head of the Church WE proceed to examine what the Rever Assembly say that Jesus Christ hath instituted this ecclesiasticall â—…sdiction as King and head of his Church Mr. Gillespie one of their body and therefore the best interpreter of their meaning saith in his 2. book chap. 5. that Jesus Christ hath two Kingdoms 1. a generall as he is the eternall Son of God the head of all principalities powers raigning over all creatures 2. a particular Kingdom as he is mediatour raigning over the church only by which church he understandeth a visible church of saints combined in such a body as is the church of Scotland enjoying the ordinances and the discipline of Christ And of this Kingdom he understandeth Matth. 16. v. 28. There be some standing here which shall not taste of death till they see the Son of man coming in his Kingdom So doth Beza against Erastus who with Mr. Gillespie out of those words of Christ my Kingdom is not of this world concludeth two things 1. that the ecclesiasticall government is distinct from the civill or that of the magistrate 2. that that Kingdom is an aggregation of many churches under one presbytery In the 6. chap. of the same book he is very prolix to prove that Jesus Christ as mediatour and head of the Church hath not appointed the magistrate to be his viceregent in the government of the church in the second acception I confesse that the holy Scripture mentioneth two Kingdoms but that both these be visible ones I deny flatly particularly that Jesus Christ is called King and head of the church in reference to the visible congregations of Christians or that by the body of Christ is meant the visible assembly of those that make outward profession of the Christian religion Let us then consider in this Kingdom of Jesus Christ as mediatour the nature of the King and head of his scepter sword power weapons keyes fullnesse that so we may see if all these qualifications yea if any one of these are proper to any visible church particular and nationall Both Rivet and Reynolds in their comments upon the 110. Psalme make this Kingdom wholly spirituall not of this world much lesse seen in this world though known to be in this world It is that Kingdom which is many times mentioned in the Gospell but never once taken for a visible government of men professing outwardly the name of Christ but for the Kingdom of grace and that government which Christ hath over those whom he ruleth by his spirit of adoption The keyes of this Kingdom are the door of utterance in the ministery whereby men have entrance these keyes keep out from coming in those that are without doors but never put out any that are once in and therefore most absurd it is to ground the power of excommunication upon the power of the keyes committed by Jesus Christ to the Apostles if the Kingdom of which Christ speaketh is the Kingdom of heaven or of grace will they say that an excommunicated person is put oâ— of the Kingdom of grace The scepter and sword of this Kingdom is the word of God The weapons are not carnall nor are they used to the putting a man out by excommunication but to the pulling down the strong holds of sin not by tying a man with church-censures but bringing into captivity his imaginations to the obedience of Christ This truth broke through the darknesse of popery and was acknowledged by those that were oppressed by the Popes tyrannie so in the year 1080. the advocate of the Emperour confut 9. saith that the preaching of Gregory the 7. was new since the church had no other sword then that of the spirit which was the word of God This language was acknowledged by the canonists to be in the mouths of the Popes adversaries who yet kept within the communion of Rome never dreaming of a Wicleff or a Luther as can inter 33. quest 3. Ecclesia non habet gladium nisi spiritualem qui non occidit sed vivisificat The law of this Kingdom is not the discipline or censure of the church but the law both of the Gospell and of faith called also the law of the spirit For by the power of that Kingdom described by the holy Ghost in the new Testament and mentioned in 50. places is not in any of them understood the ecclesiasticall power or any such thing as the power of ministers presbyteries synods to make decrees canons to determine authoritatively to suspend excommunicate and absolve but alwayes is meant that power that translateth from darknesse to light and from the power of satan unto God by which we are made sons of God Ioh. 1. v. 12. by which we are enlightened Act. 26. v. 18. and raised unto newnesse of life The fullnesse of that Kingdom is the saving gifts and graces given to the members The head of this Kingdom is Jesus Christ our King Priest and Prophet ruling by his spirit his subjects which are his members offering satisfying and interceding only for them teaching none savingly but them There is no governour or viceregent of this church but the spirit of God working in the heart by the word preached or read and guiding into all truth Though God hath no visible governours of this Kingdom yet he hath externally many subservient instruments and ministers for the advancing of that Kingdom as magistrates by their jurisdiction pastors by their function all godly people by their generall calling and dutie their persecutions afflictions maladies and particularly the ministers of the Gospell are main agents in Gods hands for the building up of that Kingdom What they know they do is the least part of their ministery they themselves being ignorant what and how they work by it in mens hearts Gods chief minister is Christ in the word the power is the efficacious working of the word the keyes are the openings of the heart to the word or rather the openings of the word to the heart and the receiving of the person into the heavenly fellowship This power is not placed in the ministers but the word which though it is delivered by them not only in a way of beseeching and exhorting but also of commanding yet that jurisdiction is only effectuall on those that of unwilling are rendred willing so that it is rather the jurisdiction of the word then of the minister for the ministers operation in the ministery is like to that of the artists in their chymicall operations where they are rather spectators then actors admovendo agentia passivis for nature and fire are the main agents They are like an husbandman in a vintage who maketh not the wine but ordereth it powring it from one vessel to another This being the nature of the Kingdom and church of God of which Christ is the head and King it remaineth to enquire who is the viceregent of God in governing the visible congregations of Christians meeting about the worship of God Properly
themselves with a power and jurisdiction improperly so called leaving to the magistrate the opposite member of power properly so called which is a silent confession that they have none at all since they can yet find no name for it I have one division more of ecclesiasticall power brought by Amyraldus and some others quite different from the rest being not a dichotomie but a trichotomie not a division into two but three coordinate powers the one belonging to the magistrate the second to lay-elders and deputies of the church and the third appertaining to ministers These three ecclesiasticall powers he maketh to be conspicuous in all ecclesiasticall assemblies and synods where the magistrate hath his ecclesiasticall indirect extrinsecall power as they call it the ministers have their intrinâ—…call direct ecclesiasticall power and the lay-elders have a lesse intrinsecall direct ecclesiasticall power for it hath not found a name yet for it is say they neither of the nature of ecclesiasticall power belonging to the magistrate nor of that which is proper to ministers but a mungrell ecclesiasticall power in regard they cannot perform by their power those acts that belong either to magistracy or ministery For besides that they cannot preach and administer the Sacraments Amyraldus will not allow them any voice but consultative not deliberative and only in matters of discipline and ecclesiasticall policy and that power they say they have common with the magistrate who over and above hath his ecclesiasticall power which neither the ministers nor lay-elders have any thing to do with Lastly the ministers have their ecclesiasticall power distinct from the ecclesiasticall power of both The bare relating of these divisions of power and modifications of ecclesiasticall jurisdiction is sufficient to confute them so that there is little need of authority to witnesse their nullity and vanity Yet three grave and learned divines namely Martyr Musculus and Gualterus would have the name and the thing to be abolished Martyr loc com 13. class 4. § 9. sheweth the little need of multiplying powers whenas that of the magistrate is sufficient and that David Salomon Iosias being civil magistrates did think that religion belonged to their care and Constantinus Theodosius Iustinianus had no greater thought then to constitute the true church of God Musculus is yet more pregnant loc com de magistratibus what hinders I pray but that this may be ecclesiasticall which is done neither by the church it self nor in the name and by the power of the church but is done commanded and enjoyned by the magistrate within the church in the name