against the common enemy and for keeping communion as of saints so of churches that those church judicatories were set up not for conscience sake or in obedience to any prescript of Christ but for orders sake as the reverend man wrote to me but a few weeks before he died CHAPTER XXIII The consistency of the right and power of private churches with the magâ—strates power in ordering publick worship proved by the example of the Iewes that they had through all the land particular convocations synagogues or churches called also colledges or schools where the Prophets sons of the Prophets taught especially on the sabbath-day that they were independent from any church-judicatory How synagogues were altered from their first institution and that being converted into Christian churches they retained the same right power and way of government THe most convincing proof for the consistency of the right and power of particular churches with the magistrates power in ordering settling and commanding the publick Divine worship of the Nation is the example of the Commonwealth of the Jewes wherein we are informed of three main things which taken into consideration will clear all doubts about the right and power of particular churches and the magistrates jurisdiction in matters of religion and publick worship 1. That in the Commonwealth of Israel at their first institution there were particular churches throughout all the land near every families dwelling-place called synagogues 2. That these churches were independent both from any of their own of the Priests or Levites judicatories 3. That the while the magistrates power and jurisdiction remained whose entire and undivided over all persons and in all causes and matters particularly in ordering settling and commanding the publick nationall worship of God For the first that such churches were instituted in the land of Canaan we have a very expresse proof Leviticus 23. v. 1 2 and 3. Speak unto the children of Israel c. six dayes shall work be done but the seventh day is the sabbath of rest an holy convocation ye shall do no work therein it is the sabbath of the Lord in all your habitations 1. We have here a convocation and an holy one every sabbath 2. near every families dwelling place at that distance which is called in the Gospell a sabbath-days journey and to travell a sabbath-days journey was equivalent to go as far as the house of convocation which was esteemed a fulfilling of the command Exod. 16. v. 29. abide every man in his place let no man go out of his place on the seventh day For he that went no further then the place of convocation or meeting to attend on the ordinances where they use to tarry from morning to evening obeyed that command let no man go out of his place on the seventh day For how could they keep a sabbath-day holy without an holy convocation and how could that be frequented and they not stir from their own place except by not going out of his place be meant not going any whither but to the place of convocation For they could not keep the sabbath without a holy convocation kept near every ones dwelling Now that this convocation cannot be meant of nationall and festivall meetings is evident for those were appointed but thrice in the year and far from every ones dwelling-place and after the building of the Temple they were celebrated either before the Tabernacle or in the fore-court of the Temple Now had they been bound to repair to Jerusalem every sabbath-day it would have been against the command not to stir from their own places on that day These convocations or synagogues were particular churches assembled in a temple or house called also schools or colledges where Prophets and their sons or scholars dwelt and taught daily but on the sabbath-day they had a more solemn meeting of all those that dwelt near for prayer expounding of the law exhortations conferences the main action being performed by the Rabbies yet the disciples were not silent but sate at their feet asking questions and hearing their answers and resolutions sometimes a new comer in might interpose as we see in the example of Jesus Christ Luke the fourth who being unknown had the priviledge to expound the Scripture and to ask questions and give answers so had St. Paul as we read in the Acts of the Apostles chap. 13 v 15. But to speak more particularly of the place the teachers and the matter and form of worship in those places of meeting or synagogues I say first one may trace the place in the old and new Testament In the 26. Psalm David saith he will blesse the Lord in the congregations and Psal 68. v. 26. blesse ye God in the congregation which doubtlesse ought to be understood of those convocations in temples which are called synagogues Psal 74. v. 8. they have burnt up all the synagogues of God in the land Which texts make it good that such places for an holy convocation were erected through all the land Calvin upon the place saith that the people met in syngogues every sabbath-day to read and expound the Prophets and call upon God by prayer The 29. Psalme v. 9. doth not obscurely mention them for the Psalmist relates that while the works of God sounded by haile rain and thunder the faithfull not only under a shelter of stones and timber but of Gods gracious providence and protection did attend the service of God Of this House and Temple David also speaketh Psal 87. v. 2. The Lord loveth the gates of Sion more then all the dwellings or tents of Iacob The sense of which words paraphrastically I think to be this although God graced with his blessing and presence those convocations which at first were kept under tents in the wildernesse yet he is much more taken with that glorious manifestation of his between the cherubins whereby God setteth out the Lord Jesus Christ Also Salomon Ecclesiastes 5. v. 1. and 2. speaketh of these houses or meetings when he warneth men to be more ready to hear then to speak in the house of God intimating that there was a freedome for the faithfull in those convocations and synagogues more then one to speak and besides that there were no other sacrifices performed in them but those of preaching praying and thanksgiving This house of convocation was also a place to train up disciples called the sons of the Prophets which were indifferently of all tribes and therefore by the way the ministers of the Gospell that do not succeed the Priests and Levites but those Prophets who had neither ordination nor jurisdiction cannot pretend other call or power then such as these sons of the Prophets had So then these house or places for convocation were also colledges and schools and therefore Philo in the life of Moses calleth them both 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 houses of prayer and of learning of which you have mention 2 Kings 6. v. 1. where
not of their own nation and religion then they performed by a confederate discipline what the magistrate was to enjoin and command them The confession of Basilartic 6. hath a notable saying speaking of the duty of magistrates to propagate the Gospell as they are magistrates This duty was enjoyned a magistrate of the gentils how much more ought it to be commended to the Christian magistrate being the Vicar of God If then the heathen magistrate fails of his duty in not propagating the Gospell those that live under him and are better minded ought to supply the part of the magistrate in that particular and yet in doing of that they do but perform their own duty and businesse like as a master leading his horse down the hill his man being out of the way doeth both his own businesse and that of his man and both employeth his own strength in guiding an unruly horse and supplieth that of his man or which expresseth more lively the thing in hand as the Duke of Somerset in training up Prince Edward in the true religion did both do his own duty and that of Henry the 8. his father who being wanting to his duty in shewing his power authority to have his son brought up in the true Protestant religion Somerset Cranmer and others were not to be wanting to theirs and yet were not to act by a power distinct from the power of the King for if so then when ever a power is exercised rightly and yet against an unlawfull command of a superiour we had need to give a new name to that power and there would be as many kinds of power as duties to be performed Having done with Origen I come to Ambrose whom I was to alledge upon the 1. of Timothy relating to the places of St. Paul and Origen and to the power of magistracy assumed by churches There he teacheth the custom both of the synagogues of Christian churches of having elders that composed in stead of the magistrate controversies arising amongst church-members saying that first synagogues and afterwards churches had elders without whose advice there was nothing done in the church and wondreth that in his time which was about the year 370 such men were out of use which he thinks came by the negligence or rather pride of some Doctors who thought it was beneath them to be esteemed the lesse in the church as S. Paul saith of them while they are to decide controversies not as judges invested with a coercive power but only as arbitrators and umpires But the true cause why these elders ceased which he wisheth had been still continued he mentioneth not but the true cause is when the magistrate that was for above 300. years heathenish became Christian these arbitrators and elders ceased in great part at least they were more out of churches then in churches and in stead of them the Emperours created judges which yet retained much of the nature of those whereof Origen and Ambrose speak and which were invested as most of the Lawyers affirm as Cujacius for one with them my Rev. Father in his book de Monarchia temporal and in his Hyperaspistes lib. 3. cap. 15. not with a coercive jurisdiction but as they term it audience hence comes the Bishops and Deanes and Chapters Audit However such arbitrators sate in a court and were chosen by the Christian Emperours and were not members as before ever since St. Pauls time chosen by the members of that church where the contention did arise betwixt brother and brother and at that time it was not thought a violation of the command of St. Paul if a wronged brother had gone to secular judges because they were not infidels but Christians faithfull and saints as the Apostle termeth them 1 Cor. 6. 2. therefore it was free for any lay-man or other either to repair to the Audit of the Bishop or to the secular judge Which custome Ambrose doth not like so well as when Jewes and Christians were obliged by the law of their discipline to have controversies decided by their own elders Certain it is that these elders though they were not as Ambrose wisht they had been in his time arbitrators in those churches whereof they were members kept that office a long time under Christian Emperours but with more authority and dignity because they were countenanced by the Emperours their masters We have them mentioned pretty late even in Theodosius Honorius and Arcadius time for in one law they enjoin that ordinary judges should decide the contentions between Jewes and Gentils not their own elders or arbitrators Thereupon it is worth considering that that title which in the Theodosian Code is de Episcopali audientia in the Justinian Code is de Episcopali judicio a main proof that these judgements in episcopall courts had much still of the nature of those references in churches under the heathen Emperours These episcopall courts were set up by the Emperours to favour the clergy that they might be judged in prima instantia by their own judges for if either party had not stood to the sentence of that court they might appeal to the secular court The words of the 28. Canon of the councell of Chalcedon are very expresse If a clerk hath a matter against a clerk let him not leave his Bishop and appeal to secular judgement but let the cause first be judged by his own Bishop Now this episcopall court being in substance the same power with that of the elders mentioned by Ambrose which were first in synagogues and then in Christian churches under the heathen Emperours one may plainly see how weak and sandy the grounds are upon which ecclesiasticall jurisdiction and the power of the keyes and of binding and loosing in the hands of church-officers is built which government say they is the government of Christ and is to be managed by those church-officers by a warrant from Christ the mediatour For Constantine erecting an episcopall court and empowering the judges of the court to decide causes and controversies did not intend to give them a commission of binding and loosing or to put into their hands the keyes of Heaven so delegating a power which was none of his to give but only granted what was in his own power namely that some magistrates under him should set all things in order in the church and among the clergy Besides he intended to set up that magistracy which was through the necessity of the times assumed first by synagogues then by Christian churches under persecution for sure Constantine did not place the power of the keyes of binding and loosing in the exercise of that power managed either by the elders which Ambrose mentioneth or by the episcopall court erected by himself Neither Constantine nor any of his successours did ever conceive that churches were to be governed by any other power then their own as all other societies of men were In this episcopall court any cause between man and man
