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
Christ or beleeve not in him joyne hands with Papists and make way for Anabaptisticall Anaâ—chy that a persecuting or an unbeleeving King is no King not to be obeyed but to be turned out of his Throne And to this meaning Calvin Viretus and Cartwright teach that the kingly power floweth immediately from God the Creator not from God in the Mediator Christ. But 2. thâ— kingly power is considered in a speciall manner as it is in a Christian whether professing onely the Gospell or truly beleeving in Christ and so in relation to Christs Church and to the soule of a beleeving Prince the kingly power floweth from God in and through the Mediator Jesus Christ as all common favours which in generalâ— flow from God the Creator are sanctified and blessed to the beleevers in the Mediator Christ as meat drinke sleep riches kingly honour And in this meaning Sauls kingly honour in respect of Saul himselfe is but a common favour flowing from the Creator howbeit to Gods Church for whose good he did fight the battels of the Lord it was a speciall favour flowing from God in Christ as our Divines say that creation which in it selfe is a common favour to all is a meane in the execution of the Decree of Elâ—ction to the children of God 3. Conclusion Hence our Divines say that kingly authority is the same ordinance of God essentially considered in the heathen Princes as in Christian Kings as Cartwright and others say Neither doth it follow as our unlawfull Canons teach That the Christian Kings now have that same power in Causes Ecclesiasticall which the godly Kings amongst the Jewes as David and Salomon had â—or David and Salomon were Prophets as well as Kings and had power to pen Canonâ—cke Scripture and to prophesie which power in Ecclesiasticke causes no King now can have Neither doth it follow which Whytgift saith that we give no more authority to the Christian Magistrate in the Church of Christ then to the great Turke Our Divines say and that with good warrant that the kingly power as kingly is one and the same in kind in heathen Nero and in Christian Constantine As a heathen man is as essentially a father to his owne children and a husband to his owne wife and a King to his owne subjects as a Christian man is a father husband and king to his owne children wife and subjects Neither doth Christianity superadde and give of new any kingly power to a King because he is now become by Gods grace of a Heathen King a Christian King Christianity addeth indeed a new obligation to imploy his kingly power which he had full and entire before now in its exercise and use to more regall and kingly acts as to take care that the Gospell be soundly preached the Sacraments and discipline of the Church kept pure and heretickes punished according to that he to whom much is given from him much shall be required But the same King while he was a heathen King had the same kingly power and authority to performe these regall acts but being yet a heathen he wanted 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 supernaturalis a supernaturall or reall and physicall power to performe these acts now this power which he wanted before he heard of the Gospell and beleeved in Christ was not a kingly authority for then he should not have been a compleat Heathen King before which is against Gods word commanding obedience to heathen Kings Rom. 13. 1 2. 1 Tim. 2. 1 2. 1 Pet. 2. 17. but this power that he wanted is a Christian power to exercise regall and kingly acts Neither is this an inconvenience that power to exercise the acts of a calling in a Christian manner be Christian and supernaturall and yet the authority kingly and not formally Christian but such as is and may be in a heathen King therefore kingly power and Christian power are here carefully to be distinguished and a Christian Kings power as a Christian is more then the Turks power in Church-matters Hence our Adversaries here dethrone and degrade the King for they give the King a head-ship and dominion over the Church as he is a Christian man and take that headship from him as a King because if the Turke by sword should conquer Britaine and become our King by their grounds he should be Head of the Church no lesse then our Christian Prince who now reâ—gneth over us and certaine it is a poore Headship that they give to the King even such a Head-ship as a Heathen King and the Turke hath over subdued Christian kingdomes and thus by their way Nero and Julian were heads of Christs Church 2. If unbeleeving Kings cease to be Kings then when they commit any fault that maketh them in Gods Court no members of the Church they are to be dethroned which is most seditious doctrine and so Formalists herein joyne with Papists 4. Conclusion There be these distinctions here considerâ—ble 1. The Kings power ordinary and extraordinary 2. His power as a King 2. and as a singularly graced Christian. 3. His power hortatorie as a Christian and coactive as a King 4. His power accumulative not privative in Church-matters 5. His power in actibus imperatis in acts commanding to another and his power in actibus elicitis which he is to performe himselfe If a King were a Prophet as a David he might doe many things in an extraordinary way in Church-matters which he cannot now ordinarily doe 2. As a singularly graced Christian he may write Sermons and Commentaries on holy Scripture for edifying the Church but this should be done by him by no kingly faculty 3. As a Christian he may exhort others to doe their duty but as King he may command that which Paul commanded Timothy and Titus to commit the Gospell to faithfull men who are able to teach others to preach in season and out of season to lay hands suddenly on no man and reforme Religion purge the Church of idolatry and superstition as Joshuah and Hâ—zekiah did all which Church-men and Synods might doe also but Synods doe this in an Ecclesiasticke way upon the paine of Ecclesiasticke censures The King doth it by a regall kingly and coactive power of the sword 4. the Kings power is accumulative in giving to the Church and ayding and helping God hath given to the King the ten Commandements and the Gospâ—ll as a pupill is given to a Tutor The King holds his sword above the Law of God to ward off the stroakes of wicked men who doe hurt the Law but the Kings power is not privative to take any priviledge from the Law and the Church so his power is as a tutor to keep not as a father who may both give and take away from his son the inheritance his power is defensive not offensive 5. He hath power in actibus imperatis to command that all preach sound Doctrine decree just Canons exercise discipline aright but in
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.
