The Utter Routing of the Whole Army of All the Independents and Sectaries, Pages 1-101 (1 of 3)

The Utter Routing of the Whole Army of All the Independents and Sectaries · Pages 1-101 (1 of 3)

p. 1THe Apoſtle Saint Paul in the fourth of the Epheſians, exhorting all Chriſtians to walk worthy of the Vocation whereunto they were called, and to behave themſelves as beſeemed Brethren; wiſheth them with all lowlineſſe and meekneſſe, with long ſuffering and patience, to bear one with another in love: And uſeth a forceable Argument, to move them to brotherly kindneſſe, Becauſe, ſaith he, there is but one body and one ſpirit and one hope of Salvation: We all worſhip one God, we are all conſecrated to him with one Baptiſme, and we all hope for one and the ſelf-ſame glory: Therefore as there is but one Lord, one faith, one Baptiſme; ſo be yee alſo of one minde, live in love, and keep the unity of the Spirit in the bond of Peace. If ever there was need of this exhortation, there is now ſingular uſe of it, eſpecially in this diſtracted Nation wherein we live. For the diviſion of a Kingdom is the ruine of it: the diviſion of a family deſtroys it: the diviſion between brethren brings a confuſion amongſt them. It hath ever bin obſerved, That diverſity of judgment & opinion hath made a difference in affection. The difference between the Iews and the Samaritans in points of Religion, made the Diſciples deſire, That fire might come down from heaven to end that controverſie. p. 2The difference between us and the Papiſts, and the diverſity of opinions between us, made them, becauſe they could not bring down fire from heaven, fetch it out of hell, to blow up the Parliament; and becauſe that had not the deſired effect, and the diverſity of opinion ſtil remaining, makes the difference of their affection from us ſo great, that nothing can expiate their indignation againſt us, but the utter internetion and deſtruction of us all; and this and this only, next unto our own ſins, is the cauſe of all thoſe fatall calamities this miſerable kingdome is now imbroyled with. And therefore, all care and diligence among brethren, ſhould be uſed to get a right underſtanding one of another, and to move them to bear one with another, and ever to call to minde the ſaying of Abraham to Lot, Gen. 13. Let not us contend together for we are brethren. I am moſt aſſured, if there were a right underſtanding of the differences that are now among brethren, there could not be ſuch bitter expreſſions one againſt another, and ſuch alienation of affection as is now too frequent and too well known to the common enemy. We are commanded, If it be poſſible, as much as lies in us, to be in in peace with all men, Rom. 12. 18. And the fruits of diſcord are ſet down in the 5^th of the Galathians verſe 15. If ſaith the Apoſtle ye bite and devoure one another, take heede yee be not conſumed one with another, and in the 20. verſe. Hatred ſaith the Apoſtle, varience, emulation, ſtrife, hereſies &c. and envyings are of the fleſh, and they that do ſuch things ſhall not enter into the Kingdome of God. A double miſery follows thoſe that do theſe things, miſery here, and miſery hereafter, it excludes men out of heaven. The contemplation of the ſad condition, that will inevitably come upon that Land, Kingdome, and Church, where thoſe variances and heart-burnings are, and where there is ſuch diverſity of opinions, and by reaſon of them, ſuch difference in affection, put me chiefely upon this imployment, to ſee and try, if by any poſſible meanes, I could, by ſhewing wherein the difference between the brethren lyeth, be an inſtrument of a good accord amongſt them: reſolving with my ſelf by Gods aſſiſtance whatſoever others do, to obſerve to the uttermoſt of my abilities, the royall Law, Jan. 2. 8. I do conceive, that if there were a right underſtanding one of anothers opinions, the world would wonder there ſhould be ſuch invectives in every pamphlet one againſt another, and ſuch varience among thoſe that are joyned together p. 3and that with nigheſt relations. The truth is, the miſ-underſtanding of each others opinions and the miſ-priſian of each others intentions, is the onelyonly cauſe of this diverſity of affection which to the diſhonour of God and of our holy profeſſion, and indeed to the diſgrace of Chriſtian Religion, every where too much venteth it ſelfe. And therefore as Abraham ſaid unto Lot, ſo ſay I to all thoſe that love the truth in ſincerity and wiſh the Peace of Zion; Let not us contend, eſpecially with evill language, for we are brethren; we have one father, we worſhip one God, we have one light, one truth, one way. And this I profeſſe to all the world, That I contend not for victory, but for that ancient light, the faith once delivered unto the Saints, Iude 3. For that truth which we have heard from the beginning, 1 Iohn 2. ver. 14. for the old way, verſe 6. The way the truth and the life, Ioh. 14. and for the honour of that Church againſt which the gates of hell can never prevaile; in the which there are all thoſe undeceiveable marks, as are able for ever to declare her to be built upon the foundation of Peter, in which the Goſpell of Jeſus Chriſt is purely and ſincerely both preached and beleeved, and where the Sacraments are rightly adminiſtred, and in the which there is the true invocation of God, and all other requiſites that make her a true Church; and from which there is no juſt cauſe of ſeparation. That I have dedicated this Treatiſe to no man, nor ſought the patronage of any Authority, no mortall creature I preſume, will blame me, knowing my Reaſons. For writing in defence of the Prerogative Royall of Kings, againſt Papall Uſurpation; I dedicated my booke unto the King of great Britaine, France, and Ireland, ſuppoſing my ſelfe ſafe under his protection, whoſe honour and imperiall dignity I maintain: but all men know, what miſery to the ruine of me, my wife, and many ſmall children came upon me by it, through the power and exorbitant authority of the Prelates: ſo that for my duty and Loyalty to the King, I had a priſon for my reward, and the ſcornes and contumelies of the world to comfort me in it. And when I moſt humbly petitioned his highneſſe, complaining againſt the injuſtice done me, and moſt ſubmiſſively ſupplicated his Majeſty (who was the Caeſar to whom only I could then appeal) that he would be pleaſed to grant me one of theſe humble requeſts, either That his Majeſty would be pleaſed, but for one houre to give me a hearing of my juſt defence; or if p. 4that could not be granted, That at leſt he would then grant me that liberty in his Kingdome, that he denyed not to Crows and Kites and other Vermine, that I might provide for my young ones; and if his highneſſe would not be pleaſed to condeſcend unto either of the former juſt demands, That then he would give me leave to depart the Kingdom, and to go into any other Country where I might enjoy my Liberty and provide for my poore diſtreſſed family. I am moſt aſſured there was never a more equall Petition put up to any Prince in the world, yet his Majeſtie vouchſafed not to yeeld unto any of theſe my requeſts, nor to any other Petition put up either by my poor diſtreſſed wife or calamitous children; ſo that without any wrong unto his Majeſty, I may truely ſay, That Paul found more favour from a Heathen Roman Caeſar, then I had from a Chriſtian King, the defender of the faith. After I ſaw all poſſibility of releefe was now taken from me, I writ my Apology to the Biſhops themſelves, diſcovering unto them their unjuſt proceedings in their Courts, and their unrighteous dealings towards my ſelfe, and gave them my reaſons of all I ſpake, without any offenſive language and without any perturbation of Spirit; and Dedicated this my Booke to the Lords of his Majeſties Privy Councell, expecting ayde and reliefe from them, and indeed I had no hope of ſuccour from any other, nor knew none to whom I could better apply my ſelfe, earneſtly imploring their patronage; but they, as it is well knowne, of Patrons became my unjuſt Judges, and after they had made me a ſpectacle to Men and Angells, and expoſed me to the ſcorne and ludibry of the world, ſent me into baniſhment, where I lived a living death and a dying life, and ſuffered ſuch intolerable miſery of all ſorts, as would exceed beliefe to relate; and I am moſt confident, if all the particulars were truly known, the world never heard the like, and there I had ended my dolefull life, had not God of his infinite mercy called this Parliament, and put into their hearts to redeem me from my captivity; for the which incomparable favour, I do, as of duty I am ever bound, profeſſe my ſelfe to the laſt drop of my blood to be their ſervant in the Lord, and in all their moſt juſt and honourable imployments; I hope, with all fidelity to anſwer to the expectation of the world, and ſhall in life and death ſhew my ſelfe to be one, that without all by-reſpects ſhall ever aime at the glory of God▪ the honour of them and my p. 5Country, and the common good of all: and ſhall never by Gods aſſiſtance do any thing in their concernment, that ſhall be unbeſeeming a Man and a Chriſtian. Now becauſe by my ſad experience, I found that I could neither from King nor Nobles have protection, I reſolved never any more in Gods matters, to ſhroud my ſelf under any covert but Divine Providence, and that, I with an aſſured confidence promiſe my ſelf, eſpecially when I now maintain the prerogative royall of the King of Saints, & King of Kings, the Lord Jeſus Chriſt, Who is our Lawgiver, upon whoſe ſhoulders the government of his Church is laid, who is the wonderfull Counſeller, the Prince of peace; whoſe dignity and royalty in all this diſpute between me and Mr. Walter Mountague, I have to the uttermoſt of my power maintained, under the ſhadow of whoſe wings I have ever found there is only ſafety; whoſe bleſſed aſſiſtance, in all calamities, they that truſt in him, may be moſt aſſi…ed of. His patronage now and his defence, is my ſhield, whoſe cauſe and the honour of whoſe kingdome at this time I contend for. And howſoever, in all my life, in all humane learning, I was never ſo wedded to my own reſolves, but▪ upon better reaſon I could eaſily be divorced from them, yet in Gods matters, if an Angell ſhould come from Heaven and teach me, that, that there were another way to happineſſe, then by that new and living way, the blood of Jeſus Chriſt, who was the Lambeſlaine from the beginning of the world, I would count him Anathema. Or if an Angel ſhould tell me there were a new way of worſhipping God, and ſerving him, then that which God himſelf hath ſet down in his holy Word, I would account him accurſed; for I have learned to believe God and Faith upon their word and bond, without any either Angelicall or Humane reaſon, or the authority of Coun…els and Fathers: and whatſoever I finde a warrant in Gods Word for, I have learned to cleave cloſe to it againſt all humane reaſon, ſuppoſing ſuch men none of Gods, nor Faiths, trueſt friends that will not believe them upon their own word and bond, except they have reaſon, humane authority, Councels, and Fathers, and …aine traditions joyned with them for ſureties. Again, if any man ſhould go about to perſwade me, that there were any other government eſtabliſhed in the Church of God, then an Ariſtocraticall and a Presbyterian one, I ſhould notwithſtanding all humane reaſon to the contrary, ſubmit my ſelf to that kind of government, p. 6as being moſt confidently aſſured that it is warranted in Gods Word; which all Chriſtians are bound for ever to make the Rule and Square, both of our faith, manners and government. And here I muſt minde all thoſe that ſhall read this Book, that this is no new opinion of mine, but that which I have once and again ſuffered for▪ and if ever they have read my Elenchus religionis papiſticiae, or my Flagellum pontificis, or my Apologie, or any of my Latine Books, in all thoſe they will finde, that the cauſe of all my ſufferings was this, and this only, That I maintained that all Churches were to be governed by an Ariſtocraticall and Presbyterian government, which in thoſe Books I have clearly and fully (through Gods aſſiſtance) made good. Yea, in in my anſwer to the Bill of Information put up againſt me in the Star-chamber, they ſhall have ſome reaſons I gave there, of this my tenent, to the Lords of his Majeſties Hrivie Councell, and Judges in the Star-chamber; ſo that I ſtand to my principles and am no ſtarter. And if then amongſt Gods people it was thought an opinion worthy the ſuffering for, and my Chriſtian brethren deemed me worthy of honour for it, and afforded me their prayers, and ſhewed me and mine in all our diſtreſſes, many curteſies, when we found little favour from our own brethren (which their humanity I muſt never forget, but with all due thankfulneſſe for ever acknowledge) I ſay, if then this my opinion was thought Orthodox, and worthy of their applauſe, I ſee no good reaſon why a truth then ſhould not be counted a truth now; for the Word of God out of which I had it, is the ſame, and if it were good then, it is good now: for the change of mens minds cannot change the truth, but it muſt be ever truth: but this my opinion I learned out of Gods Word then which ſhall be for ever, by his gracious aſſiſtance the warrant of my beliefe and practice. This Word therefore, I deſire all my Chriſtian Brethren, in the deciding of this queſtion now agitated, amongſt Gods people and his faithfull ſervants, concerning Church-government, to take into their hands, and with thoſe noble B…reans to ſit down and examine whatſoever ſhall be ſaid on either ſide according to the holy Scrigtures: and I intreat them alſo to lay aſide all paſſion (which Religion has no need of) and all vain-glory and bitterneſſe, which is a diſhonour to our holy calling, and in the ſpirit of meekneſſe, and with a Virgin judgement, not raviſht with any previous or anticipated opinion, to p. 7come and approach to the Altar of truth, and ſo conſider and examine, which of thoſe two opinions the Brethren on both ſides now ſacrifice themſelves unto, be the offering that will beſt endure the firy-tryall, 1 Cor. 3. 13, 14, 15. viz. Whether the Presbyterian government Dependent, or a Presbyterian government Independent, both now laid upon the Altar, be the acceptableſt ſervice, and beſt pleaſing ſacrifice. This is granted on all ſides, and of neceſſity it muſt be yeilded unto, that that Oblation is the beſt and moſt acceptable that is offered up by faith, without which it is impoſſible to pleaſe God, and that ſacrifice only is offered up by faith, which is according to his Word, and has its warrant from his revealed will, which is the rule both for worſhip and the government of his Church we are to be guided by. The Brethren on both ſides agree about the rule in deciding of this Coutroverſie and make the written word the rule. They agree alſo about the materials, both acknowledging a Presbytery, the difference between them is only, about the mould and manner of the offering. I will therefore ſtate the queſtions between us, and ſhew wherein we differ, and then ſet▪ down my own opinion with my reaſons, and after endeavour to be a Moderator for the determining of this unhappy difference, which hath been an occaſion of ſo much rejoycing to the common Enemy.