and 30. chapters of 2 Chronic. for the magistrates power of calling synods is of the same stamp It is true chap. 29. v. 4. Ezechiah gathered Priests Levites together but it was to make an exhoâ—tation to them not that they should congregate into a synod invested with judiciall authority I think that none ever yet dream'd of it that synods in the old Testament could be proved out of that place The last place Prov. 11. v. 14. speaketh of counsellors in the multitude of which there is safety but not a word there of calling of them nor that those who were called were Priests and Levites but rather any other One would almost think that they had a mind to weaken a good cause and make invalid the power of the magistrate by alledging places that make nothing for it but however they will have them to passe for valid proofs that magistrates by divine right are to call synods But to the matter I am quite of another mind then our brethren the Scots are and I desire to be judged by any other then by them whether there be any spark of reason or truth in their saying Is it not more like that in a well-constituted church things must run their wonted channel that the power of calling synods belongeth to the magistrate but the church being in a troubled condition then that ministers yea any good man should contribute his helping hand toward the reforming of the church whether by way of synods or otherwise without expecting orders from the magistrate In turbata ecclesia omnis homo miles est Christianus minister But who sees not but the drift of our brothers the Scots is to constitute a jurisdiction independent from that of the magistrate The third section or article of the 31. chapt of the confession needeth a comment to make it agree with the second it belongeth to synods and councels ministerially to determine controversies of faith and cases of conscience to set down rules and directions for better ordering of the publick worship of God and government of his church to receive complaints in cases of mal-administration and authoritatively to determine the same which decrees and determinations if consonant to the word of God are to be received with reverence and submission not only for their agreement with the word but also for the power whereby they are made as being an ordinance of God appointed thereunto in his word First they do not define what synods are here meant whether convocated by the magistrate or by private churches or even convocated by the ministers themselves If by the magistrate how can a company of men called to advise him make constitutions valid except they be first submitted to the judgement and approbation of him by whose authority they were assembled The like judgement may we make of the decrees of syâ—ods convocated by the common consent of private churches If the ministers assemble of their own accord were they so many Apostles they must have some magistracy to give vigour of law obliging to obedience either actively or passively else their canons would have no jurisdiction but over them they could overcome by perswasion The fourth article or section is all synods or councels since the Apostles time whether generall or particular may erre and many have erred therefore they are not to be made the rule of faith or practise but to be used as an help in both A synod is no rule but to him that is willing to make it a rule All the synods power and authority is only so much as either the magistrates will is or a conscience inlightened or convinced is perswaded to yield unto I know no middle way to create authority There is a rare saying of Festus Hommius disp 18. thes 2. de concil authoritate the foundation of all synodicall authority is an agreement with the divine truth and ordinance whereof we must be first evidently and clearly made certain before the synod get any authority with us So that synods are of authority when men and churches are clearly convinced of the equity reasonablenesse and truth of their decisions I am not of the opinion of Gregory Nazianzen and Bazil who condemned all synods generally for I believe they are of very good use and necessarily to be had so that the members be not invested with any judiciall power independent from the magistrate or from particular churches whose decisions be counsells and advices given to them both not lawes otherwise I think little or no good is to be expected from them and that they are not a way to decide controversies 1. Judges in an assembly never so upright must be indifferent to persons and causes but so cannot ministers be in a synod for a synod made up of orthodox Divines is no competent judge of Arminians Therefore it is no marvell if the councell of Trent did condemn the Lutherans in the first Session before they ever heard them or that a late synod at Charenton prepossessed against independent churches in England did as it were anathematize them though none of the members of that synod being 80. in number had hardly seen the face or writings of any of them 2. It seemeth to be against all courses and proceedings of courts either of law or chancery that both plaintiffs and defendants should sit as judges in one judicatory to determine their own cause 3. If there be but one party either the defendent or plaintiff sitting voting no doubt but he will cast his adversary out of the court therefore there being no other then Protestants sitting and voting in the synod of Dordrecht the Arminians could not chuse but loose their cause besides that it is no lesse unreasonable that one party should submit to the judgement of his adverse party 4. It seemeth neither just nor reasonable that churches and men should submit to the major part of the members stating and concluding of any matter of religion rather then to the weight of the reasons of the minor part dissenting Should in synods alwaies the major number of votes carry it in a generall councill made up of Papists Lutherans Calvinists no doubt but that party that is most numerous though it carrieth it but by one vote would give religion and faith to all the rest therefore the late long Parliament did wisely decline to adhere rather to the major part of the members in the assembly who had voted for a presbyterian government reserving to themselves the liberty to weigh the reasons of both not to number the persons Hence we may gather how unreasonable it is in matters of faith and religion that that which is not the act of all should be reputed as done by all when as it may fall out that the major part hath out-voted the minor but by one suffrage for usually all collections syntagmes of confessions of faith canons and decrees go currant and are published to the world as if all the members had consented to them with a
many constitutions about regulating the power of fathers masters and husbands and yet allowing them their authority at home are an argument that their fatherly power is consistent with their subordination to the magistrate 4. There be as I shewed above two kinds of acts to be performed in a church one as they are church-members the other as they are a society that for their government must assume some part of jurisdiction of the same nature with the magistrates power In the managing of the acts of the first kind there is no subordination of the church to the magistrate but only in the second for preaching hearing the word of God administring the sacraments walking holily submitting one to another are no acts of power subordinate to the magistrate and under that consideration I will grant the right of churches not to depend on the magistrate but as these acts in a church-way cannot be exercised without a power of magistracy assumed in this regard a church may be said to be subordinate to the fountain of magistracy For it is with these two kinds of acts in subordination to God and the magistrate as with the body and the soul For none doubts but the faculty and gifts of reasoning apprehending truth loving God and our neighbour believing in Christ are no acts subordinate to the power of the magistrate but as reasoning faith love must be supposed resident in the body of man and that the man in doing acts subordinate to the magistrates power as going ordering commanding and obeying doth carry along his reason faith and love in like manner as it is not possible to consider a man performing the acts of reason faith and love and not being the while subordinate to the power of the magistrate so a church even performing those acts of church-members as such in as much as the second kind of acts that are subordinate to the magistrate must be joyned with the first cannot be considered without it be subordinate to the magistrate 5. If the power of churches were not subordinate to the magistrate many inconveniences would follow 1. That some churches gathered by the magistrate and his acts of appointing time place and stipends should not be subordinate to him 2. Or if he should gather none and besides appoint no publick worship to take place in all parts of his dominions but leave that wholly to the will of those that congregate of their own accord this I say would in a very short time breed irreligion or heathenisme in most places and most tanks of men for then it must be conceived that not one of 20. would congregate of themselves that the 19. parts not being called upon nor any way invited by publick ordinances set up in all places of mens abode atheisme or neglect of all religion would soon ensue in most parts And a persecuting magistrate as in the primitive church were ten times rather to be wished then one carelesse and neglecting to set up ordinances for by one of these two wayes either by persecution or by countenancing and commanding the worship of God the magistrate causeth religion to flourish by doing neither one nor the other he takes the way to abolish it as Julian the apostate was about to do if God had not the sooner cut him off 6. But suppose it be granted on all sides that the magistrate is bound to do what King Edward did or Queen Elizabeth to banish popery to set up protestantisme and an orthodox ministery in all parishes throughout England which acts cannot be performed by a few particular churches with all their church power sure it must be also granted that all those acts of a magistrate in ordering affairs of religion are in his disposall and depending on him 7. Since then the magistrate must have the ordering of those affairs of religion which he himself hath constituted if he should not likewise be the supreme governour of those churches which he hath not erected but were gathered by the members of churches of their own accord there could not but a great confusion arise in mens minds as well as in the state it being no small businesse to distinguish the power of the churches that are subordinate to the magistrate and the power of those churches that are not From reason I descend to the authority of the rever brethren both in old and new England dissenting from the presbyterians In old England the reverend pious Jeremie Burroughs will be in stead of all the rest of his brethren for in the eleventh chapter of his Irenicum he professeth to deliver not only his own judgement but also that of his brethren with whom he had occasion to