The divine right of church-government and excommunication: or a peacable dispute for the perfection of the holy scripture in point of ceremonies and church government; in which the removal of the Service-book is justifi'd, the six books of Tho: Erastus against excommunication are briefly examin'd; with a vindication of that eminent divine Theod: Beza against the aspersions of Erastus, the arguments of Mr. William Pryn, Rich: Hooker, Dr. Morton, Dr. Jackson, Dr. John Forbes, and the doctors of Aberdeen; touching will-worship, ceremonies, imagery, idolatry, things indifferent, an ambulatory government; the due and just powers of the magistrate in matters of religion, and the arguments of Mr. Pryn, in so far as they side with Erastus, are modestly discussed. To which is added, a brief tractate of scandal ... / By Samuel Rutherfurd, Professor of Divinity in the University of St. Andrews in Scotland. Published by authority.

SECT. III.

IF Iesus Christ be as Faithfull as Moses and above him, as the Lord of the house above the servant, Heb. 3. 1, 2, 3, 4. Then as Moses was admonished of God, when he was about to make the* 1.1 Tabernacle, for (saith he) See thou make all things according to the pattern•• shewed unto thee in the mount, Heb. 8. 5. And was not to follow his own spirit, but was to follow the patterne that God shewed him in the Mount, then far lesse hath Christ the Apostle and high Priest of our Profession giving us a Platforme of the Church and Government of the New-Testament variable, & shaped according to the alterable laws, customes & manners of divers nations, for as Moses though a Prophet was not to make one pin of the Tabernacle, but ac∣cording to the samplar & patern that God did shew him, so Christ ma∣nifested to his Disciples, all that he had heard, and seen of the Father, Ioh. 15. But it is not to be supposed, that the Father shew to Christ an alterable tabernacle in the new Testament, that men might alter, chop and change at their pleasure, as the customes of Nations are changed:

If God thought Religion should run a hazard, if the greatest of Prophets (except Christ) might have leave to mold and shape all the Leviticall Service, and Ceremonies, (for as the judicious and Lear∣ned Interpreter Mr. David Dickson saith, all the Leviticall Service* 1.2 is comprehended under the name of the Tabernacle, Exod. 25. 40.) according as he pleased, far more should all be corrupted, if erring men, far inferior to Moses, Prelats and Pastors, should have leave to draw the Lineaments of the New Testament, Tabernacle, Church, Service, Officers, Censures, and all the Positives of Policie accor∣ding to no patern shown by Christ; but only the Fashions, alterable Laws, Customes, & forms of nations: Now all the pins of the Taber∣nacle were but shadows, and Types of Morall and Heavenly things, Heb. 8. 5. Heb. 10. 1. Heb. 9. 9. And they were to be changed and done away by Christ, Col. 2. 17. Heb. 7. 12. 2 Cor. 3. 11. Yet could nei∣ther be devised by Moses, nor altered by any mortall man, Church or Priests; how can we imagine that men may now devise and set up an alterable and changeable New Testament-frame, of Prelats, Altars, Religious dayes, Surplice, Crossing, or any the like toyes? And though David was a Prophet, and a man according to Gods heart; yet in the externals of the Temple, nothing was left to his spirit; he might neither in the least jot adde or omit, 1 Chron. 28. 11. Then David gave to Solomon his Son, the patern of the Porch, and of the houses thereof, and of the Treasuries thereof, and of the upper Chambers thereof, and of the inner Parlors thereof, & of the place of the Mercy-Seat. Here be many particulars; But whence had David all these? From the patern according to which, Crosse, Surplice, Altars, and humane Prelats are shapen? Alas, no; therefore it is added, v. 12. And (he shewed) the patern of all that he had by the spirit, of the courts of the house of the Lord, and of all the chambers round about v. 19. All this (said David) the Lord made me understand in writing by his hand upon me, even all the works of this patern. I see no rea∣son to deny, that the form of the Temple was written by the hand of God; as the Ten Commandments were written in two Tables of stone by him; the Text seemeth to say no lesse, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Pagni, and Ar. Mont. ren∣der it, Omnia in Scriptura, de manu domini, super me intellegere fecit. So Jerome, Omnia venerunt, Scripta manu domini ad me. Vatablus in notis, Omnia ista dominus Scripsit manu, su•• et digito, ••u•• ut me fa∣miliarius

do••eret: We shall not contend with Tostatus, who saith,* 1.3 It might have been written by Angels; though we go not from the letter of the Text, we have from this Papist Tostatus, all we desire; for he saith: We must say that it was not by Davids own thought, that he builded all; for David durst not build a Temple to the Lord of his own heart; because he knew not if that would please God, but by Divine Revelation: And therefore the old Translation is corrupt in this, as in many things, which rendreth, v. 12. Thus: Dedit David, Salamoni descriptionem p••rti••us, &c. Nec non et om∣nium que cogitaverat: As if Davids thought had been his guide; for 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 by the spirit, by Tostatus, Corneli. a Lapide, Lyra, is meant, not Davids spirit, but the spirit of Revelation from the Lord; and Lyra saith, on v. 12. Per hoc designatur; quod deus pater dedit homi∣ni Christo notitiam omnium agendorum in ecclesiâ. And Pet. Mar∣tyr, our own Doctor saith, on 1 King. 8. It cannot be told how un∣pleasant the institution of new worship is to God: And, there should be nothing in Baptisme but the Word and the Elements; any thing added (as Crossing, Oyl, Salt,) came from the Prelats: Lavater, in 1. Par. c. 28. ver. 14. condemneth all additions, even though Solomon should have added them, Ezech. 43. 11. Thou Son of man, shew the house to the house of Israel,—12. And if they be ashamed of all that they have done, shew them the form of the house, and the fa∣shion thereof, and goings out thereof, and the comings in thereof, and all the forms thereof, and all the Ordinances thereof, and all the forms there∣of, & all the Laws thereof; And write it in their sight, that they may keep the whole form thereof, & all the Ordinances thereof, and do them. Now it is most considerable, that the Form, Fabrick, and Structure of the Temple, Ezech. c. 40. In the visions of God, is shewn to the Prophet by a man, by Christ the great Angel of the Covenant; who with a measu∣ring reed of six cubits, measured the Temple; and in these chapters, c. 40, 41, 42. Christ sheweth to Ezekiel all the patern and form which evidently typifieth the Church of the New Testament, the Bride the Lambs Wife in the Kingdom of Grace, and glorified in Heaven, revealed by the Angel to John, Rev. 21. 9, 10, 11. It may be thought that the Porches, Chambers, length and bredth of them East, West, South, and North, the Laws about the Priests, their linnen garments, Sacrifices, washing and the like, are of lesse concernment then the Doctrine of Christs nature, person, offices of Faith, Repentance,

