Animadversion to Cliftons Advertisement, Part 4
Of the 7. articles which they obiect unto us; as contrarie to our former profession.
They aAdvertis. p. 27.pretend more sound and better observations that they could send and spread out against us. Let us bring them to the trial.
Cōfess. art. 10.17.19.20. Counterp. p. 175… 176. Defēse against Mr Smyth. p. 126.127.128. and in other Treatises.1. WHeras (say they) wee had learned and professed, that Christ was the onelyonly King and Lord of his Church, and had left unto it among men but a ministerial government, and that all the multitude of the members the saincts, ought to obey & submit to the Eldership in every Church: Now we have lately been taught, *In their dispute against us: & in Mr Rob. Iustif. p. 217.225. &c.that the people as Kings have power one over an other: and that the saincts being Kings are superior to their officers, because the order of Kings is the highest order or estate in the Church, and so an order superiour unto, and above the order of the officers or Eldership. Also that the church may in relation to the officers, being servants therin, be called a Lord &c.
I answer; first our former profession touching Christ the onelyonly King and Lord, we hold it firm in all points as before; and never had so much as a thought to reason against it. Secondly for the ministerial government of the Church by the Officers, we never disputed against it: but doo stil acknowledge the whole Church and every member is to submit unto their ministration in the Lord. Our cō troversie was about the Churches power, as we have bpag. 10.before manifested. Thirdly, for the people being Kings, we neyther taught nor doo teach otherweise then as we alwayes cConfess. art 17.professed; namely that they are a d1. Pet. 2, 9royal Preisthood, made by Christ unto God, both eRev. 5, 10.Kings and Preists, and that reign on the earth: not one over an other, as they speak, but one with another, in the fellowship of the faith of Christ. That fRefut. of Giffard. p. 75.every Christian is a gRev. 1, 6. Psal. 149.King and Preist unto God, to spie out, censure, and cut down syn as it ariseth, with that two edged sword that proceedeth out of Christs mouth. These things heretofore both we and they professed: which now they would injuriously turn to be against Christ the onelyonly King, and against the ministerial goverment of his officers: such collections, as we think our common adversaries (that make conscience of their words▪) would be ashamed for to make. Touching Mr. Robinsons book which they allege, I have desired himself to answer, which he was willing to doo, and hath written as foloweth.
Mr Robinsons answer.
Because Mr Iohnson hath in his “pag. 27.Answer touching the division expressly taxed my book against M. Bernard, I think it meet to insert a breif answer to his exceptions, as followeth. He there writeth thus.
Wheras we had learned, and professed that Christ was the onelyonly King, and Lord of his Church, and had left unto it among men, but a ministerial government, and that al the multitude of the members, the saincts ought to obey, and submitt to the Eldership in every Church: Now we have lately been taught, that the people as Kings have power one over another: and that the saincts being Kings are superiour to their officers, because the order of Kings is the highest order in the Church &c. Also that the Church may in relation to the officers being servants therein, be caled a Lord, &c. And for this he quoteth my book, p. 217 225. adding that I advance the people one above another as Kings, intitle them with kingly and lordly power in the outward policie and affayrs of the church, by which as the Prelates on the one hand, so the people on the other hand become idols.