is to prove the power of the keyes to be in the multitude But we are now disputeing about the power of the keyes in a Church ministeriall which is totum heterageneum where the whole giveth not a denomination to the part as every part of a man is not a man a Church made up of only believers is not Christs organicall body where there are eyes eares and hands and feet as is meaned Rom. 12. and 1 Cor. 12. for all are here an eye of believers and all of collaterall and equall authoritie neither is there here an eye or an hand in a ministeriall function above a foote But wee now dispute about the keyes of a ministeriall Church as Iunius saith made up of integrall parts of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of Shepheards and Sheepe V. Conclusion The office bearers of the Church have the power of the Keyes and their office immediately from Christ by the immediation of free gift they have their offices from the Church by the mediation of orderly designation seeing it is the Church which designeth such a man to such an office therefore it is said Eph. 4. 11. Hee gave some to be Apostles for the Church he saith not to the Church as if the faithfull by an innate and received power from Christ did ordaine by authoritie Ministers as their servants and Deputies for all the authoritie is Christs not the believers I grant what is given for the Church in some sense is said to be given to the Church as Chrysostome said The gift of baptisme is given to the whole Church but the power of baptising is not given to all the believers as to the subject This Conclusion I prove 1. That is not to be holden which is not written as our brethren hold So Best Travers Parker Ames M. Iacob so also Theodoret Cyrill Augustine Ambrose but it is neither expresly nor by good consequence in Scriptures no precept no promise where all the faithfull lay hands on men for the Ministerie as Titus Paul and the Presbyterie doe 1 Timothy 4. 14. or where all the faithfull doe binde and loose and receive witnesses judicially against Elders as Peter and Timothy have authority to doe 2. Argument If the word say that the power of the keyes is given to certaine select persons and not to all believers then is not this power given to all believers but the word saith the former er The Assumption is thus proved If these Offices that essentially include both the power and the exercise of the Keyes be given to some select persons and not to all the faithfull then are not the Keyes given to all the faithfull but the Lord gave the office of Apostles Prophets c. to some only And God hath set some in the Church then not all first Apostles secondarily Prophets thirdly Teachers c. And hee gave some to be Apostles not all and some Prophets c. Are all Apostles The major is proved because to be an Apostle a Pastor c. is to have a power given by Christ to use the keyes by preaching binding and loosing by censures as an Apostle Pastor c. This cannot be answered seeing there must be another power to binde and loose in Pastours and Elders than is in all believers women believing children and many believers unapt to governe 3 Argument To whomsoever Christ giveth the power of the Keyes to them he gave a ministeriall spirit by way of speciall ambassage to remit and to retaine sins as the Ambassadors of God in Christs stead and them he sent as the fatheâ— sent him as is cleare in the Scripture As the Father sent me so send I you c. He breatâ—ed on them and said receive the Holy Ghost whosoever sinnes ye remit they are remitted In which words our Divines Calvin Bullinger Musculus Beza yea and Papists Cajetan Toletus teach that Christ here did inaugurate his Disciples to preach and exercise the censures of the Church so also Cyrill Chrysostome Cyprian But this ministeriall spirit Christ gave not to all the faithfull but only to the Apostles for he sent not Mary Magdalene and Cleophas in this place as M. Smith saith and why because it is gathered from Luk. 24. 33 34 36. That Magdalene and Cleophas were there saith he when Christ said As my Father sent me so send I you Therefore Mary also and Cleophaâ— received a ministeriall power of the keyes all as well as 〈◊〉 Apostles I answer but this place is all one with Mat. 28. 18 19. where they are commanded to preach and baptize which is not lawfull to women 1 Cor. 14. 1 Tim. 2. And it is all one with the Commission Mark 16 14. which is restruted to the eleven Another weake ground he hath that the eleven were not made Apostles untill Christs Ascension Act. 2. when the spirit was sent and untill he led captivitie captive Ephes. 4. 11. but this power was given to all the Disciples before his ascension Answer a higher mâ—asure of the Spirit was powred on the Apostles at Christs Ascension and by vertue of his Ascension he ordained Apostles Eph. 4. 11. but will it follow none were made Apostles untill he ascended if this were good by vertue of his death wee obtaine forgivenesse of sinnes by his ascending to heaven we also ascend But hence it followeth not that there is no forgivenesse of sinnes while Christ die and that there is no ascending to heaven of the spirits of the Patriarchs and Fathers while Christ ascended 2. That the Apostles were called and received Apostleship from Christ in the dayes of his slesh before his death is cleare Matth. 10. 2 3. and that they went out and preached and cast out divels A second exception there is of some who say a concionall or preaching power of forgivnesse of sinnes is not given to all to whom a loosing from sins by Church censures is given as is cleare in our Ruling Elders who have not power to forgive sinnes by preaching yet have power to forgive binde and loose by Church-censures Answer We may distinguish where the law distinguisheth for howbeit the power of preaching be not given formally to ruleing Elders yet it is effectually in the fruit given to them in the judiciall and authoritative applicatioâ— in the externall court of Christs Church but believers as believers only have neither power to preach formally nor yet effectively to apply judicially the threatnings of the word in discipline to the judiciall correction of delinquents now the keyes in the word and the keyes in the discipline are the same keyes of Christs kingdome as Amesius observeth and the keyes of the word are the keyes of the kingdome committed to all either formally or effectively to whom the keyes of discipline are given but they are never given to
single believers who cannot lawfully preach Therefore single believers are not the subject of the keyes 4. Argument Such power of the keyes without the which the Church of Christ is perfect and complete for government is superfluous and so not of Divine but of humane Ordination But the Church is complete and perfect in its government in that there are in it believers Pastours Doctors Elders and Deacons suppose no power of the keyes be in the communitie of believers The proposition is Parkers so reason the Fathers Cyrill Chrysostome Basil Augustine Beda so William Best M. Iacob M Robinson I prove the Assumption The Eldership have no oversight in the Lord and there is no necessitie or exercise of the keyes as Elders if all believers have a ministeriall power to bind and loose as M. Smith and others teach and if all edifie by the keyes as Parker saith and judicially censure excommunicate and ordaine or depose their rulers as the English Puritanisme and authors of the presbytery examined doe prove from 1 Cor. 5. and Guide to Zion For ten believers being nothing but believers by Divine right or al 's well the governing Church without the Eldership as having them suppose all the Elders were believers Where also there be twentie times three believers they have all in their owne families the power of the keyes and so there are twenty Churches complete and independent within themselves joyned in twentie neighbour families all under one covenant with God and flying all knowne sins Now when Christ saith If thy brother offend thee and obstinately refuse to heare tell the Church Which of the twenty three shall the Brother wronged have recourse unto tell the Church as reason would say must bee some visible Church Senat or judicatorie but all these twenty threes met within their houses are independent Churches if they be believers as we suppose and all visible Churches Shall wee thinke that Christ hath left a grieved brother to a blind Tell the Church and yet who can know this Church for all have alike interest in Christ which of the twenty threes bee the Church that Christ meaned in these words Tell the Church by this doctrine none can dreame 5 Argument The multitude of believers hath either this power of the keyes from Christ and from heaven or from the earth and from men for I thinke our brethren will not dreame of any ecclesiastick positive law not warranted in Gods word for a third for this Papists teach This is Christs argument for John Baptists ministerie If from Christ and Heaven it is either from the law of nature or from some divine positive law from nature it is not For 1. the power is not naturall but supernaturall reaching a supernaturall end the gathering of the Saints Eph 4. 