Iudgement, Heaven &c. And therefore being not so necessary, nor so weighty; there was no necessity that all the like Positive exter∣nals of Church-Policie, written to a rude and carnall people, should be written to us, who are now more spirituall, and upon whom the day-spring from above doth shine, the shadows now being past; and who have greater liberty then they had, who were as children under Tutors. Ans. 1. I do not deny, but all Ceremonials are of lesse weight then the Morals; but the question is, if they be of lesse Divine authority, so as we may devise of our own Spirit such Ceremonials, and may alter, omit, or remove these, or any new Ceremonials in the Sacraments under the New Testament; for New Testament Ceremonials, as to take Bread, Eat and drink, are not so necessary, nor so weighty to us under the New-Testament, as the precept of believing in Christ, and of repentance from dead works, yet I hope it shall be a weak inference, from thence to inser, we may therefore alter and change any thing of the Sacrament, for the same Christ who commanded us to believe in him, said also, Drink* 1.4 ye all of this; and if we may not remove drinking from the last Sup∣per, because injoyned by Christ upon the authority of the Law∣giver, as signifying the spirituall drinking of Christs Blood, how can any dare to adde Crossing to Baptisme, which signifieth the dedication of the Baptized to Christs service? But 1. Divine Ce∣remonials, and positives which were to be changed, have these notes and impressions of God, which Surplice, Crosse in Baptisme, Corner-cap, (which by Analogie answereth to Moses his Ceremo∣nies) hath not; and yet if they be of the New Testament, and so* 1.5 of a more excellent spirits devising then the people of the Iews were capable of, in regard of their Bondage under Carnall Precepts, they ought to have them in a more excellent man∣ner: As 1. In regard of the manner of Revelation; all the Laws and Ceremoniall Ordinances were revealed to Moses when he was forty dayes in the Mount with God, and was in Heaven and above men, Exod. 25. 40. Heb. 8. 5. The length measure and patern of the Temple was revealed to Ezechiel when he was in the spirit, and saw the Visions of God, Ezech. 40. 2, 3. And a writing of the form of the Temple by Gods hand, was delivered to David, 1 Chro. 28. 19. Now if a more free and glorious spirit teach the Positives of poli∣cy, under the New-Testament, such as Surplice, Crossing, then Pre∣lates

must be in a higher mount with God, then Moses was, and in a deeper extasie of the visions of God, then Ezechiel was in, Ezec. 40. 1, 2, 3. When they are in the childe-birth pain of devising, and bring forth such defaced and dirty whelpes, as Surplice, Crossing, Altars, &c. 1. I should think it blasphemy so to think: 2. In re∣gard of the Doctrine revealed: When I read the 40, 41, 42. Chap∣ters of Ezekiel touching the forme of the Temple, and the Anti∣tipe, Chapters the Revelation, c. 21. c. 22. Yea, and the very Ce∣remoniall Laws of Moses, as the scape-goats going to the wilder∣nesse with the sins of the people of God, and all the rest of the Lawes that pointeth at Christ to be slain for us, and the heavenly mysteries of the Gospel explained especially in the Epistle to the He∣brews: when I read these, I finde a strong smell of the ointments of a precious Redeemer, the extream love of God to man: the Majesty, the divinity and efficacy of divine power in these, as in other Scriptures: But should our Prelats, put in Print by the spirit of the new Testament, some Epistles touching Ceremonies in Generall, or of Surplice, Corner-cap, Crossing, and their heavenly relation to the mysteries of the Gospel in particular, I should not think men would dare to say a nobler spirit speaketh like God and heaven in these then in the other.

It is without all Warrant to expound Christian Liberty of a po∣wer of devising a mutable Church-Policy, and lawes not warran∣ted in Gods word, seeing Christian Liberty expresly exempteth us altogether from obedience to mens Laws not warranted by Christs word, Gal. 5. 1. Col. 2. 20, &c.

Let us hear what Hooker saith, for his mutable Policie under* 1.6 the New Testament: Christ is not lesse faithfull then Moses, because Moses delivered to the Iewes some Lawes that were durable, and Christ some Laws that are changeable, otherwayes by this reason Christ shall be lesse faithfull then Moses; for Moses erected in the* 1.7 wildernesse a Tabernacle, which was moveable from place to place; Solomon a stately Temple, which was not moveabl••: Therefore So∣lomon was faithfuller then Moses, which no man indued with reason will think: Christ was faithfull, and saith, I have given to them the words that thou gavest me: He concealed not any part of his Fathers will: But did any part of that will require the immutability of Laws concerning Church-Policy?

Ans. I answer, as Christ did to the Jews in another case, Ioh. 6. 32. Moses gave you not that bread from heaven, but my Father gi∣veth you that true bread: So in this, neither Moses nor Solomon e∣rected either that Tabernacle or Temple, as Law-givers, but the Father of our Lord Iesus, as the true Law-giver: Now both were but meer servants and Heralds in all that they did, for God shewed to Moses the pattern of the Tabernacle, and to David and Solomon the forme of the Temple, in all the pins, rings, chambers, cubits, length and breadth, Exod. 24 40. 1 Chron. 28. 11, 19. And the que∣stion is not if ever the Lord himself delivered mutable or immu∣table Laws, either in Doctrine or Policy: We grant he did, and may deliver Laws changeable and to indure for a time only in both the old and new Testament, Heb. 7. 18. Col. 2. 17. Act. 15. 28, 29. But the question is, if Moses as a man, if Christ as a man only, if the Church of Prelates, yea, or of Lawfull Officers can be faithfull, if they deliver lawes to the Church, which may be altered, without the expresse will of God, speaking in his word at the pleasure of men, and which are positives of worship and Policy, such as hu∣mane Prelates, Surplice, Crosse, &c. which varieth, dieth and li∣veth, falleth and riseth with the climate, Nation, civill-Government, Lawes, Manners, and customes of People; and this is all one, as to move the question, whither the Ambassadour as a man, may alter the Articles of his Commission, according to his own private lust, without an expresse and evident Warrant of the Prince and State, whose servant and Messenger he is in all that he doth, and if he be a faithfull Ambassadour, who doth his own will, and not the will of those that sent him, and if Christ be as faithfull as Moses, if he had given Laws of policy under the New-Testament to be altered with∣out an expresse and evident Warrant from the will of the Father, at the pleasure and will of men? This we deny; and certainly, say that Moses had erected a changeable Tabernacle at the will of man, and Solomon a Temple unchangeable at the will, and expresse Com∣mandment of God, then had Solomon been faithfuller then Moses; our Arguments nerves do not consist in the immutability, or the mu∣tability of things themselves, or of the Laws, but on the immutabi∣lity or mutability of things positive, or Laws positive, under this re∣duplication, so as they be immutable or mutable at the pleasure and will of men, without and beside the word of God, such as Crosse

and Surplice, and such like Romish stuffe are pretended to be. 2. Certain it is, that Christ concealed not any part of his Fathers will, Ioh. 17. 8. But delivered all, and this place, with the place, Ioh. 15. 15. We urge against the traditions of Papists, and say, because Christ spake nothing from his Father either in his own person, or his Apostles in the New-Testament, or in the old by Moses and the Prophets, of invocation of Saints, Purgatory, Worshipping of Images, and Reliques and the rest of their unwritten Traditions, these being positives of worship, and more then unseparable, and connaturall attendants, such as are common, Time, Place, Person, Name, Country, Habite, Gesture, are therefore unlawfull, because Christ neither heard them of the Father, nor spake them to the A∣postles, and just the like say we of Surplice, Crosse, &c. That they are no part of the will of God, which the Father revealed to Christ, and these same Texts Papists use, to prove that the Scriptures are not perfect, because they speak nothing of the Traditions of the Church; so Bellarmine, Because the Counsell of Trent, Andradius, Stapleton, and all the rest, and they prove as well, if Crosse and Surplice, and humane Offices, as Prelates, stand good and lawfull, that yet the Scriptures are unperfect: 3. We say that the whole will of God revealed by the Father to Christ, and by Christ to the Prophets and Apostles, requireth the immutability of all Laws of Church-Policy in this sence, that men should not dare to make and unmake, erect, command, alter, and injoyne positive Laws, of do∣ctrine or policy at their pleasure.

Hooker, ibid. p. 113. There is more reason to say that God hath a lesse care of the Church under the New-Testament, then under the Old; then a Philosopher had to say, because God hath provided better for beasts that are born with hornes, skins, hair and garments by na∣ture, then man who is born without these, that therefore nature is a carefull mother to beasts, and a hard-hearted Step-dame to man: for Gods affection consisteth not in these, for even herein shineth his wis∣dom, that though the wayes of his providence be many, yet the end which he bringeth all at the length unto, is one and the self same: yea, it should follow that because God hath not prescribed Rites, and Laws of civill Policy to us, as to the Iews, that he hath lesse love to us, and lesse care of our Temporall estate in the world then of theirs.

