actibus elicitis in acts performed by an intrinsecall power in the agent he hath no power for the King as King cannot preach himselfe nor baptize c. as the will may command the eye to see the feet to walke but the will doth not see nor walk Here two errours are to be rebuked 1. Whitgift saith the King is not the head of the Church as it is a society of elect and believers for so the government is spirituall but he is the head of the Church as it is a visible society in externall government comprehending good and evill For 1. The government visible and externall is meerly ecclesiasticall by Christs spirituall lawes and censures of rebuking binding loosing and excommunicating but the King is not an ecclesiasticall person and so not the head who hath any intrinsecall influence as King in these acts 2. He is the head of the persons who make the Church and so is a politick head but he is not the head of the Church visible as it is such The head visible and memberâ— are of one nature the King as King is a politicke and civill head the visible Church is not a politick and civill but an ecclesiastick body so Camero erreth who will have all Church-men synodically constituting and decreeing Canons and in all acts of externall government subordinate to the King as King as the instruments and servants are subordinate to the principall cause and first commander 1. Because then the King should be the principall ecclesiastick matter and prime Canon maker the King the first excommunicater when the Church excommunicateth but the members of a Church-Synod are immediately subordinate to Christ whose servants and instruments they are and not the servants of the King Nathan as a man was Davids servant but as a Prophet he was Gods servant and not Davids servant Hence a third errour of court sycophantes must be rejected that the King hath a negative voice in discipline and in Church-Assemblies which is most false 1. Because Christ hath promised to lead his Church in all truth to be with her to the end to be in the midst of his owne assemâ—led in his name and this promise Christ maketh and keepeth under Heathen Kings who have no voice at all in Church-Assemblies 1 Cor. 4 5. Math. 18. 23. Act. 15. 28. 2. If the acts of Church-Assemblies have no ecclesiasticall power without the consent of a Christian â—rince by that same reason the acts of publick preaching baptizing and administring the Lords Supper should lay no ecclesiasticall bond upon mens consciences except the King should consent unto these acts but the latter is against the Word of God Jer. 1. 10. Jer. 1. 18 19. 2 Cor. 10. 4 5. and most absurd Ergo so is the former I prove the connexion because that same power of Christ which is given to the Church conveened for acts of discipline is given for preaching and the conferring of the seales of the covenant for the Church hath the keyes to bind and loose from Christ equally independent upon any mortall man in discipline as in doctrine so in discipline the Kings power cannot be to impede all acts of discipline or to make them null except he consent to them 3. Because these words are absolutely made good without the interveening of any other authority Whatsoever ye binde on earth shall be bound in Heaven and whatsoever ye loose on earth shall be loosed in Heaven els Christ would have said whatsoever the King or civill Magistrate shall binde on earth shall be bound in Heaven otherwise nothing is ratified on earth or Heaven either which the Church bindeth or looseth because the King saith not Amen to it 4. If a contumacious brother shall refuse to heare the Church hee is not for that to bee excommunicated and to be reputed an Heathen and a Publican because the civill Magistrate doth not repute him such an one 5. Of that free grace wherby God heareth the prayers of two or three agreeing to pray for one thing on earth the Lord bindeth and looseth in heaven that which his Church bindeth and looseth on Earth Mat. 18. 19. but the Lord heareth the prayers of two or three agreeing to pray for one thing on Earth though the civill Magistrate doe not give his consent that these prayers be heard and granted of God because the Magistrate is no intercessour without whose consent God heareth not prayers The proposition is cleare from Matthew 18. ver 18 19. 6. If the Magistrate have such a joynt power of binding and loosing and of forgiving and reteining sins with the Church then also with the Apostles and their successours but Christ gave this power to his Apostles without any such condition Matth. 28. 18 19. John â—0 22 23. and they practised this power without consent of the Magistrate and preached and excommunicated against his will 1 Tim. 1. 19 20. 1 Cor. 5. 4. yea as the Father sent Christ so should the Father have sent the civill Magistrate for so are they sent who have power to forgive and retaine sinnes John 20. 21 22 23. 7. That power which upon just reasons we deny to the Pope that we cannot give to the King but upon just reasons we deny to the Pope a negative voyce in Councels to anull lawfull Councels conveened in the name of Christ except he who is the virtuall Church say Amen thereunto neither is the King the virtuall Church 8. If a woe be due to a Pastor if he preach not suppose the Magistrate should forbid him to preach then also is a woe due to the Church which useth not the keyes though the Magistrate forbid then hath the Magistrate no such voyce and if the Church of Pergamos be rebuked for not using the power of the keyes against these who held the Doctrine of Balaam and the Nicolaitanes even when the Magistrate was a killer of the witnesses of Jesus then the Magistratâ— hath no such negative voyce for it should not be possible to censure the followers of such Doctrine seeing hee was against both Doctrine and Discipline but the Lord reproveth Pâ—rgamos in this case Revelation 2. ver 13 14 15. 9. There is no Word of God to prove that the Lord hath given the power of thâ— keyes to the King as the King and therfore we are not to believe that he hath any such power Also if the fore-said power of the keyes be given to the Church without any such power of the King the Church by all the former arguments may conveene to exercise that power in preaching binding loosing excommunicating suppose the civill Magistrate should discharge and inhibit these meetings for if the power of the keyes be given immediately by Christ to the Church then the power of meeting for the exercise of that power must also be given though the Magistrate say not Amen as is cleare Mat. 18. 18 19 20 21. 1 Cor. 5. 4 5. 1 Cor. 11.
