessary Ordinance of God: for he lives as a heathen, in a condition of sinning, who is a Member of no visible Church.

Mr. H. These are not sufficient requisites in one to be a Member, which may be in a drunkard, who is not to be a Member, but to be cast out; Ergo, to be kept out. But these three assigned by Mr. R. 1. To profess the Faith. 2. Eagerly to desire the Seals. 3. To desire Church-fellowship, counting it a disparagement not to be born again, if not admitted to the Sacraments, may agree to a drunkard.

Ans. For the ordinary drunkard, he is either born and baptized in the Church, or he is a Pagan and an ordinary drunkard having these three. If the former be said, he is born a Member of the Church, and so the question is concerning his casting out, not concerning his receiving in. I confess, I know not how Mr. H. could answer the question himself, concerning children born in their Church of Parents, Father, Mother, that are Church Members, though such live 60 or 70 years never baptized, and have these three requisites, and be free of gross scandals, they could not admit such to the Lord's Supper. The Ministers should have some extraordinary call of God to preach to such, as Paul had to go to preach in Macedonia, Act. 16. for by our Brethren's way they have no right, by way of Covenant, from the parents, but only a providential right to preach the Gospel, which requires an extraordinary Apostolic cast.

As for the other, if the man be a born heathen, and shall come to get these three requisites, and profess as Magus did, he is to be received a Member: but if he hath not these three requisites, for he lives in Sorcery, as Magus and Elymas, and opposeth the Gospel, the openly lying profession is scandalous; such a profession Mr. R. faith is not his requisites: If he be a Pagan, and continue in habitual drunkenness, he may be holden out while he gives evidences to others of amendment, and then he may be admitted to the outer court, as a heater; though a profession of faith, if not belied with worshipping of false gods, can hardly consist with Paganism.

CHAP. XVI.

Mr. H. p. 1. cap. 3. pag. 23.

1. WHether the invisible Church be the principal, prime; and only subject of the Seals of the Covenant, pa. 3.

Ans. It is not such a subject by any argument that Mr. R. brings: But Mr. H. frameth a question of straw, as if I had moved it, and disputes against Mr. R.

My words are: The invisible, not the visible Church, is the principal, prime, and only subject with whom the Covenant of Grace is made, to whom all the Promises do belong, and to whom all titles, styles, properties and privileges of special note in the Mediator de belong, p. 248. The Promises are preached to the whole visible Church, but for the Elects sake; yet they belong, in God's intention and gracious purpose, only to the Elect of God, and his redeemed ones, to that invisible Body, Spouse, Sister, whereof Christ alone is Lord, He • d, Husband. I wonder then, if Mr. H. did read my book, when he will dispute such a Question with me.

1. Whether the invisible Church, and the El • ct, be the prime subject of the Seals? A question that hath no sense, nor any favor from Mr. R. For can the Elect, of which, some are not born, eat and drink at the Lord's Supper, or be washed with water? 2. The Lord hath ordained the Seals in an orderly way, and in an Ecclesiastic and Church right to the visible Church, as to the fi • st, prime, and only subject external, visible, in foro Ecclesiae, and according to the command of God to Pastors, they are to be dispensed to all Members of the visible Church, to Magus as to Peter, whether the dispensers or Church repute them real Converts, or not. 3. Here the Seals, Ministers, Word, Promises, are considered only in the sign, letter, external administration by the dispensers, who see not the heart. Now Mr. H. proceedeth against me, Arg. 1. pag. 41. to prove that, to wit, That bare and naked Seals, as Circumcision, are bestowed upon graceless men, Ishmael and Esau: which is to set up an adversary of hay; for I am not the man who either dreamed or wrote, that the invisible Church is the principal, prime, and only subject of the naked Signs bestowed upon Ishmael and Magus: This will be found the mind of Mr. Hock • r; for I spake expressly of the privileges of special note in the Mediator, pag. 144. But the bare and empty Seals, the Promises as in the letter preached, and as precisely considered and separated from the grace promised and signed, are not privileges of special note given in the Mediator, for they are privileges bestowed upon Cain and Magus, as upon real believers, Peter and John, the very same way. 4. But the Lord hath ordained Promises, Sealt, and the like, including the inward grace, Christ, Righteousness, Pardon, Perseverance, Eternal life, in his gracious purpose, as I say, pag. 244. to the invisible and effectually called Church, as to the principal, prime, native, internal subject, a right not only Ecclesiastic in foro Ecclesiae, which they have also, professing the sound faith, but also with a real and internal right in foro Dei, Upon these Arguments, never touched nor answered by Mr. Hooker.

1. These are the first and proper subject of all Promises. Properties, Privileges, Seals of special note in the Mediator (taking the Privileges and Sea's as they include Christ, and the graces promised and sealed) to whom the Covenant, and special promises of a new heart, the Law engraven, perseverance are only promised, and to none other, But these, A new heart, Perseverance, &c. are only promised to Elect Believers, Ierem. 31. 33, 35. & 32. 39, 43. Ezek. 11. 19, 20. & 36. 25, 26, 27. Isa. 59. 19, 20, 21. Deut. 30. 6. Heb. 8. 8, 9, 10, &c. If these be promised to Cain, Magus, then either absolutely, and so all shall have a new heart, contrary to Scripture and Experience; if conditionally, show the condition to be performed by the Elect, which being done, they shall be therewith gifted: Such a condition is not in the Word; for the condition should be either of Nature, or Common Grace, and both must be Pelagianism: for if of Grace, the question must recurte, What shall be the condition again?

2. These for whom, and for whose salvation God intends the sweet Marrow of the Ministry, and other Ordinance • , the meeting in the Unity of faith, and the knowledge of the Son of God, Ephes. 4. 11, 12, 13. to whom they all belong, 1 Cor. 3. 21. and for whose sake all are, 2 Cor. 4. 15. and for whose salvation only Christ came and died, Matth. 20. 28. Luke 19, 10. 1 Tim. 1. 15. 1 Pet. 3. 18. John. 15. 13. must be the prime and only subject of all these privileges in their marrow and substance.

3. These to whom Christ is given only, and with him all other things, must be the prime and only subject, to whom all privileges of special note in the Mediator are given; or then the visible Church, or some other than the Elect and ransomed of the Lord, must be the principal and only subject: But he hath given us Christ, and with him all other things, Rom. 8. 32. And Mr. H. cannot say, that to that visible body, as visible, in which Magus, Cain, are joint Members, having as good Ecclesiastical right as the Apostle Peter, by Mr. H. way, are given all things, Christ, saving grace out of his fullness, &c. as to the first and prime subject.

4. Christ is Head by the influence of saving grace, King, Husband, Savior, Ransomer, Surety, High Priest of the really believing Church: If he give any privileges, then who shall be the first, prime and only subject of graces flowing from him, but his Liege-people, Spouse, Ransomed ones?

5. The Elect justified, are only the Sons of the Promises, Rom. 9. 8, 9. and are internally, and not externally only, as Magus, in Covenant with God, and internally called.

Mr. H. The Catholic Church invisible is not the prime and only subject of the Seals, as the meaning of 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 is to Mr. R. though the exposition of the Rule be neither safe nor sound, quod convenit 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , convenit 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 .

Ans. Taking the Seals for bare and naked signs bestowed upon Magus, which is Mr. H. mind, he disputes against himself, not against me.

2. The axiom, what agreeth essentially, and per se, in secundo modo per se, (as aptitude to discourse, or also to laugh, agreeth to man) does both agree universally to all men, and reciprocally; for every man is apt to laugh, and everything apt to laugh is a man: So the invisible Church is that Company to whom all saving privileges belong, Effectual Calling, Redemption, Justification, the promises of a new heart, of Perseverance, the Seals including Covenant-grace; and reciprocally the same Company to whom all these privileges belong, is the invisible, mystical, Living Church, and not the Company visible of which Magus is a Member. Is this axiom neither safe not sound? Mr. H. should show wherein it is faulty, and not pass with disdain the Rule as neither safe nor sound. It is defended as a truth of Aristotle by Christian Philosophers. What agreeth in anything 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 and 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , (which Aristotle saith are the same in secundo modo per se) agreeth to all, and to everyone, and to such only. So the first modus per se is when the Praedicate belongs to the Essence of the subject; so Aristotle taught me long ago. So Collegium Conimb • icense, Ant: Ruvio, Murcia de Lallana, Smyglezius, Toletus, and many; yea, all who Comment upon Aristotle. And the secundo modo per se, is when the subject belongs to the definition of the Attribute; as a man is apt to laugh, to weep, to admire, and reciprocally; yea, and what agrees to any, according to its specific nature, and last essential difference, agrees reciprocally: and to this old Logic I stand, it is not new.

Ans. An error in the first concoction spoileth all: I speak of an internal right in foro D • i, and this way only real and invisible believers have internal right to the Covenant and Seals, including the blessings and graces rem significatam; otherwise, naked Seals, of which Mr. H. speaketh, are not special privileges in the Mediator, for they are (himself granting) bestowed upon base hypocrites: so the right internal to the seals, and Christ in them, and to the Covenant and new heart, is the privilege of special note, with only the invisible and really believing Church hath; Mr. Hookers Saints, Magus and Judas have no such privileges.

2. The answer of Peter, Acts 2. is indeed of a being in Covenant visibly, and that being is not excluded, but it is rather and more principally to be expounded of real and internal being in covenant, Repent, and be baptized everyone of you, for the promise is made to you and to your children; that is, ye are within the Covenant. Now Peters answer is a strengthening and comforting answer: for the doubt of their cast-down conscience is, Ah! We murdered the Lord of Life, then must we be rejected of God, we know not what to do! Peter had returned but a comfortless answer, to say, But be of good cheer, the promise is only to you and to your children; that is, ye are only visibly in Covenant: They might say, So is Magus. I grant it is a ground of comfort, Psal. 147. 19, 20. Exod. 20. 2. Deut. 5. 1, 2, 3. but it was not so healing an answer to their question, which was not, Men and brethren; what shall we do to get in to be Members of the visible Church? What better had they been in a place where Ananias and Magus had as deep a share of the comfort as they; and which having, they might eternally perish? But their question was, Men and brethren, what shall we do to be saved eternally, and to be Members of the invisible Church? Peter answereth, There is a Covenant made in the holy mind of God really with you Jews, and your children, and to all that are afar off, with the seed of Jews and Gentiles; and so he must have among you a company ordained to life, and internally in Covenant: So Calvin, Gualther, Bullinger, Marlorat, Beza, Brenz. His meaning is not that they were all the same way within the Covenant, and the Promise made one and the same way; some were actually and really, and so invisible in it; some visible, and in profession; some as fathers, some as children and parts of their fathers. (2.) He cannot speak only of the visible Covenant, but of their being invisible in it; he bids them repent really, not visibly only, as Magus did, and heals their anxious conscience, by this repenting really, for that end that their doubting may be removed; not that the holy Ghost bid • any within the visible Church repent only professedly, and only externally, but the command of repenting, as born in upon the chosen, carries with it the Lord's intention often, and his decree to save, and their being internally in Covenant, as here it doth.

3. I shall desire Mr. Hooker to be true to his own distinction. If being externally in Covenant make a Church-member, as he expounds Acts 2. Then all to whom the Lord saith, I am your God, and to whom the Covenant is externally preached, and they by silence hear and accept of it, are to Mr. H. Church-members; then all Israel whom Moses preached to be blind, hardened, Deut. 29. 4. rebellious and stiff-necked, Deut. 31. 27. who had tempted him in the Wilderness forty years, and when they had entered in a Church. Covenant with God, Deut. 29. 10. as our Brethren expound it, they were to Moses, to Joshua, and to all the godly, and to one another, real converts, savouring as if they had been with Christ, and practically reformed. O what strange charity, when Moses and the Prophets preached, they confess, the world knew their life declare the contrary.

2. Why should Mr. H▪ deny but the three thousand who heard with gladness, received the Word with joy, were real converts, by a frequent figure, the part for the whole, because the most part were real converts? Yea. Mr. H. will have Ananias, Sapphira, and all of them in the judgment of charity to be real Saints: But when the Scripture calls Israel these whom Saul and David were to feed and rule, 1 Sam. 9. 16. 2 Kings 3. 18. 2 Chron. 7. 13. even all the murmurers and •• bells whom the Lord brought out of Egypt, Deut. 5. 2. Exod. 6. 4. his covenanted people, Will not Mr. H. give us the favor of a figurative speech, a part for the whole?

3. Or then (which is strange) all Egypt, Assyria, Isa. 19. 25. all Nations, Isa. 2. 1, 2. All the kindreds of the earth, Psal. 22. 27. Of the world, Rev. 11. 15. must be in the judgment of charity to one another real Converts.

4. Could not the Lord call them, and make a Church of them, and say, I am your God, and they, We are thy people, while first the Pastors and the Church passed their judgment of charity upon their real conversion?

5. Mr. H. passeth over all the Texts cited by me, which conclude only the invisible Church to be really within the Covenant; see them above: and contendeth, That the visible Church only, which is of these who never had, and it may be shall never have any sound work of faith in their hearts, pag. 37. the only prime subject of those special privileges in Christ.

6. So the Reason is null, if this be the only visible being in Covenant, which is Act. 2. 38. it concludes not: Mr. R. said the contrary, both visible and invisible being in Covenant, must be understood Act. 2. as also invisible grace is believed in itself, therefore it is not known in its effects; it follows not, the invisible and really believing Church, is not visible in the effects to men: Isa. 61. 9. Their seed shall be known among the Gentiles, and their offspring among the people; all that see them shall acknowledge them, that they are the seed that the Lord hath blessed. Isa. 62. 12. And they shall call them the holy people, the redeemed of the Lord, and thou shalt be called, Sought out, A City not forsaken.

Mr. H. p. 37. That only the invisible Church hath right to the Seals, draws many absurdities: The adversaries of grace will hardly be gained.

Ans. True: if you mean external signs and Ecclesiastic right; if all Israel be in the judgment of charity within the Covenant, we must indeed believe visible Murmurers, Idolaters, Fornicators, Backsliders, Worshippers of Heathen gods, 1 Cor. 10. 1, 2, 3. Exod. 16. 1, 2. Psal. 78. 17, 18, 19, 20. such as slew their sons and their daughters to Molech, openly under every green tree, Psal. 106. 35, 36, 37, 38, 39. Ier. 7. 30, 31. Hos 4. 13. Ier. 3. 2, 3. Isa. 57. 8, 9, 10. Ezek. 16. 31, 32, 33, 34. to be real converts, and all and many other absurdities follow.

2. We must believe, That all the visible Church have saving grace; Ergo, we must believe that God hath chosen to life all the Independent Churches on earth.

3. That God intends salvation, and pardon, and perseverance to all and everyone of them of the visible Israel, and that to be false, Rom. 9. 6. They are not all Israel which are of Israel.

Mr. H. p. 38. Mr. R. compasseth us about with a crowd of accusations of the grossest Arminian, Popish, Socinian Doctrines.

Ans. Why did ye not clear yourselves of conspiring with Papists, in denying the preaching of the Word to be an essential note of the visible Church, and in other points also? 2. Of conspiring with Socinians, in setting up Independent Congregations. 3. Denying the Power of Synods. 4. The necessity of Ordination by Laying on of the Hands of the Elders, &c. to such you say not anything, in leaving the Reformed Churches, and joining with these enemies of the truth; but of this hereafter: you have yet place to dismiss the crowd.

Mr. H. p. 38. Let Mr. R. help us to answer the Anabaptists upon his grounds.

Mr. H. Those that I cannot know have any right to the Seals, to them I cannot give the Seals in any faith: But I cannot know that Infants are of the invisible Church, which only gives them right to the Seals. If Mr. R. grant the proposition, that they give the Seals to such whom they know not to have any right, they triumph.

Ans. No Anabaptist can object to me. That to be of the invisible Church only giveth right Ecclesiastic to the outward Seals, which Magus receiveth, Mr. H. calleth the dispensing of the outward Seals a special privilege, but such as Magus hath no special or saving Privilege.

2. It passeth the wit of man to defend Independents against Anabaptists: for 1. The Anabaptists and Independents both agree in the same constitution of visible Churches, that they must be real converts, as far as we can judge: but that we can judge of no Infants born of believing Parents, except we pluck out the eyes of charity, and believe that Cain, Ishmael, Esa • , and all and everyone born within the visible Church, are born converts, is impossible. Hence Mr. H. Those that I cannot know have any right to the Seals, to these I cannot give the Seals of the Covenant in faith, as the Apostle calls faith. So Mr. H. But I cannot know that all the Infants of Believers have right to the Seals, because their parents are visible Saints, some of them Elect, some of them Reprobate: Except I 1. Put the Seal of God upon a blank, contrary to our Brethren's Doctrine. 2. Except I profane the holy things of God, and admit heathens to the Church of visible Saints. Let Mr. H. answer the Anabaptists.

Mr. H. Mr. R. helps the Minor with a distinction So, faith in Christ truly giveth right to the Seals of the Covenant, and that in God's intention and decree, called Voluntas beneplaciti, but the orderly way of the Churches giving the Seals, is, Because such a society is a professing and visible Church, and the orderly giving of the Seals according to God's approving Will, called Voluntas signi & revelata, belongs to the visible Church. Mr. H. answers, This salve is too narrow for the sore, for the distinction will either make God order the giving of the Seals to such who have no right, and so impeach his wisdom, to appoint the giving of the Seals to such to whom he gives no right to receive them: Or else it doth involve a contradiction and the several expressions contain apparent contradictions; for this voluntas signi which allows the visible Church to give the Seals, it tither gives another right, besides that which the invisible Members have, or else it gives no right: If it give another right, then the invisible Church hath not only right, which is here affirmed; if it give no right, then the visible Church doth give the Seals orderly to such who have no right to them. I confess, such is my feebleness, that I see not how this can be avoided. How have hypocritical Professors right to the Seals? Not as Members visible: For Mr. R. saith, p. 249. The visible Church, as the visible Church, hath no right unto the Seals; as invisible they can give none, for they have none to give.

Ans. Were it not conscience to the truth, I would be silent of the infirmity of this pious man.

1. It is a good salve: for it becometh not Mr. H. with Arminians and Socinians to impeach the wisdom of the Holy One, because he appoints the giving of the Seals, Baptism to Judas and to Magus, who have no right true and real in foro Dei, in the Decree of God, and in his holy intention, as I spake p. 248, 249. to the Seals, and the grace sealed; nor to the engraven Law, and God's teaching of the heart, and to perseverance; and I cite pag. 249. Ier. 32. 38, 39. & 31. 33. and pag. 244, 245. par. 1. Psal. 89 33, 34, 35, 36, 37. Isa. 54. 10. All which places Mr. H never looked on the face, but suppressed them all. Then let Mr. H. clear the wisdom of God in appointing a Ministerial and Pastoral offer of Covenant-mercies, Christ, Pardon, the Anointing, the new heart, Life eternal, to be made to such as Magus, and Judas the traitor.

2. Whereas he saith, The distinction of voluntas beneplaciti, and voluntas approbans, contains apparent contradictions. It seems he never heard of this distinction allowed by the Reformed Churches; and that he joins with the Arminians, who teach, That this distinction placeth in God two contrary Wills; and that he wills and decrees one thing from eternity, and commands and approves the contrary to his creatures: Hence there must be guile and dissimulation, and no serious dealing in the Lord's commands, saith Arminius, Corvinus, and the Arminians at the Conference at Hague, and the Synod of Dort.

3. Hence it is, that Mr. H. will have the same very right given by the approved Will of God to Members, that is given by the Decree. Just as Vorstius will have the promises and threatenings every way conform to the Decree: and he and all the Arminians say, We may make them often contrary to the Decree, and make the Holy Lord to deal doubly, and to will one thing within himself, and command the contrary. So Mr. H. saith, we make God's command to give one right external to the Seals, and his Decree the contrary, or no right at all to some hypocrites.

But we answer to both: God by his Decree ordains what shall come to pass or not come to pass, or what shall fall out or not fall out, be it good in his effective Decree, or be it evil in his permissive Decree: For all things were written in his book, when as yet they were not, even all David's Members, Ps. 139. 16. Eph. 1. 11. But God by his approving Will does not decree what shall come to pass or not come to pass, but only commands what is good, and promises rewards accordingly, and forbids what is evil, and threateneth punishment, whether the good or the evil come to pass, or never come to pass; he commands Judas to believe, and Cain, and Pharaoh, that is, he approves of their faith as good obedience, and agreeable to his Law, and yet their obedience never falls out, nor did the Lord ever decree they should obey: for what God decree • shall be, must be; but what he commands does not ever fall out: So the Lord forbids the killing of Christ, Exod. 20. 13. that is, he declareth that he nilleth, disapproveth, and hateth the slaying of the Lord of Life; and yet the killing of Christ falls out, a • d was decreed to come to pass by the permission of God, Acts 2. 23. & 4. 27 28. Here is no shadow of contradiction here. Again, God giveth a right to the Seals to hypocrites; that is, he commandeth the Church to give the Seals to Magus, whether such really or hypocritically believe, this is a right not properly inherent in visible Members, for their Profession, yea, or their supposed Conversion. 1. Because all saving and real right to Ordinances is relative to Election to glory, and flows from the Merit of Christ's death; but visible Professors, as such, of whose society Magus and Judas are, have not any saving and real right, as chosen and redeemed in Christ, by grant of our Brethren. 2. A right flowing only from an external profession, and from composed hypocrisy in Magus, is no true right; a lie cannot give a true right, I offend that Mr. H. so anxiously contends for a Charter to such Bastards as Magus. 3. It is a favor to hear the Gospel, and partake of the Seals; and Ius activum, an active right the Church and Ministers have to call and admit to the Seals all who profess as Magus, that the Elect in the visible Church may be converted, but it is not a right proprie dictum ne quidem Ecclesiasticum, that they have who are such hypocrites as Judas and Magus; for the command and revealed Will of God most improperly is said to give M • gus a right to the Seals: Except Mr. H. never Divine so spake; the command reveals the right, but gives none. As also the right of visible Professors is Ius passivum, and a conditional and passive right; for Magus and Judas have no right to be visible Members, or to partake of the Seals, yea or to profess the Covenant and Name of God, Psal. 50. 16. but upon condition of faith: for God cannot command sin and an hypocritical profession: yea, he forbids treading in his Courts, Isa. 1. 12, 13. except they repent and believe, ver. 16, 17. therefore Magus sins in professing, and in being baptized, he remaining rotten: But the Church sins not, but does the command of Christ in calling, inviting all that profess, whether they be really, or in the judgment of charity, Converts or no. Which distinction not being observed, our Brethren and Mr. H. mistake the nature of an Ecclesiastical right; for the Lord in the command gives to all visible professors, such as Peter, who really believe, both the Ecclesiastic and external right to the Seals which he decreed to give them, and the same internal and real right which they have by faith, and no other than according to his eternal decree, they have given them in time by real believing. But for hypocrites, as Magus, they have no right Ecclesiastic to the Seals, but a sort of active and permissive right, by which they claim room in the visible Church, and the Seals from the Church. Therefore taking the Church visible as only visible, as contra-distinguished from the invisible and really believing: and as visibility is common to both Peter and Magus, and their external profession obvious to the eye of man, so the visible Church hath no right that is true and real to the Seals: So I retort the Argument upon Mr. H.

True real believers, as Peter, and hypocrites, as Magus, have either one and the same Church-right to Membership and Seals, or another, and diverse. The same right they cannot have;

1. Because the right of truly and really believing ones, is according to the Decree of Election, such as the Lord ordained to be purchased to them by the Merits of Christ, and also according to the Lord's revealed Will. He who believes hath right to eat of the Tree of Life, and to Membership and Seals: But this right Magus and hypocrites have not, for they have no part in Christ.

2. The right that believers, as Peter and John, have, is by fulfilling of the condition. He who believes, and loves to be reformed, hath right to the Covenant, Promises, to Perseverance, to the anointing that teacheth all things. These are promised and decreed to them, Ier. 31. 33, 34. & 32 38, 39, 40. Isa. 54. 10, 11. & 59. 20, 21. compared with Acts 13. 47, 48. John. 6. 44, 45, 46. & 6. 37. & 10. 26, 27. and to them only, not to Magus and to Reprobates.

3. Magus, and such like wooden and tree-legs, might claim the same life, living Membership, lively and vital operations, and to have the anointing, and to be kept through faith unto salvation by the power of God, 1 Pet. 1. 4. and to have the fear of God put in their hearts, that they should not depart from God, as Ier. 31. 39, 40. if they have the same right to Membership and the Seals in their substance and grace signified with sound believers. And this is most absurd.

If hypocritical Professors have another external and Ecclesiastical right then real believers upon these grounds, it must be a false and a bastard Charter, founded upon an hypocritical profession. Let Mr. H. show how the right of visible professors who are real believers, and the right of painted and rotten Professors, such as Magus and the like have, is one univocally, and in nature the same right; and yet Mr. H. (which darkeneth the Reader) puts them all in one, and would have Christ the same way to be King, Head, (survey pag. 16.) Redeemer, who hath bought with his blood the Elect, pag. 39, 40. and such rotten ones, as Magus and Judas. 2. How a false and a true right can come from the same command of God, let Mr. H. judge.

Lastly, it is poor to say, How come hypocritical Professors to have right to the Seals? As visible Members they have none, as invisible Members they have none, for such they are not.

Ans. True, they are not; but Mr. H. gives them the same right with invisible Members: quo jure let him show. Ergo, the Church must give them no Seals, or give them Seals, when she cannot know they have any right, for indeed they have none that is true and real.

Ans. The Church doth obey Christ in giving them Seals; and it well follows, Ergo, The Church giveth them Seals, when she cannot know they have any right, to wit, internal and real, which is a saving privilege of special note in the Mediator, to the Seals including signs and the grace signified: for so only they do belong in the Lord's intention and eternal decree to real believers, not to Magus and Judas, except Mr. H. will stand for Arminian Universal Grace, and say that God intends the same saving grace in Ordinances and Seals to Peter and John, and likewise to Pharaoh and Magus.

CHAP. XVII.

Mr. H. saith, These things may well be given to the visible Church.

Those over whom Officers are set, to feed them by Doctrine and Discipline, must needs be the visible Church: But these are the Church, Act. 20. 28. Feed the flock, not of the Elect only, but of the whole visible Church; Take heed to the whole flock of God, else if they were set over the Elect only, they might reply, Lord, we cannot search into thy secrets, who are the Elect and invisible Saints, only to feed them: where as the current and common sense of the Scripture, is, taking Redeemed and Sanctified as visible, though not really such, the stream of the Text runs pleasantly, Feed all visibly redeemed. Elect and Reprobate: So they be redeemed in the judgment of Charity.

Ans. 1. The Church visible is taken two ways. 1. In the latitude, as comprehending all Professors, sound, as Peter, or rotten, as Magus; all which have a sort of right to the Seals, but divers ways, as is said.

2. More restricted, as a Church so and so visible, as the soundest part of real believers, comprehending in Corinth only such as are really justified, sanctified, &c. In the latter • ense, the Church visible and professing is one in the matter, all one with the Church invisible, and soundly and sincerely professing, and Peter is both a real believer, and visible and soundly professing believer. In the former sense, Paul writing to Corinth, to Ephesus, 1 Cor 1. Eph. 1. 1. Rom. 1. 7. to the Romans, calleth all the Church visible there justified, or not justified, the Church, to wit, the Church visible. In the latter sense only the so and so visible professors, sanctified, justified, are the only really, soundly professing visible Church, and the whole is named from the sounder part. In the latter sense, Christ is head and Husband of the visible Church, consisting of only real, sound, visible Professors, and that not only by the influence of politick guidance, but also by the influence of saving grace. But of this visible Church Mr. H. moves not the question, and therefore his Arguments speed the worse.

2. The Argument of the same strain is formed by the Arminians, so, As many as are the really redeemed Church (say the Arminians) and, As many as are the Church of God redeemed in the judgment of Charity (saith Mr. H.) the Elders were to feed. But the Elders were to feed the whole flock, Elect and Reprobate, real believers and hypocrites. But the Proposition is denied, and how either the Arminians or Mr. H. prove the Proposition, we see not: For Redemption to be bought with the blood of God; yea, to be chosen to life before the foundation of the world, which are proper to the invisible Church only, are attributed to the visible Church of Ephesus, Eph. 1. 4. Was it Paul's mind that thanks should be given to God, because God hath chosen us all, and everyone of the visible Church (here is Universal Predestination) of Ephesus before the foundation of the world to be really holy (for of that holiness he speaks) because from eternity God had in the judgment of charity chosen to life and holiness such as Magus and Judas, and the grievous Wolves in that Church? So must Paul say, 2 Thess. 2. 13. We are bound to give thanks to God for you, all whom we feed, all to whom we write, real converts or hypocrites, that God hath, in the judgment of charity, chosen you all salvation through sanctification of the Spirit, and bilief in the truth.

2. The Proposition is false, That as many as in the judgment of charity were bought with the blood of God, as were to be fed with Doctrine and Discipline, and so with Excommunication; Then were they to esteem all the grievous Wolves that spared not the flock, but preached perverse things, Acts 20. 28, 29. and all that had in such a manner fallen from their first love, and first works, yea all the Apostates in the judgment of charity to be bought with the blood of God, and eternally chosen to life, and saved: for the Officers were to feed all these with Exhortations, Threatenings, Censures. Now the latter is unsound.

But 3. They were all recommended to the care of Pastors, as dear bought. True: but not as if all were dear bought, the Text saith not that. Mr. H. no doubt, sinned with the Arminians, in adding that to the Text; for a father departing may recommend his family of children and servants to a Steward, because (saith the father) they are dear to me; it will not follow that they are all dear to him as children.

4. Feed the Redeemed flock, not as known to you to be Redeemed or Predestinated to life, but as professors among whom are my ransomed ones.

5. The Text runs in its stream most muddily, not pleasantly; if the world, and the whole world, John. 1. 29. & 3. 16. 1 John. 2. 1, 2. and the All, that Christ died for, be the Church of converts in charities judgment, behold, Mr. H. turns the world, all the world, all the world for whom Christ died, before they were born, and had being, into visible Saints; and when the Lord saith, Ephraim is his dear son, Jer. 31. and Israel a holy priesthood, a chosen generation, the currant and pleasant sense must be, All and everyone in the ten Tribes, and all Israel are the Lord's dear children, and Priests sanctified to offer themselves an holy living sacrifice to God, in the judgment each one of another, though there be to their knowledge many thousand visible Idolaters, Murderers, &c. that are detestable to God, not dear to God, as everywhere the Scripture teacheth.

Mr. H. p. 40. The visible Church is called The Body of Christ, 1 Cor. 12. 27. 28.

Ans. The visible Church in the sense of Mr. H. as including Magus, Judas, as such, is not Christ's body. 2. Nothing is proved, except it be made out, that all and everyone in Corinth were lively Members under the Head Christ, in the judgment of charity, otherwise it is a sinful addition to the Text.

Mr. H. A Church may be visibly in Covenant, which hath not an infallible assistance, may err in fundamentals, fall away, and not endure as the days of heaven, and so are his first and fifth arguments answered.

Ans. It is, I confess, soon done, if well.

Ans. It is true, if men entertain such things as they call truths, when they are but lies of Arminians, it will be easy to wipe away all with a dry Negoconclusionem. My first argument to prove that the invisible, and not the visible single Congregation, is the principal, prime and only proper subject of all the privileges of special note given in the Mediator Christ, is Par. 1. pag. 244, 245. because that is such a subject of all these privileges, to which only and principally the Promises belong, that they are a seed enduring as the days of heaven, Psa. 89. and can no more cease to be in God's Covenant favor, than the Ordinances of heaven can cease to be, Jer. 31. 35, 36. then the Mountains can depart, Isa. 54. 10, &c. But the visible Church of a Congregation is not such, &c. Judge Reader of the answer.

The fifth Argument, Because the invisible Church of the Elect is such as cannot err in fundamentals, cannot fall from the Rock, and not the visible Church of the Congregation, whereof seven may be a Church, and six of them such materials as Magus; nor can such a Congregation bear as the first, only, and prime subject, these styles (say I, pag. 250.) that are proper only to the Elect, Redeemed, and really sanctified Church, the styles of Christ's Sister, Love, Dove, Spouse, Mystical Body of Christ.

Mr. H. answers by yielding the Assumption, A Church may be visibly in Covenant, may err in fundamentals, may fall away. And this is Mr. R. first and fifth Arguments. Hence if perseverance and never falling away, be a special privilege given in the Mediator Christ, and it agree not to the Congregational, the only visible Church, and if it agree not to all visible Congregations, then is not the visible Church the only principal subject of such privileges; since the world was, no Logic can say that a property can be denied of its first and only subject, That is a man, and yet is not apt to laugh.

2. To be visibly in Covenant, is not a privilege of special note, that is, a saving privilege, such as Perseverance, to have the anointing, and a new heart: Of which saving privileges I spake all along, pag. 244, 245, 246, 247, 248, 249, 250, 251, &c. for to be visibly in Covenant, agrees to Magus, and to all rotten Members; but these saving privileges of perseverance agree not to Mr. H. his visible Church, which may, and doth fall away, saith Mr. H. Judge then, if these two Arguments be wiped away with a wet finger, as saith Mr. Hooker.

Mr. H. p. 40, 41. A Church may be visibly red • emed by the blood of God, be called the Body of Christ, the Sons and Daughters of God, and yet not be really and inwardly such, which is his second Argument. The third is answered already.

Ans. This is with a hop and a skip to take away Arguments. 1. Mr. H. should have done so much as repea • ed the Argument. But to be really redeemed, to be the Body of Christ, to be really, to be, I say, in veritate rei, the Sons and Daughters of God, and not to be called so only (a generation of Vipers call themselves, Matth. 3. the holy seed) are privileges of special note in the Mediator Christ, as I spake pag. 244. and these privileges agree not to the visible and nominal Church, of which Magus is a Citizen, as to the principal, prime and only subject, as Mr. H. yieldeth; and so yieldeth the Argument.

2. A Church may be both visibly the Redeemed of God, and called, and be really the Body of Christ, and invisibly, be also the Redeemed of God, by a figure, as touching the sound and real visible Saints among them, but that destroys Mr. H. his cause, who will have all and everyone in the judgment of charity redeemed, even so many as are fed with Word and Censures.

3. Mr. H. should have applied his answer to the Arguments, but he saw it would not frame. I have done it. Let the second thoughts of some help here.

For Mr. H. must apply his answers to the cited places: so Ier. 31. 33. I will put my law in their inward parts, according to the judgment of charity; and Ier. 32. I will put my fear in their hearts, according to the judgment of charity. And when the Lord saith, I was a husband to Israel, that is, in the judgment of charity. Isa. 53. He was stricken for the transgression of my people, that is, visible Saints, and for Magus, for my confederate people, in the judgment of charity. Ah! • ee not men dare to add their after-birth inventions to the truth of God.

Therefore Mr. H. addeth, pag. 40 They who hold that a visible Church is redeemed externally, cannot say by any good inference, that Christ died for all such in God's intention, or that all such are chosen to glory, or that God intendeth to save all such.

Ars. This is said, not proved. If Christ die for the whole world in the judgment of charity, he must intend and decree in the same judgment of charity to save them by his death, else he is conceived to die for them upon no intention at all. I judge Christ's dying for us essentially includes his intention to save, to deliver from the present evil world, Gal. 1. 4. If therefore this charitable judgment of Mr. H believed Christ died for all the Members of the Church of Ephesus (suppose Magus to be a baptized Member) he must in the same judgment believe that God intended to save Magus: yea, and Mr. H. must believe in charity, by his death he intends to save all and everyone in the visible Church, all the earth over, and so did choose to glorify all the visible Saints, and consequently all nations; Isa. 2. 1, 2. all Egypt, all Assyria, Isa. 19. 25. all the Gentiles, Isa. 60. 1, 2, 3, &c. all the Kingdoms of the world, Rev. 11. 15. for they are all the visible Kingdoms and Churches of Christ; and charity shall forbid to believe, that there be one reprobate in the visible Churches, and shall necessitate Mr. H. to believe that God intends salvation, and so chose to salvation every man and woman of them. But I shall not undertake to reconcile our Brethren's charity and their faith, when the Lord shall fulfil the Prophesies, Isa. 2. & 19, &c. And what reason is there, I pray you, to say, People are visibly redeemed, but not visibly chosen to glory? for the act of redeeming is not Christ's visibly dying on the Cross, for that Redemption material was visibly to no generations before that crucifying of Christ, or to us; but it is the laying down of the ransom of that noble life for such a certain number of Elect, not one moe, not one fewer than are written in the Lambs Book of Life (I am of that opinion, I hope, with our Brethren) and this is as much hid and invisible to man, until their godly walk make their redemption in its effects to be visible, as their eternal Election to glory; therefore I much wonder of Mr. Lockyers asserting from Acts 15. (but I hope my Reverend Brother Mr. James Wood hath by this silenced him: for we look for only silence from him, except some other lewd brotherly help) that the proper and allowed matter of a visible Church now in the days of the Gospel, is persons truly converted, such as God who knoweth the hearts of all men can bear witness of, as indeed sealed by his holy Spirit; I say, This is the matter that we ought now to take to raise again the Tabernacle of David, and none other, no not in a whole Church, as for that, so far as very spiritual men can judge. Its a dreadful addition to the Word.

CHAP. XVIII.

Me. H. Ar. 1. If those who were graceless, and had no interest in Christ, had yet a command from Christ to receive the Seals, had warrant from his Word to require them; then they had a right (outward and visible in foro Ecclesiae) to partake of them: for there is no better right than God's Command to enjoin, and his Word to warrant us to challenge any privilege. But many graceless, who were no invisible members, Ishmael, Esau, and all the males were enjoined to be circumcised, and all the houses of Israel to eat the Passover.

Ans. 1. What is in question is not proved, to wit, That the privileges of special note in the Mediator Christ, i. e. saving privileges, as Mr. R. often teacheth, pag. 244, 245. belong not to the invisible Church as to the proper and first subject. But Mr. H. proves, That external signs, and external right to the Seals, in foro Ecclesiae, are bestowed upon rotten Members, Magus and others.

2. He ought to prove the visible Church is the only principal subject of the seals, as he elsewhere asserts. But this Argument proves it not.

3. He frames the Argument of Infants, who have right to be circumcised, who have no command of Christ (for Infants are not capable of commands or threatenings) and brings not instances of these come to age under the New Testament.

4. A graceless man, as Magus, hath thus far right to demand the Seals, that he may say to the Church, You sin in withholding the Seals, and therefore I require you baptize me, as Christ hath commanded you: but he cannot say, I have right even external to receive Baptism, and I sin not in receiving it. And Mr. H. Argument to prove it is naught: Why, saith he, Graceless men have the command of God to challenge the Seals; Magus hath the command of God to challenge, and to receive the Lord's Supper. A command absolute he hath none: show me such a command, Magus, Judas, eat and drink at the Lord's Supper, challenge, claim and receive Baptism; All Israel eat the Passover, be ye real believers or hypocrites, be ye self-triers, and prepared or not, be ye clean or unclean: I confess there were no better right to challenge the Seals, than such a command, if any such were; but if Mr. H. or any of his read such a command, I pray I may see, and read also. But Magus hath only a conditional command, which gives him no true and real right, save only conditionally, to wit, Magus, receive the Seals and the Lord's Supper, so thou believe, and examine thyself; if not, thou hast no right to the seals, but eatest and drinkest thine own damnation: And because these graceless men fulfil not the condition, and believe not, Mr. H. his Argument is wa •• ry; They have right from the command of God, which is the b •… right: that is, they have no right at all from a conditional command, they not fulfilling the condition, but such right as Robbers have to the Travelers purse; yea, they have no command of God, but the contrary a severe discharge, Isa. 1. 13. Bring no more vain oblations. Matth. 22. 12. Friend, how camest thou in hither, not having a wedding garment? He that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh damnation to himself, 1 Cor. 11. 29.

Mr. H. p. 42. Job and his godly friends were invisible Members, but being strangers they are forbidden to eat the Passover: Ergo, the seals belong not to invisible Members.

Ans. 1. The thing denied is not concluded. Job and his godly friends had the marrow of the Seals, and wanted some external signs, which are not saving privileges, as I allege pag. 244. That Job was not circumcised, possibly is said, not proved by Mr. H.

2. My mind is not to deny that the visible acts of eating, drinking, being washed in Baptism, belong not to visible believers as visible, taking visible as coincident with real believers; for invisible men can no more visibly partake of Ordinances, than Spirits can be baptized, and eat the Lord's Supper.

3. Job and his godly friends were not forbidden to be circumcised, nor to sacrifice; Job sacrificed warrantably, Job 1. c. 42. Job professeth he was visibly in Covenant, Job 13. 16. and 19. 25. I know that my Redeemer liveth. And so they were neither invisible Members only, nor debarred from the seals. Nay, Proselytes were admitted to the seals.

Mr. H. 〈◊〉 . 41. If the invisible Church be the first subject of the seals, the invisible Church must have the seals firstly, and the visible Church secondarily; as heat is first in the element of fire, and secondarily in things hot by participation, as iron.

Ans. It is no Logic: If the invisible and real believer, for example, Peter, be the first subject of the seals, including Christ signified in them, then to receive the seals worthily, agree first to Peter and to invisible real believers, and secondarily to these same invisible believers, as they do visibly declare by their savoury conversation, that they are really believers: but there is no real transmigration of accidents out of one subject to another; that is cold Logic: but such real and internal right to the seals, and to Christ and his grace signified by the seals, do neither firstly nor secondarily belong to such visible Saints as Magus and Judas, yea neither per se, nor per participationem; as the Sun and Stars are neither hot nor cold, either firstly or secondarily, for they are, Aristotle saith, Corpora quintae essentiae, bodies of a fifth essence, different from the elements and all mixed bodies.

Mr. H. p. 42, 43. The Olive tree is the prime subject of the fatness that issues from it, and appertains to it, and of all the Ordinances. But the visible Church, Rom. 11. is the Olive, the seals and other privileges are part of the fatness which pertains thereunto: Therefore the visible Church is the prime subject of them. That the Olive is the visible Church, see Beza, Pareus, Willet.

Ans. 1. Will Mr. H. bide by this Conclusion, That the visible Church, including rotten Magus, traiterous Judas, is the prime subject of all saving privileges, of the new heart, God's inward heart-teaching, perseverance, &c? Then by his own argument, Magus, and the visible body whereof he is a graceless member, as visible, must be first qualified inherently with all these saving privileges, as heat is firstly (saith he) in the fire; and then Justification, Perseverance in grace, must be transferred from such an ugly body as Magus, Judas, &c. to real and invisible believers.

2. The Assumption is false: Read again Calvin, Beza, Pareus; add Pet. Martyr, The English Notes, Diodati, they expound not the Olive of the visible Church only as contradistinguished from the invisible, as Mr. H. takes the visible Church in this dispute, as it includes the whole visible Israel, even Idolaters, who slew the Prophets and the Heir: But the Church visible including the Election, Rom. 11. 7. and also the invisible and really justified, and by fatness, they mean not only external privileges, which the rotten hypocrites wanted not, but the juice and sap of saving grace, by which, saith Pet. Martyr, They that are far off are made nigh, Ephes. 2. 12, 14. and were engrafted in the Head and Body, saith Pareus; yea, Willet citeth Gorham, and Lyra, who expound the fatness of habitual grace.

Mr. H. Let Mr. R. remember he said, lib. 2. pag. 260. None are to be cast out for non-regeneration known to be such. But if ye give them the seals (saith Mr. H.) the Church shall give the seals to such whom she knows have no right to them.

Ans. Mr. H. himself is alike burdened with this as I am: A toleration there must be of some, until the scandals be examined, and Censures applied, and the Church knows men to be unregenerated, many days before they can know it juridice. Let Mr. H. then answer, whether they should be debarred from the seals or not.

2. If such were admitted being free of scandal, it follows not (its a poor begging of the question) that the Church should admit to the seals such as she knows hath no right. Why? because they are not in the judgment of charity real converts; that is, non causa pro causa, no cause.

Mr. H. Mr. R. puts the formalis ratio, the essential reason of Offices and Officers in another subject, besides the visible Church, in the invisible Catholic Church, convertibly, or reciprocally and universally. Whatsoever hath these privileges, to wit, Offices, Officers, Seals, right to the Seals, &c. is the invisible Catholic Church. And only the invisible Catholic Church (Ergo, not the visible) hath all these privileges. If Mr. R. rid his hands, &c. its good.

Ans. Mr. H. hath two pages near by of this, of which whether I have rid my hands, let the judicious Reader determine. Know, Reader, that Mr. H. will have all privileges, external Offices, Officers, Seals, and right Ecclesiastic (which is formally a painted bastard right) in the visible Church, only as its first subject: I rid my hands of this, by granting it; take the visible Church in a good sense, as including good and bad, nor said I ever anything to the contrary. But these are not the saving privileges of special note, such as to be taught of God, to persevere in saving grace, &c. as I oft say, p. 244, 245, &c. And though Mr. H. his privileges, to be an Apostle, or another Officer, to have right external to the seals (a bastard right) agree to the visible Church, yea to Judas and Magus, they being gratiae gratis datae: yet saving privileges, the anointing; the new heart, Justification, Perseverance; the styles of Spouse, Sister, Love, Dove, &c. are such as I desire Mr. H. to rid his hands, and to clear the coasts to us, by his answer to my words. Due right, par. 1. pag. 244, 245. divers pages; how these agree reciprocally to his visible Church. I take but some few. The single Congregatinn of such as Magus and Peter, &c. is the first and reciprocal, and proper subject of the anointing, of justification, and perseverance.

And convertibly, All that have the anointing, are justified, persevere, are only the single independent Congregation of such as Magus and Peter, &c.

What then will Mr H. do with his own, that are both visibly and invisibly justified, regenerate, who by persecution or pestilence are broken from the Independent Church? Shall they not share of the anointing, because they are not Members of the single Congregation? This is hard measure to the godly, and bad Divinity. This is not good Logic, that therefore Mr. R. must show some other essential causes of Offices and Officers besides the invisible Church: He must mean the visible Church of which Magus is a Member. I know in Logic, that the subject is an essential cause of an accident; Subjectum sumitur in d • finitione per additamentum, I learned long ago.

And for the close, the society, the saving privileges, of the new heart, perseverance, is the invisible Church; and all that have these, the anointing, perseverance, &c. is the invisible mystical true Church. I own this reciprocation, as new Logic; though let not the Reader mistake, I take invisible as opposed to visible in its latitude, as it takes in both believing Peter, and the hypocrite Magus; yet so, as the visible Church is so named, to wit, a true visible Church, from the choicest part, but not as invisible is opposed to visible, tali modo, both visible and sincere: for the Catholic Church invisible, is also the Catholic Church visible, to wit, tali modo, in a sincere profession visible.

CHAP. XIX.

Mr. H. We have done with the material cause: Now we come to the formal cause of the visible Church. The faithful, whether they be seemingly or sincerely such, scattered up and down the earth, are like stones in the streets, or timber in the field, they may have a communion by faith, by which they are an invisible Body Mystical, but until they meet together in one place, and have right to all the Ordinances there, and be confederate by a Church-Covenant, which gives the formality to these Churches, they are not visible Church members.

Ans. If the faithful scattered in sundry Congregations have an invisible communion only by faith, and so make up an invisible communion, and an invisible Mystical Body; then two Sister-Churches that cannot meet in one place, though they may do all the duties of Church-gaining one another, as Mat. 18. yet are not a visible body, no • their acts, acts of Churchprofession, not are they visible members of the same Body of Christ, because they partake no • of the Ordinances within the same walls, as do members of the same single Congregation: so there is no visible communion, but within the walls of one Church; which is absurd, and repugnant to common sense.

2. It is uncharitable, and against the Word, to teach, That when a Church is dissolved, by no sin and scandal visible, but by persecution or pestilence, that the dissolved members, though both real and visible converts, have no right to the Ordinances: for if the formal cause, to wit, their confederacy into one visible body, as Mr. H. saith, be removed, their visible and external right is removed. The like is to be said of visible professors, and of members of another Congregation, and known godly sojourners; these Mr. H. excommunicates for no scandal visible and invisible: for impossible it is that they can meet together in one place with their own Church, with which only they are incorporate by this confederacy.

Mr. H. This confederating implieth two.

1. The act of mutual engaging, which passeth away, arising from the act of obligation, the state of membership. The nature of incorporating members to mutual duties will constrain to yield to this.

Ans. 1. An Oath or Covenant is no passing away thing, as Mr. H. saith, but leaveth the person under the tie.

2. The state of trying these persons and their seed to be baptized only into the single Body, is a dream, even to Mr. Robinson, and the engagement that gives them right to Ordinances only with that single Congregation, and in one place, and with no society else to partake of one Bread, and of one Christ, 1 Cor. 10. 16 17. is a Scriptureless imagination: for 1 Cor. 12. 12, 13. We are baptized all, Jews and Gentiles, by one Spirit into one Body, (Catholic, not a single Congregation only) and are all made to drink into one Spirit, in the Lord's Supper, even all; not of one single Congregation only, but of several Congregations, whether they be engaged Mr. H • . way or not.