There is a two-fold queſtion between us, they call the Presbyterians, and our Brethren they tearme Independents. The firſt is concerning the government of the Church, vi…. whether it be Presbyterian Dependent, or Presbyterian Independent. The ſecond queſtion is, concerning the gathering of Churches: but of that in its due place. The firſt queſtion is whether many Congregations or Chriſtian Aſſemblies (commonly called Churches in our dialect) in the which there are all the acts of worſhip, or all Ordinances, as the pure preaching of the Goſpell, the due and right adminiſtration of the Sacraments, the true invocation of God, Diſcipline rightly executed, and all other performances, which make for the eſſence and form of a true Church, and in the which aſſemblies likewiſe, they have all ſuch officers and helps of Government▪ as in their ſeverall places being rightly imployed, may ſerve for the edification of the ſame, and mutuall comfort and benefit of each other, and the preſervation ofall, as Presbyters, doth preaching and ruling and Deacons, and all other Officers; I ſay p. 8the queſtion between us and the brethren is, Whether all theſe ſeverall Congregations and Aſſemblies, may be accounted but one Church, or make but one Church within their Precincts; and be to be under the government and rule of one Presbytery, or a Councell or Colledge of many Presbyters together, upon which, all the Congregations and ſeverall Aſſemblies under it are to depend; and to which in all weighty buſineſſes they are to appeal, for any injury or conceived wrong, or ſcandall; or for redreſſe of any abuſes in Doctrine or manners, and for the exerciſing of Church-Diſcipline upon incorrigable and ſcandalous offenders; as admonition for giving offence, ſuſpenſion from the Ordinances till amendment and reformation; or if obſtinate, Excommunion? Or whether every one of thoſe particular Congregations, or Aſſemblies be they never ſo ſmall, ſeverally or conſidered a part, and by themſelves be Independent; that is to ſay, have full and plenary authority within themſelves, without reference to this, or any other great Councell or Presbytery, for tranſacting or determining all differences about faith or manners amongſt themſelves, or for the redreſſing of any grievances or abuſes, or the exerciſing of the power of Diſcipline or juriſdiction, and from the which there is no appeal for relief, though the parties offended conceive they have never ſo much injury or wrong done them? In a word, whether two Presbyters with a ſlender Congregation, have an abſolute kinde of Spirituall Soveraignty among themſelves, in their own Congregation, and as ample authority as was given to the whole Colledge of the Apoſtles, Mat. 18. and to the whole Presbytery in the Church of Ieruſalem? And this is the firſt Queſtion: Which that it may the better be underſtood, I will propound it in a ſimile, and that in a matter well known unto all men: The government of this famous City of London, and of many other great Cities through the Kingdome, are called Corporations, that is to ſay, majeſtracies; and have in them a Secular or Civill Signory or Presbytry, who are inveſted with Anthority to exerciſe all acts of Government amongſt themſelves, as if they were an abſolute Principality; and this Government, by which all Citizens and inhabitants within their Precincts and liberties, are to be ruled and ordered, as occaſion and neceſſity ſhall require, is committed to the Lord Mayors, Aldermen, and Common-Councell, who onelyonly by ſuch other Officers as they p. 9ſhall elect and chooſe, are to manage and exerciſe this government ſo, that all particular Citizens, and all the Companies of ſeverall Tradeſmen, are in their particular Wards, Precincts, and Fellowſhips, by their conſtitutions and Charter, to depend upon the determination of that Counſell, and are to make their addreſſes unto them upon any urgent occaſion, or conceived wrong, or when it concerns the common good, and for the time to ſtand unto their arbitrement. Now then, the queſtion between us and our Brethren is, as if there ſhould ariſe a controverſie in theſe ſeverall Corporations; Whether the Companies in each City where they all have their ſeverall Halls, and their ſeverall aſſemblies and meetings upon all occaſions, and have all their Officers, and exerciſe alſo a power of ruling and juriſdiction among themſelves be independent, that is to ſay, have plenary authority within themſelves without reference to the Lord Mayor or Aldermen or Common-counſell, to determine of all things among their ſeverall Companies, and from the which there is no appeale for reliefe; though one be never ſo much injured and damnified by any unjuſt act; and whether theſe ſeverall Companies and ſeverall Aſſemblies be each of them a ſeverall Corporation or Magiſtracy, or all of them put together make but one Corporation, under one civill Presbytery conſiſting of the Lord Mayor, Aldermen, and Common-counſell? This I thought fit to propound, that every one may the better underſtand the queſtion. Now, as this kingdome of England hath its ſeverall Porporations through all Pounties, and the which Porporations, although they have their ſeverall Pompanies in them, yet are all dependent upon a civill Presbytery and Common-counſell, and every Company in them makes not a ſeverall Porporation or Magiſtracy, or a ſeverall City, but are all dependent upon the Common-counſell or Presbytery, for the better ordering and governing of them in all their common affaires, and for the redreſſing of abuſes, and taking away and removing of common grievances, and have their ſeverall appeals to the Common-counſell, the Lord Mayor, and Aldermen; and if they finde no juſtice there nor ſatisfaction, have their redreſſe and appeal to ſome generall Court, or ſome ſupreame judicature, as to the Parliament of the Kingdome, who redreſſe and determine all things according to the lawes and conſtitutions of the whole Kingdome. So in the Kingdome of the Lord Jeſus Chriſt, which p. 10is his Church, all theſe ſeverall Churches which we reade of in the holy Scrupture of the New Teſtament, are ſo many ſeverall Corporations and Aſſociations, all the ſeverall congregations and aſſemblies as ſo many ſeverall Companies in them, depending upon a Presbytery or Common-counſell and Colledge of Paſtors and Rulers, all making up but one Church in every one of their juriſdictions and ſeverall Precincts, though they be conſiſtent of never ſo many ſeverall Aſſemblies, according to the greatneſſe of the Cities or Townes wherein they are, or according to the ſeverall Hundreds or Diviſions aſſigned to each Presbytery, and all theſe ſeverall aſſociations to be groverned by their ſeverall Presbyteries for the better ordering and preſerving of the ſame, to the which every particular man, as well as any Aſſembly or Congregation, may have their appeal for the redreſſe of any abuſes or enormities, and if they finde themſelves wronged there, then they have appeals to ſome other higher Presbytery or Counſell of Divines for relief and juſtice; and both they and all other of the ſeverall Corporations to be governed and regulated by the Laws and Statutes given by Chriſt himſelf, the onelyonly Head and King of his Church, according onelyonly to whoſe laws they are to be governed and ruled for the common good and preſervation of the whole Church, divided into thoſe ſeverall Juriſdictions, Corporations or Precincts, in imitation as neer now as may be of the Churches of Ieruſalem, Epheſus, Corinth, and Galatia, &c. and whoſe lawes alone muſt be the rule for the ordering of all their government, doctrine, and manners.