11 12. neither is this power such as can have nature for its Author as Almain saith seeing it is above natures reach And so also saith And Duvallius If happily they say it is from good consequence naturall for because of the claime and interest that the faithfull have in Christ Christs keyes are given to them as God giving Christ he giveth all other things with Christ. I Answer This maketh no man but a believer yea no gifted pastour capable of the keyes except hee have faith in Christ which we shall hereafter refute as contrary to Scripture Neither can it bee from any positive law or grant or promise in the new Testament that all the members of the Church shall be Princes Rulers Commanders that Christ hath left none to be over other in the Lord. If this be from men it is a humane ordinance and cannot stand See what Bellarmine saith to this purpose 6. Argument The power of the Keyes is either given to the believers as believers or as they are such whome God gifteth for government selected from amongst others if the later be said we have our intent and the keyes must be given immediately to some selected guides If the keyes be given to believers as they are such and under this reduplication Then 1. All believing women and children have authoritie in the Lord over the congregation which as Duvallius saith is not to be admitted for quod convenit 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 convenit 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Yea 2. saith Paul Baynes If the power of the keyes and teaching had beene given to all believers all should have beene made Pastours and Doctours though not to continue so in exercising the power And so all must have the power of seeing as the Church eyes and Watchmen and all the power of hearing as the Church eares and certainely the second act must proceed from the essence and first act as moving must proceed from a living soule to laugh from a reasonable soule so to excommunicate judicially to judge correct cast out bind and loose all which Parker and others prove to agree to believers from Matthew 18. and 1 Corinth 5. must flow from a ministeriall principle and so all must bee eyes and eares which is against the varietie of the gifts of the spirit If the whole body were an eye where were the hearing if the whole were hearing where were the smelling v. 14. for the whole body is not one member but many yea a collection of many members Hence 7. Argument That is not to be admitted which overturneth the order established by Christ of commanding and obeying and which everteth the integrall members and parts of a visible politike ministeriall body of Christ but to give the power of the keyes to all and every one overturneth this order of Christs Ergo This doctrine is not to be admitted The Major is undenyable I prove the Minor The ministeriall Church is divided as Junius saith in Sheepeheards and flock some are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Overseers and Watchmen others such as are to submit and obey some are Watchmen then they have some that they watch over Some Shepheards ergo they must have Sheep Some Ambassadors in Christs stead Ergo They have some to whom they carry the Embassage Heralds Witnesses Stewards Fathers Saviours Sowers Reapers builders then they must have a People House Sonnes Ground c. upon whom they exercise their native operations But if all have power of the keyes and power to edifie by binding and loosing all should be Overseers Watchmen Sheepheards Ambassadors and if all were Fathers where were the Sons What a worke would this be that all Christians must leave their trading husbandry arts sayling and oversee the Church and judge and determine Church matters betwixt brother and brother So Francis Iohnson reasoneth Master Smith answereth two things to this 1. The Elders saith he shall obey the voice of the Church in things commanded by God and all the Saints are to obey
our brethrens minde cleare Ten or twenty believers in a congregation have from Christ 1. The supreme power of the keyes 2. They are the supremest and highest Church on earth 3. Above Pastours and Elders even convened in a Synod in Christs name 4. Some few believers cloathed with no ecclesiasticall office may ordaine Pastours and Elders deprive and excommunicate them 5. Give ordinances and lawes to the Eldership 6. When Synods or assemblies of office-bearers are met in assemblies and cannot agree in their canons the matter is to be referred by appeale or reference to a company of believers cloathed with no ecclesiasticall function as to the most supreme ecclesiasticall judicatorie on earth These are points unknown to Scripture which our brethren hold Hence out third conclusion The Church of believers in eminence and primacie of Christian dignitie is above the Church ministeriall as ministeriall 1. In dignitie 2. Stabilitie 3. Causalitie Indignitie 1. Because the Church of believers is the redeemed and conquested purchase of our Lord Jesus but all the office-bearers or the ministeriall Churches of Pastours and Elders on earth are not his redeemed ones in so far as they are no more but officers and ministers of the house except they be believers and so they fall in to the redeemed Church which is a better world than to be naked pulpit-men 2. In stabilitie because the advocation of Christ that the gates of hell shall not prevaile against the Church of believers and the promises of the Covenant for perseverance standeth good for them But no such promises of stabilitie are made to naked Church guides but if they guide well they fare the better only common gifts are promised to them which cannot take them to heaven 3. In causalitie the Church of believers are superiour and above the Church of Church-guides because Rulers and Officers are servants and meanes imployed by Christ for the Church of believers as for the end office-bearers are for believers as the meanes for the end but believers are not for office-bearers Medicine is for our health and meate for our life and the end is the cause and so excellenter than the meanes because of these three respects and of the necessity of consent of believers in all acts of Government Christs kingdome being a willing people The Fathers Tertullian Origen Cyprian Chrysostome Augustine Epiphanius Ierome Cyrill Hilarie and our late Divines Junius Chemnitius Martyr Calvin Beza Willet Fulke Bucer and our brethren Baines and Ames doe ascribe a superioritie and so an authoritie to believers as to the fountaine and cause of jurisdiction above Ministers and give the exercise of jurisdiction only to officers not because officers have not the power aswell as the exercise but because the being and operation of officers is all for the Church Gerson also in this subjecteth the Pope and we every Pastour suppone he were a double Lord Prelate to the Church that is to the Councell or Assemblie of the Church and that in a fourefold respect 1. Ratione indeviabilitatis because the ports of hell shall not prevaile against the Church but the Pope or the Pastour is a man may nod and totter 2. Ratione regulabilitatis because the Church in a Synod may regulate and line the Pope or pastor when he crooketh because hee is not essentially a right line 3. Ratione multiplicitatis because the Church containeth in it the Popes or Pastours power but the Pope or Pastour containeth not in his bosome the Churches power 4. Ratione obligabilitatis because the Church may appoint lawes to oblige both Pope and Pastour but the Pope or Pastor cannot oblige the Church Now as the Church of believers is above the Church guides in Christian dignitie and excellency of grace for asmuch as the saving grace of faith is more excellent than the common graces of the power of the keyes yet in an other respect the Church guides are a Church ministeriall in authoritie and jurisdiction above the believers Therefore Junius saith the Pastour and the flock are in divers relations above and inferiour to one another Hence 1. Every one of these two Churches are first and highest each in their owne kind The Church of believers is the highest and most supreme Church I speake of a Christian supremacie and dignitie in the one kinde Also a ministeriall Church is the highest and most supreme Church in its kind to wit in a ministeriall authoritie But that which we prove is that we see not in Gods word a Church of sole believers that is a governing and ministeriall Church having the keyes and power and exercise of jurisdiction over the Eldership and Church-guides whatever our brethren say on the contrary Our first Argument is Because such a Church in name or thing is not in the old and new Testament Therefore this independent Church to us is nothing for the Antecedent we require precept promise or practice for such a Church 2. We have proved that the power of the keyes is no wayes given to sole believers ergo farre lesse can the exercise of that power be in them over their guides except we establish a popular government where all the members of the Church have the power of the keyes and doe actively use them and judge ordaine consttuite despose and excommunicate their rulers 3. Every lawfull power of jurisdiction is regulated by precepts in Gods word But this power in believers over their guides is not so regulated for Gods word giveth precepts to regulate the Kings power to his subjects that he play not the Tyrant the Masters power to his servants that he deale equally with them the parents power over the children that they provoke them not to wrath and so in all lawfull powers that are of God But in no place hath God said Ye that are the flocke and sheepe oversee and governe your sheepheards nor hath he said ye that are sheep children sonnes of the house use your power over your shepheards fathers in God stewards in Christs house with moderation and longanimitie and wisedome nor hath he said yee sons â—lock and people of God feede governe and rule these that are your fathers in God and have the oversight over you in the Lord not as lords over the Lords inheritance but as good examples to the flocke yet this must be in Scripture if this power be of God 4 If the Eldership and Church-guides be rulers and governours taking care of the house of God 1 Tim. 3 4 5. Such as rule well the people 1 Tim. 5. 17. such as must rule with diligence Rom 12. 8. and feed the flock of God not as lords over Gods inheritance taking the oversight not by constraint 1 Pet 5. 2. such as are over the people in the Lord 1 Thes. 5. 12. such as rule over the people and the believers watching for their soules and must give an account
