this old form saith he hath remained to the having even in our dayes a medley of clergy and laity in our courts of Parliament But I foresee that some of the presbyterian brethren will take me at advantage for saying that ministers may vote in synods and there being invested with judiciall authority make canons lawes and constitutions which bind churches to obedience for if they may have that judiciall power in Parliaments which doth oblige all men and societies and so churches to obedience why may not they have the same right power in synods I hope the rever brethren will not so require me for my pains in being their advocate retorting my plea made in their behalf against my self But I willingly grant that the ministers of the Gospell have alike power of sitting and voting in synods and in supreme courts of the magistrate but how viz. if they be called to it by the magistrate and so their acts whether they sit in synods or Parliaments are a production of the magistrates jurisdiction delegated to them and as such they oblige all men societies and churches Besides as I said ministers sitting in Parliaments and synods do discourse and debate matters touching doctrine church-discipline as ministers of the Gospell but they reduce what they discoursed of into lawes and stamp their authority and sanction upon it as men invested with judiciall authority from the magistrate just as I said of physitians who vote in Parliaments not as such but as judges of the land Against the ministers sitting and voting in Parliament it may be objected that thereby they would be kept off from the main care they are to attend which is over souls and from the preaching of the Gospell I answer 1. that their particular calling which is to be ministers of the Gospell ought not to keep them off from a moderate taking care and looking over things that are of lesse concernment as that of familie land estate suits in law much lesse to mind the generall good of the nation in which religion and peace are mainly concerned 2. There being two branches of the power of the magistrate one of legislation the other of jurisdiction this latter power is exercised by judges Mayors Sheriffs Sergeants and the like This power as men that have otherwise a constant profession which taketh them wholly up as physitians souldiers marineâ—s and the like cannot well manage so neither ministers of the Gospell but for the power of legislation the managing of which doth not take a man up so much there is no doubt but that as a physitian may take it upon him so also may a minister For the making of a law is like the making of a coach which being made in few dayes will be many years adriving by the coach-man before there be need of a new one so in a well-constituted state a good law which requireth but a little time to make it will continue many hundred years A minister may be well dispensed with for a little intermission of his ordinary calling to contribute his counsell to the making a law which may be of very good use a long time though there be no need he should busie himself further like a coach-driver to see by a power 〈◊〉 jurisdiction the law to take right course and be well obeyed I believe if in the first Parliament of Queen Elizabeth that drove away popery and settled the Protestant religion many of the godly ministers that suffered persecution in Queen Maries days had been sitting and voting in Parliament the then-reformation would have been much more compleat 3. Some ministers may be found whose parts lye lesse for preaching and more for government and who have wise politick heads why may not such be fit members in Parliament 4. As there is no reason to deprive a man of his right because he cannot alwayes attend to make use of it so must not a minister be devested of his right to sit in Parliament because it may be he cannot alwayes attend it A physitian would be loth because of his great practise to be made incapable to sit in Parliament so would a Divine however much taken up with the work of his ministery The premisses considered I conceive that the Rever Assembly doth part with its own right when they say in the last section of the third chapter that synods and councells are to conclude nothing but what is ecclesiasticall and are not to intermeddle with civil affairs unlesse by way of humble petition in cases extraordinary or by way of advice for satisfaction of consciences if they be thereunto required by the civil magistrate By which as they seem to keep off magistrates and lay-men from sitting and voting in synods so they bar themselves from sitting and voting in Parliament But if such assemblies as were the great Sanedrim the synagogues of the Jewes the conventions that I have mentioned for 7. or 8. hundred years in Christian states the politick ecclesiasticall Senates among the Helvetians and that which was settled in the first reformation by the Prince Palatine of the Rhene if I say such assemblies in which there is a mixture of men and causes are lawfull as indeed it were very fit there should be no assemblies of publick concernment but of this nature why may not in these assemblies lay-men conclude in ecclesiasticall matters and ministers in civil If they may not or it must be with distinction and caution how shall the conscience of a man sitting in those assemblies if he be a lay-man be resolved when he may intermeddle while ecclesiasticall matters are debated and likewise if civil things be in agitation how far a minister sitting in the same company may interpose vote must when civil affairs are handled the ecclesiasticall persons first be required to vote or must they petition to have that liberty It may be they mean that when the assemblie is upon ecclesiasticall affairs that then the laity should likewise petition the clergy for a liberty of voting and intermeddling But suppose a member of this assembly be both a States-man and an elder of a church and therefore an ecclesiasticall man must he change his name and personage as the nature of the matter handled requireth professing not to interpose in such a businesse in the capacity of a church-officer but as a member of the Commonwealth And how shall the conscience of a man be resolved what is an ecclesiasticall affair what a civil that he may not doubt when he may vote and intermeddle when he must sit mute and silent or go out of the assembly For the casuists have not yet determined what is ecclesiasticall what civil for some of them make the discipline of the church of humane constitution and therefore to be ordered directed and commanded by the same power that giveth sanction to all humane lawes And if it be put to the question when how often in what place synods are to be convened what time they must
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.
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
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.
Lord neither do I â—…sse honour the churches of Scotland then those of France I would fain make all churches and brethren friends without prejudice to the truth which I conceive I can retain inviolable by that temperament I have followed which giveth unto the magistrate his due and to private churches their right which denyeth not the presbyterians a discipline but only groundeth it upon a firmer and steadier foundation then they have hitherto done themselves The Lord reveal these truths which are very much subservient to saving truths to all sorts of people that so the minds of the people of God may be more settled and united to retain the foundation that is in Christ Iesus not by constraint and by an externall coercive jurisdiction but with a ready mind and that others who are otherwise led captive by their errors and ignorance in doctrine but much more swayed by this mystery of iniquity or ecclesiasticall jurisdiction may now by the discovery of this truth get freedom and by it the knowledge of saving truths hid from them because of their bondage Thus the truth of that saying of the Lord Iesus will be more manifest If ye know the truth ye shall be free indeed Did but those of the Romish communion understand that all Papall Episcopall Presbyteriall and Ecclesiasticall jurisdiction which is not subordinate to the power of magistracy is repugnant to Scripture and reason they would soon by the knowledge of this one truth recover their liberty and with it the opportunity of having saving truths taught them lying no longer in shackles for fear of men which though imaginarie ones have kept them in as much captivity as if they had been really of iron For the ecclesiasticall jurisdiction and excommunication the product of it put forth and exercised over magistrates and people by inconsiderable men for coercive power have hitherto been like to a child leading about an Elephant with a thred who if he knew his own strength would lead the strongest man that is with a single hair In short all ecclesiasticall jurisdiction without a power of magistracy is like the feathers of an arrow which can never hit nor have a direct motion but with the wood to which it is adjoyned The feathers alone may be made to fly at one but never to hurt or make any impression I will conclude this Preface with the words of Antonius de Dominis lib. 5. de rep cap. 2. who says that all ecclesiasticall jurisdiction is ineffectuall without a power of magistracy Nihil sine potestate laica obtinebimus neminem ecclesiastica potestate possumus extrudere abripere expellere If this which is the substance and the whole drift of my book can be made out to me not to be Scripture and reason I will not obstinatly maintain either this or any other errour but acknowledge it both to God and man as I ought continually all those of my life which as I hope God will forgive me so till I be otherwise taught I crave no pardon either of God or man for holding this which to some is an errour but to me and I hope in Gods good time it shall be so to others as clear a truth as that two and two are four ERRATA Pag. 121. l. 16. read to whom I give thanks Pag. 242. l. 11. dele common Pag. 215. l. 2. read Cornelius Nepos saith Pag. 292. l. 27. read next to the magistrates who have Pag. 311. l. 14. for was read is Pag. 355. l. 2. read supra quam Of the Right of CHVRCHES And of The Magistrates power over them CHAPTER I. OF the nature of power and authority That there are but two wayes to bring men to yield obedience either by a coactive power or by perswading them by advice counsell That there is no medium betwixt command and counsell which sheweth that Ecclesiasticall jurisdiction is a name without a thing not being exercised by either of them The division of power and of the subordination and coordination of powers Many errours and mistakes are discovered about subordination and coordination of powers That the power called Ecclesiasticall doth signifie nothing and such as it is is subordinate to that of the Magistrate THe nature of power right command obedience function law judgement are so twisted together and linked that it is not possible to treat of one alone for as the perfection of power is command so power is exercised with lawes by those that have right to it and a function in the state obedience is a yielding to power command lawes counsells and advices The word Potestas power denotes three things Person Right and Office Often it is taken for the person or persons that are the soveraign Magistrate it is also opposite to jus or right thus Tacitus in the third Book of his annals saith that right is weakned when power comes in In a large sense it is defined A faculty to bring any thing to passe either by right or by wrong or thus A faculty in the agent to move it self towards the patient either necessarily or at the will of the agent necessarily in a naturall body but arbitrarily in an intelligence either Divine or Angelicall and humane Authority as it hath relation to man is a faculty in the agent to move it self at the will of the patient for power is exercised over men against their will but authority is over those that willingly yield and are perswaded and convinced yet sometimes power and authority are promiscuously used But philosophers humanists and statists usually ascribe authority to men and writings that put no coercion or force to mens actions thus they attribute great authority to the placita and responsa of wise and prudent men whose judgements dictates and definitions who ever giveth no credit 〈◊〉 is taxed of foolishnesse not of rebellion or disobedience and so to men commendable for their age wisedome prudence and experience as the Heathens did to their Plato Socrates Aristoteles Zeno Princes of Schools who captivated the minds not the bodies of their hearers 'T is in that sense Cicero in his first Book of Offices in the very beginning speaks of the great authority that Cratippus and Athens had though neither of them had power either of legislation or of jurisdiction and in his Epistles he often mentioneth those that were in great favour and authority with Caesar and Pompey although they had no power of jurisdiction over them Albeit Grammarians should put no difference betwixt power authority yet nature custome and the practise of all nations yea the holy Scripture distinguisheth power of jurisdiction and command which imposeth penalties upon the transgressours from that authority which enforceth not the outward man but only worketh upon the soul perswadeth and begetteth belief respect and reverence Power of jurisdiction is alwayes attended with command and followed with obedience either active or passive to the command of the power but authority being for the most part attended with some of
