him Here one may see as the law of God and the law of the King may stand together so the power of the magistrate may very well consist with the power right and liberty of a private church And the like he doth by many passages of Scripture which he urgeth namely Isa 49. v. 23. Kings shall be thy nursing fathers c. and Esa 60. 10. Revel 21. v. 24. the Kings of the earth shall bring their honour to the church and Rom. 13. 4. and 1 Pet. 2. 13. He addes since the Scripture speaks thus generally for thy good for the punishment of evil-doers and the praise of them that do well we must not distinguish where the Scripture doth not Now let us go to new-New-England where none will deny but a power and right of churches is maintained sutably to the sense of the dissenting brethren in old England and yet they ascribe no lesse to the magistrate in matters of religion then Mr. Burroughs Witnesse the result of a synod at Cambridge in new England published an 1646. They say magistrates must and may command matters of religion that are commanded in the Word and forbid things therein forbidden by the Word meaning the whole Word both in the new and old Testament In short they hold for substance what I said before of the two kinds of acts performed in every private church one looking immediately at the externall act of the body and the duties and sins which appear in the carriage of the outward man and this they say the magistrate looketh at and commandeth or forbiddeth in church and out of church see pag. 15. and therefore they say pag. 40. every church considered as a civil society needeth a coercive power They say further that this power is needfull in churches to curb the obstinate and restrain the spreading of errours Pag. 49. they invalid the example of Uzziah often alledged by the Romanists and the presbyterians though Mr. Gillespie as I remember never maketh use of it in his great book and say that this act of Azariah thrusting out Uzziah was an act of coercion and so of magistracy and a civil act which priests and Levites were allowed to do and which they made subservient to that command of God that none should burn incense but the sons of Aaron For I believe any officer under the soveraign magistrate might do the like in case this later should go about to violate a command of such a high nature for being an under-magistrate and invested with power of coercion he obeyeth the greater master and maketh use of his power to hinder a notable breach of Gods expresse command Having thus made good that there is a fair correspondency and concurrence of the right and power of private churches with the magistrates power over them I do not see but my principles and those of the dissenting brethren are very agreeable consonant in the main It may be a few of them will call that power in every particular church ecclesiasticall which I call a power of magistracy and they will call excommunication an act of the ecclesiasticall power which I conceive to be rather an effect of the power of magistracy settled in every particular church But the difference is not great since we both make that church-power call it what you will a power of jurisdiction and coercion which must needs be subordinace to the power of the magistrate since both are of the same kind and upon that account excommunication is a law of the power of coercion so of magistracy In short whereas some of them will say of all church-censures that they are the product of a positive divine power I say they are the result of a naturall civil power subservient to the divine power in the exercise of the first kind of acts of church-members as such sure Mr. Burroughs and the result of the synod in New-England come very near if not altogether to my sense For Mr. Burroughs pag. 27. maketh but two powers residing in a private church one of admonishing perswading desiring seeking to convince the other a power restraining This latter power I call a power of magistracy because by the first power men are not outwardly restrained nor rought to outward conformity and accordingly excommunication must needs be a product of that restraining power So that the difference is not at all reall but nominall I find in Musculus in his common-places concerning magistrates the same power of magistracy in churches The passage hath been alledged above there he saith that that power exercised in churches is notecclesiasticall but the power of the magistrate CHAPTER XXI That a church made up of many particular churches under one presbytery invested with a judiciall power over them is not of the institution of Christ. VVE are brought insensibly to know the nature of a Christian church instituted by Christ which as I said is a particular visible one meeting in one place to celebrate the same ordinances whereof mention is made 1 Cor. 11. v. 18. and chap. 14. v. 23. and Act. 13. v. 42. and 44. In this church the Lord Jesus Christ hath properly instituted the ministry for Christ hath not instituted a catholick visible church much lesse a nationall church under one presbytery but this appellation of church is like the word man which denotes a nature common to many singulars and yet is properly said of John or Peter For as many fountains are not a fountain and many schools are not a school and many families are not a family so many private churches are not properly a church We shall find below Amyraldus saying most truly and very pertinently to our argument that the appellation of church doth not properly belong either to the catholick visible church or to a nationall church such as are the English French Helvetian churches which are rather a knot or collection of churches then a church That such a church made up of many private churches under one presbytery is not of the institution of Christ nor ex necessitate praecepti but of the free pleasure of each private church who without any violation of the command of Christ may either remain single or aggregate it self to other churches under such a presbytery may be proved by severall arguments 1. I begin with the testimony of the Rev. Assembly in their humble advice who lay no greater stresse of necessity upon it then that it is lawfull and agreeable to the word of God that such a thing be 2. If the Lord Jesus Christ had instituted such a presbyterian church it were fit it should be told us what is a competent number of churches requisite to be under a presbytery whether only three or four or more it may be two thousand If so many why may not a hundred thousand churches be under one presbytery If so many why not all private orthodox churches that are dispersed through the world If a presbytery may be over all the catholick
not trouble the reader with many quotations Yet to shew that this is no new doctrine I might produce some famous Romish authors who thought no lesse in the darkest times of ignorance for so Claude Fauchet hath left written a famous Historian and a Papist in his book of the liberties of the Gallicane church who out of Gregorie of Tours and the practise of his time proveth that the Kings of France were reputed heads of the church a title which many 100. years after was much found fault with in the Kings of England by the Romanists yea by some reformers He concludes his discourse thus which sheweth that the Bishops of that time did hold the King assisted by his counsell of State to be under God head on earth of the church in his Kingdom and not the Pope whom if they had looked on as the head they would have sent unto him the conclusion of the councill of Orleans and not to King Clovis So speaketh the author of the Review of the councill of Trent lib. 6. cap. 5. The ecclesiasticks in France do not hold their ecclesiastick jurisdiction from the Pope but from the King though the Iesuits teach otherwise CHAPTER VII The strength of Mr. Gillespies reasons to disprove that the magistrate is not chief governour of the church under Christ examined ALl that I have said doth sufficiently overthrow what Mr. Gillespie alledgeth for a double jurisdiction and against the magistrates being the chief governour of the church under Christ To make good that in a hundred places he doth much under value the magistrates power in sacred things namely p. 187. that the magistrate though Christian and godly doth not exnatura rei and in regard of his particular vocation intend the glory of Iesus Christ as mediator and King of the church In the next page The glory of Iesus Christ as mediatour and King of the church is not the end of magistracy And in the same page he saith that the end of magistracy is not godlinesse honesty but peace and quietnesse Pag. 235. he saith the magistrate is not to rule in the name of Christ Pag. 250. he saith the magistrate of England is not a member of the church as a magistrate but as a Christian In the 294. page the civil magistrate is Gods viceregent not Christs and ibid. If the magistrate be supreme head and governour of the church under Christ then the ministers of the church are the magistrates ministers as well as Christs and must act in the magistrates name and as subordinate to him and the magistrate shall be Christs minister and act in Christs name By all this he declareth his opinion more then he proveth it But to elude whatever strength this carries I further adde that God maketh use of two main instruments to promote and advance the Kingdom of Christ as mediatour 1. The first is the sacred function wholly set a part by God to preach the glad tidings of God reconciled to the world which function was first laid on Christ and then on the Apostles and the ministers of the Gospell who are embassadors and messengers of from Christ In this function there is no jurisdiction annexed but what the spirit in the word hath upon mens hearts for their conviction and conversion In the exercise of this function there is no law made by him that bears it but the law of the spirit no censure inflicted but on such as either willingly and not by constraint undergo it and chose whether they will or no or when it pleaseth God in judgement to afflict the despisers of Gods ministers ordinances This function I grant is not exercised in the magistrates name but Christs nor is it subordinate to him 2. The second thing servient if I may so speak and subservient to the promoting of the Kingdom of Christ is the magistrate and magistracy in as much as which I said before it cannot be that ministers and people assemble synods be called an outward government settled lawes published good men rewarded bad men punished heresies and hereticks rejected ministers maintained union preserved except ministers people synods be invested with a power of magistrate and magistracy These two as I suppose being undeniably true all Mr. Gillespies assertions above-mentioned will be found built upon the sand The magistrate having not the sacred function on him is no minister nor ambassadour of and from Christ neither doth the inward operative jurisdiction annexed to the sacred function arise from magistracy ex natura rei In that regard the minister preaching the Gospell and exercising his pastorall function is not the magistrates minister but Christs But as magistracy is the second necessary instrument which God employeth to promote the Kingdom of his Son in the world and for as much as it cannot be so much as imagined that magistracy is inherent in all pastors and assemblies of churches and synods no doubt but the ministers in that consideration may be called the magistrates ministers as both in the same respect are Christs ministers If Christs Kingdom cannot be nor ever was promoted without magistracy actually present and acting then the magistrate is a main minister of Christ in those acts Reverend and learned Mr. Lightfoot in his Harmony of the New Testament upon the 1 Cor. 5. clearly evinceth that church-officers cannot be so much as conceived to govern the churches without magistracy either assumed or delegated for having told us that every synagogue of the Jewes had magistracy within their own body judging betwixt party and party in matters of money Health damage yea inflicting corporall punishments he addeth all things well considered it may not be so monstrons as it seems to some to say it might very well be so in those times of Christian congregations for since as it might be shewed Christ and his Apostles in platforming the modell of Christian churches in those times did keep very close to the platform of synagogues and since the Romans in those times made no difference betwixt Iewes Iudaizing and Iewes that were turned Christians for as yet there was no persecution raised against Christianity why might not Christian congregations have and exercise their double function of ministry and magistracy in them as well as the Iewish synagogues and if that much controverted place 1 Tim. 5. 17. should be interpreted according to such a rule it were neither irrationall nor improbable Here by the way one may see that in synagogues there were severall functions but one Imperium and jurisdiction which was that of magistracy 2. that the churches of Christians were modelled according to Iewish synagogues 3. that every church had both ministery and magistracy By this likewise down goeth what he saith that the magistrate though Christian and godly doth not in regard of his particular vocation intend the glory of Jesus Christ as mediatour and King of the church The main end as well as duty of magistracy is the care of religion and so of