19 20. where the Church had her owne Synods without the consent of a civill Magistrate but we are to repute it a speciall favour of God when the King as a nursing-â—ather will countenance Synods with his royall presence God blesse our King 5. Conclusion The Kings royall power in adding his sanction to the ecclesiasticall constitutions and in punishing such as are decreed to be hereticks by the Church is regall and not ministeriall and servile See for this the Con c. Chalced. Aâ—t 16. the Imperiall lawes Cod. l. 1 tit 8. leg 2. Heretic Vocab decret p. 2. caus 23. q. 8. c. 30. crossing Bellar. de pont l. 1. c. 7. So do their owne men goe against Bellarmine in this as Sanderus de clavib David l 2. c. 13. Carerius de potest sum pont l. 2. c. 23 Leo epist. 38. to Martian and Pulcheria and Leo epist. 7. to Theodosius Becanus erreth here with Bellarmine making the King as a servant obliged to adde his sanction civill to ecclesiasticall Canons Becan in opusc exam conc Anglic c. 7. 1. Because the use of the sword at Gods commandement is a kingly act commanded by God and is service done to God not to the Church 2. Neither is the King so to execute the Churches will as he should judge only of the fact and of the assumption yea he is to judge of the law and of the major proposition I or we see not in the Word of God where a Judge is a Judge to punish a fault and is not to know judicially that it is a fault a Judge as a Judge should know such a thing to be heresie and not takâ— it upon the word of an Assembly of Church-men Deu. 17. 18 19. he is expresly to reade and know the law and to know and remember the Decree Prov. 31. 5. And the cause which he knoweth not he is to search out Job 29. 16. all which is meant of a knowledge not of private discretion which is required in all private Christians but as I take these places of a knowledge judiciall and authoritative which agreeth to a Judge as a Judge 3. If a Synod erre and decree that man to be an heretick who is sound in the faith the King is not obliged to erre with the Synod and to punish the innocent he is to decree righteous judgement and so the King is to judge of heresie but after a regall and civill way and with a coactive powâ—r as the Synod or Church-Assembly is to judge of heresie after an ecclesiastick way and with a spirituall power 2. The King punisheth heresie as it troubleth the Common-wâ—alth and the Synod as it is scandalous and infectious in the Church Yea and the Christian King ruleth over men as men and also as Christian-mâ—n he ruleth over them as men with a dominion over their bodies lives and goods by his civill lawes he hath also dominion as King over men as Christians and members of Christs kingdome and Church not over their conscâ—ences for that is proper only to the father of spirits but he hath a coactive power over all men even Pastors as to cause them do their Christian duties he hath power to compell Church-men in Assemblies to determine truth and to use the keyes right and to preach and use the Sacraments according as Christ hath commanded in his Word and to punish them when they do otherwise What then if the King discerne that to be truth and absolve the man whom the Church-Assembly doth condemne as an heretick who shall judge betwixt them I answer the infallible rule of judging for both is the Word of God which speaketh home unpartially to both if they will heare but certainly the Kings civill kingly coactive power to compell men to doe their duty remaineth the highest and most supream power on Earth in genere potestatis politicae in the kind of politick power and pastors and all men may by this power be compelled to do right as for the abuse of the power it is no part of the power and in this kind the King hath a negative politick and kingly suffrage and voyce in all Church Assemblies no ecclesiasticall constitution hath the force of a law without the politick suffrage of the civill Judge And againe the ecclesiastick power that Christ hath given to his Church remaineth also the most supreme power under Christ in genere potestatis ecclesiasticae and the King is subject to this power The King is not excepted in this He that despiseth you despiseth me and in this whatsoever ye shall binde on earth shall be bound in Heaven and in this whose sinnes ye remit they are remitted and whose sinnes ye retaine they are retained and this ecclesiasticall power being the highest on Earth Pastors may command Kings in the Lord Jer. 1. 10 18 17. to doe their duty by an ecclesiastick power Arminians and Formalists both aske which of the two powers are highest and nearest unto the head Christ whither the kingly power or the ecclesiastick power for two paralell highest powers on earth cannot be I answer by asking which of the two shoulders in a mans body are highest and nearest to the mans head Certainly one of them in a well proportioned body is not higher then another and both are alike neare the head as none of two pole-starrs are nearer to their Zenith and Nadir none of two wheels in a right Chariot are higher then another The Church power saith the Prelate Davenant is highest in teaching and directing the kingly power in commanding and compelling Barclai compareth them to two shoulders under one head Meisner saith one of them is not above another There is no absurdity saith Spalato that in two bodies formally different there should be two heads yea it is necessary The Roman Glosse saith Patricius is the Popes father in things temporall and the Pope is his father in things spirituall as Cusan saith Papists saith Spalat have deleted that out of the Glosse So Berengarius Gelasius Papa Nicolaius the I agree to these words Sciendum quod nec Catholicae fidei nec Christianae contrarium est legi si ad honorem regni sacerdotij Rex pontifici pontifix obediat regi Spalato seemeth against Bellarmine to make up the losses made by Papists in Kings honour while he holdeth that the King his person and as he is a Christian man is subject to Church-power but as King he is subject to none but to Christ from whom immediately he hath his kingly dignity even as saith he when an Emperours servant being a Physitian the Emperour as Emperour is not subject to the Physitian but only the Emperour as he is a wounded man is subject to the art of his owne servant who cureth him and that of the Emperour free-will not by coaction so the Image-maker or he who maketh pourtracts in his art is not subject to the King neither is the King as King
