Relation of the Sufferings of Ministers in Scotland Since 1660, Section 13

Relation of the Sufferings of Ministers in Scotland Since 1660 · Section 13

p. 200SECTIO XIII.

The former purpose further prosecuted, & Mr Stilling fleet's notion examined.

THere is one reason more pleading against the taking of the oath as it is now glossed, & it is this,

20. By taking of this oath they should assent unto that power which is given unto the King, in the 16 Act of Parliament, viz. a power to settle & secure Church governement, in such a frame as shall be most agreable & suiteable unto Monarchicall Governement, & most complying with the publick peace, & quyet of the Kingdome: And so grant 1. That there is not one forme or modell of Church governement, set down in the word, obliging Churches in all ages to follow the same 2. That the supreme Magistrat alone may appoynt what forme he thinketh good.

p. 201To speak to this head at length, would take a long time in regard that one Mr Stilling fleet hath been at the paines to give the World a proof of his learning & reading, by engaging in this quarrell, & in pleading against the privilege & prerogative of the Crown of Christ, whom God hath made King in Zion, & who will reigne untill all his enemies be made his footstool. He would, without all doubt, have had more peace, when stepping into eternity, if he had imployed his partes & abilities for Christ & his interests as King & sole King in his Church, & Kingdom.

But yet though the nature of this discourse will not admit so long & full an examination of the grounds whereupon this learned man walketh: Some thing must be said in short, & so much the rather because, through the injury of the times, the labours of such; as have fully & solidly answered him, cannot be gotten printed.

And therefore till providence so order matters as that both those & severall other things against prelats, may receive a free Imprimatur. Take these few observations upon his whole book which he is pleased to call a weapon salve &c. so far as concerneth the bussinesse in hand

Obs. 1. He granteth pag. 154. That it is necessary there should be a forme of government in the Church by vertue not only of that law of nature, which provideth for the preservation of societies, but likewise by vertue of that divine law which takes care for the Churches preservation in peace and unity. So then if there be such a divine law for a forme of Church Government; & i… in the primitive times there was a forme of Church Government followed, the poynt is gained by Mr Stillingfleet's own concessions; for part 1. c. 1: § 3. He sayeth that there is not the same necessitie for a particular clear revelation, in the alteration of a law unrepealed in some circumstances of it, as there is, for the establishing of a new law: as to the former, a different practice by persons guided by an infallible Spirit is sufficient, which is the case, as to the observation of the Lord's day under the Gospell; for the fourth command standing in force, as to the morality of it, a different practice, by the Apostles p. 202may be sufficient, for the particular determination of the more rituall & occasionall part of it. Now there being a standing morall law for a forme of Church governement, the practice of the Apostles who were guided by an infallible Spirit is sufficient for an alteration: And so as their practice obligeth now, to the observation of the first day Sabbath, because of the standing force of the morall law for one day of Seven; So their practice obligeth now unto that forme of Governement, which they used, because of the standing force of the law of God for a forme of Church Governement: So that we need not enquire after a particular & clear revelation in this case where there is but the alteration of a law unrepealed as to some particular circumstances. And thus, if the morality of the first day Sabbath stand, the morality of the governement of the Church which the Apostles did set up, will stand also. Their practice altering the last day of Seven into the first, will no more oblige then their altering of the ancient governement, into a new one, which was distinct from the former.

Obs. 2. Part. 2. c. 1. §. 4, 5, 6. When he is about the stateing of the question he will have a nationall Church, to be understood as a Church in which a forme of Government should be setled. It is true a nationall society incorporated, is a Church; It is also true that the notion of a Church agreeth to other societies, then nationall, & as himself sayes, wherever the notion of a Church particular is to be found, there must be a Governement in that Church: & so every society which may be called a Church, should have a Governement in it. But now the question is whether every such society as may be called a Church, should have its own liberty, to set up what forme of Government it thinketh best, or only a nationall Church? If only a nationall Church have that liberty then that liberty agreeth not to a nationall Church, as it is a Church, but under some other notion, & what is this other notion? Is it because they are under one civil Governement? But many nations may in some respect be under one civil Government, & in some respect there is hardly any one nation, which in all its parts incorporations & cities, is governed after one & the same p. 203manner. But further, what hath the Church to do with the civill lawes or civill way of Governement, especially seing himself granteth that the Church is a quite distinct society from the civil state? But next if every Church hath this liberty then in one & the same nationall Church, there may be many severall sorts of Governements, & this would occasion the greatest confusion in the world, & looketh no way like the ordinance of God, which neither tendeth to union nor edification but to confusion & distraction, & will make every parochial Church (& he cannot deny a parochiall Church to be a Church) to have its own distinct forme of Government, thus porachiall Churches should be like the Cant…ns of Helvetia or distinct Kingdomes ruled by their own lawes & after their owne manner. If it be said that the unity & peace of the nationall Church ought much more to be looked after, then the peace & unity of any one particular congregation Ans. will it thence follow that every particular congregation, in a nationall Church, should be Governed after one manner? then it will follow also that all nationall Churches being members of the Church universall, must be Governed after one & the same manner; for the peace & unity of the Church universall is preferable unto the peace & unity of a Nat. Church, as the peace & unity of a Nat. Church is preferable unto the peace & unity of Particular congregations. But where shall a Magistrat be found for establishing this one forme of Government? Is it not then saifest to say That Christ hath set down such a forme which all Churches, all the world over are obliged to follow & imitat: for he is only head of the Church?

Obs. 3. When he stateth the question Part. 2 c. 3, §. 1. He limiteth the disput unto two sorts or species of Government thus Whether the Church should be Governed by a colledge of presbyters; or by a superiour order above the standing ministery having the power of jurisdiction & ordination belonging to it. But under favour, this is not faire dealing in stateing of a controversy for his bussinesse is to shew that there is no forme at all setled by a Ius divinum. That there is no warrand in the word, for any one forme more then for all the rest, & that there is no one forme p. 204so determined by a positive law of God, that all the Churches of Christ, are bound to observe it; but that it is left to the prudence, of every particular Church to agree upon its own forme, which it judgeth most fit for the ends of Governement, in it self: & if this be his drift & scope, may not every one see how he prevaricateth here, in limiting the disput to these two formes; seing there are moe formes pretended unto. The independents will grant that there is no warrand in the word for either of those two formes mentioned; & yet will allaidge that there is another forme allowed of God & determined: The Papists have a forme of Government, & it may be the prelats think that their forme differeth from that. The Morellians have another forme distinct from all these, the Erastians have a sixt, & it is possible that Mr Baxter shall give him a seventh made out of presbyterian episcopall, independent & Erastian. now if his principles exclude all these why was the disput limited to two? or doth he think that these other formes are expresly excluded by the word, & that Churches are not left at liberty to make choise of any of them, but only of either of the two which he mentioned? Then the scripture is expresly & determinatly against severall formes of Governement, & if this be true, his principles are overturned, for if the law of God be expresly against some formes, it must be more for other formes, then for these, & all formes are not indifferent, nor are men left at liberty to pitch upon what forme they please.

Obs. 4. He granteth Part. 2. c. 2. §. 1. That the Government of the Church ought to be administred by officers of divine appoyntment. And now what shall become of that Government by a superiour order above the standing ministery; for a prelat as a superiour order is a distinct officer from presbyters; & so must have a divine appoyntment, & if he hath a divine appoyntment, he must be a standing officer, as well as presbyters; & if so, men must not, as they please, lay him by; but the Government by prelats must be juris divini: & if upon the other hand, he be really a distinct officer, & hath no divine warrant, or appoyntment, the Government of the Church by prelats must be utterly unlawfull.

p. 205But what sayeth he to this objection? Part. 2. c. 4. §. 11. These officers are only said to be new that were never appoynted by Christ: & the Church may appoynt none such: but if such be meaned as have a Charge of more then one particular congregation by the consent of pastours themselves, such an officer is not ne…; for beside the generall practice of the Church, from the first primitive times, which have all consented in the use of such officers, we finde the foundation of this power laid by Christ himself, in the power which the Apostles were invested in, which was extended over many both pastours, & Churches; & this power must be proved extraordinary, before it can be said to cease; & that must be done by some arguments proper to their persones; for if they be of a morall nature, they will prove the office, to be so too—I say not but that the necessity of the office, as in their persons, for the first preaching & propagating the Gospell did cease with them; but that after their death it became unlawfull to take Charge of di…ecesian Churches I deny; for to make a thing unlawfull, which was before lawfull there must be some expresse prohibition thus he.

To which it is answered. 1. It appeareth then that a Bishop is a distinct officer from a Presbyter, for the Apostles were distinct from Presbyters, & their office by Mr Stilling fleet, is the same upon the matter with that of the Apostles, viz a power over both Churches & pastours, for he will not grant that that power in the Apostles was extraordinar, for he sayes that the foundation of this power, was laid by Christ himself, in that power which the Apostles were invested in: & therefore that power of the Apostles, & the power of Prelats must be one upon the matter, and so Prelats must be distinct from Presbyters as the Apostles were. 2. It is strange how he can so confidently say. That it was the practice of the Church of God from the first primitive times, to consent to the use of such officers: s…ing himself is at so much paines to prove that antiquity is most defective in the times immediatly after the Apostles, & that none dar with confidence beleeve the conjectures of Eusebius at 300 yeers distance from the Apostolicall times, when he hath no other testimony to avouch but the hypotyposes of an uncertaine Clement & p. 206the commentaries of Hegesippus, &c. Pag. 296. 297. 3. To let this passe. Mr Stilling sleet would do well to shew whether the office of Apostles (which is a distinct thing from their extraordinary immediat mission (which he is pleased to make the maine distinguishing note of an Apostle) & also from the power of working miracles to confirme the truth of what they preached) did cease by God's warrand and approbation or not: if not, how could any be so bold as to lay this office aside, by which persons should be invested with power over many both Churches and pastours? & how can any say that it is not still necessary: Mr Stillingfleet seemeth here to plead for the divine right of prelacy: And indeed if the office & power of Apostles be the same with prelacie, & if that power or office be not laid a side with God's warrand & approbation, it must still be an office allowed of God, & if so, Mr Stillingfleet's notion will fall to the ground. His saying that the necessitie of the office, as in their persons for the first preaching & propagating the Gospell is ceased is nothing to the purpose, for he must speak of the office, as it is the same with the office of Prelats. It is certaine the necessity of the office as in their persons must cease, because they are gone, & the work of first preaching & propagating the Gospell, could be done by none after them, when they had done it themselves but that was not their ordinary office, if Mr Stillingfleet speak truth here. If this office did cease by God's warrand, then how can any raise it up againe without his expresse warrand? for either it was the Lord's will when he caused it to cease, that it should cease till he was pleased to make use of it againe, or till men pleased to raise it up, at their owne pleasure: This last cannot be proved & therefore seing God thought fit to lay is aside & gave no signification of his minde, when the Chur… should be at liberty to make use of it againe. It must now be a… new office unwarranted of God & so unlawfull. 4. That rule, th… to make a thing unlawfull, which was before, lawfull, there must be some expresse prohibition for bidding any furder use of such▪ power will not alwayes hold in this case; because some oth… thing may be equivalent unto an exprese prohibition, … when God removeth the speciall propper work of such an office, p. 207& the speciall proper qualifications, with which such officers were endued, when those cease the office ceaseth; & God thereby declareth that the office & work was extraordinary, & therefore should not continue. As for Example in the primitive Church there were some Prophets, & these were distinct from Apostles & Evangelists, & Pastors, &c. so were there workers of Miracles, & such as had the the gift of healing, & of speaking with tongues. And when God withdrew those gifts fiting those off…cers for the work unto which they were then called, did he not therby declare that it was his will that that office should cease? & was there a necessity for any other expresse probition? And because of the want of this expresse prohibition will it be lawfull now for any to set up such officers & offices, in the house of God, when God giveth not the qualifications & so giveth not the call thereunto? So is it in this case of the Apostles; when their qualifications, & their speciall work ceased, their office ceased; & there will be no call for such officers till there be fit work, & God give fit qualifications; & without a call & warrand it must be unlawfull to set up such an office againe. This will be clearer if it be considered what was the speciall work of an Apostle It was this. A planting of Churches, & setling of the Gospell government in them, by ins…nteing the standing officers thereof, & that by an eminent power immediatly granted by Christ to them, solely. This was their speciall work, & this ceased with them, & so did their office with it, As also the qualifications: And therefore it would be unlawfull now for a Church at here own hand to set up such an officer againe though there be no expresse probition. By this it is clear. 5. That the power & office of Apostles laid no foundation for prelaticall power, the work belonging to them as such, being altogether extraordinare. It is true, their power did extend over many Churches & pastours but yet. 1. They were not fixed to such & such particular dioecies, as propper to themselves; but sometimes moe of them were to gether in one place, following their work, Nor. 2. Did they account themselves the sole pastors of such or such a Church after other ministers had been ordained there. 3. …or p. 208did they ordaine alone in Churches constituted. nor. 4 Did they exerce jurisdiction alone, but alwayes they joyned others with them in Churches setled. 5. They assumed to themselves no negative voice either in ordination or jurisdiction: & so in them there could be no foundation for prelacy laid, even as to their common work, or work of a lasting nature which did not properly & peculiarly appertaine to them as Apostles. 6. Neither finally were they consecrated & ordained after the manner that prelats are now consecrated, being first made Deacons, & next Presbyters, & then Bishops, so that there is a vaste disparity.

