Part 25
We use to make a statue by cutting away of matter, as in carving a statue out of freestone, and so in what is left a form ariseth, and it bears the image of what we intend (as well as we do it by adding to of matter, as in making a statue of plaster, &c.); and so here prescindendo, or by cutting away what will not serve for a sedes, the true form in such and such a matter will discover itself.
Now, according to our congregational Prineiplesreceived, I belieye, we will agree in these particulars that follow, and if not, let the breach be made where any one thinks meet to make it upon them.
I shall in the firat place set them down by way of narration; the use and benefit of which narrative will be to help us to discern the special value and tendency of this ordinance of the Lord's supper, which, when all is done, must regulate this case.
And also, by degrees, each of those particulars added to others coming up so far to the conclusion, thereby both the state of the question will be seen, yea, and perhaps some demonstration of it
. spring out of all, at least to convince your judgments of the final conclusion, which is this.
A congregational body to Christ or church, considered as such, and met as such, is the proper sole seat of this ordinance of the Lord's supper, with \ difference from other ordinances of worship and other meetings.
Now to- } wards the proof of this I advance by these steps :
| 1. That if the whole congregational church were met, it must be a minister who must dispense this ordinance, let the necessity of the ordinance be what
Observe this, that in cases of the most absolute necessity,'none will admit any other than a minister to administer it; and your best ground for that is (which I shall own), that we read not that any other but such administered it, or baptism, in the New Testament; and everywhere we read, that where the sacrament of the Lord's supper was administered it was by an whole church, and so the argument for the negative is for this cause as good as for that. other, viz. that ministers only should administer it; nay, we have more instances of the one than the other.
And this also shews a manifest difference of the Lord's supper from other ordinances.
For if we consider public prayers or preaching, gifted brethren in cases of necessity may administer them; and yet you will not say this is common to the Lord's supper, which none but a minister may administer.
However, for this first i | Cuap. VII.) THE CHURCHES OF CHRIST.
' difference betwixt this and other ordinances, there must be some reason in the nature of the ordinances themselves (for that it is the thing which in the first place I inquire), that should require and admit such a difference.
2. The qualification of being a church member, or of being in the order, as I may call it, Col. ii. 6, of that state, is also as requisite as to a person's receiving the Lord's supper, as that the person administering it should be in the order of preaching eldership.
This is acknowledged also, insomuch that the holiest man in the world (and who is known to all that society to be such, and to be utterly remote from the least jealousy of scandal), who owneth not a relation to some church membership, would not be admitted to this sacrament by any of our churches when met together.
8. The third case is this: if some members out of each or all congrega- ! tional churches in England were met together in a town, and a minister of | that town were met with them (where some one congregational church resides, but yet, where at that time that church he belongs unto as minister are not met, but yet there is such a fall congregation of such saints mentioned
; with testimonials from their respective churches), he, according to our : principles, could not administer the Lord's supper to thom, and yet they are j all qualified for it in this respect, that they are in the order of a church, and | in a church state as church members, so as the defect that it was in, in the former case, is taken away also hereby.
And if it be said they cannot be administered unto, because he that is the minister is not their proper minister; but not because they are not capacitated themselves for it, I add these steps more still by putting further cases in the way of answer to this, and to shew that this defect is ultimately resolved into this, that, indeed, they are not a church, for that is the ground of any man's being their proper minister.
4. If any apostle were present, he could not administer-this ordinance to them.
We may make this supposition, for in the primitive times it might, de jacto, have fallen out.
Therefore, the above-mentioned defects doth not lie in their not having a proper minister, for an apostle, having an universal relation of office to all churches and saints, would be (so far as being a minister of all parts therein lies) sufficiently qualified.
5. But still there is a defect why this company of men could not have the Lord's supper administered to them, and that, although qualified in being each a member of some church ; and where lies the obstacle but in this, that they are not one particular church, or members of one and the same church amongst themselves; so that an apostle's presence and power doth not extend to supply that defect, any more than to make a company of disciples a chureh without their coalition first so to be. We use to say that a company of elders met in a synod cannot have the sacrament together, if Paul were with them, although they each do represent particular churches.
(according to us), the administration of the sacrament farther depends upon these being one in the same individual particular church fellowship, which can be said of no ordinance else whatever.
6. If two or three of that church were met, and a teaching elder with them, he might pray with them, preach to them, &c., but not administer this ordinance.
The evangelist Philip and the eunuch alone went together, and he could baptize him, but he could not have administered the Lord's supper to him; so as still it is not sufficient that members of the same individual church be met with a teaching elder.
'Thus, still the administration : of this ordinance advanceth itself and climbeth up further and farther towards its having for its seat that company of believers which ought to be accounted an whole particular church.
THE GOVERNMENT OF [Boor VII.
7. It is not a namber of the members of the same church met with s teaching elder which your principles will allow capacitated for the adminisstration of this ordinance.
Yea, though it be supposed a number of so many and of such persons, that if there were a church to be begun, there were a aufficient number for to make a church (be it the minimum quod sic of seven, as Mr Cotton says, or of ten, as in a synagogue, or of eleven, as Christ's
* disciples were when Judas was gone forth).
Yet your principles will not allow it.
For, i 1. Then any such number met with a teaching elder for other religious worship might in the end say, Let us have the sacrament also in the close, since God hath been with us in the other ordinances, and we are sufficient for number.
But this you would not allow.
2. If there be a church of five hundred, and as many teaching officers as were in the church of Antioch, Acts xiii. 1, who would accordingly meet in so many several parcels as they had teaching elders over them (one teaching elder meeting with one parcel of many of them, another with a second many, a third with a third many, and so on), and would multiply their meetings according to the number of their elders, this you would not allow neither; especially you would not admit such several meetings for the Lord's supper at one and the same time.
This yet is a case supposable, and it may be put.
Now by cases put, we having brought the matter thus high and thus near, it is to be considered what is here yet wanting or to be superadded to capacitate and endow them with power for this, that the Lord's supper may be administered in this case!
Let any man of us either make a breach upon some or all of these principles, or assign wherein the defect lies; and as Peter said, What should forbid that these should not be baptized ? eo let us inquire what doth forbid or hinder why these should not be the seat of the Lord's supper when so met, and where there are all requisites materially for it.
1. Saints in the order of church fellowship.
2. In the same individual church fellowship, and members one of another in that respect.
8. A teaching elder in proper relation unto them.
4. A need (perhaps) of edification of many of them; yea, and an earnest, spiritual, and special longing after it at the meeting, and a great preparation made by other ordinances unto it.
