A Little Stone Found to be Counterfeit, Treatise · Part 1 · Section 6
SECTION VI. Examination of Mr. Lockyers proofs brought under the name of reaſon.
section 1 HIs reaſons are four, which, becauſe they ly looſe out of form and are ſomewhat prolixely pro pounded, I ſhall labour to take up the ſtrength of them, as far as I can ſee, ingenuouſly, in form, that we may both with the more ſhortneſſe, and clearneſſe, to the greater ſatisfaction of the Reader, conſider and anſwer them.
section 2 The firſt reaſon, ſo far as I can poſſibly ſee; may be formed into theſe proceſſes. 1. The Church Viſible is a building, whereof Jeſus Chriſt is the Rock and foundation: Therefore the whole Viſible Church and all parts of it, conſiſt of ſuch perſons as muſt be, and bear upon him as a ſuperſtruction, foreign, ſuperſtructi, Eph. 2. 20. And muſt be among themſelves an uniforme, congruous building foreign, v. 22. ſo as they may ſtand. Then ſuppoſing that conſequent this will be the ſecond proceſſe; But ſuch perſons as have not true ſaving faith, ſuch as Peters, cannot hold and bear upon Chriſt, nor can they make up an uniforme, congruous building that will ſtand; how can the building ſtand, whoſe materials have not a ſymmetry, but antilog…, and antiſtaſie, not an agreement, but a fighting with the foundation and one another, Ergo, they are not fit materials to conſtitute the Viſible Church. Anſ. Truely this reaſon, let me ſay it without offence, is a building that cannot ſtand, let a man but touch it, as it were with his finger, and it will to the ground. 1. If it prove any thing, it proveth not only, that de jure the Viſible Church ought to be conſtitute of materials or members, truely endued with ſaving grace and faith; but alſo it is no true Viſible Church which doth not de facto conſiſt of materials all ſuch, i. e. truely in veritate rei endued with true ſaving grace and faith, and then likely there was never in the world a true Viſible Chriſtian Church, unleſſe it was that of the eleven after that Judas hanged himſelf, or may be that Acts 1. nor ever ſhall be in the world. For ſuppoſe a Church conſiſting of members all which may be accounte… truely gracious ſo far as men can judge; yet ſeeing mens judgements herein are not infallible; ſome of them, many of them, yea moſt of them, are not indeed truely gracious and believers; Then ſay I, according to Mr. Lockiers reaſoning here, how can theſe bear and hold upon Chriſt who have no faith? And how can that building ſtand whoſe materials have not a ſymmetrie, &c. Let men judge of them what they will, and how probably ſoever, that helps not; for they want the bond by which they ſhould bear upon Chriſt, and they have no ſymmetrie one with another. 2. 'Tis grounded upon a meer miſtake or falſe ſuppoſition that the building built upon Chriſt as a Rock and foundation, Eph. 2. 20, 21. is the Viſible Church as ſuch: Mr. Lockier ſaith well, that it is confeſſed on all hands, that Chriſt is the Rock and foundation ſtone; but he could not ſay it is agreed upon by all that the Church Viſible is the building that is ſaid to be built upon that foundation growing up into a holy Temple, &c. Papiſts indeed ſay it is the Viſible Church, that they may draw all the priviledges of the Church Inviſible, which is the Myſticall body of Chriſt, to the Church viſible; and by that means at leaſt to their own ſtinking whore the Antichriſtian Roman Synagogue: But Orthodox Proteſtant Divin… have ever maintained the contrary, that it is the Catholick Inviſible Church of the elect that is the building built upon Chriſt as the Rock and foundation ſtone (ſee Whittaker de Eccleſ. in many places known to any that hath read him) untill of late Separatiſts and Independents have joyned with Papiſts in this, and drawn all the priviledges, proper to the Church Inviſible, which is the Myſticall body of Chriſt, unto every Independent viſible Congregation. Mr. Lockier ſhould have proven, and not meerly taken for granted, that the Viſible Church is the building built upon Chriſt as the foundation-ſtone, ſeeing he knew that it was denyed generally by Proteſtant Divines. The Viſible Church, according to its viſible ſtate is not the building, but the work houſe wherein the ſtones are fitted for to be laid in the building and built up. 3. Mr. Lockier ſuppoſeth in this Argument that the Viſible Church, i. e. a particular Independent Congregation muſt be a ſtanding faſt, laſting houſe, quae non deficiat, which is not to fail, and that perpetuity is the priviledge and property of it, in this alſo joyning with Papiſts, againſt whom all Proteſtant Divines maintain that to belong only to the Church of the elect, or if to the Church Viſible, not to any particular, but to the univerſall. We grant then that any Church Viſible is defectible and may indeed fall, and that even upon that ground amongſt others that there is not an uniformity and homogeneouſneſſe amongſt all parts of it, ſome are of the ſeed of the Woman, really good; ſome be, at the beſt, ſeemingly good, and really bad, and the ſeed of the Serpent (and Mr. Lockiers way will not make it to be otherwayes) and we confeſſe that it is by the finger of God, that any Church is any long ſpace kept ſtanding: Yet God will keep Viſible Churches ſtanding, for all the aſymmetry and heterogeneouſneſſe of members amongſt themſelves (as to their inward, ſpirituall, eternall ſtate) ſo long as he has a work for gathering and building up his elect amongſt them, for whoſe ſake it is that a Viſible Church and his Ordinances therein are ſet up. You will ſay, but doth not God this by means? Anſ: yea verily he uſeth means which he bleſſeth and maketh effectuall for that end, to the keeping down of the evills that are in many and would be ready to break out to the undoeing of all, as long as he ſees meet; as the Preaching of the Word, exerciſe of Diſcipline againſt ſcandals; but God never preſcribed this as a means for keeping up Viſible Churches that no perſons ſhould be admitted or permitted to be in the Viſible Church, but ſuch as are ſymmetricall and homogeneall in true ſaving grace. This is a means altogether unpracticable by men, unleſſe God by an immediat revelation ſhould point out the men.