Acknowledging the former and latter part of that he sayth we have formerly professed, I except against the midle clause of the sentence, in sundry respects. First, in that he drawes the question, which is about the power of Christ in the Church (common to all) to the government and guydance of the Church in the use of this power, which is peculiar to the officers: which may also more clearly appear to him that reades the places he quotes in the margent, wherein he concludeth (though more covertly) a double vntruth: the one, that, because the government of the Officers is onelyonly ministerial and not Kingly, therefore there is no Kingly power left vntounto the Church, or communicated with the Saynts for the suppressing of sin: the other that, because the Officers are the onelyonly governours of the Church, and so by vsus acknowledged, therefore they onelyonly have the power of Christ. And thus he would closely wrap up the Churches power, in the officers government, and not be seen in it. For the clearing then of the difference between government, and power; it must be considered, that by government may eyther be vnderstood the whol… …ensation of Christs Kingly office, whither inward, or outward, whither by himself or vp others: and so this power, we speak of, is comprehended vnderunder it as a part thereof. Or it is taken more strictly for the guidance, and ordering of the Church in her Publique affayres, and the administration, and exequution of them: and so it apperteyneth to the Officers and is clean another thing then the power in question. For the proving of this difference. The Apostle Paul wrytes to the whole Church of Corinth to excommunicate the incestuous man, *1. Cor. 5.4.5.by the power of the Lord Iesus Christ. This Power he would have the whole Church to vse; but yet would not have the whole Church to become governours, nor to take vponupon them government, but the officers onelyonly: by which it appeareth that government, and power, are divers things. I do further adde, what if the whole Eldership should be charged by 2. or 3. witnesses, with heresy, blasphemy, or the like crime, and complaynt thereof be made to the Church? Mr. Iohnson in this his †p. 47.Answer cōfesseth that the Church (he would be asked whither womē and childrē or no,) may depose al her officers joyntly, persisting in transgression, though in the same place he mince the matter too small, in saying they may depose, or refuse them, & separate from thē, and againe, refuse them. Wheras to depose, and to separate from, or refuse, are very divers, For 1. to separate from the Eldership requires no power, but libertie, and therfore may be doon by one man, or woman, upon just occasion: so cannot deposition be, upon any occasion, but by the Church: for which deposition of al the officers of the kingdom of Christ, the church; a man would think the power of Christ were needful, and that by it such a judgment should passe out. Besides, the Church in deposing her officers, dooth not separate her self from them, (to speak properly) but them from her. Wel, to take the least libertie he wil give the people. If they may separate from al their officers persisting in transgression, then they must receive the complaynt of sin, which is orderly brought, and by sufficient witnesses, against them, and must examine, and judge the matter. Now if it argue power to receive a complaynt of sin against one brother, and to examine, and judge it, and so to censure him by excōmunication, if ther be cause; dooth it not also argue power to receav a complaynt of sin agaynst all the officers, to examine, and judg it, and so to censure them, as their is cause, by deposition? But what now shall the Elders do accounting themselves innocent, and wrougfully accused, whilst the Church thus examineth things, and judgeth of them? Shall they sur…ease their government, and fayl the Church in so great a …eed? and would M. Iohnson so practise? or are they not now to do a speciall work of theyr government, not onelyonly in preserving order, but in directing, instructing, and guiding the Church by the wod of God in her whole procedings. By which it appeareth, that judging of sin, and power to suppresse it, is one thing, and government for the right use, and ordering of the same, another thing. The officers which are judged do govern, and the bod… of the Church which judgeth them, is governed by them. We may yet further see this difference even in the Lordly governments of this world, and that both in Peace and Warre.
In the civile government of our own land, (then the which none in the world in the right vse of it is more excellent,) when a malefactor comes to be arraigned at the Assises, or Sessions, he is to be tryed by his country, (a competent company, where all cannot possibly passe vponupon him) which they cal the Iury, whose power and sentence is of such force, as that the Lord Cheif justice himself, and all the Bench with him cannot proceed agaynst it, eyther for the quitting or cōdemning of the person: and yet the Bench governeth the whole action, and the Iury is by them, according to law, to be governed. I wish the Elders with whō we have to do, would allow the body of the church the like liberty, at their Sitting, as they call it, that is, at their spirituall Sessions: or rather that they would better consider, that they are as Ministers to *Num. 16, 9 2. 2 Chrō. 35, 3.2. Co. 4, 5.stand, and serve, and not as Lords to sit, and judge.
Lastly when an army is sent against the Kings and their own enemies, the government is in the Captains, and Officers, but so is not al the power for fighting with, and subduing of their, and their kings enemies. Neyther is all the power of the church, which is an army with banners, in the officers alone, for the the subduing of Christs, and their enemies, sin, and Sathan, though the government be. Thus may the difference plainly be seen betwixt power, and government: in the opening of which I have been the longer,See for this, Iustif. of separation pag. 134 135. because 1. I think it a mayn ground of our controversie. 2. Our opposites do much insult over us, as speaking contradictions, when we yeeld the officers all the goverment, and yet deny thē al the power.) 3. The weaker sort ar much misled, and caried away thorough want of discerning this difference.
