An Apology for the Discipline of the Ancient Church, Part 1 · Section 2
SECT. II. The words of the Letter.
THat you would call to remembrance, and alſo ſeriouſly conſider and lay to heart what (I in the judgment of rational charity am bound to conceive) you cannot chooſe but know, by what Chriſt did reveale to you, and by what you did likewiſe receive from Chriſt: namely how our God in covenant hath thought meet to conſtitute three ſeveral ſorts of viſible Churches, and no more to be owned and acknowledged as his, to be founded and found ſucceſſively on earth from the beginning of the world to the end of the ſame.
Anſwer.
OF what you write in this paragraph in general, I am not now to conſider, to wit, what hath been the external government of Chriſts Church from the beginning to this day. And how farre I agree with you, will by and by come to be examined. But in the meane time let me put you in minde that theſe words [God hath thought meet to conſtitute three ſeveral ſorts of viſible Churches] are improper. For the Church of God, before, under, after the Law, was but one in eſſence and being; ſo we beleeve One Holy Catholick Church, the bonds of whoſe unity are extant, Epheſ 4.4, 5, 6, 7. Let then the external government be what it will, yet this cannot conſtitute three ſeveral ſorts of viſible Churches, becauſe diſtinction of ſpecies muſt proceed from internal principles, not from extrinſecal accoutrements. This then is not properly expreſſed. But if you mean, as I hope you do, That the viſible Church of God hath had a different kind of regiment and exiſtence, one from the beginning under the Patriarchs to Moſes, another from Moſes to Chriſt, and a third from Chriſt to the end of the world, I aſſent to you. And I ſuppoſe your meaning to be this, by your words which thus follow:
Whereof the firſt was Oeconomical or Domeſtical; the ſecond the National or Judicial, and the third was the Presbyterial or a Combinational Church.
Reply.
In the general I told you I aſſent to you, but about the particulars I ſhal offer unto you ſome conſiderations, eſpecially about the firſt and the laſt.
1. You ſay the two firſt, viz. the Oeconomical and Judicial Church continued of a ſpace of time alotted to each of them of two thouſand years or near about. Here you are not ſo exact in your Chronology as you ought, for the firſt continued longer, and the laſt fell ſhort, as Junius hath given us the accompt, and other Chronologers diſſent not much from him. For the Oeconomical Church continued two thouſand five hundred and ten years, and the Judicial and National one thouſand five hundred and two onelyonly, if you ſet the period at Chriſts aſcenſion; but if at the final overthrow of Jeruſalem by Titus, one thouſand five hundred forty two. For then it may be better ſuppoſed was the abolition of the Ceremonial Law, when the Scepter was utterly departed from Judah; and now your words will run ſmoothly on, in this laſt and third kinde of Church Government every child of man, that is an ingenuous child of God, and a conformable member of Chriſt, either really hath for the preſent, or elſe earneſtly longs and deſires to have for the future both a name and a naile according to what is promiſed to the beleeving Gentiles, and was performed to the beleeving Jews, Iſa. 56.5. Ezra 9.8. ſuch a naile was Eliakim the Type of Chriſt, Iſa. 2. An hearty motion to you.22.23. Upon this you move me to ſpend ſometimes a few of my morning thoughts, maturely to peruſe, ponder and apply what is by you ſet before my eyes, and propoſe to my conſideration. And I aſſure you I am not now to begin to do it; for I could preſent you if I pleaſed with many animadverſions on this ſubject many years ſince collected. I am not ſuch a ſtranger in Iſrael to be ignorant of theſe things, which are obvious to any one that hath been converſant but meanly in the Scriptures; however for your monition I thank you. foreign.