A Vindication of the Preacher Sent, Chapter 12
CHAP. XII.
Concerning Election, as belonging to a particular Church.
THere are three Scriptures chiefly urged, to prove the power of Election to belong to a Church, viz. Act. 1. Act 6. and Act. 14.
Many of our anſwers to objections againſt theſe proofes we have no reply to, and ſo we ſhall but touch upon things here, and refer the Reader unto our former Book, and to our reply to Dr. Collings for a fuller anſwer.
1. The firſt Scripture is, Act. 1. 23.
Object. It was not an exhortation to chuſe, nor a direction in chuſing (here is not a word of the piety, &c. of the perſon) but onelyonly a declaration that one muſt be choſen, &c. however it was fit the people ſhould conſent, pag. 120.
Anſw. 1. Here he plainly contradicteth the provincial Aſſembly; for he ſaith, it was not a direction in chuſing; they ſay (Jus Divin. Min. pag. 127.) they were guided and directed in their choice by the eleven Apoſtles, and ſeek to prove it from ver. 21, 22. how ſhould we anſwer both?
2. Qualifications are ſet down. ver. 21. and the men and brethren in the meeting being ſpoken to, ver. 16. it is clear that they were the perſons chuſing, ver. 23.
2. The ſecond place is, Act. 6.
Object. 1. Regulation by dead Lawes and rules is no prejudice to the peoples ſole power in Election, but a regulation by living Judges doth deſtroy it. If the Apoſtles had refuſed any of thoſe choſen by the people upon juſt grounds, would they have been Deacons? if not, then the Eſſence of the Call conſiſts not in Election. Mr. Pool, pag. 121.
Anſw. 1. Paul was as much a living Judge when he did write …o Timothy and Titus, as the Apoſtles were, Acts 6. yet he giveth Rules for …egulation, 1 Tim. 3. ver. 2. 3. Tit. …. ver. 6…, and if Ordination be aymed at here, either theſe Rules of Regulation deſtroyed the power of Timothy and Titus in Ordination, or elſe thoſe Rules, Act 6. did not deſtroy the peoples power of Election. And we may turn his queſtion upon him, If Paul had upon juſt grounds refuſed any of thoſe Ordained by Timothy and Titus, would they have been Officers? if not, then (according to his arguing) the Eſſence of the call conſiſts not in Ordination.
2. If they choſe perſons duely qualified, the Apoſtles could not refuſe them.
3. If the Apoſtles had a negative voyce, in caſe perſons were not rightly qualified, yet that would not deny the whole power of Election to be in the Church; for, their affirmitive voyce might be onelyonly cauſa ſine qua non, not cauſa formalis of the Election, as himſelf telleth us, pag. 13…. we may urge his inſtances there againſt what he ſaith here, and they will be as ſtrong for us, as for him.
And this anſwereth what followeth: If the Apoſtles refuſing any choſen, would have hindred their being Deacons, as p. 121. or the want of Ordination would have made Election null, as he ſaith, pag. 122. yet the Eſſence of the Call might conſiſt in Election; for, their approbation or Ordination might be onelyonly Cauſa ſine qua non; they might not be Eſſential, though they could not be without them.
But it is he that forgets, not we; for the preſent queſtion is about the peoples power of chuſing, not about Election, as Eſſential to a Call, nor of Apoſtles power in Election.
As to what he addeth (pag. 123.) about arguing a minori ad majus affirmative; we anſwer, It is Mr. Pool that runneth upon the groſſe miſtake; for our Argument is fetched from the ſame Canon that there's is, as any one may plainly ſee, Preacher Sent. pag. 224.
And whether the Argument from the greater to the leſs affirmatively, be not urged, in the Scriptures we mentioned, pag. 226. let the Reader judge.
Object. 2. There is another Canon, and that is this, Quod competit minori, competit e…iam majori. If Ordination was required to the meaner and leſs conſiderable office, which is that of the Deacons, much more is it required to that which is the greater and weightier Office, and this was the Argument uſed by the Aſsembly, Mr. Pool, pag. 123.
Anſw. Our Argument will ſtand upon this foot, he can get nothing by this, for the Canon will ſerve us; what he ſaith of Ordination, we may ſay of Election. If the peoples Election was required to the meaner and leſſe conſiderable office, which is that of Deacons, much more is it required to that which is the greater and mighter office.
3. The third Text is, Act. 14. ver. 23. To his exceptions we anſwer,
1. That the uſual ſignification of foreign is, to chuſe by ſuffrages, and without ſpecial reaſon we muſt not recede from that; and many reaſons we gave againſt its denoting a chuſing or ordaining onelyonly by Paul and Barnabas.
2. The word being applyed to God, Act. 10. 44. it muſt needs be taken figuratively, and as there it doth not denote chuſing by ſuffrages, ſo neither can it be taken for Impoſition of hands; for God hath no hands to lay on.
3. The word is but once more uſed (that we know of) in Scripture, and then its applied to the Church; ſo that according to the Scripture uſe of it, the advantage is on our part, 2 Cor. 8. 19. He thinketh the people did not foreign For,
Object. 1. They are ſaid to ordain them foreign not to themſelves, Mr. Pool, pag. 125.
Anſ. He confeſſeth that foreign is taken for foreign, and therefore this cannot deny it to be the peoples, or Churches Act.
Object. 2. The ſame perſons are ſaid to ordain in ſeveral Cities and Churches, and ſo had an authority over ſeveral Churches, pag. 25.
Anſw. 1. If the perſons were the ſame, yet
1. They did not (as the manner of ſome is) ordain in one Church …or another, at Lyſtra for Antioch, but in every Church reſpectively; it was not all upon one day.
2. They are ſaid foreign who go before others, and are chief in chuſing.
2. It is not evident that the perſons were the ſame: I… a Parliament were to be choſen, and the Supream Magiſtrate ſhould ſend men into the ſeveral Counties to obſerve the peoples Elections, it might be ſaid as it is here, and when they had choſen them Parliament men by ſuffrages in every County, &c. though thoſe men ſo ſent had no hand in the Elections. So, if Paul and Barnabas had been onelyonly Spectators and eye-witneſſes of the ſeveral Churches Elections, yet all might have been ſaid that is, much more they being moderators therein.
Object. 3. They ordained, who going away, commended the people to the Lord, pag. 125.
Anſ. Paul and Barnabas (for ought we ſee) were they that were commended, and the Churches the perſons commending them to the Lord, as we have further ſhewn in anſwer to Dr. Collings. We did not inſiſt ſo much upon its reference to ver. 22. but as ſtrange references are found in Scripture.
As to the faint concluſion which he mentioneth, pag. 126. we firmly proved (Preacher Sent, pag. 231. 232.) that it cannot be meant of a chuſing or ordaining onelyonly by Paul and Barnabas, and that is enough againſt him.
Prayer uſed in managing Election is no Eſſential act thereof, as it is of Ordination, and ſo the Tautologie doth not remain on our part, as he ſuppoſeth, pag. 127.
The Scripture neither uſeth ſuch Tautologies, nor expreſſeth impoſition of hands by that word, which ſignifieth quite another thing; our preſent work was to deny that Paul and Barnabas onelyonly did foreign, and what we ſaid (if granted) will evince this, and this anſwereth what is ſaid, pag 127.
What we have replyed to Dr. Collings about Churches fitneſs to judge of Miniſterial abilities, will anſwer his exceptions, pag. 128. 129. we ſhall add a few words in the next Chapter.