and power of God and to procure the good of the church and represse the evils committed in the church A little lower he hath these expresse and golden words the way and nature of government cannot bear that in the same people there be two authentick powers two diverse legislations and dominations except it be by subordination as there is no place for two heads in one body Gualterus Homil. in 1 Cor. 5. is no lesse expresse They distinguish betwixt ecclesiasticall and politicall jurisdiction but this distinction is taken out of the shop of the papists for it is not to be had in the Scripture for it is plain that the same way must be observed in the New as in the old Testament And a little lower The same then must be observed in the new Testament and no need there is that the ministers of the word should have a peculiar senate taking upon them what belongeth to the magistrate they may be censors of manners such as are needfull in a greater commonwealth where ordinary magistrates cannot attend all businesses but these are created by the magistrates authority and ought to do all by his command and not ly a peculiar power of their own distinct from that of the magistrate Such passages and many more I alledge in my Paraenesis p. 16. and 17. No marvell if those that recede from the plainnesse of the Scripture have knit themselves such nets and windings of powers in which while they think to be safeâ— they lose themselves With the help of those distinctions and divisions of power M. Gillespie stretcheth and shortneth his ecclesiasticall power as a leathern point sometimes lengthening it so far as that the magistrate may take hold of it by one end and sometimes giving both ends and the middle into the hands of the ministers I will alledge one or two more places out of Mr. Gillespies book by which his art will appear in extending and contracting his ecclesiasticall power one while making the magistrates and ministers to share the power between them another while giving to either all or nothing Pag. 263. speaking of the extent of the ecclesiasticall power of the magistrate he is usefull saith he and helpfull to the Kingdom of Christ the mediatour magistracy being serviceable to purge the church of scandall to promote the course of the Gospell and the edification of one another But how not perfectly but protanto not every way but more suo not intrinsecally but extrinsecally not primarily but secondarily not directly but ex consequentâ— not sub formalitate scandali but sub formalitate criminis or not under the notion of scandall but of crime I alledge this not to confute it having elsewhere shewed the weaknesse and nullity of such divisions what a lame and impotent thing is eccleâ—asticall power that needeth so many woodden legs and crutches But I pray doth not the magistrate punish blasphemy as a scandall and a contagious offence communicative to others Pag. 264. The coercive part in compelling the obstinate and unruly to submit to the presbyteriall and synodicall sentence belongs to the magistrate not as if the magistrate had nothing to do but to be an executioner of the pleasure of church officers or as if he were by a blind and implicite faith to constrain all men to stand to their determination God forbid The magistrate must have his full liberty to judge of that which he is to compell men to do to judge of it not only judicio apprehensivo by understanding and apprehending aright what it is but judicio discretivo by the judgement of Christian prudence and discretion examining by the word of God the grounds reasons and warrants of the thing that he may in faith and not doubtingly adde his authority thereto in which judging he doth judicare not judicem agere that is he is judex suarum actionum he judgeth whether he ought to adde his civil authority to this or that which seemeth good to church-officers and doth not concur therewith except he be satisfied in his conscience Whoever examineth narrowly the extent of power which he yields to belong to the magistrate will soon discover that all the ecclesiasticall power is to be managed by the magistrate 1. He maketh all synodicall or presbyterian power to be of no force without a coercive power 2. that the magistrate must have his full liberty to judge of
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
and the civil and therefore no need to make two of one that ecclesiasticall presbyterian jurisdiction is bounded by the same limits as is the civill jurisdiction which is against the nature of all other jurisdictions different from the magistrates power though subordinate to it as is the maritall and paternall powers none doubting but a father in England hath a power over his son in France and that a wife is subject to her husband however distant from him Now it is granted by all that the jurisdiction of churches combined and that of synods never went beyond the magistrates jurisdiction that the churches of Persia Aethiopia and India were not tyed to observe the deciees of the first councill of Nice nor the reformed churches of France those of the synod of Dordrecht neither the church of Barwick to submit to the orders of the generall assembly of Scotland and yet some do not stick to maintain that a man excommunicated in Scotland is also bound by the same sentence in France or Holland because if we may believe them it is reasonable that the sphear of activity within which excommunication acteth should as much spread down wards as upwards and that since a man bound by excommunication at Edenburgh is also tyed in heaven good reason he should be bound and fast in any part of the earth 4. This also which all churches classes and synods assume makes their jurisdiction wholly concurring in nature and property with the jurisdiction of the magistrate which is that as in all civil and politicall assemblies the major and the stronger part in votes not in reasons doth carry it so decrees and canons because the major part have voted them to be such are therefore receivable by inferiour ecclesiasticall judicatories as they call them whereas since they pretend that ecclesiasticall jurisdiction is of a quite different nature from that of the magistrate it were most convenient that it should not be like it in this main particular but that private men or churches should adhere to truth not to multitude not numbring the votes but weighing the reasons And indeed this was well considered by the Parliament in their ordinance for calling of the assembly for though they took upon themselves that power of legislation jurisdiction whose votes are not weighed but numbred and which cannot be otherwise exercised in this world yet they very prudently conceived that such a jurisdiction could not be assumed by churchmen as such in matters of religion for they never intended that whatsoever should be transacted or defined by the major part of the ministers of the Assembly should be received for a canon and an ecclesiasticall law that should stand in force since they expressely enjoyn in the rules which they prescribed to the assembly 1. that their decisions and definitions should be presented to the Parliament not under the name of law made to them but of humble advice 2. that no regard should be had to the number of the persons dissenting or assenting but that each party should subscribe their names to their opinion 5. Another argument to prove that the ecclesiasticall and the magistrates power are not coordinate but that the ecclesiasticall is subordinate to that of the magistrate and that they both are of the same nature is that both of them magistrate and ministers challenge not only the duty of messengers from God in delivering to the people the lawes of God but also as judges exercise power about making new lawes which do oblige to obedience for conscience sake for the assemblies presbyteries of Scotland do not only presse obedience to the lawes expressely set down in Scripture but also to their canons decrees and constitutions 6. Another argument to prove the identity of the powers ecclesiasticall and civil is that both are conversant about lawes and constitutions that are made by men such are most of the canons and constitutions of synods and ecclesiasticall assemblies which are no more expresse Scripture then the Instinian Code and therefore it is altogether needlesse to constitute two coordinate humane legislative powers 7. But suppose that all the decrees canons constitutions of presbyteries and church-assemblies were word of God and divine precepts this very thing that they are divine constitutions and that one jurisdiction or other must be conceived enjoyning by a sanction and commanding obedience to them argueth that ecclesiasticall and civil jurisdiction are but one For what can the ecclesiasticall jurisdiction do more then to give a sanction to the lawes of God which thing the magistrate is to do If he must give a sanction to the decalogue why not to all other precepts which are equally of divine institution 8. It is absurd to put under the Gospell a difference betwixt the jurisdiction or law of Christ and the law of God the universall Monarch as Mr. Gillespie speaketh p. 261. for there is no precept of the decalogue there is nothing good holy honest and of good report but is the law of Jesus Christ and therefore since the magistrate cannot