A Little Stone Found to be Counterfeit, Treatise · Part 1 · Section 4
SECTION IV. The Authors Texts which he calls hints and ſhadows of his Doctrine.
section 1 THe firſt is, Mat. 16. on which place the Author, thus: note theſe things. 1. That Chriſt doth not ſpeak here of the Inviſible Church: For he ſpeaks of the power of the keyes, binding and looſing on earth; the Inviſible Church is the greatest part in heaven; and they which are in earth, conſidered as one with them, as one intire univerſall Body whereof Chriſt is the Head, are not capable of Viſible, and limited Diſcipline; therefore I judge we are to gather from Chriſts Words, that he ſpeaks, by way of anticipation, of that viſible order which he did purpoſe to inſtitute, after his departure, by his Apoſtles, whereof Peter was one. 2. Obſerve of what mater he ſaith this building ſhould be, viz. of ſuch as have a faith which fleſh and bloud cannot reveal, and to a body thus conſtitute is the power of the keyes, and both theſe repreſented and perſonated to us in Peter. I do not find the learned and Orthodox of latter times apply this place to the Inviſible Church, and I think I am not then a forcer of the Scripture in the ſenſe I gave of it.
section 2 Anſwer. I wonder much how this has fallen from the Authors mouth, and Pen, that he ſaith he doth not find the learned and Orthodox of latter times to apply this place to the Inviſible Church. Do not all the learned and Orthodox Writing againſt the Papiſts on the Controverſie of the Church, refute the Papiſts expounding it of the Viſible Church, and prove it to be underſtood of the Inviſible Church and every member thereof, and do not the learned Orthodox commonly Writing againſt the Arminians upon the controverſie of perſeverance, apply it to the Inviſible Church, and uſe it as one of the prime Arguments for proving the certain finall perſeverance of true Beleevers. See theſe noted on the Margin.Whittaker de Eccleſia, centies, notentur praeſertim illa loca, q 1. c 1. Eccleſia aliquando totum corpus electorum fidelium & ſanctorum ſignificat ut cùm in Symbolo dicitur, Credo Eccleſiam Catholicam; ſic in hoc loco Math. 16. 18. & c. 13. par. 1. per tot. & q. 2. c. 1. he propoundeth the Queſtion with the Papiſts thus: De Eccleſiâ in Petra aedificatâ quaeritur inter adverſarios & nos, ſitne viſibilis an inviſibilis? And part. 3. he determines according to the Proteſtant Doctrine that it is inviſibilis. &c. 2. Bellarminus dicit Calvinum non potuiſſe unum Scripturae locum proferre ubi nomen Eccleſiae inviſibili Congregationi tribueretur. Reſp. (inquit) falſum hoc eſſe—nam Eccleſia aliquan…o inviſibilem Congregationem ſignificat,—ut in hoc ipſo loco quem tractamus, Super hanc Petram aedificabo Eccleſiam meam. & q. 3. c. 2. §. 2. 2•. Adverſargumentum ſumitur ex iis locis in quibus nomen Eccleſiae experſse ponitur, ut Math. 16. 18. 1 Tim. 3. 15. in utroque loco (inquit Adverſarius) agitari de Eccleſia viſibili, & tamen ipſam veritatem audivimus aſſerentem portas inferorum non praevalituras.—Reſp. (inquit Whitt.) illam quidem Eccleſiam de qua loquitur Chriſtus—nunquam poſse deficere,—ſed quod aſſumit illam Eccleſiam, de qua loquitur Chriſtus, eſſe viſibilem, illud affirmo eſſe falſiſſimum. Here is a plain and round contradiction to M•. Lockiers note upon this place. Joan. Alſted. ſuppl. Chamier. de Eccleſ. nat. l. 1. c. 17. par. 2. Reſp. 2. Duo iſta loca (N. Math. 16. 18. 1 Tim. 3. 15.) agunt de Eccleſia Catholica & inviſibili ſeu interna quae conſtat ex ſolis bonis, neque enim Eccleſia viſibilis quae conſtat ex bonis & malis eſt fundata ſuper Petram Anton. Wall. Loc. Com. de Eccleſia militant on the queſtion, An Eccleſia poſſit errare, in Anſ. to the 2d. Obj. of Papiſts upon this place, Math 16. 18. Negamus (inquit) hunc locum eſſe intelligendum de Eccleſia viſibili ſed univerſali & inviſibili cui proprie competit haec firmitas inſuperabilis. The Orthodox in Colloq. Hagien. and Ameſius in his Coron. preſſe it as a prime place for the perſeverance of Saints. We might inſtance very many moe, but we need not; the thing is known to all acquainted in Orthodox Writers. Nay ſome eminent Papiſts themſelves have acknowledged that is ſpoken not of the Viſible Church, but of the Inviſible. Ferus. non loquitur de Eccleſiâ ut communiter ſumitur pro his qui Chriſtiani dicuntur, ſive boni ſint ſive mali, ſed de Eccleſiâ ſecundum Spiritum quae ſolos electos complectitur. So Cajetan on the ſame place, Adverſus Eccleſiam quae conſtat ex Congregatione fidelium unâ ſide, ſpe & charitate, &c.
