Review and Examination of the Doctrine, Part 3 · Chapter 2

Review and Examination of the Doctrine · Part 3 · Chapter 2

p. 29CHAP. II.

The Informers charge of internal and external Schisme, put upon Non-conformists: …f impeaching the Churches constitution, and her practice in point of Worship for more than a 1000 Years, examind. His argument from Rom. 14. Heb. 10. 25. answered, and retorted upon him. His answer to the argument taken from the command of seeking the best gifts, considered. As also his argument from ancient canons, from the Act of the Assembly 1647. from the reciprocal tye betwixt a Minister and his flock, to fortify his charge of Schism, repell'd.

HAving thus cleard our question and plea, & fortified our practice with these arguments; We come p. 30now to examine the grounds on which this new Casuist imputes sinfull separation to us therein, We acknowledge the evil of Schism upon these Texts mentioned by him, which might have caused sad reflectings on himself and his party, who are guilty of divisions and offences contrary to our received ordinances, and the doctrine of this Church: And so are lashed by that Scripture Rom. 16. 17. And who would have have us saying I am of this or that Rabbi or Prelat, contrary to 1 Cor. 1: 12. It's they who have disownd a spirituall pure unity with this pure Church, and are seeking a perjurious union in departing from God, contrary to that precept Ephes. 4: 3. And are so far from esteeming others in Lowliness of mind better then themselves, as we are enjoynd. Phil 2. 2. That their Rabbies trample on all Ministers; and their underlings do most insolently persecute and despise faithfull Pastours for adhering to the Reformation, authority, and union of this Church, against their innovations. Schism is no doubt an evill which hath much infested the Church, and our Church: and the Scripture sufficiently discovering the evill thereof we need not Cyprian, nor Jeroms elogies anent unity, to persuaed it. Only where he insinuats from that saying of Cyprian, which he mentions. Who asserts from 1 Cor. 13. [that who are slain in their Schism, their inexpiable sin is not purged by their blood, and that they are not Martyrs] that such is the case of the suffering people of God at this time; we may discern the cruell venome and sting of this mans malice, for all the sobriety which he pretends unto; I shall only tell him, that as its more then he will be ever able to prove, that the Lords remnant are guilty of this sin, and are assembling out of the Church, when attending the Ministry of Christs faithfull Ambassadours in this Church, so he and his fellows setting p. 31these murderers upon them in this duty, will (if they repent not) be exposed to that vengeance which the cry of their souls under the altar, who have been slain for this their Testimony, doth plead for. He would also do well to resolve this doubt upon Cyprians Testimony, viz. Whether Cyprian did ever hold, or if himself will dare to assert, that the blood and sufferings of the best of martyrs did expiat their guilt. As for Jeroms assertion [that Schism. and Heresy, or some degree of it go together.] I think it is fitly applicable to himself and fellow Conformists, who since their departing from the unity of this Church, and her sworn Reformation, have not only, to justify their course vented gross errours in point of Oaths, and otherwise, but are now (as every one sees) posting fast to Rome, in denying many and great points of our Protestant profession. We accord to Augustines saying [that separatists (as such) receive no life from the body] & the unquestionable godliness, & fellowship with the Father and the Son, to which many Presbyterians are admitted, and wherein they shine, compared with the abominable prophanity of the whole of those almost that owne Curats, will by this rule declare who are the Schismaticks, and separatists from Christs body. The comment of the Thorn which rents the lili… Cant. 2. 2. Is very suteable to him, and those of his way, who have now of a long time rent the Lords faithfull flock, wounded our Church, and taken away her vail: esteeming themselves Christians of the first magnitude, so he esteems his most reverend Arch-Bishops and reverend under-fathers; What pitifull preambles are these.

The Doubter alleadges [that every separation is not schism.] This (as we heard) he acknowledges, and that when communion with a Church cannot be held without sin, separation is necessary; wherein he yeelds all that we p. 32plead; since we have proved that in this our case, joyning to their way and party is in many respects sinfull; and since he Instances the protestants plea for separating from Rome on this ground, knowes he not that the Papists tell us such stories anent union with the Church, and that suffering without the Church is no Christian suffering, to Iustifie their bloody persecutions, which very well sutes his case. And no doubt the protestants answer, viz. [That we are in Christs Church, because owning his truth, tho separat from their syn…gogue, and that notwithstanding this pretence, the blood of protestant Martyrs is in their skirts] doth sute the case of Presbyterians in relation to their persecuters.

But the great charge followes, viz. That we are guilty of as groundless and unreasonable separation, as we shall read of in any age of the Church. Bona verba! How is this made good? first, (saith he) in casting off Christian love which is heart Schism. 2. He chargeth with external Schism in separating in acts of Worship. Now what if we recriminat in both these, and retort this double charge upon himself. Have they not disownd the Worship of Presbyterian ministers & Professours, and charged all to separat from them, meerly for non-complyance with their perjured Prelats? 2. Have they not for many years glutted themselves with their blood, I may say sweemd in it, upon the same very ground of forbearance as to prelatick complyance, and endeavour by multiplyed lawes and Acts, to root them out of the very nation? Good Sir, Pull this beam out of your own eye, that you may see a litle clearer in this point. But as to the first he sayes, that we make difference in Iudgement as to lesser matters (Church Government) a ground of difference in affection, as if they were no Christians who are not of our persuasion in these things, putting thus lesser points into our creed, and un p. 33unchurching and unsancting all who are not of our persuasion therin. Ans. As to the first general charge, I know none more guilty then themselves, who are contending with fire and sword tanquam pro aris & focis, for these their lesser points, and with unheard of rage, seeking the ruine of all who dare not comply in Judgement and practice with them therein. 2. I thinke Christian affection to their souls, is best seen in opposing and testifying against their soul-destroying sins. Thou shalt by any means rebuke thy neighbour, and not suffer sin upon him is an old standing rule. Levit. 19: 17. And if they be even hated in so far as owning pernicious wayes, its no more then what David avowes, Psal 139: 21, 22. do not I hate them that hate thee, I hate them with a perfect hatred. I account them my enemies, I hate the work of them that turn aside, it shall not cleave unto me. 3. As we have not so learn'd Christ, to call every thing lesser or small po…nts, which his latitudinarian party have the confidence to term thus, so we know no point of truth reveald and commended to us in the word, as the object of our faith and matter of our practice, which should be keept out of our creed, lest our saith become much shorter then the Scripture pattern. And we acknowledge not the new patchment of mens Lawes, which this man and his fellow-Conformists have annext to their creed, and which can pro arbitrio make or unmake these his lesser points.