these old age gravity wisedome prudence experience strength of reason eloquence by its exhortations dehortations counsells produceth in those that are wrought upon and perswaded the effect of obedience not with constraint but freely and voluntarily not for fear of punishment to be inflicted by men in case of non-obedience but either may be for fear of offending God or because strength of reason maketh one yield to a truth or one yields to authority to avoâ—d an evill or purchase some good Briefly the holy Scripture reason mans wisedome and reach nature and custome yea all tongues of men can utter or imagine but two wayes by which a man is drawn to yield obedience or put upon that duty to obey and yield either because the command of a power puts a force or penalty on the outward man or because the authority of counsell advice and exhortation hath so convinced the inward man and perswaded him that it must needs move the outward to yield an obey Plautus in Bacchides act 4. sc 7. could say ego neque te jubeo neque veto neque suadeo I neither bid thee nor forbid thee nor yet perswade thee Sure the holy Scripture maketh use but of these two wayes to draw obedience from a man 2. Thessal 3. v. 12. We command and exhort you Curtius lib. 5. speaking of the souldiers of Darius who were rather drawn by command then that they approved his counsell saith Regis imperium magis quam consilium sequebantur and Livy in his 29. book nec imperium illud meum sed consilium this is not my command but advice So in all states councels assemblies civill or religious men bring their designes to an end either by advising and counselling or making lawes and constitutions in order to their commands Cicero in his Oration for Rabirius saith that the soveraign counsell is seated in the Senate but the soveraign command in the Consuls and Tacitus speaking of the Germane and Gallick Kings saith that they were endowed with a perswasive power but not with a commanding power so Curtius lib. 6. of the Kings of Macedon in capitall matters the power of the Kings was little worth except they could by their authority perswade The like may we say of the power of Synods or church-assemblies without a power of magistracy that their canons and decrees except men be convinced and perswaded to yield and assent are of small validity The most learned Divines did never put a medium between command and counsell or advice Thus Rivet upon the decalogue there is some subjection of the Magistrate to the Ecclesiasticall colledge but such as is not a power of jurisdiction as under a command but of direction and counsell And in the same place We say that the Magistrate doth not depend on any so that we do not exclude counsell but commâ—nd for it is one thing to make use of counsâ—ll another to submit himself to command So for matter of law as we shall see somewhere else which is a product of power if it doth not put a penalty upon the transgressours of it it is a mere counsell and advice So saith Campanella real Philosoph cap. 4. apoph 12. Lex nulla potest esse sine poena ubi non exprimitur est arbitraria alioqui consilium erit non lex My reverend Father in an Epistle to Subrandus Lubâ—rtâ—s and in his book of the temporall monarchâ—e of the Pope ch 8. saith take away the coâ—ctive power in judges then their judgements are but counsells since the execution dependeth on the will of man Under counsell â—…ank entreaty warning exhortation dehortation counsell perswadeth command compelleth and is an act of jurisdiction 〈◊〉 defined by the Lawyers potestas jus dicendi etiam in nolentem a power which giveth law to the unwilling whereas the other if it be jurisdiction and so may I call it though it be but a product of the inward jurisdiction it is over those that from unwilling are made willing such is the jurisdiction of the power of the keyes by the preaching of the Gospell As I know no medium betwixt these so I do not conceive that a jurisdiction presbyteriall classicall synodicall or even congregationall can ever have any workings that run in a middle channell and are neither acts of magistracy nor of counsell and advice but a consistory or synod must needs exercise either one of these two jurisdâ—ctions singly or both jointly For example a synod of Dordrecht dispensing both jurisdictions the one from Christ the other from the magistrate may by the one convince some remonstrant ministers of the truth of the five points handled but by the other jurisdiction they will remove the obstinate remonstrants from their flock Thus a synode of Arians if authorised by the magistrate may compell the orthodox Bishops to relinquish their sees but never perswade them to change their opinions But the Ecclesiasticall history affordeth us a notable example proving the nullity of Ecclesiasticall and Presbyteriall power which is neither advice counsell nor the inward jurisdiction by which the inward man is perswaded and convinced nor a power of magistracy compelling the outward man to obedience Paulus Samosatenus being by a Synod of Antioch excommunicated and deposed from his see and one Domnus voted to be in his place Paulus slighting the synods judgement and the synod being not invested with any power to execute their sentence against Paulus Samosatenus had recourse to their Emperour Aurelianus a heathen who not onely judged in the behalf of the synod of Antioch but actually outed Paulus and put Domnus in his place This history we have in the seventh book of Eusebius ch 39. I aske here what was the sentence of the synod against Paulus Samosatenus but advice and counsell and a declaration of their mind that Paulus deserved to be excommunicated and put out of his place and Domnus to take his place and indeed that sentence of excommunication and deposition signified just nothing untill power of execution went along with it All this is sufficient to evince that all jurisdiction Papall Episcopall and Presbyteriall is a name without a thing if it be not coercive else that it is merely a counsell and admonition by which if a man be not perswaded to obey the transgressour cannot incurre any penalty and thereby be deprived of life liberty and goods so that all censure as excommunication which is not a product of magistracy and a coercive jurisdiction falls to the ground and is like the bulls of the Pope which hurt none but those that are afraid of them For the act of excommunication must be a product of a commanding jurisdiction or of counsell and advice we having clearly seen that there is no medium betwixt these two If it be an effect of coercive jurisdiction then it must be a product of magistracy delegated by the soveraign power without or exercised within the assembly of those that do excommunicate Either way excommunication finds no
division of lawes into civil and ecclesiasticall and tells us how far lawes are to be called ecclesiasticall though they be in truth the magistrates lawes only because they are made by him for the good of the church for as properly saith he lawes may be called scholasticall and Academicall because they were made for the good and benefit of schools or Universities and so far and no further can it be allowed that lawes should be ecclesiasticall CHAPTER IV. Of the nature of judgement what judgement every private man hath what the magistrate and what ministers synods and church-judicatories They have no definitive judgement as Mr. Rutherfurd asserts but the magistrate hath the greatest share in de finitive judgements which is proved by some passages of Mr. Rutherfurd and of Pareus and Rivetus Who is the judge of controversies NOt to run over all the acceptions of judgement which I have handled in my Paraenesis I will mention but one that serveth to decide the whole controversie which lieth in a narrow room whether the magistrate or pastors assembled in a presbytery and synod or even private men be judges of controversies about faith and discipline Iudgement is an act by which every man endowed with reason or pretending to have any upon debating within himself and weighing things to be done or to be believed at length resolveth peremptorily what either he will do himself or will have others to do about things he conceiveth to be true just and usefull For to the nature of judgement it is not required that the thing that a man will do himself or will have others to do be true just and good it being enough that he apprehendeth them to be so I make two judgements one private the other publick The private I call judgement of discretion by which every one having weighed and debated within himself the truth equity goodnesse or â—sefulnesse of counsels advices commands doctrine and persons at length choseth and pitcheth rather upon this then that this judgement may be called judgement of knowledge and apprehension The publick judgement is the delivery of ones private judgement so far as concerneth others by which a man uttereth what he conceiveth fitting for others to do or believe This judgement in ministers presbyteries synods wise men counsellors physitians and others not invested with any jurisdiction and who have more authority then power is called advice counsell declaration when they deliver their sense meaning and opinion upon any debated subject concluding something which they conceive others are to embrace believe or practise In magistrates and men invested with jurisdiction both this publick judgement and the private have the same operation as in ministers synods counsellors and the like but over and above it causeth them to command what they conceived fitting to be received and practised By the publick judgement Pastors do what St. Austin saith Epist 48. to Vincentius pastoris est persuadere ad veritatem persuadendo pastors are to bring to truth by persuasion sed magistratus est cogendo but magistrates are to bring to it by constraint and by commanding From these publick judgements every private man is to appeal to his private judgement of discretion not yielding and giving his assent to the declarations canons sentences of ministers any further then by his judgement of discretion he conceiveth them to be true just and usefull not obeying actively