Mr. H. The judgment must be of persons free (in regard of human constraint) for they may join, or not join to this Congregation, to receive them or not receive them. 2. It gives power to each over another, to watch over one another.

Answ. Mr. H. makes three properties of this engagement; but he is sharp-sighted, who can difference the third from the first.

2. Freedom from human constraint i • dubious: If from the Christian Magistrate compelling to Elicite acts of the will; Never man, I think, dreamed of such constraint, as may be laid upon men to believing, loving, fearing. If it be freedom from compelling the external man to Imperate acts; our Divines say, The Magistrate may civilly in his way compel to the means of Salvation, the baptized ones especially, both to hear, and to eat and drink at the Lord's Table in some true Church. If it be freedom from a Law of God, or the Church constraint, as this it must be, or then nothing is said.

1. God hath commanded all to come to the house, Pro. 1. • 0. Prov. 9. 1, 2, 3. Matth. 22. 3, 4, 5, 6. Luk. 14. 16. And that is a Prophesy to be fulfilled under the New Testament, Zach. 14. 17. And it shall be that who so will not come up of all the families of the earth unto Jerusalem, to worship the King, the Lord of hosts, even upon them there shall be no rain. The English notes say, it figures the Elects gathering together into a particular Church, to which everyone must reduce himself to partake of the communion of Saints. And they are also the words of Diodati, and Calvin, Junius, Piscator, Danaus, say the same in sense. It is true, preaching to a particular Church should be voluntary, but not by such a Covenant, and so all worship should be; and it were not enough to say, Lord, thou commandest us to get us to the shepherds tents, Cant. 1. 7. And to come into Wisdoms house; but we have freedom to enter Members to this or this, or all the Churches on earth.

2. And it is in all the Churches on earths power to receive us, or not; which is also false. One is born, baptized, comes to be a visible professor in the Church of Boston; is not that providential necessity a ground to the Magistrate to command him to do his duty, and for the Church to constrain him by Ob • estations, Censures, being born a member, to partake of the Ordinances, as his duty is. O but he is not satisfied with the Ministry of Boston, but he hath freedom to enter a Member of a Church a hundred miles distant by a new Church-oath: show a warrant why he ought not to worship the Lord there where his Calling and Trade is; he must confess Christ before men in all places, it is not arbitrary then.

3. Not one word of God is alleged, that this engagement gives power to watch over one another in this Congregation only, and not in all Congregations where Providence shall dispose he shall be; as if all these Church-duties to Members of Christ, of warning one another, comforting, watching over one another, taking care for one another, mourning with those that mourn, Col. 3. 16. 1 Thess. 5. 5, 11, 14. 1 Cor. 12. 26, 27. Heb. 10. 24, 25. & 3. 13. Rom. 12. 15. were forbidden as contrary to the Rule of the Gospel, in order to all precious Churchmembes of other Congregations of which we are not Members.

Mr. H. There is good cause why visible Saints (u • supra) who are thus to engage to watch over one another, should be acquainted with each others fitness, &c. and because the work is weighty, it would be done with fasting and praying, which is not requisite, when one single Member is admitted.

Ans. That the thousands baptized of John the Baptist, and the three thousand, Acts 2. who were to engage themselves, that is, before they were admitted, could have acquaintance and knowledge of the spiritual fitness one of another, is impossible; and not only wants the authority of the Word, but is expressly against it; for it was impossible in some few hours to be done.

2. Ten neighbouring sister Churches lying together are obliged to watch over one another, then they ought, by the Rule of the Gospel, to come under the same engagement.

Mr. H. An implicit covenanting may be sufficient: as suppose a Congregation consist of the children of Parents expressly confederate, but vocal and express confederation comes nearest to the Rule. Mr. R. his bitter clamours, that we make all other Churches save our own, no Church, will be past.

Ans. The Popish and Lutheran Churches in which there is valid Baptism, in which a Vow is made to walk in Church-ways, as observing one another, shall have the formal cause of true visible Churches, and so must be true visible Churches; for they have this Covenant implicitly and virtually.

2. How shall we be made from the Scriptures to see that the Baptist, Mar. 1. 5. the Disciples of Christ, who baptized moe disciple than John, Jo • 5. 4. did tie by Oath one way or another, (and the Covenant being their complete Rule must be vocal and express) are they so enchurched to engage to these Church-duties within their own Congregations? the word hints at no such thing.

3. There is a necessity of vocal Covenant always, if it come nerest to the rule; but where is the rule?

4. What making of matter and form as so described, and what reciding from the Rule of these Churches in the essentials, is so well known to all, as they must be most false Churches that are not made of visible converts, which is the constitution of the Anabaptist Churches: for bitter clamours and unworthy aspersions, I wish Mr. H. had expressed them, that the Reader might judge. I judge that the Church of Christ in N. E. makes true the prophecy, That the wilderness and the desert do there rejoice and blossom as a Rose, Isa. 35.

5. Judicious Mr. Cawdrey citeth Dr. Holmes making an explicit Covenant necessary.

Mr. H. Cohabitation, which is necessary for our Churches, is such as is fit for the end, for the dispensing of Ordinances and C • nsures where they may conveniently meet, Acts 14 27. 1 Cor. 11. 26. & 14. 23. it suffers some exceptions. The Church may send out some to begi •… •… antations where they want able guides, until they attain to a Church-state. States may be compelled to send men to Sea for traffic and for war, and yet no prejudice is done to the Rule of Christ, they are said to cohabit where the place of their abode is in the issue.

Ans. If cohabitation be necessary for the attaining the end; then, as the Pastor cannot be a non-resident, by necessity of a calling in Trading, neither can ten godly Merchants be three years absent, as Mr. H. says Solomon's Merchants were, but they must be non-residents, and neglect Church watching, • nd break Covenant, if it be said (as it must be) it should be the Ministers only calling to reside and watch, but the Merchant hath an extraordinary calling to trade beside.

Ans. This confirms us not a little; no godly visible professors can tie themselves by Covenant or Oath to exercise the common Christian acts of a Church member only to such a society, but in an occasional and providential way: for it is as unlawful to tie Church-worship to one society or place under the New Testament, as it was to tie it of old to Bethel & Gilgal, Hos. 4. 15. & 9. 14. & 12. 11. Amos 44. which is a demonstration that a godly professor carrieth about a Soul with him stands in need of Church-feeding by the Lord's Supper, and other Church Ordinances in all the Christian world, and that he is to warn, admonish, comfort all Church members, and to labor to gain a trespassing brother, not of the single Congregation only whereof he is a Member, Matth. 18. and neither Scriptures, nor sound Divinity, nor the Law of Nature (which is not destroyed by the Gospel) will warrant to limit the word, Brother, as Mr. H. doth, and his Brethren, Matth. 18. 15 If thy brother trespass, if he hear thee, thou hast gained thy brother; to a brother only of the Congregation of which the offended brother is a member; as if Christ had not set down a rule, Mat. 18. of gaining all brethren within the single Congregation, or about it; for the word, Brother, is of this latitude, that it comprehendeth

1. All that may offend a Brother, that is, one not only within a single Congregation only, of which the brother offended is a member, but also one of another Congregation. Now Mr. H. saith, ye have no Church power over one of a •• there Congregation.

2. He is a Brother whom ye are obliged to admonish, Go tell him.

3. He is a Brother whom thou must labor to gain; Thou hast gained thy brother.

4. He is a Brother who is obliged to hear the Church: He will not hear the Church.

5. He is a Brother who may be cast out, Let him be to thee as a heathen.

6. He is one whose sins • ay be bound in Heaven, Verse 16, 17.

7. He is a Brother, who if gained, may pray and meet with others in a Church-way in the name of Christ.

8. He is a Brother, who if he be gained, Christ grants his desire and prayer, Verse 19, 20.

9. He is a Brother, who is to be pardoned, If he sin against Peter seventy times seven times, Verse 21, 22.

10. He is a Brother, who ought to forgive his fellow-Brother, as he would have God to forgive him, Verse 14, 25, 35.

Now it were a foul straitening of the word of Christ, to say these ten agree only to a Brother in order to another Brother of the same single Congregation, as if we did owe by Christ's Doctrine in that notable Sermon, Compassion, Forgiveness, Teaching, Gaining &c. to no Brethren, but to those of the same Congregation, where of we ourselves are members.

2. This Doctrine deprives godly travellers, so journers, savoury professors, of the Lord's Supper, for three, for six years, of the Ordinance of the Lord's Supper, of Church-teaching, Rebuking, Prayer, Church comforts, of all Church-manifestations, and of all Church communion with Christ, the Head of the visible Church, of all Church-presence of him that walks in the midst of the golden Candlesticks, of all Church-influences, of all Sanctuary-beauty, for no scandal or sin, but only for going about a lawful duty in all the visible Churches on earth, as is clear Cant. 1. 7. & 2. 1, 2, 3 4. Psal. 27. 4. & 73. 16, 17. & 84. 4, & 42. 1, 2, 3, 4. Hib. 2. 12. Psal. 22. 22. & 40, 9, 10. for it cannot take off the Argument to say, The godly professor may have the same comforts, but in an invisible way, which he hath in his own Church, in his native abode in a visible and Church-way: for, 1. This is to beg the question, for h • s professed hearing, praying with a foreign Church is as visible as at home. 2. If Christ nowhere have deprived a man of the comfort of the Lord's Supper, whithersoever he come and profess himself a visible Saint, no men on earth can deprive him; but there is no more warrant why a visible Saint should not everywhere remember the Lord's day by eating, as he may pray everywhere in faith holding up pure hands: for as he takes God's Name in vain, if he hate to be reformed; so also to banquet with Christ, not discerning the Lord's body.

3. If these foreign Churches, of which he is no member (as Mr. H. saith) may and do as well discern Mr. H. his Marks of a visible Saint, as his own Church, to wit, after trading among them divers years, to them he savors as if he had been with Jesus, p. 14, 15. he abstains from all known sins, p 24. then have they as good right to tender the Lord's Supper to him as his own Church, and he may have a desire, and the same right both real and visible, that he hath to the Ordinances in his own Congregation; then, as the Eunuch said, Here is water, so, here is a • able, and Christ in eating, what should hinder him to eat? Is not Christ walking beside the golden Candlesticks here as at home?

4. If Providence necessitate him, as he is chased by persecution to one City, and is banished out of that, that he must fly to another, and from that to another, and from that to a third, and is providentially necessitated to have no certain dwelling, as was Abraham, and the Saints case, Heb. 11. 37, 38. 1 Cor. 4. 11. so was Christ's case, Matth. 8. 20. he must either live by the Rule of the Gospel, all his life, without Church-Ordinances, or as he cometh to ten sundry Churches visible, he must be ten times, twenty times married unto, and divorced from the Church, have and lose Church-right to a communion with Christ in his body and blood, and to the Head Christ, and to all the edifying comforts of Church-Ordinances.

CHAP. XX.

MR. H. Every spiritual and Ecclesiastical incorporation receives its being from a spiritual Combination. So Cities and Towns have their Charter granted them from King and State, to meet for such ends; it is the Sement that sodders all. 2. Polished hewn stones give not being to a house, except they be conjoined, &c. But every particular Church is a City, Heb. 12. 22. A house, 1 Tim. 3. 15. The Body of Christ, Eph. 4. 13, 14. 1 Cor. 12. 27, 28. And all these are particular visible Churches where Pastors and Teachers are set, and Members k • it together. So Mr. R. Lib. 2. pag. 302. A Church in an Island is a little City, a little Kingdom of Jesus Christ.

Answ. Mr. H. in the title saith, 3. The reasons of the Covenant, and concludes nothing for a Covenant, but only tells us Saints are the Matter, like scattered stones, union makes the form; but Union is the result, the Covenant goes before; The proposition is, Every Corporation receives its being from Combination: This shall prove no more, but the Congregation is a Congregation from Union of Members; (this is no conclusion debated by us) and proves as well that a National Church, a larger Kingdom of Christ, as Rev. 11. 15. Isa. 2. 2. Egypt and Assyria are made the Lord's people visibly considerated, Isa. 19. 25. and that by one Union, one Lord, one Faith, one Baptism, by the Covenant of Grace so professed; yea, the invisible Catholic Body, the Bride the Lambs Wife, Rev. 21. is a spiritual corporation by such an Union.

2. The thing in question is never proved, to wit, that every single Congregation is made a visible Body within itself, by such a Covenant as the Members are engaged to watch over only one another of that society, have a Church right to Ordinanc • s, Word, Seals, censures, only with the Members of that one society that meet within the walls in one house, and with no other all the earth over.

3. The comparison of a City to a State holds not; See Mr. Cawdry. Cities, 1. have different Charters and Privileges in measures, trading, selling. 2. Different public Rents, Burrough-Lands. 3. Different Governments, some by Major and Aldermen, as royal Burghs: some far otherwise. And so 4. Free Citizens in London, not free Citizens in York, and here is some specifical difference (as it were) in Laws and Freedom • . But it is a poor begging of the question without probation to say, that single Congregations have these four differences; for all Congregations visible have 1. The same Charter, the Covenant of Grace, one Faith and Doctrine of the Gospel. 2 One inheritance and hope of glory, Eph. 4. 3. One and the same visible Head Christ. 4. The same Baptism, and are all visible brethren and members, having the same right to the Seals all the world over, without any new Church Covenant. Phoebe, Iustus, Epaphroditus, Rom. 15. 1. Col. 4. 10. Eph. 6. 21. Are brethren (visible professors, the distinction of saluting brethren, and of Church-brethren must not be taken up on our brethren's word) having right by Letters of Recommendation to Seals, as Mr. Cotton teacheth: now Letters of Recommendation, as I prove, (and Mr. H. never lets on him that he did read it) yea, nor do men or Angels give, but only declare right, that brethren Pastors had before in all Churches to Baptism, to partake of the Seals, otherwise they cannot eat the Lord's Supper in another congregation, contrary to both the truth and Mr. Cotton, and the way of the Churches of N. E. except they swear or engage themselves members to all the Churches about where they should and ought occasionally to receive the Seals, and partake of Church-comforts. But this Mr. H. flatly contradicteth; let them agree among themselves: now such an engaging being a binding of themselves to impossibilities, that they shall discharge duties of watching over all, as over their door-neighbors of the same flock, is unpossible, and so unlawful; no authority on earth can take saith, or the holy and blameless visible profession thereof from a visible professor; and to whatever Table of the Lord he comes, or ordinances of ministerially preached promises, they are his by his faith visibly professed; Mr. H. must show one inhibition of Christ to debar any visible son from the fathers bread; if then the argument be drawn from civil Corporations (as they cry out against this argument in us for Provincial and National Churches) it must be this, as every incomplete Corporation or Lane in London consenting to receive such a man an Inhabitant and Member of that Lane, doth not make the man so received a free Citizen of London, for that he was before they received him, when he was a member of another Lane: and every City admitting a man to be a free Citizen of London, does not make him a subject of the Kingdom of England, for that he was before he was a Citizen: so neither does every single Church receiving a member, make him for that a member of the visible Church: for 1. he was before (we suppose) baptized, and both a real and a visible Saint, and had Church right to partake of the Lord Jesus, and the bread, not as a seal of our communion with the Member • of his own church only, but of all the Churches of the Saints, saith the Church of N. E. The argument is not unlike this: Whatever constitutes Socrates a single person, doth also constitute him a man, which is most false. 2. The Texts in the assumption are widely mistaken, Heb. 12. 22, 23. But you are come to Mount Ziou, that is, to a single Independent Congregation; nay read more, v. 23. To the general Assembly and Church of the first-born, which are written in heaven; that is, to a company of visible saints, of which seven may be a Church (saith the way of the Churches of N. E.) and these sometimes (say they and M. H.) hypocrites, such as Judas and Magus: If so, then these must be called the City of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem, the general Assembly of the first-born, whose names are written in heaven. It may grieve the godly, that the word of God should be so perverted: Oecumenius, and Thtophylact and Galvin, Piscator, Marlor •• , English Divines, Diedati, Pare • s, as also Cajetan, Esthius, cal them the universal church of the elect.

The place 1 Tim. 3. 15. is not to be limited to the Church of Ephesus, Pareus loquitur de columna ministeriali, of a ministerial Church that preacheth the Gospel, and so its nothing to this purpose; Calvin, Beza, Cr •• iger, he means the Church indefinitely whithersoever Timothy should come, let it be a particular Congregation, it is made up of preaching Pastors, who bear up the truth, by the preached Gospel, as the pillars (say Piscator and Pareus) bear up the house.

The place Eph. 4. 13, 16. is meant not of a visible Congregation, whose members are Magus and Judas; for Christ leading captivity captive, and ascending, gave not Apostles and Teachers finaliter, for the saving and perfecting of the visible body as visible in Mr. H. his way (which must be said, if anything be proved against us) but of the body which is visible, but not as visible, but as he saved the Church, inlived by Christ, saith Beza: He speaketh, saith Calvin, of the end of the Ministry, Until we all meet in the unity of faith; not that all men shall believe in Christ, but he speaketh by a Syn • cdoche (saith he) of the pr • destinate only; for they only come to the unity of faith who are chosen to glory. Zanchius and grave and learned D. Bodius of Trochrigge in his learned Commentary, as also Piscator, Bullinger, Sarcerius, Marloratus, Rollocus, Diodati, English Divines, with the Text expound the place of the true mystical body.

For 1. Christ ascended for that body, and sent Apostles not for Magus, and such of Mr. Hookers visible saints.

2. He intends the perfecting and edifying of that body, verse 12. and Apostles and Pastors are theirs, and for their salvation, 1 Cor. 4. 21. 2 Cor. 4. 15.

3. Christ is the saving head only of that body, and the visible Church is never called his body in Scripture, because visible, but by a figure, because of the lively members among them, drawing life from the head Christ, Eph. 1. 22, 23. Eph. 4. 16. Eph. 5. 23. Col. 1. 18.

4. He speaks of that body which shall come with all the saints to the unity of faith.

5. Which grows up into a perfect man, &c. which is a living body, from which I excommunicate Magus and Judas. And for the place 1 Cor. 1. 12, 13. It's not a single Congregation visible; show in all the Scripture where a single Congregation, yea, and every single Congregation never so few (for were it but of seven, or ten, or twenty, it is an instituted politick Church (though wanting Pastors to our brethren) is called Christ's, the body of Christ, as this Church. So Calvin, Beza, Martyr, N •• parvae consolatio hac; it is no small comfort, that the Church is called Christ's, because it is his body: for as Cyrillus saith, Christ, assumed the nature common to all. 2. All the members of the body being many are one body, so also is Christ: yea, th • se many are men of divers cases, divers nations (saith P • rous) yea Jews and Gentile • , verse 13. And therefore this is the Catholic visible body. 3. It is the body, that have been all made to drink into one spirit, in the Lord's Supper; but this must be the many members of divers Congregations, 1 Cor. 10. 16. as our brethren confess. 4. It is the body that lives by the spirit of Christ, 〈◊〉 . 12. For when Christians are said to make one body, it is not understood of a politick body only, but (saith Martyr) of the spiritual and secret body of Christ which aims at life eternal, and hath all th • se common, God, Christ, the Holy Ghost, the word of God, Grace, the Sacraments, to wit, Baptism, the Lord's Supper, called by a Synecdoche, a drinking of the Wine in the Supper; into one spirit, which excludeth not the eating of the bread, v • 13. and so sometimes he speaks of his body in regard of its parts, to wit, of single congregations where the sacraments are administrate, and where there are Prophets, Watchmen, Pastors, Ruling Elders, as eyes and ears, yet not fixed and married by a Church-Oath to one only single congregation, and all along as of the Catholic visible body. And it is true which Mr. R: grants, that a Church in an Island is a little City; but so as it is a member of the Catholic visible body, that hath no charters and privileges spiritual different from these of the whole.

Mr. H. Arg. 2. They who have mutual power each over other to command and constrain in cases whereas they were free before, must by mutual engagement be made partakers of that power. But such are the Church of believers. Ergo.

The second part of the Assumption is clear by Matth. 18. where a legal order is set, by which brethren only of the same Church ought to exercise power one over another, not over infidels, nor yet with other Christians; for I rebuke a Christian of another Church, I cannot call the Church; he departs the place and refuses to come; but I may in a legal way convince and bind Archippus, for he is a brother; and Mr. R. saith, if the classis will not censure him, the congregation may reject him. Learned Whitaker saith, That each of the congregation or counsel hath power over the Apostle Peter, as a brother to censure him; so saith Mr. R.

Ans. The conclusion denied is not proved, but this, Ergo They must by mutual engagement be made partakers of this power. The question is, whether this Church-Covenant be the formal cause of membership visible to and in this only Congregation, and no other visible Church on earth.

2. The proposition is false; for before that engagement so monopolized and restricted to that one only Congregation (which were Will-worship) these brethren being born of believing Parents, and also solemnly by their covenant in baptism were engaged visible members of all the visible Church on earth, and of this of Boston, & these round about (where by providence they dwell) they visibly professing the Gospel. I deny not but it is lawful for a sojourning godly professor, to promise to watch over these of the Congregation where he sojourns: but not in in all cases expedient that he multiply twenty engagements, and it may be twenty oaths, or solemn promises in twenty sundry congregations; so may he engage for a Family, Camp, College, Ship. And it is false to say,

1. You only are my Church brethren, Matth. 18.

2. It is false to say, I have Church-power to the Seals here only.

3. I am made, by this engagement, a Member of Christ visible, whereas I was not so before.

4. It is false, that when I remove to another Church from this, that I loss • all Church-right to seals, all Church-power to gain brethren to Christ there.

And 5. it is false, that when I leave this Church, I am unchurched, no fellow-citizen with the Saints, no Church-member, and yet I was never excommunicate.

3. The Assumption is most false, That by Matth. 18. a brother is to gain only a brother of that congregation whereof he is a Member: Mr. H. aims not to prove that, If thy brother trespass, &c. that our Savior means only of that independent congregation, whereof the brother is a Member engaged to that only congregation, where the gaining and offended brother is a Member. I have alleged ten Reasons on the contrary. Mr. H. his Reason is against himself and the Text, as well as against us. You (saith he) rebuke one of another congregation, he will not hear you; tell the other Church, he departs the place. What then? his Church he leaves should proceed to censure him by Matth. 18. And may not a brother of the same Church refuse to hear also, and depart the place? and the place of Matth. 18. (say we) proveth that both are to be censured by their own respective Churches, as obstinate offenders.

4. Mr. R. saith indeed, That one Congregation hath no power of Jurisdiction over another, but each may complain of another to a Presbytery, or to a Church above both, else the remedy of Christ to remove scandals between Church and Church, is too narrow, and very nothing; and sister-Churches offending each against others, are not to rebuke, and labor (by Mr. H. his way) to gain one another to Christ; and nothing can be more contrary to love and edification, th • n this, and more contrary to our Savior's intent, Mat. 18.

5. What is the formal binding and loosing which one Congregation hath over another, or one Member hath over another of the same, or of divers Congregations, the Scripture is silent: The Churches of divers Congregations lay on burdens and bind other Churches under them, Act. 15. 28. and command and enjoin the things to be believed and done: So Mr. Cotton. But that one Church-member may bind and loose, is unknown to the Scripture: for you may say so, one Subject may bind and loose, forgive debts and bloodshed, because he may complain, or forbear to complain to the Magistrate, and so one Church may bind or loose another Church, and one Member may bind or loose a whole Church, and many Churches, by complaining or not complaining to sound Neighbor-Churches, whose it is to unchurch by non-communion, or to forbear.

6. Mr. H. proves not that Members have not power over each other by this engagement, because before the engagement they are free, and none can compel them to be Church-members, or to be baptized, Luk. 7. True, but if they reside and refuse to join to the true Church, and so deny Christ before men, and being professors, if they refuse to join to the true Church of Christ, they are to be esteemed as Heathens or Publicans; as the Lawyers who refused to be baptized, despised the counsel of God, Luke 7. 30. and the Gospel-threatenings for refusing to come to Wisdomes banquet, Prov. 1. 20, 24. & 9. 3, 4. Luk. 14. 18. are no less bindings and constrainings in their kind, than Church-rebukes of one to another, and Excommunication. Of this before. It is probable and more, That a godly Christian conqueror may hinder conquered Heathen to blaspheme Christ, and adore Idols, and compel them to hear the Gospel.

7. It a wonder that Mr. H. should cite Whitaker, or any of our Divines, who are all for the power of Presbyteries, Synods, yea of an Ecumenic Council, from Mat. 18. which he himself disclaims as an invention of men.

Mr. H. Arg. 3. Voluntary combination makes a man a Member of a Presbyterian Church, as Mr. R. Lib. 2. pag. 320. th • n must voluntary combining make one a Member of a Congregation.

Answ. Still the point in question is never touched. Will this prove that voluntary engagement is the formal cause of a visible Church? so Mr. H. tells us, ch. 4. pag. 45. Of the formal cause of a visible Church: Nor doth voluntary combining make any so a Member of this Presbyterial Church; as he is not also a Member of the whole visible Church, or as he hath no Church right by divine institution to Ordinances and Seals in another Presbyterial and Congregational Church, as this way of Mr. H. teacheth: for, as I say in that place, Presbyterial Churches & Congregational in their being are of divine institution, but in their local bounds, and determitate number of Members, they are things of conveniency, of order, and providential necessity, not of divine institution; and the consequence is poor and nothing; for that is a huge mistake of Mr. H. An implicit Covenant is, when professors in practice do that whereby they make themselves to walk in such a society without any verbal profession; for then a sojourning believer partaking in forty Churches of the Seals in some few years, occasionally doth enter forty implicit covenants, doth forty times unchurch himself, and lose and take up of new his Burgess-ticket and Church-right, and lose it again: For Mr. Cotton, and the Way of the Churches of N. E. teach, That such a man an hundred times partakes of the Seals in some few years, and may lawfully do it, as a son coming occasionally to ten sundry Tables in ten cities or ten families, which do equally belong to his rich and potent father, as he providentially cometh along; yet is he not ten times for that made a son and member of his fathers great family; for his one and the same numerical sonship gives him right to all the ten tables: So one and the same visibly professed sonship gives to a sojourning believer the same Church-right to be fed at all the Tables, to all Church ordinances in ten hundred visible Churches all the earth over; Letters of recommendation do declare, but not create his Church-right to Christ and ten hundred Lord's Suppers; and it is a dream, that the practicing and partaking of the Lord's Supper gives ten hundred new combinations and fancied formalities of Membership to all the Churches, whether Congregational or Presbyterial. Say one be necessitated to dwell in his fathers heritage, and must be a Member of that Church; What Scripture doth loose him from the same occasional duties he owes to the Church from whence he departed, as now being no fixed Member thereof?

Mr. H. 4 Arg. That society of men who may enjoy such privileges spiritual into which none are admitted without the approbation of the whole, that society must be in a special combination; for such an act argueth a combined power, which the whole hath, and not any Member alone; and that they cannot have but by their agreement. But the Congregation is such. They who have power to choose, have power to reject their Officers, who offer themselves to be Members.

Ans. If none may be admitted without the approbation of the whole Congregation, then may no visible Saints, Members of sister visible Churches, be admitted to Church-ordinances Pastoral, hearing, seals, rebukes, comforts, prayers in a Churchway, but by some Covenant one or other made between the Church and these strangers that come to partake: Let Scripture speak, if communion of Saints be not here enough.

2. This fell from a sleeping pen, and what the conclusion is who can tell? 'It is far from the question: for the conclusion is, Ergo, the Members of the Congregation are combined. Why not? Valeat totum. And the whole Church must admit the communicants the many thousands; then ten or twelve thousand of Jerusalem must all be acquainted with the visible Saintship of each other; yea, women who have taken the Church-covenant as well as men: then can none hear, nor partake of Churchprayers and seals in another Congregation, without the privity, and conscience and consent of all the Members, suppose they be ten thousand, and without the consent of the whole: now women are confederate Members as well as men.

Mr. H. Arg. 5. Christian affection makes not the Church; for it is in such as never saw other.

Ans. It proves nothing: they may be Members of the visible Catholic Church, who never saw one another in the face, Prov. 11. 15. Isa. 2. 1, 2. & 19. 25. Psa. 22. 27, &c.

2. Cohabitation (saith Mr. H.) and meeting in one place, makes not a Church; for Turks may meet to hear the Word, 1 Cor. 14. Ergo, covenanting must be the formal of a Church.

Ans. 1. Divers other things are required to the essence of a visible Church, as we shall hear.

2. All is beside the question, we dispute not now the essence of a Congregation.

CHAP. XXI.

Mr. H. If there be a Church, and so Members before Baptism, then Baptism cannot give formality; for forma is causal, and before formatum. But the Church now considered as totum essentiale, is before Baptism. For Ministers are before Baptism, else Baptism may be administered lawfully before by such as are not Rulers nor Pastors, which is denied by Orthodox Divines, and none can give a call to Ministers, but only a Church of believers.

Ans. Its a conclusion not ingenuously forged, as if I made Baptism the specific form of Membership visible; he ought to have cited my words. By Baptism (I say) we are received solemnly into the visible Church; and Baptism is a seal of our entry into Christ's visible Body, as swearing to the colors entereth a Soldier a member to the Army; and, we teach not that Baptism constituteth the Church visible simply as the Church, its a seal of a visible profession.

I distinguish the simple being of a visible Member actu primo; such are Infants born within the covenant visibly made to parents, the promise is made to Church-members, Gen. 17. 7. Acts 2. 39. from the solemn entry and admission into the visible Church.

2. I distinguish between simple being of a Member, and actual solemn communion or visible profession: So speaks the renowned Assembly, so Calvin, Bucan, Tilen, Professors of Leyden, Beza, Ursine, Tr • l • atius, Pet. Martyr, Junius, Pareus, Waleus: its a seal for our solemn admission, and solemn engraffing and adopting into the visible Church, 1 Cor. 12. 13. For by one spirit we are baptized into one body, &c.

1. The conclusion is fancied, and nothing against me, who teach, That Baptism is the door, way and means of our solemn installing into actual communion with the visible teaching Ministerial Church, (which Arminians and Socinians deny) Ergo, must Baptism be before the Ministers?

2. This fancied homogeneous Church visible of only believers, can be no politick Church, and that in ordinary to Christ's second coming, which calleth Ministers, for Ministers did baptize this Church; then must the effect, to wit, called Ministers, be before, and that ordinarily the creating cause, to wit, the Church of believers who made them Ministers, a dream: If this homogeneous Church be a number of unbaptized believers, (and such Pagans they must be, for Mr. H. saith, They are a born Church, before their fathers Baptizers) then must unbaptized children (a strange Church) call and give Ministerial being, and that ordinarily, to their fathers, and choose out of their own unbaptized body their own Pastors not yet baptized: and who baptized these unbaptized? not the unbaptized Church, nor themselves. Mr. H. I judge would deny both.

3. As to that, Whether the Church or the Ministry be first, it is sure, Adam and Eve, as men, were before the Word: if any say, They being created according to the Image of God, were created a Church; yet some priority there is of the subject, before the concreated Law: but sure they were not created a visibly professing Church, and therefore the Word, as preached in Paradise by the Lord the first Minister, Gen. 3. 15, 16. must be before Adam and Eve as a visibly professing Church. For, the seed is before the tree, the means before the end, the father before the child, and so some Ministry, ordinary or extraordinary begetting, there must be, before the Church begotten. Who baptized John the Baptist? or if he was at all baptized, is not much. But that the Church in the ordinary way of Christ is before the baptizing and begetting Ministry, is wild Divinity.

Mr. H. If Baptism cannot be before a Ministerial Church, nor a Ministerial Church before a Congregational Church, which only can call them to be Ministers; then such a Church is much more before Baptism. For before the coming of some godly zealous Christian and Scholar into a country where there are a company of Pagans converted, they may join in Church-fellowship, and call this man lawfully according to God, to be their Minister, therefore there is a Church before a Minister, and so before Baptism.

Ans. 1. Mr. H. gives an extraordinary instance of his own devising, without Scripture; and of this he frames a fixed ordinary Rule, May not converted Pagans, which only (saith he) can call Ministers, call this Christian Scholar to be their Minister according to God? No, say we,

1. God never did it, nor is there any Scripture-proof for it.

2. Why doth Mr. H. frame a new instance of his own, and pass by the Lord's way? For God sends not private men, or Christian unofficed Scholars (or if he do, their extraordinary sending makes them public Pastors and Prophets, not the people) but he sent Philip an Evangelist, and after Peter and John to Samaria, Act. 8. Paul to Macedonia, Act. 16. and his own Ministers, Tit. 1. 5. 1 Tim. 4. 14. & 5. 22. Paul and Barnabas, men in office, some more than zealous Christians and Scholars to the Gentiles, Act. 13. Jonah to Nineveh, Ananias to baptize Paul, Jon. 3. Act. 9.

3. Doth not Mr. H. dress up a providence of a Christian Scholar sent to converted Pagans, and must they be made the ordinary and only Church who can call Ministers? and this Scholar being unbaptized himself, must as the married Pastor in the ordinary way of Christ baptize to his dying day others, and his calling must be null (say our Brethren) except that only Church call him; and according to the ordinary Rule of Christ, he must be all his life unbaptized (which must be a reputing of Baptism, with the Famil • st, a thing indifferent) rather than he own a foreign jurisdiction (as Mr. Lockier speaketh) so as to be baptized by a Pastor of another Church.

Mr. H. If Baptism give the form to visible Membership, then while that remaineth valid, as it doth in excommunicated persons, and when the Church is dissolved, visible Membership must remain; for where the form is, the formatum, the thing having such a form must be also: for, Relata se mutuo ponunt & t • llunt.

Ans. The conclusion is fancied, and nothing against me. 2. There be two things in baptized Members.

1. God is their God, of Egypt and Assyria, fathers and sons under the New Testament, as the Prophecy is, Isa. 2. 1, 2. & 19. 25. & 60. 1, 2, 3. Rev. 11. 15. 2. Infants are holy as the root, 1 Cor. 7. 13, 14. Rom. 11. 16. and it must be cruel divinity to say, That fathers and feed broken off an Independent Church through persecution, and no sin in them, are by the Lord cast out of visible covenanting with God, and from Membership and Church right to the Seals: nor is Baptism any ways removed.

2. There is the solemnity of admission by Baptism in the excommunicate; this is hurt: but its no more to me the formal cause of Membership, than the ceremony of Coronation, or the delivery of a Sword, is the specific form of a King, and of a Major: and therefore all is granted, and Mr. H. proves nothing.

M. H. Baptism is but a separable accident to the covenant, its efficacy may be hindered by the unworthy receiver, and yet it remains in its own nature to the excommunicate and dissolved member, for the form can never be removed from the thing formed. If to be the eldest son be the formal cause of possession, it could never have been taken away. But to be a well-deserving heir, is that wh • ch gives formality of possession.

Ans. 1. It is a wonder that M. H. cannot find valid arguments to bear a free conclusion. For to me Baptism is not a means of a Church-membership simply, but of a Church-member tali modo, that is, of a member conspicuously and solemnly differenced from a Pagan.

2. It is bad Divinity to join the nocent excommunicate man with the innocent dissolved member.

3. It is a naughty argument to prove that Baptism is a separable accident of the covenant: why? because its efficacy may be hindered by unbelief: for the efficacy of anything is the actus secundus, the operation of it, not its essence; so he may prove that Christ the essential subject of the Gospel is a separable accident of the Gospel and covenant of Grace, because both the efficacy of the Gospel and of the Redeemer, by men's unworthiness and unbelief is hindered.

4. He concludes not so much as his own fancied conclusion; to wit, this only, ergo the efficacy of baptism is not the specified form of visible membership; valeat totum: what Dreamer said any such thing? it is sure baptism in fieri, as it is administrate and professed, is the means of the excommunicate man's solemn installing and engaging to be a follower of Christ: and by the scandal that brings on excommunication baptism as professed and as binding is so far hurt as the Covenant-Baptismal is violated: and if the man be excommunicate for Apostasy, then it is disputable whether Baptism be not quite undone.

5. It is weak moral Philosophy which Mr. H. addeth, that well deserving in an heir gives formality to possession. Well deserving gives just and Law-right to possession in the heir: But he is a weak Lawyer who would so plead; the innocent Traveler believing in God hath due deserving to his own purse, which yet is in the bloody Robbers pocket. Why Mr. H. saith he hath well deserving, which (saith he) is the formal cause of possession, and so he must have possession, for the formal cause cannot be separated from formatum. And so godly David unjustly expelled from his Kingdom for many years, yet deserving well, must have right both to possess his Kingdom, and not possess it, for if he have the formal cause of possession, he must have possession when he is expelled.

Mr. H. It shall follow that the Church of Rome is a true Church, for all the members of that Church have true baptism, which is the formal cause of a true Church: but that is false, that that Church is a true Church.

Ans. The conclusion of the connex proposition is nothing against me, who deny Baptism to be the formal cause of Membership.

2. Such a Baptism that is valid, as touching the substance of the seal, as is in Rome, such a Church according to the Metaphysick entity and being of a Church, is Rome a Ministerial Church, teaching necessary fundamentals, though darkening and contradicting all; but it is not morally a true Church, but leprose and unclean. See what Junius, Whitaker, Calvin and Rivet say hereupon: Mr. H. is far from their sound expressions; if this be true, then to Jezebel and seducing Teachers, who are under the Church-covenant, the formal cause of membership must appertain, and they must be Church-members, and must be tolerate, till they be judicially tried, and censures applied, so Mr. H. and Church privileges bestowed on them at the command of Christ. So also Mr. H. So visible non-converts, and swine adorned with Pearls, contrary to Christ's command, Matth. 7. 6. and yet keeping the essential form of visible Saints, must be visible Converts. Which is a contradiction.

Mr. H. The seal of our incorporation, which is latter and posterior to the incorporation cannot be the form of it; for the Sacrament is not appointed to make a thing that was not, but to confirm that was; or it doth not give, but confirm grace. But such is Baptism.

Ans. The conclusion is not against me.

2. Observe that Mr. H. sides with Arminians and Socinians, who deny the seals to be exhibitive signs, and make them mere signs: but seals used in faith, both confirm the former grace, and add increase of grace. Baptism seals that union with the visible Church, which was actu primo in Infants, being born federally holy, Rom. 11. 16. 1 Cor. 7. 14. and is a way and means of one more solemn installing in the visible Church; as the receiving of the Keys of a Castle, both confirms the covenant of the Princes giving of the Castle to the receiver, and doth more solemnly authorize the man as Captain of the Castle. The like may be said of the press-money received by the soldier, who before had given up his name to the Captain, and that by covenant.

Mr. H. The Church was visible, when there was no seal, neither Circumcision nor Baptism; therefore these do not constitute it, nor any member thereof, Gen. 17 10, 11.

Ans. 1. These five Arguments Mr. H. borrowed from the brethren, but weakened them by an unjust conclusion, which I own not, nor any of our brethren. This argument also is apt to destroy all the seals; for there was a Church of visible regenerate persons, and of such as by faith saw Christ's day in Abraham's house, Gen. 12. and as yet neither was there Circumcision, nor Passover, nor Baptism: will it hence follow, that Baptism is essentially no seal of regeneration, nor of any covenant or covenant-Grace, because covenant, covenant-grace, visible membership, and all these were before either circumcision or baptism? but sacred signs are seals of graces and privileges going before these signs, both in time and nature.

Circumcision so shall essentially be no seal of the covenant, nor of the righteousness of faith, contrary to Gen. 17. 7. Rom. 3. 11. For there was a people visibly in covenant, and Abraham was righteous before that circumcision was instituted. But nothing follows, but only baptism doth not seal our union with Christ, and solemn entry into his Church-visible, until the Lord institute water and sprinkling therewith, and stamp them by his Divine Authority, to seal these graces and privileges.

CHAP. XXII.

FOr the better understanding of the question, Church-right to membership, and to Ordinances and Seals must be considered.

1. As it is in, and referred to the professor himself; and then the question is upon what ground may the man himself challenge a room in the visible house, and the seals: now profession, as profession is not a ground, for then a man should be formally made a visible member, and be fed as one of the flock, and be externally called (which are finaliter, and in themselves saving mercies) because he professeth his desire to be fed, and to have the Gospel sent unto him.

But 1. there is no such word nor promise: (do this, and profess so and so, and you shall be made a visible member.)

2. To have right true and real to Membership and to Ordinances, is to be called of God in a Church-way, from sin to grace and glory. So 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 and 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , the Church-visible, and the visibly called, are the same almost. Now no man hath right, true and real to membership and seals, and to be called of a God in a Church-way by the preached Gospel, because he professeth that he desires to be called; but the whole right and ground here is the Lord's free grace, sending the Gospel to whom he will, Deut. 7. 7. Deut. 10. 14, 15. Psal. 147. 10, 29. Acts 16. 6, 9, 10. Acts 18. 6, 7, 8 9. Nor hath it a shadow of right in Scripture, that Macedonia and Corinth hath Church-right to the Gospel, and to be a Church, and to be the called of God, rather then other people, Bythinia especially, at this time, because so Corinth shall profess the Gospel, before ever they hear the Gospel; but here the Lord hath mercy upon whom he will.

But 3. when the Gospel is come to a people, if the question be, what gives to this man, not to this man true real right to Membership, and Ordinances, and Seals, so as he may claim them before God and not sin: The meritorious right is Christ's death, the condition upon his part is faith; hence visible profession as such cannot give right: for then might Magus say, I have right to a room in the visible Church, and to baptism, because I am a visible Saint: for that is an untruth.

1. If God forbid hypocrisy, and taking a room in the visible Church, and taking the covenant in the mouth, and receiving the seals, when the party hates to be reformed, and eats and drinks unworthily, then cannot profession as profession give a man right true and real to room in the Church, and to the seals: but the former is true, Ps. 50. 16, 17, 18. Isa. 1. 12, 13. Matth, 22. 12. Matth. 13. 7.

2. Profession is in order to the Rulers and Members of the Church, which have hand according to their place, either formal or tacit consent, to receive in members, here especially to be considered. And here our brethren mistake the question; for when the question is, what profession is required in such as the Rulers may without sin admit to membership and ordinances; we say a profession morally true, not real conversion judged to be real by men. Now this confession or profession do • h not make a Church-member, but declare a Church-member, and it only declares him to the conscience of the Rulers, that they sin not in admitting such: but declares him neither to have right before God nor to his own conscience. Yea, for all this profession Magus sinned in being baptized, Magus usurped, and hath no true and real right, no not Ecclesiastic, except in a most unproper sense; the Church hath right and command to receive him to membership and seals, but he sins in occupying room in the house, and receiving seals, having no true right to membership and seals: it is scarce excusable (but it is among that godly man's errors) that Mr. H. saith, graceless men, as Ishmael and Esau, have the best Right that can be to Ordinances, to wit, the command of God. But ah! Magus and such Comedians have no command to receive the seals, but conditional commands, If they believe; which they never do. I return to Mr. H.

Mr. H. Profession most frequently is a public acknowledgement to the truth delivered in the Word, and our resolution to persist in the maintenance thereof, so it is used by distinction from practice; for an excommunicate person may so profess, yet it gives no formality to Membersh • p. 2. Profession is larger, and includes a suitable-carriage void of scandalous courses. 3. As it must not be too narrow, so it must not be too b •• ad; though one hold some errors out of infirmity, as Justification by passive obed • ence only—This hinders not, but he may profess the faith savingly.

Ans. Here be three notations of the word, no Scripture for any one of them. The fi • st is most frequent (saith he) and includes a resolution to maintain: But resolution, as such, is a secret heart purpose; and profession must be visible.

2. Profession (saith he) is yet larger, and includes a suitable carriage of life. Say stricter, The species is not larger than the genus, or that which is as genus; man is not larger than animal a living creature.

3. Profession with some errors, should have been more warily delivered, left it set up toleration, the ruin of the one true Religion.

1. Profession, in Scripture, is rarely distinguished from Practice; when it is differenced from it, then its condemned, 1 Tit. 1. 16. They profess they know God, but in works they deny him. Jam. 2. 14. What doth it profit, if a man say, he hath faith, &c? For 1 Tim. 6. 13. & 2. 10. Heb. 3. 1. & 4. 14. & 10 23. Matth. 16. 17. & 10. 32. it includes a holy practice. Now Mr. H. saith, The pinch of the question is, Whether such as walk in a way of profaneness, though otherwise professing and practicing the things of the Gospel, have allowance from Christ, or may be counted fit matter, according to the terms of the Gospel. But sure this is a pinch of a question made of contradictions, Whether one walking in a way of profaneness, and yet not walking in a way of profaneness, but professing and practicing the things of the Gospel, have allowance to be the fit matter of a visible Church. A strange pinch!

2. Mr. H. takes allowance from Christ by his command, to be all one with being accounted fit matter of the visible Church by the Rulers; for the account must be of men, and the allowance of them as fit matter must be of Christ. But the truth is, there is no pinch of a question, Who a • e they that are fit matter of themselves in se & in •• insece, who have due right to Ordinances, Seals? we say, only sincere real professors. But the question is, Who are fit matter, having right to Ordinances in the account of Rulers and the Church, whether they have true right or not?

3. Allowance from Christ is ambiguous: for if it be referred to the Rulers, as Mr. H. seems to take them both for one; then the question must be, Whether Christ allow and command Rulers to admit such as walk in a way of profaneness, that is, visible hypocrites, to be fit matter, having right to the holy things of God? that was never a question to either side, Whether Christ command to cast pearls to known swine? or the allowance or command of Christ may be referred to the so walkers; then the question is as blasphemous, to wit, Whether doth Christ allow and command men to be gross hypocrites, and to take his Covenant in their mouth; though they hate to be reformed.

Mr. H. Profession conceived according to the compass of the •• rm • n explication (add a causal power with Baptism too) doth make a member of the visible Church, and a member of all Congregations in all the earth; the expressions of Mr. R. load me thus to c • nceive his meaning.

As. Then Mr. H. granteth, that his own conceptions, not my words (for he ought to have cited them) lead him.

2. I own no such explication of Mr. H. as I have shewn.

Mr. H. Profession lawful of the whole truth hindereth Mem bership; as suppose one believe mistakingly, all the Churches on earth are ill gathered, he dare not be baptized and made a Church member: If therefore profession hindereth Membership, as this doth, then is cannot constitute Membership.

Answ. I retort this Argument; forbearing of all known sins, and practice of known duties cannot constitute Membership, as Mr. H. saith. For suppose one to be admitted a Church member, in a wicked mistake fall in an act of Adultery, and to cover that in a known act of Murder, then cannot practice more than profession constitute this visible Saint a member: for, that which opposes and hinders baptizing, and so kinders the formality of membership, that doth not help forward membership. So Mr. H. But such a practice blemished with Adultery and Murder, hindereth both one to be baptized, and to be made a member, for this practice will cast a man out; Ergo, it shall hinder him to be admitted a member. So also Mr. H. ibid. Arg. 2. pag. 92. So here, an erroneous profession of a Seeker, denying either Baptism, lawful Ministry, or right Churches to be on earth, until the Apostles arise again, constitutes not membership, but hinders it. Ergo, a sound profession gives not formality of membership, it follows not though Mr. H. conclude nothing against me.

Mr. H. That which giveth Membership to a party who had it not before, that can restore Membership when he hath lost it. But this cannot restore Membership. Now if Profession and Bap • ism were sufficient to do the deed, Baptism remaining the same as before his Excommunication, and now his profession being renewed, there is the whole formality of Membership, which is false.

Ans. 1. The Argument supposeth that I make bare profession separated from a non-scandalous practice, the formal cause of Membership: but if one renew his practical profession by Repentance, he is fit to be re-admitted a member.

2. There may remain in one excommunicate person,

1. Sound profession.

2. Evidences of Saintship in D • vid excommunicate, except in the matter of Uriah.

3. A real purpose to adhere to the Church-covenant; yea, and all the three remain, and holy and blameless walking beside in a dissolved member. Ergo, the Church-covenant gives not formality to Membership; but the conclusion is contrary to Mr. H. Therefore the Minor is denied in the sense that Mr. R. holds of real profession, as is before declared.

Mr H. That which gives actual existence to a Member, must give interest to the whole actually existing, and therefore to some particular Congregation, for only Individuals exist; and since such an individual person is a Member, he must have reference to the whole that doth actually exist: and this the general nature doth in the particular Congregations only.

Ans. What is concluded, is not the present question, but it belongs to what follows.

2. Individuals only exist firstly, and kindly; but the common nature of a man exists in Peter, in and with the Individual, and the nature of a Congregation exists in this or that Congregation: but the nature of the whole integral Church, of which Peter is a member, as we shall hear, does no more exist in a Congregation, than the whole organick body existeth in the left hand: or the whole body of the Element of Water exists in a drop of the River Euplorates: But the Catholic integral visible Church, existeth in this or that Catholic integral visible Church. Nor doth that which gives actual existence to be a Member, give the same way ex • stence and interest to a totum, a whole integral body; the Thumb hath one way interest of existence to grow in the Hand, and another way interest of existence to grow in the body; and in all the parts of it, it is a member, or part of the hand, and also of the whole body, but the Thumb hath no possible interest of existence to grow in the head, in the leg. And so is John a near and fixed member of the congregation of Boston, and a common and remoter member of the whole integral Catholic Churches of Hartford, of Cambridge, of Norwich, and of all the congregations on earth: but it follows not, Ergo, John hath an interest of ex • stence to be fed and to exist at one time in all the congregations on earth; as the common nature of man, of substantia, corpus, viv • ns, animal, homo, exists in all the individuals at once: It is wild Logic, to put no difference between a whole integral, and the parts; and whole essential, and the parts subjective; or species and individuals: so as one integral member may exist at the same place where all the members exist.