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
rebuke him from this Text. 14. Christ immediately and without the mediation of the Church saith Parker communicateth himselfe to beleevers ergo he communicateth his power also immediately to his Church Ans. It followeth not because he communicateth not his power of the keyes to the Church of believers either mediately or immediately because he giveth it not to them at all CHAP. V. Q. Whether or no some doe warrantably teach that the power of the Keyes is essentially and originally in the Church of Beleevers and in the Church-guides only at the second hand and in the by quoad exerâ—itium so as the Church of Believers should be the mistresse delegating the keyes by an imbred and kindly authority and the Church-guides as her proper servants and delegats do borrow the use and exercise of the keyes from the foresaid Church of Believers THe tenent of these with whom we now dispute is that all the power of the keyes is given by Christ to the multitude of Believers as to the first fountaine and that this power is derived and gested by the mulmultitude of believers to such and such persons to be used and exercised by them as the servants both of Christ and the Church For the clearing of the question and trying if this distinction be law-biding These distinctions are to be observed 1. The power of the keyes may be thought to come to the Ministers of the Church three waies as shall be cleared 1. By mediate derivation the Church receiving this power from Christ and deriving it over to the friends of the Bridegroome 2. By immediate donation God immediately giveth the honour of the keyes to these whom he maketh his Courtyers in this kinde 3. By application the Church only naming the men to the office 2. The power of the keyes and all sacred offices in Gods House are from the immediate wisdome of Christ The designation of such men to such offices is by the ministery of the Church 3. The power of the keyes is one thing the lawfull exercise of the keyes is another thing 4. The Ministers may be thought the servants either of the Church or servants of Christ for the Church 5. Designation of men by the Church to sacred offices may be thought either in the Churches free-will or tyed to the lawes designed by Christ. 6. The Church of believers may be thought either the virtuall or the formall subiect of the keyes 7. The power of the keyes may be thought to be given to the community or multitude of Believers or professours of faith in Christ in the generall not designing one man rather then another but leaving that to the disposition of meanes and disposition of second causes who shalâ— be the man as to be a Musitian to be an Astronomer is given to mankinde as some way proper to man as Porphyre saith howbeit all and every one of mankinde be not alwayes Musitians and Astronomers It is thought by our Brethren that the Church of believers is the first seat the prime subject and head fountaine under Jesus Christ to whom the keyes are given and that howbeit all offices and officers be only of Christs institution yet the Church of believers doe as the Spouse and Mistresse and bride of Christ communicate the lawfull exercise of some acts of the keyes as to preach administer the Sacraments oversee the conversation of the flock care for the poore to some certain men as her deputies and servants with borrowed authority from her selfe as the Well-head and prime fountain under Christ of all the authority and use of the keyes that is in the officers of the House as Pastors Doctors and Elders the Church still keeping in her own hands authority and power of the keyes in most materiall acts of the power of the keyes as by these keyes to ordain and elect all the officers and in case of aberration or failing to censure depose excommunicate them and all members of the visible Church and that independently and without any subordination to Presbyteries Classes and Synods even as the kingly power of actuall government is in the Kings hand and he appointeth deputies and servants under himself and in his name and authority to do and execute his will according to the Laws of the Kingdom so doth the Church of believers under Christ by an imbred authority and power received from Christ send out Pastors Doctors and Elders in her name and authority to exercise certain ministeriall acts yet so as the Church of believers in all the acts performed by the officers remaineth the principall and prime agent cause and actor under Christ and the officers only her servants deputies and instruments performing all by authority borrowed from her the bride Queen and Spouse of Christ This they believe to be contained in the Scriptures and taught by Fathers and Doctors of the Church I deny not but by the faculty of Paris this question was agitated in the Councell of Basil and Constance to bring the Pope as a sonne and servant under the power of a Generall Councell The Sorbonists and Doctors of Paris that are not near the smoake of the Popes glory for this contend with the Jesuites men that are sworne bellies to the world and the Pope The Parisians cite the Councell of Carthage where Augustine was present And Augustine and Tertullian and Chrysostome seeme to favour this So Maldonate Ferus Jansenius Sutluvius Whittaker Morton Spalato Gerson Almain Petr. de Alliac Also Edmundus Richerius and Sim. Vegorius set out a booke of Church policy depressing the Pope and extolling the Church power as full and compleat without a ministeriall head as their owne Parisian Doctors acknowledging the command of having a Pope to be affirmative and not to bind alwayes and that the Churches power remaineth full when the Pope is dead as the Parisians say p. 8. The booke came out without the name of an Authour and was condemned by Cardinall Peronius Archbishop of Senona and Primate of France and Germany and is refuted by Andreas Duvallius a Sorbonist What our Divines say in this I have exponed to be far otherwise then is the mind of Parker M. Jacob M. Best and the Authours of presbyteriall government examined Ann. 1641. Hence our first conclusion is All offices and office-bearers in Gods house have their warrant immediately from Christ Jesus as we all agree against the bastard prelacy 1. because of the perfection and plenitude of Scripture 2 because of our Law-giver Christs wisedome and his seven Spirits that are before the Throne seeing he seeth better then men 3. because of the Scriptures Eph. 4. 11. Rom. 12. 7 8 9. w 1 Cor. 12. 26 27 28 29. 1 Tim. 3. Act. 20. â—8 And therefore Presbyters and Deacons have their offices immediately from Christ and not from the Prelates 11. Conclusion The first subject of the keyes is either made quate or narrower as one Pastor and some ruling Elders of
