ffil *.'•:>: i^H w\ ""TO ' i *~0 t £*.<&<, o1& sec r> 'V> r\ J V/7 > w e* J/' {7> ,Lc y&*' . /~ \ o ztr /4& 7 $*C &A .f.-^C-t- C > V- *> Review and Confiderttlon PAMPHLETS. " The Fiift Entltuled, Queries to the Presbyterians of Scotland, by a Gentleman of that Countrey. The Second, A Querie turnd into an Argument in favours of Epifcopacy. ExpofingttieUnfound Principles, andPopifh Tinfture and Ten- dency of both 5 and Vindicating the Government and Confti- tution of this Church from the Cavils and Afperfions contain d therein. To which are Annex'd Counter' Queries offered to the Prelatijis of Scotland. As alfo «/. Conftderationsupon Church-Government: ^Thomas Torre fc-Ye. Wherein the moft material Points agitated in the Epifcopal Con- troverfie, and,infpecial, upon the Debate andQueftion of Antiquity, are fuccin&Iy cleared 5 Together, with a Defence thereof agairft Exceptions and Animadversions of a Manu- script, fupposJtobe written by J. S. The whole intended for the further Confirmation of the Teftimony of our Church, and Encouragement of her Sincere Members in Adherence to her true Gofpel Conftitution. prov. 14. 6. A Scorner feeketh Wifdom, andfindeth it not; but Knowledge is cajie mitt him that wider ft andeth. Ifa. 8. 20. To the Law and to the Teftimony ; if they Jpeak not according to thit Word} it is be* caufe there a no Light in thentr a Cor. 1-5.8 Far roe can do nothing, againtt the Truth, but for the Truth. Dt Ccelo quarendut eft Judex, fed ut quid pulfamus ad Coehm, cum habeamus hie in E'vangelid Teftamentwn. Optat. Milevit. contra Parmen. Lib. 5. ' Edinburgh, Printed by the Heirs and Succeflbrs of Andrew Atnderfon, Printer to the Queens moft Excellent Ma jelly, Anno DOM, ijq6. TO THE RIGHT HONOURABLE Sir PATRICK JOHNSTON LordProveft, Archibald Rule, William Neilfon, N D ... George Lawfon, > ™lus i George Lind, \ Sir Samuel Mcclellan Dean of Gild ; William Jeffrey Thefaurer ; Mr% Henry Hamilton iw tLfy*, ; And the reft of the Honourable Council of the City of Edinburgh. RIGHT HONOURABLE, THE following Treatifes fent to me by fome Judicious and ft*> Worthy Perfons ( who, out of a Generous Regard to th^prefent Eftablifhment, without any other Byafs, or Lower 0 Mo- Motives, have been at the Charges of Publifhing them) I have, at their Defire, Prefum'd to Dedicat to Ycur Honours. Had the Reverend and Learn d Author thought fit to Prefix his Name to them, I perfwade my felf, the known Character, which, by his Great Perfonal Accomplifhments, and Ufeful Writings he hath juftly Obtaind in this Church, would have fufrlcient- ly Recommended them to Your Honours. THE Aim and Work of the Author ( which he hath Ma- nag'd with Great Advantage) is to Brufh off the Duft, the Adverfaries of our Church have been pleas'd to call: upon Her. And indeed they do little more than Rake into the Dung-hill of long (ince Antiquated Arguments, and prefent Threed-bare Topicks in a New Drefs, to Amufe Unthinking and linwarric People. A very Superficial Acquaintance with the late Con- trovert 'twixt Us and the Prelatifts will let us fee, that feve- ral of their Arguments touch not on the Merit of the Caufe, but are manifeftly Falfe Reflections on the Miniftry of this Church and their Judicial Procedures : Not unlike the Old Serpent, who, after he has got his Death-Stab, will be ftill Nibling at the Heel of Him that gave it. Right HorzvuraLle, If it would not Trefpafs upon Your Mo- defty,. I would Acquaint the World with the Great Encourage- ments, r ) ments and Support You have given to Piety and Vef tue, both by Your Authority and Example, and Publifh Your Difintereft- ed Zeal for Suppreffing of Vice in this Populous City. THAT the Unerring Spirit of GOD may Prefide in all Your Counfels, and Direft Your Determinations, fo as to be a Never Failing Fountain of Juftice, whofe Streams may Refrefh the Good Town,, and that Your Honours maybe as Eminent for Your Adminiftrations, as for the Truft that is put upon You» is the Sincere Prayer of, Right Honourable. Tour moji Obliged attdHumtoe Servant, ALEX. HENDERSON, :u TO THE Judicious and Candid Reader. '?/* ■ ^IS longflnce obferved ( fhall Ifay,expcriencd by the Learn- I ed and Judicious,inPoint of Debate) thatjince the Prefs { I has helped the Pen, many of all Difpofitions will needs be ■^^ Scribling, and predacious Wits, and Self-feekers, upon va- rious Defigns, of Covet oufnefs, orfupposd Credit. are Emulous to ap- pear in Print } Many Jo /hew that which paffes in theWcrld ^Learn- ing or Parts, and left theyfhould appear worfted by Adverjaries, in Debate, when once engaged, will needs, from the old Principle of Pride, make a Jhew this way in publick, thd Truth be never fo much obfeurd by the Clouds they draw upon 't, Enemies harden d, and the lefs difcerningjlumbled^ Many, to court a Party with whom they have embark 'd, will needs in this way, t ho never Jo weakly, appear to fence for their Intereft. And this, no doubt, has fet a work,, in our day, many Smatterers and fanciful Heads to enter the Lifts of Debate $ AIM , beftdes the lofs of precious time, and endeavours this way, in ftead of reaching the Praife they catch at, they do blot their Name, in the judgment of the Impartial 5 And, which is worft of all,fadly wound their Confcience,and mar the Peace thereof And as this Difpofition has pgn ally appear d in our Age, fo efpeci- dly in this Controverpe about Church Government. There have been various Methods thereof contended for $ But, the Debate running mainly betwixt the Epifcopal and Presbyterian, the Controverfie h novo come tofuch an Iffue, that the Scripture Decift on in favours of the Eftablijh'd Government of this Church, is beyond Debate with aUfincere Enquirers, and Lovers of the Truth and Way of GOD. 1 2 ' The iv To the Judicious and Candid Reader. The lamentable dear-bought Experience of the dreadful Tendency md Effe&sojf* Prelatical Eraftian Hierarchy ( that grandTool of Arbitrary Government and Tyranny ) having,at loft, opened the Eyes of this Nation, and thereupon excited ,to pake off that Antichri- ftianYoke, and, together with our National, to Kef ere and Efta- bijh the true Gofpel Liberty 0/ this National Church, her Courts and Judicatories 0/Divine Appointment,*^ bleffed Effe&s where- of have beenfeen and felt in the Advancement 0/* Edification ( the great Defign fure Difownd, and, atbefi, made a meet Ambiguous Mute, a Rule fo General, Verfatile, and (fo to fpeak ) indigejted, that it mufi have the premisd Decifions to make it of any Significancy in this Point, Moreover, we have a clear Difc every of the ?opifo Tin&ure and * Tendency of their Principles and Pleadings, in their ]oyning Jjfue with Papifls, in the Arguments adducd to uphold ^ef-lierarchy, the very fame with fuch as are made ufe of by the Popes Advocats to Uphold and Support his Triple-Crown. This may feemftrange in Men pretending to own a Protefiant Profeffion : But the My fieri- ' oufnefs ofthu Myfierie lies here 5 The Popifh Hierarchy // of fuch a Mould, Founded and Upheld by fuch Principles, that it mufi needs run up to the Apex cfan Infallible Head 5 A±nd the Prelatick Hierarchy, being of that fame Nature and Cut, and in it f el fa Member of the fame Body, a Branch of the fame Tree, whe-n the Pope & To the Judicious and Candid Reader. is profeffedly Jhaken off, another Head mufh be in his 'Place, 4 Vifible Principle of Unity ( as J.S. Afferts, theBifljop is to his Diocefs ) . And thus it mufl Ijfue in a Civil Pope, as Sir George Mackenzie has own dour King to be in place of the Pope : Whence none have 6eenfuch Zealous and warm Pleaders fir , andflickling Upholders of Arbitrary Government, and our Kings Transcendent SoveraignL over Parliaments and Laws, as Prelats yWitnefs their Principles and Pra&ice in both Nations. 'Tistrue, a Beckett Mitre did once pujh the Crown if England, as f aid one of their Poets, and their many Seditious PraUices in Oppofition to Monarchs are Recorded • But then they had aflrong and prevalent Patron, the Man at Rome with the Triple Crown, whofe proper immediat SubjeUs they held them* f elves, who could Trample on Emperours Necks, Threaten the Greatefl Monarchs with RomeV Thunder and Lightning, Looje Subjects from their Allegiance, and Arm them againfl their Princes 5 But now that the Scene is changd, and the Monarch is Pope, they mufi Serve their New Mafter, who, as Bifljop Gladftones expreffes it in his Letter to K. James, can nod them Down at his pieafure, if they be not Clofs and Cordial to Court Dejigns, and become not Faith- ful Creatures to their Affumd Head, and Faithful Subje&s of the New Civil Papacy. But for aflmple Go/pel laborious Miniftry and Government,^ Court r of a Divine Mould and Subordination, Cenfu- ring all Scandals, and in all Church Members, according to Scripture Rules, with Go/pel Impartiality, wherein Congregations have a. Right to Call Paftors, and Ruling Elders, Representing them, are Conflifuent Members of Church Judicatories, Down muft this Fabrick go as a blazing Star and Comet ofprodigioufly dangerous Influence and of a formidable Afpetf upon the Hierarchy 5 And this we find their Prin~ ciples and Pra&ice Zealoufly levelled againfl. Hence hijhop Whitoift Archhifiop ^/Canterbury, tragically Complain d to G). Elizabeth^ as if the Hierarchy were going to Wrack, andimplord Her Help, when a Motion was but made in Parliament for Removing that Shameful Ihing, and Grievance of all good Men, fcil: The Pluralities and Npn-refidences : Not toinfifl upon that which is imputed to that Queen, That floe Dif own d, ifnotlaidafide, one of Her greatefl Bi- fhops, for dealing with Her in order to the Eftabliflment of a Teach- ing Miniftry throw the Nation* Jf To the Judicious and Candid Reader xj \ If fome Prelats have appear d if a betttr Natural Humour, and more AffeBed to the Proteftant Religion, and have accordingly, *: pott this Grmnd, withjhod fome Arbitrary Court Motions and Popifh Defigns, 'tis owing meerly to the premisd Ground of their Perfonal Qualities, not at all to the Nature and Mould of the Hie- rarchie itfelf. So that they fall into a meer unaccountable Paralo- gifm, who, upon the Ground offuch like Oppofition, and even that made to the Popifh Ddigus of the late K. James by fome Englifh Prelates, will Conclude that Government and Hierarchic a Barrier again]} Popery 5 For that late Inflance, it is well known,* that theviftble Profpett of that Princes A&ing the Phaeton, andhaftine his Downfall, together with apiece of Self-Inter e(l and Reputation, as likeways the convincing Difcovery^ how the Body of the People flood AffeBedto him and his Defigns, in a great Meafure, if not ab- folutely prompted them to that Appearance, which has ever fin ce Ren- dered them fa Popular. We know, th at fever al of the more modeft and better Humour d Papifts have profefsd Aver fation from, yea,and Abhorrency of the Maffacre of 'Paris, andfuch like Barbarous Mur- ders committed up in Proteftants, yet 'tis known, that their Infak lible Head the Pope x Holinefs, did with the Extremeft Complacency entertain the News of that Maffacre, rf/>/wW^Proceffions and 0- ther Signs of Joy at Rome and elfewhere, fent his Legat to Congra-- iulat the French King, upon that glorious Effort in Defence of the Church. And therefore, as none can be fo Brutifo as to deny, that the Popifh Principles do natively lead to fuch Tragical Iffues, the Obligation and NativeTinffure whereof, mufl needs have the Afcen- dent over the more Calm and Modefl Humour of fome Subjeffisof that Hellijh Hierarchy 5 The fame may be apply ed to the Cafe of Prelats, , and infpecial with refpeft to the late inflancd Oppofition ofK. James. The Principles arid lnterefl of the Hierarchy being of a Piece with Arbitrary Government, and knit untofuch a Supreme Head, and Abfolute Supremacy,**/ the Native Complexion thereof doth require, this lnterefl mufl needs Over/way, and have the Predominant over the Better and Calmer Temper of jo me Perfons, when A dt ions mo ft tm account able come to be Stated as apparent fit Means and Expedi' entsfor Upholding this beloved Hierarchy, and the proper Define thereof " Jjs xjj To the Judicious and Candid Reader. As for the Prints here Examind, Ifuppofe, the Weakness ', as well as Heterodoxie thereof, has obvioufly appear 'd to all judicious Per- Cons, who have Perns' d the fame, together with the virulent Tin&ure of the large Preface prefix d to the firft. I have therefore been flow, tho Solicited, to offer this Account of them, expeBingfome might have done it better, and in a more Compendious Method, but finding - thefe Pamphlets very Current, and Commended by that It arty, I beftow^d fomefpare Time upon the Firft 5 And having thereafter teen the Second, much of a Piece with the Preceeding, and, in a great Meafrre, a Naufeous Repetition of the Silly Paralogifras where- with It is Stuff 'd, 1 have offer dalfo my Thoughts upon it , juppofing the Defign and Connexion of both did Require the fame. I judgd it alfo Expedient to Offer fome Counter Queries to that Party, to Draw them Forth, ifpojjible, to a Scripture Difpute upon upon this Point, which, if Formally and Scrip tur ally Manag'd, ( and 1 am not without Hope, Some will beftirrd up to. Under tab this, if any of that Party fhall thus Enter the Lifts, who will acquit them- felves to more Advantage than ever I could ) I am fur e, A&um eftde Caufa Epifcopatus, its Antifcriptural Frame and Weaknefs will ap- pear, when it is come to this fair Trial. As for The Considerations upon Church Government, after Subjoyned, I had of a very confider able Time fince, even fever al years ago, Offer d them to a Gentleman if the Epifcopal Perfwafion,z//»^ hisDefire, who having Perus 'd them about fix Weeks and more, Re- turn d them, without the le aft Hint of any Reply to be made by himfelf, or any other, tho I have been credibly Inform 'd? they were Commu- nicated to Mr. S. But the Gentleman's Declining as is faid ) any , Reply to be Offer d, either by himfelf or any other, having perfwaded me, that neither he nor Mr. Sage did intend any Anfwer ot Debate, I was fomewhat Surprizd, when Inform d by a Rev. Brother, to whom I had Entr lifted the Delivery of my Papers /# the Verfon men- tion d, that ^ Paper containing a pretended Reply was fent unto him, which he had keep'd by him of a confider able Time, as judging upon Verufal thereof, that it was offuch a Matter, and Mould, as did notdeferve my Notice ^ And thus it was alfo judgd by another Ju- dicious Perfon who had Perufed it. I i'onfefs 1 was Dtfirous to fee it> but > Y To the Judicious and Candid Reader." hut a very confiderabk Time interveening betwixt the Gentleman 's Redelivery of thefe Papers, in the Manner infianced, and the Offer of this pretended Reply to thePerfon mentioned, and much more Time ere I had any Notia >ofith I muft confefs, it appear a Odd f™f' '*!' th°f" goodly Piece appear d % have ken the Z>ubje&ofnojmallTimesAdvifement,yet it was not only Offer din- fuch manner, as I was left to a meerConjetfure about the Author (what ever probablereBitude there is inmyConjetfure, which I do judoehas not mifsd theMark) but leeways that it was drawn up in fuch Dull and Illegible Writ, that for my own part, who am none of the beftSkill'din Reading bad Writ, £ was in no Capacity toVerufe it. The Truth is uprn- this Ground, aslikeways, bee aufe of the Characters of it mention d 1 had of a confiderabk time laid it afide^ But being about to fend thefe Confiderations to tbe Prefs, Icaufed a Perfon well feei in Reading Writ Tranfcribe it Andupon perufal, I found it indeed fuchaPiece as Anfwered the Defection I had of it 5 Tet knowing the Humour of the Party tand that probably it is now in the hands of fever als, as an Anfwer to the Confiderations mention d Ilud/d it expedient to offer this Confutation of it, wherein I have Declif/d nothing Confiderabk in itfearce one material Sentence, if any in it ma? be calVd fo, a Capite ad Calcem, which the Author, whoever he be muft needs acknowledge. Therefore I have not J udgd it expedient to burden Paper further, orjwell this TraB to any greater Bulk,which is too big already, in offering to the Prefs this pitiful P of quill. As for the Repetition and Co-incidence offome Paffages,th'eReader mil not think it Strange, when undemanding that fever al things here foyntly prefented, were written upon various Occ a ft on s and at & Con- fiderabk diftance of Time, when there was no Defign of Offering them to Publick in this Conjunction : What appears repeated, the Judicious may eafilypafs over 5 And for the Readers of the kffer Size in Point of Knowledge, they may reap fo me Advantage in Re- freshing their Memory. The Prolixity, I know, will be readily 6)uar~ retted \ Andy no doubt, a Sufficient Anfwer might have been redae- 5 f 5 1 fed ~P To the Judicious and Candid Reader ted to much porter Limits } And I Acknowledge, it hath Smiled te this Bulk, afler putting Pen to Paper, much beyond Intention :, Tet, if theVariety of the Matter be confidered, and the neceffary Charing cf fever allhingsadducd by the Querift, for pretended Illuftration and Enforcement of £// Queries, 'tis hoped, that the Ordinary Reader, not fo fully feen in the Popifh, or Epifcopal Controverfie, for whoje Vfe this is mainly, if no f only, intended, may reap Con ft- derable Advantage by the more dilated Accounts and Explication of thefe Points. r r I (hall Detain the Reader no further from the Yerufal of theje Sheets, andfiall only add my ferious Prayer, that the GOD of Truth may lead him into all Truth, with all the Lovers ofHohneJs, md put his Band to the Rearing up of his fallen Tabernacle in our MarriedLand,Revive His Work, and Glorifie the Houfe of Histo- ry fo as all Impiety and Error may flop its Mouth, and His Qjlory may Shinein his own Inftituted Ordinances, mtil His Churches Ware- fare is Accomplished* THE His Reafon and Notion againft this Dif- fer proof of Prelacy,improven againft him. 2 tinttion, taken from the Relation of that His Argument from the Subordination of which is Extraordinary to fame antecedent fettled the Seventy to the Twelve Apoftles, as like- Order, Examined and found Impertinent; wife from the (landing Office of the Dia- Which is made appear in fome Queries a. conat, to prove that there were Church-Of- nent Mofes^s Extraordinary Office, which is ficers of different Ranks, to which Apoftles found thereby Impeached, as likewife the were Superiour, difcovered r,o be utterly Office of Apoftles. 9, 10 Unferviceable to his Scope. 3 His Demand, What need was there to employ His Argument from Eph. 4. 11, 12. and Extraordinary Officers, to do that for which Prom I Cor. 12. 28. made appear to fall utterly vijian had been made by appointment of Ordinary, fliort ofafuitableConclufion to his purpofe, difcovered to be founded upon the abfurd and improven againft his Pleadings,as draw- Hypothefis of a prior Inftitution of Ordina- ing feveral Abfurdities upon him. ,4,5 ry Officers, and a Super-inftitution of the His abfurd Extenfion of the Deacons Of- Extraordinary, and thus to ftand crofs to fice, withrefpeQ: to Preaching and Admini- the Divine Appointment under both Dif« ftration of the Sacraments, noted and con- penfations. Ibid. Where alfo his Demand, futed. Ibidem What was wanting to Extraordinary. Officers His Reafoning from the Power of Timothy to oblige them to have Recourfe to the Ordinary, and Titus, in reference to conferring Sacred is Examin'd and Refuted from the Inftances Orders and Cenfuring Presbyters, Refuted premis'd. and found fhort of reaching a Conclufion a- That the fixing of Ordinary Officers of the gainft Presbyterians. His infolent angry Church through the World, was both ne- Conjiden.cc noted. 6t 7 ceflary for the Churches Prefervation, and [ a J its kvi Tht CONTENTS, the great Scope of the Exerclfe of the A po- His AfTertion, that the fame wtrl which the ftolick Office, notwithstanding whereof Jpfiles, and Evangehfls did m their daysywas tg- the Apoftles flood in no need of Ordinary *e performed by Authored Ptrfons to the End Officers for Dire&ion and Jnftruttion in at large confuted.and loaded with grofsAb- their Office. Page i i furdities ; in fpeeial, as be extends the Af- The Prefacer aflerts that Ecclefiaftick Go- fertion to all Officers mentioned in the New vernment being ConfiderM, whether with Teftament, and fo as likeways to include refpett to the Original of Church Power, or the Extraordinary Gifts communicated to the Charifmata, the Gifts and Qualifications Laicks. Paget i6, 17,18 of Officers, either they were all Ordinary The Plenitude of A^oftoiick Power or Extraordinary, how abfurdly, made ap- which he holds to import an Authority and pear; And from the fame Grounds it is Jurifdittitn over all Subordinat Officers and Demonftrated,that in the beginning of the Believers in Chrift,he, notwithflanding, will Gofpel, there was a neceffity, fome Officers needs own to be NecefTary, Perpetual and ihould be Ordinary, others not. 11, 12 Permanent; how abfurdly, at large made The Prefaced s next Argument againft this appear. I9 Diftin&ion, taken from the Communication That what was Ordinary in the Apoftles of Extraordinary Gifts to Laicks as well as Office, and to be deriv'd in a Suceefiion re- Minifters, confidered and refuted. The fu- fpecis properly and primarily the Paftoral tility of his further Inference noted, viz Office, prov a from feveral Scripture That this DiftinsTim is unferviceable againft the Grounds. zo Suceefiion of Eccliftafticks in that comely Order, The Prefaced s Railings againft the Ctve- vthich our Lord and his Apostles EJlablijked -, a "ant noted, which caft a deep Reflection Conclufion utterly extraneous to the Point upon K. Charles f, and id. 20> 2t in Queftion. # 12, 13 The Prefaced s Glofs upon the Apoftle The abfurd Application of this Suceefiion J*hns Reprehenfion of Diotrephes, wholov'd in his Principles further noted Ibid, the Preheminence , viz. That Preheminence is His Argument againft Extraordinary N. not the thing Condemn'd, but the undue Af. Teftament Officers, taken from the removal feeling of it, confuted from the Scope *nd •fa Scripture Pattern for the Church to imitate Contexture, as alfo from Parallels, and dif- in the Ministry and Gevernment thereof, fince covered to be a Popilh Evafion oppofite to extratrdinary Examples are no Precedents, nor de~ the Senfe of Sound Divines. 21,22 22 fi&* for Imitation, Examin'd and found His Impudence in the pretended Retorfi- grounded upon a falfe Suppofition, and on upon Presbyterians, as ac\ing the Diotre- a begging of the Queftion, and improven phefes in oppofing Prelats, which he pre- agamft the Epifcopal pleadings from the tends to inftance in the AfTemblies Aft at Office of Apoftles and Evangelifts, which is Glafgow 1638, at large made appear, and made appear to be Extraordinary. 13,14 Demonftrated from the Account of the Mat- t His Argument againft the premised Dif- ter of Faft,the State and Carriage of Prelats tinftionof Ordinary and Extraordinary Officers, their Grofs and Illegal Ufurpations upon taken from our Lord's promis'd Prefence with this Church, together with their other his Meffengers to the End of the World, confi. Scandals grounding that juft Aft and Cen- der d, and refuted., and retorted upon him- fure. 23 24. felf, with refpea to what he muft needs ac- This further Confirmed from what' he knowledge anent the Offi«e of Prophets, as Confefles of K. Charles his full Satisfaction diftinft from Apoftles and Evangelifts, with the Proceedings of Church and State, Gifts of Tongues, Miracles, Gifts of Heal, in Oppofuion to Prelates in the Parliament ang. The abfurdity wherein he is in volv'd, 1641. ibid whether he "ownthefe Offices to be expir'd, The Prefacer' s Affertion, That thtre is no or not, with refpeft CQ Our Lard's fromis'd In/ianse ff Ordination, and Jurifdiftw by meer frtjeme, IC Presbytcrf The CONTENTS. Presbyter) to it found in Scripture, Confider'd Minifters of different Ranks and Orders, disJih* and Refuted by (nftances. Pace's 25, 26 guffid by Marks of Authority and Power; that His Argument taken from the derivd Paul T^ forth the different Ranks and Functions of Epifcepal Authority, which he offers to prove the Chriftian Miniflery -with Refemblance to the (com 1 Tim. r. 3. and $\ 19 Tit, 1. 5. Con- natural Body, Examin'd, and his Unfoundnefs fidered and Refuted from the Office of thefe and Inconfiftency therein made appear, 1. In Evangelifts, and the Subject Matter of the acknowledging the Gofpel Difpenfation an-. Epifl'es. ( 26, 27 other, and diftinft from the Legal. 2. In His Self-contradicVing Folly, in Charging CrofTingthe Gentleman Querip, who founds a Diotrephes Ambition upon Presbyterians, the Office of a National Primat upon that of altho' acknowledging that Presbyterian Go- the High-Priefr, which is Contradicted by vcrnment fets ali Minifters on a Level, the deriy'd {landing Office of Apoftolat. noted and made appear : As alfb the Re- It is alfo made appear, that the Admimori tortion is offered, that the Hierarchie fets of different Ranks of Church Officers under Srairs and Steps for ambitious Climbers, to both Difpenfations, touches not Presbyte- be Bifhops, Arch-Bifhops, Metropolitans, rians, with whom the Queftion is anent &c That Calvin aflerted Presbyterian Go* different official Degrees in the Pafloral vernment to be a Reverfe of the Government Office. Page 30, 31 •/ the Primitive Church, a grofs Calumny. The Prefacer pretends to anfwer the Ob- A Reference made to the Tra£htr entituled jeftion, that People are not fo much Edifl- the Counter Effay ibid, ed by theEpifcopal Clergy, as by the Pref- The Prefacer' s grofs Diftortion of that byterians: His Anfwer taken from Chrift's Paflage, Do alt things decently And in order, Inftitution of Prelacy, &c. Scann'd at fome made appear, whether as applied to Patronife length, with a Summary Account of Pre- Symbolical Ceremonies in Worfhip, or Prelates lacy's Oppofition to rhe Scripture Pattern, and Areh.Pr elates in Government. 27,28 31,32' His Incorififtencie noted ; In Charging His large Eru&ation of Outragious An- Presbyterians with the Rebellion of Core, ger and virulent Reproaches upon the Work in withftanding Prelates ; In Aflcrting the of Reformation fince the 1638, both in Divine Institution of Prelacy in the Holy Scotland and England, as having deftru&ive Scripture, and yet, in his Method of IfTues of damnable Doctrines tBlafphemies,Enthu- pleading from the premised Text,bnnging it fiafms, the crumbling of th7 Church into factions', within the Compafs of a Circumstance of Go. Confider'd and Confuted atfome length. As vernment, Alterable according to the Pra- likewife his renewed Bantcrings about the derice of Church Governours. His Miftake Covenant. 32, 33, 3^, and Mifapplication of that Paflage, 1 Cor. The Prefacer mentions B. Guthrie's Manu- 11. 16. made appear. 28, 29 fcript ; Upon which an Account is given of His Aflertion, that the whole Model of Pref- this Prelate at fome length, as a meer time lyterian Government is contrary to Scripturt, a ferving Vertumnus. 3 5>30* boli/ignorant^ ArTertion. His alleadging His Charge of Murders of all Ranks upon th?t 'Presbyterians pretend Scripture, not Presbyterians, from him that fat on the Throne, only for their Cohmtution, but for every to her that grinds attheMiln, which he alfo thing that's peculiar to it, Confider'd, and aflevrs to be .the Effects of the Covenant Charg'd with Ignorance and Obfcurity. /£;W. from the year 1640, to 1660, Confidered The Prefacer s Addrefs to his Presbyteri- and Refuted at large. 36, 37 an Countrie-men, "to confider GOD s Jnftitu- How unjufrlyfjhd £iyil Wars and Blood- tion under the Legal Dijpehfation, as to the Mini- fhed are Charged upon the Covenant, con- ftery and Government of the Church, the Inftitu- vincingly made appear; Where an Account tion of our Saviour and Practice of hit Apoftles; is alfo given of the Inundation of Pro- thatQOD wider both Difienfations did Injtitute fanity of all forts attending the Erection of tta y \ itfiii **"""' The CONTENTS. the late Prelacy in this Nation. Ibid. Which This Examen of the Prefect clofed with was alfo notic'd by the Marquefs of Argyll a Prayer for the Prefacers Repentance i£ in his Speech upon the Scaffold.?*** 38, 39 in the Land of the Living, for his attain- The Zealous Endeavours ( and not with- ing more Prudence, more knowledge ; And cut Succefs ) of Presbyterians to promote with an Advertifement, if he confult the Piety, and fupprefs all Profanity made ap- Peace, or Reputation, either of Himfelf, pear. Hid. or his Friend, to beware of fending again That the main Abetters of growing into this Countrie, Pamphlets, and of fuch Profanity, are the Non-jurant Jacobits, bigot a Nature, as is this here Examin'd. Ibid, PrelatiSls, and Popifhly affected Perfons, af- ferted and cleared. 40 GHAP. II. A Confideration and Review of the Queries ofthefirft Chapter % Ex* pojing the guerift's Ignorant and ?opifi Notions, anent the Tefti- mony of 'Early Antiquity, and the Pra&ice of the Primitive Church, as Authorizing and Determining the Senfe and Interpretation of Dif- ficult, or Contravened lexts of Scripture 5 As likemfe his Ignorant Demand ofExprefs Scriptures, to fortify the Anfmr of every one of his Queries, THat the Scriptures do Exhibite the to Fortifie the' Anfwer of his Queries perfect Rule of all Credtnda,Faticnda, Noted. ^ 47 and Petenda, made appear j with Application What Deference and Authority is allow- to the Point of Infant Baptifm, Lay- men ed to Sermons and Commentaries upon and Women receiving the Sacrament of the Scripture, cleared. 47, 48 Lord's Supper, 4T> 41 That the Church is not Infallible, and in The Paffage of 2 Pet. 3. 16. Mentioning what Senfe the Pillar and Ground of Truth, fome things hard to be underftood in ?*»? s cleared. 49, 50 Epiftles, cleared. The gjierifl Homologat- The jtpoftles were furnifhed with a fix'd ing the Popiih Adverfarie in this Citation Rule, and had Infallible Infpiration in . the made appear. 43 , 4f> 45 Management of their Work and Office, His Affertion of the NeceJJity of Consulting how and in what refpecb/ made appear. early Hislory, and the Practice of the Church, in 5',WJV 5 J urder to the Understanding of the Difficult Scrip* The pretence of Miracles to patronife *urest found a Popifh. Evafion, and loaded Epifcopacy Refuted. 54, 5 J with Abfurdifies. 45> 46 The Point of Separation from the Epifco. ft His Foolifh Demand of Enfrefs Scripture pal Church, touch'd. 55, 5$ *---,■■ l -\ ■ CHAP. III. The CONTENT 5. CHAR III. rv XIX ^ Containing anAnfwer to the Queries of the \\ Chap. And Bxamin* ing this ParaphleterV Popijh Inconfiflent Notions, anent the]ewi(h Oeconomy, as Exemplifying a New Tejiament Pattern of Epifcopal Government 5 And his Affertion of ~ the Necejjity of an %)nioH thereunto : Together with his Ahfurd Pleading fir the Denomina- tion of Priefts, as the proper Official Name or Epithet of G of pel Minifters. HOw far the Jewifh Oumomie and Laws for Epifcopacy, clear'd, and the unfervice- are fulfill'd and aboliuYd by Chrifr, ablenefs of this Argument made appear from clear'd, ^ Pages 56, 57, 58 feveral Grounds. Page 6$ The DifHn&ion of the Law of. Nature »nd The Queries pretended Anfwer to the the Law Pojitive, clear'd. As alfo whether Objection, A Bifhop over Payors, and the High. the Law concerning Forbidden Marriages Prieft over all the Priefts, is fuch a Medium as will obliges Chriftians, and upon what Ground, plead for a Papacy ; viz. That under the Law, The ^terift's Ignorance in this point not- there was but one Temple and Altar, that the ed. 59, 60 Jewifh Nation was one Provincial Church, dec. The Unwarrantablenefs of Separation largely fcann'd and baffled ; The flrength of from the Jewifh Church, tho' corrupt, ut- the Objection fortified by feveral clear terly unferviceable to prove Subjection to Grounds ; And the Unfoundnefs and In- Prelates, and doth plead againft Separation confiftency of his Subterfugies made ap- fromthis Church in her prefent ConfKtuti- pear. 6$, 66,67, 68, 60, 70 on. 4 ; Ibid, His pleading for the Denomination of Prieft Our Saviour's Ordaining twelve Apoftles, or Sacerdos, as a Defignation proper to Mini- and feventy Difciples ab.furdly pleaded by fters of the Gofpel, largely Scann'd ; The the Qjterift to Patronize Prelacy. His ab- unwarrantablenefs thereof Demonftrated by furd Affertion of our Lord's adopting two feveral clear Scripture Grounds. 7 r,72, 73, 74 Jewifh Rites of that Church, viz. the Poftcce. His Quibbling anent Melthifedeck, as being nium andBaptijm to be two Sacraments of the a Type of Chrift, yet not offering Sacrifices, New Teftament, at large made appear u- confuted. 74,7? pon important Grounds. 61,62,63 His Argument taken from ifaiaFs calling In what Senfe the Apoftle Heb. 5. may Miniflers of the Gofpel Priefts, Ifa. 66. 21. be faid,to argue from the Old Conftitution, The Apoftle Peter's mentioning Sacrifices un- to the New, clear'd, and the Hjterifi' $ abfurd der the Gofpel, 1 Pet 2.5. As alfo from the Diftortion noted 63, 64. Altar mention'd, Heb. 13. Examin'd and In what Senfe Luke made u£e of the 70, Refuted. 76,77,78 alfo clear'd. Ibid That Paftors a (Turning the Title of Mini- Whether the Succefllon of hUtthiat to Ju- fters, not of Priefts, obliges not to refufe das, the Orders of Levites and Priefb,plead to live by the Altar in a Gofpel feofe. 78, 79 Lb] CHAP. IV, r £ ' m an contentr CHAP. IV. Wherein are Examind the Queries touching the loft Appeal in t$tu troverfies about Matters a 14. clear'd at large ; And the Queries <*, yea, to another Nation, &c. how ab. Foolilh Pleadings detected. 126,1 27, 128,129, furdly, clear'd at large. .113., 114,115^116 GHAP. VL / **« sfo CONTENTS. CHAR VI, iaknlol \&AT ^^^Mr^ C efpeciall/ that taken pom Atts 20. J agaw& Timothy'/ Epifcopacy. THe Sjfurifs Foolifh Cavil, That Bifhop of Rpbtfi* clearlv DrnvM Presbyterians infer that Timothy was The ®uerifl\(^*l %P > ' f3M3>'"'* De- covered at large. P^„ ^ , , Ldfrom^ £**"»"> Our Argument, that 2y«,% is not menti- His Inference W rf P„7 dl '3*>»3 7 »» d particularly in the Exhortation to the Elders, legat frme of their ComJj , ft°pS COhU dt' improven at fome length; And the ^m/?' Jfeni, Jy Zh Z Zti ' I °We>' m theh Evafions, /«7. i. That he is included in fame .' plaIf t! ? ' W **** ifc'!^ .GM^A. . a; That he was from wh^fa^r H* "*«»* -inirrufted in all parts of his Office by rowd kuowleds'd «{/S ^7 rV' ■ who are ac- jf *.** ; As.alfo that he is not excluded ^X^^aiJ^T9 ^P°int" from his (harem the pathetick Exhortation; Warraniablenefs of wL^nl0' abL°Ut the fully Confuted, and made appear to be rel ftionis Shted ffice the Re- pugnant to the Scope and Context, as alfo His next Concln/Tnn j , J37 to the Epifcopal Hypothefis and Plead- premised ! SuppofitiS ' ,t\l H™-/* ^That Timothies Travels ^ft g^^^J^f**^. Churches clearly pointed at in Scripture, Epifcopal ^ lod^Zr^ intfinfical are rnconnftent with his Eftablifluncnt as pear T, ,be equally abfurd ^ madeap" 138 CHAP. VIL Wherein are Confidered ^Queries of the VI Chapter, anent the Extent andUmUs of the Apoftles Com*®,*, he Office oftL LXX Difaples, and Evangehfls, the Succeffion of Btflms to 4 poftles, EXpofingthe Q»v'fsAntifc^^^ And wfpeaal tnPorntofa Lawful Sue ceffion and Derivation of the Mwifierial Office from Apoftles. Privation of *Hat the Apoftles could confine their Church wh^ch himfelf U*a - „, extenfive general Commimon by a GroundlTfs PlcadW Ll"? PHted' a volunury Parfition, is gr«t„ fuppos'd by which is at 1 ^TM^lnl i'T\ the ghtenft, and impertinently pleaded from from the Scone *r/r* Everted *«ft being thcApoftle of the Circumcifion ral klsLmX M% Conte™\ ^m Pa- andPWof the (fcififc/, which is made appea Office' JTl t NatUre of cj»e APoftolicfc from feveral Grounds. Vages ,3^14141 °^' ^ the JucSement <* Interpreters. The Appftle JEWs not medling with any l42' l43' l4*> '45, 14* y ' ^CONTENTS, xxllj i > . t * The Nature of the Office of the Seventy bited by the Fathers. Ibid. Where isalfo Difciples* whether Extraordinary, ©r to be made appear the Q$erift's foolilh Cavil a- Succeeded to, clear'd from Scripture, and nent the Different Reading of the Original the Tudgment of Interpreters. Page 147 Text, and that the anticnteft Copies are A Succeflion to Apoftles in the full Ex- folio w'd, becaufe of the greater Number, tent of their Power, difown'd and pleaded ^ Pages iy4, 15 c againft by Dr. Barroxo. 148, 149 The Qtteriji's Odd and unaccountable Af- The Nature of the Office of Evangelifts, fertion, viz. That Offiu-bearers of the ChrU what it was, clear'd from Scripture ; The si ion Church musl us clearly derive their Suc- Scnle of the Univerfities of Ley den and ceflion from Apoftles, as the Priefts were Simmer Exhibited thereanent. The Qyerisl's obljg'd to clear Succefion by the Regijler men- inconfiftent Notions in this point expos'd. tiond, Ezra Chap. 2. Expos'd at large. The 149, 150, 151, 1J2 Nature of a true Succeflion from Apoftles The Succeflion of Bifhops from Apoftles clear'd, and feveral palpable Inconfiftencies Exhibited by fome of the Antients, fuch as in the Qgerifl's Reafonings upon this Point, lunaus, Tertullian, &c. in vain pleaded by made appear. 15 y, 15$, 157, 1 58 the gkterift ; And how unferviceable this His Calumny and Afperfion upon the Fa- is to his Scope, made appear. 152, 1 $3, '54 mous Mr. Robert Bruce, viz. That he did O/- Thatfome Canonical Books of Scripture, ficiat as a Pasltrfor Ten years before put inOr- were not at once received by all the Anti- ders ; A grofs and lying Imputation. «nts, or that there is Difference in the 158, 159 Catalogues as to fome of them, a ground- In what Senfe Pallors are called to Ratifie lefs and unfuccefsful Anfwer, to what is the Covenant betwixt GOD and Man, pleaded againft the pretended Succeflion of cleared ; And the Office of Non-preaching Bilhops to the Apoftles, from the maim'd PreUtis thereby upon this Ground expos'd, and contradi&ory Accounts thereof, Exhi- I6® CHAR VIII. Wherein are Examind our Querift'x Ignorant Notions upon the Point of the Apocalyptic Angels, and his Foolifo and Atttifcriptttral Plead* Ings for the Acceptation of the Term Angel for a Jingle Per/on, THe Qgeriti's Medium againft Presby- Angels, is utterly remote from affoording terians, viz. if t he Seven Angels be any Patrociny to the Diocefan Prelate. As n Prejidents, it mail be made appear there likewife the Denomination of Stars. Page 165 were fome Number of Presbyters in each of the The Commendations given to fome of ACizn Churches t elfe the Scheme of Presbyterian thefe Angels, and Reprehenfion of others, Government is marrd, or Bex* s Opinion of a does not impeach the collective Senfe of Prefident muft be rejecled ; Expos'd, and the Term Angel. 164 found a Fooliftt Unaccountable Notion, The Huerip's Foolifli Inference from > Pages 161,162 Presbyterians Account of the Angels, viz. What Change of Prefidents Presbyterian That a U theChriftians in thefe Churches, were Government admits of, clear'd. Ibid, to be equally Blam'd far the Faults reprovd in That the Seventy Tranflate the Word the Epijlles; Expos'd. i$6 Mejfcnier, Mai. 2. 7. by the Term Ayy'tfos, That the collective Senfe of the Word whereby phn Reprefents the Apocalyptic Angel, gives no Advantage to Independents [ c ] againft ^ CONTENTS. ig*\r& Prmytman Government, either to Monro, and others, that the Pa~- i J^ argue for the Power of Lay -men in Chursh wanting in the Cooie J 'v * c!e K"* " Government, or the Independency of at St J W , P K- 7«** Library Parochial Churches ; clear'd at large. His Fooliih Cavil, that the fti p*9 Ptfff?* i6<5 itf? ^nfe r.f *h. t y, ynat the Collective The *,*>, Evafion from what « fplead terpre? the S? 25 "S' °blige t0 in" That the Term A^/ is reprefcnted in the Jlis Dilemml Vi P , / , ,(i9 170 Plural Number anent Z Aprfties ufing *»2le ^Tfe^yS^t £=£ "f rf an Apofirophe, eip0SM and Confuted, {mil, Sun,d ,hS ilrX, S,Z p'J I As alfo, his repeated EvaSon of Dr! ST**.?**"*"***. Anfwe'r. C H A P. I X. A Conjrderation and Anfwer of the Queries of the V III Chan >f mnt the Confutation of the Council of Terufalem • Tho Da * R»li„& Elders, The Ri.ht ^dwLL of ZlyJrftj JhJh atone,, be. Expo/^g the QueriftV J^t' \nd Antifcrt turd Notions in thefe Points. xwycrtp* THe Qgerijrs Notion anent the Confli- Primats, Arch-Bilhops »;/w *>i tuent Members of the Church of Cmm/arieV Prfbenl'^tTh Ch"nceIh"> UerujMhm, Ails r5, Expos'd ; In fpecial The &£,/? FonliS ' ¥"*<"<• ^id. touching the pretended Suffrage of Deacons J PrefjZ* lytleZ*} IK"* ^ therem, and their Authorhy to Baptize. PrWd b/rhe Speech of 3g ^t°Tf His Enquiry, what the Ruling Eider' is* £ &( wt?trfUS^^r "»^ and if a Lay-man, how he comes by a Del- refuted and expS^pS^L^ ^ Cifive \ ote m Church AiFairs ; Confider'd ;. That BeUarmin zkerrfthlU- 79,l8°> ' 8 1 And the Office of Ruling Elder, clear'd o? Prtcy Zth*Z Prin^T RJght from Scripture. x73, m JW^'donwcffi^ **/<¥». s Judgment m this Point clear'd made appear o a ^W '> in his Comment upon the chief Texts con- That it was not meerly the vL^ % A*2 troverted, i Tim. 5. 17. x «* Ia. a8. portunity, but a Principl faoalnft? '?f 0p- Upon 1 the <%m/?'s Demand of Exprefs the firft Reformers to EftTblifh .n^ff f°r PCed Texts of Scripture for Kirk-S-fftcns, Presby- prov'd from a lar^e T^ft- ■ 0tter Form» M# 238, 239 the Senfe of Orthodox Divines. 224,225 The Arguer's impertinent Allegation of His Attempt upon the Second Preroga- Pauls Reprehenfion of the Apoftlc ?eter4 tive, anent the Gift of Tongues and Miracles, and Paul and Barnabas Quarrelling and Part.. confider'd His frivolous Evafion, that it ing Afunder, to this Scope, expos'd. 239, was not confind to apoftles, expos'd. 225", 240 426,227. Where it is cleared, in what re- His Arguing for Epifcopacy from the fpe£r, thtfe Gifts were the Badges of the Policy of the Church from the beginning Apoftolick Office. of the World, from the Government of the The Arguer's AfTertion, viz. Thatthefe Patriarchs, from the Jewijh Oeconoraie, the Gifts wtre Credentials and Evidences of their Subordination of Priefts refolving in one Ctmmifiion, as the firft Propagators of apofitive High-Prieft ; His Inference to prove the Religion, and thus not nectjfary to be devolved on fame Mould of Government continued in their Succejfors, has overthrown all his Pam- the New Teftament from this Ground, fhlet} which is at large made appear in fe- That it was a comely Order ; That Chrift veral Inftances, 227, 228, 229 came not to Deftroy, but to Fulfill the He aflerts,the Apoftles were to be Succeed Law; That, if this Model muff be Typical^ ed to in every thing proper to them as fuch, Chrift fulfilVd it by copying after it ; At large yet not in the Credentials inftanced ; How Scann'd, and made appear to confift of moffc abfurdly and inconfiftently, noted. 230,23/ unaccountable Notions. 240, 24?, 243> His Attempt upon the third Mark. fill. 243, 244. The giving the HalyGhoji by impojition of Hands, Several other grofs Inconfiftencies, and is, that the Church Primitive believ'd the unaccountable Errors obferv'd in this his Holy Ghoft was confer'd by the Impofiti- Pleading. 244, 24?, 246 on of Bifhops Hands in Confirmation ; That his Arguing Pleads for a Pope o- Wherein his abfurd Confounding the Spi- ver the Catholick Church vifible, evidently Tit's Ordinary and Extraordinary Gifts, the made appear, and the nakednefs of his filly Ordinary and Extraordinary Evidences, Subterfuges and Anfwers to this Argument cSr-t. is made appear and expos'd. As like- laid open, viz. This, i. That there cam wife his Contradiction to Dr. Barrow, who be no univerfal Paftor, becaufe the Unity «f the aflerts this incommunicable Apoftolick Pri- Headjhip mufi refolve only in Chrift, which is Viledge 231, 232, 233. Where alfo is found equally to Impeach his Aflertion of confider'd the Inftance of Ananias impofing an Univerfal Oecumenick Head under the Hands upon Paul, and the unferviceablenefs Old Teftament, fuch as he aflerts ; That: thereof to his Defign made appear. this Principle overthrows an Univerfal That the fourth Mark, fed. Infallibility in Vicar or Suffragan, either under the Old Teaching, was peculiar to Apoftles, at large or New Teftament Difpenfation, evidently made appear, from the Nature and Scope nude appear. 24*5, 247, 248 of their Office, from his own Pleading, His Contradifting 7. S. herein alfo made from the Senfe and Pleadings of their own evident. Ibidem. Dr. Barrow, and other Learn'd Divines. His next Anfwer, that the Univerfal Suf. 233,234,235 fragan or Head dtftroys the Commijftm given the That Infallibility in Teaching did neseflarily sipoftlest whereby every one of them was, and [ d J every asxvHi The CONTENTS. every one §f their Succefors Succeeding in full the acknowledgement of a lawful MifTo Tinner, becomes each a Reprefentative of the in the Church of Rome, for SubftantiaS At/yet, Independent on any other Bead but Chrifi; thereof, will infer, that it is at rue Church DifcoverM to be a Shameful Self-deftroying and impeach the Doclrine and Practice of Blunder, overthrowing his Scheme of the our Reformers in Separating from the fame New Teftament Oeconomie, as alfo both confider'd and refuted. Pages 260 26 r 6 the Sctttijb and EngUjh Hierarchy. Fages The Senfe of the Famous Foetid and our u <<&\ V A -'dL'-i.- »a*8'.a,49 Learned Mr. G/^/e, in this point isexhi- How vainly he boafts, that his Principles bited. Ibide do more Support Proteslant Arguments a- A Recolleftion of the whofe in a moTe gainft rhe Papacy, than thofeof Presbyterians, clofs Application to our Pamphleter\ Areu made appear. 250. And that the Prelatick ment, wherein fome Diftinctions are Principles do evidently give a handle to the addue'd, touching thcEffemials of Ordination Popifh Pleaders for an Oecumenick Head, and adhering Corruptions. The proper End or.^fil"P- . , D7 . fb'dem; oi Ordination it felt; with its confequential His Affertion, that Prelacy is not difown'd Obligation, and the corrupt perfonal End ly the Rijornid Churches, and that Miraculous of Ordainers. The Fountain and Frimarv Gifts were vigent after Prelacy was EftablijVd, Author of a Gofpel Minijiry, and the impure and chat none endow 'd with thofe Gifts have given Channel of either Ufurpmg Administrators ox. a Tefiimonie againft it j confider'd and refut- Adventitious Corruptions. As alfo, betwixt cd. 251,25:2 the perfonal Suceeflion, and Doilrinal, &c His grand Argument againft Presbyterians 20-2 2A 2<5 ' confider'd, mi. That the firH Presbyters after The PampleterV Argument, That the fir% the Reformation, had either their Orders from Ordaining Bifhops gave not Presbyters a Power te Bijbeps, and thus tmtfl own their Power to Or. Oraain, and therefore they have it not confi- dain,unlefs they difown their Authority to Aft as dcr'd. As alfo his Inference That if this Presbyters, or betake them to the Suffrage of the be not admitted, they muft betake them to People, and thus ftand obliged to prove fuch a the Suffrage of the People ; Or, if neither Power lodgd in them ; Or, if an inward Im. be admitted, to an inward Impulfe and Call fulfe be pretended, he demands Scripture In- foolifhly repeated, and the Confutation fiance of our Lord's appointing fuch a Call, and thereof renewed, 264, 265, 266 267 Sufficient Vouchers from every individual Preten- With fome Additional Difcqveries of the der thereunto. 252, 253, &c. Unfoundnefs thereof. The Senfe of Proteilant Divines, and Uni- A threefold Retortion of his Argument verfiries Baffling the fcme Pleading us'd by and Notion offered. 1. That theie Bifhops the Popifh Adverfarie, exhibited. That falfifie their Ordination, as to its Nature 'tis one thing to have a Vocation by the End, and Defign, who were Ordain'd in means and Miniftry of an impure Church, the Church of Rome, and Embraced the Re- or corrupt Officers, another thing to have formation. 2. That Bifnop Spotfwood with it from fuch a Church. In what Senfe a the other Prelates cjr.fecratcci with him in Vocation may be in divers refpe&s both England, either cught to have been re-or- Ordinary and Extraordinary, clear'd. 252, dam'd Presbyters before they were thus Con" 2J3>254 ^crated per f ahum, or if they were own'd as In what Cafes the Ordinary GaU may be lawful Paftois, the Lawfulnefs of Presbyteri. difpens'd with ? What Intereft the Call of al Ordination was acknowledge, and in the People, and an inward Impulfe have in either Cafe his Notion ftucks againft his this Affair, difcufs'd and clear'd at large, Principles <;nd Pleading. 3 . That the Con- firm the Senfe and Pleading of Du Mtulin, forming Ckrgie in K. Charles II. Reign" The Profcflbrs of Lsyden, The Univerfity ought by his own, and the PreiaricJs PrinI of Saumr, ana Turrettiu, irom 253, to 260 ciples to have been Re-ordam'd fmce they The grand Popifh Obje6Hon ( which is were Ordain'd by Pmbpers only ; ana fee- alfo the Balis of our Arguer's Notion ), thac jn„ 2& CONTENTS xx'x fug.they.were not Re-ordaiVJ, the Lawful- Prayer. In the vea'r ieSft a c ll nefs of their PresbyterM Ordination was Covenry decreed IL\J(\ X -c- yS1°,d " own'd, eH. Thar the denyal of a Lawful Crofi in fc.S?f£ A£ ft Se Slgn of the j£U«l Ordination wi^0 far i pr ™ Kp§^ H A^ts^ofl^c0^- of the Nullifying their Mmifteiia Afts forrmrv tf sL™. •«. !f . Non-con- and fuppofmg'our Arguer to have been fi^Non SWn^??iytheHardU- ing SI Ohlige hi, to he Re^L fe?^^^^^ Ws Epiftle to EvMpius vindicated n^m^J Vt"V VKPfpi* Rub^ In'difowning a Lawful Presbyterial Or? ^r Tetonfe^ *°V^ and O*,. dination, the Arguer hasimpeach'd Vhe TeIhmonl« againft the Ceremonies. Miniftry of mofl Reform'd Churches, caft RifhnnR-/-Wc a„„ **•,,-, 279 a foul Blot both upon K. Jtms VI and the rS?'^ S Amount of the Luke- warm- and own d the Identity of Bithop and Pref- mm^*., , >j l l „ , , 2So The Churches Intrinsic Power dilWd TSffiJi • , u '*?""• by Bifhop Wkitgift, and f=«ral Chief of ™?<3ffiS? larM g »f-f ft.6?* Pleaders for Prelacy. Our King own'd as nffl ^ Cnn£.™ • 4 t » ned by Pa- Pope over the Church of S^W, „/„?. jfcSc^T by B^,fl^' Mamies Creature, to ftand or Ll ,c ht *F$&Sg$$&^&gS. The Hierarchic and Ceremoniti j^jg loffe^l 'f?^ iV ^^^ of the Church of £,«W drfown'd by PerP &&£**&# .Wr There?™ fons of Emmencie m the Communion of chaftifincr WdWA -^'J a /aerein ^Sh^mnTonle'3^ B.£^w.;s Hiftory of the Reformation e t 9 ftnnnf A . ^ a89 ven from %/j» himfelf. 277 As ^n .iii?" °c r, A^gGef ,n feVeral re" 1 j uueir. 277, 378, 279> markable Points of the Controverfie, which The Advances of t-Mc T a; ■ ' 28j xtr mftanc'd> *'• In the AlTertion of the i?7i M8o icSc rcS? 1 Y I- l 5i £ ^ tha* 7' 5' OWnS the Church of Jfrael to &f ^ of CoLipe itionMa^alnft He £ & T^i ^ ^ ^ * P'"™««1 Violent Ufage of MTn ifl e£ for otifficn of 3S Whr ■ ^ ^ S^r Wl" have fame R(fM nr^nK'i /u d Umiliion ot the LXX Difciples . * ftandmg Meriour Order tome Rites prefcnbd m the M ./Owww. p/O^r;, whom 7.5. holds to be only um. sx» the CONTENTS. perary Mfttnuriu, eonft'tuted for an Errand Promife, at large made aoneai- a** a. which could not poffiVy be more than tern- A.gument formally profecuted iHt? - porary. Pages 289,290,591,292,293 'V ' £es 293, J S. Made appear to have contradifted The Pamphleter's Arguing excWe/^l Br Scott m this point. Ibidem. Apoftles tfrum*, Giftlof "»£„ j?e The Arguer, Ground and Topicks in from the Comp.fr of the cimmSLn ^ this Pamphlet, impeach and ftrick againft Promife, becaufe net deriv'd ST. wV"d the Apoftles Aftlng in Faith in the impor- His Inconfiftence hcr J^ It^tSSSi p"wnd F Cat ?US^Su0f thueirr °ffice' *I ing/?aSucceffion to the Apoftolkk Office Robbing them of a Right to the Covenanted asfueh. r To J Prefence of their Mafter imported in the 9J* 2J° The C O N T E N T S of the Queries offered to the Prelates of SCOTLAND. " THp CUirufy% dlfown any fix'd Ro11> a«d Characters of Ordinary Church Form of Church Government; H w Officers. The Prelate qua talis bound to this confifts with our prefent Pleaders for Preach to no Flock, and in this his Office the Divine Right of Prelacy ? Why the appears {landing Croft to Scripture ffi Word E»,#K«T0f made ufe of in Scripture P«„ 50 0/,!!' to point at the Office of a Pallor, is by Our LORD's Commiffion to Preach the Prelates appropriated to the Bifhop, as dif- Gofpel, impeach'd by the Prelarick Office tingmGVd from the Paftor ? The Autho- The' Prelates prendmgto be he Principle rity and Exercife of Government being a- of Unity to his Dioceft, importing an a $! fenbed to Paftors joyntly in their fix'd lute Dominion, ftands in contradiction to Colleges, or Juridical Courts, how the true Scripture Epifcopacv as alfo £ Ecclefiaflical Power and Junfdiftion can be this refpeft to that SSwe jL Ma °£ monopohz d and concentred in the Prelate/ . j, 16 And the Gradation in point ofjul ^ . . . P*&e aS>8 dicial Procedure, which is from the l^n- Series touching the Ruling Elders Of to the gteaer Number ,0VloC lice as exhibited 1 ^.5.17 -Paftors Col- The Paftoral Relation imports an OblLa. legiat Imereft in the Higheft Cenfure, . tion of Perfonal Performance of Duties to C^.5.4. Anent Pallors or Presbyters con- the People; The Prelate therefore beingthe currence with the Apoftles in the firft pretended p-oper Pallor of the Dioceff af! Chnftu* Ceunctl Ms ,5 Ttmthies Ord.na- fumes an Office impoffible to be manag'd tion by a Presbytrie, , Tim. 4. ,4. 298, and perform'd. * 3^307 a„„„- o ft tr • t » 299,300 Prelates affuming State Offices, as co'nfti. Anent Paftors elTential Intereft in Go- tuent Members of Parliaments, and other vernment ( imported in the Terms of Civil Judicatories dearly CondWd by Rulers, Governours, Bifliops, &e. ) in- clear Scrip ure Rules, demonftrated^ at large Vf^ed 1arndJ.1rnCr°ach? UP°n b* Prelates> inFivelnftances. 307, 308 300 Yfo Prnnh, ' *a ' %* ^J^?* to the No fbadow of the Biffiops Office pleaded hSS ^(V-eT3n^-1 ^ H 29' TJhePrc" for b* our Prelatifts «* the Office of Apo- lates diftinft Ordination, pretended di- files P £ a M^ner" "d^O^f Parliament The ^o?\cS Right to caH a Paftor, im! S« S fenf i tQuallfilatl°cns- from peach d ^ thc ?rel«ick Office, as alfo the the Paftor, fent a packing in the Scripture Office and Right of the RulingEWerj l'*3ii Tfle The CONTENTS, xx^ The late Prelacy in Scotland grofs Erafti- can have no AfTurance that our Prelatifts attifrn, and therein crofs to the Scripture are found in the Faith, they having dik Rules of Church Government. Pages 312, own'd our Confcjfiens of Faith, and exhibited 313 no New Confeffions, whereby their Ortho- The Members of this Church of Scotland doxy may be made appear, 314 The CONTENTS of the Confederations upon Church Government* DR. Stillingfletis Notion anent the In- Accounts of this Term. Pages 330, 33 c difference of the Forms of Church EufebiuSs Hiftory ean give no irrefragable Government,made appear to be contrary to account of Church Government, as to the Scripture, upon feveral important Grounds, point of Antiquity. > 335 Pages 3 1 6, 3 1 7, 3 1 8 As neither Ignatius' s Epiflles, whereof the Scripture Inftances exhibited, condemning Spurious Nature is made appear. 333, 334.) the Diocefan Prelate, inhancing all Eccle- 33 j fiaftick Authority in the Diocefe in his own The pretended Catalogues of Bifhops perfon. 3 19. 3 20, 3 3 r, 3 22, 3 13 from Apoftles and Evangeliils, made appear The pretended Epifcopacie of Thnothis to be utterly unserviceable to our Prelatifts. and Titus, over Ephefiis and Crete, confuted _ 335, 336, 337 from clear and important Grounds drawn As like wife the fuppos'd Condemnation from the Epiftles themfelves, and from the of A'erius, upon ground of his Judgment ^ Teftimnnie of Famous Proteftant Divines as to the Identity of Bifnop and Presbyter' and Univerfities. From 324,10330 338, 339, 340, 34r A pitiful Evafion from our Argument • Augufiines remarkable Teftimonie, aflert- upon Ails 20. precluded, fell, that the Term ing that the Church is only to be found, E^KSMiroi imports InfpeBion, but not Authority, and Demonftrated in the Divine Oracles, And made appear to be crofs to Scripture exhibited. 34i, 342 The CONTENTS of the Review of the Exceptions upon the Confederations pre mis' d. C HRIST's Political Headfhip over the point of Government. Pages 347, 348, Church, fooliftily equiparated with 349 GOD's Political Headihip over all Rationals, The Animadverter alleges a lawful Deri- and found an inconfiftent Evafion- Pages vation of Power from the Head, whether 344> 34?> 3*^ Governours Aft in parity, or Imparity ; The Animadverter quarrells the Indufti- That ChriftV Prophetical and Prieftly Office on inftanced to prove a Species of Govern- exclude New Revelations and Meritorious ment, becaufe not amounting to prove a Satisfactions, yet his Kingly Office excludes peremptorie Inftitution, how irrationally, not fuperadded Laws and Meafure of Go- made appear. 34^347 vernment, how abfurdly and inconfiftently, The Nature of a Divine Right clear'd, made appear. 3 49»3 5» and how it may be made appear in this The Churches Power given by Chnft [ e ] for xyxu The CONTENTS. for her own preferratlon, gives her no Warrant for Authorizing Officers not of Chrift' s Appointment. That the Dogmatick, Critick, and Diataclick Ptwer given to the Church, cannot be applicable to all Forms of Government, made appear. Pages 350, 35 1. Where the Paffage of Rom. 15. 4. is Defended from his Cavils. The Animadvert er pretends to difown the Bifhop' s Sole Power, and pleads in point of Prelacy, the Dependencies enumerated 1 Chron. 24. how unjuftly and inconfiftently macie appear. 352. Where a Paffage of the Alt are Damafcenum is vindicated. The Epithets, Denominations of Pallors not confident with Subordination to a Pre- late, made appear. The Ruling Elders Office is vindicated from the Animadvert er's Cavils, and in fpecial that Paffage, 1 Tim. S- 17. 353* 3PU As likewife that Paffage, Alts 15. with 1 Tim. 4.14. 3 54,3 55. 3 5<5 In what Senfe the Evangeliftick Office was confer'd in Timothie's Ordination ; And that the Word trnseCvrifiov imports a Go?i- ft si trial Meeting. 3 5 6> 3 5-7 The Inftance of the Corintb Presbyteries Ex- communication of the Inceftuous, forces the Animadvert er to grofs Antifcriptural E- vafions. 3 57^3 58 His Foolifk Defence of what is alleg'd of the Bifhop of Salisbury. 3 5^,359 Several other Absurdities of our Animad- i'irter upon the Point of Tttnothie's Ordina- tion noted. As alio" his pitiful Defence againft the Obje&ien that Timothie's fup- pos'd Epifcopacy at Epkefus ftages him as an Apoftat. i3 59;36d, 361 That Timothy was enjoyn'd to commit what he had "heard from the Apoftle to Faithful Men, pleads againft an Epifcopal Succeffion ; The Animadverters pitiful Ev«Hon contradicting his Fellow-pleader Xjr. Monro. 36^,362 Timothiis Evangeliftick Office alTerted by the Univerficy of Saunter, with others. Their Teftimonie vindicated from the Ani- uiedvericrs Cavils. That Famous Englijh Dc&ors, yea and Bifhops, have Difown'd che Divine Right of Prelacy. 3<>3> 3 *4 That the Term Evangeli/I imports a pe cujiar Office. Pages 364, 355 The Animadverts Anfwer to what's pleaded from the Ep. files to Timothie and Titus, againft their pretended Epifcopacy, confider'd and Expos'd. 3 6 j , 3 66, 3 67 Dr. Pearfons Chronological Account of the Date of thefe Epiftles, a vain Subterfuge, contiadi&ed by Hammwd, Light foot, &c! and improven againft the Epifcopal Caufei Ibidem. This Argument taken from the Subjeft Matter of the Epiftles further improven, and feveral pitiful Evalions of the Animadverterf expos'd. 368,369, 370 Animadverfions upon the 4th Cmjideration confider'd and expos'd . 371 For the point of Antiquity, his Defence of Eufebiw confuted. 37'>372,373,374 His Defence of Ignatius' s Epiftles confut- ed ; As likewife his Attack upon Mr. Jamefm in this point. 374, 375, 376, 377 His Anfwer to a Paffage of Stiliingfieet ex- pos'd. 377i 37g His Anfwer to the Teftmonie of Clemens for the Identity of Bifhop and Presbyter, at large Confider'd and expos'd. 378, 379, 380 As likewife his Defence of feveral Paf- fages of Ignatius. 38c, 381, 382, 383, 384 His Exceptions upon that point of the Succeffion of Bijbops from Apoflles, at large con- fider'd and expos'd. 384,385,386,387 SuUir.gf.eet found in this point, to Oppofe and Baffle him. 387, and 389,390 The Animadvert er's Exception to what is offer'd anent the Condemnation of Ah-ius confider'd. 390, 391 His Anfwer to the Paffage of Auguftin Epiftle 19. As likewife anent the early Reception of Chri(lianity in Scttland, confi- fider'd. ( 391,392 The Epifcopal Syllogifm, our Animadver- ts Attempts to mould better, but has therein expos'd himfelfand marr'dhisDe- fign. . 394,395 His pretended Confirmation of the Major and Minor, confider'd and expos'd at fome length. 395,396, 397, &t. His grofs and Popifh Affertion, that the Univerfa] Tie CONTENTS. „ „x;j; Unlverfal Belief of all Christians in the Apo- That the Animadverter, in fome Citations ftolick, and two next Ages, is the bcfi of Auguftin, has Wrefted his Words made Reafon we have for Believing, that fuch, appear. ' or fuch a Book, belongs to the Canon of That therein he is Embark'd in a Popifh the Scripture. ,m Page 39$ Defign of drawing Auguffin to Patronize His Inference, that this ts as good a Reafon Unwritten Traditions, and equal them to for Believing the Apoftohck Inftitution of Scripture, convincingly made appear, and Epifcopacy, expos'd. _ Ibidem, in Special from the Pleadings of the' Rfa± His Popifh Tincture in this point noted, miffs upon 2 Thef 2. 15. Where the fame and Auguftin oppos'd againft him. 395, 3 96 PafTage of Angufiin cited by our Adimadver- His Equiparating the Reception of the ter, is offered by them, and improven to Canon, with the Reception of Epifcopacy, his Scope. 400 410 further expos'd. 397. Where his Igno- This further made appear from the' An- ranee of the true State • of the Queftion, fwer of Cartveright and Fulk to the Je fates and Method of Arguing is noted. ( upon this PafTage, where the Orthodox HisArguings upon the Point of Certainty Senfe of Auguftin is madeappear. 410 4ir ©f a Traditional Csnveyanee, confider'd. 399, '412' . ,, 400, 40 r The fame Orthodox Senfe of Awuftin The Minor of the premis d Syllogifm vindicated and afTerted by* the ProfefTors of eing not only denied, but Reafons of the Ltyden. 4I, t. Denial offer'd, the Animadverter can only Some Inference drawn therefrom.*' Itid repeat the Proportion denied, without the The Animadverter' s Citations further im- lcaft fhadow of a Reply. 402 proven againft him. 4f4L Nor to the Inftanced early Aberration of Thzt Auguffin in point of a Divine Proof the Church. Ibid. As alfo > 403 of Infant Baptifm, laid the main ftrefs on His Anfwer to the Teftimome of Augu. the conftant Cuftom and Tradition ©f the ffin confider'd at large. 403,404,40?,^. Church, abfurdly afTerted by our Animad- His Foolifh Evafion, that Auguftin in ex- verter, and that he is therein inconfiftent preffing himfelf Zealoufly for the Authori- with himfelf, clear'd. 4l5> 4f5 ty of the Scripture, he means only, that it That the Scripture treats of fome Things is the great Rule of Faith, and no other yet not fo fully and plainly, but that Re- Arguments are needful to Determine a courfe muft be had to Tradition,for a more Controverfie when it can be clear'd from full Difcovery, a Grofs and Popifh Errour Scripture ; Expos'd, and made appear to impeaching the Perfection and Perfpicuky oppofe Auguftin's Scope, yea, and the Senfe of the Scripture. 4^ .}i of Epifcopal Pleaders Ibidem. The Animadverter s Application of the He alleges that Aaguftin excludes not the Teftimonies of Augu ffin to the Point of unanimjus Suffrage ofthu Primitive Church, Epifcopacy, and the Succeffion of Bifhops in MatceiS wherein the Scripture isnotfo from the Apoftles, confider'd, and his pre- full and plain, how impertinently, clear'd tended Teftimonies to this Scope made from feveral Grounds 406, 40 7 appear to be utterly Unferviceable to his A further Account of Auguftin's Senti- Defign. 4I~ ,g ments in this Point exhibited,which intirely The Conclufion of the Whole. '419 excludes his Evafion. 407,^08,409 ERRATA. P^fl3^-Liflj7' *&er itumpatMe, add underfiood as ConteMpwary. P. 12 1 ,a Re* A 1 R Jr 17 'i *»d^™d- P.H. 1. 19. R. Officers of. £ i7.l.7.R.rt£ ?*?? 18 R ^/«,ty ,*« p. a6. 1. 38. R. ?».,##,„ ^ Government P ,o. 1 penult R w J9 dele ft*w. P. l8a. 1. 8. R.velpr*ca>venda. P. ,88. 1. 15. R ft jfoff* Ibid 1 ? p !'R7iffr'AfPepn K-'bichmf needs, to all Men, in y our Senfe, L9rf? 2Q£ 4,* Judicum et Principum P ^ r 1 -, T R «v^ t> 1 £ •*-»"*/«**&. 4. it, is not added to Payors and teachers, as to the other Dei grees mentioned., nor (landing betwixt the two Names ; befides that the Taflor's and tender's Work is much one and the fame, the two names be- ing often put one for the other in Scripture, and both con/oyn'd in the Tryal of Minifters, 1 Tim, 3. fit. 1. y, 8, 9. Thus the Belgick Divines upon the place. But, upon ferious fearch of thefe Texts, our Prefacsr will be found more dangerouOy to' have involv'd himfelf in this Argument than he isa- ware of f taking along the Series and Scope of what we have heard from him )s and that he has rais'd thus a Ghofr which will prove a Frighting One. For, 1. Making the Apofalick Univerfal In/petition over the Catho- lick Church a ft anting Ordinance, he will thus fet up 12 Univerfal In- fallible Patriarchs, with Collateral Power: And here's a pufling Work, to get his fo much boafted of Antiquity to Eccho this Afferdon. 2. This appears to juftle out the Argument from the Priefthood ,• for, if the Jewifh Church had but One Superintendent High-Briefr, and the Chriftian Church Twelve, here's a true Inequality with a Witnefs, but fucb as one ofthetwomuft go down and outweigh the Other, Further, 3. .Our Prefacer tells us, tha», in 1 Or, 12s and in the other Parallel, The Apoftle argues from ths Structure of the Humane Body, and brings alt htme to the Government and Mini Hry of the Church; And therefore, according to his Senfe and Pleading, the Apoftle, faying, v. 21. The Head cannot fay to the Feet, I have no need cf you, mult point at a Political Head, and High- Prieft. Thus the Hi-gh-Prieft will gain it upon the Apoftles. 4. What will our Prefacer make of Governments, mehtion'd v. 28? Presbyterians alledge. they are a diftiadt Order of Officers, and can make appear, they are neither the PaHor nor Deacm, but, in the Text, ftand diftinguiih'd from both : And fince all Officers, according to him, here enumerated, are oi a fhiidirig Nasuje, thus the Invidious Ruling-PLlMt , niil he, will he, Chap. I. gxerks to the fmhylerians^of SCOTLAND. 5 he, 'will get in upon him. Finally t What will our Prefacer make of the Gift of Tongtm and Miracles* fince here we read of Miracles, or Work- ers of. Miracles, Gifts of Heating, Diverfides of longueit Are thefe Offices (till Vigsnt, and 01 a ftanding Neceflky, or not? If Vigent, where do they, or have they appear'd ? He will not own, I fuppofe, the Church of Romcs Miracles for fuch a ftanding Office. If he own, that thefe Offi- ces are gone, then, in {lead of, beating Presbyterians with this his (ham Notion, he muft needs beat offfome of his Officers from a (landing Ufe and Neceflky, and thus muft acknowledge the Church may be Well tempered without fome of thefe Officers. Thus Presbyterians will evite his Argument by his Conceffion,* fince hisTopick concludes a ftanding Neceffity of all; Eife he will fay, the Apoftle's Similitude is Lame and ' Unf utcable, fyUe the well tempered Body can want none of its Pans or Members. After Apoftles, our Prefacer tells us, he finds another Order of "Ecshfi.u flicks ordain d by Apctfles, viz. DedCcns, Act., 6, and Rules deliver 'd anmt* their Qualifications, 1 Tim, ;• What this /igniries, to Conclude an Imparity in the Paftorai Office, the Presbyterians, and all Men of common Senle, \ are yet to learn,* fince a Subordination and Imparity of the New Tcfta* ment Office-Bearers is not deny'd ,• and the Inference of an Official im- parity in the Fafioral Office, drdwn. therefrom, they hold to be a Bacufo ad Angulum3and pitifully Nonfenfical Arguing a Genere ad Speciem off. tive. But further, there are two things in his Difcourfe Presbyterians cannot but cenfure. The One is, That he will have the Deacons Autho- ris'd to Preach the Gofyel, and Adminiiier Sacraments ; whofe Office, all do acknowledge, had rdpect to Serving of Tables and Mihiftri.ng to . the Popr, as is evident from that Text, Aft. 6t cited by him, where is exhibit a Scripture Standard of their Inftitution ■ And if therein our Pre- facer will make it appear, they are intruded with Preaching the Gofpel and Adminiftring the Sacraments, or can prove it from this, or any other Text, I will undertake for Presbyterians, they lhall give KitrtMwa ViBas> -and acknowledge him a Magnus Apollo. The Text a ill- Ground and Occafion oi this Inftitiitipn, fell* a Complainc of the Ne- glect of the pQor Grecian Widows in Che daily Mmlftratfons of Charitable Contributions, whereupon the Apoftles, calling the Multitude, told them» It was not fit they jhitU leave the F reaching cf the Word to Serve Tables, asd did thereupon appoint the chopfing out of fit peiions for this Employ- . ment, that they might not be diverted from Preaching the Gofpd 5 to ; which, he. will eafily-acknowi^dge^ Baptilin was annex'd, fiace thereby - petfons were Iniii?c into the.-Chn./ch. I3ut 2, In the Parallel '"cited by our Prefacer, 1 Tim, 2. theQu Idds or the Detain are m do ^" Pieibv- 6 A Review and Confederation eft be Chap. I. Presbyterians defire to know of this Sagacious Perlon, I. In what place of the Context he finds them Authored to breach or Adminifter the Sa- craments? 2. Since there is another Officer there defcribV* who tnuft be Apt to Te^ch, and is preferr'd to the Deacon, who has no fuch Qualifi- cation requir'd of him, how came he to overlook him in this his grand Proof of Subordination of Officers, fince he will acknowledge, the A- poftles were fuperiour both to the One and the Other? No doubt his afcribing to Deacons an Authority to Preach or Baptife, of whom no fuch thing is hinted in the Text cited by him, and denying it fat leaft implicitly ) to fuch, to whom it is fo exprtfly afcrib'd, is fuch a piece of Inadvertency, as requir'd a Retraction, or new Addition to the Errata. As for the Power of Timothy and Titus, in reference to conferring Sacred Orders, and anfuring Presbyters, pleaded by him in the next place ,• he fhould know, that Presbyterians here deny two Points, wherein he begs the Queftion: i. That either Timothy or Titus had, in Churches Conftitut, a Power in this Point Paramount unto, or ExciufiVe of that ofPaftors or Presbyters, fince Presbyters or Pafiors are found Inftru<5ted with fuch a Power, being own'd as Rulers, Bijbops, Governours? Overjeers, and the Exercife thereof found competent to them ; a Presbyery lay'ng bands on Timothy, i Ttm. 4. 14; The Corinth Presbytery putting forth the high Sentence of Excommunication, 1 Cor. 5. j. PJ and Impari'y in the Paftoral Office, the Ad million of Subordination in the N. Teftament Officers can no more jmpeach that Paftoral Official Parity which we aflert than the Affernon of Official Parity among Apoftles, and in that Office wiU .mpeach that Inftituted Subordination which he mentions. The follow ing Eruption of our Prefaced angry Bills [Let the unPre)udu]T2r 3»k'y«h what Face Presbyterian, can pretend Scripture fir their bellied Part «■ enntle the.r Book,, written in Defence of Presbytery" SCRIPTURE PLe1£\ the Presbyterians do entertain with pity of his Ignorant TW J as a piece o that confident Mger imputea by sZo?n Zle fed we can appeal to the fame Uopre udie'd Judge to'eive SemZL' ., jheftAnfwers he has offered to Suture Argent's loT^TJ^ But onr Prefacer, after his Superficial Rovines will r™. i. the Point, and Impugn our D.ftinaion of ' OrjE'rl Idf, ]£ t0 Officer,, which we \% doth effedu lly cu the Sinews off^'"^ Superficial Arguing. He tells us i» taTM". ianewj of the premis'd ty. Tins is fomewhat in the Clouds and obfeure Our Afl%V '", Pr nciple f the fame with that of the Body of Prote'ftant D,W, "°n a{?d pomt ) is, That in the N. Teftament Accounts °md ^Schfm of O^ $ Jomewere Extraordinary, fuch as Afeftle,, «L,°fCS ftriaer acceptation, fome Ordinary and of ftafdinj ffii fal Pallor,, Elder,, Deacons. If by GMel Mini/In hi 3» TnL fcl1' hemuft needs acknowledse fonTnf ££? v und« ftooa «» Officers, hinted, or fwallow grofsg AMI "ditto '^J™*?-*™^ as is abOT« retort his Charge of CLlKS- ™S h- fr** 7° wLarra«ablie Apoftles and E?angell 1 be Orfc w T^Zt^S^ °f dictum, there being Argument ito the cl',Zl r J* h,s £ra<" ed by'him, far leffffierS But tak ngThe Te^T™1??"0"- asreftriaedto the Paftoral Office"' '££?£ 'JS *t£*"**> - fad.. Reftriaion) we % it „ „' ttj^tfj?^- ; § A Review and Ccnfideration of the Cbap. I. fice, fucceeding the Apoftolate in what is Ordinary, viz. in the Power of Order and Jurifdi&ion, as conjoyn'd in one Office, # Thus, 'tis our Principle which we maintain, and our part of the Queftion, oppofite to his Affirmation of Imparity in the Paftoral Office : So that we do as juft- ly, and much more Charge him with begging the Queftion : Which is evi- dent two ways, i. We not only fuppofe, but prove an Official Parity in the Paftoral Office, by Scripture Grounds known to all that are ac- quaint with this Controverfie; and therefore, we do not meerly fuppofe and beg it, as he doth poorly prefume, 2. In that all along he argues an Imparity in the Paftoral Office, or that there are higher ftanding Officers than the Paftor, from the Superiority of A peril es and Evange- lifts, the one to the other, and both to Inferiour Officers. Now, who knows not, that the ftanding Office and permanent Superiority of Apoftles and Evangelifts is the Queftion betwixt him and us, whereof we make the contrary appear. But the id. Anfwer is, That fuppofwg the Diftinclion to be good, it allows the Chriftian Church to have been at fir ft founded ,go If our Di- ftimfHon is Good, as he will fuppofe, then he muft fuppofe, that all Offi- cers higher than the Paftor are ceas'd, and conftquently the Paftors are left to govern as the higheft Authoriz'd Officers, and fay we in Parity ; for all his pretences of Imparity are drawn from the fuperiour Orders to the Paftor, which now he doth, with us, fuppofe to have gone off. 2. He faith, We thus admit the Church to have been once govern d by Minivers of different Orders, which excludes^ in Jo far, Parity. What pitiful triflirg is this ? There's no doubt that this doth exclude Parity of Officers fm>p!y considered, which we never afterted ; but that this ever did, or doth exclude Official Parity in the Paftoral Office, we deny. So that, if by Minifters he mean Church Officers in general, our Conceflion, no doubt, imports fo much ,• If he mean by New Teftament Minifters, Paftors Labouring in the Word and Do&rine, their Official Parity is not in the leaft injur'd by this Conceflion. Here I*muft again mind him, that his denying absolutely the Extraordinary Nature of any New Teftament Officers, will plead for Twelve Univerfal Infallible Patriarchs and In- fpeetors of the Catholick Church : And befide,looking back to his Notion anent the jewijh OEconomy infpeded by One Supreme High-Prieft, and what may be in his Principles drawn from the Infpe&ion of John the A-poftle, when the reft were remov'd, the Man with the Triple-Crown feems to have a fair Plea from his Pleading. 3. This common Diftinc; tion of Ordinary and Extraordinary Officers, our Prefacer is bold to call Chap. T. S&eties to the Presbyterian of SCOTL AND. 9 - call Futilous and Impertinent, A bold Charge put upon the Sentiment of fo great a Body of Proteftant Divines and Reformed Churches* who. have conftantly own'd this Diftinction, upon fuch folid and unanfwerable Grounds,* as he has never concern'd himfelf to fearch and underftand. His great Reafon is, that what is Extraordinary, wufi needs have a Relation to jome antecedent fettled Order , which in this Cafe cannot\be afftgrid. That it has a Relation to a fettled Order, is true : But why not a Relation to an Order to be immediately fettled, without the Limits whereof this— Order (lands t Eife let this Gentleman fuffer me to entertain him with ^ thefe Queries. I. Whether thinks hetMo[es9s Office was Extraordina*y,who is appointed to be God's Mouth and Meffenger, to deliver to l)rael% as a Church, yea, and Nation Angularly devoted to God, the Laws botii Moral, Ceremonial, and Judicial, to inftitute and appoint the Sacred Priefthood and Miniftry, to give the Fundamental Laws of the King- dom inftru&ing their Kings and all inferior Judges in their Offices, to be the fpecial Infpedor of both, to deliver all the Ordinances of Wormip to- be bbferv'd by all God's People, to be the Typical Mediator betwixt God and the People ? as is clear in the Solemnity at the delivering of the Law, Exod. 19. 20, &c. * and in many other Inftances wherein he is declar'd to be Singular in his Office and Privileges, fee Numb. n. 7. Dent. 34. 10, ir, 12. If he deny his Office to be Extraordinary, he is an Extraordinary to all Interpreters and Divines,and in this as Heteroclite, as in his other Conceits. If he own him to be Extraordinary, then, II//,I enquire, to what Prior efiahlifjed Order in the Church & State of Ifra^ el ( I mean, a National Order, with refped: to a National Churck and State), had this Extraordinary Office Relation Mf he fay, it was Extraor- dinary with refpeft to the common Order of Priefthood and Civil Go- vernment then to be eftabliihed, fo, fay we, was the Office of Apoftolat: And in this he muft yield the Caufe to us, and acknowledge his Notion of ^Extraordinary] Futilous (to return to him his own Term^, which he will needs have to refped: a prior eftahlifked Order, and that there was an Ordi- nary fettied Order of both Priefts and Civil Officers by Mofes's Miniftry, wherein leveral parts of his Office were recommitted to ordinary Hand- ing Officers, which did no wife impeach this Extraordinary Office of Mo- fes hirsfelf, or render it of an ordinary Nature,* and, by parity of Reafon, neither could the Committing the Admimftration ofr Word and Sacra- ments, and the Jurifdietional Power to Ordinary Officers, render the 'Office of Apoftles Ordinary, who, as Mofesin the OidTeft-atmnt Di(- pehfauon, were God's Extraordinary MefTengersro Inftitute in God's Church a (landing Miniftry, and deliver his Mind as to the Worfhip, Doftrine, and Government thereof, upon whole Foundation, in this re- B fpea, io A Review and Confederation of the Chap. I. fpe&, the New Teftament Church is faid to be built, Eph. 2. 20 I hope our Prefacer will not fay upon the Foundation of either Pope or Prelats their pretended Succeflfors : Nor can he, without the greateft.abfurdity, and a clear Implicantia in Adjecto, aifert, that there was a New Teftament Miniftry prior to that of Apoftles, and to which it could have re- aped:. But fays our Prefacer, If there was a fettled Order of Men, (ufficient to » perform the Functions, and Miniflries of the GhriQian Religion, what need was there to imploy Extraordinary Apojlles, Evangeli/ts, and Prophets, to do that for which Provision had been made, by appointment of ordinary Officers.} This Queftion may be retorted thus, Since, in the Jewifh Oeconomie, the Ci- vil and Ecclefiaftick Sanhedrim, with their Subordinat Judges and Mini- fters, were fufficient to perform all neceffarie Offices and Duties both of the Sacred Priefthood, and Civil Government, what need was* there of a Mofes to Inftitute, Direcl, and Superintend them under this Difpenfa- tion? He ftill luppofes (how pertinently let any judge) a Prior In flit u- tien of fuch Order and Officers as we call Ordinary, and a Super-inftitu- tion of that which we call Extraordinary. If the Holy ONE, the GOD of Order, judg'd it fit,both under the Jewifli and Christian Difpenfation to authorize Officers, with an Extraordinary Power to Inftitute and Di- re#,as his Mouth and Meffengers,the ordinary (landing Officers, and de- liver his Ordinances to his Church; why will this Man quarrel* the Wif- dom of the Almighty in this Point ?- Nay, doth not the neceffity here- of evidently appear to all Men of common Senle? Our Saviour did not create at once a Chriftian Church,and a fix'd Miniftry of Handing Ordi- nances therein, but thought fit to call Twelve Special MeiTengers to behis Mouth and firft Ambaffadors, to lay the Foundation of the Gofpel Church to deliver the Ordinances of the Da&rine, Worihip, and Government to' the fame. This required a Special and Extraordinary Legation, Infallibili- ty in Doctrine, Extraordinary G*/h,and the cloathing of thefe firft MeiTengers with fuch Univerfal Authority, and Infallible Injpeclion over the whole Catholick Church, both Members and Officers, as is impoffible to be competent to any Ordinary Officers. But, faith our Prefacer, If the Ex~ inordinary Office was firft injiitute, which is abfurd, becaufe it has a Relation to the Ordinary as its Correlat ; what was wanting to the Extraordinary Officers of the Church,to oblige them ,to have Recourje to the Ordinary, and Sole Order of Pre f- bytersl I will not fay, that in this Obje&ion, there's much wanting to this Prefacer of very Ordinary Senfe. Who ever faid, that the Extraordi- nary Officers had fomething wanting in their Office, obliging them to have Recourfe to the Ordinary Officers for a due Exercife thereof? Lee an Inquiry be made, what was wanting to the Office o'iMofesi to oblige him Chap, i; g«erhi h tit TmlyUtum p\ ^GOTLAND? n him to have Recourfe,in theexercife of his HighExtraordinary Fun£ion,to the Ordinary Priefthood and Miniftry ,• and let the evident and neceflary Return be the Ballance to weigh the Judgement and Senfe of this Objection. Who knows not, that the Apoftles Infallible Conducf of the Spirit, in the Execution of their Univerfal Extraordinary Infpecfion over the whole Church, both Members and Officers, put them beyond the reach of ha- ving Recourfe to the Ordinary and Standing Officers, for Diredion and Inftru&ion therein ? And, in a word, befides that his Objection doth ablurdly fuppofethe pre-exiftence of the Ordinary Office to the Extraor- dinary (whereof above ), whoever underftands the Scope and Intend- ment of the Apoftolick Office will neceffarily acknowledge, that the fixing of Ordinary Officers in the Chriftian Churches through the World, was both neceflfary for the Churches Prelervation, and the great Scope of the Exercite of the Apofto'ick Office ; and accordingly, the Apoftles may be rationally faid to have Recourfe. even to an Ordinary Miniftry, for the managirg the Churches Concerns in an Ordinary ftandingGof- fpel Method* which we find accordinglv exemplified in the Apoftles pra&ice, as is evident in the Inftances exhibited. The Prefacer adds, That whether we confider the Woi\ of Ecclejtaflical Go- vernours and Government y or the Original of Church-Power, or\the Chari/matd the Gifts and Qualifications, wherewith they were endow *d% eithir they were all Ordinary, or Extraordinary. Herein 1 differ fo far ficm him, that, upon this very Ground,! will prove,therewas a neceflity,thatiome in the beginning of the Golpel ftiould be Ordinary, others not. The work of Ecclefiaftic Government, as committed to the ruff. Officers, the Apoflles for the Original moulding of the Chriftian Church, was but to gather the Churches by the Voice of the Gofpe! ( whereof the Apoftles were the firft Heraulds ), by Infallible Authority to deliver the lively Oracles to ' them, accordingly to Inftitute all their neceffary Oificers.to &\xe:€i them in the Nature and End of their fevcral Offices, to prescribe the Golpel Worfhip, asdifrina from that of thejewifh Oeconomie, to take Inlpt&i* on of the whole Church planted, and to be plantedj direct the Duties both of Officers and Members. This he cannot but acknowledge to* have been the Work of our Lord's firft Meffengeis and Governors of his Church, which confequently he muff acknowledge to be Extraordi- nary^ and fure, he will not be foabfurd as to aflfert, tha' either the firft Officers Inftituted by the Apoftles, or ai! fucieeding Officers were or could be of this Nature. Next, for the Original of Church G vemment 'tis our Saviour's great CommifJion as Mediator and Meifenger ol the Covenant, who having a Donative Kingdom as Head of his Church and in the Capacity of Head and King, he prefciibes the Laws Offi - R 2 r * D 2 Ge^ 12 A Review And Conji&etAtion of the Chap. L ces, and Ordinances thereof, in the Execution of which Glorious Le- gation and Truft he committed to his Apoftles the Authority above* expreft, and for the End mentioned ; which doth clearly include and reach both the Ordinary and Extraordinary Offices. And finally* as for the Gifts and Qualifications of the firft Meflengers, they were futed to this Re&oral Power intruded unto them, fuch as Gifts of Tongues, InfaU libilitie in DoBrine, Gifts of Miracles, &c. Now, upon thefe Grounds, confidering the firft Original State of the Gofpel or N. Teftament Church, all could not be Extraordinary, fince the Extraordinary Re&oral Power of Apoftles did neceflarily refpeft-the fettled Miniftry and Ordi- nances in fuch Nature and Extent as is above defcrib'd. They had for their Work the Foundation of the Gofpel Church to lay, prefciibe its Ordinances* fettle its (landing Officers : This could not: be twice done* confequently by no Succeftbrs : ■ In. this, therefore, they were neceilarily Extraordinary' they had an Univerfal Superintendency over the Officers in all Churches planted^ and to be planted. And this A- poftolick Relative Olfice and Power, our Prefaced Logick will acknow- ledge to have a Correlat. fcil. The Ordinary Officers to.Direcl and Autho* rize. Again, Ordinary Officers being limited in their Infpeclion, to their particular Precin&s and Watch-Towers, under the Catholick In- fps&ion of thefe fi.ft Catholick Infallible Officers, upon the fame Ground and Medium, they could not be all fuch Catholick Infallible Officers. Which is further Confirm -d by that Text, i Cort 12. and Ulu- itrated by the Apoftie's pungent Que^ie, Are all Apoftles, are all Teacbers,&cc. and the Similitude of the Natural Bodie, wherein all Parts have not the feme Situation and Office : So that 'tis evident to the moil obvious Confederation, that in the Hrft Constitution of the Church, there was a neceflicy of a mix'd Set of Ordinary and Extraordinary Officers, as is evinc'd.in the beginning of the Jewifii Oeconomie by the Miniftry of Mofes, But our Prefacer will next difprove our Diftinc"Hon of Ordinary and Ex* traordinary Officers from this Ground, viz. That Extraordinary Gifts were common to all, to Lai ch as well as Minivers, and therefore concludes, that the Dijiintlion , as we ufe it, is unferviceable againft the Sutcejjion cf Ecclefia flicks in. that comely Order and Subordination which our LORD and his Apoftles efta*> blifheJ* But befides that he muft needs, in this Point, diftinguifih the &J1&HK and 'B|«*/*, the Gifts and Authority or Power* elfe, in a Com*. plyance with Anabaptifls, he will deny the DiftincT: Office of a Miniftry upon Communication of Minifterial Gifts to many privat Perfons, and confequently thefe Gifts y which he calls Extraordinary, even upon fup- pohl of fach a large Communication in the firft. Times of the Gofpel, . he. Chap. L Queries to the Presbyterians o/SCO'TLAND. 13 he muft grant, did not of themfelves entitle to the Apoftolick Office* nay to any Church Office, and tho' materially the fame., yet were for- mally, as to Extent and Exercife, and the proper immediat End thereof, diftinct from thefe Gifts in the Apoft!essor other Extraordinary Officers, thefe given to Apoftles in fpecial being to Seal their Apoftolick Authority, and Univerfal Million and Legation, and to fit them for Managing the great Dudes and Truft committed to them : Befides this, we fay, he mould have confidered, that the Presbyterians diftinguim the Gift from the 0$ee- formally considered; the Office lying in that Uni- verfal Rc&oral Authoritative Infallible Infpection over the whole Ca- tholick Church, the delivery of our Lord's Mind as his immediat Meffengers, as touching the Worfhip, Doctrine, Difcipline, and Govern- ment of the Goipel Church, an Authority and Work which, without the groffeft .Contradiction imaginable, none can ailert, could be deriv'd into a Succetiion ; elfe the Churches Foundation could be twice laid, and the Ordinances twice delivered. Befides that, thus there behov'd to be ftanding Apoftles veiled with fuch InFallible Power to the end of the World. He tells us our DiftintStion is againft the Succefion of Ec ihjia'ftkks ■ in that comely Order which Chrift did Inftitute. 'lis indeed againft fuch a Succeffion as is hinted, and of Twelve Infallible Patriarchs to Superintend the Catholick Church, both Members and Officers, which all Reform'd Churches are againft •• But in no whit is this againft that comely Order of a Gofpel Miniftry,Superiour and Inferiour Officers, Subor- dination of Courts and Judicatories, which our Lord and his Apoftles eftabliuSed. What he means by leaving. us no Ranks of People in the Church as the Gonjtquence of our /iQtrtion, U fomewhae myfterious. Muft the Diffe- rence of the Ranks of People, Diftinctiori of Church Officers and Mem- bers, the Ditti notion and subordination of Eccleiiaftick Courts evanifts, becaufe Extraordinary Gifts and Offices are ceafed ? . Who of common Senfe fees not the Abfurdity of fuch an Inference. But OUT Prefecer next fuggefts, That the making different Orders of Church Officers of the Nw'tef lament Extraordinary leaves the Church , in After- Ages, no Pattern in Scripture, to imitate in the Minittry and Government thereof; fince Extraordinary Examples are no Precedents, nor defign'd for Imitation. A pitiful falfe Suppofition and Begging of the Queftion. Do we therefore hold that all different Orders of Officers were Extraordinary, or that there are no ftanding Orders of Ordinary Officers, becaufe we hold, that fome Officers were Extraordinary, and fome not ? What Confequence is this? He mould know, that as we hold the Office of Apoftles,£vangelifts,Pro- phets, Extraordinary, paffing off with that Infant-ftate and Exigence of she Church ,Iq we hold, there are Handing Orders ©tPaSors, Elders, and Deacon^ 14 & Review- and Confident} on of the Chap, h Deacons, imitable and imitated in the Gofpel-Churcb, whofe ftanding Authority, with refpect both to the Power of Order and Jurifdifiion, and the Churches comely Order, generally we find appointed and au- thoriz'd by the Apoftles, and Exemplified in the New Teftament Churches Practice 5 and, confequently, recommended to the Churches conftant Imitation in all Ages, for the neceffary Ends and Ufes thereof And if, as he fays, Extraordinary Examples are not defi^rid for Imitation, it follows neceffarily, that the Inftance of Apoftles and Evangelifts Extenfive In-> fpe&ion was not for (uch a Defign; and therefore, Prelates, Arch- Prelates, Metropolitans, Patriarchs, and Popes, pretended Imitation is ab- (urd,and Anti-fcriptural. He addSjTbat the fame Work which Apoftles and E^ vangelifts did in their dayss was to be perform7 d by authorized Perjons to the End. That the Exercife of the Power of Order and Jurifdi&ion. was to con- tinue to the End, is certain, the Churches Subfiftence neceffarily requir- ing the fame: But, that the fame Work which Apoftles and Evangelifts perform'd, as refpe&ing their formal proper Office, was to be continued, is fo far from being certain, that 'tis moft falfe and abfuid, as is evident from what is laid. The Apoftles by an immediate Million, as Catholick Officers in the Church Catholick, were to plant Churches through the World, to deliver our Lord's Inftitutions of the New Teftament Church anent Doctrine, WorJhip, Difcipline, and Government, to Di- rect and take Infpection thereof, by an Infallible Authority. Evange* lifts were to Water their Plantations, to bring Reports of the Churches State to the Apoftles, as fuch Infallible Infpediorsj and Inftructionsand Commiflions from the Apoftles to the Churches, Now, where are the Perfons Authoriz'd for this Work f As for Teachers, whom he joyns with them, either he makes them One with Apoftles and Evangelifts, and thus contradicts himfelf in his former Accounts of thefe Offices as diftinct; or if he own them, and their Work, as of a diftinct Nature, viz. to Preach the Gofpel, and Adminifter Sacraments, within a certain Precinct, with ordinary proportioned Jurifdi&ional Authority, and a due Subjection to the Prophets and Superior Judicatories, we acknowledge this Workis to be performed by Authorizd Per/ons to the End. But then, he is abiurd in mak- ing this Work and Office One with that of Apoftles and Evan^eli ft [stand of a ftanding Necejfity, which are fo evidently different, and vaftly Difcrepant in this Refpecc. For that Argument which he adds, of Our Lord's pro- mised Prefence with his Mejjengers to the end of the Worldt he, or his Friend,1 might have found it Anfwered by the Author to whom he would feerri mainly to offer thefe Queries, the Promife having Refpect to the True Church and Handing Miniffry, whereof the Apoftles laid the Foundation, as Mafter- Builders ; fo that what was in their Office a$ of perpstual Ufe and Chap. h Jfueriei to the TreshperUns of SCOTLAND. 15 and Neceflity, derived into a Suceeffion, and to be continued and propa- gated in the exercife of a true Gofpel Miniftry and Ordinances of the Word, SacraFrents,Goverriment,and Difcipline,inftituted by the Apofties; Such (landing Ordinances and Officers, we fay, upon Ground of our Sa- viour's Inftitutions, are allowed his Premifed Prefence to the end. But that the Office of Apoftolat or Evangelift, taken in a proper formal Senfe was to continue upon Ground of this Promife^ no Proteftanc Interpreters did ever dream. Nay, our Prefacer muft needs acknowledge this, and baffle his own Argument,- For he reckons Prophets diftinct from Apofties, and Evangelifts among the (landing Orders of a Gofpel Miniftry, Eph. 4. 1 1. 1 Cor. 12, 28. And he muft add, according to his Scope and Exposition, Gifts of Tongues, Miracles, Gifts of Healing which, in his Senfe and Plead- ing, muft needs'make up alfo diftinft Orders of a nVd Gofpel I^iriiftry. For all thefe Orders he will have the Apoftle fee down with a Firfi, Secon- darily, Thirdly, to beat down Presbyterian Equality, and exemplifie (landing diftinft Orders of the Ecclefiaftick Officers. Now, I would know, what he would make of the Prophets here fet down, as a diilincS Order from Apoflles,, Evangelifh, and Teachers, if not to fpecifie an Office of ' foretelling things to come, and expounding, by a fpecial inftinfi, the more difficult Scriptures and Prophecies, fuch a* was Agabus. SeeProfefi. of Leyd.Difp. 42. th. 12. Did our Lord's promis'd preience fuppofe, or will it infer the Handing Neceffity of this Office, or not > Whatever Anfwer he make, he will find this Query and Dilemma fo pungent, as to pulh.him down. If this, with other Officers menrion'd, are (land- ing upon this Ground, let our Prefacer prefent us with his Spectacles, and let us fee where they exift. Might not fuch an Affertion cover him with Blufhes, and cxpofe him to the Contradicting Expofition of all the Churches, that I fay not the Hiffing of all Men, and the Confutation of Experience, efpecially including the Offices of Healing, of Miracles , . &c. which the Apoftle places in diftintt Orders, and ( to ufe B. Home- man % Phrafe ) makes an Ordinal Numbring of them, as F/'r/?, Secondarily^ &c. If he hold thefeOffices to be expir'd, then, 1. He muft acknow- ledge his Clamouring againft Presbyterians, for diftinguiflhing (with the Current of all Proteftant Divines ) the New Teilament Officers in- to Ordinary and Extraordinary, is futilous, and his Argument to im- pugn this Diftinction to be of the fame Stamp. And, 2. He muft ac- knowledge, that our Lord's general Prornile, Mattbt 28. will not bear his Conciufion of the ftanding Neceffity of all the Offices mention din the New Teflament, but, with us, he muft own, That the Promife, tho5 not ex- clufiveiy, yet mainly, refpects fuch as are of perpetual Ufe and Neceffity^. as diftinguifti'd from fuch as are expir'd and gone off with the Churches , firftt 1 6 A Revhw And C ^deration of the Chap. I. firft Exigence. He tells us, That the fame Work which the Apoflles and Evangeliils, &c. did in their days, was to be performed by autboris'd Per fens to the end of the World, who have a Right to the Apo\\les Plenitude of Power perpetual Authority and Jurifdiclion over aU (ub'ordinat* Officers and Believers in Chri/l. Upon this Afferdon, Fir ft t I would know, ffince he collates Eph.^.ii. with i Cor. 12. 28. which he will have exactly parallel as letting down the ftanding Orders of Church Officers) why he omits 'the Secondary Order of Prophets, fee in the- iecond Rank next to the Order of Apoitles, in both thefe Texts, and preferr'd in Order to that of Evan- gelifts, Epb. 4. who, in the other Parallels, are not at all mention'd ? One would think, that aliquid Myfierii alit, that fomething frighted our Prefacerfrom advancing this Sacred Order of Prophets, as of a ftandine Ncceffity. IU may offer a Conjeaure, I iuppofe, he was afraid of dafning with, and contradiaing his Account of the-inlare'd Gifts of Prophecie, which he exhibits as Vigent in the firft Times of the Gofpei from Joel 2. upon which he afferts, That all forts of People, Old and Youn? Men and Women, had extraordinary Gifts. What Exceptions this large Af- fertion is lyable unto, I will not now ftand to inquire. But °ood Mr Vrefacer, here is Syfipbxs's Stone ftill returning^ for the Query Is What kind of Offices thefe were, which the Apoltle places fo high 'betwixt Apojiles and Evangelist Was it to foretell things to come,a'nd by extraor dinary Infpiration to expound and apply difficult Scriptures' and Pro* phecies, and that in publick Aflemblies, for the Churches Edification > If this be faid, and that the Office was intirely of this Nature it will be a hard faying, and grate the Ears fadly, to affert, that all Perfons Tonne and Old, Men, yea Women (by the Apoftle forbidden to fpeak'in the Church ) had this Gift and Office. For if fo, why did God make this Of- fice fo Eminent in the Church ? If their Work and Office was properlv and mainly to Teach, then their Office was properly Ordinary . for he will not deny, that Ordinary Teachers had, at this time, lingular Gifts And if fo, the Queftion ftill recurs, Why are they diftinsuifli'd from Teachers, and let in fo high and diilina an Order before, and above that of Evangelifts and Teachers in the Apoftle's Ordinal Numbrine* Since therefore, according to his Scope and Defcription, thefe Office's are own'd as Ordinary, it follows, that the New Teftament Church has had a Mank and Lame Conftitution for many Centuries, fince Officers with fuch Gifts, are no where nnw pviftfnf i*a uac,A~. t _ j> ' and Evangelifls, teachers, &c. did in their days, was to be perform 'd bl Authons d Perfons to the end, I have heard, that a blind [e^j in an Oath Chap. I. Queries ie the 'Preslytcridrii of SCOTLAND. 17 Oath made once a great Conteft in England • and furely our Pre facer's l&c] here is like to creat him Trouble enough, No doubt, it muft, here, in this Man's Senfe and Scope, relped all the Orders mention'd in the premis'd Parallels, which he will needs make a Hercules Club of, to beat down Presbyterian Parity of Offices, fo that it muft, to make the Antithefis good, import fix'd and (landing di'Mind Orders. Then let us view the reft of his Apoftolick Mufter, and fearch the Churches Rolls for them. Here are, then, FirftApojites, Secondarily Prop bets. Thirdly Teach- erst after that follow other Orders, as Miracles, or mighty Works, next Gift s of Healing, then Helps, then Governments, then Diver fides of Tongues, I need not ftand to mew how thefe Orders arc underftocd by ProtefSane Divines and Interpreters ,* but that Three, at leaft, of thefe here men- tion'd, if not more, are ceas'd. as Extraordinary, is doubted by no PrO- teftanc Interpreter I know. Not to mention Prophets, we have here Miracles ; that the Apoftle means fome Order of Men and Church Of- fice, none will doubt,* viz,, fuch as were impower'd to work Miraculous Operations, and thofe of a more remarkable Nature. Thus the Con- tinuators of Pool's Annotations. Such as cur 'd Difeafes}oth?rw[e incurable, and had Power of infii&ing Miraculous Fearful Puntfwimts upon Oppo- fsrs of Truth, as was inflicted- by Paul on Elymas, ?nd by Peter on Ana- nias and Sappbira. Thus the Englijh Annot, The Bdgick, Divines un- derftand it to the fame Scope, of fuch as had the Gift to confirm the Do- (trine hy Miracles. Gifts of Healing, in the Judgment of Interpreters, im- ports another diftinci Order of Officers, whole Work and Office was to Cure Incurable Difeafes, as alfo others, but yet had no Power of Mira- culous Operations of a further Extenfion, as the firft Order had. Thirdly, for Pivcrfities of Tongues x_ this fpecial Diftind Order is judg'd to import fuch an Office, as had a fingular refpe£t either to Speaking in a (I range Tongue • or in fome 'tis fuppos'd to import the Ability of Inter- p:eting5feparated from the Ability of Speaking,which the Apoftle places in the i aft Order, to extenuat the Corinthians magnifying this Office and .Gift: A Gift, fay the forefaid Continuators, not given to all, but to fome, who were much magnified on this Ground. However, not to fraud upon the-Sentimsnts of the Nature and Differences of thefe Offi- ces offer'd by Interpreters ( wherecf a Graphical Exacl Defer iption Ju- dicious Calvin doth efteem a Difficult Work, thefe Offices being long fince ceas'd and much unknown. to us ); That there were fuch Offices and Functions in die fit ft Gofpei Church is denied by none, and that they are now expir'd is equally acknowiedg'd. Now, I would ask our Prefacer, Where is that Work perform'd, and by whom, which he doth here mention, as manag'd by Apoftles, EvangeliSs, and the &c. of C other 1 8 A Review And Conjideration rf the Chap. F/ other Officers, and to be ftill continued in the Gofpel Church? By what Orders of his belov'd Hierarchy are the enfuing Functions manag- ed > -viz,, the Prophetical Office of Foretelling future Events, the Expofttion and Application of hard and difficult Prophejtes by the fame immediat Impulfe and lnffiration, the Confirmation of the DccJrine of the Gofpel by Miraculous Operation ( and Punijhments of the Refractory, the Miraculous Healing of Di- feafes, Speaking withy and Interpreting of grange Tongues, by the fame facial Inflincl without Study and Learning the fame. Or if he own it that all thefe Functions are ceas'd, Where is that continued performance of the fame Work which Jpoftles, Evangeli/ts, Teachers, and the &c. did in their days * Aand how doth this confiil with Cbrift's Promised pre fence to the end with all the fir (I Gofyel Miniftersl Be/ides, if thefe Gifts of the Holy Gho/t were to be pour* d out upon all, Men, Women, Old and Toung, how comes the Apoftie to ftate them in diftind Offices * And fince thefe Gifts com- prehend the Teaching, Preaching Gift, will he be bold to affirm, that not only Women, but Children, were authored and fitted to Preach the Gofpel in the firft times thereof, as he infinuates from that Paffage Joel 2 ? But further, how will this confift with the Apoffle's Queries', which himfelf pleads, Are all Apo files } Are all Prophets f Are all teachers} 'Are all Workers of Miracles ? Have all the Gifts of Healing ? Do all ffeak with Tongues ? Do all interpret* The Apoftle's Queftion here, as elfe where imports a peremptory Negative', but wiJl our Prefacer give him the Lie' in a contradicting Affirmative? How can that fame Work perform'd by alj thefe Officers, and whereby they were diftinguifh'd from othersi be of a (landing Nature, fince thefe Functions were ceas'd many Centu- ries of Years ago ? So that, of necefltty, he mud either accommodat this Promife to fuch Works and Offices, as are of a ftanding Neceffity and Nature, and interpret the fame as refpeding the Continuance of a Gofpel Miniftry to the end, not the expired Functions premis'd, and thus yield the Caufe to the Presbyterians; in acknowledging Works and Offices Ordinary and Extraordinary, or impeach not only the Senfe and Judgment of Proteftant Divines and Churches, together with con- vincing Experience of all Chriftians, but, which is moft of all, our Saviour's Pr omifs of a Non-performance, and wanfof Efficacy and defirable Iffue. That Plenitude of Afoflolich Power, wherein they muftbe fucceeded, which he holds to be Becefjary, Perpetual, and Permanent>our Prefacer expref- feth thus,that it is an Authority andjurifdicfion over all Subordinate Officers and , Believers in Chrift. That the Apoftles had a Supreme, Infallible Authority and Infpe&ion over the whole Church, planted and to be planted,and all Officers and Belierers in Chnfti I know no body doubts of if j who read Chap. f. guerhs ft tk Vtethyterhis o/SCOTLAND. 19 and confider the Scripture Accounts of the Apoftolick Office : But that this Office and Infpedion, in the Extent and Nature thereof, as is above exprefs'd, was of a Permanent Nature, and to be Succeeded unto, I know none, who difown the Pope's Pretentions, who aflert it, if not this venerable Prefacer, with his Querift, and our late new Phantaftick Pleaders. Nor can he evade by alledging a Succeflion in point of Juris- diction and Authority over all Subordinate Officers in a certain limited precinct, which he may pretend to be hii Senfe from that which follows (whereof anon ).,• for he afierts this Succeflion exprefly with refpect tt the Plenitude of the Apoftles Tower and Jurifdiclion ever all Subordinate Offi- cers and Believers in Cbrifi, I wonder, what this Man will call the Plenitude of the Apofths Power, and that with refpect unto their Jurifdiclion ever all Subordinate Officers and Believers in Chrift, if he would apply it any other- wife than in this Extent, which was neceflarily and effentiallv included in the Apoftolick Office and Infpection ; And it being thus, I would know who the perfon or perfons are, who have thus fucceeded V Sure he will not afcribe it either to Bifhops, Arcb-Bifiops, or Metropolitans, if, at leaft, he will accord with his Querifr, who pretends, tho'in this inconfi- ftent with himfelf, to difown a Supreme High-Prieft, or Pope, over the Catholick Church, albeit he will admit him over a National Church, and this, no doubt, leaft he fliould have angred his Grace, the Metropolitan oi England, Here, I muft, obiter, offer it to Consideration, which doth clear the Subject we are upon, that, in the Senfe and Pleading of alJPro- teftam Divines agairtft a Papacy,tho' there were more Popes in a pretend- ed Collateral Supremacy poflefling that Chair, they are upon this ground equally reprobate and difown'd, as when this Infallible Supremacy is aicrib'd to One. But if the Supreme lnfpe&ion over all Ecclefiafticks and Believers, and that in an Apoftolick VUnitude, as this Man expreffes it, he will acknowledge to be competent to no fucceeding Officers • Then I will infer againft him, i. The Neceflity of acknowledging an Apoftolick Extraordinary Infpetfion, which neither is, nor could be fucceeded unto. And that, 2. He confequentiy lofeth his Argument from Chrift's promifed prefence to the end, to prove fuch a Succeflion. And, 3/7, • that ne lofeth his Argument from the Jemifr High-Prieft's Supremacy, as of the fame Nature, in point of a Succeflion of Power with that of Apoftles. * In Explication of this Aflertion, our Prefacer Subjoyns, 7bat that Superiority, and Subordination, neeejjaty among the Gcvemours of any Society and remarkable in all the Scripture accounts of Church -Government, muft needs con" time. Such a Superiority and Subordination in Church-Governmenr' as is neceffar.y among all well govern'd Societies, we never denied : £ 2 But ao A&evhwandConfideratifihtpty Chap.- 1 But he Ihouid have underftood himfelf and the Point better, before he took upon him to appear in this Debate : He mould have considered,: I fay, the Point in Controverfie, and State of the Queftion, which is anent the {landing plenitude of Apoflolick hfpeclion and Authority to be de* rii/d in a perpetual Succejfion, which we deny ,• and Affirm, yea and make Good the Contrary. For, i. We find the Apoftles committing what. was Ordinary in their Office to Paftors, Elders, Deacons, as the con- ftant ftanding Officers of the Church/ ■ Afti 14. 2$. with 6. iy 2, Tbih 1. 1. Acts 20. 28. A8s if. 2//. As we find thefe Officers of a ftanding Nature and Neceffity, fo we find Judicatories made. up. of Paftors and Elders adling with Ariftocratical Power, and cloathed with Jurifdi&i- onal Authority* 1 Cor. f. 1 Tim. 4. 14. ;ly We find the Apoftles injoyning Obedience to thefe ftanding Officer* in the Exercife of their Authority, and Difcharging a Lordly Superiority in any of them ever their Fellows, 1 Pet. j. 2, 3, 1 Theft y. 12, Htb. 1;. 17, 24* 2 Job. 9. So that 'tis ihis Man in his novel Invention of the Hierarchy, not we who difown the Scripture Pattern, preferring a Novel Invention to it. What follows in this and the next page, is meer Banter and foolifh Raiiery, as is moft of all that enfues in this long Preface, which I have no humour to retaliat, For his Railing againft the Covenant, he mould have underftood, that the National Covenant of Scot land & necelfariiy underftood and Explain'd againft the Corruptions that had been introduced contrary to this Na- tion's Libertie and Laws, was Ratified by King Charles I ( whom he entitles the Glorious Marty ) in full Parliament, with the greateft Sa- tisfaction, profelfing himfelf a Contented King, with a Contented People, as this Pamphietsr acknowledges. And for the Solemn League and Covenant, which he next foully exclaims againft, who knows not, that there was nothing in if, but what, in the prefent State and Exigence of Affairs, was a neceffary refult of, and founded upon that firft Cove- nant mentioned, which K. Cbarhs I. found, ac laft, Declaring in his admired £'»«?. B* Li the Love of the one be warrantable, the other not, the Love and Defire inirfelf confidered as the collated Parallels will evince then he Obje& in the one Cafe is Unlawful, and the other Lawful and - Gofpel Epifcopacy and Pre-e minence Objectively confidered are 'in point of LawfulnefcOppofites and Antipodes. 4/,. I find, the .Apoftle hbn (whole impreffion of our Lord's difcharging a Primacy and Pre-emi nence upon the occafion wherein he was fingularly concern'd none will doubt of/ lays down this Love of Preeminence as an Evil influen- cing the Carriage of this contumacious Diotrephes towards himfelf Which doth evidently Confirm what is faid anent the inherent Evil of this his Love of Pre-eminence, in it felf confidered ,• and his Con tumacy againft the holy Apoftle may be in all reafon fuppofed" the IfTue of this Pre-eminence-affe&ing humour, fince this Wretch could not but know the holy Apoftle's difowning fuch Pre-eminence and the Inconfiftencie thereof with his Dodrine and Practice. Fi! pally, good Interpreters make the places of Peter and John parallel • Thus the Dutch Divines upon this Pafifage, fhewing, that out of Ambition be Exalted himfelf above bis ^Fellow-Brethren, feeding after this, to Lord it ever them ( the very thing the Apoftle Peter difcharg'd >, and draw *U RefpeB to himfelf. BuUinger Exemplifies this in Prelates Pre-eminence not to mention others. And in that they were his Fellow -brethren* and by trie Apoftle put under that Character, v. io, over whom this Pre-eminence was affeBed, amongft whom he would needs be ac- counted higheft, as the Englijh Annot. exprefs it, the Pre-eminence in it felf confidered, appears Unlawful, whatever way he coveted and fought it. From all which it appears, that our Prefecers Glofs and ©tap. t ghteriesto the Presbyterians ge of lfa.2^. 1%. [In vain thty worfhip me, teaching for Doclrines the commandments of men] againft humane Traditions, Matth, 1$. from the beginning to v.ioth. But I wonder, if Mr Prefacer will aflert, with Bifhop Horn man, Prelacy and Piesbytery tobe but diffe- rent Circumftances of the lame Subftanrial Government • If fo, I hope he will allow us at prefent the Subftantials of Church Government, and give fome grains of Allowance to the Prudentials of our Honourable Par- liament, in removing that alterable Circumftance ofPrelacie, holding faft the Subftantials of Government in the prefent EftabHlhment. He cites the Apoftles words, » Cor, 11. 16. Ifanyfeem to be contentious y -we have no fuch cuftom% nor the Churches of God:- Then, let him, and all his Party, lay afide tl ei Contendings for their Circumftance of Prelacy, fince the Church of Soo land, together wiih the Nations Representatives, hare dif- own'd it. But who can trace or underftand iuch pitiful proteus Trif- flings ? In what is paft, we have heard him aflerting Prelacy toconfift of a Handing Set of Divinely appointed Church Qftkers, as neceffary for the Beeing and fuitable Subfiftence of theChriftfcn Church, as the Parts and Senfes of the Body, for its Subfiftence and Adings (from thefe Texts, Ephef 4.1 1,12. 1 Cor. 1 2.28. )• fo that the (baking off his beloved Prelacy, thefe glorious Succefibrs of Apoftles and Evangelifts, makes us guilty of the Rebellion c/Core, and with ftandin? the Inflitutim and Government of the Chri* pan Church delivered to us in the holy Scripture: But here, and in the fame page, wherein this Inftitution is afferted, it is found to be only a - cumftance of Government, alterable according to the prudence of Church Governours. If this be not his meaning, he doth in this Affertion beat the Air, and touches not Presbyterians, who never denyed this in Theft 1 Tho' Imuft tell him, by the way, that he miftakes that Paffage, 1 Con si. 16. [If any Man feem or lift to be Contentions , we have no fuch Cuftontj neither the Churches of God ] if fuppofing (with Bifhop Andrews), that the Apoftle refolves the Lawfulnefs not only of alterable Circumftances, buc even of Symbolical ceremonies upon the churches meer cttfiom, as if the Apoftle wg9id{bultopfhgM9i^b o|a Wrangyi agaiflft his |grgw adduced Rea-; Chip. I. guerhs to the imlyittUm of SCOTLAND. 29 fons/for what he is there ordering in point of Decency,* fince this were to affert, not without Blafphemy, that a Wrangling Wit could avoid or d'fprovethe Holy Ghofh, Reafons. But. when the Apoftle fays, If any lift to be Contentious, we have no (ucb Cu(lomt he limits this to the Vraclice and Cujiom of Sinful Contention, difowned by all true Lovers of Church Unity. But, fays our Prefacer, If the Controverfie turn upon thefe Points with Presbyterians, jo they were right in the Main, he would not contend with them. What then angers him * Why, it is this, That they pretend to Scripture for thnr Constitution, and every thing that is peculiar to it, Thif, faith he, is provoking to any Man whfrirircwvinced, that their whole Model of Government is contrary to it, to Jhew his Abhorrence of fuch Ajfuming Boldnejs. If, by our Conftitution, he mean the Church Officers, which we hold to be of Divine Appointment, and of landing Ufe and Neceflity, fuch as Pallors, Teachers, Elders j Deacons, with Subordinate Courts ofParochi* al Seffions, Presbyteries, Synods, National AiYemblies in a National Church, thefe we hold to be of Divine Appointment, And it had be- come this Prefacer's Modefty and prudence, had he confulted right the Reputation of either, to have confidered the Scripture Proofs exhibited by Famous Divines, Vindicating and Afferting thefe Courts and Offi- cers, in Oppofition to the Hierarchical Model;- ere he, or his Querift, had fuggefted their pitiful Notions againft thac which they appear ne- ver to have underftood nor confidered. And, in telling us of his Ab- horrency of this Conftitution, he hath ftretched, no doubt, his Anger far beyond his Reafon. But he is Angry at our pretending ( we fay, Ex<- kiblt'wg ) Scripture not only for our Conftitution ,> but every thing that is peculiar to it. What he means by [every thing that is peculiar to if] is not fo clear: If he mean that which is peculiar in ejji talis, or properly and effentially diftinguimeth this Model as its neceiTary fpecifick Difference, whereby it is diiiinguimed from other Models- pretended to, we hold, that the fame Scripture, which evinceth theModel it felf to be Divine, will, by Confluence, include and prove this alio to be fuch,* If by [every thing peculiar ] he means fuch- alterable Circumftances of the manner and method of its Exercife, as are left to the Regulation of the Prudence of Church Rulers, which? in their Various and Different Ufe, do noe Impeach or Intrench upon the Effeniial Nature of the Conftitution it felf, ftho* fuch are very improperly called peculiar to the Government^, I know no Presbyteiian, who pretends any fpeeial Scripture Warrant for the fame, beyond the General Rule mentioned. Our Prefacer next makes a Solemn Addreis to his Countrey-mers of the Presbyterian Perfwafion, who have Zeal for God and a due Re- gard to the Holy Scriptures, to. cpnfidtr Gsd's Inftitutions undtr the Leg P*fy §o A Review tttd Confider aiten of the Chap. I. Difpenf&tltrty as to the Ministry and Government of the Church, which was the Christian Church und>r another Difpenfation, the Institutions cf vur Saviour und Practice cf his Apo/fles. I do heartily imbrace his Exhortation, and do fuppofc, that all fuch whom he Addreffes, do ferioufly confider both. But what is that, which, in both, he will have us to confider ? Why, he is hopeful, that, if not blinded with prejudice Jo, as to (hut our Eyes againji Light, ( a fad Imputation upon fuch as have Zeal for God, and a due Regard for the Holy Scriptures , which our Prefacer's [*/ ] makes compa- tible with this Zeal and Regard), we will confider, that God, under loth Difpenfations, by Divine Appointment, enjoyned Minift.ers of different Ranks and Orders, diftingHifhed by Marks of Authority and Power* and Jnch different Ranks and FunBions cf the Chriiiian Minifiry are fet forth by Paul with kefem- hlance to the Natural Body. Now, will our Pre facer be fatisfied with a fair Conceffion, he (hall thus have it, viz,. That we own God's Ap- pointment of Different Orders of the Church- Officers under both Dilpeniations : Only, with this Conceffion, I muft mind him of of three things, i. We are glad he acknowledges, that the Legal Difpenfation was different, and another Difpenfation from that of the New Teftament Miniftry : And then, to beware of ] a tZ\ 3' X WorWly Entanglements, as they would pleafe Chrift 4 ' their Matter H, to preach the Gofpel in feafon and out of feafon a. Let him fay, if this be for Ufication, as he aflerts his beloved Prelacy is« The reft of this Preface is made up of a full Legend of Imputati- ons on the Work of Reformation, and the late happy Revolution, Reftoration and Eftabiifnmene of this Church ,♦ renewing the old Prelatick Cant, and Imputation of Sedition and Rebellion upon the, mod juft A&ings of our State and Church, the Vindication of our Na- tional and Spiritual Libsrties. Mujl we prefer, fays our Prefacer, our In- ventions- to the Divine sip point went S God forbid we fhould, but we prefer a Teaching Miniftry,. attending God's Work in all the Duties thereof, and Exercifing Difcipline in a due Subordination of Eeclefi- aftick Courts, for promoting Godlinefs, and Cenfurirrg all Scandals, whether in Minifters or in People, to fueh a Hierarchy as is above defcribed, and is adapted to no fuch Defign and End. He tells us, the Churches of Britain were not Edified, but Destroyed by the Rebellions after the year 1638, and Damnable Diftrines, Blafyioemits and Enthufiafms prevailed in England, after Epifcopal Government was pul- led down, which was the Fence of Religion. As for Scotland, we can appeal to the Knowledge and Experience of all the Surviving Godly, yea of all knowing Perfons, what glorious Advances in Reformation, both in H^art and Pradice, of folid Edification, and evidently en- larged Down-pouring of the Spirit of Grace and Supplication upon both Minifters and People, attended the Reftoration of our true Gofpel Church Government, and the Renovation of our Vows for the Prefervation and Maintenance thereof, which the Oppofition and Banter of this Adverfary, with his AfTociats, will never wear out of the Hearts #f the truly Godly, and knowing. And as for England, what a Fence, or rather Offence, his beloved Hierarchy was and has been to Proteftancs, and the true Protectant Religion, let their dear Martyr Bishop Laud, and his underling CUrgy, their Prin- ciples and Practice Teftilie : What Advances of Popery and Superftition; What horrid unhea.d of Periecution of the Seekers of Gods Face; Eje&ions of many Hundreds of Godly Faithful Paftors, for not Sub- murine to his Orders of Sports on the Sabbath day, and other Popilh Superftitious Mandacs 5 Whar imminent H zird of Overturning that Reformed Church, as well as the nue National Liberties, and Funda^ mental Civil Government, by the Influence of the Popifoly atteclea Olfcrgy Chap. I* gutties to the fresbyteria** of SCOTLAND. 33 Clergy and Courtiers* and in fpecial the Influence of this Hierarchy on King Charles the Firft: Let thefe, we fay, teftifie and determine of the Truth or Falfbood of this Affertion. As for Enthujiafms and Scftarp after prevailing, no Man of common Senfe can impute them to the Presbyterian Government, which was never there eftablimed : And all who know the State and Affairs of £»^Wat that time can teftifie, that as the Godly and Faithful Minifters oi England, and others who owned that Government, frill oppofed the Sectatys their Defigns and Principles, both in Writing and Acting ; fo thefe Seclarys had always the erecting of Presbyterian Government as their Eye-fore, as know- ing how effectually the erecting of this Wall of the Houfe of God, and the eftablifhed Vigor of True Gofpel Difcipline and Cenfures, would have curb'd all their Infolencies nndmifchievous Principles and Defigns. Our Prefacer further charges, the crumbling of that glorious Church into factions, upon endeavours to fet up Presbyter ie, and thereupon wijhetb Presbyte- rians to conjider what he has [aid, and prap they may have Understanding in all Things, for Edification, Peace , and Order. But Mr. Vrefacery if En- deavours to erect a true Gofpel Government, in opposition to an unlaw- ful Hierarchy, hath occasioned this Crumbling you talk of, it impeaches neither the Lawfulnefs of Presbyterian Government itfelf (for, as for Independence, he mould know, we own it not; and our Queftion is a- nent that Presbyterian Government which the Vows of both Nations engaged them to erect) nor the Parliamentary Endeavoursfor that End and Effect. His Prayer for undemanding what tends to Edification, Peace, and Order, Presbyterians do accord to, and in a due Charity do return it to himfelf, and do put it up for all his Party, who* we are lure, ftand in great need of that Mercy and Apoftolick Blefling,- for ne- ver were profeffed. Protectants more guilty of a Supercilious Schifmatic breach of Unity than they are. Is it not known, all England over, that feveral Hundreds of Godly Orthodox Minifters, whom many Churches would have imbraced as a Bleffing, have been and are kept from Church Communion in Government and Worjhip, who are content to keep Fellow- ship therein, notwithstanding of their eftabliflhed Hierarchie ( fa ftudi- ous are they of Peace and Unity in the Reformed Churches ), and yet to this day have that Door (hut upon them, unlefs they will fubmit, yea, and (wear Submiffion not only unto the Hierarchy, bur unto thefe Ceremonies which themfelves hold indifferent, and we, with the Body of Proteftant Divines, Popifh and Scandalous. As for his renew'd Banterings about the Covenants, I am not of an Humour to Retaliat his infolenc clamours : Thefe Sacred Oaths have been fo fully Vindicated by feveral Learned Pens, as renders hisRail- E ings 54 ^ Revie» and Confidtrati&n ef the Ctoap, F. ings not worth noticing. He will not reproach us for Burying it, at fame of our frltnds do. If any Friends do fo miltake us, wc pity them ; But I am free to tell him, that the great important Duties ingaged to in thefe Oaths, and rcfpe<5Hng Reformation according to our previous Ingagements in the Word of God, all the truelv Godly Minifters and People in this Church, have a due confcientious Senfe of the lame. He tells us, amidft his other bantering Clamours, that he may fay with Zlpporab, It was a bloody Covenant to Britain. See the precipitancy of foolim Anger, Zipporab re'proached God's Covenant of Circumcifion and this Seal of it as Bloody, in her paffionat rage, and our clamouring Antagonift here, upon the matter, and locking to his Scope and apply- ing Parallel, apparently accords her. Now, I hope, he will acknow* ledge, that Zipporab's charge and reproach of this Sacred Ordinance, and confequently upon the Covenant fealed by this Ordinance, was unjuft, and that its being bloody and very uneafie to her, was no juft Ground of Accufation ,• fo that the Gentleman is in the Briers of an intangling Dilemma, which will probably fcratch him: Either he muft acknowledge, a Worthy Covenant and Seal thereof may be occafion of Difturbance and Blood, without any Imputation on its intrinfick Value and Worth, and, confequently, that this his Argument againft the Co- venant is Foolim and Impertinent, or elfe he muft juftify Ziipporah's Plea and Anger againft God's Covenant of Circumcifion : Let our Prefacer ch«o(e him which he will imbrace, and reckon upon his Ad- vantage againft us in either of the two, especially fince the Strain of his Difcourfe, as well as the Thing it felf, cuts him off from the Pre- tence of a meer Allufion in this Matter. Had this Man prov'd the Co- venant to have been the Caufeof the Blood and Murthers he mentions, and that in its Defign and Principles, it had a native neceffary Influence thereupon, he had fpoken to the purpofe. As for what he adds of Sir George Mackenzie's Defence of King Charles 's Government, I refer him to the Reply offered unto it, and can confidently appeal to all perfons of Judgement and Integrity, acquaint with our Laws, as touching the Validity of that Defence. In a little view of it, I difcovered fuch a virulent partial Strain, and mattered Inconfiftencies, that I really Judge, they badly confulted that Gentleman's Reputation ( whofe Learning and Knowledge of ou* Laws none will doubt) who exhibite to publick view that pretended Defence under his name, if I may fuppofe it was thus drawn and offered after his Death. Among other Inftances I offer this • He reproaches the Covenant, and endeavours to afperfe and ex- pofe it, as the grand Fountain and Foundation of all the Rebellions and liifarckrs in Scotland, among which pretended Iffties and Effecls, he fee* Chap/* Sjferki to the Tresbykfhns of SCOTLAND. 35- r t iwn feveral Papers of fome poor Ample weak diftreffed people, Aytk upon pinnacles and precipices of Errors in point of Government, Tuch barbarous Oppreffions as would make even the wife Man mad, fome of which the Covenant is exprefly difowned,- fo that it is the greateft prevaricarion imaginable, to affert that the Covenant influen- ced fuch principles and pra&iees. As for Bilhop Guthrie's Manufcript, which our Prefacernext meftti* ons driving, it feems, the fame Defign of afperfing the Covenant, and the'Reformationof this Church, as the Caufe of thefe Diforders, Wars, and Tumults mentioned, it falls under the fame Confideration with the other Pamphlet, as being of a piece with it, and, as all ourPrefacers Arguings this way, a parcel of poor tranfparent Sophiftry. Tho' I have not had occafion toperufe thefe Memoirs, yet, having of knowing perfons underftood its Tendency and Tenor to be of this Nature, hav- ing alfo had fome Knowledge of the Man, I cannot but touch here a little this perfons Carriage, that it may appear what Judgement we are to make of his Hiftory. Being a Minifter about the time of Prela- cy's real or apparent Down-fall, and when the National Grievances did grow to fuch a Crifis, as influenced the fhaking off this Yoke, who fo Zealous againft Prelatsas this Man? In his Sermons he compar'd them to Tobia and Sanbattat, in their malicious oppofmg the building the Tem- ple and Walls of Jerufalem. In his Bifcourfes to this purpofe, he did fofar runout to fuch paffionat,and fometimes unbefeeming Expreffions, that he grated the Ears of fome perfons of Honour his Hearers, tho* no Friends to Prelats. He had once an odd Allegory and Similitude (no doubt too rude for the Pulpit), comparing the Bifhops and their In- terefts to a Coach, the Devil he made the Coach-man, the Prelats the Horfes drawing it, the quickning Whip-ladies he reprefented to be the great Offers of fat Benefices,State-Offices,and the like,whereby this furi- ous Coach-Man drives hard,and made thefe Horfes rufh on fo furioufly. He told the peopleof their long lawnSlieves, what odd Stuff was couch- ed therein. Well, fuch was the Mans Humour at this time. Bsing there- after ( as were many Temporizers ) upon important Grounds legally proven againft him, depofed from the Miniftry, he was afcer fome time, upon profedion of his Repentance, Reponed and Re-admitted to the Exsrcife thereof ; Such was the Moderation and candid Charity of Church Judicatoriesjeven in thofe times,which fome Men will call moft rigid. When upon King Charles's return and fetting on the Throne Ann$ 1662, Prelacy came to be again obrruded violently upon this Church, without the leaft (haddow of her Confent, by that Parliament which bxfely fold and mancipat the Nations Liberty to an Arbitrary Govem- E z menr, g6 A Review and Con jideratitn cf the ~*haD. I ment, againft our foundamental Laws, this Man, who loved aKn fwim with the Scream, and court the Rifing Sun, was among tht?c dieft Conformifts toit,- which a perfon (much, it feems, of his Dit^~ fition) perceiving, who had, as he, inveigh'd againft Prelats, whentha, Intereft was like to fall, in a Similitude of one carrying behind him a Gloke-bag Co? Wallet, as the Scotti[h Term is) ftuffc with dangerous. Wares, againft Church and State, fent him fome droll Satyiick. Lines s Mi Frater faid he, Te and your Sanballat, And J with my Pock manty Walleit Thought Prelats to retrain : Sanballat now d.fyes our Feady The Horonice has up his Head, And Mount td is again i, &q0 Upon the Vacancy of the Biflaopric'fe of Dunkel, the firft Bi/hoot whereof continued.not long in that Seat, this Mr. Guthrie falling inti- mate with Bimop Sharp, who loved to have a Son in his own Image; ( fuch a double-rac'd Gentleman as himfelf ) interpofed for gettinghim inftalled in chat See. And here we end this lictle Story of the Man. When this Authors famed Memoirs are by that Party Re-printed they will do well to do him .thej'uftice of annexing this Memoir oi himfelf that his Hiftory may be Weighed and Valued accordingly. ' * For what our Prefacer adds of che Murthers of all Ranks, from which none were exempted from him that fat on the Tnrone, to her that grindeth at the Mill, as the Effects of the Covenant, from the Year, 1640, to the Year 1660, &c. Nothing can be in the Judgement of Men of Undemanding more falfe and impertinent. As for the Bloody Civi! Warrs raife.d by Mmtro{e and his Party, How Adive himfelf was in it • How paffive the Body of the Nation, Church, and State ,• How unjufi and wicked, both in its Rife and Progrefs, wherein the Kinadom and State of Scotland, was upon the Defenfive, and in four or five Battles their Blood cruelly fhe.di How juft, confequently, the Executions were upon fome Remains of thefe that were Adive in this Blood med e- fpecially upon that Rout of the hi[h Rebels joyned with them who were guilty of the Murther (as is computed by fome ) of ioooo'o Pro- tectants in Ireland, is evident to all who know the Affairs of that time and can make impartial Judgement thereof. Let any perufe the Eftates of Scotland's Reply to Montrofes Declaration, in hislaft Invafion in the Year j§$qj And this wil| $$ e.vujenjt beyond Exception,. Queries to the Presbyterians cf SCOTLAND. 37 rj^/fcrefacer is bold '* to charge Abounding Immoralities in Scot- 1 1^ upon Presbvterian Government fettled therein, and aflerts, that * jfrors, Infidelities, BlafphemieSjand all fort of Debaucheries do more 'abound, and are more bare-faced under its Influence, than formerly. For evincing the bare-faced Impudence of this Charge ( to return his own Term ), I dare confidently appeal to all Men of Candour and Confcience in Scotland^ to the Recorded A6b and Progreis of our At- femblies, fince Reftored to their Liberty, their inftant Interpofings with the Civil Powers* the Corretpondent Laws Ena&ed for Suppref- fing all Wickednels and Immorality, the Impartiality notorioufly ap- pearing in Cenfuring all Immoralities in fuch as profefs to own the Eftabliihed. Presbyterian Government : And who knows not-, that th« Wickednefs he mentions, abounds with our Jacobites, Non-jurants, and Men diiaffe&ed to, and Enemies- of the prefent Eftabiiftiment : And the Retardments of the Execution of Civil Liws> and Church Canons againft fuch Wickednefs as he mention?, all Men that know Scotland do know, have their Rile from the Opposition to Presbyterian Govern- ment in the juft Exercife thereof by the Men of his Kidney and Gang, who cannot endure the Reftraint of the'ir Wicked Immoralities by the juft Curb of that Dilcipline appointed by our Lord, and avowedly de- clare (yea fome of the Chief of their Clergy) they had rather embrace Popgry than Presbytery. What Advances the Myftery of Iniquity, and bare- faced Popery, and all that wicked Superftition and Idolatry, had in the late Reigns, if I mould undertake to Delinecit, were to Light up a Candle to (how. the Sun at Noon-day ,• and how the Defign of Introducing it, which was come, in both Kingdoms,, to the Birth, did, in the late happy Revolution, mifcarry. What an Inundation and Deluge of Debauchery, and Profanity of all forts, came into this Nation pari paj]u with Prelacy, and attended their Wicked Eje&ing of a Godly, Faitnful, Confcientious Miniilry, to the Number of Three or Four Hundred, and filling their Places with fuch a Gang and Set of Men, as were, for the Generality, the Shame and Scandal of the Gofpel, and guilty ofmoft notorious Profanity (if Swearing? Whore- dom, Drunkennefs, Sabbath-breaking, may come under iuch a Chara- cter), all Scotland have fuch a Senfe, and hath fo long fmarted under the Effects thereof, as neither this, nor probably any fucceeding Age, will blot out the Remembrance and Impreflion of the fame. 1 have my felf known fome of the Vulgar fort, upon the obvious Obfervation , of this vifible and evident Iffue of the Erection of Prelacy, complaining, that the Land was become generally Profane and Debauched. May I here mind this PrefaCer, or xathex the Gentleman Queiift, of the Words 33 $*eries to \he PtedfterUfti 0/ SCOTLAND. C ofan Eminent Peer of Scotland, theMarquefs of Argyh who w!£' \ A<5hve ir i bringing home King Charles in the Year x6co, and ftX7 Crown of^Won his Head, in a grateful Requital whereof t^! IWe in th? Beginning of his Reigri i66r, cut off his H d at the Gr«a of Eiw^A, and let it upon the Tolbooth, as a ftanding Monu! ment of his Remembrance of the Service done to him. This Noble Patriot, at his Death, when way was making for Prelacies Eredtion took Notice in his Speech upon the Scaffold, of the Formidable Ad! vancesand Growth of Profanity. 1 may fay trulyy £M he, tho I have been a Prtfoner, 1 have not had mme Ban (hut, I hear afjuredly \no doubt Affuredlyj for, by this time, all Scotland was Refunding Eaft W,ft iouth and North, with this fad Noife and afflicting Obferva'tion to all that eared God, or had any Senfe of Religion ), that DrinkTnTs^l w£, Whorewg, were never more common, never more countenanced than „«•>,, they are. He told the People, That if MagiSlrats did not regain 1Z Teople abandon this Wickednejs, there was no doubt, but God's Wrath would fttrfue both. If there were a true Account and Hiftory of the almoft in numerable Inftances of Drunkennefc, Uncleannels, Horrid Oath-" Elafphemies, Immoralities and Debaucheries of all forts Strange InA Barbarous Unnatural Murthers, Children of Parents, ' Husbands of Wives, Wives of Husbands, Avowed and Deliberat Sabbath-Breakimr (in Remembrance of it feems, and coveting much the Renovation of Bilhop Lauds Book of Sports, our Epifcopalians dear Martvr ) Blaf phemous Mockeries of Religion and a Deity, Abounding under he late Reigns, it might make the Ears of all, that have any Imoreffinnc of a Deity, of a Heaven, ofHolinefs, to Tingle, and their Hearts w Tremble. For Popery it was fo become in fafliion ( before ever Kimr James afcended the Throne with a bare-faced DeCign thereof) that ? fuits and all Romes Traffickers, were avowedly profecuting their Ma~ Iters Work and Service m fo much, that one of that Number, Dempftcr at Aberdeen, had the Boldnefs to fend fome of his Profelytes to chal lenge Mr. Mmzies, Profeffor of Divinity, to a Difpute, whence enfu ed a Perfonal, and thereafter a Paper Debate, fince printed A Paral" lei Inftance to which, in the Town of Dundee, and with' refoedt to iuch an Blue, is ftili upon Record, which put the then Minifrer Mr Rait, to a Defence of the Proteftant Do^rine, fince printed When one of the Minifters, in Mr* Sharp thePrimat's Diocefs, complained at the Diocefan Meetings of the Affront and Oppofition of Papifts 'the Venerable Primat told him, it was the Presbyterians they were to fet themfelves againft. This, a Presbyterian Minifler, yet alive, can tefti fjr, who was an Ear Witnefs. Many are the Inftances3 which may be ex" hibued Chap. I. St^mtt to the Presbyterians ^/SCOTLAND. 39 hibitcdy of this Infolency of Papifts, at that time. The Inftanees, alfo> are notour and fad, of the Blafphermes of that Horrid Villain, and Pro- fefled Atheift, Cbriflopher Jrvin : Some Accounts I have heard of this Wretches Blafphemous Mockeries of a Deity, that I truly Tremble to reflect upon. This Man, Profeffing Medicine, was Imployed and Converted with by perfons of the greateft Rank, without Controulj whereas a Youth, who had been fometime in the Colledge of Edin- burgh, upon Reading of fome Mifchievous pamphlets, falling under Impreffions of Deifm^ and found guilty of Blalphemies againft the Tri- nity, and our Saviour's Incarnation, and, in Judgment, appearing Ob» ftinat, all Scotland know, was, according to our Laws againft Blafphe- mers, made an Example of Shame and juftice, being Hanged betwixt Leitb and Edinburgh, and appointed to be Buried there, in the place where notorious Criminals and Malefactors are Hanged in Chains, and denyed the Common Place of Ghriftian Burial. This I, with many others, was Witnefs to. Tho' this Poor Youth, a little before, and at his Death, Confeued his Guilt, Profeffing to Flie to Chrift for Mercy, and was related to fome of Eminent Note, and even of his Judges, Now, let our Prefacer, or any of his Party, produce, if they can, fuch an Inftance of Exemplary Impartial Juftice upon the many Blafphemers, during the Time of Prelacy. What remains in this Preface, is of a Piece with the preceeding Viru- lent failings, and Bantering Stuff, fo notoriously Falfe and Confuted by the Oblervation and Knowledge of all Perfons of Common Ingenu- ity, that it is a fuiftcient Confutation to Read it. Among other abfurd Infolencies, he is bold to Charge feveral Abiding providences, fuch as the Burnings in Edinburgh, Famine, Epidemical SickneiTes, the Mil- carrying of the Affair of Darien, &c upon the Erecting orPreshyie* rian Government ,• an Inference fo Remote and Senfelcfs,. that, to Repeat it, is to Refute it : Our Prefacer mould have had fo much of very Common Prudence, as to forefee an Obvious Retortion, and far more probable, from many fad Providential IiTues attending upon King Charles II's Reftoration and Government, fuch as, the Plague, the Burning of London, the Mifcarrying of feveral Sea Adventures, and Strokes that way, the Selling of Dunkirk^ with other Ominous' Ad- vances of the French King's Greatnds and Deftgns, upon the propor- tion'd Ruines of the Greatnefs and Honour of England, not to infrft up- on the Tragical Murthers of EJfex, Btdfoord, and Sir Edmondbury Godfrey, He is bold to appeal to the People of Scotland, Whether, fince Presbytery *ivas eflabltjhed therein, they have found Jttcb happy Effhfis of more Orthodoxy i? Faith, and Imfrovmnnt in Morals* And 1 dare make die fame Appeal, that: 40 d Keview and Con ft 'deration if the Chap. I. that they have, and, for Proof, may again atteft the Current of our Affemblies Afts and Procedure, fince this Happy Revolution and Efta- blifhment, fo Convincingly Adapted ( and, we blefs God, not with- out Succefs ) to thefe great Ends of Eftablifhing Truth and Godlinefs, for Supprefling Popery, and all Errors and Immoralities, for EitablilM ing a Laborious Faithful Miniftry through the Nation, the many Ad- dreffes to the Civil Power, for Strengthening their Hands in this Good Work. We may alfo renew the fame Appeal to all Unprejudic'd Ob- fervers, that the grand Impediment of this BlerTed Defign hath flowed from our Bigot Prelatifts, our Non-jurant Jacobites, and Popimly Af- fected Perfons, who are known to have ufed all Mifchievous Endea« vours to Obftrua the fame, whereof their late Projed of Procuring from the Queen a Letter. Incouraging their Non-jurant Clergy to En- croach upon a Legally Eftablifted Miniftry, is none of the leaft, upon which, DifafFeaed Perfons to the Government, and many Profane Debauched Wretches, have been encouraged to withdraw from the Infpeaion of the Lord's Servants, and from the deferved Cenfures of their Scandalous Immoralities. That (ome Supporters of Presbytery are the Scandal of Cbriflianity, that Infidelity, Blag>bemies9 and all fort of Debauch* ries do more abound, and are more Impudent under its Influence, than formerly , is fuch a notorious Untruth, that Mr. Colvil, were he alive, might ap- ply to it what he faid in his Verfes of a Calumnious Hiftorian anent the Affairs of Scotland, and our Presbyterian Church in fpecial, All the De- vils *Blufhy he Lie* fo. But I pray the Lord give this Man, if in the Land of the Living, Repentace, more Prudence, more Knowledge and Sobriety, and then,. I am fare, his Penitent Refleaings, and Self- Revenges, for thus accufing the Brethren, yea a whole Church, will be his beft Remedy, and all our defired Revenge. Thus I have done with our Prefacer, when I have added one Word, That, fince the Advantage he expeaed of this Shamelefs Calumnious Banter he hath ftuffc his Preface with, he could only, in Reafon, hope for it from his Enilijh High-Flyers, and fuch other Credulous Perfons in that Nation, whofe Ignorance of Scott ifh Affairs, together with their Prelatick Bigotry, renders them capable of believing his Falie and Foulfome Imputations upon Presbyterian Government, and whofe Plagiary Credulity is much of a piece with that of tbofe, who re- ceived, and, with Complacency, hugg'd that Fardel of Ridica- lous Lies, Entituled, The Scots Presbyterian ELauence, He fhould have keeped his Learned Preface and Pamplet from ftepping over the Bor- der to Scotland, where he might be well allured, it could be no other- ways entertained, than with the Derifion of fome, and the Pity of Chap. H. 'ghmki to fh Prtdyteridff if SCOTLAND. 4! the more Serious, from a Senfe of his Petulant Folly, and federal other Vices, wherewith he hath Blotted himfelf, and is therein Staged and Expof^d to all Men ©f Senfe, who know our A& fairs* CHAP. II. A Conftder&tion and Review of the Queries of the Firfl Chapter* Expofiftg the Querift's Ignorant and Popijh Notions, anent the Teftimony of Early Antiquity, and the Practice of the Primitive Church, as Authorizing and Determining the Senfe and Interpre- tation of Difficult or Controverted Texts of Scripture 5 as likemfi his Ignorant Demand ofExprefs Scriptures, to Fortify the Anfme of every one of his Queries. O M E we now to Examine theCb Goodly Queries, to highly valued by our Prefacer. The firft Querie is, How far the Teftimony of Early Antiquity, can be aUoivd for clearing many Places of Scripture, in Matters of Doftrim, and Churcb-Gt- c vernment To this the Anfwer is eafy and cleat, That all Orthodox Divines," all the Reformed Churches, yea and the Ancient Fathers themfelves, hold the Scriptures to be the Only Judge, or ( as Come do fpeafc more properly,) the Only Rule, not Antiquity, as to all Matters of Do&rine, and all Subftantials of Church- Government : So that, whatever Helps this Teftimony may be fuppos'd to afford, in order to fuch a Clearing as he mentions, yet 'tis neither a part of the Canon, nor of it felf In- fallible, but, as all other Subordinat Helps, Mill Examinable thereby. To the Reafon annexed unto the Query, viz,. That there are many things believed and paBisd% for which there is n» Pojitive Command* It is Anfwered, not to ftand upon the inquiry, what he means by Tojttive Command, that, if we acknowledge the Holy Scripture to be the Perfeft Rule, as to all Credenda, Facienda, Petenda ( as all Proteftant Churches do, and the Scripture aflerts it felf to be, in many clear Te- ftimonies), then it neceflarily follows, that nothing is to be believed or pra&ifed in Point of Doctrine, or Subftantials of Worfhip and Church- Government, but what is either exprefly, or, by neceffary and good F Con- 4> A^tvimAnAConfd&dtiomofihe Chap. II ConfequencCi contained ir* Scripture-- Such as are thefe things he * Mat 28 10 inftancethi fcli- Infant'Baptifm, whereof the Cbmpre-' I Aa\ t£ 33', henfive Command'and Inftitudon of our Saviour *, the vith ij. v. Practice of the Apoftles in Baptizing Houfholdsfi where-^ 1 cor. 1. 16. of Infants are a part, as alfo great Multifudcs ||, the clear mJt\l*' 4I' Su?ceffion oflhis firft Seal of the Gofpt>Covenant into the old Seal ofCircumcifion, in its proper Defign of the *colof. 2. it, 12. Ear]y initiating Children into God's Church * and the T x c*r. 7. i4. ApoftlesAffertion of the FederalHolinefs of Children .f, clearly importing this ftanding Title, and ,this Birth-right Priviledge, as being born of profeft Religious Parents within the Bofom of the Church Vihble, are ' fu.fficient Scripture Proofs and Warrants; fo that we need not go to any Practice of Antiquity to Legitimate the fame. This alfo we affert of his other Inftances. For the Change of the Jew- ish Sabbath into the Lord's Day, this hath been cleared by ftveral Di- vines in Learned Treatifes. Had he read Caudrie, Mr. Durham upon Rev* 1. 10. with feveral others, this might have faved him the Labour of this Fooliin Query. A feventh part of Time to befet apart for So* lemn Worfhip, being enjoyned in the fourth Command, we have, for Warranting the Change of the Seventh Day into the Firft, our Lord's reiterated Converfe with his Apoftles on that Day of his Refurreftion, ^ Exemplifying and Recommending thus the Relative Ho$ itu 281 *\2" Iine^s of the Day *. the fpecial Chara&er and Denomi- Luke 24.. 21,36. . , t Jn ' « . ... ,. , , ?oh. 20. 19, 26. nation thereof, Rev, 1. 10. wherein it is called xv?i but to the Tbings then- and re uSnTZ >*?*"'&**' I™ bdng Jn the F.mini/ Gender % and ela^ng to the Epiftles Things themfelves may be great My- llZU ^ pofal as clear, and7 adapted to ho Undemanding of the Sincere, and fuch as can Spiritually Difcern! F 2 as 44 rA Review i»d Cw/tderdtlM efthe Chap. % a, the Thing can admit of, t cor. 2. Thus even tmnut and E/ftw. See 7W* on the places But to mew how our Pamphleter ftrikes in with Papifts in this Querie, let any read the Popifh Pleadings from hence, for their Traditions, au& making the Scriptures but the half Rule, the Chur- ches Practice and Antiquity the other ; in fpecial, the Rbemijh, and Bailiut in his Catkolhk catecbifm, and this will: be evident beyond all Peradventure. Fir(l< For the J- fuirs of Rhtmts, " Tbey found their 'Charge of Obfcurity and D fficutty upon the Scriptures, from this c very. Paffage cited by our Querift ; and do Charge PfOteftants for c Admitting nothing as the Rale, but the bare Scriptures. Lutber they * Reproach, for faying, that the Scriptures were more plain than the 'Fathers Commentaries. Moreover, they Charge Proteftams with a c Devilifli and Seditious Arrogance* becaufe they expect- not the Pre* * laces and the Churches Judgment for urder (tending the Scriptures; * holding, that the Things treated of- in the Word of Cod, and the " manner of Writing is hard and high, and by God's Providence * purpolely Written in fuch fort. Bailius the Jetuit, in his Catcchifm, * enquiring, whether the Scriptures be Perfpicuous, makes his Catboli* 'tut Papi/ia to Anfwer in the Negative; and among other Arguments, 4 to evince the Scriptures Obfcurity, his Catholick adduceth the * premiied Text of Scripture, which he tells us, is alienum a Judici* ' Keformatorum. He pretends to Anlwer the Objection, that aU things *necefiary are clearly revealed, asking* if in thefe things, which are * Difficult, there be nothing neceffary to Salvation. I need not £hew the Learned Rivet's Anfwer, in his Catbolicut Ortbodoxus, and Confutation of what is premifed, which is to the feme Scope with what is already touched : To which he adds, What can be (aid of -Paul's Writings, which may. not be Objected againft Traditions, fince they are involved in the fame, or greater Obfcurities? He after cites a Notable Paffage otxhryfoftem, H$m. 3. on Tbeffal 2. Omnia funt dilucida et retta qua junt in Uivinis Seripturis ; manifefta funt Wecunytt funt nece£aria, All things are Right and dilucid in the Divine Scriptures, and manifeft which are neceffary. But to fliew further the Folly of this Querie, fince our Quenft will not deny, that thefe Difficulties in Pauh Epift'es, in his Senie, and according to this his Rule, had a neceffary Explication in the Churches Judgment and Practice, when the Apoftle Peter Noted thefe Hard Things to be underftood, fince otherways there wanted a. neceffary Explication for clearing Scripture Difficulties-, and tfce Divirje Wifdom fliail be reflect^ upon, as leaving the Church - cuviUtutc, Chap. IT. Queries to the Vreshytersdns 0/ SCOTLAND. 45 deftirute of a neceflary Rule for clearing Difficulties ; And then it will Puzzle our Querift to Anfwer thefe Queries. i» How comes it, that the Apoftle Peter, in Noting the Malady, Points not out the Remedy, fo neceflary for Removing the Same ? Nay, that the Scfipiure no where elfe, Points us to fuch a Remedy for clearing Difficulties? Gur Saviour, in the great Debate with the Jews anent bis Office of Mtjftai appealed to the Scriptures, enjoyning to Search, or minding them, as the Word IftwZn imports. But neither he nor his. Apottles, fen t any to the Churches Practice or Tradition in thar, or Subfequent Ages, for clearing Scrip* ure Difficulties, lfy Since this Rule muft hold in all Difficulties, or elfe this Querift muft fhew, why the Difficulties in Paul's Epiftles, come under this Rule, and none elfe upon the fame Ground,- How will it appear, what Churches Practice or Canons do clear Difficulties ? and why Some, and not all ? elfe the Rule is not Uniform : If there are other Difficulties, as Weighty and neceffary to be Refolved as thofe menti- oned, which notwithstanding have no fuch practice or Canon toclear them, how (hall they be Refolved Mf by Scripture icfelf, comparing it with itlelf, which is the Proteftants Rule, why are not all Difficulties equally thus Determinable PBefides^ fince it is beyond all Peradventurei that not only Church-Canons and Traditions are found Involved- in very confiderable Difficulties, but the Churches Uniform, Um> verfal Practice, in any Age or Century^ is a Difficulty it felf, hard enough for the Learnedeft to penetrate into ,• How then (hall this be a Rule to clear Obfcure Places, to every Searcher of Scrips ture ( whom this Man will acknowledge concerned in the Difco- verie ) which is it felf involved in fuch Obfcurities ? 3/^ It may be further enquired, whether this Rule will not make the Chus> ches Praftice the *Diotii the Ratio a Prioi to Determine Scripture Senfe, making thus Men, the Rule of our Faith ? Finally, it may be enquired, what can be the Remedy in the Cafe of the early Aberrations in the Churches Praaice,from the Scripture Path, wherej of feveral Inftances are given, and of Errours ( f o far aY Credit is to be given to Hyftorie ) univerfally held, fuch as the Errour anent the Vifion of God? that the Souls of Saints departed, fee not the Face of God, till the Judgment of the Great Day, the ETrour of Free-will, which obtained tiil Augufiin rejected it, wh© Elourifhed in the ^.Century, the Millenary Errour, and the like? Our Querift demands Exprefs Scripture for refufing thk Rule, and wet for all clear, exprefs Scripture Anjwers to all bis Queries v For the firft Part of his Demand, I hope what is faid, is a clcai' 46 ARevhwandConfiderrtioHofthc Chap. II. clear and Scripture Anfwer thereto ; But if he by Clear mean txpre/s Scripture, that is in fo many Letters and Syllables, and thus Difown Scripture Confluences, he has Difowned the Proteftant- Doarine, and joyned IlUie with Papifts, fuch as Cardinal Perron Cottonus, ArncUm, VeronW, as likeways with the old Arrians, Macedo- nians, and others. The neceffity of admitting Scripture Confequen- ces this Gentleman Querift might have found Demonftrated by •Proteftant Divines from dear Scripture Grounds ,• As fi-jl, From the Scriptures exprefs Dsfign, as to this Improvement thereof by Doarine, Reproof, Correaion, Inftru&ion, &c. 2 Tim.;.i6. Rom iy. 4. which Improvement and Ufe cannot be Reached without Rational Inference, and, Confequently, the Application and Improve- ment of our Reafon. zly. From the Command given to Men as Rational Creatures, to fearcb the Scriptures, Joh. f- 39. to Dig for and Search out the Gold, the Nucleus, the Kernel, and Senfe not to reft in a Superficial Knowledge of the Shell of bare Words/ 2/y From the Wifdom of God, who, in proposing his Word and Oracles' Commends to us -what is clearly deduceable therefrom ,- and, con- fequently, calls for the ufe of our Reafon in fuch rational Deductions 4/y. From the Practice of Chrift and his Apoftles. Thus our Saviour Mattb. 22. 32. proved the Refurredion from the Covenant Promife, Exod. 3. 6. I am the God of Abraham, I/aac, and Jacob, where there* is nothing exprefs of the Refurreaion. Thus the Apoftles proved Jefus of Nazareth to be the Mcjjiab promifed in the Old Toftament by Confequences drawn from the fame: And many fuch Inftances can be Exhibited. Thus our Querift hath run to the Popiib Camp, before he hath done with his very firft Qierie, in that he will have us Ru'ed by Tradition for clearing Scripture Difficulties; bQCidas, that, in Deman- ding exprefs Scripture for what we hold, and to prove every An- fwer to his Queries, he flies to the Exploded Refuge of Grofs Hereticks. But I would gladiy know, Where hath he Exprefs Scrip* ture to Fortify theie two Opinions? if they be the Onjeas of his Faith, and in his Principles Divine Truths, he ftands Obliged by the fame Principle to produce Exprefs Scripture for them • and if this he cannot perform, to Difown them. Where hath he Exprefs Scrip- ture for prefenting this Lsarned Volume of his Queries, fince in this Pradice he will profefs to Aa in Faith, and the Scripture is Clear and Expiefs, that whatjeevtr is not of Faitb I Rm». r4. 23. is sin *> Our Querift offers this Reafon of his Demand, be- caufe Chap. II. Queries td the Presbyterians of SCOTLAND 47 eaufe the Gentleman whom he Addrefies, when pinched with Antiquity re- ject every thing for which Text of Scripture is not^iven in Relighn and Church Government. But how little Seme or Reafon doth this Gentle- man Querift, difcoyer in this his Reafon and pretended Retortion ? Will he be bold to fay, that when we demand Scripture Proof for every thing in Religion and Church- Government, we either demand exprefs Scripture exclufive of> or difowning juft and neceflary Confluences, or exprefs Scripture for every thing that is merely circumftantial in Re» ligion or Church-Government? If he cannot lay, that we do either* how pitiful is his Reafon, and how irrational is his indentifying either the Subfiantials and Gir cum (lances of Government, or his making one and the fame clear Scripture Proof, and exprefs Scripture Proof? Was not our Saviour's Proof of the Refurrection sgainft the Sad4uceesyfrom Exod. 3. 6. clear Scripture Proof ? but will he fay it was an Exprefs-^ and not a* Confe^mntial Proof. Come we now to the fecond Querie, which is this. QV E R I E II. I Fit he a Fault to fay, fame places of Scripture are cleared by Apocryphal Writ ifjgs, whether this condemns not all Commentaries and Strmons > Anf. What he means by Apocryphal Writings is not fo clear : II the Books commonly called fo, he fhould underftand, that we give[thera the credit of other Humane Writings, fuch as Jofephus in point of Hi- ftory , or fuch like Moral Writings in other things ,• and whatever clear- nefs may be iuppofed,as to fome Matters of Fact, or Hifrory,deduceabIe from fuch Writings,we hold it frill tobs aSubfervientClearnefs tttoccslo differing from the Rule and Canon it fdf, and no part of ir. But with- al, we have more Vejierable Thoughts of the Sermons and Commentaries of the Lord's lent Ambaffadors, who have Authority accordingly to be Expofitors of his Law and holy Oracles, Stewards of the Myfteries of God, and are, as in that Capacity, fuppos'd See Jer. 2. 8. to undergoe God's infiituted Tryal by the Prophets, as l Cor- 4- '• 2 touching fuch a competent meafure of the Spirits Gifts Ccr' 3'6- l£0Tm of Knowledge, Utterance, &c as the Lord hath pro- ^IrimTl' mifed to his Servants and Minifters to the end of the World. Since God hath declared, that Faith comes by Hearing,. * Scil. the Word preached, and hath declar- * Rom, 19. 17, ed a Sent, Teaching, and Scripture exponing Miniftry, improving the Word .for Doctrine, Reproof, Exhortation, Corre- 4$ A Revietf dttd Confide? att&tt of tie Chap. XL &ion, and lnftru Law> bu£ no< abfolutely, D«a. 17. 12. Chnfts promifed Prefence ftill refpetfs the following of rowTttP^'f^Ti fuchObie^onsmayPbe read,and SI folv d* in the premifed Authors, and others upon this Subjetf. As for the affirmative part of the Anfwer, face 'tis not ours, we are not con' SAV! °^n^ ^PPos^ Confequence drawn therefrom. For What ne hints ofjeroms Toto orbe Dccretum, 'tis fpo&en to in Reclius In. itruetMxm, and other pieces. His^Querie, pouching tertian's Rule, $>cil Such things wherein the Church is One, hzve not come by Error, but hy Tradition, Scil. AfoHolical 33 Of the. lamp. Wafiir* »,:t-U *J,~ i _ 1 r „ *i "Yw*cwfl>, /• . r * «T •«« -/ *-" *,, vni, rj iraaitiop OCI . Apostolical I of.lhfbm] 1 N«ure with the former, and founded upon thatfaife Popifli Suppoftion of the Churches Infallibility , and therefore receives a t?\ £*F? heMV> , ehere beinS Inftances gi«n of pretended Apoftohcjt Tradition, and the Churches Praflice thereupon which are duown/d by ail the Orthodox, fuch as thefe mentioned by B.0 and the uk(* the* n«frvu«/l«an. ~* .u- *- 1 • J ~«/«, A I r \ in^-e"' Befid^$) ,there beinS Inftances Siv«n of pretended Apoftohcjt Tradicon, and the Churches Practice thereupon which are duown/d by all the Orthodox, fuch as thefe mentioned by Bal and die hke the unfoundnefs of this Ground is apparent, and the premised Anfwer equally evident. UiT^f ^^ff' inway°fMemma, is, 0fci&r **r Saviour, fc/w *» 4ff*3% dtdeave everything concerning Church Government tofitively determmd with his Apexes or not r If he did, what need was tberi of the unvutrjally acknowledged Injfiration, face they had ban thusfurnifhed with a jud Rule to walk by? But, if they were only commanded, and inputted in the 'fi 1/J / ra , that our Lord nevet gave fuch immediate InftrudMon anc« thefe Crcumftantials This general Command (as he Terms it 1 rl\ ,C<£ JfP°nden^ Inftniiftioiis. . refpeding the Nature and End of the W,9 1rSKanr C°Urt^ imp°^£h a P°firiw ^terminadon of the Species of the Government, and nothing of the Government m or Subftantials thereof, but had this Infallible J„& Management. 'fi-uiun in it s r im P?C,ee-d j!th .°:Jr Q"*"'1 J If we %• the Apoftles were In- felhbijr Inlpned, with rrfped to. the f.r.W *&*'*& "»r be'had in^al rrtiTe N. Teftament Writings, for Determining. ni. i„ this Matter. What ^ the great Projeaion of our Querift, when we are brau>c 2 this great Iffne t Why, If the Accent,, faith he, be net fi dearttheZ rem,, of ,„,, Matter of Fail, but variou, Interpretation, are fjj 2 then,, and fer.ou, Men of Jiferent ?,rfwafto», are t*h convine'd elhZ Item are ,n the Right, and have Scipture on their fiie, how 'thai, ' tht (gttroverfie, a, H , he true Serf, of thofe Serine, be cleared, Lt firm the early J^, cf the Cbmcb, and the nearer the Apolik, the better Lilt Projection, *ft He Charges upon the Apoftles n Con^adhft on to h„ Suppofition of their Infallibility in p'articu a^nag m« tof Church- Government, that tho' Chrift gave them i! TI ral Rules and Idea of Government, and the Holy SpTrit w DrX inpar.icuiar Management, yet, in this Management; and theh Do ftrtne thereanent delivered to the Churches, they f"t down n„ Sne" iFtrff*T!aTmA r°-^hiCrh the Churcfl is Infallib|y uerkf to the-Pmbyieridttt 0/ SCOTLAND. $3 "Practice is noe, ^ cannot be our Rule in this Point, ily. He is ye* farther Injurious to the Apoftles, in fuppofing, that tho' the Apo« files had the Spirit's Infallible Condud in this particular Manage^ nient of Government upon the Lord's General Riredions, yet all that's Written and left upon Record in this Point, is like the Heathen Oracles, fo Dark and Obfcure, that Serious and Knowing Men can never reach its Meaning, but muft have the Churches Pradice as a Clew to wind them out of this Labyrinth. So, it feems, neither were the Apoftles fo Faithful as they ought to have been/in giving Enigmas and Inextricable Riddles inftead of Rules of Government, nor ( borrefco deferens ! ) the Spirit, in his Condud, fo firaiftht and Infallible as was neceffary : For he tells us, that what the Apoftles have Written, is not in it (elf Jo Clear as to bavs prevented this jupfos d blijl of Debate, and that of Godly Strious Men on both fides $ who may be fuppts'd to Jeek the Sprit's Light in their Inquiry. Again, if our Querift Evade by laying, that tho' he affert thefe Didats are not fo Clear, but that Different Interpretations are fix'd upon them, he doth not Charge an Objective Unclearnefs upon the Things themfelves ; Tlien I Anjwer% That, befides that his Words will not bear this Conftrudion, ( for he Charges an Obfcurity upon them, in tbemfehet confident ) he lofes the Defign of his Que- rie, which is to fend us for clearnefs to the Churches practice. For, fince this may be (aid of Hundreds of controverted Scripture Truths, he muft make the Churche's practice the Univerfal Rule, or go to Rome for the Infallible Vifible Judge, there being fuch mul- titudes of contending Parries, who profefs all of them a ferious Searching for Truth, and Oppofing, in thefe Debates, Scriptures to Qdch other. Finally, I would know of this Querift, fince the Churches early firit Pradice, after the Apoftolick Age, is fo very Dark in the Hi- ftory, by Confeffion of EHJtbtus, and Scaliger, and of the beft In- quirers ,• And fince he will not aver, that thefe Records of the Churches Pradice, are either, i(t. More clear than the Apoftolick Re% cords Extant in Scripture ; or, ilyy Of equal certainty^ ; And %ly. Since he will not deny, that there are as waim Debates and C ontefts touching .this Primitive Pradice, and the Records thereof, betwixt Contending Parties c in his Chariry, Learned and Knowirg ) in this Point of Church-Government, Epifcopalians thinking that thefe Records ftand clear for them,,, lo alf© Presbyterians, ai ti Jo Irtdtrcn* dents; How., I pray, (hail this Leaden &uie of the ChuiChei after- pradice 514 A Review and ConficleY&tUn of the Chan tt Pgtafc. preferred to the Scriptures Unerring Golden Rule £J VI. Querie is, // Miracle, did not ceate before \t»:rr~. , . , , th Church, Whether dec, net that f*J^T^$£?.$*li * net Ob Prove Epifcopac, net incoLent thiol Jl Z'f, "? °r> wiU Mark, o a True Church > I Avfwr HeClH "f"*' end , be Epifcopacy, about which our QudHon U to hay^-'^ ^ thefe Miracles ceas'd, fo that his Query is airy w,?fh„a'"d b/°re dation. And he (hould have made his p15 „h?u.c a Foul>- Conditional one with an If Teain 4 ,Tf T Ai'fo!ute> not a Gentleman, or any f„ hit ~„ age™ o^m^he ft? M° nod of the ceafing of Miracles Nbu f,L.- r ?? he fixd Pe- obtain'd before the eeaftj « Ade SiS^^'Sry" "^ the Warrantabienefs thereof f Did not tte Devil fc» Vt P'ead Lfor Men {kept, Afawi. i ,. 2J > *rd »„,,,,». ,ow l,,s Tar« while in the Churches <*iJ&»ton™irtV%^*■ lyceasd. But did the continuance Vf Mi^cles W^ f° ?f Corruptions ? Did the Lord's fending an Eft* w?,h M- ' thefe firming his Meffage, and after him aV^Tw £ ^T racles, after the ten Tribes Defe/K™ r c . . d°ub|e Mi- DoaAne, together wXnfe SSSff b.&VT™ the Prophets Mtnifoy, reach any Patrocin_ a^t » "' lr Jones, 1 8. 4. the Corruptions which thra/c4oCl and'^-.?" Church was guilt, of, the Wickednef/ Sff VSt/%" c 4rW, 5,r-r0Ur ? "I* S?**j« '• ,he Do*f «"« °f *<£» EatW ...4, «. thmgs Sacnfic'd to Idols, the Toleration ofFo/ntclTI wi*ib.y. as a Thing indifferent, the denya] of the l£r £" d « O. on 4 the holding of Feafts in the o'a ct nr I tfa"e&iZ ,5; \%. C,^t»ration of the* Lord's Su per ,, Pthe reS^ uM;„. P'«°'ng for Circumcilion, and other Amia,l!lZ% d f&U. monies/. If he fair thefe Evil, I,, t a iqHated Cere- ■* .3. ^ k.t.£v«tE» naortegft ;£:?» i Churches, while tainted with rl^O. ^ • he GofPe! the Efflence of Churches, and fo "tt Scope ofl^uST^ that what is confident with the Euence of a d , Jr ' "A* *"-• heniibie: So might Prelacy bef tK TWnft K ^ tuption For his Inference, rA* Ration fZ% Chltd J ?'■ Ep,/copal)Canmt he Vindicated from Scbifm: 'Tis Angered Tht' .• " granted, what can our Querift tffr StfS^SSAgS Chap. II. Qntrksto the Presbyterians of SCOTLAND. ** land, their Plea ftands fare upon this Ground, that tho' Epifcopacy be Eftablifh'd, a Government we hold, and make Good to be con- trary to the Word of God ; yet Minifters ever difownd a Separa- tion ffom the WorhSip ( viz. a Lawful Gofpel Wor/hip ), remo- ving the Scandalous Popifh Ceremonies, acknowledge by themfelves Indifferent,- nor did Minifters there ever refufe concurrence for the necefTary Exercife of Difcipline, allowing them the Effentiai Pri- viledge of all Paftors, viz. to deliberate and Vote in Judicatories for the great Ends of Church-Government : But who knows not* they are Excluded from both, and their juft Demands in both, de- ny'd by the Prelats and their Upholders, who are as afraid of Godly Minifters Affociation in their Worfhip and Government upon the Terms Inftanced, as Popes are of General Councils left their corruption in both fliould wear off. As for Scotland, our Que- rift cannot but know, that this National Church is Eftabliihed Presby- terially, and no Quarrel is made with Episcopalians, as to their Epifcopal Principles formerly owned by them ,• bur a Door is o^ pen'd for Communion, both in Wor/hip and Government : As for the Worfhip none are Excluded from it ,• nor are there any finful Terms propos'd to barr Communion in it, it being the lame for Subftance as was formerly, upon which Ground themfelves pleaded for adherence thereunto: And for Minifterial Fellowship, and- Aft fociation in the Government, they are admitted to it, ( if not Erroneous in Doctrine, nor Scandalous in Practice ) upon their Engagement to all necefTary Duties therein, and to own the Efta- bliftVd Government, an Engagement fo necefTary for the very be- ing of the Government it felf Eftablifli'd by Law, that no Man of common Senfe can quarrel the Equity and Neceffity thereof. So that, 'tis palpable, that the Schifm lies at their .Door, who re- ject thefe Terms of Admittance, and refufe to Joyn to this Nati- onal Church, when fo fair a Door is opened j and alike they are Guilty of this Schifm, who (hut that Door of Fellowship in Worfhip and Government which God has opened. Our Querift Demands an Injiance from us, of Separation from the Church in the purtfl Age of it, upon the account of Qifhops] which Learn d Tresbjterians ajjtrt to have Govtrnd the fame. His Quefticn wants a Foundation, the Prelacy about which our Queftion is had never Place in the Pureft Times of the Church ,• if he understand the Prelacy now exiftent in England, and lately in Scotland, and in thefe Pureft Times include ( as needs he muft ) the Apoftolick Times. To fay, that Presbyterians^ yea, Learned- Presbyterians, and in j£ A Review and Confederation of the Chap. Ill, in Pleading for Presbyterian Government* acknowledge the Apoftolicfc Church, and the immediately fucceeding, to have been govern'd by Bifoops, is fuch a grofs Falmood, fo palpably inconfiftent with their Principles, yea common Senfe, that the very Reading thereof impeaches our Querift of Dull and Unaccountable Inadvertency. CHAP. III. Containing an Anfvoer to the Series of the Second Chapter : And Examining this Pamphteters Popifi Inconfiflent Notion^ anent the Jemfi Oeconomjf, as Exemplifying a New Tefiament Pattern of Epifcopal Government $ And his Ajfertion of the Necejfity of an "Union thereunto : Together with his Abfurd Pleading for the "Denomination of Priefts, as the proper Official Name or Epithet of Go/pel Minifiers. HI S Fir ft Query has feveral Branches, to which a particular Anfweriball be return'd. 'Tis touching the Jewifh Oeconomy, and how far it is Fulfill' 'd in , or Abolifb'd by Shrifts according to the Title of this Chapter : Puriuant to which Scope, the firft Qusry, in general, is, If all of it may not be imitated •which was not truly Typical. In Anfwer to this, He mould know, that Divines make a Threefold Partition of their Laws j Some were given to them as Men in general, fo the Law Moral proper and common to Mankind as fuch ,• 2//, Some were Ceremonial^ given to them as a Church under that fir ft Difpenfarion of the Covenant ,• 3/;, Some were JuJicial&iven to them as a Nation regulated in its Civil Govern- ment and Laws immediately by God. The firft obliges all Men, as being the Tranfcript of that Holy Law written in Man's Heart in his Original Integrity, representing an intire Scheme of his Duty to God and Man. The Ceremonial contains a Delineation of the Rule and Plat-form of Divine Worftvp in that firtt Difpenfation of the Cove- nant, containing fhaddowiog Odinances reprefenting Chrift the Sub- ftaiice, Colof. 2. 16, 17. Heb. 10. i, The Law Political or Judicial is that which determines the Duties or Magiftrars and Subjects, with Rules refpefting the Commonwealth of Ifrael, containing alfo certain Promifes and Threatnings, according to the Rule of both Tables, efpe- ciajly the lesond, The Uft two are, 3s it were, Appendices of the firft, Chap. III. Queries to the fmbjterians of SCOTLAND. 57 firft, which is the Ground of their Obligation ,• the Ceremonial rcf. peded the manner of Worfhip, according to the firft Table ,• the Ju- dicial refpe&ed the Duties, efpecially of the fecond Table, with a fpecial relped* to that People in their prefent Cafe and Gircumftances. The Law Moral differs from the other Two; in that it is founded upon the Law of Nature, and is naturally in fome meafure known,* but the other on the Law Pofitive, flowing from the Actings of the Divine Plea- fure in the Revelation thereof. They differ alfo in Duration, the firft being Eternal and Immutable, the other two Mutable and Temporal, They differ alio in Refpecl of the Obje ™tb wiuawAiiiuuvu, z. , ,f 1 r 1 many ethers upon of the things themfelvesv as was needlul to tound this t^ suhje^f. Tofttivt Law, which, therefore, not having a Beeing, there could be no Tranfgreffion of it. And, as for the contrary Practice of the Patriarchs (after objected by him ), whether we fup- pofe their Ignorance *>f the Law, I mean that refpecting Polygamy, H 2 as 60 A Review and Confidentldn of the Chap. III. as to God's firft Inftitution of \tarriage, or an Invincible Ignorance of the after Rules, fpoken of Levit. 20. or plead, with others, Gods Difpenfing with his own Pojitive Law in fuch Circumftances,* in either Cafe, the Moral Binding Force of the Precept it feif, and the Rules after-mention'd, is no whit lmpeach'd or Infringed. But, to argue from the Binding Force of the Decalogue, to the Obligation or Stand- ing; Force of the Jewifh Oeconomyi is fo palpably abfurd, that, be- fides what is offered, nothing needs to be further added. For what he after ,ald$ in his Query, it is not worth the noticing : His averting, without any ReftVi&ion, That Moral Laws are fuch, as God djfmftth not with, difcoveis his Ignorance of the premis'd Protectant DocVine on this H^ad. The tame may be faid of what he Cites from Mat. j\ jy. Our Lord's coming not to dejlroy the Law, but to fulfil it, and that our Right eoufnefs muf exceed that of Scribes and Phari fees , who fate in Mofes'j €hiir, and of our Saviour's raifing even tbe Moral Law to a Higher fitch, than the Jews thought of : For, as 'tis certain, that the Moral Law, as fuch, is ftill binding, fo that Higher fitch he mentions, ( if he right- ly underftand himfeif, or the Point ) he cannot but acknowledge, muft refped the Standing Spiritual Nature and Extent of the Law, which thefe Pharifees had miftaken and corrupted. II. Query. Whether it deferves not to be remarked, that, tW the Jewijh Church was very Corrupt, and Degenerate, not only in Practice, but alfo in its very ConfUtution and Fundamental Principles, yet, our Lord did not [e- farate from their Communion, and commanded the People to objerve what the Pharifees commanded, as their Lawful Rulers, fitting in Moles'* Chair, and fucceeding the Seventy Elders. He allow d not the People to forfake their Communion for their Perfonal Faults, sr Erroneous Dcfirine. I An- fwer, This Query.hath no Conclufion or Inference to his Scope; And any Conclufion or Inference he can draw from it, will plead for a Non-Separation from the Church of Scotland, as now Conflicted, and the Officers thereof, notwithstanding what Errors or Vices their party impute to us. I (hall not ftand to Criticife upon his imputing to the Jewim Church, at that time, a Corruption in its Conftituticn and Fun- damentai Principles ; but fure his Hypothefis makes the Conclufion premis'd the more forcible. If he plead this for Subjeaion to Prelates, we deny, either that they are the True Officers of this Church, or, where they have obtain d Power and Iruereft in Government, that they fit in iiofess Chair, or have, as Prelates, a Lawful Succeflion to Apofties ,• whereof afterward. So that this Conclufion has no Con- nexion with the premis'd Command of our Saviour. III. Query. Chap. III. Queries to the VreshyterUns of SCOTLAND. 6i III. Querie. Whether our Saviour's Ordaining Twelve Ape files, and Seventy Dijciples of a lower Order anfwering exatoly to the Jewifli Sanhedrim, his ad" doping two Jewifh Rites obtaining in that Church, tho1 not appointed in th* Law, viz. the Poficaenium and Baptifm to he the two Sacrament > of his Churcht will prove that he was not for altering whatever "Vw the old Oeanomie was cap* able of being for advantage in the New? I Anfwer, i. That the External Ordinances proper to that flrft Oeconomie are altered, and the New come in their place, has a full Scripture Teftimony : They are called, Shadows whereof (Shrifl is the fubftance, Collof. 2. 17. A yoke which neither we nor our fathers were able to bear, A<5rs r f. 10. Weak^and beggarly Elements, Gal. 4. 9. Rudiments of the world from which we are delivered if dead with Cbrift, Collof. 2. 20. The law given by Mofes oppofite to that grace andtrutb which' came by Jefus thrift, John I. 17, The miniftration of death in ft ones 9 Oppofed to tbt Minifiration of the jpirit and of life in the Gofpel/2 Cor. 3. 7, 8. Carnal ordinances impos 'd until the time of Go/pel Reformation, Heb. 9. lo. The Churches pedagogie and fchoolm after unto Ghrift, Gal. ;. 24. That cur Lord the true Melchi(edeck} the of spring of Juda, of which Tribe Mofes (pake nothing of Triefihood, has infiitutedyas the only Trieft of his Church, a new Mini(lry and Lawt making a change of both Miniftry and Law of the Old TeJ- tament Oeconomie, Heb. 7. 1 1, 12, 1 3, 14, 1 j. The Scripture alfo informs us, that be has nailed to hisQrofs all that Hand Writing of theft Ordinances, CololT. 2. 14. That he has abolifhed the Law of Commandments as the Corner- {lone, makjng of both Churches One, Eph. 2. if. 2/y, That our Eord imi- tated the number of the Twelve Tribes in chufing Twelve Apoftles,and the number of the Sanhedrim, in the choice of the Seventy inferiour Difciples, is gratis diftum, which our Querift fliould prove, not affert without Proof. For 1. What end can any affign of this Imitation ) Was the Chriftian Church, gathered through the World, to have Twelve diftina Tribes, with Twelve diftintt Heads and Patriarchs, having a Collateral or Equal Power, fuch as were thofe of Jjrael, at leaft until the Government was a&ually eftablifhed in the Tribe of Juda ? Who will be bold to afferc this > ily% That our Lord refpeded not the number of the TwelveTribes in this Inftitution of the Apcftles, is plain by addition of a Paul after the number of Twelve made up ,• and feme will aflert, of a Barnabas alfo. Again, as for the Seventy, the Querift cannot prove any fuch Samplar taken from the Sanhedrim, as he alledges: This Number waschofen for a tranfient Preparation, be- ing fent two and two to places whither the Lord was to come, with- out any Iaftirutionofa Subordinat Miniftry, in the Judgement of fe* veral of the Learned, whereof there appears no Footftep in- the Sacred Text. Befides, what Myftery will our Querift find in the Lord's fend- ing 62 . AfywewdndGonfiderationofthe Chap. Ill, ing them two and two ?*What Imitation was there of the Oeconomfe in this Dual Number ? I know there want not Fancies of Allufions here to Mojei and, Aaron ^nd the like: But the Reafon appears Evident viz for their mutual Strengthning and, Affiftance in this Work. There are alio other Fancies of Allufions in this number of the Seventy, viz to the Seventy of Jacob's Family, Gen. 46. 27, the Seventy days mourning for him, Gen. jo. g% the Seventy Palm Trees, Numb. 1%. 9. the Seventy years Captivity, &c. But, leaving thefe Fancies, tho'it were granted that the Seventy were an inferiour ftanding Order to the Apoftles • Why might they not be Evangeiifb, whofe Office was to pafs off with that of the Apoftles themfelves ? which, if fuppos'd, does quite over- throw the Scope of his Querie, and doth evince, that 'tis founded upon a meer begging of the Queftion. Again, ;/y, Our Querift will needs have. the Inference to follow, That what was ufeful in the Old Oeconomieis to be retain din the New. Now, to make fenfe of this Inference Trom his +>* dedue'd Inftances, he muft needs hold a ftanding Patriarchat of Twelve Apoftles, a ftanding New Teftament Sanhedrim, for the Church Catho- lick. But if none of thefe will follow, where is the Standing of this Viece of the Old Economic, as ufeful in the New ? If he fay, he means dU ItincT: Orders of Officers, and Courts Subordinat to Bifliops, then he contradicts himfelf, and loofeth his Argument for retaining what is uleful in the Old Oeconomie ,• for that ftands upon the Inftitution of Twelve Apoftles,by a Copy taken from the Twelve Tribes, and the Pre- cife number of Seventy Difciples, according to the number of the San- hedrim, which he makes Seventy: So that, his hiding himfelf, when pur- fued, in this general Conclufion of diftin& Orders and Officers, proves him a very faint and unfound Difputer. 4/), Upon fuppofition, that botfe Offices of Apoftles and Evangeliils are ceas'd.which is fully prov'd by our Divines, by Arguments to which he can make no Anfwer, this Retention of fuch a Piece of the Old Oeconomie in rheNew, evanifties as Srnoak before the Wind, and in fuppofing thefe Officers ordinary, he beggs the Queftion. j/y, Our Lord's ordaining Baptifm and his Holy Supper, in Imication of the Rites mentioned by I im, and adopting them to be two Sacraments of the New Teftament Church, is but a piece of our Querift's prefumpruous Folly, and Antffcriptural' boldnefs, whereof he neither doth, nor can offer any (baddow of Proof from . Scripture, even granting there were fuch Rites exiftent. Finally, Too* all he feeks were granted, viz. our Lord's Imitation alledged in adoo- tmg of fuch Rites, how will he prove the fame Authority in Men, or lay me Church, to make fuch a TranQation? Our Saviour, by his Supreme Chap. Ilk Quirks to tk VmbyHrhns of SCOTLAND. 62 Supreme Dominion over his Church, as her only Head and Lawgiver *, the Corner- (rone of both Buildings, *EPh 1 ** »m and of the Old and New Oeconomies f , in appointing, 4. iy! Col. 1. 18. by his Sovereign Prerogative, the New Teftament Or- mth 2. 19. Ifa! dinances, might Retain and Adopt thereunto whatever 33' 22, Jam' *' Pieces of the Old Oeconomie he thought fit : But f *Eph a 20 * who is that Man, that Church, yea, or Angel, that has 1 Pet. Y. o\ ' '' this Authority ? So that whatever Adoptings or Tranf- lations of this nature he may be fuppofed to have made, mud ftand and that up®n the Sole Ground of his Soveraign Authority, and none muft prefume to add to his Teftamentarie Prefcriptions hereanent ||. g Gal. 3. 15. IV. Querie, If it he Lawful to argue from tie Old Con- Bit ution to the New, as the Apojile does in the Eft file to the Hebrews in many places, particularly as totbeGofpel Miniftry, Hebr. 5. 4. I Anfwer, This Querie labours of Obfcurity, to give it no worfe name. If he mean fuch anabiolute Arguing as tends to introduce every piece of that Oe< conomie into the New, iff. He contradict himfelf, zly, The Author of that Epiftle. 1. Himfelf ; for he acknowledges, in the very next page, that the Jewiih High-Priefts fuppofed and included a Soveraign Precedency over the Church of the Jews, and is not imitable in the New Teftament Dipenfation, nor confequently valid to infer fuch a Prefident over the Chriftian Church, becaufe of the Speciality of one Temple, one Altar, at which only all I/rael were to offer 'Sacrifices. 2//, He comradi&s the Apoftle, who afferts Chap. 7. 12. that the Prie/l- W of the Old Teftament Difpenfation being changed, there is by necef- hry Conkquemc a change alfo of the Law, fcil. The Ordinances refpec* ting their Worfhip and Government. But if by [ Arguing from the Old Conftitution to the New ] he means an Arguing, ift, In that which is eliennal to Government in general ,• Or ily, Such Arguing as refpefls 9ihuLrc!j ?°vern"ien? as fuch> °r meSe talis, fcil. That it depends in all theSubftantials of it, upon Divine Inftitution, as God commanded Mo{es to imitate his Pattern on the Mount, in the whole Frame of the Tabernacle Heb. 8. f. This is eafily admitted, and as the Inftance he exhibues, Chap. f, 4. No man takes this honour to himfelf \ but he that is call* d of God as was Aaron, makes evident in the Point of Government. i But our Querift from his diftorted Senfe of Heb. y. 4. doth further infer, and inferring asks, Whether the Citation Ads 1.20. His Bifhop- nck let another take, proves not, that the Apoftles were Bishops ? I muft confefs, that this Inference isfo remote and fubtile, that itpafTes my comprehenfion, and I fuppofe of any Man who has a futable Exer- cife 6$i A Review and Confederation of the Chap. III. cife of his Reafon. The Apoftle fays, None muft, without a lawful Cal« ling, invade an Ecclefiaftick Office, fince Aaron was call'd of God to his Office; Ergo, the Citation Afis j.20. His Bishoprick (or Office, as the Epifeopal Tranflators themfelves render it in the Margin ) let 'another take , proves the Apoftles were Biftsops, foil, in the Prelitical Senfe ofthe Hierarchical Bilhop intended by our Querift. The Man that Argues at this rate) may prove yuidlibtt ex qnolibet. It will follow indeed, that the Apoftles had a Lawful Office and Charge, to which they wete called: But if he infer, that it was of the Epifeopal Mould, fuch as he pleads fori" I would ask him* whether Aaron had not fuch an Epifcopacy, to which he Was call'd of Gods and whether that ofthe Apoftles was of the&me Nature? This laft our Querift difowns, and therefore their Epifcopacy muft be reftri&ed to the New Teftament Oeconomie and Rules, or elfe he muft fay that all the parts of that Oeconomie are introducible into the New, which, as is above touch'd, he afterwarddifowns" however in this inconfiftent with himfelf, as will alfo after appear! But fhortly, to any that but reads that Text, 'tis evident, that in the' Accomplishment of David's Prophecy anent Judas, the Apoftle Peter pleads, that his Apoftolick Office and Charge, or Apoftolick lufpe&i- on, as the Term properly Signifies, is to be given to another : But that the Apoftolick Office, Epifcopacy, or Epifeopal Infpe&ion, was properly and formally fuch as Prelats affume and plead for, is a Con- fequence utterly Remote from this Antecedent. Therefore his next fnquirie, Why they are not fucceeded by Bishops, if the Apoftles were fuch, as well as by Presbyters and Deacons, has a ready Anfwer, fell. The Apofto- lick Office containing TLminmter all Lawful Offices and Officers, who were according to Divine Warrant to fucced them, thefe Officers mention'd, do in their own Sphere, and for the proper Defign of their Function, fucceed them. But the Office of a Prelate, according to the Principles of our Epifcopalians, has no Warrant in Scripture, but ftands in Oppofition to the Rules theieof in point of Church- Govern^ ment. For what he adds of Luke's making ufe of the Seventy, in his Tranf- htion ofthe Term,- as the granting tne Equivalencie of both Terms is nothing to the purpofe, fohe muft be Advertis'd, that the Holy Pen-men of Scripture fooke v*omivp*Ttt * 2 mi I. 2 1. JyU f«fo^ftf 1 *, As they were carried by the Holy Ghost, and therefore were not at their own Arbicr'iment or Difpo- fal, to Ufe or not Ufe fuch or fuch Expreflions or Phrafes, and cannot, without a great Incongruity, be faid to have bor- rowed or mads ufe, ot the Fhrafes or Words of other Authors, to expiefs Chap. III. gtotrki ti the PmiptriaM of SCOTLAND. 6% exprefc what the Holy Ghoft dilated unto them,fecing both Matter an* Words are immediatly Divine, .and, according to the premis'd Scrip- ture flowing from the Spirit's immediate Influence. Our Querift fur- ther* asks, Whither the Mifkory of the Ele&ion */* Matthias to faucedjuaav doth not fhewttbat the Apoftles thought %th*t tbej ought and muft be fuceeeded t$ as fuch ? 1 Anfwer Negatively, and offer this Reafon. The Hiftery, mentions,that in the Accomplishment of the Scripture- Prophecy, there was One to be Subftituted to fill up Judas's Room as an Apoftle,and to take part in the Apoftolick Miniftry, as fuch ; but that, therefore, this Apoftolick Office and Miniftry was Ordinary, and to be Succeeded unto by ftanding Officers of the fame nature, does no ways follow : Which I prove two ways, ijf. The Nature of the Office, as Delineated in Scripture, is fuch as can admit of no Succeflion, as all Orthodox Di- vines do artert againft the Popiih Pleadings, underftanding ftill the Office in a proper formal Senfe, as is faid. zly, In all the Apoftles La-] bours and Do&iine, in reference to a Succeffive Standing Miniftry (whereof afterward ) , there is not the leaft hint of a Succeflion of A- poftles or Eyangclifts. V. Querie, Whether the Orders of Levites and Priefts, having by God's appointment, Overfeers called by the Seventy %Bishops9 according to the New Tef» tatnent Language, and tbeje Over jeers One over them, or an Arch-Bishop, bt- fides Aaron, who was the Type ofChrifi, our Higb'Prieft, does not make for E- pifcopacy in the Ghriftian Church? To this the Anfwer is Eafie, and Nega- tive, as is clear from what is above hinted. If we acknowledge thzlaxis and fpecial Frame of that Oeconomie to be remov'd, as Orthodox Dig vines do hold againft the Popim Pleadings, according to the Apoftles affertion, Heb. 7. 12* And zly, if v/e acknowledge (as needs w;) mull, unlefs we impeach our Saviour's Faithfulnefs paramount to that of Mofes, according to the fame ApolUes aiTertion, Heb. ;. y, 6. ) 3l new Scheme and Frame of the New Teftament Miniftry, depending upon our Lord's fpecial Appointment, 'tis this Pattern we muft look unto, and not fetch our Meafures from the Jewifh Antiquated Oe* conomie. But our Querift moves to himfeif an Obje&ion, 'that this is a Popish Argument, and by Parity of Reafon will plead for one chief Bishop or Pope fiver the Chriftian Church, feeing the Jews bad but one High-Prieft. To which he Anfwers, That under the Law there was one Temple and Altar, and it was not lawful to offer upon any other than on that Altar, and in that place which God did chufey which makes that Nation but one Province, fo that the utmo(l this can infer is, that every National Chriftian Church ought to have « Metropolitan or Arck'Bifbop, to whom the reft of the Bijbops and Glergy ought I t$ 66 A Review attd Confide? titon of the Chap. Hi. to he in form Subietlien, and he to continue their Superiour for Life. The Un- ferviceablenefs of which Anfwer feveral ways appears, i. Heabfurdly afleits that this was Properly, or Solely, the Reafon, why there was but one High Prieft or President fet over that Church. For i. The Author of the Epiifle to the Hebrews can fi*cw him, in his many Companions ( which our Querift fhould have heeded better) that the Typical Na- ture and#A *- there was one Supreme Prefident ever all the Overfeers of the ouc ^a^e Friejis3 andnot only over the Priefts themfelves, and this befides Aaron who only was the TypeofChrifl. So that he clearly joyns with his Fellow in this Antecedent and Confequence. And we may add a third, Dr. Monro, Who expreily affirms t, That the taxis' t ineptbie int» and Order of that Oeconomie was never abrogated^but ftands un- f^e new °pwm$ der the NewXeft anient. So that, in defpight of all Contra- page 27' diction, our three Epifcopal Pleaders are joint Harmonious Pro&qrs for a Papacy, ily, The Church being fuch a Body as all the Parts thereof partake of the Nature of the whole, and, in particular, Orga- nick Churches, the Nature of the Church Catholick, and thefe Ai cries above Arches^ with the Supereminent Arch overall, belonging (ac- cording to our Querift) to the neceffary Taxis and Strudturet>f the Church as fuch, as is evident from the Structure of his Pleading* it ne- I 2 ceirarily 68 A Review And Confldentlm of the Chap. HI. ceflarily follows, that, remove what was Typical, the Order it felt ?.an.ds* 'l°r}Qc willLn0,Ldcny that the Supreme Prefident, whom he diftinguiflieth from the Typical, belong'd to the Taxis and Order of that Church, as a Neceflary and Effential Part thereof, yea, ami that in the Capacity of a Church, and, moreover, as God's only Church then upon Earth, ify He judges the High-PriefVs Office Exemplified in that of Apoftles ( how confidently, I (hall not now Debate ) All do know, and this Gentleman will not difown it, that they had an Univerfal Infallible Official Infpeaion over the Catholick Church - For, as for what he after afierts, anent their Concerted Meafures of Exercife, it doth no whit Impeach their Effential Radical Authority over the whole Church, as having an Immediate Relation, Aftu SecuL do, thereunto. Now, when the Apofrle John furviv'd fo long all the reft, cioath'd with this Authority, here was clearly Exemplified in his Principles, the High-Prieft's Supremacy over the Church. Again 4fy, He fays, That this will plead for aVrimtcy over every National Church Hence, ■ iyf,%He muft acknowledge, his Anfwer to the Objection is nought, and inconfiftent with it felf, fince thus he removes the Ground of it,* for he affigns this Reafon, wherefore one Prefident was fet over the Church of the Jews, viz. That they were tied to One Altar and Sacrifice, to One Temple, or Place of Solemn Worfhip ; but, fure he will not adventure to fay, that every National Church is thus tied to One' Altar and Sacrifice, to One Temple and Place of Solemn Wor/hip ; So that, if his Ground hold good, this will no more plead for a Prefident over the National Church, than over the Universal. 2/7, Ke fays This Ground made that Naticn but a Province. This is odd,J a Nation taken into God's Covenant, intirely form'd into a Church,' having its Model of Government and Worftip prefcrib'd by him, yea, and in this diftingui/h'd exprefly from all Nations of the World, as God!s Only Church then exiftent, as is above evine'd ; yet this Nation become but a provincial Church. I wonder, how this Gentleman will define a National Church, as diftinft from a Province,- or if he thinks, that the National Church of England has not Subordinat Provincial Churches or Dioceffes, ftanding in relation to that National Church ,• and if fo, to what Superior Church, had the Jewifh Provincial Church fuch a Relation r %ly, What will he fay, in fuch a Providential Cafe, which is not impoflible, that an Emperour's Power and Authority ftould be extended over all the Church Vifible ? Now, if his Meafure of a Nation's being under One Civil Head and Governour, or many Provinces, in this refped, Coalefcing into One Nation, mud infer, and regulat this Supreme Prefident or Metropolitan ; here is a clear Foun- Chap. III. Queries to the VrtsbyWrhm 0/ SCOTLAND. 