Mr. H. That which equally belongs to all, that can make no particular appropriation to any out rather than to another: if a woman love all Christian men with Christian affection, she is not therefore a wife to this or that man, but this profession is equal and indifferent, as well to one, and to all, as to another.

Ans. All is granted; for we teach not that profession, as profession, makes a man a fixed and a married member of this Independent Congregation, rather than this: so that it shall be spiritual Adultery to partake of Church ordinances elsewhere: we detest such a comparison destructive to Church-communion; for profession, as profession, declares the man to the Rulers to be a Church-member in all congregations on earth. It declares (I say as before) but does not as a formal cause make a Church-member, and it declares he hath right as a citizen of the visible Church, that Rulers without sin may admit him to Ordinances: but profession makes him not a member visible of only this one congregation; yea, that one be a fixed member of this congregation, is, 1. An Affirmative command, not binding ad semper. Nor 2. does it tie, but as being a member of the Catholic Church, which is a confession of Christ before men. And 3. it is of providential conveniency for the more careful feeding, but not of divine institution or marriage tie.

CHAP. XXIII.

1. LEt it be remembered, in what sense I make profession and Baptism to have influence in Membership.

2. That I make not Peter a member of this congregation only, and of the whole integral Catholic Church, or of all congregations on earth, one and the same way, for though the right to Christ the Head, to Ordinances and Seals, be one, yet Peter is a fixed member of this congregation, a transient member to all other congreg • tions. 2. He is a proper member, and nearer of this congregation, and a more common and remote member to all; as the thumb is a nearer and proper part of the hand, and a more common and remote part of the whole organical body; and Richard a near member of Norwich, and a more remote and common member of the Kingdom of England.

3. I am constrained to take in some Arguments transposed by Mr. H. that were in the former Chapter.

Mr. H. To be a member of the Cathol • ck Church firstly to a whole, which a man neither did, nor can see nor do any homage to, nor receive any influence or direction from for Government, is a sublimated imagination.

Ans. This makes the Doctrine of Ecumenic Councils holden by Calvin, Melancthon, Luther, Whitaker, and all the learned Divines in the Christian world, to be a sublimated imagination, and Mr. Cotton his associate to be sick of the same imagination; and the decrees, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 of the Apostles and Elders, Acts 16. 4. by which the Churches were established, ver. 5. to have no influence of Government upon the Churches.

2. It must be a sublimated imagination, That the whole Churches of Jews and Gentiles, who could not see the faces of all the Apostles, nor do any homage to them, nor receive any direction (except in their Writings, which yet may be) from them, should be governed by the Apostles; and it must be an imagination, That the Apostles were members of the Catholic integral Churches, and never fixed and married members of the single congregation: and could everyone of the ten thousands of the congregational Church of Jerusalem, as our Brethren will have it be, be governed by the whole Church, except they had seen the faces of all the thousands that governed them?

Mr. H. If a man that is a Member of one Congregation, • e also a Member of all Congregations on earth; then he can perform the duties of a Member to all: but that is impossible.

Ans. The duties we owe to members of the integral Catholic Church, are,

1. Common and personal, as Church-praying, Church-praising, Church-fasting for the evils of sin or judgment, Isa. 62. 6. Psal. 122. 6. Eph. 6. 18. & 3. 14. Rom. 12. 18. 1 Cor. 12 26. they being members of the same body with us, Eph. 4. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5. and their good or hard condition being known to us, (which say also they are one visible body with us) these duties are possible and necessary, if the meaning be, of occasional duties of love, not in word but in deed, as giving of alms to brethren, I judge of all congregations beside our own: I am. 〈◊〉 . If a brother or a sister be naked, &c. of what ever congregation on earth, where providence cast your lot to be, 1 John. 3. 17. If, I say, he mean such duties of members to foreign Church-members, as Church-members, be impossible, I much differ from Mr. H. it is contrary to 2 Cor. 9. 1, 2, 3. Gal. 6. 10. And the like I say of duties, of occasional comforting, rebuking, warning one another, even in order to Church-members, and Church-duties; They are this way impossible, that physically I cannot be in all places to discharge these duties. But to fetch an Argument as watery, I might say, A man in Musc • via cannot be to a Scottish-man a neighbor, whom he is to love as himself. A man in Morpeth cannot be a fellow-member both with another m • n in Morpeth, and with another English Subject who dwelleth four hundred miles from him whom he never saw, not can see. Why, its impossible he can discharge the duty of neighbor-love to the one that he never saw, nor possibly can see; or that of a fellow-subject of England, as toward the other: Yea, by this its impossible one can discharge the duties of personal watching over five thousand members of the congregation (as they say) of Jerusalem; for while as he watches over one, he must neglect fourscore of hundreds, and above.

2. What liberty and power a man hath in one particular congregation as a member, he hath the same in all, because he is a member everywhere: Then he hath power in choosing the Officers, and in maintaining them; and these Officers must be sought in casting him out.

Ans. What liberty and power a man hath jure, habitu, actu primo, by the right as a visible professor in one congregation as a member; that same moral right of Saintship (taken in a right sense) he carries about to all congregations on earth, whithersoever he comes, as is clear by Letters of Recommendation (which I said, and its never answered, only declare, but give no new right to Church privileges) which our Brethren give to members, by which they have right to the seals in other congregations. But it follows not, what liberty and power a man, as a fixed, nearer and proper member hath in his own congregation, that same liberty and power he hath actu secundo, and that he may actually exercise in all congregations; for to the actual exercise of it, is required the actual knowledge of him, and his right and qualification, that they with him, and he with them, may act in a Church-way, in other congregations and foreign Churches: And also he cannot act with that power in all congregations, as in his own; not because he hath not the power in habit, and actu primo, but both he cannot orderly exercise it, and without scandal of usurpation, until he first evidence he hath such power; and also because he cannot physically be in many places at once: as a Citizen of London hath power and liberty to do the duties of a Subject of England, such as to save the life of a Subject, and to apprehend a public Robber that waftes the country, in all cities and places in England; but its impossible that he can be physically present in all places of England, where his help may be useful for the performing of these duties.

2. Nor will it follow that he should give hire to any but to his own personal feeders, from whom he receiveth the benefit of feeding, Gal. 6. 6. 1 Cor. 9. 1 Tim. 5. 17, 18.

3. It is also an untoward consequence, Therefore be cannot be cast out of one congregation, unless the Officers of all others did cast him out: for that is physically impossible, God will have the Catholic integral Church to purge itself in its parts, and its no more necessary nor convenient that the whole integral Church should, or possibly can pass an actual sentence for the casting out of every person, than all England can convene in Parliament for the passing sentence upon every English Subject guilty of Felony, Murder, Sodomy, Blasphemy, Drunkenness, Swearing, &c. and all guilty of these faults, are both Members of either Cities, Counties, or Shires, and also Subjects of the Kingdom of England: and the Argument is as strong in the one as in the other, even suppose Great-Britain were but one Kingdom. Nor

4. Will it follow, that a guilty person can require the convening of the whole integral Catholic Church to judge his cause: for he can have no moral right, but such as all in case of scandal have, why he should more decline the Churches judging, than their feeding by the Word. Now since such a convening of all Officers to judge every scandal, is physically unpossible, it is not to be thought that Christ hath given a moral liberty to all delinquents without exception, to appeal to all the Officers on earth; for the infinite wisdom of God gives not moral power to physical impossibilities, that are physically destructive to edification.

Mr. H. If he that is the member of one Congregation be a member of all, I cannot see but of necessity it must follow, that one particular Congregation must be another, Ephesus must be Smyrna, and Smyrna must be Thyatira: for where there be the same individual members, there be the same whole integral body; and the ground is undeniable from received Rules: Integrum est totum cui partes sunt essentiales. Therefore the same members carry the same essence to the whole. I assume, there be the same individual members of all the particular Congregations: For if one particular professor be a member of every particular Congregation, then all particular professors must be so; and so all of them members of one particular Congregation, and so of everyone. Hence there being the same members of every particular Congregation, every particular Congregation is the same: and thence it will follow, that Ephesus is Smyrna, and Smyrna to be Thyatira. Hence when Smyrna is destroyed, yet Smyrna remains.

Ans. Its a pity to black paper with such Wind-mills. Where there be the same individual members, there must be the same individual whole or totum integrale. All the individual members of a man's body, either similar parts, flesh, and blood, and bones; or the Organs, eyes, ears, feet, hand, and all the rest taken together, as united, are the whole organical body of man; and so all the Congregations on earth, taken together, are, and make up the whole integral Catholic visible Church, existing in all the Kingdoms and States of the earth. But what follows? therefore the hand is the foot, where there be the same proper and nearer fixed members, the thumb and the little finger of the hand, and also the same common and remoter members (the same thumb & little finger) of the whole organical body, there is the same individual integral whole, so as the one member is affirmed of another, the thumb is the little finger, and the little finger is the thumb: for all the organs are members proper, the eyes, ears, nose, of the head, the fingers of the hand, the toes of the feet, and all the rest, arms, legs, belly, shoulders, and all these same members are common and remote members of the whole body: Just as Peter is a fixed and near member of this Congregation, and also a common and remoter member of the whole integral Catholic Church. And as all the Citizens of London are fixed and near members of London, and proper parts thereof, and yet common and remote members and Subjects of England. Hence by Mr. H. his own Argument, Where there be the same individual members, thereof necessity must be the same whole integral: So I assume (saith he.) But there be the same individual members of all the particular Congregations. I assume also, John, Richard, Thomas, Citizens of London, of York, are all in their very individual natures, individual Subjects of England. Ergo, London must be York, and York must be London; and John Citizen of London, must be Richard Citizen of Yo • k. And contrary. Again I assume, the same individual thumb, and individual little finger and toes, and individual eyes and ears, are all members of the hand, or congregation of fingers, of the feet and society of toes, &c. and they are also common members of the whole organical body. Therefore by Mr. H. his Logic, the thumb must be the little finger; and when the thumb is cut off, the thumb remains. Let Mr. H. or any for him, answer Mr. H. his Sophism.

2. Mr. H. makes an Assumption, but could not infer any conclusion, nor frame a Syllogism. This connection is never proved, There are the same members, common, remote, of every particular Congregation, or of all the Congregations on earth, therefore every Congregation is the same, and Ephesus must be Smyrna. Put Mr. H. or any man for him, to prove the connection, and they must be silenced; These Congregations must be the same, and the one must be affirmed of the other, which have the same individual persons to be common members to both. Nothing more false: and so Mr. H. his received Rules vanish. For say that all Citizens of York were Citizens of London, and Citizens of London were also Citizens of York, and they had the same common Laws, City-privileges, the same Rules, it follows only they differ not in nature, but in number and accidents; but no Logic can infer, Erg • , York is London, and London is York; or that the one is affirmed of the other, as Ephesus is said to be Smyrna. So nothing follows, but only Ephesus and Smyrna are not Churches different in essence and nature, but only in number, which is that which we teach.

Mr. H. Mr. R. yieldeth, that one Church hath not power over another; but if one, who is a member of one Congregation, be a member of all, then the members of this. Province may send messengers to the Synod of another Province.

Answ. Mr. H. would do well to prove his deductions; for common members as common members send not Commissioners, nay, nor one Church to another: but as God is the God of order, so such a Church in an association do send to a larger Church.

Mr. H. It is folly to seek differences (saith Mr. R.) between Congregations, from a Chu • ch covenant, which is common to all Congregations. It is true (saith Mr. H) particular Congregations, and Church covenants differ not in essence and nature; but there is a real difference from this Church in another Church, in their specificating, and individual formality. The rule of old was, Genus cum forma constituit speciem.

Answ. It is great folly to seek differences essential, when all Congregations agree in the last specific difference: This Congregation and that Church differ only in accidents, except Mr. H. show us essential and specificating differences between one Christ the head, one faith, one Baptism, one hope of Glory, one Lord's Supper, one Bread in all Churches, Eph. 4. 1, 2, 3, 4. 1 Cor. 10. 17. 1 Cor. 12. 13. one power of binding on earth, one and the same body, Matth. 18. 15, 16, 17, 18. John. 20. 21, 22. 1 Cor. 12. 12, 13. from the same Christ, the same Faith, the same Baptism, &c. in another Congregation: and when the Church of the Jews, and the Church of the Gentiles differ only as two Sisters, Cant. 8. 8. and in regard of age (which is a mere accident) as Mother and Daughter, Isa. 54. 1, 2. Isa. 49. 20, 21. Cant. 3. 4. It is folly for Mr. H. to trouble us with new Logic, such as the specificating formality in Peter, for that is no new degree of essence in Peter which was not in man, but the same contracted to the individual differences of time, place, figure, &c. Let Mr. H. show a specific difference between Christ and the seal in this and in that Congregation.

2. That Genus cum forma constituit speciem, is neither old nor new rule, the true rules are Genus & differentia constituunt speciem & compositum Metaphysicum, and materia & forma constituunt compositum se • corpus Physicum.

3. Whereas Mr. H. saith that this and this Congregation and this Church-covenant differ really ut res & res, and if they differ in accidents, these must be either common or proper; it's answered.

1. Mr. Cotton and Mr. Hooker are not two new kinds and species of Pastors, because officers of divers Congregations, and John and Peter members of the same Congregation differ ut res & res; and so in the Church of Jerusalem there shall be five thousand species and kinds of members, five thousand kinds of Church-covenants, of Baptisms, of Lord's Suppers, of new species of rights to the Seals in one single Congregation. For they differ really ut res & res, when as they differ only in number: and it were good that Mr. H. had expressed to us, what be these proper accidents by which Congregations differ among themselves. It is true the particular combination gives distinct being to the Classis; but it gives not a being distinct in nature and essence, but only in individual properties from the being of other Classis.

Mr. H. How comes it this Church hath power over this person, which another Church hath not, but from some special engagement?

Ans. It is from no marriage engagement, but from providential conveniency; the wise Lord seeing it Physically impossible, that the whole Catholic Church so numerous can be fed in the same field, by the same men, therefore he divided them in sundry little flocks, over which the shepherds combined, have power not as married husbands but as mere servants.

Mr. H. The peculiar and individual formalities of engagements difference all voluntary covenants; should a man say, I am a Master of servants, therefore thou art my servant: servant-covenant is common to all, there is only a difference in number and some accidents: a people might say to a Pastor of another Congregation, The covenant between Pastor and People is common to all, and makes no difference, but in number and accidents; therefore thou art our Pastor: that a man should be a general husband to all women, and a woman a general wife to all men, because marriage-covenant is common, seems folly; we are content to bear the charge of folly.

Answ. 1. I am far from charging folly on these godly men, but weakness should appear in the Argument, If Mr. H had framed an Argument thus; if all Covenants of Master and servant, of husband and wife, agree in essence and nature, and differ in number and accidents only, then may a Master claim all men on earth to be his servants, and then may a husband claim all women on earth to be his married w • ves.

This is most false, and not proved by Mr. H. for the just contradiction is true.

If covenants between Master and Servant, between Husband and Wife differ in number; then must a Master make a covenant in number different with servants; one with this servant, and another covenant different in number from that, with another; or then he can claim neither the one nor the other for his servant, because covenants between master and servant, are all of the same common nature: nor because Abraham married Sarah, and all marriage-covenants are of the same essence and nature, can Abraham claim Hagar and another third woman, and a fourth for his wives, and except he have a marriage covenant with Hagar different in number from the marriage-covenant with Sarah, and a third marriage-covenant with the third different in number, he cannot claim any of them for his wives: for Hagar may say, though all marriage-covenants be of the same essence and nature; yet because Abraham never made a marriage-covenant with me by name, which is essentially required in all covenants of that kind, he is not my husband, nor am I his wife. So a people cannot say to a Pastor of another Congregation, thou art our fixed, proper Pastor, obliged to reside with us, and to employ thy labors ordinarily upon us only, except they had particularly chosen him by name; but this will not hinder, but all elections and covenants with Pastors, as fixed and ordinary laborers with them, are of the same essence and nature, and differ only in number and accidents; nor can this hinder but a Pastor of another Congregation is a Pastor habitu and actu primo, to all Congregations on earth, and no married husband to that Congregation: though it be physically impossible, and contrary to reason, to say he can be a fixed, proper chosen Pastor to all the Congregations of the earth; for fixedness and election of the people is not of the essence of a Pastor.

CHAP. XXIV.

MR. H. Relation as such is not a foundation of a Covenant, when Twins are born, or Brethren and Sisters near to other in time. The duties issuing there from have their rise and power from the Impression of the Rule of nature, such relations may be multiplied without a covenant.

Answ. This destroys your Church-covenant, for many in sister-Churches, men and women, are born over again, and made visible members of the body of Christ, and made fellow Citizens to them that are far off, and near to the whole household of God, Jews and Gentiles, Eph. 2. 19, 20, 21. Eph. 4. 1, 2, 3, 4. 1 Cor. 10. 17. 1 Cor. 12. 12, 13. Heb. 12. 22, 23. And the duties issuing hence rise from no covenant soddering the members together in one single flock: for they belong to many flocks, but only from the rule of renewed nature. Therefore Mr. H. is obliged to prove, if there be a necessity of a voluntary covenant, that visible Saints of two Congregations now agreeing to be fellow-members of a third Congregation, are now more brethren by Mat. • 8. then before, and have more one Faith, one Baptism, one visible head Christ, one Hope, do more eat one Bread, 1 Cor. 10. then before; are more, yea, now, and never till now, by a positive institution and command obliged to Church covenanting, to Church watching one over another, whereas by this way they were never visible members, nor visible fellow-Citizens before.

And 2. so Paul hath been less accurate then our brethren in the visible oneness of brethren.

3. There must be no visible brotherhood, nor Church oneness, but by ordinary meeting within the walls of the same house.

And 4. this covenanting either implicit or explicit must be of as great necessity as a visible Church on earth.

Mr. H. The covenant once made by mutual agreement of parents, may be communicated to the seed, without their consent, Deut. 29. 10. A Minister is a Minister to children born of parents, who have elected him to be their Minister, and they are within the covenant, by virtue of that covenant which their parents made.

Answ. 1. Nothing then makes children within the covenant of grace visibly, but your Congregational covenant. But sure Israel's seed by Deut. 29. 10, 11, 12, &c. and Gen. 17. 7. Act. 2. 39. were born in visible covenant with God, and they knew not any such Congregational watching over one another.

2. The seed of dissolved members, visible Saints, are then without any sin in parents and children (to speak comparatively) born Pagans, but the Scripture teacheth us of no losing of covenant-right, but by sin, either of the parties themselves, or of their parents.

3. How are then children of covenanting parents born Church members; yet, when come to age, if they cannot evidence their regeneration holden all their life, for no Church-members are debarred from the Lord's Supper, living and dying Pagans? are Ministers, because of their covenant, Ministers to Pagans?

4. The Scripture teacheth that parents oblige the children to the Gospel-covenant, Deut. 29. Gen. 17. but no Scripture teacheth that parents lay bands of oath and vow of God to be visible members of only (for example) the Congregation of Boston, of only Hartford; for look what covenant obligation lies upon the parents which is to that Congregation by name only, the like must lie upon the children.

Mr. H. Among such who by no impression of nature, no providence, or appointment of God, or reason, have power each one over another, there is a necessity of a free engagement by consent, as between Prince and people, husband and wife, master and servant, and the covenant being once made, there needs no new covenant to the exercise of the duties belonging to that relation.

Ans. The vow in Baptism, and the Gospel-covenant professed by me, without any new engagement, obligeth me in all Churches I am in, to be my brothers keeper, and watch for his soul, otherwise I may make this count, Lord, I was not obliged to any Church-watching over my brother, but my Congregational brother by Mat. 18.

But 1. was he not thy brother before thou wast enchurched into one Congregation with him? (shall the Lord say.)

2. Wast thou not to eat the same bread with him before as then? by 1 Cor. 10. 17.

Secondly, there is no need of engagement to watch Congregationally over all with whom thou eatest the Lord's Supper, except thou being so journer enter in oath to every Congregation, and break it in the morrow.

Thirdly, The covenant of Prince and people, husband and wife hath nothing to do with this, except the nearer visible oneness, brotherhood, &c. of which I spoke, be cleared from Scripture; and M. H. prove that Peter is tied by oath to that only Pastor and Flock, as subjects to one only sovereign.

Mr. H. The covenant of grace may be taken in the narrowest acception (believe and live) so it is inward and invisible between the soul and God. But if you take it in the breadth, as it includes whatever is warranted by the Gospel, so it is visible and includeth the Church-covenant, and its ordinance of the Gospel, but not properly the covenant of the Gospel if the Churches be dissolved through persecution, they are not obliged to the duties of confederacy.

Ans. (Believe and live) is not the narrowest, nor the invisible covenant, but the sum of all duties given to all the visible Church, John. 3. 16, 18. John. 5. 24, 40. John. 11. 26, 27. Rom. 10. 9.

2. If this be a Gospel ordinance, give us Scripture for it.

3. Dissolved members are never loosed from Church-warning, comforting, rebuking, otherwise they were not to gain their brethren.

4. Christ by no hint or shadow, lays the duty of gaining a brother upon our membership with single Congregations, a thing of order and providential necessity; but upon brotherhood, Mat. 11. If thy brother trespass against thee, &c. Now he is as near my brother who is of another Congregation, or a dissolved member, as he who is my Congregational Brother.

5. The enclosed gainable trespassing brethren within the pinfold of a single Congregation, seem to make only the Congregation the visible Kingdom of Christ; the Scripture teaching, Nations, the Kindreds and Kingdoms of the world to be his, Rev 11. 15. Rev. 2. 1, 2, 3. Ps. 22. 27, 28. Ps. 72. 3, 4, 5, 6. Ps. 2 8, 9. Isa. 60. 1, 2, 3, &c. It is true, Christ exerciseth his Ministerial power as King in Congregations, yea, and in Synods also, saith Mr. Cotton. 2. The oneness of his visible body is larger then a Congregation, 1 Cor. 10. 17. 1 Cor 12. 12, 13, &c.

Mr. H. That a Minister swear an oath of fidelity (saith Mr. R.) to the flock; a Father, a Master to discharge duties to Children and Servants is lawful, but to tie the essence of a Minister, Father, Master to this oath, so that he is no Minister before he thus swear, is to lay b • nds where Christ hath laid none, and will-worship.

Ans. The instance of a Father, because it results upon a rule of nature, without any free consent required, is not to the purpose; the other two cuts the throat of Mr. R • . cause; can any charge another to be his servant without mutual engagement? that which makes a man a Pastor to this people, is the free choice of the people; we do not make the swearing to do our duty, to be our covenant; a witness ties himself by oath to tell the truth in a Court, here is no covenant between man and man at all. Those are to be distinguished.

• 1. An agreement of persons to combine and associate.
• 2. The doing of these duties.
• 3. The swearing they will do them; the first is the form of the Corproation; the other two may be done after they be combined.

Ans. 1. The instance brought by me is as well of a moral father, as a natural father, and his either agreeing by promise or oath to the people, makes him not a Pastor, (a Pastor to them is another thing) nor doth the election of the people make a Pastor, the ordination of the Elders by prayer makes him a Pastor, Act. 6. 6. 1 Tim. 5. 22. 2 Tim. 2. 2.

2. The being a Pastor to the people doth not make a Pastor, for it is but actus secundus, the exercise of his calling, not the essence of the Minister.

3. The man doth tender the Lord's Supper, which is a specific and proper act of a Pastor, and that warrantably, to these who are of another Congregation, and never chose him for their Pastor.

2. The other two hurt not the truth (I desire not to plead mine own cause) a man is made a servant to a master by mutual agreement, true: Ergo a Minister is made an Embassador, Pastor, and Servant of Christ by the election of the people; it follows not: for were he a servant in relation to the people only, this were something; but the people's choosing of him hath not any influence at all in the essence of a Pastor.

3. My Argument proves, that swearing, as it includes a free agreement to the duties of a Father (Moral) or Officer, or Master, or Pastor, doth not make the man a Father, a Master, a Pastor, especially when the man is Father, servant of Christ, and Pastor habitu, and actu primo, to all the Churches on earth, before he agree to be Father and Pastor to this Congregation, as I thus illustrate, a free City appoint four men fearing God to be Rulers, or Bailiffs to them, the City divides itself into four quarters: the first quarter agreeth with such a man to rule them: The next quarter agreeth with the second to rule, and so do the rest. Now no man can say this first quarter made the man a Magistrate, for the whole City made all the four of private men to be public Magistrates, and quarters by agreement did only appropriate their labors to them. So Titio covenants with a Mason, with a Gardener to build him a House, and plant him a Vineyard; yet this agreement makes neither the one a Mason, nor the other a Gardener, for they were such before: nor doth the sick man's choosing of such a Physician to cure him, make the man a Physician. Any man knows that the people call and choose Epaphroditus, not that they may make him a gracious and an able Minister, but because they discerned him to be such, therefore they chose him.

4. A Witness who swears to tell the truth, engageth covenant-wise to tell the truth, though the engagement be put upon him by the command of the Judge.

Mr. H. Neither the incestuous Corinthian, 2 Cor. 2. 73, 74. (saith Mr. R.) nor these 3000. Act. 2. nor Samaria, nor any planted Churches of Ephesus, Acts 19. of Corinth, Acts 18. Berea, Philippi, Thessalonica, Rome, give any hint of a Church-covenant. Ans. The Churches forgiving and confirming of their love to the incestuous Corinthian, was a receiving of him of new to covenant; had his profession at large made him a member, he had been a member whether the Church received him or not; or had baptism made him a member, that remaining, he should have been a member; a disfranchised man is so received by Covenant anew to City-privileges.

Ans. 1. Nothing is answered to these celebrious Samplar-Churches planted without this new covenant.

2. One excommunicate for a particular scandal, as the incestuous Corinthian was, retaining some profession, retaineth some membership, and is only deprived of Church-honor, and of some Ordinances.

3. But of Baptism before.

4. The forgiving of that man, may say somewhat to the restoring of him to the privileges of the Covenant of Grace, but nothing of a Church-covenant.

5. The civil Corporations way of re-admitting disfranchised members, is no binding Rule to the Church of God.

Mr. H. There is no word of Church-covenant in these places, Acts 2. it follows not, Ergo, it is not in the word.

Ans. The consequence is not valid from particular Negatives: but if there be no Covenant in any place, where mention is made of planting of Churches, it holds well. Heb. 7. 14. Moses (who in his writings speaks of all sorts of Priests) spake nothing concerning Priesthood in the Tribe of Judah: Ergo, there is no Priest of that Tribe. And there is no hint in Scripture, where the sacrifice of Christ is spoken of, that there is any ungodly sacrifice: Ergo, (say our Divines) the sacrifice of the Mass is a device of men. So no such Covenant is in Scripture in framing of Churches.

Mr. H. The solemnity of fasting and praying is only required at the first founding of a Church, Acts 2. where there is only an addition of members, the stroke on the Spirit by the Ministry of the Apostles was so extraordinary, that they needed no miraculous discerning.

Ans. 1. Mr. H. may make the Reader believe, that I am against fasting and praying, at either planting of, or addition to Churches, and therefore divides my Argument: for I argue from the want, not of fasting and praying only, but

2. No Church-covenant was here; nor

3. Any frequent meeting of the members to be acquainted with the spiritual state one of another; nor was it possible these things could be in seven hours space. All which they require in founding Churches, and so there was no day of fasting kept by the Church baptized.

2. There is an addition, that the Christian Church was also solemnly founded.

Mr. H. The • r steadfast continuing was after they were added: Ergo, (saith Mr. R.) that could not make them members. Ans. Nor lies the Argument there from the effect to the cause; they continued; Ergo, they took themselves engaged to continue.

Ans. There is no doubt they took themselves engaged by Baptism.

2. Did Ananias and Sapphira either continue steadfastly, or take themselves engaged by Church-covenant? for we now speak of visible actings that agree to Church members, as such; therefore they took themselves to be engaged members, and members to that only Church by a solemn Marriage-covenant, is a dream unwritten.

Mr. H. Where there is a solemn baptizing into a Church, the person is made a Disciple of Christ, Matth. 28. 19. So to be a Disciple, is to be engraffed into the body of Christ, and to be made a fellow-heir of the same body, Eph. 3. 6. that is, of the visible Church, Joh. 12. 40. though many believed in him, yet they would not confess him, or be his disciples.

Ans. 1. If confessing, and being a disciple, be one; and if solemn baptizing make a disciple, as from Matth. 28. and John. 12. Mr. H. saith: Then 1. Must Infants be actual disciples: 2. Actual confessors: 3. In danger to be excommunicate; for the Jews made such an act, John. 9.

2. Ingraffing in the body is to be made a fellow-heir, and of the same body of Jews and Gentiles, who were partakers of the promise of Christ by the Gospel, and fellow-citizens with the Saints, and of the household of God, built upon the foundation, Eph. 3. 8. & 2. 19. and comprehendeth both the truly believing visible body, and invisible: And when, and who made Magus and Judas partakers of the promise of Christ by the Gospel, and fellow-heirs of the same body?

3. Did ever man dream that this body is a single Congregation, and not that its the great Catholic Body of Jews and Gentiles, Eph 3. 5, 6. & 2 15, 16, 19?

Mr. H. The people are said to magnify the Apostles, that is, to approve their doctrine, and the goodness thereof, yet there was more required to this Church-work, and to b • come a disciple; and therefore its added, And the believers were added, i. e. they confessed th • ir sins, and became disciples and followers of that Doctrine, and so covenanted for their children: Else we cannot reason against the Anabaptists, If the converted father was baptized, therefore the children. The place thus expounded is not taken out of our hand.

Ans. The scope of the place is not to show the qualification of visible members, but that though Satan had made a • oul breach in the Church, by the lying hypocrisy of Ananias and Sapphira, yet the Lord was mighty in the Apostles, by the miraculous and righteous smiting of the hypocrites, and other mighty wonders, to the admiration of all, and the terror of many, Acts 5. 1, 2.—11, 12, 13. and that breach by their death was made up, ver. 14. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , Believers were the more added, not to the visible Church only, but 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , to the Lord, which was a real addition of real believers, as the same phrase is, cap. 2. ver 47. not unlike.

2. The magnifying of Apostles, is spoken of be • ievers who not only approved their doctrine, but confessed the power of God to be in the Apostles miracles, and some fear of God, as Calvin saith: Oecumenius, They praised that Gospel pow • r; Chrysostom, They do not mock, nor threaten, yet they seem, as our Interpreters, to be medii homines, not wicked despiser • .

3. He expounds they were added, i. e. they confessed their sins, and became disciples and followers of that doctrine. But sure, confessing of sins, and professing of the doctrine, if he mean such a following • s was in Magus, its a hungry Exposition of being added to the Lord, since it is in many hypocrites that are never added to the Lord. 2. If he mean, that they were practical followers of the Apostles doctrine, (as he must, if he say anything more than what he said before) sure, that must be an habitual constant walking with God all their life, and cannot be before they were added, Acts 2. for they were believers, and added the same day, cap. 2 and cap. 5. Nor says he anything for adding of visible members, cap. 5. but all their life they were added to the Lord. And is that the meaning of Luke, either cap. 2. or cap. 5? Sure, Luke sets down the history of men added to the Lord at the sight of these miracles.

4. Its a wonder men are so bold with the Scripture! They were added, i. e. They became disciples,—and so engaged themselves, and covenanted also for their children But did their being added to the Church, and to the Lord, which certainly, in the sincere part, was real and sound believing, include the swearing of this Church-covenant to be watching members married to the only single Congregation of Jerusalem, and to no other visible Church on earth? If to dictate be to prove, then we have more than enough of this.

5. If Mr. H. judge that Calvin, Pet. Martyr, Beza, Ursin, Pareus, and our Worthies, cannot reason for Infant baptism against Anabaptists, except thus; The fathers are married members by Church-covenant to one single Congregation; Ergo, Infants must be baptized: Or thus; The really converted father must be baptized; Ergo, the children; We have a weak part of it, for this strengthens Anabaptists not a little; for the common Arguments both of our Brethren and the Anabaptists, are, They must be real converts that are Church-members, as I have proved. And sure our Brethren judge it absurd, that the Seal of Baptism should be put into a blank, or to a falsehood. Now since Baptism is the seal of our Regeneration, either must our Brethren put a blank and a falsehood (which the Church, who knows not the heart, without sin put upon Judas) or then with monstrous charity they must believe all baptized Infants are regenerate. But the truth is, the inward state of none can be said either a falsehood or reality to the Church, following the Rule of the Word in dispensing of Ordinances; for in the like, neither regeneration nor non regeneration can be the object of the Churches discerning. Also this is to be observed, that Christ hath made the sounder part of the visible Church, the Church in the actual exercise of Ordinances. For,

1. Christ never gave a power to err or to sin to his Church visible, or to any part thereof; as Nature gave not a power to the locomotive faculty to halt, but to move: therefore he cannot have given a power to a Synod as many, but as proceeding right; and to Members as choosing discerningly, not as erroneously.

2. Those must be the Church, to whom the Promise is made, they fulfilling the condition, to wit, he must promise his presence to those that are convined in his Name. But if the larger part be the Church visible, because larger and more numerous to whom the Promise is made; then when the major part err • s, and meets not in his Name, Christ should be obliged to fulfil the promise to them that fulfil not the condition, and ought not to fulfil the promise to those who meet in his Name, and fulful the condition of the promise; which is abominable: for very often the larger part errs, and meets not in Christ's Name, and the lesser part meets in his Name, and shall those who fulfil the condition be defrauded of the blessing promised, because they are fewer?

Obj. But so no questions shall be determined in Church meetings, for two may say they only meet in Christ's Name.

Ans. These are but words: for if they not only say so, but it be a real truth, and if all the rest err in that act, these two are only the visible Church, though men judge them turbulent Schismatics.

Hence, by the way, a word of that necessary and judicious question moved by Calvin, Matth. 18. 18. What ye bind on earth, &c. Since the Church tolerateth many hypocrites, and absolveth and looseth many who do but counterfeit and fancy Repentance, shall we say that such are loosed and pardoned in heaven? Some say, by heaven here is meant the visible Church; and they distinguish between Sin and Scandal: and therefore that by binding and loosing, here is meant, not forgiveness, or justification, or absolution from the guilt of sin in heaven, or in the Court of God, or condemnation for that sin, but only deliverance from scandal, and the removing of scandal, and admitting of the man into the visible Church as a Member: suppose his repentance be but hypocritical, yet when the Church proceedeth impartially, according to the Rule of Christ, the sentence is ratifi • d by God, and the man is loosed from the scandal, though not from the sin; the sin is yet bound before God, because he hath not really repented; otherwise the Church, who knows not heart-actings, and who really repent, who not, though proceeding right according to the Rule of Christ, should not have the promise of ratifying in heaven what they do on earth, fulfilled to them; which cannot be said.

But taking it for a good observation that Calvin hath here, that Matth. 16. Christ speaketh of binding and loosing concional, by the Word preached; but here, Matth. 18. he speaketh especially of binding and loosing juridical in the Court of the Church, by Excommunication or Absolution from that Sentence. In the former consideration the question is easy.

No Pastor in preaching Gospel-promises or threatenings, can bind, but conditionally: If the party do not believe and repent, the man's sin is bound in heaven; if he do believe and repent, his sin is loosed in heaven.

As to the other, we find in the Word no such signification of binding and loosing, in regard of scandal, but they are ever spoken of in regard of sin and the guilt thereof. And therefore.

1. Calvin saith well, That the speech of Christ is directed to no other than to those who duly and sincerely do reconcile themselves with the Church; and the Lord being willing to comfort trembling consciences, is not setting down a Rule for comfo •… g of • ypocrites: But by the contrary, because hypocrites Soldly provoke to the Tribunal of God, when for gross scandals they are justly cast out; our Savior saith, The sentence of Excommunication is ratified in heaven. The Scripture-rule is for such as obey, and for those who fulfil the condition, non de obliquis.

As to the doubt, That the Church often absolves such who really repent not, how then can the hypocrite be loosed in heaven, when the Lord knows he does but fancy Repentance?

Ans. Two things here are to be distinguished.

1. The Churches proceeding in the external Court, as relating to them, if they impartially, according to the Rule of Christ, proceed, and be not sudden in re-admitting, but see the incestuous man near swallowed up (though one man's measure of visible repentance be not the Rule to all) before they confirm their love to him, and forgive him, 2 Cor. 2. Suppose his repentance be but counterfeit, or not saving and real, as was that of Ahab, yet are they to receive him, and admit him to the Ordinances, and the Lord ratifies what they do in heaven. As

1. The Lord ratifies Philip's baptizing of Magus; and the Lord approves the Servants inviting to the marriage-supper the man that wanted the wedding-garment: for what the Lord commands, that he must approve and ratify in heaven.

2. What in charitable judgments is praise-worthy, that God also must ratify in heaven; yea, it is praise-worthy in the Disciples, when they heard Christ say, One of you twelve hath a Devil, one of you shall betray the Son of Man; everyone suspected and feared himself; none of the eleven suspected Judas, but gave him charity.

3. Without this God should not approve the gathering of Churches, nor the casting of the draw-net in the Sea, nor the sowing of seed upon all sort of grounds, the way side, the thorny, the rocky, the good ground, that the chosen, who are yet in the state of nature, may be brought in, and effectually called. But in receiving in Excommunicates, the Church would not be sudden. In the ancient Church, Sacrificers to Idols were six years before they were received; they that defiled themselves with Beasts, were debarred from the Sacrament thirty years; Adulterers, seven; women who made away their Births, ten years; such as uncompelled denied the faith, twelve years. What other years Burchardus and Gratianus have, may be seen. Something for edification sure there was here.

2. There is another thing here, which concerneth the conscience of him who is to be received, and when the Church-Court applies the sentence to the conscience for his personal pardon, sure whatever satisfaction the people have for removing of the scandal, the sentence of Absolution so relating to him, is concional, not properly juridical; and conditional, not absolute; and therefore is to be pronounced by the mouth of the Church, the Pastor, thus: Be it unto thee according to thy Faith and Repentance; and except the man really repent, his sin is not loosed in heaven. So then, the Churches loosing from the scandal is conditional, upon a seen condition of outward repentance morally sincere to the Churches apprehension, but they simply and absolutely make him a Citizen of the Church, and admit him to Ordinances, according to the command of Christ, both in private and public Church offenses, (If thy brother who offended, repent, forgive him) but his loosing from the sin or guilt in heaven, is ever conditional, and never absolutely to be pronounced by the Pastor, the mouth of the Church, who cannot certainly know the condition.

Hence 1. the scandal is loosed in earth and heaven; the Church impartially following the rule of Christ sometime when the sin remains and is bound in heaven.

2. The Church may say the man is absolutely freed from the scandal, so as the Church sins not in receiving him in, if they follow the rule; but he sins, and the scandal is bound in coming in, if he repent not: and also as to the guilt, he is freed from the sin only conditionally, for the condition of removal of the scandal is seen, and visible: but the condition of the loosing from sin is invisible.

3. Sometime the man is both loosed from the scandal, and from the sin, and every way loosed in heaven and earth, when he both really and visibly repents.

4. The Church should go as near in readmitting a fallen sinner, and loosing him on earth, as they can discern the Lord's loosing in heaven: the Corinthians seem to exceed in this. 2 Cor. 2. 7. So that contrariwise, ye ought rather to forgive him.

5. There is more of real Saintship required, to receive in again one who hath been once a member and hath fallen, and was cast out, then to admit a member newly come from Paganism.

1. The larger the means of salvation have been, the greater guiltiness, as the scandal of a Christian is greater then the sin and scandal of a Sodomite, Mat. 10. 15. Mat. 11. 22. Mat. 12 41, 42. And therefore the repentance of the one must be more signal and larger then the repentance of the other.

2. There is not such a measure of marriage-love required of a Virgin before she be married, as after she hath been married, and born children to the husband; nor can any say there is so much knowledge required in a new Intrant that knows not the first elements of Philosophy, as in one who hath studied seven years.

Hence 6. it is utterly false, that as visible Saintship and real Repentance, as far as can be, is required of one excommunicate, before he can be received in again; so real visible Saintship, as far as can be seen, must be required in members before they be first admitted. But I desire our Brethren, if they judge the first receiving into the Church a loosing from sin and scandal, as readmission is, they will teach it me.

Mr. H. If Baptism be the Seal (saith Mr. R.) of our entry in the Church, then is not this covenant the formal cause of Church-membership.

Ans. If Baptism seal our membership, then it is after membership, and so not the formal cause of it.

Ans. There is in my argument no word that baptism is the formal cause of our membership. Baptism is a seal of our solemn installing in the Church; it's a seal quoadnos, as state and feising in houses or lands is.

Mr. H. Though children do not covenant personally, yet they are included virtually in their parents, Deut. 29.

Ans. If Mr. H. mean Children not born, as the place Deut. 29. doth evince, what is that to the purpose? we have no question with any, whether unborn children have right to membership, or to baptism, non entis nulla sunt accidentia; if he mean born infants are but virtual, or potential covenanters, as the seed is a tree in potentia, and no tree actu, so must Infants be no actual covenanters, but in potentia only. Anabaptists shall thank Mr. H. for this, for then they are not actually holy, Rom. 11. 16. nor actually to be baptized, nor is God actually the God of Infants; but some act is required of them, to lay hold on the covenant.

2. The Kingdom of Heaven then is not due to them, nay not a half salvation but in potentia. But our Savior pronounced them actually blessed, and said, of such is the kingdom of God, Mat. 18. 14 Mat. 19. 14. Mark 10. 14, 15. Yea, as Christ cannot bless unborn Infants, not can he say, of such is the kingdom of God, if they be covenanters only in potentia, and be such only.

Mr. H. This covenant is either the covenant of grace, or different from it.

Ans. The new covenant is either considered according to the benefit of saving grace given in it, and so this is not the covenant. Or 2. according to the means of grace offered, and so the Church-covenant is contained within the covenant of grace, and so the consequence is null. A man may be in the covenant of grace, who is not a Church-member, and a man may be a Church-member, who is not within the covenant of grace, as Magus.

Ans. It is a doubt to me if Mr. H. understand his own distinction of God's decreeing, and commanding will; for with Arminians he saith these are contrary wills.

2. My argument is this, The Church covenant is tither one and the same, or a branch of the covenant of grace, as it offers grace externally to all, to Peter and Magus, or then it is a different covenant. That it is different Mr. H. denies, for then it should not be warranted in the Gospel, if it be a part of the Gospel-covenant, how can they debar men of approved godliness, and visibly within the covenant of grace from ordinances? for such are implicitly in this covenant.

3. Some are (saith M. H.) in the covenant of Grace, that are not Church-members, and contrary: true; but not if they be externally and professedly as Israel was, for so to be God's visible people in covenant, is to be God's visible Church, Acts 2. 39. Gen. 17. 7. Rev. 11. 15. Isa. 19. 25. now we dispute whether the Church-covenant be not a branch of the covenant of the Gospel externally proposed. Mr. H. yields it is, only he saith, the Church-covenant is not the covenant of grace according to the benefits of saving grace given in it: true; nor is the covenant of grace externally preached, according to which Magus and Judas, and all such Church-members are in the covenant of grace: the covenant of grace according to the benefit of saving grace given it, to wi • , a new heart, and remission, &c. Then this cannot hinder, but when one vows to duties in baptism, he also vows he shall acquit himself in all duties of warning, rebuking, gaining to Christ persons in all Congregations he shall come unto: for sure to be buried with Christ in Baptism, and to rise again to newness of life, Rom. 6. 3, 4. Col. 2. 11, 12. Gal. 3. 27. 1 Pet. 3. 21. 1 Cor. 12 13. engages a man, when converted, to strengthen his brethren, to gain others, Ps. 51. 12, 13. Luk. 22. 23. 1 Cor. 7. 16. and undeniably to gain a trespassing brother, Mat. 18. and it must be commanded in the covenant of grace; and to exhort another while it is today, Isa. 2. 3. Isa. 19. 23, 24, 25. Zach. 8. 21, 22. Ier. 50 4, 5. And therefore it must be will-worship and unwarrantable, to teach that a visible professor is not called, nor can lawfully gain a trespassing brother, as Mat. 18. until he be enchurched a member to that one Congregation, and that he is not to gain to God, and to bring into fellow Church-duties the inhabitants of another City, nor in covenant way to exhort one another while it is today, nor to strengthen one another in Church duties of love, while first we be all enchurched, by particular agreement, and covenant to this only Congregation. Yea, it is the nature (saith Mr. H.) of all Corporations, that one cannot be a Member, or free Citizen, without the consent of that Corporation.

Ans. If entering the covenant of grace and professed faith in Baptism put me not in a state of brotherhood to any, but to the five thousand men, and multitudes beside of the same Congregation, Acts 4. 4. and also Acts 5. 14. Acts 6. 7. (whose faces I never saw, nor can see, to enter this new covenant with them.) Then

1. All of other Congregations, as to the duty of Church-gaining, as to me are Pagans.

2. Mr. H. must warrant from the word the distinction of Christians, and of Congregational brethren.

3. To Christ's s • cond coming, none can be made my Church-Brother, though visibly and professedly he have with me one hope of Calling, one Lord, one Faith, one Baptism, one God, one Father of all, Eph. 4. 4, 5, 6. but one of the same Congregation, and that by this new covenant.

4. He is never my Congregational brother, but by this new engagement. Nor

5. Of the same visible body with me, notwithstanding of the oneness, Eph. 4. 4, 5. but by this.

6. Nor can he eat of one bread with me, contrary to Scripture, 1 Cor. 10. 17. 1 Cor. 12. 13. and our brethren's way, being not my brother, nor a member of that household of Faith, Eph. 2. which to Mr. H. is only a Congregational household.

7. Nor should I love him as a visible brother to me, contrary to 1 John. 3. 14, 15. nor give him alms, as such, contrary to 1 John. 3. 17, 18. 3 John. 5. I am 2. 14, 15.

M. H. The word (saith Mr. R.) teacheth that I should confess Christ, walk before God, &c. but that I am under a divine law to swear this covenant which is different from the covenant of grace, in relation to this duty, is no divine law.

Ans. But to say there is no divine law to necessitate a man to enter into another covenant for marriage, beside the covenant of grace is strange. So a man may take the place, and do the duties of a husband to a woman, and tell her, I have been these many years in the covenant of grace, and there is no necessity to make a mariagecovenant beside. A Nimrod might say, the Gospel teacheth to pay tribute to Princes, and the Prince to exact it, and there needs no other covenant between Prince and people.

Ans. The reason is altogether impertinent, for a Pastor is no married Husband, no Monarch to rule over one single Congregation only. So when he dispenseth Bread and Wine in the Lord's Supper to forty of another Congregation, which he may lawfully do, 1 Cor. 10 17. 1 Cor. 12. 13. As our brethren teach: the Pastor saith, I am no married Husband, nor Church-covenanting Pastor to you forty foreign members of another Congregation, but yet I do the duty of your own sworn, and only Husband and Pastor to you, in dispensing to you this Seal of the Covenant, and there is no need of a marriage covenant between you and me.

Is not this by Mr. H. his own doctrine, to quit the argument, when it undoes his own cause, and to say the comparison of husband & wife is blasphemous? And the like is said of that of Prince and people; for he is no Prince nor Magistrate to a people which never promised, nor covenanted with him for subjection and obedience: and a covenant is necessary in both these, but a Pastor may and doth discharge pastoral acts to these with whom he never entered a marriage-covenant, all our brethren grant.

2. Mr. R. denies not, but there may be a Covenant between a fixed and a proper Pastor (to make him fixed and proper, not to make him a Pastor) and this Congregation, but that agreement makes neither Husband nor Prince; but my argument is, that the covenant of grace gives marriage membership to the man who entereth it, to all Congregations on earth, and warrants the sound professor to gain a trespassing brother in all Congregations, without the new fancied marriage, or covenant between him and them. And the covenant of grace entered did this.

See and answer my Arguments, and prove not to me a marriage-membership with this only Congregation, by an asserted comparison, wickedly said. But Mr. H. speaks dishonourably of partaking Church-ordinances, and seals in another Congregation, and from another Pastor, when he will have these acts to be adulterous, and traitorous, performed by no Husband, but by a strange man, and a foreign usurper and tyrant.

Mr. H. That of Baptism is removed.

Ans. The answers of Mr. H. are removed.

Mr. H. The Gospel requires me to seek for the help of a godly Pastor, and to marry, and not to burn, therefore there is no marriage covenant to make a husband, and such a man a Pastor to me.

Ans. This heedless similitude ever brought to the fields is already removed.

2. There is a difference between making a man a Pastor to me fixed, and making him a Pastor simply; the former I grant, and Mr. H. shall gain nothing thereby.

