The great care of Souls in their Accesses to God, should be to sanctifie his Name. Divine Institution to be heeded in the whole of our Worship. The Question proposed. That 'tis lawful to hear the present Ministers of England, denied: one Argument proposed to consideration. Nothing may be practised in instituted Worship, but what is warranted by the Scripture: The Testimonies of the Ancients produced. That Hearing is part of instituted Worship, proved.

Argument 1.

That which there is no warrant for in the Scripture, being part of instituted Worship, is not lawful for the Saints to practise: But there is no warrant in the Scripture for hearing the present Ministers or Eng­land; and hearing is part of instituted Worship. Therefore.

The major (or first) Proposition is evident.

1. From the nature of instituted Worship, which consists in this, that it be of Divine Revelation; else whatever it is, it is not institu­ted Worship.

2. From the Verdict of Christ, who pronounces all the Worship of man to be vain and fruitless, and so unlawful, that is bottom'd on any thing but Divine Revelation, Mark 7. 7.

3. If it be lawful to conform to any one part of instituted Worship without warrant from Scripture, 'tis also lawful to conform to ano­ther, a third, the whole, which would banish instituted Worship out of the world.

4. To assert that it is lawful to conform to any part of instituted Worship, without warrant from Scripture, reflects sadly upon the Wisdom and Faithfulness of Christ; for either he was not wise enough to foresee that such a part of Worship was, or would be requisite, or had not faithfulness enough to reveal it, though the Scripture com­pares him to Moses for faithfulness, who revealed the whole Will of God, to the making of a pin in the Tabernacle.

6. It pours out contempt upon the Care of God over the New-Testament [Page 14] Churches (as if it were less to these, then to the Church under the Law) and the Oeconomie of the Gospel, as not so com­pleat as that of old, the whole of whose VVorship, Orders and Or­dinances (as was said) was bottom'd upon pure Revelation.

7. It carries with it a sad reflection upon the Authority of the Scripture, as not thorowly furnished to make the man of God perfect.

8. The Lord condemns not only that which is done against the warrant and direction of the VVord, but also that which is done be­side it, Deut. 4. 2. and 12. 32. Mat. 15. 9. Lev. 10. 1. (their sin lay not in this, that they offered strange fire which was forbidden, but which God commanded them not) Prov. 30. 6. Jer. 7. 31.

9. Of the same mind with us in this matter are the renowned VVitnesses of Christ in all ages; generally all that write upon the second Commandment, speak fully hereunto.

Cyprian (in his Epist. to Caecilius de Sacram.) sayes roundly, Et quod Christus solus, &c. i. e. that Christ alone ought to be heard: we have the Father himself witnessing from Heaven, saying, This is my belo­ved Son, hear him. Wherefore if Christ only be to be heard, we ought not to attend to what others did before us, but what he hath pre­scribed. Beza (on Phil. 1. 1.) sayes, Episcopos igitur, &c. The Apostle meaneth by Bishops, such as were set over others in the prea­ching the VVord, viz. Pastors, Teachers and Elders, for so were Bi­shops of old called, until he which for Polities sake, did preside in the Assembly, began peculiarly to be call'd Bishop: hereof the Devil began to lay the first foundation of Tyranny in the Church of God: Behold (sayes he) of how great moment it is to decline from the Word of God, though but an hairs breadth. So he. To whom may be added the Testimony of that lively Witness of Christ Martin Luther In a Translation of the New-Testament in Edward the 6ths time, the Author of the Notes on Matth. 15. saith, God will not be worshipped after the doctrine & precepts of men, but as he himself hath pre­scribed and taught us in his Word., who sayes, on 1 Pet. 4. 11. To the Office of prea­ching, that properly belongs, which the Apostle Peter prescribeth, viz. unto whom­soever the vocation and charge of Prea­ching the Word is allotted, let him speak as the Words of God; which Caveat and Lesson ought most carefully to be taken heed unto, that no man presume to preach and teach any thing, whereto he hath not the express words of God for his [Page 15] warrant, and except he be most certain that the same be directly to be a­vouched out of the sacred Scriptures. Which being so, what may be thought of the Pope (we may add of the Hierarchy) and his dirty Traditions? And anon after, he saith, A Bishop ought to do nothing in the Church, unless he be certain and sure of the warrantise thereof by God's Word; for God cannot abide to have his Service jumbled and mingled at pleasure with every foolish gewgaw and light trumpery; yea further, saith he, And therefore we are strictly forbidden not to rely unto, nor to allow whatsoever decree or constitution the Bishops list to obtrude, and enjoyn, unless they stand upon a sure ground, that the things which they do, are allowed of God—and unless they be able to say, Do this; for it is the Will and Commandment of God, and we have his express Word and Commandment for our warrant: if they be not able to say thus, they ought to be accounted as Liars and Decei­vers, much less ought any Christian to yeeld unto them therein any obedience or subscription: And afterwards, There is nothing (saith he) so pernitious, nothing so monstrous, nothing so beastly, as to go about to govern the Church of God, without the Warrant of God's own Word. Of the same mind is learned Whitaker, We acknowledge (saith he) no Oyl in God's Service, because we reade nothing of Oyl in the Scriptures, can you shew that ever Christ or his Apostles used it? To whom many others might be added.

The minor (or second Proposition) consists of two parts.

1. That Hearing is part of instituted Worship, one would wonder should it be denied; however 'tis evident it is so, from the light of this single demonstration: That in which we wait upon God in the way of an Ordinance for the communication of good, beyond the vertue of any creature to conveigh to us, is part of the instituted Worship of God (for what I wait for, not being in the thing it self, in which I am waiting, no ground can be assigned, for my expecting of good through it, but Divine Institution) but in the Hearing of the Word we wait upon God in the way of an Ordinance, for the com­munication of good, beyond the vertue of any creature to conveigh to us: Therefore.

2. That Hearing the present Ministers of England is not warrant­ed in the Scripture: This will be manifested, when we come to the ventilating and scanning of those places, which are usually produced for the abetting of the practice of some in this matter: in the mean while we crave liberty to profess, that it is not opinionativeness, sin­gularity, vain-glory, uncharitableness, or any thing of that nature; [Page 16] (as some are apt uncharitably enough to censure) but the dread and awe of God (who is a jealous God, and especially in point of Wor­ship) and an holy fear of offending him, that hinders us from com­plying in these matters: could but one word, tittle or iota be pro­duced from the Scriptures of God, for the warranting the Hearing the present Ministers of England, we should quickly lay our mouths in the dust, confess and bewail our guilt and folly in refusing to conform thereunto; but this we are fully assured, those that dissent from us, are not able to do; what they say herein, shall [...] be sifted to the uttermost.

A second Argument proposed to consideration: That 'tis not lawful to hear the present Ministers of England, as Ministers of Christ, nor as Gifted Brethren, proved. A Separation from them, if Brethren, evinced. That the best of them walk disorderly, proved.

Argument 2.

IF it be lawful to hear the present Ministers of England, 'tis lawful to hear them, either as Ministers of the Gospel, or as gifted Bre­thren: But 'tis not lawful to hear them, either as Ministers of the Gospel, or as Gifted-Brethren: Therefore.

The major (or first Proposition) will not be denied; That Christ hath appointed some, as Ministers, by vertue of an Office-power, to dispense the Ordinances of the Gospel, until his second coming, is granted by all, that 'tis permitted to others, as their liberty, enjoyned them, as their duty (having received Gifts and Enablements from the Lord thereunto) to improve those Gifts in preaching, praying, &c. for the Edification of the Body of Christ (though not solemnly invested into Office) is assented unto, at least by some of those with whom we have to do; whence a lawfulness to hear them as Ministers, or as Gifted-Brethren, doth necessarily arise.

'Tis the minor (or second Proposition) that is capable, in the thoughts of some, of a denial: which we prove, per partes, thus.

1. 'Tis not lawful to hear them as Ministers of the Gospel: they are not such, therefore may not be heard as such. That they are not Ministers of the Gospel (but Thieves and Robbers) is manifest: Such as come not in by the Door, which is Christ, Joh. 10. 9. (viz. by ver­tue [Page 17] of any Authority derived to them from him) are not Ministers of the Gospel, but Thieves and Robbers, Joh. 10. 1. (from whom 'tis the property of the Sheep to flee, ver. 4.) But the present Ministers of England come not in by the Door: Therefore.

That they come not in by the Door ( viz. by vertue of any Autho­rity derived to them from Christ) is evident: If they have received any such Authority or Commission from him, they have received it, either mediately, or immediately: the latter will not be asserted, nor without the working of Miracles, should it so be, would it to the world's end be made good: 'Tis the former must be fixt upon, viz. That they have received their Authority or Commission, mediately from Christ, but to as little purpose; for those that receive Autho­rity to preach the Gospel mediately from Christ, have it from some particular instituted Church of Christ, to whom power is soley dele­gated for the electing of their own Officers, according to the tenour of the ensuing Scriptures, Acts 6. 5. & 14. 23.

These men (as it's known) have no such Authority, pretend not to it, have it in derision, come barely with a Presentation from a Pa­tron, and Ordination, Institution and Induction from a Lord-Bishop (things forreign to the Scripture) and impose themselves upon the people whether they will or no.

2. 'Tis not lawful to hear them as Gifted-Brethren. 1. The most of them are not gifted; nor 2. Brethren, being Canonical-Drunkards, Swearers, Gamsters, &c. 3. The best of them cannot by Saints, in respect of Gospel-communion, be so accounted: for, 1. There was never any giving up of our selves, each to other, according to the will of God and primitive Example, whence such a Brotherhood doth result. 2. We cannot (as things stand) perform the duties of Brethren to them, according to Mat. 18. nor will they, or can they, in the state in which they stand, to us. 3. If we acknowledge the best of them for such, we must also acknowledge the worst of them: for, 1. They are all Members of the same Church. 2. Profess themselves to be one Brotherhood, so sayes their Rime upon the Lord's Prayer,

Nay, 3. we cannot so acknowledge them, but we must also acknow­ledge the Bishops for our Reverend Fathers, (for theirs they are) which how abhorring it is to any tender enlightned soul, may easily [Page 18] be conjectured. But to hear this Plea speak its uttermost, let it be granted they are Brethren, and may be so esteemed; They are Bre­thren that walk disorderly, or they do not: That they walk disorder­ly cannot be denied by such as pretend to Reformation, If submit­ting to Ordination or Re-ordination by a Lord Bishop, covenanting and protesting with detestation against a Reformation according to the Scripture, and the best Reformed Churches, to own (as consonant to Scripture) a Lyturgy or stinted Forms of Prayer in the Church, and read them, to wear the Surplice, &c. be disorderly walking; they are (the very best of them) beyond contradiction, to be reputed in the number of disorderly walkers; And so after due admonition (ac­cording to the Scripture) and a perseverance in their sin, to be sepa­rated from, by vertue of positive and express Precepts of Christ, Mat. 18. 2 Thess. 3. 6. Now we command you, Brethren, in the Name of the Lord Jesus Christ, that you withdraw your selves from every Brother that walketh disorderly, and not after the tradition he received of us: With what vehemency, authority and holy earnestness doth the Apo­stle press separation from Brethren that walk disorderly? We command you, and we command you in the Name of the Lord Jesus, and we com­mand you, Brethren, by vertue of our relation to each other, and that love and endearment that is betwixt us as Brethren, that you withdraw your selves, &c. I scarce know any one thing pressed by the Apostle, with greater vehemency than what is here instanc'd in: wherein we have also an undeniable convincing Argument, that the persons of whom we are treating, walk disorderly. Those that walk not after the tradi­tion received from the Apostles (we may adde, and the Primitive Church for above three hundred years after Christ, but according to the traditions of the old Bawd and Strumpet of Rome) are such as walk disorderly: But the present Ministers of England walk not after the Tradition received from the Apostles, but after the Traditions of the Whorish-Church of Rome: Therefore they are such as walk dis­orderly. What Apostolical Tradition have we for stinted Forms of Prayer or Lyturgies in the Church, did they frame any? (those that are ascribed to some of them, are all spurious, as hath been over and over proved) for Surplice, crossing in Baptism, and many other gewgaws used by them? if they have any Apostolical written tradition for these things, let them produce it, and we shall lay our mouths in the dust, and for ever be silent, as to a charge of this nature: If they have [Page 19] not (as there is nothing more certain) they are disorderly walkers, if the Apostles Argument be valid, We command you to withdraw from such as walk disorderly. But who, I pray, are these disorderly walkers? how shall we know them? they are (sayes the Apostle) such as walk not after the tradition received from us.

A third Argument proving the unlawfulness of hearing the present Mini­sters of England, produced. That they act by vertue of an Antichri­stian Office and Calling, proved. Their perfect agreement with the Po­pish Priests in seventeen Particulars, demonstrated. That the Office of Lord Bishops is Antichristian, proved. (The Testimonies of the An­cients produced) Whence the Antichristianism of the Office of the Mi­nisters of England is evinced. An Objection answered.

Argument 3.

THose that act in the holy things of God by vertue of an Antichri­stian Power, Office or Calling, are not to be heard, but to be se­parated from: but the present Ministers of England act in the Holy Things of God by vertue of an Antichristian Power, Office or Cal­ling. Therefore.

The Major is evident. For 1. The Power, Office and Calling of Antichrist is opposite and contrary unto the Power, Office and Calling of Christ: Not to separate from such as act by vertue of such an Office-Power, is to stand by, and plead for Antichrist, against Christ. 2. Its unlawful to attend upon the teachings of Antichrist, therefore upon the teachings of such as act by vertue of a Power de­rived from him. 3. Christ calls, and solemnly charges his, upon the penalty of most dreadful Judgments, to separate from every thing of Antichrist, Rev. 18. 4. and 14. 9, 10, 11. 4. There is not a command in the Scripture enjoyning Saints to take heed of being de­ceived, to try the spirits, because many Antichrists are gone abroad into the World, but is an abundant demonstration of the truth of this As­sertion. 5. The institution of Officers of his own, by Christ, to be continued in the way appointed by him to the end of the World, Eph. 4. 11. 6. That there is not one promise of a blessing in the whole Scripture upon persons atending on such a Ministry, with innumerable things of the like tendency and import, that might be produced if [Page 20] needful, are such a basis upon which the truth of the major Proposition stands, as cannot be easily shaken or removed.

The Minor wants not sufficient demonstration.

First, The present Ministers of England, are either from Christ or from Antichrist. There is no medium (a Linsey-woolsey-Ministry, that is partly of Christ, partly of Antichrist, as 'tis not to be proved by Scripture, so will it not be abetted) That they are not from Christ, hath in part been proved already, and may farther be evinced.

1. Their Names are forreign to the Scripture: Where reade we of Deacons in their sence, Priests, as distinguished from Christians, in the New-Testament, Deans, Cannons, Petty-Cannons, Prebendaries, Arch-Deacons, Lord-Bishops, Parsons, Vicars? &c. these are onely found in the Popes Pontifical, whence they are derived. So are 2. Their Offices: Deacons attending Tables we reade of, but Deacons Pray­ing, Preaching, Administring Sacraments (so called) by vertue of an Office-power, an order of the first step to the Priesthood, we find not: Priests in the Old-Testament (both true and false) we reade of; in the New, Saints are so called; First, in respect of analogie to the ritual Priests of old, whose prerogative it was to come near to God, Deut. 21. 5. to whom, through Christ, Saints have access with bold­ness, Ephes. 2. 18. and 3. 19. Jam. 4. 8. Secondly, in respect of their union and engrafture into Christ the great High-Priest over the House of God. Thirdly, in respect of that analogy there is betwixt what Christ hath done for them as Priest, and by his Spirit worketh in them: He offered up Sacrifice; so do they, Psal. 116. 17. and 141. 2. Rom. 12. 1. Heb. 13. 14. He was crucified, died; so are they, Rom. 6. 6, 7, 8. &c. Gal. 2. 20. Fourthly, as Priests, they are anointed to the participation of, do thereby attain to, a kind of holy and intimate communion with Christ, in all his glorious Offices, Rev. 5. 10. But an Office of Priesthood in men for the Ministry of the Gospel, that are to be bounded by men in that their Office, must preach what they would have them, and cease when they would have them (as is the case of the present Ministry of England) the Scrip­ture is a stranger to: So is it 3. to their admission into this their of­fice, viz. by a Lord-Bishop, without the consent of the Congrega­tion, in which they act as Officers. The very truth is, both in their Names, Office, and admission thereunto, the present Ministers of England symbolize not with the Ministers of Christ, but the Popish [Page 21] order of Priests: (so that if these do act by vertue of an Antichristian office-power, then do they) as he that runs may read in the ensuing parallel particulars.

1. They are both called, and own themselves Priests; which though some may make light of, yet considering that it is a term bor­rowed, either from the Priests of the Law, the assertion of such a Priesthood being a denial of Christ come in the flesh; or from the Priests of the Heathen (in conformity to whom, as the Druides of old, our Priests wear their white Garment or Surplice) or from the An­tichristian Church (so called) of Rome: Such idolatrous supersti­tious names being commanded by the Lord to be abolished, Hos. 2. 15. Zech. 13. 2. wants not its sufficient weight; the retention where­of, being also a sore suspition of too great a compliance with, if not a willingness to return to that from whence they are derived. Of the same mind with us herein is Hierom upon the 2d of Hosea, the He­brew Doctors, Kimchi and Aben-Ezra, the Caldee Paraphrast, Ribera (though a Jesuit) Zanchi, Danaeus, Sanctius, Polanus, Rivet, and almost all that write upon the said Scripture. The last mentioned, viz. Learned Rivet, hath these words in his Corollaries from Hos. 2. 15, 16. There are many names which in themselves are good enough, and might be used, but God abhorreth the use of them, because they have been abused to Idolatry: he instanceth indeed in the word Mass; but Priest or Altar being of the same allay, upon the same foot of ac­count, is to be rejected. The reformed Churches in Helvetia, in their harmony of Confessions, are of the same mind; The Ministry (say they) and the Priesthood are things far different the one from the other—he himself (viz. Christ) remaineth only Priest for ever; and we do not com­municate the name▪ Priest to any Minister, lest we should detract something from Christ.

2. The Priests of Rome must be first Deacons ere they are Priests: So must the present Ministers of England.

3. The Priests of Rome must be ordained to their Office by a Lord-Bishop or his Suffragan: So must the Ministers of England.

4. The Priests of Rome must at their ordination, be presented by an Archdeacon or his Deputy, with these words, Reverende Pater, &c. Reverend Father, I present these men unto thee, to be admitted unto the or­der of Priesthood: So are the present Ministers of England.

5. The Priests of Rome must be ordained to their office according [Page 22] to their Pontifical, devised by themselves: the Priests of England ac­cording to their Book of ordering Priests and Deacons (which is ta­ken out of the Popes Pontifical, as is evident to any that shall com­pare the one with the other, and as hath been long since confest by some of themselves, in an Admonition to the Parliament in Queen Elizabeths dayes, in their second Treatise.)

