A Little Stone Found to be Counterfeit, Treatise · Part 2 · Section 6
SECTION VI. Mr. Lockiers Anſwers to ſome other Objection made by way of Reaſon SECT. 15. 16. 17. Examined.
section 1 THe Author as he picked out ſome of the places of Scripture brought by the oppoſites of his way to prove the powe… of the Church Government to be in the hands of Church Officers only (and they are but a few of many and only concerning a particular Act of Government, Ordination, when as they bring many pregnant proofs from Scripture for the whole power of Government in generall,) ſo he is pleaſed to pick out at his pleaſure ſome few of their Arguments by way of reaſon.
section 2 1. If the Elderſhip cannot determinately act in the Church without the conſent of the Church, then Church-Government is a Democratie, all are Elders, and Officers, and Paſtors, and Teachers, and Rulers alike, and then what needs different names, and ſtations, when theſe, as to diſtinct power, ſignifie nothing. Anſ. We do juſtly charge that way of Church Government maintained by the Author and his Aſſociates, with this, that it ſets up ſuch a Democratie or popular Government in the Church, condemned by the French Church in Morellius: Which alſo Independents themſelves would fain ſeem to diſclaime, but it will not be for them. The Author is pleaſed in his wiſdome to propound the Argument for evidencing this, as ſlightly as he could: But let him take it thus; That Government in the Church wherein, albeit there be ſuch as bear the name of Officers and Rulers, yet not only all the power of Government is placed in the body of the people as in the firſt and proper ſubject thereof, and not in their Officers; But alſo the whole body of the people formally and authoritatively, concur and act in the exerciſe of all the acts of Government, at leaſt all acts of juriſdiction, ſo that all maters of this kind, are caried and determined by the authoritative ſuffrage, conſent and diſſent of the people, nothing therein being left to the Officers as Officers, but to preſide and moderate the body of the people in their authoritative acting, or, may be, to prepare and ripen maters for their authoritative deciſion, and to be their mouth to declare the ſentence determined by their authority, yea and wherein, the body of the people, may authoritatively call all the Officers to a judiciall account, judicially cognoſce upon their Adminiſtration, cenſure, degrade, yea and Excommunicate them all together, ſuch a Church Government muſt needs be Democraticall or popular, and therein all are Rulers and therein different names and ſtations ſignifie nothing, (I ſay not ſimply but as Mr. Lockier) as to any diſtinct power of Authority. If any will deny the connexion of this propoſition, I beſeech ſuch to give a deſcription of a popular Government. Sure I am that the very Government of Athens it ſelf, the moſt popular and Democratricall that we read of, was never more popular then that which we have expreſſed in the Antecedent or firſt part of the propoſition. But now the Church Government maintained by the Author and his Aſſociates is ſuch in every one of theſe points expreſſed, as is undenyably evident both by their Doctrine and practice, Ergo, &c.