the commands of the magistrate in case he conceiveth them by the same judgement of discretion to be against faith and good manners The staring thus and dividing of judgement decideth as I conceive all the questions and doubts arising about this subject and answereth all Mr. Râ—therfurds and Gillespies definitions and objections concerning judgement They make a fourfold judgement apprehensive discretive definitive and infallible which belongeth only to Jesus Christ The definitive they say is proper to ministers and church-judicatories But they forget the main judgement which giveth life and force to all the rest and is the magistrates when he bringeth to execution things well debated by the judgement of declaration and approved of by the judgement of discretion In that division of theirs they also commit two great errors 1. That they make of one judgement two for to the judgement of discretion they adde a judgement of apprehension which differs only in degrees from the other and were these judgements distinct yet they go alwaies together and are alwaies in the same person and do belong to the private judgement 2. They ascribe a definitive judgement to pastors and church-judicatories which they themselves had need to explain what they mean by for 1. must every private man stand to it and not appeal from it to his judgement of discretion 2. if they do not stand to it what inconvenience harm or danger or worse consequence can befall him then any one that despiseth good counsell or advice which put no obligation except they be reduced into lawes and commands by the magistrate 3. must the magistrate adhere to that definitive judgement and command them without debating within himself whether those definitions be agreable with his own publick or private judgement which indeed is to make of him an executioner If he must not stand to the definitions of pastors and synods but rather they must stand to what he conceiveth most fitting then it is evident that that judgement of pastors called by them definitive is of no validity and hath need to take another name since neither magistrate nor private men are obliged to stand to it except they be convinced that it is reasonable and that its definitions are true just and usefull The evidence of this truth about judgement is so clear that Mr. Rutherfurd and Gillespie are unwares carried sometimes to deliver the substance of what we said before I will alledge but two passages out of Mr. Rutherfurds book of the divine right of church-government for there he overthroweth his definitive judgement of pastors or church-judicatories and setteth above it not only the judgement of the magistrate but also that of every private man for sure that definitive judgement that may be reversed and rejected without any redresse by the ministers cannot be of any weight or validity The first passage is ch 25. quest 21. p. 668. The magistrate is not more tyed to the judgement of a synod or church then any private man is tyed to his practise The tye in discipline and in all synodicall acts and determinations is here as it is in preaching the word the tye is secondary conditionall with limitation so far forth as it agreeth with the word not absolutely obliging not Papal qua nor because commanded or because determined by the church and such as magistrates and all Christians may reject when contrary to or not warranted by the word of God If such words had faln from Grotius or Mr. Coleman they would have been branded for rank Erastianisme If all the presbyterians will but put their names with
probatum est to them all controversie will be ended and the power in the hands of church-officers will be no longer distinct from that of the magistrate and all presbyterian jurisdiction of excommunicating deposing and making lawes authoritatively will be taken away So that if we give credit to Mr. Rutherfurd all acts sentences and excommunications pronounced by synods and presbyteries are no further valide then as they are conceived by the magistrates and private men agreeable with the word The other passage of Mr. Rutherfurd doth no lesse pull down the definitive judgement of ministers and by it all presbyterian jurisdiction p. 577. As the church is to approve and command the just sentence of the civill judge in punishing ill doers but only conditionally so far as it is just so is the magistrate obliged to follow ratifie and with his civil sanction confirm the sound constitutions of the church but conditionally not absolutely and blindly but only so far as they agree with the word of God Studying brevity I am loth to load the reader with authorities out of most eminent divines Zanchius Martyr Iunius Pareus Camero Rivetus and others all jointly proving 1. that all the judgements and sentences of synods church-judicatories presbyteries are mere counsels advices and no lawes obliging to obedience or to assent except they receive the ultimate sanction from the magistrate 2. that the magistrate ought not to take the ministers or synods judgement barely because it comes from them but follow his own judgement I will alledge but one or two out of Pareus and one out of Rivetus That of Pareus is on the 13. Rom. All faithfull even private men ought to judge of faith and of religion not only with an apprehensive judgement that by it they may understand the true religion but also with a judgement of discretion that they may distinguish the true from the false hold to one and reject the other much more ought the Christian magistrate to judge of the religion not only apprehensively and discretively but also definitively Here we have a definitive judgement proper to magistrates as well as to ministers and church-judicatories In the same place A Prince ought to defend the true religion suppresse the false banish blasphemies and heresies he ought then to know of all these singly and by his office judge of them for if he were only to draw the sword at the beck of the priests without knowledge and judgement and without making any question whether the judgements of the pastors are right or no what would he be but a sergeant and an executioner as the Iewes made of Pilate saving to him If he had not been a malefactour we would not have delivered him to thee Rivet on the decalogue hath these words We joyn those two together that the magistrate should not only act by others prejudice but also by his own judgement not that he should trust so much to his but also let ministers of the Gospell have their parts not relying on his fancy but being counselled by the pastors of churches calling synods and there hearing godly and learned men discoursing out of the word of God of controversies of religion and of articles of faith then what he hath himself approved of to be the truth let him embrace it and spread it There he maketh no more of synods then a Prince of his state-counsellors or a sick man of his physitians whose judgements they take for counsells and advices and not for definitive sentences And so speaketh Maresius Coll. Theol. loc 16. thes 77. Ministers of churches do not so much represent judges in a senat as prudent doctors and learned gathered to give counsell and their result is like the advice of physitians about the health of the body By what I have said of judgement and alledged out of Mr. Rutherfurd that question so much debated betwixt the Romanists and the Protestants who is the judge of controversies in matters of faith is easily decided for doubtlesse the ministers of the Gospell have by their education function and ministeriall duty that publick judgement to declare either in churches or synods what by the judgement of discretion they conceive to be the mind and the ordinance of Christ but this judgement inforceth and obligeth no man to assent to it except they also by their private judgement of discretion apprehend it to be such So ought neither magistrates nor the power of magistracy seated in churches to command or enjoyn it as a law to be obeyed or a doctrine to be believed except apprehended by the judgement of discretion to be the mind or an ordinance of Christ Ministers in divinity physitians in physick each professour of art in his art not only because they are more versed in that thing they professe but also ex officio have a judgement that carrieth and giveth more authority but it being fallible and therefore subject to the revisall of others whether magistrates or subjects and not attended with command obliging to obedience either active or passive it is only authentick to them that are perswaded and convinced to yield to it CHAPTER V. An examination of the 30. chapter of the confession of faith made by the Rever Assembly of Divines That in their Assembly they assumed no jurisdiction nor had any delegated to them from the magistrate and therefore were not to attribute it to their brethren That the ecclesiasticall jurisdiction is the same with the magistrates jurisdiction Mr. Gillespies reasons examined THe reverend Assembly of Divines in the 30. and 31. chapters of their Confession of Faith are strong assertors of a double jurisdiction Before I come to examine what they say and their proofs alledged in the margent I would be well understood that I do not quarrell against the spirituall jurisdiction over the inward man in the ministery when a minister doth command from Christ and the people yields obedience being once inlightened and convinced all is done on both parts willingly and not by constraint the weapons of that jurisdiction are not carnall and yet very mighty not by putting away by excommunication but by pulling down the strong holds of sin and bringing into captivity every thought to the obedience of Christ 2. Cor. 10. v. 4. 5. The Lord Iesus Christ say they sect 1. as King and head of his Church hath therein appointed a government in the hands of Church-officers distinct from the civil magistrate It may be the Rev. Assembly do only intend to adjudge jurisdiction to other church-assemblies and synods and none to themselves for these reasons 1. They were bound by their charter by which they were called not to exercise any jurisdiction and authority ecclesiasticall whatsoever or any other power for these be the words of the ordinance and besides are en joyned not to assume any authority but to advise and give counsell upon such things as shall be propounded to them and to deliver their opinions and advices 2. And the same they did
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
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
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