6. The Popish Priests must kneel down upon their knees at the feet of the Lord-Bishop that ordains them, and he must say to them, blasphemously enough, Receive ye the Holy Ghost; Whose sins ye remit, or forgive, they are remitted; whose sins ye retain, they are retained: which exactly accords with the fashion of ordaining the Priests of England.

7. The Popish Priests are not ordained in and before the Congre­gation, to whom they are to be Priests, but in some Metropolitan, Cathedral City, several miles from the place: So are the Priests of England.

8. The Popish Priests take the care of souls, though not elected by them, from the presentation of a Patron, by the institution and in­duction of a Lord-Bishop: and do not the present Ministers of Eng­land the same?

9. The Popish Priests wait not the Churches Call to the Ministry, but make suit to some Prelate to be ordained Priests, giving mony for their letters of Ordination: So do the present Ministers of England.

10. The Popish Priests are ordained to their Office, though they have no Flock to attend upon: So are the Priests of England.

11. The Popish Priests must swear Canonical Obedience to their Ordinary: So do the present Ministers of England.

12. The Popish Priests may at their pleasure, without the con­sent of the People, resign and give over their Benefices, and be­take themselves to some other of greater value: A symmetrie with them herein is visible, by the frequent practise of the Ministers of England.

13. The Popish Priests, though ordained to preach, must have spe­cial Licence from the Prelates so to do: So must the Priests of Eng­land.

14. The Popish Priests are subject to be silenced, suspended, de­prived and degraded by the Prelates; as are the present Ministers of England.

[Page 23]15. The Popish Priests are not of like and equal Power, Degree, and Authority amongst themselves, but are some of them inferior to others herein; as Parsons to Archdeacons, Archdeacons to Lord Bishops, Lord-Bishops to Archbishops: So the Priests of England.

16. The Popish Priests must be distinguished from other People by their Vestments, as Surplice, Tippet, &c. So must the Priests of England.

17. The Popish Priests are tyed to a Book of stinted Prayers, and a prescript Order, devised by man, for their Worship and Ministra­tion: So are the Ministers of England, and that to such an one as is taken out of the Popes Portuis, as hath been proved by divers: That the Common-Prayer-Book in Edward the 6ths time was so, you have his, with his Councils Testimony for it; thus they write, As for the Service in the English Tongue, it hath manifest Reasons for it, and yet per­chance it seemeth to you a New Service, and indeed is no other but the Old, the same words in English which were in Latine— If the Service of the Church were good in Latine, it is good in English. How little diffe­rent the Common-Prayer-Book now in use is thereunto, they that wil take pains to compare the one with the other, may be satisfied.

To these parallel particulars might be added sundry more, wherein there is an exact symmetry betwixt the Popish Priests, and the pre­sent Ministers of England but— Ex ungue Leonem.

The sum of what we have been offering in this matter, is this.

First, Those Ministers that in their Names, Offices, admission in­to their Offices, are not to be found in the Scripture, are not Mini­sters of Christ, act not by vertue of an Authority, Office, Power, Calling, received from him.

Secondly, Those Minsters that in their Names, Office, admission into their Office, are at a perfect agreement with the Ministers of An­tichrist (such are the Popish Priests acknowledged to be by those with whom we have to do) are not the Ministers of Christ, have not re­ceived any Power, Office or Calling from him to act in the holy things of God: But such (as hath been abundantly demonstrated) are the present Ministers of England; Therefore these have received no Pow­er, Office or Calling from Christ, and so are Antichristian.

Secondly, Those that receive their Power, Office and Calling from a Lord-Bishop, and act in the holy things of God by vertue of that [Page 24] Power, Office, or Calling, act in the holy things of God by vertue of an Antichristian Power, Office and Calling: But the present Mini­sters of England receive their Power, Office and Calling from a Lord-Bishop, and act in the Holy Things of God by vertue of that Power, Office and Calling. Therefore.

The consequence of the major (or first Proposition) is manifest, the Office of Lord-Bishops is Antichristian, therefore those that act by vertue of a Power, Office or Calling received from them, act by vertue of an Antichristian Power, Office or Calling.

That the Office of Lord-Bishops is Antichristian, one would won­der should be denied in such a day as this, after so full a demonstra­tion thereof by many Witnesses of Christ, who have wrote so cleer­ly in this matter, as if they carried the Sun beams in their right hand, especially that it should be denied by persons of Presbyterian and Congregational Principles (if indeed any of them do deny it.) To pro­secute this matter to the uttermost is not our present intendment, the intelligent Reader knows where to find it done already to our hand; and if after all that hath been said, any through self-love, or fear of persecution, will herein be ignorant, we might say, Let them be ig­norant. But we shall propose briefly a word or two in this matter.

1. That Office that is not to be found in the Scriptures of the in­stitution of Christ, but is contrary to express precepts and commands of his, is Antichristian: But the Office of Lord-Bishops is not to be found in the Scriptures, is contrary to express Precepts. There­fore.

1. That the Office of Lord Bishops is not to be found in the Scrip­ture of the institution of Christ: He gave indeed Apostles, Prophets, Pastors and Teachers, Ephes. 4. 11. of Pastors and Teachers we reade, Rom. 12. 7, 8. Eph. 4. 8. Bishops also, and Deacons, without the inter­position of any other order, we find, 1 Tim. 3. 12. Deacons we have ap­pointed, Acts 7. Elders, Acts 14. 23. those who are Bishops we find called Presbyters, Tit. 1. 5, 7. and those who are Presbyters, we find termed Bishops, Acts 20. 28. (Gr. [...], Bishops) but where the Office of Lord-Bishops was instituted by Christ, we are yet to seek: indeed some appearances of a spirit striving to ascend into this Chair of wickedness, was seen in Diotrephes, and others in the Apostles time, but these were the Antichrists that were then gone abroad into the [Page 25] world. The Scripture before mentioned, Ephes. 4. 11. speaks as fully to the Officers and Offices instituted by Christ, as any we meet with: Fail they in their deduction of their Office from hence, and they will undoubtedly prove succesless in their attempts. Let us then fix here a little; mention we find here of Apostles, Prophets, Pastors and Teachers, none at all either here, or elsewhere, of Lord-Bishops. But perhaps their Office, though they are called by another name, is comprized in some one or other of these, let that then be considered. Are they Prophets? that (in the sence of the Spirit in this place) they will not pretend to. Are they Pastors or Teachers? this is too great a debasement of their Lordships, their Parochial Priests over whom they preside, are supposed to be Officers in that degree. What then are they? Apostles! Their Successors they do indeed boast themselves to be, and are so accounted by their Abbettors (and so doth the Pope himself) but how prove they their Succession from them? if they derive it through the Papacy, who sees not the in­validity thereof? How lubricous and uncertain is that their Succes­sion? how do they therein proclaim their shame, and yield the mat­ter in controversie? what clearer Argument that they are Antichri­stian, if the Pope be the Antichristian Head over many Countries, as is by the generality of Protestants believed, and will not by them­selves be gainsayed? But in what sence do they pretend to be the Apostles Successors? do they succeed them as Christians? that is not the thing in question, they stand or fall, in respect thereof to their own Master; herein we have no controversie with them, as not willing to judge any thing before the time. Do they succeed them in respect of their Office? let them prove that, and take the Cause. The Apostles were first immediatly Sent by Christ: Secondly, Extra­ordinary Officers, Commissionated to the preaching of the Gospel throughout the Nations of the world: Are their Lordships such? what can be imagined more frivolous or false? where find we any Apostles after the departure of those that were immediatly by Christ called to that Office? Did the Apostles ordain any as their Successors therein, in any of the Churches of Christ? Where reade we of their so doing? yea, are any qualified with Gifts as they, for the dis­charge of such an Office? or doth Christ indeed send forth Servants in any imployment, and not furnish them with Gifts suitable thereun­to? Credat Apelles!

What more dishonourable to the Lord Jesus can be asserted? it re­mains then, that they being neither Prophets, nor Apostles, nor Pa­stors, nor Teachers, that they are not to be found in the Scripture of the institution of Christ. Nor are they dream'd of in the world for several hundreds of years after Christ. Clemens in his Epistle to the Church of Corinth takes notice of no other besides [...] & [...], Bishops and Deacons, which Bishops he calls [...], Presbyters or Elders: Yea, Lombard himself confesses, Hos solum Ministrorum duos ordines, Ecclesiam primitivam habuisse, & de his Solis, prae­ceptum Apostoli nos habere: Lomb. l. 4. Sen. D. 24. li. 3. ext. The Primitive Church, he tells you, had no other Order of Ministers, than Bishops (or Presbyters) and Deacons; nor did the Apostles give commandment concerning any other. That their rise and oc­casion was from the aims and designs of men, to accommodate Eccle­siastical or Church-affairs to the state and condition of the Civil Go­vernment, is ingenuously confest by one that was looked upon to be as great an Admirer of, and as able a Champion for, Diocesan and Metropolitical Prelates, as any one of late dayes; 'tis Dr. Hamond we mind, who in his Dissertations about Episcopacy, Sect. 3. hath these words, His sic positis, illud statim sequitur ut (in Imperli cognitione) in Provinciâ qualibet, cum plures urbes sint, una tamen primaria, et prin­cipalis consenda erat, [...] Ideo dicta cui itidem inferiores reliquae Civitates subjiciebantur, ut Civitatibus Regiones, sic et inter Ecclesias, et Cathedras Episcopales, unam semper primariam, & Metropoliticam fuisse: So far is the Office of Lord-Bishops from being of the Institution of Christ, that their Primacy and Supremacy was the result of the designs and contrivements of men to accommodate the state and frame of the Church, to the state and condition of the Government of the Nations.

2. That the Office of Lord Bishops is contrary to express Precepts of Christ in the Scripture; the truth of which, he that runs may reade in the ensuing Scriptures, Mat. 20. 25. Mark 10. 42. Luke 22. 25. 1 Pet. 5. 3. the English of, Vos autem non sic, but ye shall not do so; Neque ut Dominantes Cleris, not lording it over God's Clergy or He­ritage, an ordinary Reader may easily conclude to be inconsistent with their fordly dignities. Not to multiply Arguments in a matter that o­thers have so largely debated. 2. That Office that is derived from, and is only to be found in the Papacy, is surely Antichristian (if the Pope be the head of Antichrist, this must not be denied) But the Office of [Page 27] Lord Bishops is derived from, is onely to be found in, the Papacy. Which of the reformed Churches that have separated from the Papa­cy have retained it? Did the Woman in her flight into the Wilderness carry it along with her? What more absurd, then to run to the perse­cuting Whore and Beast for an Office of Ministry? and what more evident demonstration of its being an Antichristian office, than its entertainment only by that false Antichristian Church, and its utter rejection and detestation by the true Spouse and Witnesses of Christ in all Ages? What is delivered over to us in this matter by some of them, we shall briefly affix hereunto. Hierome in his Epistle to Eva­grius, and in his Commentary upon the Epistle of Titus, professes, That it is more by Custom than by any Institution of the Lord, that Bi­shops are become greater than the Elders or Ministers. Har. of Conf. sect. 2. Tit. 11. So from him do the Churches of Helvetia proclaim, whence they infer (and that truly according to Act. 4. 9.) That no man by any right can forbid, but that we should return to the old Appointment of God, and rather receive that, than the Custom devised by men. Wickliff in his answer to King Richard the 2d, citing Mat. 20. 25. 1 Pet. 5. 3. sayes, Lordship and Dominion is plainly forbidden to the Apostles, and darest thou then usurp the same? if thou wilt be a Lord, thou shalt lose thy Apostleship, &c. The University of Geneva say, [ Theses Genev. 71.] These Functions following, we hold to be altogether false, and destitute of all true foundation, viz. the Primacy of the Bishop of Rome over all Churches; the Cardinalship, Patriarchship, Archiepiscopalship, and briefly the whole Episcopal degree of Lord Bishops over their fellow Elders. Marlorat in his Exposition on the Revelation, chap. 17. 3. says, That Arch-Bi­shops, Deans, &c. are in office under Antichrist; yea, upon chap. 9. that they are the tails of Antichrist. Beza saith, They could not be brought into the Church, until they had driven him out who is the onely Master, Christ; and, there is neither holy Scripture, nor Council, nor Ancient Doctors which ever did know such Monsters, Beza's Confes. Art. 7. c. 14. The Noble Ancient Old-Castle, Lord Cobham, saith, That the whole Episcopal degree of Lord Bishops over their Fellow-Elders, is altogether false, and destitute of all true foundation—yea, that all other Functions and Offices besides Priests and Deacons are unlawful, as being Sects devi­sed by men destitute of all true Foundation. To these we might add Ho­nest Bale upon the Revelation, viz. chap. 17. where he saith, Can­terbury and York are the Beastly Antichrist's Metropolitans, and Pri­mates, [Page 28] and upon chap. 13. that Arch-Bishop, Diocesan, Arch-Deacon, Dean, Prebend, Doctor, Parson, Vicar, &c. are very names of Blasphe­my: For Offices they are not appointed by the Holy Ghost, nor yet mentioned in the Scripture. Cartwright saies of them, That their functions are not in the Word of God, but of the Earth, new devised Ministries, and such as can do no good: that their Office is the neek of the Popish Hierarchie, come out of the bottomless Pit of Hell. Fenner proclaims them, to be no natural Members of the Body of Christ's Church, as being of humane addition, not born with her, nor grown up with her from the Cradle. The French and Belgick Confession sayes, That they pass not a Rush for them. The Church of Geneva, That the Hierarchie is devilish Confusion, stab­lished (as it were) in despight of God, and to the mocking and reproach of all Christian Religion. The Seekers of Reformation in Queen Eliza­beths time speak fully hereunto, [2 Adm. to Parl.] We have an Anti­christian and Popish ordering of Priests, strange from the Word of God, ne­ver heard of in the Primative Church, taken out of the Popes shop, to the destruction of Gods Kingdome—The names and offices of Arch-Bishops, Arch-Deacons, Lord-Bishops, &c. are, together with their Government, drawn out of the Popes shop, Antichristian, Devilish, and contrary to the Scriptures: Parsons, Vicars, Parish-Priests, are birds of the same feather, to whom might be added many others.

Object. One stone of offence must be removed out of our way ere we pass on further, it is this: Though Lord Bishops are Antichristian, yet it doth not follow, that the Office and Ministry derived from them is so: For they are also Presbyters, and ordain as Presbyters.

Answ. Give me leave to say, That were not men resolved to say any thing that they might be thought to have somewhat to say, we had not heard of this Objection. For, 1. That they act in the capacity of Presbyters in the matter of Ordination, is false (1.) Contrary to their own avowed principles; their Lordships think it too great a de­basement, to be degraded from their Lordly Dignity, to so mean an Office. (2.) Contrary to the known Law of the Land, by which they receive power to act therein, in which they are known and owned onely in the capacity of Lord-Bishops. (3.) Contrary to their late practice, whereby they have sufficiently declared the nullity of a Mi­nisterial Office, received from the hands of a Presbyterie, in thrust­ing out of doors several hundreds of Ministers so ordained. Strange! that it should be pleaded, they act as Presbyters in the matter of Or­dination, [Page 29] and yet they themselves judge a Presbyterian-Ordination invalid. But 2. What if this should be granted? it would avail nothing, except it can be proved, that they are and act as Presbyters of the Institution of Christ, which (these being only in a particular institued Church of Christ) will never be to the worlds end. Thus far of the third Argument.

A fourth Argument, proving the unlawfulness of hearing the present Mi­nisters of England. A twofold denial of the Offices of Christ, asserted. That the present Ministers deny his Kingly and Prophetical Office, pro­ved from their Non-conformity to the Orders and Ordinances appointed by Christ for his House. Several Institutions of Christ remarked: Their Non-Conformity thereunto, manifested. An Objection answer­ed.

Argument 4.

THose that oppugn or deny any of the Offices of Jesus Christ, are not to be heard, but separated from: but the present Mi­nisters of England oppugn and deny some of the Offices of Jesus Christ: Therefore.

Before we come to clear the several parts of this Argument, we shall crave liberty breifly to premise,

First, That there is a twofold denying or oppugning of the Offices of Christ.

1. Verbal and Professional. Such was, and is that of the Jews; the Papists are not guilty hereof; in words they own, preach up, plead for all the Offices of Christ as much as any: So do also the present Ministers of England: This is not then the denial of the Offices of Christ we implede them as guilty of.

2. Real and actual, when persons do that which enwraps in the bowels of it, an impugning and denial of the Offices of Christ. This the Romish Synagogue are eminently guilty of: So are the present Mi­nisters of England, as shall (we doubt not) be clearly demonstrated in its proper place.

Secondly, That a Verbal Professional acknowledgement of the Of­fices of Christ is nothing, when contradicted in practice: This the Apostle avowedly asserts, in respect of the knowledge of God, Tit. 1. 16. They profess they know God, but in works they deny him: And [Page 30] may congruously enough be applied to the matter in hand. This, as applied to the Combination and Synagogue of Rome, some of them­selves have long since acknowledged, Whilst they profess Christ to be King, and submit not to the Laws he hath prescribed in his Word, they make him an Idol, and put a Scepter of reed in his hand: So some of their own.

But I interrogate; What if a man should with the greatest earnest­ness profess, and in the height of a confident Spirit aver, That he were Born again of God, Washed, Sanctified in the Blood of Christ, and by the Spirit of the Lord, that he did receive and own Christ as his King and Lawgiver, when I see this man at the same time walking in a way of Rebellion against Christ, in open contempt and defiance of his Laws and Government, subjecting to the Yoak of other Lords and Lawgivers; Shall his Plea be admitted? surely no!

Tis long since decided by Christ, That False-Prophets are to be de­scried, Not by their words (they may speak like Angels, cry Hail Ma­ster, kiss him, yet be False Prophets, yea Judasses to him) but by their fruits: Let them profess a thousand times over, That they own all the Offices of Christ, if they are in the mean while found in the practise of those things that are inconsistent with the truth of such a Profession, they are really Deniers and Opposers of the Offices of Christ. This is that then we affirm in this matter. 1. That those that do really oppose any of the Offices of Christ, are not to be heard, but sepa­rated from: This carrying a brightness along with it, that is sufficient to convince all, except such, whose eyes the god of this world hath blinded; that its original is from God, we shall take for granted will not be denied by a Professing Enlightened People, though otherwise it were easie to multiply Arguments for its demonstration. 1. To oppose Christ in any of his Offices, bespeaks such as are guilty there­of to be Antichrists, 1 John 2. 22. and 4. 2, 3. 2 John 7. (of the same mind with us herein is learned Beza upon the forecited Scrip­tures) and none will surely be so inconsiderate (not to say worse) as to assert, It's lawful to attend upon the Ministry of Antichrist. 2. To hear such, is to strengthen and encourage them in that their denial of, and opposition unto, the Offices of Christ; and thereby be­come partakers with them in their sin: The thought of which, can­not but be grievous to the poor Lambs of Christ. But this will not be denied.