them The synod of the Apostles was extraordinary not exemplary The exception of the brethren of Scotland against the 2. article of the 31. chapter of the confession examined The uses abuses of synods that they are not the way to compose differences in matters of religion if their canons are beyond counsells and advices HAving examined what plea the Rever Assembly can have in the 30. chapter of their confession for a government distinct from that of the magistrate the 31. chapter which is of synods and councells is more superficially to be handled for what we have said before of the jurisdiction of churches plainly sheweth that the jurisdiction of synods is no otherwise distinct from that of the magistrate for since synods must be made up of church-officers it is not possible they should impart to synods what they have not in churches and that those that have not a jurisdiction in churches distinct from that of the magistrate should delegate to themselves a power which they never had I admit willingly the necessity of synods as the first section doth synods being necessary whether magistrates be orthodox or not 1. for preserving and restoring truth 2. for uniting churches in one judgement 3. for keeping an externall communion of Saints And it were to be wished as the magistrate of England hath set up again the Lords house so they would re-establish a house of convocation or an assembly of ministers meeting at the same time that the Parliament sits treating such questions in matters of religion as should be propounded to them by the Parliament or they themselves should petition the Parliament to be handled not being invested with more judiciall power then a company of merchants or sea-men called by the Parliament to give their advice about trade and navigation in which convocation the major part of votes should not be so much regarded by the Parliament as the weight of their opinions and reasons and therefore as it was in the last assembly where 20. did not prevail against one dissenting brother so this convocation should return to the Parliament not the result of the whole assembly because carried by the major part of the members but the names of parties assenting and dissenting This convocation I humbly conceive ought to be made up only of ministers of the Gospell that have wholly set apart themselves for the work of the ministery and study of Divinity For as the supreme magistrate usually calls men of that calling and profession about which he is to make lawes as being the most fit to give counsell in the thing they are called for so doubtlesse none are so fit to be advised with in matters concerning religion as those that are most learned and versed in it for I hold them not only the fitter members in an assembly convened to treat of matters concerning religion but also not unfit yea as fit as any other men to sit and vote in Parliaments For this opinion of a double jurisdiction ecclesiasticall and civil that lay-men must be judges in civil courts and ministers in ecclesiasticall assemblies as it hath barred lay-men from sitting at least from voting in synods and councels so hath it removed clergy-men from sitting and being judges in civil courts and Parliaments which opinion hath out-gone the Papists in some things for though they do not permit lay-men to have votes yea hardly to sit in synods yet do the popish magistrates admit ecclesiasticall men in their courts and judicatories thus lately Bishops in England sate in Parliament I confesse that Popes to advance the building of their empire within the empires of magistrates Kings and Emperours would be sure to have an oare in every boat yea more for though they have members of their own in civil courts yet they permit no members of civil courts to sit and vote in synods and councels But some Protestant magistrates in reforming popery as they have not so much relinquisht and parted with their own right as popish magistrates to loose their right in calling and voting in synods so have they more wronged the clergy debarring them from sitting and voting in their courts which I humbly conceive to be a losse to the magistrate and a wrong and injury done to the ministers and thereupon I propound these considerations 1. Debarting of the ministers from sitting and voting in Parliament hath occasioned and confirmed mens minds specially of ministers in that opinion that there is such a thing in Scripture and reason as a government in the hands of church-officers distinct from that of the magistrate and that there is a double jurisdiction two judicatories one civil whereof the magistrates and laity are members and judges and another ecclesiasticall in which ministers only must sit and vote for ministers think it but reasonable that since they are kept off by the laity from being members in Parliament and in all civil judicatories so likewise the magistrate and the laity should not be admitted to sit and vote in synods whereas it being certain that there is no ground in Scripture or reason for a double jurisdiction a government distinct from that of the magistrate and all judiciall proceedings in whatsoever court assembly Parliament synods presbyteries being acts of the magistrates jurisdiction the minister now considered as as member of a Christian common-wealth ought to enjoy the same priviledge as the other members of it All which make me conceive that it was more heat then reason that made so many write against the Bishops voting in Parliament besides it was no good work to divide jurisdictions which by the ministers sitting and voting in Parliament like other ranks of men were re-united 2. There being in a Parliament men of all sorts and ranks gentlemen lawyers physitians apothecaries merchants and they all having an equall interest to maintain religion lands liberty lawes wife and children of their own it is altogether unreasonable that ministers that are alike concerned in all these and are as well members of the Commonwealth as the best of them should notwithstanding as it were be culled out from having that priviledge that others of their fellow-citizens enjoy 3. It is known that men do not sit and vote in Parliament as merchants physitians silk-men or drapers and that if there be new lawes to make or old to alter suppose about some manufacture as cloth-working a member of Parliament being professour of that craft which is in agitation is the most able to discourse upon that subject and to state how the thing may be regulated and this he doth as a professour of the craft about which the law is to be made but when the thing debated is to be carried by vote receive the stamp of law of publick authority then I say none of the members give their votes as professours of the art and science which they exercise in the Commonwealth and which is debated in Parliament no not if a member were a chief justice of England
many constitutions about regulating the power of fathers masters and husbands and yet allowing them their authority at home are an argument that their fatherly power is consistent with their subordination to the magistrate 4. There be as I shewed above two kinds of acts to be performed in a church one as they are church-members the other as they are a society that for their government must assume some part of jurisdiction of the same nature with the magistrates power In the managing of the acts of the first kind there is no subordination of the church to the magistrate but only in the second for preaching hearing the word of God administring the sacraments walking holily submitting one to another are no acts of power subordinate to the magistrate and under that consideration I will grant the right of churches not to depend on the magistrate but as these acts in a church-way cannot be exercised without a power of magistracy assumed in this regard a church may be said to be subordinate to the fountain of magistracy For it is with these two kinds of acts in subordination to God and the magistrate as with the body and the soul For none doubts but the faculty and gifts of reasoning apprehending truth loving God and our neighbour believing in Christ are no acts subordinate to the power of the magistrate but as reasoning faith love must be supposed resident in the body of man and that the man in doing acts subordinate to the magistrates power as going ordering commanding and obeying doth carry along his reason faith and love in like manner as it is not possible to consider a man performing the acts of reason faith and love and not being the while subordinate to the power of the magistrate so a church even performing those acts of church-members as such in as much as the second kind of acts that are subordinate to the magistrate must be joyned with the first cannot be considered without it be subordinate to the magistrate 5. If the power of churches were not subordinate to the magistrate many inconveniences would follow 1. That some churches gathered by the magistrate and his acts of appointing time place and stipends should not be subordinate to him 2. Or if he should gather none and besides appoint no publick worship to take place in all parts of his dominions but leave that wholly to the will of those that congregate of their own accord this I say would in a very short time breed irreligion or heathenisme in most places and most tanks of men for then it must be conceived that not one of 20. would congregate of themselves that the 19. parts not being called upon nor any way invited by publick ordinances set up in all places of mens abode atheisme or neglect of all religion would soon ensue in most parts And a persecuting magistrate as in the primitive church were ten times rather to be wished then one carelesse and neglecting to set up ordinances for by one of these two wayes either by persecution or by countenancing and commanding the worship of God the magistrate causeth religion to flourish by doing neither one nor the other he takes the way to abolish it as Julian the apostate was about to do if God had not the sooner cut him off 6. But suppose it be granted on all sides that the magistrate is bound to do what King Edward did or Queen Elizabeth to banish popery to set up protestantisme and an orthodox ministery in all parishes throughout England which acts cannot be performed by a few particular churches with all their church power sure it must be also granted that all those acts of a magistrate in ordering affairs of religion are in his disposall and depending on him 7. Since then the magistrate must have the ordering of those affairs of religion which he himself hath constituted if he should not likewise be the supreme governour of those churches which he hath not erected but were gathered by the members of churches of their own accord there could not but a great confusion arise in mens minds as well as in the state it being no small businesse to distinguish the power of the churches that are subordinate to the magistrate and the power of those churches that are not From reason I descend to the authority of the rever brethren both in old and new England dissenting from the presbyterians In old England the reverend pious Jeremie Burroughs will be in stead of all the rest of his brethren for in the eleventh chapter of his Irenicum he professeth to deliver not only his own judgement but also that of his brethren with whom he had occasion to converse Whoever shall peruse his book throughout specially the fifth chapter will find that he attributeth as much power to the magistrate over churches as any of the opposites to the presbyterian brethren Which power of the magistrate while he asserteth he never conceives it should overthrow his other positions namely in the seventh chapter concerning the right and power of churches or that his stating the right liberty and power of churches could not consist with the power of the magistrate over them Now he is very expresse in the said chapter for the power of the magistrate in sacred things Pag. 21. he saith that magistrates in their magistracy are specially to ayme at the promoting of the Kingdom of Jesus Christ the mediatour and there and throughout that long chapter you have these conclusions 1. That the church and Commonwealth of Israel were mixed in one that there is no reason it should be now otherwise 2. That the power of the magistrate is alike in the times of the old and new Testament and were it so that nothing were set down of it in the new Testament that it is enough it is a law not only granted to the Israelites but also of the light given to the very heathens whose power of magistracy was to govern religion as well as other things 3. That it is most unreasonable that a magistrate turning either from the heathenish or Jewish religion should enjoy lesse power in matters of religion then he had when he was a Jew or heathen An infidel magistrate saith he converted to Christian religion is thereby better inabled to perform the duty of his place then before but he had the same authority before 4. He holds that the magistrate hath a soveraign judgement of his commands though unskilfull in the things commanded A magistrate that is not skilfull in physick or in navigation yet he may judge physitians and mariners if they wrong others in their way 5. He asserts largely the power of the magistrate in matters of religion by the example of the Kings of Judah and Israel yea of the Kings of Niniveh and of Artaxerxes interposing his power in matters of religion for which Ezra blesseth God whosoever will not do the law of thy God and the law of the King let judgement be executed upon