be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a minister of God as St. Paul calls him but he must be a minister of Jesus Christ and that he cannot be keeper of the decalogue and of the law of God under Moses administration but he must be also the keeper of the law of Christ what need to constitute two coordinate judiciall powers each of them being pari gradu subordinate to Jesus Christ Lastly if the Kingdom of Jesus Christ is not of this world and that this Kingdom as our brethren tell us is the presbyterian government then this Kingdom must have a jurisdiction and lawes quite different from the Kingdom and jurisdiction of this world which yet doth not prove true by the parallels we have made of both jurisdictions Mr. Gillespie a member of that Assembly pag. 85. endeavoureth to shew what a wide difference there is betwixt these two jurisdictions in their nature causes objects adjuncts but I might upon the same grounds maintain the like wide difference betwixt martiall navall testamentall paternall maritall and civil power all differing and yet subordinate to that of the magistrate I might also attribute to each society its peculiar power placing in a colledge of physicians a medicall power subordinate to God the God of bodies health and outward safety as the civil is subordinate to the God of the Universe and the ecclesiasticall to Christ For if the God of nations hath instituted the civil power and the God of saints the ecclesiasticall as Mr. Gillespie speaketh what hinders but that the God of nature hath instituted the medicall power And if morall good be the object of the civil power and spirituall good of the spirituall power why may not bodily health be the object of the medicall power CHAPTER VI. Whether Iesus Christ hath appointed a jurisdiction called ecclesiasticall as King and head of his Church Of the nature of the Kingdom of God In what sense the magistrate is
not trouble the reader with many quotations Yet to shew that this is no new doctrine I might produce some famous Romish authors who thought no lesse in the darkest times of ignorance for so Claude Fauchet hath left written a famous Historian and a Papist in his book of the liberties of the Gallicane church who out of Gregorie of Tours and the practise of his time proveth that the Kings of France were reputed heads of the church a title which many 100. years after was much found fault with in the Kings of England by the Romanists yea by some reformers He concludes his discourse thus which sheweth that the Bishops of that time did hold the King assisted by his counsell of State to be under God head on earth of the church in his Kingdom and not the Pope whom if they had looked on as the head they would have sent unto him the conclusion of the councill of Orleans and not to King Clovis So speaketh the author of the Review of the councill of Trent lib. 6. cap. 5. The ecclesiasticks in France do not hold their ecclesiastick jurisdiction from the Pope but from the King though the Iesuits teach otherwise CHAPTER VII The strength of Mr. Gillespies reasons to disprove that the magistrate is not chief governour of the church under Christ examined ALl that I have said doth sufficiently overthrow what Mr. Gillespie alledgeth for a double jurisdiction and against the magistrates being the chief governour of the church under Christ To make good that in a hundred places he doth much under value the magistrates power in sacred things namely p. 187. that the magistrate though Christian and godly doth not exnatura rei and in regard of his particular vocation intend the glory of Iesus Christ as mediator and King of the church In the next page The glory of Iesus Christ as mediatour and King of the church is not the end of magistracy And in the same page he saith that the end of magistracy is not godlinesse honesty but peace and quietnesse Pag. 235. he saith the magistrate is not to rule in the name of Christ Pag. 250. he saith the magistrate of England is not a member of the church as a magistrate but as a Christian In the 294. page the civil magistrate is Gods viceregent not Christs and ibid. If the magistrate be supreme head and governour of the church under Christ then the ministers of the church are the magistrates ministers as well as Christs and must act in the magistrates name and as subordinate to him and the magistrate shall be Christs minister and act in Christs name By all this he declareth his opinion more then he proveth it But to elude whatever strength this carries I further adde that God maketh use of two main instruments to promote and advance the Kingdom of Christ as mediatour 1. The first is the sacred function wholly set a part by God to preach the glad tidings of God reconciled to the world which function was first laid on Christ and then on the Apostles and the ministers of the Gospell who are embassadors and messengers of from Christ In this function there is no jurisdiction annexed but what the spirit in the word hath upon mens hearts for their conviction and conversion In the exercise of this function there is no law made by him that bears it but the law of the spirit no censure inflicted but on such as either willingly and not by constraint undergo it and chose whether they will or no or when it pleaseth God in judgement to afflict the despisers of Gods ministers ordinances This function I grant is not exercised in the magistrates name but Christs nor is it subordinate to him 2. The second thing servient if I may so speak and subservient to the promoting of the Kingdom of Christ is the magistrate and magistracy in as much as which I said before it cannot be that ministers and people assemble synods be called an outward government settled lawes published good men rewarded bad men punished heresies and hereticks rejected ministers maintained union preserved except ministers people synods be invested with a power of magistrate and magistracy These two as I suppose being undeniably true all Mr. Gillespies assertions above-mentioned will be found built upon the sand The magistrate having not the sacred function on him is no minister nor ambassadour of and from Christ neither doth the inward operative jurisdiction annexed to the sacred function arise from magistracy ex natura rei In that regard the minister preaching the Gospell and exercising his pastorall function is not the magistrates minister but Christs But as magistracy is the second necessary instrument which God employeth to promote the Kingdom of his Son in the world and for as much as it cannot be so much as imagined that magistracy is inherent in all pastors and assemblies of churches and synods no doubt but the ministers in that consideration may be called the magistrates ministers as both in the same respect are Christs ministers If Christs Kingdom cannot be nor ever was promoted without magistracy actually present and acting then the magistrate is a main minister of Christ in those acts Reverend and learned Mr. Lightfoot in his Harmony of the New Testament upon the 1 Cor. 5. clearly evinceth that church-officers cannot be so much as conceived to govern the churches without magistracy either assumed or delegated for having told us that every synagogue of the Jewes had magistracy within their own body judging betwixt party and party in matters of money Health damage yea inflicting corporall punishments he addeth all things well considered it may not be so monstrons as it seems to some to say it might very well be so in those times of Christian congregations for since as it might be shewed Christ and his Apostles in platforming the modell of Christian churches in those times did keep very close to the platform of synagogues and since the Romans in those times made no difference betwixt Iewes Iudaizing and Iewes that were turned Christians for as yet there was no persecution raised against Christianity why might not Christian congregations have and exercise their double function of ministry and magistracy in them as well as the Iewish synagogues and if that much controverted place 1 Tim. 5. 17. should be interpreted according to such a rule it were neither irrationall nor improbable Here by the way one may see that in synagogues there were severall functions but one Imperium and jurisdiction which was that of magistracy 2. that the churches of Christians were modelled according to Iewish synagogues 3. that every church had both ministery and magistracy By this likewise down goeth what he saith that the magistrate though Christian and godly doth not in regard of his particular vocation intend the glory of Jesus Christ as mediatour and King of the church The main end as well as duty of magistracy is the care of religion and so of