clergy-man or not was decided capitall only excepted For matters of faith I confesse there be many Emperours sanctions forbidding secular courts to meddle with them but this doth not argue that the clergy had any power more then declarative not sancitive For 1. This very sanction that secular courts should not meddle with matters of faith was a law of the Emperour and the episcopall courts or synods could not challenge any power therein but by a commission from the Emperour 2. The Emperours did not conceive themselves obliged to receive lawes concerning faith from the Bishops or that coming from them they had a stamp of authority through all the Emperours dominions except they were approved of and ratified by them 3. The Emperours did not think themselves much obliged to receive lawes of doctrine and faith from the Bishops in regard that most of the lawes and constitutio is concerning the fundamentall points of faith were composed reduced and inserted into the Code without so much as taking counsell or advice of the Bishops though we never read that they ever complained thereof Only a late famous Lawyer and a Papist in his book de Iustinianei seculi moribus cap. 2. maketh a great complaint thereof which is a strong argument that the magistrate did not then acknowledge any ecclesiasticall power seated in the clergy 4. And the power that the Emperours challenged to belong solely to them to call synods to chuse members to review their acts to approve ratifie disannull or give them the vigour and strength of lawes obliging all churches and men to obedience either active or passive is an argument that what ever combined churches under the heathen Emperours did in calling of synods making lawes and decrees and requiring from all churches and church-members obedience to them the Emperours did not conceive otherwise of those acts of theirs but as of acts of magistracy taken up by consent for want of a Christian magistrate and which was to last no longer then till the time that God should send a Christian magistrate For had not these been the thoughts both of the Emperours and the Bishops at that time how came it that Constantine the Great the other Christian Emperours that came after him did not rather wish the Bishops clergy to call synods upon their own authority as they were wont to do and how came it that Oâ—ius Spiridion Paphnutius did not disswade Constantine from taking upon him to call synods telling him that it was more then did belong to him and speak in the language of Mr. Gillespie that ministers by virtue of their office are to call and assemble synods that it is altogether unreasonable that they should be abridged of what they had enjoyed for 300. years and now loose a main branch of their ecclesiasticall power that hitherto it was not so much as thought on that magistracy which is not a thing essentiall to the church should so far entrench upon the government of Christ wherewith the ministers are solely entrusted But these notions came not into the minds either of the Emperours or of Osius Eustatius Paphnutius and others nor of Hierom who questioned the validity of a synod that was not convocated by the Emperour These good men did not quarrell either at the convocation of synods or at the making or giving of lawes to churches by the sole authority of the Emperours 5. A further proof that neither the Emperours nor the Kings after the Roman Empire was broken in pieces conceived that Bishops and clergy-men had any judiciall power distinct from theirs is that for many 100. years in most parts of the Roman Empire as it then was Emperours and Kings kept state-assemblies where both clergy and laity sate and voted without any such distinction of power ecclesiasticall and civil I should here shew as I promised in the beginning of the chapter that the very heathens never knew any such distinction of power for although the law of nature and nations taught them that there must be a sacred function distinct from others yet they never knew nor understood that the jurisdiction of that function was distinct from that of the others for many thousand years neither the people of God nor the heathens knew any such distinction Aristotle in the third of his politicks ch 10. speaking of heroick Kings the Kings saith he were judges and moderators in all divine matters So was the Roman Senat both before and after it was governed by Emperours for it was wont to consecrate Emperours and the name of Pontifex Maximus of which they were so jealous was taken by the Emperours even till Gratians time In short they alwayes conceived that a common magistracy and soveraign power was made up of these two main ingredients viz. ceremonies about religion and humane lawes both put in trust with the soveraign magistrate One thing I cannot but observe that the very heathens by the light of nature have gone here beyond Mr. Gillespie For to confirm a common errour that the church jurisdiction is wholly independent from the magistrate and that the end of magistracy is only the protection of temporall life having nothing to do with promoting the eternall good of the soul to confirm I say this errour he teacheth us that magistracy is not subservient to the Kingdom of Jesus Christ the Mediatour ex natura rei But this errour is refuted by the very heathen namely Aristotle in his 3. book of Politicks ch 16. where he saith that the scope of politicks is not simply to live but to live well I should ask Mr. Gillespie when a magistrate turneth from heathenism to Christianity whether his first duty is not to seek the Kingdom of Heaven both for himself and all that are under his charge There is also a notable passage of Pareus among his Miscellanea Catechetica artic 11. aphoris 18. where he lamenteth that heathens should surpasse Christians in this particular in attributing more to the magistrate for ordering matters of religion and that they in this point should be more orthodox these be his words Ac sane dolendum est rectius in hoc capite sensisse olim ethnicos qui unanimi consensu regi suo demandarunt curam religionâ—s cultus Deorum idque persuasi tam jure naturae quam gentium As pregnant a proof that the same persons amongst the heathens had the managing of religious as well as civil affairs is that of Cicero in his Oration pro domo sua ad Pontifices the words are these Praeclare à majoribus nostris constitutum est quod vos eosdem religionibus Deorum immortalium summae reipublicae praeesse voluerunt ut amplissimi clarissimi cives rempublicam bene gerendo religiosissimi religiones sapienter interpretando rempublicam conservarent It was excellently well ordained by our ancestours that the same persons should be put in care with matters of religion and the supreme government of state that so whilst the most
publick judgement he had been a publican and a heathen not only to the offended party but to all others But Jesus Christ seemeth to a private offence and a private way of proceeding to give a private counsell how the party wronged ought to behave himself to wards the offender Learned Mr. Lightfoot thinketh that in all the context there is nothing intended either of Jewish or Christian excommunication that there was no judiciall sentence pronounced nor constraint put upon the offending party but only shame and that not publick but only within the walls of the synagogue or of the school As if a man would not provide for his family after a first and second admonition he was put to shame in the synagogue by these or like words Such a one is cruell and will not nourish his children 2. This makes way to know both what power that church in the Text had and what is meant by it Calvin upon the place hath some remarkable concessions much to our purpose 1. That Jesus Christ alluded to the custom of the Jewes and had respect to the form of discipline among them 2. That the power of excommunication belonged to the elders of the people who represented the church Which concessions are convincing arguments to prove 1. that Iesus Christ by the word Church did not mean an assembly of men whose power was distinct from that of the magistrate since no such thing as was called Church Kahal Gnedah in the old Testament was ever taken for an assembly of churchmen invested with jurisdiction and distinct from those of the Commonwealth 2. Since the elders of the Iewes were no more elders of the church then of the Commonwealth and that they had the sole power of excommunicating it followeth that the act of excommunicating was not more an act of church then of state and therefore if Christ speaking of the Christian excommunication alluded and had a regard to the custome of the Iewes that likewise their excommunication must be like that of the Iewes and be as well an act of magistracy as an act of the church Which is confirmed by what he faith upon the 18. verse speaking of the government of the church where he makes two kinds of elders in the Christian church answerable to two kinds of elders in the Iewish church Now as these were not invested with a power called ecclesiasticall distinct from the civil so may we conclude of the elders in the Christian church These be his words Legitimam Ecclesiae gubernationem presbyteris injunctam fulsse non tantum verbi ministris sed qui ex plebe morum censores illis adjunctierant But above all he is expresse upon the 17. verse where he saith that the Lord Iesus Christ in modelling the churches discipline sendeth them to the institution under the law admonuit in ecclesia sua tenendum esse ordinem qui pridem sub lege sancta institutus fuerat If we all stand to Calvin the quarrell is ended and the church Matth. 18. will prove such a church as was in Moses Ioshua and Davids time by which is never meant a congregation of Priests or church-elders distinct from the commonwealths elders So then we see even according to Calvin if Iesus Christ spoke in the context of a church Christian as I do not believe he did it must be a church of the same nature with the Iewish in which excommunication being an act of magistracy so must it also be in the Christian church But I do not believe that in this whole context there is any thing meant either of the Iewes or Christians excommunication or of such a church as our opposites would have to be understood by the word church viz. an ecclesiasticall senat or presbytery being certain that neither in the old nor in the new Testament the word church in Greek or Hebrew is taken in that sense Is it likely that Iesus Christ would mention a church that was never recorded in all the old Testament and whereof neither the Evangelists nor the Apostles speak Doubtlesse Christ speaketh here of such a church or assembly of men who were as Calvin saith Morum Censores censors of manners much used among the Iewes and Romans not invested with any judiciall power but yet of such authority and gravity that whoever did reject their wholesome advice and counsell was as much discredited as if he had suffered corporall punishment It may be those censors of manners were rectors and teachers of schools men who for their gravity and learning were highly esteemed among the people and such a school some say Christ and his Apostles made up much like those schools of the Prophets in use in Samuels time in which the scholars or young Prophets did sit at the feet of the Rabbies as Mary at the feet of Iesus who for that was called Rabbi-However those words if he neglect to hear the church do argue that the church spoken of in this context was not invested with a power of censuring the offender as Bilson and Sutliffe do judiciously conclude from the words For thus speaketh Dr. Sutliffe in his 9. chapter de presbyterio Christ speaketh of a church that had no power to constrain and which one might despise without insurring punishment for if it had had power to constrain in vain had he added if he will not hear the church for the church would have constrained him In short these words tell it unto the church are made like regula Lesbia a nose of wax by Papists Episcopall men and presbyterians it is to them a wood which if a thousand men go into none will fail to shape himself a stick a mallet or a hammer Bellarmin will tell us that tell it unto the church signifieth tell it unto the Romish church or tell it the Pope Mr. Gillespie will expound it tell it unto the presbytery Dr. Hammond tell it to the Bishops called by Chrysostome 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 I will not urge much the words let him be to thee an heat hen or a publican which if they do not make void excommunication I am sure they do not help it much seeing that neither a publican nor a heathen were the object or subject of excommunication I conceive that the true pataphrase of these words may be this and that this was the meaning of the Lord Jesus If the offender refusech all honest wayes to right thee then prosecute him in the court of the magistrate where heathens and publicans have their own judges deal with thy brother as if he were and as thou wouldst do with an heathen or a publican for since thou must now repute thy brother as to thee as an heathen or a publican and since thou wouldst not scruple to implead an heathen or a publican so neither must thou scruple to sue thy brother For sure neither Jesus Christ in this place nor St. Paul in the 1 Cor. ch 6. forbiddeth Saints to go to law against an heathen before an heathen
