he truly and visioly reigns over all in her so that obedience to this power is obedience to Christ as King of his Church and the contrâ—re is high rebellion against him Concl. 10. Although this power be only Ministerial and declarative of the will of Christ yet it is authoritative and binding on all the Church without exception of persons and that on a double account first on the account of divine commands enjoyning submission and obedience to its exercise in the persons of those invested therewith and also on the account of its respect to and derivation from Christ whose power and ordinance it is and whom in its exercise it doeth represent to all Concl. 11. This power is exercised either singly a part by every officer according to the nature measure of their power or in conjunction with one another conforme to the precepts of the word and practises of the Church in Scripture times Although every officer of the Church in their several orders have the whole power belonging intrinsice to it yet there are some acts thereof they cannot exerce but in a conjunction with others as ordaining of persons for the Ministry Trying and censuring of scandalous and heretical Professours or Ministers c. for which there must be fixed meetings of officers general and particular Concl. 12. The ordiner officers of the Church the extraordinarâ— being ceased are of three orders Teachers and Pastors Ruling elders and Deacons These we finde to be of divine institution and no others Many others have been brought into and obtruded on the Church but all of humane or rather of diabolical invention as alace their effects have sadly made out to the Church of God in former and present times In every one of these divine orders we finde no institute superiority in the same order of one above others as a Pastor of Pastors or an Elder of Elders and a Deacon of Deacons These who have assumed and exercised this superiority we cannot owne as the Officers of Christ nor subject to them as such till they prove their institution and mission from him which yet they have not done The outmost essey hath been for Prelacy or a Bishop who is pleaded to be a Pastour of Pastours having the oversight of them and their flocks but nothing attempted for making out the divine right of Primats Archbishops Archpresbyters Archdeacons c. This is that lowly and humble Government of the Church that Christ hath institute in his word and put in the hands of his Officers commanding them to exercise and dispense the same to all in his house under high paines of which in the second place we assert these two 1. That it is distinct and specifically different from the civil government of the Magistrat And2 That it is independant on it These two conclusions we now undertake to prove against the Erastians of our time who assert that when the Church comes to be embodyed with the Commonwealth her Government becomes one with the Government of the State and does not differ from it In opposition to these we affirme that when a Nation State or Kingdom turnes Christian in its Rulers and Subjects the Government of the Church remaines specifically different and distinct from the Government of that State or Kingdome as it was before its conversion to Christianity The reasons perswading us of this are 1. The Government of the Kingdome that is not of this world is distinct and different from the Government of the Kingdomes that are of this world But so it is that the Government of the Church is the Government of a Kingdome that is not of this world Therefore the Government of the Church is distinct and different from the Government of the civil Magistrat that is the Government of Kingdomes that are of this world This Argument leans on these three 1. That the Church is a Kingdome,2 That she hath a Government And3 That she is not of this world although in it All which are beyond disput clear from the Scriptures All that our adversaries say to this is that the visible Church of Christ is not properly but metaphorically called a Kingdome But how evident is the contrare for is not Christ Jesus the Churches visible Head and King Is she not ruled by his visible Lawes Ordinances and Officers that are properly and truely such and are not all these from above and not of this world Argum 2. That Government whose supream Head Lawes Ordinances and Officers are specifically different from the Head Lawes Ordinances and Officers of the civil Magistrat must be distinct from it But so it is that the head lawes ordinances and Officers of the Church are distinct from the lawes c. of the civil Magistrat Therefore c. The reason of the first proposition is clear for that which makes one Government differ from another is different heads lawes Ordinances Officers where these are either numerically or specifically different the Government is different accordingly it being comprehended in all these but that the supream head laws ordinances and Officeis of the Church are specifically different from these of the civil Government who will deny it that professes himself a Christian Obj. But all these come under the inspection of the Magistrat when he turns Christian Ans 1. Either these continue in the Church under the Magistrats Government what they were before or they do not if they do the Argument holds and proves the Government of the Church to be distinct from that of the Magistrats when Christian If they do not continue we ask from whence come this alteration and how will they prove it Nothing here from our adversaries but Altum silentium or nugae destitute of all reason But 2. The tearm INSPECTION or OVERSIGHT is am biguous if by it we mean the countenancing protecting and encouraging of this Government of the Church we yeeld â—t but what sayes that to the confounding of the Governments or making the Government of the Church the Magistrats if by inspection we understand the devolving of the Government of the Church on the Magistrat as the fountaine of it the ordering and disposing of its exercise the changing thereof at pleasure in whole or in part this we deny and long have we looked for proofe but have hitherto met with none Arg. 3. The Government of the Church formerly deliniated is incompâ—table with the civil Magistrats therefore it is distinct from his Government We hope none will refuse this consequence The antecedent is thus proven 1. The subordinat Government of the Church is purely Ministerial not dominative or imperial it is only declarative and not decisive not coactive and compulsive it is exercised in Christs Name and in his stead and is the representative of his special presence in his Church these are incompatible with the Government of the Magistrat whose power is Supream Magisterial and Imperial coactive and compulsive and exercised in his owne name c. 2. The
