The Birth-Frivilerlge and Covenant-holineffe of worfhip, or the !call of the'fervice ofGod, but only y le ps to a right underlianding of the nature, ufe and extent of that which is infiltuted. 2+ When in our reafoning from Analogy for the right underffanding of any _inf}itution, or ordinance, we do not refl folely on the Analogy with other commands, but have our farther reafon for confirmation, 3. When the Analogy holds full proportion in that for which it is brought, fo that nothin ran fairly be brought againtt the one,but may be alto concluded a(intt the other. Againa theee rules he takes three exceptions. i. That never 4 one of.thefe rules is brought oat of Gods word; net the farft,for there is neither declaration of fuch a rase, or example to prove that rule. The .fiat rule I thus illuffrated, fw. pag.76. You finde nothing in Scripture for excommunication of women, yet we finde in the Old Teflament Miriam fhut out of the Camp, Num. r 2.I 4. and in all penalties for tranfgrefìion,in Scriptures we finde no regard had of dilfinaion of fèxe, and by confequence it is not to be denied that women offending are within this cenfure. Master Tombes magifcerially anfwers, The proving of excommunicating of women from Miriams Phut ting out of the Camp, Num. r2. 14. is not a Scripture colleflion, but a meere device of men. If there be no fuch thing as Excommunication in the New Tettament, (as Matter bombes faies, pg. 92. and unfaies, pag. 93.) then I confeile what be fates:. but if there be fuch an inttitution (which here is not a time to examine, as I am lure there is of Baptifine) ,then it may be evinced from that place that it reacheth both fexes. Matter Tombes would have us to proceed by alterable rules of prudence, This prudence as may be inferred, is to reach both fexes ; I brought an instance not for a proof of it (elfe, but illuffration of another proof, from Divines arguing againit non.refidence is fromEzek, 44.8. This (he faies)is good after other arguments, but of it felfe is not convincing. Such arguments then are of validity, when aright placed and orderly marfhalled, I hope this of mine then is of force, it is not in the van, but brings up the reare. The fecond and third rules,he faies,,are.nat fet down from any declaration or example in the Scripture; I delire him at his leafure to look againe,and he may fee the fecond rule confirmed from the Apoffles way of thus arguing, i Qr. o. and the ..Lord Chriffs, . tatth. 12. The third is cónfirmecrby that reafoning of Chril with the Pharifees before J mentioned, compared with our reafoning with 4ntipadobaptifls; j BSI Ch.4
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy OTcyMjk=