'Tis the second thing may sound harsh in the ears of some (as did some Sayings of Christ, but if Truth, where God shall give the seeing eye and hearing eare, 'twill be received) viz.

2. That the present Ministers of England do oppose and deny some of the Offices of Christ, viz. His Kingly and Prophetical Office, which we come now to the proof of.

Argument. 1.

Those that hearken not to the Revelation Christ hath made, and as Supream Lord and Law-giver, hath enjoyned to be observed touch­ing the Orders and Ordinances of his House, deny the Prophetical and Kingly Office of Christ, Deut. 18. 18. Acts 3. 22. Isa. 9. 6. But the present Ministers of England hearken and conform not to the Re­velation Christ hath made touching the Orders and Ordinances of his House: Therefore.

Tis the minor (or second Proposition) that in the thoughts of some is capable of a denial, but the verity thereof shines forth as the Sun in its brightness, in the review of the Orders and Ordinances of the House of Christ appointed by himself; and the present frame and deportment of the Ministers of England with respect thereunto: Which of them have they not made void by their Traditions? This is that which Christ hath said, (1.) That all power for the Calling, Insti­tution, Order and Government of his Church, is invested solely in him, as the alone Lord, Sovereign-Ruler, and Head thereof, Mat. 28. 19. 1 Tim. 6. 14, 15. John 3. 35. Acts 3. 22. and 5. 31. Tis upon this foot of account that Christ chargeth his Disciples, not to be called of men Rabbi, nor to call any Father (viz. not to impose their Au­thority upon any, or suffer themselves to be imposed upon by any in the matters of their God) Mat. 23. 8, 9, 10. because one is their Master and Lord (viz. Christ) Hence also the Apostles lay the weight of their Exhortations upon the Commandment of Christ, 1 Cor. 11. 23. and 14. 37. proclaim all to be accursed that preach any other Go­spel, Gal. 1. 8. (yea though Angels from Heaven, should they live and speak as such) charge those to whom they write, Not to receive any in­to their houses that bring any other Doctrine (much more not to receive them as their Teachers) 2 John 10. yea, the Spirit of the Lord in the close of the last Revelation of his Will, it pleased this great King and Lawgiver, in such a way to give forth; testifies, That if any man shall adde unto these things, the Lord shall adde unto him the Plagues that are [Page 32] written in his Book, Rev. 22. 18. Do the present Ministers of Eng­land conform unto this great Institution? in words indeed they do so: But what meaneth the bleating of the sheep, and lowing of the Oxen in our ears? Do they not own other Lords, Heads and Governors, that have a Law-making power, and would enforce the consciences of the Free-born Subjects of Christ over his Churches, besides him? What doth this less than evidently proclaim their disobedience and rebellion (which is as the sin of Witchcraft) against the KING of Kings, and their rejection of his Scepter and Soveraign Authority over them! But of this more hereafter.

2. This great Prophet and King hath also revealed and proclaim­ed, That 'tis his Will, that those whom he hath called by his Word, should separate from the world, walk together in particular Societies and Churches, having given up themselves to the Lord and one another according to the Will of God, for their mutual Edification and comfort in the Lord. The truth of this Soveraign Institution of Christ, he that runs may reade in the Scriptures hereunto annexed, 1 Cor. 1. 2. and 5. 12. 2 Cor. 6. 17. Rev. 18. 4. John 15. 19. and 17. 6. Acts 2. 40. and 19. 9. Phil. 1. 5. Act. 2. 41. and 17. 4. 2 Cor. 8. 5. with many more. In the proof of this matter we might be copious, but that we study brevity: The diligent Reader knows where to find this theam, at large treated of by learned Ainsworth, Bartlet, Cotten, Rogers, &c. How do the Ministers of England acquit themselves, in respect of this Solemn Appointment of the Lord? alas! who sees not that they are in their practice at open defiance herewith, have it in derision and contempt, making no difference betwixt the Holy and Prophane, admitting per­sons led captive by the Devil at his will, that openly blaspheme the Spi­rit of the Lord, and deride its effectual opperation in the consciences of men, into their Society? Are any too vile (except such as truly fear God, and desire to press after Holiness) to be admitted by them into their Communion? Is not their Church-State (so unlike is it to the Institution of Christ) a very Babel, a Den of Dragons, and Hold of Unclean-Beasts?

3. That he hath entrusted them, so called and united together, with Power, and given them Rules for the due and right exerting thereof, for the carring on the Worship of his House, to chuse Officers over them to act in the Holy Things of God for and to them (of which more shall be spoken in its proper place) to admit Members, excommu­nicate [Page 33] Offenders, &c. all which we find shining forth in brightness in the ensuing Scriptures, Act. 1. 23. and 6. 3, 5. and 14. 23. 2 Cor. 8. 19. Mat. 18. 17. 1 Cor. 5. 4. Do the present Ministers of Eng­land conform unto this Institution of Christ? nothing less; is there any thing like this in the whole oeconomie invented and practised by them? do they not to the utmost of their power, labour to break this Bond of Christ asunder, cast away this Cord from them, by stirring up the Magistrate to persecute by Fines, Imprisonments, Banish­ment, &c. the precious People of the Lord, that desire to be found in the practice of this Law of Christ, branding them with the odious names of Phanaticks, Sectaries, Schismaticks, &c.

4. That the Officers of his appointment are only such as these, Pastors, Teachers, Elders, Deacons, Widdows or Helpers: Who as they are in one particular Congregation, so they have not any Lord­ship or lordly Authority over each other, being all Brethren, Ephes. 4. 11. Rom. 12. 7. and 16. 1. 1 Cor. 12. 28. Phil. 1. 1. 1 Pet. 5. 1, 2, 3. Acts 6. 5. and 15. 2. and 20. 17. and 28. 21, 28. 1 Tim. 3 chap. and 5. 9, 10, 17. This Law of Christ so clearly revealed in the Scripture, they are so far from subjecting to, that they have nei­ther the name nor thing required by him therein. Set up other Of­ficers and Offices, as if in open contempt and defiance of his Autho­rity; of which it may righteously be said, He did at no time command them, neither did it ever enter into his heart, so to do.

5. That these Officers be chosen by the common Suffrage of the Church of Christ, and solemnly set apart by Fasting and Prayer, this is evidently comprized in the ensuing Scriptures, Acts 1. 15. and 6. 1, 2, 3, 5. and 14. 23. and 1. 23, 26. and 9. 26, 27. In conformity whereunto, we find the Saints for many centuries of years after Christ, in the peaceable possession of this their Priviledge and Right.

Clemens in his Epistle to the Church of Corinth, p. 57. saith, Our Apostles also knew by our Lord Jesus Christ, that contention will be about the name of Episcopal-Charge: Therefore for this reason, having re­ceived a full predetermination, they constituted such as were fore nominated, and in their instructive distribution delivered; that if they were negligent, other aproved men should receive their ministration, being ordained by them, or in the mean time by other choice men, all the Church consenting there­unto. Yea afterwards,

Let some one among you, Ingenious, Merciful, filled with Love, speak, if [Page 34] through me Faction, and Contention, Schisms, I will depart: Of which if you are willing, I return and will do the things appointed by the Multi­tude. Wherein he fully asserts the Priviledge of the Church or Peo­ple of Christ we are pleading for. And afterwards, during the raign of Antichrist, Christ hath not left himself without a Witness, nor his People without Champions to plead their Right in this matter. To instance but in a few: That lively Witness of Christ Martin Luther loudly proclaims, that the voice of the People ought not to be severed from the chusing of Ecclesiastical persons: And long before him, Cyprian (who lived about two hundred sixty years after Christ) sayes, Plebs obse­quens, &c. The People that obey the commands of God, and fear him, ought to separate themselves from a wicked Pastor, seeing the People them­selves chiefly, have either power to choose Pastors that are worthy, or to re­fuse those that be unworthy, Cypr. Epist. 68. and tells us plainly, That this is bottom'd upon the Authority of God: That that is a just and law­ful Ordination which is tryed by the judgment and voice of all, viz. that fear and obey God. Of the same mind long after, was Francis Lam­bard, the companion of Luther in Germany, in the Preface of his Book, entituled, The Sum of Christianity, who sayes, Verily every Parish ought to have his proper Bishop, the which should be chosen by the People, and confirmed by the Commonalty of every Parish, who if they swerve one jot or tittle from the Doctrine of the Gospel of the Kingdom, ought to be deposed by the People; and others more fit, to be elected by them. And in chap. 5. of the said Book, he professes, That 'tis the most grievous crime, and by no means to be suffered, that many children of perdition do deprive the People of God of their just Right and Title, viz. to chuse them a Pastor. Peter Martyr in his common places, refers the chusing and election of Ministers to the People as their undoubted Right: To whom we may joyn Mr. Bullinger, who sayes, That the Apostles exercised not Tyranny in the Church, in ordaining Ministers without the consent of the People. Bullin. Decad. 5. Serm. 4. Tit. 1. 1 Tim. 5. Gualter also upon Acts 1. 25. saith, That those that profess the Gospel handle the matter as evil as the Monks and Popish Bishops, in that they restore not again to the Church the liberty of chusing Ministers, which by Tyranny they took from them. Of the same mind is Zanchio, Calvin, Beza, Danaeus, Tilenus, Tyndall (the Martyr) with many others, as Mr. Fox, Cartwright, Mr. Jacob, &c. We cannot omit the famous Case of the United Brethren of Bohemia, who concluding the whole Papacy to be purely Antichri­stian, [Page 35] could not allow of the Ordination of their Ministers by any in communion with it, and yet being perswaded of a necessity of con­tinuing that Ordinance in a way of succession, send some to the Greek and Armenian Churches; who returning with dissatisfaction, they thereupon commit themselves and their cause to God, and chuse Elders from amongst themselves, and by Fasting and Prayer solemnly set them apart to the work of the Preaching of the Gospel. To these many more might be added. The practice pleaded for (as is evident) is as antient as the dayes of the Apostles, and the first election of or­dinary New-Testament Officers, continued in the Church till after the dayes of Constantine, when Pride and Tyranny soon brought all things into horrible confusion, upon the pretext of Decency and Or­der; yet in the worst of times have the Witnesses of Christ born their Testimony hereunto. What say our Reverend Fathers and Ministers of the Church of England to these things? have they not an equal respect to this Appointment of Christ, as to those before instanc'd in? is there any thing like it almost, practised by them, in this great con­cern, of separating persons for the preaching of the Gospel of Christ? is not the liberty of the Brethren and Churches of Christ, as much as lies in them, wholly disannulled, and broken by them? have they any such call to the Ministry? do they at all value or esteem of it? are they in the practice of the Primitive Church, or of the Reformed Churches of this day, in this matter? is not the print of the feet of the old Strumpet of Rome, the bloudy Persecutor of the Saints, the cunning Devisor of a new self-invented and whorish Worship, to be soley found in the paths, they are in this matter traversing? and can such be accounted as the subjects of the Kingdom of Christ, and the real owners of his Authority and Power? To these, many other In­stitutions of Christ may be added, which they subject not to. What, should I mention

6. That Royal Command of our Soveraign King and Lawgiver, (which the profound, self-philosophically wise, but indeed foolish and unlearned Doctors of this day, wrest, to the countenancing of the disorders and confusion of Antichrist (darkness so gross that it may be felt) that all things be done decently and in order, 1 Cor. 14. 40. viz. that the Saints may prophesie one by one, and ought to admonish, exhort, and build up one another in their most holy Faith. Rom. 8. 26. & 12. 6. 1 Cor. 4. 17. & 5. 4. & 11. 23. Ephes. 4. 7, 11, 12. 1 Tim. 2. 1. [Page 36] & 3. 15. Jude 20. 1 Cor. 12. 7, 11. Mat. 25. 24. 1 Pet. 4. 10, 11. 1 Cor. 12. 15. & 14. 12, 24. Ephes. 4. 3, 7, 15, 16. Act. 2. 42. Rom. 15. 14. Eph. 5. 19. Col. 3. 16. 1 Thess. 5. 14. 2 Thess. 3. 15. Heb. 3. 13. to which might be added the frequent examples of the Saints, in the Old and New-Testament, 2 Chron. 17. 7, 8, 9. Job 2. 11. Mal. 3. 16. Luke 4. 16. Act. 13. 15. 1 Cor. 14. 24 to 34. and the practice of the Primitive Church, as witness Origen (in his Epist. to Celsum.) Tertullian (in his Apology) Justin Martyr (in his Apology) and many others. Yea,

7. What, should I mention that grand Institution of this Sove­raign Lord and Lawgiver, that nothing be offered up to the Father, but what is of his own prescription (Divine and Spiritual, without affectation of Legal shadows, ( Joh. 4. 24.) of worldly pomp, or carnal excellency, 2 Cor. 1. 12. & 2. 17. 1 Cor. 2. 12. & 6. 13.) 1 Cor. 12. 28. Isa. 33. 22. Jam. 4. 12. Mat. 15. 6, 9. Heb. 8. 5. 1 King. 13. 33. & 12. 33. Jer. 7. 31. Numb. 15. 39. Deut. 12. 1, 4, 31. It's evident the present Ministers of England conform not to the Orders and Ordi­nances, Christ, as the great Prophet and Lawgiver to his People, hath appointed them to walk by; and therefore really disown the Kingly and Prophetical Office of Christ.

But perhaps to these things, some may say; These are but small mat­ters, good men differ amongst themselves herein.

To which we answer,

1. That they are part of the Instituted Worship of God; the Or­ders he hath left his Children to conform to, hath already been pro­ved: to say, that any part of the instituted Worship of Christ, is a small matter, is no small derogation to the Wisdom of the Lawgiver that gave it forth.

2. What if it should appear, that as small as these things seem to be, they are the great Grounds of the late Controversies of God, plea­ded with Fire and Sword in most of the Europaean Kingdoms? this may perhaps a little stay sober persons from so rash a conclusion, that these are small matters: A serious review of the late Contests of God in the Nations, with the consideration of the Grounds and Rise of them, will to persons of sobriety, sufficiently evince the truth of the Suggestion.

3. As small matters as these have been severely punished by the Lord: he is a jealous God, and stands upon Punctilio's (if I may so [Page 37] call them) in his Worship; hence is that expression, Ye cannot serve the Lord, for he is a jealous God, Josh. 24. 19. What should I men­tion the case of Ʋzziah, 2 Chr. 26. 16. of Corah, Dathan and Abi­ram, Numb. 16. of Uzzah, whose sin lay meerly in, whose judgment was singly upon this foot of account, his not seeking the Lord after the due order, 1 Chron. 15. 13. God commands that when the Ark was removed, it should be covered by the Priests, that no hand touch it, that it be carried upon mens shoulders, Numb. 4. 11, 15. which Order was violated, when they brought it from the house of Abina­dab, 'twas Uncovered, and upon a Cart, after the manner of the E­gyptians, 1 Sam. 8. 7. for which breach of Order Ʋzzah is struck dead.

4. As small matters as these, when once commanded by the Lord, are of that force, as not only to deface the wel-being, but to overturn the true-being of the Worship of God. Take one pregnant instance herein. The Lord commanded the Israelites by Moses, to bring their Sacrifices to the place that he should chuse, and offer them there; which in it self was but a circumstance of place; yet all the Sacrifices offered elsewhere, were a stink in the nostrils of God, and not accoun­ted by him as any Worship performed unto him.

5. But the Objection is altogether impertinent; we are not de­bating the greatness of the sin, but the truth of what is charged upon the present Ministers of England: what we have mentioned, are ei­ther the Appointments of Christ, or they are not; if they are, (as hath been proved) the present Ministers conform to them, or they do not; if they do not (as nothing more sure) they conform not to the Orders and Ordinances Christ hath left his People to walk by, (which is the thing in debate) and therefore really deny his Kingly and Propheti­cal Office.

As for what is added, that good men differ amongst themselves in this matter, it's of no more weight than what went before: for, 1. 'Tis not at all to the business in hand. 2. 'Tis possible good men may for a while do that which really enwraps in the bowels of it a denial of the Offices of Christ. We shall not deny but some of the Ministers of England may be so in the account of God. 3. That good men dif­fer, is an Argument of their Ignorance and Darkness, which though in some cases it excuses a tanto, yet not a toto; it may alter the de­gree, never the nature of the sin. 4. 'Tis false, that good men pres­sing [Page 38] after Reformation, and the restitution of the Worship of God according to the Primitive Pattern, do differ touching the substance of the things instanc'd in: Were but the pride and passion of mens spirits a little more allaied; and they disentangled more from their selfish interests, a greater harmony would appear amongst them in these matters. But 5ly, as was said, The particulars instanc'd in, are commanded by Christ, or they are not; if they are (as hath been pro­ved) doth it in the least discharge persons that conform not to them, from the charge they are impleded as guilty, viz. Non-conformity to the Laws of Christ; that good men differ in these matters ( i. e. some good men transgress the Laws of Christ, which is sure no part of their goodness, nor any warrant to justifie me, in the doing of what may strengthen their hands in such a Non-conformity)

A second Argument demonstrating, that the present Ministers of England deny the Prophetical and Kingly Office of Christ. That they own, sub­mit and subscribe to Orders and Ordinances that are not of Christ's re­vealing, proved by the induction of 14 Particulars. An Objection answered. That they own Laws and Institutions, contrary to the In­stitutions of Christ, proved, by the induction of 10 Particulars. A 3d Argument, proving their denial of the Offices of Christ, produced. That there is no other Head of the Church but Christ, proved. Ob­jections answered.

Argument 2.

Those who own, submit and subscribe to Orders and Ordinances which not only, are not of Christ's revealing, but contrary there­unto, do really deny, and oppose the Prophetical and Kingly Office of Christ. But the present Ministers of England do own, submit and subscribe to Orders and Ordinances, that are not only, not of Christ's revealing, but contrary thereunto: Therefore.

The major (or first Proposition) is beyond exception: If an own­ing, submitting and subscribing to Orders, and Ordinances, that are not onely, not of Christ's revealing, but contrary thereunto, be not a denial of his Kingly and Prophetical Office, I must profess, I know not what is. Suppose the Chief Magistrate or Magistrates of a Na­tion should give forth a Declaration of their will, touching this, or that other concern, were not persons Non-conformity thereunto (supposing it to be what lies within the verge of their Authority, and power to command, and may righteously be exacted of them, whose Conformity is thereunto required) a silent opposition of their Autho­rity, but should any presume to give forth Laws of their own, with­out the least stamp of Authority upon them, yea contrary unto the Statutes and Declarations of their Governours, would not all con­clude that these persons and their Abettors were guilty of Rebellion against their Rulers, and did really deny the lawfulness of their Au­thority? This is the present case, if men shall be found traversing paths, in the possession and practice of Orders and Constitutions that are forreign to the Edicts of Christ, yea contrary thereunto, shall we not as rationally conclude that these persons are really opposers of his Soveraign Authority and Government? doubtless so!