But he sayes, that we unchurch and condemn all Churches in all ages who have ownd Bishops, Liturgies, festivals and oth…r ceremonies—And if we make the removal of these things necessary to a Church, there hath not been a a Church for above a 1000 yeares together Ans. To make the last part of this argument not to contradict the first, he should have said that there has not been a Church without these things mentioned these 1600 years, but the p. 34man seeing his first flight or Rodomontade too fierce; he did well to clap his wings closser. Upon a review of this page, I find our Informer in this charge playes but the pityfull Camelion and versipellis: for finding that this assertion of his, that Christians of all ages since Christs time and in all places have own'd Bishops, Liturgies, Festival dayes and other ceremonies, would have drawn upon him the heavy burthen and task of a proofe, he lightens himself of this burthen, by a prudent [almost] which in this point is very significant. But his confining the liturgies, Festivals, and other ceremonies within the compass of the last thousand years (sullied with all popish abominations) appearing too simple inadvertency, within the compass of two or three lines, he secures it with a [much above.] But lest this prove too broad reckoning, he instances the second or third century from whence he sayes, we beginne our reckoning as to Bishops, festivals, liturgies, and other ceremonies. But 1. why mends he the matter so inadvertently, as to run in such a wide uncertainty as the the length of 200 yeares in that calculation which he imputes to us. 2. I challenge him to shew what presbyterian writter did ever commence the original of liturgies and festivals, with his blind &c. of other ceremonies (which will travell who knowes whither, and include who knowes what) from the third, far less the second century. I affirm that its more then he or any for him can prove, that the Church hath had Bishops, liturgies, and festivals since Christ. Our writters have abundantly proved the contrary; and we challenge him to shew either his Diocesan Bishops, liturgies, or festivals and the &c. of his ceremonies, in the first Apostolick Church, or in these two ages mentioned by him. That there were not diocesan Bishops then or long after, we have already proved, and far less Erastian p. 35Prelats. For holy dayes, let him shew by divine appointment any other then the Christian Sabath, in the Apostolick Church if he can, or in the first succeeding ages. As for the feast of Esther, it is acknowledged to have come in by custome after the Apostolick times. For liturgies, we assert that the Apostolick Church and age knew no such thing as set & impos'd liturgies and formes, other then Christs prescriptions as to baptism & the Lords supper, and that they pray'd as was suteable to the present action and circumstances of time, place, and persons; If he betake him to the liturgies which are ascribed to Peter, James, Mathew, Andrew, Clement, Mark, Dionisius Areopagite, and other Disciples: protestant writers will stigmatize him for embracing that which they have abundantly proved to be counterfit. That liturgies had no place for a long time in the Church, is proved by clear testimonies; Tertullian (Apol. cap. 30.) shews that in their publick Assemblies christians did pray sine monitore quia de pectore, that is, without a prescription because from their heart. And in his treatise de Oratione sayes, that there are somethings to be asked according to the occasions of every man—that the Lords prayer being laid as a fundation, its lawfull to build on that fundation other prayers, according to every ones occasion. Agustine epist. 121. tells us that liberum est, Its free to ask what was in the Lords prayer alijs atque alijs modis, some times one way somtimes another. Likewise Justin Martyr Apol. 2. tells us that he who Instructed the people pray'd according to his ability foreign. We might also tell him of Bishop Andrews success, or rather disappointment in seeking an old Jewish Liturgie, which when sent to Cambridge to be translated, was found to be composed long after the Jews rejection, so the Bishop p. 36being asham'd, suffered this notion to die and the Liturgie never saw the light. See Smectim and Didoclav. pag. 615, 16, 17, 18, 19. & seq. 2. What consequence is this, that because we disowne a Schismatick party of Innovators introducing these corruptions mentioned: Ergo we disowne them as no Churches wherein these have been admitted. Must we bring in, or comply with every corruption once purged out, the retaining wherof may be consistent with the essence of a true Church? what consequence or reason is here? Again, doth not he and all his brethren stand in direct opposition to the order and government of the Presbyterian Church of this Nation, and unto all that own's the same: will he then admit this consequence that he unchurches her before prelacie came in, and other reform'd Churches govern'd Presbyterially. So we see himself must acknowledge this his reasoning naught.