section 3 Now what anſwers the Author to this Objection? He brings us a number of words clouted up unhandſomely enough out of Hookers Surv. Par. 1. c. 11. which I think not worth the while to inſiſt particularly upon. Briefly, the ſumme of all comes to this: He tells us there is a power of Judging, to take in and to caſt out Members, to exert Office (he means to confer Office) or to degrade from Office, which he calls eſſential or fundamental power; And there is the maner of managing this, and exerting it: He expreſſeth it alſo, To declare, act and exerciſe judgment in the name of the reſt, which he calls organicall power, and Poteſtas Officii particularis. And tells us that that former power is common to the whole Church Elders and fraternity: The latter is in the Elders (yet I cannot underſtand how this can ſtand with what he ſaith, that it lyeth formally in one: But be it ſo) And ſo their (to wit, the Elders) power is diſtinctly uſefull and ſignificative. Anſ. To paſſe by here the exagitating of that diſtinction of a power eſſentiall and a power organicall (the abſurdity whereof in Philoſophy might be ſhown abundantly, might we ſtay upon every ſuch triffle) and other ſuch minutias. Here, to the main purpoſe in hand. 1. To talk of, and ſuppoſe a power of judging, in taking in and caſting out, inveſting Officers and degrading them, belonging to the people and alſo exerciſed by them formally, meaning, as he doth, of authoritative judging, is but a ſuppoſing and begging the main thing in Queſtion. The place, 1. Cor. 5. 12. proves it not, Tho the Epiſtle be written to the whole Church of Corinth, yet not every command and direction there relates to all and every one in that Church, as to act formally in the work commanded or required. We ſay that command of caſting out the inceſtuous perſon judicially reſpects the Officers of that Church only. See this made good by Mr. Rutherfurd. Due Right. pag. 36, 37. Gul. Apollon. Conſider. of certain controv. c. 4. pag. 64, 65, 66. Mr. Lockiers Argument to the contrary, is weak; The Apoſtle ſayeth caſt out from among you. But the inceſtuous perſon was not only amongſt the Elders, but among the people. What a poor Argument is this? Then it ſhould follow, that the Women and the Children ſhould judicially and authoritatively voiced in the Excommunication of the inceſtuous perſon; For he was not only amo…gſt the men; but alſo amongſt the Women and Children; Theſe, ſure, were a part of the people. So then certainly the Apoſtle here, caſt out from amongſt you, tho Writing to the Church of Corinth in generall in the Epiſtle, yet in this particular command, muſt be underſtood to be ſpe king with relation to ſuch in the Church as were inveſted with a morall capacity of power and authority to act that which he was commanding. 2. When he ſayeth the power of judging is common to the whole Church, Elders and fraternity, its but a fallacy as to Elders; For in effect Elders as Elders, by his way have no power of judging: As ſuch they have only the manner of managing the judgement. 3. When he expreſſeth the act of eſſentiall power (as he calleth it) competent to the whole Church, thus, Some to judge; and then the act of the Originall or Officiall power, thus, Some to declare, act and exerciſe that judgement: I would aske him what he meaneth by acting and exerciſing judgement? Either it muſt be the determining of the judgement; But that is nothing elſe but judging it ſelf, which belongeth to the eſſentiall power of the whole body: Or he muſt underſtand the execution of the ſentence, as for example, ſhunning the company of the Excommunicat; But that is no act of Office-power nor of authority, but is common to all the Church Men and Women: Or he muſt underſtand the publick uttering and pronouncing the ſentence of judgement: But that is juſt all one with declaring, and to call this acting and exerciſing of judgement, is very abuſive ſpeaking: Except theſe words be uſed otherwiſe in Engliſh Language then I know of. But 4. The chiefeſt thing I would obſerve is, that the Author in ſaying much to the objection propounded, has ſaid juſt nothing, but in effect yeelded it wholly. For when as he ſayeth that the power and exerciſe of judging, to wit, authoritatively (for of this, and not of judging by way of privat diſcretion is the preſent diſcourſe) belongeth equally to all the Church, and that the matter of managing this only, belongeth to the Officers, what is this but as much as if he had ſaid in formall terms: 'Tis true, I yeeld it, the Government of the Church is Democraticall. And as for that he ſayeth, that ſeeing the Elders have in their hands the manner of managing the judgement, therefore their power is uſefull and ſignificative, and not uſeleſſe and nothing from the whole. True, it is not ſimply uſeleſſe and nothing ſignificative. But ſure I am it ſignifies nothing as to any power of Authority and Government. A Mr. Speaker or Preſidents part in a Parliament, a Prolocutors or Moderators in an Aſſembly, is not ſimply uſeleſſe and nothing, ſignificative, but it is juſt nothing ſignificative, as to Authority or Government.
