Animadversion to Cliftons Advertisement, Part 3 · Point 2
The second point of difference: in the Letter.
2. WE had learned, that every true Church of Christ, hath this power to cast out obstinate synners from amongst them,Treat. of the Minist. of Engl. p. 62. Apol. p. 63. & this not onelyonly when it hath officers, but also when it wanteth them: but now we were taught, that a people without officers have not power to cast out obstinate synners. Which doctrine amongst other evils, overthroweth the constitution of the Church that so taught; for it was gathered and constituted by Christians without officers, receiving in the repentant, and casting out the disobedient, wheras by this opinion, they had power from Christ to doe neyther; for they that cannot cast out, cannot receiv in, one power is for both.
With this they joyn out of the printed copy.
6. The 33. article [in our Confession] which our Apologie also confirmeth, pag. 45. professeth that people being come forth of the Antichristian estate &c. are willingly to joyn togither in Christian communion and orderly covenant, and to unite themselves into peculiar and visible congregations &c. These have pleaded, that al are bound to communion by vertue of their baptisme received in the Church of Rome, or other Antichristian assemblies.
These things are confirmed by Mat. 18.17.—20. with 28.20. 1. Cor. 5.4.5. and 12.27. & 1.2. Rom. 12.5. Heb. 12.22.28. Mat. 5.14. Phil. 1.1.5- Act. 2.41.42.47. & 17.4. The latter is also confirmed with sundry scriptures and reasons expressed in our foresayd Apologie.
Against this their former profession, these men now thus write.
1. Where find we in the scriptures, Advertis. p 45. Treat. on Mat. 18. p. 23.that God hath thus layd upon the people without officers to excōmunicate? where is the precept for it? which be the examples of it? or what are the grounds requiring & bearing it out?
I answer, 1. First as their manner is, they would put others to prove, that which by others and themselves *Discov. p. 46.242, 243 Treat. of the Minist. p. 62.63.64hath been proved and approved; and is not as yet by them or any taken away. It is easy for any to dispute and trouble men after this manner. 2. Secondly in that place of their Treatise on Mat. 18. they quote Mat. 2….20. as alleged for a ground: yet they give not any answer to that scripture, but stil call upon us to answer their questions, & write more. Wheras Christ there encōmendeth to his disciples of all nations to the worlds end the observing of all things whatsoever he cōmanded th'Apostles. And excommunication was one of those things commanded, Mat. 18. 1. Cor. 5. Therfore to be observed by a Christian people though they want officers, unless these men can shew some prohibition. Christ requireth to observ al things; these men say, nay, not excommunication: it lyeth now, on them to shew wher Christ or his Apostles have excepted excommunication. But from that place, and by the very same reasons, doo the Anabaptists deny baptisme of Children, caling for scripture, example, precept, & ground to warrant it, as these doo now in this case.
3. Thirdly, besides al things heretofore written, they have a ground in the article it self, which they neyther doo nor can take away; which is the power that the church alwayes hath to receiv in members: and therfore consequently to cast them out agayn if they deserv it. Which ground if they deny, they in effect deny that ther can be any church without Elders, contrary to the express scripture Act. 14.23. 1. Cor. 12.28. Tit. 1.5. Yea or that ther can be any visible Christians without Elders: for how can they be Christians without †Ioh. 15.1.2.3.4.union with Christ? And if men cannot be united with his members and body, because ther wanteth Elders, how should they be united with him the head? 4. They have it proved a point of false doctrine by Mr Iohnson himsef, to teach that the Church of Christ hath not alwayes power to receive in and to cast out by the keyes of the kingdom. Answer to M. Iakob, pag. 159.160.
2. They secondly allege sundry examples & grounds that it hath been doon by the Lord himself and by his officers, &c. This we never doubted of, but a Church having officers may excōmunicate. Though yet the proof for the Elders wilbe excepted against by the Prelates and such like. For, th'examples of Abraham, of Paul, of Titus, of Timothee, and of the Preist judging a leper, make rather in show for one Bishop, then for a Church of Elders: and so are alleged by Papists, for the Prelacie. The other scriptures doo none of them shew the Elders power to excōmunicate, but to watch, take heed, reprove, admonish &c, al which the Prelates grant to their inferiour Preists: whom yet they wil not suffer to excommunicate, with out the Bishop or his Official, as these wil not the Church, without an Eldership. The examples of excommunicating by the Rulers of Israel, I wil turn against them thus: If the Magistrates and people of Israel might not onelyonly punish civilly with death, but also execute a spiritual censure of excommunication upon the consciences of evil doers, though they had wanted ministers of the Temple, and synagogues: then a Christian magistrate and people may doo so now, though they want ministers ecclesiastical. And if the Church may excommunicate having a magistrate, it may also do it wanting one: seing the power of spiritual censure dependeth *Io…. 18.36not upon the civil magistracie, as the state of the Churches in the Apostles dayes sheweth.