3. If the Gospel bid me pray everywhere, remember the Lord's death till he come, gain an offending brother everywhere, teach, warn, comfort the brethren everywhere; Ergo I must pray Church-ways, partake of seals, &c. at the Church of Ephesus, of Philippi, of Rome, &c. without any new engagement, or covenant superadded to the Gospel-covenant.

CHAP. XXV.

MR. H. Some Paradoxes fall from the Pen of Mr. R. a Pastor gifted and called by the Church, is a member of the visible Church before he be their Pastor, though he be a member of no Congregation.

2. That a Pastor may have a calling from the Church before he be elected by a Congregation, and so an Individuum vagum, a Pastor of all people, and yet of no particular people. But if all the Congregations are all the members that all the v • sible Church hath, then he that is not a member of a particular Congregation, is no member of a visible Church, for that which comes not within the number of members is no member; but all particular Congregations are all the members that a visible Church hath.

Ans. That he must be a member of a visible Church, before he be the Pastor of a single flock is clear.

1. He must be baptized into one body visible, whether of Jews or Gentiles, 1 Cor. 12. 13. for an unbaptized man cannot be a Minister.

2. The qualifications of an Elder or Watchman, 1 Tim. 3. 1, 2, 3, 4. 2 Tim. 2. 2. Tit. 1. 6, 7, 8. And that he be in covenant with God, and visibly holy, and th •• he as well as the Deacons, 1 Tim. 3. 10. may be proved to be such as agree to learned and godly members, who are broken off from membership for no scandal, but through persecution, and pestilence, then it cannot be a paradox, if some that are no members of a single Congregation, and so visible professors known to be faithful and able to teach others, as 2 Tim. 2. 2. and so in covenant visibly, as the visible Israel of God, and as God's covenanted Nation and Kingdom, Isa. 19. 16, 17, 25. Rev. 11. 15. Psal. 2. 8, 9. Psal. 22. 27. and members of the visibly covenanted people, and Church of God, be called to be Pastors and Elders, except it be said that public suffering for Christ, and affliction only, and not sin make men learned and holy, uncapable to be Elders.

2. That a Pastor is made a Pastor by ordination, 1 Tim. 3. 22. 2 Tim. 2. 2. Tit. 1. 5, 6, 7. Acts 6 6. by such as Timothy, Titus, Apostles and Elders is clear in Scripture: and not one word in Scripture saith, that unofficed men laid hands upon any to make them Elders. Nor will it ever follow that a Pastor may be ordained, and called a Pastor, or an individuum v • gum, and appointed over no certain flock, except that Mr. H. prove that we now, when Apostles are ceased, do separate the ordination of officers by the Presbytery, from the election of the people, and that the presbytery may do as the prelates, ordain a man to be a pastor everywhere, when as no certain flock calls him; which we teach not: for ordination only makes a pastor, sola ordinatio, but that ordination is not solitary, and it's alone, but inseparably joined with an inviting, and choosing, and consenting people. But that consent and choice doth not formally constitute a man an officer, but only appropriate his labors to this consenting people. Mr. H. argues here just as the Papists do. If we be justified sola fide, by faith only, and not by works; ergo we are justified by such a faith as is void of all works, and so by a dead faith: we deny the consequence, the man seeth with the eyes only, ergo he sees with the eyes plucked out of the head: The like Paradox M. H. imputes to me, if only ordination formally make a Minister, ergo ordination now where Apostles are not, though separated from election of a certain flock, makes a lawful Minister in a settled Church-state, it follows not: indeed in some cases, as hereafter I shall clear, only ordination of Officers makes a lawful Minister.

Nor is it here as Mr. H. imagines in the case of marriage; for marriage-covenant makes both a man a husband, and a husband to this woman only, and to no other: but election of the people makes not a man a Minister, but only appropriates his Ministerial labors to this flock fixedly.

3. Not is that anything but a fancied contradiction, he that is not a member, enchurched and married to one only particular Congregation (for so is Mr. H. his sense) he is not a member of the Catholic visible Church; For Presbyterian members are so neither members one way nor another.

1. Apostles and members dissolved are not fixed members of a single Congregation, and yet members they must be of the visible Church Catholic: sure it is no Paradox, that the Apostles are such members, for they had right to all the seals in all Congregations; Ergo, they must by this reason be members and no members: the like may be said of godly professors so journers, of these baptized by John Baptist, Matth. 3. by Peter, Act. 10. by Paul, Act. 16. For if we say that professors are only members of a particular Congregation, then we confine a Brother to be gained only to one Congregation, let all the rest perish, they are not my brethren.

2. To deny men to be members of the Catholic visible Church, is to confine all the Church-blessings, and Church-prayers, Church-comforts, Church-faith in Church-hearing, Church-partaking of seals to the one only Congregation whereof I am a member, for in all other Congregations whereof I am no member, there is no assembly-glory, nor no assembly comfort promised, Isa. 4 5, 6. no assembly, o • Church-protection, and Church-leading from a cloud by day, and the shining of a flaming fire by night, no joy in the public sanctuary, Ps. 84. 1, 2, 3. Ps 42. 1, 2, 3, 4. Isa. 2. 2, 3. no comfort in a Church-way through • ion in which the fool shall not err, Isa. 35. 89. no more comfort to me, who am not a member of that flock, then to the Heathen and the Eunuch; for I have no more a place there then the Heathen: contrary to Isa. 56. 4, 5, 6. nor have I Interest in Church-holiness, Zach. 14. 20, 21. and the sanctuary beauty, Ps. 27. 4. Ps. 23. 6. which the Angels desire to learn by the Church, Eph. 3. 10. 1 Pet. 1. 12. 1 Cor. 11. 10. more then if I were excommunicate by Mr. H. his way.

3. Consider if this be not a Judaizing, and a confining of all these spiritual privileges, and glorious Church-comforts, Worship, and Church prayer once confined to Bithel, to the Temple, 1 Kings 28. 29, 44. Dan. 6. 10. which Christ hath made common, and excepts of in all places, John 4 21. 1 Tim. 2. 8. Rev. 1. 10. to one single Congregation, whereof I am a member.

4. Its against the nature of the seals, that is, our union by spiritual engraffing into one body, 1 Cor. 12. 13. and we all eat one bread, 1 Cor. 10. 17. our communion in love with all the Saints is here sealed, and the broken bread seals the body of Christ broken, not for one man, and for only one single Congregation, but it seals Christ's love to the Redeemed world, John. 3. 16. 1 John. 2. 2. to the whole redeemed, saved, sanctified Church, Eph. 5. 23, 26, 27. John. 10. 11. & 11. 51, 52. for the Catholic Bride, not a limb, a single Congregation is the complete object of Christ's intent.

2. The complete and adequate matter of his work and soul-travel on his incarnation, dying, rising, ascending, interceding, giving of the holy Spirit, Luke 19. 10. & 2. 10. 1 John. 2. 2. 1 Tim. 1. 15. Rev. 1. 5, 6. Heb. 7. 25. John. 16. 7. Isa. 53. 11.

3. The only complete recipient, and principal subject of all the gracious and saving actings of Christ, of Church-callings, of the Promises, Covenant preached.

5. By this the congregational body may say, I have no need of thee.

Obj. Yea, I have materially need of thee for counsel, rebuke.

Ans. But is Body-need, Organ-need, and Church-need that Paul speaks of, 1 Cor. 12. 26. Peters body hath no Organ-need of Paul's feet to walk, for he hath two feet of his own; but he may have physical need of another kind: So the Congregation hath need of Heathens to rebuke them, but this is no Church-need.

6. Paul, 1 Cor. 12. would have no schism in the body, but would have the Churches to have the same Church-care one of another, and not to be divided in one Faith, one Baptism, one Church-head, one Church-Gospel, &c. which must be, if I be not a member of all congregations.

7. We are to suffer one with another, rejoice one with another, but no Church-feeling is required of me, if I and those of another congregation be not of the same visible body, by virtue of the fellow-feeling between the members, the Apostle cannot speak of a natural compassion: for humanity will teach Christians to mourn at the destruction of Heathens, but they are not for that of the same body of Christ with us. But as all these prove that there is a visible body of m •• y congregations, and so that there is a Catholic integral visible body. So we thus argue: If the Church-actings, and sufferings, and rejoicing condition of those of associated Churches be visible and audible to us, no less than the Church-actings, and sufferings, and rejoicing condition of the single congregation, whereof I am a member: then must the one be a visible Body and Church as well as the other.

But the latter is true. The Proposition is clear: for if the properties and accidents be visible, the subject is visible; because this is the formal reason why a congregation is visible, for we see not the spirits and faith in the hearts of the single congregation, but we see their profession in single persons, and their meetings in one place, for hearing, praying, praising and partaking of the seals. Now all these we see in three or four or six meetings, or conventions of the Churches associated, which shall but make one numerous congregation of ten thousand, as the dissenting Brethren said of the Church of Jerusalem: and we see them severally meet, as we see the Church of our own single congregation. As for their poverty, sickness, imprisonment, and the sufferings of these of the same congregation of which we are members, we see not these in Church meetings, but in single members, and these must be visible in many congregations, as the famine in Judea for which Paul made a collection, as well as in one. From all this its clear, that it is false which Mr. H. saith, That all particular Churches are all the members that the Church visible hath. For Apostles, godly sojourners, dissolved members, are not members of congregations, not are they congregations themselves, and yet they are members of the visible integral Catholic Church.

CHAP. XXVI.

Mr. H. Mr. R. plainly affirms, That when one enters a member of such a Congregation under the Ministry of A. B. he cometh under a new relative state, by an implicit • or virtual covenant, pag. 95. which is cross to that which was affirmed pag. 92.

Ans. Mr. H. cites not my words to the full. I deny not, but he that enters a fixed member of a congregation, comes under a new relative state of a virtual covenant, and so does he that enters a member of a Christian Army, of a Family, of a Society in a Ship. But the state of the question is not touched: for the state of the question is not, Whether this new Covenant make the adjoyner a member of the visible Church, where as he was no visible member before; that is, whether a born Englishman, by being made a citizen of London, was made an Englishman and a born Subject of England, whereas he was not a born Subject before?

2. Whether doth this New-covenant give him right and claim to Church-ordinances, and seals of the Covenant of grace, so as without it, the man hath no right at all to Ordinances. Sure, its a great sin to lay more weight on either the Temple or the Ark than God hath laid on them. But this Covenant so used is a fancy.

Mr. H. A Church newly erected becomes a sister-Church with others, yet she needs not a new Covenant (saith Mr. R.) to accomplish it. Ans. No certain, our Covenant once entered, all the relations that depend thereupon are included in the first Covenant. A woman once being married, all duties to the husbands kindred results from the Marriage-covenant, there is no need of a new Covenant.

Ans. Yea, but a Church newly erected becomes as really a part of a Synodical body that is really obliged to engage for association, saith Mr. H. (and its both lawful and useful) as a person becomes a member of the single congregation. And officers are no less married to Synodical duties (by the light of nature and right reason (saith the same Mr. H.) than single persons are married to congregational duties; therefore a covenant is as necessary in the one as in the other, magis & minus non variant speciem, if there be a marriage, here officers are more married to the associated Churches in general, as to the complete correlate, than to the single and inadequate correlate the bit of a single congregation.

2. A man born in the Covenant of grace, and baptized, is engaged in all duties,

Mr. H. The Apology said, Its not the Rule of the Word touching Man and Wife, Magistrate and Subject, that makes people in such a state, but the Covenant thus stands unanswered by Mr. R.

Ans. This is for me; but he being born in the Gospel-covenant, and baptized to all Churches, he is a son, a married member to all congregations.

2. Mr. R. constantly denied the naked comparison, as blasphemous and Popish, the Church is Spouse to no sinful man, Pope or any other. Enaristus, The Council of Carthage, of Sardis, of Antioch, so judge, That the Bishop is the Husband, the Church his Wife. Innocentius the III. As Almighty God hath left the Marriage-covenant to be dissolved by his own judgment only, so let not the Bishop leave his Church. But Calvin and Luther say, The Lord is the Husband of the Church: So Bullinger, Musculus, Gualther.

2. It makes communion between the Pastor and those of divers congregations to be acts of Adultery.

3. It makes a Pastor to be married till death.

4. When the congregation is dissolved by persecution, the godly Pastor is cast out of his Masters service by the nature of this covenant, because he is faithful to Christ, and that by Christ himself.

5. It divorces between all godly Pastors, and all Churches on earth, so that it is not lawful to preach pastorally, or to tender the seals to another congregation, or any member thereof, though Letters of Recommendation (as our Brethren say) may give Church right to the se • ls to those of another congregation to be admitted to the Lord's Supper; yet we still desire to Quere, Whether the Pastor, upon the banishment or death of the Pastors of sister congregations, may not lawfully, pastorally preach and tender the seals to them, or not? if the former, here is a strange man acting as a husband to another man's wife.

2. Here is a Pastor acting as a Pastor and a Shepherd to those that are not his flock, and that by no intervening of a Church-covenant; and he wants the essentials of a Pastor, which is the choice of that people.

3. Here is Mr. H. his relation between Pastor and People broken, and their principles destroyed, if the latter be said.

1. What difference is there between his tendering of the seals to those of another congregation in his own Church, and in another Church, except the walls of the house make the difference?

2. Why should he not tender the other seal of Regeneration common to all covenanted ones, Act. 2. 39. as well as the Lord's Supper?

3. If he may not as a Pastor in another congregation; How, or by what authority of Scripture are Pastors only Ambassadors of the King, Messengers of the Lord of Hosts, Workers with Christ, Stewards, Dispensers of the Mysteries of the Gospel, Sent of God, Friends of the Bridegroom, and can act only as such within the precincts of a congregation; and lose both name and thing, when they pass over the line to visible Saints of another congregation? The Priests might not offer sacrifice and offerings, but in the place that the Lord should appoint in his Word; show us a word confining pastoral acting 〈◊〉 Ambassadors to one flock only.

6. This destroys the communion of Churches as Churches, and makes Synods, in which Pastors act as Pastors to other congregations associate, (as Mr. Cotton teacheth) to be no Ordinances of Christ.

7. The same husbandly power must be in Doctors, so that they write not books as Doctors to other Congregations, but only to their own.

8. What Scripture warranteth the same Pastor in the same Sermon preaching to his own flock, and to many strangers of another congregation, to act as a Pastor to his own only, and to others as a gifted man? and to hear in the same word to the conscience of the one by pastoral authority, and to the other by private authority, such as a gifted plowman or woman hath?

9. Only Christ is the Bridegroom, Spouse, Husband of his Church, John. 3. Eph. 5. Cant. 6. 1, 2, 3, 4. and it will not suffice to say, Christ is the supreme Catholic Husband of all Churches, but the pastor is the under-politick head and husband of the congregation, as some distinguish. For the Husband and Bridegroom are as incommunicable Titles proper to Christ only, as to be the Head of the Church, Eph. 1. 22. Col. 1. 18. and yet Jesuits do but mock, when they say, That Christ is the principal and perpetual Head of the whole Church in a sovereign and principal manner, but the Pope is the Ministerial Head. Nor do Papists make the Pope a Father, Husband, Bridegroom and Head of the Church by the spiritual influence of life, motion and grace, yet are they refuted by Willet, D. Fulk, Cartwright, and ours: And Mr. H. will but ad naus • am inculcate, that the Pastor is the married Husband, and the Congregation his only Wife; and that he may not act as a pastor toward others than his own flock, more than a man may venture to take the place, and to do the duties of a husband to a woman—and tell her he is in the Covenant of grace—and there need •… Marriagecovenant. Hence I infer, he cannot dispense the Lord's Supper to one of another congregation, contrary to himself and his Brethren, except he be married by a Church-covenant to them; and so he must be a husband, and perform the duties of a husband to a hundred persons, of a hundred associate congregations. But it had been fit Mr. H. had produced any words of mine that bear, that being in the Covenant of grace can warrant a man to discharge pastoral duties, either to one congregation or other, before he be lawfully called of God by the Church, and before he formally consent and engage not implicitly, but formally and expressly to feed the flock of God; or that any man's being in the covenant of grace licenses him to do all duties whatsoever of a Pastor, of a Magistrate, of a Husband, of a Physician, b • fore he be lawfully called of God to the calling of a Pastor, a Magistrate, a Husband, a Physician. And Mr. H. wrongfully would that the Reader should believe, That Mr. R. so teacheth. There are some actions indeed that the visible and professed being in the covenant of grace warranteth a man to do, to wit, to partake of the seals in all congregations, without any new Church-covenant, to gain a trespassing brother, to counsel, teach, rebuke, comfort Church-members of all congregations, where it shall please God he shall be for the present. And Mr. R. denies that these are either pastoral, or husbandduties, and thinks Mr. H. in a great error: for if one of another congregation should trespass against a member of a sistercongregation near by, Mr. H. hath furnished the offender rebuked with this Reply: You and I are not congregational Brethren, nor married members of the same congregation; and therefore the covenant of grace warrants not you to rebuke me, or to tell the Church of my obstinacy in Adultery, except you and I had both sworn in the same Marriage-congregational covenant: for the covenant of grace no more warranteth you to gain me in a Church way, than it warranteth a man to do husband-duties to the Woman with whom he never made any Marriage-covenant; and so all duties of this kind performed by Presbyterians never so godly, must be Antichristian and adulterous.

Mr. H. This new Covenant makes the new adjoyner a member of the congregation, (saith Mr. R.) never 〈◊〉 of us (saith Mr. H.) said any such thing. The Church as totum essentiale, made of visible Saints covenanting to watch over one another in a Church-Way, is before her officers, the particular members are members before they choose their Pastors, and therefore are not made Church-members by this new covenant.

Ans. There be too many ways to the Well here. I said, the new covenant makes the new adjoyner a member of the congregation. Yea, I add, A member of the visible Church, whereas he was no better then a heathen before, and the Churches of New England say with me; Though Mr. H. say, That never one of them said any such thing. And sure this is one Church-covenant by which persons are made fixed members of a congregation; Ergo, they are by this covenant made members of the visible Church, whereas they were as pagans before. But there is another Church-covenant, by which pastor and people are married, and every member so married, as they cannot act as Church-members without their own congregation, and he cannot act as a pastor toward any, but toward his own flock. Hence a new Quaere, Whether there be two different Church-covenants?

3. Its without question, that the family of Abraham was God's covenanted people before circumcision was instituted, Gen. 17. nor is there any ground for a formal Church-covenanting among themselves. And it speaks against all Scripture, to say there was a Church covenant in Egypt, and in the Wilderness, Exod. 19. 1, 5. for they were not made Church-members, for members they were before, by these covenantings with God. And this is Mr. H. his own consequence, They are members before they chose their Pastors: Ergo. So I retort.

Mr. H. If this covenant difference the visible Church from the invisible, as the formal cause; then there have been no visible Churches since the Apostles times till now. Now the Churches (saith Mr. H.) in England, Holland, &c. have the implicit covenant, at their practice evidenceth.

Ans. Yet it must f •… ow, since presbyterian Churches believe and practice juridical power, without the bonds of a single Independent Church in divers associate Congregations.

2. And do not contend for, but are against really supposed Saints, as only constituent members of the visible Church, and in the causes internal and external.

And 3. are so contradictorious to Independency, there have been no Church, according to the rule of the word, since the Apostles days.

2. If an implicit covenant suffice, we shall find popish Churches to have much of that.

Mr. H. Though many unwarrantable wayet convey this covenant, yet itself may be warrantable.

Ans. If by ways Mr. R. mean, as he doth, ways inseparable, causes, pillars, means and undeniable consequences, the covenant must be the more unhappy, as the unlawful ways of the Mass, the lifting up of the bready God, and Idolatrous Ceremonies inseparably conveying it, render it unlucky.

Mr. H. It is a dream to say, that when the Apostles came to plant Churches, that private men, not the Apostles converted them; Where is the man (of ours) that will affirm that all (All) are converted by private Christians?

Ans. The reply auswers not a whit to the Charge of Mr. R. now when the Apostles are not.

2. The Apostles, by our Brethren's way, are not Pastors so much as extraordinary nor, public men, for extraordinariness destroys not the nature of Pastors; and to our Brethren Pastor and flock are relatives; but the heathen are no fed stock, nor these who now teach the Gospel to the heathen, Apostles nor Pastors.

3. These who teach that now Apostles ceasing, Pastors as Pastors convert none according to the revealed command of Christ; but pre suppose all are converted before they be admitted members: they convert not as Pastors; Ergo, they must convert them as no Pastors; Ergo, they convert them as private men, except there be a middle preacher between a preaching officer, and a private man, but this everywhere is taught by our brethren: now this middle uncalled man, must be the ordinary converser of all.

2. Mr. H. teacheth that the Church homogeneal, in ordinary, now when there are no Apostles, is before Baptism and Ministry; now this Church is all the visible sovieties of confederate converts on earth. Let Mr. H. tell us who converted them: not Pastors, for they are a framed Church in esse and operari, the Fathers and sole Creators of all Officers.

Mr. H. It is unwarrantable to say Pastors now convert not Indians and Heathens, saith Mr R. It is warrantable enough, saith M. H.

Answ. Enough is a feast. Converters of Heathen now are either Apostles, Evangelists, or Ordinary Officers and Pastors, or of some middle new Officers: this latter cannot without Scripture be said, not the former, for they want the gift of tongues and miracles; nor are they ordinary Pastors. For Pastor and flock, saith Mr. H. Shepherd called, and Church choosing, Husband and Wife are Relatives. But Indians are no choosing Church.

Mr. H. Men must be satisfied in conscience of the conversion one of another, saith Mr. R.

Ans. To reasonable charity they should, saith Mr. H. and no doubt it was in Ananias, Sapphira.

Ans. But their long conversing together, for this satisfaction Mr. H. bringeth down to two poor experienced Witnesses, Magus and Judas, for everyone must witness of another, and that witnesses were called and judicially deponed, that all the 3000. Act. 2. and all Judea, and all round about who were baptized, Matth. 3. 3, 4. Mark 1. 5. Luk. 4. 21. were real converts, who can believe, except you believe? for so saith Mr. H.

Mr. H. What is all this to overthrow the covenant?

Ans. Very much; for it destroys the Ministry: for though some private Christians may convert some, yet no man can show me, by our brethren's way, that pastors now do convert any at all; contrary to Mat. 28. 19, 20 Rom. 10. 14, 15. Eph. 4. 11, 12, 13. 1 Cor. 3. 5. 2 Cor. 5. 20. Act. 26. 16, 17, 18. or if they convert any, they do it not as pastors.

M. H. They which have no Church-power, can put forth no Church power, but such as Churches to other Churches.

Ans. The proposition is weak, they put forth an act of love, of counsel, of approbation, of conjunction, as well as power. Mr. R. grants one single Congregation to have no power over another; many Churches sent to Parliament, to declare their judgment, may approve of their determinations, if holy, if not, may confute them; yet they have no Church-power over the Parliament.

Ans. 1. My argument is mistaken, many Churches, suppose mine, have not power by this way to receive in one Church, nor James, Cephas, and John power to receive authoritatively Paul, as they do, say Calvin, Pelicanus, Pareus, Piscator, Diodati, Beza; yea Jerome also before them.

Mr. H. If Mr. R. const • ue a token of consent, consensionis, to be a Symbole of authority, it is beyond my understanding.

Ans. Mr. R. never understands private consent, or private counsel, such as one private man or woman may give to another private person, of their own, or of another congregation, to be public authority; but I acknowledge a public authoritative, and Aopstolick consent to be in James, Cephas, John; and their meaning was, Brother Paul, our counsel as Brethren, is, and our consent, you be a Preacher, but we have no Apostolic authority from the Lord to own you as an Apostle. Now that is the true meaning of Mr. H. for this of Mr. R. must bide yet strong: these that have no Church-power can put forth no Church-act. Such as one Church may put forth toward another single Sister-Church, as Mr. R. often granteth, as one single man cannot excommunicate another; yet one single man being a Pastor in a Church, Judicature joined with the Church binding and loosing, such as is Mat. 18. may give consent, not private by way of counsel, but public, by way of authoritative influence, as a partial and collateral cause, that Paul, Gal. 2. be authoritatively adopted into the number of the Apostles, & that they be excommunicate who say, they are Apostles, but are not, and do lie, Rev. 2. and a married wife hath no marriage-power over any man but over her own husband; nor is it to be heard, which Mr. H. saith, I but she may put forth an act of love and counsel to all men. But I ask, may she put forth a certain act of matrimonial love, or perform a certain matrimonial duty to all men on earth? this would be too near unchaste acting. So let Mr. H. answer, whether these three, James, Cephas, and John, gave Apostolic public consent, that Paul should be received an Apostle, or only a private counsel. If the former be said, why contend we? if the latter, what more had Paul from the given right hand of these Apostles then he had before? he was no more to them an Apostle then before, yea, more to three private Believers in Galatia; contrary to the scope of Gal. 2. These Churches sent to the Parliament that way, not representing the National Church and Kingdom covenanted with the Lord, can give no Church-determination, more then so many single Pastors; yet it is an official judgment, not a private judgment.

Mr. H. It is not warrantable that one not in office (saith Mr. R.) but a private Christian, should pray, exhort, preside in the framing of a Church, and in ordaining of Pastors. Ans. The practice of the Church of Scotland will say to this, we allow not public prophesying of unofficed men.

Ans. 1. Here is ordinary prophesying, such as that of the Apostle Peter at the calling of Matthias, Act. 1. and public Church-prophesying and praying; such as is by the Prophets or presbytery of the Church of Antioch, Act. 13. when Paul & Barnabas were called to be Apostles to the Gentiles: and since officers are but adjuncts of the Church to Mr. H. and separable accidents, by no institution of Christ have pastors hand in ordaining pastors; but the settled way till Christ's second coming is that the male-Church kindly per se, make and unmake all the officers, which cannot be done, but by Church prophesying of unofficed men. 2. Expectants being pastors in fieri, sons of the prophets, by command of the prophets, vi materiae, for trial must prophesy: that you cannot warrantably say from Scripture of your prophets.

LIB. II. CHAP. I.

M R. Hooker moves the question, whether such a company be a Church indeed? by which he insinuates, that it is a certain kind of a visible Church, but not the only visible Church instituted by Christ in the New Testament. Therefore Mr. H. stands obliged either to form the question in other terms, or to show which is the only instituted visible Church in the New Testament: for the Discipline-book of N. E. saith, that Church which Christ in his Gospel hath instituted, to which he hath committed the Keys—the Officers, Censures—is coetus fidelium, a combination of the godly—called a particular visible Church. And Mr. H. comes to our hand, and (so with a trumpet giving an uncertain sound) he tells he speaks of the Congregational Church, as it goes before Officers; which is a Man in the Moon, and proved by no Scripture at all.

Mr. H. The trumpet here gives an incertain sound. M. R. expressions are so full of variety.

Ans. It is a groundless charge, except you bring expressions of Mr. R. ambiguities, which is not legible to the Reader: I blow the trumpet always against such a visible Church as Mr. H. forgeth by arguments from the word, which are not answered.

Mr. H. A Church ministerial is taken two ways. 1. Generally, as implying any delegate power in the exercise of any Church-acts, under Christ. So a company of visible Saints hath power of admission of members, and election of officers; and in case they prove heretical, to reject the officer, and make him no officer. All these are granted by Mr. R. Ministerial power is taken strictly, as it includes an office power, so it is not ministerial.

Ans. Mr. H. dictates, but neither teaches nor brings one word of Scripture to prove a distinction that hath neither head nor feet.

2. The members of the distinction are coincident; for to ordain officers, and excommunicate them is governing strictly and most properly; as is in the second member. And yet in the first member, to excommunicate makes a ministerial Church largely so called. The distinction is a begging of the question, and destroys itself; for it is to ask whether visible Saints, wanting such as are the only Governors and Rulers, who are called in the word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , 1 Cor. 12. 28. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , 1 Tim. 5. 17. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , Heb. 13. 17. Rulers, be a ruling and a governing Church, for a Society that doth ordain Elders, and which censures them, if heretical, with excommunication, must be a Ruling, and so a Ministerial Church, if there be any Ruling and Ecclesiastic Church on Earth. If any say that a Society that appoints Stewards and Officers over the house, and excommunicateth them, is not a politick governing Society; they may deny that the man which maketh use of reason is a reasonable creature. And to frame a distinction, and say a man is a reasonable creature in that sense, is poor Logic. We can give instances where the Presbytery ordains, and lays on hands, 1 Cor. 4. 14. and where Titus and other Elders are to ordain Elders in every City, Tit. 1. 5. and Timothy, and in him others are charged to lay on hands, and ordain no man suddenly, while he be proved to be a fit Officer, 1 Tim. 5. 22. 1 Tim. 3. 10. and where Timothy and others with him are commanded, 2 Tim. 2. 2. to commit the ministry to faithful men, who are able to teach others. Would Mr. H. show so much for the power of Rule in a company of Believers, void of Officers, or give us a shadow of reason in the word from precepts, practices, promises, for this new Church, that ordains and excommunicates without Officers, they should have something to say to this, who upon good groun • say, they coin a new Church of their own, unknown to word.

Mr. H. indeed elsewhere saith, Such places shall prove Ti •… thy and Titus to be Prelates.

I answer, 1. Mr. H. and our Brethren's way shall be straited with this groundless Argument, as well as we.

2. We say, these Epistles in point of governing, as trying of Pastors, 1 Tim. 3. 1, 2, 3. of Deacons, ver. 10. of Elders, 1 Tim. 1. 17. ordaining or laying on of hands, ver. 22. receiving of accusation by witnesses, 19, 20. the ordaining of Elders thus and thus qualified, Tit. 1. 5, 6, 7, 8. 2 Tim. 2. 2. preaching the Gospel in season and out of season 2 Tim 4. 1, 2. with gentleness, 1 Tim. 5. 15. ruling in the house of God, 1 Tim. 3. 16. charging of men to preach sound doctrine. 1 Tim. 1. 3. dividing the word aright, 2 Tim. 2. 14, 15. These Epistles (I say) are written to Timothy and to Titus, not as little Monarchs, with preeminence above other Elders, but to them as representing all faithful Officers in the College of that Presbytery, 1 Tim. 4. 14. who are to keep that command unviolable, to the second appearing of Christ, 1 Tim 6. 13. and they are not written to Elders as having dominion over the faith of the people.

2. If these Epistles were written to Timothy and Titus not as representing Officers, but as the Church representing the people, yet wanting Officers, and so in a Church-capacity, then it should be Paul's mind that the people in that case destitute of Elders, should preach the word in season and out of season; as Timothy, 2 Tim. 4. 1, 2. and that the people, in that capacity, should, as the approved workmen of God, divide the word of truth rightly, 2 Tim. 2. 15. as well as they ordain Elders, and make and unmake Officers, by the places, 1 Tim. 5. 22, 2 Tim. 2. 2. Tit. 1. 5. yea, and the Apostle should not have ordained Titus to appoint Elders in every city, for he should have appointed the Cities and Churches of only believers to ordain their own Elders.

Yea 3. the Church void of Elders, by our Brethren's way, are the only society and visible Church on earth, who make and unmake, call and excommunicate Officers, and Officers have no hand in it, but accidentally: for, Elders are made, and if heretical, rejected (saith Mr. H.) by the people, having no Elders at all. Ergo, these Epistles must be written to the believers of Ephesus and Crete that yet want Officers, that they may be instructed how to behave them • elves in the house of God, how to lay on hands, how to receive accusations, and how to prove and try officers. Yea, Paul should not have written Rules to Timothy and Titus the public Officers, who by their office ought to have no hand in calling or rejecting of Officers by this way.

Lastly, saith Mr. H. All these are granted by Mr. R.

Whereas in many pages I dispute against this new visible Church, and grant no such thing, but suppose all the Officers should turn heretical in this, in that case the people in tutelâ inculpata salutis, when they turn Wolves, may withdraw. But I say not they can authoritatively excommunicate, and make and unmake Officers; and the Officers, when the people turn Familists, may withdraw and remove the Tabernacle.

Mr. H. God hath set officers in the Church, 1 Cor. 12. 28. Therefore the Church is before officers.

The setting of the candle in the candlestick presupposeth the candlestick; the Church is the candlestick, Revel. 1. 20. the officers are the candles. Mr. R. answered, It was not good Logic.

Ans. I yet maintain this to be naughty Logic, and a naughty Grammatication: and if this be the best Argument for this new conceit, it cannot stand.

God (saith Moses, Gen. 2. 7.) formed man of the dust, and God breathed in his (that is) in the nostrils of the man, the breath of life.

Ergo, He is a living man before the soul be breathed in him. Its naughty Logic like this.

Mr. H. God made man of earth, i. e. the body of man of the earth, and he breathed into the nostrils of that body so made by that mean, the breath of life: to affirm the body was made before the soul was infused; and that the body, which is the subject, to receive the soul, must be in nature before the soul, is very good Logic.

Ans. The Logic is yet naughty: for Moses saith, God breathed in man a living soul, therefore Adam is a living man before his soul be infused. By this Logic

Mr. H. will but change my consequence, parallel and large as good as his. And have it thus:

God breathed in man's body as the matter, a living soul as the form.

Ergo, the body is in nature before the soul.

I shall not deny that consequence: but 1. The antecedent is not the Grammatical phrase, and the figurative speech of Moses, as my antecedent is. God breathed a living soul in the nostrils of man: Ergo, he was man before God breathed in him a living soul. So I desire Mr. H. to answer the like quirk of Grammar, Zech. 12. 1.

God createth the spirit in the midst of man.

Ergo, he was a man before God created a spirit in the midst of him.

So Isa. 42. 5.

God gives breath and spirit to the people, and to those that walk on the earth.

By this Argument,

Therefore the people are a living people, moving and walking upon the earth, before God gave them breath and spirit. What more absurd?

So Mr. H. God hath set officers in the Church:

Therefore the Church is before the officers.

So God hath set the members, pastor and people, eye, ear, hands and feet, &c. everyone of them in the body, as pleaseth him, 1 Cor. 12. 18. this is as much as, God hath placed single believers also (for believers are not members visible without God's setting) not yet clothed with adjuncts (as they call them) of officers in the Church, ver. 18. or in the body visible.

Therefore by the consequence and grammatication every way alike,

The body or Church visible of combined believers, shall be before the body or Church visible of combined believers. But the Conclusion is absurd. What then hath Mr. H. gained by this Argument? Of necessity then, when the Apostle saith, God hath placed in the Church Apostles, Prophets;

The word Church, must be the visible Catholic organick Church, which is made organick by such organs as Apostles, Prophets, so seated.

Like this, God hath created a soul in man, and yet he is a man by the soul that is created in him, and is not a man before it be created in him.

Mr. H. Beside there's advantage to the cause, that not only the subject in which these officers are, is totum essentiale, but by virtue of her choice which is causal of the officers, they are there, saith Mr. H. and therefore in reason must be before them.

Ans. Its a great disadvantage, and an untruth, to call the Elders and Rulers of a politick ruling visible Church, which is an organical body, the adjuncts thereof: for the members and organs of an organical body, are the integral parts, and so in a physical consideration, the essential parts of the whole integral are not adjuncts by any Logic I know: and if you take away the integral parts wholly, you destroy the integral whole; but if you remove the adjuncts or accidents, you destroy not the subject.

2. What Logic is this, to make the Fathers, Apostles and Pastors who beget, and the Ministers by whom we believe, and visibly believe, Rom. 10. 14, 15. Eph. 4. 11, 12. 1 Cor. 3. 5. the separable adjuncts of begotten children? This is strange Logic, Whiteness begot Snow! And this is as strange, that this Church of believers is the cause, and the officers the effect; that is, the adjunct is the cause, and the children, the Church of believers, or the subject is the effect, and the effect begets the cause, and is before the cause, and the fruit hath being before the tree, and the children before the father: for if we speak of a constant Rule, as now we must do, when Apostles are removed, if the Church of believers be a visible Church, having the Keys and using them, even to admit officers, and to excommunicate them, they

1. Dispense censures and govern, who have no call to carry on censures and government, by preaching the Word, or exhorting and praying, for there are no officers as yet, &c. If these be visible believers, who are their fathers who begat them? for there are no officers yet to beget them.

3. Who begot them by the preaching of the Word? and if they were heathens, and are now converted, who either did convert them or baptize them? for there are no officers as yet: Did everyone baptize another? or did unbaptized members baptize their own Ministers who are yet unbaptized? and this argument must be strongly retorted: The officers cannot be the effect of this Church, for they are the only causes of the very materials of this Church; for officers must convert, gather a flock to God, and baptize them, if it be true, that faith comes (in the Lord's ordinary and instituted way) by hearing of sent Pastors, Rom. 10. 14.

Mr. H. The Church (saith Mr. R.) is the candlestick, not simply without candles and lamps; the Church Ministerial is the candlesticks, and the Ministers the shining torches and candles. Its cross to all men's apprehensions, saith Mr. H. that the candlestick should be no longer a candlestick than the candle is in it: They are bought and sold for candlesticks. Is not a subject a subject, though the adjunct be not there? What kind of Logic is this?

Ans. Its indeed unknown Logic, that officers the fathers should be adjuncts, and the Church of believers begotten by them, as is said, the children should be the subject.

2. Mr. H. will have a figurative speech against all Logic and Grammar, to be a proper speech, and the candlestick, Rev. 1. 20. to be like the candlesticks of brass or other metal, or wood, which are bought or sold. So when its said, Christ walketh in the midst of the golden candlesticks, the sense must be, Christ walkesh in the midst of Churohes destitute of Angels and Officers: Whereas he hath promised his presence to the officers, Matth. 28. 20. especially, L •• I am with you —and by this Christ must promise his presence to blind candlesticks, and to Churches wanting officers and Angels. Then the meaning of this, Rev. 2. 5. I will remove the candlestick, must be, O Ephesus, I will remove believers, and that homogeneal body of Saints, as destitute of Angels. Never man dreamed of any such sense as this since the world was. But the true sense is, I will remove a shining Ministry, and the Ordinances, and the eight of the p •… ed Gospel, and the Word of the Kingdom; as Zech. 9. 8. Three shepherds also I cut off in one month—Then said I, I will not feed you. Amos 8. 12. They shall seek the word of the Lord, and shall not find it. Mat. 21. 43. The kingdom of God shall be taken from you, Acts 13. 46, 47. Let Mr. H. show how the Church without the Minister is called the golden candlestick? And where the Church of believers, without the stars and torches, is called The light of the world? Godly and found Interpreters, Pareus, Pignetus, Marlorat, Piscater, Di •• ati, English Divines, The Church are candlesticks, because they bear (saith Pareus) the torch of heavenly Doctrine. So Pignetus, Marlorat, Piscator.

Mr. H. A Corporation of Aldermen, before they choose a Major, is a free Corporation: Ergo, the Church of believers is a visible Church before it have officers. A man cannot be a husband before he have a wife, yet he may be a man wooing woman before he can make her his wise.

Ans. 1. The comparison is most unlike. For,

1. A Corporation of Aldermen is a Corporation of free Citizens and Magistrates, such as Aldermen are, though they yet want a Magistrate supreme, or a Major. The Church void of all officers 〈◊〉 not a body capable of governing in a formal way.

2. Say they want Aldermen, they had by nature an intrinsacal power to choose to themselves private men to be their Rulers, whereas before they were no Rulers: But the making and laying on of hands upon men, to make them Elders, agrees not to believers, because visible believers, by the Law of Nature, but by a positive Law of God is given to a certain number of Presbyters or Elders, 1 Tim 4. 14. as is above proved.

3. Say that forty Pagans, not baptized, were made by the travels of some private Christian, man or woman, visible Saints, forty unbaptized could not make unbaptized Pag •… their Rulers and Pastors, as they could make some of their members their Civil Magistrates.

4. That Corporation do • he get and create their Rulers, and their Rulers, who are posterior to them, did not beget them, and make them free Citizen • . But officers •• cording to the fixed Rule of the Gospel, now when Apostles cease to be, are the only fathers who baget visible professor.

Mr. H. If the Church •• net a Church without officers, then as often as the officers die, the Church di •… also.

2. When the Church for gross heresias rejecteth the officers, the Church must destroy herself, while she laboreth her own preservation. Doth a Corporation, when they put out a wicked Magistrate out of his place, therefore destroy their own Liberties, and nullify their Corporation? Such Arguments may seem • n • ugh to cast a cause, and yet Mr. R. by them can turn all aside.

Ans. Its unfit that a man should so reflect upon his Brethren, when there is so little strength.

1. The Pastors being the husband, and the Church the wife, sure, if the wife destroy the husband to save herself, she destroys her own wife ship, while she labors the preservation of herself as a woman: and if the Church destroy all the heretical officers, is there any absundity to say, She destroyeth her own Ministerial feeding, her own sacramental communion, by which she is one body with all the Saints on earth, as the Brethren grant; and its sure from 1 Cor. 10. 16, 17. & 12. 13. as touching any spiritual well-being and feeding by these wretched feeders: but they have no authority to do it. I see no inconvenience, why a Corporation may not out, and lay aside all their Aldermen and Major, if they turn Lions and Leopards, and so destroy the present individual Government, while they labor their own safety, and the safety of their privileges. But the case is not alike, except Mr. H. prove, That the Church of believers hath the same positive power of Government intrinsical without their officers, and only fathers who begat them to Christ, to use the Keys, and formally to excommunicate them, as a free City hath over their Magistrates.

2. If the officers die, sure the organical Church dies, and the organical, and the ministerial and politick essence of that visible Church, as it is totum integrale, dies.

2. I retort the Argument. When the Church of the Jews, Acts 13. & 18. turns heretical, and blasphemes, and refuses to be the married wife (I speak in our Brethren's language) if the Church of officers reject them, and turn to others, it shall not follow.

1. That the officers destroy their own husbandly power, while they labor their own preservation: which is the great absurdity that Mr. H. puts upon Mr. R. as enough to cast the cause.

2. Shall it follow, That the officers without the people, or governing without, yea contrary to their consent, is a true visible Church? in no sort.

Mr. H. When the tents are removed, they are not the shepherds tents: to remove the candlestick is to remove the Ministry, and remove all the Officers, the Church is not a body visible eating one bread, 1 Cor. 10. 16, 17. So Mr. R. But Mr. H. answers, Yet they are called tents fit to receive shepherds, and are the same they were before the shepherds were chosen, and remain the same: To remove the candlestick is to remove the Ministry, because Ministry and Ministers have their dependence on the Church; destroy the man the whole, you destroy the parts; but it holds not contrariwise: its true in a Ministerial Church, i. e. an organicum totum, when you take away any part, you lame the integrity of it; but you dedestroy not the essence of it, as it is totum essentiale.

Ans. It is enough to me, if ye remove all Officers and Shepherds, it is no ruling Church, though the fitness of choice (which is no act of government) do still remain; yet the fitness to ordain and to excommunicate remains not, for they never had it; Luke distinguishes the one from the other, Acts 6. 3, 5. the multitude 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , chose not the Apostles; but the twelve Apostles, not the multitude, ordained them by praying and laying on of hands, v 6. as the Elders do, and they only, in the New Testament, 1 Tim. 4. 14. 1 Tim. 5. 22.

2. It is good that Mr. H. grants that to remove the Candlestick, is to remove the minist •… y; I hope he means the shining, burning, and guiding Ministers and Watchmen, 1 Tim. 3. 1, 2. Mat. 5. 14. John. 5. 35. But in the other page 91, 32. It is cross to all men's apprehensions (saith he) that the Candlestick should include Candles and Lamps.

3. Nor is it true in Mr. H. his way, that to remove the candlestick, is to remove the Ministry; for there remaineth a preaching and a praying Church (which is at the ordaining of Officers, and sending them, Act. 1 • 15. & 6. 24. Act. 13. 1, 2, 3. Act. 6. 6.) which doth only make and unmake officers, saith Mr. H.

4. Destroy the whole (saith he) and you destroy the parts; but it holds not, contrariwise: why not contrariwise? if you destroy all the parts (otherwise the Logic is naught) take away eyes, and ears, and hands, and feet, and all the integral parts, or all the essential parts, and you destroy the whole, in any sense; too much of this Logic Mr. H. gives us.

5. Take away (saith he) in an Organick or Ministerial body a member, you lame the integrity. Now the ministry and officers are removed by the people, because they are heretical, as Mr. H. teacheth page 90. I pray you, remains there a ministerial or organick body? no, saith M. H. there remains a homogeneous body.

4. Take away any part, you lame the integrity; take then away the ministry, you lame the body. O Logic! the ministry is a separable adjunct to Mr. H. page 92. Here it is an integral part; is an integral part an adjunct? is the eye an adjunct of the organical body? is the integrity hurt, because a separable adjunct is removed?

5. Nor is this true, take away any part in an organical body, and you lame the integrity; it is only true of an organical part, not of any part; take away ten members, believers only, the Church remaineth an entire, and unlamed integral body: let ten free members of a City be removed by death, yet the City remains an unmaimed entire body of Citizens, ruled by Major and Aldermen.

6. Remove the ministry, the essence and organical body remaineth not.

Mr. H. That which is added, is more beside the cause; It is granted where Officers are not, there is no communion of the Sacraments, is there therefore no Church-communion?

Ans. If this communion be removed, there is no communion of the Church, which being many members, is one body, 1 Cor. 10. 16, 17. & 12. 12, 13. And what reason but a Church, and the only instituted visible Church in the New Testament, as the book of Discipline of N. E. makes it, should be a complete Church in being and operation, and partake of all Church-communion, though it want the officers, which are to Mr. H. but poor harmless separable adjuncts? page 92. and this is somewhat for the cause.

M. H. We have done now with the first Quere, and made it clear, That this Church is before all Officers, and may be without them.

Ans. So Mr. H. hath done, and made it as clear as midnight darkness, with whole two Arguments, the one whereof is a poor Grammatication, and scarce that, and the other a begging of the question; that there is a ruling Church before, and without officers, which may make and unmake officers.

CHAP. II.

Mr. H. The qualification of the Church as totum essentiale, in the order and pr • cedency of it, in regard of her true Officers we have dispatched. Now we speak of it in comparison with a Presbyterian Church.

Ans. Let not then the Reader expressed any visible Church organical to be spoken of; Organs are but separable adjuncts, the only Church spoken of, and acknowledged by Mr. H. and our brethren, is an homogeneal Church of only believers, which Mr. H. now calls the Church, before he called it a Church, and this Church, page 94. but we ask the question whether the word Church, Mat. 18. 17. Tell the Church, 1 Cor. 1. 2. Unto the Church of God which is at Corinth. And 2 Cor. 1. 1. 1 Thes. 1. 1. 2 Tim. 2. 15. be this congregational Church without the separable adjuncts of officers: and the truth is, the place Matth. 18. The principal copy of the Independent Church, can mean no Church according to our brethren's way: for no reason can say that the Keys of the Kingdom of Heaven, Matth. 16 19. and the power of binding and loosing. Matth. 18. 17, 18. are given to the separable adjuncts of the Church: but such are the officers, saith Mr. H. page 92. and to such as are no essential parts of the instituted Church, and of the only visible Church of the New Testament. But M. H. makes it clear, as he says, that the Congregational Church is before the Officers, and may be, and is without them, therefore officers can be no essential parts of the Church of the New Testament. And so this Church void of Officers, must be to our brethren, the first and principal subject of all Government, Rule, Keys, Officers, and what not?

Mr. H. being to evert Presbyterial Government, he begins at the Pillars.

The Presbyterian Church consists of three Pillars.

1. There must be several congregations, made entire of such members to make up an integral body of Rulers and Ruled.

Ans. There is a crack in this Pillar, it is not essential to a Presbyterian Church that all the congregation be entire, and formed Churches, having their own Officers distinct from the offices of others, we cannot determine that Matthias had a determinate flock, to which only he was a fixed Pastor, and Peter another, and John a third; we rather judge the whole twelve fed in common, sometimes in one congregation, in this house, daily, and sometimes in another; but all the huge thousands could not feed in one house, otherwise many congregations framed and fixed, or not framed and fixed, are all under one Presbytery, as the Learned and Reverend Assembly at Westminster teacheth. If the Pillars be dreams, the house that M. H. storms is also a dream.

To the second Pillar we shall speak hereafter, if the Lord will.

3. These Churches send Rulers, by way of delegation, to whom they submit.

Ans. This also is a faulty Pillar.

1. They so send as they may be present to hear, dispute, dissent, to what is amiss, nor are the Pastors delegates.

2. They submit to them not simply.

But first, reserving judgment of discretion.

Secondly, and with liberty to appeal.

3. The whole Elders of six congregations in a City may all meet in one common Presbytery, without any delegation; and that is a Presbyterial Church, as is the meeting of a Congregational Eldership.

Mr. H. To their power of Jurisdiction the Churches must submit—but it ariseth from a power of order or office to preach.

Ans. Well said, then cannot they exercise the highest acts of jurisdiction, to excommunicate all the Elders, as Mr. H. saith, page 92. they do, for the people hath no power of order or official power to preach the Gospel, and administer the Seals, page 92. and yet Mr. H. saith, they may communicate all their officers.

Mr. H. There is a Jurisdiction official that issues only from the office, this the officers have.