converse Whoever shall peruse his book throughout specially the fifth chapter will find that he attributeth as much power to the magistrate over churches as any of the opposites to the presbyterian brethren Which power of the magistrate while he asserteth he never conceives it should overthrow his other positions namely in the seventh chapter concerning the right and power of churches or that his stating the right liberty and power of churches could not consist with the power of the magistrate over them Now he is very expresse in the said chapter for the power of the magistrate in sacred things Pag. 21. he saith that magistrates in their magistracy are specially to ayme at the promoting of the Kingdom of Jesus Christ the mediatour and there and throughout that long chapter you have these conclusions 1. That the church and Commonwealth of Israel were mixed in one that there is no reason it should be now otherwise 2. That the power of the magistrate is alike in the times of the old and new Testament and were it so that nothing were set down of it in the new Testament that it is enough it is a law not only granted to the Israelites but also of the light given to the very heathens whose power of magistracy was to govern religion as well as other things 3. That it is most unreasonable that a magistrate turning either from the heathenish or Jewish religion should enjoy lesse power in matters of religion then he had when he was a Jew or heathen An infidel magistrate saith he converted to Christian religion is thereby better inabled to perform the duty of his place then before but he had the same authority before 4. He holds that the magistrate hath a soveraign judgement of his commands though unskilfull in the things commanded A magistrate that is not skilfull in physick or in navigation yet he may judge physitians and mariners if they wrong others in their way 5. He asserts largely the power of the magistrate in matters of religion by the example of the Kings of Judah and Israel yea of the Kings of Niniveh and of Artaxerxes interposing his power in matters of religion for which Ezra blesseth God whosoever will not do the law of thy God and the law of the King let judgement be executed upon
magistrate Since then an irreconcilable brother ought to be esteemed as an heathen is it any whit against Christian charity for the party offended to sue him before an heathen magistrate This exposition is very naturall having nothing strained but most like to be the sense of Jesus Christ As for the 18. verse concerning binding and loosing we have examined what strength can be in it for excommunication not discussing whether it may not be as well applyed as Chrysostome Austin Theophy lact thought to every private man as to the operation of the word in the ministry or whether this verse hath any coherence with the precedent discourse of Christ Neither will I enter into the controversy whether Iudas was partaker of the Eucharist for it is not much materiall to know it all agreeing he was not removed by any excommunication or casting out and that he did eat of the passeover which eating was equivalent to that of the Lords Supper Now lest more heads of objection of this Hydra of excommunication should arise if all should not be cut off we must examine what strength the example of the incestuous person 1 Cor. 5. hath for excommunication But this extract being already too much lengthened and the drift of it all along being to prove that the casting out of any member of a church being the same with the putting out of the synagogue is no act of ministry or of church members as such but an act of magistracy I need not to speak of it at all besides that these 3. or 4. observations will take off all hold for excommunication 1. It is granted by Calvin Beza Walaeus Apollonius Mr. Rutherfurd and Mr. Gillespie that St. Paul mentioneth but one censure inflicted upon the incestuous person viz. excommunication and that the delivering of him to Satan was the casting him out of the congregation 2. Now it being evident that this delivering to Satan was no excommunication but a judgement quite of another nature it is likewise equally evident that the putting away of the incestuous person being the same with delivering him to Satan was no excommunication 3. This casting out of the incestuous person makes nothing for that excommunication which is only a putting a man by from partaking of the Eucharist for though examples may be brought out of the Scriptures of men cast out or kept from the temple or synagogues yet there is no one example nor any reason for it that a man admitted to enter either into the temple or the synagogue should not be partaker of the same mystery or ordinances celebrated with the rest 4. Calvin thinks that St. Paul by these words put away the wicked from among you did not point particularly at the incestuous person but rather at the devil or the wicked one indefinitely as the plotter and contriver of all evil which St. Paul saith was put away from them by that delivery of the incestuous person to Satan 5. Wendelinus in his common places of excommunication saith that the putting away of the incestuous person from among the Cormthians was not only an exclusion from godly converse as praying hearing and receiving the â—ucharist with him but also from civil commerce in eating trading and talking with him Which exposition is the most naturall I know and proveth that this putting away was no act of ecclesiasticall power distinct from the civil for alwayes every court punisheth according to its kind a court of Exchequer doth not summon men for causes that are of the cognizance of a court-Martiall so neither should an ecclesiasticall court impose penalties that are to be inflicted by a civil court such as is the depriving of a man of civil liberty 6. Learned Mr. Lightfoot saith that all the power of the church of Corinth in delivering the incestuous person to Satan was by the strength of Paul's spirit that went along with them so that the people of Corinth acting by no power of their own no church ought to do as that church then did except they be sure of the assistance of the same spirit Next in order followeth the necessity of self-examination 1 Cor. 11. made an argument to prove that ministers must examine every communicant and judge of mens worthinesse For Beza Walaeus Mr. Rutherfurd and Mr. Gillespie thus argue If it be the duty of every man to examine himself much more is it the duty of a minister to examine him Never was an argument more inconsequent and lesse concludent by which the Papists may as well prove auricular confession If men must confesse their sins to God much more must ministers require every man to confesse their sins to them For quite on the contrary from this Text these or the like inferences should be drawn If all men must examine themselves much more ought ministers to examine themselves or this If every church-member ought to examine himself then ought the ministers to exhort them to that self-examination or this If every church-member ought to prepare himself for the word and Sacraments then ministers are not to prepare them otherwise then by shewing them and giving them directions for their due preparation leaving every one to do the work himself CHAPTER XXIX That excommunication is contrary to common sexse and reason THere being no Scripture for excommunication in the next place we shall see that there is no reason for it I do not deny but that a private church as well as any other society by vertue of a power of magistracy seated in them may expell a member out of their society but that this is done in obedience to a pâ—sitive command of Christ by a jurisdiction independent from the magistrate and by warrant from those words whatsoever ye shall bind on carth c. I conceive to be absurd impertinent a yoke laid upon Christians necks which is none of Christs as if whomsoever pastors do bind or excommunicate on earth Christ also doth bind or excommunicate in Heaven and whomsoever they absolve or loose on earth Christ also doth absolve and loose in Heaven 1. Since the words Matth. 16. and 18. be the very same words it is absurd to understand them in the 16. chapter absolutely but in the 18. conditionally Now they would have the words Matth. 16. whatsoever ye shall bind c. spoken to Peter to be without condition and absolute that God should approve of and ratify whatever opening loosing and binding should ensue upon Peters preaching and converting of souls for Calvin Pareus and most Divines will not have in that place any thing understood of church-censures but only of the operation of the word by the preaching of Peter But though it were granted that in the 18. chapter Christ spake of church censures by excommunication what reason is there why they should not be understood as absolute and without condition in one chapter as well as in the other For in the 18. chapter they put a condition to the absolute words of Christ saying that
naturall power right liberty and prudence in ordering all kinds of affairs societies and families are no otherwise distinct in kind or species then a yard that measured cloth differs from that which measured searge as a yard is alike appliable to silk and thred and the same hammer will knock in an iron naile and a wooden pin so the same power and prudence governeth the church and a colledge It is also observable that a man being at once a member of a family hall city Parliament church doth not act alwaies according to the quality of his relation function and place publick or private not acting as a physitian father or husband but as a judge and not as a church-member but as a free member of a society Thus a member of a colledge of physitians joyneth in consultation with his brethren in a case of physick as a physitian but in making lawes regulating the practise of physick and the apothecaries entrenching upon the physitians he doth not act as a physitian but as a judge and as a person invested with judiciall power from the state The same physitian in a Parliament upon the matter and question of physick and of physitians to be regulated may speak pertinently of his art as a physitian but doth not vote give his consent to the making of a law about physick as a physitian but as a judge of the land Likewise to be sure by what right pastors and people act in the church the acts and actions of a pastor or church-member are to be considered either as acts of pastors and of church-members or as they are acts of rulers and members of a society The act of a pastor as pastor is to discharge all ministeriall function commanded in the revealed word and not declared by any dictate of nature In those acts I see no right of jurisdiction but over the inward man when by the power of the word the sinner is brought to the obedience of the crosse of Christ The acts of church-members as such are either in relation to the pastor or of one member to another In relation to the pastor the acts are to submit to the minister ruling them and dispensing unto them the word They may have that liberty to try his doctrine and to do as they of Beroea who searched the Scriptures to know whether it was so as St. Paul preached unto them this is also an act of every faithfull member of the church not to assent to any doctrine because it hath been assented unto by the major part of suffrages but in things that concern order and discipline to yield to the constitutions agreed on by the major part of the assembly so that by them the bond of charity and the truth of the doctrine be not violated and perverted The acts of church-members relating one to another are to bear one anothers burthens to forgive and edifie one another to preferre another before himself The acts of pastors and church-members as they are endowed with a power common to all other societies are 1. to do all things orderly 2. to make a discipline sutable to time and place since there is not in the Scripture a positive precept concerning the same 3. to oblige every member to the lawes of the discipline voted by the major part of the members 4. to admit and expell the members which by the major part are thought fit so to be Many other acts are performed by the same members not as church-members as to appeal to a superiour tribunall as magistracy or synod in case of wrong sustained for they do not oppose a just defence to wrong by any