section 4 2. Obj. But is not this confuſion, for all to have an hand in theſe great things? This abſurdity is moſt juſtly charged upon your way of Government. It is confuſion to ſpeak ſo, both formally and effectively. Firſt I ſay, formally: For when as the Lord has inſtituted his Viſible Church to be a body organicall conſiſting of diſſimilar parts: ſome as eyes, ſome as feet, ſome as hands, ſome to rule and ſome to be ruled, ſome to be over others to command and govern in the LORD, ſome to obey in the LORD: This way makes all in the Church to be Rulers, and all to be ruled, all to command and govern, and all to obey: all to be eyes and alſo all to be feet, and all to be one member, and ſo the whole not to be a body, to wit, organicall and diſſimilar. Yet more, it hath yet a greater confuſion in…t by attributing the judiciall determination of all maters of Government and Juriſdiction to the ſuffrages of the people, who by Scripture are theſe who are to be ruled, and to obey, and are as the feet and the hands in the naturall body; Indeed it maketh theſe who ought to be ruled, to be the Rulers, & contra; Sets the feet above the head, &c. 2. Effectively, it cannot but in the exerciſe of it produce many confuſions. Was there ever a Democraticall or popular Government to this day, but it did ſo? And is not that the evil of popular Government: in regard of which, it is by all intelligent Politicians poſtponed, both to Ariſtocraticall and Monarchicall Government, and ſcarce accounted worthy the name of an allowable Government? But ſee we the Authors Anſwer.
section 5 No: 'Tis not confuſion: The Church being conſidered as an organicall body, the power of acting may be fundamentally and intrinſecally in the whole, and yet each organ move orderly in his diſtinct place, and way. As for inſtance, in the naturall body of man the ſenſitive faculties are all in the ſoul originally: and the ſoul it ſolf is in the whole body fundamentally, tota in toto, &c. So that the ſenſes are radically and potentially in all the ſoul, and the ſoul radically and potentially in all the body, and yet theſe ſenſes, act only by ſuch powers (I humbly conceive this to be a ſault of the Printer, and that it ſhould be, parts) as are fit to act by, as ſeeing by the eye, and hearing by the eare. And the ſoul acts all its works by ſuch organs as are proper to each work; The hand to work and the feet to go.
section 6 I humbly conceive the Author had done better to have ſpared his phyſiologick ſimile here, and am of the mind ſome of his late aſſociats here, will not comply with his phyſicall conceptions, whatever they eſteem of his theologicall Tenets. How the ſenſitive faculties may be ſaid to be all in the ſoul, originally, radically, and potentially, I can underſtand. The meaning being that the ſoul is the effective principle from which theſe faculties proceed by way of iſſue or emanation (as they call it) to have their ſubjectation or inherency in their ſeverall reſpective organs, and to ſay this is not incongruous. But how the ſoul can be ſaid to be in the whole body fundamentally, radically and potentially, I cannot well underſtand. That the ſoul may be in ſome one part of the body as in the heart (which ſome) or brain (which others have thought) ſubſtantially and informative, and in the whole reſt of the body, virtually and operativè, as the Sun which is ſubſtantially and locally in the Heavens, is in the Earth by its influence and operation. This I can conceive, and it is not altogether incongruous to ſay ſo, though I think it be not true. But to ſay the ſoul, eſpecially the ſoul of man, is in the whole body; fundamentally, radically, and potentially, is ſuch a ſoloeciſme (to ſpeak ſo) in philoſophy, as I think we ſhall hardly meet with one groſſer amongſt men of any knowledge. For then, not only, does it follow that the ſoul muſt be by way of information, only in ſome part of the body (which tho falſe, yet is not ſo untollerable) but alſo that the whole body is the effective principle from which the ſoul is produced and iſſues by way of emanation, into that part of the body which it is ſuppoſed to inform: Now how abſurd this is in Philoſophy, yea in Divinity, let any judicious man conſider of it. But yet I further wonder, that the Author, when he is expreſſing this his way of the ſouls being in the whole body, to wit, fundamentally, radically, &c. he brings for it that common ſaying amongſt the Schooles, totain toto & tota in qualibet parte: For indeed that is the proper expreſſion of their Doctrine who maintain that the ſoul is in the whole body, eſſentially and informativè, and withall that it is in it as a ſpirituall forme, indiviſible, without extenſion of parts. But to paſſe this and to come to our preſent purpoſe. I verily think, Mr. Lockier could not made choiſe of a fitter compariſon to make good and eſtabliſh the Objection againſt his way, which he pretends to anſwer, then that ſame he has pitched upon, and his own very words condemns him. He ſayeth the Church is to be conſidered as an organical body. So it is indeed, and this will make for us, as we have ſhown before. Next