A Defense of Sundry Positions of the Congregational Way, Position 22
POSITION XXII.
The Lord Jeſus reproving the Angel of Pergamus, for ſuffering Balaamites, ſends his Epiſtle, This is alledged by Anſw. to 32. q. 45. and 49.not only to the Angel, but to the Church. The Spirit ſaith not only to the Angel, but to the Churches, Rev. 2.11. And the Church members are ſeen by Iohn in a viſion, ſitting on Thrones, clothed with white raiment, having on their heads Crownes of gold, Rev. 4.14. Now Thrones and Crownes are enſignes of Authority and governing power.
To make good your charge againſt the Elderss of wrong offered to theſe Texts alledged, you ſay,
The Lord Jeſus reproving the Angel of Pergamus, Anſwer. ſends his Epiſtle (ſay you) not to the Angel, but to the Church: I adde, not to the Church but to the Churches. As you gather that the ſuffering of corrupt perſons and practices was the ſin of the Church and not of the Angel only; ſo I may gather that it was the ſin, not of the Church only, but the neighbouring Churches alſo.
It is like you intended a conſutation; Reply. but it hath befalne you as it did the Potter in the Poet: Horat. de Art. Poet.—amphora coepit. Inſtitui currente rota, cur urcens exit?qui amphoram inſtituens currente rota effingit urcoum. For in ſtead of a conſutation you have brought forth an addition otwo other inferences. Now, if you ſhould unto this inference of the Elders adde a hundred more of your owne; yet this will not prove that the inference of the Elders is injurious to the Text; For ſtill it may be doubted, whether theirs, or yours, any of them, all of them, or none of them be true, true inferences from the Text, yea or no; eſpecially conſidering that the inferences you bring, are of friendly compliance with that that you pretend to confute. For you ſay,—not to the Church (I ſuppoſe you mean — the Church only, for elſe you harp upon a harſh ſtring in the ears of rationall men, to ſay, John writ to all the ſeven Churches of Aſia; Ergo, he writ not to Perganus, one of the ſeven) but to the churches. Now can you ſay the Lord Jeſus, writing to the Angel of the Church of Perganus, ſends his Epiſtle to all the ſeven Churches, and not abuſe the Text? and yet muſt we believe it, when you tell us, that the Elders of New-England, in ſaying Chriſt writ not to the Angel of the Church of Pergamus only, but to the whole Church of Pergamus alſo, do abuſe the Text? Again, if the ſuffering of Balaamites in the Church of Pergamus was the ſin of all the neighbouring Churches, and that this may be affirmed by you without wrong to the Text; then the ſuffering of them in the Church of Pergamus it ſelf was the ſin of that Church; and this may be affirmed by the Elders of New-England without wrong to the Text.
2. But let us look upon the words, not as they may afford matter of an argument ad hominem, but as they are in themſelves: Two things you affirm,
1. That Chriſt reproving the Angel of the Church of Pergamus, ſends the Epiſtle to the Churches. We ſuppoſe you mean the other ſix Churches of Aſia.
2. That ſuffering Balaamites (which is reproved in the Church of Pergamus) was the ſin of the neighbouring Churches alſo. For the firſt:
1. The book of the Revlation contains ſeven Epiſtles, which were of immediate concernment in a diſtributive ſenſe, to ſeven ſeverall Churches; and many other glorrious myſteries that were of equall concernment to all the people of God. Theſe all being molded into one book (as we ſaid) are ſent to the ſeven Churches of Aſia. Now the Elders of New-England affirm, that the Epiſtles ſent to the Angels of Pergamus and Thyatira, are ſent by way of immediate appropriation and concernment (for that is their meaning) to the whole Churches of Pergamus and Thyatira. Now if in this ſenſe you affirm, that Chriſt reproving the Angel of the Church of Pergamus, ſends his Epiſtle to all the Churches, you ſpeak to the purpoſe, but not according to truth: For,
1. What a Pleonaſme and redundancy, if not a groſſe Soloeciſme in diſcourſe, and abſudity it is, in a book ſent as an Epiſtle to ſeven Churches, two ſeverall times to mention them together, verſ. 4. John to the ſeven Churches of Aſia, verſ. 11. What thou ſeeſt, Rev. 1.4.11.write it in a book, and ſend it to the ſeven Churches of Aſia, and afterwards to write ſeverall things of a Heterogeneall nature to thoſe ſeven ſeverall Churches diſtributively. To the Church of Epheſus write thus, to the Church of Pergamus thus, &c. commend one, condemn another; admoniſh a third, extoll a fourth, threaten a fifth, &c. and yet, that theſe ſeverall Epiſtles ſhould be of as immediate a concernment to all the reſt, as to thoſe to which they are particularly directed.