other right then a member of any society should do Thus an assembly of Christians meeting in a church way being persecuted or assaulted in their temple by rude and wicked men doth not oppose a just defence by weapons or otherwise as church-members but as men invested with naturall power against an unjust violence In short ministers and people have many actâ—ngs within the sphear of Christian duties which are not proper to them as Christians and members of churches being like in that to a physitian who doth not build as a physitian or to a counsellor of State carrying a letter to a friend who acts then the part of a letter-bearer thus a father hath a power over his son by a naturall paternall right but he doth instruct him in a Gospell way by a paternall Christian right and duty grounded upon a positive precept of the Scripture thus Queen Mary of England established a religion by a naturall right power and duty annexed to all soveraignty to order sacred things with a soveraign authority but Queen Elizabeth did overthrow the false worship and did set up Protestant religion not only by the same right that Queen Mary had but also by a positive right as principall church-member as Ezechiah Iosiah c. appointed by God to be heads and nursing fathers and mothers of the churches The same things lawes and constitutions that are of divine right are also of humane right and likewise the things that are of humane right in a good sense may be said to be of divine right Things are said to be of divine or humane right either because the matter of right is concerning Gods worship or humane policie or because God or man is the author of them Thus the lawes of the Iewes regulating their Commonwealth are said both to be of divine and humane right divine because God is the authour of them humane because they order all affairs about mine and thine right and wrong and betwixt man and man Likewise many things have been instituted with great wisedome by magistrates and councils which may well be said to be both of divine and humane right Divine because they further the purity of worship and power of godlinesse humane because they were instituted by men and may suffer alteration and reformation So things that are every way of divine right both for the matter and institution as the eating of the passeover and the observation of the Sabbath may be said to be of humane right because commanded and enjoyned by humane authority The very calling of synods which they say is of divine institution both for their institution which is Apostolick and for the matter that is handled in them none but a papist did yet deny to be the Emperours and magistrates right Thus fasting prayer publick humiliation though duties to be performed by divine right and precept are also of humane right as commanded and ordered by the magistrate in a publick way Thus it was the good Kings of Iuda's right and none can blame them for it to command fasting and prayers Lastly things that are every way of humane right and made by man and have for their object the regulating of humane affairs as are the lawes concerning conduit-pipes buildings forests chases c. may conveniently be said to be of divine right because by divine right they
and the civil and therefore no need to make two of one that ecclesiasticall presbyterian jurisdiction is bounded by the same limits as is the civill jurisdiction which is against the nature of all other jurisdictions different from the magistrates power though subordinate to it as is the maritall and paternall powers none doubting but a father in England hath a power over his son in France and that a wife is subject to her husband however distant from him Now it is granted by all that the jurisdiction of churches combined and that of synods never went beyond the magistrates jurisdiction that the churches of Persia Aethiopia and India were not tyed to observe the deciees of the first councill of Nice nor the reformed churches of France those of the synod of Dordrecht neither the church of Barwick to submit to the orders of the generall assembly of Scotland and yet some do not stick to maintain that a man excommunicated in Scotland is also bound by the same sentence in France or Holland because if we may believe them it is reasonable that the sphear of activity within which excommunication acteth should as much spread down wards as upwards and that since a man bound by excommunication at Edenburgh is also tyed in heaven good reason he should be bound and fast in any part of the earth 4. This also which all churches classes and synods assume makes their jurisdiction wholly concurring in nature and property with the jurisdiction of the magistrate which is that as in all civil and politicall assemblies the major and the stronger part in votes not in reasons doth carry it so decrees and canons because the major part have voted them to be such are therefore receivable by inferiour ecclesiasticall judicatories as they call them whereas since they pretend that ecclesiasticall jurisdiction is of a quite different nature from that of the magistrate it were most convenient that it should not be like it in this main particular but that private men or churches should adhere to truth not to multitude not numbring the votes but weighing the reasons And indeed this was well considered by the Parliament in their ordinance for calling of the assembly for though they took upon themselves that power of legislation jurisdiction whose votes are not weighed but numbred and which cannot be otherwise exercised in this world yet they very prudently conceived that such a jurisdiction could not be assumed by churchmen as such in matters of religion for they never intended that whatsoever should be transacted or defined by the major part of the ministers of the Assembly should be received for a canon and an ecclesiasticall law that should stand in force since they expressely enjoyn in the rules which they prescribed to the assembly 1. that their decisions and definitions should be presented to the Parliament not under the name of law made to them but of humble advice 2. that no regard should be had to the number of the persons dissenting or assenting but that each party should subscribe their names to their opinion 5. Another argument to prove that the ecclesiasticall and the magistrates power are not coordinate but that the ecclesiasticall is subordinate to that of the magistrate and that they both are of the same nature is that both of them magistrate and ministers challenge not only the duty of messengers from God in delivering to the people the lawes of God but also as judges exercise power about making new lawes which do oblige to obedience for conscience sake for the assemblies presbyteries of Scotland do not only presse obedience to the lawes expressely set down in Scripture but also to their canons decrees and constitutions 6. Another argument to prove the identity of the powers ecclesiasticall and civil is that both are conversant about lawes and constitutions that are made by men such are most of the canons and constitutions of synods and ecclesiasticall assemblies which are no more expresse Scripture then the Instinian Code and therefore it is altogether needlesse to constitute two coordinate humane legislative powers 7. But suppose that all the decrees canons constitutions of presbyteries and church-assemblies were word of God and divine precepts this very thing that they are divine constitutions and that one jurisdiction or other must be conceived enjoyning by a sanction and commanding obedience to them argueth that ecclesiasticall and civil jurisdiction are but one For what can the ecclesiasticall jurisdiction do more then to give a sanction to the lawes of God which thing the magistrate is to do If he must give a sanction to the decalogue why not to all other precepts which are equally of divine institution 8. It is absurd to put under the Gospell a difference betwixt the jurisdiction or law of Christ and the law of God the universall Monarch as Mr. Gillespie speaketh p. 261. for there is no precept of the decalogue there is nothing good holy honest and of good report but is the law of Jesus Christ and therefore since the magistrate cannot be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a minister of God as St. Paul calls him but he must be a minister of Jesus Christ and that he cannot be keeper of the decalogue and of the law of God under Moses administration but he must be also the keeper of the law of Christ what need to constitute two coordinate judiciall powers each of them being pari gradu subordinate to Jesus Christ Lastly if the Kingdom of Jesus Christ is not of this world and that this Kingdom as our brethren tell us is the presbyterian government then this Kingdom must have a jurisdiction and lawes quite different from the Kingdom and jurisdiction of this world which yet doth not prove true by the parallels we have made of both jurisdictions Mr. Gillespie a member of that Assembly pag. 85. endeavoureth to shew what a wide difference there is betwixt these two jurisdictions in their nature causes objects adjuncts but I might upon the same grounds maintain the like wide difference betwixt martiall navall testamentall paternall maritall and civil power all differing and yet subordinate to that of the magistrate I might also attribute to each society its peculiar power placing in a colledge of physicians a medicall power subordinate to God the God of bodies health and outward safety as the civil is subordinate to the God of the Universe and the ecclesiasticall to Christ For if the God of nations hath instituted the civil power and the God of saints the ecclesiasticall as Mr. Gillespie speaketh what hinders but that the God of nature hath instituted the medicall power And if morall good be the object of the civil power and spirituall good of the spirituall power why may not bodily health be the object of the medicall power CHAPTER VI. Whether Iesus Christ hath appointed a jurisdiction called ecclesiasticall as King and head of his Church Of the nature of the Kingdom of God In what sense the magistrate is
Christian religion his aime is and ought to be not so much peace and quietnesse as godlinesse and honesty Must a magistrate hide his power which is his talent in a napkin were not Adam Abraham Isaac and Jacob by their paternall magistraticall power tyed to promote Gods true worship It is very strange doctrine when he saith p. 189. that the end of an ecclesiasticall sentence as delivering to Satan is that men may learn not to blaspheme but the end of the magistrate in punishing blasphemers is only that justice may be done according to law and that peace and good order may be maintained A rank papist could hardly speak more crudely Ought not this to be the end of the magistrate in punishing transgressours if it be not by death that they may change their lives and be better then they were Were not reformation of life the end for which a blasphemer is punished but only peace and quietnesse the magistrate might as well let him go unpunished if he can but obtain his end which as Mr. Gillespie saith is peace and quietnesse which hath been often obtained when no blasphemers were punished It is observed that in Augustus time there was for 12. years through all the Roman Empire peace and quietnesse though the life of all his subjects were a perpetuall blasphemy against God But I pray how can Christs church be ruled by magistracy except it be in the name of Christ promote the interest of Jesus Christ and ayme at the glory of Jesus Christ When he saith that the magiâ—…rate of England is not a member of the church as a magistrate but as a Christian and that he governs not as a Christian but as a magistrate I confesse I understand not why I may not say as well that a pastor is not a member of a church as pastor but as a Christian for there be in the church as well Balaams and false teachers as persecuting magistrates Why may I not say that a father is not to teach the fear of the Lord to his son as a father but as a Christian for the magistrate is not to rule and order affairs of the church as a Christian but as a magistrate otherwise a Christian without the office of magistracy might do the like How can the duty about the exercise of a power be divided from the power it self as that a magistrate should be by his duty of magistracy