place is to be such as so aboundeth in the knowledge of God as to teach rebuke admonish and comfort mutually one another in a private way not to preach publikely in the Church for the ordinary conversion of soules for which sort of Prophets you do contend Robinson addeth The Apostle cannot meane extraordinary Prophets 1 Cor. 14. there could not bee such a number of extraordinary Prophets now when extraordinary Prophets were beginning to cease in the Church Answ. 1. When the Church of Corinth abounded in every thing in all knowledge and utterance and came behind in no gift 1 Cor. 1. 5. 7. and so much grace was given them in Jesus Christ v. 4. It is cleare there were abundance of Prophets even then in Corinth 2. It is not to purpose for lay-Prophets whether they were ordinary or extraordinary Prophets They were Prophets as the Spirit of God calleth them 1 Cor. 12. 29. set in the Church as officers even as Apostles and Governors and Teachers who are officers And there is no reason that you should impose significations on words at your owne pleasure without warrant of the Word Now shew us in all the old or new Testament when the word Prophet signifieth a naked gifted man out of office in the Lords house for you have as good warrant for you to say there were lay-Apostles lay-Teachers lay-Governors who were gifted persons not in office as you have for lay-Prophets 3. Multitude of Prophets may consist with the time when Seers and foretellers of things revealed in visions were beginnings to cease even as the gifts of the holy Ghost given abundantly at the Pentecost Act. 2. 17. 18. Ioel 2. 28. did consist with the time when things concerning Christ must now have an end Luk. 22. 37. Luk. 24. 44. Robinsons 3. Argument is The Apostle in forbidding women to prophesie in the Church licenceth men 1. The Apostle in and for the worke opposeth the men to the women Sexe to Sexe and in forbidding women hee must license men when the holy Ghost opposeth faith and workes in the cause of justification and denyeth that we are justified by workes is not then the consequence good we are justified by faith 2. If in prohibiting women he gave not libertie to men where were the prerogative of men above women which is the onely ground upon which hee buildeth the prohibition 3. Ver. 34. 35. Women are not permitted to speake in the Church yet may they speake to their husbands at home now if the husbands might not speake in the Church more then the women what reason can be rendred of the Apostle his so speaking 4. The Apostle in the whole Chapter taketh order that some should prophesie in the Church and debarring women therefrom he must either admit men or then we have a third sort of Persons to prophesie who are neither men nor women Answ. Here is a great noyse of Arguments for just nothing and a faire sophisme concluding that secundum quid which should be concluded 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for we deny not but some men in office are permitted yea and commanded to prophesie in publick and we grant that Sex and Sex are opposed but the opposition made by Robinson is creeple and throwne-backed for all and every one of mankind are not permitted to prophesie as all and every woman is forbidden to prophesie or teach in the Church by the Lawes of France a woman may not sit on the Throne and sway the Scepter but friend can you say then the Lawes of France doth license any Frenchman whatsoever he be to sit on the throne and be King Mr. Robinson proveth men are licensed to preach Sed indefinita propositio in materia contingente â—quipollet particulari but he knoweth all men are not licenced to prophesie in publick for ungifted men are not sent of God and we say neither all gifted tradesmen never called by the Church nor educated in Schooles or sent of God to preach in the Church This he covereth and proveth never onely he setteth downe foure armies of Arguments to prove I know not what to prove forsooth that men may prophesie in publike and not women but who denyeth that And the similitude of faith and workes crooketh here for saving faith is opposed to all good workes whatsoever both in kind and individualls for wee are neither justified by good workes in specie nor by any one good worke in individuo but though all women be debarred from teaching in the Church yet are not all men licensed to teach in the Church but onely those say we who are called of God as was Aaron 2. I would bandy the Argument thus It is not permitted to women to administer the Sacraments Ergo It is permitted for any man though not a Prophet by office to administer the Sacraments The Antecedent is Pauls the consequence is yours and so all these foure Arguments prove not what is in question to with that Ergo a gifted person not in office may preach publickly Mr. Robinson addeth In restrayning women he sheweth his meaning to be of ordinary not of extraordinary Prophets because women immediatly and extraordinarily inspired might speak without restraint Exod. 15. 20. Jud. 4. 24. Luk. 2. 36. Act. 2. 17 18. Answ. Robinson cannot show that the same kind of prophecying in women v. 34. is taxed by Paul which is regulated in men v. 26 27 28. and therefore that connexion is denied hee restraineth women from ordinary prophecying in the temple Ergo he speaketh of the ordinary prophecying of men for 1. he compareth prophecying with tongues extraordinary with extraordinary and he desireth them to covet to prophesie ordinary he cannot meane for in all the Word you find not private professors are commanded to desire to bee ordinary Prophets for so God should command them to pray that they might leave their callings and stations contrary to 1 Cor. 7. 20. and give themselves to study sciences and tongues for if the holy Ghost command the meanes he must command the end and if hee command the end hee must command the meanes But v. 34. he setteth downe a new canon about women who tooke on them to prophesie publickly and hee inhibiteth so much as ordinary prophecying yea so much as speaking in the Church and I deny not but Irenaeus Eusebius yea and Tertullian Cyrill Chrysostome Theophylactus with warrant teach that alwayes women extraordinarily inspired may prophesie for in that God immediately exalteth them above men But for ordinary prophecying in publick it is of morall equitie and perpetuall that the women should not teach for Adam was first formed this Paul bringeth as a morall argument against womens preaching His fourth Argument is from 29 and 32. verses Let the Prophets speake two or three and let the rest judge The Apostle cannot saith Robinson speake of extraordinary Prophets for they cannot erre but are infallible but the Prophets here spoken of are not infallible because they are to be censured
that is the speaking and commanding Church let him be as a heathen he must speak of a representative Church for a collective body of all believers even women and children cannot command nor soeak in the Church and it were confusion that women and children should bind and loose on Earth as Christ doth in Heaven and when Paul sayth that the convened Church 2 Cor. 5. should cast out the incestuous person he meaneth not that they should all Judge him by the power and authority of Christ and the pastorall spirit of Paul therefore your doctrine is false that as many are Judges in the Judiciall acts of excommunication as did not mourn for the sin as were Saints by calling and to whom Paul writeth 1 Cor. 2. and as met together for the publick worship for it is as great confusion for women and children who are true parts of the Church to be Iudges cloathed with Christs authority and Pauls Ministeriall spirit as for women to speak or for twelve Apostles to pray all at once vocally in the Church and the whole Church is said Acts 15. 22. to send messengers and Canons to Antioch to be observed and yet that whole Church are but in the act of governing and decerning and judiciall passing of these acts only Apostles and Elders Acts 15. 2. v. 6. Act 16. 4 Act. 21. 5. Ergo it followeth not that we exclude women and children from being parts of the Church or that all are excluded except Elders all are parts of the mysticall and redeemed Church officers are only the ministeriall Church and Mat. 18. Christ speaketh only of a ministeriall Church in the judiciall act of excommunication though if you speak of excommunication in all the acts of it we doe not exclude the whole multitude Mat. 8. nor 1 Cor. 5. from a popular consenting to the sentence and a popular execution of the sentence of excommunication and therefore though the whole Church convene yet the whole Church conveneth not with Pauls ministeriall spirit to excommunicate judicially either must our brethren here acknowledge a Synocdoche as well as we yea and a representative and select Church in the judiciall act of excommunication else they must say that women and children Ex officio by a ministeriall spirit doe Judge and so speake in the Church for he who Judgeth Ex officio in the Church may and must speake and excommunicate in the Church Ex officio but more of this hereafter CHAP. 3. SECT 3. QUEST 4. WHether or no is there a necessity of the personall presence of the whole Church in all the acts of Church-censures The Author giveth us ground for this question whiles as he holdeth the company of believers cloathed with the whole power of the keys and these meeting all of them even the whole Church to be the only visible instituted Church And Ainsworth sayth with what comfort of heart can the people now excommunicate him if they have not heard the proceedings against him Let wise men Iudge if this be not spirituall tyranny that Elders would bring upon the conscience of men Also it would seemâ— if the people be to execute the sentence of excommunication that they cannot in faith repute the excommunicated man as a Heathen and a Publican and eschew his company except they be assured in conscience that he is lawfully cast out now how shall they have this assurance the Elders say he is lawfully cast out and the cast out man sayth no but he is wronged therefore it would seem that all the people must be personally present to heare that the processe be lawfully deduced against him else they punish upon a blind faith now the like question is if Souldiers can make war if they be not present at the counsell of war to know the just reasons of war which the Prince and States doe keepe up to themselves upon grave considerations And the same is the question if the Lictor and executioner of the Judges sentence be obliged in conscience to know if the Judge have proceeded orderly and justly or if he upon the testimony of the Judge may execute the sentence of death 1. Distinction There be oddes betwixt a free willing people executing the sentence of the Church and meere Executioners and Lictors 2. Dist. There is a doubting of conscience speculative through ignorance of some circumstance of the fact and a doubt of conscience practicall through ignorance of something which one is obliged to know and so there is also a speculative and a practicall certainty of a thing 3. Dist. There is one certaeinty required in questione Juris in a question of Law and another in questione facti in question of fact 4. Dist. There is and may be an ignorance invincible which a man cannot help in a question of fact but Papists and Schoole-men erre who maintaine an invincible ignorance in questione Juris in a question of Law and in this they lay imperfection on Gods Word 5. Dist. There is a morall diligence given for knowledge of a thing which sufficeth to make the ignorance excusable and there is a morall diligence not sufficient 6. Dist. There is a sentence manifestly unjust as the condemning of Christ by witnesses belying one another and a sentence doubtsomely false 1. Conclu The members of the visible Church are not meere Lictors and Executioners of the sentences of the Elder-ship 1. Because they are to observe warne watch over the manners of their fellow members and to teach exhort and admonish one another and are guilty if they be deficient in that 2. Because by the Law of charity as they are brethren under one head Christ they are to warne and admonish their Rulers And by the same reasons the people of the Jewes were not meere executioners though they were to stone the condemned Malefactors yet were they not Judges as Ainsworth sayth It is true Levit. 20. 2. they were to kill him who offered his seed to Moloch but the precept is given first to Moses the supreme Magistrate the accused for innocent blood stood before the children of Israel Num. 35. 22. but their Gnedah signifieth the Princes Iâ—s 20. 4. The slayer shall declare his cause before the Elders of that City 2 Sam. 7. 7. there be Tribes who are feeding or governing Tribes or 1 Chron. 17. 6. Judges there is no reason to understand by the children of Israel or the Congregation only the common people when the word doth include a Congregation of Princes so Num. 8. 11. the Levites are the children of Israels shake-offering Ainsworth saith the people are put for the Princes the sins of unjust Judges are peoples sinnes not because they judicially exercise unjust acts for they should not judge at all but because they mourne not for the publick sins of Judges Eze. 9 9. and because the people love to have it so Jer. 5. 31. 2. Concl. When the sentence of the Judge is manifestly unjust the executioners and Lictors are not to
execute it for Doeg the Edomite sinned in killing the Lords Priests at the command of Saul and the footmen of Saul did religiously refuse that service 1 Sam. 22. 17. The Souldiers who crucified Christ not only as men but as Lictoâ—s sinned against a principle of the Gospel which they were obliged to believe Maries sonne is the true Messiah nor are we to joyne with a Church excommunicating a man because he confessed Christ Iob. 9. nor need we consent to these that the Senate of Venice is excommunicated by Paul the fift An. 1607. and Henricus Borbonius King of Navarre by Sixtus 5. and Elizabeth of England by Pius 5. and Henry the 4. by Gregory 7. or Hilderland and Martin Luther by Leo the 10. An. 1520. the Pope is not the Catholick Church as many learned Papists especially the Parisian Theologues teach 3. Concl There is not required the like certainty of conscience practicall in a question of fact that is required in a question of Law 1. Because in a question of Law all ignorance is morall and culpably evill to any who undertaketh actions upon conscience of obedience to others for to all within the visible Church the word of God is exactly perfect for faith and manners and every on is obliged to know all conclusions of Law that are determinable by Gods word 2. Every one in his actions is to doâ— out of a plerophorie and a full perswasion of heart that what he doth pleaseth God Rom. 14. 14. I know and am perswaded by the Lord Jesus that nothing is uncleane of it selfe 3. We are to doe nothing but what is lawfull and what in our consciences we are perswaded is lawfull and are to know what is sinne and what is no sin All Souldiers in war and Lictors and these who execute the sentence of excommunication are to know what are the just causes of war and what crimes by Gods Law deserve death and what not as what homicide sorcery parricide incest and the like sinnes deserve by Gods Law and what not because every one is obliged to know morally what concerneth his conscience that he be not guilty before God the executioner who beheaded Iohn Baptist sinned because he was obliged to know this a prophet who rebuketh incest in a King ought not to be put to death therefore It was unlawfull for the men of Iudah to come and make war with Ieroboam and the ten Tribes because God forbade that war 1 Ki. 12. 23 24. 4. Concl. It is not enough that some say if the question be negatively just then Souldiers and executioners and people may execute the sentence that is if they see no unlawfulnesse in the fact I meane unlaw fulnesse in materiâ juris in a matter of Law hence some say subjects and common Souldiers not admitted to the secrets of the councell of war may fight lawfully when there is this negative justice in the war but forraine Souldiers who are conduced may not doe so for the Law sayth he is not free of a fault who intermedleth with matters which belonge not to him to the hurt of others so Teacheth Suarez D. Bannes Andr. Duvallius yet the command of the Prince can remove no doubt of conscience also that the cause of the war in the matter of Law so far as it is agreeable to Gods word is not manifest to executioners is there culpable ignorance no lesse then the ignorance of a sentence manifestly unjust Ergo the practise of these who execute a sentence negatively only just is not lawfull I prove the antecedent beacuse the practicall ignorance of what we doe which is not warranted by Gods Word is alwayes culpable whether the cause be cleare or darke for no obscurity of Gods Law doth excuse our ignorant practise when the Word of God can sufficienty resolve us 2. It is not enough that our morall actions in their lawfulnes be just negatively because actions morall which are beside the Word of God praeter dei verbum to us who hold Gods Word perfect in faith and manners are also contra dei verbum against the Word of God and so unlawfull 3. Because actions morall having no warrant but the sole will and Commandement of superiors are undertaken upon the sole faith that what superiors command if it seeme not to us unjust though it be in it selfe unjust may lawfully be done Now we condemne this in Schoolemen and Popish casuistes that the Commandement of superiors as sayth Gregor de Valent. Bannes Suarez Silvester Navarre may take away and remove all doubting of conscience and make the action lawfull Whereas Navarre Corduba Sylvester Adrian hold that an action done without a due practicall certainty is unlawfull If he shoud diligently sayth Suarez search for the truth and cannot find it yet the doubter may practise so he practically perswade himselse he doth it out of a good mind and whereas the Jesuite sayth that it is his negligence in not seeking the truth he answereth his negligence which is by past cannot have influence in his present action to make it unlawfull because it is past and gone But I answer it is Physically past but it is morally present to infect the action as habituall ignorance maketh the acts of unbeliefe morally worse or ill And to these we may adde that he who doth with such a doubt 1. He sinneth because he doth not in faith 2. He exposeth himselfe to the hazard of finning and of joyning with an unjust sentence 3. It is the corrupt Doctrine of Papists who muzzle up the people in ignorance and discharge them to reade Gods Word and so maintaine because of the obscurity and imperfection of Gods Word which is not able to determine all questions that there is an ignorance of many lawfull duties which is invincible and to be excused as no wayes sinfull and which vitiateth not our morall actions so Thomas Bonaventura Richard Gabriel Occam Antoninus Adrianus Almaine Suarez though Occam and Almain may be expounded favourably 5. Concl. Souldiers Lictors Servants People under the Eldership are not meere instruments moved only by superiors as Schoolemen say 1. Because they are morall agents and are no lesse to obey in Faith then superiors are to command in Faith and they are to obey their Superiours only in the Lord. 2. They are to give all diligence that they be not accessary to unjust sentences lest they partake of other mens sinnes What Aquinas Greg. de Valent and And. Duvallius saith against this is not to be stood upon 6. Concl. But in questione facti in matters of fact there is not required that certainty of conscience But that we may more clearely understand the conclusion a question of fact is taken three wayes 1. For a fact expressely set down in Gods Word as that Moses led the people through the wildernesse that Cain slew his brother Abâ—l these are questions