Answ. This Lenitive is a Corrosive. Here is the matter, the people have jurisdiction, and do excommunicate, but not by an official jurisdiction, but by another power: So a Midwife baptizeth in the Roman Church, but not by a power of Order, as a Priest, but its valid. An Usurper judgeth, but not by a power derived from the Royal Power of the Sovereign Ruler.

2. By what Scripture can any power of the Keys given by Christ only to the Church of believers, be given to separable adjuncts of the Church?

Mr. H. None is a steward, unless appointed over the Family by Christ, 1 Cor. 12. 27, 28. Hence Papists and Prelates err, officers and offices are coronation-mercies, and proceed from Christ's ascension, Eph. 4. 11, 12.

2. They are means of worship instituted by him.

3. He only can bless them.

Answ. 1. None are stewards to put in and put out stewards and excommunicate them, but such as are appointed of God: But believers without officers are no stewards at all.

2. Censuring and excommunicating is an authoritative way of edifying, 2 Cor. 10. 8. 1 Cor. 5. 4, 5. 1 Thess. 3. 14. show in all the Word, where believers and private Christians are to edify and build up in the faith their Pastors, and that in an authoritative way. The people so must

2. Be coronation-mercies, and gifts given of Christ, ascending to heaven for the perfecting of the Pastors, and the work of the Ministry, to gather in Apostles, Evangelists, Pastors to Christ. Whereas the Text saith the contrary, That Pastors were given to gather in the people, and the people, or unofficed Brethren, were not given to gather in Apostles.

3. If Excommunication be a Worship administered by the Brethren upon Pastors; then must a promise be made to unofficed Brethren, who excommunicate, Behold, I send you, as Matth. 10. 16. This we read not.

Mr. H. He that is called and appointed an officer according to God and the Rules of the Gospel, as he needs no other power but that of his office, to authorize him to execute it; So there is no power by rule or right that can hinder him in the due execution thereof.

Ans. This is a ground against both Episcopacy and Presbytery. Presbyters may preach in other congregations than their own, if they be officers over it, as Bishops may in many congregations.

2. The Pastor, if called of God, may do his office, without horrowing a power from the Pastor of pastors to do it; but he must preach hic & nunc in an orderly way, upon a day, and time of the day appointed by the Church.

3. He hath an office to preach and administer the seals anywhere, yet must he have the call by desire, consent, or some other way, before he can do it in another congregation.

4. Nor can he rule or administer censures as his alone, extra collegium, without the authoritative concurrence of the Elders, and tacit consent of the people, though he be an appointed officer of Christ. So this ground is weak. Other weak grounds we shall consider after.

CHAP. III.

MR. H. Arg. 1. If the Churches combined have no more power than they had before they were combined, they can exercise no more Jurisdiction than before; and therefore have no Presbyterian power, are no Presbyterian Churches.

But they have no more power after their combination, than before: Ergo.

The Assumption, where the doubt only lies, is made out thus: They who have no more office and officers than they had before, they have no more jurisdiction; as in the first ground, power of jurisdiction flows from power of office. But they have no more officers, for each send their own; therefore they have no more power.

Ans. Mr. H. says, The doubt is only in the assumption, and takes the proposition for undeniable: The major is false; for by this argument, two single congregations each a hundred in number, lying so near as they may most conveniently meet, cannot lawfully unite in one Church, for the better attaining the end of Christ, which is edification: for say they be the same number of offices and officers, then they can exercise no more power of jurisdiction, after the combination over two hundred, than each of them did over one hundred. But the Conclusion is absurd. Yea, this Argument destroys the Synod, Acts 15. for suppose the number of offices and officers to be equal in the Synod, after the Synodical combination, and in the Church of either Antioch only, or Jerusalem only, before the combination, which is a facile and ordinary supposition; then they can exercise no more Synodical power (it matters not what be the kind, whether of power of jurisdiction, or not) after the combination of these Churches than before; and so the judgment of a Synod should be no more than the judgment of a Congregation. But the consequence is absurd. Let Mr. H. see to it, and deal with Mr. Cotton to answer him.

2. To the Proposition. If the Churches combined have no more power extensively, feeding a larger number after the combination than before, then they can exercise no more jurisdiction, no more, by way of extension; it is false: for their united power is extended to a larger number now, then the divided power was before to each single flock. If the Churches combined have more power intensively, of the same species and nature after the combination than before, then they can exercise no more jurisdiction intensively than before. Its true, it is the same power of Christ, the same valid Excommunication, the same binding and loosing as to the specific nature of binding and loosing, that is exercised by five Churches in a City, and exercised by ten Churches about. We multiply not species, to make all congregations to differ in nature and specie, as Mr. H. doth against Logic; whereas they have the same essentials, Christ the Head, the same Ordinances, Seals, the same Faith; but then it shall never follow, Therefore they have no Presbyterian power over many Churches, and therefore they are not distinct Presbyterian Churches in local distinction; magis & minus non variant specious. Nor are Presbyterian, and Provincial and National Churches different in nature, but only in extent of Jurisdiction.

3. Its a wide mistake, That a Presbyterian Church hath its formal essence from a voluntary actual combination in such bounds, or such a circuit more or less: that is not a Pillar of Presbyterian Churches; for their near association, by dwelling where they may edify or scandalize one another, gives them right to be an associated Church, not simply habitation, but the habitation of such and such professors in covenant with God, baptized, and giving themselves up in profession to Christ as disciples, before there be a formal consent, they are obliged to associate: yea, nor doth that voluntary combination make a Presbyterial Church.

Mr. H. Arg. 2. If the Presbyterian Ministers have Jurisdiction, then, over all the Churches of the combination, or only • ver some; not over some only, for that is against the definition of a Presbyterian Church: Therefore they must have Jurisdiction over all the Churches, ten or sixteen. If they have Jurisdiction over all these, then they are Officers, Pastors, Teachers, Ruling-Elders in office to them all; for there must be an office, and so officer before Jurisdiction; and there is no Jurisdiction exercised but by an officer. To say they are Pastors of them all, is to make a road and ready way for Pluralities, Non-Residencies.

Ans. Mr. H. gives us, as also the Dissenting Brethren in the Assembly at Westminster did, instead of Scrip • ure, a number of supposed incongruities, which with equal weight fall upon their own way, as upon ours. For suppose that the twelve Apostles, Act. 2. & 4. & 6. for divers years were Pastors to the many thousands that made up divers, eight or ten congregations, who daily convened from house to house, Act. 4. 46. & 5. 42. in Jerusalem; and that all the twelve feed all the ten congregations in common, Matthias not being a fixed Pastor to this congregation more than to this; nor Peter a fixed Pastor to this flock rather than to this, which is a thing most ordinary in great Cities, where there be 12 Flocks, and 24 Pastors, and variety of gifts by interchange, proves more edifying. All the Pastors have jurisdiction, yea and Pastoral charge over everyone of the twelve. Then 2. must they be Pastors and Teachers to everyone of the twelve, and because all the 24 cannot everyone of them be residents and dwellers in all and every congregation of the ten or twelve Churches in Jerusalem, (that is physically impossible) here shall be Pluralities and Non-residents, and that which our Brethren call Diocesan Prelates here.

2. That the Presbyterial preachers be pastors and teachers, habitu, and actu primo, and in common to all the Churches of the combination, in acts of common concernment, though they be not actu secundo, actual laborers, proper and fixed pastors, residents and dwellers in every congregation (for that was physically impossible to the Elders of Jerusalem) to all and every congregation, is not absurd, but necessary; and the charge of Pluralities, and Prelatical Non-residents, follows by no Logic, except you call the twelve Apostles, who preached fixedly at Jerusalem some years, Non-residents, because that they could not everyone of them dwell in every family of so many thousands at once: In which sense, multitudes of Independent Ministers shall be Non-residents; and suppose there shall be a common Treasury to pay the laborers their wages, and that collected out of the goods of all the thousands so combined, the Independent Ministers upon the same account must be Pluralists, and receive wages from many, to whom they neither are nor can be fixed, and proper and peculiarly feeding Pastors.

3. Wisdom may forbid the Brethren to use this Argument, There is no jurisdiction exercised, but by an officer: for the whole people, men and women, the only Church instituted in the New Testament, or their unofficed Male Church, the Fraternity exercise the highest Jurisdiction, and excommunicate all their officers, and yet they are not officers by their own principles.

Mr. H. Mr. R. denies the Assumption, That they bear the relation of proper Pastors to everyone of these Congregations.

Mr. H. Proper Pastors they must be to all. If the relation of Eldership to a Classical Church be founded upon the same office that a Pastor hath to his particular congregation, then the Elders bear that same relation of Watchmen to a Classical Church, which a Pastor doth to a particular flock: for where there is the same office of a Pastor, there is the same relation of Watchman and Pastor, the one issuing from the other. But the first is said by Mr. R. Lib 2. 335. also they put forth authoritative acts, which issue only from proper Pastors, they are proper Pastors to those upon whom they can exercise such acts, else they had no warrant to put them forth.

Answ. I yet in this sense deny the assumption, that they are proper Pastors, that is, actual imployers of their labors of feeding, both by fixed teaching and governing, to all the flocks of the classical Church; for that is unpossible, except they could be in many Congregations at once so feeding. But I deny not, but constantly teach, that the Presbyterian Pastors are properly, that is, formally, essentially, habitu, actu primo, Pastors in relation to all the flocks, not of the classical Church only, but of all the visible Churches on earth. As a Physician by covenant actually employed to attend all the sick of such a City, suppose Norwich, is their proper Physician, yet so as he is essentially a Physician to all in England, who shall by providence employ him. An exquisite Gardener by paction, is a proper Gardener to such a man who conduces or hires him a certain time, to labor such a plot of ground, yet so as essentially and actu primo, he is a Gardener to all the Country round about who shall employ him. So is one a proper School-master to teach Grammar and Rhetoric to the children of such a City, yet so as he is a School-master to all the children of the country who shall employ him. Christ sends his Pastor Archippus intentionally to feed all his flocks in all fields, and he is essentially a Pastor to them all; but for the more convenient attaining of Christ's end, he fixes him by the choice of the people to the Church of Coloss, not as a Husband to a Wife.

2. Mr. H. With his little finger aims not to twitch the probation of this.

1. Where there is the same office of Pastor, there is the same relation of Watchman and Pastor. It is false, a Physician, a Pastor providentially fixed to cure and feed this City by special covenant, hath a more near relation to cure and feed this City; having a twofold relation, both by the calling in general of a Physician and Pastor, and by a special solemn oath, and hand-writ to this City; and both the Physician is the same public Physician, and the Pastor the same public Watchman officio, by office essentially, habitu, actu primo, to all the sick bodies and sick souls in the country. A mother is the same mother to ten children, but hath a special relation to the eldest as her heir.

2. As born with more pain and labor then all the other nine.

3. As more dearly loving him then all the other nine. Here is the same place, the same officer, but sundry particular relations.

3. Mr. H. leaves that unproved, the Presbyterian Pastors cannot put forth authoritative acts Pastoral, but hoc ipso, they must be proper, i. e. their fixed Pastors, and made theirs by the particular choice of the people to feed and govern these, toward who • they put forth these pastoral acts; because indeed it is adultery to them who are no husbands, to put forth pastoral acts of governing, upon those to whom they are not fixed Pastors; ye • they tender the Supper to foreign members; and so this is a rotten pillar of this way.

2. Forsaken by Mr. Cotton, and the way of the Churches of N. E. and by Mr. H. himself.

3. It destroys Synods and all communion of Churches; for Mr. Cotton yieldeth, as truth of the Gospel taught by a Minister of the Gospel, bindeth to faith and obedience, not only because it is Gospel, but because also it is taught by a Minister, for his calling sake, seeing Christ hath said, whoso receiveth you, receiveth me; they bind not only materially, but formally, for the Synods sake. I see not how this can be answered, though indeed the Discipline of N. E. and Mr. H. say the contrary both of this and their own grounds; for Elders in Synods put forth authoritative and pastoral acts, to these Churches of which these Elders are not proper and fixed Pastors; but Pastors they are to these Churches, as to all the Churches of the combination, else they cannot warrantably put forth acts pastoral, for their feeding and governing to edification, except it be said, a Synod is no ordinance of Christ; which all the Brethren and Mr. H. himself deny. All acknowledge a Synod to be an ordinance of Christ. But the truth is, they but mock the Reader in so saying, for they give no more to it, but an act of charity, to counsel, as one brother counsels another: Intuitu charitatis, saith the Discipline of New England. And so Mr. H.

For, what 1. avails it more to say a Synod is an Ordinance of God, because they can give a charitative counsel, then to say one single Believer is an Ordinance of God, or a Woman who can counsel a man? The Synod then is no positive Ordinance of divine institution; for upon the same ground, if a Synod be an Ordinance of God, because they may counsel the Churches, we may appoint a new Ordinance of a Synod. For, first, one refuting. Another for rebuking. A third for confirming. And a fourth for comforting.

2. It is but a mocking of the world, to say the association of Churches is an ordinance of God, for they can give counsel to the Churches of the bounds (what may be replied, had I time, is soon washed away.)

But first, so can twenty other Churches without the bounds of these Churches; so can many eminent Christians in another Congregation, not in office, give a counsel by way of charity to a Synod convened synodically, shall they for that be a Synod of a Synod? and shall they be an Ordinance of Christ distinct from a Congregational Church for that?

Yea, Abigail a woman, a captive maid, gave, the one a divine counsel to David, and the other to Naaman the Syrian. Shall women therefore be made new ordinances of God? and if neither the one counsel nor the other have any weight from the givers of the counsel, but only from the word; it is in vain to name the one an ordinance of God, more then the other: as for reverence to the persons, a Synod of Elders, more then one single man's counsel, adds not the eighth part of a feather as touching authoritative weight to the Counsel, if the Synods counsel amount to nothing more in point of a divine ordinance; then Mr. H. saith, any Counsel may lay a burden upon any man's conscience; so any Christian that shall publish and preach that 1 Cor. 6. 18. flee fornication —may lay a burden upon every soul, not from the authority of him that speaks, but because it is Scripture that is spoken; and this is all the authority of Synods. Would the Lord appoint Men, Elders, and Brethren, and Churches to come many hundred miles to heal rent and spoiled Churches, and the result of all is a mere counsel which a woman at home may give? for the Scripture by the law of Nature warrants women to give this as well as men, 2 Sam. 20. 16, 17—21, 22. 1 Sam. 25. 25, 26, 27.—32, 33, 34. 2 King. 5. 3, 4, 13. And God reveals to women, servants, poor ones, as much of this as to others of higher place.

Nor shall it help the matter, to say, it is safer to seek counsel from men then from women, from many then from one; for in the multitude of counselors there is safety.

Ans. It is true.

But 1. This is no ground to seek to a Synod of Fathers and Elders of the bounds of these, who are no Pastors nor Elders to us, and can put forth upon us no Synodical, no Pastoral acts; upon this ground, we should select Counselors out of one or many Churches, that have no relation to us; and so this is nothing for such a Synod, but only for many gracious Counselors, private or public, nothing at all for a Synod of Elders.

2. When all is done, their Counsel is but a Counsel, that hath as much weight, as it hath conformity with the rule of the Word, and so hath the counsel of a Woman, or a servant. And it is considerable that the book of Discipline of New England hath no Chapter nor Discourse of Synods, which shows they little value them.

Mr. H. These authoritative actt which are put forth in other Churches issue from him, either as a Pastor, or as no Pastor; If as no Pastor, then acts of Jurisdiction may flow from him that is no Ruler. Mr. R. will gain-say this, if they proceed from him as Pastor, then either as Pastor of his own Church, which cannot be; or of another Church, and then one man may have two Pastoral offices. And all these Churches must be either his flock, or not: his flock they must be, if he be Shepherd to them, for that the nature of relatives requires, the combined Churches are many distinct flocks, and he cannot be a Pastor of many flocks.

Ans. This is the former argument with a new dress, quod fui • demonstrandum. But did Mr. H. believe his Topic probabilities would be received for demonstrations?

1. To that, These acts proceed from him either as Postor, or as no Pastor. Let him be a Pastor to a Congregation compassed about with nine single Congregations in Jerusalem, in convenient nearness, he feeds his own particular flock, as a fixed Pastor actually employing his constant labors upon them, and by the same pastoral office, as Pastor habitu, actu primo, to all Churches, and more nearly to these nine, he exercises acts of government for edifying all the ten in points of concernment, which necessarily must concern them all; and it no more doth follow by a shadow of consequence, that he exerciseth two pastoral offices over many Churches, then the same Pastor exerciseth three Pastoral offices, or four over his own particular flock, as if it were four flocks, because he preacheth pastorally to some, and administers the Lord's Supper to others, as to strangers.

2, Others as Infants, he baptizes as unconfirmed members. Or,

3. Others he excommunicates.

4. Others he converts as finding them no visible Saints; by one and the same office he feeds and governs all.

2. The same argument is retorted, Archippus administers the Lord's Supper (as Mr. H. his book of Discipline, and Mr. Cotton teach, and the word warrants him to do) to forty godly visible Saints out of forty Sister-Congregations, either as a Pastor, or no Pastor, to these forty; either as to his own flock, or not his own flock, not as no Pastor. Mr. H. Mr. Cotton (except they follow Socinians) and all shall gainsay that; if as a pastor, then by Mr. Hookers argument, he must have Pastoral offices over forty Churches. So the same argument destroys the Synods, though some way soundly established by Mr. Cotton; yea, Mr. H. grants it is lawful to tender the seal of the Lord's Supper to those of other Congregations, yea, he is warranted by the word so to do, 1 Cor. 10. 16, 17. 1 Cor. 12. 13. Eph. 2. 12, 13. Eph. 4. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 11, 12, 13. It is against the Congregational way; and it is not equal to bring, quod fuit demonstrandum, such strong demonstrations (as he calls them) against Mr. R. and the Presbyterian Church, which destroys his own congregational way.

3. If he act as a Pastor and Shepherd to them, his flock they must be, for that the nature of Relatives require. This is a mistake of the nature of Relatives; for the adequate and complete correlate to which every ordinary pastor is referred as a Shepherd to the flock, as a husband to the wife, actu primo, is all the Churches on earth, as a physician is refer'd to all the sick on earth, not adequatly to this one sick person, but actu secundo, in the actual exercises of the ministerial calling, very pastor indeed now is referred to one flock, as a fixed providential feeder, and to these round about, the same way in acts of government that concern associate Churches: but it follows not, as is said, that he is a proper fixed pastor to these Churches round about; for these words, feed the flock, which is 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , amongst you, 1 Pet 5. 1. & Act. 20. 28. Take heed to all the flock over which the Holy Ghost hath made you Overseers, Have no such sense as feed the one single Congregation only, as a husband to your wife, that is in Ephesus, and beware of the spiritual adultery, of taking pastoral care of the other Churches of Christ that are, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , amongst you. Mr. Cotton saith, the Church in the Canticles (and say I, the pastors also) take care not only for her own members, but for her little Sister, which she thought had no breasts, Cant. 8. 8. And I hence infer, that a pastor is to take a pastoral care of the Churches associate, Acts 8. 14. 2 Cor. 11. 16. for they were among them as well as the single congregation. And when Paul saith, take heed to the whole flock, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , he meaneth not only a single congregation, but divers congregations and many sheep in the flocks of divers congregations, as 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 signifieth not a few, but exceeding many in Scripture, Phil. 2. 21. 1 Tim. 2. 6. Heb. 2. 9. 1 Tim. 2. 4. John. 11. 48. John. 12. 32. Rev. 5. 13.

Mr. H. The Presbytery are Elders to the classical Church, saith Mr. R.) in some respect, not simply 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , not in things proper to each congregation, but in things common to all the united Churches, to wit, in things which rather concern the consociation of the thirty Churches (about) then the thirty Churches combined in particular. By our Savior's rule, Matth. 18. (saith Mr. H.) the offender is privately,

First, to be rebuked.

Secondly, then before two.

Thirdly, before the Church nearest the Congregation. The classical principles admit not this.

2. Suppose the man in his private fault continue obstinate, this obstinacy is re • propria, proper to the Congregation, why may not the Congregation without the Presbytery then oast him out? for this pertinency was made known only to the Congregation or Church.

Object. But the neighbouring Churches must avoid his company upon knowledge given.

Answ. So must the Churches of another Presbytery or Classis, or of another Province, and therefore there is no more need the one should have a hand in the censure, then the other.

Ans. 1. The congregation in private scandals by our principles (which Mr. H. it seems, knows not) doth admonish, and the offended person is to admonish, according to the order of Christ, Matth. 18.

2. Mr. H. taketh for granted, that the place Matth. 18. is a Rule for removing only private scandals: 2. And that by the word (Church) Matth. 18. is meant only his own Independent congregation.

3. That Christ, Matth. 18 shows of no removing of scandals between two visible Saints dwelling in one Christian family, who by the principles of Mr. H. may by their own free choice be members of divers congregations: (a strange dream!)

4. He supposes it must be only one single man that trespasseth against a brother, but if ten, or many sister-Churches transgress against sister-Churches. Learned Whitaker, Calvin, Beza, Pareus, all Protestant Divines, all Fathers, all learned Doctors, Papists, Lutherans, Doctors, Councils, all the Martyrs who by the Text Matth. 18. appeal to a General Council, did but abuse the Text, in applying it to Synods: whereas Tell the Church, is now found to be only the single congregation; whereas the contrary is sure. There is a figure

1. In thy brother, for he means many brethren, within or without the congregation.

2. By trespassing, by a Sydecdoche, he means all scandals; else we were not to complain of public scandals to the Church.

3. By the Church, he means all Churches respectively, as those of Antioch, in case of scandalous doctrine, Tell a Synod, Acts 15. 2. The obstinacy is not proper to that congregation, if public, the offense of it stumbles the neighbouring Churches. But

4. It will not follow, that All of another Province should have hand in the censure, as well as the Presbytery, because those of another Province may hear of it, for that is non causa pro causa: for they are not in danger to be leavened, so as those that are nearer; and the wisdom of Christ hath accommodated Discipline to our bodily craziness. For as when there be twelve thousand members at Jerusalem, he will not have them all to meet at one house, since they have twelve Apostles to teach them, but in sundry congregations, Acts 2. 46. & 5 42. not can they partake of the seals in one house, nor can they personally watch over one another, as the new Church-covenant teacheth: So neither will he have Elders 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , in cities, where many thousands were baptized, purging their own body, and its not to be supposed that actual government for ordinary scandals should be by the personal presence of the Elders of remote Presbyteries and Provinces, far less of the Elders of the whole Catholic visible Church. For Nature, Reason, and the practice of the Apostles would say, Except the scandal be more than ordinary wide and spreading, only the Churches nearest to be edified or stumbled, should have hand in healing and censuring; though the whole Catholic and visible Church have also here some influence, to wit, tacit and virtual in that common Rule of Discipline which regulates the whole Catholic body, as is said hereafter.

Mr. H. The second difference assigned by Mr. R. is, that the Presbytery takes care rather of the regulating of the acts of governing in all these Churches, than the governed Churches.

Mr. H. They express their care in judicial acts, and that directly and immediately upon scandals and scandalous persons of any congregation.

Ans. Mr. H. should have added my words to the full, that the Reader might have seen my mind. What I speak comparatively, Mr. H. would not hold it out to the Reader, as if I meant it absolutely. For

1. The Presbytery is glad that lesser evils be healed by Rebukes within the congregation.

2. I deny not but the Presbytery doth, and must directly and immediately judge greater scandals, especially between congregation and congregation, between Elder and Elder, and Rulers and Ruled of the same congregation, but ever under the former Reduplication, as they are an associate body.

Mr. H. 3 Differ. The Presbyterian Elders are Elders to all the Churches, as the Elders themselves are in collegio Presbyteriali, and properly as they are in Court.

Ans. But I assume (saith Mr. H.) the Elders there are proper Pastors of their own particular congregations; therefore they must (if at all) be so here. A Pastor in an Island cannot teach, admonish, excommunicate, but in coetu congregationali, or severed from his Church, yet this hinders not but in these regards he is a proper Pastor to them.

Ans. Mr. H. yet halfs my words, and sets down one member of a distinction, and leaves out the other. They are Elders to the Churches in the Presbyterial Judicature; but separatim out of that (say I, pag. 326.) they do not watch in such a way for all the souls of the Presbyterian several congregations, as they do for the single congregations of which they are fixed Pastors. And this is enough to make different relations pastoral (which is my intent) between the Elders, in order to their own congregations, and to the associated congregations, as the Elders of Antioch are Elders judging in the Synod, Acts 15. one way to Jerusalem, and other to Antioch, where they have their proper fixed charge to teach and rule: and I shall not stand to yield that they act as Elders, and by the same office of Eldership in the Presbyterial, and in the congregational Judicature, but an accidental difference there is.

2. Its most unfound that Mr H. saith, That a Pastor cannot teach, admonish, excommunicate, but in a congregational meeting. This is first to make him a congregational Pope or Prophet, as the Papists do the Pope, only in Cathedra, in the pulpit, or before the congregation. 2. All the days of the week, except in the actual congregational Assembly, he is a private man by this reason. But the Word shall warrant the pastor as a pastor to visit, to warn from house to house, Col. 1. 28. Acts 20 20. & 2. 46. & 5. 42. in season and out of season, 2 Tim. 4. 2. & 2. 25. for he does not these as a private gifted man.

3. By this reason a pastor is so a pastor, a husband, a watchman to the flock actually assembled only, but not a pastor to give an account of this or that man or woman's soul to God in the flock; then if this or that man perish through the fault of the Elder, who gave not warning, Mr. H. hath taught the Minister a good excuse: I cannot be charged as an unfaithful watchman with the blood of this single man who is lost, Mr. H. saith, I am only a Pastor in relation to the flock assembled Church-ways, but I am not a Pastor nor Watchman to one single man. But ah! this distinction shall not save the man from the charge of blood! Ezek. 3. 18, 19, 20, 21. & 33. 13, 14, 15. & 34. 4, 5. Heb. 13. 17. I would not have expected from such a man's pen such a Tenet.

4. Differ. The Presbytery hath a Church relation to all these thirty congregations not takin distributively, but collectively, as they are united in one Church classical, and in one Government. Ans. If the Presbytery put forth acts of Jurisdiction upon these Churches distributively, as they are severed, then they have a Church-relation to them distr • butively. But they admonish and censure several persons of several Churches.

Ans. 1. So do the Synod Elders at Jerusalem, Acts 15. put forth authoritative pastoral acts, by the grant of Mr. Cotton, upon the several Churches distributively taken, yet are they not the proper pastors of these Churches, and Commissioners of Parliament upon persons of a single city, but as they have failed not against the Laws of that city, but against the general Laws of the whole Nation and Parliament: But it follows not, that these Commissioners are Aldermen, or fixed Judges of that city; and so Mr. H. his consequence is weak.

Mr. H. These Presbyterial Elders must exercise jurisdiction over congregational Elders, which is conceived by Mr. R. to be absurd.

Ans. Pastors, with majority of official Jurisdiction over pastors of another lower species, as Bishops above pastors, I still look upon as absurd. But that Elders in a Synod exercise Jurisdiction over Elders of a congregation that are the same in nature and degree with them, is no more absurd, than for an Eldership of a congregation to exercise Jurisdiction over some two or three scandalous Elders of their own number, which Mr. H. will not call Episcopacy.

Mr. H. Mr. R. adds, Elders of an Independent congregation, are not Elders of their single congregations, being separated from their Courts. It seems a paradox, for if separated from their Court, their office remain, then jurisdiction must remain.

Ans. Its not a seeming, but a real paradox, my words are halfed. I said, They are not Elders separated from their court in the notion (these are my words omitted by Mr. H.) of the relation of a Church-jurisdiction; for they can exercise no jurisdiction, neither excommunicate, nor relax from excommunication, being not in Court, except they be prelates.

But Mr. H. adds a real absurd paradox, that they cannot exercise pastoral acts of teaching, but in the Church-assembly; which refuted before.

Mr. H. 5 Differ. Congregational Elders have power of order, and power of jurisdiction without the Court, but they have not power of jurisdiction but in the Court. Elders have a power of jurisdiction as watchmen, but a power of Church-jurisdiction they have not, but in the Court.

Ans. I never heard that their entering into the assembly should add a new power.

2. Nor did Mr. R. say, their entering and sitting in the Court addeth a new official power; they had the official power actu primo before, but they can no more put it forth in acts, being separated from the Court, than a pastor might excommunicate his alone in his private chamber; which were tyrannical and null.

Mr. H. The example of the great Sanhedrim toucheth not the cause, or then destroyeth it: Nor doth the example of Commissioners of Parliament; for they get a new office to sit in Parliament, but an Elder of a congregation by sitting in the Presbytery gets no new office.

Ans. It is a weak answer, to say it helps not, and not show the cause, but to lead the Reader implicitly: for the great Sanhedrim ruled over all the Tribes, and yet a Judge out of the Tribe of Dan, though a member of the Sanhedrim, did not rule over the Tribe of Benjamin, but only in the Sanhedrim, and in some common cases. The getting of a new office is neither up nor down; the Commissioners of Parliament rule in that Court over all the Shires in the Land, and by that Commission every Commissioner becomes not a Major of every City, or a Judge in every Shire. And by Mr. Cottons grant, the Elders in a Synod exercise pastoral acts, and lay on burdens, Acts 15. upon the Churches, and get no new office thereby: But they do not for that become proper Elders and pastors over every single congregation in the bounds of the Synod.

Yet to Mr. H. this is a principle, That if the Presbyterian Elders put forth pastoral acts upon all the congregations, then must they be pastors to all the particular flocks, for shepherd and flick are relatives, Arg. 2. 101. But the Conclusion is absurd. This is no less against Mr. Cotton, than against Mr. R. and against himself, who admits strangers to the Lord's Supper, &c.

Mr. H. It is obvious to every man, that the Elder of the congregation hath the nature of an Elder in general, and so can and doth put forth general actions, that are common to other Elder. Where the act is, the object must be, in its proportion; and all this he doth without the Classis in his particular station: for the species determines the act of the genus, as Socrates confines the acts of the humans Nature to himself: and its known, the Classis meddles with the particular offenses, that are as special as any Elder in an Island, doth meddle within his own place.

Ans. 1. Its obvious to all men, That Mr. H. speaks new Logic, obvious to the understanding of no man, I doubt, to his own. For the Elders of a congregation, because independent, and subordinate and countable to none on earth, but to Jesus Christ (as Papists say of their wooden Head the Antichrist) determine within themselves. Suppose they he but some twelve of the twelve thousands at Jerusalem, if these be once a formal Covenant-wise married Church of people and officers, they do determine of the Doctrine of Circumcision, of the Doctrine of Balaam, Acts 15. Rev. 2. 14. (for Pergamos is to them an independent flock) and of Arianism, and of Doctrines and Scandals that concern many hundred Churches about; and whether they determine right or wrong, its against the liberty and power Christ hath given to that Redeemed Body, of ten and twelve to tell the Churches: Oh! they must not part with their Sovereignty so; or if they consult, its but of courtesy: for, single Pergamos is rebuked (say our Brethren) for not using their Church-power in a Doctrine that concerned thousands as well as them.

2. What a mystery of Logic this may be, who is so happy as to divine? Every particular Elder can, and doth put forth general actions that are common to other Elders: Why? The species determines the act of the genus. The Reason contradicts the Conclusion which it is brought to prove: For if Socrates confines the acts of Human Nature to himself, they leave off now to be general actions, and by being contracted to the species (his species is Socrates a single person) they are now most special actions.

Mr. H. takes our meaning to be, That the members of Synods and of the Presbytery, determine of the Ideal, general, abstracted Nature of Men, of Doctrines, of Actions in communi, that needs not (saith he) for the congregational Elders put forth general actions, but confined and contracted to Socrates: So doth the Classis, the National, yea the Ecumenic and General Assembly put forth acts, determinations, both of general Doctrines, and condemn them also, as confined and contracted to Socrates, to Balaam, to Jezebel, to the Nicolaitans, and to the single men of that impure Sect. And Acts 15. 24. the Synod condemns some certain particular, individual men, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , Some men from us have troubled you, and said, Ye must be circumcised. Now the abstracted nature of men disputed not and made not the 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 and the rent, as v. 6, 7. but some single men. And this comes from another wild notion of Logic that Mr. H. teacheth, That the Catholic visible Church is the Genus, and under it is this or that Independent Church. Of this hereafter. S • the Church of Boston is the Catholic integral Church: for, G • nus praedicatur de specie.

Mr. H. Its as undeniable, there be general acts in preaching and watching, which are common to all congregations, which the Presbytery neither do, nor can dispense conscientiously, because the Pastor cannot attend them: It will not suffice to say, He was Pastor to the Catholic Church before, for then before the combination he had as good power to exercise jurisdiction, as any of them. This is against Mr. R. who grants that one Church hath not power over another.

An. 1. Its undeniable, That the Apostles who were Pastors of the Catholic Church, could not attend acts of Teaching and Ruling in all the single Congregations, for that is physically impossible. But Mr. H. saith, Its morally impossible, and unlawful for a pastor to put forth a pastoral act in any Congregation, but that to which he is married, more than a man can perform marriage-duties to any but to his own wife: which is shameful Doctrine.

2. Mr. H. frequently deviseth Objections of straw, and then fires them at his pleasure, He knows Mr. R. denies, that to be a pastor of the Catholic Church, gives so right to the Apostle to preach and feed in Bithynia, but there was need of a call of God going before, as is clear, Acts 16. and so must pastors of the Catholic Church now have a call from Presbytery and Congregation, before they can lawfelly put forth in act their general pastorship which they have to the Catholic Church. Nor is this against the Church not having power over a sister-Church, because a pastor of one Congregation hath power jointly in a Synod to exercise pastoral acts Synodical over many Churches.

CHAP. IV.

MR. H. That course which severs which God hath joined together is unlawful. But the classical combination doth this. Ruling and teaching belong to the office of a Pastor and Teacher, they have the prwer of the Keys, and there cannot be full binding and loosing, but by ruling and t • aching, Act. 20. 28. 1 Pet. 5. 1, 2.

2 Both binding and loosing are required as nec • ssary to Christ's end, the gathering and perfecting of the Saints, Eph. 4. 12.

Ans. The assumption may import that the Presbytery must be Rulers, and by office, no Teachers, as the Prelate is, who by majority of power is the rule of the Pastors, and they his Deputies; the so severing of teaching and ruling in the subject cannot be charged upon us, but that the severing of them in regard of the object, is no sort of dividing of those which God hath joined, is clear; because the Pastors teach some, and rule in common others associate. And Mr. H. hath not proved the assumption.

For, 1. Elders in Synods dogmatically and authoritatively teach, as Mr. H. teacheth, par. 4. pag. 5. conclus. 3. therefore Mr. H. himself separateth teaching and ruling. And Mr. Cotton saith more.

2. The people without officers may excommunicate all their officers, and so bind them, and receive them in again upon their repentance, and so loose them, as Mr. H. teacheth par. 1, c. 9. pag. 92, 93. and yet the people cannot teach these officers as their Pastors. Is not here an irregular separating of ruling from teaching?

3. Such of the flock as are from their youth kept under by the terrors of God, Ps. 88. Godly Elders, who are not to be rebuked, but entreated as fathers, 1 Tim. 5. 1. need not juridical Church-binding and loosing, and yet need the preaching of the promises. Then in regard of the act and object, exercise of jurisdiction may be severed from teaching.

4. Pastors can exercise no jurisdiction, but only in the Court, but Pastors not in Court may teach pastorally the whole flock.

5. The Churches that meet in a Synod, may exercise the power of non communion toward a Church (which is a Church-governing, for their edification) if the Church obstinately maintain an heresy; and yet the Churches so convened cannot pastorally teach this Church. Let Mr. H. see if he be not as prelatical as Mr. R. If this be Prelacy, I thought Mr. H. had been better versed in the doctrine • of Prelacy.

Mr. H. Grand-fathers and Fathers do bear a relation to the same Children divers ways (So Mr. R.) So then as a Grand-father (saith Mr. H.) cannot be both a Grand-father and a Father to the same Child, neither can an Elder be both a proper Elder and a classical Elder to the same Congregation.

Answ. One man cannot be both a Grand-father and a Father to the same Child. True; nor is one man a proper Elder to his Congregation, and a classical Elder to his own Congregation; for he is formally a classical Elder, not to his own, but to all the associated Congregations.

2. It is but a comparison, and so admits of halting; a Grand-father is a Grand-father to his children's children, but a Father to his nearest children; so the same man is a classical Elder to all the associated Churches, and a proper and providentially fixed Elder to his own flock; as one was both a Priest to judge between blood and blood, and yet, if the matter was too hard, the same man was a Judge and a Member of the Sanhedrim, Deut. 17.

Mr. H. his last difference: The Judicature of Classis and Congregations do not differ formally (saith Mr. R.) but only in more or less extension of power.

Ans. Then there are no specifical acts that the one puts forth, but the other can put forth, as occasion shall require; gradus non variant speciem, then they can ordain officers and excommunicate in the Congregation. He said before, if there be the same office, there is the same definition, and the same causes, to wit, of election, and choice of the Classical, and of the Congregational Elders.

Ans. The difference is only of more or less, as of a River and the whole Element, though divers learned men judge the Congregation to be no governing Church at all, but only their Elders the delegates of the Presbyterial Church, which consisting of divers Congregations is the first governing Church.

2. There are no s •• cifick acts which the Elders collectively taken, may not exercise in both the one and the other: but then shall it not follow, th •• a single cong •• gational Eldership may ordain and ex •• mmunicate in one 〈◊〉 Congregation there alone divided from the body? for congr •… nal Elders cannot teach o • derly (and he is the God of ord • r, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in his Church) in all the Congregations without a cal • .

Nor 2. Exercise the power of a Synod in them all.

3. I 〈◊〉 this argument; Archipp •• hath the same office to the whole Congregation, and to the single m • mbers who chose him, and whom he feeds; or then he hath so many officer as there be choosing and fed members, •• ught by the word and ruled, which is absurd: E • go, as the single vo •• of one member made him a Pastor to one, and of a second made him a Pastor to a second, and so forth. So the • otes of the whole made him a Pastor to the whole: for that is the same offic • th •• hath the same causes, and the same choice and election, saith M • . 〈◊〉 . Ergo, where the same causes are not, the same office cannot be, but one single electing vote, and the electing vot •• of the whole Church by Mr. H. his way, cannot be the same causes, for one vote makes him not a Pastor.

2. If Archippu • hath the same office to the whole congregation, and to every single member, then as he 〈◊〉 pastoral acts of teaching and ruling to the whole, so to the parts and single members; but this latter is denied by Mr. H, page 104: who saith, That a Pastor cannot put forth Pastoral acts, but in the Church assembly, A strange imagination!

Mr. H. By the same official power (saith Mr. R.) that a Pastor teacheth his own fleck viva voice, he teacheth others by writing.

Ans This is a new invention that I never heard of before.

1. The official power, by which he preacheth, he receiveth by election, and he may be rejected from it by the people, in case of delinquency.

2. By his official power he may require them to hear, but may not require all Churches to read his writings; and if they offensively refuse to read, he cannot censure them, as he may censure them that refuse to hear the word.

3. If this power of writing of Books, to edify the Churches, proceed from his office, all Ministers by their office should write Books.

4. That which another may do with as much authority, and more authority of truth, as being more able, yet being out of office, that cannot belong to the officer; but to write books is such.

Ans. 1 Official power is not from election, but from the saying on of the hands of the Elders, 1 Tim. 3. 1, 2. 1 Tim. 4. 14. 1 Tim. 5. 22. 2 Tim. 2 2. Tit. 1. 5.

2. It is true, that a Pastor cannot require by his office those of another Congregation to hear him preach, and receive the seals from him, nor censure them, if they refuse; but it is a bad consequence of Logic, therefore he doth not exercise these pastoral acts to them by his office, as the Brethren grant.

2. A Minister by his office may require his hearers to give much alms, pray much, read and confer much, both these of his own and other flocks; yet he cannot censure them for not coming up to the highest pitch of these affirmative duties, except he may rebuke them, and so may he do all who are remiss in reading edifying writings, and the Church may censure unsound books, Acts 15. 24.

3. Neither Mr. R. nor any judicious man can teach that either a gift to write Books, or of eminent preaching, praying, exhorting, proceeds out of a power of office; it is a sanctified gift which the Church seeth and judgeth to be in any, before they call him to office; and any gift is by order of nature and time before the office, and so proceeds not from the office; and therefore it is not required that every Pastor should have a gift of writing books, but if the Lord have given it to any, they exercise it as such gifted officers as the Prophets and Apostles, as such Prophets so gifted did write Canonic Scriptures; so are Pastors, if gifted, to write and preach in their way, and both to write and preach by their office. Nor is it good Logic, that all in office should write books. because some by virtue of their office writ books; for a Minister gifted with four Talents is obliged to gain with these four Talents, and that as a Minister by virtue of his office; but it is weak Logic to infer, Ergo, all Ministers by virtue of their office are obliged to gain with four Talents, for many are obliged by virtue of their office to gain with only two to their Lord, and with only one.

4. It was needless to Mr. H. to prove writing of books doth not belong to the power of office, because a learned man out of office may do it with more authority; for Mr. R. had no such intention. For, sure if such a thing agreed to the office-power, as the office-power, then all Officers, Pastors, Elders were obliged to write books, and yet Mr. H. does not very happily prove it, because many learned men unofficed may with more authority of truth write books, then officed men. It is only some officed men he must mean, or it is not true. And then I retort it thus; many officed men may write books with more authority both of truth and of office (and two are better then one) then some unofficed men less learned. Ergo, some gifted Pastors do not as Pastors so gifted, and by virtue of their office relating both to the presbyterian Church, and their own Congregation edify all the Churches about, by writing books. It follows not.

Mr. H. We are told that Elders are ruling in all Churches collectively taken, and they are teachers 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , in some reserved acts, not constant teachers, he that rules teacheth, but always the same flock.

Ans. Take classical Elders as they are congregational Elders, and that is all one as to say, no classical Elders, and then they are no teaching Elders; and all that is gained is this; a classical Elder as he is no classical Elder, is a teaching Elder. And so there is no distinction.

Ans. Such quirks become not grave M. H. What is a Synodical Elder? Mr. H. saith a counseling Elder. I reply, that is no Elder, but a counseling Brother or Sister. But Mr. Cotton and our Brethren say better. A synodical Elder is an Elder synodically teaching the Churches with pastoral and dogmatick authority, without all power of jurisdiction, that is a Synodical Elder, as no Congregational Elder (but as he judgeth in Synod) is a teaching and a ruling Elder. Then I infer, that all Synodical Elder must be both an Elder and no Elder. So animal as he is, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , is non h • mo, but he is viv •• s. It were easy to weary the Reader with many wild unsolid notions, such like, Ergo, animal is homo, non hom • .

Mr. H. So a Pastor may be a teaching Pastor to one Church, and a ruling Pastor to two or three, or thirty. This is a B • shop.

Obj. The B • shop arrogates thi • to himself alone.

Ans. Shew a rule of Christ, why the Elders may not join many Elders to join with him; for you have no rule of Christ to join many to him to rule many Churches, nor hath he a rule to assume many to him.

Ans. Not any of the separation ever refuted, with that strength of Scripture, Reason, Antiquity, the domineeringg prelacy, as the godly presbyterians in Britain, and the reformed Churches. But so many thousand Independent Monarchies, and two Congregational, or three Elders (for a Deacon is for Tables, Act. 6.) subordinate in point of jurisdiction to none on earth, is a more lively image of a domineering Prelacy, then all the Presbyteries on earth.

2. There is no rule to join other prelates or elders to a prelate: an unlawful officer, having power of jurisdiction, the only proper pastor, and all others are but pastors under him and his delegates. But Mr. H. cannot say that the pastor of a congregation is an unlawful pastor, to whom so many bastard pastors are added, if he do, this shall reflex upon his own way; for the Synodical Elder is a pastorally teaching Elder to many Churches, Antioch, Jerusalem, and also a teaching and ruling Elder to one congregation by our brethren's way: Is the Synodical Elder therefore a pastor of pastors, and a Bishop? And Mr. H. cannot say but that there might have been divers congregations in Jerusalem, and yet unformed Churches; and that the twelve Apostles did feed and rule them all in common, and so shall Peter teach one Congregation at once, and rule many whom he cannot teach (for physically it is impossible he can feed many at once) and yet there was but one Presbytery, and this we shall hear Mr. H. confess hereafter. Ergo, the twelve Apostles and Church-Elders feeding many Congregations not formed with fixed Pastors shall bring in such sort of Bishops, as Mr. H. charges upon me.

Mr. H. If they do not both rule and teach, they cannot fulf • l their Ministry.

Ans. How is it proved that Pastors cannot fulfil their Ministry, except they both rule all the Churches with acts Synodical, and their own Congregations also?

2. How is it proved that there is a blank in the Ministry, except Pastors both teach and rule these same persons? some of the Congregation are so experiencedly taught of God, that rebukes and censures of excommunication are never drawn out, nor need to be drawn out against them; never Interpreter so expounded Col. 4.

Mr. H. If Pastors be Pastors and in office when they are out of Court, then have they Church-jurisdiction out of the Court; but the first is true. Also censures sh • uld be dispensed in the Congregation, and there they must preach also.

Ans. Priests when not actu • lly sitting in the Sanhedrim, Members of Parliament are Members sitting in the House; and Pastors are Elders actu primo, when not sitting in the Congregational Judicature; Ergo, they can exercise acts of jurisdiction out of Court, in their Houses; and may the Eldership preach out of the Court? it is a shame to hear such Logic.

2. Belike Mr. H. thinks it unpossible to dispence censures, but the Elders must preach: Ergo, when the people excommunicate their whole Officers, because heretical; they must also preach pastorally: for it is pastoral ruling and teaching which makes a fulfilling of the Ministry: but the conclusion is absurd, let Mr. H. see to it.

CHAP. V.

MR. H. The classical course layeth a burden upon teaching Elders, which God's word never laid, and which they are not able to discharge; the Apostles appointed Elders in every Church to feed the fl • ck, not the flocks. Mr. R. the way of watching over Sister Churches is as dreadful for onerous, careful, laborious watchfulness in the way of conscience, as to be bound thereto by way of duty; for this bond of lovely and brotherly consociation, which is the foundation of Presbyterial governing, ties us to do no more in governing and helping other Sister Churches, then if We had no further warrant to promote their ed fication, then the alone relation of brotherly consociation. The sentence is (saith Mr. H.) imperfect; and therefore that it may reach his purpose, I think is must be thus expressed: the bond of brotherly consociation ti • th us to do no more in governing Sister Churches, then brotherly consociation simply can do, is true; but impertinent to Mr. R. his scope, which is to compare the bond and burden between brotherly association and office-imposition, as if there were a parity between them.

Ans. 1. The classical course layeth no other burden upon teaching Elders, by way of united jurisdictions in governing neighbor Churches that are the same body, and have the same seals common, as Mr. Cotton and his own Discipline agrees (as I often cite) then the way of Churches both associated by brotherly association, and by Synodical and authoritative governing, as the same Mr. Cotton teacheth, and Mr. H. saith it is true, but not pertinent; and if it be true, why contend we?

2. That it is not pertinent to my purpose, is denied: Why? Because (saith he) Mr. R. his scope is to make a parity and equality between the burden of Brotherly consociation and of Officeimposition. But that is a change of my words, and therefore must lie upon Mr. H. as his, not my words, except they be wrested; Nor is it my scope to make an equality in quantity, as if there were, as Mr. H. most mistakingly saith, the like care, onerousness and labor required in duties of Christian watchfulness in a brotherly way, as in duties of office relation: But in equality of onerousness of answering to God for duties, the like conscience, the like sincerity, the like faith of giving an account to God, is required in the one as in the other. And he leaves, upon this account, out the word, in way of conscience, or in fore Dei, and saith my words are imperfect; but wherein they are imperfect, he showeth not, which maketh his own words imperfect: and therefore he turneth my Negative, That we are to do no more in governing sister-Churches, than in counseling and brotherly advising, into an Affirmative never dreamed of by me. That brotherly association tieth us to do as much, as if we had no further warrant; and t •… we are to do by his way as much in brotherly duties to all Christians in other Provinces or Nations, in France, Germany, Holland with whom we can by no physical possibility be present, and whose faces we never saw, as we are to do, by fixed office, to the single congregations to which we have a providential call, by the election and choice of the people, for whom we are to search the Scriptures, and study pleasant words, and for whose souls we are to give an account. But

1. Its a fruitless dispute to prove in sundry pages what Mr. R. grants.

2. If he proved from my words (from his own he may) that these are necessary consequences, he had done as became a Refuter.

3. He cannot from what I say deny, but granteth, That brotherly consociation tieth teaching Elders to do no more in governing neighbouring Churches, than brotherly advising, teaching, admonishing, tieth us unto, in point of onerousness and laborious care, and so it well follows, That there is no more laid upon Presbyterial Elders in governing neighbouring Churches, than is laid upon their counseling, and brotherly advising Elders, in point of daily occurring scandals, as is clear in the Rise of Familists, Anabaptists, Antinomians, &c. and many scandalous persons arising in sundry Churches lying together.