Testament when nothing hinders but that Kings may be ministers and ministers Kings CHAPTER XVIII The cause of mistakes in stating the nature of the church and calling that the true church which is not Three acceptions of the word church in holy writ The meaning of the word church Math. 18. v. 17. IN treating of the church I conceive a world of writers both Papists and Protestants might have spared themselves much labour about the nature power truenesse fallibility antiquity succession of it if both parties had not walked in the dark and if they had agreed upon some few and very easie common principles consonant to holy Scripture and reason How many volumes on our side are written to state how far the Romish church is a true church to vindicate us from schisme to prove that we have a right succession of churches power and ministry that the English church is a true Catholick church that the reformed in France have likewise a right to that title One party yields more then needs must and fearing to want for themselves a right of church-succession and Baptisme they will acknowledge the Romish church to be a true church and yet with such metaphysicall reservations and modifications that from a metaphysicall goodnesse they insensibly descend to a morall making of a magistrates power an ecclesiast call of a cadaver and carkasse a living body of an aggregation of churches under one presbytery of the same extent with the jurisdiction of the magistrate the only true church of Christ This made the late English hierarchy conceive that their best course was to approach as near as they could to the Romish yea to be one church with them that otherwise they could not make their power calling and succession good nor clear themselves from the guilt of schisme So that as all parties have been equally mistaken in their grounds so have they hardly understood one another raising doubts where there were none some by that weakning their own cause and strengthening that of their adversaries who took all concessions for truths putting their opposites to very great straights For not knowing well how to deny the church of Rome to be a true church and that salvation is to be had in it and not being able to shew an uninterrupted succession from the Apostles time as the Romanists can do nor vindicate themselves from schisme each party is very eager to call his neighbour schismatick rending the seamlesse coat of Jesus Christ that name being liberally bestowed by the Romanists upon the Protestants and by some of these upon those that adhere to the dissenting brethren each of them Papists and Presbyterians challenging that seamlesse coat of Christ even right of church and ecclesiasticall power and therefore for fear of schism rendings they will be sure to cast lots upon it that they may have it whole and entire Whereas had both been well informed of the nature of church and of schisme and that suceession is a needlesse plea neither availing the Romanists a whit nor prejudicing any way the reformers Baronius Bellarmin Stapleton as well as Whitaker Chamier and the like might have saved the world so much labour in reading them the first in putting the reformers upon the task of proving themselves a true church and the latter in taking off the aspersion of schismaticks for then no doubt all the hard task had been on the Romanists side who being not able to make invalid our grounds about the nature of the church the power of the church the calling of pastors their succession and of schisme had been wholly put upon vindicating themselves and not weakning our title for it had been to little purpose so long as we had retained the same grounds which do put us into a firm and unmoveable possession About the nature of schisme Dr. Owen whose grounds which is very strange though we never conferred our notes together are those that I stand upon in treating of the nature of the church hath so well resolved the world that it is but in vain for any one either to write after him or against him And having in my Paraenesis handled the nature of the church intending here only an extract of it I will say only so much of it as will make way to what I mainly intend to prove viz. that the parity and independency of churches each from the other in power of exercising all church acts best agreeth not only with Scripture antiquity and the opinion of Zuinglius Musculus Bullingerus and Erastus but also with the sense of the seven dissenting brethren sitting twelve years agone in Westminster together with the other members of the assembly of Divines yea that many forrain divines and other learned men Salmasius for one no way intending to favour the cause we have in hand have been strong patrons of it in severall of their writings and treating of the right of churches and of the power of the magistrate over them have laid the same foundations as we I find in holy writ specially in the new Testament that the word Church is taken properly three wayes I. for the mysticall body of Jesus Christ the elect justifyed and redeemed whereof the Gospell is full thus Hebr. 12. v. 23. and Ephes 5. v. 26 27. c. II. for the universality of men through the world outwardly called by the preaching of the word yielding an externall obedience to the Gospell and professing visibly Christianity of this mention is made 1 Tim. 3. v. 15. and 2 Tim. 2. v. 20. III. for a particular visible congregation with one accord meeting in one place for the worship of God according to his institution which is spoken of Rom. 16. v. 4. Gal. 1. v. 2. 1 Cor. 16. v. 1. 2 Cor. 8. v. 1. 1 Thess 2. v. 14. Act. 9. v. 31. Act. 15. v. 41. 1 Cor. 16. v. 19. yea such a church as is confined within a private family as Rom. 16. v. 5. St. Hierome upon the 1. of the Galatians takes the word church properly either for a particular church or for that church called the Body of Christ which hath neither spot nor wrinkle dupliciter ecclesia potest dici ea quae non habet maculam rugam vere est Christi corpus ea quae in Christi nomine congregatur relating to the words of Christ Matth. 18. v. 19. where two or three c. which cannot be understood of a nationall church There be two places in the new Testament where the word church is taken otherwise namely Act. 19. v. 41. for a concourse of people Matth. 18. v. 17. a place so much controverted and which when we speak of excommunication requireth we should insist upon it It sufficeth here to say that if by it were meant an ecclesiasticall assembly of pastors and elders some other parallel to it might be found in the old or new Testament I am sure as there is none in the new so neither in the old
respect the pastor others the fellow-members Those that respect the pastor or pastors are to maintain observe respect and honour them first for their callings sake looking upon them as Ambassadours from Christ and then for their work and the word that they bear to receive their commands as commands of Christ and yet not with a blind obedience but first being perswaded and convinced yea judging them by the judgement of spirituall men and by a judgement of discretion and approbation proving the pastors doctrine though it came out of another St. Pauls mouth The acts and duties of church-members as such one towards another are to love edifie forbear and submit one to another But a main act of a church-member as such is not to submit his own reason to the number of his fellow-members in assenting to or dissenting from such a doctrine act or law made by them but to the weight and to what he by his reason inlightened by the word conceiveth to be most good true just and reasonable yet for conformity sake and mutuall edification yielding as far as he may The acts of the power of the church by a naturall divine politick civil right not as they are Christians or church-members but as they are a society of men endowed with humane prudence freedom of body and mind and have discretion as to govern themselves and their private families so to contribute their advice and help towards the government of any society of men whereof they are members these acts I say are common to all other societies as to a company a hall a corporation a colledge or school these acts are to do all things orderly to chuse their own church-officers that orders made by the major part of the society shall oblige the minor dissenting part to chuse time and place of meeting to admit or reject such officers or members as the major part of the members shall think fit that each member shall stand to any order of the discipline once consented unto by him till the order be reversed by the consent of the major part All these acts are to be guided not only by the light of reason and common prudence but chiefly by that measure of light of grace or faith that God hath imparted to every church-member which light being not known but to him that hath received it and the springs and motives which induce each member of a church-society rather to be of this then of that judgement in ordering and governing the society being unknown to the universality of the society therefore church-members are to be governed as the members of any other society by the dictate of men as men and not as Christians submitting either actively or passively to an order and law because it is an order and law not because it is good and reasonable It is better in such things as they say that a mischief should happen then an inconvenience for if one member though alone in the right should dissent from the rest of his fellow-members no man but will judge that it is much better that this one dissenting member should submit to that which is wrong either by acting or suffering then that all proceedings for order and discipline should be stayed Were no law valid but to him that thinketh it so the world would be in a strange confusion So then an assembly of Christians being a society of men and a Christian having the face like a lawyer a physitian or a merchant