I have premiſed this I have now ſaid, that all men may the better underſtand the ſtate of the Queſtion and controverſie in hand. Now then, if it ſhall be made appear out of the holy Scripture, That all the ſeverall Churches we have mention of in the New Teſtament, were all particular corporations or aſſociations, and governed by a Common-Councell of Presbyters, or by a Presbyteriall government in each of them; and that there were many aſſemblies and congregations in thoſe ſeverall Churches, and all of them had their diſtinct Officers amongſt themſelves, in the which likewiſe they had all the Acts of Worſhip amongſt themſelves, and did partake in all ordinances of Church-fellowſhip, eſpecially in the preaching of the Word, Prayer, & in the Sacraments of Baptiſm and the Lords Supper, and yet made but one Church, p. 11and were all governed by a common-counſell of Presbyters, or by a common Presbyterie within their Precincts, then it muſt of neceſſity follow, that as the Mother-churches were firſt govern'd, all the Daughter-churches to the end of the world muſt be ſo govern'd, and according to that rule that is ſet down in the Word of God. So then, the queſtion in hand between us and our Brethren is, Whether, there were many Congregations and Aſſemblies in any of thoſe primitive Churches, as in that of Ieruſalem the Mother Church, and many Elders or Presbyters in that Church, and all other Officers; and whether all thoſe Congregations and Aſſemblies were one Church, and thoſe Presbyters and Officers all of them Elders and Officers of that one Church, and whether all thoſe Congregations and Aſſemblies were under one Presbytery? Which is the opinion of the Presbyterians, and the contrary that of the Independents. This I ſay is the queſtion between us and our Brethren. Now then if it can be proved, that there were more Beleevers in the Church of Jeruſalem then could all meet in one place, or in one congregation for all acts of worſhip; and if it can be evidently elucidated, that there were ſeverall aſſemblies and congregations in the Church of Jeruſalem, & yet ſo, as they made but one church for government; then our Brethren muſt of neceſſity acknowledge that the church of Jeruſalem, was govern'd by a common-councell of Presbyters, or was presbyterially governed. Neither did our Brethren ever yet undertake to prove, that in caſe there were many Aſſemblies in Jeruſalem, they had ſeverall and independent presbyteries, neither it they ſhould go about to prove, could they do it. And therfore we may conclude, and that with very good reaſon and warrantable authority, that as the Mother-church, the church of Jeruſalem, in her greateſt glory was govern'd, ſo all other Churches muſt likewiſe be regulated to the end of the world; For out of Zion ſhal go forth the Law, & the Word of the Lord from Ieruſalem, Iſay 2. v. 3. We muſt have both our Law from thence, and our paterne of government. And out Brethren do make the Church of Jeruſalem the patern of their proceedings.

Now that all things may be handled in good order and in a methodicall way, I will reduce the whole Diſputation concerning the firſt Queſtion into theſe foure Propoſitions, and prove them in order. The firſt, That there were many Congregations and ſeverall Aſſemblies of Beleevers in the Church of Ieruſalem, in the which they enjoyed all acts of worſhip, and all the Ordinances amongſt p. 12themſelves, and did partake of all acts of Church-fellowſhip, eſpecially of preaching, and in the adminiſtration of the Sacraments and Prayer, and that before the Perſecution we reade of, Acts 8. v. 1. The ſecond, That all theſe Congregations and ſeverall Aſſemblies made but one Church. The third, That the Apoſtles and Elders governed, ordered, and ruled this Church, joyntly and by a Commoncounſell and Presbytery. The fourth, That this Church of Ieruſalem and the government of the ſame, is to be a pattern for all ſeverall congregations and aſſemblies in any City or vicinity to unite into one Church; and for the Officers of thoſe congregations to governe that Church joyntly in a Colledge or Presbyterie.

But before I come to the proof of theſe particulars, it will not be amiſſe in generall to take notice that all the Churches we read of in the New Teſtament, were Ariſtocratically and Presbyterially governed, and were all dependent upon their ſeverall Preſbyteries; and that the ordering and managing of that government lay onelyonly upon the Presbyterie; and was their peculiar who had the power of the Keyes. Now Chriſt gave the Keyes to the Apoſtles and Presbyters only, and whatſoever the Apoſtles did in ordering and ſetling the government of the Church, they did by Chriſts command; and that order and conſtitution they ſet down in the Church, was to be perpetuated and continued to the end of the world. And the violating of this order and divine conſtitution, was the occaſion of the riſe and growth of Antichriſt, and the very cauſe of all thoſe confuſions that the Chriſtian world hath for theſe many generations been wearied and annoyed with; and the occaſion of all thoſe Schiſmes, Sects, and Hereſies the world hath ever ſwarmed with: and the re-eſtabliſhing and reducing of it to its priſtine conſtitution, will be a means not only of removing all ſcandall, and taking away of all diviſion amongſt Brethren, and be a ſingular means alſo of eſtabliſhing a flouriſhing government in Church & State, and for the procuring of the bleſſings of God upon the three Kingdoms, but a way alſo of ruining that Man of Sinne, and of making an abſolute Reformation through the whole world.

Let us therefore firſt take notice what government was eſtabliſhed by God in all the Primitive Churches, Acts 14. 23. And when they had ordained them Presbyters (for ſo it is in the originall) in every Church, and had prayed with faſting, they commended p. 13them to the Lord, on whom they beleeved. Here are two things obſervable. The firſt that the government of the Church was committed to the Presbyters. The ſecond, that the Presbyteriall government was that government that was eſtabliſhed in every Church; for ſo ſaith the Holy Ghoſt, when they had ordained them Presbyters in every Church. This was Gods ordinance, Acts 20. 17. And from Miletus he ſent to Epheſus, and called the Presbyters of the Church. Here we ſee there were many Presbyters in one Church. And Verſe 28. Take heed therefore unto your ſelves, ſaith the Apoſtle, and to all the flock over which the Holy Ghoſt hath made you Biſhops, to feed the Church of God which he hath purchaſed with his own blood. Here, as we may obſerve, that in Gods Dialect, Presbyters and Biſhops were all one, ſo likewiſe is evident that the Church was committed to their government: this Church therefore of Epheſus was under a Presbytery, and was to be regulated joyntly by them by a common-councell of Presbyters. And Paul to Titus, chap. 1. verſ. 5. For this cauſe, ſaith he, life I thee in Creet, that thou ſhouldeſt put in order the things that are wanting, and ordaine Presbyters in every City, as I appointed thee. If any man be blameleſſe, &c. for a Biſhop muſt be blameleſſe as the Steward of God, &c. From this place likewiſe we may take notice of the parity between Presbyter and Biſhop, and that the Presbyterian government was that way of ruling that God appointed, not in one City onelyonly, but in every City, and that theſe Presbyters were the Stewards in Gods houſe, which is his Church, 1 Tim. 3. and had the government of thoſe Churches in every City laid upon them, which they were joyntly to governe and order by the common-counſell of Presbyters. And Paul in his firſt Epiſtle to Timothy, chap. 5. v. 17. Let the Presbyters, ſaith he, that rule well, be counted worthy of double honour, especially they who labour in word and doctrine. Still we ever obſerve, that the rule and government of the Church was in the Presbyters hands. And the Author to the Epiſtle to the Hebrews, ch. 13. 7. Remember, ſaith he, them that have the rule over you, who have ſpake unto you the Word of God, whoſe faith follow, conſidering the end of their converſation. And verſ. 17. Obey, ſaith he, them that have the rule over you, and ſubmit your ſelves, for they watch for your ſoules, as they that muſt give an account, &c. And in verſ. 24. Salute all them, ſaith he, that have the rule over you, and all the p. 14Saints. Here againe he injoynes all the Churches to yeild obedience, and to ſubmit themſelves unto the government of the Preſbyterie, ſhewing them that it is their place to obey, and for their Miniſters to rule; and that ſo long as they command in the Lord, they out of conſcience ought to obey them, and that for a double reaſon; For they watch, ſaith he, for your ſouls, and they muſt alſo give an account of their ſtewardſhip. And in 1 Peter 5, 1, 2, 3. The Presbyters that are among you, ſaith Saint Peter, I exhort, who am alſo a Presbyter, and a witneſſe of the ſufferings of Chriſt, and alſo a partaker of the glory that ſhall be revealed; feed the flock of God which is among you, taking the over ſight thereof, not by conſtraint, but willingly, &c. neither as being Lords over Gods heritage, but being examples to the flock. And Saint James chap. 5. ver. 14. Is any among you ſick? ſaith he, let him call for the Preſbyters of the Church. He doth not ſay of the Churches, but of the Church. So that the Presbyterian government was in every Church, and every Church was to ſubmit it ſelf unto the Presbytery. And in Acts 15. it is ſaid, that Paul and Barnabas went up to the Apoſtles and Presbyters, &c. And when they came to Ieruſalem they were received of the Church (it is not ſaid of the Churches, but of the Church) and of the Apoſtles and Presbyters, &c. and Verſe 6. And the Apoſtles and Presbyters came together to conſider of the matter, &c. and Verſ. 22. Then pleaſed it the Apoſtles and Presbyters with the whole Church, &c. and wrote Letters by them after this manner. The Apoſtles, and Presbyters, and Brethren. And Acts 21. 17. And when we were come to Ieruſalem, ſaith Saint Luke, the Brethren received us gladly. And the day following Paul went in with us in to Iames, and all the Presbyters were preſent. From all which places, and many more which might be produced, it is moſt clear and evident, that in all Cities there was a Presbytery, and that the Presbyters had the power of order, namely, of preaching, and the power of juriſdiction, that is of ruling, which was ever to be exerciſed with others, and not alone; and that conſiſted in admitting of members, and in conventing men before them upon occaſion, in admoniſhing if any offended, in ſuſpending them from the holy Communion till reformation or amendment; and if they continued obſtinate and incorrigble, in excommunicating and caſting of them out of the Church, and upon repentance, in receiving of p. 15them in again, and in ordaining of Officers, and in appointing the times of meeting, and the places where.

