The Shepherds Wanderings Discovered, Chapter 12
CHAP. XII. In which Mr. Sheppards firſt Argument for Guifted brethrens preaching ordinarily, is examined, and anſwered.
YOur firſt argument is (ex conceſſo) you ſay, we grant you:
1. That private perſons may, and muſt read the Scriptures, Catechize their families, and that they may expound the Scripture to their families, Deut. 6.7, 8, 9. Col. 3.16. and they which tell you that every Maſter is a Prophet, a Prieſt, and a King in his family. And
2.—That we give you leave privately, occaſionally, extraordinarily, and by way of diſcourſe to reprove, admoniſh, encourage, teach, exhort, comfort, ſupport, feed, out of the texts: Leu. 19.17. Heb. 3.13. Eſ. 2.2. Mal. 3.10. Gal. 6.2. Job 2.17. Acts 18.26. Pro. 20.23. And
3.— They alſo allow you to make an open confeſſion of your faith, or an Apology for defence againſt unjuſt accuſations, or being a Magiſtrate to give a charge to the people, and this they warrant by other Scriptures.
4. And that in caſe of planting or decay, or corruption of a Church, and where a Church is not regularly conſtituted, that in theſe and ſuch like caſes a gifted man may ordinarily and publikely preacht and that without a ſolemn call. And
5. That they may preach as probationers, and by writing. "Nay
6. We doe admit ſtrangers to preach, of whoſe call we are not "aſſured.
Here is now an huddle of arguments together, all taken out of our own conceſſions and practice; for my better anſwer I will obſerve this method.
1. I will ſhew you how farre we have granted thoſe, or any of thoſe.
2. I will examine, quid inde? what this Gentleman can conclude from thoſe our grants.
3. I will anſwer what he ſayes in the enforcing his argument.
1. Therefore I confeſſe I have granted him, that private perſons muſt read the Scriptures, Catechize their families, and they may obſerve what God diſcovers to them of the ſenſe and meaning of the Scriptures. This I have granted from Deut. 6:6, 7. and the uſuall notion that every one is a Prieſt, Prophet, and King in his family, in my Vindiciae, p. 19. 20. but not that he may un…y the difficult places of Scripture, or meddle with the foreign; ſee my limitations of this grant, p. 20. for Col. 3 16. indeed my Brother Hall quotes it as a proofe of this, but I have not, being not I think ſo clear and concluſive; but ſuppoſe we doe grant this, if you have any argument from this (Sir) it muſt be thus.
What private perſons may doe in their families privately, that they may doe in a conſtituted Church, and its aſſembly publikely, but privately they may teach their Children and ſervants. Ergo.
I deny your major utterly, (Sir) you may as well conclude that every private perſon may rule the Church, becauſe he may rule in his family. God hath ſet him over his family to inſtruct that, but not over his Church to inſtruct that; ſee my anſwer to this trifling argument in my Vindiciae, p. 64. 65.
But you ſay people and preachers are both meant alike Rev. 1. v. 5, 6.19. 1 Pet. 2.9.—and therefore the duty and power laid upon them and given them hereby, is to be performed in other places as well as their own houſes.
1. I grant you, that for the terme Prieſts, it doth not properly belong to the Miniſters of the Goſpell.
2. That it is by alluſion applyed to both, and the people are called Prieſts, and Preachers Prieſts in a common notion. But yet let me tell you, I doe not thinke their ſervices are both alike. For:
3. He that Miniſtred the Goſpell of God, that the offering up of the Gentiles might be acceptable, being ſanctified by the holy Ghoſt, was one that was in office and had grace given him of God, to be a Miniſter of the Goſpel of Chriſt, Ro. 15.…6. Shew me where in that ſenſe the people are called Prieſts.
You tell us next, that that place Deut. 6. Doth contain and command more then bare reading the Scriptures, and and preaching of them to a mans owne family onelyonly, and to this purpoſe you tell us, that that Text in Deut. ſeems to be a Metaphor taken from whetting an inſtrument, by which it is made more ſharpe, and ſo more uſefull. So the word of God, &c.
I wonder how many words you would have to reſtraine a Text, here are four or five, 1. To thy children. 2. In thy houſe. 3. When thou lyeſt downe and riſeſt up. 4. Ʋpon the poſts of thy houſe and thy gates. Let the indifferent reader judge whether this Text be not enough reſtrained.
For your obſervation of the metaphor, I ſay nothing, for it is nothing to the preſent purpoſe.
But p. 29. You ſay, ſuppoſe there come twenty or an hundred in of the neighbours, may you not preach to them alſo, &c.
Sir, we can give you no licenſe to preach to any. To the law and to the teſtimony, if that ſay you may, you may, if not, you may not; this Text in Deuteronomy gives you no liberty to preach to them, nor doe I know any that doe; you may doubtleſſe, if they come occaſionally to joyne with you in a family duly) go on with your duty before them, but if you make it your buſineſſe to call them into your charret to ſee your zeale for the Lord of hoſtes, I know no Scripture will juſtifie you.
I paſſe on to our ſecond and third grant, as you ſay.Scriptures miſapplied.