from the Parisians holdeth not Sight is in the eye as the instrument but it is principally and originally from the whole man for the whole man seeth by the eye The authority of the Church is as the soule in the whole body as Bridgesius saith and in every member of the body Howbeit it doth not exercise the power in every member but it seeth by the eye and heareth by the eare so the power of the keyes is in all and every one of the faithfull but it exerciseth some Acts ministeriall as preaching baptizing in the guides and other are Acts in other members of the body but the power is in all But I answer That this comparison halteth many wayes 1. The body is a physicall organicall matter capable of the soule and a kindly or naturall house or shop for the soule to worke in and every member may exercise some vitall operation by the soules inacting of it as hearing smelling seeing moving growing c. But the Church consisting of beleevers and Ministers that are often opposed by way of contradiction as beleevers and non beleevers and a beleever that is no more but a beleever is not capable of the power of the keyes it being gratia gratis data a freely given gift of God except the Lord be pleased freely to give it by some Law or promise And so these that are only beleevers are as the woodden leg or the eye of glasse in the body wanting all authoritative power of the ministery where God hath not gifted and called them now every member of the body is inacted by the soule 2. If this comparison hold well as every member of the body liveth and is denominated a living thing howbeit every member be not an eye or an eare by the information of the soule so every toe and finger liveth by the inacting of the soule actu primo and moveth and groweth actu secundo so must every beleever in the body of Christ Man and woman be actu primo and essentially a ministeriall part and office-bearer having authority from Christ and also actu secundo exercise some ministeriall acts for such as is the nature of the act such is the nature of the power and such as is the power such is the act If the power be ministeriall so is the act If the act be not ministeriall as it cannot be in these onely that are beleevers especially women and children so neither is the power 3. The whole man seeth by the eye heareth by the eare but the beleevers see by their owne eyes as they must live by their owne faith and not with the Pastors eyes neither doe they grow by that soule of grace by which the Pastor groweth 3. The Beleevers must either be the virtuall or the formall subject of the keyes They are not the virtuall subject or cause as flint is a cause of fire for our brethren say that the beleevers formally performe acts of the keyes and that they rebuke they excommunicate they chuse their officers which is an authoritative act of the keyes as they teach Now a virtuall cause is not formally the cause of the effect as fire is the cause of fire and doth not formally performe acts of the formall cause food doth not formally make motion in the body but onely virtually But they are forced to acknowledge that beleevers are the formall subject of the keyes It is absurd that one should essentially and actu primo have the power of the keyes and yet he may not preach nor baptize that is as if one had a reasonable soule and yet could neither discourse nor move nor walke 4. The power of the keyes is either in the officers as officers or onely as beleevers if as officers then they cannot borrow the keyes from beleevers seeing they have them as officers suppose they be not beleevers and that is against the meaning of this distinction if they have the power of the keyes onely as beleevers then all Ministers that are non-beleevers want the keyes 5. Office-bearers have either a nearer and more ministeriall power of the keyes then beleevers or onely that same ministeriall power if the former be said the ministery is but a naked act that some exercise at the Churches direction sometimes and no habituall power whereby Paul is made a Minister Col. 1. 25. and Epaphroditus is denominated a faithfull messenger Phil. 2. 25. for so one shall not be a Minister of Christ but when he is in the act of his ministery against Scripture and reason If office-bearers have onely that same ministeriall power that beleevers have Then Ministers cannot ordaine others to be Ministers except they be beleevers and a Minister shall not preach from an inward principle proper to a Minister but from a principle common to him with other beleevers which maketh no diâ—ference betwixt a beleever and a Minister but in the naked acts And this is all one as to say a man doth walke naked and yet he is void of life he preacheth and hath no other inward power ministeriall then any beleeving woman or childe hath 6. If the power of the keyes be originally in the Church of Beleevers and the exercise only in officers then Pastors in rigor of speech are the Churches servants and so not over them in the Lord. 2. Pastors are sent by the Church from the inherent and innate power of the Church as if the Church had a dominion and authority over the Pastors hence will it follow that Pastors have their authority from Beleevers which is most absurd For then if Beleevers should receive the keyes immediately from Christ to be communicated to others and applyed to men fit and able therefore this application is not a making of a Minister or a reason why Archippus is a Minister as the reason why a fire burneth a dry tree is not the application of the tree to the fire but the nature of the fire and drinesse of the timber If one should bring out from amongst ten glasses one and hold it out to the Sunnes light and beames this refulgent beauty and glancing is not from the man that bringeth the glasse before the Sunne except occasionally the glancing splendor is from the nature of the glasse and the Suns light And the man applyeth not the light of the Sunne to the glasse but bringeth out the glasse to the light of the Sunne So doe Beleevers but apply the fit person in their wise election to Gods office and they apply not the office to the man for it is presupposed they are tyed to the rules 1 Tim. 3. requiring such a man as is of good report apt to teach c. and the application is not in the free-will of people or Pastors neither hath God left it to Beleevers in generall what men they place in offices So Spalato 7. It cannot stand with Christs wisedome that he hath conferred an excellent supernaturall power of the keyes that reacheth
that Babel also least ye be partakers of her sinnes For they teach were a visible Church never so sound pure holy faire in doctrine and life yet if they refuse to cast out a scandalous person and will spare and defend him they are to be separated from and those that stay in that Church and keepe communion with her are partakers of her sins Howbeit some saving truths remain in the Church of Rome and in that we keepe yet a materiall and reall union with Rome in as farre as they professe one God three persons two natures in Christ c. but we have separated from Rome 1. Because their Doctrine of professed and commanded Idolatry and their other Heresies everteth the foundation of Faith 2. Because they lay another foundation above the foundation Christ the Pope and a multitude of Idol-gods but it followeth in no sort Ergo we are to separate from every true Church of Christ that is incorrigible in one fault or other Where is there a Christian Church that we could live in in the Earth yea except the Anabaptists-Church a Church of white paper as faire as Heaven and the Sunne that there is not a spot on more then on the triumphing Church this on Earth is a city in the Moone 3. They object Come not ye to Gilgall neither goe yee up to Bethaven therfore people were to separate from Idolatrous Israel Answ. I have prooved that the true Prophets commanded Church-fellowship with Israel after their Idolatry and judge if this be good Goe not to Bethaven that is the house of vanity called Bethel the house of God where Jeroboams calves were worshipped ergo separate from all the worship of God in Israel we say Ex negatione speciei malè concluditur negatio generis separate from Ieroboams calves therfore separate from all true worship of God in Israel it is a bad consequence 4. They object In the old Testament the Law consisted of outward ordinances and if they were outwardly performed there was no cause to separate from them But under the new Testament all things are become now and spirituall where Christ hath given power to all the faithfull to censure scandalous sinnes all should separate from a corrupt Church So Barrow But Master Smith helpeth him All things were shadowes in the old Testament David Jehoshaphat c. suffered knowne sinnes in the land yet were they the true matter of the typicall Church being typically and ceremonially cleane for to the constitution of the typicall Church there was not required true holinesse but ceremoniall cleannesse Holinesse was required of them for their acceptation before God but not for the constitution of their Church so there were there typicall Saints typicall Hypocrites that might have no communion together till they were purified and yet being indeed wicked persons they might have Church-communion together But our constitution ministry communion separation are contrary to theirs true holinesse is required under the new Testament Robinson addeth No man could absolutely separate from the Church of the Jews for it was the onely one visible Church upon the face of the Earth tyed to one Temple Altar Sacrifice Priest-hood and place they had not excommunication as we have now the offender was by bodily death cut off from the common-wealth as from the Church Answ. It is most false that externall performances of duties were sufficient to make men members of the visible Church of the old Testament 1. Because man-slayers adulterers c. were to be cut off and excommunicated from the congregation of the Lord and their prayers were not accepted of God even by Moses his law Num 35. 33 34. Es 1. 10 11 14 15. Es. 66. 3 4 5. 2 It is false that all the worship under the new Testament is so spirituall that outward performances of externall profession in the new Testament doth not also make professours Ecclesiastically holy and separated from other people not of the visible Church for Ananias Saphira Simon Magus for a time were externally holy and differenced from Pagans without the Church by their baptisme and externall profession Then Barrow must quit all places in the old Testament for separation from a wicked Ministry as that Prov. 15. The Sacrifice of the wicked is abomination to God was as true in the old as in the new Testament Ergo the Sacrifices offered by the wicked Priest were no ordinances of God and did pollute others who did communicate with him 2. The Sacraments of the Jewish Church in substance were one and the same with our Sacraments Heb. 13. 