Ans. 1. Its true indeed, God should have lesse care of man, who

is born naked, then of beasts born with hair in lieu of garments, if God had not given reason to man according to which by nature, he may provide garments for himself, and the comparison should go* 1.8 aptly on four feet, God should have lesse love, and should declare lesse love to some of mankinde, if he gave some naturall reason to devise a Bible and a Religion of their own that they might walk to heaven in the light of a fire of their own kindling, without the Scrip∣tures of God (which is a false supposition) and if he had denied rea∣son to another part of mankinde, surely all would say, God had so far forth been more carefull of the salvation of the former, as he should have willed their salvation, and loved those in a higher measure to whom he gave reason on these termes, and should have been lesse carefull of the salvation of those to whom he denied reason, as he he had no more created such capable of salvation and of his love for the saving of them, then brute beasts are: and this answer lay∣eth down a ground that naturall reason is sufficient without the light of Scripture to guide us in all these things of policy that are alterable, then (say I) God did take a great deal of needlesse and superfluous pains in setting down so many particular Laws of Ce∣remonies and Civill Policy, for the Iews, if with the help of reason, they might have steerd their course to Christ and salvation, by the help of the star light of reason, as a man though born naked may by help of reason, make shift for garments to infants, which beasts void of reason cannot do: for thus the comparison must run, and it shall be indeed a cavilling at Gods wisdom, as Papists do calling the Scriptures inky Divinity: 2. The word of God maketh it a* 1.9 great love of God, and a work of Free grace, that the great things of Gods Law are written to Ephraim, Hos. 8. 12. And their sin the greater, that they should dare to multiply Altars, v. 11. without warrant of Gods word, as Formalists multiplied, Altars, Saints∣dayes, Surplices, &c. And it is an act of singular love, that God gave his judgements, Word, and Statutes, even of Ceremonies, and policy to Israel and Iacob, and did not so to every Nation, Psal. 149. 19, 20. Ezek. 20. 11, 12, 13. This was Israels excellency above all Nations on earth, Deut. 4. 6. Deut. 20. 33. Rom. 3. 1, 2. Rom. 9. 4. that God gave them particular Lawes, Iudgements, Statutes, not only in Morals, but also in Ceremonials, and Policy: yet Hooker dare say, We may not measure the affection of God towards us, by

〈1 page duplicate〉〈1 page duplicate〉

〈1 page duplicate〉〈1 page duplicate〉

〈1 page duplicate〉〈1 page duplicate〉

〈1 page duplicate〉〈1 page duplicate〉

such differences. 3. It shall not hence follow God hath a greater love to the Iews then to us, because he gave them Laws, concer∣ning civill policy, which he gave not to us. Except the Lord had given us power to make civill Laws, which laid Morall obligation on our consciences, even in civill things, which morality He expressed in particular Laws written to them, and not to us, as Formalists teach, for then he hath left us in Moralls, to the darknesse of naturall rea∣son, in which condition we could not but erre and sin, and make that morally good and obligatory of conscience, which is morally evil, for reason knoweth not what is positive Morally good, except the light of Gods Word teach us; and in Morals, such as judiciall Laws were to the Jews, the Lord should have been more carefull in his particular directing of them, then of us, and more tender to have them preserved from the sin of will-worship, then us, which cannot consist with the Dispensation of lesse light; greater obscu∣rity in regard of types and shadows toward them, and of the Day∣light of the Gospel, and the arising of the Day-star, and the filling of the earth with knowledge of the Lord toward us, under the New Testament: But the comparison must go upon this supposition, that the Lord purposed to make Politick Laws in their Positives, Morall and Obligatory of the Conscience of the Jews, and the Civill Laws of the Gentiles under the New Testament in their Positives (such as is not to carry Armour in the night, and the like) not to be Morall nor Obligatory of the Conscience. But as touching that which is Morall in all Civill Laws, the Lord is as carefull of our Temporall state, as of theirs, in condescending to particularize all Morals to us, as well as to them.

Hooker, That Christ did not mean to set down particular Positive* 1.10 Laws for all things, in such sort as Moses did; the very different manner of delivering the Laws of Moses and the Laws of Christ, doth plainly shew, Moses had Commandement to gather the Ordinances of God to∣gether distinctly, and orderly to set them down according to their kindes, for each Publique duty and Law: But the Laws of Christ we rather finde mentioned by occasion in the writings of the Apostles, then any solemn thing directly written to comprehend them in a Legall sort. 1. The Law Moral and Ceremonial were not delivered one & the same way; the former was uttered by the Voice of God, in the hearing of six hundred thousand. 2. Written with Gods finger. 3. Termed••a Co∣venant.

4. Given to be kept without time, how long, or place where. The latter not so, and restricted to the Land of Jury, Deut. 4. 5. 12. Deut. 5. 22. And if God had respect in Positive Laws, to time and place, and the Manners of that Nation, seeing Nations are not all a∣like, then the giving of one kinde of Positive Laws unto one only people, without any Liberty to alter them, is but a slender proof, that therefore one kinde should be given to serve everlastingly for all. Ans. This Argument reduced to form, shall want both matter, and form, and reason. If the Laws of Moses be distinctly and orderly set down, and gathered together according to their severall kindes for each Duty; and* 1.11 the Laws of Christ be occasionally only written; then Christ did not mean to set down particular Positive Laws, for all things in such sort as Moses did. But this difference is true, Ergo, &c. Both the Ma∣jor Proposition and the Assumption are false, and neither of them can be proved: For the occasionall writing of some Articles of Faith, and of Dogmaticall points, should then prove that Christ meant not to set down all Articles of Faith particularly; for Christ, Matth. 22. upon occasion of the Saduces tempting; Paul, upon occasion of some at Corinth who denied the Resurrecti∣on, 1 Cor. 15. And of some that mourned for the dead, 1 Thess. 4. Set down and proved an Article of Faith, to wit, the Resurrection of the dead: By this Argument the Scripture is not full and perfect, in Fundamentals, as Moses is in Ceremonials, but hath left such and such Fundamentals to be altered, added or omitted by the Church, in that way, that Surplice, Crosse, and Altars, are alterable things. Most of Dogmatick points concerning Christs sufferings, are occasionall, as his taking, his betraying by Judas, who knew the place he was in, the valuing of him at Thirty pieces, the giving him Gall and Vinegar, a punishment not intended by the Iudge, but oc∣casionall, in that Christ said he thirsted; Yea, the Crucifying of him rather then Barrabas, upon occasion of the malice of the people, when Pilate had scourged him upon a Policie, to see if the people would demand he might be released, the casting Lots for his gar∣ment, the Crucifying of him between two Theeves, the not breaking of his bones upon occasion he was dead, the piercing of his side; all which in regard of second causes, were occasionall, and so though Dogmaticall and Doctrinall, these must be all such alterable and Ambulatory points of Doctrine, as the Church and Prelats may

