The Divine Right of Church Government and Excommunication, Religious polemic · Introduction · Section 3

The Divine Right of Church Government and Excommunication · Religious polemic · Introduction · Section 3

p. 26SECT. III.

IF Ieſus Chriſt be as Faithfull as Moſes and above him, as the Lord of the houſe above the ſervant, Heb. 3. 1, 2, 3, 4. Then as Moſes was admoniſhed of God, when he was about to make the5. Arg. As Moſes and David were not to follow their own ſpirit, far leſſe is the will of the Church a rule to ſhape an unalterable Government. Tabernacle, for (ſaith he) See thou make all things according to the pattern… ſhewed unto thee in the mount, Heb. 8. 5. And was not to follow his own ſpirit, but was to follow the patterne that God ſhewed him in the Mount, then far leſſe hath Chriſt the Apoſtle and high Prieſt of our Profeſſion giving us a Platforme of the Church and Government of the New-Teſtament variable, & ſhaped according to the alterable laws, cuſtomes & manners of divers nations, for as Moſes though a Prophet was not to make one pin of the Tabernacle, but according to the ſamplar & patern that God did ſhew him, ſo Chriſt manifeſted to his Diſciples, all that he had heard, and ſeen of the Father, Ioh. 15. But it is not to be ſuppoſed, that the Father ſhew to Chriſt an alterable tabernacle in the new Teſtament, that men might alter, chop and change at their pleaſure, as the cuſtomes of Nations are changed: p. 27If God thought Religion ſhould run a hazard, if the greateſt of Prophets (except Chriſt) might have leave to mold and ſhape all the Leviticall Service, and Ceremonies, (for as the judicious and Learned Interpreter Mr. David Dickſon ſaith, all the Leviticall ServiceDa. Dickſonus, Expoſ. Analyti. in Epiſt, a… heb. c. …. v. 5. is comprehended under the name of the Tabernacle, Exod. 25. 40.) according as he pleaſed, far more ſhould all be corrupted, if erring men, far inferior to Moſes, Prelats and Paſtors, ſhould have leave to draw the Lineaments of the New Teſtament, Tabernacle, Church, Service, Officers, Cenſures, and all the Poſitives of Policie according to no patern ſhown by Chriſt; but only the Faſhions, alterable Laws, Cuſtomes, & forms of nations: Now all the pins of the Tabernacle were but ſhadows, and Types of Morall and Heavenly things, Heb. 8. 5. Heb. 10. 1. Heb. 9. 9. And they were to be changed and done away by Chriſt, Col. 2. 17. Heb. 7. 12. 2 Cor. 3. 11. Yet could neither be deviſed by Moſes, nor altered by any mortall man, Church or Prieſts; how can we imagine that men may now deviſe and ſet up an alterable and changeable New Teſtament-frame, of Prelats, Altars, Religious dayes, Surplice, Croſſing, or any the like toyes? And though David was a Prophet, and a man according to Gods heart; yet in the externals of the Temple, nothing was left to his ſpirit; he might neither in the leaſt jot adde or omit, 1 Chron. 28. 11. Then David gave to Solomon his Son, the patern of the Porch, and of the houſes thereof, and of the Treaſuries thereof, and of the upper Chambers thereof, and of the inner Parlors thereof, & of the place of the Mercy-Seat. Here be many particulars; But whence had David all theſe? From the patern according to which, Croſſe, Surplice, Altars, and humane Prelats are ſhapen? Alas, no; therefore it is added, v. 12. And (he ſhewed) the patern of all that he had by the ſpirit, of the courts of the houſe of the Lord, and of all the chambers round about v. 19. All this (ſaid David) the Lord made me underſtand in writing by his hand upon me, even all the works of this patern. I ſee no reaſon to deny, that the form of the Temple was written by the hand of God; as the Ten Commandments were written in two Tables of ſtone by him; the Text ſeemeth to ſay no leſſe, foreign Pagni, and Ar. Mont. render it, Omnia in Scriptura, de manu domini, ſuper me intellegere fecit. So Jerome, Omnia venerunt, Scripta manu domini ad me. Vatablus in notis, Omnia iſta dominus Scripſit manu, ſu… et digito, …u… ut me familiarius p. 28do…eret: We ſhall not contend with Toſtatus, who ſaith,Pag…i, Ari…ont. Vatablus in notis, Toſtatus in 1 Chron 18. 19. 2. 7. Iſta Scriptura tam poterat fieri per Angelos quam per deum. Toſtatus, Q. 1. ibid. Cornel, a Lapide, com. 1. Paralip, 29. 19. D…us ergo in tabula deſcripſittotam ideam, Templi alioqui delincatio … Davide vix intelligi potuiſſet. Degrees de Templ. Ded. p. 73. Lavater, Ex …o quod, …dificium et vaſa ſecundum formam ſibi oſtenſam facere debuit, ſignificatur in …ultu dei non ſecundum hum… nam ratio…m, ſed verbum dei agendum eſſe, quo patefecit quomodo coliv… lit. Si Salomon ſuas imaginationes fuiſſet ſequitus Templum aliâ form â conſtruxiſſet, vaſa aliter feciſſet et plura quam deus preſcripſerat.1 Chr 18:191 Chr 18:21 Chr 18:7 It might have been written by Angels; though we go not from the letter of the Text, we have from this Papiſt Toſtatus, all we deſire; for he ſaith: We muſt ſay that it was not by Davids own thought, that he builded all; for David durſt not build a Temple to the Lord of his own heart; becauſe he knew not if that would pleaſe God, but by Divine Revelation: And therefore the old Tranſlation is corrupt in this, as in many things, which rendreth, v. 12. Thus: Dedit David, Salamoni deſcriptionem p…rti…us, &c. Nec non et omnium que cogitaverat: As if Davids thought had been his guide; for foreign by the ſpirit, by Toſtatus, Corneli. a Lapide, Lyra, is meant, not Davids ſpirit, but the ſpirit of Revelation from the Lord; and Lyra ſaith, on v. 12. Per hoc deſignatur; quod deus pater dedit homini Chriſto notitiam omnium agendorum in eccleſiâ. And Pet. Martyr, our own Doctor ſaith, on 1 King. 8. It cannot be told how unpleaſant the inſtitution of new worſhip is to God: And, there ſhould be nothing in Baptiſme but the Word and the Elements; any thing added (as Croſſing, Oyl, Salt,) came from the Prelats: Lavater, in 1. Par. c. 28. ver. 14. condemneth all additions, even though Solomon ſhould have added them, Ezech. 43. 11. Thou Son of man, ſhew the houſe to the houſe of Iſrael,—12. And if they be aſhamed of all that they have done, ſhew them the form of the houſe, and the faſhion thereof, and goings out thereof, and the comings in thereof, and all the forms thereof, and all the Ordinances thereof, and all the forms thereof, & all the Laws thereof; And write it in their ſight, that they may keep the whole form thereof, & all the Ordinances thereof, and do them. Now it is moſt conſiderable, that the Form, Fabrick, and Structure of the Temple, Ezech. c. 40. In the viſions of God, is ſhewn to the Prophet by a man, by Chriſt the great Angel of the Covenant; who with a meaſuring reed of ſix cubits, meaſured the Temple; and in theſe chapters, c. 40, 41, 42. Chriſt ſheweth to Ezekiel all the patern and form which evidently typifieth the Church of the New Teſtament, the Bride the Lambs Wife in the Kingdom of Grace, and glorified in Heaven, revealed by the Angel to John, Rev. 21. 9, 10, 11. It may be thought that the Porches, Chambers, length and bredth of them Eaſt, Weſt, South, and North, the Laws about the Prieſts, their linnen garments, Sacrifices, waſhing and the like, are of leſſe concernment then the Doctrine of Chriſts nature, perſon, offices of Faith, Repentance, p. 29Iudgement, Heaven &c. And therefore being not ſo neceſſary, nor ſo weighty; there was no neceſſity that all the like Poſitive externals of Church-Policie, written to a rude and carnall people, ſhould be written to us, who are now more ſpirituall, and upon whom the day-ſpring from above doth ſhine, the ſhadows now being paſt; and who have greater liberty then they had, who were as children under Tutors. Anſ. 1. I do not deny, but all Ceremonials are of leſſe weight then the Morals; but the queſtion is, if they be of leſſe Divine authority, ſo as we may deviſe of our own Spirit ſuch Ceremonials, and may alter, omit, or remove theſe, or any new Ceremonials in the Sacraments under the New Teſtament; for New Teſtament Ceremonials, as to take Bread, Eat and drink, are not ſo neceſſary, nor ſo weighty to us under the New-Teſtament, as the precept of believing in Chriſt, and of repentance from dead works, yet I hope it ſhall be a weak inference, from thence to inſer, we may therefore alter and change any thing of the Sacrament, for the ſame Chriſt who commanded us to believe in him, ſaid alſo, Drink Ceremonials of Moſes his Law, are of leſſe weight then Morals, but not of leſſe divine authority.ye all of this; and if we may not remove drinking from the laſt Supper, becauſe injoyned by Chriſt upon the authority of the Lawgiver, as ſignifying the ſpirituall drinking of Chriſts Blood, how can any dare to adde Croſſing to Baptiſme, which ſignifieth the dedication of the Baptized to Chriſts ſervice? But 1. Divine Ceremonials, and poſitives which were to be changed, have theſe notes and impreſſions of God, which Surplice, Croſſe in Baptiſme, Corner-cap, (which by Analogie anſwereth to Moſes his Ceremonies) hath not; and yet if they be of the New Teſtament, and ſoTwo notes of Divinity ought to be in the New Teſtament Ceremonials, which were in Divine Ceremonies. of a more excellent ſpirits deviſing then the people of the Iews were capable of, in regard of their Bondage under Carnall Precepts, they ought to have them in a more excellent manner: As 1. In regard of the manner of Revelation; all the Laws and Ceremoniall Ordinances were revealed to Moſes when he was forty dayes in the Mount with God, and was in Heaven and above men, Exod. 25. 40. Heb. 8. 5. The length meaſure and patern of the Temple was revealed to Ezechiel when he was in the ſpirit, and ſaw the Viſions of God, Ezech. 40. 2, 3. And a writing of the form of the Temple by Gods hand, was delivered to David, 1 Chro. 28. 19. Now if a more free and glorious ſpirit teach the Poſitives of policy, under the New-Teſtament, ſuch as Surplice, Croſſing, then Prelates p. 30muſt be in a higher mount with God, then Moſes was, and in a deeper extaſie of the viſions of God, then Ezechiel was in, Ezec. 40. 1, 2, 3. When they are in the childe-birth pain of deviſing, and bring forth ſuch defaced and dirty whelpes, as Surplice, Croſſing, Altars, &c. 1. I ſhould think it blaſphemy ſo to think: 2. In regard of the Doctrine revealed: When I read the 40, 41, 42. Chapters of Ezekiel touching the forme of the Temple, and the Antitipe, Chapters the Revelation, c. 21. c. 22. Yea, and the very Ceremoniall Laws of Moſes, as the ſcape-goats going to the wilderneſſe with the ſins of the people of God, and all the reſt of the Lawes that pointeth at Chriſt to be ſlain for us, and the heavenly myſteries of the Goſpel explained eſpecially in the Epiſtle to the Hebrews: when I read theſe, I finde a ſtrong ſmell of the ointments of a precious Redeemer, the extream love of God to man: the Majeſty, the divinity and efficacy of divine power in theſe, as in other Scriptures: But ſhould our Prelats, put in Print by the ſpirit of the new Teſtament, ſome Epiſtles touching Ceremonies in Generall, or of Surplice, Corner-cap, Croſſing, and their heavenly relation to the myſteries of the Goſpel in particular, I ſhould not think men would dare to ſay a nobler ſpirit ſpeaketh like God and heaven in theſe then in the other.