'Tis the minor (or second Proposition) that may be under suspition amongst some, viz. That the present Ministers of England (the very best of them) do own, submit and subscribe to Orders and Ordinances, that are not only, not of Christs revealing, but contrary thereunto: In which two things are incumbent upon us to prove.

1. That the present Ministers of England do own, submit and sub­scribe to Orders and Ordinances, that are not of Christ's revealing. This being a charge, as to matter of Fact, the production of a few Particulars, that lie near at hand, for its confirmation, will give it a speedy dispatch.

1. They own, submit and subscribe to the Orders and Offices, of Archbishops, Bishops, Deans, Arch-Deacons, Eccles. Canons Can. 7. with many others appertaining unto this Hierarchie, as Orders needful and necessary in the Church of Christ, and promise subjection and obedience unto them.

2. They own, and submit ( Can. 4.) to a Lyturgy, or Prescript form of Worship, devised by men, and imposed solely by their Au­thority, to which they tie themselves, neither diminishing, nor ad­ding [Page 40] any thing in the matter or form thereof.

3. They own, submit, & engage to conform to all the Orders, Rites and Ceremonies prescribed in the said Book of Common-Prayer, (Can. 36.) such as bowing at the Name of JESUS, using the Cross in Baptism, kneeling at the Lords Supper (which though we do not, some would say, smells very strong of the Popish Leven, and is but one peg beneath the adoration of their Breaden-god) wearing the Surplice, &c.

4. They own that the Office of a Deacon is the first step or degree to the Ministry (Can. 32. 36.) to which they are to submit and subscribe, before they are made Priests.

5. That no person be admitted to expound the Scripture, though judged worthy of the Cure of Souls (as they speak, Can. 49.) without License from the Bishop thereunto.

6. That there be some lawful Ministers, which are no Preachers, (Can. 49. 57.)

7. That these unpreaching Ministers (Can. 57.) may lawfully admi­nister the Ordinances of Baptisme and the Lord's Supper.

8. That persons refusing to have their Children Baptised, by such dumb Ministers, or receive the Communion from them, worthily deserve Excom­munication if they shall persist herein (Can. 57.)

9. That Confirmation by Diocesan Bishops, is an Ordinance of God. (Can. 60.)

10. That it appertains to the Office of Ministers to Marry. (Can. 62.)

11. That the Bishop of the Diocess may lawfully for a while, suspend a Minister from his Ministry, for refusing to Bury the Dead. Can. 68.

12. That 'tis not lawful for Ministers to preach or administer the Communion in private houses, except in times of necessity. Can. 71.

13. That no Minister may lawfully appoint or keep any solemn private Fasts, or be wittingly present at any of them, nor hold any meetings for Sermons, in market Towns or other places; which if he do, and persevere therein, he may lawfully be deposed from his Ministry. (Can. 72.)

14. That Ministers ought to be distinguished by their Vestments and Apparel, as Gowns, Hoods, Tippets, Square-Caps, and in their journeys, Cloaks with sleeves (called▪ Priests Cloaks. Can. 74.) with many more that might be added, to which the Ministers of England are to sub­scribe, and own as agreeable to the Word of God, before their ad­mission into the Ministry according to the 38th Canon Eccleasiastical. Are any of these Ordinances and Constitutions of the appointment of [Page 41] Christ? when, or where were they instituted by him? that these are posts set by the Lord's posts, and thresholds by his thresholds, (of which the Lord complains, Ezek. 43. 8.) who sees not? That the present Ministers of England do conform and subscribe hereunto, cannot be denied, and thence an owning subscribing and submitting to Orders and Constitutions that are not of Christs appointment, is evidently evinced.

Object. If it be said, That though these Canons, and Constitutions owned by the Ministers of England, be not [...], to be found in the Scrip­ture of the Institution of Christ in so many words, yet by consequence they may rationally be deduced from thence: As where it is commanded, That all things be done decently and in order, 1 Cor. 14. 40. which 'tis the duty of the Church to make Rules and Constitutions about, which when it hath done, it is the duty of every Son thereof, to own, or subject to, without questioning its Authority.

Ans. That there is any thing of moment in this Objection, though their Achilles in this matter, and that which they are upon every turn producing, is easily demonstrated. The whole of it being built upon as uncertain principles, yea upon as notoriously false sup­positions, as ever objection in so weighty a case was built upon.

1. 'Tis supposed, that Christ hath not determined in the Scrip­ture, how the Affairs of his House should be managed with decency and order, as well as commanded that they be so; which is, 1. No small derogation to the perfection of the Scriptures. 2. To the Wis­dom and Faithfulness of Christ, debasing of him herein, below Mo­ses, though the Scripture in this respect prefers him before him. 3. Diametrically opposite to the Scripture instanc'd in, which stands as a two-edged Sword to cut the throat of their cause, in its ap­proaches thereto for shelter: Of which take this brief account; The Apostle having in the beginning of the chapter, prest the Church of Corinth, to follow after Spiritual Gifts, but especially that they might prophecy; the liberty of the Saints therein being fully asserted, and several directions thereabout given, he condemns their disorderly practise, in respect of this important Duty and Priviledge, ver. 26. and gives direction touching its regular performance; and this he doth, first, generally, ver. 26. Let all things be done to edifying, which with a little alteration he re-presses, ver. 40. Let all things be done decently and in order. Secondly, Particularly, by telling them [Page 42] how they ought to manage this affair, in a way of Decency, Order and Edification; wherein several Rules are comprized, too long to be here insisted on, as in cases of speaking in an unknown Tongue, ver. 27, 28. of prophesying by two or three, ver. 29, 30. of the duties of Women with respect thereunto, ver. 34, 35. that from hence a power invested in the Church for the binding of the consciences of men, touching ceremonies in Worship, should be regularly deduced, is the first-born of improbabilities and absurdities. 1. Paul speaking by an infallible Spirit of Prophecy, advises the Church of Corinth, that all things be done decently and in order; therefore persons that have not, pretend not to such a Spirit, may of their own heads bind our consci­ences by Laws and Rules of their own in the service of God. 2. Paul doth not onely tell them, that all things ought to be done decently and in order, but discovers to them, wherein that Decency and Order lies; therefore the Church hath power to determine in this matter, are such Non-sequiturs as will not in hast be made good. But let this be granted, suppose that 'tis the priviledge and duty of the Church to make Laws and Constitutions, for the binding of the consciences of men in matters of Decency and Order; this Church herein is bounded by the Scripture, or it is not: If it be Learned Maccovius in loc. com. cap. 83. p. 851. sayes, Leges se­cundum quas judicare debent recto­res Ecclesiae sunt leges in verbo Dei praescriptae. The Laws he tells you by which the Governours of the Church are to judge, are such as are prescribed in the Word of GOD. bounded by the Scripture, then when it hath no prescription therein, for its com­mands, its not to be obeyed, and so we are where we were before, that Decency and Order is to be determined by the Scripture: If it be not bounded therby, then what­ever Ceremonies it introduceth, not directly contrary thereunto, they must be subjected to; which how fair an inlet it is to the whole Farago of Popish Inventions, who sees not? yet were this also yielded them, they were never a jot nearer the mark aimed at, except it can be proved, that supposing a power of introducing Ceremonies to be invested in the Church, thence a power for the institution of new Orders and Ordinances, the introducing of Heathenish, Jewish and superstitious practices in the Worship of God, may be evinced: And yet should all this be yeelded them, none of which will they be able to prove to [Page 43] the worlds end; how will they manifest, those Lordly Commands and Constitutions are the Constitutions of a truly-constituted Church of Christ, (a strong supposition hereof is the [...] of the present Objection:) and yet fail they in the making good their ground herein: who sees not that their plea hitherto impleaded, sinks of it self? what is it then they mean by the Church, whose [...], we are without disputing to subject to? is it the National Church of England? But where find they any National-Church of the instituti­on of Christ, in the Oeconomie of the Gospel? how prove they that the Church of England is so? Yet should this also be granted, where are the Constitutions and Laws of this Church, that we may pay the homage to them as is meet? when was it assembled [...] in the same place together, in its several Members freely to debate, (1 Cor. 11. 20. & 14. 23.) and Maccovius in loc. com. ap­pend. de Adi. p. 861. sayes, Conditio tertia quae requiritur in adiaphoris est haec, quod haec non debeant introduci in Ec­clesiam, nisi communi consensu Ecclesiae, Acts 15. Things in­different, he tells you, ought not to be introduced into the Church, but by the common consent thereof, according to Acts 15. determine what Laws and Constitutions were fit to be observed by them? If it be said, That this is not requisit, it is enough that it be assembled in its several Officers, or such as shall be chosen by their Offi­cers, whose Laws every Member is bound to be obedient to. We answer, But these Officers are the Church, or they are not; if they are not (as there is nothing more sure) I owe no sub­jection to their Laws or Constitutions, it being pleaded that 'tis the Church that hath only power in this mat­ter: if they are the Church, let them by one Scripture prove they are so; or, where the true Officers of a true Church are so called, and as Nonius saith out of Naevius to them, ‘— Dum vivebo fidelis ero.’ Yet except this also be yeelded them, there is nothing of moment in the Objection produced: It remaineth therefore that the present Mi­nisters of England, submit, own, and subscribe to, Laws and Consti­tutions, that are not, in any sense, of Christ's revealing, and therefore oppose the Kingly & Prophetical Office of Christ. But this is not all.

2dly. The present Ministers of England do own, submit, and sub­scribe to Laws, Constitutions and Ordinances, that are contrary to [Page 44] the Revelation of Christ, whence an opposition to the Kingly and Prophetical Office of Christ may rationally be concluded: This al­so by the induction of a few particular instances, will be evinced be­yond exception.

They own and acknowledge,

1. That there may be other Arch-Bishops, and Lord-Bishops in the Church of Christ, besides himself: which is contrary to 1 Pet. 5. 3. 1 Cor. 12. 5. Eph. 4. 5. Heb. 3. 1. Luk. 22. 25, 26.

2. That men may, and ought to be made Ministers, only by these Lord-Bishops: which is contrary to Heb. 5. 4. Joh. 10. 1, 7. & 13. 20. & 14. 6. Act. 14. 23. with 6. 3, 5.

3. That Prelates, their Chancellors and Officers, have power from Christ to cast out of the Church of God; contrary to Mat. 18. 16, 17. 1 Cor. 5. 4.

4. That the Office of Suffragans, Deans, Canons, Petty-Canons, Prebendaries, Queristers, Organists, Arch-deacons, Commissaries, Officials, Parsons, Vicars and Curats, are lawful and necessary to be had in the Church: evidently contrary to 1 Cor. 12. 18, 28. Rom. 12. 7. Eph. 4. 11. The Officers instituted by Christ are sufficient for the edification and perfecting of the Saints, till they all come unto a perfect man, unto the measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ, ver. 12, 13. in what sense the fore-mentioned, being not one of them of the institution of Christ, may be owned as lawful or necessary, without an high contempt of the Wisdom and Soveraignty of Christ, cannot by such dull persons, as my self, be conjectured. That any others see them any way useful to the Church of Christ, may be im­puted to such a sharp-sightedness as was that of Caius Caligula, to whom, when he enquired of Vitellius, whether he saw him not imbra­cing the Moon? 'twas answered,

5. That the Office of Deacons in the Church, is to be imployed in publick Praying, Administration of Baptism, and Preaching, if licen­sed by the Bishop thereunto. Contrary to Act. 6. 2. Eph. 4. 11.

6. That the Ordinance of Breaking-Bread, or the Sacrament of the Lords Supper, may be administred to one alone; as to a sick-man ready to dye: which is diametrically opposit to the nature and in­stitution of that Ordinance, 1 Cor. 10. 16. & 11. 33. Mat. 26. 26. Act. 2. 42. & 20. 7.

[Page 45]7. That a prescript form of words in Prayer, a ceremonious, pom­pous Worship, devised by Man, and abused to Idolatry, is according to the will of God, and may lawfully be used under the New-Testa­ment-dispensation; contrary to Mat. 15. 9. & 28. 20. John 4. 23. Deut. 12. 32. Jer. 51. 26. Rom. 8. 26. 1 Cor. 14. 15.

8. That wicked and ungodly persons, and their Seed, are lawfull Members of the Church, and if they consent not willingly to be so, they may be compell'd thereunto: contrary to Psal. 110. 3. Act. 2. 40, 41, 47. & 19. 9. 2 Cor. 6. 14, 17. & 9. 13.

9. That Women may administer the Sacrament of Baptism: con­trary to 1 Cor. 14. 34. 1 Tim. 2. 12. Matth. 28. 18, 19, 20. Ephes. 4. 11.

10. That the Lord's Supper is to be received kneeling, which is di­rectly opposit to the practice of Christ, in the first institution thereof, Mark 14. 18, 22, 23. and positive precept, as being what hath an appearance of evil in it (being a gesture used by the Papists in the adoration of their Breaden-god▪) 1 Thes. 5. 22. as also to the practise of the Churches of Christ for several hundred years after, to the time of the invention and introduction of the Popish Breaden-god. Not to mention its contrariety to the judgment and practise of most of the reformed Churches (if not all) at this day. What should I mention the Constitutions and Canons before pointed to, wherein 'tis for­bidden to any to preach, not licensed by the Bishops thereunto, to Marry, or eat Flesh at certain times, with many more of the like na­ture; all directly contrary to the Soveraign Edicts of Christ, and some of them evident characters of the last dayes Apostates, 1 Tim. 4. 3. from whom Saints are warned by the Lord, to turn aside, ver. 5. These we have produced, carry an undeniable evidence with them, that the present Ministers of England do own, submit and subscribe to Orders and Ordinances, that are contrary to the revelation of Christ, and therefore deny his Propheticall and Kingly Office. To all that hath hitherto been offered in this matter, we shall yet adde, as a fur­ther demonstration of the truth we are in the disquisition of,

Argument. 3.

Those that acknowledge another Head over the Church beside Christ, deny his Prophetical and Kingly Office: but the present Mi­sters of England do own and acknowledge another Head over the Church beside Christ: Therefore.

If the assertion of another King in England, that as the Head there­of, hath power of making and giving forth Laws to the free-born sub­jects therein, be a denyal of his Kingly Authority (as no doubt it is) the major (or first Proposition) cannot be denied. If Christ be the alone King of his Church (as such) he is its alone Head & Lawgiver: If he hath not by any Statute-Law established, any other Head­ship in and over his Church, to act in the holy things of God, from and under him, besides himself; who sees not the assertion of such an Headship, carries with it a contempt and denial of his Authori­ty? if there be any such Headship of the institution of Christ, let us know when and where it was instituted; whether such a Dominion and Soveraignty over the Subjects of his Kingdom, with respect to Worship, be granted by them to any of the Sons of men, absolutely, or conditionally: if the first, then must the Church (it seems) be governed by persons, casting off the Yoak of Christ, trampling upon his Royal Commands and Edicts: for so it's possible, it may fall out those that attain this Headship may do; as it's evident many Popes of Rome (the great Pretenders hereunto) have done. If the second, let one iota be produced from the Scripture, of the institution of such an Headship, with the conditions annexed thereunto, and we shall be so far from denying of it, that we shall chearfully pay, whatever respect, homage, or duty by the Laws of God or man, may righteously be expected from us. But this will not, we humbly conceive, in hast be performed; and that because,

1. The Scripture makes mention of no other Head, in, and over the Church, but Christ, Eph. 1. 22. & 5. 23, 29. 2 Cor. 11. 2.

2. If there be any other Head, he must be either within, or with­out the Church: The latter will not be affirmed; Christ had not sure so little respect unto his Flock, as to appoint Wolves and Lions to be their Governours and Guides in matters Ecclesiastical, nor can the former; for all in the Church, are Brethren, have no dominion or au­thority over each others Faith or Conscience, Luke 22. 25.

3. If any other be Head of the Church but Christ, then is the Church the Body of some others, besides Christ; but this is absurd, and false, not to say impious and blasphemous.

4. There was no Head of the Church in the Apostles dayes, but Christ.

5. If any be Head of the Church beside Christ, they either have [Page 47] their Headship, from an original right seated in themselves, or by donation from Christ. To assert the first, were no less than blasphemy; if the second, let them shew, when, and where, and how they came to be invested in such a right, and this controversie will be at an end.

6. He that is asserted in Scripture to be the Head of the Church, is said to govern, feed, and nourish it to Eternal life; is her Spouse and Husband, 2 Cor. 11. 2. In which sense, none of the sons of men, one or other, can be the Head thereof; and yet of any other Head, the Scripture is wholly silent. But of this matter thus far. It cannot by any sober person be denied, but an owning of a visible Head over the Church, having power of making and giving forth Laws, with re­spect to Worship, (such an Headship not being of the Institution of Christ) must needs be a denial of his Soveraign Authority and Power. That the present Ministers of England do own and submit to such an Headship, is undeniable: witness their Subscription, Oath, Conformity in Worship, to Laws and Edicts, made and given forth by the sons of men, as Heads and Governours of the Church; which are not onely forraign to, but (as hath been already demonstrated) lift up them­selves in opposition against the Royal Institutions of Christ. This being matter of fact, the Individuals charged herewith, must either acquit themselves, by a denial of what they are impleaded as guilty, or prove that what they do, is not criminous, but lawful to be done. The former being too notoriously known to admit of a denial: 'tis the latter must be insisted on: what is therein offered, is nextly to be considered. This is that some say,

Obj. 1. That they acknowledge another Head besides Christ, cannot in­deed be denied: but the Headship owned and acknowledged by them, is an Headship only under Christ. To which we answer:

Answ. 1. But this Headship is either of Christ's Appointment, or 'tis not; if it be, let it be shewn where it was instituted by him, and (as we said) this controversie is at an end: if it be not, the Assertion of such an Headship, even in subordination to Christ over his Chur­ches as such, hinders not but persons owning, submitting thereunto, are guilty of denying the Kingly Office of Christ. 2. The Headship pleaded for by the Church of Rome is no other. 3. 'Tis not so as is pretended, they own an Headship that is not in all things subordinate to Christ, having a Law-making and Law-giving Power touching Institutions of Worship, that never came into his heart, are flatly [Page 48] against his Appointments, as hath been proved. 4. One Head in subordination to another, doth as really make the Body a Monster, as two heads conjoyned. If it be said,

Obj. 2. That the Kings of Israel were the Heads, successively, of th [...] then Church; and therefore a visible Headship over the Churches of Christ, in the New-Testament is lawful.

We answer, 1. That betwixt the Oeconomy of the Law and Go­spel, there is a vast disproportion; many things were lawful in that day, which to do, or subject to now, were no less than a denial of Christ come in the flesh. 2. The Kings of Israel were Types of Christ. 3. That the Kings of Israel were Heads of the Church, is false. God was its alone Head and King. Hence their Historian saith, their Government was [...], and when they would needs choose a King God said, they rejected him, to whom even, as to their Political Head, a Sicle was paid yearly as a Tribute, called, The Sicle of the Sanctuary. True indeed, as they were a Political Body, they had visible Political Governours, who when they ceased, their Polity was at an end; but that these had any Headship over them, to make any Laws, introduce Constitutions of their own fra­ming in matters relating to Worship, will never be proved.