section 3 Mr. Lockier for the ſtrengthning of this firſt reaſon bringeth in 1 Cor. 3. from verſ. 10. thus: Chriſt (ſayeth he, it ſhould be Paul) doth argue from this medium, that ſuitable to the foundation ſhould be the building: otherwiſe ſuch uncongruous ſuperſtructions will be fired and they which make them, verſ. 10, 11, 12, 13.—in which words the Apoſtle argues as I do, that if Chriſt be laid as the Foundation-Stone in a building, 'tis good for men to take heed that they make congruous ſuperſtructions, leaſt all the building fall about their ears: and ſee how he applyeth this verſ. 16, 17. incongruous ſuperſtructions if it be in point of Doctrine, it maketh incongruous matter, it defileth the Temple of God, deſtroyes it, ſayeth the margent; and ſuch will God deſtroy; for the Temple of God (ſayeth he) is holy, which Temple ye are, i. e. ſuch are the Temple which are holy, which have the Spirit of God dwelling in their heart, and none elſe. Anſ. 1. I profeſſe I cannot forbear to ſay that I find Mr. Lockier abuſe much Scripture in the little bounds of this Peece, by moſt impertinent Citations. What is there in this place to the purpoſe of the conſtitution of the Viſible Church as to its matter or Members? the Apoſtle here ver. 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15. is ſpeaking of Doctrines fundamentall and ſuperſtructed, and that theſe ought to be ſuitable and agreeable to that, what is this to the mater of the Viſible Church? Ay, Yes, by Analogie would he ſay firſt, becauſe the Apoſtle uſeth the ſame medium and argues as I do, that if Chriſt be layed as a foundation, &c. Anſ. And muſt that hold Univerſallie? becauſe one uſing a medium in one mater reaſons truelie and ſolidlie, therefore another uſing that medium in another mater and reaſoning that ſame way for forme, muſt alſo reaſon truelie and ſolidelie? What if this other erre in the application of the medium, and if ſome of his premiſſes and principles, whereof his argument conſiſts, be falſe upon the matter? ſo it is here: The Apoſtle reaſoneth well and concludently upon that principle, that the ſuperſtructure ſhould be ſuitable to the foundation that Teachers ſhould take heed what Doctrines they teach in the Church; Becauſe he aſſumeth well that Chriſt or the Doctrine of Chriſt is the foundationpoint of Doctrine in Religion, and all other Doctrines are the ſuperſtructures; But Mr. Lockier aſſumeth amiſſe that the Viſible Church as ſuch, is the ſuperſtructure built upon Chriſt as the Foundation. The Scripture ſayeth no where ſo, a Viſible Church-ſtate, or to be received unto, or to be in the Viſible Church ſtate, is not to be built on Chriſt as a Foundation, but is to be taken in under, or to be under the means of being built, either firſt or in a further degree of advancement, on Chriſt as a Foundation. But further (ſayeth he) ſee how he applyes this, ver. 16, 17. incongruous ſuperſtructions, if in point of Doctrine, &c. Anſ. This is ſomewhat ſpoken in the miſt, but for ought I can conjecture or conceive, the meaning ſeemeth to be this; that wrong Doctrines taught in the Church makes perſons unholy, and ſo unfit mater for the Church to conſiſt of; and ſo deſtroyes or defiles the Temple of God, which is, as he conceiveth, the Viſible Church. And thus he will have the Apoſtle, v. 16, 17. to apply that which he had been ſpeaking in the preceeding verſes. Now if this be not a forceing of the purpoſe and meaning of theſe two verſes, let any underſtanding man in the Chriſtian World judge. The plain, genuine intention and purpoſe of the Apoſtle in theſe verſes is, to warne and dehort the Corinthians from defiling and laying waſte the Church, either by corrupt, idle, or curious Doctrine not ſuitable to the foundation Chriſt; or by Schiſmaticall addicting themſelves to this or that man who were teachers among them (which was the purpoſe whereupon he began this diſcourſe, v. 4.) or both; and that upon theſe three grounds. 1. The conſideration of the dignity they were advanced to, that they were the Temple of God, conſecrated by the indwelling Spirit to him. 2. That ſuch things did defile, and lay them waſte. 3. That God would ſeverly puniſh ſuch as any wayes defiled and deſtroyed them that were a Temple conſecrated to him. Ay but, 3. Saith he, it is added, for the Temple of God is holy, which Temple ye are, i. e. ſuch ar… …he Temple of God which are holy, which hath the Spirit of God dwelling in their hearts, and none elſe. Anſ. 1. Mr. Lockier then conceiveth that theſe words are brought in as a reaſon why he that teacheth wrong or incongruous Doctrines defiles or deſtroyes the Temple of God: To this ſenſe, the Viſible Church conſiſts of ſuch as are holy, and hes the Spirit dwelling in them and none elſe, therefore men by teaching incongruous Doctrine, making men in the Church incongruous mater, i. e. unholy, deſtroyes the Temple, i. e. the Viſible Church. A meer forgerie contrary to clear ſhining evidence of the Apoſtles context, wherein any man that is not blind may ſee that theſe words for the Temple of God is holy, are given as a reaſon why theſe that defile the Temple will be ſeverly puniſhed of God; the reaſon of which conſequence clearly intimate in the words is, becauſe God will not indure the defiling or violating of that which is holy and conſecrate to himſelf. 2. True indeed, ſuch are the Temple of God which are holy and none elſe? So Mr. Lockier ſuppoſeth, but without reaſon or proof. Sure, the Apoſtle borroweth this deno…ation from the typicall Temple of Jeruſalem, but that was no type of a Viſible Church, but of Chriſts Myſticall body and every member thereof. And hence I reaſon thus, the denomination of the Temple of God is ſuch as is competent to, and predicable of theſe to whom it is attributed, not only collectively, i. e. to the whole ſociety of them; but alſo unto every one ſeverally*Martyr in loc. non ſolum fidelium caetus, qui Eccleſia dicitur, templum Dei dicitur; ſed unuſquiſque credentium in Chriſtum reperitur ita cognominatus; nam poſtea de fornicatione agens Apoſt… lus (cap. 6.) corpus cujuſque credentis vocat templum ſpiritus Sancti.: But if it be taken for the Viſible Church it could not be attributed to every member thereof: Every one in it is not a Viſible Church. 3. If ſuch only be the Temple of God in Mr. Lockiers ſenſe, i. e. a Viſible Church; which are holy and has the Spirit of God dwelling in their hearts and none elſe; he may ſeek ſuch a Viſible Church in the new world of the Moon.