and nothing being seen but the out-side they must be all governed by the same dictate which appeareth prima fronte to be reason to a man considered as a man and not as he is a Christian lawyer or physitian And as Dionysius governed his Kingdom and school by the same dictates of reason so must a society of merchants a colledge of physitians a family and so a society of Christians Of these two kinds of acts as every society hath one proper to it self as it is a society of merchants physitians lawyers Christians so one kind of these acts is common to all as they are equally a society of men that must have a government and magistracy set up within themselves and so must a society of Christians meeting about the worship of God have But to make it evident that all church-acts are not acts of men as church-members but as members of a society and not as Christians but as invested with magistracy either assumed by a confederate discipline or delegated I might instance the like necessity of two kinds of acts in all societies of men that can be imagined not considered as Christians For example these two kinds of acts will be found in a colledge of physitians who as physitians joyn in consultation upon a case propounded to them send bills to their apothecaries examine and judge of the worth of those that are candidates or have license to practise physick discourse of their art either asunder or in a body as in a consultation but as a society of men invested with jurisdiction and magistracy they chuse a president censors and officers they make choise of time and place to sit they do all things orderly they admit or expell members they give authority and license to practise physick they bind themselves to stand to those orders that are made by the major part of their fellows which act is no act of physitians as physitians but a dictate of any other society who usually take that for a law of the society that hath passed by the major part of their members By this by the way we see what plea synods except they be infallible as the synod of the Apostles was can have for making decrees and canons by an ecclesiasticall jurisdiction it being in truth no other then what is assumed by all societies whose orders do passe for lawes as to themselves if made by the major part of their members But some of our brethren will interpose and say that if the Lord Jesus Christ hath appointed a set rule for governing of particular churches as some of them are of opinion and this rule be not arbitrary nor left to the dictate of mens common reason prudence then it followeth that those acts for taking care that those set rules of Christ for government be according to the mind of Christ are duties of church-members as such and not as members of a society To this I answer were it so that the Lord Jesus Christ had appointed an exact and expresse rule for government in particular churches I confess that those acts to see the mind of Christ fulfilled are acts of church-members as such so far as both pastor and members do act in obedience to God and not unto men not by constraint but willingly for so the preaching and hearing of the word are to be performed by church-members as such but these same acts specially about government as far as they are commanded and imposed and require externall obedience and that the
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
him Here one may see as the law of God and the law of the King may stand together so the power of the magistrate may very well consist with the power right and liberty of a private church And the like he doth by many passages of Scripture which he urgeth namely Isa 49. v. 23. Kings shall be thy nursing fathers c. and Esa 60. 10. Revel 21. v. 24. the Kings of the earth shall bring their honour to the church and Rom. 13. 4. and 1 Pet. 2. 13. He addes since the Scripture speaks thus generally for thy good for the punishment of evil-doers and the praise of them that do well we must not distinguish where the Scripture doth not Now let us go to New-England where none will deny but a power and right of churches is maintained sutably to the sense of the dissenting brethren in old England and yet they ascribe no lesse to the magistrate in matters of religion then Mr. Burroughs Witnesse the result of a synod at Cambridge in new England published an 1646. They say magistrates must and may command matters of religion that are commanded in the Word and forbid things therein forbidden by the Word meaning the whole Word both in the new and old Testament In short they hold for substance what I said before of the two kinds of acts performed in every private church one looking immediately at the externall act of the body and the duties and sins which appear in the carriage of the outward man and this they say the magistrate looketh at and commandeth or forbiddeth in church and out of church see pag. 15. and therefore they say pag. 40. every church considered as a civil society needeth a coercive power They say further that this power is needfull in churches to curb the obstinate and restrain the spreading of errours Pag. 49. they invalid the example of Uzziah often alledged by the Romanists and the presbyterians though Mr. Gillespie as I remember never maketh use of it in his great book and say that this act of Azariah thrusting out Uzziah was an act of coercion and so of magistracy and a civil act which priests and Levites were allowed to do and which they made subservient to that command of God that none should burn incense but the sons of Aaron For I believe any officer under the soveraign magistrate might do the like in case this later should go about to violate a command of such a high nature for being an under-magistrate and invested with power of coercion he obeyeth the greater master and maketh use of his power to hinder a notable breach of Gods expresse command Having thus made good that there is a fair correspondency and concurrence of the right and power of private churches with the magistrates power over them I do not see but my principles and those of the dissenting brethren are very agreeable consonant in the main It may be a few of them will call that power in every particular church ecclesiasticall which I call a power of magistracy and they will call excommunication an act of the ecclesiasticall power which I conceive to be rather an effect of the power of magistracy settled in every particular church But the difference is not great since we both make that church-power call it what you will a power of jurisdiction and coercion which must needs be subordinace to the power of the magistrate since both are of the same kind and upon that account excommunication is a law of the power of coercion so of magistracy In short whereas some of them will say of all church-censures that they are the product of a positive divine power I say they are the result of a naturall civil power subservient to the divine power in the exercise of the first kind of acts of church-members as such sure Mr. Burroughs and the result of the synod in New-England come very near if not altogether to my sense For Mr. Burroughs pag. 27. maketh but two powers residing in a private church one of admonishing perswading desiring seeking to convince the other a power restraining This latter power I call a power of magistracy because by the first power men are not outwardly restrained nor rought to outward conformity and accordingly excommunication must needs be a product of that restraining power So that the difference is not at all reall but nominall I find in Musculus in his common-places concerning magistrates the same power of magistracy in churches The passage hath been alledged above there he saith that that power exercised in churches is notecclesiasticall but the power of the magistrate CHAPTER XXI That a church made up of many particular churches under one presbytery invested with a judiciall power over them is not of the institution of Christ. VVE are brought insensibly to know the nature of a Christian church instituted by Christ which as I said is a particular visible one meeting in one place to celebrate the same ordinances whereof mention is made 1 Cor. 11. v. 18. and chap. 14. v. 23. and Act. 13. v. 42. and 44. In this church the Lord Jesus Christ hath properly instituted the ministry for Christ hath not instituted a catholick visible church much lesse a nationall church under one presbytery but this appellation of church is like the word man which denotes a nature common to many singulars and yet is properly said of John or Peter For as many fountains are not a fountain and many schools are not a school and many families are not a family so many private churches are not properly a church We shall find below Amyraldus saying most truly and very pertinently to our argument that the appellation of church doth not properly belong either to the catholick visible church or to a nationall church such as are the English French Helvetian churches which are rather a knot or collection of churches then a church That such a church made up of many private churches under one presbytery is not of the institution of Christ nor ex necessitate praecepti but of the free pleasure of each private church who without any violation of the command of Christ may either remain single or aggregate it self to other churches under such a presbytery may be proved by severall arguments 1. I begin with the testimony of the Rev. Assembly in their humble advice who lay no greater stresse of necessity upon it then that it is lawfull and agreeable to the word of God that such a thing be 2. If the Lord Jesus Christ had instituted such a presbyterian church it were fit it should be told us what is a competent number of churches requisite to be under a presbytery whether only three or four or more it may be two thousand If so many why may not a hundred thousand churches be under one presbytery If so many why not all private orthodox churches that are dispersed through the world If a presbytery may be over all the catholick