A fifth Argument against hearing of the present Ministers of England, advanced. That they have the characters of false Prophets upon them, manifested in 15 Particulars.

Argument 5.

THose who have the characters and properties of false Prophets and Priests upon them, are not to be heard, but separated from: But the present Ministers of England have the characters and proper­ties of false Prophets and Priests upon them. Therefore.

The major (or first Proposition) stands upon too firm a basis, to be quickly removed: nor will any attempt so to do, Christ having charged his to beware of such, Mat▪ 7. 15. to take heed that none deceive them, Mat. 24. 4, 5, 23, 24, 25. not to believe every spirit, but to try the spirits, because many false Prophets are gone out in the world, 1 Joh. 4. 1. not to receive such into their houses, 2 John 10, 11. to watch against them, Act. 20. 29, 30, 31. with much more that might be said (if needful) for its confirmation, is a sufficient evidence [Page 49] of the truth thereof. But herein the parties litigant are at a perfect agreement.

'Tis the minor Proposition that is iudged by some to come short of a sufficient substraction, viz. That the present Ministers of England have the properties and characters of false Prophets and Priests upon them. This we doubt not, by a serious observation of the characters are given of such in the Scriptures by the Holy-Ghost, will to any or­dinary understanding be made exceeding perspicuous and evident. The signal Characters of whom are,

1. That they run before they are sent, Jer. 23. 21. That a Mission from the Lord is of the essence of a lawful Ministry, that whoever wants such a Mission, is no Officer of Christ, but a false Prophet, and Minister of Antichrist, may hence rationally, at least by way of analo­gy, be deduced, is evident. Which also exactly accords with what is asserted by the Apostle, Rom. 10. 15. That the present Ministers of England want such a Mission, hath already been demonstrated, and we shall not actum agere. In a word, when it shall be proved, that they have received their Authority from Christ, either immediatly or me­diatly, from any rightly constituted Church of Christ, or by succession from the Church in the Wilderness, we shall acknowledge them to be the Ministers of Christ, and look upon our selves as obliged to pay them all the honour and duty, that as such, we are charged in Scrip­ture to do: But if they have nothing else to plead for themselves but what is usually instanced in by them, a succession from the Church of Rome: That Apostate Church having lost her Churchship, and there­with, all lawful power for the sending forth Officers into the Churches of Christ, we shall not fear to say, That they are such as are characte­rized here by the Prophet, persons that run before they are sent.

2. That they commit Adultery and walk in Lies, Jer. 23. 14. Which none as I ever yet met with, interpret literally of corporal Whoredome and Adultery, but mystically of spirituall Adultery, a departure from the pure Wayes and Institutions of the Lord in Worship, to the In an old Translation of the New-Testament, dedicated to Edward the 6th, the Author thereof in his Notes on Mat. 21. says, They which in their Ministry and Preaching do otherwise than God hath com­manded them, are no true Di­sciples of Christ. Devices & Inventions of men (a sin usually in the Scripture expressed, for the nature and greatness of it, under that notion, Jer. 3. 8. Ezek. 23. 37. Rev. 2. 22. which is also in [Page 50] Scripture called a Lye, Isa. 28. 15. Amos 2. 4. John 8. 44. The whole Worship of Antichrist being patch'd up with such dirty Inven­tions, is so called, 2 Thess. 2. 11.) That this character also doth rightly appertain unto the present Ministers of England, the best of whom, do in the sence of the Spirit, in the forecited Scripture, commit Adul­tery, and walk in lies, hath already been proved (and more hereun­to shall afterwards be spoken) ['twere well if upon some of them it had not a literal accomplishment] which of the Institutions of Christ have they not mixed with their inventions? From how many have they gone a whoring? Is not a great part of their Worship drops of the Whores Cup of Fornication, and shreds of the great lye of Anti­christ? who that hath soberly and unbiassedly considered of these things, but must acknowledge it?

3. That they strengthen the hands of evil-doers, that none doth return from his wickedness, Jer. 23. 14. That the present Ministers of Eng­land, really do so, is capable of an ocular demonstration: perhaps they do in their Sermons reprove sin, thunder out the Judgments of God against transgressors of his Law, as much as any; but alas! what is this, to condemn them in the state wherein they stand, without-re­pentance, to the pit of Hell in the Pulpit; and by and by to Saint them in the Chancel, and tell them there, without exception, that the Body of Christ was broken for them, his Blood shed for them? Oh how many millions of souls are and have been hereby hardened to their own undoing, and had their hands strengthened in wicked­ness? what should I mention their admission of the Children of all to Baptism, without exception, their owning them as Church-mem­bers, yea, die they never so wickedly, as Brethren, of whose joyful Resurrection they profess they have a sure and certain hope; thereby proclaiming their undoubted perswasion, that they are a People in co­venant with God? not to take notice of the terrible reflections, and uncharitable censures are publickly by them past upon men truly fear­ing God, because they cannot conform to them: How desperately are the hands of the wicked hereby strengthned? So that none indeed doth return from his wickedness: How rare a thing is it to hear of one soul that is brought over to God by all their preaching? so that visi­bly that Judgment of God seems to be upon them, ver. 32. therefore they shall not at all profit this People.

4. That they prophesie placentia, smooth things, according to the de­sires, [Page 51] tempers and lusts of men, to the pleasing of whom they addict them­selves, Jer. 6. 14. and 27. 9. Ezek. 13. 10, 11. and 22. 28. What visible lineaments of such a frame of spirit, are drawn upon the faces of that Generation of men, concerning whom we are now discour­sing? Have they not been of all others (I am now speaking of such as are look'd upon by Professors, as men of the greatest parts and ho­liness) the most ready to strike in with, preach up, and plead for what was most suitable unto the spirits of such, upon whom they have had a dependance: 'Twere indeed well for them, could they in their present standing and practise acquit themselves from that sore crime, of seeking to please men, which if they do, they cannot be the Servants of Christ, Gal. 1. 10.

5. That they are greedy Dogs, that can never have enough, and look every man for In a Translation of the N. T. dedicated to Edw. 6th the Authour of the Notes on chap. 10. sayes, We must preach the Truth with out any respect of reward or gaines. They therefore that preach for their bellies sake or preach after the pre­script of man—are not the Disciples of Christ. his gain from his quarter, Isa. 56. 11. seeking and serving themselves in their Ministration Ezek. 13. 19. Mich. 3. 5, 11. That herein there is a perfect harmony betwixt these false Prophets and the present Ministers of England, cannot be denied: What means else their frequent Calls, from places of less, to places of greater value; their ga­ping and greedy desires after preferment; the vexations they put poor men to, that cannot in conscience put into their mouths, preparing War against them?

6. That they sadden the hearts of the Righteous, Ezek. 13. 22: What need I turn aside to make application of this to the Prophets of this day? who that is serious, doth not experiment the truth thereof in his own soul? to see the Name and Ordinances of God prophaned, the Ceremonies and Inventions of man subjected unto, by such as pre­tend to be Ministers of Christ, would make an heart of stone to bleed; much more those whose hearts are made tender by the Lord. Those of our Brethren that as yet attend upon their Ministry, will tell us, they are troubled at their Compliance and Conformity—all that look in the least after Reformation, say, they could wish it were otherwise; so that this character also is visibly upon them.

[Page 52]7. That they mix the Word of God with their The Notes on Matth. 28. in the foresaid Translation are, Here do all Preachers learn what they should teach; nothing else but God's Word; nothing else but that the Lord hath commanded them: Not their own Dreams and Inven­tions. Dreams, Jer. 23. 25, 29. So do the present Ministers of England, as hath been proved.

8. That they come in Sheeps cloa­thing, having the horns of a Lamb, but are inwardly ravening Wolves, and speak like Dragons (i. e. pretend to the Holiness and Meekness of Christ, and Saints, but are inwardly full of Raven and Cruelty, yea terrible in their Edicts and Laws, stirring up & making use of the Powers of the world, to persecute, kill & destroy the Saints) Mat. 7. 15. Rev. 13. 11. (which second Beast is no other than the false Prophet, mentioned Rev. 19. 20. as might easily be demon­strated) As face answers face in a Glass, so do the present Ministers of England the False Prophets there spoken of. Are not all the Perse­cutions, Imprisonments, Slaughters and Butcheries of the Children of God, that the first Beast hath exercised upon the Saints for this 1260 years, to be charged upon this Generation of men? yea, who do more eagerly press a rigid Conformity (not only contrary to the Kings Declaration from Breda, and others since published by him, but also (as is thought) to his natural temper, and the inclination and bent of his spirit) though to the infringing of the Liberty, the Banishment, the taking away of the Lives of the Saints, who love Truth and Peace, and humbly beg, That they may be suffered for the Tribute they pay (as in the Dominion of the Grand Seignior they are) in quietness to serve God according to their perswasions.

9. That they put no difference betwixt the Holy and Prophane, Ezek. 22. 26. Do not even the Ministers of England the same? Are not All their dear Brethren and Sisters, living and dead, though Drunkards, Swearers, Adulterers and Adulteresses? &c. Are not, as was said, the Children of them all admitted to the Font, and they themselves to the Lord's Table? Is not the Childrens meat frequently given by them unto Dogs, and the holy Ordinances prostituted to be polluted by the worst of men?

10. That they exercise not pity to the weak broken scattered Sheep of Christ, nor shew bowels in their recovery, but with Force and Cruelty rule over them, Ezek. 34. 4. One would think the former part of the [Page 53] chapter, were rather an History of what is practised by the false Shepherds of this day, than otherwise: so perfect an Agreement is there betwixt their practice, and this Prophecy of the Lord. They tell us 'tis our weakness and distemper that we conform not to their Worship; that we are persons gone astray: VVe profess to them, that we would not give way to Spiritual distempers, nor stray one step from the wayes of God might we but know it; we would thank any to convince us of our mistakes, and reduce us to the true Sheep­fold, if we are gone astray: Do they seek after us; in a spirit of tenderness labour to convince us, and carry us in their bosoms, like tender Shepherds to the true Fold? what less? with force and cru­elty they rule over us, threaten us with Excommunications, Impri­sonments, Banishments, dispoiling us of what God hath graciously given us, yea, condemning us to Death: in all which (through the Grace of God) we can rejoyce, though they thereby abundantly de­monstrate, that they are the successors of the false Shepherds here spoken of. VVhat should I mention,

11. That they come up out of the Earth, Rev. 13. 11. are raised up by men of earthly spirits and principles.

12. That they exercise the power of the first Beast, or make use of the Civil Power for their supportment, ver. 13.

13. That they make an Image to the Beast, v. 14, 15. (i. e. erect an Ecclesiastical State of Government, in a proportionableness to, and resemblance of the Civil State.)

14. That they compel all under the penalty of Death, to worship or bow down to this Image of the Beast, (or Ecclesiastical Government, in its Courts, Canons, Laws, and Ceremonies devised by it) v. 15.

15. That they compel all to receive a mark, either in their right­hands or foreheads; secretly or openly, one way or other to acknow­ledge subjection unto this Beast, without which they may neither buy nor sell, being cut off from the Church, by their Excommunications, for their stubornness, v. 16, 17. All which Characters of the second Beast (or false Prophet) he that runs may reade upon the present Hie­rarchy and Ministry of England. It remaineth then that the present Ministers of England have the Characters and Properties of the false Prophets and Priests upon them, and therefore are not to be heard, but separated from.

A sixth Argument against hearing the present Ministers of England, pro­posed. Of the several sorts of Idolatry, that the Ministers of England are hereof guilty, proved. An Objection answered. That the present Ministers act in Divine things by vertue of a power received from Idolaters, offer up a Worship abused to Idolatry, with the Rites and Ce­remonies of Idolaters. That the Romish Church are Idolaters. Objecti­ons answered.

Argument 6.

THose that are guilty of Idolatry, Saints may not have communi­on with (much less own them as their Teachers) but ought to separate from them: But the present Ministers of England are Ido­laters. Therefore.

The Major (or first Proposition) will not be denied, because bot­tom'd upon express Commands from Christ, 1 Cor. 5. 11. & 10. 14. 2 Cor. 6. 14, 18. Before we descend to the confirmation of the Minor (or second Proposition) we shall crave leave to premise; That Idolatry may be considered under a threefold notion. 1. Most gross and absurd Idolatry, when the creature is worshipped terminatively; this Rab. M. Maimonides de Idolat. 8. 2, 3, &c. Observes that never any Idolater was so silly as to think that an I­dol of wood, stone or mettal, was a God that made the Heavens and Earth, but through them all Idolaters intend to worship God. few are guilty of, the Israelites of old wor­shipped not the Calf terminatively, but God in it; therefore they are said to proclaim a Feast to Jehovah, Exod. 32. 5. 2dly, Somewhat more refined Idolatry ( viz. in respect of what we but now in­stanc'd in) when we offer up any wor­ship or homage, proper and due to God only, before any creature, as the Medi­um or Representative of God: Such was the Idolatry of Israel in the Golden-Calf, Brazen-Serpent, &c. Of this are the Synagogue of Rome, amongst all the combinations of men in the world, most emi­nently guilty. To this Head may be added, 1. The ascription of the Godhead to any creature, as to Herod, Acts 12. 22. 2. The ascrip­tion of the Properties of the Godhead to any creature. 3. The worshipping of God in any other way than what he hath prescribed: which all that write upon the second Commandment say, is the Ido­latry [Page 55] therein forbidden. 4. The Oblation of Worship or Service to God, that hath been offered up to Idols, for which there is no pre­scription in the Scripture. 3dly. Most refined Idolatry, when the heart goes forth in desires after any thing beyond what is limited by the Lord, or trusts and relies on any creature on this side God.

In the first sense, there are (as was said) few or no Idolaters in the world: the Papists come as near thereunto as any, praying to the Cross, the Virgin Mary, Saints, Angels, &c. expresly affirming, that the Virgin Mary may be worshipped with that worship, which they call Cultus Latriae, which yet they say is due only to God.

In the last sense there are none but at one time or other may be said to be Idolaters; the hearts of the best of men too too often going forth too far in desires after, and secret dependance upon, things be­neath the Lord: which yet they are watching and warring against, waiting and longing for the day, in which they shall be compleatly swallowed up in the will of God. 'Tis in respect of the second parti­cular, before instanc'd in, that we assert the present Ministers of Eng­land to be Idolaters: to the proof whereof we now address our selves.

Argument 1.

Those that worship the true God in any other way than he hath said he will be worshipped in, and is prescribed by him, are Idolaters: But the present Ministers of England worship the true God in ano­ther way, than he hath said he will be worshiped in, and is prescribed by him. Therefore.

The Major (or first Proposition) is evident, from this single Con­sideration: To worship the true God through false mediums is Ido­latry, such as so worship him are Idolaters; (this must be so, or else there is little or no Idolatry in the world, nor ever was: The Athe­nians (and other Gentiles) worshipped the true God, for they wor­shipped him whom Paul declared to them, even that God that made the world, Acts 17. 23, 24. yet none doubts but they were Idolaters, which they cannot be charged with upon any other account, than their worshipping the true God through false mediums.) But to wor­ship God in any other way than what is of his own prescription, is to worship him through a false medium. Therefore so to worship him is Idolatry, and they that so worship him are Idolaters.

The Minor (or second Proposition) viz. That the present Ministers [Page 54] [...] [Page 55] [...] [Page 56] of England, worship the true God in another way than he hath said he will be worshipped in, and is prescribed by him, is that which is denied by some; but the truth thereof, we doubt not, will to the unprejudiced Reader be beyond exception evident, from the en­suing demonstration, Viz.

Those that worship God after the way of the Common-Prayer-Book, worship him in another way, than that he hath said he wil be worship­ed in, and is prescribed by him: But the present Ministers of England worship God after the way of the Common-Prayer-Book: Therefore.

The Minor (or second Proposition) cannot be denied, their sub­scription before they are admitted to the Ministry, together with their daily and constant practice, are sufficient evidences hereof.

As for the Major Proposition, That to worship God after the way of the Common-Prayer-Book, is to worship him in a way that is not of his Appointment. 1. Let any shew, when, and where, such a stinted-form of Service was appointed by Christ, and this part of the controversie is at an end: sure we are, there are not the least foot­steps of such a way of Worship to be found in the New-Testament, no, not in the whole Book of God (whatever is pretended by some touching Lyturgies (in the sense we are speaking) amongst the people of the Jews;) no, nor yet was there any such a way of worship thought of, much less imposed, in the first and purer times of the Gospel, for several centuries of years, after the dayes of Christ and his Apo­stles. In the Epistles of the Church of Smyrna (about the Martyrdom of Polycarpus) and of the Churches of Vienna and Lyons (concerning their Persecution) in the Epistle of Clemens (or the Church of Rome) to the Church of Corinth, in the Writings of Ignatius, Justin Martyr, Clemens, Tertullian, Origen, Cyprian, and their contemporaries, there is not only an utter silence of such a thing, but Assertions wholly [...], and oppsit thereunto. Tertullian sayes expresly, Illuc suspi­cientes Christiani, manibus expansis, quia innocuis, capite nudo, quia non crubescimus, denique sine monitore, quia de pectore oramus. Apol. cap. 30. The Christians in those dayes (he tells us) looking towards Heaven (not on their Common-Prayer-Books) with their hands spread abroad, &c. prayed to God without a Monitor, because from their hearts. And in several places he testifies, that they praised God in a way of Prayer and Thanksgiving according to their abilities. Indeed Clau­dius de Sainctes and Pamelius (two Popish Divines) tell us of Lytur­gies [Page 57] composed by the Apostles, James, Peter, and Mark: Of Peter's and Mark's Cardinal Bellarmine himself, not only takes no particu­lar notice, but upon the matter condemns them, as supposititious and spurious: which that they are, is abundantly demonstrated by learned Morney, and no more need be added thereunto. There are some al­so fathered upon Basil, Chrysostome and Ambrose, but as these lived about the years 372, 381, 382, in which time many corruptions had crept into the Churches of Christ, so the spuriousness thereof, as being falsly fathered upon the persons whose names they bear, may easily be demonstrated: 'Tis already done to our hands by learned Morney, in his Book De Missâ, l. 1. chap. 6. Durantus himself (the great Lyturgy-munger) acknowledges, That neither Christ nor his Apostles, used any prescribed Forms, but the Lords Prayer and the Creed (that they used these, he sayes, but proves not, nor will it ever be pro­ved to the worlds end) That about the year 380. Theodosius (the Church being rent by Heresies) intreated▪ Pope Damasus (at whose election, though the contest was betwixt him and Ursinus, a Deacon of the Church, there were not fewer than one hundred thirty seven per­sons slain) that some Ecclesiastical Office might be made, which was ac­cordingly done by Hierome, and approved by Pope Damasus, and made a Rule. The unlikelihood of this latter part of the Story is ma­nifest: Theodosius was too well acquainted with the Spirit of Prayer, than to go about any such thing; had he judged it necessary, having assembled the great Council of Constantinople, wherein were not less than an hundred and fifty persons convened; Is it probable this good man Theodosius, would in so momentous a concern, rather consult with one single person, than such an Assembly as were by his Authority met together? and yet should this be granted, it would not from hence appear, that at this time there was any Lyturgy devised and imposed; all that is pretended to be done by Hierome, was the appointing an Order for the reading of the Scriptures, which is another thing to the imposition of Forms of Prayer in Worship. There is one passage in Socrates his Ecclesiastical History, l. 5. c. 21. who lived about the year 430. that carrying an undeniable evidence with it that at that time there were no Lyturgies, we cannot pass over in silence, 'tis this: [...]; wherein he tells us, that among all the Christians in that age, scarce two were to be found that used the same words [Page 58] in Prayer. Not to tire the Reader in this disquisition; Though one part of the Lyturgy was not long after introduced by one Pope, and another part by another, yet till Gregories time (who to the honour of Lyturgies be it spoken, was the very worst of all the Bishops of Rome that preceded him) viz. about the year 600. was there any considerable use, or any imposing of them? Yea till the time of Pope Hadrian (which was about the year 800. was it not (as I find) by publick Authority imposed: Then indeed the Emperour Charles the Great being moved thereunto by the foresaid Hadrian) by his Civil Authority commands the use of a Lyturgy (viz. Gregories Lyturgy, as is thought) to which he compels his Ministers by Threats and Punish­ments; the usual attendancies and support of Lyturgyes ever since their production in the world.

