Page 118
The 2 Article objected.
We professed heretofore, that Christ gave the power of receiving in & cutting off, to the whole body togither of every Christian congregation, & not to any one or more members sequestred from the whole &c. Now we have been taught that in cases of question and controversie, the grea∣ter part of the people are the Church; though al the Elders and other bre∣thren be against them, &c. and so have the power to receiv in & cut off &c.
I answer, ther is no contradiction in these things; we hold stil in all points according to the article alleged: neyther ever taught we the people onely to be the Church sequestred from their officers; but the officers governing, and the people governed, to be the Church which hath the power, to use in holy order. But if these officers fal into heresie or wickednes themselves, or to abett wic∣kednes in others, and wil not be reclaymed by any holy means the Church can use, then may they by the Church which chose them, be deposed, as unworthy of their places, yea and excommunica∣ted, and so al other impenitent sinners. and this by the voices of the most of the congregation, if al consent not; aswel as members or officers are received in by the voices of the most, if some doo dissent: for ther is one power for them both. And these our oppo∣sites must eyther manifest, that if one or 2 officers or members doe dissent in a controversie, ther is a sequestration of them from the whole, and the Church then hath not the power of Christ to receav in and cutt off: or els al may see, that this is a colourable accusation of theirs, & no contradiction of ours. For if the consent of al & every one, be not necessaryly to be had, they dissenting through their ignorance, frowardnes, or the like: thē the most voices must prevayl. But how farr their new doctrine (that the Elders are the Church,) is, both from our former professiō and from equitie, I have before shewed.