But distrusting this answer he giveth a second §. 12. to this purpose. The extending of any Ministeriall power, is not the appoynting of a new office, because every Minister hath a relation Actu primo, to the whole Church of God, the resiraint & enlargment of which power is subject to positive determinations of prudence & conveniency in Actu secundo—The exercise and execution of the power of order belongeth to every one in his personall capacity, but as to the power of jurisdiction, though it belong habitually and Actu primo to each presbyter, yet being about matters of publicke and common concernment, the limit ation and exercise of it belongeth to the Church in common (such is the power of visiting Churches, of ordination and censures) and when this is devolved to some particular persons, by the rest of the pastors or by the Magisrat, quoad executionem it belongeth to them.

Ans. 1. This contradicteth the former answer, for the former answer did suppone that these were distinct officers from presbyters, because their office was such as the ordinary office of the Apostles; and the Apostles were distinct from other Church officers, even by their office, & not in respect only of their extraordinare mission, or power of working miracles. But this answer affirmeth them to be one & the same with presbyters. But. 2. By this answer he might plead for the Pope for every Minister in actis primo hath a relation to the whole Church & so might be a Pope, if the supreme Magistrat or the rest of the Ministers, would devolve upon him the execution of the power of jurisdiction; & so the Pope is no new officer p. 209but a mere presbyter, only his power of jurisdiction is enlairged: So may he plead for Cardmals, Patriarchs, Primats, Archbishops, as well as for Bishops. But it will be objected that the Pope pretendeth to some other thing as the warrand of his power even to a jus divinum Ans. & so do prelats, but with Mr Stillingfleet, all is one whether that be pretended unto, or not, for it is no matter what they say of themselves, but what any may feigne of them, to the end they may both deceive others, & be deceived themselves. This is, as if one would defend a man who had taken upon himself to be a King of such or such a common wealth, contrare to the fundamentall lawes of the land, and would alledge that he were no distinct officer from any other member of Parliam. because (for sooth) the power of Government, as to its execution, is subject to positive determinations, & Parliaments may, & do commissionat some of their number to some eminent piece of work, as to be a Generall or the like; & he who calleth himself King, is nothing else, notwithstanding that he rule the commonw. with as absolute power & unlimited, as ever King did. Sure any man of understanding would smile at such a defence, and just such an one is Mr Stillingfleet's, prelats rule & domineer with as absolute & unlimited power, as ever any did, & when it is alledged that they account themselves distinct officers from, & superiour to other presbyters, & that there is no warrand for any such officers Mr Stillingfleet, their new advocat cometh in, & sayeth: They are no distinct officers, let themselves say what they will, you may take them up as no distinct officers, & so suffer them to domineer still, if you look upon them as no distinct officers there is no hazard, all is saife, be they Pope be they Prelat & let them pretend to never so high & speciall commissions, as speciall & distinct officers, yet they may be submitted unto & obeyed, this mentall conception will make all right. 3. When any are disputing against an intruder in the house of God whether is it saifest to take him up, in his own colours & to look upon him as he holdeth forth himself, or to paint him as any think best? If any disputant would take liberty to paint him as he pleaseth he should not dispute for truth, but deal deceitfully. Let Mr p. 210Stillingfleet answere this question: Whether is it possible that a man may give out himself for a new officer, or not? or whether is there any hazard that such an one may be acknowledged & countenanced as an officer & as such an officer as he giveth himself forth to be, in the house of God: or not? If Mr Stillingfleet be consonant to his principles, he must answere that it is not possible: for really there can be no new officers warranded of God; & every one is at liberty to take them up under a right notion: & there is an end: & then let all the popish rable & ten times moe come in, they may be submitted unto; for really there can be no other officers in God's house, but pastours & deacons (with Mr Stillingfleet) & every one may look on all the rest as having their power either restricted or enlairged, according to the determination of prudence. 4. It may be asked: whether the Apostles were distinct officers from presbyt. yea or not? If they were distinct; what was it which made them distinct? It could not be their different way of mission for Matthias had not such a mission as Iames, Iohn & Peter & the rest had & yet all of them were Apostles & Matthias no lesse then the rest. It could not be their extraordinary qualifications, for Prophets & workers of miracles & speakers with tongues, had extraordinary qualifications; & yet they were not the same with Apostles: & further distinct qualifications make not distinct officers. Or was it a larger extended power? Then it is certane that prelats upon the same account must be distinct officers, from other presbyters; for they have a larger extended power then other presbyters have. 5. Doth Mr Stillingfl. think that there is no difference betuixt a man who acteth as commissionated from a judicature, having his power & particular commission from them; & a man who doth all of himself by his own power, having a commission from none? & that there is no difference betuixt one who receiveth commands from others as accountable to them, & one who taketh upon him to command them as he thinkest best: & betuixt the generall of an army sent forth by the Estates of a land (ruled without a King) having power & commission from them; & a King making use of the Estates, or of the Parliament of the Kingdome as his counsellours whose advice he will follow, or p. 211not follow, as seemeth him good, & commanding all of them a… pleaseth him best? If he think that there is no difference betuixt these, then indeed he cannot be much blamed for thinking that the prelat whom he busketh, is one & the same with the prelat of whom the controversie is. But in sober sadnesse let it be asked of Mr Stillingfleet; If he did satisfie himself with this his fiction & notion. There is no controversy now about what may be, or of a man in the moon, but of the prelats who are now in being, & concerning these it would be asked whether he thinketh that they ar… chosen by the Church over which they are, & that they are impowered by that Church, or by the officers of that Church, for that effect, & that they are accountable unto them, so that their power may be restrained at the Churches pleasure: Or not rather that they choose & ordaine the presbyters, & commissionat them, calling them to an account, & punishing as they think sit, usurping & useing this power as their owne, not borrowing it from the presbyters, in whole or in part, as being themselves solely invested with all Church power from Christ, & letting out the same to presbyters as they think meet. Now it is of these that the controversy is & it is such as are understood when it is said that they are new Church officers, & there is no controversy concerning Mr Stillingfleet's supposed Commissioners; for whether such as he speaketh of; be new distinct officers, or not, it is no matter, so long as these of whom the disput is, are such without all question, for any thing which Mr Stillingfleet hath said to the contrary; for the persons he speaketh of, are not the same with the persons concerning whom the controversy is: Commissioners having all their power derived from others are one thing, & such as have all the power from & with in themselves are another thing. But. 6. To put the matter more out of doubt, let it be considered that a distinct proper work with a distinct ordination for that effect, is enough to make a distinct officer: What distinguisheth Presbyters & Dea…ns (Let ruleing elders be laid a side, seing Mr Stillingfleet will not owne them as Church officers) but their distinct peculiar work & ordination: & so since prelats assume to themselves as their peculiar p. 212work, the power of jurisdiction, & ordination (to speak nothing of the power of order) they do account themselves, & so must all take them to be, distinct officers: All the prelats that ever were yet in the world, did look upon themselves as distinct from presbyters: & all who ever wrote of prelats, took them up as such (whether Iure Divino or Humano all is one, as to this bussinesse of their being distinct) till Mr Stlling fleet did vent his new notions. 7. That a judicature which acteth joyntly in matters of jurisdiction, may, in some particulars for facilitating their execution, impower one or moe of their number for that effect, is easily granted; but that they may so Impower them, as to denude themselves wholly of the power; & so enlarge the power of others as to null their owne; must be otherwayes proved then by Mr Stilling fleet's bare assertion: Christ's commission taketh in both the power of order & jurisdiction, & alloweth his servants no more to denude themselves of the one, then of the other. They themselves must answere for the duties of the one as well as for the duties of the other: And every Presbyter hath the Ius to both as well in actu secundo as in actu primo. judicious V…etius Polit. Eccl. Pag. 224. Quaest. 15. doth abundantly cleare this particular, shewing that such a delegation is not lawfull out of Mat. 18: 18. & 16: 18. 1 Cor. 5. Act. 20: 28. 1 Tim. 5: 17. 1 Thes. 5: 12. 1 Pet. 5: 1, 2. comp. with 1 Tim. 3: 5. Ioh. 20: 20. 1 Tim. 3. & 4: 13, 14. 2 Tim. 2: 2. & 4: 2. Tit. 1: 3, 5, 7, 8. Whatever may be done in case of necessity, for dispatching of some particular Act, which is transient. And how or what way the limitation & exercise of the power of jurisdiction, belongeth to the Church in common more then the limitation & exercise of the power of order, is not yet clearly demonstrated by any thing which Mr Stillingfleet hath said: And it is known that Prelats arrogat to themselves, a speciall or sole interest in the power of order, as well as in the power of jurisdiction, & therefore they stile themselves the only Pastors of the Dioecies, & say that the Presbyters are but their Substitutes & Vicars; And it is certane that they assume to themselves, the sole power of ordination. And though p. 213here in this place, which is now under consideration Mr Stillingfleet is pleased to rancke up ordination under the power of jurisdiction, yet else where viz. Pag. 273. he sayeth that, The collation of orders doth come from the power of order & not meerly from the power of jurisdiction. 8. How cometh the Christian Magistrat in here to appoynt the constant limitation, & exercise of the power committed by Christ, unto Church Officers? This is a very great power granted unto the civill Magistrat & some warrand would be seen for it: But this is not the proper place to examine his notions concerning the power of the civill Magistrat in Church matters. Enough of this observation.

