Page images
[ocr errors][ocr errors]

nership, not consisting in ones value, or estimation of another,
but in every of their joynt interestfor instance, it is used of
men of the same vocation, thus Luk. 5.10. And so was also
James, and John the fons of Zebedee, which were partners, souvenir
with Simon. 2. e. they were all Fishernien, and traded upon a
common Stock. Șt. Paul calls Philemon his partner, ver. 17.
and urgeth it as an Argument, why he should receive his Run-
nagate Servant Onefimus into favour, and employment ; which
partnership let it confift either in work, or wealth, implies joynt
interest and concernment, otherwise St. Pauls argunient had
been weak and invalid. Thus sufferers of like affli&ion, Heb. 10
33. and sharers of like grace, I Pet. 5. 1. 2 Pet. 1.4. 1 Cor. 10.
13. and ver. 20. 2 Cor. 1.7. are all of them expressed by this
word xortaros. The substantive xorvavía which with xorvards are Items
sprouting from one and the same root, is used of the A& of the
other Apostles, receiving S.Paul & Barnabas into a fellowship of
their Office.Gal.2.9. And wben James,Cephas, Johnwa bo seemed
to be pillars perceived the grace which was given to me, they gave to me.
and Barnabas the right band of fellowo ship, Xosvcovies And why did
they give it, even as it follows in the verse, that we should go una
to the Heathen, they unto the Circumcision. This being the usual
fenfe of the word xortivos in other places, therefore Titus being
called St. Pauls partner,doth more probably evince his Aposto
late tlien his Evangelizate; e pecially it we reflect upon him;
either ordaining elders, and setting things in order at Creet, Tit. 1.
5.or accompanying his fellow travailers in this text of the Epi-
tle to the Corinthians;Pho are called αδελφός ήμά'Απόσυλοι Εκκλησία,
or our brethren the Apostles of the Churches.
*The other word Eurezzo or fellow helper is promiscuously used
of any kind of helpers, either temporal or spiritual; Thus A-
guila, and Priscilla are called St. Pauls helpers. Rom. 16. 3.
Greet Aquila, and Priscilla my belpers. What Aquila was we
dispute not, but Priscilla could not be St. Pauls helper in the
Ministerial Office, she being of the Sex prohibited to take Or-,
ders. Contrariwise, Titus was St. Pauls helper in Office, he.
being engaged at Creet upon distinct Apoftolical works; which
whether they make both St. Paul, and Titus to be of one Order,
or one an Apoftle, the other an Evangelift, let the prudent Rea-
der determine ; our business is to proceed to the examination
of the residue of Bucanus his Text whereof, A&t. 16.3. is the
third. It concerns Evangelist Timothy, and relates how St.
Paul took, and circumcised him ; which I believe Bucanus mil-

Bb 2


[ocr errors]

ftook for his taking him, and sending him forth to Evangelize, - the words are bim (i. e. Timothy, of whom the discourse

is continued from the first verse) would S. Paul have to go forth with bim, and took bim and circumcised him, because of the Jeans mbicb dwelt in those quarters, for they all knew that his father was * Greek. This Timothy long after ministred to St. Paul, A&. 19, 32. consequently could not be at the time of St. Pauls circumcifing him his Companion and Fellow labourer, for the reasons expressed in the second Exception of this discourse, pag.69. Ang Suffice this in examination of his third,

proceed we to his fourth Text, which is z. Tim.4. 11, 12. This is his proof of three Evangelifts, let us read it, and beed it well; the words are Only Luke is with me, take Mark and bring him along with sher, for be is profitable unto-me for the Ministry; And Tychicus bave I sent to Ephesus. Here are three men named; Luk, Murk, und Tycbicus, but were a thousand Alembicks set to the Text, and worider-working Paracelfus alive to tend them, he could not thence extract three, yea not one Evangelist; for inftance, Only Luke ås with me- ; what pity is it that is an Evangelist is not added? or is fuch addition needless? was every companion to the Apostles an Evangelift? Alas it cannot be, for Barnabas was with St. Paul, Act. 14. 14. and yet he; Priscilla was with St. Paul, A&. 18.18. and yet she was no Evangelitt