change at their godly discretion, and Christ meant not in these, to set down particular Positive Laws in such sort as Moses did. Yea, the Evangel according to Luke, is set forth occasionally; because many have taken in hand to set forth in order a Declaration of these things which are most firmly believed; therefore is seemed good to Luke also to write, Luk. 1. 1, 2, 3, 4. Upon occasion of Onesimus his fleeing from his master; The Epistle to Philemon was written upon occasion of the un∣constancy of the Galathians, whose faith was perverted by false tea∣chers, that of Iustification by Faith, without the works of the Law: And the Epistle to the Galathians was written, most, if not all the Canonic•• Epistles were written either upon occasion of false Teach∣ers, or for fear they should be scandalized at Pauls bonds. By this vain Argument, the most part of Canonick Scripture should be al∣terable, imperfect, not particular in most Doctrinals, no lesse then in Ceremonials; And so the Major Proposition is most false, for its a vain thing to Collect Christs meaning, to set down particulars of either Doctrine or Ceremonies, from occasions of Providence; for most of the Scripture is penned upon occasions from men, and from second causes, shall these things leave off to be of Divine In∣stitution, that hath their rise from occasions, even sinfull occasions? Yea, the death of Christ is occasioned from mans fall in sin. What then? Is it an alterable Doctrine left to the determination of the Church that Christ died? But this is no other then the shift of Pa∣pists for their unwritten Tradition. Sanderus de Visib. Monarch. Lib. 1. c. 5. pag. 13. Si ergo per solas conscriptas leges dei civitas* 1.12 gubernaretur in valdè magnâ parte corum que passim contingunt, quid faceret, nesciret, quia legem de his loquent••m non haberet; Imo si tantum una Lex toti reipub: necessaria esse posset, eaque ipsa scriberetur a prudentissimis viris, ac singulis annis ab orbe condito novae interpre∣tationes eidem adderentur: tamen nunquam eveniret, ut ea lex tam plenè interpretata foret, quin causae novae possent intervenire▪ ob quas lex et legis interpretatio novam iterim postularet interpretationem, a∣deo et foecunda est natura in suis eventis, et Angustum ingenium huma∣num, et varia surisperitorum sententia, et verba tum pauca, tum am∣bigua. All cometh to this, that this Papist saith, That there cannot be one written unchangeable Law that is necessary for the whole Church, for new events, occasions and occurences of Providence, should so change the case, that there should be a necessity of a new

interpretation, and of a new Law. 2. Nor can we say that Laws made upon occasion, as that Law of transferring the inheritance to the Daughter, made upon occasion of the Daughters of Zelophehad, are in this sense occasionall, that the Iews might at their pleasure alter, or change a Law made by God, and substitute one of their own in place thereof; for then might the Iews change all the Ceremonies and Iudgements that God gave them for a time and occasionally: Now then they might have abolished Circumcision, the passeover, and substitute other Sacraments in their place, for these Sacraments were not given by Gods own voice. 2. Nor written by Gods own finger. Nor, 3. Are they termed a Covenant, in that sense that* 1.13 the Morall Law is termed a Covenant. 4. Nor are they given without limitting of time and place, expresly when and where: Now if the Church of the Iews could change Sacraments at their pleasure, because their Sacraments were no part of the Eternall Law Morall, they might alter all Gods Law, as the Church may al∣ter Surplice, Crossing; and I see not, but the Church of the New Testament upon the same ground, may alter the Sacraments of the New Testament. Papists, as Vasquez Becanus, and others say, that neither the Pope nor the Church can adde or devise a new Article of Faith: Yet doth Horantius Loco Catholice. l. 2. c. 11. fol. 129. teach, That Christ hath not taught us all fully in the New Testament, but that the holy spirit, shall to the end of the world, teach other new things as occasion shall require. And this he bringeth as an Argu∣ment to prove, that there must be unwritten Traditions, not contained in Scripture; even as the Formalists contend for unwritten Posi∣tives of Church-Policie.

3. Morals of the Law of nature and the Morall Law, do more respect occasions of Providence, customes, Laws, and the manners of people (they doing so nearly concerne our Morall practise) then any Ceremonies of Moses his Law which did shadow out Christ to us, and therefore this reason shall prove the just contrary of that for which its alledged; for the Morall Law should be ra∣ther alterable at the Churches lust, then Ceremonials, for there be far more occurrences of Providence in regard of which the Laws Morall touching, what is Sabbath breaking, whether is leading an Ox to the water on the Sabbath a breach of the Sabbath? (the Jews held the affirmative, Christ the negative) touching obedience to Su∣periors,

Homicide, Polygamie, Incest, Fornication, Oppression, Ly∣ing, Equivocating: Then there can be occasions to change the Law of sacrificing, which clearly did adumbrat Christ, who was to be of∣fered as a sacrifice for the sins of the world; yea, all significant Sym∣bolicall Ceremonies have their spirituall signification independent from all occasions of Providence, and depending on the meer will of the Instituter; Surplice, or white linnen, signifieth the Priests holinesse, without any regard to time, place, or nationall customes; for Christ might have made an immutable Law, touching the Sym∣bolicall, and Religious signification, and use of Saints-dayes, white linnen, Crossing, and all the rest of humane Ceremonies, which should stand to Christs second coming, notwithstanding of any oc∣currences of Providence, no lesse then he made an immutable Law, touching the Sacramentall obsignation of water in Baptisme, and of Bread and Wine in the Lords Supper, if it had not been his will never to burden his Churches with such dumb and tooth-lesse myste∣ries as humane positives: 4. The assumption is false, for divers Ce∣remoniall Laws now altered were made without any regard to oc∣casions of Providence, and many Doctrinals that are unalterable were made with speciall regard to such occurrences: 5. If positives of Policy be alterable, because the occasions of such are alterable by God; it shall follow that God who hath all revolutions of Pro∣vidence in his hand, must change these Positives, and not the Au∣thority of the Church: and thus Doctrinals are alterable by God, not by men, which is now our question; for Christ hath given a Commandment; Take ye, Eat ye, Drink ye all of this: Yet hath he not tyed us in the time of persecution to conveen in publick, and Celebrate the Lords Supper; but the Church doth not then change the Law, nor liberate us from obedience to a Command given by God, but God liberateth us himself.

Hooker. But that which most of all maketh to the clearing of this* 1.14 point, is, that the Iews who had Laws so particularly determining, and so fully instructing them in all affairs what to do, were not withstanding continually inured with causes exorbitant, and such as their Laws had not provided for, and so for one thing, which we have left to the order of the Church; they had twenty which were undecided by the expresse word of God; so that by this reason, if we may devise one Law, they may devise twenty: Before the Fact of the sons of Shelomith, there

was no Law that did appoint any punishment for blasphemers, nor what should be done to the man that gathered sticks on the Sabbath. And by this means God instructed them in all things from heaven, what to do: Shall we against experience think that God must keep the same, or a course by Analogy answering thereunto with us as with them? Or should we not rather admire the various and harmonious dissimilitude of Gods wayes in guiding his Church from age to age; Others would not only have the Church of the Iews a pattern to us, but they would (as learned Master Prynne with them saith) take out of our hand the Apostolick Church, that it should be no rule to us; for saith he, There was no Ʋniforme Church-government in the Apostles times, at the first they had only Apostles and Brethren, Acts 1. 13. no Elders, or Deacons: Their Churches increasing, they ordained D••a∣cons, Act. 6. And long after the Apostles ordained Elders in every Church, after that widowes in some Churches, not at all. In the pri∣mitive times some Congregations had Apostles, Acts 4. 11, 12. 1 Cor. 12. 4. to 33. Evangelists, Prophets, workers of miracles, Healers, &c.* 1.15 Other Churches at that time had none of these Officers or Members, and all Churches have been deprived of them since those dayes. Ans. 1. What Hooker saith, is that which Bellarmine, Sanderus, Ho∣rantius, and all Popists say, for their Traditions against the perfection of the word, to wit, that the word of God, for 2373. years between Adam and Moses (saith Horantius) was not written, so Turrianus, Bellarmine, and the reason is just nothing, to say the Jews might de∣vise twenty Laws, where we may devise one, because the Jews were continually inured with causes exorbitant, such as their written Laws had not provided for. This must be said which is in question, and so is a begging of the controversie, that the Iews of their own head, and Moses without any speciall word from God, or without any pattern shown in the mount, might devise what Laws they pleased, and might punish the blasphemer, and the man that gathered st••cks on the Sabbath, and determine, without God, the matter of the Daughters o•• Zelophehad, as the Formalists teach, that the Church without any word of God or pattern from the word, may devise humane Ceremonial Prelats, Officers of Gods house shapen in a shop on earth, in the Antichrists head, and the Kings Court, the Surplice, the Crosse in Baptisme, and the like. Now we answer both them and Papists with one answer, that it is true, there was no writ∣ten