whereas he ſayeth that it being ſo conſidered, the power of acting may be fundamentally and intrinſecally in the whole, and yet each organ move orderly in his diſtinct place and way, as in the naturall body the ſenſitive faculties are in all the ſoul originally, &c. To this 1. Suppoſe it were true that the power of governing were in the whole body of the Church fundamentally or originally, yet it can not be ſaid that each organ formally acteth the acts of Government; For governing being an organicall act in a politicall body, thence it ſhould follow that all the organes were but one organ, and the body of the Church were no organicall body; But a ſimilar body: As, if each member in the naturall body did formally act ſeeing, all the members were eyes or one eye. And ſo, where were the body? To ſay that however that each member acteth in their acts of governing, yet each acteth orderly in his diſtinct place, viz. privat Chriſtians in their place, Elders in their place and ſtation: Yet this takes not away the abſurdity: For ſeeing Mr. Lockier will have all and every one in the body of the Church formally and authoritatively to act in the acts of Government, it followes that all and every one of them are formally Governours and Rulers, the privat Chriſtians as well as the Elders, and there is no diſtinction between them at all, as to governing, except of meer order in acting. Certainly if all and every member of the naturall body did formally elicit the act of ſeeing, albeit that part of the body which we now call the eye, were ſuppoſed to act therein, in ſome reſpect, ſomewhat diſtinctly, as to order, from the reſt of the parts: Yet all the reſt of the parts were as formally and properly an eye, as it. Therefore as it were madneſſe to ſay that in the naturall body, each member doth formally act ſeeing: So it is exceeding abſurd, ſuppoſing the Church to be an organicall body, and ſome of the organes whereof it is compoſed, are rulers governing and commanding in the Lord, to whom ſubjection and obedience in the Lord is to be given by the reſt, and are as the eyes in the naturall body; Yet to ſay, that all and every member in the Church hath a formall authoritative hand or influence in the acts of governing, 2. See the incongruity of the Authors compariſon. The power (ſayeth he) may be fundamentally in the whole, (viz. body, For he is ſpeaking in the immediatly preceeding words of an organicall-body) and yet each organ, &c. for inſtance, the ſenſitive faculties are in all the ſoul originally, &c. What incongruity is this, to propound in the generall of power fundamentally in a whole body organicall; And then for an inſtance o… ſimile to tell us of powers or faculties in the whole ſoul originally? Is the ſoul an organicall body? But may ſome ſay, the Author ſaith, the ſenſitive faculties are in all the ſoul fundamentally, and radically, and the ſoul radically and fundamentally in all the body, and ſo would by conſequence ſay that the ſenſitive faculties are in the whole body fundamentally, and radically. Anſw. 1. 'Tis a very groſſe abſurdity to ſay that the ſoul is in the whole body fundamentally and radically or potentially, as we have ſhown before: It is formally and by way of information in the whole body. 2. It is a groſſe inconſequence, the ſenſitive faculties are in all the ſoul, and the ſoul is in the whole body: Therefore the ſenſitive faculties are in the whole body fundamentally. Nay, they are fundamentally and radically in the ſoul, and therefore are not fundamentally and radically in the body, neither whole nor part. But are formally and by way of inheſion, in their reſpective parts or organs of the body. 3. I would fain know of the Author what he does make in the Church anſwerable to the ſoul in the naturall body, and ſo that wherein the power of governing is fundamentally and radically, as the ſenſitive faculties of the naturall body are fundamentally and radically in the ſoul? Is it the whole Church as comprehending both people and Miniſters? That is the body. Or is it, the people? That is a part of the body. The truth is, Mr. Lockier is at a loſſe here with his ſimile. Jeſus Chriſt as King of the Church is unto the Church as the ſoul in the naturall body; And the power of governing is fundamentally and radically in him, and not in the body of the Church. And therefore, 3. to make uſe of the laſt words of his ſimilitude (for which we thank him as making clearly againſt himſelf and for us) as the ſenſitive faculties are radically and fundamentally in the ſoul, and act only (as he ſayeth well) by ſuch parts as are fit to act by, as ſeeing by the eye, and hearing by the ear, and the ſoul acts all its works by ſuch organs as are proper to each work; The hands to work the feet to go: So (to give the apodoſis which he had no will to expreſſe) Eccleſiaſtick organicall powers (ſuch as the ſenſes are …n the naturall body) as the power of governing, teaching, adminiſtrating the ſeals are fundamentally in Chriſt the King of the Church, and act only by ſuch parts as are fit to act by Rulers, Teachers, and Miniſters: Theſe are the proper organs of thoſe works.
