FREE BOOKS

Author's List




PREV.   NEXT  
|<   464   465   466   467   468   469   470   471   472   473   474   475   476   477   478   479   480   481   482   483   484   485   486   487   488  
489   490   491   492   493   494   495   496   497   498   499   500   501   502   503   504   505   506   507   508   509   510   511   512   513   >>   >|  
from Scripture to be the will of God. And why should _jus divinum_ be such a _noli me tangere_? The reason was given. "This was the only thing that hindered union in the Assembly (saith he). Two parties came biassed. The reverend commissioners from Scotland were for the _jus divinum_ of the presbyterial, the Independents for the congregational government. How should either move? where should both meet?" If it was thus, how shall he make himself blameless, who made union in the Assembly yet more difficult, because he came biassed a third way, with the Erastian tenets? And where he asketh where the Independents and we should meet, I answer, In holding a church government _jure divino_, that is, that the pastors and elders ought to suspend or excommunicate (according to the degree of the offence) scandalous sinners. Who can tell but the purging of the church from scandals, and the keeping of the ordinances pure (when it shall be actually seen to be the great thing endeavoured on both sides), may make union between us and the Independents more easy than many imagine. As for his exceptions against us who are commissioners from the church of Scotland, I thank God it is but such, yea, not so much, as the Arminians did object(1330) against the foreign divines who came to the Synod of Dort. They complained that those divines were pre-engaged and biassed, in regard of the judgment of those churches from which they came; and that therefore they did not help, but hinder, union in that assembly. And might not the Arians have thus excepted against Alexander, who was engaged against them before he came to the Council of Nice? Might not the Nestorians have made the same exception against Cyril, because he was under an engagement against them before he came to the Council of Ephesus? Nay, had not the Jewish zealots the very same objection to make against Paul and Barnabas, who were engaged, not in the behalf of one nation, but of all the churches of the Gentiles, against the imposition of the Mosaical rites, and had so declared themselves at Antioch before they came to the synod at Jerusalem? Acts xv. 2. It is not faulty to be engaged for the truth, but against the truth. It is not blameworthy, but praiseworthy, to hold fast so much as we have already attained unto. Notwithstanding we, for our part, have also from the beginning professed, "That we are most willing to hear and learn from the word of God what needeth further to be reformed
PREV.   NEXT  
|<   464   465   466   467   468   469   470   471   472   473   474   475   476   477   478   479   480   481   482   483   484   485   486   487   488  
489   490   491   492   493   494   495   496   497   498   499   500   501   502   503   504   505   506   507   508   509   510   511   512   513   >>   >|  



Top keywords:

engaged

 

church

 
Independents
 

biassed

 

divinum

 

Council

 

Assembly

 

divines

 

commissioners

 

Scotland


churches

 
government
 
Jewish
 

Ephesus

 
exception
 
Nestorians
 

engagement

 

hinder

 

zealots

 

judgment


regard

 

assembly

 

Alexander

 

excepted

 

Arians

 

beginning

 

Notwithstanding

 

attained

 

professed

 
needeth

reformed

 

praiseworthy

 
blameworthy
 

nation

 

Gentiles

 
imposition
 

behalf

 
objection
 

Barnabas

 
Mosaical

complained

 

faulty

 

Jerusalem

 
declared
 

Antioch

 

difficult

 
blameless
 

Erastian

 

tenets

 
divino