Scripture between Adam and Moses which was some thousands of years: Yea, nor a long time after till God wrote the Law on Mount Sinai: But withall, what God spake in visions, dreams, and apparitions to the Patriarchs, was as binding and obliging a pattern interditing men then to adde the visions of their own brain to what he spake from heaven, as the written word is to us, so that the Iews might neither devise twenty Laws nor any one of their own head, without expresse warrant of Gods immediate Tradition, which was the same very will and truth of God, which Moses committed to writing; if then Formalists will assure us of that which Pa∣pists could never assure us, we shall receive both the un∣written Traditions of the one, and the unwritten Positive in∣ventions of Crosse and Surplice, devised by the other: as 1. Make us sure, as God himself immediatly spake to the Patriarchs, and to Moses, nothing but what after was committed to writing by Moses and the Prophets at Gods speciall Commandment, as Papists say, their unwritten Traditions are agreeable to the word, and though be∣side Scripture, yet not against it: And the very will of God no lesse then the written word; and let Formalists assure us, that their positive additaments of Surplice and Crosse are the same which God commandeth in the Scriptures, by the Prophets and Apostles, and though beside, yet not contrary to the vvord: But I pray you what better is the distinction of beside the vvord, not contrary to the vvord of God, out of the mouth of Papists, to maintain unvvritten Traditions, which to them is the expresse word of God, then out of the mouth of Formalists, for their unwritten Positives, which are worse then Popish Traditions in that they are not the expresse word of God, by their own grant? 2. Let the Formalist assure us, that after this, some Moses and Elias shall arise and write Scripture tou∣ching the Surplice and Crosse, that they are the very minde of God, as the Lord could assure the Church between Adam and Moses, that all Divine truths which he had delivered by Tradition, should in Gods due time be written in Scripture, by Moses, the Prophets and Apostles: I think they shall here fail in their undertakings. Hence the Argument standeth strong, the Jevvs might devise nothing in doctrine, Worship, or Government; nay, neither the Patriarchs nor Moses, nor the Prophets of their own head, without Gods im∣mediate Tradition, or the written Scripture (which are all one)

Ergo, Neither can the Church, except she would be wiser then God in the Scriptures. 2. Hookers Various and Harmonious Dissimili∣cude of Gods g••iding his Ch••rch, is his fancy: This variety we ad∣mire, as it is expressed, He••. 1. 1. But Hooker would say (for he hath reference to that place) God at sundry times, and in divers manners, spake in time past unto the Fathers by the Prophets, and now to us by hi•• Son: But test of all, he hath revealed his Will, by the Pope of Rome, and his cursed Clergy, that we should Worship Images, pray to Saints, and for the dead, beleeve Purgatory, &c. and now by humane Pre∣lates, he hath shown his will to us, touching Crossing, Surplice: Now Papists, as Horantius, Sanderus, Malderus, Bellarmine, and others* 1.16 say, Most of the points that are in Question between them and Pro∣testants, and particularly Church-Ceremonies, are unwritten Tradi∣tions delivered by the Church; beside the warrant of Scripture▪ 3. We grant that there was no Uniform Church-Government in the Apostles time, Deacons were not at the first, Elders were not ordained 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, in every Church: But this is nothing against a Plat∣form of Ʋniform Government▪ which cannot be altered in Gods Word. For by this reason the Learned and Reverend Mr. Prynne, because points of Government did grow by succession of time; cannot infer therefore that Government which the immediately inspired Apo∣stles did ordain in Scripture, is alterable by men; then because, 1. Fundamentals of Faith and Salvation, were not all delivered at first by God; there is no Uniform, no unalterable Platform of Do∣ctrinals and Fundamentals set down in Scripture. For first, the Ar∣ticle of Christs death and incarnation, was obscurely delivered to the Church in Paradise: Sure the Article of Christs making his Grave with the wicked, of his being put to death for out Transgres∣sions, though he himself was innocent; his justifying of many by Faith, were after delivered by Isaiah, Chap. 53. And by succession ••f time, many other Fundamentals, as the Doctrine of the written Moral Law, in the Moral Positives thereof, were delivered to the Church: But I hope from this successive Addition of Fundamentals, no man can infer▪ 1. There is no Uniform Platform of the doctrine of Faith, set down in the Old Testament. 2. None can hence infer, because all points▪ Fundamental were not delivered to the Church at first; the refore the Church▪ without any expresse warrant from God, may alter the Platform of Fundamentals of Faith, as they take

on them to adde Surplice, Crossing, &c. and many other Positives to the Government of Christ without any expresse warrant of the Word. 3. Our Argument is close mistaken, we argue not from the Patern of Government, which was in the Apostles times, at the lay∣ing of the first stone in that Church; then the Apostolike Church had indeed no Officers; but the Apostles and the seventy Disciples we reason not from one peece, but from the whole frame, as perfect∣ed by the Ministery of the Lords Apostles. 2. We argue not from the Apostolike Church, as it is such a Church; for Apostles were ne∣cessary then, as was community of goods, miracles, speaking with tongues, &c. but we draw an argument from the Apostolike Church; as the first Christian Church, and since the Law was to come from* 1.17 Zion, and the Word of the Lord from Jerusalem, Isai. 2. 3. And the Lord was to reign in Mount Zion, and in Jerusalem before his An∣cients gloriously, Isai. 24. 23. And the Lord was to reign over his people in Mount Zion, from henceforth and for ever, Micah 4. 2, 7. And Christ for that gave a special command to his Disciples, not to depart from Jerusalem, but wait for the promise of the Father, which they had heard from Christ; therefore this Church of Jerusalem was to be a rule, a patern and copy for the Government of the Vi∣sible Kingdom and Church of Christ, in which Christ was to reign by his own Word▪ and Law, Mi••. 4. 2, 7. And so the Spirit descended upon the Apostles in the framing and Governing of the first Church, in so far, as it was a Christian Church, and they were to act all, not of their own heads, but as the Holy Ghost led them in all Truth, in these things that are of perpetual necessity; and in such as these, the first Church is propounded as imitable: Now we do not say in Apostles, which had infallibility of writing Canonick Scripture, in Miracles, speaking with Tongues, and such like, that agreed to the Apostolike Church, not as a Church, but as such a de∣terminate Church in relation to these times, when the Gospel and Mystery of God, now manifested in the flesh, was new taught, and never heard of before, did require Miracles, gift of Tongues, that the Gospel might openly be preached to the Gentiles, we do not (I say) urge the Apost••like Church and all the particulars for Govern∣ment in it, for a rule and patern to be imitated. And if Master Prynne deny, that there is an Uniform Government in the Apostles

times, because God himself added to them Deacons & Elders, which at first they had not, & removed Apostles, miracles, gifts of healing, and tongues: then say I; First, the Canonick Scripture is not Uniform and perpetual: Why, for certainly once there was no Canonick Scripture but the Books of Moses, and after the holy Ghost added the Book of the Psalmes, and the Prophets; and after the Nativity and As∣cension of our Lord to Heaven, the Apostles did write Canonick Scripture: I hope, this is but a poor Argument to infer, that there is no Vniform and unalterable Platform of Divinity in the Old and New Testament, and yet the Argument is as concludent the one way, as it is the other: 3. We do not so contend for an Vniform and unalterable Platform of Church-Government in the Word; as it was not free to the Lord and Law-giver to adde, and alter at his pleasure, only we hold it so Vniform and unalterable, that this Platform is not shaped like a coat to the Moon, or alterable at the will of men, without expresse warrant of the Lords Word, and to rise and fall with the climate, and the elevation of Nationall cu∣stomes; and therefore the Argument is nothing concludent, and judge what can be made of these words of the learned Mr. Prynne:* 1.18 The Government and Officers of all Churches, not being De facto, one and the same in all particulars in the very Primitive times, as well as since, it can never be proved to be of Divine right, and the self same in all succeeding Ages, without the least variation, ••inee it was not so in the Apostles dayes: For this is all one as to say, the Canonick Scripture was not one and the same, in the Apostles and Prophets times, but admitted of divers additions; Ergo, now in our daies Canonick Scripture is not one and the same, but may also suffer the like additions: 2. Because God himself added to Canonick Scripture, and to the Government of the Church in the Apostles dayes; Ergo, men may without Warrant from God, adde in our dayes to Canonick Scripture, and to the Government and Officers of the Church: 3. The Government and Officers in the Apostles time were not of Divine right, but alterable by God; Ergo, A∣postles, Evangelists, Pastors, Teachers, Workers of miracles were not of Divine right in the Apostles times, but might have been alte∣red by men, without the expresse Warrant of God: But will any wise man believe that Pauls Apostleship was alterable, and might be changed by the Church? Since he saith, Gal. ••. 1. Paul an Apostle,