The sum is, That in as much as first, it cannot be proved (the con­trary being most manifest in the Scripture) that any Lyturgy was en­joyned by Christ or his Apostles, or in use in the first Churches planted by them. 2dly, It is evident that for the first four hundred years and more after Christ, there was no Lyturgy framed, nor any by solemn Authority imposed, to the year eight hundred; it follows un­deniably from hence, That to worship God in the way of a Lyturgy, or stinted Forms of Prayer, is to worship him in a way that is not of his appointment. To which we adde,

2. That Worship which is an obstruction of any positive duty charged by Christ, to be performed by the Saints, is not a Worship that is of his appointment. But this is undeniably true of the Com­mon-Prayer-Book-Worship: Therefore.

That Christ did upon his Ascention give unto his Church, Officers, as signal characters of his Love to, and Care of it, will not be denied, Ephes. 4. 11. is an evidence hereof beyond exception. That to these Officers He gave Gifts and Qualifications, every way suiting the imployment which he call'd them forth unto, cannot without a most horrid advance against the Wisdome, Faithfulness, Love and Care of Christ towards the Beloved of his Soul, be gainsayed. That be not onely expects, but solemnly charges upon these Officers, an improvement of the Gifts bestowed upon them, for the edification of his Bo­dy, is evidently comprized, and very frequently remarked in the Scripture, 2 Tim. 1. 6. 1 Cor. 12. 7. Ephes. 4. 11. Prov. 17. 16. Luke 19. 20. To imagin after all this, that any Worship should be of [Page 59] the institution of Christ, that should shut out of doors as unnecessary, the exercise of the Gifts given by him, to be made use of in the so­lemn discharge of the Worship of his House, is such an imputation of folly to him, as may not be charged upon any person of an ordina­ry capacity or understanding: Yet this is righteously to be imputed to him ( absit Blasphemia) if the Common-Prayer-Book-Worship, be a Worship of his appointment: The exercise of the Gift of Prayer (to mention no more) being wholly excluded hereby. Nor will it in the least take off the weight of this Argument to say, that liberty is gran­ted for the exercise of this Gift before and after Sermon: For

1. The whole Worship of God may according to these mens prin­ciples, be discharged without any Sermon at all; and its manifest, it is frequently so, at one time or other, in most of the Assemblies of England.

2. Those their Prayers are also bounded and limited by the 55th Canon of the Constitutions and Canons Ecclesiastical.

3. We had alwayes thought that Christ having given Gifts unto men, did require the use of those Gifts at all times, when ever per­sons were called to the performance of that Service for which they were designedly given by him, by vertue of the forementioned Pre­cepts. When Christ hath given a Gift of Prayer unto his Children, and charged them to stir up the Gift given, and not to napkin their Talent, we had verily thought, that when ever they had been called forth to the performance of that duty, he did really intend and expect, that they should be found in the exercise of the Gift given, and see as yet no reason to change our apprehensions in this matter.

But 3dly. The Common-Prayer-Book-Worship, is a Worship of which we find no footsteps in the Scripture (nor in some centuries of years after Christ) as hath already been demonstrated: Whence it follows, that 'tis a Worship of pure humane invention, which is not onely not of Christ's appointment, but contrary to the very nature of instituted Worship (as is proved in our first Argument) and to very many Pre­cepts of the Lord in the Scripture, Exod. 20. 4, 5. Deut. 42. & 12. 32. Prov. 30. 16. Jer. 7. 31. Mat. 15. 9, 13. Mark. 7. 7, 8. Rev. 22. 18. The mind of God in which Scriptures we have exemplified, Lev. 10. 1, 2, 3, 4. Josh. 22. 10. &c. Judg. 8. 24. 2 King. 16. 11. 1 Chron. 15. 13.

4. That Worship which is not necessary for the edification, com­fort or preservation of the Saints in the Faith and Unity of the Go­spel, [Page 60] is not of the institution of Christ. But such is the Worship of the Common-Prayer-Book: Therefore.

The Major (or first Proposition) will not be denied. The Lord Jesus having freed his Disciples from all obligations to the Ceremo­nies of the Law, institutes nothing de novo, but what he knew to be necessary (at least would be so by vertue of his institution) for the ends assigned; which was the great aim of Christ in all Gospel-Admini­strations, Ephes. 4. 7, to 15, Col. 2. 19. Acts 9. 31. Rom. 14. 14, 15. 1 Cor. 10. 23. and 14. 3, 4, 5, 12, 26. 2 Cor. 12. 10. 1 Tim. 1. 4.

That the Common-Prayer-Book-Worship is not necessary for the edi­fication, comfort or preservation of the Saints in the Faith and Unity of the Gospel (whatever is pretended by its admirers) might many wayes be demonstrated. Take one pregnant instance instead of all, that will make it exceeding manifest. The Churches of Christ for the first four centuries of years, and more, after his Ascention, knew not any thing of such a Worship (as hath been already demonstrated; not to mention the Reformed Churches at this day, to whom it is as a polluted, accursed, abominable thing) yet, than those first and purer Churches, for Light, Consolation, truth of Doctrine, & Gospel-Union, hitherto there hath not been any extant in the world, more Famous, or Excellent, no nor by many degrees comparable to them. But we shall not further prosecute this Argument; enough hath been said to demonstrate that the Common prayer-Book-Worship is not of the appoint­ment of the Lord: Therefore such as worship him in the way thereof, worship him in a way that is not of his prescription. If the former, notwithstanding all that hath been said, be scrupled by any, we refer them to Tracts written by Smectymnuus, V. Powel, to a Treatise en­tituled, A Discourse concerning the interest of words in Prayer, by H. D. M. A. the Common-Prayer-Book unmask'd, as also to a Treatise lately published, by a Learned (but nameless) Author, entituled, A Dis­course concerning Lyturgyes and their imposition: In which that matter is industriously and largely debated.

Object. If to what hath hitherto been proposed, it be said, That the Lyturgie or Common-Prayer-Book is no essential part of Worship, but meerly circumstantial: Praying, 'tis true, is part of Worship, but praying in this or that Form is not so, but meerly a circumstance thereof: And therefore, though it be true, that the present Ministers of England [Page 61] worship God after the way of the Common-Prayer-Book, yet it follows not, that they worship him after a way that is not of his appointment. To this we answer;

1. That many things are strenuously supposed, as the basis upon which the weight of this Objection is laid, which the Framers thereof knowing to be no easie task to demonstrate, do earnestly beg us to grant unto them: Which being matters of greater moment than many are aware of, we shall not part with on such easie terms. 'Tis supposed, first, That there are some things in the instituted Worship of Christ, that are meerly circumstances thereof, as such. Secondly, That it is lawful for Saints to pray in a Form. Thirdly, That Forms of Prayer imposed, are but meer circumstances of Worship, and no essential parts thereof. Fourthly, That Circumstances of Worship, as such, are not determined by the Lord in the Scripture, but left to the wills of men, to determine therein as they shall judge meet. All unpro­ved. Of the last we have already spoken, and shall not here reassume the debate thereof. Touching the first, That there are some things in the instituted Worship of Christ, that are meerly Circumstances thereof, as such, we crave liberty to deny, which till the proof thereof be attempted, may suffice. Circumstances in the Worship of Christ attending Religious Actions, as actions, we grant; but Circumstances of Worship, as such, will never be proved: To infer that because time and place, with sundry things of the like nature, are Circumstances in Worship, therefore there are Circumstances of Worship as such, is frivolous: Those things being the attendments of religious Actions, common to any civil actions of the like nature to be performed by the sons of men; no action to be managed by a Community, can be or­derly performed by them, without such an assignment of time and place: Publick Prayer being so to be managed as a religious Action, hath the Circumstances before mentioned attending it, and so it would were it a meer civil action to be performed by a Community, though it related not at all to the Worship of God.

2. That 'tis lawful for Saints to pray in a Form ( i. e. to tie them­selves to a written stinted form of words in prayer) is not yet proved, not like to be, 'tis too large a field for us to enter into, nor is it needful to do so till it be proved, That to pray in the form of the Common-Prayer-Book, or imposed devised Lyturgies is so: yet in transitu, we crave leave humbly to offer, that to pray in a form, as be­fore [Page 62] explained, is altogether unlawful, being, 1. A quenching of the Spirit of Prayer. 2dly, A rendring useless the donation of the Spirit, as a Spirit of Prayer, unto the Children of God. 3dly, Directly op­posit unto the many positive Precepts of Christ, before instanc'd in, of stirring up the gift given to us of God, improving the talents he hath been graciously pleased to entrust us withal. 4thly, If it be lawful for Saints to pray in a form, 'tis lawful either because they have not the Spirit, or that having the Spirit, he is not a sufficient help to them in their approaches to God: If the first, they are not Saints, Rom. 8. 9. to assert the second, is little less than Blasphemy; besides its direct opposition to Rom. 8. 26. As for the third, viz. that Forms of Prayer imposed, are but meer Circumstances of VVorship, and not parts thereof, it cannot be proved. The contrary thereunto is evident; That which is made so the condition of an Action, that without it the Action is not to be done, is not a Circumstance of it, but such an Adjunct as is a necessary part thereof: But Forms of Prayer imposed, are so made by that their Imposition. Therefore, &c.

Sacrificing of old on the Altar at the Tabernacle and Temple, was part of the Worship of God; that they were to perform this Worship only, at those places, being once commanded, was not a Circum­stance of that Worship, but as real an essential part thereof, as sacri­ficing was. The case is the same here; Prayer is commanded, so is the use of these Prayers, which are as really by vertue of that Com­mand, made alike parts of Worship. But,

2dly, That the Lyturgy or Common-Prayer-Book, is no essential part of Worship, is utterly denied by the present Ministers of Eng­land, who make it not only a part, but the principal part (to which Preaching must give place, and be omitted, if they have not time for both) yea, the whole of the Worship of God, which being per­formed, they suppose they have served him acceptably, without more ado; and if omitted, whatever else is done, God is not wor­shipped at all.

And thus far of the first Argument, for the demonstration of what we are in the disquisition of, viz. That the present Ministers of England are Idolaters: The sum whereof is this, Those that worship God in any other way than he hath said he will be worshipped in, and is prescribed by him, are Idolaters; But the present Ministers of England worship God in another way than he hath said he will be [Page 63] worshipped in, and is prescribed by him, ( viz. in the way of the Common-Prayer-Book, which that it is not of Divine Prescription, hath been demonstrated) Therefore—. To which we add,

Argument 2.

Those who act in the holy things of God, by vertue of an Office-Power received from Idolaters, and offer up to him, a Worship meerly of humane composition, once abused to Idolatry, with the Modes and Rites of Idolaters, are guilty of the sin of Idolatry: But the present Ministers of England act in the holy things of God, by vertue of an Office-Power received from Idolaters, and offer up to him a Worship meerly of humane composition, once abused to Ido­latry with the Modes and Rites of Idolaters. Therefore—

The Major (or first Proposition) carrying a brightness along with it, sufficient to lead any one into the belief of the truth thereof, one would think might be taken for granted. Two things are asserted therein.

1. That such as act in the holy things of God, by vertue of an Of­fice-Power received from Idolaters, are themselves such (at least in respect of that their Office-Power so received by them.) That Jero­boam's Priests were all of them Idolaters we suppose will not be de­nied: Supposing some one or more to Act in the Worship of God by vertue of an Office-Power received from them, were these to be ac­counted in that respect, Idolaters? it seemeth so: nor can there be the least pretence of reason to the contrary: Certainly such as act by vertue of Authority committed to them, in matters Civil, from Re­bels, are equally guilty of Rebellion, as those from whom they de­rive that their Authority. The case is here the same.

2. That such as offer up to God a Worship meerly of humane com­position, once abused to Idolatry with the Modes and Rites of Idola­ters, are Idolaters: If these be not such, I must profess I know not who are. That there are few, or none, that worship the creature ter­minative, will not be denied, the most of Idolaters in the world are such, upon the account of their worshipping the true God through Mediums of their own devising, with Rites and Modes that never entered into the heart of God to prescribe. To assert that any should symbolize with Idolaters herein (who are soley upon this foot of account such) and not be guilty of the sin of Idolatry, is absurd and irrational. The Major Proposition then (as was said) may be [Page 64] taken for granted; Such as act in the holy things of God by vertue of an Office-Power received from Idolaters, and offer up to God a Worship meerly of humane composition, once abused to Idolatry, are Idolaters. Whether this be true of the present Ministers of England, is in the next place to be considered; of which briefly.

1. That the Romish Church (so called) are Idolaters, their Wor­ship, in the complex thereof, Idolatry; will not (we suppose) be de­nied by any that call themselves Protestants, the most learned of whom have asserted and proved it so to be: If any of our Reverend Fathers are of another mind, we would entreat them to construe to them­selves a Copy or two of Verses, composed by Persons of Eminency in that Combination of men, and then give us their second thoughts, which are usually better than the first.

Thus some of them,

VVherein the Virgin Mary is not only prayed unto, but Christ in his Exalted state is subjected to her Authority; which is not only a spice of Idolatry, but also some of the most horrid Blasphemy imagi­nable. Their praying to Images, Adoration of Saints, &c. is known. Take a taste hereof in the ensuing Instances; thus then they speak:

In which the Cross it self is invocated, as their only Hope, to bestow pardon upon the guilty, patience and constancy upon the Godly. And who comes not in the least short hereof, for Blasphemy and Idolatry. Bonarous the Jesuite, Lib. 3. Amphitrial. Honor. l. 3. cap. ult. ad Divi­nam Hallensem, & Puerum Jesum, saith as followeth:

To which might be added as second hereunto, the blasphemous poetry of Franciscus de Mendoza, in viridario utrius (que) eruditionis, lib. 2. Prob. 2. The usual ascription of Laus Deo, Virgini (que) matri Mariae, in the close of their writings; in which, Divine honour with God is ascribed to the Virgin Mary, is known to all: Any ordinary Rea­der knows where to furnish himself with many more instances of the like nature, equalizing, if not exceeding in expression the greatest Idolaters that ever were in the world. We judge it not necessary to stand longer upon this matter, 'tis beyond exception evident, that that Assembly of men that are usually known, by the name of the [Page 66] Church of Rome are Idolaters: If there be any such in the world, they are so.

2. That the present Ministers of England act by vertue of an Of­fice-Power, from this Combination and Assembly of Idolaters, they themselves will not deny: Succession from hence being one of the best pleas they have for the justification of their Ministry: (which when they have proved, that ever the Lord Jesus did entrust an As­sembly of the greatest Murderers, Adulterers and Idolaters in the world, with any power for the sending forth Officers to act in the Ho­ly Things of God, to, and for the Church, his Spouse, will be admit­ted, but this they shall never be able to do) So hugely importunate are some of them herein, that they are not ashamed to ask us, why Ordination may not be received from the Church (so called) of Rome, as well as the Scripture? To which we shall onely say, that when it is proved that we received the Scripture from that Apostate Church, by vertue of any Authority thereof, as such, somewhat of moment may be admitted in that enquiry, but this will never be done. 'Tis true, the Bible was kept among the People in those parts where the Pope prevaileth, yet followeth it not from hence that we received it from their Authority, as Ordination is received; if we did, why did we not keep it, as delivered from them to us, in the vulgar Latine? so that of these things there is not the same reason! It will not then be denied, but the present Ministers of England act in the holy things of God, by vertue of an Office-Power received by Succession from the Church of Rome, and so from Idolaters (that Church being eminently so, as hath been proved.)

3. Nor can it be denied, but they offer up to God a Worship meer­ly of Humane Composition (as the Common-Prayer-Book-Worship hath been proved to be) once abused to Idolatry, with the Modes and Rites of Idolaters. That the Common-Prayer-Book-Worship is a VVorship that was once abused to Idolatry, being the VVorship of that Church, whose VVorship (at least in the complex thereof) is so, cannot, with the least pretence of Reason, be denied. That the whole of it is derived from, and taken out of the Pope's Portuis, as are the Common-Prayers out of the Breviary; the Administration of the Sa­craments, Burial, Matrimony, Visitation of the Sick, out of the Ritual, or Book of Rites: The Consecration of the Lord's Supper, Collects, Epistles, Gospels, out of the Mass-Book: The Ordination of Arch-Bishops, [Page 67] Bishops, and Priests, out of the Romane Pontifical, hath been asserted and proved by many. Which might be evidenced (if need­ful) beyond exception, not onely by comparing the one with the other, but also from the offer was made by Pope Pius the 4th, and Gregory the 13th, to Q. Elizabeth, to confirm the English Lyturgy, which did it not symbolize with the Service of the Church of Rome, they would not have done. Yea, when the said Queen was interdicted by the Popes Bull, Secretary Walsingham procures two intelligencers from the Pope, who seeing the Service of London and Canterbury in the Pomp thereof, wonder that their Lord, the Pope, should be so un­advised, as to inderdict a Prince, whose Servive and Ceremonies did so symbolize with his own: When they come to Rome, they satisfie the Pope, That they saw no Service, Ceremonies, or Orders in England, but might very well serve in Rome; upon which the Bull was recalled. Not to mention what we have already minded, viz. the Testimony of King Edward the 6th and his Council; witnessing the English Service to be the same, and no other but the old, the self-same words in English that were in Latine (which was the worship of England and Rome, in Queen Maries dayes) it's evident, that the present Ministers of England offer up a Worship to God, once abused to Idolatry. That they do this with the Rites, Cere­monies and Modes Maccovius loc. com. append. de adiaph. p. 860. saith, Non licet mutuari, aut retinere res aut ritas Sacros Idololatrarum sive Ethni­corum sive Pontificiorum, &c. etsi in se res fuerint adia Phorae quia vitandam esse omnem conformita­tem cum Idololatris docemur. Lev. 19. 4, 27. and 21. 5. Deut. 14. 1. of Idolaters ( viz. such as are in use in that Ido­latrous Church of Rome) needs not many words to demonstrate; what else is the Priests change of Voice; Posture and Place in Worship en­joyned them? not to mention their Holy Vestmentes, Bowings, Cringings, Candles, Altars, &c. all of which as it's known, owe their original unto the appointments thereof. It remaineth, That the present Mi­nisters of England, acting in the Holy Things of God, by vertue of an Office-Power received from Idolaters, and offering up to him a Worship meerly of humane composition, once abused▪ to Idolatry with the Rites and Modes of Idolaters, are deeply guilty of the sin of Idolatry. To which we adde,

Argument 3.