6. The common warrant (as for time) to receive this ordinance oft ('as oft as ye receive,' &c., 1 Cor. xi. 26), and so both season and time do meet also.
There is, 6. A sufficient number as to the matter of a church to make an whole church according unto that to which any principles of any profession amongst us, episcopalian, presbyterian, or anabaptists, will say is required for a church, and go it is in that respect equivalent unto an whole church.
Wherein should the impediment lie? I press any man to assign it; but he that doth it mast assign such a ratio or condition of this company to be superadded yet to them, as (taking into his eye all the fore-mentioned cases) shall carry with it a difference and distinct ground, founded in the nature of the things, and he must compare them together.
1. With the case of many members of several other churches so met with an apostle, who yet may not receive the Lord's supper.
2. With the cases of two or three (but not arising to many) of their own church met with their own elder, &¢., who yet may not.
And yet, 8, all these may enjoy any other ordinance of worship, prayer, &c., but not this.
Cuar. VII.) THE CHURCHES OF OHRIST.
And, 4, he must consider all these meetings to be of a distinct nature from a church meeting of the whole charch that is so acknowledged, in which not the Lord's supper only, but any or all other ordinances of discipline, excommanication, &c., may be administered, which cannot be in any of the other
Let any, I say, whoever, weighing the premises, assign what notio, conceptus, or ratio (taking ratio for the modus, relation or respect put upon a thing), is a new or farther requisite to this company of many, &c., specified, and such a nvtio also as will bear warrant and afford a true ground of difference of such a church, both from the other assemblies mentioned, and will also state a difference of this ordinance of the Lord's supper from the other ordinances, according to the variation of the cases put, and he will find himself driven up to what I shall by and by assign.
For bring me two half-crown pieces, the one stamped, the other unstamped (which yet for matter and all such requisites belonging to the matter, &c., is in valore, in value, equivalent unto an half-crown that is stamped), yet the unstamped piece is not constituted currentasmoney to that purpose of payment as the other is; so it is in the present case.
The seventh case propounded presents you with a many of members of one and the same church, enough to begin a charch, &c, and yet you would not (out of times of persecution) in the modes of them propounded allow them capacitated for this administration ; and yet they are in valore, in value, every way equivalent unto a church which is immediately capable of this adminii stration.
Let any man now say what is the stamp that is to be superadded unto such a company or companies ?
Till others assign theirs, I shall present what I conceive in abstracto this formal reason to be, viz., that a company of saints, &c., met, must be endued with this superadded formality, with this nova ratio formalis instituta, that it is a distinct. body unto Christ, wherein the members are united to one another as such, with distinction from other churches that are also instituted bodies to Christ.
And this is that company which, having an officer or teaching elder over them, are the propria sedes, the proper seat, for the administration of this sacrament; and unless this consideration is or can be justified to be in such or in any company, they are not capacitated for this ordinance of the Lord's supper.
For otherwise it is not their number, and their being members of one and the same church, and their meeting with an elder, who is their own elder, that will empower them for this ordinance.
1. In general, that there must be some fartherformalis ratio, some conceptus or notion superadded unto the materials of former instances (especially that last put), is evident.
1. Because all things that go to complete the matter do meet in that last instance.
There is, 1, 6 many; 2, many of the same church; 8, they are met with their own teaching elder; and yet they are defective, and are not the proper seat of the Lord's supper.
2. Because there must some difference and distinction arise (besides what ariseth from these persons as the matter in this company), whereby they do and may become propria sedes of this ordinance, with difference from all the former instances.
Now, differences arise properly from the form, and so it must be nova ratio formalis.
8. It must be something instituted, a ratio formalis instituta (as I said).
1. Because it is that which must make a difference and distinction from, 1. A company of saints in no church fellowship.
2. A company of saints in several church fellowships.
'8. From two or three of the same charch fellowship.
THE GOVERNMENT OF [Boor VII.
4. From a manyof the same.
5. And so as that whereas any such company of the former may partake of any other ordinance of worship, yet not of this.
That which must be to pat the difference, must be satio formalis instituta, as take as many men for number and (every way qualified and enabled, é&c.) as are sufficient to make a corporation fit to enjoy such or such privileges, yet they must over and above be empowered 'by charter, and ever and above have superadded the seat of their being a corporation bya civil institution; so it is here.
2. Now, secondly, for the demonstration of that particular formalis ratio instituta sasigned, viz., that an instituted body to Christ, considered as such, is the only proper seat for this ordinance, I shall proceed,
1. By removing all suppositions I-can think of or that have been suggested, or what may be pretended to give the stamp or institution, so as it will still remain that nothing else but such a company as I have before defined, may assume and take on them to be an instituted body to Christ.
1. It is not a par ratio, a parity of reason.
The church is said to have prayed for Peter: Acts xii. 5, ' Peter therefore was kept in prison, but prayer was made without ceasing of the church unto God for him.'
And this was done by two several meetings at least, and so by pants of the cburch: ver. 12, he came to an house where 'many were gathered together praying ;' and another company was elsewhere, as appears from what Peter says, ver. 17,
'Go tell these things unto James, and to the brethren ;' and the words that follow are, ' And he departed, and went into another place."
But yet all this will no way come up to evince the matter we are upon, nor warrant that the stamp of, being a church may be put uponevery assembly of many, nor will it follow that the church may meet in parts for the Lord's supper.
1. Because prayer is such an ordinance as may be exercised by a church by parcels, and those parcels may be fewer or more, whether their officer is met with them or not, asin one of the former instances was alleged that one elder meeting with one sick person may pray with him, whereas if all the elders met with that person they would not be capacitated to administer the Lord's supper to that sick person.
For if this had been the manner then, or an apostolical practice, the apostle James had as fit an occasion to have made mention of it, and to have enjoined it to be administered also by them, as well as to pray over them, &c.; for the sacrament is as needful for the soul of such a person as prayer, &c. is for their body.
It may also be said that any two of the church, and the whele church by two and two, may meet to pray for any business of importance, but you will not say they may do so for this ordinance ; yea, they may do so without any officer, as two.or three may meet for prayer, but not so for this sacrament.
And one reason is, because this ordinance is a communion of Christ's body, and of one with another therein; but it is not so in the other ordinance of prayer, 8o as there is disparitas, a disparity of reason.
For it would be a strange assertion to say that two may meet for a communion of Christ's body as well as to pray, and thereby exercise the communion of saints, which cannot be done apart as well as by all or many together.
