congregation of which the ' Delinquent is a member or after that you have complained to that congregation if the former be said then you cannot tell the presbytery or superior Courts but in case of obstinacy for if you can gaine a Brother or a Church in a private way you are not to bring him to a more publickeshame that is contrary to Christs order v. 15. If he heare thee thou hast gained thy brother And if you tell it the Presbytery and the superior Courts after you have told it to the Church whereof he is a member then you make foure steps in your reclaiming your brother where Christ hath made but three Ans. Christs order according to the number of steps are three when the fault is private scandalls of many Congregations cannot be private and in publick scandalls we cannot go but to that church which the offence doth immediatly concerne and if you make foure steps or five according to your grounds I see no transgression if 1. You admonish the offender 2. Before two 3. Before the half of the Elders 4. Before all the Elders and. 5. If you be willing that the Elders bring it to the hearing of the Congregation the number of three precisely are not of positive Divine institution they are only set downe by Christ to shew we are to labour to gaine our brother in private before we publish his shame to the Church and if he commit the offence before two I think you need not tell him your selfe alone but before two and yet the offence is private if three only be privy to it seeing it is not yet come to the Church 3. I much doubt if no faults be punishable by excommunication but only obstinacy I thinke the 〈◊〉 of incest parricide and the like deserveth excommunication though no contumacy be supervenient to such crimes Ob. 7. The Church spoken of Mat. 18. is all one with the House of God and the House of Prayer where two or three agree to pray for onething v. 19. and the place where worshiping is and word and Saâ—raments that society in which stewards give a portion of the treaâ—â— of life to every child of the House Mat. 24. 45 1 Cor. 4. 1. 2. 〈◊〉 publick Rebukes are tendered to these who sin publickly before all that others may feare 1 Tim. 5. 20. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 this must be in the Churches hearing and before the Congregation meet for the Word and Sacraments for these ordinances of God worke for the edifying both of the party reproved and before all the Congregation which shall heare and feare and they worke upon the Heart as the Word of God doth now a presbyteriall Church convened in some Elders of divers Congregations for Church censures and exercise of jurisdiction is not such a House of God where are the Word Sacraments and publick rebukes in the hearing of the Congregation for the Congregations of all the presbytery being 20. or 30. cannot meet in one Church Answ. That onely a Congregation and not the catholick Church is the House of God I judge the Word of God cannot teach as Esai 56. 5. To them will I give a name within my House What a name to be a member of a single Congregation No but of a whole visible Church opposed to the condition of Euâ—uches and strangers v. 4. that were not of the people of God Cant. 1. 17 The beames of our House are cedars this is the catholick Church and Spouse of Christ Cant. 3 4. I would not let Him goe till I brought Him to my Mothers House not a Congregation but Ierusalem saith Ainsworth the Mother of us all Cotton the Catholick Church Alstedius Ierusalem Heb. 3. 2. as Moses was faithfull in all his House Not a single congregation 2. This Church here is formally a Ministeriall Church meeting to bind and loose and excommunicate Nor is there need to expound it of an House of praying congregationally but rather 2. 19. of ligatory and authoritative prayers of the Presbytery 3. Nor is rebuking in a Congregation for the edifying of the hearers any thing but the execution of the judiciall sentence of a Presbyteriall Church which we grant may be done in the congregation whereof the Delinquent is a member and yet the Church here shall not signifie a congregation convened for the Word and Sâ—crameâ—ts except you say all the people must necessarily be present yea and authoritative actors to bind and loose as this Church is expresly called v. 18. for if the place speake 1 Tim. 5. 20. of concionall rebuking then it proveth nothing that is done by Timothy as a Pastor virtute potest at is ordinis and not by the Presbytery as an act of jurisdiction which is done by the Church not by one man if it be meant of juridicall rebuking that is done in a Court where all the congregation are not present or if it be done before the congregation in Name of the Presbytery what is done before the Church 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 before many is not done by those many as if they were the Church which our Saviour biddeth us tell and sure nothing iâ— here against us Ob. 8. The Word Church is never used in the New Testament for the Presbytery and if it signifie a Representative Church the meaning of this the Angell of the Church of Pergamus might be the Angell of the Church of Pergamus for the Representative Church is the Eldership of that Church Answ. This being the first time that Christ spake of the Church which the Hebrewes or Iewes who knew his language behoved to understand hee could not meane any thing but a representative Church not the common multitude and though it were taken other wayes in all Scriptures beside here it must have this meaning because he speakth of a court If he heart not the Church c 2 Of a company who bindeth and looseth on Earth 3. Whose sentence is â—atified in Heaven 4. Binding and loosing are words of highest royall judiciall authority in Scripture Psal. 105. 20. The King sent and loosed him 21. He made him Lord over his House v. 22. to bind his Princes at his pleasure Psal. 148. 8. To bind their Kings with chaines and their Nobles with fetters of Iron v. 9. To execute upon them the judgement written Mat. 22. 13. Take him and bind him Pauls being in bands is to be under the Judges power Acts 12 6. Peter was bound with two chaines So the Captaine of the Guard Jâ—r 40. 4. and now be hold I loose thee this day from thy chaines 2. The representative Church is not called the Elders of the representative Church nor the Angell of the representative Church but of the collective Church and therefore there is no Angell of a Church of a Church here Ob. 9. From the Church here spoken of their is no appeale because the sentence is ratified in Heaven 2. It inflicteth the highest punishment the censure of excommunication and a
or Church assembly have any power to bind the Churches to obedience because these commandements and decrees of censure are but ministeriall and limited and in so farre onely of force as they have reason from the Word of God as you say 3. Conclusion There is an authoritative power in Synods whereby they may and doe command in the Lord the visible Churches in their bounds the whole Churches are subject to the ordinance and decree of the Church Act. 1. where with common consent of a Synodicall meeting Matthias is ordained an Apostle Ergo all the Churches are to take him for an Apostle This argument cannot bee repelled because the Apostles by their extraordinary power did choose Matthias Because 1. they themselves cite this place to prove the peoples power ordinary which is to indure to Christs second comming in calling and electing their owne officers and Elders 2. Almain a Papist alleadgeth the place with good reason to prove that a generall councell is above Peter or the Pope because Peter would not choose Matthias without consent of the Apostles and Church 3. If this was extraordinary that Matthias was chosen why then is the vow and consent of the Church sought for there is nothing extraordinary and Apostolick flowing from an Apostolick spirit which is concluded or done by the spirit ordinary of the Church of beleevers So also Act. 6. If the Apostles did not by the ordinary and Synodicall power of ordinary Pastors choose seven Deacons how doe they first require that the Churches of Grecians and Hebrewes should seek out seven men v. 3. and did ordaine them with the common consent of the whole multitude v. 5. Act. 15. A Synod of moe Churches give decrees which obliege the Churches v. 28. ch 16. v. 4. Ergo Synods have authoritie over the Churches Those who say this Synod is not a patterne for after Synods say farre aside for their reason is this was 1. An Apostolick Synod 2. the holy Ghost was here 3. the thing determined was canonick Scripture But this is a way to clude all the promises made to Pastors in the word when as they are first made to Apostles this promise Behold I am with you to the â—nd of the world and this I will send you the other Comforter who 〈◊〉 lead you in all truth cannot bee made to faithfull Pastors and the Christian Church that now is for it is certaine Christ is otherwise present with his Apostles then with his Pastors after them And that he gave them a tongue a spirit when they were before the councels and rulers as to Apostolick men as Act. 4. 8. 9 10. Act. 5. 29. as Christ promised Matth. 10. 19. 20. Luk. 21. 13 14 15. for they were full of the holy Ghost before rulers but by our brethrens doctrine it shall follow none of these promises belong to Pastors now adayes in the like because no pastors now are Apostles Surely this were to fetter and imprison many glorious promises within the pale of the onely Apostolick Church and because Christ ascending to heaven sent downe the Apostolick spirit to his Apostles to write and preach canonick Scripture it shall follow he fulfilleth that promise John 16. 13. to none now adayes because none have the Apostolike spirit in the manner and measure that the Apostles had Yea further it is canonick Scripture that the Apostles at the last supper did shew forth the Lords death till be come againe therefore it shall follow that we have no warrant to shew forth the Lords death till he come againe 2. But that the Apostles in an ecclesiastick way did determine in the Synod for our imitation and not in an Apostolike way is cleare by many evidences in the text as Act. 15. 2. Paul and Barnabas were sent commissioners to the Apostles and Elders about this question Paul as an Apostle needed not be sent to know more of the matter then he knew as an Apostle for as an Apostle he knew the whole mystery of the Gospel Gal. 1. 16. 17. Ephes. 3. 4 5. Ergo he was sent to the Synod as a Pastor and that as an ordinary Pastor 2. They came together v. 6. to consider of this businesse but as Apostles they needed not the help of a Synod Ergo they came together as ordinary Pastors for the Churches after imitation 3. There was much debating and disputing v. 7. about the matter 4. They set down their minds and sentences in order one after another as Peter first v. 7. 8. then Barnabas and Paul v. 12. then James v. 13. and to James his sentence the whole Councell agreeth v. 22. Now what the Apostles as Apostles and from an infallible Spirit do they doe it not by seeking light and help one from another 5. The Decree of the Councell is a thing that Apostles Elders and Brethren and the whole Church resolveth after much dispute v. 22. But all these especially brethren and the whole beleevers as our Brethren say doe not joyne themselves with the Apostles either to write canonick Scripture or to give their consent to the writing of it therefore they doe consent by a synodall authority for the after imitation of the Churches Also there bee reasons of moment for Synods and 1. if according to the Law of nature and nations no man can bee a Judge in his owne cause then are appeales from the Eldership of one congregation when they are a party to the accused person naturall and from a Session to the Presbyteries and Synods of many moe Elders But the former is reason nature Law of Nations Ergo so is the latter 1. It is best reason which hath most of Scripture Paul and Barnabas Act. 15. 1. 2. had no small disputation with those who said circumcision was necessary finding their parties could not be Judges They appeale to a generall councell at Jerusalem where were the Apostles and Elders The Church of the Grecians and the Church of the Hebrewes strive neither of them can judge other and both appeale to a higher judicatory to the twelve Apostles and their owne Churches meeting with them and there is the matter determined aâ—ent helping the poore by Deacons if the Judge doe wrong and one particular congregation shall oppresse one sincere and sound beleever what remedy hath the care of Christ provided for this that the oppressours may be edisied by Church censures and the oppressed freed and delivered by remedy of discipline of Christ whose it is to judge the poore of the people and to save the children of the needy Ps. 72. 4. Now it is knowne that Diotrephes doth sometime excommunicate and the evill seâ—vant ruleth all Hieronymus saith Arrians ruled all in the dayes of Constantius and Valens Basil saith we may say in our time that there is neither Prince nor Prophet nor Ruâ—â—â— nor oblation nor incense Athanasius and Vincentius Lirinent complain'd that it was in the Arrians times as with the Church and Prophets in the
review of the councell of Trent saith gravely It is but a theating of Christâ—ndome above board to leave the judgement of the necessitie of generall councells to the Popes will and no marvell then Popes decline councells for the councell of Pisan as Bellarmine granteth was convocated against Julius the second that wicked man and therefore was rejected by Julian the second in the councell of Lateran yet this councell and all the decrees thereof was approven and confirmed by Alexander the first who was accounted lawfull Pope and b Platina faith this councell was approved and that in it Gregory 12. and Benet 13. were deprived of their papall dignitie all nations assenting except neither Spaine the King of Scotland and Earle of Arminac who followed Pope Benet and for approbation of the councells of Pise Constance and Basil which censured Popes and deprived them and subjected them to a generall councell let any man read the Review of the Councell of Trent and Bellarmine is therein fully consuted Also generall councells have condemned the doctrine of the Church of Rome for which they thinke them not necessary as the councell of Frankford saith Bellarmine and Basil and Constance are not approved in all because they favour not the Roman Churches doctrine and the Popes supremacy above Councells yea and generall councells cannot bee simply necessary saith hee because the Catholick Church remained safe the first three hundreth yeers after Christ without generall councells and might have remained safe other three hundreth yeers and so a thousand yeers and faults may bee amended by the Lawes of Popes and by provinciall councells saith hee and their Costerus saith the Pope him selfe without councells hath condemned many heresies and this is a shorter and more compendious way then by councells for it is hard and laborious to conveene councells therefore the Churches salvation doth not depend upon them saith Bellarmine yea it is in vaine saith the Jesuit Pererius to doe that by many which may as conveniently bee done by fewer he meaneth councels may be wanted Our brethren rejecting councells and their necessitie at all in this sideth with Papists Though Calvin saith Nullum esse nec melius nec certius remedium that there is no better nor surer remedy to find out the truth then a Synod of true Pastors And Arminians and Socinians thinke that Synods are neither necessary nor profitable for as our brethren here give no authoritie to Synods but to counsell and advise the very same is taught by a grand Arminian Episcopius who saith Synods are not profitable for the establishing the truth or rooting out of errors and heresies but onely to advise sist examine and by reasons and arguments to perswade and therefore are not profitable either for the being or for the well being of the Church Synodici conventus nec ad â—esse nec ad bene esse ecclesiae absolute necessarii sunt ad veritatis divinae stabilimentum hereseon errorumque averruns itionem vel exstirpationem eo tantum casu utiles esse statuimus si ad deliberandum ventilandum examinandum rationibus argumentisque persuadendum congregentur litium finem facere circa religionis capita aliter quam persuadendo est tyrannidem in ecclesiam invehere libertatem conscientiarum si non omnino tollere saltem vehementer astringere ligare To â—nd controversies in the Church any otherwise then by perswading is to bring in a tyranny in the Church of Christ and to hurt if not altogether to evert the libertie of consciences of men And the Arminians in their Apologie teach us that a decision or a determination of a Synod obligeth not those who were not present at the making of that decision And so have I shown from Answorth and our brethrens doctrine that they teach people cannot assent without tyranny of consciences to the decrees of the Elders at the making whereof they were not present and present consenters 2. A Synods decision doth incline the mind to consider of the decision but doth not compell authoritatively to consent and obey 3. This is violence to the conscience 4. To setch expositions of the word from confessions of faith or decrees of councells is dangerous and this is the doctrine of Socinians for Theophil Nicolaides saith the Church in a Synod cannot decide controversies because shee may erre neither can shee take them away for that were to doe violence to mens consciences and Smalcius saith this were tacite quietly to leave the writings of the Apostles and commend humane traditions So our brethren give nothing but a power of counselling and morall perswading to Synods and no authoritie to command because say they in their answers to the 32. questions Synods may erre and their decrees have no more force then they fetch reason from Gods Word and truely our brethren with Socinians and Arminians here do fall in many foule errors For 1. all preaching of the Word and all power of authoritie of Pastors commanding in the name of the Lord faith and obedience is onely morall and to perswade and not authoritative to command because Pastors may as well erre in preaching as the Church may erre in Synods 2. Because what Pastors preach hath no more force over the conscience then they have warrant to speake from the Word of God as is cleare Ezek. 3. 7. Gal. 1. 9. 1 Thess. 2. 13. 2. All confessions of faith that are set downe by lawfull Synods are null 3. Libertie of prophecying and a Cassandrian licence of beleeving in things controverted any thing in this or on that side is lawfull 4. A perpetuall doubting of conscience except in two or three points fundamentall that all Christians beleeve yea and all hereticks is brought in in the Church 5. The Lords working with the word preached is but by way of morall perswasion 6. But our Divines hold the authoritie of Synods and of Pastors preaching the Word from the Scriptures but I find both our brethren and Arminians do misken the authority of the Church and of Pastors in both Preaching and Synods for they thinke to set up the authoritie of Synods is to cast downe the authoritie of the Scriptures because things to bee distinguished are confounded for wee deny that Synods or Pastors have peremptory absolute and illimited authoritie and power to determine as they please in Sermons and Synods their Power is limited according to the Word of God and their word is onely to bee beleeved in so farre as it is agreeable to the Word of God but hence it followeth not that Pastors and Synods have no power and authoritie at all to determine but onely to counsell advise and perswade for private Christians our equalls and inferiours have power to counsell perswade and advise in a private way by teaching admonishing exhorting rebuking conference They build upon the reproving of events of councells by
together or private by one person severally who is out of office and yet the power of the Gospell is still one and the same notwithstanding the divers manner of using it Answ. 1. If one alone have the keyes spoken of Matth. 16. there be keyes Ministeriall made by Christ before the house be builded and have walls roofe or doore the keyes all take to be metaphoricall and to presuppose a company a constituted Church where some are put in some put out these private keyes of women to open and shut heaven upon men and so to usurpe authoritie over the man are no Church-keyes and if they be not Church-keyes they are not for our dispute Robinson If the keyes of the Kingdome of Heaven be appropriated to the officers then can there be no forgivenesse of sinnes without the officers and there is no entrance into heaven but by the doore there is no climbing over any other way and without the key the doore cannot be opened Then if there be no officers in the Church or if they take away the key of knowledge then must the multitude perish eternally Answ. Though the keyes be appropriated to officers it followeth not There is no forgivenesse of sinnes nor opening of Heaven at all without officers but onely no Ecclesiasticall forgivenesse no Church-opening by a Ministeriall power but through Ministeriall keyes and opening cannot ordinarily be without officerâ— Faith commeth by hearing Ergo no faith by reading Baptisme saveth Ergo no salvation without Baptisme so doe Anabaptists reason as saith Gerardus so reasoneth Socinus averring It is a worke of charity necessary to salvation therefore all may preach and the same doth both the Raccovianâ— Catechisme and Ostorodius say yea and Theoph. Nicolaides defending Muncerus the Anabaptist Though keyes bee a publike ordinary meane in a constituted Church it followeth not therefore there is no other way of opening Heaven In the Sacraments remission of sinnes is sealed and heaven opened it follows not therefore all may administer the Sacraments 2. What inference is here if the keyes bee appropriated to officers then people must perish when officers faile certainly so saith the Lords Spirit Proved Where there is no vision the people perish and this is a fearfull soul judgement when God removeth the candlestick and there is no prophet to shew how long and the people are plagued with a famine of the word of God yet there be other meanes then publike ministery He addeth They which may forgive sinne and sinners save soules gaine and turne men to the Lord to them are the keys of the Kingdome of Heaven given by which they open the doore to such as they thus forgive gaine and save But all thâ—se such as are no Ministers may doe as Matth. 18. 15. 2 Corinth 2. 5 7 8 9 10. Acts 8. 14. Answ. The proposition is false for all who open the doore by exhorting and gaining soules as Christians in no Church-state may in some cases doe have not the Church-keyes for this were to make Church keyes without any Church and to make keyes without house doore or lock for the keyes are metaphorically so called with necessary relation to the Church the house of God and to the stewards of the house the places alleadged are the controversie it selfe and to others of them I shall answer hereafter Robinson The twelve Apostles were not called to the office of Apostles Matth. 16. Ergo they doe not as Apostles receive the keyes Answ. I trust to prove the contrary hereafter 2. If the Apostles Matth. 16. received not the keyes by no warrant are the keyes given to Pastors at all Robinson Every servant in the house no lesse then Officers have authority for the word carrieth authority with it whither soever it goeth Matth. 25. 14. and all have received some good thing or gift for the good of the Church and all should watch but especially the porter Answ. What can be hence collected Ergo the keyes are given to all and all are porters and all should watch as porters for the word of exhorting given to all is of like authority when a woman or boy speaketh it as when a Prophet speaketh it But it is not good to helpe Arminius and Jesuits who reason for universall grace given to all and every one from these Parables Mr. Pemble and opposers of Jesuits in the doctrine of grace expound this of Pastors 2. But let the Parable speake of all all have authority because all have the word all who privately exhort have the word have authority objective and of divine obligation as Christians it is true Ergo all have the keyes it followeth not but all who privately and occasionally exhort have not authority officiall by the calling of God and his Church and therefore they have not this they have not the keyes and the word by publike preaching none have but usurpers save onely called Officers and because they steale the Word they steale the Keyes also and because the Sacraments have authority from God it followeth not therefore that Baptisme administrated by women is of authority Robinson acknowledgeth that Elders and Bishops were ordained to suppresse false doctrine and lay hands suddenly on no man but it followeth not saith he that they are to doe this there alone Answ. There alone they must lay on hands that is with the Presbytery and in a judiciall way excluding all the people for people never in the new Testament laid on hands upon any to ordaine them Elders nor did they it in the old Testament Robinson The officers Ephes 4. 11. are chosen of Christ to watch so Mark 13. the porter should watch Ergo the rest of the servants should not watch it followeth not Officers are to knit together the Saints and so are all who are spirituall Gal. 6. 1. The Officers are to edifie so are all to edifie one another 1 Thess. 5. 11. Answ. The argument must be thus These who are to watch to knit together the Saints to edifie them have received the keys and are Governours and are Officers but all the faithfull are to watch to knit together the Saints Ergo first the major is false for if because the Saints may edifie they shall have joynt power and use of the keys with the Officers they may administrate the Sacraments Now because they may in a Christian way doe some acts of edifying it followeth not that therefore they may doe these acts by power of the keyes and with an Ecclesiasticall and Church-power they may doe the same duty Ergo with the same power A scholler may teach his school-fellow the same lesson that his Master doth teach him Ergo he may doe it by the same Magisteriall authority A wife may cure a disease Ergo shee may by the same authority that a Doctor of Physicke approved by the incorporation of Physicians cure a disease it followeth not Beleeve me so still doth Socinus
though there doe result a vertuall covenant Farre lesse is there a necessity of an expresse and vocall covenant before that steward can have claime to the keyes or be received in office So when one entereth into covenant with God and by faith layeth hold on the covenant there resulteth from that act of taking the Lord to be his God a covenant-obligation to doe duty to all men as the covenant of God doth oblige him yea and to doe workes of mercy to his beast for a good man will have mercy on the life of his beast and he is obliged to a duty by that covenant with God to his children which are not yet borne to servants who are not yet his servants but shall hereafter be his servants to these who are not yet converted to Christ now it is true a vertuall and tacite covenant resulteth toward all these even toward the beast the children not yet borne c. when the person first by faith entereth in covenant with God but none master of common sense and judgement will say there is required a vocall and explicite and professed covenant betwixt such an one entered in covenant with God and his beast and his children not yet borne or that the foresaid tacite and vertuall covenant which doth but result from the man his covenanting with God is either the cause or essence or formall reason whereby he is made a formall contracter and covenanter with God So though when I enter a member of such a congregation there ariseth thence an obligation of duty or a tacite covenant tying me in duties to all members present or which shall be members of that congregation though they should come from India yet in reason it cannot be said that there is required an expresse vocall covenant betwixt me and all who shall be fellow-members of this congregation and farre lesse that such a covenant doth make me a member of that congregation yea because I am already a member of that congregation thence ariseth a tacite covenant toward such and such duties and persons 6. I understand not how our brethren doe keepe Christian and religious communion with many professours of approved piety and that in private conference praying together and publiquely praising together and yet deny to have any Church-communion with such approved professors in partaking with them the seales of the covenant and censures of the Church I doubt how they can comfort the feeble minded and not also warne and rebuke them which are called acts of Church-câ—nsure Then the question is not if there be a tacit and vertuall covenant when persons become members of such a visible congregation 2. Nor doe we question whether such a Church-covenant may be lawfully sworne We thinke it may though to sweare the last article not to remove from such a congregation without their consent I thinke not lawfull nor is my habitation in such a place a matter of Church-discipline 3. But the question is if such a Church-covenant by Divine or Apostolick warrant not onely be lawfull but the necessary and Apostolick meane yea and the essentiall forme of a visible Church so as without it persons are not members of one visible Church and want all right and title to a Church-membership to the seales of grace and censures of the Church Our brethren affirme we deny Concl. The former considerations being cleare we hold that such a Church-covenant is a conceit destitute of all authority of Gods Word Old or New Testament and therefore to be rejected as a way of mens devising 1. Argum. All will-worship laying a band on the Conscience where God hath layed none is damnable but to tye the oath of God to one particular duty rather then another so as you cannot without such an oath enter into such a state nor have title and right to the seales of grace and Gods Ordinances is will-worship and that by vertue of a divine Law and is a binding of the Conscience where God hath not bound it The major is undeniable Papists as Alphonsus à Castro and Bellarminâ— lay upon us that which was the errour of Lampetians that we condemne all sorte of voweâ— â—â— snares to the Consciences of men But Bellarmine saith that Luther and Caâ—â—in acknowledge We thinke vowes of things commanded of God lawfull the truth is we teach it to be will-worship to a person to vow single life where God hath not given the gift of continency because men binde with an oath that which God hath not bound us unto by a command So Origen Gregory Nazianzen Ambrose Augustine say Those which want the gift of continency cannot live without wives and so should not burne See how Bellarmine and Maldonat contending for will-worship prescribe the contrary I prove the assumption for a Minister to sweare the oath of fidelity to his flocke is lawfull but to tye an oath so to his Ministery as to say the Apostles teach he cannot be a minister who sweareth not that oath is to lay a bond on the Conscience where God hath laid none That a father swear to performe the duties of a father a master the duties of a master towards his servant is lawfull but to lay a bond on him that he is in Conscience and before God no father no master except he sweare to performe those duties is to lay a bond on the Conscience where God hath laid none So to sweare subjection to such a Ministery and visible Church is lawfull but to tie by an Apostolike Law and practice the oath of God so to such duties as to make this Church-oath the essentiall forme of such membership so as you cannot enter into Church-state nor have right to the Seales of the Covenant without such an oath is to binde where God hath not bound for there is no Law of God putting upon any Church-oath such a state as that it is the essentiall forme of Church-membership without the which a man is no Church-member and the Church visible not swearing this oath is no Church 3 That way are members to be in-Churched and to enter into a Church-fellowship which way members were entred in the Apostolike Church But members were not entred into the Apostolike Church by such a Covenant but onely they beleeved professed beleefe and were baptized when the incestuous person is re-entred it is said onely 2 Cor. 2. he was grieved and testified it and they did forgive him and confirme their love to him 7 8. there is here no Church-Covenant and Samaria 8. 12. received the Word gladly beleeved and was baptized when Saul is converted Acts 9. Simon Magus baptised Acts 8. Cornelius and his house baptized Acts 20. the Church of Epheâ—us planted Acts 19. of Corinth Acts 18. 8. of Berea Acts 17. 10. Philippi Acts 16. Thâ—ssalonica Acts 17. of Rom Acts 28. We heare no expressed vocall Covenant So Acts 2. three thousand were added to the visible Church now they were not gathered nor in-Churched
presse this place Answ. In this Type many things are loose and doubtfull 1. We desire a warrant from the Word that the Temple was a Type of a visible Congregation and that all must be as really holy before they enter into a visible congregation as they behoved to be Typically holy who entered into the Temple of Jerusalem The Temple is a Type of Christs Body Iohn 2. and of the Church of the New Testament invisible which must consist of sanctified ones but how it is a Type of the visible Church we see not For the Lords spirituall building whereof the Corner-stone and the foundation is Christ is the Church invisible built by Faith as lively Stones upon Christ 1 Pet 2. 7. Unto you therefore which believe he is precious v. 5. yee also as living Stones are built up a spirituall House opposite to the disobedient v. 7. who stumble at the Word v. 8. 1 Cor. 3. 9. yee are Gods building Eph. 2. 20 21 22. Expressely the building are these who are built on the Doctrine of the Prophets and Apostles and grow up into an holy Temple in Christ and are the habitation of God through his Spirit This cannot agree to a visible Church the members whereof may be as our Brethren teach from Revel 2. Hypocrites who fall from their first love Yea also the laying on of stones on the bulding is not the act of inchurching or of union to a Church as it must be if the comparison prove the poynt but the joyning of the stones to the building is the union of these stones by Faith to Christ the chiefe corner stone as is expounded 1 Pet. 2. To whom comming as to a living stone v. 5. yee also as liveing stones are built c. Yea and Peter doth not build this comfortable Doctrine all upon the comforts of a Church-state in a single congregation for many of these to whom he writ were dispersed and persecuted through Pontus Asia and Cappadocia c. And might have and had an Union with Christ by Faith without a Church Union in a Parish 2. Though in this Type were signified a morall obligation that all before they be inchurched in a visible Congregation should be converted how is it proved that the Church should receive none to a visible Congregation till they bee converted for these are farre different All should be converted but there is no new Law commanding the Church to receive none into her fellowship but the converted 3. The hewers of stones or builders of the Temple must Typifie Pastors in Office dressing stones for the spirituall building our Brethren make them to Typifie private Christians out of Office and deny that any Pastors as Pastors doe fit and prepare stones to bee layd on the spirituall building Also none layd stones on that Temple save onely builders by Office but by our Brethrens Doctrine onely Pastors doe not convert Soules There were no Stones at all in the Temple of Jerusalem but choice and well squared stones are no members of the visible Church but the chosen of God 3. If the Porters typifie the Ministers of visible Churches first only Porters hold out the uncleane Ergo onely Pastors should hold out the scandalous but you admit the whole Church with equall authority to take in or refuse Church-members 2. If the Temple be a Type of the visible Church then no prophane person nor uncircumcised in heart should meet with the visible Church to heare the Word for hearing of the word prophanes the holy things of God This you cannot say for infidels may be as you say fellow-partners with the Church in hearing the word 3. Robinson holdeth that Abrahams seed and so all the Jewes were to separate themselves from the world that they might be a visible Church to God but we read not that the porters were to hold out any wicked person Yea Jer. 7. professedly they came to the Temple of the Lord who were theeves adulterers and wicked persons And so by that neither are the porters of the visible Churches of the New Testament to hold out unconverted persons because they are unconverted Lastly the place Revel 22. 15. For without are dogges c. is fouly abused when it is applied to the visible Church where there may be and ordinarily are dogges yea and liers Revel 2. 2. idolaters v. 14. Napper Pareus Marlorat expoundeth it of the Kingdome of glory for it is that Kingdome spoken of Rev. 21. 27. but within that Kingdome cannot enter any thing that defileth neither what soever worketh abomination or maketh a lie but they which are written in the Lambes booke of life But it is against all reason and the Lords Word that in the visible Church is nothing that defileth that is no sinne but onely those who are written in the Lambes book of life This is the very doctrine of Anabaptists though we know our deare brethren hate that Sect and their Doctrine Robinson The purest Church on Earth may consist of good and bad in Gods Eye but the question is about the true and naturall members whereof the Church is orderly gathered but as it were fond Philosophy in the discription of Wives and Children to make Rebellion a naturall property of a child and Whoredome of a Wife so it is as profane Divinity to make ungodly persons the true matter of the Church and prophanenesse a property of the same because many seeming Saints creepe in Answ. If the holiest Church visible on Earth consist of good and bad before God then to be partakers of the Divine nature Temples of the holy Ghost Saints by calling is not of the essence of a visible Church nor is it essentiall to make one a member of the visible Church that he be converted It is sufficient that he be a professor of the Faith And it is a poore comparison to say that prophannesse cannot be put in the description of a visible Church for in the essence of a visible Church as visible we neither include Holinesse nor Propanenesse but only a visible company professing the Faith of Christ and called by the Ministery of the Word whether they be Believers or Unbelievers it is all one neither of the two belongeth to the essence of a visible church a visible Church is saved in the number of fourty all being converted or in 40. being all unconverted so they be externally called by the Ministery of the Gospell and prosesse the same And it is as foolish to make holinesse the essence of a child as to make it of a visible Church and as vaine to make chastity the essence of a married Wife for this is not our philosophy but a conceit of Mr. Robinson falsely imputed to us Robinson All the Churches that ever the Lord planted consisted of good only as the Church of the Angells in Heaven and of mankind in Paradise God hath also these same ends in creating and restoring his Churches and if it were the Will of
There be many things in this argument to be corrected as 1. That the Church of Corinth conveâ—ed in the whole multitude whom it concerned for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 doth not prove it for the same Word is spoken of the meeting of the Apostles and Elders who met in a Synod with authority Acts 15. 6. the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is attributed to the multitude Acts 21. v. 22. and to the Church of Believers 1 Cor. 11. 20. and 1 Cor. 14. 23. therefore the one word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 seemeth to bee no cogent Argument 2. The word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which is not here in all this Chapter or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is used in the New Testament and by the seventy Interpreters whose translation Christ and his Apostles doe frequently follow in the New Testament use the words for any meeting of good or ill of civill or Ecclesiasticall persons As I might instance is a great many places of the Old and New Testament then what is it I pray you which restricteth the signification of these words to signifie a civill rather then an Ecclesiasticall meeting certainly the actions which the company doth when they are met and the end for which they meete I give an instance in Acts 19. 41. the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the like I say of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifieth not the Church of Christ and why it is a reason that cannot bee controlled They were assembled for to raise a tumult against Paul which was no Church-action and so no Church end is here So v. 39. But if you enquire any thing in other matters it shall be determined 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in a lawfull assembly surely the end of such an assembly in Ephesus where this man was Town-Clark in the meeting could be no Church-businesse Hence wee are led to know what 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 an Assembly or Church signifieth here not the Church of Christ so Psal. 22. 16. the Assembly of the wicked hath inclosed mee 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Merighem the seventy Interpreters turne it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and Tâ—rtullian followeth them the persons congregated the actions and end for which they convenc lead us to this that the Word signifieth not a Church of Christ. So wee may see Psal. 26. 5. the Congregation of Elders cannot bee a true Church 2. 1 Cor. 11. 18. for first when you come together to the Church 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 I heare there are divisions amongst you The place must signifie the Church of Believers because the end of their meeting was the Supper of the Lord or their communion v. 20. as the Text cleareth and 1 Cor. 14. 23. when the whole Church commeth together that was for prophecying and hearing of the Word as the Text is evident v. 16 17 18 23 24 25 26 27. and therefore here the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 must signifie the Church of Pastors preaching and people hearing the Word praying and praising God So in the third place when 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Church is convened to bind and loose and to excommunicate as Mat. 18. 17. 18. 19. there is no necessity that the Word Church should include those who have no power of the keyes and cannot by power of the Keyes bind and loose And therefore from the naked and meere Grammar of the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 no argument can bee drawen to prove that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Matth. 18. 17. must signifie that same which it doth signifie 1 Corin. 1. 1. 1 Corin. 11. 18. 1 Corin. 14. 23. for the word actu primo and originally signifieth any meeting but the persons who are Congregated and the end for which they meete leadeth us to the meaning and Grammaticall sense of the word in that place Now Matth. 18. the Ecclesia a Church Congregated there is such as bindeth and looseth in Heaven and Earth and congregated for that use therefore I see not how the circumstances of the place helping us to the Grammaticall sense of the word here as in all other places doth not inforce us to say in this place Mat. 18. the word Ecclesia Church must signifie onely those who have power to bind and loose that is only the Elders and not the people So to come to the place 1 Cor. 5. Those who come under the name of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 congregated together must bee expounded by the persons Office and the end of their meeting now the persons Office is Ministeriall hee will have them congregated by Pauls Ministeriall spirit and in the name and with the power of the Lord Jesus this is the power of the Keyes which hee who hath Davids Keyes Esai 22. 22. on his Shoulders Revel 3. 7. giveth to his owne Officers Matth. 16. 19. and these persons cannot be all that hee writeth unto v. 1. all that were pâ—ffed up and mourned not at the offence given by the incestuous 〈◊〉 to Iesus Christs holy Namâ— and Church all who are to forbeare eating and drinking with excommunicated persons vers 11. all who were in danger to be leavened vers 6. all who were to keepe the Feast in sincerity not with the old Leaven of wickednesse and malice for these directly were the whole multitude of Believers Men Women and Children who I am sure were not capable of the Keyes and the Ministeriall power of Paul 2. The end wherefore these 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 who were convened did meete and convene was vers 5. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to deliver the man to Satan they were not convened to celebrate the Lords Supper as the Church is convened 1 Cor. 11. 18. nor for hearing the Word of Prophecy or Preaching as 1 Cor. 14. 23 24. And whether you construe the Words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 with the Power of the Lord Iesus with the Verbe 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to deliver to Satan or with the Participle 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 congregated in the Name and Power of CHRIST all is one the multitude of common Believers of Men Women and Children are neither capable of the power nor of the exercise of that power to deliver to Satan And therefore this meeting together by no Grammar doth leade us to say that the sentence was to be pronounced in face and presence of the multitude convened vers 21. Giving but not granting that the Church of Corinth in all its members must bee convened Though I hold it not necessary by this place yet it followeth not that all other acts of Jurisdiction must bee exercised in face of the whole Congregation for there is a speciall reason of the pronouncing of the sentence which is not in other acts the pronouncing of the sentence concerneth more the neerest Congregation of which the Delinquent is a member in relation of nearest and dayly Communion it concerneth also other Congregations of the Classicall Church of which also the Delinquent is a member but not so immediately and
is essentially an act of preaching the Word Object 14. This Synod declares only in a doctrinall way what is necessary what is scandalous the same way that Paul doth Rom. 14. 14 15. i Cor. 8. 1 Cor. 10. Answ. This Synod and Paul declare one and the same thing Ergo with one and the same authoritie it followeth not Paul writeth 1 Cor. 5. that the incestuous man should bee excommunicated and this hee wrote as canonicall Scripture by the immediat inspiration of the holy Spirit if then the Church of Corinth should have excommunicated him shall it follow that they gave out the sentence of excomunication by the immediate inspiration of the holy Spirit I thinke not their Churches sentence had been given out by a meere ecclesiasticall authoritie according to the wch Churches of Christ to the worlds end doth excommunicate following the Church of Corinth as a patterne Obj. 15. Though these obtruders of ceremonies did pervent soâ—ks v. 24. yet the Synod doth not summond them before them nor excommuncite them but remit them to the particular Churches to whom it properly belonged to censure and not to any Synod or superiour Judicature Answ. There was no need to summon them for these subverters of soules were personally present at the Synod and rebuked in the face of the Synod as perverters of soules v. 24. for if they were not present 1. to whom doth Peter speake v. 10. Now therefore why tempt yee God to put a yoake on the necke of the disciples c. the Apostles and Elders did not impose the yoake of Moses Law upon the beleeving disciples nor any other save onely the obtruders of circumcision 2. Who were they in the Synod who made much disputing v. 7. note the Apostles not any save these obtruders Ergo they were personally present at the Synod nor needed they to excommunicate them for I judge that they acquiesced to the determination of James which was the sentence of the Synod and the great dispute spoken of v. 7. ceased v. 13. and the conclusion is agreed upon 22. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 then it seemed good to the Apostles Elders and whole Church and there was reason why these obtruders should acquiesce so that there was no need of further censure for there was satisfactiou in part given to both siddes The question was whether or no are beleevers now to keepe the Law and the ceremonies of Moses his Law It was answered by the Synod by a distinction which favoured in part both sides 1. There is no necessitie that the beleeving Gentiles who are saved by grace as well as the Jewes bee troubled to keepe all the ceremonies and this satisfied the Apostles who taught that the Gentiles were now made one people with the Jewes and both are freed in conscience from Moses his yoake the other part of the distinction it was this yet there bee some ceremoniall commandements as not to eate things offered to Idols blood and things strangled for fornication is of another nature and abstinence therefrom is of perpetuall necessitie 1 Cor. 6. 13 14 15 16. 1 Thess. 4. 3. Col. 3. 5. these must bee avoided for scandals sake by all the Jewes but especially by the Gentiles lest the weake Jewes who take these to be divine commandements yet in force take offence and this was satisfactorie to the obtruders and wee heare no more of their disputing and there is an end of the controversie by the blessed labours of a lawfull Synod 3. I could easily yeeld that there is no necessitie of the elicit acts of many parts of government such as excommunication ordination admitting of heathens professing the faith to Church-membership in Synods provinciall nationall or oecumenicall but that Synods in the case of neglect of presbyteriall-Churches command these particular Churches whom it concerneth to doe their dutie and in this sense the Synod Act. 15. is to remit the censure of excommunication to the presbytery of Antioch and Jerusalem in the case of the obstinacie of these obtruders of circumcision but so some power of government is due to the Synod as prescribing of Lawes and Canons for presbyteries and Congregations Object 16. Therefore was the Synagogue of the Jewes no compleat Church because all the ordinances of God cannot bee performed in the Synagogue and therefore were the Jewes commanded onely at Jerus salem and in no other place to keepe the passeover and to offer offerings and sacrifices which were òrdinary worship Deut. 12. but there is not any worship or sacred ordinance saith that worthy Divine Dr. Ames of preaching praying Sacraments c. prescribed which is not to bee observed in every Congregation of the New Testament Nor is there any ordinary minister appointed who is not given to some one Assembly of this kind So also Mr. Mather and Mr. Thomson teachers in New England Others say because there was a representative worship of sacrificing of all the 12. Tribes at Jerusalem therefore all the Synagogues were dependent Churches and Jerusalem was the supreme and bighest Church but there is no representative worship in the New Testament and therefore no need of Synods as higher Churches Answ. Surely the aforesaid reverend Brethren of New England have these words But it seemeth to us that the power of a Synod is not proporly a power and exercise of government and jurisdiction but a power of doctrine and so a Synod is rather a â—aching then a governing Church from which I inferre 1. That out Brethren cannot deny a power of governing to a Synod but it is not so proper governing as excommunication and ordination performed in their Congregations but say I it is more properly governing as to make Lawes and rules of governing is a more noble eminent and higher act of governing as is evident in the King and his Parliament then the execution of these Lawes and rules 2. Our brethren incline to make a Synod a teaching Church but I inferre that Synodicall teaching by giving out decrees tying many Churches as our Brethren of New England and the forenamed authors teach is an ordinance of Christ that can bee performed in no single Congregation on earth for a doctrinall Canon of one Congregation can lay no ecclesiasticall tie upon many Churches Ergo by this reason our Congregations shall bee dependent as were the Jewish Synagogues 3. With favour of these learned men it is a begging of the question to make Jerusalem the supreme Church and the Synagogues dependent Churches because it was lawfull onely at Jerusalem to sacrifice for I hold that Jerusalem was a dependent Church no lesse then the smallest Synagogue in all the tribes for in a Catholick meeting of all Judah for renewing a Covenant with God Ierusalem was but a sister Church with all of Iudah Benjamin Ephraim Manasseh who 2 Chron. 15. 9. 10. 11 12. made up one great Church which did sweare that Covenant Ordinances doe not formally make Churches visible nor divers ordinances divers
all fundamentalls 3. Totally and finally But wee are not to beleeve Papists who say things are fundamentall materially in themselves as all points necessary to bee beleeved but things are not formally fundamentall but such things onely as the Church dâ—fineth to be fundamentall But 1. the foundation of our Faith is Gods Word and Gods Word is necessary to be beleeved to salvation whether the Church define it or no to abstaine from Idolatry is necessary to be beleeved though Aaron and the Church of Israel say the contrary neither doth Gods Word borrow authority from men 2. If the Church may make points to be fundamentall by their definition whereas before they were not fundamentall then may the Church make articles of faith Sure I am Paipsts as Gerson Occam Almaine Suarez yea and a very Bellarmine is against this Yea and by that same reason they may make fundamentall points to bee no fundamentall points and they may turne the Apostles Creed into no faith at all for ejusdem est potestos creare annihilare 3. There cannot be a greater power in the Church to define Articles of faith then is in God himselfe but the very authority of God doth not define a matter to bee an article of faith except the necessitie of the matter so require for God hath determined in his word that Paul left his cloake at Treas but that Paul left his cloake at Troas is not I hope an article of faith or a fundamentall point of salvation 4. What can the Church doe saith Vincentius Lyrinens but declare that that is to be beleeved which before in it selfe was to bee beleeved and Bellarmine saith Councells maketh nothing to be of infallible verity and so doth Scotus say Verity before heresies erat de fide was a matter of faith though it was not declared to be so by the Church Determinatio non facit vertatem saith Oâ—cam The Churches determination maketh no truth 3. The evidence of knowledge of fundamentals is gravely to bee considered Hence these distinctions 1. One may beleeve that Christ is the Sonne of God by a Divine faith as Peter doth Matth. 16. 17. and yet doubt of the necessary consequences fundamentall Ergo Christ must bee delivered into the hands of sinners and bee crucified as the same Peter doubted of this for as one may fall in a grievous sinne though regenerated and faile in act and yet remaine in grace in habitu the seed of God remaining in him so may Peter and the Apostles doubt of a fundamentall point of Christs rising from the dead John 20. v 8 9. in an act of weakenesse and yet have saving faith in Christ as it is like many of of the Saints at Corinth denyed an article of their Faith the rising againe of the dead one act of unbeleefe maketh not an infidell 2. Dist. A simple Papist and a Lutheran not well educated doth beleeve upon the same former ground that Christ is true man hath an habitual faith of this article that Jesus Christ is truly the Son of David yet holdeth transubstantiation or consubstantiatiâ— that Christs body is in many sundry places in heaven and earth on this side of the Sea beyond Sea yet the connâ—xion betwixt Christs humanitie and this monster of transubstantiation not being possible all the error may be meerely philosophick that the extention of quantitative parts without or beyond part is not the essence of a quantitative body while as the rude man beleeveth firmely that Christ is true man and so beleeveth contradictory things by good consequence therefore the qualitie of the conscience of the beleever is to be looked into since fundamentall heresie is essentially in the mind and pertinacy and selfe-conviction doth inseparably follow it 1. There is a conscience simply doubting of fundamentall points this may be with a habit of sound faith 2. A scrupulous conscience which from light grounds is brangled about some fundamentall points and this is often in sound beleevers who may and doe beleeve but with a scruple 3. A conscience beleeving opinions and conjecturing and guessing as in Atheists this is damnable but where obstinacy is as defending with pertinacie transubstantiation and that it is lawfull to adore bread this pertinacious defending of Idolatry doth inferre necessarily that the faith of the article of Christs humanitie is but false and counterfeit and not saving 3. Dist. There is a certitude of adherence formall and a certitude of adherence virtuall A certitude of adherence formall is when one doth adhere firmly to the faith of fundamentalls A certitude of adherence virtuall is when with the formall adherence to some fundamentall points there is an ignorance of other fundamentall points and yet withall a gracious disposition and habit to beleeve other fundamentalls when they shall bee clearely revealed out of the word so Luke 24. Christ exponed the resurrection and the articles of Christs sufferings and glorification vers 25 26 27. to the Disciples who doubted of these before and yet had saving faith of other fundamentall points Matth. 16. 17. 18. 4. Hence there be two sorts of fundamentalls some principally and chiefely so called even the elements and beginning of the doctrine of Christ as Credenda things to be beleeved in the Creed the object of our faith and pâ—tenda things that we aske of God expressed in the Lords Prayer the object of our hope specially 2. Agenda things to be done contained in the decalogue the object of our love to God and our brethren Others are so secundarily fundamentall or lesse fundamentalls as deduced from these yea there be some artcles of the Creed principally fundamentall these all are explicitely to be beleeved noted by Vigilius Martyr and Pareus as that Christ died and rose againe c. Other Articles are but modi articulorum fundamentalium and expositions and evident determinations of cleare articles As Christs incarnation and taking on our flesh is explained by this conceived of the holy Ghost and borne of the Virgin Mary the death and suffering of Christ is exponed by subordinate articles as that he suffered under Pontius Pilate was crucisied c. and these lesser fundamentalls are to be beleeved necessitate praecepti because God commandeth them but happily non necessitate medii It is possible many bee in glory who beleeve not explicitely but onely in the disposition of the mind as some are baptized in voto in their desire onely these lesser fundamentalls it is enough they have the faith of non-repugnancy or negative adherence to these so as they would not deny them if they had beene proponed to them in a distinct and cleare way 5. The faith of fundamentalls is implicit three wayes 1. In respect of the degree of beleeving 2. In respect of the object 3. In respect of the subject or our adherence to things beleeved In respect of degrees the faith is implicite and weake three wayes as Calvin may teach 1. Because we are
required no calling of the Church to make one a Lawfull minisâ—er And your Arguments they have and you have their Arguments to evert all ministerie and order of calling of pastors so teach the Arminians and so Episcopius disp 26. thes 4. 5. Necessitatem missionis jam cessare dicendum est ac pâ—inde fas licitumve esse homini Christianâ— non tantum in magno necessitatis casu aut in enormi ecclesiae defectione sed quovis etiam tempore vâ—rbum divinum docere si ad docendum sit idoneus qui doari vâ—lunt id serio obnixè postulant So doe the Socinians Aâ— lr Roddeccius in not is in lib. Smiglecii pag. 3. Confitemur olim â—â—lâ—sie ministros vocari potuisse imo vocatos fuisse nunc etiam vocâ—ri posse in vero id quod olim factum est hodie fieri potest ad mâ—nus ministrorum requiratur hoc vere perpetuo quaeritur Catâ—ch siâ— Raccoviensis cap. 11. 305. 306. Cum per hujusmodi ex praesâ—ripto Apostolicae doctrinae constituuntur in his duabus rebus praest â—ut vitae innocontiâ ad docendum aptitudine propter ejusmodi constitutionem apud omnes authoritatem suam merito in venire debent Smaleius in refut thes D. Frantzii parte 2. disp 4. pag. 377. Hoc enim in questione est an hujusmodi constitutio sit prorsus necessaria ad constituendum verbi dei ministrum hoc autem nos negamus nihil enim tale quod caput reiest in descriptione eorum quae ad episcopum constituendum requiritur nec uspiam judicatum vel levissime videmus cum qui talis sit postea vocari mittiab aliquo debere imo posse aliquem per se munus tale concupiscere vel affâ—ctare manifeste scriptum legimus Theoph. Nicolaid in refut tract de miss ministrorum cap. 10. pag. 80 87. 88. Munus docendi non tam est honos quam labor laborem autem semper sumere liâ—et hâ—ores non item pag. 91. Docet Paulus rectâ— id fieri posse unumquâ—mque munus docendi aggredi mâ—do ad id aptus sit quod aggredi cogitat vel cupit Quest. II. Whether or not all gifted persons may preach the Word of God publikely and ordinarily for the gathering in of soules to Christ though they be destitute of all officiall authoritie or Church calling to that ministery Our brethren hold all gifted persons not in office may ordinarily preach publikely So teach Mr. Robinson in a Treatise intituled The peoples ple t for prophecying the Arguments of which booke I shall shortly discusse Hence these considerations 1. Distinct. There is one power of publike preaching in a Church not constitute and another in a Church constitute gifted persons in extraordinary cases where a Church is not planted may publikely preach but the case is otherwise in a Church constituted 2. Distinct. Pastors not onely as gifted men but as Pastors are â—illed of God for the conversion of soules and the visible Church is Christs visible kingdome and visible society to make persons members of the invisible Church of the first borne 3. Dist. Publike preaching as it is the ordinary meane of saving such as beleeve is proper and peculiar to the Church both subjectively as being onely in the Church and objectively as being onely exercised on the Church members perse but upon Pâ—gans by accident 4. Dist. There is a call to an habituall and ordinary propheâ—ying here is required not onely a calling by gifts but also a collation of authoritie to the office either immediately by God or mediately by the Church and there is a call to some particular or occasionall acts of exhorting as the Martyrs and Stephen are called to give consession of their faith and a King in battell to exhort his army or a Prince his Subjects to piety and to this latter there is no other call required but the place and profession of the exhorter though hee bee not by office a Pastor 5. Dist. There is a formall calling of the Church as the laying on of the hands of the Elders and a virtuall and interpretative calling or tacite approbation of the Church when learned men of eminent gifts not in office do write Commentaries Sermons on Canonick Scriptures and tractates resuting heresies to this the tacite approbation of the Church is required but these have not ordinary pastorall care nor are they the ordinary converters of soules to Christ as the pretended Prophets of Separatists are 6. Dist. Gifted Christians may occasionally admonish warne rebuke and exhort one another 1. privately 2. without any Pastorall care of soules as they are a Church but onely as they occasionally converse with them 3. Excommuni officio charitatis by the Law of nature charitie tying one member to helpe another 4. Not authoritatively by speciall office but all authoritie here is from the word occasionally spoken The Pastor is to preach 1. Publikely 2. To the Church as the Church 3. With a pastorall obligation to all alike whether he converse daily with them or not 4. Not onely by the tie of common Charitie but by a vertue of a speciall office 5. With authority both objective from the word and officiall from his charge 6. And is obliâ—ged to separate himselfe for this charge allanerly as a watchman who must give an account in a speciall manner to Jesus Christ. Our brethren hold that the ordinary and established way in the Church of Christ to the end of the world is that all that are converted are made fit materialls for the visible Church by private Christians as gifted of God to preach publikely and to gather a true Church to Christ. 2. That none unconverted as they are such are under any pastorall care of Christs officers 3. That Pastors as Pastors doe convert none but onely confirme those who are already converted and that if Pastors shall convert any to Christ it is by accident as we say with Aristotle Musicus curat aegrotum a Musician cureth a sick man which he doth no wayes as a musician for Pastors doe convert as gifted persons and not as Pastors and conversion of soules is no proper Church-worke but accidentall to Pastors But that none can take on him lawfully to preach the Word publikely in the established and ordinarily approved way of Christ for the conversion of soules but he who is not only gifted but also called thereunto by God and his Church I prove 1. Argum. If faith come ordinarily by hearing a Pastor sent of God and such Pastors as are called messengers with good newes and watchmen not onely gifted but also instructed with authority of office then are not gifted persons because gifted called of God to be ordinary converters of soules But the former is true Rom. 10. 14. for they are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and of these the Prophet saith Isa. 52. 8. Thy watchmen shall lift up the voyce And it is thus confirmed That Gospel which is the power
that Ezra the Scribe Nehem. 8. and the Levites Chap. 8. 〈◊〉 9. which Robinson citeth without warrant did instruct and â—each the people Robinson And if it were not saith he the received order in Israel of old for men out of office to speake and teach in publicke how did Scribes Pharisees and Lawyers teach publickly among the Jewes of whom yet many were not Levites or Churchmen but indifferently of any tribe Phil. 3. 5. and how was Iesus admitted to dispute in the Temple with the Doctors Luk. 2. 46. and to preach in the Synagogues Matth. 9. 35. Luk. 4. 16 17. and how were Paul and Barnabas desired if they had any word of exhortation to say on Act. 13. 14. 15. For the rulers acknowledged Christ and Paul for no extraordinary Praphets but onely admitted them to the use of their gifts Answ. 1. It is great ignorance if you thinke Scribes Pharisees and expounders of the Law were not Prophets because they were not of the Tribe of Levi for Priests behooved onely to bee of the Tribe of Levi but Prophets as Ieremiah and others were extraordinarily raised up of God out of any tribe as Calvin well observeth and all versed in Scripture and that they were teachers in office is cleare Matth. 23. 2. They sit in Moses his chaire v. 13. 14. c. and the office of teaching though abused is also ascribed by Christ to the expounders of the Law Luk. 11. 46. and what is said of Pharisees in taking away the key of knowledge is said of them v. 52. 2. Christs asking of questions and that when hee was 12. yeares of age all wondering at his learning Luk. 2. 42. was no act of prophecying and granting it had beene the practise of the Iewish Church to admit a child of twelve yeares to preach in the Temple and to admit hand over head tradesmen and all to prophecy in the Temple it is an Argument from their corrupt practise à facto ad jus and no more a rule for the preaching of fashioners cloathiers mariners in the Temple then the Jewes their taking up stones in the Temple to stone Christ and it is knowne that Christ did not publickly prophesie in the Synagogues till he was baptized as all the learned thinke and while his name and fame spread abroad that a great Prophet was arisen Luk. 3. 21 22 23. Luk. 4. 14 15 16. Yea and the Pharisees knew him to be a teacher sent of God Ioh. 3. 2. And all the people tooke him to be a Prophet and therefore the rulers feared to apprehend him and his doctrine and miracles got him the name of a Prophet sent of God and Paul and Barnabas were known to be teachers in office else the rulers would not have desired a word of exhortation for they did not invite strangers promiscuously to prophesie and this you onely say but doe not prove and is more for us nor against us Robinson alleadgeth a place out of Ieremiah 50. 3. 4. where it is said That Israel and Iudah in a spirituall conference shall incourage â—â—â— another as Calvin saith to repentance and to joyne themselves to the true Church which is nothing for publicke prophecying for thus much private Christians yea all that feare God women not excepted may doe in Christian conference as is cleare Zach. 8. 21. Mal. 3. 16. Psal. 42. 4. Esa. 2. 1 2 3. Heb. 3. 13. Heb. 10. 23 24 25. The fourth place which he bringeth is Matth. 10. v. 1. â— 6. Christ sent out the twelve Disciples to preach the Kingdome of â—eaven to the lost sheepe of the house of Israel but they were not Apostles or Preachers in office till his resurrection but onely Apostles elect as you say the major elect For 1. they received not commission till after Christs resurrection Ioh. 20. 22. 23. Matth. 28. 19 20. 2. The least in the kingdome of God is greater then Iohn Baptist for the Christian Church began not properly till his resurrection and the Apostles being members of the Church of the New Testament they could not be Apostles in office before Christs death except an adjunct be before the subject and an officer before the incorporation whereof he is an officer 3. They were ignorant of many mysteries of Christ his death resurrection nature of his Kingdome Matth. 20. c. which was unbeseeming Apostolick dignitie to the which the highest degree if infallible revelation was requisite 4. How did they returne as non-residents to remaine with Christ till his death 5. Ephes. 4. 11. Christ till he ascended on high and not till then gave some to be Apostles c. Hence it must follow that the Disciples were Prophets not in office and so did preach all this time Answer 1. I answer these frivolous reasons 2. I prove they were Apostles or at least Prophets in office before Christs death and resurrection And 1. They received not ample and largest commission to go and preach to all nations before Christs resurrection Matth. 28. 19. that is true but what then Therefore they received no commission as Pastors in office to preach to Israel not to the Gentiles or Samaritans it no wayes followeth yea the contrary a calling to a Pastorall charge they had Matth. 10. 5. These twelve did Iesus send out and commanded them saying Goe c. And these directions and canons which concerne watchmen 1 Tim. 3. are fully set downe Matth. 10. when they receive both gifts v. 1. and authoritie and a calling v. 5. and speciall instructions v. 7 8 9 10. how they should discharge and acquit themselves in their ministery the like whereof is never given to lay-Prophets I must crave leave to use this word To the 2. I answer That it is false that Christ died and lived a member of the Iewish Church onely he received the Sacrament of baptisme as a member of the Christian Church as hee was circumcised and keeped the Law of Moses to testifie hee was a member of Jewish Church and it became him to bee a member of both Churches who was to make of two one people Ephes. 2. 15. And it is false that the Apostles were adjuncts of the Christian Church as Apostles invested in their full Apostolike dignity to preach to all the world they were parts and members not adjuncts of the Catholick visible Church of Christians when Pastors are called adjuncts of the visible Church it is cleare that they are made but accidents of the visible Church so that the Ministery is not simply necessary to the visible Church which is the wicked doctrin of Arminians Episcopius Socinus Nicolaides the Anabaptists taught the same as saith Gastiâ—s But though the Apostles as invested with full Apostolick authority be members of the Christian Church and the New Ierusalem bee founded upon their doctrine Ephes. 2. 20. Revel 21. 14. yet this hindereth not but as called Apostles and officers limited to preach to losed Israel onely