Magistrat cannot yea may not exercise the Government of the Church being disenabled thereto by the commands and institutions of Christ who hath laid the burden thereof on others and not on him The most grant the Magistrat himself may not exercise some parts of this Government as ordaining of persons for the Ministery excommunicating c. and why he may do other parts and acts belonging to it and not these We desire proofe all our antagonists arguments in this conclude for the whole Obj. But some Magistrats have exercised both powers as Moses Samuel David Solomon c. Ans These were both Magistrats and Prophets and it is evident from the Scripture that what they did either in constituting or in exercising of the Government of the Church they did it as Prophets and not as Magistrats we find Magistrats that were not Prophets attempting it reprehended for so doing as Saul Uzziah which says that it did not belong to their Magistratical Office Arg. 4. That Goverment that is founded upon and regulated by another rule and instrument then the law of the civil Magistrat is distinct from his Government But the Government of the Church is founded upon and ruled by another law or rule then the Magistrats the law and word of Christ therefore c. the first proposition is clear for the Government of the Magistrat does flow from and is regulated by his owne lawes of which he is the sole fountaine The second we suppose is undenyable among Christians who acknowledge the Scriptures for a rule of Doctrine Worship and Government to the Church of Christ Obj But there are somethings necessare to the Government of the Church not contained in the Scriptures Ans This we deny For 1. What the Scriptures containe anent the Government of the Church if reduced to practice is able to attaine its ends and more is not necessary Let the Church have these and the work will be done we make feigne necessitles but no more is necessar to the ends of the Church Government then what is determined by the Scriptures anent it 2. The ability of the Churches Government for reaching its ends lyes not in the innate sufficiency of its instituted means but in the Spirit of Christ working with in and by them by which low weak and despicable wayes Christ carries on the salvation of his people that the excellency of the power may be of him and not of us 3. The Scriptures being a full and perfect rule for all maters of faith and obedience what it containes of and anent the Government of the Church must be perfect and sufficient sure we are the Churches Government is a good work and its exercise acts of obedience to Christ Jesus anent which it is said I. Tim. 3. The Scripturs are able to make the Man of God perfect throughly furnished to every good work 4. We enquire when the Church is without a Christian Magistrat and under the feet of a heathenish persecuting one in which case our opposits grant her a Government distinct from and independent on the Magistrat whether the Government exercised in her be able to attaine its ends If it be as the experience of the Church in this case puts beyond doubt why may it not do the same under a Christian Magistrat Arg. 5. That Goverement that is exercised in the name of another distinct Supream Head besides the Magistrat is distinct from the Government of the civil Magistrat But the Government of the Church is exerced in the name and authority of another Supream head not subordinat to the Magistrat Therefore c. What can be said to the first proposition we understand not for all Governments one with and subordinat to the Magistrat are exercised in his name and authority But this Government of the Church is exercised in her in the name of Christ Jesus by his Officers as is clear from the word Arg. 6. The designations denominations and relations in and with which the Church is represented in the Scriptures do also confirme this truth she is called the Body of Christ the Kingdome of Heaven the City of God the House of the living God the new Jerusalem As all these do necessarily import a Government in the Church so they insinuat the same to be different from all other Governments Which we may mould into this Argument That society which is the body of Christ c. must have a Government distinct from the Government of the civil Magistrat But the Church is that society that is only the body of Christ c. Therefore c. Obj. But all these are said only of the invisible Church Ans But the contrare is clear from those Scriptures where these Epithets are given to the Church 1. Cor. 12.1 Tim. 3.15 Arg. 7. That Government whose immediat and essential ends are specifically different from the immediat and essential ends of the Magistrats Government is distinct from the Government of the Magistrat But here it is so the essential immediat ends of Church Government are different from the essential immediat end of Magistracy as will be clear to any that compares them together The ends of Church Government are the saveing of the foule the conversion and edification of sinners c. The endâ— of Magistracy are the outward publict peace and prosperity of the common wealth the execution of justice in the maintaining and preserving of propriety c. with these the Churches government does not medle nor intend them of it self Obj. The Magistrat ought to intend and endeavour the spiritual happinesse and wellfare of his subjects Ans We grant this but as all others ought to do it for every one in their station are bound to designe and labour the eternal salvation of these under their charge this being a common end that all Christians in their several capacities should seek after in their love to one another the first proposition is evident because the specificall distinction betwixt powers habits and acts is taken from their Objects and immediat proper ends Where these differ they are by all Philosophers constitute into different species's In the next place we assert That as the government of the Church does specifically differ from the government of the Magistrat so it is independant thereon and not directly subordinat thereto A truth how much soever it be decryed we are not shamed of nor affrayed to profess maintaine and whosoever will lay aside prejudice and earthly interests and consider these reasons with us will be forced to acknowledge it Arg. 1. The Magistrat is not the fountaine of Church power it hath not its derivation from him and therefore is not directly subordinat to him The consequence is founded on this truth granted by all Lawyers and Divines that all power directly subordinat to and dependant on the Magistrat is derived from him as the fountaine thereof the antecedent we prove thus 1. The Magistrat as a Magistrat is not a member of the
necessare righteous from the Word of God before their obligation can be admitted received which we have laboured to doe in this following discourse And if from it our Covenants and Oaths doe appear to be just are we not assured that the corruptions and sins engaged against by such divine tyes and relapsed into contrare to these engadgments doe provoke our Holy and righteous God to the inflicting of all those plagues and judgments threatened in the word against the violators of such sacred bonds And if this be a truth as we hope none will deny what can we then expect to our selves posterity if reformation repentance doe not prevent but ruine and desolation according to every ones accession to these evils which no doubt are crying for vengeance on this declining Church Next We pray your Lo. to consider that we build our conclusions on no other foundation then our worthy reformers in this Church and others laid downe in their arguments and debates against popery which for its want of and opposition to the holy Scriptures they have condemned for an Antichristian defection from the doctrines of Christ We hold to the sufficiency and perfection of the holy Scriptures resolving thorow the Grace of God to admit of no other rule of faith and obedience in the maters of our God but these what they condemne we must renunce whatsoever doctrins or practises in the house of our God want their authority and approbation we cannot yea dar not admit The experience of the Church in preceding ages shews what mischeifs the opening of this door hath brought in upon her to the almost uter ruine of all her concerns The present grouth of popery and the quick advance it makes