Obj. But the phrase of Acts xii. 5 is urged, that prayer was made of the church unto God for Peter (which how it was done the 12th and 17th verses shew, viz., that it was by parcels), and therefore the church may be said to meet in several parcels, the reply is, Ans. 1. A question may justly be made whether that phrase of prayer being made of the church without ceasing, refers us unto those prayers that are afterward instanced to have been made by parcels of the church, or whether that phrase is not intended to shew how the whole church had, during Cnar. VII.) "THE CHUROBES OF OBRIST. his being in prison, met and made prayers for him, for unto the former whole time of his having been in prison doth that speech refer (view the words and compare ver. 4), and those after-passages, vers..12, 17, are but what fell out to be that night afore he was to appear next morning, ver. 6. But I will not at all insist on this, but will suppose:that during this time of persecution all their meetings were by parcels as well as that night, though I believe that the assertion in the answer given can never be disproved.
2. Prayer may be said to be made by the chureh in parcels,and yet it may be affirmed that none ofthem were meetings of the church as a church,thopgh yet, if two by two-had in such:minute parcels met, yea; if privately only one had earnestly prayed, it might have been said that prayer hadbeen made by the church thus distributed..
For, 1, the word churolin such a way of speech is taken'materially for the members of the church, whether singly or otherwise; and whena thing is done by them generally either one way or another, it may be said the church prayed; and it cannot be inferred that they prayed together, no more than to say prayer was made by the churches would argue they all met together for one prayer.
And that the phrase of church is so used in this book-ofthe Actsis evident, for when it is-said, Acts viii. 1, that there was-'a great persecution against , the church;' the word church is materially taken. 0 the phrase, ver. 5, and those compared with it, vers. 12 and 17, will in no way evidence that these meetings were church meetings, or that they met qua church, and so they had not the stamp which we seek; they were barely meetings of several members of that church; and so the whole church, indeed, might be materially in the one and in the other, but still it was not there qua church. a 2. The natare of the daty of prayer is unquestionably such as will admit a churchto perform it by parcels-greater or lesser, yea, in its members singly; and how, then, can we interpret thisphraseology in Acts xii. to serve that purpose for which it is urged?
Nay, 8, the Holy Ghost hath warily penned it to prevent such an interpretation, for he styles the meeting of these in verse 12 (where it is said
' many were gathered together praying') in distinction from being » church, or the church, or a church meeting, and so in'reality comes up but to that seventh or last instance we gave, of many of:the same church meeting, to whom.yet you would not give the supper.
And as for the-other company, who are called James and the brethren, we will suppose them met as these many, ver..12, were; and yet so much is not said there, but the meaning may be that Peter bid them to go-to their several houses.
They are but the brethren with James, not the-church,.though James,.their chief elder, had been met with them.
Yea, 4, there will fall ont this:contradiction to what is said in the bth verse, if you say that these were each formal church meetings, for then it must have been said that they met in distinct churches, and. not that. that charch in singulari met in each of these meetings, ver. 5:
(2.) It is. not the will or consent of that which we: must' call' the whole church (the savjyugc) that can have authority toset this new stamp of a charch upon such partial meetings of its own members.
For, 1, though in law estates or titles are conveyed, both by the will of man in making his will, and by inheritance, yet here the adopting any or all of these meetings apart into the privilege of a church goes not by the will of man. Bat look what company is so met as by the will and institutionofGod the inheritance falls upon, they only are the church. The church's will gives not the stamp, but it must be such in the reality afore God.
2. If the will of the church had this pretended authority, then the whole 'THE GOVERNMENT OF {Boor VII. church may say of any such few or many of the members at any time met,. that they are a church, and that others, though many, are not so.
Yea, 8. Then it may be said of as many several companies that have each an elder with them, that they are so many churches; and if all these receive at the same time the sacrament, they would be so many churches made by that one whole church, and belonging to that one church, whereas an instituted church consists in indivisibili.
4. It is not considered enough that the authority of being a church is not potestas vicaria, nor deputata, a vicarious or deputed power; therefore the whole church cannot say, This shall be your church at such or such a time, for such or such an end.
8. It is not a case of necessity for the ordinance that will be argament sufficient for the administration of it to any such divided parcels of a church.
For, put this case, that many of the same church are in case ofgreat disconsolation, and therefore need this ordinance, or that they have not had this ordinance of a long time administered to them, and one of their proper ministers were with them ; yea, put the case of necessity, which the papists and our episcopal divines put, that two or three or more are sick and weak in a great family belonging to one church, and being near death in all view, they as greatly long for, yea, more need this ordinance, in agone mortis, in an agony of death, than any other company of church members in case of persecution.
Neither of these cases will be allowed to be such a necessity as would make or constitute such a meeting to be a body unto Christ, instituted with difference from another part of that charch.
Whether, in case of apparent danger of life, loss of estate rationally foreseen, or in case of violence and force causing ordinances to cease, there may not be a prudent forbearance or secret avoidance.
The rule our Saviour gives, 'I will have mercy and not sacrifice,' is our measure and standard to forbear ordinances in the case mentioned, for it is mercy which God would rather.have.
Sacrifice was the eminent ordinance of the Old Testament in all the ages of it, yet, it being but a duty of the second commandment or instituted worship, and not of the first, it yields unto mercy, as also the duties of the Sabbath do, as our Saviour Christ hath also declared and paralleled that with the duties of the second command, Luke vi. 1-4.
But I shall give instances of such a forbearance which confirm this, and shew the extent of this rale :
| 1. I shall produce instances out of the Old Testament.
| (1.) Jacob fled from his father's house when Esau had but spoken words of threatening: Gen. xxvii. 41, ' And Esau said in his heart, The days of mourning for my father are at hand; then will I slay my brother Jacob.
F And these words of Esau, his elder son, were told Rebekah; and she sent | and called Jacob, her younger son, and said to him, Behold, thy brother
Esau, as touching thee, doth comfort himself, purposing to kill thee.'
Here was but a hearsay and report of Esau's intention, and yet thereupon his mother advises him to flee to Laban, to Haran, ver. 48, butto do it only to avoid the present distress, hoping his brother's fury would be over, as the word is: ver. 44, 45, ' And tarry thon with him a few days until thy brother's fary turn away, until thy brother's anger turn away from thee' (that | | | Cuar. VIII.) THE OHURCHES OF CHRIST. is, the fary of his anger be over), 'and he forget that which thou hast done to him: then will I send and fetch thee from hence.'
And he did accordingly, and Isaac's blessing with him also (Gen. xxviii. 1-5), and was sent away by his authority.