and their doctrine judged by the Prophets now if such could erre our faith were not immediately builded upon the doctrine of the Prophets and Apostles Answ. This is before examined by me the consequence is null for the holy Spirit saith Pareus did not dite all things which the Prophets spake they might have mixed in some thing of their owne Robinson saith that Paul could not have said if any thinke himselfe to be a Prophet c. let such an one acknowledge that the thing I wrote are the commandements of the Lord if these had beene extraordinary Prophets they should have knowne Pauls writings undoubtedly to have beene the Canonick word of God and could not have beene ignorant thereof Answ. This presupponeth that these extraordinary Prophets might have beene ignorant that the Apostles commandements was the commandements of the Lord which is not absurd for Nathan and Samuel were ignorant of Gods will in some points for Prophets see and know sometimes as men and sometimes as Prophets in the former they may erre in the latter they are infallible He subjoyneth The word of God came it to you or came it from you if the word of God came after a sort to the Corinthians and not from them then were they not immediatly and extraordinarily inspired whereas indeed the Word of God came from the Apostles Answ. This proveth not the point for hee condemneth the arrogancie of some immediately inspired Prophets Came the word of God from you that is are yee above the Apostle to whom the word of God was committed that it may bee preached to all the world that it might come from the Apostles to others Or came it to you onely as to the only Apostolick teachers that you neede no admonition but hence it followeth not but they were extraordinarily inspired Prophets for Peter might be rebuked though an Apostle a chief one Neither is it any imputation to Paul or to any who hath received the Spirit in measure to be censured It is true Canonick doctrine as it is such cannot be censured but the teachers thereof though infallible even Paul Act. 17. 10 11. and every spirit is to bee tried whether they be of God or no 1 Joh. 3. 1. yea to say that the Church cannot be builded upon the foundation of the Prophets and Apostles as Mr. Robinson saith pag. 68. if these Prophets extraordinary can erre or can bee subject to the censure and judgement of the Church is the very argument of Papists for they say that the Word of God borroweth authoritie quoad nos in respect of us from the Church and is to be beleeved because Peter Paul the Prophets and Apostles the then present Church say it is the Word of God So Stapleton as Whittakerne teacheth that Christ was the Sonne of God dependeth to our faith upon the testimony of John Baptist. See Bellarmine Gregorius de Valent. Gretser So three famous commentators say Jansenius Cardinalis Cajetan and Cardinalis Toletus But our Divines answer that the Word of God is true in it selfe and the authentick ground of our faith not because the Prophets and Apostles say it is the word of God not because Paul or an Angel from heaven saith it is so Gal. 1. 8. for even the Prophets and Apostles were but men and so their testimony not infallible but because God himselfe saith so See for this Rivetus Whittakerus Bucerus Calvinus yea and the Fathers most expressely say that the Prophets and Apostles are not the foundation of our faith nor their word because they were infallible but Gods word by their mouths and penne So Theaâ—â—â—lact Chrysostome Beda Ambrosius Occam and Gerson doe roundly acknowledge that their Popes word is not the foundation of faith quia Papa potest heretiâ—ari because the Pope may erre What because Samuel was deceived in calling Eliah the Lords annointed are not his bookes a part of canonick doctrine whereupon our faith is builded Lastly saith Robinson Pastors must preach and pray before they hee put in office otherwise they cannot bee trâ—ed if they bee apt to teach as they must be 1 Tim. 3. 2. Tit. 1. 9. It is decreed that all may preach Ministers Teachers Elders Deacons and if there beam ex ipsa plebe any of the common people who would imploy their gift for the good of the Church and it is practised in the Colledges where all must preach though they were never Priests Answ. 1. It is lawfull that these ayming at the office 2. Brought up in humane sciences 3. Called by the Church preach by way of tryall before they be admitted to the office but hence it cannot be concluded that tradesmen and artificersvoyd of learning and ignorant of the Scriptures should preach not for try all or as ayming at the office of the Ministery but as ordinary ministers of the conversion of soules to the faith and that without any calling of the Church either to the office or to the degree preparatorie to the office 2. All gifted should preach yea and in England ought to bee put in office where there is a reading ministery which Christ never ordained to bee in his house and this the harmony of confession and Synods teach and no more It is a fault that in Colledges all doe preach whether Christ hath called them or not such unsent runners Mr. Robinson cannot approve Ambrose saith at the beginning it was granted that all should preach and baptize that the Church might grow and Origen said the same But otherwise Hieronymus saith it is praesumptio temeritatis a rash presumption for any to preach who are not sent and Theophylact calleth them false Prophets Augustine will have them all to come before Christ and so to bee theeves and robbers who commeth not sent Sicut Moses Prophetâ— as Moses and the Prophets were sent Coachman saith if preaching be tyed to the ministery and that order there shall neither bee faith nor grace in a Church where there is no ministery Answ. It followeth not for faith may come by reading by conference and you expone Rom. 10. 14. As Arminians and Socinians doe 2. We as Embassadors pray you in Christs stead to be reconciled 2 Cor. 5. 20. Ephes. 4. 11. 1 Cor. 12. 29. Are all Prophets Ergo would you say no reconciliation in a land without apostolick Ambassadors It followeth not ex negatione unius medii for then there should be no grace nor salvation where there be none of your lay-Preachers Coachman Knowledge judgement utterance with gravitie authoritie power maketh a man a Minister whether he be in office or not Preaching is accidentall to the office and no part of the office but onely an ornament or appendix of it a Minister is in full office of the order of Priesthood though he never preach an office maketh not a Preacher it maketh him onely such
or any where in the which all the people did actually judge rule and command and so was meerely popular But the Word of God giveth a reall superiority to the Pastors and Church guides over the people in the Lord as Jer. 1. 10. So I have set thee this day over the Nations and over the Kingdomes to roote out and to pull downe and to destroy and to throw down to build and to plant here is a reall authority given to Jeremiah onely by his office of his prophecying without any power of the seales or sacrificing or judging or governing which was the part of the Tribe of Levi of which Tribe Jeremiah was not Matth. 10. v. 40. He who receiveth you receiveth me Luke 10. 16. He that heareth you heareth me he that despiseth you despiseth me and he that despiseth me despiseth him that sent me John 13. 20. 2 Cor. 10. 8. For though I should boast something of the authority which the Lord hath given us for edisication and not for your destruction I should not be ashamed 1 Cor. 4. 1. Let a man so account of us as of the Ministers of Christ and of the Stewards of the mysteries of God John 20. 23. Whose soever sinnes yee remit they are remitted and whose sinnes yee retaine they are retained 2 Cor. 5. 18. And he hath given to us the word of reconciliation 20. Now then wee are Ambassadours for Christ 1 Cor. 12. 28. And God hath set some in the Church first Apostles secondly Prophets c. Eph. 4. 11. And he gave some Apostles c. 1 Thes. 5. 12. And we beseech you brethren to know them which labour among you and are over you in the Lord and admonish you Heb. 13. 17. Obey them that have the rule over you and submit your selves for they watch for your soules as they that must give an account Acts 20. 28. Take heed therefore unto your selves and to all the flocke over which the Lord hath made you Overseers to feed the Church of God which he hath purchased with his owne bloud 1 Pet. 5. 2. Feed the flock of God which is among you taking the over-sight thereof not by constraint c. 1 Tim. 3. 2. A Bishop then must be blamelesse c. 4. One that ruleth well his owne house c. 1 Tim. 5. 17. Let the Elders that rule well be counted worthy of double honour v. 21. 28. 2 Tim. 2. v. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7. Tit. 1. 9 10 11. 2. The Lord in his house putteth a difference betwixt the Feeders and the flocke the Governours and the governed those who are over the people in the Lord and those who are under them in the Lord the Overseers and Watchmen and the City over which they watch the Stewards and the family therefore there must be a peculiar authority in those who are Elders 3. The flock is to obey heare follow in the Lord to have the Elders in high estimation to submit to their doctrine to receive them as Christ Ergo some authority they must have 4. The Lord hath given to them an over-sight Act. 20. 28. and hath committed to them a ministery 2 Cor. 5. 15. hath put them in his worke and ministery 1 Tim. 1. 12. 5. God will seeke an account of the bloud of the lost at their hand Ezech. 3. 20. Heb. 13. 17. and God giveth a reward for the discharge of their office 1 Pet. 5. 4. 2 Tim. 4 8 Matth. 24. v. 45. 46. Ergo they must have a place of authority over the people which the people have not 6. The proportion betwixt the priesthood in the Old Testament and the ministery of reconciliation which is more excellent and glorious 2 Cor. 3. 7 8. requireth the same Now the Lord in a peculiar manner choosed the Tribe of Levi Deut. 33. 8 9. Esay 52. 11. Num. 3. 12. v. 45. ch 8. v. 6. Separate the Levites to me ch 18. 23. Josh. 3. 3. 1 Chron. 15. 2. Josh. 14. 3. 8. But let our Author speake what peculiar authority or what singular acts of authority are due to the Elders above the people The Church saith he exerciseth severall acts of authoritie over the Elders 1. In calling and electing them to office and ordaining them in defect of the Presbytery I answer 1. Calling and electing are not to be confounded electing is no act of authority but that the people calleth and ordaineth the Elders wanteth example in the word of God and therefore the Author addeth that the people ordaineth the Elders in defect of their Presbytery that is where there is no Presbytery then in case of extraordinary necessitie and where the Church is not constituted they are to ordaine the Elders but in a Constitute Church the power of ordination is in the Presbytery Ergo ordinarily the people doe not exercise this authoritie over the Elders 2. The Church of beleevers saith the Author sendeth forth the Elders for the publick service of the Church as the whole Church of Jerusalem sent forth chosen Ministers with letters of instruction to Antioch and to other Churches Act. 15. 22. Now the Ambassadour is not greater then he that sent him but usually inferiour Joh. 13. 16. Answ. 1. I deny not but a Church of beleevers in the least Congregation is greater then any Pastor or number of Pastors as they are such for the Pastors are servants for the Church and meanes for the end and lesse and inferior in respect of Christian dignity but this is not the point wee doe not now dispute of Christian dignitie one redeemed soule in that respect is of more worth then a thousand Pastors as they are but meere Pastors but because the Church sendeth the Elders the Elders are a part and a great part of the visible Church which also send themselves but it proveth not the Peoples Church authority as they are contradistinguished from Elders to be superior and above the authority of Elders for here the comparison must not be betwixt one or two Elders and the Church including all the people and the rest of the Elders but the comparison is betwixt spece and spece the office and dignitie and authoritie of the Elders as Elders and the people as people and the Church of Jerusalem was not a Parishionall but a Presbyteriall Church consisting of many Elders and Congregations now we deny not two Elders to be inferior in authoritie to the whole Colledge of Elders and people and so there is no authoritie of the people above the Elders from this proved 2. Morton answereth Papists in the like argument that sending proveth onely that those who are sent are not superiors to those who sent them for the Father sent his Sonne into the world 3. Saith the Author if an Elder or a whole Eldership erre the Church may call him or them to account and in case of obstinacie excommunicate them for it is not reason that Elders should want the medicine of excommunication to save their soules
if they stand in need thereof more then other As Peter gave an account Act. 11. to the Church of Jerusalem of his going in to the uncircumoised Answ. 1. If a warrant or example from the word that one single company of sole beleevers wanting Elders did in a Church way censure any one Pastor or a whole Eldership and that the Church of Jerusalem consisting onely of beleevers without Elders called Peter before them judicially to give an account of going in to the uncircumcised is a dreame and though Peter should have given satisfaction to a number of sole beleevers to remove the scandall it proveth not that they had authoritie over Peter for one private offender is obliged to give an account and a satisfaction to another private brother whom he hath offended Matth. 18. 15. yet hath not a brother Church authoritie over one another to excommunicate him as our brethren say that a company of onely private beleevers may excommunicate all the Elders of the Congregation 2. It followeth not that Elders should want the medicine of excommunication when they stand in need thereof because the people may not excommunicate them for there be others who of office should excommunicate and also the want of a meane of salvation as the want of baptisme where such are wanting as have the onely Church power to administer such means doth not condemn men On the other side saith the Author the Elders have rule over the Church and that in sundry Acts as 1. in calling together the Church upon any weighty occasion Act. 6. 2. Answ. 1. This power of conveening the multitude cannot bee the power of governing Gods house spoken of 2 Tim. 3 4 5. Tit. 1. 5. to obey those who watch for our soules Heb. 13. 17. cannot bee to conveene to a Church meeting at their commandement 2. To conveen the Church meeting or Synods is an action of the whole Church for Christ hath given power to his owne Church an ecclesiastick power to conveen her owne Courts and this can no more be a peculiar act of authoritie agreeing onely to the Elders or to a Pastor then the act of excommunication for it is given to all the faithfull by your owne grounds 1 Cor. 5. 4. 1 Cor. 11. 18 1 Cor. 14. 23. how then is it a peculiar act of auhoritie in the Elders 1. The Elders if they bee to bee accused and censured are they to conveen the Judicatory as the Consull did conveen the Senate and to summon themselves also if they have any power to conveen the Church it is but delegated for orders sake to them by the Church Ergo this authoritie is principally and first in the Church and so it is no authoritie peculiar to the Elders also if it be but a thing of meere order it is not an act of jurisdiction over the Church a Moderator who conveeneth the Synod or a Consul who conveenth the Senat have not in that jurisdiction or authoritie over the Synod or Senat and may the Elders hinder I pray you the conveening of the Church I thinke not 3. This is but a Popish argument Pope Julius the third in his Bull taketh this upon him to conveene Councells The Cardinall de Monte President for the Pope gave leave by a speciall Bull from the Pope to the Councell of Trent to advise about the translating of the Councell from Trent to Bonony And Good Bellarmine and Harding as Jewell teacheth us make this a part of the transcendent power and authoritie of the Pope over the Church to conveen the Church Catholick and if it bee an act of authoritie over the Church to conveene the Church farre more must it bee in the Pope to conveene the Catholick Church Lastly this power in Elders should bee made good by the Word of God Secondly saith hee their authority over the Church is in opening the doores of speech and silence to any of the Assembly Act. 13. 13. unlesse it be where the Elders themselves lie under offence or suspition then the offended party may begin with them Act. 11. 2. Yet with due reverence observed as to their yeares so to their place 1 Tim. 5. 3. Answ. If to speake first in a Church meeting prove that the Elders have authority over the Church then one Elder hath authority over all the rest of the Elders and must be a little Pope or a great Prelate for two or foure Elders cannot all speake first We seeke now an act of authority due to Elders or Pastors as they are such and above the people if you make this an act of authority you then give us in every Church-meeting and Synod a Pastor of Pastors and an Elder of Elders and a Pope 2. If this be an act of authority over the Church then have Papists well proven that Peter hath an authority and power over all the Church for Suarez and Bellarmine and Harding prove Peter to be a Pope because he speaketh first in the councell Act. 13. 13. and the text that you cite they cite also But Whittakerus and Gerson saith as also Lyran and Carthusian It is like that James spake first as President of the Councell 3. The Author leaveth this act of authority as weake and saith that the offended party may speake first Ergo say I to speake first is not an authoritative act of Pastors as Pastors agreeing to them by vertue of their office seeing this act is communicated to those who are out of office Ergo they have not shewen as yet any Pastorall act of office due to the Elders as Elders and if it were most convenient that Elders should first speake our brethren will not say that it is due to them by their office but for their age and gifts and so they say nothing Thirdly saith the Author Elders have rule over the Church in preaching the word and they have power to teach and exhort to charge and command to reprove and rebuke with all authoritie 1 Tim. 5. 7. and 6. 17. 2 Thes. 3. 6. Answ. It can not be denied but Elders that is preaching Elders or Pastors have authoritie over the people in preaching and rebuking with all authoritie but 1. I aske at our brethren by what authoritie of the Scripture is pastorall binding and loosing an authoritative act of the preaching Elder onely for the concionall or preaching power of remitting and retaining sinnes Joh. 20. 21. is all one with the power of the keyes Matth. 16. and that is given saith our brethren to the whole Church and by these texts are not restricted to Pastors as they expone them 2. Our brethren alledge there is a two-fold power of preaching in Pastors one by vertue of their gift another by vertue of their office By the first Pastors doe preach to Infidels Turkes and unconverted ones now this preaching is not proper to Pastors as Pastors nor is it any authority peculiar to Pastors over all the flocke for
all gifted persons as our brethren teach may preach and so the gifted ones amongst the people have authority over the Pastors in this meaning as well as the Pastors have over them and so the difference of rulers and ruled of feeders and the fed is taken away Now for the power of Pastorall teaching the Pastors have authority over the Church but that is over the invisible Church of beleevers and regenerated persons for Pastors as Pastors doe not convert Soules and so they preach to the unconverted not as Pastors or with any Pastorall care for they teach that Pastors Doctors and Church-officers are given Ephes. 4. 11. onely for confirming of those who are already converted not for converting of Soules and by this meanes 1. Pastors doe not preach the Law for the humbling of unconverted sinners they doe not as Pastors or by vertue of the office open the eyes of the blinde nor are they Ministers by whom men beleeve 1 Cor. 3. 5. nor are they Fathers who begot men in Christ Jesus through the Gospell as 1 Cor. 4. 25. Nor doe they pray men in Christs stead to be reconciled unto God as 2 Cor. 5. 20. Which is strange and uncouth Doctrine of our brethren for all these acts ministeriall are performed upon non-converts who are not properly members of Christs mysticall body nor of the spouse of Christ nor members of the visible Church nor the Sonnes and Daughters of the Lord God Almighty nor have some measure of sincerity and truth as this author Chap. 3. Sect. 3. requireth of members of the visible Church and these are not under any pastorall care really and in very deed who are yet unconverted to the faith therefore the Pastor if hee convert any by his preaching he doth it by vertue of his gift not as a Pastor or by vertue of his office as they teach in their answer to the 32. questions so as Pastors they have no authoritie over the unconverted within the visible Church and this authoritative act of Elders over the people falleth to the ground by their principles 3. This authoritative preaching doth not yet make over to the Elders authoritative power above or over the people such as wee now seeke For 1. By this ruling Elders who do not preach and labour not in the Word and doctrine 1 Tim. 7. 17. by office have not this power Ergo yet you give no peculiar authoritie to the whole Eldership over the people 2. The Spirit of God requireth an authority of overseeing and governing to bee in Pastors beside the authoritative power of preaching for besides that a Bishop should bee â—apt to teach 1 Tim. 3. 2. hee must also v. 4 5 6. bee one who can both govern his own house and also the Church of God and not onely must hee not neglect the gift of prophecying 1 Tim. 4. 14. but also hee must know 1 Tim. 3. 13. how to behave himselfe in the Church of God and must bee circumspect in receiving accusations against an Elder and lay hands suddenly on no man and not be partaker of other mens sinnes 1 Tim. 5. 19. 22. he must not onely bee an approven workman to divide the Word aright 1 Timothey 2. 15. and preach in season and out of season 2 Tim. 4. 2. but also must commit the Word to faithfull men who are able to teach others 2 Tim. 2. 2. All which are singular points of authoritative power of government different from authoritative power of teaching And so Titus must not onely have the oversight by sound doctrine to exhort and convince the gainesayers Tit. 1. 9. but hee hath power in governing to order the things of discipline and to appoint Elders in every citie Tit. 1. 9. Act. 4. 23. yea there is an oversight in watching for soules in governing no lesse then in teaching Hâ—b 13. 17. Now this Author sheweth us nothing that is a peculiar authoritative power in ruling governing and a disciplinary overseeing of soules which the Word giveth to Elders as they are Elders and called Governors of Gods people as yet yea all the people are governors rulers and overseers in government by them no lesse then the Elders 4. The Author saith Elders have rule over the Church in dispensing all the censures of the Church unlesse it bee in their owne cause for though they take the consent of the Church in dispensing a censure yet they set on the censures with great authoritie in the name of the Lord yea it is no small power that they put forth in directing the Church what censures are due according to the word as though the Judge dispense no sentence but according to the verdict of the Jury yet his authority is great both in directing the Jury to give their verdict according to the Law and in pronouncing the sentence with power and terrour the like dâ—e the Elders in dispensing Church censures Answ. This dispensing of Church censures hath two branches 1. A directing of the Church in the qualitie of the censures 2. A binding of the censures upon them or in executing the censures of the Church For the former if it bee a pastorall direction it is all one with preaching of the Word and is not an act of authority by way of governing but by way of pastorall teaching But 1. Wee would have a word from God giving this power of the keyes peculiarly to the Pastors for if you give the keyes to all the Church of beleevers as beleevers and because they are Christs Spouse his mysticall body the habitation of his Spirit by faith then with your good leave there bee neither keyes nor any power of the keyes given to the Pastors as Pastors and in respect of their office but onely as they are a part of Christs body now as Pastors or Elders they are neither beleevers nor the bride nor a part of the bride but at best the friends of the Bridegroome Joh. 3. 29. especially seeing the Church as the Church and as using actually the keyes doth censure and judicially prescribe the qualitie and quantitie of the censure as they are directed Matth. 18. 1 Cor. 5. 2 3 4 5. yea and the Church judicially and authoritatively pronounceth the sentence and maner of the censure on the sentence for example of ten collaterall and coequall Judges if two of these ten bee skilled Juristes and shall direct the rest in the qualitie of the punishment to bee inflicted upon a malefactor that direction commeth from them not as Judges over the rest nor by any peculiar power that they have above the rest seeing all the ten are equally and joyntly Judges of a like power but that direction commeth from them as skilled Jurists So here though the Elders direct the Church anent the qualitie of the censure they doe not this by an authority above the Church seeing the Church with them have received the Keyes yea they principally as the Spouse of Christ and his mysticall body have received the keyes and
matters darke and doubtsome Answ. We seeke a warrant from the word for this for Elders are present at the admission and choosing of officers as prime agents by authority not by way of naked counsell and advise Act. 1. 13. c. 6. 26. c. 14. 23. Act. 13. 3. 1 Tim. 1. 13. Manuscr The fourth way saith he is by gathering many Churches or their messengers in a Synod to examine and discusse either corrupt opinions or suspicious practises Here 1. the Magistrate is acquaint with our Assembly he being a nourishing Father of the Church 2. They meete in Christs name 3. The Elders declare their judgement in order and the reasons thereof 4. All may speake till the truth either be cleared and all either convinced or satisfied as Act. 15. 7. 5. If things be not fully cleared and if it seeme that the nature of them admit farther disquisition yea and difference of judgements without disunion of affections or prejudice of salvation each man is left to his Christian liberty and if any be otherwayes minded God shall reveale the same thing to him Answ. This Section being closed I have here two considerable points to be discussed the one anent the power of Synods the other anent the power of the civill Magistrates Quest. I. Whether or not Synods have authority by divine right to obleige the Churches to obedience in things lawfull and expedient For the fuller clearing of this grave question I would have these considerations weighed by the godly reader Consider 1. Canons of Councells may be thought to â—ye as authoritative Commandements or as advises and friendly counsells 2. An advise or counsell doth obleige and tye both for the intrinsecall lawfulnesse of the counsell it being for matter Gods word and also for the authority of the friends counselling because the first Commandement enjoyneth obedience to all our betters not onely inplace and officiall relation as to Kings Fathers Pastors c. but also to all above us in age gifts knowledge experience 3. Hence there is a superiority of dominion or jurisdiction and a superiority of reverence and endowments the former is the narrower inadequate and straiter subject of the fifth Commandement and both are considerable objects in this Commandement 4. All who as friends equalls brethren and indued with more grace experience and light doe advise and counsell good are superiors in so farre but it is a superiority of reverence not of jurisdiction for by this they who are aged and may counsell what is lawfull have not power to censure or excommunicate those who follow not their counsell Yet if David had rejected the counsell of Abigail disswading him from passionate revenge he had in that despised God unlessethe Prince or the High-Priest had given that counsell by way of command though there be degrees of Latitude in despising the one rather then the other 5. There is a difference betwixt hability to judge and right or power to judge a Presbyteriall Church may have right jus and ecclesiasticall Law to judge of a point to the judging whereof they want hability and therefore de facto it belongeth to a higher Synod where more learned men are though de jure the Presbytery may judge it 6. Though government of the Church by Synods be Gods positive Law yet upon the laid downe ground Christ hath given the keyes and power of Government to every visible Church the Government of united Churches by Synods is a branch of the Law of nature 7. Synods are necessary for the well-being of the Church and still are in the visible Church in more or lesse degrees for the authority of Synods consisting of fix onely differeth not in nature and essence from a generall councell of the whole Catholike visible Church Magis et minus non variant speciem And therefore if Synods be warranted by the word of God as no question they are there is no neede to prove by particular places of the word the lawfulnesse of every one of these a sessionall meeting of the Eldership of a single Congregation 2. A Presbytery or meeting of the Elders or Pastors Doctors of more Congregations 3. A Provinciall Synod of the Presbyteries of a whole province 4. The Nationall Assembly or meeting of the Elders of the whole Nation 5. The generall and Occumenick Councell of Pastors Doctors and Elders of the whole Catholick Church visible for all these differ not in essence but degrees and what word of God as Matth. 18. 16 17. proveth the lawfulnesse of one is for the lawfulnesse of all the five sorts of Synods 8. Grant the consociation of authorities in sundry Churches and you cannot deny the authority of Synods above particular Churches 9. Consociation of Churches to give advise and counsell is not Consociation of Churches as Churches but onely consociation of Christian professors who are obleiged to teach admonish and rebuke one another 10. There is a right of dominion and a right of jurisdiction as we shall heare anon Hence our first conclusion a generall councell is a Congregation of Pastors Doctors and Elders or others met in the name and authority of Jesus Christ out of all Churches to determine according to the word of God all controversies in faith Church-government or manners no faithfull person who desireth beeing excluded from reasoning and speaking Neither is the definition of Aâ—mâ—in and Gerson much different from this save that they thinke that councells are lawfully conveened if such and such onely as are of the Hierarchike order be members thereof which we thinke Antichristian 2. As also the Pope president here we disclaime Yet doth Almain confesse that a generall councell may be conveened without the Pope in three cases 1. when the Pope is dead either departing this life or civilly dead being excommunicated for any crime of heresie for the Apostolike Sea hath vaiked often two yeares together 2. When the Pope is averse and opposeth reformation 3. When time and place hath beene assigned for the next generall councell as was done in the councell of Basil and the Papists grant that Matth. 18. Tell the Church is a warrant for a generall councell 1. Because it is a meane for the saving of the spirits of all men even Pastors and Apostles in the day of the Lord. 2. Because Apostles though in prophecying and writing canonick Scripture when they were inspired could not erre yet otherwise they might erre and if Peter should have remained obstinate in his Judaizing Gal. 2. and resused to heare Paul or the Church hee was to bee excommunicated 3. By the Church Matth. 18. saith the Schoole of Paris cannot bee understood the Prelats of the Church onely because Christ did speake to Peter and saith Almain and Gerson Peter cannot bee both an acâ—user a witnesse and a Judge 4. There is a power of the keyes to bind and loose given immediatly by Christ to all the rulers of the Catholick or universall Church visible Ergo the exercise of this power though it
bee sometimes physice impossible because of the corruption of mans nature there being bloody warres in Christendome yet it is morally lawfull for many things may bee inconvenient through mans wickednesse and so hic nunc not expedient which are morally lawfull 2. Conclusion Every particular Pastor hath a power though unproper of dominion and authoritie even out of a Synod about the Acts of preaching and determining truth according to the word of God as Jer. 1. 10. See I have this day set thee over the nations and over the kingdomes c. 1 Tim. 6. 17. Charge them that are rich that they bee not high minded c. 2 Tim. 4. 1. I charge thee before God and the Lord Jesus Christ who shall judge the quick and the dead c. So any Pastor hath power of dominion and authoritie over a Synod and Paul as a Pastor might preach even before the councell at Jerusalem passed their Synodicall determination Act. 15. that circumcision was not necessary and that to obstaine from things strangled from blood and fornication was necessary and lawfull yea and in preaching truth the Pastor is subject to no Synod But the Pastor hath not full power of jurisdiction about his acts of preaching necessary truth 1. Because the Church may for just causes deprive him from preaching 2. Because hee cannot use the censure of excommunication against those who refuse to receive his true and necessary doctrine without the Church joyne her power of jurisdiction with him 3. He his alone cannot in a Synod determine ecclesiastically and in an authoritative Church power that same truth which as a Pastor hee determined and with the power of pastorall dominion hee pressed upon the consciences of the Church yea of the whole Synod because one man is not the Church or Synod and James his alone Act. 15. v. 15. could but say Wherefore my sentence is that yee trouble not them which from among the Gentiles are turned unto God though this was the very word of God which James as a Pastor even as an ordinary Pastor might have preached in the name of God yet is it not the decree of the Church which the Churches is to keep Act. 16. 4. while it bee determined by the Church An example wee may have possible not unlike to this A man hath a power of dominion over his owne proper lands and goods to use them in God for his owne use but the supreme magistrate and Parliament hath a dominion of jurisdiction in a judiciall sentence over those same lands to forfeit them for crimes committed against King and State or this may cleare it Samuel hath a power immediately from God to annoint David King and in this hee is not subject to the suffrages of the tribes of Israel hee hath a power of dominion here but suppose wee that Samuel live till Gods time when all Israel shall crowne David King at Hebron Samuel as a part of the Assembly of Israel his alone without the suffrages of Israel could not make him King at Hebron Hence wee may see how weake the assertion of our brethren is who say That Synods should have power to bind the Churches say they wee see not Bellarmine indeed holdeth so But orthodox writers hold that the sentence of councels is but a certaine inquisition of the truth and a ministeriall and limited sentence so that the decree of a councell is of as great force as the reason thereof so saith Amesius and Junius But certainly this is a meer mistake of our brethren as if they were not orthodox writers but conspirers against the truth with Bellarmine who hold the authoritie of Synods The essentiall end to speak so of Synods is unitie and the eschewing of schisme and wee doubt not but Peter Paul James had in their Sermons and doctrine determined that same veritie to wit that the Law of Moses and ceremonies was a yoak not to bee laid upon the Christian Churches yet it was not a decree for unities sake and fuller authoritie binding the Churches to observe these as Act. 16. 4. while it was determined in a Synod Act. 5. 24. 25. But truely wee hold nothing in this common with Jesuites and Papists for wee condemne not that in Bellarmine that hee holdeth that lawfull Synods for of such wee dispute with him do bind the Churches to obedience in God to their decrees not because they say it but because they say it authoritatively from Gods Word authoritie of Synods no orthodox writers deny authoritie officiall as the representative Church of Christ they have He that heareth you heareth mee hee that despiseth you despiseth me Where two or three are gathered together in a Synod say our Divines I will bee amongst them But authoritie objective they have not so as what they say because they say it therefore the very matter object and thing said by them is no lesse the Word of God then if the Prophets and Apostles by divine inspiration had said it at least it is not infallibly true because they say it for that wee disclaime and it is that authoritie of Synods which Bellarmine and Papists hold Councells saith Bellarmine and Scripture are both infallible and the Jesuits of Rhemes and Lorinus the Jesuite said councells are infallible the holy Spirit is there present Gratian said all the decretall Epistles of Popes and the Canons of the Councells are of equall authoritie with the Scriptures and their Gregorius said hee received with the same reverence and authoritie the foure generall Councells the foure Evangelistâ— it is certaine saith Suarez that a Councell is an infallible rule of faith and Turrecremata saith the same It is certaine saith Bailius Councells are â—â— the Oracles of God to us in difficulties so saith Cajetanus Canus and Gregorius de Valentia wee hold the authoritie of Councels but ascribe to them as much power over the conscience as there is reason in them from Gods Word and no more But 2. This is a weake reason councels have no power to command obedience because their Canons and Decrees are of no more force then they have reason from Gods Word For 1. Friends brethren equals by that have no warrant to rebuke because their rebukes have but as much force as they have reason from the word of God for the reason is alike in both lawfull Pastors cannot command obedience in the Lord your independent Congregations cannot command that which bindeth the Church to obedience because the word or a commandement of a Pastor or your independent Church is onely a commandement ministeriall and limited and hath as much force as there is reason in it from the Word of God yea the Church of Corinâ—h hath not then the power of the Lord Jesus to excommunicate the incestuous person nor the Church of Thyatira to cast out and condemne Jezabell the false prophetesse nor do these commandements of the Synod
but wee uske who shall bee the visible ministeriall and vocall Judge under Christ speaking in his owne Testament for the King is a Politick and civill Judge and the Church an Ecclesiasticall Judge I answer this same is the question betwixt us and Papists anent the Judge of controversies whether the Judge bee a Synod or the Scriptures and wee answer by a distinction the Scripture is norm i judicandi 2. Christ the peremptory and infallible Judge speaking in his owne Word 3. A Synod lawfully conveened is a limited ministeriall and bounded visible Judge and to bee beleeved in so farre as they follow Christ the peremptory and supreme Judge speaking in his owne Word But wee deny that there is on earth any peremptory and in fallible visible Judge But to come yet nearer if the King have sworne to that same religion which the Church doth professe and so acknowledge and professe the reformed religion of that Church hee must then acknowledge the lawfull officers of that Church to bee his ordinary teachers and the lawfull ministers of the Church and that they are both in a Synod and out of the Synod to preach and to bee ministeriall definers of things contraverted and that they shall first determine in an ecclesiasticall way according to Gods Word and hee as King is to command them to determine according to Gods Word under the paine of civill punishment and the Kings civill and coactive way of judging is posterior and ratificatorâ—e of the right and oxthodox ecclesiasticall determination and Junius saith that the Magistrates judging politick presupposeth the Church judging ecclesiasticall going before and Calvin and Amesius are cleare that in this case the Church is to cognosce of hee owne ecclesiasticall affaires Ambrose writeth to the Emperor Valentinian that none should judge of this cause which is ecclesiasticall as one said but a Church-man qui nec munere sit impar neâ—jure dissimilis Gelasius the Pope inveigheth against Anastasius the Emperour because hee confounded these two civill and ecclesiasticall causes But if the Emperour or King professe not the religion of the land and repute it false and if the religion bee indeed hereticall then the Church is not constitute and the case extraordinary but the truth is neither the Kings judgement as a certaine rule to the representative Church nor the representative Churches judgement a rule to the King but the Word of God the infallible rule to both Judgement may crooke truth cannot bow it standeth still unmoveable like God the father of truth but in this case if both erre ex cellently saith Junius the Magistrate erring the Church may do something extraordinarily and tâ—e Church erring the Magistrate may do something also in an extraordinary way as coÌ„mon equitie and mutuall law requireth that friends with mutuall tongues bicke the wounds of friends Also fourthly some say they who make the King the head of the Church acknowledge that the King doth not judge except the matter be first defined in the Scriptures and in the generall councells yet they give a primacie spirituall in matters ecclesiasticall to the King and therefore if the King as King may forbid the inacting of wicked Canons hee determineth them to bee wicked before the Synod have passed their judgement of them I answer that learned Calderwood saith indeed the pretended Lords of high Commission have an act for them under Queene Elizabeth for this effect but it is made for the fashion for all errors and heresies are condemned in Scripture but not onely should there bee a virtuall and tacit determination of matters ecclesiastick which is undeniably in Scripture and may bee in generall councells also but also a formall Synodicall determination in particular must goe before the Princes determination in a constitute Church The Prince may before the Synods determination exhort to the determination of what hee conceiveth is Gods will in his Word but hee cannot judicially and by a Kingly power determine in an orderly way what is to bee defined in a Synod except hee infringe the Churches liberties and judicially prelimit under the paine of civill punishments the free voyces of the members of the Synod which is indeed an abuse of the authoritie of a nurs-father But fiftly it may bee objected that hee may in a thing that is manifestly evident by the Word of God to bee necessary truth command by the power of the sword that the Synod decree that or this particular so cleare in the Word the contrary whereof being Synodically determined hee may punish by the sword and so hee may judicially predetermine some things before the Sâ—nod passe their Synodicall act thereon and if hee may predetermine judicially one thing hee may predetermine all things I answer what the King may judicially determine and punâ—â—h with the sword that hee cannot judicially predetermine and command in any order that hee pleaseth but in a constitute Church whereof hee is a member and to bee taught hee is to determine judicially in an orderly way as a nurs-father But sixtly it may bee objected that if the King have a judiciall power by the sword to annull unjust acts then hath hee a power to 〈◊〉 them though hee abuse that power in making them as unjust and then hath hee a power to interpret Church acts and to defend them 〈…〉 Law saith it is not same power to make Lawes and to dâ—â—â—nd them and interpret them see Paraeus I answer the proposition is not universally necessary except onely in civill matters in the which as the Prince who is absolute hath supreme authority to defend and interpret civill lawes so hath hee power to make them for if the Magistrate hath a supreme judiciall power to interpret Church-Lawes hee is a minister of the Gospell in that case and may by that same reason administer the Sacraments so the argument is a just begging of the question 2. Though the King have power in case of the Church aberration which is somewhat extraordinary it followeth not therefore in ordinary hee hath a nomothetick power to make Church-Lawes Also seventhly it may bee objected if the King in case of the Churches aberration may by the sword rescind Church-Lawes then may hee make a Law to rescind them but those who aâ—firme that the King hath a sort of primacie and headship over the Church say not that the King hath any power formally ecclesiasticall to make Lawes as Ministers in a Synod do but onely that hee hath a power to command any forme of externall worship under the paine of bodily punishment they say not that the King may preach administrate the Sacraments or excommunicate or inflict any Church-censures I answer the transcendent power of Princesand their commissioners is not well knowne for the authors saith Calderwood agree not among themselves but it is true in words the author est Tortura torti the Bishop of Eli denyeth in words if you have strong faith to beleeve
weake p. 297 298 299 seq Mr. Coachmans arguments dissolved p. 305 306 307. seq The way of Church judging in independent congregations examined p. 308 309. That there be no peculiar authority in the Eldership for which they can be said to be over the people in the Lord according to the doctrin of independency of Churches and their six ways of the Elders authority confuted p. 311 312 313 314 315. seq That independency doth evert communion of sister-Churches and their seven wayes of Churches-communion refuted from their own grounds p. 324 325 326. seq The divine right of Synods Ten distructions thereanent p. 331 332. seq The desinition of a generall or Oecumenick Synod p. 332. 333 The place Acts 15 farther considered p. 334 335. Synods necessary by natures Law p. 336. Papists no friends to councells p. 336 337 338. seq 340 341. Three ways of communion of sister-Churches according to the doctrin of independent Churches confuted p. 346 347. seq How the magistrate hath power to compell persons to the profession of the truth p. 352 373. seq Six distinctions thereanent 2 part p. 352 353. The Magistrates power over a people Baptized and over Pagans who never heard of Christ in this poynt of Coaction to profession not alike p. 353 354 355. The magistrates compelling power terminated upon the externall act not upon the manner of doing sincerely or hypocritically p. 355 356. The magistrates power over hereticks with sundry distinctions thereanent p. 356 357 358. seq Socinians judgement and Arminians hereanent p. 359 360 A farther consideration of compelling or tolerating diverse Religions p. 361 362. Some indirect forcing lawfull p 362. Erroneous opinions concerning God and his worship though not in Fundamentalls censurable p 363 364. Diverse non Fundamentalls are to be believed with certainty of Faith and the non-believing of them are siâ—nes punishable p. 365. 366 367 seq Arguments on the contrary dissolved and the place Philip. 3. 15. cleared p 316. seq How an erring conscience obligeth p. 378 379 380 381 seq Arguments on the contrary answered p. 383 384. seq The Princes power in Church affairs Ten distinctions thereanent p. 391 392. 393. How the Magistrate is a member of the Church p. 392 393. The Prince by his Royall Office hath a speciall hand in Church-affaires p 393 394. The intrinsecall end of the Prince is a supernaturall good to be procured by the Sword and a coactive power and not only the externall peace of the State Spalato resuted p 396 397 398. seq How the Magistrate is subordinate to Christs mediatory Kingdome p 402 403 404 seq The ordinary power of the Prince is not Synodicall teaching or making Church-Lawes p. 403 404 405 406. seq The influence of the Princes civill power in Church-Canons p. 409. 410 411 seq The government of the visible Church spirituall and not a formall part of the Magistrates Office p. 417 418. seq The power of Ordination and Deprivation not a part of the Magistrates Office p. 427 428. seq Instances from David Salomon Ezechiah c. answered and our Doctrine and Iesuites differenced p. 438 439. seq Difference betwixt the Princes commanding Church-duties and the Churches commanding these same p. 417 418 seq The Kings ordinary power to make Church-Lawes examined p. 438 439 440. seq The intrinsecall end of the Magistrate a supernaturall good p. 442 443 446 447 448. The Popes pretended power over Kings protestants contrary to to Papists herein what ever the author or Popish libeller of the survey and the night-Author of Treason Lysimachus Nicanor say on the contrary p. 449 450 451 452. seq The way of Reformation of Congregations in England according to the independent way examined p. 457 458. The originall of Church-Patronages p. 459. And how unwarrantable by Gods Word p. 462 463. Other wayes of Reformation of England according to the way of independent Churches modestly considered as about maintenance of Ministers and replanting of visible Churches there p. 464 465 466. seq Errata THe Author could not attend the Presse therefore pardon errors of the Printing Observe that the Author was necessitated to make some occasionall addition to the mids of this Treatise which occasioned-variation of the Figures of the Pages and therefore stumble not that when the Booke commeth to page 484 the next page not observing due order is page 185. 186 and so forth to the end of the Treatise page 60. title of the page 60 c. page 61 62. 64. dele not and for not of the same essentiall frame c. read of the same essentiall frame c. page 484 line 22 Churches their persecution read Churches through their persecution for page 229 read 209. for page 259. read 269. for p. 484. r. p. 498. יהוה THE Way of the Church of Christ In NEW ENGLAND Measured by the Golden Reed of the SANCTUARY Or The way of Churches walking in brotherly equality and independence or coordination without subjection of one Church to another examined and measured by the Golden Reed of the Sanctuary Propositions concerning the supposed visibility and Constitution of independent Churches examined CHAP. 1. SECT 1. PROP. 1. THe Church which Christ in his Gospell hath instituted and to which he hath committed the keys of his Kingdome the power of binding and loosing the Tables and Scales of the Covenant the Officers and Consures of his Church the Administration of all his publick worship and Ordinances is coetus fidelium a company of Believers meeting in one place every Lords day for the administration of the holy ordinances of God to publick edification 1 Cor. 14. 23. 1 Because it was a company whereof Peter confessing and believing was one and built on a rock Mat. 16. 18. a Such as unto whom any offended brother might complaine Mat. 18. 17. 3 Such as is to cast out the incestuous Corinthian 1 Cor. 5. Which cannot agree to any diocesian provinciall or Nationall assemblie Ans. From these we question Quest. 1. If a company of believers and saints builded by faith upon the rock Christ and united in a Church-Covenant be the only instituted visible Church of the New Testament to the which Christ hath given the keys Let these considerations be weighed 1. Dist. The matter of an instituted visible Church is one thing and the instituted visible Church is another as there be ods betwixt stones and timber and an house made of stones and timber 2 Dist. It is one thing to govern the actions of the Church and another thing to governe the Church the Moderator of any Synod doth govern the actions of the Synod but he is not for that a Governour Ruler and Pastor of the Synod Or ordering actions and governing men are diverse things 3. Dist. A thing hath first its constituted and accomplished being in matter forme efficient and finall causes before it can performe these operations and actions that flow from that being so constituted a Church must be a Church before any
Ministeriall Church actions can be performed by it 4. Dist. It is one thing for a company to performe the actions of a Church mysticall and redeemed of Christ and another thing to performe actions ministeriall of a Church instituted and ministeriall 1. Concl. A company of believers professing the truth is the matter of the Church though they be saints by calling and builded on the rock yet are they but to the Church instituted as stones to the house 2. Because they cannot performe the actions of a constituted Church till they be a constituted Church 3. Our Divines call men externally called the matter of the visible Church so Trelcatius Tilenuâ— professors of Leyden Piscator Bucanus so say our brethern 2. Concil Ordination of Pastors and election of Officers administration of the seales of grace and acts of Church censures are holden by Gods Word and by all our Divines actions of a ministeriall and an instituted visible Church and if so according to our third distinction It is a wonder how a company of Believers united in Church-Covenant cannot performe all these for they are united and so a perfect Church and yet cannot administrate the Sacraments for though they be so united they may want Pastors who onely can performe these actions as this Treatise sayth and Robinson and the Confession And it is no lesse wonder that Officers and Rulers who are to feed and governe the Flock are but only accidents and not parts not integrall members of a constituted Church no perfect Corporation maketh its owne integrall parts or members a perfect living man doth not make his owne Hands Feete or Eyes the man is not a perfect one in all his members if all the members be not made with him but Officers by preaching make Church-members 3. Concl. The visible Church which Christ instituted in the Gospel is not formally a company of believers meeting for publick edification by common and joynt consent as this Author sayth 1. The instituted Church of the New Testament is an organicall body of diverse members of eyes eares feete hands of Elders governing and a people governed 1 Cor. 12. 14 15. Rom. 12. 4 5 6. Act. 20. 28. But a company of believers meeting for publick edification by common consent are not formally such a body for they are a body not Organicall but all of one and the same nature all believers and saints by calling and are not a body of Officers governing and people governed for they are as they are a visible Church a single uncompounded body wanting Officers and are as yet to choose their Officers and all thus combined are not Officers Rom. 10. 14. How shall they preach except they be sent 1 Cor. 12. 29. Are all Apostles are all Prophets we justly censure the Papists and amongst them Bellarmine who will scarce admit an essentiall Church of believers but acknowledgeth other three Churches beside to wit a representative Church of their Clergy onely excluding the Laickes as they call them 2 A consistoriall Church of Cardinalls 3. A virtuall Church the Pope who hath plenitude of all power in himselfe against which our writers Calvin Beza Tilenus Iunius Bucanus professors of Leyden Whittaker willet doe dispute so the other extremity can hardly be maintained that there is an instituted visible ministeriall Church to which Christ hath given the keyes of the Kingdome of Heaven exercising Church actions as to ordaine and make and un-make Officers and Rulers without any officer at all The major of our proposition is grantted by our brethren who cite 1 Cor. 12. Rom. 12. Acts 20. 28. To prove a single Congregation to be the onely visible Church instituted in the New Testament Nothing can be said against this but a Church of Governours and People governed is an instituted visible Church but there is an instituted visible Church before there be Governours but such an instituted Church we cannot read of in Gods Word which doth and may exercise Church acts of government without any Officers at all 2. That company cannot be the Church ministeriall instituted by Christ in the New Testament which cannot meete all of them every Lords day as the Church of Corinth did for administration of the holy Ordinances of God and all his Ordinances to publick edification for so this Author describeth a visible instituted Church 1 Cor. 14. 23. But a company of believers meeting for publick edification by joynt and common consent cannot meete for the publick administration of all the Ordinances of God 1. They cannot administer the seales of the Covenant being destitute of the Officers as the Scripture and their confession saith 2. They cannot have the power of publick edification being destitute of Pastors because the end cannot be attained without the meanes appointed of Christ. But Christ for publick edification and Church edification hath given Pastors Teacherâ— and other Officers to his Church Eph. 4. 11. 1 Tim. 5. 17. Iâ— is not enough to say that such a company meeting hath power of Pastorall preaching and administration of the Seales of grace because they may ordaine and elect Officers for such publick edification but 1. we prove that that which our brethren call the onely instituted visible Church of the New Testament hath not power to administrate all the Ordinances of Christ and how then are they a Church can we call him a perfect living man who cannot exercise all the vitall actions which flow from the nature and essence of a living man 2. If this be a good reason that such a company should be the only instituted Church in the New Testament having power of all the Ordinances because they may appoint Officers who have such a power then any ten believers who have never sworne the Church-Covenant meeting in private to exhort one another is also the only instituted Church ministeriall in the New Testament for they have power to make such Officers and may invest themselves in right to all the Ordinances of Christ by our brothers Doctrine 3. All the places cited by the Author speake of a Church visible made up of Officers governing and people governed as Mat. 16. Mat 18. cannot exclude Pastors who binde on Earth and in heaven or Pastors who are stewards and beare the keyes as hereafter I shall prove Also the Church of Corinth did meete for the administration of the Lords Supper 1 Cor. 11. 20. and so were a Church of Officers and governed people they met with Pauls spirit and the authority of Pastors 1 Cor. 5. 4. another Church that exercised Discipline as Collosse Col. 2. 8. was a Church of Officers and people Col. 4. 17. Philippi consisted of Saints Bishops and Deacons Phil. 1. 1. 2. Ephesus of a flocke and an eldership Acts 20. 28. so the visible ministeriall Church that the word of God speaketh of as all the seven Churches of Asia and their Angels had in them Officers to governe and people governed and therefore they were not
a number of sole believers united in a Church-covenant which in very deed iâ— but stones and timber not an house builded of God for in the ministeriall Church of the New Testament there is eâ—eâ— a relation betwixt the Elders and the flock wee desire to to see a Copy of our brethrens instituted visible Church to the which Elders are neither essentiall nor integrall parts for their instituted visible Church hath its compleat being and all its Church-operations as binding loosing ordeining of Officers before there bee an Edldership in it and also when the Eldership is ordained they are not Eyes and Eares to the instituted Church nor watchmen because it is a body in essence and operation compleat without officers 2. the officers are not Governors for as I trust to prove they have no act of ministeriall authority of governing over the people by our brethrens Doctrine 2. all their governing is to Rule and moderate the actions of the whole governing Church which maketh them no wayes to be governours nor over the believers in the Lord nor overseers nor watchmen as a Preses who moderateth a Judicatorie a moderator in a Church-meeting a Prolocutor in a convocation is not over the Judicatorie Synod or meeting or Convocation 3. The Eldership are called by them the adjuncts the Church the subject the subject hath its perfect essence without its accidents and common adjuncts 2 Quest. Whether or not Christ hath committed the Keys of the Kingdom of Heaven to the Church of Believers which as yet wanteth all Officers Pastors Doctors c. The Author sayth this company of believers and Church which wanteth Officers and as we have heard is compleat without them is the corporation to which Christ hath given the keyes of the Kingdom of Heaven which deserveth our brotherly censure for wee then aske a Scripture for the Lords giving of the keys to Pastors and Elders if the keys be given to Peter Mat. 16. as a professing believer by what Word of God are they given to Peter as to an Apostle and Pastor it would seem the Pastors have not the keys jure Divino for by this argument our Divines prove the Bishop not to bee an Office of power and jurisdiction above a Pastor and Presbyter because the keys were not given to Peter as to the Archbishop but as to a Pastor of the Church and indeed this would conclude that Pastors are not Officers of authority and power of jurisdiction jure Divino Hence the question is if it can be concluded that the keyes of of the Kingdom of Heaven Mat. 16. Mat. 18. were given to Peter as he represented all professing believers or if they were given for the good of professing believers but to Peter as carrying the person of Apostles Pastors and Church-guides 1. Distinction There is one question of the power of the keyes and to whom they are committed and another of the exercise of them and toucheth the government of the Church if it be popular and democraticall or not 2. Dist. It is not inconvenient but necessary that Christ should give to his Church gifts Pastors and Teachers of the which gifts the Church is not capable as a subject as if the Church might exercise the Pastor and Doctors place and yet the Church is capable of these gifts as the object and end because the fruit and effect of these gifts redoundeth to the good of the Church see Parker see the Parisian schoole and Bayner 3. Distinct. There is a formall ordinary power and there is a vertuall or extraordinary power 1. Concl. Christ Iesus hath immediatly himselfe without the intervening power of the Church or men appointed offices and Officers in his house and the office of a pastor and Elder is no lesse immediately From Christ for men as Christs Vicars and Instruments can appoint no new Office in the Church then the office of the Apostles Eph. 4. 11. 1 Cor. 12. 28. Mat. 28. 19. The Offices are all given to the Church immediatly and so absolutely and so the power of the keys is given to the Church the same way But the Officers and key bearers now are given mediatly and conditionally by the intervening mediation of the ruling and ministeriall Church that she shall call such and such as have the conditions required to the office by Gods Word 1. Tim. 3. 12 3. Hence we see no reason why the keys can be said to be given to believers any other wayes then that they are given for their good 2. Concl. I deny not but there is a power virtuall not formall in the Church of believers to supply the want of ordination of pastors or some other acts of the keyes simply necessary hic nunc this power is virtuall not formall and extraordinary not ordinary not officiall not properly authoritative as in a Church in an Iland where the pastors are dead or taken away by pest or otherwayes the people may ordaine Pastors or rather doe that which may supply the defect of ordination as David without immediate Revelation from Heaven to direct him by only the Law of nature did eate shewbread so is the case here so answer the casuistes and the schoolemen that a positive Law may yield in case of necessity to the good of the Church so Thomas Molina Suarez Vasquez Vigverius Sotus Scotus Altisiodorensis Durand Gabriel and consider what the learned Voetius sayth in this What if in an extreame case of necessity a private man endued with gifts and zeale should teach publickly after the example of the faithfull at Samosaten Yea and Flavianus and Diodorus preached in Antioch as Theodoret sayth yea saith Voetius an ordinary ministery might be imposed on a Laick or private person by the Church though the presbytery consent not in case of necessity God sayth Gerson may make an immediate intermission of a calling by Bishops yea sayth Anton. speaking of necessities Law The Pope may commit power of Excommunication quia est de jure positive pure Laico mulieri to one meere Laicke or a woman though we justifie not this yet it is hence concluded that God hath not tied himselfe to one set rule of ordinary positive Lawes a captive woman as Socrates saith preached the Gospell to the King and Queen of Iberranes and they to the people of the Land 3. Concl. The Author in the foresaid first proposition will have no instituted visible Church in the New Testament but a Congregationall or Parishionall Church that meeteth together ordinarily in one place for the hearing of the Word But we thinke as a reasonable man is the first immediate and principall subject of aptitude to laugh and the mediate and secondary Subjects are Peter Iohn and particular men so that it is the intention of nature to give these and the like properties principally and immediately to the speciâ—e and common nature and not immediately to this or that man
people being absent shall not know if the Eldership have proceeded right yet must they repute the excommunicated person as an heathen or a publicane 3. Arg. That government is not to be admitted which maketh men take honour to themselves without God calling them thereunto But the Doctrine of government in the hands of people is such ergo the assumption is proved 1. By it all are Kings Rulers and Guides and all have the most supreame power of the Keyes as authoritative receiving in of members and judiciall casting out by the pastorall spirit of Paul and all governe over all 2. Beleevers are a ministeriall Church a company of private Christians put in office and doing acts of a Ministeries now a Ministerie is a peculiar state of eminency that God calleâ—h some selected gifted persons unto that to the which he calleâ—h not all professors as in Israel he chosed one Tr be to minister to himselfe not all the visible Church of Israel as the Scripture teacheth us Ministers of the house of God the Levites the Lords Ministers Ministers of Gods Sanctuary and the ministery of the New Testament is a speciall emiâ—ency of office given to some few and not to all believers a matter of worke that some not all believers are put upon and employed in the act of the Ministery not common to all but restricted to the Ministers of the Church and not common to the whole visible Church Now to ordaine Elders excommunicate admit members into the Church are positive actes of a received ministery and must flow from an other principle then that which is common to all professing believers 4. Arg. All who have received such a Ministeriall state to discharge such excellent and noble actes as laying on of hands receiving of witnesses committing the Gospell to faithfull men who are able to teach others and must save some by gentle awaiting and stop the mouthes of other Pastors as the Scripture saith these must acquit themselves as approved worke-men to God and shall therefore receive a Crowne of Glory at the appearance of the chiefe Shepheard and must in a speciall manner fight the good fight of Faith and must be worke-men who neede not to be ashamed But these are not required of all the Church visible all are not men of God and ministeriall Souldiers of Christ and feeders of the flock but only such as Timothy Titus and Elders like to Peter as these Scriptures prove For the reward of a prophet is not due to all 5. Arg. That Government is not of God which taketh away the ordinary degrees of members in Christs body the Church But government exercised by all the visible body taketh away the deversity of offices members places of Rulers and ruled Ergo I prove the assumption 1. All have one and alike equall power of governing all the members are one in place and office all are Eyes all Eares all are hands according as all have one joynt and common interest and claime to Christ. One is not an Eye and head in relation to another for all are both governours and governed all the Watchmen and all the City all the flock and all the feeders all the House and all Rulers Key-bearers Stewards all the children of the house all the Fathers Tutors to bring up nuâ—ture and correct the children 2. If the power and use of the Keys result from this that the Corporation is the Spouse Body Sister of Christ the redeemed flock what should hinder but according as God inequally dispenseth the measure of grace to some more to some lâ—sse so some should have more some lesse power of the keys and some exercise more eminent acts of government as they be more eminent in grace some lesse eminent acts and if we grant this we cannot deny the order of a Hierarchy amongst Pastors This connexion may be denied happily by our brethren but there is no reason if their arguments be good they alwayes conclude Church-power from the graces of the members of the Church 3. Concl. It is cleare then that the state of the Church cannot be called popular and the government Aristocraticall or in the hands of the Elders as our brethren meane 1. Because by our brethren the government and the most eminent and authoritative acts thereof are in the hands of the people Ergo both state and government are popular 2. Because the people are not only to consent to the censures and acts of government but also authoritatively to judge with coequal power with the Eldership as they prove from 1 Cor. 5. 12. 3. The Parisian Doctors the authors of this distinction acknowledge a visible monarchy in the Church and are far from popular government Let us heare what our brethren say for the government of the people and their judiciall power in generall Quest. 15. Our brethren say the Colossians are exhorted Col. 4. 17. to say to Archippus Take heed to the Ministery that thou hast received of the Lord to fulfill it in all points Ergo the people are to censure and rebuke the Pastors and therfore they may and ought to exercise acts authoritative Ans. 1. This is an argument off the way with reverence 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 say to Archippus take heede Ergo say Judicially and rebuke with all authority it is an argument à genere ad speciem affirmativè and a non-consequence Mat. 18. 17. If he will not heare them 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 tell the Church Ergo exercise an act of authority over the Church Ioh. 8. 48. The Jewes said unto him Ergo they said it authoritatively 1 Ioh. 1. 8. If we say 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 we have no sinne by no authority can we say we have no sinne Luk. 12. 11. Take not thought 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 what ye shall say Rev. 22. 17. 2. The Fathers as Augustine Chrysostome Ambrose Hyeronimus The Schoolemen as Aquinas D. Bannes Suarez say correcting of our brother is sublevatio miseriae peccantis a succouring of the misery of a sinner Cajetanâ—ait actum correctionis elici à prudentia imperari à misericordia To warne or rebuke our brother is an act of prudence commanded by mercy and compassion And. Duvalius saith it is an act Non solum juris divini sed etiam naturalis and he citeth Lev. 19. Thou shalt not hate thy brother in thy heart but shalt rebuke him and shall beare one anothers burdens and so fulfill the Law of Christ. And Greg. de Valent. saith it is a spirituall almes actum misericordiae quo subveniatur spirituali necessitati fratris So the Doctors of the Canon Law So the Fathers say as Basilius esse benevolentiam potius quam severitatem Augustin Vulnus fratr is contemnis vides cum perire negligis pejor es tu tacendo quam ille te offendendo Excellently Hieronim Sivide at in corpore carnes putridas dicat An