for succession is Romanish Ministers are no successours in their ministery to the Iudaicall Priests but to the Prophets 133 Chap. XIII The nature of the ministers power and of that of binding and loosing the power of the keyes Amyraldus and Mr. Lightfoots judicious exposition of the power of binding and loosing The power of governing and ruling is not the ecclesiasticall contended for Mr. Gillespies arguments answered 142 Chap. XIV That the power of the keyes and of binding and loosing are not committed to all church-officers but to the ministers of the Gospell only 155 Chap. XV. That God hath not given to the church-officers of the Gospell a certain platform of government and that it is arbitrary and of humane institution and therefore not to be administred by a power distinct from the humane 161 Chap. XVI The 31. chapter of the confession made by the Rever Assembly examined The use of synods Two things are humbly represented first that for a re-union of jurisdictions over all persons and in all causes a convocation made up of ministers only be re-established during the sitting of Parliament the second is that ministers may be put into the same capacity as all other ranks of free-born people to sit and vote in Parliaments Of the power of synods and that of the magistrate in calling of them The synod of the Apostles was extraordinary not exemplary The exception of the brethren of Scotland against the 2. article of the 31. chapter of the confession examined The uses and abuses of synods that they are not the way to compose differences in matters of religion if their canons are beyond counsells and advices 166 Chap. XVII That the Iewish Church-officers had not a jurisdiction distinct from that of the magistrate Mr. Gillespies distinction that they were not materially but formally distinct examined The argument of Amyraldus that though they had a distinct jurisdiction yet the example of the church of the Iewes is no pattern to the Christian church discussed and proved to be of no validity 192 Chap. XVIII The cause of mistakes in stating the nature of the church and calling that the true church which is not Three acceptions of the word Church in holy writ The meaning of the word Church Matth. 18. v. 17. 206 Chap. XIX That a particular assembly of Christians meeting in one place about the worship of God is the only true visible church mentioned in Scripture That that church considered as an assembly of Christians bringeth forth other kinds of acts then it doth considered as a society of men by which the nature and extent of the power of a private church is made clear and evident 213 Chap. XX. That the power attributed to private churches by the reverend dissenting brethren doth very well accord with the power of magistracy in matters of religion as it is held by Erastus Bullingerus Musculus Grotius Mr. Selden and Mr. Coleman This same is proved by reason and by the testimony of Mr. Burroughs writing the sense of all his brethren as also by the practise of the churches in new-New-England 222 Chap. XXI That a church made up of many particular churches under one presbytery invested with a judiciall power over them is not of the institution of Christ 234 Chap. XXII That the greatest opposers of the dissenting brethren namely Salmasius Amyraldus and others have laid down the same grounds for the right and power of particular churches and so confuted rather their own fancies then invalidated the tenets of the brethren The question whether Rome be a true church briefly resolved That Amesius and Iohn Mestrezat late minister of Paris in their writings have held the power of private churches to be independent from any church-judicatory 242 Chap. XXIII The consistency of the right and power of private churches with the magistrates power in ordering publick worship proved by the example of the Iewes that they had through all the land particular convocations synagogues or churches called also colledges or schools where the Prophets and sons of the Prophets taught especially on the sabbath-day that they were independent from any church-judicatory How synagogues were altered from their first institution and that being converted into Christian churches they retained the same right power and way of government 251 Chap. XXIV That the Christian churches under heathens were governed by a confederate discipline or a power of magistracy as the synagogues were appointing men which Ambrose calls elders to decide such matters as otherwise were to come under the magistrates cognizance This practise is grounded upon 1 Cor. 6. v. 1 2 c. and confirmed by Origen Iustin Martyr Ambrose and Mr. Lightfoot That the power of these elders continued still under Christian Emperours with some alteration they erecting in lieu of them Episcopall courts That all church-power was the Emperours power That the very heathen magistrates knew no other but that all power was annexed to them 267 Chap. XXV That ecclesiasticall jurisdiction as it is held by the Romish church better agreeth with reason and the letter of the Scripture then that of the presbyterian brethren That some Romanists have ascribed more power to the magistrate in sacred things then the presbyterian brethren 287 Chap. XXVI The description of excommunication in terms received by most of our opposites though otherwise variously defined by them That for four thousand years no such excommunication was in use either among the heathens or the Iewes An answer to some objections That the legall uncleannesse was no type of the morall That the Priests judging of the leprosy is no plea for excommunication nor for ecclesiasticall jurisdiction 298 Chap. XXVII That neither in the time of Ezra such an excommunication began That the casting out of the synagogue did not answer that excommunication That there is no ground for it nor practise of it in the new Testament 307 Chap. XXVIII That the whole context Matth. 18. v. 15 16 17 and 18. maketh nothing for excommunication neither Iudas non-admission if granted to the Eucharist nor the delivering of the incestuous person to Satan nor yet the self-examination required 1 Cor. 11. 316 Chap. XXIX That excommunication is contrary to common sense and reason 326 Chap. XXX That excommunication was mainly subservient to the working of the mystery of iniquity That the corrupting of the doctrine of the Eucharist made way for excommunication 337 Chap. XXXI The History of excommunication from the first reformation from Popery how it was received in Geneva but not settled without disputes and clashings betwixt the consistory and the magistrate 342 Chap. XXXII A continuation of the History of excommunication in France the Low-Countreys Scotland the Palatinate How it came to pass that amongst reformed states the Scottish ecclesiasticall jurisdiction ascended to such a height What plea the reformed churches in France have for excommunication That it is more justifiable among them then in churches under an orthodox magistrate 353 Chap. XXXIII The judgement of some
Divines yet living both of the argument in hand and of the writings of the Author Of some mens strong prejudices against and harsh censures of him 369 The PREFACE I Intend here by way of Preface to give a brief account how I came to write of this subject Having a little before the beginning of the long Parliament in the year 1639. written a piece in Latin against the corrupted party of the English Hierarchy who made as near approaches as they could towards Popery and being a little while after engaged in that quarrell it so fell out that this corrupt party being soon foiled by the great torrent of opposition they met withall their opposers themselves who were very numerous did soon divide into parts and factions dissenting from one another particularly about church-way and discipline which afforded me new matter to study on which I did being indifferently affected towards the four kinds of opinions held in the reverend assembly of Divines viz. of Episcopacy moderated Presbytery Independency and Erastianisme and for many years together not giving my approbation more to one of them then to the rest before such time as I should be well resolved in the controversy I pittyed for a long time the preposterous endeavours of each party tending to make the rent wider while they sought rather the victory then the truth brother became eager against brother branding each other with schisme and heresy their principles so far dividing them asunder that partners in the same martyrdome and who had lost their ears together were soon together by the ears and Mr. Edwards by name in shewing rather his spleen then his zeal and Dr. Bastwick who stiled himself the Captain of the presbyterian army did but powre oyle upon the fire of dissention in stead of quenching it as likewise did our brethren the Scots when they wound up their string of ecclesiasticall jurisdiction to such an height that it was ready to break and ranked the Erastians in the list of abominable hereticks pointing therein particularly at poor and mild Mr. Coleman walking almost alone in a melancholy posture and who would not give rayling for rayling but mildly intreated all the brethren that dissented from him specially the presbyterians to give a satisfactory answer to the queries of the Parliament touching a jurisdiction and government of the church distinct from that of the magistrate and to shew in Scripture a place parallel to Matth. 