The Doubter alledges [that these things mention'd, are of later date then the Apostles.] To this he answers that Bishops were from the Apostles time. The contrary wherof we have proved either as to diocesan or Erastian Bishops, such as he means, yea even a proestos which in the Apostolick age had no place, as we have made appear. Next, He tells us that Polycrates in the debate about keeping of Esther with Victor Bishop of Rome, alledged Iohns authority. But how proved he this, is the Question, not what he alledged; surely bare alledging, as in other cases, so specially in divinity is bad probation; Then he asks, if we will hence infer that they were no good christians who used these things suppose that they came in after the Apostles times? I answer we thinke that in so far as innovating they were not Sound Christians, and so must he thinke unless he will be wise above what the Apostles have written; Then he tells us, that from Rom. 14. It appears that albeit p. 37some thought (he should say understood and knew) that by their Christian liberty they were fred from the ceremoniall Law and therefore made no distinction of dayes or meats yet Paul enjoyn'd them to bear with the weak, to account them brethren, and not despise them, and the weak were not to Iudge the strong. Ans. 1. How proves he, that the points in controversy viz. prelacie, laying aside our vows and Covenants, Erastianism, liturgies, and festival-dayes for mystical ends and uses, are such nothings or indifferent matters, as meats or dayes were at that time, wherin pro re nata the Church might use her liberty. As for diocesan Erastian prelacy, we have made its antiscriptural complexion to appear, so that it is not within the compass of any Lawfull liberty of the Church to embrace or establish it; We have also made the binding force of the Covenants appear, and that the laying aside of them consequently, is a horrid guiltyness, which this liberty can never be extended unto. Likewise the liturgies and imposing of set formes of prayer, and adstricting publick Worship therunto, have been sufficiently impugned from Scripture and divine reason, by several of the godly learned, and discovered to impeach the spiritual liberty of Gospel Worship. The holy dayes also have with the same evidence been impugned by our divines, who have proven that they do impinge upon our Christian liberty, are contrary to the fouth command enjoyning worke all the six dayes, except on such occasionall fasts and feasts as are held out in the word, & likewise are reprobate by the New Testament prohibitions about superstitious observation of dayes: The Jewish dayes being abrogat (as the Informer cannot but grant) how dare we impose upon our selves a new yoke? If it were here pertinent to dilate upon these points, our principles herein might be abundantly fortifyed, and the truth cleard p. 38to his conviction, and by consequence the impertinency of this parallel argument, and his pityful p…. 1. 10 principii, in equiparating the points now controvered with these things which are the object of Christian liberty. The Informers gives us nothing here but magisterial dictates. Again, that tolerance which the Apostle speaks of as to dayes and meats, relates to that time and case only of the weak Jews, when the ceremonies tho dead were not yet buryed (as they were to be honourably) especially while the temple of Jerusalem stood, and the legal worship therein by Gods providence was continued. But as these observances were ever discharged to the Gentiles (except as to blood and things strangled for that exigence only of the weak Jews) so after when christian liberty was known, and this particular exigence was over, and the ceremonies buried, It is within the liberty of no Church to unbury them, or tolerat these or such like observances in others. Finally this very text condemns him, tho his begged supposition were granted. For 1. The eater must not despise him that eats not: why then do Conformists pursue Nonconformists, with such grievous punishment and Lawes? they not only despise but persecute to the death, and vilely reproach them; who art thou that judgest another mans servant? why then do they Judge & censure Nonconformists so highly in their pulpits and pamphlets (and the Informer in this) as Schismaticks, of as deep a dye as ever the Church was infested with? 2. He that but Doubts is damned if he eat, saith the Apostle. Why then do they so violently press consciencious Doubters to their way? 3. If thy brother be grieved (saith the Apostle) with thy meat, thou walks not charitably. Why then are they so uncharitable as to grieve Nonconformists with prelatick exactions? if the Judging and despising the forbearer be forbidden, much more are their cruell edicts and constraining Lawes, p. 39whereby they burden the consciences of tender forbearers in this case. The practice of Victor as to the Asian Churches, was no doubt highly uncharitable, but it was so mainly because of his censuring about such a trifle as Esther-observation; & we see from this schism the sad effects of innovations; and that the Churches unity & peace is best keept by adhering to the simplicity of the gospel: and so our departing from the gospel simplicity in point of government, and introducing abjured prelacy, is the chief ground of the present schism, and confusions in this Church.

But now followes our Informers main charge of external schism, in s…parating from the Churches communion in word and sacraments, contrary to the apostles direction, Not to forsake the assemblies Heb. 10. 25. It seems (saith he) that some then out of pride and singularity for sooke the ordinary and orderly assemblies of Christians. Ans. In this accusation his so much boasted of charity is evaporate. What! No assemblies for worship in this Church but among Conformists; doth he not thus unchristian and unchurch all the Assemblies of Presbyterian Ministers and professors for worship? why persuades he people to forsake these Assemblies? and who now Iudges another mans servant as he, who brands withself-conceit, ignorance, and schism all these Assemblies of Nonconforming Ministers and professours, who dare not comply with prelats. Again, how proves he that no assemblies are orderly except the Prelatical? we avow our meetings for worship, to be the most orderly according to our Churches established Reformation, and that their Assemblies are cross to her constution, order, and union, both in respect of Curats perjurious intrusion, the doctrine which they deliver, and their manner of worship, which is cross to this Churches practice and appeintment; his charge of schism and disorderliness is still begged, but not yet p. 40proved; and orderliness is (with him) described from Church-walls; and as for unity, why have they east out hundreds of Ministers from officiating, because they durst not joyn with Conformists, in their perjur'd course of defection? if this man be not here self convict, let any Judge. Let him produce (if he can) in our Assemblies for worship, that which is contraire unto the nature, constitution, and worship of the assemblies mentioned in that scripture; and untill this be, we may on better ground recriminat this charge upon his withdrawing people from the Assemblies of Presbyterian ministers and professors.