69 Foundation for a Papacy in his Principles. Finally, he afferts, That this Ground if the Higb-Vritfts ¥refidenCy% will plead for a National Metro- politan, yea, and to continue f 01 Life : And if fo, why not, I pray, for an Hereditary alfo, and in one Family, iince this is as well Exemplified ■in the High- Prieft, as the other * And his Ground feems to admit no Difparity ,• he knows the Maxim, A quaienus ad omne valet Confequen- tia% If truYmuft follow, becaufe Exemplified in the High* Prieft, and is not aboliih'd as Typical, but belonging to the taxis of a Provincial Church, or, if he will call it, National ; fo muft the other, which equally belong'd to the taxis of that Church : Nor will he be able to (how, why the fixing the Priefthood to one Family was Typical, and not alio the Continuance of his Superiority during Life, which, he muft acknowledge, did fome way point out our Saviour's Eternal Unchange- able Priefthood ; So that, of neceffity, he muft either exclude or in- clude both. zljL, His unreftri&ed Aftertion of this Prefident of the Pro- vincial Church his Abfolute Continuance during Life, cannot but (adly grate the Ear of the Intelligent, What if he be Scandalous, turn Schif- matick, Heretick, commit Treafon, and fo run (uch a Risk as AUathar did, who was baniftVd for his Treafon, and another put in his place • or, muft he be (uch a pope, as, durante vitd, ftands upon an Infallible* and thus Uncontroulable 9ajis ? Here it cannot be omitted, how in- confiftently, having made the Ancient Jewifta Church but a Vrovince, as a Church, he after makes his Inference from this Prefidency of the High-Prieft, to fupport the Conclufion of the Taxis, and Frame of a National eburch, with Subordinate Provinces. But fure, in point of this Continuance efpecially, he will not make one and the fame, the State and Priviledge of the Prefident of every Provincial Church, Subordi- nate to a National, with that of the National Prefident himfelf, elfe he will run into a palpable Contradi&ion, and raze the Foundation of his -Arguing. 'Tis further obfervable, that the Author of the Three Dialogues *, makes " the Argument for »c _ - • a Supreme Prefident, to have ftronger Force under ./^t^Zi e the New Teftament, becaufe of the Larger Extenpon fupra. ' thereof, and the Danger of Schifms, and the Neceffity • of preventingthem the greater: And what better way for this, faith c be, than God's way, thus exemplarly pointed out to us ? and, in fo far, j^iftling with our Querift. For thefe Subordinations of Priefts and Levites mention'd in the reft of this Query, tis fufficiently obviated by what is faid above : I there- fore only add, that, 1. This Variety, or Subordination of Prefidems, had a neceffary Connexion with the Frame of their Worlhip in Vari* ©us 7° A Review and Confederation of the Chap. III. ous San&uary Offices: For this I will offer to him Bifliop Bilfon's Inform* iron ^rpetuai Government Chap. -j. ] who /hews, « That the Offices of the San^u.ry.Ln, Rues and Ceremonies of Sacrifices.from which alLthe other Tribw, .except the Levites, were reftraind, werTno of ont kind ,• fo that it needs be no wonder, that thefe Degrees of Admi! niftrators were diftinguifo'd, according to the Diverfiry of Offices and Services. But, in the Church of Chrift, the Word and Sacra ments, Concrediced. to all Minifcrs without Diftinaion fMr Querift I hope will not Cenfiire him, for not calling them Priefts ), "as they «rl°h ,°r?e '? ' nei/her,admicany Difference of Admiration or c Celebration fo neither do they require different Degrees of Mini- iters. 2£ It cannot be made appear, that the High-Prieft or anv Infenour Priefts, had a Preiatical Pre-eminence in Judic o es or a Negative over others in Ecxiefiaftick Judgments. Julius [ de Ckrld C 24. Note 1 j. ] (hews, « That, among the Priefts, there was alike Par ti-' |at.onoHonoarandPoWertlio'in a different Order, partly in ' itfi °fuTheSi ?art y, in refped of Times> the binary Ecdefi- aftick JurildiAion belong'd to the Affembly of the Priefts, according to the Law. But we need not ftand upon a Critical Inquiry into he Nature and Degrees of thefe Offices, 'tifa Efficient Anf^tSuS Fabnck is taken down, and fo declared by the Apoftle, and a Gofpe Oeconomy and Mmiftry erected by our Saviour in its place Our dofiPnf VK- o3ke thlS £r«un,?nt the ^°^> has an Obferve in the fZ f» a SSCuy' WhlCh qUltS ruinesit' telIinS us> That thek Ow- Jeers of Pnejls, Nehem. ix. 14, 22. *re ™flV fy the Seventy ' Bi [hops and that the Englim Tranflators make ufe of the Synonymous Word for mfhops * AA« S.fir ,A^dt0/acisfyh^in this, I tell him, that we heartily accent ?„; h S,ch.?wr/«" Jnd *'*N'. as the Apoftle there defigns, this Name wuh the thing consequently therein imported, being appropriated to' the Elders or tainifters (not Priefts) of the Church of Ephe (us when Paul gave them his laft Charge of Exercifing a Joint Epifcopal Inipeftion over that Church, as Officers thereof, without the leaft Mint of a Superintending Arch or Bifliop over them, nor of any Inte- reit Timothy had over them in thh Point, tho' then prefent VI. Query, Whether the WWSacerdos, or Pric(i% may not he fitly ap- Fy*«>tbe Minifiers underthe G fret, face the Awrft.-n of many to that Word u chiefly from a Mi\iake, as if the Prices Ofrce confifttd only in Off rinr Sacri- fices ; whereas, in the firft Inflation of the Levitical Priejihood DcUf 10.8 tj " nl mentim °> SaCrifics> hltt 0nh. li><" they were- to ftand before the L*r.*t9 Mimfter unto him, and to Bk/s in his Name, Jo that SacrificinZ was no other way an EJJentialfart of the Ugd Kiefs Ofoe, than Samfice was an EJfential Chap. 111. Queries to the TrcsbyterUtit of SCOTLAND. j? Efential part of the Jewifr ffor/hip. To the Query it felf I Anfwer Ne- gatively, That this Epithet is not fitly a pply'd to Minifters of the Go- fpel. And the firft Reafon I offer* mall be the Antithefis of the Rea- fon he offers for it, viz, That^the Term has properly a Relation to a Sacrifice and Offering, which, in the New Teftament Oeconomy, is ■ ceas'd, Chrift's Offering having put an end to all Offerings and Sa- crifices, confequently to Minifterial Priefthood. This Anfwer our Querift acknowledges to be that of many of the RefSrm'd Churches, yet is bold to call it a Miftake, as if the Prieft's Office confifted only mOffering Sacrifices. But what if it confided mainly, tho' not only, our Realon holds good, tho'it were granted, they had other Subfer- vient Offices. He tells us, That, in the firjt Injiitution of Levitical Priefthood, DeuC j-o. 8. there's no mention of Sacrifices, but of their Standing before the Lord, to Minifter and TZlefs in his Ndme. But here I muff inform him, That, i. He miftakes the Order of Priefthood, when drawing the Inftitution thereof, properly and formally confidei'd, from that place parallel with Numb* g. 16, &c. with Ch. 1.49,^0, yr, &c where the whole Tribe was, in a general Senfe, ajTum'd unto the Service of th& Tabernacle, or Sacred Miniftry, and fas Numb* ;. 6.) they were to be preferred before Aaron the Prieft, that they might Minifter unto him, whofe fpecial Priefthood, confequently, is diftingui&'dfrom this their general Office and Service. But, for the proper Inftitution of the Priefthood, we muft look to Exod. 28; where we find, that after God has defcrib'd, in the preceeding chap, in order to the Levitical Worfrip, the Altar for Sacrifices, with the other Utenfils thereof ; in this chap. Aaron iscall'd to the Priefthood, to Minifter unto God in that Office, his Garments, and his Sons Garments defcrib'd, wherein they were to be Confecrated, that they might Minifter in this Sacred Prieftly Office.,- Ghap. 29. After an Account of Aaron's Inauguration with Sacrifices, pointing at the great Duties of his Sacerdotal Office, v. 38. The Ordinance is (et down for "the continual Burnt- Offering, as the Great and Special Duty of his Prieftly Adminiftration. 2/;, In that Paffage cited by our Querift, which refpetfs the General Miniftra- tion of all the Levites, 'tis no ftrange thing, that thefe Offices, there mention'd, have no Relation to Sacrificing exprefs'd, to which none, but the Prieftsi were admitted • thefe Offices of the Levites being of an In- feriour Nature, competent to them, with refpeel: to the Tabernacle and Ark, and fuch like Services. And, as for the Biefling in the Lord's Name, Pool, upon the place, mews, That the pronouncing of the Solemn Biefling of God upon the Congregation, which was done in God's Name* was a Work peculiar to the prielts, not common to all the Le- vites* 1J A Revkiv and Conjideratien of the Chap. Ill rites, as is clear, Levit. 9. 22. Nttmb 6 2? AnH ^.«f„.» j n / it more generally, with refpeft *i/!ffi£ /i either r0^ftvd' of him, which was a part of their Work* fd* G# '" «! People £hom they did B.efs, by Performance of ftofc Hol'y &fc£ lates | he fhews, that every Prieft muft ha?e fomewhat toVfTer « a" AjM. rt* of* «* fconfequently Sacrifices 5 "L^ ,?*'&". Gifts and Sacrifices, in this Point of Offering, WbSJ:^ w^ ftttrf Upon which the Apoftle infers, rZlJleul TZmJi IZu"1' {av'i^ im^talfi u Offer, clearly holding ouf (ha" effb he •ami w>. 9, 6. the Apoftle (hews, That the Priefts went into the fi7d Tabernacle, accomplifhing the Service, foil . "he G« at Duty of s? he telhuf tm s fZ /f' ""S tht Err°" °f'h° 9<°Pl*. ^d #. 9. the ■ „ L&£. S"lii"s£"' */*»»/» »*» «»« ^»Vy?»r. And Ukm thc]e Ojfmngi, and, confequently, that Priefthood, J.j » 1 p,r,7.9. ?■?■""* £eaj~on * °ffer is this, we find indeed the ««, 1. 1. whole Church of the Godly call'd a Holy Priefthood *, „., «, „ c? ofter UP Spiritual Sacrifices, but we never find the Holy Ghoft putting the Denomination and Character of Prieft „™ the NewTeftament Church Officers in all the n/w Teftament Writ ottwaris, Ambafiadtrs, Rulers, and the ke ,• Paul faith Se L * m*L TT. 1 *i " M'"^"«f drill, t C„. 4 , And again Wei ffctafe CD-f ' * H f • 2°4 ^ Wh^ 'henftallTe lea^th6 Holy Ghoft, Dsftgnaaons, and take an Old Teftament Epithet, Chap. III. Queries to the Vresbperhm of SCOTLAND. 73 which he never us'd in the New Teftament Writings, and Defcriptions of the Miniftry thereof. This Gentleman talks of our Lord's Adopting what was ufeful in the Jewifh Oeconomy • Why then did neither he, nor his Apoftles, Adopt this Title among the many Epithets given to the New Teftament Officers ? He certainly knew bell, what Epithets were proper for them. 4//, This Title and Epithet is difown'd by moft, if not all, Prote- ftant Divines, which might be cleared in a Multiplicity of Inftances ,• but, fince our Querift acknowledges it, *s«Whi«i. we need not ftand upon it * J Melchifedec, whofe Priefthood, in the Old Teftament Accounts is re- prefented as a continuing Priefthood, abiding ftili the fame, and ad- mitting no Subftitutes or Succeffors. Again, the Apfl'*]*™*™ the Conjundion of the Kingly and Pneftly Office of MeUhfedec, to point at and iiluftrate Chrift's Extraordinary and Unparalleld Prieft- hood, and ftrengthen the premu'd Conclufion, As for what our Querift adds of the Sacrifice, and that no Vroteftant 'Author affirmt Melchifedec /# have Offered, tho' Pafifis generally affirm U; He mews himfelf fadly Ignorant of the Proteftant Dotfrine, an d Con.- tioverfte with Papiftsui this -Poinu *wt«fUm Divines do, indeed, dii- Ch^p. HI. Queries {i tk Vresbyterum 0/ SCOTLAND. 75 owrt his Offering a Sacrifice in that Action of his, of bringing Bread and Wine to Abraham, which they plead to patronize their Ma(s Sacrifice, and Sacrificing Mafs-Priefts, there being no Hint of this in the Text • but no Proteftant ever difown'd, that Melchifedeck's Office, as aPrieft' had a refped to Sacrificing, elfe he could not have been a Prieff, fince our Querift will acknowledge, that, under the firft Difpenfation of the Covenant, this was an Effential Part of the Prieftly Office. 'Tis true, he calls Sacrificing, a fart of the Jewijh Worship ; but he can- not deny, , that there were Priefts and Sacrifices, before that fix'd In* ftitution in the Jewifh Oeconomy : Nay, thus he breaks the Force of the Apoftle s Argument, from Melchi/edect^s Priefthood and Sacrifice to Chrift's. But, faith our Querift, ChriH is a Priefi for ever, and what Sacrifice hath be to Offer ? I Anfwer, he has Offered him- felf, and his Ecernal Interceffion upon his Offering, and its Eternal Merits fpeak him out an Eternal Prieft, with an Eternal Sacrifice, in refped: of its Efficacy ,• and, in this, the Apoftle placeth the Excel- lency of his Sacrifice beyond the Legal, proving thus, that he was no Legal Prieft, nor could be a Priefl, if fiiU upon Eartk * : So that his Priefthood, according to the A- * Heb. g. 4. -poftle, excludes all Suffragan Offering Priefts. But, faith our Querift ( expreffing herein his Popifli Tin&ure ), If upon Ground of his Inter ceffion, on Account of that Sacrifice, our Savil our be a Priefi, how can this Office of Prie\lh*od be denyd to the Celebration of the Sacrtfice of the Holy Supper, and the Inter ceffion made by his Priefts upon that Account ? I Anfwer, upon, the contrary, how can this be admitted? For, if Chrift's Priefthood be Eternal, and fuch as can pafs to no Suffragan, both in refpe& of his Offering and Interceffion, both which are dedar'd fo to be by the Apoftle ,• then, in the Holy Sup- per, there can be no true and proper Sacrifice, and, confequejitly, Priefts in the Adminiftration. 'Tis true, there is a Sacrifice of Praife, and a Minifterial Adminiftration of thofe Symbols of that One Sa- crifice, but chat, upon either Account, therein in this Admini- ftration, a Sacrifice refpedting a Priefthood, is crofs to the Apoftle's premis'd Account of our Saviour's Priefthood and Sacrifice, and dif- own'd by all Proteftant Churches, in Oppofirion to the Popifli Ad- verfary. As for Minifterial Imerceffioris or Prayers, who knows not, that all Divines do hold them, toto gmere, different from our Savi-. our's Interceffion : So that, by no imaginable Ground, can Mini- fies, upon this Celebration, come under the Denomination of ei- ther Priefts or Sacrifices. K z But, -g \A Review And Confideratton of the Chap. HI. But faith our Querift, It cannot be deny9 dt there are Sacrifices under the GofpeL and he defiresiii Adverfarie, who doubts of this , to read i Pet. 2. c Heb it. io, If, 16. Rom. 12. 1. ytit and an Altar too Heb. 1?. I Anfwer It cannot be deny'd, that thefe Sacrifices are offered, and iniovn'dtobe offered by all the true Members of the Church, who are declar'd all Priefts, and a Holy Priefthood, by the Apoftle Peter, in the place cited by him ; all who are injoyn'd to go forth to our Bleffed Lord by Faith without the Camp, are injoyn d to offer thefe Sacrifices, Heb. 12. ij,iy. Now, Mr. Querift, here are Prfcyfc and S*. crtf«m but where are the CorreUt, the people to whom this Pneffly Office is performed? Where is a ftanding diftind Official Priefthood with Sacrifices to be offered for the People ? Let me improve a little thefe Texts If the New Teftament Priefthood and Sacrifices be the Duty and Privilege of all God's Church, then there is no Official Di- ftirJ: Priefthood for offering New Teftament Sacrifices under the Gof- pel Difpenfation: But foit is,that the New Teftament Pnefthood and Sa- crifices are the Duty and Priviiedge of all God s Church or true Mem- bers thereof; Therefore, there is no Official diftinA Pnefthood, for offering New Teftament Sacrifices under the Gofpel Difpenfation A- eain in that Text of Htb. 12. 10. The Apoftle holds out Chrift to be the only Altar of the Chriftian Church, fancVifying all the Gilts of the People of God, to which ( let our Querift remark this ) all outward Sacrifices have no Right, and, The Sacrifices lad upon **>>, Atar are the Fruit of our Lips, or Charity and Gooa IVorks^ w, 15, 16. xhis 1 hope our Querift will acknowledge to be proper to all fthe true ChurchofGod, who fas is faid in the former cafe) are in this reipedt all Priefts and Sacrifices ,- And, in that place, Rom. 12. v. 1»our rea- dable [ervice we offer, and which all are exhorted to Since therefore thTs refpels the general Duty and Priviiedge of all Chnftians ,t can found no Argument for Official Priefts and Sacrifice*, as is faid Our Querift adds, that 1/aiah calls the Miners of the Gofpel Prtejls Chao 66 21. C in the Pamphlet printed cbap.67. which I do not find marked among the Errata ) ana fo doth Jeremiah chap. 3*. 18. Prfte/r- TJofthe times\fthc Go/pel. I Anfwer, As he calls them Priefts, Prophe- sying of thefe times,fo he likewife prophef.es That from one Mom to am. tier and from one Sabbath to another in the Gofpeltmes they < jhal I come to Zrjhtp before the Lord, and in that place \n Jeremiah, the Prophet (hews that thef** Priefts, the Levites fhaU not want a Man to offer burnt offerings before the\ord, and to kindle meat-offerings, and to do facrifice continually. I would ask the Querift, whether both Prophets do apply thefe ; Feftm- ties and Offerings to the Goipel-timw, Yea, or Not, and aficrt the Ex- Chap. III. Queries to theVresbyterians 0/ SCOTLAND. ff iftence and Obfervance thereof under the Gofpel Oeconornie, and da not rather exprefs the Gofpel WorfMp and Miniftry, with Allufion to the Worfhipand Miniftry then exifrent ? If he aflert thefirft, he doth palpably Judaiz,e, and expofe himfelt to the hiding of ail Men of Senfe, and aiTert that the Chriftian Churches muft obierve all thejewift Fef- tivities and Sacrifices in the Literal Senfe, and make the Prophefie of Zechariab formidable to all the Churches, chjp. 14. who having prophe- cied, v. 16. That the Nations [hall go up from year to year, to worfoip the King }he Lord of Hofts, and to keep the Feafi of Tabernacles. Addeth verfe 17- It fhall be that wbofo will not const up of all the Families of the Eaiih unto Jerufalem> to worflnp the King; the Lord of Bofts, even upon them fhall be no rain. Doubling the Threatning again and again, verfes 18, 19. Upon fueh as come not up to keep the Feafi of Tabernacles. If he imbrace the fecond part of the Anfwer, as needs he muft, viz,. That there is here only an Allufion to that Worfoip and Miniftry, then he lofes his Argument for NewTeftament Prieftsin a proper Senfe drawn from this Allufion. I will not trouble our Querift with further Inquiry anent the Senfe of that Paffage, Rev. 1. 6. That Believers are not only made prices but likewife Kings, yea, and are aliened to be a Royal Triefihood, in \ Vet.- 2. s< c"ed by him,- and whether this will infer the fuitab'enefs of the Denomination of Kings to Believers, in the common Literal Senfe, and that the Chriftian Church muft have fuch Official Kings. But of: this enough. Come we then to the next Querv, wherein we will find our Gentleman Querift ftiil fencing for this Denomination. I only add, for what he touches of Cyprian and the Ancients retaining this Term, that, whatever Charitable Conftrudion may be put upon their Senfe, yet the horrid Abufe of the Popifh Church inftanced, dothfuffi- ciently, together with what is faid, evince the Inexpediency and Un- fuitableneis of that Retention of the Term he pleads for. 'Tis to this purpofe considerable, which Stillingfltet has*, * Irtn- p4rt *• who, Centering, the common Miftake of Golpel Mini- Ch' 6'^ "' fters Succeffion, by way of Correfpondence and Analogy to the Piiefts under the Law, ftiews, that this has been the Foundation and Original of many Errors, that when, in the Primitive Church, the Name of Prieftscame to be attributed to Gofpel Minifters, by way of Analogy and Accommodation, in Procets of Time, Corruptions increafing in the Church, the Metaphorical Names of Priefts and Altars, at laft, brought in the Things themfdves primarily intended by thofe Names, viz,. The Sacrifice of the Majs j, without which, they thought the Names of Prieft and Altar were infignificanr. This Miftake, he tells us, did run altng through the Writer* of ihe Church;, as iooa, as the Name of griefts was apply ed ^3 A Review an A Conjiclerdtion of the Chap, IIL applied to the Elders ot the Ghurch, that they derived their Succeffiori from the Priefts of Aaron'* Order. The Jefuits of Rbentes f t AB. r4. 12. Centure Proteftants, for ufing the Word£/^r* inftead oif 23' "Priefts, which, they aliedge, the Proteftants Hatred of Priefthood has driven them unto. To which Fu\k gives this Return, That the Name of Prieft is avoided, bscaufe, by common Ufe, 'tis taken to fignifie Vriefts of the Law, whofe Name is never, in the New Teftamenc, given to the Minifters of the Church, Cenfuring feveral of the Ancient Fathers their Confounding the Name of &*e I Anfwer, i. As ;for the Names in this Point, «fe Rejecting that of Priefts, and Retaining that of Mincers, I made appear, that both the one and the other has a Divine Warrant, ily, We refufe not, in a Gofpel or Chnftian Senfe, to hv* h the AltJr, chat is, to receive a fukabte AUment and Maintainance ne- ceffiry for executing this Holy Office ; And God s Law hereanent to which the Apoftle alludes, tho', in its Speciality, V ? ,h. n~ Difpenfation. yet, with refped to the end mentioned, vm. the ne cefory Muntainance of a Miniary, is founded upon the Law Moral as may be evidenc'd from the Genuine Senfe and Handing Scope ot the Second, Fifth, and Sixth Commands, as is explain d by all Sound Di- vines, ill, We reject the N*me of Prieft upon the fame Qround, that Chap, IV. Queries to the Presbyterians of SCOTLAND. 70 we rejeft the Name of Altar, \ (cil That Reciprocal Relation of both, which our Querift, with the Popilb Adverfaries, pleads for. Our Que- rift calls them Antiquated Jewijh Names andThings, why then pleads he for introducing Antiquated Names andThings, and thus blots himlelf with a Contradi&ion, in acknowledging themAnriquatcd, in a€hri(lianSen(e\ But he muft be inform'd, that, tho' the Nams and Tning of Prie/ls is Antiquated, as is above clear'd,che receiving a fuitable Aliment,in order to the more comfortable Officiating in Sacred Offices, tho' thefe Terms, whereunto the Apoftie alludes, and whereby he exprefTes the fame, are alio Antiquated, is of a (landing Nature and Neceffity, neither of which can be faid of Friefts and Sacrifices, as is above clear'd. C H A P. I V. Wherein are Examined the Queries touching the I aft Appeal in Contra- venes about matters of Religion 5 Expojing the- Author s Popifij and Inconfident Notions in this point, in fyecial voithrefpeB to the Churches Authority ', in determining the Number of Canonical Books, the fipfe of the Scripture, and the final Determination ofContro- verfies x, As likexcife, the introducing and eftahtifhingnew Officers, and new parts ofWorfhip under the Gofyel. IN this %d. Chap, our Gentleman Querift falls in to the Popi/h Caufe and Intereft, and would briskly plead for it, but fo unskil- fully he manages their Weapons as herein he has pitifully expos'd himfelf ,• whether in point of Learning or Soundness, or both, let the Reader Judge. I. Querie, How Controverfies in Religion are to he determined > If by the Scriptures, bow [hall we come by the true fenfe and meaning of tbemr jo as to have an end put to Controverfie ? He holds, great regard is to be had to the Judgment of the Church in aU Ages, which collecled at fi.ji thefe Booh that make up the Canon, being ajfured they were Written by the Ap 0 Hies and other g \ Divinely In/fired, havingthe Original Manufcripts pre fervid in fever al Ages after the deceafe of the Apaftles, and thofe Holy Bifhops and Martyrs wholivd near eH to the Apo/lolkk Agey muft be allowed beji to have known the meaning tftbofe Sacrtd Writings, la thi$ Querie 'tis a Queftion to me, whether this $0 -A Review and Cottjiderttion of the Cnap> Vf this Perfon's Ignorance of the Proteftant Dodrine, or InconfideratneCi in the point it felf, be moft confpicuous i. After a general infinuated Acknowledgement, that the Script*re is the Rule, he inquires, bow we Jball come by the fenfe and meaning thereof ] in order to the ending of Contro- verjie. Now, 'tis evident to all found Proteftants and Men of Judg- ment, that this is the Popifti refuge in their multiplied litigious debates touching the Senfe of the Scripture, and the Judge thereof, and in order to the defign which this Man homologates, viz. to fet up in the Church an Infallible Tribunal to determine this Senfe. In fliort, the Proteftant Anfwer is clear, that by comparing Scripture with it felf, and imploring the Spirit's Illumination, who diftated the Scriptures, we reach the true and genuine fenfe thereof, efpecially by receiving Chrift the eternal Light. We are taught by bimfelf, and in the lively Oracles, that fuch as follow him fhall not walk in dark- * Toh. 8. ia. nefs *, and that, if we do the will of God, we fhall know NFh' 7' i7h DoBrioe that it is of God f • And what the fenfe !u a6 Jok! thereof is, that believing we receive the Spirit who leads into ,6. 13, all Truth ||. ily. Our Divines do hold, that the Authority confe- quently the Genuine Senfe of the Scripture, neither in it felf, nor as to us, depends upon the Teftimony of the Church, which is made good by many clear Reafons. 1. Becaufe the Church is founded upon the Scriptures, and receives all its Authority from the fame, Epb% 2. 20. Hence all the Teftimonie of the Church is Mwijierial, not Authentick$ or of it felf to be believed as fuch. and as abftrafted from this foun- dation of a Divine Objective Scripture certainty, ily. The Teftimony of the Scripture is Prior and Antecedent to that of the Church, as being the primum credibiiey upon which the Churches Teftimony de- pends as precarious. Which is further illuftrated, in the Third Place .by this Reafon, that otherwife we run into an evident Circle, if by the fame method of arguing a priori we prove the Authority of the Churches Teftimony from the Scripture, and likewife the Authority of the Scripture from the Churches Teftimony. 4//, The Teftimony of the Church in it felf confidered is ftill Humane, therefore cannot found a Divine Faith and Perfwafton^ but this is proper to the Scriptures Divine teftimony which on\y hath the prerogative of being ZvrtvtrQ; or of it felf to be believed, and felf evident. Again, that the Scripture is clear'd and interpreted by it felf, has clear evidences, 1. From its nature,as the Law of the Supreme Lawgiver, whofe Infallible Interpretation and Senfe muft therefore come from him Chap. IV. Series to the Vmhperhnt of SCOTLAND, Bi him that gave it. it being the Rule of Faith, the fealed Teftament of Chrift the great Tcftator * the Law ♦Heb.j.r^i?, of the Celeftial King, the only Head and Lawgiver of hii Church f. z7/, All Fir/} Principles are acknowledged t NV 35. ar, to be Jv$Au%l*t which can not other wife be demonftrared E^h* J 23- than by their own Dght,and, confequently, do exhibite their ownfenfe ; So that theSenfe and Authority of the Scripture proceeds from the fame Author, and is in the fame method to be fought and acknowledged, otherwife there were a running into an Infinitum, or infinite Confufion. The Scriprure in fupernatural Knowledge is the firft Principle : If the God of Nature and Trurh has (lamped clear evidences upon all firft Principles, whereby they are of themlelves known, who doubts that he has placed fuch in thefe moft neceffary Firfi Principles of (aving Knowledge* %ly^ This is alfo proved by an Atgument d Ccmparatis: The Objects of Senfes,upon a due Applicati* on, and the due difpofition of the Faculty, are discovered to be fuch Without any Argumentation, becaufe of the propenfion and propor- tion ot the Faculty to its Objects, as Light by its native Splendour, and foin other things. Bellarmin himlelf acknowledges that Scripturis ijua libris Pmpbeticis & Apoftolicis continentur nihil (ft notius nihil certius * adeo ut fiultijjimus ejje necejje fit, qui fidem illis tributndam negat. i. e. " That * nothing can be more notour and certain than the * Scripture it felf ,• and that 'tis the outmoft Folly, to * Lib* u dty* * deny Faitn thereunto *. D- c* a* %ly, As for the Churches Office in this Point,- 1. She is the Keeper of the Sacred Oracles : The Tables of the Covenant are committed to her, Rom. $. 2. 2/;, She declares and points out the Scripture, I/a. 30.21. jly, Defends and^indicates the Scripture, the true Books f om the Spurious,and is called therefore the Scriptures EVf«f«poi. 4^, The; Hcrauld to promulgate the fame, Rom. 10. 16. And hence is alfo o- bliged, as an Interpreter, to fearch the Senle thereof. But all thefe, import Only a Minifterial Service, no MagifleJiat Authority, fothat tho'we are led in this Meth.dto believe, yet not upon this Ground^ as the C au(e and Foundation of our Belief; Which two are in this Point to be ex- aaiy diltinguiflied, as they are in themfeives vaftiy DifTeier.r and clear- ly Diiii' guUKoible. Thus Believers were brought to receive Chrift by John s Mini/try, and in that Method, but not becaufe of John: And ths Samaritans were brought to hear Chrift upon the IVvmansTeftimony, but not by htr Teftirnony, as the Cau/e of their Belief. Thefe Things f have Jhouiy oiftred from our Wu?ers, which the Querift might have L fcen §2 A Review and Confideuthn of the Chap. IV. feen more fully opened in reading them * And * **«. Opufc. no doubt the (olid undemanding thereof, would have Theel. Loo de fav>a him the Labour of thefe ignorant Queries con^ FideJ^W: Col- tam»d in thls Chapter. de8TfcerT & : Script: M«cn. Loc Comtn. de Attkoritate Script, p. a9. 3°. *^g in- n.«iEifl Part i deScriptura Tbtfet SMlmttr. dc Orig. & Neccff. Script. SfSSSwTOS&SSSS rrff **■*»£■ «K« ^ * «•*• NecVff & Awh.r. Difp. j. de Lib. Can. Difp. 4- Dc t«k&. Difp. ». D. Perfp. & : In- «i»«t K.f« S ,3W 4' K» ' 9' Inft tut Lib S 7. ^ Loc. Thenl. Loc. I. Quxft.3- Tom. i. pag,4»,4J4. WU ™ Synop Papirm. ..General Controvert*, concerning the Scripture. 4. toft me A 3 "A-""* PLoc. Comm.Controv.de Script. Qn*fl. t. p. «4» «S, &c GrrW. L?c Theoi Loc. de Script,- c. »< p. «, 7, &c. M«M Loc. Gomm. Loc. de Script, p. 179, 180. &c. Amongft many others, I cannot but here reSe Church, and of the Scripture, fag. 16, 17. After he hMngmfkei a Judgement tfDlicretion, whereby every Ghriftian, who is to hveby hnFa; h muft trv the Spirits ' 1 fohn±. 1. And Secondly, « JfWrewe* «(&«««»&«■ "ompeten to the M^iftrat. And ,*, An Ecclefiaftical Judgement of Becifions in National or Provincial Synods, to whom ws owe- Reve- rence and Subjection, until, faith be, the thing be better Knowr .and Examhvdj this Judgement not being Scvera,gn, but Jab] elf to the Word, and examinable thU]. He adds, 7, efteem that the Church may judge £ Matter* of Faith, and the Senfe of Scrifture, with a Judgement of Sovera.gn Authority, andwitb Infallible Certainty,!, a tbingunjut and unfrobahle ; Form tbe9ueUion, Whether the Chunk is Judge or not; Is it fofMe (faitt I he) that ■he Church 'fhould he Sovereign and Infallible Judge there,,* AfwhenQueft,. en is made. What the Duty of the Church it ; It itreaova be the ^urch^ould he Judf-e with full Authority deciding the fame, for if this means (he Bull be lidhio m mere than fie liU her (elf, and to oiey tkoH .Laws ftch she Ml rive unto her felf. And when Quetien is made if the nfafblenef, or Author,- % f the Church if the church be Judge therein she thai he J"fj£?°™ Calf,. He adds, If the Church ^"^^^f^ff^S^'' her Authority should be much greater than that of God for fucb anlnmre.er Zuldbemucb more ciefd tbanthe Uvs-maker. Shewing this to be tbeEfl, eine whereby the- Pope has made htmfew great. ft.c.i„r * Next, As to that the Querift adds, Uat tboU who hv i nearetthe M - tie, tints, muftbe alUmti hft nbgvt known [be mmtng of '*<-^*™ Chap. IV. fguerkt. U the Vmhyterim 0/ SCOTLAND. % Writings, I Anfwer, Whatever Deference we owe to them, it is cer- tain, that, xft, Neither have we an intire Account of the Sentiments of all fuch ; the firft times after the Apoftles being, in the Acknow- ledgment of the beft Searchers, moft dark, as to. Matter of Fad, and barren of Writers, and, confequently, of the Sentiments of thofe who liv'd in thete early Times : And thus, even in the Senfe of our Que* rift, we fall fhort in one of the beft ©rounds of "our Inquiry. 2/^' Neither have we an Account of the Senfe and Judgment of thele Anci- ents, touching every Qccurrent Difficulty in tke/e SaQred Volumes ( that I fpeak not of the whole Volumes themfelves ), which ho Man will b© bold to after t, without expofing himfelf. And, 3//, Their Interpre- tation and Teftimony, however Harmonious, is not *vr$wtrte , or of it" felf to be believ'd, and finally refted in; but, in the Judgment of ail Proteftant Churches, Examinable by the fir (I AuthentUh Rule* We know,, that even the Do&rine of a Paul was Examin'd by the Beream, who are commended for this Inquiry,- or comparing his Dodxine with the. Scriptures, which is, no doubt^ a good Rule, as to all ordinary Teach| ers, who are tied and over-rul'd by the Sacred Ganon, akho' Paul's Dodrine, as an Apoftle, was Infallible, and, eo ipfa to be receiv'if; 1 Cor, 14. 37 which thefe Sereins, at this time, were ignorant of, I hope he will not fay, the Church has an Authority Paramount to his : And this Examination being commended, does clearly import a Com- mendable Eying of the Scriptures, as the Teft and Rule, whereby we muft know the Truth and Certainty of all the Churches Dilates. Our Querift adds further, That tho the Church has no Authority over the Scriptures, which is efiablifod beyond Alteration of Men or Angels „ Gal, 1. 8. jet the Univer(al teftimony of the Church In all Ages, u to the Scrip- tures, feems to him Infallible, and. their Authority is to be [uhmhted to in all Matters of Dijcipline , and great Deference given jo her in Matters of Doctrine, tho' (he has no Power to make Additions to the Chriftian Faith, yet (he is a com- ftttntWitmfi what' that Faith and Peclrine is. I' Anfwer, 1. If the Church be Infallible in this Point, as to thefe Teftimonies here de- iflity, . the Scripture Ipfatliktfitj, and muft needs ftand Antipode to that lnklii-, oility, which is afcribeable to theScripture folely; for thus the Churches Tefttct|on] ex libility g^ A Review and Conftderatlon of the Hiap. IV. libility to her (which, as is evident in the Strain of his Difcouife. he underftands not in an Objeffix/*, hut Subjective Senfe .) ; ^ for who will deny, that Infallibility in her Decifums gives her this Dominion over our Faith, and clearly derogates from the Scriptures Aut&intftl Infallibility, as is faid. ikt What means he by the testimony of the Vniverfal Church in all Ages f Dare he fay, that tho* we had the TdHmony of the U.niver- fal Church in all Ages, touching the Scripures, and the Senfe thereof ( which I believe were a rare Monument indeed ), that either rhisTe- ftimony is cJwtoti™*, Authentick, and for it felf to be believ'd or that, in this Point, it is Harmonious. How many various Sentiments have been of Councils and Fathers, as to Scripture Truths ? Nor want there Differences, as to the Canon it felf, and Integrity thereof. The Interferring of ASs and Decrees of Councils is notorioufly known, and that in weighty Points of Scripture Truth. 4/7, How comes he to aft fert abfolurelv, that the 7'eflimony of the Church, as to the Scripture, is In- fallible ( which he ftili underftands, with refped to Scripture Truths, as is evident in the firft State of his Query ), and yet, tc make a Di- ftindion, * to Submiffion to this her Infallible Decifion, fo that (he s to be jub- mitted unto in aU Matters of Difcipline, or Church- Government, and, fit the Do8rinc, only great Deference is due to her. If her Decifion and Tefti- mony of the Scripture Senfe, in all Points of Difcipline and Govern- ment be Infallible, and to be fubmitted unto, why not alfo her Telti- mony of the Scripture Senfe, in Point of Dodrine I For our Quenft will not deny, yea, owns it, that the Subftantiafe, yea, and Specresol Government, is contained and exhibited in Scripture, as well as an in- tire Scheme and Syftem of the True Dodrine ; Why then is fhe not to be fubmitted to in the Dodrine, as well ai in the Difcipline 1 We may, no doubt, give a Deference to a Perfon, without an intire Submiflion. He will not deny, we owe a Deference to Paftors Teaching us, yet, I believe, he will not own their Teftimony to be Infallible. , He tells US, She is a competent Witness of what that Faith and Doclnne is, which we are to received he muft acknowledge,that to be a competent Wit- nefsAn a legal Forenfical Senfe,or,her giving (uch an External Te hmony, or Recommendation^ is above defcnb'd,is one thing,and to be Infallible, another. And, if he Identify this Competency of a Witnefs with In- fallibility as to a Teftimony in Point of the Senfe of Scripture, and what that Faith and Dodrine is, which is therein held out, he con- tradids his Affertion immediately premifed, viz. that Jbebas no Power to import any New Voclrine, #r to make Additions to the Chn\\ian Faith. But what if (he fhould hold out that to be the Faith and True Dodrme, yea, and that to be the true Divine Difcipline of she Church Chap. IV. Queries U the Tmhytemnt of SCOTLAND. 85 which the Scripture owns not ? In this cafe, whether muft we receive her Teftimony ? If he fay. me cannot give fuch a Teftimony. or that, absolutely, we are bound to receive her Teftimony, he Mill makes her Infallible therein, joining litmfelf in this Point, to thepopim Ad- verrary, yea, and contradicts his premis'd Limitation ; Or, if he flip* pofe fuch an Exercife of her Power poflible, in tmpofing new Doctrines, and making Additions to the Chriftian Faith, yea, and recommending and owning Church Government and Officers condemn'd in Scripture, how can he affert her to be a competent Witness , touching Scripture Truth ( in this Cafe, wherein her Tefhmony is fuppos'd falfe ), or, that her Teftimony, in either of the two premis'd Suppofitions, is In- fallible? It wou'd alfo fute this Gentleman's Confideration, to Anfwer~ this Queftion, How (ball her making Additions to the Ch ri ft ian Faith, her impofing new Do&rtnes, or, in Point of Government, recom- mending that to be own'd in Scripture, which the Scripture difowns, how, I fay, (hall fuch her Impofture be known and difcenvd, while ftie, the competent Witneji* by an Infallible Teftimony, aflerts the con- trary, tho» the Thing it felf, in Point of Fa#j is true and certain? Haw (hall we then judge, in order to our re/edting this new Doctrine, thefe Additions, and this Impofture, whether in Point of Doctrine or Worfliip ? If we owe an Obedience and Faith to her Teftimony, we cannot, it being alike Infallible, as the Scripture it felf. Or if, in this Cafe, he fuppofe a real Error and Miftake, and our Judgment of Dis- cretion and Rejection accordingly, what becomes of her Infallibility which he afferts } He feems to limite this Teftimony, that it have fuch Marks , of are not compatible to any Impofture. But who judges of thefe Mark*, and what if, in the Judgment of Difcretion, her Teftimony, in many Points of Scripture Truths, wants them, we are juft where we were, and the fame Inconveniency and Difficulty recurs, and either the Infallibility, or the Judgment of Difcretion falls. Another Inconfiftency here obfervable, is, that whereas he afcribes the be ft Knowledge of the Meaning of thefe S acre d Writings, to fuch early Bim fops, and others^ who were near eft to the Apoflolii k Agts, thus diitin^Ui/h- ing them, in Point of a certain Knowledge herein, from thole of the re* inoter Ages, yet afterwards, be afcribes this Infallibility of a iVffi- piony to the Univerfal Church in all Ages. We might here infift to /hew him ( which is, in a manner, umverfally acknowledge ; how >, ore the Ancients were, in Point of Knowledge, as to the Literal fenfe of Sciipture, and many Difficulties thereof, in reipect of the Divines of the later Ages, who are found to have more exactly ftudied and better uudetftood many ;. Truths- and Myftwiss comaind m the Sacred Vo- lume s, 3.5 A Review Attd CpnfiderMion *f the Chap. IV. lumes, according to Daniel's Prophefie, that in the later days kuewledge {ball bc.increasd, Dan. 12. 4. The inftances are not a lew, and at hand: How great apd palpable the miftake of the AntientSjhasappeard as to the Antichrift and Myftery of Iniquity ( the moft fignai New- Teftament Prophefie ) is obvious to ail that are acquaint with their Writings? not to infift upon feveral other Errors ,• fuch as the MiMe* nary Error anent Chrift's Ferfonal Reign grounded upon a grofs miftake of that paffage, Kevt 20. 4,.?. the Error of Free-will, and of the Vijion of God, that the Souls of Saints departed fee not his Face till the Judgment of the Great- day. How £rofly that paffage of Genefis 6. 2. The Sens of God Jaw the Daughters of Men that they were fair, and took them Wives of all which they cbofe, has been miftaken by fome of the moft eminent ancient Doctors, and interpreted of the Fail of Angels, literally fo called, and a fort of concubinat with Women, contrary to the clear fcope and contexture, is notourly known > Yea and that not a few grofs Errors are afcrib'd unto them by Epifcopal Dotfors, yea , Bilhops themfelves, fuch as Bifaop Jewel'* Reply to Harding, Art. u Div. p Scultet.. Moduli. ?atr. Lib. 8. Cap. 24. Bifliop Whitgifh Reply to Cart wright ; and others. But not to infift further on this ; our ^Querift after tells us, That fome Booh of Scripture were foonery fomt later, by the Church, received into the Canon, and that the Church was at Ufl ( Jcil. not at firft ) fully fatisl fed as to their being genuine. This is pretty. Now I pray, during this interval of the Churches demur, whether were the People of God oblidged to. receive thefe Books or not ? If they were, what is then become of this infallible Teftimony ? And it feems a Judgment of Dif- credon was paramount to it : If not, Where is that innate Light, Splendour of1ruth% Majefly of DoBrine, the Santtity, Sublimit^. Truth and tgreeabknefs to Mans Reafon, thefe overlaying Arguments (as he calls them in the next Querie ) whereby the Scripture and the Chiiftian Religi- on commends it fell to all? It feems that wha ever the^ Splendor be and the efficacy of this Argument and Light, the Churches Teftinwtfjy muft give its Spe&acles before we can fee ic. But of mis enough. II. Querie, Whtther the Churches determination anent the number of Canonical Books univerfally received as fuch, ufon fuch e^ndmc^ ^ In- jirucler,- he either underftand an Indifpenfably NeceiTary, and Infal- lible InfiruUtr, and if he Confound the Medium with the Motive of our Belief, we rejed the Affertion ,• becaufe, as himfelf acknowledges* cur. Faith were thus not a Divine^ but Humane Faith. It refts then, that the Churches Teftimony is not ivrowK;tf, but, whatever Certainty is in itj is deriv'd from the Words Obieclive Certainty, as is above clear'd, and is illuftrated by the Teftimony of the Woman of Samaria. IV. Query, Whether the Church has Power to introduce and eflablifh new Officers under the Gofrcl, and expert to have God's Approbation ef it afterward? As the Advice o/Mofes'j Father-in- Law, for making Rulers of the People which was ex poft fatfo, appnvd of by God, and of them did the Sanhedrim con- m tbt it m ™t $ firfi Appointmem or Inflitutitn frm Gol To the « • Query . Chap. IV. ghteries to the Vresbytmans of SCOTLAND. 93 Query it felf I Anfwer Negatively, that the Church has no fuch Power. 1. This is repugnant to the Perfe&ion of ChrifPs Kingly Office, which reaches to the Appointing.Officers, Laws, Cenmres of hisHoufe, as Political Head and Lawgiver thereof: And, as it is Unlawful to Im- peach the Perfection of his Prophetical, and Priefily Office, his Propheti- cal, in Delivering, and fully Revealing the Doctrine of Salvation, in Adding New Articles of Faith, as our Querift acknowledges, Qu, 1. his Prieftly Office, in making more Saviours, and Impeaching his full Satisfaction, acknowledged alfo by our Querift ; So it is as abfurd, and the fame Impeachment of his Kingly Office, to add to the Officers he has Appointed,* Efpecially confidering, -tfy, the A- poftle's Comparifon betwixt Chrift and M*fes, Heb. j? 5-, 6. in Ordering the Concerns of the Houie of God, confequently touching this Ap- pointment of Officers : For, I, Mofcs appointed Officers and Orders in the Houfe of God. 2//, His Appointment was fixd and unalter- able by any Humane Authority ,• And therefore, %ly, was nor com- mitted to the Difpofal of the Magiftrate. 4/;, Nor were thefe Officers to denude themfelves of their Power in the ieaft, it being the Talent whereof they were to give an Account. In the next place, the Nature of Church Officers pleads Tor this: • For, 1. They are all Chrift's Donation Gifts, upon his Afcenfion into Heaven, Eph. 4. and therefore muft inftruct this Donation in his Te~ ftament. 2//, Elfe they cannot Ad in Faith, in the Adrniniftration of their Office,- and what's not of Faith, is Sin. ;//, Elfe Chrift's King- dom were more Imperfect, than that of Earthly Kings, and not To well Modell'd as theirs ; fince* therein* no Man can enjoy an Office, which is not Authoris'd by the King's Laws. Finally, I will prove this from his Prefacer's Difcourfc, who, tV tells us of a large Set of Officers from ApofHes to Deacons, who are all necelTary to the fuitable Subfiftence of the Body of the Church to • the end> with whom our Lord has promis'd hisPrefence, fitting them all -as Members of the Body, for this its Prefervation and Subfiftence, till he come again,* So that, according to our Recommending Prefa- cer, 'tis as Monftruous to add to thefe Divinely Conftituted Members and Officers of Chrift's Myftical Body, and makes it as Incongruous and Monftruous a Piece, as Superfluous Members do render the Natu- ral Body, Again, 2/7, One of the Prefacer's Arguments, for the ftanding of all thefe Officers enumerated by him, is, That, if any were called extraordinarily, the Gbufcb is left without a "Pattern in Scripture to imitate, or conform it Jelf unto, in the Minijiry and Government Ecclefiaflicd/^ n And therefore, according to his Pleading, 'tis abfurd to let up any Offi-* cers,, 94 A Review awL C&nfiderttion of the Chap. IV. cers, in after Ages, for which the Church has no Divine Pattern to imitate, and conform it felf unto ,• But fo it is, that, in fetting up New Officers, not appointed of God, /he has no Divine Pattern. Oar Qaerift, therefore, and Prefacer, mould have concerted their Meafures better, that, in this Goodly Piece, they might not thus Ad: the MU'umtet, in deftroying one another by their counter, inconfiftent Notions and Reafons. But let us hear the Gentleman's Reafons for the Affirmative : Mofess Father-in- Law gave Advice for making Rulers, which was, ex poft fa&o, approvd of God, and of th?m the Sanhedrim did con(i^} tho' it had not its firft Appointment or Inflimion from God. Anfwer: Not to ftand upon the huge Difparity, in this Point, betwixt Civil Officers and Church Offi- cers, and his ignorant Confounding the Civil and £cclefiaftick Sanhe- drim ( diftinguiuVd bv Orthodox Divines ). [ See this at large prov'd in Aaron's ilod, &c. Ch. :.] which laft he fuppofes to be made up of thefe Officers mentioned by him, he doth thus rudely and unskilfully fuppofe, that all the Ground of this Inftitution was Gid's after approving a prior Humane Advice or Device hereanent, which clearly contradict* the Text ,• for, Jethro (hews, that his Advice was not Peremptory, but Conditional, upon Suppofition, that Mofes had the Mind of God herein, who was, in every Point of his Government, efpecially in this" Matter of fo high Importance, not to proceed without God's Mind asked and obtain'd. The Apoftle tells us, he was Faithful in all the Houfe of God as a Servant, and Servants mult rot Ad:, but upon iheir Mifter's Orders, and go his Errands. Jethr$ exprefly rhus Qualifies his Counfel, Exod. 18. i%..tf thou fh alt do this thing, and God Command thee fo, or God Command thee, which is only in the Original ,• that is, faith 'Pool ( that Wife Conccrter and Conlulrer of the Judgment of Interpreters ), If G>d approve rf the CoUrfe which I ft*gg(fl, rovhofe Wi(- dom I fubmit my Opinion; for Jethro, faith he, mi,ht well think, ihat Mofes neither would nor might make fo grta? an Alttrati n in the Govern- ment, without confulting God about it, and Expdlln^ hit Anfwer. As for that Reading, Both God will give thee his Commands. &c. i. e. Ibou Wilt have Uafure to ask his Counjel in aU Emergencies, 'ns much to the fame Scope, fince itill it fuppofes the Absolute Ncctfliry of a Divine War- rant, in every Momentuous Piece of Government, confequently much mo<-e in this ; Tho' Jethro gave him Counfel, he will not have him fuither to follow it, than God would be pleis'd to approve of it The Englijh Annot. from v. 19. Obferve, that 'tis evident, as iikewife front I many parallels, that Mofes was to bring the Caufes to God, to underhand bis ' Mind therein. Now. fince Jtthro acknowledged, that all Weighty Cau- fes Chap. IV. Queries to the Presbyterians of SCOTLAND. 95 fes were to be brought to God, could he fuppofe, thatfuch a Weighty Point, as this Alteration, was not to be brought to him ? So that, there was-here no Institution founded upon his Counfel, nor an Humane Counfel after approv'd by a Divine Inftitution, as our Querift fug- gefts, but a Counfel fo Qualified, as is above clear'd, by God's Com- mand enliven'd into an Inftitution, tho' the Humane Counfel gave the Occafion, whereof there are Scripture Inftances at Hand. The Cafe of Ztlopbebad's Daughters, gave Occafion for God's declaring his Mind> and extending and explaining the Law anent ^ Inheritance of Daughters* j yet none will fay, that g N^ ™-^l-7, the Propofal or Addrefs made by thefe Daughters of ' 9' ' Zefopbekad, was the Ground of that Law,* for, v. y. Mo fes, before he gave any Anfwer to their Suite, brought their Gaufe before the Lord, that his mind therein might be known. So in the cafe of unclean Perfons, or in a Journey whereof we Read, Numb. 9. and of Men unclean by a dead Body, reprefented toMafes as that which did ftop their keeping the Paffover in the day appointed by God : When the Cafe of thefe Perfons defiled by a dead Body was brought to Mofes, v. 8. we read, Mofes /aid unto them , Stand (till and I will hear what the Lord will command concerning you. He durft not alter even thecircum- ftanceof the time without God's fpeciai Warrant, whereupon, v. 10, 1 1- we find the Divine Anfwer and Oracle given anent the allowing in this & the like neceifary Impediments the fourteenth day of the fecond Moneth. Now, fuppofe Mofcs's humane Judgment was clear in this matter, yet did this, or could this, ground the Inftitution, or warrant the Practice without it, tho* this was the occafion of God's declaring his Mind in the Cafe? Moreorer, I would gladly know,if our Querift will deny, that Mofes confuked God in this matter, and got his Anfwer before he proceeded to the Practice ? If he did, then there was no Ele&ion of thefe Governours upon an humane Advice, but a humane Advice limited as is faid, giving occafion to a Divine Warrant and Inftitution, which ftridts againfr Mofes adling upon meer humane fVifdom cr Counfel in this matter : If he fay, the Practice was antecedaneous.to Mfa's asking God's Mind in the Cafe, he makes him guilty of a moft prefurnptuous anticipating God's Direction and mocking of Him. What Matter would not look upon himfelf as mocked and affronted by fuch carriage of a Servant, as firft proceeding to practice and then to ask his Matters Adyice ? We find, in the premis'd Inftances, how tender Mofes wasin point of Light from ©od, in the Ex ;;.ution of every piece of his Office j, Why then will our Queiift make him inconfiitenc with himfeif in iuch a pra&Lce as this ? Befides, how could Mofes a£t in 9 6 A Review and Confederation of the % Chap. IV. *n Faith in fuch a confiderable Charge as this without a Divine War-* rant ? Follow fome more of our Querift's Inftances of the Churches Power,1 to eftablifh New Officers ( for within thefe Limits is his Querie pro^ pounded, without any fliadow of further extenfion ). The firft is, The Ittflitution of the Feaft of Dedication. In the next place he inftances, to fortifie his Querie, The Feafi of Purim, likewife the addition ofBdptifm to Circumcifion, the Poflcanium to the Pajfover, &c. In the firft Inftance and what follows, we may 'remark his prevarication in ^reaching them beyond the reach of his Querie, which is confin'd to the eftabli- Jhing of New Officers under the Gofftel. But thefe Inftances,. the firft and fecond in fpecial, are, according to his fcope, intended to Patronifc the Churches Power and Authority to make new farts of TVorfhip beyond the Limits of Gods Itiftitution and Appointment. Wherein, however, we cannot but commend the Gendemans Ingenuity ,• for, indeed, they are of a near affinity, and Co of one piece, that they are founded upon the fame Bafis and Medium. If the Churches Authority warrants the one, no doubt the other alfo, and his honeft Popiih Guides do difcreet- Jy joyn them both ,• whereof the Inftances are plentiful and at hand, which we need not ftand uponi However, his firft Inftance is a preg- nant proof of this Conjun<5tion, fcil. the Inftitution of the .Feaft of Dedication ; To which I Anfwer, that this Feaft is difown'd as unwar- rantable by Proteft int Divines. Cartwright thus afTaults the Jefuits of Rhem?s, our Querifts Brethren in the Caufe, who do. thus plead upon this PafTage, John 10. 22. That this Feafi was inftituted by Judas Maccha- beus, Mace Lib. 1. c. 4. Chrift, fay they, vouch fafd to keep and honour that Feaft Inftituted by him : And our Hereticks vouehfafe not to Tray and Sacrifice for the dead usd and approvd by him, 2 Mac 12. The Dedication alfo ofCbriftian Churches is warranted thereby, with annual Memories thereof- and proves, that fuch things may be inftituted without any exprefs Command* ment in Script urt. To which Cartwright returns this Anfwer : That this Feaji was unduely inftituted and ungroundedly, may appear by conference of the Dedication of the firft Temple under Solomon, and of the fecond, after the Captivity returned fr*m Babylon ; In which Dedications [eing there was no yearly Remembrance by Solemnity of Feaft, not jo much as of one Day, it is evident, that the yearly Celebration of this Feaft t for eight Days, was not com- pafs'd by that Spirit that Solomon and the Captivity were directed by : Which Spirit^ when it dwelt more plentifully in Solomon, tirid in the Prophets that flood at the Stern of the Captivity-dedication, than it did in jadzs, it was in him fo much the more prefumptuous, as having a fhorter Legg than they, he durft in that matter overftride them. And his rafhnefs is fo much the m$re aggravated, Chap. IV. Queries to the Vreshyterlans of SCOTLAND. 97 aggravated, as each of them, for the Building of tie whole Temple, with all the Implements and Furniture thereof, made no Fea(i to renew the annual Memory, where Judas, only for the renewment of the Altar, and of certain other decayed places of the Temple f inftituted this great Solemnity. As for the pre fence of our Saviour at this Feaji, he tells the Jefuits, they may as well prove the lawful- nefs of the Jewijb Penteeofi and other Jewifb Feafls, becaufe of Paul's prefence for further fftreading of the Gofiel. Befides that the Text makes mention of a fpecial ground of our Lord's prefence at this Feaft, fcil. becaufe it was in the Winter Seafon, hereby rendring the Reafon, why our Lord walked in Solomon s Porch, which was a place adapted to fafe and commodious Walking in that Seafon of Winter. Befides that, tho it were prov'd, that he was purpofely prefent at that Seafon of the Feaft, it would infer no Approbation thereof, for the Reafon already given. Gartwright doth alfo here well mind the Jefuits, That 'tis one thing; to tollerat a Cu/lom or Determination of the Church, and another to approve of it. The fame ground of our Lord's prefence at that Solemnity is afTerted by others, in fpecial by Calvin, who tells us, that Chriftus pro more apparuit, ut in fr-eefuenti bominum conventu uberior effet pradicationis fua fru-* clus. i.e. "That Chrift appeared there among this frequent Convention "of People, for the more fruitful fpreading of the Gofpel. As for the Feaft of Purim, next inftanced by him,* 1. It cannot be made appear, that thefe days were Holy Days, Dedicated and intirely fefc apart tor Religious PVorfhip, fo as the WorOnp refpe&ed ths Obfervatioa ofthofedays, as a part thereof, with an abfolute cefTation from the Work and Imployment of Mens ordinary Callings, except in fuch cafes as God has allowed in all fuch Days, which is properly injoyn'd in the Fourth Command, with refpeft to the Days made relatively Holy by Gods Appointment. The Context will infer no fuch thing, fince they are held out as Days of Civil Mirth and fending Portions, Eft. 9. 17, 18. called Days of Feafling and Giadneft, a good Day and offending Portions one to another, V. 19. they made the fourteenth Day a Day of Gladnefs and Feafling, and a good Day. And v. 22« they make them days of Feafling and Joy, offending Portions to one another and Gifts to the Poor ; that Month being turned to them from Sorrow to Joy, and from Mourning to a good Day. Bifhop Andrew's Reafons, to prove them Holy Days, our Querift may find fully confuted by the Author of the D iff ate again (I the Englifli* ?"/>//& Ceremonies, befides divers others. Learn'd Didoclaviui * has feveral things to this purpofc, vij^. That this fixed Seafen *Tar,ar is termed Zemin) ppinting at any determined time, and Mjiinguijh d from Mogned, which has a more proper reffeej to aFejfivity,that they art called days of Rejt from Enemies, againfl whorp they flood for their Life t and are N therefore A Review and Confederation of the Chap. IV. *y relatively Holy, but m fas ufeoftbi- ftorm Na'chit, ffievfrtlnt, -pointing at a fimplt Ref/ing from tb* Radix Nuach &c. zlyt T ia' it were acknowledged, that fucb Days were Sacr d Feffivities, yet they had the flffe£fofa of a Mcrdecn,n Man ofGod,and his Prophet and Mouth in this C«fe, which quite eximes this Inftance from the Omp >fs and Scope of what' he in- tends. For his next Inftance, of adding Baptifm to Circumci/ton. 'tis fo palpably abfurd, this Ordinance having a Divine Inflirurion fo evident and expfefs, in the Senfe and Acknowledgment of all, that to Read it, is to refuse it. As for the adding the Voftcanium to the Vajfvcr, if he mean it of our- Lord's adding; the Caie is the fame with the preceeding ,• If of the Jews addition offuch a inlti demi Dent. 4. 2, and 12. 52. Ifa. 29. 13. apply ed by our Lord roali humane Inventions in Worihip, Mmb. 15-. 8,9. Mark-] 14. Or, if I e fay, it was added as a meer Love Feaji, as the stgap* which * 1 Cw. ir. the Apoftle '* Reprehends as they were then circuroftan- 2I» Zl- tiated, in this cafe it comes not within the compafs of our Queftion, nor Anfwers the Scope, as is evident. When without any Reflri&ion or Limitation he adds, Which Rites, 'which were not of Divine, but Ecckfiaftick bijiitution, our Saviour approved of, &c. Calling the preceding Instances in bulk not ftridtly of "Divine^ hut of Ecctefaftick hftitution, he is palpably abfurd ; 1. In making^ Baptifm fuch a Conftitution, and ranking it with the other in point of a Divine Warrant, zly, When he lays, they were not ftnftly of a Divine Infsitution, he infmuates, they were in pa,t, and even as Ecckflatfilk Rites, as he terms them ,• and fo his diftin&ion is very bsd, tmtefs lie fay, that the Ecclefiaftick hfiitution renders them of a Divine Right, in a remote or mediae Scnfe, becaufe of a fuppofed Authority hereanent given to the Church, and that her Inftittxion renders them Divine, as the Apoftle P^«/difrsngui(beih, not 1. hut the Lord, and again 1, not the Lord, thus in the Cifs of Marriage, 1 Cor. 7, 10, 12. diftingui- /hing our Lord's immediat, and the Apoftolick Inftitution: If thus, I fay, he underftands this Ecelefinftick hfiitution, he gives the fkme Authority to the Church in point oi inlHtutcd Worihip.and the Officers thereof, which Apofties had; A Popi/h Principle, diiowfl d by all the Proteftaat Churches, But Chap. IV. gH&ries to the PresfyterUnt of SCOTLAND. 99 But our bold Gentleman Querift not only will afcribe to the Church a Power to introduce and inftitute new Officers and Worship beyond the Divine Inftitution, but likewife to lay afide fmethings which "are of Vivine Infliction, and gives this firft pertinent Inftance of Hezekj&s decoying the Brazen Serpent, which G&d commanded to be made, and we find no Order for deftroying it, yet God was plea fd mtb its being deftreyed. The Impertinence of which Inftance evidently appears in that, i. The abufe of this Monument to horrid Idolatry is held out as the ground of removing it, which will ftrick againft the retaining of what is thus abus'd, and in cafe of fuch a fcandal, tho3 fuch Retention were other- wife lawful in.it felf ,• And the Inftance is welh improven againft retaining of Holy Days, and fuch Popifh Rites and Cuftoms, as are fignally thus abufd, and the abolishing everything out of Religious Worfhip, which neitherthe Law of God, nor Nature, has made necef- fary, yea the removal of every fuch thing as is the Occafion of Scandal and (tumbling, and that either with refpe& to Friends or Ene- mies. When he fays, it u>at a Divine Inftitution, he either holds, that the J/?-1 ftittttion, with refpect to its proper End, was ftill Vigent, or not? The firft he will not fay, without expofing himfelf, it being Notour, and univerfally acknowledge, that the Typical Ufe and Efficacie wasae this time gone : If he aflert the Second, then he muft acknowledge, that the Inftitution was Obfolet, as other Symbolical Rites of the Jew- i(h Pedagogie are now Ended and Obfolet, and the Inftitution there- of removed, becaufe determined and limited to fuch a time. The like he will acknowledge of the Office of Prophecy and Miracles,- And,con- lequently, the Brazen Serpent was in this refpecl, at that time, ulelels ; And Hezttyafrs calling it Afe&«/&^/?,Brafs,or Brazen,in the breaking of it, was to import fo much to the blinded Idolaters. %fyt Granting, that, out of this cafe of Scandal and Idolatrous Abufe, it might have been lawfully prelerv'd, yet, as it was no longer of fuch a Typical Ufe (elfe it had been ncceifarily preferv'd, not lawfully only), fo this Abufe made the Removal Neceifary : And in this refpecl, it comes under the fame Notion with other Monuments of, and Incentives to Idolatries and the Removal thereof had the fame Divine Approbation suad Com- mand, as other things of this Nature, and is accordingly, in the Sacred Text, ranked therewith, and this Godly reforming King's Zeal equally commended in removing it with other Idolatrous Monuments, of the Removal whereof, by a Divine Command, no Man will doubt. Therefore, 'tisfaid, 2 Kings 18. ;. He did that which was right in tic fight of the Lord ; If Right in the fight of the Lord, then nothing in; the point N 2 of i<*o A Review and Confederation of the Chap. IV. of Reformation after mentioned by his own Authority, or of the San* hedrimon'y, but what God commanded, and what he was Antcceda- ne©ufly thereby obliged unto. Then in the 4. v. 'tis Evidenc'd and. Inftanc'd thus, He reimvd the hifh places, and brak* the images [or Sta- tues] -ind cm down the groves, and brake in pieces the Brazen Serpent that Mojei b*d made'. Yor unto thofe days the children of Ifrael did burn incenje to it ' anihe calfrd it Nehufhtan. God's Command for removing all Monu- ments and Incentives to Idolatry, is very clear, Numb. 32. j2, Veut. 7. •25-, 26. 1f*> %o. 22. with many fu^h like. So that our Querift fpeaks without Scripture, or rather is ignorant of it, when he tells us, that we never read, that God gave any Order for deftr vying it, fince thefe and the like Ocders did clearly reach this Deftru&ion of it in the Cafe inftan- ced. And he might as well fay, Hez>kjah had no previous Orders for breaking the Images and cuttingdown the Groves. For what he adds, Thai mtwithftanding Q&d never gave any fuch order for deftrtying it, yet be was f leafed with its being defrayed; He fpeaks very bad Divinity or worfe Senfe. I would know of this Gentleman, whether God was pleafed with deftroying It, without, or according to his Order ? I hope he will not fay5 God was pleas'd with breaking a (landing Order of his. Upon what Ground then was he pleas'd?Meerly becaufetf*ze£i*£ brake it ? If he fay this, he crofles the Text, and the common Senfe of all Men who read it. If he fay, God was pleas'd upon the Grounds in-' franced, then, he was pleas'd upon the ftanding Order given for re- moving Monuments of, and Incentives . to Idolatry in this Cafe : So that our Querift mufl either contradict the Text, or fall ftiort of his Scope in this Inftance. His next Inftance and Argument,to prove,the Churches Authority, c to lay afikfome things of Divine Injlitution, is taken from the Pajfover, € which was U be eaten with their loyns girt, wd the faff in their hand, a pof- ' ture that fuiced perfeftly withtheOccafionof itsInftitution,asappears * from Etcod. 12. Yet the Church did alter that Pofture, thus comman- * ded, after they were in Poffeffion of the promis'd Land, unto their c ordinary Table- Pofture, to wit, leaning, which was common to them 6 with othei Eaftern Nations, and did better agree to their profperous * Condition at that time, and our blefled Saviour himfelf did comply * with that Alteration which the Church had made, and did Eat the ' Paftbver with his Difciples in that Pofture. Anfwer : That this Cir- cumftance was Temporary, fuited only to that Exigence, and did net at all be\ong to the Effence of the Ordinance it felf, is the Confentient • Judgement of Protcftant Interpreters, Upon that Gjaufe of verfe 11. Thai t Chap. IV. Queries to the Vreshyterhns of SCOTLAND. i o i 'thus you /hall eat with pur loyns girt, &c. Mr. Pool (hews, That It seas for this time, becaufe their Circumftances required it, that they being fuddenly to take a great Journey, might be in a Travellers Habit. But, that thefe, and fome other Circ urn fiances, faith he, now enjoynd and usd, were only Tempo* rary, and not Perpetual and Obligatory, fufficiently appears from the PracJict not only of the Jews in the following Ages , but alfo ofChriJi and of his A- poflles. The Dutch Divines, on this Verfe, Thus now Jhall ye eat, &c, fhew, That it was at this time $ for, afterward ', thefe things, or Cir cum flan* Ces, were no more cbfervd, no not by Chrift him [elf, nor by hit ApojUes, refer- ring to v. 7. And they fhall take of the Blood, and fir ike it on the Two Side Tofts,, and on the Upper 'DovPcji of theHoufes, wherein they (hall eat it. Upon Vvhich Paffage they obferve, That of this Ceremony there is no mention made tlfe-where, as neither of fome other here following ( fcil. v. 11.) But they were only to be obferv'd in this fir (I Pafover. Diodat, upon the place, tells us, That thrsCeremonie was Singular and Peculiar, fcil. the girding of their loins, confequently the re (I of this nature, for that fit (t Paf/over, as it ap- pears by our Saviour s Celebration of it with his Apoflles. The Englifo An- notations upon the Paflage fhew,' That this Gefture of Standing with the Staff in their hand, was a Gt$ure of Readme ft for prefent paffage, and that this Gefture is conceivd to be peculiar to the fir ft Pajfover, becaufe that only was Eaten in hafte, and for that our Saviour celebrated the Pafiuver with another Gefture, This Senfe might be clear'd by many other Interpreters, if needful, zly, Suppofe it were granted, that the Church made this Al- teration, yet under that firft Difpenfation of the Covenant, the Church being under the Influence of God's Extraordinary Prophets, rais'd up for her Direction in Point of Worfliip in many Emergents, it may be rationally fuppos'd, they were not without a Divine Direction in this point. However, the thing it felf being, in the Judgement of Sound Divines, but a Circumftance fuited to that firft time of the InftitutiOn, it can plead nothing for the Churches Power, in point of the Alterati- on of the Subftance or Parts of Worfhip. %ly, How abfurdly our Que- rift afterward pleads our bleffed Saviour s Complyance with an Alteration made by the Church in Eating the PaJJover in the Jable-pofture, is obvious > from what is faid. We fee in what is premis'd, that our Saviour's pra- clifing and eating thus, is by Proteflant Divines laid down as a Ground, to prove, that the Standing Pofture did not belong to the EfTence of the Worfhip or Inftitution it ielf. Who will doubt, that our Saviour's Practice in this point is a leading Rule and Ground, who came to ful- fil the Law, and exa&iy obey'd the Divine Inftitutions ? Whereas this Querift brings him in ( if we may exprefs it with Reverence) truck- ling after Humane Alterations and Inventions , to which our Saviour was : 102 A Review and ConjiderAtlon of the Chap, IV. was fo Zealous an Enemie, that we find him Expounding the Law, and Vindicating it againftt he corrupt Oloffes and Praaicesof the Phari- feesjnveighing againft Humane Inventions in God'jWorlhip^and in his Pra&ice fo great an enesny thereunto, that he would not homologate Superfluous Perfons, in the ufe of the innocent Pradice o$wa(hing hands before meat, becaufe they had made it a Religious Ceremonie, Luke ir. 38, $9, &c. Matth. 15-. 2, &c. Mark 7. from v. 1. to v. 14. The Evangelift v. ;. takes notice of a tradition of the Elders in this Point, making mention of fome other Religious Ceremonies of their Church Reprefentative, that the Pharifees charg'd the Difciples in eroding the Tradition of the Elders, in eating with .ttnwafhen hands, and ihews that our blefled Lord among other things, charges them v. 7, 8. -with teach' ingfor Doclrines the commandments of men, and laying afide the Command- ments of God, to hold the Traditions of men, as the wafting of pots and cups, and many other like things, faith he, ye do. His other Inftances are as unfuteable to his Scope. For the Diaco- neffes, there is good Warrant from the Context, to fuppofe, that what- ever Offices towards their Sex might be impo*'d*upon chem, peculiar to the Circumftances of that Time and Place, fuch as propter horam bal* net, and the like ,• yet they were in no Church Office properly fo called, but were poor Eleemofyners and Obje&s of the Churches Alms and Charity, which, as in feveral other Circumftances, appears evi- dently to be held out, 1 Tim. %. 16. where the Apoftle enjoyns fuch as are able, to relieve the Widows, that the Church might not be charg'd, and kindred from relieving them that were widows indeed. As for the Holy Ki/s, there is in fuch Precepts contain'd a Standing Moral Duty of Holinefs and Sincerity, in all our Converfe and Salutes, tho' that Circumftanee of the Kifs among Men, in the Literal Senfe, was proper to that time. As for not Eating of Bkod, 'tis clear in the Context, Acts 1 j. that this Neceffity and Expedience rcfpe&ed the prefent State of the Jews, of whom many had embrac d the Gofpel, but had not yet arriv d at fuch a full Conviction (as was futeable and neceffary, and afterward to be hop'd for) in point of the Abrogation of the Mo/aical Ceremonies, and of the antient Oeconomie ; Chriftians3 therefore, were to beware of offending them fas we are, by vertue of our Lord's Pre- cept, to beware of offending any of thelittie ones*), *Mattb. 18.6. efpecially when the Temple of Jerufalem ftood, to which the Ceremonies, as to the Main thereof, were annex'd, which, altho* dead, as fome have diftmgufh'd , yet were not as yet buried, as they were to be Honourably in God's time. And this will no more prove the thing to be a (landing Gofpel Ordinance, becaufe Injoyn'd and Chap. V. gumcs to the Vreshyterians of SCOTLAND. 102 and praAis'd by the Apoftles, than Paul's purifying himfelf upon the Period of his Naz.ante Vow, and attending, with others in the like Cafe, according to the Law Nunsk. 6. 18. in Order to the PriefTs offe* ringofS^Cfificesfor them upon the Apoftle James\ Advice, will import that this Pra&ice was a (landing Gotpel Duty ,• both the one and the other Puaice being for the fame End, as is clear in the Hiftory, and the Expidt«ncy thereof warranted by the fame Rule. For the Antynt- ing of tbtjick with Gyle, 'tis fo clearly found to be the Ap- pendix of che Miraculous Gifc of Healing now ceas'd * * Qmtm Mark and own'd io by all Proteftant Divines, that the Que- 6- xz>'li- wtb rilt muft forefake them, and go to the Popifn Authors ^aniss 5 J4" for a Patrociny, if he efleem otherwife. So that, in none of thefe In- ftances there is the lead fliaddow of a Warrant for the Alteration of Gofpel Ordinances, fince they are declar'd to be iuch as come not un- der that vharacter. CHAR V. Ex mining our Qucrift s Notions ( in his IV. Chap. ), touching the Succejjion to the Apoftclick Office, and Expofwg his Grofs Ignorance and Impeachment thereof, in his I leading for an Apo~ ftolich Succejjion : As likwife, his Ignorance and Fc&lifi Conceits upon the Voint of Ordination, as proper to Apoftles, and in Oppofition to the Authority of tresbyters therein. E R E the I Query is, Whether the Jpofiles were not to be fa- cecdedto, as J«ch ? If he mean Succeitbrs to the Formal Of- fice of the Apoftolate ,• I Arrfwer, vAth the Body of Prote- itant Divines, that they were not. Of this the Reafuns- are many and obvious: It (hall iuffice, tbot we here hint what w above touch'd, w*. That the Apoftoh'ck Office import. xJi an Umverfal Infpedion over the whole Catholick Cnu.cn planted and to be planted, with Authority to deliver our Lord', Mind as his immediatly fent Ambaffadours, touching the Doarine, Wortf.ii, Dis- cipline and Government thereof ;■ to that, they were, every one of 7 +™vn*Va nid f °\ them i0yiit!y> °ur Saviours Living Oracle and ty«b*t* hjfctior* thereof '•■ upon which Ground, the Chuic b laid ro SM^feMj^l^^^, An4 therefore, iflfrner their Work,, i0 a A Review and Con fi deration of the Chap. V*. Work, their Authority, their Calling, nor the proper immediate End of both, nor their Qualifications, as fuch Officers, can be, without the higheft Preemption, pretended to by any ordinary Church Offi- cers. In Explication of this Query, our Gentleman Quenlt Further aiks, Whethif Lay- Men and Women be not as iffcStua.il) dtbarrd from the Lord's Supper, -which was given only to the Apples, Church Officers, and Bifiops of the Christian Ghurch, as Bijhops are debarred fern being SucCejJors to thejpojlles, fince Bishops of the Catholick Church believe them/elves to be fuch SufceJJors, from Chrifis Promi(e,to be with them to the End of the World, which Promife was mt reftriSled to the ApoUks Perjons? This Promife,he thinks/proves as much the Apoftles were to be fucceeded to, as fuch,. as the Command of our Saviour,Dri»>& ye all of Ogives Chriftians an undoubted Right to be ad- mitted to the Lord's Table. I have here fully exprefs'd his Senfe and Scope, tho' I have not follow'd his Words *«** tnrhs which, as there fet down, are hardly reconcilable to good Senfe and Syntax. Only I add ( which, with him, affords Strength to his Query ), viz,. He tells us, the Fromife was not remitted to the Apoftles Perfons, fince none but St. John outlivd that Century, but to the Order, which was rctfr yivmrun. Where, on the by, I take notice, that he, or the after Arguer, at leaft, over- throws this long Life of St. John, in affirming, that all the Apoftles did, very fhortly outlive the Command and Promife, Go ye therefore to teach and Baptize, &c. But, more dire&Iy, I Anfwer, the Abfurdi- ty of this Explication and Proof many ways appears: i. It is uncon- cravertibly evident, that our Saviour, in this Adminiftration, was pro- perly the Minifter, fo to fpeak, and Exemplified the Authored Admi- niftrator; the Apoftles were Communicants, yet not properly, or only, as Apoftles. but, as himfelf acknowledged, they reprefenred the Ordinary Chriftians, or Communicants : So that, the Right of all Chriftians is herein evident, and, in that refpect, the Apoftles were fucceeded to in this Right, but not as Apoftles properly I From hence the Difparity appears evident, fince Chriftians Right to the Sacrament is founded upon the Nature and Defign of this Ordinance, which is the Seal of the Gofpel Promifes to all that" have embrae'd Chrift ,• and Succeffors to Apoftles are as clearly excluded, by the Nature and Defign of the Apoftolick Office above exp.efs'd. 2/), The Diiparity is evi- dent by his own Conteffion, and, therein, the Inconfiftency of his Query, Our Saviour, faith he, gave it only to Church Officers or Apoftles, but, by his Confeflion, not as Apoftles or Church Officers properly and formally, or in a reftri&ed exclufive Senfe, but as Chriftians, re- prefenting therein the Chriftians Right. For, he tells us, in the clofe of this Chap. V. Queries n the VreshytenAns of SCOTLAND. 105 this Query, that our Saviour's Precept, [ Drink ye aB of this, ] gives aS €brifiians an Undoubted Right to be admitted to the Lord's Table. But, in the Point of Succeflion, he pleads for it to the ApoHolkk Office properly and formally as fuch. And, to argue from Succeflion to Apoftles in a general Chriftian Priviledge, unto a Succeflion to their proper for- mal Office, he will acknowledge, is obvioufly abfurd, and, confej quently, his Method of Arguing, and Parallel Argument, comparing thrift's promife to the Apoftles, with the Inftitution and Command, as it toucheth the Sacrament : For, himfelf overthrows this Argument, and clears the Difparity • fince, in Point of the Sacramental Precept* Drink ye all »f this, he acknowledges, that not Apoftles only, but all Chriftians, are concerned ; But the Promife, 1 am with you t$ the end, he reftrids to the Apoftohck Orders as the t»£ «< ymnriw. Finally as for the Promife it felf, the Author, whom he pretends to put his Que^ ries to, hath difcovered, how it is to be underftood, with relped to the SuccefTors in the Ordinary Mirtift ry, Jcil. the Preachers of the Word, and Adminiftrators of the Sacraments, with the Appendant Power of Difcipline,- who alfo hath clear'd the Abfurdity of any higher Exten- fion to a fuppos'd Apoftolick Office. And fince himfelf grants, it could net be rejlritfed to the Apofiles Perfons, but mujl re/petl their Handing Snccejfors, the Queftion ftill is, Who properly thefe SttcceJJors are} And it being evi- dent, from what is above touched, and ieveral other Reafons eafily adduceable, that their proper formal Office, as fuch, could not be Sue* ceeded unto., it doth as evidently follow, that thePromife could no morefuppofe the Continuance of their Office, than of their Perfons. Moreover, if he will not juftle with his Commending Prefacer, he muft hold, that, in the firft Conftitution of the Chriftian Church, there were fuch Church Officer, as Prophets, W&rkets of Miracles, Heat ers (for he holds, that thefe mention'd, 1 as above hinted : But he mould know, that this Preaching to the Nations, and forming them into Churches, did neceiTarily in- clude the Apoftoiick delivering to them, by our Lord's immediat Commiilion, the Gofpel Do&ine, and Rules touching the whole Scheme of the New Teftament Ordinances, in point of Doctrine, Worrnip, Difcipline, and Government. Not only did the Command of Teaching all Nations import and enjoyn the forming them into Churches in all thefe points, and miking them Difciples of Ch rift, and this by an Infallible Authority, but* befides this, an Infallible In- fpe&ion and Supsrintendency over them, and the Duties of both Officers and Members when this was done; a Work, which he cannot but acknowledge, competent to no Church Officer, or Church either: Whatever may be fuppos'd their Intereft and Duty with refpeft t© the Propagation of the Gofpel, or delegating Minifters to this end, any fuch endeavour is toto coelo different from that Infpe<5tion and Authority- of Apoflles, both in refpe<5t of Extent and Authority as is obvious to the meaneft Rv Je&ion ; For all Churches planted and to be planted were under their infallible Infpe£ion and Direction, as Catholick Officers Thereof in aBu exercito. This Authority, we fay, was peculiar to Apoitles, and was not neceffary to be continued, ncr could. For the New Teftarnem Ordinances being delivered, and compleated, and feal'd in our Saviour's Teftamsnt, this Canon being thus feal'd and compleated,the formed Churches are to obey this Pattern,the Foundation being laid, the Superftructure is to be advened in God's ordinary Me- thod of Adminiftration of Ordinances by the Churches (landing Guides and Rulers whom he has appointed : But no new Foundation is to be laid, nor new Ordinances to be delivered ,• The Faith once dtlivered to iki Saints it t± hr&mdj find (qrvefllj comettdtd for, Jud. V. J. and that which .Chap. V. Queries to the VresbyienAnrof SCOTLAND. 107 which is received held fall, Rev.;.;. No univerfal infallible Infpe&or is any more allow'd, whofe Authority refpe&s the laying a Foundation, which cannot be laid of new. 2/7, This is further confirm'd, in that we find the Apoftles, in their Travels to form and eonftitute Churches, fixing Officers therein, Church by Church ; dire&ing Officers and Members of form'd Churches in their feveral Duties, with refped to their cafe and eircumftances, and by acknowledgment of our Prelarifb, fuppofing them fix'd to their feveral Stations and Polls, whether Bi/hops or Presbyters. As for the Evangelift's Office, we make it appear to be Extraordinary, and that the Epiftles Written to Timothy and Titus iuppofe this, and the Precepts contained in them direct mainly the Ordinary fix'd Officers, tho* the moreimmediat Addrefs refped Evan- gelifts as fuch. But there is not the leaftftiaddow of fubftituting of Uni- verfal Infpe&ors of Officers and Churches to Succeed them, who were fix'd ro no Port or Watch-tower, but all their Directions to Churches refpeft the Officers as fpecially related thereunto. Thus the Epiftles to the Afian Churches iuppofe thefe Angels Relation to the Churches of Epbejus, Smyrna, &c< and refpect their Duty, or point at their Sin, as fix d in chefe Stations and Watch-towers. Timothy is dire&ed touching the Officers of that Church of Ephefa^bnt there is no (haddew of -a Sucafive Supertntendmmt after him. And moreover, ( which is an Argument adhotninem ) Epifcopalians themfelves plead his fix'd Station there* Thus all the other prescribed Duties to Minifters refpect their fixed Station as in" fuch and fuch Pofts, whatever general refped: the DutUs may have to Churches as fuch. %ly, As to what may be fuppos'd the Duty of founded Churches under the New Teftament, in this poirtf of giving a Commiffion ro Minifters to Preach to Infidels and Propa- gat the Gofpel, we fay, that upon this Hypothec's, 'tis evident from what is above touch'd, that the Authority of (aeh Miniirers havingfuch a Commiffion, is (till fubaltern and under the Infpeciion of thefe Churches, from which they have their ComraSffion : And fuppofing thesr endeavours fo blelfed of God as to have Churches form'd into an Organiek Being, and their residence among them, they can, accor- ding to the Gofpel Rules, have only a flu re of the Government, in AftocUticm with other Officers thereof, but have nor, nor can have a Nomotheiick Superiority over them, or of fuch a nature as was proper to. Apoftles, as is obvious to the meaneft Reflection, far kfs over other Churches. III. Querie, 1/ the Ejfu(ir,n, or pouring forth of the My ®h»fl upon the lApbflles to be reckoned among the difitrigm\l]tn% marks vf an Apoftie "i Since the HelyGyft fell en Others in.t-his tx-fraordinary way , ■ enMng tfem toWci k O z Miracles, io8 * A Review and Confederation of the Chap. V. Miracles^ [peak "with Tongues, utter Prophefiess Interpret, and heal /be Sick, &C. which tended alfo to the Confirmation of the Gofpel as well at ■ tkofe Gifts of the Ape files. This Querie he might have feen farisried by th« Author he offers his Queries to, who diftinguimeth the Gifts, mate. riaUf and finply confidered, and formally with refpeft to the Apoftolick Office, /hewing, that, i. There was a difference of the Degree and Extent: The Apofties had thefe Gifrs more univerfally, and in a higher degree of Eminence, than was competent to others, as luculently ap- pears in the full pouring out of the Spirit in the day of Pentecoft reprefented by the iign of the cloven Tongues of Fire, inabling them immediately to fpeak the univerfal Tongues of all Nations under Hea- ven, to the amazement of a Multitude of various Nations gather'd at Jerufakm. Paul (hews, that his fpeaking with Tongues was beyond all other Gifts of that nature among the Corinthians; for feyeral there had the Gift of Tongues, I Cor. 14. 18. 7 thank my God, I fpeak with Tongues more than you all. Such were their other Gofpel confirming Gifrs, both as to conferring of Bleffings and inflicting Judgments, fuch as raifing the Dead ; Thus the Apoftle Peter raifed labitha to Life again, A&s 9. 40, 41. The Apoftie Paul, Eutychus, Atls 20. 9^ 10. And in point of inflicting Judgments, we find, upon Peter* Threatning, Death infli- cted, flrft upon Ananias, then upon Sapphira his 'Wife, to the amaze- ment and great fear of all the Church, and of all that heard thereof, ABs f . 1, 2, &c The Apoftle Paul we find fmiting Elymas the Sor- cerer with Blindnefs,for withftanding the Gofpel, to the aftonifhmene of Sergius Paulus the Deputy of Cyprus, and fuch. as had an Influence upon his Faith, Atls 1;. 9, 10, 11, 12. Such Gifo we do not Read .were conferred upon Believers, tho* fome extraordinary Gifts were. .'Tis true, fome do include thefe laft Inftances in the Gift of Miracles more generally conferr'd, whereof notwithstanding, the Scripture is filent j and tho* admitted, this doth not impeach this Argument drawn from the univerfal Concurrence of all extraordinary Gifts in the Apofties alone, and the Angularity of their Office, confequently. zly, The difference was pointed at with refped to the immedittt end of thefe Gifts, which was to Seal and Confirm their Apoflolick MiJJion and Authority, competent to no ordinary Church Officers, far lefs to Belie- vers in the firft Plantation of the Gofpel. The proper and immediat end of thefe Gifts being to Seal the Apoftolick Minion and Meflage, Thus was Peter's Million Seal'd when fent to Cornelius, Atls 10. whereat the Jews wondred that came with him, when they faw the Holy Ghoft in his Gifts of Tongues, and Prophefying, pour'd out upon the 4 hearers. Hsr« wasi to ute our Querift's cxpreifton, * Confirmatim of the ■: Chap. V. Queries to the fresbyterlam of SCOTLAND. 1 ©9 tie Go/pel; But I hope he will not be bold to fay, ( tho' indeed he words tbe Querie fo, as to inftnuate fo much, when he tells us, That the Spirit's extraordinary Affiftance afforded to others ' than Apoftles, was for Confirmation of the Go/pel, as well as what was done by the Apt files ) that this Confirmation of the Gofpel was the fame as it refpected the Preacher and the Hearers, or did relate to this proper immediat end inftanced: For this Confirmation in refpe<5r of Peter, was to Seal his Apoftolick Office competent only to himfelf with other Apoftles ; whereas, with refpect to the Hearers, 'twas to influence their Faith and Converfion, and to confirm the Truth of the Gofpel, rendring them faithful Fol- lowers of the Lamb, to engage them to a due Subjection to the Apo- ftolick Miniftry and Meflage?. We find afterwards the Apolfle 'Peter * pleading thjs great Seal of his MefTage * AcJ. it, and Miniftry towards the Gentiles. So that the very nature of thefe miraculous Operations fealing thus the Apoftles Autho- rity, and as it were, derived from the fame, diftinguifhed tbe Apoftolick Official atlings therein, from thofe received effetls and ijiues thereof. Next, I may make this clear by a Counter- Querie ,• Whither was our Saviour s Miracles one of the great Badges of his Mediatory Authority ? Ifuppofe our Querift will not deny this, fince the Gofpel Hiftory; produces thefe as the great Confirmation thereof, and our Saviour pleads this Argument againfl the Jews, Joh. y. %6. 1 have greater witneft than that of John, for the Works which the Father bath given ?mto finijh% the fame Works that 1 do bear witnefs of me, that the Father has lent me. And Chap. if. 24. If I had not dove among them the Works which none Other Man did they had net had Sin, hut now they have fsen and hated both me and the Father. Now what fays he to his Argument ( ftiatl I fay a Counter- Argument to that of our Saviours ) in this cafe ? How could this be fuch a diftingui/hing Maik and Badge of his Mediatory Autho- rity, fince in his own time, and even during his Miniftration upon Earth, others had this Gift ,• Apoflies did Heal, caft our Devils, yea fome that followed him not, as appears, Mark 9. 38. The only An- iwer is, that our Lord's Miracles were perform'd by his Original and Mediatory Authority ; Yea moreover, in order to this great immedi-> at end thereof, viz,, for Confirming the fame, diih'nguifhing them from that Gift in all others. . . If our Querift acquiefce in this, ( as needs he muft, unlefs he. will impeach our Saviour's Authority )) he muft^confequently, acknowledge his Argument nought, whereby he would prove this not to be a diftingui/hing Mark of an Apoftle, becaufe others had that Gift in fome meafure : So that, to fave him- &1F from this grofs abfurdity, and blafpheinous Refle&ion upon our Saviours : TpVa +Q A Review and Coft/tderathftof the Ghap. 'V. Saviours Argument, and this Badge of his Mediatory Office and Milli- on, he muft needs diftinguifh, with us, The Spirits miraculous Gifts ytktplyand materially conjtdered, from the fame Gifts as peculiarly refpedt- irig bom die P. That what others did by the Spirit's extraordinary Affiance and Influence, tended to the Confirmation of the Gofpel, as well as what was done by the Apoftles, is pitifully dull, and has no Efficacy, bur to reprefenc his miftake in confounding the Confirmation of the Gofpd /imply and abfHute/y con/ider'd, with the Confirmation of the Gofpel, as refpedting Perfons, fuftaining fuch and fuch FunBiom thus ratified, the proper immediat end of this Confirmation. Paul afferts the Gofpsi's Confirmation, in the Faitn, and otner Graces of the Corinthians, gernerally, in a paffive Senfe, as they were thus his * 2 Cor. 3. 2, 3. Epiftle Commendatory of his Apoftoiick Power *, t 1 Cor. 9. 2. and the Seal of his Apoftleinip \ ailerting, that extraordinary Gifts were vigem among them> all which confirmed them and others, that the Goi'pel Preached by Paul, and the other Apoftles was the TefHmony of || 1 Cor. 1. 6, 7. Chrift ||. But ftill this Confirmation pr*pe:ly refpeeted the Apoftles Authority, who were the Gofpersfirft Heraulds and Meffengers, whereof the Corinthians eminent Gifts were a fublervient Confirmation to this end, tho' the fame Gofpd was confiitn'd both ways. Will ourQuerift deny, that the fame Gofpel Teftimony w\$ confirnd by Chrift's Miracles and glorious O^rations of the Sp; it in him, and alfo by the Spirits I iflaence and Ope-acions upon aid by the Ap >ft'es ? But will he therefore infer, that 6itf Lord's Miracles vere no Confirm uions of -his Mediatory* Auh'):icv ann* tot 9 cgeh d-flfr- ;nt from thefe wrought or performed by, the Apo'ftie*; upo Apoftles deriv'd Chap. V. Queries to the Vreshykrkm of SCOTLAND. in derived Authority, as is above expreifed } Or, will he fay, ( to give another Initance) that when God gave oiMofess Spirit to his Affiftants, the Elders, who were to be his Ccadjutors and Ssibftitutes in the Government, and Eldad and Medad Propbefied with others *, as a Badge hereof, that this prov*d that * Numb, ill Mo/es's Gifts, and his Authority thereby confirm'd, 25, 26. were not of a diftinft nature, refpeding their proper immediat end, from thefe conferr'd upon the Elders mentioned, his being to confirm his Extraordinary, theirs an Ordinary Offitet IV. Query, Whether was the Holy Gboft given by the Succefiors of the A* fofttes by the Impofition of Hands ? Anfwer : That the Holy Ghoft was given thus by Apoftles ( he muft frill underftand it, as to his Special Extraordinary Operations ), we read in Scripture ; Thus by Peter and John in trm manner, Acts 8. 14, if, 16, 17. and by Paul, AcJs 19. 6\ upon whofe Impofition of Hands,upon thefe Twelve mentioned.in that place, we find the Holy Ghoft came en them, and they Spake with Jovgues and TropheJied;wh\ch is alio evident,and univerfally acknowledged in the pre- ceeding Inftance. But, that the Holy Ghoft was thus given by their; Succeffors, we read not. And therefore, confidering the Scriptures Silence herein, we, and this Querift, are not to be Wife above what is Written, nor implicitely to believe any Humane Teftimony hereanent. And fince thefe Extraordinary Influxes and Illapfes, defcrib*d in Scrip- ture,are therein clearly reprefented, as the great Seals of the Apoftolick Office and Authority, and the Certainty of the Gofpel MelTage ,• this End and EffeA being reach'd, the Canon clos'd, the Chriftian Church, in ail its Neceflary Parts, form'd, and all OHices, and Gifts, and Ope- - rations of the Spirit, which are necefiary for the Churches Edification, continuing, this Extraordinary Confirmation and Seal muft needs be fuppo^d obfolete and gone off, together tyith the other Extraor- dinary Offices and Operations necellary in the Churches Infant State, and firft Plantation of ihe Gofpel. For what he adds, that, in- the Stcandand %hki ftenUtry, Impofition of Hands , for giving the Holy Ghoji after Baptijm, was nut believd to bt an Ex~ tr -tor dinar) Part of tbi Jiju-rtohc^ Office. 1 would know, what Gifts of the Holy Ghoft, after Baptifm, were to be conferr'd by this Impofici^ on, Ordinary or Extraordinary 1 if Extraordinary be aile.rtcd, he doth, in this, crofs the Senfe of all Proccftint Divines, who hold rher Conferring ot thefe Extraordinary Gifts, by this Irnpofmon, proper to Apuftles, and to have expir.'d with that Fir ft Age and Tims.oi the Church. The Author, to whom he off rs his Queries, gave him a fell Account hereof, and the Seiile-oitheU^iv^ifuyoj Sama* wd of feveral* Ha A Review and ConfiJer dtiott of the Chap. V. feveral others, in fpecial of turretm, who impugns Confirmation from this Ground, "Thit tha Spirit, in this Extraordinary Manner, being ' given to thofe Bapriz'd, in both thefe Scripture Inftances, Acls 8. 1 and in that Imp >fi ion of Hands by Paul Acls 19. confequently they cwere made Partakers before of his common Operations, 2/7, He im- pugns it from this Ground, " That the Spirit is faid Uwrlttv, Mabi, * irruete, an Expreflion pointing at the Gift of Prophefie, and iuch like c Extraordinary Operations, and that therefore this is not to be under- ' flood of his Ordinary San&ifying Influences. Thus alfo we are to underftand that PaflTage, Acls 10. 44, 45-, 46. Again, if our Querift hold, that the Ordinary Influences are hereby conferr'd, he incroaches upon the Rights and Priviiedges of the Sacrament of Baptifm, making this Impofnion of Hands a Sacrament, againft the Senfe of all Prote- iftant Divines. Let our Querift read Gartwrigk againft the Rhemijh upon this Head. The Jefuits, upon that Paflage, ABs 8. 17. do plead, with all their Might and Vigour, for the Sacrament of confirmation, as a (land- ing Ordinance, whom Cart-wright at large confutes upon the Ground mentioned. Again, tho' it were fuppos'd, that Impofnion of Hands, for this End, is a ftanding Ordinance, and not to have ceas'd with the A- poftles, how comes our Querift to affert its defending to Bifbopt in after Ages, and to an Office pretended Superior to Paftors* Since our Que- rift, and all his Party, will acknowledge, that the Paftor has an un- doubted Right to Adminifter the Sacrament of Baptifm, the raft Seal of the Covenant, whereby Pefonsare Difcipl'd and brought into that Covenant, have all the Bleffings thereof .Seal'd up unto them, how then can the Adminiftration of this Adfutory fuppos'd Seal be deny'd them .; This Argument was prefs'd by the Author, to whom he of- fers his Query, who gave alfo the Senfe of Antiquity upon this Point, which, had he pondered, it might have fav'd him the Labour there* of. V. Query, Whether the Commiffton, Mat. 20. 19. to Preach, or make all Nations DifcifleS) ft*0»7iuwe irutT* 7 a 40 wi, wM a diftinguifhing Mark of an Apoftle ? Or rather, is not that Commiffion Continued to their Succejjors, whom he has promised to be with to the End of the World ? To this Query, the Anfwer is eafy and ready, from what is above touch'd, and all Prote- ctant Divines do hold, that this Command, complexly confider'd, was proper to Apoftles ; fince it did import an Apoftolick Immediat Com- miflion, not only to call all Nations to Chritt's Standard, but, by In- fallible Authority, to deliver to them the Lord's Pattern, and Scheme of New Teftament Ordinances, as to Doftrine, Worfhip, Difcipline and Government, and, upon Ground of this Immediat Coramiflion and — Aucho- Chap. V. Queries to the Vresbyterhtts of SCOTLAND. ii* Authority, to Infpecl: and Govern them, when thus fettled, according toGofpel Rules, as Gatholick Officers of the Church Gatholick, in aclu. exercito, and fubjed to no Churches Direction nor Infpe&ion, being fix'd in no Poft or Watch-Tower, as General Infpe&ors of the Duties both of Members and Officers, and our Lord's Living Oracles, Armed with Extraordinary Authority both to Confirm their Commiffion with Miracles, yea, and thereby to Coerce the Rebellious and Difobedient. Hence the Command, Go Teach, or, Vifeifk all Nations, refpe&ing the Office, Work and End above defcribtd, neither did, nor could import an Office to be fucceeded unto. This being our Anfwer, let us hear how our Querift Impugns it ' and would prove this Commiflion fhemuft underftand it, as at firft de* livered to Apoftles ,• For,otherwife,we hold the Preaching of the GofpeJ, with all the neceffary Ordinances for the Churches Edification, as imported in this Commiffion, to be, by Vertue thereof, jftill in force J to be continued to the Apoftles Succeffors. His firfr Reafon, touching our Lord's promised Pre fence to the End, we have already difcu* 'd as has like wife the Author to whom his Queries are offered ,• And t here's no need of a Repetition in this place; His next Reafon is by way of Querie, Whether after a Vresbyterial Ordination, a Minifter is 'tUa to his Paroch, fo as he may not, without a Call from Presbytery, Synod, or JJfemb/y go el/e-where ?Ifto one Paroch he be confind, he may not preach out of it} If to one Nation, he cannot f reach to another "i If to cbrijfians only he is tied to Vreach, the Door is (hut againft hisPreachingto Jews cr Mahometans. I An- fwer ,• All this he might have found, in a great meafure, if not "intirely remov'd by the Author of that P?v<», and they have • aU one Scope (underftand in. general Senfe) viz. ^Hf'V'f^' 'Saints, and one Commiffion, the Preaching of the Colpe.. Soihat ' the Work of all Chrift's Minifters in a genera Senfe whether of Apo- ' files or Ordinary Paftors ( remark here his diftinguifliing flill the Or- dnay and Extraordinary Officers in this Point - and, 10 fpectel , hie Affe Son or the ApoftlesExtraordinary Office; " is to treat with Sin- « ners to ingage them by Faith to Cbrift, as the Mafter from whom • "hey tea and to enter them into the Catholick \ ihbe Church by « Bamifm which, of its own Nature, hath a Refpeft 10 this Entry and ' K km &c 4y, Tho' Minifters be defignd pr.ncipally for the . Ca hXk thurclf'and tl;eir Commiffion .would bear »to »a < flnv where • vet are they not Catholick Officers of the Church, nor ac .3X A *&£. "to treat where they will, b" (according to the •Order which he hath fettled ) in part.cular Churches, as pari i 01 • S t whole; this beingour Lord's Method ^\Xlt^O(Zs « Thev are not (Satbolick Officers, there being great Odds betwixt o.^ • JfZcJolick Church, and" Catholick Officer •(* ^* ??£» • Such the Apoftlss and Byapgslifts were, (wh the Pope claims jo b^ Chap. V. |w U the VmhyUrUm 0/ SCOTLAND. \ * 5 * that is, for having an immediat Accels Tor Exercifmg this Truft e- ' qually to all. Officers of the Catholick Churchy are fuch as at© * plac'd in it, for building up thereof, and have Commiffion and Re- ference to that End, yet is it to be execute according to the Rules laid ' down, that is as Chrift's Call in an ordinary way, fhall give them Acce($« i Buttho' they have a Power and Commiffion in a&u primo, to be Mi- * nifters of the whole Church, and Watch-men of the City Indefinitryt S yet aclufecundo, they are fpecially delegated for fuch and fuchCongre- ' gations or Pofrs. And hence he, foil, the Paftor, is a&u frimo, a Mi- ' nifter of the fame kind to all Churches, as being an Ambaflkdor of ' Chrift, for the Churches Edification ; But aclit fecund$t and in refped ' of his fpecial Delegation, he is peculiarly Minifter of that Congrega- f tion, whereto particularly he,is appointed. $ty> Notwithstanding of * this particular Delegation, yet it is profitable, that a Minifter Exerce ' Minifterial Ads upon Occafion, warrantablie calling for the fame in c other Churches. And when called to it, they doit not only hy vertue c of their Gifts, but alfo Authoritatively by vertue of their Office and * Commiffion as Minifters of Jefus Chrift, their Minifterial Ads flowing f from the premised general ileiped to the whole Church, they not 1 b^ing as Mayors of feveral Towns, as Sherriffs of Countries, who can* ( not exerce Authority out of their own Bounds, but are to.be lookvd * upon as Heraulds of one King, having Authority to charge in his ' Name where-ever it be within his Dominions, tho',for better Supply * of Churches, fome Paftors are defign'd. for one Corner of Chrift's e Kingdom, fome- for another. See Durham on the Revel, fag. io6t 107. 108, 109, &c. This doth fufficiently remove our Querift's premis'd Quible, anent a Minifter's Confinement, by his Presbyterial Ordination, to one Paroch till remov'd by a Call, with his Inquiry, How he Preaches cut efit ? If to one Nation, why he Preaches in another? His Relation, as we have heard, being to the Church Catholick Primarily, the Exercife of the Office in aclu exercito ( as tne ordinary Diftindion runs), tho' ordinarily reftrided to fuch and fuch Perfons and Pofts, yet, upon the Churches due Call (the proper Minifterial Judge in this Matter), is capable of farther Ex-» tenfion or Alteration from one Port to another,* And the Occafional Ex- ercife, upon the Minifterial Call of other Paftors, has the fame Autho- rity, and the fame general Ground, as is above fpecified: This Regular tion of the Exercife, and a due Subjedion thereof to fuch Regulation, our Querift muft needs acknowledge, unlefs he overturn the Foundatfrj ons of all Church-Government, and difown the Union and Authority of the ChurcU-Reprefemative. The fame may be laid withRefped to P 2 the x\6 d Review and Conjideration of the Chap. V. the Exercife towards the Jew, Mahometans, and thofe that are with/ out, the Extenfion and Regulation whereof falls under the fame Con- fideration, and is to be Limited by the fame Meafures, as is alfo above hir ted. ../.., , i_ xt If thefe Reftraints Bind not Absolutely, and are not in the Nature of the Office but for maintaining Order, our Querift infers, ' That- ' the Univerfality of the Apoftles Commiffion to teach all Nations, can * be no Argument againft their having Succeffors in that Branch of the c Ap«»ftolick Office. I Anfwer, The contrary Conclufion rather fol- lows. He has been told, that it is the Judgement of all Sound Divines, that the Univerfality ftfthe Apoftles Commiffion to leack and Difciple all Nations, render'd them Infallible Catholick Officers in atlu ex?rcito, of the Church Catholick, Infallible Unirerfal Infpeaors ( as well as Founders) of all Churches and Church Judicatories, conlequently their Authoritative Infpedors in the Exercife of their Office ,- So that the Maintaining of Order could never reach (as it doth ordinary Officers) the fixing of the Apoftles to any Poft, or Watch- Tower, as their pe- culiar Charge, beyond which Limits the Exercife could not be extend- ed, but upon fuch Warrant and Order of the Church Reprefentative, or fuch occafional Call as is mentioned,- the Apoftles being in this Point immediatly under the Spirit's Infallible Diredion. Let our Querift confult A&s 10. 19. ii. 12. Ms 19. 21. Ms 20. 22. and this will be Evident beyond Exception. And if this Gentleman will fhew us Suc- ceffors of Apoftles in fuch an Univerfal Commiffion, and the Spirit's immediat Infallible Diredion of the Exercife thereof, he will be a great Apollo indeed ; And if the thing be Impoffible, he muft acknow- ledge his Inference Futilous and unfound. Here it is pleafant to con- fider, how this Gentleman, in Impugning the Extraordinary Office of Apoftles, both with Refped to Miracles, and Extenfion of thetr Office, hath wounded his Caufe, and overthrown his own Principle, of making Bi- fnops the proper Succeffors of Apoftles. Before we heard him pleading, that the Gift of Miracles could be no Criterion of the Apoftolick Office, fmce Ordinary Church Officers had this Gift, yea, and, in the Judge- ment of the Prefacer, the People alio in the beginning of the Goipel, according to the Prophecy Jod 2. . And here he will have the Umver- falicy of the Apoftles Commiffion /•• teach all Nations to be no iucn Cri- terion neither, but that u is competent to Minifters or Paftors, who in this Re^ea, are Succeffors of Apoftles in that Branch of their Office, the Reftraint to a particular Flock or Poft; being, according to him5 not Effential to Ordination, or the Nature of the Minifterial Office, but for maintaining Oufcr. To which Oxder, he will, no doubt, ackno w- Chap. V. Queries to the Vmbyteri&ns 0/SCOTLAND. \}f ledge Bifhops to be Subject, as well as P'aftors, and fix'd to their Pofts, as well as they. Whence it neceffarily follows, that, according to his Principles, Paftors are fuch Univerfal Officers as ApofHes, andconfe- quenly> in the premis'd great Commiflion, their SucceiTbrs. "Tiscer- tain, that, in the Scope and Series of his Querie, he afferts the premis'd Extenfion, as his Principle, as well as a Principle of Presbyterians. VI. Querie, Seeing it is evident from what has been already [aid of Chips Vromife, To be with bis Apoftles to the end of the World, that it belongs alfo to the nyvpwi, the Rukrs of the Chriflian Church, he de fires to know, from clear Scripture, what fart of the ApoHoliek Office does not appertain to their Succejjors ? Or what part of it is excluded from a (hare of this Prcmije, which reaches to the end of the World ? 'Tisftrange, that this Gentleman, who pretends to have Read the Author's Plea for Presbyterian Go- vernment, whom he mentions, and Commentators upon that Text, mould propofe fuch a Scruple, ordefire clear Scripture for that, where- in the Scripture is fo very clear and exprefs. He has been often told, and in this all Orthodox Divines are confentient, that the Apoftolick Office properly and formally did confift in this, That by immediat Commiflion from our Lord, they were conftituted Founders of the Ghriftian Church, and as his Mouth and infallible Oracles, Authorised to deliver his Mind, to appoint the whole Scheme of the New Tefta* ment Ordinances, and to be infallible Infpe&ors of. both Minifters and Members of the whole Church, with (uch extraordinary Gifts and miraculous Induements, both with refped to the Confirmation of Do&rine* and rebuking of the Obftinat, as is above expreffed. In all which the Scripture is very clear. The Apoft!eP*«/ /hews, that he (confequently other Apoftles ) was neither an Apo\\le cf Mm, nor hy Man, Gal. r, I. and verf. 12. That he receivd not the Gofpel which he Treached of Man, neither was taught it, but by the Revelation of Je fits Chrift. Now here is one clear Scripture for an immediat Miffion to the Apo- ftolick Office, excluding all Church Judicatories, or interp&fiog of the : Church Repreft-ntaave for his Ordination : Here is alfo a clear Scrip- ture for an immediat Revelation of theDoftrine by Jefus -Chrift himfeif, proving3 confequently, the Sph it's infallible Direction in delivering it9? which he muft needs acknowledge the Priviledge of all the other Apoftles : So that, thefe two parts of the Apoftoiiek Office, he muft confefs- are competent to no Succeflbrs. And as for tne Extent and Gonfeqiiemial Priviledges mentioned, befides our Lord's exprefs Comrrjilfion, to Difciple all Nations, and to Form them imo Churches which clearly bears this Conclu lion, we find it further fortified oy that clear Text, Rm, 1, 5, wherej afoer the Ap.eftie has, to this Scope, de-: figned' 1 1 8 . . A Review and Conjtderdtlon of the Chap. V. figned himf*lf a Servant ofjtfus Chrifl, Called to be an Aptfle ( I hope he Will acknow dge, immediately called, as the other Apofiles^), he adds, v. $-. By -whomvre 6 we received Grace and Apofihfbip for Obedience to the Faith a- tnong aU Naiions.HQtQ fuch an Immediate C«//,and Infallible Univer(al Lega- tion afferted. and in order to the end premifed, as doth clearly and in- fallibly exclude Succeffors to this Of free, in a proper formal Senfe, and the Priviiedges thereof, and, confequenrly, from its Continuance to the End, upon the Promife mentioned. That the Promife it [ure to the €hurch, as long as the Ghurcb continues on Earth, our Querift tells us, hthe Unanimousju dement of Commentators'. And he might alfo have feen in Com* mentators, as the Neceflity of a ftanding Gofpel Miniftry,and all necef-^ firy Church'Offices and Ordinances for the Chmches Edification here afferted, as made Cure in this Promife, fo, the premifed Extraordinary Priviiedges, proper and peculiar to Apofiles, excluded by them, fiom fuch a Continuance to the End, as is afcribsd to the neceffiry OfficerSund Ordinances inftanced. I would ask this Querift, whether this Pro- mife, to be with the ApofiUs to the end cf the World, will neceffarily infer, that there mud be fuch Mefiengers, as have Immediate Commiflion from Chrift, by no Intervention of Church Judicatories, and are fur> je<5t to none in the Exercife of their Office, and who are Taught the Gofpsl by Immediate Revelation, without all Means and Inftru&ion of Men, with Infallibility in Teaching, and a Miraculous power and Affiftance to Confirm their Doctrine ; Whether, I fay, the Promife will include fuch'ftanding Officers to the end of the World * If he af- fert this, be will expofe himfelf to allien of commoa Senfe : If he affert, there are not, nor can be fuch Officers exiitent, then he muft, as weH as we, limit the Promife to Ordinary Succeffors, and of a ftand- ing-NecefTity. Me tells us, If Presbyterians affirm, that the end of the World refers to the laft Period of the Affiles Lives,, and that he had no other Apojlles, beftJes them, to be with, fuch a Glofs overthrows the Text. I Anfwer, He fhou!d have know"rf, that Presbyterians, with all Orthodox Commentators, do affirm, that the Promife reaches to the end of the World, with refped: to the Apoftles Succeffors in an ordinary ftanding Miniftry, for difpen- fing of Gofpel O finances, Word, Sacrament, and Church-Govern* ment : Notwithstanding whereof, they do ftill affert, that the Pro- mife, with refpecl: to the Apoftolick Office, formally as fuch, and the Exercife of that Extraordinary Miniftry committed to them, reached to the end of their Lives, and no further,* fince this Office, confidered in a formal Senfe, was to die with their Perfons. ' So that, they do di- ftioguifh Succeffors of Apoflks jn general, or in, a Gofpel Miniftry fimply, and Chap. V. Queries to the Presbyterians of SCOTLAND. j \g and Succefforsrto the Ap°jl*lat as fuch, or in' a proper formal Senfe. This Glofs is fo far from deftroying the Text, that if rather clears it : And our Querift's Sarcafm.and Mock he would caft upon lis, anent the Glofs of Orleance, is eafily retorted upon himfelf, which I prove thus: That Glofs of any Text, which concradi&s other plain Texts of Scripture, is abfurd, and tends to overthrow the Text, becaufe crofs to the Scrip- tures Truth and HarwQvyt thefe two being inseparably conjoyned i But, the Queries Glofs concerning the landing Office of Apofloht to the end of the World, as imported in that Promife, is crofs to other Scriptures* The Minor I prove thus : That which is crofs to otherScripture Ac- counts of the A poftolick Office, is crofs to other Scriptures; But the premifed Glofs is fuch, as is evident from what is faid ,• Ergof &c. Finally, 'tis noticeable, that our Querifr, in his Z sal for Prelacy', will needs Idenifie the Sytpmi, the Rulers mentioned in Scirxure, with the Bifhops of theChriflian Lhttrch j Whereas, the Terms of Rulers, Governours Ovtrfetrs. Bijhops, are found clearly applyed to Paftors or Presbyters whereof the Author of the Plea, whom he mentions, exhibites feveral clear Inftances, which our Superficial Que rift, in this, as in other Points, it feems, has not read nor considered. VII. Query, Whether it be credible, that Paul aUed as a Jingle Per fon at the Ordination of Timothy , and not as an Ap$h\ Or, that he laid ajide his Apoftlcfbip, and put himfelf on a level with mcer Presbjters, to give an Example of Parity, and to Jhew after- Ages the Authority of Presbyters ailing in Parity, without any *f*?of, or Prejident in Conferring Orders ? Anfwer : *Tis evident, in the Mould ot this. ,Qo.ery, when "he makes one and the fame, Paul'/ atling as a /ingkfresbyter irt tfcfh Ordination, and laying ajide his ApoHlefinp, our Queriif neither underftands himfelf, nor the Point he fpeaks of: For, fuppofe our Principle to hole? good, that there was here a Presbytery on a Level, arid the Apoftle heW prefrding, to give- an Example of Presbyterian Parity, and'the Presbytery's Authority in Or- dination, What Man of common Senfe would infer, that the ApofUs upon this Ground, l 4> s- without their Votes or Confent *>'. What he adds in this Query, fcil. If this was Paul'* Prance, fuppefing he came where there was fuch a Colledge of Presbyters, without one over them, difcover* further his Ignorance of the Cafe, and of our Principles, in that he fup~pofes us to hold, the Colledge of Ptesbyters, or Pres- byterian Meetiiigs, can be without a Prefkbnt ,• Whereat we hold the Office of a Prefident, Ordinis Gaujd, to be a nectflary Constituent in all •Judicatories, confequently Church Judicatories : Oi if, by this Ex- preflton, without one over them, he intend the ' Epitcopal *f «r«; oi hfc Muu d he begs the Queftion; in fuppoung, that, fometimes, the Col- ledge of Presbyters, while Paul and other Apoitles were overfeeing thsm, Chap. V. Queries to the Vreshyferum of SCOTLAND. 12 1 them, had fuch a ?refident. "' He defires plain Scripture Proofs from Afar* tors.of (ucbPoJitions, as above expreffed. As for his miftakenPofitions, we are notconcerned to offer a Scripture Proof : But for the College of Presbyrers, or Paftors acting in Parity in Judicial Procedures, the Au* thor of the Plea exhibited to him clear Proofs, both from the Authori- tative Denomination of Paftors, who are termed Rulers, Govemours, Overfeers, Bijhops ; as likewife from this Ground, that they are found placed Church by Church, in order to the Government thereof: And, in Confequence hereof, the Exercife of their joynt Authority in Go- vernment ftands clearly Exemplified and held out, .both in fuch Scrip- tures, as in joyn their joynt Authority and Exercife of Power, and the Feoples Subjection and Obedience accordingly ,• as is likewife in the Scripture Inftance of the Apoftle Paul's in joyning the higheft Jurildi&i- onal A& of Excommunication to the Presbyters or Paftors of Corinth, and in this* as in the other Inftances, without the leaft hint of any Superintending Superior Officers in thefe joynt Jurildi&ional Ads. To which may be added the Apoftle Paul's Injoyning, in his laft Fare- well to the Church of Epbejtts, an Epifcopal Infpe&ion and Authority to the Paftors or Presbyters thereof, leconded by a like Command of the Apoftle Peter, exclufive of the fame premifed Epifcopal Superinten- dency over thefe Elders or Paftors, whom he exhorts to Feed and Rule the Flock joyncly, with a joynt Collegiat Epifcopal Infpeetion over the fame, A&. 20. 28. 1 Pet. 5-. 2,3. * See mcr Bl- and this exprelly exclufive of an Epifcopal Lordfhip of M &c. Pare 2, any one^over the reft. Thefe Scripture Inftances of Pa- **j- "l v8^^ ftors Joynt Equal Authority in Government are fo clear, Pag[ J0)' 5I, & that our Querift can defiderat no clearer Proof than ahbi\ has been already exhibited *. VIII. Query, Whether the Presbytery, •which Paul mentions, as concerned in Timothy '* Ordination, confijkd of mere Presbyttn? Or, if the Per/ens, •who accompanied Paul in his Return from Macedonia, through Afia, and whoje Names we find, Ad. 20. 4. were mere Presbyters} Aniwer: .What he means by mere Presbyters, is not (o clear ; If he means Paftors Labour-] ing in the Word and Dottrine, (uch as ?he Apoftles Conftituted in every Church which they planted,we fay, It did confift of (uch Preibytmt and the Author, whom he pretends to have read, gave him a full Account of the Senfe of Proteftant Divines to this * See hutM-. purpofe *, who do clear this Matter from the Scope £& St*\/^£' and Contexture. That the Presbytery mentioned did $'6) % confilihof fuch Officers, may be further made appear, by reflecting upon the Grounds exhibited; /«/, the Apoftolical Com- q mands 122 have, without all perad- venture, Authority in Admitting of Officers : But fuch Authority is afcribed to Paftors or Presbyters,* Er%o, &c. Thofe who have EfTential Intereft in the Exercifeof the Churches Dogmaticky Critical, and DiataBick Jutboritys and are found therein concerned, even in Affociation with Apoftles, muft needs be fuppofed to have an 7»re- rcft and Authority in this Jurifdi&ional Ad of Timothy's Ordination, which is included therein : But Pa (tors, or Presbyters, are found clothed with this EfTential power and intereft above expreffed, as is evident, Ac~t,i$. Er- go, &c. And, in a Word, if Presbyters., thus Authorifed be found in Apoftolick Churches, fuch as Corinth, Ephe\ fame Identity of fHS> &c. then certainly this Presbytery muft be Fup- th«0 icei con- p0fe£j 0f fucn a Nature, as were others of a like Juris- dictional Power. The Author of the Jus Divin. Regim, Eccl. has made the firft evidently appear f. ilyy That- the Word here imports a Confiihrial Juridical Meeting, is made good from Parallels, and cannot be fuppofed to import the Office, as Tome have fuggefted; fo that there is a joynt Jurildi&ional Power alcribed to the Col- legiate Meeting as fuch, which clearly excludes all pre- latical Incroachments, or Singular Authority and Super- eminent Power, there being no Hint of any peculiar In-' tereft, beyond a Community, afcribed to any one Member of the Meeting $ iotbat {he, joy nt JuriJdi$o»al Authority of the Judicatory is clearly^ * See Dr. Bur- net, 4. Confe- rence, Pag. 310. with Page 3 3 *• wherein ths Bi • fhop and Prgs- byter are ac- knowledg'd to be the fame Of- fice Jur? Divino, and that fuch as 2re Impower'd for the SMramen- talJBitHf, a'e of the highefl Office in the Church. Bi- fhop Jewell a. gain ft Harding, V*g in- Craw OT*'',cicedby S'.il- linu'flut, hen ?ag. 392. Dr. M'rton, jtfol. CathoU Lib. I, Pag. '18,119, &c. afftrc the fequenc'ly this E- qual Intereft in theHigheftAfts ©f the Power of CWer.whieh will EiecefTiri'y infer ihefame Intereft in the ?otver of $urifd'ftion. Chap. V. Ojfoerht to tfo Vmbytmmi > of SCOTLAND. 123 clearly^nTerted. Tho' even &?aul wasprefent,and impofed Hands, fdl. with a fpecial refpeft to the Gifts, at is exprefly afferted, yet the Or- dination it felf, and theJurifdicVional Authority therein Exerced, is di- ftinguiftied i rom this, and afcribed to the Presbytery, or Gonfiftorial Meeting, as fuch. Our Qucrift further inquires, If the Perfons accompanying Paul, in hit Return from Macedonia, through Afia, whofe Namei we find, Ad. 20. 4. were mere "Presbyters, Timothy being one of them, and / ome , not without rea- [on, fuppofe, that Paul Ordained Timothy with their Concurrence and Gonfent. I Anfwer, whether they were mere Presbyters, or not, is nothing to the point, unlefs he could make it appear, that they were Members of this Confijlorial Meeting, whereof there is no fhaddow of proof offered from the Text, nor can be ,♦ And what Accounts are elfewhere given of them, points at their ordinary Office as Pallors, if we except Timo- thy, who is called Evangeliji. For Sopater, he is thought to be that So- fipater, Rom. 16. 21. fjebicus is called a beloved Brother and Faithful in the Lord, Epht 6. 21. ( a Defignation proper to the Faithful Paftor) a Beloved Brother, Faithful Mini/if r and Fellow -Servant in the Lord, £of. 4.7. and mentioned as fen t to Epbefus, 2 Jim. 4. 12. Trophimus is called an Ephef:an} and mentioned as with Paul at Jerufalem, Aft. 21. 29. men- tioned as left fick at Miletus, 2 Tim. 4. 20. Thefe perfons are here ho- nourably mentioned for their Faithful Attendance on the Apoftle, but, that they were Perfons of Extraordinary Character, has no fhad- dow of proof, far lefs, that they were Members Conftituent of this Presbytery 1 And tho* this were fuppofed, it can nothing invalidate the proof of this Presbyteries Authority upon the Ground already af- figned, to whom, as a Collegiate Meeting and Presbytery, this Jurif- di&ional A& is afcribed. For what he talks of their mere Sonant and Concurrence, therein repeating the old Epifcopal Cant anent Paul's fole Authority herein, exchafiveof that of the Presbytery, he has been told by the Author of the Plea, that Impofition of Hands is an Authoritative Jurifdi&ional Ad, and Infallible Badge of Authoritative Blefling, and therefore cannot import a mere Confent, or 'Confentient Concurrence* which is proper to the People, who can have no Intereft in laying on Hands. The Author mentioned fortified this by the Judgment of Epis- copalians themfetves, particularly Dr. Forbes, in his Irenicum. Our Qaenft tells us next, It could be no Presbytery .Afting in Parity, if Paul was one of the Number, unlefs it was a Colltge of Aptfiles. This Eva- fion hemight have found atfo remov'd by the Author of the Plea, from this Principle, that the prefence of Paul, tho' fuppofed, rather Con- firms than Invalidates the Presbyteries Authority and Acting in Parity,-. Q i and 124 ^ #«*«* dtfd CovfiderAthn opht Chap. V. and that npon thefe Grounds: i.- Becaufe the Ordination it felf afcrib- ed to the Presbytery in the Texts collated,is diftinguifhed From the lay- ing onof Paul's hands, and from the Gifts and Prophecy fimp'y confidered, and pointed at as a Priviledge diftincT: therefrom IS* * See Hler. Neglct not the Gift,, faith the Apoft!e, given thee by Pro- Bifhop &CC Part pbejie, with the Laying on of the Hands of the Presbytery. So i. P. 60. that, by Paul's Declarator, the Presbyteries joy ntjurif- diaional Authority, and confequenriy the Equal Inte- reftof all Members, as a Presbvterv, in this Ordination, is aflferted. 2lr Becaute PWsprefence, or laying on of Hands, doth not enhance or exclude the Presbyteries Authoritative. Impofnion of Hands, the acknowledged, Badge of the Ordaining Power: So that upon both Grounds, there is here an Example of a Presbyteries Ading in Parity fuppofing ftill the ApoOle Paul's ftanding Extraordinary Ornce in this Inftance, and hisPrefence and Concurrence Cumulative unto, not Privative of, the Presbyteries Inrrrnfkk Authority here afferted. Our Querift will not have it A Presbytery ailing in Parity, unless it was a College of Apples. Upon this Suggeftion the Author *Hier Bi(hop, of the Plea plied his Fellows, and confequently him- &c.part.i-par. fclf, with this Querie *> That> if f°> ,b°W eoulit*?A!°(tl? 6: 62 afcribt the conferring of Gifts to the laying on of bis bands (olely excluding his Fellow- Apples, whofe equal Intertfi and 'Authority herein none will call in queftion ? For his next Objedion, fto mere Presbyters could lay on hands upon an Evangeiift t The Author he men- tions told him, " That a Presbytery with the- -great Apoftleor the • Gentiles, might ordain an Evangeiift. and yet the Presbyteries Au- « thority no whit thereby Infringed* but rather Strengthned, (nice ■ Paul, affdmins their Authoritative Concurrence, did, a fortiori , Chew, 8 that much more the Power of Ordination is their Effential Priviledge, * c with Refped to Ordinary Officers, when the Office *See Hier Bi- c of Apoftles and Evangelifts is ceas'd *. Befides that top &c. Part, fome would be apt to tell him, that, tho Timothy, m 1 fit Refped of his Extraordinary Office of Vifiting and Watering Churches upon the Apoftles Direction, was Major Singulis, above any fingle Paftdr, yet he might be Minor Urn- vtrfx, and this Judicatorie and Church Reprefentative of an higher Sphere and Authority: For, in Churches confotuttd Timothy could not Ordain alone, nor perform other Jurifdidional Ads excluding the Churches fixM Paftors, and in that relped appears InFenour. Ina Author of the Plea here pos'd him and his Fellows, By what Authori- ty- did the Prophets or Paftors at Antkcb, even admitting lome ot them were Gliap. V. Qumei id the Vreslyttrum of SCOTLAND. 125 were Extraordinory Prophets, lay hands upon the great Apoftle of the Gentiles, PW> Our (juerift doth further Pofe us with this Queftion, If Presbyteries, have power to Ordain Evangelist, why do they not fend out fuch Evangelifts to the unconverted Nations ? I Anfwer, he has not yet prov'd from this Text, that there is a Handing Office of Evangelifts, andconfequently there is no Ground for to fend fuch out in his Senfe, if the Office is ceas'd : And for.the Presbyterie's Inrertft in this Ordination,it is Anfwered already. We affirm the Evangelift's Office, properly taken, and in the Senfe of Proteftant Divines, fuppefes the Exigence of the Apoftolat ,• For from Apoftles they had their Gommiflion and Inftructions to the Churches, and- to them they were accountable. 2/y, Since the EvangelifVs Office, according to him, is a. (landing Office, and refpe£ts a preaching to In- , fidels, why do not Prelats and Arch-Prelats, fend out fuch Officers, with fuch a Truft and Authority, to convert Jews and Mahometans ? Why do not thefe Succedaneous Apoflles profecute this Apoftolick Work? We hear of no fuch Commiffions given by thefe Fathers. If they have this Power, as his Principles oblige him to hold, why is it not redue'd into Ad? He knows the Maxim, fruHra eft potent ia0 &c. Let him Shield himfelf agsinfr. this Retortion. ;/;, What if it be faid, that Timothy receiv'd a mere Presbyterat by his Ordina- tion, as Honnieman g'ofles the Text f, Negletl not the \ Survey J art. Gift given thee by laying on of hand;, whereby thou was Or- - 2. f> 217* 2.1^. dairid, or made a Presbyter, and that he was thereafter aflum'd to the Evangeliflick Ofilce, as Philip who was at firft only or-, dain'd a Deacon, and thereafter made Evangelift (asCalvin with othec Judicious Divines underftand that PaiTage of ABs 21. 8.)? Were this iuppos'd, our QueFift is foon thus Nonplus'd with his frivolous Notion. 4fy, As for that Inftance wherewith he plies us, viz,. That no Order of Men can bejiow any Powers they have not them(elvesy uniefs they have it only to give away, as the Eletfors of the Empire, He could not readily couch in: fewer words greater Abfutdi'y. 1. Anv Order of Men may have that Radically, and in Refpect of Original Fountain Power y which they have not, inrefpea of the Formal, Le^al Perjonal Exerci(e) And thus the Ele- ctors confKtute the Emperor, who being conithuted, has a Perfbnal Le- gal Authority and Exercife, which they have not in this Cafe. Thus the Army choofmg a General. ily; When he fays, that they have not this Fower themj elves, uniefs they have it only, to give away,! as the E/e&ors of the Empire, he underffands not that whereof he affirms; For the Original- Inherent Fountain Power, effential to the Community ^ can not be given away, but is Hill the fame3. clfe it could never be again-put furth in • another" *126" A Revkw and Confederation of the Chap. V another Election. Can a Caufe in putting forth itsGaufality in the Production of its proper ErTedt, ceafe to be a Caufe ? This is fure as , Abfurd as what our Qaerift (uggefts of the Effcd. exceeding its Caufe. And he tells us, *tis an undoubted Maxim, Frufha ijl potentia qua pton reducitur in Actum ; I (hould think he had better exprefs'd it, Qu the Apoftle's Prefence and laying on Hands, together 6789 io- with the Presbyterv at limethh\ Ordination, { was, in ' this cafe, as in the other, a Corroborating Seal of the Presbyterie's incrinfick Authority in this matter, but no whic deroga- tory thereunto. So thit to our Querift's next Queftion, If Paul s hying an Handi with the Pmbpery bj 0 proof that the Presbytery mid 0> the Circumftances of the Context are clear, that he was with Paul, when he gave that Charge to thefe Elders : So that, neither Conclufton, of his not being a Bifoop, or his not being with pmuI, needs be inferred from the Denomination of Elders given to thefc Officers, afc Our Inference from th» charge, fcil. 7hat Timothy was not a Bijhop, and, in fpecial, over the : Church of Epbefus ( for that's the Queftion ) is from clear grounds made good by ? Presbyterian Divines, and have been exhibited at length *T*tt 2. by the Author of the Vlea ft which if he had, as he pre- Chap. 2. f. tends, Read and Confidered, it might have fared him the , , u. Labour of thefe idle Queries. The Reafons are, 1. Thefe 33,?4 Elders are clearly fuppofed Officers, having all of them a Relation to that Church. 2/,, They have a joynt Epifcopal Infpe- aion injoyned them, as the Bilhops and Overfeers thereof, inftituted by fhcHolyLofti Thus Mm*** %%> Thi^mmandandlnjundion Chap. VI. Queries to the VreshyterUh ^/SCOTLAND. 13 1 was in prefence of Timothy, without the leaft hint of any Intereft he had in them, or Infpe&ion over them3as their Bi&op, or of any Duty they did owe to him, as in that Capacity ,• Which no Man of common Senfe can imagine the Apoftie would in this cafe have omitted: Efpe- cially, fince, in the Fourth place, this was ?auh laft and farewell Charge : All which doth neceifarily fuppofe this Church (landing thus Governed, and thefe Officers Succeeding the Apoftolate in what was neceffary for the prefervation thereof. To which may be added, thac the hazard Paul warns them of, touching Error and Schifm *, has no other Remedy by him oppofed there- * Acts 20. unto, than the fame Officers or Bifhops ftanding Infpe&i- 29, 30. on, and joint faithful performance of Duty,in Feeding and Ruling that Church t. As likewife, that what is in joy- f Com 'pari ned them is fully correfpondenc to the fame Office and Ver.z&iy* Duty aferibed to Paftors elfewhere : Thus by the fame 30, 31,52. Apoftie, 1 The/, j. 12. Heb. 13. 17. Thus by the Apoftie Peter, 1 Pet. f . 2, 3, The Author of the Plea, whom he mentions, had •alio told him, that, by confequence, the Angel of the Church ofEphefus appears, upon this ground, to be taken in a Gollefiive Senfe, not for a Jtngle Bifhop, with fuch Power as is afferted by y See Higr Epifcopalians ,• Elfe there were no confiftency of that Biflup. 1 pari. paiTage with this Text, but a palpable Contradiction c&. ^.p. 79. thereunto ||. To return to our Querift, what pitiful Triffling doth he difcover, in fuppofing, That we exclude Timothy'* Epifcopacy, becaufe thefe Officers are termed Elders • The Author mentioned having offered to him the preceeding Grounds, and told him,that they are not only called Elders, but in joy ned a joynt Epijcopal Power and Authority over that Church, VKi9%:*uf with *oi[jLa,miv : So that he needs not, for Anfwer to his own fham Argument, tell us, that Apsfths are called Eiders and Deacons, 'and that the higher Order includes the Subordinate. But thefe Elders being alfo owned as fe-t up by the Hdy Gboft over this Church, and having an Epifco- fal Authority dearly aferibed to them, he muft be interrogated, where the Lower, Subordinate, Inferiour Older ( to ufe his Term ) includes the Superior and Higher? And* zty, Where finds he any that have drawn an Argument from the meei Denomination of Elders to exclude Timothy s Epifcopacy, without refpect to the premifed Grounds affigned in the Context ? For what he adds, That this is fufficient to baffle our Argument, •who[e Strength lies in the different Acceptation of one Word, fcil. Elder ; He has therein baffled, not the Presbyterians Argument, but, his own • Reputation, and expofed his Ignorance* of this Controvcrfie, yea and R 2 of 1 39 A Review md Conf&tmhn of the Chap. VL of that Authors Work he pretends to Aniwer. He tells us, that the Word Elder denotes Vrefeclure ; he fliould have faid rather the Word Bijhtp, the Greek Term *fuCv7if& being a Comparative of «psf£tft importing a Senior in Age or Office, and, with Beda, Sapientia m^turi- tatem. Whether it was in the 2d or 3d Centuries apply ed to Vreibytert hifonft from Bifkops, and Subject to them, is nothing to the purpofe ; Our Queftion here beiig, how the Term is to be underftood in Scrip- ture Language and Acceptation. But our Quei ift will hint another Objection, viz, lhat Paul Names not Timothy particularly in his Exhortation. We fayi he is Named neither particularly nor generally, directly nor indirectly in this Ex- hortation. But what Anfwers he to this Objection, Why, It cannot be inferred he was not there, hecaufe not Named, feing none of the reft are par- ticularly Named, but included in the general Compellation. The Term There feems obfcureas is faid : If he mean, that he was not with Paul when he gave this Exhortation, the Context is clear againft him, which {hews, that Timothy, with others, came with the Apoftle into Afia, and was one of that Society and Company mentioned all along as attending, him. If by there he mean Epheftis ; We affert, in this Senfe he was not there, being with PWon his Journey when he came to Miletus; And there is not the ieaft (hadowof Argument can be drawn from the Context, that he was at Ephefus, or fent for with other Elders. As for his not being Named particularly in the Exhortation to the Elders, 'tis an Argument with more Nerves than this Querift can graple with, and the Author of that Plea, which he pretends to have Read, gave him an account thereof, and the Senfe of theXearned Antonius * See Part 2. Saded, and other Proteftant Divines upon that Paflage *. chap. *. p*g. 1 fjjajj here only refume what Sadeel offers. When was Com Irsd with t^>ere ever a Seafm f° !uita^ei and fit to point at the Duty of V*g*l\' "U tfo* fuppo/ed Bifhop towards his Viocefe, and of the P a/lor s or Elders towards him, than when \>iu\gave his la ft Exhortation , Mfcourfing fo Divinely, and with ' fuch Weight and Zeal anent the cafe and hazard of the Flock, and their Duty thereanent, who were the Holy Ghcfis Ovtrfeers, intruded with the Care thereof? From this judicious Argument, drawn from the Context, 'tis evident, that upon our Querift's and his Fellows Hypothecs, the Apoftle in this cafe was not only concerned particularly to Name him, but to have injoyned the peculiar Duties of his eminent Station ; So that they charge upon the Apoftle an un- faithful deficiency in this Omiffion. Our Querift tells us further, That none pre fent are Named particularly, but included in the general Compcfotion, Very true ; Becaufe, as he will - eafily Ghap. VI. Queries to the Presbyterians ^/SCOTLAND. igi" eafily acknowledge, they were all on a level, and equally concerned in the Duties Exhorted to ,• But fo was not timothy, according to his Hypothec's. They are all Named Bifhopsfet up by the Holy Gboft • But' I pray, is not timothy, in his Senfe and Pleading, the only proper fupereminent Bifoop, having a (landing Epijcopsl Authority over them, to whom they were in fuch manner Subject,' that the Epifcopal Infpe! flion over that Church was properly and folelx Timothy's Prerogative upon whom all thefe Elders had a precarious Dependence, and a derived Miniftery from him, as their Head and Lord, the whole Autho- rity as to Ordination and Jurifdi&ion being Properly, Inherently, and Originally his ? Yea, doth not our Gentleman,in the III Querie,plead for the Bijhops Tower Jo proper to him, that any Delegation thereof to Presby- ters it at his Option as to its time and nature ? Now, upon this Ground and Principle, what greater Negligence, abfurd Inconfideratnefs, and Self-contradi&ing Inadvertency can readily be imagined, than that which he, and his Fellows, impute to the Holy Apoftle, as is faid in giving the Name of Bijhops, yea and injoyning the intire Epifcopal Infyeftion over that Church, with all Authority included therein, to the Pallors and Miniftcrs thereof, before their Bifliop's Face, never own- ing him in the thing, no more than *f not there at all, or as no fuch Relation were exiftent, to whom, according to this Opinion, the Ex- hortation ought to have been principally Dire#ed ? And if as our Querift would fuppofe, he was with thefe Elders, and the Perfon principally concerned in thefe Duties, what account can eur Querift or any rational Man give of this ahum filentium, this deep filence as to him, in this only and proper Seafon of fuch a Farewell War- ning. As for his other Evafions, they are as infigniflcant. It may be pre- fumed, faith he, Timothy was Inftrufted in all parts of his Office by Word of Month. But, I pray, were not the Elders thus alfo Inftrudted ? Or will he fay, that when the Apoftles ordained Elders Church by Church' they Inftru&ed them not in the Nature and Duties of their Office ? Yet they are here again by the Apoftle reminded thereof in this Jafi parting Vifire ; And why not alfo Timothy of his Duty at this folemn Seafon i Was lie of fuch Pop of one particular Ghurcb I It may leem ftrange, Chap. VI. Queries to the Vreshyterum of SCOTLAND. 135 that our. Querift prefents this, upon pretended Reading the Book he mentions, wherein it is fully Anfwered to Dr. Monro , making the fame Inquiry *. This Gentleman and he * See Part are therein told, 1. That it cannot be proved, that 2. cb. 4. ?ag% any fixed to a particular Station, had fuch a Planetary 120. Motion, and Tranfient Imployment, as that of timothy is proven to have been. ily. That neither can it be made appear, that either timothy or Titus, after this Imployment, did conftantly or ordina- rily return to Epbefus or Ov/e,and not to the places of the Apoftle's pre- fent Abode and Imployment. He has been told, that this infinuate An- fwir (confequently this Query ) is a Begging of theQueftion, fince all the Ground ofTimotbfs pretended Inftalment, as Birtiop of Epbefus^ is in the Charge given to him in the firft Epiftle, wherein this Tranfi- ent Imployment is clearly aflerted. The fame is made good with re* fped to Titus's pretended Epifcopacy in Crete, For what is pretended, in Illuftration hereof, anent fuch Travels of a Paftor, the Author told them *, " That the Simili- ' tude halts ; Since the Paflor's fixed Relation to his * lbida- * 'Charge is fuppofed and granted : But in the Cafe ' of the pretended Prelate 'tis begged^ 2/y, The Paflor's Ordinary Af- ' tendance upon his Charge, in Confequence of his Relation thereunto, c is alio fuppofed and granted : Whereas, in the Cafe of timothy and ' Titus f this fixed Inftalment, and ordinary Attendance thereupon, is 1 begged.not proved,anOccafional Tranfient MiniOery and Imployment ' being clearly aflerted in the Text ; So that this Tranfient Unfixed ' Miniftery appears to have been the Ordinary Imployment and Mini" 4 ftery both of Timothy and Titus, But our Querift asks, Wbut Argument can this be from fuch as afl'eri; there were no Divifion of dijiincl paroches or Diocefies till 260 Tears after C it $ fill Aq- fwer, The Argumentsor Anfwer appears to all considering Perfons very good,even upon this Suppofition,which needs not here be Icanned. The Author of the Plea told him, that Minifters having a Relation to apre's*' byterian Church, fuch as Corinth or Epbefus are proven to be, i. e. having diftind Congregations, who could not meet all Tn one place for Worfhip, but in feparat or diftind places, thefe Minifters ferving Indifcriminatim or per Vices thefe feveral Flocks, doth no whit impeach their fpecial fixed Relation to (uch a Church, within fuch a City or Precinct; As iuppoie the Minifters of Edinburgh did ferveall the Con- gregations by Turns, or fodifcriminatim, this doth no whit impeach their ipeciai Paftoral Relation to the Church in that City: And the Cafe is the fame, fuppofing two or more Pallors officiating, in one Con* gregution. ,«5 A Review and C en Ji deration of the Chap. VI. eregation. For what he adds, that the Conceffion mentioned makes equal- ly for Diocefan, as for ?aruhial Divifions ; when he fhall prove, that Diocefan Divifions have fuch a Refpedt and Subferviency to Presbyterial Unity, or the Unity and Edification of the Church, according to the Gofpel Rules exhibited in the New Teftament, as the Parochial, his Confequence (hall be admitted ; But, till .this be proved, which will be ad Zalendas Graces, his Inference muft Hand among the reft of his abfurd Conclufions. III. Query. Whether a Biftop, while at a Distance from his Varocb^ or Viocefs ( tbefe being indifferently ujedin the fir (I Ages of Chriflianity ), may not delegate fome farts of his Epif copal Power and jurifditfion to his Vresb^ters, for as long time as he may fee it necefiary or convenient ? Anfwer. His Que- ry is defubjetfo non fupponente. We deny any fuch Diocefan Prelat's Of- fice, or his Authority ; And thus the Query is palpably Futilous : For, what the Diocefan Preiat doth, or may do, according to Prelatical Principles or Conftitutions, is not the Queftion; But, whether that Office it felf, or fuppofed Deputation, is warranted by the Scripture Rules, *in point of Church Government. 2ly, If the P*w£ and Viocefs were all one, in the Senfe and Language of the firft Ages, when Churches came to be divided, either, in their Senfe and Defign, every Vajior, within his Precintf, was the Diocefan *Bijhopt (tending in fuch Relation to his Flock, and this in Remembrance of the Paftoral Office* exprefled in Scripture by the Divine Bijhcp ; Or elle the BiuSops of the Diocefan Churches were to perform immediately all Minifterial Duties to them, as the Paftor to his Flock, fince, otherwife, there could be no Ground of this Nominal Identity of the Name and Office imported in thefe Terms of Parocb and Diocefs. And, in either Cafe, there could, in the Senfe of thefe Dividers, be no Deputation of the Biflrop's Jurifdi&ion toPresbyters,more than that of thePaftors to other Subftitutes. ;!y,Tht Deputation of any piece of that Authority to Subftitutes, which Chrift has given to Church Officers, is denyed by the Author he cites,- r. Becaufe fuch to whom God has given the Power or Office, he has alio commanded and injoyned to them the Exercije there$ft Pallors are com- manded to exercife all their Paftoral Authority given them of God, as they (ball anfwer to him, this being the Talent whereof they are to give an Account, a/y, There can be no Deputation of the Work, to which a Man is called, to Subftitute or Suffragan Officers, becauleGod intrufts no Man with any piece of Stewardlhip in his Family, but what he muft overfee and execute immediatly by himfelf, and is like- wife difpofed and enabled to manage, God conjoyning the Office, Gifts, and Gall together for every piece of his Work. All Church Of- ficers Chap. VJ, £*«•&* u thefrtsfyierim ^SCOTLAND. i37 ficers are commanded diligently ( and therefore perfomVy ) to attend up- on the Work and Duties entriifted to them, Rom. 12. 6, 7, 8. Whittaker rebukes the Popiih Adverfary, in Anfwering that Argument of his, touching the Bifhop's Qualification, that he he apt to leach, fell, that he Joes it by his Subflitutes, [hewing thtm, that God commands *U his Mini* flers, perfonaVy, to look to their Work, and not to commit it to Substitutes, be- caufe, otherwife, the pcrfonal Qualification, of being apt to Te^h* wre fuper- fluous, if importing ok If a deputed, not a per f anal Care. For what he adds of Cyprian his fuppofed Cha/li/ing of 'Presbyters, as he terms it, for Reconciling Lapfers without his Confent *, and, in his Exile .writing to them, to do his own and their Office ;ThQ * Ep\H% l o. Author, to whom he offers his Queries, made appear, §. 1, tag, 29. from fever al Paflages of Cyprian, that he neither could, &c. nor would take any Sole and Arbitrary Power andGc* vernment over Paftors and Presbyters. Let our Querift compare Epift% 6, 18, 28, 78. He alfo told him, that this fuppofed Power lets Cyprian "by the Ears with himfelf. But what is this to the poinfin Queftion, viz. Ike Scripture proof ( in which our Querift would feem very peremptory ) Of a warrantable Deputation of Church Officers Power ? Let us hear the Mould of this Gentleman's Conciufton or Argument, If Bijhops could delegate fome r*f their Communicable Towers to their Presbyters, for Exigency of their Flocks m their ab fence, why might not Apo files have done the fame ? A mighty proof againft Presbyterians, who difown the Office, and the Dele- gation, confequently, of Prelates pretended Power. Officers, fuch as Apoftles acknowledged on both fides of Divine Appointment, com- mitted fome piece of their Work to' Inferiour Officers, and fuch Offi- cers, as are, in themfeives, acknowledged alfo, utrinque, of a Divine Warrant and Signature ,• Ergo, Prelates, about whofe Office is the Queftion, have a Power to Subftimte Officers to fupply their Room, yea, and to give or fubftradb from thefe Subftitutes that Power, as they think fir. What Arguing, or rather Babling, is this? Again, Apoftles, by Divine Inftind and Approbation, intrufted or recommitted feveral parts of their Work to Under Subaltern Officers ; Ergo, Prelates, at their own Option or Judgment, may Subftitme fuch Officers. When our Querift (hall reconcile fuch Reafonings to Scripture, or the ac- knowledged Rules of Arguing, he {hall be acknowledged an Apollo for his Skill. Finally, he mould know, that even Apoftles had no Arbi- trary Power herein, but whatever Officers they committed any piece of their Work and Duties unto, were of Divine Appointment, as well as the Apoftles themfeives. Is not the Scripture exprefs, that all Subal- tern Officers were, by God, fet in the Church, and Chiifte Mediate** S tj T 59 rA Review ml Confttemhn »f th Chap. VI. ry Dotations thereunto, upon his Afcenfion imo Heaven, i Or.12.28, Eph. 4. 8, 9, 10, 1 1, 12 ? Nay, doth nor his Recommending Prefacer plead this ? So that all thtfe Officers are founded upon a Divine War- rant, which the Author he mentions did alfo plead. But let us hear another Conclufion and Proje&ion of our Querift, from the premifed Ground. Here it is, So Efijcopd Ms dene by a Com; fany of Presbyters ( whatever Inflames may be brought of fucb doings ) are not fufficient to prove any Intrinfic al, Epi [copal Powers to be lodged in them, for do. ing them in Opptfition U, or exclave of their Bifhops. Had he fai<3, in Op* fofitionto, o* ex Auftve of Apofiolick Warrant, ( Apoftles being the acknow- ledged Superiour Officers of a Divine Signature ) he had concluded right : But, for his Conclufion, anent the Unwarrantableneis of Pref- bycers or Paftors performing A<5ts of Government, by an Intrinfic Power, exciufive of Prelates, 'tis eafy to make the contrary appear a- gainft him. The Inftances mentioned by himfelf, of Presbyters Offi- cial and Affbciat Adings, and Exercife of Epifcopal Power, are de- clared by the Apoftles to be their Intrinfic Inherent Pnviledge ,• Ergo, in Oppjfition to, and exclufive of the Power of Prelates paramount thereunto. The Antecedent is made good, in the adduced Inftances, by that Author he names, foil, of the Church of Corinth, TheJJaUnica, Ephefus, &c. Wherein we find Paftors Intrinfic Authority and Go- vernment afferted, without any fuch precarious Dependence upon a Prelate, as he fuggefts. The Confequent is evident beyond all Con- tradiaion. And this removes that which he adds, in point of Excep- tion, in the clofe of this Query, Vnlefs, faith he, it could be proved, that they aSed without a Delegation, which being a Negative, 1 think will oe hard for the Abettors of Presbytery to prove, I anfwer, if, in the Inftances exhibited, this Inherent Intrinfic Authority be clear, fure the Nega- tive Inference, or Conclufion, is equally evident, viz,, that, m this Exercife of their Authority, there w4s m Delegation from Prelates } which clearly Raaes the Foundation of this Query, G H A PJ Chap. VII. HjterUi to the Pmtyterhw of SCOTLAND, 13$ CHAP. VII. Wherein are confidered the Queries of the VI, Chapter, intent theEx- tent and Limits ef the Apofiles Commiffion, the Office of the Se- the Minifterid Office from Apofiles, TH E Queries of this Chapter are entituled, Such as otcurrdtl the Author, upon his reading Mr. Forrefter's Plea for Presbytery; But upon a Review and comparing of Both, it will be E- vident to the Judicious and Impartial, that a futeable Read- ing and Underftanding of that Book he terms thus, would have fav'd him the Labour of thefe Queries, and cur'd his Ignorance and Miftakes he has therein difcovered. I. Querie, Whither Afofiles did not in a great Meafure, ly Confent} limit, and confine their Extenpve general Commiflion, Authorizing them to teach, and make Difciples of all Nations^ a voluntary Diviftm or Partition to each of them/elves, of particular Countries and People ? The Author he cites gave to this a clear Anfwer, That whatever ad jufted Meafures of their Tra- vels may be fuppos'd, yet by vertue of their Commiffion (which the ApeftTcs neither did, nor could, in the leaft, Limit or Retraft), their Authority reached all Churches planted, and to be planted, to which they were as Apoftles related, and Officers thereof in aelu exercito. He might have read alfo in the Author an Illuftration hereof by the Simi- litude of the Twelve Spies, whole Authority andCommifli n, immedi- ately anil formally, joyntly and apart, reach'd to a fearch of the whole Land ; Shewing, thac Dr. Monro had acknowledged, that the diftind; Extent of places to which they went, did not alter or change cheir RedoralPowerandJurifdi&ion, where- *SeeP*r* 2. with they were Indued *. He alfo exhibited to our page 1 11. Querift the Judgement of the Univerfity of Uyden, of % Saumer, and famous Proteltant Divines, to the fame Scope ,• And 111 two Points chetk'd what he here offers in this Querie, 1. That he wiU S 2 have t0 rA Review ini Confiderdtwt oftht - - Chap; VII. have the Apoftles to confine their extenfive Commiffwn, and thus charges them with Unfaithfulnefs in the Execution thereof; it being beyond all peradventure, that they had no more power to' confine, ihm to (hake off their Apoftoli'k Commijsion. zip In aflerting, that they betook them/elves to particular Provinces, he means, as nYd Officers thereof, which the Au- thor he mentions, mewed him by a large Harmonie ♦ See HUrsrthical of Proteftant Divines, was incorififtent with their Of- £?/»i' 'to'li'- 'fice> which' as is uriiverfa![y averted, was cap-' M™*3&*. ' able °* n0 Fixati°n t0 any particular Port or Watch- Tower *. For what he adds of Peters being the Apoflle of the Circumcifim, Paul »f the Gentiles or Uncit cumcifion ; 'Tis Anfwered, r. Whatever concerted Dtirifion there was this way f which notwithftanding is toto Ccelo dirTe* rent from that Fixation to particular Pofts, or as fix'd Officers thereof,, about which is our Queftion), we muft underftand, r. Thai it was by Divine Warrant: Compare Gal. 2.7. with Colo f. 1.2 $. And the Apo- ftles, who followed the Spirit's Conduct in all their Motions, muft ne« ceffarily be fuppos'd to be herein dire&ed by him. But next, 'tis cer- tain that this did not impeach their General Commifsion, or in the leaft ReHrili or Limit the fame, fo as to render them Apoftles peculiarly, or only, and in an exclufive fenfe, of (uch places ,• which may be prov'd from feveral Grounds, with refped: to the Apoftles inftanc'd. > That Ex- tenfive Commiffion of the Apoftle Paul, as it ftands delineated Acls 26. 16, .17, 18, compared with v. 19, 20. and with Rom. r. 16. where 'tis aflerted, That the Go/pel preach'd by him is the power of God to Salvation, to every one that believeth, to the Jew firji, and alfo to the Greek, makes this evident. Hence we find him, in the Exercife of his Office, offering the Gofpel Call firft to the Jews, as is evident in feveral Inftajic.es in the Acls of the Apoftles; And none will doubr,that herein he acted as an Apoflle, and under that Relation to them. As for his calling.himfelf the Apoflle of the Gentiles, we muft underftand it not Abfolutely, or in an exclufive Senfe, which would juftle with the Scripture Accounts of his Office premis'd, but in a Comparative Senfe, viz. That his Commiffion had a Special Refpeft unto them ,• which could not Reftrid: or. Encroach upon his General Apoftolhk Commifsion, which he aflfcrts to be the fame with the chiefeft Apoftles. And none will doubt, that upon the Apofiles Foundation* the whole Church, of Jews and Gentiles, is built, Eph. 2 20. When the Apoftle fays* tfor. 1. 17. thrift fent me not tobaptije, but to fmach the Gofpel, what Man of common Senfe will underftand this Ah* (olutdy, and in an exclufive Senfe, as if he had not been lent to Baptife as *el1 as c9 fr wch the. Gofpel ,• which were crofs tq the Apoftolick Com- rniffion, Chap. VII. gtterks to the VmbytevUmof SCOTLAND. 141 mifiion, Go teach all Natims, bapt\fin% them, &c. But we are to imder- ftand it in the Comparative SenfeaDove*exprefs'd, viz. That his Com- miffion was mainly to Preach the Gofpel. Hence ify, every Apoftle might exercife his Apoftolick Authority in everyplace, as oceaflon offe- red. even without a particular Call from the Church, thus Acts 10. Peter has a Special Diredion of the Spirit, to goto fafarea, where was a glorious Fruit among the Gentiles, tho' he ordinarily exercifed his A- poftlelhip with the Circfamcifion ; And Paul, Who chiefly exercifed his Apoftlefhip among the Gentiles, yet made the firft Gofpel-Offer* as is faid, to the Jews and Circumcifion, and this by vertue of his Apoftolick Office and Commiffion. Hence fa The Author of the Vka told him *, That no Apoftle wuld in an exclujive Stnfe * Pkrt. 2. Pag. be term'd Apoftle of any one Pojl, placing therein a Diftintli* 1 1 1. on betwixt them and the Ordinary Officers or paftors, ftandin% under fuch a fixd Relation to a particular Church. Not could any one A- poftle a*A97f/96T/r*5*j/v, or be guilty of Irregularity* ifexercifing the A- poftolick Office where other Apoftles were,- elfe the Apoftle Paul had been thus guilty ( upon the Partition inftanced by the Querift ) when exercifing his Office towards the Circumcifion, and Feter, when preach- ing to the Gentiles. But our Querift will not difown it, that the Cafe is far otherwife with' refpeeT: to Minifters fixd in their Pofts and Watch- Towers, and are tfeclard fubje<& to the Prophets, the Infpe&ion ofjudicatories, or fuch like Gofpel Rules relating to Minifterial and Church Union and Communion, in the very Nature/ Extent; and Exercife of their Office and Gifts, 1 Cor. 14. from v\ 27. toi/.34. But fo was no Apoftle, nor could be, II. Querie. Whether Paul was not to be blam'd for not mealing with anf Church ,which himfelf 'hud not planted? And} if his practice (iands not on Record^ to [hew Regularity and the due Obfervation of Order, agreed upon among A- pofiks, in Dividing the World into fo many Dijltitls ? Anfwer : To this the Author told him ( ubi fupra ) $ That no fuch pretended. Divifion into DiftriSs could Infringe, or Incroach upon the Apoftles General Com-4 miffion, expreffed Mattb. 28. a Retradion or Limitation whereof hone can make appear,fince their immediate Relation, in aclu exercito, to the whole Gaeholick Church, planted and to be planted, ftood intire, as founded upon this Commiffion. So that it lay not within the Com* pafs of the Apoftles Power, to impofe upon themfelves any fuch Or* ders or Limitations, as did impeach in any meafure this General Com* million, and the futeable Exercife of their Office founded thereupon; Wherein they were abfolutely to follow the Spirit's Condud, without prefuming to prefcribe unto him, and consequently to prefcribe unto themfelves 142 ^ Reviewed ConJtderAthft of the Chap. Vll. themfelves fuch Reftri&ions and Obfervation of Orders, as this Querift -fuggelts. Of this peculiar Conduft of the Spirit we have heard above, In fe- deral Scripture Inftances : And a remarkable Inftance we have of the Spirit's fometimes reftraining their Inclination, with Refpe& to the Exercife of their Office in fome Places, therein /hewing how abfolute- ly they were fubjed to his fpecial and immediate Conduct in this Mat- ter. Thus Acls 1 6. 6, 7. When they hadgoni through Phrygia, and the X«- mon of 6alatia, and were forbidden of the Holy Gboji to preach the Word in dfia> after they were come to Myjia, they ejfayed to go intollithynia: (N. B.) But the Spirit (uffered them not. And after an Account of PauH Vifion, in order to his going into Macedonia^ v% 9. follows v. 10. Immediately we endeavoured to go into Macedonia, afiuredly gathering that the Lord had cafrd ps for to preach the Gofpel unto them, Here we fee an Humane Judgement find Inclination of the Apoftie, in point of the Exercife of his Office to- wards fome Perfons, and in fome Places, Over ruled and better directed by the Spirit: And what will our Querift fay, in cafe of fuch concerted Or- ders as he mentions, dire&ed by a like Humane Judgement, yet oppo- fing, or inconfiftent with fuch Over- ruling Direction, and Inhibition of the Spirit as is inftanced? Has he not thus entangled himfelf in an in* extricable Labyrinth, in fetting the Apoftles concerted Meafures in Terms of Contradiction to the Spirit's Direction ? As for Paul's not medling with Churches , whifh be bad not planted, he flioutd have pointed at the place where the Apoftie aflerts that his Apo* flolick commijsion reached none elfe. Sure his Commiilion, as our Querift himfelf pleads, readvd all the Gentiles: A pretty large Diftridt, no doubt* To whom,confequently,heafferts,that the Exercife of his Office did extend (and who will not doubt, both as to planting and watering of Gentile Churches). Now, will this Gentleman aflert that none preached to the Gentiles, or planted Churches among them, but he? The Paflage upon which he feems to lay the Foundation of his Afler- tion, Rom. iy. 19, 20. where the Apoftie fliews, that from J erufalem round afaut to Illyricum he had fully preached the Gofpel, adding v. 20. Tea fo have I (Irivd to preach the G>fpeli not where ^brtti was namd, left I (hwld buildup™ another M*ns Foundation: v 21. As it is written, to whom he was not Jpohn of, they (hall fee &: This PaiTage, we fay, can hava no iucnSenfe as he imagines, but Itandsin Contradiction \o his Scope and Bleading, as is evident to any chat ponders the Scope and Context. I. As co the Scope and Context, the Apoftie from v, 17. is comment din^, upon feveral G.-ou-ids, his Apoftoiick Office, as 1. fiom its Ef- fects, v. 17, 18. z/y, from the Muaculou* Si^n* attending and leal-' ing Chap. VII. ^tarter U ih? ?nshperhnr of SCOTLAND. 143 ing his Miniftry, from the multitude of Nations conquered thereby, all that were betwixt Jerufalem and Dalmatia, containing a Trad of 1400 Miles; And v. 20, in {pecialfrom this, that as the Gathering of thefe Churches was Chnft's Work as the efficient Caufe and Author, fo that the Lord had us'd therein his Miniftry. Pareus, upon the Place, (hews, that from the 14. to 22. the Apoftle gives Account of his writing more largely to the Romans, notwithftanding of their abounding inGoodnefsand Knowledge,the Grounds whereof he takes, 1. From the End of his Writing, which was not only to Teach, but to Admonifh them; Admonitions being Ufeful and Acceptable, evert to thofe that are taught, v. 1?. A fecond Realbn is taken from his Of- fice becaufe he had receiv'd The Grace of Apojllejhip from God towards all Nations, and consequently towards them; Which Argument the Apo- ftle ufes five times, fail in the beginning, Chap. 1. v. $, 6, and v. 14, iy. The Antecedent of the Argument he amplifies, 1. From the End of the Apoftlelhip committed to him, which was to convert the Nati- ons and offer them an acceptable Sacrifice unto God% 1/. i6> ily, From the* Efficacy of his Miniftry, becaufe he had been an Inftrument of bringing many Nations to the Faith, which the Apoftle prefents with a premis'd Trolepfis, (hewing that the Glory was Ch rift's and not his, v. 17, 18. Which he further Illuftrats by reprelenting the fubfervient Caufes, and principal Efficient, fcik Chrift himfelf, who adled by, and in him, by thefe mighty Signs; As likewife from the Circumftances of places, and the large Tract, of Ground mentioned; adding another Circumftance and Argument, taken from the Difficulty of the Work, that he had preach'd to People wholly ignorant of the Gofpel; where- of he renders a Reafon, v , 20. left he mould build upon another Foundati» en. This he further illuftrats from the Teftimony oil/aiah, Chap, C2. ic. as it is written, To whom he was not fpokfn of, they (hall fee, &c. Teter Martyr gives this account of this 20. v. Annitens pradicare Evangt- Hum ubi Ctori/lus non fuerat nominatus* Thefe things, faith he, are there- fore commemorated, that the Romans might underftand that Vaul was' dignified with the proper Character of Apoftlefhip ; For it was not the proper Work of Apoftles, to fucceed to the Labour of others, to whofc Labours others were rather to fucceed, for their Work was to ' propagat the Gofpel, to plant new Churches., and ordain able A4ini- flers in the Churches which they had planted, that the Truth might thus be quickly fpread through the World. He calleth, faith he, anom ther Foundation Churches planted by other Apoftles, which is not to be afcrib'd to Ambition, but to his Apoftolitk Office, rather, andhis fer- vent Zeal for promoting the Golpel. When he faith^ Iflrive, hein-- fmuates, that fometime neceifity uj£d him to go to Jerufalem (N B.) Ant'mb; 144 A Review And Confederation of the Chap. VII. Anrioch, Rnme, and other Places, wherein other Apojlles had preached. Our Querift wi 1 not fry, that neceflity urg'd him to break due Order of Cnurch G ^vernment. But this Neceflity was the urgency of his Zeal in following commanded Duty, like td that Preflure, or Conftraint by the Spirit, as the Word will read, mentioned Acls 18.5-, parallel with that Conftraint of Ch rift's Love, 2 Cor. y. 14. and his going bound in the Spitit to Jerusalem mentiond Atls 20. 22. Where none will doubt there was a famous Church planted. Upon v. 21. As it is written, to whom he was not fpoken of, they JhaU fee, Sec. He mews that this is the Senfc of the Place/The Apoftle was thus haftening to preach the Gofpel, becaufe injoyn'd all Diligence by the Holy Ghoft, that the Voice of the Gofpel might be carried to Nations that had not feen nor heard, that therefore the Apoftle (hews, he was excited with fuch Fervencie to preach where Chrift was not nam'd. Upon tv. 22. Fir which cau[e alfo I have been much hindred front coming to you, he ihews that the Apoftle tvas rather inftant to preach to them who had not heardj according to theMiniftery committed to him before he preach 'd to the Roman sywhofe Faith was publifhed through the univerfal World ; Adding, that, in Am- brofts Senfs, the Apoftle did ftrive to preach the Gofpel where Chrift was not nam'd, that he might prevent the falfe Apoftles, who, if they had Preoccupied thefe Places, and fowen their Tares, their peftilent Errors, they had rendred and left a very difficult Husbandry and Labour to the Apoftle, &c Pod upon this Paflage mews, that the Apoftle was unwilling to build upon another Man's Foundation, and to derive the Glory to himfelf which would be due to othersi 2 Cor. 10. ij-, 16. As likewife, that by him, as an Apoftle of Chrift, and in his Miniftry, that Scripture lfa. 72. ij. might be fulfilled. Shewing, upon v. 22. that the Apoftle therein obviats an Objection, viz,. That it was not for want of Refpeft and Good will, that all this while he had not given them a Vi- Jitej but that he look'd upon the planting oj" Churches the more necef- fary Work than Watering. The fame Senfe of this Context, and in fpecial of v . 22, 2;, 24. wherein the Apoftle mews bis Zealand Dejirt to f reach at Rome (where was already the Foundation laid of a flourifh- §ng growing Church) is exhibited by other Commentators. Diedat upon p, 20. mews, that thus the Apoftle makes his Zeal and Affeftion to- wards the Roman Church appear fo much the more, it having been fettled and gathered together by others, and yet (N. B.) he fervently dejiringto vi- fit it. Cahin upon this v. 20. {hews, That the Apoftle herein not only- mews himfelf a faithful Paftor,buc likewife affertshis Apoftolick Office, to render the fame the more acceptable to the Romans, fince the Office of Apoftle was to fow the Gofpel Seed where it had not been preach'd, according Chap. VII. Queries to the VresbyteriAnt of SCOTLAND. j4* according to the Command, Mark 16. if. Go Preach the Gofhel to ever* Creature ; Which, faith he, we muft diligently Obferve, left we fliould draw to a common Example or Imitation what was peculiar to the Apoftolick Order and Office : Apoftles being Founders of Churches Paftors are to preferve and amplifie what they have Built. Upon v 2/ he (hews, that the Prophet, in the Paflage cited by the Apoftle* is ipeakingof the fpreadingof the Kingdom of the Median through the World, which Command and Office was perfbrm'd and manag'd by Apoftles. Upon v. 19. where mention is made of Paul's fully Preach- ing through the places mentioned, he (hews that the Word witmi®MWi ordinarily Tranflated to Fulfill, fignifies alfo, with the Greeks to Perfect and Supply, expounding thus the Phrafe, Quod Evangelii pradicationem quafi fupplendo diffuderit, &c That in Preaching the Gofpel he gave a fpreading Supply, diffuflngthe Savour and Light thereof further, after others had begun to Preach. From all which it is evident, 1. That the Apoftle is here, in the Senfe of Proteftant Divines, averting his Apoftolical Authority and Office, with refpea to" the Preaching of the Gofpel, and Founding of Gofpel Churches through the World ,• Which one point fufficiently baffles his fuppofed Fixation to any one Port or Diftria. 2ly, That he is therein averting an Office which no ordinary Officer could Suc- ceed to. %ly, That in this his zealous Endeavour to fpread the Gof- pel where it was not Heard, which was more properly his Work than to Build upon another Foundation, he was hindered from coming as yet to Rome, to which, notwithstanding, he intended to come and to Exercife his Apoftolick Office towards them, as being thereunto indebted by this his Office, according as he afferts, Row. 1. is. tho* the Church was already Planted and Flourifhing there. 4/7, That the Apoftle is fo far from an absolute difowning a Preaching where Chrift was Named, and Building upon a Foundation already laid, that he doth in this Context clearly infinuate the Contrary. 1. In 'that tho' his main Ambition and Defign was to Preach the Gofpel where Chrift was not Named, yet he fhews, v. 14. that he began that large Courfe and Circuit of his Preaching from Jem falem, and therein had Watered a Church Planted, yea and Flourifhing ( as is evident in the Hiftory of the Ails ), the Apoftle James ordinarily refiding and Exercifing his Miniftery there, ily, In that he promifes to come to Rome, v. 24. and that according to his earneft defire, v. 2;. where there was a Church already Planted and Flouri/hing ; And none will doubt tfee Apoftle-'s Exercifing his Office and Minifiery when there. Finally from hence the abfurdity of this Querift's Notion is evident, who will ^ have ti6 A Review *t>d Cmjidrntion of the Chap. VII. ■Provincial Divilion of the World among them ■■■ »/»•»:„. One thing I cannot but furthe r notice in this his fancied Xj/fr/S w f^l^Z their feverat DifriBt and frovinca, that, bringing, for illu- 2 ^'" » P1aL ,4c ^»(l/e «/ fie Circumcifion, Paul 0/ lie grating ["fta"« "'^ L5/^ dtvidL all (he Diftri6h into Two, and I7n„««»^.», "^"^'"'^VrnVke the other Apoffles blame-worthy for Sg"' ScScC which they themes had not Planted. frOffic ting beyond the limits of their Diftnct and Building upon pa pably he «o«fcs the : bopn »« ProvinceS affigned to Peter ^ lor cue uuiu v°l V1 n T v were not chele Indies and Tn^ip? r>r moll Eafttrn Countries. But, 1 pray, were »«••»» inoies, or mo)y *-wj»c , TTnrirrumcifcn which was S. rauis *£ v" f rrf Tte"Autho1"o1 C^.t«*aS^-f ss^ze. toT^Af ;°n ^ait^r^ StfS^^'ofe. he m.yco„f»l. the ofEvangelilts, witnan «• , , 7bL Je 4iver. Minifl. Evang. grades, . °^ !(f * teftte mty «her. commonly known. «4 [ -»•*• « ,b..i8i. . b r^sroany .nftalled inno Minifterfa, Office |S**5S jrr. as : s wkK Chap. VII. Queries to the Presbyterians of SCOTLAND. 147 bis lap Sermons and Paffion, alfo of bis Refurretlion. The fame fee-ms to be the Senfe of the Belgkk Divines, who (hew that after our Lord had chofcn his Apoftles, ( viz,, to their high extraordinary Funclioh ) he fent thefe 70 before him to warn the Jews of his coming, and to pre- pare them tor the receiving of him and his Do&rine. Ut nimirum, hi %on tarn prmedicarent Evangelium, quod nondum erat impletum, quant ut fr^epararent qusdammodo populum per generakm tsfnnunciationem jam advenijfe MeJJiam. i. e. Not fo much for this end to breach the Gofpel, which was not as yet fulfilled, as that they might: fame way by this general Annuncia% tion give the People a preparative learning that the Mejfiak was come. Thus Spalatenjit, Lib. 1. C. 2. N. %. This appointment is thus conceived to be in Chrift's laft Journey to Jsrujalem ; fo that this tranfient Miffion being thus taken to infer no formal Office, the Succeffion falls of courte. 'Tis further obferved, that after this tranfient Fun&ion, we do not Read they were afterward fent upon a Gofpel Meffage with any new and extended Commiffion, as were the 12 Apoftles, after the Lord's Refurre&ion. Calvin thus expreffes his Senfe of them, Cteterutn, faith he, nulla iliis proprie comtnijfa fuit Legatio, fedtantum Chrifius Apparitor es pramijii, qui populi animos pararent ad excipiendam ejus DoZirinam. i. e. No proper Goffrel Legation was committed to them , but were fent as €hri(fs Forerunners to prepare the Peoples Hearts to receive bis Dcclrine. Not to ft and further upon this, 'tis certain that in either in the one or other Acceptation of the 70, and upon either of the fuppo- fitions mentioned, the Principle of a Succefiive Miniftery to them is fufficiently overthrown. So that what he further inquires, foil. If they have Succefiors, who are their Succcfiors, and if Succeeded in the full extent of their Commijjion, why not Apoftles alfo in the full extent of theirs, is eaftly Anfwered and fatisried in the account already exhibited. Whereas he defires plain Texts of Scripture in Anfwer to the Query,* The Author mentioned hath exhibited to him plain Scripture proof of fuch a Nature of the Apoftolick Office and Evangeiiftick ( fuppofing the 70 to have been Evangelifts ) both with relped to the extent thereof, and otherwife, as could not be Succeeded to. And for the other Opinion of thefe 70 Difci pies, viz.. That they were in$ ailed in m formal Church Office, The Scripture Grounds inftanced are left to the Qusrift'sCon- (ideration. * But our Querift, having fo often renewed the Epifcopal Notion and Cant, anent Succeffwn to Apojiles in the full Extent of their Commrfltw, which he will needs, with his Fellows, appropriat to Prelates; Hold- ing thus the Apoftolick Office to be ftill continued in the Church 1 I will offer to him the Senfe and Judgment of one Chief Patron of T 2 the 14.8 A Review And Confidet&thn of the Chap. VIL theEpifcopalGaufe, Dr. Barrow, Matter of trinity College in Cambridge, and Chaplain to King Charles II. in his Treatife of the Pope's Supre- macy, publifhed in the Year 1680, Pag. 113. wherein, among other thing, he lays down this Affertion. |c The Apoftolick Office, as fuch, * was Perfonal and Temporary* and therefore, according to its Nature 'and Defign, not Succeffive or Communicable to others, in. perpetual c Defendants from them. Ic was, as fuch, in all RefteGs "Extraordinary f Conferred in afpecial manner, defigned for fpecial purpofes, difcharg- ' ed by fpecial Aids, indowed with fpecial Priviledges, as was needful * for the Propagation of Chrlftianity, and founding of Churches. * To that Office it was requifitcthat the Perfon mould haveanimmediat ' Defignation and Commiflion from God, fuch as St.PW doth fo often * infift upon, for averting his Title to the Office; Paul an Apoftle, not ' of Men» nor by Men, Gal% 1. 1, citing Ciry/ojhm upon the place, who mews, '' That this is a Property of the Apoftles. Adding, " That A- * poftles were to Atteft che Lord's Refurreclion and Afcenfion, either * immediatly, as the Twelve, or by evident Confequence, as St. faul, &c> He adds, IC That the Apoftles were to be indowed with Miracu- Mous Gifts and Graces* inabling to aflure their Authority, and execute * their Office ; Hence Vattl called the Signs and Wonders, and mighty 'Deeds, the Marks of an Apoftle. He tells us alfo, ''That, in dbr//*» * fiotn's Opinion, 'twas proper to an Apoftle, in a certain confpicuous * manner, to impart Spiritual Gifts, as St. Peter and St. John did atS*/»<*. * ria, citing Cyprian on A8f 8. 18. Adding, "That it wasaPriviledge * of an Apoftle, by vertue of his Commiflion from Chrift, to Inftrud * all Nations. That he had Warrant and Right to Exerciie his Fundi. ' on every where. His Charge was Univerfal and Indefinite. The ' whole World was his Province. He was not fixed to any one place, T nor could be excluded from any: Citing Chryfoftm on John 21. and Cy- ril y**v in Gen. 7. calling the Apoftle* " an Oecumenick Judge, and * an f»ftru<5Lr of all the Subceleftial World. And, after feveral fuch Prerogatives rehearfed, he adds this Conclufion, *' That fuch an Office, * confifting of fo many Extraordinary Priviledges andMiraculousPowers, c requifite for the Foundation of the Church, and Diffufling ofChriftia- ' nity, was not defigned to continue by Derivation, it containing di- ' verfe things, which, apparently, were not Communicated, and which 1 no Man, without grols Impofture and Hypocrifie, ( fee how he lames our Querift, and his Succeffive Bifhops ) " could challenge to himfelf. ' Neither, faith be, did the Apoftles pretend to Communicate it. They * did Appoint (landing Paftors and Teachers in each Church, but did c not Conftitute Apoftles equal, to thcmfclves in Authority, Priviledges • or Chap. VIL Queries to the ?nshyterhns of SCOTLAND. 140 e or Gifts. To this Scope he citeth duguftin, de Baft. c. tfonat. 2 r Yea BeUamh himfelf afferting, That Bifhops have no part of the Apojhlic^ Authority. Shewing afterward, in Oppofition to the Pope's Pretentions, That St. Peter'/ Apoftolate did naturally expire with hk Verfm, as did that of the ether Apofths. Here our Querifr may fee, as in a Looking-Glafs, not only the After- don of the Extraordinary Fun&ion of Apoftles, and a peremptory De- nyal of any Succeffion to them in Office- But likewife upon thefe very Grounds adduced by the Author of the vleat with other Presbyte- rians. And this Teftimony is the more considerable againft him and his Fellows, in this point, that the Author appears as high a Prelatift as any, as is evident in his Difcourfe concerning the Vnity of the church, Fag, 48. wherein he accufes the Ruufants in England, as the worfi of Schijmaticks and Separates, and puts upon them the Imputation of mofl defre. rat Rebels againfl the Church. Many others might be added, which for brevity, we omit. ' IV. Query, What was the Office of an Evangelifl ? Whether was it any particular diftuiQ Office peculiar to them, vhe mTe defined EvangelijU or was it any particular Employment, or Exercife of an Office upon the doing of »»icb, one had Right to the Title of anEVangelif}> Or, Was)t the Writing the Oojpel of our Bleffed Saviour, that made one an Evangetifil Anfwer s The Reading of the Author he mentions, might have faved him the La- bour of this Query, as molt of all the other Queries. But, for the Senle of Proteftant Divines, as to this Office, I /hall, inftead of many, which may be mftanced, exhibite to him the Judgment of two Prote- ItantUmvcrfities. The nrft is that of Ley den, Synopf. Varicr. thtol Vift; 42. The/. 2 % . Evai/gtlijlarum alii erant Script ores Evangelic} de Vita & Mor« te VitiU & VaSa Salvatorit noftri Ieftt Chrijii, &c% " Of Evangelifts , *oije were Writers of the Evangelical Hiftory, concerning the Life fand Death, Doarme and AGs of our Saviour,. There are others, who / were called by the Apoftles to Preach the Gofpel together with them- t iclves, and ^therefore, as Fellow-Labourers, attended them, except f ^hen for fometime, they were put upon the Overfight of certain « „,K-r?NTS- ?f rhlS f°iC ^ B*rn*b«> S/7*> Timotheus, and Titus, to which Number fome do alio joyn the Seventy Difciples The Uni- verity of Uumtr, Syntag. Thef. de Diverf. Uiniji. Evang. Gradibus, Pag 181, 182. Jbef. ic, 11,12, 13, 14, ,f. has givena large Account of their Judgment upon this point. Eva*gelift*dicunturvela$cripto, velaUunere &c. " Evangelifts are fo called, either in refpetf of Wiumz, or Of' « ; In reipeationt yet fuch as cannot be clearly evidenced, and differs nothing from a bare Affirmation without Ground ? How^can a Succeflion be Rt- al, and in Faff, and without Flaw and U[urpation ( which certainly in- cludes all that can make up a Right, and will clearly import the fame > whereof there are no Evidences froduccabk? Or, will he fay,that his fore- mentioned Evidences, both Lineal and Doctrinal (for bisforementi- oried Expreflions will include BothJ, from the Apoftles, are not Real and Uncontrovertible, and therein contradid the Senfe & Pleadings of the Proteftant Churches^n point of a true C&fpel Miniftery, and, in cor- refpondence to the Popifh Pleaders, abfolutely Nuiiii;s their OrganicJc Beeing, and Lawful Miniftery. Sh> OurQuenft, further weaving out this Web of Abfardities, t&lh us, that, " By a clear Derivation of Succeflion from the Apoftles, he * means fuch adearnefs as the length of time, from their Days, will a!- low of,- confldering intervening great Perfections, Inundations of t Barbarous Nations on the civiliz'd Parts of the World, fuch Trou- ^ bles and Alterations as are great Enemies to Records 5 fince the Writ- ings of fome are quite loft, and fome little Fragments only of early Writers remain. Bur, good Maftcr Q*eri(l, this is fuch a Clearnefs, as is no Clearnefs, and a very rightly exemplified Repugnant ia inadje&o, fell, a Clearnefs of Succeflion from Apoftles, from iuch a Perfonal Se- ries of undoubted SucceJJors, as the Prielis were to find in the Sacred Re- gifter co clear their Succeflion, and this neceffary tor allMinifkrs^anct yee 1*8 A Review dnd Confide? ation of the Chap. VII. yet the Records and Writings clearing thefe Succeffions,except fome lit- tle Fragments, quite loft. But ourQuerift adds, lhat if this be not allowed, fcil. this clear Per- fonal Succefsion mentioned, in all Church Officers and Minifters, we will ofen a door, to make holy Orders an ufeiefs Ceremonies and to every gifted Brother to invade the Function of the Miniftry. The Abturdity of which Confequence is evident from what is premis'd,* fince our Principle, touching a true Doctrinal Succefiion, and the juft Rights of Ordinati- on according to the Scripture Rules, fufficiently excludes fuch an U- furpation; Whereas his Principle mentioned, inferring the Obfcurity and Lofs of a true lucceflive Gofpel Miniftry, opens a Door to fuch an Ufurpation, and patronifeth the Seekers Principle. 6lyt That our Querift may in this Point afToord us Store of Contra- dictions, he tells usofan '• Inftance of fuch Practices ( he means, of the Gifted Brother neither really fuch, or only reckon'd fuch by few or by many* invading the Sacred Function of the Miniftry) " in our Hl- ' ftory, particularly that of the Famous Mr. Robert Bruce, citing \Spotf- x -wood'* Hiftory, who did officiat as a Lawful Paftor for no leis time ' than ten Years before he was put in Oiders, and this dire&ly con- ' trary to the Scripture, Heb. 5. 4. No Man takes this Honour to him- c felf, but he that is called of God, as was Aaron, and to our Saviour's 4 not' glorifying hitnjelf to be made Higb-Priefr, contrary to our Blef- * fed Saviour's choifing a Select number of Men, whom be alfo named * Apoflles, Luke 6. 13. To whom he committed the Reyes of the King* ' dom of Heaven, committing to them the Miniftry of Reconciliation, ' and as having all Power in Heaven and Earth, giving them Commif- c fion,and promifing his Prefence with them, and their Lawful S.uccef- c fors, to the End of the World,- purfuant to which Commifiion the A* 1 pofties ordain'd others, and gave Orders and Rules for preferving a ' regular SucceiTion of true Office-bearers in the Church to the End of ' the World. 97 ). To tne Jlxth Queftion, which is, Is he Lawful 'Paftor who wanteth Imp cfitiomm rr> annum 1 They returned this • Anfwer, Impojition, or laying -en of hands, is not Fffmtial aid Nectary, but Ceremonial and Indijjirent in Admifsion of a Pajhr. See €alderwoodts Hi- ftory, page 38:5,423. But not to dip further in this Queftion, how far and in what Re< fpe<5b, the Ritual of Impofition of Hands is requisite to a Lawful Ordi» nation ,• _ In the third Place, if the Apoftles, purfuant to their Matter's Commifsion and Command* did ( according to our Querift ) ordain others, and gave Orders and Rules for preferring a Rtguiar Succefsion of true Of- fice-bearers in the Church^, would fain know, how he can deny them fuch a Lawful Succefsion,who are ordained according to thefe Rules 'i And, if this Succefsion be Real, and without Flaw or Usurpation, as he exprefles it how can he, without Impeaching the Authority of the Apoftles, defide- rat. l6o A Review and Conft 'deration of the Chap. \H. rat,over and above this, that which he calls a derived Succefsion from Apo\ files, as their undoubted Succefiors, which he muft needs mean of fuch a Lineah Perfonal. Uninterrupted Succefsion from Apoftles, as thefe Priefts Ezra 2. were to produce in their Genealogies from Aaron*. Nay, has he not ackowledg'd this impofsible, upon Ground of the Irremediable Vefetfivenefs of Records ? So that, either he muft acquiefce in our folid Ground premis'd, or fall into the Abfurdity of quite loofing and Im- peaching aGofpel Miniftry, as is before obferv'd. What follows in this Querie, anent the Necefsity of a Lawful Or- dination, in Order to the Ends mentioned by him, is eafily ac- corded : Only, in a Word or two, I muft Animadvert, i. That where he afferts the Necefsity of the Succefsion of iuch a Miniftery from A- poftles, as has intruded thereunto the Word of Reconciliation, and of fuch Valors or Minivers as are called to ratifc the Covenant betwixt God and Man, he mould have pondered, what Succelfors Prelates arc, who look upon the preaching of the Word of Reconciliation, and therein the ratifying the Covenant betwixt God and Man* as no part of their Office and Duty, in that Capacity; And if they do preach, it is but Obiter to the great and eflential Actings of their fuppofed Grandure and State Employ- ments • Upon which Ground Preaching Prelats in England, where his adored Hierarchy is in its Robes and Royalty, have been upbraided by their Fellows, and called Preaching Coxcombs, zly, His Affertion, anent Sealing and Ratifying the Covenant, and con/toning Men to everlafiing Happinefs or Miferp had need to 6e limited and cautioned, with the necefTary Caution of a Minifteriai Subaltern Authority, left our Lord's only Soveraign and Abfolute Authority in this Point be incroached upon. %ly, That to ufurp Tower without a Mi/sion from our Lord, is a great Jin in the Ufurper, and (n are to the People, is a Truth which cafts a deep Charge upon Prelats, who are the falfe Priefts, the Shepherds and Thieves not entring in by the Door mentioned by him, ilnce their Authority and Mifsion, as in that Capacity, will never be found in the Scripture Records or Regifters, as he fpeaks, but is many ways contrary thereunto, as the Autnor to whom he has offered his Queries, has clearly demonftrated unto him : So that, thefe Ufurpers are, in their pretended Adminiftra- tions (to return him his own Terms,), The withered hands through which no Spiritual Blefsingt can tomt. CHAP. Chap. VIII. Queries to the Presbyterians ^/SCOTLAND, \6i CHAR VI 1 1. Wherein are Examnd our Querifis ignorant Notions upon the Point of the Apocalyptic Angels, and his foolijh and Antifcriptural headings for the Acceptation of the Term Angel for a jingle trerjon* State of theQueftionsJbil. Whether the fe Angels are fingh Perfi>ns 5 Or 7/ they muff be taken in a Gollt{?ive Senfe > When I fay a right State of the Que/Hon, I underftand it with Re- lpea to thatQucftionprecifely confidered,- Suppofme as fliall hereafter appear, that whatever Refolution of this Queftion be given, tisutrerv remote frnm rU*rina -k,-, «>u„„ ^.._/i. ^ 1.7. . confided tt^Ste^ftMSft P-P-'yandcofflp!a confidered. But proceed we to his Queries. ' I. Querie ^4«4 »nd did demnnftrat from Scripture that the College Senfe of the word Angel fiands upon acnPmre» the moil probable Foundation *. »/,, He did alfoprove, * Bier. mfJ, (as Presbyterians generally) that the admitting of Be- c/"'». f«> «• ss*s TfMru, or Prefident, doth nothing injure the Pres- f'e' 7°- v' ?:- bytenan Caufe, nor help the Epifcopal , the Admiffion of a Prefidenr. being very well confident with the Principle, of Presbyteri, r Gown menr and Judicatories ,/,, Whereas he holds, we muft make appe,r ' there were fim numier of treih,erl in til(e ehttnhe,, he might K Found, 552 A Review dnd'Cotifitkutim of the Chap. VIII. found, that Presbyterian Writers have afforded him a clear Scripture Proof of this; in fpecial the Authors of Jm Divin.Rtgim.Ecckf have ex- hibited clear Proofs of fuch Presbyteries and Judicatories in. the Apo- ftolick Churches. Might he not have read in his New Teftament, That the ApoiUet ordain' dElde*s. or Presbyters *«t' U*X*rU*, Church by Church, A&s 14. 22. That the Church of Corinth had Church Officers therein veiled with Power of Excommunication, without the leaft madow of an Epifcopal Head. 1 Cfr. ?i f, 6, 7, 12, i> a (> 2 * 7, 8. That the Church of Ephejus (the firft here wdcten to) had Eiders or Presbyters fettled therein, to whom the Apoftle faul intrufted the whole Govern- ment and Epifcopal Power, in his laft Farewell, Atts 20. 28. Whereas he affirms, It would puxik Presbyterians to prove there were fome number of Presbyters* in each of thefe churches, when the Epifiles were written to them ; Our Sagacious Gentleman fhould have been aware of the Baffling Re* bound of a Counter-Query, to this purpofe, -viz,.. If it be fo puzzling and infuperable a Difficulty,to pr<*re Presbyters exiftent in thefe Chur- ches then his fuppofed Diocefan Prelate is a mere Chimera, and {tends Naked as a Relative without a Correlate, foil having an Epifcopal In- /fo#w»overaDiocefs, without any Presbyters, over whom this Infperti- on is to be exercifed ,• Or otherwife, to evite this, he muft make him a mere Parochial Paftor, in which Cafe alfo, the Presbyterians have a clear Advantage againft him, as is obvious to the meaneft Reflexi- on. For what he addf, That thefe Prejidents appear not to have been fo often changed as now a days by Presbyterian Claffical Gonflitution, or that they were changed' at atl, and that the Gbief AJJcrtors of Presbytery allow a conftant Prefix dencyin tbefirli Ages; He mould know, that Presbyterian Government admits of no Change of Presidents which may be called too often; And the Author of the Plea gave him an Account of the Sin * Hier BU and Danger offthe fixed Prefident * ,• And for Presby- ihtfs Claim, terians Acknowledgment of conftant fixed Prefidents in Part 1. Pag. 4. the firft Ages, he (hould know, that the making of Mo- derators fixed and conftant, however it may be acknow- ledged as to Matter of Fad, is by Presbyterians held to be among the firft Rcceffei^om Divine Appointment, in fpecial by Bex*, who holds this fixed President to be Epijcopus Humanus, diftincl from the firit Di- vine Bijhop of God's Appointment. Dc Tripl Epifc. .. . ' ..^.. , II. Query, Whether the Affinity betwixt the Stile of the Infared Writers of the NewTeffament, and the Septuapnt Iranflation of the Old, and in facial tht Septuagint Iranflation or Angd the Chap. VIII. Queries to the Presbyterians */ SCOTLAND, ifo fame term that John makes ufe of in depgning the Mini/ten of the Allan Churches, he not a reafonable Ground to infer, that the Apocalyptic Angels were ahove Jingle Presbyters , or any Society of them > Anfwer. There needs no other Refolution of this Query, than to fend him to the Book he pre- tends to have read. Let him read again the Authors IV. Chap, againft Dr. Monro, Pag. 142. where he will find this Doubt fully refolved. The Dr. pleading this Imitation in John of that Paflfage, Mai. 2.7. He is Anfwered in the place mentioned, That the Term of Meffe'nger and Friefl hath, in that Text of Malachy, a Plural Signification, and that confequently, our Expoiition of the fame Term Angel in a Colleftive Senfe in thefe Epiftles, and the Application of a Plural Signification to the lingle Term Angel or Mefjenger is Exemplified in that very Scripture and cleared in the Collating of the two Pafifages together. Further, the Dr. is told, in the next place, that the Application of the Term to the High-Prieft foiely, or in an Excluiive Senfe, is moil abiurd, as being, 1. Crofs to the Scope of the Prophet, which is to dired the Lord's priefts and Minifters in their Common Duties, to which they were called. zly, That this Application to one ilngle High- Prieft, will infer, that the great Commandment to give Glory to God's Name, as is injoyned, v. 2. was only applicable to the High-Prieft as foiely therein concerned, and that he alone was to have the Law of Truth ' in his Mouth, and he alone concerned to keep Knowledge, v. 6, 7. where- as all the Priefts were Teachers, and therein folemnly addrefifed the People, together with Mofes himfelf, Deut. 27.9, 10. and were fent to leach the People, zchron. 17. 8. Befides, that this (ingle Exposition will infer, that the High-Prieft alone falls under the heavy Threatning, v. 2. of having a Curfe to be inflicted upon his Sletftngs, which looks like an Ominous Thunder-Clap upon my Lord Bi/hop, whereof our Gentle- man Querift mould have been aware. Finally, the Author alfo told the Dr. that as the Term Levi reprefenrs, in this (Bap. the Multitude of Le- yites, fo the Term Angel, whereby the Officers of every Church of a a* is reprefented has nothing peculiar in it, befide what is applicable to eve- ry Minifter of the Gotpei, whofe Angelical Frame, as well as Office and Authority, is hereby pointed out , and therefore cannot, in this place, indignate an Officer Superiour to Pallors or Minifters. As for the Denomination of Stars ( which our Querift alfo pleads) to fignifie Illuminating or cberifmng; Influences upon the Faithful, as the Sun and Stars do piflpenct this Infer hur World, and that the churches arc termed Sockets or Ltmps, where thefe Lights are fei ; 'Tis a very poor and infignificanfr proof againft Pi esbyterian Government, and for Prelacy • This being fo notablj applicable to the Influence of a Faithful Minffiery upon the X 2 - People, iS 4 A Review tttd Conftchmion&fthc Chap. VIII. People, ovir whom Minifters or Paftors are fet, in their Exercife of the Power of Order and Jurifdi mentioned by him, made it appear, that the contrary Conclufion dotrt better follow, viz,. 7hat the Word Angel, upon this very Ground, is to be taken in a Colic 6iive Senfe. Thus, ^art i. Pag. 7f. wherein is made appear, C and thus be- fore him, the Reverend Mr. Durham, with feveral others) that the taking of the Word for a (ingle Perfon, cafts a Blot upon feveral Para- ges of the Context, As, when it is faid in the beginning of the Epiftles, I know thy Works, this will infer, he knew the Works of one Tingle Bi- fhop only, and of no Minifters elfe ,• That one only BiAnop La- boured at Ephefus, and none elfe, contrary to Acl. 201 28. where we find a Plurality of Biflhops fet over that Church, to Feed and Rule the fame ; That one only Bifliop at Ephefus fill -from his firji Love, no Church Officers elfe ( a pitiful Imputation upcn Timothy the fuppofed Bifliop of Ephefus ). The lame may be applyed to other Inftances, I have a few things againji thee, viz,, againft One Biftop, but no Minifters elfe* Remember whence thou art fallen, viz. the Bifliop only fallen, and none elfe. Repent and do the pji Works, none concerned in either, but the Bi- fliop iblely, &c. If it be faid, thefe Paflages concern Bifoops mainly, others in a Subordinate Senfe ; The Author of the Plea told the Epif. copalians, that, in this Subterfuge, they beg the Queftion, yea, and mine their Caufe and Pleading, which, from a fuppofed Singularity of the Addrefs, doth conclude the Singularity of the Perfon Addretfed. Moreover, the fame Author told Dr. Monro, Pag. 14;* pleading, " That the Faults of the Churches are imputed to the Angels, becaufe ,*' of their Spiritual Power to Reform and Chaftife Abufes, That, upon * our Suppofition of plurality of Paftors addrefied in the Angel, 'tis * much more;futeable to fuppofe a People's good or ill Frame to be 'influenced by the good or bad Carriage of their Paftors, who have an * immediate Infpedion over them, than to fuppofe, it flows meerly from I the good or bad Carriage of one Prelate, fet over their Clergy and them- Chap. VIH. Queries to the Presbyterians of SCOTLAND. \6< ' themfelves, this Inspection being the more remote ; And that Expe- * rience has fometimes taught, that there has been fome diligent Paftors * with a thriving People in a Diocefs, where a Bifhop has been naught. The Dr. was alio pofed with this Queftion, "Ho-v feveral of thefe * Evils, charged upon the Churches, could be the Obje&s of the Biftops * fuppofed Spiritual Chaftifmg Power, fuch as their Dead Frame, Fat « ling from their firft Love, &c. As alfo, " How the Warning of a ' Prifon-Tryal, and of Sufferings! are folely applicable to one Per- * fon. Our Querifl: adds, that 'tis no more likely* that all the Chriflians in thofe Churches were to be equally blamed for the Faults reproved in the Epijiles, than that, in a Corporation, where jome have Deformities in thtir Bodies, 'all the Members of that Society (hould be equally Flat-Nofed, Crooked, Blind, Deaf Sec. I (hall be loath to fay, that fuch an Illuftration and Inference* will prove the Querift to have fuch like Deformities in his Soul Facul- ties : But Cure, the Proof and Inference it felf doth, prima fronte, ap- pear very dull. For, i. How will he prove, that the taking of the Term in a Colledive Senfe, or for the College of Paftors, will infer, that all the Members of thefe Churches were to be equally blamed for the Faults reproved in thefe Epiftles. Here is a ftrange and remote Inference, Mim/iers, in a Colleclive Senfe of the JVorA Angel, are generalh blamed, Ergo, all the Members of the Church are equally guilty ,- what imaginable Twift of a Connexion b here. So that this abfurd Principle, or Inference is his own, not ours. Again*- ily, Taking the Term to import a fmgte Perion, his Abfurdi'ty follows, viz. That a Suppofition of his being lyable to fuch like Faults or Deformities, as is inftanced will infer the whole Body and Incorporation to be reproved upon this Account. And, in a word, we find our Bleffed Lord making a clear Diftin&ion of the Sound and Unfound in thefe Reprehenfions confe- quently, not blaming all, or equally : Thus in the Paffage cited by him and his Fellows, Re*v. 2. 