Master of the art of painting or pourtract-making the art onely is subject to the precepts and principles of art but the person of the painter is subject to the kingly power for the King as Bellarmin saith may forbid the Image-maker to draw obscene and filthy Images or to waste too much gold or silver upon his Images or to sell his images at too deare a price Hence saith he the kingly dignity is not subject to the ecclesiasticall power or to any other power on earth but only to Jesus Christ. I answer the Prelate doth well difference in the art of paintry these two 1. That which is artificiall and is only ruled by art that the King cannot command another thing which is morall as that he sell not his Images too deare and hurt not the common wealth by spending vainly too much gold and silver on his Images and in this the King may make lawes to limit the Painters morall carriage but then he and his fellowes honour not the King who call him judge over all persons and of all causes or in all causes and that without any distinction for when two Shoomakers contend about a point of tanning leather the King is not Judge in that cause because it is a point of art which belongeth to the art not the King Also the right translation of the Bible out of the Hebrew and the Greeke in the vulgar language is a cause meerly ecclesiasticall belonging to the Church Assembly it were hard to make the King being ignorant of these mother languages the Judge of that version as he is made by them Judge in all causes ecclesiasticall howbeit de jure he is a politick Judge even in this judging by a coactive and kingly power howbeit de facto and through ignorance he cannot exercise the kingly power that God hath given him in this act 2. By this comparison the Prelate putteth upon the King â—ut a course peece of country honour O faith he as King I make him above all and subject to no power in Heaven or Earth but immediately to God forsooth so make you the Painter the Shoomaker the Fashioner subject to no power in Heaven and Earth no not to the King but only immediately to God only their persons are subject to the King and so is the person of the King as a Christian man not as a King subject to Pastors who may exhort him and rebuke him when he judgeth unjustly But 3. saith the Prelate The wounded Emperour is subject to his servant the Physitian who cureth him not as Emperour but as a wounded man and that of his owne free-will and not by coaction What meaneth this not by coaction but that a King neither as King neither as a Christian man is subject to Church-discipline to the admonition of Pastors by any ecclesiasticall coaction or any law of God but of the Kings owne free-will Consider how Court-parasites doe dishonour the Lord for if Nathan by Gods commandement was obliged to rebuke David for his adultery and murther and the man of God obliged to cry against Jeroboams Altar and the Seer obliged to reprove King Asa and Jeremiah commanded to speake against the Kings and Princes of the land and if the Kings of Israel and Judah were plagued of God because they would not heare and submit to the Prophets speaking to them in the name of the Lord then the King as a Christian man is subject to the Ecclesiasticall power not of his owne free-will as this flatterer saith but by such Ecclesiasticall coaction as God layeth upon all men whose spirits are subject to Christs kingly power 4. This comparison halteth fowlely In the art of paintry ye may abstract that which is morall from that which is artificiall but in a King as a King there is nothing artificiall or which is to be abstracted from justice and piety for all the acts of kingly authority as kingly are morall acts of justice and of piety in preserving both the Tables of the Law if a King command a stratagem of war that which is meerly artificiall is not from the King as King but from a principle of military art in him as an expert souldier if then the King as King be a morall agent and a preserver of both Tables then as King he is subject to the Ecclesiasticall power 5. Spalato faileth farre in making the end of kingly government a naturall end not life eternall as the end of sayling is the desired harbour and not the kingdome of Heaven which is lâ—fe eternall nay but if we speake either of the end of the worke or the end of the worker the end of kingly power is a morall end for the end of the worke called finis operis is by Paul said to be that we may lead a quiet and a peaceable life in all godlinesse and honesty and this is de iure also finis operantis the end which the Ring is to intend and so the dignity office acts and end of the King as the King is subordinated to Christs kingly power in Church-discipline and yet he is the most supreme politicke power on earth and in eo genere solo Deo minor and above the Pastors in that kind But doe we joyne with Papists in this 1. Papists say Kings hold their Crownes of the Pope the Church universall virtually We thinke Nero had not his kingdome from Peter nor Domitian and Traian their kingdome from Clemens and Anacletus nor Hadrian from Enaristus and Alexander 2. Innocentius 3d. forbad obedience to Emperours Bonifacius 8â— for hatred of King Philip of France forbad to pay tribute to the Emperors the Devill might blush to lay that upon us 3. Was there ever amongst us the like of their 8 generall Councell A Prelate shall not light off his horse nor bow to a King nor shall a King seeke that of a Bishop under the paine of two yeares excommunication 4. Did any of us thinke or write what Bellarmine hath spoken against the Lords anointed If Princes cannot be moved by Church-censures and if the necessity of the Church require the Pope shall free their subiects from obeying them ipsisque principatus abrogabit and shall pull their Princedome from them I say no more of this CHAP. XX. Q. 20. Whether or no the government of the Church of Scotland can be proved by Gods Word to be lawfull 1. ARTICLE Of the Doctrine and worship of the Church of Scotland WE acknowledge the Scriptures of God contained in the Old and New Testament to containe the whole doctrine of faith and good manners our Covenant rejecteth all traditions contrary without and beside the word of God and so it rejecteth all religious observances all humane Ceremonies all religious symbolicall signes all new meanes of worshipping God all Images positive Rites which have any influence in Gods worship as will-worship and impious additions to Gods word Jer. 7. 7. 2 Sam. 7. 7. Deut. 12.