18. v. 17. where by the word Church is meant either the ministers or a presbyterian consistory besides to find out in Scripture the name and thing of excommunication or that it is as well though not as much a soul-saving ordinance as preaching of the word and the administration of the Sacraments as the reverend presbyterian ministers would fain have perswaded him in their reasons against the dissenting brethren p. 63. At length being well satisfied that truth seldome lyes on the multitudes side as I did much pitty Mr. Coleman so did I fall to study him and thought it but reasonable ere I should join with the generall clamour against him to hear what he could say for himself And indeed his still voice did more work upon me then all the thundring voices of his opposites So then being convinced by him about eight years since I put forth in print a tract in English the drift whereof was only to assert the power of the magistrate in matters of religion which subject being but an answer to a letter I handled cursorily and superficially And while I was upon that work I was much in charity as I expresse in some passages of that tract with the churches of the congregationall-way no lesse cried out upon then Mr. Coleman both here and beyond seas specially in France where namely at Charenton near Paris a nationall synod condemned them by an authentick act yet then I had no such thought as to conceive or imagine that the power and right of private churches or congregations could agree well with the power of the magistrate in matters of religion But soon after the publishing of this English tract my uncle Dr. Andrew Rivet whose memory is very precious to me and to all the Churches of God sent me a Latin manuscript made by a Divine in France wherein he endeavoured the confuting of my English book and besides did much taxe me for favouring the congregationall way so much spoken-against amongst the reformed churches in France and expressely condemned by a nationall synod of theirs About the same time came Amyraldus forth in print as full of bitternesse and invectives against them as Mr. Edwards in his Gangrena Both which books I mean Amyraldus and that which Dr. Rivet sent me were the cause occasion and subject of writing my Paraenesis in Latin In writing of which I was insensibly carried to conceive and propound wayes of accommodation betwixt the brethren of the congregationall way and the assertors of that measure of power in sacred things allotted to the magistrate by Musculus Bullinger Gualterus and Erastus nothing doubting but that by these propositions of reconciliation and accommodation I have given with a very little yielding on both sides the true way and notion of settling in such a nation as this where the soveraign magistrate is orthodox might be made out and the Christian reformed religion worship established with more peace truth and holinesse of life then they were ever hitherto since the times of the Apostles These notions suting more to the purpose and interest of the English climat nation ought to have been then rather put in English then Latin but that I mistrusted my own abilities to appear in publick in any other tongue then Latin or French and that I had a great mind first to disabuse other nations particularly my own countreymen who were possessed with strange prejudices against the godly party of this nation as well presbyterians as others by the false suggestions and informations of Amyraldus so far that some have expressed to me by letters how much they bewailed the lamentable condition of England where all religion and fear of God was well-near quite extinct where there was no church-discipline no excommunication no synods no ordination no lay-elders no Lords prayer or ten commandements rehersed and no Sacrament of the Lords supper administred Now this present tract coming after the other and being otherwise digested and framed and those controversies that concern England being chiefly handled therein and all brought within a narrower compasse I do not despair but that my present designe will be excused though I come short of giving satisfaction to all parties I honour equally the persons learning and piety of those that I assent to and dissent from no lesse respecting the memory of Mr. Gillespie an eminent man for wit piety learning and soundnesse of faith but very erroneous in what he stiffely maintaineth in his Aarons Rod then that of Mr. Coleman or of any of Gods Ministers now with the
naturall power right liberty and prudence in ordering all kinds of affairs societies and families are no otherwise distinct in kind or species then a yard that measured cloth differs from that which measured searge as a yard is alike appliable to silk and thred and the same hammer will knock in an iron naile and a wooden pin so the same power and prudence governeth the church and a colledge It is also observable that a man being at once a member of a family hall city Parliament church doth not act alwaies according to the quality of his relation function and place publick or private not acting as a physitian father or husband but as a judge and not as a church-member but as a free member of a society Thus a member of a colledge of physitians joyneth in consultation with his brethren in a case of physick as a physitian but in making lawes regulating the practise of physick and the apothecaries entrenching upon the physitians he doth not act as a physitian but as a judge and as a person invested with judiciall power from the state The same physitian in a Parliament upon the matter and question of physick and of physitians to be regulated may speak pertinently of his art as a physitian but doth not vote give his consent to the making of a law about physick as a physitian but as a judge of the land Likewise to be sure by what right pastors and people act in the church the acts and actions of a pastor or church-member are to be considered either as acts of pastors and of church-members or as they are acts of rulers and members of a society The act of a pastor as pastor is to discharge all ministeriall function commanded in the revealed word and not declared by any dictate of nature In those acts I see no right of jurisdiction but over the inward man when by the power of the word the sinner is brought to the obedience of the crosse of Christ The acts of church-members as such are either in relation to the pastor or of one member to another In relation to the pastor the acts are to submit to the minister ruling them and dispensing unto them the word They may have that liberty to try his doctrine and to do as they of Beroea who searched the Scriptures to know whether it was so as St. Paul preached unto them this is also an act of every faithfull member of the church not to assent to any doctrine because it hath been assented unto by the major part of suffrages but in things that concern order and discipline to yield to the constitutions agreed on by the major part of the assembly so that by them the bond of charity and the truth of the doctrine be not violated and perverted The acts of church-members relating one to another are to bear one anothers burthens to forgive and edifie one another to preferre another before himself The acts of pastors and church-members as they are endowed with a power common to all other societies are 1. to do all things orderly 2. to make a discipline sutable to time and place since there is not in the Scripture a positive precept concerning the same 3. to oblige every member to the lawes of the discipline voted by the major part of the members 4. to admit and expell the members which by the major part are thought fit so to be Many other acts are performed by the same members not as church-members as to appeal to a superiour tribunall as magistracy or synod in case of wrong sustained for they do not oppose a just defence to wrong by any other right then a member of any society should do Thus an assembly of Christians meeting in a church way being persecuted or assaulted in their temple by rude and wicked men doth not oppose a just defence by weapons or otherwise as church-members but as men invested with naturall power against an unjust violence In short ministers and people have many actâ—ngs within the sphear of Christian duties which are not proper to them as Christians and members of churches being like in that to a physitian who doth not build as a physitian or to a counsellor of State carrying a letter to a friend who acts then the part of a letter-bearer thus a father hath a power over his son by a naturall paternall right but he doth instruct him in a Gospell way by a paternall Christian right and duty grounded upon a positive precept of the Scripture thus Queen Mary of England established a religion by a naturall right power and duty annexed to all soveraignty to order sacred things with a soveraign authority but Queen Elizabeth did overthrow the false worship and did set up Protestant religion not only by the same right that Queen Mary had but also by a positive right as principall church-member as Ezechiah Iosiah c. appointed by God to be heads and nursing fathers and mothers of the churches The same things lawes and constitutions that are of divine right are also of humane right and likewise the things that are of humane right in a good sense may be said to be of divine right Things are said to be of divine or humane right either because the matter of right is concerning Gods worship or humane policie or because God or man is the author of them Thus the lawes of the Iewes regulating their Commonwealth are said both to be of divine and humane right divine because God is the authour of them humane because they order all affairs about mine and thine right and wrong and betwixt man and man Likewise many things have been instituted with great wisedome by magistrates and councils which may well be said to be both of divine and humane right Divine because they further the purity of worship and power of godlinesse humane because they were instituted by men and may suffer alteration and reformation So things that are every way of divine right both for the matter and institution as the eating of the passeover and the observation of the Sabbath may be said to be of humane right because commanded and enjoyned by humane authority The very calling of synods which they say is of divine institution both for their institution which is Apostolick and for the matter that is handled in them none but a papist did yet deny to be the Emperours and magistrates right Thus fasting prayer publick humiliation though duties to be performed by divine right and precept are also of humane right as commanded and ordered by the magistrate in a publick way Thus it was the good Kings of Iuda's right and none can blame them for it to command fasting and prayers Lastly things that are every way of humane right and made by man and have for their object the regulating of humane affairs as are the lawes concerning conduit-pipes buildings forests chases c. may conveniently be said to be of divine right because by divine right they
the magistrate is not head of the church more then of other societies for as the callings of a physitian merchant smith sea-man so of a Christian as Christian and church-member are not subordinate to magistracy but only under the notion of and as they are members of families societies corporations and commonwealths in all which magistracy is virtually and eminently resident in regard that no society of men can be imagined to be governed either without a power delegate from the magistrate or without assuming magistracy within it self In that sense the magistrate may be said for these three or four reasons to be head of a visible nationall church 1. Because the matter manner and extent of the power exercised by that church being wholly the same with that of the magistrate it is needlesse to make of one power two and therefore the magistrate being the supreme governour in the managing of that power exercised alike in all kinds of societies within his dominion he may very properly be the supreme governour as well of churches as of all other societies 2. The magistrate may be said to be head of the visible church because there is no man of what place function calling dignity so ever he be that in an externall visible way can so much promote the interest of Jesus Christ and the building up of his Kingdom as the supreme magistrate not so much considered as Christian but as magistrate and by vertue of his magistracy None doth doubt but that one single woman namely Queen Elizabeth being a magistrate did contribute more for establishing and spreading the Gospell of Christ in England then all the godly ministers put together in the dayes of Queen Mary Let but one single magistrate countenance religion this will avail more then thousands of Greenhams or Bradfords under a magistrate of a contrary religion Sure where God hath given more ability and power to do good he also hath placed there more right duty to promote that good I think there was more stresse of duty laid upon Queen Elizabeth to advance Christs Kingdom in England then on 100. Bradfords Latimers and Ridleys in Queen Maries dayes A 3. ground may be added why the sovereign magistrate may be called the head of the church and which is much pressed by Reynolds Martyr Musculus Bullingerus Gualterus Zanchius Pareus is because all the decisions of ministers about matters of faith or discipline are but mere counsels advices and directions not binding externally that is actively or passively any church society or corporation except they receive a sanction from the magistrate and besides that these sanctions are not to be made by him caeco judicio with a blind judgement standing to their determination without examination and doing as much as those of Beroea who ere they believed St. Paul searched the Scriptures to know whether it was so as he preached As no obedience is to be rendred by any person society or corporation without they duly weigh in their judgement of discretion whether the command be just or no so a command is not to be made by the person whose duty and part it is to command untill he first understandeth and apprehendeth by his judgement of discretion the thing to be a good and a fitting rule of obedience So that since presbyteries and â—ynods cannot enforce obligation of obedience to their declarations and decisions without the injunction and command of the magistrate since also