Sixthly, contrary to

the manner of reforming of the Chriftian

Church.

Word, to do his work. A like truth with this concerning Uzza is 1 Sam. 2. 34, 35. (and I wonder neither of then made impreffion upon the confciences of Amefius, Henderson, and other the like brazen trumpets to popular feditions) where we read, that when the prodigious fins of Elie's fons (the Priests) provoked God to use extream severity against their whole family, he doth not threaten to raise up the people, to reform the Priesthood, but promiseth that he will raife him up another Prieft.

'Tis granted the Chriftian miniftry is not now confined as the Jewish was, unto one family, or tribe neither is our Church (as theirs) limited to one nation, but if when the vineyard was thus either way e clofed, God left the reformation of ecclefiaftical corruptions, if not folely, yet inexclufively to the chief Magiftrate, and fons of Levi (his firft Committees for the custody" of that discipline) how much more forcibly doth it conclude in this ftate of the Church, that duly ordained Officers be convened under the authority, and protection of Chriftian' Princes, about the determination of matters of like na

ture.

First, Because Chriftian Kings as nurfing fathers, may challenge the fame authority in our Churches, as the Jewish Kings exercifed in their Church, because the Polity, or external adminiftration of difcipline is (even Presbyters being Judges) fo much alike in both: Witness the London Presbyters, they lay; Jus divin. What Grotius Jaith, that the government of the Churches of Chrift was conformed to the pattern of the Jewish Synagogue, is true in many things.

1 par pag.

172.

Secondly, Because the firft Chriftian Emperours, and Kings Read Bp. had this power peaceably allowed them, neither can they now be excluded but a Pope fteps immediatly into their place, or which is worfe, many.

Jewels defence of his Apology a

gainst Har

Thirdly, Becaufe each Church now grieved, or corrupted, ding. pag.691. hath not only a liberty as the Jewish had, to convene all her, and feq. London. 1571 own Officers (fome whereof at leaft may be rationally adjudged to be as much fpirited with a zeal for reformation, and have, or ought to have more reforming abilities, then the rest of the people.) But alfo (which the Jews had not) hath priviledge to affemble with her fifter Churches in general, or other Synods to eafe and reform her felf. And why should not we rather expect Chrifts prefence, and fubmit to its dictates in fuch affemblies, fince he hath promised it. Mat. 18. 17. Mat. 28. 19, 20.

And

And the Apoftolical Church practifed it, A&t. 15. 6. And the Apostles, and Elders came together for to confider of this matter, then to await an extraordinary call, and affiftance to a promiscuous multitude, who however they come together (even their advocates, and patrons being Judges) they cannot affigna werrant, or example of Scripture for their direction. This fhall conclude our third reafon against the temporarinels of ChurchOfficers in this second limitation, and expofition of the word

temporary.

Fourthly, Who ever have in thefe dayes ftood to an extraordinary call, they neither have the gifts, nor do Fourthly, the works of them who are accounted extraordinary Officers in how pretenthe primitive Church.

ded extraor

dinary officers

neither have the gifts, nor do the works of those who were formerly accounted extraordi

nary.

I

gifts.

Sca. 25.

Compend.

Jus divin par. p. 116.

Firft, They have not their gifts. Amefius faith the former, First, they extraordinary Officers had extraordinary gifts, and affistance to have not their minifter without error; what gifts, and affiftance the first Habent do Church-Officers had we difpute not, this we do deny that na & assistenAmefius, or any for him can maintain thofe to be thus qualified, tiam extraor whom in that very Chapter he calls extraordinary Officers ut fine errore raised up of latter times, or fince the reformation begun by miniftrent. AMartin Luther in Germany. Wollebius gives a more particular mef. medull. account of their gifts, he faith they were prophefie, tongues, and lib. 1. ca. 33. miracles. But where, or in whom fhall we find them, or any of them in thefe dayes. The London Divines abate one of thefe Theol. lib.1. three, they fay; He might be an extraordinary Officer who did not ca. 26.22 work miracles, they instance in John the Baptift; were it not for the fake of others, I could turn this over with a fhort answer, and fay what am I concerned in their contradictions? But leaft the Enthufiaft take fanctuary at it, I difpute its priviledge. That John the Baptift wrought no miracles, is confeffed, but there may be feveral reafons given for it; & why it is not to be drawn into a juftifying president of the want of those gifts, in any now pretended extraordinary Officer: For John was the immediate forerunner of Chrift; that the Meffiah fhould come, was the conftant and ordinary belief, and at this time the raised expectation of the Jews, unto whom he preached, and affirmed de facto that he was come. This was a more direct way to prove his doctrine, then working of mirales; for miracles may be feined, in his preaching could be no deceit; Ifhis Auditors turned to their Bibles, and found what the antient Prophets

