Answer to the Narration of the Practices of the Churches in New England, Part 6
Anſwer to CHAP. II.
HE ſaith Art. 1. 2. That we currently hold there is no viſible Church, but a particular, and that we denie an univerſall viſible Church [IN ANY SENSE.]
Anſw. Though the quoted Authors ſay. There is no Church (properly ſo called) wherein Ordinances may be adminiſtered, but a particularly only. Yet wee acknowledge alſo IN SOME SENSE a Domeſticall Church, Phil. 2. To the Church in thy houſe; and an VNIVERSALL Church conſiſting of all viſible beleevers, according to 1 Tim. 3.15. And this HIMSELF grants we hold, Marg. 2. Art. 2. Why then doth he ſay we denie an univerſall viſible CHVRCHIN ANY SENSE?
He ſtumbles at the ſmalnes of the number of members in our Churches, at their firſt erection. 7. 8. 9. (ſaith he) and on this ſtring he harpes foure or five times at leaſt in this booke.
1. What number expreſly ſhall make a Church is not ſet downe in Scripture. In Adams and Noahs time when there was not above 7. 8. or 9. perſons, will he denie the being of a Church? And what will he make of Chriſt his family, where were not above 12. beſides himſelfe? And of the firſt foundationalls of the famous Church of Epheſus who were about 12. Art. 19. 1. 7. and Biz… on that place ſaith, Paul then planted a Church amongſt the Epheſians.
2. When our number is thus ſmall, it's only in the very firſt infancy of it, it abides not ſo, but members are ſpeedily, and daily added, untill they be (as he blames us for not being) a compleate organicall body Hence …heſe objections alſo in his Marg anſwered, OF WANT OF IMPLOYMENT AND MAINTENANCE for the Officers, in regard of their ſmall number.
He ſaith Article the third, We denie all repreſentative Churches in a power of judicature.
Anſw. It is becauſe we know no rule to ſet the Officers in the roome of their whole Church, and the Presbyterie in the place of all their Churches, to binde the one or the other to ſtand to their decrees, unleſſe we had Apoſtles on earth againe, for Church Officers, yet even they were very tender in this point.
To the Margent to Art 1.
…t he may prove the number of 7. 8. or 9 too ſmall, to admini… cenſure, and ſo no Church, he makes a faire addition of his own to a rule of Chriſt: for whereas Chriſt directs, Mat. 18.15, 16. an offended brother to take one or two only to him to admoniſh the offender in private, and then tell the Church, now he will have this courſe, (beyond the rule) twice gone over, that he may make the foreſaid number too ſmall for a Church-cenſure. So that he will rather croſſe Chriſt himſelfe then not thwart us, and here he makes a long diſcourſe to ſhew his owne weakneſſe the more in this new deviſed cenſure of his.
He ſaith, The Apoſtles Churches conſiſted of many thouſands.
1. Not in their firſt beginnings, Anſw. for in the greateſt Church the number was ſmall enough at firſt in compariſon, Acts 1.15, and this is the time of our Churches we now ſpeake of.
2. Their grouth was ſudden, and by an extraordinary way, (certain thouſands being added in two dayes,) and ſo neceſſity inforced their abode together at preſent.
3. They continued not long ſo great a body, but were ſoone diſperſed by Sauls perſecution of them, Act. 8.1.
4. While they did hold together, they might poſſibly meete to edification, as well as in ſome of our Churches here in London, as Cripple-Gate, Olives, Sepulchers and others, where the Miniſters voyce may reach to edification, 4. 5. 6. 7000. ſoules, every Lords day. Vid. Mr. Mathers booke, pag. Therefore for him to ſay it is not poſſible, &c. is too large.
He tells us our Churches cannot be gathered in country Ʋillages, eſpecially of ſuch choyce Members, &c. where ſo few Saints are, &c.
1. That is the fault of people, not of the rule, nor of the way; Anſwer If the Saints be thin ſowen, who can helpe it? They ought to have flowed in more abundantly to Chriſt by the Goſpell in all this time.