And within theſe limits, as I conceive, is all the power given to the Presbyters terminated, and this they are by Gods Ordinance joyntly and by the common-counſell of Presbyters to exerciſe, and it peculiarly belongeth unto them; and therefore the Presbyterian government was the order of ruling and governing all Churches, that God himſelf eſtabliſhed, and is to be continued unto the end of the world; neither do I ever read, that the people or the congregations were joyned with them in their commiſſion, or had any power given them of ruling. For Saint Paul profeſſeth of himſelf in 1 Cor. 14. 37. that whatſoever he writ in his Epiſtles Were the Commands of the Lord. And the ſame may be ſaid of all the other Apoſtles. Now Paul writ to Titus, that the Churches in all Cities ſhould be governed by a Presbytery. And in the firſt Epiſtle to Timothy he commands Timothy again and again in chap. 5. verſ. 21. and in chap. 6. v. 12, 13. I give thee charge in the ſight of God, ſaith he, That thou keep this Command without ſpot, unblameable till the appearing of our Lord Ieſus Chriſt. Here Timothy and all Miniſters in him, are to the end of the world bound to maintain that government unblameable that was appointed by the Apoſtles; and that was the Presbyterian government, and the ruling of all Churches by joynt conſent, and a common counſell or Colledge of Presbyters; ſo that nothing ought to be done or tranſacted of publick concernment without their joynt and mutuall accord or agreement and common conſent of the Presbytery. And therfore when Diotrephes aſſumed unto himſelf and his particular congregation a power and authority to rule according to his will and pleaſure, without the conſent of the Presbytory, & oppoſed Iohn the Presbyter, he ſharply reproves his proceedings and ſignifies to the Church Epiſt. 3. That when he came he would remember his words, and teach him how to prate againſt the Presbytery with malicious words; For he (ſaith S. Iohn) contenteth not himſelf only to prate maliciouſly againſt us, but he will not receive his brethren, nor ſuffer others, but caſteth them out of the Church; which is an evill thing in him; ſaith Saint Iohn: But for you, ſaith he, ſpeaking to the Church, follow not that which is evill but that which is good. It was evill in him to aſſume unto himſelf alone, and his particular Congregation, that power that p. 16belonged unto the colledge or councell of Presbyters, and was to be moderated and exerciſed onelyonly by the conjoynt and common conſent of the Presbytery. For God had appointed, that his Church ſhould be governed by a Presbytery; and Diotrephes would have his Congregation Independent, and have an abſolute juriſdiction within it ſelf, Which, ſaith Saint Iohn, is an evill thing. So that I cannot but wonder our brethren the Independents ſhould call Diotrephes the Patriarch of the Presbyterians, as one of them did to me not long ſince; whereas if the place be du… ly weighed and conſidered; it will appear that he was the firſt that oppoſed the Presbyterian Govenment, and for the which he was by Saint Iohn ſharply reproved, and in him, all that follow his ſteps, and will not ſubmit themſelves to the Presbytery which is Gods Ordinance, and that will not receive the brethren into the Churches, but upon their own termes and conditions. But of this buſineſſe when I come to the ſecond Queſtion.

In the mean time I muſt here make reply to what Mr Knollys by way of Anſwer hath to ſay to this Argument drawn from Diotrephes his practiſe which was occaſioned as I related before, by reaſon of a diſcourſe between me and an Independent, who affirmed, That Diotriphes was the patriarch of all the Presbyterians: which opinion of his Mr Knollys doth ſeem to favour, as by his words may appear, but I hope to make the contrary more evident then yet it hath been, viz. That Diotrephes was the primate of the Independents, and of all thoſe of the congregationall way. But firſt I will ſet down Mr Knollys his words at large, to take away all occaſions of their calumniating tongues, who ordinarily uſe to ſay, That we keep from the world their Arguments, that we may the better delude the people, and hold them in ignorance. His words therefore by way of anſwer to that Argument are theſe.

Now let the reader judge (ſaith he) whether the Doctor be not much miſtaken in his commentary expoſition and application of this place of Scripture. And let me give you to underſtand, that Saint Iohn ſaith verſe the 9. I wrote unto the Church. But ſeeing no mention is made of any particular congregation, how can the Doctor ſo confidently affirme that it was his particular congregation? Now the reader may ſee plainly, that the Doctor can expound thoſe brethren and their Elders or Presbyters, which the Scripture calls a p. 17Church, to be a particular congregation. And what it was which Saint Iohn had written to the Church is not in this Epistle, nor in any other Scripture delcared, except it was, to receive thoſe brethren which he ſaith ver. 8 ought to be received, and ver. 10 whom Diotrephes would not receive, how then doth the Doctor ſay that Diotrephes aſſumed that power to himſelfe, which belonged unto the Colledge and Councell of Presbyters, without whoſe joynt and mutuall agreement, and common conſent nothing ought to be done or tranſacted of publike concernment? is the receiving of brethren, or caſting out of brethren a power which belongs to a colledge of Presbyters, and neither the one nor the other may be tranſacted by the Elders and Brethren of a particular congregation unleſſe the Court or common-councell of Preſbyters conjoyntly conſent unto it? Let it be alſo conſidered, that D otrephes oppoſed the brethren and forbad them that would have received thoſe who Saint John ſaith verſ. the 8. we ought to receive, yea and caſt them out verſe 10. of the Church, to wit, excommunicate them. Doth it hereby appear that Diotrephes would have his congregation Independent, and have an abſolute juriſdiction within it ſelfe? No, but Diotrephes would lord it over the Church, and have the preeminency above his brethren, whether fellow-Elders or fellow Saints. Diotrephes loving the primacy amongst them, he would be the Primate and Metropolitan of the Church, and have the preeminency of all the Preſbyters in it, and brethren of it. The Doctor could have urged this Scripture againſt the domineering Prelates, and why ſhould he marvell, that his brethren ſhould now urge it againſt the Court of Preſbyters. It is confeſt that Diotrephes did that which was evill in uſurping authority over the Church and thoſe brethren he caſt out of the Church; But that he was the firſt that oppoſed the Preſbyterian government, or that he did affront a Court or common▪councell of Presbyters, it is more then I know, or the Doctor can prove. For had Diotrephes done ſo, why was he not convented before them? Surely the Apoſtle Saint Iohn would rather have written to the colledge of Preſbyters (if there were any ſuch) then to the Church, or in writing to the Church, would tather have ſent him a ſummons to appear at ſome conſiſtory before the Court and common-councell of Preſbyters, then to warne them to take heed of hi… evill, that they did not follow it. And doubtleſſe St John would have writen thus: Diotrephes loves to be a Primate amongſt you, wherefore when the Preſbytry, that is to ſay, the Magiſtracy p. 18or Signiory of grave, ſolid, learned, religious, and wiſe Divines and Miniſters come to keep order, and meet together in a Court and common-councell, I will remember his deeds, and informe, or complain to the Court and common-councell of Preſbyters, that he prates againſt us (the Preſbyters) with malicious words. But the Apoſtle Saint Iohn (did not know any Court or Common-councell of Preſbyters, neither Claſſicall nor Synodicall, to appeal unto) Nor can the Doctor make good thoſe appeals he mentioneth page 10▪ to be according to the Scripture of truth, to wit, that every particular man, as well as any aſſembly or congregation, may have their appeals to the Preſbytry of their Precinct, hundred, or diviſion under whoſe juriſdictions they were, and if they found themſelves wronged there, that they have appeals to ſome other higher Preſbytry or Councell of Divines for releefe and juſtice. I only aske the Doctor how he can prove thoſe appeals by Scripture; and if he could, whether that higher Preſbytry or councell of Divines (especially if they may ſay the Holy Ghoſt and wee) be not as Independent as theſe brethren and their churches, againſt whom the Doctor hath written. And if ſo, then ſuch a high Presbytry or councell of Divines, is not Gods Ordinance by the Doctors own confeſſion and affirmation. Therefore the Apoſtle writes to the Church or particular congregation whereof Diotrephes was a Member and an Elder, whom he knew had power to judge him as well as the Church or particular congregation of Corinth had power to judge them that were members therein, 1 Cor. 5. 12. 13. and therefore might as warantably admoniſh Diotrephes as the Church of Coloſſe might Archipus: Coloſſ. 4. 17. And if nothing of publike concernment ought to be done or tranſacted without the joynt and mutuall accord or agreement, and common conſent of the Presbytry; Iohn the Presbyter would not have tranſgreſſed ſo farr, as to take upon himſelfe this authority over Diotrephes to tell the Church of his faults, and to ſay, he would remember him and ſharply reprove him, and teach him to prate againſt the Presbytry with malicious words, which belonged unto the Court and common-councell of Presbyters. But I ſhall have a juſt occaſion to ſay more touching this matter, in the anſwer unto the third question, and therefore paſſing by the objection with his anſwer mentioned page 19. to the 29. unto its due place. I ſhall deſire ſeriouſly to conſider the Doctors proof of his firſt propoſition, which he laboureth firſt by producing ſuch Scriptures, as he conceiveth make for the manifeſtation p. 19of the truth, and from thence frames and formeth his arguments. Thus Mr Knollys in way of reply ſpeaketh to my argument concerning Diotrephes and of his intention what he will do in the inſuing diſcourſe to all the other arguments.