And yet, consider the case how it stood: He went away from his father's house, where God was worshipped and where sacrifices were offered, for so in the patriarch's families they were and had been from the beginning, from Adam, Abel, and Cain, and so on; yet to avoid this fary he tled to a family where a strange God was worshipped (for we read that Laban did swear to another God than Jacob did, Gen. xxxi. 58, viz. the God which Abraham and Nahor had worshipped before Abraham's conversion: Joshua xxiv. 15, 'The gods which your fathers served, that were on the other side of the flood.'
That Laban was an idolator also appears by the said Gen. xxxi. 80, ' Wherefore hast thou stolen my gods ?' compared with ver. 84), and his flying was but a matter of prudence, it was but for a danger threatened; he was not yet surprised, but it seemed rationally impendent.
And also it was but for a time, but not for always, and his mother (as Ainsworth says) counselled him in faith; yea, and farther, Isaac sent him away with a blessing as from God. And there was this farther in the case, that he, having bought the birthright of his brother
Esau, if his father (who was so old that he was stricken with blindness, and Esan, in his speech, had implied that it would not be long to his death) had died, it was he that should have officiated in the priest's office in the family, and have performed the worship of the family, as having bought the birthright, and so was the head thereof in that respect.
How soon his father might die he knew not, and yet he fled, and fied upon this occasion and with this reserve, till his brother's fary should be over.
I might from hence urge an argument against what is ordinarily alleged by people in our times, who, in the case of eminent danger, tell their teachers and one another, You must trust God, and not avoid or forbear.
I reply, Why should not he have trusted God against such fears as these, which were indeed but from flying speeches of his brother ?
But because it was rationally probable that his brother would indeed have killed him, he therefore flies to avoid it ;but when, indeed, God really did call him to trust him, as when his brother Esau came with four hundred men against him, he then trusted God and prayed it out; but in this case he was not called to do it, but wholly to avoid it rather.
2. To sacrifice and to worship God together in assemblies had been the religion of their forefathers, transmitted to them from befure the flood, as appears from the first in the case of Cain and Abel, Gen iv. and from the 26th verse of that chap., 'Then men began to call upon the name of the Lord,' that is, to call upon him together.
But while they were in Egypt, the people did forbear sacrifices and public worship: Exod. viii. 25-27, ' Pharaoh called for Moses and Aaron, and said, Go ye, sacrifice to your God in the land.
And Moses said, It is not meet so to do; for we shall sacrifice the abomination of the Egyptians to the Lord our God: lo, shall we sacrifice the abomination of the Egyptians before their eyes, and will they not stone us?
We will go three days' journey into the wilderness, and sacrifice to the Lord our God, as he shall command us.'
Videtur colligi non fuisse liberum;* it seems to be inferred that it was not free, sacrificia offerre, no not in their own dwellings for them to offer sacrifices; no, not in their own dwellings in Goshen, or if they did it they did it but secretly.
And it is for certain that public sacrifices and meetings were not used; for it is but now granted as a special favour by Pharaoh:
'Go, sacrifice in the land,' as ® Rivetus in locum.
THE GOVERNMENT OF [Boox VII. that which they had not done afore; and they forbore upon a pradential ground, when yet, according to the principles of trusting God in any case,
&c., and if they were true they ought not to have forborne ; they knew not infallibly and certainly that the people would stone them, and yet thereupon
Moses says, 'It is not meet so to do;' ver. 26, 'For we shall sacrifice the abomination of the Egyptians before their eyes, and will they not stone us ?
'We will go three days' journey into the wilderness, and sacrifice to the Lord our God.' Which argues farther that they knew their fathers had offered up sheep and oxen ; and so it was not out ofignorance that they forbore, as if they knew not what God would accept.
From the transactions of Moses, this may clearly also be argued, that if, in cage any person be to enter into a state of church ordinances (which sacrifice was then more eminently in the room of), or to join with a set company and with a pastor suitable to them, &c., which hitherto they have not done, they may warrantably forbear and wait a due and fit season for it in a settled way.
Or if a man intended to remove for ordinances to another country, he were not bound (perhaps for some good space of time) to enter presently into them in the place where he is, or upon the néxt opportunity which will present itself.
Also in that case of a dangerous opposition from their relations, such ag, by reason of their spirits and principles, do threaten to | break all between them; we do use rightly in such a case to advise, that wives and children are not so bound up to do it, but they may forbear, to gain the consent of such relations.
And our arguments we account strong, because, for present enjoyment, we are not to hazard or prejudice a future more settled and quiet enjoyment, which yet truly hath much of the case afore us.
For we only profess to forbear at particular times, whorein there appears rationally a more certain danger, to preserve ourselves and our estates to enable us to enjoy them more frequently at other times, and not expend all our future enjoyments upon one present, and spend (as it were) the whole of all at once.
And this is truly mercy, and is the same kind of sacrifice too, viz. for the future, instead of sacrifiee at present.
Now all this is justifiably inferred from the case of the Israelites in Egypt, especially from the time that Moses presented himself as a deliverer unto them; for seeing deliverance was at hand, why did they not presently fall upon sacrificing? Why doth Moses defer the time, and not set upon it presently ?
It was not that the duty of sacrifice was not in force, for it had been (as Christ says of circumcision) from the fathers, and obliged them as well as their forefathers, especially when Pharaoh had given liberty, saying,
'Go, sacrifice in the land.'
No, but he defers it, to work about another . thing, viz. a total deliverance, and sacrificeth the present enjoyment they might have had unto the attainment of a fature settled enjoyment.
He forbears at present, that the present performing it for once might not hinder the future for a continuance.
8. During Saul's wicked reign, there was no frequenting the ark, which yet was the ordinance of God: 1 Chron. xiii. 8, ' Let us bring again the ark of our God, for we inquired not at it in the days of Saul.'
I omit David's flying from Saul, and complaining of his dwelling in Meshech, and his saying, 'Oh that I were a sparrow,' a ' doorkeeper in the house of God,' Ps. Ixxxiv. 8, 10.
4, We have another instance in the case of the ten tribes all the days of the kings of Israel.
There was in Elias's time seven thousand had not bowed to Baal, but they kept themselves from the defilement of idols conscientiously,
1 Kings xix. 18, and yet they went not into ordinances at Jerusalem, to temple-worship, nor did not during all those times, which were well nigh
| two hundred and fifty years, nor do we find them anywhere blamed for it.
Cuar. VIIL.J THE CHURCHES OF CHRIST.
Yea, and surely, had they been observant thereof, it would have been here remembered by God for the evidence of their sincerity, as well as that negative of not bowing unto Baal.