section 7 The fifth and and laſt Obj. he meeteth with is this. The Elders of the Church are called overſeers, ſtewards, ſhepherds, fathers: All which in their analogy, hold forth a peculiar and ſole power to do things, fathers govern alone, ſo overſeers, &c. As to this propounding of this Argument. 1. We ſpeak not for a peculiar ſole power to do things indefinitely, in Elders; But for a ſole power of authoritative acting in maters of Government, and not excluding or denying unto people a private judgement of diſcretion to try and prove the actings thereof by the rule. 2. The Author leaves out ſome of the names and titles given to the Elders, which uſe to be alledged in this Argument, beſides the name foreign, Elders, as foreign, guides, leaders, conducters, governours, Heb. 13. 7, 17, 24. foreign, foreign, 1 Tim. 5. 17. Rom. 12. 8. 1 Theſſal. 5. 12. foreign, Governments, or Governours, the abſtract being put for the concrete, 2 Cor. 12. 28. 3. Becauſe the Author is pleaſed to propound the Argument from this ground, in the ſofteſt way for his own advantage, we deſire the Reader will be pleaſed to take it thus. Theſe perſons and theſe only in the Church have power and authority to govern, and conſequently are to exerciſe formally acts of Government, to whom in the Scripture by the Spirit of Chriſt are appropriated ſuch names and titles; which do import the power and authority of governing. But to the Officers of the Church are ſuch names appropriat as importeth power and authority of Governing, Ergo, &c. For the major or firſt propoſition, I think it may be clear to any of it ſelf. And if any ſhall be ſo wilfull as to deny it, I would ask him (as doth the learned Authors of jus divin. of Church Government, Par. 2. pag. 170.) to what end and for what reaſon are ſuch names and denominations importing power and authority of Government, appropriated to ſome perſons, i. e. given to them and not to others, if not for this end and reaſon, to diſtinguiſh them that are veſted with authority to govern in the Church, from others, and to ſignifie, and hold forth a duty or work incumbent to them and not to others? The aſſumption ſee evidenced at length, in jus divinum of Church Government, Par. 2. pag. 171, 172, 173. the ſumme is this. Theſe titles, Elder, Overſeer, foreign, Conducter, Governour, foreign Steward, Paſtor, Governments, Ruler, are names which generally have power and authority gra…en upon them and are ſuch names, as not only heathen writers, but alſo the Greek Verſion of the Old Teſtament by the 72. and the Originall of the New Teſtament are wont to give to politicall Officers, to expreſſe their politicall power and government, now all theſe titles and denominations, are attributed to Chriſts Officers in his Church, as cannot be denyed: And are not any where in Scripture attributed to the whole Church or any other member of the Church whatſoever, beſides Church Officers: Nay, they are ordinarly attributed to the Officers in contradiſtinction to the body of the Church. But ſee we what the Author anſwers.