24. Unto you I (ay, and unto the reft in Thya- tyra, as many as have not this Doclrine, and which have not known the Depths of Satan, &c Thus, after the general Charge upon the Church of Sardis Chap 3 4. there s an Exception, Thm hafl a few Names even in Sardis, which have not defiled their Garments, and t key [hall walk with me in White &c. * IV. Query. Whether the Presbyterians Amnion of the Collective Senfe of the Word At gel, will not prove too much, and be ferviceable to the Indepen- dents again ji Presbyterian Government, from the GloJJes put en thefe Texts by Tresbyterians, fcil. 7 hat they may hence argue for the Power of Lay' Men in the Church^ovemmjnt, and tht Independency of Parochial churches, there appearing i 66 A Review and Confidently of the Chap. VIII. appearing no Dependency among theft Afian Churches, nor mutual Confent con' cerninz their Government ? Oar Querift's whole Inferences here, arc of the fame insignificant Mould with fuch as we have heard : For, upon Suppofuion, that thefe Churches were Presbyterially Governed by a College of Presbyters, or Paftors, what Advantage, I pray, is given to fuch as plead, that the Members of the Church are the proper Subjefts of Church-Government, & affert the Independency of Parochial Chur- ches, or call it every fingular Meeting in thefe Presbyterian Churches for Worfoip. No doubt, this Vresbyterial United Infpeclion which we hold, and our Principle, that Chuuh* Officers are tbt prefer Subjecl of Church-Government^ does ftand in direct Oppofition unto, and quite overturn the Independents Error in both thefe points, zly, As for the Presbyterial AiTociation of Churches, and the Synodal Af- fociation of Presbyteries, our Querift might have found a full Scriptu- ral Account and Proof thereof, exhibited by Presbyterian Writers, particularly in the Author of Jus Div, Guber. Ecd. Gbap. 14, if, and the fame, with refpe& efpecially to Synods, averted largely by the Learned Univerfity of Ley den t Difp. 49- Synopf. Pur* TkeoL and Mr. GiSefpfi Aflertion of the Government of. the Church of Scotland, and more briefly in the Affembly of Divines Advice in point of Church- Government, Where he may find briefly, and from clear Scripture, the Divine Warrant afferted of Congregational, Claffical and Syno- dal Aflemblies, g/y, Whereas he afferts an Independency among thefe Churches, and tells us' that he is fure, there are no Texts of Scripture can prove their Conjent or Dependency ; 'Tis Anfwered, 1. His defire to (hew Knowledge in this Controverfie mould have prompted him to take into Confideration and to have anfwered the feveral Texts of Scripture adduced to prove this Dependency. Again, if a Dependency of Gofpel Churches in general be made good from parallel Texts, the Dependency of thele fevan Churches is therefrom clearly inferr'd, fince it muft be of necel- fuy fuppofed, that all the Churches were by the Apoftles fettled not in a various, but uniform Mould of Government, the Rules thereof being, even in the acknowledgement of our Querift, one and the lame, as refpecVme all Churches. Befides that this Dependency is clearly m- finuated, not only in the Vifional Reprefentation of our Lord's wal- king amid/3 theft Candle fccks, as the Lord of Order and Unity 'therein, and Oerfeeing them, holding and fupporting the Stars and the whole Miniftery by his right Hand of Power, which muft needs import a fubfervient Unity in the Church Representative generally considered, the Church being as an Army mfrb Banners, whereof this glonous Captain Chap. Vin. Queries to the Presbyterians of SCOTLAND. i£7 of Salvation, his Churches Lawgiver, is the Political Head and fure not of a /battered, but fitly compared Body, lfa.9.6. The Government v upon bis Shoulders. And this Political Body has ( as the Natural to its Head ) fojoynts and Bands uniting the fame to him, Col 2 iq But likewife, and efpecially, that in the clofe of every Epiftle, all the Churches are called, as concerned, to hear and improve the 'Directi- ons, Exhortations, or Reprehenfions in point of Difcipline or other wife, offered to every particular Church, pointing at their Ailbciac Unity in point of Government, tho5 confifting of feveral Congrega- tions ; As the Ghurch of Corinth, having many Teachers and Meetings for Worflnp (as is clear 1 Cor i4i 54. ) is, notwithftanding, Saluted as One church, in reipecl: of this Unity of Government, Chap. 1. 1 2 and an AlTociation of Teachers is clearly pointed at Ch 14 %\ %% \ 2 ' Finally, I would gladly know of this Querift, how he will evite his abfurdity of -giving Advantage to Independents, by affertine theie Churches to be Diocefan ,• For if, as he is bold to affert, then are no Texts of Scripture which will prove a Dependency among theft Churches or any mutual Confent concerning their Government, ( which Aflertion'no doubt, he extends to others as well as to thefe Churches, elfe his Aflertion hath no Senfe nor Confonancy with refpecl to his Scope ) what becomes of the Confent and Dependency of many Congregations upon one Diocefan, and the Unity of thefe Diocefan Churches under one Arch-Epifcopacy, yea and the coalefeing of all the Diocefan Churches into a National Church Unity under the Infpe&ion and Authority of a Metropolitan, the Divine Warrant whereof he has already aliened from the Inftance of the Jewim Qeconomy under the Influence and InfpedHon of one Supreme High Prieft. So that our Gentleman Queriit falls here, as in the preceding Inftance, by the rebound of his own Blow,- mice it is beyond all peradventure" that fuch National Churches Unity as he aflerts under the National Metropolis tan, is as much overthrown by the Independency of Diocefes as the Independency of Parochial Churches. V. Querie, IVhether there are not figurative Expre/fions in the Holy Scripture ? And, if when the Holy Spirit Jfake to the An^el of the Church of Thyatira, fifH, in the fingular Number, Rev. 2. 18, and afterward, v. 24. he fays You in the plural Number, there is not a known Figure made u/e'of ca(?d an Apoiirophe, as if a Majier fhould Write to his Stew ay d and principal Servant, be Careful of my Affairs, and thereafter fay to him avd the reft of the Servants, but take care that you all avoid liknefs, Drunkenness &C A fwer : This Query, as molt of the reft, difcovers the Gentleman's lupine Negligence m Reading the Book he mentions, ( or rather that he t g8 A Review and Co tt federation of the Chap. VIII. he has not at all Read this Paffage of it ) fince he might have feen therein a clear Solution of what he here Offets , and that no .fuch Apoftrophe as he alleges, can be here admitted ; The fpeech being palpably and eiridentiy to the fame Petfons, when the Angel is plu- rallv AddrelTed. As the Precept and Injuntfion is the very fame, fo the Perfons to whom it is AddrelTed. Fear none of tbefe things which Thou (halt fuftr; here the Panicle [tbm ] is a Relative pointing at the Angle Term Angel ; then it follows, the Devil fhaU caji feme of r You 1 into Prifon that [ Ye ] may be tried. Be [ Thou J faithful unto. Death In which Sentence it is convincingly evident and obvious to everyReader, that the fame Perfons are AddrelTed and fpoken to, both finely as One in the fingular Term Angel, and plurally as many, or more than one, and that in reference to the lame very individual purpofe and Duty the Speech continuing and running on both to the fame Perfons and the fame Scope. The Book he mentions did exhibue to him in a clear parallel fuch a change or the Singular Term into a Plural, with refpe& to the fame Perfons, particularly, i Jim. 2. 1 r. Notmtb- ftandme &e fhau he faved in Child-bearing ; [ She ] in the fingular, then it follows, if [They] continue in Faith, &c. Ihty in the plural, u e. fuch Women in Child- bearing. . _ And whereas his Friend Dr. Monro would have the Words we infill upon in this Paffage applicable to thofe mentioned in the latter end of /erf. 2i and not properly to the Angel of the Church of Ihyattra, giving this Senfe of the Words, and all the Churches, viz. theChurches oiAfia, (ball know, then Verf. 24. but unto you, i.e. faun the Dr. the Churches of Afia. The Author of the Plea told the Dr. that this is an offering Violence to the Text ; for after the Lord hath added a gene- ral Motive. Verf. 2%. that by this ftroke on Jezebel all the Churches /hall know that he is a jearcher of the Reins and Hearts, he returns * See the to an exprefs Application, and addrefles again his Speech Baok men- to thyatira, 1. In general, by the difcriminating Term, tioned, P*r* ^ ^ £ jn exDrefs mentioning of Thyatira, reftri£ing 2. faS. Ho. th>u$ thfi phrafeand Addrefs to that particular Church, to you and the reft in Thyatira, and not u you and all Afia *. The Similitude us'd by our Querift baffles his Defign j For mould a Mdfterfay to his principal S-rvant, Be thou careful, Sec. and then extend his Speech, take you all care, Sec. he palpably and in plain Terms without any Figure, 1. Addreffes the fingle Steward and then the other Servants : Whereas, there is here, by his Confcffion^ a Figurative Exprefion, and ufe of a Metaphorical lerm, Angel, which is, in the Text, clearly extended to a Plurality. 5 Chap. VIII. Ghtrm to the Vmhfttmns of SCOTLAND, ' 169 But our Querift next tells us of the Copy in the Kings Library at S. J dines'/, wherein the Copulative Particle x) is wanting. The Author of the *Plea told Dr. Monr»i that the Epifcopal Tranflators had no Eyes to fpy this Copy, but render the Text with the Conjunction £, ac- cording to the Current of all the Greek Copies, wherein this Particle is found, yea the whole Body of all Tranflators, who render the Text with a Conjunction, and without which the Text cannot be read confonantly to the Scope and Contexture,* Since, after that our Lord^ Verf. 23. has given this general Warning, I will give unto every one of you according to your TVorks, he adds, Bat unto you and the reH in Thyatira, viz. Tou Minifters, and the People in that Church contra- diftind: from others. For what he adds, cf the Succesfion of Bifoops in Ephefus from Timo- thy, and Irenaeus'j account o/Polycarp'/ being made $i(hcp of Smyrna 'tis fpoken to above j And his naufeous Canting over again what he might have feen Anfwered to Dr. Scott, by the Author he mentions, dis- covers what* a loofe and negligent Difputer he is. He defires fuch evidence for taking the Apocalyptic Angels in a Collective Senfe, as he has offered for their being taken for /ingle Perfms. He might have fatisfied his Defire, in reading what he pretends to have read, and a clear proof of this point in the Author 61 the Plea, pag. 70.71. And when he fliall be pleafed to look forward to pag. 72. he will find it made good, that his Party has no Advantage, tho' it were granted that the Angelis afingle Perfon. VI. Query. Whether the Angel mentioned, Rev. 20, having the Key of the Bottomlefs Pit, is to ire taken in a Colleclive Senfe ? If f&> why one Key muft have fo many Angels to hep it > And whether the Angel, Rev. 10. and he bei fore whej'e Feet John fell to Worfhip; Ch. 22. are to be underflood Colleclivdy^ And ify in no other place of the Revelation, it is taken in a Colleclive Senfe, he defires plain Proofs from Scripture, why the Seven Angels of the Seven Chur- ches, (hould, each of them, be underftood Colldlively} He tells us3 that*, un- lefs we can give fome good Account of this Matter, 'tis a Begging cf the Que- jlion This Query, at fiifrview, appears fo very mean and inconlide- rable, that it apparently deferves little or no notice,* Wherein it is very poorly fuppofvd, that the Cchtlive Senfe oi the Term Angel, in the Epiftles wiitten to the Churches, does oblige to undeiirand the Term Ar.gel, wherever mentioned in this Book, in the (ame very Senfe. A very fiivolous Suppofuion, and begging of the Queftion ,• Since the Term mufi needs be imderftoocl and expounded, according to the Scope and Ciicumftances of the place where it is uftd, as allSciip- tme Terms are, in the Senfe of all Divines ; And 'tis beyond all Debate, Y that 170 A Review And Cettfideration of the Chap. VHI. that the Term Angel, in feveral places of this Book, denotes the Ceiefti- al Spirits, properly, literally, and ordinaiily fo termed, As for the Paffages cited, had he read Commentators upon the Text, he might have found, that the Angels , Ch. 10. and 20. are fitly underftood, ac- cording to the Circumftances of the Text, of our Blefled Lord. Jefus, the Angel of the Covenant, and of no Created Angel. And tho' the literal, ordinary Senfe of Angel were admitted, ( which yet in thefe places cannot ) he has therein no (baddow of Advantage, as is evident from what is (aid. For the Angel mentioned, Chip. 22. 8. 'tis appa- parent from the Context, that he is a Created Angel, and as a Crea- ture refufing Adoration, wherein there is no ftiaddow of Ground for fuch a Collective Senfe of the Term, as is to be underftood of, and applicable unto the Angels of the Churches : Both Paffages, wherein this Angel is mentioned, being collated, do point out one Celeftial In- dividual Perfon, or Angel, fpeaking to another Perfon, fuch as John, For what he adds, of the precarious Foundation for Presbytery, pleaded for by its Advocates, as of Divine Rights and here depending on the different Acceptation of a Word [Ibou ] or [ i*u J, 'tis but an Effort of this Per- fon's Vanity, and a Difcovery of his having neither read nor under- ftood the Grounds which thefe Advocates plead upon, who, were they fuch Advocates for that Government, as he is found to be for Pre- lacy in thefe mean and Childifh Queries, their Pleadings, no doubt, , were little worth- VII. Query. Whether 'tie reafond tie to fay, that in ati Afia, taken for the Lydian or Troconfnlar Afia, there were but Sev'■ Hand, is fomewhat Myiterious , For, d thn ha. Relation unto the Bifinefi, which* he calls, m theTuleoJ the pre- ceeding Chap, ike Bufi-efs of tie Analytic Angel,, he has, in this Chae. another B^e/s in his Hand j The e Quer.es be.ng much, !fC wholly, Extraneous to his Grand prececding Ufi»[i. Y , I. Query, 172 A Review and Confederation of the Chap. IX. I. Query. How far any be fides Ap&files were concern 'd in tie firjl c*i*m #////? Jerufalem, of which Luke gives w an Account, Acts if. And whe- ther Deaions did not Baptize? And, if it be granted, that the) mi%ht, and did B*ptiz>, but could net Adminifter the Sacrament of the lord's Supper, whether their Voting in the frft Council, ( if they -ha i Suffrages there ) does not advance them to an Equality with fresbyten, at well as eresbyters Voting there, {if they did Vote) here raifes them to an Equality with Bifbcps ? This Query, which he imagines calculated fo well for his Dztign of Ad- vancing Bifhops, and Depi effing Presbyters, is nothing but a Farrago made up of Ignorant Miftakes. i* That the Council of Jerufalem wa9 made up of moe than Apoftles, fcil. the Elders 9f the Churches, the Text is clear and exprefs, and that in more places than one> v. 6. The Apoftles and Elders came together,, repeated a fecor.d and third time, f . 22, 23. As alfo, that they concurred pari pajfu with the Apoliles, in the De- bate and Difquifition, in the Sentence of the Council* and in the De- cretal Epiftle injoyning the Churches Obedience. 2/y, For what he adds of Deacons, the Author of the Plea, with the Concurrence of all Sound Proteftants, has afferted their having no Intereft either in the Adminiftration of the Sacrament ofBaptifm or the Lord's Supper; Their Work and Office, as is evident in the firft Inftitution, confiding in Serving of tables, and Administrating the Churches Alms to the Poor. What is pleaded from Philip's Pra&ice, the fame Author * difcover- ed to be utterly unferviceable to this Defign> he being * Hier% Bi* an Evangelifr, and no Deacon, when Adminiftrating fhop's claim, that Ordinance; So that his Infinuation of a Grant or part 2. pag. Conceffion, that Deacons did Baptize, but. did not Ad- 1 54, minijter the Sacrament of the Lord's Sapper, is among the reft of his Ignorant Miftakes. g/y, He demands ex- prefs Texts of Scripture to make it appear, that mere Presbyters and Deacons did Vote in that Council: A Fooiifli Demand : For, 1. As for the Voting of Deacons, he can affign no Presbyterians who aflferc it ,• And for the Voting of Presbyters or Elders the Text is clear and exprefs • Aud> for the Voting of Prelates of his Stamp and Mould, a Demand of Scripture Proof, exprefs, or, by Confequence, hereanent, muft needs Baffle the Qentleman to an abfolute Silence. As for our Querift's Proof from lertullian, lib. de Baptise. 17. that both Deacons and Presbyters did Baptizejn the Abfence, and by the Allowance of *beBilh*p,\et him read the Learned Rivet, Cat b0l. O'tbod. Tra8. 2, g»4> 22. P'g. 285-. where he will find this Teftimony vindicated againii his Fellow-Pleader for this Caufe of Prelacy, BaUm the Jefuite, who Ihews, that, in that paifages he fpeaksof the Humane *v*»* introduced in Chap. IX. guerief to the Vrtsbyterhm of SCOTLAND. 175 in his time, and that fertuUian, Apohg.G. 39. /hews, that thefe Prefix dents were the Pro fat i quiqae senior es. For what he adds of Philip's Btptifing, AGs 8. as a proof of Deacons Power to Baptize, 'tis already ^nfwered, and needs not be here repeated. II. Qu. Whit the Ruling Elder is ? Whether a mefe Lay-Man, er an Ecck- ftujlicl^ i If he be no more than a lay-Man, hove he comes by a Derifive Vote in the Church Jffw s ? He defies alfo to know the Charafier of the other Lty-E/derj, and iftheyfwe not their Original and Rife to Calvin, &c. Anf If he had underftood the Matter he /peaks of, and been, in any meafure, feen in this Controverfie, and what is pleaded by Presby- terian Writers in this point, he would have, no doubt, in flead of propofing this filly raw Query, concerned himfelf to Anfwer what is publiihed and pleaded largely from Scripture and Divine Reafon, foe the Office and Divine Right of this Church Officer, in fpecial by the Authors of that Elaborate Piece, entituled Jus Divin Regim. Bed. from Pag. 106. to i6r. " Upon thefe three notable Texts of Scripture, vix. ' firft, that of Rom. 12. 8. where they do at large make appear, that here there is One, who is an Officer* Ruling in Chrift's Body the Church, mention being made of One thit Rules; That his Office is nor Extraordinary, but Ordinary, Standing and Perpetual,- That he is an Officer dilrintf: from all other Ordinary Officers of the Church* theBi. /hop, Elder, or Deacon: That God himfelf is the giver and the Author of this Office. Alfo from that place, 1 Or. 12. 28. where this Of- fice is made appear, to be convincingly pointed at. in the Term of G*vemmenhy Governments, in the Abftrac5t» being put for Governors, in the Concrete-, and that by thefe Governments cannot be under- stood Governments in general ,- For that exifts not. but in particu- lar Kinds or Individuals: Nor can it be fuppofed here fet down, where there is an Enumeration of Church Officers: Neither can they be Matters of Families, fince all Families are not in the Church ,• Pagan Families are without : Nor can the) be the Political Magi- strate, who, asfuch, is no Church Officer, and for many other Rea. fons hinted by the Authors, part- 1. C. 2, likewife, part 2. Qh. 9; Nor cm they be the Preiatical Bifhops. a pretended Order above Preaching Presbyters, firce, in Scripture Language, the Bifliop and PiesbyterarealfoneO'der/Tif.r.5-,7. Nor can they be the fame '-with Helps, thefe two, Help*, Governments, being t.-iken generally for twedi- ftinct Offic s, and, in the Original Texf, mentioned diftindtiy, and diverfifitdbv diftinft Peri, dc, ««7m4«wj tbfcfttmts : Nor can they be ^ the Teaching E'ders. or Paftun, for fhat were to^make a needlefs ar.d „ abfurd Tautology, the Teacher being formerly mentioned in the fame 4 Verfe. I74 A Review and Con ft deration cf the Chap. IX. Verfe. The Exceptions of the Prelatical Party againft this Argument5 are fully (canned by the Author. ^ That Exception, that the Word xvfcfvMtK points at Governments in the Abftra<5t, is thus Anfwered, That as the Terms, Apoftles>Prophets,and Teachers, are fet down Con- cretely and not Abftra&ly, and are confefled to be three diftinft Or- ders enumerated, fo all the other five, tho' fet down Abftradly, are (by a Metonomy of the Adjunct for the Subject to be underftood Concretely, Helps for Htyers, Govirnments for Governours, &c. Other- wife we Ihall here charge the Apoftle with a needlefs impertinent Tautology, mould we fuppofe, that, in this laft Enumeration, by thefe Abftra&s, he means common Gifts of the Holy Ghoft, fince, in this Chapter, he had already fpoken of thefe Gifts Abftra&ly, v* 8, 9, 10. But here, v. 28, 29, 50. he fpeaks of Gifts, as in feveral diftin&Subje&s, for the Benefit of the Organical Body of the Church, and that in a Form of Enumeration; Firji, Secondly, thirdly, and not flopping at 'TA/n*//, but going on, in an enumerating way, to mew, that thole that follow are diftinft Officers. The third Text improven for the Divine Right of this Officer, is 1 lint. y. 17. Let the Elders that Rule well, he accounted worthy of dauble Honour, effreciaUy tbty that La- bour in the Word And Voftrine. Here are Officers of the Church ftiled Elders* invefted with Rule therein, approved of God in their Rule, and yet diftincl: from all them that Labour in the Word and DoGrine* Here there is a Genus or General, undtr which feveral Kinds of Offi- cers are comprehended, fciU vpcfrvnyi Riders, ily, Hereare two di- ftina species or Kinds of Elders* fcil. fbofe that Rule well, there is one Kind • and, Tbtfe that Ltfour in the Word ( as the Paftors J andVoSrine (as Do&orsor Teachers), here is the other Kind. 3/;, Here are two Participles exprefling thefe twoSpecies or Kinds of Elder s,vp9ir arts , Rul- ing, and Miriavru, Labouring j Thole only kule, that's all their Work, and are therefore called Ruling-Elders, non quiafoli, fed quia folum pr£- funt : But thefe not only Rule, but, over and bcfides, they Labour in the Word and DoSrine. 4/y, Here are two diftind Articles •« and »i, diftinctly annexed to thefe two Participles, it vpoerwref, and It urtumi. Finally here is an eminent Difcrecive Particle let between thofe two Kinds of Elders, to diftinguifti the One from the Other, viz. weW* efpeciaVy they that Labour in the Word andVeBrine; Intimating, that, as there were fome Ruling Elders, that did Labour in the Word and DoQrine, fo there were others that did Rule, and did not Labour in the Word. That the Term <*«W is a diftinguiihing Particle in the New Teftament, diftinguifhing one thing or Perfon from another, is evi- dent in many Parallels, as Gal. 6. 10. Ml. 4. zz. 1 Tim, y. 8. 1 Jim. 4. 10. Chap. IX. gnmesio the fresbyterUm of SCOTLAND. 175 ' 10. tit* I. 11. 2 tfw. 4. i|. 2 Pef. 2. 1.0. 4tf/ 20. ;8. and 26. $. « In all which places, the Particle p«*«c* is liied as a Difcretive Particle, * to diftinguifli one thing from another. But there needs no more Tranfcribing in this Point : Let ourQuerift, ifhe pleafe, perufe for his better Inftruftion in this Subject, the Au- thor forementioned, fcil. Jus Div. Reg. Ecclef. Mr.Rutherfocrfo Due Right 0} Presbyteries, chaf. 7. tf. 7. fag. 14 J, 146, H7- The Vindication of the Presbyterian Government and Minijlery% pub!i(hed Anno i6jo. by the Mi- nifters of the Province of London, from page 30 to 48. not to mention feveral others. Where, befides an Anfwer to the Objeaions exhibited, in this and the former Authors, he may find the Confentient Judg- ment of Antiquity in this Point. For the Story he adds, " Of Calvin's Banifhmsnt from Geneve, upon * the account of the firft Scheme of Government, till Ruling Elders c were let up, that thereby the People, otherwife diflatisfied, might ( have a greater mare in the Government:^ 'Tis among the reft of the atrocious Calumnies prompted by the Grand Accufer of the Brethren, to his Popim and other Agents and Inftruments againft that Worthy Divine,whofeJudgementin this Point being founded upon Scripture5 as is evident in his Senfe of the Texts premifed, 'tis evident that he herein a&ed upon Divine Warrant, and upon nofuch politick Grounds of Self- Intereft, as this Gentleman fuggefts, which a little view of his Senfe of the Texts premifed will convincingly demonftrate. Upon that Eminent Paflage, 1 Tim. j. 17. Presbyteri qui bene frajunt, &c. he hath thefe words/ CoUigere autem bine licet, &c. i.e. " We may hence conclude, * that at that time there were two kinds of Prebsyters or Elders,- becaufe ' all were not„ordained to preach: For the words' do clearly hold out, ' that fome had ruled Faithfully and Well, to whom, notwithftanding, 'the Fun&ion and Office of teaching was not committed, and there * were truely grave and approved Men chofen from among the People, ■ who, together wi$$P Paftors, by common Counfel and Authority, * did exercife Church Difcipiine, and were, to fpeake (o, Cenfors of -the * Peoples carriage, and for correding what was amifs. This Practice 4 and Cuftom Ambrofe complains to have worn out of ufe> by the ntglU « gence and (loath* or rather the pride of Doctors, while they will needs rule « alone. Upon 1 Cor. 12. 28. on the Term Gubtrnat tones, or Governments. Gubernationes, faith he, interpreter (eniores, qui frajides erant 'Dijciflin*, &c. i. e. " Governments I expound to be Elders who were Prefidents, or c Infpedors of Discipline : For the firft Church had its Senat, which ' kseped the People within the Limits of an Honeft,or Gofpel Walk, « which the Apoftle elfe-where (hews, while heafferts a two-fold Or- jyS A Review and Confederation of the Chap. IX. ' der of Presbyters, or Elders, i Tim. <;. 17. Upon Rom. 12.8. He ex- pounds the Term *p tfrtfpiw , he that rules, to the fame Scope with the former Paffages, as pointing at the Ruling Eldtr's Office. But our Querift will needs crave " Exprefs Texts of Scripture for c Kirk-SetTions, Presbyteries, Synods, and General AiTemblies, orCom- ' mttfions of General AiTemblies, as they are now in ufe among the * Presbyterians in Scotland. Not to Re-examine here his Demand of Exprefs Scripture, whereof above,* we may fend him again for the full Satisfaction of his Demand, to the Author mentioned, fcil. Jus Div. Reg EccleJ. where he may find the Divine Right of the Judicatories we own, fully cleared. For Parochial or Congregational Elder/hip*, he will find, r. thatPafTage improven Mat. iS.fromt/. 15M021. "Where f there is an Allufion to thejcwifh Ecelefiaftick Courts, which were ' of fuch a Nature as that there was, 1. a great Sanhedrim diftincl from f the Civil (as is made good by MtXiillefpie m the daron s Rod, Lib. 1. cap, ' 5. fag. 8. to 38. ) -ily, Iktwixt this Sanhedrim and their Svnagogue, * there was a midle Ecelefiaftick Court, called w^vn^v, Luke 22. 66. s with Atls 12. y. Finally, they had their leffer judicatories in their * Synagogues, or Congregational Meetings, which were not only for * Prayer, and expounding and reading the Scripture, but alfo for pub- ' lick Ccnfures, and correcting of Offences, as is evident by collating * Ails 26. 11. with Atls 9. 1, 2. Atls 13.1^ with 18.8, 17. Mark c\ 35, e 56, 38. LukeS. 31. and 13. 14. The Apoftolick Pra&ice is alfo here 'pleaded- as we find larger Churches planted and alTerted, fuch as ' that at Jerufalem, ABs%. 1. at Antiocb, Atls 13. 1. Ephefus, Revd 2. c 1. Corinth, 1 Cor. 1. So likewife fingle Congregations term'd Church- * es, or leffer Churches, 1 Cor. 14. 3, 4 Rom. t6. <;. 1 Cor. 16. 19. Colof. '4. 15;. Philem. 2. which particular leffer Churches, or Congregations, ' had their Rulers or Elders, as is evident by collating Abb 14. 23., with ' Tit. 1 y. R*m. 12. 8. 1 Cor. 12. 28. For Presbyteries, the forecited Authors will give fcim a clear Proof, 1. " From the mention made of the plurality of Presbyters, as affociat c and affembled in Presbyterial Churches, which is evident by collating ' Atts n. 27, 2K, 30. with Atls 21. 17, 18. and Atls 20. 17, 18. 2/y, * From the very name of the Preibyttry extant in Scripture, and which e clearly points at a plurality of P.esbyters affembled in a Presbyterial Church, 1 Jim. 4 14. the word alfo points at a Jewilh Presbytery, or 1 fuch affaciar Judicial M-seting of Elders, Luke 22. 66, *A8s 22.5. * Next, this is made good from the Pattern of diverfe fingle Congrega- * tions Presbytcrially fcffuciat in one Chinch, iuftanced at large by the ' Authors forfeited, in the Quiches of Jerujatcm, Ammb, Epbejus, and ' Qtrinth, Chap. IX. Sumts td the Vmbytevt&ns of SCOTLAND. \77 ( Corinth from page 192 to 209. and at large made good, befides other ' Proofs, unto Chapter 14. wherein alfo the Divine Right of Synods c or Synodal Affemblies is largely made appear. From kfts 1$, in 'which Meeting or Judicatorie they mew to have been put forth a Ju- c ridical Power, Dogmatick, Diatadick, and Critick,- Dogmatick, in ' afferting a Divine Truth in oppofition to a contrary Error ; Diatadick c with relped to Order in the Church ,- Critick, incenfuring the obfti* e nat. , In this Paffage, the Occafion of this Synodal Meeting is evident fcil. Falfe Dodrine preached by corrupt Teachers. Moreover, the * Members of the Synod are here reprefented, fcil, The Officers and * Delegats of diverfe presbyterial Churches, as, of the Presbyterial ' Church at Jerufalem, the Affiles and Elders j of the Presbyterial * Church at Antioch, Paul, Barnabas, and Others, Acls if. 2, 6, 12, and " befides thefe, there were Brethren from other Churches prefent as Members of the Synod, which appears, r. Becaufe it is called, 'the ^ whole Multitude, *«p 7* nkn8tfi the Apo files and Elders of the whole Church 'v. 22. The dfofrks, Elders, and Brethren, v. 2;. which could not be - the whole Companie of the Faithful, who could not meet in one pri* * vat Houfe, but it was Ceetus Synodkus, the Synodal Multitude, the Sy- ' nodal Church, where were alfo Judas and Silas, who were Affiftants * to the Apoftles. zly, Becaufe the Brethren of Antioch, Syria, and CM- ^ da were troubled with this Queflion, v. 2%, 24. Who therefore muft be ' fuppofed to have fought for a Remedy, and for that end to have fent ( their Delegats to the Synod. Again, that the Elders did in all Points ■ A<5t as Authoritatively as the Apoftles, is made good, not only in f their being fent as Delegats from the Church of Antioch, as well as | Paul and Barnabas, but alfo becaufe they are laid to have been fent to I the Eiders, as well as to the Apoftles, yea, and that, together with the I Apoftles, they were received by the fe Elders, that the Elders, together * wich the Affiles met to confider of the guejlion, that the Elders, together t with the Apoftles, after t and fay, it feenid good to the Holy Ghoji and to us, ^ and to us met together, or affembled with one accord, as muft be fuppofed from v, 2? and the Decrees are iaid to be ordained by the Elders as well 'as the Apoftles at Jetufalem, chap, 16. 4. This is clearly made good by feveral fuch Arguments in the Chapter forecited, JLec our Querift perufe Mr. Paget's Defence of Church Government, Part 2, Mr, Gi//e//>/Vs Vindication of Church Government, Part 2. Chat. 4, ProfefJ, ef Ley den Di/p. 49. with others. " " For General or National Affemblies, he will eafily grant that they have the fame Warrant with Synodal, there being in this Cafe, (when a Church becomes National, or a Nation conit it ute in a vifible Church ^ State) ,73 ARevievwd ConjtderAtUn of the Chap. IX. State) nothing but a majus & Mhm, or further Extenfion of the fame effential ludifijatories, consequently upon the fame Scripture Ground and Bafi with the former. The fame may be laid of QommiJJions cf Af- (emblies, which are nothing elfc but a leifcr Affcmbly with a deputed and limited Power, both as to the Subject Matter, and Jtme ot their A&i»e< and are anfwerable to the Affembly in their Adminiftrations. In a Word, thisQuef, Printed at Paris Ann* i6U. wherein he informs, That .the Majefty < of the Pontifical and Epifcopal Junfdidion is fo conjoyn d an d confe- ' derate together, that the Enemies cannot fo guide their hands, but « with the fame Audacity wherewith they affaulted the Pope s Crown, • they have lifcewife (hak't the Bifhops Miters, and as it were, with ■ one Bloody Wound, piere'd both their fides, &* This Piece is de- dicated to Cardinal RiMi* But Chap. IX. (Queries to the Vresbyterhm 0/SCOTLAND. 1 7Q But proceed we. Our Querift's great Argument is taken " from ' the Gouncil of Irent, and in fpecial from the Speech of Lavnez the ' General of the Jefuites, a Partifan of the Court of R$mt9 Lib. j. c$nc ' Tril where we find his long Difcourfe againft the Divine Right of 'Epifcopacy ; accorded by Writers in favours of the Papacy fince c that time, particularly BeUarmin de Roman. Pont. Lib. 4. So that al- lowing Epifcopacy's Divine Right, and that Bifhops have their ' Gommiffion from Chrift in refped to Order and Jurifdidion, and c not from the Pope, doth quite fubvert his ufurped Headship over the 'Church, and Epifcopacy appears a better Barrier againft Popery than s any other Church Government. To which I Anfwer, 1. With our Judicious Countrey Man Mr. Jamefon ( Fundamentals of the Hierarchy, Pag. xo4. 109.) "That the declaring of Epifcopacy** ( Divine Right at that Gouncil, could not have in the leaft injur'd the ' Pope's boundlefs Authority and Supreamacy which he pretends over ' all Bifhops, and his paramount Power had never been touch'd or c hurt by fuch a Declaration, fince his Infallibility was nevei queftion'd ' by the Bifhops at that Council, nor did they in the leaft endeavour ' the removal of the iniupportable Burdens and Slavery the Church c groaned under. What diminifhing then of the Pope's Power could have infued from rhis Declarature ? for admit once his Infallibility and Supreamaey Zeaioufly pleaded for by all his Agents, yea many Bifhops themfelves. his Miter ftands faft, and even fupported by Prelacy, faith not BeUarmin, Lib. U de fmtif. Rom. cap. to. Affirmant Gatholhl Petrum Apofiolum fuifie ntiut Ecclefi* Caput & principem loco Ckrifli, ah tpfo ekrifio infiitutum, & non eft Jimplex Errsr, fedHarefi, negate primatum Petri a Cbriflo infiitutum^ "That Peter being made Prince of the « Apofties, 'tis Herefie to deny his Primacy Inftiruted by Chrift. And faith not the fame BeUarmin, Lib. r. cap. 9; Paulum Pomificis mentio- ns™ facere, cum ait Ghriflum dedife alios Apojfohu &c. *' That the Apo- 'ftle Paul points out and makes mention of the Pope, when he faith that Chrift gave lome Apofties, fince that chief Power was not only given to Peter, but alfo to the reft of the Apofties, and to the reft as his delegates. Doth he not here cleaily affert the Divine Right of Peter as the only Supream Head, and the Divine Right of the other Apofties as Subordinat Bifhops * and Subordinats are not inconfiftenr Yea doth he not, IAh. 2. cap. a. diftinguifti betwixt that which is aMoluteiy to be believed Jure Divino, and that which belongs adfidem Catbohcam ? fo that with him it is not all one aliauii efie d* fide, and tfeae Jure Divino, which he even applies to the Pope's Supreamacy, and why not alfo to the Divine Warrant of Prelats ? So thac upon ^ 2 this %So ARevkiv' and Cottfideution of tfo Chap. IX. this Principle and Diftin&ion, it may ftand upon the fame bafis with the Pope's Supreamacy. Upon this we may further mind our Quenft of a remarkable Paffage of the Learned Turretin, Part ;. Quajft. 21 Pae 22 22 Quamvis, faith he, in Cmcilio Tridentino acnter dm dif- ceptatum fuerit, quo immediate jure Efifcopi funt Suferiores Preibyteru, Divino an lonti&h, certum eft. p«ucis Icalis Epifcopis except,*, qui hnguam condutlam prtth habcntes, p*gnabant p*o j^e POntifiao, ne, fi a Chrtjtt immediate dicmntur 'm^utl ayuaLs fitnnt Romano Epifcofo omnium fere Epifceptrum wcemfuiffe, Epifcopatum *fc de Jure Divine Q^frecepta efi hole (ententia *pud ipfis. i.e. " Akhc/ in the Counci lof Trent it 'was long debated* by what immediat Right the BirtioPs are Su- perior to Presbyters, whether Divine or Pontifical, tis certain, that ■ a few Italian Bifhops excepted, whofe Toneue was hir d to Plead for < the Pontifical Right, left, if it had been faid, that Bifhops were im- 'mediatly Inftituted by Chrift, they fhould be equal to the Roman < Bimoo it was the Judgment of almoft the whole Bilhops,that Epiic<> • oacv is of Divide Right. Which to this Day is the common receiv d < Opinion among them. Bellarmin, Lib.de cler. cap. 14. aflcrts the Bifliops Superiority over Presbyters by Divine Right, and that both as to the Power of Order and Jurifdidion. afr, Hence it appears how abfurdly he afferts, that the topes ufurped Beadfhif over the church u fub- vertedby the Jflertion of the Bijhops having a Commiffion fromUri/t, with refbeB to Order and Jurifdiclion. For why, I pray, according to Bellar- „Vs Senle, may they not have this Commiffion Subaltern and Imme- diately from the Pope, upon the fuppofal of the Popes Head (hip and Supreamacy, and Divine Infallibility from Peter, as the Papifts do gene- rally maintain ? And hence it appears, that he does Ignorant], tppoie in the Popifli Principles, their having a Commiffion from Lenfi, and having a Commiffion from the Pope * For we fee that in the Principles and Pleading of the great Champion Bellarmin, both are compatible it being the Pope's Prerogative as Chrifts Vicar, to give the immediat Inftifution unto, and Exercile a Supreamacy over all Subordinat Offi- cers, tho' their Primary Warrant for their Office be fuppoied Divine, vet bv the fame Divine Warrant in their Principles, it ftands in a Subferviencie and Sub/eaion to the Pope's abfolute bupreamacy, which we heard "Bellarmin affirm, cannot be oppofed nor xontradi&cd without the ftain of Herefie. Even as in Evangeliftick Orthodox Principles, the Divine Right of Inferior Church Officers, could not impeach the Apofties Infallible Directing Power, and Supream Authority ily Whereas our Querift clamours againft the Afifcrcion of Prelacy s being a Stirrup to the Papacy, and a Limb of Anticbrip, as an ignorant •malitim Qhmok I mall here again refume ( to mew that himfelfis Chap. IX. Queries to the Vresbyterhns 0/ SCOTLAND. iSi the Ignorant Clamourer ) a paffageof the Learned Mr. Jamefon, in the place formerly cited. * The tendency and nature of Prelacy, faith be, e and the Topicks, whereon it is founded, aiming no lefs at one Head over all, this Argument is not touched tho' it be granted, that by one Accident or other, the Humbling and Deprefling of the Prelats proves the Pope's Exaltation. Adding in the Second Place, . 42. The Univerfiry of Saumer profecutes the fame purpofe at large, and aflerts our Principles herein, Syntag. The/, Iheol de Divers. Mini}. Grad De Epifcopi & Presbyteri Dijcrim. from Jhef. 7. to 16. /lie wing "That in 'the Apoftolick Church no Paftor or Doflor, ( which, together with trie Leydtn Prorefiors, they affert to be the higheft ordinary Officer ) had any Authority over his Fellow Presbyters, in reliams Symprei byteros Au&mtaUm aut peiejlatem, Imperium am JuriJdiQionem led par & flush* cur a omnibus & fmgulis in totum gregem comptttbat , They denv all Authority, power, Jurifditfion, or Dominion oi one Paftor or Doftor over another, but all Paftors and Dolors in the Apoftolick times had the fame and equal Care and Charge over the Flocks. Thus, Tbef. 9 ano agam The/. 14, They affert, that in- the Apoftolick times all h afters and Dolors pari Jure, pari 4uthoritate ad Keeled clavum o- guaernaculajedebant, were fet at the Churches Helm and Government, endued with the fame Right, Power and Authority citingthele pregnant Paffagcs of Scripture to this purpofe, ABs 20 28 PM r. 1. Tbefi i y. they argue upon iTim. %. 2. " That PWdefcri- . bing the Bifhop, had he been diftinA from the Presbyter or Paftor ' § the Apoftie had not in that place omitted the Presbyter, but « ^°Uld ?lle adtde^ .tha£ the fame thinS» were requir'd in him, or if . he would have had either more or fewer things requir'd of the Paftor he had given fuch Admonitions, eife he had been wanting in his Duty. Cuing alfo to the fame purpofe, Tit. r s ■ S The Author of the Plea afterward gives an account of the Judgment of Proteftant Divines to the fame Scope Such as Maecevim frhaJptJu! fmtef.Seam. Cap. 6. Walieus de 1**8. Ecclef. Pag, ,47. Arnoldus Lux in Tenth, on A<5ts 20. Fefiu* Homius DfP. TbecL adv. Vontif. Di% 2 c M.Jcuus Loc.Com de Offic. Mmi(t. P,g. ;6o, 61, 62. Junius Animal tnBeUar.de Condi Contr. 4 Cap. ij. Gotham Expl. in Epi/t. aJ Galat. Cap. 2 Expl in Episj. ad Phil. cap. 1. & Expl. in 1 Pet. c Conicft. 8. Antomus Sadeelt Operum Thsol. Tom. 1, de Legit. Vocat, Pafla? For ,g4 A Review and Conjiderdtion of the Chap. IX. For Confeffions of Reformed Churches, he may find therein cited the Confeflion of the French Church on this Head, which runs thus, The Church mufl be Govern d by that Volioy which Gbrift has Ordain J, fell. by Paftors, Presbyters, Elders, Deacons ; averting that all true Pajiors are indued with equal and the jame Power under one Head and Bijhop ChriH Jefus. The Belgick Confeflion, Am 30. afferts, that all thrifts MinU fiers of the Woid, ( I hope our Querift will not exclude Bifhops from this Roll ) have the fame and equal Power and Authority, as being aM Mini&ers of the only Univerfal Head and Bijhop Chrift. To the fame Scope fpeaks the later Confeflion of Helvetia ( See Harmony of Confeffions, £hap. n. pag. 232. and Chap 18. pap;. 27,6. ) Thus alfo the Confef- fiori I of Bchem, Uap. 9, &o. To this is added the Tcftimony of Bi- jfhops themfelves. Bifhop Jewel Defence of Apolog. cont. Hardin, edit. An. 1570. Chryfojiom in 1 Tim. Horn. 11. Augujiin, Queft. Vet* & N Tefl. Queft. joi. Ambrofe de Dignit. Sacerd. Bifhop Pilkjngten on Revel, and in Treatife of Burning Paul's Church. Bifhop Biljon Per- petual Govern. Chap, 2. Likewife feveral famous Engiijb Doftors, Fulk againft the Rbemifts, on Tit. r. j. Whitaker, Loc.cit. &c. Now I dare pole our Querift, had the Reformers retain'd fuch a Love to Prelacy as he pretends, and rernov'd it only from a Principle of Neceflity, judging the Churches better Govern'd that retained it, would their eminent Dehors, their Umverficies, their Confeflion*, concerted by their Reprefentatives, have thusdifowned it, yea and upon fuch a clear and Scripture Convidion of its Unlawfulnefs as is inftan- ced : Which wilt plead that they difown'd and rernov'd it upon the fame Scripture Warrant, as they difown'd and rernov'd other Corrup- tions contrary thereunto ? .'./'■. , . , , . n For what he talks of Reformed Churches Apologies, for their necejjary rtmoval of "Prelacy, and their aiTerting the Government of Epijcopacy to be the beft Form. As our Querift gives us here buir his general blind After- tion without condelcending upon, or exhibiting any one of thefe pretended Apologies, fo this premifed clear and certain Account ot their Confeffions afferting the contrary, convinces his Affvrtion of Fallhood and Forgery. For proof of this Affertion, he cites Calvin, Injlit. Lib. 4. tap. 4. but dares not point unto or condefcend upon any ' Paragraph of that Chapter, in the leaft infinuating any fuch Neceflity or Principle of Calvin, or any other Reformers, as he is bold to fuggefr. The Faifhood of which Suggeftion I will make good from that lame Chapter, SeB. 2. wherein he afferts, Payors equal Town in Ordination, as having the fame Ofrcial Power and Funclion, which is Uifrittore conhderable, comparing this with his Commentary on PkiL "Chap. IX. Queries to the freslyteriam of SCOTLAND. 185 Phil, r. r. where he afferts, that Valors differ from Apoftles and Evan- geli9s, as being temporary and expird. He afferts, that there is One Epif- copacy, which is Qbrift's alone, whereof every Miniver of the Go/pel has an intire and equal Jhare. Thus Sett. %. & 14. compared with Comment, on Eph. 4. 11, Further, he afferts, that the Commands and Injunctions tp Timothy, Lay hands fuddenly on no Man *, and * 1 Tim, the other to Titus, ' 1 left thee in Crete to Ordain El- y; 22, ders -J*, are greundlefly pleaded to prove the Sole or Epij f copal 1[Tit.i.$t Authority of any One Church Officer in Ordination or Jurifdicli- on% Bat this Authority, according to him, is in the CoHep'at Meeting, and, at every Paflor de jure owes a Subjection to the Prophets or Ordinary Paftor* in the Lord,.fv the fir ft taejuraru and fix d Moderarors were de facto thus Subjeff, and had no Juridical Official Preeminence over the Judicatories, whofe Work was only to Moderat in the Meeting, and to gather the Votes* Thus Cap. 4. SeB. 2. at the end, compared with Lib. 4. Sap. 5, Sett* 14. if. with his Comment on that paffage cited, The Spirits of the Prophets are Subjecl to the Prophets, &c. and upon tit, 1. 5-, 6. . In.all which places Collated, we will find Calvin* Judgment in Opposition to Hierarchi- cal Prelacy fo clear, as none Can without extream Impudence deny the fame. For the Judgment of the Church of Scotland in this point, and the' Senfe of our firft Reformers, befides what is evident in ou£ Books of DifcipHne exhibited in that Plea he menti- ons #t the Judgrtte'ftc and A&ings of our Affemblies, when * Pari 2* not violented in the ufe of their Gofpel Liberty, and ac- Chap, 1. cording to their firft Original Mould, are a clear {landing pag.f, 6, Difcovery of this Churches Oppofition to Prelacy. To which clear proofs we have an Additional Evidence and fufficienc Gonvi&ion m Beza's 79 Epiftle Written to John Knox, wherein he 'afferts, that '"the Presbyterian Government which he brought into c Scotland, is the right Order* and the true Government of the Houfe •of God/ the Hedge and Wail of the Do&rine, without which it c cannot be kept pure, the want of which Government is the Gaufe * why the Gofpal is Preach'd to many in Wrath, He afferts, that W11I he Cat4 and cfwn the Reprefentatives of the Nations with the Body or the People concurring a Varty Only ? With what Senfe and Reafon, I PF For what he inquires further. If any of the Reformed lurches averted that it was necepry or lawful tofeparatfroma Church meerly hecauje Governed to mops 1 I Anfwer, the ftate and circumftances of the Churches oi Scotland and England being confuted, the Queftion appears ground- lefs, fince in Scotland Prelacy was obtruded oyer the belly of this Church without the leaft fliadow of her Confent in her lawful Judica- tories, againft a great Body of faithful Paftors contending for our Reformation, «nd the Nation's Vows againft Prelacy^ and their Concurrence therewith was demanded as an exprefs Badge and Tell ofdifowning pretbyterian Government, of renouncing their Oaths and Vows, and recognofcing, and owning a wicked blafphernous Su- premacy, upon the foot whereof this abjured Prelacy was ereded. S* That 'tis evident, the Schifm lay at the prelates Door, and their Affociats in this Wicked Courfe, who had thus offered Violence to this Church both in point of Union and Purity, As foe Presbyterians in England, Chap. IK, Queries to the Vresbyteruns of SCOTLAND. 1 87 'tis well known, that they are barred from Communion by a Wicked Sacramental T&, the Terms alfo of Communion being made the own- ing of Popifh, Scandalous, Superfluous Symbolical Ceremonies, befides, that Prelacy being by the Supreme Reprefentatives of the Nation once removed, and Sworn againft by all Ranks, this is a Cafe toto calo diftincT: from that which he mentions, fail, a withdrawing from a Church meerly hecauje Governed by Bifhops. V. Querie, Whether Presbytery's being fettled by Aft of "Parliament f upom the Foundation of the Inclinations of the People* be not as home a jlrokp at the Divine Right of Presbyterie, as the Ails of Parliament in time of Epifcopacy9 By which Oefar (eemd to take more than his due in &hurch Affairs, and the Government of it, is to Primative Epifcopacy, and the Intrinfuk Power of ths church*. To this firft part of the Querie, which is the Source and Main, I Anfwer, Firft, That it is grounded upon a falfe Suppofition, that the Parliament fettled Presbyterian Government upon this Foundation. In the Claim of Right, Prelacy is declar'd Scotland's Insupportable Grie- vance, a great Grievance and Trouble to this Nation, and this, befides its Contrariety to the Inclinations of the Generality of the People fmce the Reformatio on. If our Parliament found it fuch an infupportable Grievance and Burden, it mult needs be, that they acknowledg'd it fuch, upon fuch folid Grounds of Reafon, and Law, -as are of a landing Nature ; For a thing to be a Grievance , &nUnfupportable Grievance to a Nation, yea» and fuch in it felf, and in its own Nature, is a Principle and Ground prior to that of a Peoples Inclination ; And in this Cafe, the Inclination ( be- fides that it is declared General fince ths Reformation, and thus is fuppofed grounded upon xhtGofptFs Reforming Light)\s nothing elfe,than what the Law of God, of Nature, and Nations, the Love of true National and Chriftian Liberty prompts unto, ily, Tho* Prelacy was fecluded by, fuch an A<5t, wherein the Ground of the People's Inclination is mention- ed, as is above fem'd July 22. 1689. Sej]. 1. Aft 3. Yet in June 1690. by Aft y. Sefi. 2. Pari 1. King William and Queen Mary, Presbyterian Government was fettled by a Special A6t, wherein, tho' the Inclinations of the people are mentioned as one Ground, yet not that only, buc other Grounds are mentioned for eftabliining of Piesbytery^ia. "It's bti* g * agreeable to the Word of God, and moil: Conducive to the Advance- ' fflent of true Piety and Godlinefs, and efUbiifhihg Peace and Tran- c quiiiicy within this Realm. Now, 'Mr. Querift, do you think thefe are moveablei and not fixed and unalterable Grounds^ and unfliakea Pillars, as long as the Authority of God's Wordf the folid Foundations of Piety, Truth and God'inefs, the true peace and Tranquillity of the Nation founded thereupon, fraud fure and immoveable, and while thefe March-Hones A a 2 and l88 A Review and Confideratlon of the Chap,, IX and Land-marks, which the God of Order and Peace has fet, arenotre- moved (and removed they cannot be without Impeaching his Authori- ty) Presbyterian Government, in the Senfe.of our Laws, ftands fix'd, as-tiie unmoved Rock, Outbraving ail Waves of Times, Mutations, or unfetded Humours of Men, without theFearof God, and deftitute of trut. ^ietyand GoJUncfs, Enemies to the Nations ?eace and tranquillity ; So that,, whofoever (hall endeavour the change of our Church Government, are., m the Conftruaion of our' Laws put under this Character, andxonfe- quently the Querift and his Complices in. that wicked Dcfign. And no doubt there has been greater, yea, far greater Severity in Execu- tion of Laws in Vindication of the Nations Authority,than if his goodly Fardel of Queries, with other Pamplets of this Nature, were upon this. Ground condemned to the Fire. %ly, There's a great Difference be- twixt the proper genuine Ground of a Law, and fuch a Motive as may en-. courage the Magiftrat, together 'with other Motives, to exad it, and confequently to infert it into the Aa it feif. The proper Ground here is the bound Duty of the Civil Magiftrat,- to fettle in his Dominions that Frame of Government which thrift has inflituted, for preserving Order and Peace, for promoting. Piety in hisChurch, and this in theSenfe, Conftruai- on, and Scope of our Law, is Presbytery. That this is alfo moft agreeable to the Inclinations of the People, is a Secondary Motive, and fiipervenient Incouragement to the Magiftrat, to eftablim it by a Civil Sanaion. But (till the proper Foundation of this Civil Sartaion it felf, is in the Senfe and Conftruaion of our Parliament, and Laws of a higher Nature, (ell. The eftabliihing of that Government which Chrift has inftitutcd^ and therein eftabliihing Solid Peace/Piety, and Order in the Church and ' Nation; Which, as is faid, are fix'd and unalterable Piin- ciples fubjea to no fuch Mutation as this Querift fuggefts. Hence Aly- Our Submiffion to this Eftablifnrnent, is both Confonant to our known Principle anent the Divine Right $f Vresbytery, and has this for. an annex'd Incouragement,that the Reprefentatives of our Nation, have declar'd the Inclinations of the People to be correfpondent thereunto. And they muft in all Reafon be prefum'd beft to underftand what are. their General, True, and Well grounded Inclinations. , Hence it appears, that our Querift s Parallel of this Cafe with that of King Charles'* cftablifhing of Prelacy, and his Parallel and Comparifon of the State of Presbyterians now with Epifcopal Conformers then has no fliadow of a Ground- which wiiifurder and evidently appear,if it be confidered,. •i. That King CW« eftablifhed Prelacy upon the foot of his arrogated boundlefs Supremacy, as the Fountain of all Church Power, as Su- preme Church-Officer and Head ql thisGhurch^arrogating to himfelf the. * " ~~ Church. Chap. IX. Queries to the Presbyterians of SCOTLAND. i2§ Church Government, as his Ecdefiaftick Government, and inherent Grown- Rigbt. ily% Hence all Church Government Intrinfick to a Church as fuch, was raz'd to the Foundation (I mean (till as far as Legal Enae"Hngs could reach J, and all Intrinfick Power of Judicatories taken exprefly from the Office- Bearers of the Church, all Church Judicatories being raz'd in Jnno 1662, till Auchoriz'd by his Ma jetty and his Bifhops. The Difpofal of the Government being declar'd the Crown- Right, and in- herent perpetual Prerogative, and then the Biihops are reftor'd to their Subalern Power over all Church Difcipline, fo as the Meetings were to be made up of (uch perfons only, as they judged of known Prudence and Loyalty, and the perfons found fuch in their Lordihips Judgement, our Laws do only allow to give them Advice, without the leaft fhadow either of power to choofe Moderators (impofed folely by the Biihops ) or of a Decifive Vote or Suffrage in Government. And moreover, in this very power the Biihops themfelves were but his MajefKe's Crea- tures, wholly at his Dilpofal, either as to their Invefliture, their Act- ing, or laying them afide from their Office. In the Aclfor the Nati- onal Council* the confHtuent Members, the Matters to be treated of, the Authorizing the Conftitutions as Church Canons, is folely at hisMa-r jetties Difpofal, the Work of this pretended National Council being declared this, fcil. Only to give- his Majiftie Advice, and that upon fuch pints only as he offers and gives in te them, without the leaft fhadow of any InherenfcJDecifive Suffrage. Hence, by vertue of this monftruous Supremacy in the kdt for the High Commiffian, his Majeftie in the Exercife of this his Ecclefiaftick Government, puts Excommunication and Spiritual Cenfures, and confequently the Power of Keys, into the hands of perfons meerly Civil. See 1 AH 2 SeJJ. Pari. My 1661. which ena&s-hisMajeitie's Supremacy as an Inherent Right of the Crown, for difpofing of the External Government of che Church, and declares' that whatever the. King mail determine with Advice of the Biihops, and fuch of the Clergie as he (hall nominat of the Church,' /hall be Valid and-Effe&ual: Rescinding all former A&s anent the Churches Intrinfick. Authority, or giving any Church Power. or Jurifdiclion to her Office- BearerSj other than that which acknowledges a Dependance upon, and Subordination to the Soveraign Power of the King as Supreme, and is to be Regulat and Authorized in the Exercife thereof by the Bifhops, who (as his Majeftie's true Creatures) are declared accountable to him for their Adminiftration. And in 4 Aft, Sefj. 5. of the fameP*r/. for the Conftitution of a National Synod,the King is made Soveraignly and properly to conftitute this Aflembly; both as to the appointment of it's Members Conftiment. and of its conftaqt Prefident, the abfolute Regu- lation: joo A Review and Con ft deration of the Chap. IX. lation of things there to be propoied, declared to be only fucb as be fhJ* be plea[edtojtgnifie, the Decifions of which National Synod are declared only to be Valid, in fofar, as confident with his Majefiy's Prerogative and Laws, and Strengthened by his Approbation and Ratific; tion. U- pon which, the Judicious Author of Naphtali- page 18;, 184,18 ^&c. in- fers and attefts the World to confider,if he could have done more in the Confthution and Regulation of his Court of Exchequer; And if he hath not done all as to the Conftitution of -this Court immediately depending upon our Lord Jefus Chrift, and his Sole Authority, which he himfelf hath done, or poflibly could do. and that fuch Defining, that the Sole Power and Jurifdi&ion of Chrift's Church doth not ftand within the fame, but is Fountained in, and derived from the King, and that all Church Officers in all Church- Matters are accountable unto him, is to fcc the King upon our Lord Jefus his Throne, and is a high Derogation from, and Reflection upon him who has builded. the Temple of the Lord', and bears the Glory, and fits and rules both as King and Prieft upon his Throne, &c The Author of the Cafe of Accomodation ex- amined, infersfromthefe and fuch like Ads, that there was not fo much mGenus of a Church Government then exiftent. Now, this being clear, the Anfwer is Eafie and Ready to our Que- rift's furder Inquiry; Whether the Epifcopal Clergy, who in their Judgement thought thefe i^cls of Parliament gave the King too much power in £ ihis pirate as Senfed by the Cur- rent at.d Scope ofthele A&s, it muft net csidpect ail External Ordinan- ces, whereby our Lord exercifes hi I \ srnal Government as political Head of his Church, in CoauadifHn&iun unto his Internal influence upon Chap. IX. Queries to the Trtshyterhm of SCOTLAND. 191 upon the Church Invisible. %ly, The Magiftrate affumes no other Power over Judicatories, than Calling and Strengthening them by his Civil Authority and Infpedion ; Their choice of Moderators, whether of Supreme or Subordinate Judicatories, the Conftituenc Members thereof, their free Votes, their Decifive Suffrage being all regulated by Ads of our Church,and matters to be Treated on are at the Liberty of our Church according to Presbyterian Principles. Where- as all was contrary in time of Prelacy ; 1. There were no National Aflemblies through all the late Reigns. 2/7, No Spiritual proper Power, or Freedom of Judicatories, either as to the Decifive Suffrage or Choice of Moderators, the Bifhops Power abfolutely fwallowing up both, for their Negative Vote own'd by our Pamphlecers, took abfolutely away all Freedom in thefe Meetings competent to Church Judicatories, Presbyteries were not fb much as daign d with that Scripture Name, but by a New Stile termed Exercifes. And ali the pretended Authority in thefe Meetings of the Bifhops themfelves, who were their Heads and Lords, did abfolutely terminate and center in the King, the Fountain and Center of all the Church Power, who by hii own & his Parliament's exprefs Declarature in the legal Declarature and Extenfion of the Supreamacy, was to Exercife the Tame according to hit fleajure, and as his Ma\efy jhould think fit, -with rej}etf to all Church Meetings and Matters therein cognofcible, without the ieaft hint of any other Rule he was to walk by *. Was * See p»i. 2. everfuchaMonfter of'Tjrrany fee up in a Chrifrian ^fn9/'7H|s Proteftant Church ? Finally, the Prelatick Clergy did Majsftie's Su- formally own this Supreamacy, not only in their preamacy over Oaths, which the Bifhops exa&ed at their Ordinations, all Perfons and of Obedience to them as they were then Conftituted fij^, s Ecc,e* and Authorized, as is faid, but alfo in their Oath of Alleageance including a dired: Acknowledgment of His Maieftie's Power, as then Eftabli&ed by tXSee,A®fo? _ # ' * caking the Oath .Law *f\ of Aileagcance, I need not ftand to Animadvert upon the bad and with the ac- Snconfiftent way of exprefling his Querie, he tells us, knowiwgement That Csfar only feemed'to take more than his due in Church p,"" „?jf ^ Affairs , and the Government of it, which might be con- ^# „_ parit fiftent with accl iiming only what was really his Due, An. 1661. ( ftnee a juft and real Claim may tofom.: feem othnwife ) and vet that the Epifcopal Clergy in then Judgment, which no doubt our Gentleman has a Veneration for, thought thefe Ach »f Parliament gave the 'Kiug too much Vower in Spirituals, Now here's a Scylla or Charybdis 192 A Review *nd Ctnjideration of the Chap. IX. Charybdishe is Shipwrack'd upon, or a Dilemma which in this point may be offered to him,- Either King Charles really }a?idupon the matter ,toofe too much in Spirituals ( to ufe hh Term ) or not : If really and upon the matter and very Deed, how comes he to fay that he feem'd only to take fuch Power ,• and what can he fay for the Epifcopal Clergy their Recognofcing and Aflerting this Power by their Oath, and how will he free them from the ftain and blot of falfe Swearers?If apparent only, fdl. to Ignorant or prejudicat Obfervers, what a Crack yea and Dif- loyal Byas was in the Epifcopal Clergy's Int-lle&uals, and Fidelity to their Prince, if their Judgment led them to think he to$k more Power in Spirituals than was his Due • yea, may I add, in their Consciences, who by Oath Recognofced this Power againft their Light? But here comes a new fprung Query from the former, Tiheth'er the Epifcopal Clergy were more Eraftian, who would not take the Teft, without an authorized Explanation of it by the King and his Council) by which the In* trinfick Power of the Church is referved iniire to it, as it was pracli/ed in the fir (I three Centuries : Or the Presbyterians , who, when it was propofed in Par* liamtnt, that the Church might be declared Independent of the King and Go- vernment, and their Intrinfick Power ex -rci fed by themf elves t their • Fr tends in Parliament Voted againjl their having this Power, and the Gommitee of the General Afiembly rejected the Overture made in favours of the Power and Rights of the Church"*. Wherein our Querift, as he has ( with his Prefacer ) fuggefted, together with his other grofs Errors and Miftakes, feveral grois Lies in Matter of Fad, concludes his Pamphlet with a Signal and Calumnious Reprefentation of this Matter, as. well as a Foolifh and Impertinent Inference therefrom. Firji, As to Matter of Faelr, 'tis falfe, that the Queftion was fo ftated in Parliament, as that a Vote paffed upon't, altho' fome perfons ( and thefe known to be no fincere Friends to Presbyterian Government ) made fuch a Motion of that Parliamentary Declaratureinftanccd. Our Querift, in telling u^ That our Friends in Parliament Voted againjl their having this Vower, would fo impofe upon Ignorant Perfons, as to make them believe, that tKis Mat- ter was formally ftated, and a Vote paft upon it in Parliament,- Where- as, all that know our Affairs, do know, there was never fuch a thing, nekher Queftion ftated, nor Vote paft. Next, for the Gommijfton of the General Affembly, they did not ia- deed, at that time, addrefs for fuch an A#> being a Limited Court, and having no Inftructions to that effecft from their Conftituents, Moreover, there might be other weighty Confiderations* .determining not to move in it at that time, both in refpecl: ot the bad and finiftru- ous Defigns of fueh. a» might ftart fuch a Motion, and for other Rea-J fons .• Chap .IX. Queries to the Presbyterians of SCOTLAND. j$$ sforis ,* ; S6>tbat this will fall utterly fhort of proving their difowning th€ Ihing it (elf. He is very dull, who cannot diftinguifh betwixt the Law- fulnifs of a pra&ice in it felf» and Expediency thereof hie & nunc j And wflo knows not, that Affirmatives bind not ad femper. ilyt For what he aflerts of the Bufinefs of the Tejl, it is utterly un- ferviceable and impertinent. For, i. Granting that fuch a Declara- tor was made by King and Council, the Queftion is, whether it could comport with the Words of the Oath. Dr. Sanderfons Rule is, " That *■ no Interpretation can be admitted, which cannot agree to the Words c wherein it is conceived, in their proper, genuine, literal, gramma* ' deal Senfe ,• That the Oath being Stricli Juris, the meaning is to be 'kept, when clear from the Words ,• but, if doubtful, none muft in* ' dulge their Inclinations and Liberty of doffing, and either give unto * others, ( N. B. ) or take to themfelves (uch a Senfc as the Words will 1 not beax. [De JuramJromiffor^ralecl. 2.] Again, 2/7, King Charles in the whole. Gourfe of his Government, together with his Parliament' ftill owned the Supremacy in Matters Spiritual, as above reprefented by our Parliaments A&s, and, in this Refped and Confideration, as the Chief Flower ofbisCrown and Prerogative Royal, And all Royalifts will owne it, that he neither could, nor mult be prefumed to have intended to part with, and give away his Royal Prerogative, and Effential Flower of his Crown, and, confequently, to give fuch a Declarator, as was con- trary thereunto ; Which were ( to ufe his Father the Martyrs Dialect. ) no lefs than a Betraying of his tr»fi committed to him by God in a Lineal De (cent *. ;/y, I would gladly know, where * See King was that Scruple of his Loyal Epifcopal Clergy, anent Charles's. An- the Churches Intrinfick Power, in all the preceeding E- fwers ' at his ftablifhments, and fcrewing up of the Supremacy, even Arraignment to a non ultra of Arbitrary Tyranny, by io many A#s, before theHigb and in their owning this by Oaths, before that time ? Court of Ju- And who, I pray, were fo Zealous and forward in this ftiee, fo called. Exaltation of the Supremacy^ as theirLords5the Biihops, the/e Court (Sreatures , and Grand fools of Arbitrary Government, and Lawlefs Supremacy?So that their former Praftice renders this Scruple,^©' Matter of Fa<5t were fuppofed true, a Prctcftatien contra Factum, if, at leaft, they had not evidenced their Repentance for all former Comply ances there* with ,• which they never fo much as pretended. But the truth is, the Monftruous Abfurdity of that Te(t, betides the palpable Contradi&ions therein, having amufed and alarmed all Men, who had any Exercife of CJonfcience, fo that feveral of their own Party choofed rather to abandon their Charges than imbrace it, fome Imprefilons of Shame, B b and 1 94 A Review And ConfdcntloH tftht Chap. l£. and to guard their Reputation againft that which all the Nation were' crying out upon, put others of them to pretend Tendcrnefs, and to plead for fuch a Limitation and Explication, as is fuggefted, but fuch, as, to all Men of Senfe and Ingenuity, both upon ground of their pro- ceeding and after Pradices, appeared a mere Sham and Counterfeit Cover of Fig Leaves, to hide the odious Nakednefs of this wicked Teft. To clear this further, I would gladly know, what Retrenchments or Limitations were ever made in Parliament of that Supremacy, which had been, by feveral Ads, fcrewed up to the higheft Peg: And (which clears all' that is premifed to the utmoft Conviction J was not this Tranfcendent Crown ( adorned with thefe Flowers of an Abfolute Su- premacy ) let upon the Head of a Popifli Prince, who thus became Head of their Prelatick Church, and confequently the Pope > For, this Prince, in his Principles, owned him as the Churches Head. Was there any thing like a Reftritfion or Limitation to falve Proteftant Principles, far lefs the Churches Intrinfick Power? Nay, what will thefe Gentler- men, together with our Prefacer and Querift, fay to that which their own Stillingfleet has adduced, hen. p. 389. to 39?. wherein he makes appear, that, in the Reign of Henry VIII. The Arch-Bifoop of Canter- bury, with the whole Body of the Bifliops then in Beeing, in Anfwer to fome Queftions propounded, gave under their Hand and Subfcriptions, A Renunciation of all Ecclefiaftick Authority proper to the Church, or Intrinfick therein, afcribing it intirely to the ChriHtan Magi/Irate, as his proper Effential Office. * An Affertion owned in after times by fome of their Chief Do- lors, and Advocates for Prelacy. Hooker, Eccl. Pol. pag. 2, 19, 20. being againft all particular Forms of Church-Government, afcribing its Deter? ruination to the Civil Magifirate. Sutlive alfo, in his Book de Vresbyterio, Ch. 4. pa%. 6, &c. dt (owning all Governing Power in the Church, but what is lodged in the Civil Magistrate. The fame is owned by Bilhop IVhitgift, in his fecond Anfwer to Cartwright, who makes the Supreme' Magistrate the Supreme SubjeB and Fountain of Church-Government, which was the generally owned Principle of all the Bifliops in his time. Nay, what will they fay to the Affertion of their highly applauded and juft Lord Advocate, ( Ml, pag. ;;. ) That, fince the Reformation, the King it come by our Law in place of the Pope. So that, in this pretence of owning an Intrinfick Power of the Church, they contradi& and baffle the Judg* ment and principles of 1 he Bifliops in England, in the beginning of the Reformation* yea, and in after-times, Arch-Bifhop Whitgift his Judg- ment in this point, with his Fellows, who, in Defence of the An/, to Cartwright, pag. i-jz* compared with pa£* 435- a^rts ^ ^amc tmnS* togettyw Chap. IX. Queries to the ?resbyterhnt ef SCOTLAND. i 105 together with the other Epifcopal Doctors inftanced. And, in pre- tending fuch Intrinfick Authority, they have not only baffled their Ad- vocate, but Treafonably impeached his Majefties Supremacy and Popedom afferted by the Laws. But this we may touch again. Not to fpeak of the Fundamental Laws thus incroached upon, when this Prince with abare-fac'd Defign of overturning the Reformation, and eftabliihing Popery, was cordially received and imbraced by them, did they not (o cordially own him, as to pray for his Intereft, as the Darling of Heaven ? And do not all that party, to this day, own that Intereft of his, in Oppofition to proteftant princes and princeffes fince eftablifned? And is not the Confequence hereupon dear, that they have difcover* cd themfelves to be ftatcd Enemies to the Reformation of this Church having lifted themlelves with that Party, who ftandupand contend fo? a French Tyranny in our State, and Popery in Confequence thereof .* That pretended Limitation and Referve of the Churches Intrinfick fewer, as frafiifcd in the fir ft Three Centuries, can no wife confift with the Exten- sion of his Majefty's Prerogative and Supremacy, whereby he is declar- ed to have Authority to determine all Church Meetings, and Matters therein cognofced upon, as he fhaU think fit ; So that thefe Gentlemen by pretence of fuch a Liniitation,have put theCenfure of falfe Swearing upon all that Swore and Recognofced, by Oath, his Majefty's Autho- rity, at leaft before this Limitation, and muft acknowledge, that there- in a Government was Recognofced, oppofite to the Churches Intrin- fick power in thefe firft Ages, Befides, feveral points of thatConfeffi- on, Recognofced and Sworn to, are clearly repugnant unto their Prin- ciples, fuch as the 8, Art. of a fi*ed determined EUttion% in Opposition to their Arminian principle of Conditional Eleclion. As like wile the ni and i;. upon the fame ground. Befides, whoever ponders what is contained in Art. 14, touching Good Works* will find their Principles in point of Worfbip, clearly condemned, and their Dcftrine, with re- fpe<5fc to Humane Traditions in the point of the Sacraments, and other- ways. And who knows not, that, in Art. td. Ecclefiaftical Difci- pline, rightly Miniftred as God's Word prefcribes, whereby Vice is repreffed and Vertue nourffhed, being afferred as a neceftary and true Mark of the Church of God, their Engagements and Oaths mentioned, and Extenfion of the Supremacy, fo as to reach the Difiojal of the Gc- vernment as his Majesly thinks fit, is thereby clearly condemned, yea, and that Prelacy, in it felf confidered, which they own, as being ciofs to the Scripture Pattern in point of Government? So that, upon this very ground, their Hierarchy robbed their Church of one Sound and Ef- (ential Mark of a true Church *f Chrift, and ftood oppofite to the Chur- B b z ches %$6 -* Review And Confiderdtion of %the Queries, &c. Chap. IX", ches Frame of Government in the firft Three Centuries • For they cannot make appear, that the Government, during theie Centuries, did Coalefce unto fuch a MetrcpoHtical Headship* as was then eftabliiried. Yea, doth not 7, S. with their other Advocates, plead, that all Dioce£ fan Bifhops are on a Level ? Nay, what will they fay to drt, 21. con- demning all Men's Inventions in Adminijtration of the Sacraments ef Bap* ti I'm and the Lord's Supper, fucb as Oyl, Salt, Spittle, and fuch like in Bap* iifm? 1 would know, whether this fuch like doth not clearly include their Ceremony of the crofs, pra&ifed in the En^lifh Church, which they fo warmly Court, and the Kneeling ?o/lure in the Celebration of the Lord's Supper be not alfo condemned, among thefe Inventions inftan- ced as oppofite to the Table Poflure in our Lord's Inftituiion ; Since the Article condemns, as a Humane Invention, what ever is oppofite to the/rjl Institution and Original Purity. Further, this Teft obliges to the Maintenance of all his Majefly's Prerogatives then ef obliged, and this Oath they profefs to Swear in the Genuine Senfe and Meaning of the Words , wherein all Ecclefiafick Meetings, or Treating of any Point of Religion, without his Majefty's.fpeciai exprefs Licence and Command> by this So- lemn Oath, is pronounced unlawful: So that no Sophiftry imaginable can reconcile this with the Churches Intrinfick Tower, and the Exercife thereof in the firft Three Centuries. Nay, fhould the Prince embrace - the grofleft Herefies, and exercife the groffeft Encroachments and Ty- ranny imaginable over the Church, the Church is left without all Help and Relief by any of the Means God has appointed for her Subfiftence, and the Churches Practice, which the pretended Limitation pretends to approve of, is thus, in a plain Contradiction thereunto, difowned ajid condemned. So that, upon this, with many* other Grounds adduce- able, which, for brevity, muft be omitted, that pretended Limitation, or Explication, rather Jays open, than hides, the odious Nakednefs of that wicked Engagement, which, to this day, ftands upon Record, as a clear demonftrative Evidence of the Wickednefs and Naughtinefs of that Government, and, without- Repentance, as an Indelible Blot of 3gnominy upon the Impofers and Swearers of that wicked felf-contra- dicting Oath. And thus we leave our Querift to his more fcrious and better digefted Thoughts, upon this and the other Points dicourfed. *97 A CONFUTATION O F A N Additional PAMPHLET; ENTITULED, A Query turned to an Argument in favours of Epifcopacy. LTHO' There's nothing of Subftance or Nerves m this mean Difcourfe, but what may be found ob- viated and removed in the premifed Reply to the Queries, ( in fpecial to thefe of the IV. Chap. ) yet, for further clearing what has been offered, and left the Author of this New Effay, who (eems to be the fame with the Querift, fliould boaft of thi<; fuppofe^: Unanfwerable Piece of Stuff, I fliall offer this Review of it. Hit guery, he tells us, is founded upon one fingle text of Scripture, fcil. Mat. 28. 19, 20. containing our Lord's Grand Commiffion to the A- pottles, Gey* therefore and Teach all Nations, Baptizing them in the Name of the Father, of the Son, and of the Holy Ghejt, teaching them to obferve aU things whatfoever lhave commande^ou*, andlo lam with you eves to the end of the World. Which he parallel's; w]th John 2c 21, 221 23. and 2 T/w.' a/2« lit. r. y. I fhall not ftand upon the particulars he holds to be contained in thefe Words, fuch as, A Cmmiffwn from cur lord to hit Jpoftler, the manner how all Nations are to be Difcip/ed, the Limitation whereby the ApofU.es »ere reftrffied in teaching their Vifciples, «ur Lord's pro- mife to bvAfofllef, of being mtbthem to the end of the World\ Upon which 198 A Confutation of m Additional Pamphlet-? Entituled, which laft, he mainly founds his Reafoning in this Pamphlet : Nor need I ftandupon Examining his. many impertinent Bantenngs, where- of there's good Store in this Goodly Piece. ^ What he fays upon the firft Point or Inference, Pag. 4. That no C$m< mifflm can le valid, which k not rightly handed down f rem the Applies in a Channel wherein none of thz Effentials of Ordination have been omitted ; Or, If an Immed'tat and Extraordinary Commijfnn be pretended, it mull be vouched by Miracles: 'Tis fpoken to above, and mall be further touched,' when we mail examine what he further adds upon this Point. Here only 'tis obfervable, that, in Contradiflion to himfelf, he after pleads for a Succeffion of the Apoftles Commiflion and Office as Ordinary, altho' by hk Confeffion thus vouched by Miracles- Pag. 7. We find him holding, that varying h Words in the Ainimfr*. KonofVaptifm, viz. in point of the Parents Obligation, th the Matter it felfkkeeped and adhered to, is, in Presbyterians, a Breach of Regularity } With what Senfe or Reafon, let the Indifferent judge. ?a° 8. He tells us, That Presbyterians, in their Admimfiration of thu Ordinance, not having th*t Tower, put 4 Cheat, yea a great Cheat upon People, making them Difciples of a larty, and not at d of cbrifts School ; Mat this u a lamentable Deceit, having fuch a Train of Dreadful Con/equences, at 'tm all Mens latere}} to efchew the fame : To which he adds the Ser- vice-Book Cant Good Lord deliver us. This Renedion upon this Natio- nal Church and oth«r Reformed Churches, in point of the Mimfiery thereof, and Ordinances Adminiftred, is fuch, as the very Repeti- tion fufficiently expofes the Author. , .■ ^. ;; Pag. 9. Having told us, Ibst the Apofihs, in reaching., were toobferve what the Lord commanded them, and not what ever they pie a/ed ; He gives us thereupon this Modeft and Wile Inlargement, Obferve, lalth he if thou can find any cmmand in all the Mew fejlament for teaching up Rebellion as the v/esbyterians and other §et}*ries did 1* King Charles 1/3 j time, of which Principles Pencland-H/ffi *»<* Bothw '^Bridge are not to be forgot ten Evidences, be ft Jes all the 01 ber Calamities they occafioned m tbn Ifcndjy theft Principles. But befides that, in this foulfoai Imputation and Eruftati- on of his Angry Ignorance, he neither hath nor can mftance Principles maintained by Presbyterians, tending to a Rebellious lffue or Conle- quence, nor, upon foiid Grounds, faften this Imputation upon thele Armed Appearances, he mentions, which has been demonstrated by Arguments, which all his Party are not able to Anfwer 5 He fnould, in Correfpondence to what he afferts of our Lords Limitation of the Apoftles Commiflion, have given us an Account, where our Lpid commanded his Apoftles the Ufe of the Croft in Baptifm, and the A Query turn'd to an Argument in favour, «f$$ifco$*ci. roa other Ceremonies of the Church ot England, whereof he is fo fond For what he adds of cm pronouncing at Reprobate,, »k. tre n,t of,ur ferfrafitm andCommmio*, he could not readily have forged a more VrJ- notorious Lie. 8 re 6ro!s tUm> °»» »** Shrift commanded} But why may not Presbyterians return and retort Hpon "'mffh's Tragical Cant, p torrid I i£ his condemning as Seda- Ih'Jrl 1 eh"ft's.Tr«fB?dy ^d Pec!,**,, ( t0 ufe his T^erm fall rt E r *' /" ?°-nt of P"nc'Ples ™°- Pr^ice, of a Piece with the Church of England in her Hierarchical Government and cereLialmrZ and thus not only the whole Church of J, eland, but moft of the Re! ^rm^,-rC, " '" 9«fe If- b> »r Pr°f'V>»- be meant our Chare ches Doctrine contained in our Confiffions and Covenants, and bC r*'n'ft°nfeqUenLly' ^3t whichis correfpondent there"™ when he ftall /hew us, Wh«rein this contradias theProfeffion of the Reform, ed Churches, and their fuit.ble Practice, his Rd'emment mail be ac- w&bSStfuS. l00k upon " as his other EfUpti0BS of «• * 2oo A Confutation of an Additional Pamphlet $ Entituted, Ibid. To fhew we are all Pigs of one Sow, he inftances our fending Mitui fieri, upon a Petition given in to the General Afiemblf, to Want ana" Preach in the 'North. Whether this Expreflion ( which he will have excufed be- caufe Proverbial ) be more Swinifo and Dirty, or his Inference imper- tinent let others judge. II Perfons of Note, and others, in the North, from an Afflicting Senfe of the Penury of Paftors, and apparent Famine of the Word, Petitioned the Aflfembly for a fuitable Supply, what Monftruous, Invidious Uncharitablenefs appears in this his Foulfom Re- flexion upon the Affemblies granting fo juftand neceffary a Demand ? He will have no Man authorized to AdminiHer Sacrament si refufe to Initiat an) who have a Rightfo Baptifm, and can claim it. And I would gladly know, why his Englifb Hierarchifts refufe this Ordinance to fuch as would' not have it Adrniniftrcd with their Sign of the Crop; And whether their admitting only fuch as will accept it with this Ceremony, be not a lifting; men into a Tarty, this being diiowned by the Body of all Refor- med Churches? And let him Anfwer his own Query ( page prececding ) Whether this be according toChrifis Inftitutionyand the plain way of Christianity, crnotl And whether our ingaging Patents to Educat Children in ,the true Proteftant Do&rine contained in our Confeflion and Catechifms, tthe Word of God being primarily prefented as the Fundamental Rule ) a Confeflion and Catechifms fo confonant to the Dotfrine and Con- feflions of all Reformed Churches ,• Or his Englijh Hierarchifts tying up Parents to admit of the Symbolical Crois-Ceremony, and thus upon the matter to adhere to the Hierarchy with all its ap- pendant Ceremonies, be moft Confonant to Chnfts Inihtuti- He hath told us well of a limitation in Chriffs Commifton, whereby rApoMes were in Teaching remitted to fuch things as the Lord had Commanded, and were not left at Liberty to Preach what they plea fed ; And, no doubt, bv eood confequence, not to add to his Institutions, fince they were to teach to Obferve (i.e. to receive as his Ordinances ) only what be has ^Authorized and Commanded ; And it being thus, I would gladly know of him, i. Where finds he, Chrift Inftituted the Sign of the Crofs in Baptifm, which his Hierarchical Party has added thereunto as a figm- ficant Ceremony, and whether the addition of this Symbolical Cere- mony be not an over-ftreach of Chrifts Commiffion ? 2/, Whether the fame ground and pretence of a Symbolical lllftoen ofthii Myftery inttvt Gofpel Ordinance will not as well plead for the Candle Uardsm Oyly and the reft of theft Vopifb Rites and [Inventions I 3/;, Since his Fellow-Querift at leaft, if not hirofelf alfo, pleads for a Power in the Church to fupcradd new parts of Worship to fuch as are Inftituted, yea and to A Queryturnd to an Argument in favours ofEpifccpAcy. 201 to alter inftituted parti of Worship tl would know,how this new Arguer will ^coord what he here aflerts of the premifed Limitation in the Afcfkks €otnmi$m with this Dodtrine of the Querift: For,certainly, the Church, in this point, has no Power above that of the Apoftles. If Chrift's In- stitutions, his Commands delivered by his Apoftles ( which, he cannot deny, reached both Do&rine and Worfhip ) were to be intirely jecei- ved, yea and in anexclufive Senfe, in oppofitionto all Humane Inven- tions in either, then furely the Church has no Authority whether to alter or add thereunto, and in owning fuch Addition or Alteration, he, or hi&Foreleader, the Querift, falls under the Imputation of impeach- ing Chrift's Authority in this grand Commiffion. But it may be our new Arguer will aUedge, to Juftiiie the Church of England's making the Terms of Communion fo narrow as to exclude fuch as own not the Hierarchy and Ceremonies, her prefent legal Conftitution, which, upon the ground of Order and Unity, does ne- ceffarily call for, and injoyn a Conformity to tills her Eftablifliment, And if fo, r. He baffles his own general Rule premifed, which makes the preceeding Profeflion a ground of this Reception. zlyt He Vindi-] cates, by the fame Principle, the Church of Scotland, in (landing to her prefent Eftablifliment in point of Reception to the Minifterial Fellowfhip, and, in point of Adminiftration of the Sacrament of BaptiCm,' our premifed method of ingaging Parents who have this Ordinance ofc" Baptifm Adminiftred to Children. Come we now to his fourth Obfervation, the Bafis pfall that follows in point of Difpute, fag. 10. The Promife, Match. 28. 20. he calls vaftly Gimpreben/ive, as no doubt it is, and tells us, That it is given for the Apo\\les Incotiragement in this great Undertaking, of Difcifleing the Nations, that therein he ingages never to be abfent from thtm in the right and lawful Exercife of that Commiffion given to thtm. Now, fmce he profeflVs to underftand this Promife in its full comprehenfive Ssrife. as refpecYmg the Apoftolick Office of Difciphing all Nations, and their other Prero- gatives neceffaiiiy included therein, fuch as Infallibility in Dotlrine, UniverfallnfftfVum ever all the Churches planted and to be planted, the delive- ring of the Gofpel Rules and the intire New "l^ament Pattern and Scheme of thit Qeconomyin point of Doclrine, JVerflrip, Dlfclpline and Goverment, toge- ther with their immediat Miffton and Commifjion hereanent, he ftands obliged,to make it appear,that this Promife will import a Succeflion and Continuance of this Office thus intirely and complexly confidered, and not rather that it imports ( tho* primarily and immediately the Lords prefence with the Apoftles in the Execution of their formal Office as fuch X yet that, in its full Extent and Scope, it mainly pqiats at this his Gc' Prefence 202 A Confutation of an Additional Pmp&tet, Entttuled, Pretence with, and Affiftance of a (landing Miniftery, and the Di£ I ntg orGofpel Ordinances, ML the Word, Sacraments, and D,f doline by ordinary Authorized Officers, without fuch Prerogatives as are ^ above ex preffed. His Promife, ( as is already h.nted in the An- fwer to the c Query of the 4 chap. ) is abundantly verified m his pre- fence with fuc , Succeffor., the Apoftles ftill Living in their Living Dod.ine, upon which the Church is built, and the Streams ol a Gof? pel Miuiftwy and Minifterial Authority drawn from ch» Fountain are Si vigent and running in the due Exercife thereof. When the Apo- file injoyns Timothy to keep that Command> injoyned * 1 Tim 6 him * (which certainly impom fuch Duettions as 1A Compared have Relation to Gofpel Ordinances, and his Minifterial JitbwL 2®. Authority thereanent) until the coming of our Lord, ' trc. W ' This can no ways conclude the Continuance or Succef- fion of Timothys peculiar Office', or his Work of Watering the Infalhble Anoftles Plantations, in the Senfc, and for the end above expreiTed, ^Pce7S Ordaining fuch Perfons, but to ^t Table faithful teachers that Gtfpel taught n bmftlf, 2 Tim. *' But le<- us hear our Argue r's proofs for a Handing Office of Apoftolat drawn from this Promife! ( for that this 11 his Scope is evident from the whol Scde of hS Reafoning. ) Firft, he tells us, The Apples were ^t^WW could they manage their ™>"'™%d"?£ lews and Heathens without this Promifed Affi(t*nct. He adds, ibid Or muft needs have Suwffors therein, .nd Author.^ «.h the Ume Ccmmiffion- What Confcquenee is this ? Did God s promiiea ttV in Executing his Ccmmiffion to Pharacb import Suc- ceffors in that Office or Work ? Again, our new Arguer Antwers and Confutes himfelf in his way of propofing this Radon. Hew cmld A- ,Z jZ faith he, who receiva « Common from CMim J***, Ztol'reZa J,w, and Heothm,, which i, fl«in tb«M m thepr,- „,, 4thJwJ, without thUAffiH*™- Now . * *« Commffion las of this Nature, that itwasySWCfov/f!^" Afo«'i, th.en'„I,n0Pe> ?' will Erant that it was immediat, and m» */ Mm, asthe Apoflie phrafes wil I grant tnat it ^ aU the(c fupp0[ed Saccef. forsGl a^o^y . J5£ ***&»>,.*?> I And ^e Confequence ,s evident, that thev were Infallible in delivering this Commiffion j And • if withaUheir Work was of this Nature in refped of Extent, ijhat A Query turn A to in Argument in favours of Epifiopacy. 203 they were to OuUreafon^ and bring into Cbrifis School and Peculium hotb Jews and Gentiles, thus forming them into Churches, and Eftablifhing ( as Chrift's firft Infallible MefTengers and Oracles ) the Gofpel Ordi- nances among them, and, by further neceffary confequence,infpec1:ing them all, as being in aBu exercito their Catholick Officers ; Then furely, in all the three refpetfs their Office was Extraordinary, and fuch as could admit of no Succeflion in a proper formal Senfe, fo that the Promife, in this refped, could not include fuch SuccefTors, who ne- ver were ndr could be. _ His fecond Reafon is, How could they, or their Succejjors, readily go on fa the Work intruded to them by their Commiffion, in fright of alt Oppofition% without this ?re fence ; or how could the Church have juhfijied fo long as U this day when jo incompapd with Enemies from without, and rent and torn by Hireticks, Schifmaticks, andfalfe Cbriflians in her Bofem, had it not been for this Promife of her gracious Lord ? Here 'tis pleafant to fee how our Ar- guer Equiparats Apoftles and SucccJJors, in point of Commiffion : Buc wilfhe in good earneft affert that their SuccefTors have the fame mm edi at and extenftve Commijfun with the Apoftles, the fame Infallibility in Doftrine, the fame infallible Supreme Infpeaion over Churches of Jews and'Gentiles, the fame Work and Truft in delivering the Gofpel Ordinances to Churches, and laying the Foundations thereof ? If he fay, they have, who will not deride him? If he affert ( as needs he muft, if he fpeak the Senfe of Proteftant Divines, yea of all ferious confidering Perfons ) that thefe Prerogatives were peculiar to Apoftles, then he muft of necefficy limit the Promife, and diverfihe the Accom- plifliment, as refpe&ing Chrift's firft MefTengers, and their SuccefTors in an Ordinary Miniftery, which our Lord has ingaged to preferve, and haspreferved againft all the attempts of Satan, ily, Our Arguec Confirms this, in adding that the Churches Subfiftence, tho' ' incsmpafied with EHemies without, and rent by Heretickj, Shifmatieks andfalfe GhrijHans in her Bofom, is owing to this Promife : Hence he muft grant that this Promife refpedts the Church in General, and therefore is not to be Limited, no not to real, far lefs to pretended SuccefTors of Apoftles. The. Church is Founded on fuch a Rock againft which the Gates of Hell, cannot prevail, on the Rock Chrift *, * Mat, 16. 18.' and in a fecondary Senfe, is built on the Prophets and 1 Gor. 10.4. Apoftles {. The Rock fupports that Foundation. I f Ephef. 2. 20.' hope, he will not fay, that any SuccefTors of Apoftles, with/refpeca either to their Office, their Commiffion, or Duties of their Office are this Foundation. Again, 2/7, Will our Arguer be bold to fay, that the Subfiftence of the Church by -this Promile, will necefiarily C c 2 infer 2o4 A CntfiattiM ofm AdihUml frnfiUt, &>th«UJ, _^ . r ■ .• „l the fame Mithd and Means or hUrummU, as infer the ^f^rl^llZg and Enablement. If his Anfwer were rcquifite for her fitlt «e"B ■ and Medium 0f fading for be negative, then he lo j« h's ™ S™ Qffi as he alledges this pro; fuch a continuance of the ^P0'*? IC^ p/.ftnce^nd Support of the cl arc" h"eb y5is a^S Kho* the ^ and ***•*«• "« 2 fam' every' way, as at her firft Plantation ,. If his Anfwer be AffirniTeW- that the Means and Method and Inftrumems are every %&%£&. * r-Vfi:sfu„wb^^aoi;!/Ltrn! SSTtaSfcrS th^Sull for the ChurcL Sub^encc ami ft Z Oppofition of fuch EnenrU^ he r«n«o«. a J, g£5£S* did what he affe ™ ^ *e M«^ ™K* SMfm*M, fsslfe Chn- ftence to this Day wh ^ » n w. I. ^ , ^ «,«»., Sec. N°^\.,l:nuii-1 t:iatwav hemuft owne it, with the ^ of ^ ^ Officers, , and even in ms m V LimUation of the Promife as we plead he mutt of neceflvy g_r ant wc . churche6 Subliftence in for, and underftand it as "compi Defeaion even of £" ffirV So'tCal IS cceffor! "tfttLhave not ftood their her °*«r^ . JJV^ moft of the Churches vifible Members, tho' the Ground, ne.th ^^ have mott °t me ^ of this promife : ;;*», under the ^atf p/w* J«M"*' p^i A Query turrid to an Argument in favours oj Epifccpacy. 205 ■ Tag. 1%. Our Arguer tells us, that he will now proceed^ to his Argument from tjjis Tromije, (o that what he hath above propofed ap- pears to be his more general and remote Arguing. His Argument is thus ,* Either this Commiffion granted to The dfofihs was temporary, or to continue for ever to the end of the World. This Dilemma is eafily Anfwe- redas not juft in the Divifion. This Commiffion, in divers refpetfs, was both Temporary and like wife to continue to the end. Temporary, as immediately refpefting the Apoftles, their Office, Work and Commif- fion, as fuch, in a formal Senfe, wherein they could have no Succef- forsj as is above made good. It was a!fo to continue to the End, as virtu- ally including a Gofpel Commiffion and Legation in Administration of the Word, Sacraments, Difcipiine, 6y an ordinary fianding Miniftery. The Diftin<5tion is common, and univerfally Acknowledged by . all Orthodox, betwixt Succeffors of Apoftles in general, or in a Gofpel Minn fiery fimply and abfolutely, and Succeffors to the Apoftokt and Apoflolick Office as fuch. And this fufliciently overthrows his horn d Argument, the Horns whereof touch us nor. If the Commiffion was only temporary, fays our Arguer, there will follow fever al Absurdities, whereof he mufters five : l^ut from what is faid it appears, that in thefe (uppofed Abfurdities he but beats the Air, and has no Adverfary, and that they can never by a thoufand Degrees reach the Presbyterians, who affertnot the Coramifsion to be fimply, abfolutely, or in all refpects Temporary. . The firft is, h would follow none but Apoftles had a Right or Title to A& hy vert ue of it. A pitiful Inference with refpeft to his Scope and Plea- . ding againfr us j Since he cannot (hew, when and where thefe firft Apoftles inftituted others having a Commiffion of the fame Nature and Extent with their own. Nay, who fees not thh irnpoffible upon- the grounds already affigned. Again, If [by •■Acling by vertue of thii Qommijfim ] he mean ' Acling in a general Senfe or in a Goffiel Legation, we affert, others had by vertue of this Commiffion Authority and Power to K€t ; Becaufs this Fundamental primary Commiffion, given to Apoftles, did virtually and neceffariiy include a ftanding Authorized: Commiffion to Gofpel Minhlers, and the Preservation and Propagation of this Miniftery untOffhe end, fo that, Apoftles, by vertue of this Commiffion, were Aiithoiized to 0*dain fuch SuccclTors as were fuited to this great Dsfign of the Propagation of the Gofpel, and of a Gofpel. Miniftery; As Mojes's firft extraordinary Commiffion imported an Obli- gation to appoint ordinary Suc^fTors in the Levitical Miniftery un- till the end of time Oeconomy and fiift JJifpenfadoa of the Cove- nant. io6 A Confutation of an Additional Pamphlet, Entitled, Asaimlf by fa Right and title to Acl by vertue of this Commiffan'] he mean Ading in the Exercife of the Office of Apoftolat as fuch ,• Wc fay none had Title thus to A£ who were not thus Authorized, which himfelf muft acknowledge or contradict his Affertion of their smmedtat Commijfan, *nd Univerfdl Legation, which none could affume, or Ad by vertue of it. , .«•<*« »J His fecond Abfurdity is, lhat thus the Promt fe is unintelligible, tf not worfe : How can he be with them ( faith he ) to the end of the World fince all of them died a few Years after that Promife was made? But ai that this will plead, is the necefGty of Succeflors in a Teaching Gof pel Miniftery and Adminiftration of Gofpel Ordinances, whereby the Church is Propagated and Preferved; And therein the Promife is abun- dantly AccompHlned: But that it pleads for Succeflors m the formal Office of ApHolat, doth no way follow nor can Again, tis he m this Foolifh Glois, who makes the Promife unintelligible, who wiU needs have by vertue thereof, Infallible Univerfal Inlpedors of the Church Catholic^ with the other Apoftolick Gifts of Tongues, of Miracle*, &c. to be of (landing necemty and continuance to the end of Time, contrary to the Dodrine of all Reformed Churches, yea the Senfe and ^nTwwd, I^ouldknow, how this Arguer underftands that Paffage Eph.4. ir, 12. with i Cor. 12. 28. wherein we find Apoflhs, Evange- lih Prophets, Gift's' of Tongues, Gifts of Healing given to the church, And inReafon he cannot exclude them from their (hare in this Promife and he knows that in Eph. 4. the great Work of the Miniftery the Scope and Intendment of the Gifts there enumerated^ the Edification of the Body of Chrift hath this Term of its Duration teHnUwt all come in the Unity of the Faith and of the Knowledge of the Son of God, to* Z eel Man, fcc? i. e. till the Day of Judgment when the Churches Warfare is ended. And when he falls upon a found Senfe of this Paf- te and Accords it with the Promije, he will fee the ftrength of his iw£d Ahfurditv or rather the weaknefs of this Argument ; It being Serin that it s the Work of the Miniftery, or the Edification of the Slply and initfclfconfidered, and as reached by a ft an- a- ir^U Minifterv not all the foremen tioncd Offices, Ver{. n. whl Pa'ff i ^thfto continue and laft. But, in his Principles, it is a pm gent retortion, how our Lord's pomi[ed Prefence to the end is verified w^th refpea to Gifts and Offices long fince removed : For fuch is the Nature ofthis pungent Query How can cur Lord be f aid to *™£W< to the end of the Wor Id, who diU all of them *£">*«" after that Proms fe lis made I Here, on the by, he muft be told, that his Skill in Chrono- A Query turnd to an Argument In favours ofEpifcopacy. 207 logy gets a pitiful blot in this AlTertion ,• For ( not to enquire,, how many Years the other Apoftles furvived this Promife, which certainly was for fuch a length of time as far outftretches his Expreffion of few Tears, if we (hall except the firft Martyr Apoftle, James the Brother of John, whom Herod killed with thebword ) 'tis certain, and univerialiy acknowledged, that the Apoftle John did long furvive all the reft, a for* tiori the giving of this Promife. The third Abfurdity is, That if this Commiffion was Temporary, and to continue no longer thin the Death oftbeApifiles, tben} for any thing we know frjom this Qommiffim, none bad Authority to teach^ to Difeiple any of whatever Nation. But granting that fuch like Abfurdity would follow upon the Aflertion, that the Qommijfion was absolutely Temporary, yet. upon our Aftsrtion that it was fuch as peculiarly respecting the Apoftolick Office, and the Exercife thereof in a proper formal Senfe, but not as virtually including a Succeflr/e ftanding Gofpel Miniflery, there is no apparent fhadow of his fancied Abfurdity. Any that but Reads the New Tefta- ment can inform him, that the Apoftles did fo execute this CommifTion, as having gathered Churches, to plant Officers, and Teachers therein, to Propagat a faithful Teaching Miniftery, Exciting and Incouraging them to their Duty, concurring with them in Adminiikation of Go- vernment, in their limited Br6cin£h, and the Churches over which they were fet, and injoyning accordingly the Peoples Obedience unto them. And he will not doubt that this the Apoftles performed upon the Obligation of, and in Obedience to their Apoftolick CommitTton, to Difeiple all Naiisnt, thus clearly holding out, that in this Method the Church and a true Gofpel Miniftery was to be prefervejd aad propa- gated when they were gone. The fourth Abfurdity, which he inferrs upon his ownchimeiical fancied Anfwer of the premifed Dilemma, is, +That thus it would folLw that our hjeffed Saviour dtfigned to have his DoUrine no more Taught or Propa~ gated after the Apofiles Death3or was indifferent how and Jty whom it was to be Propagated. But who fees not the Abfurdity of fuch an Inference upon our AlTertion and DiftincYion premifed, and that the Commiilion was Temporary as refpe&ing the formal Office of Apoftolat, the Scripture being fo,exprefs as to their Subftituting an inferior Teaching Minittery, and that our bkfled Lord fet in his Church Teachers, Paftors, and feveral other Officers who were not Apoftles, but had an Office fpeci- fically diftinft. Will he deny our Lord's Promife to fuch, or deny them their (hare and Intereft in the Apoftolick Commiffion to Teach, and pifciple, or Baptije ? If Apoftles were by their Commiffion Autho- rized to inftitut a Teaching Miniftery, and gave Rules for Propagation thereof 268 A Caution of m AMthUPdmfUet ; E*tit*Ud, thereof bv a Lawful Ordination, there was a Jure Foundation laid for Propagating this great Mean of Edification. How t>*U that fa 4«*,fayi Pp?i„hl-fer tor be left «, Rule nor Laws for Jmg of it, he means our Pamphleter, /""£"'> ft, Temporary Office as fuch. But I "HfttwL her th Apoftles left any Rules or Laws for a WC &-M fflferj* ' If they dm%hich he muff either acknowledge, or den v pain Scripture, then fure they did it by venue of Chi.lt s CommTffion G>Tca\ o'r, Difciple *S Mtien, ; Consequently his Com- ^ffinn reached this. Bur our Arguer mult be poled upon it, Where Z Z Rulet and Laws for Subftituting fuch Apol lesas themfdves? Ani W him here take up his Shield, and beware of this Rebound of And let ™m ^e tSK= £ Chrift gave Laws and Rules for a (landing h,SnZt of the 'fame Naure with that of the fttft Apoftles, or his %!* he cl n be no more propagated after their Death : But in ail the Sew Teftament Rules in reference to Ordinat.on and the Prop*. IMew ienaiuc. -ft there's none ro be found, that can reach S* Tho ize th 'Office of ApoftoUt, as defcribed in Scripture, either wihrefpe^totScommiffion, Work, or Qualifications ; Ergo, Our Ciour detnVd to have his Doftrine no more taught or propagated alter them Thus, virm ,u4 vmX ipfe voret, let our Pamphleter lick UPThe°Fifrh ArXdity is, 7U AS CbriflUnit, mf be «**£ Chril enfe it was to continue, we have already heard* But our Arguer would "prove k was to continue in the Senfe that he has propounded, viz. That 'the Apoftolick Office, in a proper formal Senfe, was a ftanding OrKce, He tells us, the Promt fe reaches their lawful Succeffors to the end of the World** But who thefe lawful Succeffors are, is the point in Queftion. We fay, Mini(lers Labouring in the Word and Dsclrine, Officers to whom are in- truded the Power of Order and Jurijdiclion, are fuch properly, and of a [land- ing Nature and Continuance. He holds, tbeje Suceeprs are Apoftles endowed with the lame and equal Power with themfelves, Or, holding the fame formal Office wherewith they were cloathel And having built, as he imagine? the negative part of his Dihmma, that the Office was not tempera} for* proof of the pofitive part, that it was a fianding Office to the end, he ar- gues thus, ' - Here is a Commiffion to the Apoflies, and a Pfomife to be with them ( A- poftfcs) (.for fuch they were to whom he froke) to the end of the World therefore there are to be, and mufl be Jpojiles to the end sf the World, for him n be with. Anf I deny his Confequence, as having no Tvvift of a Connexion, which is fufficiently overthrown by the premifed Diftin- ftioaof theCmmijfio* arid Office of ApofU$% or the Commiffion as D d . refpedting +*• a„ AConfmtUn ,f*» Addition* Pallet h E.tituhi, r AU.d ,he Aoottles in a Vrofn formal Se»(e, with all Ingredients refpea.ng the */0M"}£ J/the office and Commiffion as refpe. making up chit formal 0ffi">*fJ%„niiiK<, GMd UUmfitr,. In the fe- ains ,bc M« B*nD^ 'edfe the prSmife^d prefence'to reach to eond Senfe only, we„a""£w ,0 be terminated with the State and Con- the end , In the ««» Serf* ° ^nfwer may be fortified, and his ditionof theApofiles. Next our a ^ acknowledge. Confluence infringe .from whet him It ™«^ s^Wffa He tells us pofuively, P«£. »7- '*!' ^ h wiU not difown it, . that thel %""^'v7'rri7G(l/>t/ 0„,BSm>, Prfrri^ and K«fa to the Na- &,, J By . fir«.«.'^.^ '• -« C*^.5r«i^«yo which rit's Extraordinary In alhble Conduct t.nauy ^ to them being ; to ™™™%J* £™t 'n ceffarily added thereto and connected tnerewun, «i j Apofto ate, as thus Now; take this Conference, with relped : torn P officers o{ !n Scripture delineated -,. J^^g*^ ^ A this Nature to the end of ™. d acknowledge, that, in nhereofispalpab^ ourPamphleter mm . ^ ^ ■*, this Arguing, lh"e J* "S^ffli, in'd a Piomife to be with them HereisaCommiffion o. he Apott.es and. e o{ ^ ^ ^ ,o the end £*., ^ muu ^ fuch Apo||ies as were Penr, J«mt; above defcnbed, to the end , >«.""'£ f thi Charader. Now, and ?«4», who, he will not d*w«« thw U* ar j if neither the *--*-'•* *{ $&'*Z Conclufion premifed, he's :hm u tie end, will bear the weight 01 ne ex_ obliged, ofneceffity, to limit and reltm* the lame, plained. _jj.j rlJJ that tbere mull be in Cbrifl's fw/er. For wh.t he adds IU"»C'» , Q A , ^ ^4 „„, f« A"' J a„i tbathe could nfttnmg » < m* ,» 0£ r f ^ fonce T„ Anfwered, That as our jLortc /ftanding Neceflity aS unto the end, with an uroer ui "» , , f .{ r an Order the Churches Edification and preservation "Ued tor, 11 lucn were to fail, the Failure whereof were uKraCOcm «"" tuen «^ 4 Query turtid to an Argument in favours ofEpifcopacy. in mife; and the Scope thereof,* So this promifcd Prefence to the end* might be very well confident with the Failure, or Temporary State of fuch an Order of Men, as were not of this Nature and Neceffity, but to pafs off with the Churches firft Exigence, as being fined to the in- ftanced Work of laying the Foundation thereof. Finally, Our Lord's Proraife to the Apoftles, as refpecting their Office, may point at two things, i. The Standing and Continuance, to the end of the Worldt of that Foundation of the Doctrine of the Gofpel, which they were to lay. ily, The ftanding Nature and Neceffity of a Gofpel Miniftery, whereof they were appointed to be, as Apoftles, the Authorized Infal- lible Inftituters and In(pectors. Our Pamphleter cannot fee a Middle (Pag. 17, 18, ) between making the Commiffion and Promt fe temporary, and ti determine with the Lives of the firft Apoftles', Or to make both lafting, and to cent hue to the end* But, from what is premifed of a twofold Refpe<5l, wherein the Office it .both Temporary, and of a (landing Neceffity, this Middle is eafily pointed at, and the Abfurdity of his two Extremes is therein difcover- ed. Ibid. He concludes* 7 bat , finee the Promt fe takes in their Succejfirr, therefore , it mufi import Per fans of the like Character with the firft Apoftles; Wherein he ignorantly confounds SttcceJJsrs 'of Apoftles, Amply and abfo» lutely fuch, and Succejjors in the Apoftolates or by Perfons of the like Cha- racter with the firft Apoftles, both which are of a fignal Difparity : Can there not be Succeffors in a part, or with refpect to the retrenched or limited Fower of Apoftles * Can he deny the Succeffion* of the Jewifli Priefts, and other Minifters unto hhfes, in point of a ftanding Miniftery, tho' none of them were Succeffors to his formal Office, or Plenitude thereof? We are again told, that the Superintending tin Af% fairs of the £burcb3 and €ondufting tbofe Subordinate^ is an Exigence of hfiing Advantage to the Church. Ergo quid? There's a Superinteiiidency of Supe* riour to Inferiour Judicatories* and a Subjedion of the Spirit of the Pro- phets to the Prophets Exemplified in Scripture, 1 &0M4. with Acl.i$. A Superintendency of Paftors over Inferiour Officers : But cmnot this Man diftinguilh Superintendence fimply or abfolutely eonfideredt from that of A* fifties, in its full Extent and Nature ? Has he ever heard the Sophiftry, ( into which he here ftumbies ) of Arguing a Ditto fimpliciter adDittum fecundum quid, or a genere ad fptciem affirmative ? Superattending Affairs of the Church, and Conducting chels Subordinated, is neceffary, and of lafting Advantage ,• Ergo, fuch Superintending and Conduct as was proper to Apoftles as fuch. Pag> 19. Shew me, faith our Pamphleter, which Branch of their Power and Commiffion is excluded from a /hare of the Promife, or is (teluded from the. D d'2 PriviUdge Vriviledie thereof, *nd I will •»>"> 'b'*- in that Branch of their Vewfr. thej are mt fucceeded. Anf. i. Bim&lf mull acknowledge, fome of their Privilcdges could not be (uccctdtd unto unlefs hecrofs the Serfc of all Men fcii. their Infallible, Univerfal Irfpeaicp, &c Ard then it will Cuit his Consideration, to clear and in(Truc"r how th's Infallible, Univerfal Infpe&ion is excluded from the Promife of our Lords Pe- fence Or, how it could be exercifed and fubdft without the fanu-? a/y His Fundamental Grofs Miftake is, that he diftinguifheth not the Promife, as refpe^ing the Apoftles, to whom it was immediately given, and as it includes their Succeffors. The Promife refpeds Succeilors in this Commiffion of Teaching and Baptizing, Difcip'ining or Forming Church Members : Now, either he muft fay, that all who Teach and Baptize, are properly and formally Apoftles, this being the Work to which Chrift promifes his Prefence to the end ; Or acknowledge, that the Promife cannot reach or infer the (landing of that formal Office of Apoftolace: or has any fuch Senfe or Defign. fa The Promife, as is above hinted, in a twofold Senfe,reaches Apoftles, i. As to the fading tommilfan9f*G$fttlMnft Md£#^ doth in fo far continue and has'the Lord's Prefence allowed the fame, as that of MirintheOldOeconomy, tho' the Office, in a propsr formal Senfe, Wone off I fappofe, fuch a Promife given to M+s in the Admi- ^n^on of his Omce, of giving the ; Law inftttocmg the R.ie. ,of C- ril Government, andtheftanding-Prieithood, or Jewifh M mtter> di- SgtSwSW, infticuting the Rules thereof, **«tk>W*k M with you all wiv f tbt end ( fay this is to be undciftood of the end of A g»ery turn 4 to m Argument In favours of Eptfiopgcj. a I * that Oeconomy ),• Will this Man's Wife Dilemma hold good, Either Mo{ts was to be Succeeded to in this Work and formal Office, or the Promife was not verified, and whatever part of his Work and Office)* oof Succeeded unto is excluded from a Jhare in this Promife. He tells us that W3 retrench the Promife, and Pag. 20. do pretend the ApoHolick Order h exttntf, becaufe they are dead to whom that Commiffun was fir & given A. fooliih Calumny : We fay, the Order or Office is ceafed, becaufe the immediat Commiffion, the Work and qualifications of the Officers together with the proper delign of the Office ic felf is ceafed, not meerly becaufe the Perfons are dead; And 'tis he, not Presbyterians who jC™Q the A?om<* were alt tofail by deceafe! whom did they Ordain, where, and how, to Succeed them in tfS formal Officeof Apoftolate? Let'himRead hi, Newleft.me m L in and inew Presbyterians this if he can. N*y, was not this Cho ice* nd Ordina ion of Matthias, as that of the other ApoBles, immediaul]by G^W^andconfequently, in the Senfe of ail found Divides, eL tn ordinary, AUs j 24. they thus Addref$ God Tb Prayed and faiJ thou Lord w^uh knowefltbe Hearts of all Men, Jhew whether , ftbefJ thou ^iiinru?Ti «^c Wwd, will Read, Ordain *f tt,je twatn on Jwho* thuhafi Chofen. Gr Luk. l0, 1. Lee him poi,£ ej*c u.to Usf,cm Scripture, where, when, and how did the Apoitk* make fogh w A? ifi A Confutation »f*n Addithml Pomphlet, EnthuUd, 24 ~ , t ^ wAneceflors to be Ordained by him in the full He further te"Vus'.""V A altt fjt and tyvertue, no doubt, o the Mg'lnot tokfth, CjJ ZhZiTUunJt/h of a Ufi»t Na,»re,nct Commiffun by the m rece.vd w ""/J'l >„ Md therefore fabfitute Matthias toexfireafonthefa.hre '/^''fW 'vtrtu, J ihe Common u to be to fill*f tie Vacancy and 'h"JXfn 1ZZ, , clcatied with it. But Mood in it, full Extent, ^«4^' * n ■ aS refpt the ^f " *!f i, ', /oncern of the Apoltlesto keep up the notwithftanding of the Z^°"s Concern ot « P Explication, he Number of Twelve, yet making a lori oi ^ convmci„tl, tells us, <*** Dr. Scott ,» h's f^^re trained b, the firSi ^oftuf n ( forfooth ) ■'*« r^.-'^ f^Tnrvery Reading of this i/fuffici- Ubm .» »*? °#" w '^frt"*'Hefavs in the beginning of this Page, em to expofc ourPamphlwer. H la!''nm ^ B krf ' -fray -who told the VreApertam Chr.ji iJ^JW' j w / • * ilthe full Extent of that C-4-rt^ 1 mav confi- *,,„ ? CHWnJa*". - <* hfigXTt'nd Inadvertent -Novice to dently retort, W ho TMWedrtK Ign r Contradiaion in one Write and Print Nonfenfc, and ucn a p j Apofties were to and the fame Page J tor, if all • ^™| To exprefles it, as it was have their Commiffion in the H&*, ■» * ^ that M the Succtf. delivered to the firft Apofties how comes n ^ fir, tf rfe/i Jf* ^f»J"". h.f> ""Tpowm entrufted to the firft Apofties frfaU if the Comm.(l»on and Powe r««ui ^^ be thus Limited, R^MP«^,Mjl^^he Phtafc.it ) and thefe Suc- ceffors, yea and their wet f »#" kumbe™ ere O.dained by them? cedaneous Apofties, who m> a g reat^ Nun, » ,fc/((„ £x, , How comes he to affcrt, that the Af^tia COnfidering the of the CommHfm g^> b Miracles, &c the Churches infallibly, to confirm their D *» e J ^^ Tot 'tisbeyond all peradventuce that the/*" *«*' j t9 A Query turnd to ah Argument in favour -i ofEpifcopacy. 31$ to which he holds the Bifhops to Succeed, did rieceffarily include this.' Ifany fliall except that he Explains and ArTTplinVs this Succeffion to all whofe Office is contained Emimnter in that of the Apoftles, fo thac with him even Triefts and Deacons Succeed them in a part of their Tower : I Anfwer, this wiii never help hum out of the Briars ,• For to all Men of common Senfe he is put under the fame neceffity of a proportioned Limitation of the Bifhops Succeffion : For what P$ rfon in their right Wits will be bold to affert, that every Succeeding Bifliop has by his Office an infallible, unconfutable Super intendency over the whole Qathdick €hurch, both Officers and Members, and this to be Comprobated and demOnftrateJL by miraculout Gifts and Operations of the Spirit, which (as he muft needs acknowledge ) was the Nature of the fir ft Apoftles Commiffion, to whtdh Commiffion in the full Extent thereof he confidently afterts that every Bifhop doth Succead, and tells u cftabHfhing a fixed Policy in his Church, as King and Head thereof % a pitiful remote abfurd Inference, arguing from the General of a fixed Agutry iurnd to m Argument in favours of Epifeopacy. $\j Volley, to a Policy of this fuppofed fpecial Nature, with fuch continu- ing infallible Infpectors as Apoftles were, and is equally abfurd, as if any mould argue SuccefSors to Mojes and his continuing Office, in its Nature and Extent, upon this Ground, that be was employed by Godti e/tablifh * fixed 'Policy in the Church of Ifrael. Page 2 f. 'tis ob\ecled, that the Apoftles having Authority over Timothy *ni Titus, who were Bifhops, that therefore the Offices of Apoftles and Bijhops were divers, and that of Apoftles hut temporary. To this our Pamphleter Anfwers, That the Apoftles, the fir ft Bijhops, were in this diBincl from the fecond Bijhops they ordained, in that feveral (uch being their Converts, they bad * particular kind of Authority, which every individual Apoftle in a more fpecU si manner exercifed over thefe who were converted by their particular Ministry % which made up a Parental and Filial Relation between an Apqjtle and bis Convert, which -we may fee 1 Cor. 4. J J. tho they were trutly afsumed int9 the Apoftolick College, and had as great power as the Apoftles them f elves. This Anfwer, confidered with the other enfuing, appears pitifully /nattered. 1. If thefe Bifhops had as treat power as the Apoftles, then there was no fubjeclion properly payable by fuch Bifhops to the Apoftles; So that,to affert an Equality of Power,and yet to own a Subjection and Authority of the One over the Other, is pitifully Nonfenfical, and a Self-deftroying Contradiction. 2//, thefe Secondary9 Apoftles, fet over Flocks by tbefirft, he muft needs acknowledge, had a retrenched limited ^Authority, far different in point of Extent, as otherwife, from that of thefe firfi Apoftles who fet them up, and yet with him they are averted to have as great power, i. e. the fame extenfive Power as Apoflles. ^ly9 He tells us, That the particular Apoftles to whom they did owe their Converfion, might claim a filial Duty from them. What calls he a filial 'Duty, if not of a moral poikical Subjedtion, fuch as is that Deference which timothy payed to the Apoftle Vaul, who, as a Son -with a Father, fervedwith him in the Work of the Gofpel *, as the filial * Phil. 2. 22, Duty is natural from the Child to the Parent, founded upon a Natural Subjeftion. Now, if it be fo, I would know, r. How are thefe Secondary ApoHles ftated in the fame Authority with /£/* * bure he fuppofes all the Apoftles were on a Level: And if fo, no A- poftles were Primarii, as he afferts page 27, nor could there be any ihadow of Authority applicable to one over another, nor any filial Sub* je&tan and Deference, underftood in a proper political Senfe, or in point of Government, due from one to another, zly, I would know, how he comes to offer this in an Anfwer to the Obje&ion, that Paul being *» Office above Timothy and Titus, Apejiles are above Bifhops. Will he own i^ that Timothy and Titus are in Scripture Account* equal with A-1 E e po files a , 8 A ConfrMhn of m Additioml Vm^hUf Knt'tuUA *m ^c-«mq1 Power as he expreiies it? It lo, What Poftles in Office, or of equ l^writtAg Apoftolical, may I call them means, I way, the AP^'^^^^gAuThori.atively their Motions hi- 1?eCreta^ Fmlh S A* Ch-'hes, calling for their attendance when^i^t"ahnfient Wo'rk was over in thefe Churches, where they d.d officiat when the Apoftle w»«»the» ApoftoH Primarii, ,^rW, i Paf„j iK " i'*. third H.^m. How impertinent this is is hcMf'V*" K'f""" ' a Refl-aion there being, by his Confefsion (tho obvious to ^™""»fh3)no officii Primacy or Precedency in this inconr.ftentwnhh.mlen, no ^^ ^ f ^ Vte,mml„c, among Apoftles. He td s us U^ J7 ; ^ *, /m„ „ <&|f ,-, I. flJVw, « ^f/»K^Xn-«^ ,'j tht Ommtftim .ndVr,. povcn, *' rU T t ZiZsiJh proved, and univerfally acknow- */«. And, no d°f ^J?cae'lsDSicPai in(p'eaion over all the Bifhops ledged that Apoftles tad^ %£?°$™t?Xm clearly to hold a flan. we read of in Scripture, Bismncip how many, and where J* ?.,ri.nb.t, or * f""'^ f^rLimhs of thek Infpedion is, muft to place them, what he Nature a^ no t P^^ be referred to his next Advilement in a profelyts< are ob efled a«.) the Apoftles travels up ^*™WS, ^„ fc A. joflk,, tniowd m tb tb 0 .r,m. u, «• Jif;JJll)ckl afiigmd tb.m, jet it. H ^T.^T^bZbJn^ttJc.ficn,, « .If. Polycarp Bificf tht] travtlltd ,nto ttbtr Cbur'bcs on u.gin j , ,/smyrna , ?™ <%££%£&' ££?i As if the Apoftles Tra- pertinency of wh.cUnlw" evm n y «• rf , their Work> as vel. up and down had been '««''*» k, them pjoielyts, but as our '? ^ Alible O cfes To del ver to^them, when form'd into Chur- Loras Infallible uracies, lu " rnfiwl Oeconomie, in point of Do- ehes, the whole Scheme of the GofpelOeconom,,P a.ine, Worffiip, Difcipl.ne ,.nd G°«r« • »°aeh,d tShe Gpfpdf t0 »«a»-«g2^fite JESS them all from any fuch Office and Au horny . *or nboye eH efs-d> ST* SSSwSSk whom heranks among thjMJ \i Query tnrrid to m Argument In favours of Epifcepacy. 2 1 9 Bifhops after Apoftles, travelled into feveral Countreys, the Scripture is clear and exprefs. But our Pamphleter here fuggefts two things, wherein the Scripture is againft him, 1. That they had definite FUckjt aJfirneJ, them ,• Their Imployment in Epheftu and Crete appearing evi- dently to be Occafional, and Trdnfient ; From both which places, they are found recatied, for further * 2 tim.^9l profecuting their Evangeliftick Imployment *. So that compared with he can exhibite no ftiadow of a Proof for their Inftal- fl.13,21. Tit, ment in definite Pofts, or having definite Flocks affign- 3. 12. cdthem. 2/1, He ignorantly fuppoles, that their Tr a- ■ velsinto other Countreys, were at their own Arbimmem and choice; Whereas the Sacred Text is clear and exprefs, that they were therein fubieato the Apoftles Authorizing Direaion and Infpedion, both] as to Time and Vhce of thefe Travels, and the fPor^tbey wereU manage therein • Whereas the Apoftles were, in their Travels, under the Spi- rit's facial immediate InftetkUn. Finally, his principle, equiparating this Traveling Profeljting Work, with the Vromije, muft needs make it a dandin* eTerk to continue to the end ; And therefore his acknowledging, that it continued only for a while in the Church, breaks his own Meafure, and involves him in a Contradiaion. So that this Objeaion has quite ruined his Pleading* .'■>;-./.-, He' tells us (Ibid. ) The Dominium Ecclefiafncum was, in lolidum, lotted in every'lndividnaloftke Apojiks, andcon/eqttentfy in their Zucceffors, the Bifhops, »ho might devolve their Uwr to ethers, as they jbould think.pt. But he might have read in his New Teftament, that our Lord difchar- zed a Dominion to his Apoftles, and the Apoftle Peter hisinjoymng the trtje Scripture Biftiops, not to be Lords over God's Heritage, difchargeth the fame Dominion to them, which his Mafter had to himielf, and his Fellow- Apoftles: And a little more Knowledge of the Proteftant Doarine would have difcovered to him, that the Church-Govern* ment, in' the Senfe and Judgment of the Proteftant Churches, is, in its kind, and tote genere, diftina from a Dominion, properly lo called ; That none has Dominion in, and over the Church, but he who is her Head and Lord, which we have from his own Mouth, One U yonr Mafter, even chrift, faith he, and ye are all * Mat, 23.7,8, Brethren * Knows not this Man, that the Apoftle faul difowns a Dominion, Not that we have Dominion over f 2 Cor. 1. 24. your Faith |. Again, 2/7, Where has he learned, that the Apoftles, or their Succeffbrs, in point of devolving their Power, lefs or more, upon others, or the inftalling of them into Church- Offices, had no Rule to walk by, but their own Pleafure, or think, fit, E e 2 ss 220 A Canfutdtion *f an Additional Pawphlet $ EntituUd, as he calls it > What mean the Scripture Rules, touching the Ordinal tion and Qualifications of Church-Officers, if this Lax Principle were •to be admitted ? So that his Lawlefs Arbitrary Lord Prelates appear, upon this as upon other Grounds, Rabbits of an Antifcriptural Mould. Put 'tis pleafantto fee, how this Rambling Pamphleter involves himfelt in the next Page : For having told us again, that the Bijkops, tr the A? tties might chotfe whit Verfons they would injtaU in Cburcb-Offices, or with bow much Power, whether they w^ld make thit Man a Bijhop, erieji, or Deacon or but one of tkefe, tr all of them, or nont of them ; He not- withftanding acknowledges, it wm not in their tower, net tteftabhfh* Succfffnn in the while Tower themfelves had, and that, by the tenor of their Commfllvn they fitU thus obliged. Now, if their Commiffion obliged them to leave Succeffors in their fuU vower, together with inferiour Officers, I hope he will acknowledge, that the Commiffion was not fo general and blind, as not to point at the gualification, andCharaQeroftbe?erfons to be thus admitted, according to the leveral Cafes and Circumftances • of the Churches which they planted ,• Nor can he deny an Obligation refultins therefrom, and that both with refpedto the Perfons, and the Nature of that Power wherewith they were to be intrufted. So that his Arbitrary [ think P \ which he makes the cWwr* in this weighty Point, deferves to be trampled under Foot • ■ . ^v; Here again we have the old Cant and Miftake renewed, in- Con- founding * superiority among Cbmh-Ofceri, ^if***) *J"l*U> over Vigors. He tells us, we hold, that every Mimjhr ofQod s Word u a BifhoP: So the Scripture hath taught us, and him alio yea, and that they are the higheft ordinary Officers fucceeding Apoftles, to whom they committed the Government, in their laft Farewells to the j Chur- ches. To this he renews his blunt Suppofition of the Apples superiority cverPaflors, and tkeir Ordaining fucb as tbtmftlvts, and that, tf ™'*f» tbejpojiles immediate Succeffors to be Judges, at thoft oftbtStcond andlbird Centuries, they 11 give it in favours of Epifcopacy, agai^theUvchnoDoUrine. Thus Pae 20 Anf. i. I had thought, the Apoftles immediate Succel- fors were properly to be fearched for, and found in the ; Scripture Tables; Where/by his Confeffion, we have the full Scheme and Draught of the Apoftles Conftitution of Churches, ziy, All do know that the Point of Succeffion, in the Second Age, is very dark, and an unfure Ground to build upon; That, for the moft Pa"> ^ ^c has a Cloud upon t, in point of Church Affairs and that :the Records thereof are very lame, is acknowledged by the beft Searchers. %lyt It this Teftimony, he pretends, does (hike againft Levelling Mm*, pro- perly fo called, it levels not againft us, who owne no fuch Principles A Querj turnd to an Argument in f avows of Eplfccpacy. 221 in point of Church-Government ; But let his Darling J S> look to it, who fets all Prelates on a Level, and all Paftors on a Level with the People in this point. ^ Here is Levelling Do&rine with a Witnefs, and 'tis left to our Arguer's Advifement to ponder, how this confifts with Arch-frelacj, and National Primary, owned by the Querift, and a Pa- triarchate, fuch as himfelf holds may be made good, yea, and after pleads for from the Old Teftament Times. For what he boafts of the Defence of the principles of the Cyprianick Age, 'tis eafily Anfwered, by telling him, and chat Pamphleter, that he has never touched the point in Controverfie, which every Body knows, is anent the DoUrine and PraGice of the Apples, in point of Church-Government, and not, what was the Principles or VraQice tf the Third Age. So that, in that Volumi- nous Rambling Pamphlet, he but beats the Air, and, fome will be apt to tell him, mews himfelf a Self-Contradidting Fool. I mall not need to infiftmuch upon that which our Arguer adds fur- ther, in magnifying this their pretended Champion J. a. viz. That the Principles of the Cyprianick Age* and the Defence of them, is fuch a piece of Suhfiantial Learning in this Controverfie, and contains fuch Solid &ea~ jottings., that'tk no wonder, if he and hit AJfosiats judge, that the Author Im the better of it, fince none of the Presbyterian* have yet mustered up courage and Confidence enough even to pretend to dnfwer it. What Suk/tantial Learn- ing in this Controverfie appeareth in thefe two Pamphlets, fcil. The Principles of the Cyprianick Age, and the Deface ef them hy J. S. or rather Superficial, Inconfiftent, and Prelacy* deftroying Notions, is, by this time, (as certainly from the beginning ) obvious to the Judicious and Difcerning, who have perufed both j In the laft whereof 'tis evident, that he has not fo much as offered an Anfwer to the molt part of the Reverend Mr. Rule's Confutation of the firft, yea, and in all his Volumi- nous Inconfiftent Difcourfes, has palpably declined the true State of the Controverfie, and fled from the Scripture Bar, to appear before which his Antagonift had challenged him. So that his Pamphlets deferve no notice nor Anfwer from Presbyterians, and, when our Arguer hath im- partially perufed Mr. Jamefon's late Confutation, he may probably change his Thoughts of J. S's Acquittances in this Controverfie, and fee him contradicting, and that oftner than once, himfelf, and his Fel- low-Pleaders alfo. Of the laft, one Inftance we may here exhibite, in point of Dr.ScotVs Pleadings, commen- * Chrifi.Lifel ded by our Arguer in this Page, as alfo above. The Vol.z pag.;88* Dr. holds *> that the Seventy Difciples were a [landing and others. Order of Subordinate Officers to Apoftles, making this one great Topick of Pleading for Epifcopacy. In this point, his great Champion 232 A Confutation of an Additional Pamphlet, Entituled, Champion J. S. fmitcs the Doftor on the Face re- *Cb6 f*. proachfully, and gives him the Lie afTerting pofitively *, ' i( That Vis impoflible to make it appear lo much as pro- ■ hahlp that St Cyprian believed the Seventy, as making a diftina Col- • S from Ihat of the Twelve, to have had any (landing Office in the < Chriftian Chufch, in which they were to have a cjnftant Line of 'SucceiTors. Yea and he peremptorily contends, That the Com- • million, which is recorded, Luke 10 did conftitute them only Tem- • porary Miflionaries, and that for an Errand which could not poffibly « be more than Temporary. How far he has herein alfo baffled our Arguer and Querift, is left to hii Melanchohck Refleaions. For what he iddsiVag.ii.1btt the Encomlerers mtbj. S.mf get theFa- thers taught to ffcak the Language ./Geneva 'Tis Anfwered If that which he calls the Language of Geneva, be, in this point confonant to the Divine Oraclesfhe muft acknowledge the Fathers obliged to fpeak that Language, or that they are to be difowned in fpeaking otherwifc ; And for this we can exhibite to him the Fathers Harmonious Submiffion and Acknowledgement, fubferibed and attefted in their Writings, as is afc IeoLTampahlPeter'will Anfwer (Ibid) that Argument, tbatwbatwai more fhan a Presbyter was in the Apoftles Extraordinary ^hereof he exhibites four Inftances. But, good Man, 'tis not Presbyterians only, whom he muft, in this Point, enter the Lifts with, and encounter but Chrjjo- jtom, who has told him on Rm. i. or lorn 8. ?. 114. Ihzt^^ 'poftlefaip was a Bufinefs or Office fraught with ten thoufand good 'Thines/both greater than all Priviledges (he means common Privi- * ledges of Grace ) and comprehenfive of them : And * Treatife of their own Dr. Barrow *, who from this, and feverai the Vopt's Su- other Fathers, fuch as Cyril, Augu\\m? &c. has made premacy page their peculiar extraordinary Prerogatives appear. In ii2, 114. mort, » The APoftles Redoral Authority over the « Church Univerfal, with refpeft to the founding and cwaterine of Churches, and framing them according to the Golpel < Rule whereof they were the firft "and infallible Deliverers, cftab hfli, ■ in* the Gofpel Ordinances therein, impeding and dueling infallib- ly boch Officers and Members in their refpedhve Duties, is that wherein this Office did confift. But let us hear what he Anfwers to the four Inftances of the Apoftles incommunicable Prerogatives Thefiffthe mentions is the University, Generality andlndefimtemfr ■4 their Cwmitfon. To which he Anfwers page 52. That ^esbyten. m ?rmher bj Imposition 0} Htnds f leads be ua Mtmfter oj the Chnflian A Qttmt turnd to an Argument In favours of Epifcopacy. 223 Church, and pretends be has the Priviledge of preaching the Gofpel, and admi- firlng the Sacraments, where ever he (hill happen to be, tbo' feemingly confined to a particular Flock. Anfwer, 1. In what fenle Paftors are related to the Church Univerfal by Ordination^ and how their Relation differs from that of Apoftles, is cleared above. He has been told that Apoftles were Officers aclu exercito of the whole Church, and capable of no Fix-^ ation, which the ordinary Rules of Government require in Paftors. Their own Dr. Barrow has told him out of ChryfoHom on John 21. That the whole World was every one of the Apoftles Province \ And out of Cyril on Gen. 7. that the Apofile was an Oecumenick Judge, and an Inftrutfcv of aU the Subcxleftial World, zly, He ignorantly cuts off this Generality, or 7«- definitenejs of Commiffion from its proper Work and Defign, which was the firft and Infallible Deliverie of the Gofpel Rules, Do&rineand On dinances to all the Churches, and Infallibly to Infpedt and Superintend them. Their Doctor * has told him; * Ubi Supra. cv That the Apoftles were to govern all the Churches * in an abfolute manner, accordiflg to the Spirit's infallible Affiftance^ * to which they might appeal, according to that of A3, if. It feemed c good to the Holy Ghoft, and to us; And in vercue of the fame Divine * Affiftance, were to found Churches, conflitute Paftors, iettle Orders, * cor reel: Offences, to perform all Ads of Sovereign Spiritual Power/ * in vertue of the fame Divine Affiftance, according to the Authority * given them. But our Argusr will Anfwer the Objection taken from the Apoftles being Officers in aftu exercito of the Catholick Church, having a general and indefinite Commifsion 5* muft have their Commiflion of the ' fame Nature ; And thus even Deacons, who, according to him, have their Share in the Apojiolick commiffion, have fuch an indefinite Miniftery : And, according to his Principle, may alfo Ercacbi Than which, what can be more abfurd? 3//, In the Series . of A tottery turn d to m Argument in favours ofEplfcopacy. 225 of this Anfwer, he makes the Apofltes fif Univerfal Commijpsn to thwart -with* andcontradiMt.be Nature and common Principles of Government, aIy Where finds he, that the Holy Ghoft fixed Apoftles afterward to par- ticular Stations? This he fnuft inftru&» 1, With refp*e& tc every One of the Apoftles : For, I hope, he will not fay, that this Fixation, which he holds to be the Nature and common Principle of Government, and thus prior to the ApoRoIick Cominiffion* refpected fomeoniv, and noe all and every one of mz Apoftles ; Fife he will affert, that fome of the Apoftles might overleap this Boundary, and were not under its Obli- gation, ily, He mud needs acknowledge3that this Fixation ^Limitation or Retraction of the general indefinite Commit fan, muft be inftru&ed by Scrip- ture j For he calls it the Holy Ghofs Explanation of their Commijfim. Let us then fee the Holy Gbofis Patent, and new reftriUed Ccmmijfion in Scrip- ture, wherein only the Holy Ghoft fpeaks in this point, and his Affer- tion {hall be admitted ,• Otherwife, he is Cenfurable, as intruding into what he has not feeen *, ari& beings in this * C0L2. i St pint) wife above what is written f j And indeed, in this f 1 Cor. 4.6. point of Government! all that Set of Men are. For what he inftances of Peter and Vaul% 'tis anfwered above, and its utter Unferviceablenefs to him diicovered, as alfo what he hints from Rom. 1$. 20. But the beft on't is, the Heteroclitelnftance he exhibites of this Fix- ation ot ApoftieS' in the Cafe oiSt.Tbomas, who was fent to the Indies at his peculiar Pofl : And how does it appear, that the Holy Ghoft directed and fent him there ? Why, he reads it in Eufebius, Lib* 3. Cap. 1. But altum filentium there is> as to any Scripture Sound. He tells us, in Eufe- bius we have a particular Detail of the Provinces, to which the Apoftles were fixed. But, Sir, a Detail on the Back of the Bible is no Scripture Detail, nor Proof of the Spirits Explanation of his Cemmiftn, as you affert this Apoftoiicai Fixation to be. Come we to a iecond Badge of the Apoftolick Office* viz* Ihe Gift of Tongues and Miracles, acknowledged iuch by all our Divines according to Scripture, as is above made appear. Our Arguer tells us, That, if this were found confined to apoflles, he would acknowledge it a relevant Obie- fflon* But why not relevant, tho'not abfolutely thus confined, finceit will import an extraordinary Qualification, and a Badge of an extraor- dinary Office, or call it fuch a Qualification as none can fucceed unto, and muft, confequemly, fuppofe fome proportionable extraordinary Work and Duties, even of Apoftles, to whicft it had a fpecial refpeft > Upon both Orounds, it cannor, in his Ssnl'e, fall within the Conipafs of this Fromife, lam with you to the end% Sorhat, of necefliry, he muft, with us, limit the Fromiie, and diverfifie its Actoroplifhmcnt, wkh F f reipfc£ , ,5 A ConfUMh* ./« AMUUfd Pamphlet ; EMd . n, j .u*:,. QnrrffTor*; • Which cuts the Grand refptft to the Apoftles and h«r ^^ who will have all Apofloi ?rrkr'ra»d ^MrtESS- indudeffit'.a, ofaftanding neceffi.y. w\S!« indeed how 'conffcehtly let others Judge ) {***** ™'TA Vuvfomi ■ And thus with him, a Dfefe Pre/<»ce is denied r"l iComesEwrcife of the Gift of Tongues, and Miracles ; And to the Apoftles txeraie own s ^ ^^ Reflcaion. what a grots Ab'urd"X tl\'? ''h. own it that the Apoftles had out Or if, '°d«'np%tnct^heyExe"rcTo 'thefe extraordinary Gifts, MnSit » te fuch a Prefence and Affiftance as falls not within he will aff«t it to mhi ^ &c And will £o3^^^^ End 9f tbt fronay i^ wraordinarv Gifts mentioned? And fiance the Ex ercfe of ^^^'Lour-gemen. of the -M, how, I pray, was mis =°nn" d f d in this Promile ? It were 7 '4to^ here* oLw htconienfien: Judgment of Divines in this Sa.w S&4S-& tVp^Sg^nd fiSS •ti/^-4, &c. ,a whereas he will grant the Objejftioii » i Or. «4- '*"■" h» th/moft Emine„t in thefe and other Gifrs. ,3' Mo eover he fpcaks of Sip,, Wmim and mtkf D«V, wrought among them, and of thefe as **..**» jTai.l Now if there were fuch S,p» »f *t>fik,, i , ftr. I.. ^\t" f °W' '* fo be a reUtive connexion be wixt the Sign and ,ti»f &*&.«* ^fZ^ ffeM ? What Inferior Officers had lucn coercive row* qma»tct A Query turnd to in Argument in femurs efEpifcopMj. 1 27 Obftinate, as Peter and Paul, the one ftricking with Death Ananias and Sapfkira *, the other Elymas with *J£t.$,$ti9; Blindnefs t ? What Inferior Officers had fuch Mira- | Aft, 13! \i\ culous Merciful Power, as the railing of the Dead, apparent in both thefe Apoftles || ? And he will not f| Atls 9. 40; fay that fuch Miraculous Power was peculiar to thefe 41. Acls 20! two, which were repugnant to the general Gommif- 9,10,11 12* iion, Matth. 10. £. given to the Apoftles, which in this point was never retraced, but rather inlarged. 2//, With refped to the immediat proper End to which thefe Gifts were proportioned, they were peculiar to the Apoftolate : 1. They were to Seal their immediate Apoftolick Gommiflion, as Mofes's Miracles had fuch an End to Seal his to Pharaoh. This our Saviour exprefly declares, Afts 1. 8. Te jhall receive Power ,(fciI.thQ Spirits miraculous Gifts) after that the Holy Gkoji si come upon you ;m Then follows the proper End of this Power and extraor* dinary Operations ofthe Spirit, Andye {kail be Witness unto me, both in Jerufalem, and in all Judea, and Samaria, and unto the uttermofi parts of ike Earth. Behold what is Sealed by this Power, 1. The Apoftolick Teftimony, as Eye and Ear-witneJJes of Qhrifts Glory, and, in fpecial, efhis Rejurreclion, Ads i. 22. 1 John 1, 1, 2. 7 he Life was manifefted, wehavefcen, and bear Witnefs, &C. That which we have heard, and '{sen with our Eyes, our Hands have bandied of the Word of Life. 2 Pet. 1. 16. They were Eyewitness 0} his Majefty. 1 Cor. 9, r. Am I not an Apofik, have I not feen Jejtts Chrift our Lord. See the fame adduced, Acls f , 21 32. Acls 10,41, 42, 44, &c. 2/;, Thefe Gifts were 'to Seal their Authority* to lay the Foundation of the Gofpel Church, to deliver thereunto the Gofpel Oeconomy, and a new Scheme of its Ordinances of Do&rine, Worlhip, Difcipline, and Government, different frorn the Old Oeconomy : A Work intrufted to no other, nor could be. Compare 1 Cor. ;. 8,9, ro, u. 2(^.3.6,7,8,9, &c. Epk.2.20. Heb\ 7. 12. John 16, 13. But 'tis pleafant to fee, how this Mark has fo Maftered our new Arguer, that it forces him, in the next Words, to make fuch a broad Confcffion, as overthrows all his Pamphlet, telling us, ( Page 54. ) That the/e Gifts were helps for Exrcifing, and. Credentials and Evidences of their ( ' ommijpon, and that Uo, as the fir ft Propagators of a pofiive Religion, and fonotnectjjary to be devolved on their SucceJJors-witb their Power and Supremacy, which they had by vertue of their Qommiffion, Here we have him overturning at one dam alt he pleads for; Since, 1. Thefe Gifts Were helps for Exercifixg, Credentials and Evidences of their Commiffton, Ihe^cfoxe ot neceflity they behoved to be fuch with refpedt to this F f 2 immediat 22 8 A Confutation of an Additional Tampklet, Entitled, ,. -c 3 ,v»rnli*r to Anoftles, and fuch Seals and Credentials Vo^rf^TJ^oA,s f/^r ,o,Um, befides ,ha, tbe, to « ^'^7?;;V • , of an i.mimiU°Omce tr^o ched DNoSw men J the Office it le.f.in It t,^p\^h be as beholds >J^tf*£>£fc fitted to Poftenty, how come an Office o be thas jie , Obligation to performance °f th%Du^*™Vf ma£'s\he Holy God, He/dj ve cxpreflfed. As the Apoftles had Eminenter all the Inferior included in tneir high Apoftolick Office, which no Inferior Officer had, nor could have, which very ground cuts off all pretences of a Succefr (ion thereunto; So, all fuch extraordinary Gifts, viz. Gifts of Prophecy- ing, Healing, Miracles, Gifts of Tongues, &c. as were in thele firft timts divided among different Recipients, fo as the Perfon who had one had not another, as appears in the Apoftles Interrogators after reciting thefe Gifts, I Cor- I2- ^rt all workers of Miracles, are all Prophets, have all the Gifts of Healing, &c. were fuhy conjoyned and eminently ihin- ingin the Apoftolick Office, and this for the great End and Delign men* tioncd. Now, here is a palpable difciiminacing Mark and the March-' ftonefet by the God of Order, betwixt the Apoftolick and all Ordinary Offices, clearly excluding a Succeflion thereunto, and even fuch Offi- cers A Query turnd to an Argument .in f mows ofEftfcopacy. $%x cers as had fome extraordinary Gifts, and much more all pretended SucceiTors in an ordinary Office with Gifts that are Ordinary. And befides thefe inftanced, Vis evident that the Apoftles were endowed with that fpecial Gift of conferring the Spirit ( I mean Minifterially ) in bis extraordinary Operations, and the evident Badges thereof; As like- wife with fuch extraordinary miraculous Power of coercing the Rebel- lious by ftupenduous Judgments, yea and even that of Death, and the equally Miraculous Merciful Power in railing the Dead, as isuiftanced in the two Apoftles, Peter and Paul, which our Arguer cannot deny to be applicable to the other Apoftles. With refpe& to the Merciful Application of this Power we find the Commiffion and Authority generally given, Mattb.io.S. And the exhibited Inftances do evince this Commiilion to reach the inflicting the Judgments mentioned, and fuch like, in the proper Exigences thereof in the Management and Exercife of the Apoftolick Office, But this leads us to Examine what follows, wherein the matter will be more clear. Follows a Third Mark inftanced by him, fcil. i be giving the Holy Gbofi by impefition of Hands. His Grand Epifcopal Doctor has informed him, That amongji other incommunicable Apoftolick Priviledges, it was peculiar to Apoftles in a certain conspicuous manner, to impart Spiritual Gifts as Peter and John did at Samaria, citing Chryfoftom on Ads 8. 18. who jhews that this was the peculiar Gift and Priviledge of Apoftles. And Dr. Scottt the Epifcopal Chiftain fo much efteemed by him, pleads, that tbo* Philip who bad SucceffuVy Preacbsd to the Samaritans, was indowed with the Gift of Miracles, yet thefe two Applies, Peter and John, were fent to Seal and Confirm them. I know the Do&or pleads an Epifcopal Priviledge from this Inftance, how impertinently is made appear by his Impugner- But the Apoftolick Priy Hedge, ( tho'falfly pretended by him as the Bafis of the Epifcopal ) he neither did nor couid deny. We might cite a multiplicity of Orthodox Divines aflertlng this Apo- ftolick Perogative. Our Arguer's Anfwer is that the Churcb Primitive believed that the Holy Gbojl was conftrrd by Imp^fuion of Bi(hep's Hands iff Confirmation, citing generally Tertullian, Cyprian, Firmiiian, and'there- fore believed not this to be an extraordinary part of the Apoliclick Office. But % He pitifully miftakes the point in Queftion, not diftinguilhing the Spirit's ordinary and extraordinary Gifts. xly, The ordinary and extraordi* nary manner. %ly, The ordinary and extraordinary Evidences of his Prefence and Bre tchings * In the latter of which refpeds, this giving cf the Spirit by. impofition of Hands is alerted to be the proper B dge of the Apoftolick Office, as is evident in Scripture Inftances, Ails 8. 17, x8. God had confirmed with a gcacious converting Seal of the Spirit* 2^2 'A ZonfiUthn of m Additional Pamphlet, Entituled, bv converting Influences and Graces, Philips Miniftery and Baptifm; vv: vs cur pamphl< ter will not deny to be a Seal cf the Spirit graci» . r.dthvrithftdnding whereof, w«aretoid, T^/. r6. ft* Hf;*> GA-fl ^-« M<» a\?et u?°* mnt e'fthtm> *c& in tnar extraordi- nary wanner > and with thefe extraordinary Evidences, which attended >ofidon of the Hands ofthe Apofties. Tha Learned 7»rrtffe ws that the Greek Term im*t*fof> figmlying i/Wi, points at an extraordinary Z//ap/f, by vifible and extraordinary Gifts and Evidences. Therefore the Apoftles, by Prayer and Imposition of Hands, obtained this which had vifible Evidences apparent even to Simon Magus. Thus jifls \9* 6. Perfons Baptized, and having fuch an ordinary gracious confirming Seal, as he will acknowledge, yet the Holy Ghoft came mt upon them, in the Meafure* Manner, and Evidences Inftanced, till the Aooftle Paul laid his Hands upon them, and then as the great Badge and Evidence of his Apoftolick Authority and Privilcdge in this point, 'tis (aid that the Hdy Ghofl came ufn them, and that with this fpecial Demon- ftration and Evidence, that thty [pake -with Tongues, and Prophefied. ily As for the Churches Belief in point of Confirmation^ by laying on the B'lhops Hands, we refer him to what is laid by the Author of the Hierarchical Bifhops Claim, fart i. Pag. 113. 114, 11^, &c. And in Anfwer to the 4th Chapter of the Querift cited by him. Befides, giving, not granting, what he afierts in matter of Fad in point of common Influences, it touches not this Queftion, anentthat Communi- cation of the Spirit mentioned as peculiar, to the Apoftles. And he can jhew no fuitable or pertinent Inftance of fuch Communication of the Spirit in fuch extraordinary Manner and Evidences performed by an Officer inferior to Apoftles. For his Inftance of Ananias his laying of Hands upon Paul, it can in this Cafe break no fquare nor infringe God's ordinary Method with refpeft to Apoftles ; But, all the Circum* fiances confidered, ic rather confirms, than invalidates our Aflerrion, fince the whole Context makes it evident that he was immediatly and extraordinarily called of God thereunto. And we all know, that God impofes pofitive Commands and Rules upon hisCrearures or Church, but not upon himfelf who is infinitely above tbem. The whole Con- text makes it evident that he was immediatly and extraordinarily called of God, His being extraordinarily Infpired appears from what he fays, Verf. 17. Je(*s that apf eared to theetn the way ^ ha:h/ent me unto thee, that thou mighteft receive thy Sight and be filled with the H$ly Ghoft, which he could not know but by immediate Inspiration ,• and therein alfo his extra- ordinary immediate Call is pointed at : So that this extraordinary Inftance breaks not fquare, nor thwarts God's ordinary Method, in this firft Confutation A Query turn'd to w Argume nt in favours of Epifcopacy. 255 Confticution of the Gofpel Church* no more thanfuch other extraor-; dinary Inftances of a like Nature. God immediatly called the Perfon^ pointed him out to Paul in his praying Vifion, Verf 12. Judicious Calvin Judges it clear from the Context, that Ananias aKoTaught and Preached together with the Adminiftration of Baftifm. Our Arguer will not fay, that therefore any Difciple, or Church Member may take upon him to breach and Baptize without a Call. For what he adds. That no Presbyterian Preacher will fay, he is Ordained without the Holy Ghojji, and that there are different degrees of outward Evidences of one's having the Holy GhoB, which, with him, impeaches not the Spirit's being given in Ordi~ nation ; He foolifhly confounds different Degrees of outward Evidencesf with different kinds, and the Ordinary , and Extraordinary Evidences : This amounts to a Specifical, or, if he will, Generical, not a gradual Difference only. Thus we have feeft hisfooliih attempt to rob the Apoftlesof this their Third 'Prerogative. Come we to the Fourth Mark of Infallibility in leading, which all M«n have hitherto acknowledged peculiar to Apoftlcs, competent to none but the(e firft Heraulds and AmbafTadors, thefe living Oracles of Chrift, who were to be the firji Propagators of a pofitive Religion, as he expreffes it, or rather the Revealers of God's Mind to the Nations, as touching the Gofpel Oeconomy, the whole Scheme of the Chrifti- an Religion and Doftrine. But this pitiful Arguer will needs rob them of this Prerogative, and take this Grown off their Head, making it competent to others than themfelves ; So that Prot errant Churches have been far in the Mitt, if this Man may be believed, when deny- ing the Churches Infallibility, or even that of the Man with the Triple Crown, being fo Ancient and Venerable a fiiihop, Succeeding the Infallible Peter in a long Series. It were tedious to fliew, how unani- mous Proteftant Divines are in aiTerting this Prerogative. His Dr. Barrow aifercs '.* AponMes guidance by Infallible Afliftance, to which c they might appeal, It (eemed good to the Holy Gh&(l and to- us. f Whence, faith he, their - Writings have paffed for Infpired, and ' therefore Canonical or certain Rules of Faith and Practice, citing Alls 1 j. 28. Profeff. Salmur, de 'DiverJ. Grad.pig. 2 8r. after mention* ing the Apoftle* immediate-Vocation, make this the Second Prerogative^ Quod a Spiritu Sanclo infruBi & in omnem veritatem diducli Jint, ut in doctndo plane fint cwa,p*f rmoi , a-Hoefui Jrrita fuiffet eorum mijjio & muntts, fi fidemillis dengare licit urn fuifiet. "' That they were {o Ihftru&ed and ' led by the Spirit of God into all Truth, that in Teaching^they were c Infallible, otberwife their Million and Office had been in vain, had J it been lawful to deny Faith unto them. Polanus makes this to be the G g Fiftfi 2 34 ^ 'Confutation of an Additional Pamphlet*? EntitukcL, Fifth Mark and Incommunicable Prerogative of Apofiles, Jmmunlffsab cmni enore D>t?rinx Pofl acceptum die PentecoHes Spiritum Sanilum ' Im« 1 munity from Error in Do&nne, after they had received *Cbrifl.TbeoL < the Holy Ghoft, in the Day of Pentecoft*. lApofioli Lib i cap 28 erant 9r*cones Evangeht Vmverfales, immediate a Cbrtfio 1,J i-Io vocati. qui Aiiraenlis follcbant. & in Dottrina nm errabant, ?»y i& it The ApoftieS were Univerfal Heraulds and Meffengers r- b6But to (hew the certainty of this Incommunicable Prerogative, of Apoftles, I will affume this Arguer's Conceffipn and Principle and therefrom inform him/and prove what he denies: He acknowledges, the ApoftlJ "were to bz tte M Propagators he hou\d fayfc or Authorized Inftituters, of a pojitive Religion ^before unknown to ^ World and M acknowledged. Hence thefe things are clear, 1. This pofitive Religion had an ObjeBive Infallible Gertainty, obliging upon its difco- verval to receive it, as being the Voice and Mind of the Eternal God IheVoumai and Center of all Truth, «fc Hence thofe intrude* ^SW"in Order to this End behoved to have aDiv,ne Sjto Afiftaile in its delivery, fince God intrnfted this to Men, and not o Angel |j God's infinite Wittom in proportioning Means to thh End neceffarily requiring this. (ft Hence thofe Credentials or :"^IeKe of the Spirit's Affiftance. "fpeftcd thefe ffi Deliverers of the infallible Oracles properly, pmanl? and ^med^' h For thefe Evidences or Credentials were to lead the People ;to two things 1 The Objective Certainty of the Meffage and Divine Oracles hemfelve then New to the generality of Mankind, i/jp The InfaU MW? of thefe firft Meffengers and ^^.^^^§ L Infallible Connexion, and neceffary to found the Fat * ^l^« and their certain Perfwafion in the Reception- of thefe firft M'fienprs and their Meffage ; So that, make a breach m the one, Nereis a breach made in the other, and the proper ^^l^^^ 4/r, This Man muff acknowledge, that this Infallibility was prof* • £ guwyttftid to An 'Argument m favours of EpifcopAcy, 235 and peculiar to them, as the firft Propagators or Inftituters of this Pofitive: Religion, then new to the World, and thae upon two grounds-.^ 1 For, i. The Foundation of Chriftian Belief being thus laid, all fubfequent Teaching or Teachers were to be Examined thereby, fo that no fuch Infallibility can be fuppofed necefiary in them ,• For this were a palpable impeachment of the Canon, the infallible Rule and Foun- dation laid, if that which other Teachers by Office did deliver, had been abfolutely and intirely to be received de ipfo that they delivered it, rendering them thus tott&tm* and the thing it felf Authentick. Hence, ily, All Teachers, all their Gifts, were (till reduceable to this Rule, and thereby examinable, and thefe firft infallible Oracles, and Be* liverers, the Holy Apofties, in cafe of Doubt and Difficulty as to the Truth of what was Taught/ were to be confuked in order to a clear Decifion, and, consequently, no fuch Inferior Teachers were infallif ble. Finally^ it hence inevitably follows, that all Confirmations, even Extraordinary, in after Teachers was ftill Examinable by this Rule of the Apofties infallible £)o<5trine firft delivered, and are therefore infi- nitely ihort of proving them Infallible, and abfolutely beyond Error in Teaching, foas were the Apofties ; Since, 1. Thefe Confirmations C fuppofe them even Miraculous ) reflected the antecedent Doclrinc delivered by the Apojiles, fince they were ftill Examinable by this Rule, and therefore could import no infallible Authority, iuch as was com- petent to the firft Deliverers of the Ganon and Divine Oracles, zly, This would impeach the Authority of the Canon it felf; For, admit, that what they delivered was eo if Jo to be received as Infallible,, then upon the Hypothefis of their delivering what was beyond or crofs to the firft Canon,even that was alfo Canonicahand accordingly to be received. Hence, ;/y, The Defign of the (landing Canon is to be the Touch- ftone of all Teachers after the Apofties, both as to their Authority and Doftrine, and the Church is ftjli allowed, yea and Commanded to try the Sprits by this unerring Rule, 1 John 4. 1, &c. Hence our Arguer's Reafons to communicate this Infallibility to others than Apofties appears naught. Miracles were wrought, fays he, by infallible Guidance 1 Elfe what would their Gifts of "tongues avail d them or the Gburchs if they were not infallibly diucled to [peak, right things in them, and preferved frem fpeaking wrong ? What would the Gift of Healing Jigm nifie, if every one who had it were not diredled by the Holy Spirit when to ufe it ? Elfe thefe Gifts muH have proven dejbuclive to Cbriftianitp had it not bten for the direction of the Spiriiy bow, when, or upon whom to ufe them. But btfide G g 2 that V 2%6 A Confutation of an Additional Pamphlet^ BntUukd% that to be dire&ed when to ufe the Gifts aright, and to be abfulutely] and in every cafe Infallible, yea or even to be Ttachtrs by Office, are toto ccelo different, ff the Spirit conferred fubordinat Gifts for the end mentioned, the cTifTrenee is yet further confpicuous, in that, i. They were appendant, fubfervient Gifts to the Apoftolical, and to confirm the Ganon eft abii(h not to deftroy it ; But this was the ex- piefs 2$8 ^Confutation of an Additional Pamphlet, Entituled, prefs Will of God, that all Miracles mould not be credited, as is evi- dent, Deut% i%. where the Lord (hews, lhat the falfe Vmpbet, or Dream- ■ er of D'eamt, giving a Sign or Wonder , and the Wonder coming to pafs where- of he (peakj, faying, Let us go after other Gods, and ferve them, tbon (halt nit hearken to Ibe Words of that Prophet, for the Lord your God proves you, &C. Whence, faith he, it follows, that, if it could be imagined without Blalphemy, Chrift had delivered fuch a Do&rine as this, Ltt us go after ether Gods, his Miracles had been difowned and rejected ; And there- fore Miracles of themfelves are not to be credited, zfy, Chrift and his Apoftles have foretold us, that Miracles fhould be done by the Teach- ers of falfe Doctrines, therefore Miracles in themfelves are no fufficient Evidence, The Antecedent is proved from 2 lhe(% 2. 9. compared with Rev. 13. 13, 14. where we are taught, that the tslntichrifl Jhall cme with Power, and Signs and Lying Wonders ,• Lying Wonders, becaufe brought to Confirm his Lying Doclrine. And that he (hall do Great Wonders. - '■ And thus to deceive them that dwell on the Earth, by means of thefe Miracles. A Third Ground he offers, is, That our Sa- viour fpeaks of Miracles, as common to himfelf, and counterfeit Mef- fias's, as is evident, Mattb. 24. 24. where he (hews, that falfe Chrifls and falfe Prophets jhall jhew great Signs and Wonders* And therefore he points out Miracles, as of themfelves no fufficient xpiTMfw of Infallibili- ty ( But the Scripture Truth only is the fure KpiT»pw : And therefore, what Divines obferve of the Spirit's leflimony, that it is always conjunct with the Teftimony of Confcience, ( and therefore it is notfaid/£«fTif sir but tvyi/Afrvfiu ) the like we may difcern in this, that, where Chrift ureetli fhe Argument of Miracles, he doth it in Conjunction with the Scrip- ture, as is evident in John 5". compared with John i<*. 25, 38. where Chrift pleads his Works only, as they are done in his Father's Name, i. e. Not only as he pretended his Father's Name, ( for fo did the falfe Ghrifts, Mattb. 24,) but he really a&ed them with his Commiffion, and in Conformity to his Will and Word. Whence he concludes, that the Scripture is the only Tuuapi^, and not Miracles in themfelves, as this Argument of the Papifts falfty fuppofeth • Charging thus the fame falle Popifh Suppofition upon our Arguer. Another Ground he urges againft the Popiih Adverfary pleading Infallibility f-cm Miracles, is this, That, if it were admitted, that Miracles could prove the Verity, of a Doftrine, yet they do not neceflarily prove the Infallibility of him that doth thefe Works, or receives that VeQrine. Obferve this, faith he, f < r it ftrikes at the Root of this their laft Pretence. And here is an Ob- ferve for our Arguer, for it ftrikes at the Root of this his Popifh No- tion, and ftrikes out the Bottom of it ^ &nce he afcribes this. Infallibi- lity A Query turn d to an Argument in favours of EpifcopacyJ 239 lity of the Doctrine delivered, to the Workers of Miracles. But let us fee, how the Learned Author, illuftrates and clears this AfTertion* The Notes of a Man, faith he, may prove his Manhood, but they do not prove his Nobility, Wifdom, Learning: Thefe muft be proved aliunde from another Head, The Proteftant Notes of a Church do prove the Being and truth of our Church, but not its Infallibility, which muft be fetched from another Topiek; Which he illuftrates thus* The Gift of Miracles was not peculiar to the Apoftles, but was commu- nicated by God to other Minifters and Chriftians in the Primitive e Times : Either then they muft fay, that every fuch Minifter and Chri- 4 ftian, fingly confidered, was infallible, which no Man ever yet wasfo impudent to aflert ( I muft add, unlefs it be our Arguer ), or confefs, that Miracles are no fufficient Evidence of Infallibility. It was enough, that Miracles, faith he, did Confirm the Doctrines delivered, whether by Apoftles, or other Minifters, for the Confirmation of our Faith, &c He adds further, That Miracles are fo far from proving the Infallibility of the Perfons that do them, that they do not fo much as prove ( he means in themfelves, and abfolutely confidered, as he has before caution- ed ) the Verity of the Doctrines delivered by them,- Shewing, That Miracles have been done (or, at leaft, fuch things as the ftrickeftObfer- vation of common Prudence could not diftinguim from Miracles ) by Hereticks, yea by Pagans, &c. He after cautions this, That God's Providence is no way blemifhed in permitting fuch Miracles, this be^ ing an Act of his Wife Counfel and Righteous Judgment, that thofe who will not be won by the Word, and the Glorious Miracles done in Confirmation of it, may be hardened by o:her Miracks, efpeciaHy God having forewarned the World of fuch Impoftors, &c. We might add a Multiplicity of Proteftant Divines, in Difputing this Point of Miracles as a Note of the Church againft the Popilh Ad- verfary, which they induce in Proof of the Infallibility thereof, But this being notour to all that underftand the Popilh Controverfie, we need not infift upon't. But, from what is faid, 'tis fufficiently evident, that our Arguer, who in this point hath claffed himfelf with the Popi/h Adverfary, is fufficiently expofed, and his Folly made appear ; And that, in this Endeavour, to impeach this m7*ftov and Prerogative of Apoftles, he has discovered as well his Ignorance in the Proteftant Doctrine, as his Popiih Tincture. For what he adds further of Paul's Refrebtnfion of the Affile Peter, and Paul and Barnabas quarreling, and farting a/under , to prove, that the Apoftles were not, in every thing, and at all Occafions infallible, 'tis utterly unferviceable to him, and impertinent ,• Since the Queftion is anent 240 ■ -A Confutation of an Additional Vamphkt, Entitttled, anent a Voclrinal Infallibility, $r in Teaching, in delivering the Lord's Mind unto the Churches, whether by Word or Write : The Impeach- ment whereof by this Scribler, wounds the Divine Canon and Afftolick Authority, and reduces the Church to that Uncertainty, * See i 7bef. which he would fain improve againft us upon this 4. i,2. with point*. But 'tis not of fuch Practical and Abfolutdy 2 Ibef. 2. 1 5*. Sinlefs Infallibility, in the whole Walk or Practice, as hiiFooliflilnftances would fuppofe : And his Confound- ing the One with the Other, is among the reft of his Purblind Stum- blings in this point. One thing I cannot but add, as a further Difco- very of our Arguer's /hallow Precipitancy in this Matter. Theie Mira-. culous Gifts mentioned, he will needs extend beyond Apoftles, with a proportioned Infallibility, and he, together with the Querifti and other Aflfociates, would needs have them vigent in the Church for a very confiderable time, if not for fome Ages. And he will not dif- owneit, that, confequently, they fall within the Compafs of the Pro- mife, which, with him, reaches an Affiftanceto the end of the World, and confequently the Exiftence, the (landing Nature, and Continu- ance of that which is the Objecl of this A/Jiflance : For this is the Grand Topick, upon which he pleads for the Continuance of the Apoftolick Office, and that in its full Extent , as at firft excrcifed. Now, I hope, he will acknowledge thefe extraordinary Gifts to have long fince ceas'd, and, confequently, that the Promife,will not prove the Continuance of all thefe Gifts, or Offices included therein ; Or, to avoid this, he muft fay, that thefe Miraculous Gifts, Operations, or Offices, had no Right to our Lord's promifed Prefence or Afliftance: And thus, in ei- ther Cafe, he falls upon this ScyUa or Gharybdis, and impeaches the Grand Topick of his Arguing in this Pamphlet. I find nothing further in this Pamphlet worth noticing • Yet two things, that this Anfwer may be full, I (hall further touch upon. r. He will needs argue for Epifcopacy, from the Pelicy of the Church from the beginning of the World, a Defcription whereof, no doubt, is a Task this Pafquiller could not manage. He tells us, (Pag. %6, 37. ) of the Government of the Patriarchs, wh$ were Independent Princes and Prie[lsy by keeping Fellewfhip with whom, the Lord's People had Direction from God, how and when toWorfhip. Families were thus like a National Church, and the Pa- triarchs like the principal Bifhop of fuch a Church, whofe Defenders and Sub- jects all the reft were. After them, he telis u», that, in the Jewijh Oeconemy, there was no appearance of Parity, there being One High Priejt and Subordi- nate j>riefts ; Yet} in this Oeconomy, Eleazar the Son of Aaron was Chief ever the Chief of the Levitts, Numb. 3. jz. which is all fine with Prefident over A Gheric tnrrid to an Argument in favours of Epifeopacy. 241 'over the Yrefidents> Overfeer, or Bifbop over tbe 'Bifhops of tbe Levitts. And Nehcm. 11. 14. we find a Chief Prefident Bifbop, or Overfeer of tbeVriejis. So that here is, in the Old Teftament, a perfett Pattern of the New Tefiament Hierarchy. Aaron as only Qhrifts Type, and Eleazar Arcb-Bijhop over Bi- Jhops, and under bim Bifhops of tbt Priefts, and Bifhops of th<&Jzgvitet, and under them tbe ordinary frit ft* and Leviteu For what he talks of the Model of tbe Synagogue Werfbip, I need not notice, as not touching the point. %ly, " Chritt being to break down the Jewifh Hedge, and to make up * a Ghurch of all Nations* he did it in a general eafie Method, for all * different forts of People : Yet, coming to fulfill the Law, unlefs this * Order of Jewifh Officers be made appear to be Typical,* he tells us, He cannot fee what can be faid again]} continuing of that comely Order • For a Law it was which eftablijhed it, and alfo a part of that very Law, which Chriji came not to defiroy, but to fulfill; And tbe Officers which thrift Ordained and Appointed, while on Earth were made after this Model and Pattern, they not Acting in Parity* Or, if it muji be Typical, and fo fulfilled in and by Cbrifl, then bis copying after it muH be the only true fulfilling of it, and certainly the. moH natural way of fulfilling of it. Anf. It were tedious to trace the many ignorant Inadvertencies apparent in this Gentleman's large Dif- courfe to this Scope from Pag. ;6. to 46. whereof we have recited the Summ. 1. For what he talks of the Patriarchal and Jewifli Oeconomy, (tho» all that he fays were admitted, which, notwithstanding, upon evident and obvious Grounds, were tedious here to recite ) it never by a thoufand degrees, touches our Queftion, which is ftated anent that Oeconomy appointed by our Saviour in the New Tefiament church which he acknowledges, hadits diftinft and peculiar pofitive Rules and Infti- tutions ; So that this his ihattered Difcourfe involves an Inconfiften- cy,- For he tells us, Page 42, That our Lord brake down the former Hedge, whereby tbt Jews were Jeparated fiom other Nations, which, all do know, was the Hedge of their peculiar Oeconomy t as a Church and Nation go- verned by God's peculiar pofitive Laws, and therefore muft needs be fuppofed to have let up another. Oeconomy and Hedge of his own framing, elfe he left the Church open, without' a Hedge, to the lnvafion.of her Enemies. ily, 'Tis evident, and acknowledged by the Learned, that the Sanhedrim a&ed in an Official Parity, and the High- Prieft was no other than Prefident, without any fuch Dominion as Prelates afiuiue, and Prelatifts pretend.- Junius * (hews, that, in the Sanhedrim, there was par confortium Ordinis & PoUjiatis, * De Cleric, fed Ordini imparl, ycta familiar urn, jua temporis refpeflu ; C.24. Not, 1 fa penes &*n\efium Sacerdotum ex lege fuit Ordinaria Jurifdiclio Ecclefiafiica* i. e. " The like Participation of Authority and Power, H h < tho' 2-4-2 A Confutation of an Additional Pamphlet \ Entitled, c tho' in diftintf Order, partly in refpeft of Families, partly in refpect 'of Time, the Ordinary Ecclefiaftick Jurifdi&ion and Authority was • eftabliflied in the AfTt mbly of the Priefts according to the Law. We heard, that Biftiop Bilfon * Mates this Diftintfion be- *Ptrpet.Go- twixt Officers of the Jewifh Oeconomy and thQ Chri- vernment,C.z. ftian Church, ces are abolilhed by him', a 6jr. a . ,. a ,7. and the T> prcal u«« ^ M u ba, f fc VrUfhooi hring Alnd gI°?J ?fc J! IfTeeeTya ChaHe «//. 'of the U». Heb 7 .a. vTr this Kti ProU will inform them that the only «• "Tcllof^nd m «ke notice, how impertinently, all along ;, Ms , oppoles his /m™" uniers his pretended Hierarchy take place ; be no Imparity of Officers unieis m pr Officers, Whereas all do know,, that the ^"^^f ^ , oppofite to hi's which we <^a ™d^h° who ej wiffiOeconomy, in point of Wot- Hierarchy. In a word, tn= wn" s J luHaizing Pamphleter, fo clear- Jbip and i Government ; 0, by *h new udaiz.ng ^ P ly introduced into ,ne ^e™ / •" " '. r-d< has a new Confirmation r* &.ff«**P* 44- whVr "he Tells ul, *^Wfc«* from what he allerts, r*g. 44- l .l. t,m\(h Otconmi in point of the ,„,r, fibular. W «r W coN U«fy tie Jem fh O ,«£, , f I Tditj of the CbrWao Church ; But f«* he. »« f» W touched above. But here us pia. ^/WjSUhg *j /** - the Government ; And lure "„ ' in extending this Copying SB S?AE* 5? * ■"Stf* th? fame Ground' he rauft extend it to rfc frfiri Fwwe ,/.i«r IP£j&/;. inconfiftent Government merely i.^n^J?*"'^S*.?*fa P**r«M JWftJ Tfo oblcvable .. /^, holdmg e^ »- y p WS^«.he >. 4«w refrefented the fy&fj " %™din& fet ever'y Prelate in this Repre- fentativeCha.r.asw.U after ,ppe , * inCommunim with the toy©, floroftheDioc Is. I'J.tU. noos,« Vrin,..x>riett, Vrimate, or Vatnurch, A Query turn d to an Argument In favours ofEpifiopdcy. 245 m Communion with the A«>©-, where this Patriarchal and Princely Prelatical Infpe&ion is warning, impeaching thus and denying the Miniftery of the mod Reformed Churches, yea and their EiTence as fuch ,• Befides that, tho' not immediatly, the Worfhip is to be dire- cted, yet in the Confequence of his Difcourfe, the Direction mutt ftill flow, and that infallibly from this Prince ©r Patriarch to all under his Infpe&ion. Thus he is made a Pope to his Subftitutes and Subjects. Befides that, this Patriarch or Prieit being alfo a Prince, and having a Givil as well as EccUfiaftick Sever aignity, he mult either own the warrantable Conjunction of both in his New Teftament Patriarch, or his Difcourfe anent thefe inftanced Prerogatives is extra oleas, and fruitlefs Talk, not to the purpofe. %ly, ThisPatriarcb, he fays, was like the principal Bijbop offuch a church, whofe Dependents or Sub\et~ls, all the rejl of the Nation or Family were. Upon which, I would know, whether he makes thefe principal Bifbops independent upon a Prince, or not. If not, then he contradicts his ArTertion, Pag, prec, for he afferts, that thefe Ancient Patriarchs ( to whom he affimilates his Patriarch Prelatessas ex- acts y parallel ) were Independent Princes , as well as Prhfts. If he aiTert them Dependent upon the Prince* then he breaks his Parallel, and Ar-" gument deduceable therefrom, and can make no Senfe of that AlTerti- on which heha«i Pag. 37. viz,, That the Patriarch is like the principal Bifhop of a €hu*ch, and, in his Senfe, like the Metropolitical Head of a National Church, whoje Defenders, yea, and Subjects, aU the reft of the Nation are. Befides. in his Senfe and Pleading, this principal Bi- fhop ftandmg in Relation to all Subordinate Bifhops> as his Dependers and SuhjcBs, he calls a mameful Blot upon their great Champion J. S, who fees all Prelates on a Level, in point of Epifcopal Power and Au- thority* as being, within their Diftrictj (ubjed to none but Chrifr, yea, and palpably contradicts himfelf, who gives the fame account ot Bi- fhop*,as mail be made immediatly appear.^He tells u$,lh\d.That Aaron the High Prieffs Office fail'd when Gbrifi came, he being the Typical Repre Ten- tative of the A«^©-, and Ghrift the only High Priefl. Head, and Husband of his Church. Now, if his Offi ke fail'd, then certainlv his National, Prince- like, or Patriarchal InfpeElion laii'd, • which he cannot deny to have been effentially included in hisQjji:e ; So that he mult acknowledge our Lord to have taken away-,together with this obfoleteojfre of Aaron, that Metrepolitical, Patriarchal, National lnfpetlion of Prelats which he afferts-: And here is a new Contradi&ion of oxti Pamphlecer 5 For if Aaron's National Headship, to fpeak fo, was properly TypicJ, and Reprefen- tacive of the AtyQ-, as he expreffes ir, he muft confefs that the Aoy<&, or Chrift's coming in the Ficih has cakeaic away, and, together the t- wich, 246 A Confutation of an Additional Pamphlet, Entituled, with all pretences of a National Primacy fuch as he aflerts. Befides, tf as he afferts, Chrift is the only High Prsejl Head, and Husband of the Church this Only muft either be cxclullve of a typed Head alone which he will not aiTert j For thus he will own the Popes pretence of being ChrUYs Vicar and Under- Head, tho' not properly Typica: And if he embrace the affirmative AnfWer, then he muft acknowledge, that Aanns Head(hip is alfo excluded, as hkew.fe the Epifcop.l Pre-emi- nence over a National Church, which he will needs draw from it, as upon the matter an Univerlal Primacy or Headrtiip is becomes each a ***!««**» 4 **.*>** fori [acceding <» /«» »™*'r« _, .„ Here >tis evident, that in one hdefmdent of any other **>***« Cbrg. ««s whole frame both of dafh he has overturned and b oken ^h ,e cannot but acknowledge the Mf and ^"™"Jto%W. Arch-biihops over there were in Scotland, ana now arc 111 s » p. h ; faith he, « P«/M«* «.r »** P»^«; ''• 9^ ;X; r ^5 cWr/ „wr ,4, Chief of the Levites, JNumD. ?. ?2« r™"' r, nverlerr of the Anirefiden,, or Overfeer of the .?** ^^J,, foppo ed jSi.ll Fr«fJ. «W £«*«. ( how truly this his Delcant ot th ! lupp Hierarchy is calculated, needs not be here inqu. ed «».™*M£* r dy couched in the account we have given of the equal umnai ro A Qutr? Mnd to ah Argument in favours ofEplfiopacy. 249 of all the Members of the Sanhdrim^which will bear the fame Conclufkm *sto the Inferior Courts ). Having reprefented this Hierarchy of the Aaronical Order, he tells us, that there is a perfect Pattern inthe Old Teftament of the New Testament Hierarchy, Aaron the Bead as Reprefenting Qhrift cur only Spiritual Head, and under Aaron Eleazar his Son Arch-hijhof, as above, and under him again the Bifbop of the frieftt, and the %i(hop of Levies, and under them the ordinary friefls and Levites, &c. Now, can there be a greater and more palpable Jnconfiftency and Contradiction imagined than this is ; The Priefthood of Aaron and the Jewifri Oeconomy had Prefidents or Bifhops above Bifhops, Arches above Arches, and thefe fteps and flairs of Official Superiority of Church Officers refolving and coaleicing in one High Prieft, or Chief of all the Chiefs, as he re- prefents it ,• And this Old Teftament Hierarchy a perfect Pattern of the New Teftament Hierarchy, which is compleatly correspondent thereunto; And yet in this New Teftament Hierarchy every Bijbcp is Reprefentative of the Asy©-, and Independent of any other Head hut Chrifl. Again, in the Old Teftament Pattern, the Power of ail Inferior Officers did refoiva inthe Supremacy of one High Prieft, who, befides the Typical Prieft; he tells us, was Chief over the Chief of the Levites, and Prefident over aU the Prefident s, which is a perfcK pattern of the New teftament Hierarchy j And yet in this New Teftament Hierarchy there are Twelve Apoftles of the fame full Power, Independent one upon another, each a Reprefentative of the a*>©% as alfo every one of their Succeffors. Further, his great Reafon tor denying the premifed Presbyterian Ar- gument, That the Epifcopal Hierarchy muji at la ft end in one Pope, is this,' That the Church having but one Head, this Head can have no fingle Deputy, or Vicar. But, I pray, had not this one Head a fingle Deputy in the Jewifli Oeconomy ? And hath ht not. made this Government a ferfecl Pattern if the New Teftament Hierarchy ? And thus, I. He does evidently eftabliffi a New Teftament -^Supreme Prefident, a fingle Deputy, or Vicar ol Ghrift. And, ily, He hath deikoyed the Commiftion of the Twelve Apoftles, which, he tells us, did import a Collateral Independent Tower. It has been always judg'd as Monftruous, that One Body fhould have Two Heads, which has ajuft Application to the State of he Church ; But this Man makes her fuch a Monfter of Monfters, as has not only Twelve Heads, but as many Heads as there are Bifhoi s> who are by him declared Independent of any other Head but Chrift. Was ever (uch a farrago of Nonfenfical Contradiaions fpoken or written ? Ouc Pamphleter tells us, that by this Reafoning Presly erin s may Jte} whether] he of the Church Principles, or they be n arett Popery, and have jbhdeft Reaf ns and Grounds to fupport Protefiant Arguments again} the fope and the Church I i «/ 2 5o A Confutation of an Additional Pamphlet 5 Entltuled, of Rome's encroachments upon the Headfrip and Reprejwation of Ckrtf Jefm) But, without doubt, the Presbyterians have teen this Pamphleterby foch Reafonirg put in the Pope's Hand a Handle and Sword againft the Proteftmt Churches, as is evident from what is premifed. The Bitten of Rome can plead againft him, that the New Teftament Hie- rarchy muft have a Supreme Head in correfpondence to its perted: Pattern in the Old Teftament Hierarchy, and that this our Pamph- leter's Principle and Acknowledgement is the fame very Argument and Ground upon which Bellarmin and the other Popifli pleaders do Areue the Advantage and Neceflity of one Supreme Monarch over the New^Teftament Church. And for what he adds of every Biftop s Reprefentation of the Ao*©-, and of every Bifhop s Independency upon any Head but Chriit, the Pope and his pleaders can eafily baffle him in mewine, that, 1. He herein has deftroyed his own premifed Principle of ont Supreme Head. a£ The Pope and his pleaders can pole him with this, Whether it doth look more like Order and Unity, vea and that Monarchical Order and Unity of Government reprefen- ted in the Records of the Old Teftament Church, which he (together with the other Hierarchical pleaders ) holds to be a ferfeB f^ternof The New Teftament Hierarchy, that there be :one Jleprefentative of the i L Tndeoendent of any other Head but Chrift, than that there be ^Sn^MdSS yea3poffibly,Thoufands of Independent Reprefen- tldvl" of the A^O-, as there are Prelats or Bifhops and that thus the New Teftament Church be cantonized and crumbled into as many vZcL as there are Prelacies ? Nor can he evade, in alledging, that he meanS only one National Church in this point of Government which he inflSiats ?i. 40. For, i. He cannot deny, that the Church of 3eW under the Old Teftament Difpenfation.was not meerly a Na- bnl Church, but God's only Gatholick Vifible Church then exiftenr, whfch h above made appear ; Yea and our Pamphleter acknow edges for he tells us pas. 42. 7 bat the Church of the Jews under the Old te/lZent Difpenfation was the Lord's only proper Peculium and that tfanj Iter Nation eaped Benefit by their Oeconomy, it was by bemgfi/t made a Jew etber ssanonreay j j allowed for that purpse. And if ^TcouTd b"e AS ^tt jo S^ Blcffin^s or Privileges but in S3?lfcthod of being joyned to that Church, he muft of neceflity, ac- kno^edge, that i t wa then the only Catholic* Church VifMeitd that upon the tme g ound afferted A3, 2. 47- with refpe<» to the New Tcfta- mL Church Viz That the Lord added to the Church lady luch at JktuU ™7^ Hence ll„ When he tells us, That thu Governm* of the A Query tmni to m ArgumtttiufAvms ofEpifcoptcy. 251 to make the Pattern or Copy and the firft Exemplar correfpondent, he muft necefiarily extend this Correfpondency and Similitude to the New Teftament Church generally and univerfally confider'd, which clearly precludes any fuch Evafion. Pag.tf. He is bold to tell Us, IhatEpifcopaty is notdijowndhy the Reformed Churches. The Author of the Plea mentioned by the Querift ( who, probably, is alfo the Author of this goodly Superftru&ure ) gave an account of the Confeflions of Reformed Churches difowning Prelacy. If they approve of it, and are [orry they cannot have it, as this Pamphleter is bold to aflert, how come their Confeflions, their Univerfities to appear againft it, as is above made good ? That which he talks of Gobs infpiring; People with miraculous Gifts after Prelacy was eBablijhed, and that none who had thefe Gifts are found to have given any feflimony aga'wftyt, is alio Anfwered above. Here I only add, firft, That who ( and how long after the Apoftolick Age ) had fuch Gifts, is a point he can give us no account of. 2//, It is univerfally aeknowledg'd, that the times immediatly Succeeding the Apoftolick Age are moft dark as to matter of Fa&, both as to Perfons Writing, and their Writings them* felves ,• And, confequently, feveral fuch Teftimonies might have been, tho' they have not come to our knowledge. The denyal of matter of Fatf becaufe of the defect of Hiftory, is a Gonfequence derided by Proteftant Divines Writing againft Papifts, who, in Defence of their Superftitions and Idolatries, make ufe of the fame Topick, demanding Hiftoiical Iuftances when fuch and fuch Corruptions did firft appear in the Church, and when, and by whom they were teftified againft. Whence they conclude, that they were from the beginning and are of Divine Appointment. And 'tis notourly known, thar, in point of the Hierarchy, our Prelatifts have borrowed this Notion, telling us ever and anone, " That we can give no account when the Hierarchy f«rft 'had its rife after the Apoftles, if Presbytery was the firft Govern- f ment. But in this point, among other Anfwers, cur Divines have offered this to Papifts, ( which Anfwer hath the fame force againft Prelatifts ) (t That to deny a Man to be Difealed becaufe he cannot 'give account of the Method and way how he took it ,• Or, a Man ' being found Wounded, thrown in a Ditch, or robbed, to be in fuch c a cafe, or thus ufed, becaufe he cannot give an account of she Per- 'fonswho thus wronged him, as 'tis grofly Nonteufical and Imperii* ' nent;Of a like Nature is the denyal of' Corruptions condemned in the ' Word of God, to be fuch, becaufe the Original and firft Inftruments of ' their Incrodu&ion are latent in Hiftory. Which leads to a third An- fwer, If we can make appear, from the Apofties Doctrine and Practice, I i 2 in , 1 5 J A Confttttliott ofM MMtttd PmpBlet, Enthuled, in framing the Gifpel Church, that both the one and the other «: dudes Prelacy, and Reprobates this beloved Hierajchy he muIV ac- knowledge that this isPthe ben, yea and the onlv true Tefhmony or Teft whiein we are to acquiefce ; The Apoftles Do<»nne the Miraculous Confirmations thereof, their Authority apparent in both, be rtE infinitely beyond any fuch Principles and Confirmation! as he may pretend : And therefore, till his Hierarchical Party can Anfwer whit is offered from thefe lively Oracles againft Prelacy, th.sNot.on falls of courfe. Com* we now to our Pamphleter's laft Argument to fupport Pre- lacy, ihicb he imagines to be Achillean , And yet its nothing but an ■ old Popllh Cant, and rotten Notion, long fince exploded and baffled by ProUint Divines. He tells us, ( P*. 4«- ) «f ^^Tsi, late Judicious and Learned Author, forfooth, of the Church of Scot- land to this effea: Let m fopfi Tretbperial Order. ,» tbemfches vmU ( a Suppofition he jaftly QuefHon,). neverthel,^ V™£, «' ■* VantJtbat thu, it ht *l« can this avail the prefent Presbper.an, fince t be %li vLyter: of Presbyterian Principle,, aSing a, Pre.byter,, after the Refer- PJath« badthir Order,, either fi-om »«h>i, and confe^uentlymui own tbt 2 pier to Ordain] or elfe deny their own Authority to AS a, P«,*y,£; 0 ,% muH (a, they had it by the Call and Suffrage ***]$*> £**" it mur, If an tnward CaUand Impulfebe pretended, h» demands a Scripture mfiance of our u,rd, d.figmng ZapnJing (uch 'a Call, a, alio fufficicnt Voucher, ^'TZ^^X ZJrim to tbi< inward Cat Now, to make it appear what pitiful 1 aelary Popilh Stuff this is, and that the Man is fighting with the Arguments of the Anti-Chrifiian Rable, againft the Reformat- °n'Let us hear' what is returned to this Argument by Proteftant Di- J? taUj of Poplfl. Bilhops ^^nf^e tSJZ *A Mmtria l^S^rKSLa-STtotnftrna. an ordinary « Commiffion no Witnefs of an Extraordinary Authority, no Mira- • desS! after difcovery ol the Pope, and Popilh X lergv s lnrufion leu wn»«reu» Reformers to Preach the Goi- ^t^o%^t^L^f^S, infofar tlieir oidmary Call, who wefe Ordaiued by Popifh B.fhopsj He «*»\^Jg A Query tumd to m Argument in favours ef Epifiopdcy. 255 * retaining that which was good in that Ordination, they, moreover, 'had this Extraordinary, that God imployed them contrary to ' their Intentions who Ordained them, as being contrary to the c Intention of Jefus Chrift, the firft Author of that Vocation. And c this extraordinary Comrniffion, he tells us, is nothing but theantient ' ordinary Charge ,• That an ordinary Charge may have an extraprdi- * nary Comrniffion ,• as Jeremie, Ezekiel, John Bapiijl^ having' an ' ordinary Charge as Levites and Priefts, were by God imployed in .' extraordinary Commiffions. He (hews, That the Reformers obfer- ' ved what was good in their bad ordinary Vocation, /lotfrprn the ' Prelates who had Confecrated them, but from Jefus Chrifran-d the * Apoftlesirorn whom thefe Callings were firft derived,- Aswfren Water- ' of a clear Spring comes to us through an unclean Channel, then In- 'lection comes only from the Channel, but the Water it felf comes 'from the Spring and firft Original thereof, which coming thick and 'troubled to us, our Labour is commendable if we endeavourto make ' it run clear. 'Tis one thing, laith he, to have a Vocation by the 'Means and Miniftery of the Church of Rome, and another thing ' (N. B.) to have it from the Church of Rome, and from her Authori- ' ty. The Authority of the Calling comes from Jefus Chrift and his ' Apoftles, not from polluted Hands through which it is paft. Buckier of the Faith, pag. 577* Us> 3*9, &f. Profef. Leid. Difp. 42. The/, 39. Having after ted above, that the Ele- ction and Ordination ofPaftors is proper to the whole Presbytery, they add thisLimitation,that they fpeak of a Church fuUy conftituted. Nam nbi ejufmodi nondum e{i Eccltfta, ibi Negotium iltud aliter, pro re nata, geri potefl : " For, where fuch a conftituted Church is not as yet exiftent, * in that cafe, this Affair maybe otheiwife managed, when Occafion 'offers thef. 40. They fhew what are the parts of the Divinely in- ftituted Paftor's Office, whereof our Lord has prefcrlbed the Rule's,' jcfi* '■ The pure Preaching of the Word according to the Scripture, ' the Lawful Ufe of Sacraments, and right Exercife of Difcipline, Mat. 28.20. and 18. 17. tbtf. 41. They aflert, "That the Vocation ' of Tome firft Reformers, who Reformed the Church from Antichri- ' ftian Superftition and Idolatry, was partly Oroinary, and partly Ex- c traordinary ; Ordinary* in fo far as they were Ordained either in * the Ro*n*n% or feme Reformed Church ; Extraordinary, in fo far c as they applied an Extraordinary Remedy to an Extraordinary Evil, * and were therefore indowed with Extraordinary Giits for this Extra- , f ordinary Function, thef, 42. " But, if fome of them Preached the t Gofpel of Chrift to an Oppofing Reclaiming People in the beginning - 'of 3 54 ^ Conjktdth* of An Addition! Pmphkt, EntitHled, * of the Reformation, without the previous Gatl of fome certain c Church, they werei for this Work o! the Sacred Miniftery, aded by * the fame Spirit, as was Apollo, and thofe of Cyprus and Cyrtne, who « are faid to have Preached the Myfteries of Chrift in the Synagogues * of the Jews, and unto the Gentiles, tho' we no where read of their ' being Ordained to that Office by either Jews or Gentiles, or Apoftles . * or Evangelifts. — Tho* ( Tbef. 43. ) th*Y were» £y Apoftles Ap- * probation, by Barnabas, and other Difciples of Chrift, Confirmed in 1 their Office, as we read, AQs n. 23. and 18. 27. T^.44. " Where * there is no Church exiftent, Men called by God to Preach theGofpel, * can have no Call from Men ignorant of God, but God muft be obey.. - ed in his immediate Million, from the common Obligation to pro-] c mote his Kingdom, until they be eftabliftied in their begun Fundion, * both by Confent of the Church begun by themfelves, as alfo of the * Neighbouring Brotherhood, or even of thofe who are more remote, diftinguifliing clearly this Miflion, tho' fo termed, from that of Apoftles. tbef. 47. They aflert " the Ordination and Call valid of fuch of the * firfi Fa'ftors as were Ordained,whether by Bifhops or Presbyteis,and that * becaufe the Name and Office of Bifhop and Presbyter is, re & nomine, ' in Name and Thing the fame. Ibid. «' In cafe of thofe Ordained in * the Church of Rome, they propofe three diverfe Caufes to beconilder- * ed r. God the principal Caufe, the two lefs principal Caufes the c Romijh Church, and the Bifhop. Shewing? " Thar, in fo far as they * were Ordained, tho* in the Name of the Adulterous Spurious Church * by fome Bifhop,yet,according to Divine Rule.to Preach the Gofpe!,and « adminifter Sacraments, that, in this Senfe, and thus far,the Ordination « was pure i But, in fo far as they were Ordained, accoiding to the Sta- tutes of the Pope of Rome, to Say Mate, Preach Humane Traditions, " 6-c in this refpecl:, the Call was impure and unlawful, like Water 1 flowing through an impure Stream, contrafting the Filth of an im« * pure Channel. Ihef, 49. " There's a Twofold Perfonal Succeflion of c Ordinary Paftors either continued from a Primitive Ordination of e true AnteceiTors,' or interrupted. Antichrift uiurping upon the « Church has in ™oft Places« taken awa>" this ftr Succeffcon, the po- c ft-rior may be afcribed to fome, who, altho' no: immediately fucceedj c ine Orthodox Doftors of tiie firft Ages, yet, in point of Reformation 1 of Corruptions, and Rejeaion of thefe Mercenanes, by the Htlp of ■ the Pious Magiftrate, have (ucceeded thefe pare Primitive Dodors, c as Faithful Subjects of the true King are intsufted with Initiation 'and Miniftration of Government- after it is liberated from the slavery * of a Tyrant, and his Tyrannizing Officers ; Or, as the Keftored " : Health A vinery tttrnd to An Argument in favours of Bpifcepacy. 255 1 Health of the Body, when the Difeafe is over, follows upon the prior * Hearth exifting before the Difeafe. Jhef, yo. " Hence true Paftors ' are to be dilcerned from Hireling?, not by a Continuance of Perfonal ' Succeffion, but of the true Do&rine ,* And the Hirelings are undcr- ' /rood to be fuch, not from the Interruption of a Perfonal Succeffion, J but the Interruption of pure Preaching of the Gofpel. Thus far we have hinted the Judgment of the Learned Univerfity in this point. How confonant to the proceeding Teftimony* is obvious* The Univerfity of Saunter exprefs themfelves fully to the fame Scope, [ de Mlniftt Evang. Vocat. ] having diftinguifhed betwixt the private Gha- ritative} and Vublkk Official Ministerial leaching, as like wife the Ordinary and Extraordinary Office, and Adifim proper and peculiar ta the Apoftles, Pro- phets and Evangelifts* to which none did, nor could [ucceed (in this one Sentence and Account of their Judgment, overturning the whole Foundation and Scope of this Pamphlet ) : Having thus, we fay, di- ftinguifhed the Extraordinary from the Ordinary Vocation. and Mif- fion,communicated by the Apoftles to their SuccefTors, whom they pla- ced xdT« now in fingle Churches founded by them, and by whom the Church was to be governed and propagated to the end of the World, they offer this Reafon, why the Apoftolick Vocation and Miffion eould not be reiterated, becaufe, that, after the Apoftles, no new Voffrine^ new Gofpel, nor new IForfiip of God, is to be expeBedin the GhrifHan Church and what Corruption the Church has contra&ed) is to be Reformed by the Ordinary Mim(leryt And, having difcourfed of the Qualifications of the Ordina- ry Miniftery, they add this Caujion, Tbef. 18. " That this is not to be * fo underftood, as if a Miniftery, thus defcribed, were fo Pimply and c absolutely neceffary in all refpeds, that there could be no Faith in * any Cafe, no Preaching of the Gofpel, no Church of Chrift, no Chri- ' ftian People, where Officers or Teachers are not Gonftituced in fuch * Order and Method, by fuch who have been inftalled in that Office, * by a continued uninterrupted Succeffion from the Times of the c Apoftles, fince the Efficacy of the Word and Sacraments depends not ' upon the State and Condition of Adminiftrators, but flows from the * Spirit's Efficacy concurring with their own Inftituted Power. Theft 26. They thus Ahlwer the Popifh Objection againft the Call of Mini- ftersof the Reformed Churches, as being Schijmatical, "That granting c the flrft Reformers had been privaie Men, and not Ordained by c Popifh Prelates, and had been cloathed with no Authority of 'Preach- c ing, to which their own Hiftory repugns, yet the difiurbed State and c Condition of thefe Times, ( wherein Sincere Preachers could not be f got Cpnftituted by Rmijh Prelates ) and the Law of Charity, ingag- a $£ A ConfuUthn of an AddUUnd Pmphkt, Entitukd* ' ing to do ow outmoft for the Safety of our Neighbour, gave thfirn c Authority to Preach the Gofpel purely, to refute the Popifo Errors, 9 recover Men from them, to Conftitute Churches, Inttitute a Mini- ' ftery, for the Churches Edification, and Propagation of the Doctrine, € for Purging Ecclefiaftick Difcipiine from Errors and Abules, and re- • calling and Reftoringit to the firft Apoftolick Frame, they being thereto • impowered by the Church and People whom they had converted • c Comparing thereafter this Perturbed State of the Church, to that ot ' a Kingdom, wherein Traiterous Inferiour Magiftrates conipire to 4 Dethrone their Lawful Prince, drawing Cities and Provinces into • their Confpiracy, in which cafe, the Faithful Subjeds are lmpower- < ed to invade, oppofe, yea, to expel fuch Traiterous Rulers, and ule c their beft Endeavours to extinguifh this Confpiracy, and reduce the • Subisas to their Duty, altho', in this, they go beyond the Legal Or- «der of their Station in the Kingdom's fettled State and Condition. From Tbef 52. &c They defend further the Aclings and Miniftery of the firft Reformers, fuch as Luther in Germany, ZuingUus in Hdvetia. with feveral others, as thofe in England, " from the Fusion where- « with they were Authorized in the Rm*n Church, which receded ■ the Preaching of the Gofpel, and Adniiniftration of Sacraments, ■ fo that, in their Endeavours ot Reformation, they did profecme the -'RightandproperUfeandEnd of their Vocation, afting according ■ to the Law of Charity, and of a good Conference, which they could « not have omitted, without finning grievoully againtt God, againlt ■ their Neighbour, againft the Flocks commuted to them. ; * To the fame purpofe the Learned Turrctin has many things. Part ;. Lee 18 Qu** 2 c upon that point of the Lawful Call of our firft Reform- ed^Having mown, TfcjU I how acaloufly the Popifh Pa.