not of men, neither by men, but by Iesus Christ, and 1 Cor. 12. 28. When Paul saith, And God hath set 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, or instituted some in the Church; first, Apostles, secondly, Prophets, thirdly, Teachers, after that miracles, then gifts of healing, &c. and Eph. 4. 11. When Christ ascended on high, he gave some Apostles, some Prophets, and some Evangelists, and some to be Pastors and Teachers, 12. For the per∣fecting of the Saints, &c. Can it enter into the head of any man to say, some Churches had Apostles and Evangelists, and Pastors, and miracles, and some not; Ergo, Apostles, and Pastors, are not by Divine right; Ergo, because they were not in all Churches, there∣fore they were alterable at the will of men? and a Surplice, and Crosse in Baptisme hath as much of Divine institution, as the cal∣ling of the Apostle, or of a Pastor, and truly to me, it is bold Di∣vinity to say, that Pastors set over the flock by the holy Ghost, Act. 20. 28. and whose due qualifications are so specified, 1 Tim. 3. and Elders, 1 Tim. 5. 17. and Teachers placed by God in the Church, 1 Cor. 12 28. may be all turned out of the Church, by men, as ha∣ving no Divine right to be there, and that men may set up other al∣terable Officers in their place; for by this reason the Apostles, by that ordinary spirit, that is now in Church-Rulers, might without their Apostolick spirit, or any immediate Warrant from Christ, have altered the whole frame of Apostolick-Government, and Church-Officers, as the Church may upon motives from themselves not warranted from the word, turne out Surplice, Crosse, and all such stuffe out of the Church.

Master Prynne. The Apostles speech, 1 Cor▪ 12. 4, 5, 6. There are* 1.19 diversity of gifts, but the same spirit, there are diversity of operations, but the same God, compared with chap. 8. to 13. and c. 9. v. 19. to 24. I made my self a servant to all, that I might gain all, &c. parallel'd with Act. 15. 1, 2, 5, 6, 10. to 32. and chap. 21. 18. to 30. The Churches of Judea did retain the use of Circumcision, Purification, and other Iewish Rites, which the Gentiles by the Apostles resolution were not to observe, and Act. 2. 22. The Apostles frequented the Iewish Temple, and Synagogues (conforming themselves to the Order and Discipline thereof) and their own private Christian Assemblies; all this will clear, that all Churches had not one and the self same Church-Govern∣ment. Ans. If diversity of Gifts, as to be a speaker with Tongues, a Prophet, a Pastor, will prove the Discipline to be alterable at the

Churches will, as are Surplice, Crosse, &c. I shall think men may infer any thing they please out of the Scripture; and that to be A∣postles, Past••rs, are as indifferent and variable as eating of meats, 1 Cor. 8. and Pauls taking of wages at Corinth, 1 Cor. 9. Which none can say; for if the Church should now command us to abstain from such and such meats, as the Apostle doth, 1 Cor. 8. We should call that, and do call it, in the Romish Church, a Doctrine of Devils, 1 Tim. 4▪ 1, 2, 3. All brought for this, from Act. 15. Act. 21. tendeth to this, the Lord himself for the then weaknesse of the Jews, of meer* 1.20 indulgence appointed some things to be indifferent, and abstained from, in the case of scandall: Therefore Circumcision, Purifica∣tion, Sacrifices of Bullocks, and sheep; And all the Ceremonies of Moses his Law, may be commanded by the Church, so they have another signification then they had before, and shadow out Christ who is already come: But because God hath made some things in∣different, shall it follow that the Pope, yea, or any Church on earth can create an indifferency in things? they must then take from things their Morall goodnesse or conveniency with Gods Law, and take from them their moral badnes, & disconveniency to Gods Law, which to me is to change the nature of things, and to abrogate and change Gods Laws: it is true, P. Martyr, 1 Cor. 9. 19. saith, Paul was made all things to all men, Quoad Ceremonias, & res medias, in that he Circumcised Timotheus: The Law (saith he) was abro∣gated, V••rum id non adhuc Judaeis liquebat; The Jews were to be spa∣red for a time, but only for a time, and therefore when the Gospel was sufficiently promulgated; Paul said, Gal. 5. to be Circumcised was to lose Christ, and he refused to be a servant to Peter in his sinful Iudaizing, Gal. 2. And withstood him in the face: Now, certain it is, Peter knew Christ was come in the flesh, and that his Iudaizing did not lay bands on his conscience, he preached the contrary, Act. 11. And if Peter did Iudaize, as Formalists observe Ceremonies, and the Galathians were circumcised the same way (for they knew Cir∣cumcision had no Typicall Relation to Christ to come, they belie∣ved he was already come) then without cause, Paul, Gal. 2. and 5. did rebuke, and argue either Peter or the Galathians of sinfull Iu∣daizing; which to say, were to speak against the Gospel. But cer∣tainly the Vniformity, and immutability of all these Ceremonies was, that then when the Gospel was sufficiently Proclaimed to all,

to be under the Law of Ceremonies in any sort was damnable, and so is it now: And as the Apostles and Church then set up no Cere∣monies, no Surplice, no Crossing, because they had no word of Christ to warrant them, neither can we do the like now; and they complyed for a time with the Iewish Ceremonies, being yet indif∣ferent, but not but by warrant of the commandment and resolu∣tion of the Apostles, and the like are we obliged unto now, had we a Warrant of the like indifferency of Prelates, Surplice, Crosse, and that we were obliged to use them to gain the weak, in regard: 1. They were once obligatory Ordinances of God: 2. And if the day light of the Gospel were not yet sufficiently risen to shine upon those who are not wilfully ignorant, and had not yet acknowledged the Gospel to be Gods word, we should also be obliged to Cere∣monies; yea, we durst not yield to any Law to lay them aside, as many Formalists, who hold them lawfull, have done.

Mr. Prynne. From the Creation till Moses, there was no one Ʋni∣versall* 1.21 set Form of Church-Government, to be observed in all the world: Nor one Form of Discipline under the Tabernacle, another under the Temple.

Ans. All this concludeth not what is in question; its but the Po∣pish Argument: This is to be concluded, that Enoch, Seth, Noah, Abraham, the Patriarchs and Moses did set up a Church-Govern∣ment of such timber as Humane Prelates, Crosse, Surplice, without any expresse Warrant from Gods mouth, and which they might al∣ter by their own spirit; for this Argument is, God might alter; Ergo, The Church now may alter without a warrant from God. And shall we believe that the Patriarchs and Moses by their own spirit without any Commandment of God, might at their pleasure set up, and put down Prophets, Circumcision, Tabernacle, Temple, Laws for Sacrifices, Priests, Levites, Arke, putting the Leaper in, or putting him out of the Campe, cutting any soul off from the Congregation of the Lord, as our men will cry up, and down Ceremonies, and put on them the weight of a Talent, or a Feather, without any word of God? The Scripture cryeth the contrary so often, saying, And the Lord spake unto Moses, saying, speak thou unto the children of Israel: Could Formalists say that, and Christ spake unto the Prelats, and the Church, and said, Command the Pastor to crosse the Infant, and ap∣point unto your selves a Prelate over the Pastors: I should gladly a∣gree

to the mutable frame of humane Government.