If the objection be, that of Jeroboam and the rest of the kings, it is indigitated that he made Israel to sin, namely, in their not going up to Jerusalem as well as in worshipping his calves;— I answer, 1, that the sin of Jeroboam, and the kings that imposed both, did lie in both, viz. in restraining them from their going to Jerusalem as well as in requiring their worshipping his calves, and the ultimate aim on his part was to keep them from going to Jerusalem: 'If this people go up to sacrifice in the house of the Lord at Jerusalem, then shall the heart of this people turn again unto their lord, even unto Rehoboam king of Judah; and they shall kill me, and go again to Rehoboam king of Judah.'
Yet the sin imputed to the people is eminently if not limitedly said to be their, worshipping of their calves: 1 Kings xii. 29, 80, 'And he set the one in © Bethel, and the other put he in Dan.
And this thing became a sin: for the people went to worship before the one, even unto Dan.'
Ans. 2. The nation generally incurred the guilt of both, because they walked willingly after Jeroboam's commandment, Hosea v. 11.
But, 8, still those godly people who kept themselves from the worship of his calves (as certainly they did, as the prophets also did), and being under this hard restraint which hath been spoken of, and mourners for it, to them simply their forbearance to go up to Jerusalem was not imputed as a sin, nor is anywhere found to have been so charged on them.
And that the greatest of the prophets themselves did, in that as well as in other cases of danger, betake themselves to ways of pradence to secure and save themselves after the most heroic darings, and durst not abide by it, you have Elias for an example.
Elias, indeed, once daringly offered a great sacrifice, and gained thereupon the people to kill eight hundred of Baal's priest, in the midst of Ahab's and Jezebel's reign, 1 Kings xviii.
But when he had done, he stayed not by it, but to save himeelf he betook himself to his heels, and ran away, and went as far as his legs could carry him, clear out of all Ahab's dominions and reach, forty days' journey, even to mount
Horeb, where the law wae given, 1 Kings xix. 8.
Some further objections may arise from the adventures and seeming hazards of utter ruin, that many godly of the ten tribes at several times made to come to Jerusalem to sacrifice, There were three special times in which we read that many of that people, after the beginning of Jeroboam's reign, went up to Jerusalem to worship.
1. Then when the division had been first made by Jeroboam during the space of three years.
2. In the days of Asa of Judah, and Baasha king of those ten tribes, some fifteen years after Jeroboam's death, another eruption out of some of the ten tribes came unto Jerusalem, 3 Chron. xv. 9.
8. The third was just at the last, even but five years afore the final ruin of the nations.
Of any other timos wo read not (that I know of) of any one's going up, unless you will credit that which old Tobit says of himself: Tobit i. 6, 'I went often alone unto Jerusalem to the foasta;' and what the angel is brought in to say (chap. v.) of two more that accompanied him at some of those times.
Yet there it is not he always went when it was duty as well to do so, but only often, and that he alone did it, not others of the godly of that nation in his days.
Now the circumstances of those three times specified, and the condition of 'THE GOVERNMENT OF [Boor VII. that people, are to be inquired into, that it may appear why then it was done by the godly, and not at other times (that are recorded), as that which will give a difference in the case, and give light to us in the point in hand, when
; to adventure and when not, for it will be found that none of these three instances, in the circumstances of them, will rise up to prove such an absolute obligation unto instituted ordinances, but as may stand with mercy shewn to ourselves in our lives, preservation of our lives, and of our families from ruin. I shall therefore make a particular inquiry into the circumstances of all these three.
1. As toaching that first flush or breaking forth of goers to Jerusalem, when it was but young tide with Jeroboam and his government, we read,
2 Chron. xi. 18-16, ' And the priests and Levites that were in all Israel resorted to Rehoboam out of all their coasts. (For the Levites left their suburbs,
.and their possessions, and came to Judah and Jerusalem ; for Jeroboam and his sons had cast them off from executing the priest's office unto the Lord : and he ordained him priests for the high places, and for the devils, and for the calves which he had made.) And after them out of all the tribes of Israel, such as set their hearts to seek the Lord God of Israel, came to Jerusalem to sacrifice unto the Lord God of their fathers.'
But the circumstances of the times and conditions of the persons must be therein considered.
As, 1, that this was done at that time when this alteration, together with the government, was first made, and (which is to be taken along) was practised by the people but the three first years, as ver. 17 hath it; and although Jeroboam was thus rigid from the first towards the priests and Levites (of which by and by), yet it being the beginning of his government
(when politic princes proceed by degrees), it may well be supposed that his being king depending much upon the people, he was a while more slack and conniving at the people ; and indeed his first declaration (I call it so, rather than edict) concerning the calves, and their going up to Jerusalem, was (as to them) published im softer and milder, and but exhortatory terms, and without penalties that we read of at first annexed, as appears, 1 Kings xii. 28, ' Whereupon the king took counsel, and made two calves of gold, and said unto them, It is too much for you to go up to Jerusalem : behold thy gods, O Israel,' &c.
It was but a presenting to them another worship, and trying first how it would take with them.
2. The condition both of priests and people is to be considered, to put the difference between this and other times.
1. Consider the condition of the priests and Levites, who began first, as vers. 18, 14.
It is apparent that their removal was total and forced, and absolutely necessitated.
They could not choose, unless they would become priests to serve Jeroboam's calves, for refusing which it was Jeroboam began with them.
It was he and his sons had cast them off from executing the priest's office, 2 Chron. xiv., and so their livelihood and maintenance utterly ceased, for their portion always had been to live upon jura temple, upon the revenues due by God's law to the priests as serving the temple, as you read,
Num. xviii., Deut. xviii., and Joshua xviii., all which ceased in Israel then with their non-execution of the priest's office.
Only, it seems he left it yet free to them to continue in their dwellings; for it is said, those ' they left their suburbs,' as ver. 14; for, alas! what would that have conduced to their maintenance, they having no inheritance or lot of lands; but, on the contrary, if they would remove to Jadah and Jerusalem (which at this dawn of his government it seems Jeroboam yet hindered them not from, but permitted them), there they had a service at the temple waited for them ; for | Cuar. VIIL.] THE CHURCHES OF CBRIST. j in their courts they were there to serve.
They had also a maintenance by | God's appointment set out for them, and the priest's self-denial in this was : but as that of priests and Jesuits now with us in England, who, if they be banished from thence, have yet colleges, and monasteries, and universities, to retire into, where they have employments and other service to do, and maintenance ready for them ; which different case of theirs from others, who, if banished, have mere nothing to betake themselves to, is not enough considered and laid to heart.