«y argue •the Schlfm'tical and Unlawful Miniftery of the Reformer, upon .he ■ Ground of feparating from them, he anfwers, IbeJ. 2. That this is « a alfe and prepofterous Digreffion from the true Controverfie betwixt ' the Reformers and them, which is anent the Truth of the Dodrmc, •without difcuffing whereof, the Truth of the Calling cannot be un- * de ftood T That an Enquiry into the Lawful Vocation is fruitlefs and •ufelefs if the Truth of the Doarine be clear and apparent, becaufe ' Faith .depends not upon the Vocation, but, on the contrary, the Vo- •carion upon Faith ; Faith is not therefore true, becaufe fuch a •Preach £ are lawfully called, but, on the contrary, they « lawfully 'called who retain and propofe the true Dodri.e, ( which lafi we are to un'erftand with fuch well cautioned ^^^^^ the Series ot his handling this Queftion ). fhef% 4> Anlwenng that A Query turnd U An Argument hi favours of Epifcopacj. 257- Obje&ion of thepopifh Party, " That there's no Hope o! Salvation in a " Falle Church, and that the Church is Falfe, if the Miflion be Falfe or Counterfeit, He diftinguimeth "A Miflion which is Falfe in EfTentials, and in refped of the Doctrines which are propounded, and a Milli- on which is Illegitimate in Accidentals and in refpecl of Rites and Ceremonies which could not be obferved in the perturbed State of the Churchi but yec are fuch, as are notEflential,either to the Miniftery, or Churcli it felf, neither are neceffary for the Salvation of thof© who believe. The firft, faith he, argues a Falfe Church, but not the other; Becaufe it may be found in a Church that is Truey &c, (Cent- ring, thus, and condemning our Querift's Impeachment of the Famous Mr. Bruce his Ordination, becaufe wanting the Rite and Ceremony of Impofition of Hands ). He further, 7hef. 6, 7, 8, &c. diftingui/heth " Th« ' Truth of the Vocation of our Reformers, with refpect to thefe who were Galled and Ordained by the Church of Rome, and of thefe who were Called by the Congregation of the Faithful without Paftors, And, for the firft, he tells us, •* We are to confider the Primary Author of the Vocation and Office, which is God, and the Secondary Inftru- ments, and, accordingly, the Twofold End of the One and the Other • God's End being to propagate his -Truth 3 Man's End the propa- gating the Papal Do&rine, which is wicked. He alfo diftinguifheth, 7bef, 8, " A Call which is in its own Inftitution falfe, tending prima- ' rily to the Propagation of Idolatry and Impiety ,• Another Call which is Holy and Juft in point of Inftitution, -but degenerated by Mens Abufe and Corruption. The firft, ke holds, is to be rejeded • The fecond to be retained, and the Abufes removed. To this pur- pofe he cites, tbef, 1®. a remarkable Sentence of *sSugujtint Lib. 3. 4s Baptifmo, Cap. 10. Lumen Lampadis} vel Soils, von insjuinaiur, etji tranfeat per loca ccenofa ; parum intereft, utrum Aqua per Canahm Lapideum, an per Argenteum defer atur. i.e. li That the Light of a Lamp, or Sun Rays ' are not defiled, tho' they (hine and pierce through dirty places, and that it matters not, whether the Canale conveying the Water be of Silver or of Stone. Shewing alfo, Chap. 7, (: That the Word of God may have its Efficacy, tho' Preached by wicked Men. He /hews alfo, and the CcmmMd of God impofing the fTit bSeeeoSU^; !fc»& ^o^fents of a Lawful Miffion in the Church of Ro^.for the Sublianttals thereof will infer.that it a i true Church, even under the Pope's Authority and Influence, at lead as to the Main, and that, therefore, there was no Ground of Sepa- ration f torn the fame, which feems to impeach the Dodnne and Pra- .„„,,. Reformers • Befides what may be Anlwered from the created Accounfof this Matter, we may fee thi. further cleared in wto i offered"^ the Famous TMm, ^.C«/iP-^. *.«* ? TJ 6 Where he thus Ihews the Confequence to be foohfh and ab- furd in this parallel Inftance, Suhlyranmulurfanteaut abutente ahjua eft p I l vllida Ac Erie, lyramis & FlBU Ijranmca (oh eft Leg,. IZ^ma ' " UndeA Tyrant ufurping o! abuiing his Power, « rtefe sfom thing of true Policy or Government remaining among « the Peoole and the Exercife thereof among the Officers of Sta e, ' foLrhi- of luft ce in the Adminiftra.ion of Judges, therefore the « Tvra t and the Tyrannical Faction is the only Lawful Policy, and Ty- ■ S nJ .Toft ice Nowithftanding he admits this Confequence, in the cT^ Mr Reformers 7. & *>> & E^««».to-, &<■ "Inandbv that Church (of Rem, f ChJJrp ... ana oi , g^ ^^ tbem Eti.cftm, « :"d S'cf G^f for theTr Abominations, yet had omet.nng *ne irmaT,* hj diflinsuifc the parts ot the body t-rom UmT'£ Mfe fe fo n VoS it felf, which is derived from ssr ss»h£ s« r>«." «*> m"1™ ■ ,h" io,nii° A-^uerytumd to an Argument in favours ofEpifcopacy. 261 Mr. Rutherford's Examen AminiflnifmU Tag. 65, 66 % and in Mr. Brown* Confutation of Vdtbeufius, Pag. 149. Our Famous and Learned Mr. Gitiejpietiti his Treatife of Mifcellany Queftions, Chap. 4. fag. 62, 63, 64. upon the point of the Neceflity of Ordination, has feveral things worthy of Obfervation to this pur- pofe. si He (hews, that Ordination being one of the Ordinances of. Chrift, the Reformed Churches had Power to fet it up, and reftore it, by vertue of Chrift's own Inftitution. And fuppofe, that Proteftanc Minifters, who firft Ordain'd other Minifters, were themfelves Or- dain'd by fuch as had no Power to Ordain them $ Nay, fuppofe the firft Reforming Minifters to have been, at the beginning of the Reformation, no Minifters, but private Perfons, not pretending to be Ordained,* This impeaches not the neceflity of Ordination, becaufe in extraordinary Cafes, when Ordination cannot be had, and there are none who have Commiffion and Authority from Chrift to Or- dain them, ( he means a legal Authority and Commifiion, according to the common and ordinary Gofpel Rules in a conftituted Church ) then and there an Inward Call from God inlarging the Heart, ftir- ring up, and affifting, with the good Will and Affent of a People whom God makes willing, can make a Minifter Authorized to Minifteriai Ads. Suppcfe this to have been the Cafe at the firft: coming out from Popery, yet here was a Seed for more Churches and more Minifters. He tells us, that at the firft Plantation of Churches, Ordination may be wanting, without making void the Miniftery, becaufe Ordination cannot be had ; But in Conftituted Churches, the want of Ordination doth make a Minifter no Mini- fter. " Again, touching the Church of Rome, and the Ordination of the Reformers therein, he Homologats what is premifed anent the Eflen- tials of a Church, and of Ordination, where fuch Effentials are fup- pofed. Becaufe that Antichrifi fits in the Temple of God, confequently there is a temple fuppofed wherein he fits, 2 the/. 2. 4. And God is fuppofed to have a People in Babylon, when he fays, Come mt of her my^eople, Rev. 18. 4. And oneThoufand twoHundred and fixty Days •wherein the Witnefies do Prophecy in Sackcloth, do certainly comprehend, as a part of this time, thofe tisfges before the Reformation, and a Faithful ExifientSuccellive Miniftery therein. He alio fhews, that Papiits, as well as Proteftams, hold the perpetuity of the true Church and Mini- ftery, tho* not ever Vifible or alike pure, and that upon Chrift's Word, Maith. 28. 20. Lo I am with you always, even to 'the end of the World. Hence he concludes, that fuch as were Ordained by the * Church 2^3 A Confutation* f an Additional Pa mpMety En tit tiled, * Church of Rome before the Reformation, in fofar as O dainedin the c Name of Chrift, by thefe who had been themfelves Ordained, ( N. B.) c Presbyters as well as Biihops, and Authorized to Preach the Gofpel c and Adminifter the Sacraments, thus far they were true and lawful 1 Minifters, truly and lawfully Ordained : But in fo far as Ordained s according to the Popifh Canons for Teaching the Traditions of the ' Church of Rome, for Offering up the Body of Chrift in the Mafs, in ' this confideration their Calling and Ordination was impure and un- ' lawful, like pure Water flowing out of a clean Fountain, which con- • tracts impurity from a filthy Channel through which it runs. We might multiply to a voluminous bulk the Teftimonies of Protefiant Divines aflerting what is premifed, and concurring in this Se*nfe and Judgmenr,in point of a MinifterialCall,* But what is offered isfufficient for our purpofe. From what is above offered, the futility and unferviceablenefs of this grand Notion and Argument of our Pamphleter evidently appears. For clearing which, thefe things are obvious in this premifed Senle of our Divines upon this point, i. That the Effentials of Ordination, and of a Church, are diftinguifhed from Corruptions adhering tbtreunto, and even with refpect to Ordination in the Church of Rome. ily, Hence the true and proper End of Ordination* and the Obligation, confequently, in point of Duty, refulting therefrom, is to be me?fured by God's Infti- tution, which is profecuted by the Perfon Ordained ,• Notwithftand-* ing that both the Corruptions adhering to this Ordination, as likewife the corrupt Ordainers themfelves, are in fo far to be difowned, yet fuch Minifters are owned of God, as his true Paftors,in profecuting the End of his Call. 3/7, Whatever may be faid as to a Ver final Succtjfun, or Series of Ordainers from Apoftles, ( which tho' fuppofed, as the two Witnefies Prophecying during Antichrift's Reign, is notwithftanding, as our Arguer acknowledges, hard to be traced) yet this Perfonal Succef- fion is, in the Senfe of our Divines, neither the only, nor main ground of the lawful Vocation or Ordination ,• But the true grounds are, 1. God's Appointment and hftitution of a Miniftery in it (elf confidered. And, ily, The Deftrinal SucceJ/ion, or the Official propagation of the fincere Doctrine of the Gofpel, by a faithful Gofpel Miniftery. 4/;, We fee, that as they hold a Difrinction betwixt the Fountain and primary Author and inftitutjon of a Gofpel Miniftery> and the impure Channel of either, ufurping Adminiftrators, or adventitious Corruption- introduced ,•• So they hold the Pallors or Presbyters, i. e. a Teaching Miniftery to be the proper Adminiftrators,by God's Appoint- ment, of this Ordination, and therein Succeilbrs of Apoftles and the fitft A gutry turnd to m Argument In favours of Epifcopacy. a 6% firft Apoftoiical Rulers, v«, in the Churches ordinary fettled regular ftate, difowning, in fo far, PreJats fole aftumed Authority herein $fy. We fee, that they diftinguifh a Church already Cotiftituted, according to Gofpel Rules, and a Church in fieri and to be conftituted, or the Ordi- nary Cafe thereof and the Extraordinary • Afferting, that in 'the firft Cafe the ordinary appointed xMethod of a Call is to be obferved, in the other Cafe not, but the defed of, or not following thefe Rules'is made up and fupplyed by the Law of inevitable Neceffitp which in manv Cafes overrules pofitive Statutes, in the judgment of all the Orthodot as is clear in our Lord's adduced Inftance of David's eating the Shew-bread, and giving thereof to thole that were with him *. And feveral fuch Inftances may be adduced. * Mattb. 12. 3Tis alfo evident, that in the premifed Judgment of our 3, 4. with Divines, this Defcft is made up oy the overruling Law Luke 6. 4. of Leve and Charity } binding to contribute our Help for our own and our Neighbour's Good, efpecially their Souls well which is fitly Exemplified ( as above ) by the Cafe and Inftance of Loyal Subje&s, ftepping beyond the Sphere of their legal Vocations in oppofing traiterous Magiftrats, and endeavouring the Reftauration of the Laws, and the lawful Princes Authority incroached upon. 6/y, We fee, they maintain a Radical Vower in the Church of God and Society of the Faithful, in point of Ordination, and in order w the Retaining and Reftauration of that Ordinance and others from Corruptions and that, confcquently, when there is an Interruption and Removal of a lawful Miniitery and legal Ordainers, in. that extraordinary Cafe God's Church and People may Call them whom he has Gihed to Offi' ciat, till a Gofpel Miniftery being obtained, the Call and Ordination may run in its ordinary Channel, as, in the inftanced Cafe of a Nation's Rebellion in the point of Civil Government, is evident. The Sains Populi and prefervation of Society being the Supreme and ftandin* Law which has its clea> Application to the Church in Religious Refpetfs* So that Ordination it felf\ however in the Churches ordinary fettled State neceflary, yet in the other Cafe may be wanting and that warrantably and is not fo abfolutely and in every Cafe necef- fary, or of fuch indifpenfable necejSty, as this Arguer would fue- geft. 6 Moreover, we fee, that as they diftinguifh Ordination in its Effmtiah from its accefiory concomitant Rituals, and the defign of the Call it felf and' of the Ordainers, fo likewife they hold, that a Call may be upon di vers accounts, both Ordinary and Extraordinary : Ordinary in refpecT; of Effemials, Extraordinary with refpecT: to fpecial InfluencesV a fpecial «A a A Ctifkuto* tf* Addithml Pamphlet ; EntUukd, Primary Ordainer DflmnMeter's fuppofed doughty Argument From all which, our Pamphlcter s luppoicu & rJtoried upon appears a meer nothing ^^P^VSion For L^ofe the firft admitted as to all J and th" 'j^™'"*"0" fromJe.us Chrift, which Ordination it felf being an Ordinance cormn§ ; irorn j » in fo far is effentially Pure, this will no more plead or £ JB ^ Corruptions and Usurpations of P«^cy, than d f d bv feveral of our firft Reformers in Ae"1^.^^, Hierarchy, upon them to have owned and aft ^«ed f fame A But our Arguer ?««• 47. 4 8. alia uu ' " "" Ccrbf' n0 doubt) : Tr%t°br?J?' ^ffTZ-^^z^** Ypon, fr ,»**«> -tofc", «*9 *«« »" r'jS thefePrelat. had an Or- I Anfwer, .. In the Senfe ot ou ^ ; hi'".' »ower and Authority, torthe cnas oi in the' fit Recipient, is So that the P»"«, of Au'h°f2 ows e ObliSJ.ion fo profe- properly owing to h.m, and if om b>°<«°" ^e « § c^ q{ £uce the Ends thereof : So that, th. re «. »o,K ^^ % fays our Arguer (J^%^^^^2 Abiuidity ), IftbU hi not admitted, (lob m rnttvwg j . . ^ A Query tumd to m Argument in favours of Epifiopacy. 26$ the Prelats, in his Scnfe ) then thefe Minifters were impowered to Aft by the Call and Suffrage of the people. I Anfwer, this his Divifion, and Difcre- tive [7/3 has no place, admitting the Ejjentials ofOrdinatUn, in the Cafe inftanced. 2/7, We fee it maintained by our Divines, that there may be a Cafe, wherein the Catt and Suffrage of the People may ftand for an Ordination^nd fupply its room ; And in the Cafe fuppofed by him, the Call and Suffrage of the People impowers for a due Improvement and Exercife of the Ordination for its proper Ends, in oppofition to the Defign and other Corruptions of the Prelatical Ordinate >flBut our Arguerhath a third [if], or Abfurdity, which he prefents to us upon the premifed Suppofition, telling us, That if neither of the two he admitted* then fuch Presbyterian Mini/ten mu(l betake them to an inward. lmpulfe and Call. But* good Sir, what if all thefe be fuppofed in our firft Reformers conjoyn'd, confequently in the Presbyterian Minifters inftanced ; What is then become of thefe your Disjunftive Branches ? So that we affert, that our firft Reformers Ordination was valid for fub- ftance confequently that of Presbyterian Minifters by Prelats, like wife corroborated and fitted for its due Exercife and Defign by the Peoples Gall, whofe Intereft in this point is fully afferted by our Divines. See Mr Gille/hie's Treatife of Mifcehny Queftions, Chap. 2. pag. 16, 17*18, 19 '20 21 Where this is fully made appear, not only from Scripture, but alfo from the Judgment of Proteftant Churches and Writers, and likewife from Antiquity, vea and the Confeffion of Adverianes-them- felves and our difference from the Independents in this point cleared. Thusin the Cafe of our firft Reformers,- And for Presbyterian Minifters, he knows how our Presbyterian Church and State has owned and Authorized the Peoples Call. And if there be an Exception made as to fome Minifters Relation before this was legally Authorized by our State • 'Tis eafiiy Anfwered, that the Peoples cordial Submiffion to their Miniftery, fufficiently fupplies the room thereof. And for the inward Impulje 'tis very well fubfervient to the other two, being all to*. sether, or in conjun&ion, a clear Badge of the Divine Call. And we find that in the Churches difturbed oppreffed Cafe, our Divines do hold the laft two a fufficient Call to Officiat, diftinguifhing ftill the Ecckfiaconfiituta and cenjiituenda, her Ordinary and Extraordinary Cafe ^Fr^what is premifed, our Arguer's great Projeaion, and Strength of this his Argument ab abfurdis, is fufficiently expofed, and the unfer- viceablenefs thereof to his defign difcovcred. But to clear this Truth and fcann a little further this his fuppoled formidable Attack he hath i66 A CenffitAtUn of ah Additional Pamphlet \ Entituled, made upon Presbyterians ; Whereas he tells us, That Ordaining Bfiofs we Presbyters no Vow on Epb-4- If- Further he maintains, That, at every Vapor, de jure, owes & Subjefiion to the Prophets in the Lord, ft the fir/i vioirSw, or fixed Moderators, were, de fa&o, thus fubjetJ, and, by Gonj, Sequence,' had no Juridical Official T re- eminence over the Judicatories ; 7 hat aU Paftors have equal Right in Ordination, and have all one and the fame Offi- cial Power and Funclion, to which they are caUed of God. Inji, Lib. 4. €. 4. $ i. compared with Comment, on Phil. 1, 1. That Apojllesi as well as Evangelijh, Timothy and Titus, had a tranfimt unfixed Minifiery, wbofc Office lay in Founding and Watering Churches, and thus died w'fth themfelves, and could not incroach upon the Confiiiorial, and Deci/tve Authority of Fadors in Government. Comment, on lit. 1. j, 6. 1 Cor, 12. 28, &c* See the Counter- Effay, Chap. 1. P<*£- 1, 2, ;. Now, whether Calvin, in the premiied Doarine and Afiertions, has not condemned and fent a pack- ing the Prelacy, which our Arguer and the Querift fo zealoufly Fences for, yea, and razed the Ground of their Pleading, let the impartial and unpredicated Reader judge. Thus, Sir, having examined the Queriesy and likewife this your Grand Argument for Prelacy, the Projeaion and Iffue thereof, Imuft take leave to relume and fumm up thefe Refteaions upon the whole of that which I have debated and offered upon this Head, and therein give you a compendious further Account of the Weaknefs, yea, and Un- • found- $70 A C$nfnt Alton *f*» AMituntl PtmphUt -7 Bntitu led, _ foundnefs of this your Defence of the Hierarchy, and Attack upon Presbyterians. THE Occafion and Ground of offering thefe Queries, ( if, at leaft, we may fuppofe you the Author thereof, as 'tis probably judged by all who have perufed them ) your commending Prefacer (hews to be your reading Mr. Fcrrefler at St. Andrews his Plea for Presbytery, which Ground is alfo prefixed to the Account of the Titles of Chapters, and in fpecial alTerted in the Tide of Chap. VI. And yet 'tis evident to any who but reads that Treatife, that you have never to much as perufed, far lefs ferioufly pondered that Piece ; The greateft part, if not the whole of all that's offered in thefe Queries, or the Grand Argument founded thereupon, being fully cleared, difcuffed and anfwered in that Piece which you fo vilifie : So that the People in that Ccuntrey Place, with whom your Prefacer tells us, that Performance did take, and whom it in6uenced to a Perfwallon of what was contained therein, may truly wonder at this your filly Attack, as favouring more of procacious Vani- ty, than any Defire of Knowledge, and Love of Truth. zly Your Prelatick Bigotry has fo tranfported you, as to deny all lawful Ordination, and a true Gofpel Miniftery in the Reformed Churches, who difowne the prefent Englifh Hierarchy, yea, and ( in the Scope and Series of your Reafoning ) the Liturgy and Ceremonial Worfoip thereof alfo ,* For you term that Church emphatically, and in exclufive Senfe, The church, putting the odious Name of Sectaries up- on all who difowne either the one or the other. But, Sir, may you be informed, how, in this, you have involved your felf, i. You bave ftained your Loyalty, in calling a foull Blot upon King Jamts VL and the Two King Charles's . For King James, in the Affembly at Edin- liirih 1590, acknowledged in their prcfence, that ourPresbytertan Church oval one of the befi Reformed in the World; Yea, in the Preface to the lat- ter Edition of his b»«m*j» Aapw, he cafts this Afpeifion upon the Englifa Prelacy, That it favoured of the Romifh Hierarchy : Yea, he called their Lyturgy an ill (ail Mafsy -wanting nothing but the Liftings. And for King Cbarlefl your felves acknowledge, that, having confented to the raz- ing of Prelacy, and the full Eftablitbment of Presbyterian Government in the Parliament Anno 1641, he profeffed u depart from the (awe a con» tented Kin? from a contented Peofle, fromifin^ *" verbo Principis, to main- tain that tihblijhment. And, for King Charles II. 'tis notourly known, how that by folemn and reiterated Promiies, yea, and by Oath, and that deliberately, he engaged Adherance to the Government of this Church, avowing, he did this from a Principle of Pejfwafion and Con* fcience, A Jgttery turrid to m Argument h favours cjEpifcopacy. 2J\ fcicnce, andnot upon any byafled and extrir.fick Ground. Now, what a Stain doth this your Principle of the Church of England^ the only True Organized Gofpel Church, in pjint of Worfhip and Government, put upon thefe PrincesjA Stain,! fay,of unprecedented Falfliood,Pufi!lanimity,Treache- roui Dealing with God and Men, fuch as may ftain and make their Me^ mory unfavoury, which, fure, all your Party will profefs to difowne and abhor who do honour, even almoft to a non ultra of Superfluous Fond- nefs, the Memory of thefe Princes ,• Whereof, befides many other evident Teftimonies, yea, and Recorded Teftimonies, with refped to all the Three, let ( in fpecial ) your Harrangues and Sermons on Janu- ary 20, the Dayof King Charles's Celebrated Martyrdom, bear Witnefs, ily, You have been told, how that the rnoft Famous English Biihops, yea, and Reformed Bifhops in Henry the VIII's Time, yea, and in the Days of Queen Elizabeth, and King James, do dilowne the Jus Divi- num of the Englijh Hierarchy, affirming Church Government to be Mutable and Ambulatory, and to depend upon the Prince's Authority and Difpofal. And 'tis known, that, until about the time of Bifhop Laud his high flying Ufurpations, the Jus Divinum was never fo much as pretended, far lefs pleaded, as the Ground of Prelacy* I need not again refume to you, what your own Stilling fleet has afferted, htn% "Pag. 391* 392* &c* anent tne Affertion and Principle of the Bifhops in the Days of Crannser, who, together with the Arch-Biftiop, gave their fubferibed Teftimony to the King, in Anfwer to the loth and nth. Queftions, That the Bijbop and Prieft were both One Office, in the be- ginning of Chips Religionl Averting thus, ( Mr.-Querift, _ or Arguer, which you will) that your Religion and Principles, in this point, are another, and dijtinll, from that of our Lord Jefus, Need I tell you of Jewel Bilhop of Salisbury, his peremptory owning the fame Identity of the Biff of s and Paftor's Office* and that, by the Scriptures of God, the 'Bijbtp and Minifler are all one» citing Cbryfoflom, Jerom, and others, as of the fame Judgment. [Defence of his Apd. Pag. izr. compared with Pag, 448«] That tiooktr alfo [ Preface to his Ecclef. ?ol. ?ag. 2, 19, 20.] is againft all particular Forms of Church Government ,. acknowledging, that nothing can be produced from Scripture t to evince the Divine Warrant of Viccefan pre- lacy. So that your great Advocate Hooker has, at one daft, expunged, and fent a packing all your pretences for the Divine Ki^ht of Prelacy, and Pleadings from the Apoftolick Office, as meer AntifcriptUral Do- tages and Fooleries. But more of your Party yet, you ihal1 find, put this Cenfure upon your Pleadings. Whitgift [ Def. of Apol. Vag. \-p>. compared with Pag. 45 3. ] difewnes the Churches Obligation U adhere to that fame kind of ExHrnal Government, that was u/ed in the /Sfcjiles Jiffies, and 3 72 A Confutation ofin Additional Pamphlet, Entitled, and that it ought to be one and the fame through the World in aU times andplal ces Thus the Venerable Arch-Bilhop puts che Cenfure of a petulant Officious Schifmitick upon you, who are bold to afperfe as Seclanes, and none ofCbn/r* Peculium, the| Churches who dif jwne your Enghfh Hierarchy in poinr ot Government. Dr. Burnet, the pre* *Conf far. fent Bifhop of Salisbury ".acknowledges the ?asJuth,to be 210 i 2 if the higbefi Office in the Church,and that the Btfh-jp and Presbyter are one and the fame Office; And thus has pronounced your Que- ries and Arguings from the Apoftles,as a meer Dottage and Brain-fick An- tifcriptural Notion: For,if thePaftoror Presbyter betbe btgbefi Office of the Church, you, nor no Man elfe, can doubt, he is the proper Suceoffor of theApojiles; And what is then become of that high Clafs and Set of S«c- cedaneous Prelates fucceedin{r them in the full Plenitude of their ?ower fuch as the Univerfality ant Indefinitenefs of their Commipm, &c. which you al- fert> Shall I tell you further, that Bifhop Lighten offered to theDilienr ing'Brethren at ?afleyt that aU Church Affairs {houldbe managed inPresbyte- ries and Synods, by the free Vote of Presbyters , or the Major pirt oftbem. So that, in your Principles, he was a falfe Priejf, ( to ute your own Term) in thus laying an Ax to the Root of your Arbitrary Hie- * S^iry turn'* rarchy. You make the Presbyterians * to joyn IJJue -withPa- to an Argumrnt, ^ an£ t0 ?atroniz,e thePopifh Caufedn denying the fir ft ApoJUej P's' l8, to befucceededin 4ny Power they had above Presbyters* But,hiS not vour Bifhop of Salisbury, with your other Advocates, denyed this, and cenfured your Folly in this After, ion ? I may not here agam.at larger- fume what is animadverted upon your Ailercion, anent the Council of Ticnt's Jifiuming the Divine Right of Epifccpacy : But, when you have underftood better the State and Progrefs of that Council, and the Prin* ciples of the Popifh Agents, both before, at that time, and fince, you will embrace the contrary Perfwafion, and fee your Error As for the Council it felf, you will find, that, SeJJ. aj. Cb. 4. The Holy Synod declares, that, bef.de other Ecclefiaftick Orders, Bijhops, who fucceed m the Place of the Apojlles, (remark, Sir, their owning your great Topick and patronizing your Argument, and what Venerable patrons you have) below Principally to this Hierar chick Order, and are Ordained as faith the A. poflleVby the HolyGbofl, f Rule the Church of God and are fuperiour to *?%/„. Yea'further, youll find them thus let flie their Thunder- bolt of their Anathema's againft the contrary ^Annc.lfany fay there is no Hierarchy confuted by Divine Ration i^t he iMlMkM which confifls of Bijhops, Presbyter, and Deacons, let ^ be Accu red A- gain, IfanylaUa i Bijhops are not fuperiour to Tresbyters, lethimbcAccurfed Thus, 6/n 6 and £ Behold, Sir, what a mighty Guard furround you. A Query turnd to An Argument in favour t ofEpifcopacy, 275 your Qaeries and Argument : And who dare ftand before thefe terrible Tnunder-Claps of a who!* Council fortifying your Doctrine. Bellar- min is clear in this point *, affirming, That the Bijbep is * o>cuf.c. i*. fufcriour to a Presbyter by Divine Ris^bt, both in refpeU ef the Tower of Order and Jur'tldiftion ; Afcribing the contrary Doctrine to Aerim, Wicklefy the Lutherans and Calvinifls. So the Romanics generally,* Maldonat, 1ole\ on Luke 10. Lorin, on Affs 2. 13. Baylim, Catecb. Controv* Iratl. 2. Quatfx. 22. &e. $fy, What will you fay to both your Scottijh and Englifh Bi- (hops, who, in a baffling Contradiction to your bold Aflertion, do owne tbe Validity of Presbyterial Ordination, which, in your perverfe Humour, you are bold to call a meet Nullity f if not a Cheat ? Shall I tell you, that your great admired Champion, Bi/hop Andrews, in his Anfwer to Peter du Moulin second Letter, acknowledges Churches that have only Presbyters to be true Churches. And, by fair Confequence, ( ar- gues your own J. S. Vindic. €h. 9. § 60. ) he muft owne the Validity of Presbyterial Ordinations, and ABs of ' Jurifdittion i Shall I add, that Bi- fhop Ball, another of your great Champions, afferts the fame Validity , in Anfwer to Smeclimnuuse Shall I tell you of Bilhop Spot{wood% who, in his HiH* Pag. 5-14. (hews, that, at the Confecration of our Scots Bi» (hops in England, a Motion being made of their being firji Ordained Presby- ters t as having received no Ordination from a Bi[hop} the Motion was dif owned and rejected by the Englifll Bijkops and Clergy t ( except Dr. Andrews , who, in Contradiction to himfelf, moved this ) and, by Bifliop Spotfwood's Infinuation, difowned alfo by himfelf and his Fraternity, who were to be then Confecrated ? To thefe I may add Downame, Serm. Pag, 44, 45". who owns, that Ordination by Minifiers without theBifhepis of Force, the Church admitting the Party Ordained as a lawful Minijhrt Tkc fame Law fu\ne[s of Ordination is owned by Dr. Field, Lib. $. Cb. 27. Tag, 498, 499^ &e. Bifhop Davenant ( faith J. S. $ 61. ubi fupra ) peremptorily owns the Validity of Presbyterian Ordinations, %ly, You have appeared fond of the Title, Names and Thing of Prieft and Sacrifice under the Gofpel Difpenfadon. But you have been told, how that, therein, you are condemned by Famous Protectant, yea, and Epifcopal Divines, and that Fulk and Stillingfleet condemn the Name of Priefls appropriated to Minifters ,• The one upon Ails 14. 23. againft the Rhemiflsi The other, Irtn. Part 2. €h. 6. §11. Wihty Synop. Papif. Cent. 1%. Quaft. 2. Part z. condemneth Unmetapborical Sacri- fices, Prie/ts, and High-Prie(ls ; Shewing, that aU External Sacrifices are taken away by the Spiritual IVorjhip) in our Saviour s Anfwer to the Woman of Samaria, John 4. And this againft Bellarmin's Pleading, Je Miff a, LibM i.Cb, u, feu Lib, £• Jc Eucharist. Who is herein followed by your M m Fore. 2 74 A Confutation of an Additional Pamphlet, Enthuled, ForcUadcr alfo, Dodwell, in his j. Vifftrt. on Cyprian, and his Book, Entituled, One Vriej* and On: Altar, who is bold, yea impudent, to afberfe as Enthufiafts, (nth as difown the Name and 7W */ Priefts and Sacrifices, in a proper or Unmet aphorical Senfe. Herein alfo following the nbemids 'fantenim in Loc. Becan Manual. Lib. I. Cap. 10, Here I can- not omit, that this your Famed and Admired Dotwell, whom you are found, in feveral places of your Pamphlet, to drudge after, particularly in vour Notion of the Higb^rieftbood, and that of Vriefts and Sacrifices under the Gofpel Difpenlation, doth palpably contradia you in the point of Mchifedetk : For Dodwell alTerts, that the Higk^riesl, theBt- (hop being after the Order of Melchifedeck, the Sacrifice be offers is the fame with that ./Melchifedeck, Bread and Winy Whereas you, or your Querift tells us, ( C*. 2. P i r a ♦« Kp the ereat Rule or Cynofura, alcnbmg aflert hisMajefty s P* »b g KuQr ^ afferts tUt h, unto him f/'Kjf^ffifc/K^ DW,:/^**. Kjl*«, if I** MfUrfiJ »«**&. l%tlnZu for J Curie, Iff. hi, ««fr ««• MtVm : «•' ' '*? „* '"";_ ^';r"inl ' Rule is here his Maiefty's f /«/««. /„. So that the intire and P i«nary rf Minifteria, Wa. ever fuehSlawfli and Tra«w^P«n|P ^ ^ ^ ^ Authority to an Arb,trary J?^"h-*horridWickednefs? Add to all, thefe Court-Creamres "/^ locate owned the King to have „*>/ that both the B.(hops and ,he Advocate own £ ^ deny .rfKliorir/ over the Quire h,w men c put p preiatif,s with this Ar- to be Arbitrary and LawlekMay Ithen Ph £«» ^^ ^ gument upon what t .pre ;mited .in unmaRe fc M hi$ , meerly of AeMw»"« C «^on^d .„„ in the Word 0f God : fure, has no Divine warrant, nor r« Confeffion But fuch is the Office °^h5^*°P ™ 0f 0M B lh0£ ^ For the Af. olBifhops themfelves, and that both oi old and oi lumption, befide f" ■^^7^^ Lord Advoea.e could not Inftances "h.bited ; Efpec.aUy^ lmce ^ ^ but know the Senfe and lntenam'n; . , Enaaing ,hetn. who there- to fuch as Prelates had a ma n Hand Un E™* S an(J Q „ fore, in this point, fpeak he Senfe both in ^ ^ that time. I may argue thus further .1 hey^m^ . rf God . But ?erIantV°fnffi«'of Prelacy ?K thdS'n^nn ; *««■ ™ Major fuch is the Office of Prelacy, Dy m comDared with i Cor. 7. a?. is evident &<«" thefe Scr.ptureso.U. ^"W1^ &c. Lre, P«./«. ^»«< fCf-.^JL'-L^w,' tha the Minifterial Office, in- in this Negative Defcr.ptton he Ibewstn 0intment ; In the it felf, is not of Men, or of Man ,sC eat.on °^PP Miffion „ an next Negative Charafler, he point si t to 1 «n rf orft> Apoftle, that he wee not an *P oftle in *«^ , ^ ^ nation;. And in he P™"™ £" d as Political Head of his Church, «iri/J, he points out our Ble»s^°™ as of a Gofpei Miniftery. So » be the only ^tauter a„ d Aut homer o r a O ^ officer$) whofe that, n the Apoftles Senle, taeyare 1 f h are not Office is --•Ag^^^^^^'SSr^oB the M^rat* our Spurious pFeUte,5' ?nVPVidemN the Servants of Men, in the Nature Creatures, and appearing evidently tire and End of their Office contra ££**£ , <&£$ ih gowning c/». Having told you ol your njuuv-i iy r of the >. iw/W Qrfe» in the Reformed Churches, who are not ^^ A Ghw) turnd to in Argument in favour t ofEprfiopacj. tjj 'BngUlh Mould, and how that herein you are oppofed not only bv Presbyterians, but the Men of your own Kidney and Gang ; I mufr. here renew the lame Difcovery to you of their Regrate, who have been and are Sons of that Church, of her remaining Popifh Corruptions, A more copious and renewed Difcovery, by feveral Inftances hereof, may, no doubt, furprize you, and put you to fad Refledings upon that which you affert Pag. 8. Qjttryturn'd to an Argument, viz. That fucb gi are Initiated into this church of Scotland in her pre/ent Conjlitution, are only made Difciptes of a Party, and not at aU of Chrift^ School. Where- upon you cry out a Tragical Mas I and Oh I bow lamentable a Deceit this is : Yea, you add, that it is every Mans Inter eft, to be cartful of theft Dangerous Miftakes, attended with a Train of fucb di/malConfeyutnces ; From which to (hield your (elf, you add the Service-Book Orizon, and Threed-bare Cant of Good Lord deliver us ! Really, Sir, altho' I have no Refpetf to your Service-Book Battalogies, I am iome way inclined, from the Confideratioh of what's premifed, thus far to Eccbo this Pray* er From fucb Pbantafiick Antifcriptural Bigotry and grofs Calumnies ca$ upon God's true Churches, Good Lord deliver us* But to let pafs fuch Retalia- tions! I will offer to you Teftimonies from your own Set of Men, making it appear, that the Church of England is fo far from having arrived at that Gofpel Purity and Perfe&ion which' you fuggeft, that, on the contrary, her Lukewarmnefs in point of Reformation, her ma* king no Advances therein, but retaining the Dregs of Popifh Cor- ruption upon politick Grounds* has been the Subject Matter of the Regrate and heavy Complaints, even of thofe who are her Sons and abide in her Communion, efpecially her rigid Cruelty towards many hundreds of Godly and Learned Minifters and ProiefTors, who have Thirftedfor a through Reformation, and appeared againft thefe Cor- ruptions. Upon the point of the Liturgy and EngMJh Reformation, Fuiltr in his Church Hiftory (hews, '* That the Reformers permitted ' ignorant People to retain fomc fond Cuftoms, that they might ' remove the moft dangerous and deftructivc Superiiitions, as Mother* * to get Children to part with Knives are content to let them play withr ' Ratles. This Man, Sir, was no Presbyterian, yet he puts your Liturgy and Ceremonies among the lfcfs dangerous Super/litions, holding them -(till buperftitions, Top for Children in Knowledge to play with, and, as Calvin terms them, lolerabiles imptia* tolerable fooleries. Bur q78 A Confutation* fan Additional Pamphlet, Entitnhd, * Born in the days of Queen Mary, Nurfedin the days of Queen Eliza' ■ bttb, a tall Stripling in the days of King Jamtw and towards the end 'of King Charles grown up to the full ftatureot a Man. He mews, 'That feveral Rites and Ceremonies of the Church of England were ' offenfive to the Conference of Bifhop Hooper the Martyr. That in the * Year if 64 began the Name of Puritans, forfuch as difiented from the Unfcriptural Difcipline of the Church (here, and in what enfues, both Difcipline and Worship appeared to be diflented from, as Unfound and Unfcriptural ). Accordingly in the Year 1572, he mews, «' That 'Presbyteries began to be Erefted firft at Wanj 'worth, and after at 9 London. That in the Year ic8o, there was a Conference about the f Common Prayer Book, in order to which fixty Minifters of the ' Presbyterian party met at Qokfieldm Suffolk, and by the Year 1581, 'their plat Form of Church Difcipline appeared. They Petitioned ' the Lords of Privy Council, confeffing their Zeal for the neceflary ' Reformation of many things in the Church according to the Word of * God who thereupon Sollicited the Arch- bi (hop for favour to them. ' That in the Year 1*85 the Parliament began to correct Ecclefiaftick * Abufes but the Queen would let nothing of Moment be altered in 'Church Difcipline. In the Year 1587, The Houfe of Commons ' prefented a Petition to the Houfe of Lords, That among other ' Violences Minifters might not be troubled for omifiion of fome c Rites prefcribed in the Book of Common Prayer, and the Lord Gray ' wondered that her Majefty in this matter made choife to confer with 'Enemies to the Reformation, becaufe it touched her Free-holds. ' In the Year 1788, a Svnod at Giventy. Decreed againft the Sign of 'theGrofsinBaptifm (N.B.) againft the Calling of Bimops and ' the lawfulnefs of their Courts, and for Teaching the Reltauration of ' Difcipline as Occafion (hall ferve. In the Year 1589, Famous Mr. c fltofwrif to htd 39 Articles of Nonconformity before her Majefties ■Commiflioners Objected againft him, and he with his Brethren were ' fent unto the Fleet. About this time alfo King James Wrote from ' Scotland unto the Queen to ftay the hard Ufage of the Minifters of the ' Evangel for their diverfity from the Bimops. That after this there were « Meetings held by the Presbyterian Minifters at London, at Gamhidgey 9 at Northampton, and at Kettering. That Mr. Terkins whom * all Men held for a Prophet, was concurring in this fcaule. ' That Mr. Vdal a Learned Man blamelefs in Life, powerful in Pray- « : „~ ioC n.^A».KiA than rwinful in Preaching, was condemn d to A Query turnd to m Argument In favours of Epifiopacy. ija * Sword of Juftice being drawn was not put up before others were 'Executed, In the Year 1603, there was a Petition figned by 7^0 ' Preachers, defiring a Reformation of Ceremonies and Abufes in the ' Church, upon which followed the Conference at Hampton Court, at ' which King fames Threatned the Nonconforming with hurrying them 'out of the Land, tho' ( faith my Author) he once profeffed, to a ' National Affembly of the Church of Scotland, " He praifed God he " was King in fo fincere a Church* a Church fmcerer than the Church " of England, whofe Service was an ill faid Mafs in Knglilfr. " Bifhop ' Tturnet in his Printed Letters mews, that in his Travels he had Op* ' portunity at Zurich to Read a Volume of the Letters that paffed be- ' tween "Bullinger and the Englifh Reformers, by which it appears, that ■ the Bifhops preferved the things then contefted rather in compliance ' with the Queen's Inclinations, than out of any likeing they had ' themfelves unto them. Behold from the Pen of one of the prefenc ' Bi/hops this broad Confeflion, that the Bifhops then were Self-convidt. •' and Self-condemned in A&ing thus againft their Confcience, which ' teftified againft their Practice and for the Nonconforming, and that ' they were a Set of meer Men-pleafers, in fo far at leaft. And what thinks our Querift and Arguer of thefe Venerable Fathers and Infallible Succedaneous Apoflles, who thus ftood Antifsds and crofs to the Apoftie Paul's Principles and Pra&ice, who alTerts, That if he f leafed Men he were not the Servant of Chrisl ? But to evince this further, and how Bifhops themfelves flood affe&ed to the Ceremonies, Bifhop Jewel in a Letter, Febr. 8. 1966. Wifhes, " That all the Remnants of Popery ' might be thrown out of the Churches, and out of the minds of the ' People, and laments the Queen's fixednefs unto them, that fhe ' would fuffer no change to be made. Sands Writes, Contenditur de veftibus Papiflicis, utendiss vel non utendis, dabit Deus his queq; finem. He Prays that God may put an end to this Conteft about popifh Gar- ments. Horn Writes, "That he Hopes that the Adl concerning * Habits would be repealed at the next Seflion of Parliament, if the 'Popifh party did not hinder it. Grlndel Writes, " That the Queen ' continued inflexible in this matter. And Cex the Bifhop of Ely laments " The Averfion that they found in the Parliament unto all 1 Propofitions that were made for Reformation of a Abufes. THE fame Dr. Burnet, in the Hiftory of the Reformation, gives accour -of Queen Elizabeth's fixed Difpofition to " Magnificence and external ' Ornaments in Religion, He fhews, That there were comparatively 'few of the Popith Clergy who had left their Benefices on theac- ' count of Religion ( fo well they were pleafed with that half Refor- mation ). *3o A Co^mhn of*» Additional Vamphkt 5 EutUuU, „ • , «Th? inclines of the greateft part of the mation}. He me9"°P' flirlff-aions to the oldSupe,m;ions, that « ri^rPV who retained their /Unctions u ui© ^i« ^ ^ rinepn '« ffiKSSS^S^^ *- * long, ot ex.cr -a u in the room of the old, < had a Pr^eofn^her Religion8 Succeeded before that J** *V « hd nrobabV turned about to the old Superftuions as nimbly as of 'heRtofra 'J d" A Fiiend of Hcohr in his Letter to :sk&k it ass gva sua « An^hl contrarv Pa tv began to fear they had taken a wrong courfe. T^mLZSs, " That he mifliked their being fo like thePapifts Mn th ir Urn gv, and that it was their fault generally that they d.ffe, « red not f om hem in all their Miniftery. B.fhop *//* afferts "That h Reformed Churches can by no means d.geft; a Dram of • the Popim Ceremonies, fo far are they from admuting the Ml Dofe ' of their Herefies ,• In this diftinguifliing them from the Church ot vlll«?nrmZbty Wrote, " That we ought to refufe to conform out England. Dr. ««"£*" ' V .""p God in any 0f their Ceremonies, and that ff^fhedandh^forleufter AliHIhing of all the Monuments < of Pojfh Superftmon, which, faith he, yet f»^£™£»£*; Dr vJk Wrote " If a Man miflike their Form of Divine Service as ?»« &ffid«ntW differing from the Papifb, he Ihews his greateft Zeal « and Dftefta, on of their Idolatry and Blafphemy : We abhore, fa.th • he. wh eve"°hath but a Inew of Popery. Dr. ««Wn|? thus „ U Annlirarion to that Hate ol the Church of EngUnd, it is an vSriclft&ufc of Church Government to diteftit to the upholding • of fendalous Ceremonies and infnaring Inventions of Men. To the fame fcope difcourfeth Mr. Cbillingwrtb, inve.gh.ng aga.nft "That Churches imperious Impof.ngs upon Nonconform.fh. See leveral Citations to this purpofe in a p.ece, Entituled, *w*«, Or. Jbe Idea ,f Keformatim in England, Printed at London »***£$£. from WV» 6 J, &«• ?"": ^^ a bltKt EnS,ny 9< Pfesfayten^Sd* A §hery furridlo an Argument in favours of Epifcrpacy. 281 and a Zealous Church- of-Evglahd Man, Jhews, " That altho* by ' Calvin's means fome Reformation had been made in the fecond Litur- 'gy in King Edward's time, it was returned back into the firft Form ' ander Queen Elizabeth, and by fuch compliances the Book was mads 'fopaffable among the Papifts, that they repaired to the ParifliChurW * ches without fcruple. Yea moreover he fliews, That what was * done in the Form of their Devotions, did fo far fatisfie the Pop® \ then being, that he fheWed himfelf willing to confirm all by his Papal ' Power ; And that Parpalio was inftru or for the Exerciie of Church Power by Lay Chancellors* ' upon which they offer to fubmit and lubfcribe. I cannc t ftand to refumethe many Inftances of Heterodoxy inDodtrine, as well \ s Superftitionin Worfliip, owned by the Sons of that Church, as they are called. Any who defires a full account hereof may perufe Mr. Baillie$ Laudenfium Autocatacrifis, wherein he has, from their own avow'd Writings, convinced that party of Popery, Arminianifm, and Tyrant ny. My Author preiently in View mentions the Church of Durham as described by Fuller, wherein there was an Image of the Trinity, and Anthems of the three Kings of Colen, and a confecrated Knife to cut the Bread at the Communion, and abundance more of jueh Trinkets. He men* tions their horrid Principles in point of pajjive Obedience tending to enflave Mankind to an Arbitrary French Tyranny. Inftancing feveral paffages of Manwayring, Heylyn, Party, who in a Treatife of Religion and Loyalty $ Published 1684, hath vented this horrid Blafphemy, It is but a crude exprejfion U affirm that Kings are Supreme Governours under Chrift, they are and ever were \o under God% but fo as to be Superior ( horrefco deferens ! > to Chriji, as Chriji is Head of the Church within their Dominions. Dr, Scott in his Book called The CbriflianLife, Part 3. chap. 9. pag. Sy. ridicules the Do&rine of Regeneration and Converfion as meer fanfical Delufion ; As likewife Spiritual Deftrtion j He ridicules and mocks at leaning and rolling on Jefo Chriji, that great and principal Gofpel Duty fo much N n commended o&2 A ConfHUtioH of An Additional Pmphtet 5 Entituled, j a • Q^nfnrp And t^.^ He ridicules the DoUrint efatylute commended in Scrip ure. And ;j.^ God mtfuktf* «d vhFt-ltin and Reprobation, as imputing W1"v . L t> J ^f hi r earned Mr. E&fJi in his «*„..»>&- «*., of fome Engl.fi, Doao«th"fr Ridiculing the Hiftory of the Creation as a p.ece of ^HcrUkS,4, fulted only to the dull conceptions of the Th.ck-skull d '^'f need not infill in mentioning the barbarous Tyranny that has been exercifed by that Church upon many Hundred Godly Min.ft.rf and Profeffors, lor Nonconformity to .heir Ceremon.es and Liturgy, ard the great Regrates and Complaints hereof by Perfom of .he beft Note J/Charaaer in EntUni, jtab as S.r Franc,, *&*" and ^hers, among whom Bjflgp ■-*- » men ion -^j**. ^as TextT Dcthf and "oo manyhave fuffered Jven unto Death in « Pr fons where feverals caught their Death, and others Died. Of • ur^ lib b, (hail their Deaths be required i My Author men- •whom, 1Mb be maii^ ne , DevcH(hire Minifter, who, %ne Paffase further ( tho an Inftance not of *hb Afawre ) I can-. dmreis as » ^ly ~ . , .a" /..vA a, whereunto we are like to - The wofuland d.ftr dMdtoe, fa.u <, be wn t fall forces us . w«h Grief of H^^n m°'^e befeech your Highnefs « Your Ma ,eft.es Sove ra ign . Protedt on ^ •' SMS "SrwM take place. Behold the great 5^S*rC^»- What worthy Patrons and Pa8triotsPwere thefe to Head a Gofpe Cliurch d o(her J Query turrid to an Argument in favours tfEpifcopacy. a % pieces Millions of Perjuries filled the Land, moft brutifh Men were hired ta do the moft brutifli of things ,• Conviftions weremade and Penalties were laid not only without Juries, but alfo without any hearing of the Accufed ,• Eftates were feiz'd and Embazl'd; Houfc* were broken up and difturbed ,• Families fcattered and ruined ,• The Prifons were filled with the moft Serious Cfiriftians, and Reverent Minifters of theGolpel fent unto the Stocks and Houfes of Correction all over the Kingdom, for nothing elfe but becaufe their Confciences could not conform to the Sinful Ceremonies. He mentions a con- formable Son of the Church one Mr, Snowden, who Laments " The * Sufferings of the Church by tliefe offensive Rites and Ceremonies, e which he affirms, have freted out her Bowels, have been the con- c ftant Troublers of l[rael, and if not caft over Board with Jonas will « at one time or other fink the Ship. He mentions .alia the Sarcafm of a Papift, one Edward W > (Ion , wherein he makes "Religion in England c as a&ing the Ape of the Catholick ; Adding the faying of one, " That the Englifh feemed fo haftily to have chafed the Pope away, ' that they forced him to leave his Cloathes behind for others to put * on A paffage not unlike. to this, but to a far other Scope we have in a Sermon of Mr. Hutherfords before the Parliament of England, who told them, " That the Babylonish Whore, or Antichrift, when bani- c (hed from England left Love tokens behind, Jcil. Prelacy and the '«' Service Book, that he might have an errand back again to the i Houfe. My Author mentions alfo another faying of a conformable Writer fell The Author of a Plea for Abatement, who exprefifes his Wonder, " That in the Reformation of Religion in England there !* mould be fo great a faliy out of Daiknefs unto marvelous Light upon 6 the firft dawning of that Day, and that, notwithftanding all the ' Prayers and Tears of opprelTed Confciences, and the outmoft endea- ' voursof our Learned Fathers, it could hot for more than thefe hun- cdred Years, be carried one ftep further towards Perfection. My Author cites further Bifhop Davenant, and Biihop Taylor -, The firft -Condemning " The impofing of Ceremonies, upon this ground, that ' God would not have abolifhed the Ceremonial Law Inftituted by *himfelf, that a new One may be invented by Men ; The other upon this ground " That the Symbolical Kite of Humane Invention ! doth fignifie what it does not effe&,-.when introduced in the Solemn c Service of God, is like thofe vain Imaginations and Reprefentations 'forbidden in the fecond Commandment ; That the very fufpiciori 'is more againft Edification, than their Uis can pretend unto. Buc N n 2 no 284 A Confutation of an Additional Pamphlet, Entitukd> no more Tranfcribing. Several other Tfftimomesof * See Tag. Men of the fame Chara&er may be fe&n in this piece *. 00 91, 92, One Paflage I cannot but here Refleft upon of our o\ qa'&c/ Famous Mr. Henderfon in his Conference with King Charles h at Newcaftle, who fays of the En^lijh Refor- mation, "Thattho' Henry VIII. the Father ftirred the Humours of • the Difcafed Church, yet neither the Son nor Daughter ( [til. King 9 Edward and Queen Elizabeth ) had perfectly purged them out, and * that the Laodicean Lukewarmnefs of Reformation in that Church had f been matter of unfpeakable Grief to other Reformed Churches who 1 had attained to greater Purity. Now, Mr. Arguer, may you not, if Reflecting ferioufly upon the Premifes, be afhamed of your fetting this Church ( by Confeffion of her own Sons and Children, ftained with fuch grofs Corruptions, and that both with refpec* to her Hierarchy and Worfhip ) as a Sample and Pattern to other Reformed Churches, and making her fuch a purified and perfect Piece, that whatever Churches come not up to this Pattern are in your efteem no better than Seftaries* Do you not fee your felf in this Condemned, not only by the Nonconformifts, or Presbyterians, but the Conformable Di- vines yea Bifhops of that Church, who difallow, yea, in a great meafure, Lament thefe things as Corruptions, which you fo magnifie, vea Idolize* Your tatle of C^/i/;Vsbanifhment from Geneve* when you underftand the Hiftory better of that time, you will find, is a grofs untruth, and that it was the Unclean Leacherous Bilhop, not Calvin, who was then baniflied the City. But to proceed,- 6/y, You talk bigly of Succeffion of Bifhops fr»m Apoftles, yea and in adireH Line and Series. The Querift, Chap. 6.Queli 6. would needs have the ExatJnefs of the Prieji\ Regijler, Ezra 2. to be the jianding Pattern for clearing Bifhops Succefson from Apcjlles, which you exactly accord in this new EiTay. Yea you are pofuive and peremptory in averting Prelates SMtceffton even in the Plenitude of tsfpofiolick Power. But upon this point you muft be again put in mind, that, 1. This aflertion of an Apo- irolidc Succeffion, as you delineat the fame, is fo palpably Foolifh and Nonfenfical, that it is derided by Men of Judgment, even of the Epifr copal Pevfwafion and OfRce. I may, amongft many, give you a remarkable Inftance in StiUin%ftnt, who mocks at and derides this pre- tznce of an unquifiitnable Line of Succeffion of the "Bifhops of fever al Churches, and the large Diagrams made of the Apojiolick Churches with every ones Name fet down in his Order, as if the Writer , faith he, had been * hen. Part, 2, Clarenceaulx to the Apcflles tbemf elves *. Thus he. Not Cfot. 6. to refums again at large, how pitifully you are herein involved A.Gyumt turn d to &n Argumnt in favours ofEpifcopacy. 285 involved, and repugnant to your felf, in afferting this Lineal Succejfion* by clear Accounts and Difcoveries equivalent to the Regifter you mention, as neceffary to found a clear Epifcopal Call to that which you owne the Plenitude of the Apoflolick Power, which you muft needs ex- tend to the Bijhofs of all Churches ; And yet you alTert, that (everalWrit- ings are lo(ii and only [owe little Fragments of other early Writers Temain% which may clear this Epifcopal Regifter ,• So that you have left the greateft part of all your Bifhops as much in the dark, in point of the Epifcopal Call» as thofe in Ez>r. 2. 6is6z. who fought the Regifter among thoje reckoned by Genealogy , but they were not found, who therefore were as polluted put from the Prie/ihood ; So muft your Biftiops be, by this your wife Calculation. And you have depoled and cafhiered them all from their Epifcopal Priefthood, who cannot reckon their Genealogy in the fame manner, as in the Text which you cite, and produce their Tables of Succeffion from Apoftles. Are not their Lordftiips highly obliged to fuch a witty Pro&or and Advocate for their Caule * I may again here put you in mind of what the fame Sti^Iingfleet has at large afferted and profecuted againft this your Notion *, 1. That Perfonal Succeffion might be without Superio- * Part 2, rity of Order, as you do plead, who will have Biff ops Ch. 6. Pag, fucceed Apoftles as fuch, and in the Plenitude of their Power , 299, ;oo, forfooth. 2/j; That the Names of Bifhop and Presbyter 301, <£v. were common, after the Diftinction betwixt them was introduced. And, ;//, That the Church did not owne Epifcopacy as a Divine Injtitution, but RccUfuftical ; And thoje who feem to (peak muft of it, ( faith he ) do mean no more* Stillingfieefi, profecuting at large thefe points, judges, that he has /or ever invalidated the TefHmony ef Antiquity, in this Matter; And it had become your Wit and Reverence to have confidered what is offered in this point, and anfwered the fame, before you had offered to publick this yaur pitifal Notion anent the Epifcopal Line, and tables of Succeffion frem Appft&ry and fo confidently afferted Prelates Succeffion to them, as fuch, and in th» Plenitude of their "power. For, if Stillingfleet has made good thefe three points in the place cited, ( and I know none of your Party, who has difproved what he has afferted ) all that you offered upon this Heard will appear meer ignorant Tatle. 2/7, Eufebim hjmfet-f, whole Re- cords are the Fountain and Head of all ?our-fuppofsd Proofs, acknow- ledges it a hard Matter to kmw who Juccesded the Apofiies in the Qbrnpifo they planted ; Affsrting, that our beji and only Glearnefs is to be found in the Writings of Paul. And, if the prime Hsfrorian doth thus give it ■ o- ver, pray, whence have you your Clearneis more than he? And, if he 286 A Confutation of an Additional Patnphlet -, Entitled, he will have the firft Draught of thcfe Lines of Succetfion from the Writings of Paul, fure I am, your Prelatical Genealogy and Lines are entirely cut off,- And you would do well to remember, what Impu- tation Stillingfieet puts upon this your Antifcriptural Deduaion of your Hierarchical Prelate's Lines of Succeffio* from Apoftles, viz,. That it is a maklnz ihe tradition of the Church our Rule to interpret Scripture by; An excellent way, faith he, to find out the Truth, Joubtlefs, to bend the Rule to the croeked Stick, and make the Scripture (erve its Servant, &o ily} Your unreftrided, yea, and pofitively and frequently repeated Aflemon, of Bifhops Succefion to Apoftles, as fuck, and w the Plenitude and full Extent of their? ewer, has expofed you to the condemning Cenfure ot the molt eminent Advocates for Prelacy, who caution their AJfertion of this Succeffion with the Limiting Term ot Ordinary expreffing this Sue ceffiononly to what was Ordinary in the Apoftles Power or Authori- ty 1 will produce againft you Three Witnefles and thus one more than what will amount to a Judicial Proot and leftimo- * Survey of W K Bifhop Honniewan * fpeaking of Succeffors to ^aphtaljart Apoftles, calls it?* SucCeffion in that Plenitude ff ORDINARY ■* i «f ^ » i r» L:rU xn^r vir.t tn /•/>,*//» till the er.d at the 2. Pao- I9i * Church Power, which was not to ceafe, till the er.d of the t<*<: so6 com- World. And again, the fyejiion is, faith he, who ate the land. Sudors of the Apoflles in this ORDINARY Church Power. r Thus clearly leaving out and excluding that which in their Power was Extraordinary, and could not be fucceeded to. The their I ower w ^^ ^^ l produce> Js your Famed Blfllop Hally Wart* (T who, in his Book, Entituled, Epijcepacy by Divine Right j, ?a7 200 tells us, that the ORDINARYPower which the Apoftles had, 5* *,'"~..- they traduced it to their Succe/sorsi Diftinguifhing it thus from a Power Extraordinary-, wherewith the Apoftles were clothed, and whteh he afferts was capable of no fuch Tradudion or Succeffion thereunto The third Witnefsl produce, is Dr. Hammmd as he iscit- f/btvour Learned Friend % I who, fpeaking ot Bifap, Succtfon fdUr^Tthat they are compleat Heirs of all the ORDINARYPower JA rtceZd fions Chrijl ; Thus diftinguifhing it from the Extraor- J t I whkh the Bilhop couldnot be Heirs. Thus you fee a whole fevTrat^f^r ParV and thcfe of moft eminent Note, con: Hrmnins the whole Scope ot your Pamphlet. TwhererVoU> oryourQierifl, Cfc «. (as is evident m the Scope oftt IOa-rv J wM needs have the Apcfties klty* tbemftkei K>f*rt,. Divifim -ad PjrtMwjUpon which Ground he will needs have tke jtpfle Vj ««, to hm milei with **) ttarck «!*»«» *« M''/ Mnn **g«Jl A Query turnd to a.n Argument In favours of Epifcopary. 287 AfTerting,that bit Prattle ftarids upon Recerd to fbtw his Regularity, forfooth; and due Qbfervation of the Orders agreed upon among the Jpoftle s.come? ning the Divifion of- the World into fa many Diftrifls, which you aifc plead and harp upon. Pag. ;3« of your Arguing Pamphlet, repeating your ignorant Miftake of Thomas hit Afftonment to the Indies, as aiFertcd by Eujebim *} Upon which Ground alfo you infinite, * Ub. j.c. 1. that any other Apofile 'had been to blame, if inter medling with the Churches of hk planting, without hit Gsnfent, after the provincial Divifion of the World among them : You mould have confidered what your great Do&or and Bifnop, StiUinpfleet, has produced againft this fuppoled Divifion *,• Wherein, having fup- * Iren.Tart pofed and proved, that fuch Divifion could not be be- 2. cb. 5. Pag. fore their Commiffion to Preach to aU Nations, which 2;2,2£4,2*5jr will readily be granted, he adduces Eight important 236. Grounds and Reafons to prove it could not be after that commiffion • Arguing from their Senfe of tie-very Nature of Chrift's Kingdom, expreffed aUs r. 6. leading them co fuppofe Chrift would ered his Kingdom after another manner ,• From their fraying zt Jerufalem, after endtwed with the Holy Ghcji t> ■ 1*1^24,4.9* and not betaking themfelves each one to a feparate Province; And yet, after the Perfecution railed at Jerufalem, when moft of the Church were difper.fsd abroad, the Apoftles are found re- maining ftill at Jerufalem, Atts 8, r, 14. " Would they have been^ * faith he, fo long ab(ent from their Charge, if any fuch Diftribution 'had been made among themfelves. He further argues againft this Divifion from this Ground, '- That the Apoftles going to particular ' placel-from Jerufalem was occafional; That .the firft Departure* of * any of the Apoftles from -Jerufalem was that of Peter and jahn, wh# ' were fen t by common Order of the Apoftles to Samaria, after they 'heard, that, by Philips Preaching, they had received •, '/ J ' the Word of <3od f. And that there is not the leaft t A&* 8. 14* 'mention of any peculiar Province of theirs which - r -1- ' they were fent to. So Peter's going from Jjppa to Cafa- e rea was ofccafioned by Cornelim his fending for him t. ~M#* I0'j~«32? He further argues from this, w That we frequently ■ read of many of the Apoftles being together in one place,- *? c The whole Twelve at Jerufalem • After that, Peter and John to* * gether at iamaria; About four Years after P<*k/'s Converfion, we * meet with James and Peter together at Jerufalem 5 Fourteen Years * after Vi >2$8 A Confutation of an Additienat Pamphlet ; Entitukd, * after this, we find James, Peter and John there*. * ^1.18,19. « Is it any ways probable, faith be, ii all thefc had their Oal 2, i 9 diftind Trainees affigned them, they mould be lo often t • found together at Jerufalem, which certainly mud be- lonc but to the Province of one of them. He likewife argues from this Ground " That it was a confiderable time, yea long, before they 'thousht it' to be their Duty to Preach unto the Gentiles. Peter muft have a Vifion firft, before he will go to Corn*. iAZli lo, ii flw t. And' asyet» they re{ained tnat perfwahon, that it U unlawful for a Jew to keep Company, or come unto * Atis lo. 28, »ne that is of another Nation f« Nay more,faith he, ?eter k accufed for this very Adion before the Apoftles at *A8sli'2 X lerujaletn i, this being laid as the Ground of their * , 'f Quarrel, lhat be went in to men Vncircumcijedt and did -eat with them. And it cannot be imagined, but that forae of them iudsed it unlawful to go to their own Provinces, which certainly muft be of the Gentiles molt of them. He adds further, fk That IWsPro- ■ vince to much fpoken or, viz, That of the Circumcifion, fell not to * his Share, till near twenty years after this time. He further argues from that Ground which we have before offered againft this Divifion, fcil " In point of that (uppofed Divifion of the two Diftricts ( too laree, no doubt ) " of the Jews and Gentiles betwixt Peter and Paul ; Which StiUintfeet tells us, cannot be underftood exciufiwe/y of others; For " what Work then ( faith be ) had the reft of the Apoftles to do ? Neither, taking them Dipihutivelj \ was Paul excluded from Preach- Jncr to the Jews, or Peter to the Gentiles: We lee Paul was at nrit ing to trie je ,^^ ^ ^ co ^ a Veffd ts har Ghnfs ^^ tgm * Acts 9 1 J, f»re the Gentiles and Kings, and the children of J(rael f, * and, accordingly, he is found prefently ?re*cbwg Cbnfl i AS q. 20,22, in the Synagogues t ; And, in all places, he firft Preach- ed to the Jews in the Synagogues, and when they would not A AB 12 «? 14 h?arkent be turned to the Gentiles t. And after the Meet- ISSd/i with ing fpoken of A8s 15. he is found entering into the Sy- 1* n*gi**> *nd Preaching to the Jews at Epbejm . And * therefore he thought not himfelt excluded from Preach* hitto the Jews becaufe they were St. Peter's Province. Neither did * feter think himfelf excluded from the Gentiles, he be- i- ffi$ 10 28 ing the firft that opened the Door of Faith unto them t, by Preaching to them. And in the Council at Jeruj*- lem> hcownej lumtelfas the Apoftle of the Gentiles, God made choice amon^ A Query turnd to an Argument in -favours ofEpifcopacy. 2 8* '*mng us, that' the Gentiles by my mmh (hould bear the Word of the G fid and believe * From all which this * Afis ij, j. Learned Author draws forth this Conclufion, " That c the pretended Divifion of Provinces among the Apoftles is only the * wind-egg of a working Fancy, that wants a fliell of Reafon to co« ' ver it. Mr. Querift, or Arguer, This is a rude Character put upon this Grand Topick of your Reatoning for prelacy, which you fee your own StiUingfleet has crushed all to pieces, averting it a meer Irra* tional Antifcriptural Fancy. And whereas you may alledge, that StiUingfleet only difputes againft that which he calls An Early Divifion if Provinces, not excluding the Divifion after mentioned in Hijiory, which you feem to infmuate in the dole of your Query ; Remark what he after fubjoyns in the clofe of this Se- * pag. 257^ tfion *, rt As for that Divifion of Provinces., faith he, ' mentioned in Ecclefiaftical Writers *, tho, as to foms * Citing 'few, they generally agree ; As that Thomat went to Eujeb. Lib. 3. ' ?arthiay ( not to the Indies, as you fuggeft, and in €. 1. Stihngfl et\ Judgment, ignorantly J " Andrew to Scy- * tbia, John to the Ufftf Afis, &c. Yet, as to the moft, they are at a * Lofs, where to find their Provinces, and contradict one another in c reference to them ; And many of them feem to have their fir ft * Original from the Fables of Dorothea, Nhephsrus, and fuch Writers. And, $ ;. in the beginning, refuming what he has proved, he ex- preffes it thus, " Having mewed, that the Apoftles obferved no let * Order for diftributing Provinces ,• Wherein he peremptorily affercs, that neither early nor late, the Apoftles made any fuch Dipibmion, de* nying the thing abfolutely. Sly, You commend J. o. with high Elogies, as having prefented fuch a Learned Mafter-Piece,, that Presbyterians had not muttered Strength to encounter him.. But what if it fhall be found, that J. £, and you have mutually Brow-beat and buffeted one another ? Of this I mall exhibite unto you thefe three or four Inftances : j. 'Tis evi- dent, that J. 5. fets aU Bijhops en a Level, as tf equal, independent ?cmr and Authority ; And thus has palpably contradicted and run down your Diagram of the Hierarchy, which you draw from the Old Te- ftament Oeconomy, and thefe Arches above Arches, iifuing all in a Supreme ?nejl, or frefident. You are clear and pofuive, ? That the c Jewifh Oeconomy. Exemplifying the New Teftament Church Gc- * vernment, will infer, that, as there was One High-Pried in the Jew- Mfh Church, fo every National Chriftian Church ought to have a ' Metropolitan, or Arch-BUhop, to whom the reft of the Biftiops and O o . « Clergy a9o A Confutation of in Additional Pamphlet, Entituled, • Clercv in his Province ought to be in fome Subjection ,• Yea, and L Clergy in j ^ ^ continuc their Superiour for Life. You tell us, •*Ch 2 Quit your Querift at leaft *, '^That, in the Jewiih Oeco- ta Vi* n i ' conomy, we have an Account of Epifcopacy and 4* r I' /» * ( Archiepifcopacy, of prefidents over Prefidents, i Query turn d ' called by the Septuagint [ Bifhops ] &c Oj • *J ism aw- »an Arch-Prefidency, not only over the Pnefts, but ZL P 16, 27 ' over the Overfcers of Priefts ; Which, in your new - * - * goodly Piece t' yo* do clearly homologate. Nnw Sir if you can reconcile thefe two, All Bifhops of equal Autbo- rift and upm a level, and yet SubjcB unto ArcMiJhops and Metropolitans, fo as vou fuppofe the Prfctf* and £tfwr« were to their Superiour Arch- Triels or Prfjw**!, and all of them to the Metropolit.cal Htgb-pneft > or P^'rc/ you will be indeed an Afoh for your Skill; Tho I muft \fj that 7 5 and you are fo kind one to another, as to agree in JSnt'radiaine your (elves, as well as each other, in this point ,• You ^l&^lB^finSiuuiintbiAt^Ui in tbe Plenitude of tbesr pX the Apoftles being, by your Confcffion, of equal Authority, MdSnfoqucntly, their Succeffors in this full extent ot their Power ; And 7 5 in maintaining avowedly, yea and from the fuppofed Principles of the Cyprianic Age, the late Scott f and prefent Enghfir Hierarchy, whereof all do know, that the one did, and the other doth conuft of Bifhop. Subjcd to Arch-bifhops, the ^uthonty of them all Solving in a Metropolidcal Head, or Patriarchal Primacy. Here, on 1 kv I cannot but notice ( tho* this is touched above ; thefe blown and /ain ^ you put upon J. S's firft and iecond ****** VrVct^sol the Cypriank Age, containing, you fay, fuchfubftantial FeSe that y^u of the Church Principles muft needs think he has Ac better of it, fince no Presbyterians have had Confidence to An- I' And youCounfel the Undertaker of the Anfwer to put on corn- et Armour and get the Fathers taught to. freak the Language •/Geneva, flffo7thl fake of the bare Word Anfwer in a Tale Page, vhich, you fav L done good Service before now without regard to what / Mows in the Book What Advantage this your Champion has of Presbyterians, either in the firft, or the late Voluminous Pamphlet, has from the be- Snnins andnowefpecially, appeared to the Judicious and Impartial,. tTWti* nonentity and none at all; Yea rather, that he has in thefe Endeavours ruined the Epifcopal Caufe ; So that Presbyterians do entertain with the fame pity thefe bluftenngs of your Angry Igno- rance a thw doyour pitiful Paralogifm in this your Pamphlet And fo^fwS only b^Worion tho; Title Fagct I think you have £ A, Query turrid to *n Argument in favours of Eplfiopacy. 291 fitly Exemplified in this yourChampion's Anfwer.who is known to hare patted ovetficco pede the moft of all that the Reverend Mr. R. offered againfl him. And of this there are ftore of Inftances further which might be exhibited. May I Inftance One for All ( to pafs the Survey- er of Naphtali, whofe Anfwer fuits your Defcription exactly) you cannot but know, how that the Confuter of Mr. Burnet's feven Dialogues betwixt the Conformifrs and Nonconformifb, challenged him to a formal Difpute, offering upon his dating the Qucftions in Controverfie, and drawing forth Propofitions and Arguments there- upon, either to give him the Hand, or ihew the Reafons of his DiiTent without Pillion or Partiality. What Man, pretending to be a Scholar, and to enquire for Truth in a Debate, would have declined fo fair an offer? But behold, in ftcad of the Anfwer, comes out four new Dialogues or Conferences, quite paffing over the main and fubftance of the Difpute, and like a Fuge-baXium ( to ufe our Scots Term ) renewing the Dialogue Method, wherein he knew he had none to Ei counter him ,♦ And yet the vain Title Page of this blufrering Pam- phlet, bears A Vindication of what was Confuted ', *nd an Examination of bit Adversaries Bock. I muft give you another Note on the by, on that which you have * anent * Query turn 4 Arch bilhop Ufher his account of Aaron the High Prie(it to an Argu* who was Repre tentative of the AoyQ-} upon whom you ment% Pag,%j. put this true Elogy, that he was a great and good Man, underftanding his Greatnefs and Goodne/s as Reciprocal ,• But you muft underftand that this truly good Man. has ftobbcd your Prelaiical bad Caufe under the fifth Rib. Amongft many Inftances eafily adduceable we offer this, fcil. That f he pleads for f Reduction this as the Ancient Form of Church Government, which he &C. page 61, Calls the Ancient kind of Presbyterian Government , ( com- plaining of the difufe thereof in England) fcil. That every Paftor have a Right to Rule the church ( from whence the Name of Reitor was alfo given at firft unto him ), and to Adminifter the Dijcipline efChrift, as well as to diftenfe the Doclrine and Sacraments; Owning alfo their decifive Votes and Suffrages. So that he appears one of the Handing, and, to ufe your Term, Great andGood W'itrieffe> againft the Hierarchical Prelates Sole Power of Ordination and Jurifdiclion. But to return, after this little digreffion: A fecond Inftance I offer of your contradicting J. S. and he You is in the point of the Ijraelitijh Church, which you aifert ( your Querift at leaft *, with whom you will not pro- * Chap, 2. fefstojuftle ) to be but a Provincial church ', For having page 7. told us, That the herd didcheofe Jerufalem to place his Name •O o z . there, M A Confutation of an Additional Pamphlet, Entituhd, * c**» ?• J' L«M calling it exprefly fo. *; »*. PH* M J- v. y,i*A,t fcil. the Cyprianic, «<«•> M""^' he, «/«*«* ^. t,i", Aaron w« *»»*« [NATIONAL KM „a„kefar«»<> *« «■- W* '* a f» ^ ftand Antipods > CK7RCH ./ d . . 7- <1 N *- ^^hcW( fubjeftin f0 farto JSbSSV h" o"ns it "S a i&t CW, without any ftate of Sub- ferviency. . „ . »t,-^i«# nf /£<» Seventy Difciples ; Thcfc A third Inftance I offer is in the point o I tie 5« ^» ; ? , you will needs have a (landing Ij^nor O dec ol u m * files, which your Queritt at Uaft clearly >"f™. ^ h (£„' th?e and feveral &* I^'Sn".^ £ ««W 1*° - ^«-»<' ^-I0- Pamphlets; Pamcula-ly in yoUc^,-» j ^ ^ you affert this, telling u>, lb»t ""'' . • uevident that your great ^r^VXL net***. t,Z.n.fi^Mfrr°%! Champton jf. S. arhrrnS) """".', 4 »»«' ?Cb4.6-S- «*■**■ Jhus I heal tei ts, * \%cwi lhe SeWu,y, a, baianyfrndrngOgi., ,» |W <-f" i udgment of his fo much am ,. to-, < «»JJ,»; L*« °fjm'f";ts v'ahe contends, »«» ifa admired Saint fee clearly Homologate yea he com ^ , ^ * See «W/»i- [ TEMPORE MnSfNARSl *«° ' \ Thus not ,„ ti/V, Part ■whith could mt foffiblf be )rm"''„l"\n. alio Dr. Sen's a. fig. ,88. only contradialn. .you but ■*£*»£?£ a»° p * , grfd lT,We Yoo? fo much admired Champion Shall I add a fourth Inftance. *°" ° m^d his Fellow Pleaders J. S. contends tmu*m pro au, & foe, «h" h^"„f Eptfcopal Writers ikowne tie BiM< Sole Vow, """?,;* ™ I wXlie to en. to this purpofe, how confidently «. n my Wi k quire; But fo it is, that .you have a 1 along p e ^ Slight; Argument that » J*"^ ofcSmSn «& Imp** Tlenitude of their P«v«r, which to all M«»«" " f ? f h ;n thele an Action of this their Sole Tower Now. it ., rt /• n ^, Pisces of his, difcovered, in yout Judgment, Juei> W> * A £uery turnd to m Argument in favours of Epifiop acy. 292 in this Controverfie, and jucb Solid Reafonittgs for that which you cafi your Church Principles at had frighted Presbyterians from an Encounter with him • How comes it, that your Subftantial Learning and his, your Church Principles and his, and that in fo confidcrable Points of this Controver- fie, have fo palpably crofted and contradicted each other ? Have you not thus encouraged the Presbyterians, while feeing you of tht Church Principles, in this your Oppofition to them, acting the Midianites,. and killing one another with your own Weapons * In the $tb. Place, I will give you a little renewed touch upon this your Grand Argument for Epifcopacy, which I will make appear to have impeached the Apoftolick Authority, in ftead of Strengthening it as a Foundation of Prelacy. Thus then I argue : That Doctrine, or Argument, which impeaGhes and ftrikes againft the Apoftles Acting in Faith, in the Important and Great Duties of their Office, doth im- peach and ftrike againft their Authority and Power: But the Do- ctrine delivered in this your Pamphleti and Scope of your Argu~ ment, doth , thus impeach the Apoftles Acting in Faith, in the Impor- tant and Great Duties of their Office,* Ergo, It ftrikes againft their Authority and Power. Here the Aftumption only is to be made good, which I prove thus. That Doctrine, or Argument, which ftrikes againft the Efficacy and Truth of the Promife, upon which their Act- ing in Faith, in the forementioned Dutiesi muft be founded, does ftrike againft their Acting in Faith, in the forefaid Exercife, &c^ But the premifed Argument and Do&rine ftrikes againft the Efficacy and Truth of the Promife, in the premifed refpe&s ,• Ergo. The Af- fumption is proved thus : The great Promife founding their Faith, is that of Adatth, 28. 20. I am with you allways to the end, &c. But the premifed Argument and Doctrine robs this Promife of all Efficacy, with refpect to the premifed Actings ; Ergo. The Aftumption I prove thus : That Doctrine, or Argument, which aflerts, that nothing falls within the Compafs of that promife* but that wherein the Apoftles were to be fucceeded to the end of time, robs this Promife of any Effi* cacyj with refpect to fuch Actings of the Apoftolick Power, as were not to continue till the end of time: But the premifed Argument and Doctrine does thus rob the Promife,. or retrench the fime,- Ergo, The Major is evident of ft felf ,• For, If the Promife reach only that wherein the Apoftles were to be fucceeded, it can have no Efficacious Influence upon that wherein they were not to be fucceeded. The Aftumption is cleaaly proven fiom the Series and Scope of the whole Pamphkt. If, according to this Argument and Dectrine, the Com* million granted to the Apoftles, in its full Extent, had nothing in it of almporary Nfifure, but what was to continue for ever, then is inevitably, 294 d ConfutAtion of An Addition aI Pamphlet 5 Entituted, inevitably follows* that thzVrcmife and Commit, n being correfpoftdent^ what was Temporary, and to expire, and not to continue thus for ever, could not fall within the Compafs of that Promife: But that the Commiflion was of this Naure, is thus proved, * Par* J 2. 1. By your Dilemma *, Either this Qommijpcn granted to the Apoftles was Temporary, or to continue to the end of the World, And this Commiflion which you extend to the Apoftolick Office, in the full Extent and Exercile thereof, you exprefly hold to continue for ever, and to the end of the World ,• Whereupon ic evidently follows, that what ever Apoftolick Gifts, or A&ing of their Power, can be made appear to have expired, and to be Temporary, are, by you, clearly excluded from the Commiflion, and, confequent- ly, from the Promife, which you tell us, in terminis, t ?aZ- l9' reaches a Continuance for ever , and to the end of the World, Again t, you have this Aflertion, You defire to he Jkew* tit which Branch of their Power is fecludt d from itsjhare of the Vromife, and when that is (hown, you will owne it, that, in that Branch of their P*wer, they are not fucceeded ; And if no Branch of their Vewer be excluded fre.in a ftarc of the ?romifes then the whole is to defcend> [ entire in.the Succfjfiun] as well as it was in the firft Apofiles ; And feing Chrifl rave it entire t§ them, and their SucCeJJcrs, you conclude SucceJJors have it entire in as ample a manner as the Apofiles them/tlves had it • Adding emphatically, And thus to continue to the end of the World ; Adding, that the not allowing the full power that the Jpoftles were clothed with, is a retrenching of Christ Commifpon and Promife. Hence it appears, even o a Dsmonftratibn, that whatever Actings and Exercife of Apo- ftoiical Power, can be made appear not to have been deriv'd in a Succeflion, and to continue to the end, are thus clearly excluded from the Promife, yea, and Commiflion alio. And it being evident beyond all peradventure, that the Apoftles Infallibility in Voclrine, their Gifts of Tongues, of Miracles, &c. are long fince expired, and not fucceeded unto, it follows inevitably, that, in your Principles, the Exercife of thefe Gifts falls not within the Commiflion, nor are reach-, ed by the Promife ,• And if neither within the €ompaf;of the Com- miflion nor Promife, the Apoftles, in the Exercife of thele Gifts, could not Ad in Faith 5 So that, a primo ad ultimum, 'tis evident, that in the Scope and Series of this Pamphlet, you have equally im- peached both the Apoftles Authority, and their Acting in Faith, in the great Duties of their Apoftolick Office. I may not infift, in Item- ing, that ever and anone. even almoft to a Battolcgy, you tell us, that Apoftlts were fucceeded unto [ as fucb ], and in [ the full Extent of their ?9wer j A Query turnd to *» Argument in favour* of Epifiopacy. 295 Power J Now, Sir, this las fuch ] will, no doubt, include all that is imported in their Office, in a formal proper Senfe, confequently, their ApoHolkk Gifts of Tongues, of Wracks, living the Spirit in bis extra \rdina~ ry Gifts by laying on of Hands, their Infallibility, and the like Official AGines mentioned ; AH which you will have them fucceeded unto. Now Sir, if one mall thus affault you upon this your Principle ; Apoftles* as fucb, fpoke with Variety of Strange Tongues, as the Spirit gave* Utterance, and by his immediate Influence j Apoftles, ds fucb mi- raculoufly healed Difeafes, yea, raifed the Dead, infMed Judgments upon the Obftinate ; As /neb, conferred the Spirit in the manner inftanced; 'Therefore they are therein fucceeded, yea, and to the End, upon the Ground of our. Lord'i Promife ; And fuch Gifts arc ftill vigent and exiftent in the Church ,• I fear you muft travel t'o Utopia in queft of thefe Venerable Succeflbrs, and Apoftolick Gifts • For they are not, for a confiderable Number of Centuries, to be* found in the Churches Horizon ,• So that this your retorted Notion muft needs flop your Mouth, and pofe you into a Silence. But further Sir, you may fee your felf involved in a new Inconveniency and Shipwrack'd on this Rock of an abfurd Xnconfiftency. You tell us of the Continuance of the Gift of Miracles, for a confiderable time in the Churchy and do make it ( as like wife your admired J. S. ) a mighty Argument for G id's owning Prelacy ; Likewise the giving the Spirit., by laying on of Hands * For neither the Gift of tongues and Miracles, Infallibility in Doclrine nor giving the Spirit by laying on of Hands , you will admit to be peculiar to Apoftles, but all thefe you do affirm to be derived into a Suc^effion Now, Sir, here is a Succeffion Apoftolical ( for 'tis uncontrovertible clear, that what Gifts or Offices were not peculiar to Aooftles were thus derived, inyourSenfe and Pleading, and infpeciaf with refpedt to the Inftances exhibited ), but fuch as fails not within the Compafs of the Promife • For 'tis notour to all, ( yea, and by your own Ac- knowledgment ) that thsfe Gifts are not now vigent. So that you have thus, with your own Hand, razed the Foundation of your Ar- gument, which runs upon this Topick, and reciprocal Pofition and Principlej That wherein Apoflles were fucceeded unto, is contained in the From wife; Add whatever is contained in the Promife, therein the Apoftles were to be fucceeded unto ; And, in your Senfe, both are of an infeparabie Conne&ion, and of a continued Co-exiftence, becaufe, upon this fuppofed Nature and Extent of the Promife, ycu plead for the ftanding Office of Apoftolate > So that, with you, admit once a Succeffion the Promife will infer the fhnding and Continuance of that which is thus fucceeded unto, to the end. What fay you. then to a Succeffion temporary. , a6 A ConptUthH »fm Additional Pamphtet j Entituhd, J ~a A„\nc rtnf Tn manv Centuries before the end, and thus VT'Vul tr CcmpVoMhe Promife, becaufe derived into a stSn "„f y« nTfalUng within the Compafs thereof, bat 3 becaufe Temporary and dying out before the end ; For fha "he Promlfe reaches a continuance to the End, ".the great ground T!„ Pleadine Here is then a Succeffion conta.ned both in the So S Confmiffion and Promife and yet Temporary and falling mor by far of the Extent of the Promife, which reaches to the End So ha you muff either fay, the Promife in ,ts int.re Extent reaches not to the End, but includes likewife fuch Priviledges and Offices as are Temporary and expired, wherein you entirely rumo your Pleading for a (landing Apoftolae upon the ground of this Pro- mtfe • Or you muft fay, that there are Apoftohck Privileges, Gifts Md Office, wherein Apoftles were Succeeded, which notw.thftandlng are nof reached by this Promife ; Wherein alfo you are inconnften wfth vourfelf having clearly difowned fuch an AlTertion. This ' Charge will be evident if ic beWher pondered, that, r You can- not deny that all Church Offices and Officers were contained Em.nenter f„ fhar of tl e \poftolick, as the Fountain, and fo tofpeak, the Primary Patternof all derived Succeeding Functions, G.fts, and oZll- The Scripture accounts of the Time and Nature of the Apo- ftl« Office and Call importing fo much. And next, that your felf do own it that the very Office of Diacona, has its fhare m thi.Succeffion crfnfeauendv in the Promife, and that it is upon thi, ground of a ftandfi2 continuance ; And 'tis beyond all peradyenture that, in the Lrie and Scope of your Arguing, you make the bucceffion, w,th re- fnea to the Gift or Office, and the promifed Prefence, to run intirely mrallel n point of Extent and Duration. But not to purfue further fhefe vourinconailent roveries, and having thus, I hope, convincingly d^ovyered °he unfoundnefs and Popifh tincture and ruinous Foundation, o the Ouer ie! and overturned the tottering Superftruclure of your dou5ht?Argument founded thereupon and upon clear and im- ^r^Jorannfc the dancer and abiurd tendency cf both, i leave fou o^uWthdtgei>cdg, and thenl amfure they will I be ^ujfc Thoughts and Reflections upon what you have been bo ^ toofte u?on this point, when I have plyed you and your Litigious Pamphieting ^ribe with the Counter- Queries eniuing. QUERIES a 97 mmsmmmmmmmmmmm aUE R IE S OFFERED TO THE PRELATISTS O F SCOTLAND. I. &V ERIE. I N C E, in the Senfe of both Scottijh and Englifh AdvoS cates for Prelacy, ( both Bi/hops and others of eminent Note) there is no fix'd Mould of Church Government exhibited in Scripture, but that of its own Nature it is fo verfatile and ambiguous* that the Supreme Magiftrat may fo difpole of it, as is moft fuitable to the Ends of Givil Policy, which is convincingly evident frcm "the Inftances above adduc'd ; Whether eur prefent Epifcopal Clergy, in owning the forementioned Pleadings and Principles, the Do&rine and Pra&ice of our Scottijh Bifhops, both in the Reigns of King Jamest and the two Charles's, and, in fpecial, the Conftitution ofthe late Prelacy in Scotland, have not thrown upthe Principle of a Jus Divinum of Prelacy pre- tended to ? AndjConi'equently, whether they have not, in their prefer.t Pleadings upon this pretended ground, contradi&ed their chief Patrons and Matters? And whether they ought notf upon the premifed Principle of thefe Matters and Patrons, anent the Supreme Magiftrars P p Soveraign a-o$- Queries offered to the Soveraieft Right to difpofe of the Forms of Church Government to fubmit to the prefent Eftablifhment of our Church by this Authority, and whether, in oppofing the fame.they are noMiab'e to the Charge of Seditious Turbulency * We have heard ot their Arch bifhops, Spotfwood in Scotland, Wbitegift \n Engird theirgrear and juft Lord Advocat with feveral others of their chief Pleaders, aiTerting, that AH Eccle/iafsick Authority is Fountained in, and derived from the Supreme Mag'i4 fir at and absolutely at his difrofal, no lefs than [ a Papal Authority ] herein being exprejly owned and recognofced by them, as is evident in the Inftances above addue'd. , .- . .* II Quer. Whether the Spirit of God, appropriating in Scripture the Term ot Bi(hop, or''E»wnr©-, to Presbyters, or Paftors, Labouring in the mrd and Doclrine, thus painting at the Nature of their Work and Office, Tit. i. y, 7. ABs 20. 28. 1 Vet. j. 2, 5. doth not thus effectually rebuke the Appropriating of this Title and Epithete, confequently the Work therein imported, to the Diocefan Bifhop, astheCharaaenftick- of his Office ? Whether this be not as arrant and Sacrilegious a robbing Paftors of their Scriptural Defignation, as if the Term or P^ror ' Fmhter were appropriated as peculiar to a Diccefan Prelat only ? The Query is further fortified by this ground, that this Term of 'E»,««-®-, or Bihofi hath, as much and alike as the Word *afior , the Flock for its immediat Objea and Correlat, as is evident in the Scriptures cited • Whereas the Diocefan Wx*r©- Feeds not immediatly the Hock, as the Apoftie Veter enjoyns, 1 Prf. c. 2, 2.. but pretends immediatly 10 Rule and Overfee the Paftors themfclves. . . • III. (her. Since the Bifhop is fuppofcd by our Prelatifts the proper immediat Subjeft of Church Government, has the Power of Ordination and Jurifdiffion to Monopoliz'd and Centred in him, that Presbyters or Partes have no Power or Intereft therein, but in fo far as he intruits them with it, and may revoke it at pleafure, whether this be not cdntrary to the Scripture account of the Paftor or Presbyter s Office, wherein the Epi/copal Authority, or ( to fpeak more properly ; the Authority and Exercife of Church Government, is afcnbed to Paftors jovntly in their fixed Colleges, or Juridical Courts without the leaft Hint of this precarious Dependence upon the Over-ruling Prelat therein 1 Pet c. 2, 2. ABs 20. 28. 1 Cor. y, 4, S, &\ Yeaand the Reciprocal Obedience of the People to Paftors -thus Authorized, is cn%vned accordingly, without the leaft hint of tins Abfolute Qver- ruling Power in any ftanding Superior Ordinary Officer, 1 thej. f, 12. Htb. 12. 17. with 24. , .'■«■'■ rU *L*T>7 IV Quer. Whether th.it place, 1 Tm. f. 17. Letjbe Elders that Rule well, be^counted worthy of MU Honour, efcciaHj tbty who Labour sntfa Prelatifts of SCOTLAND. a99 Word and DoStrlm, will not plead, that the Perfon Intruded with tb* Miniftery of Reconciliation, the Preaching the Word, and the Admini" ftration of the Sacraments, is, under this Notion, and upon ground o* this Authority, an Officer of the higheji Charter in the Church ; Since this is held out to be a higher Degree of Minifterial Official Authority, than Rulini (imply considered, yea and Ruling well > And confequentiy, whether the Prelates pretended higher Authority over the Paftor Authorized as is fai*, yea and under this Notion as a Ruler, be not as Antifcriptural Ufurnation ? ,,., a c- u n u * ' r V Q*er Whether the joynt coliegiat Intereft ot the Presbyters of the Church of Corinth in the higheft Cenfure of Excommunication be not clearly imported in that place, i Cor. f. 4, U K &'; The Appftle Taul reprehending their not Anticipating his Dire&ion in putting forth this Cenfure ; Yea and afferting their effential Intereft therein, and their Intrinfick Power to Judge all within that Church, thus, v. 12, 13. Do not ye Judge them that arc within 1 therefore put away from among your (elves that wicked Perfon. And if this higheft A& of Jurjfdi&ion be afcribed to the College of Paftors or Presbyters in their Juridical Meet- ins why not alfo all Juvifditlional, all Inferior or Subfervient Ads ; And whether cohfeqiientiy, the Preiat's arrogating this to himfelf, as his effential proper Intereft, be not an Impeachment ot this their Authority, and the Apoftolick Preicription afferting fo much > . ■ VI Qusr Whether Paftors concurrence with Apoftles in the ririt Chriftian Council, ABsis- and that in both the Difauifition, the Sentence, and Decretal Epiftle, expreffing a Dogmatic^, Critick, and Dmtailick Tower in ail which they appear joyned with them, and in the whole nrocedVe will not evince their eifential Intereft in Church Judicatories and Councils, and their Authority in all Juridical Ads of the above- mentioned Extenfionj And confequentiy whether Prclats invading their Decifive Sufrage, by their Negative Voice in Church Judicatories, be not therein Condemned ? . . VII. Quer. Whether timothy's Ordination by a Presbytery be not afferced 1 Tm. 4. 14. Negkft not the Gift which was given thee hy Pro- thecy with the laying on of the Hands of the Presbytery, the word Presbytery imoortina a Juridical Affociat Court in other places of the New TefUment, thus Lukf 22. 66. and ABs 22. c. So that we have it thrice represented in this Signification, but never as importing and fisnifvine the Office of a Presbyter; Befides that Pauh laying on of Hands in order co Gifts, mentioned 2 tim. 1.6. is clearly diftingui- fli^d from chat Adt of Authoritative lmpojition of Hands aienbed to the Presbvterv. Moreover, thsGift, and the Prophecy being reprefented in *- • J P p a diftuifl o0o Queries offered to the diftinft Claufes, and as diftinft Priviledges, from the Trestyterieshnp ofi- tion; And ?«uh hepofit ion being exprefly referred to the Gifts ; And finally the Impofiion of Hands being, in the Scripture accounts, a Badge of Authoritative Blejfin^s, no other End of the Preshyteries lmfofition can be here adduced, confent being proper to the People, who in no Reafon can be fuppofed to (hare in this lmpofitiont which in the Scrip- ture accounts, and in theSenfe of all the Orthodox, imports a Juridi-i cal Forenfical A&. And if Ordination, (as is evident in this Inttance) and the higheft Cenfure C as appears in the preceding ) be afcribed to a Presbytery, where is the PrelatifVs Sole Authority here- in ? VIII. Qjitr. Whether the Authoritative Epithets of Rulers, Gover- nors, Bifhops, or OverfeetS) Paflors, Watchers over Souls as they that mujl give account^ and feveral fuch like afcribed to Presbyters, import not their effential Inter eft in Government ? Confequentlyi whether that Sole Power in Ordination and Jurifdiclion aflumed by Prelats, and afcribed to them by Prelatiftsj be not an Impeachment of the Scripture Afler- tion hereof? Since, i. They thus arrogat a greater Power than was aflumed by Apoftles, and contradid their Practice in the Inftances above adduced, wherein they aflumed Paftors to an Authoritative concurrence in Government with themfelves. 2/7, They thus Impeach that Forenfical Collegiat Decifion in Judicatories ( conftituted of fuch Officers ) and their Authority therein, whereof the Scripture exhihits plenty of Inftances, Thus, Matth. 18. Scandals mufl be delated to the Juridical Ecclefii, or Court, teUtke Ghurcb. Tnis alfo is made good by the InftancC adduced of the Presbyteries Forenfical Juridical A<5t in 'Iimothys Ordination, and by that Inftance of the Zorinth Church Offi* cers Meeting to Punifl) and Cenfure the InCefiuous ; By the Apoftles aflertion and account of the firft Solemn Council's Ad and Sentence, A9ts 15. viz. It [eerned food to the Holy Gboft, and to us, yea and to us met with one accord ; Wherein without any Difcriminating Terms the Authority is joyntly afcribed to the whole Members of the Meeting, and their Jurifdi&ional Concurrence aflertcd. IX. Quer. Whether that Text, 1 Cor. 14, 29. the Spirits of the Prophets are fuhjett to the Prophets, pleads not for the due Subjection of all Church Officers to Church Judicatories, to their Authoritative Advice, Inftru&ions, Minifterial Commands, yea Cenfures, in cafe of what is amifs in either their Life, or Do&rine, Converfation, or Government ? Confequently, whether Prelats are not Heteroclyts and ftand in oppofition to this Rule, i, By their Negative Voice in Judica- tories, 2/7, Their Abfolute Author'*} over the very Meeting thereof, which Prelatifts of SCOTLAND. 501 which muft neceflarily have the Prelats Authorizing Call intirpofed, w;thout which, in their principles and Pleading, they are not lawful Judicatories j And, 3/7, In that they are Ejjintial Prefidents therein, either immediately by their perfonal Prefence, or Authorized D;;puts ? All thefe our prelats and prelatifts do own, and were pradifed in the late Edition oi our Seottijb Hierarchy, Mr. Sharp being declared in the Ad for our National Synod the EffentialTrefident thereof • So were the Biihops in all their Synods,and therefore exeemed from all Subje&i- oa to, and Cenfure by Church Judicatories, as to either their Life or Dodrine ; And thus were no true Sons or Minifters of this Church, but ufurping Sons of Belial, oppofing the Scripture Rules of Govern- ment. X. Quer. Since it is uncontrovertibly clear, that the Bifhop is owned, by our prefent Pleaders efpecially, as a Church Officer of Divine- Appointment, fuperiour to, and fpeciflcally diftind from the Paftor, having, 1. A diftind Work, 'viz,, to Govern a Diocefs ,• 2/7, An Official Intereft in the Parliament as a Member, and a remote Capa- city for other Civil Imployments and State Offices 5 %lyy A diftind: Ordination or Cenfecration to his Office ,• 4/7, Diftind; Qualifications in Confluence of the whole ,• Whether he ought not to have (rood di- ftinguimed by fome fpecial Note and Charaderz'w the Afo/iies Recitation of Ordinary Church Officers* and in the Scripture Accounts of their Gifts and Duties frequently therein mentioned, fuch as are exhibited, 1 Cor, 12. 28. 'Efh. 4. ii, 12. Rom* 12. 7, 8, &c. And fince, in thefe Texts, there is no mention of any Name or Epithet, Qualifications, Milli- on or Office, Work or Duties, of any Ordinary Church Officer fupe- riour to the Paftor, whether the prelate's Office, as above defcrib- ed, is not fent a packing, and expunged from the Scripture Roll ? The Scripture not hinting, in the leaf!, the premifed Accounts or Cha- racters afcribeable to any Ordinary Officer fuperiour to the Paftor, or Minifter of the Word, who have Ordination and Jurifdidion afcribed to them, and all Ads of Government in a perfed Parity, 1 Thef. j. 12. with*i7. 1 Tim. J. 17. Ueh. 13, 7, 17. 1 Cor. 5. 13. I Tim. 4. 14. 3 John 9. XL Quer* Whether the Preaching of the Goff>el be not the indifpenfable neceflary Duty of all Church Officers called thereunto, and gifted accordingly, and the great End of the Ordination of fuch to tins im- portant Duty, which necefiarily includes Diligence therein ? To this we find timothy., our Prelatifts fuppofed Bifhop, zealoully excited by the Apoftle Paul, 2 Tim. 4. 1, 1* 1 charge thee therefore before God and the Lord Jejus Ghrifl, who fh all judge thg Qukk. and the Dead, at bis appearing, and 202 Queries offered to the and his Kingdom ; Here's a weighty and alarming Charge, exciting, no doubt, to a Duty of the higheft Importance ,• Let us hear it, v. 2, Preach the Word, be in riant in Seafon, and out of Sea/on ; Reprove, Re- buke Exhort with aU ■ Long-fuffering and Doftrine. The Apoftle Paul, another great Bifhop in our Prelatifts Efteem, who had * 2 Cor. 1 1.28. the Care of all the Ghurches coming upon him *, ( and there- in a Laborious Ruling Work J yet pronounces a Woe upon hiwfelf, if not Preaching the Go/pel, I Cor. 9. 16. and tells us of an Offici- al NeceJJity herein laid upon him. When the Apoftles ( Acls 6: ) are ex- citing the Church to the Choice of the Deacons, for Adminiftring to the Poor, they do it upon this Ground, v. 2. It is not Rea/on} that we jhould leave the WordtfGtd, ( /. e. the Preaching of the Word ) and ferve Tables. And after they have difcovered the Character of the Perfons who are to be Deacons, who were to be appointed to take this di- verting Care from the Apoftles, they again inforce the premifed Ground, and their {landing neceflary Duty, in v, 4. *But we will give cur felves continually to Prayer, and to the Minijiery of the Word. The Apoftle Peter, when our Lord, for his Encouragement, after his Threefold Denial of his Mafter, gave this Threefold Renovation of his Apoftolick Million, John 21, ij> 16, 17. had it delivered in thefe Terms, Feed my Lambs ; A Second Time, Feed my Sheep j And a Third Time, Feed my Sheep. Accordingly the great Charader of the Apoftolick Bifhop, 1 Tim, 3.2. is this, that he be AiAuktikh apt to teach. cfg7 %v 7ov iirijKoirov aviviKnirrav Iivai, putt yvv 1 have created a Bi[hop, but kjfled a good Preacher. And there want not Witnefles who can teftifie, that Mr. Rtfs, the late Bilhop of St. Andrews, ufed, in thir Terms, to exprefs his State and Fun&ion before he was made Bifhop, Whtn 1 was a Treacher , intimat-j ing, he was no more fuch in that Epifcopal Station* to which hisPra- &ice was correfpondent, having Preached but once a Year, while in that Station. I need not refurne how that Preaching Prelates in Eng<* landy have been by their Fellows derided as ^reaching Coxcombs. To this Query I ftnll add another to enforce the former. XII. Que?. Whether the Commiffion to Preach the Gofpel, does not neceffarily tie the Perfon clothed therewith, according to Scripture Rules to a conftant afliduous performance, and is of fuch a Nature as cannot be removed or ftopt, except either in the ca(e of Phyfical and inevitable Impediments, fuch as Imprifonment, Bani(liment» Sick* nefs." and the like, or the .Removal of the Office and Exercife by lawful Depofition, or Church Cenfures ? And, confequently, whe- ther the laying afide this Exercife and important Duty be not, r. An Impeachment of the nobleft and higheft Exercife of Minifrerial Au- thority ? 2/7, A flopping, in fo far, the great Defign of the Gonver- fion of Souls; Confequently, a (landing in Oppofition to the Glory of Chrift therein* And, %ly% Whether the Reafon pleaded for lay- ing afide this Exercife, taken from the pretended Advancement 90 a higher Sphere in the Miniftery, and of a new Burden of Government, be not ' moft abfurd, as impeaching both the Prefcription and PraBice of the /Ipojlles, who being, by Confsflion of Prelatifrs, Church Officers of the higheft Sphere, and having this great Work and Burden upon them, the Planting and Governing of aU the Churches, did, notwithstanding, ply this Wor/c frill with molt indefatigable Diligence, as the main Duty of their Commiflion* When the Apoftlefays, » G 'or \1.17. Shrift fen* me not t$ Baptize but to Preach the Gofiel, tbo' the Meaning k not exclufive of Baptifm/yet he doth thus,, with a fignal Emphaiis, exalt this Work of Preaching to the bigheft Sphere of Minifrerial Duties, afferting it to be the main point of our Lord's Commiffion j.o his Ambafladours, as is evident in the Original Patent and Commiflion it felf, Mmh. zS. 19, 20. ' XIII. Quer. Since, in Epifcopal Principles, the Bifliop is the Prin- ciple of Unity to the Diocefs, is the primary, immediate, yea the proper fole Yaftor thereof, with refpecT: to all A&s of the Power of Order and Jarif- diblion, having a Ctnforial, yea MajeQical Regal Power over the lame ; So tha't his Epifcopal Licentia ( afcribed to him by J. S. ) is abfolute^ and all Official Actings of any fuppofed Officers are precarious, de- pending **&*&'* I'^J." ^l!*' Initio much as concerned to leek their Advice in the Agings of his Power, wJ** with hit NEGAIIPE, crufr their mofl Unanimous fuppofed lotes ; tfZh that no Judicatory,' or Meeting of Church Officers, can, without his interpofed Authority, according to theft Principles, be Uwful, orexift: \u*ritur, Whether this be not fuch a Dtfotick No. nmhetek, ArchitefamcK Power' and Dominion, as is difcharged to all Church Officers, and is, toto genere contrary to the very Nature of Church Government, which is Wniflerial not Material, Steward. IhiP only, and not a Dominion ; And whether fuch a Power and Vomi^ nion doth not thus contradid thefe Scriptures, Mattb. 20. 24, 25 , **. Ye know that the Vrinces of the Gentiles exercife Dominion over them, and they that are great exercifi Authority upon them g But itjhallnotbe I 0 among you ( there mall be none exercifing an Arbitrary Power ) but whooe; vnwill he great among you, let him be your Mincer, and whoever wiU oe chief among you, let him be yourServani. Here it is obvious to the mean- eft Re fledion, that our Saviour has, in this Prohibition fent a pack- ing andbanimed out of his Church, the Epif copal Abfolute Ucmtt* and Liberum Arbitrium afferted by J. S. and condemns as grofs Antifcnptu- ralUfurpers, Prelats, who arrogate this to themfe Ives Accordingly we find the ereat Apoftle of the Gentiles difowning fuch a Demimon, 2 Cor 1 24 Yea we find the Apoftle Peter, 1 ?et. 5. 2, j. injoyning IneiualEfilctpal Gare and Authority to the Paflors of the Flock, difcharging exprefly Dminion or Lordjhip in any of them oyer the reft. The Elders which are among you I exhort, who am al(o an Elder and a fitnefs of TeZfrringsofChri^Lc. v. 2. Feed the Flock of God which „ among you, taking the Overftght thereof, or Exercifing an Epifcopal Power not by ConflJnt> but wilting &c. * ?. Nether as being Lords over Gods Heritage* but Examples to the Flock. See the true Scriptural Epi/copacy fet in Terms of Contradiflion to Dminion or Lord(hip, and much more to fuch a fcrewed up Abfolute Do- minion* u J. S. together with our Epifcopahans affert and afenbe to ' J the prelate. Upon this Ground, Diotrepbes his Love of * * Eoid v 9 Vre-eminence is condemned by the Apoftle John *. Be- fides that the Work of all Church Officers, in univer* (urn even including Apoftles, is afferted to be a Minfery or Minifte- iiKvice, oppofite to Lordjhip, Ephef. * 11, ». And he gave Jome Apofiles, and (ome Prophets, and feme Evangtli}istand fome Vaftors and leathers j For the ferfeUing of the MnU [ for the Work of the Umifery\ Prelatifts *f SCOTLAND. g for the Edifying the Body ofChrifl, Accordingly the gceat Apoftle of the Gentiles expreffes thus his Work and Authority, 2 Cor. 4. 5. We Preach net our {elves, but Cbrifl Jefits the herd, and our (elves your Servants for Je/usfake; Calling it a Minifhry, v. 1. and Stevardjhip, 1 Cor 4 r Owning himfelf a Mow-Servant with other Minifiers, Celofr 1. 7. As'yett alfo learned of Epaphras our dear Fellow-Servant, who is for you a Faithful Mini(ier of Chrifi. Thus, Cb. 4. v. 7. He calls lychicm ( another Faithful Minifter ) a Beloved Brother, and Fellow-Servant in the Lord * Deiigning them alfo FeUow-Labourers, Phil, 4. ;. Brethren and FeUowl SouldierSt Cru 2, 27, Where was here the Epifcopal Dominion Abfolut* Licentia, and Liberunt Arbitrium f XIV. Quer. Whether that Paffage, Matth. 18. 15, 16, t*j xg Where our Lord enjoyns the Offending Brother to be firff privately tsldmonifhed, and if Contumacious and Kefraflory to the Admonition that the Admoni/her take with him one tr two mere, that in the Mouth of two or three Witneffes every Word may be eftebli/hed, and if he negled to hear them, the Admonimers are enjoyned to tell it unto the Church, Jcil; the Congregation, or Embodied Court of Officers who have the Binding and hoofing Power % and upon negleding to heae the Church, he is to be looked on as a Heathen and Publican : Whe- ther, I fay, this doth not evidently defcribe fuch a Gradation and Nature of Church Government and Cenfures, as afcends from the leffer to the greater Number, and this in point of Juridical Procedure and Authority therein ,• Importing, confequently, a Subordination of the leffer to the greater Societies ,• As alfo Appeals from the one to the other > Since there is here an Allufion, even in the Judgment of our Epifcopalians, unto the Jewilh Courts, and the Subordination of thefe leffer Courts to the great Sanhedrim. Such Subordination al- fo being clearly held out, Acls if. of the Brethren and Presbytery of Antiocb to the great Council of Apoftles, and other Minifters in Jerufalem. As is alfo evident in other parallel Inftances above exhi- bited, wherein the clear Plat-Form of Presbyteries and Synods is rc- prefented, and the Subordination of the leffer to the greater Societies and Courts. And this being clearly fuppofed and imported in this Text with Parallels ,• It is further demanded, Whether the Epifcopal Authority, as owned by our Prelatifts, doth not ftand clearly crofs to this Order ? I. As impeaching the Decifive Authority of Judicatories clearly fuppofed in this Text, zly, Inverting the Order and Method here affigned in point of Juridical Procedure and Cenfures, which is from the lefier to the great Number, as is faid ; Whereas, in the Epif- copal Principles, 'tis from the great, or greatefi Number, to One fingh ft 1 Perjort 0£ Queries offered to the %trlont in whom this Power and Authority is monopolized, and who fli% S expreflesit) is xbe Center of Unity, and of all Ecclefuftick a„*» nrkv and Judgment in theChurch, over which he islet. 4v luer Whether the Paftoral Relation and Office imports not an ObliLti™ to perform all Paftoral Duties to the People, to whom the P,ftor ft»nds thus related > And it being evident that, in Epifcopal Principles, the Bifhop is the proper immediate Pajtor cft ai:d {tands m ^Relation unto the whole Vhcefs, having the Paftoral Authonty S& in him,- Oritur, Whether the Diftop affurne. no thus fuch an Office, as Is in this point, contrary to the * oid of Cod? Since r. 'Tis impoffible he can perform all Mimftcnal Pa- ftoral Duties,' fuch as Preaching, Conference, Examination %%'* -F*' to his whole Diocefs, which may confift of many Hundred Parifhes or Flols%hereia Hundreds of Faithful Paftors may hnd Work enough. And 'tis equally certain, that the Holy God ,mPofes not uoon any Church Officer a Work or Duties which cannot poffibly be performed this being inconfiftent with his SpotlefsJuft.ee zfy It is a s clearlv evident, that the Scripture allows no Deputation of the Paftoral Work Jd Duties (to which the Man of God is called ) unto Deputes and Suffragans * God entrufting no Man with any piece of Steward- Sh in his Family, but what he muft overfee and perform immediate- v bv himfelf, and is likewife difpofed and enabled to manage and overtake : Which is evident in this, that God COn,oyns the Office, Gifts and hall, together, for every piece of his Work, which the Man entrufted therewith, and called thereunto, muft himielf immediately Perform and not entruft it to others for him, this being thetalent, of rJ ' tne improvement whereof he is to give an Account to * Mattb 15. the great Mafter and Lord of the Vineyard *. He will - 16 19 once fay to allthe Stewards, Give Account of thy Steward- %Luke 1 6 2 (hip f, give Account of thy perfonal Management and ' ' Faichfulnefs in the Truft committed to thee. And will it be a fufficient Anfwer, think we, that the Steward committed the Management of this Work to Deputes or Suffragans > Remarkable it is that the Apoftle, R*m. It- As, 1. By our Saviour's difcharging Civil Dominion to all Church Officers: the Princes of the Gentiles, fays he, exerei/e Dominion, but it (hall not be fo among you, Matth. 20. 2 j, &c. i. e, I difcharge you, and all my Minifters Civii Rule, or Dominion. This will be conipicuous i£ we confider, that, upon the One Hand, the Prelates do owne Name and Thing of Lordflnp ; And tho' they will needs be diftinguimed from the Temporal^ by this Defignation of Lords Spiritual, yet it is beyond ail psradventure, that, in Parliament and Council, they Ad the Temporal L«rdsy in Official Confuking and Determining in State Affairs, and that of the highefr Nature, as Peers of the Kingdom, (being, in Engl land, Members of the Higher Houfe, or Houfe of Peers j°And we know, that, in this Nation, the Parliament Riding of the Two Arches is before all the Nobility, and of the other Bifhops, before the Vifcounts } ; And, upon the Other Hand, the Civil Power and Go- vernment is, in the Nature'thereof, a Dominion, fo declared by the Apoftle, Rom. 15, I. Let every Soul be (ubjtcl to the higher Powers, &$taim u*ifix$#*i*i VMejfatibus Dominates, or Dominantibus ; So tremeU lias j O:, Jfoteflatibus Supereminentibus, fo Beza. The Evidence of the premifed Texc forces Bilhop Honnie* * Survey 0f man to acknowledge, That our Lord had therein prohibited Naph. Part », Worldly Vomp an d Civil Greatnefs to Church Rulers * ^ And Vag,i$j lal}] if the premifed Inftances will not infer this, and prove Q^ fuch . - Quartet offered to the Wh « ******* and P**P, and bS not fuch i prcbiHtedf^x' rorlilyoreatnejs, furely nothing ; .s f Work f the Mi. v/Ji The great Apoftle of the Gentiles, found h.mtelf fcarce fufficient ?'*': * c,rSz ,6. W. » /<#*»', fti'h hC /*■ '** «""S'- But It feemi Prelate. a« bevond hiS Sufficiency, who are fufficient .to .perform., tje mlflterUl Su to their Diocefs, and to manage* *«•* »«f^A to«*A i Or rather are fuel. Spurious Amph.b.ons as are wholly Client as having neither a Call nor Ability for the one nor the Sff C£ This M^nifterial Work the Apoftle holds out to be of fich. Nature as will take up entirely the Man of God his ttme Endeavour, Studies, E«rdf. of Gfo ;«»*«£, Je ApoftE ha! nrhers we have a notabe Proof, i «'»• 4- »?• a . , V,, Lim /,, exhorted Mt Mt I. « S t^l weighty Exhortation, .. ,%. Mediate upon thefe .to* lf™(%$ ted../. .4, MT. «».«.«*; V;f/'"e;\C'T.,hZfthee' What place i». tia, «i« jfc.A MJ* '»"» '"'* tu. Anoftle when .lere'left ft *- g^^ fift ^ee^oufspi^ and State Confutations, the main Truft of the, *? HP . ,#, The P^mifedu.Siate;m^1,n£n '£!"fi Decla ator and Auerti- ChrifVs Kingdom which, by h» »"" e*p^e Awhotitv and Power on, 7.6. .8. %*>. '• »' •/ '*« "£",' 1 eexerCiftd about ftiap •/ '** thereof not hating for l« °.b>ea> ^//awT MYans of Propagation, rWi. "Tis wholly SW««> « »^ ^ ™ *«™f° Refpe|s> £ immediate Scope and fcnd ^ And gwg. and ^^ ( fc ^know^o by a*! Orthodox )/tis beyond ffif™™^ T^Kinglm Ufe'f, Co the Offi:e> they're mt cf tbu W«U, but, >• * T CSSr-d3 "worldlyXmp of Prelates ftands .AcV^ iSKfe £*»*« and IlluiWg Motive, Prelatifts of SCOTLAND. 309 2 Tim. 2.. %t 4* Thou therefore endure hardnefs as a good Souldier ofjefm €,hri(l. No Man that Warretb entangleth him/elf with the affairs tfthis Life that he may pleafe him "who hath chofen him to be a Souldier. Behold the Bifliop Timstby in his Minifterial Office (landing in a Relation to Chrifb the Mediator of the Covenant, warring a good Warfare under this glorious Captain of Salvation, 1 ¥im. 1. 18. accordingly enjoyned the enduring of hardnefs, joyning Faith and Patience in all the laborious Duties and Difficulties of this Miniftery, and in a fpecial manner exci- ted to beware of that which may indifpofe him for, and weaken his Heart and Hands in this Work, fell, the entangling himfelf with the affairs of this Life ; And the whole preffed with this great Motive, that he may pleafe this glorias Captain, who hath Chofen him to be a Souldier. Here alfo the great Apoftle of the Gentiles, in the premiied Admo- nition to the Bifhop timothy, ftood in need of our btate-prelates cau- tionary Advertifement ,• But the Scripture Canon being herein filent has put to filence thefe State 'Me diets , and forever ftopt their Mouths. Finally, The premifed Civil Offices of Prelats ftand clearly crofs to the exemplary Recorded Practice of our Saviour the Head of his Church, in whom is concentred all Ecclefiaftick Authority, from whom, confequently, all lawful Authority is derived. For we find, Luke 12, 13, 14. that he did peremptorily refufe fo much as to give an Ahvice in a Civil Affair, and that even to part a Strife betwixt contending Bre- thren, Verf. 13. One of the Company faid unto him, Mafier, /peak to my Brother that he divide the Inheritance with me. Now remark our Lord's return, Verf. 14. And he j aid unto him, Man, who made me a Judge or a Divider over you f Behold the enforcing Ground of the Refufal, Who made me a Judge ? As much as to fay, I difown all Judging in Civil Affairs. And if the Glorious Head did thus difown it, how dar his profeffed Members and Officers own it, and counteract his Authority therein? Are not thefe the Servants of Men, net of Chrifl, 1 Cor. 7. 23. Gal.- 1. 10. who dar thus ufurp upon his Authority? Upon this Ground, in the Judgment of the Orthodox, our Saviour refufed to pais the Sentence of Mojess Law, Lev. 20. 10. upon the Woman taken in Adultery, as we have the Hiftory Recorded, John 8. When thefe Adverfaries pofed him with Mofes\ Command in the paiftge premifed, asking him, What fay eft thou ? Verf. y. We find our Lord flighted the Motion, and when he had» by a Convidion, cha&'d thefe Ad- verfaries away, and asked the Woman, Hath no Man condemned thee, Verf. io. Upon her Anfwer, No Man,' Lord, Verf. 1 1. Jefus Jaid unt@ her, neither do I condemn thee. Go and fin no mtre. Now let our Prelats, or 9 Queries offered to the 310 . . . , ,.r„„riie ifthev can, theirOfficial State Imploy- *^W«S?w ^Itb the /remind Seriprntes j And il this ment and Civil G«ndu« w «. P m fc ^ appears> beimpoffibie, " oa'lun/rtu° , as indeed ,iiey ar. ) in fo far tb, ?e" f C 'Il Offi ersofTe Kingdom, of .bis World, not of Chrift> g£5 rf'TU 'toown how this Prance and Medling was condemned £ A, Ancients Whofoever fliall perufethe Canons called Appftohck, »nd vef K^Comment upon them efe the 6. 8, .Alio the feventh of "hi Council of Cbalcedon, with feveral othe.s, will find this eVi^VnbeCde Whether the premifed accounts of the Apoftolick Office and Ingredients thereof, foil, their immlat Call, their /«£r Si /n-ri« as fuch which was to plant Churches through the Work and ^ ' ".^Q^ *, jjoftrine and Rules unto them, InfaUMj ^T peatnTGo'ern Them, as being endow'd with rtfiUk, in »i?LrWith Extraordinary miraculous Gift, abovement.oned, did not fender their Office Extraordinary in a proper formal Senfe and fuch as render inettw / neither their #«*, their G.ft,, Z ir^rl"^ T/thereof could be derived untoSucceffii °nxVITI Suer Whether the Suppofition and Principle of Prelats SuSng^Apoftles, as fuch, and in the f*«m, <**»*» "'" ,,offn(er?he Obligations of Apoftles to have Planted and Ordained Office s to Succeed them of a like Nature with timfelves I And whether SufuPPofed Obligation be not impeached both by then fixing Presbyters or Paftors in the Churches which they planted, as the.r immedia Succeffors in their Minifterial Power, .as alio in committing ,o them th -OUinar? Tower ol Government in their l.ft farewells to the Churches withouf any hint of the Superinftuution of Officers of a HigherOrdTr? ^^S^j, with aj. tPtf.f.a, ;• compared with SPxix ffiin Whether the fuppofed. Prelatical Succeffion will not onlv infer that the Apoftolick Otiicein a formal Senle was Ordinary, bulyiikewife will impeach the Apoftles of Unfaithfubefs in ftmumng their Apoftolick InfpecVion, confequcntly limiting their txtei.i.ve Commiffion, *&*****?**& Thd5 W°/k ^/^nd" U hfrB all the Chur.be., as Catholick Officers thereof ; Tb. I- and Water them through all places, whether they were directed by the Sptr t's immediat Influence ? The Query is inforced further, upon th» Sd That Prelats ate fuppofed to beMh ******* Pfj and fo fixed, that their State, and Relatton, as hkewile then G,f», ™d Prelatifte of SCOTLAND. 3 , , Work is wholly different from, and oppofue to the premifed accounts of that ofthe Apoftles. XX. Oyer. Whether the Apoftles inftituting Deacons in the Church ofjeru/tlem, not immediatly, or Arbitrarily, but upon the Peoples Choife, Acls 6. %. Wherefore, Brethren, look you out among; you [even Men efhaneji Report, full of the Holy Gho[l and Wtjdom, -whom -we may appoint over this bufineft ; To which Command we find the correfpondent practice, Ver(. $. And the faying f leafed the whole multitude, and they chofe Stephen, a Man full of Faith andoftheHelyGhofl, and Philip tjrc. will not infer Church Members Intereft in the Call and Choife of Pallors r Since if this Truft of diftributing the Peoples Alms might be committed to none but upon their Confent and Choife * the Argument appears to run a fortiori, thus, Therefore People have a far greater Intereft as to their Confent and Choife ofthe Paftor, to whom they are, in a Ministerial Senfe, to entruft their Souls conduct to another World, which is of infinite more Worth than all this Earths Treafures * Referving ftiil the Ordination and Inftitution to the Church Officers and Guides, as is evident in the Context, Verf 6. Whom they fet before the Apojiles ; and when they had frayed they laid their Hands on them. The Argument feems further thus ftrengthned, That if for this mean Im- ployment, the Apoftles would not fet apart, nor inftitute the Men, without the Peoples Choice and Confent, far Iefs can it be fuppofed* that they did inftitute the higheft Ordinary Officer, the Paftor, to Offi'ciat in that eminent Office without the fame Confent and Call. Befides what is effedually pleaded from that paflage of -Acts 14. Wherein we Read that the Elders, orMinifters, who were Ordained x*t' hMKtw&v, or Church by Church, were thus Ordained, and fet apart to their Office, as is imported in the Term Xe^Totwam*, impor- ting a Hand- fuffr age % or Confent thereby expreffed ,• And that this- Ordination was to be performed in the Church, and therefore necefTarily with the Peoples Confent and Choife. Befides what we Read Afts r. that the two Candidats for the Apoftolat were Chofen, not by the Apoftles alone, but with Confent and Appointment of the Church, Verf 23. And if a Congregational Church and Elderihip be of Divine Right, as is above cleared, this Call muft needs be their Priviiedge.. And moreover the Spiritual near Relation becwixt the Minifter and his Flock, importing peculiar Reciprocal Duties muft needs fuppbfe a voluntary Confent and Call. And moreover, the Judgment of Difcretian the Spiritual difcerning and trying of the Spirit* enjoyned to the People of *«• **• ,*-,6' h« Proteftant Divines will infer the Divine by mllx, Wb irr-far, < ««d «h« Pr^Cd conftquent!V) Whether Prelate Right of ihe.^Jg* • Evolves them not in the great Guilt of difowning this D.v.ne R.ght^ grower and renders their oppofmg a Church Officer ot uoas iv PP Defealve as excluding, Sndbeingdeft.tuteofaneceflaryM^ & account of the late XXII. 4«>r. Whetl?e;.'n -TLedandfoConftituted, that it was prelacy in «f»^ "l^ welvT*e M«pft«t. difpolal, as is eyi- declared entirely andabioutely at tne r ^^ feveral oth Ar°m cur Divines, particularly by M. r. ^ » 'W 17.8,9,1°. 1 G*r«. Ex»Aa4. comparedwith M«* .«o. n; £« '.Jg,^ xr. So that 3,. 4. and 26. j9- comparedwith 2«*»». 9Mix[ur'e an(3 Confufed rt'eir4 Church Government .« > not of fuel, a U. fl ^ coalefce and be reiolveo int lh. Civil Pope Nature as to Eeclef.anick Members from tM *->'". - onf ence aUo a Dec.f.ve power, /«/. Matters Ecclefiaftick, a"g.°k Ecc\eiUnick Moderator ot diftina Suffrage ^h-" F»„rfraX of The Church Government in Prefident. itj. That this Fountainm go it Government the Civilis crofs to /he D.uma|on of the Go^pe^ g front that ot the Magiftrat, h«ld ollt in the w • 1, Chiift's Prelatifls of SCOTLAND. gi5 i. Chrift's Vifible Church being his Vifible Kingdom as Mediator, its Officers, Laws, and Cenfures muft fall within the Gompafs of his Mediatory Appointment and Infpe&ion, as Political Head of this Kingdom, Stated and Moulded in fuch a Dittinftion, Mattb. 16. 19, 28, 29. John 18, 56. 1 Cor. 12. 28. Epb. 4. u, 12. 2//, The Gofpel Church was compleated as to Rulers and Ruled when no Ma- giftrat was fo much as a Member of her. Yea and 3/7, The Pre- cepts aneot the Exercife of this Power are enjoyned to the Church, ind to thefe Officers as fucbs with the fame Freedom, and Independency upon the Civil Government, as at the firft, without the leaft hint of a Reftri&ion or Limitation in cafe of the Magiftrat's becoming Chrifti- an ; The Grounds in prefling the Exercife of this Power being moral and perpetual, refpe&ing the Church as in that capacity. So that this Eraftian Government encroaches upon ChrifiY Prerogative over his Churchj the Power afcribed, in the late Prelacy, to the King, foil. T§ dijpofe of all Church Meetings and Matters as his Majefly thought fit, being certainly ArchiteBonick, and Magisterial, and fuch a Dominion over her as is the incommunicable Prerogative of her glorious Head, to whom alone appertain thefe high Tides and Prerogatives, That be u given t§ he Head over all things unto theCburcht Eph. 1. 21, 22, That adjudgment is committed to him over herj J.chn 5. 22. That he is tbef Govern™ -over his Church, by way of Eminency, Maith.2.6. The great Shepherd of the Sheep, Heb. 13. 20. The Shepherd and Bijhop cf Souls, 1 Pet. % 25-. That One Mafier over all Church Officers* who are but Brethren, Ma'tb* 2;. 8$ jo. That he is the only Lawgiver, or Statute- maker, to whom alone belong Imperial A6ts of Power, Jam. 4. 12. If a. 32.22. Atts js 2. GaL 6. 2. A third Ground is, That this Eraftian Government makes the Magifirat, as fuch, the proper immediat Subject of the Keyes, which is clearly crofs to the Scripture accounts of our Lord's Donation thereof to Church Officers of his Appointment : Befides many other obvious Encroachments upon the Churches Priviledges ,• Such as deny- ing the Church a ^JLihsny.. to Exercife her Power and Key of Cenfure without the Magiftrat, contrary to all the New Teftament Infiances of this her Independent Authority, inverting the very Nature of her Government^ which is a Miniflerial Stewardship, not a Dominion, fuch as is the Power of the Civil Magiftrat ,• Giving alfo to the Magiftrat, as iuchs ( for King Charles his Ecclefiaftick Government wasEoad^ed as bis perpetual Crown Right, and thus Recognofced by Prelatifls ) the Proper, Sole, Decifive Suffrage in all Caufes Ecclefiaftin cal R r XXIII. Quer. Surla U the Prelafifts ./SCOTLAND. * 4 * <■• ■,:,,„iu,»nt from the Principles and Practice XXIII. C«r. S'nc* '" Xei" ,'y inTeveral late Pamphlets pub- of our Diffentient Prelaws, efpec ally in w Confe{£ons 0f thlf H'\£d ^ Cntc^ W at' AffurVnceycan the People of God have of Reformed Church, vvn i since (h haveexhlbued their Orthodoxy and Soundne,sm ^ but.onthe contrary. no new Confemons whereby tt* m y ^ ^ Confeffions of the have pubhlhd and own a rin p _ »*«&»> /"• M. Antoma Reformed Churches The An ge°fous Opinio^/ iTtoCB* bad afmfulWf- %J Kefides the other horrid Errors Defended hi their thrift andfi-etmf. Betides me f P'"' prelatick Clergy have, to this that Apology. From ^ "oneof «^*a«* ^ g^, ^ as Day, declared their ^^ib^tS^tm Principles and Defign. Homologating tins the^tr Brothers m.lcmev j Ktf„matim The Author of the ^/e £f iX'Ck CaUed the Chriftian Life, „ Lamtntahk Sthifm Dr. » « «, inh»» »J ' ' ftmiu ,nltfta, V„, j Cbaf. 9. Mocks t ^ ^r^lLkn and R^atitn s mar Sf ritual a bU^htmom '"'^Xldlc'd • But when our Prelaws (hall 'Several fuch ^""fm'S n thefe oremifed, then, and not before Rive a fatisfying Anfwer to theie P"™1"' itted'ofthi, Charge of fcall the G^ernment they contend tor be e^«««f *And Contrariety to the Scnprure^itoa ano * praai gaassr *caas rsftCS — * <° ,heir lmpartU1 and Serious Confideration. con: CONSIDERATIONS CONCERNING CHURCH-GOVERNMENT, Offered to their Thoughts who are $#* rious in enquiring into this Point. CONSIDERATION I. R.~ Stillingfleet's Notion, touching the In difrerency of Forms of Church Government, has been juftly exploded and difown'd by feverals who have Wri- ten upon this Subjed, both before and fince his Book appeared, which are well known. Firftt ChrifVs Political Headfhip over his Church Vifible% doth clearly evince this point of the Scriptures Affertton of a Di/tincl Species of Government • In that, i. It follows, that all Ordinances of Doclrine and IVorfhip, confequently of Govern- ment, muft fall under his Appointment, his Commands and Regulations thereanent, and wherein the Scriptures give a diftincSt Sound : Thus Adminiftrations relating to the Key of Order are clearly expreffed, fuch as Prayer and Thankfgiving, i Tim. 2. 1, 2. 1 Cor. 14. 14. Singing Pfalms, Reading, Preaching the Word, 2 Tim. 4. 2. Col. 3. 16. Ephef. 5- 19. 1 Cor. 14. if, 16. Thus the Adminiftration of the Sacra" m&nts, Baptifm and the Lords Suffer, Matth. 28. 18, 19. 1 Cor. 11. 2;. Thus, as the Adminiftrations relating to the Key of Order , fo fuch as R r 2 have . x6 ConttttrtttoHs etnetrmMg Church Governmtnt. r a. t TAMitn fill under dear Inftiiutions, viz. Ordina- te a refpea to * £M&~ Ml ™« „ jet ,ww, in MinifterUl V"!--T,trf-T1oW uVnds4 clearly Exemplified ^ if. Ttw "Kb Judging of Doanneltanos , ^ ^ the c»!'c* Tw7n, TheC ^ .4 compared with Macth. .6. .9. M- Ma"H- ' Thus itfo hlwl !*«*>«". refpeaing *MC jnd^**f« io. 2.. TtlUS;„ffer,ed and Rules laid down refpeaing its Exercife, tM~« .wffe .ed and J ^ f (fc ^ 1 Gor. 14. Ana as foe ^ Jlui;- r|Mr Warrant ; Such as the tahral fluur,, Off:m and C"*"™ ^ * f &c Tog ther with his Duty Off«, SP"-^V-/ra,W z Tint 4. .. Heb.f.va. ^ j Tnel. J. 1*, .'?• "■» " Wherein the DuttaSiiek, ^f"'^*W»* 'A Exemplified See > D,'t/»». Reg. Eccl. « afterwards thereof afcamed ■ *£ ^ rf A £xercife thereofj elude <^Perfea.on of CW *«* J,*,,^ as have a Re,ation to as relpeamg the Intt tut ^ °">- , b inevitable confequence, con- * P««r ./■ °'& «»"«** ainyftitu"fons in point of J«Wi» «••' elude the Pe*a«°» ."V ^ £ ° nu Eternal and Political Senfe called &»«*■ „°aC Pf„ H A no what King is there without a jW .i. Ci„Kb. &-J •• W* *; ^ Anndt ^e? 8m this Senfe r>7. Ex- avowant, and iU»» "P"™*, ,fa £*«,„£„ HrtJf Lawgiver, W ternal and Political > he is called 1 ^ ^ JW<-»>^ Ephef • ''^Vircterci./G^^™. is faid to be upon hi, IV m- £ / That tsur Parted and Exercifed by bin. ; Thus he Confidtntions concerning Church Government* 317 M Girdle, and holding the Stars, that is, the Officers ( confequently: / their Official Exercife of Government j in his Right Hand, 4/7, Hence all A&ings of an Ecclefiaftick Judiciary Power muft be in his Name and Authority as Mediator, Head and King of his Church, which is his External, Vifibte Kingdom. What grofler Imptkantia in Adiefto than to fay, there be Officers of State which H Thieves and Rotters, and Running Vnfent, cannot exped his promifed Bleffing. Fi- nally, all Officers and Offices in his Houfe, are given by him, and by his Mediatory Authority fettled in his Church, Ephef. 4. 8, 11. 1 Cor. 12. 28. they are his Stewards and Emhafjadors, Luke ii, 2 J. with 12. 42. Hence this Donation and Miffion muft needs be in-- ftru&ed in his Teftament} And therefore, by neceflary Confequcnce, it muft give a diftin<5r. bound as to the Nature ot their Office and Offi- cial Aaings, The Perfection of our Saviour's Offices, as Mediator of the Covenant, doth further evince this ♦ His Prophetical excludes all fuperadded Revelations ; His Vriefi/y ail Meritorious Satisfactions and Interceffions, becaufe of the Perfection of both for their proper ends • And why (hall not the Exercife of his Kingly Office, with refped to' the Officers, Cenfurest Laws and Government of his Kingdom, be judged of the fame Perfection and £xclufive Nature ? A Second Ground evincing this point, is taken from the Scriptures Perfection hereanent, and that Judiciary JunfmianaJ ?otver expretfed JSj 1 5. Where we find put forth (uch a Diatottuk, Gritic^&nd Dogma- tic!^ Authority as is faid, and fuch as did Bind the whole Chunk. And certainly, whatever is written, it written for 6Ur Learning, to iniiruct ©ur Faith and Praclice in every point of Duty. This is ^uther clear if we lh=iU confiJer a Twofold General, Extcnfive and Genuine Afpecl of the Scriptures in this point. 1 . That \. [dU(^ fir oltr Uarmni and U- firuQhn, \i% rh tiphffttt J'l^AfM.a^Uv bat likcways and mainly / / *i8 Confiderations concerning Church-Govern menu i * *u- RoMmi and Grounds of this Apoftolick Government. For, as this s the moft F «g« an Py. whether we confider Grounds thereof appeaej-denuy. ^ . 0f Church the Apoftles i*«.*^ ^ ^ immediately from him, Maul,. Government, th '«*"«* . juu Vrtmfe tf hh frefence with tbem, 16.I9.J*-**"- ° ™/* ,|,«, in the Exercife of a ne- '1'^'n^Po'wer for the Churches Prefervation and Edification Ser°^ togetnei compared with ^0/ 2. This it we 2 Vtnd' thafuch Apoftolick Pa.terns amount not to an Obligatory & we w 11 impeach the Authority of other * of MUM received r Zm andbottom'd chiefly on this Foundation of their Prague, from ,th^'J"lbk0churches Reception and Improvement according- ?vnd suct'as re eting teLMtfer on ,*, *„W and fuch like. y/; ^-Fffiracv of the Divinely Infpired Scriptures reaches not only \t ftW&S 'Jrtoft InftruaL in point of Ch^ian Duties i. i-i ifi. ;,, fnecial tbe»an of God, the Mimfter ofGod, or Church Sffi£ t olt of his Official W> and a*r.A.. D«i« * * **« ffiv The Scripture then fetting down all neceffary 0 fieri, tog* f/t wl'h thel G X and J**** and to this end, that they may h ??. r(l«0^ therein fure, there muft be a Species of ftwr.»«. fet ^Bj, tnftrMBed ™*™"' ..V e'nd elfe the Scripture falls Ihort of this d7nan7trp«ffaionhSereof is Impeached. How far the Obligation l^ D vi eeEx"mpte a"nd Scripture Pattern is to be , ««£f ^ u. here inlaraed uoon, only this is accorded by all Sound Uivines, *l}\^?l? ExaS are Oblatory, «** K"°n «nd Sc'K "here,f t" That ff","r]f.£^7''' Mh concernins ,ne cbmim church m another, 'f \ Z'i 1Z'- Such i th 'kLP\e oi the ch»,cb Offer, ./ Co- S I L E^mLiJht'he lnceft,om, left he mould Uaven ibe vbole nnth, in J*}"""*^ „ c.rrlf.ion ' migbt be decoyed, and the sprit ymt, and that *» *** '^e Jn d \be Scripture inftances of this faved « Cf-';,L'f'the fore-mentioned Cwrti and Cfcrc* Julieatoms, fo hav? '^ /I SSS W?fi»« *•» «« C,«^ hdf r°r^hcoVma to have « m j *the 'churches Edification, unul Chnfts cotn- refpecf as Means, unto tne ?B&„ry PM 'h'/utho. gT3*£S &£3$ U but as*, ggg Con/t derations concerning Church-Government. •«$-©-, 1 Tim. 5. 1 7. and ©e>fr*^©-, importing 'alfo Rule and Authority* Rom. 12. 8. that of MvmQr importing alfo Autho- rity, Atls 20.28. Phil. 1, 1. Several other Instances might be given' as that of w?t*0Jttt©-t that of voitfp, &c. Hence the Confequence is clear, that a Government impeaching this Authority, muft needs be crofs to the Scripture Rules. This Argument is at large infifted upon from thefe Titles and Epithets by Proteftant Divines ,• Particularly the Learned Turretin, de Poteft. Eccl. Loco XVIII. $u*jk, 29. Tbef. a proves this Paftoral EJfential Intereft in Government, Quia Tituli quibm Pal fares infigniuntur banc Poteftatem notant cum vocantur ^mth, 1 Tim.$. 17" v&K«{W*t> l *bef- 5- 17- »y«HSW»i Hek. Xg. 17. MfKorti/Acls 2o. z%. wfttupoi, 1 cor. 4. 12. Jit. 1. 7. xy/3«pr««ff, 1 Cor, 1*. 28, And down- ward he mews that this Power, Turn temporis exercebatur a Reftoribut, qua nonfuit tantum circa Pradicationem Verbi, fed etiam <:*>c<*Difciplinam, ut Exempla varia decent, &c. i. e. " That, at this time, this Power * was exercifed by Church Governours, which not only refpe&ed the ' breaching of the Word, but alfo Government and Vifcipline as the vari- - c ous Examples do (hew. ity, The Scriptures holcj out Paftors Exercife of this Official Efantial Government, without the leaft fliadow of a preca- rious Dependence upon a Prelate: This is clear 1 The/. ^ 12. Where it is evident that the xfetsmfMt jointly Laboured, and were accordingly to be obeyed by Church Members, for this their Works fake, both in Preach- ing and Ruling, efpecially iince (v. 14. ) they are exhorted Authori- tatively to warn the Unruly; So that a joint Exercife of Preaching, Ruling, and Cenjuring, is afcribed to the Paftors of this Church without the leaft tant of a Prelate's Superintendent* Thus, Htk, 13, with 7, and 15. v. we S aao Confederations concerning Church-Government. v we find, that Paftors have a Joint Rule afcribed to them over that Church and that in the Capacity of Preachers of the Word, and fuch as irmn-diaHv Watch for Souh, who are again, as fuch, Teachers and Rulert fv 24 ) diftinguilhed from the Saints and Church Members. And ini'Sim 5 *7» the higher Honour above Ruling ( which Epis- copalians afcribVto the Bifhop) is, with the Emphafis of a ^A|fl8j orWi-ty, afcribed to the Labourer m the Word and Doclrme ; ihc Discriminating and Exalting Nature of which Term appears m feveral parallel Texts, as Gal. 6. io. Let us do Good to aU Men, ^Mr* Efreciallj to them who are of the Houjhold of Faith. I Tim. 4, 10. We truit in the livini God who is the Saviour of ati Men, ^'mm, EfreciaUy »f thofe that be- lieve This Efiential Intereft of the Paftor in Government, as the higheft ordinary Church Officer, is afierted by the current of proteftant Di- vines particularly the ProfefTors of Leiden, Difput. 4*. Thef. 2$. After they 'have afferted the Paftor to be the higheft ordinary Officer, ( Thef. to. ] they aflign his proper Work and Duties, fuch as Preaching of the Word, Adminijirathn of the Sacramentsf the fourth and Iaft they affign to be, Potulum freno 'Vifciptin* Eccle/iaflic* intra limit es ebedientia Deo fecundum verbum ipfius debit* continere. i. e. " To keep the People within * the Limits of that Obedience which is due to God according to his * Word by the Exercife of Ecclefiaftical Difcipline, Matth. 18 17, A#; 26, 28, Efhef. 4. 1, ii. Thus alfo by many others, which were need* lefs to rehearfe. . ' The Scripture Inftances of this immediate Exercne ot the Pallor's Jurifdifiional Power, without a precarious Dependence upon a Prelate, are very clear and pregnant, and accordingly improven by Presbyteri- an Writers, yea. and by the Current of Proteftant Divines. The firft I (hall mention is that fore-cited place, ABs 15. Where it is evi- dent that the Elders or Paftors concurred in all that Dhtafiick, Crithk, and *Dogmatick Procedure with the Apoftbs themfelves, who Atfed therein not as Apples, but as Elders^ and as rup*ftff&vnt$i, as the Apoftle Peter terms himfelf, 1 ?et, 5 5 rw Tim t^ul « . ^ notwithftanding, the different Particles, <«w in the fi ft T>« S .h*' in the other, render, a: leaft, debateabie ;, our ArtuL", *■ ■- ftrengthened than weakened / Since neither ?he grKoft I of ^ Gentiles his W « Hands, nor the previous rrZ«™Jrln tZ,?' f G,f„ and S«««/5, did fwallow up, or exclude fhe p£h*« " n ^S but even this Evangelift mud paf through the Door of A ^ ^"' five Ordinate, or laying on of Hands • C, by an Araumenf. ^* •imam, that Authority much more bdongs w ,hem n"? f T' rence to Ordinary Church Officers, when fhe Office of ApX'Sd- Eyangehfis ,s ceafed That other Exception, that the Tern T iw bytery] denotes the Office, not a Judicatory has been alfn ? L 7 expofed, and the contrary Senfe evinced % the Cu "en of nlf""^ ters upon the place • KuMm, Etlm, A&nr P. 1, il J rpJV tUk Divine,, EHglifi Annotations', who oppofe^ he Fourth Cc £*f£ Carthage to this Expofition, and the Pralice of the Kef m£ Ch " i.* to this day WWWWJWI .4 P*rr, jL«|£ r^T^^T Yea even feme Episcopalians. ^h-Bt^poi Spala.o % top kctl f terprets this IWAKfe /s, ^ SSKSSffljKKS *«£ anijmw taw fuch as that of i, ojt /*,;„! "» Jhw? muft needs appear. SenW/j, Becaufe the Word -».c " ' /' nifies the Office, where ic occurs in the N-J t?!^ ""er *£" Parallels, £rf,.a*64 ^S.2i.V TteOffi- 3?n„T,m> C1""3 th« e3 by the Word ^w5f„#) but hew .SeWord H&^VfcK C««. -thirdly, Became wy, Auchorkl was e^rlr ,T u * .couid be called a Presbytera- Cer.a nlv whJn we ±3 ""V Apoftle's planting Pafiors, GA«™& » th^b X hfcLS I- thC Officers, without the leaft hint of { Super-Infti tutlon of o«£dw V higljer Order in thefe Churches, either K fi£ the Denominations given thefe Officers irtiOortiiw ,hh ?>1 lanta,t,°n> thority, the Exempliiing Mances of &&$ jfcg* *£** commanded Exeroje of the fame in the ApoPle's laft 7 ' Farewells to the Churches, as properly and .jlhtiaty * A3, \o ■**' snberen, in their Office *, and without fach „ pZUioZ x cf "ftf Dependence*, is .hedged, the' Ojfci*/ 'farijdiclional Aatho- c.rfhe'rYxT rjty of Pafiors ,n this Conf.ftorial Meeting is moft evi- ,, a*™it' dently evinced. A Third Inftance of Paftors inherent 3' "'*'7•,7• Official Authority in Government, excluliveota precarious Dependence upon \. a22 • Cottftdeutlom comemitig Church-Govermm. upon Officers of a higher Order, is in that pregnant Pafoge, I Cor. $ Where the Power and Authority of Excommunication is found compe- tent to Presbyters or Paftors of that Church, and the Exercife thereof eniovned That this Church was a Pretrial Gburcb, under the In- fne&ion of a Presbyerial AQociated Aiiniflry ' has been made good from the Multitude of Believers in that Church, Ms 18. 7, 8, 9., 10, ri. 7 he thvty of Preachers therein, ( ibidem ) i Cor. ;. 10. 1 Cor. e. t4. From tbs Suhndination of Prophets to Prophets, as to a Judicial Cogmzn.ee upon their Exercifes, 1 Cor. 14, 29. From the intimated plurality of Churches in that City, which, notwithftanding, are pointed out in the Inicrip- tion as one Church in refpea of Government. For, whereas, 1 O. 1, 2. theApoftle talutes the church of God at Corinth, yet, notwithftanding, Chap 14. U. he faith, Let your Women ( of that Church of Corinth, fell.) keep Silence, iv r InxKmoM, that is, the particular Churches under the Aftociated' Government of that One Church. The Exception from Tauh fuppofed Superintending Authority, and previous Judging in this point, has no foadow of Strength againft this Argument : Since, Fir/f, Th« Apoftle blames thefe Church Officers, that they had not, before this Diicovery of his Mind, pa{t this Sentence, and that they faved him not the Labour of thisPretcription of their Duty. SecW/). He writestorhem to put forth this Cenfure, as an A& of their Authority as Officers of that Church not to declare or witnefs what he had done before. Thirdly, v. 1 2, He thus^expoftuhtes, Do not ye Judg them that are -within ? A convin- cing Proof of their Power to Judg and Cenfure all Scandalous Per- fons within that Church, by an Intrinfick Authoiity proper to them as Offi:ers thereof. Fourthly, He calls the Sentence, ( 2 Cor. 2. 6. ) a Sentence, or Vunifoment inflicted of many, viz,, the Church Officers of Corinth not a Declaration of his previoufly pair Sentence. To after t, that Paul's Apoftolick Dire&ion and Infpe&ion in this Matter, is a Handing Pattern of Prelatical Church Government, would plead for a {landing Patriarchal Vrimacy over the whole Church, fince his In- fpeaion reached all the Churches of the Gentiles, and will make his Apoftolick Judging and Dire&ion ( when thus improven ) to nullifie ioQ clearly fuppofed Duties of either Church Officers or Members, as they are reached and fall within the tompafs of fuch Directions* Some Epifcopalians will have the Cenjurhg Power here afcribed to the i>eople,denying any Concern|of Church Officers to be intimated in this Text (a pitiful felf-deftroying Shifc no doubt;. Sometimes this Author rity is by them afcribed to Paul folelyjThus Incidit inScyliam cupiens vitare Cbarybdim. Sometimes the Exemplifying Obliging Influei ce of rhis Inftance is denyed : Shifts not worth the noticing. Here then the bi*b Juyiidiltional Power of Ordination and Excommunication, like the * • ■* ' - Zenith Confidefdtions concerning Church-Government, Zenith and Nadir of Government, is found afcribed to Paftors as in- herent ftanding Priviledges and Duties of their Office, without the Superintendency of Officers of a higher Order. Whence the Argu- ment is clear. Mam Vropofaion. Thefe whom the Apoftles placed as chief in the firft Constitution of the Churches, in order to the ftanding Government thereof, and left as their immediate Succeflbrs in their laft Farewells to the Churches, fuch have no fuperiour Offi- cers to them in this ftanding Exercife of Government, by Divine oc Apoftolick Warrant. Minor, But thus they placed Paftors, Labouring and Feeding immediately in the Word, Doclrine and Government, as their immediate Succeflbrs in this Ordinance and Exercife of Government • And to thefe they committed the Churches in their laft Fare- wells, as is faid. Conclufion. Ergo the Paftor has no ordinary fuperiour Officer to him in the Churches ftanding Government, by Divine or A- poftolick Warrant. The Major is of Undoubted Truth, And the Af- fumption no lefs evident from what is faid on thefe Texts fo often re* cited, Acts 20. 17, 18, a8. 1 p#. ^2, ;, 4, 1 Thef". 5-. 12, 15. The Clearnefs of this Truth forced from the Epifcopal Dialo- gift, the prefent Bifhop of Salisbury *, this broad Con- *€onfer.d. feffion and yielding of his Epifcopal Caufe, viz,. Since ^.510.2 ir] the Sacramental Actions are the bigheft of Sacred Performances ( he might have added the Offering, as Embajjadours for Ghri/?t and in his fie ad ', the Word of Reconciliation ) he cannot but acknowledge, that juch as is as are impowered for them, Mufl be of the higheft Ojfice in the Church. CONSIDERATION III. TH E Grand City of Refuge and Fort-Royal of Epifcopalians againftwhat has been offered, viz,. Timothy and Turn's [uppofed Epifcopacy over Ephefus and Crete, appears, when it is tryqej, to be a lowing Wall and tottering Fence ; And that upon thefe Grounds, 1. That both the one and the other were Evangetijis, and held an ExJ traordinary Offi-e, now paft off with that firft Exigence of t[\e Church.' It were eafy to produce a Cloud of Witneffes of Famous Proteftant Divines to Patronize this AfTertion ,• Whoever mall read Commen- taries upon that Paflage, [Do the Work of an Evangelifk~] will find this evident. Judicious Calvin s Senfe of the Office of an Evangelift, is, That Inter ApofioUs & Defines Vaftorcs medii erant ; Munus enim Mant Apoftolis proximum, ut paffim Evangelium pradicarent, ne prafi ' erentur cert and ET-ngelito who attend, ™ •„ Thf nlantint ot Churches; The rerpetual Officers ed on Apcftles in the p "^ A ^ mJ Jhcli eafiIv ad. '°rS ;£2£*3, as i.e.* P^»» t" Two UnWerfi- L, it is hoped, will ; make up Two Famous .W«f / *2W ««■ ;^^"K *H Thatof^lh II .«*M* .s'°^ee; ^ affert£d *'the Extraordinary nctl.t*g,m. After t h ey n« EtttngeMs_ from EJ,ib,/:4. Af- || »*£* Office » o^ j« ■«> * ;, office g J t/ie4hi ,,eft "^5 rf'SSfi, tiding Fundus it, the Church f • + nr 20 Thereafter they thus defcr.be the Evangel, ft s Of- t i,'i ,' fire II- IvtntdWum allien* Scripnrei Hijhn*Ev*a- •. • , r 1 •«• V; •• Some of the Evangelifts were Writers of the *'* **• £ f;nel concernins the life and Death, tne Words Hiftory of the Gofpeh conce rmng Iiw|, was • and A* of our Savour Jdw u. fa { d „ d Then;for the one of fuch,or that the Te.mcano- tn Em»«//«b» ma cum other fort, thus they proceed ; M' *» *P. " ^ ajji cum ij*i ad Tempus < N B . j «r»« ^ £' itw ^ »,<(« «M»t Barnabas Syhis, Tin otheus v 1 „ 'J . e cafled by tne c ttmotbem and T"«* » 10 Trr '-„„ a,,. Hearlv the Evanee hfts Pla- « Difciples may be added. A to ng th u. ctearij he t g a fij£ d netary Fundion and Motion, hke that o« aPo Snperimen- Prertdency over any panicolar Church, » An^ *"™ei orPf0r fome dency o/e,any one Church Jgg*»^gX»SSo this Fun- * m ,i Z^hey^K^Panors ^"ggg Confederations concerning Church Government. 32c Dilfen fat ores certh t Ecchfis (N.B.) docendh ac regendis *b Apofali, & Evartgeli/tts prafeclt, quorum Opium dejcribitur, A&. 20. t Tim 2 Tit 1 M^w' J fV"/?" '^ rail°rS *ereDi*P^rs, or Preachers' of the Word of God, fee over fome particular Churches by Apples and Evangehfis, for Teaching and Governing the fame, whofe Office is defenbed, A&s 20. ( as .,bove ). Thus averting, I# The iHentirv of the Biflu>p and Payor's Office. 2/7, Paftors Equal Official In te eft in Government, as well as in Preaching the Word. %ly Their be ii.g .affigned to fixed Stations and Poiis • In tWlSi diftinguiiW them from Evangelifts, who had no fiich fixed Station. ■ I he fecond Witnefs 1 offer is the Univerfity of Saw mer * : Having f propofed the Objedion upon Jerom's *Syni. mf. rhcol Teftimony on Chap 1. of the Epiltleof Tiiuo, viz. That iaA^(t».salm.Dg upon occafion of that Schifm of one Perfon's faying I £pirctp' Prts- Dl' am of Pauly and another, lam of Apolo. It was Decreed """'***' 3°2" that an Epifcopa! lnfpeclor foould be fe'e up||, Refponder'i I r *9' poffuntfiay they) duo if>rimum,Tuum&Timotheum extra n* 3°' Ordincm (N.B.) * Vmloconfiituto, efeadEcclefiarum illarum con(litutienem & ardmattcnem, utt tttamfan (olet in civili faUttia^uki prater & Jupra Ma£iflra. tus Oromartos uutbut dtmandatum tjf oppidorum municipiorum vcl FrovLci* Urdmanum Regimen, conilituitur aUyuis ad tempus ( N 8 ^ cum m*jore.& emtnentiore pote&ate lVA rf auW* *iu$»n mi de Tito ' Jlpodol hie loquitur. i,e. Two things may be Anfwcred : The 1 TW Timet*, and titui were by P**/ extraordinarily appointed for the Ordenng and Confuting thefe Churches, as" the^afefc ufoa in Civil Policy, where, -over -and above the Ordinary Magics to- • whom is committed the ordinary Government of the towns and Cities or of the Province there is fome one Perfon fee apart and Au Jl nzed# for a time for the right Ordering of fomethings That ^ are wanting, as the Apolile here fpeaks concerning Titus. Hence thev draw this Inference, Si quid Ergo illi. habueruntautoritatis&vrJrTj Uvajupra rdiquos Ecclefix Vresbyteros, id non b.butrunt ( N.B ) ex lfrQ Ordinano, utTiUd ferfetuum efiet in Ecckfia- Sod hatmfunt ( N B ) tanuuam Evangel,?*, five finguUris Apofioii Pauii AduiHiM a quo buc& illuc extra ordtntm mittebantur, ad Eulefiamm fiat urn bone & ]Lit * j«* V?* tT\e' tl A al tbi*g< a, their «*. figure ; Or with the LAcnm ZiJumorUcntiaoiy.S'serpriamc Bilhop . «* }?. They put fheQueftmn to the Patrons of Prelacy ( g EpH^mUinnu ^rert lliiim? upon Suppofition of thofe Evargehfts Sole Epilcopal Towe?and Governmem, *U *?»> «?*■*** ^'^"'""/^T" Whit need was there of a College of Wesbyters .d,oyned to them Thoft Counfel or Cohfent they might ufe or fight at their pleafure f F^or thus (fay they ) fuch a Perfon were not a P. (for or true _B.lbop, {M&3TS WeftSSft Lerend Unities Preshvterian Judgment and Principles in this point. ?he Famois and Learned JKwr Anfwering Bale* the Jefuit, ufing the fame A^aument for Prelacy, from ««./*; and T,W s Pre-eminency the lame Argument t nr .^ .^^ th , the Bjftops * Cat. Orrt. Power over them in Government * thus propofes the It* a Caa/f. Proteftant Churches Reply. Sat* «„» .»/araw a1*..^ ,. .« 282 tern fupra ftrfeaMi «a «• SaJlitntM ap?a««, JedauihmMcm Evanselifrx aaVom & <*«'« ##°lU> '"" *"' : S" T'r f7 jT"" «L?N B > Exrrao.dinariam, munus aafanaMss E«Upf~J«»«m „L, internum *ir>«#«a..*ra»J/«-aat«r. ,. «. .rh'' f ° .™,e'r • D gnity abwe thePal\prs or BifcoPS «"«'«"* by them be evident «ve -hit Aa mritv Which the* had above others, thev had it not as ; Pallors, or slop's, of any pirtieular City, but becaufc they were Ccnjiderdtions concerning Church-Government. o27 f alfo Evangelifts, Coadjutors and Affociats with the Apoftles in their * Work : Tims by an Extraordinary Delegation, they Exercifed a 'Fun&ion, appointed for laying the firft Foundation of the Church, f But fo it is that fuch Fun&ions as are Extraordinary and Limited to ' a certain time, can be devolved upon none by Succeflion. Here is the Solid Anfwer and the Foundation thereof offered by Presbyterians fo clearly aflerted. as there needs no Explication to difcover the Nerves thereof, timothys Extraordinary Funftion as Evangelift is laid as a Foundation to infer the Abfurdity of a fuppofed Succeffion therein • And it is remarkable that this great Divine propofes this, as the Prol teltants Anfwer to Papifts, with whom he is here dealing, and the Senfe of the Proteftant Churches in this point. Thereafter he {hews that no fuch Mandats were given to either of them, as to receiving Accufations againft Elders or Presbyters, and correcting Defers, as did encroach upon the Collegiat Authority of Paftors, fluo Vresbyterii corpus excludatur ■ ; Or, whereby the Body of Presbyters is excluded ; Which he compares to fuch a fallacy, as if, from the Command given to JoJhua*y Not * Chap, r. to turn ajide from tbs Word of God to the right or left Hand, ver. 7. 8. one mould conclude, that this Duty belonged only to him. ltaq;non fequitur, ( iaith he ) Timotheo & Tito hoc mandat 5 Ergo Soli Timotheo & Tito. "Such things were enjoyned to them ' refpecting Government j Therefore to them alone, fecluding Pa- * ftors ,• He holds, with Presbyterians, to be an Unfound, Abfurd confequence. The fecond Ground which I offer, to Raze this Refuge and Subter- fuge of Epifcopalians, taken from Timothys fuppofed Epifcopacy, mall .be offered from the many Circumliances of the Sacred Text, and the Nature of thefe Epiftlesthemfelves. Firfl, This fuppofed Epifeopacy is confuted from fevera! pregnant Paffages in thefe Epiftles : As, r. That their Tranfient, Occafional Imployment in thefe Churches is clearly aflerted m both the Epiftles j Wnich doth contradict a fixed Infhiment, 1 Him. 1. 5. I befou^ht thee ( faith the Apoftle ) to abide JliU at Ephefus, whin I went into Macedonia; that thou might charge fomt that they teach no other Doctrine, &c- Had the ApoftJe Inftalled him as Biihop there,he would not have pointed out thus an Occafional Transient Ground 'of his abode at Ephefus; Nor would there have been any need to bejeecb him to abide at that Seafon, but the Apoflie would have bid as fevere a Charge upon him to profecute the Dudes of his fixed Station in that Pofr, as he doth in point of his Preaching the Gofpel, 2 Ejti/lie, Chap. 4- «* r. And none can deny that this Paff.ge and Preface in the hrft Epiftle, was the proper piace for pointing at his-fixed Inftaiment, if s an'/ 43 Co^^ommctrmngCynh.QmTnmm. ' ^ . u j u„„ The fjme nvw/fc"' f>«>» we find afteried as td anyfuchhad been. ^'"W^, 7 ^ as „.„, ofc G4,?. I. f. Br ,hu "••! mentary beyond the hr.titanc^ both ^ ^•rt .APTb«*Tr f 9, T^isenjoyned to come (hortly to ^ tJltil Zr £ T us alfo XW, «,?. ». .2. is enjoyned to c,me tPo? e'Apoft'le to Ni«f««< with all diligence, wbtn Arums, or come totne Apj-nciu r Reafon is the more forcible, in that *J'T naf them Is o'nd J h.ve ever returned .0 thefe plac s again, neither of them is to una 10 1 ^ „, prefent abode, or Imployment. ^A^At^^Xo^<* - Bilhop and Presbyter ;. In thele Ep files them leiv es in d d t the Ordination is clearly Identified, and n° R"'"Zve "he Faftor ; Which were a or Qualifications «J%0&f^^ Scope of tU Epirtles, if IheXbUfcin^ wifeWd«ohH«h,.Grf '^ °«?o££Ko Prela.ical Domi- fr«t/rer/, I Tim. 4. M- A_ <> tn6 h h d j told that the zv;%£m& &&& ** g*5 »«--»*- °» Honour above * R.fcr -«. ^h^^fi^V, 'who under clearlv preferrs the Pr««W P.lV„K/y for his Work and has no that Reduplication, as Prelat, ^'^dXL; And what he Obligation on h.m to Feed any F lock by Doc tr , ffiW«Z»K3 Gralt ' ^-^is^fed J, Apoftle Pol ( another high P««nded lie tool ttmop , Work, yet pronounced a #"» «/»» W Aas f9- 22- t0 the 4o. Whence he returned to Macedoma and through it to Afia, accompanied with timothy and others but never to Epbefus again, tho' to many other Churches to" strengthen them, fuch as Macedonia, Thejfalonica, &c» -• Secondly, As this groundlefs Fancy of limotbf* Prelatical Inftalmenr ' is thus convicl: of Falfhood from the fubjea CvSiertiiM «"«**** Chmh-Gmtfimnt. " ,, . i .1,. Prv-Ole to die Ephcfians, nor in the Body of the EpJWs, or the V ?***<$& ^4 notwithft.nding of the f j.,**, che «•»?•***?? $bn» and Scores of a Gofpel Miniftery, Agile's ^J^oaU™ dely he Strength of this Argument, they Cb,f. 4- « EP^c2Hsine tlr" Proteltant Argument againft a Pope, ot muff beware of infiing ing tl 1- 1 rorei 6 the Rom^ Bi;h0p «f R^from,'l\r[SfurdConVequence following on this To which may be ^$™$*£m Apellate, and fM*Jhm CONSIDERATION IV. Th p r F is a pitiful Evafion fome of the EpifcopaUans make ufe HtE ;?(> what a ledg'd of Paftors immediat Effent.al Intend of agitnft what is aliens ft,,,}™* in ^ ir. To our Lord Jeiiis, denoting his Authority Paiforal, John 10. ir. CONSIDERATION V. Vpon the Point of Antiquity : And, firfi, touching Eufebius / Hiftory. TH E Defe&ivenefs and Maim'dnefs of this Hiftory is generally acknowledged by all the Sound and Orthodox. The Author himfeif, Lib. i. Cap. 4. aflerts the Difficulty to find out who Succeeded the Apoftles in the Churches, unlefs it be thole mentioned in the Writings of Paul. So that the Author himfeif renounces all certainty in this point, but what is drawn from Scripture : And no wonder, the Man coming at 300 Years diftance after the Apoftolicfc times, and grounding only upon the Hypothecs of an uncertain T t z €kments 532 Con/tderations concerning Church-Government. Clemint, and the as uncertain Commentaries **$&**'* .^V* this Ground ( as is touch d m the i ft. Part ) St tiling fleet * Irenic* himfelf * " derides Eu\ebim\ accounts in this point, as to. 296,297. ' making the Tradition of the Church our Rule to In- * terpret Scripture by j A bending of the Rue to the < crooked Stick j A making the Judge ftand to the Opinion of his - Lacquey what Sentence he (hall pafs upon the Caufc in Qutfti- con *£* Not only he. but other Famous Divines have mdde good crofs Errors and Defeds in his Hiftory : DidocUve, Reel. Infiruend. Hierarch. Bijh. have exhibited Teftimonies to this t Vrohzew purpofe. Scalliger t tells us, "That Inter vdlumiUud, ■hi Uron Eu- ' ab ultimo cafite Attorum, &c. The Interval from the MX « laft Chapter of the Acls of the Apoftles, until the • midft of the Reign of Irajan, in which Tra& Quadra* 'tus and Ignatius Flouriihed, may be call'd with IW Um», or ob- ■ fcure • Wherein nothing that is certain of the Affairs of Chrifhans is *■ come to our Hands, except fome few things which Heathen Writers 1 catch up obiter. Tshn himteil, a great Pleader for WCont.i.Cap. the Epifcopal Caufe, yet acknowledges ||, "That 2. Not. 59. » t|ie Hiftory of thefe times hath great Blanks and Gaps, * which the fpurious Siemens and other Writers of the fame Stamp fil- * led up with petty Fables drawn from their own Brain. * Cap.$.Not.6. He tells us a]fQ *} «« That from the end of the Afts of the c Apoftles to the times of Trajan, vix aliyuid certi exjlat, i. t. There is 'fcarce any thing extant in Hiftory that is certain, and that thereafter, * muidlibet audendi &ccnfingendi arrepta occafio amah feriatis bominibus, &C. ? Nothing being certain in thefe times, Unfound, Unworthy Perfons 'took the boldnefs and had occafion to feign what they pleafed. 'Meredith Haumer, an Englijh Doctor of Divinity, who, Anno 1619, Tran- flated Eujebius, Socrates and Evagrius's Hiftories, in his Preface to the Reader, Charges Eufebiut with Crookcdne[s of Style, with ImpcrfeB Allegations,, and tells us, he is \urey no Reader is Jo Foolijb as to Build upon the Antiquity and Authority of thefe HiHories. Much more might be added, but let the reference to the Authors mention d fuffice in this point. Secondly For Ignatius'/ Epiftles. THIS Point of thefe Epiftles has been largely fcann'd. We may, for Brevity, refer the Reader to that which is clearly made good in three diftind Se&ions in the Nazianzeni Querela Part 2. Wherein, /in the fiift Hypothecs, it is mads good, that Ignatius is at beft inter- folattJL Confederations concerning Church-Governmnt. 222 polated, Sed. 2. And the Exception of Dr, Vearfon and others remo-" ved. Inthefecond Hypothefis, Sett. ;. It is made appear, that the Antiquity of the true Ignatius could not JeCure him from all Lapfes or Efcapes norferve to prove that there were no Veclenfion in his time. In the third Hypothefis, Seel. 4. It is made appear, that there is no real Difagreement hut a true Concord betwixt the Vottritte of Ignatius, and that of the prefent Presbyterians. In which Author it is alfo made appear, that not only VaSyt but Monfitur L' Arrow's Vindication, has fully removed what has been alledged by Doftor Pear/on. Stiliingfleet profeffes, pag. 300 " Ttiat in all the 35* TefKmonies produced out of Ignatius' for Epifco-' 'pacy, he can meet but with one which has the leaft femblance of 'Truth, fcil. Epi/t. ad Ephef, Pag. 19. Votfii, the Senfe whereof he notwithstanding undertakes to /new that it is miftaken, I need not infift in (hewing what Rivet in the Critica Sacra,. Videlius and others have Animadverted upon thefe Epiftles, Stiliingfleet, Pag% 298. ac- counts, together with Scaliger, " The time wherein Ignatius began s to Flouriih, A mere chaos of time, filled up with rude Conceptions e of Papias, Hermes and others, who? like Hannibal, when tbey could c not find a way through, would make one either by force or fraud. * He charges- the very Story of Ignatius as none of the moft probable,' ' and his going fo long a Journey to Rome to be Martyred there, as 'apparently fi&itious, fince the Pre/tdes Provinciarum Execute the * Laws againft Chriftians at their own Tribunals : Efpecially his many ' and ftrange Excurfions by the way, he fhews to be a piece of Story * contradicting his own accounts of the Souldiers cruelty to him • E Telling us further, that thefe fabulous Narrations, through the Defect ' of fuffici en t Records, make it evident, How incompetent a Judge € Antiquity is to the certainty of things done in Apoflolick times. Others add further Evidences, viz,. " That Trajan could not be c fuppofed to be at pains to guard him fo long a Journey thither as * ixomAntiocb to Rome, afcer his Condemnation there, fince there w'ere c fuch Spe&acles enough to entertain the People with at Rome. And if the terrifying of die Roman Chriftians by the Death of fuch a Fa- mous Biihop be alledged ,• It is eafily thus retorted, that the Ernpe- rour could not but fuppofe, that the Refolucion of fuch an one as Ignatius would rather encourage, than weaken their Confidence. Among other Fabulous Pdflages afcrib'd to Ignatius, that mentioned by Socrates, Lib. 6. Gap. $, is remarkable ; Who Ihews, That the be*. ginning of the Antiphones was reported to have come from Ignatius, whicb^ they f*id, he had revealed to him. by Quires of Anvils, that ujed to dejcend *nA §inl tk* ?(aifes °t the H»h Trimiy, It were tedious to &ew the large 354 fjl|6illtiH' cOMCcrrnvgChurch-Government. fcrs* aftd clear Teftimonies brought from CicuMfli Roman* for the Identity of Birtiop and Presbyter, and Presbyteries Divine Authority in Government, in Oppofuion to what is al kdg d of Ignatius. He mews, how unworthy a thing it was to hear, How the Ancient and * Firm Church of Corinth, for the fake of one or two Perfons, mould ' raife a Sedition againft the Presbyters ,• And pleads.that the Flock of ' Chiift may enjoy its Peace with the Presbyters which are Jet over it ; c T ''sat the Apoftle^ forefeeing there would be grea,t Contentions c-bout 'the Name of Epifcopacy, Ordained their full Fruits to be Biihops « and Deacom of thofe that mould believe. And the fell fame Bifhops ' he calls Presbyters in feveral places. See Epifl* Grac. hat. Pag. 54, 9 r, ' c6 C7 &c Thus, 69, 7?. lf the not citing of the Paiiagcs im- mediately from the Authors be aliedg'd, as Come have done hi the point of hnativs Epiftles ,• It may be asked, how many Tianlcnpts have come from Ignatius9* Autograph > And through how many Hundreds of Ye'rs > And what greater Certainty there is of their being tinted to the" Autographs, than that the prefent Citations are correfpondent to the prtfent exiftent or beft Copies I Upon a Review of two Copies now by me, ( having a conliderable time fmce taken lame View of hnatius ) I find that which is imputed to him truly fuch. It were iuperfluous to cite all the Paffages which a View of the Copies oftt- dJius, Voffins, and even that per Martialem Ms Mire Epijcopo, & in* nuh illi refragars I Whiui none will deny to be crofs to that limited Obedience which the Scnpmre Conjf derations concerning Church Government* % 5 - enjoyns to be given by Children to Parents, who are commanded to obey them in the Lord only *. He cites * Eph 6 i1 alfo the Epiftle to the Phihdelphians, wherein it is affir- * med, that fuch as belong to Chrift, are united to the Bifhop, fuch as are not, are curfed, %m x?,^h(rhhoi ^7* t« bme*»™ 1*1*, &c% ' Quotavn funt Chnjh, funt pertium Epifopi, iaith the Tranflator. What Ceniure ■ this puts upon the Reformed Churches not united to the Bi/hop is evident enough. In the Epiftle to the Magncfians, cited alfo by the Dodtor, he commands Obedience to the Bijbop and to the Presbytery As likeways, in the Epiftle to the IraUians, he enjoyns Suhjettknto the Presbytery, as U the ApojUes of Jefus Chri/ft and calls the Presbytery wvt^m ©e* £ ffwJittpv AroroA«F xp/r». Which PaiTages contradid the Epifcopal Swtiie of the former, or impute a Contradiction to Ignatius, All which, with many other things,which might be adduced, viz, Seals' g er's Obje&ion againft the bringing of Ignatius to Rme .our of : Syria • That the Provincialis Magiftratus de Chrifliano [upplicium fumebat • An- fweringthe Objection, Srymj dixerit fuiffe civem Romanum ; To' which he gives this Return, Civem Romanum bejtiis eftcere von licehat; Thefe, I. fay, with many fuch Teftimonies which might be adduced,, do fuffici- ently overthrow this Argument from Ignatius'* Epiftles. Thirdly, For the fuppofed Catalogues of Bijhops pom Apoftles and Evangelijh 5 THEY are found fo ftiatter'd and inconfiitant one with another and their Expreffion of Bifhops, of fuch a dubious Signification* that no Man of Senfe can lay weight upon them ; As hath been iufficienrly evinc'd by Presbyterian Writers, Vidodave, Pag. ii9s lzo Hi, hath, from feveral Learned Authors, difcovered the utter Infuf*- ficiency of Eufebius's^ Relation hereanent. Speaking of Eufebius he faith, iCatalo^us Eufebii Epifcoporum feriem nobis exbibet, non tdmcn Epif- coporum Judicittm & Princiftum, yuijingularem habet Potefiatem & Ma)o- ritatem Poteflatis diftcTtvc, & Corrective in Presbyters & Gregem • Quod traiprobandum. Epifcopi Vocabulum audio, Jed Officium & Vote fiat em Di- rettivam &Correttivam non audio. Eauivosalii eft in nomine Epifcopi. De* tur fuiffe Epifcopm. ejuos recen/et Eufebius, pcculiariter & Autonomaftice fie dittos f»i§e mnfefStur. Detur Autonomaftice ftc dittos, non fufuitur Epi/cc- fes JudiceS 'fuiffe cum & Pra fides itidm Autmomajiice & jeculiariter dicli funt Ejijcopi. Which is in fumrn, " That there is an Equivocation in g the Name of Bifhop in theie Catalogues, and no fuch Directive and u Correclivs Power ove* Paftors and Flocks afsribed unto then), as ' tfesfe 22(5 Corfderatiotts concerning Church Government. ' thefe Catalogues are adduced to prove. That granting they were • Bifhops whom Eufebius names, it will not prove they were Bifhops in ' a Prelatical Senfe, or properly and peculiarly io called • Yea, grant- • ing they had been thus called, it will not infer, that they were 1 fuch Bifhops as are Judges in a peculiar Senfe, fince Prefidents have 4 fuch a Name peculiarly attributed unto them. He afterwards adds, Pag. in. DeLino, Cleto, Anacleto, Clemente, qui in Catalog* Romz* norum Epifcopsrum po/t Petrum numerantur, tanta efi fententiarum varietas, quis, cui, & quo ordine fucceforit, ut conciliari nuVo modo petfit. Cleti nu(- quam, n<«ue Irenes, neque Eufebius meminerunt. That there can be • no Reconciliation of the different Judgments concerning thefe PerJ c fons who are rehearfed in the Catalogues of the Roman Bifhops after c Peter. That Cletus is made mention oi by neither Irentus nor Eufebius. Thereafter he mews the Caufe of the Error, from the *Contr.Lih.%. Learned Frdncifcus Junius *, Errors caujam fr*buit tjued Cap.f. Not tiS. Epi/copus non unus primum in EceUfiis erat, fed multi Jimul frterant, qui "Epijcopi Jive Presbyteri ab Apc/lolis difti funt, &c. " That the Caufe of this Error in the inconfiftent Catalogues • of Bifhops, was, that there was not one only Bifhop of the Churches, ' but many at once preeeeding, called by the Apoftles Bijkop* or Pr*/- f hjteri \ Who(e Times of Death or Martyrdom being kept in the '■ Churches Records, and publick mention made thereof for up- {lining ■ of others, thefe Catalogue Drawers put them, in order to the filling 1 up of their Tables of Bifhops, into their Rolls as Succedaneous, &e. The Learned Bucer, in his Differtation on Church Government, " cha'lenges any to make appear, that any one of the pretended Bi# ■ fliops of Rome, in this mattered Catalogue thereof, did prefide over ' the Church of Rome, indar Epifcopi &ta*iiTi*»s apfellati, or called fo by • way of Eminency, or in a Prelatical Difcriminating Judicial ' Senfe Didodave has three Obferves on this point of the Succeflion of Bi- fhops in'the Writings of the Ancients. Primo, A Majoribus abjc/ue de- letlu & examine multa acceperunt, &c. %< That the Ancients, without f Examination or Trv.-il, having, from their Progenitors received ' Fabulous Stories, delivered to Pofterity fuch things, as can neither • be reconciled to Scrip:uje nor with themfeives Setundo, Ut labulas Succtjfionum ab ipfis Apojhiorum temporibus dcducerent & retrociora Jecula ad fua conformarent, &c. " Toat they might fill up their Tables of Bi- • mops, and conform the Firft Ages to their own, they culled out the •moft Famous Minifters for Zeal, Piety, &c. and put them into . • their Catalogues. Tertio, Q»er/i Jeligtrunt & Catalog infer ipferunt, peculiariter Confederations concerning Chnnh-Qovernmenu ff^rU»& Autonomaftke, (exundum moretn (ui feculi Epifcopum nominafuZ &c. * Whom they thus.put in, they called them Bimops, in CoS formity; to their own Times, tho' they were meer Presbyters This he proves afterward from fome Paffages of Irtndm datum, and no Veftige of it appearing, certainly it could not fub* - flit at ferufalem. Aratrum M imprejjum, faith he, a Mufoneo Tynheno PrafecJo Munitionum, &c, " That a Plough being drawn over >he ^ place of the City by this Mufoneus, not only was there no City exi- .ftene there, Mut after it was truis plowed up, Nmini licutrat illi (oh velcajam f«per0rttens None might fo much as build a Cottase there Yet, notwithftanding Enfibius numbers Bifhops until that Subverfion of it which it fuffered by Hadrian, The fame Diverfity appears in the pretended Succeffion of Bifhops in the Church of Antioch, as in that of Rome, ome placing Evcdms, fome Ignatius, as the firft BifhoD - Whereas they were both Collegues in that Church, and becaufe of their Moral Eminency, thus placed by the Catalogue Drawers Blondel mews, that tho' the firft Churches were govern'd by the common Council of Presbyters, yet the Line of Succeffion was drawn from the ^or^jiform^ the firft Ordained Minijler, as among the At heal* ans% tho there were Nine Archontes or Chief Ruhr s in Athens, yet the Succeffion of Governors was drawn from the firft Arch on or Ruler not to impeach the Authority of the reft, Sed m compendiotor *c minu* impeatta efet temporum enumerate, faith the Author, to make thg Rechmno- the more compendious. In the fore-cited Appendix, there is a "iar^ Ac count given of this confuted, contradictory Mould of the Cata^ueV Clemens is afferted by fome to be firft Bilhop of Rome after Peter 8>n£ fay, that he was the third. Tnm is made Bifhop of Crete likeways bl fome, and Arch-Biihop by others, BiOaop of Dalmatia by a third Tore Timothy and John are made Bifcops of Epbefus at the fame time. p0fc carp by fome is made firft Bifticm of Smyrna, by others made to fucceed one Bug Jlu,, fome allcdgmg alfo, that Arijio was firft, &c. In a word the Catalogues refolving into Apoftles or Evangelifts, who could' not be fucceeded properly in idem offiemm, this pretended Draught of Succeffion is nothing elfe, but (as the Poet expreffcth it) bumaua capiti cervtcem pingsre tquinam. ' Hmm?"*. U u l&rtblf, 55B Conjsderations concerning Church-Government. Fourthlv For thefupposd Condemnation of Aerius upon the Ground ofhh Judgment, Z to the Identity of Bifiop and Presbyter. Tot; Notion and Fancy has been abundantly expos'd and dif- nrov'd by Presbyterian Writers The Learned Dr. Reynolds, in his Epiftle to Sir Francis Knouls, hath made it appear, out ot Cbryfoflom, Hierom, Amhrofe, A»g*fim, Thecdoret, Primes Sednliu, ^EltLZh that Bifhops and Presbyters are all one in Scripture, and ^Atol^dTmoic be juftly condemned for Herefie, on this Ground of holding Bifhops and Presbyters to be all one than all thefe Urounaomo ^^ ^ whom agreej [aith ht, Oecumemus and *Pa? 216 Anfelm, &c Any that will read VidocUve *, will L-/J& V-a. find this purpofe largely profecuted and this pitiful 7?,c2;r?4 Obieaion baffled. The Learn'd Whittaker f, tells us, oLft i. CafZ that Cenfit fane cum Aerio Hierony -mui ,«». mmMs man- s,a Vn dum efi toties nobis ohjici Acnum ab mjulfis bomtmbus : St Z frit in bac re Heretics Aerius (ocium Herefeos Hieronymurn hahuit nee iUm modo, fed alios etiam veteres Patres, Grids fartter & La- tils « That W was of the fame Mind with Versus, and therefore « i matteTs no{ Zt Ignorant Blockifi Men do objecl Aerius : ft upon •ihUGronn3r * ™ an Heretick, he had W alfo an .AlTociate m • rhS Herefie and not W only, but other Ancient Fathers both this Herehe, aim n^ ^ ^.^ Nay even ^.^ Mdi*^ms *Lib 1 Reding this*, that a of Heretick did reach; Yet doth acknowledge *, that W« *9. there is no Difference by Divine Inflitution betwixt Bifhop and Presbyter. It is alfo obferved by Judicious Mr. Durham on the Rev. t, j. p A in his Digreffion upon this Head of the Identity of T £' zz6$ Angel, Bifhop and Presbyter, w That who confiders 227' ' the Rolls of Herefies fet down by thefe Fathers, will find, that often * fuch are reckoned amongft Hereticks, who rather * ought to be accounted Schifmaticks ; And that even * Lib. 4, * Efiius * acknowledges, That none of the Fathers con- tag* 2,5. * demned him, for denying the Diftin<5Hon betwixt Bi- * (hop and Presbyter to be Jure Divino. So much mail fuffice for In- formation anent Ae'rius* Let me add in a word, that Do#or Blondel hath made appear, that, in the firft purer Age, the Church was governed by Presbyters with- out Biihops ; Wherein alfo he hath made appear the Confent of the Learned, For this Church of Scotland, we have the Teftirnony of Joannes Major * of Fordon f, likeways * De Geft. of Blondel [|, and others, all ftiewing, that this Nation Scot. Lib, 2. having heard the Chriftian Faith Preached to them, An- f Scoto-chrc- no 97, till about the Year 430, when the Bifhop of nic Lib. a, Rome fent Valladius as our firft Bifhop, the Church ga- Cap. 8. thered therein was Governed only by Presbyters with- || Sr#. 2. out Bifliops: So that we had our Union to the See of Rome together with Prelacy. In a Word, the incurable Wound in this Argument from Antiquity will evidently appear if redue'd into form, thus. The Major Tropifitim. If Diocelan Biihops, by the Teftimonies of Ancient Fathers, did exift in the Primitive Times, and Catalogues of them are, by thefe Ancients drawn from Apoftles and Evangelifts, Then I mnft believe thefe Biihops to be of Divine Institution. The firft Propofition taken for granted by our Epifcopal Pleaders, is palpably falfe. and hath no twift of a Connexion. r% It makes Human Pra&ice the infallible Comment in this cafe, and confequently the infallible Comment of Succeeding Ages is brought in to Determine every Scripture Truth, and Duty u u z therein ai0 toMtuthm comtrnhg Chwch-Govmmitnt. '* . . ■ « i ti . , .h.r» ;< a hieher Rule and Tribunal than the therein held ™-*^*^tX< Faith mad, ,. Aj «? M £wj L« ;M fiV^i * • The Scriptures are made of a *lC„,2.f. $£.-££&„; a'iftheProphefiehadcome hvrte will of Mm, contrary to that we have, 2 Pet. 1. 20 21. 7;/^ to te,«sssi« gataa agorae S;f wherein t mutt ultimatly refolve, if it be a DMn *£ fKt'a »'« Human Credulity; And it is fixed upon the rotten Foundaionofa H«**» IV^v/,' and Teftimony of falhble Men, a Prineiole difowned by all Proteilane Churches. 7k M,nor $*#>£ Nowcome we "o the AfTumption of the Argument, pn Thatch And here 1 1 cic Succeffion is made appear ? Since, the Millenary r-rrur, wui«-i ^ , r, ;fl. . t ^ifown if. LaUannm m Tradition as they are no Ch J™»g ^U' r;^„, ^^vh'cVrlftUm^olrw/^i^onTup L Apofiolick Traditions ^SSSTc&b P»,(ngtotheEair, Anoim.ng w* O^ 34 * Praying in the IfSndlftg po'fttire fl-otn ' E after to - Tfrbitfuntlde. * : %p\phmm. imputes- to ,#>•;** as great * Sea Appendix Herefies, that htf Jielcj it unlawful to b^r.an^ Pray for de JuriDivin the Dead ; That he held _ that Saints departed "were Minijl.' Evan- not tobelnvocated, &c. Upon this point of Antiqui- gel. tyt the Query is eonfiderable which is by fome pro- pounded from Ifail's Prance in letting up the Golden Calf, under pretence of Wdcihippiflg Jehova-; Viz,. Upon the Tuppofcion of this -Pra&ice: continued and Universally owned, whether the Pleadings of fuch Pradifers from an Ancient1 Church Cuftom ( Xhar the Jecovd Command doth not (lrik§ againH the fame, hut that this confiant Traffics doth evince the contrary ) had fosen found and folid Pleading? If tne Anfwer be Negative, as needs it nnufr, unlefs we make the mere Practice of Men the leading Rule, or Regula Regulans, then 'tis infallibly clear that whatever Practices of the Church can be alledg'd, tho3 never fo Univerfal, cannot at all of themfeives lead and ground our Faith and Perfwafion, being but Human Witnefles, or teftes Facli, at moft but not Judkes veri & reels, Atteftors of matters of Fact, but not Judges' of what is Right and Equal therein, Augujlin, Lib. de Unit ate EccUfia, Cap. ;, Non audiamusHas dieo, Hac diets, Jed attdiarr.ut Hn them, Pfil. I47- _> 9, «. Here the Chuich of God is exprefly diltinguifhed, in point of Chrift s Reeal Power, the Headlhip and Influences thereof, from the reft o» Sdons deftitute of ^Revelations of ^"nZtZA fuch a Political Headlhip and Government. For he will not deny, [hat this Revelation amounted to the Determination , of their Church Government-, as well as its Doftrme and Worfl, p, a nd tha tth s De.srmination of the Government did flow from Chnlt s lpecial i oli- ^cal Headlhip over that Church. And the Scripture hath further affured him and us, that our Lord's Faithfalnefs, as Head of the Gofpel Chutch,is beyond that of ^f ^n the Dete™,nat.on of ^ Doa ne^ WoHhip and Government <%rf^^£g$X ft'm "u> \ |' Dreffeth j, And gave him to to Head over aU thing, to ttZfUEet* &*. t£ lulnef, of him that fi ft, ha £a. Where there is a cleat D ift^ «" j&Reftffl Heidi raignity over all Creatures, and his ipeciai ikingiy m he to hu Church, which is here Emphatically called H„ Wg^he upon the Gonfiderations' prem/d. 345 Gorrelat of this Headship and fpecial Kingly Soveraignty. He is Head over all things, but not of all things* as if thefe AU were Members of his Myftical Body, and Subjects of his Mediatory Kingdom; ElfeDevits were, over whom he Exercifes Soveraignity. But the Church only is His Body, yea and is His Fulnefs, compleating him in this Myftical- Forenfical Senfe. Here is an Aflertion both of his Relation to the" Church, Vifible and Invifible. To this Body he is a Head, in refpe<5^ of his Rule and Government, vifibly by his own Officers difpenfing the Word, and Genfures, 1 &or% j.4. and inwardly by the powerful Operation of his Spirit, John 16. x;, 14. Here is implied an Onenefs of Nature betwixt him and his Church. Here is alfo a ftrift Union betwixt him and his Church, fuch as is betwixt the Head and the Mem^ bers in the Natural Body, the tie of which Union, as to the Vifible Church, (h is Vifible, Political and Minifterial Body, 1 6or. 10.16,17.) is the Bond of the Covenant of Grace, wherein they are Externally, FfaL f®. f. together with a Profeffion of Faith, A£tt 8. 3-7. But as to the Invifible Church of real Believers, they are enlivend in the Inner Man with that fame Spirit poured forth on Chrift, Roth. 8, 9. and by Faith and Love really and ftri&ly United to him, ColoJ. 1. 4. Ephef 6. 24. Hence, upon ground of this. Special Union to his Church, as the only proper Political Head thereof, there is an Influence ol common Gifts from his Spirit upon the Church Vifible, Kfb. 4, 7. and an Influence of Spiritual Lite and of Saving Grace to the Church Invifible, or fuch as really Believe, Golof. 2. 19. Thus Mr. Fergufsn upon the place, with our Divines generally. Befides, when the Pfalmift in the place forecited diftinguifhed God's Ifrael from the Nations, and when the Church afferts God to be their King and Lawi giver, or Statute-mafcer, Ifa. ;$. 22, who will doubt but the Inference was good, that therefore this King and Statute-maker had eftabltfhed their fixed Form of Government- and that upon this very ground of his (landing under fuch a Relation to them. And this Objedtor may Conje&ure what the People of God, or the Prophets, would have Anfwered to his Senfdefs /ham Notion or Objection, God is King and - Supreme over all the Nations, therefore he has no more eflab/ijbed a fixed Government among you than among them* Would- they not have told him, that God's general Soveraignity and Government over the Nad* ons, or his Providential Difpofal is far diftinft from the fpecial Reve- lations of his Mind wherewith his Church is Priviledg'd, and that Relation wherein me ftands unto him. And in a word, this his Quibble Confutes it felf ,• For he acknowledges, at leafi will here iuppofe it, that there is a fix'd Species of Church- Government determin'd in X x Scripture. g46 ARtv!e» offom Exceptions Scripture. Thus in his i. §. Now I pray, upon fuppofal of the Scripture Determination, from what Topick can he, or any Manelfe infer this Determination or Scripture Revelation, if not tio-nthat of Chriffs K-«zh O^rt an J Political Oeadfhip over bis Church ? As he will erant-ali rht Laws in a Kingdom, eftablifhing and fixing the Govern- men-' fl -w fiom the King's Authority, and is the Lxercife of his Sov-r igpity • Thus our Lord's Kingly Sovereignity, upon the one Hand acknowledge by him, and, on the other hand, the fixing of n Specie! fuppos'd alfo by him, muft needs be of an infeparabie Con- nexion fince he can fetch this Determination from no ocher Fountain or Principle, ^Fo" hs tiuareKng the lnduBion injtane'd; He, firft, pitifully miftakes and overlooks the Scope of this Induction of Particulars ; The ftrensth of the Argument lying thus a fortiori, That if fucb a Wife, Trovident, Cartful, peculiar Head over bis Church (as the Scripture points out our Saviour to be) hmth in the Exercife of this his Headfhip and Soveraknity. betn fo funiculi and accural in aV the particulars wjlaned, nuch mm ' mufl it be fupposd, that he would not omit to Determine what facial Government fhould hsve fUce in his Church, fin* no imaginable ground canbeadducd of bis-dondefcenience in the particulars injhnc d, which wiU net equally conclude the fixing of a Species of Government. For if it be laid, that this is remitted to the Vrudence of Church Governors ; The Retortion is readv Why not alfo the premis'd Determinations wherein the Scripture gives fo clear a Sound ? And if this Determination was to orevent the hazard of remitting thefe particulars inftancd to Mens Co, their changeling Will and (hallow Wit, why (hall it not be thought that our bleffed Lord was careful to prevent the like hazard in Doint'of the Government of his Houfe, which al will grant to be a point" very high Concernment * Again, the Objedor tho' foi very fhame he dares not quarrel the Divine Warrant of all the particulars nftTnced vet he will needs mew his Teeth in feme pmful Quibbles as to f~e of them. He tells us, that there is nothing in T«. ,. c.'ar * Tim a 14. containing an Inflitulion of Ordination y nothing but an Exercife IfDogmatick Bower in Ads ic. nothing of Diatacihk} 1 Gor. IQM4 Infii- LioXucbing Catechifing -*r Bhffing the People 2 Cor. 1 ;. 2 Tim. 4. r. Heb I 1 if nothing of Ruling Elders and Deacms. Rom. 12, 7. * rTim , 8 &c. He tells us, this Vroofmaybc jujiiy cbaUeng df *nd whauhenis become of this Argument*. 'Tis Anfwertd, The tame is ^be- come of this Argument that the Scripture Light has afforded unlefs hXre den afwithout madow of a Reafon can be fuppos'd to infringe this Sptwe Proof. Nay in this denial he has wounded his Epifcopal upon ffeConfiderations prem/d. 547 Caufe to Death : For who knows not, that he, with his Fellows, con* elude the Epifcopal Power in Ordination from lit. 1. $. with 1 Tim* 4. 14. 2 Tm. 1.6. And if there be, as he aflerts, therein no Warrant or Infcitmion of Ordination, the Epifcopal Ordination inferr'd there* from falls to the ground. And if there be, as he alio acknowledges, in the Texts cited, the Exercife of the Degmatkk and D'tataclick Power, how can he deny a Divine Warrant to this Exemplified Exercife * And doth he not thus overthrow all his Epifcopal Arguments taken from the Practice of the Apoftolick Church ? Whereas he tells us, 7 bat tbif ati the premisd InjlanCes were panted, they cannot amount to the Determination of a Species, becau/e there is no peremptory Institution. I would gladly know, what this Man calls a peremptory In[titution ? Does he not know, that a Divine Right, in the Senfe of found Divines, is for Subftance equivalent to a Divine Infiitu- thn, and may be either inftru&ed by that which is €tnfonant to the true Light of Nature, or Natural Reafon, or the remains of pure Natures Light, mentioned Rom, 2. 14, 15-. with Chap, 1. 18, 19, 20* &c. Or by Obligatory Scripture Examples ; There being feveral Commands for fuch Imitation, Eph. f. 1, 2%and 4. 32. i Gor.$. 16, 17. Heb. 6. iz, &c. Moreover fuch Examples are binding, which are of a moral Nature, and upon Moral Grounds, 1 cor. n. 1. Phil. 4. 8, 9. which we are commanded to imitat, as 1 Job. 2. 6. Eph, 5-. 1, 2. Phil. 4, 9, &c. and whofe Ground} Reafon, Scepei and End are Obligatory, and of a Moral Nature, as much concerning one, Chriftian as another, one Church as another, fuch as are thefe inftanced. There is alfo a Divine Right by Divine Approbation, as when God commends a Practice, as he commends what is Right in the Churches of Afia, confequently difcommending what is oppofus thereunto, adding Promilss and Threatnings. There is alio a Divine Right evident in Divine Acls ; Thus whatever points of Religion are ereded in the Churchby God' and are recorded in Scripture, they are Jure Div'mo ; Thus the Lord's Day Sabbath is Jure Divino, he having therein perfe&ed his Spiritual Creation of the new World by his Refurre&ion and Apparition to his Difcipleson that Day, and miraculous Bleffing and Sanctifying that Day, pouring out the Gifts of the Holy Ghoir, Acls 2. All which were feconded with Aprfolicalfraclice, in the Primitive Churches, Acls 20.7. I Cor. 16. r, 2, &c There is alio a Divine Right by Divine Precepts and Commands; And thefe either immeJiat, as thole which GodL himfelf propounds and urges, as the Ten Commandments, and other Injunctions pofitively laid down ; And thefe are either Explicit, or exprefly in plain Terms propounded, as is the Letter ©f the Commands X x 2 of 548 A Rcviw of fome Exceptions of the Decalogue, and the Commands of Chrift, Teed my lamb}, Joh. 21. Do this in Remembrance of Me, Matth. 26, Or implicit, which are either comprehenfively contained under the exprefs Terms, as is eviJent in the general Precepts of the Decalogue, wherein particular Duties and Sins' are comprehended under general Heads ; O; (uch as may be deduced from the exprefs Commands by clear Confequence,~ as Minifters Preaching and Baptizing has its Divine Warrant clearly dedue'd from the Command given hereanent to Apoftles, Go leach all Nations, &c. Now whether the exhibited Inftances amount not to the Determination of a Divine Right upon the Scripture Grounds mentioned, is left to the Confideration of the Judicious and Impartial; For, not to infift upon this, how far the Light of Nature will go as to the neceffiry of Officers and Adminiftrators of a Government, the advantage and neceflity of Judicial Decifions by Plurality of Votes, the Subordination of the lefler to the greater Courts 01 Societies ; We have in the premis'd Accounts, 1. Apoftotical Vrattice, and Recommending approv'd Examples m order to cur Imitation in the points snftanced, -(til. The feveral A&ings and Exercife of the Key of Order and Jurijdiclion. In the next place, we have in the Inftances exhibi- ted, befidss the Apoftles Practice? their Pofitive Injiitutions, in Ordaining and Inftituring fuch and fuch Officers, as Payors, leathers, Elders a id Deacons, as may be feen, Rem. 12.6, 7, 8. 1 Cor. 12. 28. Epb. 4. 11, 12. 2. We have the Apoftles Inftitucions concerning the Qualifications of thefe Officers, as is evident in Paul's Epiftles to timothy and Titm. 3. We find thefe Officers enjoyn'd their feveral pieces of Work and Duries, fome to Rule, fome to teach alfo, fome to take Care of the Poor. 4. Thefe Officers are enjoyn'd a diligent Attendance upon their Work in their own Perfons without Subftituting others in their place, Rom. 12. 6, 7, 8. The Minifter is to wait on his Minijiery, He tbatTeacbetb on Teaching, he that givetb is to do it "with Simplicity, and he that Ruleth is to Rule with Diligence. j . In matters of Discipline and Jurildi&ion, we find them commanded to A& joyntly, or with joynt Collegiat Authority. Thus the Officers of the Church of Corinth are enjoyn'd to meet together, to deliver the incejiuous Perfon unto Satan, 1 Cor. f . 4, 5". and the Officers of the Church of TheJJahnica are commanded joyntly and Authoritatively to warn the unruly. Here is then a Scene of all the Church Officers of Divine Warrant ; Here is an account of their feveral refpeetive Duties ; A Command of their diligent Attendance ,• A Command of their Aaing joyntly in matters of Government, which, no doubt, amounts to the determining the Species thereof Befidcsic jnay be en«iu» dJ Whether (his Palquiller makes one and the fame (hat upon the Gonfiderations prem/d. ug, that which he calls a peremptory Infant ion, and "Divine Right > If thev be one and the fame, fo that nothing is of Divine Right which wants this ^T^I^^J r,^hat Per^mPtory Inftitution can he produce for all the Offices of the Hierarchy., which he owns ? Hath he not thus robb'd them of a Divine Right > Or, if a Divine Right can be inftrudt- ed, without that which he calls a peremptory In ft it u.t ion, then he muft acknowledge his Reafon nought, whereby he denies the Determination of a Species from the premifed Grounds, (cil, Becaufe there is no fuch peremptory foftitution. Whereas he tells us^that there might he a lawful Derivation ofVower fern the. Head, to make Admini sir at ions' valid, whether the Governors atl in Xfrtttor Imparity. He firft difcovers grofs Ignorance of the State of the Queihon, which is not anent' Parity or Imparity of Church Officers fimply considered, but Parity or Imparity in the Paftoral Office And it the Scripture hold out a Parity therein, he muft acknowledge there can be no lawful derived Imparity, And if this Glorious Heal has Ut in his Church the Officers mentioned, he has certainly done k as Kino and for the great End of his Churches Union and Edification. Befides *I would glaoly know of this Pafquiller, from what Ground is the Law- I ulnefs of thefe Officers, and their Official Aclings dedue'd, if not from this Scriptural Derivation of Power from Cbrifi the Head ? And if lo then, by inevitable Confequence, and by the Rule of Contraries where iuch a Divine or Scripture Derivation- of Power from the Head cannot be inftruftcd, the Office and Official Ad-kigs of fuch pretended Offices is unlawful and an Impeachment of the Mediator's Author!- , £ r ^ fuffi,cientIy removes what he after adds, viz. that Ckrifl's- Kingly Office infers mt the Regulating of all Cafes. For it is enough, if in lo far it regulate Cafes, as not to impeach the Species of Government instituted. Jed. the Officers, together with their Duties, and the Courts- of his Appointment: For he will not fay, that, even upon the Hyi pothefis- of a fixed Species of Government, there was a Neceffitv of tin Scriptures particular or explicite Determination of all Circumftan- tiate Gates in the Exercife thereof, thefe being left to the Prudentials of Church Governours, who are to aft therein according to the gene- ral Rules of Decency and Order, with Subferviency to the Ends of Go- vernment, This alfo confutes what he further adds, viz,. Ihat Offi* cers, by vert ue of a common Power, may cajt them f elves into particular Socie- ties, and maintain vfeful Government, whatever be the Species ; Which is nothing but his ignorant Petith Vrincipii, and contradifts what he af- lerts anent the Exclusion of Anarchy and Papal Monarchy by the ScriD* tare Rules, ( for this he muft of neceffity be feppofcd to hold, or he fpea&s. g5o A Rettiw offom Exceptions Nonfenfe, in affecting the one and the other to be inconfiftent with Church Societies md Government ) fince, if the Government be fuch as exclude; thefe mentioned, it muft certainly exclude them, as in- confiftent with the Scripture Rules prefcribed; For he will grant, tha', upon the Hypothecs of a Divine Warrant and Inftitution, even the Papal Monarchy and Hierarchy were lawful. Moreover, he has been told in the 4. Reafon upon this 1. Confid. that all Aclings of an Eccle- Jitftick Judiciary Power are in Scripture held out te be in Cbrift's Name and Authority, as Mediator , wboft Mtfficn therefore in Official Ablings mufi hi in/lmfted C as every Magistrates Atlings in a Kingdom ) by the Laws, i. e. the Word and leHament of this great Lawgiver, that chrijVs Prophetical and Priefily Offices exclude new Revelations and Meri- torious Satisfactions, jet bis Kingly Office excludes net fuper added Laws and Med" fures of Government, (as he is bold to afiert) cannot but found harihly in any Chriftian Ear. For what Ground can he, or any Rational Man offer to prove the Exclufion of thefe Revelations and Satisfactions men- tioned upon the Ground of Chrift's Prophetical and Priejlly Offices, which will not equally prove the Exclufion of fuperadded Laws and Meafures of Government by his Kingly Offi:e^ if we mall but fuppofe, as neceffarily we muft, that they are equal in Perfection, and exactly commenfurated to their proper ends ? So that the fuperadding of Humane Inventions, as an Eikment and Amendment of the Exercife of his Kingly Office, is the fame wicked Ufurpation, as the Addition oinew Revelations and Meri- torious Satisfactions is upon his Prophetical and Prieftly Offices. His Inftance of the Colony in Darien their Liberty to choice any Government in the King's Ntme, is pitifully impertinent, and touches not the point in QuefHon, which is anent the Churches Liberty to fit up whatever Form ef Govern- ment Jhe thinks fit, and to aft therein in Chrifis Name ; But it is eafily ac- k-iowledg'd, that no Colony had Power to let up a Government op- posite to the King's Liw*, nor Officers not Authorized thereby. His Talk of the Lord's lodging in the Church a Power for her Prefervati- on, and inferring, that the Governours Jhe authorizes by vertue of that Power, maybe juflly faid to be given by Chrift, is palpably impertinent. As if the Suitablenefs, forfooth, of this Power to her Prefervation, were at the Churches Option, and to be judged by her folely with- out refpsft to the Lord's inftituted and appointed Means $ But the Scripture has taught him, that Chrift has fet in his Chjin h his own Officers for that end. 1 Cor. 12.28. And 'tis fuch Offi. :ers only, as can plead an Intereft in ChriiVs Donation, who do Exercife their Office in bis Name, and not in the Name of the Church. Whereas he adds, 7>a the} mt jubfift b) aVower dmved from him ? He makes what- ever upon the Confiderations prtmis'4. „, ever Officers the Church /hall devife, to fubfift by fuch a Power, and thus "wy Plejd for Patriarch, Cardinal,, yea Pote, themS For wnat he add. of S,0ingfieet's Anfwer t0 the feco„d ArgumenTaddu: ced, he Jnould know, that StMingfieet's Arguments or Anfwers h, that, «alfo>n other points of his W«W) have been removed by M? R«U, asa lo by the Author of the Apologetical Relation. * He tells us the church ma, have the Critkk, Degmatiek, and Dhtaffick Power, whatever h the particular Form of her Government. What «* be more ,mper ttnent? For the Paffage which he would An"wer and which he calls <#r/W main Argument, from AUs ^ n wer> *«t o«y toinaruatb; Divine Warrant of the Power it felf, but Tl,°r Sffid IT'* H • 1 '^ivinely Inftituted 0#.-,„ cloathed tSs. W*h ltd. Afoftle,, With Elder,, or Praters in ,Cfa M,«;„, which ,s clearly everfive of thi, P^r monopolized in a P™f'£ Moreover, when he tells us, * Church may hale thefe Powers that X, Ah'i" "f"j:,F'rm °fG°*»»ment, he comrades whTl"' before aflerted, that the Ch ^Government i, ,f Jmh aNat JXdesfoZ ne is as pur-blind and infignrficant, as in is other (illy Ex^eorionc fince the Paper, he would Animadvert upon, told I him that-,to p /* which is the mod proper and profitable Inftru&ion can b- dra«n f££ hat Inftance. And afterward the premifed C3u°"on i" l\ down al™ the Cafes wherein or. how far, the Obligation of a D ivine E±Z chLh h:'ai,z, ujsSK^ri sbfiSfi? fernon thereupon being thus limi ed\ and fol d,y exotaleS ^_ hafhe fc/E P**"' '*i?re°ff>l>"< f» «> Amal hfHtution > But nas he had hii Ejrw ,n his Head ? Did the Paper Dl»ad hare *w.7 and not as above camfon'd. For- his further Qui&tg ZnTA' lloUk lurches Rveftion a„i Improvement, adduced in the iCr ^ ■ her Wlth^. tck Pattern* a, arx*H„ti'„? „ m om?J,VR«V^' that th» u an E?tjcopal Argument . He (hews the fame Inadvertencv £ reading that Pap*: - For the Argument runs thus, The ApoSu «hor.t, being pl^ded, as being iealed by the Spirit, and X tifelr" Patterns. 