ad me pertinet scias quiae crudelis est And Nazianz. Charitatem potius hic quam potestatem ostendendam To rebuke is a worke of charity rather then of power Calvin saith Good Ministers stand in need to be admonished Davenant thinketh that Archippus in the absence of Epaphras his collegue was to supply his absence and it is like was somewhat cold and therefore needed to be admonished But because the Collossians were to exercise an act of mercy towards their Pastor which the Law of nature enjoyned them it is a wide inference therefore they had Church authority and power over him to censure deprive excommunicate him so the faithfull receiveth a charge Hos. 2. 1. Say ye to your brethren Ammi and to your sisters Ruhammah 2. Plead with your mother plead pleading for wheredomes is more then a simple exhorting of Archippus yet none can well collect from these words that those faithfull who kept themselves cleane from the common defection had power of jurisdiction over their breth en sisters and mother to censure them judicially and by authority to un-un-Church them And certainely the Apostle if he had commanded here the judiciall act of Church-jurisaiction to all the Saints of Colosle men and women who may admonish Archippus we we would looke he had said command and charge with all authority Archippus to take heed to his ministery Also it is much to be doubted if the duties of rebuking exhorting and comforting one another be positive acts of Church-membership which the fellow-members of a visible Congregation owe one to another by vertue of a Church-covenant or that the people owe to the Pastor in a Church way for these ex hort teach comfort one another are duties mutuall not restricted to fellow-members of a visible Church or Parish but such as we owe to all the members of the Catholique Church as we are occasionally in company with them Yea and duties as our brethren say that sister Churches owe to sister Churches and acts of the Law of nature that we owe to all as brethren not as brethren in Church-membership Levit. 19. 17. onely I will here answer What Robinson saith By the Keyes is meant the Gospell opening a way by Christ and his merits as the doore into the Kingdome the power of binding and loosing opening and shutting Heaven is not tied to any Office or Order in the Church it dependeth onely upon Christ who alone properly forgiveth sinnes and hath the Key of David and this Key externally is the Gospell which with himselfe he giveth to the Church Isa. 6. 9. Rom. 3. 2. Ergo the Keyes are given to all though not to be used by all and every one alike which were grosse confusior The Keyes were not given to Peter as Prince of the Apostles as Papists say nor to Peter as chiefe Officer of the Church and so to Prelates nor to Peter as a Minister of the Word and Sacraments but we say to the confâ—ssion of faith which Peter made by way of answer to Christs demand and therefore to every faithfull man and woman who have received the like precious faith with Peter 2 Pet. 1. 1. Ans. 1. If the Keyes be given to as many as the Gospell is given unto all have the Keyes who are beleevers children women whether within or without the Church for all have obtained alike precious faith So it is vaine to speake there of a Church builded on the Rockâ— or of any ministeriall Churcâ— 2. The Keyes are not given to the naked Office or Order distinct from the spirits working and proving the acts of preaching and discipline to be mighty through God 2 Cor. 10 5. to open hearts Act. 16. 14. for what or who is Paul and who is Apollo but Ministers by whom ye beleeved 1 Cor. 3. 4 5. and Christ alone worketh with the Sacraments and without him great Iohn Baptist can but baptize with water Joh. 1. 26. yet all say administration of Sacraments externally is so tied to the Office as none can administer them without warrant but Pastors 1 John 5. 25 Math. 26 19. 1 Cor. 1. 17. and therefore this is weake to prove that because Christ onely hath the Keyes of the Word yea and of the Sacraments also that therefore he hath not committed the Keyes to certaine Officers under him who are Stewards and Key-bearers 3. The places alledged prove not Is. 6. 9. Christ is given to us that is to the Church as to the subject O say it not but to us the Church as the object and end for our salvation Ergo the Keyes and the Gospell are given to the Church yea and to every faithfull that they may by preaching open and shut Heaven You cannot say so Also Rom. 3. 2. to the Jewes were committed the Oracles and Scriptures that every one might be a Priest and Prophet to teach and sacrifice it is a shame to say so but to the Jewes as to the object and end that by the Scriptures and faith in these Oracles they might be saved 4. The Keyes that is the Gospell is given to all though not to be used alike by all and every one which were grosse confusion that is the same we say the Gospell in use is not given alike to all but to the believers as to the object and end to the Officers as to the subject and proper instrument And so you fall into grosse confusion while you eschew it Robinson The Keyes be one and the same in efficacy and nature and depend not upon the number and excellencie of any persons but upon Christ alone though the order and manner of using them be different Ans. The Sacraments remaine one and the same in nature and efficacy who ever be the persons many or few excellent or not excellent in whose hands soever they be it followeth not therefore the power of administration of Sacraments is given to all 2. We see no difference in the order and manner of using the keyes if all even a faithfull man or woman either may also truly and effectually loose and binde both in heaven and in earth as all the Ministers of the world for those be your words Robinson These keyes in doctrine may be turned also as well upon them which are without the Church as upon them which are within and their sinnes either loosed or bound Matth. 28 19. in discipline not so but onely on them that are within 1 Cor. 5 13. Answ. If this distinction were in Gods Word we would receive it but seeing by preaching there is receiving in and casting out and binding and loosing I aske how these who were never within can bee judged and cast out by preaching more then by discipline may Pastors judge these who are without by preaching and not judge those who are without by discipline and that in a setled Church Robinson There is an use of the keyes publike ministeriall by men in office by the whole Church joyntly
and Ostorodius Theoph. Nicolaides reason against Gods ordinance of a sent Ministerie Robins God hath indeed set in the body some to be eyes and mouth and hath not said to all the Church Goe and preach but first they have not their gifts from the Church Secondly you would have the body to starve if such hands as Deacons will not feed and all the body blinde if the eyes of the watchmen be blinde Answ. Yet thus much is granted that gifts give not the keyes nor authority to use gifts and so that all beleevers though gifted and graced also have not power of the keyes 2. It 's certaine that in a constituted Church there be no hands nor mouthes to doe and speake by authority and ex officio by vertue of an office save onely Elders and Pastors and that if they doe or speake they doe it extraordinarily when Churches hands are lame and her eyes blinde or if they doe and speake ordinarily it is from the law of charity in a private way not by power of the keyes and as Judges and Officers Manuscript 5 ch 4 sect The Churches not the Angels of the Churches are blamed for not executing censures against Balaam Jezabel the Nicolaitans g Robinson saith more 1. These whose workes Christ commendeth for that dwelling where Sathans throne was they kept his name and denyed not his faith these he reproveth for suffering the doctrine of Balaam and the Nicolaitans 13 14 15 16. 2. They which were commended by Christ for their workes love service faith patience increase of workes are reproved for suffering Jezabel but these were not the Angels onely 3. These conjunctions but never the lesse say though they were zâ—alous in many things yet they failed in not being zealous enough against false teachers Ans. 1. These connexions prove guiltinesse in Angels or Pastors and one common fault may be laid upon them all but hence it followeth not that they all abused one and the same power of the Keyes as being all collaterall Judges no doubt the Angels preached not against Balaam Jâ—zabel and the Nicolaitans doctrine and yet women dwelt where Sathans throne is and there faith and patience was commended and yet our brethren will not say women are rebuked and all the beleevers because they did not pastorally preach against Balaam and Iezabel so this argument hurteth them as much as our cause The Pastors were guilty because they did not in their place use the Keyes and the people because they did not say to Archippus and their Officers Take heed how you governe as Israel was involved in Achans trespasse because they warned not one another 2. Seeing the Spirit of God maketh mention of Churches in the plurall number and every one of the seven Churches of Ephesus Rev. 2. 7. of Sâ—yrna v. 11. of Pergamus 17. of Thyatira 29 of Sardis 3. 6. Philadelphia 13. Laodicea 22. It is cleare there were more Churches then a single Congregation and an independent incorporation in every one of them and so a Presbytery of Angels in every one of them behoved to be guilty of this neglect of discipline yet not all one and the same way It is not cleare enough though that the whole Church in Ephesus was to be rebuked or that all and every one of the Elders whereof there were a good number Act. 20. 26. He prayed with them all they all wept sore were guilty of these abuses of the power of the Keyes for in Sardis there were a few names which had not defiled their garments yet the whole body is rebuked Manuscript Ch. 5. Sect. 4. When the word Congregation is put for the Elders or Judges only it is never understood of them sitting in consistery and judgement there alone by themselves and apart from the people but in the presence of the publick assembly who also had liberty in such cases to rescue an innocent from unjust judgment 1 Sam. 14. 45. I answer we urge not a Church assembly of Elders only to exclude the people from hearing yea and in an orderly way from speaking reasoning and disputing even in our Generall assembly but for judiciall concluding we find not that given to any but to the Church-guides Act. 15. 6. Act. 16. 4. 2 It is not a good argument the people sate with the Rulers and rescued innocent Jonathan 1 Sam. 14. Therefore all the people may fit and give judiciall sentence or impede the Elders to sentence any This I grant is alledged by Ainsnorth for to give popular government to the people as also 1 King 21. 13. and Ier. 26. 11 12. but 1. a fact of the people is not a Law 2. It was one fact and that in an extraordinary case of extreame iniquity in killing innocent Ionathan a Prince and Leader of the people 3. in a civill businesse and the people were to be executioners of the sentence of death and they saw it manifestly unjust 4. they were not the common people only but in thar company were the Princes of the Tribes and heads and the King and his family only on the other side what will this infer but that there were no Kings in Israel who had power of life and death nor any judges as Ainsworth contrary to Scripture sayth but that the people were joynt Judges with the King and that the people in the New Testament are co-equall Judges with the Elders from so poore an example and so the Separatists proving from the peoples power of judging in civill causes which yet is a wide mistake and a punishment bodily to be inflicted upon strangers as Paget doth learnedly observe doe conclude the peoples power of judging in Ecclesiastick causes which concerneth only the members of the visible Church Manuscript We grant it is orderly to tell the Elders the offence that the whole Church be not frivolously troubled but it followeth not that the Officers may judge there alone without consent of the people he who told his complaint to the Levite told it orderly enough to the whole Congregation assembled at Mizpeh Jud. 20. Ans. These to whom we are to complaine these and these only are to be heard and obeyed as Judges binding and loosing in Earth and validly in Heaven Mat. 18. but these are not the multitude nor one Elder only but the Church of Elders 2. if the Church of Believers be the only subject as you teach of the Keys and not the Elders but in so far as they are parts of the believing Church then it is more orderly to complaine to the multitude who only are proper Judges then to Elders who are not properly Judges Manuscript A second reason why we allow such power to the people in Church censures is from the Church of Corinth 1. He directeth the whole Church of Corinth to whom he writeth to excomunicate the incestuous man Ans. He writeth to all the faithfull and so to women the woman is not to usurpe authority over
the man 1 Cor. 14. 34. 1 Tim. 2. 11 12. but to voyce judicially in Excommunication is an act of Apostolick authority Manuscript Ib. The whole Church is to be gathered together and to Excommunicate Ergo not the Bishop and Elders alone 3. Pauls spirit was to be with them and Christs authority 4. the whole Church 2 Cor. 2. did forgive him 5. nothing is in the Text that attributeth any power to the presbytery apart or singularly above the rest but as the reproofe is directed to all for not mourning so is the Commandement of casting out directed to all Ans. 1. It is cleare that if some were gathered together in the power of Christ and the spirit of Paul that is in the authority that he received over the Corinthians for edification 2. Cor. 10. 8. and Pauls Rod 1 Cor. 4. 21. then as many as were convened Church-ways and mourned not for the same did not cast out and authoritatively forgive seeing women and believing children did convene with the whole Church and were not humbled for the sinne and yet women and believing children cannot be capable of pastorall authority over the Church which was given for edification 2. The power of the Lord Jesus that is the keys of the Kingdom of God were committed to Peter as to a Pastor Mat. 16. and power to bind and retaine to loose and pardon sinnes Joh. 20. 20 21 22. Which power is given to these who are sent as Ambassadors as the Father sent Christ v. 21. which power cannot be given to puffed up women 3. Except this be said the Text must beare that there was not a Presbytery of Prophets Governors and Teachers there of all who had a more eminent act in excommunicating and Church pardoning then the women who mourned not for by what reason our brethren would have the act of excommunicating an act of the whole Church convened including all to whom Paul writeth women and children by that same reason we may appropriate it to these only who are capable of Pauls pastorall spirit and authority according as attributes are appropriated by good logick to their own subjects else that cannot be expounded 1 Cor. 14. 31. For ye may all prophecy one by one What may all that the Apostle writeth unto 1 Cor. 1. 2. prophecy one by one even the whole Church even all sanctified in Christ Jesus called to be Saints and all that in every place call upon the Lord Iesus I thinke our brethren will not say so so when Paul sayth 1 Thess. 5. 12. Esteem highly of these that are over you if that command be directed to the whole Church of the Thessalonians which is in God our Father as the Epistle is directed to them all 1 Thess. 1. 1. then doth Paul command the Elders in Thessalonica to esteem highly of themselves for their own workes sake if exhortations be not restricted according to the nature of the subject in hand we shall mock the Word of God and make it ridiculous to all Ainsworth sayth The putting away of leaven was commanded to all Israel Ergo the putting away of the incestuous person is commanded to them all in Corinth without exception and the putting away of the Leper was commanded to all Israel I answer 1. Proportions are weake probations 1. every single woman 2. privately in her own house 3. without Churches consent and authority was to put away Leaven but it is a poore inference therefore every woman in Corinth heâ—e alone might excommunicate without the Churches authority and in their private houses 2. The Priest only judicially putteth away the Leper Deut. 17. 13. and the Priests without the peoples consent put out Uzzah their Prince from the Sanctuary when he was a Leper 2. Châ—on 26. 20. Manuscript Lest this judgement should be restrained to Presbyteries only he magnifieth the judging of the Saints taking occasion from thence to stretch their judicature in some cases even to the deciding of civill causes rather then that they should fly suddenly to Law one against another before Infidels Ans. That upon this Church judging he taketh occasion to magnifiy the judging of the Saints I see not for he passeth to a new subject in reprehending their pleadng before heathen Judges 2. Though that cohesion of the Chapters were granted yet doth he not magnifie the Judging of all the multitude the Saints of men and women shall judge the world by assenting to Gods Judging but all the Saints even women are not Church-Iudges Also he extendeth Judging of civill causes to the most eminent Seniors amongst them v. 5. Is there not a wise-man amongst you no not one who shal be able to judge betwixt his brethren and therefore he layeth a ground that far lesse can all the rest of men and women be Judges Ecclesiastick to binde and loose validly in Earth and Heaven but onely the wiser and selected Elders I may adde what Master Robinson sayth that our argument from confession may be objected to the Apostles no lesse then to Separatists Acts 1. 23. They presented two that is the multitude which were about an hundred and twenty men and women and Act 6. 5. And the while multitude presented seven Deacons to the twelue Apostles and the twelve Apostles called the multitude and so spake to them and v. 6. prayed and laid hands on the Deacons Now when the multitude Acts 1. presented Joseph and Matthias it behoved them to speak spake they joyntly or all at once this were confusion contrary to 1 Cor. 14. 14. did the women speak they must not meddle in Church-maters v. 34. did children speak It is impossible so Acts 6. did all the twelve Apostles speak at once and pray vocally at once did the whole multitude speak when they presented the seven Deacons that is confusion by these and the like women and children are utterly excluded from the Church as no parts of it Acts 15. 22. The whole Church sent Messengers to Antioch 1 Coâ— 14. 23. the whole Church commeth together in one to exercise themselves in praying and prophecying but children could not send messengers nor pray nor prophecy and women might not speak in the Church and therefore women and children must be excluded from being parts of the Church if one be excluded why not another and so till we come to the chiefe of the Congreation Ans. This is much for us every way therefore the 120 Acts 1. and the multitude Acts 6. did present the two elect Apostles and the seven Deacons by some select persons and when these select persons spake the Church spake and when one Apostle prayed the whole twelve prayed Ergo there is a representative Church which performeth Church actions in the name of the Church and you will have a representative Church in the New Testament to be a point as you say of Judaisme yet here you are forced to acknowledge it 2. By all good reason when Christ Mat. 18. sayth if he refuse to heare the Church
that is the speaking and commanding Church let him be as a heathen he must speak of a representative Church for a collective body of all believers even women and children cannot command nor soeak in the Church and it were confusion that women and children should bind and loose on Earth as Christ doth in Heaven and when Paul sayth that the convened Church 2 Cor. 5. should cast out the incestuous person he meaneth not that they should all Judge him by the power and authority of Christ and the pastorall spirit of Paul therefore your doctrine is false that as many are Judges in the Judiciall acts of excommunication as did not mourn for the sin as were Saints by calling and to whom Paul writeth 1 Cor. 2. and as met together for the publick worship for it is as great confusion for women and children who are true parts of the Church to be Iudges cloathed with Christs authority and Pauls Ministeriall spirit as for women to speak or for twelve Apostles to pray all at once vocally in the Church and the whole Church is said Acts 15. 22. to send messengers and Canons to Antioch to be observed and yet that whole Church are but in the act of governing and decerning and judiciall passing of these acts only Apostles and Elders Acts 15. 2. v. 6. Act 16. 4 Act. 21. 5. Ergo it followeth not that we exclude women and children from being parts of the Church or that all are excluded except Elders all are parts of the mysticall and redeemed Church officers are only the ministeriall Church and Mat. 18. Christ speaketh only of a ministeriall Church in the judiciall act of excommunication though if you speak of excommunication in all the acts of it we doe not exclude the whole multitude Mat. 8. nor 1 Cor. 5. from a popular consenting to the sentence and a popular execution of the sentence of excommunication and therefore though the whole Church convene yet the whole Church conveneth not with Pauls ministeriall spirit to excommunicate judicially either must our brethren here acknowledge a Synocdoche as well as we yea and a representative and select Church in the judiciall act of excommunication else they must say that women and children Ex officio by a ministeriall spirit doe Judge and so speake in the Church for he who Judgeth Ex officio in the Church may and must speake and excommunicate in the Church Ex officio but more of this hereafter CHAP. 3. SECT 3. QUEST 4. WHether or no is there a necessity of the personall presence of the whole Church in all the acts of Church-censures The Author giveth us ground for this question whiles as he holdeth the company of believers cloathed with the whole power of the keys and these meeting all of them even the whole Church to be the only visible instituted Church And Ainsworth sayth with what comfort of heart can the people now excommunicate him if they have not heard the proceedings against him Let wise men Iudge if this be not spirituall tyranny that Elders would bring upon the conscience of men Also it would seemâ— if the people be to execute the sentence of excommunication that they cannot in faith repute the excommunicated man as a Heathen and a Publican and eschew his company except they be assured in conscience that he is lawfully cast out now how shall they have this assurance the Elders say he is lawfully cast out and the cast out man sayth no but he is wronged therefore it would seem that all the people must be personally present to heare that the processe be lawfully deduced against him else they punish upon a blind faith now the like question is if Souldiers can make war if they be not present at the counsell of war to know the just reasons of war which the Prince and States doe keepe up to themselves upon grave considerations And the same is the question if the Lictor and executioner of the Judges sentence be obliged in conscience to know if the Judge have proceeded orderly and justly or if he upon the testimony of the Judge may execute the sentence of death 1. Distinction There be oddes betwixt a free willing people executing the sentence of the Church and meere Executioners and Lictors 2. Dist. There is a doubting of conscience speculative through ignorance of some circumstance of the fact and a doubt of conscience practicall through ignorance of something which one is obliged to know and so there is also a speculative and a practicall certainty of a thing 3. Dist. There is one certaeinty required in questione Juris in a question of Law and another in questione facti in question of fact 4. Dist. There is and may be an ignorance invincible which a man cannot help in a question of fact but Papists and Schoole-men erre who maintaine an invincible ignorance in questione Juris in a question of Law and in this they lay imperfection on Gods Word 5. Dist. There is a morall diligence given for knowledge of a thing which sufficeth to make the ignorance excusable and there is a morall diligence not sufficient 6. Dist. There is a sentence manifestly unjust as the condemning of Christ by witnesses belying one another and a sentence doubtsomely false 1. Conclu The members of the visible Church are not meere Lictors and Executioners of the sentences of the Elder-ship 1. Because they are to observe warne watch over the manners of their fellow members and to teach exhort and admonish one another and are guilty if they be deficient in that 2. Because by the Law of charity as they are brethren under one head Christ they are to warne and admonish their Rulers And by the same reasons the people of the Jewes were not meere executioners though they were to stone the condemned Malefactors yet were they not Judges as Ainsworth sayth It is true Levit. 20. 2. they were to kill him who offered his seed to Moloch but the precept is given first to Moses the supreme Magistrate the accused for innocent blood stood before the children of Israel Num. 35. 22. but their Gnedah signifieth the Princes Iâ—s 20. 4. The slayer shall declare his cause before the Elders of that City 2 Sam. 7. 7. there be Tribes who are feeding or governing Tribes or 1 Chron. 17. 6. Judges there is no reason to understand by the children of Israel or the Congregation only the common people when the word doth include a Congregation of Princes so Num. 8. 11. the Levites are the children of Israels shake-offering Ainsworth saith the people are put for the Princes the sins of unjust Judges are peoples sinnes not because they judicially exercise unjust acts for they should not judge at all but because they mourne not for the publick sins of Judges Eze. 9 9. and because the people love to have it so Jer. 5. 31. 2. Concl. When the sentence of the Judge is manifestly unjust the executioners and Lictors are not to
de facto not questiones facti and must be believed as Almaine and Occam say well with that same certainty by which we believe Gods Word 2. A question of fact is taken for a question the subject whereof is a matter of fact but the attribute is a matter of Law as if Christ in saying he was the Son of God did blasphem if the Lords Priests in giving David shew-bread did commit Treason against King Saul there is some question there made circa factum about the fact but it is formally a question of Law For these questions may be cleared by Gods Word and the ignorance of any questions which may be cleared by Gods Word is vincible and culpable for the Law sayth The ignorance of these things which we are obliged to know is culpable and excuseth not But thirdly a question of fact is properly a question whether this Corinthian committed incest or no whether Tittrs committed murther or no and in this there is sometimes invincible ignorance when all diligence morally possible is given to come to the knowledge of the fact Now we know here the question of Law must be proved by the Law all are obliged in concience to know what sinnes deserve death and Excommunication But whether this man Iohn Anna Marie hath committed such sins is a question of fact and cannot be proved by the Law or the Word of God for the Lâ—â— is not anent singulars or particulars this is proved by sense and the Testimonie of witnesses and therefore the certainty practicall of conscience here is humane and failible not Divine and infallible Now though Souldiers Lictors or People joyne to the execution of a sentence and have their doubtings anent the fidelity of the witnesses yet when all diligence morally possible is given to try the matter they may well be said to doe in Faith though they have not certainty of Faith concerning the fact because there cannot be certainty of Divine Faith in facts mens confession sense the Testimony of witnesses cannot breed Divine Faith yea here the Judge himselfe may condemne the innocent and yet the sentence of the Judge may be most just because the witnesses are Lyers and the Judge giveth out that sentence in Faith because Gods Word hath commanded him to proceed secundum allegata probata he must give sentence under two or three witnesses yea though the Judge saw with his Eyes the guilty commit the fact yet he cannot by Gods Law condemne him but upon the testimony of witnesses For the wise Lord seeth what confusion and tyranny should follow if one might be both Index actor tâ—stis the Iudge the accuser and the witnesse And when the Judge giveth out a sentence to absolve the guilty and condemne the innocent his sentence is judicially and formally just and materially and by accident and contrary to his intention only unjust if the Judge in that case should say as Master Weemes observeth well such a proposition is true when he knoweth it to be false and being posed and urged in conscience is this an innocent man or no it he should answer and say he is not he should then answer contrary to his knowledge but as a Judge he must answer he is not innocent because witnesses being with all possible diligence examined have condemned him and it is no inconvenience here to say that the Judge hath one conscience as a man and another contrary conscience as a Judge in the question of fact for God hath tyed his conscience as a Judge to the fidelity of witnesses known not to be false I desire the Reader to see anent this more in Bonaventura Richardus Occam Antoninus Adrian and our Countreyman Iohn Weemes and Henricus Now because Souldiers Lictors and people are not Judges if they know the fact in Law deserveth such and such punishments where the sentence is not manifestly false and unjust but in the matter of Law just though erroneous in the matter of fact all possible dilligence being used by the Judges they are to execute that sentence upon the testimony of the Judges though they be not personally present at the proceedings of the Judges and Eldership which may be proved many wayes 1. By the confession of our brethren iâ— any of the Congregation be absent by Sicknesse Child-birth paine Trading over Sea imprisonment the Congregation doth justly put away from amongst them the incestuous Corinthian and they who are absent are to repute the party Excommunicate as a Heathen as their own practise is at censures in the week-day the largest halfe of the Congregation is absent yet the absent upon the testimony of the Church hold valid what is done by the Church 2. Other sister Churches who ought not to be present at Church-censures as our Brethren teach are to repute the Excommunicate cast out by a sister Church-independent as they say as an Heathen because being bound in Heaven here is he not bound in a Church visible one mile distant from the Church Excommunicating yet this is no tyranny of conscience 3. Women are to execute the sentence and to eschew the company of the party Excommunicated yet are they not to be present â—s Judges to nâ—â—rp authority over the men This Robinson granteth 4. This should evert all judicatories of peace and war so many thousands Acts 2. could not be present at every act of censure and that dayly nor are acts oâ— Discipline necessarily tied to the Lords-day They are I grant acts of Divine worship but the whole multitude of women and children are deprived of the liberty that God hath given them for six dayes to the works of their calling if they must be personally present at all the acts of Discipline to cognosce of all scandals and to here and receive Testimonies against Elders under two or three witnesses which is the office of Timothy this way the overseeing of the manners of the people which also our Brethren laye upon the whole people taketh up the great part of the Pastors office and the whole office of ruling Elders And if we lay upon the people the worke and all the acts of the office how can we not lay upon them the office it selfe 5. All Israel gathered to war from Dan to Beersheba could not by vertue of duty and obligation be present personally at the determination of lawfull War Nay if they were all present as Judges as Mr. Ainsworth would have them there be no Governors and Feeders in Israel but all the governed are Feeders and so no Magistrate and Ruler as Anabaptists teach here 1. It were not lawfull for one to be King over more people then he could in his own personall presence judge contrary to Gods Word that teacheth us to obey these who are sent by the supreme Magistrate as we obey the King 1 Pet. 2. 13. 14. Ergo these who are sent by him are lawfull Judges and yet
together a visible act of government in sending messengers to 〈◊〉 Acts 15. 22. Then pleased it the Apostles and Elders and the whole Church our Brethren say the whole collective Church Men Women and Children at Ierusalem to send men of their own company to Antioch 23. And wrote Letters and some Decrees and Commandements to be observed Now the many thousands of the Church of Ierusalem by no possibility could meete aâ— one Parish in one materiall house to administrate the Lords Supper farre lesse could they be as is said Acts 2. 42. all continuing stedfastly in the Apostles Doctrine and followship our Brethren say in Pâ—rishionall or Congregationall fellowship and in breaking of bread and prayer nor could they dayly continue in the Temple and breake bread from house to house being all one Church or a fixed parishionall meeting in one materiall house Now it is cleare they were 〈◊〉 even after they exceeded many thousands in number in one Parishionall and Congregationall government as our Brethren would prove from Acts 15 22 23 24 25. And Acts 2. 42 43. Else how could they have all their goods common if there be not one visible government amongst them but this government could not be of one single Congregation for all who sold their goods and had all things common could not meete to give voyces in Discipline a judicatory of so many thousand Judges were impossible and ridiculous 2. Paul writeth to the Galatians where there were many Parish Churches Gal. 1. 2. as our Brethren teach yet doth he write to them as he doth to the Corinthians where our Brethren will have one Parish Church and writeth to them of uniformity of visible government that they meete not together to keepe dayes Sabbaths and yeers Gal. 4. 10. as the Iewes did that they keep not Iewish and ceremoniall meetings and conventions Gal. 4. 9. these Churches are called one lumpe in danger to be leavened as Corinth is a Parishionall lumpe in hazard to be leavened as our Brethren teach Now how could Paul will them that the whole lump of all the Churches and Congregations in Galatia be not leavened except he lay down a ground that they were with united authority to joyne in one visible government against the false Teachers suppose there were twenty sundry Kings in Brittaine and twenty Kingdoms could our friends over Sea write to us as to one Nationall lump to beware of the Spanish faction except they laid down this ground that all the twenty little Kingdomes had some visible union in Government and might with joynt authority of all the twenty Kingdomes concurre to resist the common Enemie Here that godly and learned Divine Mr. Baynes sayth Communion in government is not enough to make them one Church this sayth he maketh them rather one in tertio quodam separabili in a third thing which may be separated then one Church Government being a thing that commeth to a Church now constituted and may be absent the Church remaning a Church I answer this is a good reason against the Prelates Dioceseâ—n Church which as Baynes sayth well is such a frame in which many Churches are united with one head Church under one Lord prelate common Pastor to all the Pastors and particular Congregations of the Diocese as part aking of holy things or at least in that power of government which is in the chiefe Church for all the others within such a circuit Now the prelâ—tes frame of a properly so called Church under one Pastor being a Creature with a hundred heads having Church and pastorall care of a hundred little Congregations and Churches is a dreame for we know no such Church fed by a Prelate nor no such prelaticall Argos to oversee so many flocks nor doe we contend that the many Congregations united in a presbyteriall government doe make a mysticall visible Church meeting for all the Ordinances of God But union of many Congregations in a visible government is enough to make all these united Churches one visible ministeriall and governing Church who may meete not in one collective body for the worship of God yet in one representative body for government though worship may be in such a convened Church also as we shall heare The name of the Church I thinke is given to such a meeting Mat. 18. 17. Acts 15. 22. though more usually in Scripture the Church is a fixed Congregation convened for Gods worship now government is an accident separable and may goe and come to a mysticall Church but I thinke it is not so to a Ministeriall governing Church So the Church of Ephesus is called a Church in the singular number Rev. 2. 1. and all the Churches of Asia Rev. 1. 20. but seven Churches and Christ directeth seven Epistles to these seven and writeth to Ephesus as to a Church having one government v. 2. Thou hast tryed them which say they are Apostles and are not and hast found them lyers This was Ecclesiasticall tryall by Church-Discipline yet Ephesus contained more particular Congregations then one 1. Because Christ speaking to Ephesus only sayth v. 7. He that hath an Earâ— to heare let him heare what the spirit sayth unto the Churches in the plurall number 2. Because there were a good number of preaching Elders in Ephesus Acts 20. 28. 36. 37. and it is incongruous to Gods dispensation to send a multiude of pastors to over see ordinarily one single and independent Congregation 3. This I have proved from the huge multitudes converted to the Faith in Ephesus so huge and populous a City where many Iewes and Greeks dwâ—lâ— and where the Word of God grew so mighâ—â—ly Acts 19. 17 18 19 20. and Christ writeth to every one of the seven Churches as to one and yet exhorteth seven times in every Epistle that Churches in the plurall number heare what the spirit sayth Now as our Brethren prove that the Churches of Galatia so called in the plurall number were many particular Churches so doe we borrow this argument to prove that every one of the seven Churches who are seven times called Churche in the plurall number contained many Congregations under them yet doth Christ write to every one of the seven as having one visible Government 2. Concl. A nationall typicall Churchâ— was the Church of the Iewes we deny But a Church nationall or provinciall of Cities Provinces and Kingdomes having one common government we thinke cannot be denyed so Paul Baynes citeth for this 1 Pet. 1. 1. 1 Pet. 5. 2. Though we take not the Word Church for a my sticall body but for a ministeriall company But Acts 1. Matthias was elected an Apostle by the Church as our Brethren confesse but not by a particular Congregation who met every Lords-Day and in ordinary to partake of all the holy things of God the Word and Sacraments 1. Here were the Apostles whose Parish Church was the whole World Mat. 28. 19. Goe teach all Nations 2. In this Church were the brethren of Christ
Church communion amongst all the visible Churches on Earth Ergo de jure and by Christ his institution there is an universall or catholick visible Church I prove the antecedent 1. Because there ought to be mutuall fellowship of visible Church-duties as where there is one internall fellowship because Eph. 4. 4. we are one body one spirit even as we are called in one hope of our calling v. 5. one Lord on Father one Baptisme v. 6. one God and Father of all There also should there be externall fellowship and Church fellowship of exhorting rebuking comforting and Church-praying and Church-praising in the behalfe of all the visible Churches on earth even for those whose faces we never saw Coloss. 2. 1. and when one nationall Church falleth away the visible Churches of the Christian world are obliged to rebuke and to labour to gaine such a Church and if she will not be gained to renounce all the foresaid communion with such an obstinate Nation 2. As the Apostles had one publicke care of all the Churches and accordingly kept visible fellowship as they had occasion to preach write to them pray and praise God for them so this care as Apostolick I grant is gone and dead with the Apostles but the pastorall and Church-care and consequently acts of externall fellowship are not dead with the Apostles but are left in the Church of Christ for what Church-communion of visible fellowship members of one particular congregation keepe one with another that same by due proportion ought nationall Churches to keepe amongst themselves 3. This is cleare Act. 1. where particular Churches with the Apostles did meete and take care to provide a Pastor and an Apostle Matthias for the whole Christian Church and why â—ut particular Churches are hereby taught to confer all church-Church-authority that God hath given them for the rest of the visible Churches and the Churches conuened in their speciall members Acts 15. 12. extended their Church-care in a Church-communion of Ecclesiastick canons to all the visible Churches of the Jewes and Gentiles Hence Oecumenick and generall councells should be jure divino to the second comming of Christ Neither need we stand much on this that our Brethren say that one Catholick visible Church is a night dreame because no Church is visible save only a particular congregation the externall communion whereof in meeting in one materiall house ordinarily and partaking of the same word and Sacraments doth incurre in our senses whereas a Church communion and visible fellowship with the whole Christian Churches on Earth is impossible and no wayes visible But I answer if such a part of the Sea the Brittish Sea be visible then are all the Seas on earth visible also though they cannot all come in one mans senses at one and the same time so if this Church particular be visible then all the Churches also in their kind are visible 2. There be acts of Church-communion externall with all the visible Churches on earth Ergo the whole Catholick Church according to these acts is visible I prove the antecedent we pray in a Church-way publickly for all the visible Churches on earth we praise Church-wayes publickly for them we fast and are humbled Church-wayes before God when they are in trouble and so ought they to doe with us we by preaching writing and Synodicall constitutions proclaime the common enemie of all the Churches to be the Antichrist his doctrine and the doctrine of that body whereof he is Head to be false and hereticall by writings we call all the people of God to come out of Babâ—l and we renounce externall communion with Rome in Doctrine Discipline Ceremonies and Rites all which are Church-acts of externall communion with the reformed catholick visible Churches neither to make a Church visible to us is it requisiâ—e that we should see the faces of all the members of the Catholick visible Church and be in one materiall Church with them at once partaking of the same visible worship yea so the Church of Iudea should not be one visible Church which our Brethren must deny for they had one Priest hood on Temple one Covenant of God visibly professed by all yet could they not all meete in one materiall Temple to partake together at once of all Gods O dinanceâ— For I partake in externall worship with these of New England who are baptised according to Christs institution without the signe of the crosse though I never saw their faces Hence all may see that Oecumenick councel's are de jure and Christs lawfull Ordinances though de facto they be not through the corruption of our nature yet such a visible Church-fellowship in externall Church-communion is kept in the whole catholics Church visible as may be had considering the perversity of men and the malice of Satan It is constantly denied by our brethren that the Church of the Iewes was a congregationall Church and of that frame and institution with the Christian Church but that it was peculiar and meerely in laicall to be a nationall Church yet let me have liberty to offer a necessary distinction here 1. a nationall Church is either when a whole Nation and all the Congregations and Synogogues thereof are tied by Divine precept to some publique acts of typicall worship in one place Which the Lord hath chosen so all Israel were to sacrifice at Jerusalem onely and the Priests were to officiate in that kind there onely and they to pray toward the Temple or in the Temple and they to preseâ—t the male children there as holy to the Lord Luke 2. 23 c. this way indeed the Church of the Jewes in a peculiar manner was a Nationall Church and thus farre our brethrens arguments doe well conclude that the Jewish Church was Nationall in a peculiar manner proper to that Church onely But a Nationall Church is taken in another sense now for a people to whom the Lord hath revealed his statutes and his testimonies Whereas he hath not d alt so with every Nation Psal. 147. 19 20. which Church is also made up of many Congregations and Synagogues having one worship and government that doth morally concerne them all Thus the Iewish Church was once Nationall and that for a time God chose them of his free grace to be a people to himselfe Deut. 7. 7. and Deut. 32. 8. When the most high divided to the Nations their inheritance Iacob was the lot of his inheritance Amos 3. 2. You onely have I chosen of all the families of the earth But the Jewish Church was in this sence but Nationall for a time Now hath God Act. 11. v. 18. also granted to the Gentiles repentance unto life and called the Gentiles and made them a Nationall Church Hos. 1. 11. 1 Pet. 2. 10 11. Esay 54. 1 2 3. that is he hath revealed his testimonies to England to Scotland and He hath not done so to every Nation So if a false Teacher should goe through Israel and call himselfe the power
member Christs wisdome who careth for the whole no lesse then for the part cannot have denied a power conjunct with that congregation to save themselves from contagâ—ons to all the consociated Churches for if they be under the same danger of contagion with the one single congregation they must be armed and furnished by Christ Iesus with the same power against the same ill so the power of excommunication is given to the congregation but not to the congregation alone but to all the congregations adjacent so when I say the God of Nature hath given to the hands a power to defend the body I say true and if evill doe invade the body nature doth tell it and warne the hands to defend the body but it followeth not from this c. if the power of defending the body be given by the God of Nature to the hands therefore that same power of defence is not given to the feete also to the eye to foresee the ill to reason to the will to command that locomotive power that is in all the members to defend the body and if nature give to the Feete a power to defend the body by fleeing it is not consequence to infer O then hath nature denied that power to the hands by fighting so when Christ giveth to the congregation which in consociated Churches to us is but a part a member a fellowsister of many consociated congregations he giveth also that same power of excommunicating one common enemy to all the consociated Churches without any prejudice to the power given to that congregation whereof he is a member who is to be excommunicated because a power is commmon to many members it is not taken away from any one member When a Nationall Church doth excommunicate a man who hath killed his Father and is in an eminent manner a publick stumbling â—lock to all the congregations of a whole Nation it is presumâ—d that the single congregation whereof this parricide is a member doth also joyne with the nationall Church and put in exercise its owne power of excommunication with the nationall Church and therefore that congregation is not spoyled of its power by the nationall Church which joyneth with the nationall Church in the use of that power And this I thinke may be thus demonstrated The power of excomunication is given by Christ to a congregation not upon a positive ground because it is a visible instituted Church or as it is a congregation but this power is given to it upon this formall ground and reason because a congregation is a number of sinfull men who may be scandalized and infected with the company of a scandalous person this is so cleare that if a congregation were a company of Angels which cannot be infected no such power should be given to them even as there was no neede that Christ as a member of the Church either of Iewes or Christians should have a morall power of avoyding the company of Publicans and sinners because he might possibly convert them but they could no wayes pervert or infect him with their scandalous and wicked conversation therefore is this power given to a congregation as they are men who though frailty of nature may be leavened with the bad conversation of the scandalous who are to be excommunicated as is cleare 1 Cor. 5. 6. Your glorying is not good know yee not that a little leaven leavneth the whole lumpe therefore are we to withdraw our selves from Drunkards Fornicators Extortioners Idolaters and are not to eate and drinke with them v. 10. And from these who walke inordinately and are disobedient 1 Thess. 3. 12 13 14. And from Hereticks after they be admonished lest we be infected with their company just as nature hath given hands to a man to desend himselfe from injuries and violence and hornes to oxen to hold off violence so hath Christ given the power of excommunication to his Church as spirituall armour to ward off and defend the contagion of wicked fellowship Now this reduplication of fraile men which may be leavened agreeth to all men of many consociated congregations who are in danger to be infected with the scandalous behavior of one member of a single congregation and agreeth not to a congregation as such therefore this power of excommunication must be given to many confociated congregations for the Lord Iesus his salve must be as large as the wound and his mean must be proportioned to his end 2. The power of Church â—jection and Church separation of scandalous persons must be given to those to whom the power of Church communion and Church confirming of Christian love to a penitent excommunicate is given for contraries are in the same subject as hot and cold seeing and blindnesse but the power of Church-communio at the same Lords table and of mutuall rebuking and exhorting and receiving to grace after repentance agreeth to members of many consociated Churches as is cleare Col. 3. 16. Heb. 10. 23. 2 Cor. 2 6 7 and not to one congregation only Ergo c. the assumption is cleare for except we deny communion of Churches in all Gods Ordinances we must grant the truth of it 2. We say that of our Saviours tell the Church is not to be drawen to such a narrow circle as to a Parishionall Church only the Apostle practice is against this for when Paul and Bannabas had no small dissention with the Iewes of a particular Church they determined that Paul and Barnabas and certaine others of them should goe and tell the Apostles Elders and whole Church Nationall or Oecumemek Acts 15. 2. v. 22. and complaine of those who taught that they behoved to be circumcised Acts 15. 1. and that greater Church v. 22. 23. commanded by their ecclesiastick authority the contrary and those who may lay on burdens of commandements as this greather Church doth expresly v. 28. Acts 16. v. 4. ch 2. v. 25. they may censure and excommunicate the disobeyers And Acts 6. 1. the Greek Church complained Acts 6. of the Hebrewes to a greater and superior Church of Apostles and a multitude made up of both these v. 2. and 5. and they redresed the wrongs done to the Grecian Widdowes by appointing Deacons also though there was no complaint Acts 1. Yet was there a defect in the Church by the death of Judas and a catholike visible Church did meete and helpe the defect by chosing Mathias it is true the ordination of Matthias the Apostle was extraordinary as is cleare by Gods immediate directing of the lots yet this was ordinary and perpetuall that the election of Mathias was by the common suffâ—ages of the whole Church Acts 1. 26. and if we suppose that the Church had been ignorant of that defect any one member knowing the defect was to tell that catholick Church whom it concerned to choose a catholick Officer we thinke Antioch had power great enough intensively to determine the controversie Acts 15. but it followeth not that the catholick
may be a true visible Church there as yet and we then wronged them in separation from them Because Gods people in Babel did never wilfully reject the covenant 2. Our brethren professe they cannot receive into their Church the godly persecuted and banished out of Old England by Prelates for the truth unlesse saith he they be pleased to take hold of our Church-covenant Now not to admit into your Churches such as cannot sweare your Church covenant in all one as to acknowledge such not a true Church and to separate from them and so the want of an explicite and formall Church-covenanting to you maketh professors no Church-visible and unworthy of the seales of grace but reverend Parker saith that there is such a profession of the covenant in England sic ut secessionem facere salvâ conscientiâ nullus possit that no man with a safe conscience can separat therefrom 3. The ignorants and simple ones amongst the Papists have not rejected the Gospell obstinately in respect it was never revealed to them yet the simple ignorance of points principally fundamentall maketh them a non-Church and therefore the want of your Church-covenant must un-Church all the reformed Churches on Earth It is not much that this Author saith the primitive Church never did receive children to the communion nor any till they made a confession of their Faith What then a confession of their Faith and an evidence of their knowledge is not your Chuoch-covenant for by your Church-covenant the parties to be received in the Church must give testimony of their conversion to the satisfaction of the consciences of all your Church The old confirmation of children was not such a thing 2. The tryall of the knowledge of such as were of old not yet admitted to the Lords Supper is not an inchurching of them because if â—ny not that way tryed in the ancient Church did fall into scanâ—alcus sins they were being come to yeeres lyable to the censures of the Church which said certainly the ancients acknowledged them to be members of that visible Church but you say expresly they are without and you have not to doe to judge them 1 Cor. 5. 12. And let the author see for this the counâ—ell of Laodicea Gregorius Leo Augustine Tertullian Cyprian Ambrose the councell of Elibert Perkins Martine Bucer Chemnitius Peter Martyr who all teach that confirmation was nothing lesse then your Church-covenant 2. That it had never that meaning to make persons formll members of the visible Church 3. That that was sufficiently done in Baptisme 4. That comfimation was never the essentiall forme of a visible Church but rather the repetition of Baptisme so Whitgift a man much for confirmation confirmatio apud nos usurpatur ut pueri proprio ore proprioque consensu pactum quod in Baptismo inibant coram Ecclesiâ confirment Pareus sayth they were in the Church before Sed impositione manuum in Ecclesiam adultorum recipie bantur Beza saith the same Calvin liberi infidelium ab utero adoptati jure promissionis pertinebant ad corpus Ecclesiae Bullinger acknowledging that in Baptisme infantes were received into the Church saith Pastorum manus illis impone bantur quorum fidei committebatur Ecclesiarum cura 7. Argum. A multitude of unwarrantable wayes partly goeth before partly conveyeth this Church-covenant As. 1. It is a dreame that all are converted by the meanes of private Christians without the Ministery of sent Pastors by hearing of whom Faith commeth all are made materialls and convertes in private without Pastors judge if this be Christs order and way 2. How it is possible a Church shall be gathered amongst Infidells this way Infidells cannot convert Infidells and Pastors as Pastors cannot now be sent by our Brethrens Doctrine for Pastors are not Pastors but in relation to a particular congregation therefore Pastors as Pastors cannot be sent to Indians 3. They must be assured in conscience at least satisfied in every one anothers salvation and sound conversion were the Apostles satisfied anent the conversion of Anainas Saphira Simon Magus Alexander Hymeneus Philetus Demas and others 4. By what warrant of the word are private Christians not in office made the ordinary and onely converters of Soules to Christ conversion commeth then ordinarily and solely by unsent Preachers and private persons Ministery 5. What warrant have the sister Churches of the word to give the right hand of fellowship to a new erected Church for to give the hand of fellowship is an authoritative and pastoriall act as Gal. 2 9. When Iames Cephas and Iohn perceived the grace that was given unto me they gave unto me and Barnabas the right hands of fellowship that is saith Pareus they received us to the colledge of the Apostles so Bullinger and Beza now this is to receive them in amongst the number of Churches as Pareus and members of the catholick Church but Churches being all independent and of a like authority the Sister Churches having no power over this new erected Church what authority hath Sister Churches to acknowledge them as Sister Churches For 1. They cannot be upon two or three houres â—â—ght of them hearing none of them speak satisfied in their consciences of their Regeneration 2. By no authority can they receive them as members of the catholick Church for this receiving it a Church-act and they have no Church-power over them 3. What a meeting is this of diverse Churches for the receiving of a new Sister Church It is a Church I believe meeting together and yet it is not a congregation and it is an ordinary visible Church for at the admitting of all converts to the Church-order this meeting must be surely here our brethren acknowledge that there is a Church in the New Testament made up of many congregations which hath power to receive in whole Churches and members of Churches unto a Church-fellowship this is a visible provinciall or nationall Church which they other wayes deny 6. We see no warrant why one not yet a Pastor or Elder should take on him to speake to a congregation though they all conseâ—t that he speak exhort and pray we desire a warrant from Gods Word that such a thing should be here is preaching and Church-preaching Church-praying and praysing and yet there is no Pastor nor man called to office we see not how this will abide the measure of the Golden-neede especially in a constituted Church 7. We desire to see such a Church-action Acts 2. Where three thousand were added in one day to the Church 8. If it be enough that all be silent and testify their consent to the Church covenant by silence how is the Church-Magistrate and these of other Churches satisfied in conscience of the conversion of all for all consent to this the Magistrate may be a King and he cannot acknowledge these as a Church whose faces he never
the Church receiveth in as you say but the putting of Iudah and the strangers of Israel to this Oath was by the Kings authority who convened them 2. Chron. 15. 9. And Asah gathered all Judah and Benjamin and the strangers with them and they were compelled by the Royall sanction of a civill Law to this covenant v. 12. and they entred into covenant c. 13. That whosoever would not seek the Lord God of Israel should be put to death whether small or great man or woman 4. How were they all in conscience satisfied anent the regeneration one of another 1. Being such a number of Iudah Benjamin and strangers out of Ephraim Manasse and Simeon v. 9. Were 2. Gathered together and meet but one day 5. This covenant obliged young ones your covenant seekes no Church duties of little ones for to you they are not members of a visible Church 6. The place 2 Chron. 30. 8. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 yeild to God as servants Iunius humbly imploring his help as the same phrase is Lament 5. 6. we have served the Egyptians 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and the Assyrians to be satisfied with bread neither doth the Text say in infinitive that yee may enter into the Sanctuary as if a renewed covenant were a necessary preparation before they could enter into the Sanctuary but it is set downe as an expresse Commandement of the King 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 enter yee into his Sanctuary and there is not a word of a covenant in the Text but only of the peoples keeping the Passover and though there had been a covenant of which the Spirit of God speaking so much of Iosiah's zealous Reformation would not have been silent it is not to a purpose Iudah was a visible Church before Hezekiah wrote Letters to them to â—ome to Jerusalem to keepe the Passover as is cleare ch 29. 17. they begun to sanctifie the House the first day of the first moneth and all the congregation worshipped 36. And Hezekiah rejoyced at their zeale and so there was a visible Church and the Passover was eaten the 14. day according to the Law also in all covenants renewed by the people of the Jewes the matter was done suddenly and all convened in a day when a voluntary preparation and evidenced regeneration could not be evidenced to the satisfaction of the conscience of all the people nor can this preparation be called Jewish and temporary for it is as morall to all who sweare Churches duties one to another as the covenant it selfe which our brethren say is of perpetuall equity And all these may be answered to the covenant Neh. 10. where there is no insinuation of Church duties but in generall 29. Yo walke in Gods Law and to observe and â—â—e all the Commandements of the Law and not to marry strange â—vives The apology saith it is to no purpose that the people 2 Chro 15. was a Church before this covenant because the place is not alledged to prove that a people are made a Church by entering into covenant with God but to prove that a decayed Church is restored by a covenant now the Church at this time was corrupted with idols sodomy c. Answ. 1. Yet it proveth well that this covenant is not the formall cause of a visible Church for a visible Church hath not its formall being before it hath its formall cause 2. The convening of all the people to sweare is an act of the Church visible now nothing can have operations before it have the formall cause 3. The Author saith who knoweth that all the Tribes of Israel were yet in covenant with God from the dayes of their Fathers Answer I think that it is easily knowne that they used and exercised many Church actions also and so were a Church visible of a promiscuous multitude and it is knowâ—n that none were excluded from this covenant none selected and chosen out as Regenerates who onely were thought fit to sweare this covenant and so that it is not your Church-covenant that all were forced to and commanded under painâ— of death to attest Our brethren as first our Author secondly the Apology thirdly the Author of the Church-covenant repose much on Isai. 56. 3. where the stranger is joyned to the Lord in a personall covenant for his own salvation for so the Text saith v. 3. 4. yet are they not joyned to the visible Church while they lay hold on the covenant that is to sweare a Church-covenant now that they are not members of the visible Church is cleare fâ—r Deut. 23. 1 2 3. The Moabit Ammonite though never so holy cannot be members of the visible Church because they are discharged to enter into the congregation of the Lord. 2. They complainâ— that they are not of the visible Church The Lord hath separated me from his people 3. Adjoyning of them to the visible Church is promised as a reward of their faith and obedience v. 8. even a Name in Gods House Hence it is cleare persons under the New Testament have a promise and propbecy thâ—â— if they be inwardâ—s joyned by faith God shall give them a Name of Church-membership amongst his people by swearing a Church-Oath or if they lay hold on the covenant of the Church Ans. 1. There is no churching here of strangers and Eunuches by Church-Oath but as Calvin Musculus Gualter Iunius observe the Eunuch and stranger are comforted that under the Messiâ—hs Kingdome they shall have no cause to complaine of their ceremoniall separation from Gods people and the want of some ceremoniall priviledges of that kind because the stranger and Eunuch shall have v. 5. an everlasting roome and honor in Gods Housâ— and the Son of the stranger a place in the Catholick Church v. 6. 7. so being they believe and obey But 1. v. 6. to lay hold on my covenant is not to lay hold on the Church-covenant give us precept promise practise or one syllable in Gods Word for this interpretation 1. v. 4. to take hold on the covenant is to believe the covenant and not to sweare a vocall Oath 2. To lay hold on the covenant saith Musculus is to keep the covenant and not to depart from it to live according to it saith Iunius and to rest on God to doe what is Gods will commanded in the covenant saith Calvin and Gualter and so all who spake sense on that place and never one dreamed of a Church-covenant before 3. God saith of it my covenant there is no reason then to call it a Church-covenant here more then Ierom. 31. 32. 33. Psal. 25. 10. Isai. 55. 3. Ierem. 50. 5. Zach. 2. 11. 4 Laying hold on the covenant is not an externall professed vocall visible and Church embracing of the covenant for then the Lord promiseth to the Eunuch the name of a faithfull visible fellow member in a congregation if he shall lay hold on the covenant and sweare it
hands of the Elders Secondly the practice of the Apostles is our safe rule because at all ordination of Church-officers the Apostles and Pastors were actors and ordainers as Acts 1. 15 16. Acts 6. 2. 3. Acts. 14. 23. 1 Cor. 3. 6. Tit. 1. 5. and this Robinson granteth because the charge of all the Churches did lie on the Apostles As also before the Law the people did not ordaine the Priest hood but God ordained the first borne by succession to be teachers and priests and after he chose the Tribe of Levi without consent of the people though the Princes and heads of Tribes said hands upon them And also God of sundry other Tribes raised up Prophets and did immediately call them they had onely of the people not the calling buâ—â—â—t the least the silent approbation of the faithfull amongst the people Christ comming in the flesh chose twelve Apostles not knowing either the governing Church or the people at length when the Apostles established a Church-government and a Pastor to a certaine flocke they ordained that the châ—sing of the man should be with consen of the people and begâ—n this in Maâ—thias then the seven Deacons then Acts 14. 23. Elders were chosen by lasting up of the peoples hands But that persons were ordained Pastors and sanctified and set apart for the worke of the ministery by the authority of the sole multititude and that without all Officers we never read And the laying on of the hands we see not in the New Testament we shall be dâ—siâ—ous to be informed of this by our deare brethren and intreat them in the feare of the Lord to consider of an unwritten calling of a Ministery Thirdly if ordination of Pastors bee laid downe in the Apostolike Canons to Officers as Officers then is not this a charge that doth agree to the people especially wanting Officers But the former is true Ergo so is the latter I prove the proposition What is charged upon Officers as Officers cannot be the charge of the people because the people are not Officers I prove the assumption because 2 Tim. 2. 1 2. To commit to faithfull men the things of the Gospell which Timothy heard Paul preach is a charge laid on Timothy in the very tearms that he is vers 4. not to intangle himselfe with the affairs of this life but to be separated for preaching the Gospell from all worldly imployment as a Souldier sworne to hiâ— Captaine can attend no other calling vers 5. and as he is to put other Pastors in minde of these things and to charge them that they strite not about words and as he is to be an approved workman dividing the word aright vers 14. 15. But these are laid upon Timothy as a Pastor So 1 Tim. 5. as he sheweth the honour and reward due to Elders so doth he charge Timothy not to heare accusations of Elders but upon two or three witnesses testimony which is the part of Church-Iudges even as hee is to rebuke sinne publikely that others may feare vers 19 20. So according to that same office must imposition of hands be conserred upon Pastors advisedly vers 22. As the Apostle commandeth all beleevers to lay hands suddenly on no man Also Paul would have said I left a Church of beleevers at Crete to appoint Elders in every City if it be the Churches part even though destitute of Elders to appoint Elders over themselves but by what poâ—er Titus was to rebuke sharpely the Cretians that they may be found in the saith by that power was he left at Crete to appoint Elders in every City but this is an officiall power Titus 1. 13. due to Bishops as a part of their qualification vers 9. 4. Argu. The speciall reason against ordination of Elders by Elders onely is weake and that is a succession of Pastors must be granted ever since the Apostles times which is say ourbrethren Popish This reason is weak because a succession of Elders and Pastors such as we require is no more popish then a succession of visible beleevers and visible Churches ordaining Pastors is popish but our brethren maintaine a succession of beleevers and visible prosessors since the Apostles daye Secondly we deny the necessity of a succession perpetuall which papists hold Thirdly we maintaine onely a succession to the true and Apostolike Doctrine papists hold a visible Cathedrall succession to the chaire of Rome and titular office of Peter 4. Quest. Whether or not our brethren doe prove that the Church of believers have power to ordaine Pastors In answering our brethrens reasons I first returne to our Author secondly I obviate what our brethren say in the answer to the Questions sent from old England and thirdly shall answer Robinsons arguments Our Author saith Beleevers have power to lay hands on their Officers because to them Christ gave the keyes that is the ministeriall power of binding and loosing Matth. 16. 16 17 18. and Acts 1. The voices of the people went as farre as any humane suffrages could goe of an hundred and twenty they chose two And Acts 14. 23. The Apostles ordained Elders by the lifting up of the hands of the people Acts 6. They are directed to looke out and chuse seven men to be Deacons And the ancient Church did so from Cyprians words Vlebs vel maxime potestatem habet vel dignâ—s sacerdotes eligendi vel indignos recusandi Answ. The places Math. 16. and 18. give to some power ministeriall to bind and loose open and shue by preaching the Gospell and administring the Sacraments as to stewards the Keyes of an house are given but this power is given to Elders oâ—ely by evidence of the place and exposition of all Divines 2. If the ministeriall power and the warrantable exercise thereof be given to all then are all Ministers for the faculty and exercise doth denominate the subject and agent but that is false by Scripture 2. That all the hundred and twenty did ordainâ— Matthias an Apostle Act. 1. is not said they did nominate and present him 2. they did choose him But authoritative separation for the Office was Christs and his Apostles worke 3. That women and Mary the mother of Iesus v. 14. being there had voice and exercised authority in ordaining an Apostle cannot be orderly Yea the Apostles names are seâ— downe and these words V. 23. and they appointed two are relative to v. 17. these words For he was numbred with us the Apostles and to these V. 21. Wherefore of these men which have companied with us c. and to these v. 22. must one be ordained to be witnesse with us of his resurrestion and they appointed two that is the Apostles and the rest are set downe as witnesses v. 14. These continued that is the Apostles with the women and Mary the mother of Iesus c. The women and others were onely consenters 3. Here is no probation that onely a company of believers wanting Pastors are