keeper of both tables and yet should have no power given from God for the keeping of these tables But which is most al surd how can the keeping of the two tables under the Gospell be separate from the keeping of the doctrine and discipline of the Gospell as that the magistrate should be keeper of one and the pastors of the other If the magistrate under the old Testament was keeper not only of the decalogue but also of the covenant of grace by which the people of Israel was distinguished from the rest of the world what hinders but he should be under the Gospells administration a keeper both of the law and Gospell except Mr. Gillespie say that the priests were keepers of the law whereof David speaketh in the 19 Psalme and the magistrate keeper of the two tables given in mount Sinai As for the magistrates being a member of the church and therefore no head or governour of the church I believe he is as much lyable to submit and stoup his will to the commands of Christ in the ministery as the lowest in the congregation he must acknowledge his minister the better man as honoured with the highest function that ever was and which the Son of God our Lord Jesus Christ took upon him But were all the ministers of the Gospell as many Jesus Christs I would yield unto them all alike jurisdiction over the wills and minds of men but deny them an externall coercive judiciall power over their bodies estates liberties c. CHAPTER VIII Mr. Gillespies manifest contradictions in stating the magistrates power in matters of Religion BUt I will plainly shew that in this matter Mr. Gillespie doth manifestly contradict himself and stands on no sure ground for what he hath taken from the magistrate in some places in others he restoreth to him In some he grants as much to the magistrate as if he had been another Erastus in others he gives him nothing at all and makes ecclesiasticall and civil jurisdiction to be res disparatae or things as much different as wisedome and a candlestick being of severall classes and predicaments so that one hath nothing to meddle with the other Thus pag. 253. these be his words We deny that in a well-constituted church it is agreeable to the will of Christ for the magistrate either to receive appeals properly so called from the sentence of an ecclesiasticall court or to receive complaints exhibited against that sentence by that party censured so as by his authority upon such a complaint to nullify or make void the ecclesiasticall censure This indeed is imperium in imperio a jurisdiction within a jurisdiction and independent from it Mr. Gillespie would not have a man to appeal from the presbytery or synod or make complaints to the magistrate nor a magistrate to receive the complaints but he is contented that the magistrate should act the part of an executioner in compelling the party censured to submit to the church-censure which indeed is a most ungodly and tyrannicall proceeding like that of Pope Julius the 2. who would have King Lewis the 12. to execute the sentence against the Waldenses by destroying them by the sword and burning their cities without taking any cognizance of the fact And since all church-censures do signify just nothing without a power of magistracy giving its sanction for effectuating the sentence of the church here if we believe Mr. Gillespie the pastor is like the intellect and the magistrate the will this following with a blind obedience the dictates of that But who shall judge when the church is well constituted that then the magistrate may not receive complaints and appeals and may not sometimes wrong proceedings und unjust sentences passe in a well-constituted church so long as a church never so pure is not infallible and on the contrary may not an unsettled church be very just in their censures why then should it be more agreeable to the will of Christ to receive appeals from a just sentence in an unsettled church then from an unjust one when the church is well-constituted But when was ever such a well-constituted church unerring in their judgement as all appeals from their judgement to another should be unlawfull was or is that church well-constituted that either ever clashed with magistracy or was divided in it self as now it is Now we shall find Mr. Gillespie playing two other parts under the one he ascribeth to the magistrate as much as ever they challenged under the other vizard he chalks a middle way of magistrates power in sacred things
church-officers of the Gospell a certain platform of government and that it is arbitrary and of humane institution and therefore not to be administred by a power distinct from the humane THe fourth and the last thing to enquire into in this 30. chapter of the Confession of the Rever Assembly is the rule and modell that church-officers are to govern by which were it granted to be expressely set down in the Scripture would be no stronger an argument for a government placed in church-officers distinct from the magistrate under the new Testament then it was under the old when there was a very exact form of church-government and yet no way distinct from that of the magistrate Which makes me much wonder that in that church loaden with such an infinite multitude of rites ceremonies constitutions lawes whereof the Christian church is wholly freed there was no distinction of government and jurisdiction from that of the magistrate and yet that there should be such a distinction of jurisdiction in the Christian church which hath no modell nor scheme of discipline as the Jewish church had but such as in prudence is assumed by the joint consent of pastor and people That there was no platform of government given to church-officers by Jesus Christ or the Apostles may be proved by a cloud of witnesses I will content my self with a few Camero in his book of the church p. 369. saith that the Christian church hath no need of certain lawes seeing it is made up of men of ripe years not of children under pedagogy and a little lower non est ecclesia certis circumstantiis alligata the church is not tyed to certain circumstances The like saith his scholar and great admirer Amyraldus namely in his Synopsis Salmuriensis cap. 30. of the ecclesiasticall power § 4 5 6. So speaketh Capellus in his Thes Theol. parte priore de potestate regimine ecclesiae thes 40. where we have these words in tantum valet ecclesia constitutio definitio quantum est ratione subnixa The constitution and definition of the church is so far valid as it is grounded upon reason therefore not upon the Scripture Much more large and as expresse he is in the third part of Thes Salmurienses de vario ecclesiae regimine thes 16. and 17. So is Mestrezat no lesse expresse in his book of the church lib. 3. cap. 12. God hath defined nothing in the externall order and polity about the worship of God but only hath prescribed that all things should be done decently and orderly But were there any platform of government judicious and learned Mr. Lightfoot the most able and unpartiall judge in this matter will tell us Harmon on the 1 Cor. 5. that it was according to that of the Jewish synagogues which yet was assumed by a voluntary and prudentiall choice not upon any speciall command from Christ or his Apostles Which notion of his which was also mine before we could or had conferred one anothers notes doth lead us into many considerations 1. It doth decide the argument of the precedent chapter proving that the power of the keyes and of binding and loosing is committed not to all church-officers indifferently but to the ministers of the Gospell only For if it be reasonable as the Rever Assembly saith in their humble advice to the Parliament and as we have examined before that the Christian church should have their elders as well as that of the Iews it is alike reasonable as Mr. Lightfoot saith that the nature and extent of both jurisdictions and powers should be the same and that if the elders among the Jewes did not act in synagogues as men invested with the power of the keyes and of binding and loosing but with the power of magistracy the like should be conceived of the elders of the new Testament That the elders of the church of the Jewes had power of magistracy it is evident by their acts as fining imprisoning casting out whipping and the like and in that the elders of the new Testament are most unlike those of the old and therefore the Jewish elders could be no president to the Christian elders not de facto because these never exercise that power nor de jure for the Rever Assembly will acknowledge that the elders of the old Testament had a right to those acts of magistracy which they performed in their synagogues but will deny that now the Christian elders have such a right although for my part I know no inconvenience to assert that the elders in both times had alike right to all mentioned acts of magistracy though for some reasons it is not found so expedient under the Gospell by the presbyterian churches 2. We may well conceive that if the act of putting out of the church was an act of magistracy under the old Testament there is no reason it should be now otherwise 3. That likewise if the church of the Jewes never knew nor exercised in their synagogues a jurisdiction distinct from that of the magistrate neither now are the Christian synagogues or churches to know or exercise such a distinct power 4. But strange it is that since God giving such very exact lawes as he did to the church of the Jewes yet he gave not to that church a jurisdiction distinct from that of the magistrate it should now be quite otherwise and that God that gave no expresse lawes discipline or rule for the government of the Christian church yet should invest them with a power distinct from that of the magistrate 5. It seems altogether incongruous that that power and jurisdiction as is the ecclesiasticall which mainly is conversant about lawes constitutions and rules which are instituted and ratified by men and do not oblige either actively or passively but as they are commanded by men I say it is altogether unreasonable that such a jurisdiction should not be placed in the magistrate he being the fountain and spring from whom all humane jurisdictions lawes and constitutions do flow And it is so much the more absurd and unreasonable that constitutions decrees canons discipline meerly of humane institution should be ordered and commanded by a power and jurisdiction meerly Divine and distinct from that of the magistrate when as all constitutions lawes and ordinances given to the Jewes and all being of Divine institution were notwithstanding ordered and commanded by the magistrate not by the keepers of an ecclesiasticall jurisdiction distinct from the civil CHAPTER XVI The 31. chapter of the confession made by the Rever Assembly examined The use of synods Two things are humbly represented first that for a re-union of jurisdictions over all persons and in all causes a convocation made up of ministers only be re-established during the sitting of Parliament the second is that ministers may be put into the same capacity as all other ranks of free-born people to sit and vote in Parliaments Of the power of synods and that of the magistrate in calling of