4. The care and onerousness in brotherly watching, essentially, formally in rendering an account to God, as being keepers to our Brethren all the world over, with whom we converse in other congregations, haply at our door, and occasionally, is as binding before God, as the care of teaching Elders in exercising power of Jurisdiction in Collegio, and in things common to divers Churches; but it follows not, that Christian love tieth me to all the positive means of warning my brother to go to Germany, to America, to try and admonish all the scandals that are committed there.

5. This same Argument is thus retorted upon Mr. H. if the Apostles, as Church-members, as Believers, be obliged all the world over, to eat the Lord's Supper, as Paul did at Troas, Acts 20. 11. a • Corinth, 1 Cor. 10. 17 and in all the Churches on earth, to eat and receive the Lo •… Supper, not as an Apostle with an Apostolic, but with a faith common to all Christians; then must he be obliged as a Christian with the like care and onerousness to leave his calling of an Apostle & to go to all places on earth, to remember the Lord's death, and as a Christian to lay down preaching, planting of Churches, working of miracles, and to teach, rebuke, as a Christian, in all places. Its not enough to say, That the Apostles

1. Were privileged persons, and so might eat the Lord's Supper all the world over, for they eat not the Lord's Supper as Apostles, but as believers, who were to try and examine themselves, and so d •• ncerningly to remember the Lord's death until he come again, as other believers were.

2. Is it enough to say, They were occasionally only to discharge these Christian duties, as they should be locally present, for so are teaching Elders to perform official duties to these neighbor Churches with whom they occasionally converse in the occasional emergency of scandals: and if Pastors were in Africa or America, they might, without any new ordination or official call, preach and govern as Physicians of souls. But by Mr. H. his way, the Lord in the day of Judgment might say, Thou wast a member of that body, with which thou hadst a right to • at the Lord's Supper in all Churches on earth; therefore I require at thy hand the blood of them that are lost in America, because thou watched not over all the Christians on earth, which is physically impossible. And I require at Paul preaching in the the W • st, th • blood of such as perished, when he was 300 miles absent from them, for Paul had an official call to all the believers on earth. As Mr. H. saith, our Presbyterial Elders must give an account for souls that are lost in all the Presbyterial, Provincial and National Churches on earth, and go all the world over to cure scandals, leaving their own calling of Merchandize. But by this (saith Mr. H pag. 115.) a pastoral care is f • r more enerous and laborious than Christian and brotherly care in some sense. I grant all, and there is nothing proved against me, who say, that this ties teaching Elders to no more in governing Sister Churches, in point of binding the conscience to answer for them, as far as they have power in matter of common concernment, for the well being of all the near hand associated Churches, then brotherly consociation can do. And Mr. H. page 112. saith this is true, and yet in some sense pastoral care is far more onerous and laborious, to wit, in using more means in watching fixedly over a Congregation, by constant preaching in season, and out of season, in standying pleasant words, administering the Sacraments, &c. Nor did I ever say anything to the contrary.

Mr. H. An eminently gifted man in an Island, where no Pastors are, is no less (saith Mr. R.) tied in conscience in the extraordinary employment of his calling, then if he were formally ordained and chosen their Pastor. In some extraordinary cases a gift and Christian love ties even as much to onerousness in using means to save, at the office itself. See what I add in that place, (Mr H. saith) then this gifted man in an Island, in using his general calling as a Christian, destroys his particular, as a Merchant, and turn Minister. 2. This is to confound the general and particular calling.

Ans. Not at all, for in this case, the extraordinary necessity of gaining souls, when other Pastors cannot be had; and ordination and election by that means are invincibly wanting hic & nunc, turns his Christian calling in place and room of the particular calling of a Pastor; and so Mr. R. said well, that in some extraordinary case like this, The naked R • lation of Jurisdiction addeth nothing to care and onerousness in point of labor, by preaching the Gospel.

Mr. H. If we have a divine command (saith Mr. R.) to be our brethren's k • epers, then our Christian watch in that regard requires as much onerousness and care as office watch. It follows not (saith Mr. H.) am I bound by office to watch no more over the people left to my pastoral care, then as a Christian over these of another Province, whom I am occasionally only to gain, and whose faces I never saw.

Ans. Mr. H. leaves out the words, in point of conscience to answer for them to God, Which I have. Otherwise in regard of using of more means, he is obliged to more constant feeding, by word, seals, daily watching over the single flock, then over all Christians on the other side of the Sea, and some thousand miles distant from him.

But if the foundation of governing classical Churches be the love and union of the members of one body of Christ, then there is much care, onerousness, and labor, which is required in brotherly consociation to help, as the care & onerousness which is required in officership.

Mr. H. Ans. The proposition hath no truth, because I love all consociated in one Synod, whom I never saw, and with whom I could never meet to do good, or receive good. But if I should be bound to put forth the like onerous and laborious care for their spiritual good, as for these, to whom by way of office I am bound in the same Congregation. Then officers must either do too little, or be bound to do too much.

Ans. This is neither my Argument, nor my words: my words are, Par. 1 pag. 332. Now if we distinguish ONEROUSNESS, CARE and LABOUR by way of jurisdiction, the former is as GREAT IN FORO DEI, in the Court of conscience, as the latter. These words are left out by Mr. H. qua fide; let the Reader judge; for the toil, care, onerousness and labor in point of conscience in the kind, and sphere; I urge in both, by necessity of a divine command: but the like care, onerousness and labor in quantity, in the use of more means, in constant preaching, personal comforting, to all the Christians on earth, as to the single congregation, I utterly deny. But can Mr. H. deny but the Apostles and Brethren, Act. 15. did ow as much care, onerousness, and labor in a binding conscientious way in laying on synodical burdens, which bind not only (saith Mr. Cotton) materially for the weight of the matter imposed by divine precept, but also formally from the authority of the Synod, upon the Churches of Jerusalem, Antioch, Syria, Silicia, as any pastor owes to his single flock; and that because these Churches are all one consociated body? and yet Elders of the Synod were never to see the faces of all these members of the Churches.

And I put this query to the Brethren, what warrant of Christ is there that a member of an Independent Church ow Church-care to watch, teach, admonish, rebuke, comfort, as Col. 3. 16. Heb. 3. 13. 1 Thes. 5 14. to a fellow member of the same congregation only, and ow no Church-care to another brother, dwelling in the same house with him, having with him the same faith, the same baptism, the same Lord, the same covenant of Grace, the same Savior, only because he is a member of another Independent Church?

Mr. H. Arg. 5. If they be Pastors over all the Congregations of the circuit, then they were new chosen by the Congregations, or not, &c.

Ans. This is a repeated blast of an old horn; there is this required, that Churches about, by their silence approve him as Pastor to one single Congregation; but that all Congregations make a special election of him to be their fixed Pastor, is no more required, then that the Churches of Antioch and Jerusalem chose the Apostles and Elders, who yet Act. 15. exercise pastoral and official acts over them by the grant of Mr. Cotton and our Brethren.

They are Elders of Ephesus, i. e. of enery Congregation of the combination, as all the Kings, if they were met in one royal Court to govern the Nations, in things of common concernment to all, yet are called the Kings of the Nations. These are words (saith Mr. H. to darken:) the Elders met here, have a new power distinct from the power over their several Congregations, a Commission, i. e. a new Creature. The Kings if so convened, have a joint power of confederate Princes, to act in things of common concernment, and if that power were distinct from the particular power that they have over their own territories, the comparison were parallel.

Ans. We may suppose such a convention of Kings, the Commissioners or M • ssengers of the Churches have no new office, but only are met to determine of such a thing as disturbs the Churches, Act. 15 5. they differ as Elders, and such Elders sent and nominate by the Church, and act as Elders by the same official power common to Elders that are not sent, and are called by the Church Apostles and Elders, Act. 15. 23. & 16. 4. & 21. 18, 25. then sending and commissionating is a condition of order appointed by the God of order, no devise of men: and the Churches submit to them as to no new office.

But 1. as to the messengers of the Church, and gracious and sound Elders.

2. If they speak according to the Law and the testimony, not otherwise, and the answer is as much against Act. 15. and against Mr. Cotton and all that are for Synods, either juridical or consultative, as against Mr. R. for they go to Synods, who so go by a new power of order, not by a new office.

Mr. H. This course nullifies the power of Elders, and propl •• f a Congregation, and their proceeding in a righteous way; for the Classis may judge a member to be excommunicated, whom the Congregation judgeth. and that truly not worthy of that censure; here the power of Elders and people which act in a way of Christ is wholly hindered.

Ans. This weak Argument is fully answered by me before; That Government, which of its own nature hinders and nullifies the righteous proceeding of the Congregation is not a power from Christ. True; but now the assumption is false: for the presbyterial power added to the just power of a Congregation does strengthen, and not nullify the power of the Congregation That Government, which by accid • nt, and abuse of their power in over voting two Elders, who proceed according to the rule of Christ, hinders and nullifies right proceeding in on • single act, is not from Christ, is most false: For because an abused power, and abused government is not from Christ, it follows not that the power and government itself is not from God. I added an answer to this in my Book which Mr. H. passeth over in silence. Suppose the Congregation and Synod agree in the truth, as they do Act. 15. Will you say that Peter, Paul and James, their power is nullified, and their three votes are swallowed up in that greater convention; because to their power is added in this dogmatical determination, the power and voices of the rest of the Apostles and Elders; yea, and some say of the whole Church, Act. 15. 2, 6, 25. & 16. 4. & 21. 18, 25. So say that the Congregation of Thyatira (suppose it so to be) by assuming to themselves a huge number of Elders and visible Saints shall by over-voting the former Congregation, conclude that Jezebel shall still teach and seduce. Mr. H. cannot say, that the added power of the Elders and Members of itself is not of Christ, but rather their abusing of their power in that wicked act, is not from Christ; for the adding to the Church two thousand to three thousand, to make five thousand is lawful, Act. 5.

Mr. H. To this Mr. R. answers, de jure, the power of the greater in this case ought to be swallowed up of the two voices of the Elders of the Congregation. But saith Mr. H. so the weaker should overbear the stronger, the part the whole.

2. This opens a gap to endless dissention, the fewer say we have the truth, the other, we have the truth, and who shall be the Judge?

Aus. Mr. A. citeth my words (as frequently elsewhere) so here imperfectly, and mutilates the sense, if their power and voices be against the truth; it is fit that many voices be swallowed up by two, Iure in fore Dei: for Christ gave no power to thirty to err, and to excommunicate an innocent person, he hath given no power, but to edifica • ion, 2 Cor. 10. 8. 1 Cor. 5. 4, 5. But I said not that Iure Ecclesiastico, the fewer, and the part, should overbear the many, and the whole. And what will Mr. H. say, the fewer names in Sardis judge that a Jezebel should be excommunicated; the whole saith no. The fewer say we have truth, the whole say, we have truth; by the brethren's way no remedy, but be the matter heresy, or scandals, incest and parricide, the larger part of every single Congregation in the midst of 24. sound Churches hath a power independent, and from which there is no appeal on earth, to excommunicate the few names that are in Sardis and keep their garments clean. If ye say, so is it in a National, in an Ecumenic Council by the Presbyterian way:

I answer in either the one or the other; if there be a manifest departing from the faith, and the man of sin sit in the Temple of God, and the fornications of Babel be multiplied, the fewer and weaker being Sa • ior pars Ecclesiae, the sounder part are (as Mr. H. saith, Iure in the Court of Heaven) the Church.

Mr. H. Arg. 7. This course cannot attain its end appointed by our Savior, whose wisdom fails not, nor can be frustrate in its preparation. But the Classis excommunicating, when the Elders and Congregation refuse to submit, would be of no force.

Ans. Let the larger part of the Congregation by three votes excommunicate a godly sound man, and descern an Arch-heretic to preach, as a Godly Socinian; Where is the end of Christ attained by you?

2. It is an Arminian and unsound tenet to condemn the wisdom of Christ, because he draws not his Ordinances, Gospel, Promises, Precepts, Seals, Censures, according to his irresistable Decree, by which the infinitely wise Lord cannot come short of his end intended of the Ordinances themselves, finem operantis; for his Counsels and Decrees must stand, Isa. 14. 26, 27. Ps. 33. 10, 11. Rom. 9. 19. and who hath believed our report? Isa. 53. 1. Some, yea many stumble at Christ and the Word, Isa. 8. 14, 15. 1 Pet. 2. 8. Rom. 9. Shall we accuse the Ordinances, the Gospel and Seals, because God attains not the end, the Salvation of the hearers? How unjust is it to accuse the Wisdom of God for this sinful folly of men?

But the Lord draws his ordinances and seals according to his approving will, and thereby his Wisdom attains the end, finem operis, which is to save and render inexcusable; and though the Classis be divided from the Congregation, and the Congregation be divided, the fewer keeping the rule, and the greater number erring: this is no more a just ground of challenging the immaculate and spotless Wisdom of God in the ordinance of Presbyterial censuring, then we may challenge Christ's coming in the world, to bring the sword, not peace, Matth. 10. 34. his ordinances are media nata apta, of their own nature apt to bring union between the Classis and the Congregation; if it fall out otherwise, the blame is in men's corruption.

There were answers given to these Arguments by me; Mr. H. would not set them down, nor remove them, as he answers, but in halfs and parts.

CHAP. VI.

MR. H. Pastors as they stand in relation to the Congregation, and in reference (saith Mr. R.) to the Classis, have not two, but one office, page 329; 333. and yet they are elect to the office of a Pastor in the Congregation, l. 1. & l. 2. pag. 201. but not elect to the office of a Pastor in reference to the Classis, l. 2. 345. which is very strange, since there is but one and the same office.

Ans. Is it strange that Mr. Cotton and the dissenting Brethren teach; Elders in reference to the Synod, and Elders in reference to the single Congregation at Antioch, and at Jerusalem have but one and the same office of Elders; for they are not twice Elders, nor two sort of Officers, by reason of these two relations. If they be, say it out, and yet these were elect Pastors in order to their Congregations, and chosen to employ their labors constantly there only, as married Husbands to their Wives. So Mr. H. par. 1. c. 7. pag. 81, 82, 83. and yet neither Mr. H. nor Mr. Cotton can say they were elect to the office of Pastors in reference to the Synod, though they exercise pastoral acts in reference to the Synod (Cotton Keys. c. 5. p. 25. Mr. H. par. 3.) and the associated Churches. Is not this strange? For the eighth Argument repeated from Survey, c. 8. Arg. 1. pag. 99. is answered.

2. I • esire the Reader also to consider my words, pag. 244, 245. The Congregations acknowledging and consenting to the classical Presbytery, do tacitly choose and consent to the common charge and care that every Pastor hath, as he is a member of that common Court, which d • th concern them all. and therefore when Mr. R. saith, that Pastors are not elect to the office of a Pastor, in reference to the Classis; the sense is in every page known to be, that Pastors are not chosen to be fixed and constant feeders of all the Congregations of the Classis, because they feed and rule in things of common concernment.

Mr. H. The power of a Congregation, and of a Presbytery, and their acts (saith Mr. R.) differ not essentially. But Elders (saith Mr. H.) do, and must preach, watch and feed, by virtue of the essence of their office, therefore they have acts formally d • fferent.

Ans. That Elders do act as Elders, and put forth specific acts of Elders in the Congregation, and in the Presbytery; Ergo, Their acts in one differ in nature from the acts in the other: it no more follows then this, Peter laughs today, ergo it shall be rain tomorrow. That Elders must constantly and fixedly teach and feed the Churches, whom they govern synodically, is denied by Mr. Cotton: and that they must put forth all the acts of the essence of the office, and that constantly and fixedly to all the Churches congregational, presbyterial, synodical, to which they are referred as pastors in their several relations respectively is most false.

Mr. H. If it be one and the same office of a Pastor to the Classis, and to a Congregation, as Mr. R. saith, l. 2. 329. then the office relates one and the same way to both the classical and congregational Church; then if the congregational Church be their proper flock, so must the classical Church be, quae sunt idem inter se, sunt idem uni tertio.

Ans. the first consequence is naught; If it be the same office, then the office relates the same way to both the classical and congregational Church. A Pastor hath the same office to the whole Congregation, and to one single man, to whom he preaches; for he is not two Pastors, one to the whole, and another to the part. An Elder is the same officer to Antioch, and to the Synod at Jerusalem, Act. 15. for he is not two officers in reference to these two. But it follows not that the office relates the same way to one man, and to all the Congregation; nor is he referred to the Synod as the fixed and constant feeder of the Synod, but he is referred to a Congregation of Antioch, as their fixed and constant Pastor; it is wild Logic, that one and the same office must relate, one and the same way, to one and to ten hund •• d, to the adequate, and to the inadequate correlate; and these that are one in one Faith, one Baptism, one Lord, one and the same Seals, it will not follow that they are one every way, but in illo uno tertio. For the whole Congregations on earth are one in all the essentials of a Church, one Faith, one Lord, but it follows not that all the Congregations on earth are but one single Congregation. The thumb is referred to the hand, as a member, and also to the whole body as a member; yet it is referred to the hand as a nearest and proper member; but to the whole body in a more common relation, as the toe is referred to the body, yet is not the toe a part of the hand as the thumb is, but both are parts of the body.

Mr. H. The combination of Churches gives no office, and so no power to the Elders of many Churches, for they were Elders before the combination.

Ans. That they were Elders before the combination, and made and ordained by the laying on of the hands of the people, which is your homogeneous Church, is an unwritten Tradition.

2. The tacit consent of Sister-Churches even before the formal combination is enough on their part, who neighbor with them to make them Elders.

M. H. Would you see a Pastor that hath the formal essence of a Pastor, and yet never did, nor is bound to preach? it is the classical Elder.

2. The Pastor may preach in his own Congregation, and Minister the Sacraments; but 〈◊〉 Presbytery keeps the key of jurisdiction.

3. The classical Elder is not bound to preach to them, over whom he hath jurisdiction. And this is the Bishop.

Ans. A bishop is rather a Pastor to Pastors, then to the Churches: Envy cannot say this of the Elders of the Presbytery.

2. The formal essence of a Pastor is not in being fixed to one Congregation, as a Husband to a Wife; so that it is adultery to act as a Pastor either in a Synod, or in another Congregation, as Mr. H. teacheth; for so Elders in a Synod, Apostles and Evangelists should not have the formal essence of Pastors.

3. It is false that he is not bound to preach and minister the seals to another Congregation, or members thereof, if he be called thereunto. But the Bishop is a Bishop ex officio, is bound to preach to none, but a Sermon to the Clergy once a year, and not that he may be a Bishop and never preach.

3. The Pastor of a Congregation as a Pastor hath power of jurisdiction in Collegio, and hath no majority of jurisdiction and ordination at all, as the Bishop hath.

4. The Pastor of a Congregation, yea, all the officers thereof, poor men have no jurisdiction without the people, yea, the people without them have majority of jurisdiction to make and unmake all the officers, which is the formal essence of a prelate by Mr. H. his way; the prelate is the virtual Church: tell the Church, i. e. tell one single man, the Prelate, who need neither do by vote, or consent of other Elders or people, as the prelatical way teacheth. Our Elders are neither over the saith of the people, nor can they dispence censures contrary to the mind of the Godly. So Mr. H. hath not found the prelate with us: but the Male, Church which is above all their officers, and all others is the prelatical Church.

But what if the Elders meet and confer this pow • r of sole Jurisdiction upon one man, and make him more then a Moderator?

Ans. What if the firmament fall? if they make a Bishop, they make a Bishop. I cannot stand; but see more of the prelates their majority, pride, dignity, privileges in the Authors cited, in nature and essence distinct from our Elders, or from Synodical Elders, against whom the argument fights with the like strength as against us. What famous Independents have refuted prelacy, I or a few can read.

Mr. H. What rule of Christ condemneth the Churches of error, for giving the power of jurisdiction to one man, but will condemn the i • vesting many Elders with jurisdiction over many Churches? let Mr. R. give me one place of Scripture, or one sound Reason for it; that one may be a Pastor to a people, by whom he was never chosen, &c.

Ans. The places of Scripture that tell us the Elders of Jerusalem were over so many as their constant officers, who could not meet in one Congregation, declare they had jurisdiction over that Church, otherwise Elders of that Church they could not be: but they could not all of them be chosen their Elders constantly teaching in all the Congregations; for that was unpossible.

And our grounds for a Presbyterian Church, and for Presbyterian Elders are these.

1. To appoint Elders 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , in every City. Tit. 1. 5. Is to appoint a College, or Church-officers in every Church, the Town, or City of Samaria receiving the Gospel.

1. As many, even from the greatest to the least, as were bewitched by Magus, Act. 8. 6. 9.

2. Both men and women were baptized, v. 12. and so were made a Church.

3. The number being above the strength of Philip, and so more then one Congregation, they stood in need of Peter and John, v. 14. to help in the work.

2. The first samplar Church of Jerusalem is one Church in Government, for their Elders are called the Elders of the Church of Jerusalem, Act. 2. 43, 44, 47. & 8. 1, 2. & 5. 11. & 11. 30. But that this Church was not all one Congregation, is clear.

1. From the multitude thereof, Act. 2. 43. three thousand.

2. Act. 4. 4. Five thousand. And then 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , multitudes of men, and women, Act. 3. 14. and yet they were multiplied, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , exceedingly; and a great company of the Priests (hard metal to be wrought upon) was obedient to the faith, Act 6. 7.

2. They meet in sundry places from house to house, Act. 2. 46. & 5. 42. for the celebration of the Lord's Supper, breaking of bread; nor is it like they durst bring into the Temple the new seal of the Supper. The dissenting Brethren refused that.

3. The multitude of twelve preaching Apostles for some years, and seven Deacons for the poor, declare, that in

1. Such a plentiful harvest,

2. In such a necessity of gathering souls.

3. Of preaching in season, and out of season; that one Apostle could not preach to one Congregation, the other eleven hearing, that were twelve reapers all in one ridge, in one single Congregation, where eleven that time must be silent.

4. The Apostle spoke with divers tongues, that these of all nations understood, Act. 2. 1, 2, 3. Therefore in divers meetings; nor is it clear, that all the three thousand heard Peter: the Text saith (v. 37.) they that heard were pricked, Act. 2. 11. the rest of the Apostles also spoke, as Mr. H. thinketh.

5. What agreeth to the Apostles as Elders, agreeth to all Elders, but the Apostles Act. 6. as Elders, not as Apostles (which is a Presbytery of twelve Elders over divers Congregations) chose Deacons, lay hands on them, and praying ordain them, v. 6. and use the joint concurrence of the people for the choosing of them, as a standing example to the Churches. Now what they do as Apostles either in writing Scripture, working miracles, speaking with tongues, &c. they neither seek nor need the help or occurrence of others, either people, or any else. There is no ground to say that all these thousands meet in Solomon's porch, Act. 5. 12. at one act of divine worship Congregational, or that they were all joining in one and the same prayer, or that they returned (to wit, Peter, and John) to their own, that is, all the thousands, but to the Apostles, who spoke the word with boldness, Act. 4. 23, 31. nor doth the word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , multitude, note every individual person, man and woman, Mat. 8. 37. The whole multitude of the Gadarenes besought Christ to depart: Festus, Act. 25. 24. All the multitude hath deal • with me about Paul. Luke 1. 10. The whole multitude were praying without. See the Reverend Assembly at Westminster.

They meet 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , in every house (it notes a Church-meeting, Act. 5. 42. & 16. 15. & 20 7, 8, 10. Rom. 16. 5. 1 Cor. 16. 19. Phil. 1. 2.) but that all these thousands interested in ordinances and government (as the Brethren say) meet for the same word, breaking of bread, government and censures, in the same house, needs no refutation, it refutes itself.

3. The Church of Rome, though one body, had many members, Rom. 12. and could not be one single Congregation.

1. In it were many Churches lesser, as the house of Aristobulus, Rom. 16. 0. Of Narcissus, v. 11. & 14. Philol • gus, Ne • ea, Iul • us, and all the Saints w • th them, v. 15. the Church at the house of Aquila and Priscilla: many teachers and fellow-helpers, ve • s. 3, 9, 12.

4. The Church of Thessalonica could not be one single Congregation; their faith being heard in all Achaia and all places, 1 Thes. 1. 6, 7, 8. of them Paul gloried in all the Churches, v. 16. Paul at one Sermon converted of them 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , a great mul titude, and of devout women, Act. 17. 4. not a few: also what must be the growth of that Church, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , Act. 15. 33. when they tarried at Antioch, Steph. some time, Beza not a little time. Paul and Barnabas continued there 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , with many other Teachers; and when God layeth the daily care of all the Churches upon one man, 2 Cor 11. 28. and upon other eminent members of the same body, that the Lord sent so many eminent Teachers, and Prophets to one Congregation only at Antioch, at Corinth, who can believe it?

5. The Church of Eph • sus had divers Congregations, if not more then one, 1 Cor. 16. 19. The Churches of Asia salu •• you, Aquila and Priscilla salute you much in the Lord, with th • Chur • h at their house. So Marlorat, so Par • us and B • za on Rom. 16. See the English Divines on the place, and Diodati. There were divers small assemblies in one and the self same City. See 1 Cor. 16. 19. Col. 4. 15. So were Church-assemblies ordinary for praying in the house of Mary, Act. 12. 12. Joh. 20. 19, 26. in an upper chamber, at preaching, praying and choosing of an Apostle, Act. 1. 13. praying and baptizing in the house of Iustus, Act. 18. 7, 8 preaching in the Scho • l of Tyrannus, Act. 19 9. preaching. c • lebrating of the Lord's supper in a house of Troas Act. 20. 8, 20. & 5. 42. & 10. 24. The Assembly of Divines at Westminster proveth that there were more congregations then one at Ephesus. 2. That there were many Elders over them as one flock, Act 20. 17, &c. 3. That these congregations were one Church, Rev. 2. To which add,

1. The multitude of converts Luke saith, Act. 19. 10, 17. three times 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , all the Jews and Greeks in Asia and at Ephesus heard the Gospel, a great door there was opened, Sorcerers converted, Act. 19. and Paul giveth direction to Timothy, how he should govern in the house of God. 1 Tim. 3. 15, 16. at Ephesus, 1 Tim. 1. 3. upon whom he should lay hands, 1 Tim. 5. 22. 1 Tim. 3. 1, 2. 1 Tim. 6. 4. to what faithful men able to teach others he should commit the Ministry, 2 Tim. 2. 2. Had it been a single congregation, where one might teach at once only, what needed such watching over false Teachers, speaking perverse things, and gathering Disciples and Churches out of one single Church, Act 20. 27, 28, 29. and trying of false Apostles, Rev. 2. 1, 2, 3. who were not sent to one single congregation, and there hath been need to take heed to such as speak lies, sow unprofitable questions, 1 Tim. 4. 1, 2, 3, 6, 11, 12. 2 Tim. 6. 3, 4. 2 Tim. 2. 14, 15, 16. and so there must have been many preaching Elders there.

6. At Corinth there have been many instructors, 1 Cor. 4. 16. many Doctors and prophets, 1 Cor. 14. 24, 31, 32.

7. Though there be many Churches in Galatia, Gal. 1. 2. yet must they be one lump, who have power to judge and censure false teachers, Gal. 5. 9. and there is a Church restoring made by spiritual officers, Gal 6. 1. otherwise they might have replied, We Galatians have no power in one body to cut off a troubler who infecteth the whole lump, every single congregation is to see to that, and the troubler is without our Churches, save to one only single Independent power, say our Brethren.

8. Its not possible that the Churches can send their common Messengers whom they choose, 2 Cor. 8. 19, 23. except the Churches convene, men, women and children, or then convent in Elders of many Churches, or the Apostles must have gone from Church to Church to beg suffrages and votes: which sort of Election is never heard of in any Writer sacred or profan • .

As to the first, who can believe that men and women and children capable to hear and be baptized also (which is the only Church of Believers owned by our Brethren) the externally covenanted and redeemed did send the Apostles to Jerusalem? or received the Apostles, and did welcome them? or salute the Saints, as Act. 16 3, 4. Rom. 16. 16 Act. 15. 22, 27, 28? therefore need for it, the second must be said. That the Churches in their Heads, Rulers, Officers, sent them, which is a very Presbyterial Church.

9. If divers Churches meet for laying on burdens by power of the Keys, as M. Cot. saith, & exercising acts of Church-government, then there is a Presbyterial Church governing without and above a single congregation, by pastors neither chosen to be fixed and constant teachers, nor that can possibly teach many congregations. But the former Mr. Cotton and our Brethren teach.

Obj. This is no Church-power (for a Synod is not a Church) b • cause it is no Church-jurisdiction.

Ans. 1. The Antecedent is false. 2. The Consequence is naught. A number of private Christians wanting all official Authority, so might lay on Synodical burdens binding materially, if this be no Church-power.

2. They are called the Decrees of Apostles and Elders, Act. 16. 4. written and concluded. Act. 21. 25. Saith James, Act. 15. 22. It seemed good to the Apostles and Elders, with the whole Church, to send chosen men. Now whether Church note the Apostles, Elders and Brethren, or the multitude of believers only, or the Church of Jerusalem, made up of both, the Decrees must come from Church-power, governing, teaching, uniting and removing a Schism. Though it were no power of jurisdiction, yet here is a Church-power above a Church, except it be said that so many pastors of the same or of divers Churches, or so many private Christians commissionated from no Churches, made the Synod, Act. 15. and Synodically said, It seemed good to the holy Ghost, and to us. But this shall no more import the promised presence of Christ to such as are convened in his Name, Mat. 18. 19. 20. & 28. 19, 20, 21. John. 2. 21. than if so many private Christians had been convened, and so may such of a sister-Church remove all Schisms, and a Synod shall be nothing at all.

10. If Christ build the power of binding, loosing, gaining upon brotherhood, Mat. 18. If thy brother offend, &c. then as far as brotherhood goes, if I possibly can converse with him, and may be offended or edified by him, so far must the power of jurisdiction be extended; because these two, The gaining of a brother, 2. The safety of the Church by edifying of others, and removing of scandals, are intended by Christ. Mat. 18. but brotherhood is without the bounds of the congregation whereof I am a member; Rom. 16 14. Salute the brethren that are with them; 1 Cor. 16. 20. All the breth • en salute you. These were brethren of other congregations.

2. If there be no Church-tie upon me to gain any but those of mine own congregation: then 1. There may be communion of Saints only within the same congregation, and no communion of Churches: what Scripture is for this?

3. It must be the will of Christ that we bestow no Church-rebukes upon other Churches; which must be contrary

1. To Christian love, to save others.

2. Contrary to zeal for the Lord's glory.

3. Spreading the Gospel.

4. Desire to remove Scandals.

5. To be made all things to all men, to save some.

6. To serve one another in love.

7. To promote the common interest of the whole catholic Body of Christ.

8. Its against our praying for the Church, and that all Israel may be saved.

9. Against the Doctrine of our Brethren, who say, That Churches ought to rebuke, exhort, warn, comfort Churches.

10. Its against the communion of Spiritual privileges of one Head and Savior, one Covenant, one God, one Faith, &c. Its not enough to say, We are the same Body entitative, for that entitative Body without this congregation, is either visible or invisible; if visible, then members of divers congregations are of the same visible body: and to say that other congregations are not as visible as that whereof I am a member, to me and others about, is to deny twice three to be six; for one Christ, one Faith, one Profession, the same seals, are as visible in a Church within few paces to me, as in the Church whereof I am a member: to say it is invisible, is to speak against sense.

CHAP. VII.

MR. H. If a Church in an Island may dispense all Censures, and all Ordinances, then every congregation may: But such a Church may. For 1. it is a City and a little Kingdom of Christ. 2. The essential notes of a visible Church agree to it.

Ans. The consequence from a broken arm to a whole arm is not good: or, because James the day before he be beheaded in strong prison, cannot discharge all Christian duties to brethren, and to neighbor Churches, therefore he is not actu primo a Christian. A Church in an Island is not actually associated with other Churches, and so cannot in the full extent dispense all Ordinances of rebuking, comforting neighbor Churches, and of withdrawing communion from them, because of the want of the object, not because of defect in the subject: I might retort the argument, Therefore associated congregations cannot dispense all Ordinances of rebuking, comforting, &c. But the latter is absurd.

2. An homogeneal Church in an Island void of pastors and men able to teach, cannot administer the Seals by Mr. H. his way.

3. A Church so divided, and not associated, is imperfect, and may remove scandals within itself; but it follows not, Ergo, every associated Church may remove scandals within itself, and without itself also independently, and without any subordination to united powers of the associated congregations, it follows not, the notes of a visible Church agree to such a Church imperfectly; except it be said, That the same Church from its own intrinsical and internal independency can dispense censures, it proves nothing; but the independency here is extrinsical and objective, and so accidental, and the affliction, not the power of jurisdiction in this Church.

Mr. H. There be all the officers in such a Church in an Island, and all the operations, operari sequitur esse— and the end is the same in both, the perfecting of the Body.

Ans. There be neither all the Church-operations, because there is no dispensing of pastoral acts, censures, Church rebukings, Church-warnings to neighbor Churches; nor is there the same adequate end, which is the perfecting of the visible body round about, as far as may be, which is the complete end of an associated Church: the perfecting of one single congregation, is a mangled and imperfect end.

Mr. H. 3 Ground. Where there is an office or power appointed of God, there needs no other power, but the office to authorize the work.

Ans. There is nothing more false. Every pastor hath a power to preach, but there is need of a call of God to preach to Macedonia, not to Bithynia, Acts 16. There is need of a call to preach fixedly to this, not to this flock, and to ossociated Churches.

2. How is it proved? its but begged that there is a power independent in an associated congregation.

Mr. H. If the power be the same, and the end the same, the power must be vain, if it be not put forth to the end: the power and institution of Christ should be wronged, if it should be hindered in attaining its end.

Ans. This is also a false ground. Power of admonishing, of rebuking, of preaching, is not wronged, when the object, to wit, neighbouring Churches, are not; and the Lord cannot wrong his own institution. Its a carnal reason, to say an institution is in vain, & a power, when they are not put forth in all possible acts. Steven is stoned, James is beheaded, Paul imprisoned, the Church scattered, that they cannot by a physical impossibility meet to remember the Lord's death, preach the Gospel, dispense censures, is therefore the power given by Christ to do all these in vain?

Mr. H. Neighbourhood of other Churches, is but a separable adjunct, it can add nothing to the constitution, and so to the operation of the Church; for death and dissensions may take away some Churches, and may nullify them.

Ans. This is for me. Neighbor Churches are extrinsical to the nature of a Church in an Island: Ergo, the Church in the Island hath a ministerial and official power actu primo to rule, and jointly edify the neighbor Churches, if they be. If any say Eve was accidental to the nature and to the operations of Adam, will it hence follow, a power of procreating children is accidental also to Adam? no more does it follow from the notexistence of neighbouring Churches, that the Church in the Island hath no power to edify, and jointly rule those nighbouring Churches, its poor Logic, because the object is not, to remove the power: Such a man is in a dark dungeon, Ergo, he hath no visive faculty; and because light and colors add nothing to the visive faculty, or to its nature and essence; Ergo, if light and colors be removed, the visive faculty is removed. So associated Churches are accidental to the Church in an Island; Ergo, that Church is deprived of all politick power to govern associated Churches, if they were, it follows not.

Mr. H. Suppose a Church be gathered in a wilderness, any latter Church planted beside it, cannot binder nor abridge the liberty, power, authority and operations, that all are from Christ; and when the same intrinsical power of constitution according to God, remains unaltered, the operations remain the same.

Ans. 1. A Church or Churches added, do not hinder or abridge, nor bring any privative power; but the added Churches bring a perfecting, helping and cumulative power to perfect objectively in complete operations the former Church in the Island, in things of common concernment, in which hath that Wilderness-Church, and the added Churches must be either edified or scandalized.

2. When the same intrinsical power remains unaltered, the operations may be altered to the better, and perfected. Mr. H. deviseth much Logic of his own: When the visive faculty of a man brought out of a dungeon who could not see the daylight, seeth now, should the operations remain the same, when he is brought forth; Ergo, as he saw not before, so he sees not now.

Mr. H. If it be said the Church in an Island should submit to a combination of Churches, as well as combine as members of a congregation: Ans. 1. This is to beg the question. 2. Suppose they will not (submit) then th • other Churches cannot command that, no more than a particular congregation can command me to be a member. 3. They ought not so to combine, as to prejudice the operations of that power they have received of Christ, and there is no warrant of Christ to hinder the operations of a Pastor or ruling Elder, more in one act of his office than another.

Ans. The contrary is a begging of the question. For

1. The Church in an Island should submit to the counsel and advice of new added Churches, as to the Lord's Word, by Mr. H. his grant, Ergo, a new addition of Churches, as an addition, doth help, and not hinder the power.

2. The addition of a new power of jurisdiction to the power that was in the Wilderness-church, and that in matters of common edification, as in dogmatick points, by grant of Adversaries, is no prejudging, • xcept they over-vote, in a corrupt way, the Wilderness-church. And we say, Christ never gave any power of erring, or male-administration.

3. The adding of 50 members to a Wilderness-church consisting of 25, shall have the same inconvenience: for the Wilderness-church is to submit to these added members, if added according to God (as we suppose) as to as lawful a Church-judicature as the Wilderness-church was before the addition. But what if they will not submit? Let Mr. H. see to that. I should think, by Mr. H. his grounds, they ought to submit, for they are added according to the Rule of Christ; and by Mr. H. his grounds they ought not to submit, (which is a contradiction.) For

1. The power of the Wilderness-church, the authority within themselves, offices, officers, were before complete, were all from Christ. Ergo, the operations should be the same, and they should vote and conclude as they did before, without the addition of 50 members.

2. Those 50 added are separable adjuncts to the constitution and nature, and so to the operations of the Wilderness-church. For by Mr. H. the Wilderness-church being of 25 members, was complete in essence and operations, before the addition of 50 members.

3. The 50 members over-vote and nullify the righteous preceeding of the poor holy Wilderness-church of 25. Ergo, here the power of a single congregation in the Island and the Wilderness must be over-turned by these three Arguments of Mr. H. Let his defenders see to it.

4. A congregation may command me a visible professor so and so, dwelling near the Fountain, to confess Christ before men, and so to be a member.

Obj. They cannot excommunicate • a r • fus • r to be a member, for a non-member cannot be c • st out.

Ans. Its all along a false principle, that a man is no member until

1 • A Court congregational judicially judge of his Regeneration.

2. Until he actually consent, and give up his Name as a married party: 3. and that to one only congregation; all are rotten and headless principles. What way pastors may be hindered in exercising pastoral acts, or acts of ruling, is clear: he may not publicly preach in a set time of his own appointing, without the Churches consent, by whom he is to be regulated, which is no hindering of the exercise of his power, as Mr. H. imagines, but a regulating thereof.

Mr. H. The addition of anything besides an office, adds no power of right or jurisdiction.

Ans. True, but it extends the right of the Wilderness-church to so many members added, to 50 Infants to be baptized when born, to ten Churches about, when the Lord shall add them, not to rule over them, but to rule jointly over the whole combination with them, for promoting the Gospel in all.

Mr. H. The ground of the combination is of no force, to wit, the preventing or curing the taint and pollu • ion that a scandal will bring, by the nearness of combination. Therefore the combination is of no force, the scandal falls out in another Classis. 2. In the outside of the combination, nearer the congregation of another Classis than their own. 3. It goes far to another Province and Nation. The righteous proceeding according to the Rule of Christ, is a cure appointed to remove it, where ever it falls out, far or near.

Ans. By combination, we do not mean only a combination of a Presbytery, but also of a Province, Nation; yea, of all the sound Christian Churches on earth, as the Synod of Dort, 1618. condemned the unsound Doctrine of the Arminians, by writing to all those either within or without the Church, and nearness of habitation is not the adequate ground (though a ground it is, 1 Cor. 5. 1. It is reported there is among you fornication, &c.) of the danger of pollution.

2. The reason, Because the scandal may fall out without the combination of the Classis, is no reason why the combination is of no force, for the combination is upon other grounds also, to wit, the establishing in the faith, the increase of the Churches, Acts 16. 4, 5. the gathering of the Saints, and perfecting of the body, Eph. 4. 12. edifying the body, beside the preventing and curing of scandals.

3. Its to beg the question, to say, that the proceeding of the Independent congregation of Antioch (say it were so) is a cure for the scandalous Doctrine of salvation by circumcision, preached at Jerusalem, Acts 15. 1. troubling the Churches of Syria and Silicia, Acts 15. 23, 24. Yea, this is for Mr. H. to say, the holy Ghost used not a sufficient cure. As for that, to say scandals should not be prevented and cured by the combination, because they may fall out without the combination; his meaning is, without the combination classical, or congregation, it makes Christ's remedy nonsufficient, that either there can be no Provincial, no National scandals, contrary to experience, or then Christ hath provided no Church-remedy to remove them, but only the power of a single congregation, which hath no power at all, but over themselves. Hence this rotten principle, That Church feeding is due to none under the New Testament, but to persons hampered into the Pinfold and Judaical Prison of one single congregation, against which 1. it licenseth the most godly Saints on earth, residing at Corinth, if they be no Church-members of that Church,

1. To deny Christ and Church-ordinances before men, when Christ's sends out his servants, as Mat. 22 3, 4. Luke 14. 16, 17. for they may say, the Lord calls none to Church-ordinances at Corinth, but members of that Church, and such are we not.

2. It licenseth them to despise Church-prophesying, Church-praying, Church-praising.

3. To disobey a Gospel-command, though they have visibly to the conscience of all tried themselves. Do this in remembrance of me: whereas Christ limits his invitation to all who can discern his body. Mr. H. must say its adultery for the members of the Church of Philippi, to remember the Lord's death in the Church of Corinth.

4. That Doctrine is not of God, which debars the birds, sheep, and children of God sojourning in what fields or land soever (as it were) from feeding as his Eagles upon the carrion, in every lawful Church-way; or from watching at the gates, and waiting at the posts of the doors of Wisdom, except in that only congregation to which they are sworn by marriage oath, or from seeding at any table of the Lord, or dwelling all the days of their life in the New Testament-sanctuary, to behold the beauty of the Lord, Prov. 8. 35. 36. Psal. 23. 6. & 27 4. except in one single congregation: but such is the Doctrine of an independent congregation, the only visible Church of the New Testament, as they say.

5. That Doctrine is not of God, which confines Church-comforts, Church-praying, &c. to one single congregation, and puts us in a worse, if not in as hard a condition as the Jews, whose public Temple-service was tied to the Temple; whereas in the New Testament, 1 Tim. 3. 8. (as in the Old also in some sense) we may pray in every place, lifting up holy hands without wrath and doubting. But we may not pray, praise, and heat Church-ways in any place by this way, but in our own congregation, although the Lord promise to create on Zion's assemblits a cloud and a smoke by day, and the shining of a fleming fire by night, Isa. 4. 5. and that upon all the Lord's Mount.

6. The sojourner is left to the Eunuchs complaint, I am a dry tree; there is glory in this assembly, but I have neither part nor portion in it: Nor will it establish the heart to say, I see the beauty of the Lord in my own congregation, for these under the New Testament can find no solace and comfort from that Psal. 106. Remember me, O Lord, with the favor that thou bearest to thy people. Nor can it be the comfort of an Institution, which is something more to a believing sojourner, and David banished to want, then we conceive • when David's spirit is overwhelmed, when he wants the joy, presence and come • ort of instituted holy days, Psal. 42. 4. and of Tabernacle-consolation with the covenanted people of God, which made the sparrows more happy than he was, Psal. 84. 1, 2, 3, 4. and yet he had soul-refreshments in lively desires, Psal. 63. 1, 2. For the godly sojourner is not of that covenanted visible body with the Church to which he is a stranger; for by this way, he is an alien, and deprived of their sanctuary joy and glory of that cong • egregation, both in Church-hearing, believing, and joy of the seals.

7. By this way, Christ must promise his Ministerial presence, and his Spirit, not always, as Mat. 28. 20. Eph. 4. 11, 12. John. 20. 21. Acts 1. 8. and in every congregation where they open the mouth, but only in one fixed congregation. With what faith can they preach elsewhere? or people hear the pastors elsewhere?

CHAP. VIII.

MR. H. A Church in the Gospel is never used for the Elders only.

Ans. It is never used in the N. T. for men only who govern, secluding women and children, as Mr. H. takes it; nor for the people secluding the Elders as a governing Society; but of the signification hereafter. But it cannot be a binding and authoritative loosing Church.

Mr. H. There cannot be a definition given that will agree to a Congregational and Presbyterial Church.

Ans. Ergo, There is no Presbyterial Church, it follows not.

2. As we take a Congregational Church for the Eldership ruling, it is false. One and the same nature of a Ruling Church agreeth to the Congregational, Presbyterial, Provincial Eldership: and so they differ per magis & minus, as is said.

Mr. H. If the Congregations be species specialissimae of a true Church, then there can be no lower species resulting or arising from them, as this doth.

Ans. No Logic can say, the Church of Boston so existing hath other species of the Church of Boston under it. The hand of Socrates cannot be called species specialissima; nor is the hand, to speak Logically, a species; it is a part, and an uncomplete part of the body. If Mr. H. mean, as it seems he doth, that we make Presbyterian, Provincial Churches, lower species and kinds of Congregational Churches, the pious man refutes Presbyterian Government, which he understands not. For species specialissima praedicatur de inferioribus, according to Aristotle his, Ramus, and all Logic. And O what Monsters feed we if this be true properly (a Presbyterial Church is a Congregational Church) or (a Congregation is a Presbyterial Church) for the congregation is an integral part of the Presbyterian Church, the Presbyterian likewise an integral part of the Provincial: but neither of them is species to other, except we say, Euphrates is the Element of Water, the Element of water is Euphrates.

M. H. If every congregation hath all the integral parts of a Church, then it is an entire and complete Church.

Ans. Therefore it is an entire politick Church in its association with other Churches, it follows not. But what then? London is an entire city having all the integral parts of a Society, Major, Sheriffs, Aldermen, Rulers and ruled, Ergo, London is no part of England, nor ruled by the Parliament of England. What Logic is this? But if the meaning be, that the congregation associated in the midst of ten congregations, is so a city different in species and in nature from all other congregations, and so married to its own Pastors, as the husband and wife are, so that to exercise Church-acts, official acts without themselves, is adultery and unlawful; and so as this Church is no integral part of the body Catholic, its against Scripture and sound reason, and a begging of the question.

Mr. H. Every integrum is made up of his members, therefore in nature they are before, therefore Churches before Classis; therefore what each have they receive from them; therefore they have no office, but from them; therefore both ordination and jurisdiction come from them.

Ans. I desider at a Syllogism.

Every whole Incorporation is made up of its members that are before the whole, and hath power, offices, ordination and jurisdiction from these members. It is denied by us, and nakedly asserted by Mr. H. For

1. The Churches are before the Apostles, Ergo, the Apostles had their immediate calling and power of jurisdiction from the Churches. It is against Scripture: as women and children are by nature before officers; ergo, officers have their ordination and jurisdiction from women and children. 3 Churches are before counseling and advising, yea as Mr. Cotton saith well before, pastorally and authoritatively determining Synods, Ergo, Synods have all their synodical power to counsel and pastorally teach from the Churches, they came from, it follows not, not will our brethren yield the consequence.

Mr. H. If a Congregation grow too big, and therefore be forced to swarm out; or in ease they transplant themselves from one place to another, so that part be forced to go before others, to make preparation for those that follow, we then send an Offic • r with the smaller party, and the greater number remain with the rest: and yet are all but one Church in our account, and under one Presbytery of chosen Elders of the Congregation.

Ans. 1. Why do not our Brethren show a practice of this in the Church of Jerusalem, consisting of so many Act. 2. & 4. & 6. thousands, if more then five thousands all in one congregation? Was there not need that four or six congregations should swarm out of six thousands, and six Officers be sent with them? in which case, suppose they go forty miles to a new Colony, and five congregations meet in five sundry places for Word and Sacraments, here must be five Churches, • s our brethren take the word Church, 1 Cor. 11. 18. Act. 11. 16 & 21. 22. & 4. 31. Mat. 18. 17. & 16. 18. Sure, though they had no Officers, they are a homogeneous true visible Church, as Mr. H teacheth, page 1. c. 5. page 5. and so here, or six Churches (if we contend not about names) under one Presbyterial government, which is the yielding of the cause, and yet at forty miles distance, and yet by no will or appointment can they meet in one place, O but they are all one Church in our account! one congregation in Christ's account. Shew us Scripture for this acception of the word Church in Old or New Testament; that they are one single congregation, otherwise Mr. H. his account is no account: If they be one Church, because they have one and the same power, jurisdiction; officers they had before. So we say, and the same power and jurisdiction in nature and essence we grant; but so all the congregations on earth have one and the same power and jurisdiction, covenant, seals, saith, Christ, hope of glory; so we agree. Why dispute we, if the meaning be, that all these six swarms (for a thousand will be a number too great for one congregation, if not sufficient) are but one individual congregation, though now separated by forty miles, and meeting in six sundry places.