In the end of this paragraph he prompts us another Argument equivalent to this firſt, from this that Chriſt is called the Head, and the Church the Body: In form it muſt ſtand thus: If Chriſt be the Head, there muſt be an homogenealneſſe in the Church to him, he meaneth they muſt be truely gracious, and endued with true ſaving faith; But Chriſt is the Head, and the Viſible Church his Body. Therefore, &c. The reaſon of the connexion of the firſt Propoſition is, becauſe elſe there can be no mutuall derivation from one to another. Anſ. 1. Proteſtant Divines will with one conſent deny your aſſumption as Popiſh, and tell you that it is the Church of the Elect that is the Body of Chriſt the Head. See but Whittaker de Eccleſ. q, 1. c. 13. pag. 449. in fol. Yet. 2. For more clear and particular anſwer we are to conſider, that Chriſt may be ſaid to be the Head, and the Church his body, either in a politicall ſenſe, as a King is called the Head of the Common-wealth, and the People are called his Body: Or (to ſpeak ſo) in a phyſicall ſenſe according to the ſimilitude of mans body. Now we grant that Chriſt is a Head to the Viſible Church, and the Viſible Church hath unto him the relation of a body in the former ſenſe, Chriſt is a King of the Viſible Church, and the Viſible Church is his politicall Body: But hence it followeth not that there muſt be ſuch a homogenealneſſe in the Church Viſible as Mr. Lockier meaneth, that it be endued with true faith and have the Spirit dwelling in their hearts. And as to the reaſon of the connexion of the propoſition, we anſwer, ſuch a homogenealneſſe is not requiſite for ſuch a derivation, as is from a head politicall to its politicall body; this derivation being only morall, by commands, prohibitions and the like morall actings. But Chriſt is not a Head in the latter ſenſe, (as the head in the naturall body is) to the Church Viſible as ſuch; nor is the Viſible Church a body to him in this ſenſe, but only vocatione activâ and in externall profeſſion: Neither is that derivation from Chriſt unto the Church, whereby it groweth up in the Lord, unto the Church as a Viſible Church, or conſidered according to its viſible conſtitution; But unto the Church Inviſible, internall, Myſticall as ſuch.
section 5 His 2d. Reaſon is thus ſhortlie. If the Viſible Church be the Church of the Living God, the pillar and ſtay of truth, and conſequently ſuch as ſhould bear up the truth into the World, and be a ſtay to truth holding it out firmly and faithfully in the midſt of all tryalls; and ſuch as in which God lives, and dwells, and walks. Then none can be mater or members of the Viſible Church, but real Saints. For why? Doth God live and dwell in dead perſons, who only make a Profeſſion of Religion? Will ſuch perſons be a ſtay to truth and the things of God? Will they be a ſtay to truth foreign firmamentum, as the firmament to the ſtars, who fall from Heaven themſelves? And ſo how can God have glory in the Church throughout all ages. But the Viſible Church is the Church of the Living God, the pillar and ground of truth, 1 Tim. 3. 5. in which God lives, dwells, walks, Ergo, &c. Anſ. Mr. Lockier ſtill in this, as in all his other Arguments, ſhews that in propounding his Doctrine, he added that qualification, truely gracious ſo far as men can judge, but dicis cauſa, and in ſhew, to avoid for a while the odium of the greateſt Anabaptiſts Tenent of the mater or members of the Viſible Church. For ſuch as may be gracious and Godly ſo far as men can judge, mens judgement being not infallible in this (as himſelf confeſſeth) may be deſtitute of the power of Godlines in their hearts, and ſo ſuch as will not hold out truth firmly in the midſt of all trials, may be but dead perſons, and ſo ſuch as in whom God doth not live, walk and dwell. 2. As to that firſt property and character attributed to a Viſible Church from, 1 Tim. 3. 15. by Mr. Lockier: Firſt, I would aske him if in good earneſt he meaneth that to be a property of a Viſible Church rightly conſtitute in its mater, as it ſhould be, that it will bear up the truth and things of God firmly and faithfully to the world in the midſt of all trials? Sure, this is the very thing that Papiſts alledge from this place for the unerrabilitie and indefectibilitie of the Viſible Church againſt which all Proteſtant Divines diſputes. Yea it is much more, for Papiſts attribute this only to the Catholick Church Viſible, acknowledging that all particular Viſible Churches may erre and make defection, and let the truth and things of God fall down; excepting only the Roman Church, becauſe