It is without all Warrant to expound Chriſtian Liberty of a power of deviſing a mutable Church-Policy, and lawes not warranted in Gods word, ſeeing Chriſtian Liberty expreſly exempteth us altogether from obedience to mens Laws not warranted by Chriſts word, Gal. 5. 1. Col. 2. 20, &c.

Let us hear what Hooker ſaith, for his mutable Policie underEccleſ. Policy, book 3. pag. 122. the New Teſtament: Chriſt is not leſſe faithfull then Moſes, becauſe Moſes delivered to the Iewes ſome Lawes that were durable, and Chriſt ſome Laws that are changeable, otherwayes by this reaſon Chriſt ſhall be leſſe faithfull then Moſes; for Moſes erected in theHow Moſes doing all according to the pattern proveth an immutable platforme. wilderneſſe a Tabernacle, which was moveable from place to place; Solomon a ſtately Temple, which was not moveabl…: Therefore Solomon was faithfuller then Moſes, which no man indued with reaſon will think: Chriſt was faithfull, and ſaith, I have given to them the words that thou gaveſt me: He concealed not any part of his Fathers will: But did any part of that will require the immutability of Laws concerning Church-Policy?

p. 31Anſ. I anſwer, as Chriſt did to the Jews in another caſe, Ioh. 6. 32. Moſes gave you not that bread from heaven, but my Father giveth you that true bread: So in this, neither Moſes nor Solomon erected either that Tabernacle or Temple, as Law-givers, but the Father of our Lord Ieſus, as the true Law-giver: Now both were but meer ſervants and Heralds in all that they did, for God ſhewed to Moſes the pattern of the Tabernacle, and to David and Solomon the forme of the Temple, in all the pins, rings, chambers, cubits, length and breadth, Exod. 24 40. 1 Chron. 28. 11, 19. And the queſtion is not if ever the Lord himſelf delivered mutable or immutable Laws, either in Doctrine or Policy: We grant he did, and may deliver Laws changeable and to indure for a time only in both the old and new Teſtament, Heb. 7. 18. Col. 2. 17. Act. 15. 28, 29. But the queſtion is, if Moſes as a man, if Chriſt as a man only, if the Church of Prelates, yea, or of Lawfull Officers can be faithfull, if they deliver lawes to the Church, which may be altered, without the expreſſe will of God, ſpeaking in his word at the pleaſure of men, and which are poſitives of worſhip and Policy, ſuch as humane Prelates, Surplice, Croſſe, &c. which varieth, dieth and liveth, falleth and riſeth with the climate, Nation, civill-Government, Lawes, Manners, and cuſtomes of People; and this is all one, as to move the queſtion, whither the Ambaſſadour as a man, may alter the Articles of his Commiſſion, according to his own private luſt, without an expreſſe and evident Warrant of the Prince and State, whoſe ſervant and Meſſenger he is in all that he doth, and if he be a faithfull Ambaſſadour, who doth his own will, and not the will of thoſe that ſent him, and if Chriſt be as faithfull as Moſes, if he had given Laws of policy under the New-Teſtament to be altered without an expreſſe and evident Warrant from the will of the Father, at the pleaſure and will of men? This we deny; and certainly, ſay that Moſes had erected a changeable Tabernacle at the will of man, and Solomon a Temple unchangeable at the will, and expreſſe Commandment of God, then had Solomon been faithfuller then Moſes; our Arguments nerves do not conſiſt in the immutability, or the mutability of things themſelves, or of the Laws, but on the immutability or mutability of things poſitive, or Laws poſitive, under this reduplication, ſo as they be immutable or mutable at the pleaſure and will of men, without and beſide the word of God, ſuch as Croſſe p. 32and Surplice, and ſuch like Romiſh ſtuffe are pretended to be. 2. Certain it is, that Chriſt concealed not any part of his Fathers will, Ioh. 17. 8. But delivered all, and this place, with the place, Ioh. 15. 15. We urge againſt the traditions of Papiſts, and ſay, becauſe Chriſt ſpake nothing from his Father either in his own perſon, or his Apoſtles in the New-Teſtament, or in the old by Moſes and the Prophets, of invocation of Saints, Purgatory, Worſhipping of Images, and Reliques and the reſt of their unwritten Traditions, theſe being poſitives of worſhip, and more then unſeparable, and connaturall attendants, ſuch as are common, Time, Place, Perſon, Name, Country, Habite, Geſture, are therefore unlawfull, becauſe Chriſt neither heard them of the Father, nor ſpake them to the Apoſtles, and juſt the like ſay we of Surplice, Croſſe, &c. That they are no part of the will of God, which the Father revealed to Chriſt, and theſe ſame Texts Papiſts uſe, to prove that the Scriptures are not perfect, becauſe they ſpeak nothing of the Traditions of the Church; ſo Bellarmine, Becauſe the Counſell of Trent, Andradius, Stapleton, and all the reſt, and they prove as well, if Croſſe and Surplice, and humane Offices, as Prelates, ſtand good and lawfull, that yet the Scriptures are unperfect: 3. We ſay that the whole will of God revealed by the Father to Chriſt, and by Chriſt to the Prophets and Apoſtles, requireth the immutability of all Laws of Church-Policy in this ſence, that men ſhould not dare to make and unmake, erect, command, alter, and injoyne poſitive Laws, of doctrine or policy at their pleaſure.