The Doubter alledges poorly that all do not forsake their parochial Assemblies, but some do now and then keep them. He Answers, that tho all withdraw not in alike degree, yet the least degree is unwarrantable—that people advance from step to step, that some after withdrawing from them, hear only the Indulged, or those who have still preached without conformity in their own Ch…rches, and within a little will hear none of them; that some hear in their own Churches but will not communicat, the reason whereof he cannot understand, since the efficacy of Sacraments depends not on the Minister, that the lest degree of separation makes way for a greater—that Baxter in his cure of Church divisions, tells of some turning separatists, who dyed Infidels. Ans. He hath not yet proved that the withdrawing which he mentions, is a Sinfull Schismatick separation; and we hope we have made the contraire appear. As for these degrees he mentions, we say. 1. His cruell uncharitablness to Presbyterian Ministersis here very conspicuous, since he will not allow them to be in the least heard or own'd in their present case and circumstances. Certainly to tye up people from occasional improvement of the various gifts which God hath bestowed upon his ministers, even in a setled state of the Church, and in her p. 41right constitution, is cross to that interest in one anothers gifts and graces, which the members of Christs mystical body (upon the ground of their union and communion with the head, and among themselves) are priviledged with. And in impeaching this the Informer blotes himself with scismatick uncharitablenes of the deepest dye. 2. As its no strange thing that in such a time of darkness, desertion, and defection, peoples recovery be gradual, and sometime attended with Infirmities in the manner of duties incident to us while in time, so the contrary influences of love to truth and duty, and fear of hazard, may be easily productive of such variety in the carriage of poor tender souls in this matter. In a word, the Lords supper being a special badge of our union and communion in and with Jesus Christ, Its no strange thing that tender souls scruple to pertake thereof from men at so palpable a distance from him, as Conformists, especially while this ordinance may be enjoyed more purely elswhere. He tells us, that Schismaticks ar cut off from the body, and receive no life from it, and (if we may drawan inference and retortion from this assertion) the people of God must judge Conformists to be such. For these effects of separation which Baxter mentions, we bless the Lord the contrary effects of sound piety, in many who were prophane while owning the Ministry of Conformists, are convincingly apparent, since they separated from them: and the effects of backsliding from Gods truth, viz. gross prophanity, or atheisticall Indifferency in the matters of God, are as sadly evident in those who having once own'd Presbyterian Ministers, have return'd to Conformists again. As for what he objects and answers, anent some of their own party going to others then their own parish-Curats, whom unless insuperable lets hinder to attend their own parish-Church, he would have his fellows not to owne. We are not much concernd to notice any further, p. 42then to tell him that parvo discrimine refert, which of them people go to, the best of them being as a briar, and the most uprights as a thorn-hedge, and all of them blotted with such Schismatick opposition to this Church her pure constitution and principles, as may put it beyond debate with tender souls, (lovers of truth and duty) that they ought adhere to Christs faithfull ambassadours rather then any of them.

The Doubter objects, [that its hard to hinder to go where we may be most edifyed; since we must Cover the best gifts. 1 Cor. 12. 31.] He answers 1. that the Apostle is not directing private Christians, what gifts in others to seek after for their edification, but shews that though there are diversities of gifts, and every one should be content with his own, given for the edification of others, yet that he should seek after better, not in others, but in himself. Ans. Our Informer doth but trifle and deal deceitfully in his way of representing this, and some objections ensuing; for 1. He supposes that this is lookt upon in it self, as a sufficient ground of adhering to Presbyterian Ministers, without previous consideration of all the circumstances of our present case; and also in supposing that nothing casts the ballance (in the Judgement of the objecter) as to profiting or not profiting, but difference of gifts; whereas we grant, that the soveraign Influence of Gods Spirit, (who teaches to profit) renders the means and ordinances effectual to salvation, whether the Ministers gifts be great or small. 2. We grant, that tho people have a discretive Iudgement as to gifts, and their own profiting, and are to try the spirits, yet in a setled state of the Church, they are not to shake off the due regulation and guidance, of a faithfull Ministry set over them in the Lord, so as to be wholly at their own disposal herein: since there is no Justling betwixt the privat discretive, and publick p. 43Ministerial judgement, in this matter. 3. As in the tryall of Intrants, not only the sufficiency, but suteablenes of gifts for such a people, is to be eyed. So when a faithfull Minister is thus duely called and setled, people are obliged to owne his Ministry, by a due attendance upon the ordinances administred by him, which is all that decency, union, and order, and that act of our Church after mention'd, doth call for; which notwithstanding cannot be supposed to exclude all occasional usemaking of other gifts bestowed upon faithfull Ministers, which were (as I said) cross to the communion of Saints, and beleevers interest in one anothers gifts and graces. But 4. our question here being stated upon the supposition of the greater part of this National Church their apostacy & defection from our sworn Reformation, and a great part of Ministers and professors adhering to their principles, viz. to which of the two parties on this supposition people are to adhere in worship? sure the Lords palpable blasting the backsliding party their gifts, as to any saving success, and on the contrary his as palpable owning and sealing with his blessing the Ministry of his faithfull servants adhering to his truth, is a loud call (in this broken state of our Church, and case of defection and persecution) to come out from the one party and way, and adhere to the other. So his Doubter in this and the next objection, should have argued thus. In this case of defection and overturning of our Reformation, God being pleased to seal with a palpable blessing on our souls, the word from Ministers adhering to their principles, we may safely look on this as a call from God to hear them, rather then the prelats perjurd hirelings, whose Ministry we have found palpably blasted since they complyed with …his course of perjurious back siding, and opposition to Gods work. In this case certainly its an argument very pungent, and founded on that of Jer. p. 443. 31, 32. Where the Lord threatneth the prophets who caused the people to err by their lies and lightness, and whom he hath not sent nor commanded tho they prophesie, with this, that therefore they shall not profite the people at all. So the Argument going upon the supposition of our Churches broken and persecute state; and a competition betwixt a faithfull Ministry, and a party of Schismatick Innovators, and overturners of our Reformation, will infer nothing against our Churches setled order under Presbyterian government, nor the assemblies act. 1647. presupposing the same; and its not meerly the gifts, but Gods saving blessing attending the same, which is the ground of this argument, and that practice pleaded for, thereby.