u

predicted

predicted concerning the Meffiab verified in Chrift, they had reason to beleive their Preacher, otherwise they might reject both as deceivers: This if I mistake not, is a reafon affigned by the holy Ghoft, why John wrought no miracles; Joh, 10. 41. And many reforted unto him, and faid, John indeed wrought no miracles, but all that he faid of this man were true; how foon John fpake of Chrift, and how he protects himself under the wings of his authority, when questioned for doing fomewhat reputed extraordinary; appears by Joh. 1. 25, 26, 27. And they asked him, and faid; why baptizeft thou then? if thou be not the Chrift, nor Elias,nor that Prophet, John answered them faying, I baptize you with water, but there ftandeth one among you, whom you know not, be it is, &c. The fum of all this is, John was a cryer, For Herald. Joh. 1, 22. who gave notice of the coming, and approach of the longed for Saviour; whofe meffage could be no ved otherwise confirmed then by Chrifts prefence: Miracles would do no good without it, and were needlefs with it. Perhaps alfo our Lord referved thofe largeffes of the divine bounty to be diftributed among the people by his own hands, or the hands of his Apoftles, after he was more publickly known. We expect therefore from our now pretended extraordinary Officers,to minifter without errour, prophefie, and work miracles (all which in the judgment of their favourers are requifite qualifications in an extraordinary Officer) or we cannot, we will not own them.

SY

H

་་

t

Secondly, They do not do their works. This is by far a Secondly, more certain way to judge of the order of Officers, then gifts, they do not do for gifts may be divers, works must be the fame; and all that their works. we have faid concerning them in the foregoing Paragraph, is to be reduced to the force of an argument, arifing from the conceffions of our oppofites: But we shall by and by digrefs, return we therefore into our way; now pretended extraordinary Officers, do not do the works of formerly prefumed extraor dinary Officers. The Apostles and Evangelifts preached, bapti zed, and mainly endeavoured to build Churches, where no foundation was already laid to their hands, and to preferve fettled Churches in order and unity. But our extraordinaries, if they break down the carved works of Gofpel order in con. ftituted Churches, with axes and hammers (inftruments of vio lence of the readieft execution) are inftantly baptized by their Party into the name, and confirmed in the Office of an Evange lift, or an Apostle. The good works of real Apostles and Evan