We doe, (nay the word of God doth) grant you, that you may privately, occaſionally, extraordinarily, and by way of diſcourſe reprove, admoniſh, encourage exhort, comfort, ſupport, but we doe not grant it you from Pro: 20.22. or Mal. 3.10. there is not a letter in them to any ſuch purpoſe, no more is there in Io. 2.17. nor in Gal. 6.2. nor in Acts 18.26. Apollos was more then a gifted brother, (Sir) indeed we grant it from Levit. 19.17. Heb. 3.13. Eſ. 2.2. your other five places are ſhamefully applyed to ſhew you that it is not the ſpirit of God that immediately and ſpecially directs you in applications of Scriptures alwayes.
We doe grant alſo, that private perſons (if called to it) may make open confeſſions of their faith and apologies on their own defence, and magiſtrates may make charges: and in them make uſe of the Scriptures. But now let us heare what you will conclude.
If they may doe this, then they may without any call preach the Goſpell publikely in a conſtituted Church. I deny this ſhamefull conſequence; (Sir) are families conſtituted Churches? or meetings of people at aſſizes conſtituted Churches? fy, fy; ſurely your mind (if we may judge of it by your Logick) is to abuſe, not convince your readers; but to defend your weake cauſe you tell us,
1. The texts named and duties preſſed doe as much appertain to preachers as people, what then Sir? therefore the preachers may alſo exhort &c. privately, we doe not goe to conclude from thoſe Scriptures what you may not doe, but what you may doe.
2. You tell us, The preachers have forced theſe termes, occaſionally, extraordinarily, and privately upon the texts, there being not any one word in any of them, holding forth any ſuch diſtinction or intention, only in Acts. 18.26. a place very neare to one of their texts, there is this, that Apollos, a man then doubtleſſe out of office, did mightily convince the Iewes; and that publikely by the Scriptures, proving that Ieſus was the Chriſt. Nor can we underſtand what they meane by theſe terms, or how to make any certain definition of them, or to give to our ſelves any certain rules for the guiding our ſelves therein, the duties enjoyned are common and neceſſary, the command generall and indefinite, how then are ſuch deſtinctions warrantable?
3. Let the force and uſe of the words, and the nature of the duties thereby enjoyned, and the uſe and ſenſe of the words in other Scriptures, Acts 2.4. Heb. 10.22, 23, 24, 25. Acts 15, 32, 13, 15, 11, 23. Titus 2.3. Heb. 5, 12. 2 Chron. 17.7, 8, 19, 6, 7. 2 Tim. 2, 16, 17. be well weighed, and then let the preachers tell us, if they can, wherein theſe things doe differ from preaching, and how they may be done without preaching.
"To theſe cavills I anſwer.
1. If the preachers have deviſed the diſtinctions of Occaſionally and Extraordinarily, and privately, you are beholden to them for it, for you your ſelf make uſe of them, p. 23. and tell us, that but in ſome caſes it may be done ordinarily and conſtantly.
2. Though the very word privately ſhould not be found in Scripture, yet words are found that argue the ſame thing, Heb. 3.13. exhort one another, which is a terme of a private notion and differing from exhorting the congregation.
3. The peoples inquiry concerning the interpretation of Scripture was privately, Math. 24.3. Mar. 13.3. Math. 13.36. contrary to the practice of many publikely to diſpute with the Preachers when they have done their ſermons, or interrupting them when they are preaching.
4 As the term (extraordinarily) is not put in, ſo neither is it needfull: for the duties commanded them are, to be done ordinarily, viz to admoniſh, reprove, comfort, ſupport, &c.
5. Though it be no where ſaid they muſt doe it onelyonly privately, yet withall it is no where ſaid they may do it in a conſtituted Church that hath publike officers to preach to them.
6. Neither is there any one example of any not gifted with the extraordinary gifts of the holy Choſt, nor in office that did it publikely.
7. If Apollos mentioned, Acts 18.25, 26. were at that time out of office (which yet by your favour is not doubtleſſe) yet he was no private perſon, for it is more then probable, he had the extraordinary gift of proph…cy, and to be ſure he was to be a miniſter in office, 1 Cor. 3.5.
8. The very putting in of that terme, Acts 18.28. and that publikely argued that it was not ordinary for private perſons or any not in office to ſpeake publikely in the Synagogues.
9. It is an eaſie thing for men to pretend ignorance, when they have no mind to underſtand; to helpe you, By privately, we meane not in publike aſſemblies and congregations: By extraordinarily we meane they may doe it. 1. Where no Miniſters in office can be procured or reſorted to, till ſuch time as the congregation can be ſupplyed regularly.
10. The duties enjoyned are common and neceſsary, but thoſe duties are private exhortings, not publike expoundings, for thoſe are neither common nor neceſſary to be performed by perſons not in office, and the command is generall, but not to all duties.
11. The command to preach is no more common then that to Baptize Math. 28.19. But your ſelfe will grant they may not Baptize, unty the knot for your ſelf, and you doe it for us.