8. 1 Cor. 10. 1 2 3. Joh. 8. 56. Joh. 6. 50 51. Col. 2. 11 12. 1 Cor 5. 7. all say this except Papists Anabaptists Arminians and Socinians and for notoriously wicked persons to use the Sacraments with prophane and wicked hearts was most unlawfull and made them in that no members of the true Church but as Sodome and Gomorrah â—s 1. 10. as Aethiopians Aegyptians and Philistins Amos 9. 7. and such were forbidden to take Gods covenant in their mouth seeing they hated to be reformed Psal. 50. 16 17. Their prayers were abomination when their hands were bloody Es 1. 15. their Sacrifices like the murthering of a man and the Sacrificing of a dogg which was abomination to God Isa 66. 3. and so are all the means they use but I believe if Christ was the Spouse Priest head of the body to the Church of the Iews as to us to the constitution of this body visibly worshipping him in a Church-state there was required that the people should be not only typically holy but really and that God should be sanctified not only typically but really by reall declaration of all that drew nigh to him and the Song of Solomon saith that the communion was morall spirituall beside that it was typicall in some points And this is direct contrary to their confession where they make Separation from a corrupt Church morall and to that separation of the godly from the wicked was taught of God before the Law under the Law and under the Gospell and they teach That all true Churches from the beginning to the end of the world are one in nature and essentiall constitution And would the Lord have these to receive the seales of his covenant as true members typicall of a typicall Church This they say is 1 To take the name of God in vain 2. That the Lord doth seale unrighteousnesse 3. That he prophaneth his Sons bloud and death then a people laden with iniquâ—ty a Sodome a generation of Idolaters might all by Gods typicall command claime to the promises of the covenant and they only 3. The common beleevers amongst the Iewes had the power of the keyes as well as we if Separatists teach right for they had power to rebuke one another Levit 19. 17. and this to them is a part of the power of the keyes as Smith saith they had power of ordination to
and Hugo Grotius object this also This is the answer of Bridgesius and Hugo Grotius who deny the necessity of reformed Synods Parker who is for our brethren in many points refuteth this and proveth it was a Synod They object sixthly They were not neighbouring Churches that sent for Jerusalem did lye two hundred â—iles from Antioch How could they that lay so far distant ordinarily meet as your Classes did Answ. To the essence of a Synod and the necessity thereof is not required such meetings of Churches so farre distant but when the Churches necessity requireth it the lawfulnesse thereof may hence well be concluded and that when they lye so neâ—r-hand they may more conveniently meet 2. Neither is this much to give M. Best his Geography at his owne measure when the Churches were now in their infancy and the question of such importance that the Churches travell many miles for their resolutâ—on in this They object seventhly How prove you that these that were sent from Antioch had authority in the Church of Jerusalem Answ. Because Paul and Barnabas sent from Antioch had voyces in these Decrees They object eighthly It cannot be proved from henâ—e that Antioch was a Church depending on Jerusalem Answ. Neither doe we intend to prove such a matter But hence it followeth that both Antioch and Jerusalem and Syria and Cilicia depend upon the Decrees of these Pastors of divers Congregations assembled in this Synod They object ninthly That Papists and Prelates alleadge this place to prove their Diocâ—san Synods Answ. So doth Satan alleadge a Scripture Psalme 91. which must not be rejected because it was once in his foule mouth Prelates alleadge this place to make Jerusalem a Cathedrall and Mother-church having Supremacy and Jurisdiction over Antioâ—h and other Churches that there may be erected there a silken chaire for my Lord Prelate and that Lawes may bee given by him to bind all mens consciences under him in things which they call indifferent we alleadge this place for an Apostolike assembly to make Jerusalem a collaterall and Sister-church with Antioch and the Churches of Syria and Cilicia depending on a generall Councell We deny all Primacie to Jerusalem it was only judged the most convenient seat for the Councell We allow no Chaire for Prelate or Pastors but that they determine in the Councell according to Gods Word laying bands on no mans conscience farther then the Word of God and the dictates of sound reason and Christian prudency doe require They tenthly object That the matter carried from Antioch to Jerusalem was agreed upon by the whole Church and not carried thither by one man as is done in your Classes So M. Best Answ. It were good that things that concerne many Churches were referred by common consent to higher assemblies but if one man be wronged and see truth suffer by partiality the Law of nature will warrant him to appeale to an assembly where there is more light and greater authority as the weaker may â—ly to the stronger And the Churches whose soules were subverted with words Acts 15. v. 24. did â—ly to the authority of a greater assembly when therâ— is no small dissention about the question in hand Acts 15. 2. They object eleventhly The thing concluded in this assembly was divine Scripture imposed upon all the Churches of the Gentiles v. 22. 28. and the conclusion obliged because it was Apostolike and Canonicke Scripture not because it was Synodicall and the Decree of a Church-assembly and so the tye was Divine not Ecclesiasticke It seemed good to the Holy-Ghost Answ. 1. So the excommunication of the incestuous man 1 Cor. 5. if he was excommunicated and his re-receiving againe in the bosome of the Church 1 Cor. 2. and the laying on of the hands of the Elders on Timothy 1 Tim. 4. 14. and the appointing Elders at Lystra Iconium Antioch and fasting and praying at the said ordination Acts 14. v. 21 22 23. was Scripture and set downe in the Canonicke History by the Holy-Ghost but no man can deny that the conclusion or Decree of excommunication given out by the Church of Corinth and the ordination of Timothy to be a Pastor and the appointing of the Elders at Lystra did oblige the Churches of Corinth Ephesus and Lystra with an Ecclesiasticall tye as Ecclesiasticall Synods doe oblige 2. That this conclusion doth oblige as a Decree of a Synod and not as Apostolike and Canonicke Scripture I prove 1. Because the Apostles and Prophets being immediately inspired by the Holy-Ghost in the penning of Scripture doe never consult and give decisive voices to Elders Brethren and the whole community of beleevers in the penning holy Scripture For then as it is said Ephes. 2. 20. That our faith is built upon the Apostles and Prophets that is upon their doctrine so shall our faith in this point concerning the taking in of the Church of the Gentilâ—s in one body with the Jewes as is proved from Scripture v. 14 15 16 17. be built upon the doctrine of Elders Brethren and whole Church of Jerusalem for all had joynt voyces in this Councell as our brethren say which is a great absurdity The commandements of the Apostles are the commandements of the Lord 1 Cor. 14. 37. But the commandements of the whole Church of Jerusalem such as they say this Decree was are not the commandements of the Lord For we condemne Papists such as Suareâ— Vasquez Bellarmine Caiâ—tan Sotus and with them Formalists such as Hooker and Sutluvius who make a difference betwixt divine commaâ—dements and Apostolike commandements and humane ordinances for our Divines as Junius Beza Pareus Tylen Sibrandus Whittaker Willet Reynolds Jewell make all Apostolike mandates to be divinâ— and humane commandements or â—cclesiasticall mandates to oblige onely secondarily and as they agree with divine and Apostolike commandements But here our brethren make mandates of ordinary beleevers that were neither Apostles nor Prophets to be divine and Canonicke Scripture 3. That which is proper to the Church to Christ his second comming againe doth not oblige as Canonicke Scripture â—or Canonicke Scripture shall not be still written till Christ come againe because the Canon is already closed with a curse upon all adders Rev. 22. but what is decreed according to Gods word by Church-guides with the consent tacit or expresse of all the community of beleevers as this was v. 22. as we and our brethren doe joyntly confesse is proper to the Church to Christs second comming Ergo this Decree obligeth not as Scripture 4. The Apostles if they had not purpose that this Decree should oblige as an Ecclesiasticall mandate but as Canonicke Scripture they would not 1. have advised with all the beleevers as with collaterall and joynt pen-men with them of holy Scripture 2. They would not have disputed and reasoned together every one helping another as they doe here v. 6 7 8 9 10 c. 3.