he is not to enjoin or command any thing repugnant to his own judgement it doth consequently follow that good reason it is that he who last is to judge and command any thing propounded and debated in whatever assembly of men should be stiled the sovereign judge head ruler and governour of those things that are solely in his own power Fourthly he may be said to be head of the church because of three main duties which are annexed to his office of magistracy which comprehend what is requisite for life godlinesse and happinesse The 1. is provisio mediorum conducentium ad finem optimum provision of the means conducing to the best end 2. remotio impedientium the removing of hinderances 3. actualis directio in illum finem an actuall direction ordering things to that end These 3. conditions Javellus a Romish Bishop layes down to assert the soveraign power of the magistrate in judging providing ordering and removing in order to obtaining the best end which he saith is the main felicity of man Lastly he may be well called head of the church that receiveth appeals from all church-judicatories and disannuls or ratifies their judgements and sentences But Mr. Rutherfurd denieth those acts to be appeals being not in eadem serie from a lower ecclesiasticall court to a superiour ecclesiasticall court and saith that from an ecclesiasticall court to a civil as to the magistrate there is no appeal but a removall by a declinator a complaint a refuge But we having proved that synods presbyteries c. have no jurisdiction but what they have from the magistrate therefore all appeals from a church-judicatorie to the magistrate are but from an inseriour court of the magistrate to a superiour of the same magistrate Rivet on the decalogue had not learned such squibs of distinctions betwixt appeals and refuges complaints and declinators for by any means he would have men to appeal to the magistrate from church-sentences Ministers as ministers are the subjects of the soveraign magistrate and why may it not be lawfull for subjects to appeal from the judgements of subjects to the supreme magistrate and why may it not be lawfull to the supreme magistrate to review the judgements of his subjects to ratifie them if they be good and abolish them if they be bad For call those removals what you will so that the thing be still the same for he that from an unjust sentence of a church-judicatorie hath his recourse to the magistrate both declines the sentence of that court appeals to a higher court and makes his complaint to him that can redresse him help him and disannull the first sentence I confesse if a man be condemned in England he may have his refuge to some neighbour Prince but this Prince can but protect him from the execution of the sentence against him but cannot disannull the sentence against him nor restore him in statu quo prius Such are the examples of Chrysostomus Flavianus and Athanasius which are to no purpose for they repaired to the Bishop of Rome desiring indeed to be judged by him but they did not look upon him as their superiour that could relieve them and quash the sentence against them they repaired to him only as to a mediatour and intercessour Authorities should now make good what I have proved to be consonant to reason such as might be brought out of the best reformers as Martyr Reynolds Pareus Chamier who make no other supreme visible governour of the church then the soveraign magistrate but I will
Christian religion his aime is and ought to be not so much peace and quietnesse as godlinesse and honesty Must a magistrate hide his power which is his talent in a napkin were not Adam Abraham Isaac and Jacob by their paternall magistraticall power tyed to promote Gods true worship It is very strange doctrine when he saith p. 189. that the end of an ecclesiasticall sentence as delivering to Satan is that men may learn not to blaspheme but the end of the magistrate in punishing blasphemers is only that justice may be done according to law and that peace and good order may be maintained A rank papist could hardly speak more crudely Ought not this to be the end of the magistrate in punishing transgressours if it be not by death that they may change their lives and be better then they were Were not reformation of life the end for which a blasphemer is punished but only peace and quietnesse the magistrate might as well let him go unpunished if he can but obtain his end which as Mr. Gillespie saith is peace and quietnesse which hath been often obtained when no blasphemers were punished It is observed that in Augustus time there was for 12. years through all the Roman Empire peace and quietnesse though the life of all his subjects were a perpetuall blasphemy against God But I pray how can Christs church be ruled by magistracy except it be in the name of Christ promote the interest of Jesus Christ and ayme at the glory of Jesus Christ When he saith that the magiâ—…rate of England is not a member of the church as a magistrate but as a Christian and that he governs not as a Christian but as a magistrate I confesse I understand not why I may not say as well that a pastor is not a member of a church as pastor but as a Christian for there be in the church as well Balaams and false teachers as persecuting magistrates Why may I not say that a father is not to teach the fear of the Lord to his son as a father but as a Christian for the magistrate is not to rule and order affairs of the church as a Christian but as a magistrate otherwise a Christian without the office of magistracy might do the like How can the duty about the exercise of a power be divided from the power it self as that a magistrate should be by his duty of magistracy keeper of both tables and yet should have no power given from God for the keeping of these tables But which is most al surd how can the keeping of the two tables under the Gospell be separate from the keeping of the doctrine and discipline of the Gospell as that the magistrate should be keeper of one and the pastors of the other If the magistrate under the old Testament was keeper not only of the decalogue but also of the covenant of grace by which the people of Israel was distinguished from the rest of the world what hinders but he should be under the Gospells administration a keeper both of the law and Gospell except Mr. Gillespie say that the priests were keepers of the law whereof David speaketh in the 19 Psalme and the magistrate keeper of the two tables given in mount Sinai As for the magistrates being a member of the church and therefore no head or governour of the church I believe he is as much lyable to submit and stoup his will to the commands of Christ in the ministery as the lowest in the congregation he must acknowledge his minister the better man as honoured with the highest function that ever was and which the Son of God our Lord Jesus Christ took upon him But were all the ministers of the Gospell as many Jesus Christs I would yield unto them all alike jurisdiction over the wills and minds of men but deny them an externall coercive judiciall power over their bodies estates liberties c. CHAPTER VIII Mr. Gillespies manifest contradictions in stating the magistrates power in matters of Religion BUt I will plainly shew that in this matter Mr. Gillespie doth manifestly contradict himself and stands on no sure ground for what he hath taken from the magistrate in some places in others he restoreth to him In some he grants as much to the magistrate as if he had been another Erastus in others he gives him nothing at all and makes ecclesiasticall and civil jurisdiction to be res disparatae or things as much different as wisedome and a candlestick being of severall classes and predicaments so that one hath nothing to meddle with the other Thus pag. 253. these be his words We deny that in a well-constituted church it is agreeable to the will of Christ for the magistrate either to receive appeals properly so called from the sentence of an ecclesiasticall court or to receive complaints exhibited against that sentence by that party censured so as by his authority upon such a complaint to nullify or make void the ecclesiasticall censure This indeed is imperium in imperio a jurisdiction within a jurisdiction and independent from it Mr. Gillespie would not have a man to appeal from the presbytery or synod or make complaints to the magistrate nor a magistrate to receive the complaints but he is contented that the magistrate should act the part of an executioner in compelling the party censured to submit to the church-censure which indeed is a most ungodly and tyrannicall proceeding like that of Pope Julius the 2. who would have King Lewis the 12. to execute the sentence against the Waldenses by destroying them by the sword and burning their cities without taking any cognizance of the fact And since all church-censures do signify just nothing without a power of magistracy giving its sanction for effectuating the sentence of the church here if we believe Mr. Gillespie the pastor is like the intellect and the magistrate the will this following with a blind obedience the dictates of that But who shall judge when the church is well constituted that then the magistrate may not receive complaints and appeals and may not sometimes wrong proceedings und unjust sentences passe in a well-constituted church so long as a church never so pure is not infallible and on the contrary may not an unsettled church be very just in their censures why then should it be more agreeable to the will of Christ to receive appeals from a just sentence in an unsettled church then from an unjust one when the church is well-constituted But when was ever such a well-constituted church unerring in their judgement as all appeals from their judgement to another should be unlawfull was or is that church well-constituted that either ever clashed with magistracy or was divided in it self as now it is Now we shall find Mr. Gillespie playing two other parts under the one he ascribeth to the magistrate as much as ever they challenged under the other vizard he chalks a middle way of magistrates power in sacred things
the sentence before he causeth it to be executed 3. that the magistrate having both the last judgement of approbation and of that they call imperative or command to yield obedience to the declarations and sentences of synods or consistories it is plain he is the soveraign judge of all ecclesiasticall judgements sentences and debates and that they are but counsells and advices till the magistrate approveth of them and commandeth them This single passage of Mr. Gillespie graunted unto him might serve for an answer to all his book would overthrow all ecclesiasticall jurisdiction And indeed all the controversie lieth in the narrow compasse of these few lines of his the matter of which by right should have been the main subject and bulk of his book and not have been so slightly passed over for this is the very hinge on which Gualterus and Maccovius conceive that the whole controversie betwixt Erastus and his opposites hung and which as it is stated by Maccovius will give a bone to pick till doomsday to the assertors of an ecclesiasticall jurisdiction it is a Gordian knot which they will never disintangle but by cutting of it the truth of it being so undeniable that it was never answered by Walaeus Apollinus Triglandius nor by Mr. Gillespie who indeed in this paragraph alledgeth the substance of Maccovius positions but doth not answer them to any purpose The three positions of Maccovius are brought by severall in various terms but all to the same purpose and are these 1. It is the duty of the magistrate to look and take order that the word of God be preached with purity that the Sacraments and the discipline of the church be duely administred and to make a diligent enquiry into the ministers performing of these and to punish them if either they misse or do amisse in the dâ—scharge of their places Which words of Maccovius Rivetus upon the decalogue doth expresse in equivalent terms It is the duty of ministers to infuse doctrine to wound by censures to administer the sacraments immediatly and personally and as they speak ex officio by their office Now the magistrate under whose authority these things are to be done if ministers do not perform them by his grave and commanding power may and ought to force them and enjoâ—n them to do these things and to do them well and to punish them that do otherwise then they should do 2. The second position of Maccovius is Since no determinations or sentences of presbyteries and synods have any force of obligation in them to obedience without the sanction of the magistrate therefore not the presbyteries and synods but the magistrate is the supreme