among all degrees of Professors in this and our nighbouring Churches sayes to all we suppose to your Lo. that the fasety preservation of the protestant reformed Religion does in all prudence require that its real and sincere friends should be encouraged and not thus persecuted with violence which no doubt tends so to the weakening of the Protestant interest cause that in one of Queen Elizabeths Parliaments it was judged a sufficient reason not only to restraine the rigide pressing of conformity but likewise to encourage all Non-conformists who in those times were looked upon as stout antagonists to popery and such as might be employed entrusted and made use of in opposition to it Is it not to be feared that the â—ope having his instruments and emissaries amongst us for working out of his designes on these Churches which all his former engines have not hitherto effected and finding through our confusions and distempers the occasion fitted for his purpose hath no question a secret active hand in influencing and increasing of this violence which if the Lord in his mercy to this many wayes afflicted and ruined Church doe not prevent will facilitat his longed for much endeavoured designes against the reformed Religion in these Ilands And however we are represented to your Lo. as unfriends to Religion and the interests of State as if they must ruine if we stand yet the experience of past and present times beside our publick confessions doth sufficiently witnesse how malitious our adversaries are in this unjust calumny We are no innovators nor pleaders for innovation in Church or State but do hold adhere to and resolve through the grace of God to maintaine the reformed Protestant Religion against all sorts of enemies as it is contained in the holy Scriptures summed up and breifly comprehended in the Confessions of faith of the reformed Churchs especially in the Confession of faith Larger shorter Catachismes of this Church in opposition to all Popish Arminian Socinian and Sectarian errors and innovations We hold for our maine rooted principle the holy Scriptures to be the Word of God the absolute perfect and only rule of faith and maners not needing any supplement of Ecclesiastical tradition yet we do not deny Antiquity its due respect use reverence and although we maintaine that every Christian of what rank degree soever ought to study be conversant in the Scriptures yet we acknowledge the necessity and great use of a Gospel standing Ministry and receive the directive authority of the Church not with an implicit faith but with the judgment of discretion We hold the teaching of the Spirit necessare to the saving knowledge of Christ but absolutly deny that the Spirit bringeth new revelations in maters of doctrines worship Government but only that he opens the eyes and enlightens the understanding that we may perceive and rightly take up what is of old revealed in the word by the same Spirit We rejoice in Christ Jesus having no confidence in the flesh or in a legal righteousnes desireing to be found in him who of God is made unto us wisdom righteousnes sanctification and redemption yet we constantly affirme good works of piety towards God of equity and charity towards men to be necessare both necessitate precepti medii our Ministers presse on themselves hearers the necessity of Regeneration as the solid fundation of good works the severe strict exercise not of a popish out side formal but of a spiritual real mortification and self denial We extol all ordinances of divine appointment but reject all humane inventions especially religious and significant not institute ceremonies in the worship of God It ought to have no little weight with your Lo. that by using of such violence the most sober judicious universally religious and industrious part of the subjects and consequently the most useful and stedfast to his Maj true interest and honour are exposed to dayly vexation and trouble to the great dammage and prejudice of this Nation and Kingdom We suppose that upon an impartial view it will be found that the choice and better part of the subjects is dissatisfied with the Government now introduced into this Church and consequently obnoxious to the severity of the lawes enacted against non-conformists and of what dangerous consequence this may prove to Church and State we leave to your Lo. most serious consideration We know the certaine issue of all maters is known to God only but if we shall take our measures in conjecturing at future events from the working of present causes there is all rational ground to fear that there are dismal and heavy times coming on this nation which by taking and fallowing of right wayes in the present juncture of affaires your Lo. may prevent and if not done will no doubt afford mater of bitter sorrow repentance to your Lo or children afterwards It is shall be our hearty prayer to God that your Lo. may have the Spirit of wisdome and of the fear of the Lord poured out upon you to foresee the evils that are hastening towards us and in time to hide yourselves this Church Kingdom from them Is it not apparent to all that conscience does not
it be one with the same why may not Presbyters consecrat and if they may ordaine as we undertake to make out from Scripture and Antiquitie what necessitie was there for going to England for it seing it might have been done by the Presbyters of this Church If consecration differ from ordination sure it is a humane custome and invention for which we have nothing in the Scriptures and pure Antiquity that only speaks of ordination the only way in which all Pastors entered into the pastoral office 3. The truth is as a Church Ministerial and politick constitute according to the Word of God with all officers of divine appointment hath the full power of the keys of the kingdome of God so there is no sort of officer necessare by divine institution to her edification but she is enabled to furnish her self with such without a necessitie of seeking to other Churches for them and if it be so the Presbyters of this Chruch being her representatives their consent should have been had Although we had no just exception against the office of the Prolates as it is constitute and declared by law as we have but their violent intrusion in this Church it puts a sufficient bar on our subjection to them so that we may not yea cannot owne them as the lawful pastors of this Church Obj. 3. The Magistrat consented to and procured their consecration Ans If any will make it appear that the Magistrat is the Church as Erastus does insolently assert without all probation yea a member of it as such or hath the power of mission we shall yeeld the cause and quietly submit but when we search into the Scripture we find the Magistrat as a Professor of Christianity a member of the Church without all Church power â—et be to be the fountaine of it and subjected as such to the care and oversight of Church Officers in the exercise of their ministerial authority and power We grant it is his part to put the Ministers of the Church when negligent in furnishing of her with officers to their duty anent it but not to thrust in officers upon her of himself without her consent Obj. 4. But the Curats have entered by the Church Ans 1. This we deny the contrare is clear from constant practice for the Curats come in upon congregations only by the Bishop and Patron who are not the Church nor have any power from her for what they do in this all their right and power is founded upon and derived from the supremacy and acts of Parliament and not from the Church in