section 8 Minuta's (ſaith he firſt in generall) in Parables muſt not be faſtened on, but principalia, what is their main ſcope. Anſ. What? And are all theſe names given to Chriſts Officers in his Church nothing elſe but parables? Or are they Parables at all, taking them as titles or names given to the Officers in the Church? I have thought a Parable (as we take it now in the Scripture ſenſe) to be narratio rei verae vel veriſimiliter geſtae ad ſimile ſignificandum ſeu explicandum (as Pareus deſcribeth, Math. 13. 3.) i. e. a narration of a thing truly done, or probable, to ſignifie or explain a like thing: and not a ſimple term or title given to a thing. Indeed ſome of them, no doubt, are metaphoricall; But a ſimple Metaphor, for ought I know, is not a Parable. And I pray, when the Apoſtle ſaith, Rom. 12. 8. He that ruleth, let him do it with diligence. And 1 Corin. 12. 28. God hath ſet in the Church—governments. And 1 Theſſal. 5. 11. Know thoſe that are over you, foreign, in the Lord, and other ſuch places; is the Apoſtle in theſe places ſpeaking parables? But be it ſo that the Author, takes a parable for a ſimple Metaphore. Will any man but the Author ſay that all and every one of theſe forementioned names are attributed to the Officers of Chriſt in the Church, only Metaphorically, and none of them in a proper ſignification. Indeed ſome of them I confeſſe are Metaphoricall, as Father, Paſtors, or Shepherds, Stewards: But withall others of them, as, Presbyters (in the politicall ſenſe of the word) Rulers, foreign, foreign, foreign, are as properly and univocally attributed to them as unto ſuch as in the civil Common-wealth have the ſame names attributed to them. The Philoſopher tells us, Categor. c. 1. that theſe are Synonyma, and ſo participate a name properly, which have not only the name common, but alſo the ſame definition accommodate to th…t … …o it is here, as … Eccl…ſia… … of … a com… … indued … …ay of … …ndent … will no… … ſame … being … pro… … of … Church, …o import in th… … authority … we … to his mor… …
section 9 Elders … ſhould … not abſolute …ow … power, is to make th… … ſelf and o…hers, … as being … ſtock. Anſ. …, brought by … …urch of the … borrowed …rom the … …ether Eccleſ…ſtick … …at can be ſaid to …lude the … …tive power of Government … abundantly d…ſh…d by … …d, Book …. c. 9. pag. … his read, I wonder …ow … ſ…ry anſwer he hat… … Author hath on this purpoſe: … him, adding what … true that the … which of th…m y…u … Rul… of the Wo…d? … …o more … to direct … …ſell or … the Rul… … having … others, … rules a… … ſuperio… … as Beza … vit no… … word … …xim… … Sep… … …the… … th… is … uſe … of Government … Church, … it … Mr. Lo… … … the only … …me name, … whic… … way of counſell and … of …wer and … to all the Church … way of … to authority, and … ſimple … forth of …ght. 2. … this … …uted to the Office … were to mak… … …erſe expoſition … think the Author… … …repreſenting o… … …ording … unto, … …ſteriall, not … but alſo limited … …ſts … people … oblig… … of the wor… … ſimple dire… … and perſwaſ… … …govern… … …all Go… … Presbyteria… … not meerly … …reater knowledg… … …an of knowledg… … …oer of … Eraſtian ſayeth: … …differ one from an other … …oſt contrary to common … … ment. 2. I would … whole body of the … then mee… di…ection … …thoritative power of government … that their power over … abſolute … … ver their …aith? I think… … ſay that▪ … Miniſteriall and ſuch … very place, 2 Cor. 1. as in v. 24▪ …ed by the Author, he affir… of himſelf and other Officers, that they did not take unto themſelves a … power ov… … of the Church. So in the … Officers had a … then of meer … To ſpare you … power to cor… … …oved to have … Go we on with the …