the Synod at Ierusalem proveth that in a thing common to them all they depend upon a Synod that doth oblige them all 2. How could one independent Church at Ierusalem give Lawes to an independent Church at Antioch 3. Antioch might have condemned the heresie Suppose they could not judge the heretickes if they were an independent congregation seeing the heresie troubled them 16. They object Oâ—cumenicke and universall Synods of the whole Christian Church are unpossible and the Church is and may be without Synods therefore Synods are no ordinances of Christ. So Best See Parker Answ. Whittaker saith indeed universall Synods are not simply necessary and Parker saith no more they are not absolutely necessary necessitate medij but they are necessary necessitate praecepti and conditionally if some politicke union were amongst all Nationall Churches but hence it followeth not that they are not Christs ordinances because they are not this way necessary necessitate medij for then Baptisme and the Lords Supper publike preaching of the word perfect discipline were not Christs ordinances because in time of persecution or universall apostâ—sie many yea even whole Churches may be saved without these 2. Synods are necessary for the well being not simply for the being of the Church But hence it 's a weake consequence therefore they are not ordinances of Christ. 3. It is knowne that the Popes power hindereth generall Councels for the Councels of Constance and Basill where the Popes wings were clipped made that good burnt children dread fire Adrian it may be with some honesty promised the councell of Trent anno 1522. But Clemens the seventh did openly oppose Charles the fifth his Chancellors proclaiming thereof at Bononia they feared the place that the Emperors power should shame them and learned well from Ioh. 23. as Nanclerus saith to make the place of the councell all in all And such was Trent for they licked and revised againe and againe all the circumstances of that councell that it was a birth in the Popes wombe good twenty and five yeares and then was the Popes barne borne against his will yet generall councels should be Popes hinder them to be and what wonder Theeves love not well iustice-courts yet by their owne Law they should be The councell of Constance ordained that a generall councell should be every ten yeares once Yea after the councels of Lansen and Florence the sea being void ann 1503. the Cardinals convened and sweare to Almighty God and blasphemously to Peter and Paul that whosoever of them shall be created Pope he shall convene a generall councell within two years after his inauguration which oath Iulius 2. did sweare but had neither honesty nor memory to performe The facultie of Paris and Church of France who are still as saith the Reviewer of the councell of Trent at daggers drawing wâ—th the Pope and court of Rome doe cry and write for a generall councell But they say â—he articles of Paris cannot climbe oveer the Alps. It is some hundred yeares since Thomas Bradwardine of Canterbury the hammer of the Pelagians cryed to waken Simon Peter that he might speake out of his Councell-chaire for grace against the Pelagians But Jâ—suites bellies and pennes stout for their Father the Pope thinke it wisedome that the Pope be deafe at the cryes of Dominicanes who call for his holinesse tongue to determine in bickerings betwixt their order and Jesuites in the matter of Grace Predestination Free-will Gods providence The Pope fearing a generall Councell thinketh best that they rather bloud other in the Schools then that his greatnesse hazard to face the Court of a generall Councell and therefore matters are now tryed at home Lod. Molina the Father of the new Science the middle light with that wild heed fansied to be in God was cited before Clemens the 8â—â— and holden in processe five yeares even before Paul the fifth and the Cardinals and when all was done was whipped with a Toads stoole and nothing was determined as saith Francis de Ariba Other Councels ordained that there should be in all places Provinciall and Nationall Assemblies So ordained the Councell of Nice Trulla Africa Sardis Hence I adde a third distinction From this is concluded onely that Councels are not necessary but impossible impossibilitate morali non Physicâ Councels are only morally impossible not simply impossible and that through mens corruption It followeth not therefore they are not Gods ordinances For seeing Churches independent are morally and I feare more then morally impossible and have been hindred by Prelates our brethren would not from hence conclude that they are not Gods ordinances A Congregation of visible Saints where there is not an hypocrite is unpossible morally and cannot be because of our corruption yet such a Congregation should be and so is an ordinance of Christ. Let me also adde the fourth distinction Christ may well ordaine that as a necessary meane of edification which cannot be had ordinarily in the full perfection and degrees required so it may be had in the degrees and parts that may edifie howbeit not so well and not so conveniently so Synods are ordinarily possible I meane lesser Synods if not fuller and compleater if an universall Synod cannot be had a Nationall may be in Scotland and in England also if it please the Prelates and if God will whether Prelates will or will not and if these cannot be Provinciall Synods are and may be and if these cannot be yet Synods Elderships and particular Churches may be and I thinke independent Congregations in their perfection consisting of sincere beleevers onely and a perfect Church-discipline are Gods necessary meanes of edification yet in their perfection they cannot be had But to close this point no Divine that ever did write or speake of this Chapter except some of late but they acknowledge Acts 15. to be a formall copy and draught of a generall Assembly I might cite all our Protestant Divines the Lutherans Papists Schoolemen Casuists all the Fathers and Councels all the Doctors antient and moderne but this was to fetch water to the Sea CHAP. XV. Que. 15. Whether or no by other valid Arguments from Gods word the lawfulnesse of Synods can be concluded HItherto hath been sixe Arguments against Churches independent and consequently proving the lawfulnesse of Synods Now followeth our seventh Argument 7. If there be a commandement to tell the Church when an obstinate brother offendeth a brother then must this course also be taken when an obstinate Church shall offend a Sister-church But the former is true Mat 18. Ergo so is the latter This is not mine but the Argument of Parker D. Ammes Professors of Leyden and of all our Divines Willet Whittaker Junius Beza c. Our brethren say Christ speaketh Mat. 18. of a particular Congregation and not of many Congregations meeting synodically in their members of principall note as Pastors and Elders
1. Because an offended brother cannot have a Synod of Elders and a Nationall Assembly alwayes to complaine unto and so Christ shall not set downe an expedite way to remove scandals betwixt brother and brother 2 Christ say they is setting downe a way how an obstinate offendor shall be cast out of the Church where he was an ordinary hearer of the word and a compartner with other professors of the holy things of God in a particular visible Church Now these of divers Congregations partake not in a Church-communion of these same holy things of God Word Sacraments and Discipline Answ. 1. Christ here setteth down a way how all offences of brethren may be taken away for Christs salve must be as broad and large as the soare and excommunication must reach as farre as offences but offences are betwixt Church and Church betwixt the Grecians and the Hebrewes Acts 6. 1. no lesse then betwixt a single brother and a brother 2. I borrow the Argument and pay it home againe Christ setteth downe a way how all scandals in his visible Church may be removed So teach our brethren as an offended brother cannot alwayes have recourse to a Nationall Assembly and so Christs remedy shall be insufficient If by a Church Mat. 18. we understand a Synod say they but when the Grecian Church offendeth the Hebrew Church the Hebrew Church cannot complaine to the Grecian Church for the Law forbiddeth the party to be the Judge therefore if they understand Mat. 18. onely a Congregation excluding all Synods Christs remedy of removing scandals betwixt Sister and Sister-church shall be unsufficient therefore the Grecian and Hebrewes must have recourse as Act. 6. to a Colledge of Apostles and Pastors and that is a Synod 3. I borrow the other Argument also and shall pay it againe These who are consociated and neighboured together in the Acts and Dentees of visible Church-communion by rebuking one another Leviticus 19. 17. Admonishing Collosians 3. 16. Exhorting Hebrewes 3. 13. comforting one another 1 Thess. 5. 11. and pleading one against another Hosea 2. 2. and occasionally communicating one with another in that same Word and Sacrament and in eschewing the fellowship of one and the same excommunicate person These make up one visible politick Church that is under a common Church-government according to Christs discipline which regulateth these acts of Church-communion of one with another But so it is that Grecians and Hebrewes and sundry particular sister-Churches are consociated and neighboured together in the fore-said acts and dentees of visible Church-communion c. Ergo divers sister-Churches so make up one visible politick Church under one common Church government according to Christs discipline c. The proposition is our brethrens wherby they proove and that strongly that single professours consociated in these acts and dentees of visible Church communion make up one visible Church under one common governement and so say the Fathers Basil Chrysostome Augustine and Athanasius howbeit in habitation we be separated yâ—t are we one body and Cyprian will have nothing done in the cause of many Churches except wee all meete in one place The assumption for the communion of sundry Churches Parker granteth and the Scripture is cleare Laodicea and Colosse have a sister-communion in that same word of God Col 4. 16. so Corinth Macedonia and Galatia in these same acts of charity to the Saints at Jerusalem 1 Cor 16. 1 2 3 4. see also 2 Cor 8. 1. Rom 16. 27. Also if any person be excommunicate in one congregation also in all the neighbour congregations 1. Because his sinnes are bound in Heaven 2 He is delivered to Satan 1 Cor. 5. 4. to all 3. Christ saith he should be as an Heathen to all and so is excluded from Church communion to all Hence these visible acts of Church communion require a common law and discipline of Christ to regulate them seeing they may offend in the excesse and defect one to another but one common discipline they cannot have except they may by authority conveene in one Synod in their principall members Also Field Bilson Whittaker alleadge this place for Synods all say if Pastors have authority every one within themselves and farre more when they are met in a Synod for vis unita fortior united force is stronger Our eighth Argument is from the constant practise of the Apostles if all weighty affaires that concerne equally many particular congregations were managed not by one single congregation but by the joynt voyces and suffrages of Apostles Pastors and selected Brethren of many congregations in the Apostolick Church Then were Synods the practice of the Apostles and nâ—t independent congregations but the former is true Ergo so is the latter The proposition our brethren grant I prove the assumption by an induction 1. The select Pastors of the Christian world and select brethren Act 1. did elect and ordaine Matthias to be one of the twelve because that concerned many particular Churches the publick treasury of Apostolick Churches was committed to the Apostles because that concerned them all Act. 4. 33 34. When the Churches of the Grecians and the Churches of the Hebrewes murmured the one against the other one common Synod of the twelve Apostles authoritatively conveened and ordained with praying and laying on of hands the seven Deacons Act. 6. 2 3 4 5. and Walleus saith the argument for ordaining Deacons that the Pastors might attend the word and prayer proveth also that there were then ruling Elders Also Act. 20. 28. there is a Synod of Pastors at Ephesus whom Paul warned to take heed to the flocke and Act 11. 2. Peter giveth a reckning and count of his going in to the Gentiles before a Synod of Apostles and Brethren for it was unpossible that the multitude of believers now growne so numerous could all meete in one house and Act. 21. 18. an Assembly of Apostles and Elders ordaâ—neth Paul to purifie himselfe a Synod of Elders 1 Tim 4. 14. ordained Timothy 9. Argument is from the care of Christ Iesus the head of the Church in the end of excommunication Hence if Christ Jesus take care that one particular congregation be not leavened and sowred with the wicked conversation of one then farre more will he take care that many Churches be not leavened and hath ordained excommunication for many as for one but our brethren grant he hath taken care that one lump leaven not one single congregation 1 Cor. 5. 4. c. I prove the proposition For Christs remedy for remooving of scandals is hence argued to be unperfect if excommunication doe not remove all offences and prevent the leavening of many lumpes for he that careth for the part must far more care for a whole Church and ordaine excommunication of a Church for the edifying therof 1 Cor. 4. 20 21. 2 Cor. 10. 8. That their spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord 1 Cor.