Hooker, ibid. p. 113. There is more reaſon to ſay that God hath a leſſe care of the Church under the New-Teſtament, then under the Old; then a Philoſopher had to ſay, becauſe God hath provided better for beaſts that are born with hornes, skins, hair and garments by nature, then man who is born without theſe, that therefore nature is a carefull mother to beaſts, and a hard-hearted Step-dame to man: for Gods affection conſiſteth not in theſe, for even herein ſhineth his wiſdom, that though the wayes of his providence be many, yet the end which he bringeth all at the length unto, is one and the ſelf ſame: yea, it ſhould follow that becauſe God hath not preſcribed Rites, and Laws of civill Policy to us, as to the Iews, that he hath leſſe love to us, and leſſe care of our Temporall eſtate in the world then of theirs.

Anſ. 1. Its true indeed, God ſhould have leſſe care of man, who p. 33is born naked, then of beaſts born with hair in lieu of garments, if God had not given reaſon to man according to which by nature, he may provide garments for himſelf, and the compariſon ſhould goGods care for us leadeth us to think he hath given us a better guide then naturall reaſon, in all Poſitive Morals of Church-Policie. aptly on four feet, God ſhould have leſſe love, and ſhould declare leſſe love to ſome of mankinde, if he gave ſome naturall reaſon to deviſe a Bible and a Religion of their own that they might walk to heaven in the light of a fire of their own kindling, without the Scriptures of God (which is a falſe ſuppoſition) and if he had denied reaſon to another part of mankinde, ſurely all would ſay, God had ſo far forth been more carefull of the ſalvation of the former, as he ſhould have willed their ſalvation, and loved thoſe in a higher meaſure to whom he gave reaſon on theſe termes, and ſhould have been leſſe carefull of the ſalvation of thoſe to whom he denied reaſon, as he he had no more created ſuch capable of ſalvation and of his love for the ſaving of them, then brute beaſts are: and this anſwer layeth down a ground that naturall reaſon is ſufficient without the light of Scripture to guide us in all theſe things of policy that are alterable, then (ſay I) God did take a great deal of needleſſe and ſuperfluous pains in ſetting down ſo many particular Laws of Ceremonies and Civill Policy, for the Iews, if with the help of reaſon, they might have ſteerd their courſe to Chriſt and ſalvation, by the help of the ſtar light of reaſon, as a man though born naked may by help of reaſon, make ſhift for garments to infants, which beaſts void of reaſon cannot do: for thus the compariſon muſt run, and it ſhall be indeed a cavilling at Gods wiſdom, as Papiſts do calling the Scriptures inky Divinity: 2. The word of God maketh it aTheologia, Atramentaria. great love of God, and a work of Free grace, that the great things of Gods Law are written to Ephraim, Hoſ. 8. 12. And their ſin the greater, that they ſhould dare to multiply Altars, v. 11. without warrant of Gods word, as Formaliſts multiplied, Altars, Saintsdayes, Surplices, &c. And it is an act of ſingular love, that God gave his judgements, Word, and Statutes, even of Ceremonies, and policy to Iſrael and Iacob, and did not ſo to every Nation, Pſal. 149. 19, 20. Ezek. 20. 11, 12, 13. This was Iſraels excellency above all Nations on earth, Deut. 4. 6. Deut. 20. 33. Rom. 3. 1, 2. Rom. 9. 4. that God gave them particular Lawes, Iudgements, Statutes, not only in Morals, but alſo in Ceremonials, and Policy: yet Hooker dare ſay, We may not meaſure the affection of God towards us, by p. 30duplicate page p. 31duplicate page p. 32duplicate page p. 33duplicate page p. 34ſuch differences. 3. It ſhall not hence follow God hath a greater love to the Iews then to us, becauſe he gave them Laws, concerning civill policy, which he gave not to us. Except the Lord had given us power to make civill Laws, which laid Morall obligation on our conſciences, even in civill things, which morality He expreſſed in particular Laws written to them, and not to us, as Formaliſts teach, for then he hath left us in Moralls, to the darkneſſe of naturall reaſon, in which condition we could not but erre and ſin, and make that morally good and obligatory of conſcience, which is morally evil, for reaſon knoweth not what is poſitive Morally good, except the light of Gods Word teach us; and in Morals, ſuch as judiciall Laws were to the Jews, the Lord ſhould have been more carefull in his particular directing of them, then of us, and more tender to have them preſerved from the ſin of will-worſhip, then us, which cannot conſiſt with the Diſpenſation of leſſe light; greater obſcurity in regard of types and ſhadows toward them, and of the Daylight of the Goſpel, and the ariſing of the Day-ſtar, and the filling of the earth with knowledge of the Lord toward us, under the New Teſtament: But the compariſon muſt go upon this ſuppoſition, that the Lord purpoſed to make Politick Laws in their Poſitives, Morall and Obligatory of the Conſcience of the Jews, and the Civill Laws of the Gentiles under the New Teſtament in their Poſitives (ſuch as is not to carry Armour in the night, and the like) not to be Morall nor Obligatory of the Conſcience. But as touching that which is Morall in all Civill Laws, the Lord is as carefull of our Temporall ſtate, as of theirs, in condeſcending to particularize all Morals to us, as well as to them.