Mr. Lockiers reaſon brought to prove that it is not ſpoken of the Church Inviſible, is but weak: which will appear the better if it be put into form (for it is ſomewhat confuſedly propounded by himſelf) as I conceive it may be thus: That Church is underſtood here which is capable of viſible & limited Diſciplin; but the Church Inviſible is not capable of this: Therefore, &c. Anſ. 1. How is the Major or firſt Propoſition proven? By inſinuation thus: He ſpeaks of the power of the keyes, binding and looſing on earth. What thence? Ergo, he ſpeaks before of ſuch a Church as is capable of viſible limited Diſcipline. If I deny the Conſequence; how will he prove it? I do not ſee it, nor think he ſhall ever be able to make it out. 2. But to paſſe the Propoſition, let's ſee the proof of the Aſſumption. The Inviſible Church is the greateſt part in Heaven, and they which are in earth as one with them, as one entire univerſall body whereof Chriſt is the Head, are not capable of, &c. Anſ. 1. That part of the univerſall Church which is in Heaven is impertinently brought on the ſtage here: Chriſt is ſpeaking of thoſe that are yet to be built, or are a building; therefore we ſay He is ſpeaking of ſuch as are on earth. 2. Albeit that part of the Inviſible Church that is on earth be not capable of viſible and limited Diſcipline, formally conſidered as ſuch, i. e. as the Inviſible Church: nor yet collectively conſidered, as one intire body: yet the Inviſible Church materially, i. e. theſe that are the Inviſible Church, being alſo a part of the Church viſible, and conſidered diſtributively in parrs, may be capable of viſible Diſcipline. David, Peter, John, and the reſt who make up the Church Inviſible, as they are alſo outward Profeſſours with others, are capable of viſible Diſcipline. O! then you will ſay, why? Are they not ſpoken of here, I will build my Church, as they are a viſible Church. Anſ. It doth not neceſſarly follow: for to perſons ſtanding under diverſe conſiderations, one thing may be attributed, according to one conſideration, and another according to another.
section 3 As to his 2d. Obſervation. 1. It is contrair in it ſelf to Truth, that the viſible Church is to conſiſt only of ſuch as have a faith (he means fidem quâ creditur, or taken ſubjectivè: for we ſhal grant it of faith quae creditur, or taken objectivè) which fleſh and blood cannot reveal, i. e. true ſaving faith. The Church may conſiſt of ſuch as have not that faith: and the Author addeth not here his qualification of ſo far as men can judge: neither can it be admitted here. 2. Qualifie it as he will, it is a meer violenting of the Text, ſundry Interpretations by diverſe have been given on theſe words: Ʋpon this Rock will I build my Church: but I think few or none ever before our Author gave ſuch an interpretation as this: The viſible Church ſhall be conſtitute only of ſuch as have true ſaving faith in them, ſo far as men can judge Certainly whether we take the Church Inviſible or the Church Viſible to be meant here under the name of the Church, Mr. Lockiers ſenſe cannot have place; For, 1. Underſtanding by the name of Church, the Church Inviſible in that ſentence, Ʋpon this Rock will I build my Church, Chriſt is not ſpeaking of gathering and conſtituting a certain incorporation or ſociety, in the ſtate and condition of ſuch an incorporation or ſociety, and how perſons, of whom it is to be made up, muſt be antecedently qualified, that they may be capable of admiſſion to be conſtituent members thereof: but ſpeaking of his own act of efficacious grace (put forth in deed with the Miniſtry of the Goſpel) upon the hearts of ſome perſons (whom he cals his Church, becauſe they are called out from amongſt the reſt of the world to himſelf) which doth not ſuppoſe them antecedently having faith, and, taking them as ſuch, ſtate them in a ſociety: But indeed is the very giving to them that faith, and ſtating them in an impregnable condition of grace and ſalvation. Whether by, this Rock, we underſtand that faith which Peter confeſſed, or Chriſt the object of that faith; or Peter himſelf conſidered in regard of his Miniſtry of the Goſpel: or the Goſpel Preached by him (as ſome of the Orthodox do) certainly this is the meaning of building the Church upon the Rock, ſuppoſing (that which I do incline moſt to, with the moſt part of Reformed Divines) that by the Church is meant the Church Inviſible 2. If by the name of the Church here be underſtood the Church Viſible, as ſome later Orthodox Divines have expounded it, namely judicious and learned Hudſon in his acurate and elaborate Vindication of the Eſſence and Ʋnity of the Catholick Viſible Church: Yet it will little avail Mr. Lockiers purpoſe. 1. Becauſe it is a particular Congregation, and the qualification of members, to be admitted thereunto, that he is ſpeaking of all along under the name of a viſible Church. But ſuppoſing this place to ſpeak of the viſible Church, it cannot be underſtood of a particular viſible Church or Congregation, but muſt of neceſſity be underſtood of the Catholick viſible Church, becauſe it is ſuch a Church as is to ſtand firm and impregnable that the gates of hell cannot prevail againſt it: but any particular Church may be prevailed againſt. 