ordainers of Matthias to the Apostleship and this is the question 4. The place Act. 14. 23. proveth that Elders appoint or ordaine Elder with consent or lifting up of the hands of the people which is our very doctrine 5. Act. 6 The multitude are directed to choose out seven men as being best acquainted with them Yet if Nicholas the sect master of the fleshly Nicolaitans was one of them it is likely they were not satisfied in conscience of the regeneration of Nicholas by hearing his spirituall conference and his gift of praying which is your way of trying Church-members But 2. they looke out seven men 2. They choose theâ— But v. 6. The Apostles prayed and laid their hands on them which we call ordination and not the multitude 6. Cyprian giveâ—â— election of Priests to the multitude but neither Cyprian nor any of the Fathers give ordination to them Author Sect. 7. If the people have power to elect a King they have power to appoint one is their name to put the crown on his head Ergo if beleevers elect their Officers they may by themselves or some others lay hands on them and ordaine them Ans. The case is not alike the power of electing a King is naturall for Ants and Locusts have it Prov 30 25 16 27. Therefore a civill Society may choose and ordaine a King The power of choosing Officers is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a supernaturall gift And because God giveth to people one supernaturall gift it is not consequent that he should give them another also beside ordination is another thing then coronation of a King Presbyters in the Word have alwaies performed ordination Neither will it hence follow saith the Authour as some object that because the Church of believers neither make the Office nor authority of Pastors that both are immediately from Christ and that therefore the beleevers may not lay hands upon the Officers nor doth it follow because they receive ordination from the Church that therefore they should execute their Office in the Churches name or that they should be more or lesse diligent at the Churches appointment or that the Church of beleevers have a Lordly power over them or that the Elders must receive their commission from the Church as an Ambassadour doth from the Prince who sent him or that the Church in the defect of Officers may performe all duties proper to Officers as to administer the Sacraments For 1. most of the objections doe strike as much against imposition of hands by Bishops and Presbyters 2. Though Officers receive the application of their office and powerly the Church yet not from the Church and if from the Church yet not from her by any Lordly power and dominion but onely ministerially as from instruments under Christ so that they cannot choose or ordaine whom they please but onely him whom they see the Lord hath fitted and prepared for them nor can they prescribe limits to his Office nor give him his Embassage but onely a charge to looke to the Ministery that he hath received of the Lord. Ans. 1. I know none of ours who use such an Argument that because a Pasters or Elders Office is from Christ that therefore the Church cannot ordaine him For it should prove that the Presbyterie cannot ordaine him a Pastor because his Office is from Christ and not from the Presbyterie It would prove also that because the Office of a Judge is from God that the free States of a Kingdome could not ordaine one to be their King or that the King could not depute Judges under him because the Office of a King and Judge is from God and not from men 2. If Elders have their Ordination to that heavenly Charge from the people as from the first principall and onely subject of all ministeriall power I see not how it doth not follow that Elders are the servants of the Church in that respect and that though it doth not follow that they come out in the name of the Church but in the name of Christ whose Ambassadours they are yet it proveth well that they are inferiour to the Church of beleevers For 1. though the power of the Keys given to beleevers in relation to Christ be ministeriall yet in relation to the Officers whom the Church sendeth it is more then ministeriail at lest it is very Lordlike For as much of this ministeriall power is committed to the Church of possibly twenty or forty beleevers as to the Mistresse Lady Spouse and independent Queen and highest dispencer of all ministeriall power and the Elders though Ambassadours of Christ are but meere accidents or ornaments of the Church necessary ad benè esse onely and lyable to exauthoration at the Churches pleasure yea every way the Officers in jurisdiction are inferiour to the Church of beleevers by your grounds and not over the people of the Lord. For if the Church of believers as they are such be the most supreame governing Church then the Officers as Officers have no power of government at all but onely so farre as they are beleevers now if they be not believers as it falleth out very often then have they no power of the Keyes at all and what they doe they doe it meerely as the Churches servants to whom the Keyes are not given marriage-waies or by right of redemption in Christs blood yea Officers as they are such are neither the Spouse not redeemed Church yea nor any part or members of the redeemed Church 2. The Church of believers are the â—od the Officers meanes leading to the end and ordained to gather the Saints if therefore as the end they shall authoritatively send Officers they should call and ordaine Officers as the States of a Kingdome with more then a power ministeriall Yea with a Kingly power for all authority should be both formally and eminently in them as all Regall or Aristocraticall power is in the States of a Kingdom as in the fountaine But neither doe we bring this argument to prove a simple Dominion of the Church of believers over the Officers or a power of regulating limiting and ordering the Ambassage of Officers as King and State lay bands upon their Ambassadours but we bring it to prove that this doctrine degradeth the Officers from all power of government above the believers and putteth them in a state of ministeriall authority under these above whom Jesus Christ hath placed them contrary to Scripture 3. The Authour saith believers may not administer the Sacraments in the defect of Pastors because that by appointment of Christ belongeth onely to such as by Office are called to preach the Gospell Math. 28. 29. which is indeed well said but I desire to be satisfied in these 1. These places Math. 28. 29. Mar. 16. 14 15. Luke 24. 28. being all one with Math. 16. 17. and Joh. 20. 21 22 23. The Keyes of the Kingdome are given to Church-officers because of their Office So the Text is cleare and so
6. 1. or by vertue of ordination received in another Church they might minister Now if this be we establish an iâ—dâ—lâ—ble character of Papists but if being called to another Church there be need of a new Election then there is need of a new ordination for that dependeth upon this Ergo then ordination commeth by succession but we see not what authority ordinary officers have to ordaine Pastors to a Church whereof themselves are not members Answ. 1. That ordination be wanting where Ministers are wanting is extraordinary and not against 1 Tim. 4 14. No more then that one not baptized for want of a Pastor should yet believe in Christ. 2. We see no indeleble Character because a Pastor is alwayes a called Pastor if the man commit scandals the Church may call all his character from him and turne him into a meere private man But to renew ordination when election to another congregation is renewed is to speake ignorantly of ordination and election for election maketh not the man a Minister nor giveth him a calling but appropriateth his Ministery to such a flock But they speake of Election to a charge as of marriage which is not well understood for by marriage a man is both made a Husband and a Husband to this Wife onely by election a Pastor is not made a Pastor by ordination he is made a Pastor of the Church Universall though hee be not made an Universall Pastor 3. The ordination by succession of Pastors where Pastors are you hold your selves But a popish personall succession wee disclaime as well as you doe The 5. Objection I omit to another time The 6. Objection is If there be a magistrate before the succeeding magistrate receiveth keys or word from the preceding magistrate but if there be none he receiveth them from the people So here Answ. Christs calling is not ordered according to the patterne of civill governments his kingdome is not of this world People may both ordaine and elect to a civill office without consent of the preceding Magistrate But we reade of no officers ordained by the people only in an ordinary way Ordination say they is not of such eminency as is conceived it is not mentioned in the Apostles first commission Mat. 28 19. Marke 16. 15 16. The Apostles accompted preaching and praying principall So Perkins VVillet VVhittaker Amesius Answ. So answer Arminians and so doth the Socinian Theol. Nicolaides and Socinus and so in your words saith to reforme but this is not to take away the necessity of ordination by Pastors I come now to answer what Mr. Robinson doth adde to what is said for the ordination of Pastors by Pastors and not by single Believers Mr. Robinson saith the question is whether succession of Pastors be of such absolute necessity as that no Minister can in any case be made but by a Minister and if they must be ordained by popes and prelates Answ. But we say that this is no question at all wee affirme ordination of pastors not to be of that absolute necessity but in an exigence of necessity the election of the people and some other thing may supply the want of it Nor doe wee thinke a calling from papists no calling as we shall heare before I proceed this must be discussed Q. 5. UUhether Election of the people be essentiall to the calling of a Minister â— Election we are to consider to whom it belongeth of right 2. The force and influence thereof to make a Church-officer but let these considerations first be pondered 1. Consid. Election is made either by a people gratious and able to discerne or by a people rude and ignorant the former is valid Jure facto the latter not so 2. Consid. Election is either comparative or absolute when Election is comparative though people have nothing possibly positively to say against a person yet though they reject him and choose one siâ—ter the Election is reasonable 3. Consid. Peoples Election is not of a person to the Ministery as a VViâ—is choyse of a man to be a Husband but of a Minister Election doth not make a Minister 4. Consid. Election is either to be looked to quoad jus or quoad fâ—ctum A people not yet called externally cannot elect their own Minister a Synod or others of charity as Reverend Junius saith may chuse for them though de facto and in respect of their case they cannot chuse their own Pastor 1. Conclus The people have Gods right to chuse for so the word prescribeth So Tertullian Eyprian Non blandiatur sibi plebs quasi immunis à contagione delicti esse possit cum sacerdote peccatore communicans ad injustum atque illicitum propositi Episcopatum consensum sâ—um accommodans c. and nefas sine consensu poâ—uli and this Cyprian writ an hundreth yeeres before the Nicen Councell Bellarmine loâ—ed hiâ— face to say this custome began in the time of the Nicon Councell It was not a consuetude Quâ—d ipsum inquit Cyprianus videmus de Divina autoritate descenderâ— Ignatius It is your part as the Church of God to chuse the Pastor 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 So speaketh hee to the people of Philadelphia and so speaketh Ambrose to Valentinian Omitto quia jam ipse populus judicavit Origen Requiritur ergo in ordinando sacerd te praesentia populi c. and his reason is Scripture a pastor must be of good report And Chrysostome saith all elections of pastors are null 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 without the conscience of the people And the Councell of Nice did write this to the Bishops of Alexandria as Theodoret saith and the fiâ—st generall councell of Constantinople wrote the same to Daemasus Ambrose and others as Theodoret also sheweth The councell of Africa is cited by Cyprian producing Scripture as Acts 1. 23. Acts 6. to prove that the people had their consent in elections and the councell of Chalcedon the councell of Ancyron and of Laodicea and the Popes owne Canons say this so Nicolaus the Pope in his Decrees saith the Clergy and people did chuse the pope Reliquus clerus populus Romanus ad consensum nova electionis pontificis à Cardinalibus factae accedant So Gelasius the pope writeth to Philippus and Cernutiâ—â— Bishops so Stephanus ad Romanum archiepiscopum Ravâ—â—natensem is cited in the glosse to that purpose in the Epistles of Ivo Bishop of Chartres we being called by the will of God the Cleâ—gy and people of such a City and this Pope Urâ—â—â— practised upon Ivo 2. Conclus But elections in the ancient Church were not by one single congregation but by the Bishops of diverse other Churches In the councell of Sardis Si unum tantùm in provincia contigerit remanere Episcopum suporstes Episcopus conâ—â—care debet Episcopos vicinae
Persis oriens India omnes Barbarae nationes uâ—um Christum adorant unam observant regulam veritatis What were all these but such as after were called VValdenses And in the first ages Pius 2. saith ante concilium Nicenuâ—â— parvus respectus babitus fuerat ad Romanam ecclesiars before the Nicen councill little respect was â—ad to th Church of Rome See this learnedly Demonstrated by the learned Voetius and his reason is good Ignatius Ireneus Iustin. Martyr Clâ—m Alexandr Tertullian Cyprian speak not one syllable of popery or popish articles also Lucian Porphyrius Trypheâ— Cellus Sosymus Symmachus Iulian mockers of Reiligon would have spoken against transubstantiation one body in many thousand places worshipping of dead bones the worshipping of a Tree Crosse and dumbe images and bread a Pope who could not erre and they would have challenged and examined miracles and I adde if they scoffed at the Doctrine of these called after VValdenses as the confession beareth then were the Church of Waldenses though not under that name in their time The Jewes objected against the Fathers Tatian Theophilus Athenages Iustin Tertullian Alexand. Cyâ—rian Chrysostome Isiodorus Hispalensis Iulianus Poâ—nerius They objected all they could devise against the Christian Faith but not a word of poynts of popery now controversed Ergo popery hath not beene in the World then an 188. In the Time of Victor many opposed victors Tyranny and as Plessaeus and Doctor Molineus saith were called Schismaticks therefore and excommunicated Neither can Gretserus nor Bellarmine defend this but by lies and raylings Yea from the 4. to the 7. age saith Voetius produce one Martyr professor or Doctor See Augustine de side ad Petrum Ruffinus his exposition of the Creed Gâ—nnadius of the Articles of the Church Theodoret his Epitome Divinorum decretorum Cyrillus his tract de fide and produce one holding the popish Faith Clemens Romanus and Elutheriâ—s in the Epistle to the Bishops of France maketh all Bishops pastors of the Church universall Any who readeth Greâ—serus against Plâ—ssie may see in the 4. age that Baronius and Bellarmine cannot desend that appeale was made to the Pope in the councell of Carthage yea the Popes Legate brought Apiarius to the Councell that his cause might be judged there becausâ— the Pope could not judge it and that the Councell of Chalcedon was per precepta Valentiniani convened and that Canstantinople was equall with Rome That Simplicius Gâ—lasius and Symmachus were Judges in their owne cause and that Hormisda an 518. had no command over the Oâ—ientall Churches as may be seene in Baronius So Pelagius the 1. Ioan. the 3. and Pelagius the 2. were refused the honour of universall Bishops and could not helpe the matter See Gretser and Honorius must be defended as not denying two wills and two natures in Christ. See what saith Bâ—ronius of this The councell of Constantinople would not receive the worshipping of Images The best part of the Western Churches were against it The Churches of France Germany Italy Brittaine The councell of franckford of Paris so did they all refuse the power of the Pope So Occam Gerson Scotus in most poynts were not papists Nor Cajetan Contaren Almâ—in Ioa Major Caranza Therefore said Thuanus the Doctrine of the VValdenses were now and then renewed by 〈◊〉 and Hus and when Hildebrand came in all know what wicked new poynts hee brought in as in the Tomes of the councells may bee seene and Onuphrius sayth quod major pars antea parum in usu fuerit The greatest part of his novelty not heard before or little in use His Tyranny upon the consciences of Church-men forbidding marriage and over the Lords people may be seene in Sleidan In Lampadius and his forme of excommunicating the Emperour as it is written by Beruriedenses and Sigonius also Aventinus Gerochus Reicher spergeâ—sis Orthuinus Gratius and others can tell But ere I speake of this monster head I should not have omitted humble Stephanus the 5. To whom Lodovick the Emperour descending from his Horse fell down upon the Earth thrice before his feete and at the third time saluted him thus blessed be the Lord God who commeth in the Name of the Lord and who hath shined upon us As Theganus saith that Pashalis excuseth himselfe to the Emperour Lod. That hee had leapen to the Popedome without his authority which saith this headship is not supreame as Aimoinus saith who was a murderer of Theodorus The Roman Churches Seale-keeper and of Leâ— for having first put out their Eyes hee then beheaded them say the same Aimoinus Gregory the 4. caused Lodovick the Emperours sons to conspire against the Father and was upon that plot himselfe Sergius the 2. made an act that a Bishop should be convinced of no fault but under sevety and two witnesses Siconulphus a Prince desiring to have this Popes blessing came to Rome and kissed sayth Gretserus after Anastasius his precious feete Anguilbert Archiepisc. Mediolanensis departed out of the Roman Church for the pride of Rome and Simon of Sergius sayth Sigonius It was ordinary for all sayth Anastasius to kisse the seate of Leo the 4. Platina saith hee was guilty of a conspiracy against Gratianus a godly and worthy man to expell the French-men out of the Kingdome and bring in the Grecianeâ— Gretser the Jesuite saith their owne Platina is a Lyer in this Wee all know there was an English Woman-Pope called Ioanna betwixt Leo the 4. and Benedictus the 3. Bellarmine Baronius Gretser Lipsius will have it a fable Platina a popish writter is more to be believed then they all for hee affirmeth it as truth A great schisme arose in the Church because Benedictus the 3. was chosen Pope without the Emperours consent The Emperour did hold the bridle and lead the Horse of Nicolaus the 1. Gretser cannot deny this hee defended and maintained Baldvinus who was excommunicated by the Bishops of France because he ravished Iuditha the daughter of Câ—rolus Calvus Hee pleaded that there was no reason but the decretalls of the popes should be received as the Word of God but because they were not written in the bookes of Church-Canons for by that reason some bookes of the old and New Testament are not to be received as Gods Word Grets said these Epistles were equall with Gods Word and said they had neither these Epistles nor the Scriptutes authority from the holy Spirit but from the Church That the church was foure hundred yeeres ignorant of the authority of the Scriptures that hee himselfe was Jehova eternall and that Gratianus had inserted it in his distinct 96. That hee was God Adrian the 2. approved of Basilius his killing of Michael the Emperour his Father Onuphrius who observeth 26. Schisms of antipopes thinketh Schismatick Popes no popes as Benedict 5. and
every one of the visible Church and that he inteneth to save all and every one of the visible Church This I prove for if thâ— covenant and promises of the covenant if the stiles of Christs Body his Love his Spouse his Sister and Dâ—ve if the revelation of Christ made not by flesh and blood but by Christs Father the ground of that blessed confession of Peter Mat. 16. 17. For which the keys were given to the visible Church if I say all these be proper to the visible Church as visible and due to her as to the first principall and prime subject and not to the chosen redeemed and invisible Church as such then the promises of the covenant and all these styles belong to the visible Church and God promiseth and intendeth a new heart and a new spirit to all visible Professors as such and so he intendeth redemption in Christ and salvation and Christs Righteousnesse and Forgivenesse of sins to all the visible Church But our Brethren do not I hope thinke that Gods intentions are castles in the Aire and new Ilands beyond the Moone as if his intentions could be frustrated and he could misse the white of the scope he shooteth at for certainly these to whom the covenant and promises thereof belong as to the prime and first subject these are his covenanted people now the orthodox and reformed Church holdeth that the covenant and promises are preached to the whole visible Church but for the elects sake and that howsoever externally the covenant of grace and promises be promulgated to every one and all within the lists of the visible Church yet they belong in Gods Intention and gratious purpose only to the Elect of God and his reseemed ones to that invisible Body Spouse Sister whereof Christ alone is Lord Head Husband and Brother and the first begotten amongst many Brethren Hence let me reason thus The Church whose gathering together and whose unity of Faith knowledge of the Son of God and growth of the measure of the stature of the fulnes of Christ the Lord intendeth by giving to them for that end some to be Apostles some Prophets some Pastors and Teachers Eph. 4. 11 12 13. must be the Church to which all the promises of the covenant and priviledges do belong But the Lord intendeth the gathering together the unity of Faith the knowledge of the Son of God and growth of the measure of the stature of Christ only of the invisible Elected and Redeemed Church not of the visible professing or consesing Church nor doth the Lord send Pastors and Teachers up-on a purpose and intention of gathering the visible Church and visible Israel except you flie to the Tents of Arminians I conceive these arguments cannot be answered If any say that Christ in giving Prophets Pastors and Teachers to his Church intendeth to save the true visible Church of the chosen and redeemed in so far as they are chosen and redeemed now they who answer thus come to our hand and forsake the Doctrine of their visible Church and say with us that the Ministery and the keys are given only upon a purpose on Gods part to save the invisible Church and that all these promises of the covenant the styles of Christs Spouse Sister Faire one are not proper to the visible Church nor any ground or argument to prove that the keys the power of excommunication ordaining of officers are given to the visible Church as to the prime and principall subject 4. The invisible Church and not the visible Church as it is such hath right to the Sacraments because these who have right to the covenant have right to the seales of the covenant and this is Peters argument to prove the baptizing of Infants to be lawfull Acts 2. 38 39. But only the invisible Church hath right to the covenant For God saith only of and to the invisible Church and not of the visible Church in his gratious purpose Jerem. 32. 38. And I will be their God and they shall be my people Jer. 31. 33. I will put my Law in their inward parts 34. They shall all know me all within the covenant I will forgive thâ—ir iniquity Now the visible Church as the visible Church is not within the covenant therefore the visible Church as the visible Church and being no more but the visible Church hath not right to the Seales of the covenant but in so far as they are within the covenant and in so far as God is their God and they his pardoned and sanctified people as it is Ierem. 31. 33 34. 5. It is knowen that our Brethren here joyne with Papists for Papists ignorant of the Doctrine of the visible Church labour to prove that the visible Church on Earth the Ministeriall Teaching and Governing Church cannot erre but that she converâ—ed in a visible Synod and met in Christs Name hath a promise of an infallible assistance And by what argumunts do they prove it You know here Bellarmine Pererius Tolet Stapleton Bailâ—â—s Suarez Vasquez Harding Gretsirus Costerus Turrecremata Salmoron Locinus Cajetan and an host of them say because the Church is builded on a Rock and against it the Gates of Hell shall not prevaile because Christ saith I have prayd to the Father that thy Faith faile thee not because Christ saith I will send you the holy Spirit and he shall leade you into all truth Now our Divines say that the invisible Church of Elect believers cannot fall off the Rock and cannot fall from saving Faith and cannot erre by falling into fundamentall heresies but it followeth not Ergo the visible ministeriall and Teaching Church either out of a Synod or convened in a Synod have an infallible and Apostolick Spirit to lead them so as in their determinations they cannot erre Just so our brethren take all the places for the priviledges covenant promises stiles of Sister Love Dove Spouse mysticall Body of Christ c. Which are proper only to the invisible redeemed chosen sanctified Church of God and they give all these to their only visible ministeriall and right constituted Church in the New Testament and say that this visible church gathered in a church-state because of the foresaid priviledges and stiles hath the supreame and independent power and authority of the keys above all Teachers and Pastors whatsoever and that the right visible church consisteth only of a Royall generation Temples of the Holy Ghost a people in covenant with God taught of God partakers of the Divine nature c. And that all visible churches that meet not in a materiall House in a visible and conspicious Society as on visible Mount Zion and not consisting of such a covenanted sanctified and separated people are a false church false in matter not an ordinance of Christ but an Idoll an antichristian device a Synagogue of Satan voyd of the power of the Keys 6. A church in covenant with God and the Spouse of Christ and his mysticall Body and a church which
that he may learne not to blaspheme 1 Tim 1. 12. That be may be gained Mat. 18. 15. Ergo he is not altogether cut off from the Church for delivering to Satan is medicinall not vindictive as the great Excommunication is which is called Anathema Maranatha which we cannot use but against such as have sinned the sin against the Holy Ghrist and is hardly discerned and I would think such an one as Julian the Apostate should be debarred from the communion of the word preached But these who are ordinarily excommunicated for contumacy and particular faults and not for universall Apostacy are not altogether excluded from all brotherhood of the Church 3. If the excommunicate person be excluded from all priviledges of Church-fellowship then also is he excluded from hearing the word as a sick patient under Church-medicine for it is a pastorall and so to our Brethren a Church-act that the Shepheard strengthen the diseased heale that which is sick bind up that which is broken bring againe that which is driven away seeke that which is lost Ezec. 34. 4. And feed the flock with knowledge as a Pastor according to Gods heart and a Bishop Jer. 3. 15. Act. 20. 28. 1 Pet. 5. 2. Jerem. 23. 1 2 3 4. Jer. 50. 7. Esay 56. 10. Zâ—ch 11. 9 10 11 12. It is a Pastorall act to preach with all authority reprove rebuke exhort with all long suffering and doctrine 2 Tim. 4. 2. 5. He should as a Pastor teach sound doctrine exhort convince the gainsayers and silence heretickes Tit. 1. 9. But seeing the excommunicated person is not excluded from hearing the word and the Pastor hath a Pastorall care of his soule and is to intend that his spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord 1 Cor. 5. 5. he cannot be utterly cut off from all Church-fellowship Also this Authour saith that Church-members are to be admonished and if we doe it not we hate them in our heart Levit. 19. 17. and if we warne not an Achan his sin is the sin of all Israel Now if an excommunicated brother remaine one whom we are to gaine and whose salvation we are to intend if he be an ordinary coworshipper in hearing the object of Pastorall and brotherly teaching and admonishing he cannot be wholly excluded from all Church-fellowship And this also proveth that these be members of the visible Church in some degree of Church-worship who yet are debaâ—red from the â—ealeâ— of the Covenant And it cannot be said that the excommunicated person ought not to rebuke his brother and not hate him in his heart as Levit. 19. 17. Penall excommunication looseth not from the Law of nature But our brethren make rebuking and mutuall exhorting one of another Church duties of watchfulnesse then is the excommunicated in some degree of Church-membership Nor can our brethren here reply with good reason Indians and Turks may heare the Word as well as the excommunicated person and therefore hearing of the word is no note of Church communion I answer the Turke and Indian must heare the word but at the by and not professedly but the excommunicated person by theâ—ty of his Covenant made in baptisme and that relation he hath to the Church under whose cure he is for the saving of his spirit and to that Gospel which he professeth is obliged to the Church-communion of publique hearing the Word yea and according to his oath given to be subject to the ministery of such a man whom he chose for his Pastor to give obedience to him in the Lord however in that one particular for which he is cast cut he hath failed against all the foresaid obligations 2. The Church as a visible Church exerciseth no medicinall acts upon Turks or Heathen persons and doth not repute them as Heathen but doth repute them to be Heathen Nor hath the Pastors any pastorall charge of Turkes and Heathens except they would desire to be baptized and professe the faith But the Church as the Church exerciseth medicinall acts of shunning Christian fâ—llâ—wship with the excommunicated and that with a continuated intention even when he is excommunicated that his spirit may be saved in the day of God and the Pastor hath a pastorall and so a ministeriall care and obligation of pastorall teaching admonishing and perswading him to returne to God 4. Neither doe we meane with Suarez and other Schoolmen that excommunication doth not so cut off a member as it removeth not that baptismall character or that passive power to receive the Sacraments or that the prayers of the Church are not offered of direct intention for the inwardly humbled and repenting excommunicated person while the sentence of absolution be pronounced by the Church as Soto Adrianus and Alanus thinketh because forsooth Innocentius 111. saith the excommunicated person though repenting and doing what he can to be reconciled to the Church yet without absolution from the censure he is mortuus Ecclesiasticè dead Ecclesiastically and so in Heaven also Though Navar Turrecremata Richard Anton. thinke the penitent excommunicated person is included in the generall desires of the Church in their prayers because it is not the intention of the Church to exclude a true and living member of Christs body from a communion spirituall with Christ. But our meaning is that the excommunicated person is deprived of actuall fellowship with Christ in the Seales of the Covenant as the Councell of Arausican A gremio 〈◊〉 matris Ecclesiae consortio totius Christianitatis climinaâ—us His sin is bound in Heaven yet so as the salvation of his spirit is intended by the Church see for this Augustine We understand not a baptismall character except regeneration and 〈◊〉 of sins which cannot be taken away by excommunication and therefore a morall claime to the holy things of God and that for that time and state is rather removed then any internall right to Christ. Therfore some say in this he loseth rather possessionem quam jus possession then right As a Nobleman for some offence of three dwelling houses that he hath is confined to one of the three so as he may not remove from that one yet doth he not lose right to the other two 5. Our brethrens doctrine is that none can be judged and excommunicated but those who are within the visible Church now none are within to them but such as are supposed to be regenerated and saints yea and more faithfull brethren not onely in profession saith our Authour but also in some measure of sincerity and truth Hence none are to be excommunicated and delivered to Satan but regenerated persons then it cannot be the Churches mind that the excommunicated persons are wholy cut off from the visible Church since they being the true matter of the Church as our brethren teach remains therefore a part of Christs body in covenant with God having right to the promises of the Covenant and so these to whom
not fall The sentence is either given out a jure vel ab homine by the Law or the persons Secondly it is either just or unjust Thirdly and that three wayes Exanimo good or ill zeal secondly Ex causa a just or unjust cause thirdly Ex ordine when order of Law is kept An unjust sentence is either valid or null That which is invalid is either invalid through defect of the good minde of the excommunicators and this is not essentiall to the excommuncations validitie That which is invalid this way onely ligat it bindeth in foâ—o exteriore But that which is uâ—just through want of a just cause it onely bindeth from externall communion but because Gods Ordinances are to be measured from their own nature and the generall intention of the Catholike Church and not from abuses and particular intentions of such excommunicators therefore they doe not exclude from the generall Church-desires The fourth Councell of Carthage as also Gerson saith an unjust sentence neminem gravare debet should affright no man I see not a warrant for division of excommunication into penall and not penall excommunication The ancients made some excommunication not penall as the fifth Councell of Carthage and Concilium Arelatense Turraconense Concilium Agathense As if one should culpably absent himselfe from a Synod erat privatus Episcoporum communione He was for a space excommunicated from the communion of other Bishops The Canonists infer that this excommunication was no Church-censure and M. Antonius of Spalato defendeth them in this But since Christ for scandals appointed onely publike rebuking or secondly confessing or thirdly excommunication from the Church not onely of Church guides but of professing beleevers we see not how any are to be excommunicated from the fellowship of the Clergy or Church-guides onely For Christ ordained no such excommunication and therefore wee are to repute this a popish device Zosimus saith Zancbius Celestinus Hormisda and Pelagius 2. did threaten to excommunicate Iohn of Constantinople from the communion of the Apostolike seat and of all Bishops Spalato his argument for this sort of excommunication is 2 Thessalonians 3. 15. which commandeth all Thessalonians to forbeare any fellowship with such as obeyeth not the Apostles doctrine and doth not infinuate any excommunication from the society of Church-guides onely Nay such an excommunication is not in Gods Word Cajetan calleth it excommunicatio claustralis whereby some were interdicted the company of some other Church-orders It is true that in the ancient Church the excommunicated person was debarred from comming to the Church to heare divine Service And Sylvester appointeth three degrees of excommunication first Debarring of the contumacious from entring into the Church secondly A suspending of them from communion with the Church thirdly An anathema or imprecation by cursing them So the fifth Synod under Symmachus appointed first that the contumacious should be deprived of the Communion and if he should not repent it was ordained â—â— anathemate feriatur that he should be cursed So say diverse of the Schoolmen and Casuists as Soto Paludanus Cajetanus Sylvester Navarrus that it is not lawfull to heart service or to be present at a Masse with an excommunicated person But in the fourth Councell of Carthage as Papists acknowledge no excommunicated person is debarred from hearing the Word But it is to bee observed carefully that for the same reasons Papists think the excommunicated persons should heare Sermons and the Word preached that our brethren say Because preaching is an act of jurisdiction and authority but not an act of order and therefore preaching is not an act of Church-communion but common to any who have not received orders and may be performed as the reading of the VVord by Deacons and those who have Priest-hood or power to administrate the Sacraments And Innocentius the third saith Preaching is proper to Priests who have received orders by no divine Law Indeed Leo the first made a Law of it for which cause Suarez saith That Christ in these words Iohn 21. Feed mâ—sheep and Matth. 28. Preach the Gospel gave power of jurisdiction but not of order onely It is given commonly saith he to the Clergy to preach and to Deacons because decentius it is more fiâ—ly and decently performed by them then by Laicks Though it be true that two Cardinals Toletus and Cajetanus be against Suarez in this and say that Iohn 21. Peter is made the head and universall Pastor over sheep and lambs to feed and governe them And Navarrus saith Preaching soli sacerdotio institutione divina adjuncta est is by divine institution proper to the Priesthood Yet this excluding of them from comming into the Church was from comming in to the holy place only where the Lords Supper was celebrated and they stood at the Church doore where they might heare the VVord and therefore were called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 hearers and murmurers as Basâ—lius saith and Field Excommunication doth not wholly saith he cut off men from the visible Church and his reason is good because they may and often doeretaine first The profession of pure truth secondly The character of Baptisme thirdly They professe obedience to their Pastors fourthly They will not joyne to any other communion And therefore to say with our Author we dare not to wit That though the seed of faith may remaine in the excommunicated person yet to the society of the faithfull joyned in a particular visible Church they are not knit but wholly cut off from their communion Also he is delivered unto Satan and therefore wholly cut off from the communion of the Church and so from the seals he and his seed as heathen and heathens seed are We condemne Novatians because as Cyprian saith they denied mercy to the repenting excommunicated person and because as Socrates said of them God onely can forgive sins And we condemne the Donatists who would not as Augustine saith receive into the Churches commmunion againe such as had delivered to persecuters the Bible and other holy things So we are to condemne these who are more rigorous toward such as are excommunicated then Christ is for Christ keepeth them as sick children within his visible Church and useth Satan as the Physitians servant who boyleth Herbs and dresseth Drugs for them while he by Gods permission tormenteâ—hthes spirit with the conscience of sinne As when a child is sick saith worthy Cartwright the Father calleth a Colledge of physicians to consult about medicine to be given to the child So iâ— the contumacious person under the medicine of excommunication administred by the Church-presbytery Now this wee cannot say of heathen and publicans And therefore Augustine sayth excellently excommunicated persons non esse Ethnicos sed tanquam ethnicos are not heathen but estemed as
transact within their owne Congregations but doe ex aequo belong to them all As 1. That they doe not give offence one to another that one Church doe not hold the Doctrine of Balaam to the effence and scandall of other Churches 2. That one Congregation make not Acts and Canons against the Word of God and against the Acts of another Congregation agreeable to the Word of God 3. That one Church admonish rebuke comfort provoke another to love and to good works in such and such poynts now though a Congregation make acts and constitutions for governing this or that member of the community yet they doe not nor cannot make acts that oblige the community and the Church as the Church the Church as the Church being a part is to be regulated by the whole and if there be things that ex aequo concerne all and doe not concerne one particular Church more then another one particular Congregation cannot governe in these And by the like reason particular Churches and classicall Presbyteries and Provinciall and Nationall Churches are parts of the whole Catholick visible Church 6. Because Christ hath not given the power of Ministery and Ordinances and Jurisdiction to the single Congregation as to the first subject upon the ground that our Brethren speake to wit because the single Congregation is that Spouse to which Christ is referred as an Husband and that body to which hee carrieth the relation of an head communicating life to all the members Eph. 1. 22. Col. 1. 18. nor is it that adequat number of ransomed persons of sheepe of lost ones of fellow-citizens of spirituall stones c. To the which Christ doth carry that adequat and compleat relation of a Saviour of a good Shepheard of a Seeker of lost ones of a King and Governour of the chiefe câ—â—ner-stone Therefore that visible Church for whose salvation Christ hath given the Ministeriall power must be the larger visible Church just as the God of Nature hath given to the whole race of sheep a power to seeke their own food and because of their simplicity a power to be ordered and led by the shepheard and secondarily this power is given to this or this flock feeding on Mount Caermel or elsewhere so hath the God of Grace given a power to the whole visible Catholick flock to submit themselves in the Lord to other guides and he hath given to the whole company of Shepheards as to the first subject the power of the Keys and secondarily the power is given to this or this visible Church and company of Pastors 7. When any scandalous person is delivered to Satan he is cast out of the whole Catholick Church Ergo he was before his ejection a member of the whole catholick Church for hecannot be cast out who was never within And when he is excommunicated his sins bound as in Heaven so on Earth that is not only in that Tract of ground where a handfull of a little Congregation independent as they say of 10 or 20 or an 100 doth ordinarily feed but in all the visible World where God hath a Church and all both within the little Congregation where hee is and without are to repute him as an Heathen and a Publican It is true some of our Brethren say he is excommunicated onely out of that Congregation whereof hee is a member antecedentèr because Christ hath given the power of excommunication onely 1 Cor. 5. 4. To the congregated Church when they are met together to deliver to Satan and they must do it in collegio in consessu coram tota Ecclesia before and in presence of the Church congregationall which is to give their consent and hath a certaine power of interest in the busines but he is cast out and excommunicated to all other Churches onely consequentèr by consequent and by vertue of the communion of Churches I answer the plaine contrary hee is antecedentèr and formally delivered to Satan by the power of the catholick visible Church which is put forth in exercises and in act before that Church whereof he is a neerest member Even as the left hand doth cut off a finger of the right hand which otherwayes should infect the whole body Now it is not the left hand onely that cutteth off the contagious and infectious finger but the whole man deliberate reason and the will consenteth it should be done for the preservation of the whole man the left hand is a meere instrument and the losse of the finger is the losse of the whole body and the finger is cut off the right hand not antedentèr and onely off the right hand by that power intrinsecall onely in the right hand but intrinsecall in the whole body it is true the contagion should creepe through and infect the right hand and right arme first and therefore incision is made upon the right hand So if the Eldership of a Congregation deliver to Satan it is not done by that power that is intrinseally onely in that Congregation but by the power intrinsecall in the whole universall Church who shall keepe communion with him that Eldership cuts him off as the instrument or hand of the Church catholick and the incision as it were is performed there in that meeting I will not say of the whole Congregation that is to be proved because the contagion shall come first upon these with whom the delinquent is to keepe the nearest fellowship and that Excommunication be performed in a meeting I grant and the place 1 Cor. 5. 4. saith so much and a meeting of the Church But that that is a meeting of the congregation with favour of the learned cannot be proved cogently though I thinke excommunication when it is actually performed it should be done before the Congregation but that is for the edification and nearest and most immediate practice of that Congregation for the contagion is nearest to them but the reason why the presence of the Congregation whereof the Delinquent is a member is requisit is not because this Congregation hath the sole intrinsecall power in her selfe and because shee onely doth formally and antecedentèr Excommunicate and the rest of the Churches consequenter and by vertue of a communion for the sister Churches are to debarre this excomunicate person from their communion with Christ in the Seales of the Covenant and that by an intrinsecall authoritative and Church power where as if he were not excommunicated they should have received him to a Communion with them in the Seales and that by an intrinsecall authoritative and Church power for one man cannot receive another to the Seales of the Covenant with him because no one man hath a Church authority If therefore the Church as the Church is consociated by an intrinsecall Church-power should have admitted him if he had not been excommunicated it is evident that hee was a member not onely of the Congregation out of which he is excommunicated but also of the whole consociated congregations 2 The man
originally in caetu sidelium in a Church of Believers but they cannot say that therefore the acts of Preaching administrating of the Sacraments and all acts of jurisdiction can be exercised by the Believers because they are the first subject Secondly the farther that the members or Churches either Congregationall Presbyteriall or Nationall are removed in locall distance one from another the lesse is the visible and externall communion of rebuking comforting and admonishing one another yet the power and obligation of these duties are not removed So though the Nationall Churches be locally distant one from another yet their power of exercising duties and so their power of Jurisdiction in an Oâ—cumenicke Councell is not from thence concluded to be null Yea Nationall duties upon occasion are still obligatoryâ— and communion of men of sundry Nations is cleare to mee Esai 2. 3. many Nations shall flow unto the Mountaine of the Lords House Zach. 8. 23. Ten men shall take hold out of all Languages of the Nations they even shall take hold of the skirt of him that is a Jew saying we will goe with you for wee have heard that God is with you I do not say these Nations doe meete all in one Synod but the places doe well prove the power lawfull of performing duties whereas the exercise of them in one place is not hic nunc in ordinary providence possible And so this consequence must be weake the whole catholick visible Churches in their principall guides cannot ordinarily and constantly meet hic nunc for the exercise of their power Ergo they have no such power For if the power be exercised in parts which through occurrences of Providence and the corruption of mens nature cannot be exercised in whole at once yet it s not hence evinced to be a power not given of Christ for eâ—ification for by our Brethrens grant three thousand are added to the Congregationall Church of Jerusalem Acts 2. and to this Church of three thousand and a hundred and twenty Christ hath given the ordinary power of the Keyes as to the first subject though through occurences of providence and the corruption of mans nature some of these suppose a thousand through sicknesse pest danger of persecution and sinfull separating from the assembly of Saints could not hic nunc meet in one house to exercise joyntly all the acts of that power which our Brethren say is given to them by Christ they cannot say therefore Christ never gave to this whole Church consisting of three thousand and a hundred and twenty any such power Thirdly there is a great difference betwixt the power given ad esse simplictèr to the being of a Church and the power given ad benè esse tantùm onely to the well-being 2. Great difference also there is betwixt ordinary power to be exercised constantly and ordinarily because of neerer consociation of the Churches in those things that concerne that Church in particular suppose a presbyteriall or Congregationall Church and a power to be exercised but more rarely not ordinarily because of the lesse communion visible and great locall distance of Churches as it falleth out in the whole visible Church Now from this First The ordinary power of Jurisdiction because of neerest vicinity and contiguity of members is given by Jesus Christ to one Congregation in an Isle 1. Because that Church is a Church properly so called though it be not a perfit and complete Church I say it is a Church properly so called Because 1. It is a little City and a little Kingdome of Jesus Christ having within it selfe power of the Word and Sacraments and that is a Church and hath the essence of a Church to which agree the essentiall notes of a visible Church Now preaching of the Word and Administration of the Sacraments are essentiall notes of a visible Church But I say it is not a compleate and perfit Church in the latitude of visibility for Churches are lesse or more visible according as they have lesse or more visible communion for visible communion constituteth a visible Church Now a Congregation in a remote Island hath a lesse communion visible with other visible Churches then conscciated visible Churches have 2. It is not compleate and perfit in its operations because in case of doubts of conscience touching government and practice and dogmaticall poynts it wants the joynt authority and power of Jurisdiction needfull for the well-being of a Church which it should have if it were consociated with many other Congregations so as wee say an hand with five fingers is a compleate hand but it is not a compleat organicall body but a part of the organicall body of a man so is a Congregation a Church wanting nothing of the being and essence of a Church yet is it incompleate because it is a part or member of a Presbyteriall Church and not being consociated wanteth that which belongeth to the well being of a compleat visible Church For visibility of a Church must have a latitude because it is an accident or adjunct of an organicall politick body which is totum integrale Secondly the ordinary power of ordinary Jurisdiction in a more perfit way because of ordinary and perfiter consociation is given to the Presbyteriall Church as to the proper subject in the constant and ordinary exercise of Discipline because contignity being the foundation of visible externall government the Presbyteriell Church of Ierusalem Ephesus Corinth Antioch and Rome is a perfit compleat consociaâ—d body To which the power of ordination exauthoration or deprivation of Pastors of excommunication in a constant and ordinary way doth belong For this is a principle of Church-policy Every politick body of Christ hath power of Church government within it selfe But a Presbyteriall church is such 2. This is a received maxime also Quod tangit omnes ab omnibus suo more tractari debet VVhat concerneth all should be agitated by all according to their degrees of concernment but excom nunication of a person in a consociated Church concerneth all the consociated Churches in a Presbytery all are scandalized all may be and are in danger to be leavened with the infectious lumpe And here it is to be observed that as preaching of the Word is an essentiall note of the visible Church and agreeing to the visible Church as necessary ad esse simpliciter to the very being of a visible Church For if the word as Preached and some way promulgated be not in such a society we cannot call it a visible Church so Discipline is a note of the visible Church and necessary ad bene esse and it cannot be a Ministeriall Church in a good condition exercising acts of edification if the wall of Discipline be broken downe and meeting in one place for Word and Sacraments is but accidentall for a Ministeriall Church If the Word be preached and the Sacraments administrated in sundry Congregations though not in a Presbyteriall Church all convened in all its members
in one place yet hath the Presbyteriall Church the essentiall note of a visible Church Because there is a difference betwixt carrying the colours in an Army tali modo as all the Army at once may see the colours and the carrying of the colours Yet the colours are a note visible of such an Army so there is a difference betwixt preaching the Word simpliciter and preaching the Word tali modo in such a way in one materiall house onely And therefore it is necessary that government which concerneth many Churches consociated be in its exercise hic nunc larger then preaching of the Word in its exercise hic nunc which cannot be done but to a multitude which conveneth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to the same materiall place And we see an act of government Acts 15. by confession of our Brethren belonging to divers consociated Churches and performed by them and yet these cannot ordinarily meete to one and the same place in all their members for hearing of the Word Thirdly an extraordinary and remote power of Jurisdiction which is but rarely and in extraordinary cases to be put forth in acts is given to the Catholick visible Presbytery of the whole Catholick visible Church Because the Oommunion externall and visible is lesse where the locall distance of visible Churches is more and therefore because oecumenicall councells being necessary for the Catholick visible Church neque ad esse simpliciter neque ad bâ—â—è esse sed ad melius seu optimum esse neither in respect of the Churches being nor in respect of the Churches well-being â—uâ— onely in respect of her best and most spirituall well-being these councells are seldome to be had in an ordinary providence For the Cresse of Iesus Christ is rather a marke of the catholick visible Church then Bellarmine his prospeâ—ous condition that he will have to be one of his fifteene notes of the Church and since the Church cannot have her wishes the want of generall councells is the Catholick Churches Crosse not her sin we doe not say that God is deficient in meanes necessary to his Church or to some of his owne Children because the Woman hath wings given her of God to stie to the Wildernesse to hide her selfe from the Dragon Rev. 12. 14. and so cannot enjoy Gods ordinary presence in his Sanctuary Nor doe wee say that God hath denied a power to his Church in the Wildernesse to enjoy them in a visible Sanctuary I meane a morall power and jus a right and interest in that presence because he interrupteth the Churches physicall power for a while in the injoying of these comforts of a visible Church-Communion in the Sanctuary Fourthly hence it doth not follow that because the catholick representative visible Church is the first subject of the power of the Keys that the power of Excommunication is derived from the visible Church to a Presbyteriall Church or that a Presbyteriall Church cannot excommunicate without consulting with or fetching authority from the Catholick visible Church Because the Catholick visible Church is a great integrall body of Iesus Christ and he is the head of this body because though the power of seeing by order of nature be first in the whole man and then in the Eye yet the power of seeing in the Eye is not derived from the rest of the body from Hands Leggs Shoulders Armes to the Eye The light is first in the whole Body of the Sun as the first and prime subject of light yet supposing now the received opinion of Astronomers that the body of the Sun doth exceede the quantity of the Earth an hundred sixty and seven times it doth not follow that this or that part of the Sun hath no light intrinsecall in it but that which is derived from the whole body of the Sun for then this or this part of the Sun should have borrowed light derived to it from another so the Soule doth at one and the same instant animate and quicken the whole organized Body as its first matter and subject but it doth not follow that the Hand hath life derived to it from the whole body so because the power of the Keyes is also intrinsecall in the Presbytery as in an Oâ—cumenicall councell it doth not follow that the power that is intrinsecall in the presbytery is by derivation or borrowed and at the second hand from the Catholick presbytery of the whole World farre lesse that the Presbytery cannot Excommunicate except it consult with the catholick visible Church The power of the Keys by order of nature is onely in the catholick representative Church as in the first subject but in order of time this power is communicated from the head Christ to all the integrall parts of this great Body according to the capacity of every part so as it is intrinsecall in the particular Eldership of a single Congregation in these poynts of Discipline that concerne a Congregation as a Congregation and it is intrinsecall in the classicall Presbytery as it is such and it is intrinsecall in the provinciall and Nationall Synod in poynts belonging to them as such 3. They object if a single Congregation have not power of Excommunication and of entire and compleat government within it selfe because it is but a part of a Presbyteriall Church and so an incompleat Church by that same reason a Presbyteriall Church shall be a compleate Church and not have entire and compleat power of Government within it selfe because a presbyteriall Church is a part of a provinciall Church and a provinciall Church shall be in the same case because it is a part of a Nationall Church and a Nationall Church in that same case because it is a part of the catholick visible Church and there shall bee no perfit visible Church on Earth which hath full and entire power of jurisdiction save onely the caholicke visible Church which by no possibility can convene before her Oecunenick and highest catholick Court a Nationall Church or the Church of great Brittaine and upon the testimony of three witnesses deliver her to Satan and upon supposall of Repentance receive her againe to the catholick power of that same Court into fellowship of Church-union with the great catholick body For so because this catholick Church for many centuries yea possibly for a million of yeeres cannot convene to exercise her authority in a Court and out of her Court shee hath none the repenting Nationall Church shall remaine in Satans bands for ever by a physicall and invincible necessity Answ. A single Congregation is a Church but so as it is a part also and a member of a Presbyteriall Church and because of neernesse of communion with consociated Churches under one Presbytery it can neither have compleat power of casting out one of its owne members because that member hath so strict a visible Union of membership also with consociated Churches nor can it exercise that intrinsecall power that it hath as a remote part of Christs
Catholick body but the case for ordinary and constant power of ordinary and constant Jurisdiction is not so in a Presbyteriall in a provinciall in a Nationall in the Catholick visible Body And therefore it followeth not that they are not compleat Bodies and entire Churches for all ordinarie and constant Jurisdiction and the reason is cleare because Synods or Synodicall Churches above a Presbytery to me are not ordinary not constant Courts but extraordinary and prore nata occasionall having their rise from some occurrence of providence as is most cleare by Scripture The Church of Ephesus being a Presbyteriall Church did constantly exercise Discipline and try false Prophets and those which called themselves Iewes but were lievs Revel 2. 2. Whereas that famous Councell at Ierusalem was not an ordinary and constant Court but extraordinary that is occasionall for so I take the Word for expressions cause and had its rise Acts 15. 1. from a meere occasion because some came from Iudea and taught the Brethren except yee be circumcised after the manner of Moses you cannot be saved And the subject of this Court was not the constant and ordinary affaires of Discipline that belonged to the presbytery of Ierusalem and Antioch No v. 6. the subject was only an incident controversy raised by false teachers subverters of soules v. 24. and therefore it is said v. 6. The Apostles and Elders 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to consider of this matter therefore the presbyteriall Church hath both Word and Sacraments dispensed in it distributively through all the Churches and for the power of Jurisdiction ordinary intensivè and quoad essentiam Ecclesiae ministerialis according to the entire essence of a ministeriall Church it is as perfit and compleat in one single Congregation as in a provinciall as in a Nationall yea as in the Catholick visible Body whereof Christ is the Head onely a provinciall nationall and the Catholick Church visible extensivè according to the power of extension is a larger and a superior Church and though the presbyteriall Church be a part of the Catholick it is so a part as it is a perfit whole Church as a man is a part of this great all the World yet so as he is a perfit reasonable Creature and so a whole man and a part of the World but a Congregation is so a part of the Presbytery that it hath not a whole entire compleat intensive power over its owne members to excommunicate them because its members are for contiguity and necessity of neere visible communion parts that cannot avoyd dayly edifying or scandalizing of consociated Churches and therefore the consociated churches trust have a power over the members of a Congregation But our Brethren will say Contiguity of locall cohabitation doth not in be a visible Church but only the voluntary agreement of Professors who doe ex pacto and by covenant tacit or expresse make up a conseciation for a Papist and a Protestant may cohabit in one house Answ. That is true but contiguity is such a necessary foundation of externall visible Church fellowship in one presbytery as without that contiguity I see not how jure Divino there can be either a Congregationall Church or any other Church for sure I am Christ hath not ordained me to be a member of a Congregation in America or of a presbyteriall Church in Geneva And that such persons and no more be members of a Congregation is not juris Divini yet without a contiguity lesse or more they cannot be members of a Congregation nor is this single Congregation a limbe of this presbyteriall Church jure Divinâ— onely this in abstracto is jus Divinum that there be a Congregation of a convenient number and a presbytery of such as may meete conveniently in their guides But to returne the Brethren do deny that God gave a power of Jurisdiction to the Catholick visible Court of the Oâ—cumenick Church And why because a generall councell cannot excommunicate nor relax from Excommunication a nationall Church But I answer 1. It is by accident and not through want of innate and intrinsecall power that the Court of a Catholick councell cannot in an ordinary and constant way exercise the power that Christ hath given to her as the presbyteriall church doth and the exigence of providence maketh it so because it falleth out by the blessing of God that Zion must say as it is Esai 49. 20. The place is too streight for me give place to me that I may dwell And because she inlargeth the place of her Tent and stretcheth forth the curtains of her habitation and lengthneth her cords and breaketh forth on the right hand and on the left and her seed inheriteth the Gentiles Esai 54. 2 3. and because from the rising of the Sun to the going dâ—â—ne thereof his Name is great amongst the Gentiles and in every place incense is offered to him Mal. 1. 11. yet have generall councells condemned Hereticks as Nestorians Macedonians Eutyches and others and I see nothing to prove that a generall councell hath no power to excommunicate a Nationall Church If the Lord should be pleased to give the Christian Churches a generall councell this day they might lawfully in a juridicall way declare the faction of Romish pretended catholicks to be mysticall Babylon a cage of uncleane Birds which is excommunication in the essence and substance of the Act nor is there need of a legall and juridicall citation of nationall Churches or a citation of witnesses to prove Romish Heresies and perfidious and detestable obstinacy for their writings and deeds are so notorious that the senses of men may as infallibly prove the fact as we know there is such a City in the world as Rome and Câ—nâ—tantinople as for the instance that a catholick councell cannot ordinarily be had to relax a repenting nationall Church I answer the same inconvenience will follow if we suppose an ordinary case the Church congregationall as our Brethren suppose of Ierusalem Acts. 2. consisting of three thousand and a hundred and twenty having excommunicated Ananias Saphira and others who yet by the grace of God should truely repent in the meane time the Sword of the Roman Emperor intervening scattereth this Church that they cannot convene in a spirituall Court to relax them and out of Court they have no authority of Jurisdiction here were an invincible necessity of their remaining in Satansbonds in foro externo ecclesiae But what then This is to limit God as Papists do in binding and tying salvation of Infants to the outward signe of externall baptisme as if God in soro caeli in his own Court could not absolve penitent sinners because the Church will not which is more ordinary through mens corruption or cannot absolve through the necessity of exigence of divine providence and the more catholick that crosses be as warâ— the universall and catholick cruelty and treachery of the church of Mâ—lignants against the true catholick Church of Christ the more easily are