I have here ſet down his words at large, omitting only the greek and latin texts which he School-boy-like ſcribleth, to little other purpoſe than to ſhew his own vanity, and to perſwade the ignorant people, that he is ſome-body in the Greeke and Latine tongue (which kind of learning notwithſtanding the moſt of his fraternity generally deſpiſe and contemne) I have therefore omitted them, eſpecially having learned this leſſon from Saint Paul, 1 Cor. chap. 13. verſ. 19. rather to speak five words to the underſtanding of the people, that I might teach others, then ten thouſand words in an unknown tongue. And truly unleſſe there be ſome controverſie concerning the Interpretation or about the text (as there is not here) I conceive it the greateſt folly in the world; writing in the vulgar tongue and for the common benefit of all men, to inſert ſentences either of Greek or Latin, except very varly; for it but pudders the reader that is not skilled in the languages, neither do we finde that it was the cuſtome either of the holy Prophets, or any of the ancient Greek or Roman fathers in all their Writings or Sermons, to uſe any, but their vulgar tongue without it were very ſeldom and that with interpretation. I ſay therefore, thoſe flaſhes being excepted I have punctually ſet down all that he had to ſay againſt any of my arguments both here and every where, that neither he nor any of his party may complain, that I had not ſet down their words in their full ſtrength, and ſo might fall into the ſame condemnation with him, who hacketh and minſeth my arguments at pleaſure, picking and chooſing what he thinks himſelf beſt able to deal with, either wholly omitting the other or ſlighting of them which is the ordinary method both of Mr Knollys, J. S. and my brother Burton and all the Independents, wherein they deal not fairly with me, nor ingenuouſly nor candidly with the people: for in ſo doing they delude them and meerly play the juglers.

This large diſcourſe of Maſter Knollys, if it be well weighed, hath but little ſubſtance in it, it conſiſting of abſurdities and contraditions and flat denyalls of that which he often granteth. In breife, if the reader will but duly conſider every paſſage of his anſwer, p. 20with whathe grants in the third and the 11. pages of his pamplet, he will ſpeedily perceive, that whiles he labours to confute others, he gives a fatall blow to his own cauſe, and overthrowes that opinion which both he and all thoſe of the congregationall way labour to maintaine, and withall by the examination of the particulars he will the better diſcerne into the futility of Maſter Knollys and the vanity of thoſe of his party, that beleeve & take every word of his, for an Oracle though it be never ſo diſtructive totheir own cauſe. The ſum of this his anſwer is this, that I ammiſtaken in my comentary expoſition and application of this place of Scripture. Theſe are his words.

It will not be amiſſe therefore, in the firſt place to take notice what he denyeth in his anſwer, and what he affirmeth, with the reaſons of both, that the reader may the more eaſily perceive the vanity of error and the force and efficacy of truth. Firſt he denyeth that Diotrephes would have had an abſolvte juriſdiction within himſelf and have had his Congregation independent, and that he was the firſt that oppoſed the Presbyterian Government, or that he had any particular congregation: He deneyeth alſo that Saint Iohn knew any Court or Common counſell of Preſbyters either Claſſicall or Synodicall to appeale to his time. The reaſons of his denyals are theſe. Firſt, becauſe ſaith he, there is no mention made of any particular congregation Diotrephes had. Secondly, it is not declared what it was that Saint Iohn had writ unto the Church in his Epiſtle nor in any other Scripture, except it were to receive thoſe brethren which Diotrephes would not receive and therfore, how ſaith God can the D… affirme that Diotrephes aſmed theypower to himſelf which belonged unto the Colledge and councell of Presbyters &c? and to prove that Diotrephes was not the firſt that oppoſed the Presbyterian government, he ſaith, had he done ſo, then he ſhould have been convented before them, which he was not; and therefore he did not oppoſe a Court or common Councell of Presbyters. Beſides Saint Iohn would then have wrot rather to the Colledge of Presbyters (if they had been any ſuch) than to the Church, or in writing to the Church would rather have ſent him a ſummons to appeare at ſome Conſiſtory, than to warne them to take heede of his evill, that they did not follow it, and doubtleſſe he would have written thus. Diotrephes loves to be a Primate amongſt you: therefore when the Presbytery comes to keepe order, and to meet together in a Court common Councell, p. 21I will remember his deeds, and informe and complaine to the Court that he prats againſt us with malicious words. Now when neither of this was done by the Presbytry, nor by Saint▪ Iohn, it is manifeſt that Diotrephes did not oppoſe the Presbytry, and that Saint Iohn then knew not of any Court or common councell of Presbyters either Claſſicall or Synodicall to appeale to in his time. And then in the third place he putteth me upon the proofe of thoſe appeales I made mention of page 10. affirming that I cannot make them good: And in the laſt place, he afferteth that Saint Iohn w…it to the Church and particular congregation whereof Diotrephes was a member, and that, that congregation had power to judge of him, and the reaſon of this his aſſertion, is, becauſe ſaith he, this Church had the ſame power over Diotrephes, that the Church of Corinth and that of Coloſſe had over their members.

Having thus briefly ſet down what Maſter Knollys both denies and affirmes with the reaſons of each, I ſhall now anſwer to every ſeverall branch in order; and if I be the more large in my reply, I crave pardon, in regard it is not only a buſineſſe of publicke concernment and about the principle queſtion now in debate, but that it will give the more light to the wholo following diſcourſe.

For anſwer therefore to his reaſon of my miſtake, in my commentary expoſition and application of that place of Scripture viz: that there is no mention made of any particular congregation that Diotrephes had, I ſay, there was no neede of making any mention of it: For if there were many Presbyters in all the Primative and Apoſtolicall churches, and in that Church by name in which Diotrephes was Presbyter as it is evident out of all the places above quoted as out of the 14. of the Acts and the 15. and 20. and 21. of the ſame booke and the Epiſtle of Paul to Tit. Chap. 1. ver. 5. and the 1. Epiſt. o… Pet. chap 5. ver. 1. 2. 3. and the 13. of the Heb. and Saint Iames the 5. and the 3. Epiſtle of Saint Iohn which Maſter Knollys himſelf acknowledgeth and if it be alſo apparently evident from all thoſe ſeverall Scriptures, (as it is) that thoſe Preſbyters were fixed with in their particular juriſdictions, with a ſpeciall charge given them in common, to looke unto the flocks committed unto their charge, and to feede the Church of God which he had redeemed with his precious blood, which word feede includes the Keys, to wit, the power of order and preaching and the authority of juriſdiction and rule, and from the which charge p. 22they were not to depart, as too too many of the Independent Miniſters now amongſt us dayly do, leaving the poore ſheepe in the wilderneſſe: I ſay when all theſe things are evident out of the holy Scripture it neceſſarily followeth, when Diotrephes was an Elder and Presbyter in that Church Saint Iohn writ unto, which Maſter Knollys confeſſeth, that he had there his particular congregation, and therfore there was no neede of making any mention of it: for very common reaſon will dictate thus much, to any man, that if any great graſier have ten or twelve thouſand ſheepe and many ſeverall walks and places of paſturage to feed them in, and hath ſeverall paſtours to looke unto them all, as not a few Shephards can feede ten or twelue thouſands ſheepe, and gives them all a charge in common of looking to his ſheepe and feeding them, although all thoſe ſeverall paſtours are to have a generall care of all thoſe ſheep that have his marke upon them, and that are within the limits of his ſeverall walks and graſing places, yet it is to be underſtood, that every one of them hath his ſeverall flocke committed to him in ſpeciall for he muſt not be idle, over the which he is to have the particular inſpection and care for the well ordering of it, with this limitation, that he may not wrong the flocke, or do any thing contrary unto his Maſters pleaſure, or to the dammage or prejudice of his other fellow Paſtours or their flocke: All this I ſay, good reaſon will dictate to any rationall man, and dayly experience will confirme it.

In the ſame manner things were ordered, in the primitive and Apoſtolicall Churches, all whoſe Elders and Paſtours in them, had the charge of the ſeverall flocks committed to them in common, all the which they were to governe communi conſilio presbyterorum as it is by all the Independents themſelves confeſt: for all thoſe Churches were Ariſtocratically and Presbyterianly governed: and therefore according to the wiſdome and common councell of their Elders, this Presbyter had the charge of the ſheepe of ſuch a ward or walke committed unto his care; and that Elder had ſuch a Circuit committed unto his charge, and a third Elder had ſuch a precinct committed to his cure, and ſo of the reſt, with this proviſo alwayes, that all things of publicke concernment, and that tended to the common good both of ſheep and Paſtours ſhould be ordered by the joynt and common councell of the ſeverall and reſpective Presbyters in an orderly and p. 23well regulated way: for all things in the Church were to be done in order and decency and uniformitie which could never have been, if every Paſtour and Presbyter and every particular congregation under them ſeverally would have governed as pleaſed themſelves, without any reference to the Colledge or common counſell of all the Presbyters, which was the failing of Diotrephes here, for which he was greatly blam'd by Saint Iohn. And that all thoſe Churches were to be governed by their ſeverall Presbytries, and that the people were not to intermeddle with the government of them Maſter Knollys himſelfe in the third page of his pamphlet and in the eleventh of the ſame doth accord, who citing my words in my introduction to my booke deduceth from them foure concluſions, which I ſhall by and by ſet downe after I have related the grounds of them.