352 A Review of [one 'Exceptions Patterns amount to an Obligatory Rule, the Denial and Impeach^ ment of the Obligatory Foice thereof ftrikes againft other Ads of Re* ligion chiefly founded on this their Pradice, and the Apoftolick Churches Reception. Is any thing more evident, that the Foundati- on is here laid upon the Apoftolick Pradice properly and immediately; But will this, by the mod remote Confequence, make the Churches Pradice the Rule for underfhnding of, or a Comment on that of the Apofties? The Paper further had told him, that the premis'd Scripture In/lances and Examples are declared efficient to m»k the Man of God, i.e. the Minifterof God, perficl, and throughly to furnifh him for every good Work, all Official ASings and Governing Duties as in that Capacity: But this our Pafquiller had no Eyes to fee. Upon the fecond Conjideratify, our pitiful Animadverter appears fo mattered and overcome, that rre has no Refuge, but that of Lies, in denying the Biftofs file Vower, wherein he has been fufficiently ex- pos'd and chaftis'd. He tells us here, 'tis enough to (how the Qutjlion is mif-flated: And 'tis a (ufficient Anfwer to the whole of his Animadversi- on, to aflert what is already made good, that, in the Vindication of the Principles of the Cyprianick Age, mention'd by him, he ownes the fole Power, as has been convincingly made appear. And if in his IV. Ch. he has contrary Affertions, all the Advantage he has, is the provr ing himfelf a Self-Contradiftcr. He asks, if all the Dependencies enumerated, i Chron. 24. were precan~ cm Dependencies? And cites a Pajjage of the Altare Damafcenum, Pa^ 21 r. touching the Parisians, afferting a proportional and immediate Dependence of ' Biihops and Priejls upon Ghri(l\ as, in France, Infer iour Judges, tho fubjeel toihe Parliaments, have their Authority immediately from the King. # fiut this is enough to confound and defeat what he alledges ; For himfelt diftinguUhech a due Subordination from a precarious Dependence. Now if the Author be found in his Principles and Pleading; to owne this pre- vail.wt Dependence of Paftors upon the Prelate, ( which our Aimus here profelTes to difowne) as 'tis evident he hath done in that Pamphlet, afcribing to the Bifhop fuch a Liberum Arbitrium and Licentia, as leaves to Pallors not the leaft Grain of Authority, but what he is pleafed to allow, and may refume at his pleafure, then he cannot but acknow- ledge, that his Inftances condemn himfelf. . To the firft Argument taken from the Scripture Denominations ot Pa- ftors, fcil. that they are called »>»|**roi,-«»«r»T«, &*• importing an EJJential Interefi in Government, and to the (econd, taken from the Exer- eife of this Offisial Power, pointed at 1 The/. ?. 12, 14. Heb. 1 3. 7, 17. 1 timt S. 17. All that he has to Anfwer, is, That this is confident with -- *■ ' their upon the Confidcrations premisd. g -~ their flanding in a due Subordination to a Bifhop; And this can no more impeach an orderly Subordination of Rulers, than the Ruling Elders Subordination to the Payors. But, i. He has been told, That the Paffaget import Payors Efrntial Interefi in Government, and their fading in an Immediate Subordi* nation,at Ordinary Officers of the bighefk Rank, to the expired Office of Apofiolatt And next, that-**;; Ejjtntial Intereft in Government, yea, and the ExerciU thereof, is, in thefe texts, pointed out, without the Iea$ (hadow of aDependenes ' upon any Ordinary Officers of an higher Order : So that what he talks of this Subordination to the Bifhop, is a meer Petitio Principii, and a Supposi- tion ftanding in Contradiction to the Te*t cited, 2/;, His hiding himfelf under the Covert of this general Subordination, is but his Cover of Fig-leaves already expofed. ify, His Anfwer cenfures the Apoftles who, in all thefe Power-importing Epithets, and commanded ExtniU 0f this Authirity and Power, do not, in the leaft, hint a Dependence upon any Ordinary Officer of an higher Order, which certainly ought to have been fuppofed, in the Texts inftanced, and fome Difcriminat- mg Cautions added, had that fuppofed Office of the Prelate b&en law- ful or allowed. For his Quible about the Ruling-Elder, 'tis pitifully dull J For the Queftion here is, Whether thefe Ruling and Teaching Elders by Office, do, in the premifed Scripture Accounts, or any where elfe, fiand in Sub- ordination to a Prelate > The Negative whereof is invincibly made good, which is no way impeached by the fuppofed Divine Right of the Ruling-Elders Subordinate Office. He tells us he will defend the Epijcopal Senje of that Parage, I Tim. 5.17, viz. that thefe who do faithfully dif charge the Office of Uunh Governours,' and in facial thefe who are very painful in Preaching^, be fuitahly provided for as to their Maintenance. But this Evafion of his Epifcopal Mailers, Sutlive li- len, Bifhop Bilfon, Biinop Hall and others, he might have found fully confuted by Presbyterians. ISzeAltareDamafcenum, Cap. 12. Pag 9Iq 910, 924. Mv.GiUtjffs Af]ert„ of the .Govern, of the Church vf Scotland '' Vart 1. Ch. 7. Pag. yo, $■ i. Jus Divln, Regim. Ecckf. Pag. 151,152 &c Gartwright againit the Rhemijls, in he. ] In a word, this Giofs allows' a double Honour to Miniiters that Labour not fo much as others in the Word \ And mall we think, that Laborious Paul intended to incourage idle Drons, lazie, feldom Preachers > heftdes, that chisGIois fuppofing both branches are to be underftood of Preachers, (' for he ownes no Inferiour Governours ) thefe Words [ in the Word and Do- Urine ] mould either have been quite omitted, or mould have been in- ferted immediately after them that Rule wA Cattwright hath alfo here * y toid A Review offom Exceptions «4 W,™ lUt thU Glofsof making one kind of Church Offlcert tZ»*i SSl urt V'/H ivvf ?£ ft vere k> vc , , , x i . pr t9 Teach Worthily and Singulartj SatiM^, •**»&» ftLmay I **«} u m Xtttba, where the latitr notes cm Venue only of ?mns- tlTm o.KU above, bur Poller further ceils us, tbs, mM« Cant stained by tbh t«H, irnkf, it could be proved that the Word^ by m leans Ian allow a Subordination among Elder, who Labour m theWerdani . V o% X But he has been .old, that the Words do c early exclude fuel. rS,ih>rdirn*> p^liDS ism**8**1 °'h« upon the Considerations prem/d. 555 in point of a Divine Office, has fufficiently expofed him in this point. The Word np*pt9Cv'ri}&9 as expounded *ThejXinz by R Stepbanus *, imports, Qgi jum & ipfe Presbyter. Grac. fom.% Thus alfo the Tigurin, as our Englifh Tranflation, Who Pag. 5-45. urn alfo an Elder. H. Stephanus will alfo have the Senfe of i.9GvTif®'> ft"* & ipfe Stniorum & Presbyterorum Col'egio eft% he who is of the Affembly or Golledge of Elders, commonly calied the Presbytery; Which Hez* inflnuatesi by rendering it, Ego ma Presby- ter, who am together with you a Presbyter ,• Which Hkrom probably intended by the Word eompresbyter. See this laft* Acceptation largely pleaded for by Mr. Gib fry, Mfcellany Hue/lion*) Chap. 8. Pag. 106, to j. ' To that Inftance of t Ttm. 4* 14. where the higheft Action of Ju- rifdi#ional Authority, (oil. Ordination, is afcribed to a 'Presbytery ; We have our Pafquiller, 1. Offering a Quible about Ruling-Elders, as not there ; Or if they were, he charges our Practice as impeaching this Rule, . Anf. As for the Divine Right of this Officer, and his Intereft in Government, it is above made appear ,- and his Quibble this way is a meer Diverfion from the point : For, if this Collegiate Meeting of Elders or Presbyters be found the .Subject of Ordaining Power, and clothed with this Authority, as is clearly evinced in the Contexture, whether a Ruling Elder be fuppofed a Member or not, the Epifcopal Pre-eminence and Ufurpation is palpably overturned ,• The Bilhop afcribing this Ordaining Power to himfelf Solely, excluding Presbyters. And for the pra&ice of our Church in this point, 'tis very eafily accorded with our Principles anenc the Office of Ruling Elders ,• ilnce they do concur in the Presbytery's Difquifition anent the Legitimacy of the Call, yea, and in the Presbytery's Determination in point of the Minifterid Million, wherein the EfTence of Ordination properly confifls, and in all thefe points as Ruling Officers ; Ahhb* not in the Ritual of Imppjiticn, which the Pra&ice of this Church has, of a con- fiderable time, referved to Pallors. In the 1. Book of Difcip. Head 4. It is faid, lAlbeit the Apoftles u/ed Impojition of Hands, yet feing the Mi- racle is ceafed, the ufing the Ceremony we judge not neceftary. 'Tis true, it was afterward admitted into Pra&ice, as in the 2. Book of Difcip. Ch. ;. where we are told, that the Cer em om\s of Ordination are Faj\ingt Earneft Prayer s% and the lmpofitisn of the Hands of the Elderjinp : But, for the Ground of our Churches prefent ?ra&ice, the performance of this Ceremony feems to be appropriated to the Faftoral Office ; becaufe. it has been looked upon as a Rite appendant unto the Solemn and Pub- Hck Prayer for, and Bleffing of the Perfbn fee apart to the Office ; Yy 2 which a 5 6 M Kw«» offome Exceptions which Performances, as the Word of Exhortation, being peculiar to the Paftoral Office, it has therefore been judged meet, that this Ap- pendant Rite, in that Solemnity, jhould he alfo performed only by the P.aftors. ily For his next Quible about the Members Conftituent, as rot being Or Unary Pafton; "Tis Anfwered, if Paftois be found in Scrip- ture the highefr Ordinary Officers fettled by the Apofrles in the Churches, and fuch Rulers and Governours therein, as is inftanced, there's no imaginable Ground to deny this Presbytery to have been made up of fuch ,• Nor is there any fhadow in the Text to prove, that this Pieshytery wastoade up of Officers of any higher Order. For what he adds of Timothy's Evangeliftick Office y which they could not confer, he might have feen this folidly removed by Presbyterian Writers. In a word, befides that fome would tell him, that tho an Evangelift were M?jor Singulis, yet he was Minor Univerfis, inferiour to a Con* fiflorial Meeting or Judicatory ,• But efpecially, that the great Apoftle of the Gentiles his Concurrence did fufficiently impower this Pres- bytery for fuch an Ad, He has been moreover told, That the Argu- ment runs the flronger for Presbyterian Government, and the Presbytery's Power with refpeel to Ordination of Ordinary Officers ; Since they concurred Authori- tatively with the Apbftle Paul in the Ordination of an Evangelifi* Our Pafquiller next objects the Apoftle Paul'/ prefence, and Imfofition of Hands, together with the Presbytery, as Examplifyingthe $ flop's Inspection, forfooth with concurrent Presbyters* And whereas the diftinct Particles of l$ and cf,« were alledged to prove the Diftin&ion betwixt the Presbytery's Impofition, and that of Paul; He tells us, that ^imports ?er, or By, and & With ; The one pointing at the Principal, the other the Subordinate Caufe. This Quible he might have feen fre- quently expofed, as crofs to the Context ,• For> in the place where the JW is expreffed, there's no fuch thing as an Intimation of the Apoftle Paul's Principality in this Action ; But thefe two grand Privi- ledges are prefented to Timothy for his Incouragement, j .The Gift given by Prophecy. ilyy The Laying on of the Hands of the Presbytery, and tfcefe in diftind Commas, as the Variation of the Term from ft$. to^«7** makes appear: And no Senfe can be made of this Impofition of the Hands of the Presbytery, abfolutel y thus prefented, as fuch a diftincl: Priviledge, without the leaft hint of the Apoftles Superintendency, if not to hold out the Presbytery s Authority herein. In the next place, our Pafquiller will needs Embrace the Reading which Interprets t« •qwlurtpiv of the Office, not of a Confi/lorial Meeting* An Anfwer fo frequently expofed, that I need not infift upon it. Their own Camert, a better Grecian than the Animadvercer ox any of his up$n the Confederations premsd. 257 his Party, has convincingly baffled this Anfwer, as contrary, not only to the ordinary Acceptation of the Word, but to the Scripture parallels where this Word is ufed.' The Paper had faid, that it is thrice in the New Teftament found only, and in the other two places it points at a Gonjtftorial Meeting ; And all that the Pafquiller can Objed, is a contrary Acceptation in Eufebius ,• A worthy Acceptation,, no doubt, to oppofe to that of the Scripture, and fo many Learn'd Divines* Grecian, an 1 1nterpreters, upon this Text, as are already exhibited. For Calvin* Judgment upon the place, it is already accounted for ; Nor can he, or any elfe, make appear, that Calvin ever retraced his Senfe thereof exprefled in his Commentary, efpecially considering his clear After t ion of Presbyterian Government, both in his Inftitutions and Commentaries. Come we to the Inftance of the Church of Corinth, from which the Paper pleads an Official Authority in Government, applicable to Paftois, exclufive of a precarious Dependence upon a Prelat ,• And 'tis pleafant to fee how this Inftance has baffled our Pafquiller. 1. He denies this Church to have any ordinary fixed Governours* fet Over her • Art Anfwer fo palpably Antifcriptural, that to recite it, is to refute it. The Authors of the Jus Div. Reg. Eccl. pag. 206, 207. have convin- cingly made appear,** lhat as there was a multitude of "Believers, fo there were plenty of Minifters in that Church> The Text in the Paper cited to prove this,our Pafquiller dare not meddle with,- Only he quibbles upon that, 1 (Sor. 14. where is pointed out a Subordination of Prophets to Pro- phets, as to a Judicial Cognizance upon their Exercifes. He tells us, Ihtfe being Extraordinary Perfons, it was net Organized after the manner it was t& cmtinue. But what pitiful Triflling is* this ? If there be here exemplified a Subordination of Prophets to Prophets, in point of Judicial Cognizance, even fuppohng the Officers extraordinary Gif- ted, doth not the Inftance plead the more ftrongly for fuch a Subordi- nation and Mould of Government, in cafe of the ordinary Officers endowed with ordinary Gifcs ? Befides that he fhould have conildered what is offered by Mr. Rutherfoord from the Scope and Contex*, to prove thefe Prophets ordinary Officers, vid. Due Right of Presbytery. For his denying the Term UxKiawt, r Cor. 14. 34. to import Churches with Eccltfiafiick Difcipline, becaufe Atts 19. 41, the Term UM.*r\*9 fignifies a tumultuous Meeting of Heathens ; 'Tis'fo Nonfenfical, that. he is fufficiently expos'd in the repetition of it. In a Word, after his pitiful Apology, That he will fay at prefent but little to this Inftance as not having Leafure^ forfooth, for it } All that he can further *4& #, that i^X *££** MiQfi&E of that Church ; The repetition whereof is g j 8 A Review of fome E xceptibns is a fuflhient Confutation, fince, i. The Apoftle calls himfelf u M4er Builder who had laid the Foundation, yea had ftay d with them one year and an half AB. 18. ir compared with I **r. ;. 10 And was there no Superftruflure of Inferior Officers all that time i Did not the Apoftle Ordain Elders, Church by Church, where the Gofpel was received? A3. 14. 22. 2/7, From whence did flow their Carnal cryinz up of their fever al teachers, fome doting upon one, (ome upon another, and fome upon a third, if this be not fuppofed, that they had plenty of Preachers? And, %ly, Saith not the Apoftle, iCor. ;. if. 7ho yon have ten thoufand hfirucJers in Chrifi, you have not many Fa- thers ? Sec. But what needs more ? The very Scope and Contexture of that' 1 Cor. y. compared with the parallel, iCor. 2. does fo clearly conclude fix d Officers with ajurifdiaional Authority over that Church, that his denial thereof convinces him of an Obflinat withftanding of Scripture Truth. - - - For that Paffage of the Bimop oi Sahtbury, acknowledging the Vajtoral Office to be the highefl Office in the Church, as being empowered for the hiehefl Alisons of Sacred Performances ; Our Pafquiller had done well to have let it alone : For his Anfwer is pitifully Nonfenfical, telling us, that tho the Sacramental Actions be the highest Performances, yet by no Logick it will follow, that all empowered for them muji be of the high $ Office sn the Church : fome may be empowered as Supreme, others as Suhordinat. Where- in r. He gives the Bilhop the lie in his Argument and Realomng ; For the Bifhopfrom this Topick, of biing empower d for the highejl Perfor- mances, infers this neceffary Conclufion, that therefore fuch muft be of the hizhcli Office. And fure this is a good Conclufion upon all grounds of Reafon or Logick, elfe the Pafquiller will impeach fuch an Argu- ment brought in Proof of the Apoftles high.fi Offi:e, as being empower 4 for fuch Actings as were the higheftof Sacred Performances in that State of the Church. And who knows not that the Supreme Kingly Office is thus diftinguiJhed from the Inferior Office of Subordinat Magiftrats ? 2//, Tae Bifhops Inference is, that fuch are of the higheH Office ; and , it Cloathed with the higheft Offi.e, where is there ground f or Subordina- tion and Degrees in this Offi;e > Wil he thus make Officers higher than the Higheft > If the performance of Duties of the higheft Nature, doth neceflarly import a Correfpondent Authority of fuch a Nature, fure there is no place left for Subordination or Degrees M™e°™r« will our Pafquiller deny, that the High Priefts Office had a jrefp^ft to Sacred Performances of the higheft Nature. m the Jewifh Oeconomy , And fliould one have thus Argued for the High Pncft, > Author. *y. He that is empowered for Sacred AcVions of the higheft- Nature, is of the upo n the Considerations prewifd. ~ - q higheft Office of the Church ; What would any Rational Perfon have thought, of his Return and Anlwer to the Argument . Tho'he Wa! empower d for the higheft Performances, yet he was not of the higheft P u*d AkQ CherLe m-ay rs Subor<*ination of Adminiftrators in the higheft Office, wherein fome may be Supreme, others Subordinate But, aeain^we are told by the Author of the Vindication of the Trin- V >i I CyPn*m? A&> IhatVMty confix in indivfibili \ and for a fupposd Aftrttonof the contrary .he inveighs agait.fi ths Reverend Mr Rule But here our Animadyerter cuts out a Parity into Subordinat' (tens' dividing the higheft Office into Supreme and Subordinat : And furelv our. Ammadverters Logick is in that point, of a piece with the above- named Authors Divinity difcover'd in his Pamphlets, #.«.bothofa Linfie Woolfie Verfatile Frame and Colour. Upon the Third Conftderation hs pafles over all that is faid, till he come totne Paffage anent Rivet; And upon this, he asks, Who empower^ Rivet to reprefent the Protect Churches ? To which we Anfwer The fame Truth that empower d him to all his other Proteftant Defence? avow d and own d hitherto by the Proteftant Churches. Our Momus* SSL.' cT 6iOUnd>K £hat the A!"h0r °/ ***'"* **'"**"> HieZcZal Bijbops Claim, with many others, have made appear the Teftimonv of Proteftant Churches againft Prelacy by their Confeffions!ye o^ Bi/hops themfelves, and of the moft famous Divines of the Church of England And for the Churches of Britain and Ireland, which he after fo^edlfow^d0"^ ,0yn'd " a Q™»™*^ P»lacy, IZkllt Timothy, Authority, received by lotion of the Hands of the Presbyter S ga good Argument to prove he had no Authority over them S fame Ground and Topick which proves that a Church Officer has n« Dominion over a Church Judicatory Authorizing him; which ground ftands Fortified by this fare Principle, That the* Authority ofaU%Turct Judicatories ss Mmfterial, and therefore there is no D,minL0v*rthem properly competent to any Officer. The Superintending iXedSJ and Authority, even ofApoftles, being Minimal, and ln^6hon not a Domimon, which is difown d by th.em *. Befides S^t,, what inconvenience can our Pafquilier find in this* 1 Pet *c \ 7 Affertion That Timothy was firft Ordained a fresbyter i Cor aj by the Presbytery .and after Ordain' dan Evangelift by the Apojtle ' ttr I r 1 DPaf!Kthe = P°wfr,of aI1 our i^latiitsto makeappear5that the Impofmon of Pauls hands and the Presbyteries were at one and the famZ time Yea their own Honnyman pleads, that Timothy received onlv t Vmhyterat by this Impofnioa of hands,- For thus he expounds Thd Text, %6o A Review office Exceptions Text, i Ttm. 4. 14. Negleft not the Gift given thee hy tht f Survey Part ImpofitUn of hands, whereby thou was Ordain'd and made a 2. pag. 217, Presbyter i. Yea, even admitting he was Ordain'd an 218. Evangelift, and the Anions of the Apoftles and the Prer: byteries Impofitlon to be contemporary, the Presbyteries A& needs be extended no further than the Ordaining him a Presbyter, and what was more, foil, the Ordination to the Office of an Evangelift, might proceed from the Apoftle ,• So that what was Ordinary in his Office, is afcribable to the Presbytery, what was Extraordinary, to the Apoftle. Yea, if it were faid, that even the Presbytery Ordained and fent forth an Evangelift, what abfurdity is it if it be afferted, that in fo far ( as is above hinted ) they were above him? Tho' an Evan%eli(& be greater than a fingle Presbyter, this proves not, that even in that Ca- pacity, he is greater than the whole Presbytery. One of * Mi feel, Queft. the Houje of Lords ( faith our Learn'd Mr. Gille/pie * Qh.%. pag. 103. handling this point ) is greater than one of the Houfc of Commons ^but he is not therefore greater than theHoufe of Commons* When a King and his People is compared together, we life to fay, that he is Major Singulis, Minor Univer/isn This removes and fufficiently baffles his Quible anent the Election of the High Prieft, and cf Kin%s in Elective Kingdoms ; For the fame Rule premis'd holds in both Gafes : Befides, that the High Prieft had no Prelatical Dominion over the Sanhedrin when Conftituted. And he foolifhly equiparats fuch a pretended Ele&ion with that of Kings in Eleftive Kingdoms,* Since the High Priefts Ele&iori was properly by God himfelf, and, by his Original Authority, fix'd to the Family of Aaron, and the firft Born of liis Sons. He has alfo been told, that, in Eleftive Kingdoms, the Radical Elective Power and Authority over the Elefted ltill continues; Elfe itcould never be put forth in cafe of a new Ele&ion. To fave Timothy, the fuppos'd Bifhop oi Epbefus, from being Stag'd ,as an ApoHat, Rev. z. our Animadvcrter offers this Defence, that tis certain Timothy might have been Bijbop •/ Ephefus a good many Tears, and yet have died a good many Tears before St. John wrote the Revelation. 'A pitiful Apology,* John Wrote the Revelation in Demitians time, computed about 97. after Chrift's Birth, and fome do judge that John Wrote his Gofpel after the Revelation, confidering withal timothys Youth when the Apoftle Paul Wrote his firft Epiftle to him, there will be no great probability of his being Dead at that time. But to let this pafs, our Animadverter hath expos'd himfelf, in telling us he mi^ht have died before that time. For, 1. The ftrength of our Argu- ment lies \x\ this, That the, Bifhop of Ephefus being ftag'd for iuch an Apoitar; upon the ConGdcrations pnmlsd. ~, Apoftat, and Timothy being by them fuppos'd Bifhop, if he was alive and Bifhop when this was Written, he is ftag'd as fuch an Apoftat • And for any thing that we or they know, he was then alive and atfually Bifhop^ And if alive, this Gonfequence clearly follow* So that, they fuppofing that he was not alive, nor Bijhop at that time' which is the only Defence,and their part of the Queftion; It lies upon1 the Affirmers to make it good, that he was remov'd, and another Bifhop in bis place at that time. And in this we deal in the fame Method wich him, as Proteftants do with Papifts. When we Impugn the feveral Corruptions of the Church of Rome, they make this Defence " Who and where were the Witneffes that Terrified again ft them when " they firft appeared >. Name your Author, fay they. To which the Proteftant Anfwer is, That there might have been fuch, tho* the know- ledge thereof is not come to our Hand, and that it lies upon them as the Affirmers to prove no fuch Teftimonies were given, and that it is bad Arguing from the Defeft eftheHifiory, to deny the truth of the thing- Thus /Win his Dialogues, with our Divines generally • And the" Gafe is here the fame, we Aflerting timothy might have been 'alive and in their Principles, Bifhop at that time; They Affirming he was not ( fo? this they muftfay, or they fay nothing ), are obliged to make it ap- pear, zly, Whereas he fays, "Tit certain Timothy might have been Bifhop and yet have died before that time ; He has made a pitiful and /hameful Blunder,- Since, as is faid, the only Defence is, that defaclo he was dead, and not Bfoop : And he infers this only from the poflibility or might be. Thus Arguing a fojje ad effe, which is palpably ridiculous ' He cryes out a little before, O brave Loghk ! when the Paper infer'd that timothy could not be Cloathed with Authority above the Presbv tery, becaufe O.dain'd by them. And what Logick or Inference is his" in Arguing from the Uncertainty, of a may be^ov might be, to a Certainty of wot? The Royal Martyr King Charles, in his Conference with Mr. Hinder (on, who had Objeded the Churches Defection after the ApoRc- lick times, tells him, that he was Taught that a p oft ad eff'e was no/ood Argument How many Inftances might we give, and adhomintm of this pitiful Paralogifm? This Momus might have lived, and never Written what is here Wiitten ; He might have liv'd, and Written or Printed Nonfenfe, £c. Ergo, de faclo it is thus. ' Where *s timothy is enjoyn'd, 2 Tim. 2. 2. to commit what he had heard f» is 'Tis evident that the famous Pag. 5. Cloud of Proteftant Divines and Universities have, not only averted this, but, upon fuch Scripture ' grounds as clearly evince it and which he cannot Anfwer. Again, 2. Whereas he fays, That the' Author rejetied the Tefiimonies of Fathers, and why may not he, Iranfmarine Divines* It is Anfwered, 1. He never re^ed Teftimo- nie$ of Fathers 01 others, when Fortified by folid Scripture.Grounds. 2. Tis upon the Confederations pemlsd. 363 2. 'Tis not Tranfmarine Divines only, but even the Britlfit who after* this. For that Exception agaiaft the Saunter Univerfity, viz. that feme Members are fttppot'dtodwn Opinions not found ; "Pis utterly impertinent,1 He enquires Whether the Author wiU Subfcribe to every thing Published by theje Proftjfors. 'Tis Anfwered> The Author pleaded not (imply and abfo- lutely the Sentiments of the Univerfity, as an infallible Rule, but as that which has its own fecondary Strength or Weight in the Confirma- tion of a Scripture-Truth, efpecially their Judgment being founded upon Scripture ,• Which will no more oblige to Subfcribe to every Tenet of every one of thefe Divines, than his Citations cf, and Veneration for the Principles or Teftimonies of the Fathers, will oblige to fuch. an abfolute Submiffion. Should this Momus plead the Authority of the Oxford Univerfity 's Judgment againft the Covenant, fure he would take it for a very impertinent Anfwer, that Jcme of thefe. Doclors maintain d fome Errors • Even upon the Hypothec's that this were clear and evident. And whereas he alledges the opptfit Opinion of Oxford and Cambridge in this point ; 'Tis Anfwered, Their moll famous Dodors have difowned Prelacy ,• Whijtaker, a famous Profeffor in Cambridge, whom Bucer boafted of as his Mafter [Refp. ad Campiani Rationes~\, affirming that $nsbyter and Bifhop are a& one Jure Divino. And whereas Duraus the Jefiiit, againft whom he alfo Writes, did Affirm, they were Jure Divino different • He tells him, that what he affirms is fuch, as all Men fee to be evidently falfe ; Citing Jeroms Tefti* mony, who, he tells his Adverfary, confirm'd by Scripture, the Identity of Bifhop and Presbyter. And for the other Univerfity, Dr. Heland the King's ProfefTor in Oxford^ at an A& July 9, i6c8, concluded againft Mr. Lam's Queftion, An Epifcopatus fit ordo diflintlus a Presbyteratu, and faid, that the Affirmative was moji falfe, againfithe Scriptures, Bathers, the Doclrineof the church of England ( let our Momm Remark this ), yea the very Schoolmen themfelves, Lombard, Thomas, Bonaven- ture, &c% The fame we have heard of Arch- bifhop Whitgift againft Cartwright ; Of Bifhop j^ef, in the Defence of his Ape* logy *, who cites, againft the Jure-Divinojbip of Prelacy, * Part 2. Ch.9*. and to prove that Bifhop and Preibyter are one Jure Div- r- Divino, Hierom, Auguflin, Chryfofiom, clofing up his Anfwer with thele words, " All thefe and many moe Holy Fathers^ f together with the Apoftle St. Paul, for thus faying, muft, by Hardings • Advice, be held for Hereticks. We have heard alio of Bifhop Morton, in his Catholick Apology , Pan r. Ch. ??. who aflerts, JJ That there is Z z 2 * no %6\ A Review offome Exceptions ' no difference, by Divine Right, between the Biihop and Presbv- 4 ter. Citing alfo Medina, Anfelm, Sedulius, Era(must and Alpbonfus a Caftro, who fayeth that Jerem was alfo of Opinion, •' That Bifhop " and Presbyter are of the fame Order and Authority. To whom may be added Bifhop Bilfon in his Book againft SemN *Lib. i.pag* naries #, who affirms out ofjerem, S( That the Church ^ 1 8. 'at fiift was Govern d by the common Council of ■ Presbyters; And therefore Bifhops muft underftand • that they be greater than Minifters rather by Cuftom, than the 'Lord's Appointment, and the Bifhops came in after the Apoftles c times. To thefe many others might be added, fuch as Dr. Reynolds in his Epiftle to Sir Francis Knols, who proves this Identity frorn Chryfoflomt Hierom, Ambrofe, Auguftin, Theodorct, ?rimafiusi Sedulius, Tbeophylatt, with whom agree, faith he, Oecumenius and Anfelm Arch- bifhop of Canterbury, &c. So that 'tis evident, efpecially from what is above offered, that our High»Flown JurcDivino Gentlemen are but of a late Edition. Here then is the Presbyterian Judgment in point of the Presbyterat asofthe Highefi Order, aflerted, not only by the Univerfky- Doctors, but by Scripturesi Fathers, yea the Authority of the Church of England. But our Momus will have the Term Evangelift to import no peculiar Office, but to be competent to Bijhop, Presbyter, or Deacon. This abfurd Aflertion he might have feen fufficiently exposTd by the Author of the Hierarchical Bijhops Claim, againft Dr. Monro. And he muft Tatle over again what the Do&orhas faid. But let us hear his odd Proof. He tells us, he will make it appear from the Definition affign'd by that Author, fcil. that they were to Water the ApoBles Plantations^ bring Commijjicnt from the Apoflles to the Churches, and Reports of the Churches (late to the Apoftles. But he fhould have known, That, r. He did make it appear, both from the Scripture accounts of thefe Officers, and theSenfe of Proteftant Divines and Univerfitiesf that they could be fixed to no particular Poft or Station s Which clearly excludes their Epifcopal Function. 2. That the Scripture defigns a fpecial Office of Evangelift properly and fpecifically diftinft from other Offices, and this even in the Senie of Sound Divines ,• Since, 1. Timothy is enjoyn'd to do the Work or Duties competent to that Relation, D) the Work of an Evangelifl : Which muft needs import a peculiar Duty fuited to a peculiar Function ; And has the fame Senfe in order to fuch a Scope., as if the Apoftle had faid, Do the Work.«f* Bifhop ("will our Momus make the Work and Office of a Bifhop competent to Deacons I) Do the Work of a farent, &c. 2. In the Apoftles Recitatioq and Scale of .diftincT; upon the Confiderations prem/d. §6- diftin& Offices appointed of God, be fets down that of Evanselift as peculiarly diftina from others, Efh 4. u. He gave (owe, tipoiu^ and [owe, Prophets: and /ome, Evangtlijlst and feme, Vapors and Tedd- ers. What Confufion were this, if the Term Evan^ijt imported no peculiar Office, but were fuch a Verfatile Ambiguous Term as is competent to any of thefe Offices? Nay, %ly > Upon this Ground he might make every one of thefe Offices infianced, as Iikewife 1 Cor 12. 28. fuch Individuum Vagnms% may I lay, or Verfatile Amphibions as afford no diftincl: Senle, and leaves the Ghurch at an Uncertainty what to make or them. J For what he adds of Philip the Deacon, who is call'd an Evange- lift, he but Tatles over again what is already expos'd. Gatvin tells him, c< Philip was no Deacon at Jerufalem, when thus term'd, elfe we ._ Evangelfft. But our Animadverter reads not of any peculiar Ordination to make him an Evangelifi, $r to fix. any other in that Station. I Anfwer, he reads not this as to other 'Extra* ordinary Offices ; He reads of no peculiar Ordination of Healers, Workers of Miracles, ot Prophet st which he holds to be Extraordinary Officers 3 and to be pointed at t Cor. 14. Shall I add, he reads no peculiar Ordina- tion of Titus, of the (even Afian Angels to their Epifcopacy, whom notwithftanding, he holds to have been inft all'd in that Office. And -whatever Evafion he can invent in this Cafe* will difcover the Folly and Naughtinefs of this his Notion, To the many clear Arguments taken from the Epiftles themfelves, to prove that Timothy and titm could not be Bijbops jet over thefe Churches our Pafquiller can repone nothing but this poor General, viz,. Tnat thefe three Epiftles were written after the time accounted for by Luke in the Atls ; Citing Dr. Pearfons DilTertation de Succetfione Epifcop. Rom. and his Annales Paulini, who (hews, that, " before the firft E« ' piftle was written, Paul was going to Macedonia,- and left Timothy 'at Epbefm, 1 Tim. 1. 3. Luke accounts only for St. Paul's beifg / thrice at Macedonia, but it could be at none of thefe three times, * that he left limothy at Ephefus j For, the firft time he took Timothy * with him, as appears, A8s 16. 1. The fecond time he Cent Timothy * before him, Acls 19. 22. The. third time timothy was in his Return, * Atts 20. 4. Alfo it is clear concerning Titus, that Paul, before he * wrote his Epiftle, had left Titus in Crete, Tit. 1. y. but Paul never ' fet Foot on Gretijb Ground, during all that time Luke accounts for in t *? 4®i >> Hence f ml was. liberated \vjm his Bonds ac Home, men* t tioned %66 A Review offome Exceptions c tioned ASts 28. and again travers'd the World before he wrote ttoafe c Epiftles. 'Tis Anfwered, For the Chronological Account, and the Tims and Date of thefe Epiftles, there wants not Difficulty, We mail not here need to refume the Hiftorical Account of the Date and Time of timothy arrd Titus their Evangeliftick Travels, before and after thefe Epiftles written to them, exhibited by the Learn 'd Authors of the Jus T>ivin. Minift. Evang. But for this Account and Calculati- on of Dr. Pearfon, our Momus will not find fo exactly to quadrate as he imagines. Who defires the exact Difquifition on this point ( which were tedious and impertinent here toinfert) may read Mr. Tool his Collection of the Senfe ofCriticks and Interpreters, in his Preface to both thefe Epiftles, and efpecially the exact Difcuflion of this Quefti- on offsr'd by the Famous and Learn d Hermannus Witfiusi in his Mekte- tn at a Lei den/it, Sect. 12. de Vinculis Pauli */>WRomam. Wherein, hav- ing fet down the Judgment ofLudovicus CapeVus and Dr. Pearfon, anent the Epockx of the fecond Epiftle of Timothy, which is mainly contra- verted ; And having ftated the Queftion, Whether it is to be refer- red to P*»/'s firft or fecond Imprifonment at Rome; And having pre- sented the AfTertion of Pearfon and capellus, t( That this Epiftle was * written by ?anl a little before his Martyrdom, and in .his laft Impri- ' fonment, and that it is the laft of all the Epiftles; Together with their Reafons and Arguments: He afterward prefents the contrary Judg- ment of feveral of the Learn'd, fuch as Hammond, Lightfoot, Cavs, be- sides others of the Romijh Communion, fuch as Baronius, Eftius, Sal- mzro, together with their contrary Reafons; Yea, and Anfwers to the Reafons of CapeUs and Pearfon* See Pag. 186, 187, 188, 189, 190, 191. And coming to give his own Judgment, Pag. 192. he afferts l< this * Epiftle to have been written in the time of P^s firft Imprifonment at ' Rorm* His Judgment alfo of the Time and Date of the firft Epiftle may be feen ibid. Sett. 9: Pag. 14 r. This Learn'd Author holds it not improbable, that the Apoftle Paul wrote the Epiftle to Titus, as alfo that to the Galatiam, during his Abode at Ephe/us. Ii the next place, this Hypothefis, which our Pafquiller will have fo fix'd, viz, That thefe Epiftles were not written, till after PduYs Libera- tion from his firft Imprifonment at Rome, is fo far from helping him, that it quite dailies and affronts his Caufe and Defign; For, 1. By this Hypothefis, there was a Church planted at Ephtfus% furnifh'd with Ei- ders, to whom the Authoritative Infpection thereof was committed, and that for many Years before the pretended Epifcopacy of Timothy could take place : For Paul teftifies, he bad Labour d three Tears among them, Acts zo. 31, Thereafter be was two Tears Pri/oner at Cxfarea, and upm ^Confiderations premised. *$- and two Tears at Rome ,• And how long after was the Commencement of Timothy's Infpe&ion, and, in our Epifcopalian Senfe, Epifcopacv over chat Church, is hard to determine. 2/7, When Paul took his Farewell of the Elders of Ephefus, Ms 20. Timothy, according to this Hypothefis, could not be Ordain'd Bifhop there, nor the firft Epiftle as yet written unto him,- Neverthelefs, the Apoffle, when he expe&ed to have {qzti them no more, he committed the whole Charge, Over- fight and Government of that Church to the Elders, without t'he leaft Infinuation, that their Conftitution was imperfect, and afterwards to be changed, and a Bifhop fet over them. So that this Evafion of our Animadverter appears utterly infignificant,and his great Dodlor and he in this Critical Travel, have made but a Journey to Utopia, and have run to catch a Nothing, yea, and have thus difcover'd the Strength of the Presbyterian Caufe, this Church being (as they rauft needs acknowledge; under the f nfpetfion of fuch Bi/hops, as Paul gave his latt Charge unto ; And thefe were the College of Presbyter's exerciflng iuch a joynt Authority over that Church, as is above exprefs'd And what a grofs Imputation is it upon the Apoftles Infallibility and Faith- fulnefs, yea the Spirit's fpecial Influence and Condu& in this Matter of fo high Importance, to fay, that the Apoftle after retraced this his Solemn Charge, in fetting a Prelate over them, who had all this Epifcopal Authority, afcribed here to the Elders, MonopohVd in himfelf > Yea, fays not the Apofrlc, that the Holy Ghojihad made theU Elders Bijhops over that Church ; And when, and how, I pray, did the Holy Ghoft retra6t this his Commiffion ? We fee into what inextri- cable Abfurdities thefe Men involve themfelves in withftanding Scrip- ture Truths. And 'tis evident to Conviction,' that this filly Pro/eft will never help him, or his Dodtor, out of the Briers. Nay he has herein prefented to the Presbyterians a ridiculous Pageant /«/ his admir'd Dr. Pearfm combating his no lefs admir'd Dr. Hammond and that in a point wherein Presbyterians are little or nothing concern'd - But of iuch Concernment in his Principles, that the one mud needs be luppos'd to have afFerted and fupported, the other to have betray'd his' Epifcopal Caufe, And let the Choice be referred to our Pamphleter's Melancholick Refleaion. To clear this further, let us hear what J. S. has> in his Third Letter to Mr. Mel- * Pag 8 9 drum * It is certain, faith he, there was all along a ^. 24 ^ College of Presbyters at Ephefus, even before a BiJhop „ was fet over them : We read of them, Ms 20. and, as I have already .! infinuated, 5$3 A Review of fome Exceptions € infinuated, ( And the Learn'd Dr, Vearfon hath to t AnnalFauti.' D~monftration prov'df) "it was after Faults Liberation Vag. 22. and ' from his firft Imprilbnment, that Timothy was made Dijfert.de Sue- ' Bifhop. Now if Dr. Vearfon and he acknowledge, that cefi.Epif.Rom. the Apoftle* Acts 20. fet a College of Presbyters with Epifcopal Authority over that Church, yea, and fuch as continued all that Decurfe of Time accounted for by Luke in the Afts9 the Argument adduc'd appears ftrong and invincible ; Yea, and over and above, the Inference is rhus ftrengthened of the Abfurdity inftanced, (cil. of making that Church to have had but a Mank Conftituti* on all that time, impeaching thus the Apoftles laft Charge to them> as is faid. He tells us, That, upon Supposition, the Epiftles were written after Luke'* fflfiory, There is no need of a particular Anjwer to what's pleaded from the Epijlles themfehes. Nay, very much need upon his Principles, tho* there's no Inconfiftency in our Principles betwixt thefe Epiftles and Paul's laft Charge ,• But his Hypothecs, as is faid, cafts a pi iful Im* putation upon the Apoftles Farewell Sermon, Ails 20. making him (o Inadvertent, a?, 1. To commit an Epifcopal Power over that Church to a College of Elders, when never to fee their Face more, and then to retract it, and fet up a new Form of Government, Again, in the ne*xt place, If the Argument pleaded fiom the Epiftles themfelves, will impeach their Epifcopal Authority, as certainly they do, to any Ra- tional Confideration, then thefe Epiftles, being written afcer the Hi- ftory of the Afts, confirms thefe Presbyterian Arguments, {hewing the fweet Harmony betwixt Paul's laft Farewell Sermon, yea, and his other Doctrine, in Oppofition to Prelacy, and that which is delivered in thefe Epiftles. For wa find the Apoftle injoyning the Jurif- dictional Act of the higheft Nature to pafton. 1 Cor, $. fuch as Excom* munication\ We find him alcribing the Power of Ordinasipn to a Pres- bytery, tho* himfelf was prcfent in the Action, 1 Tim. 4, 14, 2 tint 1. 6. Identifying ( Phil. r. 1. Tit.i. $■ ) the Office of Biff> p and Presbyter ; Difcharging Dominion in rhe Church, 2 Cor* 1. 24. much more a C*«*7 Peerage to any Church Officer; Alcribing to himfelf a Mini fiery and Service only, not Lordfhtp, 1 Cor. 4. I. Pronouncing a Woe upon himi felf, if nor Preaching t ;e Gofpcl, 1 Cor, 9. 16. Enj »yning the fame Di- ligence to Tim ot by, 2 fins 4. I. Preferring Labouring in the Word to Ruing, 2 Tim. f. 17. Enjoyning the Minifler of Chrifi not to be entangled with Worlily Affairs, 2 t%m 2. 4. And if, in thefe Refpects, the Apoftle has exploded the Diaceian PreJate, 'tis beyond all peradventure, he nercr luftali'd timothy or tim in fuch an Office, wnctker the Epiftles vptn *fe,Cbnfiderations pyemud. s6 BSSfcT?? *ritteft 6ef°re' °r aW/7W)»/»,W„,(,/Ti„0thv„ ,T. in thefe places, is in the Paper, joyn'd with' that X"k« fc2 S ««««»£ »/»4«w both to attend the Apoftle further in their 1L„. /vl- I tori****,'. And what fays onr Animadverter to this > W^ 1'f Word iranflated, /4,/„„^, '*«*. will as naturally bear to beTrarflT,! ie/cugit ind tncuragU, fare both the one and the o.Wmu ft refiw? the *«*,«*&*, ./ * jfcdfc, and muft be underftood^n a Sent correfpondent thereunto; So that our AAmn is never a whi,ri5 nearer by this VVnimPy But befides this, it feem [he Epfca. Enghjh. Tranflators were fhort of h m in the Know!e,W „f Tl £ P i Term. Who knows not that the Term t,. - g , the Gr"* ****&*« Thus &*»«*« .pj/i, renders^ S £ ?* ^.rendered « ^rTranflat.on, W.» /V»^ ZlnTZ^ Pur Tr.nfla.ion render, it, ^^Sto / fw ""* ' Thu V»Ua F^atcr, Erafixu, and IW*,. 7rfB„fe, renders the Ani cient %,«*Tranflation, *W«W „4, ,f e8M »r./f«/«rw T MacLw ■ am utremancm Ephefi, d-«; All wh«-h «:, J J'"'";er '" Macedoni- But 'tis further pleaded, that :■***>, jw*, i*uiflr« /fcfi Mr, A pftlu. S£? " X^S'ow^^i ^ Church. 74. 44M, Un'Jill^ !„Z/j A &£ °?CfS ° that of this appears in the Cafe of thefe Elders P ' " n° &*d°W- having 570 A Review effome Exceptions having defcribM the Elder, v. 6. adds this Reafon of hk Qualifications^ v. 7. For a Hifhop mujl be blamelefs as the Steward of God, &c. If this be not like it, yea, and the thing it felf, the Apoftle fpake badSenfe, and in this Caufal >8, or for, Realon'd with a meer Paralogifm, in faying the Elder muft be fo and fo qualified, becaufe a Bifhop of another diftin& fuperior Office muft. Moreover, 1 Tim. %. the Apoftle, in defcribing the Bifhop ^ defcribes entirely the G($el Minifter by his Qualifi- cations fuitable to him as fuch* If this be not like an Identify ingi there was never Likenefs of one thing with another. Sure Chryfo(lom and Jerom faw fomething like this, who aflert from thefe, and the parallel Texts, the Identity of Bifhof and Presbyter ; Yea, and the other Greek and Lathe Fathers menf ion'd. But thefe Men, fo they may make filly Shifts to uphold their Hierarchy, care not what Reflexions they put upon the Scriptures, and the Holy Apoftles. But let us hear our Animadverter's Reafon for denying this Identity. *Tis this, They were written to as Bifhops, and Jtftiticl Rules laid down, at touching their Behaviour towards Presbyters and Deacons* But, 1. That they were written to as fix'd Bilhops in thefe Potts, it his Petitio Trincipii and groundlefs Suppofition. 2. If the Apoftle gave diftinA Rules as to their Behaviour to Presbyters and Deacons, why did not the Apoftle give diftinA Rules as to the Office of Hft-op and tresbyter, as wtll as that of the Presbyter and Dtacon ? If thefe Rules were ad- drefs'd to them with fuch Diftin&ion, as not only to import their diftind Office, but likewife, to this Scope, to defcribe and diverfifie thefe Inferior Officers, fcil. Presbyters and Deacons, who are diftin&ty defcrib'd* why are not the fame Rules laid down, to diftinguifh and diverfifie the Bijhop and Presbyter? tfy, I inforce the Argument thu* ; To what Scope is it, that the Apoftle lays down, or delivers thefe Rules, touching the Offices of Presbyters and Deacons ? Sure, our Paf- quiller muft confefs, it was in order to Timothy and litus% and the Churches Inftru&ion, touching a Succeffion of thefe neceffary Church Officers ,• And if fo, why did not the fame Neceffity, the fame Vk and End of the Epifcopal Office, ( fuppos*d by our Pafquiller and his Fellows ) draw From the Apoftle an Account and Deicription thereof? Was the Apoftle fo concern'd for the Meaneft Office, and not for the Higheft Office of the Bifhop * And behov'd timothy and Titus to be informed touching the Meaneft Office, and yet had no need of In- formation anent the Higheft ? Other Grounds are produe'd in the ;V. Conjid. befides their Planetary Motion and Attendance upon the Apoftle, fcil. " The time fpent in *■ th«ir Journeys, the Order of them*, tht inJinuated Nature of theit ; imployment, upm the Gonfiderations pmtid. g.f 6 Itttployment, and that neither in the Salutation or Gonclufion or the • Epiftle to the Ephefians, nor the Apoftles Recitation of Church Offi- c cers, Ch. 4. there is the leaft hint of Timothy % Epilcopacy &c. To all which, our Pafquiller Anfwers Silence. Upon the Fourth Confederation, the Animadverrer tells us, he is mt therein concern d, fince he pleads not for the Prelate's Sole Power in Ordina- tion or Jurifdicliont And therein gives over his Concern in the Defence of a P< elates Superintendency own'd in this Name of Bilhep and pleaded for by Prelatifts. But upon this Confederation, he tells us He wiH difcover /owe Trips. What are thefe I 1. He knows no Epifcopal Writer, who pleads from the Import of the term for his Superior Order. Then he knows not Do&or Scott, who pleads this dire&ly : In ftatine theQueftion. he tells us, that the two ^ival Forms are the Presbyterian and Epifcopal. The Epifcopal he thus defer ibes, w, that which is flacdin a Superior Order of Men [called Bijbops ] to whom the Orders of Vresbyters and Deacons are fubjetl. Nay, Biihop Honnyman pleads the very Name, as importing this Superiority. And why, I pray, is the Name, by all of them, made ufe of as peculiar to a Prelate and to exprefs his Superior Office ? The fecond Trip our Momus will difcover is this, that, in this Confederation, the dijlinguijhing of Inf}e8ion from Authority is {aid to infringe the common Rule [ Suboidinata non pugnant ]. Yea, he is bold to fay the Author underftood not diftincllj what he was faying, Infttclion being one thing, and Authority another. But tho' it were granted, that, in fome Gafes, there might be a Difiinaion admitted, which this Pafquiller has not prov'd, the Queftion is, If the In&eSlion denoted in the Scripture Term Epifcopus admits offucb a Dijtinfiion r For this is the thing pointed at in the Confideration ,• And if he acknowledge the Import of fo- Jpeclion therein held out, will not alfo import Authority, he has robb'd his Lord Bifhop thereof, and thus, in ftead of helping, has wounded and ftricken oft the Mitre. For Walo Mefealinus his diftinguiflbinz lnff>effion and Authority, tfs nothing to the purpofe, as is already cleared Upon the Fifth Confideration upon the Point of Antiquity, and firft anent Eufebius's Hiftory, he tells us, u That Eufebius only • (hews *, that it is not eafie to tell, whom St, Peter * Lib 2 ' • and St, Paul Ordain'd to be Bifhops over every parti- Gap 4, * cular Church, yet he fays not, that he can name none, * but, on the contrary, he adually deduces the Succeffion of Bi/hoos ' in the Four great Sees. Rome. Mfx never ^.appear,. that the Bifhops rofihiian!y,iO;.^%^W »"■«/ B\£«f* wherein he is oppos'd' both iy .F -ulicrs *tft*Fa&ig pgjc^nt Divines, as is above clear'd ; Eujchm, in the Proc n of his Hiibiy, alierts* " That he had no.Tra&s -of any clear Hiftory going before^him ; Ye; •ii Difcovery here^ But let us hear Eujcbius himfelf fptak.it out, am give our Pafquiller the Lie, "Oirot $ vvrm, $ rm< yvfom fykartuyiyv'tTii vtii irrii at/nSiv IfyvVitfttf 'nam jpfltyttffr&i iS-mt*tleQti*M iHtMf'w, * p*JW irtCtf. Uk in yi \fhewing, that none of the Ancient * Fathers, Greek or Latine, mention him ; So that it appears written * fome Hundred Years after his Death. Take unto you, fays be, a * Baftard born after Ghafter and Purer Times, A Genfure which may be juftly put upon much of our Episcopalians new found Anti- quity. For what he adds of Wen's Retraflion, it can no more prejudge the Truth at firft aflerted by him, than tjhe Retra&ion of *ny other Apo- ftate, or prejudge the other Solid Truths aflerted in his Syntagma, For Meridetb Hanmers Tranflation of Eufebiusi as it has had the Tel Itimony of the Learn'd, and his Knowledge of the Greek, as likewife that of Didedavius, is fo notour, as to fcorn the filly Cavils of this Animadverter and his Aflbciates ; So.this Mcmus hath not fo much as offer'd an Anfwer to the Accufetions of Eufebius's Hiftory initanced. And for the Greek Blunder he imputes to that Author, this Man may be filent, confidering his wife Criticifm upon the Word j&uw* above examined. Upon the point of Ignatim's Epiftles, we are told, 1. Tkat tbo tbtfe Eft files were granted to be Jpurious , yet Efifcopaey ftands good upon ibefefti- monies of Cyprian, Origen, Pontius, Dionyfius Alexandrinus, &c. I had thought Epifcopacy had pretended to ftand good upon a Scrip- cure Teftimony ; And he ihould know, we lay not the ftrefs of this point upon the Teftimony of any Human Writings, neither doth our Charge of Forgery upon Eufebius or Ignatius fuppofe any fuch thing, but therein we only ule an Argument ad Hominem. ily, His general Citation will Weigh little with fuch as confider, 1. That the Ouefti£ on in point of Faft is anent Prelats Sole Power in Ordination andjurtf* Jiftion, which his Teftimonies will not amount to, tho' producd. a. That many Fathers, Greek and Latine, hold tbe Identity of Bifhop and Presbyter, and thus (land in Terms of Contradiction to him and his upm tie ConGdeMtiotts premiid. 375 his Aflbciats in this point, elfe Bifhop 7«j/*/, wbittaker, &£ Were be* guil'd and Impoftors* In the next place, our Momm is bold to vilific Mr. Jam fa's Perfor- mances, who in feveral Se&ions of his Nanx.ianx.eni Querela had made appear, 1. That Ignatius is Interpolated. 2. The invalidity of Dr Pearfon and others Exceptions to this point. %. That his Antiquity could not fecure him from Error. 4, That there is no Difagreement betwixt his Dodrine complexly taken, and that of Presbyterians, in all this, fays our Momus, be has perform d nothings What? Nothing in all thefe points ? Has he Examin'd them ? Nay, this was too hard Work. What then excepts he ? Why, Mr. Jamefon bat pnducdno Sentence unworthy ^Ignatius. Said you fo ? Then you approve all he has cited, fag. ny. viz. Tbat whatever the Bi(hop approve* of it accept- able to God. Thus in Epift. adSmyrn* cited from the Greek, In Epift. ad Poly carp. He pledges bis Soul for fucb at obey tbe Bifhop : Mr Soul for fuch, faith he. And in the fame Epiftle, the Bifhop mud not be reftfied that we may obey God, be muft be received at tbe Lord. In Epift. ad Magnes, As Gbrift did nothing without the Father, fo do you nothing with- out the Bijfiop. Again, the Spirit Preach 'd to him, fee you do nothing without tbe Bijhop. In Epift. ad Trallen. He boafis of his Knowledge of Heavenly things, the Orders of Angels, their Conftitutiens, Principalities, things vifibh and invifible. Is not this unworthy of Ignatius, to fet the Bifhop in place of God, and render him Infallible, Dare this Momm deny, that the imputing, of fuch abfolute Infallibility to the Pope of Rome is Condemned by all the Proteftant Churches, as a blafphemous Ufurpa- tion. Can any Rational Man impute to the Humble Simplicity of this early Martyr fuch vainboaftings of Knowledge, even of that wbich is not Revealed, fuch as tbe Order of Angels, &c. Mr. Jamefon juftly Charges thefe Epiftles with " a furiousZeal of inflaving all' Chriftians c under an illimited Wind Obedience to all Church Men. How fecure *< faith he ) had Bafilides and Martial, two Spanifh Laps'd Bifliops been ' had their Flocks believd this Ignatian Dbarine,, whom 6yp rial when 'Confulted by their Flocks, whether they might defert them, and • Chufe new Bifhops, refolved in the Affirmative, and Admoni/hed • to Chufe other Paftors. Had they believed Ignatius, it had been the blacked Impiety thus to feparat. Mr. Jamefon proves, in the place cited, that " the Antiquity of Ignatius could not fecure him from ' Error. Our Momus tells us, Tbat Mr. Jamefon proves this oddly from this ground, tbat be was fallible in matters of Opinion, and therefore might have been attually deceived in matter of Fa8. But any that but Reads his ij, Sttt. will fet this Man's pitiful Forgery. Mr. Jamefon fays, " His ! Antiquity __£ a fa-vlete of fame Exceptions • Antiauitv toM not fecit* him from Lapfes andMifJakes, Which ■ Ses our Prtl rtifts proofs for Epifcopacy from his EpiiHes , And this rJ&OvW^V :%MiU*itij aberration, of Chu'cbe, in tbe Afcfiks tmes. 'ffif ground, • that ■when Afojile, ,be UfaUhGmie, vert tot,,, the O ioprj e,rly fhv'J Us 7.™. ? . He cites, in proof of this, tli BilKop of Hifrofolis, in Antiquity and Auriori-y little Inferior WlJtiWun whofe Weaknefs of Judgnien- Euleiius h.mlelf Cenfures in to ■qnmu , ^ o(.the.Error of xhr^.s Perj,„ai Rtig„ ,coo Years *L!l - cat 29. after the Rcfurreftion *. Likewife the Antie^s con- *' F'* cWolAnteh carnal knowleigi of Women, earneflly con- tended for by W» Martyr, who liVd not many years after Ignatim TlaUenat. Hence he Infers, " Since they fwervd in matters of « fneculatiori they Svere no left capable of ftraying in-things belong- ' f4 to P adice : y For there is no more lecurity; i ItfW promifed « mthe cLrch from the one, than from the other. And of this e^yttaBhal DeoUnfton he gives Inftances, fuel, as, " Tie mixing of «£ Sacramental Wine with Water, the Obfervanon of Ea- ' Iter &c Hence ouf Animadverters foolilh Cavil appears, i. Mr JameTon lays not the Confluence Only or i« tn}tbt be, but proves a real Dell A i* Point of FaB, which demonftratively proves the Conft. I ST 2 Whereas our Momus tells us, 7h*r tbi, »«f fithth tlnZ'ion of aB.HMoricalGerUinlj; If he acknowledge an early aber- latTon of the Antients both in point of Prtnaple and Pratf.ce ( as lieedshe muft, unlets he fo expofe his Ignorance, as to render l.im- EtfrdcuTou ) how fecures he thefe Foundations? And does he Abklhat all Foundations are fhaken, becaufe in point both of Prin- ■ciol i and I raftice, yea and in point of Hiftory, many Antients have been deceiv'd, yea and crofs and contradia one another We fay .hen our belief of all Humane Hilfory is Humane, and in fo far Ture'as there are other Correfpondent Grounds betide, the meet Hmorv to found out Perfwafion. But, fays our Momus, Tb,, ^luuLketl Faith oftbe genuine Cammed Book,. Not at all finte vTv ^coend upon a Higher and Nobler Ground than Church H^ory!Pora„yPfuch Accounts, as is acknowledged by all Prote- ftaFor Mr iamefon's Reconciliation of Ignatius Epiftles, with the Frfnc Ws ofWbytery, and his Affer.ion, that ^«*^ ' Difaggieement, but a true Concord betwixt lgnatm s Doarine in • pomflf Government, and that of Presbyterians ( he ™*™%°<™> •being exprels for the Reciprocation of a B.lhop and a Paltor o. one « Congregation ), We do refer him to Mr. Jamefon s Proofs, fag. *£, upon the Gonfiderations premisd. ' Author defended what is afferted of the fpurious Tincture of thefe * Eplttles againft Dr. Pearfons firft Attempt ; Dr. Pear fins next Attempt being after that Learn'd Author's Death: For that which our Momus cites in reference to JJArroque ,from Monfieur le Clerk, wherein '(is alledg'i that the not Fublijhing that Author's Reply to Dr.Pearfon was from an evidence of the Doctors unanswerable Acquittance , forfooth ; I Anfwer> r. The account which Mv.Jame/on has given, fufficiently precludes this Ex- ception, wherein he (hews that L' Arrow's Son,in his Life,prefix»d to his tAdverfaria Sacra, gives this Account, " That L'Arrojue, in favours of * ' DaiUe, had fortunatly Defended his Judgment, but thefe Obfervations c being again Aflaulted by Beverege, the Author . had prepar'd an € Anlwer, which, faith he, we have by us alcnoft perfe&ed, which 'through the Importunity offome Friends was fuddenly turn'd ano- ' ther way. And who thefe Friends were, we are informed by a Man of the Epifcopal Perfwafion, viz, Jofeph Walker Tranflater of L'Arroque's Hiftory of the Eucharift, who defcribing his Life, prefixed to his Tranflation, tells us, " That at the Requeft of fome Perlons ■ favouring Epifcopacy, he did not Finifli this his fecond Piece. From which account Mr. Jamefon well infers, " That the Iifue of this c Debate concerning Ignatius % Epiftles was Heither Advantageous nor c Honourable to the Favourers of Epifcopacy, feing therein they faw c the utter Ruine of their Caufe by fo formidable an Adverfary, un- ' lefs the Storm were diverted by powerful Charms and Solicitatih> cons. And who will doubt, that L'Arroques Son, Writing his Father's Life, together with the Epifcopal Tranflator mentioned, muft needs be fuppos'd to give the moft ingenuous account in this matter, and far preferable to that of Mmfieur Le Clerk. Nay, the very account given by our Momus mikes this evident j For therein it it acknowledge, That V Arro^ue bimfelf, -with feveral others, had bun no ways fatitfied with Dr. Pearfon's acquittances in this point. In the Gonfiderations a PalTage is cited of StiWngfleet, who holdsj *f That of the 3 y Teftimonies produced out of Ignatius for Epif- * copacy, he meets but with one that has the lead Semblance of ' Truth. This, fays our Animadverter, is not faithfully cited. Why fo ? StiUingfleet fays, " He finds but one that has the leaft Semblance • of ChrhTs Inftitution for Epifcopacy. And what is the difference, I pray, betwixt the Semblance of truth in point of Epifcopacy ( for 'tis that the Doctor is fpsaking of; and olQhri(L"s hjHtution I Moreover, , Bb b m 373 A Review of fome Exceptions . in thefe Confiderations, he is told, that StUHngfieet proves this to be but a meer Semblance, a (hadow without Sub/lance. For what he adds of Dr. Pearfon\ Vindicia of l^nat'tuss Epiftles, which, he fays, remcvd all Stil- lirr fleet's doubts concerning them, and that Rivet and Videlius wrote before thf%nulm Epiftles of Ignatius were Publifb'd ; 'Tis Anfwered, he Ihould have confidered the fuccefsful Attack which Mr. Jamefon has made upon thefe fuppos'd genuine Epiftles, before he had made this 002ft, who (hews them even as thus Pub'ifhed to be ft ill Interpolated : Of which Judgment are alfo THondel and Salmajim, with others of the Learned. He fnould have Considered and Anfwered what he has offered agairift Dr. Pearfons Defences of the flrange and unacceptable Sentences in thefe Epiftles, wherein he (hews, how the Dt dlor is inevit- ably involved in Abfutdicies, in Defending fuch Paradoxes as are con- tain'd in thefe Epiftles. Our Animadverter falls next upon Stillingfleet's account of Ignatius'* Journey to Rome as ficlitious, and his- after ting the improbability of (ending , for Ignatius from A ntioch to Rome. To which he Anfwers, they could do things more furprizlng. They cduld do, therefore they did ,• What Confequence is this ? Stitiinifleet Argues from the palpable Improba- bility and Ufeleflhefs of fuch fending. To that point of what is rela- ted of Jgnatim\ Excurfions in his Journey, contradicted by the Martyr's account of the cruelty of the Soldiers that guarded him, ( a very confiderable Objection ) he can Anfwer nothing, and in To far appears Convidi by this truly unanfwerable account of this mat- ter. For that Pallage about the Antiphones, our Mom us has fufficiently expos'd himfelf in afferting the Truth of that Fable, (cil. Of the Quires of Argds defcending and revealing the fame to Ignatius, What Antifcrip- tural Forgeries may not have fuch a Defence ? But fays our Momus, t%tt will not impeach the validity cf his Epiftles. But if fuch a fabou- lous Account came from fo early a Writer, it Confirms, as an Acceilbry Argument, the evident hiterpolatisn of his Epi- ftles. J To Clemens his Teftimony of the Identity of Bifhop and Presbyter, our Momus can Anfwer nothing ,• Yet he will not feem altogether with* cut an Apology, citing a Paflage ed. Catoler. ia $ Apx'ef* «A«« hin%tyiau, &C, i. e. Summo quippe facer do'i jua munera tributa junt, Sacer- doiibus locus prcprius affignatus eft, & Levitis faa Minifteria incumbunt. Laicus praceptis laicis conftringitur. The unferviceablenefs of which Citation evidently appears, if it be Confidered, 1. That all along, this early Writer is preffing Unity, 2, He frequently calls to the Divine. upon the Confiderations prem/d. 27a Divine Command and Inftitution in point of Obedience, as is evident ff- %1* %- In" tnis §< 4°- he enjoyns, Omnia rite & cr dine facer ey qua Dominus peragere nos jufftt, 7«v'fa 7a'£« *n*v ^ma^, &c, And in the fame §. Domini enim mandata /equentes non aberrant, rots $ vo^uf TK uKoh$*ne< i ^tAyt-^rdy^tv. Adding that Paffege, Summo yuoj; Sacerdoti, 8cc. And §. 4'r. enjoyning • all to keep their Order and i Station, he preiTes an Argument alluding to the Jewifn Oeconomy, Non -.in omni- loco cfferuntuv facrifieia perpetua & diurna, 'Ov yavT&y* Kotpep'wt** ^offieut &c, vel pro gratiariim afiione, velpropeccatu & dslittts, fed Bierofolymis tantum ,• n< f$ $fc in piovis loco fit obiatio, fed in atn§ templi ad Alt are, diligenter plus infptUo facrificio a fummo Sacerdote. Now who of common Senfe does not fee, that in this Difcourfe> Clement is Arguing only by a meer Aliufion to the Jewifh Oeconomy ? Our Momus himfelf mult acknowledge this, elle he will fee a High Pried over the Catholick ChurChi and aflign one place for Solemn Worfhip; Yea afTert gratulatory and expiatory Sacrifices, properly fo called in, the New Teftament Church. Which is in the ^tb place convincingly evident from what he has, ff. 42. where he fets down the New Teftament Oeconomy and Order, co* 'A*Moi 9$r: IwyyihiekceM > &c. Apofkoli nobis a Cbriflo evangeliza-verunt, Jejus Chrifim a r£>eo. Mifjus enim eft Cbriflus a Deo, & Apopli a'GbriJh, & factum el) utrumq^ decenier ex voluntate ejus. Mandata quippe accipientes, & per rejurreclicnem Domini nojhi Jeft* Gbrifii plena certitudine imbttti, D(iq; vert o cenfrmati cum certa Spirit us Sancli fiducia egrejji funt< annunciantes regni Dei Advent um. Where- in he (hews, that the Apofties, endowed with the Spirit of Chriir, Preached the Kingdom of God, being thus Fortified by God's Com* mand and Word, and that vyith a full certainty, -drc Then mewing, how the Apofties manag'd this great Truft and Commiflion in the Constitution of the Gofpel Church, he thus expreffes it* X? PC"?^ %* Xj-*oMf »'»pi»'i$S 'it & daw* Per regioues igltur & urbss yerbum pradicantes, primitias eorum, Spirit probantes, Epifcopes & Diaconos eeruft* qui credituri eranty conliituerunt. Adding, x Ncque hoc quidem novum infti- tutum fuit^ mult is enim retro fectdis de Epijcopis & Diaccnis jcriptum eft, yiy&irTO %!. i. e. " Tnat the Apoftles knowing by our Lord jefus c Chrift, that Contention was to arife concerning the Name or Office c of Epifcopacy, and being endowed with fuch perfeft Knowledge4 * did for this Reafon conftitute the forementioned Officers, and there- ' after gave Ordination* that in the places ofthofe that wereremov'd c by Death> other approved Men might Succeed, and Execute their • Functions and Offices, Where he convincingly fhews, that the Apofrlesj as the great remedy of Schifm, Inftituted thefe Orders of Biftiops and Deacons, and this to remove all Debate concerning the Epifcopal Order or Office ; Moft clearly overthrowing this Pafquil- ler's pretended Subdivifion of Orders. So that he has discovered great Impudence in afferting, That Clement has not one word in all bis genuine Epijiles, averting tbe Identity of Bijhop and Presbyter. Here are Words, yea Ssntences more than one, afferting this to any that will but open their Eyes. But he was certainly a Bijhop him[elft (ays our Pafquih ler. And what them if fuch an Apoftolick Biftiop as he here defcribes. Such Citations are offered in the Confiderations to which he can make no Anfwer. Our Pafquiller attempts to Defend the fayings cited from IgnatiHs. A great Attempt : He was told that Dr. Scott had cited that place, fag. 407. in Epifi. ad Trallian. What is the Bijhop but he who hath all Authority and Power or Principalitie over all * Which he tells us, taken *ff together, bath nothing in it abfurd. For which end he cites the Greek, t< $ 'thv crmo-KQ*®; &c. which he thus Englifheth, What is a Bijhop hut a Supreme EccUfiaHicK Governour ? Quid aliud e(l Epifcopus quam is qui emnem Principatum & Poteftatem intra omnes obtinett quoad licet obtinere homini% qui pro viribw imitator Cbrifti Dei eft faclus. Now let us Confult Tranflators who may be prefumed to have underftood the Greek better than this Pafquiller. Thus the Learn'd Videlim Tranflates and Reads it, Quid enim aliud efl Epifcopus quam is qui omni Principatu & Poteftate Superior eft ; & quoad homini licet, fro viribus imitator Cbyfli Dei faclus. And thus on the Margent, is qui ultra omnem Principatum & Poteftatem tmnibm excelknthr eft, Thus TraniUted by Mart* Maflraus, Quid enim aliud upon the Confiderations premtid. %Bi aliudefi Epifeopusy quam is qui omni Principatu & Poteftate Superior eft,1 & quoad homini licet, pro viribus imitator Christ i Dei faclus. Wherein we may fee, That in ftead oiPrincipatum & poteftatcm intra cmnes% and quoad licet obtinert bomini, it is rendred, qui omni Principatu & poteftate Superior eft, Who is above all Principality and Tower, who has an Excellency beyond all Principality and Vower ; Or, as it is rend red by the Learn'd Authors of the Appendix to the Jus Div. Minis!. Evang. Pag. in, " Who is poffefTed of all Principality and Authority beyond all, as *c much as is poflible for Men to be poffefTed of. To give a further Convi&ion of this, Bifhop Hall^in his Epifaopacy by Divine "Right *, teils us, " That this bleffed Saint Ignatius, *Bag. 14$-," * whereas other Fathers compare the Bifhops to the Apo- „ 146. ' files, he advances his Pattern higher, requiring Obe- • dience to Bi/hops as to Ghrift. The Bifhop, faith Ignatius, bears ' Refemblance of God the Father of all things, the Priefts are as the • Bench of his Apoftles ( here the Bifhop is fet pretty High, even above Apoftles ). He adds, And left any Man fhould conftrue thefe words to found only of a generality of Reverend refpects, without yielding of any Power of Command, foon after be fpeaks Home * " For what other, faith Ignatius, is a Bifhop, than he that is' Superior 'to all Principality and Power, and as far as a Man's Power may * reach, made an Imitator of the Chrift of God. Here indeed he fpeaks Home, but fo as in Gorrefpondence to the other Expofitions to confound the Animadverter's Glofs, who will have this Sentence to import no more, but that a Bi(hop is a Supreme Ecclejtafiick Governour • For he fets the Bifhop above all Principality and Authority t beyond all as much as is pojjible for Men to be po^ejtdof. And here, befides his crofling Bifhop Hall and the other Expofitors mentioned, I do again pofe this Pafquiller upon it, how this is reconcilable with Rom.i%. Let every Soul be fubjetl to the higher Powers > For, if the Bifhop be poffefs'd of all Principality and ?ower, and Superior to all Principality and Power, and as far as a Mans Power may reach, made an Imitator of Qhrift, as Bifhop Hall with his other Friends have rendred the words, how is he Subject to the higher Principalities and lowers, according to the Apoftles Com- mand ? If Superior to them all, how is he Subject to them f I had thought the Pope's pretences this way had been long fince cxpos'd by the Proteftant Churches* Befides that this Man doth thus put a pitiful dafh upon his Loyal Clergy's pretences of Veneration for the Supreme Magiftrat's Authority, and pleadings even for his Ec- clefiaftick Supremacy, yea and for Abfoluce Paffive Obedience to him. But ' - g82 A Rtvkrv of fome Exceptions But Jef us take even his ownTranflation,we will fee,it will confound him ; For if the BiOiop is luch an one yai otnnem Principatum & pote- tc'em intra: omnes o&:vrt, this omnem Principatum & potefiatem intra omnes, thtfe Univerf Is, I lay, do fo palpably exclude chat Principality of the Civil Mr-'ftrat aiffTted by the Ap-ftle, as nothing can be phiner. And befidis, the other Claufes of his Tranfluion are fo far from hewing • him, thai they do further Dtfeat his Defign. The Paffage is quoad licet obtinere homir.i, ejui pro viribus Imitator Chrijli Dei efl faclus, as much as a Man can obtain, who is made an Imitator of Chrift. For wiil he deny a lawful Imitation of Chrift to the Supreme Chriftian Magi- ftrat, how then is this his Principality Monopolized in the Bijhop ? Again, if it be fuclt a Power and Principality as ftates the M- n in the Cafe of a fuitable Imitation of Chrift, * he rnuft acknowledge that this all of Trincipality and Fewer muft fall to the Ground ; For our bleffed Lord ownd a Subjeaion to the Magiftrat, pay'd Tribute to Cafar, en joyn'd a due Subjeaion and Obedience unto him ,• And therefore, by clear Confluence, the Perfon that arrogates to himfelf a Principality and Vower among all, or above all, can be no Imitator of Chrift, but a per- verfe Oppoter both of his Doarine and Practice. For what he adds of Mr. Mdvins faying> that every Pa/for is Supreme Ecclejtaftick Magiftrat in his own Par och, and that this is equal'y abfurd with what is atcribed to Ignatius ; What will not perverfe Impudence dare to aver i Becaufe a Paftor is Supreme Ecclefiaftick Governo-ur in his Paroch, is he poffefs'd of all Principality and Power, and thac among all, or above all ? Doth not Mr. Melvin hold the Paftor to be fuch a Minifter as Paul owns, jciL who is Subjed to the Presbytery, and other Church Judicatories, who has no Negative over the Seflion, far lefs over the Diocefe, and therefore is infinkly fhort of that ail of Princi- pality afcribed to the Bifhop, by this fpurious Ignatius. But he tells us, Who Quarrels at this faying, ma) Quarrel wkb Deut. 17, 12. which Ignatius perhaps had in vkw. or Matth. 10. 40: Heb. 12] 17! What perverfe Ignorance of Scripture is this? Becaufe God enfovn'd heark'ning unto the Priefl, and threatens prefttmptuous di^beyir.r the Vrieft and the JuJge ( he wili acknowledge in their lawful Com- mands, they being tied to God's Law, God rebuking them by MaUchy when psrverters ofir, Chap. 2. ), and becaufe cur bkftcd Lore fte ws that the) who receive the Apo/lles, in delivering his Mefiage, receive him , Matth. 10. 40. and enjoyns Obedience to ju(h as Watch for Souls, as they thit rnufl give account, does he- atcribe this Transcendent Univerfai Principality to them inftanced in the-Paflage of Ignatius > Will any in their light Wits affert this ? Nay doth not the Lord in that firft , Pali-age upon the Confiderations prems'd. 28- PafTage en joy n the Came Obedience to the Judge, owning his Civil Princi* parity f How then is the Pflefl PofleiTor of all Principality ? For what he adds,- that this Saying of Ignatius overthrows the Author of Nanzianze* ni Querela his Third Hypothecs. There needs no more than the read- ing of it to confute this filly Cavil. To Dr. Scotfs Citation of the Epiftle to the Magnefans, wherein Obedience to the Bijhop is enjoynd, and oppofing him in any thing difchargd ' • Which is crofs to that limited Obedience enjoyn'd to be given by Children to Parents, who are commanded to obey them in the Lord only * He AnfwerSj, there's no more Abfurdity in this, than there, is in i Pet. 2. 13, 14. Was ever fuch Impudent Perverfion of the Scripture own'd ? The ApofHe faith, Submit your [elves to every Ordinance of Man, for the Lord's fake, ( i. e. ) upon Ground of God's Command and Authority., confequentiy in a due Subferviency to his Reveal'd Will ) whether it be. unto the King as fupreme, or unto Governours, as unto them that are fent by him, for the punijhment of evil *Doers} or for the praife of them that do wellt v. 14. Adding, v. rft 16. That this is the Will of Gods and that, ia this Obedience, we are the Servants of God, Is there not -here fuch a palpable Reftriaion and Limitation of Obedience, as fhnds in clear Contradiction to that abfolute and blind Obedience enjoyn'd to tho Bifhop ? Our Pafquiller, in owning this abfolute Obedience to the Bifrop, and fuch as intirely excludes the dijdeying him in any thing, has fet up a good Number of Infallible Popes* and ftamp'd a Jus Divimm upon Bijhop Laud'j Book of Sports, his owning and contending for Pictures of the God- Head, and his other Superflitiotss Mandates, &c. The Paffjge *. Epijl. ad PhiUd. is alio cited in the premised Confi- deration,wherein 'tis affirm'd, tl That fuch as belong to Chrift, are ' joyn'd -or united to the Bifhop, and fuch as are not, are curs'd ; From which it is inferr'd, " That this thunders'a Curfe or Anathema ( upqn the Reform'd Churches not united to the Bifhop. What fays our Pafquiller to this ?'.'" Is this lgnatius's Fault, fay's he, that they are' ' not conftituted according to his Rule ? ' Are all Reform'd Churches ' exaaiy conftituted according to the Rules laid down in Scripture ? He asks, cc What we think of the Church of England, and mutt we ' lay afide Scripture, to complement the Church of Rome i &c. Was ever fuch Ignorance or Impertinency uttered or written? Who fees not, that the Queftion is not anent the Conftituticn of Reform- ed Churches according to Ignatius'* Rules? Or, Whether all Reform?d Churches are all exaaiy fram'd according to Scripture Rules? But, in this Cafe, the Queition is, « Whether fuch Churches, as are not uait- l ed to the Bifhop, are disjoyn'd from, or not united to Ghrift the ! Head ^84 A Review of fome Exceptions * Headi and confequently no Churches, but under the Curfe ? For this is the Inference drawn from that Paffage of the Epiftlc to the Philadelphia™, wherein it is afferted, That fuch as belong to Chn ft, * are united to the Bifhop, and fuch as are not, are Accursd. So that this filly Evafion will not help our Pafquiller out of the Briars, but he is tofs'd upon the Horns of this Dilemma, viz,. Either he mult owne this Confequence, and caft this formidable Blot upon fo many Re- form'd Churches, yea, and contradict many, it not molt, of his Epifcopal Pleaders, and himfelf to the boot, in owning the valid Ordi- nation of Reform'd Churches, who difowne Prelates : Or, he mult dif- ownethis Affertion of the fuppos'd Ignatius. And where is then his Defence ? And how is he thus fav'd from another Contradiction, in aflerting, That there is nothing in thefe Epijiles unworthy of Ignatius. He hath been further told, that, in the Epiftle to the Magnefians, and to the TraUians, there are feveral Paflages contradidwg the Epil- copal Senfe thereof, and of the other Epiftles, fince therein Obedience h enjoyn'J to the Presbytery, together with the Bifap So that either the Epifcopalians muft aitociate the Presbytery together witn the Bifliop in point of Government, or impute a Contradiction to Ignatius. What fays our Pafquiller to this > Juft nothing. Yet he is bold to anerr, be ts not at leifure to expofe the Reafonhgs of that Paver on this pint Come we to the Third Point, of the Catalogues of Bi (bops the flutter- ed and inconfiftent Mould whereof is made appear. To this our Uomus excepts, i. Out of King Charles's Reply at the Ifle of Wight In An, 1648, "That this will no more difcrcdit the Account it fclf, * than the Difference of Hiftoriographers, in reciting the Succeffion c of the Babylonian, or Perfian Kings, will invalidate .he Truth ot the f Succeffion in thefe Monarchies. All Men believe, there were Kings ■ in thefe Countries, and Gonfuls in Rome, tho* there be fome Diffe- ■ rence in the Relation, with refped to Petfons Succeeding, But how oft has this Exception been baffl d ? Might he not have read what the Divines returned to this Exception* ws. That « granting a Succeffion of Men to Feed and Govern thefe Churches, « while they continued Churches, cannot be denied, that the Apofiks « and Evangelifts, who had Planted and Watered thefe Churches c r tho' Extraordinary and Temporary Officers ) were by Ecc efiaftical •Writers, incompliance with the Language and Ufage of tneir own * Times, called BiOiops ; And fo were Eminent Men of cnief Note, « orefiding in Presbyteries of Cities or Churches call c I by fuch Writers * as wrote after the Divifion and Difflnftion of the Names of Bifhop I and Pw»by ter : But, that thefe nrft and ancienteft **^™™g upm the Confider&tions fnms[d. 3$^ * BifliSpsin the proper Senfe, fail... Inverted with Power over Presby-] * ters and People, to whom ( asdiftincl from Presbyters ) did belong * the Power of Ordination, giving Rules and Genfures, can never ' be prov'd by Authentick Teftimonies. Whence they infer, " That, * granting there could be a Proof of the Succeflion of Bilhops from 'the Primitive Times [ Seriatim _ ], yet if thefe, from whom it is * drawn, and through whom it is deriv'd, be found either more than ' Bifnops, as Apoftles and Extraordinary Perfons, or kfs than Bi/hops, * as meerly firft Presbyters, having not one of the three Effentials to * Epifcopal Government in their own Hand, all that's prov'd by this ' Succeflion, is the Homonomy and Equivocal Acceptation of the 'Word [ Epifcopm ]. . In this one Account, our pitiful Uomus might have feen all that he alledges on this Head fully remov'd; Since 'tis evident, r. (and even from Eufibius his Accounts ) That there's an utter Darknefs upon the firft Succeffors of Apoftles or Evangelifts ,• So that, in point of Hiftory, the clear Account of Succeflion is intirely cut off from its true. Source, and thus the pretended Spring from the Fountain: 2^, That the Scripture Church Officers, from whom the Succeflion is drawn, are> in the Scripture Accounts, found fuch as could not be fucceeded to in idem Ojjicitim 3 So that the pretended Succeffors, in fo far as fuperior to the Paftor, could derive no Suceefli* on from them, whole Office, in a formal Senfe, died with themfelves. 5/7, 'Tis evidently made appear, that there is an Homoncmy in the Word Bijhop, and that the giving Perfons fuch a Name, will not prove, that all Perfons thus nam'd were Diocefans, or holding fuch an Office, For what he adds of the diliinft Accounts of tie Four Grest Sees, ex* hibited by Eufibius, and that there's no plaufthle Objection againfl the Sue- cejjion from St. Mark, is fo often and fully refuted, that his Confidence herein is moft unaccountable. He mould have, at Ieaft, • confider'd what their own Stiflinqflzet has made appear *, * Inn. Pa£, who, as is above touch'd, impugns this pretended Sue- 29P, 30c &c. ceflion from feveral Grounds, as that fuch Succcjfien, tho' Perfonal, will not prove the Superiority of Order j That the Names of *Bijhof and Presbyter were common ; Neither did the Church owne the Divine Inftitntion of Prdaty, &c Sure* our Pafquiller will acknow- ledge, that, if thefe be ma4e, good, all that he has faid, or can fay upon this Head, is utterly fruitlefs : And he mould have confidered and anfwered this Learn'd Author's Profecution and Proof of all thefe three Points, before he had vented this ignorant Confidence in anAf- fertion fo often expos'd, and particularly what he has made appear with refpeft to the Churches of Alexandria and Jerujakm, C c c Our g K J Retneto offim Exceptions Gut Pafquillef tells us, No Man maiei nj flaffiiU Olje^Ju&tfi itil»**£ «tU Swefflen from ft. Mark in Alexmid, i> u Ho did wdl to add this prudent Caution, fO, m far m J W. But has he not known, that, in this, and fact, other places, the Succeffion was drawn fromihe «,T.»ipmi*«. oc th, M Ordain' d Mm.fier according to Blond I ianTo h^r Learn'd Divines. Has , I* not heard, that the Ac- count we have of this Succeffion, is, that i Marco Evangel.fia Prefer, 21 ex fe ehiium, &c Tine Presbyters cl.usd one from among them- felves, fit him up in the higher place, and caird him Bifhop, ,-ceord- ne to ferems Account. That therefore this Choice was » ter Ifcri, Tnd exdudTng him who was an Evange lift; And that he is clearly excluded bvf his Expreffion, Vre.byteri a Marco «.« A «W«-.I And therefore this was a meer Prefidency and flowing from their Choice and utely Heterogeneous to the Authority of «"k the £ SlifT1 BS that, ?£■. drawing his Proo s for fcg*. Jfc. *L« fiiokt nf Governing in common from ABs 20. P*//. 1. 1 ret. y. and ^m% the laft of gthe Apoftles, and afferting, .*.« <*< Epijcopaey prevJntin hu time came in by Cuftom » D« he muft needs hold, thaTthefe Bilhops of Alexandria behov'd to be fet up long after Aferi who died before Peter and tU according to the Calcu anon, even of wno aiea oeio Three Dia,ogues He mould have *iiiXU4, known, that B./MW * *« »« ^r* «• "r B./hop of Alexandria, whom he calls tie £w«g«/«/J W Paul* Interpreter- but ^x he places as the firft jBilhop, iW M* Marcum ^T , ' 7%, ,./i a«:^«„c AWanHrinse Parovbi* Aamtniftra- 'ZlltffJnlanat { Pious and every way Famous Man was the firft .hat did undertake the Government o the ^"'/'f Alexandria Whete 'tis obfervable, that Euftb.m calls Mark an Evange- lift and Apoftie And the Hiftoriesm2ke mention of his performing + Defntif. Lybia. fmtapolis, and o.her Countreys. T»/«i himlelt r-7: s ': acknowledges t. " That there is nothing, that's clear W. 1. f, 24- ack' -^f caTn be drawn either from Scripture or the •Fathers, who flourilh'd before the Council of Nice, concerning the erfcnaUwl-jW U of no Convene if there v,« a fibula' S»cctfm Bu fas he ^been told, that there's no Shadow tjS, £*£ *«g- of Prelates in his Senfe j And granting there were (ingular Fe. ons the Succeffion was dcdnf'd. « Mwtt makes appear, irom tie fist Or upon the Conflderatiens perns V. -9- Jain J Mtttzfter, as among the Athenians, tho* there were Nine Archon- Us, or Chief-Rulers, of equal Authority, yet the Succeffion of Gover- nors in Athens was deriv'd from the fivftArchom to make the Reckon- ing the more compendious. Nor will his bare Denial, that Evodim and Ignatius might be Collegues, ftand good againft contrary Evidences produc'd by the Learn'd. For what he talks of the Succeflion of -the BiHiop$ of Rcme, by the Teftimony of Irentus *. Ic is anfwered, i. If our Pafquiller fuppofe a Succeffion from Peter, he * Lib* 2." mould know, that Peters being ever at Rome, is denied Adv. Htrek by Famous Proteftant Divines. When he mail read C. 2, what's difcours'd upon this Head by Amyrald, and feve- ral otheis, he may (ee his Error. 2//, Irenaus's Accounts of the Suc- ceffion, do frame him ,• For Irenaus plainly afcribes the fame Succeffi- on to Presbyters ,• €um autem ad earn iterum Traditionem <*u& eji ab Apofolis, qu£ per Succejjimes Presbyterorum in Ecclefiis cuftoditur, provocamus €0s cjui adverfantur Tradittoni ; Dicent fe non folum Presbyteris, fed etiam Apojhiis exifhntes fapientiores, &c. Attributing thus the keeping of the Tradition of Apoftolical Dodrine to the Succeffion of Presbyters. And more fully afterwards f, Quapropter f Lib.4X.42. eis qui in Ecclcfia funt Presbyteris obattdire opportet, his mi ' Succeffionem habent ab Aptftolis, ficut ofiendimm, mi cum Epifcopatus Succefu one Charifma Veritaxis certum, fecundum p taciturn Patris acciperunt In which place, he not only aiferts the Succeffion of Presbyters to the Apojlles but hkewiie attributes the Succefto Epifcopatus, the Succeffion of Epif- copacy it fell, to thefe very Presbyters. The common Evafion of the then Community of Names, their own Smingfleet thus anfwers " That c T?/thu ■?uPP°fltj°» ol£ch Arguers for Epifcopal Succeffion' not only Apojtles being dead, but hkewife Presbyters being thus fubjetf to Bifhops exiftenr at leaft, in fome of thefe Churches conftituted fo, whence c Cu mJs tb*Commlimtl f Names ftii], that thofe who are faid to fucceed the ApoftJes, are call d Bifoofs in one place, and not Bifhopss but Pw- by>ers, m another yea, and the very Succeffion of Epifcep/cy attribut- ed to Presbyters; Can we poffibly conceive, faith he, thai thefe Tefti- monies of W«, can determine the point of Succeffion, fo as to make? clear to us what that Power was, which thofe Perfons enjoy 'd, whom he fometimes calls Bifhcps, and fometimes Presbyters. Adding that c^ "not alone in this Account of Presbyters Succeffion to Apcftles, but hkewife Cyprian, citing feveral Faffages of his Epiftles ! to tras Scope. SeeP^. 2,07, 3o8, &c. v C c c z For «gg A Review of'fom Exceptions For what he adds of James's Epifcdpacy in Jerufalem, 'tis very infig- fiificant, r. To Scaliger's Objection drawn frOm the Razing of the City ajrainfi the SuctefpW of Btfhops therein, he tells us, they wight have been ealTdfo, tbo not Rlfikng in the City. But how comes it, that thee is not the leaft Shadow of Limitation or ReftricYion in thefe fuppos'd Cata- logues, with refpecVto-a City Exiftent,. and Non-exiftent, or R z'd, and the Scatterings of th'e Church and People of God thereupon > Befides, that he (hould have confider'd, that, as to thefe Bishop? of Je- rujaknti their own Stillingfleet fays, " it will bear an Inquiry, where * their Seat was, till the time of Hadrian. Tis true, Biftiops might have been fo call'd after the Cities Deftrudion, but that, in all that Decurfe of Time after the Deftru&ion of the City, until Hadrians Time, there is not the lead Account of their Seat or Cathedral elfewhere, is very odd and unaccountable, Stillingfleet had objeaed, " That it feems ' ftran^e, that fifteen Bifhops of the Circumcifion are crouded in fo ' narrow' a Room, in refpe& of the Time of 'heir Ruling,- To which out Pdfquiller returns, "That, by this Calculation, more than 18, * Months will be allow'd to every one of them ,• That old Men are c Mortal; That -diverfe Bifhops of Rome had not liv'd many Days. Which Shift rather increafes, than difpels this Cloud and Doubt : For, how improbable is ic, that, of this Number of fifteen fucceeding Bi- mops, every one was fo old, or liv'd and rul'd fo fhort a time as he pretends * But to let this pafs ,• He tells us, " It is plain from Scrip- * ture, illuminated, forfooth, by very Ancient Authors, who liv'd in * the Second Century, that James was Bifhop at Jerufalem, that Simeon « was alfo Bifhop of it, after its Deftruftion by Titus • That there is \ no Abfurdity in being fo many, as EufeVius fays there were. He might have feen this phantaftick Conceit baffled by the * Pag. 144. Learn'd Didoclavius *, Eulebius cum Jacobum Epijcopum nominat, faith he, & Thronum ti tribuit, fecundum mortm fuifeculi loquitur, &c i. e. " Eufebius, in calling James a Bifhop, and * afcribing a Throne to him, fpeaks after the Cuftom of his own Time ; 6 The Apoftles were not folicitous about Thrones and Inthronizations, * as the Gloffator feigns. Eulebius reports of Simeon the Son ofGIeophos, * that, after the Deftrudtion of Jerufalem, the Apoftles, and remain. ' ing Difciples of the Lord, gattur'd together from all places, together * with the Kinfmen of our Lord according to the Flefh, and^with una- * nimous Sentence, judged him worthy to fucceed to James, in the Seat 1 of the Church of Jerujalem. And this, fays Eufebius, iLi&2*C.u. 'is reported, Rumor e[i .f. What, faith our Author, I ihould he have, pacgh'd up Tables of the Succeffion •of upon the Confiderations premsd. %$* 'ofB'iftops out of meer Rumors or Reports, fince, in the Sacred * Tables, we read not of the leaft hint of his Epifcopacy ? Let meer Ru- * mors be flighted, and let us fpend our Hours better, than in cohfuting c them. He adds, u That if James was Ordain'd Bifhop immediately ' after the Lord's Death, and prefided as Bifhop Thirty Years, and c if Simon fucceeded not before the Deftru&ion of Jerusalem, the Epif- * copal Seat was void and empty for the fpace of Ten Years. Was ' this Eleftion of fuch Confequence, that Apoftles muft be con- *, veen'd from the remoceft Regions to Jerufalem about it ? Did they * place any in the Room of an Apoftle, but fuch as was an Apoftle I * And mall we think, that they had a Refpe& to Flefti and Blood, in ' the beftowing of Bifhopricks ? Yea, and thus obliquely, and upon * the Matter, cenfure the Counfel of the Lord, who had not chofen * Simeon an Apoftle ? Our Pamphleter flights what is offered by Didoclavius, Bucer, Blon> del, Junius* &c, affirming confidently that in the Catalogues Bijhops of the fame Order are meant Cloathedwitb the fame Superiority over Tresbyterss and is bold to call the Sentiments of the Authors mentioned groundkfs fancies, which will no doubt pafs current with fuch as will take his petulant Confidence and groundlefs Affertions or Negations for Proof, but with none elfe. Remarkable is alfo that Paffage of their own StiUing- fleet *, " That the thing enquir'd for in this point, is * Pag, joo, * a Succeffion of Apoflolkk Tower, which cannot be prov'd 301, &ct 'by a Lift and Catalogue of Names m Apoftolick ' Churches, without any evidence of what Tower they had. They e apparently fail of proving the thing in Queftion, which is not, * Whether there might not be found out a Lift of Ter fens in many Churches * derived from the Apoftles times • But, Whether tbofe Perfons did enjoy , by ' way of Peculiarity and Appropriation t» themfelves, that i*ower which the * Apoftles had over many Churches , while they livd ? Now this the meer * Succeffion will never prove. And having clear'd this from what has been faid of the deriv'd Succeffion of Governours at Athens from the chief Archon of the nine Archontes, tho' equal in Power ; He adds for a fecond Illuftratioh, " That the Succeffion is not fo evident and con* * vincing in all places as to demonftrat the thing intended. 'Tis not * enough, faith he, to mew a Lift of fome Perfons in the Churches of * Jerufakm , Antioch, Rome, and Alexandria, altho' none of thefe bs % unqueftionable> but it (bould be produe'd at Thilippi, Corinth, Cafare*% * and in all the feven Churches of Afia, likewife in Crete, fome Succeed* [ ing Titus, and not think, Men will be fatisfled with the naming of a * Bi/hop ^90 A Review of fome Exceptions f Bifhop of Gortina fo long after him. He proves in the *Adv. Herts, next place, and even from Irenaus *, c< That the 8uceejfi$n Lib. i.Cap.i. ' pleiu ;d by Writers of the Primitive Church, was not a ' Succejjion of Perfons in Apsflolick Power. He alfo at large c baffles what is reprefented of the Succefiion of the Bilhops of Epbefus « from timothy by Leontius. ,„...' , . ^ r .„ Come we to the Confideratton of Aenus, wherein our Pafquiller tells us, he is little concern d: And as little am I in his pitiful Whirlings upon this Head. He tells us, it is no great matter whether he was eon* iemnd as Heretick or Schifmatick. Said you fo ? If he was Condemn'd meerly as a Schifmatick, then with our Pafquiller its no matter, era point of no Confideration, whether this Principle of the Identity of Bifiop and Presbyter , was own'd or difown'd, not only by all the Fathers of that Age, but likewife the foregoing cited in the Paper as owning this Identity. Is not this Pafquiller a fine Prcdor for the Epifcopal Caufe, who thus has given manus vifias to Presbyterians, telling us, it is to him no matter ofGonfequence whether Hierarchick Prelacy was accus'd or condemn'd by Antient Fathers ? He has been then, by his Confeflion, pleading for a Fable or Falfhood, and iohis Fellows in their Pamphlets . # ,.,,,., . ' . - But he tells us that the Age wherein Aenus hv d, fell, the fourth Century fihwshim not to be reckon d on. What ? Was that Century fo degenerat, which was next to the Third, fo pure and Apoftolick an Age, the great CyprUnick Age, fet by J. S. for a Patrern to all the Churches ? Were Augujiin and others in that Age meer Dunces * But what fay* he to the Fathers cited and referred to by the Authors mentioned * Why, little flrefs fays he, was to be laid on thefe Authors ( fcil. Dr. Reynolds, Whittaker] T>idocUvey &c. ) There's all the Reajon in the WMd to btium faith he, the Fathers of the fir (I three Centuries were again\\ Ae.ius : What pitiful prevarication is this? I. AJJthe Fathers of the firjilhree Centuries were againfr thefe Authors, and again (t CiiTan-.ler'j Afimon, Cnvemt inter omnes Apoflolorum at ate inter Epifcopos & Tresbyteros nullum 'fyijje alf^rimerK Yet not a jot he can Anfwer to the Citations of the Fathers offered by the Authors msntion'd, who in all Reafon may be fuppoted much better feen in the Fathers than this Pafquiller. Again, 2. If a*i the Fathers of the firft Three Centuries were againft Aenus, and condemn d his Judgment of the Identity of Vifhcp and Presbyter, how comes he to make it fuch a matter of Indifference, whether the Fathers ot lus Age condemn'd him or no > Were they fuch Dun.es and Ignoramus's as knew nothing of the pure Cyprianic Age i Axe the Monuments theie- of corns fo freih and entire co our Hand after to long a deturie ot Centuries, npon the Confederations prem/d. agt jemmies, and was that firft Age immediatly preceeding abfolutelv Ignorant hereof > Or were they fo Malicious as to oppofe themfelves to the joynt Sentiments of their immediat Forefathers, and that in a point fo c .nvmcmgly clear in our Epifcopalians Judgment ? He is told that Augufin imputed Herefy to AeHui. O ! fays our Pafquiller, Mr Jam-ion averts Auguftin under(ieod not Greek, and it cannot be prev'J Epiphamus was Tranjlated into Latin in his time. That he was not Tr inflated our Pafquiller is oblidg'd roma&e appear; But this is a Triffla not worth noticing. To the Paffage of Auguftin, Epift. 19. the laft of thefe dire&ed to Jerom, when preffing Jerom a Presbyter to ufe freedom with him who was a Bijhop, and to £orre& him when he was wrong he urgeth it thus, Quanquam enim fecundum honor urn vocabula, qua jam Ecclifia u/us obtinuit, Epijcopatus Vresbyterie major fit, &c. Our Pafquiller tells us No Man alive canfijueeza any [mh thing fiom his Words, at the denial of a difference, by Divine Infiitution, between Bifhop and Presbyter. But the-e needs no fqueezing to infer this, which is obvious to any of common Senfe, to any School Boy who can conftrue or Expound a Sentence of plain Latin, Qjiamvis fecundum bon.orum vocabulay &c. Wherein *ris convincingly evident, he afcribes the difference betvvixt Jjrcm and him, firft to a meer Nominal Diftinclion, 2//, To the Churches Ufe and Cuftom. Yea 3/7, To fuch an Ufe and Cuftom, which obtain'd and had then prevaii'd ,• Thus dittinguifning ic clearly from a prior Vraclke, and confequently, VrinaipUy of the Church. For he fays ^a jam Eccbfia ufus obtinuit, fhewing clearly that fomedmes fuch Difference was not in Cuftom, nor admitted into the Church. It is an obferve of Judicious. Mr. Durham, Difcourfing upon this Paffige of AuguHin, in his Differtation concerning the identity of Angel Bifhop and Presbyter, on Revel p fag, 227. "That with Augufiin, and almoft all the Fathers, Ujusy or confuetuU Ecclefia is ever taken when 'given as a ground of any Pradice, as cqmradiftinguiuYd from Divine ' Inftitution. Which he clears from the known Teitimony okj^r&m Epifcopi novennt fe magis confuetudim, yuam diftcfithonis Dominica veri'aie Vresbyteris effe majora. i. e. " That Bifhops are above Presbyters rather * by cuftom. than by any verity of Divine Difpofition or Appoint- ? ment. Which is in this evident, that after this Digreflion, in his Coment on Tit. 1. 5, 7. when he returns to the Text he ufeth this Tranfition, videamus iguur yualis sPre*byter> five Epifcopus, Ordmandus fit ; AlTerting clearly the Identity of both, yea and a Scripts Identity as founded upon this. Text and other Barai&ls cited by him. b «s aifo of Weight which the, fame Judicious Author has addue'd. u&m mis JPatfage 202 A Review of fome Exceptions Paffageof Augufrin againft Billarmins Glofs, who will needs Identifie the "Ufe of the Church and Divine Inftitution, that fuch a Senfe will * crofs Auguftiris Scope, which is to fhew that tho' he was call'd a Bifhop ' and Jerom a Presbyter, yet indeed there was no difference, but fuch * as Ufe and Cuftom had brought into the Church ,- Intending thus ? to leffen that diftance of Superiority that feem'd to be between them -'becaufe of thefe Titles. Whereas, if we expound Cuftom or Ufe ' other wife* Augufiin rather had thus aflerted and agreg'd the Diftance * that was between him and Jerom, than any ways diminilhed the ' fame. To what is faid of Blondely he can only Anfwer by a fimple denial. He is bold to affirm, that what Blondel has upon this Head is only fr em Ferdinand Major. But his naked Affirmation is no proof, and is eafily Confuted by the Reading of Blondel. He admires what is faid in the premis'd Confideration anent the receiving of the Chrifti an Faith in Scotland, fo early, fcil. An. 97. ('tmay be for this he has Read 79. ) He enquires what Author averts ft early a Reception. This is a point needs not be much infifted upon. Our Buchanan in the Life of Donald 1. tells us, Donaldus Regum' Scotorum primus/Chriftiatios ritus receptrat. i. e. Donald I. King of Scots did firft receive the Ghriftian Religion: This Donald did Reign about the beginning of the Third Century. Spit/wood faith, " The Ghriftian Faith was firft publickly * received in Anno 203. Which was the fourth of Donald's Reign* But he adds, " Yet was not that the firft time wherein Chrift was here f made known. — And in the fame Pag. 2. " I verily think that ' under Domitians Perfecution fome of Johns Difciplesfiift Preached f the Gofpel in this Kingdom. - ■■■ - Sure not long after the Afcen- f fion of our Lord, at lead when the Apoftle St. John yet liv'd, the ' Faith of Chrift was known and embraced in divers places of this. ' Kingdom. Thus he. Now DomitUn was advane'd to the Imperial Dignity about An. Chriji. 83 # { according to fome Chronologers ) and his Perfecution began Ans 93. And Johns Death is reckond about ..An. 99. So that, according to Spot/wood, the Gofpel was Preached in Scotland before An. 99. How long before he does not determine. Several other Chronological Accounts of this early p Recepti- on might be here Recited ,• But what is faid is fuffici- ent. Gome we now to the Syhgifm reprelenting the Method and Nerves of our Epifcopal Arguings j Which is thus, *' If Diocefan Bifhops by \Teftimony of Ancient Fathers did exift in the Primitive Times, and J Catalogues of them are drawn by th^fe Ancient Fathers from Apo- * files upon the Confiderations premt/d. g«* c ftles and Evangelifts j Then I muft believe thefe Biffiops to be of * Divine Inftitution : But fuch Diocefan Bifhops, by Teftimony of ' Ancient Fathers,did exift in the Primitive Times, or in the Churches, * and Catalogues of them are drawn by thefe Fathers from Apoftles c and Evangelifts ,• Ergo, I muft believe Diocefan Bi/hops to be of * Divine Inftitution. Our Animadverter tells us, that it is pretty good upon the matter. And why not alfo in Form, according to their Prin- ciples/ Which is eafily made appear, had he ofter'd any Exception to the Form or Mould of the Argument. Well, what fays he to what is ofFer'd againft the Major or Minor and Aftumption, todifco- ver the Unfoundnefs of both ? Juft nothing. But leaft he fliould feem to give it quite over, he tells us, he win frame it a little otherwife* But fuch a Frame he put* it into, as does in a great meafure, if not entirely, overturn its Nature and Scope, Well, thus it is in his Mould. *' If it was the universal and firm Belief of all the Chriftians who liv'd * in the Apoftolick Age, and the two Ages . next to it, that Diocefan " Epifcopacy was Inftituted by the Apoftles, then I have good Reafon c to believe that Diocefan Epifcopacy is of Apoftolick Inftitution : But c it was the univerlal and firm Belief, &cm Ergo, Wherein we fee9 i. That our Animadverter hashed from the true M?^*^oftheSyI!ogifm, the Matter whereof he dares not Quarrel, nor Form either. For, therein the Strefs and Foundation of our Perfwafion and Certainty anent this Belief and Pra&ice of the Apoftolick, and the Two next fucceeding Ages, is laid upon the Teftimony of the Ancient Fathers, as the Arguings of all his Tribe do import, and upon the Catalogues of Bi&ops drawn by thefe Fathers from Apoftles and Evangelifts. For this is properly the point, when we fpeak of the Scops of the Catalogues adduc'd to prove this. And he cannot call it into Queftion, yea pofnively owns it, that the Catalogues of Succeflion are the great Argument and Medium made ufe of to this end. But fo it is,that,in this new Syllogilm, in ftead of this Medium drawn from the Epif copal Lines ef Succefftm and the teftimony premis'd, he Subftitutes the certainty of this matter of Fad, fcil. the univerlal and firm Belief of aS the Chtiftians who livd in the Apoftolick Age, and the two fubfequent ; putting that which is the Scope intended by the Catalogues, or the proper immediat Inference therefrom, in place of the Medium It felf ,• It being evident, that the Catalogues and Teftimonies mention'd are adduc'd to prove this point of Fact, fcil. this univer[al and firm Belief of all Chriflians in the Apoftolick. and two Ages Succeeding in point of Diocefan Epifcopacy ; Which here he a flumes as the Medium. Betides, if thefe deduced Lines of Succejfion will prove this univerfal Belief and Reception, why has he laid afide this D d d Medium -2„4. A Review of/owe Exceptions Medium, and in place thereof fubftituted this point of Fad, fal the univerlal Belief and Reception mentioned? Again, in the next place, this Argument, as thus Moulded refits upon the Ammadverter himfelf, who grants that feveral Churches in the Apoftohck Times were not Moulded Epifcopally, and in fpecial that of Epbe- But to come more clotty to this Syllogifm, 'tis eafy to mate appear, that therein he is ftill in the Briars and cannot in the leaft efchew the Imputation of the fitft. Againft the Major thereof it is Ob.eaed. that therein the Humane Pradice of the Churcn is made the infallible Comment as to Scripture accounts of Church Government that thus this Practice is fet up as the J>,m, the ratio a prion, the chief Ground whv I believe thefe Scriptures to have (uch a Senfe, and no other; That thus our Faith is made to fland in Mam Wifden, and the Scriptures made of a private Intimation; That by this Principle Men have a Dominion over our Faith, which is removd thus from ..s true Balls and Foundation of a Divine to a Humane tefttmon,. Now if thefe Grounds hold good againft the Major of the firft Argument us beyond all peradventurtthat they do equally level againft the Major of this new Syllogifm; For here the fuppos'd Praft.ce and Belief of the firft Chriifians is laid down as the fole and proper Reafon and Ground of our Faith and Belief in this point ; It being ^contravernbly clear that the Queftion here is not about a meer pmt of FaB or of what the Church did hold and Believe in point of Church Government, but anent the > and Divine Right of Church Government, or what the Doarine and Pratfice of the Apoftles was in this matter To make this further evident, together with this Mans pitiful Triffltng ,n this mltter, I would ask, what our Animadverter holds to .be : the Founda- tion of this Belief, which he calls the firm BeUef of the Apo^oUckAie or what it is that with him Fortifies this f»w«/i, and renders it fuch > Sure he will not fay, that it is thus firm or ftable meerly becaufe a refolute orfiX'd Verfvafim, or thus in *W&? S»/ u without refped to a CuitahU ObjeB and Ground, yea a D,v,»e Ground, This he muft of neceffirv admi if he afTert it to be * Divine Beluf; For all Hereticks hoW SubjeaTveiy (or in that Senfe) a firm Belief oi their Errors: And fuppofing the Errors inftanced to have been of an un.verfal Spread heBeHef had been, as Extenfivel, treat, fo Srijtlhv.hr firm , ^ And herefoe of neceffity\he muft fetch this Brmnef, from a SenpmeGround, And thus our Vagrant being reducd to the true hold the Quf>°™, WhethTtheChurL meer JZfatii* vil clear and demon f rat, he firmnef, of this Belief I Or, if it m„ft h male appeal bj » smpanfm thereof mth the Scripture upon the Confider&tions premi/d. 395 Scripture Rulel Whether we muft, for the certainty of our Peffwafion, iri point of the Divine Right of Prelacy, reft upon the Churches meer Affertion hereofi or fearch further for a Scripture certainty ? If he affert this laft (as needs he muft, unlefs he difown Proteftant Principles ) then, 1. His Medium is weak, by his own Gonfeffion, in deriving this Firmnefs from the meer Belief and Pra&ice of the Church, as is faid. And, ily, He thus, of neceffity, will be lead in to the Scripture Bar and Decifion in this point ,• For there only can we find the folid Ground of a Divine Belief , as is faid. But in the next place, if he foHnd this Firmnefs of Belief upon the Churches meer Practice, he will fall clearly into the PopiftlCamp, in holding the Churches Infallibility, not only in this, but other points of our Belief, and all the Abfurdities attending that Principle will light upon him, who thus will make the Scripture ferve its Servant, as Stitiingfleet phrafes it, and bend the Rule to the crookgd Stick. But let us hear how our Animadverter attempts to prove the Major, wherein we will fee, how a Popifli Notion has drench'd him in the Mire. If, faith he, the Univerfal and firm Belief of all Chrifiians in the ApoHolick and the two next Ages, be the befi Reafon we have for believing, that fucb a Goff>el or fuch an Epifile belongs to the Canon of the Scripture, then it cannot bttt.be a good Reafon for believing the ApoHolick. Infiitution of Diocefan Epijcopacy : That the XJnivtrfal and firm Belief of the afore faid Gbriftians is the be$ Reafon we have for believing fuch a Qofpel or fuch an Epifile to belong to the Ganon of the Scriptures, he fays, muft be acknowledge by the Author of the Confederations, unlefs he can produce better. This Popifli Ground is above Convi&ed of Falfliood, Has this Man ever Read or underftood Proteftant Principles and Pleadings againft Papifts, who utters fuch Stuff as this ? We fee where thefe Gentlemens Principles lead them, and Popery and Prelacy in their Pleadings muft ftill ftrick Hands. Shortly, the Churches Reception and AftertiOn is neither the only, nor the beft Ground of our Belief in this point, as is above clear'd ,♦ Bat fuch intrinfick innate evidences as are engraven upon the Canon, and all the Divinely Infpired Writings, are the proper andge- •'. nuine Foundation and Ground of our Faith in the Judgment of all the Reformed Churches. AuguHin ( of whom we ftiall after have Difcourfe With our Animadverter ) would have Taught him founder Divinity, as in many other places, fo in ConfefS. Lib. 1. Cap. 5-. Berfnafifti mihi} O Domine Deus, non eos qui crederent Libris tuts, quos tanta in omnibus fere gentibtts Authoritate fundajfi, ejje culpandos9 fed eos qui non erederint ,• Nee audiendos effe ft qui forte mihi dicerenty unde fcis illos libros uniiH veracijfimi Vet Spiritu. ejje humano genet i Miwfirates l Id ipfum D d d 2 emm 2$6 A Review of font Exceptions enlrn maxtme "ertdendum erat. i. e. •' Thou haft perfwaded me, O lord 'God, that not thofe who believe thefe Books of thine, which with f fo great Authority thou haft in all Nations Founded and Fortified, * are to be reprehended, but fuch as would not believe the fame $ ' And that they are not to be heard who poffibly might fay tome, * from whence know you that thofe Books are given to Mankind, ' by the Spirit of the only and molt true God 1 For this is k which 8 above all things is to be believed. Where 'tis evident that %dug*\\in puts this among the prima credibility or firft Principles of Divinity* that the Sacred Books are of a Divine Infpiration. Even *DeVer.Dei BeUarmin himself * oppofes this to Anabaptifts Lies, Lib, f. Cap. who boaft of the Spirit, At Sacris Scripturis qua Prom j j, pbeticis tjr Apofiolicis Uteris continentur nihil efl not ins , nihil certius, ut (lultiffimum ejje necejje Jtt tfui Wis fidem ejfe haUndam neget, i. t. u That nothing can be more clear, notour or 'certain than the Holy Scriptures contain d in the Writings of Pro- * phets and Apoftles, fo that to deny Faith to them is the greateft c Folly. Which he after proves in reciting the ordinary Arguments, to this Scope, fuch as, " The Truth of Prophecies, the wonderful ' Harmony of the Writers tho* at fo great a diftance of time and place, s the Divine Defence and Protection from Man's Profanation there- * of, &c. And ( as above ) this Animadrerter may be pos'd upon it, Whether thefe foremention'd Evidences of the Divine Authority of the Canon do not oblige the Church to a Reception and Recommendation cf tbefe Sacred Writings as Divinely Infpir'd ? Sure he cannot deny this Obligation ; And hence it inevitably follows, that the Ground of our Belief is of an higher Nature than the Churches meer Receptions which is but a fecondary Ground, and founded upon the firft. The Scripture com- mends it felf to all, obliges all to whom this Divine Revelation comes, to a finable Belief and Reception, and the Ground is the fame upon the Evidences mention'd, both with refpeft to the Churches Recepti- on and Recommendation, and the Reception and Belief of all her Members ; Elfe he muft fall into this Abfurdity as to affert that the Church believes the Canon becaufe me receives it, and receives it, becaufe me, believes it. But of this above. He fays/ this is a good Argument, unlefs a difference can he af fan' d betwixt the two In/lances. Indeed the difference is eafiiy affign'd : In the one Cafe, the Effential intrinfick Evidences of a Divine Infpiration and Authority are evident and acknowledg'd by all Proteftants, and confe- quently the Churches inviolable Obligation of the Reception menr tion'd > In the other Cafe, both this Reception and Obligation are at leaft, upon the Confederations prtmtsd.- 397 leaft, debated and contravened, as he muft needs acknowj ledge, . . V * Bat, feys our Animadverter, the Ground holds good, utilefs we canfhew^ that Vicce/an Epifcopacy was not j» univcrfatiy receivd, or firmly believd to he of Apojhlical Inftitution^ at that (ucb a Gcffrel or fuch an Epifile belongs to the Canon. But he mould have underftood better the Method and Na- ture of Arg uing, than thus to Blunder ; For, the Affirmative, touch" ing thU Univerfal Reception of Epifcopacy, as of Divine Institution, being his, it lies upon him to prove and make good this Aflertion ,• Yea, and not only this Univerfal Reception, in point of FaB in the Ages mention'd, but likewife the Reception upon an Apoftolick Warrant and, Institution \ For, upon fuch Warrant, the Church receives the Di- vine Oracles, and he has already equiparated the Reception in both Cafes, in refpeel of the Ground thereof. Now, when our Animad- verter has made good this Affirmative, I can allure him, Presbyterians will give him the Hand, and yield the Gaufe to him. But 'tis ftrange, how this Man feeks fuch a Proof. Knows he not the large Proofs ex- hibited of Ancient Fathers, owning Presbyters and Bilhops to be one and the fame ? And that Eufebim has no Proofr, in point of the firft Derivations of Church Government, from Apofrles, but what are to be clear'd in the Writings of VauU no Primary Lines of Succeffion, but fuch as are drawn from him ? And fince Eufebim, the prime Hi* ftorian, takes this Meafure, why ftands he not to it? Why debates he not the Matter from his and other Apoftolick Sacred Records ? He fays, his Reafoning is founded upon this uncontraverted Suppos- ition, That the Confentient Ttftimeny of innumerable competent Witneffes, if a foil d Foundation of our Belief of a. Matter of FaB, a Suppofuion which our Saviour and all his Apoftles proceeded upon, and without which, no reveal'd fofitive Religion can be handed down, er fubfift. But, i. He has been told, that this is not a meer Matter of Faff, or abfolutely fuch, but if it muft be fo call'd, it is a Divine Fa.B, fell, a Que{Uon anent the Do- Brine and Brattice of the Apojiles% in point of Government, and the Apoftolick Churches Reception and Vrattice accordingly •■. which all muft acknowledge,, muft be clear'd from the Divine Records, fince it is this Rule, not: the Churches me-er Pra&ice, which can clear this point.. 2. He falfe- ly fuppofes (as is hinted.; the fame Univerfalicy and Certainty of the Churches Reception of a reveal'd Religion, or the Divine Records, and of Diocefen Prelacy, which he lhali never be able to prove, upon Grounds often affign'd. Our Animadverterfhews but the Confidence of a Fool, in talking of innumerable competent Wiinefas in point of Biocelan Epifcopacy, when there are exhibited fo many contrary, Witneffes, 398 A Review of fome Exceptions WitnefTes, a$ to this point of Fail, befides the Scriptures contrary Teftimonv, which he will 'acknowledge to be the nuin. 3/7, He /hews grofs Inadvertency in two points, 1. In aflerting, there is no other Ground of Handing down a Revcal'd or Pofitive Religion, but by fucb Confentlent Tefliwonies as he mentions, and that, without thisy no Pofitive Religion can Jubfift ; For, fince the Authority of a Pofitive or Reveal7 J Religion, depends upon a Divine Revelation, it is the Revelation it Jelft comprobated by innate Evidences thereof, that grounds its Authority, or makes Faith to ir, in an Objective Senfe, and obliges the Reception, whatever be the Method or lnjlruments of Conveyance, more or fewer; And 'tis the Divine Breathings, which makes this Objedive Certainty effectual, whatever way it be handed down. Cannot this Man diftin- guifli betwixt the Medium and Motive of Ghriftian Belief, or Recep* tion of a Divine Revelation ? zly, The fame Inadvertency appears, in aflerting. that out Saviour and his Apoftles pleaded upon this Ground of an Handing down by Harmonious Witneffes, if he mean the Ground of the Authority and Veracity of their Teftimony,* It being evident, that our Saviour pleaded the Scripture Records, Search the Scripturest for in them ye think ye have Eternal Life, and thefe are they that tefiife of me. He pleaded the Writings of Mpfes and of the Prophets, Had ye believ'd Ma fes, fays he, you would have believd me, for he wrote of me. Beginning at Mofes and all the Prophets, he expeunded unto the Dijciples the things concern- ing himfelf, 8cc. So did his Apoftles, in Proof of his Mediatory Autho- rity, Appeal to the Scriptures, the ftanding and infallible Record: The Apoftle Paul open'd and alledg'd from the Scriptures Chrift's Authority. He defcribes the Gojpel, Rom. 1. 1, 2. that which God had fromii'd before by his Prophets in the Holy Scriptures, concerning his Son Jefus Chrijl our Lord, &c. We readi that the Bereans feanb'd Paul'* Voclrine ty the Scriptures • And we never find our Lord and his Apoftles Ap- pealing to Tradition, or fuch a Handing-down as he alledges, as the Ground of the Veracity of their Do&rine, and of the Obligation of a Reception, altho' this is fuppos'd, but ftill as a Mean, not the Motive of Belief, as is faid. Finally, he foolifhly afferts, that, if we quite this way of Handing down by Tradition t we mu(l betake our ftlves to immediate Revelation. For, if we fuppofe, ( as needs we muft, unlefs we withftand clear Scripture Light, and the Sentiments of all Proteftant Churches ) that the Canon t by its Innate and Efjential Light % commends it (elf, this is that Rule, that directs all Revelation, and whereby we are to try the Spirits, and all pretended Revelations, In Jo/ias's Days we find, that the Sacred Records had been of a long time hid and obfeur'd, fuppofe it had been upon the Considerations premise}* 299 been for fo long a time, that a Traditional Handing down, or Con* ▼eyance, had been, if not quire loft, yet rhuch obfcur'd and contra- dicted, ( for he will not deny the Poffibility of fome Iraditional Im- foflure being found there, in ftead of the True Canon ) the Practice alfo of the whole Church, for fo confiderable a Trad of Time, going crofs to it, pray, whac commended the Reception again of the Canon, and of thefe Sacred Records/ Was it not the Divine Impreffion of the Canon it felf, or thefe EiTential Marks and Evidences demon- ftrating its Divine Authority? 'Tis true, it was found in the Temple, as a Record there, and this might have its own Secondary Force,* But who will difowne it, that it was the Divine Au- thority it felf, with Infallible ObjeBive Evidences, and thefe blefs'd with Saving Divine Influences, that touched Jofiass tender Heart, when he heard it read, and engag'd him, and the People of God* to a due Re* ception? But I need not any further purfue the Popifli Antifcriptural Rovings of our Memus. *• He tells us, that, hy this time, the Unjuccefsful Attempt appears upon the Major of the Argument ; And by this time, fay* I, the Succefsfui Attempt, which he can no otherwifc Anfwer, than by fuch Fopperies as we have heard. He tells us, the Attempt is made againfi the Minor. What the Minor is, we have heard, and how attempted, as likewife what the i&inor h he has offered. Againft it, it has been averted, that this Uaiver- fal Practice is at beft Uncertain, that many of the Ancients wrote no- thing, many Writings are periuYd, many are fuppomitious and coun- terfeit ; Upon all which the Demand is made, " How it is prov'd * and made appear, that fuch of the Ancients as have not written, or * whofe Writings are loft, have not contradicted fuch as have written I Again, 'tis alledgvd, " That many things had a Traditional Convey«j * ance, as from Apoftles, and have had an Univerfal Gonfent, as far as 'Hiftory can reach, which, notwithstanding, are found Spurious^ * and,, even in the Acknowledgment of Prelates themfelves, crofs to the* ' Canon, whereof Inftances are already exhibited. To this our Animad* verter Anfwers,i.T£tf we are not t$ regard what Teflimonies might have been poffible, hut fuch as are acluatiy handed down to ui% The Impertinency off which Anfwer appears, when it is confidered, i. That 'us not meer- ly a Vofiibility of Teflimonies the Argument is founded upon, and there- by his Minor impugned, but Actual, Real, and, as far as Traditional Conveyance can reach, clear te(limoniesi in point of Belief and Do- ctrine, which the uncontraverted Canon reprobates, and are now univerfally acknowledge Errors. V;, Thefe not only probable, but adually handed down Teftimonies, oppolite to that Prelacy he main- tains-, fufficiently overthrow his- abfolute univerlal Affirmative, jcil. That 400 . A Review of fome Exceptions That Dioee fan Epifcopacy wat the univerfal firm Belief, yea and Pra&tce, of all Chriftians, who livd in the Apofiolick Age, and the two Ages enfuing ; Which is here the more infignificant. in that he offers not, in the leaft, to difprove thefe oppofite Teftimonies produced. Who knows not, that even one or two contrary Inftances, will overturn fuch an abfo« lute unreftrided Affirmative Proposition ? Should he affirm, that all Chriftians, without Exception, are of the Epifcopal Perfwafion, or . that all Minifters in all Churches are, that all Inbahitants of Scotland are Jacobites, or the like, who would not fmile at fuch a lax Affirma- tive, contradided by (o many contrary Inftances? %ly, The great Topick o! his Anfwer lies in this Certainty of a traditional Conveyance ; And Inftances are exhibited of a Traditional Conveyance, of (ever al Errors oppofite to the Canon : Now, he oppofes to Teftimonies, which are fuppos'd meerly poffible, fuch as are dcluaUy^ handed down to us,- And fince, according to his Hypothefis and Divifion, he puts fuch Teftimonies as are actuary handed down, under the Character of fuch at we are to regard and receive, diftinguifhing them from fuch as are meerly foffible, he is dalb'd upon this Charyhdk or ScyUa, either to ac- knowledge thefe Errors thus conveyed for Truths? and thus crofs the Senfe of all the Orthodox, or acknowledge his Self-contradiding Fol- ly, in holding, that we muft regard fuch points, as are thus adually handed down by Tradition. The fecond Anfwer is, That, fuppofe Come Fathers errd in Matters of Opinion, it will not follow, that they therefore errd in Matters of Fact. This is fpoken to elfewhere. But fhortly, he ftlll begs it, that ail the Fathers, and all Chriftians univerfaliy, in the firft ThreeAges, own'd Epifcopacy. So that the Queftion here is not, whether they might err in fuch point of Fad, but whether there were ever exiftent fuch a Fad, *. e. Whether fuch an universal Testimony for the Exigence and Reception of Viocejan Epifcopacy from Apojlhi, bad ever a Beeing > Which he. nor none elfe. can never make appear, as is above made good. Whereas he tells us, that, fuppofe the Millenary Opinion was an Error % or that Juftin Martyr maintain d it, will we therefore difiruft hit Teftimonj, at to who was hit Father or Mother, who was Emperor in hk Days, &c. He prefents but a filly and pitiful Evafion. For, i. He wilfully or igno- rantly miftakes and mis-ftates this point, which is not meerly anent a Matrer of Fad, and upon his meer AfTertion, but fuch a Principle as had an univerfal Reception at that time, as far as Hiftory can lead us, from whence is dedue'd the Uncertainty of a Traditional Conveyance from Apoftles, and an Hiftorical universal Reception theieupon,( as a Ground of a Divine Faith) fimply, and in it felf confidered, without any other upon the Confiderations pvtmisd. '40 1 •the? Ground of Afiurance. To clear this further, I argue thus, Ei- ther Juftin, Laclantites, and others inftanced by Presbyterians* de« liver'd what was Truth, in afierting the univerfal Reception of this Mdk* nary Errtr as from Apojiles, or not : If this Matter of Fa& was true, then there was an univerfal Reception of an Error, by Traditional Conveyance as from Apoftles ; And he cannot make appear a Con; tradition to it, in the Times or Ages accounted for by thefe Fathers* If they were in a Miftake or Error, not only as to the Point it Jelf, but as to the Traditional Conveyance and Univerfal Reception, then 'ris evi- dent, they did miltake in this Point of Fa8y and, by further Confe- quence, neither their Accounts, nor fuch like, are, in point of Pre- lacy* to be receiv'd as certain. And for the Relations inftanced by him, as to publick Concerns, there are other Grounds of the Certainty of this Hiftorical Belief, beyond the meer Affertion of any one of thefe Authors. And 'tis a filly and moft unaccountable Inference* Ihey could not mijfake in [owe Points of tacit Ergo, they were beyond fojflbility of mi- flaking in any. Which is a pitiful Sophifm, in Arguing a Particular's to an Univerial Conclufion. This Animadverter cannot miftake in the Relation, who was his Father or Mother, ( to ufe his own Simile ) Ergo, he is beyond the Reach of Miftake, in any point of Hiftory, or Matter of Fact. What if Epiphanius* fays he, er fome others, might mifiake concerning a little Rite or Ceremony, will it follow, that aU &hriftians, who livd in the Apoftolick and the two Ages enfuing, were miflaken in a point of fo great Conference as thk, what Form of Ecclejiafiick Government had the Apoftolick Sanation? But, 1. It is ftrange Confidence, mail I fay Impudence, in this Man, to affert, that all Chriftians through the World cmbrac'd Diocefan Prelacy as of Apoftoiick Sanction. What fays he to Eufebim his Uncertainty in this point f To the Affertions of fo many Fathers, both Greek and Latin?, in point oithe Identity of Bi(htp and ^Presbyter > To what is offered againft the Catalogue Proofs? &c. So that, tho' his Comparative Argument were admitted upon Truth of his Hypothecs, the Hypotheils it felf being palpably falfe, it falls to the Ground. 2//, The Queftion is not meerly anent Epiphanies Miftake, folely consi- dered, or anent a meer Rite, as is above clear'd ,• But anent the Im- peachment of a weighty point &f Truth by an Antijcriptural Error univerfaliy receiv'd by the Church in thefe times , as handed down from Apo files, which evidently overthrows the Ground of that Certainty afligu'd by him in point of Prelacy, The Affumption of his Argument has been denied, and Reafons offer'd of the Denial, wherein he has been, interrogated, how thk ,E fi C univerfal 405 A Review of fome Exceptions umverfai RiceptUn of Diocefan Vrelacy is made appear fince feveral Rej cords are loft, others are Suppofititious and contrary Affertions of Ancient Fathers can be produe'd, that palpable Errors had fuch a Tra- ditional Conveyance, as he afferts, &s. And fince the AiTumption, or this very point of Fa&, frit, that there was fuch an umverfai Recepti- on of Viocefan Prelacy, as he afferts, and lays down as ithe Medium -of his Argument or Anfwer, is not only denied, but the Denial alio fortifi- ed by contrary Reafons and Inftances, why offers he not a Proof of this denied Propofition ? When he tells us, that tbo Epiphanius mtebt be mistaken. wiU it fellow, that all Ghriflians, who livd in the Apo- Mick and the two Agts following, could bt mifiaken ma Matter of fo great Conference, as that of the Church Government, which had the Aprfdick Sanaion • What a filly Defence makes he, who, inftead of a Proof of the AiTumption, which is denied, yea and impugn d, Quibbles only at the Major, and takes the Truth of the AiTumption for granted, fcil. the universal Reception inftanced. In fhort, the AiTumption of his- Ar- gument is denied, and all his Proof is, the renewed Ailertion of ir. What ridiculous Pageantry is this > I remember, when at Schools, a certain fimple Youth, being enjoy nd to impugn a T^, heofterda Svllogifm againft it, the Major or Minor whereof being denied by the Defendent, in ftead of profecuting the Argument, he ftood filent : And being defir'd by the Prefiding Mafter, to profecute the Argument, and prove the Propofition denied, he gave this Return, Trohavtmeum Arzumentum haBenm ; Which, we need not doubt, was eccho d by the hearty Laughter of all the Hearers. To to know better and more diftin&ly than himfeif, who are his true Body and Church, or what is the Nature of her Unity, and her true Frame of Govern- ment ; For this is the point Augufiin is there Difcourfing againft the Donadfts, viz, Htw the true €burcb is to be di/cernd. When he mews how the trueChurchis to be demonftrated> to be pointed out, or made Confpicuous, as his word imports, he .exprefly oppofes the Divine Oracles to all Humane lift-monies. Yea moreover he affirms, Nee > Cathoiicis Epifcopis confentienaumj Ji contra Canonical Serif turns aliquid feniiunt, that we muft not confent to Catho'ick Bifhops, when their Judgment is crofs to Scriptures, clearly fuppofing the thing poffible*. So that tho* all mould thus Confent, in Auguftms Senfe, their Tefti- mony is to be rejetfed, which I prove thus. If their intire Harmo- nious Confent be3 in Augufliris Serife, frill a Humane lefiimonf, then it cannot of it felf or for ic felf, be admitted : But fo it is, that fuch fuppofed Teftiinonies - yr,n of all Bifhops, are,in his Senfe; ft ill a Humane Tefimtnj- 4o£ A Review of fome Exceptions Tefiimony ; For he oppofes it to a Divine, N»lo humanls lecumentis, faith he, 'fed Divinis Oraculis janttam Ecckfiam demon/Iran. ily, Other- wife his Oppofition and Antithefis were impertinent, if the Humana Documents, or Humane Inftrudtions and the Divine Oracles were all one. But fo it is, that, in this point, Auguflin excludes all Humane le(limonies% as fuch ( confequently, tho' never fo full, Harmonious, or Univer- fal ), making the Sacred Oracles the only Document*, Fundamenta, Firmament a, the only folid Foundation*, and firm Bafis of our Faith in this and all other points of Religion, as he expreffes it. This fuffi:iendy difcovers the Impertinency of what he adds, v'rz. That Auguftin thought not of excluding the unanimous Suffrage of the Primitive Church in matters wherein Scripture is not fo full and pain.- Wherein 'tis noticeable, that, r. His way of Expreffion is very bad, and rerkaing upon God's Wifdom and the Scriptures Perfe&ion. When he fays that in this point it is not fo fut and plain, he fuppofes the Scripture to treat of a Subject ( and fuch as Church Government ) but not with that fulnefs and plainnefs that is neceflary. For what can he make the Scope of this treating, if noE to point out the thing it felf ?. And if ( as he afferts ) it be not fo fully and plainly as to reach this end, till the Churches Practice give a diftinft Sound, arid help in this Acquittance and Defign, how abfurd is this Imputation, and what a grofly Wicked Inference this will bear, is obvious to the meaneft Reflexion, zty, The excluding the Churches Suffrage from the Authority of a Divine Oracle^ or as being «/Wr©- and of it felf to be believed, is very well confident with giving a due Deference to her Decifion, in a fecondarV Senfe ,• But this is ftill to be underftood with a juft refpeft to the Divine Rule • For 'tis upon this Ground we hear the Church, and no abfolute Obedience to, or Belief of hec Dilates, is due, but in fuch a Subordination in the confentient Judg- ment of all Proteftant Churches ; Elfe we equal her Decifion with the Divine Oracles, and the Judgment of Difcretion, our atling in Faith in obeying the Churches Digues, the trial of the Spirits, enjoy ned to all Church Members, fall to the ground. And fure, Augufiin underftood this Deference in no other Senfe, nor could he, unlefs we will involve him in a palpable Contradiaion. %lyt Whereas he tells us, ibat Auguftin never thought of excluding the unanimous Suffrage of the Primitive Church, in matters where the Scripture is either not (0 full, or fo plain, befides that he ignorantly Confounds the net excluding, or giving a due Subordinat Deference to that Suffrage of the Church which he men- tions, and tta making this Suffrage the hading Rule and Trimph of our upm the Confiderations pemisd. >07 Faith and Practice in thefe points about which is our Queftioft, which ^ he cannot but acknowledge, are in ihemfelves diftinguUhable, asjs evident in Anguftirii Appeal to Scripture in this Gafe ,• Before this Anfwer can fignifie any thing to his Scope, he is oblig'd to make this unanimous Suffrage of the Apoftolickand Succeeding Ages,in point of Diocefan Prelacy, appear, which he will no doubt perform ad Kalendas Gracas* And there being no fuch Suffrage produceable as will clear this point in his Favours, he muft acknowledge the Scripture muft be appeal'd to for a Decifion, yea and upon Auguftins premifed Principles and Grounds adduc'd ,• Or abfurdly affert an abfolute Impoffibility of this Decifion. What is faid is fufficient to difcoverthe utter unferviceablenefs of our Animadverter's Quibblings upon this Head. But that I may not leave it thus, and to expofe him further, I fhall here, i. Give fome further account of Auguftins Sentiments in this point, which will ber found fuch, as will intirely exclude his Evafion and Subterfuge. 2// I (hall make appear, that in thefe Citations of AuguBin, offered by him* he has, 1. Abufed and wrefted what he cites. 2/7, Imbark'd therein in a Popilh defign of drawing Auguftin to Patronize unwritten TraditU ons, and equal them to Scripture. For the firft, anent Auguftins. abfolute Appeal to Scripture as the proper Supreme Judge , in all points of Religion, from which he will not dare to exclude Church Government, and that in anexclufiveSenfe to all Humane Teftimonies or the Churches Practice,- The Tefti- monies are many j Take thefe few. lorn. 6. Lib. 5. de Uaref. Cap. 6, fpeaking to an Arrian, Vade interpella Judicem : habes Judicem ordinal rium ; & ub'i. inputs, ifium invmiam ? Audi Pnpiietam dkentem, Ifa. 22: Deminus Judex noflery Dominus Legifer nofler ; fie eft in Casio, ut non de feral 7errami i. e. " Go and Appeal to the Judge : You have an ordinary ' Judge ; But where, fay you, .(hall I find him ,- Hear the Prophet * faying, The Lord is our Judge, the Lord is our Lawgiver ,\ He is fo in * Heaven, that he has net left the Earth. Eod. torn, cont* Maxim. Arrian. Epift. Lib. ;. Cap. 14. Nunc nee ego Nicamurn, nee tu debes Ariminenfe tanyuam prajudicaiurut prajerre Gtncilium, &c. " Neither ought I in an ' anticipating Judgment to alledge the Council of Nice, nor you the * Council of Arim'mum j Neither am I oblig'd by the Authority of the 'one, nor you by that of the other ; Let one point with the other coneCaufe with the other, one Argument and Reafon with anothec ' be compar'd and-concerted by Scripture Authority, the common ( Judge and Witnefs to them both, and not peculiar to either. Thus Jem. i, {jdr. de UnjP% Eccl, Cap. 3. Non audiamm hxe dico, ha& dicis,. fed audi am us 401& A Review of fome Exceptions fiudlamui hac dUH Dominus, u e. " Let us not hear, This I faj% This ' you fay, but, Thus faith the Lord. Eod. Lib. Gap. 4. Quia cum Donatiftii nobis Qua/lio efl nen de Capitt, fed de Corporet &C. " Beeaufe ' which is our Debate* that by his own Words cm Debate may be ended. Eod. Lib. Cap. J. Os**6!} aperta & mdnifejla delsgamus, eju* fi in Sacris Scripturis non invenirentur ', nutto modo ejSet, unde aperinntur clauja, & itiujlrarentur obfeura* i e. "Let us pitch upon fuch things as are clear * and evident, which if they were not found in the Holy Scriptures, ' there is no way left to open what is (hut, or illuftrat what is obfeure. •in the Apoftle Chrift fpeaks, &c% Citing the Words of Chrift and c the Apoftle. It. 7m. 8. in Pf. 57. Auferantur de medio Chart* no(lr*t procedat in medium Codex Dei% 8cc. i.e. "Let our Writings betaken ' out of the way, and let the Book of God be produced ,• Hear Chrift 1 laying » Hear the Truth fpeaking» &c. Eod. ftm. Lib. de Grat. & Lib. Arbit. Gap. 18. Sedeat inter nos Judex Apofiolus Joannes, *. e0 *f Let the Apoftle John fit as Judge betwixt us ; Citing hi* Words in * his firft Epiftle* Cmtra Liter as Petiliani, Lib. %. Cap. 6. Sive de Chrijio, Jive de ejus Ecclefia, &c. " Whether we Debate concerning * Chrift, or his Church, or whatever other point belong to our Faith s or Pra&ice, we are not comparable to him who faid, Altho we, yea * much more, tbo dn Angel from Heaven (bouU Preach contrary to what we ' have received in the Law or the Gofpel in the Holy Scriptures, let him be c accursd. In which Paflfagesj and many fuch,* which were fuperfluous here to Gite, 'tis evident, that, i%-Augu$in makes an abfolute Appeal to the Scriptures in all Controverfies about Religion. 2ly, That he difowns even the Decifion of Councils, as giving an abfolute or infallible Judgmenttherein ; And that, even upon Suppofition of the Churches Univerfal Practice, or Decifion in Councils, the Scripture Authority is ftill Supereminent thereunto, the Decifion whereof is folely and abfolutely to be refted in. %ly% That as the true Church, fo the true Churches Unityy is only co be fought in and from the Divine Oracles, where the true Principles and Foundation thereof is only to be found ; That in all Debate* concerning the Frame of Chrift's Tabernacle, the Nature and Complexion, ( io to fpeak ) of his Myftical Body, we mull upon, the Considerations pfymh'd. jeg muft hear bis own Voice in the Lively Oracles, who is the Churches Head, and thereby only be Determined, Finally, whereas our Animadverter alTerts Auguflins refting upen the Ghurches Savage* itt matters wherein the Scripture is not jo full, or plain ; If thefe matters do touch Religion, Auguftin aflferts the Scriptures therein tobefofult and diftin&, that no Decifion or Practice of the Church, without the verge thereof, can, as a Divine Law, -.challenge our Obedience, or oblige the Cpnlcience. So that, if our Animadverter mean, by this Unanimous Suffrage of the Primitive Church, fuch as can finally Determine in this, important Controverfie of Church Government, which is evidently his Scope, he is rebuked by Auguflin and Scripture both. To come to the next point of His wre/ting Auguflins Words, and imbarkiog in the Popifh Defign inftanced ; He cites Lib. 4. de Bapt. contra Donat. Cap. 2;, alledging that he founds Infant Baptifm on the conftant Practice of the Catholick Church. Quod traditum tenet Univerfitas Ecclejia, cttm parvuli Infantes Baptizmtur, &c. And then he adds, Cap. 24. Si ^uifijuam in hac re Authoritatem Divinam ®}t*rit, quanquam quod Univerfa tenet Ecclefia * non nifi Authoritatt Apeftolica traditum creditur ; Where AugujHn, fays our Animadverter, plainly lays the great ftrefs of the, Baptifm of Infants upon the conftanc Practice of the Church ,• Which he alfo afferts in his Controverfie with the Donatifts #, where Auguftin * Lib. r . de afferts the Apoftles Commanded nothing, but the Bapt. cont* Churches Cuftom concerning the Baptifm of Hereticks Donat. G#p„ and Schifmaticks, as many other things,took its Original 23. ah hpoftolorum Tradltione, fcut ut multa <\u is evident by - — t ins upon the Gonfiderations perns d. 411 his Words which the Jefuites alledge ,• For when he faith, I* wen not to he believd unlefs it were Apo/tolical, if it mould be reftrain'd to unwritten Traditions, it fhould thereof follow, that we may believe nothing but unwritten Verities, which is abfurd, Befides that of this point in the next words he gives a Reafon out of the Scriptures, And where they pretend that upon ground of unwritten Verities only he refufes the Opinion of Rcbaptizing thofe which were Baptized by Heretical Minifters, they do extremely wrong him, as one who in diverfe places affirmeth, That it was contrary to the Scriptures what Cyprian didf with his Council, determine in that behalf. For befides the Churches Cuftom, and the ftrength of General Councils, he faith,, that there were both many and great Testimonies of Scripture, arid alfo evident Reafons. Alfo that itisagainft the Commandment of God that they are Rebaptized who have been Baptized by Hereticks ; And what Commandment that is, he fhews by Name, The Tefiimonies of the Scriptures, which do not only Teach, but plainly Teach that they fhould not be Rebaptized *. And f he cites this * Lib.de Bapt, Scripture to prove it, John 13. 10. He who is wajhed, Sap. 4. needs no more to be wajhed : So that under the word of f Gap% 142 Tradition, Augufiin muft needs underftand the Scriptures. And when he denies (N. B%) that fuch things are Written in the Scripture ,• his meaning muft needs be, that there is no particular and exprefs Cafe, wherein it is namely faid, that an Infant was Baptized, or that a Chriftian Baptized by an Her etick was not to be Rebaptized. Let us next hear Dr. Fulk to the fame purpofe defending Augufiin. upon this Text : The Jefuites alledging, he had aflerted, That many Articles of our Religion are not fo much to be provd by Scripture, «/s by Tradi* tion, he anfwereth thus, " That (ome Articles are prov'd both by c Scripture, and alfo by Tradition, it is no hurt, for that only is a true ' Tradition ( N. B. ) that hath the Teftimeny of the Scripture to war- * rant it. Nay, fay you : He avoucheth that in no wife we could * believe, that Children in their Infancy fhould be Baptized. Yerily if ' he did fo avouch, he was in a great Error. For we have as good 'Arguments out of the Scriptures^ that Infants are to be Baptized, as * old Folks. But you do impudently belie him, for He has no fuch * words or meaning. For he faith, The C,u(lom of our Mother the Church * in Baptizing of Infants k not to be dt (pis 'd, nor by any means to be accounted * fuperfluous, neither to be credited at at if it were not an Apojlolick Tradition. * For even that Age hath a great weight or Tejiimony which firfi merited to [Jhed^Blood for Cbrifi, How prove you that by Apoftolick Tradition or F f f 2 I delivery (fh A Review effim Exceptrofts ' delivery, fa fafcaneth hete an unwritten Tradition ? He is fo far From 'denying that this Cuffbm hath Teftimony in the Scripture, that he * Cap. 24. He proves the Baptifm of Infant?, not only ' Cuftom of the Church obferv'd ever fince th~ Apoftles, but alfo by 'the Inftitution of Circumcifton out of the Scriptures. 'So likewife * that fuch as were Baptized by Hereticks, were not to be Rebaptized * he proves by thtf faying of John, Cap. 13. He that is encewajhed ' needs no more to be wajbed, De Baft. Lib. 2. Cap. 14. And by Exampl«* * of them that Were Gircumcifed in the Ten Tribes, Where Jeroboam* •Calves were Worfhipped. Again he faith, That evil Men have * Baptifm, and do give and receive Baptifm, tho' they be not changd into Scriptures. To this account of Kuguftin offered by theLearn'd Cartwright, and by this Learned Epifcopal Do#or, I will add a remarkable Paffage from the ProfeiTbrs of Leiden, Difp. 4. de S. Scrip. Perf. Thef. 24, !i In cenfu Traditionum yu* in Sacris Literis inveniuntur, eify; infunt per * amtipoUcniiam analogicam, contra quamFontijicii arbitrantur prater Articulos ' Symboli Apoftolicifbac Automata cofligendaccnfemus. Infantes Chrifrianorum *efle Bapcizandos. Crenam Domini muiieribus quoq; effe imperrien- daro. Baprifmum non efle iterandum, &c. i. e. Tnat they reckon in the number and account of fuch Traditions as are found in Holy Scriptures, according to Analogical equivalency, ( or according to the Analogy of Faith are deducible therefrom) againft what the Papifts hold, befides the Articles of the Apofrolick Creed; thefe Axismes, or Principles, lhat the Infants ofCbriftians are to be Baptized That Women have a Right to participat of the Sacrament cf the Lord's Supper. That Jefns Chrifi is cce'JJential with the Father, That there are only two Sacraments of the New Teftament, Baptifm and the Lord's Supper , That Baptifm ( N. B. ) is not to be reiterated.. That the Apoftles, by Infpiration of the Spirit , fet apart the Lord's Day to be SaricJifod in place of the Jewifk Sabbath which was kept even to their times. And feveral fuch like, all which, fay they, are by fome of the Fathers call'd impro- perly Traditions Apoftolical, viz, by Origen} in Cap. 6. ad Rom. by Auguflin, Lib, 4^ dt &aftf conU Ponat. typ, 22, ( Here's the tfery place »/>/?« /^e :Confideratipnis 415 place cited by our Animadverter ) "by Jheodortt, Lib* 1. C. 8, Hifi- 8 £cc/. by Epifbahiiti, Haref 69 , adv. Krrian. and by others. Wherein 'tis xvident, 1. That, according to the Senfe and Judg- ment of die Leaned Profeffors, feveral important Scripture- Truths, in the Writings and tXfa|e of the Fathers, come under the Denominati- on and Character of kpcjiolick traditions, which is convincingly evident in the Inftances exhibited by them ,* For who will doubt, thatWomens Right to the Sacrament of the Lord's Supper, that there are but two Sacraments of the New Teftapient, Baptifm and the Lord's Supper, that our Bleffed Lord k 'Co-tffential with the Father, (not o/w/frw, but ouoma ) are important Scripture^Truths, clearly deduceable therefrom, anent which the Scripture gives a diftind: Sound, not an ambiguous and obfcure,. as this Animadverter is bold to alter t, zly, That, in fpecial, they confequently hold this considerable Point, The Admini- ftratien of Baptifm to Infants, as like wife the Non*Reiteration of Baptifm, to be maintain'd by Aug*ftint upon Scripture Warrant, as the proper Foundation thereof, and that they are founded upon fuch Apoftolical tradition, as is the fame with, and equivalent unto Apcftoli* cal Doctrine ; Therein baffling what this Animadverter holds of Augti- flin\ deducing the Warrant of this meerly from the Practice of the Church, Lib. 4. C. 23. de Bapt. cont. Donat. & C. 24. & Lib. 5. £. 2g. tfc. compar'd with what he cites deUnico Bapt. cent. Peril, G. 9. Where- in he is bold to aiTert, that Augujiin, having found nothing in Scrip- ture to clear this point* laid the great Strefs, yea, the main Strefs of this Traflice on the Cuftom and tradition of the Church. In Aniwer to which, I offer, 1. Our Animadverter mult acknowledge, that Augufiin ei- ther believ'd the Divine Authority of this Ordinance, as Adminiiired to Infants, or not. If he believ'd its Divine Warrant, then he made not the Churches Cufrom the fole or proper Ground of this Admini- stration. If he fay, Augufiin did not believe this Divine Warrant, 'tis above made appear, that he did, and that* confequently, his Citations are extra ciekj and do but amctint to prove, tHatj in this Point, Au- gufiin gave only a due iubfervient Deterefice to the Churches Practice or Cuftom. 2//, 'Tis alio made appear, that hegrofly miitakes Augu~- fiirss ExpreiTion of tradition, as if importing, in his Senfe, a m'eer Church Fractice or Cuftom^ which, according to Augujiin, includes-' Aptfhlical tradition, or futh a Practice, as deriv'd its Original from them. Nor need we wonder, that Avguftin^ wrtft others of the Ancients, ufes fuck ExpreiTiofis, if we (hall Kejfecj:-. upon what we heard &cnv;nght o&tsrve; that ths Apoule, 2 1'hef 2. 15. makes mention ot Dic^ines or 'Ordinances' delivered, whether by Word, er by EPilUe3 under this DenQjaunacioH and Character of traditions, Yea 414 A Rwiw offowe Exceptions Yea who knows not, that the Do^rine of Chriftianity it felfi mayi in a good and found Senfe, be call'd a Tradition. See this prov'd at fome length by the Author of the Sermon upon a Thef. 2. 15-. anent the Scriptures Sufficiency as a Rule of chrifiian Faith, without *Morning- the Supplement of Unwritten Traditions *. This is convin- Exer. againft cingly made good in the very Citations offered by our Popery, Ser. 6. Animadverter « For Augujlin f , even as his Teftimony t Lib. y. de is reprefented by him, holds, that Confuetudo ilia qua op* Bapt. contra ponebatur Cypriano, (nlm. a Stephano ) &c. ab eorum Donat.C. 23* ( Apojiohrum ) Traditione exordium Jumpjtfie credenda efl • Sicut funt mult a qua univerfa tenet Ecdefia^& ab hac>*b Apo. ftolu recepta, bene creduntur^ quanquam fcripta non reperlantur. i. e. That fuch a Practice had its Rife and Original from the Apoftolick Tradi- tion, as are many things which the Univerfal Church doth hold and by the Church are rightly believ'd to be receiv'd from Apoftles', altho* they are not found written. Wherein it is evident, that Augu* ftin fpeaks of a Pra<5Hce or Cuftom founded upon Apoftolick Warrant and fuch as is, confequently, the Ground of a Solid or Divine Faith* as the doubled Expreffion of Credenda and Creduntur does, in this Cafe' make evident ,• For none will fay, that Augujlin held the Inventions of Men to be the Ground or Objed of the Churches Belief in Matters of Religion. And as for that Claufe, Quanquam fcript a non reperlantur 'tis evident, as we heard Judicious Cartwright obferve, th*t Au^uflln, by the Term [ Scrlpta ), intends only What k exprejly written, and that with an Application to the prefent Circumftantiate Cafe ; So that, according to AuguHln, this Pradice, tho' not exprefly com- manded, or in fo many Letters and Syllables aiTerted, ( which maybe faid of many Scripture-Truths) yet he holds to be by juft Analogy and Confequence deducible from that which is written, as is evident from the Series and Scope of this, and* the other Teftimonies of Augujlin, above fet down. And hence it is, that, in the next Paflage cited by our Animadverter, fell. Lib. 2. dt Bapt. contra Donat. C 17. fpeaking of this Famous Cuftom own'd by the Church in point of Baptifm, he adds, Quam Confuetudinem credo ex Apoftolica Traditione vementem, ficut wulta non inveniuntur in Lltetis eorum, neque in ConclliU poflerorum & ta- . men qua per univerfam cujlodiuntur Ecclefiam, non nlfi ab Ipfis tradita & commendata creduntur. Where 'tis evident, that Auguflin fpeaks of this Pra&ice, as proceeding from the Apoftles ,• And 'tis obfervable, that his Expreffions of Tradita and Commendata have here a Signal Emphafis, pointing at the Apoftles Delivering, yea, and Approving the Thing it felf, and that the Church receiv'd and beliey'd the fame accordingly, and upon the Confederations prems'd. 415 and upon this fole Warrant $ Which is further conflrm'd by what our Animadverter acknowledges, that Auguftin^ in this point, argues, and that frequently, from Scripture Semblanets and Analogies ; Which doth convincingly demonftrate, that ssfuguftin, by Apoftolical Tradition, un- derstands what has a Foundation in Scripture, and by good Confe- quence, and according to the Analogy of Faith, is deduceable there- from. But our Animadverter adds, that be hid the main Strefs on the conftant Cuftom and tradition of the Church, making Augufiin thus to fet this £#- ftom or Tradition of the Church, as a Topick and Ground of Argument of a more folid, and of an higher Nature, than that of the Scripture Analogy, how abfurdly and crofs to Augufiin s Scope, is obvious to the meaneft Reflection. He acknowledges, that Auguftin holds no other Arguments are needful to determine a ContrOver/te, when it can he clear d from Scripture, and therefore Auguftin s Scripture Grounds inftanced do evince, that his Judgment was, that the Churches Cuftom was not, in this point, to be refted in, as the only or main Ground of this Practice, or for clearing the Divine Warrant thereof, fince fuch an Exaltation of the Churches Cuftom or Pra&ice will contradict his frequent Appeal to Scripture in points of Religion, and that in an qxclufive Senfe to the greateft Humane Teftimonies. 3/7, I would know, whether our Animadverter holds, that all great and weighty points of Religion can be clear'd from Scripture, and that Auguftin judg'd thus ? If he deny this, I appeal to all Proteftants, whether he has not impeach'd the Scriptures Perfection, and imbrae'd thePopifh Dodrine in point of Traditions. If he hold, that all weighty Religious Matters, as he words it, are determinable by Scripture, and that not only upon the Matter, but in Auguftin s Senfei he contradicts himfelf, in avert- ing, that Auguftin laid the Strefs, yea, the main and great Strefs, and thae in weighty Matters, upon the Churches Tradition ; For thus he interprets what he cites from Auguftin *, * Lib. 4. de that Auguftin confefles, he y put to conjecturing for finding Bapt. Contra a plaudble colour in Scripture for Baptifm of Infants, ( which Donat.C, 24. he cannot but acknowledge an important point in Reli- gion ) and therefore lays the great Strefs on the Practice of the Church; He hath told us further, that Auguftin argues from Scripture Similes and Analogies, but frequently lays the main Strefs on the. Cuftom and Tradi- tion of the Church. Now, how do thefe quadrate, All necefSary or weighty points of Religion are determinable by Scripture, in Auguftin' 's Sen ft and Pleading, and yet there are weighty and great points of Religion, for de- lirm)nin£ whmof 9 Auguftin hid the gnat and main Strefs, er foundation * pf 4I6 A Review of fome Exceptions of hit Belief, upon the Churches Guflom and Prablice ? And, in the StrtYt of our Animadverter's Difcourfe upon this point, 'tis evident, that he applies not this to the Cafe of Baptifm only, but to many other Prin- ciples and Practices of Religion, which he will needs have to be thus founded, in huguftiris Senfe. Now, fince he acknowledges, that A«- guflin reafons this, and fuch like points from Scripture, he mud either fay, that fuch Inferences were (olid to conclude the point, and that therefore, there being a Divine Warrant for the Practice, there was no need of that drawing the Ground thereof from the Churches Cuftom, as a proper Argument, and in eodem genere cauf* with that of the Scrip- ture Evidence, or that kuguftin diftrufted his own Reafoning, as not folid and fufficient to infer the Conclufion, which who will be bold to affert of fuch a Judicious Father. So that 'tis evident, that cur Animadverter, in the Series of this Reafoning, isfo in the Briars, that he rauft needs father a Contradiction upon kuguHin, if not himfelf alfo. 4yy When he will needs have the Churches Practice and Cuftom to be, in kuguflins Senfe, the directing Rule, in points wherein the Scripture fpeaks not fo fully and plainly, 1 would gladly know, to whom he afcribes the Judgment of this Fulnefs and Plainnefs. If to the Church, or her Cuftom and Practice, here is an abfolute Infallibility afcrib'd to her, and her Cuftom (nali over-rule whatever, in point of bcripture-Truth, (he {hall judge upon this Ground regulable ,• And how this croffes the Senfe of all Reform'd Churches, as well as of A«* gufiin, is obvious from what is faid. If he hold, that this Plainnefs or Fulnejs is to be judg'd by Scripture Analogy, or that of Faith, then down h\\s cujiom as the Rule, and is, in this point, of no Avail, And that Auguflin judg'd thus, is evident from the Teftimonies adduc'd. Be- fides, that if the Churches univerfal Cuftom and Pra&ice is made the Rule to determine, the Rule is more darit than what is to be enquir'd for, efpecially fince it will be granted, that this Rule rauft be full, adequate, and commenfurate to every point of Difficulty, wherein it may be pretended, that the ScriptiKe is not full or clear : And who would be bold to affert, that there is fuch an univerfal Cuftom or Pra- ctice produceable or exiftent ? So that, in this Cafe, the Labyrinth is inextricable, and there's no clew to winde out of it. Several other things in his Citations would require a large Animad- verfion, but what is faid, is fufficient to evince the Unferviceablenefs of what our Momus has offered ; For what he cites on Cap. 9. Lib, 2. de Baft, contra Donat, That the Churches Praclice and Cu\hm uaty in thU point, opposed to fuch a* would introduce a Nwdty, we have heard how AtfgMjiin underftands this Cultom, as founded upon the hpojlolick Tradi- tton upn the Confidcrations pnmi/d. i.17 Hon mentioned, which, with him, is all one with Apcfiolick. Dofirine. And 'tis remarkable, that, in the PafTage cited by him, Auguflin fays," that Confuetudinis Rohore tenebatur Orb* Terrarum, i. e. The World was held by the Strength of a Cuftom or Pradlice, and that this was op- pos'd to Novellifts, Quia non foterant apprebendere Veritatem : And if this was prefented as _ a plaufible Argument to fuch Obftinate Ignoramms% or as fuiting their prefent Cafe and Gircumftances, it will, by no Gonfequence, infer, that this was the only or main Argument ad- duceable. And for Auguflins pleading, in the fame Gbap9 againft Rebaptization, Htc d Major ibus traditum ms accepimus, hoc in Catholic* Ecclefia, qua tote Orbe diffunditur9 centra omnes Falfitatis Nebulas Cufto* dimut, i, e. This we have received from our Progenitors, this the Catholick Church holds, &c* His Scripture-Proof, in this point, above inftanced, doth evince, that Auguflin made this neither the §nly nor main Topick of his Reafoning. But now, our Animadverter will apply the Testimonies of Auguflin to the point of Epifcopacy ; For which he cites two further Proofs : The firft is Cap, 18. contra Crefcent, Grammat. where he mentions ■' ,,' ■ — Pofi Epifcopos ab ipfts ApoftoUrum fedibm inconcufiam (eriem ufauc in h*c tempna, &c. i. e. The unfhaken Series of Bifhops from the Sees of the Apoftles to his own times. And contra Litems Petiliani, Lib* 2. C. 51. If all througk the World were fuch as you accufe, Cathedra tihi quid fecit Eccltft* Romans, in qua Per trus fedit} & in qua bodie Anaftafius fedet ,• vel Ecclefia Hierofoly-. mitana in qua Jacobus fedit% &c. i. t. What hath the Chair done unto you of the Church of Rome, in which Peter did fit, and in which this day Anaflafim doth fit ,♦ Or of the Church of Jerufakm in which James did fit?; &c*. 'Tis Anfwer- cd, 1. This point of Succeflion of Bifliops from Apoftles has been above fully clear'd, and the utter Unferviceablenefs there- of to the Epifcopal Defign convincingly made appear ; So that we need not here infill upon it. Nor need we, in Anfwer to the premised Citations, infift in telling him, that, 1. As thefe mattered Catalogues are found Contradictory one to afic ther, and the Ambiguity of the Term Biftiop, is fuch as cads an indilfolvable Cloud upon them, fo 'tis evident, that this Argument from Succeffion, is, by Augttfiln, and others plead- ing thereupon, made ufe of, to prove, againft Heterodox Per- rons, the traduces Apoflolici, Seminis, or a Derivation of a true Do&rine from Apoftles, not a Series or Succeffion of fuch Pre- lates, as our Epifcopalians pretend. Which, in the fecond place. Ggg is A1% A Hevim of fome Exceptions is made good from this, that the Lines •fSnuffi* are drawn from Apoftles, and >he Apoftolick Office being fuch as admit- ted no Succeftor, the Stream (as is above clear d ) is cut off from the Fountain. Nor will this Man be bold to fay, that AutuMn believe thefe pretended Succeeding Bifhops were Apoftles, in a proper formal Senfe. And 'tis above alfo deard, that, in the Ufage and Language of the Fathers, the Be nomination of mm was put upon Apoftles f with refpeft to fuch places as they are found, for fome time, to have refided in. To all which may be added, that whatever Augufm might apprehend from fome Hiftorical or Traditional Conveyance anent Petert Seat at Romt, yet the Judgment of feveral Learn d Divines ought to preponderate with us, who have made appear, that he was never at Rome, which has no fmall Strength from this Scripture-Argument, that, in the Epiftle to the Romans there is not the lead hint of his Seat at R*mt, nor of his Eptfcopacy over that Church. Nor can it be clear'd, who were his imme- diate Succeffors. And, in a word, as the fame may be faid of the fuppos'd Epifcopacy of J*mes in the Church of >^, and others mention d by Axgufrin, ( ot which *™J *}* *'JW of our Mowm, in thefe Citations, is inmely b-ffled and exclud- ed if we but refka upon what A*gu$n aliens Eprf. 19 • ** Bi'eron. viz,. That Epi(c*p*tm was m*j« Preicteric 1««**»*. %"*. rum Vocabula, v* EccLfi* U/us obtinmt, making , the Dilution Nominal rathe/ than Real, and luch as took us Rife from* Cuftom which had obtained { So that, upon both Grounds (unlets we will fatten upon MugufHn fuch a Contradidion arid Nonfenfe, as no Man having the common Ufe of Reaton could Sprcfi ) we muft needs fuppofe,. that Aupfin, /Peking of this Seiies of Bilhops from the Apoftles mentioned could neither mean nor intend a Succeffion of the Afofiohck Office properly ftcr,? nor of fuch Viocejan Prelates, as this Man and his Party ^Vhus^ha^c we feen the bold, but foolifh fruitlefs Attempts of SS PafquiUer, and his Fellows, again* that Truth which ?his T ue Reformed Church ownes, and the folid Scripture] Foun- dations in point of Government, upon which (he is eftabh/hcL Bu wha Difcoveries and Defences of Truth will ftlence the En-. nitty of Man's Corrupt Nature, which will jnceifairiY - &** Sfnft it until Faith's Sight of the Beauty and Glory of Chnft, to EtauL Word and Wiidom of the Father, ******* Poyfon upon the Confiderations pemifd. 4 1 9* of the Old Serpent ? However, Wifdom bat always hem] 'and will i$ juflified of at her Children, and the Purity and Power of Gofpel Ordi- nances of God's Appointment will commend his Work, his Worfhip, his Authoriz'd and Inftituted Miniftery, to fuch at have their Senfet txercisd to difcern and approve things truly Excellent. Such will grow up to him in all thing$» who is the Head and Saviour of the Body, while Obftinate Adverfaries will find more and more accomplifhed that Expoftulatory Threatning, which the Lord Jefus from Heaven darted down upon a Perverfe Perfecting Saul, while continuing in his Rage againft the Church of God, It it hard for thee u Kick againft the Pricks, Calcitrat in Stimulos quoties Furihundm Afellm, jUat/is Stimuli* , toties fua Vulnera Jtnttt. Letus therefore look eo our'Exal ted Triumphing Lord,M>fo will Reign till all hit Enemies are made hit Footfloel, and whofe Truth will finally Triumph, and render Eternally Victorious all ferious Aflerters thereof. JXlic Power is his, the Glory, and the Viaory. Let us, Together with pleading with our Mocher. cry unto him, her Glorious Head and Husband, intreating, that he arife and plead hm own Caufe, and haften, in its time, his .Final Victory over the Deteftable Antichriftian Hierarchy, and when the Vial is poured out which will light upon the Seat of the Beafl, and the Papacy it felf is extinct, the Litigious Con- tendings for rrelatical Hierarchy will fall of courfe, and be at an end. We know 'tis now near ( O very near! ) the Dawning and Breaking up of the Eternal Day, and the Accomplifhment of the Churches Warfare : BkJJed therefore is that Servant, who (haU be found Vigilant and Seduhtu in the Lord's Work when he comes, delighting in the ferious Stu« dy of Conformity unto him, rather than in coding the Duft of Dik putes and Debates. Even Jq come Lordjejm. CAUSA EPISCOPATUS HIERARGHIGI LUCIFUGA; OR, A Confutation of J. SV Vindication of the (pretended) Principles of the Cyprianic Age j^C^- Expofing his Fruitlefs Attempts upon Presbyterian Government therein, and his alike Fruitlefs Pleadings for the Hiera>chie upon the fame Ground, Diflolving alfo the Chief Sinews, and Overturning the Scope of that Voluminous Pamphlet 3 In Exhibiting a View of the Churches Defection in the Third Age, and the confide- rable Advances of the Myflery of Iniquity therein, and in Special with Refpett to Church-Government ; Difcovering alfo his Unfuccefsful pleading, whether from the Pra&ice of that Age, in point of Epifcopacy , limply Considered, or the Reception thereof under the Notion of a Divine Inftitution ; Affigning fignal Differen- ces betwixt the Cyprianie Bijhop pleaded for by this Pamphleter, and the tru- ly Apojielick Bijhop Reprefented in Scripture : His Impeaching the Do&rine of the Reform' d Churches, in the Scope and Series of his Pleading, evidently made Appear; As alfo, his Declining the true State of this Controvert : His feveral Attacks upon the Rev.Mr. R«/e,and the Author of The Hierarchical Bijhtps Claim,Re- pelfd: Unfound and Inconfiftent Principles in the whole detected ; Befides feveral other Things tending to clear the Truth in this Debate, Advanc'd. To which is Annex'd an APPENDIX containing a Scripture AfTertion of Presbyteri- an Principles, both in Point of Government and Worflrip. Ezek< 20. 18. But 1 [aid unto their Childreniu the fVildemefs, Walk you net in the Statutes of your Fathers, neither Qbferve their Judgments, nor Defile your Jehes with their Idols y. 19. lam the Lord Jour G$d : walk in my Statutes, keep my Judgments, and do themt Ephef 2. 20. And are built upon the Foundation of the Apeftles and Pnpktts, Jejus Ckrift himfelf being the chief Corner fione* jguferantur ilia de medio qua adverfusms invicem tton etc Divinis Cantmcis Libris, Jed aliunde recitatbus, quia nth humanis DKumentis, fed Divinis Oraculit SavBam Ecckfiam demtntlrti- r», Auguftin. de Unit. Eccl. cap. 3. * Sljolus Cbriftus eft andiendus, non dtbtmu; attendm quid alius ante not faciendum putavtrat- Sed quid qui ante otnnes e& Ckriflu: prior fecerit -tNan inim hminis eenfuetttdintmjta-iti oppor* tet, JedDiiveritatim. Cyprian, Epift. 63, Edinburgh, Printed by the Heirs and Succeflbrs cf Andrev Andtrfon, Printer to the Queen's moft Excellent Ma jetty, Anns DOM. f&B* u< TO THE Candid Intelligent Reader. AS the State and Condition of the Church of G OD is m Time fiill Militant, and that againfi Enemies without and within, who aB againfi her under various Difguifes 5 So none are more dangerous th an fuch Enemies, as Malign and Oppofe herCaufe andTeftimony, under the Vretence of Friendjhip, and appearing for her true Interefl. 'Tis, no doubt, a great Demonstra- tion of the Defperat Wichdnefs and Deceit of Man s Heart, that Truth has at all times been opposd by fuch as pretend to appear for it. The areat Apoftle of the Gentiles was thus ContraMed by Juch 4s Transformed themfelves into Apoftles of Chrift,and impudently averrd they were Appearing for GODs Antient Infiitutions, againfi him and other Apofiles as Innovators. Nay, our Blejfed Saviour himfelf was by the Pharifeesf theft antient afpiringRabbies ) Opposd, as an Innovator andTranfgreffor of 'Mo fesV Law. And under this Co- vert of Advancing fome Signal Truths, has Satan, in all Ages, Op- posd the Divine Infiitutions, in that long Trati and Train of Mif- chievous Errors and Here fies broach' d againfi theFundamental Truths of the Gofpel : As that "Prince of Darknejs is Transformed into an Angelof Light, fo he has infusd his Transforming Subtilty into his Agents and Infiruments. . . And no doubt, it is afignal Piece of this Policy, that Antiquity and Prefcription of Time, theConfent and Authority of Venerabh Antients, has been made ufe of as an Argument toOppoJeand Afperfi GODs Truth and Way : Hence our Lord had the Traditional^ Au- thority of the Antients Opposd unto his DoBrine and Difciples. Ws Followers were trained as Ignorant of 'GODs Antient Law and * a statutes, iv To the Candid Intelligent Reader.' Statutes, and the Go/pel Church had the Imputation of a New Se& put upon it. Thus Tradition and Antient Fathers ( as a Learn d Divine well obfervd ) has proven an old Plea for Snperftitious Inventions, although this Plea has been frequently expos \d, as by our Lord and his Apofiles, in oppojing the Holy Scrip. ures thereunto, fo by the current of all the Orthodox, in all Ages, upon the fame Ground. And this, no doubt, hath in nothing more appear d than in the prcfent Debate about Church Government. // is a wonder to fee, how Copious and Voluminous our Epif copal Pleaders are in their Alle- gations of the pretended Principles andPra&ice of the Antient hurch in this Point, and how fender and flow in the true Scripture Debate^ How Indiifirious in theSearch andColle&ion #f Humane Tefti monies, to fetch therefrom fme apparent Patronage to the Hie > archie, how flack and averfe in Searching the lively Oracles, the true and firfl Antiquity, and thus from hearing the Voice and Teftimony of COD, ofChrift the great Tefiator, the only ]udgin this Debate. Andfure, whatever has been the Popifh Policy in this Voint, 'tis fir ange and unaccountable Perverfenefs, thatprofefsd Pro te ft ants, pretending to Difown this Popifh Method and Device, and to accord with us in this Principle, That the Spirit of GOD fpeaking in Scripture is the only infallible judg in Points of Religion, flhonld, in an Evi- dent Selfcontradiclicn, Embark in this Defign, and Plead m fuch a Method. 'Tis in this Cafe, no doubt, evident, that one Err our and Snare is productive of, and leads into another. For, thefenfe of Texts brought againfl our Adverfaries in this Debate, they will needs, have to fa Clear d and Deter mind by the fupposd Principles and Practice of the Antients $ And however in plain Terms they are loath tofpeakit out, yet in theSerier and Scope of their Pleading, it is written as with a Sun beam, whereof ire have a clear Proof in the Acquittance and Prac- tice of this Adversary with whom we deal. He at fir ft Affaulted the Rev. Mr. Rule vkk a Pamphlet aneni the Principles of the Cyprianic Age, with a Defign to f often upon him a Miftake anent an Ajfertion about the then exiftent Prelacy To the Candid and intelligent Reader. *, (a Digladiation, no doubt , de lana caprina ).■ Mr. Rule in his Rviewofthis Pamphlet peremptorily told him, that he might have fallen into a Miftakein this point of Fa^, and thereupon challengd him to a. Scripture Difpute, Appealing unto the lively Oracles, as the only Rule, jhewing him that the Antient Fathers them/elves ap- peald to GODfpeaking in his Word, as the only Judg^ in Points of Religion, dif owning any other Judg or Rule in fuch Matters : And would not any ingenuous Verfon enquiring for Truth have An* fweredthis Challenge ? But behold this pitiful Lucjfugus prefents a new Pamphlet of near JO Sheets, and all to prove this great Point, forfooth, That there was real Epifcopacy in the Third, or Cy- prianic Age, yea, and in his vainglorious Humour, glorying in his flume, he is bold, on this very ground, to boaft of an abfolute Vi&ory overall Presbyterians, and to have for ever filene'd them and ftop'd their Mouths.But he has befdes the obvious folly of this h is Method of Pleading generally confidered,fo loji his Labmr,and% I may truly fay, befool d and confuted himfelf in his abfurd and in~ confident Ramblings through the whole of this Pamphlet, as the wry Reading may to any IntelligentPerfon dif cover it to be fuch a Farrago of Self confuting Incongruities as mayfaveth Labour of a diredf and formal Confutation. I need not here antjeipat the fuhjequent Difco- veries, thofe efpecially made by the Leakid Mr. Jamefonj Only let the Reader take in view this Jhort Touch and Specimen of the Man's Genius and mighty Acquittances in this Contr over fie. I. He will needs fet his pretended Cyprianic Btfhop, a Pattern to all r\eform5d Ghurches, yet in the Series of his Pleading has made him fuch a verfatile Proteus, andjpeaks with fuch con f us d Vncer~ tainty, yea and palpable Contradiction about the Nature oj his Office and Power, as none can fee the Pattern thy are to Imitate. Again, he will needs have the Cyprianic Bifhop the fame with our Scottifh and Engliih Prelacy, and profejfeth to intend this as his Scope in his whole Debate^ Tet in hisDefcription and Difcourfes anent the one and the other, he has fixed betwixt themfo many and palpable differences, as Blots hisPleading with Contradictions as palpable as were ever exemplified or extant in Print. Amongft many Infiances, let * * the v! To the Candid and Intelligent Reader. the Reader take this one in View. Hefets all his Cyprianic Bi- {hops on a Level, yea, and makes them abflute Caefars in their Diflrct^ whereas all do know », and himf elf acknowledges, that the prcfent Englifh Hierarchie is ( as our late bcottifh was ) offuch a Nature and Mould as therein the BiJJjops are Suffragans to the Arch- Bifiop, and he Subjefftothe Metropolitan. In the Third Place, He will needs have the Cyprianic the fame with the Apoftolick Biftiop, wherein he has in two Points put afoull Imputation upon the Apoflles, \. In Speaking fo amfoguoufly, and giving no certain Chara&er of this Bijhop. he thus charges the Apoflles Dodtrine in this Point with as dark, ambiguous Uncertainty as the Delphic Oracles ^ for ( as is f aid ) he makes this pretended Apofto* lie Bijhop offuch a Chimerical Changeling Shape and Colour , as he may either appear in the highefl Sphere of Abfolute Dominion, or Crumble and Defend into the lowefl Step of a Mean Praefes, with fome fmall Imparity, even the very At ome of it. 2ly, As he has thus Impeach 'd the Apoflles Veracity in the Truth and Certainty of their Dodtrine, in making it fuch an Ambiguous Mute, as is Inflamed, fo likeways their Authority, in making their DoUrine in* tirely Regulable by the Churches PraUice 5 for ( as is faid ) he pre- fentstke Pra&ice of the Third Age as the great Rule andStandard for deciding the Debate anent the Apples Doftrine in Point ofEpifco- pacy, Suf pending thus, both the Senfe, and Authority thereof, vpon this Pra&ice. I need not here further Anticipat the Difcoveries of this Maris In* con fiflent Folly, in Point 0/aVifibJe Principle of Church Unity 4>fcrib*d by him to every Bijhop within his Diocefe or Diflri3 5 and how that thereby he hath clearly Embracd the Popifh Notion, where* by Bellarmhi and others do plead for fuch a ViCib\Q Principle ofU- nity, as competent to the Church Univerfal. Mr. Rule hadjuffi* siently expos d him in this Point, and his Endeavours to Extricat himfelf have more and more JLntangl'd him,as Mr. Jamefon has Lu- culently made appear. Nor need we here to notice his in con fiflent Inad- vertency, in his alledging again jl Presbyterians the Pra&ice and Prin- ciples ofths Firft Ages generally, whereas theprofefsd Scope of his Teftimo- To the Candid Intelligble Reader. vii Teflt monies in the whole cf his Arguing, is palpably Confined to -the Cyprianicrfr Third Age. Tothefe an df ever al fuch like Difcoveries of his Inconfifiencies and Unfoundnefs, eafily adducible, and more fully laid open in the enfu- Ing Debate, I cannot but further add this convincing Infiance cf the Mans procacious Vanity. He appears a great Nomenclator of Writer sy and would be thought vaftlyfeen in all who have written in this Con- troverfie-JCou flail find avafl Number of Writers on both Sides Recited, f&^tbut this vain P leader would make us Believe, nothing has Efcapd his Search, but that he has Swallowed whole Libraries, yet notwith- ftanding this Vapour, he has notfo much as Touched one Scripture Medium agitated by either Party in this Contr over fie. So that for any Thing this Man, in all this Voluminous Nothing, has Offered, or has Amounted to, Presbyterians have taken the Garland from his Hie- r archie Pleaders in Point of the true Scripture Debate, and he has left his Epifcopal Caufe Groveling in the Duft. To this Purpofe his Inconfifient Folly further appears, in that he cafts Supercilious Scorn upon his Antagoniji, as a meer Novice, and not feen in Antiquity, He tells us that the R. Mr. R ule had not feen his Dzmr Cyprianus before he wrote at firft againft him, yea, and that he had not fully Read him thereafter. Beftdes he will needs exhibit a Specimen ofX. F's Skill in Antiquity, and thinks he has fufjiciently exposed him in this Imputation. But is it not a far greater flame to him, to flew himf elf fuch an Ignoramus in the true Scripture Antiquity, that of all the Scripture Arguments pleaded for Presbyte* rian Government, which , if valid, entirely overthrow his Cypria- nic Bifhop, and condemn him as aPlant not of GOD 's Plantation, and therefore to be Rooted up, he has not dard to Scanfo much as one? Is it not aflameful Imputation he has brought himfelf under, that coming forth as anOlympidnvincibleChampion again fl Presbyte- rianSj andprefentingfo many Sheets upon this Controvcfie, he has never fo much asjiated the true Queflion, but made an Ignorant Fruit- lefs Traverfe, a long Days Journey out of the Limits and true Mea- fures\t hereof? Did ever any but fuch a Perfonat Thrafo, or Therfites as J. S. pretend to have come off Victorious and Triumph 'd in any De- bate viii To the Candid Intelligent Reader. bate and Controverfie without fo much as Offering the State thereof, yea or one Argument laying Level to the true Point Controverted .«? May I add, that his Boaftings have fo much of Banter Intermix* d, asjuflly Entitles him to Solomon'/ Chara&er of the Fool, That he Rages and is Confident. But in the Iffue it is evident that the Trnth of GOD in this Pointy againfl which this Railer hath made ^ ? £ His Aflertion,rA* Epifcopal Government Cav.ls noted 3^,33* v*Vl*ftit*ted by Affiles, «» ^ ""JfcW Mr R«/« s Rcfleftwns upon wh.at 7. S. churches in part of the Firft, aid through the had adduc d anent Prelates prerogative in de. Semid and Third Centuries, Scann d and Con- legating their Pover to fonte Presbyters, not t$ , 2f, 21 others, and particularly in the caie of Reg*. His Acknow'edgement, That the Elders tianus, and Namidicus, vindicated from his cfEphefuswarn'd by the Affile, Afts 10. 30. Cajtts. «• . * 3U3V5 ierfw* D^/"» ^°^> improven againft In thefe Cavils, 7 S. is palpably Nonfen- l' i • '••'' 22 fical, and in the Buars of Self-inconfl- His alleai.g, he Pleads not for the Sole ftency 3j,35 Pon,er 0r B;jw /» Point of either Ordination or His fooliih Sarcafm in point of a PaiTage Jurifdtl'on a Contradiction to what he ef Eufebius his fuppos'd mentioning of Sozo. cleaiiy eifewhere afierts. aa 23 ^ noted. Jfo*. Mr Rule's Afleition anent *** fitffow, His alleging Mr R«/e s Appeal to Cyprian Cometimes overlajb in their Expreffions anent in p-inl of Epifcopal Debate, falie and Schifm, vindicated from 7.5's Imputation, groundlefs. 3 17 J ' 23, a4 His groundlefs Cenfure of Mr. Rule in Mr R«/(?'s Inference upon 7. 5's.Aflertion recommending Books. Ibid, rf the Parity of all Bifkops, vindicated. Ibid. J. S Afierts, That the evincing ef proper As like wile his two Ttftimonies from Prelacy in the Cypnanic Age, u a Foundation .. 2 5 which being laid, he may have occafion to run it His pitting Sicco pede over feveral Tefti- up to the Jpojlolick Ctnflitution of Church Go, •rt;;J0f the Fathers Cited by Mr, Rule, vernment, how impertinently at large made m0na 25.26, 27 appear. 38,39 n%!,Ws Teftimonie in that PaiTage, Ale- 7- S. Gives over the Convincing of his •candri** Marco Evangel^ a Presbyteri Antagonift, if this hit Defence mU not do it ■ e Hr unum ex fe eleBum, occ. Vindicated Wherein his Inconfiftency is made appear, from 7 S s Exceptions. a6, 27, 28 in pretending to run »p Epifcopacy in the Cy- Several Citations of the Fathers offer'd by prianic Age to the Source of an Apoftolick ConfiU Mr Ra/e againft the Prelates Sole Power of Or ■ tut ion. 39,4° Aination patfd over by 7. S's. without a That feveral Writers for Presbyterian Zj. I ' 28 Government, acknowledge fome Excref- Mr R»/«'s Inftance of rfo Ordination of cent Power of a Moderator to have crept J ,. ; vindicated. 29 in before the End of the firft Centurie, im- ^As alfo his Citation from Cyprian, and pertinently alleg'l by 7. S. As alfo the u;c AiTpTtion anent the Apoftolick Canons. Acknowledgement that a Moderator was hisAne.w r 3o ft.n -udg,d Efrential t0 church Govern- H'-s Inference alfo, in point of Presby- ment Ordinit caufa. 41 4a ters concurring with Bifliops in Ordination, The abiolute Parity of Pallors afierted by which is made good againft 7. S 3°,3 » all Presbyterians /M. TheBifliop's Power to fettle Presbyters A remarkaole Paflageortne Famous Mr. without confent of People or Clergy, 7. S. Dickfon upon Mat, »i, *J, 26. in Point of the The CONTENTS. nh the eonftant Moderator. **"?>*} Mr. ^Inference upon his Explication % S Difowns his Pleading for the Sole oitht-Chief Power, viz. That lt is much the Power of the Diocefan Prelat, and therein has fame with Sole V ever, in the Scnfe of / S. T-„„-i,M Mr Rafe's State oftheContro- and that it hence follows, That Presbyters not touch a jvir. ^ ^ ^^ ^ g_^ L-^ ^ ^ .^^ VCThat his Pleadings upon this Ground are AS except he pleafe, made appear to be folid, meerlv ufclefs as declining the Defence of and J.Ss Cavils thereupon Confuted, the Authority 'affunYd by Prelates, and not . 5a, 53 amounting to prove the Ctf««w Bifhop to J S s Inconfiftency noted, in ho ding Gy- be our Diocefan, made appear by fome ad- pnan not to plead for ■* D*8 Right of Pre- , >, n r 43, 44 lacy, as having no occajton, Jmcejio Man doubted UThe S 'ate of the Queftion which he of- of it, and yet pretending to offer a Summary fers Whether the Church (kould be Govern' d by ef Cyprian's direS pleading for't. 53,54,?? Pallors aBing in Parity, having equal Power He ioolilhly ftrains the places of Cyprian without the Superiority ofoneYaslor over ether and others adduced by him, to prove theDU Vafiors, made appear to be, ( ..) Imftrfe*. vim Right >£ the Bijbops Office , as .intended to (a ) Obfcure. And (3.) Repugnant to his own prove an Ofhce fpecifically diftincl: from the Vltadim 44 Ofhce or a Presbyter, and * Presbyter as fub* His further Inconfiftency noted. 44. 45 ordmat by Divine Inftitution. 55,5<5 The Exclusion of Sole Power, pleads not borne remarkable Tcitimonies adduc d to for his State of the Queftion, feil. Parity, or evince the contrary, andthartaepiftinai- Intparitv *^' on Detwixc Biihop and Presbyter is held to His further Inconfiftency in this point be founded upon Etclejiaftick" Conftitutim on- noted 45>46 ly, but no Divine Right 57,58,59 His Impertinency and Weaknefs in Cita- This further clear'd from the Ancients tion of Authors, made appear in feveral dichotomot.zing Church-Officers into pregnant Inftances. *6, 47, 48. 49 J.1*0?? ™d Deacons, acknowledg d by J.S. H.s dangerous and incoherent Principles hirnielt. 59, 60 in this Voluminous Pamphlet," convincing- A large Account and Recitation of J s s lv made aoocar in many clear Inftances. grofs Contradiaions in his Pleadings, from ■ ^ 49,50,51,52 Pag. 60, to 66 CHAP. II. An Account of the Chri(iUn Churches declining and Ecliffe in point of Gofpel Purity, and of the prevalent Errours of the chief Doctors in the Third Age, of Cyprian in /pecial, as they are Reprefenttd by the Centuriators and others, THE further the Church Advanced in the World and Period of it Recited./*g? 67' Time from the Apoftolick Age, Concerning Angels in General, and m the more Corruption fhe contrafted accor- Special their Fall, yea the Religious Invo- ding to the Centuriators. Page 66 cation of Angels. f7,f>8 The Errours of Origennrb inftanced. Se- Concerning the Fall of Angels, the Er- veral grofs Errors anent Chrift's God-Head, rors alfo of Juftin, Clemens,aad MethodiusR? his glorious Satisfaftion, the Holy Ghoft's cited. • #«*. Influence upon the Saints : the Creation of Ongen's dreadful Error, thatjhe Devil * 2 raay IV ^CONTENTS, f. f a •* , Marriage. 78, 79 ?holeLaw,andJ^ His afcribing Merit to feveral things in* PtoS«^-^» &^d«» of Sin by Pu- different , Afcribing alfo to the Bkfled.be. that t{iCy are ,n a The'Doftorsof tMs Age according to the place only above HelLEiis .Error concerning r nr.fri.w« in the point of Good- Works, the Voluptuous Life of the Godly upon Centuriators, m the^om ^^ for ^ ^^ year$ ;^ dwpaf J v, ^ and Sly depraved the The Centuriators Offer an Abridgment ran e f om Sin to he merit of Works, affer- of many againft ft. is that of c™«, the t ns ConverSn to be our own Work and Hiftorians relate his grofs Errors. He holds Aft And hat in our Humiliation we make that Chnft fatisfied only for Original Sin c ? V S , tn Rod ^ ^d we our felves for Aauai ; In the point S Hfs Dr«ms concerning Baptifm after this of our Lord's Names of Jefus and Chrift, he His Dreams concerning b*^ ^ imbraces the Herefie of Marcus and the C»- His Formula of the Invocation of Saints. Urbafii 80 Wis rwwwi* u* lbid His Errors c0ncerning the Creation, the TheHiftorians afcribeto the Doaors of Fall of Angels, the power of Free-will. ^•f^Frrors concerning the Church, I wherein he followed his Erroneous Mailer) W L^cegWeninS^ g 7* 73 the poffibility of fulfilling the Law I>id. 8 o"«» prSbH " Martyrdom to Baptifm; His Errors concerning Satisfaftion for T4 P^nnen^ deorefllnc of Marriage, and our Sin by Repentance. P^. 8i. And the HisEnoneous depmnng or ma 1 g , lfoJof r^„^» ,& by the Centuriators^ E^^ 38 imputed to moftWriters of this Age./W. K^Frrors concerning the place of Souls He affirms that Eternal Pumfhments fuc Dep t^ End fcatteJed Hints and Seeds of Purgato- in exprefscontrtdiftion to the Apoftle», rv Asalfo npoint of the hft Judgment, who fhews that thefe ft*** fuffer the SeHappinefs and Rewards of the Juft, and vengeance of eternal Fire, 1M. ^e Mappineis an j concerning Baptifm, the Sa- ^feTe^ crifice and Eucharift, the Invocation of tullivi and Cyprians great Veneration for Saints. . r- ' • him ;nd owning him as his Mafter. 7 J The Centuriators impute alfo an Error in . His Error concerning God, thathe had a thispoint of the Invocation,^, to the other Bodv Refuted by Auguftin. *>&• Doftors of this Age. h IM. - Hfc Error concerning Chrift and the blef- H.s Errors concerning the Church,& the fed Trinky, concerning the Holy Ghoft, R«»«i Primacy ; Concerning Martyrdom, and concerning the Fall of Angels (the that Immortality is purchased by it: As alfo fame with tfo? of Or,*» ) and anent the concerning Marriage and Virginity. 82,81 remanen f eedomof Man's will after the His Homologating the foulfom Popifli remanent rrecu ^ ^ ^^ concerning Commands and Councils of Concerning Godly Perfpw prpwttd by ft?«i« «* As alfo his Error cower- The CONTENTS, ning Repentance, bet of Thirteen, Recited Abrahams Sea'" Divine, imputes i tituled Medulla rable number of grofs Errors, to thenum- CHAP, in. Wherein is demonjirated and made appear the Abfurd and Fruitbr, r j of this VamphUur, to prove, froZ the WriJgi 0T \hj^%^m the Cc.Vemporariesalledgedby him, an Vniverfal Reception of tUn / r E& mi °f Cbmh Gmt""Mnt> itt ,he whl $5$££ THat the Undertaker of fuch a Work, Whereof f%t^« t a or Defign, muft have an exad Know- en Inflan<*s are Exhibited, ledge of the State and Government of all That there v^r»ru -a- ™ p,age ?* Churches planted and propagatedin thatAge tied in nit f el C™*n Churches fet- and accordingly Exhibite Authentick Re-' »bw£«bZ,?n , i?' tbs Kno*>UdV cords hereanent. pa„tL ZTDthjtl ¥ ST 'c^ Tmss cr Ears> ^ An Account of the large Spread'of the ^l^^nr9^^^^^ ChriftUn Church in tha^Age; And firft ^»d ^^fi?y °Verthr°WS \*J through Ma, ?ag 87, 88 As Reprefented n;/ "ypotneiis. j^ by E4eb J vlyJntius: KeprClented g^sImPf ^en xn leveral fubordinat Ar. In t£ % H Jg< HypoAefi, further overthrown ?J That it is incumbent upon this Pampt te^^'^f *»*?> °r,b- ^ ?R°Vei?,Ch a-PrdaCy ExifWin DLcef/nl^ PMck Ch»*« with* all thele Churches, as is commenfurated to The firft InfWe FvMkv 4 • «i ™ 9 »na Government, and Wor. Mr. Clarkf.„s Defcription of the prfmi ' A ' Ch™'- ™- tive Ep.fcopacy, ftands in Term/of c?n inhifiS8""' Jf ™ony "f Doflor B,™« mdiftion to fuch a„ MbST^ ny' hibi d^hXfct Uk"°fta/'"^; BioET °f ,US "^"Mu.tipHcityo'f The InftancfSbited of the Church of AS a.fo upon ground of the man^im2. £££&££*** »^«. and portant Dunes Bilhops are found obliirlfn inftt Jl e tjurches- . '°°> *°i, 102 perform to their Flocks nerfonal W 3 f- fie" °Lf ^ natUre in the beginning ns* 93 > 94 and the fmalnefs of their Charge or Pa- f t t ] roches VI. The CONTENTS. roches, whereoMufrances are Exhibited ofParoches, and that according to hnatim fromHiftory. page 101 5 * * A Remarkable Inftance of the Gothick The Objeftion, That fome of the Same) Churches, planted and conftitim-d for a adduced, are without the Limits of the Cvnri long time withcut a Bifhop, and of Carthage anick Age, Anfwered: And the Anlwer rejtaing a Bifhop when cfftred io-, 102 confirmed by Bifhop Burnet's inftanced AC Alfothe Inftance Exhibited of the Church fertion, and fortified by the Teftim nies of oiAntioch, thus by Dodor Burnet' s Obferva- Bifhop Morton, Bifhop JemLStiUinzfieet &c tion on the firft Apoftolick Canon, who a ' ' ownes the firft Biihops to be meer Pallors I0* CHAP. IV, Wherein is made appear that the Ex'flence of Epifcopal Government in the Cv- prianic or Third Age, th4r£uing3 Whether from the meer Practice of the Churchy or the Reception of Prelacie, under the Notion of Apoftolical Right ,• And that either, or both Grounds are utterly Unferviceable, to Sup- port his Conclufton, and the Scope intended bj him, THat the Scope intended by J.S. in this The Sum and Scope of his Areuine re Pamphlet is to prove a Divine Right due'd to a Syllogifm ; The Major Propofil ef Prelacy, a Confequence clearly drawn tion thus Reprefented, If in the Third or Cy trom the Title Page, and other PafTages of priaaic Age, the Epifcopal Government did lb his Pamphlet : Hence it is made appear, tain, and was received in att the Churches as that if he difown this, his Defign is unper- delivered from the Aposlles, or of Apoftolick Ori ceptible and Nonfenlical, Page 105 ginal, thin it is to be Received, 'and acknow- ledged The CONTENTS. VII lednd in all the Churches ofChriji as a Divine His Inconfiftency and declining the true Right The Minor, But this Government was thus Debate, and ftate of the Queftion with Mr. UniverfaUy received, &c. Ergo,8cc. Page \o$ Rule made thus further appear. Page 1I(j The Minor Proportion being in the .'or- That he appears thus, a pitiful Pleader mer Chapter difcufled, here the Major is upon Humane Conjectures, while (landing denyed and Impugned ; And firft,Uponthe mute to Scripture Arguments brought to O- Hypothefis of his Arguing from the truer verthrow ■:hem,IUuftrated and Confirm'd by Practice of the Church, Ibidem. His Argu- a Similitude. ^ 1 16, 1 17 ing, if fuppos'd upon this Hypothefis, im- This Confirm'd by a remarkable Teftimo- pugned by feveral important Grounds. 106, ny of Snllingpet, who derides a pretence of 107, &c. Pleading a Jus Divinum in point of Prelacy,. Viz. That this will make the Churches when Men leave the Scriptures. Ibidem. Practice our Rule in every Controverfie Ibid He Argues againft this Pleading from That thus, he will Contradict himfelf Antiquity, and the Humane Prafttce of the and his fellow Pleaders 108,109 Ciiurch, 1. From the Defectivenefs. 2. That upon the Hypothecs that Presbyte- The Ambiguity.. 3. The Partiality. 4. rian Scripture Arguments are Sound, yea The Repugnancie of the Records of Sue- are offered, he appears a Lucifugus from ceed.ng Ages, which fliould inform us Scripture Light in oppoiing the Churches what the Apoftolick Practice was. 118 meer Practice thereunto. 109 His three Grounds addue'd upon the Yea, and obliges himfelf to own the Er- point of Ambiguity. Ibid. rours abounding in thefe Ages. 109, no The Argument addue'd upon this Head The Objection taken from the Diftinfti- by J. S. viz. That the Cyprianic Bifhop may on in point of Extent, betwixt the Recepti- be Traced by SuccefFion from the Apoftles, on of thefe Errours, and that of Epifcopal expos'd upon feveral important Grounds. Government, Anfwer'd. Ibid. < 118,119,120 An anticipating Objection, That he Pleads This pretence and Argument nought in not this Reception, or Practice, fimply, but as the Senfe of Famous Englijb Divines, fuch flowing from Jpaflolick Inflitutton, Anfwer'd as Diilor RaynoWs, Bijlop Jewel, Whitaker, and Overthrown by feveral Grounds. 1 1 1 who hold the Identity of Bijhop and Presbyter, A DiftinBion if Doctor Monro, touching the and make appear this to be own'd by the Errours of the Fathers in point of 'Doctrine , and Current of all the Antient Fathers. 120, their Delivering to Pojierity what is Falfe in point 121 of Fail, Scann'd and Overthrown by feveral The impoflible task affign'd to J.S in Grounds. 112, 113 order to the Proof of a deriv'd Succeflion of The other Branch of the Dilemma, that his Diocefan Prelate from the Apoftles, he Argues not meerly from the fuppos'd fed: that this muft be performed, 1. By Practice of the Third Century, but the united and Harmonious Teftimonies,6V;«z,V- Conformitie thereof to the Divine Pattern, ly, He muft prove, that whatever the An- Profecuted. 113 tients fpoke of Bifliops, is intended of his Several Grounds addue'd to Overthrow Hierarchical Diocefan Bifliop. Thirdly, his Pleading upon this Ground, and the That thefe Diocefans came by an uninter- preceeding Arguments further improvem 1.14.J.115, 116 uptedLine from the Apoftles. 122 SECT.IT The CONTENTS, VIH. SECT. II. the Scripture Account of the Myfterie of Iniquity working in the times of theApoftks, improventothc/ame Scope, with the preceeding Grounds* THat Presbyterian Divines Plead this Several Confiderations drawn from the Argument againft Prelacy, acknow- premis d Scriptures further to clear this laed by J $■ P"Ze I23 PoiHt' • , • 126,127 That this Myftery is that of the papal In Special, it appears that this Myftery of Primacy and that the Seeds and Foundati- Iniquity behoved to be well Advanc'd in ons thereof were laid, yea, andAftingin the Third or Cyprianic Age. ,27 the Aooftles times, clear'd from feveral That this Myftery of Iniquity, this Scriptures. »23, *24 Afting growing Monfter, in tht Senfe of The Senfe and Interpretation of Pro- Proteftant Divines, hath a fpecial refpeft to teftant Divines in this Point. 124, "5 the Government of the Church. 127, 138 SECT. III. the Ghurckes DoEirine and IVorfhip, being corrupted confiderably in the Third Age, the Application is made of this Apofracy accounted for 1 Unto the Seeds [owls of Antichrifiian Apofiacy in that Age, and in Special, it is made appear , that the True Apoftolick Church Government was fignally deprav'd therein* A Limitation and Caution prefix'd, that Monaftick Snperfthious vow if fingk life, and there were Seeds fown of Anti- the Popifh Diftinttions of Counfels of Per feci i. Chiiftian Errours in that Age, though not en, beyond the Ordinary Rule of Commanded of fe full a Growth and Extenfion, as after ap- Obedience, inftanc'd in Cyfrtim himfclf Pages'. pear'd Pa£e lz8 . x3r' ft» The Firft Inftance given in the Point of The Seventh and Eighth, in point of the the Popilh fundamental Errour of Juftifcati- Popilh Doftrine of Purgatory and Invocation en by Good Works, Inftanc'd in the Aflertions •/ Saints, the Seeds whereof made appear to ofOrigenm&TertuUian. Ibidem, be apparent in this Age. I3a»i"3 That Origtn holds the Apoftle Paul to IX/7. feveral Popilh Errours alfo touch- Exclude fromjuftification Works of the ing Baptijm, were fpringingup in this Age, Law, intending the Law Ceremonial, not ' Ibid. Moral, Homologating thus the Popiih Di- The Tenth and Eleventh Inftances m ftinttion. Ibidem. Point of the Eucharift, and the Number of Sa- The Second Inftance in the Point of the craments. 134 Doftrine of Free*Will, the fignal Pillar of This laft Inftance fortified by J Ss. Con- the Popilh Doftrine of Merits, Inftanc'd in fefllon, yea, bold Affirmation in point of Tertullian, Cyprian. 