Parish-assemblies in Old England and if it be lawfull to continue in them Which question must be expounded by the foregoing Quest. 10. If you hold that any of our Parishionall assemblies are true visible Churches c. Hence the 11. Question goeth thus in its genuine sense are we not then to separate from them as from false Churches Now neither the Spouse Cant. 1. 7. c. 3. 1. 2 3. nor David Psal. 63. Psal. 42. Psal. 84 nor Ezra 8. 15 16. nor Christ in these cases when they sought Christ in all his Ordinances in the fullest measure were members of false Churches nor did they seeke to Separate from the Church of Israel nor is it Christs command Mat. 28. 10. to separate from these Churches and to renounce all communion with them because these who sate in Moses Chaire did neglect many Ordinances of Christ for when they gave the false meaning of the Law they stole away the Law and so a principall ordinance of God and yet Christ I believe forbad separation when he commanded that they should heare them Mat. 23. 3. Nor doe I judge that because there was but one visible Church in Israel and therefore it was not lawfull to separate therefrom and because under the New Testament there be many visible Churches and many Mount Sions therefore this abundance doth make separation from a true Church lawfull to us which was unlawfull to the people of the Jewes For separation lawfull is to not partake of other mens sins not to converse bretherly with knowen flagitious Men not to touch any uncleane thing not to have communion with Infidels Idols Belial c. Now this is a morall duty obliging Iewes and Gentiles and of perpetuall equity and to adhere to and worship God aright in a true Church is also a morall branch of the second commande and a seeking of Christ and his presence and face in his owne Ordinances and what was simply morall and perpetually lawfull the contrary thereof cannot be made lawfull by reason of the multitude of Congregations 4. The most that these arguments of our Brethren doe prove is but that it is lawfull to goe and dwell in a Congregation where Christ is worshiped in all his Ordinances rather then to remaine in that Congregation where he is not worshipped in all his Ordinances and where the Church censures are neglected which to us is no separation from the visible Church but a removall from one part of the visible Church to another as he separateth not out of the house who removeth from the Gallery to remaine and lie and eate in the Chamber of the same House because the Gallery is cold and smoaky and the Chamber not so for he hath not made a vow never to set his foote in the Gallery But to our Brethren to separate or remove from a Congregation is to be dismembred from the only visible Church on Earth for to them there is not any visible Church on Earth except a congregation And our Brethrens mind in al these arguments is to prove that not only it is unlawfull to stand in the Parish assemblies of Old England because of Popish ceremonies and we teach separation from these ceremonies to be lawfull but not from the Churches but also that it is necessary to adjoyne to independent Congregations as to the onely true visible Churches on Earth and to none others except we would sinne against the second Commandement which I conceive is proved by not one of these arguments And to them all I answer by a deniall of the connex proposition As this These who must doe all which Christ commandeth and seek Christ in all his necessary Ordinances though superiors will not doe their duties these must separate from true visible Churches where all Christs Ordinances are not and joyne to independent Congregations as to the only true visible Churches on Earth This proposition I deny 5. If our Brethrens argument hold sure that we are to separate from a Church in which we want some Ordinances of Christ through the Officers negligence because say they The Spouse of Christ will not rest seeking Her beloved untill she finde him in the fullest manner Cant. 1. v. 7. 3. 1 2. then the Spouse Cant. 1. 7. 3. 1 2. is separating from one Church to another which the Text will not beare 2. I would have our reverend Brethren to see and consider if this argument doth not prove if it be nervose and concludent that one is to separate from a Congregation where are all the Ordinances of Christ as in New England now they are so being hee goe from a lesse powerfull and lesse spirituall Ministery to another Congregation where incomparably there is a more powerfull and more spirituall Ministery for in so doing the separater should onely not rest as the Spouse doth Cant. 1. 3. seeking his beloved untill he find Him in the fullest manner For he is to be found in a fuller manner under a more powerfull Ministery and in a lesse full manner under a lesse powerfull Ministery But this separation I thinke our Brethren would not allow being contrary to our Brethrens Church-Oath which tieth the professor to that congregation whereof he is a sworne member to remaine there 6. The designe and scope of our reverent Brethrens argument is that professors ought to separat from Churches where presbyteriall government is because in these Churches Professors as they conceive doe not injoy all the Ordinances of God Because they injoy not the society of a Church consisting of onely visible Saints and they injoy not the free use of the censure of excommunication in such a manner as in their owne Churches and because in them the Seales are often administred by those Pastors who are Pastors of another Congregation then their owne and for other causes also which we thinke is not sound doctrine But we thinke it no small prejudice say our Brethren to the liberty given to a congregation in these words Mat. 18. Tell the Church if he heare not the Church c. That the power of excommunication should be taken from them and given to a Presbyterian or nationall Church and so your Churches wante some ordinances of Christ. Answ. Farre be it from us to take from the Churches of Christ any power which Christ hath given to them for we teach that Christ hath given to a single congregation Mat. 18. a power of excommunication but how 1. He hath given to a congregation that 's alone in an Iland separated from all other visible Churches a power which they may exercise there alone and. 2. He hath given that power to a congregation consociated with other sister congregations which they may use but not independently to the prejudice of the power that Christ hath given to other Churches for seeing all sister Churches are in danger to be infected with the leaven of a contuâ—acious member no lesse then that single congreation wherof the contumacious resideth as a
the scandalous 3. Reas. Author If the Apostle speake of severall exercises of severall gifts but both coincident to the same person or Church office why then doth he command the Teacher to waite on teaching and the Exhorter upon exhorting One who hath a gift of giveing Almes and shewing mercy is not commanded to wait upon Almes giving unlesse it be his office as well as his gift Ans. It is not fit that the Doctor should attend the pastorall duties except he be a pastor also and have both gift and office but having gifts for both he may attend both as the Church calleth him to both Author Teaching and exhorting flow from severall gifts and they are seldome found in one in eminency Ans. Then where they are found in one in eminency as sometimes they are either hath God given a Talent for no use which is against the Wisdome of Gods dispensation or then hee who hath gifts for both may discharge both as hee may and can through time and strength of body But wee contend not with our brethren in this seeing they confesse he that is gifted for both may attend both CHAP. 7. SECT 7. Of Ruling Elders WE subscribe willingly to what our Author saith for the office of ruling Elders in the Church For Paul Rom. 12. 8. from foure principall acts requisite in Christs house and body v. 6 7 8. Teaching Exhorting Giveing of Almes Râ—ling maketh foure ordinary officers Teachers Pastors Deacons and Elders Opposite to the office of ruling Elders object that by Rulers may be understood Governours of Families Ans. Families as they are such are not Churches but parts of the Church and cleare it is that the Apostle Speaketh of Christs Body the Church in that place 5. As we have many members in one body c. They Object that Paul speaketh of severall gifts not of publick Offices in the Church for he speaketh of all the power and actions of all the members of the Body of Christ now the offices alone are not the body but all the multitude of believers Ans. This cannot well be answered by these who make all the believers governours and a generation of Kings and Teachers because it is expresly said v. 4. all members have not the same office Ergo they are not all to attend ruling and to rule with diligence 2. 〈◊〉 is false that he speaketh not of Officers and publick Officer Hee who speaketh of reigning doth indeed speak of a King as he who speaketh of exhorting which is the specifick act of a pastor speaketh of a pastor The place â—1 Cor. 12. 28. 29. Is cleare for Ruling Elders but some say that governours are but arhiters which Paul biddeth the Corinthians set up in the Church for decyding of civill controversies 2. Cor. 6. that they goe not to Law one against another before heathen Judges Ans. Paul commandeth to obey Judges but never to set up a new order of Judges in their roome 2. These arbitees weâ—â— not governours to command but rather faithfull Christians to counsell and remove controversies or Christian reconcilers to hinder them to goe to the Law one with another before infiâ—â—â— judges 3. The Apostle is speaking here of such Officers as Christ hath set in the Church as the Church and Kingdom of Christ but these civill arbitrators are no Church-Officers â—â— Tim. 5. 17. The Elders who rule well are worthy of double honour c. This place speaketh cleare for ruling Elders The adversaries say here are meant Deacons to whom are allowed stipends for either here or elsewhere wages are allowed for Deacons Answ. 1. Paul would not speake so honorably of Deacons as to allow them the worth of a double honorable reward Yea Gods Word purteth the Deacons out of the roll of Rulers and governours in Gods house as having nothing to doe by their office to labour in the Word and Prayer but are in Gods wisdome set lower to attend Tables nor doth the word call them Elders or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in relation to the Church but onely in relation to their owne family and house 2 Tim. 3. 12. their office is an office of meere service of Tables 2. He is a labouring Elder worthy of wages that the Apostle speaketh of here as v. 18. The Deaconship being to receive the mercy and charity which is almes and not debt cannot be such an office as taketh up the whole man so as hee must live upon the Churches charges 3. Bilson a man partiall in this cause against the minde of all the ancients saith Didoclavius giveth this interpetation But it is seconded with no warrant of Gods Word for Governours and Deacons are made two species of officers Rom. 12. 8. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 he who ruleth with diligence and he who hath mercy with chearefulnesse And two opposite species are not predicated the one of the other And if well governing Rom. 12. be â—ell teaching and diligent exhorting all are confounded in that Text where the Apostle marshalleth the officers and their severall exercises so accurately Nor can hee meane here Bishops so old that they are not now abâ—e to labour in the word and doctrine for then pastoâ—s for their age and inhability to preach should because of their age and infirmity deserve lesse honour and reward then the yonger who are able to labour in the word and doctrine This is crosse to the sift Commandement which addeth honour and double honour to age and gray haires being found in the way of righteousnesse 2. Against Justice that because yeares and paines in Gods Service hath made them aged for that they are to have lesse honour and reward whereas they deserve the double rather then that the younger should be preferred to them Nor. 3. Can the Apostles meaning be that these who rule well that lead an exemplarily holy life are worthy of honour especially painefull preachers Because 1. A person is never called a labourer and worthy of hire as the Oxe that treadeth out the Corne because of holinesse of life especially the Church â—s not to give stipend to a pastor for his holy life 2. Their life should be exemplarily holy who did not labour in the word and doctrine that is we have a pastor passing holy in his life but he cannot preach or keepeth an ill conscience in his calling because he is lazy and a loyterer in preaching 3. What Word of God or dialect in the word expresseth a holy life by well goverâ—ing for a holy life is the sanctity of mans conversation be he a private or a publick man But to govern well is the paraphase of a good Governour and officer in the Greeke tongue or any other Language Nor. 4. Can the Apostle understand by labourers in the Word and Doctrine as Bilson saith such as wâ—nt thorough the Earth and made jâ—urnies as Apostles and Evangelists did to plant visit and confirme Churches and by these who govern well such as labour indeed in the
house or his owne Gal. 6. 10. Let us doe good to all but especially 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to those who are of the houshold of faith Ergo we are to doe good to some who are of the houshold of faith and to some who are not of the houshold of faith except you say the Text doth beare onely that we are to doe good to none save onely to those who are of the houshold of faith which is non-sense Phil. 4. 22. All the Saints 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 salute you 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 especially those of Caesars house Hence two sorts of Saints saluted the Philippians some Saints of Caesars house and some not of Caesars house this you must say if you will not have the Text to beare either that no Saints did salute the Philippians save onely the Saints of Caesars house contrary to sense for the Text saith All the Saints here with me at Rome salute you Otherwaies you must say that the reason and motive why the Saints saluted the Philippians was because they were Saints of Caesars house as you say the speciall cause and respect why the well ruling Pastor is worthy of double honour is because he laboureth in the Word and ' Doctrine for so you expound it Now this is two waies false for 1. this can be no respect and cause why all the Saints saluted the Philippians except all the Saints which did salute them were onely the Saints of Caesars house and so both the argument should be false and the conclusion false for they were not all of Caesars house who saluted the Philippians Nor 2. was this the reason why they did salute them for the Saints did salute the Philippians upon this ground of Christian relation because they were Saints and loved one another in Christ and not upon this civill and common consideration because they were Caesars Domestickes and Courtiers with the Emperour So a Tim. 4. 13. Bring with thee the cloake which I left at Troas and bookes but especially the parchments And thus doe also the Hebrews speake Prov. 11. 31. Retribution shall be made to the just far more to the wicked Here be clearely two sorts of retributions and two kinds of persons which are recompenced And Prov. 17. 7. The liâ—s of honour are not seemely for a foole much lesse is falsity to a liberall man or to a Prince I know these examples doe not every way come home to our point but they prove that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is to the Hebrews a note of discretion as also â— Psalm 31. v. 11. is even as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is to the Greekes It is true where a genus and a species a generall and a speciall under that are set downe for as much as genus species non faciâ—nt numerism there is no need that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or the particle especially should be as a note of dicretion or multiplication As if I should say a Iudge is to be honoured but especially judging righteously I should not inferre that there are two sorts of Judges but the case is not so here because two species are expresly set downe to wit those who rule well and those who labour in the Word and Doctrine And if I should say a Iudge judging righteously for all is worthy of much honour especially he that judgeth righteously for the Widow and the Orphane I should in this hold forth either two sorts of righteous Judges or then I should say no other but he who judgeth righteously for aâ—â— is to be honoured especially he who judgeth righteously for these and these comprehended under this all Thirdly I should in that also say that there be two things though not two sorts of judges worthy of much honour to wit the office of a Iudge and his equall and unpartiall judging are both worthy of double honor But Paul is not here allowing honour to the office in abstracto and in a generall notion but to the officer in specie and in concreto who doth rule well and labour in the word and doctrine Object 2. But Paul doth here understand by him that ruleth well the civill Magistrate Answ. When Paul is here speaking of the Oeconomy of Gods house it is not consonant to the Text that he would instruct Timothy of the wages due to the Emperour Nero and yoice the Emperour in one verse with the Pastor and the Doctor labouring in the word and doctrine and prove from the Law that the mouth of Nero should not be muzled Nor doth the VVord give this word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to Magistrates but some higher stiles calling them 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Tit. 3. 1. Principalities and powers Rom. 13. 1. Secondly this Text would prove that double wages were due to Paul above Nero the Emperour and that Pastors are more to bee honoured then Emperours and Kings Thirdly the Text speaks clearly of two parallel species of Elders in the Church but the Magistrate is no parallel line with preaching Elders Object 3. By those who rule well are understood Deacons who take care of the poore Answ. Didoclavius observeth that Deacons are never called Rulers but distinguished from them Rom. 12. 8. Secondly the well ruling here taketh up the halfe of the Pastors Office and all that belongeth thereunto except labouring in the word and doctrine as to receive accusations against an Elder to judge and governe with the Pastor to visit the sicke to exhort and rebuse in a judiciall way but to serve Tables and to take care of the poore onely is the least and most inferiour part of well-governing of Gods house and is but a care for their bodies VVhereas to rule well is an Ecclesiasticall Magistracy to goe in and out before Gods people to watch for their soules as those which must give an accompt Hebr. 13. 17. 1 Thess. 5. 12. The Deacon careth for the body onely and the Deacon that Bilson and others would have with him is neither in this place nor in all Gods VVord as we shall heare Oâ— 4. By these who rule well are understord Bishops who for age cannot preach yet rule well Ans. Surely these who have laboured in the Word and Doctrine and spent their strength in painefull preaching and now in old age rule well cannot in reason bee thought worthy of lesse honour and wages then preaching Elders but above them as emeriti milites are not to be degraded and if they have never laboured in the Word and Doctrine they being Bishops by office must be dumb dogs and worthy of no honour at all 2. They cannot rule well as Pastors and yet be dumbe and not labour in the word 3. The Text speaketh not of Elders aetate by age but of Elders Officio by office who labour as work-men in a vineyard v. 18. Ob. 5. By ruling well he meaneth a holy life so as he meaneth not only that Pastors should live holily but also preach painfully Answ.