Before (ſaith he) the Doctor comes to proove his four particular Propoſitions, he ſaith it will not be amiſſe in generall to take notice that all the Churches we read of in the new teſtament were ariſtocratically and Presbyterially Governed, and were all Dependent upon the ſeverall Presbyters, and produceth divers places of Scripture to prove the ſame, and two ſheets are ſpent wholly in proving thereof, from the 12 page to the 29. Theſe words Mr Knollys quoteth out of my book. Now hear his anſwer. All which (ſaith he) ſhould it be granted, onelyonly proves. First, that in every City or Church there was a Presbytery, For they Ordained them Elders in every Church, Act. 14. That thou Ordain Elders City by City, Tit. 1. v. 5. Secondly, that as there were Apoſtles and Elders in the church of Jeruſalem, ſo there were Elders, in the church of Epheſus Acts the 20. ver. 25. and in the church of Corinth and in the church of Galatia and Philippy, &c. Thirdly, that thoſe ſeverall churches were dependent, upon their ſeveral Presbyteries, and they were to obey them who had the rule over them, Hebr. 13. 7. 17. 24. Who were their guids, obey your guids. Fourthly, that this Presbyterian church Government God hath appointed as his Ordinance to be continu'd to the end of the World, the which whoſoever reſiſteth, reſiſteth the Ordinance of God. Theſe are the foure concluſions Maſter Knolleys gathereth out of my arguments, but with all adds, ſaying, that all this doth not prove, that this Presbyterian Church government is dependent upon a ſupreame judicature, to the Decrees of which they muſt ſubmit themſelves and their churches. This ſaith Mr. Knollys doth not follow; but of that in its due place.

p. 24In the mean time it will be much to the purpoſe, a little to conſider his expreſſions. All which ſaith he) ſhould it be granted proves: Firſt, &c. to wit, the four concluſions now layd down in this place, I intreat the Reader to behold the vanity of the man, in ſo ſpeaking, all which ſh…uld …t be granted, as if he did me a great courteſie and favour to yeeld unto me, that which the holy Scripture in ex…reſſe wo…ds declareth o be the will and pleaſure of God and that which I had out of the bleſſed word of truth ſufficiently ev need, and which no man can deny, except he will deny the Scripture and Word of God which hath perſpicuouſly and in fo mall termes ſet own, that there was a Colledge & Presbyte ie of Elders, orda ned and conſtituted in very Church or City who were to have the rule over the people in their ſeverall congre…ations, within their …r…cin …s w^ch M Knollys himſelf conſenteth unto, as is evident by his 4 concluſions. So that if ever there had been any time of denying or not granting, that all the Churches of the New Ieſtament were all Ar…ſtocratically and Presbyterianly to be govern'd, and were ſo many ſeverall Eccle a…icall Corpo ations, and that all thoſe Scriptures I had produced for the proof of the ſame, had not been rightly applyed and alleadged, now had been the time (when this buſineſſe was in queſtion and agitation) for Mr Knollys to have ſhewen his skill and to have produced the reaſons of his diſlike and gain-ſaying, but when he confirmed what I proved, as is manifeſt from his four concluſions it is a great folly in the man, to ſay, all which ſhould it be granted, when he himſelfe acknowledgeth as much, and in expreſſe terms in the eleventh page of his book hath theſe words; It is not denyed (ſaith he) by the brethren, (meaning the Independents) that the Presbyters in all Churches, were the men in the Government of the Churches, in which they were Elders: Theſe are his own words, by which he conſen…s to that I had written to be true, to wit, that all the Churches of the New Teſtament were all Ariſtocratically to be governed, that is, that all the particular congregations under the ſeverall Presbyters were to be moderated and regulated Communi conſilio Presbyteram: ſo that if every Congregat on and particular aſſembly, then the paſtor and Elder alſo of that congregation, as being but a chie…e member of it, is to be ordered and governed by the joynt and common councell of the whole colledge of Presbyters, and that by Mr Knollys his own conceſſion p. 25from which grant of his, I ſhall now likewiſe deduce theſe enſuing concluſions, which will neceſſarily follow out of his words, and all of them fatall to his own principles, and to the opinion of thoſe of the congregationall way.

The firſt, that the people are wholly excluded from Government in the Church; for ſaith he, It is not denyed by the brethren, that the Presbyters in all Churches, were the men in Government of the Churches, in which they were Elders: So that the people and Church though presbyterated (as they ſpeak) have not the government in their hands, as indeed they have not, as never having received the Keyes, nor never having been made ſtewards of the Church, nor joyned in Commiſſion with the Elders, and therefore they can never either receive in members, or caſt out offenders; for all theſe are acts of Government and belong onelyonly to the Rulers of the Church, whom the people are ever to obey in the Lord, as he granteth, and by this he overthrows all that which afterward he affirms, that the Church or Congregation of which Diotrephes was an Elder, had power over him; and this is the firſt concluſion, that of neceſſity followeth out of Mr Knollys his words; but more of this in the ſequell of this diſcourſe.

The ſecond concluſion that follows out of his words is this That the Government was not put into the hands of any one Elder with his Congregation, but into the hands of many Elders, that is, into the hands of the whole Presbytery, to wit, the Court or Colledge of Presbyters; ſo that they, and they only, joyntly and together, had the power, both to queſtion, convent and cenſure; for M. Knollys ſaith, It is not denyed by the brethren, but that the Presbyters in al churches were the men in the government: according to that of S. John If I come, I will remember his deeds which he doth prating againſt us. So that whoſoever ſhall, Diotrephes like, indeavour to alter this government, and aſſume it to themſelves from the other Elders and from the Presbyters, or to inveſt the people with it, or joyn them in commiſſion with the Elders, or to arrogate unto themſelves or to their particular congregations, an abſolute juriſdiction within themſelves, and an Independency from them; and ſhall go about to diſgrace and prate againſt the Presbyters, and labour to bring them into the hatred of the people, and ſhall take this liberty at pleaſure, to caſt out whom they will out of their congregations, or to bring in whom they pleaſe upon their p. 26owne tearmes and conditions, and exerciſe an abſolute Lordly Dominion amongſt themſelves over their congregations and the ſeverall members in them, all ſuch are guilty of Diotrephes his ſinne, and offend in like manner, and are equally to be blamed as aſſumers unto themſelvs of that power which only belongeth to the presbytery; now when all the Independents are guilty of this crime, they may juſtly with Diotrephes be cenſurd: and this is the ſecond concluſion that neceſſarily followeth from Mr. Knollys his words.

The third is this, that there were many congregations in all the primitive churches, and yet made all of them within their ſeverall precincts and juriſdictions but one church; for ſo it was here in the church that Saint Iohn writeth unto, where there were many Elders as Maſter Knollys confeſſeth, in the which every Elder had his particular congregation as well as Diotrephes, for they were no way inferiour to him; ſo that, if he had his particular congregation they each of them ſeverally had their congregations likewiſe, and yet they were all of them to be governed and ruled communi conſilio presbyterorum, which kind of government Diotrephes oppoſing, or refuſing obedience unto, and affecting a Supremacy and juriſdiction to himſelfe and his congregation independent from the presbytery, was juſtly blamed by the Apoſtle Saint Iohn, in that he prated againſt the presbyters with malicious words. So that by all that I have now ſaid, theſe three poſitions are clearely manifeſt which Maſter Knollys denyeth, viz: the firſt, That Diotrephes had a particular congregation. The ſecond that he affected an abſolute juriſdicton within himſelfe and to have his congregation independent, and that he was the firſt that oppoſed the presbyterian government; for we never read of any that prated malicious words againſt the Preſbyterie before. The third that the church that Saint Iohn writ unto, was governed by the common counſell of the Presbytery at that time, and that Saint Iohn did then acknowledge a Court and common councell of Presbyters both Claſſicall and Synodicall to appeale unto, all which Maſter Knollys notwithſtanding doth peremptorily deny. But for the fuller elucidation of the truth, I will firſt make all theſe propoſitions good from Maſter Knollys his own words in this his anſwer, and then I will prove thoſe ſeverall appeales I made mention of page 10. and after that, evidently evince that the people and congregation in any Church have p. 27not power to judge their Miniſters, and that it is a meare babble in M. Knollys to ſay, that if nothing of publicke concernment were to be done without the joynt conſent of the Presbytery, that then Saint Iohn the Presbyter would not have tranſgreſſed ſo farre as to take upon him this authority over Diotrephes, to tell the Church of his faults &c. all theſe things I will methodically handle, and then go on to anſwer whatſoever Maſter Knollys hath to ſay to all my other arguments in their due places.

And for proofe, that Diotrephes had a particular congregation, which Maſter Knollys ſaith there was no mention of, waving the reaſons above ſpecified, from that nigh relation that is betweene a Paſtor and a flocke, which is ſo much urged by all the Independents, I ſay waving all thoſe reaſons, I will make uſe of Maſter Knollys his owne words, for it may be, he will beleeve himſelfe, and perhaps his Diſciples and followers and thoſe of the congregationall way will give more credit to him, whom they accompt very learned, then to any thing I can produce out of the holy Scripture: and if they will duly conſider and ponder his expreſſion they will then perceive not only his errors, but how palpably he everywhere contradicteth himſelfe and woundeth their cauſe, and everteth their opinion, whiles he laboureth with all his power to maintaine and defend it.