change for the better or hinder a change for the worse The King or another magistrate as he doth not ordain so he doth not depose formally as I may so speak or administratorily yet he doth it of himself not only by his counsell command and authority for he may command it when there is just cause of deposing a minister to those that have that power in the church who in that case and there being just cause for it if they do not obey and do what he commandeth are subject not only to wrath but also to Gods judgement Ministers as ministers are subjects to the soveraign magistrate why then should it not be lawfull to appeal from the judgement of subjects to the supreme magistrate and why may it not be lawfull for the supreme magistrate to review the judgements of his subjects to ratify them if they be good and to abrogate them if they be bad There is a subjection of the magistrate to the ecclesiasticall senat but not of jurisdiction as under a command but of direction and counsell CHAPTER XXXIII The judgement of some Divines yet living both of the argument in hand and of the writings of the Author Of some mens strong prejudices against harsh censures of him I Have through all this book and in the first section of my Corollarium proved that I have digressed nothing in my Paraenesis from Scripture reason about the right of churches and the magistrates power in matters of religion but my opinion is also confirmed by two kinds of authorities of learned and orthodox Divines The first kind of authorities is of those that for the main concur with me or rather I with them such are Zuinglius Musculus Bullingerus Gualterus Mestrezat Mr. Jeremiah Burroughs Mr. Lightfoot c. The second kind is of those that though in generall they profess to be for a church-government distinct from that of the magistrate yet if one take notice of all the positions concerning that argument which each of them admit and grant will be found jointly though not every one of them considered a part to say as much as I just as the Protestants doctrine will be found in all though not in each of the Romish authors overcome by the evidence of truth in the handling of some points controverted betwixt them and us as Scotus confesseth that Transubstantiation hath no ground in Scripture Cajetan denyeth the Popish indulgences Bellarmin after he hath much heightned the merit of works concludeth with a â—utissimum est and flieth to the righteousnesse of Christ apprehended by faith as the safest anchor to stay a staggering Christian Jansenius is right in the doctrine of grace all the rest in some positions or other hold with us And of this kind are Bucer Martyr Jewell Zanchius Reynolds Camero Rivet and many more who besides by yielding an inch have given us a whole handfull to believe that what we have discoursed of the nature of power lawes judgement the right of churches and the magistrates power in matters of religion is both reason and Scripture For whoever admits as most of these authors do that the judgements of Pastors in presbyteries synods are subordinate to that of the soveraign Christian magistrate and that appeals from church-judicatories to the magistrate are grounded upon Scripture reason and the practise of all nations and besides saith that the magistrate is the supreme governour and head of the church over all causes and persons whoever I say grants these to be truths must needs overthrow ecclesiasticall jurisdiction and power of excommunication except it be in subordination to and dependently on the magistrate But among all the reformed Divines who appear in the throng of those that hold an ecclesiasticall jurisdiction and a government distinct from that of the magistrate none hath delivered positions in print so near the language of Mr. Coleman as Ludovicus Cappellus pastor and Professor at Saumur yet living hath done which passing currant for truth from the mouth of Cappellus if they had fallen from Mr. Coleman would have been taken by our brethren the Scots for pernicious and dangerous tenets and mere Erastianisme In the first part of his Theses Salmurienses de potestate regimine Ecclesiae thes 12. he saith that pastors have properly no other jurisdiction then that which subdueth the affections of the world and the flesh when the spirit of Christ in the word restraineth the assaults of Satan that there is no other authority of governing the church then what is seated in Christ the head when by the efficacy of his spirit he enlighteneth the mind and convinceth the conscience In his 40. thesis he saith that the constitutions of the church have authority no further then as they agree with reason In his 41. and 42. he puts equall stresse of duty upon the magistrate in governing and ordering the church the commonwealth as being keeper of one table as well as the other These are his words in Latin Porro his de rebus dispiciendi atque statuendi ita penes ecclesiam hoc est ecclesiasticos quos vâ—cant viros est potestas ut si magistratus pius Christianus sit fierâ—id non debeat non modo sine ejus consilio conscientia verum etiam sine ejus authoritate qua ea quae videbuntur in hoc genere conducibilia confirmentur vimque legis obtineant Is nempe est utriusque divinae legis Tabulae vindex atque custos ad quem propterea pertinet etiam pastores si cessent vel peccent in officium movere objurgare ubi opus fuerit castigare denique prospicere atque providere ut omnia tum in ecclesia tum in republica seu politia recte ordinate fiant utque ordinis legitime constituti turbatores violatores pro merito puniantur This he seemeth to speak after Pareus in his Miscellanea Catechetica art 11. aphoris 18. where he layeth upon the magistrate a greater duty in governing the church then the commonwealth and more in keeping the first table then the second Hoc vero jus gubernandi ecclesias sacra Scriptura disertim magistratui attribuit ut ei quemadmodum tenetur procurare ut bonum civile in foro judiciis legitime administretur ita non minor imo longe major ejus cura esse debeat ut jus Divinum bonum illud animarum hoc est vera religio pietas subditis suis in ecclesia scholis ad aeternam eorum salutem proponatur juxta legem testimonium idem docent exempla laudatissimorum regum Davidis c. Sic Paulus affatur Christianos Romanos Minister est Dei tuo bono ubi intelligit omne bonum tam civile terrenum quam ecclesiasticum seu spirituale secus namque magistratus homini Christiano non plus commodaret quam infideli Ac sane dolendum est rectius in hoc capite sensisse olim ethnicos qui unanimi consensu regi suo demandarunt
c. In his disputation de summo controversiarum judice thes 52. he saith the power of the church and ministers in delivering their judgements about controversies is meerly declarative having no authority further then their reasons are perswasive and convincing In his theses de diversis ministrorum evangel gradibus ordinibus thes 2. he alloweth ministers a function but no jurisdiction and urgeth 2 Cor. 1. v. 24. not that we have dominion over your faith c. and 1 Cor. 3. v. 9. we are labourers together with God In his 2. thesis he saith that Jesus Christ Matth. 20. v. 28. takes off all jurisdiction from the ministery In his third thesis he saith that the power of excommunication does no more argue a jurisdidiction over the flock then prescribing a diet to a patient argueth the physitians power jurisdiction command and dominion over the patient making the jurisdiction in both alike in these respects 1. As a physitian may suspend his own act in administring physick so the minister in giving the Eucharist 2. As a physitian inflicteth no censure upon the patient for refusing to take his physick only warneth him of the hazzaâ—d he runs upon the neglect of taking it so doth the minister he that receiveth not and obeyeth not the commandement of God delivered by the minister cannot be punished for his neglect of the tender of grace any more then a sick man for refesing to take physick In his disputation de clericorum immunitate privilegiis thesis 10. he saith that Princes have power to inflict punishment upon transgressors of the lawes that concern the worship of God the administration of the Sacraments and the doctrine of faith and besides that these lawes have no force except they be confirmed and ratified by them In his 12. thesis he saith that the lawes about faith the Sacraments divine worship discipline and ecclesiasticall order cannot be defined or decreed in a synod nor any controversies therein decided without the knowledge and consent of the magistrate if he be godly and Christian as being the keeper of both tables who ought to confirm and ratify the lawes agreed on if they be just else to amend and correct them seeing he is the servant of God both for the spirituall and temporall good The Latin is much more pregnant Sane aequum juilum est leges canones de fide Sacramentis disciplina 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 tota ecclesiastica primum constitui deque illis deliberari à viris ecclesiasticis legitime in concilio synodo congregatis litesque controversias de illis ortas in foro ecclesiae hoc est synodis agitari definiri at non tamen sine cognitione conscientia consensu Principis magistratus politici si pius Christianus est est enim ille custos utriusque legis divinae tabula à quo si bene constitutae sunt leges lites definitae confirmari ipsius authoritate sancâ—ri debent ratae haberi si minus corrigi ab eo emendari eas oportet siquidem servus est Dei in subditorum suorum bonum tum temporale tum spirituale cujus curam procurationem pro sibi à Deo demandato munere debet suscipere ac Deo de illa cura rationem reddere De clericis lib. 1. cap. 28. propos 1. In his 13. thes he confirmeth the same by the example of the commonwealth of Israel when the Kings even against the will of the Priests did set up and order the true worship of God But in his 14. thes he would not have this so to be taken as if the faithfull were to receive decrees and orders because decreed or ordered by the councill or magistrate in case they be not agreeable with the word but only that nothing can be decreed bearing the name and force of law obliging and requiring externall obedience without the consent and the sanction of the magistrate I might adde a third sort of authorities of some in England France Scotland and the Low-Countreys who not only differ little or nothing from me but also give their approbation to what I have lately put forth on the subject I am writing of which may be more wondred at in the Fâ—ench who are iâ—…ured to a discipline of their own modelling and exercise a power uncontrolled by the magistrate who instead of inspection giveth only a toleration Yet some of these later have given me a large testimony to have delivered nothing but truth and acknowledged themselves to be now convinced which they were not before that excommunication is meerly of mans devising and not an ordinance of Christ I could name many but that some of them are like Joseph of Arimathea acknowledging fully that truth which we maintain but secretly for fear of their fellow-ministers that are so strongly possessed with prejudice against it Others being like those that have told a tale so long that at length they believe either that it is truth or at least that there is some truth in it for having since Calvins time every communion-day pronounced this clause in their Liturgy I excommunicate such and such sinners in the name and authority of Christ they are rather prone to believe there is some truth and ground for this commination then to search too far into it besides their collegues strongly believing that excommunication is an ordinance of Christ if they should never so little question it they might be in danger of suspension from their offices and benefices But all God be thanked are not afraid to countenance this truth as will appear by the judgement which the rever Ministers of Diepe in France have given of my Paraenesis and Corollarium here annexed as related by one of them whose gravity piety and learning is so eminent that he not only deserves to be believed when he speaketh in the name of himself and his brethren but also were it his own single testimony it might wel over-balance hundreds of those that dissent from him but have not penetrated to the bottom of the controversy as he hath done The Gentleman being unknown to me but by report I sent him my Paraenesis and desired him not to spare me in delivering his censure and judgement freely both of the book and argument and to do me rather justice then shew me favour He some weeks after returned me this answer in this excellent well-penned letter in Latin PAraenesis tita Vir clarissime eruditissime sero ad me pervenit sed tandem pervenit coâ—gratior quo diutius expectata ardentioribus votis expetita nec immerito nam praeterquam quod mihi pignus extat illius tuâ—benevoli erga me animi quem doctissimus mei amantissimus Dominus Congâ—ard mihi conciliavit eas tam celebres quae hodâ—e apud vos inter Presbyterianos Independentes versantur controversias quasi in speculo nobis exhibet ac proâ—nde instar facis micantis tot mendacâ—orum â—ebulas