Hooker, That Chriſt did not mean to ſet down particular Poſitive Book of Eccleſ. Polici…, 3. pag. 113, 114.Laws for all things, in ſuch ſort as Moſes did; the very different manner of delivering the Laws of Moſes and the Laws of Chriſt, doth plainly ſhew, Moſes had Commandement to gather the Ordinances of God together diſtinctly, and orderly to ſet them down according to their kindes, for each Publique duty and Law: But the Laws of Chriſt we rather finde mentioned by occaſion in the writings of the Apoſtles, then any ſolemn thing directly written to comprehend them in a Legall ſort. 1. The Law Moral and Ceremonial were not delivered one & the ſame way; the former was uttered by the Voice of God, in the hearing of ſix hundred thouſand. 2. Written with Gods finger. 3. Termed…a Covenant. p. 354. Given to be kept without time, how long, or place where. The latter not ſo, and reſtricted to the Land of Jury, Deut. 4. 5. 12. Deut. 5. 22. And if God had respect in Poſitive Laws, to time and place, and the Manners of that Nation, ſeeing Nations are not all alike, then the giving of one kinde of Poſitive Laws unto one only people, without any Liberty to alter them, is but a ſlender proof, that therefore one kinde ſhould be given to ſerve everlaſtingly for all. Anſ. This Argument reduced to form, ſhall want both matter, and form, and reaſon. If the Laws of Moſes be diſtinctly and orderly ſet down, and gathered together according to their ſeverall kindes for each Duty; and The occaſionall writing of things in Scripture, no reaſon why they are alterable.the Laws of Chriſt be occaſionally only written; then Chriſt did not mean to ſet down particular Poſitive Laws, for all things in ſuch ſort as Moſes did. But this difference is true, Ergo, &c. Both the Major Propoſition and the Aſſumption are falſe, and neither of them can be proved: For the occaſionall writing of ſome Articles of Faith, and of Dogmaticall points, ſhould then prove that Chriſt meant not to ſet down all Articles of Faith particularly; for Chriſt, Matth. 22. upon occaſion of the Saduces tempting; Paul, upon occaſion of ſome at Corinth who denied the Reſurrection, 1 Cor. 15. And of ſome that mourned for the dead, 1 Theſſ. 4. Set down and proved an Article of Faith, to wit, the Reſurrection of the dead: By this Argument the Scripture is not full and perfect, in Fundamentals, as Moſes is in Ceremonials, but hath left ſuch and ſuch Fundamentals to be altered, added or omitted by the Church, in that way, that Surplice, Croſſe, and Altars, are alterable things. Moſt of Dogmatick points concerning Chriſts ſufferings, are occaſionall, as his taking, his betraying by Judas, who knew the place he was in, the valuing of him at Thirty pieces, the giving him Gall and Vinegar, a puniſhment not intended by the Iudge, but occaſionall, in that Chriſt ſaid he thirſted; Yea, the Crucifying of him rather then Barrabas, upon occaſion of the malice of the people, when Pilate had ſcourged him upon a Policie, to ſee if the people would demand he might be releaſed, the caſting Lots for his garment, the Crucifying of him between two Theeves, the not breaking of his bones upon occaſion he was dead, the piercing of his ſide; all which in regard of ſecond cauſes, were occaſionall, and ſo though Dogmaticall and Doctrinall, theſe muſt be all ſuch alterable and Ambulatory points of Doctrine, as the Church and Prelats may p. 36change at their godly diſcretion, and Chriſt meant not in theſe, to ſet down particular Poſitive Laws in ſuch ſort as Moſes did. Yea, the Evangel according to Luke, is ſet forth occaſionally; becauſe many have taken in hand to ſet forth in order a Declaration of theſe things which are moſt firmly believed; therefore is ſeemed good to Luke alſo to write, Luk. 1. 1, 2, 3, 4. Upon occaſion of Oneſimus his fleeing from his maſter; The Epiſtle to Philemon was written upon occaſion of the unconſtancy of the Galathians, whoſe faith was perverted by falſe teachers, that of Iuſtification by Faith, without the works of the Law: And the Epiſtle to the Galathians was written, moſt, if not all the Canonic… Epiſtles were written either upon occaſion of falſe Teachers, or for fear they ſhould be ſcandalized at Pauls bonds. By this vain Argument, the moſt part of Canonick Scripture ſhould be alterable, imperfect, not particular in moſt Doctrinals, no leſſe then in Ceremonials; And ſo the Major Propoſition is moſt falſe, for its a vain thing to Collect Chriſts meaning, to ſet down particulars of either Doctrine or Ceremonies, from occaſions of Providence; for moſt of the Scripture is penned upon occaſions from men, and from ſecond cauſes, ſhall theſe things leave off to be of Divine Inſtitution, that hath their riſe from occaſions, even ſinfull occaſions? Yea, the death of Chriſt is occaſioned from mans fall in ſin. What then? Is it an alterable Doctrine left to the determination of the Church that Chriſt died? But this is no other then the ſhift of Papiſts for their unwritten Tradition. Sanderus de Viſib. Monarch. Lib. 1. c. 5. pag. 13. Si ergo per ſolas conſcriptas leges dei civitas Papiſts pretend that things are not written in the word, becauſe of the various occurrences of Providence.gubernaretur in valdè magnâ parte corum que paſſim contingunt, quid faceret, neſciret, quia legem de his loquent…m non haberet; Imo ſi tantum una Lex toti reipub: neceſſaria eſſe poſſet, eaque ipſa ſcriberetur a prudentiſſimis viris, ac ſingulis annis ab orbe condito novae interpretationes eidem adderentur: tamen nunquam eveniret, ut ea lex tam plenè interpretata foret, quin cauſae novae poſſent intervenire▪ ob quas lex et legis interpretatio novam iterim poſtularet interpretationem, adeo et foecunda eſt natura in ſuis eventis, et Anguſtum ingenium humanum, et varia ſurisperitorum ſententia, et verba tum pauca, tum ambigua. All cometh to this, that this Papiſt ſaith, That there cannot be one written unchangeable Law that is neceſſary for the whole Church, for new events, occaſions and occurences of Providence, ſhould ſo change the caſe, that there ſhould be a neceſſity of a new p. 37interpretation, and of a new Law. 2. Nor can we ſay that Laws made upon occaſion, as that Law of transferring the inheritance to the Daughter, made upon occaſion of the Daughters of Zelophehad, are in this ſenſe occaſionall, that the Iews might at their pleaſure alter, or change a Law made by God, and ſubſtitute one of their own in place thereof; for then might the Iews change all the Ceremonies and Iudgements that God gave them for a time and occaſionally: Now then they might have aboliſhed Circumciſion, the paſſeover, and ſubſtitute other Sacraments in their place, for theſe Sacraments were not given by Gods own voice. 2. Nor written by Gods own finger. Nor, 3. Are they termed a Covenant, in that ſenſe thatHorantius Loc. Com. lib. 2. c. 11. fol. 129. Quaecunque audi…t, loqu…tur, & que futura ſunt, annunciabit vobis, quaſi dicer…, Quoti…s r…i occaſio fuerit, revelabit vobis. Quae … re veſtra eſſe viderit, ſuggerit, ac quoties revelare exped…e…it. l. 2. c. 12. fol. 132. Sed quis non vide… multa verbo eſſe tradita, quae Eccleſiae ſolum memoriae, & mulius …mirum Scriptis ſunt mandata? the Morall Law is termed a Covenant. 4. Nor are they given without limitting of time and place, expreſly when and where: Now if the Church of the Iews could change Sacraments at their pleaſure, becauſe their Sacraments were no part of the Eternall Law Morall, they might alter all Gods Law, as the Church may alter Surplice, Croſſing; and I ſee not, but the Church of the New Teſtament upon the ſame ground, may alter the Sacraments of the New Teſtament. Papiſts, as Vaſquez Becanus, and others ſay, that neither the Pope nor the Church can adde or deviſe a new Article of Faith: Yet doth Horantius Loco Catholice. l. 2. c. 11. fol. 129. teach, That Christ hath not taught us all fully in the New Testament, but that the holy spirit, ſhall to the end of the world, teach other new things as occaſion ſhall require. And this he bringeth as an Argument to prove, that there muſt be unwritten Traditions, not contained in Scripture; even as the Formaliſts contend for unwritten Poſitives of Church-Policie.

3. Morals of the Law of nature and the Morall Law, do more reſpect occaſions of Providence, cuſtomes, Laws, and the manners of people (they doing ſo nearly concerne our Morall practiſe) then any Ceremonies of Moſes his Law which did ſhadow out Chriſt to us, and therefore this reaſon ſhall prove the juſt contrary of that for which its alledged; for the Morall Law ſhould be rather alterable at the Churches luſt, then Ceremonials, for there be far more occurrences of Providence in regard of which the Laws Morall touching, what is Sabbath breaking, whether is leading an Ox to the water on the Sabbath a breach of the Sabbath? (the Jews held the affirmative, Chriſt the negative) touching obedience to Superiors, p. 38Homicide, Polygamie, Inceſt, Fornication, Oppreſſion, Lying, Equivocating: Then there can be occaſions to change the Law of ſacrificing, which clearly did adumbrat Chriſt, who was to be offered as a ſacrifice for the ſins of the world; yea, all ſignificant Symbolicall Ceremonies have their ſpirituall ſignification independent from all occaſions of Providence, and depending on the meer will of the Inſtituter; Surplice, or white linnen, ſignifieth the Prieſts holineſſe, without any regard to time, place, or nationall cuſtomes; for Chriſt might have made an immutable Law, touching the Symbolicall, and Religious ſignification, and uſe of Saints-dayes, white linnen, Croſſing, and all the reſt of humane Ceremonies, which ſhould ſtand to Chriſts ſecond coming, notwithſtanding of any occurrences of Providence, no leſſe then he made an immutable Law, touching the Sacramentall obſignation of water in Baptiſme, and of Bread and Wine in the Lords Supper, if it had not been his will never to burden his Churches with ſuch dumb and tooth-leſſe myſteries as humane poſitives: 4. The aſſumption is falſe, for divers Ceremoniall Laws now altered were made without any regard to occaſions of Providence, and many Doctrinals that are unalterable were made with ſpeciall regard to ſuch occurrences: 5. If poſitives of Policy be alterable, becauſe the occaſions of ſuch are alterable by God; it ſhall follow that God who hath all revolutions of Providence in his hand, muſt change theſe Poſitives, and not the Authority of the Church: and thus Doctrinals are alterable by God, not by men, which is now our queſtion; for Chriſt hath given a Commandment; Take ye, Eat ye, Drink ye all of this: Yet hath he not tyed us in the time of perſecution to conveen in publick, and Celebrate the Lords Supper; but the Church doth not then change the Law, nor liberate us from obedience to a Command given by God, but God liberateth us himſelf.