2. Taking the name of the Church ſo, here the meaning of the whole ſentence upon this Rock I will build my Church, is nothing elſe but this (as the learned Author, but now cited, well obſerveth) that the Profeſſion and Doctrine of this Truth, that the Meſſiah is already come, & that this Jeſus is the Meſſiah, & this Jeſus the Meſſiah is the Son of God, the Doctrine and confeſſion that Jeſus Chriſt is come in the fleſh, 1 Joh. 4. 2, 3. and the beleeving that I am he (ſaith Chriſt) Joh. 8. 24. is the foundation whereon the Church of the New Teſt. is to be built; out of all which nothing more can follow, as to the qualification of members of the viſible Church, of the New Teſt. then this; that when as the Jews under the Old Teſt. beleeved in an indefinite Meſſiah to come: now under the New Teſt. none can be of the Chriſtian Church, but ſuch as beleeves and confeſſes that the Meſſiah is come, &c. Now I appeal to all the Orthodox World, if Mr. Lockier his commenting upon this place be not a forcing of the Text. As for what he addeth, that to a body thus conſtitute (i. e. a Viſible Church ſo conſtitute as he hes been ſaying) is the power of the keyes given, and both theſe repreſented, and perſonated to us in Peter. To paſſe, I cannot well underſtand how it can be ſaid that the power of the keyes could be repreſented and perſonated in Peter (poſſibly the Church might be repreſented and perſonated in him) This belongeth not to our preſent Queſtion, and therefore we paſſe it now, truſting with the Lords aſſiſtance afterward to evidence that both aſſertions, viz. that the power of the keyes were given to a Church Viſible, I mean the collective Church, and ſo to it is as the ſubject, and that Peter in receiving them here did repreſent and perſonat the Church; are groundleſſe.
section 4 The next ſhadow or hint is, Rev. 11. 1, 2. And there was given me a Reed, &c. Hereupon the Author maketh much adoe. 1. He layeth down grounds by Interpreting particulars in the words. 1. Saith he, by the Temple is meant the Viſible Church, the ſtate and welfare of which, though moſt infeſted of any publick condition, ſhall not be left and ruined, but be carefully looked to and raiſed from its corruptions, intruſions, and ruines made by unſound men. This is confirmed by a Teſtimony of Marlorat, hunc in modum jubet ut Eccleſiam, &c. 2. By altar is meant, per ſynecdochen, the whole Worſhip of God, this is confirmed by the Teſtimony of the ſame Author. 3. What is meant by worſhippers is plain of it ſelf. 4. The ſtate of worſhip and worſhippers now under the Goſpel is to be meaſured, kept regulated to an exact rule. What is that (viz. rule) by the Word of God? To confirme this is brought the teſtimony of the ſame Author. 5. By the Court which is without the Temple is meant men which have only outſide Religion and devotion, but are deſtitute of the power thereof. 6. What is meant by the not meaſuring of theſe? That ſame Author (ſaith he) telleth us ne complectaris eos in ſpirituali aedificio Domini, do not imbrace them to be matter of the ſpirituall houſe, they are without, and let them be caſt out. Why? muſt not ſuch be received nor abide in the Church ſeing they have a profeſſion? Becauſe, firſt, ſaith that Author (Marlorat) the houſe is ſpirituall, holy, they are not congruous matter. Secondly, ſaith John, theſe are given to the Gentiles, i. e. (ſaith Marlorat) ipſi ſunt facti conformes gentibus incredulis, immo deteriores ſunt illis quantâlibet ſanctitatis ſpecie polleant, nam traditi ſunt in reprohum ſenſum, &c. And ſaith Mr. Lockier himſelf ſuch kind of Profeſſours and outſide Chriſtians will ſoon in times of temptations conform themſelves to the worſt of men, yea and be worſe then they, and will ſtrike in with the vileſt to tread down the holy citie, i. e. the true worſhippers in Gods Viſible Church, that have name and thing, form and power of Godlines. Then he tells that he cites Marlorat not as finding him fully of his judgement, but to ſee how he and other good men of the reformed Churches, ſpeak unawars his judgement, and cannot tell how elſe to give any life to places of Scripture. Neither can a man tell how to make themſelves agree with themſelves in their commentaries without taking them with a grain of ſalt in this maner. After all theſe grounds laid down, he inferreth upon the whole this concluſion, that perſons profeſſing meerly the things of God are not approved and allowed mater by the Lord in a Viſible Church, they are ſuch as he doth not meaſure, embrace for his building; they are ſuch as are fit to deſtroy, not to build the holy City. And theſe Chriſt not allowing of them, nor meaſuring of them: but caſting them by, and will do if we do not; how then we can, but at our perill, both in order to God, and order to ſuch men, imbrace them I know not. Thus he upon this place.