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
by their practise for they assumed no jurisdiction but having perfected the Confession of Faith the Catechisme platform of government they presented them to the Parliament under the name of humble advice for they were not to determine any thing authoritatively albeit they pretend no lesse was due unto them as they speak in the 31. chapter sect 3. that ministers in synods may determine authoritatively matters of religion 3. But both the power which was delegated to the Assembly and the exercise of that power during their sitting at Westminster being a lively representation of the extent of power which all councels synods under an orthodox magistrate ever enjoyed or ought to have I wonder much they would ascribe judiciall authority to ministers in synods which they themselves had not never look't for were not to have and which they never saw practised before in any assemblies convocated by the magistrate 4. Had the Lord Jesus Christ instituted a jurisdiction distinct and independent from the magistrate they were to disclaim that ordinance which delegated a power which was none of their own but was derived immediatly from Christ not by the intervention and the chanell of the magistrate unto themselves as ministers of Christ and if any ordinance before their sitting was to be expected it was not to be directed to the ministers but to the people who were to be enjoyned to suffer the ministers to exercise that jurisdiction which they authoritatively challenge from Jesus Christ 5. Had the jurisdiction of the Assembly been acknowledged the magistrate as our brethren the Scots speak should have submitted to all resolutions of the Assembly being no longer humble advices but canons decrees and lawes made authoritatively by the Governours of churches under Iesus Christ But what sense can be given to these words when they say there is a government distinct from the magistrate Is it such a distinction as is betwixt subordinates or betwixt coordinates If the magistrates power and the presbyterian power are coordinates each must needs be independent one from the other which how inconsistent it is under one magistrate we have discussed in another place If these powers be subordinate it must be one of these three wayes 1. in coercive power 2. in judgement or judiciall determinations that are to passe for lawes obliging all sorts of people to obedience either active or passive 3. in the affinity of power in nature and definition which necessarily imports subordination betwixt them 1. For matter of coercive power the ecclesiasticall having none they must be beholden to another power which indeed makes it to be power all externall power and jurisdiction being but childrens play ens rationis a bubble a name without a thing without a power of coercion 2. For judgement if ecclesiasticall men cannot execute their power without the magistrate the question will be whether he shall execute their injunctions as a judge and interpreter or as a sergeant and executioner not interpreting the commands of the court but fulfilling them with a blind obedience and judgement for there is no medium betwixt these two If as a judge then he ought to judge of the judgements of ministers ere he doth command them to be observed and so in a manner all determinations of ministers will be but counsels and advices seeing before they have force of law and of rule they must receive the ultimate judgement and approbation from the magistrate 3. Subordination of powers implieth affinity of definition and nature betwixt the subordinates as Surgerie being subordinate to Medicine proveth the affinity betwixt Medicine and Surgery Yea if subordinate jurisdictions stand in pari gradu and in equall distance from the power they are subordinate unto it argueth an identity of jurisdictions among them as if the jurisdiction of a colledge of physitians and of a corporation of merchants be both subordinate to one magistrate it is manifest that the jurisdiction of that colledge and of that corporation are but one as springing from one head of jurisdiction thus if the jurisdictions of a church and of a corporation are of equall distance in subordination from one spring-head of jurisdiction no doubt the jurisdiction of that church and of that corporation are but one jurisdiction Now that the nature of the jurisdiction of pastors churches and synods is the same with that of magistracy needeth not to be coordinate with it it is evident by many proofs 1. There is the same use of judgement prudence and discretion as by the same yard one may measure cloth silk and thred so may the same wise politicall head and the same prudence and discretion govern a state a church and a family Dionysius the tyrant used to say he did employ the same art in governing his school at Corinth and his Kingdom of Sicily 2. There is the same nature of law in both jurisdictions for the nature of the law consisteth not in its being just equall and honest but in its being published by him or them that are invested with magistracy The better men that is not the wiser and the most rationall but the richer and the most potent give law to the rest The philosophers permit us to weigh and interpret their lawes but the magistrate enjoyneth blind obedience to his Seneca saith that the magistrates law doth not dispute but commandeth and Tullie in his thâ—…d book de natura Deorum saith I am to receive from thee O philosopher satisfaction from reason but I am to yield to the lawes that our ancestours have delivered us though they give no reason In like manner all presbyterian synods namely the generall assembly of Scotland do not give so much leave to inferiour ecclesiasticall judicatories or private persons to examine their decrees by a judgement of discretion as those of Beroea took to themselves when they examined St. Pauls doctrine and searched the Scripture to know whether it was so as he preached for their ecclesiasticall constitutions have force of law only because they have the sanction of an ecclesiasticall assembly and are not to be disputed by any inferiour judicatory whereas the nature of an ecclesiasticall law should be quite different from the civil viz. that it should not be the product of a jurisdiction compelling or requiring to assent or obey except the inward man be perswaded and convinced It may be our presbyterian brethren will say that for example excommunication hath no further validity of sentence then as it is just and done deservedly which indeed proves the nullity of all excommunications for all being done in the name of Christ all must needs be just and valid and every one excommunicating in the name of Christ should excommunicate infallibly and his excommunication should be an effect of an unerring judgement which till it be known to be infallible a man may justly question the validity of his excommunication 3. In this also there is a great affinity and agreement betwixt the jurisdiction they call ecclesiasticall
nemine contradicente Thus the late confession of faith and directory go for currant to be the opinion of the assembly because they were the act of the major part of them albeit many godly and learned men among them had no hand in framing the 30. 31. chapters of the confession In affairs concerning temporall life it may be born with when what hath been voted by the major part of the counsell or Senat goeth for the act of all and this was one of the state-precepts that Philip the II. gave to Margerite Governess of the low-Countrves by the report of Strada 5. In all great differences betwixt nation nation army and army party and party the judges that are appointed to reconcile them must propound conditions by which parties in extremes should come to some accommodation and moderation each side if need be complying and parting with some of his right to prevent a continuance of strife But such a composition cannot be expected in or by a synod for making up differences in religion since each side apprehendeth his opinion to be the truth and would think it a great sin to baulk any part of it or admit an accommodation CHAPTER XVII That the Iewish Church-officers had not a jurisdiction distinct from that of the magistrate Mr. Gillespies distinction that they were not materially but formally distinct examined The argument of Amyraldus that though they had a distinct jurisdiction yet the example of the church of the Iewes is no pattern to the Christian church discussed and proved to be of no validity THis subject touching the identity or diversity of jurisdiction ecclesiasticall and civil among the Jewes well understood will decide the whole controversie which Mr. Gillespie well apprehendeth and therefore perceiving the strength of this plea that good reason it is that the ecclesiasticall power should be distinct or not distinct in the church of the Jewes as well as in that of the Christians since the power of the keyes and of binding and loosing of censuring excommunicating and making lawes authoritatively be the same in both churches and therefore that it cannot be supposed without great inconvenience that the jurisdictions were indistinct amongst the Jewes but distinct amongst the Christians this I say being considered by him makes him withall endeavour to lay hold on that opinion that maketh jurisdictions distinct in the Commonwealth of Israel for this supposition he takes to be the ground-work of the ecclesiasticall jurisdiction But I will not enter far into this matter having in the examen of the 30. chapter of the confession of the Rever Assembly taken off the main objection from Amariah and Zebadiah for I cannot think but Mr. Gillespie hath embraced this opinion for conveniency and more because it is subservient to the fabrick of his book then that it hath any great probability 1. because most of the learned Papists and others even his fellow-presbyters are of another judgement who if they had had never so little shew or likelinesse for a double jurisdiction among the Jewes specially the Papists and with them Amyraldus and others no doubt they would have made as much of this advantage to further their cause as Mr. Gillespie thinketh to prevail with it for himself 2. because Mr. Gillespie when he hath done what he can to assert a double jurisdiction in the church of the Jewes reaps very little benefit by it for he pulls down by his large concessions with one hand what he hath striven to set up with the other For the first it were an endlesse labour to produce the names of the authors that are for Erastus opinion in this particular and for one Constantinus l'Empereur which he pretends to be on his side twenty may be brought of a contrary opinion Not long since discoursing with Manasseh Ben Israel at the house of my noble friend Mr. Sadler about this same subject he told me he could not conceive how this opinion that there was a double jurisdiction among the Jewes was taken up by the Christians and that he held it altogether absurd against Scripture and reason Nothing can be added to what Grotius Selden and Cunaeus have written on this subject Amyraldus in his Theses de spiritu servitutis thes 28. saith that religion and policy were so straightly conjoyned among the Jewes that one being overthrown the other could not stand but must needs fall too and in his book of the government of the church p. 46. he saith the same man did judge Israel as a soveraign magistrate and was also over matters of religion Lud. Capellus parte 3. de ministerii verbi necessitate thes 18 19 c. doth not only conspire with Amyraldus but outgo him in asserting that the 70. judges or elders though lay-men and not of the tribe of Levi were not only to compose controversies and suits in law but also to instruct the people about the worship of God and to teach them the fear of the Lord so far that from the time of Ezra to Jesus Christ any in the synagogues which were known to be gifted might teach read and expound the Scripture which he proves by the example of Jesus Christ Luc. 4. 