Obs. 5. With Presbyterians; the practice of the Apostles, & of the Churches in their dayes, following their appoyntment & command, is of much weight. It is true their examples as examples, do not binde; But when the Lord hath sent them forth, for this end & errand, to plante Churches, to ordaine new offices, & officers, immediatly under him, and to appoynt unto these officers, their proper work, & to show them how & what way they should goe about their work, & when in all things they delivered nothing to the Church but what they received of the Lord, 1 Cor. 11: 23. & as Tertull. said de praeser. adv. haereses, Apostoli nihil ex suo arbitrio elegerunt quod inducerent, sed acceptam à Christo disciplinam fideliter nationibus assignaverunt; Sure then their practice & example ought to be followed. Seing they were sent forth for this end especially, viz. to reforme & setle Churches in doctrine, worship, discipline & governement, according to a new Gospell modell, can any think that we are not obliged to follow their practices. It it true there can be no duty without a law making it a duty; But Christ's sending them forth for this end, & giving them a speciall commission for this work, sending them forth as the Father sent him, & breathing the Holy Ghost upon them, & commanding them, Math. 28: v. 19, 20. To goe & teach all Nations all things which he had commanded them: & Act. 1: 2, 3. Speaking to them of the things pertainting to the Kingdome of God. By which sayeth Calvin p. 214on the place, Is signified that Christ would not goe away till first he had seen to the governement of the Church, carry a law in their bosome, & say that their example is obligeing: And when there is a law or warrand for following such an example, it is but in vaine to dispute, whether it be the example which bindeth, or the rule making it our duty to follow such an example. But moreover he will grant that examples in actions that are morall naturall are obligeing (whether as examples, or by reason of the morality of the action, needeth not be anxiously enquired after) & will not actions done by them upon morall grounds, that are of perpetuall concernement, become actions morall naturall, & so obligeing? Is not their example in observing the first day Sabbath, obligeing? And why? He sayes, because there was a morall law standing in force concerning the observation of one day in Seven: Why then shall not their example in observing such or such a forme of governement be obligeing, seing there was a morall law standing in force concerning the governement of the Church in generall? Is there any rule extant making their example in the one case obligeing, & not in the other? If the Apostolicall practice in the one case make an Apostolicall tradition, & so a divine institution, so will their practice do in the other case: yea the examples of the Churches practise in the Apostles times, & hints from their writtings do sufficiently evidence an institution; we read of elders in Ierusalem, & hence we saifly argue that they were ordained, though we read not in terminis terminantibus of the manner how they were ordained, (sayeth one.)

But he hath foure things to object against this ground taken from the practice of the Apostles, though acted by the Spirit Part. 2. cap. 6. §. 20.

As 1. That the Apostles did many things without any intention of obligeing others, as preaching without maintenance, &c. Ans. 1. The consequence is null. Because they did many things without such an intention, will it follow, Ergo they did nothing with such an intention? 2. The disput is about such actions as were done by them by vertue of their speciall office & p. 215calling, of which kinde, this is none, to preach at some Churches without wages. 3. Yea this same action of preaching without wages, is to be imitated in the like cases, that is, when Ministers have a competent livelyhood otherwise, as Paul had who said, he robed other Churches, 1 Cor. 11: ver. 8. & when there is no other way to stope the mouthes of false teachers, who thereby take occasion to hinder the good of the Gospell, for this was the thing which moved Paul to take …o wages from Corinth. That he might cut off occasion from them that desired occasion, and these were the false Apostles, 1 Cor. 11: v. 12, 13.

2. He sayeth, The Apostles did many things upon particular occasions, emergencies & circumstances, which things so done cannot binde by vertue of their doing them, any furder then a parity of reason doth conclude the same things to be done, as Paul's celebat, communitie of goods, their preaching from house to house, absteaning from blood, &c. Ans. this is still to argue a particulari because such & such particular practices oblige not Ergo no practice obligeth, is a weak consequence. 2. Actions done upon particular occasions & emergencies, are of another nature, then such actions as are done upon morall & lasting grounds. 3. If even those actions binde upon the ground of a parity of reason, much more will these binde upon the same account: for whatever ground or reason be given why the Apostles followed such a modell of Government in their dayes, will stand good now, & evince that the same modell ought to be followed. 4. And where as he sayeth before an acknowledged Apostolicall practice be looked on as obligatory, it must be made appear, that what they did, was not according as they saw reason & cause, for the doing of it, depending upon the severall circumstances of time place and persones; but that they did it from some unalterable law of Christ, or from indispensable reasons, as will equally hold in all times, places & persons he confirmeth what is now answered; for the reasons of their erecting such a species of Government, do equally hold in all times & places, nothing can be said for the dependence of such a forme upon the severall circumstances of time place & persons. As for the particulars mentioned by p. 216him, It is answered. 1. For Celebat, Christ himself Mat. 1 9: v. 12. restricteth it to such as have the gift of continency, & it bindeth none else. 2. The Community of goods was for that time only, for the contrary is practised in after times by all other Churches & Christians; for when Paul is pressing the Corinthians unto a contribution he never mentioneth this as an argument moving thereunto. 3. Their preaching from house to house was for want of conveniency of more publicke places & yet when they had liberty they went to the temple, & to Solomons por…h, & to Synagogues. 4. As for that Act 15▪ concerning the abstaineing from blood & things strangled, & things offered to idols it was only for that time of the scandall, & not alwayes; for Paul taketh off this. 1. Cor 10: 25: when he sayeth whatsoever is sold in the shambles that eat asking no question for conscience sake & againe when he sayes. 1. Tim 4: 3, 4, 5. Every creature of God is good & nothing to be refused if it be received with thanks giving. But there is nothing of this kinde that can be showne, in the matter of the species of Government as shall further appear when his alledgances are answered afterward.

3. He sayes officers that were of Apostolick appoyntment are growne out of use in the Church as widowes. 1 Tim. 4: 9. or diaconisses Rom 16: 1. Ans. These Diaconisses were not Church-officers having any Ministeriall charge or office in the Church, for there is nothing spoken of their ordination. But they were poor eleemosynaries, & indigent women, taken in for some service, unto sick strangers, or propter horam balnei; aut visitationis quando nudatum fui… corpus mulieris as sayeth Epip… rius lib. 3. Tom. 2. haeres. 79. And so their work was for those …ote countreyes, & because now there is no such necessitie for their work, themselves are laid aside. But 2. are there not severall other officers laid aside as Apostles, Prophets & Evangelists▪ & will he hence conclude that therefore nothing of their practice obligeth? 3. If this ground be followed forth, that Apostolick practice even in the matter of officers instituted by them, is not of an obligatory nature, then may all Church officers be laid aside, & so his formerly mentioned position & p. 217concession touching the government of the Church by officers only of divine appoyntment, will fall to the ground. If he say that divine institution is one thing & bare examples are another thing. Ans. Then his reason here is impertinent: for all Church officers are of divine institution, & these Diaconisses among the rest must be of divine appoyntment: & then what hath this to do here where the examplary practices of the Apostles are only spoken of; which yet to presbyterians in the case of Government will speak faire for a divine institution. finally if it could be cleared what was & ought to be the proper work of these Widowes & that it were of a lasting necessity unto the Church in all places & at all times (of which the scripture is altogether silent) as may be seen concerning other standing officers of the Church, respect should be had to that ordinance of God, as well as to others.

4. He sayeth Rites & customes apostolicall are altered … dipping in baptisme, love feasts, holy kisse, & therefore men do not think that apostolical practice doth binde. Ans. 1. He still argueth à particular… which is very unsure & fallacious: because in some things men look not upon the practice of the Apostles, as bindeing therefore in nothing: This argument will not hold. 2. There is a great difference betwixt rites & customes, which are alterable: & such & such formes of Government which be of a more lasting nature. As for dipping in baptisme. It is no where commanded, nor was it constantly practised by the Apostles, nor other Church officers: It is true they were commanded to Baptize, but this will not necessarily import baptizing by dipping; for baptizing any thing may be otherwise then by dipping, as these places do cleare Mark. 7: 4. Heb. 9: v. 10. with Numb. 8: 7… 1. Cor. 10: v. 1. Rev. 19: 13… compared with Isa. 63: 3. Mat. 3: 11. compared with Act. 2: 17. And next it is severall times found that they baptized, when & where they could not get Dipping used as, Act 2, 41. & 4, 4. Where such multitudes could not be gotten dipt, especially in the streets: so Act 9, 18, 19. This was in a lodging when Paul was sick & weak & so unfit for Dipping: So Act 16, 33. This was in the night in a privat lodging when Paul & Silas by reason p. 218of their sores were unable for dipping. And therefore all that can be said in this, is that sometimes they used Dipping & sometimes sprinkling as occasion offered: & this will speak nothing for the Apostles continuall practiseing of dipping, & so it will not speak home to the case in hand. 4. As for love feasts, if they were ordinary seasts, amongst private Christians, it was but an Act of civility to use these, & they needed no institution from the Apostles practice, & a custome it is that continueth yet; But if it be meaned of the feasts which they keeped at the Lord's supp…, when rich persons brought some meat with them to make a feast of at that time; This was not constantly practised by the apostles (of whose practices we are now speaking) not yet was it warranted by them; yea Paul writting to the Corinthians Epist. 1. c. 11. v. 22. sayeth have yee therefore no houses to eat & drink in? And so would have them forbearing that custome, which they had so much abused. Their custome was to keep those feasts in the place of the assembly: & he would have them (if so they would feast) keeping those feasts at home in their own houses: & therefore this is nothing to the purpose in hand. 5. As for the Holy Kisse It was only a civil custome used then in saluteing one another, & was not of any Apostolicall institution: famous Voetius Polit. Eccles. Pag. 466. sayeth that this Kisse was a common rite in its Kinde & forme, used according to the received custome in toaken of love, friendshipe, familiarity, as also of subjection and againe Pag. 467. of what soever kinde & forme it was, it was nothing but a common signe of love, good will, acquaintance, friendshipe, familiarity, courtesie, reverence & honour in thwir meetings, conferences, & salutations, especially in the Eastern conntreyes see Gen 29, 11. &. 31. 28. &. 45, 15. 1. Sam. 10. 1, 2. Sam. 20, …. Mat. 26, 48. Luk▪ …7, 45. It is true Paul bids them salute one another with a Holy Kisse, but when he doth so he doth not institute the Kisse but only ordereth the manner of their useing of that salutation & exhorteh that it be not done wantonly or dissemblingly, but Christianly & Holily. Voetius ubi supra sayeth By thi… Epithet Holy it is distinguished from a lust full Kisse as that Prov. 7. 13. & Hypocriticall, like that Mat. 26, 48, 49. And it p. 219is called holy because the Kisse of Holy & true charity as 1 Pet. 5. 4. And againe he sayeth It is propounded be…y of a command not generall, but speciall according to the particular & present circumstances of time place and persons.

Thus it is apparent that for all these foure reasons of his, the practice of the Apostles in the matter of Governement, …being a bussinesse unto which they were called, & for which they were endued, & specially assisted by the Holy ghost, is obligeing & of binding force.

But there are some other things, which he all…igeth against this Part. 2. cap. 6. §. 19. Which must be examined. He layeth down as probable That the Apostles in probability did not observe any one fixed course in setling the Government of Churches, but setled it according to the severall circumstances of places and persons which they had to deal with. Though he lay not this down as a foundation of his thesis, but only as a Doctrines of probability, yet if he be able to make it out that the Apostles in some places did setle Presbyterian Governement, & in other places Episcopall Governement, he shall gaine his poynt: And therefore his strength in this particular must be tryed.

To this end he layeth down three grounds. 1. The different State, condition, quantity of the Churches planted by the Apostles. 2. The multitude of unfixed officers which Acted then with authority over the Church where they were resident. 3. The different customes observed in severall Churches as t… their Governement after the death of the Apostles. As to the last of these grounds it cannot appear to be any at all: For the pracctice of the Churches after the dayes of the Apostles will not prove what the practice of the Churches was, dureing the dayes of the Apostles, nor what the practice of the Apostles was, unlesse it could certanely be manifested, that these Churches did punctually follow the practice of the Apostles which he will neither affirme nor undertake to prove, unlesse he would flatly contradict himself. As to the second ground it cometh not up to be a sufficient ground for this position p. 220unlesse he will prove that these unfixed officers or Evangelists, (such as Timothy & Titus were as himself acknowledgeth) were proper Bishops, that is to say, were not Evangelists, but fixed officers. 2: Though the Apostle made use of them in some Churches, & not in others, it will not follow that therefore the Apostles did set up distinct formes or models; for the way of setting up a model is adistinct thing from the modell itself: the modell or species of Government might be the same whether erected in a place immediately by the Apostles themselves, or mediatly by the Evangelists at their direction. And 3. Neither the Apostles themselves, nor the Evangelists (for any thing which can be seen in Scripture) did act in matters of governement, after an Episcopall manner, but conjunctly with other Presbyters, in Churches constituted (& what extraordinary course they tooke in Churches not yet constituted is not much to the purpose in hand, for their way of erecting a modell thus; being extraordinary, is not necessarily imitable.) And thus one species viz. Presbyterian is directly pointed forth.