classicall under one externall and visible government even as the Elders of an independent Church are not Elders of their single Congregation being separated from their Court and extra collâ—gium Presbyteriale in the notion of the relation of a Church-Jurisdiction for they are Elders by reason of Church Jurisdiction only in their Court 3. Classicall Elders in the Court have power of Jurisdiction in relation to this presbyteriall or classiciall Church but they have not properly an ordinary power of order to preach to them all and every one and to administrate the Sacraments to them The Elders of a particular Congregation have power of order and power of Jurisdiction without the Court but they have not power of Church jurisdiction but in the Court for there is a difference betwixt a power of jurisdiction which Elders have as Watchmen and a power of Church-Jurisdiction which Elders have not but in foro Ecclesiae in the Court of Church-Jurisdiction So the great Sanedrim beare rule over all the Tribes of Israel But this Judge of the Tribe of Dan a member of the Sanedrim is not a Judge of the Tribe of Benjamin or a Judge to a thousand of that Tribe as the Captaine of that thousand 2. I distinguish the proposition if the Elders of the Presbytery be Elders of the Presbyteriall Church then are they Elders in relation to the many Congregations in that Church if they bee Elders in these common affaires which concerne government in generall then are they Elders in feeding by the word of knowledge and in governing in all the particulars which concerne the government of each Congregation That I deny for their oversight in governing in things belonging to all the consociated Churches doth not make them Elders of all those particular Congregations 3. Deacons in some cases are also Deacons in relation to all the particular Churches in some reserved cases if all the Deacons of Macedonia Corinth and other Churches should meete in one and take course for supplying the distressed Saines at Jerusalem what inconvenient were in this Ob. 2. If Presbyteriall Elders be Elders to mary Congregations in a generall Relation what sort of Elders are they are they Elders ruling or are they Elders teaching it is unpossible that they can be Elders teaching to so many Congregations for teaching is a personall and incommunicable act that mâ—n cannot commit to any others they must performe it in their owne persons aâ—â— cannot commit it to others if they be Ruling Elders onely and not teaching Elders this is against the Scripture for the exten of teaching and the extent of ruling are commexsurable in the Word and of alike extersion Acts 20. 28. These same whoe are to feede the flâ—ck at Ephâ—sue are to governe and rulâ— and they are to feede the whole flâ—ckâ— not a part of it so the Text sayth Take heede to the whole flâ—cke then they are not to governe all in a presbytery and to feede with teaching the Word one particular Congregation onely so 1 Peâ— 5. 2. feed the flock of God which is amongst you not with knowledge onely but be addeth their duty of governing Taking the oversight thereof not by constraint but willingly c. So Hâ—b 13. 7. Remember them that have the rule over you who have spoken unto you the Word of God Ergo these same who have the rule over the flock and governe du also speake the Word of the Lord and teach v. 17. obey them that have the rule over you and submit to them for they watch for your soules as these who must give accompt Ergo these same who governe doe also as Pastors watch for the flock as those that are to give an accompt but the governing classicall Presbytery doe rule but it is unpossible that they can give an accompt for all the Congregations of a classicall Presbytery for they cannot watch over them all except every one of these must have many Eyes Nor can they be both ruling and teaching Officers for then they should have two Offices if one man be both a Physitian and a Chyrurgion to two severall companies he must have two Offices in relation to two charges which he hath to those two companies if he practise physick to the one company and chyrurgery to the other this is against the order that Paul Col. 2. rejoyced to behold Therefore the classicall Elders cannot be Rulers having the oversight of the whole câ—â—ssicall Church and yet every one of them must be a 〈◊〉 and teaching pastor only to the single Congregation over which 〈◊〉 Answ. As grand-Fathers and fathers doe beare a relation to these same Children divers wayes both are fathers and may tutor and provide for the children but both are not begetting â—athers so also doe the classicall Elders and the Elders of particular Congregations beare divers relations to the flocks the question then is what sort of Elders are the Presbyteriall Elders to the Presbyteriall Church I distinguish Church I distinguish Elders They are Elders classicall only to the classicall Church collectively taken and they have an authoritative care over this Church But they are proper Elders to the classicall Church taken distributively that is this man is an Elder to this part or member of the Presbytery to wit to this Congregation And another man to this Congregation as the Elders in the Court and Aslembly at Jerusalem Acts 15. they are Elders in relation to the whole Churches of Antioch Syria and Silicia and the Gentiles collectively taken in those dogmaticall poynts with the confession of our Brethren and these same Elders were in speciall manner Elders to the Congregations of Antioch Syria and Silicia and other Churches taken distributively so also the Elders of many consociated and Neighbouring Churches are speciall watchmen over their own flâ—cks by teaching and ruling according to our Brethrens grounds and also they have a Brotherly care over all the consociated Church to Councell â—dmonrth Comfort seeing every man is his Brothers keeper by a Divine Law and the care is like as is it were authoritative onely by our Brethrens way it wanteth the relation of authority vet doth it not follow that Elders this way have two Offices but onely that they performe two acts of one and the same Office also a Pastor of an independent flocke who writcth â— Bâ—â—ke for the instruction of Sister-Churches as hee preacheâ—â— those same Sermons that are in the printed Bâ—oke to his owne people and flocke hath two Relations one to his owne flocke whom hee preacheth unto as a Pastor another as an instructer of other Churches by his writings yet for that hee hath not two Offices as one who is a ' Physitian and a Chyrurgion to two sundry companies if any say hee writteth not Bookes as a Pastor by vertue of his Office but as a gifted man by power of fraternity let mee deny the truth of the distinction for this is to begge what is in question For to teach the Churches by writing should
proceede from the authoritative power of a Pastor as a Pastor and by that same officiall power that hee teacheth his owne flocke vivâ voce by vocall preaching as a Doctor hee teacheth other Churches by writing But it was asked whether are the classicall Elders ruling Elders or Teaching Elders to the classicall Church Answ. They are both and they are neither in divers considerations they bee teaching Elders in all the Congregations distributively taken they are Rulers in all collectively taken they are Teachers 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in some reserved acts resolving synodically some cases of conscience and dogmaticall poynts upon occasion but they be not the constant Teachers to watch for the Soules of all 3. The places Acts 20. 28. 1 Pet. 5. 2. Heb. 137. 17. prove that those that rule in common many Churches should be Teachers of these same Churches distributively and all the Eldership at Ephesus should rule the whole Churches amongst them And there should no Pastor be a sole Ruler and not a Teacher as the Prelate is nor is there a Pastor who is a sole Teacher and it is very true hee who is a ruling Pastor is also a Teaching Pastor but not to that same flock alwayes Neither is this true that because power of jurisdiction is founded upon power of order therefore teaching should be every way commensurable with ruling for 1. The Eldership convened in Court and onely formalitèr in foro Ecclesiae in this Court hath Church-power of Jurisdiction in a Congregation and in this Court they governe but the Eldership in this Court neither doth preach nor can preach 2. The power of ruling is in the ruling Elder but not the power of teaching and the power of teaching publickly is in the unâ—fficed Prophet as our Brethren teach and yet in him there is no power of ruling Ob. 3. It is strange that to excommunicate agreeth to the ruleing Elder in a classicall Presbytery which he may doe in many Congregations and so he may performe his principall acts over thirty or forty Congregations and yet the Pastor may not performe his principall act of teaching in many Congregations by vertue of his office but onely in one congregation by this frame of a classicall Church Answ. The ruling Elder doth onely in some common cases with the presbytery performe his speciall acts but all the ordinary acts of the spirituall Jurisdiction the ruling Elder performeth in that Congregation whereof he is an Elder nor is this an inconvenient but preaching which is given to unofficed men by our Brethren should not be called the principall part of a Pastors charge Ob. 4. It is unreasonable that a Prelate or a Pope should rule me and not teach me and we condemned this in Prelates that they would onely rule and not teach But the classicall presbytery doth fall in that same fault for they governe the whole classicall Church but they doe not teach the whole classicall Church It is dreadfull for a man to watch for the soules of one single Congregation as being under necessity to give an accempt Ergo far more dreadfull it is to watch also for a whole tract of thirty or forty Churches the Apostle will have Him who watcheth for one flock to entangle himselfe with no other imployments How then shall hee take the burden of thirty or forty Flockes Answ. It is unreasonable that Prelate and Pope should rule me and so many hundred Churches 1. as the sole and proper Pastors and all under them be but suffragans and deputed Pastors doing by borrowed authority from Pope and Prelate 2. That their sole Office should be to command feeders as Pastors of pastors and not to feede with knowledge the flocke that is most true but the classicall presbyters are neither principall nor proper pastors of the whole classicall Churches collectively nor are two or three pastors under them as deputies 3. Nor is their Office to rule onely not to feede with knowledge also 2. The pastors of independent flocks are obliged by brotherly association to be Vine-Keepers Governours fellow-Counsellers to forty sister Churches for they acknowledge that Churches cannot subsist in good government without the helpe of Synods Now if wee distinguish onerousnâ—sse care and labour of Bâ—therly watching over one another and onerâ—uâ—nâ—sse care and labour by way of Jurisdiction the former is as great in foro Dei in the Court of Conscience as the latter and so ouâ— Brethren make Governing without Teaching as well as wee doe They in a Brotherly way wee in a way of Jurisdiction I prove that their way is as dreadfull and laboâ—ous in the â—oynt of conscience and in a way of giving accompt to God as our way For 1. A divine command that wee be our Brethrens keepers and we watch over one another commandeth onerousnesse and care in Brotherly governing to them as to us 2. Wee make the ground and foundation of governing a Classicall Church that band of Love and Union of the members of one Body of Christ and this band of Lovely and Brotherly consociation of many Congregations commandeth and tiâ—th us to doe no more in Governing and iâ— Helping and promoting the edification of sister Churches then if wee had no further warrant to promâ—te edification then the alone relation of Brotherly consociation for the onely and very reason why the Wisdome of our Law-giver Christ hath put a speciall Commandement on consociated Churches to make one Presbytery and to governe one Classicall Church in these common poynts that concerne the whole Classicall Church in the poynt of sound Doctrine and lawfull and Ministeriall Jurisdiction is the necessity that Members of one Body have of Brothâ—rly Helpe Light Direction Comfort one of another Which poynt I desire carefully to bee observed for wee see no ground to make the powers of a Congregation of a presbytery of a Province of a Nationall Church powers formally and essentially different they differ onely in more or lesse extension as the adjunct or genuine property of one and the same great visible Body which is one integrall part That same 1. Covenant of God 2. That same Lord 3. That same Spirit 4. That same Faith and Baptisme 5. That same power of the Keyes in Nature and Essence belongeth to all onely the power must bee more or lesse as the Body is more or lesse as there is more of that vis locâ—motiva the power of moving in the Hand then iâ— one Finger and in the whole Arme then in the Hand onely and in the whole body then in the Hand And I cleare it in this a man is a gifted Preacher in a Congregation in an Island there is none other gifted of GOD to Preach the Gospell but hee onely I would thinke as a Brother hee were under as great an Obligation of care and laborious onerousnesse of conscience to bestow his Talent for the gaining of Soules by preaching though hee were not called to bee their Pastor and that by vertue of
neerely because as I sayd before the more universall the Church visible is the externall visible Communion is lâ—sse even as when the number of a Family is cut off by the Sword of the Magistrate the matter first and more intimately and more neerely concerneth the Family whereof hee is a Member yet it doth also concerne the Common-Wealth of which also hee is a Member A Finger of the right Hand is infected with a contagious Gangren it is to bee cut off yet the cutting-off concerneth more neerely the right Hand then it doth the left Hand and the whole Body For the contagion should first over-spread the right Hand and Arme and Shoulder before it infect the left Hand and the whole Body though it doe not a little concerne the whole Body also So though actuall Excommunication concerne all the Churches of the Presbyterie yet it doth more neerely concerne the Congregation whereof hee is a Member 2. The pronouncing of the sentence being edificative it is a fit meane to worke upon others but calling and trying of witnesses and Juridicall decerning of a Man to bee Excommunicated requiring secrecies yea and some scandals and circumstances of Adultery Incest Pestiality requiring a modest covering of them from Virgins young Men Children and the multitude wee have no warrant of GOD that they should bee tryed before the whole multitude nor are acts of Jurisdiction for their excellency to bee brought forth before the people but for their neerenesse of concernment and use of edification Object 12. The people are to consent yea they must have a power and some thing more than a consent in Excommunication Ergo they are all to bee present The antecedent is proved 1. Because they were not puffed up they did not keepe the Feast they did not dostaine from eating with the incestuous person onely by consent 2. Others not of that Church did excommunicate by consent 3. It is said v. 12 doe yee not judge them that are within Answ. If you will have them to excommunicate the same way that they doe other duties you may say they excommunicate the same way that Pastors and Elders doe and if they Judge vers 12. as the Elders doe either all the people are Judges and where are then all the governed if all bee governours or then hee speaketh in this Chapter to the Churches-Iudges onely 2. There bee degrees of consent these of other Churches have a tacite and remote consent the people of the Congregation are to heare and know the cause and deale in private with the offender and to mourne and pray for him Object 13. The highest and double honour is due to him who laboureth in the word 1 Tim. 5. 17. but if the Presbyteriall Church be the highest Church it shall not have the double honour for it is onely the governing Church Answ. Highest honour is due in suo genere to both And this is as if you should compare obedience and honour that I owe to my Father with that which I owe to my grand-Father 2. Paul 1 Tim. 5. 17. compareth Elders of diverse sorts together as the Ruling and Teaching Elder here you compare Pastors to bee honoured in respect of one act with themselves to bee honoured in respect of another act and this might prove I am to give more honour to my Pastor for preaching in the Pulpit then for ruling in the Church-Senate Object 14. The Congregation is the highest Church for it hath all the Ordinances Word Sacraments Jurisdiction Ergo there is not any Presbyteriall Church higher which hath only disciplinary power Answ. There is a double highnesse one of Christian Dignity 2. Another of Church-prehemenency or of Ecclesiasticall authority indeed the Congregation the former way is highest the company of Believers is the Spouse and ransomed Bride of Christ. But the Eldership hath the Ecclesiasticall eminency as the Kings heire and Sonne is above his Master and Teacher one way yet the Teacher as the Teacher by the fift Commandement is above the Kings Sonne as the Teacher is above him who is taught And so is the Case here Object 15. The Arguments for a Classicall or Presbyteriall Church do much side with Prelacy for you make many Lords ruling and not teaching Answ. Let all judge whether the independent power of three Elders accountable to none in a Church-way but to Iesus Christ onely as you make your little Kingdomes on Earth be neerer to the Popes Monarchy and especially when there is but one Pastor in the Congregation then the subordinate Government of fourescore or an hundred Eldersâ— sure I am three Neighbours are neerer to one Monarch then three hundred 2. One Monarchicall Society is as tyrannicall Antichristianism as one Monarchicall Pastor 3. If wee made many ruling and dominering Lords you should say something but wee make many servants endued onely with Ministeriall power onely to teach and rule and to bee accomptable to the Church your Eldership in this agreeth with the Pope that though they deliver many Soules to Satan yet no Man on Earth can in a Church-way say What doe you ACT. XV. A Patterne of a juridicall Synod THat the Apostles in that famous Synod Act. 15. did not goe on by the assistance of an immediately inspired spirit and by Apostolick authority but onely as Elders and the Doctors and Teachers assisted with an ordinary spirit to me is evident from the course of the context 1. Because Act. 15. when a controversie arise in the Church â—â— Antiochia Epiphanius saith as also Hieronymus by Câ—â—mbus and others touching the keeping of Moses his Law especially the Ceremonies except they would bee losers in the buâ—nesse of their salvation Paul could not goe as sent by Amiâ—h to submit that Doctrine which hee received not from flesh and blood but by the revelation of Jesus Christ Gal. 1. 12. to the determination of a Synod of Apostles and Elders for who would think that the immediatly inspiring spirit iâ— Pâ—ul would submit himselfe and his Doctrine to the immediately inspiring spirit in Paul Peter Apostles and Elders therefore Paul and Birnabas come as sent to Jerusalem not â—â— Apostles or as immediately inspired but as ordinary teachâ—â— Therefore saith Diodatus Not because these two A◠〈…〉 were every wayequall to the rest in the light and conduct 〈◊〉 Spirit and in Apostolicall authority Gal. 2. 6. 8. had any 〈◊〉 instruction or of confirmation but only to give the weake 〈◊〉 who had more confidence in Peter and James and in the Church at Jerusalem and to stop false doctors mouths and to estaâ—â—â—â— by common votes a generall order in the Church Hence when a controversie ariseth in the Apostolicke Church and the Controversie is betwixt an Apostle as Paul was and others and both sides alledge Scripture as here both did out of all controversie there is no reason that the Apostle Paul who was now a party should judge it and when a single Congregation in the like case is on two
Elders as well as the Apostles convened to consider about this matter and Act. 21. 18. 25. All the Elders of Jerusalem with James take on them these acts as well as the Apostles and they are the decrees of the Elders no lesse then of the Apostles Act. 16. â— 4. a derivation of the immediate impiâ—ing Spirit to â—â—â— Elders and by them as fellow-members of the Synod to the Apostles and a derivation of this immediat Apostolick spirit by the Apostles to the Elders to make them also infallible is unknowne to Scripture for one Prophet did not immediatly inspire another and one Apostle did not immediatly inspire another wee read not in the Word of any such thing and therefore it is said Act. 15. 7. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And when there had beene much disputing Peter sâ—â—d up All who interpret this place say even Papists not exâ—pted as Salmero com in 〈◊〉 Salmeron Lâ—â—mus â— Lorinus Cornelius a lapt Cornelius a lapide and others on the place that when there is not consultation and disputing on both sides to find out the truth but an absolute authoritie used by commanding the proceeding of the counceil is rash saith Salmeron now the Prophets were immediatly inspired without any consultation with men in delivering Gods will and they saw the visions of God as it is said And the Word of the Lord came to Jeremiah to Ezechiel to Hosea c. and bee said c. yea when a propheticall spirit came upon Baâ—â—m Num. 24. bee seeing the visions of God hee prophecied directly contrary to his owne carnall mind and to his consultation with Balâ—â—k now it is cleare that the Apostles what they spake by the breathings and inspirations of that immediatly inspiring Spirit is no lesse cannonick Scripture then the prophecies of the immediatly inspired Prophets who saw the visions of God and therefore 2 Pet. 1. 16 17 18 the voyce that the Apostles heard from heaven This is my beloved Sonnâ— in whom I am well pleased is made equall with the word of prophâ—cie and propheticall Scripture which the holy men of God spale â— they were moved by the holy Ghost v. 19 20 21. and 2 Pet. 3. 16. Pauls Epistles are put in the classe with other Scriptures v. 15 16. now all Scripture 2 Tim. 3. 16. is given by divine inspiration and 2 Peter 3. 2. puteth the words of the Prophets and Apostles in the same place of divine authority 2 Pet. 3. 2. That yee bee mindfull of the words which were spoken before by the holy Prophets and of the commandements of us the Apostles of the Lord and Saviour whence to mee this synodicall consultation is not Apostolicall but such as is obligatory of the Churches to the end of the world and a patterne of a generall Synod 6. This assembly is led by the holy Spirit as is cleare v. 25. 28. but this is not the holy Spirit immediatly inspiring the Apostles as Apostles but that ordinary Synodicall spirit to borrow that expression that is promised to all the faithfull pastors and rulers of the Church to the end of the world because the immediatly inspiring spirit comming on Prophets and Apostles in an immediate inspiration did necessitate the Prophets and Apostles to acquiesce and prophesie and to doe and speake whatsoever this spirit inspired them to doe and to speake but this spirit spoken of v. 28. doth not so but leaveth the assembly to a greater libertie because the assembly doth not acquiesce to that which Peter saith from Gods Word v. 7 8 9 10 11. nor doth the Assembly acquiesce to what Barnabas and Paul saith v. 12. but onely to that which James saith v. 13 14 15 16 17 18. but especially to his conclusion which hee draweth from the Law of nature not to give scandall and from the Scriptures cited by himselfe and by Peter v. 19 20. Wherefore my sentence is saith James c. and this clearely is the sentence of James as a member of the Synod v. 19. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which is an expression clearly insinuating that the judgement of James though it was not contrary to that which Peter Paul and Barnabas had spoken yet that is was somewhat diverse from them and more particular and the very mind of the holy Ghost which the whole Synod followed and therefore though Peter and Paul spake truth yet did they not speake that truth which did compose the controversie and this is to mee an argument that they all spake as members of the Synod and not as Apostles 7. The immediatly inspired Apostolick Spirit though it may discourse and inferre a conclusion from such and such premisses as Paul doth Rom. 3. 28. and hee proveth from the Scripture Rom. 4. 4. 5. 6. that wee are justified by saith without workes and 1 Tim. 5. 17. 18. and Act. 9. 22. Act. 24. 14. 17. and so doth Christ reason and argument from Scripture Matth. 22. 31. Luk. 24. 25 26 27. and so have both the Prophets and Apostles argued yet the immediatly inspired Spirit of God in arguing doth not take helpe by disputing one with another and yet doth not obtaine the conclusion in hand but here Peâ—â—â— and Paul argue from Scripture and they prove indeed a true conclusion that the Gentiles should not keepe Moses his Law as they would bee saved yet they did not remove the question nor satisfic the consciences of the Churches in their present practise for if James had not said more then the Churches had not beene sufficiently directed in their practise by the Synod and for all that Peter and Paul said the Churches might have eaâ—â—n meates offered to Idols and blood and things strangled which at that time had been a sin against the Law of nature and a great stumbling block and a scandalizing of the Jewes Except therefore wee say that the Apostles intending as Apostles to determine a controversie in the Church they did not determine it which is an injury to that immediatly inspiring spirit that led the Apostles in penning Scripture wee must say that Peter Paul and James here spake as members of an eccleâ—iasticall Synod for the Churches after-imitation 8. If the Apostles here as Apostles give out this decree then it would seeme that as Apostles by virtue of the immediatly inspiring spirit they sent messengers to the Churches for one spirit directeth all and by this Text wee should have no warrant from the Apostles practise to send messengers to satisfie the consciences of the Churches when they should bee troubled with such questions now all our Divines and reason doth evince that a Synod may by this Text send messengers to resolve doubting Churches in points dogmaticall for what the Apostles doe as Apostles by that power by which they writ canonick Scripture in that wee have no warrant to imitate them 9. I propounded another argument before which prevaileth much with mee The Elders of an ordinary Presbytery and Churches such as conveened at this Synod cannot be
clearely insinuate that their commandement as Apostles de jure should have ended the controversie but now for the edification and after-example of the Churches they tooke a Synodicall way 13. The way of the Apostles speaking seemeth to mee Synodicall and not given out with that divine and Apostolicall authoritie that the Apostles may use in commanding it is true they use lovely and swasory exhortations in their writing but this is a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a decree not an exhortation now James saith 1◠〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is set downe as his private opinion with reverence to what Peter and Paul saith and v. 7. Peter when many had disputed and spoken before him standeth up and speaketh and v. 12. Barnabas and Paul after the multitude is â—â—nt doth speake which to mee is a Synodicall order and the whole Synod v. 28. say It seemed good to us They answer 1. Consociated Churches have some power in determining of dogmaticall points but this is no power of jurisdictim The seventh Proposition to which almost all the Elders of New England agreed saith The Synod bath no Church-power but the cause enimeth with the Church Corpus cum causa the Church-body and the cause which concerneth the Church-body doe remaine together â—nd therefore quaestio defertur ad Synodum causa manet penes eccleiam the question is brought to the Synod the cause remaineth with the Church Another Manuscript of Godly and learned Divines I saw which saith That the ministeriall power of applying of the rules of the word and Canons to persons and things from time to time as the occasions of the Church shall require pertaineth to and may be exercised by each particular Church without any necessary dependance on other Churches yet in difficill cases wee ought say they to consult with and seeke advise from presbyteries and ministers of 〈◊〉 Churches and give so much authoritie to a concurrence of judgements as shall and ought to be an obligation to us not to depart from any such resolutions as they shall make upon any consideration but where in conscience and hence our peace with God is apparently concerned Answ. I perceive 1. That our brethren cannot indure that a Synod should bee called a Church but 1. I verily thinke that when Paul and Barnabas Act. 15. 1 2. had much dissention with those who taught you must bee circumcised after the manner of Moses that the Church of Antioch resolved to tell the Church that is the Synod while as they fall upon this remedy v. 2. They determined that Paul and Barnabas and certaine other of them 〈◊〉 goe up to Jerusalem unto the Apostles and Elders about this question that is that the Church of Antioch when the subverâ—ers of soules would not heare their brethren of Antioch did tell the Synod convened at Jerusalem that is according to our â—viours order Maâ—â—â— 18. 17. they did tell the Church and my reason is if the Church at Antioch could not satisfie the conâ—câ—enâ—es of some who said you must bee circumcised else you cannâ—x in saved they could not nor had they power in that cast not to goe on but were obliged to tell the Synod that is the Church whom it concerned as well as Antioch for if they had sent the matter to the Synod as a question not as a cause proper to the Synod or Church then when the Synod had resolved the question the cause should have returned to the Church of Antioch and been determined at Antioch as in the proper court if that hold true the question is deserred to the Synod the cauâ—e remaineth with the body the Church but the cause returned never to the Church of Antioch but both question and cause was determined by the Synodicall-Church Act. 15 v. 22. 23 24. and the determination of both question and cause ended in the Synod as in a proper court and is imposed as a commandement and a Synodicall Canon to bee observed both by Antioch v. 25 26 27 28 29. and other Churches Act. 16. 4 5. Ergo either the Church of Antioch lost their right and yet kept Christs order Matth. 18. 15 16 17. or the question and cause in this case belongeth to a Synod 2. It is said expresly â— 22. It pleased tâ— Apostles Elders and the whole Church to send chosen men of their own company to Antioch c. What Church was this the whole Church of â—â—leevers or the fiaternitie at Jerusalem say our brethren but with leave of their godlinesse and learning no say â— 1. What reason that the Church of all beleevers men and women of Jerusalem should de jure have beene present to give either consent or surfrage there because it concerned then practise and conscience but I say it concerned as much if not more the conscience and practise of the Church of Antioch if not more for the cause was theirs say our brethen and cause ad corpus say they quaestio ad synodum and it concerned as much the practise and conscience of all the Churches who were to observe these decrees Act 16. 4. 5 Act. 21. 25. yet they were not present If the multitude of â—â—leevers of Jerusalem was present because they were 〈…〉 to the Synod whereas Antioch other 〈…〉 were nor off were not present but in their commissioners then I say the Church â—â— the multitude of Jerusalem whose commidicâ—â—â—s were here 〈◊〉 I say the multitude was present â—uely de 〈◊〉 not 〈◊〉 nor was there more law for their presence then â—or all other Churches who also in conscience were obliged to obey the councells determinations but I deare a warrant that the fact of the Synod such as was sending of the decrees and Commissioners with the decrees to Antioch should bee â—â—â—â—ibed to the multitude of beleevers at Jerusalem who by no Law of God were present at the Synod and by no Law of God 〈◊〉 more consent then the Church of Antioch and were present 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and by accident because they dwelt in the 〈◊〉 where the Synod did sit therefore say I the 〈◊〉 Church in the whole Synod 2. By what Law can Jerusalem a sister Church have influence or consent de jure in sending binding Acts as these were as is cleare v. 28. Ch. 16. 4 5. Ch. 21. 25. to the Church of Antioch for this is an authoritative sending of messengers and the Canons to the Church of Antioch as is evident v. 2 2. 3. It is utterly denied that the Church of Jerusalem I meane the multitude of beleevers could meet all at one Synod 4. The word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 v. 12. which is said to hold their peace is referred to the Apostles and Elders met Synodically v. 6. and is not the multitude of beleevers 5. Where are these who are called Elders not Apostles they are ever distinguished from the Apostles as Act. 15. 2. v. 6. v. 22. Act. 16. 4. Act. 21. 18. 25. â—are is no reason that they were all
Elders of Jerusalem for 〈◊〉 can Elders of one sister Church impose Lawes burdens â—28 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 decrees Ch. 16. 4. upon sister Churches or hâ—w can they pen canonicall Scripture joyntly with the Apostles Some of our brethren say so much of those degrees that they obliged formally the Churches as Scriptures doe oblige the learned Junius saith well that the Apostles did nothing as Apostles where there was an ordinarie and established Elderyâ—â— in the Church therefore those Elders behoved to bee the 〈◊〉 of Antioch for Act. 17. v. 2. 〈…〉 Commissioners were 〈◊〉 from Antioch then Paul and 〈…〉 I thinke also the Churches of Cyria and 〈◊〉 〈…〉 there as well as Antioch and de jure 〈…〉 should have beene there The case was theirs every way the same with the Church of Antioch and their soules subverted v. 24. 6. Those who are named v. 22. Apostles Elders and the whole Church are called v. 25. Apostles and Elders and Brethren and elsewhere alwayes Apostles and Elders Elders including brethren or the whole Church v. 22. of some chosen men and brethren as Act. 13. 2. v. 6. Ch. 16. 4. Act. 21. 18. 25. 2. I desire to try what truth is here that this Synod but power and authoritie in points dogmaticall but no Church-power saith the seventh proposition of the reverend and godly Brethren of New England and no power of jurisdiction but the Church of Antioch had Church-power and power of jurisdiction to determine this cause and censure the contraveeners as our Brethren say But I assume this Synod tooke this Church-power off their hand and with the joynt power of their owne Commissioners sent from Antioch v. 2. v. 22. 23. determined both cause and controversie and it never returned to any Church-Court at Antioch as is cleare v. 25 26 27 28. Ergo this Synod had a Church-power 2. A power and authoritie dogmaticall to determine in matters of doctrine is a Church-power proper to a Church as is granted by our brethren and as wee prove from Act. 20. 29. This is a part of the over-sight committed to the Eldership of Ephesus to take heed to men rising amongst themselves speaking perverse things that is teaching false doctrine and if they watch over them as members of their Church for they were v. 30. men of their owne they were to censure them 2. If Pergamus bee rebuked Reâ—el 2. 14. 15. and threatned with the removing of their Candlesticke because they had amongst them those who held the doctrine of Balaam and the doctrine of the Nicolaitans hated by Christ himselfe and did not use the power of jurisdiction against them then that Church which hath power dogmaticall to judge of doctrine hath power also of jurisdiction to censure those who hold the false doctrine of Balaam and v. 20. Christ saith to Thyatira Notwithstanding I have a few things against thee 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 because thou suffâ—â—â— that woman Jesabel which calleth herselfe a Prophetesse to teach and to seduâ—e my servants to commit fornication and to eate things sacrifâ—â—d to Idols Hence I argue what Church hath power to try the false doctrin of Jesabel and is blamed for not censuring her but permitteth her to teach and to seduce the servants of God hath also power of jurisdiction against her false doctrine this poposition I take to bee evident in those two Churches of Pergamus and Thyatira I assume but this Synod Act. 15. hath authoritie and power to condemne the false doctrine taught by subverters of soules teaching a necessitie of circumcision in the Churches of Syria Cilicia Antioch c. Act. 15. vers 23 24. Therefore this Synod hath power of jurisdiction 3. Every societie which hath power to lay on burdens as here this Synod hath v. 28. and to send decrees to be observed by the Churches as Act. 16. 4. and to send and conclude that they observe no such thing and that they observe such and such things Act. 21. 25. by the power of the holy Ghost conveened in an Assembly 25. and judging according to Gods Word as â— 7 8 9 10 11 12 c. these have power of juridiction to censure the contraveners but this Synod is such a societie Ergo it hath this power The Proposition is Matth. 18. 18. If hee refuse to heare the Church let him be to thee as a heathen and a publican nothing can bee answered here but because this Synod commandeth onely in a brotherly way but by no Church-power therefore they have no power of jurisdiction But with reverence of these learned men this is petitio principii to begge what is in question for the words are cleare a brotherly counsell and advise is no command no 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 no decree which wee must observe and by the observing whereof the Churches are established in the faith as is said of these decrees Act. 16. 4 5. To give a brotherly counsell such as Abigail gave to David and a little maide gave to Namaan is not a burden laid on by the commander but it is said of this decree v. 28. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 It seemed good to the holy Ghost to lay no other burden on you Also we do not say that power of jurisdiction is in provinciall or nationall Synods as in the Churches who have power to excommunicate for 1. this power of jurisdiction in Synods is cumulative not privative 2. It is in the Synod quoad actus imperatos potius quam act us elicitos according to commanded rather then to elicit acts for the Synod by an ecclesiasticall power added to that intrinsecall power of jurisdiction in Churches doth command the Churches to use their power of jurisdiction rather then use it actually her selfe Let me also make use of two propositions agreed upon in a Synod at New England Their 3. proposition The fraternitie have an authoritative concurrence with the Preshyteny in judiciall Acts. 4. Proposition The fraternitie in an Organicall body actu subordinate id est per modum obedientiae in subordination by way of obedience to the Presbytery in such judiciall Acts 2 Cor. 10. 6. Now if here the whole Church of Jerusalem as they say from v. 22. was present and joyned their authoritative concurrence to these decrees there was here in this Synod an Organicall body of eyes eares and other members that is of Apostles Teachers Elders and people and so a formed Church by our brethrens doctrine â—â—gs Paul and Barnabas v. 2. being sent to this Synod by the Church of Antioch to complaine were sent to tell the formed and organicall Churches as it is Matth. 18 19 which is a good argument if not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as Aristotle saith yet 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 2. If the Brethren here concurre as giving obedience to the Elders and the Apostles doe here determine as Apostles and Elders then the brothren in this Organicall body doe concurre to the forming of these decrees by way of obedience to the
Elders â— Presbyters and by the same reason the Elders concurre by way of obedience to the Apostles for as the Elders as Elders and above the fraternitie so the Apostles as Apostles are above the Elders but then I much wonder how the acts are called the decrees of the Apostles and Elders joyntly Act. 16. 4. and how the Elders of Ierusalem doe ascribe those decrees to themselves Act. 21. 25. and how all the assembly speake as assisted by the holy Ghost Act. 15. 28. Shall wee distinguish where the Scripture doth not onely not distinguish but doth clearly hold forth qualitie and an identitie But some object that the holy Ghost v. 28. is the immediatly instiring Apostolick Spiritâ— and so the Apostles must here concurre in giving out those decrees as Apostles not as ordinary Elders 1. Is Peter and Paul alledge Scripture and testimonies of Gods Spirit in this Syned as Elders not as Apostles then they reason in the Synod as falliâ—â— men and men who may erre but that is impossible for if they 〈◊〉 Scripture as men who may erre the Scripture which they alâ—â—dge 〈◊〉 be fallible Answ. Though the Apostles here reason as Elders not as Apâ—stâ—â—s I see no inconvenience to say they were men who might â—re though as led with the holy Ghost they could not erre in this Syned following the conduct of the holy Ghost as is said â— 28. though the holy Ghost there bee onely the ordinary holy Ghost given to all the Pastors of Christ assembled in Gods name and the authoritie of Iesus Christ yet in this Act and as led by this Spirit they were not fallible neither men who could erre for I see not how ordinary beleevers as led in such and such Acts by the holy Ghost and under that reduplication can erre for they erre as men in whom there is flesh and a body of corruption and therefore though both Apostles and Elders modaliter might erre as Logick saith Apostaâ—â—s err are est possible yet de facto in this they could not erre being led by the holy Ghost v. 28. and the necessitie of their not erring is not absolute but necessary by consequent because the Spirit of God led them as v. 28. But the reason is must weake if they might erre Ergo the Scripture they alledge might bee fallible for though hereticks alledge Scripture and abuse it and make it to bee no Scripture but their owne fancie while as they alledge it to establish blasphemous conclusions yet doth it no way follow that Scripture can bee fallible or obnoxious to error but onely that abused and aâ—â— applved Scripture is not Scripture Object 2. If ever the Apostles were led by an infallible spirit 〈◊〉 to bee in a matter like this which so much concerned the 〈◊〉 and consciences of all the Christian Churches amongst the Gen 〈◊〉 Eâ—go in this Synod they could not bee led by a fallible spirit but â—â— an infallible and so by an Apostolick Spirit Answ. I conceive the spirit which led both Apostles and Elders in this Synod was an infallible Spirit but Ergo an immediatly inspiring and Apostolick Spirit it followeth not yea the holy Ghost of which Luke doth speake v. 28. as the president and leader of this first mould of all Synods and so the most perfect Synod is never fallible no not in the meanest beleever and it were blasphemy to say the holy Ghost in any can bee obnoxious to errour and I thinke de facto neither Apostles nor Elders could erre in this Synod because de factâ— they followed the conduct of the holy Ghost without any byas in judgement but it followeth not 1. that the men could not erre because the holy Ghost leading the men could not erre as wee answer Papists who produce this same argument to prove that generall councells and so the Church must be infallible 2. It followeth not Ergo this holy Ghost was that immediatly inspiring and Apostolick Spirit leading both Apostles and Elders which is the question now in hand Object 3. This is a patterne of all lawfull Synods then may all lawfull Synods say It seemed good to the holy Ghost and to us if therefore the men might erre the leader to wit the holy Ghost might erre which is absurd Answ. It followeth onely that all lawfull Synods should so proceed as they may say It seemed good to the holy Ghost and to us and there is a wide difference betwixt Law and Fact all are lawfull Synods conveened in the name and authoritie of Christ and so by warrant of the holy Ghost speaking in his Word but it followeth not as Papists inferre and this argument proveth that therefore all which de facto those lawfully assembled Synods doe and conclude that they are the doings and conclusions of the holy Ghost and that in them all they may say It seemed good to the holy Ghost and to us 2. The consequence is false and blasphemous that if all lawfully conveened Synods may not say It seemed good to the holy Ghost and us that therefore the holy Ghost is fallible and may erre but onely that men in the Synod following their owne Ghost and spirit can say no more but it seemed good to our Ghost and spirit and cannot say it seemed good to the holy Ghost and to us for an ordinary Pastor lawfully called and preaching sound doctrine in the power and assistance of Gods spirit doth speake in that act from the holy Ghost and yet because in other acts wherein with Nathan and Samuel hee may speake with his owne spirit see with his owne eyes and light it followeth not that he is infallible or that the holy Ghost is infallible Object 4 Is the Apostles did not conclude in this Synod what they 〈…〉 an Ap sâ—a â—â—k spirit it shall follow that the holy Ghost 〈…〉 15. 28. is not that same holy Ghost of which Peter 〈◊〉 2 Pet. 1. 21. But holy men of God spake as they were moved 〈◊〉 Ghost and if so that holy Ghost which spake in the Pro 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 not also speake in the Apostles Answ. I see no necessitie of two holy Ghosts 1 Cor. 12. 4. Now 〈◊〉 â—â—â—â—ersities of gifts but the same Spirit there be divers acts of the same holy Ghost and I willingly contend that the Synodicall acts of Apostles and Elders in this Synod though comming from the holy Ghost assisting them as Elders in an ordinary Synod v. 28. are different from the acts of that same holy Ghost as immediatly inspiring the Prophets and Apostles in prophecying and penning canonick Scripture and yet there bee not two holy Ghosts for Paul did not beleeve in Christ by that same spirit which immediatly inspired him and the rest of the Apostles and Prophets to write canonick Scripture â— meane it is not the same operation of the Spirit because Paul by the holy Ghost given to all the faithfull as Christians and not given to them as canonicall writers or as Apostles or immediatly inspired
Prophets doth beleeve in Christ love Christ contend for the prise of the high calling of God as is cleare Rom. â— 37 38 39. 1 Cor. 2. 12. 16. Phil. 3. 13. 14. 1 Cor. 9. 25. Yea Paul beleeveth not in Christ as an Apostle but as a Christian and yet hee beleeveth by the grace of the holy Ghost but â—â— followeth not that the same spirit which immediatly inspired the Prophets doth not immediatly inspire Paul as an Apostle and all the rest of the Apostles Object 5. These decrees Act. 16. 4. are called the decrees of the Apostles and Elders but if the Apostles in giving out these decrees gave 〈◊〉 as ordinary Elders not as Apostles then the sense of the words Act. 16. 4. should bee that they were the decrees of the Elders and of the Elders which is absued Answ. It followeth onely that they are the decrees of the Apostles who in that give them out as Elders and as a part of the ordinary established Elders of Jerusalem Whence if Christ promise the holy Spirit to lead his Apostles in all truth hee promiseth also the holy Spirit to all their successors Pastors Teachers and Elders not onely conveened in a Congregationall-Church but also in a Synod as hee maketh good his promise here Act. 15. 28. and whereas the holy Ghost commandeth in a Synod of Apostles and Elders who are lawfully conveened by our brethrens confession and speaketh authoritatively Gods Word by the holy Ghost Act. 15. 28. they cannot speake it as a counsell and brotherly advise onely for that a brother may doe to another a woman to a woman Abigail to David a maide to Naaman wee desire a warrant from Gods Word where an instituted societie of Pastors and Elders conveened from sundry Churches and in that Court formally consociated and decreeing by the holy Ghost as Act. 15. 28. against such and such heresies shall bee no other then a counsell and advise and no Church-commandement nor binding decree backed with this power Hee that despiseth you speaking by the holy Ghost the Word of God despiseth mee and whether doctrines or canons concerning doctrine comming from a lawfull Court conveened in Christs name have no ecclesiasticall power of spirituall jurisdiction to get obedience to their lawfull decrees for if every one of the suffrages of Elders bee but a private counsell having onely authoritie objective from the intrinsecall lawfulnesse of the thing and no authoritie officiall from the Pastors because Pastors then the whole conclusion of the Synod shall amount to no higher rate and summe then to a meere advise and counsell If it bee said that when they are all united in a Synod and speaking as assembled Act. 15. 25. and speaking thus Assembled by the holy Ghost v. 28. the authoritie is more then a counsell yet not a power of Church-jurisdiction Then 1. give us a warrant in Gods Word for this distinction 2. Wee aske whether this authoritie being contemned the persons or Churches contemnibg it bee under any Church-censure or not if they bee under a Church-censure what is this but that the Synod hath power of censure and so power of jurisdiction if you say non-communion is a sufficient censure But I pray you spare mee to examine this 1. If the sentence of non-Communion bee a sentence of 〈◊〉 it must proceed from a judicature that hath a 〈◊〉 of jurisdiction but give mee leave to say as all Church 〈◊〉 have and must have warrant in Gods Word so must 〈◊〉 such as non-communion for the ordinary Church punishments such as publike rebuâ—ing have warrant in the Word as in 1 Tim. 5. 20. and excommunication 1 Cor. 5. 4. 〈◊〉 1â— and the great Anathema Maranatha 1 Cor. 16. 22. and forbearing to eate and drinke with scandalous persons 1 Cor. 5. 10 11. withdrawing from his company 2 Thâ—s 3. 14. and I pray you where hath the Word taught us of such a bastard 〈◊〉 ensure or if you will not allow it that name a censure indicted by the Church or Churches as is non-communion May our brethren without Christs warrant shape any punishment equivalent to excommunication without Gods Word 〈◊〉 they may as well without the Word mould us such a censure as excommunication if they say separation warrenth this censure of non-communion But 2. By what Law of God can an equall give out a sentence of non-communion a 〈◊〉 an equall an equall cannot as an equall punish when a Christian denieth followship to another because hee is excommunicated hee doth not punish as an equall for the punisher in this case denying fellowship to the excommunicated doth 〈◊〉 an equall but as having authoritie from the Church who hath given this commandement in the very sentence of communication 1 Cor. 5. 4. compared with v. 10 11. Separation under a great controversie and denyed in many cases â—â— the way of those who are more rigid therein even by our 〈◊〉 2. Christ Matth. 18. 15 16. will not have any brother who 〈◊〉 but private authoritie and no Church-authoritie over a broâ—â—â—◠〈…〉 non habet potestatem to presently renounce 〈◊〉 give up all communion with his brother though hee bee 〈◊〉 before two or three witnesses and inflict on him the sentence of non-communion while hee first tell the Church and non-communion is inflicted on no man as if hee were a heathen 〈◊〉 to speak no thing of delivering to Satan while hee â—â— conveened and judicially sentenced before the Church 〈◊〉 our brethrens sentence of non-communion is in inflicted by an equall Church upon a â—â—ster Church in a meere pâ—â—â—â— way and by no Church-proces 4. Non-communion if it bee warranted by the law of â—â—ture as communion of equalls is yet should wee not bee refused of the like favour when wee plead that the Law of nature pleadeth for combination and communion of joynt authorities of sâ—sâ—er-Churches in one presbytery for if non-communion of Churches bee of the law of nature so must communion of Churches and authoritative communion and authoritative and judiciall non-communion by natures law must be as warrantable upon the same grounds They 6. Object â— the Apostles were in this Synod as ordinary Elders thâ—n The Synod might have censured and in case of obsâ—inacie excommunicated the Apostles which were admirable Answ. For reâ—ukeing of Apostles wee have against Papists a memorable warrant in Paul Gal. 2. withstanding Peter to â—ce face and Peter his giving an account Act. 11 1 2 3. to the Church of Jerusalem of his going in to the Gentiles which Parker acknowledgeth against Papists and Prelats to bee a note of Peters subjection to the Church Papists say it was Peters humilitie other Papists say Peter gave but such a brotherly account to the Church such as one brother is oblieged to give to another also all our Divines and those Papists who contend that the Pope is inferiour to universall councels doc with good warrant alledge that by Matth. 18. Peter is subjected to the Church-censures if hee sinn against
from any who walketh inordinately 2. Thes. 3. 14. 15. 3 It is not well said that Christ giveth no Lawes for sinnes that seldome fall out What say you of Anathema Maranatha 1 Cor. 16. 22. to bee used against an Apostate from the faith and against such as fall into the sinne against the holy Ghost I thinke visible professors capable both of the â—nne and the censure yet I thinke it falleth seldome out it fell seldome but that an Apostle was to bee rebuked haâ— Paul then no law to rebuke Peter Gal. 2. Object 2. A Synod or presbytery may prâ—nounce the dâ—â—dfull sentence of non-communion against persons and Churches 〈…〉 Answ. But I aske where is the power and institution from Christ that one private man as hee may counsell his brother so hee may by our brethrens grounds pronounce this sentence Object 3. One private man may not doe it to a whole Church â—â— a classicall Presbytery and a Synod hath more authoritie over him then hee hath over them Answ. One private man may rebuke another yea bee may plead with his mother the whole Church that hee liveth in for her whoredomes Hos. 2. 2. But if hee justly plead and his mother will not heare may hee not separate Our brethren of New England I thinke shall bee his warrant to separate for their sixth Synodicall proposition saith the fraternitie and people are to separate from the Eldership after they refuse wholesome counsell Now what Scripture warranteth twenty to withdraw and separate shall also warrant ten and five and one for no reason that if twentie bee carelesse of their salvation in the dutie of separation and shall not separate that one man shall not separate because a multitude doth evill I am not to doe evill with them Object 4. But a Synod or a classicall presbytery hath more 〈◊〉 and authoritie then one private man or one single Congregation 1. Because they are a company of Elders to whom as to the Priests of the Lord whose lips should preserve knowledge the â—â—yes of knowledge and consequently a power and Synodicall authoritie is given though they have no power of jurisdiction 2. Because as a private mans power is inferiour to a Pastors so is the power of classicall and Synodioall meeting of Elders above a man or a single congregation and a Synod in dogmaticall power ariseth so higher then these â—â— divine institution doth fall upon it Answ. The power of order and the key of knowledge doth elevate a Pastor whose lippes doth preserve knowledge above a private Christian yea as I conceive above a multitude of beleevers but I would know if a Synods dogmaticall power bee above the power of single congregations I thinke it is not by our brethrens â—enents for they say expresly that every particular 〈…〉 jus to decide dogmaticall points and this â—ight the Church of Antioch had Act. 15. and laboured to end that 〈…〉 in her selfe which sheweth that they had right and â— we but they had not habilitie and therefore in that case they 〈…〉 light and advise from other Churches and they say The câ—niociation of Churches into classes and Synods wee 〈◊〉 to bee lawfull and in some cases necessary as namely in things 〈…〉 not peculiar to one Church but common to all And likewise when a Church is not able to end any matter that concernes onely themselves theâ— they are to seek advise counsell from neighbour Churches hence the power of Synods is only by way of counsel and advise a Pastors advise is but an advise he giveth not his advise virtute 〈◊〉 as he is a Pastor for then his advise should bee pastorall and authâ—â—itative and proceeding from the power of order though not from the power of jurisdiction hee onely giveth his advise as a gifted and inlightned man and so to my poore knowledge two hundreth five hundreth holy and learned Pastors determining in a Synod any dogmaticall point they sit all there not as in a court not as Pastors for then their Decrees should have pastorall authoritie and some power formally ministeriall to determine yea and to sway in a ministeriall way by power of the keyes of knowledge all the inferiour Churches whom the decree concerneth even as the Eldership of Pergâ—mus which to our brethren is a congregationall Church doth decree by the dogmaticall power of the keyes of knowledge that the doctrine of Balaam is a false doctrine therefore they sit there as gifted Christians and so have no Church-power more then a private brother or sister of the Congregation hath toward or over another for though a multitude of counselling and advising friends be safer and more effectuall to give light then a counselling friend yet are they but a multitude of counselling friends and the result of all counselling and advising men doth never rise higher then a counsell and advise and can never amount to the nature of a command as twenty schâ—â—â—-fellowes suppose as â—udent and wise as the twentie masters of an Universitie if these twentie schoole-fellowes give their advise and counsell 〈◊〉 a weightie businesse that concerneth the practise and obedience of all the students the result of their counsell and advise can never bee more then an advise and cannot amount to the same determination of the twentie masters of the Universitie the result of whose determination is a soveraigne commandement and an authoritative and judiciall decree and statute to all the whole Universitie 2. Whereas these Godly brethren say the power of Synods in things which belong to particular Churches is but a counsell and advise they should have told their mind whether or no the Synod hath more then advise and counsell in things that are not peculiar to one Church but common to all the Churches in that bounds for it would seeme that a Synod is a colledge of commanders in dogmaticall points that doe equally concerne all Churches this should have beenespoken to though in those things which are peculiar to each particular Church they bee but a colledge of friendly advisers and counsellers 2. If a Synod bee but a societie of counsellers they have no more any authoritative power to pronounce the sentence of non-communion against any single Congregation or private man then a private man or a single Congregation hath authoritative power to pronounce that sentence against them but 3. You make the Synodicall power so above the power of private Christians in counselling as that this Synodicall power is of divine institution as you say but let me aske what to doe to counsell and advise onely then that power of counselling in Abigail to David in one brother or sister to another brother and sister is of divine institution warranted by the Law of nature Levit. 19. 18. by the Law of charitie by the communion of Saints Col. 3. 15. 1 Thes. 5. 14. Heb. 3. 13. Heb. 10. 24. Mal. 3. 16. Zach. 8. 21 22 23. for there is a divine institution for one brother to counsell
of a publick Synodicall rebuke is onely gradually different not specifically from excommunication and both must proceed from one and the same power Now the Synodicall censure is evident in the Text v. 24. certaine went out from us so it is cleare they pretended they were in this point followers of the Apostles and Lorinus thinketh that some deemed them schismaticks 2. They have troubled you with words Lorinus citeth the Sy 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 vedalacachum they have terrified you as if your salvation were not sure except you keepe Moses his Law of ceremonies and the morall Law 3. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 destraying by false arguments your soules it is a word contrary to building up in sound knowledge as Aristotle taketh the word saying that you must bee circumcised and keepe the Law 4. They abused the name of the Apostles as having an Apostolick commandement and so a divine warrant for their false doctrine and therefore are they refuted as liars 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 whence it is cleare they did labour to prove a necessitie of circumcision not onely from the old Testament and an expresse divine Law but also from the authoritie of the Apostles which was manifestly false out of which I argue thus If the Apostles doe not onely in a doctrinall way refute a false doctrine in this Synod but also in a Church-way and by a juridicall power rebuke and Synodically charge the authors as subâ—erters of soules and liars then they doe not onely use a meere doctrinall power in this Synod but also a juridicall power but the former is true Ergo so is the latter 2. Observe two things in these obtruders of circumcision First the error of their judgement It is more then apparent that they had a heterodox and erroneous opinion of God and his worship and the way of salvation as is cleare Act. 15. 1. And certaine men which came downe from Judea taught the brethren and said except yee bee circumcised after the manner of Moses yee cannot bee saved This doctrine is clearely refuted both by Peter v. 10. That yoake of the Law wee disclaime there is a way of salvation without that yoake v. 11. But wee beleeve that through the grace of the Lord Jesus wee shall bee saved as they and it is synodically refuted v. 24. wee gave no such commandement it is not the mind of us the Apostles of the Lord that you keepe Moses Law as you hope to bee saved there was for this error in their judgement required a doctrinall or dogmaticall power and this the Synod used 2. Besides this erroneous opinion in their judgement there was another fault and scandall that the Synod was to censure to wit their obtruding of their false way upon the soules and consciences of the Churches as vers 1 They taught the brethren this false doctrine 2. That they wilfully and obstinately did hold this opinion and raised a Schisme in the Courch v. 2. wherefore Paul and Barnabas had no small 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 dissention the word signifieth sedition which was raised by those who held that erroneous opinion and great disputation with them 3. They laid a yoake upon the brethren v. 10. and v. 7. They made great disputation against the Apostles and v. 24. They troubled the brethren and perverted their soules This was not simply an heterodox opinion which is the materiall part of a heresie but had something of the formall part of an heresie to wit some degrees of pertinacie of brutish and blind zeale even to the troubling and perverting of the soules of the Churches while as they would make disciples to themselves and lead away soules from the simplicitie of the Gospell now the Synod doth not helpe this latter simply in a Synodicall way by a dogmaticall and doctrinall power but by an authoritie Synodicall and therefore they authoritatively rebuke them as subverters of soules and whereas these teachers laid on an unjust yoake to keepe Moses his Law upon the Churches v. 10. the Synod by their ecclesiasticall and juridicall authoritie doth free the Churches of that yoake and they say in their decree v. 28. It seemed good to the holy Ghost and to us not to lay the yoake of Moses his Law on you as those who trouble you have done to lay upon you no greater burden then these necessary things c. now if there had beene nothing to doe but to resolve the question if this had beene the totall and adequat end of the Synod in a meere doctrinall way to resolve the question Whether must wee bee circumcised and keepe the Law morall and ceremoniall of Moses upon necessitie of salvation as the argument of our brethren contendeth Peter v. 10. 11. made a cleare issue of the question We are saved by the grace of God both â—â—nes and Gentiles and it is to tempt God to lay the yoake of the Law of Moses upon the brethren the resolving of that question is the end of the Synod but not the adequat end for here that not onely the doctrinall power was to bee used but beside that 1. the schisme was to bee removed and the authoritie of the Synod to bee used against the wilfulnesse and obstinacie of those obtruders of circumcision in rebuking them as perverters of soules 2. For the scandall which might have been taken if the Gentiles should have eaten blood and things strangled and meats offered to idols and therefore the Apostles and Elders behoved as a conveened Synod to forbid a grievous scandall and a spirituall homicide against the Law of nature to wit that the Gentiles for feare of scandalizing weake beleevers amongst the Jewes should abstaine from the practise of some things at this time meerely indifferent in their nature though not indifferent in their use such as were to eate things offered to idols things strangled and blood and whereas our brethren 3. Object If the Apostles did any thing more then might have been done by private Pastors out of a Synod it was meerely Apostolicall and the Elders did but assent to the Apostles Apostolicall determination and every one did here Apostles Elders and Brethren more suo Apostles as Apostles Elders and Brethren as Elders and Brethren after their manner as consenters to the Apostles but other wayes it is a begging of the question for to say the Apostles and Elders rebuked Synodically the obtruders of circumcision it s but said because one Pastor might have rebuked those obtruders for the specification of actions must not bee taken from their efficient causes but from their formall objects therefore this is no good consequence the Synod rebuked those obtruders Ergo the Synod rebuked them as a Synod and by a power of jurisdiction it followeth not for Paul Gal. 2. rebuked Peter Ergo Paul had a power of jurisdiction over Peter I thinke your selves will deny this consequence I Answer 1. These two answers are contradictory and sheweth that our brethren are not true to their owne
principles for sometime they say the Apostles gave out this decree as Apostles and sometime there is nothing here done by a meere doctrinall power such as Paul had over Peter or one single Pastor hath over another now it is sure that Paul had no Apostolick power over Peter and that one Pastor have not Apostolick power over another 2. When our brethren say here that the Apostles as Apostles by an infallible spirit gave out this Decree they doe in this helpe the Papists as Bellarmine Becanus Grâ—â—rut and in particular the Jesuit Lorinus who saith decrâ—um authenticum cujus inspirator spiritus sanctâ— and so saith Cornelius a lapide visiâ—m est nob is inspiratis decretis a Spiritu sanctus therefore saith hee the councell cannot erre and so Salmeron and Cajetan say and expresly Stapleton saith this Apostosack definition flowed from the instinct of the holy Ghost observandum saith Stapleton quanta habenda sit ecclesiae definienth authoritâ—s hence our brether here must yeeld either that all Synods are infallible as Papists say this Synod the patterne of all Synods being concluded by an Apostolick spirit could not erre and so neither can councells erre or they must with Socinians and Arminians say there is no warrant for Synods here at all And certainly though wee judge our brethren as farre from Popery and Socinianisme as they thinke wee detest Anti-Christian Presbytery yet if this Synod bee concluded by an Apostolick spirit it is no warrant to bee imitated by the Churches and wee have no ground hence for lawfull Synods Whittakerus Calvin Beza Luther and all our Divines do all alledge this place as a pregnant ground not of Apostolick but of ordinary and constant Synods to the end of the world and Diodatus good to the holy Ghost because they did treat of ecclesiasticall reders concerning the quietnes and order of the Church wherein ecclesiasticall authoritie hath place the Assembly used this tearme it seemed good to us which is not used neither in articles of faith nor in the commandements which meerely concerned the conscience and to shew that authoritie was with holy reason and wisedome there is added and to the holy Ghost who guided the Apostles in these outward things also 1. Cer. 7. 25. 40. 2. If our brethren meane that the Elders and brethren were in this Apostolick and immediatly inspired Synodicall determination not as collaterall penners of Scriptures joyned with the Apostles but onely as consenters and as consenters by power of an ordinary holy Ghost working consent in them more suo according to their capacitie as ordinary Elders 1. They yet more helpe the Papists because they must say onely Apostles and so onely their successors the Prelates had definitive voices in this Synod the Presbyters and Brethren did no more then Papists and Prelates say Presbyters did in generall councells of old and therefore the Presbyter is to subscribe Ego A. N. Presbyter consentiens subseribo whereas the Prelate subscribed say they Ego A. B. Episcopus definiens subscribo wee crave a warrant in Gods Word to make an Apostle or a Prelate a Synodicall definer having a definitive voyce and the Elder Brother or Presbyter to have a consultative voyce for here all the multitude if there was a multitude present doe make Synodicall decrees by consulting and consenting yea all the nation may come to a nationall Synod and both reason dispute and consent because matters of doctrine and government of the Church concerneth all therefore all have an interest of presence and all have an interest of reasoning and 3. by consequent all have an interest of consenting yea of protesting on the contrary if the Synod determine any thing against the Word of God If they say there is a threeford consent in this Synod 1. an Apostolicall 2. a second Synodicall agreeing to Elders as Elders and a third that of the people or a popular What a mixt Synod shall this be but 1. then as the Epistle to the Tlxssalonians is called the Epistle of Paul not the Epistle of Silvanus and Timotheus though Silvanus and Timotheus did consent so these dogmata or decrees should not be called the decrees of the Apostles and Elders as they are called Act. 16. 4. Act. 15. 6. Act. 21. 25. but onely the decrees of the Apostles seeing the Elders did onely consent and had no definitive influence in making the decree by this doctrine as Silvanus and Timotheus were not joynt pen-men of Scripture with Paul 3. When as it is said the specification of actions must not bee taken from the efficient cause but from the formall object and all that a done in this Synod might have beene done by a single Pastor I answer wee doe not fetch the specification of this rebuke and of these decrees from the efficient causes but from the formall object for an Apostle might his alone have rebuked these obtruders of circumcision and made this decree materialiter for Paul did more his alone then this when hee wrote the Eâ—istle to the Romans but yet one Pastor could not have Synodically rebuked and given out a decree formally Synodicall laying an Ecclesiasticall tie on moe Churches then one there is great ods to doe one and the same action formally and to doe the same action materially and I beleeve though actions have not by good logick their totall specification from their efficient cause yet that ordinances of God as lawfull have their specification from the efficient causes in part our brethren cannot deny For what made the difference betwixt Aaron his fire offered to the Lord and Nadab and Abihu their strange and unlawfull fire that they offered to the Lord but that the on fire had God for its author the other had men and the like I say of Gods feasts and the feasts devised by Jeroboam else if a woman preach and administrate the Lords Supper in the Church that preaching and sacrament administrated by her should not have a different specification and essence if wee speake morally or Theologically from that same very preaching and celebration of the Supper performed in the Church by a lawfull Pastor it is as I conceive of the essence of an action Synodicall I say not its totall essence that it cannot bee performed by one in a Church-way and with an ecclesiasticall tie but it must be performed by many else it is not a Synodicall action and it is true that Paul Rom. 14. and 1 Cor. 8. 10. hath in substance the same Canon forbidding scandall which is forbidden in this Canon prohibiting eating of meats offered to Idolls and blood in the case of scandall but I pray you is there not difference betwixt the one prohibition and the other yea there is for Rom. 14. 1 Cor. 8. 10. it hath undenyably Apostolick authoritie here it hath onely Synodicall 2. There it is a commandement of God here it is a Canon of the Church 3. There it commeth from one man here from a