sit what matter they must handle may not the lay-man then interpose as in a businesse of his classis may not also ecclesiasticall persons do the like Besides 100. constitutions may be found of such a mixt nature that it is not yet resolved what classis they pertain unto whether ecclesiasticall or civil such are the lawes about wills marriages tithes tenths usury collections for the poor appointing of dayes for fasting or thanksgiving lawes for pious uses and the like Will this expedient serve to resolve the conscience viz. if such an assembly of mixt persons and causes be named neither a councell or synod nor a civil judicatory but an assembly or some other name participating of the nature of both as if names could alter the nature of the thing and satisfy the conscience In short I believe the reverend assembly both wrong themselves and no way satisfy mens minds and consciences in not stating what is ecclesiasticall what is not and how far this or that man may meddle in ecclesiasticall and civil matters what name is to be given to this or that assembly I am crowded with matter that were worth deciding about synods which argument I handled largely in the 22. and 23. chapters of my Paraenesis The power of synods is decisive directive and declarative they decide by way of discussion and disputation they direct by way of counsell and they declare their opinions as expert and well known and read in the thing that is in question Coercive and judiciall power they have none but what is delegated from the magistrate or from private churches so that though the authority of a synod is greater then that of a private church yet the power of that church is greater then that of a synod If there be an union of churches as there ought to be even under an orthodox magistrate all canons and decrees are no otherwise binding as laws then as they have the stamp of magistracy upon them Supremi magistratus approbatio est supremum arrestum ut loquuntur saith Festus Hommius disp 18. thes 4 and disp 17. thes 3. the approbation of the magistrate is the supreme decree And not only reformers but also some Romanists namely the authour of the Review of the councill of Trent a learned book and which the learned Dr. Langbane thought his pains worthy in his youth to turn into English Lib. 3. cap. 13. the Emperour as is commonly known the Monarch of churches is president to the synodall sentences gives them force composeth ecclesiasticall orders giveth law life and policy to those that serve at the altar Is it credible that a Romanist should be of a more sincere judgement in this matter then a reformed Christian such as Mr. Gillespie Those that are for a judiciall power of synods over churches do alledge the synod of the Apostles which being infallible is no example to us no more then the miracles of Christ and the Apostles argue that ordinary ministers must work miracles When private churches can be sure that a synod in these dayes is led by such a spirit of infallibility they may yield to it without disputing yet not without examining as did those of Beroea who tryed the Sermon of St. Paul whether it was agreeable to other scriptures and were there now a synod made up of 40. or 50. men like Peter and Paul a church should reverence their orders but yet that synod should have no coercive jurisdiction over the church but such as overcometh the inward man by perswasion and leadeth him as it were captive to the obedience of truth And in case men and churches were not perswaded or did delay obedience and submission I say that such an Apostolicall synod could bring neither churches nor men to an outward conformity to their sentences lawes and decrees without a power delâ—…ated from the magistrate or some magistracy seated in churches Let us come to the second section As magistrates may lawfully call a synod of ministers and other fit persons to consult and advise with about matters of religion so if magistrates be open enemies to the church the ministers of Christ of themselves by vertue of their office or they with other fit persons upon delegation from their churches may meet together in such assemblies There is nothing in this section but I will willingly grant 1. They yield that magistrates may call synods 2. that a synod is an assembly of men convocated by the magistrate 3. who are to advise the magistrate about ordering matters of religion and discipline 4. under an orthodox magistrate as synods receive their jurisdiction from the magistrate so private churches under them ought to receive their orders and constitutions as lawes of the magistrate but under an heterodox magistrate synods receive their authority from private churches so that canons and decrees of synods are so far valid as they are approved or ratified by private churches that have conferred the power they being then in lieu of the magistrate The generall assembly of Scotland perceiving that this article doth much weaken ecclesiasticall power under an orthodox magistrate hath thought fit in their generall assembly at Edenburgh Aug. 27. sess 23. to put a glosse or comment upon it saying that the assembly understandeth some part of the second article of the thirty first chapter only of Kirks not settled or constituted in point of government and that although in such Kirks a synod of ministers and other fit persons may be called by the magistrates authority and nomination without any other call to consult and advise with about matters of religion and although likewise the ministers of Christ without delegation from their churches may of themselves and by vertue of their office meet together synodically in such Kirks not yet constituted yet neither of these ought to be done in Kirks constituted and settled So they will have the second article to be understood of churches not constituted or settled in which case they say the magistrate may call synods else they say it doth not belong to him but to the ministers who then ought to assemble of themselves without any commission from the magistrate which is expressely against the literall meaning of the second article which as all others of the confession is of things that are to be received believed and practised at all times and which they count of Divine right and for which therefore they alledge places of Scripture namely Isa 49. v. 23. Kings shall be thy nursing fathers a place which in my opinion maketh little to the purpose no more then the place out of 1. Tim. 2. v. 2. where we are bidden to pray for Kings doth to prove the power of magistrates in calling of synods Neither doth that place 2 Chronic. 19. v. 9. c. avail much but only that magistrates may call and constitute assemblies in generall for there is no speech there of any ecclesiasticall assemblies for they were not yet thought on at that time The 29.
churches would there be even 33. for so many were overcome but should all these 33. Kings be subdued these 33. Churches would cease to be independent on each other and in stead of 33. churches depending each on their magistrate one nationall church should be moulded of the same extent of power as the magistrate that ruleth over them CHAPTER XXII That the greatest opposers of the dissenting brethren namely Salmasius Amyraldus and others have laid down the same grounds for the right and power of particular churches and so confuted rather their own fancies then invalidated the tenets of the brethren The question whether Rome be a true church briefly resolved That Amesius and Iohn Mestrezat late minister of Paris in their writings have held the power of private churches to be independent from any church-judicatory THe spirits of men are now a little more calm and not so eager either at home or abroad and the quarrell not so fierce with the independents as it bath been these 15. years I having my self been a poor instrument to disabuse some of my country-men who partly by their misunderstanding paitly by the false reports and ill will of the common enemy to all goodness good men were possessed of very harsh opinions and conceits of them passed a strange censure upon them as enemies to all order and discipline and men of dangerous and pernicious tenets to all humane societies The very children amongst them did question whether they were shaped like other men Amyraldus made a great book of Invectives against them and turned them into Sodomites franticks and enemies of all order and discipline Salmasiâ—s and Maiesius were no lesse bitter against them A nationall synod net at Charenton where Amyraldus had a standing but no vote condemned them But as this synod condemned them as the councill of Trent did the Lutherans before they heard them so did all these authouâ—s I have named fall upon them without mercy before they had any particular knowledge of them or any certain information of their supposed pernicious manners Yet for all that those very men that wrote so much against them as they refuted rather their own fancies then any thing those they call independents believed so they did handle this matter of the nature and power of the church and that of the magistrate over it much to the advantage of those that they made as black as they could namely Amyraldus in declaring both his own sense and that of the ancient church next to the Apostles hath laid the same ground-work for the parity and independency of churches as the reverend brethren dissenting from the assembly of Divines have done He alledgeth Vignier a French authour writing above 70. years agone highly valued as the truest historiographer that ever put pen to paper by the most learned and pious Prelat Dr. Usher in his ecclesiasticall history relating the opinion of Irenaeus Eusebius and Nicephorus concerning the state of the government of the church soon after the Apostles The form of the government in this age was almost democraticall for every church had equall power to teach the word of God to administer the sacraments to absolve and excommunicate hereticks and those that led a d'ssolute life to elect to call and to ordain ministers to depose them when occasion required to erect schools to call synods to ask the opinion of others upon doubts and controver sies I find the centuriators of Magdeburg cent â— cap 7. to have these or equivalent words with little difference but that they wrote in Latin and Vignier in French Here then we may see our brethrens sense 1. that every particular church is independent free to govern it self and to exercise all church acts not rejecting a consociation with other churches but such as equals have among themselves 2. for the power of synods they acknowledge none nor judiciall authority only a liberty to admonish advise and counsell In the 8. chapter he hath a long passage whereof the drift is 1. that particular churches are no lesse free asunder then provinces and towns before they join in a confederation 2. that all aggregation and consociation is as free for churches as for free towns or cities 3. that a particular church for example that of Saumur considered as not united by any voluntary confederacy to other churches oweth the same duty of respect to the orders and constitutions of the churches of Leyden Heydelberg and Basil as to to those of Paris or Rouen 4. that the power of synods over churches is of the same humane and civil right with the power of a judiciall senatover cities and towns Pag. 144. he hath these words The Church and the Commonwealth have some things that seem common and they may be almost alâ—ke managed both by ecclesiast call assemblâ—es and by the powâ—r of the magistrate How doth this agree with what we have heard him say that it were an horrible confusion for the church and state to be governed by the same men Pag. 198. and 199. he speaketh of the authority of synods in the language of our brethren It is true that the meer authority of councils ought not to move us to receive a point of religion the knowledge of the truth of the thing ought to be the chief motive and ground But we have him very expresly teaching his scholars and auditors at Saumur that the appellation of a true visible church doth properly belong to a particular church I shall cite his words Disp de ecclesiae nomine definitione thes 28. in English I know that a communion and as it were a confederation of many the like societies which are associated either by the same use of tongue or the same form of Commonwealth or else by the same government and discipline is called a particular church thus we speak of the French English and German churches as of particular churches to distinguish them from that universall society of Christians which comprehends all nations that bear the name of Christians but as we said before the word church is not proper to the society of all Christians as it is to the particular assemblies of Christians so that consequently we say that the word church is not to be said in the like manner of a consociation of many particular churches Let then that communion which is between the churches of France be said to be a church and that the church is a confederation of many churches for if taken according to the use of the holy Scripture St. Paul calleth the severall particular churches which were in Achaia not by the name of the church of Achaia or the Achaian church but of the churches of Achaia A passage very considerable which force of turth hath drawn from the mouth of the greatest enemy to the brethren for their greatest advocate could not say more in justification of what they have alwayes urged about the nature of the church but could never be heard till of late viz.
