Justification of Separation from the Church of England, Treatise · Section 62 – Section 63
Lastly the word Church (you say) must be expounded figuratively Mr B.to avoid the absurd…t…s, which e…s would necessarily follow out of the text, viz: that, the whole Church must speak ioyntly, which were confusion contrary to 1 Cor. 14. 40. that women must medle in Church affaires, which the Apostle forbids, ver. 34. that children must speak, which were impossible: so then it must needs …e taken figuratively, the part for the whole, and if one part must be left out, why not an other, till the cheif of the Congregation be taken, who are chosen by the rest as their mouth.
Touching the exception of confusion, I desire the reader to rememberAns. what hath been formerly answered: adding further, that Mr B. herein doth not oppose vsus but the Apostles, and Apostolicall Churches governed by them: yea the H. Ghost it self propounding their examples for our imitation. The Apostle Peter, Act. 1. 15. &c. standing vp in the middest of the disciples (which were about an hundred and twenty) spake to them about the choise of one to succeed Iudas: and it is sayd, ver. 23. that they, that is, these brethren to whom he spake, presented two: as also that the whole multitude, Act. 6. 5. presented the seaven for Deacons to the twelve Apostles, who are sayd, v. 2. to hauehave called the multitude, and to have spoken vntounto them, & v. 6. to have prayed, and layd hands on the elect Deacons. Now might not any prophane spirit take vp M. B. words, and insult over the holy Ghost himself, and say: what did all the disciples that were in the place (an hundred and twenty) present Ioseph, and Mathias? They must needs speak in presenting these two, and spake they ioyntly, or all at once? this were confusion contrary to 1 Cor. 14. 14. did the women speak? they must not medle in Church matters, …. 34. did children speak? it is impossible. So for Act. 6. did all the twelve Apostles speak at once, v. 2. and pray at once, v. 6. did the whole multitude speak ioyntly, when they presented the 7. Deacon… v. 6. here were the like confusion; and besides here were women, and children in the Church also. Now let the indifferent reader judge, what M. B. hath sayd more against vsus, then any Lucian or scoffing Atheist might obiect against the spirit of God himself, and his holy penman the Evangelist.
Yea further, by these and the like consequences, women and children are vtterly excluded from the Church, as no parts of it.
Luke sayth, Act. 15. 22. that the whole Church sent messengers to Antiochia, and Paul 1 Cor. 14. 23. speakes of the whole Churches comming together in one to exercise themselves in prayer, prophesying, and the like parts of Church communion; but children neyther could send messengers, nor pray, nor prophesie, nor the like, and women might not speak in the Church; and therefore both they must be left out of the Church, and if one part why not an other, & so till we come to the cheif of the congregation, that they alone may be the Church, and all in all? & as it is iust with God, that he which opposeth the truth, should oppose himself also, so doth Mr B. in this very place intāgle himself in the same absurdities, wherin he would ensnare vsus. First he affirms the Church, Math. 1…. must be the principall of the congregation. Then Mr B. is not your congregation the true Church of Christ, for the principall of your Church, namely your self, hath no power to excommunicate. And say not for shame, the Archdeacon or officiall are principalls or lesse principalls of your congregation.
Again, which is the cheif thing I desire may be observed, you say, these principalls must be chosen by the rest of the Church, & be their mouth, and stand for the whole. And how chosen? must the whole Church speak joyntly when they chuse them? that were confusion. must women speak? that is contrary to the scriptures. Yet are they members of the congregation, and so are young youthes, childrē, and servants. I adde further, the Church you say, is two or three principall members. Well then, they two or three must speak to the party, how can he els heare? but for two or three to speak together, is confusion, and contrary to the cōmaundement, 1 Cor. 14. 31. for all must speak by one & one.
And by this time, I hope you are ashamed of such tristing as here you vse.