129, 13° tke Sacrament of Confirmation as dijlintl from The Third and Fourth Inftances in Point Bapufm. _ ^id. of the Tutelary Angels, and the Popilh vilify- The Exhibited Inftances do include the use and Di^ar aging of Marriage. Ibid, begun Corruption in Point ©t IVerjbip, there- The fifth andfixth Inftancts in point of upon a Traniition made to the ceed iown of The CONTENTS, tk\ of Antichriftian Dominion in point of G*. His pitiful Inadvertency noted in this Ex- wernment. page *3 ? tenfion of the Prelats Power, F/rj?, in faften- The firft lnftance in the point of the Pn- ing a Rebuke upon ourlateS^/ffePrehts.whs raacy of the Roman Church. 13 ?, 135 were declared Accountable to bis Majefty, A Caution as to Limitations and Diftintti- as their Head and Lord in all Ecciefiaftical ons made ufe of by fome of the Orthodox, Adminiftrations, Secondly, In fetting fuel* to defend the more innocent Intention of Unaccountablenefs upon every Mitre, he thefe Fathers in this point. Ibid, has diffolv'd the Frame arid Union both That this doth no whit Impeach theScope of the English and Scottijb Hierarchy, page 139 of the Inftances adduced, made appear, and The Objeftion that he fpeaks of Prelats even from the Pleadings of J. S. Ibid, within their Diftri&, Anfwered. 139, .140 This further cleared from the hinted grofs !?. S's pretence of Prelats Snccejfton to A~ Ignorance of the Fathers in point of the Mj- foftles in this their paramount Power, improves fiery of Iniquity. 136, 137 to this Scope againft him. 140,141 A fecond lnftance, and thereby an Argu- This principal pretence Impugned frons ment ad hmimm offered againft J. S. from feveral Grounds ; Such as r. 1 he Autho- that Abfolute, Unreftri&ed, Arbitrary ritative Denomination cf Paftors Exhibited Power and Dominion in the Houfe of God, in Scripture. 2. The Exercife of their Ef- and over Paftors afcribed by him to the Cy- fential Authority therein Exemplified, pages prianic Bifhop. Jfcrf. 142, 143. 3/)-. From the notable Inftanc* ' This fortified firft by the Scripture prohi- of the Authority in point of Excommuni- bitions of unlawful Dominion, and con- cation afcribed to the Presbyters and Paftors demning Preheminence and Lordfhipin any of the Church of Coring, 1 C«*. *. i4S Church Officers. lb. A Syllogifm from the whole offered t<* Next, the Charge inftrutted againft J. S. J. S. . '4* in point of Faft, in four important Inftances Do&or Burnet preient biinop oi Sal: :burp of this Dominion afcribed by him to the his ingenuous Confefiion anent the Author Hierarchical Prelat I37f'38,i39 rity of Paftors in Government, which cuts A modeft Jronie in noticing J. sYaffert- the' Sinews of J. S s Pleadings for the Hie* ing no Superior to Prelats on Eartb, thus rarchical Biihops Authority in this Pamph-* excepting One Superior in Heaven. Ibid. let. *44> *4£ S E C T IV, The Argument taken from the Myfiery of Iniquity, Afting and Working fince til Apollles times } until the Antichrift arofe to his full Power, further improve* againft J . S. from an Inflituded Comparifon betwixt his Hierarchical Prelat % and the Kpoftolick Bifiop, the fame with the Pajhr, evincing in Ten or] Eleven In flames t theOfpofition of the one to the other * THe firft lnftance oftheOppofition and feed Actually and Immediately, whereas Difference is in point of Inaugurate the Cyprianic Bifhop is Pallor Pailerum, and on and Election of the Apoftolick Bifhop has no gerfonal infpeccion over any Flock, by the Presbytery and the people j The Cy- underftanding the Cyprianic Bifhop, in the risnic not fo. Exercife of that Dominion afcribed to The Second lnftance, that the Apoftolick him by J. S . to be one and the fame with our Bifhop is defcribed with a fpecial refped Hierarchical, Englijb and ScW//bPielats. H^» to the people and Flock, whom he is to . ; H7 [ t t t J The X. » CONTENTS; Thepirdlnftancerefpeasinfpecialthe A Suppofition made of a Prelate with KrchutEfonic, Nomtbette , and Defrti* Power fuch pretended Power over the Confiftorkl and Dominion afcnbed by J S. to the Cy Meetings of Prophets coming to OrS* fnamc Bifaop, and made appear to be con- and the Cafe reprefented to the AdS trary to the Scripture ^147,148 P*k/, and thereupon an Irani vS. Tl:e Fourth Inflance, that the Apoftolick »*« his Decijicn cf^Lfll^Lf^' Bifliop had adjoyr.ed to him in Government been ■ Whether if we belie-,- L n a • rh« Ruling HdenTh. Warrants of his Of. he wo„,d not'h,,? cond 1^ £*£ fice cleared from Scripture. The Cypnanic arrant Ufurper ? Bifhop difowns this Officer. 149,150.191 T S's Rt-flrftmnc r-U,n u f'1^1^ The" Fifth Inftance, that the Vftclicfc P^-d^trfthlTWA^0n-*e Bifhop in BcdUbftkk Courts and Judica- Re-capituiation of his Elogt th^oV*' Jj tones, Exerafed only the Mors part in Go- in point of Faa a renewedDifcoverv° • n,,d, vernment concurring in Crnfultation and how the Advantages anrt r™„„j ci Decifive Votes: The Hierarchical Bifhop grity affigneo^^^ own d no fuch Concurrence and Authority on of their txnSt Conformity u t keDhfa Irt ™ I Prt /fl v i5,,li,*i 'i1 3nd infPecial ^ Point of Chunh GovernZil' The Sixth inftance, the Apoftle Pauls J(.^ ^'nment. V fl°P 't^"12- 8"d J^it'lll^ • An Inference thereupon/ that J.' [^ ^m-J^^'imAe'\^^^^^htt Impeach the genuine Stnfc of £ame and Office, and pretended correfpon- Scriptures addue'd, making it regulable bv dentDuc.es ,53,, r54 the Principles and Praftice of the Third The Seventh Inftance,the C^,*Bifhop Age, ( overthrowing thus the Scriptures ownes Ordination of Paftors to be his In- Authority and Infallibility ) or acK communicable Prerogatives islnaugurated ledge the Infufficieney of his pretended fcy Prefers ofthe fame paramount Authori- Charafters of that Age to reach h^rll ty with himfelf. The Apoftolick Bifhop clufronof thefuPPo?d Vtegrit y thererf H ownes Ordination to be competent to a point of Government, confequentlv the 'S/^Lur a u i o r J%h ""^ndnefsof his whole PamphJet *i o /Jo The Eighth Inftance, theApoftohck Bi- Finally, The Scripture Bifhop's Power is fliop ownes the Preaching of the Gofpel to Spiritual, abfolutely exclufive of Civil BehiSmauiWoik, and the official Actings Rule. The PreJats whom J « pleads for therein, to he above that of Ruling. The not fo.they being Spiritual Lords and Peers Cjprimie Bifhops Work and Office fWs in m Parliament J. Ruling, as diftina from, and Supereminent This Inftance enfore'd from the Senfe of to the Paftoral Teaching Office. 154,155 the Antients and Cyprian himfeK in h; The Ninth Inftance, the CyfrJanUBiihop point mBKL' 3° this obtruded by 7. S. pretends to Succeed the The whole Sum'd'up in a Q8eftion,Vhe! Apoft.es in his Supreme, Singular, Eccle- ther we fhall obtemper and Jiften to Part iiaftick Authority over Paftors, in this Op- and other ApoftlesDefcrintion of the R.fl,„./ pofite to the Scripture Biftop. 1 55 or J. S's Accounts of rffiSS* B fc m The Tenth Inftance,the Scripture Bifhop Ibid. To which another is added Wherhir is fuDJeft to the Judicial Cognifance of his J. S. has not, in prefenting for a Pattern Yn fellow Teachers, or Prophets both as to the Churches, in ftead of the truly Divine Jik life- and Dri/Trine. The Cvtnamc RiOinn RiiT.r.n ^ D.-- .„.. _£■/*.. _t. . „ ■* . I,,c SECT, The CONTENT 5. vr XI, S E C T. V. Wherein is made appear] that], S has .in this Vamtlht -** .?;. ,„ 'w ^ F«/£, /a/. The fralhbility of the Church in am aJJL ' of the ApofiiisxnJ tie Persian ofthe Holy Scdp7ref^lS ""? Believed and Vr atii (el in point of Religion. y'*CnVmQ5> m *™>»gt to be n THE Churches Infallibility in any Ase able Hu^^r, ■-, r tc ■ after the Apoftles, difown'd by our Tt^^'TJ^^^^^^mthh Confeffion of Faith, and that .7 1 Scribes noted P Eft»bhfl»™nc of our Church, an Infallibility to the Third Age. The next uncontrovertible point r*T '7t An important Teftimony^S^ eT^M^S^ff^S^ this purpofe, wherein this Truth is alTerted Zes Thk Li/ f " °fthi HblJ Smh and fortified by folid Grounds, drawn from ProtelhntD $?<£*& ■ a , l7+> '7* the Holy Scriptures, and confirmed by t£ fal Sic '5 ^Xr J° ^ che Univer- Judgmentof the Orthodox in point ofAn- poftle^ the A- tiquity, again* the Popifh Adverfary. ^ $££££ ^ointlf ReHgio°n ^ ^ And by a fpecial Teftimony of &g2 ^| St^ a^f^£ 7.S. Is found to accord with BeU^n ZusJeT^ ^^om theiuperfti- and other Popifh Agents, in this Pleading That ?' s ^1c «■», • » • ^ I7y» [?6' clear'd in a fignal Inftance. "1(£ fo niSjL tt thu* «i.t>is Controveifie Some pregnant Teftimonies of Famous TndMonf L[nQWf rittenACo^^reSand Oral Proteftant Divines on this Head, drawn ou A e S r S L \\ &&&& dear'd fro™ and improven againfl J. S. fuch as, Doctor tth.lf ScoPf .0l" hjs. /^uing. #/,. Str«ng, who reafons this point from Serf?! eS <5S^^?f fe^»**» ^ ture and Antiquity, 27;* Univerfityvf Sm ra fnnvZ } r , ISV,'lle the ?w O- mer, P„/^ ./ Leiden, MarefiusiiJetus 1^2^^^^^^ Law c° An Application made upon thVeTdli- foch andfnch I A *'? Me» fining to monies, in oppofidon to £ S's Principles ApoftS &\"^g? ^^ thetimeof the and that the FiftitiouS Ground of the cC H islnftf ' ^^^eyear 24g. fc«. ches Infallibility, is the Balis and Founda W&m f??^ fy*»** Like- tionofhis whole Arguing made annlr E „ ,? Inftance of W ,:, averting he had in feveral AffertionsdrawnVromLwPhnl ^7°^ °/mo»th from fuch, as had it im Pamphlet, in fpecial ^E^ffi ^!%^W *> -§ His unaccountaM^t^^ ^§^P^^£ Wed, in callenging & Presovtedan fr" J^BV^J^^£^tt^Mt£ »..5Uw.iHimwniSUmCnus; mticmtt 'Is them contradtfl-nrir n«iT T-J • ««n*iitea wryLfefc, when compare with the Pri-i of r£ r « i *>adinons, m the point ciplesandPrafticeof tLcj^VAge S5 f4m rhe A *S?% °f *"?">• °nS W^* His TreafonabJe and Seditious Acc\utT Yu a pu,f"S ?'!^ tllar lC Was t0 ^ Ce- cnofour Parliament and C vil R, , S ^braceedon the ,4 day of the Monerhf the nrfuing0vlyTem^l iStSd^££. ot,Mr*«»» the ApoftleP,^ that it was to be ■XII. The CONTENTS, be Celebrated on the day of Chrift'j Refur- A Notable Teftimonie of dentins 'Alt** reftion. Page 178 drinus, together with Cnnrhla- a Several Superftltious Prances Inftanced, therefrom, and in Ccvcr^ntTLnJ^11 flowing from this, pretended Ground, Ibid, againft J. S's Pleadings PI f ? The Scripture Proofs, and Teftimonies The Helvetick Confcffinn «L 4,,?-y of the Fathers, in point of the Perfection Head, and feveral Articles !£ *t of theCanon 178, 179, 180 in fome Deductions againft 7 5 ,£ *i A remarkable Tefhmonie : of the Profef- As like wife the Scouijh and Englilh C o„f?r fors of L«yd«i to this purpofe, adduc'd and fion. J iia£^ft L°nfef. improven l8l l8* TheConfcffions of W,>, of OT»«,/ir Umverfal Reception of a Principle, or in the fame manner improven zaJlit'^ Praftice by the Church, the Poximitie of with Inferences draCS?„m VS ^^^ an Age to the Apoftolick pretence of Sue- ThefeTeftimon.es fortified by?he Autho- ceffion from Apoftles when Perfinal, not nty of the Antients, fuch al c5rwSSS ^ffnwj/, unfound and fallacious Grounds Ag«M of. 7m» in fpecial, who hoS of Perfwafion in point of Religion. Ibid, that, Mens talk in divine things \>ithout Trt? That the Church may be deceiv d by her tare is ?neer BdHinz • Purine* rim. .-i 1 V" DoBors, that the MyBcry of Iniquity roas wrk- tation of BanteA'nd JBaMinf upon T£ wg in the jpofiles times, that during Jnii- Pamphlet. * u of chrifs prevalent Reign, the World Wonders af. The Confcflion of Bobem, added to 'the X t r*P Sc"PtureJru!,hs improven by preceedlng, and J. S «, Cenfure of Dr 5/7/ the Profeffors ( as by the Current of Prote- /w«r/fctf noteci. r ,'' ftant Divines ) againft the Popifh Marks of A notable Teftimonie of Auguflin who the Church taken from, Antiquity, Sicaf. would not have his own Writing or fcSf < C-r/^4, &c. /tat. thofe of ^ref* to be otherwife reSiv'5 Teftimonies of Turretin and A«W to this than as they agree with Scripture ml Scope, fortified by Scripture, and the Af- v ma' fertions of the Fathers. 182,183 SECT. VI. The 'Antifcnftural Method of J ,'Si & his Pleading, further Muflrated from the Scrtptures, giving; a full and di(lina Sound in the Point ef Church Go* vernment> and EftMJhhg ?reshyterian Government in /fecial. THat J. S owns this Principle in theft, Grounds, fuch as ( r ; The Exercife of led. the Sacred Scriptures deter- Chriffr Kin°Iy Office as Political I H«S !f the leaft hut of a Scripture Warrant. Pages ces,& the Bleffing thereof.?^/ ipoi^i,!** Th** *1,. c..*.... n. , ,l89' I9° Tne Scripture is full and clear in the rented an JrZ^T «»« needs have pre- Enumeration of all Subftantials of Govern- Sl^Xi?COfChu,?GoWrn- mCnt' evinc'd in fcveral Teftimonies, ap- mer* Uemonftrated,fr9m faveral important plied unto all thefe Subftantials. ,9* As P Th CON TENTS, XIII As alfo, it is clear and diftina in general appear fromfeveral Scripture Grounds ( i ) Rules, refpefting the Circumftantiais of The Presbycerial Chureh.confiiting of Offi- Government. An Enumeration of thefe cers of divers Congregations (3) Synods of Rules exhibited. . Page 193 a Superiour Degree of Authori y to Presb^ The Scripture alfo points out a clear teries, and by Parity of Reafon.National Af- Plat-form of Presbyterian Government, fembHes in a National Church. All thefe Condemning thus ?. S s Pamphlet. ( 1 ; clear'd from Scripture and Divine Reafon All the Ordinances we owne, are reprefen- pages r94j ,9- T9(j ted to us in Scripture. ( 2 ) All the Officers. Confe£hries drawn therefrom, and offer'* ( 3 ) The Judicatories, fuch as ( 1 ) The to J.S's. confideration. 195, ioy Congregational Elderlhip, which is made CHAP. V, Wherein are Examtrid J. S's Attacks upon the Author of the Treati/e EntitukJ Reftius Inftruendum, and of the other Entituled, The Hierarchical Bifhop'j Claim to a Divine Right, &Ci Offering an Anfwer to his 6ri- ticifms, and Accufation anent that Authors pretended Incongruous Citations of the Fathers, in the tratlat lafl mention d, ejpedaUy • Refuting alfo his €harge anent the Misdating of the ^Heftim, and bringing likewife unto th* loucbflone of the Solid Principles of Logick, his tw» Syllogijms which he vainly Offers to the two Principals upon the Point of the Ruling Elders Office « Dif covering clearly, upon the whole, his Unfoundnefs, Ignorance, and Self' Contradiction, J ' SECT. I. The Citations of the Fathers, Defended from J. S's Cavitations t and the Ins* pertinency of this Charge made appear^ His firft Attack upon the Citation of Cenfure of a Citation of RufMs Hlftory Uennns. Some Confiderations ©f- pages 20i ** fer'd to fliew the Impertinency of his Charge His Criticifm anent a Citation of Gratian aaent the Citations,in gcntr&l. Pages 198,199 refuted. m/ This Cavilhtion particularly ConGder'd, As likewife upon an AfTertion of that u ■ r fi I' l , 7^- Author anent the Diftinaion of the Clergy His Cavillation upon the Authors AfTer- and Laity. 202 2ot tion anent Hegefippus, as alfo anent a Citation His Criticifm upon the Authors AfTer'rion, Of Ambn)t Kttuted. 199, 20o That Cyprian own d Presbyters as Colleges .• His grofs Ignorance of Jerom's Writings confiderd. 203 204 in his Cavillation upon a certain Citation of That Cyprian refolv'd not to Aft without Jerm made appear. 20I the Clergie made good, and J. S's Cavilla- The lame Ignorance made appear in his tions repell'd. 20 . lit ft] H?s xiv, The contents; His FoolKh Cavil, and Glofs upon the which J S. has given no Return ?/»« 50, Word Statui, in thar Sentence of Cypritn The Author alfo had Examm'd at laree , — aprintordio Epifcopa'n* mei ftatuenmniKil Dr. Scott's Citations from the Epift'es of/ ' fine conftlio veilro & fine confenfu pleura mi* rmiur, and difcover'd the Unioundnefs of privata fatentia gerere. Sml. That it -mporcs his Inferences therefrom. ,07 ,oa only * voluntary Rejolution, but no Officii O- He had alfo Demr.nitrated in Twelve In iligstion, repell'd. P^« 204,20? ftances, the Difference betwixt our Scottiih This Confutation confirm d by an ad- Hierarchic, ard the Epifcopzcie which firff due'd Paffage, in Synodo ad guercum, Ann. obta n'd in th Churches, to all which 7 ? -±01, by Can. to. Con, Carth. 4. by the Te- return'd no Anfwer iu-J mo.. *».-". ... z* ~ ., , r .. , 7 "*"'" ^auuiu or uic councils to Teftimonies, to which J S. could make which 7. 5. amidft his Criticifms (lands no Return. , m, 205.206 filent. 7^ A Notable Teftimome of Jerom, anent Several other Teftimonies of the Fathers" ffc* &n>f«re J«fc»ri7/e of Bijhop and Presbyter, J. S. had feen cited by the Author upon addue'd. The Author hath confiaer'd fix whofe Works he thus Grates and Cnticifes Exceptions of Dr. Scott thereunto, which but offers no Anfwer thereunto Ibid J. S. Offers not to touch - 206, 207 Some Obferves added in confequence of Likewife, two rotable Teftimonies of the whole. aog Augutftn and Chryfo^om to this Scope, to . SECT. II. v J— * Vj J- • M. X» 'A Conftderatlon of what J% S. Offers to that v*utbor, as to the State of the Que ft ion, * * BIfhopV Sole Power always judg'd one ly confider'd, with feveral Diftinftions of m.in Point Debateable. Pate 2 1 1 fer d to evlnr. rh^ Tm« ^"ll»«ions ot- That 7. S. fpends a great part If his ^ ^ ImPc«mency thereof. Endeavours upon AiTerting this Sole Power. The Application with refpecUo DrScotf TT. j t t- • • 212,213 and Biihop Honnieman, wherein this i« m^.l His pretended Limitations in feveral fullvmade aocea, ,nfXm ?rc Points difcover'd to be contradictory to ftances PF ' convincing In- what he holds of the Cyprimic Bilhoi/r t ? nwf.n^ ~~* ► u 2/9 220, 221 **, wherein Ms p^ Rdkftio*^ T&£^^/y^¥ *£ pon Cyprian are diicover d 213,114 puuui cvaiion. The Common Diftioftion of the Deafive Biihop Honnieman and Dr A/**™ nU./fZ andCovfuluve Power and Authority in Chu.ch tbi S,U Pomr,a;j. 3 S will „£l tf"*f£ Government, improver, aga.nft him. 215 Author of ,4, »^^C*flSS.*! His Diltinctons about the ftate of the an>,r i'nm, rh,„„e -1 . J'»r swatm, to dueftior,, and the BilhopV Power £ ffii^otZfl^SfCC^tol^ nWd, and aifcovcr'd to be Null, accor- «^iS^M^J5F?r-ia3W** ding to th. Series and Scope of his Pleading &JES& ™ ^ tm^t^ His Attack upon the Author of ^VL^V. ^ ChargC Refuted b* fcVe^ **22 rW *#** qu* &<, more particular- He imputes Cp that Author, the Action anenc The C ON TENT S. xv# anent the Prelats Paramount Authority to that common fpeech, yea and in Scripture Lan of ordinary Officers, who yet are by h.m fupfot'd guage, wherein the Subjetl of the Propoficion H have no Authority, This made appear upoa h«rh a Denomination taken from its on?- feveral Considerations, to be ignorant puc- extent State, to irs prefent Connexion with rile Sophiftry. page n$ iuch an jdymel, as when we fay, A Parla. The Prelat de faBo Exercifes a Paramount ment is D.ffoHt'd, Sion is plowed Ufo aFeld Tower over Presbyters in Government, who J^ruiaiem ii la.-d onfieaps. pages ii* iz5 de jure have a Divine Right thereunto, altho' J S\ Jmpertinency m fome further Quirks Che Exercii'e is reftrain d. _ Ibid to this purpofe made appear, yea and his Proportions or Affercions frequent in Seif-contrudicuon. 227, 228 229 SECT. III. Wherein are Examined J. S's Attacks up»n the Reverend Mr Rule, and the forementioned Author, anent the Ruiing Eiders Oifioe, and, in fpecial3 his two grand SySogtfmi upon this point, offered to the two Principals, arefully Jcand, and therein his cbilaijh Sophiftry and grofs Ignorance of the common Elements ofLogtck is made appear » FROM the Paroch Minifler's Authority m Senfe of Proteffant Divines, upon this Doint the Seflion afTerted by Mr. Rule, J. S. * p / * Infers the warranrablenefs of the Prelat's Some Exceptions of 7. St upon this point Negative Mice over Presbyters in Church Ju- further expos'd. 2\s dicatories, how falfely and foolifhly, made Mr. Jamefon aiTerts the Divine Right of appear _ ^5231 the Ruling Elder. 236,237 No (hadow of the Hierarchical Uilhop's Trie AfTsrtions in point of the Ruling. Power ( afcribed to him by 7. S. ) over Elder afcribed by J. S. to Mi. Rule and Presbyters, in the Paftors Authority in the 7? F, as the Ground of his grand$yllo"ifms. Seflion, whofe Negative Voice therein is dif- & j^/ own'd by our Church. Ibid. J. S's two Syllogifms propos'd, together J.s's Argument from the Dichotomy of with fome general Co.ifiderations anent the Church Officers into Bijhops and Deacons, pre- ruinous ground 'hereof. 238 230 fented inScr ptureand alerted by Presbyte- A threefold Charge offered againft'j. S'. rian Divines, to exclude the Ruling Elder as upon his Syllogifms. The >ft Of proving no Divinely appointed Officer, confidered himfclf therein an Ignoramus in the datura and and expos'd. 231, 232 &c. Rule thereof The 2d. Of contradicting and This Argument improven againft the baffling his own main Principle. The id. Of his Prelarick Party. Ibid, [editions Imoeachment of the Government, by Em Several Coniiderations propos'd and urg'd Spoofing a Medium that overturns it.. 237, 238 againft J. $. upon this point, and in fpecial He profefies to Argue ad Homines, and an [nfhnce Exhibited df a Scripture Sub- therefore mull: fuppofe our Principle anent div/«, That the Tiaching Paftor, Principles to clear this. 243,244 X Ruling Elder, and Deacon jre the He holds the Power of JurifdiBion to bene, flanging Church Officers of Divine Ap- ceiTarily included in the Prelat's Official M- pointment. J>*£* 253 thorityofOrdination,yettho' owning the Pref- II. Principle, That the Offices of Apoftler, fcyter's Power offstrifd&m^bColmsly denies Prophets, and Evangelifls, andthefe othetGifts his Right and Power of Ordination. < Ibid, mention'd 1 C»r. 12 a 8. of Miracles. HeaU Three Syllogifms offer' d upon his own ing, and Diverfities of Tongues, are Extraordiv. Medium, clearly overthrowing this his Af- nary, and now Expir'd, as peculiar to the*" fertion. ft'd- firft Apoftolick Church 2*4 The id Charge, That his Argument involves III. Fnns . That the Prelat's fuppos'd Of- him in aftditious Impeachment of the Civil Go- ficc, which inhances all Ecclefiaftick Au- vernment: His Medium and Topick prefen- thoriry in his Perfon, with refped to his ted in two Syllogifms to evince this. 245 Diocefe, is crofs to the Scripture Rule, as Some Queries after propos'd by him, and being oppofite to that Immediate EiTential Improven againft him. 246 Intcreft in Govejnmcnt,which is competent His 2d Syllogifm Examined, the Minor to Pallors : Where are feveral proofs of this whereof is founded on the ruinous Ground EiTential Intereft. 254,2*5 ' of the Conclufion of the prior. 247 IV Pn'nc. That nothing like a Diocefan His Charge upon the Author of The H e. Epifcopacy can be inferred from the Scrip- rarchicalBiJbops Claim, Sec, viz. That he had ture Acccuntsot Timothy and Titus. 255,256 , imputed to Doftor Monro, aPopijb Interpretation V. Princ. That no Docefan Epifcopacy cfMatth. 20. 2j. Examin'd. 247,248, 249 is in the Scripture Accounts of thefeven An Epilogizing Addrefs to Mr. Sage, jfian Angels. 2 $6 (hewing, he has neither fatisfied Friends nor VI. Princ. That Presbyterian Govern- Adverfaries, in this Debate; In regard of ment in all irs Courts and Judicatories,ftands hisftretched Inferences, palpable andfre- upon a Divine Balls. 2*7 quent Contradiftions,and Inconfiftent Plead- Scripture Warrants for the Congregation- fugs. »5° alEIderflup. Ibid, Scripture Thi CONTENTS, XVII Scripture Grounds for Presbyteries. Pages 257, 258 The Divine Warrant of Synods, aflerted and iiiuftrated. a$8, 259 National AfTemMies have the fam; Ground and Foundation *uh che Synodal. 260 VII Princ The Eratfian Mould of Church Government, (ach\ as was the late Prelacy in Scotland ( which is evinc'd by A&s of Parliament ), difownd upon feveral Grounds. *6o> a°"r VIII. Print. That the People have Power and Intereft to call their Paftor. 261 That Prelatifts difown this Power in the People and Congregation, prov'd. 262 This Right of the People to call their Paftor made good from feveral clear Scrip- ture Grounds. ; 262, 263 IX. Print* Church-mens A£hng in Civil Affairs, as ftated Official Civil Rulers, or conftant Condiment Members of Civil Ju- dicatories, Condemn'd, as contrary to Scrip- ture Rules and the Minifte rial Office. 263, 264 X. Print. That the Plea from Antiquity is Unfound, and utterly Inefficient in the Epifcopal Caufe, Evinced. § 264, 265; XI. Print. Concerning Worlhip; I. The Impofing of Fixed Set Forms of Words in Prayer or Preaching, and aftrifting Paftors thereunto in their publick Officiating, is Sinful and Unwarrantable ; As wanting, i.A Divine Inftitution and Promife. 2 Apo- ffolick Precept or Example, or of the Apo- ftolick Church ; Where the pretence of the Prescription of the LORD'S Prayer as a fet Form, is ihown to be Groundlefs, from fe- veral Afguments. And 3 As being a Sin- ful Limiting of the Spirit of Prayer. 265, 266, 267 II. Symbolical Ceremonies in W or [hip, of Humane Appointment, Condemn'd fiom feveral Grounds. 267 Of which fort are. t. The Sign of the Crofs in Baptifm. 2. Kneeling in the Aft of Receiving the Sacramental Elements in the LORD's Supper, with particular Argu- ments againft each of them. Pages 267, 268 III. Aniverfary Holy Days : which are Diftinguifh'd from either the Deputation of a Day for Failing or Thankfgiving, or fuch and fuch Days of the Week ( or rather parts thereof ) for Sermon. 268 That thefe Aniverfary Days are Obferv'd as Relatively Holy, and upon a fuppos'd Myftic Signification, yea, and that the Ob- fervation of the Day is Efteem'd a part of the Worfhip, is evident in the Practice of the Obfervers thereof, and from the Argu- ments of the Chief Pleaders therefore. 268, 269 The Unlawfulnefs of this Obfervation evinc'd by fome five Arguments, 1. That it has no Divine Inftitution. 2. That it in- croaches upon Chriftian Liberty. 3, That it is a Refle&ion upon the Wifdom of GOD ; Particularly the Obfervation of Chriftmafs.Day. 4. That it incroaches upon the Authority of the Fourth Command. 5. That it has a Mifchievous Tendency to in- troduce all Jewifb Antiquated Days, and to Harden Pa pifts. 269,270,271 The Objection from the Days of P#w», and theFeaftof Dedication,?^. 10. 22,234 Removed. 271,272 XII Print. In Oppofition to Independents, there isr 1. A Subordination of Letter to Larger Church Judicatories, Maintain'd from feveral Grounds. 272 ity.Thatthe Community of the Faithful, or Body of the People, are not the proper immediate Subjeft of Church Government, evinced by feveral Arguments. 273 3(7,1 That the Formality of Church Mem- berlhip doth not neceffarily require Saving Converfion. 273, 274 LtttttT ERRATA. PAge 13 • Line ir. Read to the Parliament. Ibid. 1. jr. after Certainty add, This Convey* ance being, underftood the Mean, not the Mnive and proper Ground of fucb a Belief. P. 14, 1. a 1. Afcet Reformation add, Arguable to the Pattern of the Cyprianic Age P. 1?. 1. j0( for* undfarlefs, Read, or, in a further Abfurdity, affert. P. 18: 1. 26. dele not. P. t 5> Read thus. Their Farnd Epifcopal Divine Scultetus, whatever mty be faid of this Fabiantis, hath in fo far dim'.ni(h,d from the Hmiur and M'.miry *f his Divas Cyprianus, to whom he a- fcribes fuch like Authority, that he Charges him with Unaccountable Errours. P. 2? 1.35, J^ neceffario P. 31. 1. Antepenult. R.fo lignal. P.6j. 1. 11. after known, add, ( which J. s] -acknowledges). Ibid. 1 i5. after «*, add, andfure, with hi* Approbation. P. 78- 1. penult, after Church, add, But this, with the preceeding Inftartte, after his Defection, cited pag. 76. we Mo not peremptorily prefs. P. 94.. 1. 16. after ( 1 ) add, It general P 112 1. 21. after fuppos'd, add, as for the Centre and Correction of their Errour, the Judgment of Antient Fathers anent the Identity of Bijh)p and Presbyter, is an evident Correction and Cenfure. P. 1 3 j. J. 24. after others^, add, as competent to the Roman Church. P. 136. 1. 26. after ( 1 ) add, In ge. Tteral. P." 146. 1 7. R. this in general. P. t6o. 1. 24. after §. 3?. add, which Power and Epithets do, beyond doubt, virtually include the Aftus Primus of this Civil Rule, when * Door is open d for it ; which is evident in that. P. 166. 1. 8. R. Piacular. P 174. 1. 9. R.Ungodly Courfe. P. 189. 1. penult, after Theji, add, of the Scriptures difiintt Sound in point of Church Government. THefe Elcapes will obvipufly appear : Such others as the Intelligent Reader will Difcover, in Point of Mifplac'd Words, or wrong Figuring of fome PaiTages, or whatever elfe doth Marr the Senfe, Syn- tax, orScopej he will eafily Amend in the Perufal. **i CONFUTATION O F J. 4s VINDICATION Of the (Pretended ) Principles oi the Cyprianic Age ; Expofmg his Fruitlefs Attenlpt upon Presbyterian Government therein, and his alike Fruitlefs Pleadings for the Hierarchy upon the fame pround 5 DhTolving alfo the chief Sinews, and Overturning the Scope of that Voluminous Pamphlet. C HA P. I. Containing fome Animadvtrftons in Proof of the Unfoundnefs and ^Jinconfijlency of his Principles and Reasoning. H E Mould of this Man's Endeavour in this Trea^ife,' lias; been juftly efteem'd very odd and unaccount- able byJ>erfons of Judgment who have perus'd it; For hejiath taken fuch Meafures, pleaded upon fuch ( Grounds, and^profecuted fuch a Scope, as never any of his Aifociaces has therein led the , way to him,, fince this Controverfie has" been Tcann'd and agitata ed : For, what Difputanr, who ever profefs'd to pTead for Epifcopacy, founded all his Reafonirigs for the Divine or Appftolick Right thereof upon the Principles and Pradliceof Cyprian, or the Third Age, before; this new Advocate appeared i And 'tis ftrange, that he did not con^ A fjder, 2 A Confutation of J. S / Vindication of the Chap. I. fider, how that Judicious Perfons, not only of the oppofite fide* but even of his own Party, could not but look upon this his prolix Endeavour, and Reafoning fo largely, in the Point of Fa&, and a Praftice of that hsfi as a Fruitlefs Traverfe oat oT the true Limits and State of this ConwoverCe, and a meer Cob.web, eafily fwept away with a fuita&e Account of the true point dcbateable arid State of this Queftion., Such as do, from a nncereitefpea to truth, and in an earneft Enquiry tot it, embark in any Debate, according to the true Laws and Limits ofDifpute, have always judg'd themfelves oblig'd to plead to the true point controverted, and to make ufe of fuch Arguments as they judg'd fit to fortifie what they m3intain'd, and ro overturn the Principles and Pleadings of the Adverfary; But, in the Judgment of all Men of Senfe, who have perus'd this Piece,the Author in fuch a Laborious Nothing as he has offered to publick View, has neither advane'd Arguments proper to fortifie the Epifcopal Caufe, nor, in the leaft, offered to fcan thefe of his Oppofites: And his obvious Folly doth in tbis alfo appear, that, in this prolix Endeavour,he levels againft a little Traft of the Reverend Mr Rule, a great part, and the chief Sinews whereof, he has, not- withstanding, quite pafs'4 over ; So that his prolix Defence appears, in this refpea, pitifully lame and fruitless. « Vagi i, He profefies his Defign to defend his firft Pamphlet, and to vindicate 'the Principles of the Cyfrianie Age, with regard t» Epifcopal Power and Jurifdiclion ; And that having feen the Anfwer thereof, and confider'd the fame ferioufly, he now offers this Duply. Wherein 'tis oblervable, from the Series and Scope of both Pamphlets, that 'tis notmeerly the Matter cfFacl, but the Jttt and Point of Right which he is obliged to vindicate, yea and forhe where would feem to do fo : And how he has acquitted himfelf in this Proof, having never fo much as offer'd to fcan one Scripture Medium upon this Controverfie, is left to the unpredicated Reader to judge. Pag. 3. He acknowledges, Mr. Rule had told him, that he might (part his Pains, if he only defign d to [hew his Mifiake in point of Hiflory. He ac- knowleda'd> he wot not infallible, and this would not ruine the Caufe of Prcs* hytery% tb$ fuch a Mifiake had been made appear. Notwithstanding whereof, this vain Flanting Pamphleter gives this Reafon of this Ap« pearance of his, fell. To <\ue& his Pride who had made fo great a Fi^uro in Writing. But> 1. What Pride can he here fallen upon that Reve- rend Author in this point, who, by J. S's Confeffion, acknowledge! he is not infallible, and poflibly might be miftaken. ily, He had told him That whatever he could offer in Matter of Fact, touches not the. Point and Presbyterian Caufe, and by jF. -S's Confefficn it is lb. Whj; £hap. % ( pretended ) Principles of the Cyprianic Age. 3 Why then has he fpent this Volume on a Trifle without the Limits of the Caufe, by hi5 own Acknowledgment. %ty, Since he fays, this Was one Reafon of his appearance, to quell that Reverend Authors Pride, •pho bad made fucb a Figure by his Writings , why did he not, for this end, attack him in thefe his Writings, which ftand to this day without an Anfwer? Thinks he, this Figure could be man'd, by (hewing a Mi-i flake in a point of Faff, which that Reverend Author judg'd not im» poffible, while his other Writings ftand inviolable and untouch'd $ Nay, 4/7, Did not Mr. Rule not only tell him. that this would not ruine the Caufe of Presbytery f but likewife had appeal'd him to a Scrip- ture Difpute upon the Queftion, from which he has, in this Appea- rance, prov'd himfelf a meer LucifugM ? Pag, 4. He looks on him as a proclaim 'd Ob •ampion of "Presbytery, be* caufe he faid he wrote his fecond Vindication by Order, and J. S. tells lis, bis Commijjion was not revocK d when be wrote his Defence , But, 1. Granting he wrote that Book by publick Order, it will notfollowJie is fuch a Champion, nor that all in it is the Sentiments of all ,• Some Deference might be £,iven (and that defer vedly )^ to this Reverend Perfon, and likewife what he wrote might be own'd as to the Mainf altho every Parcel or Sentence of what he wrote be not the joynt Sen* timents of the Party; Nor can he prove the neceffity of a formally re- voked Commiffion to evince the diicominuance of any fuch fuppofed Order, ilyt If* as he fays, he confidered him as a publick Advocat, why did he not attack him upon the complex and main Caufe, upon the point Controverted,and by him Defended* I wonder what Judgment would be made of an Advocat, who hearing his Adverfary bring many Arguments to the Caufe and Point in Law, mould only Anfwec and Attack him in fome Hips of a Word or Sentence, without evec medling with his Arguments upon the Caufe, but quite paffing them over ? Who would not think 'this Perfon worthy, as a loqua- cious Fool, to be check' d by the Judge,, yea chas'd from the Bar. Ibid, He tells us, " That the Argument taken from the Conftitution ' and PradHce of the Government of the Churches in the Firft Ages * is truly Unanfwerable, But, I pray, why mentions he the Firft Ages generally, not the Cyprianic *. If he mean the Cyprianic, which his X>efign and Principles oblige him unto, why calls ne it the Firft Ages, this including the two preceding ; Oc if in "this Denomination he intend and mean all the Three, I would know* 1. Why he confines his Difpute to the Cyprianic or Ihird Age with fuch high Elogies above the Second, yea 01: Firft? zly, Since ourDsbAte Is properly anent the A 2 Ganjtitutio* 4 A Confutation of ] S 'sFwdicathn of the Chap. I. ConftttutUn and Principles •/ the Apojiolitk Church, why declines he the true State of the Queftion. and obrrudes fomc (ham Arguments under the Difguife of this poor General anenc the Frame of the Firft Ages*, without ever adventuring to attack us upon the Fnft Antienteft and onlv Proper Age to be debated ? Next, f would glad y know of this PamDhleter, what is it that renders this Argument taken from the Conftitutionofthe Firft Ages VnanfwerabU ? Is it a Conformity to the Divin" Pattern i or this Co'nftitu'rion meerly and in it fell confidered* Hewn! not probably profefs to own this Mi,- And if the fuftbe adher'd to let any Perfon of Candor or Confcience fearch out and let us fee a Proof of this Conformity acapite ad calcemothh whole Pamph- let Vat f We are told, That the Incautious among Presbyterians clamwr that thy do not value the Fathers, that the Scripture is the only Judge of Controverts, and that they are not to he concluded by later than Scrspture 'Antiiuitv. Here is, i. An implick, if not a plain difowning and denial of this great point of Truth, that the Scripture, or £od freaking in the Scripture is only Judge of Controverfies of Religion and that no later AntiLty is to determine this pint, confequently an Impeachment of the Do&rine of the Reformed Churches, fince the affecting of this prearand folid Truth is term'd a Clamour only of fuch as are lefs i.auUeUS. fy Since he takes in the Firft Ages generally in this unanswerable Argument, and owns it that the ApojUes fix d a Divine Canjhtutson of ihe Churches* how comes he to Quarrel the owning ot this as the hrft !fc?-SJ. and proper Rule* That* he holds the Apoftles to have rnnfcituJed a fix'd Platform of Government is apparent 5 For, I, He pr°et *n2 acontinuance of that Mould and Platform in the Third A*. Ill He difowns Dr. StWngfleet's Notion as to the Indifferency of Forms °fHeU^ *V' Presbyterian Writers acting that the Hierarchy obtain' J not in the the firfi Three Centuries, cMng tbk noUriom Fallhood But, i. If he fall mort of his Proo f and this is confpicuoiu fo the Judicious Reader of his Pamphlet ) the Falfoood lies on himfelf. IV Let the Tryal be made of the Bifhop as he Busks him, and the «"/> *-"-;• , T; , i ___ „ — *:„** K« o^mKpc rn him in this Pamoh- hot cffentul and notorious differences as th.s Man ftates. 2/y Do Chap. I. ( pretended ) Principles of the Cyprianic Age'. $ Diftinaion became afterward ro be ftated betwixt them. 3//, None of the Authors whom he cites do deny a begun Epifcopacy, and lome Vefiigies and Seeds thereof to have early crcep'd in. The Quefhori with him is anent the grown Monfter of that ftupenduous Hierarchy which he alTers, wherein all Minifters in point of Government are put on a level with the People, yea below them. . Altare Dtmafcenum, faith he, ?a^z6<;. averts that the Btjh op had no Negative Voice in Cyprian'i time, that Churches were equal, their Presbyters tmu*l Sec He Oiould have told his Reader alio, that this Learn d Author afferts, "That the Bifliops could pot meet without their « Metropolitan, who notwithftanding, had no Negative over them ; < Whence he infers, that no more had the Bifhops over Paftors.tho ' thev could not meet without their Bifhop, that Churches and Prel- < bvten being equal or commenfurated to each other, €jprian makes « all Diocefes equal, thus overthrowing that Towering Hierarchy, '* refolving in a Metropolitan, fuch as our Englifh and Scotnjb Prelacy * is which this Man undertakes to affert. He might have feen like- wife in the fame Paffage tikn\ Anfwer to Marmin de Pontificatu Lib. Cap 8 comparing^ &i(hop to the King, and Pafiors toCwnjeRours, the ablurdity of which Simility and Comparifon Tilen himfelf zealoufly afferts as likewife Dr. Field, de Eccltfia, pag. 137. another unexception- able Wieners. Thus alfo Augufin, who calls and owns Pallors the Bifhops Collegues, EfiB. 137- and lib] exprefly thus contradiaing this Affertion of Bttiarmin owned and pleaded for by our Pamphlet Pag. 14: He tells US, that our Reformers proposed U themfehes the Scriptures 'not (imply indeed, neither as fens' d by their own or any Modern Gloffes, but as fens d and interpreted by the ^Principles and Praclice of the Pri- mitive Church, as the Rule accsidino; ro which this Church was to be Reform' J. That our Reformers propofed this Rule under fuch a Coercion and Limitation is an Untruth, obvious to any that do perufe our Hiftory j And, confidering this Man's Scope, 'tis here evident, that, « 1. He difowns the making the Scriptures fimpiy our Rule in Reformation, or to be in any other Senfe a Rule than as fens' d by the Principles and Praclice t>f the Primitive Chunh> and conlequently denies the Scriptures to be fatly and abfolutely our Rule in any point of Religion. So here is con- firm d what we have charged upon him anent his cenfuring and con- demning them as not Cautious, or as Ignoramufes, who own the Scripture as the only Rule, and do Appeal to this Judge in the point of Church Government. Hence 'tis evident, 2//, That he has dif- ©wned and impeached the Doftrjne and Confeftons of all the m™** Ei — • " med 6 A Confutation of ]. St Vindication of the Chap. I. med Churches in point of the Scriptures Perfe&ion, aiTerting, with the Papifts, that it is but a general and half Rule authentically ienfed by the Principles and Practice of the Primitive Church, which wich them makes the Rule compleat, and to give a diftinct found in point of Religion and the Controverfies thereof. " *• From Tag. 14. through this whole Chapter J. S. propofes his grand Reafons wherefore the Churches ought to be conforrn'd in point of Government,to the Principles and Pra&ice of the Third Age taken from the High Elogies and many Advantages of that Aee' inferring, with him, the neceflity and advantage of this Imitation and Conformity. Such as, 1. That it had no Temptations of fecu- lar Grandure to ingage to the imbracing of Prelacy, it being a Time and Age wherein the Church was liable to much Suffering. 2ly An Age off much Ecclefiaftick Buiinefs, no Age after the Apoftles had more. 3/7, An Age of great Men, fuch as Cornelius, Lucius, Stepba- nus9 and more efpecially the admirable Cyprian. ^lyt An Age of many excellent Records, Synodical Epiftles, and Forms and Con- ftitutions, many Epiftles of all forts, Epiftles from Biinops to their Clergy, from Bifhops to Biihops, from all parts of Chriftendom. 5/y, An Age wherein the extraordinary Manifestations and Commu- nications of the Divine Spirit had not ceafed, but continued in very great plenty. 6ly, That this Age was not fo far from the Apoftolick bat that they might have been well acquainted with the State of Government in which the Apoftles left the Churches before they left the World. 7//, That they were bound by Principle and Intereit to refift Innovations ; By Principle, fince it was own'd in this Age that the Government of the Church was fettled by Apoftles. 2/y By Intereft, in oppofuion to the Perfecution and Reproaches both of Jews and Heathens, fince they were not only Reproached by the Jews as imbracing Novel Principles, but by the Heathen Wo/U Maffacred and Tyrannized over, under pretence of being peevifh wilfu'jhumorous, Fanaticks, who had no folid nor accountable Princi- ples, Now, how palpably abfurd this Reafoning is, will evidently appear if we confider,, 1. That moft, if not all his Elogies, he cannot deny to have an Application, and more proper to the Second Age than the Third, which may eafily appear upon a review and applicarion there- of, efpecially in the point of exifting extraordinary Manifeftations and Communicathm of the Spirit alledged by him, and affinity to the Afofiolick jigey and acquaint wee with the fate of the Government which the Apoftles hft itfire they left the fVorld, wherein he mult be forced to acknowledge the Chap. I* (pretended ) Principles of the Cyprianic Age. j the Second Age had.by fir,a preference to the Third- And what Records and Accounts hereof were exiftcnt in the Third, 'tis beyond all perad* venture they received from the Second, who herein had the preference and advantage of a more full and exact knowledge. And if, as is univerfally acknowledged, this Age has a great Cloud upon it, as to matters of Fad, 'tis a wonder how this Cloud comes to be pulled off in the Third Age, and that the Eyes thereof mould be fharper in difcerning the ftate of the Apoftolick Church, than thefe of its Parent and Progenitor. But, 2//, Whatever be laid of the Secend Aget thsre is no Body will doubt but that all thefe his Elogies are much more applicable n the Firft, and that it is in point of Infallible Pattern abfolutely preferable thereunto. So that, upon his own Grounds, this Pamphleter is convict of Folly in fending us to the Ihird in ftead of the Fir ft Age as the Cynofttra, Touch- ftone, or Tryal to difcover the true Church Government eftablifted by the Apc~ (lies. To make this convincingly evident, let us ftiortly touch a particular Application and Companion. 1. In that Firft Age there wot no Ttmptaiten to jecular Grandure. This he needs mult acknowledge. The mean ftate, as to the external, of our bleffed Lord and his Apoftles affording a clear conviction hereof. Our Saviour told the Man who would follow him for the World *, The * Luk. 9* 58. Foxes have holes jhe Birds of the Air have neftsjout the Son of Man hath not where to lay his Bead* He told his Apo- ftles *f*i They were to be hated and dejpifed of all wen for f Mat. 24. % hi/Names fake^and they were accordingly accounted the filth of the World t the off- {comings of all things ||, Yet, on || 1 Cor, 4: 13, the by, we muft tell him, that as there was a Seed of emolous Ambition early appearing in the Apoftles, which their Maftec nipped in the Bud, fo there was a MyHcry of Iniquity working in that time *, the Seed of a Papacy, and there * 2-Tief 2, yl was then an a/firing Diotrephes climbing up to be a Primat -f\ So that he may fee there may be Tempta- f 3 Job. 9. tions to Church Grandure even when and where there are no Temptations to fecular Greatnefs without the Verge of the Church. 2/7, For Ecclefiaflick Bufinefs, he tells us, no Age after the Apoftles had more. And thus acknowledges the Apoftolick Age had in this a preference, wherein we have the Divine Records of rhe Apoftles Arts and Pia&ice in the Conftitution, Founding and Watering of Churches, and in the Sacred, Authentick Epifiles ( Pardon us to fay, preferable to thpfe of fyprhn) the clear Diagram and Portraiture of the 8 A Confutation of J. S> Vindication of the Cfity. I. the Churches State the Intercourfe betwixt the Apoftles and them in noim of Dutv d fcoveries of the Affaulrs of Enemies and Tempta- Z o S«a^U Scand ihlnd Cenfures Prices of Sathan's Inftruments, and how curb'd and obviated, Refolut.on of momentuous mc.dent Cafes &t Efpeciatly if we addhereunto the Cafe of the^o Churches, as reprefented in our Lord's Epiftles to the 7 Angels, this w,l be further convincingly evident, j/;, As for hi, jl.„r,f»ng put Men m that Age, may I be bold to tell him, that the .2 Apoftles, the 70 Difcples, the Evangelifts.wcre as great Men as Lucim .Stephamu fro Nor will we except thegfeat Infallible 'Cyprian. 4JV, As for the man, exceUtnt Record,, Sjnod,cat EPiil»(r»»B;ih»p,te their Clergy, from Bijh.p, to B,(hof, ^containing m that Age an Intelligible Schemeof the Principles thereof in the point of Church Government ; Who will doubt that the New lament Record, are in this point infinitely preferable, a far clearer Ground of our Faith and Practice, than all the GonftitutioM and Epiftles of the Thud Aee » Have we not therein the New Teftamem Records and Gofpel Hiftorv of our Saviour's Life and Doftrine, and laying the Baft and Foundation of the Gofpel Church and the Government thereof? Have we not the Apoftles Dodrine and Practice, their authemick Epiftles unto the Churches, preferable to his Epiftles from , B.lhops to their Clergy, yea Apoftolick Epiftles to eminent Church Officers iuch as timothy and lit* i Have we not the Revdaucn containing ; an account not only of the then State and Condition of the Churches but likewife a difcovery of the various Temptations and Tryals fad Pe fecutions and correspondent Outgates, Defea.on or Integrity of i,s Officers, her Eclipfes and after minings untrl the very end of Time,- Yea and difcoveries of fuch a Nature as do ntceffarfy import and infer her Declining, in that Third Age, fo much magnified by him » Yea have we not an account of the firfl (oemn Cir,/I,an Afothluk C.uncd the Conftitution and Adings whereof, none writ doubt in point of amhentick exemplary Influence, are abfolutcly preferable to all after Councils or Canons thereof. ..^ ~ J S tells us> when fpeaking of thefe Records and Epiftles of the Third Age, that nany of them are (till extant, acknowledging thus that lorn of tUmare H ; But needs he mult acknowledge that all the Lively Oracle , the Divine Records of the Apoftolick Age are-M *«■*'. He tells us farther, that the Mmumems of excellent Cypnan i are honoured wJthl treat* fi feneration, as incomparable Records of knotty by the mo ft uJl ModeL But may we inform his Reverence that they are ^mmr^hlv ihort of the Apoftolick Records of Antiquity truly Vto^lX^ only/butby all true Chrlftians ; . So that Chap; I. ( pretended ) Principles of the Cyprianic Age~. $ his Elogy of Incomparable rauft needs evaniih in this Comparifon, and will hazard its coming under the Blot of an Incomparable Folly in fuch an Aflertion. J. S% tells us, the four premised Advantages of that third Age are certainly very great : But that the other two appear to him n* lejiy if not of greater Conference, namely the yth. That there were in this Third Age extraordinary Manifeftations and Communications of the Divine Spirit obfervable in the Writings §f Cyprian and his Contemporaries, Now I think* for very fhame, he will not dare to difown it, that the Firft Age had in this a palpable preference, fince therein we have a clear account of the Apoftles Inftruftion by our Lord, fourty Days after his Refurre&ion, in the Nature and Conftitution of his Church and Kingdom % of their folemn Seal by the * A8. i. 3. Holy Spirit in the Day of Bentecoft f, their authen- f Afi. 2. tick Dodrine delivered touching the Government and Conftitution of the Churches, their correfpondent Practice purfuant to their Matter's great Commiffion, the Spirit's miraculous Influences and Operations attending their infallible Doctrine, and thefe extraordi- nary Manifeftations of the Holy Spirit largely pour'd oat upon others, both on Church Officers and Members, and that in fuch a Meafure and Extent, as no Body will deny to be preferable in both refpects to any fuch fuppofed vigent in the Third Age. But J. S> tells us, Since the diftincl Manifeftatkns of God's Mind were in that extraordinary manner communicated to them by that fame Spirit which directed the Apoftles in the Government of the Church , how could they over- turn the kpoftolkk Conftitution , and fet up another ? Yea, which is, with him, of greater weight, thofe who liv'd in that Age infifted upon thefe Manifestations in the Defignation and Promotion of Perfons to Epifcopal Office^ and in directing and encouraging them in that Office to which they were fo extraordinarily Promoted. But, good Man,, he mult be told, that, 1. 'Tis the Judgment 'of all found Proteftants, who difown Popi/h pretences of Infallibility, that no Communications of the Spirit fince the Apoftles were of fuch an univerfal Extent or Nature as thofe com- municated to the Apoftles, fo as to render any Church Officers, yea Councils,in their Doctrine orPra&icein point of Church Government, Infallible. And, ily, That the great and {landing Apoftolick Rule, I John \. Believe not every Spirit ? but try the Spirits whether thy are of God3 allows, yea obliges all Chriftians, to bring the Decline and Practices of whatever Church Governours, yea of Councils themfelves, to this Standard and Rule of the Apojlles Doclrine. So that thefe Pro- motions and Encouragements he talks of muft needs be acknowledged of fuch a Nature as are reducible to, and examinable by this Rule, and B if AConfuUttoH of J. 3'/ Vindication of th . Chap. I. , ^ ¥Up. no^rine and Pra&ices of the Apoftles in their llfTd fflftsK. ch- th « fame Infallible Spin, which taught the £1™1 S3 X Promotion of fuch Diocefan Prelacy as ho PlComer'we V^Ai Advantage of this Age, upon which this Man win n«ds make the Praftice thereof the Gynofura and Rule to the Churches viz. That thefe of the Cyprianic Age »«. e*> /«■ r**« ^ V ,, L, »f lie i*»»/?fci hut that they might have hem very well acauam- fT iTVL td c Government in which tbcApofile, left the Ch„nhe, M^telletLVM And fure I am, he will acknowledge the firft SoUckAge to be, in this point, incontrovert.bly Superior to the TWrd fincffherein the Apcftlet Ttrfonal prejence, notour v.fiblePralltcc, the llMni Define and authentick Sacred Oracles del.verec I to the Ghurche put this beyond Debate ; So that whatever Medium or Areumem he may ufe in this point, may be, a fortiori, improven agamft wT™, order To his Obligation to have ftated and debated the Queftt- on in Point rf Church Government from the Doclrin, and Prattle, of the plTJta,- For i( a vicinity nth. Rule have luch weight with him Firff^tgc, ror n i b him ,0C)ked w and ZtrdTnlf D ba« : If The Third Age mi'ght have known this Ki7* (uppoid Vicinity nth* Fir* beyond all peradvemure li Tn It JV \, bevond a mkht be in this point, becaufe of ,mmed,at the Ftri age ^ ^AoomeTpcrfonal prefence%niT^<>&t\n^nc\P^aic» K^KrffiyK^Ses.^ Why then bath this new Projtor ed us off (i the Lapwing is faid to do fearchers from her Neft by rfverfed Fut.erlgs J from the true feat of this Controve-ne and proper ftate of the Quezon > Doth he not thus cxpofe ^himlelf, as one afraid to bring his Caufe to this true Light and Touelvftone ? Wh the Iks here, of the well being of a Society depending on the Cenfl,. Utionand Temperament of Government, a, of greet cogence thereunto and that few or n Member/ but m«\\ have under Obfervat.on, "?*»'«" their Lre of their Priviledge, their exfetlatior , of Secur.ty Jometbmg or ether Z lay or other, that may oblige them to have their Eyes M w*fc4 h. 'el n vum ,1 an, thinking P.rfon, and that at fubianual Innovate, tG.vcrnm.nt are nLraf, AnraSivc cf the accuse O^rvauen and mu-l lee / • 'be bka /( Degree thus in the Government of the Cb-rcH. I Anfwer, this is a TV pick "well calculated *or ekcluding Innovations aS vSor pr,,babft either }u this or the ftbUquent Ages, and confe- S uives the fiat Lie and Contradiftion to the Scripture accounts ar,d affection hereof. Again, this Man Wifely iuppofe * there ^ can be no Byats or Corruptions in the A&fttons, Will, .or ^nations of Chap. I. (pretended ) Principles of the Cyprianic Age. j r Church Rulers or Members, fo that 'tis impoffible they can Contra- dict or Counteract their Knowledge of the Divine Rule ,• And how crofs this is to both Scripture and Experience, I may tell this Pamph* leter, is obvious to any thinking Perfon, and confequently, the abfurdity of his premis'd Notion, whereby he would ftate that Third Age, or even the fubfequent in fuch a Perfection and Infallibility as excludes all Defection whatfomever and receffes from the Divine Rule. Finally we are toldj that the Third Age was bound by Principle and Intert\\ to with Hand Innovations t it being their Principle that the Government of the Church -wOS fettled by the ApoHles^ afled and affiled by an Infallible Spirit • That Innovations were Criminal } that the Iniereff of Cbriftians in thole times obliged tbem not to thwart the Definitions of the Founders of their Keliaion, which would have exposed them to the fpite and reproach of the Jews, the Ztal and Might $f the Civil Government then bent againfl thtm, as peevish Fanaticks who had no accountable Principles. That the Fir ft Age is in this preferable is prima fronte convincingly evident and palpable, if we ponder the much more lively Impreflions of this Principle vigent in the Apoftles times than afterward. And there were vigilant Enetiiies both without and within the Church. Was not thejewiin Peilecutiou then violent, and the Reproaches of the Apofties and their Doctrine atrocious ? Was not likewife the Heatheniin Perfe- ction againft the Apoftles violent, who all* except the Apoftle John, fuffered Martyrdom, who notwithftanding Wrotethe Revelation in his Batiiihment to the lib of Patmos ? Was not the Apoltle James the Brorher of J;hn a very early Martyr, and the Apoftle Peter miracu- loufly refcued from the Bloody Hands of a Herod the very Night before his intended Execution ? Have we not fcveral Epiftles of the great Apoftle of ths Gentiksfrom Prifon? And was he not delivered from the Mouth of the Lyon Nero> and brought once and again before him 1 No doubt, nothing he can pretend in point of Principle and Inter*, ft, but was much more considerable and vigent in this Age, And fure we are, ihe Lord's firft extraordinary MefTengers, the Apoft;cs, being haraikd and Perfecuted, and at laft their Blood ftjed, be lids; many others of the Lord's Servants of an Inferior Order, fuch as Antipas and the like, were more glorious Martyrs and Wit- nefles than Cyprian** or any of his Contemporaries. In the next pi ace, thsre is none of all chefe pretences but may be aVleged to prove the Churches rttentim of Divine Infliiutions in oppofi- tion t© the Divine .Records of palpable Badjl'niingsi fuch as that of the J 2 Church I2 AConfntdttonof].$s Vindication of the Chap. I. Church of lfrarito very fhortly after the Laws delivery * Exnd. ;2. by Mofcs *, and after Jofhuas Death, and of the ■fjudsr.1.2. Elders -f\ ?nd fuch like in after times. We have in the New Teftament Sacred Warnings of the Churches fpeedy Defection, yea and an account of the actual Defection and fad Corruption of Churches while the Apoftles were alive and In* fpeaing them, fuch as thefe in the Churches of Corinth and Galatia, the laft whereof had (peedily turned to another |j Gal. i%6, Goj}il\\. the lamentable Defection and Corruption of feveral of the feven Afian Churches. Now, I would fain know, what J. S. would Anfwer if fuch an Apology of the Nature which he offers were made for their Defection and againft the Scripture Charge thereof ( fuch as we maintain to be in force againft Prelacy ) viz,. That they had fuch Advantages and Encouragements for their Standing and Integrity as are mentioned by him, That they were ntt only near the times of the Apo flies, but had the Injoyment of their Light, that they were in the very times of the fir (I Go/pel Inflitutions, that they had exctUent Records vi^ent, and extraor dinar Mamfefrations of the S first, &c. Nay, fuppofe they had all the indivi- dual Advantages mentioned by him, will he fay, in contradiction to the Scripture accounts, that it was impoflible they could have turned aiide ? Why then will he afcribe fuch an Infallibility to the Third AgeVor afiert that they were Absolutely and Infallibly keeped ftraight by thefe Advantages? For, unlefs he fays this, he fays nothing to the point, while making the Frame, Conftitucion and Practice of the Church of that Third Age our Gynofura and Rule in the point of Church Government, as is evident he doth in the whole Series and Scope of his Pamphkt. %ly, Whereas he draws the ftrength of this Argument from what they might have underftood of the Apoftles Doctrine and Practice in point of Church Government, he ftill, upon the matter, (however herein inconfiftent with himfelfin the Scope and Series of his Pamphlet ) muft fuppofe their Vraclice examinable by the R»/e, and not the Rule by their Practice, fo that he fays nothing till this Conformity be cleared by a due Gomparifon of the one with the other; otherwife ( as StiUinifleet has told them ) he and his Fellows do in this hind the Rule to the crooked Stick, and make the Scripture (land Cap in hand to ferve its Servant. And to infer from what Advantages that Age had what they might have known, what they might have imprcven,&c. theic terrefpondent Improvement, and attual ftanding and perfeverance, is fuch an Arguing a Pope ad Ejje as common Reafon, as well as the premis'd In* fbyice*, does coimnce of Folly and Falihpod. /•"•^ "^# i * Chap. h C pretended ) Principles of the Cyprianic Age. \ g Pag, 22. He Difcourfes of the fafe banding down of fignal Events by Tradition, and remarkable matters of Facl, &c. Granting this in fome miners of Fa&, yet in the prefent Cafe this is not to the purpofe. For, i. Our Queftion is not anent Matters of Fa& Jimply conjidered, but anent the Conformity of the Churches Practice, and fuch matters of Fad: as he pretends, to the Divine Rule. -zly, Himfelf acknowledges this Divine Rule which muft regulat thefe matters of Fad. 3/y, We have fafely Tranfmitted to us this Divine Ganon and Rule, and therefore need no Traditional conveyance^ as touching either theDoarine or Pra&ice of the Apoftles in this point. The Defender of the Epifco- pal Remonftrance by the Parliament of England, Pag. 125, compares the leaving of the Divine Right, and fupporting of Epifcopacy by another , to the Condition of fuch Men, who, when God hath withdrawn himfelf, make Fle(h their Arm, Thus alfo the Author of Epifcopacy by Divine Right, Tart 2. Pag. 49. . -. , As for what he adds, to fupport the Credibility of Tradition pom our pleading a certainty of our Reformation from its fir ft beginning in oppefuion to Prelacy, Pagk. 24, 2f. and that Mr. Rule cenfures Dr. Monro for affirming that Tradition k not to be believed if it exceed 200 Tears , is- utterly unferviceable to his Scope, as is palpably evident: For, r; He runs de Genere in Gtnus in this his illogical Reafoning, me wing alike Skill therein as in his two doughty Syllogifms. We fpeak of an Hiftorhal Human Certainty, when we mention our Knowledge of the ftate of our Reformation from Records : The point debateable is anent a Divine Faith of a Divine Truth, which no Human Tradition or Records can fufficiently ground. 2//, Mr. Kule, in the place cited by him, having laid, that it is hard to fix a period how far Oral Tradition can hand down a Tradition to Pofterity, adds this cautional Reftri&ion, efpecialfy if it be about the credenda of Religion, and he has told him our Queftion is of this Nature, and confequently is capable of no fuch Refolution or Rule of certainty. Pag. 27. We are told, That if proper Prelacy is found in the Cyprianic tSlge*, then the DijlincJions of Presbyterians anent the Superintendettcy of the firji Prelates*, viz. That it wot of Dignity not Power, of Order not a Degree, and that thefe fir (i or constant Moderators hud not the fole Power of Ordination and Jurijdiclion, &C. can never evacuate the Force of Testimonies, even of the Ages prior to the Cyprianic, ftnee tbofe of the Gyprianic Agt wert far from innovating or proceeding on Principles different from thefe of former Ages* But, 1. What if thefe Teftimonies of the preceeding Ages mall be found to crofs thofe which he pretends to be the Cyprianic Principles in point of Government I Then we muft either believeand give the Precedency 1 4 'A Confutation of J. &* Vindication of the Chap. I. Precedency to thefe prior Principles, or make thefe of the CypHank Age the Infallible Rule. 2/* When he freaks of the TeOimomes o thlV, Prior to the Cyprianic, he muft, of neorfficy, include the fift Av clfe there's no plurals of Ages prior to the third, and thus either he mutt mik- that fuppos'd Pradice of the Ihira Age regulate our Belief ^ZoITfJ™* fo render it the Infallible Rule, ( wherein his Abfurdity and Self-inconfiftency will appear palpable ) or elie he muft acknowledge himfelfobHgd to impugn the premisd D.fti^ions, and evince the Power of the Prelate; Which he aiTerts oppofite thereunto from the Principles and Prattice of the Firfl Age and, by dear Confe- rence, Jromjk DoZtrine and Practice of the Apojlles, in theConftitution of the firft Churches. ** \ •>_ - ;f , . 2 ;t Vai 27 28 We are told, that the fixing of the Principles of the Cvpri-. anic Ate clears the Principles of our Reformers who in An *, }5ST **' drefsdthe Queen Regent, that the Statt Ecclefea/iial might be Reform d act cording to the Rules and Precepts of the N An i^z. for hinging into Scotland tr,g Vwdk&tion of the Chap. I. s~„tu+ ^'mreritv of the one and the other, would he thus eqn.pen ting he S »«"'JI/not rather have condemn'd them of haveowndtheDer.gnation.a thePratfice iKftri r0 "he" ApoTef in point of Church Government > By anduoann= r that exptefflng ,hemfelves as ?*tL? rouched they afcribe an iJMUfi* W Pa/Mi- * **. M buf;p^,ti. W ftWito, » *M -nd * «n.ko their Appeal .,*. clear Information omening the anaent Conflttutm, , of the Church Government » The Anfwer is eafy, much more in the M Age or elfe J, S. fpoke Nonfenfe, in flaming all the three excluding the F'rLtt I a. Mr. Rule faid, a Bi(l,op, in Cyprian'; time, * not aDiocefan withl'oU ?Pwe, -of Ordination and JurifdiBion, if be prove that, ^Cyprian and him call m Scbifmatich. Here is the point, fays J. S. « fiat.d by Mr Rule. and the Stref, of the Caufe in which I engagdmth km. Now, let K be confidered, that J. S. all along difownes the Sole power of Jur.f- diition as afcribeable to the Bilhop, ( whatever upon the Matter, the Teftimonies of Cyprian and others, as Glofs'd by h.m will amount toi andiftheStrefsol the Caufe is laid on this, t.s evident, that he has never pro/d that which Mr. Rule calls him to prove, and upon Proof whereof, he allows J. S. to call him Schifmatick ; So that t;s evSew thta clear State and Strefs of the Caute has o Mrefsd^h.s weak Indeavours, that, in all this Rambling Pamphlet, he afferts nothing to the purpofe, nor has Anlwered Mr. Rule's, Demand and "pl'rTj*. Mr. Rule had faid, Pag.lo. That Parity of tower w* not wholly taken away in Cyprian. Time, tbo man, Corruption, bad Creep t >nt> the Church, and ibie Declenfion from abfoUete tarit) went dong w,w them. Upon this 7. S. fafteneth his Quibble, calling this a Uy fiery, Jince. >f mtakf awa, an, fart from Parity, there, »> Unger Parit, but b>pr«7, Chap. I. C pretended ) Principles of the Cyprfonic Agf. ty which confijh in Indivifibili* But, looking to the Scope and Contex- ture of Mr. Rifles Difcourfe, this Quibble appears very imperti- nent. He fliould know, that, altho' Parity in Ablatio, or under that Reduplication, as fuch, doth thus confift in Indivifibili, and to fay otherwife were Implieantia in Adjeclo, and Parity were Imparity • Yet Parity in Goncrets, or Concretly confider'd, as denominating Sub- ieas qualified with Power, or otherwife, admits of Extenfion and Degrees, according to the Nature of that Quality or Power, wherein the two'Subjeas are compar'd, as may be Exemplified in a Multiplici- ty of Inftances. Thus, as is faid, the Term Power importing a Qua- lity admitting Degrees, there may be both Parity and Imparity in the different Refpeds of thefe Degrees, which makes, according to Mr. Rule's Expreffion, Purity, Power and Parity to be of fuch a Latitude, as admits a Companion or Diftinaion of Abjolute Parity, and that which k in part, which may be fitly and fully exemplified in many Inftances, if needful. Take two Waters, the one iuke-warmi the other hot in extreme, there's both Parity and Imparity ,• A Parity with refped to Heat as confider'd as oppofite to chill Goldnefs, yet Imparity with refped to the Degrees of that Quality. The Man in the Heat and Height of the Fever, and the Man in the firft Advances of it are pares with refpea to the Difeafe, as confidered fienply as oppofite to Health, fince they are both Difeas'd and Feverilh, and in that fimple refped para, as the Difeafe ftands oppofite to Health, or in this Companion ; Yet 'there's Imparity with refpea to Degrees. Take it in Moral Qua- lities, a Man veiy Learn'd, and a Schollar advancing in Learning, and having reach'd confiderable Degrees thereof, are both fitly deno- minated Learn'd, as Learning is oppofite to meer Ignorance, yet there's an Imparity with refped to Degrees* An hundied fuch In- ftances may be given, where there is a Quality denominating two Subj.as, there's a general Ground of Denomination reaching both, and confequently wherein both agree, and are eatenus equal, elfe the general Predication were true of the one and falfe of the other. If ?. S. cannot underftand, how Power may be taken away in part, not wholly , I know not what he will readily underftand, or if he under- Hand himfelf. He holds, there is an intire Power of Ordination and Jurifa diction competent to the'Bifhop; He makes tbe'BiJhop fole in both, fay we. : No faith 7» S. he is fole in Ordinationt not in Jurijdiftion. Now then, tht Power of the one is taken from the paftor, not the other ; Here is Power tiken away in part.,/d/. in Ordination, but not in Junfdi&i- on Ergo, not wholly ; Confequently, here is Parity and Imparity in diffweat RefpecU Bifoop Honnicman holdsfhatlhc Mijhop and Paftor are C ' w* l8 rA Confut Alton of\ SV Vindication of the Chap. I. He and the fame in the A8\ of Order ; There's Parity of Power, not fo in MSis ofJurifdiBion : Here is Power taken away in parr, not wholly, confequently the fame Parity and Imparity exemplified, or Mr Rule's DiOinaionofthe Abfolute ?*rityt and Parity in part I would know, how J S underftands the Accomphfhment of the Prophecy, Ibe Scip'trM nt depart from Judah, nor aLaw-giver from between bit Feet, till Shfloh come ? Was the Kingly and Sovereign power ftiU exifhng and in force or in the fame Degree of Sovereignty as formerly, from the rtmeofthe Captivity until our Saviour's Coming, when their Kings and Governoms were under the Jurifdidion of a Forreign Prince, and the Kingdom became bafc, as Ez,ek% 17? Yet the Accompliihment of that Divine Oracle and Prophecy puts it beyond a 1 Debate that a Power of Government was ftill exifting in that Royal Tube of Judah ard Family of David, until -that period of the coming of Sbihb, till which period, the Scepter was not totally departed, and I consequent- ly rheie was no abfolute Parity, to ufe Mr. Xn/^phraie in refpeft of Power betwixt the Governours after that Captivity and thele that and thus were eatenm, or in fo far, according to that Prophecy, tir,,, the Denyal whereof would impeach. the Truth of the Prophecy it Hf Not to enforce again here the Abfurd.ty which Mr. Jamefon ha "faftened upon him. of reducing the Bifhop's Power above the Pres- b? er o fuchaninngnificant Atom (may leal it to) of Difference, a. fa not in the leaft meafure, diftinguifh'd from an abfolute Parity • 'Therein pulling down, as it were with his own Hand, that Magnificent StruSurt of the Cfprianic Bilhop's many and high Pre. roeatives above a Presbyter afferted in his Pamphlet. _ \at. St. Fabianus U own'd « Ordaining Novatianus « Vmbyter net on, JtbLMeGonlent, hit again? the Inclination, of both CUrg, and People. Now if J. S owne, that thus he OrdainM without and agamft them, tlZ AiTerfinn will so far to prove, that the Bilhop is Sole, as well in Jut m* on as 7 Ordination' For' if, in fo f.gnal an AS of Govern- ment he may a8 without and againft them, why ,;ot, I pray, in all ethers > ff he may admit whom he pleafes into the Number of Pres- by ten. why may he not ufe and govern them alfo as he pleafes? SrS raid, that this was the IrtaiceofanAftinng Vope. And ~ , ,.,|. ... l. I tte firti that attempted to dimimflt lots Honour and Me- Zln But why dono?fuch thus diminifh from his Honour and Me- Zoly,, who plead for Bifhops Ordaining with Concurrence of P^ Chap. I. (pretended) Principles of the Cyprianic%. J9 byters, fince that Fourth Council of Carthage ? He fliould have alfo confider'd, how their own Fam'd Epifcopal Divine Scuketusy befides divers others, have diminiuYd from his Honour and Memory, in afcrit*i ing very unaccountable Errors unto him j So that, in fuch a Charge, Mr. %uU was neither ible, nor the firft that condemn'd the Bijhops aft'mg without the Clergy. Moreover, Mr. Rule had told him, that this Aft wM not only condemn d by the Qlergy and People, hut by Cyprian** ccnfiant Pra&ice, yea moreover he ajfrted, that himfelj did prcmife, it (liould not be made a Precedent. And, from that which is faid, that the "Bijhop had prevail'd and Ordain d him, Mr. Rule inferr'd, that he had prevail'd aC leaft with fome of the Clergy, tho' they did at firft much refift it. But this J. S. pafled over faco pede, as the moft of all that his Antagonift has againft him. Pag. ?§. We have it afferted, that that place, i Pet. f. 2. is, by Mr. Dodwell, fairly interpreted t* prove the Bifhotfs Power of Di§>ofing of the Revenues of the Shurch. An Interpretation not unlike to that oi a Pope to prove his Head/hip, In principio Deus ereavit Caelum & Terram, Ergo, the Pope is infallible Head of the Church, unlefs we will, with the Mani* ebees, admit Two Principles; And not unlike that other Interpretation of the Voice from Heaven to ?eter, when the Veflel was let down from Heaven with all forts of Beafts, Rife Peter, KiU and Eat, Ergo the Pope has Sovereign Power over the Church Catholick. For his Commendation of Dpdwell, in this high Elogy of the hcom* parable Dodwell, and his entituling Dr. Pearfcn the Great Dtcler, whom his Friend Dr. Monro calls the Incomparable Bifhop cfChefter, we need not ftand to enquire, how far he makes thefe two pair of Incompa- rables pares, and whether their Parity confided in IndivifibilU and whe- ther, in this point of Epifcopal Learning, they were fo abfolutely equal, and to the leaft Atom Heady-peers^ that there was no gradual Difference betwixt them. He cenfuresthe Author of the Hierarchi- cal Bifhop's Claim, for aflerting, that Apofiles had a Supreme. and Colla- teral Power ; But if he affert an Equality betwixt thefe his two Incom- parables, that Author may, as to this point, tell him, Jam jumut ergo fares, and that he muft retrad: his Cenlure. His Friend Biftop Honnie- man, impugning Naphtali, faid, that the Affertion of two Soveraigns in a Kingdom was to m&k$ two Gods -y So that J. S. will find it a pretty hard Work to accord with the Bi/hop in this Affertion. But not to notice this further, Pag , 40. He Cenfures Mr. Rule, for faying, 'that he was more inclined to write ad Hominenrij than ad Rem, for that which he took to be the Truth 6f God. By what imaginable Gonfequsnce, or Chain of Confe^uences, can it C z follow, to A Corfu Alton of] S/ Vindication of ttie Chap. I. fo'low, ( faith .7. 5. ) that I put a higher value on the on? thing *han on tk* or.hzr, becaufe 1 chusd to be/in with it in the Or*tr of Wri Anfwer, That Mr. Me fixed not his* Charge upon this O d iy confider- ed, but founds it upon this important Ground, viz,, That he h fag called to tin ri;bt Order by bis Antagonifi. i. e- the tiue Scripture D bate, as in the firft place and properly, yea folely the point to be hgwt at, fbent hit Efay upon this Trifling QuefHon% anent the Principles of the Cvpria- fiic Ave, which is utterly remote from the premifed true Subjeft of the Dsbare'j And this his Trifling Voluminous Pamphlet confirms the Ghirge, wherein he has wholly declined the true State of the Contro- verfie. 'Nor can he evade, by telling us, that Delaying is no Waving ; For, in this Cafe, fince he cannot deny, that the State of our Goncro- verfie is a Scripture Difpute, anent the Doctrine and Practice of the Afofiks in point of Church Government, his Delaying to (peak to this point in Qucftion after he is called to it, (yea all this time Delaying, or, to fpeak truly, quite giving it over ) is a mter Waving, and expofmg the Weaknefs of hii Caufe, which cannot abide the Scripture Light and proper Decifion. Pag* 41. He afferts. That Epifcopal Government was inflituted by the 'Apofihiy did prevail in all duly con/lituted Churches, in part of the Fir ft, and through 'all the Second and third Centuries. What means he by duly conjti- jutedCbttrcbcs? If EpHeopally conftituted, then it feems fome Churches in the firft Age wanted Prelates, and fo were not duly conftituted, and thus the Apoftolick Conftitution was but Mank and Defeaive, till compleated in the Second and Third Age. If he fay, he means that all Churches were not fully conftituted in that Age, I Aniwer, i. There's a vaft Difference betwixt not fully conftituted, and not duly conftituted. A Church may be in a good meafure conftituted accord- ing to Gofpei Rules, and in fo far duly conftituted, altho leveral things may be wanting, as to a full Conftitution, but not to be duly conftituted, imports fomewhat amifs in the Conftitution it lelf. zly, When we fpeak of the Apoftolick Age, in its inure and full Extent, as reaching not only to the Death of the Apoftle John, who ( it Hiftory may be believed ') long furvived the reft, and none will doubt, in the Aooftolick Inlpedion of Churches, but likewife includes all the after Duration of that Century • We muft, in point of Church Government, confider that Age, with refped to the Doanne and coirelpondent Pradice of the Apoftles, in the Conftitution of Churches ; And there- fore how abfuid is it, to affert, that the Churches which they Planned and Watered, in all that Extent of Tme, were not rightly or fully conftituted in their Orgtnick Beings till compleated in the fubfe- • Client, Chap. L (pretended) Principles j.*r£TcLf 'ft Vfal 106 22 Zeal and Rhetonck producd this Ettift of an unjuft ' Condemnation ofSchifm, as J. S's blind criticifing AV Zeal prompts him to fuggeft, but that they did overlap Retimes in their Exprejfions about it. Now who can deny that thef- are very well confident, and that the Condemnation of a Crime or Error may be juft and true in it felf, tho there may be jeme overh(b fometime in the manner of Expriffion. TTlM. had faid, T^ by Cyprianic Principles, aV Bi{l>ofs were tmi Hence Mr. Rule obferved, that he ufor Parity in the Church, and tells him, that if it be found among Bifhops he knows no Scripture, nor Reafon, which condemns it among Presbyters J. f thinks he twits his Antasonift Wittily, when he adds, and truly neither do I But, i He fhould-have accounted for his Foolifo Argument to prove- the Biftop the Center of Church Unity, becaufe the Church it an Or game apolitical Body which mufl have a Principle of Unity upon xrhicb at the Members mu(t bant tile they are no Members. Which Argument, as propounded by him, Mr Rule did (hew to Hand crofs to the common Principles of Logtck, there heinz three premifes exfrejfed and a fourth necefSarHyto be under flood, ere the cJclufim can be reached. And besides his other Impert.nencies he mewed the falfe Suppofition his Argument is grounded upon /«/. that the Principle of Unity in a Political Body muft needs be One Perfon and cannot be a Society and Confitlory, a Principle difcarding all Cm to this nmp Sarlfm , If he own a Parity among Bilnops, he ffifowns both the E^lijh, and the late ScoU.fl, Hierarchy j For as & the Uft the Bifhops were, fo in the fitft they are ub,ea to Arch- Bilhops did bwear and do Swear Obedience to them, yea and all of them to the Metropolitan the Center of their Unity j/,, If he acknowledge all Paftors or Presbyters equal, equal I fay by Scr.pture Rule ( for he will not dilown it that -herein the Paftors Office as wel as the Bimops (lands delineated ; they muft be fuch in all Offic.al lZ%,ajM ,. ,bem in Serif,*,. And this Official Amhonty according to the Scripture accounts thereof reaching both the Key s of Doftriue andWline, the Supereminent Offie.il Autho- rity of the Prelat inhancing this Power in biinlelf, and giving it to Paftors as his SubftUutes and Seffiagans, is evidently cut off and c«lu< ded, ng Chap. I. ( preundcd ) Principles ofahe Cyprianic Age. 3 5 Tag» 45\ He Griticifcs upon Mr. Rules two Tefti- monies from Firmilian *, but quite paffes over feveral * Pag. 49^ Citations of C#>r**»,cited in that and the preceeding Page, to prove Presbyters Authority in Judicatories, as Epift. 10. §. 3, wherein they are owned as the Prapofiti and having a Minifterial and Epifcopal Infpe&iom Epift. 28. commending the Clergy of Carthage for debarring from Communicating with them Gains Presbyter Didden/ts and hi* Deacons, who had Communicated with the Lapfcd, wherein he tells them, they A&ed according to the Difclpline of the Church. Likewife, Presbyters Judicial concurrence with the Bi/hop he proves from Epiji% 2j. §. 17. wherein it is affirmed, that in con- demning Schsfmaticks, affuerunt Judkio & Cognitions. Likewife ^\ 2r. fpeaking to Cornelim Bi/hop of Rome, he exprefly mentions the Clergy as Ruling together with Cornelia*. His words are, Florentijjimo Clero illic tecum prtfidenti. Citing alfo to this purpofe, Efifi. 58. §. 21 alfo Epi/i. 62. 65. adding that Paffage of Epift. 6. §. 4. Doleo enimquande audio 1 nee a Diaeenk nee a Presbyteris regi pefje. i. e, 1 regrate that they can be Governed neither by Presby ters, nor by Deacons. Adding Pamelms Note on this Paffage, Hinc non objeure coSigitur viguifie adhuc Carthagini at ate Autharit Frteregativum Presbyter orum ac Diaconerum Primitive Ecclefia, qua communi totitts Presbyterii, it e. Presbytererum & Diaconorum CoUegii confilio adminiftrabantur omnia ab Epifcopis, i. e. " That c at this time the Presbyters Prerogative owned by the Primitive * Church was ftili vigent at Carthage, (cil. their Inrereft in Govern- * ment, and that the Bifhop Adminiftrated the fame with their Concur- ' rence and Counfel. To confirm which, he tells us, Pamelim cites Ignatius* as he had before alfo cited him. J. S* having paffed over this ficco pede, as to the Teftimony of Firmilian, he alleges that Mr. Rule infers from this, Jhjt.PrxpofitusJignifies Bijlop, Senior Presbyter according to Pamelius, that therefore be it for Parity betwixt Bifhop and Presbyter. A grols Diftortion. Mr, Rule having cited Fsrmilian's Epiftle which is the 7 j. adGyprianum, and that Paffage thereof, Necefiaria apud nos ft ut per fingulos annos feniares & prapofiti in unum conveniamUM - * ut graviora communi Confilio dirigantur, and §. 6. • — ■ Prajidtni ma\ores n*tu ^»%ffCvneyt 1ut & baptifandi & manum imfonendi & ordi- mndf pefjla'ent potejiatem ,• Wherein the common Council of Presbyters in all the weighty Affairs of Government and their Authority even in Ordination is affei ted ,• From hence he infers, that all Power is alcribed to the Presbyter that is given to the Prtepojltm or Bifhop. He alter ciies Greg. Ntz$an, who, in his Apology, (hews, that the Apoftle did make Canons for Biihops or Presbyters, i Jim, ^ tit, i. afferdng, D Presbyters a6 A Confutation of J. S'i Vindication of the Chap. L Presbyters Authority in Government; Aifo lAmbrofe, Epiftle to Syaorim, anent Syagrius's being cenfured for paffing Sentence by hlmfelf,' fme alicuim Fratris conjenfu, without the Concurrence and Con- Cent of any of the Brethren : Shewing alfo, that his own Sentence was acquiefced in, becaufe hec judicium noflrum cum Fratribus& Con-Sacerdo- tibus partcipatum frecejjit, was part by Concurrence of his Brethren and Fiilow-Prtsbyters. Alfo Chryfrfom, Horn. n. on I Tim. aflerting that there U dmofl no Difference betwixt the Bi(hop 'and Presbyter, rendering this Reafon wherefore the Apoftle omits the Oder of Presbyters and paffeth to that of Deacons ; Adding further, in Confirmation of this Reafon That Presbyters are Ordained for Teaching and G*w?**»£ the Church I and what the Apcjlle had {aid of Bijhops he applies to Presbyters. Judge then, lays Mr. Rule, if Chryfoflom was for the Bifbops * P<*£- 5 r« lole JtrifdiSiien, He cites alfo* Augu/iin, Epift. 19. where- in he fets all the Difference betwixt Bifhop and Presbyter on this Foot, that Epifcopatus was Wrcsbyterio major fecundum honorum vocabula qua jam EccUJi* u/us obtinuit. i. e. That the Difference betwixt Epifcopacy and the Presbyterat, was only Nominal, and flowing from the Churches Gufrom. From whence he infers, that Augu0in places the Prelation of a Bifhop above a Presbyter in the Title of Dignity, but fpeaks not a word of Superior Power. Next, not only does he deny, that it had its Original from Divine Inftitution, putting in the place thereof a Human Quftom only, but he fpeaks of it as lately Jettled, jam obtinuit, tho'this was after 420 years, fo that it was neither Conftituted nor Univerfal till then. Citing alfo Sahianus, who makes the Levitas and Sacerdotes to be the Apofiles Succejfors, not mentioning Bifiops as diftinft, Alfo Gildastwho frequently fpeaks of Bifhofs and Presbyters promifcuoufiy. AH this J* S. paffes over ficco pede, as likewife Jerom's Epiftle ad Hdiodorum & ad Demetrium, Ambrofe Epift. 80. Cyprian Epift. 12. wherein it is made good that Penitents were received by the Bilhop and Clergy, Neither doth he touch Mr. Rule's Examen ofPrelats Prerogative in Confirmation, together with the Proofs adduced by him : As alfo his Examen of what J. S. had offered for Prelats Prerogative in point of Ordination, Pag. ?2. ?;, ^4. In all which and many fuch Inftances 'tis uncontrovertibly clear, that he has taken but a very fuperficial view of his Adverfaries Strength and Reafoningi in this voluminous Pamphlet. Amongft other Proofs of Presbyters Power in Ordination, Mr. Rule had cited that Paffage of Jeromt Alexandria a Marco Evangtlift* ufy; ad Heraclem & Dionyfium Epifcopos, Presbyteri [emper uttum ex ft tleftum in excelfiori gradu c«UogqtHm fcfifcopum nommabant ; u e9 That Chap. L (pretended ) Principles of the Cyprianic Age. 27 at Alexandria from Mark the Evangelift until the Bifhops Heracles and Dionyfius, the Presbyters having chofen one from among thcmfelves, fet him in the higher Seat, and peculiarly term'd him Bi(hop. Whence he infers, that during that time all the Power and Authority of the Bi/hop was given byiPresby ters ; They Ele&cd him, nor had he any- other Ordination or Communication of Power but what he had from them, in the Opinion of Jerom* To this Teftimony J. S. excepts^ 1. His leaving out that Glauie, Quomodd fi Exercitus Imperatorem faciat, i.e. As an Army choofeth a General, &c. which he fays, would have marrd his •whole Tlote and G$nclufion. I Anfwer, not at all, becaafe, as is notourly known, no Allufion or Similitude is Argumentative in this Gafe, becaufe of many apparent Abfurditiesj Nor is any Similitude to be ftrain'd fo as to infer an abfolute Likene/s^fov this were Identity, not Similitude ; And any who ponders Jerom's Scope here, and in his Comment on Titus, his Epiftle to Evagrius, will eafily Judge, that he was as far from making the Biihopfuch an Emperor over Presbyters asEaft is from Weft. , He Quarrels the Confequence. they had the Power and Authority of choofing and nominating him, Ergo he had all his Tower and Authority from tbems But, u He offers no Reafon of his denyal, as if it were enough for him to deny what is made good by clear evidence. 2/y, He but difguifes and curtails the Paffage and Expreffion ufed by Jerom, for thus the Words run, Vresbyteri unum ex fe eleftum in excelfiori tradu coUocatum Epifcopum nominabant, where 'tis evident, in Jerom's Senfe and Account of this matter, thatthele Presbyters pitched upon one »f their own Number, whom they thus Advanced, and who, as to the Main, and in point of Official Power and Authority, was ftill a Presbyter, becaufe, in the id. place, All the Difference betwixt him and them was in this, that they fet him in an higher Seat, or Bench, as Cloathed with a derived prefiding Infpe&ion. ;//, That they gave him the Name of Bifhop as fet up in this Precedency, and as Mr. Rule well infers, he had no Confecration of hit fellow Prelats, as having this Sole Authority. In ftead of this true Senfe and vigour of the Paiftge, J. S. will have it to bear no other Inference, but that they had the Power of Choofing and Nominating their Bilhop, fuch a Power as the Chapter hath to Nominat the Perfon who is. to be Bifbop, abho only the Biflaops can Inveft, Confecrat and Inaugurat him ip his Office, wnereas Jerom fays, that ail his Authority in Univerfum ^either as to Inauguration, or call it Confecration, or Exercife of nil Office, flowed meerly from the Presbyters free Choife, who by this their free Eieaion fet him ud to Prefide over them, as an Affembiy . Chooles and D z Nominates 28 A Confutation of J. S'/ Vindication of the Chap. f. Nominates a Moderator, in no other manner, and for no other end. jfy, Mr. Rule did further infer from this Paffcge that if the Vrcsbyitrs made a Bifhop, it could not ye be alow, but the Bifirep with them% and as one tftbem, tbat made Presbyters. J. S. fays, Who can b- fa pert as to fay this is no good Conference ? But this Sarcafm lights upon himlelf, who is fo pert as to deny fo clear a Confequence, tb Connexion whereof is evident, r. A Majore ad Minus% The making a Bifhop is a higher Ad of Authority in his Principles than making a jmeer Presby- ter, Therefore if the Presbytery had Authority of making a Bifhop, and fet him ,up as their President, or Head, much more had they an Intereft with this their Prefident and Head to Inaugurat or Ordain a Member or Fellow-Presbyter ; And therefore the Bilhops Sole Prero- gative in Ordination, which he is bold to aflert, is cleat ly cut off and excluded. ilyt If the Biftiop was fet up by them thus to Prefide, to be fure they did it not to deftroy their own Power, but to Fortirle h by fuch a Head of their Union, not to diffolve or annihi!ate their Judiciary Power, and therefore the Bifhops acting is ftill to be con- ftrued with their Authoritative Concurrence. 3/y, He was fet up as one of them, Vnum ex fe eleftum fays ]ervm, wherefore by his Election he was ftill Unas ex ipfis in their Senfe and Deilgn ; And if fo, his perfonal AB was no judicial Acli as J. S. pretends the Ad of the Prelate is/ and no other wife Judicial than with their Authoritative Concur- rence. Mr. Rule had further difproved the Prelates Sole Power of Ordina- tion from feveral other Teftimonies, As, i. That of Miarius, wha lived in the middle of the Fourth Century, on Epbef. 4. 2/y, That of Novatus, a Presbyter in Carthage who Ordained Felicijfimus while Cyprian was Bifhop. Citing alfo Cyprian Epift. 33. likewife Epift. 24. Epift. 10. £. 2, Likewile ConciU Cartbag. 4. Can. 3. and feveral fuch Paflages, pag> yj, ?6, ft, wherein he makes appear Presbyters Vower in. Ordination, and confutes fome of J. S's Subterfuges in his firft Pamphlet. All which this Man fcims over ficco pede. Only, as to what he has pag. c8. againft J. S's Proofs for the Bifhops Sole fower m Ordination, who had adduced the Inftance of the Ordination of Aurtli* us • '* Mr. Rule had Anfwered three of his Reafons : Upon the firft, ' anent the fame Power in all Ordinations, he had told him, that it • doth not thence follow, they might fo difpofe of Ordaining Power • with refpeft to thofe whom God had appointed, and about whofe • Ordination he had given Rules in the Word, To the id. Reafon, I aaem the Bifhops asking only the Counfcl of Presbyters about the ! Manners Chap. T. (pretended ) Principles of the Cyprianic Age. ^ Manners and Merits of the perfon to be Ordained, not their Con- currence in the Ad of Ordination, Mr, Rule had told him, that not their Gounfel only, but their Joynt Suffrage was neceffary, as he had before made appear, and that the not mentioning of it in this Aft of Ordination* is not to the purpofe, feing it is confequential to their Office and Church Power. He tells him further, that this was a fingle Inftance in an extraordinary Cafe, for which Cyprian fpends a whole Epiftle in making Apology, and infinuates the contrary, when he ftiews what he mi to do, and gives a fmgular Reafon for what he now did. Telling him further, that fuch an Aft does not import a Guftom. To a Third Anfwer of J. S. that Cyprian Consulted Pres* byters of his own Eafmefs and Condefcendency, his Antagonift ' Anfwered, that he had before refuted this, and that J. S, is herein inconfiftent with himfelf, who holds, that the Bifhop was the Mo- narchr and the Presbyters his Senate, and that he will not fay, that 'tis ex bene-placitor that Kings Confult their Parliaments, unlefs he be for the Turkilh Government in Church and State. Now, to (hew this Man's Prevarication and Trifflir g, of all thefe Anfwers pafled over in filence, he only Nibbles at this laft Claufe of the Third An- fwer, wherein he, i. Grants, " That 'tis not ex bene-placito, that * Kings Confult their Parliaments, about granting Commiffions to * Inferiour Officers in Civil or Military Imployment. 2//, He af- * ferts, that Thoufand fuch (Sommiflions had been granted by our ' Kings, yet he remembers not, that any of them did ftonfolt their * Parliaments about any of thofe Commiffions, but gave them with- * out fuch Confutation- Then, fure, it muft be ex bent-placito they Confult them, or effe, he muft fay, they infringe the Parliament's Righr, in giving fuch Commiflions, fo that his Anfwer confutes it felf, and confirms what Mr. Rule had offered againft him; I hope, he will grant, that what he holds of this Eafinefe of Cyprian, or fuch' like, had refped to all points of Government, and Judicial Agings* thereof. Says he not, that when Cyprian profeffes *b initio Epifcapatm mei decrevi, &c. that he is determined to do nothing without the Counfel of. Presbyters, fince the beginning of his Epifcopacy, to pro- ceed in no A<5t of Government without the Concurrence of Presbyters, that the Word Decrevi points only at his Voluntary Condefcenfion^ but imports no peremptory Obligation, and therefore the Parallel will hold, that he makes him fuch a Monarch* as Confults his Senate ©r Parliament only ex btm-pUeitQ% or out of his own Qendejeendency and Eajinefs, as he exprefe k. go "A Confutation of J. S s Vindication of the Chap. T. Mr. Rule, § 4?. adduces another of his Teftimonies from Cyprian, Epift. 4r. as alfo $ 44. another of his Teftimonies from £/?;/?. 39, and 29. To which he has offered feveral Replies and Confutations, all which J. S. paffes over ftcco pede. And whereas J. S. in proof of the Bifhop's Power in Ordination, Tag. 4;. had produced the fecond Canon of the Apoftles, commonly fo called, which is, Let a Tresbytet he Or Jain J by one Bifhop, and likewife a Deacon, and the reji of the Clergy. In Anfwer to this, Mr. Rule had told him, ( Pag. 61.) That the Au- thority of thefe Canons wtH contravened even among Tapijls> as Sixtus Sentn^ fis, Lib. 2. ad Foe. Clemens, Tag. 62, *;. and Carranza. Summa Concil% with others. Moreover, that the Contentions about the Number of them, make them all to be (ufiefled. He alfo further made it^ appear. That the Canons, tho admitted, prove not thk tonclufion. To this J. 5. Tag. 46. anfwers only to that point of the Contentions about the Number of the Canons, and tells him, Let the Canonical Books of Scripture fee to it, unlefs there has never been any contention about the Number of them. A wit- ty Anfwer, no doubt •, As if the fame inherent and convincing Im- preffions of a Divine Infpiration, demonftrating their Divine Authori- ty were to be found or acknowledged in thefe Canons, as there is in the Canonical Books of Scripture, which the Contentions or Doubts of fome Perfons can no more impeach, than Doubts or Debates anent the true genuine Senfe of thefe Divine Oracles thcmfelves. But fur- ther Mr. Rule had cited Rivet's Critica Sacra, Lib. 1. C. 1. Tag. 9V and Peter* Martyr, Loe. Com. Claf. 4. C 4. Pag. 779. who brings (ufficient Grounds for rejeAing them, as neither done by the Apoftles, nor col- lected by clement, to which J. S. can return no Anfwer. _ Moreover, from what J. S. had after ted, Pag. 44. that after Cypri- an'-f time, it wm appointed by the Ganens, that Presbyters jhould concur with the Bifhops in Ordinations, Mr. Rule infers, that this overthrows all his Difcourfe of the Bifhops Majefy, Sovereignty, Vncontroulable and Unac- countable Power, &c. To which J. S. Replies, That he cannot fee the Confequence, or if Kings can difcover it, it will be their Wildorn to bethink themfelves, before they admit of the Concurrence of their People to the making or executing Laws, left they bid Good-morrow to their Majefty and Soveraignty, as well as their Uncontroulability andUnaccountablenefs. But, .1. The Confequence , which this Man cannot fee, is evident and clear to any of common Senle^ tor, if the Neceffity of a Judicial Concurrence of Presbyters, in Order to the putting forth or exerting this Ad of Ordination, impeacneen not an abfolute Soveraignty. Uncontroulablenefs and Unaccounublenels, furely nothing will ; For fuppofe the Prelate inclined and relolved to Chap. I. ( pretended ) Principles of the Cyprianic Jge. 31 Ordain, in Oppofition to the Defign and Intentions of Presbyters* either their Eflential Intereft therein can flop bis Defign, or not ; if it can, and thus Controul him, where is an VncontroulaUe Power, fo zealoufly contended for in this Voluminous Pamphlet, Ch. 6. through- out, as likewife, Cb, 7. §. ^9,60, 61, 73. If they cannot, where is their Eflential Intereft in the Ordination, fince the Bifhop may per- form it without and againft them / As for his Caveat, with refpedfc to Kings, 'tis of a piece with the reft of his wife Inferences, there be- ing a palpable Difference betwixt Kings being, by Laws in a Limited Monarchy, ( Limited, I fay, in Opposition to that Turkifh Arbitrary Monarchy, which this Man and his Fellows covet) tied to Confult, yea aria! have Content ot Parliament in Enacting. Laws, and a Prelate or Prince's Confulting only ex bene-p!acito% being free to A# without, or even againft Parliaments, or Peoples Rights, Votes or Priviledges, whether in" Matters Givil or Ecclefiaftick. J. S. had affirmed, that the Bifhop had full power in Cyprian's time, without asking the Confent or Concurrence of Clergy or People, to fettle Presbyters within his Diftrift, for proving which, he adduces. Cyprians Epift. 40. written to Carthage, that they fhould receive Nunridi* cus as a Presbyjer among them: And J. S, adds, probably he wti Ordain- ed before. To this Mr.£»&.J^3iwers, that, having before written on that Point and Queftion about the Power 0/ Election, in a Book whicli J% S. had feen and cited, he hath neither ftated the Queftion, not (poken to the point. ily> That if Numidicus was Ordained before, then he was alfo placed in Carthage before, and that there's Caufe to think, he was Ordained by the Confent and Concurrence of the Pres- byters of Carthage, that at leaft J. S. cannot prove the contrary, which is neceflary for eftabiifliing his Conclufion. %ly, That he who animad- verts on Pameliuis -Notes on Cyprian, hath thefe Words on the begin- ning of the Epift le, Etfi Vocatio JMumidici magis erat Extraordinaria, quart Qrdi»ariat tamen non fine Plebe Carthaginenfi Presbyteri'o afcribiiur, i c> Altho' the Vocation of Numidicus was rather Extraordinary than Or- dinary, yet he is not affumed to the Presbytery, without the People of Carthage. Whence he infers, (fays Mr. Rule) that Ordinaticns without their Confent, are Prof an* & Irrita, Profane and Unlawful. 4/7, That J. S'j Work is to prove, that it was the Practice and Prin- ciple of the Cyprianic Age, that a Bifhop by him f elf f laced Minifiers. This, faith be, cannot be inferred from one ungle Inftance, and that in a Time of Perfection and Diffipation, and where there was no fignal Appearance of Divine Determination, that Cyprian's Words are3 Admnitoi noh & infifitfhs- Dignatione Divina^ ffiatit ttt Numidicus Prei- ^i rA ConfuMUn of J. r$V VimtiaiU* of the Chap. I. Ivter adfcrihatur Presbyterorum Carthaginenfium Numero. He lets them lmow rhat he was admonifhed and inftruaed by Divine Condelcen- dency* toadmit N«m/V«w into the Number of the Presbyters of «jr- that 'Ur Rule offers to the Confideration of J. S. or others who d*. fire SalUfadtion in this point of the Election of Paftors, BXtndeh AfoL pro StntMitron. from***- ?79* to T4»- where it is traced trough all the Ages of the Church. Of all which Anfwers, J S. dare only nibble at th! fecond, and endeavours to ridicule Mr. Rule s Confequence as if Numidicm's being Ordained, had been adduced by him abiolutely, and without refpea to the prefent Cafe and Circutnftances, to prove his being placed in Carthage. But how he naicules himfelf in this In- ference, is palpable to any who ponders Mr. R«/.s third and" fourth Anfwer which J. S. durft not meddle with, and that he intended no fuch thing, but fuppofes, according to what he cites from the Ammadr verter on Pamela's Notes, that, upon this Hypothefe of his being Ordained at Carthage, non fine Plebe Carthaginenfi, he was thus affumed. Now, what a pitiful Momus mult this be, who, in this point, being challenged to a formal Difpute, and called to anfwer fo many Arguments offered ar/ainft his Affertion, dare only Quibble or Nibble at a Word of his Antagonift, and then, tho flying from the Caufe and Point, run away lhr*fo-nte with a Cry of Viflo- ^ Pair An We have J. S. leaping over from Mr. R«/e's P*?. 62. to ?ag. 68. omitting leveral important Anfwers of Mr. Rule% and Efforts upon his pTmphlL He had cited a paffage of Cornell s receiving ferfom about whom he cat* the Presbytery, without asking the fejles Conjent. Upon Ail Mr! Rule had told him, that he had a few Lines before acknow- ledged, that after they were received in the Presbytery, the people were made IS! with it, and not one Word of the Bilhops receiving them by himfelf. Mr. Rule added, That at if deftgntn^ t0 refutet *'-?$> ""ud * Letter tf tbefe perfons, (hewing, that they were reconciled to the Btfhof and ZboUlerg. overthrowing thus the Bilhop's So e Power of receiving Penitents, In Anfwer to this, J. S, contradidmg Ml himfelf, dST- owne hii pleadlS >M ^ S.h Power, quarrels Mr R,/f fecond Anfwer is this, Sending a MeJJenger to As* for m what we are reJhain'A from doing, is not al- ways an AB of Authority. One Friend may (end another \if he yield toit}awe8 fis a Mafter may fend hit Servant. Here, as I faid, we have his pofitivff Sentiment in this point, and very well caution'd, wherein he further impugns J. S'i Medium, addue'd to prove the fiiihop's Authority over the Chap. I. (pretended ) Principles of the Cyprianic Age. 35 the Presbytery, fince a Delegation, (imply confidered, will not prove this, as J. 5. himfelf acknowledges. But let us hear our vain Momus Infulting, Happy U that Tarty, faith J. S. that has fitch a Mafter of Reafoning for their Champion. But he has rather discovered, how Unhappy the Prelatic Party is in fuch a punny Prodor, or Pratter rather, as himfelf, who difcovers fuch grofs Igno* ranee in the folid Methods of Reafoning, while taking a Gonclufion drawn from his own Medium to be his Adverfary's Judgment and Conclufion, yea, and moreover, while he ignorantly takes his AntagonifTs oppofite contrary Gonclufion and Inftance, adduced to difcover the VVeaknefs of his Medium, to be contradi&ory to his Adver- fary's own Judgment, or Principle, which is only a Contradi&ion of his falfe Gonclufion and Inference. And therefore, he proclaims his Folly in that Exclamation which he fubjoyns, Courage, Brethren, ( Addreffing, in his phantaftick Humour, Mr. Rules Collegues, upon Suppofal of fuch a Delegation as is mention'd ) Mr. Rule may delegate you% and yet acquire no Authority ever you. Indeed the Presbyterian Brethren may take Courage in this, as in many other Difcoveries of J. S's Weaknefs, yea and a&ing the Fool upon a Stage, while pre- tending fo fuccefsfully to plead the Epifcopal Caufe, But, "tisp'eafant to fee,how Nonfenfical he island in the Briars ofSelf- inconfi(tency,in what he addsfurther. It k very true, faith he, in one Senfe, i. e. it it not indeed an Acl of Authority over the Perfon fent or delegated. And therefore, lay I, your Inference was nought, in concluding the Bifli op's Sole Tower from the Delegation, fimply, and in it jelf conftdered, and Mr. Rule's Inference againft you was good, that your Medium will equally ftrike againft the Equality of Bifhops ,• And fo your Argument prov- ing too much, proves nothing. f. S. tells us, the Original Equality of Bijhops, notwithftanding Mr« Rules Inference, and upon his Concefli- On, is both Wind-tight and Water-tight : But, from what is faid, 'tis evident, his Medium hath made it neither Wind-tight nor Water-tight, but, through Idienefs of his Hands, and his (hallow unskilful Arguing, that long fince Tottering-Houle is dropping through, and Presbyters Official Equality without Bifliops, notwithftanding his Medium, yea and upon his Conceffions, is both Wind and Watertight. But, faith J. 5. it it fel(e in another Senfe, that only in -which it might be (erviceabie to el R. And what is that Senfe, think we ? Thus he exhibites it, viz. that it is not always an Acl of Authority over the Church, in which the Matters are to be ordered by vertue of that Delegation. Where, I. We may fee this Man's mameful Prevarication and Flinching from the point debateable. For, the Queftion 'twixt him and Mr. Rule was not anent £2 an 3<$ A CrtfitUth* of J. S V FwdicatioH of the) Chap. £ an Aft of Authority over the Church in general, but of the Bifhop over a Presbytery or of one Church Officer over another, and he has acknowledge!, tl e Delegation, fimply confidered, will not bear fuch a CWufion ,♦ So that, in the Senfe he h?s owned, tis only and prop-ilv ferviceabie to Mr. Rule, and the other Senfe was not by Mr. Rule intended. In the next place, Mr. Rule, in his fecoiid Ar.iiv-.r, had Caid That fending a Mefienger to do what we are rtftratn d from detng, is not always an Aft of Authority., fince one Friend may fen d another, as w- II as a Mailer his Servant ; In which Inftance he toews, that, in for,, <.afest faluppo(es it is fucbanAcl. Finally, fince he grants, one 'equal in Autho- rity over anochermay give fuch a Delegation both having Authority over the Church, with what Senfe could he fay; that this Senie would h we been ferviceable to Mr. Rule, viz. That 'tis not always an Aft of Authority over the Church, fince, as'tisfaid, Church Officers Authority over the Church was not the Queftion 'twixt Mr. Rule and him * This Flanting thrafo Glories in exhibiting a Dozen Infances, as he calls them ofMr.RuWs Abilities in Reafoning, Boajiing be could have tripled the Number. Bue, to any who perufe his Pamphlet, 'tis evident, he has exhibited Inftances, not a few, of his own Ignorance and petulant Folly fince he not only skips over, in this Voluminous Pamphlet, molt 'of all Mr. Rules Reafonings and Confutations of kis nrft., but offers fuch Impertinent groundlels Quibbles for Replies, as difcovers he underftands not whereof he affirms. For his Rant and Quibble anent Eufebiuss fuppofed mentioning of Sczemen, and his Infolent Mockery of Mr. Rule, and feveral Learned Men, who have taken him to mean the Author fo called, 'tis well that he is bold to ftage for Ignoramus's fo many confiderable Authors, as well as Mr, Rule, Mr. Jamefon, and T. F. in fpecial the Famous and Learned Mr. Melvil and Mr, Calderwood, either of whom could have taught fuch a Hawker as J. S. 'Tis well known, that Mr. Melvil, in fpecial, was, as in other points of Learning, fo, for Knowledge in the Greek Tongue, Inferit our to few, or none of the Age ,• And 'tis pretty 'odd, yea and Unac- countable, that, tor fo long a time, fo many LearnedSearchers of JLufcbiue, and even the Englijh Dodtor Merideth Hanmer* his Tranflator, (a Man who has difcoveied both exaft Diligence, and Knowledge of the Greek) could not difcover this Miftake, which J. S, or fome of his Fellows Learning has now found out. But, as in his other Attempts to alperfe this Reverend Author Mr. Rule, fo, in this, he hath blotted himfelf. He would feem mightily feen, forfooth, in Eu[ebius, under- taking the Defence of his Hiftory, yet dares not, in the leaft, meddle with the many weighty Grounds of its Falflaood exhibited by Mr. Chap. I, ( pretended ) Principles of the Cyprianic Age, 37 Melvil Didoclavius, yea the Famous J 0 (eph us Scalier t ajtid ereti by SpaU'tnfs himfelf, Lib. 4. Cap. 1. with fevefa! others. ; Cenfures Mr. Rule, pag. ^2. for faying, that CyprianV Authority & injuffi:ient to prove a Divine 1 'ruth , citing his Preface,* And adds, be it fo, but did not you appeal to him. I Anfwer, Mr. Rule never ap- peal'dtohini in this point, fcil. the Decifi-n of the pretended Jm of the Diocefan Prelate, and in that Preface which J. S. might have been ainamed to. mention he had appeai'd him to a Scripture Dilute, offe- ring large proofs from Scripture and the Fathers, that the Scripture Decifion is only to be lork'd to in this point. And for the Appeal mentio- ned^ Mr. Rule, as I faid, never appeai'd to him as giving the deciding Stroke in this Controverfie, but only in Opposition to J. S's Scottifb and Englifh Hierarchies, and to clear that point of Fad, that Cyprian's Biihop and theiis are Two, or Diftincl in point of Power and Authority. And 7. S. in this voluminous Pamphlet is fo far from difproving this AlTei tion, that in many refpecls he has made it good and confirmed if, as is already made appear. As for his long winded Genfure of Mr. Rule in recommending Books, he has therein, as much as in other points, proclaim'd his Folly.' i. He is Guilty of a grofs Forgery, in afferdng that Mr." Rule recommended Mr. Bayns in the Controverfie betwixt Prelatifts and Presbyterians, fince 'us evident in the place cited by him, fciL pag, 52. that he only recommended him and Mr. Peregrine's Letters Patents of Presbytery, &c. upon a fpecial and particular Head, touching the Reception of Penitents by the Bifoop and Clergy, in Opposition to the/ JBifhop's pretended Sole Privikdge herein ; Shewing, that they had fomewhat finguiar upon this very point, and thus reftri&ing his Recommendation. So that his phantaftick long winded Quibbling?, anent their fuppofed Errors in this Controverfie, are like the reft oC his Reflexions, bombiftick Talk, nothing to the purpofe, Mr. Rule never having abfolutely Recommended thefe Authors, as he afTerts. He knew, there were at Hand, in order to fuch Recommendation in tliis Controverfie, many Learn'd Writers, to whom none of his Party are able to Anfwer. Befides, can J. S. prove theie Confluences or Aflertions, which all his prolix Ignorant Tatle is founded upon, viz, I. that a Man's Recommending, feme Authors OS having f^oken pertinently to a' certain particular point, will infer his judging fuch Authors intirely, or abfolutely found in the whole of any Controverfie; Or, that be has recom- mended them OS Juch, or under fuch a Notion. And, 2ly3 That the aflertwgi that one, or both thefe Authors have fpoken pertinently t@ a certain pint of 'Fact ( th*c inftanced, in fpecial ; will infer the A fart ion of their intirs -8 ' A Confutation of J. S's VinAictt'un of the Chap. t. intire (cuntifr in thi. Controverfie. Who fees not the Folly and imperti- nencv of both Conclufions or Inferences f Pal. 69. Our voluminous Pamphleter will have >t» now believe he has Travelled to Hereutt,'* Pillar,, and tells us, Be ha, fix d the Centre- „Zf,, treat it it tolucb a point as (liew, the true Mark at wb Why, 'tis this : His Defign is to try to put it beyond all Controvert for the future, that tberi weu true, real and proper Prelacy inS Cyprian'/ Age, that Cyprian and hi, Contemporary, have d, pof-d for the Divine Right of Epifcopac, ; which Foundation being laid he tells us, t mar bave occafion t, ran it uf to the true Source, the Apo^o.c\Co^,t«t,on JcbZcb Government. Now, how inconfiftent Rambling there is in this bid Thrafonic Boaft and Undertaking, will evidently appear if we confider 1. He grants elfewhere, that all that can be proved in point of Faa from Cyprian will not amount to prove aDiv.ne R.gbt, and this in more places than one, however in this inconfiftent with , himfelf, as »illafrer appear Hence let all Men of common Reafon Judge with X SenfePPhe could affert the clearing this point of Faft to be the Vm and Mark which all Arguments on either fide ( he muft of neceffity underftand and include in the firft place Scripture Argument.) are to Uvela • Ifitbe fuch a Mark to be fix'd on, then lurely it muft be fuch a 'it is the Touch- ftone and Cynofura to try winch of the Argu- m^nrffre true and genuine, folidand convincing, and which not : And ffo hen fo« thi. point of Fa. Founda.on. t'TZtoZ^kConmtu^ be the only Divine Rule and Cynohira whv ha« he not laid this Foundation, efpecially fince h.s Antagou.ft why has ne not aiu Foundation. Was ever (uch a appeal d h.m to t, as ^the only pr p fuch ^ ^ prepofterous Fabrick «iltent, tu 1 / g , what proteron in this point afferted i But again, ?v» lwuu' A . he means in calling this Ctfrianic Pracl.ce a Foundat.cn i Whereof a Chap. I. (pretended) Principles oftkeCyprfomcJge. 33 If he hold tp.^e firft, how can he call a meer point of FacJ or Pra&ice of the GhMcjl a Foundation Proof in a Scripture Debate*. And, no doubt, all may fee, that in the current of his .Arguing,, heafferts it to amount to much more than the force of a meer Practice. If he hold to the fecond, viz,. That this Practice is the Foundation of a Divine Right • Then I infer againft him, r. That he makes it the Infallible Rule, And, ily, He is Inconfiftent with himielf, in granting, that this evinc'd PraBice will not prove a Divine Right, ^ly, He acknowledges the Apo» ftolick Conftitution the Source and Fountain. This Source and Foun- tain, he muft needs understand with refpect to a Divine Right, ahho' he expreflfes this darkly and generally, not fliewing whereof it is a Source. But fure, if in any found Senfe it be a Source, it mud be the Fountain whence the Divine Right flows, and whereby all after Practices are to be meafured : This, therefore, muft be the Apex and Mark that all Arguments on either hand are to level at ,• This, and this only muft be the proper Foundation ; Why then, in contradiction to himfelf obtrudes he another Apex, Mark, and Foundation* And how abfurdiy contrary to the Senfe, I am fure, of all proteftants, will he have all Arguments to be levelled at this Mark of the Cyfrianic PraBice, which he calls the true Mark : So that, in his Senfe, the Arguments that do amount to prove the Practice do neceffarily infer the Scripture Decifion in this point : If this be not to make the meer Pratlice the leading Rule, and paramount to the Scripture Light, let any Judge. Pag. 64. J: S, tells us, That if what he hat digefted in this his Defence he not able to make Mr. Rule yield, he knows not how to convince him. Yield to what ? J. S. will tell us, that there was real proper Prelacy in Cyprian'* time. But, 1. If by real proper Prelacy, he mean fuch Diocelansas are all on a level, without Dependence of any upon ano- ther ( as he has frequently reprefented his Diocefan), then he has been at all this pains in his voluminous Pamphlet to fct his Cyprianic Trclacy by the Ears with his Etigltjb and Scottijh Hierarchy, which is of a clean contrary Mould, as all do acknowledge. So that he has not only loft his Labour, but for his DiiTervice to his Party, and Affront put upon their beloved Hierarchy, in cutting them thus off from this eminent Cyprianic Pattern, deferves their fevejeft Cenfure. zfy, Did not Mr. Rule appeal him to a Scripture "Dilute upon this point ? Nay has he not acknowledged ( however in this incoitfiftent with himielf, as is often obferved ) that this matter o\ Fact will not amount to prove a Divine Right : So that, to all who Reed his Pamphlet, 'tis evident, that he has given aver the true Debate, and declines the due State of this Controverfie3 lo A Confnmhn »/ X SV nation of the Chap. I- * ^ f ,-r i * 1,0c nnfhinp to Dlead /taw ScrMureior this his Controverne.Confeffir, i he has no bmg o p fr f ibBjdrane0US great Di«-, and that all his ab l.ty n tn ^ ^ c6hm^ and Excrafcr.pu.-al Furthe > ,n ^J,d, FFoundation ofanrxiftent his infinuated Offer, when this his u y ^^ e Epifcopacy in «;(*«/<» » Agf «' '"^aft. 0f , <£r;,,wa/ defeat of this ^,M«*.C«»Jfi'»'»«.. where i*:hif' ooear Why then cuts he out Prelacy, and of ability to make th i> app* «• *** l of Fa<< Autim man '» J , G»(,M« „W.4*e ; *" TiHUMCetZ tl Tl?«* *&», ofO* caZ *ffi»hJrtLr^Z%J *»«,,., ~J« do «l/o UJ.**.*r i*i a ^'^y'Z, ameer M„Urs»r, *»» ** in their Principles ,• Ergo. The Connexion is clear there being an evident Diffraction betwixt the Divine Pattern, and Innovation, in ilwn/eives confidered. Next, If the fixing of a Prsefes durante vita be crofs to the ElTential Authority ofPiftorsin Government, as being an Encroachment upon, and Limitation of thefe Gifts and Graces fuiting fuch a Duty and Office, competent to other Members of the Judicatory, especially if this draw along with it fome beginnings of more Power than is competent to a mcer Prefident Or Unit cau/d ; 'Tis evident, that this fix'd Prefidency of fuch a Nature and Tendency as is inftane'd, was beyond that of a meer Prefidency Ordinis cau/d, and in fo far an Innovation and Rtcefs from the Divine Pattern, altho' the Jurifditfiona] power of Judicatories was not thereby at firft excluded, nor did thefe prefidents intirely encroach upon the fame : So that both Affertions (land good : The very firft Priority of the Nature and Tendency inftanced was in fo far an In- novation, and yet reached not that Tower ofjurifdiclion which Prelates after affum'd: Again, that the Pnority and Prefidency inftane'd was from the beginning, and coecaneous with the Inftitution of Church Judicatories or Presbyteries, J. S. cannot make appear to be the Affertion or Principle of Presbyterian Writers, this being the Epifcopus humanm, and thus diftinguilhed by Beza, from the Divine Epijcopacy, which firft took place by our Lord's Inftitution, in his Jracl. de TripL Epifc As for the Affertion of Presbyterian Divines in point of a Conftant Moderator, whatever, as to matter of Fail, might be drawn from fome Affertions this way, yet the abfolute Parity of Paftors, in point of Government, being fo fully and peremptorily afferted by all of them, and thefe in fpecial cited by J. S. Chap. 3. ^.74. it follows, by inevi- table Confequence, that whatever Encroachment upon this Divine and Abfolute Parity of Paftors may be made appear to attend fuch conftant Moderators durante vita, muft needs be, upon this ground, difowned by them, as to the Jus, or Divine Right thereof. And this the Connexion betwixt the Caufe and EfFedt doth neceffarily re*; quire. I cannot but, upon this Occafion, Reftecl: upon a confiderable Paftage of the Worthy and Famous Mr. Dick/on in his Commentary on Mattb. Chap, 21. V. 2.9. 26, 27. The Vrinces of the Gentiles exercife "Dominion ever them, 8CC But it Jhall net be fo among you, hut wbojoever will he great among you let him he your Miniver, and whomever will he Chief among you let him hi pur Urvanu Upon, which wprds, ( having noted that all = j^ __ _.. £ Majority; Chap. F. ( pretended ) Principles of the Cyprianic Age. 43 " Majority of Power, all greatnefs of Jurifdi<5Hon of one over the Reft, * is by pur Lord forbidden to his Minifters ,• He adds, for his fixth Do $\ 7, 10, ii, &C. and condemns his Book to the Fire, if he do, 'tis evident he has not touch'd Mr. , Rule's State of the Controverfie, and the proper Ground and Occafion of the Debate : But his pleadings are meerly ufelefs, as not amounting to prove the Cyprianic Bijhop to have been our Diocefan ; Becaufe, 1. They prove not, according to J. S's former Acknowledgment, that Sole Power of Ordination and Jurifdiflion owned by Epifcopalians, as Me. Jamefon has made appear. 2/7, They prove not the Negative Voice, which, according to J, S. is a {pecial Jewel of the Epifcopal Soveraignity • For he owns the Cyprianic Epifcopacy to be fuch as is acknowledged by Cbamier, Blondel, &c. Thus, Chap. ;. J\ 68, &c. But certain it is, that their Acknowkdgments, even as reprefented by him, make not F z * 44 A Confutation of J.S's Vindication eft&e Chap. I. a Negative Voice to have been afium'd by fuch Prefidents, but fome little Impxrity, or Majority of Power, Hence appears his Impudence, in adducing thefe to prove a Negative Voice, as if what they affert did include the fame* yea, and endeavouring to fet them in terms of Contradiction with Mr, Rule, who, in his Cyprianic Biftiop, never difewned this. He acknowledges them Learned, yea Learned Antiquaries whom he cites ; Why has he then receded from their Judgment ? Pag. 118 The Queftion is ftated by him thus, Whether th£ Church fkould be Govern d by ?af?ors ailing in Parity, having equal power, without the Superiority of one Patfor above the other Payors f Wfaich ftare of the Controverfie, is, i. Lame and Imperfect. ily, Obfcure and Un- diftina. And, %ly, Repugnant to his own Pleading. Lame and Imperfect, fince the Queftion is touching the leafi Degree of Imparity much more fuch as includes a Negative Voice, and molt of all fuch as wrefts from Paftors the whole Power of Government. So that his State of the Queftion reaching only the firft, it touches not the other. That this Sole Power is own'd by the Church of England, is evident from that Paffage of King Charles I. cited chap. 4. ff. 36. where his Majefty fuppofes, that preceeding that Conceflion of his mentioned, anent the Concurrence of Presbyters with Bifhops, the while burden of the Government lay upon the Bifhops Shoulders : And none will doubt, that thus it was all over the Church of England^ and Scotland likewffe. Next his State of the Queftion is Obfcure and Indiftinct, fince he ftuts up all in the general Term of Superiority of Power as diftintf: from abfolute Parity. %lyt This State of the Queftion crofles his Pleadings ; For, to the Cyprianic Biihop ( the Pattern, with him, for the Prelacy he owns ) he afcribes not a bare Majority and Superiority of Power, but a Sole, Abfolute power. Thus Chap. 7. jj\ 10. pag. 545. and tf- u. fag. 347. and 5". 12. Pag. 349. He declares, that the Cyprianic Bifhop, by the Principles of that Age, had fuch a Power, as that by himfelf, when he thought it txpedient, he could have given Laws to all ha Clergy, Presbyters as well as others and that %e did it not always, wot the refult of prudence, not the defect \{ Power Sec. As for his" afcribing to the Cyprianic Bifhop a Power, he cills Soveraign, not Sole, Chap, 7. pag. 340. Let him fee to the Reconci- liation of his own Inconfiftencies. Whereas he fays, in Anfwering the difficulty of the Difparity between the Antient Cyprianic, and his Modern Diocefan, Chap. 7, pag.^49. That tho the Cyprianic had an abfolute inherent Power, yet be ]udgd net himfelf bound always to aft abfo* ht(lJ i ?M *£**' it aww [m»M> m W(H * p™iwt}*h fit ?jJw*rJ> to reflrift them* Chap. I. (pretended) Principles ef the Cyyriamc Age. 45 tkemfelves, fo far as to aft with Gounfel and Advice $ Whence he infers,' There is no Error in our Confiitution. But what pitiful Blunder is this ? If this abfolute Power competent to the Gyptianic, he afcribe not to the Scots Conftitution of Prelacy, then there is an Effential Difparity be- tween the Two: If he do afcribe it, he maintains the inherent Right of the Bifhop's absolute Power, and in the ftate of the Controverfie not propofing to maintain it, he flatly contradicts the pleadings drawn from the Chara&er of the Cyprianic Bifhop. He will needs have the State of the Controverfie to be "Parity or Impa~ rity ; But his Grounds to prove it are palpably nought. 1. He will have it to follow upon the Exclusion of the Sole Power, Thus, Ch. 4. 'Tag. 182. But what pitiful Confequence is this ? For, fecluding the. Controverfie of Sole Power, there remains the great Controverfie of a Negative Voice, which the Controverfie of Parity and Imparity does hot comprehend. He brings in a Presbyterian faying *,' That granting * Ch.^Pag.1%4. Epifcopacy now in England were pull'd down, that the Bi- (hop fhould have nothing left him, hut only ( as fome hjive prcjeffed ) a good Benefice, with Care of Souls 9 whereto they fhould be tied, Jbould have a very ImaH Diocefs, the Name of Bifhop peculiar to themf elves, to Ordain Mini* fltrs in their DioceJJes, with Concurrence of other Adinifters, to be conflant Moderators during Life, upon Condition of good Government, &c. Tet Cannot fuch an Office be lawful in the Church. Where 'tis evident, that the grand Epifcopacy of Sole Power, and the Moderate of a little Majority cf One to other Paftors, are diftinguilhed, that the former, not the latter, was then in Being through all England, and confequently was maintain'd by Epifcopalians, His next Reafon to prove this the State of the Queftion, is taken from the Tendency of Arguments on both fides. 1. Presbyterians defign to prove Parity, and not meerly to overturn Sole Power. But will it follow, that becaufe they are not defigned only againft the Sole Power, but further to prove Parity, that therefore only Parity, antf not Sole Power, is controverted ? It rather plainly follows, that both are controverted, viz. Parity controverted by others, and maintained by them, and therefore they ufe Arguments to prove it • And Sole Power maintained by others, and controverted by them, and therefore they ufe the fame Arguments {d Minore ad Majm ) fi- nally to overturn it. But, ily, Are there none of rheir Arguments not fo very prevalent for Parity, and yet ftrike deep at the Roors of Sole Power ? See Ch. 4. §. 4. Pag. 121. And reconcile him witn him- felf, where he fays, by removing the %>litude of Power fesm the State of the €ontnverfiey PretbyHrhns. t$ Arguments become bconcludent ; tor they only a A A C»*f*utl*« »f J- S> Vlm&tfo* »/ tbt Chap. I. ■■■ , j _ .- Rut then 2/y favs he, the Controverfie *™ZF vX'tZZ;, .ndnSt S'^P;^, beJifcthe Arguments aiBft be ?'" Th'ev conclude not <» »p'™ ^'"' nor ever (hall, Eric, A 11 vJr!L° .not controverted ? 2&, The Conftituioa of the SZo?Z Cyclic Age, (according to his Acknowledgment ; however when Uferves his Turn, he contradifls it ) afenbes to the Mffinn In Ahiohu P«r, as an Inherent Right ;. And fo, by his own Me?her/s tfficient Reaion for taking hck Porer into the State of thFor°nwhaVtehee;dds, that S^/5 of Difcipline vitbDtfatcb cf B.fiuf, is better attaint* by Submit, cf Power Wftb a Negate, than wt » Sole !w 'T?i true! D.#*«4 **fS~«/i, right or wrong, may be afct.b- 5^T'« Sole Power • But a K«g*r, as well as **«, D#«m*, « bell obtl d by S ./ ^«/nd r«*, ft tt«£To««".'i'' Calderwood hacking tofay, hut*. - f \cJ fnrhe Tavs more in that lame place, rag. 6; a. 01 nis nuiuiy, ?lS the Bmt M Trelard tc the A^mhlys AH en tbatHead iut, not- vZiZ, Jftbe Bounds, tMnt Ordination ,n (bar chappeli, &C. Which, •r^hllifcover how unfaithfully he cites the Sentiments of Perfons, who feem^ fevour h!s Caufe, Aus alfo his Impudence in cha leng- who leem to i«o Fraternity, as he terms them, to produce Z!boJ7, concurrence of Prefers, Ch, 4. * 99- »»r here ,sC«««Ws ^^kne^^^^^ Proofs appears in fevera. In- The WeaKneis 01 icvci , w« Bift.ops,as contra- there', not a WtfMTtf ffrfe i" Opp?0uoa to Phi*?', tat<«^ Chap. T. (pretended) Principles of the Cyprianic Age. 47 and Rulers in Oppofition to Deacons. Thus we have impregnable Rea-' foning» Bi/hops and Rulers are the Succeflbrs of the Apoftles in Oppo- fition to Deacons, Ergo, they are the Succeflbrs of Apoftles in Oppofi- tion to Presbyters. This Reafoning will appear the weaker, if we con- sider, that, 1. By Vr*pofetit or Rulers, Presbyters are frequently under- stood. And next, whether we underftand by Rulers here only Bi- fliops, or not, what is afcribed to them makes them Succefars of the Apoftles in Oppofition to Deacons ( their Office being inftituted by Chrift flrft, and that of Deacons being after fubjoined as a Help), agrees not to Bifbops in Oppofition to Presbyters, but is a Dignity belong* ing unto Presbyters, as well as unto them. Hear another of his proofs, §. j. Ejufd, Cap. where he brings in Cyprian faying, You conftitute your felf Judge of Chrift, who fays unto bis Apoftles, and thereby to all Bifhops who fucceed to Apoftles by Vicarious Ordination* They that hear you, hear me, &c. Therefore they fucceed to the Apoftles, yea, and fucceed exclufively of Presbyters. A good Coniequence ; The Succeflion clearly importing Presbyters, as is faid» In the former Inftance, the Property laid down of the Succeflbrs of Apoftles* was Perfons having their Office inftituted by Chrift himfelf ; That laid down in this Inftance, is their having this Promife of Chrift attending their Office, viz,. He that hear eth you >&c. Both which none can deny to belong to every Presbyter, when called forth by Chrift to preach the Gofpel. And if Cyprian hold, our Lord (aid thefe Words to the Apoftles, fome will alledge a Blunder, ftnee they were faid to the Seventy, tho' indeed the Words properly reach the Apoftlesj not them only> and do clearly include Presbyters fent forth upon this Errand. Take another Inftance, Cb. 6, $\ 66, He proves the Bi^ops Stveraign Intereftin Baptifm, by a Paflage of Cyprian, Pag. 293. §, 64. Nee nobis eredentium Populus nutiam per nos conjecutus 3a$ti/mi Spiritus SancJi Gratiam judicetuu §* 66. He tells us, " Cyprian proving his Epifcopacy againft ' Papianus, he argues ab Abfurdor if he were not a true Bifhop, it would * neceflarily follow, none of thefe, who, in the DiftricT: he pretended * to be Bilhop of, had been Converted to Chriftianity, had bsen * either Baptized or * Confirmed. Cyprian, fays he, Baptized not all 6 himfelf, but moft part being Baptized by Presbyters and Deacons, c how can the Argument ab abfurdo conclude, without making thefe ' Presbyters and Deacons do it by Subordination, and particular ' Allowance* And this Suppofuion, with him, concludes irrefiftably Cyprian 's Soveraign Power. But, will he hold Cyprian to be infallible in all his Argumentations ? Again, Cyprian's Argument ab Abfurdo will conclude, without Supposition of his Soveraign Intcreft in Baptifm : i» tyfrijntt 48 A Confutation of J. S V Vintiuthn of the Chap. I. ,.Mr!M Words do not refpea all that were Baptized within his Diocefs bu-only fuch as wore Bapc.zed by h.mfelf, ( NuSom per «„ contccm Bavtilmi GratU" ) ■ Does not his Argument conclude better by this Per final Admrni/lratien, than by any pretended Scvera,^ hterefi k in Bapcifm adminift ed by others? If he were not a true Bilhop, h.s BaDtilm is mire clearly null in the former refpea, than in the latter. But next, giving, not granting, that Presbyters are to be here in- cluded, even on this Suppofition his Argument may be good, without the S'veraign hterefl in Bapcifm : For r If he were no B.fhop, not only the Baptifm which he perfonally adminiftred, but lncewife that which was adminiftred by Presbyters and Deacons, whom he Ordained, was null, and that without fuppofing any S<™» hunt in their Admin.ftration of Baptifm. And, afr, The Bapt.im of all other Presbyters adhering to him as then- B.fliop was nul , fince, in adhering to a counterfeit B,(h°P, «hey feparated from the true B.fhcps, and thuf Baptized without the Church ; And all this without fuppofing their Dependence alledged by J. S. -„.„«*i!.' To orove the fame forementioned Intereft in Baptifm.P^.agS, ^.72. he brings this Argument, " A certain Man Baptized in an Heretical •Communion at ifngtb came over to the Communion of the Church of « Alexandria, and living long in it without any other Baptilm, came to ' £.1 Bilhop.and earneftly befought Baptifm.wh.ch he refilled. « perfwad ing, that it was not needful, and all this without mention of « aPny other Presbyter's being confulted or concerned A mighty proof, the Length whereof lies in one of two ; Either, 1. That the Man foLht hi! Baptifm from DUnyfim, and none of all the Presbyters ,n the Citv of ]AleXdZ, But thiV is nought, and will as wel P^ve, that a Man feekfnTBaptifm to a Child from one Minifter in Ed.nhrgh, and no rom toother Miniftets, will ptove that Minifter's having an Intereft in that Holy Sacrament, which the others had not. Or, ^ The Vrength lies here, that Vmyfiuu without confuting h.s »r«t!«L refuted to give t. But, 1. How is that proven? He Neeadve W tn fs is no fuffi-.ient proof. a/,, Will h.s no. confuh.ng Shis SeZaign b«nf in Baptifm, beyond thefe he did not con- ? u > tnZl a Minifter of Edinburgh refule a Scandalous Perfon the P vledgeTopr remnf/child, before his Satisfeaion, without con- f , . ° .\ \4;n;ft?r«; • Will this prove his Soveraign Intereft m he Alminift a >on!ofm Admitting Spo'nfors. beyond what they can ^!TSin a word, his wife Reafon will not only prove * &£», $i'$mm^> ^d that Presbyters had none Xbap. % (pretended) Principles of tht Cyprianic Age. 45 at all : For, if the Biftiop had the Chief Tower only, and Presbyters a Subordinate Power, if the Cafe was ftraitening to himfelf, he would and ought to have taken their Minds thereanent ,• But his Argument excludes even fo much as a Confutation, or Advice. See another of his Proofs of the fame Stamp, Ck 7. §. 23. Tag. 382. " He proves the Bifhop's Sole Definitive Voice in that Council of Car- * was a Cafe about Baptifm, which none, befides the Bi/hops, had f Right fo determine in. But, can he fay, that no Perfon, whoever he be, has Power to give his Decifive Judgment, unlefs cloathed with Soveraign Vower, in that Affair, in which he is called to give his Judg*» ment ? Will not a Subordinate Power do his Turn, but he muft be cloathed with Soveraignty for that Effed ? I would know, i. What Difference he can make betwixt Soveraign and Sole, if the One, as well as the Other* fiiall exclude Presbyters, in Judgment, from a Voice of Decifion? 2. What fhall become of the Scottifh Diocefan ? If his Argument hold, by the Scottifb Conftitution, he muft lofe his Soveraignty. Yea, g//, What became of Cyprian with his Presbyters at Carthage, when he gave them not barely a Deliberative, but a Defini- tive Volte * Nay, his Argument not only contradids common Senfe, but even his own Reafonio-g elfewhere* when he is at pains to prop Epifcopal Soveraignty on a Negative Voice} Thus, Ch. 6. P. ;i& Which clearly fuppofes *ther Voices , and, confequently, if his Reafon- ing be good, th. 4. is Incomiftenc with fuch a Soveraignty, as includes. a Sole Power. 'Tis obvious to any Reader, that his Principles, in this Voluminous Pamphlet, are both Dangerous and Incoherent. 1. Dangerous. There is a deal of Popifh Tenets apparent in them, as, 1. That of his Principle of Unity, taken notice of, and improven againft him for proving a Pope, by Mr. Rule, to which he has Reponed nought but Banter, as we may fee, Ch. 9. ff% 7. 2/y, That Ahertion, that then it more Evidence for Epifcopacy, than ftr the Canon of the Scripture, pro* pofed in an impudent Boaiting, ch. 9. §. 1%. ad fin. But then, his Principles are like wife Incoherent, r. Not to infift on the Nonconiiftent Contradictory Account of his Cyprianic Biftiop, fometimes making him to have had a Sole Power, See Ch. 7 Pag. 349. and again frequently Recanting it» and making him not to have had it, for which fee Pag. 340. and Ch. 4. Pag. 123, 124, as having been m a Strait what to make, him,' For, he forefaw, if he did not make G h|ro 50 A Confutation of J. $s VwdkAtUn of the Chap. I. him to have the Sole lower, and give Presbyters only Voices of Delibera* tion, not of Decifiou, efpeciaily in Synods, he would fay nothing to Mr. Mule, fee Cb. 7. Pag jyo. And again, if he Ihould fairly and fully hold' the Sole Power, he faw, he muft contradia the State of the Quefti- on anent Epifcopacy, maintained, Cb. 4. Thus he prefents his Bifkop a meer Amphibion and Verfatile Proteus, imking ' im frmetimcs to have this Sole Power, fometimes not to have it. 2/7, His Account of the Cyprianic Bilhop is Inconfiftent with the Cor ft<"rution of the Scottijb Diocefan, An. 1* ro, which he himfelf maintains, and that not in things Trivial and Circumftantiah but, in pcint of the Cyprianic Epif- copacy, Substantial and Ejjential. Gonfider, 1 That, in his Account, the Cyprianic Bifhop, however he, for ordinary, did limit himfelf, yet had an Abfolute Inherent Power, which he might, at ple*fure, exer- ci(e Cb+ 7. P*g. ?49» 2^> ^^e Cyprianic Bilhop had a Licentia, a Power of doing things within his Diocefs, of which he was to make no Account, Cb. 6. Pag. 224. Now, the Scottifh Diocefan, by his Gonftitution, as his Power was in no refpeft Abfolute, fo neither was it Unaccountable. See Cb. 4. ?ag. 178. and CaMerwood, who gives Account, that Bifhops were reiponfable to Aflemblies, and, by them, frequently before, called to an Account. The Bi/hops, in An% %6%b\ in their Declinator, did not difowne this to the Affembly at Glafgow, and only declined them on that pretence, that they judg'd them noAifembly, for want of due Countenance of Civil Authority. %ly, The Cyprianic Bilhop, according to him, had the Sole Decifive Suf- frage in Synods and Councils, Cb. 7. *«g- ?J4- Bat» bv tne *°re- mentioned Gonftitution, An% \6 io, Presbyters, as well as Bifhops, in like Cafes, had the Priviledge of Decifion. Amongft many other Inconfiftent Blunders, that is confiderable which he has, ?ag. j 23. where, having told us, " That if G. R. and • his Brethren (hall think fit to examine what he has faid, they muft • not think it enough, to raife Mifts agair.ft the Reafonings ufed by • Cyprian and Firmiiian, for averting the Divine lnfiitutim of Epifcopacy « ' They muft remember, faith be, our preient Enquiry is, whether they ' believed fuch an Inftitution ; And not, whether the Arguments were ' good, which moved them to believe fo/ For who knows nor, that ■ 'tis very ordinary for Men, very firmly to beiieve fometimes truths, * fometimes Errors, when yet, in the mean time, their Faith is found- c ed on very inefficient Arguments. From whence it is eafy and obvious to inter 1. That, by his Confeffion, their Reception of Epifcopacy upon Divine Righti or as a Divine Inftitution, will not prove it, or bear the Sonclufion, that, in very fad, it » jo. And therefore, by his Chap. I. (pretended ) Principles of the Cyprianic Age. 5* his Confeflion, in all this Voluminous Pamphlet, he but beats the Air,' and has never touched the main Controveifie with Presbyterians, which is touching a Divine Right, as he cannot but acknowledge, and thus belies the Title-Page of his Pamphlet* wherein he pretends to fiats the main Controverfie with Vrfskyterians ; For thus he expreffes it in the Title-Fage, that, in his pretended Vindication of the Principles of the Cyprianic Age, the main Controverfie betwixt thofe of the Church and the "Presbyterians k fully and difinclly (lated. Is it not ftrange, that this Matt fhali dare to affirm he has ftated the main Centroverjte with Presbyterians^ when he ftates it upon fuch a point of Fad, as is, by his Confeflion, confiftent with Prelacy's being contrary to the Divine Inflitutiont and that both the Principles and Practice of Cyprian, yea of this whole Third Age, was, in this point, an Error,* Which will be evident, if we confider, ' ily* Since he grants, that there may be a firm Belief of an Error, and founded upon unfufficient Arguments , yea and that it m ordinary t yea very ordinary for Men thus to believe, he doth in fo far acknowledge, that this point of Fad:, viz,, that Cyprian and others holding the Divine Right of Epijcopacy as an unqueftionable point of their Faith ■> is infinitly fhort of proving the thing it Jelf, or that it really it of fuch a Right 9 and hat a Di- vine Warrant, and therefore, that he but mocks and pitifully blunders in the laft Chap, and Parage of his Pamphlet, in challenging all who are in their Judgment againft the Divine Right of Epifcopacy, to joyn their Arguments together , and put them in the BallanSe with the Principles and Vniverfal Belief of the Cyprianic Age, and ingenuoujly confefs they are light and of very little moment. ' Yea he is bold to fay, that the XJniver^ [al Faith and Praclice of the Cyprianic Age amounts even to a Demonftration againft them. A ftrange Demonftration, no doubt, to invalidate all Scripture Arguments againft Prelacy, drawn from fuch a meer Practice and firm Belief of Men, which, by his Confeffion, may be founded upon an Error, and thus have a Crack and Fallhood in the bottom of it. Again, %ly, His inconfiftent Blunder in this point is palpably evident in §. 40. Cap. ult. For he tells us, " That Cyprian, FhmUiars^ 6 and whoever elfe, in thofe days, reafoned from our Lord's building * his Church on St. Peter-, for the Divine Inftitution of Epifcopacy, did ' reafon folidly and upon good and firm Principles, whichj he tells, us is de- ' monftrated fully and clearly by the Admirable $Ar. DodwtU in his ' VII. Cypr. Divert.' Now, if theie Fathers reafoned folidly for this Di- vine Inftitution* yea and reafoned folidly from Scripture Grounds, fo that their Arguments amounted even to Scripture Vtmonftraticns, how comes he to insinuate that the Arguments moving them to belitve fo, might hay<5 been frfujjicient, and founded upon Error/i Jtefides, it fol- G 2 lows, A ConfuUthn of I Vs Vindication- «f the Chap. I if fo, i, is beyond all Pe^dve"^^ ^ '^eft. thaf what he aflerts could haw «o &ror in ".« any U» ^ Qn an anent aft- fifVw„ot I*****, or with Application is his Action in Thfi, not in «;/> ^ our Pamphlet- K'Sed" pSy^an! hCT'enough againft him, and £ be thus tounaea, riwuj , thev can diiprove tins Dtvitfe agatnft h mfelf, in this Conceffi on rf they c £ ^^ ^ Hi£*». Nay, his granting, that *g* * g- 0Jr Fix.d Perfwafion «./„#*« Argumtnt, I mean &rf«* £f£ '"; ' an6nt theP6rlwafion d?-h»^r'iy ffio ml ^S sTatfoFthe Queftion, or the <%ff«*«'r f«f*. and to make WW psrfwaded, or ■very vttt proper Enquiry. Morcove if he £ ^JJ and others, ^ .^ fttujiti, as he here afferts, that Ctfr.*., £»»< ,f EfijcLcj, jMdly, and upon fia. P»»«f/«, for ««" D «w. « ^ / 7. and that this has been £^^J£> Zv UwWupoofed folid ftand,> obliged to bring ^' h»**."f^ ^ples, to a Scripture "?^^^?sK. I3SS5 acknoPwied es/that this &£ I^^;& -not othetways be vindicated and made aP, pcar; tt mi w*> rh*» r^W not SoltVowtr, to be the Queftion, ing argued tnus, i 7 whatever be their own, and, confe- they muft follow his ^igw_,w ^ ft ^ (>< ^ T6"^' tn 1 M™'kJto£*d another,,, fay, the, *.jl A -fo^ « jay tbr, can do notb.ng mn . Quibbie, Mr. tfW* Con- pr fa "»»»«*• °ut> n X , ' foUow8s Up0„ what / S. maintains ; fequence ftands ;« wr ,■ af d^f Vho le Extent of all the Adings of For, in his Principles, in " . cnnftrued propeily cheirs, Church Government, the BilhopsAct is eojuuircu p v ^ Chap. I. (pretended) Principles eftheCyynamcAge. 5* and they are obliged to follow that which he calls the Bi&op s Lllerum Arbhrium and Licentia. And who can difowne it, that, in this point his Light is properly theirs, if his whole Conduct in point of Church Government mulf neceifarily draw along their Concurrence, fo that there can be no Gounter.ading, yea no A&ing without him. The Inftance of J. S. and his Anfwer is very-frivolous, 'lis one thing, faith he, they can do nothing without himi and another^ they mufi do what be commands. For, whatever Diftin&ion may be fixed betwixt thefe m T.hefi, yet upon his Hypotfa/is, and in the Series and Scope of what he difcouries upon the Bifhop's Abfolute Licentia and fower, they are one and the fame ; For, if he have fuch an Abfolute Licentia and Liberum Arbitrium, in A&ing, Ordering and Commanding, in point of Church Government, then this Abfolute Tower mult needs have the Correlate of an Abfolute Obligation to Obedience, And his Inftance, whereby he thinks to fortifie his Anfwer, makes this apparent, Should Mr. Rule, fays he, command his Son to marry his Sifter, he is not bound to follow his Light , yet he would judge him Undutiful, if Marrying without his Confent. But, I pray* whence flows the Unwarrantablenefs of the firft Marriagej if not from the reftri&ed Power and Authority of a Parent, or Head of a Family, and its being over-ruled by fuperiour Laws ? Nay, % S. himfelf will find it hard to prove, that the Parent's Confent is fo abfo- luteiy and fimply necelfary, that there cannot be a Cafe affigned, wherein the Child might Marry without it. But, make the Parallel juft, and ailign to the Parent that Abfolute Licentia, and Liberum %Ar* bitrium in the Government of the Family; which he afcribes to the Prelate in the Government of the Church, and that his Command, Ad, or Signification of his Pleafure, lays an inviolable Obligation of } Obedience upon the Family, then the Son were obliged to Marry as he commands, and, in Cafe of thehigheft Neceftuy, inviolably oblig- ing the Parent to this Confent, in point of a Marriage otherways law. fur, could not Marry without it. In further Confirmation of what is offered above, 'ris pleafant to confider, how J. 8. Sums up his fuppos'd grand Proofs of Epifcopacy. Chap. 10. Having faid, that the Reception of Epifcopacy as of Divine Ki%bt, by Cyprian and his Contemporaries, is an Argument of mighty weight againji Presbyterians, he Sums up his Proofs in Ghap, 6. $.2. 2, 14, 17, 53, 34, ;6, as alfo Ghap. 7. §. 41. viz,. " That Biihops were ' Succeffors of Apofties inJupremsPowerEcckiraftical, that none were 'accounted Bifhops but fuch who had a regular Succeffion from Apo- f ftles, that Epifcopacy was iudg'd fo of Divine Right that there could ' be but one Bilhop in a City* chat Separates from them were judg'd ■ J Usurpers ti A Confutation of]- ft Ttnhuhon tf the Chap. I . Tir„,„<.« aoainft Divine Precept and Inftitmion, that the Bilhop u .HS?5MQortSTieft, and his Office Cod's Hi£h Prieflhood. utZt uVfur her "That C;P„-« Reafons from Texts of Scripture, "»nd ha freau'mly for proving himfelf God's High Prieft, For l"V£ ,£« to fiL 6 «•. li. «. " That he was the one Judge in ^Diftril a Peer fs* pX Vhlf he believed .he Rules obfervM in « Ordina on Promotion, and Eleaion of Bilhop., to be of "D.vme « S— In •« which we may fee, how pitifully this Man preva- ricafe. r He difowns his aflerting, that Cyprian pleaded for the V,vmc mbtofipifcoPacy, Chap. .o. S:i;( and this n Contraa.a.on to what wf have heard above ). Mr. Rule having alleged, that Cyprsan pleads only for th Divine Mri; of the Church and her Bilhop,, that ,s pX« not for a D^«»« Rfc&t of a Prelation of fome above others, j HeM he had not affirm'd, that Cyprian pleaded f* the Divine RitbtofEpifcopacy, that he had never occafun to plead for n fince no Man iStedoflin hi time. Thus, evidently afferting that CtorM. never havirs he Occaf.on of pleading for this Divine Right, he clearly owns it that nothing he has now cited of Cypian, will amount to prove his PkadinX hi Divine Right; Since, ash'? .afferts, m Man ,M <*>, ftl in any pleadings was beating the Air, and pleading for that wh ich none calfd in Queftion. NotWuhftanding whereof he brings inCyprln here, in the Paffages ciud, as pleading for his Office upon Divine Precept and hftitution ; For, in the places cited, he affirms he is vZLzZ inft Novatiant, and Fortuna'm, who were Sch.fma.ick Ufuroefs Now. if he pleaded againft an Ulurpation upon the preims d Bround of « Divine Precept and Infiimion d Epilcopacy «h.i wai a downright Pleading againft them, upon • Divne R.gbtol the Office, t nfffi of that 'Divine Right as a Medium and Ground of his ALment Nofcan it be faid, .hat he only aiTerts his not pleading fhiffohC firfi I Pamphlet, for therein he alcribes the fame Prerogatives this in nis nru r H That there can he no 6hufih without h,m, 1^9 ^TZer^Ml^chical, end hi. DceUhe Churches A*; naf' ,2 »1 ■ That he » Suherd.nat to none. pag. ,,. aff I J J. 74et k » ILai'onPeerlel, and Unaccountable in b* DiHriS, And as he owns ell fhTpreVoa" veS of the Pre ace, fo he owns, that Prelacy Cloathed •L !.,h?£ Priviledeesisof Divine Right, pag 26. zly. H Cypnan hetv'd hrfe S3S.WM, uponW Warrant andlnflitution . 5^fforDIvS^A$thi^ fromowning .he eg. i Chap, I. (pretended) Principles of the Cyprianic Age. 5* and if he aflert the fecond, he muft own it, That, 1. Cyprian pleaded for a TXtfvim Right. zlyf That himfelf pleads this Divine Right upon this Reception and Belief of Cyprian and his Contemporaries, as of this N^urej Which is evident in the whole Scope and Series of his Pamphlet, wherein he afTerts not only this Reception and Belief, but that the Reception was f om the Apoftles,, yea he pleads feveral preten- ded grounds, that in this Reception and Derivation that Age had an Obieitive certainty, and could not be miftaken. Again, he tells us that Cyprian h,ui no occafion to plead this Divine Right, becaufe none denied it ; And thus I would fain know, what means that Scripture pleading, yea and frequ.nt Scripture pleading, which he afcribes unto him ? His Charge upon the Perfons inftanced, fay it was a Separation from the Epjfcopal Church, muft be of necefluy fuppos'd to derive its ftrength from the Divine Injlitution of the Office. And that fieyuent Reafenfno- from Scripture, which J. S. mentions, to enforce the neceflity of a due Subje&ion to God's High Prieft, neceflarily importeth this. Again if Cyprian was the One Judge to his Diocefe, as J, S. allerts, I hone* he will acknowledge, he was the Sole Judge to it, at leaft by neceflary Confequence he is thus oblig'd j For to be the One Judge Emphati- cally, or in an Exelufive Senfe, as it is here Reprefented by him, and to be Sole Judge are of fo near an Affinity, that he cannot pofiibly feparat them, nay no Sophiftry can. And thus he has here overthrown, at one daih, and in one word, all that he pretends againft his afcri- bing a Sole Tower to the Cyprianic Biihop, difcovering his groundlefs Clamours againft his Antagonist for imputing this unto him, and has himfeif confirm'd the Charge. In $\ 41. Chap. 6, to which he refers Cyprian # oblig'd to hold that he is Chrift's only Vicar and Reprefentative in hh Dioctfe, that he it the One Judge in Chriji's ftead, which evidently confirms what is faid. Finally, he tells us of Cyprians Reafoning, and that fr<\umdy from texts of Scripture, and to make it appear that he has pro/d this, he refers to Chap, 6, §. 33, 34. whereas there is not 3 word of any Text of Scripture in the places cited to prove this fup- pos'd Prerogative of the Biihop, where we Read only the Terms of Friejis, and High Prices, and in the Marginal Citations, there's nothing but an empty found of Prie/ls, Altan% Apoplkk SucseJJlon, Church Unity, but of Scripture Teftimony, to fonifie thefe pretended Epifcopal Prerogatives mfta*iced, there is not one Jot. The places of Cyprian and others, cited to prove the Bi/hop's Superiority to Presbyters, he will t\Q;d^ Interpret of, or rather (train to import their Senfe of the Biihops Office as ipecifk^ly Di/rindfc, and that by Divine Right and Inftitution, from the Office of a Presbyter, Whereas *6 'A ConfHMlon of J. SV Vinihdtlon of thi Cliap. L Whereas »tis evident, and by feveral of the Learn'd made appear that by the firft the Paftoral Office is properly underftood, as the ordinary ftanding Fundion of the higheft Nature, and in point of Divine Right The fame with that of the Presbyter, but by Ecclefiaftick Con- ftitutbn made thus Diftina, and th^Cyprian and his Contemporary B fhops never took up, nor entertain'd our Prelatifts new Notion of a Presbyter \ or Taftor (fecif.caUy difiinB from, and Subordmat to the Btfhof VureDivino, fo that the then Subordination of Presbyters to Prelates, who had in a conilderable meafure enhansd I the Government into their hands, they held to be a produB of, and founded upon the Churches Authority for pretended Union and Order of Government. Hence this -Ground of Order and Unity in Oppofition to Schifrn is pleaded by Cyprian and others/ againft fuch as did in any meafure oppofe this . Authority which Bifhops had affum'd. But our Epifcopalmns new Arguments anent the Epifcopal Authority f Timothy and Titus, of Apples above the Seventy, of the Jev.n Afiati Angels, &c was never pleaded as Authorizing' Bifhops Divine and JecificaUy JtftnSl Office above the Taftor. To this purpofe feveral Paffages of the Antients are exhibited to prove this their Senfe of the Bifhop s Office, as being one with that of the Pallor's Jure Divine, lrenaw, H*r. Lib. %. Cap. 4. makes Presbyters properly Succeffors of Apoftles, Cum autem tterum ad earn traditionem Vt* e(i ab ~Apo(lolis% qua. per Succegiones fresbyterorumin Zcdefiis cuftoditur, &cc i.e. « When Hereticks were called to Apofto- ' lick Tradition preferv'd in the Churches by Succeffion of Presbyters, c th-y will own themfelves Wifer than both Apoftles and Presbyters &c. And Li*. 4. Cap. 4?- ^opter Us ft in Ecclefia funt *™byterk daudire oportet his qui lucceffionem habent ab Apoflohs, fi'ut oftendt- mm Sec i e '* We muft hearken to fuch Presbyters in the Church, ■ who have ' a Succeffion from Apoftles, who, together with the Sue « ceflion of Epifcopacy, have received the Gift of Truth Where he not only afferts the Succeffion of Presbyters to the Apoftles but like- wife attributes the Succejfto Epifcopatus, or the Succeffion of Epilcopacy it felf, to thefe very Presbyters. And Chap, 44. he mews that the Church entertains fuch Presbyters of whom-the Prophet fays, _ I will give your Princes in peace, and your Bifhop, in Right eoufnefs. Their own StiSint fleet has obferv'd upon thefe PaiTages- that the Apoftles being nowlemovd, and in feveral Churches Presbyters Sub, eft to B. mops, vet the Community of Names was (till retain d, and thofe who are- faid to Succeed the Apoftles are call'd Bilhops in one place, and Frel- byters in another, and the very tow/m of Epifcopacy h afcnbdto Vr.ef- h*m? To Chap. T. (pretended ) Principles of the Cyprianic Age. 57 To this Scope Cyprian himfelf is alfo cited, who not only calls Paftors the Cmprestyteri, but afcribes alio to thofe he calls the Pr*poJttii a Succeflion to Apoftles by a vicarious Ordination. Epift. 69 edit. S'amth §. 4. compat'd with Epift. ;. a, Clero Rom. Ep. 62. and 6j. Jeromfayt th*t Presbyters are loco Apoflolorum, and that they do Afoflotico ^radui Succthre. See feveral places of Ignatius and Ciemens Romanus cued by their own Stillingfleet, Inn. pag. 308, 309, &c Re'mrkab^e is that Teftimony of the Martyrs of the GMcan Church, in their Epiftle to Eleutberius, Bifhop of Rome, who call heraem fyicCfriav cuKKwiat, when, as Biondel obferves, he had been nine Years Bnhop of Lions, in the place of Potbinus. Thus Apol. pag. $jm * And 'tis very improbable, iaith StiUingfleet, that commending one to ' the Bifhop of another Church, they Ihould make ufe of the Ioweft ' N»me of Honour appropriated tofubjed Presbyters,which were a great * Debating of him, had they look'd on a Superior Order above thofe * Presbyters, as of Divine Inftitution. Nay, Cyprian himfelf (hews, that Ecclejia eft Plebs Epifcopo coadmata, & Grex Pafiori adherens, i. e. The Church is the Flock joyn'd to the Biihop, and adhering to the Pa- llor. The fame Author hasobferv'd, that fuch as acknowledge Superiority of Bifhops over Presbyters do impute it to an Acl of the Church, as Contradiftin<5fc from a Divine Injlitntion • To which purpofe the known Teftimony of Jerom is cited, who tells the Bimops, they owe their Superiority above Presbyters to Ecclejia/lick Cujhnt rather than -to the Truth of Divine InfHtution. Alfo the Teftimony of Ambrofe, or Hilary on Eph. 4. who has the fame Aflertion, Quia primum Presbyteri Epif- copi appellabantur, &c. h e. " Presbyters were at firft called Bifhops, fo ' that one being retnov'd another Succeeded, but the after Presbyters ' being found unworthy to obtain this Prefidency, this Method by * the Judgment of many Priefts or Presbyters was chang'd, fo that * upop. ma ure Advifement, it was appointed, that not the Order, but ' Miiit ihould confticuce a Perion the Bilhop, It is the Inference of Stillingflaet, ** That hence it is clear, he aliens all the 'difference be- *twes* a Biihop and Presbyter to arife from an Acl: of the Church c choofmg Men for their Deferts, when before they Succeeded in c Orc3er of place. That it was ftrange that Auguftin% citing thefe J Commentaries with appiaufe of the p&rfon, did not rather ftigmatize c him for ai Heretick, if it had been then the Opinion of the Church, * that Biihops in their Power over Presbyters did Succeed the Apoftles I by a Divine Right, H _ > Auguftin's . g A Motion of J. ts fei!W* ff '*« <*«P- * 5 ... T„olnl„nv Eoift. '9- isappofitero this purpole, Austin known Tefhmony, tpm. 9 w e,;^,,,*, J""*" *«-•-, ™C'W '(^Author dofh thus pnraphWe 'it/that thereby it is implied « ™™" d ,fth'e Jifflre„ce wm fom the ttot . that,** obtmmt and that the u g ^ rf ^ ^ u Te this purpofe : the Teflimow of y . ^ ^ Cited, -?« E«k/. ?|"-,L,Vw«*t «i* £„/,&-, GW/K d> « «»/•«■«»»« nmm D« «■«»'/* zcificaUy dijlinft from that of the Paflcr or Preskyter Injiitutedty the Apples 1 Yea and mould have produc'd their pleadings upon the Epifcopal Grounds injianced, and that there is fuch an Officer as that of a meer Presbyter in fuch a manner Subject, and owing fuch Obedience to the Bifhop, as he afferts, and this, as I faid, by Divine Appointment. Now, there is nothing in all hisCitations which has the leaft flbadow of any fuch Belief or Perfwafion thus Grounded ; For, all that Talk of Cyprian, or others of Apoftolick Succtffion, Peter7* Chair , of Unity % and the like, ftill reiblves in thisn and can amount to no more, viz, that there were Officers tloath'd with Power of Order and Jurisdiction, and thofe of Divine Signature} who had de fa&o Presbyters Subjecl to them, but that thefe Presbyters were, as in that State, of a lower Divine Station, or holding an Office fpecifically diftincl from the Bifhop, any otherwife than by Ecclfftaflick Genjiitution, or fuch Canons as are above mentioned, this they never dream'd. Which is evident from that which J. S. pleads in point of the Ancients Dichotornacizing Church Officers into Bifiops and Deacons, at leaft as cited by Blondel, which he apparently approves of in order to the excluding of Ruling Eldeis, fuch as Jercm, Clemens Romanus, Polycarp^ Jufiin Martyr, Clemens Alexandria, Qrigen, £ypri<* an &c.' See pag. 4? 9. Now, this Account and Argument from Dichotomies, will invincibly prove that the Antients, and thefe in fpecial cited by him out of Btondel, to no lels than the Number of Twenty One, underftood the Bifoop and fresbyter to be one and the fame. Office, elfe tjicre were no iuch Dichotomy as ftdiids thus attefted by fo H 2 many, 60 J CmfuM'um of J. S'* 'VtnMcttUn of the Chap. I. manv Wirneffes ; And the fame Argument, which from hence he hath deduc'd ag'inft the two Principals pag. 4«° ■«> oopofition to £,fi./l»». will equally esch.de the B.Jhof, at leaft ,» he own this Dichotomy, (ince. as he pleads, diefc.Anttoms underftood ?.«W and R«W the Power of Order and Jurifd.a.on tobe neceffarily «»c!uded in the >fl ««*' or Branch of this Div.fion, and consequently did not Trtehotomaiizs, or Subdivide the Epifeopal or Paftoral Office, which they held to be all one, into Superior and Inferior Orders and D ifwere tedious, and, in a great meafure, but aSum pert, to give a full account of ; he many grofs Contradiaions in J.bt pleadings which Mr W»» h* Succinftly perform'd. 1 fhall therefore give this ftort Review, i. As Mr RuU had told him, he makes his Bifhop a ftrange Animal, a meet Proteus, fome.imes exalting him to the UM Pin.de IM », *« «-.f«. havmg his Liberumfhm.m and **/*» Lt«»(tj °f **», or whatever Degrees of Imparity mavftate a DiMnaion, were it never fo incont.derable betwixt him ^Presbyters. He tells us, Ep.fcopal Arguments _ 'ondude only Imparity, and that this is the fiat* of the D«,ft,t», Chap 4, $. iia. conWd with tea. yea the lean Degree of I^r.r, thele humble Men wiUbefatished with, Chap. 2. J. j. Here's ,te««wr ,«rf&. and S.W-. conjoyn'din Ids Prelate, whom, in his pleading, he toS from Zenith to W. a/,. He will have our Seaf, Prelates of he fame cut with the Cyfriamc Now, our Set* Prelates, he contends were TeTup by Rules and Canons to Aa with concurrence of Prefc bvters Tea profeffed to own a Subjeaion to the Genera! Aflembly, and therefore were not to Aa Solely, yet h.sC,?r«mr, as above de- fcrib'd he will have to be an Abfolute Unaccountable Ltkrum, A bitrium ul without the leaft fhadow of fuch an Obligation who pL',ttr/» «*« « «*«"• Thus Chap. 7. f 6, 10, 11. He tells us, Chapl '/,4. that the Bifhops in their Declinator pre^ted to th8 Affemblv .62* ownd Pallors or Presbyters Dondefcending plea/ure : When it is Obje&ed to him, that Cyprian expieffes his Refolution to d» nothing in point of Government without concurrence of Presbyters i he pleads zealoufly, that the word Statuit in Cyprians Language, Imports no Obligation. Thus Chap. 7. pag. 344. Status, faith he, imports only a voluntary Conde(cenfion% it was the refult of his free Qhcije^ had he pieafed, he needed not, jcil. jo to refolve. Hence 'tis evident, that he curs off from Paftors abfolurely all Power of Jurifdi&ion, as well as of Ordination. Kay, he holds they had no more Intereft in Judicatories or Synods than the Common People, that is, to hear, and fee, and give Confent. Thus Chap. 7. JJ\ 61, 62. 63, 64, 69 70. Yet he denies that he afcribes the Soie Power of Jurifdi&ion to the Bi/nop, Thus Chap 4. pag, 124, 125-, *Bum my Book, faith he, // I a/cribe a Sole Power to the Cyprimic Bi(bcp. If aid, the Bifbop in Cyprian'.* time bad hole Power of Ordination ; I jail (ot faith he, but where did I fay. be had Sole Power of Juri/diclicn ? pag. 1 3 1. He Quarrels the imputing to him that he afcribes to the Biihop a fole decifive Suffrage and Negative Voke. <$ly, Apoftles according to him had the (oh Power of Ordination find Jurifdtf't Hon by Divine Right, and by vertue of their Office, this power, he afferts,. was iujolidum devoiv'd upon Bifhops, as their proper immediat Succeilors, and. the hnie Power he makes -Cyprian all along to plead ; Yet, as we have heard, he peremptorily denies, that Cyprian and his CpncemDorarie* were Sok~Po wer-Mefl, aad afferts,, they <5S A Confutation of] & Vindication of the Chap. f. thev were fo far from acclaiming this, that t-hey were fatisfi'd with what m« be called parity, or Majority ef?ov>er, ««e it never fo Utrie beyond an AbfolJe rarity ; For, he is peremptory in holding P<- little O-yona an -a / r { h Queftion. Thus,CA.4.^.i02, ffih« E -holds i o be ftTed by that .argJXrain of Epifcopal Plead- ers cited by him; And fare, he will not own his fetting them in Terms I rontradiaioA to the Authority and Power of his Cjfrtamc Bilhop. Tn^s th Slucce ded Apoftles/ and not fucceeded Apoftles, m then- Office • Or, fucceeding, betrayed the.r Apoftohck Tmfl \ 6ly BimoDS and Presbyters are fo vaftly difcrepant, that they make dift.nic Bl(h0pSand Offices, the Bifhop's Office is the H.gh.Pr.efihood, *Cb 6 f !f and Sacerdotii Sublime Faftigium *; Cornelius ialcenied t, U>. 6. J). 3 5. ^ o/ Romej m( per fa,t tutting yne tbrourb alllnferiourEeckfiaflick Office,, he regularly afcended though all In- ftZl. r Order he had ben Acolyth, Exorcift, &c. and at lajl a Presby- ^llfoehe'obtain'd tf» %* Faftigium, oi *W Of. This he will hwe confirmed by Optatu, Milevitanm. Lib. i. Fol. 6. who makes D-aco* £ dhird Order, Presbyters the fecond, S«^<;«», B.mops & ™£ . and Prince, of all. Or*, he will have to affert the fame Hm it on ?«•«». and ?«•«» to compare the Church to* e,t,, the plifeoo'al Office to the Caflle commanding it. See Chap 6. pag. 264, fl Yet let m Confult Chap. j. pag- 74, we will find him affertmg, that'the Queftion is but ameer Nicety, Wbethe, ■the fH'^"^ n,ake dUHnil O'der,, or are net one and the lame Order > This he makes TmeerNminal Dbate, and little other than a Controvert' about Word, then lilted u the bottom ; According thus to Au(ufl,nS faying, that the mTJZ* ereater than the Pa^or, only ecundum Honorttm Vocabula <,u* £,(hp *"«"«?' . w'e have heard, that he peremptorily de- ^fteafcribSothe'felliop the SoU vJ»« cf Jurifdmion: But not onlv hafh" atoibed to the Bilhop fuch a Soveraign Command, as xobrPaftors of a Power, but, which is yet more, he fets them Man ttpelTn, hi, point, and offers pretended Inftances, more than one or two to (hew, tha, in the cprianie Age, they were as to Power or Tnt'ereft in Church Judicatories, below the Pr.v.ledges of he lufc 1. Presbyters, faith he, gave but Adv.ee, but the llwteConLt \ly, " «rt*» fP=^s of a MutuusH.nor due unto the :7i kTufcb of no fuch thing as due to the Clergy. He •People, ^l^\fZ^A\n Synods by common Advice, as ?eH.nnnUrdueSo°he People but no^uch thing is faid concerning « Pnre^bvte"« " And we mU(\ not think, fa,, he, that Cyprian fa.d . ftn « e 0, ortodvertently, fmce it exaflly agr,es wuh h.sDo- Chap. I. ( pretended ) Principles of the Cyprianic Jg€. G% ' &rine cited Tag. preceeding, fciU Epifi. 19. p. 42. See Tag. 2881 389, 390, 391. Yea, P*g, 589. he challenged G. K. upon Search of the Gyprianic Monuments, kf to /hew fuch Five Teftimonies concern- ' ing the Intereft of Presbyters in Provincial Councils, as he alledges ' he has mown for that of the People. Yet he allows " his Book to cbe burnt, if he afcribed a Sole Power of JurifdicHon to the Bilhop1 and tells us, ' he was at all pain*, in his firft Book, to /hew that he ■ pleaded not for the Bifhop's Sole Power of either Ordination or Junldicihon, Cb. 2. P. 42. To thefe palpable Contradiaions I might add an Eight Inftance, anent what he afferts of Jmm fcil 'That he pleaded not for the Unalterable Right of Parity, Now it is notourlv known, that jerom pleads for the Identity of Bifiiop and Presbyter from feveral clear Scripture Grounds, arguing the point thereupon! and therefore Jerom could not hold this Apoftolick Government to be Versatile or Alterable See Tag, 7h 76, Again, 9ly> Tag. Hi. He tells us, that all that Andrew Logic, Arch-Deacon of Aberdeen pleads for, in point of Epifcopacy, is, that one be prefe&ed over the reft for keeping Order, and avoiding Confufion, and this ad culpam only and not ad vitam. How clearly this mean Account of the Bifhrfs Tower contradifts that Fafluous, Abfolute Dominion he afcribes to him is obvious to the meaneft JUfledHoii. Further, (for lam almoft weaned 'inTracinsr this Man's Incunfiltencies ) he ownes his calling Bi/hops Monarch, he denies it will fo low they had Sole Tower. Had Julius C*far, faith he Sole Tower after be turn d Monarch of the Roman Empire f Thus Cb a £ '» " Yeta Ci' h ?' JS?' C-#™» ufe4 ^e Term Lkentia to exprefs the Paramount, Turks, Unc0n:roul d 'and Unconfind Power of Roman Eml ferours. And who knows not, that this Power in the%*.„ Empe^ rours, efpecially that of Julius C ;£v«» nnr Kiik-Seffions, our Presby teties, and Sy- £pf °aPnd *« Xfe « Aw and" *..i *£*£ Did not even nods, ?nd that alwue ^a Kirk.Seffions and Presbyteries, theft ^^'"Sjj,, wi hont fo much as Confulting the filfc Now lUe think 'this Man was in Earneft, when he ?» Lrf afcJted this or confidered what he was doing in inch wrote and aUerted tms whether he ownes the Effi&^S^&P^'*** he terms thus Lawfulness _or « inftanced by him ac- Ana*/ n«', and et J i difownes that which h°ercaUsS 1 cinftanl -rem P^ice of our Church under Epifcopacv, hecaiistnsc . d thus contradi „«,, ^'"'J^oduces feveral Argument* nrf ««.»«. t«. CWL ?TV F a'painft Rutins Elders. Here ^en h a Ju ,cu,>,y conHft, and 7. *•• agaiun » kjcPrincioes aic ukuownco bcnpmre ing of fuch Members as in^s gg^^ and (hat lnde. and Ant.qu.ty, £« «"crfm* ~d ifo,maU..& iUud Judical ownd f nden^Tlllopr n 'itsTuthoric, a. d Exercift, and as a part of by our Scot, B>*°ps m i Vindicator call in Mant their goodly ««^*rve^ Inconfiltencies, or advife how he will Gimmerers to Sodder h^1"0 fc «fo thispitifu| unaccount- frame an ^"^InVciA owes an Apology to the able betraying of ,h«'^'e,heir Church Government as Lame and ftcfi* Bi&ops, as Jg£m"b *ffi deftitucc of, and dlfownlng fuch *«.*!. i+ ffi and »-.. *«*"»»«• finally, he holds*. Th* his EpUrimP^ are iW M» h *• ^urch«g Chap. I. (pretended ) Principles of the Cyprianic Age, fy trinfick Power, in Oppofition to Era/iianifrn, and that upon much bets ter Principles than any Presbyterians in 'tcotland^ or in Chriftendom, But, how crofs this is to the Principles and Pradice of many* if not moftof that Party, is clear as the Noon-day Light. ¥ dJ i Whitgift * whom J. S. magnifies as the firft Pleader in c„jjffi*' t England for Epifcopacy, holds, " That Church Go- * vernment is committed to the Magiftrates ; That all Ecclefiaftica!,' * as well as Civil Courts, are in Her Majefties Name ; All theie «Jurifdiaion,~and Exetcife derived from Her. Sir ;.•/- George Mackenzie t afferts, " That the King is come, f Jnfi. P. if. t by our Law, in place of the Pope, And, by the A a i. of Parliament i. of King Ckarles 2. Scj?. 2. it is aflerted, " That the ' Ordering and Difpofing the Extef nai • Policy and Government of * the Church does belong to His Majefty, as an Inherent Right of the ' Grown, by vertue of his Royal Prerogative and Supremacy in .Gaufes ' Ecclefiaftical. And 'tis declared, Ibid. " That whatever His Majefty * mall determine in this External Government, by Advice of the Arch- ' Bifhops and Bifhops, and fuch of the Clergy as he mall pleafe to no* 'minate, the fame confifting with the Laws of the •Kingdom, 'fhall be valid and effectual. Moreover 1 1*"'; ™' p ' ■• Hooker ft, whom J, S. calls the Great' Hooker, is againft all particular Forms of Church Government, afcribing < its Determinatim to the Civil Magnate. Sutlive * alfo L££ ^ %St ' difownes aU Governing Power in the Church. And as the Arch-Bifliop of Canterbury, with the whole Body of the Bifhops then in Being, in the Reign of Henry VIII. in Anfwer to fome Queftions propofed, gave under their Hands and Subfcriptions, " a Renunciati*- v on of all Ecclefiaftick Authority proper to the Church, or Intrinfick * therein, afcribing it intirely to the Chriftian Magi- ' 1 ftrate, as his EiYential Office t ,• So it is notourly t^Xf"*' known, that the whole Tribe of our Scotttfh Prelates were Zealous Promoters and AfTerters of the Ecclefiaftick Supre- macy afcribeo* to King Charles II, by our Laws; As were their Pre? deceflorsV^ftbe fame Supremacy affumed fey King J*mes VI. There are many other things,, which would give Ground of large Animadverfion in the mattered Difcourfes of this Voluminous Pamphlet, and which may be hereafter touched ; But this firft Chapter having thus far fwell'd to men a Bulk, we muft proceed to fbme more clofs Review of that which is the grand'Topick of this Man's pleading, viz, the Frame and Principles of the Cyprianic Age in Matters Religious \ Wherein we hope to make it appear, that this Age, if we may take an I Eftimac £6 ' A Confutation ef J. SV Vindication of the Chap. II. Eftlmat from the chief DoSors thereof, was fo far Corrupted and De- generated from Apoftolick Purity, that this Source, from which J S. derives his Pleadings, in point of Church Government, and other wife, is a troubled Fountain, and corrupt Spring, wherein abounded not a fewgrofs and unaccountable Errors, crofs to the Scripture Rule and Standard. CHAP. II. lM Account of the Chriftian Churches Declining and Edipfe in Point : ofGofbel Purity, and of the Prevalent Errors of her Chief Dotfors in the Third Age, */ Cyprian in facial, as they are Refrefcnted by the Centuriators, and others.. TH E further the Church advanc'd in time from the Apofto- lkk Age, ( fay the Genturiators ) the more Rubbifh and Corruption was mixed with her Do^rine.. In Reciting and giving an Account of thefe Errors, Inftance (hall be given in the Chief and Fam'd Dotfors of that Age, fuch as tertuVianA whom this Author mews, that Cyprian had fuch Eileen* of as to intitle him his Maficr ) Origen and others : Afterward the crofs Errors of CyfrUn himfelf Jhall> exhibited, as they are drawn from his Writings by approven and unexceptionable Authors todiieow vcr this Author's precipitant Folly whp fome way will Deify this father at lcaft, render him fo Infallible, as to make his fuppofed Principles and Pra&ice,' in point of Church Government, the leading Rule and Meafure of the Churches Praaice in after Times. , To begin then our Compendious View with an Account ot Ongen •, Etlthanim from his Words upon Pf*l. t. and other places, affirms this to have been his Judgment, 9 That Chrift^ was not truly Ged, but •Created, and according to Grace denominated the Son of God • Which is the Blalphemous Opinion of the Seeinians. Alio, in his M. Mom.onGencf. Becaufe that (C^.22.) God is called the Angel, &U he jvas, ia faftio^ found Chap. II. ( pretended ) Principles of the Gyprianfc Age* 6? * as an Angel. He avouches, " That thrift's Blood was not fhed a* ' Jerufdem only, where was the Altar and its Bads, and the Taber-i ■ nacle of God, but that alfo the fame Blood was fprinkled above that ' Altar which is in Heaven, where the Church of the Firft-born is. Hem. i. on Lev. Alfo, Horn. 2. he holds, " That, in Heaven, Chrift ' is offered not for Sins, but for Office, but that on Earth* where Sin c reigned from Adam to iicfis, he is offered for Sin, and thus, by his * Blood, hath pacified all in Heaven and Earth. He afferts alfo, Horn. 7. upon the fame place, " That Ghrift hath not yet perfect Joy in * Heaven, being neccffitated to mourn for our Sins* and becaufe his ' Body the Church is not yet Glorified. Efiphanius alio, Lib. 2. centra U*ref. afferts, " That he affirms, that the only begotten Son cannot ' fee the Father, neither the Spirit the Son, neither Angels the Spirit, &c. Vionyfim Alexandrinw, in the Efifi. contra SabeRUnes, wrote, "That ' the Son is a piece of Work framed by God, not properly and natu* " rally the Father's Son, but different and alien from his Subftance, as * the Vine is different in Subftance from its Dreffer, and the Ship c from its Framer, and therefore, becaufe (omewhat made and framed, c he had not any previous Exiftence. Thefe Words the Arritm cited foe their Opinion,as Atbanaftut relates.iw Eftfi.de Stnt.Bionyf.Akxxont.Arianos. All which, how Contumelious and Blafphemous it is againft om Glorious Redeemer, no found Ghriftian can be ignorant. But again, as touching Origen, Bafih Lib. de Spir. Sanclo, ffieWs, that Origen, in this Age, held no folid, but prodigious monftruous Opinions of the Holy Ghoft, viz. " That he withdraws from the Saints in the c Conjugal A&ion: Thus, Hem. 7. on Numb. " That in the Saints he e hath but a Temporary, Fluid, no Perpetual Refidence* Touching the Creation, he maintains feveral Errors, viz* " That God made ' another World before this that is now Created, Lib, 3. de Princ.C. ^ As alio, "That, after the Corruption of this, there (hall be another: * As alfo, that there had been other Worlds before this was. He af* firms alfo, Horn* %. on Cant. " That the Creatures are made after fome * Celeftial Images ,• And feveral fuch Fopperies; Horn. 4. on E&fc he holds this monftruous Opinion, " That the Eaith is an Animal or f. Living Creature, yea and Sinful Creature, becaufe God faid to Adam, ■J Du(t thou art} and to Dufl thou (lialt return. Moreover* as to Angels, he every where afcribes Bodies tothe.au Lib. 2. de Frinc. C. 2. " It feems to me, faith be, impoffible, that^Ra- * tioaal Creacures can remain without Bodies, when they attain their * higheft Pitch of Happinefs and San&ity. He holds alfo, " That, in I the iaft Judgment, every Angel will bring along with him, fuch I 2 ! over 68 A Confutation of]. S / Vindication of the Chap. II. 'over whom he has watched, and whom he has inftruaed, and for < whom he has feen the Face of God ; And that the Angels, who « have been more flack and negligent, will be judged by the more lire- < Ennui Men Concerning the Order of Angels he has alfo many f "cSS Yearns, Lib. .JrW 8 He held, - That they were to 'he nvocated, Hm, i. on E*e*. where he propofes this Formula of Invocation, " Come, O Angel, affift, by thy Convert one that is •converted from former Errors, from the Dodnne of tow, « from Iniquity crying aloud, and receiving him, as a good Phyfician, « refrefti cherilh* and inftruft* &c ■ Concerning the Fall of Angels, The Fathers ol this Age ( fay our Authors') held the lame Opinions, which Jufiin and CA™«w^ntertain- ed upon the bad Underftanding of that Paffage, Gen. 6. the Sens ef Ge'd law the Daughter, ef Mm, that they were Fair, and they te'k tbem WiveTef A which they Me, *fc: "That they had a Conjugal Fellow- • fiiir, with Women : We know, faith the Author of the Sermon it st^taeekrZVm, - That the Angeis fell with Women Methe. TJX his Sermon of the Refurreaion, faith; That the Devil be- « came wicked concerning the Admimftration committed to him, and ' conceived Envy againft us; As alfo, thofe who afterward lov- ' ed the Flefh and converted with the Daughters of Men out of a ' Concubinate Love. As touching the time of the Fa I ol Angels, the Author of Hen,, on Can,, holds, againft Cyprian an \Ongen, That the • Dsvtl fell from Heaven in the time of Ctmft s Paflion. ' Concerning the Devil, Orije» himfelf was of Opinion, (™?-»f« on IMua ) " That when one Devil is overcome by one certain Saint, ?heda*e not come in again and aflault another Man. but is fent by • Chrift into the Abyfs , Iron, this Ground «< That God tramples Satan « under our Feet. Moreover, againft what he hath laid. L,b. i. .» fob " That the Devil cannot be faved, nor return to Heaven he afferts, Lib. i. de Trine. C. 6. " That the Deyi! may be faved in after •future Ages, lince there is in them the Faculty of a Free-Wilh L,b JTprincCaf. 6. he faith, « That the laft Enemy that is deftroyed ' • is not to be fo underftood, as if his Subftance fhou d per. h which « AnThas made, but that his Purpole and Hoftile Will, which is not «?fGod bit come from himfelf^erilheth. Yet, in his 8 tt«a«. 'flu. he abfolucelv denies, " That, in the Refurreaion, there ftall ^bfabevil- A that "me. faith be, there lhall be no Devils, becaufe « then there' (hall be no Death. He afferts alio, Hem 6 on ExO. J jnfliasd oifhiin, butiaU flWlg Children. *. a Sinners, ^ Chap. If. (pretended ) Principles o/ffoCyprianic Age\ $$ ~~ Alfo, Hm* I. on Gen. he afferts, " That Man at firft was Created ' after the Image of Chrift. Methoditts alio, in his Sermon on the Re* furredion, afcribes to Origen, and charges upon him this Opinion,1 Thar, together with his Fellows, Vroclm and Aglatphon, he held, "That * the Soul was yet without pain or Suffering, and before its Conjun- * dion with the Bodyj finned in Paradife, and that thereafter it was * fhut up in the Body,' as into Chains in a Prifon. He fhews alfo, that they held, " That Souls are caTft out of Heaven, and pafs through Foun- * tains, Fires and Waters upon the Top of the Firmament* until car- ' ried to our World. Apud Epiphan. Lib. 2. com. HtereJ. Turn. 1. Concerning Free- Will, Origen aiferts. Hum, 9, on Numbers, " That * our Senfe and Judgment is able to choofe what is Good, that it may * become a Veffel unto Honour ,• Or, tilings Evil and Terrene, that ' it may become a Veffel of Difhonbur. Horn. 12. upon that Paffage of Scripture, What doth God require of thee, O Ifrael, but that thou fear the L*rd thy God, &c. He faysr " Thefe Words may imprint a Blufh upori 'them, who deny to Mankind Free-Will : How could God require, 4 unlefs Man had that in his Power, which he ought to offer unto * God, requiring it of him. Many other things he hath, Mom. 20. as alfo Horn. 6. on Judges, and Lib. 2, on Job, «' The Power of Faith ' and Piety ( faith he ) is in Mens Free-wfll, for if they will efchew ' Evil and do that which is Good, they are able and fufficient, and * the Evil one will not prevail over them. Likewife Lib* i, de Principt " It follows (faith he J that the Power lyes in us, and in our motions, ' that either we be Happy and Holy, cr by our floth and negli* * gence go on to Wickednefs and Perdition. Methodius, in his Sermon on the Refurre&ion, afferts, " That the Power is in our felves either ' that we believe or not believe, and that in this our Free-will is * confpicuous. In all which we may fee the early fpreading, bad Tinclure and Tendency of that Principle, Concerning Original Sin, Origen fpeaks thus5 Horn. 12. on Jerl c{ Although Adam Sinned, yet his Mind fell" not down to abfolute ' Wickednefs. Lib. 1. on Job. he afcribes as much and the fame Inno-i * cency to fob's Sons as Adam and Eve had in Paradife. He afcribes * alfo to Job, that he was free from Sin, from every Impiety, and every ' thing Unlawful, that neither in his Thoughts, nor the Counfels 'or Defigns of his Soul, or Deliberations of his Heart he finned. Alfo ' Lib. 3. on Job. He afcribes fuch Perfection to Saints, that he deny* f they can be reprehended without Sin. As for what concerns the Law of God, in Horn. 8. on Exod. Expoun- ding the Dialogue, he feems to aifert, " That fuch as are Baptized !are 70 A ConfuMion of \ S'x Vindication of the Chap. II. j are able in all things to obey the Law. The fame faith the Author of the Homiiies on Canticles, as the Centuriators affirm: '* The Word and t Command is not irregular, according to that Author, nor enjoyns 'what is impoOible, /«/. to Man in his Natural ftate. Orlgtn alfo erroneoufly Judged, "That the Law of Mojes purgeth us from Sin, * yea and that the Law can priviledge us with Immortality. Alfo Horn. 9. on Numbers, he contends, " That the Law is the vertue and * ftreneth ot the Gofpel, that the Gofpel is then rightly underftood « when apprehended as founded upon the Law's Foundation,- That « the Law is called the Old Teftament, to them who carnally under- '■ ftand but is new to them who underftand Spiritually. Alfo Horn. 6. on Levit, " He Judgeth that Ghrift, ( Mattb. 5. ) expounded not the e Law but commanded fome things more perfed than the Law. Alfo Bom J 1. on Numbers, he holds, " That Chrift hath let us at Liber* c tv and delivered us from the Curfe of the Law, that is ot the Cere- c monies, but not from the Curfe of the Command,or of the TeAimony,' I or of the Judgments. ''•J\ . ~ «. „ . ' •• • As for what concerns the Gofpel, to that Queltion, Horn. xi. in Levit Wherefore the Law denunced the punilhment of Death to the Adulterer, but not the Gofpel ? He gives this Reafon and Anlwer, fcil. " Becaufe the Law would purge our Sins by Temporal puniihments, * but the Gofpel by Repentance. As alfo in like manner he doth in the fame place Judge, " That Sins which the Law puniOieth capitally ' are nursed away by the punifhments themfelves but that the only < and plain Declaration of the Gofpel is to the Simple and Inno- ? cent, fufficient to Salvation : Thus grofly Trattat. 26. on Mat- As for Juftincation, Origin] Lib. 1, on J^Declaming concerning the Righteoufnefs of ]ob, " He pronounceth him Juftitied only for his « Vermes and legal Works ; Of his Faith he freaks nothing, only he adds, "That his hope in a Righteous Juit God and diligent Righ, * teoufnefs was a part of the Righteoufnefs of Job Many fuch Errors are recited by the Centuriators. The Author alfo of t^e Homilies on Canticles, making a twofold Righteoufnefs, one of Faith, another off Works, imputes Salvation to both* . \ Methodius alfo hath pronounced many things of this Nature in his Sermon of the Refurredtion, whereof the Fragment is extant with %,%Lm9 Lib. 2. torn 1. He appears to be ^ the Judgment -That by the fulfilling of the Law of N«i ire through Chrifts help we JaieluftW S^al f^hAffertions he hath, difeoiirfing of Chrg Ghap. IL ( pretended ) Principles of the Cyprhmc dgi. ft Reftoring that Law of Nature for the end of our Juftificati-J on. Upon the point of good Works,the Hiftorians obferve,that the Dodtors ©f this Age, more than the preceeding, had declined and departed from the Doffrine ef Ckrift and the ApofHts. Crimen in many places aicribes the Preparation unto, yea and the caufe of Salvation to good Works, as Traft. 32. ,on Mattk, where he ''compares them to the fool i(h ' Virgins who prepared not themfelves to Salvation by good Works. And Bom. 24. 26, on Jojhua. " He afcribes to good Works the Lord's 'dwelling in us. In Lib. 8. on Ep. ad Rom. t( He afferts, that the* * Works which Paul re/eds and frequently vilifies, are not the Works of c Righteoufnefs commanded in the Law, but fuch Works wherein 'they glory who obferve and keep the Law according to the Fle/h,- 'that is, either the Circumcifion of the Flefh, or the Rites of the 'Sacrifices, the Obfervations of Sabbaths, of new Moons: Thefe,and ' fuch like, are the Works by which, according to him, Paul denies we 'can be Juftified. In which Affertion he appears clearly to Homolo- gate and Patronize the Popilh diftindUon of Works of the Law in the point of Justification, Jcil. That Paul excludes only the Work of the Ceremonial, not of the Moral Law. Yea in downright exprefs terms he afferts ( Ibidem ) " That God wiil render in the Life to come accord- ' ing to the meafure and degree of Merits. The Hiftorians alfo afTert, that the Writers of this Age have fignally depraved the Doftrine of Repwtance, while they afcribe and reduce it to^ the work it felf of the Penitent, imputing unto it the pardon of Sin, making no mention ofFaith in Chrift and free Remiilion through his- Blood. Among other .Lapfes of Qrigen, ''* He enjoyns Sinners to expiat ''what Sins they have committed, by Repenting, Weeping and Satif- * fying for the fame, becaufe the Prophet faith, Ifthoujhah return and * bemoan thy (elf thou Jbalt be faved. Thus Bom. 6 on Exod. Horn. 1 f . on £eyit. he afferts; " That Repentance, that is, Tears and good Works 5;are the price, by which our Sins are Redeemed; Wherein he evidently Patronizeth the merit of Works. He afferts- alfo, " That Converfion is '"our own Work and A<5t, upon that faying oF^KrJft, 7he Kingdom of c God is within you. Thus Horn. 24. on Numb.' qAd Horn, ^, on Judges, " As long time, faith he, as thou art confeious" to thy felf to have '.Erred, as long time as thou haft turned afide or TranigreiTed, for as 'long time humble thy felf to God and make Satisfaction to him. Horn. io. on Jiry citing that faying in the Epi ill e to the Hebrews, If j# hnpoftblefor thefewho were once inlightenedt &c. Hs (eems himfelf to deny? Ripmancttofa Htm, jj, upon M A Confutation of J SV VinMutlon of the Ghap. IT. the fame place, he feemsto promife to the related after Baftifm the exi teftation only of Purgatory. ^ - . - P He is alfo reported to have entertained fome prodigious Dreams concerning Baptifm after this Life, Hm 14 .on Luke, «IJudg, 6 ( faith he ) that after the Refurretfion from the Dead we ftand in 'need of the Sacrament to purge and cleanfe us. He affirms, That 'the Lord Jefus will fee himfeif. in a firey Flood, befides a flaming two ■ handed Sword, that whofoever after they are paft From this Life • defire a paffage over to Paradife, and ftand in need of purging he • may in this River Baptize him, and tranfmit him to the defired placer • but that the Perfons who have not the Sign and Badge of prior BaP!; c tifm be not Baptized in this firey cleanfing. For, iaith he, a Perfon •muftbe firft Baptized by Water and the Spirit, that when he comes • to the firey Flood, he may fhew himfeif to have kept the Wafhings ' both of the Water and Spirit, that thus in Chrift Jefus he may merit a I Reception of the Baptifm of Fire. • Moreover, in the Writings of the Doftors of this Age, there are Footfteps not obfeure ol the Error of the Invocation of Saints. Among others we have with Origen the Formula ,oi ^this Invocation. Towards the end of his Lib. 2. on Job. ' p bleffed Job pray for miserable us, ' that the tremenduous Mercy of God may proted us in all Tnbulati- « ons, and rid us from all Oppreflions of the Wicked, and give us Fel- Mowihip with the Juft. Write and Inrolluswith thofe who flial 1 be • Saved/and make us reft with them in his Kingdom, where we fhall 'forever maenifie him with the Saints. Horn. 16. on Jojhua. He fudees " That the Martyred Saints do fight together with us, and < help us by their Prayers, and this he proves by the Authority of a • certain Senior Mafter . To which may be added, that the Author of the Sermon de Sulla & Mag»> ottbe Star and Wtfe Men, hoids the ODinion, " That the Innocent Infants flam by Herod were made the •firft Martyrs, and do in Heaven plead for Gods Clemency and •Mercv for all thofe who Suffer Perfection, yea and do obtain • Pardon for fome that are Unworthy. The Hiftory is alfo known in. Eufebius Lib. 6. &af. j! that the Martyr Petamiena appearing to the Executioner, Baftlidu, in his Sleep mewed that Interceding with the lord for him me had obtained the fete. The Hiftory alfo (hews, that the Doftors of this Age intertained no Small Errors concerning the Church. Among thefe Origen had his fietial Errors, and no fmall Blots, about the Power and Duties of the Church. For inftance, concerning Excommunication, he faith, C Trjti*. h te *** ) " If W P«fcn who will bind and loofy^ Chap. II. ( pretended ) Principles of the Cyprianic %. jjJ ( himfelf tied in the Bonds of Sin, he in vain doth either bind or ,c loofe. Wherein he holds Gonverfion indifpenfably necefiary in order to Minifterial Ads. He alfo Difputes, " That it is not permitted to Minifters of the Church that they mould en ioy Earthly Pofleffions or • Houfes in Cities, more Coats than one, more Money than fufficeth . for Food and Raiment. Thus Horn. 1 5-. on Levit. The immoderat Efteem and Extolling of Martyrdom prevailing in thefe firft Times is by Hiftorians afcribed to thefe Dotfors among whom, Origin doth prefer " Martyrdom to Baptifm, and holds, that c thereby we are more purified than by Baptifm ; Alfb that by Baptifm 'Sins that are paft are purged away, but by Martyrdom Sins that are * to come are flain ,• That the Devil himfelf can lay nothing to the * charge of the Souls of Martyrs, becaufe wafli'd with their Blood and J made Glorious and Illuftrious by their Death. ' Upon the point of Marriage, the erroneous depreffing of it and immoderat Extolling Virginity had its fignal advances in this Age Upon this Head concerning Marriage, Origen, Horn. 19. on Luke faith V Now there are found fecond, .third and fourth Marriages 'not tb * fpeak of more, and we are not ignorant that fuch Marriages caft us ' out of the Kingdom . of God. And in the fame place he affirms * That not only Fornication, but Marriage repells from Ecclerlaftick 'Dignities, for neither Bifliop, nor Presbyter, nor a Deacon nor, a ! Widow can be lawfully a Digamift. As touching Virginity and Celebate, Origen Lib. 10. Epift. to the Romans, " makes Virginity a * work of Perfedion, and thus, with other Dodtors of this Aee p\ve>< •PatrocinytoMona/lickvows. S glw As to the Refurreffion, Methodius, in his Sermon of the Refurre&ion " Corruption inherit Incorruption ' It may be it fliall be preferved fal. theFleih, by him who. once made this his own Fleih, but Fletfi ' mail it no more be, but what was once impretfed on the Fiefh mall 1 be impreffed upon the Spiricual.Body. He recites alfo this Argument of Aglaofhon and Origen, " The Bleffed /hall in the Refurreaicn be as * Angels, but Angels have no Flefii, therefore the Bleffed /hall not rife I in the Flefli. As for what relates to the place of Souls departed, Origen Horn ^ on Pjalm. ;6. faith, " That the Prince of this World cometh to every , Soul departing out of this World, and the Aereal Powers, and en- t quires if they gad therein any thing of theirs, if they find Cove* K I toufnefs _, A ConfutSon of J. S's nndkattovof the Chap. If . « _e- r •, ;< Jrheir Dart, if Wrath or Luxury, if Envy and every r°t,iLnnd"nLeverPy one what is theirs, they defend and draw .0 ftrange and Antifcr iprural C™*1^ do alfo deprehe„d fcat.ered in Bertdes what is hinted HKtor^ p ^ _ 2*? «^tohto of An««U one o/ thefe which brings Wood, Hav^'StubLe^o the Budding, and of neceffity thefe : materials that we muft all come to «^?s F°" nough a 'Perfon wire PW S'to^fc- «-• 8 on r™ lie afferts " That fuch as commit Sin which is neither for- driven in this L re nor that to come, remain unclean for two Weeks, « |ut in "he beginning of the third they are purged from unclean- dui m inc u 6 b recited out of Horn. n. on iSSg a^L^ £S «4* Alio » x. 4, W..C* Faithful and "j™"',^", not come into Judgment, but are on .Pagans and all J"^™^ Cand Unexcufable, becaufe of their *tW« " .nlfhaU be,Ct™utto.he punilhments of the Damned. * Mdehty, and IhaU be mut £ Faith ^ ^ ^ SVbfd N m 7 flSl givePaccount of every day in that terrible of a hid Name, inau B £»to, he hath ' rU'fK,^«l^on "That tvery one of ue'in the day of Judge- ?^& rtftiaed by another, and Condemned by .no, 'th«er\ (,•„„ fhP HaDDinefs and Rewards of the Jufl, Hiftorians recite i,- XuouSsNationsaPndFi^onS,^..hata»../. on J°jUa,\« Judges, "T^^rGodlv rtiaU receive the Inheritance of Devils which they "That the G™ y lhall rece , ( haye c had before their tall, ana oi im.., ^ ,„,,„„ r« Thar fuch as 'Lercome Htm. to. on the fame place, he Judges, lhat iucnas •til. Sved but have thereunto added no Amendment nor « f a. nlManne"s ball be Saved, but not whhout a note of In- flT/ Im zT on Mr,, he 'afferts. "That Souls after the 'ReZ'tecMon flU'll not alcend to the higheft Manfions all at once • bu bv many Manfions and Degrees, until, hey come to the Father of aSS Sft that s«ipt»re, &ftf*«^**!»^^g Chap. If. (pretended) Principles of the Cyprianic^; * 3 Horn, 11. ott Numbers, he Dreams, u That in the Life to come * fome Men mall not fee God, but only Angels, and that God will * fubje& fome Men to fome Angels, others to others> Several other figments are to be feen in his Homilies on the Book of Num* hers. Concerning Damnation and the puniftments of the Damned, Orlge* maintains feveral Errors. Lib. 2. de VrincipiU% and elfewhere, as Romm 6* on Exodtu, He Judged 1 " That God had fixed a meafure of * Damnation, and that in their time the hardened Jews (hall be Saved, and this he proves from the Epiftle to the Romans* Chap. 1 1. Blindnefs in part hath happened t§ Ifrael according to the Flejh tiS thefuUnefs of the Gentiles are come in. Hitherto we havebada difcovery andwV;/»»* of the manymonftruous Opinions in the chief points of the Chriftian Faith maintained by this great Do&or of the Third Age. And with fuch Heterodoxy we mail find Cyfrian and his other Contemporaries, Tinctured and Charged by the Centuriators, wherein it will appear how abfurdly this new Pamphleter, from the Do&rine and Practice of Cyprian and his Con- temporaries, endeavours to commend the Third Age, and by his pompuous Elogies will needs prefent it as a Pattern of Gofpel Purity to the Reformed Churches. Let us now proceed to another famous Dodor thereof, fertullian, from whofe illuftrious Name and Do&rine alfo our Pamphleter will needs commend this Third Age as a. Pattern to the true Church, and in fpecial on this Ground, that he was the great Cyprian's Mafter, from whom he denominats this whole Age, whofe Writings his little god Cyprian, rje tells us, had in fuch Veneration, and was fo highly therewith Delighted, that when about to Read him, he ufed this phrafe, Give me my Mafieu Let us therefore confider how many and grofs Errors this Illuftrious Mafter of Cyprian maintain* ed. Concerning God he is acculed as having dangerous Expreffions, fcil. that he had a "Body. Thus in Lib. Adverj. Prax. '* Who will deny that ' God is a Body* altho' God be a Spirit, a Spirit being a Body of its own * kind inits own likenefs. This Error Augufiin refuted, Lib. 1 o* De Genef. ad Liter, fertultian ( faith he ) feared that God mould be nothing if he were not a Body, and of God he would Judge no, other- wife. There is alfo a dangerous Error imputed to him concerning Chrift by Hiftorians, For in his Book of the Trinity he faith, " That of * necetfity the Father muft needs be nrir, becaufe in fome refpe& * he goes before him who hath an Original and Beginning, who him- ^ K* !felf ^ » J Confutation of J. S i Vindication of the Chap. II. * felf knows no Original. He therefore^ ( i. e. the Son ) proceeded s from the Father when the Father would. And in his Book againft Herw£. " Neither could he be before the Son, neither the Judge 'before the fault, faith he, but there was a time when both the fault * and the Son was net, which might make the Father Judge and ' Lord. Several fuch things are rehearfed . from his Book Advtrj, Trax. As touching the Holy Ghoft, TertuSian after his Deletion to Montanifmj tC Judged with Mont anus t that the Holy Ghoft did ' not deliver what was neceffary to the Church by the Apoftles, but * by the Comforter or Paraclyte of Montanus, of which Opinion he ' fcattered many Teftimonies, ( Libr de Monogam ) which he Wrote ' againft the Church ; Wherein among other Absurdities, fpeaking of Marriage, he faith, " If Chrift took away what Mo/es commanded, ' why not alfo thre Paraclyte hath taken away what Paul indul- * ged, Ocher Teftimonies are exhibited by the Centuriators to this pur- pofe. Concerning the fall of Angels he vented this Fiction, ( Lib. de habit u Mulierum ) " Angels, faith he, rufhed from Heaven to the Daughters 'ofMefiw Strange! after their evaporat libidinous Moments they * breathed for Heaven, From this, as from many fuch Inftances, 'tis evident, that the true literal Senfe of many Scriptures was hid from the Fathers* which is now clear and perlpicuous to the Reformed Churches, and there the Errors of the Ancients difcovered. In his Apologetick he feerns to fpeak *.' of the Generation or begetting of 'Devils, when from Angels, corrupt by their own will, there flowed c a more corrupt Nation of Damons Condemned by God, together ' with the Authors of their kind, &c. In his Books De Habit u Mulierum & Cultu Fcemin, He held Opinion, c; That Devils were Authors of k Womens Ornaments* and to have revealed to Menfome hidden and * fecret Arts, In his Book of the Refunedion he held the Opinion, f That Man was Created after the Image of Chrift, viz. fuch an Image ■ which the Man Chrift reprefented. Concerning Free WiU> together with other Doctors 'of this Age, he is reported to have held the Opinion, that after the Fall, the Freedom of Mans WiU remains intire. Thus Lib. 2. againft Marcion, «f Thus, faith * he, in the fucceeding Laws of the Creator he is found propounding ' Good and Evil, Life and Death, but nootherwife will we find the. * whole Order of Difcipline difpofed by Precepts by God inviting, 'Threatning, Exhorting, then towards Man ftill free and voluntary, * cither with refpect to Obedience or Contumacy, The fame he hath, Chap. H. (pretended^ Principles of the Cyprianic%. 