Yea, as things stood, it was every way their interest and advantage in this distress to take this course of resorting to Rehoboam out of all Israel.
Then, 2, for the people, who, after them (as it is said), both after that time and after their example, came to Jerusalem also; besides that (it was said) they as yet had no positive prohibition to the contrary (that we read of) further, it is not apparent at all that they did for these three years remove their stations from out of Israel, but keeping their houses and their lands still, did only go up to Jerusalem to sacrifice at the usual times
; and so it is only said of them, 2 Chron xi. 16, ' They came to Jerusalem, to sacrifice unto the Lord God of their fathers ;' and because this is spoken with an observable difference from what had been said of the removal of the priests (vers.
18, 14), that they also left their dwellings, &., and that the people here are barely said to go to sacrifice, hence, therefore, it seems more than probable, that these people's going was only at the feaste for sacrifice, but they returned again to their own dwellings and livelihoods in Israel, as in former times they had been wont to do.
And if so, then this clearly argues, that Jeroboam's laws (if any concerning them were yet made) were not as then 80 severe against the people's going up (that is, not for these three first years), as afterwards they were, when by the experience of their going up during those three years he saw that the kingdom of Judah was strengthened thereby, ver. 17. And that but three years are mentioned, argues that then they ceased any more so to go up.
On the other hand, if the case of this people had not stood thus free in this respect for those three first years (as hath been argued), but that they should be thought utterly to have quitted their station, it had been far harder with them than with the priests and Levites, and indeed unsupportable.
And the vast difference between the case of the priests and the people (if thus stated) is very apparent ; for the priests and Levites left but mere dwellinghouses, but had a provision for them, though perhaps less in Judah upon their removal; but the people, if they removed, were to leave inheritances in lands, vineyards, orchards, &c., which they already possessed in Israel, and that allotted them by God ; which if Jeroboam had been so severe with them at first as is supposed, they could not have sold them neither, for he would have prevented them in that also; and if they had liberty to have sold them, it had been but for the time till the year of the next jubilee by the law, which to many would have been but little profit, for it was but twenty years at the utmost that the bishop of Armagh reckons them, others but fourteen, between Jeroboam's very beginning of his reign unto the next jubilee, which was the tenth.
And when they should have come unto Judah, they could not have bought any other lands of inheritance there, for those that were that time dwellers already, had their inheritances fixed to them by divine right; they were bona immobilia, immovable goods, which they could not sell longer than the next jubilee, when they must have returned; and so these poor
Iaraelites should have had nothing to have lived upon, no, nor to employ themselves in, in the land of Judah, if thither they had removed.
Neither had they any ground (for aught I know that may be gathered out THE GOVERNMENT OF [Boor VII. of the story) to hope for any support or encouragement, either from that people of Judah or Rehoboam, who was not # godly prince, nor sincerely hearty to the cause of religion; but, 2 Chron. xii. 1,
' After he had established the kingdom (once), and had strengthened himself, he forsook the law of the Lord, and all Israel with him.'
And in that former placealleged, itwas but those three first years that he and they walked in the ways of David and Solomon, upon which it may therefore well be supposed that the godly people of these ten tribes ceased to go up to worship, though in the end he humbled himself, and things went well again in Judah, 2 Chron. xii. 12.
But then, that after those three first years Jeroboam's severity interrupted any from going up (as we read of that none did), is very likely and most probable; for of Jeroboam it is particularly said, that he began to use foree and violence to keep the people from going up to Jerusalem, as the summary account which God gives why he removed that nation wholly at the last shews: 2 Kings xvii. 21, ' Jeroboam drave the people from following the Lord,' that is, from their going up to Jerusalem; for, indeed, in that did his main interest lie; and his calves was but a device to divert them to another worship; and that word, drave from, imports violence to have been used, And this way of severity, begun by Jeroboam, was continued by other of their kings, both by severe laws, as the statutes of Omri, mentioned
Micah vi. 16, shew, whose statutes are therefore mentioned, because he, ander more strict penalties than ever had beer, onacted the observation of the things which Jeroboam had first brought in.
For unto the level of what Jeroboam had done, Omri's wickedness is limited: 1 Kings xvi. 26, ' For he walked in all the way of Jeroboam, the son of Nebat, and in his sin wherewith he made Israel to sin, to provoke the Lord God ofIsrael to anger with their vanities."
And therefore those his statutes in Micah are to be understood as more severely backing what Jeroboam had begun; and this
Omri, who made these laws, began his reign not past'thirty years after Jeroboam's death, so that it did rise up to the highest severities very soon.
And as he was severe by laws, so also, by waylaying any that should go up to Jerusalem, which the Jewish writers do affirm their kings did, and how they set guards, and built watch-towers on purpose, at the passages and ways, to take and kill them that attempted to ge to Jerusalem, and confiscated their goods; and they do say that that place, Hosea v. 1, is an allusion to that practice which their former kings had used upon mount Tabor and Mizpeh,* whereon (says the Jewish writers) they had placed watch-towers and sentinels, as gins and snares to catch any that should attempt to go up to Jerusalem ;+ these two places being outlets into the dominion of Judah from some part of Israel.
And that this was one way and course taken up and continued by these kings, those scriptures do expressly relate. For of Baasha, that succeeded but two years after Jeroboam, it is there said,
' Beasha, king of Israel, went up against Judah, and built Ramah, that he might not suffer any to go ont or come in to Asa king of Judah.'
Now Ramah was on the borders of Benjamin, in the way to Jerusalem; and one fresh occasion of this design had been that (as 2 Chron. xv. 9 relates it), many in abundance out of Ephraim, and Manasseh, and Simeon, had fallen te Asa, and came out from those tribes to Jerusalem for the worship of God's-sake.
And Ramah, which he attempted to build, was the direct passage for' those particular tribes to go into Judah by.
* See Rivet on Hosea v. 1. t Jeroboam ut asseritur satis rationabiliter posuit custodes in terminis regni, ne quis de regno suo ascenderet in Jerusalem, et qui ascenderent caperentur et occiderentur et confiscarentur opera eorum.—Tostatus on 2 Chron. xi. quest. 17.
Cuapr. VIL.) THE CHURCHES OF OHRIST.
The seagad outbreaking over the banks which the kings of Israel had raised up to, restrain their subjects from inundations into Judah, is recorded
2 Chron. xv. 9-18, 'He' (viz., Asa) 'gathered all Judah and Benjamin, and the strangers with them out of Ephraim and Manasseh, and out of Simeon
(for they fell to him out of Israel in abundance, when they saw that the Lord his God was with him); so they gathered themselves together at Jerusalem in the third month, in the fifteenth year of the reign of Ass.