Diotrephes (ſaith he) oppoſed the brethren and forbad them that would have received them, yea and caſt them out (ver. 10.) of the Church; to wit, excommunicated them; but doth it hereby appear (ſaith he) that Diotrephes would have his congregation independent? and have an abſolute juriſdiction within it ſelfe? N… (ſaith he) but, Diotrephes would lord it over the Church, and have the Preeminency above his brethren, whether fellow Elders or fellow Saints. By the way, take notice, that in Maſter Knollys his opinion, Diotrephes was a Saint, Saint Diotrephes therfore let him be even ſuch another Saint as himſelfe and his brethren are. Diotrephes (ſaith he) loving the primacy amongſt them, would be the Primate and Metropolitan of the Church, and have the preeminency of all the Preſbyters in it, and brethren of it. And why therefore ſhould the Doctor marvell that his brethren ſhould now urge this place againſt the Court of Preshyters? Thus Maſter Knollys while he ſeemes to anſwer, moſt maliciouſly and wickedly calumniates his brethren and labours to perſwade the world p. 28that the presbyters of our times are like Diotrephes, in affecting Supremacy over their fellow Presbyters and over the churches; and all this to inrage the people againſt them, when it is they themſelves, that would bring all men under their ſlavery, and have an abſolute authority and juriſdiction Independent in their ſeverall congregations within themſelves, which was the ſinne of Diotrephes. But out of Maſter Knollys his words, it appeareth that Diotrephes had a particular congregation: For Church and congregation are Synonimaes in his Dialect, which is yet more clearely evident from his words page the 7. which are theſe: Therefore (ſaith he) the Apoſtle writs to the Church or particular congregation, whereof Diotrephes was a member and an Elder, who he knew had power to judge him. Theſe are Maſter Knollys formall expreſſions; out of all which it doth now evidently appeare, that there were many Presbyters and many congregations in that Church Saint Iohn writeth unto, and that Diotrophes had his particular congregation amongſt them; for ſo Maſter Knollys doth in expreſſe termes acknowledge, and in ſo ſpeaking contradicts himſelfe, and vindicates me from the error he accuſed me of, who affirmed, I was much miſtaken in my commentary expoſition and application of that place, ſaying there was no mention made of any particular congregation Diotrephes had, And yet here he aſſerteth that Saint Iohn writ to the church or particular congregation, whereof Diotrephes was a member and an Elder: ſo that he hath done my worke for me once and again, and made himſelfe guiltie of that fault he charged me with page 6 and page 7. By which all men may ſee not only the contentiouſneſſe and reſtleſneſſe of the creatures ſpirit, and the folly of the man who contradicteth himſelfe at every hand, but may alſo gather that that Church conſiſted of many congregations, all the which made but one Church within its precinct, and was to be governed by the joynt conſent and common counſell of the Presbyterie; and that Diotrephes aſpiring to the primacy amongſt them and ſeeking to ſtand ſingular by himſelfe with his congregation, and to be Independent, and to have no relation or reference to the Presbyters of that Church, became an offender by it, and was therefore ſeverely reproved by Saint Iohn for his ſo doing, in oppoſing his brethren in taking in and caſting out of what members he pleaſed, by his ſole and abſolute authority; p. 29all which Mr Knollys accordeth to: whether therefore this were not to make his congregation Independent, and whether Diotrephes was not the firſt that oppoſed the Presbyterian government, and affronted a Court and common▪councell of Presbyters (ſeeing we read of none that did theſe things before him) and whether thoſe that now ſeek to eſtabliſh an abſolute juriſdiction in every congregation within themſelves Independent, be not rather like Diotrephes than thoſe godly Miniſters that deſire the government in common according to Gods holy word, I leave it to the judgement of the learned to conſider; and whether or no Mr Knollys doth not palpably contradict himſelfe in all this his diſcourſe: for he acknowledgeth that Diotrephes had his particular congregation and oppoſed the Presbyters in it, and that he did evill in uſurping authority over the church and thoſe brethren he caſt out: and yet notwithſtanding he ſaid it was more then he knew, or I could prove. Whether this therefore be not to contradict himſelf and to ſay and unſay and meerly to trifle, I leave to the judgement of all intelligible men.

I conceive that all men that are but of ordinary capacity, when they ſhall well conſider my argument and Mr Knollys his reply unto it, will ſay▪ that Diotrephes aſſumed that power to himſelfe, which belonged to the Colledge and councell of Presbyters; for if he had not bin a tranſgreſſour, and an offender againſt Saint Iohn and the other Presbyters, the Apoſtle would never have ſaid, Wherefore if I come▪ I will remember his deeds which he doth, prating againſt us with malicious wordes, &c. ſo that by us there, muſt neceſſarily be underſtood, Saint John himſelfe and the other Presbyters; for he includes himſelfe in the number of thoſe that Diotrephes prated againſt and oppoſed. Now Saint John was an Elder, for ſo he calleth himſelfe, and Mr Knollys acknowledgeth it, and confeſſeth alſo that there were many more Elders in that Church, and againſt all thoſe did Diotrephes prate with malicious words in oppoſition to their authority, which Mr Knollys doth not gain-ſay, yea he affirmrth it, that Diotrephes would lord it over the Church, and have the preeminency above his brethren, whether fellow-Elders or fellow-Saints, he would be Primate, ſaith he, and Metropolitan of the Church, and have the preeminency of all the Presbyters in it, and Brethren of it. Doth it not then ſufficiently appear from Mr Knollys his own words, that Diotrephes aſſumed p. 30that power to himſelfe, that belonged to the Colledge and councell of Presbyters, and that he was the firſt that oppoſed the Preſbyterian government, and that affronted the common-councell of Presbyters? without ſpeaking of malicious words againſt them, & lording it over the Church and taking in and caſting out of members and ruling after an arbitrary way, and with a ſole power and authority within himſelfe in his congregation, and violating that order of government God had eſtabliſhed in that Church, be not in Mr Knollys▪ and thoſe of his parties judgement, to aſſume that authority to himſelfe that belonged unto the councell of Presbyters, and openly to oppoſe the Presbyterian government, and to affront all the Presbyters which were ridiculous in any man to affirme? I am confident all intelligible Chriſtians will ſay, there was never any oppoſition of any court or councell of Presbyters, if this were not; and yet Mr Knollys ſaith it is more then he knoweth or I can prove, that Diotrephes aſſumed that power to himſelfe that belonged unto the Colledge of Presbyters, or that he oppoſed the Presbyterian government, and yet acknowledgeth the thing in formall words; whether therefore he doth not again and again contradict himſelfe and confirme my argument and fight againſt his own opinion, I leave it to the judgement of the learned.