that there was no true proper church but a particular church that therefore a presbyterian nationall church made up of many particular churches under one presbytery is not properly said to be a church I am of opinion that the Roman church upon that account is very improperly called a church but most improperly a tâ—ue church for if it hardly deserveth the name of a church how can it be called a true one at least morally though it may be metaphysically it being a consociation of erroneous and hereticall churches for if every privaâ—e church within the Roman communion is so disfigured that I do not think it deserveth the name of a church how improperly then is a systern made up of those particular churches stiled a church And so I conceive that the question about the truenesse of the Romish church which hath so puzzled men may be easily resolved I have but one passage more of Amyraldus to alledge which a man could hardly believe to be the language of a professed enemy to the cause of the brethren For if they should state their own opinion of the power and independency of churches they cannot use more significant words then those of Amyraldus who in his disputation de concil author thes 28. saith that private churches ought to retain their full right liâ—erty and power untoucht specially in matters of great concernment as points of faith not submitting slavishly their own judgements to synods but expecting that synods should define and decree nothing till they have had the advice and approbation of particular churches This is the passage in Latin Alibi diximus pulcherrimum saluberrimum esse earum ecclesiarum institutum quae concillorum decreta ad res magni momentâ— qualia sunt dogmata fidet pertinentia rata esse noluerint nisi prius consultis synodis ecclesiis particularâ—bus quarum quaeque symbolam suam ad veritatis cluc'dationem conferat Salmasius followeth the steps of Amyraldus or rather Amyraldus of him for Amyraldus wrote last He is very large in his apparatus ad libros de primatu and I should be tedious to the reader to set down here all that he hath handsomely stated about the nature of a church I will only quote two pages which are 265. and 266. The substance of his discourse is comprehended under these 4 or 5 heads 1. That all churches by right are equall in power and dignity and are independent 2. That the consociation under the heathen Emperours was voluntary and by consent 3. That under Christian Emperours a consociation was introduced by humane right so that what was at first by free and mutuall consent came afterwards under the Christian Emperours to be of humane institution and constitution 4. That the unity of churches consisted not in an united collection of private churches but in an agreement in faith and doctrine for such an union there is betwixt the Helvetian Belgick and French churches who agreeing in the same faith and doctrine do notwithstanding differ in discipline so that these churches may be called independent each on the other yet they keep an union and communion among themselves No other communion and independency do the reverend dissenting brethren admit and practise either among themselves or with the presbyterian churches both at home and abroad 5. The fifth head is that a consociation of many particular churches joyned with the same band of discipline and under the direction counsell advice not the command or judiciall power of any synod or presbytery doth much conduce to the keeping the unity of faith the band of charity and the communion of saints In the same place and many others throughout his apparatus he saith that the communication betwixt particular churches was voluntary and by way of counsell every church reserving to themselves full right and power as to those acts of their discipline and the acts of binding and loosing so that every church had power to take cognizance of any fact and crime committed in their body to censure and excommunicate them or reconcile them again without any appeal to other churches or synods except it were to beg their friendly intercession for so they were wont to consult and entreat Bishops and namely him of Rome to review the sentence repairing to him as to an umpire not a judge to disannull or evacuate the judgement which makes the Romanists take those applications to the Bishop of ROme as an acknowledgement of supremacy over all the churches To these authorities Iwill adde that of learned and moderate Spanhemius who did not use invectives as others but arguments and reasons as good as he could yet in my opinion the good man mistaketh much in his Epistle to David Buchanan not so much through ignorance of the right as of the fact yet in the 55. page he hath these words which are much to the advantage of the brethren A particular church hath no power at all over another but they are all collateral and of equall right and authority Let us now hear other advocates of the brethren before the word independency came to be given to Protestants in the world The first is learned Amesius in his first book of the marrow of Divinity chapt â—0 where after he hath in the 17 18 19 20. and 26 sections spoken of the parity and equality of particular churches in right and power in the 27. section he tells us what consociation of particular churches may be admitted these be his words Particular churches may yea ought to have a mutuall confederation and consociation amongst them in classes and synods that by a common consent they may be helpfull one to another with as much commodity as may be chiefly in things of greater concernment but this combination doth not constitute a new frame of church neither ought it in any sort to take away that liberty and power which Christ hath left to his churches since this form is only usefull by way of direction John Mestrezat a very learned orthodox Divine lately deceased minister of Paris goeth upon the same grounds with Amesius in his book of the church written in French and his testimony is most considerable because being a French-man he could not know or foresee as Amesius perchance might any such plea in England about right or power of churches aggregated It would be too long here to set down his own words at large For those that understand French they may see specially the 1 chap. of the 3. book where he saith that all power to do any church acts is placed in the particular church that all church-priviledges and promises were made and granted unto and in consideration of a particular church assembled in one place As for aggregation and consociation of churches he holds it not to be grounded upon any pattern or command from Scripture or even from a judiciall power given by Christ to classes synods presbyteries over particular churches but meerly assumed prudentially for mutuall preservation
the sons of the prophets multiplying and their house temple or auditory being too little they enlarged it and chap. 22. v. 14. Huldah the prephetesse is said to dwell in Bamischnah in a colledge or school of learning So from 1 Samuel 19. v. 18. and 20. one may gather that Samuel being the chief Rabbi and Prophet having many disciples under him had his house of oration school or Colledge at Naioth in Ramah where he did not only teach publickly upon sabbathâ— ayes but also instructed upon other days his disciples or young prophets called his sons as appeareth by the 20. verse except by prophecying be meant uttering marvellous things of Gods greatnesse goodnesse providence for the ordinary gift and charge of the prophets was not so much to declare hidden and foretell future things as to expound the law and to exhort the people and pray with them in which sense John Baptist is called by Jesus Christ a propher who yet never wrote nor uttered any prophecies and Exod. 7. v. 4. Aaron is called the prophet of Moses because he was his interpreter to the people And the great number of those prophets sheweth manifestly that their ordinary employment was to do what the prophets of the new Testament do to exhort teach comfort-rebuke no lesse number being required for that work under the old then under the new In the 1 Kings ch 18. when Jezabel did seek to destroy the Prophets Obadiah hid 100. in a cave and in the 2. book chap. 2. v. 16 the sons of the Prophets sead of their own body 50. men to seek after El jah Sure there was no need of so many to foretell future things when one of a 1000. Prophets might undergo that charge well enough to satisfy all the people of the mind of God concerning future things wherewith but few of the people need to be acquainted but all the people had need of teachers and instructers in the law of Moses and that in a considerable number for 1000. had not been enough to instruct the fourth part of the people in the ordinary way of prophecying that is teaching and exhorting for the Rabbins say that there were 480. such houses of convocation or prayer otherwise called synagogues in Jerusalem There is mention made of two houses which were famous one at Bethel the other at Jericho whither the sons of the Prophets repaired to Elisha They were frequented not only every sabbath-day and new moon for praying with the people of the neighbourhood as appeareth by 2 Kings v. 22. but also for teaching their disciples and resolving any that should come to them upon any doubt whither it is likely David did go Psal 73. v. 16. when being inwardly perplexed with distractions he could find no settlement till he went to the sanctuary of God to be instructed better then he was where by the sanctuary doubtless is meant such a house of convocation or school And in the 27. Psalme that one thing that David desired of the Lord was no doubt to have communion with God and with the faithfull people in the Temple or house of prayer whereto he resorted every sabbath for it is not likely he understood this of being partaker of the legall rites sacrifices in the Temple at Jerusalem which was not yet built What was the form and matter of the exercises in those houses the Scripture mentioneth not only we gather by what the Prophets of Baal did 1 Kings 18. v. 26. that likewise the Prophets of God in those synagogues or houses of convocation