• 1. Give us Scripture for that Church.
• 2. Give us any Greek Author sacred or profane, that so speaks, for we stand not to Mr. H. his account in this.
• 3. Where there are and must be six sundry meetings, coitiones six numero distinctae.

2. Six companies hearing at the same time six several Sermons.

3. Partaking of six Tables of the Lord numerically distinct, here sure must be fix congregations, as our Brethren define us a Church, a company of Believers meeting in one place, &c. And if so, here is a prelacy.

3. A number of non-residents; for all are Elders ruling; but it is physically impossible, that all can be Elders teaching. So Mr. H. then it is no • essential to a Church that they meet all 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , in one place, as the brethren often tell us.

M. H. But when the Congregations are fixed, and they established in peace, and settled with support about them, not more then may comely and comfortably meet together, to partake of all ordinances, should be one Church.

Ans. If the six swarms, which issue out of the numerous Church of Jerusalem, disturb the peace, and make war and division in the Church, it is strange. The Eldership or Presbytery over these six swarms, so separated by many miles in divers Colonies, may either meet and exercise discipline, and dispence censures to these six swarms not yet settled, and provided with Officers, or they may not meet. To say they may not meet for that end, is to deny that they are under one Presbytery of the same chosen Elders, contrary to what Mr. H. said. If they may meet to dispence censures, here shall be ruling Elders, & no physical possibility of teaching the swarms so separated as forty miles, they may haply hear of written Decrees, as Act. 16. 4. but cannot be edified by preaching.

2. So this Church congregational which cannot comely and comfortably meet to partake of all the ordinances, is no ordinance of Christ, and so no congregational Church. But such are these swarms that are forty miles distant.

3. This Church is either visible, or not; neither can be said by Mr. H. his principles, as elsewhere is proved.

Mr. H. Hence an answer may be easily accommodated to the examples which Mr. R. brings for a Presbyterian Church.

1. That of the Apostles will no wise suit his end for to make up a Presbyterial Church; there must be many congregations, many Elders appropriated to these congregations, which have power over their own only, and not over others; and these must combine, and upon the combination, the Elders must assemble and d • spence their censures, and set down their decisions. But there were no Elders at Jerusalem appropriate to their several charges and Churches, which had power only over them; and such Elders the Apostles could not be, because though they had all power in them, yet they had no power limited for that should contradict their Apostolic commission.

Ans. I smile to read this worthy man yield in terminis a Presbyterial Church; and yet be saith, the examples serve not Mr. R. his end. Why? saith he,

1. To make up a Presbyterial Church, there must be many congregations; good: so say we.

2. There must be many Elders appropriated to these Congregations, which have power over their own only (saith he) and not over others; That we deny. I should say, any other save this worthy man, (whom I much loved and ever honored) who would write a Book against Presbyterial government, and yet did not understand the constituent elements of a presbyterial Church, deserves to be censured; for Mr. H. yieldeth all the presbyterial Church that Mr. R. pleads for, or that the famous Synod at Westminster desire; where there were eminently learned men, who well understood Presbyterial government, and all adversaries thereof. An eminent man Mr. Ier. Burroughs, one of the dissenting Brethren, did not oppose, nor enter his dissent against the proposition, concerning a Presbyterial Church, as Mr. H. does; nor look upon it as a principal of Presbyterial government; only the Dissenters did hold, there was but one single congregation at Jerusalem, in which they are redacted to miserable absurdities; and in these two Mr. H. contradicts them: let them compose their domestic contradictions. See the answer of the Assembly of Divines to the seven dissenting Brethren, An. 1644. Suppose in Jerusalem (saith the Synod) there were ten congregations, and twenty officers, feeding and ruling them in common, not one of them fixed to any one congregation. This kind of Presbytery would pass for a lawful government: and none of these incongruities or absurdities are charged on them, by this argument: and it shall not follow that ruling and teaching are not commensurable, as the Holy Ghost makes them commensurable.

2. Mr. H. cannot, nor any man for him, clear from that text Act. 2 • whether they were fixed or not fixed, they are the Elders of the Church of Jerusalem, that is, as Mr. H. saith, contradicting the dissenting Brethren, Elders of divers congregations, under one Presbyterial government, which is all we crave.

2. Fixedness or not fixedness of Elders is an accident of the visible governing Church to our Brethren: who hold that it is the same numerical Church homogeneous, which being void of Elders, may choose their officers, and thereafter being fixed and formed, may excommunicate all their Elders, if they turn heretical; so that the people is the Church without their officers, and the officers to Mr. H. are separable adjuncts, and the coming or going of the separable adjuncts of the Church cannot alter the nature of the Church. It is most weak, that Mr. H. saith, that the Apostles could not be fixed Pastors to them, for then they should be limited Pastors to them, and so not Apostles: for there can be no contradiction between Apostles and Pastors, for their fixed preaching, and fixed administering of the seals. For example, Paul's pastoral officiating a year and six months at Corinth, Act. 18. 11. and so many years at Sphesus, so many years at Rome, differs not in nature and essence from the pastoral preaching and administering of the seals in constantly fixed Pastors, chosen to the congregation for all their life: and yet he remained habitu, and actu primo an Apostle. Yes the adding of an extraordinary seal of a miracle, contradicts not the charter, or the preaching of the Gospel, more then Samuel's judging at Gilgal, is opposite to his judging all Israel at Ramah: Extension of preaching to many is a mere accident; and a members receiving of the Supper in his own Church is not opposite to his receiving thereof in four other Churches. See the Answer of the Assembly, page 115, 116.

As also, if the twelve Apostles govern, as they do, Act. 6. All the twelve meetings, and yet neither do, nor can preach all of them to everyone of the twelve, except all the twelve be in twelve several meetings at once, then (which is a monstrous impossibility)

1. Ruling is divided from preaching.

2. Then all the twelve cannot fulfil their Ministry. Yes,

3. Then Episcopal ruling of many Churches, and neither being bound, nor able to teach any of them, or all of them, is not sinful. But sure the Apostles might govern, send their decrees, and Epistles to many Churches, the members whereof they never saw in the face.

Nor could all the many thousands, who had power of judging with the Elders, as our Brethren say, meet in one place comely and comfortably to act: and therefore Christ so must never have appointed such a judicature, to rule all these congregations, who are entitatively one; so must they say what we say, and more. For all the congregations on earth are entitatively and in nature one, and yet our Brethren will be far from saying, that they are all under one government, as they say that these meetings at Jerusalem were.

M. H. The rest of the examples of Antioch, Ephesus, Rome, though it were granted upon their greater growth, and increase, and so want of Elders, they might meet in divers places for the while, these might still be under one presbytery, their officers in a distinct manner attending upon them. And therefore Gerson Bucerus in his answer says here, Quis adeo ineptire sustinuerit, &c. Who can say; that because they meet in divers places, they were under divers Presbyteries, or Elders?

Ans. 1. This is a short way of answering, with a leaving out of the Church of Samaria, a great City, wherein all both men and women were baptized, the Church of Corinth, of Thessalonica, &c.

2. And yet there is no less cause to say all the Saints at Rome, Antioch, Ephesus, Samaria could not meet in one place, then that these of Jerusalem could not.

2. If they might meet in divers places, for the while, and yet be under one Presbytery; Here is a Presbyterial Church of many Congregations, for a while. Here is a Prelatical and Antichristian Government, for a while, at least ordained by Christ.

And Mr. H. writes a Book with a huge noise of absurdities, with which he burdens his Brethren the Presbyterians; yet he will suffer their Church to stand, for a while.

3. Who told Mr. H that a Presbyterial Church may stand for a while, during the time of the growth of the the Church of Jerusalem, Antioch, Ephesus, but no longer? for when the swarmed out Churches are once settled, the Presbyterian Church must down again, since the Scripture speaks nothing of this. Who gave Mr. H. leave to set up an Antichristian Tabernacle (for so is the Presbytery to him) for an hour, and pull it down again?

4. It is a wonder that Mr. H. should cite Gerson Bucer cuttedly, as a Witness so much for a Presbyterial Church, not in the swarming out of Churches only (of which Bucer hath not one word) but in the settled state of the Church: for Bucer contradicts Mr. H. and all his as foolishly erring, when they say such Churches meet in divers places for the Word and Seals; Ergo, they are independent in their government, and cannot be under one common government. Bucer saith, if they lie near together, it is folly to say they are under divers Presbyteries, and so say we.

Mr. H. 2. It doth not appear out of any Text, nor any evincing Argument gathered therefrom, that (setting aside the Church of Jerusalem) they should needs meet in several places.

Ans. Then the Church of Jerusalem met in sundry places, by Mr. H. his argument: but this shall offend the dissenting Brethren, that maintain against the Synod at Westminster, that they meet all in one place.

2. Mr. H. should have given a reason, why the Church of Jerusalem met in sundry places, and not the other Churches of Antioch, Ephesus, but because he saw our Arguments run as strong for other Churches as for Jerusalem. He was pleased to dictate what he could not demonstrate, and so leave the Reader in the dark.

3. Before I leave this, let Mr. H. or his teach what is meant by this, that there were about three thousand added to the Church, Act. 2. 21. whether by the Church be meant the one hundred and twenty, of which ch. 1. and whether there the one hundred and twenty were there to receive the three thousand as members at that time in a judicial way? And if they were not there, how the three thousand were not added primarily to the Catholic Christian Church that then was; and secondarily to this, or to that Church? as we say. For when there were said to be added to the Church, they were not added to themselves.

Mr. H. 3. Let it be considered, whether by Church may not be meant many Churches. Saul made havoc of the Church. i. e. of the faithful of many Churches.

Ans. It is weak as water, Saul persecuteth the Church, i. e. members of the independent Church: Ergo, there is no Presbyterial Church. Ergo, there is not such a thing as a Synod, for he persecuted James, Peter, and the Elders and Brethren, members of the Synod, where he might find them; now the Apostles were not fixed member of congregations: and let Mr. H. consider whether Luke gives not a better interpretat on then he, Act. 83. Saul made havoc of the Church, entering into every house, and haling m • n and women, and committed them to p • ison. So that Saul destroyed the scattered members, that were n • t enchurched, and where he found any of this way, Act. 9. 2. whether members of a congregation, or not, even members of divers meetings under one Presbytery, as he grants, he persecuted them. And by this the Church at Jerusalem, Act. 11. 22. must be Churches congregational at Jerusalem. And Act. 2. The Lord added to the Church such as should be saved; that is, the Lord added to divers Independent Congregations, such as should be saved; good: but this Church and these common Elders meet for acts of Government, Act. 2. 18. and the day following, Paul went in with us to J •… , and all the Elders (verse 25.) were present. S • re the place shows they meet for acts of Government. Yea, Act. 11. 30. & 21. 18. They sent alms to the Elders of Judea, to be distributed to the distressed in Judea. As also the Elders of Judea were members of the Synod, Act. 1 • . And how could there be administrating of the seals without any jurisdiction at all to debar the unworthy?

CHAP. IX.

MR. H. If Christ allude to the Synedry, then must Mat. 18. be expounded of a Presbyterial Church. Mr. H. both Proposition and Assumption is denied.

Ans. Mr. H. leaps from one Book to another. I no where frame an Argument from a mere allusion: but so, if Christ so allude to an authoritative company, that hath power of binding and loosing, as the Jewish Sanhedrim in this Mat. 18. then he judgeth the Church, Mat. 18. to be a Juridical Church.

2. Its a poor Argument, he alludes not to the Jewish Synagogue, because that Synagogue had no power of Excommunication, as this Church Mat. 18. hath, saith he: but can there be no allusion to a Judicature, except the one, to which allusion is made, and that of which the present speech is, have the like power? Then cannot the Scripture allude to earthly Princes, who place their greatest Courtier upon the right hand, because earthly Princes have not the like power with the Father of Jesus Christ. This destroys all allusions, which abound in the Scripture; as Paul, Rom. 10. 18. alludes to the Sun; Malachi compareth Gospel-worship to the burning of Incense, chap. 1. shall it then follow, that the one is of the nature of the other? That allusions bring little light, is said without ground; for they being grounded upon Metaphors often, which bring light, must bring much light.

3. That Synagogues had no power to excommunicate, seems to bring darkness, and not light. The contrary is Job. 9. and 16. Though they abused that Ordinance.

Mr. H. Its in vain to send the plaintiff to a general Council, he might be dead before he be relieved, and the Council be gathered.

Ans. We send no man by a loup to a General Council, but the grieved man may appeal to the nearest Judicature; and Mr. H. will have him to loup to a General Council at the first, being accused of a scandal, which declares, that he would elude all the Government of Christ, between him and that Judicature.

2. We do not maintain any Appeals whatsoever, but only righteous Appeals. Illud tantum p • ssumus, quod jure possumus.

3. So may the plaintiff be buried before a Synod, by way of consultation, may be had; the ways of Discipline, a • all Christ's ordinary ways in the Gospel, may possibly never take effect in those to whom the word is a savor of death unto death, but that doth not nullify an Ordinance of God.

Mr. H. Our Savior, Mat. 18. points at a standing Tribunal of such a Church as is at hand, whereof both parties were members.

Ans. Its a perverting of the words of Christ, Mat. 18. that no man trespassing, whom I must endeavor to gain, can be my brother, but he who is a member of the same congregation of which I am a member. This is to renounce and quit all brotherly communion with all Churches on earth, but only that single congregation of which I am a member; when not one brother, but twenty or many Churches of brethren without the congregation, as false brethren of Judea trespass against Antioch by perverse doctrine, Act. 15. there is not a Judicature a • hand, hath Christ provided to tell no Church, and left no remedy to remove the greatest of scandals?

Mr. H. How could a Church in an Island, or the first Church at Jerusalem, Act. 1. 23. exercise discipline upon an offender upon this ground?

Ans. Why not? since the purpose of Christ is, That every Church, even the less of one hundred and twenty, Acts 1. and the greater of ten thousands, Act. 2. & 4. & 6. should respectively purge themselves; and when association of many Churches about shall be, they should also purge those without the congregation. Scandals fall out where many meetings are, and one only Presbytery over them, as Mr. H. granteth: to which of the meetings shall: the plaintiffs complain? The offenders are of divers Meetings or Churches that are not at hand.

Mr. H. The Sanhedrim is a mixed Judicature, partly of Ecclesiastical, partly of Civil Judges, Deut. 17. 12. 2 Chron. 19. Ergo, allusion cannot be made thereunto.

Ans. The Consequence is naught.

2. Mr. H. with the Prelates, confound the Judicatures, but they are clearly distinguished, while one is appointed for the matters of the King another for the matters of the Lord, 2 Chron. 19. 11. So are they distinguished, The Priest or the Judge, not the Priest and the Judge, Diut. 17. 12. Men might sinsully confound them; but sin is no institution of the Lord.

Mr. H. Arg. 2. The Church of believers is that which meets for prophesying and for praying: but this, Mat. 18. especially for binding and loosing, and censures. Mr. H. The Church of believers is assembled mainly for prophesying and praying, yet not only, but for censures also, the Word being ended.

Ans. That is indeed in question, That men, women and children meet ordinarily every Lord's-day for to act in all Ordinances; and after Sermon to leed witness, bind and loose, and that under the notion of believers, for neither here, nor in Scripture, is there warrant for this.

Mr. H. Arg. 3. The Church Mat. 18. is such a superior and judicial Seat, as is to be obeyed in the Lord, under the pain of excommunication: But a multitude of believers are not such a seat. So Mr. R. Mr H. The Major is the question, and the Conclusion is to be proved, whether a particular congregation be the highest Tribunal, or the classical Church: and Mr. R. takes one part of the Conclusion to pr • ve the other: If the congregation be not highest, then the classical must be. The Minor should have been proved, not nakedly propounded.

Ans. I propound a Syllogism, and for answer to the minor, Mr. H. transforms my Argument, which I dreamed not of, and says, I take one part of the conclusion to prove the other, If the congregation be not highest, then the classis is. But, Sir, that is not one part of the conclusion to prove another; but since you bring it, its a lawful Syllogism, Either the congregation or the classis is the highest Tribunal: But not the congregation. Yet this is Mr. H. Arg. not mine.

The Church Mat. 18. is such a superior seat, as is to be obeyed, as being over us in the Lord, &c. But no Scripture, no Divine in the world saith, That the multitude of believers (I use not there the term Congregational Church at all) is such a superior Seat, that is over the Guides, and whom the Guides do obey in the Lord, or disobey under the pain of Excommunication. This minor of mine is not nakedly propounded. The Scripture saith, the officers are over the multitude of believers in the Lord, 1 Thess. 5. 12, 14. 1 Tim. 5. 17. Heb. 13. 17. But the contrary is never said; they do not awake that say, this is to take one part of a conclusion to prove the other; for its a conclusion proved by a medium, that is no part, neither subject nor attribute of the conclusion.

Mr. H. Arg. 4. of Mr. R. Whatever the Church may excommunicate, every member thereof convened with the Church may inflict all inferior censures.

But all the members cannot inflict lesser punishment; for neither women, nor aged children, nor the unofficed brethren, can rebuks, exhort, or, by the Word, openly convince the officers. Ans. The consequence is feeble, as appears from the nature of delegated power, which is committed by Christ to persons capable thereof, which women for their sex, children for the want of the exercise of understanding, cannot do. People have power to choose officers, therefore women have power to put in their voices. The Body of a Corporation may put out a Major upon desert; therefore women and children may do it. No, the wise God hath included the votes of women in the male.

Ans. Nay, but Mr. H. shall not so elude the Argument. Whatsoever the judging, binding and loosing Church of believers may do, that every member of the joint community may do, in collegio, if the Keys be given to them (as Mr H. and Mr. Cotton say) as actual believers, giving Peters confession, Mat. 16. and therefore Mr. H. too suddenly says, The consiquence (he would have said the major, for its a lawful Syllogism) is feeble; for women, children, sons come to ag • servants, which he left out, are formal and essential parts of the believing Church, to whom the Keys are given as to the first subject. If the Keys be not given to them as confessing and professing believers, because not to women, sons, servants, then not to all confessing and professing believers, as such; then not to all blessed, as taught by a teacher above flesh and blood, as Peter was, Mat. 16. This shall cross the Principles of our Brethren (& the Truth and Scripture cannot but cross them) nor can it be denied, but women, sons come to age, servants, are no less members of that Church, than the multitude of male-believers, for they confess Christ, as Peter, are blessed, and built on the Rock, as well as Peter, and are no less conceived in charity, to have some spi •… l good in them, as Mr. H. dictates, cap. 2. par. 1, 15, 16. and these must be visible Saints to whom Mr. H. his definition of visible Saints agrees; and therefore our brethren must either quit the principles they follow, or then a multitude of believers of visible Saints must be larger than the actual binding and loosing Church, Mat. 18. and against their will this, Tell the Church, must be understood of, Tell some believers only, (if they will) The Officers; but, Tell not women, nor sons, nor servants, for they are no part of the binding and loosing Church; and, If he hear not the Church; that is, as the Hebraism there, If he obey not the Church, if he obey not some believers Men, and Heads of Families, not women, servants, • ons, Let him be to thee as a publican, &c.

2. So woman are either not capable of believing and visible Saintship, which none can say; or they are not capable of a power of binding and loosing: and so a power capable of binding and loosing is not given to the multitude of believers, as the Church, Mat. 18.

3. Nor are women, sons, servants, debarred from voicing in Election, because it is a Church-power, for it is no power of jurisdiction. For

1. Their tacit voices and consents are not excluded, because they must try the spirits, & not upon trust, & fide implicitâ believe every teacher more than men, or believe as the Church believes, more than their husbands, nor must they take Doctrines as truth: upon their husbands word; not are women so excluded from speaking in the Church, as they may upon no occasion confess their faith.

2. Profess vocally repentance.

3. Depose as Witnesses.

4. Accuse the guilty before the binding Church.

4. Nor may a Corporation cast out a Major by an authoritative power, such as binding and loosing is, Mat. 18.

5. We seek a warrant why the votes of women in choosing their Pastors, must more be included in the votes of the male, than their being essential parts of the redeemed Church is included in the males, or their confessing publicly, that Jesus is the Christ, as many women Martyrs, and sons and servants have gloriously done; and yet their confession of Christ to the death must be personal, and not included in the confession of husband or parents, as Mat. 10. 32.

Mr. H. Arg. 5. of Mr. R. Those to whom the essence and definition of a Ministerial Church, having power to excommunicate, doth belong; those and those only are understood under the Name of the Church, Mat. 18. But the essence and definition of a Ministerial Church, having power to excommunicate, doth not necessarily belong to a great company of believers assembled Churchwise.

Ans. Both propositions may be denied. Neither a Church without officers, nor as having them, is here only understood; but the second sense is here firstly attended. For both people and Elders have their power, parts and places in a right order and manner; when its said, a Ministerial Church is here understood, Ministerial notes either Ministers without the body exclusively, and that is false, or Ministers with the body inclusively. Now a Ministerial Church in the fairest sense aims at both. In the first sense, the proposition is false; in the second it doth not conclude to whom the essence and definition of a Ministerial, i. e. of a Church of Ministers, without the body, having power to excommunicate, doth necessarily belong: These and these only are here understood. This Mr. R. l. 1. p. 226. refu • eth.

Ans. Well then Mr. H. denies the conclusion; then both a Ministerial Church, and a Church of Redeemed, meeting to partake of Ordinances, have their part here: Ergo, women have their part here.

2. If a Church in both s • nses be here understood when all the Officers turn grievous Wolves, Socinians, Papists, Familists, such as say they are Apostles, and do li • ; then

1. Must the people that are stumbled complain to themselves. This is not just, to make the complaining party (saith M. H.) judge. What if they unjustly complain, and say their officers are Presbyterial and Prelatical, and are Legal Preachers, and preach neither Christ nor Free-grace, then hath Christ ordained them whose lips preserve not knowledge, to be the only judging and first Church, which hath power to excommunicate, to be the first and only Judges-of sound Doctrine, and Heresy in officers. And suppose the Church of people and officers be here firstly understood; we cannot complain of the Familist people (of which there were too many in N • E.) to the Elders, for the same reason.

2. Nor is it true, that people and Elders (the people must in judging be first, by Mr. H.) have their power, parts and place in this work, for all Elders and people have equally a decisive voice, except women, and children, and se • vants; and by what reason they want votes, a reason 〈◊〉 yet is not heard of.

3. There is no reason that binding and loosing may be transacted by only a power of judgment in people, for then a power of office is accidental to binding and loosing, how then can a society with both power of judgment and of office be understood here firstly? as Mr. H. saith. Therefore I ask a reason, why officers, who are mere adjuncts, such a • come in at the by, and as latter in nature, power, and operation to the visible Church, should have any hand in binding and loosing, since all officers are made and unmade, ordained and cast out by the male-Church, by this way?

4. Nor can the officers bind and loose as officers, nor hath Christ given this power to the officers as officers, by this way of our Brethren. For they say,

1. That the Keys were given to Peter, Mat. 16. as to a believer, not as to an officer.

2. Officers to them are but adjuncts of the visible Church, and the Keys are given to the visible Church before they have officers, and the people may make and excommunicate them.

3. Here is strange work! the Keys were not given to Peter as an officer, but as a believer, and yet he useth the Keys as an officer.

4. The Church is not made Ministerial by us, without the body exclusively wholly (for Christ's Government is voluntary) nor ought any new thing to be concluded in our Assemblies, while the people hear of it: for if the Romans used rogare & suadere legem, and obtain the consent of the people thereunto, far more are they not to be acknowledged as Church-laws, that are to be obtruded upon the godly against their will and knowledge; and much more if they be against the Word of God, and former godly acts with consent agreed unto by the Church; that is, whether the people consent or not, but yet without the body, whether they exercise acts of jurisdiction or not, for no act of jurisdiction is due to them; and to exclude the consent of women, no less interested in practice of conscience than men, is to be Lord's of their faith.

Mr. H. The sixth argument refers to former proofs, &c.

Ans. And Mr. R. refers to former Replies.

Mr. H. Its evidently false, that there can be no complaint to a multitude; for complaints may be made to a Parliament.

Ans. How can complaints be made to ten thousand of the Church of Jerusalem, for that Church, as Mr. H. grants, pag. 128, 129. met in sundry places, not in one: No Parliament or Judicature consisteth of such a number. We cannot complain to the many Churches of Galatia of their wicked tenet of Justification by Works, for they are scattered in divers societies, and its unlawful (say our Brethren) to meet in their officers to exercise jurisdiction.

Mr. H. Arg. 8. The house of Chloe complained to Paul. 2. Paul gives rules about the Elders receiving of complaints.

Ans. That house complained to Paul, because his Apostolic Authority might have been helpful, but they might have complained to any of the Church of Corinth. Paul advises Titus to hear complaints, to prepare them for the Church. 3. If the people must consent tacitly to the censures, before they be dispensed they must hear the complaints.

Ans. Paul gives rules and directions to Timothy, 1 Tim. 5. 19. v. 1. and Titus, cap. 2. as to pastors, not as to believers, concerning the manner of receiving complaints, nor is there in Scripture, Precept, Promise or practice of believers to receive complaints, we are surer than our Brethren; and its safer to expound thi, Tell the Church, that is, Tell Timothy and the Elders; then, Tell the Church, that is, Tell any member of the Church at Co • inth, i. e. Tell any woman, or servant, for they are as essentially members as Timothy or any of the Elders: 2. and must join their consent to censures, because members must hear the scandals, because they must tacitly consent before censures be dispensed, it follows not that members must be told; for the tacit consent of women is requisite, for they may be scandalized or edified by the good or evil dispensing of censures as well as men.

2. They may not converse with excommunicate persons more than men.

3. Their consciences must not be Lorded over more than the consciences of men, in the dispensing of censures.

4. They must have a vote tacit or formal in choosing of a Pastor, and must not take him blindly; and complaints to women, sons, servants, yea, and the precepts of withdrawing, Rom. 16. 17. 1 Cor. 5. 6, 10. 2 Th • ss. 3 14. 2 Tim. 3. 5. Tit. 3. 10. John. 10. 11. oblige the consciences of women, sons and servants, then women may receive witness against Elders; as well as Timothy, 1 Tim. 5. 19 20. but with such qualifications and limitations. For Mr H. maintains this connection, Complaints may be made unto the Church (Tell the Church, Mat. 18.) to all, without whose tacit consent there can be no proceeding to excommunication. But without women's consent there is no Excommunication, no Admission, no Election, Responde it a, vol non.

Mr. H. The people may censure heretical Elders in an Island.

Ans. So they may in justa tutela aeterna salutis, but not by the power of the Keys.

2. And so may the Elders, remaining godly and sound, remove with the Tabernable and Candlestick from a people in an Island, if they dance to the golden Calf, and be incorrigible: Yea, if the Elders and men in an Island turn Familists, and the women, sons, servants remain sound, Let Mr. H. show what the sounder part of the Church may do. And though women be forbidden authoritatively to teach in the Church, 1 Tim. 2. 7. 1 Cor. 14. and publicly, yet they may teach the younger women, Tit 2. 2, 3. give a seasonable rebuke and counsel to men, 2 Sam. 20. 16, 17. 1 Sam 25. 23, 24, 32, 33. and a woman a sister is to labor to gain a sister, by Matth. 18. and that in a Church-way; and women, as other Church-members, are to teach, exhort, warn, according to their place, as well as men, Col. 3. 16. Rom. 15. 14. 1 Thess. 5. 14. Heb. 3. 13 & 20. 25. Let M. H. teach us how their faith is included in the men in these duties, in consenting that a savoury man, not an Heretic, be their pastor.

Mr. H. Arg. 9. That Church is here understood to whom the Keys are given, Mat. 16. but they are given only to a Classical Church. Ans. The minor is barely affirmed.

Ans. My Argument is divided: The minor is not barely affirmed. The Keys are given to Peter, as representing Elders and Apostles, to whom Christ saith, John 20. Whose sins ye forgive, they are forgiven; to whom he said, As my Father sent me, so I send you: but this official sending is most undue to the people; and its equivalent to that Mat. 28. Go, teach and baptize. But Christ said not to unofficed Brethren, Receive the holy Ghost; Whose sins ye forgive, &c. Go, teach and baptize. So Cyprian.

Mr. H. Arg. 10. of Mr. R. The only apparent argument against this interpretation is weak, and therefore this sense hath ne strength.

Ans. Both parts fail: 1. There may be other Reasons given. 2. It doth not follow, that the different sense is clear, because many better Reasons haply may be rendered, than were alleged. Mr. Ball according to his sagacity and sharpness of dispute, seeketh far and wide where to find, where the word Church noteth only the Elders, but all cometh to this, One may suppose such a sense.

Ans. 1. Mr. H. denies the Antecedent and the Consequence, and proves both to be false with the same Argument, Because many better Reasons may haply be given; which is bad Logic: for other Reasons may be given (and Separatists, Morellius, Anabaptists, and Prelatical men have besieged, but never taken in this Text) but if this be the only seeming and apparent reason given for popular jurisdiction, yea or that can be given, the consequence is not proved by Mr. H. his Adverb haply, which implies No as well as I. And when Mr. R. saith, the Reasons against our sense are Sophisms, its not an answer to say, I. but stronger arguments haply may be rendered by others, such as never were alleged before. What if one should say stronger Reasons and clearer Scriptures yet than ever have been alleged, may haply be rendered for unwritten Traditions, Image worship, Praying to the Dead? Papists should be little stronger than they are.

2. The Argument is but this:

If the word Church in all the Scriptures so often mentioned, be never taken for the Elders only, it a strong suspicion it is not so taken in this place, Matth. 18. But the word Church—is such.

1. The major is denied. All the judiciou • Interpreters find a word only in this sense in this place, and that it cannot bear sense according to the analogy of faith, but in this sense only, as scope, matter and circumstances of the place enforce; and yet the same word must be otherwise taken in many other places: And when all is done, the conclusion of the apparent reason amounts but to a suspicion; and Mr. H. of his own adds the qualification of strong suspicion, and Mr. R hath leave upon better grounds to add, that his own suspicion is weak.

Mr. H. wrongs that eminently learned and godly man, Mr. Ball, who proves the Elders here must be meant, and no other Church, and Mr. H. touches not with one finger his reasons.

2. I retort the Argument. If the word Church of the Redeemed meet to partake of all Ordinances, Word, Seals, Censures, &c. often mentioned in Scripture, be never taken for Brethren only, excluding believing women, sons come to age of 15 or 16 years, which are the far larger number of the Redeemed, confederate, visible Church, called, sanctified, as 1 Cor. 1. 1. 2 Cor. 1. 1. Eph. 1. 1. Col. 1. 2. 1 Thess. 1. 1. 2 Thess 1. 1, &c. then can it not be so taken, Mat. 18. and the Assumption must be as strong, That the word Church in this sense is destitute of the least loving look of the allowance of any Text, that might be a second in the field; as is the Rhetorication, in place of Disputation of Mr. H. therefore we desire a parallel place for the acception o • the word Church or only male-Church of Redeemed meeting for all Ordinances.

Mr. H. answers not, when he tells us, that Women for their sex, and children for want of the exercise of understanding, are excluded from governing.

Ans. That is another question, whether they be excluded from governing from this, what is the notation of the word Church, Mat. 18. and whether women, children come to age, and servants, be not essential parts, and the far larger part of the Church of believors, fed, redeemed, of the Church which Chr • st hath instituted in the Gospel —that is, (saith the Discipline of N. E.) of a combination of faithful godly persons, meeting for that end, to partake of all the Ordinances of God in one place-built on the Rock, Mat. 16. If such a signification of the word Church be not in all the Scripture, is not this to have in the bag a stone & a stone, when we say, Tell the Church—and if he hear not the Church, Mat. 18. is the Church-meeting in one place for hearing the Word, receiving the seals, professing the faith of Peter built upon the Rock, which essentially includes women, aged children, servants, but yet Tell the Church, is not Tell the women, aged children and servants, for they are excluded from governing (say they) true, but they are not excluded from being members of the Church, Mat. 18. which in its proper signification (as our Brethren say) signifieth only this redeemed visible Church built on the rock meeting in one place, &c.

3. The word Church, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , must in Scripture be restricted to the subject matter and the end, wherefore the convention is instituted; and seldom is it taken, but it excludes some such, as Act. 19. it cannot signify the Church of Christ, but a civil tumultuary meeting. The town Clerk dismissed the Church.

2. Eph. 5. 26. Christ loved his Church, and gave himself for her. The Church there is such a Catholic body visible, or invisible, as he shall present without spot or wrinkle, and excludeth rotten members professors, as Magus, who are no more but visible members, but includeth all real Saints, Men, Women, Infants, Jews, Gentiles, &c.

3. It notes these who convene in the same place to be fed with Word, Seals, Censures, Act. 11. 26. a whole year they assemble with the Church, 1 Cor. 14 4. he that prophecieth, edifieth the Church. It must exclude Infants, who though members of the visible Church, yet cannot be edified by prophesying: but cannot but include Women, more aged children and servants: and say there were but one place in all the World, where the Church came together for the hearing of the Word, receiving of the Lord's Supper, that one place were sufficient to teach what the word Church notes in that place. And so here, Mat. 18. is the like case.

4. Tell the Church must be, tell the Church that hath power to bind and loose on earth, and which if the offender hear not, he must be declared a heathen; but this is neither women, children, nor servants, by our Brethren.

2. The binding and loosing here is to be expounded of the specific acts of office, never given to any by other Scriptures, but only to officers, 2 Thes. 5. 12, 14. Luke 10. 16. Heb. 13. 17. 1 Tim. 4. 14. 1 Tim. 5. 17, 20. Act, 20. 28. Rom. 12. 7, 8. Mat. 16. 17. 1 Pet. 5. 1, 2. Tit. 2. 5. John 21. 15. Ephes. 4. 11, 12. Is. 6. 5. Ier. 3. 15.

5. Tell the Church, if he hear not the Church: shall be by us gladly expounded of both Rulers and Professors in their own kind.

1. Let him be to thee as a Heathen, that is, to the whole Church, women and servants, by withdrawing from his company. Pu • ge out, all ye who have been puffed up and mourned not, and such were women, and so men also to whom he writeth. 1 Cor. 1. 1. And women were a part of the lump in danger to be infected; and upon that hazard were not to eat & drink with an excommunicated man, 1 Cor. 5. 6, 12. and were not to be mixed, but to eschew scandalous persons, 2 This. 3. 14 Rom. 16. 17. nor receive such a man unto their house, nor bid him God speed, 2 John 10. 11. Tit. 3. 10. which the women were to do one way, and the Elders another way. So 2 Cor. 2. 7. Ye ought rather to forgive him, and comfort him. Sure women, children of age, and servants, to whom he writes, were to forgive, in their way, for to them he determined to come, 2 Cor. 1. 15. They were a part of his rejoicing. v. 14. they were anointed, established, sealed by the Spirit, v. 21, 22. as well as the men and Elders. And say the word of confirming their love, were an authoritative word, as it is; Yet it is so, as applied to the Elders, not as applied to women. As the same word of Worshipping relating to Jehovah is a religious adoring, relating to David is civil reverence, 1 Chr. • 9. 21. The people bowed their heads, & worshipped the Lord and the King, 1 Sam. 12. 18 All the people greatly feared the Lord and Samuel. Though they were two really distinct actions. And this cannot be denied by Mr. H. who gives to the Elders an official power of jurisdiction, to the Brethren a judicial power of judgment; Ergo, they excommunicate not one and the same way.

6. Yes, and Paul writes to Timothy, not as to a Christian simply, but as to a Pastor representing the company of Elders (as Christ speaks to Peter, Mat. 16.) as to a Pastor to take heed to Doctrine and reading, 1 Tim. 4. 14, 16. What Widows, 1 Tim 5. 9. What Watchmen, 1 Tim. 3. 1, 2. 2 Tim. 2. 2. 1 Tim. 5. 17, 22. What Deacons, 1 Tim. 3. 10, 11. there should be in the Church. How he should rebuke, preach. Now this way the people should be warned, how to preach, how to rebuke, not to lay on hands suddenly, to save themselves and others by preaching, if they have a joint power of ruling with officers. It is true he writes to Timothy as to a Christian, to flee the lusts of you h • , but in order to the Ministry, that he may be an example to the flock, 2 Tim. 2. otherwise women, children come to age, servants, are to flee lusts, and to follow righteousness, faith, love, peace, &c. yet they are to exercise no jurisdiction.

7. Tell the Church, cannot bear this, as Mr. H. would say, tell first the Church of Officers and people, when the officers are too ordinarily grievous wolves, seducers, blind guides, Idol-shepherds, Act. 20. 29. Mat. 7. 15. 2 Pet. 2. 1, 2. 1 John 4. 1. Rev. 2. 14 20. Tit 3. 10. Ier. 23. 9, 15. Ier. 14. 14, 15. Isa. 56. 10, 11. Mich. 3. 5, 6. Zach 11. 8, 15, 16. Then must the keys and power of binding and loosing be firstly in the people, not in the officers who are separable adjuncts (as our brethren say) the garments of the Church, not parts of the Church, as garments are not parts of a man.

Lastly, Mr. H. cannot build his new house, but by raising the foundation stones of all our worthy Protestant Divines, and Fathers, who prove that the Pope should hear the general Council from Matth. 18. So Chrysost. hom. 85. in John. Orig. hom. 7. in Ezek. August Ssrm. 49. de ver. domini. Cyprian. Jewel Apolo. c. 8. div. 2. page 55. Tho. Mort. Appel. Protest. l. 4. c. 2. sect. 8. page 451. 452. Aene. Sylv. in Gest. Conc. Basil. fol. 5. 51. Rom. Pont. non audist Eccles. Christum non audiet. And Riv. Catho. Ortho. To 1. Tract. 1. q. 8. Papists that are sounder, as Gerson, Almain, Occum, Cusanus, Contaren •• s, Ca • etanus, Ferus, Toletus, Menochius, Maldonatus, &c. say the Pope is a Brother, and ought to hear the Church.

Mr. H. The Angel of the Church of Ephesus stands for the whole Church. saith Mr. R.

Ans. See how strangely shall that sound, To the Angel of the Church of Ephesus, i. e. To the Church of the Church of Ephesus.

Ans. This is a poor consequence, it is known there are often two Tropes in one word. The word Angel being put for many Angels, as Didoclavius and other learned Authors from Psal. 34 7. prove. And then these many overseers are put for the Church, and rebuked in the people, and the people in them. When an Embassador speaks to the Parliament, he speaks to England, and when he speaks to the Speaker, he speaks to the Parliament. Will it follow, the Embassador speaks to England of England? A headless conceit, and such quirks make a cause to be suspected; so when one offended tells the Church, he but tells the brethren of the Church; and this is the Church of the Church. And if women, sons, servants be excluded, as Mr. H. excludes them, then he tells the Church of the Church.

Mr. Parker, though not far from our Brethren's way, hath said the very same; for which Mr. H. refuteth Mr. R. And if Mr. Parker shows my mind in that, when Mr. H. refutes therein M. Parker, I yield; but he contradicts Mr. Parker.

Mr. H. It is said Acts 18. 22. Paul saluted the Church at Jerusalem, it cannot be thought in reason, that the Elders only were saluted; because the scope of Paul was to confirm the hearts of the Disciples, and therefore had an eye to the weakest, and those that wanted his sweet refreshing, who heard of his arrival, and assembled to give comfortable entertainment to him, and to be comforted by him.

Ans. The Argument must then be thus, if any: Paul saluted and kissed (for so is the original word) as many as he confirmed and encouraged in the way of grace at Jerusalem. But he confirmed in that way, all and everyone, man, woman, servants, rich, poor; Ergo, he kissed them all, and saluted them all. Let Mr. H. see to the conclusion, it is all his own.

2. The Argument is not brought to prove that the word Church there noteth precisely only the Elders. Nor does Mr. R. allege it upon that account precisely; but that the word Church may note some eminent professors, and note a Church of all, men, women, children, yea the thousands who meet in sundry places, by the grant of Mr. H. came not out to meet Paul, and were saluted of him; for to be saluted, was but a matter of courtesy, though Christian, but to be comforted and confirmed in the faith is another thing.

Mr. H. The word Church in the Hebrew and Greek used by the Septuagint, notes the Rulers of the Church, not always the body; and it is granted without any hurt to our cause.

Ans. Since the signification of words, and of the word Church, as Moses and the Prophets use them, is frequently followed in the New Testament by the Evangelists and Apostles; it is clear, our Savior, Mat. 18. departed not from the received signification of the words in the Old Testament used by the Septuagint. And so the word, Tell the Church, hath a better warrant to be expounded. Tell the Rulers, then, tell all the faithful men, women, children, and servants; therefore the suspicion is so strong, as Mr. H. said, that there is no parallel Text for this signification of a male-Church excluding women and officers, who may excommunicate all officers; and whereas he so much contends for the signification of the word Church, Let him answer what is meant there, 1 Cor. 11. 16. If any man seem to be contentious, we have no such custom, neither the Churches of Christ. If the meaning be, that the congregations meeting in the same place, contend not among themselves; what if they so should do? who should right them, by our Brethren's way? and if that be the Church that meets in one place only, when shall the Church Catholic which Christ loved, and gave himself for, meet? not until the day of Judgment? and did the Brethren testify of the charity of Gaius, 2 John. 16 before the Church, was that in the convened together congregation? or was it not before the men of the Church? And 1 Cor. 11. When ye 〈◊〉 together to the Church, Was not this to the meeting of men and women, except women be debarred from the Lord's Supper? And when Saul made havoc of the Church, he must persecute only the binding and loosing Church; but the Scripture saith, he persecuted both men and women, Act. 8. 3. & 9. 2.

Mr. H. Arg 11. The Church which the Plaintiff must tell, is to admonish publicly the offender. But this is the Church of Elders, 1. Thes, 5. 12. 13. 1 Tim. 5. 20. Luk. 10. 16. for they only are to receive public complaints, Tit. 1. 13. 1 Tim. 5. 19. 2 Tim. 4. 2.

Ans. Complaints are to be given to the Elders, that they may prepare them for the congregation, and lend the action. T ••• efore the incestuous Corinthian 〈◊〉 said to be r •… of many, and so judged of many, not by the judgment only of discration; for so they might judge these that were without, but legally.

Ans. Mr. H. answers not one word of Scripture for telling the complaints to the Elders. Christ saith, Tell the Church, that is, tell all the visible Saints, say our Brethren.

2. That the incestuous Corinthian was rebuked legally of many, that is, of the Elders and Brethren, or Male-Church only, that is said, not proved. If we speak of judging by the judgment of discretion, he was rebuked of Elders, Brethren, Women, aged Children, Servants, for it concerned them in conscience to have knowledge of it, and to yield to withdraw from him, and to forgive him, upon his repentance to join with him, else their obedience must be blind.

2. The minor is false.

1. For though they judge Heathen with the judgment of discretion, it follows not, that therefore Brethren, Women, aged Children, and Servants should not also judge an excommunicate person by the same judgment.

2. The probation is faulty, for I appeal to the conscience of our Brethren, whether there be not sundry kinds of judgment of discretion, and whether Church-members have not one kind of judgment of discretion toward the excommunicate man, who is now under a medicinal Church-cure, and another judgment of discretion toward them that are without, and were never members.

Mr. H. to Mr. R. his twelfth Argument, It hath received an 〈◊〉 out of a mistake, because neither women alone, nor children will make a Church, nor have any public power put into their hands for that purpose.

Ans. I never said in any Argument, that women and children there alone ma • e a Church, nor spake I of women's ruling there: But yet I say, women, children of years of discretion, serva •• s being the Lord's freemen and professing the faith.

Arg. 1. The essential parts and largest part of the Congregation •… Church of Believers, professing the faith of Peter built upon the rock, Mat. 18. ••• ting every Lord's day to partake of all the Ordinances; and therefore if the Church, Mat. 16. signify such a Church 〈◊〉 • hat which you say, women and such children and servants must especially be understood as parts thereof, under the name of the Church, tell the Church, and if so, the Church to which we complain, doth not bind and loose by your own grant.

2. What ground is there in the Word, that the Brethren alone, because men should, only be mooned by the name of the instituted Church in the Gospel, or the 〈◊〉 Church of Believers, partakers of all the ordinances, excluding women and such children and servants, since there 〈◊〉 neither made nor female, bound nor free to be regarded in the condtion of believing visible Saints? Gal. 3. 28. 〈◊〉 9. 14. 1 Cor. 7. 21, 22. So is not this very like to the respect of persons condemned by the Apostle I •… , ch. 2, 3, 4, 5. when brethren because of their sex, and heads of families must be the only Church of believers, built upon the rock, the Body of Christ, the Kingdom of Christ, the Redeemed of God, partakers of all the precious ordinances, and the only visible Church above all the officers, women, children, servants?

3. Nor hath such a Church of only few, any such power put in their hand, and so to say, because it is said, Tell the Church, except Mr. H. prove them to be the governing Church above the Officers, is to beg the question; for Mr. Cotton and Mr. Burroughs say, without officers the brethren can exercise n • jurisdiction, no excommunication, one of the highest acts of rude in the Church; they have nothing without the officers (saith Mr. Burroughs) but brotherly admonition, no jurisdiction. And Mr. H. is to give a parallel place in old and New Testament if he hear not the Church, id est, the male-Church of Brethren, let him be cast out.

Mr. H. Arg. 13. Not only the Church must convene to worship God in Spirit and Truth, but that they bind and loose by the Pastoral Spirit of Paul, and officers in their convention.

Ans. The Church met hath power to execute all acts of discipline, as well as doctrine.

2. The Church of Corinth is blamed, because without the knowledge of Paul, or his authority (as they ought to have done) they did not excommunicate the incestuous person, only for their encouragement, he expresseth his consent, and the concurrence of his spirit.

Ans. That the Church of Believers without the pastoral spirit and authority of Paul or any other officer, and excluding the tacit consent of women, children of age, and believing servants, could exercise all acts of Discipline and Doctrine, that is, of pastoral preaching, destroys Mr. H. his principles; for who can preach but sent Pastors? Rom. 10. 14. not unofficed brethren. And as to the point of Jurisdiction, Mr. Cotton and Mr. Burroughs, with me, deny it, and Mr. H. nakedly saith it. That the Church of Corinth was rebuked for not excommunicating the man, is true: But 1. what means he by the Church rebuked?

1. All that were rebuked must be the Church; can Mr. H. deny but women, children of years, servants, were rebuked, as those who were puffed up, and mourned not? ver. 1, 2.

2. And as those who were a part, and the largest part of the lump, that is, of the body of the people in danger to be leavened with that scandal, ver. 6.

3. As those who were to keep the feast (Christ being sacrificed for them) With sincerity, ver. 8.

4. As those who should not familiarly converse with scandalous fornicators, ver. 11. but all of them were to judge, and put away the wicked person from among them, ver. 13. in a way suitable to their place, that is, the officers with Paul's Spirit, or a pastoral authority like unto it, the brethren, women, children of age, and servants, professing the faith in their way, by consenting, and by the judgment of discretion so far as belonged to their practice in withdrawing from the delinquent. 2. Not did I deny that the Church of Corinth should have excommunicated the man before Paul wrote to them, but that they should have done it without Paul's knowledge, is only said, not proved; and that any save officers, and such as were endued with such a pastoral spirit as was in Paul, could have done it, is only asserted by Mr. H. his sole word; and this answer insinuates, that the only male-Church did it, and they needed not any pastoral spirit; only Paul addeth ex superabundanti his encouraging consent, whereas the work might have been done without officers by this new male-jurisdiction, which is contradicted by Mr. Cotton, and not owned by the Scripture.

LIB. III. CHAP. I.

T Here is a double Authority, one Supreme and Monarchical only in Christ, and another Subordinate and Delegate; which 〈◊〉 a Right given by Commission from Christ to fit person • , to act i • his House according to his order. By Right, is meant jus, or 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , which according to God, certain persons possess in their external administrations issuing from such special relations, unto which they are called by Christ. 2. Its given to 〈◊〉 persons who are capable to receive this power, not to women, children, • admen, &c. Therefore let the Reader take notice of that, as not worthy to be considered. If power be in the Church of believers, then women and children may exercise it, 〈◊〉 Mr. Ball, Mr. R. for they are not fit persons appointed by Christ to manage this power. Lastly, they must act according to God's order. The whole Church is an Army terrible with Banners, but the parts do fight in their own order: The power is in the whole firstly, but each part knows his rank; the officers in their part, order and manner, the members in theirs. The whole acts some things immediately, some things mediately.

Ans. A Mona • chical power in Christ we know, and authority delegate of Jurisdiction in the Ambassadors and Officers, who are called 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , 1 Tim. 5. 17. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , 1 Thess. 5. 12. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , Heb. 13. 17. Rulers we know: but that the people or Church of believers especially separated from officers, are called Rulers, or endued with any delegate power over we know not whom, we read not in Scripture.