Hooker. But that which moſt of all maketh to the clearing of this Hooker, 3. Book, pag. 114. 115.point, is, that the Iews who had Laws ſo particularly determining, and ſo fully inſtructing them in all affairs what to do, were not withſtanding continually inured with cauſes exorbitant, and ſuch as their Laws had not provided for, and ſo for one thing, which we have left to the order of the Church; they had twenty which were undecided by the expreſſe word of God; ſo that by this reaſon, if we may deviſe one Law, they may deviſe twenty: Before the Fact of the ſons of Shelomith, there p. 39was no Law that did appoint any puniſhment for blasphemers, nor what ſhould be done to the man that gathered ſticks on the Sabbath. And by this means God inſtructed them in all things from heaven, what to do: Shall we againſt experience think that God muſt keep the ſame, or a courſe by Analogy anſwering thereunto with us as with them? Or ſhould we not rather admire the various and harmonious diſſimilitude of Gods wayes in guiding his Church from age to age; Others would not only have the Church of the Iews a pattern to us, but they would (as learned Maſter Prynne with them ſaith) take out of our hand the Apoſtolick Church, that it ſhould be no rule to us; for ſaith he, There was no Ʋniforme Church-government in the Apoſtles times, at the firſt they had only Apoſtles and Brethren, Acts 1. 13. no Elders, or Deacons: Their Churches increaſing, they ordained D…acons, Act. 6. And long after the Apoſtles ordained Elders in every Church, after that widowes in ſome Churches, not at all. In the primitive times ſome Congregations had Apoſtles, Acts 4. 11, 12. 1 Cor. 12. 4. to 33. Evangeliſts, Prophets, workers of miracles, Healers, &c. Horantius, loc. Catho. Lib. 2. c. 12 f…l. 131. Turrian. to. de fide, ſpe. et Charit. diſp, 20. duo. 2. Bell…rm. de Verb dei non ſcript. l. 4. c. 3. That there was no Vnif…rm Platform of Government in the time of Moſes and the Apoſtles, is no Argument that there is none now.Other Churches at that time had none of theſe Officers or Members, and all Churches have been deprived of them ſince thoſe dayes. Anſ. 1. What Hooker ſaith, is that which Bellarmine, Sanderus, Horantius, and all Popiſts ſay, for their Traditions againſt the perfection of the word, to wit, that the word of God, for 2373. years between Adam and Moſes (ſaith Horantius) was not written, ſo Turrianus, Bellarmine, and the reaſon is juſt nothing, to ſay the Jews might deviſe twenty Laws, where we may deviſe one, becauſe the Jews were continually inured with cauſes exorbitant, ſuch as their written Laws had not provided for. This muſt be ſaid which is in queſtion, and ſo is a begging of the controverſie, that the Iews of their own head, and Moſes without any ſpeciall word from God, or without any pattern ſhown in the mount, might deviſe what Laws they pleaſed, and might puniſh the blaſphemer, and the man that gathered ſt…cks on the Sabbath, and determine, without God, the matter of the Daughters o… Zelophehad, as the Formaliſts teach, that the Church without any word of God or pattern from the word, may deviſe humane Ceremonial Prelats, Officers of Gods houſe ſhapen in a ſhop on earth, in the Antichriſts head, and the Kings Court, the Surplice, the Croſſe in Baptiſme, and the like. Now we anſwer both them and Papiſts with one anſwer, that it is true, there was no written p. 40Scripture between Adam and Moſes which was ſome thouſands of years: Yea, nor a long time after till God wrote the Law on Mount Sinai: But withall, what God ſpake in viſions, dreams, and apparitions to the Patriarchs, was as binding and obliging a pattern interditing men then to adde the viſions of their own brain to what he ſpake from heaven, as the written word is to us, ſo that the Iews might neither deviſe twenty Laws nor any one of their own head, without expreſſe warrant of Gods immediate Tradition, which was the ſame very will and truth of God, which Moſes committed to writing; if then Formaliſts will aſſure us of that which Papiſts could never aſſure us, we ſhall receive both the unwritten Traditions of the one, and the unwritten Poſitive inventions of Croſſe and Surplice, deviſed by the other: as 1. Make us ſure, as God himſelf immediatly ſpake to the Patriarchs, and to Moſes, nothing but what after was committed to writing by Moſes and the Prophets at Gods ſpeciall Commandment, as Papiſts ſay, their unwritten Traditions are agreeable to the word, and though beſide Scripture, yet not againſt it: And the very will of God no leſſe then the written word; and let Formaliſts aſſure us, that their poſitive additaments of Surplice and Croſſe are the ſame which God commandeth in the Scriptures, by the Prophets and Apoſtles, and though beſide, yet not contrary to the vvord: But I pray you what better is the diſtinction of beſide the vvord, not contrary to the vvord of God, out of the mouth of Papiſts, to maintain unvvritten Traditions, which to them is the expreſſe word of God, then out of the mouth of Formaliſts, for their unwritten Poſitives, which are worſe then Popiſh Traditions in that they are not the expreſſe word of God, by their own grant? 2. Let the Formaliſt aſſure us, that after this, ſome Moſes and Elias ſhall ariſe and write Scripture touching the Surplice and Croſſe, that they are the very minde of God, as the Lord could aſſure the Church between Adam and Moſes, that all Divine truths which he had delivered by Tradition, ſhould in Gods due time be written in Scripture, by Moſes, the Prophets and Apoſtles: I think they ſhall here fail in their undertakings. Hence the Argument ſtandeth ſtrong, the Jevvs might deviſe nothing in doctrine, Worſhip, or Government; nay, neither the Patriarchs nor Moſes, nor the Prophets of their own head, without Gods immediate Tradition, or the written Scripture (which are all one) p. 41Ergo, Neither can the Church, except ſhe would be wiſer then God in the Scriptures. 2. Hookers Various and Harmonious Diſſimilicude of Gods g…iding his Ch…rch, is his fancy: This variety we admire, as it is expreſſed, He…. 1. 1. But Hooker would ſay (for he hath reference to that place) God at ſundry times, and in divers manners, ſpake in time paſt unto the Fathers by the Prophets, and now to us by hi… Son: But teſt of all, he hath revealed his Will, by the Pope of Rome, and his curſed Clergy, that we ſhould Worſhip Images, pray to Saints, and for the dead, beleeve Purgatory, &c. and now by humane Prelates, he hath ſhown his will to us, touching Croſſing, Surplice: Now Papiſts, as Horantius, Sanderus, Malderus, Bellarmine, and othersHorantius, in loe. Catholic▪ l▪ 2. c. 12. fol. 1 …1. Sanderus, de viſib. Monarch. l. 1. c. 5. …. 13. Malderus▪ in 22. de virtu. Theolog. q. 1. de Object. fidei tract. de trad. q. unic. dub. 1. Fundamentals were by ſucceſſion delivered to the church, yet are they not alterable. ſay, Moſt of the points that are in Queſtion between them and Proteſtants, and particularly Church-Ceremonies, are unwritten Traditions delivered by the Church; beſide the warrant of Scripture▪ 3. We grant that there was no Uniform Church-Government in the Apostles time, Deacons were not at the first, Elders were not ordained foreign, in every Church: But this is nothing againſt a Platform of Ʋniform Government▪ which cannot be altered in Gods Word. For by this reaſon the Learned and Reverend Mr. Prynne, becauſe points of Government did grow by ſucceſſion of time; cannot infer therefore that Government which the immediately inſpired Apoſtles did ordain in Scripture, is alterable by men; then becauſe, 1. Fundamentals of Faith and Salvation, were not all delivered at firſt by God; there is no Uniform, no unalterable Platform of Doctrinals and Fundamentals ſet down in Scripture. For firſt, the Article of Chriſts death and incarnation, was obſcurely delivered to the Church in Paradiſe: Sure the Article of Chriſts making his Grave with the wicked, of his being put to death for out Tranſgreſſions, though he himſelf was innocent; his juſtifying of many by Faith, were after delivered by Iſaiah, Chap. 53. And by ſucceſſion …f time, many other Fundamentals, as the Doctrine of the written Moral Law, in the Moral Poſitives thereof, were delivered to the Church: But I hope from this ſucceſſive Addition of Fundamentals, no man can infer▪ 1. There is no Uniform Platform of the doctrine of Faith, ſet down in the Old Teſtament. 2. None can hence infer, becauſe all points▪ Fundamental were not delivered to the Church at firſt; the refore the Church▪ without any expreſſe warrant from God, may alter the Platform of Fundamentals of Faith, as they take p. 42on them to adde Surplice, Croſſing, &c. and many other Poſitives to the Government of Chriſt without any expreſſe warrant of the Word. 3. Our Argument is cloſe miſtaken, we argue not from the Patern of Government, which was in the Apoſtles times, at the laying of the firſt ſtone in that Church; then the Apoſtolike Church had indeed no Officers; but the Apoſtles and the ſeventy Diſciples we reaſon not from one peece, but from the whole frame, as perfected by the Miniſtery of the Lords Apoſtles. 2. We argue not from the Apoſtolike Church, as it is ſuch a Church; for Apoſtles were neceſſary then, as was community of goods, miracles, ſpeaking with tongues, &c. but we draw an argument from the Apoſtolike Church; as the firſt Chriſtian Church, and ſince the Law was to come from The church of Ieruſalem as perfected in Doctrine, and Diſcipline, is our patern. Acts 1. 4.Acts 1:4Zion, and the Word of the Lord from Jeruſalem, Iſai. 2. 3. And the Lord was to reign in Mount Zion, and in Jeruſalem before his Ancients gloriouſly, Iſai. 24. 23. And the Lord was to reign over his people in Mount Zion, from henceforth and for ever, Micah 4. 2, 7. And Chriſt for that gave a ſpecial command to his Diſciples, not to depart from Jeruſalem, but wait for the promiſe of the Father, which they had heard from Chriſt; therefore this Church of Jeruſalem was to be a rule, a patern and copy for the Government of the Viſible Kingdom and Church of Chriſt, in which Chriſt was to reign by his own Word▪ and Law, Mi…. 4. 2, 7. And ſo the Spirit deſcended upon the Apoſtles in the framing and Governing of the firſt Church, in ſo far, as it was a Christian Church, and they were to act all, not of their own heads, but as the Holy Ghoſt led them in all Truth, in theſe things that are of perpetual neceſſity; and in ſuch as theſe, the firſt Church is propounded as imitable: Now we do not ſay in Apoſtles, which had infallibility of writing Canonick Scripture, in Miracles, ſpeaking with Tongues, and ſuch like, that agreed to the Apoſtolike Church, not as a Church, but as ſuch a determinate Church in relation to theſe times, when the Goſpel and Myſtery of God, now manifeſted in the fleſh, was new taught, and never heard of before, did require Miracles, gift of Tongues, that the Goſpel might openly be preached to the Gentiles, we do not (I ſay) urge the Apoſt…like Church and all the particulars for Government in it, for a rule and patern to be imitated. And if Maſter Prynne deny, that there is an Uniform Government in the Apoſtles p. 43times, becauſe God himſelf added to them Deacons & Elders, which at firſt they had not, & removed Apoſtles, miracles, gifts of healing, and tongues: then ſay I; Firſt, the Canonick Scripture is not Uniform and perpetual: Why, for certainly once there was no Canonick Scripture but the Books of Moſes, and after the holy Ghoſt added the Book of the Pſalmes, and the Prophets; and after the Nativity and Aſcenſion of our Lord to Heaven, the Apoſtles did write Canonick Scripture: I hope, this is but a poor Argument to infer, that there is no Vniform and unalterable Platform of Divinity in the Old and New Teſtament, and yet the Argument is as concludent the one way, as it is the other: 3. We do not ſo contend for an Vniform and unalterable Platform of Church-Government in the Word; as it was not free to the Lord and Law-giver to adde, and alter at his pleaſure, only we hold it ſo Vniform and unalterable, that this Platform is not ſhaped like a coat to the Moon, or alterable at the will of men, without expreſſe warrant of the Lords Word, and to riſe and fall with the climate, and the elevation of Nationall cuſtomes; and therefore the Argument is nothing concludent, and judge what can be made of theſe words of the learned Mr. Prynne: Mr. Prynne, Truth Triumphing, &c. p. 128.The Government and Officers of all Churches, not being De facto, one and the ſame in all particulars in the very Primitive times, as well as ſince, it can never be proved to be of Divine right, and the ſelf ſame in all ſucceeding Ages, without the leaſt variation, …inee it was not ſo in the Apoſtles dayes: For this is all one as to ſay, the Canonick Scripture was not one and the ſame, in the Apoſtles and Prophets times, but admitted of divers additions; Ergo, now in our daies Canonick Scripture is not one and the ſame, but may alſo ſuffer the like additions: 2. Becauſe God himſelf added to Canonick Scripture, and to the Government of the Church in the Apoſtles dayes; Ergo, men may without Warrant from God, adde in our dayes to Canonick Scripture, and to the Government and Officers of the Church: 3. The Government and Officers in the Apoſtles time were not of Divine right, but alterable by God; Ergo, Apoſtles, Evangeliſts, Paſtors, Teachers, Workers of miracles were not of Divine right in the Apoſtles times, but might have been altered by men, without the expreſſe Warrant of God: But will any wiſe man believe that Pauls Apoſtleſhip was alterable, and might be changed by the Church? Since he ſaith, Gal. …. 1. Paul an Apoſtle, p. 44not of men, neither by men, but by Ieſus Chriſt, and 1 Cor. 12. 28. When Paul ſaith, And God hath ſet foreign, or inſtituted ſome in the Church; firſt, Apoſtles, ſecondly, Prophets, thirdly, Teachers, after that miracles, then gifts of healing, &c. and Eph. 4. 11. When Chriſt aſcended on high, he gave ſome Apoſtles, ſome Prophets, and ſome Evangeliſts, and ſome to be Paſtors and Teachers, 12. For the perfecting of the Saints, &c. Can it enter into the head of any man to ſay, ſome Churches had Apoſtles and Evangeliſts, and Paſtors, and miracles, and ſome not; Ergo, Apoſtles, and Paſtors, are not by Divine right; Ergo, becauſe they were not in all Churches, therefore they were alterable at the will of men? and a Surplice, and Croſſe in Baptiſme hath as much of Divine inſtitution, as the calling of the Apoſtle, or of a Paſtor, and truly to me, it is bold Divinity to ſay, that Paſtors ſet over the flock by the holy Ghoſt, Act. 20. 28. and whoſe due qualifications are ſo ſpecified, 1 Tim. 3. and Elders, 1 Tim. 5. 17. and Teachers placed by God in the Church, 1 Cor. 12 28. may be all turned out of the Church, by men, as having no Divine right to be there, and that men may ſet up other alterable Officers in their place; for by this reaſon the Apoſtles, by that ordinary ſpirit, that is now in Church-Rulers, might without their Apoſtolick spirit, or any immediate Warrant from Chriſt, have altered the whole frame of Apoſtolick-Government, and Church-Officers, as the Church may upon motives from themſelves not warranted from the word, turne out Surplice, Croſſe, and all ſuch ſtuffe out of the Church.