But most of the stresse lyeth on the first ground, for proving of which he layeth down two particulars. 1. That in Churches consisting of a small number of beleevers, where there was no great probability of a great increase afterwards, one single Pastor with Deacons under him were only constituted by the Apostles for the ruleing of these Churches. 2. In Churches consisting of a multitude of beleevers, or where there was a probability of a great increase by preaching the Gospell; The Apostles did setle a colledge of Presbyters, whose office was partly to governe the Church already formed, and partly in labouring in the converting of more: As to this last particular it may be passed, because it speaketh nothing against the Presbyterians, they fully accord with him therein; save where he sayeth, That these two sores of elders mentioned, 1 Tim. 5: 17. were both preaching Presbyters, the one imployed most in preaching, and converting moe, and therefore deserved both more respect and maintenance, because of their greater burden, more abundant labours, and greater sufferings: and others most in ruling the flock already converted. And so rejecteth p. 221ruleing elders, as not being of divine appoyntment: But (that a word only may be spoken to it here) his glosse agreeth not to the place: for 1. This glosse maketh the ministery of the Word common to both, or else sayeth that such as ruled at home, did not preach at all, (& such the Apostle would not account worthy of double honour…,) but the Apostle maketh ruling common to both. 2. Then the maine difference betwixt these two should lye in the word foreign where as the Apostle maketh the difference to lye in the whole sentence, lalabouring in word and doctrine: For he sayeth not these that rule well and are foreign in word and doctrine; are worthy of double honour, but especially such who are foreign. 3. We finde this word foreign given to others even to such as were fixed to some certaine place, as 1. Thes. 5: v. 12 foreign. 4. These unfixed preachers behoved to be either Evangelists, & such like extraordinary Officers, or …reaching Presbyters; Not Euangelists, for there was no doubt, about these; for all would grant that they were worthy of double honour. And it is like the Apostle would not have spoken so to Timothy who was an Evangelist: Not preaching Presbyters, for there was none of those set apart for that end; The Scripture mentioneth no such thing, but alwayes teacheth that Presbyters were fixed to certaine places (what Presbyters might do, & did when scattered abroad by reason of persecution, is another question) Elders are ordained & appoynted to Churches, Act. 14: 23. Tit. 1: 5. But enough of this, in this place.

The first particular then must be a little more narrowly examined: he sayeth, That in some places at first there were noneplaced but only a Bishop & Deacons, & for this he citeth Clement's Epistle (saying, The Apostles preaching through countreyes and cities ordained the first fruits of such as beleeved to be Bishops and Deacons.) But by Bishops here he cannot understand such Bishops, as are now spoken of, that is, such as had power over Presbyters and Churches; for himself doth abundantly cleare the contrary: And what can be allaidged to prove that he meaneth only one Bishop in one place, is not yet apparent, only he referreth his reader to other testimonies, p. 222which must also be looked upon, & examined: But it is certaine the place it self speaketh as much for one Deacon in a place as for one Presbyter, or Bishop (for both are one as himself will acknowledge) & as clearly for moe Bishops as for moe Deacons in villages, or cities foreign, here are as well Bishops in cities & villages, as Deacons. But then he citeth Epiphanius contra Ae…m Haeres. 75. saying, That at the first there were no Bishops appoynted, & then the Apostle writteth to Bishops & Deacons (for the Apostles could not setle all things at first) for there was a necessity of Presbyters & Deacons, for by these two Officers, all Ecclesiastick offices might be performed; for where there was none found worthy to be a Bishop, the place remained without one, but where necessity required one, & there were some found fit, some were ordained Bishops, but for want of convenient number there could be no Presbyters found out, & in such places they were contented with the Bishop & Deacons. But what can Epiphanius or any other writter in his time, do, as to the clearing of what was the practice of the Apostles (concerning which is the present discourse) must their testimony be beleeved without a word of Scripture to warrand the same? Yea must they be beleeved when they speak contrary to the word? Be it so that there was a time in which there were Presbyters & Deacons, & againe a time in which there were Bishops & deacons, what will this say, so long as nothing is said to prove, that these Bishops & Presbyters were distinct officers, & not one & the same, as is supposed of the Bishops & presbyters now under debate, all this will never prove a distinct species of Government but alwayes one & the same, whether the presbyters be called presbyters, or Bishops. 3. Be it so that in some places there were only one Bishop or Presbyter & deacons appoynted (of which there can no warrand be seen in scripture for scripture sayeth that there were presbyters ordained foreign Act. 14: 23. & foreign. Tit. 1: 5. for it was to cities whither the Apostles did most resort to plante Churches & not to countrey villages, where gentilisme did long thereafter continue, whence these of that religion were called Pagani) what will this speak for p. 223Episcopall Government; so long as this one Bishop could not be a Bishop properly so called, not having presbyters under him? Or doth he think that it is inconsistent with presbyterian Government that one preaching presbyter be set over a parish or a village, & that he & others joyn with the presbyters one or moe of a Neighbour city, in things of common concernment? or must he rule in that village independently? Mr Stillingfleet will not acknowledge this: Nor can he say that he can exerce Episcopall power: Therefore though this were granted to him the Government may still be presbyteriall. 4, How can Epiphanius say that the Apostles could not setle all things at the first? if they could not do it who could do it else? had they not the Spirit in great measure to prompt them to do what was fit & expedient? either they could not get men fit to be Bishops, or a sufficient number to be presbyters; But this will suppone that at that time presbyters & Bishops were destinct, which Stilling fleet will not acknowledge; & Epiphanius cannot give one instance of a Bishop distinct from, & superiour unto preaching Presbyters setled in a Church alone with some few deacons. The reader may see this passage more fully examined by Wallo Messalinus, pag. 102. & pag. 277. &c.

The next author which he citeth is Clemens Alexandrinus out of Eusebius saying. That Iohn after his ret…n from Pa…mos went abroad into severall places, in some constituting Bishops in some setting in order whole Churches, in other choosing …ur one among the rest, whom he set over the Church. But of this the … is utterly silent, & therefore it cannot be received as an undo… ed thing, & what would Mr Stillingfleet gather from … He seteth it down in the words of Walo Messalinus, Pag. …25 In majoribus urbibus plures i. e. it is probable that there were mo… presbyters ordained in greater townes and fewer in lesser tow… b… villages, or litle parishes, one only, especially when there was no▪ … number of beleevers. And now let any …dge it there c… … thing gathered thence for Episcopall Government, & … thing for this end he must prove out of this passage, … doth nothing: He must prove out of it, that the … some places did setle presbyterian Government, & … p. 224places Episcopall, otherwise he is but beating the winde: for no asserters of Presbyterian Government did ever yet finde them selves necessitated to maintaine, that the Apostles did set up an equall number of Presbyters in every Church, or yet a plurality of preaching presbyters in each village, or countrey place, or such as the Greeks call foreign or foreign, so that though all this were granted his poynt would not yet be proved.

At le… he citeth Ambrose (or rather …ilarius) in Eph. 4. saying primum enim, &c. i. e. at first all did teach & all did baptize, at any time, or on any day—but when the Church took in all places about, there were conventicles instituted & there were Governours & other offices appoynted that so none might assume to himself that office which did not appertaine to him, not being as yet ordained—& therefore the writtings of the Apostles do not in every poynt agree with the ordination which now is in use in the Church &c. But how this can speak home to the poynt i… not discernable; For the author is to give the ground why the writings of the Apostles were not suiteable to the times in which he lived, viz because matters were other wayes setled in his time then in the dayes of the Apostles: and will any hence inferre that the Apostles setled Churches with distinct formes o… models, because after ages did so? who will beleeve this consequence? 2. There is no mention made of any change in the Apostle Paul's time; for the author mentioneth here his Epistle to Timothy, which was writen near to the end of his dayes. 3. Though there had been some change & alteration even in the Apostles dayes, as to the manner of going about the work of preaching and baptizing (& these are all the particulars, which the author mentioneth) & some order setled thereanent, which had not been setled before, what will this speak to the matter of Government, which is the only thing now under debate? will it follow that because there was a setled order condescended on in preaching and baptizeing which at sirst was not followed, therefore the Apostles in some Churches erected presbyterian Government, and in others, Episcopall? By what Medium will this consequence be proved? 4. But how p. 225how shall it beleeved that things were better setled afterward then they were in the Apostles dayes; or that the practice of after ages is as obligatory as the practice of the Apostles? It is but a dream then to think, that the Apostles did not observe any setled forme in Governing Churches, but only Acted according to the principles of humane prudence, according to the necessities & occasions of the severall Churches which they had planted; for neither this author nor any other which he hath cited to this effect, doth prove it: And though they should all say it, we were not bound to beleeve them, seing the law & the testimony showeth the contrary, as may be seen in the writings of such as plead for Presbyterian Governement, where they shew that the Church of Ierusalem Ephesus & others, were Governed by the common consent of Presbyters, & that the manner of the governement of all Gospell Churches mentioned in the new Testament was uniforme.

But he hath another thing to say against the practice of the Apostles, viz. That we cannot have that certainety of Apostolicall practice, which is necessary to constitute a divine right. This notion he prosecuteth at great length Chap. 6. & as a ground thereunto he Prefixeth §. 4. That the Apostles in the forming of Churches did observe the customes of the jewish synagogue. And thereupon proceedeth to cleare both what the Governement of the jewish synagogues was, & how the forme set up in the Christian Church did correspond thereunto; all which concerneth the bussinesse in hand litle or nothing▪ & there fore may be passed; seing it is not very materiall to consider whether or not jewish synagogues were so Governed? & whether or not the Apostles did follow that copy: for that which is now sought for is such a Government as was practised by the Apostles; & instituted, as the forme of Church Government which was to continue, & such a Governement as had the stamp of divine authority, or of a divine institution; But now, no jewish Governement as such, could have this; but only such a Governement, as these, by their practice did institute, who were thereunto appoynted of God, & extraordinarily called p. 226& qualified. And moreover if the jewish Synagogues were Governed uniformly, & if the Apostles did set up a Governement in the Gospell Churches, in a way correspondent there unto, It will inevitably follow that the Apostles did take an uniforme way in setling the Governement of all the Churches, & this crosseth what he said of late, & confirmeth what was Answered.

But leaving this. The proposition now under consideration is a question of fact the certanety of which is doubted of, as he allaidgeth, viz, what course the Apostles took in Governing Churches. or after what manner, did they setle a Governement among them? The uncertanety of this matter of fact, he thinketh to evince by three arguments. The last of which viz the defectivenesse, ambiguity, partiality & repugnancy of the records of the succeeding ages which should inform… … what Apostolicall practice was (which he prosecuteh largely & satisfactorily From §. 16. to §. 19.) may be passed, as concerning the bussinesse in hand nothing, as to Presbyteriaus; for if they be not able to prove the practice of the Apostles, out of the sacred write, they dispaire, as much as he can do, of proving the same from humane records, & that for the same reasons which he there giveth. But as for the other two reasons or grounds they must be examined.

The first then is this The equivalency of the names & the doubtfulnesse of their signification by which this forme should be determined—now there is a fourefold equivalency of names Bishop & Presbyter. 1. That both should signifie a Presbyter as. Theodor in 1. Tim. 3. 1. 2. That both should signifie a Bishop. 3. That both should signifie promiscuously some time a Bishop and sometime a Presbyter. and. 4. That the name Bishop alwayes imports a singular Bishop, but the name Presbyter doth promiscuously signifie both—equivocall words can never of themselves determine what sensethey are to be taken in—all that can be inferred from the promiscuous sense of the words, is that they may be understood only in this sense, but it must be proved that they can be understood in no other sense, p. 227before any one particular forme of Governement, as necessary, can be inferred from the use of them.