because the Apostle mentioneth onely one single Church-meeting I think not and therefore the Apostles mentioning of one assembling of the Church acts 11. 26. and of one multitude in the singular number acts 15. 30. can never prove that there was but one single Congregation at Antioch Therefore there be great â—dds betwixt meeting in a Church and meeting in the Church Also Tit. 1. 5. for this cause was Titus left at Creet that he might appaynt Elders 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in every City if 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 be not all one with 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Acts 14. 23. acts 16. 4. 5. That is if ordaining of Elders of every City bee not as good as ordaining of Elders in every Church then must there be but in all and every City where ever the Apostles or Evangelists planted Churches but one single Congregation and not any more then could meet in a single Congregation which is a conjecture and much contrary to these times when the Gospell admirably grew in the World And it must follow that every City had but such a competent number as met in one place and if this hold as an uncertaine thing in great Cities then must we say an Eldership in a City and an Eldership of many Congregations were the first planted apostolick Churches and so rules to us also And looke what frame of Churches the Apostles did institute in Cities that same they behoved to institute in Villages also for places cannot change the frame of any institution of Christ. 2. The communion of Saints and Church-edification is as requisite for Villages as for Cities Arguments removed which Mr. Richard Mather and Mr. William Thomson Pastors in New England in their answer to Mr. Charles Herle do bring so far as they make against the authors former Treatises and a scanning of some Synodicall propositions of the Churches of N. England MR. Mather Mr. Thomson c. 1. 9. Governing power is only in the Elders 1 Cor. 12. 28. Rom. 12. 8. Heb. 13. 17. the people hath no power but rather a liberty or priviledge which when it is exercised about Ordination Deposition Excommunication is of the whole communiter or in generall but not of all and every member in particular Women for their Sex children for want of discrâ—tion are dâ—barred Answ. If there be no governing power in Women nor any act at all in excommunication You loose many arguments that you bring 1 Cor. 5. to prove that all have hand in excommunication 1. Because Paul writeth to all 2. All were to mourne 3. All ware to forbeare the company of the excommunicated men Then belike Paul writeth not to all Saints at Corinth not to Women and Women were not to mourne for the scandall nor to forbeare his company 2. The priviledge being a part of liberty purchased by Christs Body it must be due to Women for the liberty wherewith Christ hath made Women free cannot be taken away by any Law of God from their Sex except in Christ Iesus there be difference betwixt Iew and Gentile male and female nor is it removed because iâ— iâ— a power or authority for the authors say it is no power but a priviledge 3. What priviledge the people have in ordination to confer a Ministery which they neither have formally nor vertually I know not But I doe willingly say something here of the peoples power The first Synodicall proposition of New England is 1. Propos. The fraternity is the first Subject of all Ministeriall power radicalitèr idest 〈◊〉 per modum collationis some say suppletivè non habitualitèr non actualit â—r non formalitèr That is if I conceive it right The people voyd of all Officers have a vertuall power to conferre a Ministery on their Officers though they have not this power in themselves I could in some sense yield that Believers not Angells are capable of the Ministeriall power to exercise it formally but that Believers doe or can by any way of causative influence make Church-Officers I see not they may design a man qualified to bean Officer to the Office and that is all But say they people wanting or being naked and without all Officers hath not formally or habitually any power in them this latter part Igrant and the 2. Proposition I grant to wit That the presbytery is the first subject of all presbyteriall power habitually and formally But I doe not see how it standeth with the third proposition which is 3. The fraternity or the people without the Officers and without Women or children have an authoritative concurrence with the presbytery in judiciall acts Because if the Brethren have an halfe Ministeriall power with the Officers in acts of Jurisdiction and Excommunication Deposition and Censures I see not how there is not a Ministeriall power formally and habitually at least in part in the Brethren and so contrary to the third proposition the Prasbytery is not the first subject of all Prebyteriall power for the brethren are sharers with the Elders in this power 2. We desire to see it made good by Gods Word that the brethren have a joynt power of Jurisdiction with the Elders for the Table giveth them a brotherly publick power not by way of Charity but a politick Church power in many eminent acts especially in those eight and that constantly 1. In the admission 1. In Sending Messengers to the Churches 2. In the excommunication of members 2. 2. In interpretation of Scripture 3. In the calling 3. In a judiciall determination of controversies of Religion in a synod 4. And Deposition of Ministers 4. In a power of disposing of things indifferent I cannot see any judiciall power or any farther then a charitative yielding by way of a loving and brotherly consent that the Scripture giveth to brethren 3. How this can be denied to be a power of jurisdiction and governing and an actuall Ministeriall using of the Keyes of the Kingdome by those who ex officio by place and calling are no Officers I believe is not easily understood 4. The letter that I saw sayth that that learned and godly Divine Mr. Cotton and some others thinke that the Church as it is an Organicall Body made up of Elders and people is the first subject of all Ecclesiasticall power and they divide it into a power of authority and a power of liberty whereof the power of authority belongeth to the Elders or Eldership and the power of liberty to the Fraternity or Brethren that are not Officers and therefore these reverend brethren deny any authoritative concurrence to the brethren and they thinke that the Church as it is an homogeneall body that is a company destitute of Officers cannot formally ordaine excommunicate or censure the Elders though in case of obstinacy they may doe that which is equivalent and so separate from them The 4. Proposition is The fraternity or Brethren in an Organicall Body or in a â—â—med and established Church consisting of Officers and people act and use
their authority subordinate per modum obedi ntâ—ae subordinately and by way of due obedience to the Elders 2 Câ—r 10. 6. But I desire a word of Christs Testament for this where wee aâ—de that collaterall Judges acting as Judges doe act by way of obedience and subjection one to another for if the brethren 1 Cor. 5. convened in Court with the Elders to deliver the incestuous man to Satan do act in that Court as giving obedience to the Elders I see not how they concurre authoritatively is sharers with them of that same Ministeriall power if it be said brethren though they act as Judges in excommunicating yet they remaine brethren and a part of the flock and so in all their morall acts of authoritative concurring with the Elders they are under the pastorall care of these who watch for Soules and so they judge and act even in the Court as under subjection to their watchmen who must give an accompt for their Soules I answer so the Elders in their acts of the most supreame Ministeriall authority and acting in a Church court leave not off to be brethren and a part of the flock of Christ and so in subjection one to another for six Elders watch for the Soule of one and one also for the Soules of six and so if this were a good reason the Elders should act with subordination of obedience to Elders As the people act with subordination to the Elders 2. The place cited for this 2 Cor. 10. 6. where it is said that the Preachers have in readinesse to revenge all disobedience must inferre that they are to revenge by the word which is mighty through God to cast downe strong holds as is said there v. 4. 5. even disobedience of Elders ruling unjustly and abusing the Keyes no lesse then disobedience of the people And I see not how brethen acting in a Church-Court joyntly with Elders how in that they put on the relation of the flock and the part governed in the very act of exercising acts of governing for otherwayes one Pastor in the act of preaching in the Name of Jesus Christ and so in authority above these to whom he preacheth doth preach subordinatè and as in subjection to the whole organicall and formed Church who hath power to censure him if he preach erroneous Doctrine 3. I see not how the third Proposition doth stand to wit that the brethren share with the Elders in authoritative acts of the Keyes and yet they â—ct according to the. 4. Proposition as under the Eldership by way of subjection and obedience to them Except this be that which our brethren meane that the people of a single Congregation exercise acts of Jurisdiction by way of dependence so as they may be censured by the Elders if they erre but the Elders if they erre are every way Popes and so independent that there is no Church-power on Earth above them that in a Church-way may censure them or call them to an accompt 4. The Table of New England divideth the actuall exercise of the power in a Charitative power by way of Love and Charity and a politick or Church-exercise the politick exercise againe is either brotherly fraternall or Presbyteriall and the presbyteriall exercise is either 1. Teaching  or  2. Governing And Teaching is either by way of Office or Administrating the Sacraments The Presbyteriall exercise of the Keyes is independentElders in the power of governing sed respectâ— apotelesmatis sâ—u complementi censurae in respect of the effect or a compleat act of governing the Elders Rule and Act with dependence upon the people in these foure cases 1. In excommunication  2. In judging  3. In sentencing the aocused  4. In election or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in calling of a Minister So that the Elders there alone without the people can exercise none of these acts completely without the people so heare the Elders depend upon the people in their actuall governing and the Fraternity or Brethren depend on the Elders by way of subjection or obedience to them Yet give me leave the letter informeth me that it is said by many learned and godly men in New England that if their policy should make the government of the Church popular they should give up the cause But I conceive the government to be popular though the people only be not governours for Morâ—llius never taught any such thing now this government maketh Elders and people to governe the Church joyntly with mutuall dependence one upon another which certainly maketh the brethren in the Lord as well as the Elders for if the Elders be not these onely which watch for the peoples Soules as these which must give an accompt Heb. 13. 17 18. and they be not onely 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 over the people in the Lord as is said 1 Thess. 5. 12. 13. Then the brethren must be taken in with them aâ— joynt governours as is said Propos. 3. Which certainly must confound the Scripturall order established by God betwixt the Pastors and the Flock the Watchmen and the City the shepâ—eards and the flock these who are to obey and these who are over them in the Lord. The 5. and 6. Proposition is The Brethren may not excommunicate an Elder but mediante concilio by the intervening sentence of the Elders is but the brethren may separate and withdraw from the Presbyteris after they refuse sound advise Answ. 1. This is much contrary to that which they ordinarily teach to wit that people destitute of Officers may ordaine and excommunicate their Officers 2. By this learning the Soules of Elders are in an hard case for when they do all scandalously 〈◊〉 there is no Ecclesiasticall meane of edifying them for there is no Church on Earth to excomunicate Elders when they â—â—re Separation from them is an unwarrantable way except they be excommunicated 3. In the case of the Elderships incorrigible scandalls the power of excommunication retireth into the brethren yet it was never formally in the brethren nor can they exercise this power but mediante Presbyteriâ— that is they cannot excommunicate the Eldership but by the Judiciall sentence of the Eldership and so the power is but a shadow Mr. Mather Mr. Thomson cap. 2. pag. 16 17. though some have appealed as Luther and Cranmer from the Pope to a generall councell Yet not from a Congreation to a generall councell Answ. In matters doctrinall some as Luther and others have justly appealed from a Congregation to a generall councell though Luther and Cranmer did it not though verily I professe I cannot see what power of Jurisdiction to censure scandalls can be in a generall councell there may be some meerly Doctrinall power if such a councell could be had and that is all M. Mather Mr. Thomson c. 2. pag 20. if Churches be dependent on Synods because the light of nature teacheth a communion and assistance in government by the same reason Churches must end in a Monarchy on
Earth Answ. I see this sayd without any probation Churches depend on many above them for unity but what consequence is this Ergo they depend upon one visible Monarch It is an unjust consequence Mr. Mather Mr. Thomson c. 2 pag. 26. The Graecians and Hebrewes made not two Churches but one Congregation they called the multitude of Disciples together v. 2. Answ. That the chiefe of both Grecians and Hebrewes were convened in one to give their consent to the admission of their Officers the Deacons I conceive but that all the thousands of the Church of Jerusalem were here as in one ordinary Congregation I judge unpossible Mr. Mather c. 3. pag. 27. 28. If your argument be good if thy Brother offend and refuse to submit tell the Church because Christs Remedy must be as large as the Disease then if a Nationall Church offend you are to complaine to a higher Church above a Nationall Church and because offences may arise betwixt Christians and Indians you may complain of an Indian to the Church Ans. Because ordinary communion faileth when you got higher then a Nationall Church and Christs way suppoleth an ordinary Communion as is cleare If thy Brother offend c. Therefore I deny that this remedy is needfull in any Church above a Nationall Church 2. Christs remedy is a Church remedy for Offences amongst brethren and Members of the visible Church And Indians are no Members of the Church and so being without they cannot bee judged 1 Co. 5. 12. We say that if the Magistrate be an enemy to Religion may not the Church without him convene and renew a Covenant with God Mr. Mather and Mr. Thomson answer c. 3. pag. 29. if the supreame Magistrate be an enemy to Religion it is not like but most or many of the people will be of the same mind Regis ad exemplum as it is in France and Spaine and was in the dayes of Queene Mary and then the Believers in the Land will not be able to beare the name of the Land or Nation but of a small part thereof nor can it be well conceived how they should assemble in a Nationall Synod for that or any other purpose when the Magistrate is a professed Enemie nor doth God require it at their hands Answ. This is a weake answer the Christians under Nerâ— were not like their Prince and it s not like but sincere Christians will bee sincere Christians and professe truth even when the Magistrate is an enemy And 2. If your meaning be it cannot be conceived how they should assemble in a Nationall assembly when the Magistrate is an Enemy because it is not safe for feare of persecution Then you say nothing to the argument because the argument is drawen from a duty a Nation professing the Gospell after many backslidings are obliged to convene in a Nationall Synod and are to renew their Covenant with the Lord and your answer is from an ill of affliction and if you meane that because the Princes power is against their Synodicall convening this is nothing against the power of the Synods that CHRIST hath given to His Church But if your meaning be that it is not lawfull to them to convene in a Nationall Synod to renew a Covenant with GOD against the supreame Magistrates will I hope you minde no such thingâ— for so doe Malignants Now alledge that wee never read of any Reformation of Religion in Scripture warranted but where the Prince did contribute his authority because he onely is to reforme and he onely rebuked for the standing of the high places but hee may soone be answered 1. Both Israel and Iudah were so bent to backsliding that wee read not that ever the people made any reall Reformation of Religion Josiah Hezekiah and Asa did it for them But what an argument is this Iudah did never for the most of the Land seeke the Lord God of their Fathers with all their heart Ergo the seeking of the Lord God with all the heart is an unwritten tradition 2. Princes are obliged to remove high places But are they obliged with their owne Hands to breake all the Images No I thinke if they remove the high places by the Hands of their Subjects or command their Subjects to remove them they doe full well But I see not this consequence Ergo Princes onely are obliged to remove the high places it followeth not 3. If it be the Princes part to command his Subjects this duty of Reformation and removall of the high places then they may performe their duty without the Prince 4. There is a twofold Reformation one an heart-Reformation Sure this is not the Princes onely All the Land may repent without the King There is another an outward Reformation And that is twofold either Negative or Positiveâ— Negative is to refraine from ill and the unlawfull and superstitious manner of worshipping GOD as in new Offices not warranted by his Word Antichristian Ceremonies and a Masse-Booke c. Certainly all the Land are to abstaine from sinne though the King command not now all the Reformation for the most part in both Kingdomes is in obstinence from superstitious superadditions that defiled the worship of GOD and to this there is no necessity of the Magistrates authority more then wee needâ— the Kings warrant to put an Obligation upon Gods Negative Commandements All that is Positive is the swearing of a lawfull Covenant to observe and stand by the faith and true Religion of the Land but I see no more a necessity that a King warrant the lawfull Vow of twenty thousand then the Lawfull Vow of one Man seeing it is a lawfull profession of CHRIST before Men commanded in the third Commandement And to the observance of that Law of God which God and Conscience hic nunc doe oblige us there is no addition of a Kingly authority by necessity of a Divine Law required to make it valid no more then if all the Kingdome at such a solemne day of humiliation should all in every severall Church sweare to Reformation of life 5. The Apostles and Christ positively did reforme Religion and the Church without and contrary to the mind of civill authority nor is it enough to say the Apostles were Apostles but wee are not Apostles for upon this morall ground Acts 5. 29. Wee ought rather to obey GOD than man they reformed contrary to the Magistrates mind And wee doe but contend for that very same Faith Jud. 3. which was once delivered to the Saints So to Reforme is to seeke the old way and to walks in it Jeremy 6. 16. to turne to the LORD with all the heart Jeremy 1. and for this cause Jeremy 3. 10. Iudah is sayd not to veturue to the LORD with her whole heart but fainedly because when a zealous King reformed them they returned not with all their heart Whence Reformation of Religion must bee the peoples duty no lesse then the Kings and I believe such a divine precept carrying
absurd the Communion shall onely be of Pastorall acts as Christian acts but in no sort betwixt them as Pastorall acts 5. The Scriptures for this opinion are weak Ergo the opinion it selfe is weake I prove the antecedent Act. 20. 28. feede the flocke over which the holy Ghost hath made you overseers c. there is no ground to feede even by Preaching or by vertue of a gift these flockes over which the holy Ghost hath not set you Obey them that are over you in the Lord Heb. 13. 17. c. there is no warrant to submit to other Pastors that are not over you in the Lord though they command by vertue of a gift not by vertue of an office or calling these be loose consequences 6. All reciprocation of mutuall duties amongst sister Churches whereby they exhort rebuke comfort one another must be unlawfull for these be Church acts and this Author saith The office extendeth no further then the calling but there is no calling of Church-membership betwixt sister-Churches and therefore all these duties are not acts of the Communion of Churches as they are such Churches or incorporations in a Church-state but onely duties of Churches as they are Saints but communion of Churches as Churches in the act of Church-dispensing of the Word and Seales reciprocally one to another is not in the Word of God as this opinion will inferre which is a weighty absurd 7. The Authors of this opinion hold That if the Congregation for no fault reject the Pastor whom they once called and elected to â—e their Pastor though in so doing they sinne and reject God in rejecting him yet they take nomen esse the name and nature of a pastor from him yet say they hee still remaineth a Minister of Christ till he accept a call from another Congregation Hence 1. such a one is a Pastor and yet the people have taken name and nature of a Pastor from him as they gave him name and nature Ergo he is either a Pastor without a calling which is absurd or he remaineth a person in relation to another flocke who never choosed him nor gave him any calling 2. To adde by the way if he be capable of a calling to another Church Ergo for the time he is no Minister else they must say he may be a Minister capable of two callings to two sundry Ministeries which yet maketh him a Pastor not in relation to one single congregation onely It is true they object that the Apostles Matth. 18. were commanded to preach to all Nations but Pastors are not so now but are commanded to feed the flocke over which God hath appointed them Act. 20. 28. but it is as true the Apostles were commanded to preach to all Nations in opposition to the charge that the Prophets of old were to speake to the people of Israel onely and the Apostles Matth. 10. forbidden to preach to the Samaritans and Gentiles and it is as true that Gods Spirit limited the Apostles to Preach to Macedonia not to Bithynia now because this particular direction for places is wanting in the Church it is certaine that a man is yet a Pastor in office in relation to as many as Gods hand of providence shall send him unto though he be chosen by a people to feed ordinarily one determinate flocke and though he be not an extraordinary and immediatly inspired planter of Churches or the first planter as were the Apostles yet is he a Pastor in relation to all And if this be not said 1. It were simply unlawfull for Pastors now to plant Churches and spread the Gospell to those nations who have not heard it because all Pastors now are ordinary and none are immediatly inspired Apostles but it is certaine what the Apostles did by an extraordinary gift as such immediatly called pastors it is unlawfull for ordinary Pastors to attempt to doe as to attempt to speake with tongues and to plant Churches by speaking with tongues and confirming it with miracles is unlawfull Papists as Bellarmine Suarez Acosta ascribe this to the Pope and his Apostles Our Divines answer that the Apostles that way have no successors But what the Apostles did by an ordinary pastorall gift as to preach the word administrate the Sacraments to erect and plant Churches by ordinary gifts where the Pastors can speake to the Churches by an ordinary gift in their owne language they are oblieged both within and without the Congregation to preach as Pastors because where God giveth gifts pastorall to pastors he commandeth them to exercise these gifts else they digge their Lords talent in the earth but God giveth to Pastors pastorall gifts to preach to others then their owne Congregation and to administrate the seales to them also and to plant Churches Ergo it is presumed that the Church doth give authoritie and an externall ministeriall calling to the exercise of these gifts 2. It is an unwarrantable point of Divinitie that the Apostles and the Pastors succeeding to them doe differ essentially in this that Apostles might preach as Pastors to more Congregations then one and might plant Churches but pastors succeeding to them may not as Pastors preach to more Congregations then their owne and may not planâ— Churches for then planting of Churches now were utterly unlawfull because it is certaine there be no Apostles on earth and it is not lawfull for a Pastor yea nor it is lawfull for any other gifted person to doe that which is essentiall to an Apostle and agreeth to an Apostle as to an Apostle It is then unlawfull for our brethren seeing they be not Apostles to plant Churches in India Nor is that comparison to be regarded much A Magistrate or an Alderman of a Citie may not lawfully exercise his office of Magistracie in another Citie whereof he is not a Maior and therefore a Pastor cannot preach ex officio as a Pastor in another Congregation whereof he is not a Pastor nor can he exercise discipline in another Congregation then his owne seeing another Congregation hath not by voluntary agreement oath or paction submitted themselves to his ministry nor chosen him for their Pastor For I answer the comparison halteth and doth not prove the point for by one and the same act the citie hath chosen such a man both for to be a Magistrate and to be their Magistrate and have given him thereby authority over themselves onely so he cannot exercise the office of a Magistrate over another Citie who hath not chosen him to be their Maior or ruler But the flocke doth not both call such a man in one and the same act to be a pastor and to be their pastor but hee is made by the laying on of the hands of the Elders a Pastor and a Pastor in relation to all to whom God in his providence shall send him to speake the Congregation by election doth give him no authority pastorall but onely appropriate his pastorall authoritie to themselves in particular
Gerson as also Glorianus but he who is casten out as a Schismaticke is in the same case with an excommunicate person Lastly baptisme is not a priviledge of a particular visible Church onely nor doth the place of 1 Cor. 12. vers 13. meane of the visible parishionall Church of Corinth but of the whole visible Church of Jew and Gentile bond and free as the words doe beare Quest. III. In what cases it is lawfull to separate from a Church In this discourse three things must bee discussed 1. With what Church retaining the doctrine of fundamentalls we are to remaine 2. Whether our separation from Rome bee not warrantable 3. Whether wee may lawfully separate from true Churches for the sinnes of the Churches 1 Cor. 3. 11. Another foundation can no man lay then that which is laid Jesus Christ. Hence Jesus Christ is the foundation of faith reall or personall and the knowledge of Christ is the dogmaticall foundation of faith Upon this foundation some build gold that is good doctriae some hay and stubble that is as Calvin faith curious doctrine Pareus vaine and frivolous doctrine We are to distinguish betwixt articles of faith or res fidei matters of faith and fundamentall points of faith Matters of faith I reduce to three 1. Fundamentall points 2. Supra-fundamentalia superstructions â—â—illed upon fundamentalls 3. Circa-fundamentalia things about maâ—ers of Faith for praeter fundamentalia things indifferent and besides the foundation in matters of Religion and morall carriage I acknowledge none fundamentalls are the vitall and noble parts or the soule of Divinitie The ignorance of fundamentalls condemneth which is to be understood two wayes 1. The Ignorance of fundamentalls such as are supernaturall fundamentalls condemneth all within the visible Church as a sinne but it doth not formally condemne those who are without the visible Church Job 15. 22. It onely maketh those who are without the Church incurable but doth not formally condemne them as medicine not knowne and so not refused maketh sicke men incurable as a losse but doth not kill them as a sinne 2. Superstructures which by consequence arise from fundamentalls are fundamentalls by consequent and secondarily as the second ranke of stones that are immediatly laid upon the foundation are a foundation in respect of the higher parts of the wall and therefore are materially fundamentall and the ignorance of these virtually condemne and the denying of such by consequence is a denying of the foundation Things about the foundation circa fundamentalia are all things revealed in the word of God as all Histories Miracles Chronolâ—gie things anent Orion the Pleiades the North starres Job 38. 31. 32. That Paul left his cloakc at Troas The knowledge of these is considered three wayes 1. As necessary by necessitie of a meane necessitate medii and the knowledge so is not necessary to salvation many are in glory I doubt not who lived in the visible Church and yet knew never that Sampson killed a Lion but the knowledge of all these is necessary necessitate praecepti because all in the visible Church are oblieged to know these things therefore the ignorance of these onely doth not actually condemne but virtually and by demerit lead to condemnation 2. This knowledge is considered as commanded in the excellency thereof and so error and bad opinions about these are sinfully ill though in the regenerate by accident such errors condemne not where the foundation is holden 3. The knowledge of these is considered as commanded and enjoyned to us with the submission of faith for the authority of God the Speaker and the malicious opposing of these is a fundamentall error not formally but by evident consequent for though the matter of these errors be not fundamentall yet the malicious opposing of these is a fundamentall error against this principle What ever God saith is true but God saith there were eight soules in the Arke of Noah Hence because the historiall things of Scripture and things about the foundation as that Paul purified himselfe with the Jewes Act. 21. that Paul rebuked Peter Gal. 2. is no lesse true because God hath so spoken in his Word then this fundamentall point Jesus Christ came into the world to save sinners it is cleare that the specifice and essentiall forme of a fundamentall article is not taken from the authoritie of God speaking in the Word seeing Gods authoritie is one and the same in all that he speaketh but from the influence that the knowledge of an article hath to unite us to God in Christ and bring us to salvation And secondly it will follow that this Thou shalt not by the use of things indifferent kill him for whom Christ died and the like be no lesse fundamentall by evident consequent in respect it is spoken by Gods own authority then articles of our faith Thirdly it followeth that formalists ignorantly divide matters of Gods worship into matters of Faith or points fundamentall and things indifferent as if many Scripturall truthes were not to be found in Gods Word such as the miracles of Moses and Elias the journeyes of Paul which are neither matters fundamentall nor yet things indifferent Fourthly many things may be fundamentall by consequent to one who can reade the Word and heareth it read which is not by consequent fundamentall to a rude and ignorant man The knowledge of points fundamentall is necessary 1. To obtaine salvation 2. To keepe communion with a true Church for we are to separate from a Church subverting the foundation and laying another foundation Fundamentalls are restricted by many to the Creed of Athanasius and Gregorius Nazimzen and Cyrillus of Jerusalem to the Apostles Creed as it is called others reduce all fundamentalls to the famous Creeds of Niâ—e of Constantinople of Ephesus of Chalcedâ—n Estius restricteth fundamentalls to things necessary for the well ordering of our life Davenantius saith better That such are fundamentall the knowledge whereof is simply necessary to salvation iâ— ignorance whereof doth condemne Doctor Potter calleth them Pâ—ime and capitall doctrines of our Religion or of that faith which essentially constituteth a true Church and a true Christian which is good but that he contradivideth from these things not fundamentall which may be disputed on either side and cannot be determined by the Word of God and must lie under a non liquet is his error Yet he may know that Bellarmine saith right many things are of faith and cleare in Scripture as historicall relations which are not fundamentall Camero and a greater Divine then Camero Dom. Beza reduceth all fundamentalls to things which necessarily belongeth to faith and obedience and great Calvin retrincheth fundamentalls within the Apostles Creed Occam will have the militant Catholicke Church alwayes explicitely or expressly beleevings things necessary to salvation and our Divines teach that the Catholike Church cannot erre in fundamentalls they meane with pertinacie and obstinacie 2. In
ignorant of some lesse fundamentalls 2. Because we see in a mirror and imperfectly 3. In respect of beleeving upon a false ground as for miracles In respect of the object the certaintie is most sure as sure as that God cannot lie In respect of our adherence of understanding and affections in this respect the knowledge of fundamentalls must bee certaine 1. By a negative certitude which excludeth doubting and so Pastor and people must have a certitude of fundamentalls as Rom. 14 5. Col. 1. 9. Heb. 5. 12. but for a positive certitude there is not that measure required in a teacher that is in a scholler for all the body cannot be an eye 1 Cor. 12. 17. yet is a Christian certitude and fulnesse of perswasion required even of all Christians Colos. 2. 2. Colos. 3. 16. highest and greatest in its kind though many may bee saved with lesse yet a distinct knowledge of fundamentalls in all is not necessary by a necessitie of the meanes necessitate medii as Beza and Doctor Ames teach There is a faith of fundamentalls implicite in respect of the will and affections which Papists make a wide faith as the Jâ—uâ—e Becanus thinke to beleeve these two fundamentalls 1. That there is a God 2. That this God hath a providence conâ—â—â—ning mens salvation though other particulars be not knowne Or implicite faith is saith Estius when any is ready to beleeve what the Church shall teach which faith Suarez saith though it include ignorance yet keepeth men from the danger of errors because it doth submit the mind to the nearest rule of teaching to wit to the Church the knowledge of fundamentalls in this sense doth not save but condemne Thomas saith better then he 6. Dist. They are not alike who beleeve fundamentall hereâ—ies 2. And who defend them 3. And who teach them and obtrude them upon the consciences of others For the first many beleeve fundamentall errors who are ignorant of them and doe thinke that they firmely adhere to Christian Religion Oâ—cam termeth such haereticos nescientes ignorant heretickes as the Marcionites and the Manicheans and these the Church should tolerate while they bee instructed It is true the Jesuite Meratius saith When many things are proposed to the understanding for one and the same formall reason to wit for divine authoritie the understanding cannot imbrace one but it must imbrace all nor â—â—ject one but it must reject all which is true of a formall malitious rejecting the Manichean beleeveth nothing because God saith it and hath faith sound and saving in nothing but it is not true of an actuall or virtuall contempt in one or two fundamentalls because beleevers out of weakenesse ignorance and through strength of tentation may doubt of one fundamentall as the Disciples doubted of the resurrection Joh. 20. 9. and yet in habite beleeve all other fundamentalls but the Church is to correct such as professe fundamentall heresies and to cast out of the Church seducers and deceivers 7. Dist. It is one thing to hate a fundamentall point as that Christ is consubstantiall with the Father as the Arians doe and another thing by consequence to subvert a fundamentall point as Papists by consequence deny Christ to bee true man while they hold the wonder of Transubstantiation yet doe not they hate this conclusion formally that Christ is true man 8. Dist. Though it were true which Doctor Christo. Potter saith If we put by the Points wherein Christians differ one from another and gather into one body the rest of the articles wherein they all gnerallaly agree we should finde in these propositions which without all controversie are universally received in the whole Christian world so much truth is contained as being joyned with holy obedience may be sufficient io bring a man to everlasting salvation I say though this were true yet will it not follow that these few fundamentalls received by all Christians Papists Lutherans Arians Verstians Sabellians Maccdonians Nestorians Eutychanes Socinians Anabaptists Treithitae Antitrinitarii for all these be Christians and validely baptized doe essentially constitute a true Church and a true Religion Because all Christians agree that the old and New Testament is the truth and Word of God and the whole faith of Christian Religion is to bee found in the Old Testament acknowledged both by Jewes and Christians for that is not the Word of God indeed in the Old Testament which the Jewes say is the Word of God in the Old Testament Yea the old and new Testament and these few uncâ—nâ—â—averted points received universally by all Christians are not Gods Word as all these Christians expone them but the dreames and fancies of the Jewes saying that the old Testament teacheth that Christ the Messiah is not yet come in the flesh the Treithitae say there be three Gods yet are the Treithitae Christians in the sense of Doctor Potter so that one principall as that There is one God and Christ is God and man and God is noely to be adored not one of these are uncontraverted in respect every society of Sectaries have contrary expositions upon these common fundamentalls and so contrary Religions Who doubteth but all Christians will subscribe and sweare with us Protestants the Apostolicke Creed but will it follow that all Christians are of one true Religion and doe beleeve the same fundamentalls now these fundamentalls are the object of faith according as they signifie things To us and to the Treithitae this first Article I beleeve in God as I conceive doth not signifie one and the same thing now joyne this I beleeve in God with holy obedience as wee expone it and as the Treithitae expone it it could never bee a step to everlasting salvation for it should have this meaning I beleeve there is one only true God and that there be also three Gods and what kind of obedience joyned with a faith made up of contradictions can bee availeable to salvation 3. One generall Catechise and confession of faith made up of the commonly received and agreed upon fundamentalls would not make us nearer peace though all Christians should sweare and subscribe this common Christian Catechise no more then if they should sweare and subscribe the old and new Testament as all Christians will doe and this day doth 9. Disl Though the knowledge of fundamentalls be necessary to salvation yet it cannot easily be defined what measure of knowledge of fundamentalls and what determinate number of fundamentalls doth constitute a true visible Church and a sound beleever as the learned Voetius saith Hence 1. They are saved who soundly beleeve all fundamentalls materially though they cannot distinctly know them under the reduplication of fundamentalls nor define what are fundamentalls what not 2. Though a Church retaine the fundamentalls yet if wee beforced to avow and beleeve as truth doctrines everting the foundation of faith against the article of one God if we must worship as many Gods as there bee hosties if Christs
and Paul tooke Titus and Timothy with him often for helping the worke of the Lord. The next Scripture saith Robinson is 1 Pet. 4. 10 11. As every man hath received the gift so let him minister as good stewards of the manifold graces of God if any man speake let him speake as the oracles of God Answ. This saith with us for private Christians are not stewards who gave them the keyes Yea 1 Cor. 4. 1. it is a word of office and it is not given to Ministers not in office as Beza observeth well he setteth downe one generall that the Ministers be ready to distribute and then two species 1 Preaching Ministers that they speake the Oracles of God 2. Serving Ministers Elders and Deacons that they minister out of the habilitie that God giveth them and the place is against private Prophets Robinson alledgeth Revel 11. 3. I will give power to my two witnesses and they shall prophecy a thousand two hundreth and sixtie dayes clothed in sackcloth The Clergie men are not onely witnesses against the Antichrist In the Antichrists raigne no Church officer aâ— anâ— officer witnesseth against him but all for him as both having their authority from him and binding themselves to submit their doctrine to his censure The persons indeed that were officers even Masse-Priests Monkes and Friers witnessed some of them against him but so did not their office something was extraordinary I acknowledge in respect of the then prevailing order and in respect of their degree of gifts and graces but no extraordinary and miraculous gift of prophecying and Brightman exponeth the two witnesses to bee the holy Scriptures and assemblies of the faithfull Answ. The two witnesses saith Junius are the Ministers for number few and for place contemptible so saith Couper and Paraeus induceth many paires of witnesses as in Bohemia John Hus and Jerome of Prague An. 1415 1416. in Saxonie Luther and Melancthon in Argentine Bucer and Cariton in Helvetia Zwinglius and Oecolampadius in France Farell and Calvin and these were Pastors in office We need not stand upon the number of two but because two is the least and fewest number the witnesses were two But first there is no reason to fetter and restrict the Text to witnesses and Martyrs out of office excluding the Ministers and Prophets in office and to inferre thence that gifted persons in a constitute Church are the ordinary Ministers of conversion 1. These two witnesses did prophecie in the midst of Popish Babylon where God had no visible Church They did upon a particular exigence being called thereunto as the Martyrs of Christ to give a witnesse for Christ against Antichrist and they sealed the truth with their blood but the consequence is null a Martyr at the stake though no Pastor may give a confession of his faith to the persecutors as Stephen did Therefore a gifted person not in office may ordinarily preach in the Church I would not buy such logick with a rotten nut 3. Many women were witnesses and Martyrs and gave a testimony against Antichrist Ergo women may preach in the Church what vanitie is this 2. Also if those witnesses had an extraordinary measure of gifts and graces to beare witnesse to the truth it followeth not Ergo Christians gifted with an ordinary measure of the Spirit are ordinary Prophets for the conversion of soules 2. Though these witnesses were only unofficed Prophets yet the prophecying ascribed to them after they arose from the dead will not inferre that unofficed Prophets are ordinarily to preach for the rising againe of slaine Prophets is not to be exponed of the raising againe of the persons of unofficed Prophets to preach but it is to be exponed of the rising againe of the buried Gospel which in the ministery of faithfull Pastors and in other new Martyrs Pastors and others arose againe from the dead with the Spirit and power of these Martyrs and that buried truth that was in former times persecuted by Antichrist did now revive againe to the wondering of Babylon for the intent of the Spirit is to show that the Gospel and true Church slaine and buried shall arise againe within a short time as three dayes and a halfe 4. It is vaine that he saith none of the Clergy witnessed and prophecied against Antichrist he is not versed in the Churches history who teacheth so for Monkes and Fryars were Ministers though their office unlawfull and as Ministers of Christ. Luther Melancthon and thousands other gave testimony against Antichrist Robinson addeth Revel 14. 6. Where an Angell flyeth in the midst of heaven that is in the visible Church having the everlasting Gospell to preach to them that dwell on the earth and to every nation and kinred That is God raised men in the midst of popery not miraculously inspired for you can show me no such who preached the Gospel not by vertue of an office The office of a Friar Monk or Massâ—-Priest is no ministery of Christs appointment and when they gave their clearest testimony they were almost all excluded out of Rome and so in respect of their personall gifts and graces they were Angels of God in respect of their office they were Angels of Antichrist Answ. 1. There is no reason to reject the interpretation of Junius that this Angell was a type of the servants of God who opposed Popery after the times of Bonifacius the eight as Cassiodorus the Italian Arnoldus de villa nova Occam Dante 's Petrarcha Ioannâ—s de Rupe the Franciscan Wickliff And Pareus refers the type to Wickliffe Marsilius Patavinus Petrarcha Our country man Napper exponeth it of Luther Melancthon and Calvin in the seventh age Anno 1541 and it is false that they were all excommunicated and though the accident of their office to be a Monke a Fryar was Antichristian yet the ministery it selfe was of Christ and by it they did preach against Antichrist as they did validely baptize for I hope they did not baptize as unofficed Prophets Lastly this Angel did not preach in the visible Church but in the midst of Popery and therefore doth not prove it is lawfull in a true visible constituted Church for gifted Prophets out of office to bee ordinary Preachers Robinson much urgeth the place 1 Cor. 14. 1 Because the Apostle speaketh of the manifestation of the gifts and graces common to all as well brethren as ministers ordinary as extraordinary 2. Hee speaketh of the fruits common to all edification exhortation and comfort compared with 1 Thess. 5. 11. 14. and of that which at all times remaineth amongst the Christians to wit love Answ. The cohesion of this Chapter with the former is cleare charitie should be followed because so excellent Therefore cover gifts which are most conducing to love and edification and that is to prophecie he proveth excellencie of prophecying above others and teacheth in this Chapter the right ordering of publick Church meeting Now Robinsons Argument is
Rom. 15. 16. 1 Cor. 1. 10. Act. 1. 14. I answer 1. that is because they are in Church-government all one and a conspiracy in error is but seeming unity But 2. I say good men as Paul and Barnabas will differ But 3. what if all be wrong of three parts as 1 Cor. 1. 12. Some said I am of Paul some I am of Apollo some I am of Christ all the three were wrong in that case doth not a Synod by the word of God determine the matter best certainly though Synods may erre yet are they of themselves Christs lawfull way to preserve veritie and charity and unity But our brethren answer us divisions ought not to be and they will not but all agree in the truth if the Church will lay aside corrupt judgement and depend on Christ considering the promises made to the Church Jer. 32. Ephes. 3. 9. Matth. 18 20. Let me answer there is much more charity in this answer then verity 1. They ought not to disassent from truth true but what then the remedy is not given except you returne to a Synod the division Act. 15. ought not to be the house should not be fired true but the question is how shall water be had to quench it for many things are which ought not to be 2. Neither will divisions be that is false 1 Cor. 1. 12. 3. As heresies must be so scandals must be our author saith they will not be they will not be say the brethren if the Church lay aside corrupt judgement and affection and attend upon the rule and depend on Christ. I answer There is but vanity and no solidity I crave pardon in this answer it is the vaine answer of Arminius in the case of the Saints perseverance The regenerate say they cannot fall away if they be not inlaking to Gods grace and if they in holy feare take heed to their wayes so saith Arminius in his Declaration and in his answer to Perkins so also say the Arminians in their confession and Episcopius But what is this but regenerate persons shall persevere upon condition that they shall persevere for not to be inlaking to the grace of God is to cooperate to the grace of God or with the grace of God and to cooperate with the grace of God is very perseverance it selfe for saith the the wicked Socinus and Smalcius and so say our brethren all shall agree in the truth if they lay aside corrupt judgement And what is that if they lay aside corrupt judgement that is if they agree with the truth and assent to the Word of God But so it is that the best regenerate even Barnabas a man full of the holy Ghost Act. 11. doth not lay aside corrupt judgement But our brethren proveth they will law aside corrupt judgement but how you alleadge the Papists abused Scriptures Ier. 32. God promiseth to put his Spirit and feare in his Church that they shall not depart from the Lord. True say I they shall not depart from God providing they lay aside corrupt judgement as you teach us But doe you not teach us by your answer to elude these pregnant places which unanswerably prove the necessity of the perseverance of the regenerated But 2. what though God promise to put his feare in the heart of the regenerate this promise is not made to the visible Church conveened in a Synod as it is such nor will it prove that a Synod shall all agree in the truth that the whole Church shall lay aside corrupt judgement except you serve your selves with these and the like places as Papists and by name as Bellarmine Gâ—etserus Snarez Bucanus Stapleton Gregorius de Valentia doe serve themselves with them and the like to prove that Councels are in fallible What is said in the fourth Section anent the power of the people in Church-governâ—â—â—â— is already examined onely in the closure thereof they seeme to give something peculiar to the Elders which the people have not which I discusse in the insuing question Quest. VIII What peculiar auhority is in the Eldership for the which they are over the people in the Lord according to the doctrine of our brethren We hold that Christ hath given a superiority to Pastors and Overseers in his House whereby they are by office government and power of the keyes above the people But 1. this authority is limited and conditionall not absolute as if they may doe what they please 2. It is a power ministeriall not a Dominion for as meere Servants and Ambassadours of Christ they doe but declare the will and commandement of the King of Kings 3. When this authority is not exercised by the precise rule and prescript of the Law of God it is not valid but null and of no force 4. They are so above the people as 1. they are their Servants for Christs sake 2 Cor. 4. 5. yea we are their servants servants not as if the people had a dominion over the Pastors or as if they had their authority from the people they have it immediately from Christ but because all their service is for the good and the salvation of the people 5. They have so superiority as they are subject to the Prophets to be judged and censured by the Church representative of Pastors Doctors and Elders It will be found that our brethren give no authority or superiority to the Eldership above the people In their answers to the 32. questions We acknowledge say they a Presbytery whose worke it is to teach and rule and whom the people ought to obey and condemne a meere popular government such as our writers condemne in Morellius Answ. So say our brethren in their Doctrine we acknowledge that the people and gifted men not in office should teach and all the faithfull is the governing Church to which Christ hath committed the keyes and power of ordination and highest Church censures even excmmunication and that the Elders should obey the Church of beleevers Ergo in teaching and â—uling you acknowledge no Presbytery 2. Seeing you ordaine the Elders to be ordained by the imposition of the peoples hands to be elected called censured excommunicated exauthorited shew us why the people are not the Rulers 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and the Elders ruled 3. The key of knowledge is a chiefe part of the keyes and these keyes by which sinnes are remitted and retained and men bound or loosed on earth and heaven and seeing Morellius Anabaptists and your selves teach that these keyes were given to the whole Church of beleevers how doe you thinke that people are not in teaching Overseers as properly as the Elders and that your government is meerely popular as Morellius taught to say nothing that when you deny your government to be meerely popular you doe not deny but it is popular for a government meerely popular admitteth of publike men to rule for the people and we never read of a government in Athens Lacedemonia
the Pastoes and Elders as such have the keyes not but as they are beleevers and a part of the mysticall body but as they are Pastors and Elders they have not received the keyes at all by our brethrens doctrine yea as Elders or officers they are not parts of the Church but onely adjuncts and ornaments thereof For the second to wit the execution of the censures of the Church if they doe it as Pastors and by vertue of their office execute the sentence of the Church as Pastors they are meere servants of the Church not collaterall Judges with the Church and are not as the Judge who doth direct the Jury for the Jury doth only cognosce of the fact but hath no judiciall power to pronounce the sentence or discerne the qualitie of the punishment nor can the Jury at all discerne any punishment But the Judge cognosceth both of the Law and the fact and authoritatively pronounceth sentence but the Elders have no authoritative power in directing the people to pronounce or not pronounce the sentence or what sentence to pronounce or what censure to inflict for if they have this authoritative power then we seeke Scripture to warrant this power 2. The Elders must then have the keyes in a more emminent manner then the people or Church of beleevers so all bee but blanke and emptie titles given to Elders hitherto Fiftly saith the Author The Elders have power to dismisse the people or Church and that with a blessing Numb 6. 23. to 26. which is an act of seperioritie Heb. 7. 7. An. This is but an emptie title also For 1. The Pastoronly one dismisseth Doctor Elders Deacons and the whole Congregation and so one is a Pastor of Pastors and an Arch-Elder of Elders hath authority by this over his fellow Elders and candismisse them therefore there is nothing peculiar in an officiall power here to the whole presbytery above the people 2. A majority or superioritie is one thing and a power of jurisdiction is another Blessing of the Church at their dismission is nothing but a prayer of the whole Church the Minister being mouth who blesseth all and is no act of superioritie of jurisdiction or power of the keyes of which wee now dispute And you cannot thinke that to obey those who are over you in the Lord and submit to them as it is Heb. 13. 17. is nothing but to receive a dismissory blessing from the Pastor And I much doubt if the Priests blessing of the people Numb 6. was morall and if it was not typicall hee not taking in himselfe but as a type of Christ pronouncing the whole visible Church blessed sorypifying Christ our Priest in whom all the nations of the earth are blessed Gal. 38. 14. And do not the people pay the Pastor home in his owne coyne for you make the Church of beleevers to ordaine their owne Elders and to lay hands upon them and blesse them so you teach 3. Nor is dismissing of the Church an act of authoritie or of officiall power for your preaching and unofficed professors may dismisse as well as they may publikely pray and preach 2. A dismission is agreed upon by the Church before hand and floweth from the nature of all publike meetings 3. Ejusdem est potestatis congregare dimittere caetum congregatum you know to conveene Christs Courts authoritatively is due to no man on earth the Church hath an intrinsecall power of herselfe to conveene being the Court of the Lord Jesus and so also to dissolve and this is the usurped power that the Antichrist taketh to himselfe to conveene the generall councells as Bellarmin Suarez Pighius and Cajetanus teach us Sixtly our Author saith In case of Apostasie of the Church or other notorious scandals or obstinacie thereof their Elders have power to denounce the judgement of God against the Church and withdraw themselves from it As upon the Idolatry of the Israeliâ—es Moses tooke the Tabernacle and pitched it without the camp Exod. 33. And Paul with Barnabas rejected the Jewes for their blasphemy and turned to the Gentiles Act. 13. 45 46. Answ. Here be two diverse things sewed together to make up one thing 1. to denounce the judgement of God is one thing 2. to separate from the Church is another thing the former is an act of authoritie being rightly taken the latter is an act of no authoritie But for the first to denounce judgement on a visible Church and that with a separation is â— nothing but an act of Pastorall teaching and so no act of officiall power of governing in the Elders above the Church is brought in all these six and so yet the difference betwixt the feeders and the fed the shepheards and flocke the watchman and the citie or the people who are to submit and obey these who are over them in the Lord who rule well is close everted and all the Churches are turned masters feeders governors rulers for Elders have no officiall authoritie by our brethrens doctrine which is not in the Church of beleevers 2. To denounce judgement to an Idolatrous and obstinate Church who by their Apostasie do declare themselves not to bee Christs body is a Pastorall act of Pastors exercised on those who now leave off to be Churches and this is to play the Pastors to that which is not a flocke and as unlawfull as for a husband to exercise the actions of a husband to one who is not his wife 3. To separate from an obstinate Church is by you thought lawfull to all private Christians who would not defile themselves with the pollutions of the Church how then do you make it an authoritative act of ruling Pastors 4. For Pastors to remove the Gospell and preach no more to an obstinate Church is not nor can it in reason be that wherein wee are to submit and obey those who are over us in the Lord. My reason is we are to be agents at least for most part in submitting and yeelding our selves to those who in teaching and governing are over us in the Lord because they watch for our soules But in their separating from us and removall of the Gospel wee are meere patients and cannot be agents 5. Moses his removall of the Tabernacle and Paul his turning from the Jewes was by another spirits warrant then Pastors now a dayes can dare to remove themselves and their Ministery from a visible Church for Paul turned from the Jewes for their universall Apostasie blasphemy and opposing of the maine and principall foundation of the Christian faith to wit that Christ Jesus came in the world died for sinners rose againe and ascended to heaven c. The 4. case to wit of any particular scandall or scandals and of obstinacie therein cannot bee the like ground for Elders to separate from a Church and never preach the Gospel againe to them CHAP. 6. SECT 1. Of communion of sister Churches amongst themselves I Here bee seven wayes saith
Minister cannot administer the Lords Supper to any but his owne flocke see you to this 6. If the sister Church lie under any offence you will not admit any of their members to the Lords Supper though these members be of approven piety and why What a separation is this What if these members do not consent to that offence as some of the godly in Corinth might be humbled and mourne that the Church did not cast out the incestuous person shal they be debarred by you from the seales because they separate not from that infected lump the Apostle alloweth communicating so that every one examine himselfe 1 Cor. 11. 21. 30. with drunken persons and where many were stricken of God with death and diverse diseases as eating and drinking their owne damnation 7. You looke at the Lords Supper as a seale of communion with all the Churches of the Saints What communion meane you invisible no. You deny that the seales are given to the invisible Church and the members thereof but to the visible Church as you say If you meane a visible communion of all the visible Churches of the Saints why then brother doe you call the universall visible Church a Chimera or a dreame as you say and if all the visible Churches have a visible communion it is to deny Christs wisdome and care of his Church to deny the lawfulnesse of a Oecumenick and generall councell of all the Churches of the Saints We recommend saith the Author Brethren for a time to other Churches as Paul recommended Phoebe to the Church of Rome Rom. 16. 1. 2. or we give letters dismissorie to such as are for ever to reside in another congregation but members are not to remove from their congregation but upon just and weighty reasons made knowne and allowed by the whole Church for wee looke at our Church Covenant as an everlasting Covenant Jerem. 50. v. 5. And therefore though it may be resigned and translated from one Church to another as Gods hand shall direct yet it is not to be violated and rejected by us if members cut off themselves by excommunication it is their owne fault if any upon light reasons be importunately desirous to remove the Church is to use indulgence as not willing to make the Church of God a prison but often the hand of God in poverty and scandall followeth such and driveth them to returne when a person recommended by letters commeth to another congregation the Church by lifting up their hands or by silence receive him if he â—e altogether unknowne and doubted of because the Church may erre be is not received till due triall be taken of him Answ. We see not how letters of recommendation most lawfull as we judge and necessary can resigne ministeriall power a liberty bought with Christs bloud as you say to any other Church for we think all the visible Churches are one Catholike visible Church and should have a visible communion and so that there is no resignation of ministeriall power in these letters but they are declaratory of the Christian behaviour of the dismissed Christian. We aske if dimissory letters be authoritative and done by the Church as the Church and how can a Church usurp authority by your way over a sister Church to recommend a sojourner to a Church state and Church liberties and seales of the Covenant one Church hath no authority over another If these letters be meerely private and meerely declaratory to manifest and declare the sojourners Christian behaviour only then he had power and right without these letters or any act of resignation or giving away ministeriall power to be a Church-member of the visible Church to the which he goeth Ergo he was a member of the visible Church to which he goeth before the dimissory letters were written and the letters doe resigne no right but onely notifie and declare the sojourners preexistent right and so there is a visible Church and a visible communion of all congregations on earth and most be an externall power and authority in all for Synods Let our brethren see to this 3. The person to remove must be dismissed and loosed by the consent of the whole congregation it conveniency permit else he is not exonered of his Church-oath made to that congregation What if conveniency doe not permit then is he loosed from an oath without consent of the Church which did by oath receive him I thinke ejuâ—dem pâ—testatis est as the Law saith ligare solvere that Church power which bindeth must loose 4. If the Church-Covenant be an everlasting Covenant as Jer. 50. 5. tying the man to the membership of that particular congregation for ever I see not how the Church can use indulgenees and Pope-like dispensations against the oath of God to breake it upon light and frivolous reasons for if God punish Covenant breaking so also should the Church and can by no indulgence be accessory to the breach of Gods oath there is too great a smell of Popery Arminianisme and Socinianisine in this way in my weake judgement But if the man be not sworne a member of that particular Church by his oath he is sworne a member of the visible Church universall which our brethren cannot well say Neither is any Covenant called an everlasting Covenant in the Scripture but the Covenant of grace Jer. 31. 33. c. 32. 40. Isa. 54. 9 10. and that is made with the invisible Catholike Church of beleevers as is the Covenant Jer. 50. 5. and not a Covenant with one visible congregation and what warrant hath the Church to dispense with the breach of such an everlasting Covenant 5. The testimony of other Churches if it be a warrant to you in faith to receive into the Church such a one as a Saint and a Temple of the holy Spirit how should it not also be a warrant to you to cast out and excommunicate also 6. The person comming from another Church if of approven piety is received by lifting up of the hands or silence of the Church as you say 1. Have we a warrant from Gods word for such a new inchurching 2. Why is he not received by a Church oath as a Minister transplanted to another Church must have ordination and election of new for to you there is alike reason 3. If there be no need of a new Church oath to make him a member of that visible Congregation seeing now he is loosed from the former you inâ—inuate his former Church-oath did make him a member of a visible Church and so â—e that is a visible member in a Church is a visible member of all and so there must be a visible Church-Catholike if there be a Catholike visible membership in any one member and so you destroy what you build Manuscr 16. A third way of Communion with other Churches saith the Author is by seeking their helpe and presence 1. In admitting of members 2. In case of differences of judgments 3. In
dayes of Elias and amongst Papists Occam the author of Onus ecclesiae and Picus Mirandula complaine there was in their time no saith no truth no Religion no discipline no modesty but all sold offices Churches dignities and benefices and that ambitious Popes spill all the Clergy entered by Simony ruled by Simony the holy place corrupted At which times all the godly were crying for a free generall councell as a remedy against the corruption of inferior judicatories Saâ—anoâ—ala reputed a Prophet counselled Charles the eighth of France to reforme the Church as he would returne from Italy with honour as saith Philip de Comines Gerson pleadeth for the necessity of a generall Councell Genebrard saith for an hundred and fifty yeeres Popes to the number of fifty had made defection from the faith and godlinesse of their Ancestors Aventinus maketh the same complaint and Almain also that Prelats were more eaten up with the zeale of money then the zeale of Gods house Is there not need then of a generall Councell Hence came also appeales from the Pope The Emperour Lodovicus Bavarus saith the German Chronicle appealed from Pope John 22. misinformed to a generall Councell and the Pope better informed and the crime was because he had taken the title of Emperour before he was confirmed by the Pope for which he was excommunicated Sigismond Duke of Austria appealed from Pope Pius the second to the next succeeding Pope and a generall Councell under him for the Pope excommunicated Sigismond because he kept backe Cardinall Cusan from the Bishoprick of Brixen within his Dominion for the Bishoprick was given to him by a commendam by the Pope See Aeneas Silvius Philip the fourth appealed from wicked Boniface the eighth to the Sea Apostolike then vacant and to a future Councell so Platina relateth The University of Paris appealed from Leo the tenth who wickedly condemned the Councell of Basill to a future Councell as you finde it in the treatise called Fasciculus c. The Archbishop of Cullen excommunicated by Paul the third appealed to a lawful Councel in Germany because the Pope stood accused of heresie and idolatry as Sleidan saith The glosse of the Canon Law saith the Pope cannot be Judge in his owne cause and we all know how justly Luther appealed from Leo the tenth to a generall Councell all which saith that the like is warranted by the Law of nature where a particular Eldership and congregation is accused of scandals that superiour Synods there must be to discusse such causes And the good use of councels you may see in one The Councell of Constance Sess. 11. art 67. condemned John 23. because he taught there was no life eternall Nequeâ—aliam post hanc vitam pertinaciter credidit animam hominis cum corpore mori extingui ad instar animalium brutorum dixitque mortuum semel esse etiam in novissimo die minime resurrecturum The necessity of Assemblies when common enemies trouble the Church prove that Christ hath instituted Synods And 1. our present Authour reasoneth from the Churches necessity Synods may conveene to examine saith he either corrupt opinions or suspitious practises and citeth for this the Councell of Jerusalem Act. 15. Now this councell did authoritatively command Act. 15. 28. Act. 16. 4. Act. 20. 19. and not give advise or counsell onely 2. If by the Law of nature and by vertue of the communion of Saints Churches conveened may give advise then say I as communion of counsels and advises is lawfull so by the Law of nature communion of authoritative power is lawfull As after the eye saith Almain seeth the danger of the body it should give warning to the rest of the members to use their power And this power saith he denunciative or by way of charity though not authoritative is in private persons for the conveening of a Councell As after saith Almain in the same place any is instructed by a skilled Physitian of that which is necessary for the health and safety of the whole body he is obliged to use that necessary meane not now by vertue of the precept or rather counsell and advise of the Physitian but by vertue of the precept and authoritative power of the Law of nature for the safety of his body yea further saith he if the right band were fettered with chanizees or should refuse pertinaciously at the nodde of the imagination to defend the body then the whole power of defending the body should remaine in the left hand And certainly this is most naturall if a forraine enemy should invade a whole Land or any part of a Land the whole Land by the Law of nature were obliged with joynt authority and power to resist that common enemy Now seeing a number of consociated sister Churches make one visible Church body having visible communion together as the Author granteth in the Sacrament of the Lords Supper which is saith he a seale of the communion of all the Churches of the Saints and in other externall acts of Church communion as hearing the Word exhorting rebuking comforting one another then are all these visible Churches with united authority and Church power as Churches and not as Christians onely to conveen and condemne a common heretick infecting all or any part of that visible Church body and if any one Church or Congregation under the pretence of plenitude of independencie of government within themselves should refuse to joyne with the whole yet the authoritative power of Synodicall judging and condemning such a heretick doth reside by the Law of nature in the rest of the body If there bee a communion of gifts there is also a communion of authoritie And if a nation have intrinsecally authoritative power under a Prince to repell a common enemy for the safetie of the whole then hath a visible body of many Churches in joyning one externall communion of sisterly consociation under one Christ one Church power to repell a scandalous heretick who is a common enemy to the whole Churches visible This Argument is grounded upon the necessitie of Synods our brethren are forced to acknowledge their necessitie by way of counselling and advising but Synods as Synods to bee necessary they thinke popish The best popish councell wee read of is that of Basil where it was ordained that a generall councell should be holden within five yeers next following the next councell within seven yeers and alwayes after that every ten yeers and in the councell of Basil the Pope is discharged to transgresse that time of convocating a councell Now the councells as councells are no popish devices but rather hated by right downe and well died Papists as is cleare by Gersons complaint who saith omission of generall councells is the Churches plugue a lover of reformation Franc. Zabarell saith wicked Pâ—pes neglecting generall councells have undone the Church The learned author of the