gelifts

ཉལ་

gelifts are, and must be accounted temporary; pretended Zealots have other work to do, then to travail in the converfion of the Gentiles, but the bad works of nominal Apoftles, and Evan gelifts are, and we fear will be long continuing. It exceeds our Arithmetick to caft up what damage, either the Chriftian Church in general, or my mother Church, the Church of England in particular hath fuftained by their violence, and ufurpatio.3.A on. What inftitutions of Chrift, and Apoftolical practices have we had difputed, cenfured, and exploded by factious, and clamorous novelty, out-voicing them to breath their laft, and close their eyes with thofe of the Evangelifts and Apoftles. And what novel inventions have been obtruded upon the Church, in the commanding form of a Divine Right, by felf fent pretenders to their Office. To fay the hot Sun in Africa, doth not more frequently generate deformed terreftrial monsters, then this loose opinion about the extraordinarinefs, and temporarinefs of Church-Officers, doth enliven ecclefiaftical mis-shapen births, might be thought a Rhetorical flourish, were not multitudes of confirming inftances at band; for what errour, or falfe doctrine hath profpered from: Mahumetanifme to this days whofe Authors have not pretended extraordinary communion with a deity, and voiced the vifions of their own heads to be the revelation of the bleffed fpirit: But we will draw the points of our compass nearer, and within the circumference of the imme-Cut off by diate preceding, and prefent centuries. Thomas Munzer; the the fword of Patriarch Anabaptift, a fmoaking firebrand, whofe tayl threat- Juftice, ned ruin to fo great a part of Germany, boasted of Gods extraordi 1525, nary raising him up with the sword of Gideon to extirpate the wicked, or if you will read his meaning in his practices,the magistracy, and miniftry; John the Botcher of Leyden, who ftitch't Munzers fcattered fhreds into a kingdome, and fewed on himself as their cape, or King, at Munster in Germany, blafphemously enough (had it not been done by an extaaordinary call) ftyled himself; The King of Saints, as a mock Christ, chofe his twelve Apostles; and like himfelf,a lustful falations wretch, took his fifteen wives at one time, one whereof difrelifhing his practices, he facrificed (for he was both king and Prieft) immediatly before he celebrated the Eucharift. This wretch burning many thousands of choice books in that Town, juftified it by Scripture, faying, the time was now come when they should be all taught of God. Thomas Schuk of A. C. 1529. Gaul in Helvetia an Anabaptift alfo, Leydens Seniour (though in respect to their King, I place him beneath him in this dif

"

И 2

courfe)

C.

A. C. 1536.

C

course) in a full affembly of his confederates, caused his own brother to kneel down before him, and in that posture killed him; their common father, and mother afterwards expoftulating with him, to fhew his motives and inducements to commit that horrid villany, he impudently told them, what was done, was by the will of his heavenly father, wherein he barbaroufly,and A. C. 1550. fearedly perfifted at the place of execution. Henry Nicholas, the unhappy root of all the accurfed ranting practices, from his time downward unto ours, faluted our fathers in this mock Apoftolick ftyle. Henry Nicholas by the grace and mercy of Gd, through the holy spirit of the love of Chrift, raised up by the highest God from the death, according to the Providence of God and bis promifes, annointed with the holy Ghoft, in the old age of the under franding of Jefus; Godded with God in the spirit of bis love, illuminated in the spirit of the heavenly truth, the true light of the perfect being,made beir with Chrift in the Heavenly good of the riches of God, according to bis promises in the most holy fervices of God, to the obedience of bis love. Hacket that manlike nionfter, and fhame of his A. C.1591. Country, whofe pofitions were fo dreadfully blafphemous, as a fober tongue cannot name them without bliftring, gave out by himself, and his two falfe prophets, Coppinger and Arthington, how God had extraordinarily raifed him up to reform the Church. That bloody parricide Enoch ap Evan, natures byblow, and the ftain of generation, whofe inhumane murder of his own natural mother and brother, at Bishops-Cafile in the Studely's County of Salop, in the year 1633. as an ill boding Meteor, and looking-glais Malignant Comet, ufhered in the immediately following Civil of fchifme. wars, and unnatural troubles, fearedly affirmed, that he butchered thofe harmless fouls in a zeal for God; the fuel to which accurfed flame was their filial fubmiffion to the determinations of their mother Church,in receiving the bleffed Eucharift kneeling, and refufing to fubmit to his Phanatick dictates in that matter. What need more words? or why waft we time in perfonal inftances? doth not Socinianifme (that fink whereinto all herefies, antient, and modern are evacuated) brazen-facedly tell the world, that their tenet, which ungods Chrift, and renders his Ecclefia no- death and fatisfaction infolvent for our fins, revealed to them as a fire credunt more nigh, and expeditious ways to what concerns the true glory of ea fibi a deo Chrift and God to advance true piety, and refine evangelical truth: revelata effe; que ad excolendam veritatem evangelicam, utpote in quius de vera dei, & Chrifti gloria c. & denique que devia vere pietaris expeditiori reddenda agunt. Smale. præf. no ving. ex Calov Socin profligat Wirlberge 16said.

TA

Fauftus