Now as to his answer, Its palpable that it meets not this argument in the least, and besides his exclusive gloss is very impertinent, viz. because we are to seek the best and edifying gifts f…r our selfs in our siation, therefore we are not to seek the best in others also. What consequence is this? Sure the Informer will not deny simpliciter, that people are to seek after the most edifying Minister, and this will follow on the very ground of our edification, which we are to design in seeking the best gifts, in and for ourselves. Nay, the one is the great mean subservient to the other; a faithfull edifying Ministry is Gods Method for winning to the best gifts for my self; and therefore as a mean leading to this end, fals within the compass of this command, to seek and Covet the best gifts. So a greater then he, Voetius, concludes it a duty to seek the best edifying Ministry, on this ground De politeia Eccles. pag. 52. And likewise on these Scriptures, Luk. 8, 18: 1 Thess. 5. 22. And removes objections to the cotraire.

His 2d answer is, That the Apostle is there pressing unity, and not to despise the meanest gifts, more then the meanest member, and to avoid Schism verse 25. Ans. p. 45Then it followes, that in the sense of this precept, which we have explain'd, seeking the best gifts, is consistent with unity, and avoiding Schism, and consequently in this our case, its no wayes inductive to schism, but consistent with a due esteem of the meanest gifted Minister who is faithfull, to withdraw from scandalous innovators, who have already fixt a Schism in this Church, by opposing her sworn reformation, order, and unity. Nay as matters now stand, this is the surest way to keep our Churches union and integrity; Since this their course has such a clear tendency to the ruine of her Reformation and pure constitution, in doctrine, Worship, discipline and Government, as is above clear'd.

His 3d Answer is, that edification is to be sought in an orderly way, not in a way that marrs the Churches peace—and that though our sense of this generall direction were granted, its thus to be understood. Ans. Let our sworn establisht Reformation, its principles, rules, and design, sit in Judgement and determine, who are greater enemies to this Churches peace and order, they or we. Was not this Church priviledged with a beautifull order of Government, pure Gospel-Worship, and sound doctrine, before Prelacy was introduced? Well then, the way to this Churches true peace, Union, and order, must be in opposing their pretended order, who are letting in the enemies, and have broken her walls and hedge. Many of them said and swore that the Presbyterial Government of this Church, was a beautifull order, unto which since they stand in opposition, they are the most orderly, who disowne them. As for that which he adds, of peoples neglecting Ministers set over them in the Lord, he must prove that Conformists are such Ministers, who are both scandalous for the far greatest part in their carriage, having no visible badge of the Lords p. 46call, and do owne principles, and carry on a designe point blank contraire to our reformation, have left the peoples conduct, in the way of truth, given up all their Ministeriall authority to abjured prelacy, and make it their work to destroy, and waste the Lords vineyard. Tho it were granted that they had been so set over people, yet since they are tracing wayes of Schism, and innovations condemned by our Church, Christs flocks cannot owne, or be subject to them, as their soules spiritual guides, they being men that have corrupted the Covenant of Levi, and made many stumble at the Law: And besides since that complyance (in subjection to conformists, and disowning of Presbyterian Ministers) which he doth here plead for, is in very deed a despising faithfull Ministers set over their flocks by the Lord, and standing in a Ministeriall relation to them; and whom consequently the Lords people are called to honour and obey, this same reason whereby he would persuade to adhere to the conforming party, pleads more strongly against them. And his rule aftermentioned not to do evill that good may come of it, will conclude that we should not under pretence of keeping parochiall order, or for eviting confusion, deprive our selves of the blessing of the Ministry of Christs faithfull Ambassadours, to adhere unto whom in this case we are under so many obligations.

As for the Canons after'cited by him, against Ministers receiving these of another congregation to the Worship, We say, that according to the Informer himself its clear that such rules of decency and order, are not calculat for every meridian, every time and case of the Church: extraordinary cases must have suitable remedies, and circumstances of parochial order, cannot in this case be pleaded, when our main order of Government is already destroy'd, and a persecuting party is in p. 47our Churches bosome, tearing out her bowels; when a besidged city hath within her walls a party of professed defendants betraying her to the enemie, they are the most orderly and faithfull watchmen who resist them, and run to the posts which they have betrayed. Again, should the many Ministers now persecute (let us suppose they are residing in the bounds) plead parochial order, for their parishes adhering to them, and disowning their Curats incumbent, the Informer will not say, that parochial order, will plead for owning them in this case. Or in the case of conforming Ministers turning enemies to Prelats, and by consequence Schismaticks in his account, he will grant that the people (whom we will suppose they are breaking off from the union of the Prelatick Church) ought not to owne them, but were concern'd to go else where to hear. Now, the case being so with us this argument by his own confession, cannot now have weight until all that we plead against them on this ground, be answered.