grant have authoritie of grace to be Kings and Priests to God for grace hath with it heavenly Majestie and authoritie but they have not authoritie officiall or power ecclesiastick they want both power of order and jurisdiction except they be called Pastours and Elders but then they are believers and somewhat more But if they want power of jurisdiction their power as members of the congregation is christian popular private not authoritative not a power of the keyes Grace true and saving addeth a faire lustre to the power of the keyes and doth graciously qualifie and adorn that power but where there is no power of the keyes in simple believers it cannot adorne it to please and embrouder a wicked man is not Christ. What is the power of believers shall be declared hereafter if God permit 4. Parker disputeth thus The Church-guides must be subject to the censures of the Church of believers whereof they are members The Colossians must say to Archippus take heed to the ministerie that thou hast received of the Lord. So Ambrose thinketh it the rulers even the Emperours honour to bee subject to the Church Nazian calleth the Emperour himselfe a sheepe of the flocke and subject to the tribunall as Bellarmine granteth and that tell the Church bindeth Peter and the highest ruler So Barrow Every member is bound to the edification service and utilitie of the whole body commanded to reprove his brother to bind their sins by the word of God even their Princes with chaines to admonish Archippus yea though an Apostle or Angell preached an other Gospell to pronounce him accursed Answ. That the Prelate should be above the Church and exempted from the lawes and censures of the Church whereof he is a Prelate is most unjust and this worthy Parker proveth unanswerably Emperours being pastours are under the lawes of Jesus Christ the highest lawgiver and so Ambrose and Nazianzen say well But hence is not proved because the Collossians are as private Christians to admonish or rubuke their pastour Archippus Therefore the body of believers have the power of the keyes to depose and excommunicate and consequently to ordaine and lay hands on pastours which is commanded and commended only to such as to Timothy and Titus and in them to the Elders and Presbyterie and that tell the Church doeth bind Peter and oblige all Pastors and Rulers to be lyable to the lawes and censures of the Church but by the word Church is not meaned the Church of believers but the Eldership of all incorporations ecclesiastick respective of congregations presbyteries and Synods as God willing I shall make good 3. Barrowes Scriptures are most corruptly wrested for Ioseph a prince did bind in fetters the Senators of Egypt therfore a private believer hath the keyes of the Kingdome of heaven to shut and open What reason is there here An Apostle or Angell preaching another Gospell is accursed it followeth not Therefore a private believer suppone a woman who is no lesse than a man bound to the edification service and utilitie of the whole body is to excommunicate an Apostle or an Angell who shall preach an other Gospell The keyes shall be too common if all private Christians may put to their hand and use them because they are to teach admonish rebuke comfort and edifie one another in a private and popular way any may see it is one thing for one member of the body to help one another by exhorting and rebuking which is a worke of common charitie and for pastors publikely as the ambassadors of Christ Jesus to use the keyes by publike preaching of the Gospell which is a worke of his pastorall charge yea these two differ as an act of obedience to the law of nature and common charitie and an act of obedience to a divine positive law 5. Parker reasoneth thus Coactive jurisdiction as excommunication is a meane of edification that the spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord 1 Corinthians 5. 4. Now the soules of guides Parker saith the soules of Prelates shall bee in a worsâ— case than the soules of the flocke if they bee not subject to a particular Church as Corinth for they want that meane of edification which others have Some say Synods are to take order with pastoâ—rs and not the Church of Believers But Papists answer The Bishop is to be judged by the Archbishop or Patriarch if they shall scandalously sinne then they are to be left to the Pope and the Generall Councell which cannot be had Answer I deny not but every pastour is subject in some things to the Eldership of the congregation where he is and if he were not lyable to lawes or censure hee were a pope but in the matter that deserveth deprivation he is only to be censured by the Presbyterie and Synods for a number of believers nay a number of Ruling Elders cannot deprive him because they cannot ordaine a pastour for the law saith well It is one power of the keyes to ordaine and to exauthorate and deprive But no word of God will warrant a number of believers to censure ecclesiastically their pastor not because hee is their pastor and they his flocke for so the Eldership of his owne congregation might not ecclesiastically censure him which I judge to be false but because the Church of sole believers hath not the power of the keyes and they have not power to censure any other believer except in a private way as fellow members of that same body but in a constitute Church a Colledge of pastors and Elders only hath power to deprive or excommunicate a pastour and there remaineth CHRISTS way of edification that hee bee in this case censured by Synods But yee will say this is the Papists answer I answer it is not for they will have the pastour censured by the Prelate the Prelate by the Arch-Prelate which we deny as Antichristian for all are to be by the Church But Synods mâ—y erre Then appeâ—le to a greater Synod for united force is stronger But they also you will say may errrâ— I answer and the Congregation of sole beleevers is not free from error but this doctrine of our brethren shall resolve all government in the hands of thâ— people as in the highest and most soveraigne juâ—icature which is to make all Pastors all overseeâ—â— all Judges 6. Parker reasoneth from the necessary defence of the Church Every particular Church is an Armie a Ship a body 1 Cor. 12. Therefore when they are neare danger they have power to take order with a drunken Pilot and put him from the rudâ—er and to take order with a tyrannâ—uâ— Captâ—ine and to purge out the filth and excrements of the body So politicians as Keckerman Hottomanus say a wicked Magistrate is to be deposed if no other remedy can be found So Gerson Answ. It is one thing what a multitude may doe in a desperate case of necessity