17. who though unknown was admitted to expound the Scripture and of St. Paul Act. 13. 15. My rever Father is of the same mind namely in the 19. chapter de Monarchia temporali where he saith that neither the Levites nor the chief Priests made use of any other law then that which was common and that they had no ecclesiasticall judges distinct from the civil Iudicious R. Hooker is very expresse for us in his 8. book of ecclesiasticall polity p. 144. Our state is according to the pattern of Gods own ancient elect people which people was not part of them the Commonwealth and part of them the Church of God but the self-same people whole and entire were both under one chief governour on whose supream authority they did all depend I have alledged elsewhere Mr. Lightfoot wholly concurring with Richard Hooker Mr. Herbert Thorndike a judicious writer and much versed in the antiquities of the Jewes is wholly for an identity of jurisdiction among the Jewes In 8. chapter he saith that when Moses was dead a President was chosen over and beside the seventy whom they called the Nasi to be in his stead from age to age as R. Moses writeth Which refuteth what some say that the President of the Sanedrim was alwayes a Priest and sheweth that the chief ruler of the Commonwealth was ruler over persons and causes of all kinds without any distinction of civil and ecclesiasticall In the 9. chapter we have these words The Sanedrim consisted of the chief of that people as well as of the Priests and Levites because the chief causes of that Commonwealth as well as of religion passed through their hands Tostatus a great Papist and writer upon Matth. 16. v. 19. will tell us the opinion of his party In the old Testament a
where the words kahal or gnedah are taken sometimes for the whole congregation as Deuter. 31. v. 30. where Moses pronounced a canticle in the hearing of the whole church or congregation and yet the 28. verse sheweth that by the whole congregation the magistrates and elders are meant thus Levit. 4. v. 13 14 15 and 21. where if the people had trespassed ignorantly the church that is the assembly of magistrates and elders are commanded to offer atonement for the sin and Deut. 23. v. 1. the eunuch the bastard the Moabite and the Ammonite are barred from the congregation or the church that is from publick employment for a converted Moabite was not forbidden from the Jewish church Sometimes for a senat of judges and magistrates called Synedrium as Proverb 26. v. 26. and so it is interpreted by the LXX and there you have a plain exposition of the word church Matth. 18. for the like cause of wrong and injury is spoken of in both places and the like judicatory so Ecclesiasticus 23. v. 24. the adulteresse is convented before the church that is before the judicatory of judges and elders Which places manifestly declare that Christ meant such a judicatory amongst the Jewes whereof the words heathen and publican make further proof and that Jesus Christ spoke of the same kind of judicatory and men as ordinarily were found when he spoke the words but it is evident that neither in Christs time nor ever since his time the word church was taken for an assembly or senat of ecclesiasticalls or an assembly of pastors So that was there any such sentence of excommunication or censure inflicted by the church upon the party that did the wrong this judgement or sentence must needs be pronounced by such a Synedrium or senat of judges and elders endowed with judiciall authority as the word church was usually taken for among the Jews But suppose the word church was not used by Christ in that sense our brethren should shew us that Jesus Christ did speak it in a Scripture sense and as it was taken in the writings of the Evangelists and Apostles namely as they would have it for an assembly of Christian church-officers invested with judiciall authority Here one controverted place of Scripture must be expounded by another and while there is very great likelyhood that Jesus Christ meant a senat ordinarily sitting amongst the Jewes to decide controversies of wrong betwixt brother and brother and which was not made up of officers distinct from the magistrate or men delegated by him if they will weaken our plea and exposition which is very rationall and naturall and make it as probable and likely that he spoke of a company of church-officers distinct from the magistrate they must look out some parallel place either in the old or new Testament where the word church is so understood which I am confident they will never find But to yield as much as I can though I find no where in the old Testament the words kahal and gnedah church signifying such an assembly of church-officers yet I find 1 Sam. 19. v. 20. the word lahakath mentioned where it is spoken of a company of Prophets which word our brethren might as well interpret a church but neither would this serve their turn for in that place of Samuel quoted those prophets were not sitting in a senat church or colledge nor were they about any church act but were travelling in the high-way and however our Lord Jesus Christ had no reference to such a church or assembly of prophets who as prophets were never endowed with a judiciall power Samuel indeed was over them as an Arch-prophet but as such he had no jurisdiction in Israel but as a Prince and Judge of the people CHAPTER XIX That a particular assembly of Christians meeting in one place about the worship of God is the only true visible church mentioned in Scripture That that church considered as an assembly of Christians bringeth forth other kinds of acts then it doth considered as a society of men by which the nature and extent of the power of a private church is made clear and evident HAving mentioned the acceptions of the word Church in the new Testament there being not any visible assembly either according to the first or second acception it remaineth that a particular assembly of Christians meeting in one place with one accord about the worship of God enjoying the same ordinances hath the true denomination of a church This church presbyterian particular church or congregationall is the true adequate subject of all church-right discipline and power which it enjoyes partly by a divine positive right as it is a congregation of Christians partly by a divine naturall civil politick right as it is a society of men endowed with wisedome prudence and liberty to govern themselves by such lawes as they find most convenient for their subsistence The first is a divine positive right for however men are so or otherwise commanded by some externall power yet the pastor is to look for a flock and people and the people for a pastor and both are to meet in as convenient a place and competent a number as they can to enjoy the ordinances of Christ by hearing the word praying and partaking of the Sacraments by a warrant and command from Christ By the same right warrant and command the pastor or pastors of the church are to perform all the pastorall acts as to preach to those that will hear not by constraint but willingly to command in the name of Christ to exhort to dehort to beseech men to be reconciled to God to lay out Christ in the promises of the Gospell to denounce the judgements of God to the impenitent and unbelievers to admit to the Eucharist all baptized persons and visibly professing Christianity who are not ignorant or publick infamous offenders ' or profane refusing none by any judiciall act of theirs denouncing sentence of excommunication or any other censure but by their generall duty as Christians by which they are bound not to have communion with such unfruitfull workers of darknesse Otherwise they are to impose nothing no injunction no censure or punishment but on such as without constraint and willingly undergo it and are contented so to do The other acts of a pastor out of the congregation are to offer himself sent or unsent to visit and comfort the sick the prisoner the widow the fatherlesse to see all persons and families that are of his flock to be the same at home as at church of the same Gospell-conversation and that all ranks be filled with the knowledge of the Lord to respect no mans degree or person in delivering his message from Christ saying even as John Baptist to Herod it is not for thee to keep thy brothers wife briefly to do the office of a faithfull minister in season and out of season The acts of the people in a society of church-members are double some do
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
1â—41 relates what troubles and ado there was to bring it in that many alledged the examples of the neighbour-churches meaning Zurich Bern c. among which excommunication was not in use some saying that bâ—…t the Popish tyranny was recalled But all these difficulties saith Beza Calvin surmounted yet he did not censure other churches as unchristian that had not proceeded so far nor those pastors who did not conceive their flocks needed to be restrained by such a bit or bridle And indeed Calvin himself though very eager to bring in excommunication insomuch that sometimes he calls it the yoke of Christ the discipline of Christ professeth to be ready to endure either death or banishment rather then to suffer that the towns senat should take upon them the right of excommunicating as he saith in an Epistle to Viret yet he cannot but speak very respectfully of his neighbour ministers who acknowledged no such necessity upon excommunication as that it should be accounted amongst the ordinances of Christ These be his words in an Epistle to the pastors of Zurich in the year 1553. All men are not of the same opinion concerning excommunication neither am I ignorant that there be many godly and learned men who think not excommunication necessary under Christian Princes I should not care much to erre in that point of excommunication with Bullinger and Musculus upon condition that I were as godly and learned as they But however the opinions of the neighbour churches and ministers about excommunication stood Calvins great authority prevailed to set up excommunication In an Epistle to a person not named pag. 409. and 410. in folio he declareth at large which way he went about it and there he hath these words which carry as much authority as if his will had been a sufficient rule for Geneva and so for other churches to be governed by Volui ut aequum est spiritualem