I proceed to a second thing, and affirm, that Christ hath not left to the church amōg men onelyonly a ministerial power (which he confusedly calleth government) as he sayth. He hath left the word of God, and gospell in the church, which is lively, and mighty in operation, Heb. 4 12. 2. Cor. 10.4, 5.peircing even to the dividing asunder of the soul, and spirit &c. ruling, and reigning in, and over the very hearts, and lives of men; binding their consciences: and bringing into captivitie every thought to the obedience of Christ. I know men can onelyonly minister this power, whither in doctrine, or discipline, as they speak. But it is one thing to say the power is onelyonly ministerial, and another thing, that men can onelyonly minister it. For men may be the ministers onelyonly of that power, which is kingly, and Lordly in it self, and so over men, as this is. So the saints can only minister their kingly power by participatiō of Christs ānoynting, as one speciall grace they have received: of which more hereafter.
Now in laying down the things, wherwith he chargeth me, he alters my words, misinterprets my meaning, and conceals that which I have writtē, and he read, in my book, for the explaning of the same.
And first he sayth I have taught that the people are as Kings one over another; that I advance them one over another, as Kings, and above their governours intitling thē with Kingly, & Lordly power, (that is goverment, as he explaines himself) in the outward policie of the Church.
I doo not in these places, or any other, advance the people one over another, much lesse over their officers, in the outward policy of the Church, that is (as he explains his meaning) in the government of it. I doo every where profess the Officers the governours, and the people the governed by them.
Neyther do I any where affirm, that the people ar Kings, or as kings one over another, as he chargeth me. I say in one place, that the saynts are not Kings for themselves alone, pag 226.but for their brethren also, as they are not Preists onelyonly for themselves, but for their brethren. And in another place,p. 133. that every one of the faithful is a King, not onelyonly to him self, but to every other member, as he is a Preist, and a Prophet &c. Here is a King one for another, and one to another, but not one over another, (much lesse over the officers) for government, in the external policie of the Church. The playn and simple truth then is; whatsoever men eyther mistake of ignorance, or suggest of an evil mind, that we do not cal the saynts Kings in respe…t of outward order, and government, as though they were to order, and govern the Church in her publick affaires, which is the work of the Officers: but as they are partakers of Christs kingly anoynting, by his spirit, common to the head, and the members, and so Kings by participation, and indowed with kingly power, for the cōquering and subduing of the power of sin, and Sathan, not onelyonly in themselves, but in their brethren also, by the sword of the spirit, the word of God, which they are to minister unto them, as all other graces in their order.
And this meaning being held, it may safely be taught that they are over one another, that is, to watch one over another, and so as kings to conquer their spirituall enemies one in another mutually. But I wil rather insist vpō mine own words, for, or to one another, as being most fit to shew that cōmuniō of the saints in this grace, as in the rest; which he also in all equity should have done. And thus I will prove this royall cōmunion of the saynts. And for them that make themselves merry herewith,Iob. 21, 3. let them suffer me to speak, and when I have spoken, let them mock on.
And first it must be observed that the place and scriptures which M. Iohnson notes in our Confession to prove Christ the onelyonly King of his Church, prove him as wel, (and that truely) to be the onelyonly Preist & Prophet of his Church. And if notwithstanding his sole prophecie, and preisthood peculiar to him, as the head, the saynts may be Prophets and Preists as members, by cōmunication, they may also be Kings by cōmunication notwithstanding his peculiar imperiall power. And so the scriptures testifie that he hath made vsus kings, and preists unto God even his Father, and so our Father.Rev. 1.6 & 5.10.