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
noble and renowned citizens should see to the right ordering of the Common-wealth and the most religious to the right interpreting of religious matters the frame of the Commonwealth might be preserved and secured But I will not enter farther into this large subject handled by others CHAPTER XXV That ecclesiasticall jurisdiction as it is held by the Romish church better agreeth with reason and the letter of the Scripture then that of the presbyterian brethren That some Romanists have ascribed more power to the magistrate in sacred things then the presbyterian brethren THat ecclesiasticall power of deposing excommunicating and making lawes authoritatively as it is assumed by the Pope and the Romish clergy is not only more consonant to reason and the literall sense of the Scripture but also very agreeable with their corrupt principles in doctrine and practise whereas quite contrary the ecclesiasticall power with all its appurtenances as it is assumed and held by the presbyterians is altogether dissonant from the holinesse of their life and doctrine and is more repugnant to reason the letter of the Scripture 1. Neither the papists nor the presbyterians have any expresse place of Scripture for a double jurisdiction except they both make use of that of St. Luc. 22. v. 38. alledged by Bonifacius the 8. behold here are two swords 2. Though the Popes speak big of their jurisdiction as distinct from the magiâ—…trates jurisdiction yet de facto they make of two but one in that they subordinate the temporall jurisdiction to the spirituall conceiving it altogether inconvenient to constitute two coordinate powers since one must be supreme and the supreme must include the inferiour and that the end of the temporall being subordinate to the end of the spirituall those that have the managing of the temporall jurisdiction must likewise be subordinate and subject to the spirituall jurisdiction These are the arguments of Bonifacius and Bellarmin and upon these grounds all states and magistrates being but ministers of God in managing the temporall power must be obedient to all acts and sentences of the spirituall jurisdiction which the ministers of God in the Gospell are entrusted with so that the magistrates power being subordinate to the ecclesiasticall all appeals from civil judicatories must be valid and so all sentences of excommunications of what persons soever But the same ecclesiasticall power as it is challenged by the presbyterians to be coordinate to the power of the magistrate rendreth all acts of excommunication altogether unreasonable and unwarrantable For it is but reasonable that a man should submit to a power that is either subordinate to another or that hath no supreme or collateral but it would trouble one to be sentenced by a power that is neither soveraign nor subordinate as is the ecclesiasticall Neither is it lesse unreasonable that the same man subject both to the ecclesiasticall and the civil power being condemned by one of the powers cannot so much as seek for remedy in the court of that power that ought to give him defence and protection The Pope well foresaw he could not depose a King except the power of the King were subordinate to that of the Pope But Zanchius and some others though they do not make the temporall power subordinate to the spirituall yet they hold that Kings and magistrates are no lesse subject to the censure of excommunication then the meanest member of a church 3. The denosing of a King or other magistrate is a result 〈…〉 flowing from excommunication for if by excommunication a man is made a member of Satan whose addresse conversation company is to be avoided by all good men it comes much to one pass either to depose him or to put him into such a condition in which he hath but the name of a King which is done by excommunication And therefore Emanuel Sa well expresseth the sense of the Romanists and with it the true consequence of excommunication which indeed if there be such a thing must be as he defines it aphoris verbo excommunicationis An excommunicated person is suspended from his office and benefice and cannot judge accuse or witnesse § 27. But that excommunication held by presbyterians by which Kings excommunicated may still retain their authority and power as before is altogether inconsistent with reason Can a man delivered to Satan make lawes obliging for conscience sake Can a soveraign put to shame and confusion yea execration by a sentence of excommunication be trusted by his subjects or can a subject excommunicated and rejected by such a solemn act as unworthy to have any communion with Christians be entrusted by his soveraign with the managing of the great affairs of state by which union communion is maintained among all ranks of people 4. Excommunication is very agreeable with the headship of the Pope under Christ in the government of the Catholick church for he doth but expell a man out of the pale that bounds his jurisdiction But a minister or a presbytery excommunicating either a King or any other man cannot say that their excommunication extendeth as far as the bounds of their jurisdiction since they have not yet defined how far it extendeth surely not so far as and no further then the jurisdiction of the magistrate under which they live for the ecclesiasticall and spirituall jurisdiction is not limited by mens bounds for it is like the place of the Angels one may say they are here but one cannot say that they are not there If it reacheth all over the world then a presbytery of Scotland may as well excommunicate a man in Germany as in Scotland 5. The Papists arguments namely Bellarmin's and others are very urging that supposing there be but one true church and body of Christ and that that church and body is the Româ—sh church there cannot be a Common-wealth within another Commonwealth and a jurisdiction within another jurisdiction except one be subordinate to the other and one depend on the other therefore that either the spirituall power must depend on the temporall or the temporall on the spirituall for fear of a continuall clashing and conflict But our brethren not allowing the necessity of dependance of one jurisdiction on the other do unavoidably run upon many rocks of inconveniences which the papists prudently avoid such as is an endlesse crossing and thwarting of contrary laws commands and orders one of the other while men do not know which to obey first as I have largely shewed in the 15. chapter of my Paraenesis 6. Besides it doth very well stand to reason what the Romanists would have that one body of a church should have one governour and one government which is that of Christ but so doth it not that the presbyterian government should be the government of Christ and yet not be received by all the members of the church of Christ as they cannot deny but that there are many churches which yet do not hold presbytery to be the government of Christ
skill annexed to their office and so they did but as physitians who are best able to judge of the pestilence yet are only to give their judgement but not to separate any one from the rest of men by their jurisdiction no more then the Priests did CHAPTER XXVII That neither in the time of Ezra such an excommunication began That the casting out of the synagogue did not answer that excommunication That there is no ground for it nor practise of it in the new Testament SOme are of opinion that excommunication had its beginning in Ezra's chap. 7. v. 27. and Nehemiahs times Nehem. 