they make it to be the Catholick Church virtually: but Mr. Lockier acknowledges no Church Viſible, but an Independent Congregation, and will have this to be the property of any particular Viſible Church, and therefore propounds the ſubject of his concluſion here thus, a Church Viſible, i. e. any Viſible Church; now let me put him further to it; either there was never a Church Viſible rightly conſtitute for mater from the beginning, ſeeing all the firſt conſtitute Churches have made defection and let truth fall down, which if he ſay, beſides that it is abſurd in it ſelf, I ask why then did he a little before bring us paterns of right conſtitute Churches from theſe firſt mentioned in Scripture? Or if they were right conſtitute, how comes it that they made defection and did not bear up and hold out the truth and things of God, but did let them fall? If he anſwer, that came to paſſe, becauſe they kept not a right conſtitution for their mater. I repone, that taks not away the force of the Queſtion, For that ſame if it was ſo was a not bearing up and holding out firmly and faithfully the things of God, and ſo the Queſtion returneth upon this. 2. But to anſwer directly to the place; though Interpreters have ſome variety amongſt themſelves about the meaning of it: Yet never one of them acknowledges that Interpretation which Mr. Lockier gives, but oppoſeth it, and refuteth it in Papiſts: Some indeed expone the attribute the pillar and ground of truth much as he doth; but theſe by the Church to which it is attributed, und…rſtand not the Viſible Church, but the Inviſible of Elect. So Whittaker de Eccleſ. q. 3. c. 2. illa quidem Eccleſia quae eſt columna & firmamentum veritatis nunquam poteſt deficere: Sed quod aſſumit adverſarius, illam Eccleſiam eſſe Viſibilem, illud affirmo eſſe falſiſſimum: Inviſibilem enim eſſe affirmo & demonſtro, &c. and often otherwhere. Others again underſtand the ſubject as he doth, by the Church to be meant the Viſible Church of Epheſus, but theſe expone the attribute the pillar and ground of truth, not of what the Church Viſible will do alwayes, de facto; but what is its duty and dignity, elogium hoc Eccleſiae dignitatem & officium deſcribit: Non autem quod in ea perpetuâ luce fulgeat. Gomar. ſpecul. ver. Eccleſ. c. 2. So Wal. loc. com. de Eccleſ. milit. Reſp. 1. Hoc dicitur de Eccleſia Epheſinâ que tamen periit. 2. Ergo, reſpectu officii ſic vocatur. See more concerning this place in learned Gomar. in the place cited; alſo in his commentar upon the Gallatians, c. 2. in the ſecond Tome of his works, pag. 244, 245. where you have an excellent diſcourſe of the diverſe Orthodox Interpretations thereof, both ancient and moderne Divines.We paſſe here Camer. Interpretation of this place, joining theſe words, pillar and ground of truth, not with that which goeth before, but that which followeth.
section 6 For the 2d. property and character out of the 2 Cor. 6. 16. We Anſ. With all Proteſtant Divines, that it is not the Viſible, but the Inviſible Church, that is the Temple of the living God in which he liveth, dwelleth, and walketh. See Whittaker de Ec…ceſ. q. 1 c. 11. pag. 442.To omit many other Arguments for proof of this, take but this one from the Text, the Temple of the Living God, in this place, is taken in ſuch a ſenſe, as that it is ſpoken and praedicated of ſingular perſons, ſeverally, as well as collectively and joyntly: But if it ſignifie the Viſible Church it cannot be predicated of every one of the perſons ſeverally; each perſon is not a Temple in this ſenſe, a Viſible Church, Ergo, &c. Obj. But the Apoſtle is ſpeaking here to the Viſible Church of Corinth. Anſ. True, but every thing he ſpeaketh of them, is not for that, competent to them as a Viſible Church.
section 7 I cannot but wonder much at that wherewith Mr. Lockier cloſeth this reaſon, and ſo how can God have glory in the Church throughout all ages? Eph. 3. 21. Anſ. And doth continuation of the Glory of God in the Church throughout all ages, depend upon his particular way of conſtituting particular Viſible Congregations of all true Saints, and a particular Congregations firmneſſe and conſtancy in holding out the truth? Hes God then not been glorified in the Church throughout the many preceeding generations, wherein there was never heard of Churches ſo conſtitute, untill of yeſterday Separatiſts and Independents erected theirs? And yet waile them as well as they will, they ſhall never get one ſuch as Mr. Lockier would be at in this Argument. And how many particular Churches have fallen away, and for their part letten truth fall?