section 5 Anſ. 1. Here a word or two in the generall. Firſt, I ſay, Mr. Lockier doth confidently enough (to ſay no more) but very poorly, with bare aſſertions without the leaſt proof triumph over theſe good men (as he calls them, hinting as it ſeemeth, that tho good, yet they were not very deep nor diſcerning, at leaſt in this matter) of the reformed Churches, as ſpeaking his opinion unawars, and not able to expound Scriptures elſe, and as contradicting and claſhing againſt themſelves, unleſſe a grain of his Interpretation be allowed them; Parcius iſta viris. Who are theſe good men in the Reformed Churches that have ſpoken unawars his opinion concerning the conſtitution of the Viſible Church? I wiſh he had named the men and deſigned the place where they ſay it; Nay were it not we are unwilling this peece ſhould grow too big, we could produce of theſe good men, who have directly and ſolidely refuted Mr. Lockiers Tenet, as he hath it, in ancient Anab…ptiſts. He would have done well alſo to have pointed us to ſome of theſe places of Scripture which they could not tell how to give life to, without complyance with his Tenet, and ſome of thoſe ſeeming contradictions in their commentaries, which cannot be agreed without that graine he ſpeaketh of; untill he do this, we muſt account what is ſpoken by him here, but groundleſſe and empty boaſting.
2. That in the whole diſcourſe upon this place Mr. Lockier ſpeaks ſo, as that he cannot be Interpret, but to hold none to be members of the Viſible Church, but ſuch as are endued with true ſaving grace and the power of Godlineſſe in veritate rei: He never once in it mentioneth that qualification, ſo far as men can judge: Yea, his expreſſions are ſuch as cannot poſſiblie admit it, as will appear in following the particulars; To which now we come.
section 6 We begin with ſome notes upon the concluſion. 1. I aske here what he underſtands by meer profeſſing the things of God? Whether ſuch profeſſing, as is oppoſite to, and deſtitute of, even morall and ordinary ſeriouſneſſe, which may ſometimes be without an inward ſaving worke of grace; yea or outward convincing poſitive evidences of it: Or as it is oppoſite unto an inward ſaving work? If he meant the former, he ſhall not have us to contradict his concluſion; we ſhall grant him that ſuch as have not ſo much as an ordinary morally ſerious profeſſion, ſuch as evidently profeſſe the things of God hiſtrionically, mockingly, manifeſtly purpoſing to deceive, are neither allowed of Chriſt, nor to be admitted by men as mater of the Viſible Church. If he ſay the other, and ſo that none are to be admitted into the Viſible Church, but ſuch as beſide profeſſion, have alſo really true, inward, ſaving grace, he putteth the Church upon an impoſſibility; and in this will be diſclaimed by all the judicious of his way. If it ſhall be ſaid, it may be he meaneth neither, but ſuch a profeſſion as is oppoſite to poſitive convincing evidences of grace to the judgement of diſcerning men, and ſo far as they can judge. I ſay, 1. This is not ſaid by himſelf there, nay, he cannot ſay it and hold to all what he ſaith here. Why? becauſe ſome may be ſuch, as far as men can judge, and yet ſuch as Chriſt will caſt out, yea, and hath caſten out: and men may be ſuch and yet fit to deſtroy the holy City. 2. Perſons may be ſuch as are not approved and allowed mater by the Lord in the Viſible Church, and yet the Church may admit them into the Church, without any perill in order to God, i. e. without ſinning by admitting them: as for inſtance, Simon Magus. If he ſay he meanes not here the Lords not approving & not allowing perſons ſimpliciter and in point of their duty, but in relation to Eccleſiaſtick proceeding with them, in foro exteriore; he ſhall not have us diſſentient from him about this in the generall. But himſelf hath never this diſtinction of the Lords approving or not approving, when from it at any time he reaſoneth to the admitting or not admitting of ſuch perſons. Yea for ought that can be perceived along this Peece, he ſeemeth alwayes to ſpeak of Gods approbation or not-approbation of perſons in point of their own dutie & ſimpliciter. But now to put the moſt candid conſtruction and Interpretation upon his concluſion, let it be ſo, that by mater not approven and not-allowed of the Lord in the Viſible Church is meant not-approved and not-allowed (no ſimpliciter) but in relation to Eccleſiaſtick proceeding, in foro exteriore: and by perſons meerly profeſſing, be meant perſons not truely gracious (not of neceſſity in truth of exiſtence, but) at leaſt ſo far as men can diſcern and judge. Come we now to ſee what ſhadow of this point is in the Scripture alledged here: I ſhall go through the grounds laid down from it in order.