which the Bishop acts as the Kings delegat and substitute only impowered thereto by his law so that the Curats having and deriving all their power from the Prelates cannot have the same from the Church none gives what he hath not But. 2. The prelates not being the lawful governing Church any that enter congregations by them cannot be said to enter by the Church no more then if a Minister should enter into a congregation of this Church by a Minister or Ministers of the Church of France or Holland without the Ministers of this Church can be said to enter by the Church here for the Ministers of other Churches are not the governing Church of this Church The antecedent is to us clear for as the Prelates have entered without the Church so the lawful Ministerial ruling Church although scattered and persecuted is yet existent and in being who by the unjust and violent intrusion of others have not lost their right of ruleing this Church but in point of right and obligation do continue to be her lawful pastours for violence persecution and intrusion do not dissolve the relation betwixt the Church and her Pastours either general or particular there being nothing in our case that can justly do it other wayes it should be in the power of the Magistrat to undo and destroy the political Ministerial Church both formally and effectively which is abâ—ord We ask at any who think persecution and intrusion do in our case annul the pastoral relation betwixt Ministers and Churches whether the Magistrats violent ejecting of Ministers and puting of Mahumâ—tan or Popish Priests in their roomes will discharge Ministers and Congregations of their obligations to one another if they think not then how can these untye their obligations in our case We ask a reason If they judge persecution and intrusion by the Magistrat in â—his case to have this effect then it will inevitably follow that the Magistrat can destroy divine commands flowing there from contrare to the practice of divine relations obligations to the obedience of the Church in the primitive times who notwithstanding of the Magistrats Edicts threatnings much actual violence performed the mutual duties of pastours and flocks Arg. 2. All power of the Prelates and their creaturs in the Church is by law fountained in and derived from the Magistrat and in its exercise subordinated to him as is evident from the act of restitution Parl. Carol. 2. 1. Ses 2. Act. 1. which derivation and subordination they owne and homologat by their compliance with what the law does require in order to it therefore such we cannot we may noâ— owne receive and subject to as our ministers under seing they acknowledge subject themselves in their ministery to another head then Christ Jesus which by law is set in and over this Church That the force of this Argument may be more perspicuous and clear we shall put it into forme thus Those that receive and derive their Church power from and are subordinat in its exercise to another head then Christ Jesus should not be received and subjected to as the ministers of Christ in his Church But the Prelats and their Curats do receive and derive their Church power from and are subordinat in its exercise to another head then Christ Jesus therefore they ought not to be received and subjected to as the ministers of Christ in his Church We suppose the first proposition will not be denyed all the debate will be in the Second Which we prove thus These officers in the Church professing themselves such that derive their Church power from and are subordinat in its exercise to a power truely Architectonick and supream in the Church beside Christ doe derive their power from and are subornat in its exercise to another head then Christ Jesus But so it is that the Prelates and their creaturs do derive their Church power from and are subordinat in its exercise to a power truely Architectonick and supream in the Church beside Christ therefore the Prelates and their Curates do derive their power from and are subordinat in its exercise to another head then Christ The major proposition is evident for whoever hath a supream Architectonick power in and over the Church must be an head to the same and the fountaine of all Church power it is a repugnancy to be supream have an Architectonick power
neither it nor the practices occasioned thereby can be any regulating precedent for us besides in all these contests about investiturs betwixt the Pope and Princes the mission of Ministers was never questioned but alwayes acknowledged as proper to the Church and not to the Magistrat which will be clear to any that will be at paines to read Church History 3. The sending of Ministers to particular congregations is an act of government purly and formally Ecclesiastical and not Civil and therefore incompetent to the Magistrat Let any consider it in its causes mater object and ends and they shall finde it so for the persons sent are Ministers the work they are sent on is to preach the Gospel and dispense its ordinances these they are sent to are the Churches of Christ the end for which they are sent to such is to gather in and perfect the body of Christ this is finis operis We know of nothing that can besaid against this But that it is not purely Ecclesiastick in the efficient cause Ans To this we reply First That all use in morals to sustaine the validity of the Arguments taken from the nature of the act to the undueness of it to such and such causes for it is by the respect of such acts in morals to their mater objects and ends that the bounds are determined and set to them in their efficient causes for instance if the mater object ends of an act be properly civil it is granted by all to be undue or incompetent to a Minister of the Gospel so of other acts in their moral specifical distinction by which in the law of God they are assigned made due to such and such efficients But Next Upon this reason it shall be as lawful for the Magistrat to ordaine and send persons without ordination to preach the Gospel which is every way absurd 4. The sending of Ministers to preach the Gospel and to oversee Churches is an act of the potestative mission one part of the keyes of the kingdom of God granted by Christ to his Church and never to the Magistrat from no part of the word can it be made appear that Christ hath given this power to the Magistrat we finde it given to the Ministers of the Gospel Matth. 16 19. with several other places of Scripture But as to the Magistrat there is altum silentium But that this sending of Ministers is an act of potestative mission we hope will not readily be denied of any do we ask whether Ministers go to such congregations on a special delegation from Christ more then to others If they do then it must flow from this power of mist on in the Church If they go not on this special delegation then they run unsent and are not the Pastours of these flocks more then of others and consequently they have no obligations upon them to feed these more then any other congregation which is absurd For beside the power of preaching and dispensing of ordinances there is alwayes a special delegation of the person to such and such a people by which he becometh the Ambassadour messenger of Christ Jesus whom they are bound to hear and submit to as such 5. This act of sending Ministers to congregations suppons several things that are beyond the line and cognition of the Magistrat as such as the trial of Ministers gifts the knowledge of the spiritual State of the congregation the sutablness or unsurablness of Ministers gifts to such and such a people ability