10. v. 29. and ch 13. v. 25. where Aben Ezra expoundeth I cursed them of the two kinds of excommunication Niddui and Cherem though others question it and say that these three kinds of excommunication Niddui Cherem and Schaâ—natha were not invented of two hundred years after However it is certain as some Rabbins observe that in the time of Ezra and Nehemiah something like excommunication begun for the people being led captive and wanting their wonted magistrate and usuall legall proceedings and having no power within themselves to keep up their religion without mixing with the heathen or to restrain those that would run after Idols the best-minded people yea most of the nation who as yet had not consulted with themselves how far they were to persevere in the religion they were born and brought up in did body themselves into severall synagogues where they bound themselves mutually by a sacred oath some say they broke bread upon it to keep the law of Moses and not to join themselves by marriages to the heathens and to hold close to the customs and constitutions of their elders and ancestours even of those that were the keepers of such a confederate discipline and were to see all things performed according to oath or covenant and to take order that whosoever did break it should suffer the penalty imposed by the discipline These synagogues supplyed the defect both of magistracy and of all those godly meetings which were kept every sabbath-day in the houses of Prophets for in them not only the law of Moses was read and expounded and prayers made but also all those causes and matters which usually were handled and determined in higher and lower courts or Sanedrims were adjudged so far as the Princes under whom they lived gave them liberty and enlarged or shortned their priviledges for sometimes they were not permitted to put any man to death sometimes they were allowed even out of Judea to have their Ethnarcha or Prince of the people who did not so much govern the countrey as the nation Hence we are satisfied how the chief Priests came to give Paul power to lay hold on the Jewes living out of Judea and bring them captive to Jerusalem for they could not have given such a commission to apprehend a Gentile Amongst other penalties that the severall synagogues dispersed in Judea Aegypt Greece Pontus and Galatia inflicted casting out of the synagogue was one The Rabbins say for the Scripture is silent in it that this casting out comprehended many degrees of excommunication so that when they were permitted to put to death to be put in Cherem was thought as much as to dye But what ever were the degrees or species of excommunication and by what title so ever called and distinguished among the Jewes it is certain that none of these censures inflicted by the synagogues or by the keepers of their liberties were of the nature of the excommunication we have described in the precedent chapter For 1. These synagogues were a mixt assembly of men betwixt a corporation and a church and had not within their body a jurisdiction of Priests and Levites distinct from the rest of the synagogue for the high Priest was a long time the chief magistrate 2. There being other censures inflicted besides casting out of the synagogue which they make excommunication as stoning burning whipping cutting of limmes as learned Mr. Despagne tells us in his judicious piece of the Harmony of times there is no reason at all to make one censure more ecclesiasticall then any of the rest as if casting out was a censure inflicted by churchmen and whipping and cutting of limmes were civil censures inflicted by others Sure a magistrate by the same power that he causeth a cutpurse to be whipt also banisheth a seditious man so were all penalties in those synagogues acts of the same power and the same men and equally using force upon the body for as yet they knew no such distinction of powers and censures nor were the distinctions of ecclesiasticall and civil spirituall and temporall found out 3. Those that were cast out of the synagogue were alike restrained from church and from Commonwealth-priviledges the church and the Commonwealth being not yet taken for two distinct bodies 4. We do not read that those that were put out of the synagogue were kept off from the Temple and from being partakers of the same mysteries that others not put out of the synagogue enjoyed which sheweth that excommunication was not answerable to 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or casting out of the synagogue for those that in the synagogue had power to put one out of it had not power to bar him either from killing the passeover in the temple or from eating of it at his own home or from being partaker of all other sacrifices and ceremonies in the Temple Christ and his Apostles taught daily in the Temple though excommunicated and put out of the Jewes synagogues 5. Neither do we find to the contrary but that a man put out of one synagogue might in the same town or countrey be entertained by another synagogue for Gemara Babvionica saith that he that was excommunicated in one town was not thought excommunicated in another 6. Many Rabbins say that one private man used to excommunicate and absolve another and hereupon some are ready to say that Jesus Christ related to that Matth. 18. when he said Let him be to thee c. as if he had said Since he will not hearken to thy good advice nor that of two or three nor yet to the church thy last refuge is to excommunicate him in thy private name and as to thy self only having nothing farther to do with him And in that manner will they have the 40. men who had conspired to kill Paul to have excommunicated one another in case any one had been slack in the enterprise Now let us see what plea there is for excommunication in the new Testament We have shewed that the Christians succeeding the Jewes retained by the same confederation of discipline under a magistrate no friend to them the same power of magistracy as they though not in that high measure of jurisdiction because the Christians were alwayes more persecuted and never had so large priviledges and liberties granted them as the Jewes had but yet as little as they had they could do that which
Which indeed overthroweth all kind of excommunication for if the validity of an outward act dependeth upon the inward grace the validity of the act will be uncertain till dooms-day to those that know not whether he that hath pronounced the sentence of excommunication is endowed with the holy Ghost or no. Perkins goeth along with Calvin upon the third of the Revelation making all excommunication void which is not pronounced by one that hath the spirit For saith he to the society only of the regenerate and faithfull is it said Whatsoever ye shall bind c. 9. But were it so that every pastor excommunicating had received the holy Ghost yet the validity of all excommunication could not be thence inferred since even a man endowed with the holy Ghost except he hath received a spirit of divination may be ill informed and erre ignorantly ignorantia facti aut juris 10. Those that by binding and loosing in Heaven understand only approving of the sentence past on earth have no stronger plea for excommunication except all sentences of excommunication be the product of an infallible judgement for God is so far from approving of an unjust sentence that his will is that it should be disannulled 11. But how can it consist with reason that God at once should ratify approve and dislike a sentence pronounced on earth for they will have him to ratify in Heaven an unjust sentence passed on earth because they say his will is that the party should stand to the sentence though unjust and not intrude to the Sacrament without he be legally absolved and yet the while they say that God doth not ratify or approve of an unjust excommunication because unjust so that at once the same sentence will be valid and invalid valid because legally passed yet invalid because unjust 12. Those that by binding and loosing understand pardoning and retaining sins though they speak truth making the place Matth. 18. v. 18. parallel to that of John 20. v. 22. whatsoever sins c. yet they say nothing for excommunication which is neither pardoning nor retaining of sins It is not pardoning for then excommunication must be counted a blessing neither can it be retaining of sins for since as they say the end of excommunication is that the soul may be saved retaining of sins or rather of pardon cannot be a means to that end 13. Since excommunication is a putting out of the communion I would fain know whither that outing is from the communion of a private church or from the communion of the catholick visible church or else from the communion of the Saints which is spoken of in the Creed for I know but of these three communions If it be only a putting out of the communion of a private church then a man excommunicated in one congregation or parish is not excommunicated in the neighbour church If it be a putting out of the catholick visible church then a man excommunicated in London shall be likewise excommunicated in any part of the world And if the vertue of excommunication extendeth all over the world as indeed so it must be since it reacheth to heaven then any church or pastors of that communion whatsoever may excommunicate any one within that communion and a presbytery in Scotland may excommunicate a man in Switzerland and therefore it must not seem strange that the Pope doth excommunicate Emperours and Kings since they are of his communion 14. Excommunication cannot be a putting out of the communion of Saints and of the invisible church of which none is outed but by his falling from grace 15. Neither can excommunication be a putting out of a presbyterian church nor out of such an hierarchie as was lately in England which are but meer politick systems of many particular societies either under the magistrate of the land or under a power of magistracy assumed by common consent as is the body of the reformed churches in France for then such an excommunication were rather like a banishment or deprivement of liberty then a spirituall censure which are no more bounded and circumscribed by the limits of the magistrate then remission or retention of sins or the vertue of baptisme are 16. Neither can it be proved that those words whatsoever ye shall bind c. are to be