section 8 The 3d. Argument grounded on Malachi 1. 11. muſt be thus: If the mater of a Viſible Church be not perſons truly Godly, then there cannot be offered up in Gods houſe a pure offering, and the Churches of the Gentiles cannot fulfill that Propheſie, Mal. 1. 11. For why? Ʋnto the impure and unbeleeving all things are ſo; every mans offering is as he is, let his offering be what it will, let a man make up his offering of never ſo much coſt and worth, yet it is ſtill in the account of God as the man is; if the man be impure ſo is his offering; But it is contrary to that Propheſie to ſay the latter, Ergo. &c. Anſ. Mr. Lockier himſelf will not be able to avoyd the ſtroak of this Argument; no, not by his own way, as ſome times he expreſſeth it, for thereby all ſuch as may be accounted truely godly ſo far as men can judge are to be acknowledged and admitted as mater of a Viſible Church; now many of theſe may be, and undoubtedly are really impure and unbeleeving, and ſo of neceſſity muſt their offering be impure. If it be ſaid, yet it is not the fault of the admitters that they do ſo. Anſ. That's nothing to the purpoſe, for whether they be faulty or not, ſtill it ſtandeth good, that by that way it cannot be avoyded but impure and unbeleeving will be in the Viſible Church, ſuch as cannot offer a pure offering. 2. It reproacheth the diſpenſation and wiſdome of the bleſſed Lord God himſelf, becauſe he hes not left in his Word a rule and way whereby the Church Viſible may be conſtitute ſo as that Propheſie and his decree revealed therein concerning his ſervice among the Gentiles may be fulfilled, for he hes given no rule whereby the Church Viſible may be gotten ſo conſtitute as that all the mater thereof ſhall be perſons truely Godly; But there may be and cannot but be, in it many impure and unbeleeving who cannot offer a pure offering. But 3. To anſwer directly, we deny the connexion or conſequence of the firſt propoſition; 'tis grounded upon a falſe ſuppoſition, that there can be no pure offering in the Church, unleſſe all the mater, that is, members of the Viſible Church, be truly godly. What? may there not be a pure offering to God in the Church, and ſo that Propheſie be fulfilled of the Churches of the Gentiles, if ſome in the Churches Viſible be truely Godly, though all be not ſuch? Therefore he takes paines without neceſſity to prove that impure and unbeleevers cannot offer a pure offering; that we grant (I mean not this materially and objectively, for ſo an impure man may offer a pure offering) he ſhould have proven to make his conſequence good, that if all the mater be not ſuch as cannot offer a pure offering there can be no pure offering in the Church at all. If Mr. Lockier ſay here, that not only the offering of the unbeleeving and impure themſelves, but alſo the offering of all that are in the Viſible Church-Communion with them, is impure; This is plain and down right Separatiſm, and is diſclaimed of all the pious and learned amongſt the Independents, at leaſt in dogmate, and is moſt contrary to the Word of God.
section 9 For further confirmation of this Argument he bringeth 1 Pet. 2. 5. but to no purpoſe for the point in hand, and what he comments on it, is to no purpoſe We grant it all, 1. That Chriſt is a ſuitable foundation to the ſuperſtructure there mentioned. 2. The Stones muſt be living to make a Spirituall Houſe. 3. That elſe they cannot be a Holy Prieſt-hood, to offer up Spirituall Sacrifices, holy and acceptable to God through Chriſt. That the offering and Offerer are one; That the offering may be Spirituall, Holy, and acceptable, the Perſon offering muſt be ſuch; That, perſons that have but only a profeſſion of Religion, are dead ſtones: But what is all this to the point? can there be no Spirituall offering in the Viſible Church, if all be not ſuch as can offer a Spirituall offering? that's the thing ſhould been alledged to ſtrengthen the former Argument, but it is evidently falſe. If it be ſaid that the place may be alledged by it ſelf, as holding forth an inſtance of the generall Doctrine that that Church the Apoſtle is ſpeaking to was conſtitute of all ſuch. I anſwer, the Apoſtle is not ſpeaking to any particular Viſible Church, but to all the effectually called Elect Jews ſcattered throughout Pontus, Galatia, &c. cap. 1. 1, 2, 3. If it be ſaid, but he intended his Epiſtle to the ſeverall particular Churches Viſible in theſe ſeveral parts; I Anſ. True, but it followeth not therefore that every thing he ſayeth to them, is ſpoken of them as a Viſible Church, and ſo ſpoken of all and every one of them in that ſtate: What is ſpoken by way of declaration and impoſition of duty, may be, is ſpoken to all and every one; But what is ſpoken of by way of aſſertion, as a priviledge or bleſſing exiſting, it is not ſpoken Univerſally of all and every on in their viſible ſocietie; But indefinitely, which may be verified though it be competent but to ſome among them; Yea, though it were ſpoken Univerſally of them all; Yet it would only prove what they were de facto and quoad eventum, and not what their Viſible Church ought to have been by neceſſity of a command, that it might be a right conſtitute Viſible Church.
section 10 The fourth reaſon muſt be formed either of theſe ways: 1. Thus: if the J…ws be to be provoked by the glory and purity of his Worſhip and Worſhippers, then a Viſible Church, i. e. every Viſible Church ought to be conſtitute of ſuch matter, i. e. Members, as are all truely Godly; But the former is true, Ergo, &c. and if thus, then we deny the connexion or conſequence of the firſt Propoſition; And my reaſon, for the denyall thereof is this: Becauſe I may ſay, if the Churches Viſible be de facto ſuch that all or moſt part of their Members be truely Godly, and ſhining in the Power of Godlineſſe, at the time wherein God hath decreed to bring in the Jews, that will be ſufficient for provoking the Jews, although it be not conſtitute by a Rule or Precept that the Church in admitting Members into externall Church-fellowſhip, admit none but thoſe that are truely Godly. And why may we not ſay, that the Lord will at ſome time, for carrying on a deſign decreed by himſelf in the way of the diſpenſation of his efficacious Grace, make his Viſible Church, at leaſt in moſt part, the Members thereof, better as to the reality and Power of Religion, then he requires them to be by way of Rule, relating to Eccleſiaſtick proceeding with Perſons in admiting them to externall Viſible Church-communion. In a word, the futurition of the provocation of the Jews by the Power of Godlineſſe in Gentile Profeſſours, proveth only, that God is to make the Gentile Profeſſours ſuch de facto, or at moſt, what they ought to be in point of their duty, for ſerving and glorifying God: But proves not that they ought to be ſuch in point of qualification in foro exteriori Eccleſiae and in relation to admiſſion to the externall ſociety of the Viſible Church.