for they were called by the Pope and his Clergy for saith Robinson when there be no 〈◊〉 Church-officers on Earth to give ordination we must hold with Arrians and expect new Apostles to give ordination neither can a true pastor go and seek a calling from a false pastor Hence observe carefully the following distinctions to obviate both papists cavillations and our Brethrens doubts 1. Distinct. That is 1. Properly extraordinary which is immediately from God without any other intervening cause so Moses his calling when God spake to him out of the Bush to goe to Pharaoh and command the letting goe of his people was extraordinary for both the matter of the calling and the persons designation to the charge was immediately from God Luthers calling this way was not extraordinary because hee preached no new Gospell nor by any immediate calling from God 2. That is extraordinary which is contrary to the Law of of nature Neither the calling of Luther nor of Hus and Wiccliff was extraordinary for that any inlightened of God and members of the Catholick Church should teach informe oâ— helpe their fellow-members being seduced and led by blind guides is agreeable to the Law of nature but according to our Brethrens grounds Luthers calling here was not onely extraordinary but unlawfull and contrary to a Divine Law For now when Apostles are ceased Luher had no warrant if our Brethren say right no calling of God to exercise pastorall acts of preaching converting soules to Christ and baptizing through many visible Churches congregations because that is say they Apostolick and no man now can bee a pastor but in one fixed congregation whereof he is the elected pastor 3. That is extraordinary which is beside a Divine positiâ—â— Law So that one should be chosen a pastor in an Iland where there be no Elders nor pastors at all and that the people onely give a calling is extraordinary and so it is not inconvenient thaâ— something extroardinary was in our reformers 4. That is extraordinary which is against the ordinary corruptions wicked and superstitious formes of an ordinary caling so in this sense Luher and our reformers calling was extraordinary 2. Dist. A calling immediately from God and a calling from God some way extraordinary are farre different An immediate calling often requireth miracles to confirme it especially the matter being new yet not alwayes John Baptists calling was immediate his Sacrament of Baptisme beside the positive order of Gods worship yet hee wrought no miracles but an extraordinary calling may be where there is an immediate and ordinary revelation of Gods Will and requireth not miracles at all 3. Dist. Though ordinarily in any horologe the higher wheele should move the lower yet it is not against ordinary art that the hotologe be so made as inferiour wheeles may move without the motion of the superiour Though by ordinary dispensation of Gods standing Law the Church convened in a Synod should have turned about Hus Wicliff Luther to regular motions in orthodox Divinity yet it was not altogether extraordinary that these men moved the higher wheeles and laboured to reforme them Cyprian urged Reformation Aurelius Bishop of Carthage Augustin and the African Bishops did the like the Bishop of Rome â—epining thereat It is somewhat extraordinary that Reformation should begin at Schollers and not at principall Masters 4. Dist. A calling may be expresly and formally corrupt in respect of the particular intention of the ordainers and of the particular Church ex intentione ordinanris operantis Thus Luthers calling to bee a Monke was a corrupt calling and eatenus and in that respect hee could not give a calling to others But that some calling may be implicitely and virtually good and lawfull in respect of the intention of the Catholick Church and ex inteâ—tione opâ—ris ipsius ordinationis he was called â—o preach the Word of God 5. Dist. Luthers Oath to preach the Gospell did oblige him as a pastor this is his calling according to the substance of his Office and is valid but his Oath to preach the Roman Faith intended by the exacters of the Oath was eatenus in so far unlawfull and did not oblige him Even a Wife married to a Turke and swearing to bee a helper to her Husband in promoving the worship of the Mahomet or being a papist is ingaged in an Oath to promote Romish Religion if shee bee converted to the true Faith of Christ needeth not to be married de novo but remaineth a married Wife but is not obliged by that unjust Oath to promove these false Religions though the marriage Oath according to the substance of marriage duties tieth her 6. Dist. A pastor may and ought to have a pastorall care of the Catholick Church as the hand careth for the whole body and yet neither Luther nor Zuinglius are universall pastors as were the Apostles For they had usurped no power of Governing and Teaching all Churches though I professe I see no inconvenience to say that Luther was extraordinarily called by God to goe to many Churches to others then to Wittenberg where hee had one particular charge yea even through Germany and the Churches of Saxony and Zuinglius through the Helvetian and Westerne Churches which yet doth not make them essentially Apostles because 1. They were not witnesses of Christs Death and Resurrection which as a new Doctrine to the World as Apostles they behoved to preach Acts 1. v. 22. They only revealed the old truth borne downe by an universall Apostacy 2. Because they were not immediately called nor gifted with diverse Tongues And the like I may say of Athanasius for men in an extraordinary apostacy to goe somewhat farther then to that which a particular Church calleth them to is not formally apostolick yet lawfull 7. A calling to the Ministery is either such as wanteth the essentialls as gifts in any messenger and the Churches consenâ— or these who occupy the roome of the Church the Church consenâ—ing such a Minister is to bee reputed for no Minister Or. 2. An entry to a calling or a calling where diverse of the Apostles requisites are wanting may bee a valid calling as if one enter as Caiphas who entered by favour and money and contrary to the Law was High-Priest but for a yeer â—yet was a true High-Priest and prophecied as the High-priest 8. If the Church approve by silence or countenance the Ministery of a man who opened the Church doore to himselfe by a silver key having given the prelate a bud The ordinance of God is conferred upon him and his calling ceaseth not to be Gods calling because of the sins of the instruments both taking and giving 9. Though Luther was immediately called by Men An. 1508. by the Church of VVittenberg as may be seene in his writings as Gerard sheweth and the Jesuit Becanus saith hee was called and ordained a Presbyter and so had power to preach and administer the Sacraments yet that hindereth
not fall The sentence is either given out a jure vel ab homine by the Law or the persons Secondly it is either just or unjust Thirdly and that three wayes Exanimo good or ill zeal secondly Ex causa a just or unjust cause thirdly Ex ordine when order of Law is kept An unjust sentence is either valid or null That which is invalid is either invalid through defect of the good minde of the excommunicators and this is not essentiall to the excommuncations validitie That which is invalid this way onely ligat it bindeth in foâ—o exteriore But that which is uâ—just through want of a just cause it onely bindeth from externall communion but because Gods Ordinances are to be measured from their own nature and the generall intention of the Catholike Church and not from abuses and particular intentions of such excommunicators therefore they doe not exclude from the generall Church-desires The fourth Councell of Carthage as also Gerson saith an unjust sentence neminem gravare debet should affright no man I see not a warrant for division of excommunication into penall and not penall excommunication The ancients made some excommunication not penall as the fifth Councell of Carthage and Concilium Arelatense Turraconense Concilium Agathense As if one should culpably absent himselfe from a Synod erat privatus Episcoporum communione He was for a space excommunicated from the communion of other Bishops The Canonists infer that this excommunication was no Church-censure and M. Antonius of Spalato defendeth them in this But since Christ for scandals appointed onely publike rebuking or secondly confessing or thirdly excommunication from the Church not onely of Church guides but of professing beleevers we see not how any are to be excommunicated from the fellowship of the Clergy or Church-guides onely For Christ ordained no such excommunication and therefore wee are to repute this a popish device Zosimus saith Zancbius Celestinus Hormisda and Pelagius 2. did threaten to excommunicate Iohn of Constantinople from the communion of the Apostolike seat and of all Bishops Spalato his argument for this sort of excommunication is 2 Thessalonians 3. 15. which commandeth all Thessalonians to forbeare any fellowship with such as obeyeth not the Apostles doctrine and doth not infinuate any excommunication from the society of Church-guides onely Nay such an excommunication is not in Gods Word Cajetan calleth it excommunicatio claustralis whereby some were interdicted the company of some other Church-orders It is true that in the ancient Church the excommunicated person was debarred from comming to the Church to heare divine Service And Sylvester appointeth three degrees of excommunication first Debarring of the contumacious from entring into the Church secondly A suspending of them from communion with the Church thirdly An anathema or imprecation by cursing them So the fifth Synod under Symmachus appointed first that the contumacious should be deprived of the Communion and if he should not repent it was ordained â—â— anathemate feriatur that he should be cursed So say diverse of the Schoolmen and Casuists as Soto Paludanus Cajetanus Sylvester Navarrus that it is not lawfull to heart service or to be present at a Masse with an excommunicated person But in the fourth Councell of Carthage as Papists acknowledge no excommunicated person is debarred from hearing the Word But it is to bee observed carefully that for the same reasons Papists think the excommunicated persons should heare Sermons and the Word preached that our brethren say Because preaching is an act of jurisdiction and authority but not an act of order and therefore preaching is not an act of Church-communion but common to any who have not received orders and may be performed as the reading of the VVord by Deacons and those who have Priest-hood or power to administrate the Sacraments And Innocentius the third saith Preaching is proper to Priests who have received orders by no divine Law Indeed Leo the first made a Law of it for which cause Suarez saith That Christ in these words Iohn 21. Feed mâ—sheep and Matth. 28. Preach the Gospel gave power of jurisdiction but not of order onely It is given commonly saith he to the Clergy to preach and to Deacons because decentius it is more fiâ—ly and decently performed by them then by Laicks Though it be true that two Cardinals Toletus and Cajetanus be against Suarez in this and say that Iohn 21. Peter is made the head and universall Pastor over sheep and lambs to feed and governe them And Navarrus saith Preaching soli sacerdotio institutione divina adjuncta est is by divine institution proper to the Priesthood Yet this excluding of them from comming into the Church was from comming in to the holy place only where the Lords Supper was celebrated and they stood at the Church doore where they might heare the VVord and therefore were called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 hearers and murmurers as Basâ—lius saith and Field Excommunication doth not wholly saith he cut off men from the visible Church and his reason is good because they may and often doeretaine first The profession of pure truth secondly The character of Baptisme thirdly They professe obedience to their Pastors fourthly They will not joyne to any other communion And therefore to say with our Author we dare not to wit That though the seed of faith may remaine in the excommunicated person yet to the society of the faithfull joyned in a particular visible Church they are not knit but wholly cut off from their communion Also he is delivered unto Satan and therefore wholly cut off from the communion of the Church and so from the seals he and his seed as heathen and heathens seed are We condemne Novatians because as Cyprian saith they denied mercy to the repenting excommunicated person and because as Socrates said of them God onely can forgive sins And we condemne the Donatists who would not as Augustine saith receive into the Churches commmunion againe such as had delivered to persecuters the Bible and other holy things So we are to condemne these who are more rigorous toward such as are excommunicated then Christ is for Christ keepeth them as sick children within his visible Church and useth Satan as the Physitians servant who boyleth Herbs and dresseth Drugs for them while he by Gods permission tormenteâ—hthes spirit with the conscience of sinne As when a child is sick saith worthy Cartwright the Father calleth a Colledge of physicians to consult about medicine to be given to the child So iâ— the contumacious person under the medicine of excommunication administred by the Church-presbytery Now this wee cannot say of heathen and publicans And therefore Augustine sayth excellently excommunicated persons non esse Ethnicos sed tanquam ethnicos are not heathen but estemed as
neerely because as I sayd before the more universall the Church visible is the externall visible Communion is lâ—sse even as when the number of a Family is cut off by the Sword of the Magistrate the matter first and more intimately and more neerely concerneth the Family whereof hee is a Member yet it doth also concerne the Common-Wealth of which also hee is a Member A Finger of the right Hand is infected with a contagious Gangren it is to bee cut off yet the cutting-off concerneth more neerely the right Hand then it doth the left Hand and the whole Body For the contagion should first over-spread the right Hand and Arme and Shoulder before it infect the left Hand and the whole Body though it doe not a little concerne the whole Body also So though actuall Excommunication concerne all the Churches of the Presbyterie yet it doth more neerely concerne the Congregation whereof hee is a Member 2. The pronouncing of the sentence being edificative it is a fit meane to worke upon others but calling and trying of witnesses and Juridicall decerning of a Man to bee Excommunicated requiring secrecies yea and some scandals and circumstances of Adultery Incest Pestiality requiring a modest covering of them from Virgins young Men Children and the multitude wee have no warrant of GOD that they should bee tryed before the whole multitude nor are acts of Jurisdiction for their excellency to bee brought forth before the people but for their neerenesse of concernment and use of edification Object 12. The people are to consent yea they must have a power and some thing more than a consent in Excommunication Ergo they are all to bee present The antecedent is proved 1. Because they were not puffed up they did not keepe the Feast they did not dostaine from eating with the incestuous person onely by consent 2. Others not of that Church did excommunicate by consent 3. It is said v. 12 doe yee not judge them that are within Answ. If you will have them to excommunicate the same way that they doe other duties you may say they excommunicate the same way that Pastors and Elders doe and if they Judge vers 12. as the Elders doe either all the people are Judges and where are then all the governed if all bee governours or then hee speaketh in this Chapter to the Churches-Iudges onely 2. There bee degrees of consent these of other Churches have a tacite and remote consent the people of the Congregation are to heare and know the cause and deale in private with the offender and to mourne and pray for him Object 13. The highest and double honour is due to him who laboureth in the word 1 Tim. 5. 17. but if the Presbyteriall Church be the highest Church it shall not have the double honour for it is onely the governing Church Answ. Highest honour is due in suo genere to both And this is as if you should compare obedience and honour that I owe to my Father with that which I owe to my grand-Father 2. Paul 1 Tim. 5. 17. compareth Elders of diverse sorts together as the Ruling and Teaching Elder here you compare Pastors to bee honoured in respect of one act with themselves to bee honoured in respect of another act and this might prove I am to give more honour to my Pastor for preaching in the Pulpit then for ruling in the Church-Senate Object 14. The Congregation is the highest Church for it hath all the Ordinances Word Sacraments Jurisdiction Ergo there is not any Presbyteriall Church higher which hath only disciplinary power Answ. There is a double highnesse one of Christian Dignity 2. Another of Church-prehemenency or of Ecclesiasticall authority indeed the Congregation the former way is highest the company of Believers is the Spouse and ransomed Bride of Christ. But the Eldership hath the Ecclesiasticall eminency as the Kings heire and Sonne is above his Master and Teacher one way yet the Teacher as the Teacher by the fift Commandement is above the Kings Sonne as the Teacher is above him who is taught And so is the Case here Object 15. The Arguments for a Classicall or Presbyteriall Church do much side with Prelacy for you make many Lords ruling and not teaching Answ. Let all judge whether the independent power of three Elders accountable to none in a Church-way but to Iesus Christ onely as you make your little Kingdomes on Earth be neerer to the Popes Monarchy and especially when there is but one Pastor in the Congregation then the subordinate Government of fourescore or an hundred Eldersâ— sure I am three Neighbours are neerer to one Monarch then three hundred 2. One Monarchicall Society is as tyrannicall Antichristianism as one Monarchicall Pastor 3. If wee made many ruling and dominering Lords you should say something but wee make many servants endued onely with Ministeriall power onely to teach and rule and to bee accomptable to the Church your Eldership in this agreeth with the Pope that though they deliver many Soules to Satan yet no Man on Earth can in a Church-way say What doe you ACT. XV. A Patterne of a juridicall Synod THat the Apostles in that famous Synod Act. 15. did not goe on by the assistance of an immediately inspired spirit and by Apostolick authority but onely as Elders and the Doctors and Teachers assisted with an ordinary spirit to me is evident from the course of the context 1. Because Act. 15. when a controversie arise in the Church â—â— Antiochia Epiphanius saith as also Hieronymus by Câ—â—mbus and others touching the keeping of Moses his Law especially the Ceremonies except they would bee losers in the buâ—nesse of their salvation Paul could not goe as sent by Amiâ—h to submit that Doctrine which hee received not from flesh and blood but by the revelation of Jesus Christ Gal. 1. 12. to the determination of a Synod of Apostles and Elders for who would think that the immediatly inspiring spirit iâ— Pâ—ul would submit himselfe and his Doctrine to the immediately inspiring spirit in Paul Peter Apostles and Elders therefore Paul and Birnabas come as sent to Jerusalem not â—â— Apostles or as immediately inspired but as ordinary teachâ—â— Therefore saith Diodatus Not because these two A◠〈…〉 were every wayequall to the rest in the light and conduct 〈◊〉 Spirit and in Apostolicall authority Gal. 2. 6. 8. had any 〈◊〉 instruction or of confirmation but only to give the weake 〈◊〉 who had more confidence in Peter and James and in the Church at Jerusalem and to stop false doctors mouths and to estaâ—â—â—â— by common votes a generall order in the Church Hence when a controversie ariseth in the Apostolicke Church and the Controversie is betwixt an Apostle as Paul was and others and both sides alledge Scripture as here both did out of all controversie there is no reason that the Apostle Paul who was now a party should judge it and when a single Congregation in the like case is on two