section 10 They ar… … ſuch … ſhould uſe diligent inſpe… … to the …ck, that none go aſt…, … …oof, conſolation, &c. … …ops or Lording Preſby… … dominantes in Eccleſi… … … …ſtle doth not by that … ove… … in… … or Lording Presbyte… … Church by force and violence▪ Mr. Lockier but ſtand … the Doctrine of Presbyterians in … …tation of the t…rme upon them and fights … own … We … no other ſort of pow… … to Presbyter… over the Church, than he … to the Congregation and Presbyters joyntly, … particular member (Unleſſe he will with State-ſyco…t …raſtia… deny all Eccleſiaſtick rule and government) and I … he will not ſay, this is Lording, or Lordly rule, dominiering by … violence. The Queſtion between Presbyterians and Independ… is not touching the nature of Eccleſiaſtick power of government in it ſelf, whether Lordly domi…ering or not, but touching the Subject in which it is, and by which it is to be formally ex…ſed whether the Officers of the Church, or the whole collective body of the Church. We ſay, the Officers or Elders only, and that the nam… … foreign importing a ruling power and authority given to them by the Spirit of God foreign, in contradi…ction to the body of the Church, prove… this, which is not infringed by what is ſaid by Mr. Lockier here. For …. when as he …yeth that they are called foreign becauſe of diligent inſpection, wa…fulneſſe, heed taking to the flock that none go aſtray for want of counſell, …, conſol… …, whether be means inſpec… … over, … …hibiting reproof, conſo…on▪ … a not-authoritative … we have our point: For … by that name, and the … …guiſhed from the reſt of … that the power of r…ing is only … by them only. If he ſay the later▪ … and … to every ſingle Beleever, … 11, 12. Coloſſ. 3. 16. Galat. 6. 1. and … might have the name of foreign as well as the … Spirit of God gives it to Elders as contradi… … from ſingle Beleevers, but alſo from the whole …lack … …hy would the Spirit of …od give thi… name to Elde… … …guiſhed from the whole flock, if thereby were … out wha… …is common, competen… … and ought to be …one by, every ſingle … Lockier, reckoning up the acts whereby the … are to … the flock; That none, ſo far… … none … … preſſeth ſome only, and … …der an, &c. I would ask him … beſide … expreſſed, doeth he intend by that … here be underſto…d exerciſe of diſcipline and cenſures, … …ons going aſtray, or …one aſtray, if otherwiſe they cannot … or reclaimed and reduced? I believe they muſt by this me… … by theſe expreſſed, take heed that none go aſtray, … …nd is not this not only a… act of Government, but even of corre…ve jur…diction? O! but may he ſay, they are not to do this …ct by themſelves, but to have a care that it be done by the whole body of the Church. But I pray how? by telling the offences of … the Church, or giving joint vote as other Profeſſors in the … it comes under publike cognizance and judgement▪ Ay, … …his may and ought to be done, by the Authors way, by any other Profeſſours in the Church, beſides the Elde…. …nd ſo nothing is left to them in regard of which, that name foreign ſhould be more pecu…ar to them than any other Profeſſours.
section 11 The A… … … ſeers, and … … thers, as … … ked in … …her; which … …en rather … aſhi… his Diſ… … and ſ…l… … are ſo Rule… … But … to th… Ch… … that t… th… … …y o… … …d … and … But … as a Brother … the … or in… … …y to con… … of Ruling and Go… … power, nor alone to exerciſe … …in con…ction▪ … Shep… … …cive that Mr. Lockier, as he … ſo he will not deny that th… … only of the Church are ſo called … the… only …ut the reſt of the Prof… … in the power and acts o… Ru… … it i… … to give the … the … of … as much and much …ore o… … thing … …hem. 'Tis true indeed that Elde… … …hood with the reſt of Profeſſours, but … in another thing, then that power which is ſignified by the names of Ru… …ver…eers, &c. i. c. the power and authority of governing; For were it that, that they are … …ood in this … why are they not all … …verſeers, &c? If they … the name? The thing … the reſt of P…of… … …eſſion of … …eing of … tell … …ſiaſtick Gover… … …qually in the … of Govern… … cal… … Overſe… … tha… … Go… … …at then … Elder… … con… the … meeting … vote… … intimate … the whol… … …te con…lude … …er for which … over the Church? … as in the … And as the fa… … exerciſed by … And … of ſeeing … part of the … … vernment … Rulers, … ſo in, and … … ſed by any other …art of the … the Auth…r … the … of Chriſt… waſhing his … feet, to illuſtrate how the Elders organicall power of Government ſhould not prejudge, deſtroy, or take away the peoples equall ſharing in