3, Thirdly they wil have us to consider how a people can chalenge the ministration of excommunication, more then of the sacraments &c. This we have considered, and find that if the reason be good, the ruling Elders may not excommunicate, any more then minister the sacraments: which whither they hold or no, let them tel us in their next. For they know wel, the Prelates object these things against the ruling Elders, as themselves doo now against the people.
4. Fourthly they say, *In Treat. Mat. 18. p. 24.they cannot find in scripture but when the church is caled the body of Christ, or compared to a body, howse, city or kingdom: it is spoken eyther of particular Churches having officers, or of the catholik church, in respect of Christ the head &c. I answer, it appeareth then plainly, they have lost that which they had found; and let them take heed least for not †1. Tim. 6.20.keeping it, God deprive them of finding it any more. But I wil help them, if it may be by their own writing, where this same author sayth, aTreat. of the minist. against M. Hilders. p. 63.64.A company of faithful people, (though considered a part by themselves, they be privat men, yet) being gathered togither in the name of Christ, and joyned togither in fellowship of his gospel, they are a b1. Cor. 12 27. Rō. 12.5. Heb. 12 22.28. Mat. 5.14. & 18 17.20. 1. Co 1.2. & 5.4. Phil. 1.1.5. Act. 2.41.42.47. & 17 4.publick body, a church, a citie, a kingdom, and that of Jesus Christ, who is present among them to guide bless and confirm what they doo on earth in his name, and by his power. So that like as in a city the citizens considered a part, are commonly privat members, yet jointly togither are the corporation and publick body of that town: so is it also in the church of Christ, whither it consist of moe or of fewer, yea though they be but 2. or 3. so as they be joyned togither in the communion of the gospel, and gathered togither in the name of Jesus Christ▪ as before is sayd. These things they have acknowledged: though now it seemeth they have forgot them, or (which is worse,) doo dissemble them. VntoUnto these I wil add th'Apostles testimonie, concerning a howse; d1. Pet. 2.6.Christ, is the chief corner stone:cMat. 18.19.20. and Christians that come unto him, as lively stones are made a spiritual howse, an holy Preisthood to offer up spiritual sacrifices. Men come unto Christ by “verse 7. Ioh. 6.35.beleef, and are joyned unto him and one to another by mutual aIer. 50.5. & 32.40. & 31 33.34. Act. 2.47. & 5.13.covenant. The ministers of Christ are as b1. Cor. 3.9, 10. &c.builders of this howse, by preaching the gospel, laying first the foundation Christ, then upon him Christian people, Gods building. But if (as often cometh to pass,) the cPsal. 118.22, 23. Mat. 21.42.builders doo refuse, yet the Lord without them putteth Christ for head of the corner, and causeth the faithful to d1. Pet. 2.4.7.come unto him, and maketh them his †verse ….spiritual howse to dwel in them, whose howse they continew to be, not by having officers alway among them, but by Heb. 3.6.holding fast their confidence and rejoycing of hope unto the end. Wherfore these men that can find no howse of God without Elders, must prove that men can not come unto, no… continew in Christ, unless it be by ecclesiastical officers, (which they shal never be able to manifest:) or al may see, how they are beguiled with errour, that they can not find things so apparant, and heretofore acknowledged by themselves. Ther opinion is injurious not onelyonly to Christians, but to Christ himself; whiles they wil not grant him being the corner stone, the head, the king; and the faithful, the living stones his mē bers and subjects, to make a howse, body or kingdom; if the Elders want or refuse: though he as is written, *Rev. 2.1.walketh among his Churches and †Mat. 28.20is with them al dayes to the worlds end.
5. Fiftly they say, our controversie was about a Church established with officers: & things concerning people without officers, are left to further consideration. I answer, true it is, they sought alwayes to hide their errors, and to put off things which pressed them, to further consideration, and the Elders having gott the Churches power into their hands, they lysted not to scan the peoples right. But we were necessarily drawn to controvert this point two wayes: first because their errour did eat out the very constitution of the Church wherof they vvere, as shal after be manifested. Secondly because it vvas by themselves acknovvledged that vvhatsoever povver the people hav before; is not to be takē away by their officers; this therfore vvas an argument that manifested the evil vvhichwhich lurketh in their nevv doctrine. And vvho can soundly discuss any question, if they look not to the foundation; as Christ sayd to the Pharisees, fMat. 19.8.from the beginning it was not so.
6. Finally, vvheras vve shevved hovv their doctrine overthroweth the constitution of their Church; as being vvithout povver from Christ, they say, First it were worth the knowing by whom the first man or two men of this church were received in, and by what power. I ansvver, it is true they say; and pray them therfore to shevv by vvhat povver their church began, if they vvould have men acknovvledge it for true, and planted by the povver of Christ Othervveise they must renounce their estate, and begin a nevv. As for ours, it is shevved in our published vvritings, vvhichwhich if they can, let them disprove; as, in Treat. of the ministerie, against M. Hildersh. p. 73.74. Apologie, p. 44.45.46.47.