judge giver and maker of all constitutions sentences and determinations of consistories and synods 3. The third is The magistrate is either to put his seal of sanction and give his judgement of approbation to all the judgements sentences and definitions of synods with a blind judgement and stand without disputing within himself to what they agreed and decreed among themselves or he must disapprove those things that in his own apprehension are not good and convenient and approve what he conceiveth to be true just and fit Whatever the opposers chose they are at a stand for they make the magistrate either a soveraign judge and arbiter over all ecclesiasticall matters or a sergeant and blind executioner of the judgements and sentences of synods and presbyteries Mr. Gillespie being not able any way to make invalide the strength of these positions of Maccovius only saith that the magistrate in having the last view and cognizance of all ecclesiasticall determinations and giving his sanction to them does not judicem agree but judâ—care which I know not how to English but that in so doing he doth not the part of a judge and yet doth judge of the thing But what strength hath this That man doth the part of a judge in whose power and breast it is to make valid and currant or to disannull whatever is debated and determined by others Of much like strength is it when he saith that the magistrate judgeth whether he ought to adde his civil authority to this or that which seemeth good to church-officers and doth not concur therewith except he be satisfied in his conscience Which if he may do the magistrate hath as much as Maccovius proveth to belong to him for in that he is not satisfied and doth not concur with the judgements of church-officers he maketh all their judgements void null of no force to oblige either actively or passively any man or assembly under his jurisdiction Had not the states of the low-countreys approved and ratified the synod of Dordrecht their decrees would have been but counsells advices and answers of prudent and wise men and had not put any obligation upon the ministers churches schools and academies within their dominions more then upon England or France to be conformable to their determinations Next in the conclusion Mr. Gillespie saith that this doth not make him supreme judge and governour in ecclesiasticall causes which is the prerogative of Iesus Christ nor yet doth it invest the magistrate with the subordinate ministeriall forinsecall directive judgement in ecclesiasticall things or causes which belongeth to an ecclesiasticall not to a civil court I understand not wherefore he bringeth this for what he hath said before doth sufficiently evince the magistrate to be soveraign judge and governour over all persons and in all ecclesiasticall causes and censures so long as they are of no force and cannot be brought to execution except the magistrate approves of them and commands them It seemeth Mr. Gillespie by these words would put it to the vote who must be the supreme judge and governour in ecclesiasticall causes whether the ministers or the magistrate It is sure enough if we believe him the magistrate must not be It remains then that the ministers should be the supreme judges and governors for all M. Gillespies drift is to take from the magistrate that which he saith duly pertaineth to the ministers and in short to put as he conceiveth the saddle upon the right horse For to what end should he except against the magistrates being invested with the power of supreme judgement and government in ecclesiasticall causes but to reinvest the ministers into it and to declare that that usurpation in the magistrate was done to the prejudice and wrong of the ministers to whom it is due by right Here then Mr. Gillespie maketh the ministers of the Gospell supreme judges and governors in ecclesiasticall causes whereas he alwayes before declined those titles as belonging only to and being the prerogative of Jesus Christ But suppose ministers in synods and consistories had also the coercive power and were invested with that externall jurisdiction that giveth force and sanction to all their censures this I trow would not make them more or lesse supreme judges and governors in ecclesiasticall causes then the
and 30. chapters of 2 Chronic. for the magistrates power of calling synods is of the same stamp It is true chap. 29. v. 4. Ezechiah gathered Priests Levites together but it was to make an exhoâ—tation to them not that they should congregate into a synod invested with judiciall authority I think that none ever yet dream'd of it that synods in the old Testament could be proved out of that place The last place Prov. 11. v. 14. speaketh of counsellors in the multitude of which there is safety but not a word there of calling of them nor that those who were called were Priests and Levites but rather any other One would almost think that they had a mind to weaken a good cause and make invalid the power of the magistrate by alledging places that make nothing for it but however they will have them to passe for valid proofs that magistrates by divine right are to call synods But to the matter I am quite of another mind then our brethren the Scots are and I desire to be judged by any other then by them whether there be any spark of reason or truth in their saying Is it not more like that in a well-constituted church things must run their wonted channel that the power of calling synods belongeth to the magistrate but the church being in a troubled condition then that ministers yea any good man should contribute his helping hand toward the reforming of the church whether by way of synods or otherwise without expecting orders from the magistrate In turbata ecclesia omnis homo miles est Christianus minister But who sees not but the drift of our brothers the Scots is to constitute a jurisdiction independent from that of the magistrate The third section or article of the 31. chapt of the confession needeth a comment to make it agree with the second it belongeth to synods and councels ministerially to determine controversies of faith and cases of conscience to set down rules and directions for better ordering of the publick worship of God and government of his church to receive complaints in cases of mal-administration and authoritatively to determine the same which decrees and determinations if consonant to the word of God are to be received with reverence and submission not only for their agreement with the word but also for the power whereby they are made as being an ordinance of God appointed thereunto in his word First they do not define what synods are here meant whether convocated by the magistrate or by private churches or even convocated by the ministers themselves If by the magistrate how can a company of men called to advise him make constitutions valid except they be first submitted to the judgement and approbation of him by whose authority they were assembled The like judgement may we make of the decrees of syâ—ods convocated by the common consent of private churches If the ministers assemble of their own accord were they so many Apostles they must have some magistracy to give vigour of law obliging to obedience either actively or passively else their canons would have no jurisdiction but over them they could overcome by perswasion The fourth article or section is all synods or councels since the Apostles time whether generall or particular may erre and many have erred therefore they are not to be made the rule of faith or practise but to be used as an help in both A synod is no rule but to him that is willing to make it a rule All the synods power and authority is only so much as either the magistrates will is or a conscience inlightened or convinced is perswaded to yield unto I know no middle way to create authority There is a rare saying of Festus Hommius disp 18. thes 2. de concil authoritate the foundation of all synodicall authority is an agreement with the divine truth and ordinance whereof we must be first evidently and clearly made certain before the synod get any authority with us So that synods are of authority when men and churches are clearly convinced of the equity reasonablenesse and truth of their decisions I am not of the opinion of Gregory Nazianzen and Bazil who condemned all synods generally for I believe they are of very good use and necessarily to be had so that the members be not invested with any judiciall power independent from the magistrate or from particular churches whose decisions be counsells and advices given to them both not lawes otherwise I think little or no good is to be expected from them and that they are not a way to decide controversies 1. Judges in an assembly never so upright must be indifferent to persons and causes but so cannot ministers be in a synod for a synod made up of orthodox Divines is no competent judge of Arminians Therefore it is no marvell if the councell of Trent did condemn the Lutherans in the first Session before they ever heard them or that a late synod at Charenton prepossessed against independent churches in England did as it were anathematize them though none of the members of that synod being 80. in number had hardly seen the face or writings of any of them 2. It seemeth to be against all courses and proceedings of courts either of law or chancery that both plaintiffs and defendants should sit as judges in one judicatory to determine their own cause 3. If there be but one party either the defendent or plaintiff sitting voting no doubt but he will cast his adversary out of the court therefore there being no other then Protestants sitting and voting in the synod of Dordrecht the Arminians could not chuse but loose their cause besides that it is no lesse unreasonable that one party should submit to the judgement of his adverse party 4. It seemeth neither just nor reasonable that churches and men should submit to the major part of the members stating and concluding of any matter of religion rather then to the weight of the reasons of the minor part dissenting Should in synods alwaies the major number of votes carry it in a generall councill made up of Papists Lutherans Calvinists no doubt but that party that is most numerous though it carrieth it but by one vote would give religion and faith to all the rest therefore the late long Parliament did wisely decline to adhere rather to the major part of the members in the assembly who had voted for a presbyterian government reserving to themselves the liberty to weigh the reasons of both not to number the persons Hence we may gather how unreasonable it is in matters of faith and religion that that which is not the act of all should be reputed as done by all when as it may fall out that the major part hath out-voted the minor but by one suffrage for usually all collections syntagmes of confessions of faith canons and decrees go currant and are published to the world as if all the members had consented to them with a