section 11 Or, Secondly, It may be formed thus; If the Jews ſhall be provoked to turn unto the Lord, and imbrace Chriſtian Religion, by the glory and purity of his Worſhip and Worſhippers, then the Viſible Church or Churches (uſe which ye will now) ſhall be conſtitute or conſiſt of ſuch as are truely Godly: But the former is true, Ergo, the latter alſo. And I anſwer: 1. Suppoſe the conſequent be granted in as large an univerſality as it can be taken in: Yet it ſpeaks nothing to the Queſtion in hand. Why? Becauſe only of what is to be de facto & quoad eventum, by diſpenſation of effectuall Grace in the Viſible Church; And not what ought to be; by rule, of neceſſity, that the Church Viſible may be rightly conſtitute in its Viſible Church-ſtate; and the Queſtion is about this latter, not that former; And diſpenſations of effectuall Grace are not our rule in this. 2. Nor yet doth it follow of neceſſity, that even de facto the Church Viſible ſhall be ſo conſtitute, as to its matter in every difference of time, but only that it ſhall be at that time that the Jews are to be brought in and converted to the Chriſtian Faith. Yea, nor doeth it follow that de facto even at that time the Church Viſible ſhall be ſo conſtitute in its mater, that all and every Member thereof ſhall be truely Godly and ſhining in the manifeſtations of Purity and the Power of Godlineſſe; but that ſo it ſhall be for the moſt part, and commonly in the Viſible Church. I acknowledge that a means of awaking up the Jews to come unto, and imbrace the Chriſtian Religion, will be a more glorious & full Reformation of Chriſtians, both in point of Worſhip and in point of converſation: Now Superſtition and Antichriſtian Idolatry amongſt thoſe that are called Chriſtians (which are theſe they only ſee for the moſt part) is a ſtumbling block to them that ly in their way at this day, and I will not ſay, but the impurity and unrighteouſneſſe of Chriſtians is alſo a ſtumbling block to them; Albeit I think they do not ſo much ſtumble at this as at the former, conſidering that, which is well known in the places where they live, how much notour and known unrighteouſneſſe is amongſt them generally, being for the moſt part moſt covetous, exorbitant uſurers, cheaters, &c. moſt evidently, the deadeſt, formall, ſlight in performance of their way of Worſhip (as mine eyes have been witneſſes) of any people in the World. Yet I ſay, I will not deny that this may ſtumble them, and they, may be, do pretend it alſo; Therefore Babylon the Mother of fornications muſt, and will down; And the Princes of the earth that have given up their power to that Whoore, will hate her & burn her fleſh with fire; and the Lord will purge and reforme his Worſhip, and Ordinances, and the Chriſtian World from Superſtition and Idolatry: And I believe alſo that their is a time coming when there ſhall be alſo a more general and ſhining Reformation of the lives of Chriſtians; & that both theſe ſhall concur as means to provock the Jews to fall in love with the Chriſtian Religion, and to ſeek unto Jeſus Chriſt; But that all and every Profeſſour in the Viſible Church ſhall be truely Godly, or ſhining ſo gloriouſly in the Power of Godlineſſe (for indeed it is not Godlineſſe ſimply ſo much, as a more then ordinary ſhining and eminency of it, that will be the means of this great work, which Mr. Lockier has not heeded well in this Argument) or that if any in the Viſible Church be not ſuch convincingly, though otherwayes profeſſing the truth and pure Worſhip, and living without ſcandall, ſhall be caſten out; neither the neceſſity of that effect doth require, nor can there be warrant of Scripture produced to ſay or beleeve that it ſhall be ſo.
section 12 As for the paſſages of Scripture brought for illuſtration and confirmation of this fourth reaſon; though the very ſenſe of them given by him were granted, they bear no more but what we have granted, that God will, by diſpenſation of providence, puniſh, deſtroy and purge out among his Elect in the Church, wicked, idolatrous, godleſſe, and profane ones (and this we deny not; but that the Lord now, and then, may be, towards the end more, is and will be doing this) But ſpeaks nothing expreſly and directly, nor by way of conſequence, of a rule concerning Eccleſiaſtick qualification of perſons in relation to admiſſion into externall Viſible Church fellowſhip, But verily the moſt part, if not all of them, are but abſurdly and violently, contrary to the genuine ſcope of the Spirit in them, drawn to this purpoſe in hand; I ſhall not now inſiſt much upon them; But briefly point out the perverting of them.
section 13 For the firſt, Eſay 66. from ver. 16. to the end, let the Reader be at the pains to read but upon the place, Calvin, Junius and the Engliſh notes, and eſpecially (if he have any skill in the Language) the notes of the learned judicious Nether-Dutch Interpreters, and I doubt not but he ſhall find ſuch an Expoſition and up-taking of the ſeries and threed of that context, as ſhall fill and ſatisfie his minde, much different from that of Mr. Lockiers, which is but a new coyn'd Interpretation by men addicted to the millenarian phancy, and forced upon the Text. I ſhall only give ſome little evidence of this, I mean that his Interpretation is forced and contrary to the Grammer of the Text.