. Bring Mark along with thee; where shall we find the Evangelift in this phrase? If we grope by conje&ture, 'tis because our Author leads us into, and leaves us in the dark; was Markan Evangelist, because he travailed in company, or was desired to accompany with Timothy the Evangelift? The primitive custom yet continuing, thar Officers of the same Order should travailin couples. This proves one incertainty by another more incertain, till Timothies Evangelizate be clearly, and convincingly proved. But

what if Timothy was no Evangelift in the sense of Bucanus his Definition : And what if Mark were the same perfon whom Barnabas assumed into a partnership, as is probably afirmed by Elbius, and A Lapide. Then Mark was as farr from being an Evangelist as the Text is from mentioning it. Ticbicus bave I sent to Epbeluszbut wherefore? could he be sent upon no other errand,except to Evangelize? What I was Timothy, and the Church at Ephesus Ethnick, and yet to hear the first news of Christ; or is an Apoftles MesTenger; and an Evangelift terms Equivalent ? If we will beleeve the Postscript to the Epistle to the Romans, is will affire us that Phete carried it to Rome, but I hope none

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors][ocr errors]

will take advantage of her being sent by the Apostle, to co:1
chude her to be an Evangelift. We must beleeve

thar fome were sent by the Apostles to tetried Chiches, (luch Ephesus was, ere Iychicus was sent thither)upon other errands then to evangelize, namely to collect their charity towards their poor and neceilitatel brethreni, 2 Cor. 8. 18. and why might not Tychicus be sent upon one or other of these accounts, as well as to evangelide? sure I am, thar mén of greater eminency then Bucanus ( as Barunime and Pelecani) lay Tychicus was sent upon the former accompt, or to bring this Epiftle to Timotby; and I am as sure, that considering S. Paul's present necessities, it is more probam ble that he was sent upon the latter accompt, or 'in hasten a collection for the Apottles relief, rather then to evangelize. We proceed to Bucanus his fifth text, which is Luk. 10. 1. But now his proofs draw nigh the dregs, and are very hat, for he borrows it from Calvin ; and we have said enough in the fifth Excaption to prove that those who believes it treats of the Evangelists, (as they are defined by Calvin or Bucanus) credit mens Fancies, not the word of God. The last text is Rom. 16.7. which of ali the rest is shot widest from the white of truth, for: as it neither mentions the name, nor any presumed work of the Evangelift, so those whom it mentioneth, it exprefly ftiles iníonun ir teis, apósodots, or famous among the Apostles,, of which phrale the Reader shall God willing have a further account in the tract concerning Apoftles. This shall conclude the Eighth Exception. The Ninth follows.

Ninth Exception. We challenge Spanhemius for bringing in Ninth Except. by head and shoulders 1 Cor. 12. 9, 10. as a witness in this con- 1 Cor.12.9,10. troverfie, where is so little appearance either of the Evangelift doth not prove or of his Office, that no Commentator, Presbyterian, or other, Spanhemius's

definition (tc my knowledge) besides Spanhemius, suspe&s his being there.

In loc. Marlorate in his Ecclesiastical Expofition, culls out the choicest of Modern, Presbyterian, and other Commentators, and tefides his own opinion, he cites Calvin, Meyer, Martyr, and Bullinger, but writes 110€ one word of the Evangelift

. To these may be added Aretius and Pifcator. Indeed Beza upon the place oce casionally mentions Philip the Evangelist, not with reference to his Office, or what he had, and performed, but in reference to his gifts, or what he had not, and could not perform. The text treating of discerning of spirits,which Philip wanted,he baptizing Simon Magus, whom Peter afterwards discerned to be in the gall of bitterness, and bond of perdition. If any think Spanbemius hath


In loc.

B. 3


dived deeper and nearer to the bottom of this text, then any other Expositor, Let them compare it with his Definition, í have done it, and perceive them to be lo disparate and unagreeing, that I could not finde in my heart to waste paper in transcribing and facing them one with another. The Reader

who is unsatisfied may read the one in his Bible, the other in the Ljusly fixth page of this Discourse.

Thus have we finished our first Head of Exceptions against the Definers, and submit it to the Readers Judgement, whe

ther they have proceeded according to their Evidence, yea or Corollary If they have not, as I verily believe, and hope I have proved from the nine they have not. We beg cur Reader seriously and in the fear of precedent Exceprions.