clearely insinuate that their commandement as Apostles de jure should have ended the controversie but now for the edification and after-example of the Churches they tooke a Synodicall way 13. The way of the Apostles speaking seemeth to mee Synodicall and not given out with that divine and Apostolicall authoritie that the Apostles may use in commanding it is true they use lovely and swasory exhortations in their writing but this is a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a decree not an exhortation now James saith 1◠〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is set downe as his private opinion with reverence to what Peter and Paul saith and v. 7. Peter when many had disputed and spoken before him standeth up and speaketh and v. 12. Barnabas and Paul after the multitude is â—â—nt doth speake which to mee is a Synodicall order and the whole Synod v. 28. say It seemed good to us They answer 1. Consociated Churches have some power in determining of dogmaticall points but this is no power of jurisdictim The seventh Proposition to which almost all the Elders of New England agreed saith The Synod bath no Church-power but the cause enimeth with the Church Corpus cum causa the Church-body and the cause which concerneth the Church-body doe remaine together â—nd therefore quaestio defertur ad Synodum causa manet penes eccleiam the question is brought to the Synod the cause remaineth with the Church Another Manuscript of Godly and learned Divines I saw which saith That the ministeriall power of applying of the rules of the word and Canons to persons and things from time to time as the occasions of the Church shall require pertaineth to and may be exercised by each particular Church without any necessary dependance on other Churches yet in difficill cases wee ought say they to consult with and seeke advise from presbyteries and ministers of 〈◊〉 Churches and give so much authoritie to a concurrence of judgements as shall and ought to be an obligation to us not to depart from any such resolutions as they shall make upon any consideration but where in conscience and hence our peace with God is apparently concerned Answ. I perceive 1. That our brethren cannot indure that a Synod should bee called a Church but 1. I verily thinke that when Paul and Barnabas Act. 15. 1 2. had much dissention with those who taught you must bee circumcised after the manner of Moses that the Church of Antioch resolved to tell the Church that is the Synod while as they fall upon this remedy v. 2. They determined that Paul and Barnabas and certaine other of them 〈◊〉 goe up to Jerusalem unto the Apostles and Elders about this question that is that the Church of Antioch when the subverâ—ers of soules would not heare their brethren of Antioch did tell the Synod convened at Jerusalem that is according to our â—viours order Maâ—â—â— 18. 17. they did tell the Church and my reason is if the Church at Antioch could not satisfie the conâ—câ—enâ—es of some who said you must bee circumcised else you cannâ—x in saved they could not nor had they power in that cast not to goe on but were obliged to tell the Synod that is the Church whom it concerned as well as Antioch for if they had sent the matter to the Synod as a question not as a cause proper to the Synod or Church then when the Synod had resolved the question the cause should have returned to the Church of Antioch and been determined at Antioch as in the proper court if that hold true the question is deserred to the Synod the cauâ—e remaineth with the body the Church but the cause returned never to the Church of Antioch but both question and cause was determined by the Synodicall-Church Act. 15 v. 22. 23 24. and the determination of both question and cause ended in the Synod as in a proper court and is imposed as a commandement and a Synodicall Canon to bee observed both by Antioch v. 25 26 27 28 29. and other Churches Act. 16. 4 5. Ergo either the Church of Antioch lost their right and yet kept Christs order Matth. 18. 15 16 17. or the question and cause in this case belongeth to a Synod 2. It is said expresly â— 22. It pleased tâ— Apostles Elders and the whole Church to send chosen men of their own company to Antioch c. What Church was this the whole Church of â—â—leevers or the fiaternitie at Jerusalem say our brethren but with leave of their godlinesse and learning no say â— 1. What reason that the Church of all beleevers men and women of Jerusalem should de jure have beene present to give either consent or surfrage there because it concerned then practise and conscience but I say it concerned as much if not more the conscience and practise of the Church of Antioch if not more for the cause was theirs say our brethen and cause ad corpus say they quaestio ad synodum and it concerned as much the practise and conscience of all the Churches who were to observe these decrees Act 16. 4. 5 Act. 21. 25. yet they were not present If the multitude of â—â—leevers of Jerusalem was present because they were 〈…〉 to the Synod whereas Antioch other 〈…〉 were nor off were not present but in their commissioners then I say the Church â—â— the multitude of Jerusalem whose commidicâ—â—â—s were here 〈◊〉 I say the multitude was present â—uely de 〈◊〉 not 〈◊〉 nor was there more law for their presence then â—or all other Churches who also in conscience were obliged to obey the councells determinations but I deare a warrant that the fact of the Synod such as was sending of the decrees and Commissioners with the decrees to Antioch should bee â—â—â—â—ibed to the multitude of beleevers at Jerusalem who by no Law of God were present at the Synod and by no Law of God 〈◊〉 more consent then the Church of Antioch and were present 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and by accident because they dwelt in the 〈◊〉 where the Synod did sit therefore say I the 〈◊〉 Church in the whole Synod 2. By what Law can Jerusalem a sister Church have influence or consent de jure in sending binding Acts as these were as is cleare v. 28. Ch. 16. 4 5. Ch. 21. 25. to the Church of Antioch for this is an authoritative sending of messengers and the Canons to the Church of Antioch as is evident v. 2 2. 3. It is utterly denied that the Church of Jerusalem I meane the multitude of beleevers could meet all at one Synod 4. The word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 v. 12. which is said to hold their peace is referred to the Apostles and Elders met Synodically v. 6. and is not the multitude of beleevers 5. Where are these who are called Elders not Apostles they are ever distinguished from the Apostles as Act. 15. 2. v. 6. v. 22. Act. 16. 4. Act. 21. 18. 25. â—are is no reason that they were all
of a publick Synodicall rebuke is onely gradually different not specifically from excommunication and both must proceed from one and the same power Now the Synodicall censure is evident in the Text v. 24. certaine went out from us so it is cleare they pretended they were in this point followers of the Apostles and Lorinus thinketh that some deemed them schismaticks 2. They have troubled you with words Lorinus citeth the Sy 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 vedalacachum they have terrified you as if your salvation were not sure except you keepe Moses his Law of ceremonies and the morall Law 3. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 destraying by false arguments your soules it is a word contrary to building up in sound knowledge as Aristotle taketh the word saying that you must bee circumcised and keepe the Law 4. They abused the name of the Apostles as having an Apostolick commandement and so a divine warrant for their false doctrine and therefore are they refuted as liars 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 whence it is cleare they did labour to prove a necessitie of circumcision not onely from the old Testament and an expresse divine Law but also from the authoritie of the Apostles which was manifestly false out of which I argue thus If the Apostles doe not onely in a doctrinall way refute a false doctrine in this Synod but also in a Church-way and by a juridicall power rebuke and Synodically charge the authors as subâ—erters of soules and liars then they doe not onely use a meere doctrinall power in this Synod but also a juridicall power but the former is true Ergo so is the latter 2. Observe two things in these obtruders of circumcision First the error of their judgement It is more then apparent that they had a heterodox and erroneous opinion of God and his worship and the way of salvation as is cleare Act. 15. 1. And certaine men which came downe from Judea taught the brethren and said except yee bee circumcised after the manner of Moses yee cannot bee saved This doctrine is clearely refuted both by Peter v. 10. That yoake of the Law wee disclaime there is a way of salvation without that yoake v. 11. But wee beleeve that through the grace of the Lord Jesus wee shall bee saved as they and it is synodically refuted v. 24. wee gave no such commandement it is not the mind of us the Apostles of the Lord that you keepe Moses Law as you hope to bee saved there was for this error in their judgement required a doctrinall or dogmaticall power and this the Synod used 2. Besides this erroneous opinion in their judgement there was another fault and scandall that the Synod was to censure to wit their obtruding of their false way upon the soules and consciences of the Churches as vers 1 They taught the brethren this false doctrine 2. That they wilfully and obstinately did hold this opinion and raised a Schisme in the Courch v. 2. wherefore Paul and Barnabas had no small 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 dissention the word signifieth sedition which was raised by those who held that erroneous opinion and great disputation with them 3. They laid a yoake upon the brethren v. 10. and v. 7. They made great disputation against the Apostles and v. 24. They troubled the brethren and perverted their soules This was not simply an heterodox opinion which is the materiall part of a heresie but had something of the formall part of an heresie to wit some degrees of pertinacie of brutish and blind zeale even to the troubling and perverting of the soules of the Churches while as they would make disciples to themselves and lead away soules from the simplicitie of the Gospell now the Synod doth not helpe this latter simply in a Synodicall way by a dogmaticall and doctrinall power but by an authoritie Synodicall and therefore they authoritatively rebuke them as subverters of soules and whereas these teachers laid on an unjust yoake to keepe Moses his Law upon the Churches v. 10. the Synod by their ecclesiasticall and juridicall authoritie doth free the Churches of that yoake and they say in their decree v. 28. It seemed good to the holy Ghost and to us not to lay the yoake of Moses his Law on you as those who trouble you have done to lay upon you no greater burden then these necessary things c. now if there had beene nothing to doe but to resolve the question if this had beene the totall and adequat end of the Synod in a meere doctrinall way to resolve the question Whether must wee bee circumcised and keepe the Law morall and ceremoniall of Moses upon necessitie of salvation as the argument of our brethren contendeth Peter v. 10. 11. made a cleare issue of the question We are saved by the grace of God both â—â—nes and Gentiles and it is to tempt God to lay the yoake of the Law of Moses upon the brethren the resolving of that question is the end of the Synod but not the adequat end for here that not onely the doctrinall power was to bee used but beside that 1. the schisme was to bee removed and the authoritie of the Synod to bee used against the wilfulnesse and obstinacie of those obtruders of circumcision in rebuking them as perverters of soules 2. For the scandall which might have been taken if the Gentiles should have eaten blood and things strangled and meats offered to idols and therefore the Apostles and Elders behoved as a conveened Synod to forbid a grievous scandall and a spirituall homicide against the Law of nature to wit that the Gentiles for feare of scandalizing weake beleevers amongst the Jewes should abstaine from the practise of some things at this time meerely indifferent in their nature though not indifferent in their use such as were to eate things offered to idols things strangled and blood and whereas our brethren 3. Object If the Apostles did any thing more then might have been done by private Pastors out of a Synod it was meerely Apostolicall and the Elders did but assent to the Apostles Apostolicall determination and every one did here Apostles Elders and Brethren more suo Apostles as Apostles Elders and Brethren as Elders and Brethren after their manner as consenters to the Apostles but other wayes it is a begging of the question for to say the Apostles and Elders rebuked Synodically the obtruders of circumcision it s but said because one Pastor might have rebuked those obtruders for the specification of actions must not bee taken from their efficient causes but from their formall objects therefore this is no good consequence the Synod rebuked those obtruders Ergo the Synod rebuked them as a Synod and by a power of jurisdiction it followeth not for Paul Gal. 2. rebuked Peter Ergo Paul had a power of jurisdiction over Peter I thinke your selves will deny this consequence I Answer 1. These two answers are contradictory and sheweth that our brethren are not true to their owne