Ans. 1. This is a ready way to cast all scripture as unable to determine any controversy; for if adversaries may be beleeved all these passages which are made use of against them, do carry another sense, & must be otherwise interpreted, & so all scripture must goe under the name of equivocall sentences, & must be laid aside. 2. Presbyterians do not lay the stresse of their bussinesse upon the name; They have other things whereby to prove their poynt then either the one name, or the other; And so this doth not concerne them much. 3. The question betuixt Presbyterians & their adversaries is this, whether there be such an officer as a prelat having superiority of jurisdiction over Presbyters & people, & sole power of ordination, instituted by Christ; or not: & not whether these two words signifie one thing or another; for it is granted by all the Episcopall party (except one who in his Annot on act 11. sayeth that there is no evidence whereby these inferiour presbyters may appear to have been brought in the Church so early.) That there were presbyters ordained in the Apostles dayes; and all the question is concerning bishops, as distinct from presbyters, whether or not they were ordained: & Presbyterian divines do demonstrat that even in those places where the name Bishop is, no such officer can be understood. As to that which some fathers say, who writting some centuries of yeers after the Apostles dayes, & speaking of the state of the Church in the Apostles dayes, after the forme & manner in their times, concerning the promiscuous use of the two names, it doth no way wrong the cause in hand, untill it be proved, that there was indeed such an officer in rerum natura, & this is not yet done. 4. Whatever these names may signifie is not very materiall, but what indeed they do signifie in such & such places: And if there was not such an officer in the dayes of the Apostles, as a Bishop distinct from a Presbyter (as shall be supposed untill it be better proved then yet it is,) it will necessariely follow that both those names must signifie one & the same thing, one & the same officer viz a Presbyter. 5. To say that both these p. 228names are promiscuonsly used sometime for a Bishop & some time for a Presbyter if these two be distinct officers, is to lay a blot on the Spirit of God speaking in the scriptures, for by what rule shall it be known when he is speaking of the one, & when he is speaking of the other? & in what a mist & labyrinth must all be lest, in this bussinesse, especially when the maine difficulty touching the being of one of these officers, is not removed. 6. But to put an end to this, let these few things be considered by Mr Stilling fleet. 1. Is it probable that Christ or his Apostles would institute a new & distinct officer, & an officer who was to continue unto the end of the world as an ordinary & necessary officer, & yet give him no peculiar proper name, by which he might be known, & every one might know when he were speaken of, especially seing all the other officers in Christ's house both ordinary & extraordinary have their own distinct names, whereby they are known & distinguished from others.. 2. Where will Mr Stilling fleet shew that an inferiour officer was stiled & called by the name, properly belonging unto a superiour officer where will he finde a Deacon stiled a Presbyter Apostle … phet or Evangelist? Where will he finde a Presbyter stiled a… Apostle or Evangelist (taking these names as restricted to be peculiar names of two extraordinary officers, & not in their generall acceptation as 2 Cor. 8, 23 & Phil. 2, 25.) how can it be then that a Presbyter was called a Bishop, if there was a superiour Church officer going under that name as proper & peculiar to him. 3. Is it not strange that in all the places of Scripture, where there is mention made of this Bishop, it cannot be clearly demonstrated that any other Church Officer is or can be understood, then a Presbyter, as to Phil. 1: v. 1. it is beyond all denyall: & as to Tit. 1: 7. Act. 20: 28. There the Bishops are expresly called Presbyters: And 1 Tim. 3: 1, 2. Is the very parallel of Tit. 1. 7. In both which places the work mentioned & qualifications, are only the work & qualifications of a Pesbyter. 4. What mark will Mr Stilling fleet give to know when the spirit of God mentioning Bishops is to be understood of mere Pesbyters & when he is to be understood as speaking of Bishops distinct from p. 229Presbyters; for neither the name, nor the work, nor the qualifications will point out this distinction of Officers, or direct us, which of the two to understand. 5. Let Mr Stilling fleet say, whether it be not saifer to conclude an identity of offices from the identity of names, qualifications, & work; then to conclude a distinction, where there is no ground for a distinction, appearing in Apostolick times? 6. Had Mr Stilling fleet once proved that there was such an officer, as a Bishop distinct from, & superiour to preaching Presbyters, instituted by the Apostles, in any of the Gospell Churches, then this notion touching the promiscuous use of the two names had said something; But seing that is not done, both these names must signify, & import one & the same officer: And so these two names shall be synonimous, & not equivocall.

The second thing which he allaidgeth is this The places most in controversy about the forme of governement may be understood without any apparent incongruity of either of the different formes. Ans. It is certaine they cannot be understood of both, onelyonly the question is, of which of the two they must be understood: And all this which he sayeth will not much advantage his cause; for hence he can onelyonly conclude, that there is a difficulty to finde out the species of Government which these places speak to; but not that there is a liberty granted to owne either of the two, because it is not well known which of the two, the places cited, do most favoure. He is pleased to name some few passages, & these none of the clearest for the Presbyterian cause. But to passe this piece of unfaire dealing, the passages which he mentioneth shall be examined, & then some others shall be adduced, to which his answers will not so well suite.

The first passage which he citeth is Act 11. 30. Which (sayeth he) may either be understood of the elders of the Church at Ierusalem or of the several Bishops of the Churches of …udea. Ans. Is it credible that learned Mr Stilling fleet could satisfie himself with this answer? Doth he verily think that these elders were or could be Bishops? If so what were these Churches over which they were set? Could Ierusalem want a Bishop when the other lesser Churches of Iudea had? If Ierusalem had also a Bishop who p. 230was he? He will not say that Iames was Bishop there, for Iames was an Apostle, & so, far above an ordinary Bishop; where findeth he the name Presbyter in all the New Testament, taken for a Bishop distinct from a Presbyter? Or where findeth he a company of Presbyters taken for a company of Bishops? Is it not also strange that where there were so many Bishops, there should not one of them be designed by name. 2. What though there should be nothing in the place (& what wonder when liberty is taken to put such glosses upon it, as cannot be confirmed by any other like passage) that expresly excludeth the one, is not this enough, that there is no thing in all the Scripture speaking for that one, nor any thing in that passage expresly for it? If there be no passage clearing that Bishops were instituted by Christ or his Apostles, every passage which speaketh of the governement of the Church by Presbyters, excludeth Bishops, if it do not expresly & directly include them, as this passage doth not. But 3. Look the context & this will be cleared: It was the Church of Ierusalem that sent Bar…bas thither to Antioch. Ver. 22. And Agabus the Prophet who did foretell of the famine was come also from Ierusalem, Ver. 27. And so it was to the Church of Ierusalem that Barnabas was sent back againe, with this contribution; Because this was the chief Church where were many Christians: & there are few plantations beside found, as yet in Iudea, that could make up Bishopricks.

The next passage he citeth, is more considerable, Act. 15: v. 6. [Where, he sayeth, nothing is expressed to make us know whether these were the fixed elders of that Church, or the Bishops of all the Churches of Iudea.] Ans. What was said to the last, may be replyed to this also: And further it was the elders of that Church unto which Paul & Barnabas were sent Ver. 2. & this was the Church of Ierusalem, that they should goe up to Ierusalem to the Apostles and elders. 2. When they came to Ierusalem they found the Apostles & elders, there present: what could the Bishops of all Iudea be doing there at that time? If it be said, that they came together upon this solemne occasion. How did they know of this p. 231occasion? For the Apostles knew not of it themselves till the Commissioners from Antioch told them, Ver. 5. [That there were certane of the Sect of the Pharisees arisen which beleeved saying that it was needfull to be circumcised, &c.] And then, Ver. 6. [The Apostles & Elders came together for to consider of this matter.] He who can imagine that these Elders were the Bishops of the severall dioecies of Iudea, may easily cast by the plainest & fullest passages of Scripture that can be, & may imagine what he pleaseth. But to put a close to this, let that passage, Act. 16: 4. be considered, where it is said, [They delivered them the decrees to be keeped which were ordained by the Apostles foreign & Elders in Ierusalem,] or who belonged to the Church of Ierusalem, or stayed there.

The third passage is Act. 21: 11. of which he giveth the same dubious sense, upon as little ground as before, & his conjectures may receive the same answers: Only where he sayes, They might be the Elders of the severall Churches of Iudea, he seemeth to prevaricat, for the poynt of difference is not betwixt Elders & Elders; But betwixt Elders & Bishops, & betwixt the Elders of that particular Church of Ierusalem, & the severall Bishops of the dioecies of Iudea: But it seemeth he blushed to name this once, & therefore thought it best to put in Elders, but this was not faire dealing. Neither is his conclusion faire when he sayeth, There is no certainty of the Church of Jerusalem, how that was governed, whether by Apostles themselves, or other unfixed Elders, or only by James, who exerced his Apostleshipe most there, and thence is afterward called Bishop of Jerusalem: For the question is not whether the Church of Ierusalem was governed by all the Apostles, or only by one; But whether by Presbyters in common, or by one Bishop above & distinct from Presbyters: And by this conclusion he would seem to say that there were no Elders in Ierusalem at all, & no Governours there, but Apostles one or moe. Moreover it is sufficiently proved by the Presbyterian divines; that the Apostles, when acting in governement together with other Elders or Officers, did not act as Apostles, but as ordinary Officers; And also p. 232that Iames did not govern the Church of Ierus▪ alone, as a Bishop

The fourth passage which he citeth is Act. 14: 23. upon which he sayeth, That no more is imported, but that no Church wanted an Elder, but not that every Church had moe Elders. Ans. whether was this single Presbyter a Prelate▪ or not? If not, what is this to the present question? The governement may be Presbyteriall where one Minister is fixed to one particular flock. If he was a Prelat, where were his Presbyters under him? 2. It is true foreign will signify no more but Ecclesia…m, Church & Church; but will foreign signifie no more but one Presbyter? Had it been said foreign it might import, but one Presbyter in one Church: Or yet if it had been said foreign But foreign must needs import more. Theodoret knew the import & force of that phrase, when he rendereth the like passage in Tit. thus, foreign, a Presbytery in each city.

The last passage which he citeth is Act. 20: 17. There is no certainly (sayeth he) whether these elders came only from Ephesus, or also from the severall Churches …f Asia about. Ans. Upon what ground can he once think that the elders of Asia may be understood here? He hath none other but this, that it is said, v. 18. that from the first day he came into Asia he had been with them at all seasons, & because he did not remaine all that time at Ephesus as appeareth Act. 19: 20, 22, 26. But this cannot so much as ground a probability; for it is certane the most part of his abode was at Ephesus, for full two yeers & three moneths are specified Act, 19: 8, 10. & the rest of the three yeers (if there be not ro…ndatio numeri here) he might now & then have visited other parts, & have most of his residence at Ephesus, heither reaching in the Synagogue nor in the School of Tyrannus, where he had taught two yeers & three moneths: & so, granting that he might have made some visits, unto the other parts of Asia, dur…ing, these Nine moneths; yet he might well say to th…se of Ephesus. That from his first coming into Asia, they had known after what manner he had been with them, againe it will not hence follow, that others then these of Ephesus were p. 233there, more then from these words v. 25. Y… all among whom I have gone preaching the Kingdome of God, it will follow that all the people he had preached unto both in Ephesus, & in other places of Asia minor, & Asia propria, were present. But whom can we expect to have been there, except such only who were sent for, viz the Elders of the Church of Ephesus? & therefore they are called the Elders of the Church & not the elders of the Churches, as they would have been called if the Elders of the Churches had been there present: as we hear of the Churches of Iudea Galilee & Samaria, Act. 9: 31. & of the Churches of Galatia, Gal. 1: 2. Churches of Asia 1. Cor. 16. 19. of Ma…edonia, 2 Cor. 8: 1. & of Syria & Cylicia Act. 15: 41. so would we hear of the Elders of the Churches of Asia. But there is no such thing; only there is mention made of the Elders of that one Church foreign. To conclude this, himself sayeth cap. 7. §. 2. pag. 349. [That this flocke & Church were the Christians of Ephesus & that all these spoken to were such as had a pastorall charge of this one flock.]