I do therefore answer in few words: it is not necessary that every one of the people should speak to the offender, no nor of the officers neyther. If but one officer do sufficiently evince, and reprove the party, what needs more speak? The rest both Officers & people, may manifest their consent eyther by voice, signe, or sil…nce, yet so as liberty be preserved for any in place, and order, to speak, eyther by way of addition, limitation, or dissent. And for women, they are debarred by their s…x, as from ordinary prophecying, so from any other dealing wherin they take authority over the man, 1 Cor, 14. 34. 35. 1 Tim. 2. 11. 12. yet not simply from speaking: they may make profession of faith, or confession of sin, say Amen to the Churches prayers, sing Psalmes vocally, accuse a brother of sin, witnes an accusation, or defend themselves being accused, yea in a case extraordinary, namely where no man will, I see not but a woman may reprove the Church, rather then suffer it to go on in apparent wickednes, and communicate with it therein. Now for children, and such as are not of yeares of discretion, God and nature dispenseth with them, as for not communicating in the Lords supper now, so vnderunder the law for not offering sacrifices, from which none of yeares were exempted: neyther is there respect of persons with God in the common duties of Christianity.
And for that so oft reinforced objection of authority given to two or three, and therefore not to all, I have answered and do, that to two, or three, and yet to all, when there are but two or three in all, as vsually comes to passe in the raysing, and dispersing of Churches.
Your 6. Argument to prove that the word Church must be taken Mr B.figuratively is first, that els the Corinthians had offended, who being all commaunded did but some of them proceed against the incestuous person. 1 Cor. … 13. 2 Cor. 2. 6. 2. that els Paul had offended, who vponupon the complaint of Cloes house did himself, without wayting for the Churches consent, being absent, iudge and determine the matter, and s…nt to them to execute … sentence.
These two Arguments Mr B. are in your hands like the two witnessesAns. that came against Christ, they neyther agree one with an other, nor eyther of them with the truth. In the former you plead for the Presbytery in saying that some of them did proceed against him, in the latter you vtterly overthrow that, and step in for the Bishops sole power where you make Paul alone iudge and determiner of the busines. I am verily perswaded Mr Smyth hath felt your pulse inMr Smyth pag. …4. this place, and found directly what blood runs in your …eynes; to him therefore do I leave you for iudgement in the case.
And for answer to the particulars.
In the first argument you do most sinfully corrupt the scriptures, knowing that if they be soundly alleadged, they will give no countenaunce to your errour. For where Paul sayth, it is sufficient for 2 Cor. 2. 6.the same man that he was rebuked of many, you for the word many put s…me: where some doth import a part, and but a part: (for where some are sayd to do a thing, it followes, that other some do it not) where the word many is oft times put for all, as being opposed to one, or a few: as in this place, many rebuking to one rebuked. Take for this phrase of speach, these scriptures. Dan. 12. 2. Mat. 13. 17. Luke 12. 7. Rom. 5. 19. and 8. 29. & 12. 4. 5. 1 Cor. 10. 17. & 12. 12. 14.
But mark I pray thee (wise reader) when this man expounds Math. 18. 19. 20. where mention is made of a few two or three having the power of Christ, there by two, or three are meant the officers, and Christ hath established the authority of a few for the good of all, and again two or three officers, and a few, have this authority: and yet notwithstanding, when he comes to expound 2 Cor. 2. 6. where mentionpag. 95. 98. is made of many rebuking the offender, there by many must be meant the officers also.
What Mr B: are two or three Officers in respect of the whole body many? Doth the holy Ghost speaking of a few in the Church, mean the officers, and speaking of many, mean the officers also? It were good you awoke out of your dream, that you might spy your contradictions, and how one peice reproves an other.
To the obiection I do answer, that first it doth not appear that the party was excommunicated, it may be vponupon admonition he repented, and so the extremity spoken of, 1 Cor. 5. 5. was prevented: and 2. if he were, eyther by many may be meant all, as I have formerly shewed, or otherwise it is sufficient if some reprove, the Elders or some of them, specially, by their office, and so of the brethren in the second place, if they see necessary cause; wherevpon with the silent consent of the rest, iudgement may be given, or the party delivered to Sathan.Mr B.