Mr. Prynne. There are but for the most part, generall rules pre∣scribed* 1.22 to us for the very ordering and regulating of our thoughts, words, actions, lives, apparell, Children, servants, families, calling, &c. in the Word; Ergo, there be but generall rules for Discipline and Church-Government, which admit variety; the former do more im∣mediately concern every man, the other more remotely.

Ans. If the Word of God do not more particularly regulate our thoughts, as, Psal. 10. 4. Psal. 5. 9. Isa. 55. 7. Ier. 4. 14. Act. 8. 22. And our words and actions by which we must be judged, Isa. 3. 8. Ier. 8. 6. Mal. 3. 13. Ier. 9. 3. Matth. 12. 36, 37. Rev. 22. 12. Rev. 20. 13. 2 Cor. 5. 10. Prov. 5. 21. 1 Sam. 2, 3. Psal. 119. 9. Prov. 3. 23, 24. Then the Scripture doth warrant Surplice, and Crossing, and kneeling to Creatures, and humane Prelats, which are changeable, and alterable circumstances and adjuncts of Worship, that may be, and may not be, and things indifferent; it shall follow, that for the most part, it is indifferent to do evil or well, sin or not sin, in thought, word and actions; and we have no warrant in Scripture for eschewing sin, or not eschewing it in the most of our actions. I confesse there is little need to walk, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 accurately, Eph. 5. 15. And to cleanse our wayes, Psal. 119. 9. according to the Word; If words, thoughts and actions, may go at random, as if they were va∣riable and indifferent Ceremonies, God throweth not men in hells torments, to be eternally miserable, for circumstances▪ 2. For the acts of our calling, if they be Morall, they are regulated as particu∣larly by the word, as to believe, love and fear God, or the crea∣ture;* 1.23 if artificiall, they are not of our consideration. 3. That Mo∣rall acts of decent usage of the Ordinances, do not immediately concern men, is admirable to me.

Mr. Prynne: To the Argument of Moses his doing all according to the patern shown in the Mount, It is Answered: 1. The Tabernacle wa•• no part of the Church of the Israelites; but only the place of meeting for Worship, answerable to our Churches and Chappels, and so was the Temple; But I pray you, God prescribed the height, length, bredth, form of Tabernacles, Ark, Altar, of every Pin, Ergo, Hath Christ as punctually prescribed to all Christians, and Nations, in expresse words, the form, matter, dimensions of all Christian Churches, Tem∣ples, Chappels, Tables, Challices, Pulpits, Pews, not varying in one

pin. 2. God named the men, Bezaliel, and Aholiah, who should make the Tabernacle and all the implements thereof. 3. God expressed the frame, fashion, colours, of the holy Garments of Aaron and his sons: shall it follow, Ergo, only the Artificers whom God nameth, immediate∣ly, and none but Embroyderers, Goldsmiths, Carpenters, &c. Not Pastors and Elders are to build up the spirituall Churches of Christ, Ergo, The form, matter and colour of Ministers, and Elders garments are particularly set down in the New Testament. 4. The Taberna∣cle and Temple were corporall things made by mens hands, not spiritu∣all buildings of mens spirits. 5. All these of the patern were delivered to Moses the Temporall Magistrate, not to Aaron the Priest; Ergo, the Church under the Gospel is not a spirituall building, whose maker and builder is God; and all is to be ordered by the Civill Magistrate, and Lay-Artificers, not by Pastors: I wonder also you alledge not Noahs Ark: And all in the New Testament, are not so particularly set down, as in the Old. Ans. The Tabernacle was no part of the Church; but being a Type and the implements of it, to the least pin, particu∣larly expressed by God to Moses; far more must we have from God an expresse for every Ceremony, not to retort this also, that a Cor∣ner-Cap, or a Surplice, is no part of the Church, and is indeed a teaching sign, and so should not be counted a Positive of Church-Policy. 2. Most false it is that the Tabernacle and Temple were nothing but a meeting place of the people for Worship, as our Churches or Chappels, are, 1. Because it is to Argue the Holy Ghost of want of wisdom, to spend so much Canonick Scripture in setting down things idely, not tending, at all to edification, and tea∣ching us nothing of God, and in specifying the Form, Height, Length, Bredth, Curtains, Candlesticks, Sockets, Rings, of naturall places that contained their bodies; for what should it edifie us, if God should describe so particularly all the Churches and meeting places of the people under the New Testament? Now certain it is, What∣soever things were written afore time, were written for our Learning, Rom. 15. 4. 2. Many things in the Tabernacle, as Candles in day light, Rings, Sockets, Shew-bread, belonged nothing to a na∣turall place, as our Chappels, or Meeting houses do. 3. Expresly the Scripture maketh them more then places; to wit, Holy, Religi∣ous, and Typicall signes of Divine institution; as the Tahernacle was a Type, Heb. 8. 2. 5. Heb. 9. 1, 2. &c. Heb. 10. 1, 2, 3. And the

Temple a Type of Christs body, Ioh. 2. 19. Ioh. 1. 14, 15. And all these were Types and shadows of Heavenly things, Heb. chap. 8, 9, 10. Gal. 4. 1. 2. &c. Col. 2. 16. 17. Which our Churches and Chappels are not, being only places common to sacred and Civill actions. 2. God therefore can no more in expresse words set down, the form, matter, dimensions of Christian Churches and Chappels, then of the Synagogues of the Iews which had no Morall use for e∣dification and instruction. 3. Yea, because the Tabernacle and Tem∣ple and their implements, were teaching shadows of good things to come, and our Churches and Chappels are not so, nor have they any Morall or Religious use or influence on our spirits as the Taberna∣cle and Temple had; therefore the Lord, who is expresse in all Mo∣rals, which of their own nature do teach and edifie; he behoved to name Bezaliel, and Aholiah, and the form and colour of the Priests garments, which also are Typicall, and could not name our Elders, or the colour or form of their Garments. 4. All these weak retortions, suppose that the Tabernacle and Temple were types of our meeting houses for Worship, which is a meer conjecture; they were no more types of our Chappels, then of the Iewish Synagogues; we may not expound types at will, but as the Holy Ghost expound∣eth them to us in the New Testament: And this is a conjecturall Exposition, and a dream to make Bezaliel and Aholiah, types of Embroyderers and Tradesmen.

5. We know the Tabernacle and Temple were corporall things made with hands, and that they are things different from the spiri∣tuall things that they signifie; as the sign and the thing signified; as therefore the Lord is expresse in the elements and Rites of the Supper of the Lord, because all of them, Bread, Wine, taking, eating, breaking, pouring out the Wine, drinking, are teaching and edifying signes; and our Lord never left it to the wisdom of men, to devise signes to teach themselves: so in like manner, should the Lord ex∣presly specifie all the teaching and signifying signes in the Old Te∣stament; and as Moses might devise none of his own, but was tyed to follow the patern, which the Lord himself shewed to him in the Mount: So are we now under the New Testament, tyed to the patern of that same will revealed in the Word; and it is laid on us, Not to be wise above that which was written; and it is of perpe∣tuall equity: The supream Law-giver, never left it to the wisdom