Thus it hath been showne how weak the ground is, upon which Mr S…illing fleet walketh, & how litle reason he hath to conclude his notion from these passages which he hath mentioned: & furder the groundlesnesse of his conceite will appear if some two or three passages of scripture be but viewed, which he hath passed by without once noticeing & unto which the answers which he was pleased to give to others, will not quadrate, as. 1. That place. 1 Cor. 5. If any look thorow that epistle they shall easilie see that there were many preaching Presbysers in that one Church & here Cap. 5. they are about a work of excommunication, & so are endued with episcopall power. In this Chap. the Apostle speaketh to them all alongs in the plurall number, & Mr Stillingfleet, who is no friend to the independent way, will easily acknowledge that what is there said was spoken to the Church Governours: So then, Mr Stillingfleet must say that these Governours were Presbyters of that one Church ruleing it together communi corsilio: And that they can not so well be understood of Bish. for one Church should have but one Bishop: So then here is a place which cannot be understood p. 234alike of both, but must of necessity be understood of a Presbytery, & of a Presbytery having full Episcopall power, in the matter of jurisdiction, what Mr Stilling fleet will reply to this, can hardly be conjectured. A second passage is Phil. 1: v. 1. where mention is made of Bishops & Deacons; now these Bishops, could not be Bishops properly so called in opposition to, & as distinct from preaching Presbyters; Because of such Bishops there can be but one in one Church at once, & therefore they behoved to be Presbyters endued with Episcopall power, having the thing as well as the name, & Presbyters of that one Church: So that this passage cannot be equally understood of both, with any shew of reason. A third passage is 1. Thes. 5: 12, 13, 14. Where there are some mentioned who were labouring among the people, & were over them in the Lord, & these were to warne the unruly, &c. So that in this one Church there were severall Presbyters, & Presbyters endued with power of warning the unruly: Mr Stillingfleet cannot imagine, any colurable pretence whereby, without much apparent incongruity, this passage may be understood of either of the different formes. And seing this ground faileth here, we may for all which he hath said to the contrary, arrive to such an absolute certainty of that course which the Apostles took in setling Churches. So much for this observation.

6. It may be observed; That Presbyterians have more then the practice of the Apostles, even their positive institutions, in these few particulars. 1. In ordaining & instituting such & such Officers, as Pastours, Doctors, Elders, & Deacons, as may be seen, Rom. 12: v. 6, 7, 8, 1 Cor. 12: 28. Ephes. 4: v. 11, 12. In all which places there is no mention made of a Bishop distinct from a preaching Presbyter. If Mr Stillingfleet say, according to his principles, that there was no necessity of making mention of him, particularly, because he is no distinct officer from a Presbyter, but only impowered by the rest as their Commissioner. Beside what hath been replyd to this formerly, this may be added here. That if this be truth which Mr Stillingfleet affirmeth, he hath wasted p. 235much paper and paines in vaine, when he went about to prove that no certanety of the practice of the Apostles could be come at whether they did set up episcopall or Presbyterian Governement; for these should not be two distinct Governments: And he had a shorter cut for Answering all the places of scripture, then the way was which he took: Yea he might have spared his whole book, & given out this one Thesis for all, viz: [Though Presbyterian Governement be Iuris Divini yet the Presbyters, may lawfully intruste one of their number with some speciall piece of the exercise of jurisdiction & ordination.] And then he might have had more to say, upon the ground of prudence or the like, for himself, then now he hath. But it is not good to be wise above what is written, & it is best wisdome & prudence to follow the rule of the word. But more over. 2. They have the Apostles institutions concerning the qualifications of these officers, as is to be seen in Paul's epistles to Timothy, & Titus. 3. These officers are commanded to such & such pieces of work, Some to rule, some to teach also, some to take care of the poor. 4. These officers are commanded to attend that work of theirs with all diligence, in their own proper persons, without rolling it over on others Rom. 12: 6, 7, 8. The Minister is to waite on his Ministery, & he that teacheth on teaching, he that giveth is to do it with simplicity, & he that ruleth is to rule with diligence. 5. In matters of discipline & juridiction they are commanded to Act joyntly, for the officers of the Church of Corinth were appoynted to conveen together that they might deliver the incestuous person unto Satan 1 Cor. 5, 4, 5. So the brethen the officers of the Church of Thessalonica were exhorted to warne the unruly. Now lay all these together. Such & such officers, set to such & such work, & appoynted to attend the same, & ordained to Act joyntly in matters of government, & there is a species of Government, & a species warranted by Divine institution viz: by Apostolick commands; for these positive commands are of a lasting nature till God repeale them againe. Himself giveth some foreign Marks, whereby to know p. 236when positive lawes binde immutably, the first whereof mentioned Part. 1. c 1. §. 6. & Part. 2. c. 2. §. 2. Is usefull here viz. when the same reason of the command continueth still. Now let Mr Stilling fleet show, if he can, what reason could plead for Ministers acting collegiatly in matters of discipline then, which will not be of force now; was there lesse of the spirit then, nor is now? Or was there fewer able & fit men for to be Bishops then, nor is now? Or was there lesse care to have things done orderly & exactly? or shall we say that all these commands were for that age of the Church only? If so, there is an easie way found to cast all the commands & injunctions of the Apostles, though they were induced with the spirit. Shall it be thought that the command given to the Church officers of Corinth to conveen & to excommunicat, did binde them only, & at that time? if so, there should be a wide door opened to much evil, & a way prepared for laying aside all the injunctions & instructions of the Apostles as now uselesse, & as an almanack out of date. Enough of this consideration.

Obs. 7. It would seem to be a great reflexion upon Iesus Christ who was faithfull to him that appoynted him, & that as a sonne & so beyond Moses who was faithfull as a servant, Heb. 3. 2, 5, 6. To say, that he hath not appoynted a standing forme of Governement in his house. Mr Stilling fleet replyeth Part, 2. c. 4. §. 1. 1. That then it must be made appear that the setling of this forme was a part of his mediatory work Ans. This may easily be made to appear; for it did belong to his Kingly office, & so was a part of his mediatory work, as well as his instituting of officers in his house, & as Mediator the Government is laid on his shoulders Isa. 9. 6. And all power in heaven & earth was given to him Mat. 28, 18. He addeth I grant he is King of the Church, & doth Govern it outwardly by his lawes, & inwardly by his spirit, but shall we say that therefore any one forme of Governement is necessarie which is neither contained in his lawes nor dictated by his spirit? Ans. No, not at all, for the Government which Presbyterians do account necessary is both contained in his lawes & dictated p. 237by his spirit, as is showne; & they reject all other formes only because they are not contained in his lawes, nor dictated by his spirit. He replyeth. 2. That if this correspondency hold the Church of Christ must be equally bound to all circumstances of worship Ans. The Christian liberty wherewith Christ hath made us free, should not be abridged in the least, nor should this correspondency be pressed so exactly & straitly, as to make it bleed; and yet there is no necessity to grant that in nothing the correspondency will hold: It is true as to the circumstances of actions much is left to Christian liberty now, & so under the law, in severall things, much was left to the liberty of the jews. But to say that the modell of Governement should come in among circumstances is to speak without any proof or sure ground, especially when the Change of the modell will be the bringing in of a new officer, which himself will not grant to be a thing left to Christian liberty. He replyeth. 3. That there is such a disparity betuixt the Gospell & jewish state as will weaken the argument Ans. Of these disparities he nameth foure The first whereof is the same with that which went before, viz. our Christian freedome from ceremonies & the like. But will it hence follow that Christians now must be at liberty to choose what forme of Governement they will, popish prelaticall, Erastian, independent, morellian, or Presbyterian? Must they be at liberty to choise what officers they will; Or must they be left at liberty, to cut out their work to them? It is good to stand fast in the liberty where with Christ hath made us free; but it is not good to turn that liberty unto licentiousnesse, & to extend it beyond the due bounds. Mr Silling fleet would do well to have a care of the first day sabbath, …st he let the morality of that passe with the morality of Church governement in specie, for his grounds will lead him sorth equally against both.

The second difference is this, That the Government of the tribe of Levi was agreeable to the rest of the tribes. & therefore of the argument hold, Christ must prescribe a civil Government. Ans. whether the Gover…ent of the tribe of … was … or not, is not very materiall; for this is certaine. Moses was faithfull p. 238in the house of God ordering all things according to the will of God, So must Christ be in his own house & Church, ordering all things there according to God's minde: It is not the Government of the state, but the Government of Christ's house which is looked after. But. 2. Had the Church under the law no Government? Where was their priests & their Levites then? & where was their Sanhedrin lesser & greater? Sure this was distinct from the Government of other tribes; Yea even from the Government of the tribe of Levi, as it was a part of the state: And as a Church they had other officers then the state had.

His third difference is, That the jewes were a whole & intire people when one set forme of Government was prescribed them, but the Church of Christ, was but in forming in the dayes of Christ & the Apostles & therefore one could not serve it then & now, when whole nations are converted: A pastor & deacons might serve a a city when converts are few, but cannot when increased to many congregations. Ans. This will plead for a necessity of multiplying officers of the same kinde conforme to the multitude of beleevers, but will not evince a necessity of having new officers. It will plead for the enlargeing of the same Species of Government; but not for the bringing in of a new Species: though the garment cut out for one in his infancy, will not serve him when growne in years: yet a garment of the same kinde of cloath will serve. 2. It is strange that when the Church was small she behoved to be ruled by a company of presbyters; but now when she is grown large, one Bishop will suffice: One would think that if the Government had been episcopall then, it should be presbyterian now; for the larger the Church is she requireth the moe Governours. 3. There is mention made of the Churches of Iudea, Galatia, Asia, Syria & Cylicia; & so of many large countreyes & territories converted unto the faith, and why might there not such a modell of Government be fallen upon, in those large countreyes, as would suite whole Kingdomes? 4. It is sufficiently known that Presbyterian Governement will suite all Churches, be they lesser, be they larger: were there but one congregation of beleevers in a countrey, p. 239Presbyterian Governement will sit that litle Church: & againe were there great Kingdomes & nations converted the same Government would suite them, & most certainly attaine the end for which it was appoynted. 5. If the forme of Church Governm. which Moses did appoynt did suite the jews both when they were in the wildernesse walkeing as an army & when they were setled in the land of Canaan, in a formall & compleat Kingdome, & where their number was multiplied, & when they were under Various sorts of civil Government sometimes under Iudges, & sometimes under Kings; shall Christ be lesse faithfull, & not appoynt such a Gospell Government as will suite a greater Church as well as a lesser, & suite the Church under whatsoever kinde of civil Government she may be?

His fourth difference is almost the same with the second, for it is this, The jewes lived under one civil Government; but Christians under diverse formes, & then as Church Government, at the first was formed according to the civil Government so should it be now. Ans. That the jewish Church Government was of the same kinde with the civill Governement is not yet proved, & it cannot be yeeld^ed without probation. 2. The parallel betwixt Christ & Moses, lyeth not in this, that both did follow one immediat copy: but in this, that both did institute a Government according to God's will, & such a government as he would have set up in the Church & to continue in the Church so long as that polity should stand, that is to say, as Moses did appoynt a government which should unalterably endure so long as the temple, the typicall & dark dispensation should stand; so Christ should appoynt a forme which should unalterably endure so long as the new dispensation should last, that is, untill the end of the world; for Christians look for no other change. 3 One & the same forme of Church Government will suite all Churches now, in all time coming, under what soever kinde of civil Government they be, as hath been already said.