understood of exclusion rather from the Eucharist then from the assembly or from either and that there is greater danger of corrupting good manners in receiving the Eucharist with a dissolute man then in conversing with him when as quite contrary to eat with carnall and deboist persons is a more contagious commerce then to partake of the Eucharist with them 17. Neither can they infer out of that Text whatsoever c. or any other whether a church a synod a presbytery whether one minister or two may excommunicate But if the power of excommunicating be included within the power of the keyes and of binding loosing which we have made good to belong only to the dispensers of the word and not to church-members or to lay-elders it will necessarily follow that one single pastor set over four or five thousand communicants must have power to excommunicate alone without the assistance of other ministers for every single minister having received entirely the povver of the keyes and of binding and loosing must needs also have received ability to do vvhatsoever is included vvithin that povver 18. It is to be noted that Christ doth not speak of binding and loosing of men but of things for he doth not say whomsoever but whatsoever and therefore our adversaries the Papists extend the povver of excommunication further then the presbyterians do for they excommunicate not only men but any other living creatures as Mice vvhereof Thuanus hath a notable example CHAPTER XXX That excommunication was mainly subservient to the working of the mystery of iniquity That the corrupting of the doctrine of the Eucharist made way for excommunication I Should next shew that excommunication was mainly subservient to the working of the mystery of iniquity but this I have handled at large in my Paraenesis St. Paul saith that in his time the mystery of iniquity began to work Satan was then very busy to infuse bad principles which first put forth themselves in the affectation of primacy and in the corruption of the doctrine of the Eucharist The laity had no hand in it for as Ministers have alwayes been the principall chanels to conveigh knowledge and grace when assisted by the spirit of God so when God gave them over to the guidance of their own spirits they have been still the only agents and instruments to bring in tyranny and heresy into the church The corruption then beginning at the head amongst the leaders of flocks their main care hath been to set up themselves not only over the inheritance of the Lord but also over their own fellow-labourers and collegues for the attaining of which and to seem great in the eyes of all men they
Cantons for being to live under a cross magistrate they could not exercise their discipline as a law commanded by the magistrate nor execute their censures of excommunication as acts of the magistrate and therefore the reformed churches of France have upon much better grounds retained excommunication then the churches of Geneva who living under a magistrate that was himself part of the church were not necessitated to divide jurisdictions since the same men who were members of churches were also members of the city and magistracy and since the discipline yea excommunication was a law of the magistrate there was little need to divide powers and jurisdictions which when they should have done all they could must needs stream from the same spring-head But in France they could not be so happy and therefore since they could not have a jurisdiction immediatly derived from their â—agistrate it was requisite they should take up one â—y muâ—uall consent and by a confederate discipline For when the magistrate as it was among the Jewes in their captivity is no countenancer of the true religion nor a keeper of the two tables nor a nursing father of the churches that live under him they musâ— if they can obtain his leave be a magistrate and a law unto themselves and set up a kind of magistracy by mutuall consent not only in their private churches but also in their consistories and synods by which religion and piety may be asserted and errours in lise and doctrine be restrained So that when a private church excludeth a man either out of its communion or assembly this it doth by no other power then a magistrate a town a coâ—poration or a hall should act by in banishing or expelling a member of their own body I confesse few of the ministers in France will acknowledge that their discipline is taken up upon such grounds but rather that it is according to the pattern in the mount and the discipline of Christ as if it were a spirituall censure and a sword committed only to the ministers by a Scripture warrant and from the power of the keyes and of binding and loosing But I much wonder that wise men having a good foundation upon which they may firmly ground their discipline should rather chuse to build it upon the sand and upon the sea shore where it may be soon washt away What man possessing an inheritance by a good title would renounce that and rather feign a false will and testament and upon that ground his title which proving invalid will put him by the inheritance he had a good title to Yet this they do who will acknowledge no discipline but from Christ and will not put a man out of their assemblies but by a power derived to them from Christ But it being proved to their faces 1. that Jesus Christ never chalked out any form of discipline but left it to the prudence and discretion of Christian magistrates pastors and people who in generall are commanded to see that all things be done orderly 2. that excommunication is no otherwise a law of Christ then is the act of putting away a hurtfull member from any society these two things I say being made out to them to be Scriptu e reason and common sense and yet they persâ—sting to have no other grounds for their discipline then those feigned ones who seeth not that their discipline must be groundlesse since they cast away that which might strongly support it Thus they are like a man that cuts off his good leggs and buyes himself wooden crutches to walk upon This is that doctrine that my Paraenesis was so much blamed for by my countrey-men yea nearest kindred as if I went about to take away all discipline and to bring in stead of it disorder and confusion yea further to lay the reformed churches open to the persecution of their adversaries But my conscience tells me I never had any such designe and my reason prompts me that no such thing can be concluded from what I have written of that subject For it is with the discipline of the reformed churches in France under their magistrate as it was with that of the Jewes under the Babylonians Persians and Romans for whereas before their captivity they had no distinction betwixt church and state no other discipline then the law of the land no jurisdiction distinct from that of their magistrate afterwards when they lived under magistrates who were no friends to their lawes and religion they were fain as far as they were permitted to set up a discipline by consent which was in lieu of the magistrate whereof one law was to be casting out of the synagogue which we may call excommunication So that their jurisdiction was no otherwise distinct from that of the magistrate then as the power of a son in ordering his own affairs and religion contrary to the unjust commands of his father is distinct from the paternall power When a man cannot go to the charge of lead he must thatch his house with straw if he wants means to keep a servant he must serve himself and if he wants one to govern him he must be his own governour and yet that power whereby he governeth himself and is master of his own actions is not distinct from that which a governour was to have over him The very same thing the reformed churches in France may say who make use of what magistracy they can contrive and set up among themselves in lieu of their own magistrate who cares not for their religion If they be persecuted while they hold that their discipline is taken up by consent as the Jewes was under strange magistrates I do not see how they will be lesse exposed to persecution when ever they hold that their discipline is not of mans devising but of Christs own appointment For the magistrate doth not give them the liberty 〈◊〉 their discipline under any such notion either as it is confederate and arbitrary or punctually set down in Scripture for either way he counteth their discipline to be but a departing from the true church and their reformation to be a meer deformation So that it matters not much as to their safety what foundation they make their discipline to stand upon Sure it is not like that those that were the authors of the discipline of the reformed churches in France did look upon it as a modell left by Christ to his churches but rather as a collection of rules well digested by humane wisedome and prudence alterable according to time and place For so much saith the last article of their discipline These articles contained in this book concerning discipline are not so determined and ratified amongst us but that they may be altered as the emolument and benefit of the church shall require I hope when all prejudice shall be laid asides no rationall man will deny my principles I have alledged John Mestrezat a very learned man late minister at Paris both in my