section 7 To the firſt, …t hath ſome ſhew of contradiction. that he ſaith, 1. That the Viſible Church ſhall not be left and ruined; and then again that it ſhall be raiſed from its ruines made by unſound men. If he ſay that in the former he means utter and laſting ruine, and in the latter, ruine in part and for a time: Well, that would have been expreſſed, ſo it appears not well how this ſaid here, the ſtate and welfare of the Viſible Church ſhall not be left and ruined, can conſiſt with that ſaid, pag. 11. that the inſtitution of Chriſt was ſo corrupted in the firſt Churches, that Chriſt did write Loammi upon them, and that quickly after the Apoſtles dayes. But I would ask here the Author, what he means by the Viſible Church, that ſhall not be left and ruined? Whether any one particular Congregation or the Catholick Viſible Church? If the Catholick Viſible Church, I ſhall grant that the ſtate and welfare thereof though never ſo much infeſted ſhall not be left and ruined utterly: But I doubt much if Mr. Lockier will acknowledge ſuch a Viſible Church: ſure I am, theſe of his way, are very averſe from acknowledging it, (though it be a thing moſt certain and clear in the Word of God) becauſe indeed the granting of it undermines all the frame of their Independent way: Yea and he himſelf all along his Peece, treating of the mater of the Viſible Church, ſpeaks of a Viſible Church, which is nothing elſe but a particular Congregation. If he mean any one particular Congregation (which is moſt ſuteable to his way) I ſee not how it can be truely ſaid that it ſhall not be left and ruined; ſure, we find no promiſe in the Word for this, and the experience of many particular Churches that have been ruined utterly and never raiſed again, proves the contrary. 2. He ſaith, that by the Temple in that place Rev. 11. is meant the Viſible Church, and doth no more but ſay it▪ that which is alledged from Marlorat *Note the paſſages cited out of Marlo. here, by Mr. Lockier, and to be cited by us, are not all Marlorats own words: yet becauſe they are by him gathered from others, they may be accompted his by approbatiō & ſo be conveniently cited under his name.maketh nothing for this. This Author only ſaith, hunc in modum jubet ut Eccleſiam Joannes metiatur, &c. but ſaith not, Eccleſiam Viſibilem. Nay, it may appear evidently to any attentive Reader, that this Author all along his comentary upon the place in hand, underſtands by the name of the Church, the Church Inviſible, the ſociety of the Elect true Beleevers, who are Chriſts Myſticall body. See eſpecially theſe paſſages *…. On theſe words & datus eſt mihi] he calls them pios Dei cultores, item electos. 2. On theſe atrium quod, &c.] calls them Eccleſiam de qua non ſunt haeretici & hypocritae, quanquam in ea verſari vidcantur, and cites for clearing thereof, 1 Joh. 2. 19. which all Orthodox againſt Arminians, on the point of perſeverance, expounds of the elect and truly gracious, i. e. the Church inviſible. 3. On theſe & ne metiaris illud] calls it ſpirituale aedificium quod nunquam corruere poterit, and diſtinguiſheth ſuch from theſe that are caſten out, as elect from reprobates.noted in the Margin. But let it be ſo, that by the Temple is meant the Viſible Church, we conceive this may well be meant, and the differencing and diſtinguiſhing thereof from the Antichriſtian Synagogue falſly arrogating to themſelves the title and priviledges of the Church. Go we on then to ſee what the Author out of this, and what followes, will make out for his point.
section 8 For the 2d. ground: Albeit by the Altar ſome learned and Godly commentators, as namely Paraeus, underſtand Chriſt: Yet let it be, as the Author ſaith, that thereby is meant by a Synecdoche the whole Worſhip of God, and paſſing the third. As to the fourth, I would firſt inquire why the Author ſaith by way of reſtriction that the worſhip and worſhippers now under the Goſpel are to be meaſured, and kept regulated to an exact rule, viz. the Word of God? What, were not the worſhip and worſhippers under the Old Teſt. alſo to be meaſured, and kept regulated to the Word of God? Were theſe things then left looſe to be diſpoſed on and ordered at mens pleaſure? I wot not well what this reſtriction means; but ſure I am it looks ill-favouredly: The Author will do well to clear himſelf in it. 2. But how will he prove, that which he only takes here for granted, that the intention of the Spirit of God in this Scripture is to hold forth a generall rule concerning the outward conſtitution of the Viſible Church, as to the mater thereof, and how members ought to be qualified for admiſſion to it, and not rather in a Propheticall viſion, to fortell what was to come to paſſe de facto concerning the Church-worſhip, and adherers to the true worſhip; ſundry learned Interpreters conceive that this latter is the intention and purpoſe of this viſion, that the true Church, the true worſhip of God, and the worſhippers after that true maner of worſhip of God inſtituted by himſelf, was to be brought to great ſtraits, obſcurity, and paucitie, in compariſon of the falſe and Antichriſtian Church, worſhip, and worſhippers; and that this is meant by the meaſuring with the Rod, and not the regulating of the ſtate of the Church, and qualification of members. See both Brightman and Merhiſton vponupon the place. But 3. Grant the meaning of the place to be, as if the Spirit had ſaid to John, hold forth dogmatically that the Church (as to its conſtitution) the worſhip, and ſuch as are to be acknowledged worſhippers, are to be regulated by the rule of the Word of God (which we deny not in the generall) then I ask what is that particular rule held forth in the Word by which perſons are to be regulated, and diſcerned in relation to their admiſſion to fellowſhip of outward worſhipping?