to judge and cognosce in these as the mater and ends of this work require with many other things which not being granted to the Magistrat as such the work to which these are necessarily requisite cannot belong to him for every work to which God calls any hath its proper furniture of gifts and abilities without which none is to look upon themselves as called thereto 6. Some of the great Patrons and zealous Promoters of the Magistrats power in this and other things belonging to the Church yeeld that this power is in and returns to the Church when the Magistrat is either heathenish or heretical as Vedelius yea all are constrained to grant it How rational this is and how consistent with their arguments the force of which is thereby utterly broken let any judge we ask when this power is granted to be in the Church whether it comes from Christ Iesus or the Magistrat For a derive power it must be It cannot be from the Magistrat who does not willingly part with any of his power neither does religion robe the Magistrat of his power nor depose him from his regality and the prerogative thereof as Protestants maintaine against the Papists if it be derived and come from Christ as it does we desire to know what way it is conveyed to her in this case and not in the other when the Magistrat is Christian As we finde no difference of cases anent this mater given in the word so we finde the same institutions precepts and examples therein by which the Church is impowered and oblidged to exercise this government without the Magistrat to continue not only without any restrictions to times cases but without any repail We hear nothing from our adversaries to answer this but ineptia foolish rovings The truth is their Arguments conclude with as great force against all power of government in the Church under persecuting Magistrats as Christian for is there not in this case the erecting of an Empire in an Empire which our enemies accoundt 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 anddo not Ministers and Christians owe as much subjection to the Magistrat in the one case as in the other Assertion 2. That the right and power of Election and calling of Ministers to particular congregations is in the congregations themselves to whom they are sent by divine right and not in the Magistrat and therefore should not have been assumed by the Magistrat and taken thus from them That this power of election of Ministers is not in the Magistrat either by divine humane or Ecclesiastical laws needs not to be much insisted on seing Scripture and antiquity for a thousand years after Christ gives not the least ground for it We desire to know from our Antagonists Prelats and Erastians from whence came this power or who were the givers of it to the Magistrat When they have condescended on the orginal derivation of this power and made it out to be just then we shall consider it which by none of these parties hath been yet done except by Vedelius but on such grounds as give every particular member of the Church as good clame thereto as he as will be evident to any that considers his Arguments for Scripture and antiquity they have none The first part of the proposition is that which is most stuck at The peoples right and power of election which is denyed by our adversaries but we thus make it out as our Divines have done
Church but as a Professor of Christianity which intitles others to this priviledge as much as him Therefore he cannot be the fountaine of Church power as such for whoever is the fountaine of power to any society is a member yea the noblest member of it Obj. But as a christian Magistrat he is a member of the Church Ans 1. What then will this prove him to be the fountaine of Church power so might Christian Husbands Parents c. argue as justly for this clame the truth is he being only a member of the Church as a Christian and not as a Magistrat Magistracy gives him no more priviledge then any other power civil or natural when the person tuines Christian for the benefite of membership goes on grounds and reasons common to all Christians and containes no speciality to one more then to another If any think Magistracy does they shall do well to prove it which none hath yet offered to do 2. If men understood well what it is to be a Christian a disciple and member of Christ's Church they would quickly see its inconsistency with the said profession does not persons turning Christians profese subjection to Christ his Lawes Ordinances and Servants which is repugnant to the fountaine of the Church power 2. He may not exercise Church power Therefore is not the fountaine of it all yeeld that these who are the fountaine of power to others may exercise it themselves it being in them and others acting as their delegates in its exercise that the Magistrat may not exercise Church power is clear for Church power being by positive institution from Christ they that exercise it must have a commission from him which none hath prodduced for the Magistrat Erastus asserteth it but without all proofe of which it is so destitute that the most of his followers have left him in this assertion Arg. 2. All Church power is lodged in and immediatly descended from Christ Jesus as the Supream Head and Ruler of the Church and Superiour to the Magistrat Therefore it is not subordinat to the Magistrat The reason of the consequence is clear for it is a repugnancy in a power to be immediatly subordinat to two Supream powers in one and the same respects especially where the one is superiour to the other The antecedent is manifest for Christ is only head of the Church all power in her is institute by him exerced in his name astricted to and regulated by his word and accomptable to him All notes of power immediatly descended from him Obj. But the Christian Magistrat as Christs substitute and vicegerent is under him the nearest and immediat fountaine of Church power for subordinata non pugnant Ans Long hath the Pope of Rome conrended for this and on grounds more plausible then these on which the Magistrat goes But Protestant Divines answer to the Papists on this head furnish us with irrefragable answers to the Magistrats clame which we desire our adversaries would consider answer at their own leasure we finde not the Magistrat inrolled among the officers of the Church far lesse substitute for Christs vicegerent if there be any Scripture for this bring it forth We know of none as yet alledged by our adversaries but what will plead as strongly for the heathenish Magistrat as for the Christian And if they do what traitours were the Apostles Ministers and Christians of the primitive times that did not acknowledge the heathenish Magistrates for their head in the Church but resisted and disobeyed their lawes and edicts against them for crying up of another Kâ—ng in the maters of their Christian Profession Arg. 3. All Church power was institute by Christ in an immediat subordination to himself without any acknowledgment of or dependance on the Magistrat Therefore it is not dependant upon nor subordinat to him The antecedent is clear from the History of the New Testament where we find that Christ moulded and constituted the Church by his Apostles and furnished her with a Government and officers to be exercised in his name and all this he did without consulring or advising with the Magistrat or suspending of her upon him the Magistrat all this time resisting letting himself for crushing of this Church Kingdome of Christ which he erected in the midst of their Kingdomes making use of their rage and violence to establish and propagat it