But it wilbe answered, that Christ hath made vsus Kings to resist, subdue, and conquer our spiritual enemies, Sin, Sathan, this world, and our worldly lusts, by *Eph. 6, 11, 17.the sword of the spirit, the word of God, and the work of the spirit, in and by the same. I grant it, and therupon conclude, that since Gods people are also by the same weapons, and means to resist and subdue the power of sin in their brethren,II. they are also kings in the same respec…, unto them.
The saynts are †Act. 11, 26 Rom. 14.4, 5. 1. Cor. 12, 27.Christians: and that for, and in respect one of another,III. as members vnderunder Christ, one of another: and therfore Kings. For to be a Christian for another, is nothing els but by participation of Christs annoynting, to be a Preist, Prophet, and King for another. Ad vntounto this, that whatsoever grace any member of the body hath received, it is for the use, and edification of the rest, and so in order to be administred by him as a good disposer of the grace of God. 1. Pet. 4.10And must this royal grace then, which the saynts have received, find no time nor place for the dispensation of it, vntounto others?
When a brother comes to subdue,IIII. and ma…e conquest of some spiritual enemy, or sin, appearing in his brother, eyther privately, or publiquely, in his place and order he dooth this as a fellow member, and Christian, and so by one of his three states, and indowments, of preist, prophet, or king (for he hath no office, wherein he administreth:) but by neyther of the two former, therfore by the latter, and as a king, and so made by Christ.
Lastly, the people are by M. Iohnsons own graunt,V. to choose their officers, as also upon just occasion to depose them. And this, as the former, they doo not as Preists, or Prophets, and therfore by their kingly indowment from, and vnderunder Christ.
And thus much to prove the saynts in their cōmunion (as Preists to offer up the prayers one of another, and Prophets to instruct one another, so also) partakers of the kingly dignity of Christ, as his mē bers, for the suppressing, and conquering of sin appearing, one in another, in that order which Christ hath left. And where do I in al this, as is imputed to me, advance the people, as others do the Prelates, and make them Idols? Do I give them power to prescribe and appoint other formes of Gods worship, offices of Ministery, canons, ceremonies, or holy dayes, then Christ hath prescribed, and appointed? to bind the conscience by urging subscription ex animo, to their own inventions, or to loose conscience by dispensations to sin, as of pluralities, non residencies, and the like? or that one man should set up, and pul down ministers and excommunicate, and absolve both ministers, and people by his sole authority? If another man should thus have charged Mr Iohnsō when he mainteyned the same libertie of the brethren (if nor greater) which I now do, though it may be not under the same terms, he would have pronounced it blasphemy in him. B passing by his terms of provocatiō, and reproach, I come to another exception: which is, that I make the order of saynts superiour unto the order of officers; to wit, in it self, as I there explayne my meaning▪ and not in respect of government, as he traduceth me. I know that he which guideth, ordereth, and directeth another, is in that his art, and work, superiour vntounto him that is so guided, ordered, and directed. So is the Pilote in guiding the ship, superiour, and above all the passengers in it, though the King, and his Councell: so is the Physition in ordering the kings body; as is also the meanest guide in leading, and directing him, and his army Royall in unknown places. So are the officers superiour to the Church in their art,Iustific. p. …18, 219. or work of government▪ which is the opening and applying of the scriptures to the use, and direction of the Church: but as this is done by them, in an order of service, and not of Lordship, so I judge, and call them inferiour. And so in my book, I make them equall in their persons, as saynts: superiour in the word they minister, and in the place of God: not so in their order of servants, wherin they minister, but inferiour.