potestatem à civili judicio distingui ita in usum rediit excommunicatio It was my will that as it is fitting the spirituall power should be distinguished from the civil judgement and so excommunication came again to be in use But however his will was he was never able to make good his ecclesiasticall or spirituall jurisdiction distinct and independent from that of the magistrate 1. Because the same spirituall senat was made and constituted by the senat of the town as Calvin acknowledgeth in an Epistle to Bullinger in the year 1553. and therefore it was subordinate to the jurisdiction of the civil magistrate not only in its first making but also all the time after just as when Constantine the great instituted for a Episcopalia Bishops courts he looked upon them as depending on his jurisdiction not only in their first constitution but also in their duration in the reviewing and ratifying their lawes and sentences or disannulling them 2. It is true Beza saith in the life of Calvin an 1541. that at the first constitution of that ecclesiasticall senat and its lawes by the magistrate and the people there was a soveraign law made that no sort of men ministers magistrates or people should hereafter presume and attempt to disannull what therein was established by the law-makers of Geneva This indeed would have been a very foolish absurd law like that of Clodius whereof Cicero speaketh that could not be repealed or abrogated either by the senat or people for when ever the law is abrogated that clause also that the law cannot be abrogated is likewise abrogated Who would think that either the magistrate and people of Geneva should so enslave themselves and tye their hands as not to be able to repeal review or reforme lawes formerly made by them or that they should believe their lawes were composed and given by them with such an unerring judgement that they needed no further recognition 3. This jurisdiction called by Calvin ecclesiasticall could not be exercised and managed without a coercive restraining power or a power of magistracy either seated in the ministers and consistory or delegated from the magistrate For among the lawes of discipline of Geneva this is one If any one in contempt of the ecclesiasticall sentence or judgement is so bold as to attempt to come to the Sacrament let him be repelled and driven back by the minister Here then there is a power of magistracy or a coercive power assumed by the ministers without which he confesseth that all ecclesiasticall censures are null and of no effect So in an Epistle to Viret an 1547. speaking of a woman within the consistory who declined the presbyteriall court and judgement and besides did tire them out with her too much prating she saith he would have overwhelmed us with her thundering language if she had not been put out by force I ask here by what power was this woman thrust out was it ecclesiasticall and spirituall and a power of binding and loosing or a civil coercive power and of the two keyes they say they have which of them was taken in hand and by which end of the key was the woman driven out 4. But the nullity of that spirituall jurisdiction is evidently demonstrated by the perpetuall conflict and clashing in Calvins time betwixt the sentences and judgements of the consistory of Geneva and those of the magistrate whereof I have given many examples out the life and Epistles of Calvin Among others of one Bartolier who being excommunicated by the consistory did appeal from that sentence to the magistrate who once did confirm the judgement of the consistory and another time did evacuate and disannull it Whereupon there being a great contest betwixt the magistrate and the consistory to whom the judgement and right of excommunicating did belong Calvin with much earnestnesse obtained that ere any thing were concluded the opinion of four cities of the Switzers should be desired Bullinger maketh mention only of one city namely Zurich in an Epistle of the Senat of Geneva to that of Zurich wherein among other quere's this was one Whether there is no other way to excommunicate a man but by the consistory In that Epistle Bullinger though very fearfull to offend Calvin yet manifestly sheweth his dislike of the whole businesse and exhorteth him to moderation and mildnesse Whatever was the issue of the contest we do not read that the magistrate of Geneva did ever repeal this decree of the court that the last judgement about excommunication falls under the cognizance of the Senat of Geneva CHAPTER XXXII A continuation of the History of excommunication in France the Low-Countreys Scotland the Palatinate How it came to pass thaâ— amongst reformed states the Scottish ecclesiasticall jurisdiction ascended to such a height What plea the reformed churches in France have for excommunication That it is more justifiable among them then in churches under an orthodox magistrate THe reformed churches of France took their pattern of discipline and therewithall excommunication rather from Geneva then from the Protestant
who had great jurisdictions many vassals and retainers the greatest part of which received no luster or increase of dignity or wealth from their Prince these had reason in emulation or opposition to that small number which the King favoured and protected to join themselves with the Kirk party there to find what the court could not afford them I have nothing to say concerning excommunication in the Low-countries but that they have no better plea for it then the churches of Scotland or Geneva I should now close up the history of excommunication by relating how it sped in the Palatinate where I think it was received the last of any reformed church though that place was one of the first that was reformed from Popery This may be seen in an Epistle of Zanchius to Conradus Hubertus in the year 1568. where he relates that for many years there was an attempt made to bring in excommunication which was withstood by many not so much that they had a dislike of it as that for some politick reasons it was not judged yet seasonable to stir further in it however by the mention that was made of it the spirits of men have been much alienated one from another Then he tells us of one George Withers an English-man who being to dispute for his degree of Doctor under Boquinus among other positions had one touching the necessity of introducing excommunication which was opposed with much eagernesse so far that one of his opponents being straitned for time so that he could not alledge all that he had to say against excommunication desired another day of dispuâ—ation which being granted Zanchius saith that the disputation grew so hot that one of the opponents a Minister protested openly against the falsity of the position as contrary to the word of God At which time Erastus amongst others wrote against excommunication It is observable that Zanchius did but favour underhand the advocates of excommunication for he saith for many honest reasons I would not intermeddle but keep silence By what I have related of the practise of excommunication in severall churches and countreys we may easily conceive and apprehend 1. That excommunication when retained upon the account of confederate discipline and as answering to the casting out of the synagogue among the Jewes may very well consist with the peace safety and integrity both of life and doctrine in the churches of France or any other under a contrary magistrate 2. That excommunication retained by churches under a contrary magistrate upon the plea of jus Divinum for their discipline and excommunication may be exercised with as little outward disturbance dispute as if they did retain it only upon the account of confederate discipline but such churches then will not only usurp a power which hath no warrant from Christ but besides will enslave mens consciences laying upon them a yoak which is none of Christs 3. But that excommunication upon what plea soever retained by those churches that live under an orthodox magistrate is inconsistent both with the outward peace of the nation where they live and the inward peace and satisfaction of mens minds 4. That excommunication as it is retained by the reformed churches in France or any other under a magistrate differing from them and upon what plea soever exercised either of confederate discipline or as had by Divine right is not attended with those clashings disputes and inconveniences that it is subject unto among those churches that live under an orthodâ—x magistrate keeping with them the same unity of faith that for these reasons 1. A church-member excommunicated in France will hardly complain to the magistrate for he would but slight his complaints and make a mock of the man and therefore the party excommunicated must needs sit still and stand to the sentence against him but a member of a church excommunicated in Geneva or Scotland looking upon the magistrate as a friend to the religion he professâ—th and a defendour and protectour of his own church-discipline will be ready if he can make his cause probably good and plausible to sue and seek for redresse Hence we see there were more appeals in Calvins time from the church-judicatory to that of the magistrate in the little territory of Geneva then are in a whole age through all the churches of France 2. Church-members under a contrary magistrate will be more united in affections and minds and so will keep closer to the observation of the discipline 3. Under a contrary magistrate members are usually such as believe what they outwardly professe and not like those under an orthodox magistrate where there is more of outward conformity to the religion of the state which is no hinderance but rather a furtherance to honours and prâ—ferments and therefore where there is more evennesse foundnesse sincerity and zeal there must be also a greater submission to the church-discipline and lesse clashings arising from the variety of dispositions in the members 4. There is a great necessity of exercising a jurisdiction among the reformed churches in France for the composing of such differences among themselves as have relation to their doctrine and religion which otherwise being opened to the popish magistrate would but bring our religion into contempt and derision But under a magistrate that is a friend to religion these differences may be with as little fear of scandall and derision to the profession and doctrine made up and reconciled by men of his own appointment and chusing as within a consistory and as well and better by the consistory if delegated thereunto and invested with authority from the magistrate then any other way so that there be but one jurisdiction 5. As there was a great necessity of discipline among the Jewes living under an adverse magistrate which should be in some sort distinct from their jurisdiction so was there lesse need either to have it divided from that of the magistrate when he was a countenancer of their religion or to have any at all more then the law of the land The like may be said of the Christian churches I will conclude this charter with two or three passages out of Andrew Rivet my much honoured Uncle when he lived and whose authority is of great weight with all the Divines of this land namely the presbyterian ministers and which taken into consideration will be found to deliver as much as ever I have asserted though none yet hath inveighed against him as an Erastian and an enemy to order and discipline They are all to be found in his exposition of the decalogue tom 1. about the 1373. page It cannot be denyed but that the principall duty in asserting and vindicating religion yea in establishing it pertained to the King of Iuda for when ever the Kings mind changed there was alwayes a change in religion which change whether for good or bad is alwayes attributed to the King as his act and deed neither could ever the chief Priests procure a