for some Hundreds of years All this is so evident that our adversaries are not able to refuse it what is there then to hinder the consequence that we draw from this deed of Christ If our opposites in this mater could shew us that the Church had no government institute by Christ nor exercised any all the time that the Magistrat thus opposed himself to her or that Christ had declared his will that she should be subjected to the Magistrat in her Government when he should become Christian they would soon end this strife but nothing can we learne from them to this purpose Arg. 4. As this Government was institute by Christ and his Apostles so it was exerced in his name in the Church without dependance on the Magistrat till Constantine the great 's time and from thence downe ward till the Reformation of Religion brack up in Germanie till which time it was never questioned by any until Erastus the Physician arose who laboured not only to subject the Church to the Magistrat in all her concearnes as such but denied all Government to her by divine institution that is distinct from the Government of the Magistrat contrare to full and clear Scripture which he most insolently and wickedly endeavours to wrest pervert So then if the Government of the Church was in Scripture times and downwards till within these hundered years exercised without dependance on the Magistrat both heathenish and Christian then it must yet be independant on and not directly subordinat to him Here our Antagonists are put to strange shifts The first three hundred years they must grant and may we not take this for a yeelding of the cause Scripture and antiquity hath been held for a sufficient plea for maters of doctrine and practise debates in Polemical divinity hath run on these two heads and whoever made out their assertions from these have been esteemed to carry the cause all that our adversaries have to say to this are these two 1. That the Government exercised in the Church was not by divine institution and precepts but by confederation of Churches and officers To this we reply 1. If the Epistles to Timothy to the seven Churches in Asia Revel 2 and 3. Chapters with other places of Scripture used by our Divines in this mater prove not the contrary they have no sense We beg of our adversaries they will for saving us a labour answer Mr. Gillespies Arguments from Scripture in the second part of his Aarons Rod blossoming 2 Besids they are not able to make out what they assert to wit that the Church did
exercise her Government in these times by confederation and mutual consent and not by institution and command for as there is nothing in Scripture and pure antiquity for this So the Churches being gathered and constitute by the Apostles we presume they continued in the constitutions which the Apostles left according to the precepts and rules they gave them to which we find in the word and Church History their practice conforme When the persecutions of the Church ceased upon the Magistrats turning Christian we find her continuing in the exercise of the former Government but with the addition of some corruptions which grew to a sad hight afterwards throw the excessive munificence bounty of Constantine the great the first Christian Emperour and exercising the sameâ— as formerly as is clear from History that speaks of these times Here our adversaries speak of some instances of the power the Magistrat did exerce in the Church as convocating of Synods labouring in the peace of the Church lorely rent at sometimes through lad heresies and schisms And that saying of Constantines repeated by them ad nauseam vos estis Episcopi ad intra Ego ad extra But how is our Antagonists conclusion made out by all these will it follow that becaus the Magistrat did convocat Synods its Government is derived from subordinat to him No wayes for 1. Albeit the Magistrat have a power to convocat the officers of the Church anent maters relating to his owne conscience and duty whether about Church or State yet this is not privative of the Churches power to convocat her owne assemblies either for worship or government as we find she did in the primitive times not only without but against his consent yea when the Magistrat became Christian she retained and exercised this power in assembling into several Synods without the Magistrat It is true we do not read of general Synods assembled after this but by the Magistrat till the Pope of Rome claimed this power and usurped therein on the Church and Magistrat as he did in all other things but the vastness of the Empire and large extent of the Church which exceeded its bounds made this in point of prudence necessare for without the Magistrat it could not easily be done But 2. Convocating of others is not alwayes in its self and infallible signe of a superiour power and dominion over judicatories convocated as in limited Monarchies and not absolute where the Supream power is lodged in the King and States of the Kingdom although the King have the power of conveâ—ning the States yet they share wiâ—h him in the leg stative and executive power while in being therefore the illation is bad and not concludent 4 What imaginable advantage-can accrew to our adversaries assertion by that saying of Constantines formerly cited We grantâ— the Magistrat is the overseer of things without the Church but this will not prove that thâ— government of the Church is in and from his hands and subordinat to him they must first make it appear by good reason that ner Government is ad extra which they have not yet done nor never will for although it be visible in its institution and exercise yet it is as intrinsinck to and within her as her doctrine and worship which by this sence will be as much derived from and subjected to the Magistrat as her Government seing the one is as visible in its dispensation as the other Arg. 5. The Magistrat may not yea cannot jure impede and hinder the exercise of the Churches government therefore it is not derived from nor subjected to him the reason of this consequence is what ever power is derived from the Magistrat and subordinated directly to him he may suspend hinder its exercise yea he may totally remove and annihilat it this is yeelded by all and taken for a sure Maxime in Politicks but the Magistrat may not do this in the Government of the Church and that becaus it is of divine institution and the persons intrusted with and called to its â—xercise are under the obligations of divine precepts and commands for it which the Magistrat cannot hinder nor by any deed or command of his make void These that deny this divine institution of Church Government we refer to the forecited book where it is strongly pleaded made out from clear and express Scriptures in the New Testament Likwise as he cannot impede its exercise so he may not nullify its sentences by himself which he may do in the sentences passed by all powers derived from and subordinat to himself Arg. 6. The Christian Magistrat is by vertue of his Christian Profession bound to subject himself to the acts exercise of Church Government in the hand of Church Officers and is as much obleidged to yeeld thereto as any other Therefore Church power is not directly subordinat to him The antecedent is clear for all are commanded submission and obedience to Church Officers in the exercise of their power in watching overseeing and ruleing of the Church Heb. 13.7 17. to which exercise of their power we finde Magistrats in the word submitting as UZZIA who was by the priests confor me to the law separated and secluded from the holy things of God and communion with the Church in these yea it is given for the maine cause of all that heavy wrath and judgment that came on Zedekiah 2. Chron. 