pag. 217.My reasons there brought to prove mine affirmation, bycause he here medles not with, I also forbear in this place to confirm; onelyonly a few words of one of them, upon which the next, and last exception dependeth. Which is, that the order of Church-officers is inferiour to the order of the saints, bycause their order is an order of †2. Chron. 35.3. Num. 16.9. Eze. 44.11. 2 Cor. 4, 5.service, and servants unto the saynts the Church. I know Kings may be sayd to serve their people, and so to become their servants, but this is onelyonly in respect of their love towards them, and care for them; but not in respect of their order, which is a Lordship, and Kingship, by which they reign over their people, as their servants, and subjects. The like may be sayd of Christ himself, as that he served his disciples, and became as a servant, &c. And for that it must be considered, that as in the things wherin he did thus serve, and become as a servant, he did in his love make himself inferiour to his disciples, and preferred thē before himself: as in *Math. 20, 28.giving his life a ransome for many: in being †Luk. 22, 27as he that serveth at the table wherat his disciples sate, (in which respect he expressly teacheth thē to be greater thē himself:) and in washing their feet as they sate at supper; so was not his order an ord of service in it self, but of headship,Ioh. 13, 4, 5. and kingship: which if our Ch:…officers could prove their order to be, we would then acknowledge it in deed superiour to the order of saynts. But their order being merely an order of servāts, me thinks cōmon sense should serve to judge the same inferiour to the order of the Church, whose servants under Christ they are.
I ad in my book, pag. 225. that, the officers being by their order, servants, the Church may in that relation be called a Lord: not for the governing of them, in the outward policie, and affaires in the church, as he injuriously collects: but as they are for the Churches use, and service; which he conceals: though I expresly so note in the same place; as also that the same Church-servants are Church-governours: the gogernment of the Church being a mere service. And for the thing If the officers be to be called servants to the Church, what is the Church to be called to the officers? A servant is a relative, and must have a correlative: and I would know by what name he would call it, if not by the name of Lord, Mayster, Mistress, or the like. And if he deny this, he takes away from men the use of cōmon reason, and understā ding. Let the servants know, yea though stewards, as are the Church-officers, add so betrusted with the goverment in a special mā ner, that the wife of their Lord, and Mayster, is a degree above thē, and so to be acknowledged by them: least they not onelyonly wrong her, but provoke him to wrath.
Lastly, because he imputes new doctrine to me, I wil note down the doctrine of some few others, both more ancient, and more worthy of respect then my self.
Musculus in his Cōmentaries vponupon 1. Cor. 3, 22, 23, 24. Let no man glorie in men, for all are yours &c. sayth thus. Is it not absurd that the †Major in minore.greater (to wit the Church) should glory in the less, (to wit the officers) the *Dominus.Lord or mayster in the servant? And in this sense (sayth he further) the perversnes of the false Apostles is noted, who when they wer servants of the Church, did make of a ‡Domina.Mistress, or dame, a servant, and of servants, Lords. And agayn the foolishnes of the Church is taxed, who when they were Domini.Lords of their Ministers, gloried in their servants.
Bullinger upon the same place, vers. 21. sayth thus. So great is the dignity of them that beleev, that God hath subjected all things unto thē. It is therfore great folly if the †Dominus.Lord of thinges subject himself to the things &c.
Pareus professor of Heidelberg in his Cōmentaries, upon the same scripture, reproving the churches glorying in Paul, C…phas, &c. and quoting 2 Cor. 4.5. we preach not our selves, but Christ Iesus the Lord, and our selves your servants, for Iesus sake, sayth thus. *Non convenit Dominū gloriari in servo suo. &c.It is not meet that the Lord should glorie in his servant: wee are your servants, Therefore &c.
All these, and many moe, call the Church expresly a Lord, in the very same relation with me: and yet I suppose, never man chalenged them for making an Idol of it, or setting up a Lordly government: neyther would Mr. Iohnson me, had he not been immoderately jealous for the officers dignity.
Iohn Robinson.
The 2 Article objected.
Confess. art. 24.We professed heretofore, that Christ gave the power of receiving in & cutting off, to the whole body togither of every Christian congregation, & not to any one or more members sequestred from the whole &c. Now we have been taught that in cases of question and controversie, the greater part of the people are the Church; though al the Elders and other brethren be against them, &c. and so have the power to receiv in & cut off &c.