principles for sometime they say the Apostles gave out this decree as Apostles and sometime there is nothing here done by a meere doctrinall power such as Paul had over Peter or one single Pastor hath over another now it is sure that Paul had no Apostolick power over Peter and that one Pastor have not Apostolick power over another 2. When our brethren say here that the Apostles as Apostles by an infallible spirit gave out this Decree they doe in this helpe the Papists as Bellarmine Becanus Grâ—â—rut and in particular the Jesuit Lorinus who saith decrâ—um authenticum cujus inspirator spiritus sanctâ— and so saith Cornelius a lapide visiâ—m est nob is inspiratis decretis a Spiritu sanctus therefore saith hee the councell cannot erre and so Salmeron and Cajetan say and expresly Stapleton saith this Apostosack definition flowed from the instinct of the holy Ghost observandum saith Stapleton quanta habenda sit ecclesiae definienth authoritâ—s hence our brether here must yeeld either that all Synods are infallible as Papists say this Synod the patterne of all Synods being concluded by an Apostolick spirit could not erre and so neither can councells erre or they must with Socinians and Arminians say there is no warrant for Synods here at all And certainly though wee judge our brethren as farre from Popery and Socinianisme as they thinke wee detest Anti-Christian Presbytery yet if this Synod bee concluded by an Apostolick spirit it is no warrant to bee imitated by the Churches and wee have no ground hence for lawfull Synods Whittakerus Calvin Beza Luther and all our Divines do all alledge this place as a pregnant ground not of Apostolick but of ordinary and constant Synods to the end of the world and Diodatus good to the holy Ghost because they did treat of ecclesiasticall reders concerning the quietnes and order of the Church wherein ecclesiasticall authoritie hath place the Assembly used this tearme it seemed good to us which is not used neither in articles of faith nor in the commandements which meerely concerned the conscience and to shew that authoritie was with holy reason and wisedome there is added and to the holy Ghost who guided the Apostles in these outward things also 1. Cer. 7. 25. 40. 2. If our brethren meane that the Elders and brethren were in this Apostolick and immediatly inspired Synodicall determination not as collaterall penners of Scriptures joyned with the Apostles but onely as consenters and as consenters by power of an ordinary holy Ghost working consent in them more suo according to their capacitie as ordinary Elders 1. They yet more helpe the Papists because they must say onely Apostles and so onely their successors the Prelates had definitive voices in this Synod the Presbyters and Brethren did no more then Papists and Prelates say Presbyters did in generall councells of old and therefore the Presbyter is to subscribe Ego A. N. Presbyter consentiens subseribo whereas the Prelate subscribed say they Ego A. B. Episcopus definiens subscribo wee crave a warrant in Gods Word to make an Apostle or a Prelate a Synodicall definer having a definitive voyce and the Elder Brother or Presbyter to have a consultative voyce for here all the multitude if there was a multitude present doe make Synodicall decrees by consulting and consenting yea all the nation may come to a nationall Synod and both reason dispute and consent because matters of doctrine and government of the Church concerneth all therefore all have an interest of presence and all have an interest of reasoning and 3. by consequent all have an interest of consenting yea of protesting on the contrary if the Synod determine any thing against the Word of God If they say there is a threeford consent in this Synod 1. an Apostolicall 2. a second Synodicall agreeing to Elders as Elders and a third that of the people or a popular What a mixt Synod shall this be but 1. then as the Epistle to the Tlxssalonians is called the Epistle of Paul not the Epistle of Silvanus and Timotheus though Silvanus and Timotheus did consent so these dogmata or decrees should not be called the decrees of the Apostles and Elders as they are called Act. 16. 4. Act. 15. 6. Act. 21. 25. but onely the decrees of the Apostles seeing the Elders did onely consent and had no definitive influence in making the decree by this doctrine as Silvanus and Timotheus were not joynt pen-men of Scripture with Paul 3. When as it is said the specification of actions must not bee taken from the efficient cause but from the formall object and all that a done in this Synod might have beene done by a single Pastor I answer wee doe not fetch the specification of this rebuke and of these decrees from the efficient causes but from the formall object for an Apostle might his alone have rebuked these obtruders of circumcision and made this decree materialiter for Paul did more his alone then this when hee wrote the Eâ—istle to the Romans but yet one Pastor could not have Synodically rebuked and given out a decree formally Synodicall laying an Ecclesiasticall tie on moe Churches then one there is great ods to doe one and the same action formally and to doe the same action materially and I beleeve though actions have not by good logick their totall specification from their efficient cause yet that ordinances of God as lawfull have their specification from the efficient causes in part our brethren cannot deny For what made the difference betwixt Aaron his fire offered to the Lord and Nadab and Abihu their strange and unlawfull fire that they offered to the Lord but that the on fire had God for its author the other had men and the like I say of Gods feasts and the feasts devised by Jeroboam else if a woman preach and administrate the Lords Supper in the Church that preaching and sacrament administrated by her should not have a different specification and essence if wee speake morally or Theologically from that same very preaching and celebration of the Supper performed in the Church by a lawfull Pastor it is as I conceive of the essence of an action Synodicall I say not its totall essence that it cannot bee performed by one in a Church-way and with an ecclesiasticall tie but it must be performed by many else it is not a Synodicall action and it is true that Paul Rom. 14. and 1 Cor. 8. 10. hath in substance the same Canon forbidding scandall which is forbidden in this Canon prohibiting eating of meats offered to Idolls and blood in the case of scandall but I pray you is there not difference betwixt the one prohibition and the other yea there is for Rom. 14. 1 Cor. 8. 10. it hath undenyably Apostolick authoritie here it hath onely Synodicall 2. There it is a commandement of God here it is a Canon of the Church 3. There it commeth from one man here from a
they are registred in the bookes of Old Testament bee formally Scripture yet as cited by the Apostles they dâ—e not become Scripture except these saying bee cited tali modo that is by the influence of the immediatly inspiring holy Ghost which influence onely maketh formally any saying to bee Scripture Object 12. If the Apostles did not in a Synod with the Elders dispute and voyce as Apostles it should follow that as Apostles they did plant Churches but after the Churches were planted they ceased to bee Apostles and did all as ordinary Elders which is most incongrâ—oâ—s for then should they descend from an infallible to a fallible spirit Answ. The Apostles did onely use their Apostolick power when there was need of it as God worketh not miracles but in some necessitating exigence of second causes and what they could doe by an ordinary power when the Churches were once constituted they did not attempt to doe by their Apostolick power and though their Apostolick power was in them as a habit yet the exercise thereof was rather under the dominion of an extraordinary and immediate rapt and influence of God then under the mastery of their owne free-will I would aske why the Church of Antioch no doubt most lawfully Act. 15. 2. did send to seeke resolution at the fallible spirit of Elders and also as our brethren teach at the infallible spirit of the Apostles and why did they not from their infallible and Apostolick spirit seeke out and choose seven men to bee Deacons but remitted to the fallible spirit of the multitude who are not infallible or Apostolick in their choise both the nomination and election of these seven men but the Apostles did much honour the Churches of Christ in cooperating with them and in doing most things with their consent that by example they might interdict dominion and assert a ministeriall power and make Christ most Monarch-like in the government of his spirituall Kingdome nor did they put off or interdict themselves nor forfeit their Apostolick power after Churches were constituted but used their Apostolick power at the Commandement of that great King exalted Jesus Christ whose Catholick Ambassadours they were as God immediatly moved them Object 13. Paul exercised the power of the Keyes of knowledge upon Barbarians and might have preached to Indians and did presâ—h to the scefling Athenians Ergo hee might exercise power of jurisdiction over them and judge those who are without it is no consequence and against the word of God 1 Cor. 5. 12. Yea Paul by this power dogmaticall rebuked the Athenians Act. 17. 22. I perceive that in all things yee are too superstitious yet Paul had no power to excommunicate the Athenians Mr. Mather Answ. I deny not but there is great odds betwixt a concionall rebukinâ— by way of preaching which may bee and is alwayes performed by one and a juridicall rebuking by a power juridicall of the Keyes which is performed onely by a Church-sâ—ciâ—tie now it cannot bee denyed but the rebuking of men because they subverted soules v. 24. is not a meere concionall rebuking which may bee performed by one 1. it is a rebuking v. 24. 2 it is a rebuking performed by many by a whole Synod v. 6. v. 22. 3 It is performed by a politicall societie and body having a dogmaticall power to judge and determine in a doctâ—inall way as our brethren say and consequently as wee say having a juridicall power v. 25. It seemed good unto us being assembled with one accord to send chosen men unto you c. which is undenyably a politicall body an assembled company as v. 6. met about a question which concerneth the Churches of Christ as is cleare v. 2. v. 6. v. 23. c. 16. 4 5. c. 21. 25. compared with v. 22. hence a businesse of doctrine which troubleth the Churches of Antioch c 15. 2. and of Jerusalem v. 5 6 7 8. and Syria and Cilicia v. 23 24. must bee a Church-businesse in respect of the subject 2. The question is a Church-question in the matter of practise it conoâ—rneth the consciences of the Churches in the point of taking and giving offence in a Church-societie as this doth v. 19. That yee trouble not them which amongst the Gentiles are turned unto God and v. 28 29. compared with 1 Cor. 10. 24 25 26 27 c. Rom. 14. 14 15. this was a Church-â—candall or publick offence as touching the matter materia quâ—nt 2 The forme and manner of deciding the controversie was a publick Church-way by the Word of God Act. 15. so 〈◊〉 proveth v. 7 8. 9. and James v. 15 16 c. maketh good 4 The efficient causes and agents in the question are 1. Church 〈◊〉 v. 6. Apostles and Elders 2. Church-officers conveened Church-wayes in a Church-body or societie v. 6. c. 15. and The Apostles and Elders came together in a Synod 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a word which cur brethren acknowledgeth doth 1 Cor. 5. 4. note a formall Church-assembly to consider of this matter and â— 25. It seemed good to us being assembled with one accord 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and the very word Church is not wanting though with reverence of others it seemeth not to bee the multitude seeing the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 beeing so generall must have its signification from the action and end for which the meeting is intended as before I said as is cleare v. 22. It pleased the Apostles Elders and whole Church 5. The action they performe when they are met in a politicall body is to decide a Church-controversie that troubled many Churches Act. 15. 2. v. 23 24. 6 The end is the peace and edifying of the Churches as that the Churches of the Gentiles bee not troubled with needlesse ceremonies as James saith v. 19. and the good of the Churches v. 29. from which if you keepe your selves yee shall doe well c. 16. 4. And â—s they went through the cities they delivered them the Decrees to 〈◊〉 v. 5. so were the Churches established in the faith Consider 〈◊〉 is the happy end and fruit of this Synod The establishâ—â—â— of the Churches Therefore have our brethren without reason I speake with reverence of their learning and godlinese denied the word Church to bee given to a Synod or a meeting of Elders which to mee is cleare Act. 15. v. 6. The 〈◊〉 sending is the Eldership of Antioch the Church receiâ—â—â— v. 4. is the Eldership at Jerusalem and cannot conveniently bee exponed of the whole and numerous thousands that â—â—eâ—ed at Jerusalem the rebuking cannot then bee meerely â—â—â—â—inall by the power of the keyes of knowledge which is exercised by one nor are the Apostles and Elders here considered as meerely Preachers and Teachers in the Act of teacher for why then should they not bee formally a Church and a Church-assembly as our Brethren say if they bee an assembly meeting for preaching the Word for the exercise of the keyes of Knowledge in the hearing of a multitnde
imagine would lead the twelve Apostles to speake to one single Congregation met in one place at one time the rest to wit the eleven and the seventic Disciples being silent for in the Church the God of order will have one to speake at once 1 Cor. 14. 31. But our reverend brethren seeing and considering well that the Church at Jerusalem could not all meet in one Congregationall way and that they were a Christian Church and so behooâ—ed to bee a Presbyteriall Church they doe therefore betake themselves to another Answer for they say that this Church at 〈…〉 an extraordinary constituted Church and 1. wanted an Eldership and presbytery as Christian Churches have now 2. the government was meerely Apostolicall 3. the constitution was somewhat Jewish rather then Christian for their service was mixed with legall ordinances and Jewish observances for many yeares and therefore cannot bee a patterne of the Christian visible Church which wee now seeke To which I answer 1. Because our brethren consider that the Church of Jerusalem will not bee their independent Congregation before wee obtaine it for us as a mould of a presbâ—tâ—riall Church they had rather quit their part of it and permit the Jewes to have it for us both but wee are content that their Congregations in some good sense bee given to them and not to Jewes 2. There is no reason but the Church of Jerusalem bee a Christian Church 1. The externall profession of a visible Church maketh it a visible Christian Church but this Church professeth faith in Christ already come in the flesh and the Sacraments of the New Testament baptisme and the Sacramentall breaking of bread Act. 22. 41 42. wee desire to know how saving faith in a multitude constituteh an invisible Church and the externall and blamelesse profession of that same saving faith doth not contitute a visible Church also and how this is not a Christian visible Church not differing in essence and nature from the 〈◊〉 Churches that now are to which the essentiall note of a visible Church agreeth to wit the preaching or profession of the sound faith if it bee called an Apostolick and so an extraordinary Christian Church because the Apostles doth governe â—it that is not enough if the Apostles governe it according to the rule of the word framing the visible Churches of the New Testament this way the Church of Corinth 1 Cor. 5. shall bee an Apostolick and so an extraordinary Church which our brethren cannot say But wee desire to know wherein the frame of this first patterne Christian Church at Jerusalem is so extraordinary that it cannot bee a rule to us to draw the mould of our Churches according to it for if the Apostles make it a patterne of an ordinary Christian Church in Word and Sacraments to say it was extraordinary in the government except you shew that that government was different from the rule that now is in government is petitio principii to begge what is in question for these same keyes both of knowledge and jurisdiction that by your grant were given to the Church Matth. 18. 15 16 17. were given to the Apostles Matth. 16 17 18. and Joh. 20. 21. If you say it is extraordinary because as yet they had not Deacons for the Apostles did as yet serve tables where as afterward Act. 6. that was given to the Deacons by office and so they had not Elders nor Doctors nor Pastors as we now haâ—e but the Apostles were both Pastors Ruling Elders Doctors and Deacons and they were the onely governing Eldership and this was extraordinary that they had no Eldership and so they were for that same cause no presbyteriall Church whence it followeth that you cannot make this Church which had no presbytery a patterne of a presbyteriall Church But I answer this will not take off the argument if wee shall prove that after they were more then could meet in one Congregation and so after they were so numerous that they were moe Congregations then one they had one common government and 1. wee say though the Apostles had power to governe all the Churches of the world and so many Congregations yet if they did rule many Congregations as Elders and not as Apostles wee prove our point Now we say where baptisme and the Lords Supper was there behoved to bee some government else the Apostles admitted promiscuously to baptisme and the Lords Supper any the most scandalous and prophane which wee cannot thinke of the Apostles it is true say you they admitted not all but according to the rule of right government but this right government was extraordinary in that it was not in a setled Eldership of a Congregation which was oblieged to reside and personally to watch over that determinate flock and no other flock but it was in the hands of the Apostles who might goe through all the world to preach the Gospell and were not tied to any particular flock and so from this neither can you draw your classicall Eldership nor wee our Congregationall Eldership But I answer yet the question is begged for though it bee unlawfull for a setled Eldership not to reside where their charge is yet the question is now of a government in the hands of those who are oblieged to reside and give personall attendance to the flock and the government in the hands of the Apostles who were not oblieged to personall attendance over this and this particular flock which they did governe were governments so different in nature as the one is a patterne to us not the other and the one followeth rules different in nature and spirit from the other for though it were granted that the Apostles did governe many Congregations as Apostles not as Elders yet there was no extraordinary reason why these many Congregations should bee called one Church and the beleevers added to them said to bee added to the Church as it is said Act. 2. 47. And the Lord added to the Church daily such as should bee saved except this Church bee one entire body governed and ruled according to Christs Lawes 2. There bee seven Descons chosen to this Church Act. 6. and Deacons are officers of the Church of Philippi which our brethren calleth Phil. 1. 1. a Congregationall Church and Pnebe was a Deaconisse say they of the Church of Cenchrea Rom. 16. 1. and if they had Deacons they could not want Elders who are as necessary 3. This Church could not bee so extraordinary as that it cannot bee a patterne to us of the constant government of Churches by Elders which wee call Aristocraticall seeing it is brought as a patterne of the Churches government by the voices of the people which is called by Divines in some respect democraticall and this place is alledged by our brethren and by all Protestant Divines against Bishops and Papists to prove that the people have some hand in government to wit in election of officers and so the words are cleare Act. 6. 5.