Nazianzen which is not against their authoritie and true fulnesse and he speaketh of the councells of his time and it is not to bee denyed but Panormitan saith well dictum unius privati est praeferendum dicto papae si ille moveretur melioribus rationibus veteris novi Testamenti and Augustine saith latter councells may correct older councells and Petrus de Monte under Eugenius complained that there was no godly and learned Bishops in his time to determine truth in a Synod when Doctors Professors Bishops and all have sworne obedience to the Pope to their Occumenick councells and to the wicked decrees of the councell of Trent as the Bull of Pius the fourth requireth But before I say any thing of the second question anent the magistrates power I shall close the other wayes of communion of sister Churches CHAP. 6. SECT 5. Three other wayes of communion of sister Churches A Fift way of communion saith the author is by helping and contributing to sister Churches Prophets and Teachers when they are in scarstie as Act. 11. 29. Rom. 15. 25. 26. Ans. This way of communion we acknowledg but we see not how this communion can stand wiâ—hout the authoritie of Synods if Churches bee not united in one visible body they cannot authoritatively send helpe of teachers one to another and this is a direct acknowledgement of a visible union of more Churches in one visible body for the Church of Jerusalem authoritatively sent Pastors Paul and Barnabas as Pastors to the Gentiles you will have them sent as gifted men and that they are not Pastors while they bee ordained and chosen by these Churches to which they goe A sixt way of communion saith hee is by admonition if a sister Church or any member thereof bee scandalous wee are then to send Elders to warn them to call Archippus or any other Elder to take beed to do their dutie if the Elders or Church bee remisse in consuring wee are to take the helpe of two or three Churches moe if yet that Church â—eare not wee are to tell a Congregation of Churches together or if the offence bee weightie wee are to withdraw the right hand of fellowship from such a Church and to forbeare all such sort of exercise of mutuall brotherly communion with them which all the Churches of Christ are to walke in one towards another Answ. You acknowledge that same order which Christ commandeth Matth. 18. to gaine a brother is to bee kept in the gaining of scandalous Churches But 1. What warrant have you of the two first steps of Christs order against scandalous Churches and to omit the third judiciall and authoritative way when sister Churches turne obstinate Christs order for gaining the scandalous is as necessary in the third as in the former two 2. Why doe you allow the third in a sort for if the sister Church will not bee admonished you will have her rebuked before moe sister Churches that are conveened that is before a Synod is it because you thinke there is more authority in a Synod then in one sister Church then you thinke there is authoritie in a Synod for by good Logick wee may inferre the positive degree from the comparative and there is no other reason why the matter should come before a Synod for all in a Synod wanteth authority and power to censure as you thinke yet to complaine to a Synod is an acknowledgement of the authoritie of a Synod as Christs order saith Matth. 18. 17. If hee neglect to heare them tell it to the Church 3. What is the withdrawing of brotherly communion from obstinate sister Churches but as Amesius saith well excommunication by proportion and analogie Ergo say I in this a Synod hath a Synodicall authoritie over the Churches within the bounds of the Synod by proportion for who can inflict a punishment of a Church censure by proportion answerable to excommunication but a Church or a Synodicall meeting which hath the power of the Church by proportion Amesius would prove that a particular Church cannot bee excommunicated because a Church cannot bee cast out of communion with it selfe for then she should bee cast out of herselfe But this argument with reverence of so learned and godly a man proveth onely that a particular Church cannot excommunicate herselfe which I grant but it concludeth not but a particular obstinate Church may bee excommunicated out of the societie of all sister Churches who meeting in a Synod in the name of Jesus Christ have power to save the spirits of sister Churches in the day of the Lord and are to edifie them by counsell and rebuking as the Author granteth and why not by an authoritative declaring that they will have no communion with such an obstinate sister or rather daughter Church Wee have never saith the Author been put to the utmost extent of this dutie the Lord hitherto preventing by his grace yet it is our dutie The Church Cant. 8. tooke care not onely for her owne members but also for her little sister that had no brests and would have taken care if having breasts they had been distempered with corrupt milke if the Apostles had a care of all the Churches 1 Cor. 8. 11. is that spirit of grace and love dead with them ought not all the Churches to care for sister Churches if not virtute officii by vertue of an office yet intuitu charitatis for charities sake Answ. That you have never beene put to these duties to the utmost will never prove that the government is of God for Corinth Ephesus Pergamus Thyatira which were glorious Churches by your owne confession were put to a necessitie of the utmost extent of these duties yea it proveth your government to bee rather so much the worse because Christs government is opposed by secret enemies in the Church 2. You make the spirit of love in a pastorall care over other Churches to bee dead because none have any pastorall care over any other Churches but the particular Congregation over which they are Pastors and pastorall love to unconverted ones as pastorall you utterly deny The last way of communion saith the Author is by propagation or multiplication which is as the Apostles had immediat calling from God to travell through the world and to plant Churches so have particular Churches given to them immediatly from Christ the fulnesse of measure of grace which the inlargement and establishment of Christs kingdome doth require that is when the Bee-hive a parishionall congregation is surcharged they have power to send forth their members to enter by Covenant in Church-state amongst themselves and may commend to them such able gifted Ministers as they thinke may bee Ministers in that young Church Answ. 1. This way of inlarging Christs kingdome is defective 1. It sheweth the way of inlarging the number of invisible Churches and multitudes of converts into new incorporations but doth shew no way how to
plant soules who were non-converts and branches of the wild olive in Christ Jesus and to make new visible Churches but it is certaine that the Apostles as Apostles and as Pastors by vertue of their office converted obstinate sinners to the faith of Christ and planted them in a visible Church consisting of professors of the faith partly converted partly not converted but the pastors by your doctrine have no power as Pastors or by any Pastorall authoritie to plant the Gospell where it hath never beene that pastorall spirit is dead with the Apostles and in this contrary to all reason and sense and contrary to the Scriptures you make private Christians the successors of the Apostles to plant Churches and to convert soules and to make them fit materialls for the visible Church of regenerate persons for Pastors as Pastors and visible Churches as visible Churches doe nothing at all to the multiplying of Churches seeing Pastors and visible Churches as they are such by your doctrine are but nurses to give suck to those who are already converted but not fathers to convert them for private Christians or pastors as Christians gifted to prophesie not as Pastors doe multiply Churches and convert men to Christ as you teach now wee all know that nurses as nurses doe not propagate or by generation multiply people in the Common-wealth that fathers and mothers onely can doe your Churches have no ministeriall breasts but to give suck to babes who are already borne but wee see by your doctrine no ministeriall power of Pastors or Churches to send forth members to enter in a Church covenant or to enter in a new Church relation of a daughter or a sister visible Church if they send a number to bee a new Church your Pastors or visible Church did not multiply them it is presumed they were converts before they were members of the visible Church which now sendeth them out and if they bee multiplied in the bosome of your visible Church and converted they were not truely members of that visible Church before their conversion and also that they were not converted by any publike ministery but by private Christians gifted to prophesie who are the onely successors of the Apostles to plant visible Churches but what pastorall authoritie have you to send them forth to bee a new visible Church none at all they have as beleevers power to remove from you and because of multiplication to make themselves a new Church and this ministeriall power of making themselves a new Church they have not from you but from their fathers who converted them so that you make a visible Church within a visible Church but not a Church begotten or borne of a visible Church as a child of the mother and wee desire a word of God either precept promise or practise of such a Church multiplication mans word is not enough 2. Wee hold that the sending of the Apostles to all the world was not in it selfe that which essentially distinguisheth the Apostle from the now ordinary Pastor who is fixed to a single Congregation but the gift of tongues to preach to all the world upon the Lords intention to send the Gospel to all nations that as many as were chosen to life might beleeve was that which essentially differenceth the Apostle from the ordinary pastor together with a speciall revelation of God to goe to such and such people to Macedonia and not yet to Bythinia And now seeing these two are taken away the ordinary Pastors which now are have as Pastors a sufficient calling to preach the Gospel to all nations to whom by Gods providence they shall come and can understand their language whether of their owne Congregation or not Neither is a Pastor tied as a Pastor by Gods Word to one onely Congregation for then it should bee unlawfull for a Pastor as a Pastor to plant a new Church but shall it bee lawfull for private Christians to plant new Churches who are not the Apostles successors and yet it shall bee unlawfull for Pastors who are the undoubted successors of the Apostles to plant new Churches I would think that admirable doctrine for so you give to private Christians that which you make essentiall to the Apostles and you deny it to the undoubted successors of the Apostles to wit to Pastors But we hold a lawfull Pastor is a Pastor in relation to all the world with this distinction hee is by Christs appointment and the Churches a Pastor to all congregations to plant and water and preach but by speciall designation of Gods providence and the Churches appointment designed and set apart for such a determinate flock just as the Apostles in generall were made Pastors to all the world Matth. 28 19. Go teach all nations but by speciall revelation and Apostolick appointment Peter was appointed the Apostle of the Jewes Paul of the Gentiles Gal. 2. 9. yet Paul was a Pastor in relation to the Jewes and Peter also in relation to the Gentiles so by speciall revelation Act. 16. they are forbidden to preach the word in Bythinia and commanded to preach it elsewhere and for this cause pious antiquity as Morton observeth called some learned fathers Pastors of the World Athanasius is saluted Pontifex maximus as Russinus saith and Origen magister ecclesiâ—rum master of the Churches so Hieronymus and Cyprian totius orbis praeses Cypâ—ian the Bishop of all the world yea and Pope so Nazianz. Hilarius is called by Augustine insignis ecclesiae doctor a renowned teacher of the Church and Nazianzenus calleth Basilius the light of the word and Damascenus the light of the whole world and Theodoret saith Chrysostome is called totius orbis terrarum doctor the Doctor and teacher of the whole world all which titles saith evidently that antiquitie beleeved never a Pastor or Bishop not to bee a Pastor onely in relation to the one single Congregation whereof hee is Pastor but a Pastor in relation to the whole visible Church though by designation of the Church his ministery bee appropriated to one particular Church Thus it is cleare that our brethren deny all communion of Churches while they confine a visible Church to one onely single and independent Congregation subjected in its visible government to Christ Jesus immediatly and to no universall visible Church or Synod on earth Quest. II. Whether the Magistrate hath power to compell persons to a Church profession Anent Magistrates sundry things are questioned to make presbyteriall government odious And first our brethren complaine that our Churches are constitute by the authoritie of the Magistrate Robinson saith it was a presumptuous enterprise that people were haled against their will into covenant with God to sweare obedience to the protestant Faith being a profane multitude living before in grosse idolatry and that by the authority of the supreme magistrate for the commandement of the magistrate say they can make no members of the visible Church or of
Christs body because it is a voluntary act of obedience to Christ that men adjoyne themselves to the visible Church Ergo none can be compelled thereunto by the authoritie of the Magistrate faith may bee counselled it cannot bee compelled For the clearing of this question these considerations are to bee weighed 1. The Magistrate may compell to the meanes and externall acts of worship and to desisting from externall false worship of the false God or of the true God worshipped in a false way hee cannot compell to internall acts of faith love and such like as having no power over the conscience 2. There is one consideration of a Heathen or Pagan nation which never received Christianitie and the true faith and another consideration of a nation baptized and professing Christ. 3. A Magistrate may compell a heathen nation to the negative reverence of Christ in a indirect way and that with the sword though he cannot compell to the positive worshipping of him if a Christian Prince subdue a Pagan nation hee cannot force them with the Sword to a positive receiving of the doctrine of the Gospell but if it bee a nation expressely blaspheming Christ as the nation of the Jewes now do hee may compell them to an abstinence from a professed blaspheming of Christ because he is to use the sword against blasphemy 4. The weapons of the Church as the Church are not carnall but spiritual and mightie through God 5. The compelling power of the Magistrate is terminated upon externall worship as abstracted from either hypocrisie or sinceritie in worship 6. Though no man resist the Magistrate in a matter of religion except in a hypocriticall way save onely he who thinketh hee hath reason 〈◊〉 and is led by the judgement and inditement of conscience to resist â—et is not the in litement of conscience but onely the Word of God â—et rule of mans obedience or resisting in actions purposes conversation 1. Conclusion Fire and sword or warre or the coactive power of a magistrate is not Gods way of planting the Gospell in a heathen nation which never heard of the Gospell before 1. Because the Apostles were commanded by teaching the Gospell to all nations Matth. 28. 19 20. Mark 16. 15. Act. 7. 8. and not by warre to spread the Gospel 2. Because Christs Kingdome is not of this world for then his servants would fight for him Joh. 18. 36. nor are the weapons of our warfare carnall 2 Cor. 10. 4. nor is Christs sword any other thing then the Word of God Rev. 19. 15. Gal. 6. 17. And in this meaning and with relation to the internall acts of sound beleeving have the learned taught us that religio suaderi potest cogi non potest if these bee the constitutions of Clemens let it goe for a truth in this sense that God hath given libertie of will to men not punishing them with temporall death but calleth them to give an account of â—â—eir doings in the life to come which yet cannot bee universally true except that the Author with Anabaptists take away the power of the civill magistrate and Athanasius meaned with us when hee citeth that If any will come after me let him take up his crosse to prove that the will cannot bee compelled and that of Lactantius is approved by all defendenda tamen religioest non occidendo sed moriendo non saevitiâ sed sapientiâ non sâ—â—lere sed fide illa enim malorum sunt baec bonorum necesse est bonum in religione versari non malum Nam si sanguine si tormentis si malo religionem defendere velis jam non defendetur illa fed polluetur violabitur Nihil est tam voluntarium quam religio in qua si animus sacrificantis est eversus jam sublata jam nulla est all which tendeth to this that religion is like free-will and free-will like a Virgin which cannot bee ravished Let that of Tertullian stand Lex nostra non se vindicat ultore gladioâ— Procopius saith that Justinian was blamed because hee compelled the Samaritans to imbrace the Christian faith 2. Conclusion A Christian Prince subduing a heathen Nation may compell them to desist from a negative disâ—onouring of Christ and from an externall false worship Dan. 3. 29. Therefore I make a Decree that every People Nation and Language which speake any thing amisse against the God of Sadrach and Abednego shall be cut in peeces and their houses shall be made a dungâ—ill 2. The Magistrate beareth not the sword for nothing or invaine for he is the minister of God a revenger to execute wrath on those who doe evill Rom. 13. 4. Therefore he should be Gods Minister to execute wrath on those who dishonour Christ. Nor must we approve of that of Tiberius that Gods take care of wrongs dene to themselves and that of the Emperour Alexander it 's sufficient that the breach of an oath hath God to be the revenger Yet the Emperour Constantine commanded all the Churches of the Pagan Gods to be closed up and Ambrose and Augustine both commended the fact and Ferdinand King of Spaine commanded all the Jewes who would not turne Christians to remove out of Spaine 3. Conclus Where a Nation hath embraced the faith and sworne thereunto in Baptisme it is lawfull for the Magistrate to compell them to professe that truth to the which they have sworne in Baptisme 1. Because the Magistrate is a keeper of both Tables of the Law Ergo he may take care that these who are baptized and sworne to be followers of Christ should professe what they have sworne to professe 2. Because the Magistrate may compell ad actus imperatos non ad actus elicitos commanded and externall acts of worship though he have no power over the conscience to command the elicit acts of will and mind 3. He may command to use the meanes of Religion though he cannot force Religion it selfe and this Jehoshaphat Ezechiah Asa and Josiah and other good Kings commanded and in that are set forth to all Princes as patterns of zeale 4. The most pungent argument of our brethren in the contrary is of no weight because say they for one to adjoyn himself to the visible Church in a profession of the faith it is a supernaturall worke of Grace and must be voluntary else the Magistrate should compell men to hypocrisie yea and he should saith Gregorius de Valentia following Cajetanus indirectly concurre to sacriledge to profane the holy things of God and feare of punishment maketh an action against the will secundum quid in some respect and for the point of supernaturality of professing Durandus handleth it Now I say that this is of no weight because as Suarez saith one may be compelled to heare the Word who yet cannot be compelled to beleeve so say I to make such a profession as may constitute any one a member of the visible
free act 2. because it is a supernaturall worke of God and so they are not under the stroake of the Magistrates sword for freewill in supernaturall acts is alike uncogible and free from all externall violence in both those who are baptized professors within the bosome of the visible Church and in Pagans and the truth is neither the Magistrate nor the Church can censine opinions even erronious in fundamentall points as they are opinions for no societie no humane authoritie can either judge of or punish the internall acts of the mind because as such they are indeed offensive to God but not offensive or scandalous to either Church or Commonwealth and so without the Spheare of all humane coercive power nor is Titus Tit. 1. To rebuke gainesiyers v. 9. that they may be sound in the faith v. 13. but in so farre as that faith is visible and as it commeth out of perverse mouthes which must be stopped v. 11. Also punishments either civill or ecclesiasticall do no other wayes worke upon the mind and heart but by a morall swasory influence for it is a palpable contradiction that freewil can physically be compelled therefore here saith Philip Gamacheus there is no need of an Emperours sword but of a Fishers Angle Let it goe then which is taught as a truth in this point by Covarruvias e Gregori de Valent. Gamacheus Tannerus Malderus that Princes have neither from the Law of nature or from any divine Law a coercive power over the faith of Pagans nor is Scotus in this to bee heard that the same divine law obliegeth all Princes and the Churches that did lie upon Israel to destroy the Cansanites Yet may it bee lawfull in some cases indirectly to force them in their false worship as Molina saith against Alphonsus a Castro if they kill their innocent children to their false Gods because it is lawfull to defend the innocent neither is that to bee regarded as a sufficient reason that these Infants doe not consent that they should bee defended because as Malderus saith it is lawfull to hinder a man who is willing to kill himselfe from unjust violence against his owne liâ— 2. It is lawfull as saith Aegidius Conin k Lorca Aquinas and Cajetanus to compell Pagans to desist from violent impeding of Pastors to preach the Gospell to some amongst them who are willing to heare because in that they are injurious to the salvation of those who are appointed to bee saved and doe manifestly hinder the Gospels progresse which the Church is so farre as is in her power to propagate even as her prayer is let thy kingdome come 2. Nor doe we thinke that Princes may compell Pagans who are under their dominions to the faith without foregoing information of their conscience or that simply they may compell them to embrace the faith except that here Princes have greater libertie indirectly to force them because they being now living as wee suppose in a visible Church they may infect the Church and therefore here should bee an indirect hindering of the exercise of their false religion in so farre as it is infectious to the Church of God ne pars sincera trahatur for to this by a certaine proportion the power of excommunication given to the Church by Christ may lead us 1 Cor. 5. 6. and if wee must live by Lawes and not by examples Paul the fourth his suffering of the Jewes Synagogues at Rome and their ancient feasts which faith Malderus of themselves are not evill is no law to us yea but to Christians it is a falling from Christ and his grace nor is Rome who tolerateth Jewith religion nor the edict of Honorius and Theodosius our warrant 3. Nor can wee beleeve that no other sinnes in opinion concerning God his nature attributes worship and Church-discipline except onely such as are against those points which are called fundamentall and the received principles of Christianitie should bee censurable by the Church or punishable by the Magistrate 1. Because Jesus Christ Mat. 18. ordaineth that every sin against our brother or a Church 1 Cor. 10. 31 32. in which the delinquent shall continue with obstinate refusall to heare the Church should bee censured with excommunication But there bee divers opinions concerning God his nature attributes worship and Church-discipline which are not against points fundamentall which being professed are sinnes against our brother and the Churches Ergo many opinions not against points fundamentall if professed are censurable by the Church and punishable by the Magistrate I prove the proposition because Christ Matth 18. maketh no distinction and exception of any sinne but saith universally v. 15. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 if thy brother trespasse against thee c. and wee can make no exception against an indefinit and Catholick statute and ordinance of Jesus Christ. I prove the assumption because there bee many scandalous points of Arminianisme Pelagianisme of Poperic anent Church government traditions the power and â—fficacie of grace circumciâ—ion forbidding of marriages and of meates which are doctrines of devills comming from such as have consciences burnt with an hot Iron 1 Tim. 4. 1 2 3. many points of Anabaptisme Antinomianisme Socinianisme and of divers other sects are not points fundamentall because many no doubt are glorified who lived and beleeved in Christ and died â—gnorant of either opinions either on the one side or the other yet being professed preached and maintained especially wilfully and obstinately do wonderfully scandalize our brethren and the Churches Nor can I say that such as beleeve that marriage of Churchmen is unlawfull and defend it as many holy and learned men in Popery did and died in that error if otherwise they beleeve in Christ and the like I say of Chastising the body and abstaining from such and such meates which yet are doctrines of devills and offensive to our brethren 1 Tim. 4. 1 2 3. can bee points fundamentall so as the holding of these must bee inconsistent with saving faith Some doe yet maintain that circumcision is lawfull and yet beleeve all points fundamentall shall wee say that such are damned and wee read Gal. 5. 2. Behâ—ld I Paul say unto you that if yee bee circumcised Christ shall profit you nothing 2. Opinions in points not fundamentall are either sinnes forbidden by Gods Law or they are not sinnes the latter can by no reason bee asserted because God hath in his word determined all controversies not fundamentall as well as fundamentall therefore it is necessary necessitate praecepti by vertue of a divine precept that â—ee beleeve that to bee true what God saith in his Word therefore the not beleeving of it must bee a sinne and a transgression of a Divine Law 2. If it bee no sinne it must bee because the mind is under no Law of God except in so far as the minde is ruled and led
changeth not he can reveale no contradictory truths for one of them must be a lie and he is the Lord who cannot lie Answ. Then I say these non-fundamentals are in themselves and intrinsecally certaine and if God reveale them in his Word he must reveale them under the notion of things certaine and we are to beleeve them as certaine truths having intrinsecall necessity in themselves from the authority of God the revealer therefore I am not to beleeve them with a fluctuation of mind to casheere the truth of them to morrow and the next and the third morrow But you say I doe beleeve non-fundamentals as they are revealed now they are not revealed to me in the word in that measure and degree of clearnesse and evidence of light that fundamentall points of faith are revealed therefore I may lawfully beleeve these non-fundamentals which are lesse evidently revealed with a reserve that upon the supposall I see I had an error of judgement in taking them to be truths whereas now I see them to be untruths I doe renounce them but because fundamentals are clearely revealed I am to beleeve them without any reserve at all Answ. The degrees of revelation and proposals of truths to our minds lesse or more evident or lesse evident so they be revealed by God in a sufficient measure of evidence they free us from obligation of faith in tanto non in toto as is cleare John 15. 22. If I had not come to them they should not have had sinne the sin of unbeliefe and in such a measure yet if God reveale these non-fundamentals though not so perspicuously as he revealeth fundamentals we are obliged to know them and beleeve them with certainty of faith and upon this formall reason because Jehovah speaketh them in his word no lesse then we are obliged to know and beleeve fundamentals for our dulnesse and blindnes of mind doth not licence us to beleeve what God revealeth to us in his Word with an 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and a fluctuation of mind no more then the naturall man is licenced to beleeve the fundamentals of the Gospel with doubting because they come in under the capacity of his understanding as foolishnesse 1 Cor. 2. 14. But say you upon supposall that our darkened hearts doe not see these non-fundamentals clearely we are obliged to take their meaning and sense with a reserve and so to receive and entertaine the truths of these non-fundamentals as we leave roome upon supposall of our misapprehensions to retract our judgement and to beleeve the contrary of what we once beleeved and this bindereth not but that we are simply and absolutely obliged to beleeve the non-fundamentalls Answ If we be simply and absolutely obliged to beleeve non-fundamentals though they be not so clearely revealed to us as the fundamentals as no doubt we are then doe we contrary to the morall obligation of a divine precept and so sinne in beleeving with a doubting and hesitation of that which God hath revealed in his word and when we beleeve Gods truth with a reserve to retract our judgement when a cleare light shall make naked to us our error that revealed error if revealed to be an error by the Lord speaking in his word doth clearely evince that God never revealed nor meant to reveale in his Word the former truth that was beleeved with a reserve for God cannot reveale things contradictory and out of the mouth of the Lord commeth no untruth therefore God in these non-fundamentals revealeth to us but one thing to be beleeved and that absolutely without all reserves for God can no more shine with a new light to delare the contradicent of what he hath once revealed as truth then he candeny himselfe or lie which to assert were high blasphemy and if the first truth of the non-fundamentall doe onely appeare truth to our understanding and be no such thing but in it selfe an untruth then doth the God of truth reveale no such thing 2. Upon supposall that we see not the truth of these non-fundamentals clearly we are neither to beleeve with a reserve nor to beleeve them absolutely nor yet are we to suspend our beliefe because I conceive all the three to be sinfull and we are never obliged to sinne but we are obliged to know and beleeve simply without all reserve having laid away our darke and confused conscience and are to know clearely and beleeve firmely that God speaketh this not this in his Word nor because I doe fluctuate about the truth of these non-fundamentals am I obliged to follow in non-fundamentals the endictment of a fluctuating conscience seeing holding the plenitude and plenary perfection of Gods Word the Lord hath no lesse manifested his will in setting downe superstructures and non-fundamentals in his Word then he hath revealed his mind to us in fundamentals But our Brethren prove that we may tolerate one another in diverse and contrary opinions about non-fundamentals from Phil. 3. 15. Let us therefore as many as be perfect be thus minded and if in any thing yee be otherwise minded God shall reveale this unto you 16. Neverthelesse whereunto we have already attained let us walke by the same rule let us mind the same thing Now there is nothing more opposite to this rule then the practises of some who will exclude and allow communion in nothing where there is difference in anything The labours of Davenant and others in this needfull case of syncretisme and pacification in those times are very seasonable I answer I distinguish three things that may be judged the object of syncretisme or mutuall toleration 1. Fundamentalia fundamentall points 2. Supra circa fundamentalia things that are builded on the foundation or superstructures or things about the foundation as many positive and historicall things that cannot result by good consequence off or from the foundation as that there were eight soules in Noahs Arke and some rituals of Gods institution in the Sacrament of the Supper and Baptisme c. 3. Praeter fundamentalia things meerely physicall not morall having no influence in Gods worship at all as such a day for meeting of an Assembly of the Church Wednesday rather then Thursday a cloake when you pray in private rather then a gowne these have or contribute of themselves no morall influence to the action as in what corner of your Chamber you pray in private these are meerely indifferent and tolerance in these I would commend It is true there is a strict connexion often betwixt the physicall and the morall circumstances so as the physicall circumstance doth put on by some necessity a morall habitude and respect and then the physicall circumstance becommeth morall as in what corner of your Chamber you pray it is meerely physicall and indifferent but if that corner that you pray in cast you obvious to the eyes of those who are walking in the streets that they may see and heare your private prayers then the place putteth on the
a man or no. It is taken for a thing out of controversie yea that this is no question at all Whether or no doth an erroneous conscience so bind that we can doe nothing against the standing enditement of an erring conscience for the Scripture is cleare in this Rom. 14. 14. I know and am perswaded by the Lord Jesus that there is nothing of meat-kind now under the Gospel uncleane or unlawfull to eat of it selfe but to him that esteemeth any thing to bee uncleane in the light of his il-informed and erroneous conscience to him so thinking it is uncleane that is to this man now under the actuall darknesse and errour of an ill-informed conscience it is not lawfull to eat but hee must abstaine from eating not simply from eating but from eating â—â—li modo So all who have commented on the place Calvin Beza Parâ—us Rollocus c. and of the Fathers all who either commented on or handled the text occasionally as Theodoret Chrysostome Basilius Augustine Cyprian Ambrose Origen Anselm all the Popish writers Lyra Hugo Cardinalis Aquinas Toletus Pirerius Estius Cornelius a Lapide c. yea Adrianus Vasquez Pezantius say it is manifestly against the Scripture and hereticall to say it is no sinne to doe contrary to the commandement or prohibition of an erring conscience 3. Hence the conscience carrieth to the agent from God a twofold obligation most considerable here 1. one from the action it selfe to be done or not done and this commeth wholly from the oblieging Law of God and not from the conscience there is another obligation that consisteth not in the action and commeth not from the action but in the manner of doing and this obligation commeth from conscience it selfe and that is that we doe nothing in such a manner that is against the light or inditement of our conscience for this is an imbred Rose Flower of divinifie and majestie that groweth kindly out of conscience according to that high place of some sort of royaltie that it hath to bee something of God a little breast-God a little Deputie and Judge not to bee contemned so when a proconsull bringeth to mee a forged commandement from my Soveraigne and Prince I may receive it with non-obedience if I know it to bee a forgery but I am not to despise and put any note of disgrace upon the proconsull be cause hee is in respect of his office the deputie of my Soveraigne though in this particular mandat hee doth prevaricate and not represent the soveraigne power and Prince whose deputie otherwayes he is by vertue of his office so is this the deputed royaltie of conscience that it standing to me bic nunc as representing a message from God though it represent it falsely that I can doe nothing in the contrary that deputry and message standing actually in vigor 4. I desire that these two obligations of conscience bee carefully kept in mind hence I say that conscience carrying the former obligation of Gods Law from which formally the action hath its lawfulnesse and in an eccentrick and irregular discrepance from which it hath its unlawfulnesse it doth not obliege mee to the action because it is conscience simply for when it offereth an action to mee as lawfull which in very deed and a parte rei in it selfe is unlawfull I am not oblieged to that unlawfull action for as God hath given to no ruler made of clay any royall power to bee a tyrant and to destroy where as his office is as a father to save and governe so hath not God given to conscience any power to obliege me to sinnes yea and conscience remaineth conscience when it representeth forged and illegall mandates under the notion of things good even when men love to goe to hell by reason yet in that false representation conscience is not Gods deputie therefore though if a man judge some doctrines to bee errors though they bee in themselves truths to him that so judgeth they are errors yet are these truths not to bee rejected simpliciter and absolutely by him who judgeth so ony they are to be rejected 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in some respect as they come in under the notion and garments of errors also if any suffer death for an error which in conscience he conceiveth to be truth that error is to him truth Distinguo it is to him truth that is he conceiveth and dreameth that it is truth that is most true but to him it is truth that is it ought to bee beleeved by him as truth and practised as lawfull that is most false for it ought to bee rejected both in point of beleefe and in point of practise and the erroneous opinion thereof should bee rejected and therefore if hee receive it as truth and professe it and die for it hee dieth not for righteousnesse sake but hee dieth for errour and for the dreames of his owne head and so is not blessed as one who dveth for righteousnesse for this vaine reason saith 1. that it is no sinne for the mind to beleeve a lie to bee a divine truth and it is righteousnesse upon the beleefe whereby I beleeve a lie to bee a truth to suffer for a lie under the notion of a truth Both these are false the former is false for the mind is under Gods oblieging Law to conceive aright of all divine truths as all the faculties of the soule are under a Law 2. The latter is false for to beleeve lies as divine truths and suffer for them because the erring conscience saith they are divine truths is not righteousnesse but sinfull credulity and blind zeale 1. Because wee are not to beleeve what our conscience dictateth as truth under this formall reduplication because our conscience thus doth dictate and saith it is truth but because Gods spirit saith to our conscience it is a divine truth not because our owne spirit and our owne dreaming and misâ—ed conscience saith so This is the controversie betwixt us and Papists anent the authoritie of Gods Word but with a little change for our conscience or the testimony of our conscience as such is no more the formall object of our faith and the formall medium and reason why with a divine faith I beleeve a divine truth to bee a divine truth then the testimony of the Church or the Pope is the formall reason of my faith so An â—baptists make a Pope and an infallible spirit of their owne conscience but the whole formall obligation tying mee to receive this and this point as a divine truth is because God hath revealed it in his Word the consciences representing of it is but a necessary condition of my beleeving but not the formall object of my beleeving the conscience is the cause why I beleeve it tali modo after a rationall way and by the evidence of practicall reason but it is not the formall cause why I beleeve it simpliciter for Papists Arrians Macedonians and the most
a Christian he is a member of the Church 5. The Kings power as King in things ecclesiasticke is not serviâ—e and meerely executive as the Churches servant to put their decrees in execution but it is regall princely and supreame 6. The object of the Kings power is not simply a peaceable life and externall peace of humane societies but also honesty and godlinesse but to be procured by a civill politicke regall and coactive way by the Sword of the secular arme as the object of the Church power is honesty and godlinesse to be procured by a ministeriall ecclesiasticall and spirituall power without any forcing of men by externall power 7. The end of Kingly power de jure by Gods right and divine Law exintentione Dei approbativâ is godlinesse but the end of Kingly power according to its essence and de facto is a quiet life though it attaine not Godlinesse as it doth not attaine that end nor can it attaine it amongst Pagans and yet there is a Kingly power in its essence whole and intire amongst Pagans where there is no godlinesse or Christian Religion 8. There is in Heathen Kings a regall and Kingly power to establish Christian Religion and adde regall sanctions to Christian Synods though there neither is nor can be during the state of Heathen Paganisme any Christian Religion there this power is essentially and actu primo regall yet as concerning execution it is vertuall onely 9. There is a difference betwixt a royall command under the paine of 〈◊〉 punishment with a royall power to punish the contraveners 〈◊〉 ecclesiasticke and a nomotbeticke power to make Church Lawes 〈…〉 hath the former power but not the latter 10. If the royall power be of that transcendent and eminent greatnesse as to make Lawes in all things belonging to Church 〈◊〉 and so as Camero must be heard saying that the â—ing is the supreame ruler and Church-men be as servants and instruments under him and doe all in the externall government of the Church by vertue of the Kings supreame authority the King is not much honoured by this for they must say that the King in the Physitian giveth dregs to the sicke in the Plow-man laboureth the earth in the fashioner seweth and sâ—aâ—eth garments whereas Paraeus who without reason also giveth to the Prince a nomothetick power in Church-matteâ—s doth except some things that the Prince cannot doe sometimes for want of right and law other sometimes for want of knowledge sometimes because it is against the dignity of his Majesty as in sordid and base arts 11. The power of governing the Church of the Jewes though it was ordinarily in the Priesthood the Sonnes of Aaron whose â—ippes did preserve ex officio knowledge Mal. 2. yet as the Prophets were raised up by God extraordinarily to teach they 〈◊〉 by that same extraordinary power did governe and therefore though the Kings of Israel were not Priests yet without doubt some of them were Prophets and as Prophets they did prophecy and as Prophets determine many things of Government by that same extraordinary power by which some of them to wit David and Solomon did prophecy and pen Caâ— niâ—k Scripture 12. There is one consideration of abuses and heresies manifestly re 〈◊〉 to Gods word and another of those things that are ordinar◠〈◊〉 〈◊〉 In the former there is no neede of the Churches ministeriall power of condemning them and therefore Ezechias Josâ—as Asa â—â—osaphat did manifestly by the light of nature and Gods word 〈◊〉 abuses and Idolatry in Gods worship without the Churches 〈◊〉 seeing the Church representative was guilty of these cor 〈◊〉 us themselves but in the latter seeing the Kings place is to com 〈◊〉 and compell by externall force and bodily punishments and it is the Churches part to teach inserme binde and loose therefore the King can make no Church Canons Hence our first conclusion The Christian Magistrate as a Christian is a member of the Church but as a Magistrate he is not formally a member or part of the Church 1. Because he is neither a Pastor Doctor Elder nor Deacon as is cleare to any for these offices were compleate in the Church without the Magistrate Ephes. 1. 11. else Christ ascending to heaven should have given Kings for the edifying of his body Neither is hee as a Magistrate a part of the company of beleevers 1. Because then all Magistrates as Magistrates should bee professors of the faith which is knowne to bee false 2. Because the Magistrate as such is the head of an externall politick civill societie not of Christs body 2. The Magistrate as a Magistrate wanteth such things as essentially constituteth a member of the Church as a Magistrate onely hee hath neither baptisme profession nor faith because then heathen Magistrates should not bee Magistrates the contrary whereof the Word of God saith Jeremiah in Gods name commanded to obey the King of Babylon and Paul commanded to pray for Kings and heathen Magistrates 1 Tim. 2. 1. Hence let us have leave to deny these Hee who is the Churches nurs-father is the Churches father and a part of the family 2. Whose office it is to cause all in the visible Church to professe the truth obey God and keep his Commandements hee is a member of the Church 3. Hee who is a keeper and preserver of Law and Gospell by his office hee is by his office a member of the Church For the first hee is a father metaphorically and doth by an externall coactive power and by the sword nourish the Church and therefore is not the Church nor a part of the Church ex officio by his office as the nurs-father is not the child nor a part of the child whereof hee is nurse-father and this and both the other two are to bee denyed because the Magistrate doth neither nurse the Church nor cause the Church doe their dutie nor desend the Law and Gospell by any power that is intrinsecally Church-power but by the sword and coactive power which in no sort belongeth to Christs kingdome as a part thereof either as it is internall and invisible or externall or visible which is not of this world Joh. 1â— 36. 3. By no word of God can Salcobrigiensis and Weemes prove that the Magistrate as the Magistrate is a mixt persen and his power a mixt power partly civill partly ecclesiastick for â—â— the ruler commeth in amongst the ordinary Church-officers â— m. 12. Ephes. 4. 11. 1 Tim. 2. 2. which the Word of God doth â—â—ver insinuate and hee should no lesse watch for soules as â—â—e who is to give an account to God then other Church-officers Heb. 13. 17. for the Magistrates office may bee performed by himselfe alone hee himselfe alone may use the sword in all things which hee doth as a Magistrate as is cleare Rom. 13. 1. and 1 Pet. 2. 13. 14 the King judging his alone and the Kings deputie sent by him judging his alone is to
not morall nor acts of justice or injustice more then the acts of Painting of sailing of making of Shooes and thus the King is not subject to the Church power nor is his intrinsecall end as King justice and godlinesse and preservation of Religion the man speaketh non-sense and wonders for the King as a King is a morall agent and not infallible in his Lawes or administration Ergo as a King he is under the Scepter of the King of Saints in discipline and in the keyes of the Kingdome of God and so the kingly office is subordinate to the power of Christ in his Ministers and Church discipline and by that same reason the power and offices of Ministers as they are morall agents and obnoxious to sinne to false doctrine blasphemy idolatry idlenesse and sleepinesse in feeding the flock are under the coactive power of the supreme Governour and he doth as King use the sword against them hence it is cleare that both the kingly power is subordinate to Church-power and that the subordination is mutuall that also the Church-power is subordinate to the kingly power and that both also in their kind are supreme the kingly power is the highest and most supreme and under no higher coactive power I meane the kingly as kingly conjoyned with the collaterall power of Parliaments where the Realme is so governed and the Church-power is the highest in the kind of Ecclesiasticall power Joan. Major saith well that they are not subordinate that is not one of them is above another that I grant but that which he and Spalato saith neutri in alteram est imperium that neither of the two hath a commandement over another that we deny yet are they powers in office and nature different for they differ in their objects 2. Use and end 3. And their manner of specifick operations and the Kings power is not ecclesiastick Others say that there was a perfect civill policy having no need of the Church power anent the perfect civill government amongst the Heathen and in Christian Common-wealths the civill power of it selfe and of its owne nature can doe nothing for the attaining of eternall happinesse except we would goe to the tents of Pelagians whither Papists doe lead us while as they teach that the naturall end of civill power of its owne nature and intrinsecally is ordained to eternall happinesse But the civill power of it selfe doth conferre nothing whereby the spirituall power of the Church hath intrinsecally and properly and formally its dignity power strength and proper vertue and doth produce its owne proper effect and end because as saith Spalato the civill Magistrates end is of another republike different from the Church he is head of the Common-wealth and civill body see Apollonius But I answer there is a Policy civill without the Ecclesiasticall Policy and the King is essentially a King though neither he be a Christian himselfe nor his subjects Christians and to the essence of a King and to the essence of a civill government Christianity and a Church-power is not required yet hath the King as King essentially a right and civill coactive power to promove Christian Religion and the edification of Christs body though he be a Heathen the want of Christianity doth not take away his kingly right onely it bindeth up and restraineth the exercise thereof but though he be a King essentially and actu primo while he wanteth Christianity and so is a perfect Magistrate quoad esse and the State that he ruleth over a perfect civill body quoad esse in respect of essence and being yet is he not a perfect Magistrate quoad 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 operari neither he nor his civill State and body are perfect in operations And it followeth not that the King as King can doc nothing about the obtaining of life eternall for as a King he hath a perfect right and kingly power to doe and being a Christian he actually exerciseth that power as a Nurse-father of the Church to see that the Kings daughter be fed with wholsome milke to see that the first and second Table be kept and that men serve Christ and have the seales of the Covenant in purity under the paine of suffering the weight of his royall sword and I wonder that this should be called nothing for the obtaining of eternall happines seeing it is a way to eternall happinesse to be thus fed under a Christian King as a King But say they it is Pelagianism that the Kings power compelling the Nurses to let out their breasts to the Kings daughter that she may sucke the sincere milke of the Word should be a meane of eternall happinesse I answer and it is also Pelagianisme to say that the planting of Paul and watering of Apollos and the ministeriall power and paines of Ministers without the grace of God can produce or effectuate supernaturall happinesse and it is false that the kingly power of it self doth confer nothing whereby the spirituall and ecclesiasticall power hath intrinsecally and formally dignity and power and its proper effect for it is true the kingly power maketh not the ecclesiasticall power but it setteth it on worke in a coactive way for the edifying of Christs body and doth causatively edifie Lastly whereas it is said the King as King is over the civill body and the Common-wealth which is a body different in nature from the Christian body or Church I say that is false for the King as King ruleth over men as men and also as Christian men causing them to keepe both the Tables of Law But 3. say they the office of a King is not a meane sanctified of God for a supernaturall good because it is amongst the Gentiles I answer this is no consequence for that office of it selfe is sanctified and ordained of God for keeping of both Tables of the Law and that it worketh not this in its owne kind is not from the nature of the kingly office but from the sinfull disposition of the Gentiles so the Word is the savour of death to some through their default Ergo it is not a meane sanctified for that end it followeth not But 4. the office of the King of it selfe and its owne power doth not governe or subdue the inward man for immediately and of its owne power it cannot bind the conscience but onely by the interveening mediation of the Word of God Ergo of it selfe it intendeth not to produce a supernaturall and eternall good Answ. Nor can the office of a Minister of it selfe and in its owne power produce a supernaturall good but onely by the authority of the Word Esa. 8. 20. Jer. 23. v. 22. Tit. 1. 9. 10. is it therefore no office sanctified for a supernaturall end But 5. they reason a supernaturall good and life eternall are effects flowing from the mediatory office of Christ bestowed upon the Church but the kingly power floweth not from the Mediator Christ but from God as Creator who
bestoweth lawfull Kings and Magistrates upon many Nations who know nothing of a Saviour I answer When I consider the point more exactly I see not how Kings who reigne by the wisdome of God Jesus Christ Prov. 8. 14. 15. have not their kingly power from Christ who hath all power given to him in Heaven and in Earth Matth. 28. 18. for they are Nurse-fathers of the Church as Kings Esa. 49. 15. they are to kisse the Sonne and exalt his Throne as Kings Psal. 2. 11. they bring presents and kingly gifts to Christ as Kings Psal. 72. v. 10. 11. and they serve Christ not onely as men but also as Kings as Augustine saith therefore are they ordained as meanes by Christ the Mediator to promote his kingly Throne Some of our Divines will have the kingly power to come from God as Creator in respect God giveth Kings who are his Vicegerents to those who are not redeemed and to Nations who never heard of Christ and others hold that the kingly power floweth from Christ-Mediator in respect he accomplisheth his purposes of saving of his redeemed people by Kings authority and by the influence of their kingly government procureth a feeding ministery and by their princely tutory the edification of his body the Church which possibly both aime at truth See the groundlesse carping at Cartwright Calvin Beza and others by that sharp toothed envier of truth the Author of the Survey of holy discipline of this hereafter more 4. Conclusion The King as King hath not a nomothetick or legislative power to make Lawes in matters ecclesiastick in a constitute Church nor hath he a definitive sentence as a Judge 1. All power of teaching publikely the Church or the Churches of Christ is given to those who are sent and called of God for that effect but Magistrates as Magistrates are not sent nor called of God to the publike teaching of the Church Ergo. The proposition is cleare from the like Rom. 10. 14. How shall they preach except they be sent Ergo how shall they publikely and synodically teach except they be sent Heb. 5. 4. No man taketh this honour upon him but he that is called of God as was Aaron c. Ergo if none be a Priest to offer a Sacrifice without Gods calling neither can he exercise the other part of the Priesthood to teach synodically to give out 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 decrees Acts 16. 4. that obligeth the Churches ecclesiastically but he who is called 2. Who so hath nomothetick power to define and make Lawes in matters ecclesiastick have onely a ministeriall power to expone Christs will in his Testament under paine of Church-censures and hath no coactive power of the sword to command these Lawes enacted and to injoyne them on the Churches But onely Church-men who are formally members of the Church as Pastors Doctors Elders and others sent by the Church have this ministeriall power without the coactive power of the sword and what ever the Magistrate as the Magistrate commandeth he commandeth it in things ecclesiastick necessary and expedient under bodily punishment I adde this because threatning of bodily punishment is not essentiall to Lawes in generall because some Lawes are seconded onely with rewards as the Judge offereth by law a reward to any who shall bring unto him the head of a Boar or of some notorious robber Ergo c. The proposition is cleare the learned Junius giveth to the Magistrate with our Divines an interpretation of Scripture as a Judge which concerneth his owne practise they are interpreters pro communi vocationis modo in a Christian way as private men but they have no power of ecclesiastick interpretation 2. Gul. Apollonius saith the Prince as a Christian hath an office to exhort the Svnod by word or Epistle as Constantius did the Fathers of the Nicen Councell and his Legates exhorted the Councell of Chalcedon ut Deo rationem reddituri See Ruffinus and the acts of the Councell of Chalcedon 3. The Magistrate hath a power judiciall as a Magistrate in so farre as his owne practise is concerned to expone the things defined but this expotition he useth non instruendo synodice non docendo ecclesiastice sed docendo seu potius mandando cum certa relatione ad paenam à brachio seculari insligendam contemptoribus not in an ecclesiasticall way teaching and instructing synodically but teaching or rather commanding with a certaine relation to civill punishment to be inflicted upon the contemners as he teacheth what is just or unjust in his civill Lawes not directly to informe the mind but to correct bad manners and this maketh the object of kingly power about Churches matters and the object of ecclesiasticall power formall objects different 3. Those who have a nomothetick power to define in Synods are sent by the Church to Synods with authoritative commission and power for that effect representing the Church which sent them as all who are sent with any ambassage doe represent those who sent them But Magistrates as Magistrates are not sent to represent those who sent them with authoritation commission of the Church Ergo they have no such power â—â—dâ—ine in Synods I prove the proposition from the Apostles practise Paul and Barnabas were sent as chosen men by the Church 〈◊〉 Antioch Acts 15. 2. 3. Acts 15. 6. the Apostles and Elders came from the Church to consider of this matter Acts 21. 18. Acts 22. 17. 〈◊〉 2 Cor. 8 17 18. if the Apostle with the Church sent Titus 〈◊〉 Brother whose praise is in the Gospel as chosen of the Churches to travell with us v. 19 in gathering the charity of the Saints for the poore at Jerusalem then by the like those who are sent to declare the minds of the Churches are also clothed with the authority of the Churches who sent them but Magistrates aâ— such are not sent but are there with the sword of Common-wealth and not with the mind of the Church as Magistrates except they be also Christians 4. The Apostolike Synods is to us a perfect patterne of Synods but persons defining in them are Apostles and Elders Acts 16. 4. Acts 15. 6. the Church Matth. 18. 18. defineth and 1 Cor. 5. 4. those who are conveened in the name of the Lord â—esus and the Apostles pastorall spirit those who are over us in the Lord and watch for our soules 1 Thes. 5. 14. Heb. 13. 17. but in these Synods there are no Magistrates yea there was at Câ—rinth a Heathen Magistrate 1 Cor. 6. 1. and in the Apostolike Church a persecutor Acts 22. 1 2 3. c. And the Magistrate as the Magistrate is not a member of the Church and is neither Pastor Elder nor Doctor nor a professor of the Gospel except he be more then a Magistrate 5. No Ecclesiasticall power or acts formally Ecclesiasticall are competent to one who is not an Ecclesiasticall person or not a member of the Church but a civill person
shall decree good or bad without examination also as Suarez the Councell of Paris their Law saith and Innocentius the first and Gregory the seventh doe teach Making Kings in their judgement slaves to the Pope and ' his determinations and to have no light but from their vertuall Church as the Moone hath all her light from the Sunne Our third distinction is that the Magistrate as Magistrate and a preserver of publicke peace may doe some thing when a Schisme and dissention is among the Church-men in a Synod 1. In this case he may punish perturbers of peace as Augustine answereth Gaudentius the Donatist and the separaters from the Church in which case the Magistrate indirectly condemneth one of the parties which the Church hath condemned but there be many other cases of dissention in this case therefore when the Magistrate findeth the Synod divided in two parties equally or three iâ— the corrupt part prevaile or foure in the case of the Churches aberration in one particular fact or five if there be an universall apostasie of the whole representative Church or sixe an universall defection of both the representative and essentiall Church all these being too casuall and of too frequent occurrence one and the same answer cannot be given and here be sundry subalterne distinctions considerable Hence our fifth Conclusion when there is an equall rupture in the body nothing extraordinary would be attempted if ordinary wayes can be had if Saul the ordinary Magistrate had at Gods Commandement killed Hagag Samuel the Prophet should not have drawne his Sword and therefore in this case the Magistrate would first seeke helpe from other Churches as that learned Apollonius saith But if that cannot be conveniently had as in a nationall Church it may fall out then the Magistrate as a preserver of peace and truth may command the sincerer part to conveene in a Synod and doe their duty as the good Kings of the people of God did 2 Chron. 15. Asa gathered together a people who entered in Covenant to seeke the Lord God with all their heart and layed an obligation of punishment to death on the rest v. 12 13. and Jehoshaphat 2 Chron. 23. 4. he layed charge on Hilkiah the High Priest and the Priests of the second order whom he knew to be better affected to the worke to bring out the Vessels made for Baal which proveth that the King should put the sincerest to doe that which in common belongeth to the whole in which case of the erring of the most part of the Church the Prince indirectly condemneth the erring part of the Synod because it is his place to forbid and to punish with the sword the transgressors of Gods Law But because his power is accumulative not privative under that pretence hee hath not power to hinder the sincerer part to meet and determine according to the Word of God 6. Conclusion In the case of the prevailing of the corrupt part of the Church or in the fourth case of the aberration of the Church in one particular the King hath a regall power to punish the Canonists if they shall decree in their Synod Popery and hereticall doctrine and so give to the Bride of Christ noysome and deadly milke the Prince as nursefather may punish the Canonists 1. Because hee is a keeper of both Tables of the Law and hath a royall power to inflict bodily punishment upon all sinnes even committed in foro exteriore ecclesiae as the King may punish false teachers 2. Because the Magistrates power is auxiliary accumulative as a tutor and nurâ—efather who hath law to helpe the Pupill and to adde to the inheriritance but hath no Law nor power to take away any part of the inheritance from the Pupill Ergo as a nursefather hee is to helpe the Church of Christ against the wicked Canons of the representative Church If any object then the King as King hath power to rescind and annull the ecclesiasticall Canons the contrary whereof that learned author of Altare Damascenum doth prove I answer that learned and worthy author proveth that the Prince cannot annull the Church-Canons and that the councell of Trent thought shame that the Pope should absolve any condemned by the Church-Canons and certainely the same power that maketh Canons should dissolve them but the Kings power cannot make Church-Canons for it is a part of the ministeriall calling to make Canons and therefore hee cannot annull and dissolve Canons but some greater Kingly power is due to the King in the case of the Churches aberring then in the case of the Churches right administration and as our Divines doe justly give to the Prince an extraordinary Kingly power in the case of universall apostasie of the Church as Jehoshaphat Hezekiah Josiah and other worthy reformers in the Church of the â—ewes did warrantably use their Kingly power when the Church-men were corrupted and negligent in their dutie so in a particular case of a particular error of the Synod the King as King may use his Kingly power in this fact that is secundum quid extraordinarie for the King is oblieged as King to adde his accumulative power of a civill sanction to all just and nâ—cessary Church constitutions and it the Canon or Church constitution bee wicked and popish he is oblieged to deny his civill sanction and not that onely for hee that is not with Christ is against him but hee is to imploy his kingly power against such Canons and so is to deliver the Church of God in that and in denying his accumulative power to unjust Canons hee addeth his kingly power accumulative to the true Church in saving them from these unjust Canons 2. Also it may bee objected If the King by a regall and coactive power may annull and rescind unjust Canons hee may by this coactive power make Canons for it is that same power to make and unmake Canons I answer if hee may annull unjust Canons that is liberate his subjects from civill punishment to bee inflicted for refusing obedience to such Canons and for bid the practise of wicked Church constitutions under the paine of the sword It will not follow that therefore hee may make Canons but onely that hee may adde his civill sanction to just Canons 2. Neither can the King properly annull the Canon but onely deny to adde his civill authoritie for the execution of such Canons But thirdly it is objected that the King bath a judgement that such Canons are wicked and superstition the Church-mens judgement at the assembly of Glascow Edenbrough an 1638 1639. is that such Canons are lawfull edificative and necessary then is the King obliged as King to deny his royall sanction and who shall bee Judge in the matter If you say the Word of God it satisfyeth not because both the King and the Synod alledgeth the Word of God as norm â— judicandi a rule of judging but the rule of judging is not formally the Judge
him all spirituall headship over the Church to the King and Burbillus also But Henric. Salcobrigiensis calleth the King primatem ecclesiae Anglicanae the Primate of the Church of England and â—ges oleo sacro uncti capaces sunt jurisdictionis spiritualis because they are annointed with holy oyle therefore are they capable of spirituall jurisdiction also may saith hee creat propria autoritate by his owne authoritie create Bishops and dâ—prive them See what Calderwood hath said and excerped out of the writings of these men the King as King 1. convocateth Synods 2. defineth ecclesiasticall canons 3. giveth to them the power of an ecclesiasticall Law 4. executeth Church Canons 5. appointeth commissioners who in the Kings authoritie and name may try heresies and errors in doctrine punish non-conformitie to Popish ceremonies may confine imprison banish Ministers 6. descerne excommunication and all Church censures and use both the swords 7. relax from the power and censures of all ecclesiastick Lawes give dispensations annull the censures of the Church upon causes knowne to them give dispensations against Canons unite or separate Parish Churches or diocesan Churches and by a mixt power partly coactive and civill partly of jurisdiction and spirituall the King may doe in foro externo in the externall court of Church discipline all and every act of discipline except hee cannot preach baptize or excommunicate And whereas Cartwright saith when a lawfull Minister shall agree upon an unlawfull thing the Prince ought to stay it and if Church ministers shew themselves obstinate and will not bee advised by the Prince they prove themselves to be an unlawfull Ministery and such as the Prince is to punish with the sword O but saith hee the author of the Survey how shall the Prince helpe the matter shall be compell them to conveene in a Synod and retract their mind but they will not doe this 2. By what authoritie shall the Prince doe this even by extraordinary authority even by the same right that David did eate of the Shew-bread if by ordinary authority the Prince would doe it yet doe you resist that authority also Answ. Though the Prince had not externall force to compell Church-men to decree in their Synods things equall holy juâ— and necessary yet it followeth not that the King as King hath not Gods right and lawfull power to command and injoyne them to doe their dutie force and Law differ much as morall and physicall power differ much 2. If they decree things good lawfull and necessary the Prince hath a power given him of God to ratifie confirme and approve these by his civill sanction but hee hath no power ordinary to infringe or evert what they have decreed 3. And if the Church bee altogether uncorrigible and apostate then wee say as followeth 7. Conclution When the representative Church is universally apostaticall then may the Prince use the helpe of the Church essentiall of found beleevers for a reformation and if they also bee apostatick which cannot be except the Lord utterly have removed his candlestick wee see not what hee can doe but heare witnesse against them but if there bee any secret seeker of God in whose persons the essence of a true Church is conserved The King by a royall power and the Law of charitie is oblieged to reforme the land as the godly Kings with a blessed successe have hitherto done Asa Jâ—siah Jehoshaphat 〈◊〉 in which case the power of reformation and of performing many acts of due belonging to the Church officers are warrantably performed by the King as in a diseased body in an extraordinary manner power recurreth from the members to the â—â—â—â—tick head and Christian Prince who both as a King 〈◊〉 â—â— in an authoritative way is oblieged to do more then ordâ—â—â—y and as a Christian member of the Church in a charitative and common way is to care for the whole body 8. Conclusion The influence of the Princes regall power in making constitutions is neither solitary as if the Prince his 〈…〉 could doe it nor is it 2. collaterall as if the Prince and Church with joynt concurrence of divers powers did it nor is 3. as some flatterers have said so eminently spirituall as the consultation and counsell of Pastors for light onely hath influence in Churches Canons but the Princes power hath onely the power to designe so as the Canon hath from the Prince the power of a Law in respect of us The Kings influence in Church Canons as wee thinke is as a Christian antecedent to exhort that the Lord Jesus bee served 2. concomitant as a member of the Church to give a joynt suffrage with the Synod 3. consequent as a King to adde his regall sanction to that which is decreed by the Church according to Gods Word or otherwise to punish what is done amisse Now that the Prince as a solitary cause his alone defineth Church matters and without the Church and that by his ordinary Kingly power wanteth all warrant of the Word of God 2. The King might have given out that constitution Act. 15. It seemeth good to the holy Ghost and to us which in reason is due to the ministeriall function for these are called Act. 16. 4. the decrees of the Apostles and Elders not the decrees of the King or Emperour either by Law or fact 3. Christ ascending to heaven gave officers requisite for the gathering of his Church and the edification of the body of Christ but amongst these in no place we finde the King 4. If this bee true heathen Kings have right to make Church-Canons though they bee not able and bee not members of the Christian Church and so without and not to bee judged by the Church nor in any case censured Matth. 18. 17. 1. Cor. 5. 11. and this directly is a King Pope who giveth Lawes by a Kingly power to the Church and yet cannot bee judged by the Church Burhillus and Thomson acknowledge that a Heathen King is primat and head of the Church and must hee not then have power aciu primo to make Lawes and to feede the flocke by externall government But Lancel Andreas Biship of Ely Tortura torti saith that a heathen King hath a temporall Kingly power without any relation to a Church power and when hee is made of a Heathen King a Christian King bee acquireth a new power But the question is if this new power be a new kingly power or if it be a power Christian to use rightly his former kingly power if the first bee true then 1. as learned Voetius and good reason saith hee was not a King before hee was a Christian for the essence of the Kingly power standeth in an indivisible point and the essence of things admit not of degrees 2. Then should hee bee crowned over againe and called of God to bee a Christian King and so hee was not a King before which is against Scripture for Nebucâ—adnezzar was to bee obeyed