I answer, ther is no contradiction in these things; we hold stil in all points according to the article alleged: neyther ever taught we the people onelyonly to be the Church sequestred from their officers; but the officers governing, and the people governed, to be the Church which hath the power, to use in holy order. But if these officers fal into heresie or wickednes themselves, or to abett wickednes in others, and wil not be reclaymed by any holy means the Church can use, then may they by the Church which chose them, be deposed, as unworthy of their places, yea and excommunicated, and so al other impenitent sinners. and this by the voices of the most of the congregation, if al consent not; aswel as members or officers are received in by the voices of the most, if some doo dissent: for ther is one power for them both. And these our opposites must eyther manifest, that if one or 2 officers or members doe dissent in a controversie, ther is a sequestration of them from the whole, and the Church then hath not the power of Christ to receav in and cutt off: or els al may see, that this is a colourable accusation of theirs, & no contradiction of ours. For if the consent of al & every one, be not necessaryly to be had, they dissenting through their ignorance, frowardnes, or the like: thē the most voices must prevayl. But how farr their new doctrine (that the Elders are the Church,) is, both from our former professiō and from equitie, I have before shewed.
The 3 Article.
*Coūterp. pag. 177.We wrote heretofore, that the Elders have the reyns of government cōmitted to them: now we are taught that the governmēt of the church is not Aristocratical, yea the people as Kings have the power &c.
I answer; we differ not from our former profession, but they deceiv the reader, by turning government into power, which we in our publik profession heretofore distinguished, and so doo still: giving the government of the whole Church, and all the actions of it, unto the officers: the power to the whole body; and so to the officers with the people, as joyntly Kings and Preists: of which things we have spoken before. We never held the Church to be a mere Aristocratie, as they speak, intending that the cratos or power should be in the hands of a few: neyther shal these men ever prove it. And in the book which they cite, †Coūterp. pag. 177.in the very same place (though they dissemble it,) we shew the Church (not the Elders onelyonly) to have Christs *1. Cor. 5.4 12, 13.power to judge al within the same; and that the keyes of the Kingdom of Heaven are committed to the whole Church, as the Protestants have heretofore testified against the Papists. That these men doo but feign contradiction, and would blind the reader, by confounding the Churches power and goverment, as one.
The 4. article.
Wee professed hertofore, that no sacraments should be ministred,Confess. art. 34, &c. until the Pastors or Teachers were chosē & ordeyned into their office: now it is held by some, that seing al the holy things of God are the churches, & people without officers are a church, therfore they may without officers have the use of the sacraments and al the holy things of God, and consequently may receive in by baptisme, confirm by the Lords supper, cast out by excommunication &c. And in this writing sent unto yow, it may be observed, how they inferr that people without officers may cast out, and therfore may receiv in, ther being one power for both.
I answer; they wrong us, and abuse their readers. 1. There is not to my knowledge (as before I *pag. 66.testified) any one man amōg us, that held or holdeth that people without officers may have the use of the sacraments; but we all continue in the same profession that we made before. 2. It is frawd, and abuse of the reader, and injurie to me, when they first speak of receiving in by baptisme, and then allege from my letter, that the people without officers may receiv in: as if they would bear the world in hand, I therfore hold, they may baptise. Wheras first the scripture sheweth that persons uncircū cised (and consequently unbaptised), may pass into the Church-covenant of the Lord, Deut. 29.10.11.12.13. compared with Jos. 5.2.5.
Secondly the children of the faithful, are born members of the Church, and are in the covenant before they are baptised. Thirdly a man excommunicated, may be received into the Church, yet not by baptising of him. And 4. we heretofore in our Confession when we †Confess. art. 34.denyed the sacraments in a Church without officers, yet *Conf. art. 24. Apol. p. 45.62.professed they had then power to receiv in members. Wherin now are we contrary to our former faith? Doo not these things rather show, how they seek to make strife, where none is.
The 5. article
Confess. art. 21. &c.We had learned, that none may usurp or execute a ministerie, but such as are rightly caled by the Church wherof they stand ministers, unto such offices, and in such maner as God hath prescribed in his word: now it is held by some that people out of office may execute al the works & duties of the ministerie, for baptisme, Lords supper, censures &c. And these men in their second exceptiō here write, there is one power for receiving in and casting out, and that people without officers may doo both, as is observed before.