section 9 He goeth about to make this manifeſt in the fifth and ſixth grounds we marked laid down by him, to which, and what is ſaid by him in the following forth thereof, we repone theſe things. 1. The Court which is without (or as ſome others read, within) and to be caſten out; others underſtand far otherwayes, not of perſons, but of the outward and viſible face and ſtate of the Church; and by the caſting of it out, rejecting, caſting off care of it, and giving of it over for a time, viz. of Antichriſts power and prevalency to be poſſeſſed by Antichriſtian and idolatrous people, becauſe of their following and practiſing heatheniſh-like wayes and idolatrie: So Merhiſton. And certainly it is very likely that the Court here cannot denotate perſons, I mean profeſſours to be caſten out of the Viſible Church; becauſe it is ſaid to be given to the heathen, and theſe heathen are theſe very perſons, that are ſaid to be caſten out. The Interpretation in Marlorat is exceeding harſh, and hath no probability in congruity of ſpeech, to wit, to caſt out hypocrites and idolaters, i. e. the Court, becauſe it is given to the heathen. 1. Becauſe they are become like the infidel heathens. Where ſhall we finde the like ſpeech, that perſons are ſaid to be given unto ſuch and ſuch perſons becauſe they are become like unto them. 2. But grant, by this Court perſons are meant, and that by not meaſuring of them is meant not imbraceing of them, but caſting them out. How doth Mr. Lockier prove, that theſe perſons are all ſuch as have but an outſide of worſhip, and are deſtitute of the power of Religion, even albeit their Religion be true and right objectively, and in the nature and kinde of it; and their profeſſion morally ſerious. This he muſt not only affirm, but prove, if he would ſay any thing convincingly to the point he taketh in hand to deduce. What if I ſhall ſay, not ſuch perſons, but Antichriſtian, idolatrous perſons are underſtood hereby? What can he bring from the Text, or reaſon to prove what he ſaith? 3. Let's ſee his reaſons he bringeth to ſhew that ſuch as have only an outſide worſhip, Religion, and devotion, but are deſtitute of the power thereof are not to be imbraced as mater of the Viſible Church, but held out or caſt out. The 1. is brought from Marlorat, becauſe the houſe, ſaith he, is ſpirituall, and holy, they are not congruous mater, ne complectaris eos in ſpirituali aedificio Domini. Anſ. 1. That ſpirituall houſe or aedifice Marlorat ſpeaks of, is the true Church Inviſible, ſpirituali aedificio Domini quod nunquam corruere poterit: Mr. Lockier has ſlipped theſe words. 2. Marlorat comprehends under theſe that are the Court, all the reprobate mixed with the Elect, tho they were even as guilded hypocrites, as of whom it may be ſaid (which Mr. Lockier ſaith) they are true converts as far as men can judge; as is evident all along. 3. Marlorat ſpeaks not of caſting them out of viſible ſocietie with the ſpirituall houſe of the Elect, by Diſciplinarie ejection of ſingular perſons diſtinctly, (but by Doctrinall conviction, and denunciation of deſtruction againſt them) except in the caſe of evidently manifeſted rebellion or obſtinacy. So he upon theſe words, & adorantes in eo] quando hypocritarum magna ſemper fuit copia in mundo, & reprobi electis nunquam non permixti fuerunt, Paſtoris munus eſt, quo ad fieri poteſt, inter utroſque diſcernere, ut pios Dei cultores, verbi Dei pabulo paſcat, exhortetur, conſoletur, foveat; reliquos ad Dei tribunal citet, & extremúm illis exitium Dei nomine pronunciet (all this is but Doctrinall not terminat ad ſignata individua, (as they call them) i. e. to definite ſingular perſons) at que etiamſi ſe prorſus rebelles prodiderint impii, publicâ autoritate coerceantur & à …aetu reliquorum ejiciantur. All this we grant willingly, yet without any advantage to Mr. Lockier. 2. Reaſ. Why muſt theſe out-court-Chriſtians not be taken in? Why, John ſaith, thoſe are given to the Gentiles, i. e. ſaith Marlorat, ipſi facti ſunt conformes gentibus incredulis, &c. Anſ. 1. As we ſaid before it is altogether improbable that by the Court is meant perſons, but a thing, and it ſeemeth to be a moſt forced ſenſe, and without example, given up to the Gentiles, i. e. they are become like the Gentiles. Next we ſay it is moſt evident from the end of this ver. that the Spirit ſpeaks not theſe words as a rule preſcribing what he or others ſhould do in governing the Church; but as a prediction of ſomewhat that was to come to paſſe, this I ſay is evident by the deſignation of the circumſtance of the time or duration of that which is ſpoken of in the end of the verſ. But 2ly. Mr. Lockier ſuppoſeth two things which he mainly ſhould have proven, that the outer-court-Chriſtians are all that have not the power of Godlineſſe in their heart, though their profeſſion and practice in Religion be objectively right and true, and ſubjectively ſerious. 2. That caſting them out and not meaſuring them muſt be underſtood of Diſciplinarie ejection, upon that very account that they have not the power of Godlineſſe. 3. As to that he addeth himſelf ſuch kind of Profeſſours will ſoon in times of temptations, &c. 'tis true, they may be ready to do ſo; but tell me, will not even ſome ſuch fine, well guilded Profeſſours, who may ſeem as far as men can judge to have the power of Godlineſſe in their heart, be ſuch as will be ready ſoon to do the ſame? Yes; becauſe when all is done they may be but outſide Profeſſours. Simon Magus, Hymeneus, and Alexander muſt have been at their reception into the Church, by Mr. Lockiers principles, ſuch as were true converts ſo far as men could judge; yet we ſee them ready ſoon to conform themſelves to the worſt of men. Thus, I humbly conceive, we have made it clear that Mr. Lockier hath little ground for his doctrine from this Text, moſt part of the pillars of his diſcourſe being meer ſuppoſitions, taken for granted, but having no light of proof from the words, as alſo that he had as little cauſe to boaſt of Marlorats complying with it unawars.