12. What though the ſame words be uſed to expreſſe the duty of the peoples private exhortations one of another, and the Paſtors publike exhortations: yet this will not prove that their exhortations are to be in the ſame manner, nor that the duty is the ſame. The Magiſtrate in his charge at an aſſize may be ſaid to exhort: yet ſurely it is not every private perſons duty ſo to exhort the people.
13. If the uſe of the ſame word for both be any argument, then they are not only bound to exhort and preach but to doe it as Apoſtles and prophets and paſtors, the places you quote will prove this, yet you your ſelfe ſay, p. 24. that they cannot doe it as preachers in office, in an …uthoritative way, or as a paſtorall act.
14. The ſame word ſignifies to Baptize and to waſh our hands, or pots and cups, and by your Logick it will follow, that every man that may waſh his hands, or every kitchin wench, that is by her office to waſh a cup, may Baptize a Chriſtian, why? the word is the ſame.
But to proceed yet with you p. 30. you ſay:
We grant that in caſe of planting, or decay, or corruption of a Church, and where a church is not regularly conſtituted, that in theſe and ſuch like caſes, a gifted man may ordinarily and publikely preach without a ſolemne call. If ſo, we deſire them to conſider how neere our caſe at this time, at leaſt in ſome congregations, comes to this; if our Churches be rightly conſtituted (you ſay) why is there ſo much labour to alter and reforme the conſtitution of them?
1. Let us ſee how far this is granted. 2. What you can conclude from our grant. 3. how you apply it, and cavill from it.
1. I never granted you that in caſe of the planting or decay of a Church, and where a Church is not regularly conſtituted, that in theſe caſes a gifted man might preach without a call, &c. except the caſe were ſo, that none could be found to ordain, nor none ordained found to do the Lords worke.
Nor doe I thinke it Regular. I doe not thinke it the beſt way to convert Indians to ſend unguifted men to them not ordained. But for the Church to ſet ſome apart by faſting and prayer, and ſend them out to them, with authority.See M. Firmin… ſeparation examined, p. 60. I am ſure this is Gods way when he was to ſend preachers where Churches were not formed, Acts 13.5. indeed if the caſe be ſuch that no ordained perſons can be found, nor any Preſbyters to ordaine them, the caſe is otherwiſe. My Brother Hall in his pulpit-guarded p. 5. 6. durſt grant you no more, now what doe you argue from hence.
Thoſe that may preach to Heathens or to Chriſtians where no officers can be had to preach or ſet apart preachers, theſe alſo may ordinarily preach where there are preachers in office and more may be made. A miſerable conſequence, Sir; apply it to Magiſtracy, and you will ſee the abſurdity of it.
But you tell us this is our caſe or very neere.
We are beholden to you for this (Sir) are we no better then Heathens thinke you? 2. Have we no officers ordained in England? nor 3. Any meanes of Ordination? But our Churches are not rightly conſtituted.
1. The Church of England (Sir) is rightly conſtituted, here are in it preachers rightly ordained, and people rightly qualified, and the ordinances rightly adminiſtred.
2. For the particular Churches in England, poſſibly they may not be organized regularly, but conſtituted they are, though corrupted, and ſo have much need to be reformed.
3. You have foiſted in this terme, Rightly, into our grant; we doe not thinke that every particular fault in the conſtitution of a Church makes the Lords Vineyard ſuch a common, that every one may come and dig in it.
But fourthly you tell us we grant you,
That gifted men may preach as Probationers, and by writing in what manner and method they pleaſe, without any call at all—and that a judge may give a charge,—and a Colonell or Captain exhort his Souldiers.—That a man may comfort his afflicted friend.
1. The three latter we grant you in terminis as you propound them.
2. We alſo grant, that men may exerciſe their gifts as probationers, but not in what manner and method they pleaſe; for their method we deny them not what they pleaſe, but for the manner it muſt not be ordinarily but once or twice, or more, in order to Timothies laying on of hands upon them, which muſt not be ſuddenly.
3. Theſe Probationers muſt not be Naylors, Taylors, Coblers, &c. but ſuch as have beene approved, as have ſtudied the Scriptures and give themſelves wholly to that worke.
4. We ſay others may write, but we doe not call writing preaching.
But what followes upon this grant?
Will you conclude that therefore thoſe that never intend the office of the Miniſtry, nor to give themſelves wholly to that worke, may make it a Trade to preach every Lords day in a conſtituted Church, is there no odds thinke you (Sir) betwixt our grant and your taken concluſion? we have given you an inch, you have taken an ell.
But laſtly you tell us, that we doe conſtantly admit preachers to preach for us that are ſtrangers to us, and of whoſe call we can have no aſſurance, I anſwer.
1. It is no argument to argue a facto ad jus, that becauſe ſome doe it, it is lawfull.
2. But ſurely none do it, if they know them to be ſuch as are not called, if we be deceived by report or common fame, or their own words, the ſin is not ours ſo much.
3. I know none that doe it; if there be any, let them plead for themſelves. If ſuch thruſt into our places, we give them no leave.
And thus Sir, I have ſhewn you the weakneſſe and inſufficiency of your firſt argument, which proves too ſhort for your purpoſe. I come now to your ſecond.