7y Lib. de Exhortation Caflit'atkj u Since, faith he, we have from his ComJ ' mands what he will and what he will not, the Will is now in us to' * choofe cither, as it is written. Behold I have Jet before thee Good and ' Evil, for thou baft eaten of the Tree of Knowledge, and therefore we * ought not to impute and refer that to the Will of God, which is 'committed and laid open to our own Arbitriment and Will, &c. In his Book de Mon&gam. 1 have jet' before thee Good and Evil, choofe thou what is Good. M If thou cannot, becaufe thou will not, (for he (hew-' * erh, that thou can, if thou will, becaufe he hath propofed both to ' thy Arbitriment and Choice ) thou muft needs flee from him, whole ' Will thou doft not perform. As touching Sin, Tertullian, Lib. de- Anirnds judged, that Godly Per- fons are procreated by the Godly ,• For thus he faith, *' The Apoftle * hence affirmeth, that Saints are procreated and begotten by either ' Sex who are Sanctified, and that as well from the Prerogative of the- * Seed, as from the Law and Rule of the Inftitution, Concerning the Law of God% he, with other Fathers of this Age, is reported to have held very Erroneous Opinions. In his Book againft the Jews, he difputes-, " That the Saints in the Old Teftament, as * Noah, Abraham^ Meichifedeck, and others, were Righteous by the ' Righteoufnefs of the Law of Nature. For what relates to Good Works, in his Book de Tatientia, he feems to judge, Si That Good ' Works do both go before Faith and follow after it, This he affirms of Patience. And eifewhere, viz* Lib. 4. againft Marcion, he fhews i; That' the chief Cauie of the Juitificatioa of Zachem, was, that he 1 ignorantly fulfilled the Precept of Jfaias} then (halt, deal thy Bread to i the Hungry , Upon the point/of Repentance, he is found to have depraved this Dodrine, together with moft of the Writers of this Age, imputing Kem'tjfion of Sim to Contrition, for Tertullian admits only one Repentance after Bapifm, ( as alfe in the preceeding Age, Clem. Alexandr.) Lih, de Teeniten. "Repentance, faith he, which,by the Grace of God,, is repre- * fented and injoyned to us, reftores us into God's Favour; being once * known and received, can never* afterward be foredone, or fealed '■again, by the Iteration of the Fault. In his Book de Pudicitia, he afferts, *' There are fome more Grievous and Fatal Sins, which are 'are not capable of Pardon, namely, Man-flaughter, Idolatry, Deceit &c Of thefehe affirms, " Chriil is no ImerceiTor and Obrainer of * Pardon ] He fhall not at all commit thefe, faith ke, * ho fhail be bortt of God, and to be no -more a Son of God, U thele be committed, In which Words, he has. added to the $?* tt ah ™P erdwMe, fevera! others a ■M AConf,uiim^\'SsVln^Un,ftht Chap. II * r. - fu • „,,„npM and impeach'd the Sovereignty and E*. other*; and therein wr0"gd ™d. ""? h Scripture Inftance. of the tent of ^ Grace of God, app-a r.,g: n R^enerate, as in DeviJ, J.ardonoffuchSms.n AeE^a ^^y £ ^.^ ^^ ilte#4, «fe \\=Vhet0 oTblfck Gonfeffion and Satisfaaion. There, •' That the Baptifm of ?•*» ?V*°™1° tn°reumo. Alfo, in his Book • but gave • P^MjTftSJ Option, " That Children, concerning BaptiCm he holds a ma g ^ p _ ^^ « are not fo foon to be Baonz-d. ^to t ., ^ ^ CbiUrm to com to me, and b »** tbem » ^ they have learn- « come when they are gro wn jap, let t hen i come j^ ^^ « ed, white they are taught whethe Mhey ^come , ^ ^ « Chrlftians while they ar« a ' VmiffiorTof Sins • Yea and he will have jfc. f Lf#. A ft*. »*»■ > a"dJd\f° ed the way to the Idolatry and ^wha^elates to the Church. -f^ggWgS^ Book "A ftJWri* he fcem. « > iudg* £h « the fceye • ted on>y to ? «* «d*^h«£ of th h i Age, did extravagantly ex. TtrtuUimaVo, a,s other U0Morsi6 •»„«;/»,, faying, ,ol Martyrdom. In -.** .he: al™°JMf£ ' ifm, but U Spots are •' That our Fitthmefs ls,waftldAan7 in his Apology, he faith, " Who t ™^°bl^ZlZto fuffer ^Suffering comes, that he • would not delite earnemy J° luner commenceand com- ' may merit and obtain the Gr*» him by the Compenfation of his f pleat all Favour and I Pardon «™ "^^ And; in his Book ffttbt?^£U3l> for God, thy Blood is verendty, .f*' /U D^jon; m he Jtooto whc^ ^ ^ ^ the Church. In his Book «e w*"°*"Th ' . ,n(i proper to Chn- ; and Do&dM of one Marriage is both ancient ana Pr » , ^ . Chap. IL (pretended) Principles oftheCypitemcAge. fa * ftians. In this Book, he hath heaped together feveral Abfurdities.1 In his Book anent the Exhortation of Chafiicy, he makes Marriage of a Kin to Uhcleannefs. In his $tb Book advirf. Marcionew, together with feveral others of this Age* he prefers Continencj and Virginity to Marri* age. He afcribes alfo a Neceffity, yea and Merit, to feveral things indif- ferent. As. in his Book de Jejunio contra Vfycbicos, he affirms, " That * Faftings do merit at the Hand of God, not only the Ghange of Nature € and the Averfion of Hazards, or the Obliteracing of Faults, but HkeW « wife the ( Agnitionem ) Recognizance of Sacraments ,• Affirming a little thereafter, " That Sins are expiated by Abftinence and Faftg * ing* As for what relates to the place of Souls departed, TcrtuHian is ae* cufedby the later Writers of this Error, that he affirmed, «' the place * of the Bleffed, before the Refurreclion, not to be theCeleftial MariT * lion, but a place only above Hell* Many other Errors of Tertulli an Hi ft orizns have related, the Abridge- ment whereof may be feen with the Magdebwgians, defertultiani Navts\ befides feveral grofs Errors concerning the Trinity & the EiTenceof God! It is no fmali Error of Tertutiian which is represented, concerning *c the 1 Kingdom of Chrift, and a Voluptuous Life of the Godly upon Earth, ' for the fpace of a Thoufand Years before the end of the World. He fometimcs calls Montanus the Comforter, and, in an evident Infatuation, affirms, '* That the Holy Spirit was in the Apofties, but the Com- ' forter was not ; And that the Comforter had revealed more to 4 Montanus, than Ghrift had brought forth end matiifeftsd in the Go-' c fpel ,• And not only more; but alfo things greater and better^ Many fuch Fictions of bis may be read with the Authors mention- ed. The Centuriators alfo ( Cent. %.Gap. to. Pag. 250, 251. ) have re- prefented from Authors the Errors and Blots of Dionyfiw, mewing, that there is extant with Nicepborm, Lib. 6. €ap. 2$. an intire and fuUChap- ter defcribed from the Epifrle of Bafilim Magnm to Bimop Maximus, concerning the. Errors of this Dlonyjias, especially that homologating the Impiety of Lybkut the Hentkk. Together with the Diversity of the Suhfifieme cf the trimty} he maintains and afierts the Diffe- rence alfo of the Subflance and Efance, and, as it were, a remitting of Tower and Mitt at ion of Glory, &c. Let us now make our Advance to Cyprian, whom our Pamphleter obtrudes as a little God, and his Doftrine, together wkh his Practice in poiot of Government, as the Churches great &ule« vVe will find the $6 - A Confutation of J. S> Vindication of the Chap. II. the Hiftoria'ns reciting his fignal Errors and Blots. In his Sermon^ : £teemofy»*t he affirmed, " That Chrift fatisfied only for Original Sin, 1 but that we our felves muft fatisfie for A&ual Sin. Here alio, as it Were on the by, we may notice, that the Author of the Trailat. apud Gyprian. de Sina & Sion% heretically diftingujftied " betwixt Jefus and * Chrift affirming, that the Flefti of our Lord was called Jefus, and * the Holy Spirit which defcended from Heaven, Chrift; And that c thus the Spirit and Flefli mixed are Jefus Chrift. In which Opini- on, he intirely embraceth the Hereiie of Marcus and thefl>/*rJ*/?i. Cyprian alfo C Lib. *• Epijl Ep. i*. and elfewhere ) did erroneoufly judge " the Holy Spirit to be in the Power of the Minifters, and to 9 be given by them even in refpe<2 of his Perfon. In his Expofition alfo of the Creed, he affirms, «* That when God made the World, he ' fet over the fame certain Prefidents of the Celeftial Powers and Vk* • tues by which the World and Mankind was to be Governed and ' Ruled. Tr*#. 4. de Van. Idol, he judged, " That the Angels fell up- 9 on this Ground, that being immerfed in Earthly Things, they fell ' from their Celeftial Vigor, by an Earthly Infedion. In Tract, 2, de Habitu Virglnum, according to the Conceit of his Mafter tertullian, he is of Opinion, " That the Art oJ Dying and Colouring of Wools, had ' been revealed and did proceed from the Devils, defcending toEarth- 9 ly Contagions. L Following alio this Erroneous Mafter, he drunk in the Errors con- cerning Iree-Wih For he judged, Lib. 3. Epifi. J, " That Man left to - fr\s Free- Will, and placed in his own proper Arbitnment, hath an Ih- 9 clination unto, and may bring to himfelf either Death or Life. And, « placed in Mans Free- Will a Liberty ot believing or not Believing. As alfo, that this is affirmed by the Prophet Ifaiab, If ye be willing and will bear mey ye (hall Eat the Good of the Land. As touching the Law of God, together with other Doctors of this Aee, efpecially Origen, he after ts the VoffbUity of Fulfilling it. Thus, Serm. de Baptifmo GbriJIi, " Becaufe, faith Be, we both know what we J! are' to pra&ite* and are able to perform what we know, thou com* € mands me Lord that I Love thee : This I both can do, and ought to * As touching the Gojfrti, in that fame Sermon de Baptifmo Cbrifii, dif- courfing of thefe Words, (Hear p bim ) he almoft makes no mention of the Gofpel but only of the Law. As to Juftification and Good E«to ilih h WA *ir ) he i^dgcth. JJ That fubiequent Sins are Chap. II. (pretended) Principles of tkCyprhmcJge. 3* I c vailed and bid by the Defence of preceeding Merits : Upon the Ground of which Error alfo, he afcribes unto Difcipline, that is to Good Works, " That it is the Guardian of Hope, the Prefeiver of c Faith, and that which procures our abiding alwife in Chriir, our * continued living in God, and our arriving and coming at laft to the * Celeftial Promifes and the Divine Rewards, Alfo, (in Sermcnt de Oratione ) " As we continually, faith he, do Sin, let us pur^e * away our Sin with Afliduous SandHfication. In like manner (% Strmone r. it Eleem% ) he exprefly holds this Opinion, " That Sins ' committed after Baptifm are extingui/hed by Alms and Good Works. And this Doarin* he endeavours to prove by that Sentence of Tobi. 4[ ' fay our Authors, viz. " That Sim are purged away by our Alms and * Faich. And from that of Ecclefiafthus 3. u As Water extinguimeth f Fire, fo do Alms extingui/h Sin. He entertained alfo Errors concerning Repentance, together with his Maiter Tertullian, and moft Writers of this Age, Thus, Lib. 1. Epift. 3. he affiims, '« That Sins are expiated by Saasfaaions, and that we" * are thus redeemed from them, And in Lib. 3. Epiji. 18. he gives this ' Definition of Repentance, «' That Man doth repent who is meek and * patient to, the Divine Precep-s, and obtemperating {he Priefts of * God, doth merit God by his Obfequious.Obedience, and Righteous c Works. In the fame place he faith, " That the Lapfed may be help- * ed and relieved before the Lord, by the Afliftance and Help of the * Martyrs. The Centuriators alfo aifert of this Author, that ( Sertn. de Pafi. -hrijii ) he appears to afcribe V a Merit to our Contrition and" * Confeflion, and ownes it, that Corporal Punifhments fatisfte for ' Eternal ; Affirming, in Confequence hereof, " That Eternal Pu- * nilhments fucceeded not to the Temporal of the Sddomites, that the I * Punifoment was to them for a Remedy, and the Torment for Abfo- * iution. A ftrange and moft unaccountable Chara&er of that Stupen- duous Stroke, which, none will doubt, js difowned by alt the Ostho; dox, as of a fadiy dangerous Tendency, and clearly contrgdicTting the-* ' Scope of that Scripture, and exprefly the ApoftiejWs Account there. of^ who {hews, that thefe filthy Sodomitet Juffer t hi Vengeance of Eternal ' Fire, V. 7. For what relates to Baptifm, he faith, Lib. 1. Epift. 12. " That the 'Water mull be hi ft cleanfed and fantfified by the Prieft, that ir may 'by its Wafhing, purge away the Sins of the Man who is Baptized' * becaufe the Lord laith by the Prophet Ezekiel, And Iwiti §rinkU dean ' Water upon you. An egregious Application andParaphrafc, no doubt orchis Prophefie, and worthy of an Impreffion on Corinthian Brafs! ^ Wrhere 82 A Confutation of \ SV Vindication of the Chap. IT. Where alfo he is bold to affi m this, " That the Perfon Baptizing gives « the Holy Spirit, and fanaifies the Baptized inwardly ,• As alfo, " That the Perfon Baptized, of neceflity, muft be anointed, that, c upon receiving the Chrifm and Ointment, he may be anointed to the « Lord and have the Grace of Chrift in himfelf. The Opinion of Rebaptizing fuch as were Baptized by Hereticks, was held by him and others of this Age /as the Centuriators relate. m Concerning the Sacrifice and Eucbanfi., he alio fuperftitroufly feigns, that fome Virtue and Efficacy is added to it f om the Perfon who ad- miniftrates the fame. Lib. I. Epifl. i. where he afferts, " That the * Eucharift is fandified on the Altar, and, Lib. 2. Epifr. %. he affirms, that the Piieft fanaifies the Cup, " that the Piieft perform* the Office * of Chrift, and that there is a Sacrifice offered to God the Father, al- * fo that the Paflion is the Sacrifice which we offer unto God. This Phrafe ( of Offering a Sacrifice ) he learned from his Matter TcrtuVian, who ufes the fame, fpeaking of the Supper. Astofi&e Invocation of Saints* there are found, in the Writings oXCy. plan, fome not obfcure Foot fteps thereof, as alfo with other Dodors of this Age. For, Lib. 3. Epifl. ij. he affirms, '« That the Lapfed are, , * before God, aflifted by the Help of the Martyrs : As alfo, in the end of the firft Epiftie, Lib. 1. he infinuates not obfoirely, that the Martyrs and SaintsDeparted do pray for the Living; " Whoever of us, * faith be, mail firft pafs off from Time, the Divine Condefcendence fo * accelerating the Departure, let our Love continue and ftand before ' God, and let not Prayer ceafe for our Brethren and Sifters with the * Mercy of the Father. "" Concerning the Church, and the Roman Primacy, he drunk in alfo the Error of his Mafter Tertutlian. For fpeaking of the Order in the ChurCh, Lib. t. Epifl* 8. " God is one, (aitbbet and Chrift is one, and s theFe is one Church> and one Chair or Cathedral founded upon the ' Rock by* the Voice of the Lord, there can no other Altar be confti# c tjited and appointed, nor can there be a newPriefthood_, befides that * one Altar and one Priefthood, whofoever gathereth elfe where doth * fcatter. And, Lib, 5. Epift. l-i« '* cyfrianm% Maximtts, Tlrbanuu and 8 Salonim do judge, that there ought to be one Bifhop in the Catho* 1 lick Church. Lib. 4. Epift. 8. he doth exprefly, and in fpecial, af- fert and this without any Foundation in the Holy Scriptures, " That * the Roman Church ought to be acknowledged by all others, as the * Mother and Root of the Catholick Church. Likeas alfo, ( Lib* 1. Eoij*; y, ) and in his JraBat. de Sbnplicit. Vrxlat. he calls M Peter's Chair * -the* principal Church, from which the Sacerdotal Unity hath its Ori- 'ginal: Chap* II. (pretended) Principles of the Cypriatuc Age. J* * ginal : And frequently* elfewhere, he affirms, that the Church is fomtd- * ed on Peter ; As Lib% i. Ep&. %. Lib. 4. Epifl.y, &c. He hath alfo, upon this points other dangerous Opinions, as, " That the Pail orate, or f paftoral Office, he tyes to an ordinary Succeffion, Lib. 1. Epijt' tf« Alfoi that he denies, '* That the Bifhops and Governours of the Church * can be judg'd, no not in a Council, Lib. 4. Epift. 9. As to Martyrdom, he affirms, Lib. z. Efift. 6. " That Immortality is * purchafed by the Blood of Martyrs. And, Libro de Exhrtatione Max* tyrii, he hath a dangerous .faying, " That Martyrdom is aBaptifmyi ' Grace more Eminent, in Power and Efficacy more Sublime and Ex* -- cellent, in Honour mqre Precious, than the Baptifm of Regenerate ' on. As to Marriage, Cyprian ( 3V*#. 2, de Habitu Virginum ) holds a vioi lenrjudgment againft it. " That the firft Law, according to him, did * command Generation, but the fecond did perfwade Continency. He doth, as it were ex profe(!o, exprefs a fort of Deteftation of the Fe* male Sex. Lib. de Bono Pudicit% he faith, "Virginity doth equal it feif * to Angels, and if we enquire more narrowly, doth even exceed them, * while wreftling in the Flefli, it obtains the Vi&ory, and even againft * that Nature which the Angels have not. In his Sermon of Chrift's Nativity, he prefers *' Continency to Marriage, and fuch Continency « which neceffity doth not enforce, but the Counfel of Perfection per- ' fwades. And what a Foulfom Popifti Savour this* with preceeding Sentences, doth reprefent to us, I need not exprefs. For what relates to Antichrift* the Author of the Tra&at. de Siva & Sion, with Cyprian, doth affirm, in a Signal Dottage, " That Enoch be- ( ing tranflated to a certain Place, is preferved, in order to the Con- * founding of Antichrift. Who defires a joint View of the Errors of Cyprian, may fee them di- gefted and abridged by theCenturiators, in the Inftances enfuing, Cent. 3, Cb. 10. P. 247, itffcj That, following TertuUian, he, for the moft part, reprefents Repentance by the Name of SatufacJions and Exomologetick or Expiatory A8s> to which he afcribes theCaufe of Abjolution andKemifion of Sins. And, in his Sermon de Lapfu, ''The Lord, faith he, is to be ' pleafed and atoned by our Satisfadion. He fpeaks alfo doubtfully and dange oufly, in the fame place, concerning the Repentance and Far* don of the Lapjed. As like wife, from that faying of the \th of John, Behold thou art made whole, Jin no more, he draws a hard and bad Con* fequence, Books nave u«> Caule, JoW ^\*£%£$2£^L«*, with high EloS ment of England, in A"lw«r c° *J ''. F ■ d and Patron of the Epif- gies, ^*^o Scod aliarfthen mud needs acknowledge him : copal Intereft ; Our Ep>twpahans tnen, ^^ confid a Lft Unexceptionable™ cnef m tta Pomt . ^^ what Errors "e afcr.bed to «^^ «* Tb^U P«r«., Li* 8.6. Divine. I°h,s .?°^.f T,»Mi * N-«xri C;fri«»i. P. ;<*> 37°. he 24. which has this Title, Errww Or X*&-"{'fHSifc/,itm *; Faitb affirms, that C;,r*. ^f^' '*„ ^n right -Terms, he affirms, w«b J»W W n(g«i|h» mixing w »y„* ,. ^ Chap. II. (pretended) Principles of the Cyprianic %. #$ 'in the Lord's Supper, upon this ground, that Blood and Water % flow'd from Chrift's pierc'd Side. ?/y, That he held, the Baptifm * Adminiftred by a bad Minifter is not Legitimat ; Which Error is *opp6s'dby the Author of the Sermon De Baptijmo. 4/y, That he ' afSrm'd the Holy Ghoft to be Infcriour unto Chrirt : Thus in the ' Epiftle ad Pompeium. 5/7, That he held Baptifm, to be fimply and /absolutely neceffary unto Salvation (a Popifli Error long fince 'bafrTd by all found Proteftants ) : Upon ground of which Error ' ( faith our Author ) he fell into another, in affirming the Sufferings . the ' penitent Thief, and this cale of neceffity did exclude Baptifm. * 6ly, That he afcribes Remiflion of Sins to the Sinners Satisfa&ion. 'Thus Sttmoxi'de-Lapfis. 7/y, That he enjoyns the Lapfed not to ' ciefpair of Mercy, yet in the fame place he will not have the penitent ' Lapfed to promife themfelves Pardon. And of this Nature ( faith ' our Author ) he hath many, dangerous Affertions in the fame Semon. 'The Stb is what was touched before, vjj&i That he retains, urges and 'defends the Montanifikal Ceremonies, fuch as Ctrifeeratign and Unftion ' after Baptifm, which hereceiv'd from .TertuMani- Thus Lib. 1. Ep- ult ' 9/y, That he is too Hyperholick, and runs too high in the commenda-. * tion of Catibat, or Virginity, wherein he hath confenting with him 'the Author of the Gcelibat of the Clergy, and another Writer of the ' Sermon concerning the Nativity. loiy. That he permitted the Lord's ' Supper, as indiff>en[ably and absolutely necejjary to Salvation, to be given to .* Infants. Serm, de Lapfis. uly, That he held it unlawful for Chri- * frians to wa%e War, L&2. Ep. 2. 12/y, That ( as is above touch'd ) fin a new and odd Devotion he Admonifh'd and Exhorted the Living c to remember him before God after Death, hib. 1. Ep. 1. 13/^ That ' and not before ,\ Which Opinion and Error of his, faith our Author, £ 5^n)?# doth refute. The Errors and Herefies begotten or brought forth in the preceding Age had their fignal (jrowth in this, as would be evident to any who will compare what is obferv'd by the Centuriators in both, who (hew, that the Second Age may be truly called a Seminary of thefe Errors, which overfpread the Church in after times., the Original whereof ihex^sdiice partly fromjudaifm^ partly from Humane Wifdom, and Sophiftical* 8S A Confutation of Jl SV Vindication of the Chap. II. SophifticalPhulofophy* made the Standart and Meafure of Religion, the vulgar Prevalency of Heathenifm* together with the Ignorance of the Scriptures and Sacred Languages, as alio the unconcernednefs of Emperors anent, and hatred of the true Religion. The Herefie of the Catopbryiians was maintain'd and propogated at Rome by Proclus, as Teftmes \Eufebius, Lib. 6. Cap. 21. Jerom has alio fhew'd, that lertuBian in Africa deferted the Church and went over to the Tents and Camp of the Montanifts. Beritlm the famous Doftor in Arabia fell into this Herefie of Artemon concerning Chrift, that he affirmed, * That * Chrift did not exift before he became Man, with refped to a proper 9 and diftina Subftance from that Nature. Jerom thus fhortly repre- fents that Herefie in the Catalogue of Ecclefiaftical Writers, affirming that he fell into that Herefii which denietb Qbri/tu have bad a Being before bis Incarnation. ' , Whofoever mall Read and diligently Weigh the Catalogue of Herefies reprefented by the Centuriators, will find how fruitful a Growth they had in thefe Firft Ages, v. g. That Herefie called Helcbefaitarum, in Arabia, under Philip* concerning God, Cbrifi, and the Holy Spirit, Remi^n of Sins, the Scripture, &c. According to the Relation of Ibeodoret, Epipbanius, Eufebiu*. The Herefie of the Novatians, or Catbarifis, under Decius, concerning Repentance, concerning Salvation, Baptifm, Man tag*. The Herefie called Patriptjflanorum, imputing Sufferings unto God the Father, aifo concerning Chrift, whofe Body they placed in the Sun, &c. The Nepotian Herefie, under Galienus, which prevailed in %;*, and laid the Foundation of the Millenary Error. The Samo/atenian Herefie prevailing in the times of the Emperours Galienus, Claudian and Aurelian, concerning God, concert ning Shrift and the Holy Spirit, &C. The Herefie of the Manic bees in the time of Probus, concerning the Scripture, God and Chrift &c% Whofoever, we fay, mail ponder the Herefies prevalent in thefe times with refpe£ to their variety and multiplicity, how many places, how many famous Do&ors were infeded thereby, how deeply Rooted, and of how long continuance, it may appear one of the prodigious Wonders of our Age that this Pamphteter J. S. has taken the boldneh to prefent the Principles and Pradices of the Cyfrianic Age, as the^uthentick RuJ« to all the Churches in point of Church Government. CHAP. Chap. HL. (protended ) Principles of the Cyprianic Age. %r CHAP. III. Wherein is Demonflrated and wide Appear the abfurd And fraitlefs Endeavour of this Pamphlet er, to prove, from the Writing* or Pratfice of Cyprian, or the Contemporaries alledgd by him, an ZJniverfal Reception of the Diocefan Form and Mould of Church Government in the whole Qhriftian Churches through the World, THE Undertaker of fuch a Work and Defign as this Man has Attempted, all will acknowledge, muft needs be furnifh'd with an exafl Knowledge of the State and Government of all the Churches } in what place of tbe World foever planted and propagated in that Third Age. ThtHiftorians give us account, that the Church planted by the Apoftles and their Succeflfors- was by this time Propagated through the great part of the habitable World, as may be concluded from the Writings of the confiderabk Writers of thefe times. Tertullian, in his Book De Prafcr. Haret. posi- tively affirms, the Church had then continued and Flourished in \sffia, Africa, and Europe. Origen, Horn. 4. on Ezekiel, makes mention of the Churches fpread to the Worlds outmoft bounds. And Eujebius, Lib. 8. Cap. 1. fhews, that before the Perfection moved by ViocleLn the Chriftian Dodrine was vigent among aS Men, both Greeks and Barbarians. In fpecial, the Hiftorians recite the Catalogue of the Churches Flou- rishing in this Age. As firft, through Afia, to wit in Jerufalem and Gaw, Eufcbius, Lib. 8, Cap. 1 ?#, Many Learned Do&ors, fuch as Theoclifius, Domnut, theotecntts, and others, make mention of the Church of Cefarea. There was at this time a Church in tyre and Si don, as Witnefs Eujebius^ Lik.S. Cap. 15. who mentions a certain Tyrantiont Whom he calls Biihop of 7$re, and one Zenobius, whom he calls a Paftor or Presbyter of Sidon. The fame Eufebius, Ub. 7. Cap. 29. makes* mention of iliuftrious Churches in Syria. Epphanius makes mention of the Church of A&fopotamia*. Archilam and Manillas fiouri/hed £>o&ors of 83 A ConfHtdtlon of J. Sx Vindication of the ' Chap. III. of this Church, to wit, in Cafcbara of Adefopotamia. Eufebius alfo makes mention of the Church of Laodicea. And that there were a good number of famous Churches in Syria, may appear by the Hiftory of the Perfecution under Diode/tan. Eufebius a!fo mentions the Rbofenjtan Church. Lib. 6. (Sap. 12. There was alfo in the Metropolis oiCilicia a Church, viz. in tarfus, as Witneffeth Nicepborus, Lib. 6, Cap. ^2% and Eufebius, Lib, 7. Cap. 28. Vinctntius alfo Writes, £,/£. 11. Cap. $2, The Church of Perga in Vamphilia under D*««/ furnimed Martyrs. The Hiftories alfo make mention of the Churches of Epbe/us, Smyrna, to r have continued in this Age in Jonia. As alfo the Church of Sardis and oiTralkis, the Church of Philadelphia and Aiagmfia, mentioned by the Hiftorians in the preceeding Century. There continued alfo- a Church in Pbrygia at HierapolU^ even from the Apoftles times. As alfo in Lamfacus, Vinctntius recites the Martyrs Suffering under Decius. DUnyfius Alexandrinus afuu Eufeb. Lib, 7. Cap, 7. makes mention of the Church at Synada a City of Tbrygia There were alfo famous Martyrs in Nicomedia of Bitbyma^ Eufeb. Lib, 8. Cap. 6. who alfo^nentions in a Writing to Stephanus Bifliop of Rome, the Churches in Pcntus, Bitbynia and Galatia. That there was alfo an antient Seat of the Church at Ancyra of G.tlatia is evident by Eufebius's Narration, Lib. 5-, C*/> ~*7, Tertullian makes mention of the Churches in Cappadocia in his Writing ad Scapulam. That there were alfo Chriftians in Melitena, a Region of Armenia, Situated upon Euphrates, the Hiftory of the Perfecution under Dioelejlan makes evident, apul Eufeb, Lib. 8 Cap, 6. The Magdeburgers alfo affirm that there were Churches among the Indians, whereof they mention fome reftor'd by Pantenus. They alfo m^ke mention, that Vincentius relates out of the Martyrologie, Lib. 11. Cap. ^2, That there were Chriftians found in Perjia at the time that Decius raif'd up Perfe- ction, fertullian alfo Writes, Lib. contra Jud^eos, That Parthians,Medesi and Elamites did believe in Chrift. Eufebius alfo makes mention of the Church in Arabia, Lib. 6. Cap% 21. and 3 ; . Let us proceed from Afis to Afric. And in Egypt firft there occurs the Church of ^/f**» which in the zd. Book is the 7th in number, is a clear and evicted Proof. In traceing the fpread of Chriftian Churches, if we pafs over with Hiftorians from Afric to Europe, we will find Teftimonies anent a multitude of famous Churches in almoft all confpicuous places in this Age. tertullian makes mention of the Churches in Greece, Lib, de vel. Virg. NUephorm makes mention of the Church of Athens, Lib. $1 cap. 2I Tertullian alfo mentions, E#fc de Praf. adv. H*ref. the Church ol \Gcrinth in Peloponnefus. And there is no doubt, that thefe two eminent Churches extended themfelves largely towards places adjacent, tertullian alfo makes mention of the Church of fbllippi in Macedonia, as alfo of Theffalonica. So doth Nkepborus, Lib. 8. Cap, 6. of the Church of Byzantium. The Centuriators tilfo affirm that there were exiftent in this Age in the reft of thracia Churches, namely at Ancbialum and *Debeltum% It is alfo probable, that the Dalmatian and Illyrian Churches were exiftent in this Age when Conffantine the Emperor conveened the Synod in Sardica of lllyrium. That there were remaining Churches in Italy , as in Rome, the frequent Synod conveened there againft Novatus is an evident Proof, whereof Eujebius Writes, Lib. 6. Gap. 4?, Another Synod was alfo gathered againft PopsMarcellinus the Apoftate! If we (hall give Faith to Vincentius his Speculum we will find alfo hi feveral other places the Church of God entertained, at Verma Beneventum, Spoietum, in Lucania, and other places. Of which places he recites the Martyrs, Lib. n, & 12. fertullianztfo, Lib.con.Jud makes mention of the Church among the Gauls. As alfo of the Church at Orleans and Lyons, Cyprian, Lib. 3. Ep. 13. The Church of Burdeaux is evident from the Epiftle of Martialis, Vincentius alfo in his Speculum, making mention of the Martyrdoms of this Age,doth rehearfe many places of France, wherein the Martyrs were apprehended and condemned to Death, Lib. 12. (gap. 10. As for the Spaniards, lertul- lian, to other Churches which he names, adds alfo the Spanifh! Lib. con. Jud. where he affirms that in all the Spani(l) Coafts and divers Pro- vinces of the Gauh the Name of Chrift doth Reign, Not to mention the Churches rehearfed by Gyprian, Lib. 1, Epift. 4. Vincentius alfo rehearfes feveral Cities in Spain wherein there were Churches fettled fuch as Tarracona> Emerita, Ca/ar-Auguftai Complutum, called now Alcala de Hmres wish others. In which Cities he makes mention of M Martyrs *>■ A Confutation of J.SV f&JG&feJ* of the Chsp. HI; Martyrs who fufFered at this time under Vakrian M&OioJeJUn, Lib. n. mt I2'L * -.-a. rdnrches. we have the TefUmonies of Antient J* thr ^tt^^edT, Joannes M'jor, and others, touching Klv&«£#C riffilmty, and the eftablifhing oi Churches IhLf -As afo in J«W, as mall be after made appear. Tertalhan, l.t i * / mentioneth alfo the Churches in G«r».«»/, F,»«„t«* Sfc "i!^i/' So« Chrittian Martyrs at *£««. the M*. m alfo, Ui. 12. mentio fo tfhaU Read the Gentunators, will finrmar/moe^es, where the Chriftian Church was propagated in this Age. evident, even to a Demonftration ( I mean as far Since therefore tis ev went, eve was p j, d and 35 l!?e ,%h °lH'S?ryf,^n fach a vaft Extent through the habitable W^X^T^^^S^' fAe would (hew World in this Age , ""« * ~, f r;n this Centroverfie and himfelf indeed a Her,, not ameer Ito/ #. « » |g Debate ) to prove and ^kyut, that rf ^ rf whatever places fettled^nthu Age • jp^ fuch E i(eopacy. theDiocefanForm and Mould i£ ^ ^ ^.^ M 1 1 TaD SnVnla ?m had many '?*», or -Presbyters under hi, Govern.. fucb a Utoceian rr*tU¥ " ,. ' tL • Lord n precartous or vicarious min,, ^'"^i^Zr'^M )tf«cb\ *H» he defers y.*„, who -7!f^fFoVmr;'nd Mould of whole Epifcopacy he pre* Cyprian h.mfelf the to rm thtAMimticKSmtUr and Pattern fentstamany pUcesof hiswmpnieia zW«M **4 Priti Sand) on tbe bitbtit Lid, the Balance of Government, ^ffrf'&Z/ovn Phrafiologie: Slep n Pinacle *'*?"*$ J^ '*%$, ,, chief and properly and Sacerdoiss tenet [Mm, f'fV^K Jui ,bnef tbe (ame u the DioceJ. frimardy.ofthe D.oe e the me «V f I mtt['whom upon this Ground ,hM 1 ^/ I Ltle^&tL, U, hath tbe Supreme tar of Sacra- Kingly MauHy «rlf'£"*L \0 whm mh tbe Leyflative Power over T J VI t"f,feVice7e' %«H> and primarily competent All rtrl p" -ftLof the V% te ^undertakes to prove from the Pr.n- 6» 7- > • -„^„mlv.nt «oon him to prove, that the Chriftiaii Moreover 'tis incurnben ^pon m | ^ ^ fueh Qr Chap. III. (pretended ) Principles of the Gyprknic Age. 9 1 or giving Suffrages in Synods and Ecclejiajlick Councils^ wherein he is bold to aiTert, that Presbyters or Payors bad no Authority above the Vulgar ■ f whereof afterward ). That the Chriftian Ghurch, I fay, was thus abfolutely and univerfally Governed, this Pamphleter hath not, nor ftiall ndver bs able to make appear, by any fhadow of good Confluence, from the Writings oi Cyprian or Contemporary Bi- fhops. For, i. Giving, not granting, that the Ghurch over which Cyprian did prefide and others mentioned in his Epiftles, had been of fuch a Diocefan Form in point of Government, as he alledgcs, by what Gonfequence fhall he prove from this, that the Chriftian Churches fpread through the whole World were caff into the fame Form and Mould, and did concur and confent to' fuch a Government ? Such a Conclu- fion cannot but be expofed to Mockery and have Folly Written in its Forehead, fince the far different State and Gircumftances of other, Churches might be fuch, as did not only require, but render neceftary a Frame of Government different from a Diocefan, .wherein the Bifhop Is Cloathed with fuch an Abfolute Power as he alleges 5 Yea that in point of Faft it was fo, if Credit may be given to fome Patrons them« (elves of Epifcopacy, fliall afterward appear. ily, Whoever fhall ferioufly ponder the State and Condition of the Churches mentioned, will be forc'd toacknowledge,thatmanyof them, at leaft,were,in point of Government, of a Frame and Conftitution different from the Dio- cefan mentioned ,* They being fo ftated in point of Remotenefs of Bounds, the fmall Number and narrow Circuit of ProfeiTbrs where the Chriftian Do&rine was receiv'd, over whom, notwithstanding, there were Paftors and Ecclefiaftick Governours or Presbyters eftabli^ ihed, whofe mutual Counfel and Minifterial Correspondency in Ghurch Government and Confiftorial or Synodal Union in the Churches Concerns and Affairs in fo far as could be obtained, he can - with no fhadow of Reafon deny j And that therefore by no imagi- nable Gonfequence they could admit of fuch Diocefans with fuch a Pompuous9 and Majeftical Superintendence over Paftors and People as he pleads for. The Learned Clark/on, in his Book, entituled, A defcription of the "Primitive Epifcopacy, chap. 2, makes appear, that in Dorps, or little Villages, there were Biihops conftituted, who, according to the then ufual Form of fpeaking, had this Title of Bijb&ps ; Such Villages as were Hydrax, Palabifca, Olbiumi Zygrif, Several fuch Inflances are adduc'd by him to clear this ,• That in the Breviary ofMiktius, wherein he gives Alexander an account whatBifhops he had made ,• Among the M 2 "reft A Confnution of J. » Vindication- of the Chap. Ill ^~ . • («• .■„..,, in Athandf. ApL t. pag. 612, And a reft there is Y'fjJlTtte Epifcopal -Seat of 2W&, as Athmtfm. nUrn* called Andromene was tnc ^piiwyp # > y $ormsu Which twolaft ( with divers others wmch I will pais by) £e°n aU probability Villages, face there are no fuch Cmes d.lcove. are in an pi j yj^ge according to Stefbanm, and it had r,Cd 'n-En atotee M'oniuf (ox the MeUuan Fadion, and PWfor tyoBilhopjatonce >,*<»' SuntarHru, was a very fmall and tlK S ViU ge iha A " was made Bifhop of containing fo contemptiDle Village tnaw/ch there bgfo a$ Afcw> few lnhatimms.thaMher^ wa^nef ^^ rf eh^rftell us, that aCu^! i'«- ** fe»krdA ^It^i- 3 Topatbv fo£*&* fmall Hamlet. Anonym, mt. Chjf. pag. U>- lo pals Dy leveral lucn ChuErr "" 14. 3. A^d thaf rgnew Epifcopal Pleaders wil. neJs have thefe Bdets to be Bilhops, he takes notice of the places ment.o- Z r»o ii. where thele Bilhops were conft.tuted tm. A -«4 , -ZlkrL \ni Li Sra. Antiocb, fays he, tho' the Metropolis of *"?."• v^fwLs not fo great, but that all the Inhabitants could meet fofethVto hTa the Word is. « * 44- «-- to *«*• « «»« a fmall togetner to neai Sttpbmui, is rp.u.r, a Fort, or Sme^f iA'wnich 5** calls not a City but the Seat of Came 01 isam , which js pM&)>MtV Aufira< and **"? ! tf ,1 wSi but a VHage, W. Lib. ;. pag. iia. Hereby tohhe^app ar t£t in Scripture fmall places do pafs under the Name of Citfes , Dtrh a Fort or Grange, and I0ta are called Cues olTv«»^ Aa .4. 6. Adding, that where , there „ a Church, whe- detthe place be fmall or great, there, according to Scripture account he e ought to be a Bilhop. And Hkewifc that the Apoftle Ordain'd • „% -B wiiuw. and other places as inconhderable, and left the StW » yA^olii Example and Authority He adds fh« ArZidlrm giving an account of all the C ties in P.fiJ.a, reckons but Eleven whereas there are Twenty two B.lhopr.cks in the Cat*. tone of U , Sr«*. Lib. .1. p. 392. See many nftances of this nature tnfouah the reft of this Chapter, and in fpecial what Advantage this Learnt Author makes of Prelatifis conftitut.ng ice ■ Brihop, in Cute, ArfWW. who Wrote in V.fpf«ti "me, a little _ after the ApojHes Death found but Fourty Cities there, (only the Memory of Sxty Sore ) SftA-i. giv« an account of the fame Number. So that Temoft of the Fourty called Cities were little better than Villages. Smbo, faith he, (hews that cm had ?w nw* M- I* W< ?«• Chap. III. ( pretended ) Principles of the Cyprianic Age. « * but only Three of any great Note, and of thefe Three one loft its ™at nefs before Titus knew it. s1**"* Moreover, from the ConfTitution offuch Bifhops, and their De" fcription exhibited by approv'd Authors in Cyprus, drmtnis, Bontul" Lycaoma* Bythinia, Cafpadocia, vizt Bifhops of fuch a Nature Form and Mould as were thofe of whom we Read, AEl. 14. who were plac'd and Ordain'd k*t l**Mtnt*, or Ghurch by Church, this Learned Author makes appear, that the Biihops of that time were oblig'd to perform all Paftoral Duties to their Flock, and before the growing Corruption of Government he doth demonftrat,that they flood eneae'd to a Perfonal Infpeclion and Watching over them. Of which Infpechon he particularly recites. thefe Parts or inftances, Chap 7 *** 179, &e* r J% r ** 1. They were obliged to take diligent heed unto, and Watch over the Reception of all Members of the Church, viz,. That thev were endowd (vith fuicable Qualifications of Church Members Likeas n our Church the fame Office and Duty is incumbent upon Paftors o* H-v r Cr¥tgfZ™ 2n^ Par0ches- , This ^ proves from Eufito, ckVtta Conjiannm Lib. 4. Cap 64, 2!yt The Primitive Paftor or Bifhop wasobhgd to Note, and for that end with all Cautious Dili- gence to obferve fuch as did walk Drforderly, to Rebuke them alfo and tne matter fo requiring, to feparate them from the Congregation', that is, in a GofpeiMethod,and upon Siippofition of their ContSmacv. 5/7, To undentandexaaiy the Temper and Condition of fuch as wei e in the State and Condition of Penitents, what Fruits of true Repen- tance they did evidence, and according as the publick Profeffien of Satisfaction did require, to lengthen cut or abridge thQ Courfe and P/?gr?fs °f their Cenfuie. Concil. Nic. Can. 11. Z The v were oblig'd diligently and by fluent Preaching to Feed the Flock to Adraimfter the Sacramenrof the Lord's Supper in the full Conlreof tion f^^coronm^ ^ToWaTch^ Souls of all Members of the Church, giving all Diligence in order to Christ iHs°W^ge ther£0f^S Tb??g t0 giVe a^^t "hereof to Ghrift as Jt is, Mb. 15. i7. Jfil Lib. y. Bp. ;2?. frofper tiVita tontempk Lib. 1 Cap. 20. citing alfo to this purpoVe ChrjCf who upon that place Heb. ij. afferts that his Soul trembled aft he ReadW rhW L^a &A That °ne T»Wc only was in one Church fetapm for the Admimftration and Celebration of the Lucharifl. Thfc Cuftom he tells us, prevailed long. The Device of Communicating cttetw,fe than Ferfonally at one Table with the Paftor or hilcpfnd fading the Confuted Sread to others, that they might no^feem excluded A ConfuM'M of J S> Vinticttlon of the Chap, in. . j.4 t*nm rhe Communion of the Church, he tells us, U a novel excluded rromT\homT £ firft Author AMftvk 3. > o," Rme, Ire:t,I°,n atofdingtoB.;;:(-«;'sreckoni,fe. ^ *WnPuba<4 t" 4 L were" tbefe Bithops to have a Regard to the Condition of l/w;v..ing5 v.* b moreover to make their Admonitions pro- •*" fn^ui abf- to the private State and Circumftances ofevery Pe.fon, Kfch^nd many dU are reckon^ up %f^™c™*™J indauuT'-ttew was no Bilhop of Paftors, or Inferior Bifhops, or fuch as did arrogat a Brecedency over many Churches united in one *S; Man of Sound Judgment will deny, that there were Chri, ffiafctacta fettledTplce! of the World, the Knowledge where* o hath not cotrie either to our Time or Ears and far lefs pubhck T^b e of the Succeffion of Paftors or Biihops. What Perfon who has It a B°azen Forehead, will be bold to affirm, that the fluttered Mo- nnmem of Antiquity now extant, or the rotten tragmentsof Hifto. SSt m this point an «*. and K,^ Jj^' «'*** in the Hiftorical Accounts the ^ " rftrute railed theie^ S^TO^^*^ This wil! be convincingly evi: d'nt;Whaht1heS^ of anVe'trctes in this Age was, in point of l What the btate 01 an , and therefore enra^S^^^-ft and afbfolrlyt 15 C j AS inHre Hiftorv of that Time. And even fuppohng the pr0ved, and inure Hi* to rjro no£ jnfaUib, as ., evi. Hiftory, te«« ,sJUtThis PAuthor-s' Affertion and Deflgn, as dent from .what is i* id. *h ^ b( vM§ wM .„ tbj§ VTA fG^nlUo hisProoVArguments and Inftances Aik£ rrnuateaad levelled to this Scope, elfethey f.gnifie nothing , • muft be adequate aaaievei be found of a Form of Government So that if tawCW man oe Argument falls to ^ »T nnceaU doknowjhat.in a Queftion.fpechliy of thisNa- the Ground, fince ; all «° *2. . * , overthrows an Univerfal Affirmative; ture a contrary ^£g™ en >* * ^ Affertion ft ds good , Sl^^Sfii- o« Churches not of the Diocefan Form , Chap. Iff. ( pretended ) Principles of the Cyprianic Agi «g For ( befides that fueh Inflates can' be exhibited ) the Affirmative and the Proof confequently, lies at his Door, which, nodoubi hlwUl perform al 2lr, 'Tis certain, that, as many Writings of the Ancients are corrupted and interpolated, and hat very few, if any. have come lincere and pure to our Hands, nor could the/, ^/"T"! ^°nl?»ra"Ve^ butLa Novel Inwntioni fo,many excel' ent Men, both Manners and others in every Age, never wrote any thing, nor inclined thereunto , And who will be bold to fay, tnaf, w every Corner of God's Habitable Earth, where a Church was ga- thered and conflicted, either Members or Officers concern'd 7hJn / dil« Z H r*hanife • Mt t0 P^'ent to P°«"*y the Sta "and P ,„: ' ciples of the Church, in their Time and Place, and fpecially in point of Government ? And tho- a Man mould arrive at the Boldneft to **»S: what a N°» Wri of Impudence were it, 0 aflert! *a m ^efe Writings are come to us pure and imire ? How Mank and Mutilated the .Humane and H.rtorical Monuments are of the Firft Age, after the AwA lv hAreStaesol D.»£ too AC&nptdthnof].^sFmdicdtionoftbe Chap. III. p * cc Thar, if we believe Philojhrgias, the Get hick Churches were < planted anc- fem«d by Presbyters for above 7° Years • For io long ' it wa^ {rom t ; Mfft ConreiTion to the Time of Ulpbilat whom he c makss heir j?>ji Si/^p. Adding, that there's great probability, That • where Churches were planted by Presbyters, as the Church of Francs * bv Androebius and Benignus, that afterward, upon the lncreafeofChuu* «ctU and Presbyters to rule them, they did, from among themfelve% • choofe one to be as the Bifhop over them ,• For we no where read, * faith he, in thofe early Plantations of Churches, rhey fent toother •Churches, to derive Epifcopal Ordination from them,- Clearly c afferting their Original Frame to have been oppofite to the Hierarchy, c and abfolutely averfe from any Acknowledgment of a Divine or Apo? ■ ftolical Right thereof. r „ . , ,. ,, n L A „, \ To proceed to other Inftances, St. Patrick, who is called the Apoftle of the hifi is reported to have placed in Irc/WBifhops by Hundreds, in the firft Plantations of that Church : Witnels Ujjer 4e Hyb. Relig. P. y9. And that all thefe were of the Diocelan Order, and Moulded in thac Frame no Man, in his ri^ht Wits, will be bold to affirm. Nemtut reckons up no fewer than 36 y Bifhops there. This alfo is worthy of Obfervation, that the BHhops and Churches* over which they were fet runs to the fame Number and Reckoning. Varkfon^ in his Print. Epifc. P. 40. proves this equal Number of Bilhops and Churches from Bernard and Baronius. Bernard reports, That, when Malachias went to Inland almoft 600 Years after St. Vatric^ Anno [ell. iijos theBifhops were confticuted in this Method and Order, viz,. That every fmgle Church had its Bifhop. Thus Bernard in Vita Malacb. Baronius ad An. iicq No*. 16, relates from the Writings of Langfranc to larlacbus King of Ireland, that, in Villages and Cities, ( which, no doubt, at that time, were in Ireland very i'rnall ) there were many Bilhops Qr- *Like"wife in Africa, ( however our Pamphleter may oppofe ) even in the Time of Cyprian, there was, in the Council of Carthage, ever which he prefided, a Multitude of Bilhops, and, no doubr, a far great- er Number, placed therein ,• So that no confidering Perfon can ima- gine they were all ot the Diocefan Form and Mould, confidering, fhat* in Africa, there were, at this time, few Chriftians, befides thofe that* were in the Roman Colonies : And the Jurifdidion of thefe Bi« Chops was confined to fmall Villages, by the Confeflion of ?amelius himlelf. Moreover, a long time after this, while the Perfecution of the Vandals was raging, as is related by Viclor Uticen. Lib. 1. after the Death of the Bifhop of Carriage, in the Ztugetw ajid Proconfular Province^ Ctetpr :Sfe (pretended) Principles <$ the GyprJaiiic Age. yog Province*, the Number of the Ordinary Bifliops was 164. Others recite mare. From this great Number and Multitude of Bimop? which may be demonftrated by feveral other Inftances, 'tis convin- cingly evident, they could not be alio! the Dioceian Form and Or* der. Hyljn hitafelf ( Cofmgr. Pa& 342. J mews, that thefe Irifh Bifliop^ for the molt part, were potfefFed with no greater Sallary, than a little piece of Land, fufficient for the Pafturage of two Mi'lk-Kine.' In Africa there was a Bifliop's Seat in every little Village, to which his Church and Infpe&ion was connVd. Sets rbornd. Eccl. Jurifd. In* vefli£. Pag. ?;. In Augufliris time, in the five Provinces of Afthk there were no fewer than 900 fcifhopricks. Several Inftances to this purpofe may be feen with the Learned Clarkfon% Lib. PradP. 41, 42 43. 3Tis obfervable to this purpofe, what our Learned Mr. Jamefon offers, ( Naz. Qmr. P. 32. ) fpeaking of the great Number of the Bi* {hops in Africk, having told us out of Vitler Uticenfo, That thtre were in the Zeugetan or Proconfular Province, 164 Bifiops, he faith, others reckoning more, adding, that this was but a fmall part of what the Romans poffeffed in Africk, that there being few Chriftians there, the Old Africans being called bv the fame Victor [ Gentiles, ] and many of the Romans themfelves not having yet embrae'd Ghriftianity. Nowfub- duce, faith he, from chat fmall Number of this Xeugetan Province, who were Chriftians,the many Arrians, and other Hereticks and Schifma'tick? whom thefe Bifhops did not/reckon as a part of their Flocks.and furely there (hall fcarce be found fo nuny as to make up above 164 Parodies. Adding further, that Do&or Maurice afferts, ( Pag. 164.) that all the African Biihops in Cyprian's time, could not have fuppiied the Dioceffes of one Province in the Fifth or Sixth Century.. Upon this point likewife we may adduce the foremention'd Impar- tial Witnefs, Dr. "Burnet, prefent Bifliop of Sal* bury in his Vindication; of Scott if* Prelacy ,Obfervation on the firit Apoftoliek Ganor />, co ci- who mews, in Confirmation of what we have faid, and 'from 'the* Authors mentioned, f That Scotland from the time of its Scnverfion to the 1 Faiih, Anno 265, until the Tear 450, was Govern d by our Culdees- * without Bifhops. He tells us likewife, that in Carthage they wanted a * Bifuop 24 Years, when Hxndereck invaded them, and a Biftop being '.by him offered* providing the Arrians might have the free Lxercife "of their Religion, they anfwered, Ecclefianbn dekftatur Epijcopum habere * that their Church deiir'd and valued no BHhops. So Victor, £ife 2! * Bmfi Vand. 'Tia true,, the Doctor adds a Patcheihent, upon tbejeterms] 4 hut 1 02 A Confutation of J. rSV Vindication of the Chap. III. but there is no fuch thing in the Author. He tells us likewife from Theodores Bift. Lib. 4. Gap. 2,. That when ^te,« was dnvcno« of^iwA, ZW*™, and*W», two Presbyters Ruld that Church He tells us likewife, in Confirmation of what is laid, that the Gotbtck Churches were Planted and Conflicted for 70 years together with- out a Bifhop. He tells us likewife, that, in the beginning, the Bijhcps whole Charge was caff J Paroichia a Parocb, and by the foam ^Ignatius its Efi files, effieciaVy that to Smyrna, it would appear that there was tut one Church, at leaf but one place, where there was one t^ltar and Comma? nion in each of thefe Paroches : For he faith ( Ignatius fcil I.) there was one Bifhop, one tburch, andone Altar. And Cyprian phrafeth the Erecling of a Schifm by Erettingofau Altar a^ainfl an Altar, which feems to import there wot but one Altar in the Bifhofs Parocb. And whether the Dodor makes not here thefe fir [I Bijhops, ( and in fpecial according to Ignat'm ) eerPafiors of Pancbes, is left to the Readers Judgment. In the Age immediatly fucceeding that of the Apoftles, no doubt; the Number of Chriftians was greater than in the Firft Age J Notwith- ftandine, in the beginning of the Fourth Age, in great Cities, which in Amplitude furpaffed Ephefm it felf, there weie no greater number of Chriftians than could meet for Worfhip in two places at moft. Con* jiantine the Great contain'd all the Chriftians of his Royal City of Constantinople in two Temples. VilTripart.W -Lib. 2. Cap. 8. in Gen Exam pag. 299. Poor Dorps had their Bifhops, as is clear in Hiftory Na*isnzM a little Town, or rather little Village, near Ctfaret 1 was all the Epifcopal See, or Paroch rather, oftheFam'd Gregory Nazianzen. In Cbry form's time, as appears, Horn %. in Aft. the Bifhop was fet over one Town or City ; Yea among the Arabians, and thofe of Cyprus, Sozomen flieweth, Hi ft. Eccl Lib. 7. Cap. 19. That the Bifliops were in the fmalleft little Villages ^which contain d their whole Charge, Accordingly the 4'* Can°ii of the Council of tarthagcMcnet by Gratian in the Body of the Decrees, D,fi. 41. Decrees, thvat Epifcopm non longe ab Eccltfia, vilem SupeUeftilem, &c. That the Bifhop have his little Manfe not far from the Church, that he have mean Houfliould Stuff, &c. Ev Dignitatis [ua AuBsritatem, Fide & Merit* tuarat, and purchafe Authority to his Office or Dignity by Faith and good Works. Socmen, Lib.6.Cap. 16. Relatesof Bafihus Matnm Bifhop of to/area that he anfwer'd the Emperors Prefed, who Threaten'd the Confifcation of his Gocds, thus, Horum nihil me cru* dare pote/l, eauidem opes non habeo, praterquam lactram Veflem & paucdt Libros] None of thefe things can trouble me, I have no Richer but a torn Garment, and a few Books. Chap. III. ( treUn^ ) Principles of the Cyprianic Age. i 03 If it be Obje&ed, that lome Inftances addue'd are without the limits of the Cyprianick Age ,• 'Tis Anfwered, 1. That Mr. Clarkfon, Blondel, and others draw their firft Meafures from the times of the Apo- ftles,-and -their Conftitution of Ghurches, as is evident to fuch as do perufe them, zly, J. S. pretends an exa& Conformity of the Prin- ciples and Pra&ice of the Cyfrianic Age to the Original and Apoftolick Gonfticution of Churches ,• So that if a Difconformity be found, the Foundation of his Argument is crufh'd. ;/y, The inftanced Confti- tution of Churches is own'd by the chief Episcopalians, and many of the Antients, as Primary and Apoflolical. Bifliop Burnet holds, that in the beginnings the Bifhop^s whole Charge was call'd *^'«*/<*, and .this by the ftrain of Ignatius Epiftles. as is above touch'd. See the fame afferted by Wittet *, who owns the Identity * syriopf. Pap: of Bijbop and Presbyter in the Apoftles times. Morton, Afol. ^«. 5 • %*/?. 3 \ Catk Lib. r. pag. n8. Bifhop Jewel, againft Harding, pag. tit. SnUntfieet, Inn. pag. 392. 39;, 394, 395-. There is a Catalogue of Greek and Latin Primitive Dolors cited by Medina to this purpoleand Scope, (as he is cited by BeVarmin, Lib a. de Cler. Cap, if. ) fuch as Ambrofe, %Augu$in% Sedulim, Primafius, Cbryfoftomus, lbeodoret3 Oecumeniusy TbeopbyJaBus. See feveral of thefe Teftimonies fet down as agreeing with Jerom by Stows Stnenjis, BibI, Santh Li), 6. Annoti £19, 324v C BAP, It04 A Confutation of J< $? Vindication of the Chap. IV. C H A P. IV, iVhenln k made appear, that the. Exigence of Epifcopal Government in the Cyprianic, or Third Age, thofuppasd, k abfelutely fiort of proving either a Divine, or ApofioUck Right, and the Obli- gation, of the Go(f>el Churches to he Conform J to that Epifcopal Pattern. Wherein f$ alfo made appear, that J. S. is involved in unextricable Abfurdities, whether he Argue from the Principles andPra&ice of the Third Age [imply and abfolutely conftderd, or • fiom the Reception of Epifcopal Government therein under the Notion of an Apofiolical or Divine Right. Thk Pamphleters abfurd Extenfion of the Epifcopal Jurifdi&ion, and Deprejfion of the Pafioral Office is noted. The Difference alfo is Stated, in feveral Inftances, betwixt the Cyprianic Bijhtpj defcrib'd by him, and the truly ApofioUck and Scripture Bifiop. Tis alfo made appear, that he hath Impeached the DoUrine of the Reform d Churches in two fignal Points, fcil. The Perfection of the Scripture, and Fallibility of the Church. S E C T. I. Wherein is evlncd J. $'/ ahfurd Arguing whether from the meer Vraclice of the Church, or the Receftion of Prelacy under the Notion of Apofiolical Right ; .[And that either, or both Grounds are utterly Unferviceable, to fupport bis fynclufion, and the Scope intended by him, f JL MONGST the many that have Written on this Subjetf, as Patrons of the Epifcopal Caufe, who have endeavour'd to evince a Divine Right of Prelacy, this Pamphleter (as we have already obferv'd ) is the firft who hath pro- ceeded in this Method, and pleaded that Caufe from fucha Principle and Topick as that of the Principles and Pradice of the GmkniQ or Third Age. That his voluminous Pamphlet, in the whole — ~ 5Cfies ri. Chap. IV. (pretended ) Principles of the Cyprianic Age] l0- Series thereof, levels at this Scope, tho' he fometimesfeems do diffemble. it, is evident to any that confidently Reads it. In the very Title Page he pretends to State and Difcufs the main Gonhoverfie between the Presbyterians and Epifcopalians, which, all do know, is anent a Divine or Apoftolkk Right of either the one or other Government. He boaftsVlfo of overthrowing Mr* Rule'/ main Defences, or Subterfuges as he calls them j And 'tis certain that Mr; Rule Appeals to Scripture Decifan in this point. He alfo /hews, in the fame Title Page, that he has demon- ftrated Epifcopal Government to have been Universally delivered to be of Divine Right in the Days of Cyprian; And he will not difown it that he intends m being delivered from the Apoftles and by them, 'nay as clear and pofuive in this Affertion ,• Nor will he fay, that this Divine fygbt was a fupposd only, and not a real Divine Right, upon this Ground- Which brings to Mind the Mould of the Argument us'd by Kins Gharles, in his Conference with_Mr. Hendetfen, viz. "That nothing - maY he further made appear from the scripture he is bold to prefix, Tit. i. IX OvU M «wrj/x<«>. And this Pamphleter will not pretend, that' the meer Fiadice of the Third Age will fijence Presbyterians Pleadings from Scripture without any prior Ground. This may 6e alfo further con- firm'd from the high Elogies he puts upon this Third Age, €hap i viz. That it was an Age affording no Secular Temptations towards Epifcopal Treeminency, an Age of great Men, ajjording many excellent Records &c C whereof above ). And in a Word, let the Elogies he bellows upon Epifcopacy, and his Seditious Challenge faften'd upon the Governours of this Nation in the prefent Eftabli/hment, Tag. 5 34, m of his Pamphlet, be duely weighed, and this will be evident beyond Contra- diction. So that, either this Proof of Divine Right muft be the Scope he drives at in this Pamphlet, or, it mult be a Chimera, unperceptibie and fluauating in the Spatium Imaginarium of his own phantaftiek Brain The Sum,therefore,of what he offers in this large Fardel of Teftimonies may be redue'd to this Argument and Syllogiim : «f If m the Third * or Cyprimic Age,the EpifcopalGovernment did obtainsand was receiv'd ' in all the Churches, as delivered from the Apoftles, or of Apoftoiick ' Original ; Then it is to be receiv'd and acknowledge by all the * Churches of Chrift, as of Divine Right : But this Government was thus Univerfally receiv'd by all the Churches of the Third, or Cyprianic . Age } Ergo, This Government is to be embrae'd and receiv'd by all B the Churches, as of Divine Righr^ The Affumption of this Argument P we tc-6 A Confmthn of J. & VindicMoH of the Chap. IV. we have difcufs'd in .he preceeding. Copter The ftrength of the Major Propofition we (hall now enqmre into. And Id., '" 'heConh- fonrr nf Truth denv the Conneaion thereof, and lhall uemonnrat, fhat thi, Jea Founday.fon andTopick of his whole Pamphlet, bear.ng the whole" FabHek and Snperftrafture thereof is Rotten ™*K™°£ and muft needs f,nk and perim by us own ^J^l^X*^^ Afferdon then is .his, That the HyDoAefii of i heE» en«°* th« EpifcopalForm of Government » the Third Age can ««*«£<£• ^ Divine nor Apoftoiick Right even admitting that u wm ««wd «rt Anoftolick O.-iainal j And that, confequently, there lies no UDiigation upon the Chutes to be conform to that Pattern upon tb» G7UThen, I thus Argue, in general ;. If the premised Argument or Conneaion of the Major Propofmon be Mid, then the Tie £ Cham of .his Conneaion muft either flow from, the &™*f*^%,$£ felf,and abfolutely confider'd as luch ; Or. it m ft flow f ^ the ^on to r mity of this Praaice to 'he Apoftolick and Divine Pattern inatm« Right or Obligation flows from .he Churches Pr^/'mp$'n^njt it felf confided, no Man of common benfe and M™%£%£ ™ f Pamphleter will be bo'd to aflert becaufe of the many grol andevt dent Abfurdities attendingfuch an Affert.on : \ et, W°"C°f ™SX"°U" of this Man's Confidence, and the Strain aw Series of "»^ Argu mentt in this voluminous Pamphlet made up of ? HumtwTrt t.mon «, in the Third Age, I (hall upon this Branch of *e ™mac ™£,w appear by fomeReafons, that no ihadow of an Obhga ion can Ho* from this Praaice, tho' fuppos'd, and that J. S. himleli « palpably in confident with himfelf if affertingromucn. ieadine Rule in this Queflion, or by an Imnnfick ^JS^ then, of neceffity. the Churches Praa.ce muft be of this . Na tun and Authority, and thus Decif.ve in every Somroverfie « «" « , n "«• Interpretation of the: Scrip u*. a«d ol ^^ ow Mr Faith, in ment in fpecial, and thus i Men man n ^ exprefs Contradiaion to the ^^'fc *Xlfm of jnr J*r> fir have Vcminim ever pur Fattb, iaith he, m -«r, "rJJ £ Faith % Art ye *«* Moreover, »pon «hn C««nd P^0^,^,,, fcall be no more a D,v»« Art, »nt ^genw ate m Chap. IV. (pretended) Principles tfde Cyprianic Age. I0 as if the Prophecy had come by the Will of Man ,• Which alfo is an exprefs Contradiction to the ApOftle Peter, 2 Pet. 1. 20. The Prophesy came not in old time by the wiR of Man, hut Holy Men of God fafy as they were moved by the Holy Gbofi. Upon this Ground Tertutiian faid, Ni/i homini Deus plactterit, DtM non erit, Homo jam Deo propitius ejfe debebat That if God pleafe not Men he fliail thus be no God, fo that Man muft be propitious and favourable unto him. To this purpofe we have a very Remarkable Paffage of their own StWngfleet) Iren+ Chap. 4. pag. 297. After he has related that Paffage of Eufebim his Hiftory, Lib. 1. Cap. 4. viz. That 'tis hard to find out who Succeeded the Apoftles in the Churches planted by them, unlets it be tbofe mention d in the Writings of Paul. " What then, faith he be- c comes of our unqueftionable Line of Suceeffion of the Mhops of feve- c ral Churches, and the large Diagrams made of the Apoftolical ' Churches, with every ones Name fet down in his Order, as if the ' Writer had been Clartnceaulx to the Apoftles themfelves ? Is it come c to this at laft that we have nothing certain, but what we have in * Scriptures ? And muft then the Tradition of the Church be our Rule * to Examine Scriptures by ? An excellent way to find out the Truth c doubtlefs, to bend the Rule to the crooked Stick, to make the Judge ' ftand to the Opinion of his Lacquey, what Sentence he fhall pafs * upon the Caufe in Queftion : To make Scripture ftand Cap in hand * to Tradition, to know whether it may have leave to fpeak or no ' c Are all the great outcries*>f Apoftolical Tradition, of Perfonal Suc- * ceflion, of unqueftionable Records refolvd at laft by the Scripture it c felf, by him from whom all thefe long Bedegrees are fetched ? Then Met Suceeffion know its place, and learn to vaile Bonnet to the ' Scriptures, And withall let Men take heed of over reaching them* * felves when they would bring down fo large a Catalogue of finele c Bilhops from the firft and pureft Times of the Church ; For it will c be hard for others to believe them, when Eufebim profeileth it fo * hard to find them. Well might Sedliger then complain that the * Interval from the laft Chapter of the Afts to the midle of Trajan, in ' which time Qjtadratw and Ignatius began to Flouriih, was tempm ' *SnA*v as Varro (peaks, a meer Gkaos of time filled up with the rude 'Conceptions of Papas, Hermes and others, who like Hannibal when ' they could not find a way through, would make one either by Force ! or Fraud 2/j, If this new Proaor of the tottering Caufe /hould found his Conclufion upon the meer Pra£ice of that Third Age, he /hall never be able to elche w a pontradi&ion to himfelf j Since" he pretends, as is O 2 above a r e.trtUn ofl S'x VtrtMatim »f the Chap. IV. above dear'd, that -the Eptfcopa ^"'he Foundation of his luk.W>«',ion> and,n,„„„ the Churches Acknowledgment and Argument, not meerly upon the Churc he afferts the Releption of Ep.fcopacy in ttac^ age, G^ernment up the Church to have receiv d and P «« ^ ^^ ; a ftrange ^plioluk Apprebaum yea an i ^ a } (rom the H , unufual ignorant Ina dvertency, hU whole Arguings run to this Scriptures to make this appe". . rfEpifafal Government m that Iffue, *i*. u freve **%££*£/* *a™ fr°m hU dSik "? Me. Now, whatever Gonlequencs j ( wiU not dare>1„ Jhlttered Method of A'W**^ £^ Third Age held fuch an terminU, to affert, That tne u« ^^ ^xjnivtrUl ) R««J«»» oc Prague Opinion as this, That :* >»"' M. or , ^ A hua Ant0^ „ ofEfifcWV* a fuffi,cientJg u £?. nnt affert that «fl Humane Tradition UZhn thereof. Nay doth he ino ^ailert m ^ g d *U which obtained till Augufiin 's time, who flourished in the Fourth Age. To which we may add the grofs Error concerning the Vifion of God, that the Souls of Saints departed fee not hit Face until the Judgment of the Great Day, which, with feveral others, univerfally obtained in thefe Times. If J. S. (hall except upon this univerfal Reception, and thereupon place a DiftiacYion betwixt the Reception of thefe Errors, and that of Epifcopal Government ; 'Tis Anfweredi 1, Th?t the univerfal Receptfc on of the Errors mentioned, ( and others not mentioned J has a fuffi- cient Hiftorical Ground, as to the time of their Prevalency, accounted for by Authors, whatever Cootradiflion was made to them afterward. •ily% This Pamphleter has not yet made appear, that Epifcopacy did univerfally obtain in all the Churches eftabliihed through the World, as is above evinced. %ly% Upon the Hypothefis, that the fore- men- tioned Errors did univerfally obtain, arid were afferted and practifed in all Churches, or in this Third Age, the Principles and practice whereof J. S. has in fuch Admiration, would he not be afhamed to infer, C if at lealt he difowne thefe Errors ) that the practice of the Church' had transformed them into Truths, and thefinful Practice thereof into Duties, in Contradi&ion to the Scripture Light in this point. So that our Pamphleter, reduced to thefe Straits, muft, of neceflity, feek another Foundation for his Concluhon in the point of Prelacy, than tU Principles and YrMfe of the Church of that Age, clfe his Caufc is deipsiate and loft. Chap. IV. (pretended) Principles of the Cyprianic ^g*. m If it dial! be further obje&ed, That this Reception and Practice of the Cypriank Age is not (imply the Ground and Topick of his Argu- ment for a Divine Right of Prelacy, but in fo far only as received, and flowing from an Apojiolkk Institution: I anfwer, Altho' the full difcuf- fing of this Obje&ion I referve till I come to the fecond Branch of the Dilemma, yet I (hall here give a previous Touch at fome things in Anfwer thereunto. *> i. If he quite the meer Pra&ice and Principles of the Age, as the Ground of the Argument, and betake himfelf to this pretended Xnfii~ turion mentioned, then he acknowledges, in fo far, the Strength of what is offer'd againft him, if founding his Perfwafion upon the Prin- ciples and Pra&ice of that Age, as that, i. This will give a Patioci- ny to Errors, from the meer AfTertion and Pleadings of fuch as hold them, unlefs he hold, that an Univerfal Reception will import an Infallibility, a Principle difown'd by al! Proteftants,as I fhall {hew. So that this will patronize and approve the forementioned Errors upon the Hypothefis, as is faid, of an Univerfal Reception, and the Old Te- frament Churches Errors and Declinings from the fhaight Path of the Word of God, fhall thus be owned as Truth and Duties. 2//, If he betake himfelf to the fore-mention'd Divine and Apofto- Iick Inftitution, then he muft acknowledge, 1. His Obligation co have clear'd this Conformity by Scripture ,• And, zly% That, not having attempted this, his brittle Conje&ures memion'd, where- by he would prove this Conformity* can amount to no Argument, unlefs he will ablurdly afferr, that a Scriftttre Conference may fubfifr. and be valid, where no Scripture Grcund appears co (upport it. But further, I thus argue ; Since, from what is alieady offered, touching the State and Condition of that Third Age, and the Writings of Cyprian in fpecial, that he/ with other Famed Doftors thereof did grofly err in jeveral important Principles of the Cbriflian Faith]> by what Reafon, yea, or fhadow of Reafon# can he, or any Man elfe, prove, that Cyprian was free from erring and ftraying in the point of Faff, or with refpeel to his Carriage and Practice in Point of Cburct-Government, or his, or others Accounts of the State of the Church in their Time ? For, 1. If he fhall hold, that Syprians Epiftles, or his other Writings, are, in point of Fatly of Infallible Verity * and properly and primarily to be acqui- efc'dinj Why not alfo in the Matter of Judgment and Opinim, fince, in both Cafes, the Foundation of our Perfwafion and Certainty muft needs be a fuppofed Infallibility afcrifeed to tbefe Writings. The Diftinetiom whereby Do&or Monro endeavours to efchew this Abfurdity in fife Pamphletjentituled^w Enquiry into the JSew Opinicns^c. is A CnnMithn of J. ** Vin&utton of the Chap. IV. , „ A ConfUUtton oj, ^^ ^ ^ Fa. i5 obvioudy «nflgn«8«»^ He te » Weaknefs and Infirmity 'thers, in point °fP°a^J°' '„£ but to deliver to Pofterity that « in the Undemanding an^/"XXth prove a Malicious Difpofition • which is falfe in Matter ol Faft dort prov ^^ ^ « and Intention & ,h« Wdjt"^-££t be imputed to Holy Men, • P«chment o Chrlft, „ Chanty, cjmnot^ P^ (dx ' efpecially fuch as were ^™n ds have been expofed to the Cen- « Prevarication and Deceit mui i : « . . u >d This Diftin&i- •ftre^Cot^rft^tT^lue. For i. Neither on, we fay, in the > prelent ^ haye> , , made appear the this Author, nor any °* nJ£ * *T of aU the Fathers, or Martyrs, Unanimous Conren^naTeftimonyot^ ofneceffity> diftinguifl, upon this Point and Q.ueft,on- *'{? -" d Correfpondent Erroneous ieErwr i» tie 3Mt-<»V" PTl^J Dell of Propagating an Errtr, Praaice, from a *ta/«- *"■£» *mUft tapu te Lh a Malicious De-' W ^M« *j*a ^ Tn"he WriS of the Fathers delivered fign to the premited fcrrors, as ,mm = D?fign in Writing was, that «f Pofterity; Since, none «n doubt, the.r Dehgn in g had ^ the Pofterity might ^^"^PJ^^Tn Error upon the'pofte- Malicious Intention to deceive, or ootr f , That E ifeo. rity, "nnot, in Reafon or C^ nty, ,e Juppou -^ a ho,d$ pacy washanded downto themby tnenp £xercife Df this Govern- W their Principle, and ib-^ffi the fame, ,fc PraSicol ment, which he [«PP°f%"™d ProduS I th. Prior! Moreover, Strir muft needs be the ¥^J"i Govefnment, which he fuppofes, if the Exerciie and Reception of tins ^"n > the fame Prkq ihall either prove *« W^'&SdefTj llraftice ol the Ages ciple, as is faid, would erea 'h'P"Sal higher than the Scripture, fucceeding to the Afo^Uck, «*»JjT1« X whom fome of the and the fuppofed Succeflors of r,».t*r ana i. MetropoUtans, Ancients make Bilhop.. < ^A*^s'j *efeScriptures, wherein Ihall be a Demonftrative Proof of *s Seafe oMh P^ rf the Office of Timothy and T«m* is de,c"D' = ° c ,f fUPp0r,ng itUnivei-. atrous Praaice in Worlhippmg of f ^f^^nd^immfdiately be, fal, (hall determine the Senfe of *« ^c°"2^om ion thereof. The fame fore delivered.and Ihall be "J^fj^^helSke Hypothefis may be faid of other Breaches of he L aw upo n ^/q^, felu ^^rd^op^o^ VifibU Chug Chap. IV* (pretended ) Principles of the Cyprianic Age. 1 1 3 her Univerfal Reception thereof at that time, and fuppofe it pleaded for by the Fathers and Learn'd Men, as in thefe Gradual Advances it was, by feveral of the Ancients, who forefaw not its Monftruous Apex; Sure, he will not owne, that this Univerfal Practice and Plead; ing would juftify this Monfter. I know nothing he can Aufwer, ex- cept the denying the Hypothefis, and afferting the Impoffibility of the thing it felf, which fpeaks not at all to the point ,• Nor can any Ratio- nal Man admit it, for it will ftill reft upon the Infallibility (in this Cafe) of Cyprian, or his other Contemporaries, a Supposition which the fore-mentioned Inftances do fufficiently refel. But now, to proceed to the other Branch of the Dilemma: If the Strength of his Arguing be fiippos'd to flow, not meerly from the fufposd Practice of the Third Century, but the Conformity thereof to the Divine, or Apo/hiick Pattern ; Then, i It appears, that he has gone Antipode to all his Fellow-Pleaders, and crofted their Method, fo that his Pamphlet deferves to be difown'd and condemn'd by them, fince, as is laid. ?«s notourly known, that they all, in order to this Proof, fetch the Original from the Apoftles, beginning at that fuppo- fed Fountain, and do thence conclude a Warrant to the Churches Practice, whereas this Man begins his Proof from the Practice of the Ghurch, which he fuppofes Univerfal, and from thence, as the leading Argument andTopick* concludes the Divine and Apoftolick Warrant. It were a prolix and tedious Work, to give a renew'd particular Difcovery, by Inftances, of J. S's croffing his Fellows in his Method of Pleading, whereof there are plenty at hand. DoCtor Scott *, begins with the Inftitution of our Saviour, then ad- p * chr^illn Llff> vances to the PraUice of the Apcftlest and then, in the third Fart2f-388,389. place, pleads Che Conformity of the Primitive Church thereunto, and not her Vraclice meerly, putting this at the Foot of the Argumentation, as the Appendix and Rear ( as it were ) of his Army, which this Man places in the Front of the Battel. Du&or Monro, his dear AUbciate in the Caufe, in the fore-mentioned Enquiry into the New Opinions, &c. Pag, 10 j, iq6. ig?. makes this the Stare of the Quefrion, "Whether the ' Apoitles committed their Apoftolick Authority, which they exercifed 1 in p-ircicular Churches, to Tingle perfons, or a College of Presbyters • Acting in Parity in Ecclefiaftick Government ? And, in Proof of this Point, tells us, 8* He will hrft view the Holy Scriptures, then Ec- ' clefiaftical Records. Whereas this Man prefents for lisFirjl, yea only Proof, the Ecclefiaftisk Records of the Cyprianic Age, wkhout the leaft hint of a Scripture Argument, through his whole Pamphlet. The Surveyer of Napkali betakes him,in his fioof'alfo to this Method, 1.T0 ■P the ,,, AConputioHoflS'sKntlcMhncftbt Chap. IV. i 11 a a v -l p»j*!,, nnd in the next place* to what further cipal Argument and cher«nj baffl s^h « I "■* ttmSj D~f Defcnc" oHus Sermpn W*«» hiS Re" moXnce to the Parliament, and Defence of it aga.nft ft*«m»»9 monltrance to tne entituled. tie Wf«-«w« o/ffc 7iw«j Zm lay, the chief Foundation and Strength of his Pleading upon the AMkkVo^r derived « *** &«««/*" '*« ***' ; r?ef'deS TkY X which are well known, zip This Man's .nconfiftent and ab- fi^H Prevarication, in this his Method of Arguing, ( which appears to b HtfZn-?ntZ or Antipode to that of hit Fellows ) mil tefu* the" e* Stent if it be confidered, that he has fled from the Pom. de- b^eable even with -Mr. Rule, and that, in this long Career of htt Ldiou PamphleT, he has run away from the Point, and with his Back « he Caufeand his Adverfary. For Mr. K.&, in the Preface ot his Anfwe Pro his firft Pamphlet, to which he pretends to reply, tola h,m, £,! h, kid not the Strets of the Point upon the Principles of this or £ Ag i"f the Ghurch-challenging hin! f to a Scriptu ■ e Di fpute upon the Oueftion. ( from which he appears a meer Uammt and not only fo but fortified his Challenge by feveral Grounds, idlu(h% nl "That 'tis unaccountable, that, in a Matter upon which Salva- - ion doth fo much depend, in their Opinion, they fliould lay fo much '' Strefs on the Opinions of Men. and the Teftimonies of the Ancient < Q ureh fein-a! , except Papifts, agree, that Matters of Faith, on, • which Salratiw oeSndeth, mud be determined only by Scripture, « Tnd tharGod freaking in his Word, is the only Judge or fuch Conrn- 4"rfi»s V/rHetold him, " That the Fathers themfe ves plead Yor « rt J, and difowne both each himfelf, and one another as either « Jute or £ Witneft in fuch Debates : Confirming this by tne •Teflfmonv of feveral Fathers, fuch as Oft*. M.kvU. contr* town. rlir Julm ■l $J 1 VHZU And by Confequenc^ Mr. Rule afcertained him, Zm t ^nr'scrioture Arguments, wmch he had in other Pieces «.-. Authority by JbA L\ 2- ""• *CrJ% \ ¥haf the Ancient Again, in the next place, he offered this to. J. S, ... That the^ Ancient Chap. IV. ( pretemied'^tmC^s cftkCyprfank Age. 1 1 5 Bifliopsi and other Divines, when they gave Marks of the True Church, brought them ai wife from Scripture, not from Humane Te* ftimonies, citing Auguft'm, Epift.50. who charges " them with won- derful Blindnefs, who feek Chrift in Scripture, and the' Church in Humane Writings, citing to this purpofe Gyprian in Epiji. Cecilio, and n that to Vompeim, who proves, l* That we muft follow Chrift and his written Word only, as our Rule, and not old Cuftoms and Pra- Aices. And, in a word, he, had told this Pamphleter, Fag. 2. "That if we mould grant all that he pleads for, it would not ruine the Gaufe of Presbytery, nor eftablifti Prelacy, that all the Vi&ory he could thus atchieve, were the evincing of a Miftake in Matter of Fad, as related in Ancient Hiftory. But neither he, nor the Pres^y- terians, generally, did ever lay the Strefs of the Gaufe on the Prin- ciples and Pra&ice of the Church, after the Apoftolick Age. That 'tis Divine, not Humane Authority, that we take for the Rule of our Belief and Practice in the Matter of Church Government, and managing the Affairs of tfre Houfe of God. timothy was to fee guid- ed by it, 1 7im. %. 14, i^.*and fo will we. That before, he had de- clared himfelf fully to this purpofe. That, by fuch Attempts of a Critical Vindication of Cyprian, he, in vain, imagines to filence Pres* by sedans, who have other Grounds, if beaten from this. Now, this Pamphleter being fo pertinently, lb clearly, fo perempto-J ily challeng'd to a Scripture Difpute, and called to the Scripture Bat: n this Debate, and not only fo, but likewife the Debate concerning the Senfe of Cyprian being by his Antagonift laid afide, as impertinent to this Queftion and Controverfie, yea even in the Senfe of Cyprian and Eminent Fathers themfelves, what a pitiful Thrajo has this Man made himfelf appear to be, and how frighted by Scripture Light from this True and Genuine Debate, in offering ro publick View fuch a Voluminous Pamphlet, ftuffed with Airy Babblings anent Cyprian's Epif- eopacy, without fo much as once touching the. tme.State ©f the Qttefti-, on, and the Scripture Difpute to which he was challeng'd. His petty* Policy herein has been before laid open, viz,, to draw his Antagomft' from the true Scripture State of this Gontroverfie,into afruitlefs Enqui- ry into the Senfe of Humane Writings ,• Whereinjas their own Stilling feet* fjas told them, w& are liker tojofe our (elves, than reach any Certainty of truth. His Antagonift had told him, " That, in writing before 12. ' Sheets on this petty Subject, he had but a poor Prize, egregiam Laudem *£? S folia ampla, that he did not intend to Trifrle with ^m. in. fuch c Work Could any Man of Ingenuity, or Senfe, have been more pe- remptorily deferred from msdling any 'vmifi. in fuch a fruldefs Piece of F 2 Wafc' no A Confutation of J SV Vtn^cAXtonof ike Chap. IV. Work > And yet this Pamphletei muft again appear in the fame very * difcarded Triming Imployment, in a Fardel or Pamphlet of no left than ?36 Pages, wherein, indeed, he has reached one Efted of his Writing in it felf confidered, i? we diftinguifrS Conditio Operu, and Jntentio Operanth, that, fince he would needs again appear a Fool in Print, he is not to ba reckoned among thofe of the leffer Size, but a Fool in Folia. ily To profecute father this other Branch of my Dilemma, if J. S. will fay, that he pleads not meerly from the Traclice of that dgey but the Conformity thereof wish the Divine Pattern, then ( as is hinted above) all Men of Senfe will acknowledge, he was concerned in the Compi- rifon of the one with the other, fince Presbyterians fuppofe, that they have by many Scripture Arguments, evinced the Unwarrantablenefs of that Prelacy he pretends exiftent in Cyprian s time, and thus, I, For any thing he has Anfwered they overthrow his great Foundation and chief Pillar of his Opinion, viz,. " The Derivation of that Prela- « cy from the Apoftles,. and that that Age did adhere to the Divine Rule, * reie&ing all Innovations in point of Government, and otberwile ; For if thefe Arguments hold good, they were guilty of a Straying from the Scripture Rule, and had embraced unwarrantable Human* Inventions in point of Government, and upon this Ground and Hypo- ■ thefis, all thefe Grand, or rather Airy Topicks, which he prefents, Ch. i are quite baffled and excluded, fuch as, " the Humility of that Age, •in not afpiring to Epifcopal Pie-eminence, that it was an Age of ' much Ecclefiaftick Bufinefs, an Age of Great Men, affording excellent ' Records, wherein extraordinary Manifefrations of the Spirit were • frequent, fo near to the Apoftolick Age, &c. h Now what a pitiful Pleader muft this be, who holds fait, and pleads upon fuch Humane cenjeBures, and yet ftands Mute to Scripture Arguments brought to overthrow them. 2/7, The true State of this Queftion being, bv the Acknowledgment of all, properly, and in its own Nature, not Fatti cv Juris Humani, but Juris Divini, or (tofpeafc fo ) Fa&i Apoplici, and clearly running to this IiTue, " Winch of the * two Rival Forms, of Government are commenfurated to the Divine • Pattern and Standard of the Apoftolick Dodrine, Conftitution and * Practice - And accordinglv, he being, by his Antagonist, and by all Presbyterians, called to plead his Caufe at that Bar, and before the Divine Judge, moreover, hi. Plea and Principle being this, that the Die* cefan Prelacy exi/Ii^ in that third Age kApojiolical , what : a 1 meer Difpute- Dei'ener has he diicovered himfelt to be,in fpending all his Pleading «nd Arguments upon the Proof of a fimp\* Human* 'Vr«Jiw% when he ihouid have meaded the jm and Divim Right ; As if a Perfon Challenged for Chap. IV. ( pntended ) Principles of the Cyprianic Age. uy no genuine Heir to anEftate, or che true and lawful IfTue of the Perfon having Right to difpofe of it, his Proftor or Defender fhould draw his Proofs from the Mansa8ualPcJJf[i>n, his per fonal Qualities, or fuch like extraneous Grounds, without the lead Refpeft to any Re a) on s or "Principles, which, in Law, can evince either his being the genuine Heir, or bit legal Right and Title, . Juft fuch is the Cafe in Hand, when we do,- from Scripture, from the Do&rine and Practice of the Apoftles, prove the Hierarchi- cal Prelate to be no Plant of the Lord's Plantation, to be an Ufurper, and to have no lawful Office in the Houfe of God > to be a Spurious Bioodi but no genuine Oif-fpring of the Apoftles, and tliccrue'Apo- ilolick Gofpel Church and Miniftery, all the Anfwer offered by this Pleader is, that there were fuch Bifliops exiftent in the Third Age, confidently affirming them to have fucceeded the Apoftles, that his Deified Cyprian was a Marty r. and a Good Man, ( which none do de- oy) but when called to the Law and the Tsftimony, to prove the Hierarchical Prelate's Title and pretended Right, or, to Anfwer our contrary Evidences drawn from the Great Mafter of the Houfe his Law and Teftimony, here he ftands Mute, and without an Anfwer, and thus pa'pabiy appears a fruidefs non-plm'd and vain Pleader. This -brings £0 Mind a remarkable Paflage of their own StiVingfleet, C&. 6. p. 294 Iren. having mentioned the Uefsftivene-fs, Ambiguity, Par* tiality and Repugnancy of the Records of the Ages fucceeding the Apoftles, he adds, " When Men are, by the force of former Argurcjents, Che means fuch as he has ofier'd againft the Divine Right of Prelacy ) 'driven off from Scriptu^ then they prefently run to take Sanctuary. ' in the Records of Succeeding Ages to the Apoftles. Thus Ejhus no 'mean Schoolman handling this very Queftion of the Difference of ' Bifliops and Presbyters, very fairiy quites the Scrip- ures, and betakes " himfelf to other Weapons. Quod autem Jure Divinojint Epi/copi Vref- ' hyterk Superiores ctfi non ita clarum eft e Sacrk Litem, 8 aliunde tamen jatktfficaciur prchati poteft *. That tho' * in Sent. Lib, 4. e the Superiority of the Biihop to the Presbyter cannot Dlft* 4' Sea> 2** * be made appear from Scripture,yet it may be effectu- f ally prov'd from other Grounds, viz. from fuch Principles as J. S„ has efpous'd Upon this Doctor Stillingfleet adds, and thus Animad- vert^ " Ingenuoufly faid, however, but all the difficulty is, faith he, ' how zjut hivinum ihould be prov'oV when Men leave the Scriptures, ( this Difficulty J. 5. (houid have confider'd before he prefented his vain bluftering Pamphlet ) which makes others fo loath to leave this I Hold; Although they do it in e$e Divi. ' than to find that m whict « ^^"nmem. !„«« of any one particular Form o,uo his Charge, Thereafter he profecu es « la$^"d ' ,y> f4, tfttUUtf, £d ,. Of* 2>«/«Siw~/>, aly. 0, * ffmS> Ap, which fiouli infer* 4r, «< « W^^f/^ %on thl point of * W4 he m what the Ap4»!>o' p!f'ce "*'• „ rJ Perfonai Succeflion might be Undertakes to make evident i. .f ,; tend. 2, That « withoutruch S"P=»or.t5»of Orto as *P P r ^ ^ Dm^ ' the Names of Bifhop and I™bytet w And , That the chu,ch « did not own Ep.fcopacy -s a D,v,n, u , Thefe • thofe who feem to ff**^?tJ£i lKb and with this profeft 'healfoprofecutes^thmuchCrmcal £™ S the q^ of ' Defign; «fe. t0, ^e*^"mmdon and to invalidate theTeftimony « Epifcopacy as of Dmne Intotutiwi, « a ^ ^ r •of Antiquity upon this pou* . Sc ^ B a meer Speeder.ieb) aff!£ This Conformity of the Cyprianic Bifhop to the Apoftolick Pat; 4/7, A^^°,n.,„ V-nlds mav be trae'd by SuccefTion, and a con- tern , our Pampheter holds, may os ^ fotemention'd tinued Hiftoncal Series .her eof; j Inw, w. . Conjeautes to evince the fame, recited w » a j_ *«( has refuted and «""K°'R,£ which points out this Man's dation of his P'^f^.^^efentinafuch a Topick as has beenfo aa^SS^iSS^Sfi- offer u/on this Head and Argument -* ^^f^tt^d dearly refuted by the vaft V,Th' u V ,! m anvfolid Trad of Hiftory from the A3, of the and long H««». _ai to any Iom^ E«#««in the Proem of Apoftles till 7r«« Reign, J^0™** Def* having no Footfteps of his Hiftory, wh» laith, he enters , b OCCalio- * „„ rt,;., 'kefore him. but only »n««« «7ej»f*««, l0.me Pe"',. ", „r Chap. IV. (pretended) Principles of the Cyprianic Age. no Imperium, quo traflu Quadratus & Ignatius florebant, plane cum Varrone mlfihog vocaripoteft, in quo nihil cetti de rebus Chriftiamrum ad nos pervenit prater admodumpauca qua Hojies pietatis obiter delibant, Suetonius Tacitus Plinius ; Quern biatutn ut expleret Eufebius U W v Clement 'i Is m who mentions among ©thers,even the Church 6lCartbatk in the time otHunerick King of the Vandals, See Victor Uticen. Lib, 2 ■de Perf. Vandv %alfamon in Ganon. 57. Condi. Laod. And no doub% fuch 'Inftances as do impeach a pretended Univerfal Reception of Prelacy, do equally overthrow this fuppos'd Univerfal Recepim upon ground of a Divine Institution. %lyy Not to mention the Catalogues of Bifliops from the Apoftles fufficiently exposed, and convift ot Forgery by their own Stillingtfeep and feveral Learn'd Writers ( fee Appendix to the Jus Divin. MiniL Evang. Propoj. 4. ),. this pretended Succeflion ana* Derivation has an incurable Wound from the many Teftimonies of Fathers difowning any fuch Hierarchical Official, Diftin&ion betwixt Bifhop and Presbyter as this Pamphleter pretends a Divine Right for. Jrenaus in his Epiftle* to -Vtclor cited by Eufebius, Lib, y. Chap. 2;: calls Anicetus, Pius Mginus, Telefphorus, Xiftus, Presbyters of the Church of Rome, Presbyteri iUiquitefracejjerunt. lertuUian, Apol. cap. $9. calls the Presidents of Uie Church Scniorcs or Presbytery Prudent prebatiquiq; Seniores, lunam Uh. A ConfuUthn of J. SV rmdkttb* of tbt Chap. IV. . u,. ,hefp Words Quttmut Hi ««i i* Eccitfi* /«»» Vr„b«ris *.*i»> 3S%fr„S£gkm clrilna vmuti, cerium iccunium efk«dim»' !*>«"». E?,i'' Where it is evident, and accordingly ob- fhcitum fatrb *«"'""•'■' T Aclnd x " That Presbyters are call'd ft.Vd in 'h%forom s a/rrCaS-d alfo Bifhops, ,1 Apoftolical Succeffors of ArOlues . ,£ "b their Succeffion, 4*7, That whatever W^BHhot isafof idofthem. If we will c4fult the Learn'd is fo,d of Bifhops is aim 1h pa(w ^ T^mZS^ctu ;«. Upetrum, «»» »** M W hC XiJ 2Z EpilccW forum Ecclejiarum in^uibm ali^amJ.uccmmo. mmmfii ™«*<» ^Fathers when they calld ?«« or ft£ B,fh»ps. r4»,/«»», That tne r« 1 „ eri„J(hemear,s i„ the Hierarchical • 'heyru^erX °w th OfficTa Kl over Paflors ) but they call ^BftopfofCcbCches where they for fame time ReHded. - fthem Bilhops 01 ^ ^ c 2 Thus ^'St&Wtae of his Apology »»nft H^, P«J ct, q pf • clears from Cfatf**. 7"™- cS^ v'$ ?1 if' Lt fhev held the Identity of the Office of Bifhop and Pret ■j*"M», *« they hew tne y^ ^ ^ A ^ . Mf< «*» V Advfce m be holden for Heretic*. Where it is evident, **""!<"■<£ 1 . peifcUn, „utuvt Jt crura* /«#. -that tis £"£« ^between Tneolotues «* Canonilh whetl,er EPife0PaC* " ,0 PCb? "5 /Zn^the Ecclefiaftick Orders, but 'tis agreed among them S ^uSily thEaTein the Times of thS Apoftles, there was no Diflinaion betwixt a Bifhop and tresbyter remarkable therefore.the Ob,ea>ng ot y 6 ck fc thj t> he Mr hififlodats in that pi e.ended Hereto not only 7»~. but • t h G ee -dS FalhersJ His Worthy and JudictousAn^omft MtVltaft has alfo obfeiv'd in the piece forecued, that the 4^«" " Chap. IV. (pretended ) Principles of the Cyprianic Age". 121 thers, after Cyprian, do no* freak fo highly of Epifcopal Prelation a.s Cyprian doth, citing tibguflim Rp. 19. unto Jnom, whole Words are thefe ( fub finem ), Quanyuam enim fecundum bonorum vocabula ejua jam EciUfia ujus obtinuit EpifcopatHs Presbyter io major Jit> tamen Auguftinus m thultis rebus Hieronymo m'tmr e(i. ' That altho', according co rhe ufe ' which then obiain'd, Epifcopacy was greater than the Presbyterac, ' yet in many things kugujUn is Inferior to Jerem. Where are two Diminutives, the one derogating from the Degree of Epifcopal Autho- rity* making the DiftineHon betwixt Bifhop and Pre&byter meerly Nominal; The other from the Peipetuity and Divine Right of it, refolving this Jus and Right into meer Ecclefiaftlck Cuftom. His An- tagonift alfo ciced Prim. Uticen, who calls the Presbyterat, Secundus & pene unus Gradus cum Epifccpatu ; ficut vsultis Scrtpturarum lejiimoniis comprobatuf *. To this Scope many others * inTim. i.e. %. might be cited : Jerom in Epift* ad Evag. and in Pauli Epift, adTttum, after his Proof of this Identity of Bilhop and Presby- ter from -Scripture, pronnunceth thus of the whole Caufe, Sciant Epifi- eopi fefe magif confuetudine quam difpojitionis divina veritat£?Hsbyteris ejfe Superior es & in communi debere Ecchfum regere. i That the Prelats owe ' their Authority rather to Cuftom than any Divine Warrant. AfFer- ting alfo.that in the whole Apoftolick Age, the Churches wereGovein'd communi fresbytsrsrum Loncii'io, by the common Council of Presbyters, lUfciatkable is that Teftimony of Chryfojhm, Horn. 11, on 1 Tim. 5. Having proposed the Queftion in the beginning of the Homily, Wherefore the Apofile, having deicrib'd the Bimop, paffes over to the Diaconat, without mentioning the Pre>byter or Paftor, he gives this Return ar-d Anfwer, Qui* inter ¥resbytcrum& ' Epifcopum nihil interejl & qua EpHcopo ffcripferat kp jfolus, eadem Presbyiero convtniunt; quippe quoq; Vwbyterit cemvtjfla e\i Eccltfia cur a. That there is no difference betwixt the Bwhop and ^tesbyter, and what the Apoftle afcribes to the firft, agrees alio to the fecond, fince Presbyters iikewife have the Care or Go- vernment of the Church committed unto them. To this purpole alfo feveral Paflages of Ignatius his Epiltles do accord, and fpecialSy his Epiftle to the Magnejiansy wherein, he enjoyns Obedience to the Presbtery as well as the "Prelate: Befides feveral other places in his Epiftles well known. To thefe Teftimonies may be added the clear Account Presbyterian Writers nave given of the Authority of Presbyters in Councils* comprobated by the Canons, fell. 1. Can. Cone. AtAiocb. I*, Can, Cone* Ancyr. together with 1 ; Can. 4 Cove. Caxthag. Here, on the by, 'tis noticeable that the Tra&ar> enritui'd, Hierarchical Bificps £laij»s &c. ( upon fome Paiiages whereof this Pamphleter would , Q needs lit A Co»f«utlo* of I S's Friction of the \ Chap. IV . , «,jLa.\ win<» cited the premis d Tefhmony of needs AA the Crutch ) having ared «i P^ the f W, &«**» « =>» «£ ^'from the Citations of &«** as alfo his fewral Concluhons or b , h(. p^,. ag^K^SK^ ^,Mfthe.P „ the point. But this we WW*,™^^ ^ „ £ s. under. Now from what j « f^^^! ^nd Univerdi, if the Dioce- take to prove a deriv d ^cceliio". )< Bfrom the Apoftiei and Apofto- fan W*™^XJ^%^&£afo«tit Talk and Undertaking, lick Age, heftan,ds°bl'8d.t0P^;™';.. B 2/n He muft prove, Tbat >W li* ^"'f f "f0rmQt -revident from what is faid. Not if attemptmg, can perform, «ev ^ ^ the 52iJ wS aTdifowning thus the whole Foundation tit j cfBi/hop and WW"' a". , b J*he fame Reafon ; Nor the ffiW^b.. & &rt what thrown ««/and others Third, till he nas ™» cUCCeflion : And to d fcover the Abfur- have P'«d/d aSXlrof anv fuch P?e tencea, he will thus make thefe dityand Inconfiftency otanylua »? ( h hemfelves in their Fathers ™nt.ond to '^upon The whole, this point of *ff, ^•Theoreends -fc. ?tsL^™ .f*. Cyprianic, „ DUcfa which he pretenas, w *• * w Univerftl Seriet, being to £;M> £•..»*» ^£'^ fcffes or approvd Writers, and it bail* 15 pr?V d ,ah« ^ TdK «^ »«* f as a" T*«monh, which certain, that thl* ^"'S , L Harmonious, fo as no Witnefs contra- mate Faith in any Cwfi M* »a™°" • Atteftations of to many dia another, the mu ntude Pt c J his proo, and raze Famous Witneffes m th is pom t * otn j ft|i as wb !tt0 '.LdTptoof of he EnemieVofour Lord, brought to Fortifie fflS^»f«toB which *ey were fore'd » abandon and pre •ver, beeaufe the *?«#> '£»«< •* W&,> SECT. Chap, IV. (pretended) Principles iff tk Cypthmc Jge. tip SECT. II, The Scripture Account *f the Myftery of Iniquity Working in the Times of the Apoftles, Imj>r$ven to the fame Scop with m preceeding Grounds, %J OU R Pamphleter acknowledgeth, that Presbyterian Divines do plead this Argument againft Prelacy, tho' he hath offer'd no Ldow of an Anfwer to it : We (hall, therefore, in the next place, Improve this Argument againft that Derivation othis Epilcopai Hierarchy, which he fuppofes exiftent in the Third, or Cyprumtc Age, from the A potties ; For, if it be found a part of the Myftery then Working, then, fure, the Child rnuft be like the Parent, the poiion'd Stream muft favour of the poifon'd Fountain. r i. Then that this Myftery of Iniquity, is the Myftery of the Papal Primacy with its horrid Principles and Pradices upholding it, I hope he will not deny ; Or, if he be fo much in Love with his Hierarchy as to deny it, 'tis eafy to bring a Cloud of Proteftant Divines to Wit- nefs againft him. He feems to put a great value upon Dodwl[s ( who together with others- of his Affbciats, is in Love with a Patriarchal J that I doubt not, fuch an Aftertion will have no good favour with him. But however, I find nothing in his Pamphl#c peremtory and pofitive againft it,- I do therefore. proceed, and offer it to be confideT red. zty That the Seeds and Foundations of the Papal Hierarchy were tnen fawn and laid, yea and ading, is clear from thefe parallels, 2 Thth 2. i. and 7. v. with its parallels, 3 Job. 9, 10. compared with 1 Job 2 .18, 19. Rev- 1?. pertotmn ; As might be largely clear d from Proteftant Interpreters, whereof to give a (hort Touch, the Bekick Divines upon that fir ft Text underftand by this Myftery, "The fecrej ceming up of this Unrighteous Antichnihan Dominion, 'as it was by little and little promoted in the Church of Chrift, ' namely by Sathan and by forne oltiis lnftruraentt who, by deiire oF 'Rute ( as. once Diotrepbes is reproved for it, 3 Job. 9, 10. ) and by 'bringing in of falfe and Superfluous Doctrines, and humane Inven- x tions, Herein offered Sathan their hand, even from the Apoftles times.. Upon that Paffage, 3 Joh. 9. . Who loves tbe pnemmmcy They give this Senfe, " That is, who out oi Ambition exalteth himfeif above i H A ConfttMiott of J. $'s Vintiullon of the Chap. IV. * his Brethren, feeking after this, to Lord it over them, ( exprefling this, as is obferv'd above, in the terms wherein the Apoftle Peter dif- charges a Prelacy, or Lording over God's Heritage, i Pet. $\ %.) ' and to draw all Refped: to himfelf alone, receives us not, that is, * Efteems neither me nor my Interceffion. That parallel, i Job. z. 18. Te have beard that tAntichrifi Jhall come, they thus underftand, */;*>, li That he is upon his way, or beginning to A#. The many Anti- fchrifts, they underftand, of his Forerunner and falfe Teachers. Piodat by the My fiery of Iniquity, underftands " The Devil's Work ' of ufurping ChriiVs Dignity under the Mask of Piety and Chriftian ' Religion* Rev, i$, 1 r. and 17. f , 7. oppojue u the Myftery of Godlinefs, 1 Tim. 3. 16. the working of the Myftery, he thus expounds, ' " That ' it begins to frame and infmuate it felfinto the Spirits and Minds of * Men. Upon the Inftance of Diotrepbes, he (hews, That the ' Apoftle condemns Ambition, a dangerous Peftilence in God's Church,. The great Antkbri/l, 1 Job. 2. 18. he expounds to be, "anOppofer * of Chrift's Dodrine and Spiritual Kingdom, with Ufurpation of *abfolute Command. Puting thus a black. Tbeta. upon that Peerlefs Tower, and abfolute Licentia, which /, S. afcribes to the Cyprianie Bifliop. The Englifh Annot. thus paraphrafe that place, 2 T&/.2. %.. (S The Myftery of Iniquity oppofite to the Myftery of Godlinefs, it ' fignifies the. fecret rifmg of Antichriftian Dominion, whereof fomc * Foundations were fecretly laid in the Apoftles times by Satjian and * his Inftruments, who by defire of Preeminency in the Church, ; Jeb, * 9. 10, *and by in^oducing of falfe and Superftitious Do&rine began * to build his Romijh Babei, fhewing alfo that the Word Myftery was ' Written on the Pope's Mitre, citing Cafaubon in N. teff. The Biotrephes feeking Preeminency, % Job 9. they mew to be underftood by fome of a prime Pafior ; Others fay, " They take it to be a common* 'Name applied to one there that eagerly and inordinately fought * for Superiority over other Minifters and Chriftians, hence arro- 'gant Men were calfd of old fiorftfHt nourifc'd by Jupiter. Loves * Preeminence, i. e. lay they, He was fuch a Paftor there as would * not let ftrange Minifters be Teceiv'd, left he mould be flighted and * not be accounted Hi-gheit andmoft Excellent in that Church,, Upon the Amicbrifi mencion'd, ijoh.r «• thJ^ihew, " That *v\t\\\ Com- * pofi.ion notes an Oppofue, z Tkef* », 4 ily, A. Deputy,. Ait. »;. 7. ' The Pope oppofes himfelf to Chrifl and caiis himfelf Ghrift's Vicar. Pool Annot. upon zTbef* 2, by Waking of the My jhry of Iniquity ♦•under- ftands, "TThe Working of* Wicked Doctrines and Practice* fccretlyj * and fubcilly as a Moie Works under Ground, In Doctrine, damnable: iicitfies Chap. IV. ( pretended) Principles of the Cy prianic Agt. 125 ' Herefies were broach'd, 1^,2,1, In Worfliip, Inventions and 'Commandments of Men, under pretence of Reverence, Devotion * and Humility, Sol* 2. 23. In Practice, Difpenfstions to Moral Im« f pieties, under colour of Service to the Catholick Church. This My- « ftery if ait b tht Apoftle* already worketh, in the falfe Do&rines,*anci * falfe Teachers of his Time, in Traditions and Inventions of Men * obtruding themfelves into the Worfhip of God in his Time, the ■* Aff;&ation of Pre-eminence in the Church in his Time, and making ' Merchandi'fe of the Gofpel, and Gain Godlinefs, &c% Our Learned and Judicious Countreyman Mr. Fergufon expounds thus the Working of tbb Myfiery of Iniquity ; " That Antichrift and Antichriftiasi ' niim nad earl\ Entry to tne Church, tho* not avow'dly, yet fecret- ' ly, Antichriftian Dominion and Dodifine were even then working ' and advancing by little and little towards a Height, in fa far as Jufti* * ftcation by Works, Gal 2. 16. the Wormipping of Angels, C0L2.18. 9 Abftinence from certain kinds of Meats, Col, 2. 21. and from Mar- ' riage, and fuch like Antichriftian Doctrines were preached, and De* ' fire of Rule and Pre-eminence among Church Men over their Bre- f thren, and the Flocks of Chrift, had then poffefled the afpiringSpi- * rits of feme, % Job, 9, It was a Myftery then, faith be, and in the 'time following till Antichrift mould be revealed, and after his Reve- lation a Myftery ftill without Eye- Salve from God. He obferves * that Satan began early to counter- work Chriftrs Kingdom, in fetting ' up his own, as foon, or a little while after Chrift fet up the Gofpel 'Kingdom in the Chriftian Church, and therefore C faith he) the * Antiquity boafted of by Papifts, is no undoubted Mark of the True * Qhurch, for Antichriftianifm is bur by few. Years of later ftanding * than the Kingdom of Chrift under the Gofpel. He further obferves, 'That Satan, when he cannot work avowedly, works under Ground,. 1 that his Inftrumems are not idle, when they appear not, that Antk * chriftianifm did . work, when it appeared not above Board, that * Antichriftian Errors, and the Height they aimed at, appeared not at * firft, and that therefore 'ris no wonder, tho' Men, otherwise Gacious * in the Primitive Times, who were kept* bufie in maintaining Truth' * againft other avowed Errors of thofe Times, unawares, and through * Inadvertency, did fomewhat to countenance the riling of char ' Epifcopal Seat, in fome Steps of its ufurped Dominion over the" * Church of Ch iftf which, tho' improved moderately for Terror of ' Herecicksat firft, yet, in Ages following, after the Removal. of thefe ' Gxacious Eachsrs, did end in avowU Antichriftian Ty ranny. [' We „< A ConfuUthH of % ti Vindication of the i(ed para. Writers, ^^fTin^n^SeopeS others ab?ve rehearfed ; WIi, to the /a« e.e^Xhat are acquaint with them, 1 need bur- ?Ut ti Reale wl haomorc Citations; But from what is fatd to den .the Keaeer w»" ' f ^ u 0ffcr thefe Inferences. - my prefent ^?PeJ"^rp(° £ he Senfe of Proteftant Divines; in »■ Tt „\ oMt didconfift in Minifters affeaing P«~«. one main parr -ot V1 Brethren. So thatan avm^Lorf.?*™ and Z.»r ***»",underftood palpably within ,th< $$££$£ ^ ^ ^ ^ to be part ot this My wy , .f A f the p„.»* ; Hence a rofe perpetual Contefts till the reft ceding the * Conceft continued with thefe of Rome and Conpantinopk. And after '(hewing, that the Row** Rifhop has invaded both Churches and 1 K&Hfdoms of the Weft, b>' a juft Judgment depriving them of their ' Scepters, by whofc Help he invaded a Tyranny over the Churches, * he adds this Remark upon the whole, Behold, of how great Moment and Con fetfut nee it », U decline, even in an Hair' breadth, from the Word @f God. 'Tis hence evident, beyond all peradventure, that this Working of the Myftery of Iniquity, and of Andchriftianifm, according to the Apoftles Scope, in the Extent and Senfe exhibited by Protelfant Di* vines, behoved to be, of neceffity, well advanced in the Third or Cyprianic Age, viz. both in Doftrine, Worjhip and Difcipline. For, this Pamphleter, without expofing himfelf to Hifliog, will not dare to affeH, that it was either deadr . or making acv.Adyaacev -fo* £o long a time as 240 .or jo Years, fince it had taken Life, was moving anda&ing in PWs time. Nay it clearly follows, that its Advances behoved to be, by that time, very confiderable. ' Finally, this Ading; Growing Monfter, and Myftery of Iniquity, refpedting, in the Senfe of Proteftant Divines, tie Government of the Cimveb^ and, iff this refped, aife^ing ChrirVsVifibb Kingdom, which the final Iffue and Apex, in the Antiehriftian and Papal fleadftlip and Dominion* makes convincingly evident. None can deny, that the Advances of it, by this time, in this point of Government,, behoved to be very confiderable, and of an eminent and fignal Growth. Now, upmi this Ground and true Hypothefis, I dare refer it to any Man of Senfe, even to J% S. himtelf, whether a dearer Contradiaion can be readily fuppoled, than there is betwixt thefe two Propofitions, viz. ' [The Myftery pf Iniquity, or Corruption of the Churches Goveja. ment, as well as of her Do&rine and Worfeip, this Myftery, I fay' and Corruption having then its Seed fown, was frill, afting, working and growing in after times, and advancing towards Anticfcriftian Do- minion and Tyranny ]. And yat notwithstanding [Tne Church in the Third Age, yea throughout that whole Century, was rnoft averfe from ail Innovations, yea and univerfally and peremptorily walking up unto, and embracing that very Government eftablifhed by the Apoftles, without the leaft Aberration from that Rule. Yea this very Government eftablifhed by the Apoftles, by an intire and uninterrupt- . ed Series and Succeflion, was derived intire unto the then Bifhops go- verning the Churches through the Chriftian World J This being J -Ts Affection, yea the Scope of his whole Pamphlet, 1 will be bold , 28 A Confutation df]. SV Vinfoc&tion of the Chap. IV. to aiTert, either Proteftant Divines have been in a Miftake, in their Senfe and Accounts of the Scriptures premifed, or -dm his Affeition is a g ofs Contradiaion thereunto, and evident Fallhood Thus us evi- 5 g 1 he Scripture Account* of the State of the Church in the tZ! tfi£ a£ 2* that the Evil One ha i Sown his Tare* and In- ffl M *1* Poifon, his deadly working Poifon, fo early in the Church, that unU wedifowne the Authority thereof, we muft neceffanly E«nrtfe thatthi Embryo of Antifcriptural Dominion and Tyranny tn the eZk W IZed at clnfiderable Growth in the third AKe Bur to make fhu further convincing appear, and drive the Nail of this Argument JotheX^ from the State of the Church in that Age, that, in pint $f F<*£t. it was fo. SECT. Ill* • That the Churches Doftrine And Worjhip was conpderAhly Corrupted in the Third Age, the Seeds Sown of Antichrijiian Apoftafie there- in, And, in fpecUl, the Tru* ApofMick Church Government fig- >ndlj Depravd. * IN this Proof, we mall begin with a Rehearfal of fuch Popifh Errors, as made way for the Revelation ot An.-ichtift. which we will find to have been confiderably prevalent in this Age; At leait, jndt the Seeds thereof were fo -*n, and appearing above Ground, tho not of fo full a Growth and Extenfion. as afterward appeared. m In the point of Justification by Good Works, we have cor fiderable In-* fiances. We heard Origen, in-mce places than °?«V«J J™* meafure, tainted with this, and homologating the Powih Oift.naion of the Works of the Law rejected by Paul as the Can fa pi our Juration, (cil That he intends the Law at\ £ vailed and removed by preceedmg Merits, and expiated by CharstaNe Works, and the like,- Wherein he diftinguifhes. them from the Sin «. going 9 Chap. IV. (pretended ) Principles of the Cyprianic Age, 129 before Gonverfion, whicbi with him, are expiated by the Blood of Shrift andSanclifjeation, Lib. %. Epift. 2j. thatChrift has fatufedfor Original Sin, hut we mu(i fatisfit for Aclual Sin. Let J. S. cpnfult their own Scultttus, Gh. 24, Medulla Vatrum, where he will find this and feveral other Er- rors charged upon him, as is above cleared. . 2//1 The Popifh Do&rine of the Power of Fret-Will, ( the great and iignal Pillar of the Do&rine of Merits) we have heard how it was Pa; tronized in that Age, by eminent Do&ors thereof. We heard lertuUian * affirming, " That God, ia command- * ui. dsMtntg, f ing us, (hews, th'at we may obey him, if we will. And, Horn, in Num. he afferts, V It is not poffible, God inould com? c mand and require, unlefs Man had that in his own power, whicfe f he might offer to God commanding. We have alfo heard, that Cyprian himfelf t, following his great Ma- f Lib. 3. u fter fertullian, doth clearly and positively affert. " That g"mn. c. 52. c*there is a Freedom in Man's Will to believe, or not ^ • believe,* MakingjthuSjFaith^which is the great Condition of the New Covenant, the Fruit and Effe& of our Free-Will, not of the Grace and Spirit of God, in flat Contradidion to the Apoftle, Eph. », 8, 9. For by Grace art ye faved through Faith, and that not of your felves l It k the Gift of God. Not of Works, left any Man fhould boafi. Making alfo the Man believing to difference himfelf from others» in Contradi&ion to the fame Apoftlei 1 Cor. 4. 7* For who maketh thee to differ ( or diftinguifheth thee ) from another, or what baft thou that thou did(i not re* ceive, &c. And, in Correfpondence to what is abov,e afferted, anent the Connexion betwixt this Doctrine of Free-WiU and Merit of Works, we find their great Champion Scultetus, from feveral places, charging the Opinion of the Merit of Works upon Cyprian, fciU de EUem, de Simplicitate Prelate Oferum JufUtiam, faith this Author, manifefte urgett dicens : Juftiti* Opus eft, ut promereri auit pofet Deum Judicem. Vracep- tis ejus & Monitis obtemperandum eft, ut accipiant Merita noftra Me*cedem. He meweth, that Cyprian manifeftly urgeth and prefTeth the Rightet oufnefs of Works, faying, (s That we have need of Righteoufnefs, e that thereby we may merit before God our Judge. Wemuft obey his 'Commands and Exhortations, that our Merits may receive a Reward How flatly this contradi&s the ConfefiTion & Do&rine of all the Reform'd Churches, and how clearly ic afferts and homologates the Antichrifti- ari Popifh Pleaders, and lays the Foundation of feveral other their Su- perftitious Principles and Pra&iccs, I need not tell J. S. Nay, how flatly this contradicts the Apoftle, in the premifed and feveral other Scriptures, yea our Bleffed Lord Jefus, who fays, Luke 17. 10, When K ye j ao ACofifHtAtloftof]. S'/ ftv&'fcAtiwtfthe Chap. IV. ye have done ah tbefe things' vrbieh are commanded you* fay we are mpnfitable ( not meriting ) Servants, we bave done tbat wbicb was our puty to do. 7. 5. will atfo do well, to review that full Account of Cyprians Errors exhibited by .'their own Scultettai,: 'together wirh the grofi CcnttadibTtms charged upon him, and made good from federal of his * Lilt C't.c 24> Writings * ,♦ Wherein he will eafiiy difcover, that his Divus Cyprianus was no Infallible Oracle, but, in a confiderable meafure, ftained with the Errors and Corruptions of thac Age. %ly. The odd Notions, fuch asthat &l Angels tutelary, entertained by 0#e»,as we have heard, and others fuch like, was, no doubt, a fruitful Seed of the wicked Superftitious Popifh Doctrine and Practice of Angel* Wo'rfhip, to which they wickedly. adhere to this day, to the great Dii- honour' ofiGod, who will not give the Glory of Religious Worlhip ( hi» Incommunicable Prerogative ) unco Creatures, and in exprefs Contradiction to Scripture Prohibitions, Col. 2. 18. Rev. 19. 10, anff 22.9. We heard of Ori 'gens Notion of the Orders of Angels, largely improven fince by the Superftitious Schoolmen, yea his prefcribing the very Form of their Invocation, ( Horn. 1. on Ez,ek. ) aU, For the Popifh .Do&rine in vilifying and Difyataging Marriage, we have heard how fruitful Seeds thereof were fown in this Age. We have heard how Qrigen and Tertullian were deep in this Guilt, and tin- &ured-with this Error, as alfo Cyprhn himfelf ( whofe joint Influence, Lib. de Money-am. We heard Origin afferting, il That the third and fi- fourth Marriage cafts out cf Heaven, thar Marriage rejeas from Ec- 1 ciefiaftick Dignities, Horn.. 29. on Luk. And xhu Cyprian, Trail. z,de HaHt. Virgin, declaims violently againft fecond' Marriages. All which, and many fuch like Do&rines and Afiertibns of thefe Eminent Doctors of the Third Age, how fignaily they did contribute to advance the Myftery of Iniquity in this point, is obvious to the meaneft Reflection. The Apoftle, 1 7imx 4. 1, 2, 3, &c giving Warning of this Myftery of Iniquity in the latter days, after he has mown the Power of Sedu- cing Spirits, and wicked Doctrines of Antichriftianifm, and the ©bfti- ■nate Hardnefs of Heart attending the fame, in Correfpondence to what he afferts to the lame Scope and purpofe, 2 7bej.2. 11. prefents this firft Inftanee of that wicked Delufive Do&rine forbidding t* Marry, as all the Popiih Church, to this day, forbid it to their Clergy uni- vexfaUy, from thJe ,higheft to the loweft, as a fc>afe State, unwor- thy. Chap. IVr ( pretended ) Principles of the Cypriamc Age. i g t thy of an Ecclefiaftick Perfon.\_ Which leads us to a fifth In- flance. y ly, The Foundation of MonafiUk Superjiitkus Vows of fingle Life in both Sexes, whereby the Unclean Spirit hat> taken Advantage to fill the Chriftian World with Monftruous Filthinefs for many Generations, was alfo laid in the Foolifh and AntifcripiuraS Exalting of Virginity or Cefibate^ in the Writings of- the Do&ors of this Age, We, heard, that terta^/att qails k a higher Degree ofSanclity^ Lib, 5 adve*r. Marcion. Origin t a Mfr^cf Perfection,, ;Life. gft in Epift.ad Rom. And that £>*j prjan expreffes a fort of Vetejhtion of the Female Sex, de Bono Pudic* Holding, that Virginity equals ,w to Angels, Lib. de Sing. Cler. Calling like wife. Cbxfibfo or Celibate ;an Angelhal State, Sernj. de - Nariv. And how ftrongly this favoured, that Error mentioned in point of Marri- age, which the Apo&le propofes as tho^firft Inftance cf Amichriftian. Defe^ion, yea how flatly the premifed Doctrine contradicts the Apoftle aflerting, Htb. 13. 4. That Marriage U Honourable in all, and the BeiVndefiled, h equally obvious and. confpicucus, . I A fixth InftanceJ ihal.1 give* is of that Seed of the Popifh Difdnction of Gcm^wands diftind from Gounfels, md in fecial Comfits cf Pzr ft clim beyond' the ordinary Rate of Commanded f Obediem;ei the Seeds whereof we will rind to have been fown alfo in this Age. We all know, how this, is pleaded for, and improven by the Popiih. Agents. Thejefukes go anc an< Pleadings, and- cannot be the Senfe of this place, fmce our Lord had declared Perfection to eonfift in keeping the Command?, and therefore could. not commend .any Perfection of commanded Obedience beyond Commands % ;• Nor can there be a more foolim and nonfenfical Sup- position than this, *hat the Young Man had keeped the Commands, or that our Saviour did fuppoie fo much,- For had he kept them all, nothing had been wanting' to obtain Eternal Life, which contradicts our BleiTed Lord's AiTertion, that fomething was wanting to obtain the fame. So that Ms clear, that this Young Man had kept none of the Commands in the proper Spiritual and Genuine Senfs thereof, whereof our Saviour by this. Speech endeavours to convince him. And for the fpecial Precept, Go Jell all, &c. as it had its Authority derived from our Biefled- Lord, the Glorious Author and End of the Law, fo likewife its Foundation in the Law Moral, obliging to Love our Neighbour as our felf, not to Govern but to be ready to Relieve the poor Members of Chriit. And m a: word/, we mult not take the Pre- R 2 ■ . ' cepc 1 32 ACotifut*thnof].§\VwdicAtionofthe Chap. IV- cepc to be concluded within thefe Limits, Go jell all, &e. but to be extended to that which follows, Come and take up the Crofs, and follow me, pointing out Faith, and our Conformity to Chriir, to be our Chriftian Perfection, not voluntary Poverty. But this cbiter. See cartwrigbty againft the Rbemifts, upon the place. Poole s Ann. and °" But now if J. S. fhall enquire, where we find the Foundation of this Docftrine laid in the Third Age ? I hope he will look upon't as one Inftance for all, if I fhall exhibite unto him the Ailertioa of his great Infallible Cyprian, from whom this whole Age is denominated Cyprianic We heard, that, Serm. de Nativ. commending Celibate and Chaftity he brings a Proof exprefly from a tounfel of Terfeclton ; Speak- ing of Continency, he makes it fuch, Quam non cogit Nwjfitat, fcjj"? fehonU fuadet Ccnfilium. Afferting clearly, according to the Popift 1 Di- ftinaion, a Counjel of Perfection, beyond what the Neceffity of the Law and Command obliges. . . . . nly We will find the Popifh Doctrine of Furgttory had its beginnings in this Age, and that the Fathers thereof brought Fewel to this Fire. We heard tertullians Error from our Authors, Wx, That Locum Bea- torum ante RefurreBionem non Cxleflem dixit, fed Inform faltem fukltmurrem, that the place of the BlelTed Souls before the Re function is not the Celeftial Habitation, but fome inferiour place higher than Hell. We heard alfo, that O^e* afferts this Fiery Purgatory after this-Life in ie- verai places already cited, foil. Horn. 3, in Pjal. j6. and in feveral other places, . , , , .. . 8/v The Popi(h DoaHne of the Invocation of Saints, had alio its growing Tinaure and Seeds in this Age. We heard the Formula of it out of Origin % fub fin. Lib. 2. in Job O Beate Job era pro nob* miferw &c O BlelTed Job pray for us milerable Sinners, &c Thus aHo theAuthor of the Homilies in Cant. Hem. ?. afferts the fame Intercefli- on of Saints for us out of the Book of Maccabees. We alfo heard, that Oriaen, Horn. 16. on Jojh. afferts, « That the H#ly Martyrs Fight toge- 8 ther with as, and do help us by their Prayers- Cyprian allo.Li*.;. £/>'/• ic affirms, "'* That the Lapfed are affifted before God by the Help c of the Martyrs. Thefame is alTertedof the Infants khTd by Herodjcil. by the Author SermonU de Stella & Mag*. We heard alfo, that Cyprian, info. 1. Epifi. Lib, 1. feeks " the Help of a Friend, if he die firft, m 6 Praying and Pleading in his Behalf for the Mercy of the Fathef. So «uis hi* noflrum prior preterit, apud Patris Mijtricordram non tefiet Orotic. This is placd by Scukttm in the nth place among the Errors imputed wCypritn, Quod nova Devotione Vivtrtu odmQnuit> mpfi Mortem jut apud Chap. IV. (pretended) Principles of the Cyprianie %. i^ Veum memores ejjent, Lib. jr. Epift. i. That (as we heard above) in a piece of new Superfluous Devotion, he admonifh'd the Living to be mindful of him before God after Death. Now we all know that this Suppofition and Superftitious Opinion, anent the Saints departed their Prayers for the Living, yea and that wich refped to the feveral Cafes of the Living made known to them by God, their Prayers and Inter- ceflions are thus Angularly helpful ; That this, I fay, has laid the Foundation of the Popifk Invocation accordingly, and is pleaded as the great Ground of this piece of their Superftitious Devotion by the Popifli Pleaders and Advocats is evident beyond all Exception. 9/7, Several Popi/h Errors touching Baptifm were alfo fpringing up in this Age, as is clear from what is premised, Cb. 1, " The EiTential of de way the •• Neceflity of Baptifm after the Refurre&ion, and Chrift's ftanding ' befide the Firey Stream witk his Firey two edg'd Sword, to receive ' or reject Perfons, accordingly as they are fufficiently purg'd or not Serm. 14. on Lttk. A PafFage alfo giving a notable Patrociny to the' Popifh Purgatory. We heard alfo, that Cyprian owns the neceflity eftbe Santlification of the Water by the Frieji, Lib, 1. Epift, 12. and is alfo bold to aflert, " That the Perfon Baptizing confers or gives the Holy f Spirit, and that Baptifm it felf doth inwardly San&ifie ; Which alio affords a Patrociny to the Popi/n Opus Operatumi and tie Doclrine of the Indifpenpbh mctffity of Baptifm, both which are difown'd by all' the Reformed Churches. We heard him" alfo afiert, "" The necef- palpably Patronize the Vopijh Unclion. Other Ceremonies alfo in Baptifm, together with VrcUthal Confirmation are afferted' by Cornelius, who Writing of Novatus *, hath thefe Words, " Neither * -4M- EufeB. • did Novatus obtain after his Difeafe fueh things as the *ab. 6* CaP- +3» • Churches Canon requires, Xl^iTthl point of Church Government, which began to take Life and grow in the Apoftles time, had at this t me its fignal Growth Ind Advances ; Altho* the flop and Remora memior/d by the Hpoftle fibTl. made the Advances the more flow and lefs difcernable I need not here ftand to Improve an Argument ad homnem, and that % S has fcreWd up the Cyprianic Bilhop's Power to the afe* oU» liliuTunZounM hupremly which is indeed the very Som ce and Poifon of Amicnriftianifm, fothat in J. S's Senfe, Cyprian both in Juto and Practice hath ownd the fame. But this we (hall at fome lenlh Sw ahone. Nor need I here ftand to reprefent the grofs StSw whwh the.Anuenuareknown to **££$* Chap. IV. ( pretended ) Principles of the Cy^uzmc Agt 157 Concerning the Antichrift, which are fuch as do bewray their grofs Ignorance of the Myftery of Iniquity. So that we need not wonder, that while Men flept, the Evil One fow'd his Tares, and that this Myftery of Iniquity had fuch fignal Progrefs, fince in that Age, yea and in the preceeding Times, Men of Eminency were fo Ignorant of its Nature and Tendency. zfy, To fpeak to this point comparatively, and with refpect to J. S, his Senfe and Pleading, if we (hall acknowledge, that in the preimYd notable place of jM*, concerning Diotrepheh affecting Pre- eminency over the Brethren, and that place, 1 Pet. 5-, ;. condemning a Lordjhip over the Lord's Inheritance, the Pre-eminence and Dominion of Paftors over Paftors is difchargd and forbidden, or over their Brethren and Co- Presbyters, which no Man of found Judgment can denyt all Minifters of the Church being by our Lord acknowledg'd as Bretbrtn only, over whom he himlelf is the Only Lord, and Peter in the fame Epiltle de- ligning himfelf a Go-Presbyter or Fellow-Vapor, it will hence follow evidently, that J. S. in afcribing ( in his whole Pamphlet ) to Cyprian and Contemporary Bifhops of this Age, fuch an Abfolute, Unre- (trifted Power and Dominion over Vajlors, ftands convicted out of his own Mouth, of impeaching the Authority of thefe Scriptures, and the Com- mands iherein imported, and of pleading for an Antichriftian Hierarchy therein prohibited. To make this convincingly evident- I will inftru& my Charge againft J. SAn point of FacVn thefe Inftances of the Dominion and Power he afcribes to the Hierarchical Prelat. 1. Let what he afferts* Chap. 6. from §. 25. and thus through the whole, be confider'd, then it will be evident that the Power he afcribes to his Hierarchical Prelat, and which he makes Cyprian to own and Exercife, is either fuch as ftands condemnd in the premis'd Scriptures, as a part of the Myftery of Iniquity in point of Government, or it is* nothing, tf. 24. He gives him " a Chair or Throne Elevated above c all others, fuch a Chair and Throne as needs not fo much as confute * any in Government. $. 27. A Soveraign Power of the Difcipline c of the Church. Ibid. Such a Power as renders him Head of the c Church and Principle of Unity, (uch a Chair as imports Ecclefiafti- 'cal Soveragnity, and is a Symbol thereof. $. 26. Such a Chair as * imports a Soveraign and Independent Power of the Sacrament? ' fuch a Chair as was the High Priefthood, that could not admit a * Second, ibid. §. 27. He Mufters up his Titles, as being Papa ( Honeftly faid indeed ) Fontifex, Antiftes, Dux, Head, Signifer, &cj ??& S^M*! °f $h Sbi? 0ftk Church, §, 3 u whofe hands only hold the S BaSunce 1SS A ConfuUtlon of). SV Vindication of the Chap. IV , - / *. «♦ *,** ***! tn be manaed at bis Difcretion. A nouble Balance 4<*?»»"i C doubt this ifof Government, end abfoluw Rule or Fundamental no Jo nb e^ to . Affi ^ Soveraignify whfch'hU dea? Father. afcribd to King (tt-rfa II. v«. « That he wh ch his near r Meetings and Matters cognofcible in S£» A M. eft" mould think fit. Thus in that Parliament wtereto the Done of £«*br*fc was Comm.ffioner. J,m. 'That whereto tne iw - h chief, yea the One Paftor, he was not only thePaftor but a o tn ■ ^ shepherd. /. %l ^%Fl7dn,rnvea the OnSdge who Reprefented Chrfft, whojudg'd ThrS!'vicar witWn his Diftrift, the Peerlels Judge the • Princip to and Ce'nter of Unity. $. 4*- 4* And, J a* «* nreceedins he makes him (peak in the Language of the Apoftle, 1 1" j that At 4fi* « *•* *• »" •* *"">""*■ M " *" *m»*rM"- ""',;, 'Tis evident, that he aferibes to Mi Crtrieefc Bilhop an Abfolutt N^-ver aU -.^S"" gjB* R feS Jewell concerted ClgfcM* £— J^SS ft pare $. 4>. 4*- c%: fc ZjJ^etsln Abfolut Power, and of the EfffVllia** .which he Imerpre mu AMoU« £ ^ ^ ??mTZ;,iZJhoTbT»« accountabU ( a 'good Explication ro doubT of the T le of P*?' afaib'd unto him ), and that »» to 4*rt* doubt, ot the j- "» " ' , A/(in Bor $„„•„,•„ „/ Afr» j Telling fe* MaJ^u^t Urgent, that the Bilhop M^ ? ' 7 •£,«« AMtrim» ratiomm aBm f«i Domino rMturus (Joli fcil. ) He alcribes to rreiats a r«-^ CmduSmt He aferibes to them from J i ,h, TeTm Lictntia he aferibes to them a Defahck Tower, a „ Roman **?*£'&& ^"thV^ of 7„e"*&< S^S&W wSS »«r. ^wemay befurethey are of the Reorder. Thus J. J4. M, !«, 39, *c See «* y. f'.4fc' To the fame Scope, that we may know they are true Romans, J'Ute&tooLS of that Clergy, he aferibes unto them a Chap. IV. (pretended ) Principles of the Cyprianic Age. 139 Roman Cenfonan Power, and this of fuch a Degree and Extent, that whoever do withftand this Paramount Authority of theirs, be they Paftors never fo Eminent, are no lefs than downright Rebels* And this Power and Authority of the Brelat, we muft know, with refped to its Exercife, Itands upon the Foot of his Lordlhip's pro Libitu. and regulable by his Epifcopal Lkentia. See Ghap, j. tf, 40. 4r, 42, 45, &c, Thus ubifupra, and §. 39, pag. 222, 223. 4/y, This Abjolute and Paramount Power to all the Judgments or Votes of Presbyters, 'tis evident from what is faid, he afcribes not to Cyprian only as his Prerogative ,• But this wonderful Epifcopal Lkentia and Liberum Arbitrium he ftamps upon every Mitre : So that every Miti'd Head is with him inftall'd in fuch a Dignity, that he km no Superior on Earth to whom he is accountable. See pag. 230. But upon this point I muft here take notice, 1. Of J. S's fingular Modefty in a very worthy Limitation, he has put upon my Lord Bifhop's Abfolutenefs. ily. Of his inconfiftent Retra&ion with refpe& to our Scotti[h Pretets. Firfi. His fingular Modefty, when telling us, They had no Superiour on Earth to whom they were accountable in their Ecclefiam (lick Determinations and Resolutions, he has very wifely and difcreetly excepted One Superior, ftil. God in Heaven* zly, His Inadvertency, in that he has fallen foul upon the Caufe he pretends to plead : ftY/r, He cannot but know that in the late Edition of our Scottifh Prelacy, his Moft Reverend and Right Reverend Fathers were, by our Laws Eftablifhing the fame, declar'd accountable to his Majefty in aU Ecclejiaftick Adminiftrations, as the Supreme Head and Lord whole Deputs they were, and from whom they derived all their Church Power ,• So that they were but Adminiftrators of His Majefiie's Ecclejiafiick Government. 2ly, In fetting fuch an Unaccountablenefs upon every Mitre, affert- ing, (cil> That the Prelat has no Superior on Earth to whom he is accountable. he 'has fhatter'd and broken all in pieces the Unity of the Hierarchical Prelacy, /«'/. The Biihops Subjedion unto the Arch-Prelat, the Arch- Prelat to the Primat, over both whom he is as Abfolute, as he makes the Prelat to the Paftors ; So that by this one dafh of his rambling Head end Pen, he has given a deadly Wound both to the Scottijb and Englijh Hierarchy. If it be faid, that iri pa%. 230. cited, he fpeaks only of the Bijhofs Power within his Dijhick ; I Anftver, that his Affertion immediady afcer fubjoyned, that the Bi(hop was fuch a Ma$er of his Determinations % and Independent in his Government, as had no Superior on Earth to whom h& was accountable, compar'd with the Aifertions of his Power formerly cited, doth exclude and cut off fuch a Reftri&ion, or render Jc Non- S z fenfei i4o J Confutation of J. SV Vindication of the Chap. IV; fenfe and Contradiaory to former Affertions ; Which (hall appear in fuch a pretended Reftriftion afterward : So that this his after Exten- fion makes the whole Earth his Diftria or elfe let him and his Friends falve the Contradidion betwixt this Independency in ha own DM only and fuch as is of that Nature as acknowledges no Superior on Earth, and is like wife a Dominion in the higbeft degree and elevation. The adjuft- in2 of f S's Contradiaiors in this and many other points, is that wherein the Orthodox Adverfary is not in the leaft concerned, but the rolling of this Sifypbuss Stone is remitted to him and his Affociats. Nor can it be rationally excepted, that in the premis'd Prerogatives he re- orefents only Cyprians Mind ,• For, befides that his Inferences are for moft part palpably Wire drawn, it is evident, that in the whole Series and Scope of his Pamphlet, he owns the thing it felf, and prefents his Cyprianic or Hierarchical Biihopcloathed with this pretended Authority as a Pattern to all the Churches. # c/y Our Pamphleter will needs have the Hierarchical Prelat in this his fuppos'd Baramount?ower,proptr\y to (ucceedthe Apojlles in their fuppos'd Pnviledees confequently to be the Sole Guvernour ofPaftors, the Churches great and only Steers-Man, and whofe Hand onj^ holds the Balance of Go. %ernmenu See Chat 6 $Vi;, 14, £*, '?*• Yea he will have him properly the HigbWeh £. U>U- And I here this great Cntick may be pos'd why he fattens not this High Pne/thood to the Bilhops Firft- Born as 'well as his Chair, fince feveral of his Fellows,/.*/. Or-Mmr*, and the Author of the late Queries will needs nave the High Priefibood a landing Ordinance ? Moreover, theBilhop, according to J. S. is the fame in his Dioeefe that the King is in his Kingdom, thus $\ 35", 4r, at AX &C to whom Majeliy it properly afcrihable, thus §. 47, 48, 49. And to compleat theCaireer of this his flavijh Flattery and Exaltation of Prelats he makes a great bufle to prove, that the Bi(hops had the bole and Supreme ?owcr of Sacraments, thus * ill, ii*." Which he will needs have to be comprobated both by the Principles and Practices of Cyprian. And aUho\ faith he, ordinarily, that is, when it pleafes his Lordftnp C for he afcribes to him a Licentia, and a quod lihtt licet, upon which Ground he makes a great bufinefs or the Epifcopal Licentia ) he took along the Confent of Presbyters in hy Determinations, yet it was ftill with an %Ab\olute Negative over all their Suffrages or Counfels : And that there may be nothing wanting to an I.iiolent Amifcriptural deDrefline of the Paftoral office, he puts them mro Synods and Connno- rial Meetings upon the lame Ltvel with the common people, as having no Authority therein but what was competent to them. Thus Chap. 7. fEom $. I. to 58. Bu£ Chap IV. (pretended) Principles of the Cypmmc Age. 141 But here, to difcover this Man's inadvertent abfurd Ramb'ing: Ftrfi, It may be enquir'd, how he can produce, in the Apoftles Go- vernment and Exercife of their Power, fuph a Partem of this Abfolute Epifcopa] Primacy, or how he can reconcile it with that Authority in Church- Government afcrib'd to Paftors, ai\d that Exercife not only of Conjultive but Deciftve Authority therein, cr^arly exemplified in Scrip* tare, yea even in Aflbciation with the Apoftles^themfelves in Council, Aft. iy. per totum. i tor. 5. AB. 20.28. 1 Tim. 4,^4* ,&e. But of this again. 2/y, Since he will have the Bi(bop the fame to his Diocefs, that the King is to his Kingdom, he doth herein affert an Abfolute Independency, fuch as he will, no doubt, fuppole competent to a King who is, in his Governmenr,(ubjed: to no other Kingsor Superior, undei God: How comes he then* fpeaking of this Liberum Arbitrium of the Prelate, to Limit it to his DifiriS, which imports his owning of a Superior beyond the Limits of his Diftrict? Tho', in the next Ex-' tenfive Expreflion, he doth, as I (aid, contradict it. But Contradicti- ons are no Rarity in this Man's Rambling Difcourfes. Moreover, C. 5. Pag. 2jo, he feems to tie up the Bifhop, in his Adminiftration of Government, to the Lams of God> and Canons of the Church what is then become of that Abfolutenefs, yea and Kingly and Majefticl^ Abfolute* nefs of the moft Abfolute Roman Ckfars, which he afcribes unto him? Our Pamphfeter, no doubt; allows the Vulgar,, or common People^ no Suffrage, either Confultive or Definitive, in Councils or Synods, and putting Presbyters or paftors on the fame Level, Monopo- lizing this Authority in the Bifhop, he either faftens upon them an Anrichriltian Domination, or there was never fuch a Thing, and is guilty of an Ancifcriptural Deprefltng the Paftoral Office, if ever any was,* For, 1. That the Apoftles had no Succeffors in their proper formal Office, is the Confentient Judgment of Ptoteftant Divines, the Office being alTerted Extraordinary, and gone off with that Exi* gence of the Church ,• And this being fuppos'd, all the pretences of Epifcopal Paramount Power over Paftors, from a deriv'd Apoltolick Au- thority, falls to the Ground ; Befides that no fuch Exercife of an Apo- ftolick Power over Paftors, can ever be made appear in Scripturei For, 2/y. We find an EfTential Intrinfick Authority in Government, in many pregnant Teftimonies of Scripture, afcrib'd to the paftoral Of-' fice ,• Whereby., confequently, the Prelate, whom J. S. pleads for^ is found chargeable with an Antifcriptural Invasion upon* and Ulur> pation, of their Authority. For, x. The ,4i A Confutation of J. SV Vindication of the Chap. IV. t The Authoritative Denominations and Titles of Paftorsi and the ElogUs ,«£ I exprcf, it fo, wherewith the Holy. Ghoft in Scnptur. honou this Office, do make this convincingly appear, fuch as 5>¥^®. which fignifies a tUr, ft*«fcr, ofC^j By fuehan Epithet the Aooftle defcribes the floral Function, Heb. t* 17. Of the famo Imp" t is the Title «,»«-, 1 T,». ^7. .mpottmg Author.tative impoii „£ 8 Thus (he Term imw*& importing Rule, f°f«'rSffi,B W? J3 28 P4-U. 1. Which fliews the Sa- Authoritative lnpectton^ nc*. 20. " , . r V, i. • ll- r, n cri egious Impertinency of J. S. and his Fellows, m robbing Paftors of tnis their due Deflation, and afcribing it folely to the Hierarch.cal Prelate Of a like Nature is the Term «?i^imf ©- and w\an, as alio f . ' Z.i-i. This Araument drawn from the Scripture Titles Sffi'fiS^ " of M is Learnedly profecuted ( together with other Eminent Divines ) by Mirth *» iS-AP"*: Ecd &*?. 29. ?/, « See for feveral other Authoritative Defignations, Epb. 4, 11. I Cor" 12. 28. H«t. 1;. «7- 1 Ccr- 4- I- R««- I0« '4> * C.r. j. 19. to. ? Tb This2Elfential Authority of Paftors in Government, as properly and immediately competent unto them without fuch a precanous nfn-ndence upon the Prelate as this Man forges, has its Exert, fe in the Church of T6#/»»<« the Wlfap»,, or Rulers, consequently afiegiate Society of Governing PJtor.jd6r.ed to whom the AoTftle enjoyns Obedience by all the Church Members, nsLabeunng inWerd and Vctlrine therein, and Gowning thi. Church by )™' Ccunleland Srtrtr. The fame Governing Society of Paftors. as properly and by IntrinfA Authority Rulers and Governours of the Church, we find afferted EM" the Hebr. ,3.7- '7- Yea and that the higher Honou above Ruling is aicrib'd to the Labourer in the Word and Doar.ne, YVmt. 17. which the Particle ,,«*« . Efreaatly ) doth emphatically Lorefs as is evident in leveral parallel places, I 1m 4- 10. Gal 6..10. STt^d evident, that the Apoftle lets the Preachy Paficr}n the Weher Bench above his Hierarchical Ruling. or rathe. O^RulmgVre. lit. The Profeffors of Leyden do fully affert tins Authority of the fecher of the Word from thefe Texts, Manh. ,8, .6 M. 20. 29. 5J?V 11. S* M*. 42. TH 26. So Orthodox Divines ge- fetut The Paffage, All. .$. doth alio clear this where we find, fhat. ■ 1 that firft General Council of the Chriftian Church the fcxer- & the Doam"ick, Critick, and Didait.ck Power and Authority fa -fcVib-d I to PrXtersor Paftors. inConunaion with the Apoftles iheSves Of thi alfo there's a notable lnftance, I tim. 4. 14, fi h ' Enrin a Jurifdiftional Ad, the Ordmauon even of an Chap. IV. (pretended) Principles tft&eCyprhnicJge. 142 Evangelift Timothy, is afcrib'd to the Presbytery, or Confifto^alColle-, giate Meeting of Paftors, which the Apoftles prefence rather confirms than invalidates. That the Term ^wgvnpjf imports a Collegiate Meeting and Court, Camero3 whom our Episcopalians will needs have to ftand upon their fide, in this Debate, as alfo many others, hath fully prov'd, on Matth, 18. f, A ^notable Inftance of t^is Eflemial Intrinfick Authority of Pa- ftors in point of Church Government, exclufive of the Hierarchical Prelate's ufurp'd Authority, and pretended paramount Infpe#ion, we have in that notable place, 1 Cor. 5. where the Authority of Excom- munication is afcrib'd to the Presbyters or Paftors of the Church of Corinth. That this Church was fubjed: unto the Presbyterial Govern- ment of Paftors in the fame Function, Famous Divines have made ap- pear in their Diflertations upon this Queftion, " From the Multitude ' of Members in that Church, Acl. 18. 7, 8, 9, 10. From the confi- * derable Number of Paftors Preaching the Gcfpel therein, 1 Cor.^.14. * From the Subordination of Prophets in their Exercifes to the judicial € Cognizance of their Fellow Prophets, 1 Cor. 14.29. From the fuppos'd ' Plurality of particular Congregations at Corinth, which the Apoftle ' points out, when enjoy ning z Decorum in their publick AfTemblies, he faith, Let your Women keep Silence, i* rats Ukkww ( in the Churches ), 1 Or. 14. 34. Yet all thefe diftinet Societies and Congregations are, by the Apoftle, own'd and faluted as One Church, Ch. 1.1,2. viz. in refpefl: of its Unity in Government, and the Confociation of Paftors Labouring and Ruling therein. When J. S. fhall be better feen in this Controverfie, he will find the frivolous Exceptions made againft this Argument fully difcufs'd by the Authors of the Jm* Div. Reg. Ecch be- fides many others. What is elfewhere obje.aed, that the Term made ufe of 1 Cor. 14. 34. will not neceflarily import Sacred or Church Afiemblm, or at leaft Organic d Churches, is (ufficiently refuted by the Scope and Contexture, and fuch Parallels, wherein the Authority of Congregational Elderfhips is aflerted. The Apoftle, in 1 Cor. j. doth evidently Cenfure and Reprehend the Paftors neglecting their Duty, and not exerciiing their Authority in cajiing cut the hcefivous Corinthi- an, and, Epifi. 2. 2, 12. he calls this Cenfure a Vunijbment inpBed by many, (cil. the Paftors of that Church, clearly after ting their Confi- ftonal Authority herein. So that thefe great Aaings of Ecclefiaftick Authority, jcil. Ordination, and Excommunication are found clearly afcrib'd to the Confiftorial Meeting of Paftors, and competent non Vmt or Monopolized in the Perfon of One Prelate, but Vnitati, Inher rent in the Coafiftorial Meeting of Officers,- And therefore the Hand- ing , ,. A Confutation of J. S's Vindication of the Chap. IV. ^Duties and ^^ffS^^&gSXSS^i SSef rCon^t^ or plead for the Hierarchical Si- fcop's Supereminency. . may be offered to J. Sv Confide- J^"^"^W» whom che Apoft.es pfari I ,, SSrf in the firft Conftimtion of the Churches, and whom in their Va edidorv ana laft Exhortations to the Churches they commend Valedictory a"" immediate preper Succeffors, thefe have no Su- untothem, as thei. >m™aia« Pb/DiTine or Apoftolick Authority: periour G.OTe5.no;"r/'mes in the firft Ereftion and Conftimtion £&£& commending them unto ^eC ^ -*£# KXT'or aGoveTnoPrhavaenno .uperiour Ruler fa over them in the Chmch by Divine or Apoftolick Authority. The Majj .s of j k" J I Tnuh and cannot be denied, without impeaching the undoubted Truth, ana ca nn dgnt ^ ^^ Apoftles Authoru,. The Aftumpt o _ Texts of Scripture /W. * ft 7^^ ,f he ^ Imerpreten upon^hele Texts7,' atd" he will find the Harmonious Confent in the ^TheEvidl^'of this Truth. J. S. might have found, did force faflfa rJ«MiW'taJi* for the Hierarchical baffles bun, ana c ftuthori in this Pamphlet, yea, and upon the ,v.,. of Z.'J, vields the Caufe to Presbyterians*. His words s«d. *. Conf. M(J p„,L(er ( Sure I am, J- S. makes thefe d.ftinft P. no, in. offi ,£ be warranted both by Scripture and Ami- he. tie N»;,»» » ** ^j1^ fince I look upon the Sacra- Joyn'd, which u to Hiaheft of Sacred Performances, I cannot but « m^^^H^^B^^j/ir**™.. rouftbeofthe High- • acknowledge thole who are «w^/ by Doftor Awwrt Ac « eft Office in the Church. ^™«J»r i/impoweredJor, and knowledgement, « feWjLS^J. Adminiftration of the Sacra- has the lame ff^Kd's Supped aT the Biftiop himfelf. Let Chap. IV. (pretended ) Principles of the Cyprianic Age. 14- and 88, aneftt the Bifhop's Soveraign Power of Baptifm, fuppos'd by Stepkaniam and Cyprianifis, his having the fame Soveraign Power of Bap- tifm as of Confirmation, Jf. 81. which he ownes to be the Bifhop's Incom- municable Prerogative, §. 95, 97, 104, ioy. The Do#or adds, i€ I d© not alledge a Bifhop to be a diftinft Officer from a Presbyter, but a , different Degree in the fame Office, &c. His Work mould be to c Feed the Flock by the Word and Sacraments, as well as other Pres- byters. ( N.B. ) If as well as they, them fure, uponche fame equal Official Authority with them in thefe Administrations. He adds " And I the more willingly incline to believe Bifhops and Presbyters ' to be the feveral Degrees of the fame Office, fince the Names of Bi- 'Ihop and Presbyter are us'd for the fame thing in Scripture, and are * alfo us'd promifcuoufly by the Writers in the two firft Centuries Let any unpredicated Perfbn judg, if this Bifnop has not afferted" that the Scripture afcribes the fame Official Authority to the Paftor' as to the Bifhop, and afferts likewife, that this was own'd in the firft two Centuries, and confequently has contradi&ed all J. S's Endea- vours in this Pamphlet, and that both upon Ground of Scripture and Antiquity. For fure I am, the Antiquity of the Firft and Second Century, efpecially including that of the Scripture, which the Bi/hop alledges, is abfolutely paramount to the Antiquity of the Third Cen- tury, or the Cyprianic Age, which is the only Bafis of J. S's Pleadi ings. SECT. IV. The Argument tahn from the My fier y ef Iniquity, Atting and Work- ing fince the Apoftles limes, until the Antichrifi arofe to his full Power, further Improven againft J. S. from an Inftituted Compa- rison betwixt his Hierarchical Prelate and the Apoftdical Bifhop, the fame with the Paftor, evincing, in Ten or Eleven Inflames, ths Oppofition of the One to the Other. MS a known Maxim, that Opp&fita juxta fe prfita magis elucefcuntl A And if, upon an Inftituted Comparifon, the Difference and Antuhefis betwixt the Apogoljck J&J/fop, defcrib'd and Authorized in Scrip- MS 'A CinfuM'M if I S', Vindiatkn of the Chap. IV. I4& «^ j pre,a,e whom J. S. pleads for, can be tore; and theH.e»rehi«. ™«e. ft Jneed^ckaow\edge> ,hat, m de appear in dear In tances j pjeading for an Impoftor and in this Laborious ^P^^p haand has therein oppos'd himfelf to fh?ScripTur'e"of T?Xand the Apoftolick Doftcine and Authority; To come then to this P™?' ... ] the Cytrianic Bilhop, whom The iji I^3""1 exh,b'?hL%hu;cti there appears a clear Diffe- * * ?°f n°ointUof E£X AsPto the Prelate whom rence in the point oi '*«»*«"". > f lnteteft in this point, com' hede.cribes, he ownes no: fcadow <*£ , yea the whole petent either to Pan ™ ***$*- „{£& all Ecclef.aftick Authority is SerU, and Scope of his £»">£'«• ^p^Ler, doth abundantly clear abfolutely taken ^ *« *& ick bI&op we'find Inaugurated by the this But fo it is, hat the *P0l»» d Qtdination and Impofition ot Gonfent an d Call of the Church, . ^ d w Q Hands of the P«*ytery wne flftoriai MeetingS of Paftors nick Form, and the P«*»«7 ™ there is a large Gonfent o! Ortho- therein erefted. In this l nnj up« , beconfult- dox Writers. Kth^S^^ond E^STton. See ProTeffore ofL^ ed, and this will be evident beyond Excep ion Ut.Gmt£,ie, *<»' Dt *£ tMin'h ' withV wner'e'thi poim will £ found clefrly afferted from Scripture and AnW; J^ ^^ of DWin,s at Reams hjirmodum, C«p. .-*- ,fj * Vhc o'oint of Oidination. mtmxft", ^ *?' AK^iffiT i, "his. That the ApoQoIick II. Inftance of a ^ ff-rence 1 aiugn . _nd p Bilhop is defcrib'd with a fpecwl- ™pe*d n^ne, and be an Ex- whom he mould Feed with the Word *™ £0™Z> j3mV Wim- ble of an Holy Life unto them U and *»■ fttf.^ ^ ^ miiittilr, 1 P«-f- *»'*• j~10,'gMtr , c«» « fhews, that Antiquity „p« t. reach. Wbituker, **£*«£ lute's who either were not dlfownvl them as «° "^ft^u °aLing that all the Apollo- willing or able to Teach *« W; thu Ggroundj the Apoftle re- lick Bflwps were fuch. An» tn»1' P . *. { att to !««* ). N>» mf- quiresitolftheBifhop, .hat he be**. ™gj>£ $*£, «*, * *- 2U faith he.'l" \!"l.ZrffJ%T^^' *""•' JT -h jbdfritatm iocend, dm tnto' *, /«M "' '» ' h Apoffle fa;,£ ie, in call'd and fufficiently able to Teach other.. 1 ne ^p , ^ chQ-i that Paffage, (hewing ^w ^ftjhopmrffbe^ XK*. «. JU- fen,, and therefore we muft u"^ft.\ndcS" thVr ■ fcom * »»" *• ** %, «»rf «»* « Dtfuttd 6»rj, wh^ h* clsats ,UIttier " where Chap. ltf. ( pretended ) Principles of the Cyprianic Age* 147 where the Apoftle enjoyns Timothy to commit what he had heard from him to Faithful Men, qui eflcnt 1Kavot $ Heps JWiagai, who were them- felves able to Teach others. Citing alfoOecumenius and Gbryfoflom up-1 on the place, yea even the School-Men, Aquinas, Cajetan, Catbarinut thus expounding the Text. To this purpofe, the other Scriptures in- ftanced are pertinently applicable. Thefe Bifhops whom the Apoftle was Exhorting, AB. 20. 28. in his laft Farewell, are enjoyn'd an im- mediate InfteBim over the Flock, by the Word and Dodrine and Go« vernment thereof, without the leaft hint of a Superinfpe&ion of any one of them oT~Ter another. Thus, 1 Pet. y. 2. he enjoyns thefe Elders cr Paftors to faedthe Flock of God which it among them, taking the Over- fight thereof, ( or Exercifing an Epifcopal Authority over the fame, not over one another, or one over the reft ) neither as heing Lords over God's Heritage, over either Paftors or Flocks, hut being Examples to tbeml The 36 of the Canons, call'd Apoftolicki appoints the Bifoop to belaid a/ide, who it not diligent in teaching, and the 39 intrufts the Bijhop with the Charge of the Peoples Souls. This being clear then in Scripture, yea and in Antiquity, the Con- trariety of J, 5's Cyprianic Birtiop to this Apoftolick Bifhop is evident, x. His CyfrianicBimop is rafter Taftorumt Exercifing a Kingly Majefty over the Paftors. But of this again. ilyt He has no Perfonal Infpe&ion over any Flock, but the Adminiftration of the Word and Sacraments in the whole Diocefs is to be perform'd by his Deputes and Suffragans, who ferve him as their Lord, and the Fountain of all their precarious Adminiftration, and are aflum'd by him in partem tantum S$licitudinis9 non in Confortium Autboritatis, fcil. to ferve him in fome Deputed Admi- • niftrations, not to (hare in any part of his Authority. That fuch is the Namre of the Cyprianic Bifhop's Office, beiides the Paflages cited, is evident in the whole Strain and Scope of his Pleading So that 'tis evident, that, in this refpe<5fc alfo, he pleads for an Impoftor, not the Apoftoiick Biihop. Which will be more clear in the nexf Infta ice. Ill, Inftance, The Apoftolick Bifhop we find inftru&ed with noDe- fpotick, ArchittBonick and Nomotbethk Power and D§r»inion over the Church of God, and in fpecial over Paftors, but only with aMinifteri- al Service under Chrift, the or*ly Head and Lord of his Church, con* fitting in a Declaration of his reveal'd Will unto the People of God^ and fuitable Application thereof according to their various Cafes; That whatever Authority is intrufted to Church Officers, 'tis Minifies rial only, not Mafterly or D'.minative, or importing fuch a Dominion as is competent to Civil Magiftrates, This is evident by our Lord's ex- prefs Declarator, diftinguiihing exprefly his Service, Minifterial Offi- ciating of Paftors, and all Church Officers, and the Exercife of their T 2 Office, ■i r^fkution of ]. Sfi Vindication of the Chap. IV; T4g ALoHfuUwnoj) , 6 difcharging them Office, fhm '^rrfJjZZbf 7Z, "■* *•! The* , «*& prw^ Wrf tod's People as are, in chat Senfe, di- ftinguifh'd from £* " "^j? GfJ»,/ jtyjfcrio. who confequemly Steward, only and Dfr*l>r> f «« to jr 7/ and hav£ n0 Pr{. have a Steward, not a Mh>> *™Z'Jre„ Soh„ 9. PfiiT'SeTrrrumcifion andof the Gentiles, acknow- Famous Apofles oi™^™t^lrva»t,, and ft/W-SW^r, ledge themfelves F'"™.EUer/''\C0 as their Fellow Helpers in the with other Paftors, owning lh/hm„^Fa hful Minifter. h own'd Minifterial Office. Ep-»/>ir«, the CM a* ™™ anotherFaith- ^PW..hh.d«rFdlo«^^^,j-7;othVtMd-Fenow.Serv.n« ful Minifter* is own d by h.m as a Be. Epaphroji,us is {o own d SRiaSiSff-" 4SSMW Fello?w.Sou,dier, M^ element as his Fellow-Labourer «. 4. «. ? • .^ g yt*[\\ But now, let us take ^'^n^Pomp and Antiicriptural DomiS find him busked up in fuch a WJ^'S,^ Bilhop defcrib'd. .. nion, as is tou ath ^nt£°Zu De&e Voice in Council, to a He is fuch a Bilhop as has the S^e Detan t. , total Exdofitm of Paftors »nd Mmiiter.. « ^ / ownes n0 Pa_ ifc The <*** B^°P AnSr Depmes only and Suffragan* 5/7, ftors his Gollegues, but as Interior ^UF endow'd with He makes them fuch Succeffor ol | Aj»»»« ,., church Government, Swig* P»»» "f B*'"fm- 4 £, ? " . Level with the Laick, and had Paftors and Minifters were 011 ' «^«^' by vertue of his Abfoluo, no more Power than they, a"d'7JdeTby another, than he himfelf .Likrt, and Power, can no more I be juog ^ dQ a„ expe(ft the can judg another, another Biinop, ■ u ty Gevtn% Judgment of Ghrift, ^^\^AJZ^L $■ »", -7, »«• m»t tfth d"'"b- md ." »kL & Lfe T anent his afcribing to the Not to refume again what is ^J^eJiati-ve over the Judgment Bilhop a MMratictlVonwon'vdM *$ ^^fuchaLeginativePower & Suffrages ofPaftors,yea a Kingly M^ielty an ^ ^ ^ ^^ as he holds «o«P«e"t,,5.~Xl is n0 trueBifliop, but an Ant.fcr.ps IV. Inftance is this The ' AP°"°_"- (h Efo Inferior to the Paftor. Government the Ruling Elder or ™£ ffi and Governour, SSSPSSS ^ S»Wd.y prov'd * ». Authors Chap. IV. (pretended) Principles of the Cyprianic Agt\ |^ of that Elaborat piece,' entituled, Jus 'Divinum Regiminis Ecckf. ChaP. ir. from pag 116, &e. as from that PaiTage, Rom. 12. 6, 7 8 froni which Text having largely and learnedly Reafon'd the point theY thus fum up all. That this «^iV«^©-, or he that Ruleth is ' 1 A Member of Ghrift's Organick ISody. zly% Hath an Office of Ruling in this Body %ly .That he is an Ordinary Officer, being reckon'd up in ^p.Liftc° °tfmary tending Officers. 4ly% That he is an Officer dinma li cm all other Ordinary Officers in the Church, every one of the Officers reckon'd up having their diftina Work, the Doctor and Pallor Teaches and Exhorts* the Deacon gives and /hews Mercy, the Elder Rules, as his Title ® imports. ily, He (lands difiin- guifh'd in the diftin& Specifications of the Manner, and right Difchartre of the Office, and in the fpecial Direction thereanent. The Teacher and Paftoristo be Exercis'd in Teaching and Exhorting, the Deacon rnuft give with Singlenefs, fhew Mercy with Ghearfulnefs, the Elder muft Rule Z* <;<**?$ with Diligence, Studioufnefs. This fame point is largely Reafon'd from 1O.12.28. where in thisEnumeration of Apofties Prophets, Teachers, the Apoftle adds, Miracles or mighty Works, Gifts of Healing Helps , Governments, Diverftties, of Tongues, they do make appear that by Governments, we are to underftand certain Officers fix'd in the Ghurch of God, that thefe Governments import Rulers therein and Ghurch Officers, that they are diftin& from not onlv all Governing Officers without the Ghurch, fuch as the Political Magiftrat, Heads of Families, and the like, but alfo from all other Officers' wi thin the Church, viz,, from the five Extraordinary, and to continue but for a Sealbn, viz,. Apofties, Prophets, Miracles, or mighty Works, Gifts of Heal* ing, kinds of Tongues. Three alfo mentioned being Ordinary and to be perpetuated in the Church, viz,. Teachers, Governments, ( i.e.* Ruling Elders ) and Helps> ( i. e. Deacons who are to Help and Reifeve the Poor and Afflided ). And tho3 Evangelifls are omitted in the JLift of Extraordinary Officers, and Patters left out in the Roll of the Ordi- nary, which are reckoned up, Eph. 4. 11, Rom. 12. 7, 8. yet the Ar- gument ftands good, that they are plainly and diftin&ly recited as diftind kinds of Officers diftind from Apofties, from Prophets and Teachers, and all here mentioned. Thus the Text is Expon'd by Teter Martyr in 1 Cor. 12. zS. Taraus in kc. Vi feat or, Beza, Galvin. This point is alfo Argued largely and fully from that notable Paffage," 1 Tim. f. 17. Let the Elders that Rule well be accounted worthy of double Honour, ejpecially they that Labour in the Work and Doftrine. In this place ( as Mr. Rut herfoor Ihzs obferv'd, Due Right of Presbytery pag, 14c 1 fhe Word Eider is a Gmus, a general Epithet afcrib'd to them that Rule well* i 50 A Confutation of J, SV Vindication of the Chap. IV. well, and to thofe ^^£™^gffi^^ *Tn^ of InterPrPeters,6C^ w rernment ^^ ^ ^ as 1S alfo ev,dent in • ^n's Rod parallels, iTim. 3. 4: With y. and 12. *. Mr G;//^ * Moflbming,L,'*. j^ made the genuine Signification of hefe Greek 2. c*p, 9- p"&' Terms appear from Dlonyfius Areop. and Vlato. Again, «7*. ^efe Elders vefted with Rule in the Church are diftincT: r- n .Um fhcr T ahrmr in the Word and Dodrine, there being K.tS.&Kflir.or^^. *b, Here are two difiina E or kinds of Elders, ™. S(K*^.^r«, thofe that Rule well, & one kind. 8,*«sU *«• thole that Labour m Word as the Paftors ardDoarine.as the Doaors or Teachers, here is the other kind I Vr "ere are two Particles expreffing thefe two Spec.es or kinds «f Flders «,..««« R«/«»e, and immx £<»&««««£. The one kind iKffill.^W..k, called therefore Ruling Elders, •» It/I/i /W ,«,/JU. ^/-» ! But the other do not only Rule but over andbefides do Labour in the Word and Doftrine. 4b, Here are Two diftinft Articles diftinfily annex d to the two Parade*, are lwr °,I"""h R , ;, g they that Labour, clearly pom- L^Tdimna Perfons andKSina Offices. Finally the OM. pKfa" betwixt thefe two kinds of Elders, thefe two Part.cples, thefe two Articles, clear this abundantly, fed. the Term ^, or TXh intimating that there were fome Rul.ng Elders that did La- tur in the Word fnd Doarine, and that there were others that d.d Rrie and not Labour in the Word : Both were worthy of double Hwtr, ta iSh hey that Labour d in the Word That the Term r<„ Or <£/£fois fuch a D»/««tfw P«r««fc and Term as diftinguifhes thing jfom^h ng Perfon from Perfon is clear'd by feveral Parallels, -as JTo io. P«A 4. 21. i Tm. J.8. iTi»,.4.lo. TV ,. ,r. 2^.4..; o,, iV^32o *8 and 26. 1. The Exceptions of the Prelat.ck Party upon'this ud other Paffages, the Authors forecited have largely fcan'd. See alfo Rutherfoords Due Right of Presbytery, «*/>. 7. tf- 7- ..?;, t^6 ij.7. See alfo Vindication of Presbyterian Government and Miniftery.publilh'd by the Minifies and Elders, met in a Prov.n- ral Affembly in the Province of £W«, »«(«. ,649. from foe. ?o to 48 where 'tis made appear, Tfct /it* « Oflwr am. a» /**««■ 30. to 40. »w _fi5tt.u rh.v nil nnre and c ear from iheie Chap. IV. (pretended ) Principles of the Cyprianic Age. i 5 1 8. 14 Deut. 5-. 23. Jojh.8. ;?. 2 tf*»£i 10, 15-, T^f *£* 3faw had Elders of the People fitting and Voting in their Inferior Covfiftories, they prove from AB. 13. iy. ^#.18.8,17. ^>* 5.22. where we read of Rulers 6f the Synagogue who were neither Priefts nor Levites, yet were Rulers in Church Matters, and had Power together with the Priefts of calling Men out of the Synagogue, and of ordering Synagogue Wor- ship, John 12. 42. Aft. 12. if. That this Aflbciation of the Elders of the People with the Priefts in the Jewifh Church Government was by Divine Appointment,- they prove from this, that Mojes firft Inftituted it, and afterward Jehofophat reftor'd it according as they were direded by God, Numb. n. 16, 2 Chron. 19.8, That it belong'd tothejewiih Church, not as Jewifh, but as it was a Church, and therefore belongs to the Chriftian Church as well as Jewi/h, for whatfoever agreeth to a Church as a Church, agreeth to every Church. The premis'd Texts of the New Teftament, we find by thefe Authors largely improven to I he fame Scope, in fpecial by the Learn'd Mr. Gilk/pie in his Affertion of the Government of the Church of Scotland. See 1 Part, Chap. 1. 2, 3> 4, 5» 6, 7. Chap. 8, 9, he infifts upon the point of Antiquity,' vin- dicating feveral Teftimonies of the Antients from the Exceptions of the Prelatick Party. Several Teftimonies alfoof Antiquity may be found cited and improven by the forementiond Authors ; But the rehearfal or Vindication thereof, being much out of our way, fince our Work andDefign herein is to evince, in this, as in other points, the Diffe- rence betwixt J. S's Cyprianic and the Apoftolick Biihop, therefore we infift not upon it. Several other points of Truth in reference to the Ruling Elder may be feen clear'd in the foremention'd Affertion of the Government of this Church, and in fpecial the Confent of Proteftanc Writers, together with the Confeffion of Adverfaries themfelves are exhibited, $hap. 10. In this point then, as well as in the preceeding, it is evident, that the Cyprianic Bi/hop reprefented by J. S. is crofs to the Scripture Pattern, as excluding a necerfary Officer of Divine Ap* pointment, V, Inftance is this, The Apoftolick Bifhop in Ecclefiaftick Courts and Judicatories is found Exercising only the Paftors part in Govern- ment, that is, Concurring in Confultationa nd Decifive Votes, by com- mon Counfel, with his Fellow Paftors and Presbyters, but Exercifing no Paramount Authority therein, as is clear by the many forecited Scripture Teftimonies. He is dilcharg'd an Over-ruling and Lordjhip in this point, 1 Pet* j< 2. The Elders of rhe Chinch of Ephefus are enjoy r/d ajoynt Epijcopal Mini(ierial Infection over fhe Flocks, A8. 20. 28. I hope jf. S. wilj not d$ny them to be BiJhops properly fo call'd1 to whom* j *$ A Confutation of J. S'j Vindication of the Chap. IV. whom the Holy Ghoft enjoyns an EPifcopal Infpetfion, and that thefe Biihopsto whom the Joynt Epifcopal Infpe&ion is enjoynd, were Paftors or Elders having a Relation to that Church of Ephefus, he muft either acknowledge, or deny the plain Text aflerting fo much, v. 17, 28. compar d. Thus alfo the Paftors or Bifhops are found to have Laboured andRuVd joyntly, and are accordingly enjoyn'd a faithful Diligence therein, 1 the/. 5. »*. -H«*- }%- 7> 17. **■ A '£ • . This then being evident in the Scripture Accounts, let us fee how J S's Cyprianic Bifhop ftands Antipode to the Scripture Bifhop. 1. His Cyprianic Bifhop, as is faid, has an abfolute Negative over all the Judgments, Determinations or Votes of Paftors, as might be clear'd in multiply'd Affertions in this Pamphlet, Chap. 5. §. 37, 38. He will not have Paftors fo much as to interceed with the Bifhop, withrefpeA to the appointed time of Pennance, yea and makes it an unaccountable preemption in Fslicijfimus. He makes them to be fuch Roman Cenfors as have a Refemblance in their Vigour and Cenfure to the Great Judg in the Great Day. Presbyters oppofing in any meafure the Bifhops Statutes are, according to him, no left than Rebels againft their Authority, §. 39. This Rebellion, yea or Oppofition to the Bifhops Power, which he owns as Soveraign, Paramount and Peerlejs, he will needs have to be according to Cyprian, the fame with the Rebellion ofGorah, Dathan, and Abiram. Nay he will have fuch Oppofers worfe ; Thele having not gone out nor Erected another Altar, §. 42. He frequently, and particularly, §, 44. Exalts the Sacerdotal Licentia and Sovereign Power of Prelats, aflerting peremptorily their abfolute Licentia, and that they were intirely and abfolutely t&afltrs of their own Resolutions with refpeft to Paftors or Pref- byters. Chap, 7. $% 4- The Bifhop was free to determine matttrt relating to bis own Church by vertue of 'his Abfolute and Independent Power, mi^ht order and difpofe the Affairs of bh Church as he judg d he could an/wer to God. I am forry, our Prelats faw not an Encroachment upon the Bifhop's Power, when they afcrib'd to King Charles a Soveraign Authority over this Church, to difpole of all the Concerns thereof as he fhould think fit. In this Government he aflerts the Cyprianic Bifhop to be accountable to God only* Pray how were our Scottijh Prelats accountable to King Charles in their Adminiftration of Government? He tells us, he bad the free Determination of his will in the Aaminiflraticn of hit Church. And lo much free power of hit own Arbitriment, that he might do in hk Diocefe what feem'd good unto him, ff. 4. 2/7, If we fhali conuder the Nature and Authority of our Seottifh Prelacy with relpe& to Presbyters in the late Edition thereof, 'tis evident that in Parliament 1662. they were redintegrated Chap. IV. ( pretended ) Principles of the Cypriaate Age, i 53 redintegrated to their Epifcopal Fun&ion, Precedency in the Church, Poiver of Ordination and Genfurti, and all Church Difcipline to he performed by them, with tJdvice (only ) and of juch of the Clergy ( only ) as they jheuldfind ( they themfelves being Judges ) of known Loyalty and Prudence. They are alfo redintegrated to ail their Priviledges poftefted by them in Anno 16%"?. when of themfelves they fram'd the Book of Canons, eftablim- ing their Sole Power and Dominion, over all Church Judicatories, razing Clafiical Presbyteries and Parochial Seffions, and drew up the Liturgy and Book of Ordination, without the leaft (hadow of Advice from this Church, Threatening Excommunication againft the Oppofers of their Gourfe, So that 'tis evident* that the Prelacy lately exiftent with us, and the Cyprianic Prelac defcrib d by J, S. ftands, upon this Ground alfo, condemn'd as an Antifciiptural Impofture and Usurpa- tion, VI. In§anee is this, the ApoHle Paul** Bifhop is one Name and Thing with the Papr, as might be largely made appear from the Scriptures frequently cited t Phil. i. 1. thefe Bifhops are Saluted in the Plurality, as having a Paftoral Relation to that Church at Philippe without the kail hint of any Presbyters Subjed to them in the Government there- of, which indeed were impoffible, were they fuch Diocefans as this Man pleads for ; And in the next place, the Apoftle Saluting the Deacons, he muft needs in the firft Glaufe underfrand the Paftors of that Chureh. Thus A$.%o>z%. compar'd with -v. 17. the Elders of the Church of Ephefta have a joynt Epifcopal hjfieclion enjoy n'd them over that Church, 1 Pet. j . 31 the Elders are alfo en joy n'd to Exer- cife the fame joynt Epifcopal Authority over the Flocks of God, and peremptorily difcharg d the Ufurping a Prelaticai Lordfhip over them- TtU I. 7. the Apoftle having defcrib'd the Elder or Pallor, gives this Reafon of his Defcripnon, becaufe the Bifhop muft be blamele(sy &c Which were no Reafon, but falfe Reafoning, contrary to common Senfe and Rules, if the Bifhop were an Officer fo highly Paramount to the Pallor as J.B. pretends. Thus i Tim. %, x. the Apoftle defcribes the Scripture Bifhop by the Paftoral Qualifications and Work, and none elf©, S$ that 'tis evident from thefe Texts inftane'd, that the Bi/hop and Paftor, or Presbyter* are in the Scripture accounts all one, having the fame Name, the fame Office of Teaching and Governing the Flocks, the lame Qualification*! the fame Exenife of the Office, &c. This being then evident, what a Spurious Brood the Cyprianic Bifliop Is, whom J.. S« obtrudes, and how oppofite to the premis'd Scripture accounts of the Bifhop,is beyond all peradventure clear, fince in all the forsmemion'd R$ipe&s he owns him as dHiinft from, and Superior to U the A Confmthn of J. ft nnMutlon of * Chap. IV. 154. * f. j:n;nf* Name and Epithet, fctl. of a the Paftor. 1. H« <™« ^Jfi* S, His diftina Office, as the Bifhop, through hu rt*P^. *», 0|theDiocerc ?fc His Supsreminent.proper.Sole Gu.der ana ^ ^ and plock diftinft Work, fcii to ^P^;dh4t70Aebfo,l°e Power and Authority, % *USrSho.eepow Kdina'tionand Jurifdiaion Monopolized lwvin| the whole lower Negative over all Pallors In? Ge"« as h may m ke* what ufe of their Judgment and Adv.ce Judgments, as ; h- ma ly ma« CotlfequenCe ot the whole, he mutt he pleafes. And, in a *°w. Qualifications from the Paftor. So needs be fupposd to toe dm ^ ^ fo and fM that, in all theft : relpeas, n ^ and fuperiour tQ he fme» °f « F»"' * 10? i™" , 24. And confequendy appeals an An- Siur KXrt condem^d fn the Sacred Records, as oppofue to ^Vl^ Stf SS3B?!- offer is this. **, or the «-# °»r Ep'ff,TU Oar^eTaafts will needs have him the Pattern thority of Evangel dt. Our^ rre is [he ftronger agalnft of an Hierarchical Bifh op, » «*» « « * r| f ,f hom they wW needs them. Moreover ^ ^^™£%Zion of Kmih »i.r m of Hand,, in this .fcreat ana arrogate to him- Sfe P^ntS^a PreUtiea, Abfohue Domi- f ,;.»;, BilKop, whom J- S- »b«»£«' For 1. The Power of Ordi- tontradiaion to the Scripts B'^/j^ogarive. to which Paftors nation is his Sole and I *^™^™« J a RSight or Title, zfy, His or Presbyters have not the lean snacw f d or Confecrated to I*,** Prelate *s confeqoewly to betaa ugu . fame paramount his Office, by fuch precluded Prelates, a^a pw ^ ^ and AbfoluK Attthom with h mett j ™£ Buffing) byPr0. pofirion of Hands, a certain Badg- o ^ So ,„ pon ture Accounts of the K&o^** Pat)l himfelf ( whom J. S. no dorUllSwUdge a^and Eminent Biihop, *» he, with Chap. IV. (pretended) Principles of the CyprlfLmc Age. 155 all his Tribe, will needs derive the Epifcopal Authority from the Apoftles, and do hold Prelates their proper Succeflbrs in their Epifco- pal Office) this great Bifihop and Apoftle, we fay, fets the Fun&ion and Office of Preaching the Gofyel, which is the proper Work and Duty of the Paftor, in a higher Bench and Sphere, to (peak fo, above the Refloral Office of Ruling and Governing, in it felf considered, even altho' the Ruler acquit himfelf well in that Function, as is clear in that no* table Pafiage cited, 1 tim. 5. 17. the Elders that Rule well count worthy of double Honour, e/peciaVy they that Labour, in the Word and Doclrine. _ On the contrary, and in Contradiction to the ApoOle, J. S. makes his Cyprianic Bilnop to be, in this, of a higher and fupereminent Au-j thority above the Paftor, who Labours in the Word and Doctrine, that he has the fupereminent Authority of Ruling and Government concentred in him ; So that his Office, properly and formally, ftands in this Ruling Power, as it is diftincl: from, and fupereminent unto the Paftoral Teaching Office, which clearly inverts and overthrows the Apoftles Rule and grand Statute premis'd. IX.Inftance, The pretended typrianic Eifliop, obtruded by J. S, he, with his Fellows» will needs have properly to fucceed the Apoftles in their Formal Office, foil. In a Supreme and Singular Ecchfiafiick Au< thority over Paftors, fo that this their pretended Apoftolick Office ( in the Senfe of our Epifcopal Pleaders ) puts the Ballance of Government ftlely in their Handst fets them to the Churches Helm, as the only Steerfmen. Thus, Chap. ?. § 2, ;, 4, j. But fo it is, that the Scripture Bilhop ( if we will believe the Scrip- ture Account of this Office ) has no fuch Supremacy, no fucji Apofto- lick Authority and Succeffion, in a proper formal Senfe, competent unto him ,• Since the Scripture Bifhop, One in Name and Thing with the Paftor, is, in the Sacred Records, fet on a Level with his Fellow Faftors or Presbyters in point of Government ,• Is, together with them, call'd to Feed and Govern the Flocks in fuch Official Parity, as is abfo- lutely exclufive of this pretended Apoftolick Super eminency : And 'tis clear, that, according to the Scripture Accounts of the Apoftolick Of- fice, in a proper formal Senle, no Ordinary Officer could be capable offucceeding them, fince this fupereminent Infpe&ion over the whole Catholick Church planted and to be planted, whereof they were the Gatholick Officers in Aclu Exercito, joyn'd with their Infallibility in Doclrine and Government, rendered theirOffice 2bfolutely incapable of a Succeffion. So that this Cyprianic Prelate of J. S's forging, fince founded upon fuch an Antifcriptural FaKhocd, mull: needs, as an lm« poftor, evanifri before the Scripture Light. U 2 X, Inftancei , ,6 A ConfrUtio* of], « V*M***on of the Chap. IV v t * ^ The Winture Bifhop, according to the Apoftle P«*/s X. Inftance, The Scripture Dim p, b feg ^ fuch a Gharader and Description, i luct a gf {fh ^ unt0 tht Sve rfSSdto SftWte Prelatical Infpeaion ir .any Officer exciuuveoid.iu^ o Extraordinary Officers, ren- over his Fellows. To (ay, that tnetS ^ r / Extraordi* ^'fo'iH, *LHTi**«fc Palate pleaded for by J. S. is a meet ftT* ?jgt?6 £*SStoBtt?S «h"r Judicial Cognizance, Bre hismeer S-ant^r ^ Jh« , «. ,6. g »*. £• ^ Let us luppofe a Cto*»,1' Conhftorial Meeting of Scrintb, pretending '» » ",3, Apoftle, what think we his Prophets, and this represented o tne,fP°' •„. If we believe Anfwer rtiduld have been m Dec.non o^th „ $^n»™ ™ ac. I"6 T& ^tS woddT»« condtl'd him as an arrant Ufur- prA»dVby*hPe toe Reafon, the (fc** Prelate, whom ?. S, obtrudes, »«* "•^Sfart.er, I muft needs challenge ?./s Re- Chapr IV. (pretended) Principles of tfo Cyp/ianic Jge. t$f defd, that, i. Thefe Eminent Dolors mentioned, and whofe Or4 thodoxy, or rather Heterodoxy is inftanced, were, in his Efteem,1 and according to his Character, Stars of the firft Magnitude in the Churches Horizon, efpecially his Infallible Cyprian, whofe Judgment and Practice confequently, The will not doubt) had a very fignal Influence, both upon Church Officers and Members, and ( as the Vrimum Mobile to other Inferior Orbs and Spheres ) directed and over- rule their Motions. 2/7, It will not be deny'd by him, yea is clearly' aflerted, that they had the fame Impreffions of the Grounds mention ci by him, which, in his Senfe and Pleading, could not but keep them clofs, in Principles and Practice, to the Purity of Divine Ordinances, and the Apoftolick Inftitutions, both in point of Do&rine, Worfhip, and Government. He will not difowne it, that they were accurate Obfervers of any thing that look'd like an Innovation or Recefs from the Apoftolick Purity, that they found it in their Share, or their Pri- viledge, their Expectation, or their Security, fome thing, or other, fome way, or other* that might oblige to have their Eyes upont^ That they were free of the Temptations of Secular Grandure ,• Had under Confideration Queftions anent Schifms and Momemuous Points of Difcipline^ Were well acquainted with the Excellent Records of that Age; Yea enjoy'd Extraordinary Manifestations of the Spirit a« That they were near to the Apoftolick Times, and were well acquaint- ed with the State of Government, in which the Apoftles left the Chur- ches 1 That they were bound, by Principle and Intereft, to refift Innovations $ By Principle, as holding, that the Apoftles, acl:ed by an Infallible Spirit, fettled the Government of the Church ,• That all Aberrations from the Apoftolick Inftitutions were Criminal ; By Inte- reft, with refped to the Enemies of Religion, who otnerways would have fortified their Pretenfions, that Chriftians were fanfiful and pee- vi/h Fanaticks, as not adhering firmly to the Original Inftitution of their Founders* and thereupon have made this a Handle for their Perfecution. Now, in point of Fadl, let there be a Reflection upon their inftanc'd Principles; and therein we will have a clear Vidimus* how fully thefe grand Reafons and Grounds adduc'd by him, reach'd their Integrity and Purity, their exacT: Conformity to the Divine Rule. Should we trace this Conformity in point of Doctrine, the Scripture holds out Juftirication by Free Grace,* How well they walkM up to this Rule, we- have heard. The Apoftles affirm Man to be Dead in Sin, and thefe jgreat M^n own'd a Natural Strength of Free-WilL The Script tur.eip.eaksfpajingly of Angels, and abfoiutely reprobates all Religious feAddrelfijbg 158 A Confutation of]. SV Vindication of the Chap. IV. Adclrefling them in Prayer j How well they walk'd up to this Rule, we have alfo heard. The Scripture fpeaks Honourably of Marriage ,• And how they have difpa raged it, we have alfo heard. The Apofto- lick Do&rine concludes all Divine Ghaftifements tending to the Morti- fication of Sin within the Limits of this Life ,• How they walk'd up to this Apoftolick Principle,we have alfo heard-The Apoftles-do reprobate all Religious Addrefles to Saints departed in Prayer j We have alfo heard, how this was obferv'd; As likewife, how the Purity of Apo- fiolical Inftitutions,, in point of Baptifm and the Lord's Supper, was adher'd unto, or rather difown'd in the Superfluous Fra&ices in- ftanced. But, in point of the Government of the Church, we fee how the great Advantages mentioned by jr*. S. kept thefe great Lights of the Third Age (height and clofs to the Apoftolick Inftitutions. i. They walk'd up fo clofely to the Apoftles Do&rine, in point of the Presbyte- ries Authority in Ordination, that, in J.S's Principles, they abfolutely difown'd it. The Apoftles deliver'd to the Churches this Doctrine, that the Epifcopal Fun&ion hath a proper immediate Relation to the Flock ,• They adher'd fo clofely, in J. S's Principles to this Do&rine, that they own'd no fuch immediate Relation, but fuch an Epifcopacy, as has an immediate Refpeft to Suffragan Presbyters. The Apoftles enjoyn'd to all Minifters, or Rifhops, a Minifteriai Service exclusive of all Dominion ; They adher'd fo clofely to this Apoftolick Rule, that, in J. S's Principles they own'd and exercis'd a Kingly Ablolute Domw nion and Soveraignty over Church Officers and Members. The Apoftles, in point of Church Government, do authorize Elders who Rule, and are diftinguifti'd from the Elders that Labour in the Word and Doctrine; They adher'd fo clofely to this Principle, that they abf >lutely difown'd fuch an Officer. The Apoftles, in Dotfrine and Pradice, authoriz'd and own'd Paftors or Presbyters Effenthl Intereft in Government ,• The Gyprianic Bilhop, J. S. aflerts to be fuch, as abfolutely difownes any fuch Intereft of Paftors in Government, and, in this point, fets them on a Level with the People, yea below them; So clofely thefe great Lights of the Third Age adhered to this Apoftolick Principle. The Apoftolick Bilhop is one, in Name and Thing, with the Ptftor,- Thefe great Lights of the Third Age, in J. S's Principles, focloiely adher'd to this Doctrine, that they fix'd many and Effential Differences betwixt them. The Apoftle Faul prefents Ordination even of an Evangelift, as perform'd by a Presbytery; The great Lights of the Third Age walk'd lo clofely up to this Rule, that in J. S's Principles, they own'd Ordination to be the Bifliop's Sole Prerogative. The fame great Apoftle Chap. IV. (pretended ) Principles of the Cypriajbic Age. 1 5 9 Apoftle of the Gentiles (and, who will doubt, the ftme Harmonious >$enfe and DoSrine of all the Apoftles ) fets the Office and Fundion of Preaching the Gofpel above that of Ruling, limply confidered - The Cypriank Bifhop, in J. S's Principles, walk'd up fo clofely to this Apoftolick Doctrine, that he own'd his Office properly to confift in Ruling, and that therein the Supereminency and Excellency thereof over the Paftor doth confift. The Apoftles, in Doctrine and Practice prefent their formal Office of Apoftolate, asof fuch a Nature and Ex- tent,and directed to fuch an immediate end,as it appears Extraoidinary and attended with fuch Priviledges as can be competent to no Ordinary Officer, and therefore, in a proper formal Senfe, could not be iucceed- ed unco ; The typrianic Bifhop adher'd fo clofely to this Ruie and Doctrine, that, in J. S's Principles, and in the Pleadings of his Fel- lows, they held an Office the fame with that of the Apoftolate, as fucceeding thereunto in the full Extent of the Apoftolkk Power. The Apoftles enjoyh'd all Ordinary Church Officers, none excepted, to be fubject to the Collegiate Meeting of the Officers thereof; For, the Pro- phets cloath'd with Minifterial Authority of Adminiftring the Word and Saciaments, as likewife of Discipline and Government, theApoftle would have lubject to the Judicial Cognizance of their Collegue Pro- phets, both as to their Life and Doctrine, 1 Cor. 14. 29,52. compar'd- The Bifhop of the Tnird Age; in J. S's Principles, did fo clofely adhere* to this Rule, that he exe-.cis'd as Supreme, Singular, Uncontroulable Authoricy over all the Paiiors of his Liilrict or Diocefs, tho' never fo large, and an Abfolute Negative over all their Judgments or Votes nay exercis'd fo Abfolute a Power over them, that he was not fo much as oblig'd to ask their Advice in the Exercife of this his Dominion Now, here is a Myftery fuiting J. S's Skill to Unriddle the fame. Thefe great Doctors and Lights of the Church in that Third Age, hav- ing all the Advantages inftanced by him, together with a fix'd corre-* (pondent Resolution of Adherence to Divine and Apoftolick Inftituti- ons, in point of Doctrine and Worfliip, and, in fpecial, in point of Church Government ; And he will, no doubt, owne their Defign and Inclination accordingly; Yet, in the momenfuous points inftanced clearly crofting and contradicting the fame, and this both in Judgment and Practice. That the Scriptures inftanced do condemn the premis'd Accounts of their Practice and Principles, is evident to any that will iuitabiy confider the Scope and Senfe thereof, as exhibited by all Or- thodox Interpreters. So that, of neceffity, J. S. muft either impeach this genuine Senfe* and make it regulable by the premis'd Principles and Practices of thefe great Men in the Third A^e, ( and thus owne and t6o •ACoH^utUHof}.rtV,H^tk^fth Chap. IV. \nA »ffart a Principle evidently overthrowing the Scriptures Authority andaUert ainncipisc . ^ Inluffic eney of (he pretended fcffiurf the Ground and Foundation-^ his whole PnnpMot. WnX th' Scripture Biihop ftands fo deferibM, that h.s Power •s&t ffi oS'4,,, &&i*. ^»* »u*» i Th he Lea Matter of the Houfe Difchargcs bis Servants a IWMe t>£m\%r Heir Fellow, or the Exercife of fuch Authonty upon fhemTsVof this Nature,- Commending, in Oppofinon thereunto, Mimfterial Humble Servieeand Diligence in the Faftoral Office And 5JI ArfnfHe 2 Tim *.4. ihioyns tfwof*; ( our Prelatical Men's pre- Zmtypkafe Im »bohti Mm bim io h a SoMier So that both places coUated | do clearly infer not only an abfolute Difeharge of Civil Rule to aU Church Officers, but whatever Government . hath in »( Nature and Esercife an Affinity with a Regal or Cm) Dominion. But that the C}frh«k Bi&op pleaded for by 5.S, «?*««; » thefe Scriptures, Is evident two ways. i. His Mw M,op is cloathed with a Trihmfte», cm mm, yaAbfrhte f»(r,Cfe;,f.J S,,Vl4o,4.. Yea is the fame to his Diocefs, that * Kty « t,h. «> 46 47, 48, «K Befides his Smrfotti SMm< Mmom, § 1 J. 2*. •Is he a&rtsthde Prerogatives of the Cy?w»i« Btlhop, fo the &»;t?tatconcfilethis, i.hecan. with the premiftd I Scriptures difcharging all Church Officers the Imangleraent of Civil Affairs,, and Sat unde? the Terrible infmuated Faniflunent ana Th«a nw4 of MvSd and rejected by the Lord Jefe* as none of to &** « £rv!U and Souldiers. Let bim reconcile it, if he can, w th that Scrip* • W»T* wher^ th< JurdjetoChrift, the true Hoil gwMMtt ftsrtrs *« * *»*"*««• ?«» otf Vtniktttto* of the Cliap. IV. ,n?rw hUPleadineis of this Nature, needs no renewed ptmonftratyj Tu ca i/rWreadv offcrd ■ Since, from thefe Writings, as is ftid 'KreTe^ and a final Decifion of ;he laid, ^Pre"n« b*ween presbyterians and Epifcopalians, yea and Tftop th i^MoutS « to all their Reafonin« from- Scripture and f?nm thefe Wrirines and the Pradice of that Age to evince the ne- cXv of fiSffl Government, fo that this ^^'WjW ccinty 01 r,HucuH difowne or feparate from the lame, ^e&«rio«d^."' impute the premisd Infallibility to that AJ both in he Queftiono^S, and Right vis « d.ent » »»**" Chill' confide" thathe founds this Charge, and the Dmne Right men- ^on-duoonhs Ground and Topick, That the D.v.ne R,ght and In- fthnfion of Eoifcopacy w» an ArticU of their Belief inthat Age. C rDroceed with our Author laft mentiond, we cannot ftand .dL a °arPge Reherrfal and Account of the weighty and important Grounds which he offers of the premis'd Judgment of the Reform d Church' Taken from the ImperfeSion of Regeneration m tb» Life and ^atwX'.wand Prof^ *« i« fart, I tor. ,3.9. from the «»b»Good»e,. OtherlTf lu alio fhaB be M off. He argues further from the FalUbiUty o ah Pafto s, Governours, or Members of the Church apart , From the SLI^nra's Si ence of anv fuch Infallibility ; From the Apoftle Paul s- wK . ^ Churcl, Vlome it felf of tW Hazard of Drfe*on , ^om the Inftance of the Fall of the Jewifl. Church Rom ,,. zo Be- ■ t t TT.U.li.f then were broken off, and thou ftandefi by. Faith. Be not Z"'l t fd but Fear V 2 . For if Q*i frti «•» th, Natural Stanches SiS'fcA-**. He reafonsfrom the Experience of rif AVel of the Church of //,,«/. from their Deletion together with LtShimfeVf Emi. M. and under the Judges, Jfdg. z. and under 1Z wSdVndxiolmou. Ki»P, from to Error ol the Synagogue, Chap. IV. (pretended ) Principles of the Cypipnic Age. 16$ or chief Sanhedrim, in the Days of our Saviour, cc/rrupting the Law of God by their manifold Traditions, making the fame of no effect thereby. - « . . L t% - Further, from the New Teftament Prophecies, concerning the Dev feaion of the Chriftian Church, and the Inundation of Errors, where- by it was to be overwhelm'd, by the means of falfe Prophets, falfe Chrifts, and feducing Spirits, Mai. 7. 15. and Ch 24. v: 24, 1 Tim .4 1 2 Vet 2. p 2 John 18. From the Tryal and Examination of the- Doarine enjoyn'd unto the Faithful, 1 John 4. 1. and that we are call'd to the Li»w and to the Tcftimony ( Jja, 8. 20. ), as the only In-r 3Nor iPuVwe'nere omit the Judgment of the Orthodox which he produces*," upon the point of Antiquity, Z**fl.p- ^f'^*^ Adverfary who pleads thefe grand Marks of the Church, fal. The Name ofCaMici Antiquity , Duration, the Succeffion of Bijbops, the Harmony of the Voclrine with the Ancient Uunh, ( the grand Topicks of J. S. ) Thef.Q after he has made appear, that Antiquity ( fo much idolizd by 7 S and his Affociates ) is neither an Eficntial, Proper, nor Inferrable Mark of the Church, he adds, that it is moft obfcure and fallacious. OblcuriJUma faith he, quia ejus Cognitio perJet ex accurata omnium jeculo- rum Coznitiom, quotufquifque autem eji qui p jfit banc Notitiam afaui, & certo fcire wand* Uc vel Ma DocJrina & Eccltfi* cafmt. The Obicurity of this Note of Antiquity he proves, becauie the Certainty thereof de- pends upon the exaa Knowledge of all Ages, but where is the Man, faith he that is able to reach and attain this Knowledge, and infallibly to underftand when this or that Doarine or Church had its beginning. Unfortunate Men who had not the Happinefs to Confulc our great Doaor J, 5. who could have taught him the Certainty of Antiquity from Oral tradition, Chap, i § 44> 4 J, 4*. fc' . J f But thus proceeds our Author in his lecond Charge, viz. 1 heMark of 'Antiquity is fallacious. And let us hear hisReafon, Nam ut Gabionita?, faith he, fimulata long* Profe&iow,.. deeeperunt Ifraelitas, fie Jlntiquitatem multi mentiuntur, qui hm tantum aut nudiuflertius orti funt, & quorum in* wnta valde funt recentia. That, as the Gibeonites deceiv'd the Ifraelites, in feigning a long Journey, fo there are many make a lying pretence of Antiquity, to cover Inventions that are but ofyeit;rday. lo this he adds, that the Pagans, in their Difputes againft Chnftwns, did always provoke them to alledg'd Antiquity. That Jufim, Afel. 2; afcribes to the Heathens, that, in Debates, they had this Cant, Bonum eft vtteres Cmfuetudincs fervare, it is good to keep the old Cuiroms; "Xhat Infi'm afferts,, that to prefer Cuff omxand Am^I. H IWfar* ----- - - Qiccg t6S A Caution rfi fc Vh&uthny the Chip,IV. e r xa i i. .fthi tmlith That Symmacbm, in Efip. aa Thee* Thu of the ^"/"f'f'% ™Ul;.. j". pleads thus, Si Lta v£tm Au. dofium mi Ambrof. uh\*-EW;J°j/tli tct fecu!ll fide,, & («j«mJi «. tboritatem ReligiorM, ?»ffj"v('l That if Antiquity conciliates H. P«rw«<> «*/««" fM'/f"K„ea„a follow that Religion and Authority to Rel.g.on, we rnuft owne ana o s IZL.tbat'hy hdi it peculiar to exmm *>bat w. thus Mva i Wto 8 ^^^j^r^^^c saw fage of Ctf ««», Eftfi. 74- ,ttlat. „f i Moollv Error As alfo that other laying, *W- °3; *J y gedquid, qui ante cmnes e/l, Cir;/w thefs Vo.ce »»»*"«» f^ but what Chuff hath done, who i, before »^»^^b*^feCw Ae Cuftoms of Men but the 5S ol'bor AdVnJ %-gle Pa«afiOf j*-)**-^ i. where he rejects '»« ^'"/, Reiiainn Thus, Lib. i. w». Afoww*. c^fider wKbe found -^X^^tf^^^^S Sprite * ^J'^ Scr-roture is Divine and Ltbentick, more thor adds, that fince only the benpture is i^ iv im r au whence ; . " i,,, 0n nrher Wri'ines, but the Writings ot fathers, wnence '**« ^^/with refSa 10 Men, who are changeable and die, ty, tf nndecftood wi h rel put i ^ New Do(9rine may Chap. IV. ( pretended) Principles of the Cypriaiiic Age. i6? pal Chairs, becaufe fuch as fit in them may change the Do&rine of their Predeceffors. Antiquity, faith he, mu(t be meafurd only by the DoSrine flowing from the Holy Scriptures. Thef.\%, 14. He overthrows one main Ground and Topick of J. S. and his Fellows, which BeUarmine prefented before them, Lib, 3. de Ecclef. Milit. Cap. 5*. who, in ail fignal Changes, will have the Author, the Time, the Place, demonftrable, who alfo impugn'd the Doctrine' &c, Our Author calls this a fubtile Figment and meer Illufien, which he illuftrates by this Similitude/ If one, faith he, Jhallfinda Man faffn in a Ditch, (hall he doubt or deny, that he is fallen into it againji the Sight of his own Eyes, unlefs he fir ft underfl4ndwhen he fell into it, or hy whom be was Cafl into the fame. If it can be dfcmonftrated, faith he, that an Afifertion is not deliver'd in Scripture, the Change of Truth into a Lie is thus fuffi- ciendy evident, altho' neither the Time nor Place of this Mutation, nor the Author of the Opinion is known. The Rule of Truth which God has given to us is the Word; not the Hiflory of Ages ,• True Antiquity therefore muft be made good from Scripture. Behold all J. S*s Suggeftions, in point of Antiquity, blown away with a Breath. Let that which he has The/* 29. againft the Argument drawn from the Succeflion of Biihops be duely pondered, which will evidently confirm what is faid. He tells us ef Annas and Caiaphas Succeeding to- Aaron in the *Prieflhood; The Scribes and Pharifees Succeeding to the Fathers and Interpreters of the Law; the Arrians Succeeding the Orthodox : He ill* fiances alfo the Greek Shurch boaflingofan uninterrupted Succefjion of Bifhops from the Apoflles : That local and perfoiial Succeflion may be without the Succeflion of the Do&rine, and that it can not be a true Church which rejects the Apoftolick Doctrine. To this purpofe, many pregnant Paffages might be cited from the Famous and Learn'd Dr. Strang, de lnterp. & Perf, Scrips de Jud. Gontr. &c. Lib, i.Gap* 16. to prove that the Church is not Infallible Judge in Controversies of Religion. His firft Argument runs thus, Nutius Judex refiriclus & aligatus, &c: No Judge reftri&ed to a Law or Rule, plac'd by a Superior, can be call'd abfolutely Infallible. But the Church is thus reftridied. Ergo, &c. The Minor he proves from Ephef. 2. 20, and Deut. 9, 32, 1 8, 14. Jofh. 2g. 6. If.S. 20, citing Auguji, de Unitate Eccl. Caps 3.. who {hews that we muft fearch for the true Church in the Scrip- tures. The next Argument he draws from the Churches Mutability, which ftands in oppofition to Infallibility. Further, he thus Reaibns* That if any Man or Company of Men were Infallible judge in matters of Faith, then our Faith fhould depend upon a meer Humane Judg- ment ^ l68 A ConfoUthH of ). SS indication of the Chap. IV; „ • '• ,n„,t« Argument that a Divine Fath cannot ta that Chapter, dearly overthrow,ng | S s E ™ap «. Tfc/. #' AJt firce it s an entire Body, made up of particular parts and Ground, that fince it lsan cimi > . obnoxious t0 Error, asbe- Churches, ^d every particular Churcn is neceffailry foiloW!, fore had been | demonn rated ,hen« ^™?> lofc its Integrity. that this whole Body „ of teh N r ^ y ^ ^ That place, Mattb. »* 20; '*"" !j„ded for the Infallibility of Gene- £ Cou' "1 "hey T ;f 1 erpret^nd appty, N- ■*« Wl* ,M Pr»»#»» .***««<• /•*'»*'; cu„fe ;„°W/ N^ "uTpends the We«Condu«,» , nee * C «* "J^rf ^P ( performance of the p 0m le. ft S Condition is performed : Iut3efte Condon be performed, this Promife can have no otherwife. u ^ alfo Mmf * tell;ng us that Aaron ' srf. umv,rf. E ,d in the Fai,h when framing the Golden Can rJ.l i»K. ^d b^ding an Altar before it, £W. !*.•*,.?• W.-J. pt*&fi» ainambaUk' „' f„ Altar, according to the Similitude of in maKing aii , Brazen Altar.which was that in Dm**, putting .tin he p ace .oia* » wheni in the beforetheLord aX,^.i6 18 u, .a, KC , chriftj great Council, he concluded and Q< periwaded out y<,4» ii. to. adding, K«M7; that line i «« t- __ & the Scriptures, ^ Commanded by Au horny a ^ ent fot the Church of God that lhe has in tn« = F be. ft* of Faith i No. ;>"Vn^l%ett n fefuhr ^r, that thefe places of yond all hazard of E ™£ ^ £^ghS£„ is' call'd 14= Villa, and Scripture i J,m. ;. if. where tne w . G,m»i*f1r*b andth atofMrf 2 .7 *^™ anPd'[hat Jj Ma«A. 18. 17. '/ *« ae£/2« " b"" ,, h.L„n to orove an InfaiiWtt) ,n tbe md a ?Mk*» ; cannot at all be drawn to prove a £ ^ ^ G&mi, lines they do only point at the Unties 01 ins Chap. IV. (pretended) Principles tf tie Cjpiift&cJge: ify her Paftors, and do therefore pronounce an Infallibility in fo far a* the Scripture is adher'd to, and in that refpeft only/ The Famous Rivet * gives thus the Senfe of the Reform'd * Cathoi.or. Church; The Adverfary, faith he, (/til. theJcfuitA»7*M, 'hed.Traki. agdinftwhom he Difputes ) denies that the Church can ®**ft'3*pHi> Err, fcil the Vifible Church Militant, as he had before l83' defin'd and explained the fame. Nos contra, faith he, ipfam & errare pofe '& fapius errajfe afferimus. We on the contrary do'affert both that the Church may Err, and often foath Err'd. Ideoque dicimus ipfius (ententiam Definitivam nee certam nee Fidei infaUibilem Regulam efte pojje. And do therefore hold that the Churches Definitive Sentence can neither be a certain nor infallible Rule of Faith. ■■ i . ■ . ■ Adding, Selct veritatis Regula cum fit Verbum Dei3 &c. That fince the Word of God is the only Rule of Truth, wherein no Lie nor Imperfection can be found, every Church, and all the Members of the Church are to be brought to this Touchftone, and meafur'd by this Rule. Thereafter he Anfwers to the premis'd Scriptures, to the Scope and Senfe above touch'd. Chamierm, [ Tanjlr. Cathol. Tom. $\ de Natura Eccl. Cap. 14. whereof the Title and Infcription is, Ecckfiam in Religione errare pofie & folere demonjlratur. He demonftrates, that the Church, both may err, and ufually doth. ] upon this Controverfie, Whether tbeGhurch mayerr> propofes thefe three Conclufions, 1. Ecclefia in his ten'n Militant potefl errare, that the Church Militant on Earth may err. 2. Ecclefia Externa, feu Vifibilis tot a errare potefl, & totaliter atque finaliter, h. e. non (alum hdc vel ilia particularism fed etiam universalis Frofirentium Turbat in rebus plurimis, imo (ape in omnibus ad Religienem fyeflantibus omnino errare foteft, & fapifftme ip/a errat. Imo etiam inter dum pernici'fis & fundamental libus Erroribus obruta ejje definit. Tota ineptam ilia Vifibilis Ecclefia errdrt pot e[i fundament aliter, at nOn totum iDius, quatenus nempe imrnixtos habet Fl« deles, vel Ecclefia Vifibilis tota potefl errare in Fundamenlo} fi (umatUv Oppo- site, at non fi (umatur Compofice quatenus conjunela eft cum Inv'tfibili. That the whole External Yiiible Church may err, yea and totally and finally, that is, not only this or that particular Church> but alfo the Univerfal Multitude of Profeflbrs may, and oftentimes doth abfolutely err in many things, yea and in all points of Religion. It may alfo dis- appear* being overwhelm'd with pernicious and fundamental Errors. The whole Vifible Church, I fay, may fundamentally err, but not abfolutely, as to all that is included therein, in fo far as the Faithful are mixed therein ; Or thus, The whole Vifibk Church may err in the Foundation, ii undetftood in a Stnfe Oppefite-to the Faithful andEle# Y but tfft 'A CmfrMhn #f J. SV VkOctikk of tk Chap. IV. 7 t - „nHc,ftand it in the ComWnA Senfe, or as conjoynd but not .f «er"nTdne;™ned " Concluf.on is, EcfrjS. &*»" f» I™- with tte Chntch In«lft* • »• ^.^ „. iM/dr, wi fibilis, ***** eatbolZ" Vtet the Invifible and Internal Catholick ti/irvM /»»' "hitlers ofeffermoment.which are not fo neceffary aT\ ™Vor irStf. U The fi X and fe'cond Conclulion he proves to be known or pradt> j°- , ; m cbaf.i,. the contrary Opi- at »argc m this Chapter w B ^ lab'orious Work> w recite „ion of «to Papife^we" * ^ ^ Divine ^ ^ 8M3K25K*! " needful to fuch as underftand the ^f^^Wa^ffime upon what isfaid, If the Principles But now, to apP'y *»0 ' UD iftinE[„ the Third Age be, in point oi »nd '"^ra cerwin Rulfoollging all the Churches, and the Government, a certa n i ku eg s peradventure, the Touch-ftone of *«*»«« .'"