Ans.  I. As for the main proposition asserted in this objection, something hath been formerly laid down to show the unsoundness of it.  (See chap.  X. near the end.) Whereunto thus much may be superadded. 1.  What necessity is there that a particular congregation should be fully furnished with officers, to make it the subject of all church authority?  For deacons are one sort of officers, yet what authority is added to the Church by the addition of deacons, whose office it is only to serve tables, Acts vi., not to rule the Church? or if the Church have no deacons, as once it had not, Acts i. 2, and before that, all the time from Christ, wherein is she maimed or defective in her authority? 2.  If the Church, fully furnished with officers, yet walk not in judgment and peace, then in such case it is granted, that a particular congregation is not the first subject of all church authority.  Then a congregation that walks in error or heresy, or passion, or profaneness, all which are contrary to judgment; and that walks in divisions, schisms, contentions, &c., which are contrary to peace, loseth her authority.  Stick but close to this principle, and you will quickly lay the church authority of most independent congregations in the dust.  But who shall determine whether they walk in judgment and peace, or not?  Not themselves; for that were to make parties judges in their own case, and would produce a very partial sentence.  Not sister churches; for all particular churches, according to them, have equal authority, and none may usurp one over another.  Not a presbyterial church, for such they do not acknowledge.  Then it must be left undetermined, yea undeterminable, (according to their principles;) consequently, who can tell when they have any authority at all? 3.  Suppose the congregation had all her officers, and walked in judgment and peace also, yet is she not the first subject of all authority; for there is a synodal authority, beyond a congregational authority, as confessed by Mr. Cotton.[100]

II.  As for the proofs of this proposition asserted here, they seem extremely invalid and unsatisfying.  For,

The instance of the church of Corinth excommunicating the incestuous person, will not prove the congregation to be the first subject of all church authority:  1.  Partly, because the church of Corinth was a presbyterial church, having several congregations in it, (as hereafter is evidenced, chap.  XIII.;) now to argue from the authority of a presbyterial church, to the authority of a congregational, affirmatively, is not cogent. 2.  Partly, because here were but two acts of power mentioned in this instance, viz. casting out and receiving again of the incestuous person:  suppose the community had joined the presbytery in these two acts, (which yet is not proved,) will it follow therefore they are the first subject of all church authority?  Are not ordination of presbyters, determination in case of appeals, of schism, of heresy, &c., acts of authority above the sphere of a single congregation?  What one congregation can be instanced in the New Testament that did ever execute any of these acts of authority?