God, to consider whether the finger of God doth not here write in Capital Letters, That Presbyters are themselves most guilty of what they charge as tbe highest crime upon (thers ; it being an Axiome with the more downright and rigid of that party, (they call them conscientious, having learned from Beza, to distinguish betwixt Science and Conscience, who concedes the latter to the Antients, and arrogates the former to his own time and way)

That na Church matter, although it be relative to the external In Epiftola ad administration of her Discipline, ought to be entertained in L'uditium. that quality, without producing of Scripture-credentials :

-When bebold and stand amazed! we must take the definition of
Church-Officers, who are fo effential to the Churcbes external Form,

as she cannot be visible without them, upon the Defineys bare words, .:

for other warrant they give us not for their Definitions, the imperti-ñent quotation of chapter

. and verse onely, excepted. But we have fubnitred all to the Judgement of the impartial Reader ; And let me adde, I dare make the conscience of the most rigid perfon a Tribunal whereat I am content that whatever hath been

faid of Calvin and the rest shall receive a re-examination. Prc- vided he have room:enough in liis Judgement left spare of prejudice to entertain and discuss this question, Whether the Defifiners proceed upon such clear, full and convincing Scriptures as they require from others in lesser things, and is, and ought to

be used in a bufiness of this nature and weight? Second Head But part of this charge is yet behinde, and Method requires of Exceptions, vis to profecute aad finilh it, ere we crave theirs, or any other are not agreed Readers final Judgement. 1

We deliverit'ia short thus, The Jury of Deiners are not agreed diaproved in in their verdi&ta. This hath been in part evidenced in the Gifth five instances.


in their Ver

[ocr errors]

exception, where the contradictions of Calrin, Bucanus and Spanbemius, and Polanus about the seventy Disciples have been evidenced : But over and beidejt, there remairis several exceptions arising out of their Definicións.

Fiift Except. Firft Exception. Beza, Faius and Spanhemius say, Evangelifts Beza Flaius,

and Spanheconstituted Churches. Contrariwise Aretius faith, They did not

mius, against constitute Churches, but confirzed the Apoftles Doctrine, and taught Aretius, Zanin fixed Asemblies. Zanchi us faith, They preached the Gospel nom chius, and bere, now there, where I be Apostles had not founded Churches. And Maresius. Marefi us faith. They were sent bitber,and thither to finish the work. Second Exbegun by the Apostles.

cept. the Lone) Second Exception. The London divines say. Exangelists bad dor divines a a vicariate charge of all Churches. Contrariwise Aretius faith, gainst Aretino necessity lay uyon them to preach every where, but they taught in us, Urfinus,

and Pareus. certain Churches. Urfinus and Pareus say, They taught divers Churches.

Third. Except. Third Exception. Aretius destroyes his Definition by his

Aretius over; own presumed confirming instances; he defines Evangelists by throws his deGospel preachers, where the Apostles bad founded Churches. And finition by his affirms that Jimotby, and Pbilip were both of them Evangelifts.own proofs. in that sense. Whereas Philip prepared, and drew together the materials, wherewith St. Peter, and St. Jobn afterwards builded a Church.

Fourth ExFourth Exception. Zaneby faith, Timothy was an Evange- cept. Zanche list, and his Office temporary. Instancing only in his being ordained in a contraBishop by St. Paul, and preaching the Gospel to prove his discontie diâion. nuance. But certainly the fundion Bishop,or the work Preaching cannot be removed out of the Church ; neither did any before, or since Zanchy suspect it of preaching, or affirm it of the Scripture Bilhcp. And such Timothy was, otherwise we Ihon!d not have his ordination by Sc.. Paul recorded in holy Writ. Besides, Bishop may be taken in a Presbyterian, or a Prælatical sense: If in the former, then the parity of Ministers of the same Order, now zealously maintained, was not observed in the Apostles dayes, because Presbyter Timothy had pool wer of Ordination, and Censures over other Presbyters : Ifin the latter ; what is so earnestly withstood by others, is quietly yielded by.Zanchy, namely that prælatical Bishops, or Bishops superioùr to Presbyters were ordained by St. Paul, one where of was Timothy : In a word take we Bifhop in what sense we please, if Timothy were therefore a temporary Evangelist, because he preached the Gospel, and was ordained Bishop by St. Paul;


[ocr errors][merged small][ocr errors]
« PreviousContinue »