2. By the Keys he must mean both the Keys of Knowledge and of Jurisdiction: But what Scripture gives the pastoral Key to unofficed Brethren? I do not know a right given to fit persons, without any mentioning of the first subject, the Church of confederate Saints, as Mr. H. which includes women, children of age, servants, (for these are fit persons to be members of the Church built on the Rock) and of the Church of Believers) Ergo, they are fit persons, and as fit, some of them, to wit, children of years of discretion, and believing servants, as the Brethren; for neither Sex, nor want of understanding, nor distemper of judgment, the three causes of unfitness owned by Mr. H. can render them more uncapable than the brethren: yea, the brethren being often unlettered Tradesmen, and many of them dull and rude, though believers, are most unfit persons to judge of sound and unsound Doctrine, and of controverted points, whether the Pastors teach perverse things, Acts 20. 29. hold the doctrine of Balaam, Rev. 2. 13. or not; and yet by Mr. H. they are the only, and none but they are to judge and try the learning, ability of Pastors, unsoundness in Socinian, Antinomian, Popish, Arminian, &c. Tenets, though they know no more the Tongues, Arts nor Sciences, than some Priests who can scarce read the Mass-book in Latin, nor understand the Languge thereof; and they only have power to depose them all for Ignorance and Heresy.

2. As for women, they are redeemed, built on the Rock, and have a voice tacit, or no, let Mr. Hooker say.

1. To choose or refuse Officers, 1. They are of the sheep that can discern the voice of Christ in sent Pastors, Joh. 9 and this is Mr. H. his argument to prove that the people should call their own pastors, as hereafttr he saith.

2. Women must have a vote in admission of members, which Mr. H. calls potestatem judicii, a power of judging; for they are not to own as Church members, and to rehuke, and tell the Church, and to gain brethren and sisters blindly; they, by the judgment of discretion, if not by more, according to Mr. H. must have some hand in this. Women are to try, by the judgment of discretion, the spirits of Teachers, whether Antichristian or not, whether they be of God, or no, and to hold what is good, as men, 1 John. 4. 1. 1 Thess. 5. 21. Ergo, they must try both men and doctrines; and must, as was said, withdraw from the unsound and scandalous: therefore what Mr. Ball and Mr. R. say touching them, must be considered, If the power be in the whole Church firstly, then must the power of the Keys be in all the members firstly also, if Logic have place; and if it be in all, then its in women: How came it to women? show the Scripture. And whereas Mr. H. saith, The whole Church is terrible as an Army with Banners, it saith, the Church ruling and conquering by the Keys both of Knowledge and Jurisdiction, is made up of ruled commanders, and ruled soldiers, not of a number of only brethren; and soldiery acts of ruling (for of the Church that beareth the Keys Mr. H. must now speak) in women Mr. R. would know: for that terribleness is in acts of Discipline, not a little: if all be terrible, then also women. Your homogeneous Church, which only, and none but they, by Mr. H. his doctrine, may lift a Banner against all the officers, and depose and excommunicate them every man: But Mr. Cotton saith to this, What haste brother Mr. H?

Mr. H. This power is either a power of many when combined, and this is either a power—

Of judging, judicii; or of donation:

Or its power in one a power of Office:

The power of judgment the whole hath, and doth use in admissions and excommunication: the same pow • r that takes in must cast out.

Ans. The distinction of power of Office or Order in one who is a Pastor, and of Jurisdiction in many in a Presbytery, is warranted by Scripture.

But for the power of judging, and of giving of power, potest as donationis, to others to preach and administer the seals, in the people who have no power themselves, it hath neither the countenance of Scripture nor Reason, and is but a device of Merellius holden by Mr. H.

Calvin saith, The thing before judged was cleared to the people. Pet. Martyr, Pareus, and others, say well, Excommunication would not be done nisi plebe consentiente, without the consent of the people; which includes women and servants, over whose consciences, faith and practice, Rulers are not to domineer, more than over the consciences of men. Cyprian by the plebs and universa fraternitas, the people and fraternity, understands the whole redeemed flock, men and women. Its true, Cyprian threatens some Presbyters, that if they go on in their scandalous way, they should give an account to the people, apud plebem universalem; and writes to some that desired to be reconciled to the Church of Carthage, All things shall be examined, you the people being present. But judging there, as frequently with Cyprian, is no authoritative judging given to the people. He who answers to Pamelius in his learned Annotations, gives no more to the people, but the knowledge of Church-affairs: About Anno 70. as Eusebius saith, Simeon the son of Cleophas is chosen in the room of James, all the disciples consenting. The Council of Carthage, Anno 420. Let not a Bishop ordain any Clergy-man without an Assembly of the Clergy, and let him seek the people's consent, connivance and testimony.

So was Cornelius made Bishop of Rome by the Authority of God and of the Clergy, and by the suffrages of the people. Our Divines, Bucerus, Calvin, Bucanus, Tilenus, Beza, Virttut, give consenting, and in some cases correcting, not judicial power sure, but which is great enough, a Negative consent for eschewing of a Schism. And the Professors of Leyden, Urfine, Pareus, Junius, give the people a vote, a consent in Excommunication: and this cannot exclude women who are offended, when the whole Church is offended. The times of Ambrose did witness more pride in the Clergy, who began to do all without the people.

Chemnitz, Daneus, the Confession of Bohemià, of Helvetia, the Synod of Middleburgh, the Synod of Tylleburgh in Nassovia, Anno 1582. teach, That the whole Church with consent of all did excommunicate, but the judging Authority is in the Eldership.

Mr. H. The power of election is especially to be attended by the end, as a corporation hath power to choose a Major, and to give him power. 3. The safety of the whole is to be attended, and that is to submit one to another, and be rebuked one by another.

Ans. Papists prove. the Pope and Prelates from such have their warrant, people's choosing of their Pastor is from the rule of the Word, not from civil corporation, from which it differs.

1. The people makes one of no King to be a King, and does not only choose him, 2 Chron. 29 22. the people kinged Solomon; S • ul, 1 Sam. 11. 15. David, 1 Chron. 12. 38. but the choice of the people doth not make an officer, but the laying on of the hands, or ordination of the Presbytery doth that, 1 Tim. 4. 14. 2 Tim. 2. 2. Tit. 1. 5. Act. 6. 6.

2. The Corporation civil may limit the Major in regard of time, for a year, and no longer: 2. they may make him half a Tyrant, a Dictator, and absolute, or give him less power, that he shall rule none but with the consent of 12 Ass • ssors; but the people may not make him a Pastor for a year, and then lay him aside for no fault, as a Major is unofficed; nor may they limit him so as he shall not preach in season and out of season, but by the consent of 12 men.

3. The Corporation may erect itself in a Kingdom or Commonwealth, and may create Consuls, Dictators, Praetors, Tribunos Plebis, &c. as may most serve for the safety and peace of this State: but the Church may bring in no new officers, but those appointed by Christ; nor may they alter the government, and metamorphose it into another than that which is according to the pattern shown in the Mount.

4. Women and servants have no vote in choosing or creating Rulers, but since they are to be fed, and this concerns their conscience, it is not so here in the Church; though men may domineer over the civil power of women, yet not over their faith. If some acts were to be performed by a King or Major, without the skill & knowledge of counsellors, and of which the counsellors are as ignorant as the Church of believers ordinarily are of Tongues and Controversies, it might well be said, that the Wisdom of God never appointed such counsellors, and for such an end, as to appoint such men to be counsellors, and such to create Pastors; and therefore its a naughty Argument taken from a Civil Corporation, and Popish. From a worldly Monarchy, Papists prove their Monarchy in the Church. Yea, this Argument proves,

1. That Pastors as Pastors have no warrant by any Institution of Christ, to try, ordain, and lay on hands upon Pastors: for 1. that which is to be done according to Divine I • stitution by a company of visible believers, to whom Christ hath committed the power of the Keys, as to the first and prime subject, before officers be created, that cannot be done by officers, as having the power of these Keys.

2. So visible saints and women, as well, yea, and by better right, might appoint Elders, i. e. choose and elect them in every City, then Titus could do; yea. Tit. 1. 5. 〈◊〉 Tim. 〈◊〉 . 22. 〈◊〉 b • tter right then Timothy: as for the place Eph. 5. 21. wh •• h Mr. H. had no leisure to cite, everyone submit unto another, what Logic is here? is every Woma • a Church to another? for it is not spoken of Church-subj • ction, but as Ambrose, of the subjection of humility. Mr. R Boide, Zanchius, of t • e subjection in families, and Common-wealths, as of the Wife to the Husband, the Children to the Parents, of the subjection of L • ve, as Calvin and Beza. Hieronymus, poni • general • principium politiae Christiana. So Caj • tan. Paul Baines saith, it is the submission of humility, which the highest owe to the lowest, the husband to the wife; is not every woman the daughter to submit to the mother? is not this a busing of Scripture? may not the father & the son be in divers congregations? and though it were meant of Church subjection, owe not I Church-subjection to these of another congregation, as to these of my own? and should Mr. H. limit the sense of the Holy Ghost to one single congregation, i. e. submit only to these of your own congregation?

Mr. H. The power of rebuking pertains to all, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , to rebuke, Mat. 18. 15. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , to judge, 1 Cor. 5. 1 • . both which express acts of proceeding in a judicial way, the whole may censure the part; they are superior, as officers, when they keep the rule, but inferior, as members, and in submission, when they break the rule.

Ans. There is little Logic in dividing the power of private judging, which everyone owe to another (no man is a Church to his brother) into a power of rebuking, and a power of Church-judging; for that 1 Cor. 5. 12. is the Church-judging by excommunication: so the face is where the neck should be.

2. The rebuking, Mat. 18. 15. is indeed in order to Church-rebuking, and to excommunication; yea, to rebuke is a duty of the law of nature, Lev. 19. 17. Ps. 141. 5. but by Mr. H. his way, I must rebuke none but offenders of my own congregation. May I not then rebuke, but hate brethren of another congregation? for so Moses expoundeth Lev. 19. 17.

3. If to rebuke be a judicial Church-rebuking; I pray you, may not women rebuke women and men both, and labor to gain them, if they trespass, and to tell the Church? sure, Abigail, Pilate's Wife, Sarah, and other godly women did rebuke, counsel, and complain of offenses, and they are not exempted from this duty of the law of nature. Doth not then M. H. clothe women with a Church-power? and why but as Jezebel and wanton widows are censurable, Rev. 2. 20. 1 Tim. 2. 12. may they not rebuke? and it appears that a brother must forgive until seventy seven times (for upon this occasion Peter moves the question, Mat. 18. 15, 21, 22.) but not so, women, aged children, and servants, for they must be less apt to forgive then men.

3. If Mr. H. so much please himself in Dichotomies, why but to these two he might have added 2 Cor. 2. 7. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , to forgive, and 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , to comfort; and others also, as teaching, exhorting? all which cannot be taken from women, servants, aged children, except you ex • me them from the Law of Love. And howbeit the rebuker be the superior as he rebukes (which yet is not true in an unjust rebuker, for he is inferior) yet either too much shall be taken from, or too much given to godly women by Mr. H. his way.

Mr. H. objects, If the people should censure the Pastors, then there should be Pastors of Pastors, and the Sheep should be Shepherds, not the Sheep.

Ans. The consequence is feeble, because the people judge not as officers, but as members of the whole, to whom by virtue of the common Laws of combination they have subjected themselves to be ordered, for the common good.

Ans. Mr. H fathers not this argument upon me, nor upon any of ours, but Stapleton, Grego. de Valen. Toletus, Pererius, Esthius, and other Papists, who urge the like to exime their Clergy from being subject to civil powers. Own the Argument, for then the shepherd should be subject to the sheep, which is not absurd, in diverso causarum genere. But these who gave power as officers to excommunicate, are here ruled by such as have that power, and such, to wit, the people and flock, have that power, have the keys.

2. Are to edify by excommunication, 1 Cor. 5. 5. 2 Cor. 10. 8. 1 Tim. 1. 20.

3. The Rulers are to obey the people, as such, who watch for their souls, Heb. 13. 17.

4. Take heed that they perish not, and therefore must give warning and rebuke, lest these perish over whom they have the power of the rod that way. And so the people authoritatively watch for their shepherds, and the shepherds, to wit, all the officers must submit unto the sheep, the people, as being over them in the Lord, having the power of excommunication above their heads.

2. It is but a conceit, to say, that the brethren excommunicate not their pastors as if they were officers, for they excommunicate them, as having received the keys to use them against their Pastors, as the Church having authoritative power over their Pastors, as members of the Church; and it hath no sense to say, that the Church excommunicates, not as the Church, and contrary to Mat. 18. 17, 18. nor can members as members excommunicate; but saith he, the officers are not excommunicated as officers, but as members. Nor are any the most scandalous excommunicated as officers, or as saints, or as members, but as scandalous officers, or scandalous professors, or as rotten and leavening members corrupting the whole lump.

Mr. H. Suppose the members of a Class offend, the rest who censure them are not Pastors of Pastors to these whom they censure.

Ans. The whole watch for themselves, and rule, and govern themselves, as the Parliament do rule their own members. But it is non-sense to say that the sheep are in the Lord over the flock, for the Scripture saith the contrary, Heb. 13. 17. 1 Thes. 5. 12, 13. v. 7.

Mr. H. Suppose the Pastors turn Heretics, the ruling Elders with the rest consure them; here are the inferiors judging the superiors.

Ans. This is to beg the question, for if there be none to excommunicate the Pastors, but only the ruling Elder with the people, Christ committed not half a Key to any society. The Key of Ruling without the Key of Preaching is committed to no society on earth; and therefore not to the rul • ng Elder with the people • . If there be more teaching Pastors with the ruling Elders, then an heretical Pastor may be censured by the whole Judicature, and by the ruling Elders in Collegio, where he hath an equal vote with the teaching Pastor, and doth not as an inferior judge the teaching Elder, but as a collateral and joint Judge censure with the whole Judicature.

Mr. H. Its a staple Rule, No man by nature hath an Ecclesiastical power over another by constraint; one comes a Christian convert from China, to a Country or City where many Churches are, none of them can, by the rule of the Gospel, compel him to join with one more than another. He may freely choose what is most suitable to his heart, and may be most to promote his spiritual edification.

Ans. Neither Civil nor Ecclesiastic power here hath place. 1. This staple Rule (Mr. H. abounds with staple Rules which are much irregular) except it be proved by the Word, is a staple untruth. No man by Nature hath a spiritual power, either gift, office, or grace: But by Nature here is opposed to free consent. Children born in Abraham's house are without free consent members of that Church: Be it so, one congregation more than another cannot compel the China-convert to be a member of their congregation; but if he be baptized and profess, the godly Magistrate may compel him to hear the Word, and receive the Seals in the place he resides, so it be a sound Church. The Magistrate cannot compel him to faith and heart duties, but he may compel him to external profession; nor doth his being a member of this rather than of any other Church, make him a member of th • visible Church; nor is that anything but staple forgery: the • uler cannot compel a man to love his Neighbor, but he can c • mpel him to the external duties of love, and punish him if against love he beat or kill his Neighbor. He cannot compel any to the faith, but if one come to years desert his faith professed in baptism, both the Church and the Magistrate may punish him as a run away.

The Church cannot by carnal weapons (saith he) impose any Church-constitution, as Nature gives not this power Ecclesiastic: true, it is a free gift of God: So a civil Ruler (saith he) should not impose it, that is a poor consequence, he should impose all civil duties that are external, and which the man's baptism and profession ties him unto. What ever is done here (saith he) in the constitution of Churches, is done by an Ecclesiastic Rule, not by a Rule of policy. This yet is most weak. The Magistrate makes no rule of constitution of Churches, nor any Ecclesiastical Rule, as Mr. H. saith. But it follows not, therefore he cannot impose it, when it is made. The Magistrate makes not the hearing of the Gospel to be lawful; but it follows not, Ergo as the preserver of both Tables of the Law, he may not command Christian subjects to hear the Gospel: yea, to me its most probable, he may compel heathen people lawfully conquered to desist from Idolatry, blaspheming of Christ, and to hear the Gospel.

The man comes from China acknowledging God in all his ways, as Abraham left his Country, Gen. 12. if he be an Idolater, they should not lodge him, 2 John. 10. he comes not as indifferent to be married to this or this Church, or to none at all; as a man sins not if he marry none at all, 1 Cor. 7. but if he be a professor that joins to no Church, he lives scandalously; therefore the adequate cause of membership, or to this membership, is not mutual consent, as in marriage, but both parties are under a command to confess Christ before men; and its a selfish thing to make a man's own heart the Judge and Determiner of his membership, and not the Churches led by the Rule of the Word: and so the Church is obliged to receive him, and he is obliged to join a member, according to Cant. 1. 7, 8. Mat. 10. 32.

Mr. H. The power scattered in many, when they are voluntarily combined, they may give it to one, and this is a power of Office, and they may covenant to submit to him their united right. Hence it is more than plain, they may give a call and power to such and such to be Pastors, and yet themselves be no Pastors. Christ gave some to be Pastors, Ephes. 4. he furnishes men, 1 Corinth. 12. 28.

Ans. Where is Mr. H. his Logic now? Why made he not once a Syllogism, or a face of a Consequence?

1. There is a power scattered in many. What power? of ordaining by laying on of hands to make men to be Pastors which were none before? By what shadow of Scripture or Reason is this said? one half of a Command, or Promise or Practice shall silence me, if they may give their scattered powers of Jurisdiction to one, they may create a Monarch, an Arch-Pastor or Pope over themselves. I judge Mr. H. thinks not so: but Scripture should here speak, and not Mr. H. and tell us, who gave to people, to men and to women (who have no less a power to know the voice of Christ in this Pastor, and to choose an officer than men) the scattered powers official to call and create officers.

2. They may give this power to one: prove this; its a non • ns, a power of ordaining even virtual they have not, therefore they cannot give it.

3. Christ gave gifts to men, God hath placed Pastors in the Church, Apostles: what! Ergo, the people gives power of being Apostles, Pastors, to men who were not Apostles and Pastors before? This is Mr. H. his Argument: Are Mr. H. his words Oracles, and Principles that cannot be denied?

4. The people, men and women as sheep, choose a Pastor by no act of Jurisdiction, saith Ames, but rather by Subjectione and Election makes not a Minister, but only appropriates his labors to his people, quoad administrationem, saith Cyprian, Ordination is the call and juridical sending. Now the Apostles and Presbytery ordained Elders, Tit. 1. 5. laid on hands and ordained, Acts 6. 6. 1 Tim 4. 14. 1 Tim. 5. 22. committed the charge to faithful men, able to teach others. 2 Tim. 2. 2. 1 Tim. 3. 1, 2. 3. show me so much for your new Male-Church, excluding Females, who may be unbaptized men converted in China.

Mr. H. A divided power in many, is not an united power from many. The people's is a divided power, lying in many combined, and therefore not the same. Hence the power of judgment is not the power of office, and therefore the fraternity may have the one, when they have not the other.

Ans. Here is no Argument at all. This new Church, that now is called the Fraternity, a new name, not in Scripture, in this sense hath neither a divided nor an united power, to make, ordain and call to the holy Ministry one who was no Minister before; and so the question is begged, A divided power to choose in many, is not an united power. Its true of the power of electing and choosing of Officers, they are divers powers, and therefore the society hath the united power of choosing a Minister: but some men there alone have not a power, being divided from the Church of women, children and servants.

2. Mr. H. finding himself ebb in proving, he tells us, that the fraternity may have the power of judging, and not of office: and he hath given no Word of God to prove, that the power of office, and the power of juridical judging (for of that we now speak, for the judgment of discretion women have) are different, that is, in divers subjects: But I deny that any hath official power, but that man hath juridical power also; or that any hath juridical power, but he hath also a power of office. Mr. H. brings no argument of the weight of a feather on the contrary. I deny not but they have divers formal exceptions, and because the power of judgment is not the power of office, therefore the fraternity may have the one, not the other. Weak Logic. Differunt conceptibus formalibus, Ergo, differunt subjectis. A power of discoursing, rationale, is not a power of laughing, risibile; sure: and therefore (saith this simple Logic) a man may have the one, and not have the other, that is, a man may be rational, and yet not risible: I am sorry that godly and judicious men build such hay and stubble upon the foundation.

3. Why does Mr. H. give this new Church a Latin Name, The Fraternity, that is, a Church of Redeemed ones built on the Rock, made up of Brethren and no Sisters? Ah! are women, servants, aged children, nor redeemed, not built on the Rock? So is there a Gospel-instituted Church described. The word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , as Stephanus tells us, is only twice in the New Testament: 1 Pet. 2. 17. Love the brotherhood, that is, the company of the brethren, say Mr. Leigh, Beza, Calvin, English Annotators. The company of the brethren; Lorinus, The Church; Esthius, The brethren by regeneration, and new birth. So Piscator, The brethren that are regenerated; as the Nobility is put for the Nobles. Let any man judge, if name or thing be so much as hinted at, when Paul and the rest of the Apostles export the brethren, I am. 5. 12. My brethren, swear not, does he not forbid women to swear? or speak they of the brethren only of a single congregation? Yea, and when Paul determined to come to the brethren at Rome, Rom. 1. 13, 14. to whom he was debtor to preach the Gospel, came he only as such a debtor to brethren of a single congregation? or only such brethren of a single congregation justified by faith? are they only no debtors to the flesh? Rom. 8. 12. & 7. 1. & 10. 1. & 7. 4. Wherefore my brethren, ye are bec • me dead to the law by the body of Christ: are not women dead to the law through Christ? See Rom. 8. 12. 1 Cor. 1. 10, 26. and in many places of the Old and New Testament, if the Scripture mean only unofficed men by the Fraternity and Brethren. Cyprian hath the word Fraternity, the whole Fraternity: but all that read him know, he means most ordinarily the whole Church and flock of men and women. And when it is taken for only men, it is brethren in office, Act. 10. 23. & 15. 23. never for brethren of this new devised Church. Augustine useth it sometime for brethren in the Ministry, and so doth Basil and the Fathers.

Mr. H. However the Elders are superior to the fraternity in regard of office, rule, act and exercise, which is proper only to them, and not to the fraternity, the people or Church are superior to the Elders in point of censure, each have their full scope in their own sphere and compass: The office of Major, King, Emperor is not prejudged, because the Corporation, Parliament, Princes and States for faults may depose them.

Ans. What he calls the fraternity in the one line, in the next he calls it without all Scripture, the People or Church, as if women and servants were no part of the people and Church redeemed by Christ.

2. Whereas he makes the people or Church superior to the Elders (all of them if Heretics) in regard of censure, not of office and rule: He makes censuring or excommunicating no part of rule, contrary to Scripture. Excommunicating is either an act of teaching; or 2. of administering the Seals; or 3. of visiting, by private exhorting, convincing or comforting, for an act of feeding for public edification it must be, 1 Cor. 5. 5. 2 Cor. 10. 8. But that it can be none of these, it needs no probation; to excommunicate, is not to preach, &c.

2. It is contrary to Mr. Cottons words.

3. The Ordinance of Christ is prejudged, where • nofficed men take on them the name of the Church, and are not the Church, and to excommunicate, where they have no such power of the Keys given to them by any word of Christ. The instances of a Major, King, &c. prove nothing: All free Societies may, by the Law of God, create, and also choose Solomon, David to be their King, and unking them again for a fault, as elsewhere I have proved. And here is a clear Law of God, but that a new devised fraternity of some few unofficed brethren should rule and over-rule, and the sheep excommunicate all their officers, must have a word of institution, not Mr. H. his naked word.

M. H. Hence the censure of Excommunication, for the act is common to the Elders, only for the manner of managing of it, its peculiar for the Elders to be leaders in that action: and thence it is they are called (Leaders) 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , Heb. 13. 17.

Ans. I know not why the censure of Excommunication should not be common to both the Elders and this new fraternity, both in regard of the power and the act of Excommunication, except Mr. H. show, that the office adds a new power of Excommunication, which the fraternity hath not; and if so,

1. The fraternity, before they were officers, and now when they are all turned grievous Wolves, do excommunicate, and yet they want this new official power of Excommunication, which is strange; for then they shall not have the complete power of Excommunication: and yet they exercise the act with commission from Christ.

2. It is to me a mystery, what superiority in the manner of managing the act of Excommunication, the officers have above the fraternity, they load, i. e. they preside and moderate in the actual d •• pensing of censures, and therefore are called Overs •• rs, Heb. 13. 17. Good; Ergo, moderating the acts of judging, makes the Pastor an overseer and watcher for the souls of the members of the Judicature, as one who must give an account to God, for so the place Heb. 13. 17. 18. is. Was ever Scripture so tortured? The scope of that place is, Heb. 13. that men, women, obey their watchmen, feeding by the Word preached, by Seals and Censures, the flock; so the words. So Beza, Calvin, Pareus, Marlorat, Piscator; so Cajitanus, Justinus Martyr, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , Rulers. Never man, I dare say, Father, Protestant, Lu ••• ran, Papist, or Interpreter, who expound that passage, dreamed that the officers are called overseers, Heb. 13. 17, 18. because they lead and preside, or convene and dissolve the congregation. For it follows, the Moderator of a Judicature hath a superiority of office over the members of the Synod, and watches for their souls.

2. That he is the Pastor of Elders and Pastors in the act of Excommunication, and rules them, but reacheth them not, and this is the Prelate.

3. When there be twelve Pastors over one congregation of Jerusalem in acts of censure, Peter or some other leading the action, must be a Pope with superiority of office over these to watch for their soul •

4. When the Brethren excommunicate all their officers, an unofficed Brother must lead the action as an overseer, Heb. 13. • 7. What superiority of Jurisdiction hath this or any Moderator or Speaker in Parliament, or Prolocutor in a Synod? for he hath but one vote. If it be a priority of honor, for age, and grace and gifts, we must obey all the aged, and such as in learning and holiness exceed us, for they watch for our souls, by the place Heb. 13. 17. as Mr. H. teacheth us.

CHAP. II.

MR. H. The power of the Keys is committed to the Church of confederate Saints, as to the first subject thereof; it is no new opinion.

2. I oppose Fathers to Fathers.

3. If it be in the people's power to hinder excommunication to take place, then the Elders only have not a power given them of Christ, to manage this: but this is against the wisdom of Christ to ordain means that cannot attain the end; which must be, if the people may • inder it.

Ans. If man be the first and proper subject of capacity to laugh, then must all contained under this subject, Peter, Ann • , be capable to laugh; but women, servants, aged children are as properly the confederate and enchurched Saints by Mr. H. his words, as men. Cyprian and most of the Fathers take in the people with the Rulers in the exercise of censures, by way of consent; but without vanity, I say, never Fathers, Greek or or Latin, Councils, old or late, Doctors, Schoolmen, Prote • ant, Papist, or any Divine, till of late the Socinians, and now the brethren of the Congregational way, and the Separatists and Anabapti •• s taught, that the Church of believers of a single congregation, hath formally a power of jurisdiction in them to make and unmake officers, to call and excommunicate them. But you shall find all the principles and grounds of this new way 〈◊〉 the Arminian Authors and Socinians cited in the Margin; and Mr. H. never labored to vindicate their way from these impure Sects. For,

1. They deny the notes of the visible Church, as the brethren do against the reformed Churches.

2. They deny the word Church, either Mat. 18. or elsewhere to signify anything but Believers, never Rulers only.

3. They deny the definition of a visible Church, from a profession, and require reality of holiness, at least some of them, as our brethren with Anabaptists do.

4. Episcopius maintains separation.

5. They deny all jurisdiction and necessity of lawful Synods, as our Brethren do.

6. All Churches to them are visible congregations which meet in one place to hear the Word; so our brethren Churches of C • . in new England, c. 1. sect. 1. par. 1, 2. and Mr: H.

7. Our brethren reject ordination by the laying on of the hands of the Presbytery, and all juridical mission by officers of associate Churches, and teach that aptness to teach, and holiness of live is sufficient for a call, so the people desire them, or choose them; and so do also the Arminians and Socinians.

8. Th •• the whole Church, id est, the Brethren, and the Officers by accident, being only separable adjuncts of the Church, have a juridical power of excommunication; so Socinians acknowledge all the godly and believers to be the visible Church, though scattered all the world over, and reject the authority of all visible Churches and Councils, deny all juridical calling and ordination; so that it is clear that they judge the visible professors and people to be the visible Church, which governs and excommunicates, which is the mind of Mr. Hooker.

Mr. H. And the brethren and (9.) some Socinians, as Nicolaides and others, hold that wicked men by no law of God are to be suffered in the visible Church, and they are not there Iure. Mr. H. offends, that unregenerated men, when known to be such, are to be suffered to be there, or that the ordinances should be dispensed to them; which to be, is against

1. The patience and meekness of Christ (I speak of the known non-regenerated, that are not scandalous) and so against the patience and meekness required in his servants and Church in order to his end.

2. Against the institution of the visible Church, the school of Christ; no master ought to exclude out of the school a child, who though dull of learning, yet is well disposed, and keeps the laws of order and discipline; for it is ordained • o fine, that the non-regenerate may be effectually called.

3. None should be excommunicated, but these who are extremely scandalous, or obstinate; and so none are to be excommunicated for simple non-regeneration, which can appear only to be non-regeneration to some regenerate only, Ps. 36. 1. and not to them infallibly.

4. By the command of Christ, and so jure, John the Baptist baptized huge multitudes, of whom he had no assurance that they were regenerate, when by the spirit of God he names them a generation of Vipers, and rebukes them as Hypocrites, who thought it holiness enough to be the carnally born sons of Abraham, Mat. 3.

10. I do not speak this to lay any odium upon the brethren, as if they loved the ways of Arminians and Socinians, but upon a twofold account.

1. Because Mr. H. passes all what I said of this, as not worthy the answering; though indeed, to speak or comply in opinions with enemies to Christ, his redemption, satisfaction, and free grace, is not overly to be looked on; especially in a new frame of government spiritual in the house of God.

2. Because the Presbytery is called Antichristian, prelatical, formal, by our brethren. I love not high appeals, judging that they often fail against the third command; as for toleration maintained by Socinians and Arminians I impute it not to Mr. H. or the brethren of N. E. But there be not many, to my knowledge (I say no further) for the congregatonal way, but they are for toleration in non-fundamentals: and how few fundamentals there be possibly.

2. What they are, who can define? so that this way seems to me no less new, then other sinful ways of Arminians and Socinians; and what mischief toleration brings forth in Britain also.

Lastly, we hold that censures should not be dispensed against the people's mind; for as Augustine saith, the censure shall not edify, if most of the people be infected with the same scandal; and if the people shall not in their practices yield, it may breed a separation and a schism. But it is a naughty consequence, if the people may hinder excommunication, then it is no ordinance of God, which is executed without the people's judicial power; this follows not, except the people had a Ius, a judicial power from Christ to hinder excommunication, which they have not; yea, and though they had a judicial power, yet if they use it not right, but abuse that judicial power (suppose they had it) it follows not, Ergo, excommunication is not an ordinance of God. For,

1. The Elders may abuse their power, and so hinder excommunication; and without them, saith Mr. Cotton, no act of ruling and excommunicating can be; shall therefore excommunication be no ordinance? persecutors do hinder the preaching of the Gospel, shall the preaching of the Gospel for that be no ordinance of God? but the people lawfully may withdraw their consent, and then there shall be no excommunication. This yet proves not; If the people's power lawfully used hinder undue excommunication, then the Elders only have not power. For the people's power lawfully used, hindered King Saul to put Jonathan to death, and hindered all the Judges from doing the same; Ergo, King Saul and the Judges only have not judicial power of life and death, but the people have it also? it follows not: yea, but (saith he) that Christ shall appoint a means of reformation, and purging the Church, that in an ordinary course shall not attain the end, is deeply prejudicial to the faithfulness, wisdom, and power of Christ: any manner of way this is an argument carnal and human.

1. Where hath Christ interposed his faithfulness and wisdom, that if officers and brethren make use of the judicial power he hath given to them, the Church shall be actually purged, is not this the question?

2. Where hath he promised a reformed Church, in case these who have power to reform, stand in the way, shall Christ's wisdom be accused, or the Gospel reproached, because either men hinder it to be preached, or these to whom it is preached, believe it not? or does the faithfulness of God fail, though all men are liars? Rom. 3. Is his wisdom darkened, though all become vain and foolish in their imaginations? yea, if women, servants, children of age refuse to withdraw from the excommunicate, the censure cannot edify; they have not for that a judicial power to excommunicate by Mr. H. his way.

Mr. H. The keys of the kingdom, by way of Metaphor, signifies all that ministerial power by Christ dispensed, and from Christ received; whereby all the affairs of his house, in point of opening to such as stoop to him, and of shutting to such as will not come under his authority, are acted according to his mind.

Ans. Learned Mr. Wilson, Mr. Liegh, Beza, Beda, Chrysostom, Augustine, Jerome, Cyprian, tell us that the keys noteth ministerial power, never since Learning and Tongues were in the world, given to unofficed and private men, to exercise and make use of them, but to the oeconomus Master-household, or steward. Cyprian, and the learned Annotator, who answers Pamelius, make Stantes distinguished from these who fell a part of the Church, because they are not utterly to be debarred ut prophani & canes, as profane, ab omni rerum Ecclesiasticarum cognition, but never endued with juridical power, as the Rulers; to these Mr. H answers nothing: only all such means (saith he) as are sufficient, private, or public, to open and shut Heaven, may be called the keys. All means of promises and threatenings in the mouths of women. Abigail and others of ged children and servants, yea, and of these of another congregation are sure means of the word, for opening and shutting Heaven; shall these women and children, and servants, for that bear the keys of the Kingdom of God?

Mr. H. The key of Royalty is only in Christ, the key of charity in the hand of all believers, who out of Christian love lend some help, but have no power judicial to proceed. There is the Key of subordinate power which only such and all such have as are combined in a special corporation, and come under the external government of the Scepter of Christ; such have good law to proceed against such as will not stoop to the rule.

Ans. 1. What the Brethren have more then the key of charity, to lend help out of love, is the debate; sure if women be not excluded from the Law of Love, this key cannot be taken from them.

2. If only such, and all such (omne & solum) as are combined in a special corporation, have the key of subordinate power; this power essentially and universally must agree to the so combined body. But women, aged children, servants, are especially combined by the Church-covenant, as is easy to prove from Mr. H. quod convenit omni & soli convenit reciproce & universaliter. Ergo, only the combined Church-members, and all the Church-members (so women) must excommunicate, and all for them; then the officers, as members combined, not as officers do excommunicate; I quit all Logic, if this can be eluded. Now Mr. H. says that confederate Saints, all, and only have the keys.

Mr. H. Pro. 3. The keys of subordinate power are seated firstly in the Church, and by virtue of the Church, they are communicated to any that in any measure or manner share therein: heat to first in the fire, as its proper subject, the faculty of sense belongs first to the sensitive soul, &c.

Ans. The power of the keys belongs to the Church of Believers, of men and women, as the first virtual subject.

2. To the rulers and guides, as to the formal subject; as heat is in the fire, so every part of the fire is formally hot, as a part of the first formal subject: as iron is hot by participation, by the fire. But by this Mr. H. must say all the parts of the Churches of Believers are endued with this power of binding and loosing, as the partial and incomplete subject. So yetmust women, children and servants be endued formally with the judicial power of the keys: but this is false.

3. The keys are in the whole, in the exercise, in the rulers formally by the judicial power inherent in them, in the people, men, and women by consent, not by any inherent formal power juridical.

4. The keys belong to all rulers, ruled, men, women, masters, servants, parents, children, objectively and finaliter for the edification of the whole body, and every part thereof, Eph. 4. 11, 12. 2 Cor. 10 8.

Mr. H. Is suits not with right reason to cast some part of the power firstly upon the people, some part upon the Rulers, as though there were two first subjects of this power which the letter of the text gainsayeth, to thee will I give, not to them: it were to speak daggers and contradictions to make but one first subject of the power, and yet have others to share in this power, is more wide from the mark.

Ans. Judge if it suits with reason, which judicious and godly Mr. Cotton saith, when the Church of a particular Congregation walketh together in the truth, all the brethren of the Church are the first subject of Church liberty, and the Elders thereof of Churchauthority, and both of them together, are the first subject of all Church power needful to be exercised within themselves, whether in Election, Ordination, or Censures of their own body.

They may distinguish between the power of the keys, and between Church power. But it suits as little with reason to make two, to wit, Elders and Brethren, the two first subjects, or one complete first subject of Church power, as to make them one complete first subject, or two first subjects of the power of the keys. Nor is it against reason, that the body organick be the first virtual subject of the Keys, and the same body be the first formal subject of both the Keys, and of Church-power in the exercise, the Rulers acting their way, and the people their way, as is said; nor are there for that two subjects of power.

2. The Argument by which Mr. H. proveth this is most feeble, It is said to Peter, to thee I will give the keys, not to the 〈◊〉 Ergo, Peter represents the people, Believers only, 〈◊〉 est, the male-Church of the redeemed: I would not buy such Logic for a Not, for 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 is a collective, and represents many, for the Keys of the Kingdom noteth the Keys of jurisdiction, of preaching the word, &c. Now see, he gives the keys of knowledge principally and firstly to the people, and secondarily to the Elders who labor not in the word and doctrine, in so far as they concur to make the word effectual. Nor can the Lord have given the Key of only ruling to the preaching Elders, and therefore he speaks to Peter as representing two subjects.

3. It is neither dagger nor weapon of blood, that the Catholic visible Church of the first-born including rulers and ruled, be the first subject of free redemption, of all power of the Keys in their saving fruit, of all styles, the Spouse, Body, Love, &c. the saving privileges of special note, that one promised in the covenant of grace, the new heart, remission of sins, perseverance, ruling in the visible kingdom by binding and loosing, and that your particular congregation and society share of all these at the second hand. And Mr. H. must be content that we look upon it as weak Divinity, that Christ gave himself for the Catholic Church, and bestows all upon her firstly, and that this be the first natural recipient subject of all these, as the element of fire, not this or that fraction or fragment of that Element is the first adequate, natural recipient subject of heat, as is above explained.

Mr. H. Prop. 4. The power of the keys take it in the complete nature thereof, is in the Church of Believers, as in the first subject, but in the manner and order of ruling that Christ appointed, in the parts.

Ans. Mr. H. speaks not distinctly, and should have told us what the power of the keys is in its complete nature, and what in its incomplete and half nature it is.

2. When he says the Church-congregational, and the male-Church of Believers so consederate, is the first subject of the Keys, he saith an untruth like to this, this particular fragment of the Element of fire is the first subject of heat. And, Sir, what say you of the rest of the quarters of the Element of fire, must they, I pray you, be the subj • ct of heat secondary, and by way of participation? So you may say London is the first subject of the power of government in England, yea, or Norwich; now the first subject by you is omne and solum, and so doth Mr. Cotton go before you; it is like England would take it evil, and judge that Norwich did not logically distinguish. Our Brethren must be content no Congregation is any other but an integral part (as D. Ames. grants) of the Catholic visible Church. And Christ's design of Love was, that the whole, by order of nature, as the first subject, should partake of all the special privileges.

• 1. Grace.
• 2. Redemption.
• 3. Covenant blessings, &c. power of binding, loosing, seals in their blessed fruit for the whole.

Nor can I say Amen to that of Mr. Cotton.

A particular Church or Congregation professing the faith taken indefinitely, for any Church (one as well as another) is the first subject of all the Church Officers, with all their spiritual gifts and power—whether it be Paul, or Apollo, or Cephas, all are yours (speaking of the Church of Corinth, 1 Cor 3. 22.)

Ans. 1. Mr. Cotton must prove that Paul there speaks of a particular Church that comes all together into one place, as he speaks, citing 1 Cor. 14. 23. and that formally as a single congregation meeting in one. It were a most comfortless Doctrine to limit that soul delighting privilege, 1 Cor. 3. 21. all things are yours, then Christ, and Grace and Glory are yours. And verse. 23. ye are Christ's, only to Saints, as they are a Churchmeeting in one place. What is this, but by the scope of that place, you have right to Christ and Salvation, and Covenantpromises, as the first subject only under the reduplication of a congregation meeting in one place, as an organized Church. Ah! and shall not Christ and all things be theirs, who are in no Church-state like that of Corinth, but wander in deserts, and in mountains, and in dens, and cave • of the Earth, Heb. 11. 38 and have no certain dwelling house, nor fixed Church congregational, 1 Cor. 4. 11?

2. What agrees to Believers, as Christians, and Believers, to believing women, aged children, servants, and to the scattered Saints. Now in no such Church state, as Mr. Cotton imagines the Corinthians to be in, and to John in the Isle of Pathmes, and to the Apostles as believing Apostles, that cannot agree to a congregation as the first subject, which reciprocally and only receiveth this power. But such is this, Revel. 21. 7. He that overcomes shall inherit all things, all are yours, death in the sweet fruit of it belongs to women, and to Christians as Christians, though in no congregational state; Ergo, women, and the whole Catholic Church, whether in such a Church-state or not, must be the first subject of the Keys. And it is wretched Logic; Paul saith, all things are yours, and ye are Christ's, to a congregation that meets in one place: Ergo, such a promise is made to a congregation, as to the first subject, and as to a congregation: then may I infer the promise to eat of the Tree of Life, to receive the hidden Manna, and the •… ning Star, and to sit in a Throne with Christ, is made to such as overcome in the congregation (as our Brethren say) of Ephesus, of Pergamos, of Thyatira, &c. Rev. 2. 3. therefore these promises are made to the Church of a congregation, as to the first subject; upon the same ground all the congregational Church must be the first subject, and so the only subject of all privileges of the congregational Church of Corinth, of being justified, sanctified, Temples of the Holy Ghost, redeemed and bought with a price, &c. And if so, these privileges must agree to the congregation firstly, and to all other for the congregation, as that agrees first to the fire, and then to iron, to water for the fire.

3. Paul saying, all are yours, whether Paul, &c. he cannot mean Paul, as an Apostle, is proper to you as a congregation, in all his Apostolic travels, for that is false: nor can the meaning be, Paul as a fixed Pastor is yours, for he was no fixed Pastor to them, tied to that congregation only. Then the meaning must be, Paul, and by a Synecdoche, all the Apostles and Pastors, and the World, and Life and Death, in their labors must be for you, and the Catholic Church, and all the Saints all the earth over, whom they must gather in, and perfect as Christ's body, and parts of his body, Ephes. 4. 11, 12, 13. and not as a congregation; so our Brethren in this as in many other points abuse, but expound not the word.

Mr. H. The power of the keys is in her (the Church congregational of Believers) as in the cause subordinately under Christ, and it may thereby here be acted as potestas judicii, in admission of members, in the absence of Ministers, in censuring by admonition, for each man is a Judge of his brother, and there is a judicial way of admonition, when the parties are in such a state as in foro exteriori, they can make process juridice, against each other, so there is a power of gift in all elections. Or else this power of the keys is communicated from her to the officers, the soul doth not see but by an eye, makes an eye and sees by it, so that the Church makes a Minister, and dispenseth Words and Sacraments by Officers.

Answ. We seek Scripture, and see only Mr. H. his naked assertions.

1. The power of the Keys is radically in the Church of redeemed ones, to wit, the male-Church of redeemed ones, a creature for name and thing, not in the Word.

2. That this male-Church by a judicial power admits members, prove that.

3. In the absence of Ministers this is done, then Ministers and Elders with the male-Church excluding women, aged children, judicially admit members, then all female members, and children, and servants with blind obedience must own these members, and watch over them: prove this, for women have neither consent nor vote.

4. That everyone may judicially process another, that is, judicially accuse one another and complain, and bring witnesses against one another, and prove the scandal: that is true, and may judicially accuse before the Church the daughters, or servant women, yea, or men that are incorrigible after private admonition, but that the members of the male-Church judge one another by the power of the Keys, is the question. Give us Scripture for it.

5. There is Potestas doni, a power of a gift in all elections, well; a power of a gift of discerning & trying, who shall be my Pastor, sure women have their gift of discerning; why should Pastors be obtruded upon women blindly? should men have dominion over their faith? I am glad that Mr. H. gives no juridical power to the call and making of Officers: but only a power of gift, Potestas doni. But the Church communicates this power of the Keys to the Officers, that is, the male Church of redeemed Brethren. This is proved by no word of God, but by a similitude, in which it is said (by poor Physiology) The Soul makes an Eye, and the Brethren make their Officers, which we deny: God makes them by the laying on of the hands of the Elders, Acts 6. 6. 1 Tim. 4. 14. 2 Tim. 2. 2. 1 Tim. 5. 22.

Mr. H. The power of judgment is the Church formaliter.

Ans. It is often said, never proved to be formaliter in your male Church.

CHAP. III.

MR. H. 197. The power of judgment is in the Rulers directively (as formally in the people) they out of an office power, leading the whole proceeding therein.

Ans. I never heard that a chief member, either Speaker in Parliament, or President in Council, or Chair-man in Committee, or Moderator in Assembly, was a place of juridical power, or office over the Judicature, or Members of the Church; a place of priority of order it is, which one may have today and want tomorrow: for the nature of order requires that one open the Assembly, and moderate the meeting: if this be all, the official power that Mr. H. gives to officers, is weak, and of no worth:

2. There is no power, no act of ruling and governing given to the Pastors above the Brethren. For,

1. To call an Assembly, Io • l 2. Is not proper to the officers, the Assembly by its intrinsical power from Christ, may convene in his name. Nor,

2. To examine members, whether they be Apostles or not, by their way cannot be proper to the Elders ruling, for it agrees to other members, as well • as to them.

3. Ordination is, and may be (according to our Brethren) and creating of Officers, though Mr. Cotton make it peculiar to Officers, because of Act. 6. 6. 1 Tim 4. 14. as Mr. Cotton cites; yet Mr. H. saith, the Brethren may do it.

4. It is no act of the Key of Authority, that the Elders open the doors of speech more then that one speak before another, or that Elihu speak more then the rest of the friends, is no act of the power of the Keys. Nor,

5. Is the preparing of matters, and receiving of complaints, by our Brethren's way proper to them then to other officers more, since Mr. H. saith all equally have the power of the Keys from the Church of Brethren. What power of the Keys the Pastors have in preaching and exhorting, they have it rather over the congregation, then over the male-Church of Brethren; nor is it so properly a superiority of rule, as of doctrine, which in Synods they have over Churches; nor can the Pastor have a directive power as a Pastor over the brethren; since by M. H. his way, they may judge and censure him. Can the King be their Judge with a directive power, who not being a Parliament, may judge authoritatively whether he should be King or not, and may dethrone him?

Mr. H. Arg. 1. Ejusdem ist instituere & destituere, The people have power to consure and depose Officers in case of heresy, or otber iuiquity, for they gave power by election to Rulers.

Ans. It is ordinary to our Brethren to prove in a Circle, the fraternity have power to choose Officers, ere they have power to depose; and they have power to censure & excommunicate, he whole being above the part: ergo, they must have power to ordain: we deny the Fraternity can either make or unmake officers.

2. That is not so undeniable a proposition, an Assembly of Officers, a Church of thirty may constitute themselves in a Judicature, and so may a Parliament, by an intrinsical power in themselves: Ergo, they may for heresy and scandal against the Law of Nature destroy and censure themselves, it followeth not.

3. Apostles were immediately called of God, and made Pastors habitu, by that call and special direction of the spirit (which was instead of Election) Paul is forbidden to preach in Bithynia, and called to preach in Macedonia: how many times should the P • ostles be made Pastors, and unpastored again, if the present call be that only which makes them Pastors? Levites were ordained to serve the Tribes jointly, and when the Tribes were dispersed, the Levites were dispersed, and remained Levites in whatever place they came to, as Mr. Hudson showeth.

4. If Pastors be baptized, and members of the Churchonly to which they are chosen Pastors, then as to the former part, they and all other baptized to one single congregation, when that Church is dissolved, are no more baptized, and as Pastors cannot exercise pastoral acts, but to their own Church; neither can they act as baptized professors in another Church, baptizing being a Citizens solemn incorporation to the Church, and by this way to the Church independent only: as a man that is only a free Citizen in Norwich, cannot for that be a free Citizen in York, or perform the acts of a free Citizen in all free Cities in England, as he can perform them in Norwich. And suppose that Norwich lose its freedom, the man is a Citizen of no free City of England: for as he is made solemnly by admittance into the Church, into which he is baptized a visible member incorporated by Baptism, as by his Burgess Writ, or Burgess Ticket, when the City is dissolved, and no free City, either his Burgess Ticket to be a member of that City is null, or then by his Burgess Ticket he was made a member of all other congregations. John the Baptist and the Apostles, Act. 8. John. 3. after a confession never asked for their conversion, but baptized, for 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , straightway without delay, even in the night (for so the word noteth, Matth. 21. 19. Luke 4 39. & 5. 25. & 8. 44.) The Jailor and his house, Act. 16. Cornelius and his house, Act. 10. the Eunuch, the multitude of John Baptists hearers were baptized members of the universal Church, 1 Cor. 12. 12, 13. where there was no particular congregation to receive, & admit them as members, as Mr. Richard Baxter solidly observes: nor is it worthy the refuting, that the Apostles by an extraordinary power might baptize them, though to no certain Church, but Pastors now have not that power: for the Apostles baptizing and preaching, and administering the other seal differ not in species and nature, from the ordinary pastoral acts of an ordinary Minister, they speak with tongues, work miracles as Apostles; but they preach and baptize hic & nunc, as ordinary Officers. And as to the other part, the calling of a Minister so, must be up and down, as he officiates to his own Church, he acts as a Pastor, as to these of another flock he tenders the Lord's Supper as a gifted man.