section 14 He, by theſe ſpoken of in the beginning of the verſ. 19. I will ſet a ſigne among them and will ſend thoſe that eſcape of them, underſtandeth Chriſtian Gentiles, and then ſaith the meaning of the words following, is that theſe refined Gentiles ſhall be ſent unto the Nations (as he muſt take it) to the countries where the Jews are ſcattered, and then by theſe ſpoken of, verſ. 22. your brethren; he underſtandeth the Jews ſcattered through the Nations. And then he tells us that theſe Gentiles ſent abroad unto the Nations, their end and effect here is, that by declaring the glory of God, they ſhall not only gain the Gentile World, but ſhall alſo bring in theſe Brethren, the Jews; they ſhall alſo (ſaith he) bring all your Brethen, ſaith the Prophet. Further, ere I diſcover the manifold violence done here to the Text, I would ask Mr. Lockier what he meaneth by the Glory of God, which theſe refined Gentiles ſent abroad, where the Jews are ſcattered, ſhall declare? For he doth not explaine himſelf in this. Certainly if he hold to his ſcope, i. e. the illuſtration and confirmation of his former Argument, he muſt mean, the glorious reformation of Worſhip and Ordinances in their exerciſe, and of profeſſours in their converſation ſpoken of there, as the means which, by the light thereof, ſhould provoke the Jews to emulation. Now here, 1. One point of violence done to the Text, (the clear diſcovery to every body likely he hes ſhun'd by not explaining what he underſtood by that glory of God) for by the glory of God here, I think no Chriſtian Interpreter will underſtand any other thing, but the true knowledge of God in Jeſus Chriſt declared by the Preaching of the Goſpel, that ſame which the Apoſtle meaneth, 2 Cor. 3. ult.—the glory of the Lord beheld with open face as in a glaſſe, viz. in the Goſpel, and Chap. 4. 6. hath ſhined in our hearts to give the light of the glory of God in the face of Chriſt. If he ſay he meaneth the ſame, then I ſay he paſſes from the purpoſe of his Argument, for clearing of which he brought in this. 2. Another clear violence done to the Text is, that he maks an addition to the Text, while as he ſaith upon ver, 20. ſhall they only gain the Gentiles World? they ſhall [alſo] bring in all your Brethren. As if the Text held forth two ſorts of people gained by theſe ſent abroad through the nations, one ſort and alſo another called their brethren. The firſt implyed in ver. 19. and the other, ver. 20. When as there is not ſuch a thing as alſo in the Text▪ but the ſimple copulative and, which only coupleth together theſe Verbs, they ſhall declare my glory and they ſhall bring. And ſo, 2. There is not the leaſt inſinuation of the gaining two ſorts of perſons as the effect of their labour and pains; But in the end of v. 19. is ſet down their labour and work, they ſhall declare my glory among the Gentiles, …nd v. 20. is ſet down the effect of that their work, the bringing of one ſort of perſons called their Brethren. 3. By theſe Brethren who are ſaid to be brought in, cannot be underſtood Jews (I mean as the name of Jews is now taken under the New Teſt. as comprehending all that are remaining of the ancient people profeſſing the Jewiſh Religion, whether of the Tribe of Judah or of other Tribes) my reaſon, from the Text, is this, becauſe, verſ. 21. its ſet down as a new and unuſuall priviledge and dignity vouchſafed upon theſe Brethren brought, that God would alſo take of them Prieſts and Levits, i. e. Miniſters to officiat in his Worſhip and Ordinances. Now it can be no new & unuſuall thing to take of Jews to be ſuch: for it had been alwayes ſo; therefore we do conceive, with theſe Learned Interpretets we named and others, by theſe Brethren, muſt be meant Gentiles who are called the Jews Brethren becauſe when now brought in by the Goſpel, in regard of faith, they are Abrahams children, Rom. 4. and Gods Children, yea and are called Gods Children, even while yet not actually called, viz. in the decree and purpoſe of God, John 11. 52. I no wiſe doubt, but the Children of God ſcattered, diſtinguiſhed from the Nation of the Jews, to be gathered in, ſpoken of by Chriſt, Joh. 11. 53. And theſe Brethren to be brought in out of all Nations are all one and the ſame. 4. Theſe ſpoken of, ver. 19. I will ſet a ſigne among them, and ſend theſe that eſcape among them, are not of the Gentiles. 1. For that which we ſaid of theſe Brethren that are brought in by them. If theſe Brethren be the Gentiles, theſe ſent out to bring them in muſt be Jews. 2. Clearly, ver. 19, 20. theſe ſent forth are diſtinguiſhed from the Gentiles, even the whole univerſality of the Gentiles, which are ſet down, 1. Generally unto the Nations, then by a particular enumeration or diſtribution of them according to the ſeverall quarters of the World, Eaſt, Weſt, South and North, Iles and Continent. See Engliſh notes on the particulars. Therefore theſe ſent forth muſt be of the Jews; and it is remarkable that where the name foreign and another people or other perſons are ſet down by way of contradiſtinction, it ſignifieth not ſimply people, but the reſt of the people of the World diſtinguiſhed from the Jewe. Therefore we conclude with the generality of Chriſtian Interpreters, in theſe verſes is deſcribed not the Calling of the Jews, but the Calling of the Gentiles into the fellowſhip of the Church, and that by theſe ſigned and ſent forth are meant the Apoſtles and others of the Jews ſent forth to Preach the Goſpel among the Gentiles to bring about their Converſion which we ſee fulfilled and accompliſhed, Mat. 28. 18. Mark 16. 15. Acts 8. 14. Rom. 10. 15, 18. places alſo cited by the Engliſh notes to clear this purpoſe.