Next, he cites the Act of the Assembly 1647. Against them who withdraw usually from the Worship in their own congregation, except in urgent cases made knowen unto, and approven by the Presbytery. Concluding, that therefore they thought not this a fit method of edification, & that this act was made to prevent Schism. But had he set down the narrative of that act, it might have coverd him with blushes, and would expose him to the censure of every Reader; for it is grounded upon the then compleat establishment of the work of Reformation, this Churches comely order of Presbyterian Government then exercised, her Presbyterian unity and peace, the purity and liberty of the Gospel ordinances then righly enjoyed. But what will this say to the present case of defection and persecution, wherein the faithful Ministry are thrust from their flocks, and that work raz'd p. 48dare he say this assembly did intend to stretch their act to such a case as this, or to stop Ministers from officiating in such a distrest & destroyed condition of our Church Suppose this case had been stated in that Assembly, What if Presbyterian Government shall be razed, Prelac…e erected, the Covenant and the work of Reformation overturned and disowned by a number of Ministers, while a stedfast body of the Ministry stands against them, shall this act reach the people in relation to their faithfull Pastours, ejected perjur'd intruders? I dare refer it to this man himself to say to it, what their resolution would have been, and if they would have concluded it the people's duty to adhere to these destroyers in that case, rather then the faithfull contenders for the work of Reformation. In the 7th Article of their directions for family Worship past that same day, they suppose this Church to be then blest with peace and purity; and therefore do except from the compass of these directions, the case of corruption and trouble, wherein they say, many things are commendable, which are not otherwise tollerable; And dare he say that they would not call this such a case. He makes the Doubter yet again poorly except, [that men have different gifts] which is here a meer nauseating repetition, to fill up idle pages. Upon this our Informer very discreetly and charitably tells us, that we can litle judge of an edifying gift, and do call railing at Bishops, or at the civil powers, and a tone in the voice so. Just as Dr Burnet said before in in his roaving Dialogues. What is the Judgement of Gods people as to edification, and the evidence of the Masters presence with Presbyterian Ministers in preaching to his people, depends not on this Character, it being comprobat by clear proofs, and sufficiently notour to such as can spiritually taste and discern.

p. 49But he will offer some considerations about diversity of gifts, and edification by them, which is to no purpose; since our plea is not meerly grounded upon the gifts of preachers whether Conformists or others; but abstracting from this, we say first, there is much more then meer gifts, yea and an edifying gift, requisit to ground a peoples owning a Minister hic & nunc, or in every circumstantiat case, as their pastour: what if he be in a schismatick course? what if he be violently thrust in, and hath shut out their Lawfull pastour standing in that relation to them, to whom by this mans concession they owe special subjection, reverence and obedience in the Lord? (for this we will find him hereafter plead) are the people bound in this case to owne the Intruder, because of his gift? Nay he will not say it. Now the case is Just so with us. 2. We told him that our case is a case of competition betwixt the betrayers and destroyers of our Reformation, and a faithfull Ministry adhering to, and contending for it: so that its this great Ministerial qualification of faithfullness, (opposit to Curats …reachery) beside Presbyterian Ministers gifts, and Gods blessing attending the same: and the Curats intrusion, unfaithfulness, destructive principles, and design in their officiating (besides their insufficiency, prophanity, and blasted gifts) which determine us in this matter; and the Lords call consequently that for our edification, and to prevent our Church her ruine, and our perishing in their sin, we come out from among them and be separat, as we would come out of Babylon to which their party is runing post: so that all he saith here, may be granted without prejudice to our cause.