Obs, 8. Mr Stilling fleet is not well pleased with such as lay any weight upon the former ground mentioned viz: Christ's being obliged there unto by his office as mediator & King & Lord of his house; & would have them rather proving that p. 340Christ hath determined a forme of Governement, then that he ought so to have done. Therefore we shall shew that Christ hath so done indeed. And what the Apostles did at his command, or by vertue of the commission he gave unto them, will easily be granted to be equivalent. But to passe this, Christ himself hath laid down the maine ground & foundation of a species of governement in Math. 18: ver. 15, 16, 17. For there he is setting down a course, for the removing of scandalls that will fall out among his Disciples, & followers, & ordering the matter, so that when privat meanes will not gaine the offending brother, more publick meanes must be used, & he must be brought unto the Church judicature, & that Church judicature hath power to excommunicat him, if so be he heare them not, as to the removing of the scandall. It is true many parties endeavour to presse these words for their own use, but it will not hence follow that therefore these words are incompetent to determine any one forme; for if this ground be relevant much of the scripture should become incompetent to determine matters of faith & doctine; because severall parties labour to wrest the same to their own judgment. It would be tedious here to examine the clames of all parties unto this place, & the present work is only to deal with Mr Stillingsleet, & therefore only his notions concerning this place must be examined.

Concerning this place then, he giveth his judgment, 2. part. cap. 5. §. 8. & first he taketh the trespasses mentioned to be matters of private offence & injury, & not matters of Scandall, & his grounds are these. 1. The parallel place Luk. 17: ver. 3. is to be understood of privat injuries; because it is in the power of each privat person to forgive them. Ans. So said Erastus before him but after narrow search it will be found that the forgiving mentioned in the Text Math. 18. is a desisting from any further prosecution of the bussinesse, & a forgiving which must not be granted untill the brother be gained: But whether the offending brother be gained or not, all private injuris must be forgiven him, & none must keep up a Spirit of revenge against him: And therefore these trespasses must be matters of p. 241Scandall, which, unlesse the offending brother be gained, must be prosecuted untill the yondmost step be used. 2. He sayeth, It appears from the next words of Peter, ver. 20. This is another of Erastus's shifts: But for answere. It will not appear till Mr Stillingfleet first cleare that there is such a connexion betwixt these verses, as will undoubtedly demonstrat that one purpose is to be understood in Both. But commentators shewe the matter to be otherwise, & indeed there is nothing that can so much as ground a probability of such a connexion here, unlesse it be these words, Then came Peter to him, but whosoever shall look on Luk. 8: v. 19. shall have the like, thus, Then came to him his mother, &c. And yet this was not immediatly after what was said before, as will appear when compared with other Evangelists: And so since it is not certaine that this was immediatly after the former purpose, no reason can be given to evince the identity of these purposes. 3. He sayeth, If it were meant of any scandalous sin it might so fall out that matters of scandal should be brought before the Church, when only one person knowes it. Ans. It is not said that every such scandall or trespasse whereof only one is conscious should be brought in publick, but that more noture scandalls ought to be brought before Church judicatures, when more privat admonitions will not gaine the offender. But 2. This inconvenience will recurre upon himself, in the case of privat offences.

But next as to the word Church he sayes [It is a select company called together to hear the whole cause & this was agreable to the jewish practice, pudefacere coram multis: & delictum publicare, & to this the Apostle alludeth, 2 Cor. 2: v. 6. & this is the reproof before all, 1 Tim. 5: v. 20. Ans. 1. The word Church is not usually so taken in the New Testament, & the Hebrew words foreign & foreign in the Old Test. do alwayes import a company imbodied in a stated way, as a fixed congregation, either for governement or Worship. Mr Leigh in his Critica sacra sayeth that among the Grecians, & chiefly the Athenians from whom it came, it was used for a multitude p. 242called together by the command of a Magistrat. 2. Christ sayeth tell the Church foreign, & so directeth them to a fixed standing company. 3. That pudefacere coram multie being the same with, 2 Cor. 2: 6 the censure of many confirmeth this; For that censure was by a Church judicature conveened in the name of the Lord Iesus to take course with a scandalous person, 1 Cor. 5. Againe 4. No commentator taketh the words so, only Grotius & other Erastians put such a glosse upon them. 5. Christ's scope is to have the offending brother gained, & not to have matters of fact which are questionable, cleared. 6. If this be the meaning of the word Church what shall be the sense & meaning of these words, Let him be unto thee as a heathen man & a Publican? He answereth, Tho meaning is look upon him as an obstinat refractary creature, & meddle no more with him, then with a heathen & a publican. And is this all the punishment which the offender must meet with: Who gave privat men this power to passe such a sentence? But 2. This must be a Church sentence because it is added, Whatsoever you shall binde on earth, shall be bound in Heaven, &c. To this he replyeth, That the meaning is, it is an evidence, that his sin is bound upon him, & that he is lyable to punishment. But how is his sin bound upon him, or how is he made lyable to punishment? There must be something done on earth, which God must ratify in Heaven, & on earth there is none to do any thing, but either the pursuer himself, or the select company: It cannot be the pursuer, for that were a dreadful & intolerable slavery, to subjecte every man to the lust of his enemy & pursuer. If it be the select company, how or whence have they this power? If they be cloathed with authority, then are they a judicature, & this is the thing pleaded for. And thus, it appeareth that scandals are here understood, & that this Church is a Church judicature, notwithstanding of all which Mr Still. hath said to the contrary, which is but the very same, which others had said before him, & which was sufficiently answered by worthy & learned Mr Gillespy in his Aarons rod blossoming though he will not so much as once take notice of his replyes. The ancients p. 243did so understand the place particularly Orig. Tract. 6. in Mat.

But that it may be cleared how there is a foundation here laid down for a way of removing of scandals by Church officers in communi associated together in a judicature, & so how there is a way laid down for presbyterian Government, let those particulars be considered. 1. From the beginning of the chapt, the Lord is speaking of scandals, & first of scandals given, as is clear, v. 6: 8, 9. & after he hath used some arguments to presse his followers to beware of that evill, he cometh v. 15. with an foreign (which may be rendered but if thy brother) to another case, about the same purpose or head: viz. to cleare this question what shall be a christians carriage when his neighbour stumbleth or offendeth him, by his unchristian carriage in his ordinary walk: So Galvin Aretius & others: & so he is speaking of reall scandals for. 1. They are Brethren, or Church members with whom this course must be taken. 2. The offending brother is to be rebuked or convinced of his fault foreign importeth such a convinceing as' is for sin Ioh. 8: 9, 46. & so the LXX. use it Lev. 19: 17. where sinnes & scandals are spoken of. 3. He sayes if he hear thee & not if he repay thee the wrong he hath done, or if he be reconciled. 4. Then he is gained now foreign (as Stillingfleet himself confesseth) is used for conversion & turning others from sin. 1. Cor. 9: 19. 1. Pet. 3: 1. compared with Iam 5: 20. Hence. 2. It would be considered that the Christian's scope in this bussinesse should be to gaine the man's soull, & for this cause he is to assay all calme, peaceable gaineing, & private meanes, to bring the offending brother to conviction, & acknowledgment of his fault; & so first speak to him alone, & then take some others with him to be witnes both of his Christian carriage towards him, in desireing to have him gained, & of his unwillingnesse to be gained; that so they may bear witnesse of both, unto the Church judicature. 3. When privat means do not worke, he is to be delated unto the Church judicature; for the person offended must tell the Church: What Church? He must tell that Church unto which the witnesses will be usefull, & that is, a judicature; for to that, witnesses have a relation. That Church which is able to convince if any p. 244do it. That Church whose sentence is the last remedy. Th… Church which hath power to binde & loose. That Church which hath power to binde & loose with a promise of the ratification of what they do, in heaven. That Church which hath the keyes Mat. 16. & power authoritatively to pardon & retaine sinnes, Ioh. 20: 23. That Church which hath power to pronunce that sentence, after which, the man is to be looked upon, as a heathen & a publican. 4. And when this Church judicature can not get him convinced, they must passe a sentence upon him, & this sentence is the sentence of excommunication, as learned Mr Gillespy hath abundantly shewed Aaron's rod. book 3. c. 2. & 3. Hence it is clear. 5. That here is set downe the way of taking away Church scandalls, by inflicting Church censures: And this by Christ's appoyntment is not to be done by any one person, but by the Church officers in communi collegiatly; for it was never heard of to this day, either in sacred or prophane writtings that one man was called a Church or foreign. And this is a good basis for Government yea & for presbyterian Government or the Government of the Church communi consilio presbyterorum. & here there is not only a foundation for graduall appeals, [as himself confesseth here: though part. 2. cap. ult §. 8. he would say that presbyterians, found their subordination of courts, Upon the principles of humane prudence] for Church censures, & for the lawfull use of excommunication, as he confesseth also; But also for the species or modell of Government; Or for the manner of the constitution of the judicatures, which should excommunicat & take notice of Church scandalls; for it is called the Church, & so cannot be meaned of a prelat who is no where so called, and yet arrogateth to himself all the power of jurisdiction.

But Mr Stilling fleet hath two arguments whereby he endeavoureth to prove that Christ did never intend to institute any one forme of Government in the Church, part. 2. c. 4. §. 4. 5, 6. &c.

This is a great undertaking and his arguments must needs p. 245be very strong, but whether so or not, the reader may judge.

The summe of the first is this If there be any such institution of Christs, as a standing law, it must either be expressed in direct termes, which cannot here be showne: Or deduced by a necessary consequence; and no consequences can make new institutions but only apply one to particular cases; And then the obligation of what is drawne by a necessary consequence, must be expressed in scripture. Ans. It hath been showne that the practice of the Apostles was for a forme of Government, and from their practice, a law may, by necessary consequence, be drawne, considering their place, & office▪ how they were sent forth to plant Churches, & to set up officers & to appoynt unto each of them their proper work, &c. And for this cause were endued with extraordinary qualifications & assistence, confirming their commission by many signes & wonders: And this carryeth an obligation in its bosome. There hath been showne also a standing law of Christ's, from which a forme of Governement may be deduced, a standing law, about the removing of scandals which will found a species of Governement by Church officers in common, as well as appeals, Church censures, & excommunication, & from thence there is an obligation for the one, as well as for the rest. 2. But if all this will not satisfie, let Mr Stilling fleet satisfie himself with the standing obligation of the moralitie of the first day Sabbath, & he shall with all satisfie himself as to the standing obligation of the moralitie of a species of Church Governement: He can produce no law for the first day Sabbath, but a law deduced by necessary consequence (without any obligation expressed in scripture concerning that which is so drawn by consequence) & if this be enough in the case of the first day Sabbath, why not also in the case of Governement: If he say in the bussinesse of the Lord's day there was only an application of an institution, to a particular case. It is Ans. So is it in the matter of Church Governement, for there was a law for a Governement in genere, & this law drawn by consequence, from the practice of the p. 246Apostles & primitive Church, is but an application of that generall to a particular species of Governement.