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.
are not professed beleevers having saving faith can be any thing but a non-Church and such as is a non-Spouse a non-body of Christ and a non-covenanted people and so wanting all power of the keyes Quâ—re If the baptisme of that congregation can be valid baptisme not to be repeated I leave to the consideration of the learned Yea if the Minister be an unbeleever by the former grounds it can be no baptisme But some â—ay it is the baptisme of the Church and so valid suppose the Minister be an unbeliever and so want power I answer the whole congregation may be unbelievers as is the Minister and so yet the baptisme comming from the Church cometh from these who want power and cannot be valid 2. Suppose the congregation be a company of believers yet I see not how by their authority they can make the baptizing of a Pastor wanting all power to be valid for then if the Church should baptize by a Turke or a Woman that baptisme should be valid which no man can say 18. What sort of an Assembly was the meeting Act. 15. if it was a lawfull Synod of sundry particular Churches or an extraordinary meeting the practice whereof doth not oblige us If it was a meere Apostolick meeting obliging as Apostolick and if it oblige us as Apostolick how commeth it that the multitude spake and gave their mind in that which obligeth us as Canonick Scripture For that the multitude spake our brethren collect from v. 12. and how is it that Elders and brethren determine in penning Canonick Scripture Except the first be said there be many doubts here of which the way of independency cannot cleare us Q. 19. How commeth it that the Lords Apostles who were to goe through all the Nations of the world to preach the Gospell doe so often assemble together to consult about the common affairs of the Church and discipline as Act. 1. Act. 2. Act. 4. Act. 6. 4. Act. 8. 14. Act. 11. 1. Act. 13. 1 2 3. Act. 15. Act. 21. 18. Act. 20. Paul and the Elders of Ephesus v. 17 18. 1 Tim. 4. 14. it is questioned seeing these assemblies of many pastors from sundry Churches because the Scriptures saith they were occasioned by the present necessity of ordering things belonging to all the particular Churches if they were only temporary extraordinary and Apostolick meetings which oblige not us to the like practise howbeit there be the like cause of meetings in the Church now as errours and corrupt doctrine in many particular Churches as were Act. 15. the murmurings betwixt Churches as Act. 6. a suspitious practise of a pastor which seemeth to be against Gods law as Peters going in to the uncircumcised Act. 11. 20. Whither or not Paul did not some things as an Apostle as writing of Canonick Scripture working of miracles 2. And some things as a Christian as Phil. 3. 9 10 11 12 13. 3. And some things as an ordinary Elder and Pastor of the Church delivering some persons to Satan 1 Cor. 5. 4. and whither or no is Pauls rod and authority and his power of excommunicating whereof he speaketh 1 Cor. 4. 21. 1 Cor. 5. 4. 2 Cor. 10. 8. common to all believers Our brethren must say it is common to all believers 21. If the power of the keyes be given to all believers a question is 1. If Pastors have no other power of the keyes but that same that believers have seeing the ground of Christs gift is one and the same to wit alike interest in Christ and if alike power of preaching baptizing excommunicating be in Paul and all believers 2. Whither or no the calling of Christ and his Church doth not superadde and confâ—rre to him who is made a pastour some farther power of the keyes then hâ— had before he was cloathed with any such calâ—ing seeing to rebuke exhort and comfort one another are dâ—ties of the law of natâ—â—e and would oblige all suppose Christ had given the 〈◊〉 of the keyes to none at all wee see not but our brethren must deny that the calling of the Church giveth any other power of the keyes then the believer had before he was called 3. If there be not a greater power of preaching baptizing and binding and loosing in the believers then in pastors seeing believers give the power to pastours and may take it away againe 22. If six believers be excommunicated and that justly clave non errante yet remaining believers it is questioned if they keepe not still the power of the keys they must keepe that power and yet are no members of Christs visible body 23. I desire a place may be produced in all the old or new Testament where a ministeriall or governing Church is taken for a company of only believers This our brethren teach 24. If all authoritative Assemblies for renewing a covenant with God restoring of the worship of God be 1. A part of the paedagogy of the law of Moses and removed by Christ 2. If these Assemblies in the Churches of Christ now be a species of Judaisme This we deny 25. If believers exercising the most eminent acts of ordaining pastors publick censuring depriving and excommunicating pastors publick convincing gain-sayers be not formally hence made by our brethren over-seers watch-men for the soules of Pastors and guides and so Pastors of Pastors We answer affirmatively they are by the former grounds 26. Let the godly and learned consider if the Patrons of independent Churches are not to give obedience to Decrees and Canons of Synods for the necessity of the matter as a brotherly counsell from Gods Word obligeth in conscience the brother to whom the counsell and advise is given howbeit the tye be not authoritative by the power of the keyes and if in that they are not to conforme CHAP. XIX Doubts against Presbyteriall government discussed as about ruling Elders Deacons Widowes the Kings power in things ecclesiasticall Quest. 1. HOw doth Calvin and Cartwright deny that the Apostle speaketh of ruling Elders Tit. 1. and yet Junius and Beza that both a preaching and ruling Elder are there comprehended So the authour of the survey of discipline Answ. A great question anent the latitude of an haire how doth many Formalists make the Prelate an humane creature and some jure humano and yet Land of Canterbury and D. Hall maketh him jure divino 2. An office may be described two wayes 1. Directly and expressely as the Pastor 1 Tim. 3. 2. Indirectly as many things agreeing to the Deacon as that he hold the mystery of saith in a good conscience â—e be sober grave faithfull in all things c. all which are required in the Doctor and Pastor also Quest. 2. How are the ruling Elders 1 Tim. 3. omitted where the officers are named Paul passeth from the Bishop to the Deacon omitting the ruling Elder So is hee omitted Ephesian 3. 11 Philip. 1. 1. it is like they are not of Christs making who are not in Christs rowle