constitutions that are made about them are acts of the major part of the members are valid not because they are lawes of Christ and approved to every ones conscience but because like lawes and orders of other societies they do oblige as such and as consented unto in the making of them by the major part of the members though it may be the minor part were in the right for as the acts of a magistrate commanding things directly commanded by God are the magistrates acts so those acts performed in a particular church though commanded expressely by God in as much as they require externall obedience either actively or passively are acts of that magistracy set up in that church I find in a result of a synod in new-New-England printed at the end of the book of Mr. Cotton of the Covenant of Grace some conclusions wholly consonant to what I now write in this chapter of the two kinds of acts that are performed in every particular church the one done by them as church-members the other being an effect of magistracy set up in every particular church considered not as a church but as a society The first kind of acts is proper to those church-members who by any power of magistacy are not put upon stronger engagements of oredience then if there had never been any The second is exercised by magistracy either in the church or out of the church against the obstinate and unruly and such as need to be compelled I find the synod speak much to that purpose namely p. 40. the collectour saith from them that for remedying disorders and taking away or preventing grosse errors there must be a power of restraint and coercion used and in regard that every particular church is to be as well considered in the quality of a civil society as a society of church-members CHAPTER XX. That the power attributed to private churches by the reverend dissenting brethren doth very well accord with the power of magistracy in matters of religion as it is held by Erastus Bullingerus Musculus Grotius Mr. Selden and Mr. Coleman This same is proved by reason and by the testimony of Mr. Burroughs writing the sense of all his brethren as also by the practise of the churches in new-New-England WHen at first I undertook to write of this subject I had no other designe but to assert the nullity of a double externall jurisdiction and to prove that there being no such thing neither in Scripture nor reason as an ecclesiasticall power all jurisdiction that was not united under and appertained not to the magistrate was not a power of coercion was no jurisdiction Neither was I then lesse dissenting from the church-way and power retained by the rever brethren of the congregation then from the presbyterian brethren and the rather because I saw both parties carried with as much eagernesse of opposition against Erastus and Mr. Coleman as they were among themselves besides not fancying to my self otherwise but that all jurisdiction called ecclesiasticall and assumed by whatsoever society of men either single or made up by the aggregation of many societies which was not subordinate to the magistrates power was alike against reason and Scripture But being not able to study my main matter intended without enquiring into the nature of the power that both parties assumed to themselves I found that the tenets of the brethren of the congregationall way could very well accord with mine and which was not yet by any considered that the right of particular churches as the dissenting brethren hold might very well consist with that measure of power that Erastus Bullingerus Musculus Gualterus Grotius Mr. Selden Mr. Coleman allowed to the magistrate in matters of religion and over churches and that independency of private churches I mean independency from presbyterian classicall and synodicall judicatories doth no way hinder their right and liberty nor their dependency on the magistrate nor cutteth short the magistrate of the soveraign power he ought to have overall societies and persons and in all causes and matters Lastly I found that this way of reconciliation was most agreeable with Scripture reason the practise of the Jewes and of the primitive church of Christians besides was confessed so by many learned men who though seemingly otherwise affected and carried by more heat then knowledge of what was passed or held in this Island have notwithstanding in their tracts about the power of churches and discipline laid the same grounds that the dissenting brethren have delivered I need not be very long in proving by reason that this reconciliation betwixt the advocates of the magistrates power in matters of religion and those that plead for the right of churches is already made to our hands by what I have already handled I adde further these following considerations 1. Since every private church hath within it self a power of magistracy and that all magistracy in whatever society it be seated is subordinate to the magistrate of those societies it doth consequently follow that that magistracy wherewith every private church is invested is also subordinate to the magistrate for as I have demonstrated since no society of church-members no more then of citizens merchants physicians and the like can be imagined without lawes discipline and power of restraint and coercion so neither can it be imagined that such a power is not dependent on the magistrate for if a member of a society be obstinate and refractory and will not be ruled but by coercion and compulsion it be more then church-members as such can do to reduce him by exhortation and good advice then church-members must act also by a power of magistracy either assumed or delegated however it be that power of magistracy is subordinate to the soveraign magistrate 2. It is a maxime in Scripture Philosophie and common reason that theorems or propositions that are true asunder are no way contradictory one to another Now these two following propositions are of an undeniable truth viz. The magistrate is a soveraign governour over all persons and societies and in all matters and causes whether they pertain to religion or no and this Every particular church hath a right and power to govern it self without any dependence either on other churches or church-judicatories Each of these propositions being considered as true asunder must also be very consistent and no way clashing one with the other 3. That the right of churches may well stand with the power of the magistrate may appear by example of many societies as families corporations halls whose intrinsecall power of magistracy agreeth exceeding well with that of the magistrate over them for none doubteth but every father of a family hath a power to govern his children houshold and servants as he listeth being in his own as it were house a magistrate and a Priest yet none hitherto questioned but that paternall and oeconomicall powers are subordinate to the power of the magistrate for even the civil law and so
that there was no true proper church but a particular church that therefore a presbyterian nationall church made up of many particular churches under one presbytery is not properly said to be a church I am of opinion that the Roman church upon that account is very improperly called a church but most improperly a tâ—ue church for if it hardly deserveth the name of a church how can it be called a true one at least morally though it may be metaphysically it being a consociation of erroneous and hereticall churches for if every privaâ—e church within the Roman communion is so disfigured that I do not think it deserveth the name of a church how improperly then is a systern made up of those particular churches stiled a church And so I conceive that the question about the truenesse of the Romish church which hath so puzzled men may be easily resolved I have but one passage more of Amyraldus to alledge which a man could hardly believe to be the language of a professed enemy to the cause of the brethren For if they should state their own opinion of the power and independency of churches they cannot use more significant words then those of Amyraldus who in his disputation de concil author thes 28. saith that private churches ought to retain their full right liâ—erty and power untoucht specially in matters of great concernment as points of faith not submitting slavishly their own judgements to synods but expecting that synods should define and decree nothing till they have had the advice and approbation of particular churches This is the passage in Latin Alibi diximus pulcherrimum saluberrimum esse earum ecclesiarum institutum quae concillorum decreta ad res magni momentâ— qualia sunt dogmata fidet pertinentia rata esse noluerint nisi prius consultis synodis ecclesiis particularâ—bus quarum quaeque symbolam suam ad veritatis cluc'dationem conferat Salmasius followeth the steps of Amyraldus or rather Amyraldus of him for Amyraldus wrote last He is very large in his apparatus ad libros de primatu and I should be tedious to the reader to set down here all that he hath handsomely stated about the nature of a church I will only quote two pages which are 265. and 266. The substance of his discourse is comprehended under these 4 or 5 heads 1. That all churches by right are equall in power and dignity and are independent 2. That the consociation under the heathen Emperours was voluntary and by consent 3. That under Christian Emperours a consociation was introduced by humane right so that what was at first by free and mutuall consent came afterwards under the Christian Emperours to be of humane institution and constitution 4. That the unity of churches consisted not in an united collection of private churches but in an agreement in faith and doctrine for such an union there is betwixt the Helvetian Belgick and French churches who agreeing in the same faith and doctrine do notwithstanding differ in discipline so that these churches may be called independent each on the other yet they keep an union and communion among themselves No other communion and independency do the reverend dissenting brethren admit and practise either among themselves or with the presbyterian churches both at home and abroad 5. The fifth head is that a consociation of many particular churches joyned with the same band of discipline and under the direction counsell advice not the command or judiciall power of any synod or presbytery doth much conduce to the keeping the unity of faith the band of charity and the communion of saints In the same place and many others throughout his apparatus he saith that the communication betwixt particular churches was voluntary and by way of counsell every church reserving to themselves full right and power as to those acts of their discipline and the acts of binding and loosing so that every church had power to take cognizance of any fact and crime committed in their body to censure and excommunicate them or reconcile them again without any appeal to other churches or synods except it were to beg their friendly intercession for so they were wont to consult and entreat Bishops and namely him of Rome to review the sentence repairing to him as to an umpire not a judge to disannull or evacuate the judgement which makes the Romanists take those applications to the Bishop of ROme as an acknowledgement of supremacy over all the churches To these authorities Iwill adde that of learned and moderate Spanhemius who did not use invectives as others but arguments and reasons as good as he could yet in my opinion the good man mistaketh much in his Epistle to David Buchanan not so much through ignorance of the right as of the fact yet in the 55. page he hath these words which are much to the advantage of the brethren A particular church hath no power at all over another but they are all collateral and of equall right and authority Let us now hear other advocates of the brethren before the word independency came to be given to Protestants in the world The first is learned Amesius in his first book of the marrow of Divinity chapt â—0 where after he hath in the 17 18 19 20. and 26 sections spoken of the parity and equality of particular churches in right and power in the 27. section he tells us what consociation of particular churches may be admitted these be his words Particular churches may yea ought to have a mutuall confederation and consociation amongst them in classes and synods that by a common consent they may be helpfull one to another with as much commodity as may be chiefly in things of greater concernment but this combination doth not constitute a new frame of church neither ought it in any sort to take away that liberty and power which Christ hath left to his churches since this form is only usefull by way of direction John Mestrezat a very learned orthodox Divine lately deceased minister of Paris goeth upon the same grounds with Amesius in his book of the church written in French and his testimony is most considerable because being a French-man he could not know or foresee as Amesius perchance might any such plea in England about right or power of churches aggregated It would be too long here to set down his own words at large For those that understand French they may see specially the 1 chap. of the 3. book where he saith that all power to do any church acts is placed in the particular church that all church-priviledges and promises were made and granted unto and in consideration of a particular church assembled in one place As for aggregation and consociation of churches he holds it not to be grounded upon any pattern or command from Scripture or even from a judiciall power given by Christ to classes synods presbyteries over particular churches but meerly assumed prudentially for mutuall preservation