of Angels, or Men, or Prophet, Apostle or Church, to serve and Worship God as they thought good: But he himself particularly prescribed the way, signes, and means: And because God hath not been pleased in the New Testament to specifie types of Christ in∣carnate, and come in the flesh already; therefore are we obliged in Conscience to believe, and practise no more, either in Doctrinals, or teaching types, or Positives of Church-Policy, then our Patern in the Mount, the Scripture hath warranted to us, to be the will of God, and in this and this only, standeth the force of the present Argument unanswered by paterns of unwritten Traditions, and not in these loose consequences, that we under the New Testament should have these types and Policy that the Church of the Iews had, which is the Doctrine of Papists and Formalists following them, not ours; for they prove their Pope and Prelat from the Ie∣wish High Priest, their Surplice, from the linnen Ephod of Jewish Priests; their Humane Holidayes, from the Iewish dayes; their kneeling to bread, from their bowing toward the Ark. 6. It is not true, that the Tabernacle and Temple were meer corporall things, no more then bread and wine in their spirituall relation, are meer corporall things: The Lords end, use and intent, in the Tabernacle and Temple, was, that they should be to the people Images, and shadows of heavenly and spirituall things, Heb. 8. 5. Heb. 10. 1. 7. That all the things of the Tabernacle, were delivered to Moses as a King, and not as a Prophet and writer of Canonick Scripture, Heb. 3. 5. Heb. 8. Luk. 24. 44. 27. Luk. 16. 31. is an untruth, ex∣cept Formalists make the King so the head of the Church, in pre∣scribing Laws for the Policy thereof, as they make him a Canonick writer, as were David, Moses, Solomon, from whose example they would prove the King to be the head of the Church: But I judge Moses saw the patern in the Mount, and God face to face, as a Prophet whose words are Scripture to us, Deut. 34. 10. And there arose not a Prophet since in Israel like unto Moses, whom the Lord knevv face to face; And as a Prophet, not as a King, his face did shine, Exod. 34▪ 27, 28, 29. And he was commanded as a Prophet, to write the Law not as a King, Numb. 12. 6. 7. Moses is made the most eminent Prophet that was in the Old Testament. And why? Because God spake to other Prophets by Dreams and Visions▪ But he spake the Law and written Scripture to Moses, mouth to mouth: This

should not be a comparison between Prophet and Prophet, but be∣tween* 1.24 Prophet and King, by this learning. 8. We judge Noahs Ark doth prove the same, it being a speciall type of the Church, 1 Pet. 3. 20, 21. And he built it by Faith, Heb. 11. 7. And so by a Word of God, and at Gods speciall direction, in all the length, bredth, formes of it, and not of his own head, Gen. 6. 14, 15, &c. And is* 1.25 commended by the spirit of God for so doing, Gen. 6. 22. Thus did Noah according to all that God commanded him, so did he. And For∣malists should deserve the like Testimony, if it could be said of them, And as the Lord commanded the Church, in creating Prelats, Surplice, and all the positives of Church-policy; so did she. And so saith Calvin, on Genesis. 6. 22. And P. Martyr, and Musculus piously on this place: and with them, Vatablus. Hence I judge all other things in this, and the following Arguments Answer.

Notes

• * 1.1

  5. Arg. As Moses and David were not to follow their own spirit, far lesse is the will of the Church a rule to shape an unalterable Govern∣ment.
• * 1.2

  Da. Dick∣sonus, Ex∣pos. Ana∣lyti. in E∣pist, a•• heb. c. ••. v. 5.
• * 1.3

  Pag••i, Ari∣••••ont. Vata∣blus in notis, To∣status in 1 Chron 18. 19. 2. 7. Ista Scrip∣tura tam po¦terat fieri per Angelos quam per de∣um. Tosta¦tus, Q. 1. ibid. Cornel, a Lapide, com. 1. Pa∣ralip, 29. 19. D••us ergo in ta∣bula de∣scripsittotam ideam, Tem∣pli alioqui delincatio •• Davide vix intelligi po∣tuisset. Degrees de Templ. Ded. p. 73. Lavater, Ex ••o quod, ••dificium et vasa secun∣dum for∣mam sibi ostensam fa∣cere debuit, significatur in ••ultu dei non secun∣dum hum••∣nam ratio∣••••m, sed ver∣bum dei a∣gendum esse, quo pa∣tefecit quo∣modo coliv••∣lit. Si Sa∣lomon su∣as imagina∣tiones fuis∣set sequitus Templum a∣liâ form â construxis∣set, vasa ali∣ter fecisset et plura quam deus prescripse∣rat.
• * 1.4

  Ceremo∣nials of Moses his Law, are of lesse weight then Mo∣rals, but not of lesse divine au∣thority.
• * 1.5

  Two notes of Divini∣ty ought to be in the New Te∣stament Ceremoni∣als, which were in Divine Ceremo∣nies.
• * 1.6

  Eccles. Po∣licy, book 3. pag. 122.
• * 1.7

  How Mo∣ses doing all accord∣ing to the pattern proveth an immutable platforme.
• * 1.8

  Gods care for us lead∣eth us to think he hath given us a better guide then naturall reason, in all Positive Morals of Church-Policie.
• * 1.9

  Theologia, Atramen∣taria.
• * 1.10

  Book of Eccles. Po∣lici••, 3. pag. 113, 114.
• * 1.11

  The occa∣sionall writing of things in Scripture, no reason why they are altera∣ble.
• * 1.12

  Papists pretend that things are not written in the word, because of the various occurrences of Provi∣dence.
• * 1.13

  Horantius Loc. Com. lib. 2. c. 11. fol. 129. Quaecunque audi••t, lo∣qu••tur, & que futura sunt, annun∣ciabit vobis, quasi dice∣r••••, Quoti••s r••i occasio fuerit, reve∣labit vobis. Quae •• re vestra esse viderit, sug∣gerit, ac quoties re∣velare expe∣d••e••it. l. 2. c. 12. fol. 132. Sed quis non vi∣de•••• multa verbo esse tradita, quae Ecclesiae so∣lum memo∣riae, & muli∣us ••••mirum Scriptis sunt man∣data?
• * 1.14

  Hooker, 3. Book, pag. 114. 115.
• * 1.15

  Horantius, loc. Catho. Lib. 2. c. 12 f••l. 131. Turrian. to. de fide, spe. et Charit. disp, 20. duo. 2. Bell••rm. de Verb dei non script. l. 4. c. 3. That there was no V∣nif••rm Platform of Govern∣ment in the time of Moses and the Apo¦stles, is no Argument that there is none now.
• * 1.16

  Horantius, in loe. Ca∣tholic▪ l▪ 2. c. 12. fol. 1 ••1. Sanderus, de visib. Monarch. l. 1. c. 5. ••. 13. Malderus▪ in 22. de virtu. The∣olog. q. 1. de Object. fi∣dei tract. de trad. q. unic. dub. 1. Funda∣mentals were by succession delivered to the church, yet are they not altera∣ble.
• * 1.17

  The church of Ierusa∣lem as per∣fected in Doctrine, and Disci∣pline, is our patern. Acts 1. 4.
• * 1.18

  Mr. Prynne, Truth Tri∣umphing, &c. p. 128.
• * 1.19

  Mr. Prynne, Truth Tri∣umphing, p. 128.
• * 1.20

  The indif∣ferency of some things in the A∣postolick Church, cannot in∣fer that the Govern∣ment is al∣terable.
• * 1.21

  Ibid.
• * 1.22

  Ib. p. 129.
• * 1.23

  Mr. Prynne, Truth tri∣uphing, p. 130, 131, 132, 133. The Ar∣gument of Moses his doing all to the least pin, in the Tabernacle by speciall direction, considered.
• * 1.24

  The Ark of Noah pro∣veth the same.
• * 1.25

  Calvin, Com. in Gen. 6. 22. Quare dis∣camus per omnegenus impedimen∣ta perrum∣p••re, nec lo∣cum dare pravis cogi∣tationibus quae s•• Dei verbo opponunt, hunc enim honorem haberi sibi, flagitat Deus, ut ••um si••am••••s pronobis seper••. P. Martyr in loc. Nihil negligit fides, omnia pro viribus exoquitur, quaecunque scit deum v••lle: Musculus Moses fidem & obedientiam Noah comprehendit, qua secundum verbum dei arcam con∣struxit, Vatablus Hebraismus pro, quo fecit Noah prorsus, ut ci preceperat deus.