36.12 that he humbled not himself before Jeremiah the Prophet speaking the word of the Lord to him Obj. But this subjection in Magistrats to Church Officers is properly to Christ and not to them Ans we confess the subjection is primarily and cheifly to Christ Jesus whom such in the exercise of their Office doe represent yet the subjection is to them too whom all without exception of any in the Church are commanded to receive hear and obey so that in the dispensation of holy things they are superiour to all in the Church Magistrats and others as their constitut Rulers Overseers Governours and Watch men whom they ought to obey when acting in their Office agreable to the law of Christ which obedience is not CATACHRESTICAL or ABUSIVE as VIDELIUS speaks in the Magistrat but proper and really a debt they owe to the Ministers of the Gospel dispensing holy things as much as any other member of the Church their obligation to it being of the same kinde and nature with the obligation of others If any think other-wayes let them produce their reasons and Scriptures 2. If the fiery and zealous promotters of the Magistrats power in and over the Church of God did consider the true and real prejudice they do to Magistrats by exeeming them from that subjection that they with all others owe to Church Officers they would if there be any sense of Religion and its advantages remaining with men hold their hand and should have little thanks from Magistrats for their preposterous zeal who by their opinions in this mater do
really exclude Magistrats from the Communion of the Church and the benefite of the ordinance of Church Government which in its designe and effects is for saving of the soul as well as all other ordinances Other Arguments might be adduced as the want of power in the Magistrat to alter and change the Government of the Church or to nullify its just sentences passed c. SECT VII The sinfulness of the Ecclesiastick Supreamacy manifested BUt judging these sufficient to the conviction oâ— the unprejudged we come to the other part of ouâ— task which is to shew that this visible intrinsick government of the Church is assumed by and given to our Rulers in the present standing laws of the Kingdom which we shall make out from the acts of Parliament particularly act of restitution Parl. 1. Sess 2. Act. 1. act anent the National Synod Parl. 1. Sess 3. Act. 4. act against Conventicles Parl. 2. Sess 5. act against Keepers of Conventicles and withdrawers c. Parl. 2. Sess 3. Act. 17. act against unlawful ordinations Parl. 2. Sess 3. with others of the like nature But before we enter on the probation of this it will be necessare for clearing our way to it to consider alittle two things in the beginning of the narrative of the act of restitution repeated in several acts where first the Government of the Church is called the external Government of the same the tearm EXTERNAL being Notourly ambiguous should have been explained all not left to guess at its meaning EXTERNAL is by some opposed to the internal invisible Government of Christ on the souls of his people and so by it they understand the visible intrinsick Government of the visible Church that this is meant by the tearm EXTERNAL GOVERNMENT in this and other acts the following Arguments undertake to make out but some others oppose the terme EXTERNAL GOVERNMENT to this intrinsick visible Government of the Church formerly described and asserted to be distinct from and independant on the Mastrat and by it they do understand these humane adjuncts and accidents that are civil in themselves and not made sacred by divine institution some plead this to be the sense of these terms in the acts of Parlt but how groundlesly let our subsequent reasons determine Secondly It is there said that the ordering and disposing of the external government of the Church belongs to the Crowne c. it is hard to sense this for ordering and disposing when done by persons in authority is a part of government in it self and if it be so the Phrase is equivalent to this the governing of the external government of the Church which is a strange sort of speach as if a government needed a government to governe it What if this were said of the government of the government of the State Would it not be reputed non sense But the truth is all governments do necessarily imply a power to dispose and order all things relating to it as a part of the same without which it were imperfect and it is without disput evident from the experience of the Church under heathenish Magistrats that the government of the Church had this which by this act is taken from her Next we ask whether this ordering and diposing be an act of the Ecclesiastick or civil government If it be of the Ecclesiastick it is againe non-sense at the best and is as much as if it had been said the Ecclesiastical governing of the Ecclesiastical government of the Church a perfect tautology But if it be an act of the civil government how comes it that in this and other acts of Parliament it is called the Kings Ecclesiastical Government in opposition to the civil Obj. It is only objectively so called Ans Then it is properly and formally civil the phrase objectively Ecclesiastical being CATACHRESTICAL and ABUSIVE a very improper speach yea as improper as if we should call Church power or Government in the hands of Church officers objectively civil or civil Thirdly In the last place we desire to know whether this ordering or disposing of the Government of the Church be necessary or not If it be not necessary why is the Church troubled with it If it be we ask againe when it was exercised by the Church whether it was an act of civil or Church Government It could not be of the civil for the Church had none under persecuting Magistrats if it was an act of the Ecclesiastical or Church Government then it was purely and formally such and not truely civil although exercised about things civil in their owne nature and seing it was so how comes it to be the Magistrats now To any considerat and unbyaffed reader it will be manifest that these words or expressions come from mindes designing the enhansing of the intrinsick visâ—â—le Government of the Church and withall labouring to cover it but all in vaine Now that the Ecclesiastical Government of the Church formally and intrinsically such is assumed by and given to the Magistrat in the present standing lawes will be apparent to any that consider these things in the forecited acts of Parliament 1. That Church officers in the exercise of Church government in their Church assemblies or judicatories are put in dependance upon and subordinated to the King as Supream to them therein this makes the King the fountaine of Church power the Church officers to derive and hold their power of him which makes our King the proper Head of the Church substituts him in Christs roome to her 2. The government of the Church thus subjected to dependant on the King as Supream is in the act of restitution extended to and made to take in ordination acts of discipline inflicting of Church censures yea to all causes and matters formally Ecclesiastical to all about which Church power is exerced he is made the supream 3. All Church power and jurisdiction as it was exercised in this Church before the late introduction of prelacy without this derivation from and subordination to the Magistrat is rescinded and annulled certainly in these times the Magistrat had and did exercise a power about Church matters as is to be seen in the laws then made in their behalf but this does not now content without this supremacy which imports another power acclamed by the Magistrat now that was not then 4. This supremacy and as it is called the Royal prerogative of the Crown is given for the maine reason of the change made in the Government of the Church in overturning and casting out of the true government that then was and bringing in another in its stead without the authority and concurrence of the Church a fair opened doore for bringing in the like alteration and change in doctrine and worship when there is access to it 5. Prelacy by this act is restored not only to the former height it was at and had attained by law and practice before its last ejection out of this Church