when overseers will not by their authority remove a wolfe and a false teacher extremis morbis extrema remedia Hard diseases and desperate have need of desperate cures But it is an oâ—her case when in a constitute Church there is a government of Christ established for there are two things to bee considered here 1. A popular but withall a private substraction and separation from the Ministery of a knowne Wolfe and seducer and this the Law of nature will warrand than licet tutelâ inculpatâ uti as Parker saith from Saravia So the son may save himselfe by a just defence in â—leeing from his madde father or his distracted friend comming to kill him Now this defence is not an authoritative act nor act judiciall of authoritie but an act naturall that is common to any private person yea to all without the true Church as well as within to take that care in extreme necessity for the safety of their soules that they would doe for the safetie of their bodies 2. The question is whether the community of beleevers may doe this that is whether they by the power of the keyes given them by Jesus Christ may deprive and excommunicate the Pastor because the Law of Nature in some cases may warrant a private separation from a corrupt ministery 3. The case is not a like here as in a free Common-wealth for a free Common-Wealth containeth Ordines regni the estates that have nomotheticke power and they not only by the Law of Nature may use justa tutela a necessary defence of their life 's from a Tyrants fury but also by the Law of Nations may authoritatively represse and limite him as is proved by Iunius Brutus Bucherius Althusius Hâ—nonius Therefore Henning Amisaeus do well distinguish betweene plebem 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 populum for indeed the multitude excluding the States or the base of the people can hardly have an other Law against a Tyrant then the Law of Nature but the Common-wealth including the estates of a free kingdome hath an authoritative So Isiodor Origen Aristotle Plato Tit. Livius Plutarch and that of the Councell of Basil Plus valet regnum quam rex the Kingdome is more worth than the King as Silvius citeth is approved by all but the multitude of sole beleevers have not the keyes at all and therefore they can doe no other thing but use a necessary defence of their soules And what Keckerman and Hottoman saith is not against us Also Gerson in name of the Parisians going to the Councell of Pisan saith a Councell may be gathered without the Pope without the guides of the Church two wayes Charitative when Charity reigneth 2. Authoritative when the case of the Churches ruine requireth that a Councell should bee and if the Pope and Pastors refuse to convene and the necessary defence of soules is the like here 7. No power is given to Pastors absolutely but to edification and so upon condition and therefore if the condition cease the power ceaseth But say yee It ceaseth What then it followeth not they should be deprived by the Church but by the Synod yea but you will say it followeth for the power is not given for the edification of the Synod and not for their destruction but for the edification of the Church and this destroyeth the Church Also Synods cannot alwayes bee had Answ. If the power bee abused wholly it ceaseth and the Pastor before God in foro interno hath losed his power If it bee abused in one or two acts it is not losed else a King doing against judgment and justice and a Pastor doing against pietie should leave off to be a King and Pastor which is hard to affirm 2. The power authoritative is given by the Presbytery for the edification of the Church principally and for the edifying of Synods and Elderships Secondarily but hence it followeth not that this power should bee taken away by the Church of sole beleevers Object Synods saith hee cannot bee had ordinarily Answ. So neither publike preaching at some times It followeth not therefore that publike preaching is not a meane of edifying because through accident and iniquitie of time the publike preaching cannot be had 8 Parker reasoneth from the stability of the Church Where there is more stabilitie there is more authority as our Divines reason proving the Pope to be inferiour to the Councell 1. A Church cannot be gathered in the name of Christ but there is the power of Christ 1 Cor. 5. 4. Matth. 18. But a Church may be and was constitute at first saith Saravia without Elâ—ers and Pastors 2. The Church hath ecclesiasticke auâ—hority when the overseers are absent as in the reformed Churches or when by heresie they lose their authority the authority of the overseers dependeth on the Church but the authority of the Church dependeth not on the overseers 3. When the Pastor is dead the Church keepeth still her authoritie when the Pope is saith Bellarmine the keyes remaine in the Christs hands and he giveth them to the next Pope Behold fleeing keyes saith Morton Ans. A ministeriall Church is never gathered in Christs name while there be a ministerie unlesse you would say Peter is a man before he be a reasonable creature which is a contradiction some few beleevers may meete together but they cannot preach baptize censure while Christs power of the keyes bee given them except by an extraordinary power from I. C. 2. What if a Church of beleevers bee by order of nature before there be overseers Yet have they not the keyes while CHRIST call some of their number out to give them the Keyes for there was no power of the Keyes of the New Testament while Christ gave it to Iohn Baptist and called the twelve Disciples else their calling to bee Apostles should not bee a conferring on them the Keyes which is false for when Matth. 10. 1 5. they are sent out with power to preach he gave them the Keyes â—nd yet they were a Church of Disciples before and first called to faith and then to the Keyes and to the Apostleship 2. The Church of beleevers have no authority Ecclesiasticall nor power of the Keyes if all the Pastors on earth were removed from the Church by Death and in that case the Keyes should indeed bee only in Christs-hand and the case being extraordinary Christ behoved extraordinarily to supply the want of ordination which Timothy Titus and other Elders doth ordinarily give for the Church of beleevers could not give that which they have not and yet Bellarmines Keyes are â—leeing Keyes for he hath no cause to say when the Pope dieth The Keyes flee to Heaven for there are living many thousand Pastors and Elders who have the Keyes suppone the Pope died and never lived again 10. Parker reasoneth thus If Peter stand up Acts 2. in signe of reverence as standing is in Scripture