And they offered unto the Lord, the same time, of the spoil which they had brought, seven huadred oxen and seven thonsand sheep.
And they entered into a covenant to.seek the Lerd God of their fathers, with all their hearts, and with all their soul, that whosoever would not seck the Lord God of Israel should be put to death, whether small or great, whether man or woman.'
We see this was a flowing in abundance, and there were two persuasives of them to it: 1, God's prospering Asa; 2, their desires to worship God.
Yet here in like manner the circumstances of that juncture of time, as also of the persons (who and what tribes these were), are to be duly weighed, and will still serve to contribute light to us in this great point, both as under what rationally probable apprehensions men are called to adventure for the enjoyment of ordinances in the times of such distress, as also in what cases and circumstances they are to do it.
1. As to the persons (who and of what tribes), although the number of them was in a great abundance, yet but three tribes only are specified; and 8o interpreters do much narrow it unto the godly of these tribes, Ephraim,
Manasseh, and Simeon.
To clear which it must be further considered, 1. That a good part of Ephraim (called elsewhere in this story mount Ephraim, 2 Chron. xv. 8, that is, the mountainous part of that country) had been already brought under the dominion of the king of Judah since
Jeroboam's revolt; first, some by Abijah, this Asa's father: 2 Chron. xiii. 19, ' Abijah pursued after Jeroboam, and took cities from him: Bethel with the towns thereof, and Jeshanah with the towns thereof, and Ephraim
H with the towns thereof ;' and those cities were not recovered again by Jeroboam or their kings, aa verse 20 shews.
Then again more and other cities had been taken by this king Asa himself, 2 Chron. xv. 8.
Other eities were taken by him, besides the former by his father, for it would not have been first there, and then again so expressly over and again said that Asa had taken cities, if they had been ne other than those cities his father Abijah had taken afore him; andall these Jehoshaphat possessed in his time also, as that 2 Chron xvii. shews.
Now, this part of Ephraim bordered upon Benjamin, which was in the tribo of Judah's lot, as in Joshua xvi. and xviii. appears.
Then, 2, the tribe of Simeon here specified lay so near the tribe of Judah as it had been anciently a part thereof, and reckoned within it, Joshua xix. 1.
And then the three tribes, viz., Manasseh, Ephraim, and Benjamin, were adjoining to one another, Joshua xvi. and xvii.
So all these being immediate borderers, and some of the cities being already become the dominion of Judah, no wonder if many of those tribes also fell in with Asa (especially if withal you take in the circumstances that follow), and perhaps further many whole cities of these tribes, besides those formerly taken by them, fell in, and not only particular persons out of them.
And the way lying so open and fair to go forth out of these three tribes unto Jerusalem, it is the less wonder that they should in such abundance come up thither, whereas others of the godly tribes among them, lying farther off and remote, were cooped up and utterly debarred, disabled, and invincibly hinTHE GOVERNMENT OF [Boox VII. dered from so falling in with him as these did, and therefore none of them are mentioned.
2. The circumstances of the time were exceeding promising and inviting of them thus to fall in.
And they were such as I believe that every man will say that if any godly, zealous Christians were environed with the same in the like case, they would and ought to do the like in any age for the enjoyment of the ordinances of God.
Let but the face of the sky and of the times be considered, with their difference from other times, as both by the prophecies of the prophets of that age and providence coneurring they lay afore them then, and it must be said that it was in itself the best choies they could make for themselves (according as was meet for them to judge) to fall in to Asa, as things lay afore them, and to have done this, though there had not been this superadded invitement (the greatest of all other), that they should have the ordinances of God to boot.
And this we may assert, although we suppose withal that many of them had quitted their possessions, for all needed not to do so in coming to Jerusalem, from which city, and the worship of God there, their brethren in other tribes were utterly debarred.
The circumstances of these persons who thus came to Jerusalem, were these:
In general, they had had many demonstrations and convictions from God of his wrath against their kings of Israel, and against the people who willingly continued to cleave to them, and who declared for this very thing of their calves, and for the driving of Israel from the true worship.
1, They saw an instance of this wrath of God, by prophecy, and a miracle . accompanying it, at the very altar of Bethel, one of the new chapels, whilst
Jeroboam stood there to offer incense, the altar cleaving in two, and the ashes falling out, and the prophet crying out against it, Jeroboam's hand dried up whilst he stretched it out to lay hold on the prophet for so crying.
You read the story of this 1 Kings xiii., and this fell ont within the memory of these Then, 2, it would have amazed any man to have seen Jeroboam for ever after so unfortunate, to have -observed that fatal slaughter of five hundred thousand men (a slaughter so great as was never read of afore or since anywhere in the world) out of an army of eight hundred thousand, and that but by half the number of the king of Judah's men; and this was done when the issue and trial of the battle was in an appeal to God, put upon this very gage and cause of Judah's retaining the true worship, and Jeroboam's having set up a false, 2 Chron. xiv. from the 4th verse to the end.
To seo these cities taken from him, yea, and his Bethel too, and himself so weakened as never to recover strength again.
Then, 8, it was an astonishing sight to see Jeroboam himself at last struck to death by some extraordinary immediate stroke of God: the Lord struck him that he died, says the text in the 1 Kings xiii. 19, 20.
Then, 4, it was an affrighting consideration to have prophecy upon propheey issued forth against his house, and one of the loudest of them, as it were, drawn upon himself whilst he himself of his own motion would needs send his wife incognito and disguised to Abijah the prophet: 1 Kings xiv.
10-12, ' Behold, I will bring evil upon the house of Jeroboam, and will cut off from Jeroboam him that pisseth against the wall, and him that is shut up and left in Israel ; and will take away the remnant of the house of Jeroboam, as a man taketh away dung till it be all gone.
Him that dieth of Jeroboam in the city shall the dogs eat; and him that dieth in the field shall the fowls of the air eat; for the Lord hath spoken it.
Arise thou therefore, get thee to thine own house; and when thy feet enter into the city, the child shall | Cuap. VIII.) THE CHUROHES OF CHRIST.
Of the certainty of the fulfilling of all which the prophet gave him a present and as sad a sign.
'The child shall die,' says he; and he names the very time and hour of his son's death: ver. 12, ' When thy foot enters And in the 14th verse he declares how it would be that God would raise up a king, viz., Baasha, that should execute and perform all this, and do it within a very small space.
And when was it to be done?
'Even now,' says God, ver. 14; that is, I will not stay long, but make quick work with them; I will do it presently.