2. They may partake of all Ordinances, as they did, except the Sacraments, and (ſuch as are fit) of thoſe alſo, in beſt times, and ways as may be ordered for moſt conveniency.
3. He muſt not limit Gods power, who by the word rightly diſpenſed and his bleſſing thereon,Gen. 13.14. can raiſe a people for himſelfe beyond all (our thoughts,Epheſ. 3.10. as he hath done elſwhere.
He takes much paines to no purpoſe in Marg. Art. 2. to prove in confutation of us) that in ſome ſenſe, M 9.3there is an univerſall viſible Church.
Anſw. Why, we never denied it [in ſome ſenſe,] but blamed him, (even now) for ſaying, we denied it.
☞I wonder at the man, who ſaith, 1. That we hold what we doe. … 2. Then pretendeth to prove it, but falſifies his Authors. 3. Then makes confutation of his own ſayings, as if they were ours. 4. Then flings reproaches on us for ſuch ſayings, which are not ours, but his. 5. (To make us amends) in the end of his Margent, he fathers all upon our mutableneſſe, ſaying. [ſometimes] we acknowledge an univerſall viſible Church, but uſually denie it; and yet even in this alſo, he ſlanders, not bringing (nor being able to bring, I verily believe) one word of proofe, that ever we denied it: Let him make thoſe things good, or humbly confeſſe his error.
5. To Marg. of Art. 3. he ſaith, Though we denie (in Art. 3.) the Officers of one Church power to repreſent their Church in her judicature, &c. yet ſometimes we are forced to uſe meſſengers to repreſent the whole body, as at the conſtitution of a new Church, and private examination of Members to be admitted, Anſwer. &c.
Thus he would beare the world in hand, (if you wil believe him) that our practiſe doth croſſe our Principles, but there is no ſuch thing, for here he proves not, neither can, that we denie a Church that libertie, (which all ſocieties in the world have, i. e.) to depute & delegate her Officers, in ſome particular caſes (as in her name and ſtead) to repreſent the whole body: for this is no more then the Church of Antioch did, Act. 15.2. and then our ſelves frequently doe, in ſome inſtance he mentions and divers others.
But what is this to the giving thoſe Officers generally a power of judicature in and over that Church: and a compound Presbyterie, in and over all their Churches, whom (he ſaith) they repreſent? becauſe we denie the latter, doe we therfore the former?
3 It is meete he ſhould take notice of a double aſperſion (without any ſhew of ground or proofe) caſt upon us. 1. That we denie any repreſentation of Churches. 2. That we croſſe our principles, in practiſing what we denie; both theſe imputations, (I hope) he will honeſtly acquit us of.
Marg. Art. 4. In the difinition (ſaith he) of a Church the Officers are left out.
He knowes well that a definition muſt accord to the loweſt degree of the thing defined, therefore we uſe to put in only eſſentialls and not all integralls into the definition: for ſuppoſe the Officers of a Church be taken away by death … it, yet (I hope) he will not ſay, that in the vacancy, the Church ceaſeth to be, Officers are not ſimply for the being, but the well being of a Church.
See how he adulterates his quotation, in two or three Articles of this Chapter.
1. (He ſaith) his Author aſſumes,Anſw. to q. p. 10. we hold there is no viſible Church but a particular. But his Author ſaith, no viſible Church (properly ſo called) but a particular, ſo W. R. leaves out the middle words, juſt as in Mat. 4.6. whereby the ſenſe is exceedingly altered, ſith a Church improperly ſo called, is yet a church.
2. He ſaith, [we currently hold this;] but his Author ſpeaks modeſtly in theſe words, we know not any, &c. Anſ. to 32. q. pag. 9. Anſ. to 9. Poſ. 66.
3. He ſaith, we hold there is no univerſall viſible Church [in any ſenſe;] but his Author ſaith only, we know no ſuch viſible Catholike Church, wherein the ſeales are to be diſpenſed] Anſ. to 9. Poſ. 66. A man with halfe an eye may diſcerne this is not ſquare dealing.