Maſter Prynne. The Apoſtles ſpeech, 1 Cor▪ 12. 4, 5, 6. There are Mr. Prynne, Truth Triumphing, p. 128.diverſity of gifts, but the ſame ſpirit, there are diverſity of operations, but the ſame God, compared with chap. 8. to 13. and c. 9. v. 19. to 24. I made my ſelf a ſervant to all, that I might gain all, &c. parallel'd with Act. 15. 1, 2, 5, 6, 10. to 32. and chap. 21. 18. to 30. The Churches of Judea did retain the uſe of Circumciſion, Purification, and other Iewiſh Rites, which the Gentiles by the Apoſtles reſolution were not to obſerve, and Act. 2. 22. The Apoſtles frequented the Iewiſh Temple, and Synagogues (conforming themſelves to the Order and Diſcipline thereof) and their own private Chriſtian Aſſemblies; all this will clear, that all Churches had not one and the ſelf ſame Church-Government. Anſ. If diverſity of Gifts, as to be a ſpeaker with Tongues, a Prophet, a Paſtor, will prove the Diſcipline to be alterable at the p. 45Churches will, as are Surplice, Croſſe, &c. I ſhall think men may infer any thing they pleaſe out of the Scripture; and that to be Apoſtles, Paſt…rs, are as indifferent and variable as eating of meats, 1 Cor. 8. and Pauls taking of wages at Corinth, 1 Cor. 9. Which none can ſay; for if the Church ſhould now command us to abſtain from ſuch and ſuch meats, as the Apoſtle doth, 1 Cor. 8. We ſhould call that, and do call it, in the Romiſh Church, a Doctrine of Devils, 1 Tim. 4▪ 1, 2, 3. All brought for this, from Act. 15. Act. 21. tendeth to this, the Lord himſelf for the then weakneſſe of the Jews, of meerThe indifferency of ſome things in the Apoſtolick Church, cannot infer that the Government is alterable. indulgence appointed ſome things to be indifferent, and abſtained from, in the caſe of ſcandall: Therefore Circumciſion, Purification, Sacrifices of Bullocks, and ſheep; And all the Ceremonies of Moſes his Law, may be commanded by the Church, ſo they have another ſignification then they had before, and ſhadow out Chriſt who is already come: But becauſe God hath made ſome things indifferent, ſhall it follow that the Pope, yea, or any Church on earth can create an indifferency in things? they muſt then take from things their Morall goodneſſe or conveniency with Gods Law, and take from them their moral badnes, & diſconveniency to Gods Law, which to me is to change the nature of things, and to abrogate and change Gods Laws: it is true, P. Martyr, 1 Cor. 9. 19. ſaith, Paul was made all things to all men, Quoad Ceremonias, & res medias, in that he Circumciſed Timotheus: The Law (ſaith he) was abrogated, V…rum id non adhuc Judaeis liquebat; The Jews were to be ſpared for a time, but only for a time, and therefore when the Goſpel was ſufficiently promulgated; Paul ſaid, Gal. 5. to be Circumciſed was to loſe Chriſt, and he refuſed to be a ſervant to Peter in his ſinful Iudaizing, Gal. 2. And withſtood him in the face: Now, certain it is, Peter knew Chriſt was come in the fleſh, and that his Iudaizing did not lay bands on his conſcience, he preached the contrary, Act. 11. And if Peter did Iudaize, as Formalists obſerve Ceremonies, and the Galathians were circumciſed the ſame way (for they knew Circumciſion had no Typicall Relation to Chriſt to come, they believed he was already come) then without cauſe, Paul, Gal. 2. and 5. did rebuke, and argue either Peter or the Galathians of ſinfull Iudaizing; which to ſay, were to ſpeak againſt the Goſpel. But certainly the Vniformity, and immutability of all theſe Ceremonies was, that then when the Goſpel was ſufficiently Proclaimed to all, p. 46to be under the Law of Ceremonies in any ſort was damnable, and ſo is it now: And as the Apoſtles and Church then ſet up no Ceremonies, no Surplice, no Croſſing, becauſe they had no word of Chriſt to warrant them, neither can we do the like now; and they complyed for a time with the Iewiſh Ceremonies, being yet indifferent, but not but by warrant of the commandment and reſolution of the Apoſtles, and the like are we obliged unto now, had we a Warrant of the like indifferency of Prelates, Surplice, Croſſe, and that we were obliged to uſe them to gain the weak, in regard: 1. They were once obligatory Ordinances of God: 2. And if the day light of the Goſpel were not yet ſufficiently riſen to ſhine upon thoſe who are not wilfully ignorant, and had not yet acknowledged the Goſpel to be Gods word, we ſhould alſo be obliged to Ceremonies; yea, we durſt not yield to any Law to lay them aſide, as many Formaliſts, who hold them lawfull, have done.