And he performed all this accordingly on deroboam's son and all his posterity within less than two years, some say less than one, after Jeroboam's own death; and of this thing this people we are speaking of, who here fell in with Asa, knew; for these things, viz., both the prophecies and these events thereof newly fulfilled afore their eyes, were not done in a corner, and the people knew this very sin to be the cause of all this.
Then, 5, it must needs have a great influence on these persons, to have heard (which came home more to touch them) the same prophets with the same breath, to have denounced a fatal captivity and destruction of that whole nation ofthe ten tribes, as that which should be the end and issue ofthese sins : ver. 14, 15, ' Moreover the Lord shall raise him up a king over Israel, who shall cut off the honse of Jeroboam that day; but when? even now.
For the Lord shall smite Israel as a reed is shaken in the water, and shall root up Israel ont of this good land which he gave to their fathers, and shall scatter them beyond the river, because they have made their groves, provoking the Lord to anger.'
And this is uttered indefinitely for time, for no time is set or named when it should be; for aught they knew, it might be that or the next year; and they having so signally seen the former part of that prophecy, even now, fulfilled, they might well tremble to think that this captivity and destruction threatened of the whole tribes might, they knew not how soon, come upon them and their posterity, together with the whole nation in common if they were found in the same sin.
Then, 6, another thing which had an influence upon them was, to behold the kings of Judah (these two last of them especially), one after the other, to be holy, good men, and every way to prosper; yea, even the grandfather of these two, Rehoboam (from whom God rent the kingdom), so to be favoured, that in his last times things went well in Judah; and after him his son
Abijah, a godly prince, to have so great a victory as was mentioned, and to grow mighty thereupon (as in an opposition to Jeroboam's decay, it is spoken of him, 2 Chron. xiii. 21); and then to see this Asa now reigning, the third
. king, an holier man, to see how he still so prospered, as to have with a fow so great a victory against the Cushites, as to rout an army of a million of men and more, 2 Chron. xiv., and to take all the spoil of them, together with the spoil of all the cities about Gerar from their confederates the Philistines.
And then, 7, it moved them when they saw, hereupon, a new prophet sent from God to Asa, and all his subjects and complaints with him to revive the memory afresh, and their ears to rehearse the sum of these things to them, and s0 spread afore them the infinite vast difference God had pat between him with them of Judah, and the others, the people of the ten tribes ; and this done on purpose, to hearten and encourage them that God would still be with thenf and reward their work, setting afore them what and how great miseries had followed one upon the neck of another unto those of the ten tribes.
Thus, in the beginning of this 15th chap. ver. 8, ' Now for a long season,' saith he (namely, from Jeroboam's setting up), 'hath Israel been,' ver. 8-,
THE GOVERNMENT OF [Boox VII.
'without the true God, and without a teaching priest, and without law.
But when they, in their trouble, did turn unto the Lord God of Israel, and sought him, he was found of them.
And in those times there was no peace to him that went out nor to him that came in, but great verations were upon all the inhabitants of the country, Nation was destroyed of nation, and city of city: for God did vex them with all adversity.'
The fourth verse Piscator renders, interpreting the whole round about it of the time past, that if so be Israel (namely, the ten tribes) had turned, when trouble was upon him, unto the Lord God of Israel, he had been found of them seeking of him. The vulgar translation reads all this in the future, as if the prophet laid afore them what for time to come would certainly be the condition of those tribes, as thus, ' Israel shall be for a long season (yet to come) without God, &.
And in those times there shall be no peace to him that comes out or in, but great veration shall be,' &c., ver. 5, 6.
And the original admitting either interpretation, I should take both to be intended; and I am sure that in the event and matter of fact, both had been the condition of these ten tribes, and had continued to be so more or less until their final captivity.
But whether it be a narrative either of what had befallen them, or should hereafter befall them, or both, it serves all fully to the main purpose I cite the prophet for, which was to move and hearten them of Judah (who both had had, and he promiseth should have, for the most part clean contrary dispensations from God) to set up a reformation of the public worship of God, and together with them to hearten also the godly of the ten tribes (that possibly any way could do it) to come over unto them (as, ver. 9, we read they did), and to leave their interest amongst those ten tribes, and to give themselves up unto the Lord and his worship, as the most safe and secure allotment they in those times could any way betake themselves unto.
And that the prophet speaks all this as of a different condition of Israel from Judah, is evident, both, 1, in that his speech was directed unto
Judah and Benjamin, and that Israel are the persons spoken of; neither, 2, was it true that Judah had been for s long time without God, &c., but the contrary ; and 8, the ten tribes were after their separation from Judah bromeorixaic, termed Israel; as also, 4, he tells them that Judah bad enjoyed a clean contrary dispensation to this: the Lord(eaye he) is with you, ver. 2, aud will be whilst you are with him. And so indeed he had been, from that first separation and rent made by Jeroboam from them until now.
And that speech also you may put either in the time past, 'He hath been with you,' or in time to come, ' He will be with you;' the original hath left it
| free for either, or for both, in saying only, 'The Lord with you,' only the following words do carry it to the time to come.
These were the circumstances of this junctare of time, and after all these things thus related and urged by this prophet, thereupon that followeth imme- | diately in the story, which also had followed as the consequent (at least) of this his exhortation, which surely was divulged by Asa in his gathering them together; ver. 9, ' And he gathered all Judah and Benjamin, and the strangers with them, out of Ephraim and Manasseh, and out of Simeon, for they fell to him out of Israel in abundance when they saw that the Lord his God was with him.'
§o as this second ebullition and inundation of these three tribes in such abundance was effected in the view and intuition of all those things that have been mentioned; yea, and also in the virtue and strength j of them it was that Asa did gather such numbers, which must have been by sending unto all Jodah and Benjamin, and these tribes, inviting them to come in and to worship God at Pentecost at Jerusalem, ver. 10, and to enter into a covenant so to do, &.
| | Cuar. VIII.) THE CHURCHES OF CHRIST.
; Now if we look round about the coast and face of these times, and view | the posture of affairs, it will not be much material to inquire whether all
| these of the thtee tribes or others of the ten that could remove, had quitted | their own possessions of lands, &c., in their respective tribes, and removed to Judah and Jerusalem to dwell therein.
It is most likely that many of these persons were necessitated to abandon their present possessions, by reason that the people of their respective cities that continued still under the king of Israel's dominion would see to it, that those who went out from them, should no more return to possess what they had amongst them, especially seeing those that went are said to fall into the king of Judah as unto their prince, and not only to have come to him for the present; yea, and to have entered into an oath and covenant to continue to worship God, &c. vers. 12-14.