a power of Government, which …e calleth fundamentall (which yet is, by his way as … of Government, as any Rulers in the World ha… … acteth in the exerciſe of Government) When I … confeſſe I was amazed, and could ſcarcely believe my own eye … that ſuch a thing could be Writen by an underſtanding … …dverting to what he did Write: As w…ſte in Chri… … that as, relateth …o the purpoſe he has … before: viz. that Elders organicall power of Government …ould not take away the peoples equal ſhare of fund… … (a… he calleth it) nor the exerciſe thereof. … and his Diſcipl… Brethren or a Brother-hood … of mutuall and equall power fundamentall of Government; Mr. Lockier, I know will abhorre a thought of this. H… Chriſt, (ſaith himſelf) was th… ſole Ruler, viz. Soveraign and … and Law-giver. Or wa… Chriſt here condeſcending to … of Government together with his Diſciples? Neither … he …ay Waſhing of feet is an act very … from …. Or was h… by abaſing himſelf to waſh his Diſciples feet, … him …ow they being to b… Officers of his Church, ſhould … the acts of Government in the Church, viz. that they ſhould …n the exerciſe thereof take in joyntly with them the who… …ople? Sure we find no intimation of ſuch an intention by … in the Text: And the thing it ſelf in the matter, … of ſuch a leſſon. that I think never man till … would imagined ſuch a thing intended by it. Beſides, an … is a peculiar action of that ſame kind with that for which i… i… given to be an example, done for direction to do the like. … waſhing of feet is an action very far different from exe…iſe of Government, but is it not evident enough from Chriſts own …pounding …f that fact, John 13. 14, 15. that his intention thereby was to give to his Diſciples and in them to all Chriſtians an example of … and charity amongſt themſelves, and that every one of them ſhould be ready to the meaneſt and baſeſt duties whereby they may …e ſerviceable and helpfull to another. Now what is this to Mr. Lockiers purpoſe here? if this be not, I know not what is foreign.
section 12 This which we have conſidered is all that Mr. Lockier anſwereth to the Argument for proving the power of Eccleſiaſtick Government to belong to Chriſts Officers in the Church only, and not to the whole body of Beleevers or Profeſſours, taken from the names and denominations, importing power and authority of Government given by the Spirit of God in Scripture to the Officers, but never to the people, then to them in contradiſtinction to the people. And all that he has ſaid as is it is but weak in it ſelf (as we truſt we have made evident) ſo he has therein paſſed by a great part of the Argument, having neglected ſundrie of theſe Titles, and altogether miskenned the Paſſages of Scripture, which by Preſbyterians uſe to be produced for them, and are urged upon the point as containing much ground for their Doctrine, beſides the names or titles given therein to the Officers. I humbly deſire the reader, & our Author if he will be pleaſed, to be at the pains, to conſider what M. Gilleſpy hath to this purpoſe, Aarons Rod, Book 2. c. 9. wherein he proveth that there ought to be an Eccleſiaſtical Government in the hands of the Church Officers, ſee there Arg. 1, 2, 3, 10, 11, 19, 20. But now are theſe Objections brought by the Author and as ſlightly propounded as he might, and, I may ſay, Anſwered juſt ſo; Are theſe, Iſay, all the materiall Arguments tha… he could find uſed by Preſbyterians to prove the power and authority of Eccleſiaſtick Government to be in the hands not of the people, but only of the Church Officers? I cannot think he will ſay ſo, if he has been at the pains to Read them. Why then has he paſſed others in ſilence, if he minded to give his rationall Readers ſatisfaction touching his Tenet in this Queſtion? We refer the Reader to ſee theſe touched at by the Author here, more pregnantly managed, and others beſides them, in Jus Divin. of Church Government, part. 2. c. 10, and c. 11. Sect. 2. Gul. Apollon. Conſiderat. of certain Gontrov. c. 4. Spanhem. Epiſt. to David Buchan. q. 2. Mr. Ruth. Peaceable Plea, and Due Right. Now come we to Mr. Lockiers ſecond Aſſertion.