crime to appeal or repair about any matter to Jerusalem or attend at those solemn meetings enjoyned by the law of Moses three times in the year and every seventh year and therefore to keep themselves free from idolatry they frequented as much as they could those places of convocation as appeareth by a notable example 2 Kings 4. v. 22. For when the Sunamitish woman desired an asse to ride on to Elisha her husband told her wherefore will you go to him to day it is neither new moon nor sabbath The greatest part of these houses of convocation for some of them did not much alter from their first institution but remained schools and nothing else in processe of time did not properly degenerate but changed their nature and lasted longer thus then in their first institution and that begun from the time that they were led into captivity and so continued under the Babylonians Persians Grecians and then the Romans for whereas at first they needed no other discipline then the law of their nation which received vigour strength and protection from their own magistrate who was a friend and protectour of their law religion and liberty when afterwards they lived under those that were no good friends to their lawes and religion and yet were suffered to enjoy them both being dispersed they were fain to alter the frame of their assemblies and convocations and make of them so many little Commonwealths endowed with judiciall authority yet retaining still some prime face of a church or convocation and besides more mixture of ranks of men for not only Prophets were governours and members but also Priests Levites and elders of the people and all matters were handled as in a court of magistracy and yet reading and expounding of the law was not forgot as we see Act. 13. v. 27. and ch 15. v. 21. Nor was it grown out of use for scholars or young Prophets to sit at the feet of the Rabbins and receive instructions as St. Paul at the feet of Gamaliel Act. 22. v. 3. and Marie at the feet of the Lord Jesus or for the young Prophets to ask questions of the old as 1 Cor. 14. v. 29. And as the form and matter handled did alter so also the Prophets and teachers did change their names and were called Doctours Rabbies Lawyers Masters Scribes and Wise among the Jews And such were the synagogues in the time of Christ which Mr. Gillespie is not certain whether he ought to call churches or civil courts yet he is rather of opinion that before the 30. year of Christ when they had power to judge of capitall matters they were rather civil courts then churches but after the 30. year of Christ this judgement of causes for life and death being taken from them then they were to be called churches or ecclesiasticall assemblies Which is a very frivolous exception as ever was devised and sheweth the weaknesse of his cause For is a court more or lesse civil because it hath or hath not the judgement of capitall causes By that reason most courts in England should be ecclesiasticall as the court of Exchequer court Baron and court Let. But the nature of those convocations synagogues or particular churches of the Jews having been for many hundred years since they were carried first into captivity such that they were invested not only with a faculty to perform duties and acts of worship to God but also with a power of magistracy when a great many of them from synagogues of the Jewes were after turned into churches of Christians they retained the same constitution and qualification in performing church-duties and exercising power of magistracy which sometimes was assumed by the consent of the members sometimes delegated by the Emperours For as the Jewes began to be the first professours of Christian religion so the first churches were synagogues of the Jewes converted to Christian religion but yet before the conversion of an entire synagogue those that were Christians concealed themselves for fear of the rest and yet did not depart but when they were persecuted or thrust out of the synagogue So that some synagogues for some Christians that were among them were called churches as we may see if we compare Gal. 1. v. 13. with Act. 22. v. 19 for in one place St. Paul saith that he persecuted in every synagogue those that professed the name of Christ in the other that he did persecute the church And Act. 18. v. 19. it is like that either the greatest part or the whole synagogue was a Christian church though it retained still the name of a synagogue And no doubt at Antioch the whole synagogue professed Christ since they durst openly take the name of Christians But the words of Christ Iohn 16. v. 2. they shall put you out of the synagogue shew that syâ—agogues of the Iewes should become Christian churches and that those that professed the name of Christ or at least believed in him secretly for fear of the Iewes were not to depart that by their means the whole synagogue might be wonne and therefore the Lord Iesus Christ takes this expulsion for an injury done to them in the foregoing verse These things have I spoken to you that ye be not offended Had not the Lord Iesus a mind to make of these synagogues churches he would have bidden those that were Christians amongst them to flee from them and go from them as he biddes his people flee out of Babylon And indeed we do not read that Crispus chief ruler of the synagogue and other believing Iewes did forsake the synagogue or that when the whole synagogue was converted it did presently loose the name of a synagogue but kept it as we see Iames 2. v. 2. If there come into the synagogue and Hebr. 10. v. 22. The very heathens did not put a distinction for a good while betwixt Iewes Christians for Suetonius saith that Claudins did restrain the Iewes who by the impulsion of Christ did raise tumults So that in expelling the Iews the Christians were comprehended for it is said Act. 18. v. 2. that Aquila and Priscilla though Christians were commanded to depart from Rome And as the Christians suffered as Iewes so what priviledges they enjoyed it was a grant unto the Iewes and as in the 9. of Claudius the Iewes and with them the Christians were banished so in the first year of his Empire the same liberty that was granted unto the Iews did also belong to the Christians So then the synagogues were the first origine and platform of Christian churches and after those synagogues the gentils converted did modell their churches retaining the same power of magistracy as the synagogues had as Mr. Lightfoot doth very well observe yea in their way of teaching following the Prophets in their synagogues which were also schools of learning as namely when they spoke by turns and the younger Prophets submitted to the judgements of the elder 1 Cor. 14. v. 29 30 c.
Which indeed overthroweth all kind of excommunication for if the validity of an outward act dependeth upon the inward grace the validity of the act will be uncertain till dooms-day to those that know not whether he that hath pronounced the sentence of excommunication is endowed with the holy Ghost or no. Perkins goeth along with Calvin upon the third of the Revelation making all excommunication void which is not pronounced by one that hath the spirit For saith he to the society only of the regenerate and faithfull is it said Whatsoever ye shall bind c. 9. But were it so that every pastor excommunicating had received the holy Ghost yet the validity of all excommunication could not be thence inferred since even a man endowed with the holy Ghost except he hath received a spirit of divination may be ill informed and erre ignorantly ignorantia facti aut juris 10. Those that by binding and loosing in Heaven understand only approving of the sentence past on earth have no stronger plea for excommunication except all sentences of excommunication be the product of an infallible judgement for God is so far from approving of an unjust sentence that his will is that it should be disannulled 11. But how can it consist with reason that God at once should ratify approve and dislike a sentence pronounced on earth for they will have him to ratify in Heaven an unjust sentence passed on earth because they say his will is that the party should stand to the sentence though unjust and not intrude to the Sacrament without he be legally absolved and yet the while they say that God doth not ratify or approve of an unjust excommunication because unjust so that at once the same sentence will be valid and invalid valid because legally passed yet invalid because unjust 12. Those that by binding and loosing understand pardoning and retaining sins though they speak truth making the place Matth. 18. v. 18. parallel to that of John 20. v. 22. whatsoever sins c. yet they say nothing for excommunication which is neither pardoning nor retaining of sins It is not pardoning for then excommunication must be counted a blessing neither can it be retaining of sins for since as they say the end of excommunication is that the soul may be saved retaining of sins or rather of pardon cannot be a means to that end 13. Since excommunication is a putting out of the communion I would fain know whither that outing is from the communion of a private church or from the communion of the catholick visible church or else from the communion of the Saints which is spoken of in the Creed for I know but of these three communions If it be only a putting out of the communion of a private church then a man excommunicated in one congregation or parish is not excommunicated in the neighbour church If it be a putting out of the catholick visible church then a man excommunicated in London shall be likewise excommunicated in any part of the world And if the vertue of excommunication extendeth all over the world as indeed so it must be since it reacheth to heaven then any church or pastors of that communion whatsoever may excommunicate any one within that communion and a presbytery in Scotland may excommunicate a man in Switzerland and therefore it must not seem strange that the Pope doth excommunicate Emperours and Kings since they are of his communion 14. Excommunication cannot be a putting out of the communion of Saints and of the invisible church of which none is outed but by his falling from grace 15. Neither can excommunication be a putting out of a presbyterian church nor out of such an hierarchie as was lately in England which are but meer politick systems of many particular societies either under the magistrate of the land or under a power of magistracy assumed by common consent as is the body of the reformed churches in France for then such an excommunication were rather like a banishment or deprivement of liberty then a spirituall censure which are no more bounded and circumscribed by the limits of the magistrate then remission or retention of sins or the vertue of baptisme are 16. Neither can it be proved that those words whatsoever ye shall bind c. are to be understood of exclusion rather from the Eucharist then from the assembly or from either and that there is greater danger of corrupting good manners in receiving the Eucharist with a dissolute man then in conversing with him when as quite contrary to eat with carnall and deboist persons is a more contagious commerce then to partake of the Eucharist with them 17. Neither can they infer out of that Text whatsoever c. or any other whether a church a synod a presbytery whether one minister or two may excommunicate But if the power of excommunicating be included within the power of the keyes and of binding loosing which we have made good to belong only to the dispensers of the word and not to church-members or to lay-elders it will necessarily follow that one single pastor set over four or five thousand communicants must have power to excommunicate alone without the assistance of other ministers for every single minister having received entirely the povver of the keyes and of binding and loosing must needs also have received ability to do vvhatsoever is included vvithin that povver 18. It is to be noted that Christ doth not speak of binding and loosing of men but of things for he doth not say whomsoever but whatsoever and therefore our adversaries the Papists extend the povver of excommunication further then the presbyterians do for they excommunicate not only men but any other living creatures as Mice vvhereof Thuanus hath a notable example CHAPTER XXX That excommunication was mainly subservient to the working of the mystery of iniquity That the corrupting of the doctrine of the Eucharist made way for excommunication I Should next shew that excommunication was mainly subservient to the working of the mystery of iniquity but this I have handled at large in my Paraenesis St. Paul saith that in his time the mystery of iniquity began to work Satan was then very busy to infuse bad principles which first put forth themselves in the affectation of primacy and in the corruption of the doctrine of the Eucharist The laity had no hand in it for as Ministers have alwayes been the principall chanels to conveigh knowledge and grace when assisted by the spirit of God so when God gave them over to the guidance of their own spirits they have been still the only agents and instruments to bring in tyranny and heresy into the church The corruption then beginning at the head amongst the leaders of flocks their main care hath been to set up themselves not only over the inheritance of the Lord but also over their own fellow-labourers and collegues for the attaining of which and to seem great in the eyes of all men they