I answer; their frawd and wrongful dealing is also observed before; and here to make their syn the more remarkable, they proclaym it the second time. Of ministring the sacraments, and of receiving in and casting out of members, and against usurping or executing a ministerie without due caling, we hold as alwayes heretofore: they repete the same things, but to their own further blame; for our professed enemies, doo not ordinarily more wrest our words.
The 6. article
Cōfess. art. 1.10.17.18. &c. throughout.6. We learned and used heretofore to apply to our estate and use, the things that the scriptures teach concerning the governours and people in Israel. Now we ar excepted and opposed against, if we doo so, with these exceptions and the like, that they had civil authority and government, which the church hath not; that they could not in Israel forgive one an others syn, as we can now: that the people now have more power then in Israel, because now we folow Christ into heaven, wheras the people might not folow the high Preist into the most holy place &c.
I answer; the right applying of our estate to Israel, we alwayes have and stil doo approve: but these mens wrested proportions, and making the Church in Mat. 18. to be the same with the Iewes Synedrion or Sessions of civil Magistrates, we doo reprove, and so have doon in our more ancient writings, Refut. of M. Giff. pag. 76. &c. so that no new thing is doon by us.
2. That private men forgave not synns in Israel, so absolutely touching the Church order or politie, as Christians doo now, is evident by the Law, which bound the offender not onelyonly unto repentance and faith *Act. 15, 9, 11.in Christ, as also to †Lev. 5.5.confess his syn and satisfy his “Lev. 6, 5.neighbour offended; but withal to bring a trespass offring to the Preist, (the minister of the Church,) that so the Preist making an attonement for him before the Lord, it should be forgiven him, Levit. 6.2.5.6.7. Now under the Gospel, the Law is, if thy brother trespass against thee rebuke him, and if he repent forgive him: Luk. 17.3. neyther is such a man bound to goe to a minister that he may pray for, or forgive him; as the Papists by proportion *Bellar. de Poenit. l. 2. c. 3.doe gather. 3. That th'Apostle also sheweth a difference of our Church estate from the Iewes politie, Heb. 9.7.8.9. &c. & 10.19.20. compared with Gal. 4.1.2.3. &c, is manifest: neyther can our opposites deny it; onelyonly they cast stombling blocks in the readers way: saying thus, 1. what if any other would say, that Elders and Kings now should have more power then they had in Jsrael, because they now folow Christ into Heaven &c. To omit their yll framing of the reason, for their most advantage, I answer, they that would so say, should shew their ignorance, or a worse humour, Because Christs Kingdom is not †Ioh. 18, 36of this world, neyther medled he with Magistrates power, but left it *Rom. 13.1 &c.as it was, authorized of God his Father, and not subordinate to his Mediatorship; as “pag. 55.before is shewed: and therfore Magistracie hath neyther more nor less by him now, then in Israel and former ages. But his Church, and so the Magistrates therin as they are Christians, are advanced to a further degree of grace, then they were in, under the rudiments of the Law, Gal. 4.3.4. &c.
2. The Second block is a marginal note, that yet the people were typically caried in by the high Preist, in the precious stones on his shoulders and brest, as the most holy place it self was a type of Heaven. I answer, this is true, and confirmeth that which I sayd: for if into the earthly sanctuary the people could not freely enter, in their own persons, at any time, but figuratively, although they had so much as by faith in Christ did save them: then is our estate now, as touching the outward Church order and politie, better then theirs, which are not restreyned from any place whither the ministers of the Gospel may them selves enter, but we are aRev. 20, 6.the Preists of God and of Christ, and bHeb. 10, 19.may be bold to enter into the holy place, into the type wherof onelyonly cLev. 16, 2.17. Luk. 1.10the high Preist under the Law might enter sometimes and the people not at al personally. And in every place we may offer incense unto the name of God, and a pure oblation, Mal. 1.11. and are freed frō those legal prohibitions, dCol. 2.20 21.touch not, tast not, handle not, and other worldly rudiments under which Israel in their childs estate were in bondage, Gal 4.3. Therfore the Apostle, which sheweth their estate and ours to be one in substance concerning faith in Christ unto salvation, H…b. 11. sheweth also great differences between their condition and ours touching the clear manifestation of Gods grace, and the outward politie of the Church; Heb. 9. & 10. & 12. Gal. 4.