Adoration in, by, or before a creature respectivè, or with relation to the creature, is Idolatry; such as so adore, or worship God are Idolaters. But the present Ministers of England, do adore or wor­ship God, in, by, or before a creature respectivè, or with relation to the creature: Therefore.

The major (or first proposition) being generally owned by Protestants, it being the very same maxime they make use of, and stop the mouth of the Papists with, in the point of adoring God mediately by the creature, we shall not stand upon the proof of it: None that know what they say, will deny it.

The minor Proposition ( viz. That the present Ministers of Eng­land do adore, or worship God, in, by, or before the creature respe­ctivè, or with relation to the creature) will receive a quick dispatch: Not to mention their bowing and cringing at the Altar: That Didoclavius p. 755. saith, Genu­flectere non modo excludit ritus in­stitutionis, sed etiam praeceptum secundum de vitandâ Idololatriâ multis modis violat; which Macco­vius assents to, loc. com. p. 861. they kneel at the receiving of the Sa­crament is known, that they with their Communicants should do so, is enjoyned by their Church, That their so doing is an adora­tion, or worshipping of God be­fore the creature respectivè, or with relation to the creature, is too manifest to admit of a denial: Nothing being more certain than that the Elements are the objectum significativè à quo, or the motive of their kneeling, which if they were not there, they would not do.

Object. To what hath been hitherto offered in this matter, if it be said, That the charging the present Ministers of England with Idolatry, is exceeding harsh, and that which is an argument of a very unchristian, and censorious spirit. Though this makes nothing to the enervating of what hath been offered, yet we answer,

1. That many words of Christ himself, were accounted hard say­ings, and not to be born, and that by such Hearers as were once his Admirers, and did with seeming-great affection attend upon his Mi­nistry: That such poor worms as we should be recharged herewith, is no great marvel, it is enough for the Disciple to be as his Ma­ster.

2dly, We have in this matter said nothing, but what is in Thesi, over and over asserted, by most or all Protestant VVriters, upon the second Commandment: who assert fully, that the Calvin, Perkins, Ames, Mac­covius, Altingius, Wendeline. Paraeus, Explicat. Cate. p. 3. Q. 96. p. 528. saith, Quid po­stulat secundum praeceptum? Res­ne Deum ullâ imagine, aut figurâ exprimamus neve ullâ alia ra­tione eum colamus, quam quâ se in suo verbo coli praecepit, 1 Sam. 15. 23. Deut. 12. 30. Mat. 15. 9. And afterwards he addeth, Huic secundo Praecepto contraria sunt ea, quae vero cultui divino adversantur. 1. Idololatria, quae est cultus numinis fictitius, aut superstitiosus. Sunt autem Ido­lolatriae duae species, praecipuae: una crassior, cum fictitium nu­men colitur—haec species pro­hibetur in imo praecepto, & ali­quâ ex parte, in tertio: altera est subtilior, cum verus Deus coli fingitur, sed errator in genere cultus, hoc est, cum vero Deo cultus fingitur praestari, aliquo opere, quod ipse non praecepit haec species Idololatriae, hoc praecepto propriè damnatur, & nominatur [...], sive superstitio. And pag. 529. Qui peccant contra secundum praeceptum, peccant & contra primum, quia qui Deum aliter colunt, atque vult coli, illi fingunt Deum aliter effectum, atque est, hoc est alium Deum: Ita non Deum, sed cerebri sui commentum, quod sic affectum esse sibi persuadent, colunt—fingere alium Dei cultum, est aliam Dei voluntatem, proinde & alium De­um fingere, &c. worshipping God in a way not prescribed by him, is Ido­latry; such as do so, are Idolaters: with our application hereof unto the present Ministers of England, if they are guilty (as that they are, hath been abundantly demonstrated) why should any be offended? To speak Truth, when our silence would be prejudicial to the souls of our Bre­thren, methinks should not be ac­counted unchristian or censorious.

But 3dly, What would these Ob­jectors have said to Tertullian, (that renowned Servant and VVitness of the Lord Jesus in his day) who is by far more nice in this point of I­dolaty, than we have declared our selves to be; He in his Book De Idololatria, chargeth such as make Statues or Images, build or adorn Idols Temples, (though it were their trade) Astrologers, Schoolmasters, (that name the names of Idols, making honorable mention of them in their Orations) such as keep holy­dayes, dedicated to Idolatrous ser­vice, as their Saturnalia (in the stead [Page 70] of which, is the time with us called Christmass) &c. such as adorned their Gates, Posts, Houses after the Pagan manner at Festivals, with Lawrel, Ivy, &c. as sympolizing with Idolaters: yet sure we are, he could not justly be charged with an unchristian or censorious spirit. If it be further said,

Obj. 2. But what shall we judge of Latimer, Ridley, Hooper, and many other famous Witnesses and Martyrs of Christ, who worshipped God after the same way of Worship that these do now? were they also Idolaters? how could they be saved then, when the Scripture sayes, that no Idolater shall inherit the Kingdom of God, and we do not find that they repented hereof? To this we answer.

1. That the persons instanc'd in, were eminent Witnesses of Je­sus Christ in their day (whose very Names are in our nostrils as sweet Perfume) we readily grant, and would be loth to speak one word to abate of that just esteem is due to their Names and Testimo­ny for Christ.

2dly, That they are now with Christ, and shall come with him, and sit upon Thrones to judge their unjust Judges in the day appoint­ed thereunto, we have not the least scruple.

But 3dly, they were but men encompassed about with many infir­mities; that they were guilty of the sin of Idolatry, cannot (from what hath been said herein it's evident) be denied.

Yet, 1. They were in that day but just peeping out of the Gates of Babylon, beginning to arise and shake themselves out of the dust of the Abominations of the great Whore; and 'tis no wonder if some of the filth of her Fornications did cleave to them. 2. They wor­shipped God in sincerity according to the light he was pleased in that day to communicate, and God accepted of them in Christ, granting to them a general Repentance for those Iniquities they saw not to be so, knew not themselves guilty of. Which is all we shall at present say hereunto. The intelligent Reader knows that these things are not of any moment for the invalidating of what hath been offered upon this subject. Thus far of this eighth Argument, The present Ministers of England are guilty of Idolatry; therefore 'tis the duty of Saints not to hear, but separate from them.

A 7th Argument against hearing the present Ministers of England. 'Tis an offence, grief, and cause of stumbling to the Saints, proved. Two Objections answered. The nature of Scandal given. An eighth Ar­gument proposed to consideration. The various wayes of partaking with others in their sin, considered. That hearing the present Ministers, is a partaking with them in their sin, proved.

Argument 7.

'TIs not lawful for Saints to do any thing, for the doing whereof, there is no positive Precept in the Scripture, that is an Offence, Grief, Scandal and cause of stumbling to their Brethren: But the hearing the present Ministers of England (as there is no positive Precept in the Scripture for it, so it) is an Offence, Grief, Scandal and cause of stumbling to the Brethren. Therefore—

The Major (or first Proposition) is bottom'd upon express Pre­cepts in the Scripture, Rom. 14. 13, 15, 20. 1 Cor. 8. 9, 13. and 10. 24.

The Minor (or second Proposition) consists of two parts.

1. That for hearing the present Ministers of England, there is no positive warrant in the Scripture; if there be, let it be produced, and this Controversie is at an end: The contrary thereunto, hath all along been manifest in this present Discourse. It cannot enter into our hearts, to imagin, that the Lord Jesus having instituted Officers of his own, for the management of Affairs in his House, should or­dain, that any of his Houshold should attend upon the Ministry of such as are not of his institution (as hath been abundantly demon­strated touching the present Ministers of England, that they are not) nor is it by many, pleaded as their duty so to do; but onely as their Liberty, which they judge they may, or they may not do, without sin.

2. That for the Saints (such as are visibly so, profess themselves to be such) to hear the present Ministers of England, is an Offence, Grief, Scandal and occasion of stumbling to their Brethren. This is too evident to be denied, to how many thousands in England for whom (those that as yet attend upon the present Ministry thereof, dare not but think) Christ dyed, is the practise of some herein, a [Page 72] Grief, Scandal and occasion of Stumbling? Their groans and tears, alone, and together upon this foot of account, will better demon­strate the truth hereof, than our words can. Yea, how many poor souls have been drawn, by reason of the practise of some Leading Brethren in this matter, against the checks of their own consciences, to a Conformity herein, to their after-grief and wounding? Upon whose doors 'tis to be feared (and we wish they would in the fear of God lay it to heart) may be written, THE BLOOD OF SOULS. If it be said,

Object. That there is a twofold Scandal, 1. Scandalum acceptum, a Scandal, or Offence taken. 2. Scandalum datum, a Scandal or Of­fence given. In respect of the former, possibly many may be offended at their practise in the matter treated of, and so would some or other whatever is done by them: 'Tis impossible but Offences should come, that there is any just Offence given by them, herein, is denied. To this we an­swer.

Answ. 1. That as we admit of the distinction, so no doubt there is a truth in what is suggested thereupon, That whatever I do, some one or other will be offended at it: There are a generation of men, whom the doing of my duty will offend, and cause to blaspheme; these are not to be minded, but to be pitied: Christ himself was to some a Rock of Offence, and Stone of Stumbling.

2. But 'tis not yet proved (nor like to be) that the Scandal treated of, is a Scandal taken and not given, the very nature of Scandal given, as is confest by all, and evident beyond exception from the Apostles discourse, 1 Cor. 8. 10. lying in the doing of what is judged, by me, to be my liberty, which other Saints are not fully perswaded of in their own minds to be so, but are ready to conclude it to be my sin, and evil, and from thence have occasion of Grief, or Stumbling ad­ministred to them. This was the very case of the Church of Corinth (upon the occasion whereof Paul writes to them, 1 Cor. 8.) some of them judged it their liberty to sit at meat in the Idols Temple; others not being fully perswaded hereof, were scandalized many wayes, at this their practise, which the Apostle therefore condemns as unlaw­ful. Should it for Arguments sake be granted (though in truth it be not so) that 'tis the liberty of Saints, to hear the present Ministers, yet many of the sincere Lambs of Christ, being stumbled, grieved and Scandalized herear, for that very reason (if no more could be [Page 73] said herein) it becomes our sin (to be guilty whereof, who can chuse but be filled with trembling, that hath ever with seriousness read that terrible Commination of Christ, Mat. 18. 6. Whoso shall offend one of these little Ones that believe in me, it were better for him that a milstone were hanged about his neck, and he were drowned in the depths of the Sea?) especially when those that are thus scandalized, are able to demon­strate, that their Offence is not any pevish Humour, or foolish Nicety, but what is too really administred by the actions of their Brethren: When they shall hear Christ, commanding them to separate from every thing of Antichrist, Rev. 18. 4. and therefore from his Ministry, and they are in conscience perswaded the Ministers of England are such, which they judge they are able to demonstrate: When they consider, how the Laws of their dear Lord and Law-giver are made void, by the traditions of these pretended Ministers, whose Kingship they see them visibly opposing, when they find upon them the characters of False Prophets, and Apostles, and are able to manifest, that they are deeply guilty of the sin of Idolatry (from whom they are enjoyned by Christ to turn away) yea when they take a veiw of the frame of the spirits of their now Conforming-Brethren in dayes past, and the Principles were then owned by them: That they did then (some of them at least) separate from the Assemblies of England, as not true Churches of Christ, and accounted the Common-Prayer-Book-Priests, persons not meet to preach, unworthy to be attended upon in their so doing, and see them now saying, A confederacy with, and attending upon the ministry of those very persons and things, from whom, not onely Christ hath commanded them to separate, but these very Brethren did formerly decry, and at least seemingly abominate, they judge, they have just ground of Offence given to them: Nor can it be denied, but it is indeed so. If it be yet further said,

Object. 2. But if I do not go to hear the Preachers of this day, many truly godly and sober Christians will be offended at my forbearance; so that whether I hear, or whether I forbear, I shall offend.

To this I answer, 1. That granting the case to be as is suggested (though perhaps somewhat else, upon a serious and strict search, may be found to lye at the bottom of our Conformity beyond what is here pleaded: I am very apt to believe were but a toleration granted, 'tis not the fear of offending any, would cause our Conforming-Bre­thren to attend upon the Ministry of the present Priests of England. [Page 74] Yet supposing it to be as is intimated) we ask, 1. Do you look upon your going to hear as your duty, or meerly as your liberty? if the first, let it be proved from any positive precept of Christ, and we are satisfied: If the second, you are bound by many solemn injunctions (which are at least reduceable to the Moral Law) not to use your li­berty to Scandalize your Brethren.

Secondly, Let both parties be weighed in an upright Ballance, such as you judge to be offended with you for not hearing, and such as are offended thereat. I am bold to say, That the last mentioned, for Number, Holiness, Spirituallity and Tenderness, do far sur­mount the former, who will really be Scandalized at your forbea­rance.

Thirdly, Let also the grounds of the offence on both sides, be weighed; the one are offended at you, That you build not up in practise, in a day of trouble; and cause thereby the Enemies of the Lord to tryumph and blaspheme, what in a day of liberty, you did in your preaching and practise, pull down and destroy: The other, because of your disobedience to what they are satisfied; and you your selves once were, God is calling you to ( viz. to have nothing to do with, separate from, this generation of men.) But

Fourthly, That 'tis your duty (especially if in a Church-Relation) to meet together as a People called, and picked by the Lord out of the Nations of the World, in a way of distinction from them, cannot be denied: the neglect of which, is charged by the Lord, as the first step to Apostacy, Heb. 10. 25. Be you in the practise of this duty, and see, what Spiritual Saint will be offended at you; if any should, you might have peace therein; you doing your duty, no just cause of Scan­dal is given. Yet further,

Fifthly, Consider on which side the Cross lies; which the Flesh, and fleshly interest is most opposite to, whether in going, or forbearing to go to hear these men, and let that be chosen: Usually, that is the way of God that hath most of the Cross in it, and the flesh is most strugling and contesting against. But thus much of the seventh Ar­gument.

Argument. 8.

That which Saints cannot do without being guilty of partaking with others in their sin, is utterly unlawful for them to do. But the Saints cannot attend upon the Ministry of England, without being guilty of [Page 75] partaking with them in their sin. Therefore—

The Major Proposition is clearly bottomed upon Scripture, Psal. 50. 18. Ephes. 5. 7. 1 Tim. 5. 22. 2 John 11. Rev. 18. 4. which might be abundantly demonstrated were it needful: Sure that God who commands me to abstain from all appearance of evil, 1 Thes. 5. 22. never enjoyned, expects not that I should be found in the practice of what, without sin, cannot be performed by me.

The Minor Proposition, viz. That the Saints cannot attend upon the present Ministry of England, without being partakers with them in their sin, will admit of a speedy dispatch. Two things are briefly to be enquired into.

1. What that, or those sins are we suppose the Ministers of Eng­land to be guilty of.

2. How it will appear that any person's attending upon their Mini­stry, renders him guilty of partaking with them therein. Of the former we have already treated, and proved (beyond what any are able to say to the contrary) That they are guilty of the sins of wor­shipping God in a way that is not of his appointment, of acting in the Holy things of God, by vertue of an Antichristian Power, Of­fice or Calling; of opposing really the Prophetical and Kingly Of­fice of Christ; of using and conforming to Modes and Rites in Worship, not appointed by the Lord, that have been abused to Ido­latry, &c. Nor is it denied by our Conforming-Brethren, but with some of these things the present Ministers of England may be justly charged: That they worship God after the way of the Common-Prayer-Book, with Modes and Rites used in the Papacy, cannot be denied: Nor can their undue administration of that great Ordinance of our Lord Jesus, of breaking Bread to all, according to the form therein prescribed: That they are Ordained, and some of them Re-ordained by the Episcopacy is also known. I ask, are these things the sin and evil of these men, or are they not? If they are not, why did not our preaching-Brethren receive the Ordination from the Bishops these received? Yea, why do not our half-conforming-Brethren attend upon the reading▪ of the Service used, joyn with them in the Sacra­ment of the Lords Supper as administred by them? Doth not their absenting themselves herefrom, abundantly demonstrate, that they in their consciences are perswaded, that 'tis the sin and evil of the present Priests of England thus to act, and from such a Mission in [Page 76] the Worship of the Lord? As for the second, That the hearing of the present Ministers of England, is that which renders a man guil­ty, of being partaker with them in their sin; the consideration of the several wayes persons may justly be charged with being guilty of par­taking with others in their sin, will abundantly demonstrate the truth thereof. To instance in a few particulars; Then may persons justly be charged as guilty hereof,

1. When they are found any way consenting with them in their sin, Psal. 50. 18. When thou sawest a Theif, then thou consentedst with him, and hast been partaker with Adulterers. 'Tis not the doing of the act that was done by these wicked persons, that is here called partaking with them, but a secret consenting with them therein.

2. When they do that which hath a real tendency to encourage persons in their sin, 2 John 11. Receive them not into your houses, bid them not Godspeed; for he that biddeth them God speed is partaker of their evil deeds.

3. When they neglect the doing of those duties which the Lord requires at their hands, for the reclaiming of them from their sin; such are Watching over, Rebuking, Admonishing, first privately, then by two, and in case of obstinacy and perseverance therein, telling it to the Church: which are duties eminently comprized in the ensuing Scriptures, 1 Thes. 5. 14. Heb. 3. 12, 13. and 10. 24, 25. Lev. 19. 17. Mat. 18. 15, 16, 17.

4. When they (notwitstanding all that they have done, or can do, being under an utter incapacity of proceeding further therein) per­ceive them to persevere in their sin, shall still continue to hold com­munion with them, and not separate from them. Rev. 18. 4. Come out of her my People; lest being partakers of her sins, ye receive of her plagues: The abiding with obstinate persevering Offenders (as it is against positive injunctions of the Most High, Rom. 16. 17. 2 Cor. 6. 14, 15, 16, 17. 1 Tim. 6. 5. Ephes. 5. 8, 11. Rev. 18. 4. So is it in the last place instacn'd in) assigned by the Spirit to be one way of par­taking with others in their sins. Not to multiply more particulars, let us in a few words make Application of these remarked. To the business in hand.