Mr. Prynne. From the Creation till Moſes, there was no one ƲniverſallIbid. ſet Form of Church-Government, to be obſerved in all the world: Nor one Form of Diſcipline under the Tabernacle, another under the Temple.

Anſ. All this concludeth not what is in queſtion; its but the Popiſh Argument: This is to be concluded, that Enoch, Seth, Noah, Abraham, the Patriarchs and Moſes did ſet up a Church-Government of ſuch timber as Humane Prelates, Croſſe, Surplice, without any expreſſe Warrant from Gods mouth, and which they might alter by their own ſpirit; for this Argument is, God might alter; Ergo, The Church now may alter without a warrant from God. And ſhall we believe that the Patriarchs and Moſes by their own ſpirit without any Commandment of God, might at their pleaſure ſet up, and put down Prophets, Circumciſion, Tabernacle, Temple, Laws for Sacrifices, Prieſts, Levites, Arke, putting the Leaper in, or putting him out of the Campe, cutting any ſoul off from the Congregation of the Lord, as our men will cry up, and down Ceremonies, and put on them the weight of a Talent, or a Feather, without any word of God? The Scripture cryeth the contrary ſo often, ſaying, And the Lord ſpake unto Moſes, ſaying, ſpeak thou unto the children of Iſrael: Could Formaliſts ſay that, and Chriſt ſpake unto the Prelats, and the Church, and ſaid, Command the Paſtor to croſſe the Infant, and appoint unto your ſelves a Prelate over the Paſtors: I ſhould gladly agree p. 47to the mutable frame of humane Government.

Mr. Prynne. There are but for the moſt part, generall rules preſcribedIb. p. 129. to us for the very ordering and regulating of our thoughts, words, actions, lives, apparell, Children, ſervants, families, calling, &c. in the Word; Ergo, there be but generall rules for Diſcipline and Church-Government, which admit variety; the former do more immediately concern every man, the other more remotely.

Anſ. If the Word of God do not more particularly regulate our thoughts, as, Pſal. 10. 4. Pſal. 5. 9. Iſa. 55. 7. Ier. 4. 14. Act. 8. 22. And our words and actions by which we muſt be judged, Iſa. 3. 8. Ier. 8. 6. Mal. 3. 13. Ier. 9. 3. Matth. 12. 36, 37. Rev. 22. 12. Rev. 20. 13. 2 Cor. 5. 10. Prov. 5. 21. 1 Sam. 2, 3. Pſal. 119. 9. Prov. 3. 23, 24. Then the Scripture doth warrant Surplice, and Croſſing, and kneeling to Creatures, and humane Prelats, which are changeable, and alterable circumſtances and adjuncts of Worſhip, that may be, and may not be, and things indifferent; it ſhall follow, that for the moſt part, it is indifferent to do evil or well, ſin or not ſin, in thought, word and actions; and we have no warrant in Scripture for eſchewing ſin, or not eſchewing it in the moſt of our actions. I confeſſe there is little need to walk, foreign accurately, Eph. 5. 15. And to cleanſe our wayes, Pſal. 119. 9. according to the Word; If words, thoughts and actions, may go at random, as if they were variable and indifferent Ceremonies, God throweth not men in hells torments, to be eternally miſerable, for circumſtances▪ 2. For the acts of our calling, if they be Morall, they are regulated as particularly by the word, as to believe, love and fear God, or the creature;Mr. Prynne, Truth triuphing, p. 130, 131, 132, 133. The Argument of Moſes his doing all to the leaſt pin, in the Tabernacle by ſpeciall direction, conſidered. if artificiall, they are not of our conſideration. 3. That Morall acts of decent uſage of the Ordinances, do not immediately concern men, is admirable to me.