as Apostles which is the conclusion to bee proven Now that I may give a solid reason of this wee are to consider what Apostles doe as Apostles and what as ordinary Elders as take along this rule with you what Apostles doe as Apostles every one of the Apostles his alone may doe as quod convenit 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 convâ—nit 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 What ever agreeth to an Apostle as â—â— Apostle agreeth to all Apostles as because Apostles may worke miracles any one Apostle may worke a miracle so Peter his alone extra collegium when hee is not with the twelve hee may worke a miracle his alone hee may speake with tongues and his alone hee may preach and baptize through all the world and therefore Peter as an Apostle not as an ordinary Elder doth raise the dead speake with tongues preach and baptize in all nations without any calling of the people or without consent of the presbytery but what the Apostles doe as ordinary presbyters and as a classicall Colledge that by cannot doe in that relation but in collegie as the eye doth not see but as fixed in the head so when the Apostles do any thing in collegio not without the suffrages of a colledge that they must doe as ordinary Elders for example Paul if hee delivered Hymeneus and Alexander his alone to Satan 1 Tim. 1. 20. as many thinke hee did then hee did that as an Apostle but suppose hee had beene present at Corinth 1 Cor. 5. to obey his owne Epistle and direction that hee gave to excommunicate the incestuous man hee should with the Eldership of Corinth delivered him to Satan as an Elder not as an Apostle yea in a presbyteriall way Paul could not have delivered him to Sathan without the concurring joynt suffrages of the Eldership of Corinth So because Act. 6. 1. 2. 3. the whole twelve doe call together the multitude the whole twelve doe that as ordinary Elders which I prove for if they had conveened them as Apostles by that transcendent Apostolick power by which they preach and baptize in all the Churches and by which they raise the dead Peter his alone might have conveened them so they ordaine Elders by imposition of hands as an ordinary Eldership now doth all the twelve doe it in a Court whereas if they had put on these seven men to bee Deacons upon the people by vertue of their Apostolick calling they should not have convened the people nor sought the free consent of the people for any one Apostle his alone as Peter might by the transcendent power of an Apostle have ordained those seven men to bee Deacons but then hee should clearely have done it not in an ordinary Church way so now the Apostles must Act. 6. governe as ordinary Elders also what the Apostles do by the interveening help of ordinary perpetually established meanes that they doe not as Apostles but as ordinary Elders as they work not miracles by advise and consent of the multitude because they do it as Apostles but here the twelve do all by the interveening help of the ordinary and perpetually established free voices of the multitude 1. Because the twelve Apostles conveene The Apostles did nothing in vaine and without warrant any one of the twelve might have instituted the office then that all the twelve conveene it must bee to give a pattern of an ordinary Eldership for you never finde all the twelve meet to doe with joynt Forces an Apostolick worke they never met all twelve to pen a portion of Scripture twelve of them nor a colledge of them never met to raise the dead to worke a miracle to speake with tongues because these bee workes above nature and one is no lesse an instrument of omnipotencie to work a miracle then 12. or 20. therefore wee must say that these twelve conveened as ordinary Elders to bee a patterne of a presbytery 2. The complaint is made by the Grecians to the court not to one Apostle for the whole twelve doth râ—dresse the matter 3. Tht colledge hath a common hand in this government for the poore as their words cleare 2. It is no reason that wee should leave the Word of God and serve Tables 4. They put on the people what is their due to looke out and nominate to them seven men as Apostles they should have chosen the men 5. They doe put off themselves the charge of Deaconrie and the daily care as v. 1. Ergo they were before daily constant Deacons and why not Elders also 6. They will doe nothing with out the free voices of people and give to the people the ordinary election this day and to Christs second comming due to them Ergo the Apostles stoope beneath the spheare of Apostolick power and condescend to popular power and so must here bee as ordinary Elders not as Apostles 7. They doe ordaine seven men to be constant officers 2. From this it is easie to deny that we may as well inferre Prelates to be the lawfull successors of Tâ—us whose power was universall in every Church of Crete as to inâ—erre a presbyteriall power because Titus his alone 〈◊〉 an 〈◊〉 appointed Elders and wee cannot inferre a Monarchiâ— in the Church from some extraordinary acts of the the first planters of Churches because wee inferre from the Aristocraticall and ordinary power of the Apostles an Aristocraticall power of presbyteries now in the Church shall wee hence inferre a Monarchie 3. If the Acts of government performed here Act. 6. by the Apostles bee extraordinary and Apostolick they are not imitable by us but all Divines teach that from Act. 6. the ordinary presbytery may according to this very patterne ordaine Deacons and Elders The reverend brethren object The Apostles did ordaine a new office here to wit an office of Deacons as all our Diviâ—â—s prove from the place but the Apostles as ordinary Elders in an ordinary Colledge presbyteriall cannot appoint a new Office in the Church for the presbyteries now also by that same presbyteriall power might also appoint a new office in Gods house which is absurd Answ. I grant that the Apostles as Apostles performe some Acts of government in this place and that they appoint a new office of Deacons here but that is neither the question nor against our cause but I desire the opponents to make good that the Apostles did appoint this new office in a Church-way as they ordaine these seven men to the office and that in collegio I aske did the Apostles 1. Crave the concurrence of the conveened multitude and their free voices shall wee appoint this new office men and brethren or shall wee for beare 2. Did they voice the matter in a colledge amongst themselves as they doe Act. 15. and do they say amongst themselves in the presbytery Apostolick have wee warrant from Christ to appoint a new office of Deacons What is your mind Peter what is your sentence James Matthias c now this is to proceed
they are called Apostles and Elders in or at Ierusalem Acts 16. 4. for another cause these were Elders from other Churches from Antioch no lesse then Elders of Ierusalem they onely sate in Synod at Ierusalem 2. All Ierusalem was not converted to the Christian Faith and therefore they may well bee tearmed Elders at Ierusalem as the Church at Ephesus at or in Thyatira 3. I deny that the Scripture speaketh any other wayes of the Elders of the Church of Ierusalem then of the Elders of other Churches 2. Those Elders ought to meete for the governing of the Church of Jerusalem for this was their duty Ergo they were one Presbytery 2. They did meet Acts 15. 14. to receive Paul and Barnabas and to heare what God had done by them for their edification and Acts 21. Paul goeth to Ierusalem and is received v. 15. by the Brethren but the next day v. 18. The day following Paul went in with us unto James and all the Elders were present and there the Elders doe presbyterially act for the removing of a Church-scandall v. 21. The believing Jewes were informed that Paul taught all the Iewes which were amongst the Gentiles to forsake Moses This was a publick scandall 2. The offended multitude were to convene v. 22. as plaintiffs 3. The Eldership ordaineth Paul to remove the scandall by satisfying the offended by purifying himselfe after the manner of the Jewes and it is cleare Paul should not have satisfyed the scandalized Iewes except Iames and the Elders had injoyned him so to doe 4. This the very course of a presbytery yea our Brethrens doctrine which a Congregationall presbytery would and doth take with any other person who doth give offence yea though it be taken and not given if the way of remedy be lawfull and expedient as this presbytery conceived Pauls purifying of himselfe to be and if any scandalizing person should be disobedient to the voyce of a Congregationall eldership such as our Brethren believe the Eldership of Jerusalem to be they would say they are to censure him and therefore if Paul should have beene disobedient to this he should have incurred a censure It is true Lorinus saith that Chrysostome and Oecumenius will have this to be a Counsell not a Synod to command Paul and they deny any Juridicall power here but v. 18. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to mee it is They were gathered together Diodatus calleth them The colledge of the governours of the Church Beda saith there were foure Synods and hee maketh the Synod Acts 1. at the chusing of Matthias the first the second at the chusing of Deacons Acts 6. the third Acts 15. and this the fourth Acts 21. 2. The Text seemeth to mee to say it for as Acts 15. there was course taken for the Gentiles that they should abstaine from blood lest they should either scandalize or bee scandalized so the Eldership here taketh course that the infirme Iewes be not scandalized as is cleare v. 25. As touching the Gentiles which believe we have written c. and to me they seeme to do both Synodically some thinke that this fact of the Elders and Paul was not lawfull but how ever though it was not a generall councell a presbytery I take it to be taking course to remove a scandall from the weake Iewes in this place as they had by a Synodicall power removed it from the Gentiles Act. 15. It is objected by Master Mather that if a Church in an Island by Divine institution and so this first founded congregation at Jerusalem which did meete in Salomons porch had once an entire power of Iurisdiction within it selfe though in an extraordinary case 1. The case is ordinary as in the Dominion of Wales there is scarce a congregation to be found within twenty or thirty miles 2. Suppose the case were extraordinary and rare may they violate the ordinary rules of Christ for so some may thinke and say that though according to ordinary Rules Baptisms and the Lords Supper must be dispensed only by men and by Ministers yet in the want of these the one may be dispensed by a Woman or Mid-wife and both of them by such as are no Ministers Answ. We thinke a Ministery and Discipline more necessary to a Congregation in a remote Island or to the Church of Ierusalem before they increase to such a number as cannot meet for their numerous multitude in one Congregation then the Sacraments when there be no Ministers to dispense them 1. That the Church be so in the Island its alone may possibly be extraordinary but that in such a case they have the Word preached and entire power of Discipline whole and entire within themselves to excommunicate scandalous persons is not extraordinay when there be no consociated Churches whom excommunication concerneth that are in danger to be scandalized for it floweth connaturally from a Church to which agreeth the essence of a Church to exercise Jurisdiction over all its owne members if there be no more consociated with that Church that is by accident and an extraordinary exigence of Gods providence As a master of a Family is to do his duty to educate his children in the feare of God but if God take all his children from him by death he doth not transgresse the ordinary rule of educating his children in the feare of God when hee hath none This argument supposeth that a Congregation hath no power of excommunication at all either compleat or incompleat as the Mid-wife hath no power to Baptize at all either compleat or incompleat neither doth a Congregation transgresse any rule of Christ at all when it exerciseth entire power of censures within it selfe whereas there be no consociated Churches to share with it in that power A Congregation is capable of entire Jurisdiction because it is a Church But a woman in no case is capable of administrating Baptisme or the Lords Supper except shee were extraordinarily and immediatly inspired to be a prophetesse but for the exercise of entire power of Jurisdicton by a Congregation in a râ—mote Island I hope it hath no such need of immediate inspiration 2. There is no such morall necessity of the Sacraments as there is of the Ministery of the word and consequently of some use of the Keys where a scandalous person may infect the Lords flock For where vision ceaseth the people perish but it is never said where Baptisme ceaseth the people perish and therefore uncalled Ministers in case of necessity without ordination or calling from a presbytery may preach and take on them the holy Ministery and exercise power of Jurisdiction because the necessity of the Soules of a Congregation in a remote Island requireth so but I hope no necessity in any the most extraordinary case requireth that a Midwife may Baptize or that a private man remaining a private man may celebrate the Lords Supper to the Church without any calling from the Church But Mr. Mather if the power of Iurisdiction
professor at Rome Joan. de Lugo teach that the Sacraments are morall causes of grace but not physicall It is grosse that Henricus saith that God createth grace per tactum Sacramentorum by the touch of the Sacraments as Christ cured the Leper by the touch of his hand for Sacraments are not miracles as Papists say Phisicke worketh upon a mans body when he sleepeth so doe Sacraments justifie and worke grace ex opere operat◠though the faith of the Sacrament-Receiver doe worke nothing at all 4. Sacraments are considered 1. As holy signes 2. As Religious seales 3. As instruments by which faith worketh 4. As meanes used by us out of conscience of obedience to Christs commandement who hath willed us to use them Sacraments as signes are objective and morall causes exciting the mind as the word doth in a morall way they represent Christ and him crucified and this Sacraments have commune with the word The Sacrament is a visible word teaching us 2. Sacraments have the consideration of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 non 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 tantum they be seales and not teaching and representing signes onely this way also they have no reall or physicall action in them or from them for a seale of a Prince and State as it is such conferreth not an acre or rigge of land but it is a legall Declaration that those lands written in the body of the Charter doe duely belong to the Person to whom the Charter is given But Arminians do here erre as Episcopius and also Socinus and Smalcius who teach that the Sacraments be nothing but externall rites and declarative signes scadowing out Christ and the benefits of his death to us because they find a morall objective working in the Word of God but a substantiall and Physicall working betwixt us and Christs bodie they say is ridiculous but they would remember that this is an insufficient enumeration the seale of a Kings Charter hath besides a morall action on the mind by bringing to the mind such lands given to such a man and so the seales worketh upon the witnesses or any who readeth the Charter as well as upon the owner of the Charter I say beside this the seale hath some reall action I grant not in it but about it and beside it for it sealeth that such lands are really and in effect given by the Prince and State the action is about the seale not in or from the seale When a Generall of an Army delivereth the keyes of a Castle to a Keeper thereof he saith I deliver the house to you when he delivereth the Keyes onely Physically and not the stones walls or timber of the house by a Physicall action or Physicall touch contactu Physico yet in delivering the keyes he doth really deliver to him the Castle but in a legall and morall way Arminians and Socinians may see here that there is neither an action by way of naked representation and teaching for the Sacrament is a teaching signe to the beholders who receive it not nor is it a Physicall action as if Christs Physicall body in a Physicall way were given yet it is an action reall and morall so the Sacraments are signes exhibitive and not naked signes Our brethren doe side with Arminians and Socinians who so often teach that Sacraments make nothing to be what they were not but onely declare things to be what they are It is true the formall effect of a Sacrament is to seale and confirme to seale and confirme is but a legall strengthning of a right and not the adding of any new thing Yet in this the Sacrament differeth from a seale 1. That to a civill seale there is not required the beleeving and faith of the owner of the Charter to make the seale effectuall for whether the Lord of the lands beleeve that his seale doth confirme him in the lands or not the seale of it selfe by the Law of the Prince State maketh good his right to the lands but Sacraments doe not worke ex opere operato as civill seales doe worke even as Physicke worketh upon the body without the faith of the mind though the man bee sleeping Hence the third consideration of a Sacrament as an instrument Faith in and through the Sacrament being wakened and stirred up layeth hold upon Christ his death and benefits and for this cause there is a reall exhibition of the thing signified and the Sacrament is an exhibitive seale 4. The Sacrament in the use is considered as wee use it in obedience to God who saith in the Lords Supper Do this in remembrance of me and in this it differeth from a civill seale also The Prince doth not conferre a seale to confirme a man in his land upon condition that he will make use of it otherwayes it shall be to him as no seale But God hath given the scale of grace upon condition that wee make use thereof in Faith else the Sacrament is blanke and null Therefore if you beleeve and not otherwayes the Sacrament of the Supper sealeth and confirmeth you in this that Christ is given already and is in the present given to be nourishment to your soule to life eternall and so oft as you eate the certioration and assurance groweth and the faith is increased and a further degree of a communion with Christ confirmed but it is not so in civill seales though yee repeate and reiterate the same seale of lands ten thousand times it never addeth one aker more to the in heritance because the repetition of a civill seale is not commanded under the promise of addition of new lands nor is it commanded as obedience to the owner of the Charter that hee should make use of the seale but from the using in faith the Sacrament we receive increase of Grace and a Sacramentall Grace Hence Baptisme is a seale of our incorporation in Christs visible Church 1 Cor. 12. 13. For by one spirit we be all baptized into one body whether we be Jew or Gentile or whether we be bound or free Act. 2. 41. Then they that received the word were baptized and the same day there were added unto them three thousand souls so Matth. 28. 19. the taught Disciples are to bee baptized in his name Act. 8. 38. Philip was this way received in the Christian Church and Cornelius Act. 10. 47. and Lidia Act. 16. 15. and the Jaylor vers 23. 2. That which distinguisheth by a visible note the Church as visible from the invisible Church and from other visible societies and sealeth our visible union with Christs body that is the seale of our entry in the visible Church but baptisme is such Ergo. 3. What circumcision was to the Church of the Jewes that baptisme is to the Christian Church because in re significatâ in the thing signified and inward substance of the Sacrament they were both one Col. 2. 11. 12. Phil. 3. 3. But circumcision was a seale of the