Finally these things we never intended or extended to any further rights or liberties of the people now, then we find evidently taught us by the doctrine and practise eMat. 18, 17—20. & 28.20. Act. 11, 2—18. & 15, 22— 28. & 21, 18—22. 1. Cor. 5, 1.— 13. Rev. 2, 29. & 5, 10.of th'Apostles: that if in any thing we miss (as easily we may,) in the application of those legal types, yet the doctrine confirmed by other playn scriptures, remayneth sound and good. And such differences between Israel and us, we also have put, in our more ancient writings: Discover. pag. 40. & 60.
Their last note is in effect one with the first: shewing how Christ and th'Apostles reasoned wel, from the civil state of Israel, which we grant. Yet I hope they wil not deny, but it is possible for other men to reason amyss, and to make yll proportions from the common wealth of Israel, as doo the fS… before, pag. 16.Papists, and as before is manifested that these our opposites have doon.
The 7. article
Plea for infants p. 166 167.1…8. Treat. against Anabaptists p. 16. &c. Apol. p. 108. &c. Answ. to Mr Iak. p 17. & ….7. We held that the baptism of Rome, was as true baptisme, as circū cision in the Apostasie of Israel was true circumcision, and needed not to be renounced and repeted: Now we were taught that the baptism aforesayd is an Idol; and we know al Idols &c, are to be renounced and rejected, Isa. 30.22. and an Idol is nothing in the world, 1. Cor. 8.4. so then such baptism is nothing.
I answer; our former profession and writing hath been, that circumcision in the Apostasie of Israel, aDis…ov. pag. 116.could be no true sacrament, no true seal of the covenant of Gods favour unto them: also that baptism delivered in the false church is no true seal of Gods covenant, or true sacrament. Mr. Iohnson himself hath defended this very same, that bApol. p. 109. &c.in that estate of their Apostasie it could not be a true Sacrament, and so for the baptism in Rome; not a true but a false sacrament. So the contrarietie must be thus, heretofore we held it to be a false sacrament, but now we were taught it is an Jdol. Between these I hope al men of judgment, which know what an Jdol meaneth, wil think ther is no contradiction. But is not this good conveyance, for them to say; as true baptism, as circumcision in the Apostasie of Jsrael was true circumcision: wheras we professed of that baptisme (as also of that circumcision) that it could not be a true sacrament unto them, but a false? Wil not the judicious reader see, that they cast a myst before mens eyes, to disgrace the truth which themselves formerly professed? As for the consequences, I have before cpag. 69. &c.answered them; and shewed how though the Idol be put away, ther need no repeting again of the outward washing: and have proved that Antichrist hath turned the Lords baptisme into an Idol, as the Iewes did the brazen serpēt, d2. King. 18, 4.by burning incense to it: and that the most conscionable in our own nation have so professed, and the Vniversitie of Cambridge printed, eM. Perk. Wa…ning against Idol. p. 23.that the church of Rome transformeth the sacraments (yea even Christ, and God himself) into Jdols. But these our opposites are gone from the truth and from themselves herein, into the tents of our common adversaries, M. Gifford and others, who would have concluded hereupon a new outward washing: but were refuted *Refut. of Giff. p. 65, &c.by Mr Barrow. And Mr Iohnson once professed that fAnsw. to M. Iakob. in pref. p. 1he thought he should never have seen any more absurd writing then M. Giffards; though now he reasoneth like him. He also told the Oxford Doctors, that gApolog. p. 113.to hold the popish church to be a true church, having a true ministerie and true sacraments, or els that they are unbaptised, and must admitt of the Anabaptists rebaptisation, are nought els, but gross errours and notorious absurdities. Yet loe how he now presseth us with the same things: and passeth over our reasons rendred heretofore, without answering them as is meet.