But let us hear his considerations anent edification and gifts; first, (saith he) all Ministers have not alike gifts, therfore we must not undervalue the lowest 1 Cor. 12. I told him our quarrel is not meerly gifts, & a man may be hic p. 50& nunc disown'd, and yet no undervaluing of his gifts, which the Informer must either grant, or contradict all that he intends in this pamphlet. For I ask him, what if I plead this for Presbyterian Ministers, whom for all their excellent and edifying gifts he and his party will not owne, and whom be is in this pamphlet striving might and main tanquam pro …ris and focis, to get universally disown'd by all professours in Scotland? why quarrells he with the Almighty (to use his own expression) in undervaluing their gifts, and would teare their commission? I know our Informer will say that they are disorderly, and so disowning them, is no despising their gifts. Well then, he grants that men of excellent gifts may be hic & nunc or in some cases disown'd, and no hazard of this undervaluing and despising their gifts, or quarrelling with the Almighty, & so the rebound of his own blow in this retortion strikes his argument stark dead; and he must grant that the question is, which of the two contending parties, have best right to officiat as Ministers in the Church of Scotland, according to her principles and Reformation? and according thereto it will not be difficult to determine who are the most orderly & to be heard, & the disorderly have no reason to complain. 2. He sayes we must not think the meanest gifts, useless. But he must grant that men may sinfully render them useless, as he alleges Presbyterian Ministers do and we prove that conformists do so. 3. He tells us that the best gifts cannot work without the spirit, and that to do…e on gifts, is to idolize men, as those 1 Cor. 1. 3. Then he tells us, how Zanchius was offended with that frenchman of Geneva, who said he would leave Paul, should be come there, and hear Calvine. But what will this arguing reprove? must they be stigmatiz'd as Idolizers of men and gifts, who will not Idolize abjur'd prelacy, and perjur'd apostats, and in owning them while wasting and destroying a purely reform'd p. 51Church, discountenance a faithfull Ministry contending for her reformation, and signally bless'd therein? surely his instance anent Zanchius, may be well apply'd to such as will hear none but Curats, and wholly disowne Presbyterian Ministers; Again, if the best gifts cannot work without the spirit, and the spirit works ordinarly and best with those who entertain him, and as having their senses exercised, habitually wait for his breathings in duty, what hope is there that profane men, and greivers of the spirit in walking contraire to God, his people, way and interest, (as are most Conformists) should have the spirits seal attending their Ministry. What more? He tells us 4. That sometimes the spirit will act with the mean gifts more then the greater as Peter Acts 2. is found to have converted more in one sermon, then we read that our Lord himself did, tho he spoke as never man spoke. That Christ … complain'd of small success, Isa. 49. 4. & 53. 1. & upbraided people for unbelief Math. 11. 21, 22, 23. Ioh. 5. 40.—that after the sermon on the mount we read not that many were converted tho they were astonisht—that the Centurions faith was commended above that of Israel: and from the east and west many will sit down with Abraham while the children of the kingdom are cast out. Ans. 1. He must grant that this argument, taken from the spirits working great things by smal means, will not plead for owning Presbyterian Ministers, to whom many of his Scioli Rabbies impute weakness of gifts, because they think that aliunde or upon other grounds, such Ministers are not in this case to be heard. Well then let him take home his argument as insufficient, untill he prove that hic & nunc Conformists are to be heard rather then Nonconformists, and prove his groundless suppositions above mentioned (wherein he begs the question) and disprove our true suppositions above also rehearsed, or this argument will signify p. 52Just nothing. 2. For his Instances, as this man would be sober in such comparisons, so we must tell him ther's a great difference betwixt little, & no success, a Ministry with small effects; and a Ministry palpably blasted as to any saving issue; and betwixt sincere designing of success, and mourning over the want of it, making it a complaint (as our Lord wept over Jerusalems impenitency and disobedience) and the Ministers designing himself, and no such thing, and wanting this impression mentioned. Sure as it will be hard for him to point us to any of their constant hearers who have been converted by their Ministry, so it will be as hard to point out any of their preachers, who have the peoples spiritual profit for their design, or their unprofitableness as their burden & complaint to God. And since both these are conspicuous in Presbyterian Ministers, Its quickly resolved which of the two are standing in Gods counsel, and travelling in birth to beget souls by the gospel, and to have Christ formed in them. But he would have us praying for Conformists, and laying aside prejudice. Ans. I think we are Indeed called to lay aside prejudice at their persons, and to pray for their repentance; but to pray for a blessing on their Ministry, who are in such direct opposition to the Lords people, work, and Interest, were a mocking of God, and hardning them in their sin, and consequently hearing and receiving the ordinances from them as the Ministers of this Church were a strenght ning of their hands in their disobedience. Beside, will he allow people upon their praying for Presbyterian Ministers to hear them? I trow not, then it seems▪ laying aside prejudice and praying for Curats, may consist with not hearing them. His next childish objection put into the mouth of his Doubter [that tho some withdraw all will not] is not worth the noticing. It were good for our Church p. 53all her members did so understand their duty and obligatons, as to deny that subjection to Conformists which he pleads for. And that such pastours as they who destroy but feed not, had no flocks: For they have not brought back the straying, nor heal'd the sick &c. But he tells us, he hath proved that none ought to withdraw. How insignificant his preceeding proofs are, hath been discovered, and if his ensueing be no better, Its certain that Successus defuit ausis, and that he hath overshote his marke, in this undertaking.

The Doubter enquires next [what obligation lyes on him, to be an ordinary hearer in his own congregation.] In answer to which the Informer tells us first, of our obligation showen by him to maintain union, and of the Acts of the ancient Church, and our own. Which I have already answered. Next, he tells us, of the reciprocal obligation betwixt a Minister and his congregation which cannot be so easily broken; the Minister is to labour diligently and faithfully, among the people of his charge Ezek. 33. 8. Heb. 13. 17. the people of his charge are to attend his Ministry to esteem him highly, and love h…m for his works sake Mal. 2. 7. 1 Thes. 5. 11, 12. Heb. 13. 17. He asks how we obey this charge, when we disowne, discountenance, and turn our backs upon our Ministers, and will not receive the Law from their mouth. Ans. That there is a reciprocall tye betwixt a Minister and his flock, is easily acknowledged: but the Informer forgot the main and necessary point here (to make this weapon strike home, and the argument run straight without a byass) viz. What makes up this tye according to the Scripture pattern. This he should have condescended upon, and made it good in the case of Conformists, and then his arguing had been pertinent, and formidable to the Non-Conformists. But what will this poor general say, that there is a reciprocal tye betwixt a Minister and his flock, while he hath not made appear, what is the Scripture p. 54foundation and basis of that tye, & but begs the question in the application thereof to his case. I suppose a Presbyterian Minister should plead this to warrand his officiating among his people, in opposition to the Curat incumbent, that the people are bound to owne him as their Minister, because of this reciprocal …ye: That the Scripture obligations (mentioned by the Informer) lyes on him to be faithfull and diligent, which while he is endeavouring (according to his duty, founded on his relation to his people) the people are therefore bound to attend on his Ministrie to esteem him, love him, receive the Law from him, and and not to discountenance nor discourage him by withdrawing to another. Now let this man shew what he will answer to this pleading, and his argument will quickly evanish before his own answer; If he say that the tye is loosed, let him instruct what that is which has in this case loosed it. Sure neither the Magistrates violence, nor Prelatick censures, according to our Principles, and the Doctrine of sound divines, when this case is truely stated. And if this divine tye stand, what will he say? Will it not 1. follow (according to him,) that a Minister may be under a standing tye to his people, and they to their Minister, and yet the people for all this may not be obliged to hear him but another hie & nunc, and that warrantably, without hazard of disobedience to these Scriptures; and then he hath with his own hand cut the throat of his bare generall argument from the reciprocal tye. Sure in some cases the tye may stand, and yet the actuall reciprocal exercise, or obligation to the exercise of duties may be hic & nunc warrantably suspended in very many supposable cases as of Physicall impediments in the people and Minister, hostile invasion, Pestilence, Imprisonment &c. 2. If the tye or relation do stand, and likewise all things which do immediatly dispose to the exercise of duty, then the Prelatical incumbent is in p. 55this case an intruder, and not to be own'd. For I suppose he will not say, that a Presbyterian Minister might lawfully officiat in his own Parish, after the Curat is setled there, for this would quite cross the scope of his Argument. Now the Question betwixt the two competitors is, which of them hath the prior lawfull, and standing tye? will he dare to deny, that Presbyterian ministers had this; and since he cannot shew how it is loosed, nor prove it to be loosed, this argument will militat not for him, but against him.