2. It will follow, that Philadelphia was lukewarm with Laodicea, dead with Sardis; and of theſe two lukewarm, dead Churches, may be verified the Encomiaſticks of Epheſus, Pergamus and Philadelphia, with many ſuch conſequences. But if your meaning be, that the Epiſtle ſent to the Church of Pergamus, in reſpect of that remore, and generall concernment, whereby it may be of uſe to all Chriſtians, is ſent together with the reſt of the Book of the Revelations to the ſeven Churches; This (though a truth) will afford no contribution towards the making good of your charge againſt the Elders of New-England, being that which they deny not.
2. For the ſecond, it is undeniably manifeſt, that the aſſertion of the Elders, viz. that the Church of Pergamus was guilty of ſuffering Balaamites, and other wicked perſons, is true; yea, the truth of this Text. But to have ſo much faith as to believe, that all the reſt of the ſix Churches of Aſia (if that be the utmoſt extent of neighbouring Churches in your account) were guilty of ſuffering Balaamites and Nicolaitans (yea, even Epheſus and Philadelphia, that are commended for not ſuffering thoſe that are evill, hating the deeds of the Nicolaitans, and keeping the Word of Gods patience,) would require ſome further proof then foreign, your bare aſſertion for the manifeſtation of it. For if the reſt were guilty, why are they not blamed? Why is the burthen laid only (though it might be laid chiefly) upon one Church, when as the reſt are guilty? I ſuppoſe the building upon which you lay the weight of this roof, is this: Theſe ſeven Churches were a combined Presbyterie, and therefore as the government, ſo the neglect thereof concernes all.
Anſw. If you may aſſume the foreign, the thing in queſtion, as if it were the foreign, a thing out of queſtion, you may in time perſwade the world, that the Elders of New-England have forced this, and many other Texts. But to prove that the ſeven Aſian Churches were governed by a joynt and common Presbyterie, hic labor, hoc opus eſt, this is the buſineſſe.
But ſuppoſe that ſuch a common Presbyterie there were, and that the Presbyters of all the other ſix Churches did endeavour the caſting out of theſe Balaamites, &c. why were they then not caſt out? Could the Elders of Pergamus over-vote the Elders of all the neighbouring churches in a Synod? And if all, or at leaſt the major part of the Elders of theſe ſeven Churches neglect, why are the Elders of Pergamus only reproved?
Laſtly, we cannot chooſe upon this conſideration, but condole the ſad condition of Presbyterian Churches which is ſuch, if wicked men be ſuffered in any particular Congregation in the world, all the Churches in the world are guilty of it. The reaſon is, the ſame obligation that lies upon a Claſſicall Church to reform the ſeverall Congregations in the Claſſis, the ſame lies upon a Provinciall Church to reform the ſeverall Claſſis in the Province; and the ſame lies upon a Nationall Church to reform the ſeverall Provinciall Churches in the Nation; and the ſame lies upon the Oecumenicall Church to reform the ſeverall Nationall Churches in the world: and therefore, though all the inferiour Churches ſhould fail, yet the Oecumenicall is bound to ſee it reformed; and if the Oecumenicall fail, all in the line of Oecumenicall communion, that is to ſay, all Churches in any Nation in the world are guilty.