£$ ne Js be ,aid down as tfc A/b W jWrf»» of foch an WJ'gJSkr fo repugnant to the Judg* moving this fiamous ^V^Xnrf fciurck.? the whole Frame SSr^^,fc overthrown and falls to the Ground. . F a d f Teftimonies fup- have had, »»«f ^»" "^o 51.) ^cS-in Knowledge, yea full ^^rance ot'th'a F™m of' Government the Apoftles left in thefe •Churche!. whofe Station they livd to finilh <^ wuh 'he > SSEtSSK *KB& Inftitmion,Pa Lvine Ordinance 'iH^ Wfcehowta tSthofe who rejea this Prelacy. «. i^SfiSS I*h k, and all other Sctoje. < U«* «* . ) . ! i;»AFn,fcoDal Govetnmentconfider what a Prefumpoon (this Lv^S f PtPoo°oW a Term, ,he efore he adds) « or rather what a ^h 7" « "• /here's his ftronaeft Topick and Argument) the &SS3 SbS£iSSM *• is ^ft *■* » Ghap. IV. (pretended) Principles of the Cygmmc Age. iy% c all who are but for the Indifferency of Epifcopal government (and *ure much more thofe whofe Judgment is againft it, and as they do Judge upon folid Scripture Grounds ) c weigh thei* Arguments over * again, let them joyn them all together, and put them in the * Ballance with the Principles, and the Univerfal Belief of the Chriftians * of the Syprianic Age , and ingenuoufly confefs, that, all things con- f fidered, they are very light and of very little moment. See Pag. Now, from what is premis'd, let any of common Ingenuity or CanJ dor judg# if /• S. has not afcrib'd an Infallibility to the Principles and Practices of that Age, and propos'd the fame as a Samplar and Rule to all other Churches in point of Government. For, i. That he doth, for this end, propound it, is beyond all Debate from what is laid ,* And not offering the leaft Scripture Ground for the fame, or as the Reg uls Regulans of thefe fuppos'd Principles and Pra&ice, of neceffity it is, that thefe Principles and Pra&ice themfeives he propounds as this Rule, and therefore, by neceffary Confequence, muft fuppofe an Inr fallibility, zly, Whereas he alledges, they might have had moft certain Knowledge, mo(i full Aflurance, what Form of Government the Apoftles left in the Churches ; If it mail be objected, and this Demur put to him fell. " They might not have had that certain Knowledge or ■ full Aflurance, or that even, upon Suppofition of their KnowleJget f there mignt have been aByafs in their Inclination : All the Refuge and Anfwer that this Man has, is, that Epifcopacy pra&is'd in their time Was believd, and by them received as a Divine ln(lilHtian ; And thus, all the Aflurance we can have ultimately refts upon, and is refolv'd in the Beliefs Profeffion and Practice of that Age in this point, without the leaft fhadow of the Divine Warrant thereof, which, by an infallible Confe- quence, will impute an Infallibility thereunto. ;/y, This is yet con- vincingly apparent, in that he challenges all that are againft the Divine Right of Epifcopal Government to weigh their Arguments over again. Now he cannot deny they are Scripture- Arguments* and more than one or two, and they judg they are folidly founded on Scripture and Di- vine Reafon : But he will have them to weigh them overagain,^ fuppofing he can give a better Topick, and overturn all their Foundations: But how? By offering Counter- Arguments from Scripture? No {fucfi Matter ; But they muft lay down all their Weapons, and quite their Scripture Perfwafion upon reading hisIilufrriousHiftory ot the Principles and Practice of the Cyprianic Age. Here is Infallibility with a Witnefs. Yet again, when all the Scripture Arguments are joyn d together in their Utmoft Strength, they mjl confe[st that, when migh,d% they are found X 2 WMtwg, , j A Confutation of J. SV VinMution of the Chap. IV. .•-; »hev are ( to life his Terms) found light, yea, very light, and 7 *1 »A* «d thus all that are contrary minded, muft, of IS* conf.is their Error in this point, unl (s they be difi.gcnuous $ Hvn'ocritical and harden'd againlt clear Gonvuaioo. nSTow what i. that Ballance, or Touch-ftone ofTmhin thisControverlie, that wilt give foexaft a Determination^ and thus tffl^ll their formerSentiments? Isit the Ballance of the Salary ? fe fnd. Matter For, as I laid, no Scripture Argument doth here ann-ar What then is that ponderous weighty thing in the other S cale «f,h« Ballance, that doth fo abfolutely preponderate a 1 Presbyterians Scripmre Arguments againft Epifcopacy fo as to make them to be, vea and appear to be lighter than Vanity \ J. S. will foon refolve the ??.,£, and tells us, that the over-ballanctng thing in the other Scale U °th .Principles and Vmverfal Belief of theCbrifliam of the Cyprianic Age. If his import not Infallibility, greater Nonfenfe was never fpoken nor writteni as in truth groffer Heterodoxy .n this point cannot be readi- Si I remember, I have fometime feen, as an H.eroglyph.ck y« ?£. t iohmefs of Popirti Traditions, a Ballance reprefented, having £ tl orfe Sea e a great Number of Popilh Superftitious Trinkets, and •" other * Biblf out-weigWng them all ; But our honeft J. S. inverts lne Orde and inftead of the Book of God, gives us the Prinze, and Prime of' the Cyprianic Age, putting that in the Scale to out- weigh -II contrary Sentiments in this point, even from he Scripture it felf. all contrary o Pamphlet, and in this Epilogue, may heSdp to prove his fmputing an Infallibility to this Third Age, thfen we need not here Band upon the Matter it felt being clear. We know what the Denomination of St3m imports f«/Perfo„. Ifert"""^ Faith and Fellowtoipof the True Church This Man f,?rh a Blot and Stigma upon Presbyterians, «or deferting his fup- Sold KMfti * tb. Ibiri Ate, afferting thus the Objeaive ?n Aub eAive Certainty of that Age in point of Government. And, and bubieaivc j he afterward, in a piece of beditious Solent Boldne tf the Civil Government, with refped to the Sefcnt Conftitution of our Church as ptoce. ding only from Met. 5 unk whh Worldly Principles, expofing himfelJ thus, as a Criminal, ^fiwffiSStSSS** ™> of thisTreafonab.e SeditU » T.inn and offucha grofs Imputation upon our Parliament, °,US AC-C/ffal. 74. v. 22. prays thus, Arife, O God, plead thine own Caufe, remember bow the foolifh Man reproacheth thee daily. The Apoftle Peter, i Pet. 3. 14. pronounceth them happy who fuffer for Righteoufnels fake. And the Apoftle Paul, 2 Cor. 1. 12. prefents the Teftimony of a good Gonfcience as a precious Ground of Rejoicing, For our Rcjoycing is this, faith he, the "Teftimony of our Ccn[cience> that in Simplicity and Godly Sincerity, mt with Flefhty Wifdom, but by the Grace of God, we have bad our Conversion in the World. Well, J. S. will readily acknowledge, that thefeGrounds, when applyed to any Perfon or Caufe, muff needs have a Divine Warrant, that they be not mifafplyed to fortifie Delufions, and a groundlefs Hope, inftead o iolid Peace. The Caufe, which is the Good Caufe, muft be, from the Word, inftruded to be the Caufe of God. And the fame Word of God being the Great Rule of Holinejs and Rigbteoujnefs fuffering for the Sake of Rif>hteou(wfs, muft have the fame Foundation' And the Teftimony of the good Confcience muft needs be a joynt Te- ftimony with the Spirit fpeaking in the Word, Rom.S. 16. The Spirit it M fcarejb Witm(s with our tyirit, &c, And 'tis the Word only which is the ■„i AConfHMhnoflVMictthncfthc Chap. IV. '* .o . r . a Hence it will inevitably follow, the Spirits Miniffrat ,o» A. J. «• He «* « ^ ,rf n^nt and' if not in y.S'i Acknowledgment, yet u urn Goo^JwS^tfto« and fure Four- tnce, with refpefl to both, mun n f ; Temporal Interefls. dation in thsJvi'fGoij S "ce Men g™£"geffionj and very bad Unaccountable Humours < M * J-^ff x£roundff when juftly ^«tSffl.«"?WSS. for an Ungodly Caufe, and lifffiSU clear, what I pray, are the Grounds aflWd by f S to prove the God Caufe, and to found the Tefl.mony of the God LLJtr* true U&m CfMp -U «***- » ^fcnng 01 tne &G- heaping up a Number of Conje&ures and foolifh Elogie's of 'that Age ( whereof above ) fcih " That it was an Age of great Men, affording many excellent Records, having the extraor- dinary Manifeftations of the Spirit continued, that it was near to the ApoftMick Age, fo that they might have certainly known the Form of Government left by the Apoftles, that fo little time between Johns Dsath and Cyprians Promotion to the See of Carthage inter- veening, Alterations in the inftituted Form of Government might have certainly been trac'd, and even by Oral Traditw on* . And here we cannot but take notice of his Suppofition produc'd §. 44. A fine Artifice, no doubt, co fupport the Papitts unwritten Traditions by an Oral Conveyance, as likewife the Jews Oral Sonvtyance of their unwritten Law to their Talmud. He fuppofes, " Three Men s of common Senfe and Honeity attaining to 72 Years of Age a piece, *the firftof thefe Born in Ann. 80 , the fecond Ann. 132, the third * Ann. 184, thus Tradition might have been handed down fecurely. ' The fecond at the 20 Year of Age receiving a diftind account from ' thefirft, fuppole of the Age of zo Years, before the Apoftle John c died. So that the third at the Age of 20 might receive it from the f fecond, and have been made Bifhopin Ann. 248. ( the Year in which ' Cyprian was made Bifhop of Carthage ) and to have continued in 5*h.at Station for 8 Years, and died at the fuppos'd Age of 72, A Noble invention, no doubt, and a Demonftration no lefs than Mathematical, meriting a Quad erat Demonftrandum to be annex'd to it, whereof the Man is fo confident, that he adds a fuppos'd Proof from the Chap. IV. ( pretended) Principles of the Cyytiamc Age. \77 the Inftance of Irenaus and Polycarjy. Let the Jews now exult upon the Ground of their Oral Tradition, fo certainly recfeiv'd frcm Mofes by the 70 Seniors, and from them deliver'd to the* Prophets, from the Prophets to the great Synagogue, and ( no doubt5 at the firft, at leaft ) furely tranfmitted, in a fhort decurfe of time : Andhere'isa fureTopick overthrowing the Arguments of Proteftant Divines, ten- ding to prove the Uncertainty and Unfoundnefs of Oral Traditions in point of Religion. Concerning Polycarp our Pamphleter tells us " That nothing is more certain in Hiftory, than that he was Confecrat- *c ed Bifhop ot Smyrna by the Apoftle John. But let me ask this Gentle- man, Whether is the Faith and Truth of that Hiftory to be preferr'd to Scripture ? Whether is it to be meafured by the Scripture ? Whe- ther is the Scriptures Defcription of the Epifcopal Fun&ion * to be preferr'd to Hiftorical Narrations, or this Hiftorical Narration to be preferr'd to the Scripture ? benaus * tells us, that hereceiv'd by Word of Mouth * MarratL'k ' (to render ic in our Terms) from fuch as had it im- cap?™/ \'*\ mediately from the Apoftle John himfelf, that the Lord Jefus Chrift Liv'd in this World above 50 Years. Behold an accurat Oral Tradition, more clear, becaufe contain'd in fhorter limits of time than in the Inftance exhibited by J. S. I ask Kim then, is this Traditi- on certain ? He'll no doubt Anlwer, it is not, becaufe concradid- ed by Scripture, Let him then upon this Conceffion retraft his pitiful Jejune Argument from an Oral Tradition^ fince fuch a Tradition,offuch apparent probable Certainty, is fo clearly Reprobated by Scripture Light. And of neceffity he muft acknowledge this his Oral-traditiona Argument, to be as light and unfound as the Hnfoundeft Oral "tradition umil he (hall give a folid Anfwer unto the Arguments draw nfrorn Scripture againft the Hierarchical Bifnop's Office, which, no doubt he will perform ad Qahndas gracas. Moreover, for what he has afterted of Polycarp, I would gladly know of him, whether he Judges that Polycarp s Office in the Church Go- vernment, and his Trincipks thereanent, were Antipods and Contra- dictory one to another. If he thinks they were not, but did well accord, then let him Reconcile his Oral Tradition anent Polycarp's Epifcopacy, with his Doctrine and Principles in his Epiflle to the ?bilipfians.f in which he makes two Orders of Miniftery, "Bijhps and Deacons , correfpondent to the Apoftle Paul's Do&rine, Phil 1. Exhor- ting the Philippians to be fubjeti to their Presbyters and Deacons as to God and Qhrifi. z But 178 A ConfHtAtion of J. Sx Vindicttion of the Ghap. IV. But further, we may fright this Oral Tradition- Monger with a Gorgon's Head. Hie Story of Eufebius is known, Lib. j. Cap. 22, 2;. " Concerning the Celebration of the Feaft of Eafter, or the Chrifti- an Pafchal, and the Schifm arifing thereupon in the Antient Church, viz. That the Afiatkk Bifhops would have it Celebrated on the 14 Day of the Moneth, after the Jewidi manner, and they grounded their Principle and Pra&ice upon J. S\ Grand Topick and Argu- ment, 'viz,. An Oral Tradition, yea and that not only from Polycarp made a Bifhopby the Apoftle 3^0, but deriv'd Originally from the Apoftle John himfelf. Here was a fure Conveyance, no doubt, and ( as he fays of Polycarp $ Epifcopacy ) as fure as the Hiftorical Certain- ty can render fuch. But now let us fee a contrary Oral Tradition upon the fame Head. The Bimops of the Churches of the Weft Celebrated the Feaft of Eafier on the Day of Chrift's Refurre&ion, and they grounded their Principle and Pra&ice upon a Tradition cieriv'd from the Apoftle Peter. Now will J. S. affert both thefe Oral Traditi- ons to be Infallible ? Or will he Stage thefe two Apoftles as in this point contradicting one another, and delivering to the Churches con- trary Dodrines and Precepts ? Papias, by Eufebmss Testimony, Lib.%. Cap. %<). brought into the Church the Millenary Error under the Tide and pretence of Apoftolical Tradition. The indifpenfible neceflity of Baptifm ( difown'd by all Proteftant Churches ) and of the Eucharift for all forts of People, was made an Apoftolick Tradi- * Lib. 1. tie tion. Augujlin *, Bafil •}-, names, four Cuftoms as Pen* Merit. & Apoftolical Traditions, to wit, " Signing Men with R7ispiritu s. * ^e Sign of the Crofs ,• Praying toward the Eaft ; cap. 27. ' Anointing with Oyl ,• Standing up at Prayers from ' Eafter to Whitfuntide. 'Tis to this purpofe obfervable, that Proteftant Divines do aflign this as one main Ground of the Lord's Teaching his Church no more by Tradition, but by his Written Word, that thus the Church might be guarded againft the Impoftures of Satan under pretence of fuch Tradition,- For which theabridg'd Life of Man ( far fhort of what it was while Oral Tradition might have a fafe Conveyance ) hath afforded confiderable Advan- tage. It were here too large a Work to reprefent the many Grounds and Arguments upon which the Orthodox plead for the Perfe&ion of the Scripture, as the Sole Rule of Faith and Obedience, againft the Poplfh Adverfary. That known place, 2 Tim. 3. 16 is improven to this pur- pofe, All Scripture u given by Infpiration of God, and h profitable for Doclrine, for Zorreftion, for Inftruftion in Rigbteoufafs, that the Man of God may be perfeifi, Chap. IV. (pretended ) Principles of the Cyprianic Age. 1 79 p erf *efl ,and thorowly furnijbed to all good Works. j Thus alfo Deut.4.2. Ye {hall not add unto the Word which I command you, neither (h\ll ye diminifh ought from it. Thus alfo Gal. 1. 8. though we, or an Angel from Heaven ( this far tranfcends what a €yprian, Irenaus or Polycarp may deliver ) Preach any other Gofyel unto you than that which we have Preached unto pu, let him be a Qurje, or Anathema. Thefe Texts are alfo pleaded wherein Humane Traditions are reje&ed and forbidden in the point of Religi- on. Thus Matth. f. from v. 4. to v. 10. Ifa. 29. 3. In vain they Worfhip me, teaching for Doffrinei the Commandments of Men. This Text our Saviour oppos'd to fuch as prefs'd Antiquity and Traditions, and werebold to reprehend his Difciples, for difobeying the fame. Thus Ifa* 8. 20. The Faithful are call'd to the Law and the Teftimony as the only Rule. Thus the Apoftle Paul, 1 Cor. 4. 6. will not have us to be Wife <&} % ysy^Ttlcu above what's Written^ or think of Mentor follow them beyond the limits of that Rule \ Therein Rebuking and faften- ing a fad Gheck upon J. S. who will have us to adhere to the Prin- ciples and Practice of the pretended Glorious Age of €yprian in point of Church Government, without offering the leaft Ground from Scripture for the Divine Right thereof, yea and in oppofition to the many Scripture Arguments to prove its Inconfiftency with the Divine Rule. This fame Truth is alfo fortified by many illuftrious Testimonies of the Fathers, of which above. Famous is that Teftimony of lertuU lian, contra Herm. Gap. 21. Scriptum ejje doceat Hermogenes, autfincn Scriptumeji, timeat iUudV* adjicientibus. Let Hermogenes fhew that it is Written, and if it be not Written let him fear that Woe Threatned againft them that add to the Word. I hope J. 8. will allow us, with this Antient Father, thus to accoft him ,• Let him fliew the Cyprianic Bifhop, whom he defcribes, to have his Patent Written in Scripture, and if he be not found there? let him beware of the Scripture Threaten ning againft fuch as add to the Word. Notable is that Saying which he hath, De Brafc. adv. Haret. Cum credimus, hoc primum credimus, nihil ejfe quod ultra credere debeamus, When we Believe, we do in the firft place believe this, that we muft believe nothing beyond the limits of the Word. For he had faid before, curiofitate non eft opus po/l Chri(ium, nee intjuifitione po/i Evangelium, That after difcoveries of Ch rift in the Gofpel, there is not accefs for inquiring after new Truths or Duties. Thus Hierom on Matth. 23. after ts, Quod de Script ur is Authoritatem non habet, eadem facilitate contemnitur qua probatur, What has no Authority in the Scripture is as eafily rejedted as offered. Teaching us thus to contemn and reject the whole Pleadings and Scope of jf. 5;s Pamphlet, Z 2 patch'd , 8o A ConfMion of \ S's Vindication of the Chap. IV- \-a „f Humane Teftimonies, to fortifte the Principles and patch d up °J ftu™a,neAaleYn point of Church Government without Practice of theffhi d Age in p recommend the fame. To WVI'dI 1 ^ £* "^.y * m <** ***; cap29. the fame purpole is ^«g ^ In th3t p,ace hmtUi (of whom JrHomti^ boafts) calls the Scriptures the Pillar and Ground of Faith. ., n.A Th ai. having exprefs'd a due The Profcflbn o f ty£. »£• • ^V,, Cougncil£ fuch asthat Deference to the Creeds or Symbols ol Wier Confentient Jud Di "'"I* AntnTpf ther^fe add' -d gWe this pofitive Judgment Jn the dole, «^c »«#f '„/,-.«, * qua. ut Luna a Sole, Lumen .urn, reft' f *'**«"* fal TcZkC ?aH Writings of Fathers, are fium & Mm *«/?«»*• S"f ^ Tefirft Truth and Verity, and to be brought to the Sen mres , a the hrlt J. J Au_ Examined by that Rule ^^^feshs Light and Influence from W$ 8nC^nfC«S S3L.I .4- Contemning thus '.U F'o4 Pleaofngs^drawn allenarly from Humane Teftimon.es as a l« mifliadinK Vild-fit* and counterfeit Light without any Influ- ence and lum^ation from the Sun of Righjeoufnefi ^I» tta encc duu tuu DQ«,orL-aWp alfn is that which they otter, IbeJ* 3©. ^',SrPS the , h d ft rted°in"he dofeof the preceding W<, D,#«f. 4- A"" '"f V' a5 tbe Univerfal Church embrae'd withouc •that even fuch Pannes, « « »« » A ftl we are not obli l!f »"&*« the flfwd'rom theVfes, rejecting and ttmL thus all 7 Si foremention'd pretences, C** i. to render of r fh^Ss n- £,, ^ffSSE - ^ VoBoribm, fine Smpura *«[b°;''aj' ' ''. . h are oblig.d to ^^r^taVfi^^pom^wh.; the general Cedent ^''StheffiSdo^meSd, that, on the contrary we muft eV-£VjA Forie andno Apoftoiical Tradition, what the Church and r!'S^ '*" ™ hfve receiv'd and retaind under .he Notion of Tradition. the Doctors have recei ' o an Scripture. Thus blowing Apoftohcal wtthout the A«horuy ^ ^P ^ ,WT uoon the Ground of this pretended Confent and Praflice of the needs upon the t,iouno * a Government without the lead Sow of te&SwLn* to the lame. »* fc. They add, that Chap. IV. ( pretended ) Principles of the Cyprianic Age* j g r the Roman Church arrogating a continued Succeffion from the Apoftles feveral erring with her, fo as to judge, that all thing) neceflary to Sal* vation are not contain'd in the Scriptures, they do fall alfo into tha* other Error, in judging fome Do&rines to be Aooffolick, which have not flow'd frorn the Apoftles. In the next tbef. 'they prove this by In- ftance, Cui rei Jeflimonio tfi Ecclefia Prtmitiva Apoftolic* proximo, that the Carriage and Pratfice of the Primitive Church next to the Apoftolick Age, is a clear proof of this. For Uluftration whereof, they adduce the fcrementioned Examples and Inftances, fcil. Papias bringing in to the Church the Error of the M&w*™?/, under the Tide and pretence of Apoftolick Tradition, as teftifies Eufebius, Lib. ?. C. ?9. and Irenaus teaching from a pretended Tradition of the Apoftle John, that Chi iff fuffered about the jo ¥ear of his Age, Lib. 2. Cap. ?9j 40. Adding In quibm Mam Ecchfiam a juts DoBoribus deceit am fuiJSe ipfiquoaue Povtifki] confitentur, wherein 'tis fo evident, that the Papifts themfelves muft confefs it, that the Church was deceiv'd by her Doctors and Teach- ers. Here let .J. S. obferve, 1. That the Proximity or Affinity of an 42e to the Apoftolick, in the Judgment of this Univerfhy, (wherein he dare not deny, that they are own'd by all the Proteftant Churches) will not exeem the fame from Error, rejecting thus all his foremen- tioned pretences of Infallibility drawn from this Ground, which he recites, Chap. 1. 2/;, He may fee, what a deceiving thing the pretence of Succeffion from Apoftles is, when it is Perfonal, and not DocJrinaf this being the Temptation of receiving Humane Inventions under the Notion of Apoftolick Traditions, g/y, He may fee, that 'tis no fuch ftrange thing as he pretends, diat " the Church is deceiv'd by her Do- • dors embracing Unfound Principles under pretence of Apoftolick 'Tradition?, norwithftanding that fuch Traditions have the fairefl « (he w of being ApoftoiicaS, as-being of fuch a near pretended Reception from the Apoftles themielves, and that the Church, in the m oft early Times after the Apoftles, was thus impos'd upon, and lead aftray from the Scripture- Path. r Let us coofider alfo what this -Univerfity offers, Vlff, 40, Tf, ult In reje&ing the Popiih Mark of the Church taken from Antiquity Succeffion Name of Catbolick, &c. The Mark of Antiquity they rejeft3 becaufe* jam turn Afoflokrum tempore operabatur Myfterium Imquitatk, that even in the Times of the Apoftles, the Myftery of Iniquity was working Th-y reject that Mark of Succeffion, and Name of Cat bo lick, becaufe 4micki% fits itt the temple of God ; And that anent the Multitude and Unity of Po- feflbft,becauie the whole World during Amicbrifis prevalent Reign adorei &- wonders iBa A Confutation of], S * Vindication of the Chap. IV; wonders after the Beaji. The Mark taken from Miracles they rejed upon this Ground, Thi.t Antichrift comes with Signs and lying Wonders. Here let J. S. remark, that, in the Judgment of this Univerficy, neither An- tiquity { lo much magnified by him ) nor Succefion, nor Name ofCa~ tholhk} nor Multitude, and Unity of VrofeJJors, that none of thefe apart, nor all of thefe together, will recommend a Principle and Practice as imitable without the Divine Warrant of the Word of God ,• Since the Myftery of Iniquity it felf hath the Fig-Leaf Cover of all thefe pre- tences. Nay, we fee, they hold thefe to be Rejeclaneous Grounds in point of the Obligation of Pofterity, tho' competent to the moft Anci- ent Church, and neareft to the Apoftolick Age. So that 'tis evident beyond all peradventure, that the ProfefTors fend all J. S's Arguments to recommend the Diocefan Prelate a packing, which were drawn from the principles and Pra&ice of the €yprianh Age, as being of a Humane Kejeftaneout Mould. Moreover, we fee, how they improve our premis'd Argument taken from the early Workings of the My fiery of Iniquity, and the fpreading Tincture thereof from the very Times of the Apoftles. The fame we may find aflerted by Turretin *, as by all * Lot. 1 8. our proteftant Divines upon this Queftion. To the ®ipfi- *3« fame Scope of afferting the Scriptures Perfection, in Op- pofition to all unwritten Traditions, we have fome remarkable Para- ges in the Learned Rivet t« After he has mown from tcath&rth. fertuttian ||, that Hereticks had their Recouife to Tra- ^(cm'tierm dition, when beaten by the Scriptures, he fhews, that & de Refur. fince Traditiones Juit initik tarn incertce fuerunt, & tot Cor- Carn. ruptionibus & MendaciU obnoxit, quid judicandutn eft nunc poft tot elapfa fecula ? An quod dim fuit Hereticorum refugium, poterit nunc ejje vere Credentium A\ylum> Norma veritatis & Fidei, fince Traditions were in their Original fo uncertain, and lyable to fo many Corruptions and Lies, what fiball we think of them after fo many elaps'd Ages? Shall thefe which were the Refuge of Hereticks, be- come now the San&uary of Believers, and the Rule of Faith and Veri- ty 3 Adding, Non pauci alioqui pii Viri recente adbuc CbrijUanifmo in vari- es Errores inciderunt, Traditionibus non fcriptis nimium addicli, that not a few otherwife Godly Men, when Chrifrianity was yet recent, fell into divers Errors, being too much addided to unwritten Traditions. In- ftancing Vapiat (of whom above ), who would needs take in the Help of unwritten Traditions, to fortifie, as he imagined, the Scripture Rule. jfad/l. 8. Pag. 78. In Oppofition to his Jefuite BaiHus, who would not have the Scripture to aft the part of a Jadg in the Church, he hath many things apponce to this purpofe, telling us, Cbrifltts Fratres damnati Divi- W Chap. IV. (pretended) Principles of the Cyprianic Age. ,fo tis ablegavit ad Mofem & frophetas quos audirent. Non dixit, habent Kcclefi- am&Dob~loresquosaudiant} nempe primo& fine exception^ fed kabent Mokm & Prophet Of. Hujus fupremi Judicis placitis adbarendo, non (olum licet fed etiam injmllum eft a Deo unicuiqMe Fideli in Ecchfia, & tcti Ecdefia in com* muni, turn quidem proprie Judicium ferre & di/cernere per fe. cUm Judicium fit- foliui Deijedfibinotumfacere,&qu?fifignificare privatim (quod unujmJfaue Fide lis adpropriam JFiificationem debet ) aut public e promulgate (quod d veris Tajhribusfit adpublicam Edificaticmm } id quod Deus ipfe Authoritate propria in /no verbo jtidicavit & decrevit. That Chrift fent the Brethren of the damn'dRichMantohearM^and the Prophets. He fa id not, they have the Church and the Doclors, whom they may hear, to wit primarily and withontException ( as J. S. fends all the Reform'd Churches to€yprian and the Contemporary Do&ors of the Third Age, to learn whatCiiurch Government is of Divine Right), bmhe hid, they have Moksandthe Pro- phets, Not only is it lawful jbut commanded by God to the whole Church in general, and every Faithful one in the Church, to adhere to the De- terminations of this fupremejudge.d^. Adding, that what thePafiors do promulgat for theEdification of the People, is that Quod Deus ip[e Autho- ritate propria in fuo verbo judicavit & decrevit, Cujus unius vox omnibus Cen- troverfiis terminandisfufficiensjola audiri debet tad faciendamFidem indubitatam Which God himfelf by his own Authority, has in his own Word Judg'd and determin'd, whofe voice a?id Sentence aUne^as being fufficient to end all Controverfies, ought only to be heard as the Foundation of an in- fallible Faith. Citing afterward that PaiTage of the A pcftle 3W, 1 Cor. io. r 5. 1 /peak as to wife Men, judge ye what I fay. And that of the A- poftle John, 1 Job. 4. 1. wherein we are commanded to try the Spirits whether they are of Gsd ,• and that Paffage of CyriVus Hierof. Cath. 12! Wherein he will' have even the Gatechumini, Not to receive by' an Implicit Faith what he delivers, fince therein they may be deceivd. Sed nifi Prophet arum defingulis acceperisteflimonia, ne credas affertionibus, that no AfTertion is to be believ'd, unleis fortified by the Teftimony of Scriptures. He af- terward Seel. 2. mews, that all the Churches Declaration and Judge- ment is Miniflerial only ; Other wife, faith he, the Church Exercifeth a Tyranny, fince GOD (ends his People to the Law and the Prophets and afferts where this Rule is not adhered to, there is not fo much as' a Morning-Light to guide and dired. He afterward Cites a notable Paffage of 6/emens Alexandrinus, Lib, 7. Stromat. confirming efre&uaily and judicioufly, that The greateft and mofl unanimous Jeftimonies from Men in point cf Religion, are not toberefiedin without a Divine Warrant, fnewing that the Divine Oracle is The only indtmon fir able Principle. Non ab/olute tnunmntibm hominibus fidem habutrimus, qttibm licet etiam enunciate con- trarium .«, AConfHUtUttofySiymdtcanoHojwe v-najy. i». • tu,* n„r Faith muft not meerly reft upon Mens Declaration, tran»m £ That our Fauhm ^ ^ ^^ . who may Affert,jn .« iwntBr , ^^ ^ . Nm expt0amH, ^"Tr ?" nigral That Men muft not abfolutely pronounce r^^CtTment n Matters of Religion, but prove what they fay their own SemimenM in not TeftimonUs from M ty ^Tvl« 3 GOD muft make our Inquiry for Truth, which Kesmore our Faith and Belief, than any Deration j or rather, " e,'r7 . .. £ir ,h, rd, mi Draper DimonSrttion of Divine Truth, "our Authe H fe£ f omtUs thefefilidConclufions x ThatMan . V- rir ,w Faithful is not upon b sown Authority to be believed, unK P ove from Scripture what he afferts. a. That the Scripture unieis ne prove r T . . aJ h Tnnapum ^h62w/ the fifft and indemonftrable Principle, ?W jW^V, I^luf^^^'. which is not liable to our Examination and Tryal but to be receiv'd by Faith. * 1 hat from this Principle of the Scr ptures alone, (didas J»mi iemonfirat.one,, fohd DemonftratH on of Divine Truths are to be drawn. Adding, that in thii Tefti. monv ot *"■»». ^uot (m* ™ba m funt )acula, againft h.s jefu.te "°5,„;m,, trulv apply, and ay, there are as many Weaponsagainft ^•spleTdmgTnthfsVamphlet; 'and that all thefe Conclufions ftrike ags\nce"mi'. In point of a proof of the Divine Right of Prelacy, and . • ^hlVnefs of the fup6ofed Diecefan Pattern, in the third Age, t ™ hale a the Churches to reft upon the Humane Testimonies tl^eo I! 'Tisalfo evident, that in o?der to the finding out of the Tmfh in this great Point, he brings not a jot from the Divine Oracles, T-„ fo far has difown'd and Renounc'd that Great and Only Judg, f He* won d have usTo found our Perlwafion in this Point, upon the fwipksand pStf.ce of that Age, as is above made clear, excluding Kh an Examination thereof by the Div.ne Rule, as a 1 Humane Simonies are liable unto ; and thus impeaches the great Preroga- TvfTthe Scripture, which in the fenfe of cltmm, yea of al the Fa- XL asls abwe made good, in the Senfe and Judgment of Kmf.and rf Si the Prolan. Churches, is thefoleand only Trincipurn ,nde; I vi, intheTeftimonv whereof our Faith is to be ultimatly re. 72i I' ^nce ™d Demonftrations of Divine Truth are to be o^awnonW from this Principle. J. S, is palpably condemnU.n bring- fng al" toDeZiftratiom or Proofs for the Divine Warrant of the H.e v>nap. iv. {preterzaea ) r rmupies oj tfoe cypriamc Age. 1 8$ rarchical Prelat, and to engage all the Churches to a Reception of this Government, meerly and folely from the pretended glorious Age of Cyprian. So that, in the Judgment both of the Ancient and Pro- teftant Churches^ his Proofs and Demonftrations are nought, as want- ing the only folid Principle thereof, and the true Scripture topick to found their Solidity. It were fuperfluous, and would load much Pa- per, to offer the manifold Teftimonies of Proteftant Churches and Divines confirming this Point • Yet for further Confirmation, and for* tifying this our Charge againft J. S. take this little mart Touch of thejudgment of the Reform'd Churches from their Confeffions. TheHeivetick Confeffion in the firft Article afferts, that the Canoni- cal Scripture deliver'd by the Spiritof God to the Prophets and Apoftles' and propoled by them, ^ Omnium perfeftijfma & antiquifwia ?hilo(ophia\ pietattm emnem, amnem vita rationem (ola perfefte continet, That the Ca- nonical Scripture is the only perfect Rule of Faith and Manners, Aft. 2. Hujui interpretatio ex ipfa (ola petenda eft, ut ip fa interpret Jit fuit charitatit fideique Reguh moderante, That the Scripture folely is its own Interpret ter, &c. Art. 1. A quo interpretation^ genere quatenus fancli Tatres non difceffere ut Interprets Scriptura recipimm, That the Fathers are receiv'd in fo far as in their Interpretations they have not gone afide from the Scripture Rule; Art. 4. Per catera de traditionibut hominumt quant umvis fpeciojit & receptit, quacunque nos abducunt vel impediunt, ut de inutilibus & noxiit, Jic Hind Domini refpondemut : Fruftra me colunt docentes doftrinas hominum. Here we find J. S. condemn'd in every one of thefe Articles. it Ha is here told, that the Holy Scriptures contain the moft perfecVand firft Antiquity, which therefore he mould have preferr'd, in the point of Church Government, to his fo much boafted of Antiquity of the third Age. 2. Since he all along holds his Cjprianic Bifliop to be the fame appointed by theApoftles,and confequently muft thus interpret the Scriptures, which fpeak of the Epifcopal Office ; The Confeffion tells him, he mould have evinc'd and drawn this Interpretation from the Scripture it jelf,^ not from the Principles and Practice of that Age, or his flippry Conjectures of their holding what was Apoftolical. ;. The Senfe and Interpretation of the Fathers, and their Practice confequent- ly, tho' never fo unanimous, the Confeffion tells him3is ftill to be Ex- amined by the Scripture, and not abfoJutely to be refted in, as the Rule and Dire&ion of our Practice, without a due Scripture Tryal, Which condemns his obtruding the Principles and Practice of that Age^ as the great and obliging Rule in point of Church Government, ex- cluding all fuch Tryal thereof, 4. We fee, the Confeffion rejefts all A a Doctrines, x8« AConfuWionoflVtKndkatknofthe Chap. IV. •^ a :„« .W never fo (oecious and univerfaUy receiv'd, if they be Doctrines, tho ^ never 10 ipse confequently, in but Humane, and not warr an ted* ienttoll-d b, them, all ££ 4ef has offend to recotnmend and found Hierarchical Prelacy, rW the matter of Fadt were admitted; doth amount to no more than "proceed weto the E*«* Confeffion, drawn by the Convention of 8 E ,nd Arch-Bimops themfelves, «»oti?62. In^rf. 6.con- the ^ifliops. and ^Arcn n p>(. ^ gU $ neceff SatffiS'. ^ the Scriptures, nothing h to be re- « cuir'd or be ie 'd a. neceffary to Salvat on, but what >s either read .quird or ocaev u j ^ 20< Having • in the Scripture, or may be p °vd "0™ « The Authority hereof fuppofd the Chnt^e. FalUbi lity, «g« a X ^^ •as neceffary to Salvation, °"n^ f . condemn'ing ? 5. who will • which crofles another Therein c ^ Co„ mgy^ ^ ^ ne?ds p°lTtfndas the only Government appointed by GOD upon the fequence to fortifie ; the fame. „ ^ • J ^ «"b^^e *e*;9.-n^ODPerf«a..ndf»Cb as derives • Amply refted in, bat Exam.n d 3^%™l™mttt Conftitu.ions « diftinguifliing thus the Voice ol GOD^lram^ ma„ife„ly fe^h", W«d So K accordingto this Confeffion, tho' J. * had T i ,hJ ASs and Decrees of an entire General Council of the produced the Aas and uecr third Age> , whole Cbriftian Church. ^fx Epifc0pacy> yet the Churches mending and .en,^nV'°ie :f in aP.v meafure found contrary to the w Tn, COT T e Confeffion "(firming, confequently,*.. he ftands 15 'oGofaI Divine Warrant lor hi? Hierarchical Prelat, and an- Chap. IV. (pretended ) Principles of the Cyprianic Age. tSy Stratagems, Dedit ei Deus doclrinam exprejJam & certain, &c. quaie neceff* eft c»nfiderare quales fintJeges feu ritus* &undefint. That GOD has given an exprefs and certain Do&rine to his Church, comprehended in the Holy Scriptures, upon which Ground we muft confider and Examine all Church Conftitutions, and not blindly receive them. Adding fe- veral Rules to this Scope, whereof the nrft is this, Nulli creature, non An- gelis, non bominibus, non Regibus, non Epijcopis licet ccnd&re leges, auS ritus pugnantes cum verba Dei. That it is lawful for no Creature, Angels or Men, Kings or Prelates to make any Laws or Confutations re- pugnant to the Word of God. Adding, that Unhrcrfaliter Regala Ser- vanda eft, opportet Deo magit obedire 'nam beminibus ; That tbis^ is the (land- ing univerfal Rule, We muft obey God rather than man Reje&ing thus all that J. S. has offered, to found the Churches Reception of Prelacy, till he mail Exhibite a Divine Warrant thereof from the Word. The GonfeiTion of IVittemberg propos'd in the Name of the D, of Wittemberg by hisAmbaffadours,/ Presbyterians cannot but in like manner look upon themfelves, as obliged to detafte this Hierarchi- cal Prelacy, which they are upon Scripture Grounds perfwaded to be contrary to the Divine Rule, till he mall from the fame Rule, make the contrary appear, 3. Since the Confeffion pleads ( to evince the Perfeftion of Scripture ) that it is able to make the man of God perfect throughly furnijhed to all good w or kj, which muft needs include Church Government, and all minifterial Duties ; Since alfo, in order to this Proof, they /hew, that as our Lord deliver'd all neceflary Doctrines to his Apoftles, and the Apoftles in their Writings deliver'd the fame to the Churches, they do clearly and pofitively affert, that the Scripture contains an entire and perfect Scheme of Church Government and by neceflary confequence that we muft look to the Scriptures primarily yea folely, for the Knowledge and Difcovery of the Pattern of Church Government (hewed upon the Mount, which all the Churches are obliged to follow and imitate. So that, by further inevitable con- fequence,they do palpably condemn J. S's Pamphlet ; 1. As prefent- ing to all the Churches, a Pattern and Sample of Church Government from the Principles and Practice only of the third Age, preferring it in fo far, and in this point, to the firfi Apoflolick Age, 2, In commend- ing a church Governments neceflarily to be imitated by all the Chur- ches, without offering any Divine Warrant for the fame, and upon meer Humane Teftimonyand Praftice, condemning thus the perfect on of the Scriptures in this ?oint ,• Therein contradicting the AfFertion of the Scripture it feif, on the contrary, The Confeffion adds feveral Testimonies of the Ancients to this Scope, fuch as Chryjoftom, Horn. 1. in lit. Juguftin on John cap. ir. Irafi. 49, Hierenymus ad Titum cap. 1. Who aflerts, Sine AuthoritaU Scripturarum garrulitas non habetfidem^ That Men's talk in Divine chines without Authority of Scripture, is meer Babling. And may we not add without hazard of imputation of Banter, that Jerom puts under the fame Character J. S's Pamphlet, viz,. That 'tis made up of meer Pratleand Babling, fince he will needs perfwade a Divine Truth fcil That Prelacy is the Government appointed by our Lord, from meer Humane Writings, and the Teftimony of the Third Age, without ajot from Scripture to fortifie his Pleading. In further Confirmation of what is faid, 'tis Remarkable, thatin his vain Epilogue ( whereof above ) he not only Cenfures the Presbyte- nans, Exhorting them to look to his Grand Froofs- and his goodly / Scheme Chap. IV. {pretended) Principles of the Cy^xhmc Agt 189 Scheme of Ghurch Government, prefented to them as their great convincing Pattern, but he peremptorily Summonds lall thofe who are for the IndifTerency of Epifcopal Government, to look toitt and weigh their Arguments for it over again. So that Dr. Stillingfleet, and all of that Perfwafion may be charm'd in his Senfe, with a look of his goodly Scheme of Epifcopal Government, and all their Arguments muft evanifti as Smoak before this Glorious Light. Thus he doth ne~ ceffarily prefume that he has in his Book evinc d the Divine Right of Epifcopacy. For if it be not Indifferent, then fure it muft be Necef- Tary \ And if neceffary, then fure as a Divine Ordinance, and upon a Divine Warrant, which he muft needs acknowledge is to be evinc'd by Scripture Light and Authority, orelfelet him mew how the Divine Right of a Divine Ordinance can be proved by the humane tifiimony and Tratfice of Men. To proceed, The Confeflion of Boheme, 1. Art. deScripturis Sacrk afTerts, Scripts ras fro inconcuffe veris certifiimifq} habendas : ac quorum^; aliorum Scriptif ut Sacra frophanis, & humanis Divina, per omnia prapofitas iri dcberet That the Sacred Scriptures are to be efteem'd of immovable certainty, and fuch as are to be preferr'd to the Writings of all others, and that absolutely and in every thing, as Sacred things are preferable co Profane, things Divine to things that are only Humane, Adding thai we may entirely and abfolutely reft our Faith upon them, and from them only deduce all neceffary Truths, whereby we may be built up in the Faith, and that we muft efteem the Writings of the Anciene Do&ors of the Church, in fo far fur th only as they dijagree not from the Holy Scriptures, citing Auguflin in Pre fat. Lib. 3. detrinit. who afferts *c That he would not have his own Writings, or thefe of Ambrofe, to " be any otherwife receiv'd than as they agree with Scripture. How far this Teftimony concurrs with the preceeding in condemning J, S's Method in his Pamphlet, I need not ftay to fubliime. SECT. V h The Antifcrrpturd Method of J. S. in his Pleading, further Ufa- flrated from the Scriptures, giving a full and diftinff Sound in thz Point of Church Government^ and Eftablifhing Presbyterian Gcvirnment in fpeciaL. THIS Truth and Principle in fbtft J. S. doth evidently aflert, as a is clear from what is above touch'd, fince he will not have Epifcopal 190 A Confutation of J. SV Vindication of the Chap. IV. Epifeopal Government to be Indifferent. And if he owne it, that the Scriptures do exhibite an entire Scheme and Form of Church Gevernment, and in fpecial of Epifcopacy, how evidently is he Self- convi<5fced and Self condemn'd, in Writing fo much in Defence thereof from meer Humane Teftimonies and Practice, without the leaft hint of a Scripture Warrant. Could he imagine, that his Delineation of the pretended Principles of the Third Age could either perfwade its Divine Right, to thefe that are for the Indifferency of Forms of Church Government, fince they may Judg that StiUingfleet\ Hiftorical Accounts, in his Irenicum. of the various State of the firft Churches,has fufficienriy expos'd this Hiftorical Argument in point of Fa£ ,• And even admit- ting what he alTerrs therein, they may fuppofe, it cannot infer the Scriptures Determination of a Species of Government. Or could he imagine, that an Argument of this Nature could convince them that are for the Divine Right of Presbyterian Government, who found their Judgment upon Scripture Warrant. However, we do firft, in order to our Scope, propofe this in general, that of neceffity the Scripture muft needs have prefented a fuitable and entire Scheme of Church Government, which is clear upon feveral important Grounds,fuch as, 1. ThattheExercifeof Chrift's Kingly Office, as Political Head of his Church, doth neceflarily plead for this, fince his Political Headfliip which (lands in Relation to the Church Vifible, as fuch, muft needs refpect the Laws whereby fhe is to be Govern'd, and the Nature, End, and Duties of the Offices and Officers thereof, it being of infallible certainty, that the Exercife of Chrift's Kingly Office muft be abfolutely as compleat and perfeft with refpeft to its immediat proper Ends, as is his Prophetical and Prieftly with refpeft unto theirs. To this purpofe the many places may be addue'd which fpeak of this Political Headfliip of our Lord: Thus he's call'd the Churches Lawgiver or Statute-Maker* Ifa. 35.22. The Lord it our Judge, the Lord it our Lawgiver, the Lord is our King, he will fave m. Ifa. 9. 6. For unto us a Child u Born, unto Us a Son is given, and the Government JbaH be upon bit Shoulder : And his Name [kail he call'd Wonderful, Councilor, the Mighty God. the Everlafling Father, the Frince of Teace. Pfah 2 6. He's the Kinglet upon the Holy Hill ofSion. Eph.i. 22* He it given to be Htad over all things to the Church, which it hit Body. K& it the Head of the Church and Saviour of the Body, Verf. 30. We are A#*n- hert of his Body, and of his Fle(h, and of his Bones. Col. 2. 19. Heh the Head from which all the Body by joynts and Bands having Nourifhmeit mini-* fired, and knit togethet increujeth with the Increafe of God. Bsnce he's Represented* Rev. 1. 14, Judge inyourfelve? Hit comely that a (Voman Pray unto God uncovered, doth noi F even Nature it . felf teach you, that if a Man hath long Hair it is a jhame unto him. Again that whatever doth not Edify, and has no tendency to that end \V?n be efchew'd, tho' otherwife lawful, that this be accordingly habit. X intended and all methods taken fubfervient thereunto, and by that Rule the Expediency of Aaions hic& nunc be meafur'd : This beim* the great End of all inftituted Ordinances, Eph. 4 rr T2 JX H. h The End, as likewife the Rule of our endeavouring after' Peace and Unity Rom. iu 2. with 14. i9t The great End of all Mimftenal Authority, 2 Or. 10. 8. with 12. io. The great Rnl? ftf the Exercife of all Gifts, . Cor. ,4. r7. The' great DefignS of C^an Communion and Fellow/hip, and the great Rule todifcern the EXD» dience of:things in themfel.es lawfui, iCr.ro. 2;. That b£m Rule of doing all to the Glory of God doth difcover and direcl in the proper Means and Expedients leading t8 the foremention'd Ends and ftews that our laft look muft be fincere and fingle in all Church Admimftrations. Weuhave, finally, this Rule prefifcriW, that trae Peace and Unity is to be highly valu'd, and whatever tends to a Breach and Schifm to be efchew'd j But that withall the Unity muft b- the Unity of the Spirit, Eph. 4. 3. And the Spiritual Peaceable Wfdomt m the hrft place Pure, not peaceable beyond the limits of Gofpe Purity, Jam. 3, 17. viuipgt In the fecond place, that the Scripture points out a clear Plat- Form of Presbyterian Government, and that the Perfedion thereof in this L°thtCpn-demr?S 7' SI ?^n in Chis PampW«, who fends the Church to he Pnnciples and Practices of the Third Age for this Rule and Pattern, « abundantly evident, But, for further Elucidation, we B b may f 94 ^ C$*f*t&tlott of J. S*/ Vindication ofihe Chap. IV. may here offer further to Consideration, i. That alt the Ordinances which we owne ftand clearly reprefented in Scripture, fuch as are al- ready hinted, '" Publick Prayer, Praifes, Reading, Preaching, Ca- ' tschetical Expounding the Word, Adminiftration of the Sacraments ' of Baptifm and the Lord's Supper. Compare i Tim. 2. i, 2. 1 Cor. 14, i4s 15. Epb. s- 18, 19. col. 3. 16. Acls i;. ir. Rib. f. 12. 6. 1, 2. Mat. 28.. 19, 20. iCc 11.20, &c. Add to thefe, " Oidination of ' Minifters, Minifterial Judging and Difcerning of Doctrine, Rebuke * of Sinners, Rejecting the Incorrigible from Communion, and Recei- ■ ving again. Compare 1 Tim. 4. 14. 1 Tim. f. 22. Acls 14. 21. Ablt 15. from v. 16. per totum, efpecially v. 24, 28. Mat. 18. 15, 16. 1 Ccr. '$, with 2 Gor. 2. 6, <£*c. " The Relieving and Refreshing the Poor * and Indigent, Acls 6. iJy, The Officers we owne ftand clearly ex* cmplifted in Scripture, fuch as the Paftor, Dofior, or teacher, Epb. 4. 11. The Ruling-Elder* 1 Tim. 5. 17. 1 Cor. I2.28. Rom. 12. yt 8. The Deacon, who ferves Tables and minifters to the Poor, Acls 6. 3/7, As the Officers, fo the Judicatories we owne ftand clearly exempli- fied and approv'd in Scripture, fuch as, 1. The CongregatUnal Elder (hip3 the Divine Warrant whereof our Writers have varioufly made appear, 1. Even from the Light of Nature, requiring leffer Matters to be judg'd in Inferior Judicatories, according to Jetbros Advice, Exod. 18. 26. from the neceffary Subordination of Inferior to Superior Courts, fup* pofing a Congregational Church, which muft needs (as in that Capaci- ty ) have a Government, 1 Cor. 14. 1, 5, 4. 2/7, From the Scope and Tenor of our Lord's Inftitution in Mat. 18, where, 1. The Church, to which the Complaint is to be made, is fuppos'd to be vefted with a Power of Binding and Loe/ing. 2//, This Binding and hoofing Power is fuppos'd competent to two or three, or a fmall Number, confequently to the Elderlhip of a particular Congregation. Befides, that as the Scripture doth exemplifie both the greater Aflbciated and Congregatio- nal Churches, 1 Cor. 1. I. with 14. $4. Ails 8. 1. and 15. 1. Rom. 16. 5. 1 Cor. \6. 19. Colof.4. if. Fhilcm. 2. So it is obfervable, that as in <,&»,, importing that P„»/, at leaft being an Apoftle, neither he : nor ' Bamd« needed • have gone to JtrujaUm for a Refolution, had they not here carried •and aaed as Members for the time of that Presbytery in aS 't^t'-^VZ*, "0t lkw m, that P'ace' and therefore were i not Tent to the Apoftles as Extraordinary and Infallible ; For what r*rhd tht AdT °,f EldeDrS f0r this> but as Wife a"d Holy G™f the, S,"rch'. and. t0 let a pa«ern to after Ages for removing Errors I and *>f ««?»•? ^e Church,- £,. •■ The Apoftle, did "0* d ° - •mine the Thing ,n Queftion and the Point controverted by 4 pofto. •heal Authority, from immediate Revelation, but upon Stating and Debating the Queftion from Scripture in an ordinary way.8 4f The Decrees-of the Synod run in the Name not only of the A I pontes' butoftne Apoftles and Elders, ^Mj.a,,,,. m ,/4j2, f ** }!' • That here there were Ecclefiaftick Ads binding the Churches is evident alfo w the Context. This Judicatory tells the Churches 'th,v ■anU ky ujm torn no ttbvr Burdm, AS, 1 j. 28. The Binding of Burdens u an Aa of the Binding Power of the Keyss. And, A8,l6 4 men! tion is made of the Dserees Ordain'd by the Apoftles and Elders. And B b * the jg6 A Confutation of ].S's Vindication of the Chap. IV: the Word /e^a* in the New Teftament, is put for either Decrees or Laws, and fo frequently made ufe of by the Septuagint. See thi3 great Truth.further profecuted by that Piece, bearing the Title of a Vindication of the Presbyterial Government by the Minifters of the Provincial Alterably of London, from Pag. 20. and foforeward, where the notable Tendency of Presbyterian Government, both to Union and Edification, is convincingly made appear. Alfo by the Learn'd and Judicious Tra<5tate, Entituled, Jus Divin, Regim* Ecdef. As alfo, Tl.e Vind. ofPresb. Govern. Mr. Rutberfoord'sDue Right ofPresb from Pag, 219. and fo foreward. Where, for evincing this Point from the fame Scripture, there is a large Proof drawn, 1. From the Occafion of the Synod. 2//, The proper Members of the Synod. 3/7, The equal Power and Authority exercis'd by all thole Members. 4/y, The Way and Method of Ordering their Synodal Proceeding, sb* The Juridi- cal Ads of Power put forth by the Synod ; With the Iffue and Con- fequent of all upon the Churches. See alfo Mr. Paget?* Power of €laj]is and Synods , Chap. 6. P« 6;, &c. urging both Acl% 1. and Act. 15-. with the Confent of Writers generally for the Authority of Sy-r nods. To the foremention'd Scope alfo of the Nature and Subordina- tion of Church Judicatories, J. S. if he pleafe, may confuit, with thai Authors mentioned) the Piece, Entituled, Ajjertion of the Government of the Ghttrcb of Scotland by Mr. Gillefpie, Part 2, Chap. 4, &c. and hjs Aaron s Rod BloJJomingy Lib* i» Chap* ;. Pag% 8„ to ;8. Camerot Prtlecl. in Mattb. 18. ij. Pag. iyo, with others. As for the Warrant of the National Affemblies, and their Authority, it neceflarily remits front what is made appear, touching the Subordination of the lefTer to the; greater Church Judicatories) and is founded upon the fame Scripture Grounds and Principles. Now from the whoief we may offer to J* Sy$ Confederation. iiThat we have made appear the Scripture's clear AfTertion of a diftinct Specier of Church Government, and in fpecial of Presbyterian Government with refpect to all the Ordinances, Officers, and Judicatories which* we owne ,• So that we have the Voice of God, and the Laws of the Supreme Lawgiver, ftanding againft him in all his Pleadings for the Hierarchical Prelate» fo clearly crofs and oppofite thereunto* And further, we may appeal to J, S's Confcience, if it does not appear, that the Apofties of our Lord, in their Judicial Acting in Church Go- vernment, have not clearly condemn'd that Abjolute, Peerlefs, and Para- mount Authority of Bijhops over Pajlort, which he is bold to aflert* ilyf We may offer the fame Appeal to all confidering Perfons, yea to the Confide/cation of J. S, himfelf, whether fhti Divine Right for Paftors or Presbyters Chap. V. (pretended) Principles of the Cyprianic Age. \$y Presbyters Authority, and for Presbyterian Government, thus deline- ated in theDo&rine and Pra&ice of the Apofties, or his fupposd Fatlum, the Principles and Practice of Cyprian, and his Contemporaries, ought to be preferr'd in the Churches Imitation and Practice ? And whether this Ballance of the San&uary, or his Humane Ballance men- tion'd by him in his Epilogue, ought to be made ufe of for clearing and determining this point ? And finally, fince he might have knowns that there is fo much to be (aid from Scripture for the Caufe which we owne, Whether his pretending to (top our Mouths, and bear us do*vn with a meer Ac- count of the Principles and Practice of the Cyprianic Age, and Boafting fo infolencly thereupon, has not difcover'd him to be a meer Fu- gitive from the Scripture Light, yea and an Oppofer, in (o far, of the Authority and Perfection thereof, for which he deferves the juft Cen- fure of all Sound Proteftants ? CHAP. V. Wherein is Examind J. S\r Attacks upon the Author of the Treat ife, Entituled, Re&ius Inftruendum, and of the Other, Bntittd'dy The Hierarchical BifhopV Claim to a Divine Right, &c. Offering an'Anfwer to his Criticifms and Accufation anent that Author s pretended Incongruous Citations of the Fathers, in the Tra&ate lafi mention d efpecially 5 Refuting alfo his Charge anent the tnif-fiating of the ^ueftien, and bringing likewife unto the Touch-Stone of the Solid Principles of Logick, his Two Syllogifms which he vainly offers to the Two Principals upon the Point of the Ruling-Elders Office j Dif covering clearly ', upon the whole , his ZJnfoundnefsy Ignorance and SelfContradi&ion. SECT. I. The Citations of the Fathers defended from J, §rs €aviJlationsi and the Imptrtinency »f this Charge made appear. THIS New Advocate of the Epifcopal Caufe, who deferves the firft place among his Fellows in point of vain infolent Loquacity, inveighs with Bitternefs enough upon the Au- thor of the premis'd Treatifes, and has feveral Attacks up- on him in the point of Citation of Authors : But whether he hath in this appear'd the Mwm or Jherjites, or both, fhall evidently . appear o3 A Confutation of, J. SV Vindication of the Chap. V. aLar in the Defence fubjoinU This pitiful loofe Difputant, who appear m mc ^ # Laborious Nothing, to touch the ^^iStt wiU needs make a great Butle, and **» fm^ertinent Bufie-Body, in cratching at the Shell of feme Words and Phwufirft Attack is upon a Citation of Gkmens, Chap. *. ?*g. j , cited by^haf Aufho? pi 7, ?*g. 19, - ** jj ™, Whereas no fuch Poift'e iVcxtant. Which Criticifm, together with others enfuing, w?U aoDear to be vain and impertinent, when it is confidered in gene* rl 1 1 That it is meerly grounded upon the very common and ufuat Ffcaoe of the Tranfcriber, or Prefs, putting the Word fbthfftam for 3^, which being to be plac'd among the Errata f^bica, was, « other iuch like, remitted to the Readers candid Correction. The Author having obferv'd maay fuch, which becaufe of great Diftance from the Prefs, had crept into this Impreffion, to avoid the tedious Work of filling up whole Pages with fuch Obfervations determin d to remit the fame in a general Admonition, after fome or the more obvi- ouiobferv'd.to the Reader's candid Gorreftion, having no thoughts.that th Eves of fuch an Idle Mcmus as this, mould have fall'n upon that Book, who, inftead of impugning the Author, dare only make a filly pitiful Affault upon fome Verbal Efcapes of the Prefs or Tranfcriber ; Otherwife, a large Account of fuch Errors, which he had drawn up upon a Second and Third Reading, and had font to Efohrgh to the Printer, had been printed with other Errata, which Several did judge a fruhlefsWork, and not worth the while, theTreatile being then whol- ly minted off- But Judg'd it rather advifeable, according to the ufual &R««* thisCorreaionto the Candid Reader's Difcretion. Xlf fuch an Accufation were valid, and did infer fuch an Imputation upon that Author, as this pitiful Mmm intends, beyond all perad, venture, he might thus put an Ignominious Blot upon the mod Famous Divines in Chriftendom, and accufe them of grofs Ignorance in the Citations of the Sacred Scriptures themfelves wherein many fuch Efcapes might be obferv'd, and not only the Teftimony wrong d by wrong Pointing or perverfe Reading, but the very Book it felf mit cited and mifapplyed. Who knows not, that a wrong Touch of either the Tranfcriber or the Prefs, as to either Word, Letter or Figure, may make an Error of a great Figure for a Mmm to grate upon ? Thus he might fallen his Teeth upon the Learn d Jerem, who, fpeaking of Ig- wtiw'sEpiftles, prefentslome things which is not in knatims, but com- monly afcrib'd to Barnabas. When I had read in the Works of a Fa- raous Divine, whole Praife is in all the Churches, the vjth of John at- Chap. V. (pretended ) Principles of the Cyprianic Age. ,g9 ed and if I miftake not, once and again, Iprefcntly apprehended what a Field there was here for our Learned Momm critically to expatiate in had this Author been engag'd in Debate with him, and yet 'tis no tour that this grofs Typographical Error cannot, without extreme Impudence, be imputed to the Author, being nothing but a wrong Touch of the Tranfcriber or Prefs, in putting the 2 for the 1 Figure- confequently the 27 for the 17 Cb. The Author of that Treat!?*' could have helped this Momus to many other fuch like Learn'd Oh! ferves Thus, Part 2. Pag. 94 there is found cited the Book of the Learn d Rivet, Entituled, Catholkus Orthodoxus, Tratf 28 Qu*(l wherein there's no fuch thing to be found as is cited, the proper ol ace being Trail. 2. her Title and Appellation than what by a confiderable Prefcrip- tion of Time was made common ,• Notwithftanding that they are commonly Tud?d to be the Writings of Hilary the Deacon. 'Tis knowr ^ that thfs Paffage of Hilary in Cap 4. Epifi. ad EpL is afcrib'd fometimes to Hilary, fometimes to Amkrtfe. The Learn'd Authors of the Appendix to the Jm Dtva. Mmtft. Evang. pag. 10;. ia4. citing this Commentary on Eph 4, as pro. bablv afcribable to Ambrofe reprefented a remarkable Paffage which hecomes 7- S?s Confideration, Idea non per *mnla convemunt Sertpta Lfioli Ordinttmi ]** nunc in EccUfia e/ts &c. Nam& Timotheum Vmhttmm a fe creatum Epifcopum , 'Y . which was in the ?z4 of Chrift Hiftory «V"4^™ Hiftorv imothe Latin Tongue, adding two *^l Tifl Eth S, a" th 'supplement of the Hiftory, until the Books of h.s own wh,Ch are W u aftet w mann tni°^dfnl to and df raaing from the Hiftory . For Inft.nce.te ^u 11« the 10 Book ofW«". yea' and in a great meafure W,hDl Yook alo The 8 and 9 Book he Abridges into one He the 9 Boor/" Rnok the Hiftory of the Miracles of Gregory Tbauma- adds unto the , > Book the Hmo y He adds alfo w Tg' took S he mftory of l!,-.» the Martyr, which E«/^ has not. Moreoverf te invelts the Order of the Chapters bodi u. 6 and 7 Book. u.a„r,, ,i.n5 eoreaiouQv Interpolated and Chang'd.doth Nu°^ ft" fndoVdinarify yea iuftly bear the Name of K«fc and •wiih"S^6^ H*° , fo hatythe Author did very fuitably cite**. 15 *?« I f RliS Mon ■ that is, the Book which is the xo^in order -^Hiftorv which Toes under the Name of Rufin, which will by m that Hiltory wnicn B , b he Author 0f all thale no Reafon infer h" f \YnTMomus afferts, who would fain leek a l00ki>. t?Li an wto by aTwife an Inference might accufe the K ciS^. "Id »to P*«, as if he had pronoune'd taken ms ^"""' , w d beins the Words of Jerom, and not his. But low liS and emp I this Accusation is, will appear to any that But how hgnt ana c v y ground, tcarcely any thing in all t Decree muft come Tder this dWlr, ftnee it is wholly eon- SaSw«Sd?-P of Citations Moreover that Autnor ad affe. H th3t t th"' ^ur1rAn« w^ut J^ffif check unknown o the purer A" W> Animadverf.on on this point is %?mw n^ediL and no doubt, if there be any thing in cW* 5£ f^nTto favour tto Diftinaion, he ma, be probably judg'd to thf X™LZlthl ^Church of the Jews, rather than the Chriftian. Buffor W Judgment in thfs pointhe hath the Learn'd W going before him in his Difpute againft I>~, To «h« j purpole we have a wmarkable Paffage of our Famous and Lsatn£ Mf; Chap. V. (pretended) Principles of the Cypmnic Age. 202 GiUejpie *. The Diftinflion, faith he, of Clergy and - Laity is Popifh and Antichriftian ; And they who * ^ffert.ofths have narrowly confidered the Records of Antient Go™rn- °f ths Times, have noted this Diftinaion, as one of the un^chPf Scoc' grounds, whence the Myftery of Iniquity had the ' *e'3% beginning of it. For which he cites CataL Teji. Ferit. Lib. 2. Col. 98. Ofiander (Sent, ii fag. 81. Adding that the Name of Clergy appropriated to Minifters is full of Pride and vain Glory, and hath made the Holy People of God to be defpis'd, as if they 'were Prophane and Unclean, in comparifon of their Minifters. Citing further Gerard, Loc. Theol. Tom* 6. N. 37. likening thofe, who take to themferves the Name of the Clergy, to the Pharifees, who call'd them- felves by that Name8 for that their Holinefs did feparat them from the reft of the Jews. The Learn'd Author does further mention fome Councils difcharging the Laity from prefuming to enter within the Quire, or to ftand among the Clergy near the Altar. ThusSjW. Turon. 2. Sam. 3. Synod €onjl. 6. Can. 69. Shewing that the pretended ground of applying the x^* to Minifters, fcil. becaufe the Lord is their Inheritance, and that they are his Inheritance, is vain and groundlefs ; Since there is none of the Faithful who may not; fay with David, PfaL 16. f. Ike Lord if the portion of my Inheritance. The Apoftle Peter giving this Name to the whole Church, 1 Pet. y. 3, Let us then, faith he, banim from us fuch Popifh Names, and fend them home to Rome. Bellarmin thought we had done fo ere now, for he makes this one of his controverted Heads, de Gler. Lib. 1. Cap. r. Whether we may rightly call fome Chri/lians the clergy, and others the Laity er not ? Afcribing the Negative to Proteftants, the Affirmative to the Church of Rome. Where he Notes alfo Bifhop Hall's borrowing f a Glofs from Bellarmin and Gregory Vakntia, t fyifcopacyhj while he holds that Peter charg'd his Fellow Bifhops not Dirvine Ki&ht> to Domineer over their Clergy ,• So (hutting out of the Text "£' 2l2' both the Duty of Paftors, becaufe the Bifhops only are meant by Elders, and the Benefit of the People> becaufe the Inferior Paftors are the Bifhops Flock according to this Glofs. See pag. 4, 5-. Moreover, that Author, pag: 90 and 98, had affirm'd that €yprian did profefs, he neither could, nor would do any thing in point of Government without the Clergy, owning the Presbyters as hk GoUegues. Our great Gritick fiercely aiTaults this Affection. And it were here fuperfluous to infift in a Critical Debate with him on this point. As for Cyprian's owning Presbyters as his Collegues, as Learn'd Criticks, yea more and better feerun Antiquity than /. S. fcil. the Authors of the 4ppendiK £ c * u 204 A Confntation of \ Sj Vindication of the Chap. V. to tbeJusDivin. Ifinijl. Wang. Together with Smtfym*M, , bcfidci clivers others Me, they have made it good,- And therefore I (hall up- on this Readonly offer this to J. ft which.upon the matter, doth clear the Thing, that finccin many places Cyprian is found to owne himlelf a Co-prefbyer with the Paftors, and likewile. finpe tis made appear that the Paftor was with him the higheft Officer )ure divmo, it will cleanly follow, that in point of Divine Right he own'd them as his But upon this-point, that he refolv d not toA* without the Clergy there are fufficient Evidences proauceable, which we need not in M UDon That paffrge is confiderable concerning Fbtlomcntts and Fort*- »L/the Sub-deacons, and Favarinus the Acolythus, who had turn'd afide, and again returnd; The Clergy having written to him, to know his Judgment, behold the Anfwer, Cut ret huh he, non potm w (ohm Judicemdire, cum mttlti adbuc de Ciero abjentes fint, nee locum Uum velfer* repetendunt futaverint, & h*c fingulorum traclandafit & It- Lndaplenius ratio, Sec. He (hews, that in this point he could not be ludg Alone, fmce many of the Clergy were abfent, e^. Surely J.S. can make no Senfe of that non potut me Solum Judtcem dare, it they be not Interpreted to the Senfe and Scope inftane'd. The Marginal Note clears this which runs thus, Ntc de yuorundum Clericorum lapfu inconfulto Preshterio' infeia Plebe decernit, I e. That he doth Determine nothing concerning the Laps'd without confuting the Presbyterie^&c. in Epifk. 6 which U, Ad Clerum de cura Pauperum, tf. $. he hath thefe words, ^AdUvtro ouod Scripferunt mihi Compresbyteri noftri, Donatus, & For- tunatus, Novatus & Gordius, (olus rt[cribere nihil potui, yuando a Pri- wraio Epifcopatus mci (latuerim nihil fine Confilio vejbo, & fine confenfu T Ubit mea privatd fententid gerere, &c. Concerning that which our fellow Presby^rs, Donatus, and Fortunatus, Novttm, and Gordiu*, have written to me I could of my felfgive no Return, having determined fhee the beginning of my Epifcopacy, to aft nothing by my own pri- vate Judgment, without your Couniel, &c. Where was the Abjolute Negative here, the Epifcopal Licentia and Liberum Arbitrium, that Peer- WiMaiefy and Vrincipality, fcrew'd up by J.S. to the higheft Pinacle of abfoluteandincontroulable Powerjendringthe Bifhop's fole Aathe Aft of the Church ? Sure,whatever Inftances hereof he may pretend to produce, tend only to faften upon his great Cyprian Self- contradiction, and moft unaccountable Deceit and Unfaithfalnefs. Upon this palTa&e J. S. is bold to aliert, that the word Statui mfi- nuates only a voluntary Refohtion, but no official Obligation. But the words cited compar'd with the other Paffage inftanced, and feveral others. ad* duceable,. Chap. V. (pretended) Principles of the Cyprianic Jge. 205 duceable, do evince the contrary ,• It being, evident, that he afcribe5 this Refolution to a clear fenfe of Ms Duty and Obligation, and that he could not without palpable breach of Truft have Aeled otherwife. Njn potui, faith he ,• And fir.ee in amoral fenfe it holds good, idtantum fthat>^ afferts ( BUfiaJ Helion.) tha tthe PresTyter U*~* unto Satan. So Epift. ad Demet. Ihey rece.v d tTA(ol7dth Penitent, . He made alfo appear, thatc^r^ (Ep./I.^.) Affem hat Excommunicated Pefons returning unto theChurch Fellow- ftp were no, Admitted, till Hands were la.d upon them by the Sod and Clergy ; And writing to his Charge anent Laps'd Cbrifti- Sfte "K Tha.*rf«r Confelon and laying on of the :Presbjters Hands they might be Recommended to God, EKhomolegefi faHa & mlnulatbtfn Pcenitentiam imfofitt. And fuch as return d f om He- Tefie, and were to be receivd in the Church at Rome in he t.me of Cernelim, Cyprian tells us ( Efiff. 6. compar'd w.th 46. ) the, came be- fere the Presbytery, and cenf effing their Sins, were receivd. r To the fame'Scopeofafferting Pallors or Presbyters effentialln- tereft in Government, and (hewing that Senfe the Ancients had there- of in oppolitton to the pretended Prerogatives, and luperem.nent Power of Bilhops, aflerted by our new Epifcopal Pleaders, the Author had cited the famous Teftimony of Jerome m Eft0.adi.vagu. „» and in his Comment, in ifif. ad **■ ? Tefhmony which has jn- ext'ricably involv'd, andGravel-d our Epifcopalians, m making feme ftif of Anfwer. Jerome, having by clear Teftimomes of Scripture, E- vine'd and Demonftrated the Identity of Biftiop and Presbyter, upon the whole Caute and Controverfie, gives this Judgment and Sentence: SciaZ\pifcofi (c m*gi> confuetudine, «• ittfofittonu Vtvtna ventaH Vrmhteri efTe (aperiorei, & i» communi debere icclefiam regere. 1. e. Let the B ito£to& drat by Cuftom rather, than by the Truth of D.vine 1™ IZmS Tre Superior to Presbyters.and do in common govern rehuTch/' Moreoverftn the paffag'es cited ( efpecial.y both be tog -•l^edwih rerpea to his Scope J he afferts, that through all the AUnofto'icT AEe the Churches were governed Communi Presbyterorum CMrife by the' common Council of Presbyters. The Scriptures cited b?Je7oml w prove the forementioned Identity, making this evident. ly appear To (hake ^ke off this heavy Argument and Teftimony, the Adve^a- n^^tum^dt€&thw^\wt$, but with palpably ftuidofc v^ff^^^^ whom that ^horDirpu^offnr0s Chap* V. (pretended) Principles of the Cyprianic Ag*. 207 no fewer than fix Exceptions and Anfwers, all which he has fcannd and Refuted at ibme length 5 As likeways the Anfwers offered by the Author of that Pamphlet Entituled, The Differences of the limes, are fcann'd in the Treatife, Entituled, Atftius InHruendum. Yet J. S. offers not the lead help to the Do&or, notwithftanding that, if thefe Tefti- monies of Scripture pleaded by Jerome be valid to infer his Conclufion, the Epifcopal Caufe lyes groveling in the Duft. The Author alfo had cited Aug* (tins i^thEpiftle ad Hiermymum. In this Epiftle, towards the end Augujiin afcribes the Difference between a Bifliop and Presbyter to Eadefiaftick cufiom $nly, Afferting thus the Diftin&ion to be meerly Nominal. The words of Auguftin are thefe Quamvis enim fecundum honorum vocabula, quie jam Ecclefia ufus obtinuit Epi/copatus Presbyterio Major (it, tamen in multis rebus Auguftinus Hiere~ nymo Minor eft. Where in two Diminutives he excludes and depreffes the Epifcopal pretended Official Superiority in point of aDivine Right; Firft, in afferting the difference to have flowed only from An Ecclefi- aftick cufiom, which had gradually creept in, thus clearly diftinguifhing it from a Divine Original Right, therein according with Jerome in the place fore-cited. 2. In making this fuppofed Difference to dwindle into ameer difiinclion of Names, Secundum honor urn vocabula* Moreover the Author, to the fame Scope, for proving this Identity of Bifhop and Presbyter, had cited the famous Teftimony of Ghryfofiom in. his Commentary on the firft Epiftle of Paul to Timothy^ the Eleventh Homily on the 3d Chapter. In the beginning of the Homily Cbry* foflom propofeth the Queftion, wherefore the Apoftlc having described the Bifliop, and given account of his Office, paffeth immediately over to the Office of the Deacon, Intermijfo interim Presbyterorum ordine, making no mention of the Order of Presbyters? To which Queftion he gives this Return, Quia inter Vresbyterum & Efifcepum interefi ferme nihil. & qua Epifcopo Jcripjerat Apofiolas eadem Presbytero conveniunt, quippg Vresbyiero quocjuecommiffa eH Ecckjia cura. That betwixt the Bifliop and Presbyter there is little or no difference ,• And what the Apoftle had afcribed to the Bijhop, the fame alfo are proper to the Presbyter ; Since to them alfo the Care of the Church is committed. Which quite baffles the many vaft effential and official Differences, which J. S. in his whole Pamphlet fixes betwixt the Bijhop and Presbyter. Moreover, the Author Examines at large Do&or Scott's Citations from the Epiftlesof Ignatius, making evident the repugnancy of feveral Sentences drawn from thefe Epiftles, unto the Holy Scriptures, and inferring thereupon, that the Epiftles themfelves are fpurious, and not 10 be afcribed to this early and holy Martyr j. Shewing alfo herein the Gonfeni: ao8 A Confutation of }. Ss Vindidtion of tk Chap. V. Confent oj Learned Proteftant D'.vines, giving the fame Judgment on ^efeEDiftlt offering alfo a Return unto what is alleged anent the D^Lce hereoTby Doaor Petrfm and Doflor Bwrcge Moreover, Se Author hath Examined the Conclufions drawn by Doftor 5««from hefe ESlefand difcovered the -^"t^Tfcom hUOracle TreatifeP Entituled ;*;f^^ IZTIC1ZZX^0( ) .ttfuppoftd Infallibility.;. The AuthorTad deUnftrated the difference betwixt^ our W Hierarchy ereaed in this Church, and the Epifcopacy which fir ft obtained in the Churched in no lefs han twelve Inftances drawn from approved Au- thors And in "he other Treatife, the Au.hority of Paftors or Pref. Stt n in Councils as condiment Members thereof. , made app „ from the A&s of Councils themfelves, /«/. the lentnCanon 01 tne Colc^fiAthe I?th Canon of the Counc a of Antyra, together with the i ;th Ganon of the 4'* .Council , of C^Vp- f Several other Teftimonies of the Fathers, J.S. might «« "e" cie ed to this Scope in that Treatife he thus vilifies, ( P^89. ) « that lilroC Horn ,17. on ilA»k calls Presbyters exprefly «, fW», cS Vica s? 0 Deputes j Inferring therefrom their zw Ar*> Wr» in Government, derivd from our Lord,.n ^jW'^k.kna my m v* »v* / Vh:a o affertc our Lords letting apart tftf/w-j to calls the ^«^ peremptorily, that Presbyters w«= Fellow- Allocates in and afferting. '^rtd*X Affertion of 4.^, Government. That, ■» Co^ponden ^ ^ ^^ ;«»*«,, £1*. 4. C- 14' ""Vrh^f Intereft in Government. Thus Au- ing clearly their Affociated Ch e i In t« eit ^ ^ STE.2E .t ASL^Ucerni^^V^: I™ . things alfo do *&*w*0.™!Vr!Ll Authority of Government, and the Senfs. v v Now, Chap. V. (pretended) Principles of the Cyprianic Age. s0a Now, upon the whole, let it be confidered what Return 7 s> hath made to the premifed Accounts of the Epifcopal Office in point of Antiquity, prefented by that Author in the forementioned Treatifes - And it will be : evident co any confidering perfon, that, in a great mea.' fure at leaft,if not wholly,he ftands mute and filent, and in lo far hath, in this Conflid.let fall hisStandard, and yielded up his Caafe; For upon fuppofal of the Truth of what is premifed in point of Antiquity; who fees not, that the Epifcopal Gaufe and Pleadings fall to the Duft I faid, in a great meafure, at leaft, he ftands mute and filent to wha* is above offered ,• I am fure, to the far greateft part thereof, he does not fo much as offer an Anfwer, which will be obvious to any who ihall peruie his whole Pamphlet. For, as for his Quibblings upon fome of thefe Teftimonies, I may appeal to the Judicious and Imparti- al who have perus'd the fame, that either they appear a meer Diftorti- on of the Author's genuine Senfe, or elfe, if in his Senfe admitted do talten a palpable Contradiction upon thefe Fathers, which, in a (pedal manner.is applicable to the inftanced Teftimonies of JeromCfoyfoftom and Augu/lin, the exhibited Senfe of the two firft efpecially being in their Expofuion of the Scriptures controverted, and confequently muft needs preponderate and over-rule whatever Affertions in their other Writings feem to have a different Senfe. Befides that the Idea that feveral Ancient Fathers intertain'd of the Paftor, or Presbyter's Subordinate Station to the Prelate Jure Humano and Eccle/iafUco, ( which is evident in Augujiin's inftancd Teftimony ) doth very fitly accord any feemins Inconfiftencies in their Affertions in this point • Since their Affertion of the Paftor's Authority in Government, as being of the fame Office with the Bi&op, hath evidently a refped: to a Divine Right. .We (ball therefore conclude this Setfion with thefe two or three Obierves. Fir?, It doth evidently appear, that J. S\ Reproaches of that Author as a grots Ignoramus of Antiquity, are but the Eruption of his procacious Vanity, if not the Proclamation alio of his own Folly and Ignorance; Since it is evident, that, in the Treatifes mentioned which J. S. profeffes to have read, he hath made no Offer of Anfwer to fuch clear paffages of uncontroverted Antiquity, as all confiderinff perions will acknowledge did call for his Confideration. He offers in his Flanting Humour, to become Presbyterian, upon the proof of the Equality of Bilhop and Presbyter from fome paffages of Cyprian 'viz,. His calling Presbyters his Collegues, and that he neither would nor could do any thing without them. But befide what is offered in the preceeding parages oUyprian^o prove Presbyters Effential Incereft in Government, the other inftanced proofs from Antiquity will clearly D-4 conclude tj£ rA Confutation of ]. $s Vindication of the Chap. V. co/tdude this ; And thus he muft acknowledge, that, until he can « folldly anfver the fame, and in fpecial the affigned Difference between the Ancient Bifhops& the Seottifh Hierarchy,he ftands obliged to forego his Epifcopal perfwafion. ?.ly, There is, in this point, a Retortion he is lyable to, which, no doubt, he will judg very confiderable,- For, upon the pretend d Miftakes of that Author, he draws this Conclufion, Qhap. 2. $. 40- That he had never read one of thefe Ancients ; For who could have blundered fo, faith he, that had fo much as feen them ? Now, from what is inftanced of his own Blunder in fpecial, his ignorant Affertion in point of Jercm's Epiftles, denying a Sentence to be found in the Epiftle cited, which is clearly extant therein, and is obvious to all who do but look it over ; May we not, upon J. S's Logick, affirm, and return him thus his own Sarcaftick Imputation, viz,. That he hath never read Jerom ; For who could have blundered fo as he hath done, who had fo much as feen Jerom ? And, no doubt, to have never fo much as feen Jerom, this our great Antiquary will judg no (mall Imputation. ;/y, The Author whom he thusafpeifeth, hath, in this piece of Suffering from vain Flanting Adverfaries of Truth, the precedency of Great and Famous Divines, who have thus, when they had no better Arguments, fallen a Grating and Criticifing upon Words and Expreffions. The Learned Authors of the piece entituled Smeftym- mm were fo treated by the Author of the Remonftrance, who makes fuch a great Critical Rant upon a certain phrafe ufed by them, fell, the phrafe of Areopagi, telling them, he had thought this had been the Name of the Place, and not of the Men, and that it was an evil Sign they bad thus ftumbled at the Threfhold. The Famous and Learned Whittaker Profeffor in Cambridge, whom Bucer glories in as his Matter, is thus treated by his Adverfary Dune the Jefuite, to whofe Trivial Criticifms ( much of a Kin with thefe of J. S. fcil. far remote from the Caufe and Point debateable ) the Modeft Do&or gives this Anfwer, Bene habet hi/ce in rebus non vertuntur fmuna Ecclefia. It is well, that the Caufe of the Church of God is not touched by fuch AfTauIts : To which we may add, that Bene habet, it is well, that granting the Truth of J, S's inftanced Criticifms, the Caufe of God and of this Church is not in the leaft thereby touched, nor the Arguments brought by that Author weakened ; Who might fay of fome Typographical Efcapes mentioned, as the Famous and Learned Didoclavius» after reciting fe- veral fuch Errors of his accurate Work, Hac leviter ptrcurrenti occurre- bant menda% plura deprehendet Lettor, fed qua facile emendari poffunt. Thefe Efcapes upon a little Review did occur, the Reader will find more, but fuch as m*y be eafily and readily corrected. So much upon this point, in Anfwer to our Officious Monm and Critick. sect; Chap. V. ( pretended ) Principles of the Cyprianic Age. %i\ SECT, II. A Confederation of what J. S. offers againfi that Author, as to tfo State of the Gheftion. THE next Attack and Attempt of this Pamphleter is anent the State of the Que/Hon, and the Nature of the Bifliop's Power , whether it be a Sole Power or not, or touching the Soli- tude of Power as 5. S. terms it. Our Momus *will not * chap. 3, have this to be the main State of the Controverfie, ac- p- 129-S itf, knowledging, notwithstanding, that it is taken fo by '7' ,8, ***• Presbyterians, by the Synod of London, by SmeBymnuus, together with the Reverend Mr* Rule. Adding unto them the Au* thor of the Rctfius Inftrttendum, the Author of the Hierarchical Bi/hop's Claim, &c% That I may fuccin&ly Examine this Man's foolifli and inconfiftent Ramblings on this point j It is certain, that whatever other Subordi- nate or Collateral Queftions belong to this Controverfie, yet this Que* [Hon anent a Sole Power hath always been judg'd one main point de- bateable: And it is equally certain, that tho' the Expreffion of Sole "Power appear to J* S. and his Fellows a formidable Sear-Crow, whereof they are aware and afraid of a profeffed dired: owning, yet, upon the Matter, they do both owne and plead for it, which is evi- dent in the whole Series and Scope of their Reafonings upon this point. And, in fpecial, this appears in the Pleadings of J. S. and the Monftru- ous Extension of the Epifcopal Power aflerted by him, whereof fome Inftances are already exhibited. Butbecaufe the clearing of this is of considerable Importance, and to make it appear, that the AfTertion of the Sole Power is that which J. S. ( however, for Shame, he doth here dif- femble it) has fpent a great part of his Endeavours upon • And with- al, to evince his Shamelets Prevarication and Groundlefs Accufations in this point, we fhallhfere again offer a compendious Review thereof. The Bifbofs Abfotute Power being averted by him, Ch* 5. §. 40, 41, &el Their Epifcopal Liberum Arbitrium, §. 45-. He aflerts the " Bifhop 1 to be the Steerfman of the Churches Ship, and that he Solely is at that ' Helm ; That he Only holds the Ballance of Government ,• That he is r the Only Judg. having a Power properly Kingly and Soveraign, I both as to Ordination and Jurifdi<3ion. Afferted by him, Qk, 6. §. Dd2 3*3 / $f3 A Confutation of J. SV Vindication of the Chap. V. 2i, 2*, 22, 34, 3f, **' <**<• with 4T> 42' ™> 6*> 64> *u &c. with CM>. 7- tf- ?*> *K ?4, 3£ 4,» 42» 4?'44'4^ a6, #-<. He depreiTeth the Presbyters Power fo far in Sy- nods, thaf, with him, it (rands on a Level with that of a the People, who had neither a Dscifive nor Confujnve Suffrage therein This he afferts Ch n § 20, 22,;?. AH thefe do either plead tor a Sole Tower or Nothing, and are but a Beating of the Air and Nonfenfe. Befides in his firft Pamphlet, Entituied, Xbe Principles of the Cypnanic Ate he is clear and pofitive, in' this Affertion of the Sole Power, ai- ferting, that the Bifhop's Deed is the Churches Aa P. 24. and that he is Subordinated to None, P. 27,28, 3 f. Nay, to None upon Earth, as is evident in the Parage of this late Pamphlet cited above that his Power is Soveraign nndPeerlefs, P. 6S. Supreme and Unaccountable P. 67. He afferts his Sole Power in many Ads of Government andDifaphne, and his Jftprim in all, P. 37. L« any make Senle of thefe Aiferti- ons, if it be not therein clearly owned, and avouched by him, that All Church Authority is fo Concentred in the Bifhop (which is Bifhop Hmtmmi 1 Phrale ; that there is No Affectation of Power reierved to Presbyters. Nay, fo Abfurd he is, as to affert, cb. 7. tf *?'**■ " That the Management of Things in Synods by common Advice, e {mention'd by Cyprian, Fpift. 14. compared with 19. ) is pointed at ■ as an Honour due to the People, and no fuch thing is faid concern- * ninp even Presbyters \ And that, taking things ftnaiy and literally, * the People feem to have been more regarded than Presbyters them- « feives in theConftitution of Provincial Councils. He holds the Bi- fhop to be " the Principle of Unity in the Church, Supreme in his « Church, immediately fubjed to Ghrift chap 7< §. 4. there is a jarse Bundle of thefe Affertions of the Bifhop s Power, fuch as, His hav- ing Freedom to determine Matters relating to his Church by venue of hUJbfolute Independent Power 5 That he is, in his Power and Govern- ment, Accountable to God only; That he may make Statutes as he thinks fit and hath the Free Determination of bis own Willm the Admimftration of his Church : That he hath fo much the Free Power of his own Arb>- iriment, that he may do in his Diocefi what feems good 1 unto him , : Adding, " That if G. R. had confidered thefe very full Aflenions of * the Epifcopal Power, he would not have had the Courage to queftion * the Epifcopal Soveraignity. * Moreover, in the beginning of this Paragraph, he profefleth, from the pretended Teftimonies averting this Paramount Authonty.thereby to alien the Bifhop* Abfolute Power. Now, it Soveraignty and Ab/olute fewer of giving Laws, * ?ewer fo ^dependent m thj frrfon * therein Only Chap. V. ( pretended ) Principles of the Cyprianic Age* 2 ; 3 anfwerable to God, a Power in the Exercife whereof a Man hath the fee Determination of hit own Will, and may do what Jeems good unto him, be not a Sole tower, furely nothing is. Nay, §. 2. he hath thefe Words, having aflerted that the Biihops Intereft was Soveraign in making Laws for his Diocefe, Yea faith he, it was fomething more than Soveraign. And if to be more than Soveraign, will not amount to, and include Sole, furely nothing will Be/ides, JT. y. he pleads, that in all Cyprians Epiftles Written in time of his Retirement, we will not find fo much as one Gartba- gmian Presbyter with him all that while, and yet, faith he, during the fame time of his Retirement, you may find him giving Law, to bis Presbyters and Deacons, fometimes in matters of leffer Confequence fometimes of greater. Here is then aflerted either a Sole Leli/lativl Power, or the words are Nonfenfe. But to return to $. 4. it is pleafant to fee, how J. S. would Jemne all with a Limitation, which he tells us, he will readily admit of becaule he is allured Cyprian would. What is that ? Why " The* ^ Bilhop had this Power only in matters Undetermined by the Word of God, or by the Canons, or Radicated Cufroms of the Catholick Church, or by the common Authority of the Province in which he « hadi1,lDl0Cefe* But he teIls us> ™i Limitation can be of no ufe to G.R. toty up the Bilhop from making any Canon without fthe concurrent Voices of the Major part of the Presbyte- . ry. fB£t,J^WhateVer ufe he may fuPP°fe «* to be of to G.R k is fure 01 we-trtafrta _a clear contradiction upon him in the premis'd AfiV- tions^ For if the Bifliop had thefe four Chains or Fetters upon him in tfrhWl off^EpifcoPal Power, vi,, Firft, the Determination of 1 oTZruGt i*. The Determination of Church Canons, r^i^nf fK prCh-eS Rad,cautedLCuftoms. 4lys Of the common Au- thority of the Province in which he had his Diocefe.Paramonm to his Diocefan Authority , Then,nrft,the Abfolute Authority is cu° off Fo what Man of Senfe wi 1 fay, that Authority under all thefe Limitations in its Exercife is Abfolute? Unlefs Contradictions can beReconc ed thefe are^ no doubt, Irreconcilable. Befides, who will f^, that a Power Depending in its Exercife upon all thefe Superiors mentioned is an Independent Power? 2fy, Who will fay, that a Man left in "he f^rlK°(j1S P°We/ t0 his °Wn &' termination can be in a 1 Thefe icfpefe ^determined! And in a Word, how can the Man under al! thefe previous Rules, regulating the whole of his Aaings be faid m have Authority to n»kc*»ii»c£r he thinks fit, aad Jfcmsgooft hi own A ConfunthH of .J. SsFmdicttb* of the Chap. V. 2T4 /, ,„i|i i S denv. that the Bi mop, intbe cv)n JuJfmmt ? Moreover, will J. S. * ny R latedby&eWord Exercife of his Power.m h.s j*°«^n^Xerab?e to the Radicated ot God, but Anfwerable to ' «hf c*^hn,^ea, Antwerable to the Au- Cufioms of m Caurch, andin both wp caU h pef. thoricy of the Superior Pre ats Jet over rt Pro Execudon of for. or Perfons what he will, who ha d{ M nomy couid thefe Canons and Radicated Cuftoiro «! < he^ LM re „ ft , /■* „fei fc A *«"*«"; ''^d whether the inltanced Limitations Again, it may be«n^ulJedi Z,e. and in fpecial in the Paffages flan! Recorded in tyrmV ^V"'^ C„r*f . Afferting thereof cited by him in th«l Paragr apn, p Afermative, then and Exerdringan^/.toaP«w- »«™fc that «,?r»» *~«W *«a I would know.-firft, B«he»M to y, ^dm, d ;„ thefe °\f the Knfwer be Nega.^auh^ £ places cited, or in any of Cjjrw. ' Wr.tmgs, F other Fay that Cyfritns W/S\°fX Power here afferted ) then I would nor are deduceable *erefrom. Limitation, how comes he But if Cjfrivn Words w.U bear no ^f Vjolace, demanded, what thus to reftria them 1 J Jg be, -^^t^./as thus Qualified, he means by this Limitation He will, no doubt.acknow- and Diftinguifiied from other Cuttom^ H And whethef ^ ledge, that many bad Cuftoms. hav el >een **V ,„ Dettf„h,ing tb, Rallu.c^, or Canons wfth^;^h fending Rules, it fcems E«TO/i o/ffc &>!" Pf»'sr ^„";u fiL it hard Work to affert that no ^Marrtiff • ^ ^L th0' evenwally f°und never fo unexpedient and hurtful to the Church ^^ Chap. V. C pretended ) Principles if the Cyprianic Age. 3 1 5 and what is not determin'd by the Word of God muft be made appear therefrom (fince the Word of God fixes its own Limits ), the premised accounts, and Scripture Affsrtions of Presbyters or Paftors Effential Intereft and Authority in Government will entirely cut off this Arbi- trary and Abfoiute Power of the Bifhop, which he afferts ; And that upon this very Ground and Limitation affign'd by him, until he /hall be able to Anfwer our Scripture Arguments for the Power of Pallors and make the contrary appear. ' For further clearing this matter, and obviating what he further offers upon the State of the Controverfie, we may here take notice of the folid and ordinary Diftin&ion anent the Bifliop's Power, exhibited in this point by Presbyterian Divines, which will fully remove & baffle this Man'? pitiful Subterfuges, viz.That there is a Power,or rather a fliadow of it, which maybe call'd Cmfultive, and a power which is properly and of its own Nature Vecifive and Conclujive, whereby the Majority of the Votes of Members of Judicatories haVe an Authoritative Influence upon a Judicial Determination, or Juridical Sentence. The firft certainly can import no Authority properly, efpecially if the perfon whom others are fuppos'd to Advife, is at his Liberty whe- ther to Advife them or not, to Aui< u u/antins 3 If they have an Authoritative Intereftin Concurring or cSnfokingT how can the Bifhop's fimple Deed be their Ad even in itfelfconfidered* Nay, what can more palpably evince an Exclufion nf Power than to aflert, It is no more in Government, than that of the People, yea and lefs, f asis above > touch'cU andthattheBi(hopis not fo much asobliga to ask the Advice of Pafiors m his Ails of Government. # Nav dothhe not briskly contend, in the place cited,that CtfrM«,in (ending to the Church of Carthage his Decrees and Statutes, had not lo much tsone Vresbyter with him, nor coniequently did intheleaft ftand in need of their^ice in theExercife of thh his Nomothetick PMwr.Ghap. « He redu-eth the AdsandPower of Government to two Heads, JJ'uiislation andjurifditiion, he aclribes through the whole the Sole PowMofboth to the BiOiops, as is evident to any that (hall perufe £ FoTthelaft Diftinaion anent a Power which none can acl againft, and a Power dejkoying aU other Powers, it is evident from what is laid, that J. S. doth palpably afcribe ( whatever he may pretend to the contrary) Chap. V. ( pretended ) Principles of the Gyprianic Age. s i? to the Bifhop that Power which deftroys aS other Powers. For " what will he owne to be a deftroying of Power, if that deftroying Negative which he afcribes to the Bi&op over Paftors moft harmonious Judg- ment and Votes be not luch, and efpecially when with this Negative we conjoyn what he afferts anent fuch a Power as needs not Co much as their Counfel and Advice for its Exercife, but whofe JMings and Deeds are, eo ipjo, the httings of thefe other rowers, and accounted jure the fame with theirs. Can any Power or Authority be more palpably deftroyed and fwallowed up, than in fuch a cafe as this? From what isfaid/cis evident beyond allExcepdon,that J. S's feien'd and frivolous DiftinOions premis'd, when the Scope of his Pamphlet and Series of his Reafoning is confidered, are meerly Chimerical and but airy infignificant Shifts, fuch phantaftical Diftin&ions as havingbut one Wing to flee with, muft needs fall in the Duft, and evanifh as Smoakj Since both pretended Members of his Diftinaions, when compared with his AiTertions, and his grand Topicks in this Pamphlet do neceffarily coatefce and foder into one. So that in the complex Senfe and Scope of his Pleadings, the Sole Power and Chief Power a*e on* znd the fame, jub\ecTively, as both are afcrib'd to the Bifhop: And, with him, the Epifcopal Power is in fuch a manner Suptrior to all others as it doth absolutely exclude the fame, and, according to his Pleading,' is in fuch manner irrefiftible, as it doth intirely exclude all Authority of Act- ing in Paftors or Presbyters, and thus doth abfolutely deftroy the fame. This being premis'd, let us more clofely confider the Attack which J. S. has made upon the forementioned Author. He cites Reftius Jxft. and the Hierarchical Bifhop's Claim €. 4. p. i2o. 211. endeavo- ring to fliew an Inconfiftency in his way of pleading againft the Ad* verfaries therein mentioned. Let us hear his Argument. Here it is. ts [ That by the acknowledgment of that Author, feveral of the Ad-i1 ' verfaries, Scots and Englijh, plead for fuch a Prelacy as therein Prek 'byters do concur in Government, particularly that Bifhop Honnie- c ma»fonQ of thefe againft whom he Difpures.pleads for an Epifcopacy * of this Nature, and yet in flateing the Queftion with him, in that cfame place in which he aflerts the Bifhop to maintain fuch a Prelacy, c he will needs have the Prelacy to be fuch as inhances and concenters * all the power of Paftors, and makes this to be the point controverted, * How fuch a Power can be confiftent with the Scriptures Defcription * of Paftors effential Intereft in Government. ] This Attack will eafily appear to be like the Waves afiault upon a &ock, and a proclaiming of the Man's own inadvertent Folly, when jthefefcw things are confidered. E c , , S A ConfuUiUn of J. SV FmMetthH of the Chap. V. , There's a great Difference betwixt what a Difputant may pro- fe&to hold wr»» '«»', ^d what «p. <^ ««««■ bemamta,ns, and the W and Series of his Arguments, in themfelves confidered do conclude-, a ?:r ?h«-re were no other, we have hereof a clear Inftance in J. S. ^Vfr «i?» orofeffinR to Difown the Sole Power, and thus to ftate tte SiftTonXh. notlithftanding, in the Series of his Arguing clearly aflV» 'ladling by Difpute with any Adverfary, 'tis, in theacknowi 2ly. In dual ng , oy v n„ ,oproducefuchArgumenB,asdo over- Se 1 1 S'ag ffi that Gon'clunon of theAdverfary.wbkh *. ,W, i/Vi.7* Tntain both from /*« S«i« and Principles of h,s "Defence and ttli IZtoZ'be nature of 'the thing itfelf, and pint controverted ; Such Iriuments beL.beyond a I peradventure.of fuch a Nature as do touch ^.8Cauf- ana Point it (elf: For, certainly, the Imr ugner, to fay fo •; 1" ,^ when his Arguments overthrow the Conneaion and m«MMwSpta, and thus do evince their InconHft- " Fo anevincd Inconjijlenc, folidly concludes * Fal/fod *T There i a great and fignal Difference betwixt the Power du t - Afis/oerfonsor Governoursdo poffefs, and which they do . alfo J, t arroaat to°hemfelves and exercife, concerning both which the ControveSe i sftated, and fuch a Difguife and Extenuation of the fame, as Mead^BforAatVoierma, pretend to plead for, and toefchew the w rfnrt Vroke of Arguments, prefent in the State of the Controver- Dmt and Stroke otArgumenp ^ ^ tma Scfbi?u.tl filrf and S|;X» / ,fa »« W. «f '*« W and diverting the raome from its proper Scope, by obtruding that into the point which ?T V, h.w to it In this Cafe the Impugners of fuch perfons and Sngs « fo told the* to ,*. «M««r Aft or the Power *£. J/, ^/exercis'd by thefe perfons anent whofe Authority or Power and de faSto exerc. e iny tne v are fe d wheS'lm *?» * Arglen" le^el againft the The?e and Principle £T*V Defender undertakes, and isobligd to mainta.n, and is no to permit nd fuffer the Defender Vagan •*.*»•• thephraft ? Vn^Vonhifticallv to go beyond the true Limits of the Queftion, fo S.rthn%S» overthrowing the Tower A Jw. and */-*««< cifd which the Defender undertakes the patrocinie of, doth fufficien> ly rAs^hefe'ifagr^at difference betwixt an Argument ad «»and , M- ~ , « :. acknowlede'd bv % S. himfelf, in histwoArgu- menSTtoleExaS fh'ere Kg a difference betwixt fuch A, s. gumems «lwl againft ^jffiHI^ W^ Waited, »d * Chap. V. (pretended) Principles of the Cyprianic Age. 219 complex Principles of the Defender ; So Kkewife, whenfthe Defenders of the fame Gaule take different Methods, and do not agree among themfclves, either as to the State of the Queflion, or the Method of the De~ fence. For inftance, when one of the Patrons of Prelacy profeffes to defend an Epifcopacy or Prelacy of fuch a Nature as admits a Concur*. rence of Presbyters in its Exercife, another of thele Frodors or Advocats neither acknowledges nor defends an Epifcopacy of this Nature but offers to Maintain and Defend fuch an abjolute and peerkfs Power of Hrelats, as excludes aU Concurrence of Vaflorsi or Presbyters in Government When the Gafe ftands thus, I fay, in dealing with, and Impugning this lafr Adverfary, the Argument levels rightly againft the Caufe fuftain'd by thefe Defenders, and againft the Defenders themfelves when thereby the Impugner makes it appear, that fuch a Defender pleads for fuch an Epifcopacy as the pleadings of his AfTociatsdonot admit of; Since, as is faid, a profefs'd Contrariety of Principles and Diverfion from the true State of the Queftion, evine'd by the Im- pugner, iufficiently confounds the Defender, and convinces the Gaufe of Falfhood. Thefe things premis'd, the above mention'd Charge of this Pamph- Jeter will eafily evanifh into Smoak, ilnce it can no otherwife be for- tified, than by fuch a Phantafticai and Chimerical Principle as this viz. That the Difcoverie of Inconfflency in Pleaders for any Caufe or an their Principles or way of pleading, will involve the Difcoverer himfelf in this Inconfiftency, and import and infer a Contradi&ion in his Pleading and Arguing, than which there can not be a greater Abfurdity imagin'd, and will impeach, if admitted, J. S. himfelf in: a grofs Contradiction, in his pretended Difcovery thereof in that Au- thor, and thusdeftroy him with his own Weapon. Do&or Scott being clear and pofitive in afferting this Sole Power of the Bifhop, and in his whole Difputs and Arguments clofely adhering to fuch a Scope and State of the Queftion, and therein dealing more ingenuoufly than J. S ( who pretends he had not feen Dodlor Scott's Book ; But who will believe him, who appears fuch a Nomenclator of Writers on both fides? ) It was a iuitable Argument ad Hominem to fliew theDo&or, that feveral of his Fellow-pleaders profefs'd the conV trary. Next, As to the State of the Queftion with Honnieman, from what Js premis'd, it is Anfwered, 1. That he, profeffing to plead for the Prelacy then exiftent and eftablifhed by Law, it was fuitable to >|U |heiUles of Difputs, to ftate the Queftion with him upon fuch art E e 2 fxiftent 220 A Confutation of J. SV VindtcAthn of the Chap. V exiftent Prelacy, whatever his inconfiftent and difguifing pretence? mmht b" in his Method of Arguing. , . ... ,- That he both profefs'd and flood oblig'd to plead for a Prelacy of r TaN»tmre»nd Extent as was then Exiftent, none can in Reafon dfnv fm«o^ewffe he could not at all have anfwered the Scope of his Book nor PP«* ed to have given a fuitable Reply to h.s Am.gon.ft, who ■ impugn^ '*« »*«« ™ntnt Prelac? in the NT^ ""I, -IT S Se7t The Prelate afferting the Power MMAio « *>M and ;•# W <» »Pr«*rt«r» to be one and the fame, and thereupon pleading ffirsbyteian owning the fecond, cannot difown the firft it was fuitable to the Rules of Difpnte. to Ihew his difguifing the true Scrip. ,"'» ftate o tne Point in Queftion, which is anent the Scripture De er- minine theSuh,eit, as well as the Poaw »*/«//, it was therefore an im» n4chmentoVthe Scripture Rule and Standard to fuppofe the Power loth in the dilated and contraded Senfe. to be Scriptural. ,, As foe that which J. S. feems to take advantage of in this Author m The •faibins i to Bmmmrn, tbe Inhancing and Concentring all Power in rheBilhop, whereas he had before acknow edg'd,chat Honmeman afler- tedfuch a Prelacy as was to beexercis'd with Concurrence of Presby- ters wherein he alleges that he is inconfiftent with h.mfelf. It is an- fwered This is nothing elfe but a Mcovery ( with marly the like ) ?? SS'fe&o^alpable Contradiaion in his firft Pofi- tion a-d State of the Queftion, in that he both plead, for the Sc!e vZrintte flriaeft Senfe, or a /W Cmctni ,» the Afe , ( to ufe i '. TJn nhrafe ) and likewife pretends a nectary Smftnt cfprafyter, IMeJZ which to all Men of Senfe involves him in an evident Co mrad a o„rAnd muft the dilcovery of his Inconfiftency import an ^confiftency in the Difcoverer's Arguing? Who in his right Wits WiLl/rin,ttheis Anfwer to Homjman, and in Arguing thus againft him, the Foundation is laid upon his ownWords andexprefsAffertion ; The Author "eliing him ( as J. S. has acknowledg d ). "That upon our ' Wmoial ofthat Authority and Government afcnbd in Scripture to 'Pallors or Presbyters, and their Effential Intereft therein, the true « Crate of the Queftion betwixt Epifcopalians and Presbyterians is this, « How an Officer that is pretended to be diftinft from them and « Saoerior unto them, inhancing and concentring all their power in •himfelf, can be confiftent with Scripture prefenptions in point of * Government * Now Cliap. V. (pretended*) Principles of the Cyprianic Age. 321 Now, to (hew how confiftent this is to theBifbop* Sentiments and Words ,• After he had faid, that Presbyterians heidthe ©fficial Power to be feated in a College of Presbyters as in its proper Subjed and Balls, in oppoiltion thereunto he thus exprefles his own and the Epifcopalians Judgment, viz. That the Epifcopalians bold it to be concert- tred in one per [on, that i* in one per [on as in its proper Center: And the Similitude of the Manus apsrta & daufa, whereby the Bi/hop iljuftrats the matter, makes this evident beyond exception, and /hews his in-. confiftency with himfelf in what he pretends about Presbyters concur ring in the Exerci/e. For he neither could nor would fay, ( unlefs he would have expos'd himfelf to the huffing of all Men ) That the Jurif- diaional Power in the College of Presbyters ( which is wich him the Manus aperta) needeth any adventitious or extrinfick concurrence of others for its Exercife, and the Epifcopal Power being, in his Senfe the fame which he exemplifies and iiluftrats by the Manus daufa the* Author told him, he did moflr irrationally and inconfiftently pretend fuch an extrinfick concurrence of others with the Biihop for its Exer cife, or an extraneous Confent of Presbyters, both Powers bein? with him of the fame Nature and State, and in this point the fame Judgment is to be made of both. The Author thus further argu'd againft Honnyman, That in this he appear d contrary to himfelf in afcribing fuch a Power to the Bi/noo which coutf not be reducd into Ad, which is repugnant to that known Maxim, Frujira eft potentia yu* non poteB rcduci in- Aclum ul V^tflt^™ f th tMs Mfr> That the P^acy then exi/rent andeftabhfhd oy Law was of fuch a Nature as required no fuch Concurrence; Taking ; at lead Concurrence as neceifiiiiy requil in order to this Exercife of Epifcopal Authority, fuch as the Biihop 1ft needs have underftood iffpeaking confcquemly, and tochepoTnt For, the Laws eilabhflung Prelacy put fuch Limitations upon ThiJ Concurrence, as render it a meer deluding pretence • For rhe Cr^ TuTa ™f brV(ayS the LaW« ^f^perfons only, whom thcBiftow ihaii find to be of known Loyalty and Prince. And thus, befide that the general Term Concurrence may admit of fuch Ampliation and In- terpretation as will allow to Presbyters nothing of an Intere/Un Government, the Ampliation inftanced, both a, to the Qualification" ©fthe Perfons concurring, and iikewife the Judgment oi thefe Quali* fications, which is remitted Solely to the Bi/hop, renders this Con eurrence a meer Nullity. And 'tis evident, thafwhatoTr^ unm feemd to allow to Presbyters, and, tofpeakfo, gave ^ ens AConfmtlonof}.VsVi»ik*tb»ofth Chap. V. £m they did abfolutely remove and uk* *»*, w«h the in taking up for .hi ' D™,,0° J; inft th£ Author, «fe After he has omit in this Charge ot f. •>. ^ ; D s Dr. Afonro, and ,old us he wreftles w«h 'taee ^verf 3 fL\ not bad the Opportunit, t. confider Dr. Scott ^Kr s> he did weU to fl„fi, by a preten- Sole Tower 4Bf">- *£££ f h(m 4nd he had d0ne as wifely to ded Ignorance, *« °«^f the othe tWo. For Bonnieman, we have have fluffed the D«en=e.ot ^opal Power to be consented in the f^dy hllhn wh ch h Author!old him, he could by no means Bilhop ; Upon wnicn inat" Center. For Dr. Monro, it may admit that Power to go bey ond .he Cen ter. for , ^ be eafily made appear .that upon rte ma te p rf ^ S7h ^Heft <$£?. S. will, no ffi acknow.edg'to be Sole and £ B urt his Prertgatives, but likewife in his affernng, fag. icy 10S JnaSS S3 Inftances ***%*? Jfg"* £^ J. » «rAr»i« H'^rM^ZtLZi^Zfohimfea u him Alone, exelu- the Charge and Anton y c°mXfion of a U P*",- or 'tis W- f D,B ° via heWaffer« f A A ^TTimothy «/Ti«n, A p™ ^ l i«B«I^i»»* convey' d to finghferfom. I hope ?. S. «&«( A ^H»«/«m' AHtb/J2i~al AvthJiti includes aStbe Power of Order will acknowledge ao^rf gffigfim, as the proper Subjefls ml J*r,\i,lim> and it convey a to yi « r j ^ were ?rf*Z PoweV? "y« £a6'S,&.1.«S« |e V?/*5 SMT whom T/compares to the Jewifh High Pneft, were SW, and S^r in all E«^fc oi ©eve^men ^ ^ ^.^ ^ BU, ,- « Mm <5fc his confounding «. N**«* P««, and * W. peculiar to him, *«. m appear tolenifie; Adding.that, «(M, *» Poaw, which after he w |» aPP" . { ^ !aces of Ktaim hfiruen- «^''^«^w^Wif0^wtoe^An*or fliews, that "the dum, ah Pag. 4- wltn °?> £*• Diocefe, with fuch a Ne- 5 ^ry£3i^«KS S5*. and Conclufive Sdfag Chap* V. (pretended) Principles of the Cy$rm\teAge. 223 Thus in the places cited compar'd with fag. in, 1 15. To which Ac-' cufation the Anfwer is eafie and obvious, 1. "Tis evident, that the Author explains this Sole Power by that of the Sole Decifive and Conclufive Suffrage* wherein that of the Negative Voice is palpably included. Why doth then J, S. quarrel the Conjun&ion, or the making them conn- frent? It the Sole Power doth include the Negative Voice, as the general Phrafs the more reftri&ed, who can quarrel the Gonjuntfion } And ar lefs' can the proper Explication be quarrelfd of the bole Dtcifive and Conclujive Sitjfi-age. ilyt He contradi&s himfelf in this Griticifm, fince 'tis evidentj that, in more places than one, he afcribes this Ab/c/ute Sole fower to the Biihop, and likewifeas frequently afcribes a Negative Voice to him ,• So that, nill he, will he, himfelf is found to have con- joyn'd them, and let him fee to it, whether he has made them one or the fame. He will have this Aflertion peculiar to this Anchor : But, bcfides that this Affertion is found his own, he can produce no Pref- byterian Writer, who difowne the neceflary Connexion of the Sole Decifive Power with the Bifltaop's Abfolute Negative, not only over the Judgments and Votes of Paftors, but refpecting alfo their very Counfel and Advice, which he is not fo much as oblig'd to ask in J. S's Principles, as is above made appear. But, faith J. S. the Author has afferted, Pag, 180. that the Bi/hop has the Chief and Sole Power in Ordination and Jurifdi&ien ; Thus con-* founding Chief and Sole* A filly Quirk, no doubt, this is; For who will doubt, that the Sole Power includes the Chief cho' every Chief is not Sole, and that the Connexion of fuch General and Reftri&ive Terms, very ordinary in common Speech, do import an Ampliation and Illu- ftration of the one by the other; So that the Term of Chief being included in that of Sole, this laft is, by the Copulative and, conne&ed with the other, as an Amplification thereof, to this Senfe and Scope, ( as is above made clear ) that the Biihop has the Chief Power in Ordina- tion and Jurifdiclion, which Epifcopalians will not difowne, which* Chief Power is or fuch a Nature, as is not only (ucb, but alio Sole and Abfolute, Who knows not, that the Copulative and imports only fuch a Connection of Terms, as is fuitable to the Subjed Matter and Scope, where there may be a Difcrepancy in point of Extent in the Terms themfelves fimply confident while yet the one doth amplirle and illuilrate the other. But J. S. Pag. 132. $ 21. tells of Myfteriom Notions of that Author a* bout Power in his Examination of Dr. Monro's Pleadings. He fays, Pag* o3. the Presbyterians hold, that the Apoftles had a Supreme (tho' Colla- teral and Efual) and Spiritual Power and4 Authority over Officers and Mem- bers 9 u A Conf»Mhn of J 9s Vinikrthn of tie _ Chap. V. I muft fay '".^"^'^uSrthodox Divines, yea of all Men Judgment and Accepa.ono»^ Yf0 Collateral and Equal, i. t every i %t „,d fcch a pXe^as was paramount and fuperior to all ordi- Apoftle had iuch a rowc., « r h who e Cathohck Jry Church Officers < fince « had a "fpe^ •„ ^ Exm<- Church, whereof every Apome was a , Apoftle fevetaN This Power had all the Ap°ftte^J,u A"^iy "t was Supreme, ,y* Hf° 1& »Suffi Offi r^C-ttrttnd yet as ref^ing with refpeft to a I inter,°r Jr'"„, and Eauai n0 Apoftle having an all the Apoftles it was CoUate al and Equal, n P Offic al or Apoftoh k .Author, , ov r ^ ^ ^ ^ co quently, of che Congru^ and S^*$^ ta ha Au; •P*.3-. ,hoV ifc. '■ That he demand^ proof of T^/shav- •J« « ing a Sole and Singular Authority paramount to all O - binary Officers^ the <*«*, ^g*fSSS3&S TSW got Mm. 6^ out wonderful ^/?X ^X^ Butf from what is Ire one and the fame i 'h« /«** We£U kn°W' ,h" make a Myllery ot them, l i ?«« Falfification, or Heterogeneous a Deleft of the Organ ^^i^^Objea. Myfterious, the Nature of the J&«*>, may make. common u ^ ^ ftreight Rod in the Wat er to be bow d^ o 1 wo e , the greater M/fcr, with ££ . g^Xeehe infers this Abfurdi- *«, ?««•»» f. ""'^.f"^ Office s in the Senfe of that Author, ty, " That there are Ordinary Office , n fiimop's furely can- « befides the Bifhop, who have Authority, andryet whatever « not be Paramount to theirs, if hey have none Authoyrit for ,he •Authority they have, «»«"«? *Z™% theirs, bu/feelnfw ; Bilbo* An.hor.tj -no »Je^; fuch Auerrioos ; For ' thereof. J. S. is pom to inijf Power, no other Body can /«* fa, " If 'he Bimop have the Sole Fewer, ^ ^ • have any Power, but if no other Body has any Hqw Chap. V. (pretended) Principles of the Cyprianic Age. 2 a 5 But, to any attentive Reader, thefe Refleaions willappearto be nothing elfe, but the phantaftickWhimfies of his own Brain-fick Head which will be evident by confidering, 1. That the Author puts his Adverfary to prove lymothys Power to halve been properly Epifconal and of fuch a Nature as is above exprefs'd, fuppofing therein, that no* fuch thing could be prov d. So that what Abfurdity J. S mav aT, lege imported in the premis'd Terms, or Exercife of Power 'tis evident, that the Author draws the fame as an Inference upon* his Adverfary's Affertion and Principle ,• And therefore, thefe fuppos'd Inconfiftencies, even in J. S. his Senfe, lie nearer home and are imputable to him and his Fellow Pleader. 2/7, As an Evidence of the Impofitbihty of the Thing, he purs the Adverfary upon this impoffible Task, viz. To prove, that the Authority wherewith Timothy ftands in Scripture invefted, is fuch as is Paramount unto, and Exclusive of that Divine Authority afcrife'd to Paftors in Government, infinuat- mg ftill an Argument ab Abfurdo, viz.. That fuch a Power fuppofeabb in timothy would make the Scripture inconfiftent with it felfi ih The Author doth clearly fuppofe, that tho' the Diocefan Prelate il Jure, cannot, yet de Fatto he Affumes and Exercifes a Power Para- mount unto, and in fo far Exclufive of that Divine Authority in Go- vernment which Paftors are allow'd, and wherein in Scripture they ftand invefted. So that this weak Man's Fancied Inconfiftency is piti- fully Nonfenfical, the fuppos'd Inconfiftency not being ad idem nor eo- dem modo. The Ordinary Officers, or Paftors, have an Authority Jure Dtvmo} The Bifhop Ufurps a Paramount Power Jure Humano, or Papi- (tico • The Bifhop's Power is Paramount to theirs j That is, by Humane Ufurpatton he encroacheth upon their Divine Right, which Divine Right ftill exiftingj he is juftly faid to ufurp upon their Authority, and yet notwithstanding, upon Ground of this Ufurpation, they may be faicf to have no Authority, viz. de FacJo, and as to its Exercife. ilnce this Ulurpacion doth intirely exclude the fame. The puerile Sophiftry of J. S's Arguing in this point doth evidently appear in fuch AlTertions or Predications, wherein the Subjed of the Propofition hath a Denomination taken from its Pre-exiftent State to its prefent Conne&ion with fuch an Adjundt, fcil. the Conneaioti afferted in the Propofition it felf. Of which proportions and Aflerti«f ons, this is ftill the clear fuppos'd Senfe, viz. That fuch an Adjunct affe&s the Subject, as denominated from its Pre-exiftent State ,- Which may be : demonstrated in a Multiplicity of Inftance, in the common Senfe of Mankind, and ufual Speech accordingly, wherein J. S's Ob- legion could not but expofe him, or any Man elfe3 to Derifion. * f When „„fi A ConfttUtion of I $i Vindication of the Chap. V. When we fay A Parliament or SynUU Mfoh'J.or A Parliament k «[»r?i When we lay, /» i Subjea of the Propofteion, ws- The Parha- •p. by a tyrant here the 6uD> denominrated from their Native S""' anHCfhorftvwhUh founds this Epithet ofW».»., or S* Power and Anthouty^wni t0 be denominated from its Pre- md-h T«S« befori'thi Ufurpation or Diffolution, the Truth of extent State ™f ^ faVd in the clearly iuppos'd proper formal the Proportion being , cieany found ?7ThtpofidonS or Motions, underftand the c«^e»« of that in fuch 7°PX'0.ncublvaifr0m which it is denominated, with the prior State of ™° ?"b»;f ,' "° which were a meer Implicantia in Aije- frefent ^^f/|Snf/bfere we underftand, that'this Diffolution, ^U urpanon r G doth affea the Subject, with a fpecial Refpefi or "^^"'//i^urnftances of both, but not that in the premisd to the Cafe an d C rcuml ta ' fc in the fame State afcer this Inlhnce the Subjea 01 me P fuch Uke Inftances. Diffohition or Ofurp^uon. a fofoo4as t0 underftand this So when we fay, ■*££*& *, . r That theManisExifting, and ^TafterH isl MM? Bot tteSabjeft of the Propofition U under- a Man, alter he is Kiu a f ift s and thus, we under- Rood as a~nagd|om u £ gg ^ fuch J Subje Jerufa: When we ay in t , Scnpm e SenfaS , . ^ ^ ^ sSuUftum another ; Who is (o Bruitifli, as not to un- ♦MK.3.H. T 1 ' Jj f'he Subiea of fuch Propofmons, ws. Sun, ,/*„... a^,^'^ be *no«in.W from their State lempe, j* i , n « «jon . Or imagine, that fuch ■and Condition anteceden t ; ^K^'plow^ as a Field, ptopofitions do .mPO^ that J,-^ .or ^ / Edi(jce JerulaUm a Guy »'"•*'' • left upon another > So that it is evi- Temple, when not one Stone isiettp Enunciations, is J^X^iSStoK upon which fuch Adiunas do affeft the Subjeft. k and Myfterious Logick, Now it any. »P°? •»• * s.pfuch Pr0nofitions with Incongruity, argu- Chap. V. (pretended ) Principles of the Cyprianic Jge. 227 the Man be kill'd, how can he be faid to exift, or be denominated a Man, when kill'd ? If Jerufakm is become Heaps, how can it be call'd Jerufakm, when thus not exifting, but deftroy'd ? Should any Perfoti thus redargue, and accufe fuch Proportions and Aflertions of Fal/hood, yea and think himfelf acute in fuch Reprchenfion, would he not de- ferve to have our common Scottish Sarcafm caft upon him, viz. Tha* bit Head had much Wit about it * Suppofe one had pay'd a Sum to J. S. and thereupon demands the Cancelling of his Bond, which J S performs, yet afterward his Acute Topick prefented here will allow him to deny the Cancelling thereof, and he will fay, that this Afierti- cn of this Debitor, The Bond is cancelled, isfalfe, fince, by his ConfeffiS on> it is a Bondftiti ; And if a Bond, how is it cancelled? Which petty Sophiftry, whether it would impeach him of Folly or Knavery op both, let himfelf judg ? In a word, by this Man's profound Logick, no Tyrant can be faid to Incroach upon, or to Exercife a Power Paramount unto, and Ex- clufive of a Parliament and Peoples Authority and Laws ,• For thus will his doughty Horn'd Argument plead, They have Authority or Laws elfe thev could not be Ufurp'd upon, nor could there be a Power Exercis'd Paramount thereunto, and yet they have none in this AfTer- tion, fince the Ufurping Power is fuppos'd Exclufive thereof. But J. 5. proceeds in his Elaborate Difcoveries of further Abfurdi- ties of that Author, and gives us yet fome more of his Sagacious No- tions, or rather Nonlenfe, about the Sole Power and Negative Voic, " If no Body hath any Power, faith he, how can the Bifliop * have a Negative- Voice ? How can a Negative Voice be without c relatien to other Voices ? But the poor Man has forgot himlelfi and overthrows his own Aflertion, who, ( as we have heard) through- out this whole Pamphlet, afcribes a Negative to the Bifliop over Pref- byters, in their moft Confentient Judgments,- And what does that Ne- gative relate to^ if not to the Votes or Voices of Presbyters* as himfelf clear- ly affetts : For, notwithstanding of this Negative, he would not be thought abfolutely to exclude all Paftors from any Concurrence in Government, tho*, upon the Matter, he do fo. So that he may fee, if he underftand himlelf, there may be a Negative over Confultive Voices, tho' not over fuch as are Decifive and Conclttfive, But how can there be other Voices, ( faith J. S. ) if there be noTower t§ produce them ? Thus he baffles himfelf, and is bound to anfwer hisAb- furdity : How can the Bifhops abfolute Negative over Presbyters Gon- fultive Voices confift, if they had no power to produce them ? as in- deed this Man holds they had none. So that he is here holden with a ^ ' z Snare ACo^mloHofl S^VinMmhHofm Chap. V. . , L i ve, he hath told us, « Wt »y S f the J(<_ "^luchT to^onVtt nf- tt fitters, I fayf Handing T1 wW can his Negative Voice relate to, fince there .s no Power thus, what can tn,s ™B y „ , So tnat ,helr fuppofd in the Presbyters to Prod"" Non Entity ■ Whatever figment of pre- Votes is a meet ■Chinwra »ndJ^£",uy • pr"sbvters, %U evident as tended Power he may al ege c omp ere ;» ^ thereof> as a ter Sh°anm ^Shift^o dLlta? and evade the force of Arguments broughtagainft them in th,s pomt j^ „eC#r„ Re. fr& Jef'pSS 5* f h^emlTdteJon; SffiK ten with thliWe.ptm.who, in the t^f^£^™cUlf V,Wcr, Paftors, this relative *erm,s» w"" riilfPnwr to have aCmtlat, Sothat'^n whatever ^h^w;CTif™^prion. But.be- he »> Vte^°T^^ m» h.« . KeA to that lhadowing Con- fides that the Term C4% il«nds to allow to Presbyters, granting fultive Power which J. S. Ptetends to a»°™ < f> a J Bs„Wi. that?ephraesh°ef &PTuh£p^, m^«" be HSftdt0..be »«(e Power, as he auerts, tnis t F ti hcmlnem againft him, mad6 ^MffeSS^, afcriles both the ST" ^ ZZ P« 2? toP the Prelate , And he is no whit concern* in Sing or %bt£ the Difficulties and Abfurdities wherein* S.has hlVBt'd1hSrafwmyet make a further Inquiry, how a ^'^Je con^d witSm?- I»f-> » Truly »£*£?& ^n <& Again, faith he, fl5* eg w SWH| ' #* «** ' '*** r ~ net Chap. V. (F*te*uled)Prmdp\esrftBeCypriamicJge. 229 not here repeat in what fenfe the Bi/hop may be called Supreme with refped: unto his Curats precarious Power. Asfor a firfi without zfecond, whatever Abfurdity he may imagine deduceable therefrom, fallsheavi- ly upon himielf, confidering the inftanced inconfiftent Principles and Affertions prefented by him in this Pamphlet,' with refped* to the Bi/hops Power, and that of Presbyters or Paftors. But abfolutely confidering the thing or in what fenfe there may be a Firfi without a Second, fome would be apt to tell him, that had he read his Bible when he was poring on Cyprian's Epiftles, he might have found Scrip, turelnftances of theterm A>Aandjin fpecial,hc might have read the Fufi-hm oi the Virgin Mary; And it will be a puzling Querie to him/ who was the Second-horn, or if ever anv fuch did exift But our Momm hath yet more Queftions, and pofeth that Author with this great and important Querie, // the Sole Power of Jurifdiclion be competent to the Bifhop, how can there be Judicatories difiincl from him} How can Judicatories Jubfijl without the Power of Judging ? Let T S diPeft this Abfurdity, and Anfwer hisQueftion, who upon the matter im- peaches all Judiciary Power of Paftors in Government, or any other Power of Judging but what is lodg d in the Bifhop. But Hnce he feems Dy his Querie to crgue ad Homimm, pafling this Retorfion, I do tell him as above, That the Bifhops Sole Power over Judicatories, is in fuch lenle underftood, as an Invafoi's ufurping Power upon aKingdom,or a Robber upon a Family,*/*, the Ufurpation takes away the U/e and Exer- fltJkntu Ta'- ¥nVlJed^ or Benefits of either; So that when we hfc a ^ ^UudlC?t0Lie' asofthe Family or Kingdom, we underftand £^^ tho'now it be re- train d I and incroach'd upon, and in this Cafe appears not. 1 find J.S. further quibbling * about Parity or Imparity asthetrueftateoftheControverfie, citing fome Presby- * chap.*.* tenan Authors, amongft the reft Mr. Jamefon, and the 10i- Author oJthQ Hierarchical Bijhop, &c. But how Imperti- rnnfil a ^y beeTn made aPPear> and is fu"her obvious, when confidered, That r. It is one thing to produce what an Author fc£. orfe °Ulth! Sub^^ controverted/ ^i/, anfwering TTdleljZ or prfecuung h„ Arguments, another thing to fay that be thus, or intbefe peaje Terms ftates the Controvert Thefe are t.u cdo different as is obvious to the meaneft RefWKon, For in the Firfi Cafe he may fome! r^tha^n/h0^^*1 WpIe' and At*™ «d »iw red th« I u£e7 fhCC> fche Learned M'-J<-f» having decla-' ims Work being to /hew, that during, the Apoftolick Age, in the prime pri*. A Confutation of. J. S', Vindication of the Chap. V. V- vJ riM,rch there was a Bifhop for each Congregation and an Pallor to be the h,8hf "™"X oueht tobe Govern'd by a Parity chat in their Judgment all ^rche ^ ^ red, ( in Ipeciai wun • * . „ ' „ ., ; th s f00 ,Q, Cnticilm is fclf , and confcquemly hi •nco"™ent *,?'* SLf ?arily in all ordinal JLttoQu^e about this different ftate of thsQuefhon.is palpably Impertinently ..- miii an 111 S E C T. III. ,rr. . c •„,J T Tis evident, that Bt taken entirely in the whole Series and Scope of his Reasoning on this point, has owndL the Ruling Elder, yea his Divine Right. He holds r t Pf fiCl °f ^e proteftanc Churches in admitting Ruling Elders in Church Judicatories, as confident Members thereof particularly of tlie Church of Scatfandi to bea Pratfice truly Apoftolicfc, or founded upon/ 9„ AConftitithnoflS'srtndkttlonoftfo Chap. V. .Don ApofMlek Authority. Thus p&*6\ EdiJ. '/"*' '6?0- Yea moreover, he inveighs feverely aga.rtft fuchas difown this Divine OdeT fish as Dnw*-., *"'. £<• T"us •*•«* *J8,- »fc W haterar 7- <• can allege as touching the contrary Judgment of fome Divines yet 'lis beyond alt peradventure that as the generality !^l\7hlwient Fathers have own^d this Officer, fo there is a large SnfcnfofpSan. Writer,, befides the Prance of the Reform? Churches adduceaWe in proof of the D.v.ne Warrant of this Office. The Reader is referred to the Famous M G,//#e s Afterm- OBicei. x ne i ^ Goyernment of the church ofSntlanJ, Fart i, Chap 9 io. Befides what may be eafily made appear • D and Pleading fure J. S. wi 1 not difown. Yea, does not which Senfe and Pleading lure ' d .f ofthe Diehotomy> We S[anfTnftanceffcLyatbdi;mon clearly intonated by the B^ick DU ™ g ^ .henlace bv D« Unhrerfs Plebi, Ecclefia; Hipoonenfis- Alio Lib* ;. contra Crefc. cap. $6. where we have a clear Diftindtfon of the Seniotes of the Church from the Presbyter. The fame Diftindion is pointed at, Serm% 19. de Verbis Dom. and in feveraJ others, as in Epifi. Synod, Gone. Carbarfufitani apud eund. Enarrat. Pf. ;£. Alfo in Greg.Magn. Lib. 11. Epiji, 19. and in ABis purg. Caciliani & Feiicis where are mentioned Epifcopi, Presbyteri, Diaconi, Seniores, Again* Clerici & Seniores Sirthenfium. Several Letters were ^rodue'd and Read in the Conference, one Directed, Chro & Senioribus* another Clericis & Senioribus. The Letter of Purpurius to Sihanus fpeaks thus' Adhibete Conclericos & Seniores fiebis Ecchfiaflicos and Cobltr in Currie. Only I may be bold to aflert* there have been,yea and are,Ruling Elders in this Church, able to Teach him (olid Divinity, yea and fuch Mechanicks in this Office, as have far out-ftrip'd him in folid Chriftianity ,• And that (uch Weavers and Coolers as he mentions, do Exercife a more honeft Employment* than this his Pamphleting Trade will ever amount to* Let us now come to confider the two great Achillean Arguments aJ Homivem, and levelfd againft the Two Principals, which J. S% has produc'd. As a Preparation to his grand Arguments, he tells us, that G, R. has acknowledge!, or ( as the Reverend Mr. Rule exprefs'd it ) that he would not conteft about it, That Church Power, and Govern- ment and Difcipline, is founded on the Power of Sacraments. In Correfpondence to which Affertion he tells us> what is the Hazard? And I do here undertake to make appear a Threefold Hazard, 1. The Hazard of proving himfelf an Ignoramus in the Nature and Rule of Syllogtfms, or the common Standart thereof, to life his own Expreffion. 2fy$ The He zard of Contradicting and Baffling, his own Principles. %Lyt The 228 A Confutation of\ S'/ Vindication of the Chap. V. The Hazard of a Seditious Impeachment of the Government, by Ef- poufing fuch Mediums as do overturn it. The Sv'logiims then are thus, ,n;f„ None can have the Power of Church Government and Difci- pline, but thofe who have the Power of Preaching and Admini- frratine the Sacraments; . ., But Ruling Elders have not the Power of Preaching or Admini- ftrating Sacraments \ . Ergo, They can have no Power of Church Government and Dilcipline. The Second Svlloaifm is thus, . Thofe who have no Power of Church Government and Dilci- pline are no Church Governours: But Ruling Elders have no Power of Church Government and Difcipline ,• Ew, They are no Church Governours. ; ! - This Reafoning jf. s. tells us will be found ad Rewt as well as ad H To "he Firft Sylldgifm I Aniwer, by denying the Major proporti- on, which is moft falfc, and which ?, s. can no more draw from our premised Doarine, than Water from a Flint. For clearing our way herein, and our firft Charge offered againft him of Ignorance of the True Standart and Principles of Arguments, two things are to be confider'd. x. That the Two Officers, the Preaching and Ruling Eider, are by Presbyterians held to be, yea and proven to be fpecifically diftinft. We need not here again repeat what has been oWd from Scripture, to prove the Specifical Diftiniftion of thele Two Officers, and in fpecial from that pregnant Text, iTtm. ft 17. Where it is made appear, that there is a Genus or General, crufr"?'' or Elders. And, 2/7, This diftinguifo d in Two spec** of Elders, efe. The fc *** •»K3r« theft that Rule weU, there s one kind; Then there is h xartfrltf I* w i *!*•***. that Labour tn^ord and VoBrine, here's another Rind or species. Hew theft TwoJ>^« are otherwise dearly diftinguifh'd in the Text, we have heard above, and neThr2?tnrngTbe confidered is, That J. S.profeffes to give us Two Arguments ad Homines, and confequently muft of necefTuy fuppofe our Principle and Hypothefis of theft Two diftina */*«*,• So that if ««&TX our Principle ( which he is not able to over- turn) the Falfhood of his Argument both in Matter and Form, it quickly falls to the Ground. ^.^ Chap* V. (pretended) Principles*/^*? Cyprianic Age. 220 This being premis'd, the fottifh Ignorance of the firft Propofition and the whole Stru&ure o\ the Argument, appears in thisi that, in the firft Propofition, he foolifhly fuppofes, that the Predication of a Genus or General of ics Species, will infer an Abfolute Denyal of the Predi- cation of the fame Genus of another Species, Thus, when we fay, the Treacher, by Office, has neceffarily appendent upon his Office, that of Ruling, we affert only the Connexion of this Office of Preaching and Adminiftrating the Sacraments with the General Office of Ruling, and we do confider this General Office of Ruling, as reftrided to fuch a Species in a Complex Senfe, and with its Effential Specifick Diffe- rence. Or fhortly, we confider fuch a Governour, as fpecifically di- ftinguifh'd from the other, and do fo underftand fuch a Conne&ion be- twixt Ruling in its General Senfe, and the Teaching Office, as there is betwixt the Species and its Genus, But, from fuch an Affertion, to infer a Negative Propofition, ex- cluding and denying the Predication of the fame Genus of the other Species, bewrays fuch Blockifh Ignorance of the common Principles of Logick, is fo palpably Nonfenfieal and Illogical, as the meanelt T'jro may mock at it. Let us fee it exemplified in a common Inftance. I fuppofe I pro- nounce fuch a Propofition, [ Whatever Creature Exercifeth Reafon by Bodi- ly Organs , hath neceffarily connected with this U/e of Reafon ( or the Rational Seal ) the Senfitive or Animal Life ]. Now, upon this Affertion I fuppofe One takes up J. S's Weapon and Topick, and will thus over- throw the Propofition, arguing thus againft it. [That Creature which doth not Exercife Keafon by Bodily Organs, hath no Senfitive nor Animal Life\ A Horfs, or Brute, ujeth not Reafon by Bodily Organs. Ergo, the Horfe, or Brute, hath no senfitive nor Animal Life. ] Behold the Major Propofition . equivalent to, and of the fame Nature with that of J. S's and founded upon the fame Principles, or Errors rather. But what a long Tracft and Train of grofs Abfurdities, fuch a Topick and Reafbning draws along therewith, may be demonftrated by an Hundred Inftances. Again, in the next place, in Defpite of all Rules of Reafoning and Logick, he will have a Propofition in fuch manner convertible, which utterly reje&s fuch a Converfion, or Inverfion, it being evident, that this his Negative Inference doth neceffarily infer fuch Convertibility in the Propofition. But, to fet this in a little clearer Light, amongft feveral other Principles and Canons, whereby the Logicians do meafure and exa- mine the Rational Lawful Inference of one Propofition from another, I (hall offer this fignal one, againft which J. s, in this his great Ar- gument 240 A Confatdtlon of J SV Vindlcntion of the Chap. V- gument, has grofly err'd, and difcover'd his Ignorance there- of. rThe Rule or Canon is thisJJniverfalis affirmant non convertitur (impliciter, An Univerfal Proposition affirmative is not fimply or abfolutely conver- tible As when wzdy'iOnnis Adulator 5/**<&.r,everyFlatterer is pleafing orfair-fpoken : The Inference is bafe and unfuteable. £?■£*, 0«mw£/. 5. <$• %ly. Notwithstanding whereof, he profefles to hold 'the Presbyter or Paftor to have an Interefr in Government,and peremptorily difowns the Affertion of a Sole Power in Government afcribed to the Bi/hop Genfuring with might and main the two Principals imputing to him fuch an Affertion. This is convincingly evident from what is premif'd But over and above all other Proofs of what is afferted, let his own' H h 2 # per '• 244 A Confutation of\ SV Vindication of the Chap. V. peremptory Aflertion ftandgood for all, to clear this point, Chap. 4. tf. 11 His words are, B«f do not 1 exprefly fay,pag. tf.lhat a Bijhop in St. Cy* nrian's time bad the Sole ?owcr of Ordination i I (aid fo, but where did I fay, he bad the Sole ?omr of]Hri(dicJion ? Here's an Aflertion of the Principle I am imputing unto him as clear as the Noon- day Light, viz, The Bifhop . hath the Sole Vower of Ordination, but not the Sole Power of Jurifdiftion, Presbyters having a (hare and intereft theiein, together with the Bi- Now upon the whole, I offer unto him his own Medium, overturn* ins this his Aflertion anent Paftors or Presbyters Intereft in Govern- ment or Jurifdiftion. Thus then I argue: The Power and Authority of Ordination hath neceiianly con- ceded with it, and appendent upon it, the Authority and Power of Jurifdiaionand Government: But the Pallor or Presbyter has no Authority in Ordination, nor is Gloath'd with any fuch Power; Ergo, He has no Authority and Power in Jurildi&ion and Go- The two Propofitions are J. S's. own Aflertion, the Conclufion is drawn out in his own Method, and a dire& Contradi&ion of what he aflerts in this point, yea and of the Aflertion and Sentence immediately premif'd. The fame Confequence is clear, when the Ma)or Propor- tion and the whole Argument is intirely call into his Mould, after this Thofe who have no Intereft and Authority in Ordination* have no Intereft and Authority in Jurifdiaionand Government: But, foitis, that the Paftor or Presbyter hath no Intereft and Authority in Ordination,- Ergs, He has no Intereft and Authority in Junldiaion. Or, to come yet nearer to the vifage of his goodly Argument, thus it may be propof d, *Jr** None can have the Power of Church Government and Diici- pline, who have not the Power of Ordination : But, Paftorsor Presbyters have not the Power of Ordination; Ergo, They have not the Power of Jurifdi&ion, or Church Go- vernment. , , 'Tis certain, that according to the Mould of his pleading in this Ar- gument, Presbyters are as entirly excluded from the one as from the other. 'Thus, I hope, my fecond Charge is made evident enough, and J. S's Argument fufficiently improven againft him, as in this Arguing Coniradidting himfelf, and overthrowing one of his chief Principles; » So Chap. V. (pretended) Principles of the Cyprianic Age. 345 So that this his formidable Culverin has pitifully fir'd back, and de« ftroy'd our Epifcopal Champion. Come we to the Third thing I Charg'd upon him, viz. To make it appear, That by this Argument he involves himfelf in a Seditious Impeach- ment of the Civil Government. To make which evident, there needs no more than proposing that clear and generally acknowledge Truth and Principle, and which J. S. will, no doubt, own and affert viz,. That every one Cloath'd with Regal Authority has a neceflary and efTential ( J..S. will fay the Chief, tho' probably not the Sole ) Intereft and Authority in making Laws, or the Legiflative Power 1 As in the point of Ordination and Government he afferts in the Cafe of the Bifhop Now let us hear J. S's grand Syllogifm levelld againft him and Arraigning him of Sedition. Thus it is The Perfon Cloath'd with Royal and Kingly Majefty and Authority has neceffarily appendent upon and included in this Royal Authority a Power Legiflative, or of making Laws: The Nobles, Officers of State, yea and Parliament are not cloath'd with the Regal Authority,* Erg0) They have no Authority and Intereft in Government, and in the Legiflative Power, or of making Laws. Here is a dangerous Impeachment, none will doubt, of the Nation's Authority and Fundamental Laws. Or, bring we the Syllogifm aeain nearer to his Mould. Take it thus, y gm agam None can have Authority and Intereft in the Legiflative Power °r Th™ offi8 LawsVw^° are not cloath'd with the Regal Authority? ™^TCTASt?te' Nobles' Parlia*ent, are not cloaJd with the Regal Authority ,• ma^g llwsf ^^ " Inter6ft " the Legifladve Powe'> ^ of This being the intire Mould of J. S's Arguing, and in fpecial the Cenfure of the Schools for his Phantaftick Sophiftry or of the State Re?de^s "o judg.and Governme^iftu'bing Notions, is left tothl fnU^*S n°C ?"Pcaf,ant.r° obferve y. ?* Foolifo Queries which he fubjoyn, to his Syllogifms, upon the fuppos'd wonderful Advantage //^aS,^th%Premisd,A/erti°? afCfibd t0 not homo, or Man^ But to give the more Theological Anfwer ad Hominem, S'w the Power of Ordination and JurifdicTion are infeparable m the Bijhop, how can the P after orPresbyter'have an Interef m the latter, fince by J. Si Confeffun, he has no Intereft in the former J jr. His next Ouerie is, Whether one Power * appendent upon and consent unto another, hw can it exifl crfubfiftwhhomthatfertowhi^itis appcndent, and on which it k confetti To which formidable Querie the fame Anfwer and Retorfion is evident, Since J. S'i Rationality or State as a UanMasneceffarily appendent upon,and consent unto it Animality or^nfitive'Life, L L Animality or ^^^f^^}^ upon, and confeJtnt unto hVs Rationality as a Man, fubfifi or t*,f in any ThJ than J. S. limjelf? Or take it with refped to the Species, it has the fame force as is above exprefs'd. , Aeain Since the Power of Government and Jurifdfion* necejjanly fended upon, and confe^ent uL the Bifhofs Power of Ordination, how can this ?ower ofJurHdiBiol or Intent in Government ^fiorfubM in any other than the BiLp ! For what he adds of the Reverend Mr. R« e his own- torttoffipleolthelnfeparability of Teaching and Ruling, and SF s~J norwithftandine the Separability in Critical Interims, or turbato fiatu Eclefi* upon wnicnr. h ^ ^ a Church been always in tuibato ltatu • ™W ™e' , f , R n Chap. V* (pretended) Principles of the Cyprianic Age. ^? an Order of Officers who could have no Power without offering Violence to Nature, &c From what is faid, 'tis Anfwered, Thefe Queries are founded upon the fame Phantaftick Ground with hiV Syllogifm, and do eafily evanilh, when he is told, that when we fpeak of Teaching and Ruling as Inleparable, we do ftiil underftand them with refpecl to the Paftoral Office. 2/y, The Separability of Ruling, i. e. Sole Ruling, we underftand with refpetf: to the Ruling Elder asfuch whom we own to be an Officer of a Diftind Species. 3/v The* Reftraint of the Exercife in feveral Cafes, and thefe inftaneed by G. R doth very well confift with the exiftence of the Radical Power and Authority it felt, and, confequently, the Separability as to an aftual Exercife of Ruling in Critical Interims is very well confiftent with the Infeparability of the Powersof Teaching and Ruling in themfelves con- fider'd. But 'tis now time to confider J. s'$ fecond Syllogifm, which runs thus, Thofe who have no Power of Ghurch Government and Difci- pline, are no Church Governours : But, Ruling Elders have no Power of Church Government and Difcipline ; Ergo, they are no Church Governours. To this Syllogifm the Anfwer is eafie and obvious, vfe. That the Affumption or Minor, being founded upon the ruinous Ground of the Conclufion of the prior, does prima ftonte appear to be falfe and unfound, and J. S, hath offered no (hadow of a Proof to Fortifle the fame, nor will he, with the Afliftance of all his Tribe, ever make it good. So much for our Epifcopal Champions grand Syllo- gifms. I find little or nothing in his Pamphlet further worth noticing with refpc$s Vindication of the Chap. V. ** The Doctor was beholds therein to his Popifli Matters, that the ' Pope would approve fuch a Commentary. Upon this J. S. Re- proaches him, mr u/ino; B'Mngfgne- Language, and as faring Nonfenfe at tver dtfgracdthe Prefs, and c Us us further, that this is all that's com- pnbmJihU in that Anfwer to the DoB&r's Argument. Now, that this Man's Truth, or rather Falfhood, may evidently appear, let any Read what is offered from p*g. to. and forward to pag. 20. and 23. and what is Charg'd upon the D ftor will be found fo convincingly evident, as truly the Man's Confidence, or rather Impudence, is admirable. For, Reprefenting this Scripture cited by Dr. Memo as the Ground of our Argument, as alio the Doctor's Difguife inftead of the true Argument deducible therefrom, before the Doctor's Anfwer is fcan'd, 'tisfirft made appear, what it is we plead from it, and next the Confonancy of what we plead with the Judgment of found Divines, and even in theiF Reafonings againft the Papacy, fuch as Wbittaker, Chamier, istrretin, the 'Bewick Divines, Diodat, Varaus, and then the Doctor's three Anfwers are fcan'd, whereof that which J. S. mentions is only the third. And, to (hew this perfon's triffling Prevarication, who is bold to aflert there is nothing elfe offered upon the Doctor's Anfwer, but what he has represented, let any read thefe Pages, foil. 18, 19, 20. and they (hall be fore d to acknowledge* that there are Anfwers return'd, or rather fuch Confutation of the Doctor's Anfwer, from Scripture, from Divine Reaion, as muft needs engage the Affent of fuch as are Sound. Particularly in that paffage cited by J. s. wherein 'tis afferted, that the Pope's Holinefs had a fair Plea from the Dodor's Senfe of that Text ,• This Inference is made, That our Lord Exercifing a Suprema- cy over his Church, and the Doctor's Anfwer running to this Iflue,1 and exhibiting this Senfe of the Words, viz. that "which I command you I have done, and therefore that which 1 command you is ctnfijient with a Supremacy over my Churchtwhicb I have exercised and exemplified; That the Pope's Holinefs had a fair Plea, his Glofs being the very fame with that ofBellarmin and other Popifli Pleaders. Next, a more direct Anfwer is return'd to the Doctor, that the Lord's Scope being, to antidote their inward Pride, in propofing his own Ex- emplary Humility, this his firft Argument runs a fortiori thus, If I your Lord and Mafter be fuch a Pattern of Self-Denyal and Humility among you, much more ought you to ftudy Humility, and to guard againft all ufurped Dominion one over another, who are Fellow Dif- eiples and Servants, as he reafons John 13. If 1 your Lord have wa[hen nut Ftet, mob mon ought you to walk one another t Feet. Again, i£R9toifcwM Chap. V. (pretended) Principles of the Gyprianic Age. H9 Again, there is notice taken of a Twofold Inadvertency of the Dn £or in this Anfwer, i. In that he aflerted the Lord s Preceot and Prohibition to be levell'd againft an Ambitious Principle or Defan but not at all to reach, but rather allow that Effeft and Expnffion thereof which he doth in down-right Terms prohibite, viz. the Dominion they were contending about,; Forgetting the common Maxim, lubordin*. ta non pugnant, and as if a bad Principle could fall under a Prohibition : and not the bad Praclice, the IlTue thereof. 2/,, In that he (uppos'd the Lord s Argument of Humility drawn from his Pradice, while dehor ting his Apoftles from Unlawful Dominion, will infer his Arguing I pari, and a Suppofition of his Equality with them, if his Hypothecs of a Warrantable Supremacy were excluded, which, the Doclor is told was a very Irrational Imagination, the Argument running clearly a majere ad minus, from the greater to the lefs, and the very Bafts and Topick of it fuppofmg and inferring the quite contrary Conclufion So that his Arguing, that, upon this Ground, as above Sens'd Presbyteri- ans would make thrift and bis Apoftles Equal, has no moreTwift of Reafon in it, than if one mould infer from our being dehorted from Strife and Vain-Glory, and enjoyn'd Humility and Love, becaufe Ghrift made himfelf of no Reputation, and humbl'd himfelf to Death, the abfurd Gonclufion of the Equality of bis Difciples and Members with himfelf The Do&or is further pos'd with this Query, Whether our Lord did not command an Equality of Official Authority among/} the Apoftles or if he did think, that our Lord own'd in this refpeft a Prince or Supreme $ver the reft? If the Doctor did hold this laft, the Appeal is made to all Proteftants, whether he had not left our Camp, and had gone over to the Tents of the Papifls. If he own'd, that the Lord enioynd an Authoritative Official Equality of Power among the Apoftles in this Cafe demanded, the Do&or's Senfe is demanded of our Lord'* Argument, preffing and recommending this Equality from his own Exl ample, and whether his Affigning this Senfe, and giving this Account of our Lord s Reafomng, will faften upon himfelf his own Abfurdity and Blafphemoufly infer, That Chriji and his Apoftles were Equal. Hence the Do&or is told, that he muft either quite this Senfe of our Lords Words, and confequently the Senfe exhibited by Proteftant Divines or acknowledge the Abfurdity and Futility of his own Argument and Anfwer, and that he falls by the Rebound of his own Blow and Wea-i pon. This being the Reply offered unto, and Refledion upon that Third Anfwer of the Doctor's, I leave it to all Men to judg of the Fidelity and Ingenuity of J. $. who is bold to aflert, in the place cLed, that li Flat *$6 ' A Confutation of J. Sir WndttAtton ofiht CrrapfP^ flat BiUingfgate Stuff is all that's eemprehenjible in the Anfwers tjfered to the Doctor's Argument • And that it it as Robufl and Staring Nonfenfe as ever difgracd theVrefs. And whether fuch Language which he here prefents, being all his Anfwer to the premis'd Replies, has not proved him a BiUingfgate Difputer and nothing elfe. J. S. tells his Reader, in the next place, that he has given Three Samples of the Abilities of the Do&or's Antagonift, one of his Skill in Antiquity, another of his Dexterity at Stating the main Controverfie, and now a third at his Nimblenefs at Reafoning. And how he has acquit himfelf in all the three, and whether the Acquittances and Abi- lities, upon which he fattens this Charge, or his Insignificant Attacks be more obvious and confpicuous, let the Reader judg from what ii above offered. And now. Mr. Sage, having, in what is premis'd, difcovered fuffi- riently the Unfoundnefs of this your Laborious Pamphlet, let me offer to you this mort Epilogizing Addrefs. Pray what did you in- tend in this Famous Piece of Work? What doth your Arguing re- prove? Gould you imagine to fatisfie either Friends, or Adverfaries* in this Debate ? As for Presbyterians, do not all Men of Sehfe (as well as thofe of that Perfwafion) who read your Pamphlet, primd fronte difcover, that you have therein expos'dyour felf, and laid open your Nakednefs, in your many Wier-drawn Inferences, pitiful Paralo* gifms, palpable and frequent Contradictions, wherewith your Pamph- let is ftuff'd ? They fee, that as you have fled from the true State of this Queftion, and the Scripture Debate thereupon, fo you have drt cover'd your felf in fuch manner frighted and beaten with Fresbyteri* an Weapons, that you have been forc'd to flie to inconfiftent pitiful Refuges, in point of the Bifke-p you plead for; And, in the Series and Contexture of your Pleading, have made a meer Verfatile Fretem of him, fuch an Amphibion, or rather Chimerical Nothing, as evidently de* monftraces, that your felf knew not, whatState, Pofture, or Function to fix him in, or what to hold of him ,• One while fecting him in the higheft Pinacle of Abfolute Dominion, as much as any Monarch was £ver capable of, or Exercis'd, none of the moft Abfolute Cafars except" ed, with a Licentia, Liberum tArbitrium, Totentatusy yea a ejucd libtt licet 'fix'd upon his Mitre,* Other while, in point of Government, making bim a meer Nothing, content with the leaft Degree or Atome of Impa- rity , fubjed to Judicatories , as to his Life or Doctrine, a meer nVd ?r«/u, and no more. And as for your Epifcopal Friends, who fees not, that you have pal* $ ably Affronted them* and betray 'd their Caufe, which may be made- •evidently Chap. V. (pretended ) Principles of the Cyprianic Jg. 251 evidently appear in feveral clear Inftances. They pretend to deduce the Original and Warrant of Epifcopacy from Apoftolick Doctrine and Practice 5 You take your firft Meafures from the Principles and Pra- ftice of Cyprian, with his Contemporaries, and will needs have thefe to countervail and outweigh all that can be pleaded from Scripture for Presbyterian Government {Therein palpably giving the whole Tribe of your Epifcopal Pleaders the Lie. Your Friends appear Zealous for the Divine Warrant of the prefent Englifh and late Scottish Hierarchy, wherein the Biftiop is fubject to the Arch*Bi(hop, and he to the Me- tropolitan, or Primate ,* You, in Contradiction to them ( yea and to your felf ) fet all your Prelates on a Levell, making every one ©I them a Pope, or High-Prieft, in his Diftrict. They reject the Ruling? Elder, as having no Warrant to Officiate in Judicatories, or Rule in the Houfe of God j You have alfo appear'd brisk againft him, tho' with a blunt Wooden Weapon, having not the leaft Grain of Scripture JEdge, or Steel • Yet you have fo far affronted them and your felf, as to owne the Parochial Seilional Judicatories in Scotland* made up of fuch Officers, yea and their Acting without Confulting the Bifhop, And here, Sir, to your other Inconfiftencies above inftanced, and proof of your Grofling and Contradicting the Principles and Pleading of your Party, I muft add this fignal Difcovery and Demonstration in point of the Office of the Seventy Difciples. You affert, Ch. 6. $ $-. Xhat it i$ impojfiblt to make it appear fo much as probable (in Cyprian's Senfe, and your own ) that St. Cyprian belkvdthe Seventy, as making a di/linft College from that of the Twelve, to have bad any (landing Office in the £bri/ii- an Church, in which they were to have a conftant Line of Succeffors. Yea you contend, That the CommiJJlon recorded, Luke 10. did con flit ute them only £ temporary Mijfionaries ] and that for an Errand which could not po/fibly Be [more than Temporary ]. Wherein you have contradicted Doctor 8coft$ and clearly overthrown his grand Argument for Epifcopa- cy. The Doctor's firft Argument * for the Divine Right * ckrifiim. of Prelacy, is drawn from our Saviour's Inftitution,- £#*» Part 2. which he thus prefents, that Chrifl, in hit Lifetime, info. J^'3 *8>*89> tuted two Orders of Mini/lers, viz. that of the jipoftlesy and the Seventy Difciples, whofe Office he proves to be Subordinate to that of the Apoftles, from this Ground, that they are mention d apart as diflinfl z And the ftanding of this Subordinate Office he endeavours to prove both from Scripture and Antiquity. Nor is the Do&or alone in this Arguing, for it is known to be the common Method of your Epifcopal Pleaders. Your notable Querift. in fpecial, and your new Arguer, do both plead this gran,4 Topick ,• The one, Qh.,6, gner, 3, The other in' I i 2 tU \ 1 53 A Confutation of]. SV Vindication of the • Chap. V. the Query turnd to an Argument, Pag. 20. New Sir, 'tis evident^ that either you, or your grand Pleaders, do walk in Darknefs, and do imbrace a grofs Error, in this point of fo high Importance to your Gaufe Either they have laid for the Foundation of their Pleading a meer impoffibilitv, in the Senfe of your Divus CyprUnus and your own, and which has not fo much as a Probability, or you have Slandered,and put a faife Imputation upon your chief Arguers in a great and Funda- mental Topick of their- Pleading, which you have thus razd aftd overtarn'd, '- . M Befides, have you not, in the many great Prerogatives afcnb'd to yous Cytrlanic Bifhop, which you will needs have deriv'd from Apoftles, Af- fronted the more Modeft and Ableft of Epifcopal Pleaders, * On Tit. luch as Doctor Fulk *i Dodor Forbes f ,&c> Yea and Bifhops '*:•& themlelves, fuch as Bifhop Jewel ||, Bifhop Morton *$ Bi- X %'"f p {hop B;//o» t» who, with feveral other Epiicopalians,hold, 2. CW 9: " that byApoftolick Dodrine and Pra&ice, yea and in * G*th*LApl. the Senfe and Judgment of both Greek and Latine Fathers, Fart 1. CM?. Bifhop and Presbyter are intirely Identified, one and the f AgamftSe- ^mQ QfaCQ Again, your admired Patron and Pattern jLi^a'iS. l DodweU makes Peter fuch a Primate and Prince of Apoftles, as all the reft were but private Men com- par'd to him ,• You, in your Levelling Dodrine as to all Bifhops, have given him the Lie, fince you hold, they fucceed to the Apoftles, and confequently you aflert their Official Equality. Thus you have crofs'd your Admirable Extraordinary Champion ,• Admirable like your felf in Antifcriptural, Phantaftick, Popifh Dotages, who hath Brutified and Mortalizd the Souls of all who are not of the Epifcopal Commu- nion, and therein has put fair to Immortalize his Infamy. Sir, P0G5 your Conicience, did you Eye God, his Glory, in this your At* tempt * Did you confider, that his'FLyes are upon the Ways of Man, and that be ponders at bis Goings* that he will bring every tfork into Judgment% that the Fire will declare every Mans Work% that not he that commends him felf, •who catches at, yea and reaches the Applaufe of poor Great ures% is commend. edt but whom the Lord approves > Thefe things, together with what is'now offered unto you, I remit to your Reflections and Search of your Confctence ,• And, for your further Improvement in this Search, do prefent unto you, in Oppofition to your pretended Principles of the Cyprianic Age, thefe enfuing Solid Scripture Principles, I /fe all not fay of the Presbyterian Agey but of this True Organick Church of Scot^ land* _ APPENDIX. &&V\ft ^iffc^Vf 255 ?Jfi MtM^,C {intkiyaribS^-' v v%%\ t\w>m%*K ** *\ iW ^i«$ \4i jbnstakfliififi _ Exhibiting a brief Scripture Ac* count and After t ion of Presbyte- ^'rian Principles, in point of Church Government and Gofoel orb b m«j \o s -moa taqo«l ewift< avad iuox 32iH sld .bsdhuifi ri3B •urnmo. I. PRINCIPLE. HE Standing Officers of Divine appointment are, The Paftor, or Teacher, by God kt in the Church for the great End of the Edification thereof, 1 Cor. 12. 28. Ephef. 4. 8, 11 Rom. 12. 6, 7l 8, 16. Ac% 20. 28. Whole Office r«*L*»fi, deritooo in a " Golledion of many Individuals. AllChurch oSs and MeX« aareCRep«fented by One Candleftick. Which is fa«he confirms from this, that the Church of Ephef., firft here Sain- ted had many Elders of Equal Authority, 1 Tw, S i7. who all had him with relpea to them, as inferior Officers fub,s£ AP P END IX. 3, Nothing is required of him, bat that which is the common Dutv of all Minifters or Paftors. * VI, PRINCIPLE. PRESBYTERIAN Government in all its Courts and Judicatories^ fuch as Congregational Elder fbips, Presbyteries, Synods, and General Ajfemblie's in a National Church, ftand upon a Divine Bails, and have clear Scripture Warrant, i. The Congregational Elderftip appears fortified by feveral clear Scripture Grounds, i. What was competent to the Church of the Jews, as a Church, is certainly applicable to the Chri- ftian Church ; In that Church we read of Synagogues or Congrega- tional Meetings, wherein there were Difcipline, and Punifhments or Cenfures Infixed, A8s 9. 1, 2. 26. 1 1. compar'd with Luk. 22*66 A3. 22. $•. 2/y, The Apoftolick Pra&ice clears rhis, fmce we read of Chrift's Body being Denominated the Church in genera!, Mat. 16 18. 1. Cor. 12. 28. and of particular Members of that Church call'd alfo Churches, as the Ghurcn otjerufalem, A8. 8. r. the Church of Antioch, Att.i;. 1. of Ep he fm, Rev. 2. 1. Thus alfo the fame Spirit of Chrift is pleas'd to ftile (ingle Congregations, Churches, Let your Women keepfdence in the Churches, 1 Cor. 14. 34. And if Churches in' Name and Nature, then furely they had ordinary {landing Church Officers, fuch as *Pa(lors, Teachers, Elderst Deacons ; The Apoftles being Diligent to Ordain Officers in every Church, AB. 14. 22 Be- fides what may be pleaded from the very Light of Nature, dir'eding lmaller Societies, Political or Ecclefiaftical, to compofe fmaller or pri- vat Differences or Offences, and Order fuch particular Concerns as are competent thereunto, according to Jethro's Advice to Mofes Exod 18 26. fuppos'd alfo by our Saviour in the Gradation mention'd" Mattb. y. 22. wherein he infinuats their Inferior Courts, for Inferior Caufes. ^ As for the greater Courts, or Presbyteries, made up of a competent Number of hngle Congregations Reprefented in their Officers their Divine Warrant ftands clearly fortified by Scripture Grounds. 1 This may be largely clear'd from, not only the plurality of AflbciaiedPref- byters for Government of the Church, clearly pointed at in Scripture as in Jerufalem, A3, u. 27,28, 30. compar'd with Chap. 21. 17, 18* in Ephe/us.whQcQ'm we Read of a plurality of Elders AlTociated who all had a Minifterial, and, in the Scripture Senfe, an EpifcopalWpeai- on over that Church, ^tf. 20. 17, 18. But moreover, we do alfo ™ nrrmnv read of a Presbytery puting forth the high Aft of Ordinate ?> k on 258 APPENDIX. on iTim 4 14 #£**# not the Gift that was given thee ly Vropbejte, with the laying on of the hands of the Presbytery Of the Presbytery not of the Presbyters, plainly denoting the whole Body of Presbyters Affo- ciated : The Term wherever us'd in Scripture denoting a Society or Body of Affociated Elders, Again That Church Unity before hinted in the Donation of the Church of Epbefus, and confequently compe- tent to others of that Nature clears this point ; For the Denominati- on of one Church muft needs import, as the ground thereof fuch an Unity as has a fpecial refped to Government, but lo as to diitinguiih the fame from fuch ground of Unity as is competent to (ingle Congre- gations in the reftriaed or exclufive Senfe, and therefore muft needs refpe& a Presbyterial Unity in point of Government, or a joynt Admini- stration of Church Government by one common Presbytery, or College of Elders, i/y, As we find in every fuch Presbyterial Church Ecclefi^ftick Rulers who are Reprefented as Officers thereof, ftanding in fuch a Relation thereunto, fuch .. as (hat of Jerufalem, AM. 11.27, 30. and k, 2. of Jntiocb, A8. 1;. 1, 2, 3. ofEphefus AS. 17. 28. of Gormtb j Cor. 1. 12, and 4. if. So we find fuch Presbyterial Churches Meet- ing together for Ads of Government, viz. To Ordain, Appoint, and fend forth Church Officers, AB. 6. 2, 3, 6. and 13. 2, 3. to Excommu- nicat notorious Offenders, 1 Cor. 5. 4, S, 7, 1* compard with 2 Cor. 2. 6\ and to reftore again Penitent Perfons to Church Communi- The Divine Warrant of Synods, or Synodal Affemblies, differing in fome refpeds from Chgcal Presbyteries, as being more ample and ex- tenfive Affemblies than Clascal Presbyteries, tho for fubftance and kind their Power is the fame, is largely afferted ( as alio of the leffer Judicatories inftanc'd ) by Presbyterian Writers ; Prof. Lei J. Difp. 49. pertotum. JusVivin. Regim. Ecclef. chap. 14. Ailertion of the Govern- ment of the Church of Scotland, Part 2. Chap. 4. The Affembly of Divines in their Advice to the Parliament, upon that Head of Synodi- cal Affemblies. The great Proof is drawn from M 15, where we. Read of that which is the proper occafion of a Juridical Synod, fat. the broaching of falfe Doftrine by (uch as come down from Judea. 2/y We Read of an Authoritative Miffion to delegated Officers from the Church at Antioch, which was Presbyterial, to this Superior Svnodal Affembly ,• They are fent to Jerufalem, where was a Prel- bvterial Ghurch. And if we confult v. 23,41. we will find it clear, that there were Deputed Officers from Syria and Cihaa. 3/7, Inat there were Officers or Deiegats of divers Presbyteries, or Presbyteri- al Churches, appears evident in the Contexture and Scope j *or APPENDIX. 2$p befides the clearly fuppos'd Presbyterial Churches of Jeru/alem and Antioch, and the joynt Aflbciated Meeting of both thefe Presbyteries ( compare Aft. if. v. 2, 6, 12. ), we have clear Intimation of Church Officers of a larger Extenfion in this Synodal Meeting, fince we Read of the whole multitude, of an Affociation of the Apoftles and Elders with the whole Church m this Affembly. We Read of Apoftles, Elders and Brethren, yea of the whole multude, of the whole church, and Brethren, v. 12,22,23. which cannot be extended to every Individual, who cannot be fuppos'd to Meet in one privat Houfe : And the inftanced Nature, Scope, and Intent of this Judicatory will appear, if it be confidered, that the DiiTenfion and Trouble giving occasion to this Meering,reached not only the Brethren of Antioch, but likewife thofeof Syria and Cilicia* who were troubl'd with this Queftion, v. 23. 24. and therefore muft needs be fuppos'd to have met there by their Deputed Commiflioners ; So that the premis'd extenfive Expreffions of the whole multitude, and whole churchy mull needs import the church Reprefentative9 or the Synodal Multitude. 4/y, That here is an Example and Pattern of Synodal Affemblies, fuch as is recommended as of conftant ufe and neceflicy, and not fuch an extraordinary Meeting, or Synod, as admits of no Succeflion, appears evident in the Context and Scope ; For altho' the Apoftles Meeting here were Extraordi- nary Officers, of Supreme and Infallible Authority, yet that they A<5ted not here as in that Capacity, is evident from the manner of Procedure, and the Authority ( Minifterial, we mean ) afcrib'd to the other Members of this Meeting ; For the Queftion was Stated and Debated in the ordinary way of Difputation ,• Light and Evidence, in this Controverfie, was brought from Scripture, as is evident from v. 22. to 30. Again, the Elders appear the fame Au- thoritative Members in this Synod as the Apoftles. There were other Delegats fent from Antioch with Paul and Barnabas, 1/. 2. They were fent to the Elders as well as to the Apoftles at Jerufalem, Ibid. They were receiv'd at Jeru/alemt as well by the Elders as the Apoftles, The Elders as well as the Apoftles confidered the point, v. 4, f , 6. They joyntly with the Apoftles brand the falfe Teachers, as Sub^ verters of Souls, v% 23, 24. Together with them they aflfert, It feemed good to the Holy Ghojt and to us, v. 28. Together with the. Apoftles they impos'd the Decrees upon the Church, Ibid, and con- curr'd in the Decretal Epiftle, &c. Other Arguments may be drawn from the Light of Nature, Directing and Constituting thus the Joynts and Nerves ( as it were ) of Societies in Political Bodies 5 From the binding Force and Obligation of the Jewifh Sanhedr irn confider'd in this Capacity, &cr K k 2 For 26o APPENDIX. For National Jfemblies in a National Church,1 made up of a com- petent Number of Delegats from all the Subordinated Synods, fince they have the fame Ground and Foundation with the Synodal tjiere needs no new Scripture Proof for them, as having the lame Scripture Warrants which the National Church has, When the Kingdoms of this World become the Kingdoms of the JLord3 and of his Chrift, that he may Reign in them. VII. F R I N C I P L E. WE dlfown the Eraftian Mould of Church Government, fuch as was the late Prelacy in this Nation, as is evident by many clear Proofs in the i. Parliament of Charles II. Sejf. 2. Att. 1. " It is aflerted, ' that the Ordering and Difpofing the External Government and Policy e of the Church doth properly belong unto His Majefty, as an inhe- ' rent Right of the Crown, by vertue of his Royal Prerogative, and ' Supremacy in Caufes Ecclefiaftical. And it is declar'd, that what- 'ever (hall be Determin'd by His Majefty, by Advice of the Arch- ' Bifliops and Bilhops.and fuch of the Clergy as mall be Nominated by ' His Majefty, in the External Government and Policy of the Church, * ( the fame confifting with the ftanding Laws of the Kingdom ) fhall * be valid and effedual. This is alfo evident in the Act Reftoring Epifcopacy, in the A& for the National Synod, &c. This Mould of Government afferting the Political Magiftrat to be the proper immcdiat Subjedt of Ecclefiaftical Difcipline and the power of the Keyes, Impeaching thus the clear Diftinction betwixt the Civil and Ecclefiaftick Sanhedrim, Exemplarly pointed out in the Jewifli Church, and aflerted by many of the Learn'd, as likewife the Diftin- ction of the Gofpel Church Government from the Civil, clearly aver- ted in the New Teftamenr,* It being evident, that as a Vifible Church is- Chrift's Viable Kingdom as Mediatori and that its Officers, Laws, and Cenfures fall within the Compaf, of his Mediatory Appointment and Infpectjon, Matih. 16. 19. and 28. 19. Job. 18. 34. 1 Cor, 12. 28. Etb. 4. 11, 12. So the Gofpel Church was compleated in her Being and EfTence, both as to Rulers and Ruled, and directed accordingly in the Exercife of her Government when no Magiftrat was fo much as a Church Member. Again, thefe Precepts anent the Exercife of her Power are injoyn'd to the Church, and her Officers, as fuch, with the fame Freedom and Independency upon the Civil Power as at the firft, in our Lord's great Commidion anent Church Government, and the Exercife thereof, we find it imirely and exclufiveiy Attributed to APPENDIX. s6l to his own Church Officers, without the leaft Reftriaion or Limitation in cafe of the Magiftrats becoming Chriftian ,• For we find that in all the Precepts refpedting Church Government and the Exercife there- of, the Grounds are Moral and perpetual, pointing out the Churches Duty, as a Church, whether the Magiftrat be Friend or Enemy. We find, Eph. 4. that the great Work of the Miniftery refpefting the Scope and End thereof, and its neceflary Adminiftrators, ftands the fame Unchangeable and Inviolable until the Coming of our Lord, toperfe& his Ghurch, and accomplifh her Warfare. Befides that there are very grofs and dangerous Confequences clearly deducsble from this Eraftian Principle and Pra&ice in point of Government, fach as the puting this Imputation upon the Exercife of Church Go- vernment in the Firft and pureft Ages, without the leaft Dependence upon the Qivil Magiftrat, That it was a grofs Encroachment upon that Ordinance of 'God ', and of the Magiftrats Right, ilyy This Principle in- troduces a Dominion, and ( according to the late Mould of our Eraftian Prelacy ) an Arbitrary Power upon her Government, afcri- bing to the Magiftrat a Sole Decifive Suffrage, in Caufes falling under Ecclefiaftick Cognifance. 3/7, The AfTertion, that the Magiftrat is a neceflary and (landing Church Officer, is a grofs Imputation upon our Lord's Wifdom and Faithfulnefs, in giving this Commiflion and the Power of the Keyes to his own Church Officers, and not to the Magi- ftrat, Befides feveral fuch Abfurdities attending this Principle and Mould of Government,as, That Heathen Magiftrats might be formally Church Governours, who are not Church Members,* That a perfon may be Born under the Gofpel Difpenfation a chief Church Ruler ,• That Children and Women, who may have a legal Right to be Magi- ftrats, may be Church Officers, &c. That all Church Officers are not fet in the Church; contrary to what is aflerted, r Cor. 12. 28. For this fuppofes the Perfon muft be a Church Member, but fo ic is that a Heathen Magiftrat, or of a contrary Religion to the true, may, according to the premis'd Principles and Frame of Government, be a Chief Church Officer, who in refpedfc of his Perfonal Incapacity in point of Religion can be no Church Member. See feveraL other Arguments to this Scope in Apolonius3 Jus Majejhtis circa Sacra, pag.%$, ;6. Jus Div'w. Reg. Ecclef. fag. 78. 79, 80, 8*, &e. Aarons Rod Bloftbming, Lib, 2; Chap. 6. 7. VIII. PRINCIPL E. IN Oppofition to the Prelatical Conftitution, we affert the Peoples ^uwer and Imereft to Call their Paftor. 'Tis evident, that prelatifts difown 2$2 AT P END IX. difownthis Power in the People and Congregation; For in this Government the Minifters Miffion, Call, Ordination, and Relation to fuch a People over whom he is to Officiat flows all from the Prelat, and the Congregational Eldermip is robbd of its Intereft therein. H-nce Prelacys lace Ereftion was attended with the removal of this Piiviledee and the Reiteration of Patronages. This is clear by com- paring the Aft of Parliament 1649, removing Patronages, with the Aft of Parliament 1662, Ordaining Minifters, who entred fince An. 1 649, to obtain a Prefentation from the lawful Patron, and a Collation from the Bifhop. . '■ . This Right of the People to Call their Pallor, Presbyterians have made pood from feveral clear Scripture Grounds ,• As, 1. It appears from Jfo. 14. 23. and Tit. 1. f; That the Ordination of Paftors did neceffarily import, and was attended with the Peoples confent,becaufe, not to infift upon the Term x^™"'* or the llw W*& ™'a> cIearlY importing a Hand-Suffrage, the Ordination appears to have been perlorm'd in the Church, and therefore, by neceffary Confequence, fuch a performance in the Church could not but be attended with, and neceffarily import the Peoples deliberat Choice and Confent. ily There is an Argument a fortiori thus improven from AQ. 6. The Infallible Apoftles in point of the Knowledge of Gifts and Qualifica- tions would not Ordain the Deacons, but upon the Peoples Choice and Selefting of the Perfons, tho5 the Office had a refpeftonly to the difburfing of their Alms or Charity ; And if fuch a Truft of even difburfing Alms, the Apoftles judg d, did neceffarily require the Peoples Confent and Choice of the Perions, the far greater Truft of the Soul's conduft muft, a fortiori, require fuch a Confent Nay the very Perfons one of whom was to be immediatly Ordain d an Apoitle by God himfelf, were prefented and chofen by the Church. %ly, The Right and Warrant of a Congregational Elderihip, which cannot be denied fince Congregations are Term'd Churches, and confequently, muft needs be fuppos'd to have Teaching and Ruling Officers or Elders, (compare 1 Cr. 13.34. with A*. 14.23. tit. 1 . y. Rom. 12. 3 1 Cor. 12. 28. 1 Tins, c. 17. ) will clearly import this their Right and Authority , For if they have an Elderjhig to Represent them in Matters Ecclefiaftical, their Choice of the Paftor, or Chief Elder, muft needs fall within the compafs of their Right and Authority : Be- fides what is Rationally, and in Divine Reafon pleaded from that near and Marriage-like Relation between the Paftor and Flock which muft needs import a voluntary Confent ; That Judgment ot Difcretion oi Trying and Difcerning the Spirits, which is allow d, yea AP'PENDIX. 26 yea and enjoynti to the People of God, i Cor. io, if. i J6h. 4, 1 2 That neceffary Ading in Faith, Rom. 14. ult. which muft needs take place, and be admitted in fuch a weighty cafe as this is. If Chrift's Flock and Sheep have this Character, That they know the true Shepherd and difctrn his Voice , and will flee from the Hireling, John 10. 4 then their Confent muft interveen in order to their Acceptance of and Subje&ion to their Shepherd, The extraordinary Caie is frill except- ed of the Ec clefia conftituenda, or the Obftinacy, Error, Schifms or fuch like inevitable Impediments in the Irate and condition of a Con- gregation, wherein, according to Gofpel Rules, the Authority of Superior Judicatories, muft interveen for redrefs ,- For as in the Civil Policy the Salus Populi is the Suprema Lex, and to be principally inten- ded, fo in the Church Government, the Majus bonum Ecclejia is acknowledged to be the Pole-Star of Church Governours and the Leading Rule in all their Motions and A<5b of Government. ' IX. PRINCIPLE. WE Condemn, as contrary to Scripture Rules, and the Office of the Miniftery, Church Mens Acting in Civil Affairs, as ftated Official Civil Rulers, or conftant conftituent Members of Civil Judicatories higher or lower, fuch as of Parliament, Council, and the like- And this upon the Apoftles Grand Rule, 2 Tim. 2. 4. No Man that Warreth intangles himfelf with the Affairs of this Life, that he may pleaje him who hath chofen him to be a Souldier ; compar'd with 1 Tim. 4, 12. Give attendance to Reading, to Exhortation, to Doctrine. And v, 14. Nealefi not the Gift which was given thee, &c. And v.i $>, Meditat on theje thinrs give thy (elf Wholly to them, fis Totus in his, that thy Profiting may appear to all, compared with 2 Tim. 4: 2. Preach the Word, be injlant infeafon, and cutoffeafon, Reprove, Rebuke, Exhort, with all Longfuffmng and Dokrine Wherein 'tis evident that^ the Minifter of Chrift ( and, in the Senfe of our Epifcopalians, the Bifhop, fuch as Timothy is fuppos'd to be ) is enjoyn'd an intire Sequeftration from the concerns of this Life, and as a Souldier to attend the Commands and Orders of our Lord the Captain of Salvation, which he cannot do. and pleafe him, ifentangl'd in other Employments. And the Miniftery is held out to be fuch an afliduous laborious Work, as muft entirely take up the whole Time Pains, and Endeavours of the Man of God, for compaffing the great and glorious Defigns thereof, the Salvation of Souls *and the Glory of Chrift therein. Befides feveral other clear Grounds drawn from Scripture and Divine Reafon clearly condemning this Practice, fuch 2$4 APPENDIX as the Unfufficierfcyof the beft, for managing the great Truft of the Gofpel Miniftry, In it felf confidered, acknowledged by the great Aooftle of the Gentiles, 2 Cor. 2. 16. The nature of Chrift's King- dom pnd the Officers thereof, afferted not to he of this World, Jon. i8« 16 consequently to move in a higher Sphere than Worldly Concerns. The Reafon offer'd by the Apoftles, Aft. 6. 2. why they were not to be diverted from their Minifterial Employments, by medling in that which was proper to the Deacons, It is not fit that we (houU leave the Word of God. And v. 4. We will give our felves Continually to Prayer, and to the Miniftry of the Word. Wherein we fee their abfolute Averfion from the leaft Intanglement in worldly Affairs, in order to the affiduous profecuting of the great Minifterial Work inftanced. To which may- be added our Saviour's declining fo much as to give Advice in a Civil Gaufe, Luk. 12. 13, 14. His Anfwer to the Man, who defir'd him to fpeak to his Brother, that he might divide the Inheritance with him, was with his peremptory Refufal, Man, who made me a Judg, era Di- vider over you ? What is pleaded from the extraordinary Old Tefta- ment Inftances, and Examples of Eli, Samuel, and the like, will as well plead for Minifters being Supreme Governours or Kings ,• And, thus proving too much, prove nothing. And however fuch Arguing will pleafe the Pope ( with his Ecce duo gladii ) and his Parafues, yet Royalifts will difowne and be amain d of it. X, PRINCIPLE, WE hold that the Plea from Antiquity, is unfound and utterly un- fufficientin the Epifcopal Caufe, 1, Tis the confentient Judgmentof all the Proteftant Churches, that not Antiquity or the humane Tefti- mony of Men* but the Scriptures of Truth allanerly, are the Judg and Rule in all points ol Religion, of all fredenda, facienda, and />«- tenda. The Scriptures pronouncing themfelves fufficient to make, not only the private Chriftian, but even the man of God, the Minifter" cf God, perfeft, throughly furnifh'd to all good works, 2 Tim. 3. 16, 17. ily. The fetting up ot Antiquity for the Rule in this point, makes the Scriptures Senfe and Authority, and confequently our Faith, to de* pend upon a humane Teftimony ; Since thus we mud believe no otherways concerning the Scriptures pointing at the Nature of Church Officers, their Office. Qualifications and Government, than according to the fuppof'd Teftimonie and Prance of the Ancients, which thus becomes the //on, the demonftrative Ground of our Certainty in this point, and this humane Teftimonie exercifes thus a Dominion over - * our APPE NDIX. 2fs our Faith, it doth thus degenerate from a Divine Faith to a humane tredulity, and ftands in the wifdom of man, not in the Tower of God, iCw. 2. f. compared with 2 Cor. 1. 24, The Scripture alfothus becomes of a private, or humane Interpretation, 2 Vet* 1. 20, 21. 3/7. Such a Print ciple doth furtherlmpeach Two great points of our Proteftant Profe£ fion. 1. The Fallibility of the Church in any Age, fince the Apo- ftolick, maintain'd by all Proteftant Churches and Divines, againft the Pope, and Popifh Churches pretended Infallibility. (2.) The inW ftane'd ablolute Perfedion of the Scriptures, wherein we have God's Decifion in the lively Oracles, touching all matters of Faith and Re- ligion. Finally, as many of the Fathers, both Greek and Latine, do owne the Identity of Biihop and Presbyter; So they difowne a Decifive Judgment afcribable to any humane Writings in point of Religion, Optatus Milevit* ( contra Varmen. Lik 5. ) tells us, Our proper Judgis be who /peaks in the Gofpel% duguftin< ( Epifi. 19. in Anfwer to Jerom) who had cited feveral Fathers for his Opinion* tells him, that he appeals to the Apoflle Paul, who is above them all. To the fame pur* pofe he fpeaks, Epifi* 3. Fortunatiano. Lib* 2. contra Crefcon. <£. 32. He fhews,T^f beholds not even Cyprian's EpiHles to he Canonical.Cap. 31. He mews, he does him no injury when difiinguifhing his Writings from the Canonical Scriptures. Many more might be cited to this purpofe, fuch as Jerom on Matth, 23. and on I Ch. of Haggai. But I infift not, XL PRINCIPLE. Upon the point of Worfliip we hold that, • I. THE Impofing of fix'd fet Forms of Words in Prayer or Preach- ing, and aftri&ing Pafto s thereunto in their publick Officiating, is Sinful and Unwarrantable, (1.) In general, as wanting a Divine In- ftitution, confequently Promife, as all parts of Divine Worinip muft have, Deut. 12. iaft, What thing foever 1 Command you, obferve to do it « thou {halt not add thereunto nor diminifh from it. Compar'd with parallels Ghap. 4, 2. Trov. 30. 6. Rev. 22. 18. Ifa. 29* 13. Matth, i'$. 8,9. (2.) In fpecial, this Practice is deftitute of the Warrant of either Apoftoiick Precept or Example, or of the Apoftoiick Church; There being nothing in the Scriptures of the New Teftament, which either dire&ly or indiredly, exprefiy or explicitly, and by good confequence can infer and legitimat the fame. For what is pretended in point of the prefcrib'd Form in the Lord's Prayer, 'tis evident* that our Saviour never intended to prescribe the Li Re- *6* APPENDIX. Repeating thefe Words, as eflential or neceffary to Prayer • Since (i,) Collating the two Evangelifts Account thereof, 'tis evident, that there is a fignal Variety therein. i,The Gonclufion in Luke is indre'y omjt- ted, who exprefles the Precept thus, When ye pray, fay • Which fe*ms to caft the moft favourable Afpect upon Prefcribing the Words 5 But, the Prayer is intire in Mattb. who expreffeth the Precept thus, After this manner fray ye, i. e. In this Method, and to this Scope. 2. There is a confiderable Variety in the Expreflion, as Reprefented by the two Evangelifts. The Authors of the id Part of Poole's Notes have obferv'd this variety, viz,, for *flpspw, in Mattb. is **$ w^«p«r, in Luh for IptKhyiar* in Mattb. Luke hath Jjxafrias ,• for as *) «^«7< aqitifo riis o?u*£m 7*i{ Suftf, in Mattb. Luk. hath £ >& durol aft*^ ir&vn Ifithont Upty ; Whence it plainly appears, fay the Annotators. that our Saviour did not intend to oblige his Difciples to the fame fyllabical words, but only to words of the fame import, &c. Other differences are obferv'd by others, which we need not here ftand upon. (2 J We do not find, that the A- poftles ever repeated this Prayer VerhatimtnoT have we fuch anlnftance or Example in all the New Teftament Accounts ot the Apoftles Pre- fcription or Pra&ice in point of Prayer ; Nbr do we find this practice in any of the Recorded Prayers of the Church and People of God. For what is pretended as to the Excellency and Comprehenfivenefs of this Prayer, to infer the forefaid practice of a neceffary Verbal Repetition, it.will no more plead for a neceffary Repetition of thefe words, as eflential to Prayer, than for a Repeating of the Decalogue ( the moft precious and comprehensive Sum and Rule of Moral Duties, uttered by God's Voice from Heaven ) in all Sermons, as Eflential to the Duty of Preaching. In the Third pIace,Impofing of,and Aftri&ing to fuch fet Forms, is a Sinful Limiting of the Spirit of Prayer,and the due Exercife of the Gift & Graces of ?rayer,in thePerfon Authorized to be God's Mouth to the People,&the Peoples Mouth to God :For, i.God's Spirit is promis'd to all who ask, Luke n. 13. and given to all true Members of Chrift's MyfticalBody,fitting them for theirDuty according to their feveral Sta- tions, I fa, ? 9. ao, 21. Colof. 2.19. Epb. i* i %t 14. And in fpecial for the Exercife ox the Gift and Grace of Prayer, Zach. 12* 10, n. Rom.B. 26. 2ly. Hence, as it muft be Rationally fuppos'd, that the Perfon accor- ding toGofpel Rules fet a part and Authorized,as aMinifter of Ghrift, to be his Ambaffadour and Mouth to the People, and theirs to God, and whofe Gifts this way have come under theTryal and Judgment of sire .Prophets in Church Judicatories, according to the Rule, 1 Cor. 14. 2S» JPPENDIZ *67 29« is both Gall'd of God,and Fitted, ai to the Expre Give Faculty, to^^ Reprefent their cafe to God * This being the Spirit's fpecialGift to tF4 Fit and Sanftifie, as the Conceptions, fo the Expreffive Faculty for the ; • . Duties of this Function; The Apoftles Aftf, a. 4. fpoke as the Sprit' gave them utterance $ And if the Spirit was given in that manner to the Apoftles, to fit them for their woik of Prayer and Preaching to all Nations, therefore to Paftors for the great end of their Function. Hence the abounding in Knowledge and Utterance are conjoyn'd, as the .Spirit's united Gifts to the People of God, 1 Cor, 1. 5. And this Gift off Utterance we find joyn'd with Knowledge, Faith, and Love, 2 Cor. 8. 7, And Paftors in fpecial have Utterance given them, and a Door of it opened, Eph, 6. 19. Colef. 4. 3. And if God's Spirit fits all in whom he dwells, then furely, and in fpecial manner the Paftor for every good Word and Work. Compare z Thef 2. 17. with 1 fim. 4, 12. 2 Sam* 23. 2. If a. 32. 4. £I# WE condemn Symbolical Ceremonies in Worihip, viz,* Such as upon Mans meer Appointment, do fignifle and reprefent Spiritual Myfteries, as grofly Incroaching upon'the Nature of Sacraments, and God's Authority therein, it being his Prerogative to prefcribe any reprefenting thing in Worihip ; Since it mufi be fuppos'd j, A part of Worfnip, confequently muft fall under his Command and Inftitution, elfe 'tis Superftition and Will worfhip, Goto/. 2: 23: (2.) The Symbo- lical Sign or Ceremonie in point of Worfhip or Religion, muft needs have refpect to a BleHing, confequently to an annex'd Promife, which God only can give j Hence there can be no performance of fuch Ceremonies in Faith, as all inftituted Worfhip is upon this Ground fo perform'd. ^ *_*• Of this fort we hold to be, 1. The Sign of the Crofs in Baptifmi 2'. Kneeling in the Act of Receiving the Sacramental Elements in the Lord's Supper* The firft is condemn'd not only upon the general Ground offer'd, but iikeways as Encouraging and Symbolizing with the horrid Popifh Superftition, and abufe of this Ordinance, con- demn'd by Proteftant Divines, together with the other Superftitious Rites and Ceremonies of Hards, Oyl5 and the like, as reprefenting theRougbnefsoftheLaw, and Sofcnefs of God's Mercy. The fecond is condemn'd in that, (a) 'Tis contrary to the inftituted Table pofture obferv'd by our Lord and his Apcfties, as fuiting the great Defign of this Ordinance*, which represents our Eternal Com- munion, our Eating and Drinking with him at his Table in his King- dom> huks 22. %o> (z,) We condemn this ps»(hire in the Acs of Re* E 1 2 ctivinsr; 568 APPENDIX. ceiving, as being in its Nature a relative Coadoration of the Elements themfelves, and thus Idolatrous ; The Proftration or Kneeling being in this cafe a Religious Ceremony, or pofture of Adoration, and from the Nature of the Ordinance, refpecting the facred Symbols or Ele- ments, as theimmediat Object thereof, muft needs import the relative Coadoration mentioned. .s r Upon the fame Ground of the want of a Divine Xnftitution and Prom'fe, we condemn Holy Days, that is, thefetting a part Anniver* fary Days, as relative to facred Holy Duties, and thus relatively Holy, with a fpeciul refpect to fome fuppof d my ftick Signification in the Days themfelves, the Duties being annex'd upon the Ground of this Myftick Signification, and therefore efpecialiy fuited to the Day it felf, the Obfervation alfo of the Day being a fart of the ff'orfiip, and attended and Celebrated with an intire Ceffation from work thereupon. Such a Dedication and Obfervation of Days, muft needs toto ca?/* differ from a Deputation, either of a Day for Religious Duty upon occafional Emergencies, which pafleth off with that exigent, and this whether with refped to Fafting or Thankfgiving, and has clear Scripture War- rant, Joel 2. ry. 16. a Chron. 20, ;,4, with ver, 26. Or the ordinary Deputation or Defignation of fuch and fuch Days of the Week, or rather Parts thereof far Sermon: The difference of the Days or Times laft mention'd, from the Holy Days inftanced, is evident, in that, 1. In thefe Days laft mentioned, there's no Ceffation from ordinary Employment, as is obferv'd in the Holy Days. 2. In theie Days the Time is as aft Circumftance fuited to the Worfhif\ In the Holy Days, the fVorfhip is fuited to the Time, which is not a meer Circum- ftance thereof. 3. In the Days & Times laft inftanc'd, there's a Liberty to alter the fame to other Seafons and limes ; But not fo in the cafe of the Holy Days, which are fix'd and unalterable, upon the fuppof'd Myftick Signification inftanced. 4. In the cafe of Holy Days, the Time or Day is Celebrated as a fart of the Wcrjkip; In the other cafe 'tis only an alterable Circumjiance. That thefe Days are obferv'd as relatively Holy, and upon a fup- pof'd Myftick Signification, yea and that the Obfervation of the Day is efteem'd a p*rt of the Worfnip, is evident in the Practice of the Ob- lervers,and theArguments of the Chief of fuch as are Pleaders, &have a&ed the Pro&ors for them. Thus Hooker Eeclef. Policy* Lib. y. /. 70. Ibid Seel, 65 • with 69. In which places he calls the Days, Hallowed and Sanclifad, and ownes them as apart of Worfnip, and even ratione medii. To this purpofe Dr. B^rgefsi cb. ;s Lawfulnefs of Kneeling. Thus alfo chm APPENDIX. .& ty Page 42. Likeways Dr. Forbes, Irenkum Lib. Il chl J. $*#. 66. and eh. 7. Sett* 7 .Biihop Lindfays Epiftles to the Payors of the Church of Scotland, Page 24. Downam in Quartum Precept Bifliop Andrews in his Holy Days Sermons, hath many Affections to this purpofe. In his Sermon on Pfal, 8j. io, 11. He fays of Chriflmafs. 7hat Mercy and Peace, Righteoufneft and truth, meet mofi kindly on that Day. In bis Chrifima/s Sermon on the id Pfalm, he fays, that the Law is moH kindly Preach'd and /uitably Practiced on this Day. In his Sermon on Heb. *2> 2, which is -failed to Good Friday, he faith, Let us turn unto him, fail, to God, and befeech him by the fight of this Day. The tjalmift has a Suir,'p/, 84. 9, Behold, O Godf our Shield and look u?on the face of thine Anointed but the Bifhop in this phrafe fubftitutes Goodfriday in place of Anointed imploring God's Mercy upon the fight of that Day. In his Sermon on Co/of, 3 i, he afferts, that no Day in the Year is fo fit to rife with Chrifi and feek the things that are above, as Eafter'day, I humbly conceive he might have excepted the Ghriftian Sabbath. In his Sermon on John 2. 19. he aiTerts, That the receiving of Chri$s Body is at no time (o proper as this very Day. Many other Inftances may be feen in thatElaborat Piece Entituled, A Dijpute againfl tbeEngiUh-Popiff Ceremonies obtruded upon the Church of Scotland, pag. 127, 1 28. < Now to give a little Touch as to the Unlawfulnefs of this Obferva- tion inftanced, take this fhort Account, i. That which neceffarijy fuppofes an Inftitution, is Unlawful without it; But the Obfervations inftanced have no Divine Inftitution, For the Minor and Affumption, 'tis evident, in that the Adverfaries have never been able to produce either Exprefs or Consequential Inftitution, tho' often Challenged to itas Affirmers. For the MzjVPropofition, 'tis evident in that, 1. Every piece of Religious Worfhip requires Divine Inftitution, Deut. 12. 22, Mat, 15 8, 9. (2.) In fpecial, the Dedication of Days requires this: For, befides that all the Dedicated Days under theOld Teftament had God's fpecial Appointment, we have aipecial Inftance of the Un- warrantablenefs of a humane arbitrary Dedication, in the cafe of Je- roboam his Dedicating the ijth I>ay of the 8th Moneth for the Feaft of Tabernacles, inftead of the I5th£>ay of the 7th Moneth inftituted by God Levit. 23, 34, which is Charged upon him as a Wicked Invention, 1 King. 1 2 « 3 2 . ( 2ly.) We find the Dedication inftanc'd Condemn'd by the Apoftle, Gal. 2. f0. compar'd with Colo/, 2: t6.For.i. TheApoftle Argues the Unlawfulnefs of theObfervation of the Antiquated Jewijk X>ays, from an obfolet lnHitutioni and confequently from • * ■ JVo»- - Inftitution, he infers the fame Unlawfulnefs of indication or Obfervati. *fc on APPENDIX. ,„ »fn»« eire the Argument were not good, If EctUUfiul hfituth « rf Sature were Lawful, and might (land good in place of that Whi/,h Ttofiftto condemns the Obfervation of Days as encroaching 'wSftiaEribertv GW. j.i. "Tis true, there's no Liberty al- f Svi eithe from God's Command, or the (awful Commands of So- iowd etther trom oo .■ ^ chriftian Liberty, which our Lord Vn0l.w£S whereby we are delivered from the Power of Sin, Rom. «■*,!£?££ * !? andlom the Curfe of the Law, Gal . ,. ,, And 1 *_-*» 3 »hto Liberty is our Deliverance from the fliadowing SrlmLu Law C»S " M.S and therefore much more from fob- ^TT;Sfcience to Rites, Doctrines, and Laws of Men m £*" Vrf WbSST&f* ™ The Apoftle cenmres Subjection « rSLin^c uenerallv and our Gonfeffion of Faith, Cb. 20. Jm. 2. irThe ObfeWarion and Dedication inftanced reflefts upon the- ire/eeding Ground, giving Men a Liberty of impoling a Yoke of Ge: ed and obliged us to keep the ttrtnu y ^^ mand for ir in «e ™°™' h Conjeaure thereanent drawn from the a? t0 thai ?S>S oferlng fncVnfe as if he had been the High-Prieft, timeof Z«^r»es Ofiering incen o{ ^ if to ^JP™* *fc Kpriefis, 1 «*"» 24. .0. The High-I • p^w^on nd no wtohln the Courfes of the Priefts ,• Hence it fi ^ thafhh Burning Incenfe mentiond, « 9. is to be underftood *°. T 'ordi^ry %58f appointed, E«i 36.7. not the Solemn In, clnfe i^the Yearl? Day of Expiation infti.uted Uvit. 16. xx, xz, 1* *4' t'khe obfervation inftanced encroaches upon the Authority of x A Command! in point of the Six Days Labour therein etuoyn d. APPENDIX a/l except in Gates which* God, the Blefs'd Lawgiver, has exeem'd and ex- cepted from the Compafs of this Obligation and Command, fuch as Occafional Fafts, Feafts, and the like, whereof above. To this purpofe 'tis obfervabie, i. That we find a Labour com-, manded in the State of Innocency. ily, We find Ceffation from La- bour comes under a fpeciai Command in God's inftituted Holy Days pointing at the Neceffity of a Divine Warrant for this Ceffation • For the Ceffation is enjoy n'd as a part of the Religious Duty, or at leafr a fuitable Mians fubfervient thereunto: Thus, Lev. 23. 7. So v, 8 2r 25* 3f> %&• Numbi 18. 18, &c. • ' ' Finally, this Oblervation has a mifchievous Tendency j. To in- troduce all Jewifli Antiquated, or innumerable other Superftitious Days, upon fmooth pretences of Decency, Unity, Order, Ecclefiaftick Conftitution, or the like. 2/y, To harden Vapifts in their Idolatrous Abufe of fuch Dedication of Days. 'Tis a fure Rule, That fuch things 6r Rites, as neither the Law ofG-od or Nature hat made necefiary, are to be remt>yd fern Worship, when thus abusd, and of fuch a Scandalous Tendency. God did forbid feveral things, otherwife lawful, upon this Ground of Hardening Heathens, and left Homologating with them and Con- formity in leffer things, mould introduce Conformity io greater Mat* ters. Thus, Ifa. 30. 22. there is a Command, Te fbaB defile alfo the Cove- ring of thy Graven Images of Silver, and the Ornament of thy. Molten Images of Gold, thou (halt cafi them away as a Menflrucus Cloath, thou Jhalt fay unto- it, get thee hence ; Compar'd with Cb. 3 1, v, 7. Such like Commands we have as to Sowing with different Seeds, Plowing with Ox and Ms 'Rounding the Corners of the Head and Beard, Wearing the Garment of Linen. andWoUen. See Veut.zz. 9, 10, n. Lev. 19. 19, &c. For what is pretended anent the Days of Purim, two things do re- move the Objection, 1. That they cannot be paralleled with the Holy Days inftanced, being only Days of Civil Mirth and Solemnity, as is evident, Efth. 9. 17, 18, 19. 2/7, Giving, not granting, the Obfervati- on had been Religious, they had therein the Direftion of Mordecai a Man of God, who? was in this Cafe the Mouth of God unto them • Both which exeem'd them from the Compafs and Touch of the pre-- ceeding Arguments. See both theCe- points at large difcufs^din the Dis- pute againft the Englifh Popifh Ceremonies, Tart:*, Cb. 6, Like wife - the Altar eDamafc, Pag, 680, 68r, 682, 683, 684, 68y, &Qi By both, which Authors aifo, the Argument from the Feaft' of Dedi- cation, mention'd John 10, 22, 23, is dsfeufs d» there being nothing in she Text pointing at our Lord's Obfer vation of this Feaft; the Evan- gelic APPENDIX. ' 2 7s . . „ .l;. winter Sealon. as the Oecafion of ou^ gelift only ^«,om"^'hi" Vn Aat Po ch And even granting his Lord's commodious Walk mg in ™* J™^ ,he Qofpel Net among Attendance on that Solemnity for pread ng P^ ^ ^^ the great ^^ZSfu^gl be at W*» .gainft rS^^^^^r*"^ wiU prove hisowmngand Celebrating that Antiquated Eealr. xii. principle: IN Oppofition to W^ we ^^^SflFffi of leffer larger Church g«-S1"1' " ? ture. What Nature s Light dictates as E,uen t particular Parts felf confider'd, muft needs ^g^^he Whole fa neceflary both U fubjea to the Whole for the Good of *e Jho^.^ ^ ^ in Bodies Natural and Politick. i<£ wen " them thejewi(h ^^*S^J^S^S£??7.»,«^ *C^ being fubiea to the Sanhedrim a j , ^ G ent l9. 8, ir. EW.18. ">*6; . *™.' ^>rincipies of Reafon and Nature, grounded upon commonEqu £> the ™ f 'P™ s of their church, Ind had no Typ cal or pecuna Rdpoft to ^ M« in ths is, no doubt. Hill obliging. Af«?'h'sfS"fX" Appeals, Ai.«i. 1 8. Inftitution of our -Saviour in the po nt oT Gradual APP ^ jn I7' ^ ^iSttlWtoWiX an'dlaftof all to be then Admomlhd before 1 wo or inre Argument ap- Complain'd of to the Church. Jhe b rengm s fon pears by the Rule of Proportion^ by the jam e Rule t piovincial Ljea> »-^^"aAt^ffirSpSSon. that one Con- or National Affembly: Aw by me ia m £. reprefenting it, by gregation is govern'd by ^/^^^ngregatio'ns governed by a the fame Proportion are 1 en or iwsrre s & This appears from Claffical .Presbytery reprefenting th m $^rf witPhPRefPea to theSufficiency of the Remedy prelam any between Two all the Churches Exigences Church as welUsbetvveen Two Perfons £«e^ S^^Sl^S?J^A%. *• s* '* «* APPENDIX. 1 *% •Iu^PP°r,«0!; t0 fr c u> ^e a,^° affert' Th« the Community of the Faithful, or Body of the People, are not the proper immcrf^i- . Sobjeft of Church Government. For, r. This PowTw^Z given by our Saviour inEcckfia Ccnftituenda, nor by the Apoftles in the firft Framing of Churches, or in the after Eftabliihmentand Growth of them under the Apoftles Miniftery. Not the firft for then th Apoftles themfelves had derived their Power from the* Fraternitv ! Community of the Faithful, contrary to the Scripture AccounJ nf their Commiffion, Qualification, /and Defignation of their PerfL contrary to many Scriptures, Gal. i. i. Mattb. 28. iS 19 2o 7JL 22, 2;. £,»** 6. 1;, fre. Not the fecond, for the Power commit^ .r?C* the Apoftles has ftilla Refped to their* Succeflbrs in thTt Succeffio V Alcho> the Defignation to their Office-be by the Church,yet th \ DonTon and Derivation of their Office is only from Chrift, as being his MnMe" Stewards, Ambaffadours, Aclmg in his Name, and to give an Account rrf him, 1 A T, 17, i8.L»*« 12.41,42, Befides that the Promifes, with Refpeft to a Mi* mftery, never refpetf the whole Community, but the Church Guide? See John 20.21,22,2;* Afa«e.28.i9,2o, &c And moreover, the Sn?" ritof a Miniftery and neceflary Gifts for Government, are no whert P^YuthepGrmrU^a°f the Faithful, but to particular Perfonl of the Vifible Body of Chrift, Compare 1 tor. 12 8 9 ( where hi the Spirit the Word of Wifdom is faid to be given \o one Th Word of Knowledge to another, not to all) with 1 Km* J If a Z* know not bow to Rule h* own Houfe, bow /hall be take 2.41, 42. Xc and 4. S4,3f, 36.?7. compared with Cb %.»b ,mt. ai v. .2, %, .2 .2 14. with ^.2i, 22, 2;, with Cb. I4. « St, 2J. WhichisaifoVonvincingly evident from this, That as the Word .s to be Preach'd to all Vif.bleGhurch Members, fo with Refpeft to the great End of Converfion, and the Forming of Chrift in the Soul, Ga.4. 19. with PAW. 19. 7. R""'- io- 17- The Begett.ng of Fa.th, as well as the Confirmation and Growth of thofe that are already Converted and who have Faith in the Habit. But if all Members be fuppos'd Behe- vers, Converts, and to have Faith, then tins great Defign and End of the Word is cut off and excluded. FINIS. 0 •$c< *Sfe