Next, as for what he cites out of Mr Durham on Revel. pag. 105: 106. anent this tye, It is still extra oleas, and nothing correspondent to his purpose, untill he instruct that which is the basis and foundation of this Relation in the case of Conformists, which he neither doth nor offers to do. Mr Durham speaks of a special delegation from Christ, of his speciall warrand and appointment to such a man to treat with such a flock. Now sure this most be instructed from his Word and Testament, as to Curats, before he can from this make any shew of Argument. For Presbyterian ministers do upon better ground lay claim to this special appointment in relation to their flocks, upon which conformists have intruded: yet this man thinks these ministers are not to be owned. And since this deputation and appointment is, with Mr Durham, the foundation of the duty betwixt minister and people, it must be cleard from the word in the case of Conformists, before this passage of Mr Durham will afford any patrociny to his cause. Then he tells us, Tha… Mr Durham holds that this obligation is not founded on meer voluntary consent. Well let him mark this, and then he must acknowledge, that its not meerly the Curats gaping consent for the fleece and filthy Lucre, nor p. 56the peoples blind consent, that will make them Ministers of these Congregations where they officiat. What is it then that founds this relation? The Scipture-commands (saith Mr Durham) 1 Thes. 5. 12. Know them that labour among you and are over you in the Lord. Heb 13. 14. Obey them that have the rule over you, and submit your selves, for they watch for your souls as they that most give account, &c. But will this man deny that Mr Durham speaks upon the supposition of the Minister his having the Ministerial call and mission according to the rule of the Word, to ground his pleading these Scripture commands, and his special commission to such a people: And that he look't upon the Presbyteries mission, and ordination, and the peoples call, together with due qualifications, and the visible evidences of Christs call in the person thus admitted, as the foundation of this special relation to such a flock, according to the Scripture pattern, and the order and Government of this Church then established. I durst pose his conscience upon the truth of this; and whether Mr Durham did ever dream of a speciall relation to a flock in this Church, resulting from a Prelates mission in a Method of perjury, in opposition to our Covenant and sworn reformation, without the mission and ordination of a Presbytry, or the peoples call, and in a way of intrusion upon the charges of faithfull Ministers violently thrust out by persecuting Prelats, the men thus obtruded being for most part such as have nothing that may ground a reasonable or charitable construction of them, that they are sent of God, but palpable evidences of the contrary, While in the mean time the faithfull Ministers are willing to cleave to their flocks, and the flocks to them? If he say that all the Ministers he pleads for are not such. I Answer, he makes no limitation of this Argument, but pleads the foremention'd Scriptures, and Mr Durham's Testimony universally, and tells us in the next page, that p. 57Mr Durham binds the people fast to the Ministers of their own congregations by this discourse, he means to the Ministry of all the Conformists. As for that passage of Mr Durham's Testimony after cited by him anent the Sympathy betwixt Ministers and flocks, and the reckoning that will be made in relation to mutuall duties. We think it pleads very strongly for that Sympathy that ought now to be betwixt Presbyterian Ministers and their flocks, which Conformists have usurped upon, and the mutuall performing of duty to each other upon all hazards, in opposition to the Curats intrusion. And if Paul aggreaged particularly the Gentiles slighting and grieving him, by his particular delegation to them, which was, even as to the Apostle himself, by the imposition of the h…ds of the Presbytry Act. 13. 13. Presbyterian Ministers delegation to their flocks, which was in this manner, must needs stand, and may be much better pleaded upon this ground then that of Curats Who are sent to flocks by Prelats as their own underlings, and have nothing like Pauls delegation in their mission. So that Mr Durhams arguments, and the Scriptures cited by him, are so far from tying congregations to conformists, as this man alleages, that they tye them to their own faithfull Presbyterian pastours, and by consequence to disowne prelats and their intruding hirelings, as none of the lawfull Pastours of this Church.

I might here add that the account of the Pastours duty, and the ground of the people's subjection and obedience exhibit to us in these scriptures which he mentions, doth sufficiently exclude their party from any claim therunto. What? do they hear Gods word and warn the people from him, who are generally so ignorant of his word walking contrary to it themselves, and hardning others in rebellion against him? are they watching for souls as they that must give account? p. 58who are loving to sleep and slumber; and dare not say most of them, that ever they enquird at any soul how it is betwixt God and them? do their lips keep knowledge, who have departed out of the way, and caused many stumble at the Law? are they labouring and admonishing as to sin and duty, who are ringleaders in a course of defection? Sure if the duties of subjection, reverence, and obedience, suppose such characters of Ministers, and such qualifications as are here exprest, people are hereby abundantly discharged from such subjection and obedience as to Conformists, who are so palpably destitute of these qualifications. So that the Informer falls utterly short of his intended advantage by this citation of Mr Durham, and the scriptures therin mentioned do wound his cause t… death, and cut the sinews of his reasoning. This man is so unhappy as to fall still by the rebound of his own arguments, and the scripture-weapons (which in pleading for this cause will never be found the weapons of his warfare) wounds him every time he handles them: which as it hath before, so it shall presently appear further, in some more of his arguments and answers upon this point, which we now present.