a peoples Preacher when they have chosen him hee preacheth by vertue of his gift not by vertue of his office Answ. 1. Here are Socinian mysteries revealed Gerardus saith by this meane the Heretickes called Pepuziani permitted in the primitive Church to women the Ministery of the Sacraments And upon this ground the Socinians and Anabaptists proceeded that except a man would digge his Talent in the earth hee may preach though he have not a calling of the Church so doth Mr. Coachman make talents as judgement and utterance enough to constitute one a Minister whether he be called to the office or not And Gerardus setteth downe a good answer of Luther to the Argument God giveth talents but to those whom hee calleth therefore gifted men should in the use of their calling attend and accept the calling of God It may be the Church perversly set denyeth a calling to one who is gifted Then I say let him use his talent in private God reapeth not where he doth not sow 2. This is a wild saying A man is a Minister whether he be in office or not A ministery is essentially an office or a place that the Lord hath called a man unto else define what an officer is and how can he expone that Rom. 10. 14. how can they preach except they he sent if as our Divines doe then none are sent but such as are called to the office and this is against him if as Sâ—iniâ—ns say all gifted men are sent of God to preach then gifts essentially constituteth a sent man and what is a sent man â—ut a man called to the office 3. Preaching is accidentall to the office of a man that maketh court and the world his conscience it is true indeed but that preaching is accidentall to the office of a Pastor is Popish and Prelaticall for what is essentiall to the office to administer the Sacrament and consecrate the body of Christ Well said for the Popish cause Pope Eugenius in his decree and the councell of Florentine teach us that the essential forme of the office of the Priests is in these words receive power to offer a sacrifice in the Church for the living and the dead for saith Scotus and the Councell of Trent teach us that all the essentials of the Priesthood be in two â— In a power to consecrate Christs body and this is given in the last Supper 2. In a power to absolve a sinner so saith Meratius the Jesuite where the reader shall observe silence of preaching the word and Bellarmine saith the same Gulielmus Eslius saith the essentiall and most principall worke of the Priest is to offer Christs body and then to absolve from sinnes and this they have from their Master Aquinâ—s and further warrant for a Priest essentially dumbe you may find in Suarez And Vasquez doth collect from the fainzed Canons of the Apostles from Clemens his Epistles such a Priest I desire if preaching be accidentall to the office of a Pastor to know if feeding of the people Act. 20. 28. and â—eeding the flock Ezekiel 34. 2. be all in administring of the Sacrament It is strange if a watchman as as a watchman and by office should not preach and give warning Ezek. 3. 17 18. if an Ambassadour as an Ambassadour in Christs stead should not pray the people to be reconciled to God 2 Cor. 5. 20. if a Pastor as a Pastor should not feed the flocke with knowledge Jer. 3. â— 15. if as a workeman and a Minister he should not divide the word aright 2 Tim. 2. 15. if as a fisher he should not catch men but of this enough Lastly 1 Cor. 1. v. 17. Christ sent mee not to baptize but to preach Joh. 4. 2. Christ baptized none but was sent to preach Luk. 4. 43. Chap. 5. Sect. 3. The way of Church judging in New England VVE doe not saith the Author carry matters either by an over-ruling power of the presbytery nor by the consent of the major part of the Church but by the generall and joynt consent of all the members of the Church and we are of one accord as the Church of Christ should be Act. 2. If any disassent out of ignorance we labour to bring him to our mind by sound information 2. If by pride bee disassent the libertie of his voyce is taken from him If 3. the matter be difficill we seeke advice of sister Churches Answ. Unitie is much to be desired in the Church with veritie but your way we understand not Nor doe we in our Synods carry matters by the major and maniest voices because they are maniest nor because they are the the voice of men but because the thing concluded is agreeable to the word of God but what if the Church be divided and the people upon whose voyces principally the conclusion of the Church dependeth goe against both the truth and the Elders They answer These are miserable mistakes either to thinke that the people or Elders must needs disassent or that except they all consent there can be no rule I answer it is a miserable necessitie through the corruption of our nature not a mistake for Simon Magus and fortie like to him in a Church consisting of threescore must dissent from twentie whose hearts are streight in the truth You have no refuge here but let the maniest carry the matter to a mischiefe and the other twentie must separate and make a new Church presently Againe say I what if the Church differ They answer That ought not to bee nor will it bee if the Church will lay aside corrupt judgement and affections and if they attend the rule and depend upon Christ considering the promises made to the Church Jer. 32. 39. Zech. 3. 9. Matth. 1. 10. But if such a thing fall out as not often it doth if the Elders and major part consent and one disassent it is either of corrupt affection and pride and so he Ioseth his voyce or of weaknesse and then he is to submit his judgement to the Church Answ. But to beginne at your last if one out of weaknesse disassent he is to submit his judgement to the Church But I say what if forty out of weaknesse disassent from twenty may not that whole Church as well submit to a Synod as Act. 15. as one must submit his judgement to a Church the conscience of one should no more be fettered then the consciences of a whole Church 3. I grant the maniest should have Scripture but what if they say the Scripture yea and the Apostles are with them when there is no such thing as the case was Act. 15. 20. the wrong side alleadged Scripture and the Apostles commandement when the Apostles gave no such commandement should you not take Gods remedy to appeale to a Synod as the Apostolike Church doth Act. 15. 6. They answer in our Churches hitherto the major part yea all mind one thing as
all gifted persons as our brethren teach may preach and so the gifted ones amongst the people have authority over the Pastors in this meaning as well as the Pastors have over them and so the difference of rulers and ruled of feeders and the fed is taken away Now for the power of Pastorall teaching the Pastors have authority over the Church but that is over the invisible Church of beleevers and regenerated persons for Pastors as Pastors doe not convert Soules and so they preach to the unconverted not as Pastors or with any Pastorall care for they teach that Pastors Doctors and Church-officers are given Ephes. 4. 11. onely for confirming of those who are already converted not for converting of Soules and by this meanes 1. Pastors doe not preach the Law for the humbling of unconverted sinners they doe not as Pastors or by vertue of the office open the eyes of the blinde nor are they Ministers by whom men beleeve 1 Cor. 3. 5. nor are they Fathers who begot men in Christ Jesus through the Gospell as 1 Cor. 4. 25. Nor doe they pray men in Christs stead to be reconciled unto God as 2 Cor. 5. 20. Which is strange and uncouth Doctrine of our brethren for all these acts ministeriall are performed upon non-converts who are not properly members of Christs mysticall body nor of the spouse of Christ nor members of the visible Church nor the Sonnes and Daughters of the Lord God Almighty nor have some measure of sincerity and truth as this author Chap. 3. Sect. 3. requireth of members of the visible Church and these are not under any pastorall care really and in very deed who are yet unconverted to the faith therefore the Pastor if hee convert any by his preaching he doth it by vertue of his gift not as a Pastor or by vertue of his office as they teach in their answer to the 32. questions so as Pastors they have no authoritie over the unconverted within the visible Church and this authoritative act of Elders over the people falleth to the ground by their principles 3. This authoritative preaching doth not yet make over to the Elders authoritative power above or over the people such as wee now seeke For 1. By this ruling Elders who do not preach and labour not in the Word and doctrine 1 Tim. 7. 17. by office have not this power Ergo yet you give no peculiar authoritie to the whole Eldership over the people 2. The Spirit of God requireth an authority of overseeing and governing to bee in Pastors beside the authoritative power of preaching for besides that a Bishop should bee â—apt to teach 1 Tim. 3. 2. hee must also v. 4 5 6. bee one who can both govern his own house and also the Church of God and not onely must hee not neglect the gift of prophecying 1 Tim. 4. 14. but also hee must know 1 Tim. 3. 13. how to behave himselfe in the Church of God and must bee circumspect in receiving accusations against an Elder and lay hands suddenly on no man and not be partaker of other mens sinnes 1 Tim. 5. 19. 22. he must not onely bee an approven workman to divide the Word aright 1 Timothey 2. 15. and preach in season and out of season 2 Tim. 4. 2. but also must commit the Word to faithfull men who are able to teach others 2 Tim. 2. 2. All which are singular points of authoritative power of government different from authoritative power of teaching And so Titus must not onely have the oversight by sound doctrine to exhort and convince the gainesayers Tit. 1. 9. but hee hath power in governing to order the things of discipline and to appoint Elders in every citie Tit. 1. 9. Act. 4. 23. yea there is an oversight in watching for soules in governing no lesse then in teaching Hâ—b 13. 17. Now this Author sheweth us nothing that is a peculiar authoritative power in ruling governing and a disciplinary overseeing of soules which the Word giveth to Elders as they are Elders and called Governors of Gods people as yet yea all the people are governors rulers and overseers in government by them no lesse then the Elders 4. The Author saith Elders have rule over the Church in dispensing all the censures of the Church unlesse it bee in their owne cause for though they take the consent of the Church in dispensing a censure yet they set on the censures with great authoritie in the name of the Lord yea it is no small power that they put forth in directing the Church what censures are due according to the word as though the Judge dispense no sentence but according to the verdict of the Jury yet his authority is great both in directing the Jury to give their verdict according to the Law and in pronouncing the sentence with power and terrour the like dâ—e the Elders in dispensing Church censures Answ. This dispensing of Church censures hath two branches 1. A directing of the Church in the qualitie of the censures 2. A binding of the censures upon them or in executing the censures of the Church For the former if it bee a pastorall direction it is all one with preaching of the Word and is not an act of authority by way of governing but by way of pastorall teaching But 1. Wee would have a word from God giving this power of the keyes peculiarly to the Pastors for if you give the keyes to all the Church of beleevers as beleevers and because they are Christs Spouse his mysticall body the habitation of his Spirit by faith then with your good leave there bee neither keyes nor any power of the keyes given to the Pastors as Pastors and in respect of their office but onely as they are a part of Christs body now as Pastors or Elders they are neither beleevers nor the bride nor a part of the bride but at best the friends of the Bridegroome Joh. 3. 29. especially seeing the Church as the Church and as using actually the keyes doth censure and judicially prescribe the qualitie and quantitie of the censure as they are directed Matth. 18. 1 Cor. 5. 2 3 4 5. yea and the Church judicially and authoritatively pronounceth the sentence and maner of the censure on the sentence for example of ten collaterall and coequall Judges if two of these ten bee skilled Juristes and shall direct the rest in the qualitie of the punishment to bee inflicted upon a malefactor that direction commeth from them not as Judges over the rest nor by any peculiar power that they have above the rest seeing all the ten are equally and joyntly Judges of a like power but that direction commeth from them as skilled Jurists So here though the Elders direct the Church anent the qualitie of the censure they doe not this by an authority above the Church seeing the Church with them have received the Keyes yea they principally as the Spouse of Christ and his mysticall body have received the keyes and