is there not here a reciprocal subordination and superiority of persons with a coordination of powers as is hinted above We plead no more for the Ministers of the Gospel and the Government of the Church commited to them We grant a great difference in other respects betwixt the Magistrat and Ministers they act as meer servants without all dominion in them He with dominion and Magistratical authority over the persons of Ministers yet for all this the powers are coordinat and in their exercise not directly subject to one another 2. These powers their exercise and respective objects becoming reciprocally the object of one another as the Ministry and its objects being one part of the Magistrats power the Magistrat and the objects of his power being likewise a part of the object about which Ministers exercise their power under different formalities and specifications there arises or results not only a sweet harmony and a mutual subserviency to one another in advancing of their respective ends but likewise an indirect subordination to one another in the exercise of their powers without any dependance of these powers upon one another But this subordination is only of the persons and not of the powers which by being the mutual objects of one anothers powers does not subject the power and its exercise but only the persons for any thing or power becoming the object of another does not subordinat it to that power the Word Ordinances c. are not by being the object either of the Ministerial or the Magistratical power subordinated or subject thereto so that the Ministerial power its exercise and the maters about which it converses are not by being the object of the Magistrats power subordinated to it This breaks the force of our adversaries Argument which lyes mainly in this Obj. 6. It is only this sort of Supremacy and subordination that the act of restitution does mean Ans It is not so as is clear from the words and frame of the acts for it is the Church assemblies their proper maters their constitution the intrinsick obligation of their conclusions that are subordinated to the Magistrat so that all is nothing without him Obj. 7. All Divines even the Presbyterians and independents in the Church of England grant the Magistrat to be Supream in all causes and over all persons Ecclesiastical none of them scruple to take the oath of Supremacy as it is established by law in that Kingdom Ans All Divines do not grant this as is to be seen in the writings of many and for any thing we know it is not yeelded by the Presbyterian and Independants in the sense controverted among us neither can it seing it quyt overthrows all Church Government in its distinction from and independency on the civil Government of the Magistrat which is contrare to the known principles both of Presbyterians and Independants and if the Prelats themselves durst speak their minde conforme to their owne principles they would not in this differ from us as Thorndike more free and engenuous then the rest of his party does declame and cry out against the oath of Supremacy as the great crying sin of the Church of England but to an excesse would assert all and much more then we do in this mater were it not for fear of offending the Magistrat on whom now they wholly depend and whose Creaturs they only areâ— which hath in our times reconciled the Prelatical and Erastian principles at least in appearance that are most contrare to and distant from one another yea more then theirs and ours And although the Presbyterians and Independants in the Church of England do take the oath of Supremacy yet it is with such explications allowed assented to by the Magistrat that give it a sound sense which was stumbled and scrupled at both in Queen Elizabeth and King James times till its sense was explicat and allowed as is to be seen in the instructions given to justices of the peace by Queen Elizabeth for administrating the said oath Bishop Ushers explanation of it approven by King James In which sense it is understood taken to this day among them But to understand this mater aright and to avoid the labyrinth of generalities ambiguities with which some divines perplex intricat it it would be considered 1. That there is a two fold proper supremacy one civil and another Ecclesiastical about Church power meetings and maters 2 There are two Kinds of Causes of those they call Ecclesiastical some that are only extrinsically such but in their nature immediat ends and use civil that for their more remote ends and respects to things truely and properly sacred are called Ecclesiastical as lawes made for the Church her concerns outward liberty and peace external rewards and punishments c. Againe some causes Ecclesiastical are intrinsically and formally such as who shall preach the Gospel be invested with the Ministery or who shall be deposed from it who shall be rebuked admonished and excommunicated or received and admitted into the Church c. 3 The terme CAUSES is not here to be understood in a physical but moral and juridical sense that is for questions to be decided by those who are impowered either by God or men to this work 4 Causes or questions as they are the object of power its exercise are either proper and immediat or els improper and remote Hence we say 1. That the Magistrat is Supream Governour in all things or causes properly civil relating to causes and persons Ecclesiastical the judicial cognition and definitive judgment of these belong to him and not to the Church in this sense we admit the oath of Supremacy declared ourselves willing to take it which was refused us 2 That the Magistrat is not the supreme Governour in Causes and over persons formally Ecclesiastical This we assert belongs to Christ Jesus only and not to the Magistrat as hath been proven above This is the supremacy we deny to the Magistrat and for which we have declined to take the oath anent it that is now established law being perswaded for the reasons formerly given that this is the supremacy granted by law and understood in this oath But3 That causes and persons formally Ecclesiastical are not the proper and immediat object of the Magistrats power but only improper and remote and the reason is becaus in the execution of Christs law given to the Church the judicial cognition and definitive judgment about these belongs not to the Magistrat but to the Ministers of the word as for instance it is not the Magistrats part to cognosce and determine who is to be received into the Church and who not this is proper to the Ministers of the Gospel and so of other causes and questions of the like nature Obj. Then the Magistrat in protecting countenancing and furthering of the Churches acts and sentences by the sword must be a blinde executer of them Ans This must be said