section 10 The 3d. and laſt ſhadow or hint is, Rev. 4. Which whole Chapter is taken up to ſhew the ſtate of the holy City fore-mentioned; and in the 1. verſ. obſerve. John is taken up to Heaven to have the frame of this new building given him. After this I looked, and behold a door was opened in Heaven, and the firſt voice which I heard—which ſaid come up hither, and I will ſhew thee things which muſt be hereafter. And immediatly I was in the Spirit, and behold a Throne was ſet in Heaven, &c. Moſes had his patern upon the Mount nigh Heaven, not in Heaven. And yet ſome very learned men think that even that was teaching what that people ſhould be which walked in that firſt houſe, perſons really very nigh Heaven, with which compare, Ezek. 44. 7. But John hath his patern given him in Heaven, to ſhadow that this Temple, Altar, worſhippers ſhould all indeed be from above, and ſuch as ſhould indeed have an internall conſecration, and the Law given into the mind, as the Author to the Hebrews ſaith, and made Jews inwardly, a holy Nation, according to inward call and choiſe, and ſo a ſpirituall Prieſthood.
section 11 Anſw. 1. Here again we are to mark the Concluſion that Mr. Lockier would be at, touching the mater of the Viſible Church, ſuch as are all indeed from above, as have indeed an internall conſecration, the Law given into the mind, made Jews inwardly, an holy Nation, according to inward choiſe and call. Here indeed is an Anabaptiſticall model of the Viſible Church, all reall ſaints, and not in the judgement of charity only. Mr, Lockiers ſo far as ſpirituall men can judge, as it is wholly left out by himſelf, ſo it cannot well be admitted to have any place here. 1. Becauſe he ſaith they are all indeed from above, and have indeed an internall conſecration, that indeed I think to every mans apprehenſion noteth veritatem rei in ſe, or judicio veritatis (as they call it) as contradiſtinguiſhed a judicio charitatis of ſpirituall men. 2. Becauſe that place, Heb. 8. 10. cited from Jer. 31. 33. brought in by him for confirmation of his purpoſe, he is ſpeaking of, (of the impertinency whereof to the purpoſe in hand, I mean, the conſtitution of the Viſible Church, we ſhall ſpeak preſently) ſpeaketh of truth and reality of grace in the heart, I may ſay, in the very judgement of God himſelf under which there is no poſſibility of miſtake; But to the grounds he goeth upon from this Text. 2. He taketh for granted, that this whole Chapter is taken up to ſhew the ſtate of the Viſible Church in its conſtitution, as ſuch, and that it is the Spirits intention in the viſion ſet down in it, to give unto John a patern thereof to be a rule to him and others then, and ſucceeding ages, for regulating the conſtitution of it, and particularly in the point of Church-members; but why did he not aſſay ſome proofe of this: Muſt we take every thing upon his bare aſſertion? 'Tis true, Learned Brightman in his commentary conceiveth that this viſion containeth a common Type of the holy Church in all ages. But 1. In all the progreſſe of his commentarie on that Chapter, I find not any evident paſſage pointing at any particular in the viſion, as a patern, type, or rule, concerning the qualification of ſuch as are to be admitted in the external fellowſhip of the Viſible Church, as the homogeneall parts of the outward viſible body. 2. Though I will not ſtay here to examine the intent of all the particulars in that viſion, and though I eſteem much of the judgement of that learned and pious man; yet in the generall, I muſt ſay, I find no convincing argument, nor much appearance of any argument at all brought by him to prove that the intent of the viſion was to give John a patern, a certain portraicture or reſemblance of the Church, whereby we might know which is ſhe. Yea albeit I confeſſe ſundry particulars in the viſion are things of the Church (in the Interpretation whereof I would not much diſagree from Brightman) yet I think he is miſtaken in taking that for the generall intent and purpoſe of the viſion: and conceives that John being now to receive a new Propheticall Revelation concerning theſe things that were to come to paſſe in and upon the Church from that time to the end of the World, ver. 1. fin. The intention of the viſion of this Chapter is to deſcribe and ſet forth the Glory and Majeſty of God the Father, the firſt Author of the Propheſie, as in the next Chapter is deſcribed the Son the Mediatour and ſubordinate Author thereof, as it is ordinary when the Lord is to communicate to his Prophets, and by them to the Church, Propheticall Revelations of great things to come to paſſe concerning the Church, to preſent by way of preparation ſome glorious repreſentation of himſelf, as we may ſee, Eſay 6. and Ezek. 1. See theſe words of the learned and judicious Gomarus upon that Chapter, on the Margin*Sequitur (to wit from v. 2.) deſcriptio Authoris Coeleſtis, partim ratione viſaeillius Majeſtatis, partim