by the dominion of free-will but this is Pelagianisme and Arminianisme and Papists and Pelagians will needs examine the inclinations powers and motions of the soule which goe before the wills consent or arise in us without the wills consent from all subjection to a Law that so originall sinne may bee no sinne because as Pâ—â—agius said it is not voluntary and concupiscence when the will joyneth no consent to it is no sinne yea so the unbeleefe and ignorance of fundamentall points as they remaine in the mind shall bee no sinne 3. If this bee no sinne we are not to pray for illumination to see either the truth on the one side nor on the other and what actions wee doe according to these opinions in things not fundamentall wee doe them not with any certaintie of faith or any plerophorie but blindly or doubtingly and so sinfully which is expresly condemned Rom. 14. 13. and is expressely against that full assurance of faith that wee are to have in those very actions which in their owne nature are indifferent as is evident Rom. 14. 14. I know and am perswaded by the Lord Jesus that there is nothing uncleane of it selfe â— 5. Let every one bee fully perswaded in his owne mind 4. If they be not sinnes then are none to bee rebuked for these opinions no more then they are to bee excommunicated for them and though any erre in points not fundamentall they are not to bee rebuked yea nor to bee convinced of them by the light of the word 2. If they bee sinnes then when they are publickly prosested they must scandalize our brother but there bee no sinnes which scandalize our brother but they are susceptible and in capacitie to bee committed with obstinacie Every sinne sub ratione scandali is the subject of Church-censure Yea Iâ—m 16. 17. Every one is to bee avoyded who causeth divisions and 〈◊〉 es contrary to the doctrine which the Church hath learned of the Apostles and every one who walketh disorderly 2 Thess. 3. 11. and 〈◊〉 not the commandement of the Apostles is to bee excommunicated 〈◊〉 hee bee ashamed v. 14. but opinions contrary to the Apostles doctrine in non-fundamentalls are not fundamentalls and if they bee professed cause divisions and offences contrary to the Apostolik doctrine for many non-fundamentalls are the Apostles doctrine 3. What ever tendeth to the subversion of fundamentalls tendeâ—â—â—◠〈…〉 to the subversion of faith and so doth much truly scandalizâ—anâ— bring on damnation that Christ hath ordained to be removed out of the Church by Church-censures but erroneous opinions in points not fundamentall and in superstructures being professed and instilled in the eares and simple mindes of others tend to the subversion of fundamentalls as having connexion by just consequent with fundamentalls and doe scandalize and bring on doubtings about the foundation and so bring damnation Ergo erroneous opinions in points not fundamentall must be removed out of the Church by Church-censures The proposition is cleare he that falleth in a publicke scandalous sinne is to be delivered to Satan both for his owne sake that he be not damned himselfe but that 1 Cor. 5. 5. to the destruction of the flesh the spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord and so also for others because a little Leaven leaveneth the whole lump v. 6. The assumption is proved by dayly experience for corruption in Discipline and Government in the Church of Rome brought on corruption in Doctrine and the same did we find in the Churches of Scotland and England 4. Fundamentalls are no other thing then that which the Apostle calleth Heb. 6. 12. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the first principles of the oracles of God and ch 6. 1. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Doctrine of the Principles of Christ which are laid as foundations as ib. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 not laying the foundation againe c. Then non-fundamentalls must be such superstructures as are not the first Principles of the Oracles of God and are not the Doctrine of the Principles of Christ. But the Apostle will not have us to fluctuate and doubt as Skeptickes in a Pyâ—rhonian Vacillation and Uncertainty in these which he calleth the superstructures 1. As is evident by his words 11 Of whom we have many things to say and hard to be uttered but you are dull of hearing 12. For when for the time yee ought to be teachers yee have need that one teach you againe which be the first Principles of the Oracles of God and are become such as have neede of milke and not of strong food 13. For every one that useth milke is unskilfull in the word of righteousnesse for he is a babe 14. But strong meate belongeth to them that are of full age even those who by reason of use have their senses exercised to discerne both good and evill Chap. 6. 1. Therefore leaving the doctrine of the beginning of Christ let us goe on unto perfection not laying againe the foundation of repentance from dead workes c. Whence it is more then evidently apparent to any intelligent mind 1. That when he saith they ought to be teachers of others he cannot be thought to meane that they should teach fundamentalls onely to others because he would have them to be capable of the food of such as are stronger and have their senses exercised to discerne good and ill and will have them carried on to perction now fundamentalls are expressely the foode of babes which bâ—â— neede of milke c. 6. v. 12. and not the foode of the stronger if then they ought to teach superstructures and non-fundamentalls to others they cannot teach and exhort privately for of such he speaketh these things whereof they have no certainty of faith and which they beleeve with a reserve as ready to reject them to morrow upon second thoughts for what we teach to others those as I conceive we are oblieged to speake because we beleeve Psal. 116. 10. 2 Cor. 4. 13. and those we are to perswade because we know not with a reserve but with certainty of faith the terror of the Lord 2 Cor. 5. 11. If it be said teachers now are not oblieged to know all that they teach now to be divine truths with such a certainty of faith as Prophets and Apostles who were ledde by an infallible Spirit for our private exhorting our publick Sermons come not from a Spirit as infallible as that Spirit which spake and wrote canonick Scripture for we may erre in exhorting in Preaching in writing but the pen-men of canonick Scripture were infallible I answer the pen-men of Scripture when they did speak and write Scripture were infallible de jure de facto they could neither erre actually and by Gods word they were oblieged not to erre and in that they were freer from error then we are who now succeed them to preach and write but what God hath revealed in his word whether they be fundamentalls or superstructures doth obliege
solos pertinent Episcopos Constantinus Magnus in concilio Niceno ut ait Ruffinus hist. l. â— addit Eusebio cap. 2. reâ—usavit ferre ju licium inter Episcopos Dâ—us inquit vos constituit sacerdotes nobis a dâ—o d â—ti isiis judices conveniens non est ut homo judicet deos Sâ—zomenus hist. l. 6. c. 7. Mibi inquit Ualentinianus senior qui sum in sorte plebis fas non est talia negotia ecclesiastica â—erserutari sacerdotes quorum ista curae funt inter seipsos quocunque voluerint loco conveniant Theodosius Junius epist. ad Fphesinum Synodum Deputatus est Candidianus magnificus Comes strenuâ—rum domesticorum transire usque ad sanctissimam Synodum testram ac in nullo quidem quae facienda sunt de piis dogmatibus quâ—stiones â—ommunicare illicitum namque est eum qui non sit ex ordâ—â—â—anctorum Episcoporum ecclesiasticis immisceri tractatibus Gregorius Mag. l. 5. Epist. 25. Notum est piissimos dominos dicipâ—inam diligere ordines servare canones venerari in causis sa 〈◊〉 â—ese non immiseere Distin. 96. C. satis evidenter illicitum est imperatorihus ecchsiasti â— sâ— immiscere tractatibus Constantius would not take on him to judge the Arrian cause but conveened a Councell and commanded them to judge according to the word So saith Eusebius de vita Constant. l. 3. c. 10. ad Theodor. l. 5. c. 9. Neither can it be said that Constantine judged with the Synod as Emperour as some affirme for though it be true yet he judged not in the Synod as Emperour but as Episcoporum conservus as he nameth himselfe and as Eusebius saith de vita Constant. l. 3. c. 16. ipse tanquam unus e vestro numero non recusabam Now Constantine as Emperour was not a fellow-servant with Pastors or one of the number but above them as the annointed of the Lord but he judgeth with them as one of their number as a Christian having one faith one baptisme one Lord with them and so as a member of the Church and so saith he in that same place Literarum divinitus inspiratarum testimonio res in quaestionem adductas dissolvamus And let this be our first distinction Emperours of old defined in Synods as Christian members of the Church not as Emperours for as Emperours they be politicke heads of the men of the Church Gerardus Tom. 6. de Magist. polit n. 175. pag. 586 587. who giveth also a nomotheticke power to Magistrates in matters ecclesiasticall furnisheth us with an argument here because the Magistrate is a principall member of the Church and all the members of the Church are to judge and try the spirits and to try all things now this proveth well as a member of the Church and so as a Christian he may judge and that in a meere ecclesiastick way as Pastors and Elders doth as private Christians may doe being called thereunto by the Church though the ground be weake for the Kingly power maketh not New Tiberius and other Emperours members of the Church onely grace faith and communion with Christ maketh Kings members of the invisible Church and baptisme and profession of the faith and not any earthly Prerogative of Scepter or Crowne maketh them members of the visible Church Our second distinction from Fathers is that Emperours have a Kingly power politicke to confirme and adde their civill sanction to Church constitutions but they have no power formally ecclesiasticke to define and make Church-lawes So Augustine as a man the King serveth the Lord vivendo fideliter by living the life of a sound beleever and as a King he serveth the Lord by adding the convenient vigour of a civill sanction to just Lawes as the King of Ninive did by compelling the men of Ninive to pacifie God And when Gaudentius the Donatist objected that the Emperour could not take course with the Schism made in the Church by their separation because God hath laid upon Prophets not upon Kings the Preaching of the word Augustine answereth not that Kings may either preach or define controversies in the Church but that sinco Donatists separate from the Church it should be the care of Kings to see that none rebell against the Church of Christ. Hence I reason thus no Synods ecclesiasticall can meddle with the blood and temporall lives of men nor can they forbid the beliefe and profession of heresies and erroneous doctrine or scandalls against pure discipline under the paine of bodily punishment as banishment imprisonment heading or hanging But Emperours and Kings either in a Synod or out of a Synod may lawfully forbid such things and that by a Kingly power therefore if Emperours in Synods make any Lawes of this kinde they are not Synodicall nor ecclesiasticall Lawes nor doe they make such Lawes jointly with the Church-Synod as some teach nor by any ecclesiastick power for coactive power and ecclesiasticall power cannot be joyned together as one power to make one and the same ecclesiasticall lawes Let any judge then if the ancient Lawes of some Emperours were any other things but civill and politick sanctions of Church-constitutions And judge of this Law which some call the ecclesiasticall determination of Heraclius the Emperour by the consent of Pope John he ordained that there is nâ—â—ther one nor two operations in Christ. Heraclius a Monothelite commanded this under the paine of civill punishment as is certaine But had Pope John as collaterall Judge with the Emperour in this that same coactive power that the Emperour had I thinke none can say it So three Emperours commanded all people to hold the doctrine of the Trinity and that those who hold not this be heretickes This is but a civill sanction of a Church Law So Martianus commandeth that the decrees of the Councell of Chalcedon be established and that no man dispute or call in question these decrees This is clearely the Emperours civill ratification of Church-lawes and Justinianus forbiddeth any publick service to be in the Church by laicks onely in the absence of the Clergie and commandeth the Bishops not to muttter in to themselves but to speake in the administration of the Sacraments with a cleare and distinct voice If Emperours did proceede any further as some say that Theodosius deposed the Nestorian Bishops though indeed he onely commanded them to be deposed their deeds are not Lawes a facto ad jus non valet consequentia Papists here are in two extremities For 1. they will not have Princes to meddle with Church-affaires whereas by office they are Nurs-fathers in the Church Charles the fift is rebuked by Paul the third because he conveened councells for composing of dissentions in the Church and he compareth him to Uzzah who touched the Arke without warrant as we may see Wolsius 2. Stapleton Bellarmine and Papists will have them to be brutish Servants to execute whatsoever the Pope and Councells
him all spirituall headship over the Church to the King and Burbillus also But Henric. Salcobrigiensis calleth the King primatem ecclesiae Anglicanae the Primate of the Church of England and â—ges oleo sacro uncti capaces sunt jurisdictionis spiritualis because they are annointed with holy oyle therefore are they capable of spirituall jurisdiction also may saith hee creat propria autoritate by his owne authoritie create Bishops and dâ—prive them See what Calderwood hath said and excerped out of the writings of these men the King as King 1. convocateth Synods 2. defineth ecclesiasticall canons 3. giveth to them the power of an ecclesiasticall Law 4. executeth Church Canons 5. appointeth commissioners who in the Kings authoritie and name may try heresies and errors in doctrine punish non-conformitie to Popish ceremonies may confine imprison banish Ministers 6. descerne excommunication and all Church censures and use both the swords 7. relax from the power and censures of all ecclesiastick Lawes give dispensations annull the censures of the Church upon causes knowne to them give dispensations against Canons unite or separate Parish Churches or diocesan Churches and by a mixt power partly coactive and civill partly of jurisdiction and spirituall the King may doe in foro externo in the externall court of Church discipline all and every act of discipline except hee cannot preach baptize or excommunicate And whereas Cartwright saith when a lawfull Minister shall agree upon an unlawfull thing the Prince ought to stay it and if Church ministers shew themselves obstinate and will not bee advised by the Prince they prove themselves to be an unlawfull Ministery and such as the Prince is to punish with the sword O but saith hee the author of the Survey how shall the Prince helpe the matter shall be compell them to conveene in a Synod and retract their mind but they will not doe this 2. By what authoritie shall the Prince doe this even by extraordinary authority even by the same right that David did eate of the Shew-bread if by ordinary authority the Prince would doe it yet doe you resist that authority also Answ. Though the Prince had not externall force to compell Church-men to decree in their Synods things equall holy juâ— and necessary yet it followeth not that the King as King hath not Gods right and lawfull power to command and injoyne them to doe their dutie force and Law differ much as morall and physicall power differ much 2. If they decree things good lawfull and necessary the Prince hath a power given him of God to ratifie confirme and approve these by his civill sanction but hee hath no power ordinary to infringe or evert what they have decreed 3. And if the Church bee altogether uncorrigible and apostate then wee say as followeth 7. Conclution When the representative Church is universally apostaticall then may the Prince use the helpe of the Church essentiall of found beleevers for a reformation and if they also bee apostatick which cannot be except the Lord utterly have removed his candlestick wee see not what hee can doe but heare witnesse against them but if there bee any secret seeker of God in whose persons the essence of a true Church is conserved The King by a royall power and the Law of charitie is oblieged to reforme the land as the godly Kings with a blessed successe have hitherto done Asa Jâ—siah Jehoshaphat 〈◊〉 in which case the power of reformation and of performing many acts of due belonging to the Church officers are warrantably performed by the King as in a diseased body in an extraordinary manner power recurreth from the members to the â—â—â—â—tick head and Christian Prince who both as a King 〈◊〉 â—â— in an authoritative way is oblieged to do more then ordâ—â—â—y and as a Christian member of the Church in a charitative and common way is to care for the whole body 8. Conclusion The influence of the Princes regall power in making constitutions is neither solitary as if the Prince his 〈…〉 could doe it nor is it 2. collaterall as if the Prince and Church with joynt concurrence of divers powers did it nor is 3. as some flatterers have said so eminently spirituall as the consultation and counsell of Pastors for light onely hath influence in Churches Canons but the Princes power hath onely the power to designe so as the Canon hath from the Prince the power of a Law in respect of us The Kings influence in Church Canons as wee thinke is as a Christian antecedent to exhort that the Lord Jesus bee served 2. concomitant as a member of the Church to give a joynt suffrage with the Synod 3. consequent as a King to adde his regall sanction to that which is decreed by the Church according to Gods Word or otherwise to punish what is done amisse Now that the Prince as a solitary cause his alone defineth Church matters and without the Church and that by his ordinary Kingly power wanteth all warrant of the Word of God 2. The King might have given out that constitution Act. 15. It seemeth good to the holy Ghost and to us which in reason is due to the ministeriall function for these are called Act. 16. 4. the decrees of the Apostles and Elders not the decrees of the King or Emperour either by Law or fact 3. Christ ascending to heaven gave officers requisite for the gathering of his Church and the edification of the body of Christ but amongst these in no place we finde the King 4. If this bee true heathen Kings have right to make Church-Canons though they bee not able and bee not members of the Christian Church and so without and not to bee judged by the Church nor in any case censured Matth. 18. 17. 1. Cor. 5. 11. and this directly is a King Pope who giveth Lawes by a Kingly power to the Church and yet cannot bee judged by the Church Burhillus and Thomson acknowledge that a Heathen King is primat and head of the Church and must hee not then have power aciu primo to make Lawes and to feede the flocke by externall government But Lancel Andreas Biship of Ely Tortura torti saith that a heathen King hath a temporall Kingly power without any relation to a Church power and when hee is made of a Heathen King a Christian King bee acquireth a new power But the question is if this new power be a new kingly power or if it be a power Christian to use rightly his former kingly power if the first bee true then 1. as learned Voetius and good reason saith hee was not a King before hee was a Christian for the essence of the Kingly power standeth in an indivisible point and the essence of things admit not of degrees 2. Then should hee bee crowned over againe and called of God to bee a Christian King and so hee was not a King before which is against Scripture for Nebucâ—adnezzar was to bee obeyed