Mr. Prynne: To the Argument of Moſes his doing all according to the patern ſhown in the Mount, It is Anſwered: 1. The Tabernacle wa… no part of the Church of the Iſraelites; but only the place of meeting for Worſhip, anſwerable to our Churches and Chappels, and ſo was the Temple; But I pray you, God preſcribed the height, length, bredth, form of Tabernacles, Ark, Altar, of every Pin, Ergo, Hath Chriſt as punctually preſcribed to all Chriſtians, and Nations, in expreſſe words, the form, matter, dimenſions of all Chriſtian Churches, Temples, Chappels, Tables, Challices, Pulpits, Pews, not varying in one p. 48pin. 2. God named the men, Bezaliel, and Aholiah, who ſhould make the Tabernacle and all the implements thereof. 3. God expreſſed the frame, faſhion, colours, of the holy Garments of Aaron and his ſons: ſhall it follow, Ergo, only the Artificers whom God nameth, immediately, and none but Embroyderers, Goldſmiths, Carpenters, &c. Not Paſtors and Elders are to build up the spirituall Churches of Chriſt, Ergo, The form, matter and colour of Miniſters, and Elders garments are particularly ſet down in the New Testament. 4. The Tabernacle and Temple were corporall things made by mens hands, not spirituall buildings of mens ſpirits. 5. All theſe of the patern were delivered to Moſes the Temporall Magiſtrate, not to Aaron the Prieſt; Ergo, the Church under the Goſpel is not a ſpirituall building, whoſe maker and builder is God; and all is to be ordered by the Civill Magiſtrate, and Lay-Artificers, not by Pastors: I wonder alſo you alledge not Noahs Ark: And all in the New Teſtament, are not ſo particularly ſet down, as in the Old. Anſ. The Tabernacle was no part of the Church; but being a Type and the implements of it, to the leaſt pin, particularly expreſſed by God to Moſes; far more muſt we have from God an expreſſe for every Ceremony, not to retort this alſo, that a Corner-Cap, or a Surplice, is no part of the Church, and is indeed a teaching ſign, and ſo ſhould not be counted a Poſitive of Church-Policy. 2. Moſt falſe it is that the Tabernacle and Temple were nothing but a meeting place of the people for Worſhip, as our Churches or Chappels, are, 1. Becauſe it is to Argue the Holy Ghoſt of want of wiſdom, to ſpend ſo much Canonick Scripture in ſetting down things idely, not tending, at all to edification, and teaching us nothing of God, and in ſpecifying the Form, Height, Length, Bredth, Curtains, Candleſticks, Sockets, Rings, of naturall places that contained their bodies; for what ſhould it edifie us, if God ſhould deſcribe ſo particularly all the Churches and meeting places of the people under the New Teſtament? Now certain it is, Whatſoever things were written afore time, were written for our Learning, Rom. 15. 4. 2. Many things in the Tabernacle, as Candles in day light, Rings, Sockets, Shew-bread, belonged nothing to a naturall place, as our Chappels, or Meeting houſes do. 3. Expreſly the Scripture maketh them more then places; to wit, Holy, Religious, and Typicall ſignes of Divine inſtitution; as the Tahernacle was a Type, Heb. 8. 2. 5. Heb. 9. 1, 2. &c. Heb. 10. 1, 2, 3. And the p. 49Temple a Type of Chriſts body, Ioh. 2. 19. Ioh. 1. 14, 15. And all theſe were Types and ſhadows of Heavenly things, Heb. chap. 8, 9, 10. Gal. 4. 1. 2. &c. Col. 2. 16. 17. Which our Churches and Chappels are not, being only places common to ſacred and Civill actions. 2. God therefore can no more in expreſſe words ſet down, the form, matter, dimenſions of Chriſtian Churches and Chappels, then of the Synagogues of the Iews which had no Morall uſe for edification and inſtruction. 3. Yea, becauſe the Tabernacle and Temple and their implements, were teaching ſhadows of good things to come, and our Churches and Chappels are not ſo, nor have they any Morall or Religious uſe or influence on our ſpirits as the Tabernacle and Temple had; therefore the Lord, who is expreſſe in all Morals, which of their own nature do teach and edifie; he behoved to name Bezaliel, and Aholiah, and the form and colour of the Prieſts garments, which alſo are Typicall, and could not name our Elders, or the colour or form of their Garments. 4. All theſe weak retortions, ſuppoſe that the Tabernacle and Temple were types of our meeting houſes for Worſhip, which is a meer conjecture; they were no more types of our Chappels, then of the Iewiſh Synagogues; we may not expound types at will, but as the Holy Ghoſt expoundeth them to us in the New Teſtament: And this is a conjecturall Expoſition, and a dream to make Bezaliel and Aholiah, types of Embroyderers and Tradeſmen.

5. We know the Tabernacle and Temple were corporall things made with hands, and that they are things different from the ſpirituall things that they ſignifie; as the ſign and the thing ſignified; as therefore the Lord is expreſſe in the elements and Rites of the Supper of the Lord, becauſe all of them, Bread, Wine, taking, eating, breaking, pouring out the Wine, drinking, are teaching and edifying ſignes; and our Lord never left it to the wiſdom of men, to deviſe ſignes to teach themſelves: ſo in like manner, ſhould the Lord expreſly ſpecifie all the teaching and ſignifying ſignes in the Old Teſtament; and as Moſes might deviſe none of his own, but was tyed to follow the patern, which the Lord himſelf ſhewed to him in the Mount: So are we now under the New Teſtament, tyed to the patern of that ſame will revealed in the Word; and it is laid on us, Not to be wiſe above that which was written; and it is of perpetuall equity: The ſupream Law-giver, never left it to the wiſdom p. 50of Angels, or Men, or Prophet, Apoſtle or Church, to ſerve and Worſhip God as they thought good: But he himſelf particularly preſcribed the way, ſignes, and means: And becauſe God hath not been pleaſed in the New Teſtament to ſpecifie types of Chriſt incarnate, and come in the fleſh already; therefore are we obliged in Conſcience to believe, and practiſe no more, either in Doctrinals, or teaching types, or Poſitives of Church-Policy, then our Patern in the Mount, the Scripture hath warranted to us, to be the will of God, and in this and this only, ſtandeth the force of the preſent Argument unanſwered by paterns of unwritten Traditions, and not in theſe looſe conſequences, that we under the New Teſtament ſhould have theſe types and Policy that the Church of the Iews had, which is the Doctrine of Papiſts and Formaliſts following them, not ours; for they prove their Pope and Prelat from the Iewiſh High Prieſt, their Surplice, from the linnen Ephod of Jewiſh Prieſts; their Humane Holidayes, from the Iewiſh dayes; their kneeling to bread, from their bowing toward the Ark. 6. It is not true, that the Tabernacle and Temple were meer corporall things, no more then bread and wine in their ſpirituall relation, are meer corporall things: The Lords end, uſe and intent, in the Tabernacle and Temple, was, that they ſhould be to the people Images, and ſhadows of heavenly and ſpirituall things, Heb. 8. 5. Heb. 10. 1. 7. That all the things of the Tabernacle, were delivered to Moſes as a King, and not as a Prophet and writer of Canonick Scripture, Heb. 3. 5. Heb. 8. Luk. 24. 44. 27. Luk. 16. 31. is an untruth, except Formaliſts make the King ſo the head of the Church, in preſcribing Laws for the Policy thereof, as they make him a Canonick writer, as were David, Moſes, Solomon, from whoſe example they would prove the King to be the head of the Church: But I judge Moſes ſaw the patern in the Mount, and God face to face, as a Prophet whoſe words are Scripture to us, Deut. 34. 10. And there aroſe not a Prophet ſince in Iſrael like unto Moſes, whom the Lord knevv face to face; And as a Prophet, not as a King, his face did ſhine, Exod. 34▪ 27, 28, 29. And he was commanded as a Prophet, to write the Law not as a King, Numb. 12. 6. 7. Moſes is made the moſt eminent Prophet that was in the Old Teſtament. And why? Becauſe God ſpake to other Prophets by Dreams and Viſions▪ But he ſpake the Law and written Scripture to Moſes, mouth to mouth: This p. 51ſhould not be a compariſon between Prophet and Prophet, but betweenThe Ark of Noah proveth the ſame. Prophet and King, by this learning. 8. We judge Noahs Ark doth prove the ſame, it being a ſpeciall type of the Church, 1 Pet. 3. 20, 21. And he built it by Faith, Heb. 11. 7. And ſo by a Word of God, and at Gods ſpeciall direction, in all the length, bredth, formes of it, and not of his own head, Gen. 6. 14, 15, &c. And isCalvin, Com. in Gen. 6. 22. Quare diſcamus per omnegenus impedimenta perrump…re, nec locum dare pravis cogitationibus quae ſ… Dei verbo opponunt, hunc enim honorem haberi ſibi, flagitat Deus, ut …um ſi…am…s pronobis ſeper…. P. Martyr in loc. Nihil negligit fides, omnia pro viribus exoquitur, quaecunque ſcit deum v…lle: Muſculus Moſes fidem & obedientiam Noah comprehendit, qua ſecundum verbum dei arcam conſtruxit, Vatablus Hebraiſmus pro, quo fecit Noah prorſus, ut ci preceperat deus.Gen 6:22 commended by the ſpirit of God for ſo doing, Gen. 6. 22. Thus did Noah according to all that God commanded him, ſo did he. And Formaliſts ſhould deſerve the like Teſtimony, if it could be ſaid of them, And as the Lord commanded the Church, in creating Prelats, Surplice, and all the poſitives of Church-policy; ſo did ſhe. And ſo ſaith Calvin, on Geneſis. 6. 22. And P. Martyr, and Muſculus piouſly on this place: and with them, Vatablus. Hence I judge all other things in this, and the following Arguments Anſwer.