have two contrary fathers God and Sathan but that is not denyed But hence it followeth not but that hypocrites and unbeleevers may be all their life in externall society with the wicked and make up one true visible Church 6. If the godly have a due right to the promises and seales of Gods covenant and his presence and blessings appertaine to them Mat. 28. 18 19. 2 Cor. 6. 17. Levit. 26. 11 12. Isa. 56. 20. Then no prophane persons can be received or retained in the visible Church with the godly for this is 1. To prophane the holy things of God which no beleever should suffer 2. This is contrary to the nature of the covenant that offereth remission of sinnes only to the chosen and faithfull 3. The godly shall become one body with the wicked by having communion with them 1 Cor. 10. 16 17. and so shall be defiled Haggai 2. 12. 1 Corin. 5. 6. Answ. 1. This argument is injurious to Gods providence who hath left no infallible meanes to keepe his owne Name and ordinances from prophanation and his owne Church from being leavened and defiled with the uncleane For Simon Magus Annanias and Saphira Demas to whom the precious promises of the covenant were preached and the seales conferred could not be discerned to be hypocrites by any word of God while the event of their out-breaking wickednesse declared them to be such and so this should prove that God is not tender enough of the honour of his owne Name and ordinances who should permit hypocrites to lurke in the visible Church and heare the promises and receive the seales of the covenant and defile and pollute them and Christs body the Church for the godly by that Text are made one body 1 Cor. 10. if it be rightly expounded with the latent hypocrites that come to the communion with them 2. The promises and seales were not defiled to Christ and his Disciples because Iudas did heare the word and receive the seales of the word with them The Word and Sacraments were not polluted to Paul because Demas did communicate with him 3. If some one private Christian know another to be an adulterer he is to rebuke him privately and not to tell the Church but in case of obstinacie and suppose the Church would not cast out the adulterer yet is he not to private persons an adulterer while he be juridice by two or three witnesses convicted before the Church and all this while it is lawfull to communicate with him for a a testimonie should not be received against any but under two witnesses We are not made one body by eating that same supper with an unbeleever except it be one visible body communicating in one visible bread Christ and the Apostles were not made one body misticall with Iudas by eating the Passeover together but only one visible externall society which is not inconvenient 7. They reason thus The leaper by the Law was not to remaine in the campe but behooved for so many dayes to be removed and not re-admitted to come amongst the people of God while he was cleansed the uncircumcised must not be admitted to eat the Passeover the uncleane and uncircumcised the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Heathen the Moabites and Ammorites were not suffered to enter into the Temple And all these signified that no profane person should be mixed with the congregation of beleevers I answer The uncircumcised and the Heathen did sore-signifie the excommunicated who are to be reputed as Heathen and Publicanes Mat. 18. 17. and these are to be cast out of the Church being once sentenced and judged by the Church according to Christs order and Pauls if the sinne be publicke Math. 18. and 1 Tim 5. 20. yet are they not to be debarred wholly from the society of the congregation but they must not be counted as enemies but admonished as Brethren 2 Thes 3. 15. the uncircumcised were not counted as brethren yea excommunication is a meane to save the spirit in the day of the Lord 1 Cor 5. 5. and so he is under the Churches cure as a sick son and must heare the Word and is to be as a Heathen and yet not a Heathen indeed but warned as a brother and in some Church-communion with us 8. They reason thus If the prophane be admitted as members of the true visible Church the true Church should not be distinguished from false Churches contrary to the word of God Psal. 84. 10. Cant 1. 6 7. Hos. 2 â—9 20. 2 Cor 6. 15. Rev. 1. 11 12 20. compared with 17. 1 5. but God hath differenced his true Church from all Synagogues of Satan and humane societies as a separated and sanctified people Answ. Gods courts Psal. 84. 10. are differenced from the tents of wickednesse The flocks of the companions Cant 1. 7. expounded to be the false Church are differenced from the true Church in that in the true Church are the Kidds fed beside the Shepheards tents that is the Word of God is purely preached in the true Church and the members therof professe this Word which is not done in the tents of wickednesse and yet a Judas is often one of the Shepheards and a Demas a follower of Paul and the Gospell a member of this true Church visible 2. Hos. 2. Israel is called not Gods wife and God not her husband not because Israel left off to be a true Church de facto and formally as if upon Gods part he had given her a bill of divorcement the contrary wherof is said v. 6 7. he will give her grace to returne to her first husband and 19. he will marry her and Jer 13. 14. hee was married to backesliding Israel that had plaid the harlot with many lovers Jer. 3. 14. v. 1. but Isreal is called no wife de jure by her evill deservings as a husband saith to his wife that hath plaid the harlot you are not my wife to wit by law and right of deserving for you have broken your Marriage-oath Yet upon his part who hath not rent and cancelled the contract of marriage nor put her out at doores with a written bill of divorcement she is de facto and formally still a wife and so was God still in covenant with Israel and sent his Prophets to them and they had circumcision amongst them and God had there seven thousand that had not bowed their knee to Baal and had not cast off his people whom he fore-knew Rom. 11. 1 2 3 4. 3. God is present and Christ also in the midst of the seven candle-sticks and walketh in his Church and goeth not away because these that digge downe his Altars and slay his Prophets and so extinguish the candles are in the visible Church as is cleare he walked in Ephesus beside his candle-stick howbeit they had fallen from their first-love and in Pergamus howbeit the doctrine of Balâ—am was there and in Thyatira howbeit Jezabel the false Prophetesse was there