did pray from morning untill noon and then till evening taught by catechising and expounding for in the 29. verse the word prophesving is equivalent to teaching and instructing And Samuel 1. book c. 12. v 23. maketh two parts of his propheticall office viz. to pray and teach God forbid that I should sin against God in ceasing to pray for you but I will teach you Now as those prophets had no dependence on the Priests and Levites no more then the houses of convocation where they taught so neither do we read that there was any consociation of all these convocations into one nationall church under some church-judicatory made up of Priests and Levites or that they had any dependence on the Sanedrim or state-court prescribing them any orders how to govern themselves only they were not to teach and expound ought but the law whereof the magistrate was the keeper and guardian nor to thwart the duties of the publick worship commanded such as were the killing of the passeover at set times the appearing of the males three times in the year at the place that God was to chuse and performing all the sacrifices oblations and rites enjoyned and so far were the convocations depending on the magistrate For in the first institution we do not read that these convocations or synagogues or those that were over them were or needed to be invested with any jurisdiction but were like schools of learning whose masters and teachers were also like Plato Zeno Aristotle over the schools in Greece who had scholars men of ripe years and discretion that with a withing fulmission embraced their sayings and precepts so that the Prince or Dr. of the school needed not any restraining or coercive discipline to order them And indeed it is very likely that those heathenish schools of Philosophans had their first rise and ouginall from those 〈◊〉 wish schools But that each of those convocations where Prophets taught and expounded were independent from other convocations saving only so far as they were all members of the same Commonwealth will appear anone when we enquire into the nature of these convocations when they went currently under the name of synagogues and all jointly were not one Commonwealth in one countrey but lived dispersed for then every lynagogue was sui Iuris and governed it self though some Râ—manists would perswade us that many synagogues were aggregated under one Archisynagogue or chief 〈◊〉 which is a great mistake for some synagogues had sometimes many Archisynagogues It is true we read in the Theodosian code of Patriarchs of the Jâ—wes lib. 8. tit 18. de Iudaeâ—s coelicolis or Samaritanis but those Patriarchs were not over any matter concerning law or religion but were only publick treasurers of mony levied for the poor for building of synagogues the like 'T is true also that the nature of those synagogues being changed as long as the Senat at Jerusalem had any repute other synagogues did defer very much to it requesting letters of advice from them but submitted not to any command as from a superiour to an inferiour as we gather by Act. 9. v. 2. and 3. and ch 28. v. 21. But to follow the history of these convocations a little farther their independency is clearly to be seen when the faithfull people lived under idolatious Kings as under Jeroboam and his successours for they could not depend on the Sanedum at Jerusalem since it was a capitall
turned the Eucharist into an idoll and this into a sacrifice hoping that these mysteries taking once Gods place the pastors would be soon respected with a veneration beyond and above that which is due to magistrates having with the dignity of their function a speciall priviledge and power to distribute those mysteries particularly the Eucharist to such as they should count worthy from whence came excommunication But before excommunication could come to be the standard of an ecclesiasticall jurisdiction distinct from that of the magistrate the corruption of the Eucharist must precede which was a work of many hundred years 1. The Fathers though they had no intention of contributing to the working of the mystery of iniquity have occasionally given a rise to it for either because they lived among the Jewes and heathens or because they newly came from amongst those who thought there could be no religion without sacrifices and altars condescending to the capacity weaknesse both of Jewes and Gentils they borrowed many rites and ceremonies from them yea their very discipline they called the Eucharist by the name of sacrifice and gave the name of altar to the communion-table to the bread the name of the body of Jesus Christ and to the wine the name of his blood All which made way for Transubstantiation which hath taken so deep root that the very reformers amongst the rest Luther thought it too great a leap to recede too far from Transubstantiation but stuck in the mid-way and kept to Consubstantiation yea the best of ours though they took away both Transubstantiation and Consubstantiation and have allowed no reall presence of Christ but in the believer yet to the dislike of some of their brethren they have retained the very out-side phrases which clothed Transubstantiation borrowed from the 6. chapter of St. John of eating the flesh of Christ and drinking of his blood and feeding on the substance of his body which expressions Bullinger wholly disalloweth as he openly professeth in an Epistle to Beza and finds fault that in a synod at Rochell where Beza was president in the year 1571. a canon was made which condemned all such as would not grant that the faithfull in the Eucharist were fed with the substance of the body of Christ all which we are beholden for to the Fathers Tertullian lib. de oratione cap. 6. saith that the body of Christ is in the bread Ambrose upon the 17. of St. Luke besides the body that suffered saith that there is also a body whereof it is said my flesh is meat indeed The Fathers usually make three bodies of Christ a body naturall mysticall and Sacramentall yea Justin Martyr and Hilary make a mysticall union of the divinity of Christ with the bread in the Sacrament 2. Next came the crying up of the vertue of the Eucharist near upon to as great an height as that of baptisme Thus St. Austin the best of the Fathers thought the Eucharist was needfull to children for their salvation which when they had made more mysterious then ever the holy Ghost intended they devised severall degrees of penance 1. of hearers or catechumeni 2. then of competents 3. of penitents and lastly of faithfull men and Christians thus making themselves judges and arbiters of ranks and places that men ought to hold in the church all which brought along with them excommunication which from a law of confederate discipline answerable to that practised among the Jewes grew to such ripenesse as to passe for a law of Christ for a spirituall sword an arrow to be kept in the quiver of the church and to be shot at the will and pleasure of the ministers This is the weapon that hath proved so effectuall in the hands of the Pope that with it and by it he hath built up his mystery of iniquity and founded an empire within the empire of Emperours Kings and States By the same weapon the great church-judicatory in Scotland keepeth all inferiour judicatories and churches in awe and subjection for were this taken away from them or were the people well informed of the fond and panick dread they have of it then they would upon more rationall grounds be subject to order and discipline But whatever height the power of excommunication arose to it could never yet be had but one of these two things ever attended the possession of it for either the Pope had it by a power of magistracy of his own by which he kept all magistrates in awe or it was alwayes disputed and controlled by the magistrate of the place where the Popes agents did endeavour to exercise their jurisdiction This may be proved by the practise of all states within the communion of Rome specially of France where the Popes Bulls of excommunication have been often disannulled and evacuated by acts of Parliament and inferiour judicatories yea by synods convocated by the King I will produce but one example which I have read in an old French Historie of the life of Lewis the ninth written by Ionville above 400. years agone cap. 82. where when a Prelat did desire of the King the help of the secular power for making his excommunications good the King answered that with all his heart he would do it but that first â—t was fit he should be acquainted with the validity of the excommunication Which evinceth 1. that all excommunications are null without a power of magistracy to put them in execution 2. that in the darkest time of ignorance and Popery magistrates could disannull and make void the Popes censures and that they did not conceive themselves obliged to hold his censures valid with a blind judgement and obedience but were to judge of them and so either to confirm them or abrogate them for so did the Emperours before the Popes grew up to their height from Constantine the great to Justinian and did regulate order and disannull or make void excommunications CHAPTER XXXI The History of excommunication from the first reformation from Popery how it was received in Geneva but not settled without disputes and clashings betwixt the consistory and the magistrate THus the abuse of the doctrine of the Eucharist went hand in hand with the use of excommunication untill that in Luthers fuller reformation the first was reformed the other not taken away but by some of the reformers retained upon the same grounds of Scripture that the Romish was though not in that height yet not with moderation which in vain is lookt for in an action that in its very use and practise is altogether unlawfull as excommunicat on is But neverthelesse excommunication aâ—ongst other practises of the Romish church was also abrogated by Luther and all thoughts of it weâ—e quite cast off as of a yoak and relick of Popery for above 20. years after Luther first preached against the Pope and it was near to miscarrying at its first new birth for in the year 1538. he having sounded the minds of his hearers how it might