and prayed for as King by the people of God at Jeremiahs expresse commandement 3. So a pagan husband becomming a Christian should by that same reason acquire a new husband-right over his wife contrary to the 1 Cor. 7. 13 14 15. the Captains or Masters who of heathens become Christians should obtaine a new right and power over their Souldiers and Servants and they should come under a new oath and promise to their Captaines and Masters 4. If the heathen King have onely temporall Kingly power he had no power as King to take care that God were worshipped according to the dictates of the Law of nature and Law of nations had power to punish perjury Sodomie parricid as sins against the Law of nature and the heathen King should not by office and Kingly obligation bee oblieged to be a keeper and a defender of the tables of the Law of nature which is against all sense But if the power which a heathen King becomming a Christian King acquireth be onely a Christian power to use for Christ the Kingly power that hee had while hee was a heathen King then a heathen King jure regali by a regall right is the head of the Church though hee bee a Woolfe and a Leopard set over the redeemed flocke of Christ yea though hee bee the great Turke hee is a Pastor called of God the Church though for his moralls hee bee a Woolfe and a hireling yet by office and Law hee is a feeder of the flocke Talis est aliquis qualem ius offiâ—ii requirit And certainly it is impossible that a heathen King can bee a member of the true Church hee wanting both faith and profession which doe essentially constitute a Church-membership if it bee said hee is ex officio by his office a member that is nothing else but hee ought to bee a member of the Church so all mankind are members of the Church for they are oblieged to obey Christ and submit to him upon the supposall of the revealed Gospel and the heathen King is no otherwise a member by the obligation regall that layeth upon him as King yea when the Gospel is preached and the heathen King converted to the faith hee is not a member of the Christian Church as a King but as a converted professor and so Christianitie maketh him not a Kingly head of the Church but what essentially constituteth him a King that also constituteth him a Christian King Christianitie is an accidentall thing undoubtedly to the office of a King 2. They doe no lesse erre who make the King and the Church officers collaterall Judges in Church matters so as with joynt and coâ—quall influence they should bee Canon makers 1. Because perfect Synods are and have beene in the Apostolick Church without any influence collaterall of Christian Magistrates as being against their will and mind who were Rulers of the people as Acts 1. 14 15. Acts 2. 46 47. Acts 4. 1 2. Acts 6. 1 2 3 4. Acts 15. 6 7 8. c. 2. What the Church decreeth in the name of Christ standeth valid and ratified in Heaven and Earth Matth. 18. 17 18. Joh. 20. 21 22. whether the Magistrate assent to it or not so that he hath not a negative voyce in it by any ecclesiastick power for Christ saith not What yee bind on earth in my name shall be bound in Heaven except the Magistrate deny as a collaterall Judge his suffrage Now if he be a collaterall Judge by divine institution no Church act should be valid in Christs Court without him as excommunication not in the name of Christ or performed by those who are not the Church but onely in civill offices is not excommunication also what ever the Magistrate doth as the Magistrate he doth it by the power of the sword Ergo if he take vengeance on the ill doer as his office is Rom. 13. 3. 4. his acts are ratified in Heaven though the Church as collaterall Judges say not Amen thereunto 3. The coactive power of the King and the Ecclesiasticall power of the Church differ as carnall and spirituall spirituall and not spirituall of this world and not of this world and are not mixed by the Word oft as Joh. 18. 36. 2 Cor. 10. 3 4. 2 Tim. 2. 4. and therefore it in one and the same Church constitution the King and the Church be joynt and coequall Judges and joynt definers the constitution must both be injoyned under the paine of bodily punishment which the Church whose weapons are not carnall cannot command and under the paine of Church censures as suspension rebukes and excommunication the King must command Now the Canon should neither be an Ecclesiasticall nor yet a civill Canon but mixt for the Canon makers injoyneth with powers and paines which are not due unto them nor in their power Now to make a Law saith Feild is to prescribe â—â—aw under the paine which the Law-maker hath power to inflict but neither hath the Church the power of the sword 2 Cor. 10. 3 4. Joh. 18. 36. nor hath the King by Gods â—aw the power of excommunication See Calderwood And one and the same Law should be backed both by a carnall and worldly power and not by a worldly and carnall power 3. The King as King must have a mixt power halfe kingly â—â—â— halfe ecclesiastick and by the same reason the Church must have a mixt power partly Ecclesiasticall and partly civill and this were to confound the two kingdomes the kingdome of this world and the spirituall kingdome of Christ which is not of this world Joh. 18. 36. condemned by Anselmâ— and Hilarius and Bernard and Augustin Put if they say that every one hath their influence partialitate causae non effâ—cii according to the nature of causes then is not one and the same Church constitution from both King and Church See Apollonius But the Kings Canon is civill the Churches Ecclesiasticall and every one of them without another perfect in their one kind See what the learned Gerson Bucer and Amesius saith further to adde light to this point Those who maintaine a third that the Church Canons hath all the power of being Church Lawes from the King and all Ecclesiasticall and oblieging authority from him and that they have onely some helpe of consulting power from the Church are grosser Divines See Joan. Weemes for so the King is the onely Canon maker and the Church-men giveth advice onely as the Kings Proclamation speaketh having taken 〈◊〉 counsell of our Clergy we command such a worship â— and so the Canon runneth it seemeth good to the holy Ghost and the King as the Canon speaketh Acts 15. 2. the King is made an Ecclesiasticall and ministeriall Prâ—acher to expone publikely the Scriptures to the Church of God for all lawfull Church Canons are but Ecclesiasticall expositions of Gods Word and so the Emperours and Christian Kings are the onely lawfull Canon
makers and definers in Oecumenick Councels and Bishops and Pastors and Doctors have all a meere power of advising and counselling which certainely all Christians on earth sound in the faith except women have O whither are all the tomes of the Councels Oecumenick nationall and provinciall evanished unto 3. Kings justly by this are made Popes and more then Popes for Kings onely have a definitive voyce in councells whereas Papists give a definitive voyce to all the lawfull members of the councell no lesse then to the Pope Weemes hath a distinction to save the Kings invading the Church-mens place while as hee giveth to Pastors a ministeriall interpretation of Scripture in the Pulpit and to the King a decretive and imperiall power of interpreting Scripture in the Senat. But 1. there is no exposition of the word at all imperiall but onely ministeriall by the Word of God except that imperiall interpretation that the Pope usurpeth over the consciences of men and this is as Bancroft said that the King had all the honors dignities and preheminencies of the Pope as Calderwood observeth and yet Edward the sixth and Edward the eighth would neither of them take so much on them What difference betwixt a Sermon made by the King in the Senat and the Pastor in the Pulpit It is that same word of God preached only the Kings is imperiall and so must bee in his owne as King the Pastors ministeriall in the name of Christ the distance is too great The administration of the Sacraments may be imperiall due to the King also as a pastorall administration is due to the Pastors 4. In the government of Church there is nothing set downe of the King but of Pastors to feede the flocke Act. 20. 28 29. to edifie the body of Christ Ephes. 4. 11. to rule the house of God 1 Tim. 3. 2 3 4. 16. to feede the sheepe and Lambs of Christ John 21. 14 15 16. and alwayes this is given to Pastors and Elders I know that Kings are nurs-fathers to feed edifie and watch over the Church causatively by causing others so to doe but this will not content the formalists except the King command and prescribe the externall worship of God Tooker Bancroft Whitegift Laâ—celot Andreas Salcobrigiensis have a maine distinction here That Pastors and Elders rule the Church as it is an invisible body by the preaching of the word and administration of the Saâ—raments and of this government the foresaid places speake but as the Church is a politick visible body the government thereof is committed to the King Bancroft said all the externall government of the Church is earthly and Wâ—iâ—eâ—gyft and Bancroft two grosse Divines made for the court say tâ—e externall government of the Church because externall is â—â—spiâ—â—tuall and not a thing belonging to Christs externall kingdome â—aith Bilâ—â—n but this is 1 false 2. Popish 3. Anabaptisticall 4. â—yrannicall False 1. Because externall and vocall preaching and a visible administration of the Sacrament in such an orderly way as Christ hath instituted is an externall ruling of Church members according to the â—aw of Christ as King an externall ordaining of the worship is an externall ordering of the worshippers according to the acts of worship thus ordered as sense teacheth us but the externall ordaining of the worship to preach this not this to celebrate in both kinds by prayer and the words of institution and not in one kind onely is an externall ordering of Gods worship therefore as Kings cannot administrate the Sacraments nor preach so neither can they have the externall government of the Church in their â—ands 2. The feeding of the flocke by Pastors set over the Church by the holy Ghost Act. 20. 28. includeth the censuring by discipline even the grievous Woolves entring in not sparing the flocke but drawing disciples after them vers 29 30 31. and therefore Pastors as Pastors are to watch and to try those who say they are Apostles 〈◊〉 not but doe lie Râ—vel 2. 2. by discipline so this externall â—eâ—ding is externall governing committed to Pastors whereas inward governing is indeed proper to Christ the head of the Church 3. What doe not the Epistles to Timothy containe comman dements about externall government to bee kept inviâ—â—able by Timothy not as a King I hope but as a Pastor even 〈◊〉 the appearing of our Lord Jesus Christ 1 Tim. 6. 14. and this taketh away that poore shifâ— that the externall government of the Church as Tookerus saith was in the Apostles hands so long as persecuting Magistrates were over the Church but now when the Magistrates are Christians the case is changed but the government of all suâ—â— as Timothy is must bee visible externall and obvious to men as 1 Tim. 2. 1 2 3 4. 3. 1 2 3 4. â— 16. 1 Tim 5. 9. 1 Tim. 5. 19 20 21 22. 2 Tim. 2. 1 2 3 4. 2 Tim. 3 5. all which must bee kept untill the comming of Christ 1 Tim. 5. 21. 1 Tim. 6. 13. 2 Tim. 4. 1 2. 4. If externall government were in the Kings power then were it his part to rebuke publikely to excommunicate and to lay on hands upon the Timothies of the Church all which are denied by the formalists and are undoubtedly the Churches part as the Church Matth. 18. 17 18. 1 Tim. 5. 19 20 21 22 1 Tim. 3. 14. 1 Tim. 1. 20. 1 Cor. 5. 2 3 4 5. 5. Parker proveth well that the keyes are Christ as Kings ruling in word and discipline 2. This is popish for so doth the Papists teach as Stapleton and Becanus that the Pope quo ad externum infiuxum according to externall influence of visible government is head of the Church and Christ according to the internall influence of the spirit is the head of the invisible body of Christ and here the King is installed in that externall government out of which our Divines by Scriptures have extruded the Pope which is a notable dishonor done to Kings and as Parkerus observeth Joan. Raynoldus answereth that from two offices of the head which is to give life and influence of motion to the members and also to guide and moderate the actions externall of the body wee cannot make two heads and because the King hath some civill government about the Church wee cannot make two heads over the Church Christ one and the King another under him 3. This is Anabaptisticall for because the visible government of the Church is externall wee are not to cut off all necessitie of the ministery to feed and rule with ecclesiasticall authority and because the Prince is gifted and a Christian to give all to him for a calling there must bee from God for the King to governe the Church of Christ by Lawes and prescribing externall worship therein for Christ hath left Ephes. 4. 1 Cor. 12. 1 Tim. 3. men to bee feeders and governours of his Church by office whose it is to bee
should call Christs doctrine blasphemy Caesar and his deputie Pontius Pilat as Judges civill are to judge it truth Neither would I â—â—iâ—â—â—ly here contend for whether the Kings knowledge of herese in the major proposition bee judiciall or the knowledge of discretion onely as some say wee agree in this against Papistâ— that the King is not a blind servant to the Church to punish what the Church calleth heresie without any examination or tryall but though the Kings knowledge of heresie in the proposition and in Law bee judiciall and kingly yet because hee is to cognosce onely in so farre as hee is to compell and punish with the sword not by instructing and teaching It would not hence follow that hee is to make Church constitutions as King but onely that hee may punish those who maketh wicked constitutions because the Canon maker is a ministeriall teacher the King as King may command that hee teach truth and hee may punish hereticall teaching but as King he is not a teacher either in Synod or Senate in Pulpit or on the Throne now if the King by office ordaine Pastors and deprive them by office hee is to know who are able to teach others aâ—d must bee able also to stop the mouthes of the adversaries and to rebuke them sharpely that they may bee sound in the faith and this is required in Titus Ch. 1. 5 9 10 11 12 13. as a Pastor and as an ordainer of other Pastors therefore that which is required of a Pastor by his office must also bee required to bee in the King by his office 6. It is admirable that they give to Kings power to deprive ministers but with these distinctions 1. He may not discharge them to preach and administer the Sacraments but to preach and administer the Sacraments in his kingdome or dominions because the King hath a dominion of places 2. Hee may discharge the exercise of the ministery but hee cannot take away the power of order given by the Church 3. Hee may deprive say some by a coactive and civill degradation because the supreme magistrate may conferre all honours in the Christian common-wealth Ergo hee may take them away againe but hee cannot deprive by a canonicall and ecclesiasticall degradation 4. Hee may causâ—tively deprive that is compell the Church to deprive one whom he judgeth to bee an heretick and if the Church refuse hee may then in case of the Churches erring and negligence as King deprive himselfe But I answer the King as King hath dominion civill of places and times as places and times but not of places as sacred in use and of times as sacred and religious for his power in Church matters being accumulative not privative hee cannot take away a house dedicated to Gods service no more then hee can take away maintenance allotted by publick authority upon Hospitalls Schooles Doctors and Pastors God hath here a sort of proprietie of houses and goods as men have Places as sacred abused are subject to regall power hee may inhibit conventions of hereticks 2. The Apostles might preach in the Temple though civill authoritie forbid them 3. Kings are as much Lords of places as sacred and publick as they have a dominion of civill places in respect the King may be coactive power hinder that false and hereticall doctrine bee preached either in publick or private places for this hee ought to doe as a preserver of both tables and a beare of the Sword for the good of Religion and if they may command pure doctrine to bee preached and sound discipline to be exercised they may command the same to bee done in publick places The second distinction is not to purpose 1. To discharge the exercise of a ministery saith Calderwood is a degree of suspension and suspension is an ecclesiasticall degree to the censures of excommunication and therefore the King may as well excommunicate and remit and retaine sinnes which undoubtedly agreeth to the Apostles as hee can suspend 2. As for taking away the power of order it is a doubt to formalists if the Church can doe that at all seeing they hold Sacraments administred by ministers justly deprived to bee valid Ergo they must acknowledge an indeleble character in Pastors which neither King nor Church can take away If then the King deprive from the exercise hee must simpliciter deprive by their grounds it is weake that they say the King may deprive from the exercise of a ministry within his owne dominions for saith Calderwood they all know well that the King hath not power to deprive men from the exercise of the holy ministery in ether forraine Kingdomes For the third way of deprivation it hath a double meaning also 1. If the meaning bee that as the King by a regall and coactive power may take away all honours either civill or ecclesiasticall as hee giveth all honours then this way of depriving Ministers cannot bee given to the King for the King may give and take away civill honours for reasonable causes according to the Lawes But in ecclesiasticall honours there bee three things 1. The appointing of the honour of the office to bee an Ambassadour of Christ. 2. To give the true foundation and reall ground of a Church honour that is gifts and gracious abilities for the calling neither of these two doe come either from King or Church or from mortall men but onely from Jesus Christ who ascending on high gave gifts unto men and appointeth both office and giveth grace for to discharge the office Yea since morall philosophy maketh honor to bee praemium 〈◊〉 a reward of vertue the King doth not give that which is the soundation of honour civill for civill vertue is a grace of God but in Church honour there is a third to wit a deâ—â—â—nation of a qualified man for the sacred office of the ministry and an ordination by the imposition of hands used in the Apostolick Church Act. 6. 6. Act. 13. 3. Act. 14 23. 1 Tim. 4 14. 1 Tim. 5.22 Whether imposition of hands bee essentiall to ordination or not I disput not it is apostolick by practise yet there is something ecclesiasticall as praying of Pastors and an ecclesiasticall designation of men or the committing of the Gospell to faithfull men who are able to teach others 2 Tim. 2. 2. 1 Tim. 5. 22. No Scripture can warrant that the King ordaine Pastors by publick praving by laying on of hands or ecclesiasticall blessing or by such an ordination as is given to Timothy and the Elders of the Church Acts 13. 3. Acts 14. 23. Tit. 1. 5,6 7,8 9. 1 Tim. 4. 14. 1 Tim. 5. 22. 2 Tim. 2. 2. If any say the King hath a publick and regall power in ordaining of Ministers and so in dâ—priving them or a mixt power partly regall partly ecclesiasticall as hee is a mixt person and the Church hath their way of purely and unmixt ecclesiasticall calling or ordaining of Ministers or the Church and the Magistrate
both doth elect and choose the man yet so that he is not elected without the consent of the King or Magistrate in the Kings roome I answer many things are here to be replyed 1. That the King who may be borne an heire to an earthly Kingdome is also borne and by nature a mixt person and halfe a Minister of the Gospell is against Gods word ministers in whole or in part are made so of God not so borne by nature in Aaronâ— Priesthaâ—d men by birth came to a sacred office but that is done away now in Christ. 2. With as good reason may the King preach and administer the Sacraments as a mixt person as he may ordaine by ecclesiasticall blessing imposition of hands ecclesiasticall designation any person to the Ministery that same auth nity of Christ which said to Timoth Lay hands suddainly 〈◊〉 man said also to him 2 Tim. 2. 15. Study to be approved unto 〈◊〉 a workeman that needeth not to be ashamed dividing the word right that is both ordaining of Ministers and pastorall preaching of the Word or pastorall acts flowing from an ecclesiasticall power How then can the one be given to the King by vertue of that same mixt power especially seeing baptizing it directly called 1 Câ—r 1. 17. a lesse principall worke of the ministery then preaching It it be said as ordination is performed by the King is not an ecclesiasticall action but civill or mixt partly civill partly ecclesiasticall I answer by that reason if the King should preach and administrate the Sacraments these actions should not be called ecclesiasticall actions and Uzzah's touching the Arke should not be called an action by office incumbent to the Levites only and it might be said the person being civill the actions are civill And Uzziah's burning of incense upon the Altar of incense was not a Priestly act but an act of a mixt power he was partly a King and partly a Priest who did performe the action but he was a Priest by sinfull usurpation in that action as we know 2. This answer is a begging also of the question 2. Whereas it is said that the Church ordainech Pastors and the King also but divers wayes the one by a regall power the other by me elâ—siasticall power I answer this is spoken to make the people ad saciendum populum for ejusdem potestatis est saith the Law constituere destiâ—â—ere it is the same power to ordaine and to destroy The high-Commission by the Kings authority doth deprive Ministers without so much as the knowledge of the Church If then the King as King may deprive ministers without the notice of the Church then may the King as King also ordaine Pastors without the notice of the Church For the action of the instruments as such is more principally the actions of the principall cause 3 Election of a Pastor is farre different from ordination of a Pastor the whole multitude as Christians have voyces in the election of a Pastor and so hath the King or his Magistrate as a part and member of the Church but this giveth no negative voice to the Magistrate in election but ordination is not done by all the multitude it is a worke of authority done onely by the Church-officers 4. The coactive and civill degradation must have also correspondent thereunto a coactive and civill ordination of Pastors Now I ask what is a coactive ordination If it be the Kings royall and civill authority commanding that the Church officers ordaine Pastors at Christs commandement This we deny not they fight with a shadow or a night ghost not against us who contend for this But if they meane a coactive degradation by the Sword in banishing imprisoning yea and for just causes punishing Ministers to death with the Sword this indirect deprivation we doe not deny But so the King depriveth a man from being a Minister when he is beheaded or hanged or banished for civill crimes no other wayes but as he depriveth a man from being a Fashioner a Saiâ—â—r a Plower a Souldier or a Father to his owne barnes a husband to his owne wife for when the man is beheaded or hanged by the sword of the Magistrate he is dâ—prived from being a fashioner a sailer a father a husband and Solomen did not other way deprive Abiathar from the Priest-hood then indirectly by consining him for treason at Anathoth so as he could not exercise the Priests office at Jerusalem So after Junius Calderwood Gul. Apollonius Sibrandus yea Muketus a man for the times denyeth that the Prince can take away that ecclesiasticall power that the Church hath given And so acknowledgeth Wedelius the same That reasonlesse lyer Lysimach Nicanor in this and in other things hath no reason to say we borrow Jesuites doctrine to answer this argument for the Jesuite Becanus is not â—nacquainted with Jesuits doctrine against the power of Kings yet he answereth that Solomen as King had no power over Abiathar for treason or any other crime and therefore following Bellarmine and Gretserus saith that Solomon did this by an extraordinary propheticall instinct yet Abulensis a great textuall Papist and Bâ—naventura a learned Schooleman saith this pâ—oveth that the King is above the Priest and that Priests in the Old Testament were not eximed from the civill Judges sword and power this is very doubtsome to Suarez who â—aith that it was a tempâ—rall civill punishment of exiâ—e and that â—â—â—sitiâ—n from the exercise of the Priests office followed upon the other But we neede not this answer for Solomons sentence containeth in tâ—rminis a meere civill punishment and these words 1 King 27. S. Solomon thrust out Abiathar from being Priest to the Lord seem not to be words of the Kings sentence of banishment but are relative to the fulfilling of the Lords word and a consequent of divine justice relative to the prophesie against Elies house Though verily I see no inconvenience to say that Solomon did indeed deprive him from the Priest-hood by an extraordinary instinct of the Spirit as he was led of God to build the Temple 1. Because the text saith so Solomon thrust out Abiathar from being Priest to the Lord and ver 35. and Zadok the Priest did the King put in the roome of Abiathar which is a direct deprivation from the Priest-hood but I contend not here But that the King causatively may deprive that is command the Church to cast out hereticks and to commit the Gospell to faithfull men who are able to teach others 2 Tim. 2. 2. wee confesse as for the power of convocating of Synods some thinke that the King may convocate Synods as men but as Church men they have power if the Magistrate bee averse to convocate themselves see Junius who insinuateth this distinâ—tion But certainly though the Kingly dignity be thought meerely civill yet let this be thought on it may be thought that the Kings power is divine three
wayes 1. Effectually and so we thinke that the Kingly power is an Ordinance of God lawfull jure divinâ— many Papists say the contrary but we thinke with Gods word it is of divine institution as is cleare Psal. 2. 11. Prov. 8. 14. 15. Rom. 13. 1 2 3 4 5 6. Matth. 22. 21. 1 Pâ—t 2. 17 18. Eccles. 9. 20. Prov. 25. 2. Prov. 20. 2. 2 The Kings power may be thought divine formally and so as divine is opposed to civill it is a humane ordinance and not formally divine or ecclesiasticall nor subjectively 3. It may be thought divine and ecclesiastick objectively and finaliter The end intrinsecall being a spirituall good and so the King hath power to conveene Synods not onely as they are men and his Subjects but also as they bee such subjects and Christian men and members of Synods as the King may command the minister of the Gospell both as a man yea and as a Preacher in the Pulpit to preach â—ound doctrine and to give wholesome and good milke to the Church and this is formally an act of a nurie-father such as the King is by his Kingly office and this way also doth the King send members to the Synod and moderate and preside in Synods actu impâ—rato nâ—n elicito actu objective ecclesiastico non intrinsece non formaliter non subjective ecclesâ—astico The King ruleth by the Sword and commandeth the Synods to meete ordereth politically and civilly the members and meeting and as King cooperateth but by a civill and regall influence with the Synod for the same very end that the Synod intendeth to wit the establishing of truth unity and the edification of Christs-body But this power of the Kings to conveene Synods is positive not negative auxiliary and by addition not by way of impedition or privation For the Church of her selfe hath from Christ her head and Lord power of conveening without the King beside his knowledge or against his will if he be averse as is cleare Matth. 18. 17 18. if they be conveened in his name he is with them not upon condition that the Prince give them power And Joh. 20. 19. there is a Church-meeting without the Rulers and a Church-meeting for praying preaching and discipline Act. 1. 13 14. c. without the Magistrate Act. 15. 1 2. and when the Magistrate is an enemy to the Church 2. Where Christ commandeth his disciples to preach and baptize Matth. 28. 19 20. and with all faith in the exercise of their ministry they shall be persecuted by rulers as Matth. 10. 17 18 19. Luk. 21. 12 13 14. He doth by necessary consequence command Church-meetings and Synods even when the Magistrate forbiddeth and this is practised 1 Cor. 5. 1 2 3 4 5. where the Magistrate is an heathen chap. 6. 1 2 3. 3. It should follow that Christ cannot have a true visible Church and ministry on earth except the Magistrate countenance his Church which is both against experience and Christs Kingly power who reigneth in the midst of his enemies Psal. 110. 2. And what glorious Courâ—bes had Christ in Asia with power of doctrine and discipline and â—o with all Church-meetings Rev. 2. chap. 3. where Tyrants did slay the witnesses of Christ Rev. 2. 13. and certainely by what power Kings alleadâ—e that Synods may not meet for the exercise of discipline and good order in Gods house by that same power they may say there should be no Church meeting for the hearing of the word and receiving the Sacraments without their authority For Church Synods for doctrine differ not in spece and nature from Synods for discipline all be one and the same acts under Christ as King and head of his Church for which see Spalato Uâ—â—tius Amâ—sius Calderwood the Professors â—â— Lâ—yden Now what any say on the contrary for the power of Princes in matters ecclesiasticall is soone answered Gerardus saith that Moses gave Lawes both to the People and Priests Exod. 20. Lev. 8. Num. 3. I answer if this be a good argument the Magistrate his alone without advise of the Church may impose Lawes yea and institute new Laws and dite Canonicall Scripture also as did Moses Deut. 5. Exod. 20. but it is certaine that Moses gave these Laws not as a Magistrate but as a Prophet of God who spake with God face to face and it is more for us then for our adversaries David also brought the Ark to its place at Gods speciall direction the Levites carrying it by Gods Law though they failed in that sinfull omission 2 Sam. 6. but 1 David did convocate the chosen of Israel even thirty thousand to reduce the Ark to its place and so the Levites and Church-men and did it not as King his alone as 1 Chron. 13. hee did it And Junius saith and the text is cleare that he did it by the counsell of an Assembly and the whole Church and that a King may doe that in Gods worship in case of the negligence of the Church that is warranted by Gods word is but his duty Now Jesuites answer not to any purpose in this for Becanus and Suarez answer nothing to Davids placing of the Arke in its place onely they say all the people conveved the Arke and danced before it as well as David but it is not hence proved that all the people are heads of the Church as they say the King is and Lysimachus the Jesuite seeth in this that wee aâ—â—ee not with his friends the Jesuits Solomon builded the Temple and dedicated it to Gods service but this is no ground to make the King a Law-giver in the Church 1. Because none can deny but Solomon did all this as a Prophet by speciall revelation for 1. if Solomon might not build an house to the Lord but by speciall revelation that hee should bee the man and not David his father 2 Sam. 7. 6. 13. farre more could hee not as an ordinary King build that typicall house which had a resemblance of Christ and heaven it selfe especially seeing the signification of the Holy of holiest in the Sanctuary is expressely given to the holy Spirit Heb. 9. 7 8. and the Temple was a type of Christ Joh. 2. 20 21. and they may say Kings by an ordinary power as Kings might pen Canonick Scripture as well as they could build a typicall Temple like Solomons God filled that Temple with his glory and heard prayers made in that temple and toward that Temple I thinke Kings as Kings cannot now build such Temples therefore Solomon by a Propheticall instinct built that house Jesuites give no answer to this for Suarez saith Kings may build Churches to God because of it selfe it is an act of Religion which requireth riches for the building thereof and for the dedication it includeth two 1. By some religious action to consecrate a house to God and this way onely the Priests by sacrificing dedicated the Temple and God by filling
of it with his presence dedicated it to himselfe 2. It includeth an offering and giving of an house to Gods service I answer by this Solomon as a private man builded the Temple and dedicated it to God and not as either King or Prophet but this is a vaine answer for no private man could have builded an house to God with such typicall relations to Christ and to the Church of the New Testament except hee had been immediatly inspired by the holy Ghost Becanus saith three sorts of men were actors here 1. Solomon 2. The Priests 3. The people Solomon prayed and gave thankes the Priestâ— â—arried the Arke the Tabernacle the holy vessels and sacriji â—s the 〈…〉 present rejoyced and gave thankâ—s to God there is nothing 〈…〉 Solomons headship Solomon dedicated a Temple to God what it will no more follow hee was the head of the Church for that 〈…〉 â—ffered stones and timber to God then the womâ—n can â—ee 〈◊〉 of the Church who offered to God gâ—â—d purple 〈…〉 buddâ—â— Temple to God many Merâ—hanâ—s â—ubild Templeâ— upon their 〈…〉 God and pray to God to accept these Temples 〈◊〉 in England 〈◊〉 Temples to God they are not for that head of the Church Answ. 1. This is another Temple then Temples builded daily 1. Because it was wil-worship for David to build this Temple and service to God for Solomon a King of peace and a type of our King of wisedome Christ to build this Temple and for no other any Merchant may build a common house to Gods service without a speciall word of promise which word Solomon behoved to have or then hee could not build this house 1. To dedicate an house to God typicall of Christ 2. Filled with the cloud of Gods presence where God said hee would dwel in this house 3. With such ornaments as the Holy of holiest in it 4. In which God said he would heare prayers whereas now in all places hee heareth prayers Joh. 4. 21. 1 Timothâ— 2. 8. this is another positive worship then that a merchant build a house for Gods daily service which hath no relative holinesse in it but onely is holy in the use and to dedicate a house in these termes is more then an ordinary dedication to Gods service and their Prelates in England who dedicated Temples to God cannot answer this reply of the Jesuites nor can the new Jesuite Lysimachus Nicanâ—r their brother answer the Jesuite herein wee say from warrant of Gods Word that Solomon did all this by a propheticall instinct by the which also hee prophecied and did write the booke of the Proâ—â—rbs Ecclesiastes and Solomons Song else Jesuites may say that these bookes doe no more prove Solomon to bee a Prophet then the tomes written by Becanus and Suarez doth prove that they were divinely inspired Prophets Obj. David also prepared materialls for the Temple 1 Chron. 22. 2. and dicided the Levites in certaine rankes and orders 1 Chron. 23. 4. Answ. 2 Chron. 8. 13. for so had David the man of God commanded the man of God is the Prophet of God not the King of Israel as King 2 Chron. 29. 25. and hee set the Levites in the house of God with Cymba's and psalteries and â—arpes according to the commandement of David and of Gad the Kings Seer and Nâ—uhâ—n the Prophet for so was the commandement of the Lord by his Prophets they may prove then God the Prophet is the head of the Church and hath power to make Church-Lawes But it is a great mistake Hâ—â—â—â—iah David Solomon commanded the people and the â—evites to doe their duties according to Gods Word Ergo Kings may make Church-constitutions by a mixt power it followeth in no soâ—â— wee deny not but the King may command in Gods worship what is already of cleare and evident divine institution but that hee may obtrude it as a thing to bee observed by all Church men and urge it as a constitution come from authoritie to bâ—e observed under the paine of ecclesiasticall censures wee deny now this formalists teach that hee may command in the externall government as a Church constitution to bee in his royall name executed by Church men with Church censures though the Church never heard of it before It is true that Jehoshaph â—t 2 Chron. 19 8 9 10 11. set of the Levites and Priests and the chiefe of the fathers of Israel for the judgement of the Lord and for controversies and charged them to doe in the feare of the Lord v. 11. and behold Amariah the chieâ—e Priest saith hee is over you in all the matters of the Lord and Zebadiah the sonne of Ismael the ruler of the house of Judah for all the Kings matters also the Levites shall bee officers before you deale câ—â—raâ—iously and the Lord shall bee with the good Hence doth Tâ—oker and other court parasites inferre 1. That the King constituting Levites and Priests in a Citie must bee head of the Church and 2. That Jehoshaph at having constitute two Vicars and Dâ—puties under him one in Church matters to wit Amariah another in civill matters to wit Zebadiah therefore hath the King a jurisdiction and headship in both Church and State Answer 1. The institution of Priests is one thing and the calling of the persons to the Office another the former was Gods due who himselfe chused the tribe of Levi and this the King did not But it is another thing to constitute Priests and Levites who were instituted and called of God to serve in such a place at Jerusalem rather then in any other place this is but to apply a person who is jure divine by Gods right in office to such places and times This is not a point of Ecclesiastical jurisdiction for placing and timing Preachers belongeth to the people calling them and in the time of Apostasy as this was Jehoshaphat sent Levites to teach and commanded them to do their duty but that the High Priest is the Kings Deputy or Vicar as if the King offered sacrifices to God as the principall and Church head or by the Ministry and service of Amariah as his instrument deputy and servant is most idly and untruely spoken Yet will I not use the argument of Beâ—anus the Jesuite who saith If Amariah was the Kings Vicar then may the King by himselfe sacrifice for what ever the Vicar oâ— deputy may dâ—e that may the person above him who giveth him power dâ—e without the Vicar The Kings royall commandement is formally terminated upon the quality and manner of Ecclesiasticall acts that they bee done according to Gods Law rather then upon the acts according to their substance It is one thing for Ministers to Preach sound Doctrine and administrate the Sacraments in obedience and at the Kings commandement which wee acknowledge a truth and another thing for Ministers to Preach in the name and authority of royall Majesty as having a calling from him this latter is false as the King may do an
on of the hands of the Elders 1 Tim. 4. 14. 2 Tim. 2. 2. but by the authoritie of the Patron who doth nominate the man and may charge the Presbyterie by Law to admit him minister of such a flock Nor is it enough to say that the Patron doth present to such a benefit onely and doth leave all the ecclesiasticall part to the Church and the officers thereof for this would say something if the Patron were tied to the Churches free choise whereas the contrary is true that the Church is tyed to the Patrons free election of the man but this is nothing because the Patron being but one man onely and so the Church can have no lawfull proprietie right and dominion over the rents of the Church for Christ is onely Lord and proprieter and just titular of all rents dotted for the maintenance of the ministery and under Christ when the place vaiketh the rents recurre to the Church as the proper proprieter under Christ as the goods of Ananias and Saphira are the goods of the Church after they had given them in to the publick treasurie of the Church Ergo the Patron can give no right to any person to bee presented and ordained for no man can give to another that title and right which hee hath not in himselfe If it bee said hee may give in the Churches name as the Churches Patron those goods which are mortified to the Church well then is the Patron in the act of presenting the representative Church and hath the Churches power Ergo hee is but the Churches servant in that and to doe at the Churches will and the Church is the first presenter this is a new representative Church that wee have not heard of 2. This is against the nature of the Patrons office whose it is when hee foundeth and buildeth a Church to reserve the right of patronage to himselfe and never to give that right to the Church Ergo by his owne authoritie and not in the Churches name hee giveth title to the benefice to the Pastor of Minister 3. The Church hath not power to alien ate and dispose to one particular man those goods which are given to God and to his Church so as that one hath power in Law to dispose those goods to any without the Churches consent as the Patron may doe The Church may dispose and give power to one man to doe certaine actions in the Churches name but yet so as the Church retaineth power to regulate that her delegate or commissioner in these acts and to correct him in case of aberration but the Church hath no power over the Patron as Patron to limit him in the exercise of his power for the right of Patronage is his by birth he may sel it for mony to another to a Papist to an excommunicate person to a Jew or an enemy of the Church as hee may sell his lands and houses and hath a civill right thereunto under his Majesties great Seale therefore the patron doth here proprio suo jure by his owne proper right present and give title and Law to the Church benesice and doth not present in name of Church or as having from the Church a power 3. What ever taketh away an ordinance of Christ that is not lawfull but the power of Patrons taketh away the ordinance of Christ and the free election of the People because the people have power to choose out of many one fittest and most qualified for the office as is cleare Act. 6. 3. Act. 1. v. last Act. 14. 23. because the man chosen should bee one of a thousand as Didoclavius or Calderwood saith in that learned Treatise called Altare Damascenum Nor can it be said saith that learned Author that the Church may transferre her right of presenting to a Patron for that is in effect to transferre her power of election but that saith hee the particular Church cannot doe except by the decrce of a gener all assembly neither can that right bee transferred over to a generall assembly especially a perpetuall and hereditary right because as saith Cartwright it is a part of that libertie which is purchased by Christs blood which the Church can no mâ—re alienate and dispose then shee can transferre or dispose to another her inheritance of the kingdome of God to the which this libertie is annexed thus he 4. The discerning of the spirits and the knowing of the voyce of Christ speaking in his called servants is laid upon the flocke of Christ whose it is to elect but not upon the Patron which may bee a Heathen and a Publican and as such is no member of the Church 5. Every humane ordinance not warranted by Christs Tostament and abused to sacriledge rapine delapidation of Church-rents and Simoniacal pactions with the intrants into the holy ministery is to bee abolished and is unlawfull but the right of patronages is such as experiences teacheth to many and lamentable The proposition is above cleared 6. That calling in part or in whole which giveth no ground of faith and assurance of a lawfull calling to the Ministers entry to that holy charge cannot belawfull but the calling to the ministery by the good will and consent of the Patron as Patron is such Ergo. The proposition is cleare every lawfull meane and way of entry unto that calling is warranted by a word of promise or precept or practise the calling by the patrons consent hath neither word of promise or precept or practise in the Word and stayeth not the conscience of the man of God that hee did not runne unsent but a man is never a whit the more staid in his conscience that hee is presented by a Patron to the tithes and parsonage and vicarage of such a Congregation It is but a cold comfort to his soule that the Patron called him 7. What ever priviledge by the Law of nature all incorporations have to choose their owne rulers and officers this Christ must have provided in an eminent manner to the Church but all cities societies incorporations and kingdomes have power to choose their owne rulers officers and members as is cleare by an induction of all free colledges societies cities and republicks Ergo this cannot bee laid upon a Patron see for this also Amesius Guliel Apollonius who citeth that of Athâ—nasius Where is that Canon in the Word that the sent Minister of Christ is sent from the Court or the Princes Palaâ—e As concerning the other two this author condemneth Lands dedicated to the ministery because the New Testament speaketh nothing of such Lands Answ. This speaketh against Glebes of Ministers but the New Testament speaketh not of Manses or houses or of moneys for Ministers yet a wage wee know is due Matth. 10. 10. 1 Cor. 9. 8 9 10. Gal. 6. 6. and the Levites were not to bee distracted from the most necessary worke of the Tabeâ—â—acle and service of God more then Ministers yet they had Lands and Townes
of the Churches of Christ in New England c. 3. sect 3 Fundamentalls Authority of Elders Magistrats power in matters Ecclesiasticall The way of the Churches Trelcat loc 16. aâ—t â— Tylen Syntag. disp 14. de Eccl. dis 1. Thes. 19. Profess leyd synop pur Theol. dis 4. thes 34. 35 Piscator dis 23. n. 15 16. Bucan loc 41. quest 7. s. 5. Answer to Quest. 2. Way of the Church Ch. Sect compare with chap. 2. Robins Iustifie pag. 106. Confess Separ art 37. Bell de Eccl. li. 3 cap. 2. 1 Cor. 11. 23. Mat. 28. 19. 1 Cor. 1. 17. Confess art 37. Quest. 2. a Parker de poâ—it Eccl. l. 3. c. 8. b Câ—hol Paris pag. 8. c Paul Baynes docesart tyrall 3. q. concl 3. pa. 83. a Thom. 22. q. 28. art 10 ad 2. b Molina tom 6 tract 5. dis 57. n. 6. c Suarez Tom. de legib lib. 2. cap 15. d Vasq. 12. dis 129. cap. 2. e Viguertus in institut Theol. cap. 15. s. 1. f Sotus de instit li. 2. q. 3. art 8. g Scotus 3. dist 37. quest 1. h Altisiodore l. 3 sum tract 7. cap. 1. Qu. 5. i Durandus 1. k Gabriel 3. dist 37. q. 1. Art 1. Concl. 2. l Voetius des causa pap li. 2. c. ca. 21. sect 3. 6. m Theodo l. 4. ca. 14. c. 24. n Gerson par 2. Sermon Rhen. dom 2. postpashat o Anton. 3. l. 3. c. 83. a Shindler in Lexico b Muscul. com in Is. 22. 22. Insigne acceptae potestatis Occonoms Praeposito domûs commendantur claves quibus potestatem suam administret c Calvin comment ib. Gualter Homil. 114. Claves symbolum potestatis regibus Claves offerunt d Iunius Plenam administrationem e Beza in Ma. aunot Potestas Ministrorum in Mat. 16. f Pareus domus meae faciam te aeconomum g Hieron Clavis potestas excellentiae h Chrysostom Homil. 55. in Mat. Magnam potestatem i August de civit de lib. 20. ca. 9. potestatem pastoris k Beda in Iohan. Clavis est potestas ligandi solvendi a li. de fide ad Pet. b Stephan in thesaur ling. Graecae c Whittakee tom 2. contr 4. câ— 5. d Calvin ib. dissert de Apostolatu Petri. e Bullinger ib. f Erasm. Para. g Zwinglius h Marlorat com i Pareus ib. a Beza Ministerii Ecclesiastici authoritâ—â— caelestis b Tolet comment in Joan. in loc an 21. c Maldonat Harm in loc d Cajetan com in Ioh. 20. 23. ideo hoc in loco instituitur promulgatur sacramentum paenitentiae e Rolloc ibâ—cpetita reiterata potestas f Beza in ani mad in Mat. 16. sicut Ioannes iuterpretatur in sra c. 21. g Bulling Mat. 16. h Pareus Quicquid solveris id est Joh. 20. quorum peccata remiseritis i Calv. instit 4. ca. 6. k Whittaker tom 2. contr 4. q. 2. ca. 5. l Zwinglius com m Asuscul in Joh. 21. n Way of the Church of n. E. ca. 2. sect 9 o Bulling in loc Mat. 16. Bullinger comment Mat. p Muscul. ibid q Beza an r Calvin comment s Psa. 105. 27 Judg. 15. 10. Psal. 149. 8. Mat. 22. 13. Acts 21. 11. Acts 22. 4. Mark 3. 37. l Levit. 14. 7. Psal. 102. 20. Jer. 40. 4. Ps. 105. 20. Act. 2. 24. Rom. 7. 2. 1 Cor. 7. 27. Rev. 20. 3. Rev. 9. 15. Job 12. 18. a Cap. 3. Sect. 1. b Mat. 10. 2. Joh 6. 70. Acts 17. 20. 21. a Gretser de in Augnr Doctor Luther p. â—9 b Belâ— de cöcli vut l. 2 ca. 2. c Suarez de trip virtâ—dis 9. de Eccl. Sec. 7. n. 7. d Greg de Valent tom 3. dis 1. q. 1. punct 7. e Hosius in confess Polmiea f Joan. de Turre cremat de Gal. l. 1. ca. 24 25 26. a Fran. Iohnson art 5. in M. Clisions booke p. 29. b Mat. 18. 19. 1 Cor. 11. 23. 1 Cor. 1. 17. Joh. 4. 12. c Consess art 27. d Remonst conf 21. apol cons. ib. e Socin tract de Eccl c. 1. n. 140. Gatechis Raccoviens c. 11. n. 305. f Cartwright ans to the admâ—nit tract 18. c. 1â— div 5. p 663. g Beza an in Mat. 17. h Pareus Apostolis dict manisestum est quicquid vos Apostoli ligaveritis ut supra Petro dixerat Christus Mat. 16. 19. i Calvin com ib. k Joh. Weemes vol. 3. expos of the judiciall Law c. 16. a Way of the Church of n. E. c. 4. sec. 5. Irenaus iâ— qui in Ecclesia sunt Presbyteris obedâ— oportet iis qui successionem habent ab Apostolis qui cum Episcopatus successione charisma veritatis certum secundum beneplacitumpatris acceperunt Nazianzen oâ— at 21. de laud. Bas. ejusdem throni particeps est Petrus cum reliquis Apostolis in illa verba dabo tibi Claves Cyprian de unita Ecclesia Christus eandem dedit omnibus Apostolis potestatem hoc erant utique caeteri Apostoli quod Peâ—â—us suit pari consortto praediti honoris potestatis he should have said Hoc erant utique caeteri credentes in Christum quod Petrus suit also Basil de vita solitar c. 21. Omnibus pastoribus Doctoribvs candem potestatem tribuit cuâ—us signum est quod omnes exaequo ligant solvunt He should have said Omnibus credentibus in Christum eandem potestatem tribuit Ambros. in Ps. 38. in Luc. 10. Ser. 66. Quod hic dictum est Apostolis omnibus dictum non ait omnibus credentibus dictum The pâ—ilact in Mat. 6. Quamvis soli Petro dictum tamen omnibus Apostolis concessae sunt Claves Cyrillâ— in Joh. 4. l. 4. Responsionem illi Christus committebat qui ordine primus omnibus Apostolis non ait omnibus credentibus Euthymius in Mat. ca. tibi dabo claves atqui donum hoc ceterorum fuit Apostolorum Hugo de sanct victor Tom. 2. institut sanct monaster Quamvis potestas solvendi ligandi soli Petro data videatur tamen caeteris Apostolis data est Haymo Homil in festo Petri Pauli Quod Petro dixit in Petro caeteris Apostolis dixit Cardin Cusan concord Cathol 2. c. 13. Nih l dictum aâ—â—ctrum quod alits Apostolis nâ—n diâ—tum Glossa ordinaria Petâ—us tanquam principa is inter alios Apostolos non inter alios creientes pro aliis dat respensionem Cyrill in Es. 4. orat 2. sancti Apostoli Evangelistâ—e fundamenta Hyeron li. 1 cont Iovian Omnes Apostoli acceperunt claves non solus Petrus Anselm in Mat. 16. Habent eandem judiciariam potestatem alâ—i Apostoli Anastasius in quest sac script q. 79. in 6. Tom Biblioth Potestatem clavium non soli Petro sed aliis etiam Apostolis toti Ecclesie in Episcopis Presbyteris datam August tract in Joh 50. lib. de agâ—d Christi c. 30. Beda homil in Mat. 16. Chryâ—ostom Homil. 70. ad popul Hilarius ae trinit l. 6. Euscbius histor Eccl. lib 2. c.
cata-Baptistarum erroribus lib. 1. pag. 35. It is a vaine thing to say that teachers of all Israel remaining in Israel were non-residents that is Pastors not attending their charge a Iustific pag. b Confess of Separatists Art 21. c Bellarmin desacr ord lib. 1. cap. 9. d Concil Trident. Sess. 23. cap. 4. e Hosius in confes Polonica tit 50. f Martinus Ledesma in 4. quâ—st 36. art 4. ad 1. g Pet. a Soto de sacram ordinis Lect. 5. h Toletus com in Ioan. 21. an 21 i Cajetanus comment in Ioan. 21. ideo hoc loco instituitur promulgatur Sacramentum poenitentiae k Cyrillus lib. 112. cap. 56. l Chrysostome in Ioan. homil 88. m Joan. de Lugo tomo de Saram paenit disp 18. sect 1. n Suarez disp 7. de censura sect 6. not 6. o Sanchez in decalog lib. 2. c. 13. n. 13. p Aegidius Coniuk de Sacr. disp 24. n. 236. q Vasquez Tom. de excom dub 18. n. 9. r Panoâ—mit in dicâ— a nobis c. n. 10. s Avila de censur is part 2. cap. 7. disp 1. Dub. 9. t Sylvester verbo subsolvo 1. n. 8. u Ioan. Episcop Rossens de potest Papae in temporabus lib. 2. cap. 3. x Peoples plea pag. 42 43. Pag. 44. Pag 44 45 46. Pag. 46 47 48 49. Calvin Com. in Act. 11 21. Pag. 49. a Iunius annot in locum Apocalyps b Cooper on Revel 10. c Pareus comment in Apocalyps cap. 10. Pag. 52 53. d Iunius annot in cap. 14. e Paraeus in locum f Napper Comment on the Revel ch 14. Par. 54. 55. Pag. 97. pag. 59. and 63. Pag. 59. a Irenaus adversus Hares lib. 2 cap. 57. b Fusebius bistoria eccles l. 5. cap. 7. Tertullian Cyrill Chrysostom Theophylact. Robinson pag. 66 67. Parâ—us com ibi Pauls presbytery chap. 16. pag. 251 252. pag 69. 70. a Stapleton apud Whittaker de sac Script Authorit l. 3. c. 3. arg 3. sect Bellarmine Valentinian Gretserus b Transenius harmon c. 36. c Cajetan com in loan 5. in hoc ab hoâ—nine non accipio d Toletus in Ioh. 5. tom 1. e Rivetus tom 1. contrav trac 1. q. 6. f Whittakerus to 2. desac Scrip. authorit lib. 3. c. â—r 5. g Bucer in Ioan. 5. de testimonio Baptistae h Calvinus in art 17. v. 10 11. i Theaplâ—yâ— in aâ—t 1â— ibid. k Chrysost in Ioan. hom 39. l Beda in Ioan. cap 5. m Ambrosius in â— Tim. n Occam dâ—ale l. 5. ca. 2 par 1. c. 3. probatuâ— quod papâ— Canonice electus manens papa potest errare a fide bareticari quindecem rationâ—bus o Gerson de infallibilitat Papae consid 12 p Robinson Pag 70. 71. q Synod of England r Ambrosius com in 4 Eph. ut â—resecret plebs multiplicaretur omnibus inter initia concessum est Exangelizare Baptizaâ—e s Origenin Num. hom 11. cap. 8. t Hieronymus comment in Matth. in prcaemiâ— u Theophylact in art 20. x Augustin contr Faustum lib. 16. c. 12. y Coachman z Gerard. loc com tom 6. de Minister eccles c. 3. sect 1. n. 70 pag. 78 79. a Lutheâ—us tom 2. Com. in Ps. 8. fol 96 lat tradidiâ— quidem Dominus talenta servis sed non â—â—si â—â—catis expecta igitur â—u donec voccâ— is intereane ambâ—â—s b Fugeniâ— de 〈…〉 c Scotus in l. 4. d 24 q. 1. d Concilâ—i Tâ—i. dâ—ntine sâ—ss 14. cap. 1. e Lodo Meratius tom 3. trac de erdi disp 7. sect 1. Bishops preach not nor is it essentiall to their office and therfore Papists by contempt call our Ministers predicant preachers saith Gerard tom 6 q. 3. n. 294 pag. 336. f Bellarm. tom 3. de sacr ordin l. 1. c. 4. g Guliel Estius l 4. dist 24. s. 3. h Aquinas supplem q. 34. act 4. 5. i Canon Aposto lic 2. 9. 17 18. 25. 42. 43. k Clemens in Epist. 3. ad Iacob Manuscript The way of the Churches of Christ in New England In the Answ. 10 32. quest 9. 15. Answ. to the 15. quest Answ. to quest 15. a Arâ—in in declar sen. p. 57 b Armin. antâ—perkins pag. 224. quaâ—ndâ—u amâ—r Det in ipsoâ—uâ—n cordâ—bus vigebit impedâ—en ui ne â—ccedant â— Dâ—o c Remonstâ—an confess c. 18. Sect. 6. 7. d Episcopius disp 27. ch 9. e Socinus de justâ—â— â—â—l 10. quod si aâ— hac obedientia deficiamus c. f Smalcius 〈◊〉 7 in Ioan fol. 78. Answ to 32. quest q. 15. a Morton Grand Imposture Sect 5. Pag. 47. Arâ— 1547. 9. Sess. of Trent April 21. An. 1548. a Bellar. l. 1. de concil c. 12. b Harding 4. Article of Peters supremaâ—â—e as â—â—well saith c Suarez tâ— detriplâ—â— vitr disp 10. de sam â—onâ— Sect. 1. Num. 22. d Bellarm. de Pâ—nâ—â—f Rom. l. 1. c. 22. Peâ—â—us in concâ—lâ—â— primo 〈◊〉 lâ—quttur e Harding loco citaâ— f 〈◊〉 kerus tom 2. contrev 4 9 2 c. 14. Responde 〈◊〉 posse colligi ex hoc loco Petrum esse 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 citio primum naâ— constat ante 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 quis priâ—us 〈◊〉 su◠〈◊〉 evangelâ—sta tacuit g Gerson tâ— 4. in propos utâ—â—â— ad â—â—ter scbisma h Lyranus in 〈◊〉 i Carthusian in locum a Bellar. l. 1. de conc c. 12. b Suarez de tripl tra Theo. disp sect 3. c Pighius l. 6. c. 18. d Cajetan de â—uthorit Pap. â— 16. Also your unofficed Prophets may as well denounce judgement against an Apo staâ— Church as they may publikely preach mercy in the Gospel and sâ— this is no officiall act of authoritie The way of the Churches of Christ in New England a Answorth pag. 42. 43. in his Animadver b Best the Churches plea. pag. c Chap. 4. Ser. 5. d Chap. 4. Sect. 6. e Chap. 1. Ser. 2. Manuscript 6. It is true none should remove from one congregation to another without God goe before them nor can they change countries without Gods warranting 〈◊〉 Gen 12. 1. chap. 45. 4. but that such removall is a matter of Church-discipline and must be done by a ministeriall power is unwarâ—anted by any word of God a Fac de Almain de pâ—testa eccles et lav c. 15. est congregatio authoritate legitime facta ad aliquem locuâ— ex omni statu Hierarchico nulla persona fideli perente audirâ— exclusa ad nactandum ea quae concernunt publicam ecclesiae utilitatem et ipsius mares b Geâ—sâ—n de pâ—test eccles d Schola Paâ—sâ—râ— de poust Eccles. pag. 17. A Pastor may propone James the Apostles mind aneut fornication blood c. Act. 15. permodum consilii as a counsel to some other Pastor but it hath the power of a Synodicall decree not from Iames though an Apostle but from the joynt voyces of the Synod and it is not like that Iames as an Apostle said Wherefore my sentence is c. as an Apostle hee should have said as Paul doth what I received
Christ have no Church on earth for the laying hold on the covenant giveth being and life to the Church as the body of Christ and his true spouse as well as it giveth being to the visible Church according to ouâ— brethrens doctrine and if this covenant cease there is not a Church of Christ on earth 8. We have heard nothing here as yet but the covenant of grace and no Church-covenant But saith the Authour of the Church-covenant g Though it be indeed the covenant of grace and made principally with God it followeth not hence that it is not a covenant of the members amongst themselves for the covenant of God tyeth us to duties to our neighbour and to watchfulnesse and edification one of another Levit. 19 17. Deut. 29. 18. the neglect whereof in the matter of Achan brought sinne on all the congregation Josh. 7. yea it tieth us to duties to children not yet borne who shall after become members of the Church when Iehojadah made a covenant betwixt the King and the people it was but a branch of the Lords covenant obliging the King to rule in the Lord and the people to obey in God Answ. 1. But if particular duties to our brethren bind us by a new Church-covenant because Gods covenant commandeth these duties then because Gods covenant commandeth sobriety toward our selves and righteous dealing toward our brethren there is required a selfe-covenant towards your selves for temperance and sobriety toward your selves as there is required a Church-covenant to binde you to duties to those who are in Church membership with you this no man can say nor can severall duties require severall covenants 2. It is true when we enter into covenant with God we sweare duties to all to whom we are obliged but then we are made members of the visible Church before we sweare this Church-covenant and this is as if Abraham were made a living man before he have a reasonable soule and as if Abraham were Israel his father before Israel be Abraham his sonne for if Abraham be in-Churched when he did sweare the covenant of grace as the Authour granteth then he must be a member of a visible Church while as yet there is not a visible Church to which Abraham is tied I deny not but Israel may sweare obedience to all Gods covenant and all duties therein and that he may sweare also in particular to performe all duties to Abraham his father in another oath but that he cannot enter in the state of relation of sonneship to his father while he sweare that oath in particular is a dreame which hardly can be conceived 3. The peoples finne in not warning Achan was a finne against a duty of the covenant exacting obedience of all in brotherhead though not in a Church-state Levit. 19. 17. and Iob and his friends who were members of no visible Church as you say did performe this one to another Iob 4. 3 4. Iob 2. 11. Iob. 4. 1. 4. The covenant that Jehojadah made betwixt the King and the people will prove the lawfullnesse of a covenant to performe Church-duties beside the generall covenant of grace which we deny not but doth not prove that a covenant to Church-duties is the essentiall forme of Church-membership and the onely way by Divine precept of entring persons in a Church-state for persons already in Church-state may upon good reasons sweare a covenant to these duties yet are they not of new inchurched to that congregation whereof they were members before Their next principall argument as the Apology saith if a Church-covenant be the essentiall forme of a Church as a stock of Saints is the materiall cause then the Church-covenant is necessary to the being of the Church and it is that wherby Ecclesia integra constituitur collapsa restituitur quo sublato Ecclesia dissolvitur destituitur that is it is by this covenant a Church is instituted in its integrity and when it is fullen it is restored to its integrity and when this covenant â—easâ—th the Church is no longer a visible Church Answ. When a Church falleth it is not restored to the state of a visible Church by circumcision and yet circumcision is given as a signe of a covenant betwixt God and his Church Gen. 17. 11. nor is a Church restored by Baptisme or Baptizing over againe and yet Baptisme is that whereby we are entered members of the visible Church 2. When persons faile in omitting Church duties I thinke they faile against your Church-Oath yea when they fall into any sinne that may be a scandall to others yea the finne of adultery yet if they repent and heare â—he Church they are not excommunicated neither doe they â—ose the right of Church-membership and right to the seales of the covenant nor is it needfull they be restored by renewing a Church-covenant but we desire to heare from Gods word proofes of the singular vertues of this Church-covenant 3. Discipline is by all Divines thought necessary to the well being of a Church but not to the simple being thereof and for this we apeale to the learned Parker who denieth Discipline to be an essentiall note of the visible Church and citeth Cartwright for this and therefore saith that Calvin Bortrandus de Logues Mornaeus Martyr Marloratus Galusius and Beza omitteth discipline amongst the notes of the Church The apology addeth if the nationall Church of the Jewes was made a nationall Church by that covenant and therby all the Synagogues had Church-fellowship one with another in the Temple then the congregationall Church is made a visible Church by that covenant 2. Also the fallen Church of the Jewes was restored to a Church-state say they by renewing a covenant with the Lord in the dayes of Asah Hezekiah and these who fell to Judah 2 Chron. 9. 25. are commanded not to stiffen their necks or as in the originall to give their hand unto the Lord that so they might enter into the sanctuary 2 Chron. 30. 8. Answ. Is it credible or possible that all the Synagoues of so many hundred thousand people as were in the 12. Tribes were all satisfied in conscience anent the regeneration one of anotherâ— and this is required of you to the right swearing of a Church covenant else how could they in the Oath joyne themselves to all Israel as to a Generation of Saints â—â— Israel before this Oath was circumcised and had eaten the Passoyer and so was a visible Church before yea then God had no Church visible before this Oath which is against Gods promise made to David and his seed Psal. 89. 28. â—9 Also in Abijahs dayes Judah was the true Church of God 2 Chron. 13. 8. And now yâ—t think to withstand the Kingdome of the Lord in the hands of the sonnes of David 10. But as for us the Lord is our God and we have not forsaken Him 3. The inchurching of members is a Church-action as all the Church casteth out so all
acquire to himselfe poâ—er over the Church of God Though the â—ight of presenting a man to benefice were a meere temporall thing yet because it removeth the libertie of a free election of the fittest pastor as Origen saith it cannot bee lawfull but it is not a temporall or civill right but a spirituall right though wee should grant that the people have a free voyce in choosing and that the patron were oblieged to present to the benefice the man onely whom the people hath freely chosen and whom the Elders by imposition of hands have ordained 1. Because the Pastors hath right to the benefice as the workeman is worthy of his hire and hee hath a divine right thereunto by Gods Law 1 Cor. 9. 8 9. c. Gal. 6 6. Matth. 10. 10. Ergo if the patron give any right to the Pastor to the benefice it must bee a spirituall right If it bee said hee may give him a civill right before men that according to the Lawes of the Commonwealth hee may legally brook and injoy the benefice this is but a shift for the civill right before men is essentially founded upon the Law of God that saith the workeman is worthy of his hire and it is that fame right really that the Word of God speaketh of now by no Word of God hath the Patron a power to put the Preacher in that case that hee shall bee worthy of his wages for hee being called chosen as Pastor hee hath this spirituall right not of one but of the whole Church 2. It is true Papists seeme to bee divided in judgements in this whether the right of patronage bee a temporall or a spirituall power for some Canonists as wee may see in Abb. decius and Rubio and the Glosse saith it is partly temporall partly spirituall Others say it is a spirituall power as Anton. de Butr. and Andr. Barbat and Suarez and whereas Papists doe teach that the Church may lawfully give a right of presenting to Church benefices even to those who are not Church men the power must bee ecclesiasticall and spirituall and cannot bee temporall also Suarez saith that the right of patronage may bee the matter of Simâ—ny when it is â—â—ld for mâ—ney Ergo they thinke it an holy and spirituall power It is true the Bishop of Spalato calleth it a temporall power which is in the hand of the Prince but there is neither reason nor Law why it can bee called a temporall power due to a man seeing the patron hath amongst us a power to present and name one man whom he conceiveth to be qualified for wee find the nomination of a list or the seeking out of men fit for the holy ministry some times ascribed to the Church as Act. 1 23. Then they appointed two Joseph called Barsabas who was surnam d Jusâ—us and Matthias which words may well bee referred to the eleven Apostles and so they nominated men or to the Church of beleevers and so though it bee not an authoritative action it is an ecclesiasticall action and belongeth to the Church as the Church and so to no Patron and the looking out of seven men to be presented as fit to bee ordained Deacons is expresly given to the Church of beleevers Act. 6. 3. Wherefore Brethren looke yee out amongst you 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 seven men of honest report and sometimes the Apostles doe nominate men for the ministery but never doth the holy Ghost mention a Patron But if the thing it selfe say they hee necessary then is the office not unlawfull But it is most necessary that some one or more eminent and powerfull men should have power to see that the Church goods bee not delapidated Answ. It is a part of the Magistrates office with his accumulative power whereby hee seeth that every one doe their dutie to take care that vulturs and sacrilegious devourers of Church livings bee punished and the Church themselves are to censure all guiltie of Simony or delapidation of the rents of the Church as may bee gathered by due analogie from Peters punishing with death the sacriledge of Ananias and Saphira and the Simony of Simon Magus 2. The ancient Church â—ooke care of dividing of the Church rent very carefully in foure parts one was given to the Pastor who was not to imploy â—ents of the Church upon Horses and Coaches and conquering Baronies and Lordships to their sonnes as our idle belleys were in custome to doe but the Bishop was to entertaine Hospitalls and to feed the poore to take care of bridges repâ—ring of Churches so as Ambrose saith what ever is the Biships it is the poores a second part was given to the Elders and Deacons a third part was for the repairing of Churches and a fourth part for Hospitalls for poore and strangers this distribution with some other order is made if wee beleeve Papists in a Synod at Rome under Silvester the first though Socrates Theodoret Sozomen and others well versed in antiquitie speake nothing of this Synod but you may see this cleare in Synodo Bracarensi in Aventinus in Gregorius so there is no need of a Patron nor was there any in the Apostolick Church Deacons were to take care for tables and the goods of the poore no reason that men seeme more carefull for the good of the Church then Jesus Christ. 3. Though there bee a necessitie that the Church bee defended in her liberties yet is there no reason an office should be made thereof as the Canonists make it an office with a sort of stipend And therefore to make a Patron they require not onely the founding of a Church but also the building of the house upon his owne charges and the dotation of a maintenâ—nce for the Church and for this cause the Patrou hath a buriall place in the Church and if hee or his children become poore they are to be entertained of the Church rents and therefore they call it jus â—uti'e a gainefull power 2. It is jus bâ—norifioum hee hath power to nominate and present a man to the benefice of the vaiking Church 3. It is jus onerosum because hee is oblieged to defend the Church see theâ— Law for this so see also Calderwood Gerardus Suarez Anton. de dom arcb Spal Hâ—spinianus yet Justinianus himselfe forbiddeth that the Patron should present a man to the Bishop to bee examined and tryed and certainly this place and charge for the defending of the Church of Christ from injuries and wrongs 〈◊〉 Christ of want of foresight and providence who hath not appointed officers civill and eccleâ—â—asticall to take care of his Church for no power over the Church was ever given to builders of Synagogues and therefore a calling by the Patron is no more Christs way then a calling by the Prelate and his Chaplaine 2. Nor would the Church receive the ministers from Christ Jer. 2. 5. and the laying