knowne three wayes 1. When the naked naturall images or species of the materiall object are only cast in by God and no more and this is most in dreames as Nebuchadnezar saw a tree in his dreame but knew not that it was a King Pharoah saw seven blasted reeds and seven leane kine but knew not that they were seven yeares of Famine And sometimes in a vision being in an extasie as John Rev. 1. saw 1. seven candlâ—sticks but knew not that they were the seven Churches of Asia while Christ revealed the meaning to him 2. The images and species are knowne formally as signes signifying thus and thus as Joseph by a propheticall light saw the seven leane kine to be seven yeares of famine 3. Now there is a third light to judge of the act of seeing which I take to be two-fold 1. When the Seer and Prophet is perswaded that what he seeth is a propheticall vision and not a delusion of Satan this is as saith Pareus the very light of prophecy or some extraordinary light as saith Anto Walleus There is another light whereby the Seer beleeveth these things shall come to passe which he seeth either by a common light of historicall faith as Pharoah might beleeve that seven yeares of plenty should come and Balaam that Christ the starre of Jacob should certainly arise and shine upon the Church or the Seer seeth and beleeveth by light of saving faith as Isaiah and Daniel beleeved that the Messiah should be slaiâ—e and this latter light whatever good Schoole-men say on the contrary is the light of faith for the three former lights might well be in Balaam 1. He might see in his fantasie the species of the starre of Jacob. 2. And know that they meaned no other thing then the Messiah 3. And be certainly perswaded that he saw so and that he was not deluded yea and historically beleeve that that blessed Starre should arise and yet he had no light of saving faith to beleeve that the Messiah should come So hâ—â—e we cannot but distinguish betwixt a propheticall light in the second and third sight which is gratia gratis data a free gift and the light of saving faith which is gratia gratum faâ—iens a saving grace of GOD in the sound beleever onely in this last sight 4. Conclus Hence Separatists may see that extraordinary acts of prophecy may well be subjected to the determination of the Church and yet be extraordinary inspirations and that divers wayes 1. Because theâ— were Prophets of the New Testament and so grace being more aboundant now nor under the old Testament it can bow and facilitate free-will to acts of prophecying and Paul from more grace laboured more aboundantly then they all 2. Prophecying at that time in Corinth might well be obtained by prayer upon the extraordinary impulsion of the spirit as Daniel obtained by prayer the interpretation of a dreame neither can it be proved from 1 Cor. 14. that Paul willeth them all without exception to covet to speake with tongues and to prophecy but only these that were extraordinarily moved to pray except these v. 31. yea may all prophecy be contrary to these words 1 Cor. 12. 29. are all Prophets which we cannot say 3. Because it was of old in the power of Prophets to use some meanes to dispose themselves to prophecy for when the passion of anger overclouded the fancy and the species therin then Elisha calleth for a minstrell to play and dispose the minde better as Caâ—etan saith Howbeit for all that the Text saith the hand of the Lord only actuated these species and caused him to prophecy Neither are Robinsons arguments of great weight I answer only these that have most apparency 1 If the Lords giving of the spirit extraordinary to Eldâ—d and Medad made them Prophets both in office and exercise by due proportion gifts under the New Testament are sufficient to make men ordinary Prophets Answ. The antecedent is false because to Eldad and Medad were given both the spirit of prophecy and from that gifted spirit came a propheticall impulsion actually to prophecy without any farther call of the Church for God spake then by impulsion as he doth now by his Word els one may say the physicall and naturall power that Samuell had to kill Agag was a calling sufficient to authorize him to kill â—gag and an hability to discharge the office of the high-Priest in a man of the tribe of Iudah were a good calling for one so gifted to thrust himselfe in Aarons chair which God tyed only to Levies Tribe 2. This is that which Epiâ—copius Seâ—inians and Arminians teach from Anabaptists so Theâ—phil Nicolaiâ— And Radaecius Catech. of Raccovia Ostorod Socinus the 〈◊〉 1. That the sending and calling of Ministers by the Church nâ—w when the Gospell is sufficiently promulgated is not necessary 2. That any gifted man hath a warrant because he is gifted to be a Pastour without any call or authority officiall from the Church And what will Robinson say because these Propheâ—s are gifted to baptize and to administer the Supper of the Lord as well as they are to preach the Gospell then by this goodly reason of his they may be pastors without any calling of the Church and certainly any man gifted to be a King and a Magistrate by the calling that the Word of God alloweth shâ—ll by this reason have a call to leape up to the throne and the bench but our Divines as Calvin Parcus Zanchius Iunius Beza make two difâ—eâ—rent things in a lawfull calling 1. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 gifts for the calling which is not enough 2. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 authority from the Church which is also required 2. He objecteth 2 Chron. 17. 7. Jehoshaphat sent his Princes to teach the cities of Judah with the Levites and all Princes and Maâ—istrates are bound to expound open up and apply the law by which they governe else they rule by tyranny Hence the publick Sermon of Jehoshaphat 2 Chron. 19. to the Iudges and Levites and his prayer and Hezekiahs Sermons 2 Chr 29. and Nehemiah taught the people Neh. 8. Answ. 1. Iunius and Ar. Montâ—â— Iehoshaphat 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Shalach Lesarou read he sent with the Princes the Levites to teach so that the Princes were not sent to teach 2. It is said hee sent the Princes to teach not in their owne persons but hee sent them to take care that the Levites should teach in time of that Apostacy 3. The Kings and Judges were to teach according to the judiciall Law the equity of their sentence to the ill doer as a Judge to convince a thiefe and a murtherer may lay before him the eighth and the sixt commandement in so farre as the breach of these disturbeth the peace of the common-wealth not as they are Church scandals and whither the male-factor be convinced or not the Judge punisheth with the sword so that