I ſhall alſo deſire the reader ſeriouſly to conſider with himſelfe, whether theſe words of Saint Iohn, Wherfore if I come, ſaith he, I will remember his deeds which he doth, prating againſt us with malicious words, do not neceſſarily inferre, that there was a Court and common-councell of Presbyters in that Church to appeal, unto in Saint Iohns time? For to what purpoſe otherwiſe ſhould St. Iohn have ſaid, If I come, I will remember his deeds, if there had bin no power and authority in that Church to have called Diotrephes to an accompt and to have puniſhed and cenſured him? But, ſaith Mr Knollys; If Diotrephes had affronted the Court and common-councell of Presbyters, why was he not convented before them? Surely the Apoſtle and Elder Saint John, would rather have writ to the Colledge of Presbyters (if there had bin any ſuch) than to the Church, and would rather have ſent him a ſummons to appear at ſome Conſiſtory, and would have writ thus, Diotrephes loves to be a Primate among you; wherefore when the Presbytry come to keep order and to meet together in a councell, I will remember his deeds and informe againſt him that he pra…e… againſt us with malicious words; p. 31but the Apoſtle did not know of any ſuch Court or councell of Preſbyters to appeal unto. Thus Mr Knollys triflingly cavilleth: As if Saint Iohn and the Presbyters had been all ignorant of their duty, and as if in writing unto the Church, Saint Iohn did not in that write to the Presbyters in it alſo, as well as Chriſt writing unto the ſeven Churches and in ſending unto them did not alſo write unto the Angels and Presbyters in them, when we learne from all thoſe Epiſtles and from the holy Scripture that the government of all thoſe ſeven churches, as of all the Apoſtolicall churches through the world, lay only on the Presbyters ſhoulders, which Mr Knollys alſo aſſenteth unto, ſaying page 11. That it is not denyed by the brethren, that the Presbyters in all Churches, were the men in the government of the Churches in which they were Elders. So that it cannot be denied but in his writting to the Church, he writ unto the Preſbyters principally who were the Officers in it and the cheife members of it, and knew very well that there was a Court of Presbyters in that Church, who would in convenient time have called Diotrephes to an accompt, though Saint Iohn had never come thither; but he ſignifying that when he came he would remember his deeds, made them retard their proceeding againſt him, for a time, that he being a fellow-Presbyter with them (as Peter was, with thoſe Presbyters he writs unto 1 Epiſtle Pet. chap. 5.) might have the hearing of the cauſe amongſt the other Presbyters; all which ſufficiently confirmeth that Saint Iohn did acknowledge a common councell of presbyters in that Church to appeale unto. And therefore all Maſter Knollys his whibling queſtions are vaine and meerely to delude the people: for what man is there ſo ſtupid or ſo unexperienced in matters of government, or but underſtands the practice of our times in every corporation, or Committee, through the Kingdome, that knowes not if any Alderman of any Corporation, or any Commiſſioner of any Committee ſhould affect a particular domination to himſelfe over his fellow-Aldermen or Commiſſioners, or over the people that were under their charge, whenas they are by their charters and Commiſſions, to governe their ſeveral corporations, Hundreds, Rapes, Ridings or Wapentaks by the common conſent, and joynt counſell and aggreement of them all, ſo that no order made without their combined authority or the joynt conſent of them all, or the major part of them, p. 32ſhould be binding and of force, I ſay, who doth not know, that if any of thoſe Aldermen or Commiſſioners contrary unto their Charter or Commiſſion ſhould not onelyonly aſſume unto himſelf a particular power of ruling and ordering things by himſelfe, and of giving Lawes unto others and in bringing in or putting out, either in the Corporation or Committee, whom they pleaſed; and ſhould alſo uſe diſgracefull words againſt their fellow-Aldermen or Commiſſioners, that any either Alderman or Commiſſioner doing any of theſe things, doth not oppoſe the Corporation & Committee with the commiſſioners in them, and by that offend againſt their government, and deſerveth thereby ſeverely to be puniſhed? And who doth not likewiſe know, that if either any of the Aldermen or any of the Commiſſioners ſhould underſtand of this their diſorderly carriage, and ſhould informe the Corporation or Committee of it by letters, and ſay, that when he came he would remember his deeds, by theſe his expreſſions doth not acknowledge likewiſe that there is both in the corporation and committee a ſtanding court, in which there was power at all times for the puniſhing and cenſuring of any ſuch offender? I am moſt aſſured that he will ſo conclude that there is a court there, and withall will ſay, that this or that commiſſioners information doth no way impeach or hinder the proceedings of that court, or minoriſe its power, but that it may go on to cenſure ſuch as ſhall offend againſt their authority, if it can be proved by others, though that commiſſioner that informed againſt him ſhould not be preſent. And even ſo it was in the Church Saint John writ unto, it had a court, and power within it ſelfe of proceeding againſt Diotrephes, and would have uſed it againſt him, whether S. Iohn had come or no, although we may ſuppoſe that they did not proceed againſt him till Saint Iohn came: yea, I ſhall make it good out of Mr Knollys his words that there was a court in that church. But by this, I ſay, it appeareth that Saint Iohn knew very well that there was a court or councell of Presbyters to appeal unto in his time, in that church, though Mr Knollys affirmeth the contrary, peremptorily aſſerting that S. Iohn knew no ſuch Court to appeal to, and that I cannot prove any ſuch appeals. But it is ordinary with M. Knollys to confute the holy Scriptures, and to contradict himſelf as he doth both here and in all other of his anſwers, as in their due places we ſhall ſee. For what Chriſtian ever with deliberation did read the Scripture, that p. 33can beleeve that St. Iohn could be ignorant that there was a court and Presbytry in every church, when M. Knollys himſelf acknowledgeth it? Without doubt Saint Iohn knew the government that was then eſtabliſhed in all churches, as well as Mr Knollys. He could not be ignorant what government God had appointed & eſtabliſhed in every church which was a Presbytery (as appeareth from all the places above quoted) which was a Court, to wit, a company of officers in every church armed with power & authority from God himſelf within their ſeverall Presbytries to order, rule and govern the people under them, and to convent any offender before them and to proceed againſt him by cenſure and puniſhment: If the crime layd againſt him were ſufficiently proved, and that the people under them were to yeild obedience unto them in the Lord, ſuch a power was every Presbytery inveſted with through all the Apoſtolicall churches; and this Mr Knollys hath acknowledged in divers places in this his Pamphlet, & in this his very anſwer concerning Diotrephes, as we ſhall ſee by and by. And all this S. Iohn could not be ignorant of, and that in the Church of Ieruſalem, in which hee was both a Paſtor and a Member, that the Presbytery ruled there, and that all the people made their addreſſes (as well for the good of their ſoules, as for the better rectifying of abuſes) to the Apoſtles and Presbyters of that Church, and appealed alwayes unto them, and never applyed themſelves unto the people or the multitude, as we may ſee in theſe particulars: as,

Firſt, when they were pricked in their hearts, they applied themſelves unto the Apoſtles for direction, ſaying, men and brethren what ſhall we do? Acts 2. they went not to the church or people, but to the Apoſtles, knowing that the Miniſters were their guides, and that they were to be directed by them, and that they were bound to obey them. And ſo in the fact of Ananias and Saphira his wife, when they had purloyned the goods of the Church; for whereas it was ordered and agreed upon by common conſent that the price of thoſe poſſeſſions that were ſold ſhould be layd down at the Apoſtles feet, and that diſtribution ſhould be made unto every man according as he had need; contrary to this order Ananias kept back part of the price, Saphira his wife alſo being privy to it: Hereupon the people appeal unto the Apoſtles in whoſe hands the government then lay, and who had power to cenſure and puniſh them, as they did for that their delinquency, as it is to be ſeen p. 34Acts the 5. they went not to the people and Church, but applyed themſelves to the Presbytery; and of this proceeding Saint John was not ignorant.

Again when the widdowes were neglected in the daily miniſtration, for the taking away of this abuſe, they appealed unto the Apoſtles, as we may ſee in the ſixt of the Acts (and not unto the Church or people) who ordered that buſineſſe, and determined the controverſie amongſt them, to which the people aſſented. This alſo Saint Iohn was not ignorant of: And he knew very well that the Presbytery in Ieruſalem and all other Churches had power to ſend any of the Apoſtles or their other Miniſters into any other place to preach, or upon any meſſage, as we may ſee it Acts the 8▪ and Acts 14, & 15. For the Presbytery of Ieruſalem ſent Peter and Iohn to the City of Samaria to preach amongſt the people there, which they could not have done except the Presbitry had had power and authority in their hands over thē; we ſee alſo the ſame in the Church of Antioch, where they ſent Paul and Barnabas and their miniſters to the Presbitry at Ieruſalem, & the Presbitry of Ieruſalem they likewiſe ſent their decrees by their Miniſters through all Cities and Churches, which they could not have done, had they not had authority over the Miniſters. Again S. Iohn knew very well that the power of admitting of members lay not in the peoples hands; for we read Acts the 9. When Paul came to Ieruſalem and aſſayed to joyn himſelf to the Diſciples, and that they being affraid of him, & believing not that he was a Diſciple, St Paul appeals from them to the Presbytery of the Apoſtles in whoſe hands the government lay; and declaring unto them how matters were, they admitted him into fellowſhip with them, without the conſent of the people & their good liking, for the government did not belong unto them. All theſe proceedings Saint Iohn knew very well, and therefore could not be ignorant that there was a Court and Councell to appeal to in all Churches: Yea Saint Iohn knew alſo that the Presbytry of Ieruſalem had power and authority over any of the Apoſtles, and did upon any occaſion convent them before them as we may ſee in the 11. chap. and 21. where Peter was called before the Presbytery for going in to the Gentiles, and was therefore to give an accompt of his actions there, which he did; all with ſhews there was there a ſtanding Court: and ſo in the 21. chapter the Presbytry gave Saint Paul an order and direction how to behave himſelf p. 35toward the weak ones; which he followed; all which ſhewes that they only had the power in their hands, and that there was a court there, and that it belonged not to the people; all theſe things, I ſay, S. Iohn was not ignorant of, & therfore knew very well that in that Church alſo where Diotrephes was a Presbyter, there was a Court and Common-councell of Presbyters to appeal unto, or elſe he would never have ſaid, If I come I will remember his deeds. But why ſhould I ſpend time in proving that which to any underſtanding man is as evident a nd clear as almoſt any other truth in the holy Scripture? eſpecially when Mr Knollys hath proved it himſelf in formall words in many places in this his anſwer; for he confeſſeth that there was a Presbytery eſtabliſhed in every Church, and that the government of thoſe Churches was put into the Presbyters hands, and that the people were to obey thoſe Presbyters as their guides; and in expreſſe termes page the ſeventh ſaith, Therefore the Apoſtle writes to the Church or particular congregation whereof Diotrephes was a Member and an Elder, who he knew had power to judge him, as well as the Church or particular Congregation of Corinth had power to judge them that were Members therein, 1 Cor. 5. 12. 13. And therefore might as warrantably admoniſh Diotrephes, as the Church of Coloſſe might Archippus Coloſſ. 4. verſe 17. in theſe words, He confeſſeth that Saint Iohn knew that the Church whereof Diotrephes was a Member and Presbyter, had power to judg him; which doth neceſſarily infer that there was at that time a court there; for judgement and cenſure and inflicting of puniſhment is the act of a court or Magiſtracy and of thoſe that are in authority and armed with power; beſides for further illuſtration of his meaning, he ſaith that the church Saint Iohn writ unto, had the ſame power over its Members that the church of Corinth had over its Members: Now all men that have read the firſt and ſecond E…iſtle of Paul to the Corinthians, know very well that there was a court in the church of Corinth with plenary authority from Chriſt himſelfe, both to convent and cenſure, and that with the ſevereſt puniſhment thoſe that did publikely ſcandalize the Goſpell, as is evident by the excommunication of the inceſtuous perſon; now if that church that St. Iohn writ unto were equall in power to that of Corinth, and that of Coloſſe, and to all the other Apoſtolicall churches, as Mr Knollys confeſſeth and laboureth to prove; then theſe concluſions will neceſſarily follow p. 36from his argumentations. The firſt, that Saint Iohn could not be ignorant that there was a court and common-councell of Presbyters in that church to appeal unto; for Mr Knollys ſaith, that Saint John knew that that Church had power to judge Diotrephes, and therefore in this contradicteth himſelfe; for in the ſixth page he affirmed that Saint Iohn knew not any ſuch court.