2. Secondly they say, by our baptisme, as also by accord in the truth, we ar bound to communion in any thing lawful, as God giveth occasion and opportunity. I answer; 1. they here turn from the question: we speak of constitution of a particular church, they tel us of communion by baptism and accord in the truth; which extendeth to al churches in the world, and to Saincts that ar not gathered and constituted into any particular church. We speak of a church with power to receiv in and cast out, though it have no officers: they touch not this point, unless they closely grant us the question, to the overthrow of their opinion. For if they yeild such power and practise, to be a lawful thing in the communion of al such as ar baptised, or doo accord in the truth; they refute themselves: if not, al men may see how they seek to divert from the matter in hand. 2. Secondly by their baptism, they mean not onelyonly the true baptisme in Christs church, but the false baptisme in Antichrists, as the article expresseth, and after we ar to scan: which if it be according to the scriptures which they cite, the aEph. 4.4.5. 1. Cor. 10.1.2. & 12, 13.one baptisme, that by one spirit baptiseth al into one body; then are they returned into the cōmmunion and body of Antichrists synagogue, (if the church of Rome be it,) & are bound to communicate even with Friers and Iesuites in any thing lawful as God giveth occasion, and that is, I suppose, to hear them when they preach nothing but the truth, or to pray with them, when they in spirit pray to God in Christ &c. I would be loth to wrong them, their own *Treat. on Mat. 18. p. 26.words lead me to this, if I gather amyss let them pardon me, & shew their meaning plainly: for, †Ioh. 3, 21.he that dooth truth, cōmeth to the light. 3. Thirdly, without baptisme there may be a Church entred into covenant with God & one with an other: as all Israel “Deut. 29.10,—…3.passed into the covenant renued by Moses; when ‘†Ios. 5.4.5al the men under 40. yeres old, were uncirsed: besides al the women.
3. They thirdly say, it is playn and undenyable that to chuse or give voices in election, is not a part of goverment &c. but an interest power, right and libertie, that the Saincts out of office have and should use &c. I answer,
1. First this is playn and undenyable, so long as it pleaseth them not to deny it: but if they change their mind in this point to morow, as they have doon in the former about the peoples power to excō municate, then we shal hear, as we did before, wher find we in the scriptures that God hath thus layd on the people without officers to make electiō? where is the precept for it? which be the examples of it? &c. They tel us it is playn; but not one scripture is brought to shew it: yet is it needful, seing they know the Papists and other Prelates deny such elections without officers. The Prelates wil shew them sundry examples, wher it was doon by the counsel, direction and government of officers, as Act. 1.15.21, 22. & 6.2, 3. & 14, 23, 1. Tim. 3, 1.— 14.15. Tit. 1.5. but not one place where a people without officers attempted such a work. Wherefore wee wish our opposites not to deal so slenderly, as to tel men it is playn and undeniable, & so to leav it: for we make no doubt, but the sound proof of this point, wil disproov their former errour. 2. Secondly, we have upon their bare word, that to give voices in election of officers is no part of government: we pray them in their next to shew, whether then to give voices for deposition of unworthy officers, be a part of government; as also how they prove that to give voices for the reciving in, and putting out of members in the Church, is a part of government, more than the other. 3. Thirdly the reader may observ their covert cariage of this point, whiles they speak but of giving voices in election: but what say they about giving power of administration to the ministers: who must doo that? or how had these men that, but by the people? And if the people have power in the name of Christ, to say to the elected Pastor, Take thou authority to preach the word &c. or in any other terms to give him pastoral office which had none before; I hope they wil not deny but if that Pastor afterward proov a *Act. 20.29Wolf, the same people may put him out of al his pastoral office: and if they have that power, why also may they not put him quite out of the fold and Church by the power of Christ, that is, excommunicate him? And if it be not lawful for a people to give authority of Ministerie unto a man: how then do these administer, which renounced some of them their former office and preisthood given by the Prelates, and as private men received a nue caling and ordination: others from private estate, were constituted Elders by the people. Is this Ministerie now from heaven, or from men?
4. Lastly they say, seing their doctrine overthroweth not the constitution of the Church of Jsrael, nor of the primitive Churches, it cannot therfore overthrow the constitution of their church, or of any that is accordingly built upon the foundation of the Apostles and Prophets &c. I answer, this in deed is the surest argument of al: save that it is a fayr begging of the quaestion. For the thing they should prove, is, that their constitution is according to Israel, or Apostolik. For, if Israel or the primitive Churches before they had officers, did or might receiv in and cast out members, and if the people might set up, and depose officers by power from God: then are these mens errors overthrown. If not, but that the thing is unlawful for any then or now so to doo, then is the constitution of their Church overthrown, as that wch did grow up to such estate without power †Ioh. 3.27. Heb. 5.4.from heaven, and they are to let it fal, and be ‘*Mat. 15.13.rooted up, and come to a better (if they can find it) according to the scriptures. Whether therfore our exception, or their defense be more vayn & frivolous, (as they speak) let the prudent judge.