power of the keyes the private person rebuketh swearing out of charity with care onely of these with whom hee converseth withall by noe power of the Keyes A Watch-man giveth warning of the approach of the enemy and the common Souldier may doe the same the Schoolemaster teacheth one lesson the schoole-fellow teacheth that same the one by office the other of common Charity 2. The Pastour interpreteth the word the private person doeth but use apply and accommodate the sense and interpretation of the word to his owne act of beleeving and the acts of admonishing rebuking comforting his brother Twelfthly they object against Synods The Pope is the Antichrist because he willeth men to appeale from their owne Churches to him as Whittaker and Chamier prove but the doctrine of the Synods teach men to appeale from particular Churches to Synods and by no word of God have Pastors power over other Congregations nor their owne Answ. Antioch appealed from corrupt teachers Acts 15. 2 3. and that is Apostolike but to appeale from a Church to a man of sin as if he were the whole Church is Antichristian 2. If sixe beleevers in a Congregation of forty beleevers should censure a brother our brethren would say that brother should appeale from these sixe who yet make an independent Congregation to the Church of forty yet should not this be Antichristian 3. To appeale from a Church as an unlawfull judicatory is unlawfull but to appeale from a lesser Church as from a not competent Judge to that same Church in a larger meeting is most lawfull 4. That Pastors of divers Churches have power over many Congregations being convened in a Synod is cleare Acts 1. Acts 6. Acts 15. 13. They object That this wanteth antiquity Answ. This is said for the fashion what meaneth then the tomes of Councels the Councell of Sardis Laodicea Africa Toledo 4. Canon Law Cyprian Augustine Tertullus Irene Chrysostome c. CHAP. XVII Whether or no some doe warrantably teach that a Pactor hath no pastorall power to preach and administrate the Sacraments without the bounds of his owne Congregation and from whence essentially is the calling of a Pastor OVr brethren who teach that the ordination of Pastors is onely from that power of the keyes that they imagine to be in the body of beleevers must needs holding such an humane ministeriall Church fall in divers errors as 1. that he cannot officiate pastorally without that number of beleevers from whence essentially he hath his pastorall calling 2. When the Churches necessity shall call him to remove to another independent flocke He is no Pastor while he be ordained and chosen of new by that flocke So the English Puritanisme and M. Best We hold that a Pastor may officiate as a Pastor without his owne congregation 1. Arg. That which the brotherhood and communion of Sister-Churches requireth to be done that Pastors may lawfully doe but this the brotherhood of Sister-Churches requireth to be done Ergo c. the assumption is proved 1. Because death or necessary absence of Pastors necessity of keeping the flocke 2. Necessity of convincing the gainsayers if the present Pastor be weake in learning yet able to cut the word aright saith M. Paget requireth this M. Best answereth Officers of Churches may be helpfull to other Churches as Christians but not as Ministers Answ. This Argument presupposeth that Pastors not as Pastors but as Christians either may administer the Sacraments lawfully and so any Christian may administer the Sacraments which is both Popish and absurd or that it is not lawfull for Pastors to administer the Sacrament out of their owne congregation or to any other of another congregation then their owne and so yet communion of Sister-Churches in these acts is cleane taken away 2. Our Argument is from Church-communion not in Christian acts as Christian but in ministeriall acts as ministeriall 2. Arg. If Ministers as M. Paget argueth may labour to convert unbeleeving strangers and to adde them to their flocke that they may enlarge Christs kingdome then they may exercise Pastorall acts over and above others then these of their owne charge but the former is true Ergo so is the latter The assumption is cleare because Prov. 93. Wisdome sendeth out her maids to call in these that are without and 1 Cor. 14. 24. the Prophets as Prophets were pastorally to convince and so to convert Inâ—idels who were not of their charge M. Best answereth These acts are not acts of a Minister as a Minister a man and a wife a father and a childe a Pastor and a flocke are relatives as I am a Father I exercise not proper acts as a Father but towards my owne children what good I doe to others cannot be said to be the acts of a Father but rather of a friend a neighbour a Christian c. Answ. He presumeth that a Pastor may preach and exercise pastorall acts as a Christian but so all Christians may pastorally preach though not called of God contrary to the Scripture so women and private persons may invade the Pastors chare 2. It is vaine to presse similitudes while they blood for Christ properly is the bridegroome and husband of his Church Eph. 5 6 27. John 3. 29 Rev. 19. 9. Rev. 21. 9. Isâ— 54 5. Pastors are but the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 under suitors for the bridegroome John 3. 29. This is Popish doctrine to make such a relation betwixt a mortall man and an independent Church Pope Enaristus and Calixâ—us saith while the Bishop liveth the Church can no more bee given to another without his consent nor the wife can bee given to another then to her owne husband without his consent And so said Innocentius the third therefore at the consecration after imposition of hands saith Vasquez and anointing of the Bishop and delivering to him a staffe a consecrated and blessed ring is put on his ring-finger in token he is married to the Church but what have we to do with such trash as this For in a word the comparison of a marriage in this point is either Popish or unseasonable or both because the mutuall consent betwixt A. B. and his wife being essentially marriage as the Canon Law Divines and sound Casuists acknowledge it maketh A B. a husband and also the husband of such a wife during their life-time but election of the people that A. B. be their Pastor and A. B. his acceptation of the Church as his charge maketh him not both a Pastor and also the Pastor of that Church because the ordination of the Presbytery maketh A. B. formally and essentially a Pastor I meane a called Pastor under Christ but the election of the people and his consent doth not make him a Minister but doth only appropriate him after he is made a Minister to be the Minister of such a Church and so the comparison halteth in the maine point for which it is alleadged therefore A. B.