Is there any thing in the world that carries a greater brightness and evidence with it, than this, That the hearing the present Ministers of England, is to be partakers with them in their sin? is not our so [Page 77] doing, a secret consenting with them, and encouraging of them in their evil deeds? Is this to discharge those duties incumbent upon us (if we indeed look upon them as Brethren) for their reclaiming? yea, is this to come out of, and separate from them? what less? So then, except it can be proved, that the particulars instanc'd in, are not some of those wayes, whereby persons do become guilty of par­taking with other mens sins; or that to attend upon the present Mi­nisters of England, is not what doth symbolize with some one, more, or all of them (which can never be done) it evidently follows, that 'tis not lawful for Saints to hear the present Ministers of England, the doing whereof, is apparantly a partaking with them in their evil deeds.

A ninth Argument against hearing the present Ministers. That it casts contempt upon the Wayes and Institutions of Christ, hardens persons in a false way of Worship and Rebellion against God, proved. A tenth Argument produced, That 'tis not lawful to go into the Assemblies of false Worshippers, proved. An eleventh Argument, that there is no promise of a Blessing upon the hearing these men, proved. A twelfth Argument, proving, that so to do, is the first step to Apostacy. Several Queries proposed.

Argument 9.

THat the doing whereof doth cast contempt upon the Wayes and Institutions (some one or more of them) of our Lord Jesus, and hardens persons in a false way of Worship and Rebellion against him, is utterly unlawful for the Saints to do: But the hearing of the pre­sent Ministers of England is that, the doing whereof doth cast con­tempt upon the VVayes and Institutions (some one or more of them) of our Lord Jesus, and hardens persons in a false way of VVorship and Rebellion against him. Therefore.

The major Proposition is laid down in such full, clear, and evident expressions, bottom'd upon Scripture and right Reason, as carry a brightness with them, that none but such as are desperately and ju­dicially blinded, will or can gainsay.

The minor (or second Proposition) viz. That the hearing of the present Ministers of England, is the doing of that which doth cast con­tempt upon the VVayes and Institutions of our Lord Jesus, and [Page 78] hardens persons in a false way of VVorship and Rebellion against him, is by our dissenting-Brethren gainsayed. Three things are therein asserted.

1. That our hearing these persons is that which casts contempt upon the VVayes and Institutions of Christ. 2dly. That it hardens persons in a false way of VVorship. 3dly. That it hardens and en­courages souls in their Rebellion against the Lord. As for the first, a brief Observation of some of the Institutions of Christ, clearly bottom'd upon the Scripture, will abundantly evince its original to be from God.

First then, That separation from the world and men of the world, from all wayes of false VVorship, and the Inventions of men there­about, until the Saints of the Most-High be apparently a People dwelling alone, and not reckoned amongst the Nations (however it be decryed, and sound harsh in the ears of carnal men) is one grand Institution, a man may run and reade in the following Scriptures; Numb. 23. 9. Joh. 15. 19. 2 Cor. 6. 14, 15, 17, 19. Eph. 5. 8, 11. 2 Tim. 3. 5. Hos. 4. 15. Rev. 18. 4. Prov. 14. 7. (nor is it denied by some of our Conforming-Brethren.)

Secondly, That Saints separate from the world, should frequently meet together as a distinct body therefrom, for the edification and building up of each other in the VVay and VVill of God, accord­ing to the gifts bestowed upon them, is so evidently asserted, as the Institution of our alone King and Lawgiver in the Scripture, that it cannot be gainsayed; Mal. 3. 16. 1 Thess. 5. 11. Heb. 3. 12. Jude 20. Heb. 10. 24, 25. 1 Cor. 12. 9. Acts 12. 12. & 18. 23. Ephes. 5. 19. Jam. 5. 16. 1 Thess. 5. 14.

Thirdly, That particular Congregations, or Assemblies of Belie­vers, gathered into one body, for the Celebration of the Worship of God (in opposition to any National Church or Churches whatsoever) is of the Appointment of Christ, is alike evident as the former. Act. 8. 1, 3. & 12. 1. & 13. 14. & 15. 22. & 18. 22. & 20. 14, 28. 1 Cor. 1. 2. & 6. 4. Acts 9. 1. 1 Cor. 16. 19. Rom. 16. 4. 2 Cor. 8. 1. Gal. 1. 2. Acts 16. 4, 5. & 14. 23. 1 Cor. 11, 12. & 14. 4, 5, 12, 19. 2 Cor. 1. 1. Rev. 1. 2, 3, 11.

Fourthly, That Christ hath appointed Officers of his own, to act in the Holy-things of God, in and over these Assemblies, whom he fur­nisheth with Gifts every way suiting their Imployment, to whom, [Page 79] without turning aside to the voice of strangers, or attending upon the Ministery of such as are not of his Appointment, it's the duty of Saints to hearken, is very conspicuous in the ensuing Scriptures, Eph. 4. 11. Heb. 13. 7, 13. Mat. 24. 4, 5, 23, 24. 1 Joh. 2. 18. & 4. 1. 2 Joh. 10. Acts 20. 29, 30, 31. Rev. 2. 14, 15, 16. which exactly agrees with what was practised by primitive Believers, who it seems received none without the Testimony of some Brethren of known integrity in the Churches; 1 Cor. 16. 3. Act. 9. 26. Not to mention more, let it be weighed, whether the hearing of the present Ministers of England, doth not cast contempt upon these Institutions of Christ. VVhat is more evidently preached forth by such a practice, than, 1. That separation from the Assemblies of England (though in their constitu­tion, carnal and worldly) and the worship thereof (although false and meerly of humane invention) was and is our sin and evil? 2dly. That 'tis not by vertue of any Soveraign Institution of Christ, the duty of Saints to meet together, as a body distinct (without going out to other Assemblies to worship with them) for their mutual edi­fication in the Lord. 3dly. That particular Assemblies are not soley of the Institution of the Lord Jesus, but that National are also to be accounted as the true Churches of Christ (though they have no footing in the Scripture of the New-Testament, from whence the Pattern of Gospel-Churches is soley to be deduced.) Yea, 4thly, That the Officers of Christ's Appointment are not sufficient for the Saints, but together with them, the help of false and Idol-shepherds is to be sought after, than which, what greater contempt can be poured upon the forementioned Institutions of our dear Lord? Yet who sees not all this to be the language which is heard and goes forth into the Nations, from the practice of our Brethren in the matter we are debating? If they look upon Separation in the sense before-minded, to be of the Institution of Christ, can they offer a greater affront thereunto, than to run into the Assemblies of the Nation? If they judge it their duty to meet together distinct from the World and its VVorshippers, why run they thereunto? If they apprehend National Churches to be the result of humane prudence, without bottom in the Scripture, and the Ministers of Christ to be onely (in contra­distinction to the Ministers that are not of his Appointment) attended unto; why give they the right-hand of fellowship unto such Assem­blies, as profess themselves to be parts of such a National Church, [Page 80] and hear Ministers that have relation thereunto? who have re­ceived (as hath been proved) no Mission from Christ to their Mini­stry. If this be not evidently to pour contempt upon the Institutions of Christ, and confessedly so, we shall for ever dispair of success in the most facile and righteous undertaking. As for the second Par­ticular, that hereby poor souls are hardened in a false way of Wor­ship, what can be thought less? (supposing the Worship in the Pa­rish-Assemblies of England to be so, as hath been proved) when they shall see Professors, that were wont to pray and preach together, to profess, and protest against Common-Prayer-Book-Priests, and Worship, to cry up, or at least approve of, Laws made for their ejection, if guilty of no other crime, than conforming to the Worship they now conform to and practise, now flock unto their Assemblies, and hear their Priests: what can they imagine less, than that these persons, thus acting in a direct contrariety to their former judgement and practice, do now see they were mistaken? and are, beginning at least, to return unto those paths fom whence they departed, and that these wayes, in which they and their forefathers have walked, are the Good Old Way in which rest is to be found? Wo unto the world because of Offences, wo also unto them by whom they come. Nor is the third Particular, viz. That hereby poor souls are hardened in their Rebellion and Blasphemy against God, the Spirit, his Tabernacle, and them that dwell therein, to be in the least questioned: We every day hear, to the breaking of our hearts, stout words spoken against the Lord, because of the practice of some in this thing. What say the wicked of the world less, than that Religion, which many pretend to, is but a Fancy, that the Professors thereof are but a Generation of Hypocrites, that will turn to any thing to save themselves; that the spirit by which they are acted is but a spirit of Phanaticism and De­lusion! yea, how do they bless themselves that they are not, nor ever were (and resolve so much the more, they will never be) of the number of such Professors! Ask them a Reason of all this, and they wonder you should ask them, and speedily reply to you, Do you not see how many of you, for fear of Persecution, have disserted your former Principles, and are returned to our Assemblies and the Ministry thereof, and that any of you stand out ('tis from hence evident) that it is from a spirit of Pride and Obstinacy, and not, as you pretend, from Divine Ten­derness, and the Leadings of the Spirit of the Lord. And what can we [Page 81] say to all these things? must we not with grief and sorrow confess, that there is indeed too great an occasion administred to them for their thus speaking, though this will be no plea for them in the day of Christ. Blessed are they that are not offended in him. It remaineth then, that inasmuch as the hearing the present Ministers of England, pours out contempt upon the Wayes and Institutions of Christ, har­dens persons in a false way of Worship, Rebellion and Blasphemy against the Lord: it's utterly unlawful for Saints to be found in the practice thereof. To all that hitherto hath been said, we shall yet briefly add,

Argument. 10.

God calls his People out of, and strictly charges them, not to go to the places of False-Worship: Therefore 'tis unlawful for the Saints to attend upon the present Ministers of England. The Antecedent is clearly proved, Hos. 4. 15. Amos 4. 4. The Reason of the Conse­quence is, Because we cannot go to hear the present Ministers of England without we go to their places and assemblies of False-worship (as the Common-Prayer-Book-Worship hath been proved to be.)

Argument 11.

That, upon the doing whereof Saints have no promise of a Blessing, not any ground to expect it, is not lawful for them to do. But in the hearing of these men, the Saints have no promise of a Blessing, nor ground to expect it. Therefore.

The Major (or first Proposition) will not be denied. As for the Minor (or second Proposition) That the Saints have no promise of a Blessing from God nor ground to expect it, in the hearing of the present Ministers of England, may many wayes be demonstrated. If there be any promise of a Blessing upon them from God, in their so doing, let it be produced, and we shall willingly confess, there is no weight in this Argument: But this we conceive to be no easie task for any to discharge, and that for these Reasons:

1. The Blessing of the Lord is upon Sion, Psal. 87. 2. and 78. 68. there he dwells, Psal. 9. 11. and 74. 2. Jer. 8. 19. Isa. 8. 18. Joel 3. 17, 21. the presence of Christ is in the midst of the Golden Candlesticks, Rev. 1. 12, 13. and 2. 1. 'tis his Garden in which he feedeth and dwells, Cant. 6. 2. and 8. 13. and we are not surer of any thing (nor will it be denied by our Conforming Brethren) (many of them) than we are of this, That the Assemblies of England, in their present consti­tution, [Page 82] are so far from being the Sion of God, his Candlesticks, his Garden, that they are a very Wilderness, and that Babel out of which the Lord commands his People to hasten their escape, Rev. 18. 4.

2. God never promiseth a Blessing to a People waiting upon him in that way which is polluted and not of his appointment, as we have proved the Worship of England to be.

3. The Lord hath expresly said concerning such as run before they are sent, That they shall not profit the People, Jer. 23. 32.

4. The Lord protesteth, that such as refuse to obey his Calls, to come out of Babylon, shall partake of her Plagues, Rev. 18. 4.

5. Where the Lord is not, in respect of his special Presence and Grace, there is no ground to expect any Blessing: but God is not so in the midst of the Parochial Assemblies of▪ England. Where are the souls that are converted, comforted, strengthened, stablished, that are waiting at the doors of their house? Though many will not see it, yet a sad spirit of withering, and visible decaies is to be found upon many that are waiting upon the teachings of the Ministers of this day: And we hope the Lord will in mercy, cause those that are indeed his, to see it, that they may remember from whence they have fallen, repent, do their first works, and watch to strengthen the things that remain, that are ready to dye, for God hath not found their works perfect before him.

Argument 12.

That, the doing whereof is one step to Apostacy, is not lawful to be done. But the hearing the present Ministers of England is one step to Apostacy. Therefore.

The Major Proposition will readily be granted by all: The be­ginnings of great evils are certainly to be resisted. Apostacy is one of the greatest evils in the world.

The Minor (or second Proposition) viz. That the hearing of the present Ministers of England is one step to Apostacy, is evident.

1. It cannot be done (especially by persons of Congregational Principles) without a relinquishment of Principles owned by them, as received from God: That the Church of England, as National, is a Church of the institution of Christ: That persons not called to the Office of the Ministry by the Saints, are rightful Ministers of Christ, must be owned, and taken for granted, ere the conscience can acquiesce in the hearing of the present Ministers (for we suppose [Page 83] 'twill not be asserted by those with whom we have to do, that there can be a true Ministry in a False Church, or that False Ministers may be heard; and yet the present Ministers are Ministers in, and of the National Church of England, and were never solemnly deputed to that Office by the suffrage of the Lords People.)

2dly. Nor can it be done without the neglect of that duty, which with others, is eminently of the appointment of the Lord, to secure from Apostacy, instanc'd in by the Author to the Hebrews, Hebr. 10. 25. Not forsaking the assembling of your selves together, as the manner of some is, but exhorting one another, and so much the more as you see the day approaching. In which the duty of Saints as­sembling of themselves together, as a body distinct from the world, and its Assemblies, as also their frequent, and as often as may be, exhorting one another, as a medium to secure them (by the blessing of the Lord thereupon) from a spirit of Degeneracy and Apostacy from God, is clearly asserted: Whence it undeniably follows, That the hearing of the present Ministers of England (being inconsistent with the constant and diligient use of the means prescribed for the preservation of the Saints in the way of God: for whilst they are at­tending upon their teachings, they cannot assemble themselves ac­cording to the prescription of God in the forementioned Scripture) is at least one step to the dreadful sin of Apostacy from God, and there­fore is it utterly unlawful for Saints so to do. And thus far of the 12th Argument for the proof of the assertion under our maintenance, viz. That tis not lawful for Saints to hear the present Ministers of England, to which many others might be added: But we doubt not, to the truly tender and humble enquiring Christian, what hath been offered will be abundantly sufficient to satisfie his conscience in the present enquiry. We shall only in the close offer a few Queries to be in the fear of the Holy One, considered by the intelligent Reader.

Quer. 1. Whether the Lord Jesus be not the alone Head, King, and Lawgiver to his Church?

2. Whether the Laws, Statutes, Orders and Ordinances of Christ, be not faithfully to be kept, though all the Princes in the world should interdict and forbid it?

3. Whether to introduce other Laws for the Government of the Church of Christ and the Worship of his House, be not an high ad­vance against, and intrusion into his Kingship and Headship?

[Page 84]4. Whether the Lord Jesus as King and Head over his Church, hath not instituted sufficient Officers and Offices for the administra­tion of Holy Things in his House, to whom no more can be added without a desperate undervaluation and contempt of his Wisdome, Headship and Soveraignty over it?

5. Whether the Officers instituted by Christ, are not onely▪ Pastors, Teachers, Elders, Deacons and Helpers?

6. Whether the Offices of Arch-Bishops, Lord-Bishops, Deans, Sub-Deans, Prebendaries, Chancellors, Priests, Deacons, (as an order of the first step to a Priesthood) Arch-Deacons, Sub-Deacons, Commissaries, Officials, Proctors, Registers, Apparitors, Parsons, Vicars, Curats, Ca­nons, Petty-Canons, Gospellers, Epistollers, Chaunters, Virgers, Organ-Players, Queristers, be Offices any where instituted by the Lord Je­sus in the Scripture?

7. Whether the calling and admission into these last mentioned Offices, their administration, and maintenance now had, and re­ceived in England, be according to the Word of God?

8. Whether every true visible particular Church of Christ, be not a select company of People, called and separated from the world and False Worship thereof, by the Spirit and Word of God, and joyned together in the Fellowship of the Gospel, by their own free and vo­luntary consent, giving up themselves to Christ and one another ac­cording to the Will of God?

9. Whether a company of People living in a Parish (though the most of them be visible Drunkards, Swearers, &c. or at least strangers to the work of regeneration upon their souls) coming (by compulsion or otherwise) to the hearing of Publick Prayers or Preaching, are in the Scripture account Saints, and a Church of Christ according to the Pattern given forth by him: Or rather, be not to be esteemed Daughters of the old Whore and Babel, spoken of in the Scriptures?

10. Whether in such a Church there is, or can rationally be sup­posed to be, a true Ministry of the institution of Christ?

11. Whether the Book of Common-Prayer, or stinted Lyturgies, be of the prescription of Christ, and not of mans devising and in­vention?

12. Whether if one part of a Worship used by a People, be pol­luted, the whole of their Worship be not to be looked upon, in a Scripture account, as polluted and abominable, according to 1 Kings [Page 85] 18. 21. 2 King. 17. 33. Isa. 66. 3. Hos. 4. 15. Ezek. 43. 8. Zeph. 1. 5? so that if their Prayers be naught and polluted, their Preaching be not so too.

13. Whether a Ministry set up in direct opposition unto a Mini­stry of Christ, which riseth upon its fall, and falls by its rise, can by such as so account of it be lawfully joyned unto?

14. Whether such as have forsworn a Covenant Reformation ac­cording to the VVord of God, and swear to a Worship that is meerly of humane devising, that have nothing of the essentials of a Ministry of Christ to be found upon them, may be accounted of as his Mini­sters, and be adhered to?

15. VVhether such as shall so do, be not guilty of casting contempt upon the Institutions of Christ, and disobedience against his Royal Edicts, commanding them to separate from persons of such a complection? To which many others of the like nature might be added.

Arguments for the lawfulness of hearing the present Ministers of England; 1. From the supposed Precept of Christ, Mat. 23. 1. (whether the Scribes and Pharisees, Mat. 23. 1. were Magistrates or Ministers, debated: If Ministers, that their Office and Calling was lawful, proved. That Christ neither commands nor permits his Disciples to hear them, proved.) 2. From the practice of Christ and his Apostles. 3. From Phil. 1. 15. 4. From their preaching truth. 5. From Judas his preaching. 6. From their being good men. 7. From the practice of Learned and Good men in former dayes, and now. 8. From the Magistrates com­mand. 9. From the pretended Plea of their being true Ministers be­cause they convert souls. 10. From persons not knowing whither to go to hear: Fully answered.