praeceptae honorationis ejuſdem. Cujus deſcriptionis ſcopus eſt primum commendatio apocalypſeos ex Authore Caeleſti, deinde Eccleſiae in fide & timore Dei ac patientia confirmatio ex Majeſtate & honoratione illius promanante. Quae deſcribuntur opportune, nam revelandum eſt hoc libro myſterium ſtatus Eccleſiae afflictiſſimae &c. ſo Gomar.. And certainly had it been the purpoſe of the Spirit, by this viſion to hold forth a patern, portraicture, and reſemblance of the true Church common to all ages, leaſt becauſe of troubles and diſturbances, we ſhould either think it utterly extinguiſhed, or at leaſt through ignorance of her right form and figure, we ſhould be leſſe able to know which is ſhe (as Mr. Brightman ſaith) it ſeemeth the wiſedom of the Spirit of God would have portraicted the figure and form of the Church in theſe things that are moſt ſubſtantiall in the conſtitution of it, ſo as Chriſtians of ordinary capacitie might been able to diſcern & take up the true Church by; but Mr. Brightman himſelf is even troubled to find what things are meant by every particular in the viſion. And in ſome he bringeth but meer conjectures, yea and likely is miſtaken, as, could we ſtay, might be very probably ſhown; as for example, in his Expoſition of the ſea of Glaſſe like Chriſtall before the Throne. 3. But what is the particular in the viſion from which Mr. Lockier deduceth his concluſions? this, viz. that it was in Heaven he ſaw it, a door was opened in Heaven and the Throne was ſet in Heaven, this, ſaith he, was to ſhadow that the—worſhippers ſhould be indeed from above, &c. and to make it the ſtronger, it is confirmed by a compariſon of what was done with Moſes, Moſes had his patern upon the Mount nigh Heaven, &c. Anſw. 1. Here is a thing begged for a ground, that as Moſes was taken up to the Mount to get a patern of theſe things, which he was to appoint in the ancient Church, ſo Iohn is here taken up to get a patern of the Viſible Church, and the things to be ordered in it under the New Teſt. This, I ſay, is groundleſly ſuppoſed: For theſe things that were to be done by Moſes were but now a inſtituting, and to be firſt ſet up: and therefore it was neceſſary that he ſhould have a patern of them repreſented to him to regulate him; but ere the time of this revelation, Chriſt had fully inſtituted all particulars belonging to the Church of the New Teſtament, and many Churches through the World, were already actually ſetled and ordered according to that inſtitution, and beſide ſundry of the Books of the New Teſt. written, wherein the inſtitution and rule was already plainly written down, and this indeed is one reaſon which inclineth me to think that the ſcope and intention of the Spirit in this viſion was not to give a patern, and portraicture, or modell of the Viſible Church for the time to come. 2. As to that alledged meaning of Moſes receiving his patern near Heaven, viz. to ſhew of what qualification the people, i. e. the members of the ancient Viſible Church ſhould be, (viz. in foro exteriori, ſo muſt he underſtand it, if he ſpeak to the purpoſe in hand) I will not trouble my ſelf to inquire who may be theſe very learned men that ſay ſo. But the thing it ſelf is but a conjecture: and I deſire Mr. Lockier concerning this, and the expounding of Heaven here, to remember the axiome acknowledged by Schoole-men themſelves, otherwiſe doting on allegories, theologia ſymbolica non eſt Argumentativa, except where the Spirit of God himſelf openeth the ſignification. 3. I deſire to know what Mr. Lockier meaneth by perſons really living very near Heaven, if truely gracious, then what difference between thoſe, and theſe afterward brought in with an adverſative oppoſing them to the former, and why did he propound his Doctrine with a reſtriction to the time of the Goſpel? 4. That patern which Moſes had ſhown to him in the Mount, according to which he was commanded to make, did not concern the conſtitution of the body of the then Viſible Church, of what, and how qualified perſons it was to be made up. But was a patern of the Tabernacle and the things pertaining to it, Exod. 25. 9. 40. S. The place, Ezek. 44. 7. referred as ſpeaking of the ordinary members of the then Viſible Church is not to the purpoſe, for it ſpeaks of ſuch as were admitted to the Prieſts Office. See Junius and Paraeus in locum. 5. As impertinently, and much more impertinently is the place of Heb. 8. 10. cited from Ier. 31. 33. brought into this diſcourſe concerning the Viſible Church, and the mater thereof. I appeal to all judicious Chriſtians in the World, and to Mr. Lockier himſelf in ſecond ſerious thoughts, if that Scripture was intended to be a rule of conſtituting Congregations: Or if it be not a declaration or revelation of Gods purpoſe and Decree what he is to do himſelf by his efficacious grace; and if that Covenant and the promiſes thereof belongeth not in the fulfilling thereof only to the Lords elect.