His second arg. is this All the standing lawes respecting Church Governement, are equally applyable to severall formes Ans. Are they applyable to the hierarchie, to Erastianisme, to independency, & to Morellianisme: Or only to Presbytery & Prelacy? If only to these two, then all other formes but one of these two are utterly excluded, & there is no more liberty left save to make choise of one of these. But what if this ground of his shall not hold? He referreth all the lawes to these three heads The 1. Head is the qualifications of the persons for the office of Governement, & so citeth, 1 Tim. 3, 1, to 8. Tit. 1, 5, to 10. Ans. And may it not be said, useing his own words, mu…atis mutandis, that all these & the rest, are equally required as necessary in a Pope, in a Patriarch, &c. As well as in a Bishop or Presbyter: Yea every one may invent a number of new officers & defend them with this, that all these qualifications agree to them. The 2. Head is. The precepts requireing a right management of the work, & citeth, Act. 20: 28. 2 Tim. 4: 2. & 2: 2. 1 Tim. 5: 19, 21, 22. Heb. 13: 17. Tit. 1: 5. And addeth there is no precept in all these Epistles to Timothy & Titus prescribeing whether, they should Act solely, or only as Consul in Senatu. Ans. But if the precepts be such & require such a management & such work, as can not, with any possibility, in any tolerable manner, be obeyed & performed, by officers under such a forme, then it cannot be left to the will of men to set up such a forme, & so is the case here. The precepts are not applyable unto prelats: Is one man able to exhort, reprove & watch over a whole dio…cy his alone, seing he in all probability shall never see their faces? (And as for delegation of Church power Mr Stilling fleet himself sayeth Part. 2. c. ult. §. 8. Pag. 414. That there is not the least footstep of it, either in scripture or antiquity.) Is it possible that one man, can in any tolerable manner, obey these commands, & watch over such a number, over which, Two or Three hundered ministers could not get well watched? God layeth not utter impossibilities on his officers. So then seing p. 247these precepts are not applyable unto any other forme, then Presbyteriall, his Argument falleth to the ground; Seing it is not imaginable that one man can rule such a numerous people, & watch over them by discipline, over whom fifteen or sixteen Presbyteries, each of them consisting of fifteen or sixteen Ministers, & as many ruling elders (beside the competent number of ruling elders which each particular congregation had) were set, & had all work enough & more then they could well overtake. But. 2. What will he do with that command, 1 Cor. 5. given to the elders of that Church to conveen together for an Act of discipline? Doth not that command concerne Gospell Churches now, as much as any of these precepts in the Epistles to Timothie or Titus? And how is it imaginable that it can be applyable unto one man? Sure then this command is not equally applyable to both formes; For a precept given to a collegiat body, to meet together, is not applyable to one single person. The 3. Head is generall rules, such as these, that none preach without a call, Heb. 5: 2. Rom. 10, 14. That offenders be censured, that complaints b… made to the Church in case of scandall, that all be done decently in order, & to edification. Ans Well then if, it be a standing rule that complaints be made to the Church, it is a standing rule that there should be a fixed Church to receive these complaints, & all the question is whether this fixed Church which can take notice of complaints & inflict Church censures, & excommunicate, can as well be understood of a prelat, as of a body of Church officers incorporated? And if Mr Stilling fleet can be able to show that the word foreign is or may be taken for one single person, then his notion will be more able to stand; But if not, of necessity it must fall to the ground.

Obs. 9. It is worth the considering how weighty a bussinesse the matter of the Governement of the Chuch is, & of what great consequence it is to have it modelled aright: For experience hath made it appear, how much more effectuall▪ for keeping of the Church of Christ pure from errour & heresy, & for beareing downe of Prophanity, & for promoving of the p. 248work of Godlinesse in power; one species or forme is, then another: And this may speak very much for the Lord's keeping that in his own hand & not leaving it unto any Prince or Pastor to determine what shall be the species of Governement: Especially considering with what byasses & by-respects, the most of men are ready to be carryed, & how readyall are to modell Church Governement so as may most suite their own ends, & serve most to make them great in a world. And hence it hath been seen that when men leave the simplicity of the Gospell, & the p…terne there set down, they run wilde, & never once consult the edification of the Church, or the promoveing of the work of God in souls, &c. But their own base ends: And when men will be wise above what is written, & follow their own notions & devices God giveth them up to delusions, & to more strange phancies. And sad experience hath proved how dangerous it is to depart from the rule of the word, in matter of discipline; for by this meanes, it came to passe, that the Church did not only get Bishops, distinct from, & superiour unto, Presbyters; but also Metropolitans; & after these Primats, & at length Patriarchs, & finally the Pope. They followed not the rule of the word, but thought that they were lest at liberty, as Mr Stilling fleet doth sadly make out Part. 2. c. 7. & would have the Chuch as pompous, as the state, & so made the state Governement their copie: And therefore as there was one Emperour so there behoved to be one universall Bishop & Pope, whom the world had never seen; had not this notion of Mr Stillingfleets been in their head, viz. that they might order the matter of Church Governement as they pleased best: & though Mr Stillingfleet make use of this as a confirmation of his notion, yet it is such a proof of it, as may make all tender hearted protestants tremble at it & reject it, as being the very thing which raised up Antichrist.

Obs. 10. Mr Stillingfleet is pleased in the last Chapt of his book to gather together some expressions of Divines at home & abroad in France, Germanie, & the low countreyes, as favouring his purpose, which to examine, a work of this nature will p. 249not suffer, any who will, may do it, & possiblie shall finde some unfaire dealing. However, unto these whom he cir…th it will be sufficient, though he had foure for each one, to oppose the testimonie of Churches which may be seen in the harmonie of confessions, & whose testimonie, is of much more authoritie, then the testimonie of Twenty privat divines, & moreover he well knoweth that of privat divines many are against him for one who is for him.

Obs. 11. He telleth the reader in his preface, that he doth not write to increase the controversies of the times, nor to soment differences; but his designe is to allay the heat & abate the fury of that ignis sac…r or erysipelas of contention, & so all alongs in his preface he would make his reader beleve that he designed nothing but peace; & accordingly he intituled his book Irenicum & a Weapon-salve for the Churches wounds. No man must search his heart or judge in those matters; but this is certane, if such was his designe, the meanes he hath fallen upon, look not to be very suiteable thereunto; how such an under taking as this shall heale the Churches wounds is hardly imaginable: And therefore it may very well be stiled a Weapon-salve, whose way of cureing is not very rationall or obvions to every one; Yea nor naturall, if many may be beleeved. And this phisitian's undertaking shall never cure the Churches wounds by Sympathie what ever it may do by antipathy: It seemeth to be a sad interlocuture of a judge, when a plea cometh before him, betuixt a rober & one who offereth to produce his evidences & rights for such a possession, to say that all is common, & every man hath a like right to all, & may lay clame to what he pleaseth; & just such is this learned man's determination of the question in hand. The Presbyterians off…r to prove their right by the Testament of Iesus Christ, & to prove that prelats are usurpers, & his interlocuture is that neither presbyterian nor prelat hath more right then other & each may take what they please. If this be a way of ending controversies & healing wounds, it is indeed by the weapon salve of antipathy: And the reader may judge whether it be not the readiest way to increase divisions, & contention in the p. 250Church; & whether or not these piles that seem very sweet & pleasant to the palate may not prove …uell to that bilious humor which as he himself confesseth, is too too predominant already. Sure it is, he seemeth not be a man for peace who thus hath his hand against every man, & every mans hand against him: But if he would have united the broken, divided, & subdivided Church, he should have taken a way to have strengthened her union with the head: Union in an evill cause is not good-Pilat & Herod can a gree in a matter against Christ, & such an union as this looketh rather like the fruite of the weapon salve then any thing else. It is sad that he could not get this weapon salve made up without such an ingredient in it, as wrongeth the head & King of the Church: it is an evidence of an Empirick & ill skilled phisitian who cannot attempt the cureing of one desease without the causing of a worse, nor make a salve to cure a wound in the body, till first he wounde & wronge the head. Could this learned man fall upon no way to cure the bleeding wounds of the Church, but such a way, as in some degree & measure is a putting the crown off the head of Christ Iesus who is head of the Church, & the scepter out of his hand? for to say that he hath not setled the Governement of his own house by appoynting his own officers, & appoynting each of them to their own work, is to say, he doth not acte the part of a King & Governour in the Church which is his Kingdom, & of how dangerous consequence this is, himself may easily perceive.

Obs. 12. It is likewise strange that this learned man should have made choise of such an opportunity & occasion, wherein to vente his notion, for in so doing he hath no way consulted the good & edification of the Church. Because he might well have known that by his book the higher powers of the land would have been much encouraged, to set up the former prelaticall Government, which had occasioned so much persecution unto the truely godly, so much opposition to piety, & to the work of grace: & so he might well have expected to see all these evil consequences natively springing up againe, & to see the Church of God decaying as much, if not more, then ever; for that is a Governem. which destroyeth the very ends of p. 251Government, because no man were he never so good could governe the Churches after that manner to edification: He might easily see that one man could not watch over, in all the duties of a watch man, so many thousands, or rather hundereds of thousands, as by that Government he would be set over. It is true he adviseth to have lesser dioeceses but still his thesis standeth, & many will read & ponder his thesis, & the drift & scope of his book, that will never value or regaird these few lines of cautions or of advice, which he setteth down in the end of his book. He might well have known that the setting up of that Governement would have been (as he may now see with his eyes) matter of joy & Gladnesse unto all the prophane rabl… in the land, & matter of lamentation & grief unto the godly & pious. He might well have known that by that government, godly pious & conscientious able Ministers of the Gospell, should be persecuted & thrust to the door, & prophane lazy & every way unfit men should be put in the Ministery, who can do nothing else but read the service book & a homily. He might well have known that by that governement such as were no Church officers should have the management of discipline, such as Chancelours & their assistants. Yea he might well have known that if that government had been set up againe, the whole work of reformation should be demolished & cast to ground, as he may see it done to day, & his eye may affect his heart, if he be a kindly son of Zion, & a lover of the work of reformation which God owned & carryed on wonderfully to the Amazement of all: & might not these things have deterred this learned man from venting his notions, when he might as easily have seen, as he might have opened his eyes, that the consequences thereof, should have been bitter lamentation & wo to the poor Church of Christ in Britaine & Irland? & what he can pretend to counter vaile this damage is not imaginable: For all his pretensions of peace & union evanish at the first appearance of these destructive, & irremediable inconveniences. And finally it is yet more wonderfull & strange how this learned man hath been so bewitched & blinded with his own phancies, as to be in paine untill he were delivered of p. 252this birth, not considering the unseasonablenesse thereof at such a time. There is a season & a time for every purpose under heaven sayeth the wise preacher Eccles. 3: 1. & a wise mans heart discerneth both time & judgment, Ecc. 8: 5. But it seemeth he hath been so desirous that the world should see this monstruous birth, that … he wanted a time, he would take the most unfit season imaginable, for it; For it is hardly imaginable that he could have chosen a more unfit time, for publishing this his notion; Because though his notion, in th…si were unquestionably true, (as it is not) yet in hypothesi it could not now be yeelded, the Kingdomes being tyed to one of these formes, by the oath of God, the solemne League & Covenant, & so, not at liberty to choose what forme they please. His principles will not suffer him to say that Presbyterian governement is utterly unlawfull, & that Episcopall governement is necessary: & his learning will soon discover a validity in a Covenant about things not sinfull, though not absolutely necessary: & his piety will grant that conscience should be made of such oathes: And now when the Kingdomes were under the oath of God to set up a government most agreable to the Word of God; And to endeavour the extirpation of Prelacy, could there be a more unseasonable time for venting this his notion, touching the indifferencie & lawfulnesse of either Presbyterian or Prelaticall? For suppone his notion were a truth, of what use could it be now, when the Churches hands were bound up, by a solemne vow & Covenant from following their liberty? Sure his disputing so much for the liberty of the Church in such a case, at this time, sayeth that in his judgment the oath of God is of no value, otherwise at least he would have casten in this clause of exception some where, & so have stated the question as a case in Utopia, if so be it was as a fire within him that could not be keeped in. And now indifferent readers may judge whether intentio operit (I shall not say operantis) was union, peace & edification. To teach people to break Covenant with God, & to null their oaths & vowes, is no way to the good & edification of the Church; Such an union by perjury, will be nothing else but p. 253a sinfull conspiracy; Peace in such away, will be but dreadfull security when the judgments of God are at hand: And such edification is nothing but destruction. But it seemeth his silence in the matter of the Covenant all alongs, sayeth that in his judgment, the obligation of the Covenant is null, & so this weapon-salve of his, must be strong, that will eat thorow the bones of a Covenant, but because it is so dangerous & destructive unto the substantials & vitals of Religion, it is the lesse to be valued, whatever vertue he allaigeth it hath for cureing wounds in the flesh. Did he think that tender Christians would get the Gordian knot of a Covenant oath & vow so easily cut as to think themselves at liberty to choose what forme of governement they pleased? Or if he did not presuppose this, of what use, did he think his book would be? Though it were to be wished that this learned man had imployed his talent more for him who gave it; Yet seing he would not forbear the publishing of his notions & conceptions, he might have spoken his minde concerning the obligation of the solemne League & Covenant: For so long as that Covenant standeth in force, his notion will evanish as a cloud without raine.

But we must end this digression (in which we have insisted the longer, because it is one of the maine grounds, upon which the complyers of this age do walke) & goe on, that we may hasten to some other particular.