section 15 For that which he hath upon the laſt words of this Chapter, ah! let men read & with much dread lay to heart which make light of theſe things we are upon, its true indeed men eſpecially ſuch as that verſe ſpeaketh againſt, ſhould not, and, had they any ſpiritual feeling, could not without much dread of heart (tranſgreſſours againſt God) read that: but when as M•. Lockier in ſo ſpeaking, ſuppoſeth that ſuch as will not acknowledge his way of conſtitution of a Viſible Church, of ſuch only as are already truely gracious and regenerate, in ſo doing makes light of the things ſpoken of in that Text, he ſuppoſeth it without ground or warrand in this place, or any otherwhere in Scripture. The thing that he is upon, and that this Text is upon, are not one and the ſame. And therefore the things he is on may be made light of, as being but his own, and yet no hazard of the terrour of this Text for that.
section 16 The place Rev. 3. 10. ſpoken to the Church of Philadelphia is but abuſed. For, 1. What warrand is there to expone that hour of temptation ſpoken of there, of the time immediatly before the Calling of the Jews? And the Church of Philadelphia in a typicall ſenſe of ſome Churches to be then? 'Tis too much boldneſſe to force ſuch typicall Interpretations upon Scripture, where the Spirit of God in the Word goeth not before us to warrand us. 'Tis true Reverend Brightman h…s Interpreted all the Churches and the things written to them, as types of other Churches in theſe latter dayes. But 1. All ſolide Divines have ſhown their diſcontentment with his conceit as groundleſſe. 2. Yet doth not he underſtand by Philadelphia ſuch Churches immediatly before the incalling of the Jews, as Mr. Lockier fancies, But hes expreſly named ſome preſent Churches, which he will have to … ſignified thereby, Geneva, France, Low-Countreys, and with the reſt even that Church of Scotland, (which Mr. Lockier counts an evill veſſell that will be broken in pieces) and that becauſe of the order and Government ſet up in them. 3. The place ſpeaks not here of cutting off Churches, but of trying the Inhabitants of the World. 4. If theſe Churches typified by Philadelphia, are not to be cut off, becauſe of their conſtitution like its, how comes that it ſelf which was the Patern and to whom this word was ſpoken in the firſt inſtance and place, hath been cut off?
section 17 The place of Daniel, is as groſſely abuſed. What ground or appearance can Mr. Lockier give us that the Holy Ghoſt means one and the ſame time, Daniel 12. and Rev. 3. in the Epiſtle of Philadelphia? He ſayeth by theſe words, Daniel 12. 1. It doth plainly appear that this hour of temptation, viz. Rev. 3. 10. will be immediatly before the Calling of the Jews, and he doth no more but ſay it? Learned men and that upon conſiderable grounds and reaſons, have conceived that time, Daniel 12. 1. not to be a time after Chriſts firſt comming, but before it, the time of Antiochus perſecution: And muſt Mr. Lockiers naked aſſertion, without reaſon, that it is a time immediatly before the Jews incalling be ſufficient to obtain beliefe.
section 18 The New Jeruſalem ſpoken of, Rev. 21. is groundleſſely expounded to be the Viſible Church of the Jews, as contradiſtinguiſhed from the Church of the Gentiles: And I verily think that it cannot be underſtood of the Church upon earth at all, ver. 22. ſeemeth to me to ſpeak this much clearly. The place Iſa. 11. 7. is alſo groſſely miſſapplyed to the Viſible Church of Gentiles to be joyned with the Viſible Church of the Jews after their incalling, it being clearly, a Propheſie concerning the Univerſall Church of the Goſpel, reaching along from the time of Chriſts firſt comming unto the end, as all Interpreters expound it, and the context it ſelf holdeth it forth evidently. And ſo is the place of Zechariah pointed at to be underſtood. The hint at Jer. 12. 9. where that ancient people are likned to a ſpeckled bird, as if thereby were meant, that becauſe that Church in its viſible conſtitution, was mixed of …ypocrites with the Godly, therefore it is called a ſpeckled bird, and that upon that account they were caſten off, might make a man laugh were we not on a ſerious matter, and its rather a mater of mourning, to ſee Scripture, and ſo much of it, ſo wreſted: The ſimple meaning of the words being this, that as a wilde ſtrange bird, of an uncouth colour, coming in among other birds, all flieth about it and purſueth it: So becauſe the people were become uncouth, eſtranged from God, wilde, untame, the Lord would raiſe up the Nations round about to deſtroy them. But what meaneth Mr. Lockier to ſpeak here of the caſting off the ancient Viſible Church of the Jews under the Old Teſtament, for not conſtituting their outward Viſible ſociety, of all truely Saints but ſuffering it to be ſpeckled: Seeing all along this diſcourſe, he hes reſtricted his Doctrine concerning the mater of the Viſible Church, to the dayes of the Goſpel? As for his inference wherewith he cloſeth, conſequently the allowed mater of a Viſible Church, (Remember we are ſpeaking of Mater allowed in relation to the outward Eccleſiaſtick Court its proceeding in admitting perſons to externall Church fellowſhip) now in the dayes of the Goſpel are perſons truely holy, we ſay it followeth not upon any thing you have been alledging in this paragraph: For were all granted, you have been writing out of theſe places, all comes to this that God ſometime after this will bring the Church Viſible to ſuch an eſtate that all in it ſhall be truely holy, de facto. But diſpenſations of efficacious grace are not a rule of Eccleſiaſtick proceeding in admitting perſons to the outward communion of the Viſible Church.